City Council Budget Meeting Transcript – 8/4/2026 Title: ATXN-1 Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 8/4/2026 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 8/4/2026 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 [10:00:08 AM] six. It's 10:00 in the morning, and I will call to order the Austin city council for this meeting of the Austin city council. We have a quorum of the city council present, and we are meeting in the city council chambers, which are located at city hall at 301 west second street in Austin, Texas. We have two items on the agenda today. We're going to go. We're going to go with item number two first, because that is an item that requires action by the council. So we're going to take it up first. And actually, in addition to requiring action, part of the justification for taking it up first is that for getting things posted in a timely fashion based upon whatever the decision might be. We need to, we need to do that as quickly as early in the day as we can. And then we will have the presentation and discussion of the 2026 2027 proposed budget. Before we do that, as I have tried to do throughout this process. Let me run through what the schedule is with regard to the budget. As I indicated, today is Tuesday, [10:01:09 AM] August 4th. We will have a presentation and discussion regarding the budget. We will also hear from speakers when we bring up item number two. And today is the day that we have asked council members to, show to to post and bring forward potential amendments and potential ifcs that will be discussed on Thursday, August 6th. On August 6th, we'll have a meeting that begins at 10:00 in the morning. There will be four agenda items on that meeting's agenda. And we will have, of course, presentation and discussion of the budget. And that will also allow for us to, highlight proposed amendments and proposed ifcs. But there will also be a council election vote. One will be, if necessary, ordering a general bond election. One will be ordering a general election because it's my understanding that some people are up for election this time. We'll talk about you just want to pass that. Anyway, we'll talk about [10:02:09 AM] that on Thursday. But that's another item. We have three items that we have to vote on with regard to the ballot. One is, potential bond election, one is the general election and one is ordering a special election for proposed charter amendments. Then, of course, on Wednesday, August 12th, Thursday, August 13th, and Friday, August 14th is when we will vote on potential budget approval. We will also conduct during the course of that public hearings. These are all posted on. These will all be posted on the clerk's website with exactly how anybody that wants to be heard, what the envelope for timing is to sign up and when the timing, when the sign up period will be over. So with that, we will go to, I'll call up item number two, unless there's any questions or comments by council members, I'll call up item number two, which relates to a potential resolution directing the manager to prepare an ordinance for council consideration to order in November 2026. Bond election. As I indicated, this [10:03:11 AM] requires actions by the council and it requires a posting. And so that's why we're taking it up. First, we have a number of people that have signed up to speak on this item. So unless there's objection or questions, I will turn to the city clerk and ask the city clerk to please start calling people. When the city clerk calls your name, if you would, she'll call them in name, in lists or groups of three, four, five, maybe more. But she'll call the names when your name is called. Please go ahead and get up and come forward. And if there's an empty seat, take one of the seats here at the desk so that we'll know that you're here and that you wish to be heard. If there's not a seat available, but your name's been heard, take one of these front seats so that you'll be ready. And we'll be able to operate efficiently. In terms of getting your testimony in front of the council. So with that, I'll now turn it over to the city clerk. Thank you. >> Thank you. Mayor, we have a few remote speakers for item two. I'll start with Chelsea burns. [10:04:12 AM] >> Hi. Can you hear me? >> Yes, yes. >> Yes we can. >> Oh, okay. Great. Thank you. My name is Chelsea and I'm a resident of district seven. I'm the vice chair of the bicycle advisory council, and I've served on the council for three years. During the time I've been there, I've seen how much Austin has benefited from the careful work of skilled professionals at transportation and public works, recent bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects in Austin have been transformative in promoting critical safety. So, for example, the changing the structure of intersections to reduce crashes between pedestrians or cyclists and motor vehicles, or building protected bicycle lanes to provide dedicated and safe space for different road users. In addition, they've made the city a more pleasant place to ride, with trails and roads that have improved shade and higher comfort levels for a range of different kinds of riders, prioritizing routes that can be described as all ages and abilities. And these improvements have not only benefited cyclists and [10:05:12 AM] pedestrians. As the most recent email from Austin mobility news highlights, traffic calming measures and addition of protected paths for cyclists and pedestrians have also reduced motor vehicle crashes writ large, improving overall safety of these streets. These improvements have come at a cost. Of course, I recognize that the city is in a tight position financially and that Austin will not be able to have the kinds of major projects support in coming years that we've enjoyed from prior bond funding. The reason I'm calling today is to ask the city to support a bond that would specifically provide for continuity of staffing. My concern is that with cuts that are coming without bond support, we will lose not only progress on projects that have been really effective, but also expertise, workflows, relationships with different contractors. Those have been really critical for making the work efficient and cost effective, and reducing the cost per mile for various kinds of improvements. And I really am concerned that if we don't fund, a bond just to keep small [10:06:12 AM] maintenance measures going, we're not just going to pause, we're going to go backwards in those ways. And so similarly, I would also support, continuity of parking. >> Thank you very much. >> I really. >> Haydn walker. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Hayden walker and I'm one of the 22 folks y'all appointed to the bond election advisory task force. The btec began meeting in October of 24 to prepare for a potential 25 bond, which was then pushed to November of 26. We met for 20 months and heard hundreds of hours of presentations from city staff that highlighted the 3.9 billion in capital needs across the city of Austin. I'm speaking today to encourage you to fund the cip project projects you're considering for parks, pools, open space, local mobility, transportation, safety, and libraries. These programs are critical to our quality of life in Austin. I first learned over a decade ago [10:07:13 AM] that Austin funds sidewalks with only bond money. At that time, the existing level of funding was going to take 200 years to build our sidewalks that we're missing. With adequate funding, the city has built a system that effectively delivers sidewalks and safe crossings, spending local mobility, bond money as directed and on time. That effort has cut our sidewalk deficit in half. But without new funding, these local mobility programs fall off a financial cliff. In 2027, sidewalks improved safety, connectivity, access, and community health. It would be inefficient to dismantle the system we've built and reinvent the wheel again after 2028. Given everything I learned on both the btf transportation and parks working groups, I'm supportive of this package and encourage you to vote to continue funding these critical programs. Thank you very much. >> Addie walker. [10:08:16 AM] >> Good evening, mayor and council. My name is Andy walker. I live in district nine. I've worked for several years in advocacy for active transportation and climate resiliency, and I attended the public meetings of the btf, including presentations from city departments and staff. I support having a bond on the ballot in November, and I support funding for active transportation and for parks. The original discussion around this bond in 2024 was to have a climate bond, recognizing that climate change is a real and present threat to our public health and well-being, and committing to take real steps to address that. During the course of the meetings, Austin climate action and resilience completed a rough analysis of the embodied and operational carbon of each project being considered for bond funding. Sidewalks, urban trails, Fugitt zero bikeways, safe routes to schools, transit enhancements and the act plan all have negative net carbon emissions, parkland acquisition and open [10:09:16 AM] space acquisition both have negative net carbon emissions. We are living the consequences of climate change right now, and I would urge this council to consider climate resiliency and emissions reductions. In every action you take funding for active transportation and for parks supports emissions negative projects that promote public health and well-being for our residents. Thank you very much. >> Jose Loyola. >> Hello. Mic check. Can you hear me? All right. Good evening, mayor and council. My name is Jose Loyola. I live in district six and I am a father of two young children. Murray Watson has challenged Austin to become the best place in America to be a kid. That means more than creating wonderful places that children can go. It means giving them the freedom to reach those places. Bikeways, sidewalks, safe crossings, and neighborhood led projects are [10:10:17 AM] the infrastructure of childhood freedom. The yellow children to walk to the park, ride to a friend's house and gradually gain Independence. A park that children cannot safely reach is only half an investment. As you move forward with this bond and the city's broader capital investments, please provide funding and the neighborhood partnering program. Let's build a city where children can experience their neighborhoods freely and safely, not only from the backseat of a car. Thank you. >> Ian Wilson. >> Hello, Mike. Check again. >> Yes. >> You can be heard. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm also calling to echo the statements of the last few callers. My name is Ian Wilson, district three. It is kind of amazing that we need to make arguments for something that has so clearly has such wide public support. Not only is it, is it [10:11:21 AM] make our city better to get around and a whole bunch of ways. It's also just the best economic decision for our city. Bikes are more affordable for everyone. Bike infrastructure is way, way, way more affordable than expensive build outs or other things. So I could answer more strongly endorse, continued funding for all bike related infrastructure. Thanks. >> Edwin Bautista. >> Hello. Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is Edwin Bautista. I live in district seven. I'm here to support the calling of the bond election this November, and I want to tell you why my support should carry some weight. I voted against prop Q last year, but I know the difference between a tax rate election and a bond. A TRE permanently raises the rate for ongoing operations. A bond is a voter approved debt for specific capital projects spread across the generations. Who will benefit from them? Saying no to one and saying yes to the other [10:12:21 AM] is an inconsistency. It's exactly the discernment you should want from voters. So I'm comfortable approving this. They'll all be honest. I have real reservations about the city's ability, ability to deliver on time. The the 2018 bond was the first bond I ever voted for. Little did I know I'd end up directly living with it. I later moved to burnet road, where the 2018 corridor project is is under construction right now. In August 2026 and expected to wrap up soon. Eight years from the ballot to ribbon cutting is too long. That said, I imagine setting up the capital delivery services department as its own department has helped expedite the backlog of approved projects, and I'd urge you to keep that momentum and accountability going. Finally, parks with the recent changes in state law restricting how cities collect parkland dedication fees, bonds are now one of the few meaningful tools left to fund our park system. Our crown jewel, zilker, still has no comprehensive plan. The [10:13:22 AM] vision plan was shelved almost three years ago, where the update. When it returns, it must be a plan responsive to the needs of austinites, not corporations. Then this. To the voters in November, we can tell the difference between good debt and bad spending. Thank you. >> Yorgos. Economou. >> Hello, all. Can you hear me okay? >> Yes. >> Okay. Morning. Mayor Watson, council member zo representing d9 from my Travis heights neighborhood and others, want to express how important this active transportation bond funding is. A father of a young 18 month old. We're simply trying to safely walk, with my son to nearby little park and bike to our daycare at hillside. The woodland crossing has already recently been removed [10:14:23 AM] due to, 35 construction. So, you know, we're really relying on some of these alternative routes. And, we're also seeing some traffic impact down Alameda, because of the interstate construction. So this funding is really paramount. You know, in a few years, I want to be able to safely stroll to Travis heights elementary, with my son and avoid queuing up in a drop off line. I could see in my son's eyes he's engaged on our, on our trips by bike and by walking. We, we, our, our household. It's really hard. Don't really want to keep them cooped up in the back seat. And we don't always have the car available for, for both parents. So, you know, we, we are seeing a lot of the cut through traffic in a high pedestrian area on Alameda drive. And the professionals at the south routes south safe routes to schools team have been a pleasure to work with diligence from the central engineering team and the support of council [10:15:23 AM] members staff. So I just want to voice my, my opinion that this funding is crucial. It's life saving. And, I hope you support it. >> Three cardinal. >> Hello, council. My name is Mallory. I'm, district nine. I'm calling in to support the bond funding, especially as it relates to active transportation projects. And the reason for that is that over the past five years or so, I've seen more and more bike lanes, trails, sidewalks actually get built as opposed to the corridor bonds from, let's say ten years ago, which, which we're still waiting to see more results on. I'm seeing the kind of results of the transportation department able to get these projects like in the ground faster. And I'm supporting, you know, some funding to keep that going so [10:16:24 AM] that we don't lose the expertise of the staff and the, departments that have been working on this to, to keep that momentum going instead of, you know, us having to stop and start and then suddenly have to wait another few years to build that capacity back up. So I really hope that, support this going forward. Thank you. >> Claudia zapata. >> Hello. >> Yes, hi. >> This is called zapata. I'm here to support mexic- arte museum. Mexic-arte museum is one of the leading institutions in the country related to latinx art and culture. I was an intern, and I went and attended the programing as a child, and now I'm one of the leading scholars in the country. I had a pipeline to the smithsonian, and now I'm the associate curator of Latino art at the Blanton. I was one of [10:17:24 AM] the first curators at the museum and now one of the first in the country. Mexico is one of the integral, cultural, impactful institutions in the city, and it has a national presence at all academic levels, at all museum levels. They are nationally discussed, internationally participating entity in the discipline of fine arts in the country, and Latino history and American history. They're one of the gems of the city, and people come from all over the country and internationally. To understand what mexic-arte has been doing, how it sustains itself and the collections it holds, and the programing it oversees. So any sort of funding to keep that institution going needs to be supported. In order for Austin to be at the intersection of the Americas. In terms of a conversation related to Latino [10:18:26 AM] art and culture. So I fully support it. >> Pamela Vance. >> Can you hear me? Okay. >> Yes. >> Thank you. My name is Pamela. I'm here today representing the George Washington carver ambassadors. I'm speaking to urge you to restore the 18 million expansion funding for the George Washington carver museum cultural and genealogy center to the final 2026 bond portfolio. The reason I'm standing here today is because I trusted the city to carry out its baseline due diligence and see the carver museum expansion to fruition. That duty has been sorely and systematically neglected. This expansion was advanced by acme, stripped by [10:19:26 AM] capital delivery services, restored by staff under the $750 thousand I'm sorry, 750 million scenario. After intense advocacy and explicitly endorsed by the task force. Yet it was completely omitted from the final 390 million scenario recommended by staff. The project requires exactly 18 million to see the design to completion. Staff used project readiness and operations and maintenance impacts to justify cutting them. However, the data reveals a profoundly unfair evaluative evaluative standard of the carver museum expansion, scored objectively higher across community consideration, efficiency, and readiness metrics than multiple other civic projects that were retained. The operations and maintenance double standard. The carver is assigned a 1.8 [10:20:29 AM] million annual o&m impact that completely excludes its five required staff members. Meanwhile, piers standalone facilities carry almost identical projections, but fully include triple the staff footprint of 12 to 16 positions. >> Thank you. >> Staff points to a late. >> Emanu el amanii van eenoo. >> Good morning mayor and council. My name is Imani van eenoo and I am here representing community advocates for the carver museum in Austin. I have been a 20 year, 20 plus year resident of Austin and have lived most of that time in district one. Although I'm currently a resident of district four, I also participated actively and consistently in the bond election advisory task force meeting during the spring of this year, where I advocated [10:21:31 AM] for the carver, which was ultimately added to the list of projects for a potential bond package. I was deeply disappointed to see the memo from capitol delivery services to this body dated July 17th of this year, which explicitly excluded the carver. The carver museum is in the process of a design project that is is in its final stages. As Pamela Vance indicated, there's only an additional $18 million to complete this project. And unlike others that remain on the list of named projects, the carver has a substantially lower operating cost footprint. We urge you to please add the carver back to the list of projects that are to be included in this bond issue. Unfortunately, the expansion of the carver has been a file that [10:22:31 AM] has been kicked down the road for many, many years by Austin, Texas leadership and the black and diverse community within Austin is relying on you to support this very important cultural arts facility in Austin, Texas. Please do so by agreeing to fund the final 18 million needed to conclude this project. Thank you. >> That's all the remote speakers I have for now. So I will be turning to in-person speakers. As the mayor mentioned, when I call your name, please come down and take an open seat. Just be sure to state your name before you begin speaking. Martha Lanford, Adam Greenfield. Adam, are you here? Is John stark here? And then you all have four minutes. And then Marcelina gray. [10:23:36 AM] >> Langford. >> Okay, good morning to each of you again. I'm Martha Langford here to speak on behalf of the Gus Garcia center for seniors. I would like to draw your attention to a statement made by Susan Anderson, the CEO of Austin aging. She said, if you are lonely and isolated in your home, your body's decline can be compared to smoking 15 cigarettes a day. That struck me as a water wake up call. But then a rational thinker might encounter with, well, why is that person staying at home? Why aren't they trying to help themselves? The key word in her statement is isolated. So many senior individuals are limited in their options to help themselves, even though there already exists many programs to help seniors, many seniors have very limited resources, such as [10:24:38 AM] little or no transportation, limited income, limited ambulatory skills or devices list goes on and on. Wait, are we not members or citizens of the city of Austin? Don't we try to meet the needs of our citizens? This is why I'm here to ask you to positively remember that the Gus Garcia well, expansion wing project is meant to increase the services to northeast Austin seniors that are in so dire need of these services. We would like to for you to vote yes to a November election for a bond issue, including Gus Garcia. Seniors, of course. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good morning, ma'am. Mayor pro tem and Austin city council Adam Greenfield here with safe streets. Austin, nice to be with you. And I'm here to deliver a very simple message. [10:25:39 AM] Why the city of Austin's active transportation and safety programs are a first class use of public funding, and why it is so important to keep these programs funded at current levels. It is challenging to encapsulate the enormity of what has been accomplished by our active transportation safety programs in the past ten years. If you look at the map projects all over the city, sidewalks alone, walking 20 miles a day, it would take you almost two weeks to walk the entire length of the sidewalks that have been built just in the past ten years, not to mention over 100 miles of, of bike lanes, 120 schools impacted by safe routes to school and so much more. It took three key groups of people to make this happen. Firstly, it took a highly supportive community. In 2016, 59% of voters voted for the [10:26:39 AM] transportation bond. That year, 2018, it was 81%. And in 2020, in an economic downturn and a pandemic, it was 67%. The message from the community is very clear active transportation and street safety is not an optional nice to have. It is basic infrastructure and the public expects it. The second key group of people, our hard working and passionate city of Austin staff staff have become extremely effective in turning public dollars into infrastructure and stretching out those dollars as far as they will go to build this infrastructure with sidewalks. They do field engineering. So actually, staff just go out and build the sidewalks and engineer in the moment for maximum efficacy. They coordinate with street resurfacing projects so that they can, best utilize that opportunity. And they'll often take the funding that, that they get and leverage them for more dollars through grants. [10:27:41 AM] Staff also continue to innovate. Just last year, we saw staff, piloting a new machine that will allow them to pour concrete for more effective concrete protection for protected bike lanes. Staff are working on micro connectivity to connect disconnected streets together for enhanced mobility that way. And this is the kind of innovation that happens when we keep our programs funded, at maximum levels. And so this is why it's so important now that we built this organizational infrastructure that is the envy of the nation. It is good fiscal policy. It is good governance to maintain this organizational infrastructure. The third key group of people, a visionary city council. It takes something to imagine a world that is very different from the one we have today, and to stick it out for long enough to see that world come into fruition. But thanks to this council, previous councils and hopefully future councils, that's exactly what's happening. [10:28:43 AM] Ultimately, this is not about mileage. It's not about miles of sidewalks, miles of bike lanes. It's about the opportunities that this infrastructure unlocks. I remember the first time I saw children riding their bikes without an adult on shoal creek boulevard in district seven, and I finally got it at that point that this infrastructure opens opportunity for people of all ages and abilities. And this is happening countless times each day because of council support of this infrastructure. So that's it. In every council district, our streets are getting better and better as our parks, and we certainly support a parks bond two this November. We should feel very proud what we have accomplished as a city in the past ten years, and let's keep doing it. Thank you. >> Yes, please. >> Good morning. My name is Marcelina gray. I am from district three. I am also a director for communications and outreach at yellow bike project. We are a local nonprofit known [10:29:45 AM] for providing free bicycles to Austin community who don't have access to transportation. I am here today to speak on behalf of my organization, but also as a cyclist. Each year, our organization, yellow bike, provides about 1000 bicycles to people who have no access to transportation, to transit dependent and bicycle dependent austinites. These are people who don't have another way to get to work, to school, or to get grocery. And among them, the kids who don't qualify for the school bus, people who rely on bicycles as their main form of transportation are the most vulnerable road users. And that's why continued investment in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is so essential. Since 2020, our our city has made huge progress in this area, and it has been noted by people [10:30:46 AM] for bikes rating Austin from only 13 to 36 today in in their city ratings. But we're still far away from the city. We could become. We still have a gap in our network that force riders into dangerous traffic. And we are still losing cyclists on our streets. Most recently, our dear friend Paul, and who was also a yellow bike volunteer. So I'm asking you today to continue investing in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure that can make Austin a city where everyone, regardless of how they move around, can travel safely. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Barbara Scott. Barbara, are you here? Is Brian Dolezal here? Okay. Y'all have four minutes. What about Sylvia orozco? Sylvia, are you here? She is. [10:31:47 AM] Okay. And Mindy raddix okay. Four minutes as well. And then Ashton Cumberbatch and Megan Schneider. >> If your name has been called, please come forward if you're speaking. Please welcome. >> Thank you. Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is Barbara Scott and I'm here representing, the colony park neighborhood association. The colony park community has addressed you on several occasions to request your support for the proposed library and Austin public health combined facility and its inclusion in a 2026 bond, your appointed bond task force. City staff and community constituents have all indicated that these facilities are greatly needed. Today, I would like to remind you that our community has lacked consistent access to educational resources, licensed child care and public health facilities for decades. [10:32:49 AM] There is no library east of 183. There is currently no public health care facility east of highway 183, south of highway 290, north of the Colorado river, and extending to the bastrop county line. Community leaders worked for decades with Austin public library to ensure the eastern crescent was included in the library's long term planning efforts. Likewise, the Austin public health department identified this critical service gap as early as 2005. We are all aware of the recent public health crisis that is spreading throughout our country, and the importance of having health care services available within our communities. Therefore, on behalf of colony park and the other communities of the eastern crescent, I respectfully implore you to keep the colony park library public health and child care center in the 2026 bond. If you decide to postpone the bond [10:33:50 AM] election, we trust that the time, effort and hard work invested by city staff, the appointed bond task force and community members will serve as the building blocks for the next bond election and will not be lost since multiple city councils have identified colony park as a priority, and the northeast district plan is underway, we respectfully ask that if the 2026 bond is postponed, you direct the city manager to identify alternative funding to move these facilities forward. The eastern crescent has waited long enough. We ask that you honor past commitments and ensure these critical investments become a reality. Thank you. >> Thank you, miss orozco. >> Hi. My name is Mindy, and I'm donating my time to miss orozco as well. >> We've already made note of that. So she has four minutes. Okay. Thank you. >> Good morning, mayor and city council members. My name is [10:34:51 AM] Sylvia roscoe. I'm the executive director of Mexican art. The museum. 2026 is an important year, not only because it is the museum's 43rd year, but because it brings the opportunity to begin the completion of the museum in downtown Austin, on the corner of fifth and congress avenue. I'm here today to ask the Austin city council to support the bond election and to include mexic-arte museum for $19 million that is needed to fully develop and complete the museum building. For over four decades, mexic-arte developed a partnership with the city of Austin. This partnership was approved and enhanced by the citizens of Austin in the past two bond elections, 2006 and 2018, we together are building a legacy for the generations of today and tomorrow. We, the city and the community. But we are not there yet. We need support. The funding was approved that was approved in [10:35:51 AM] 2018 is no longer sufficient due to inflation and the delays due in covid and other matters. Mexic-arte museum, in partnership with the city, has have made major contributions. We together started the downtown de los muertos parade and festival that now attracts 20,000 people annually. It is an annual tradition. We together secured the building on the main street of Texas congress avenue. We together, through an international agreement with the Mexican government, are now bringing to Austin. In the fall the first historical painting painted of Texas in 1765 that will open at the history center. Thanks to the partnership with the city of Austin, we together have uncovered and brought to light the contributions of the indigenous people and the Mexican Americans in downtown Austin, the fifth street Mexican American cultural district is now officially designated by the state of Texas is now forever. Austin's. [10:36:54 AM] We together have touched the lives of hundreds of artists and interns, providing opportunities and career career opportunities. We together have served thousands of visitors and schools annually. We mexic-arte the community and you, the city of Austin. These are our accomplishments. This is for Austin for now and for all the future. And just like every city, we together want Austin's downtown to be the best that we can. We together need help to complete the building that will house Austin's museum, that will house the fifth street Mexican American cultural district's museum that will house the official Mexican American museum of Texas. The community, the city, the state are anxiously waiting for this building. We together. As for the opportunity to continue this partnership by supporting the bond election and including mexic-arte the museum, our city cannot wait anymore. It is time [10:37:55 AM] to complete this project that we created together. In the end, it is for Austin. It is Austin's museum. We today ask that we together support the bond election include Mexican art. This building project. Thank you for bringing mexic-arte to this current level. But now let's support the bond election. Let's support mexic-arte to complete this museum building in the center of downtown Austin for now and generations to come. Thank you. >> Thank you, miss roscoe, Mr. Cumberbatch. >> Good morning, mayor and council. Thanks for having me this morning. My name is Ashton Cumberbatch. I'm with Eckhardt atx. We are a catalyst for the acceleration of holistic, equitable, sustainable development throughout. The eastern crescent colony park is one of the areas that we work in. We've been working there since 2018. I personally have been working with colony park neighborhood association and the stakeholders there since [10:38:56 AM] around 2016. I'm here in support of the colony park neighborhood association request that if there is a bond in 2026, November of 2026, that you include the one stop service of the Austin public health library and our early learning center, we understand that you have some difficult decisions to make as far as finances. So we're saying if there is one, please include the colony park. Colony park has been around, as you know, for almost more than 50 years now. But it's always been one of those things that has been under-resourced and underserviced for years. The pool that was opened up just last year was promised 50 years ago when miss Scott first moved into the neighborhood. That's a long time to wait for a promised asset. The Austin public health has been asking for resources in the community college park community for years. Right now, they operate out of an inadequate portable building. There's no library east of 185. Excuse me. 183 [10:39:58 AM] that's important for many of the students in that area and seniors who don't have a library to access computers. I've spent the last two years giving away 600 computers, and I've met seniors with no computers in their home, young families with no computers or homes, students about to attend high school with no computer, Baylor no computer, ACC with no computer. The library can help address some of those needs. And then lastly, our consultant noticed when we did our report several years ago that only 19% of the need for early learner early learning. Excuse me. Early learning is being met in colony park. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you all. >> Hunter Kaluna, Karen brimble, Marty combs, haydn brooks, Ted siff. [10:41:13 AM] >> Mr. Stiff, why don't we start with you and we'll just go down the line. However you want to do it, Mr. Siff. >> Good afternoon or good morning, and thank you so much for this opportunity to talk about this important topic. My name is Karen ruble. I'm a proud austinite and zilker. 351 board member. I would like to ask you today to please place the proposed bond on the November ballot for voter consideration. Our parks have many needs, and I'd like to highlight two high priority projects in zilker because they directly affect public health and visitor safety. The Barton creek spillway, more commonly known as barking springs, is a beloved community asset. It is the free side of Barton. Barton springs and it's where people come to cool off. It is one of Austin's most iconic and heavily used public spaces and serves residents from across [10:42:13 AM] our city, regardless of their ability to pay. Zocor park receives approximately 3 million visitors each year, and Barton springs pool welcomes over a million people per year. That level of use has taken a toll on barking springs, causing compacted soils, exposed TRE roots and significant erosion. Apr has stated that they have funding for lighter touch maintenance. This is no longer a maintenance issue. It is a public safety issue. Erosion threatened safe access to the water, creates tripping hazards, destabilizes the shoreline and impacts water quality. The second high priority item that I'd like to visit with you about is the playground. Originally installed in 2004, it has served visitors for more than 20 years in high use environments. Commercial playgrounds are typically replaced every 8 to 10 years. [10:43:14 AM] Austin's children deserve Ada compliant play equipment. Please support this bond and place it on the ballot this November. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, mayor and council members. I am Ted siff. I appear before you today personally and as a board member of Austin outside a coalition of more than 70 businesses and nonprofit members that support placing the parks and recreation and the library bond propositions on the November ballot so that austinites can vote for them. Additionally, I speak in favor of the council continuing to fund the sidewalk safe routes to school, bike trail and transportation safety programs in either your fiscal 27 capital budget or through bonds [10:44:16 AM] that can be voter approved at the level of funding being proposed. We're talking about a conservative and fiscally responsible investments of long needed, capital improvements. This funding level will address current safety, functionality, security and capacity needs. It will fund the repair, for example, of hvac systems that desperately need repair. It will fund repairs to garrison, big Stacey walnut creek pools so that they can stay open. It will fund long delayed plans and improvements to bond park and silverton pool in district three. It will also make sure that sidewalk, trail, bike and transportation safety programs stay funded simply at their current level. So I'm asking you to vote yes to put these propositions on the November [10:45:16 AM] ballot, giving austinites the choice to approve them. Thank you for this opportunity, and I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Siff. >> Morning, mayor. Council members, my name is Marty combs. I'm a resident of district nine. I'm here to voice my support for the November bond measure. 180 years ago, Austin started out as a city that was not meant to be. We are not a center of commerce or transportation hub like Dallas or Houston. We have no specific resources such as oil or minerals. What we had and still have is quality of life. Residents and visitors are attracted by Austin's quality of life, which turned which in turn attracts businesses and sintering to those residents and visitors. All this increase increases Austin's tax base amenities, which improve the quality of life in Austin, and the cycle continues with new visitors, new residents, new [10:46:17 AM] businesses catering to those residents. However, not all amenities are created equal. Some provide a much higher return on investment. To mention a few. May 2026 study by the trust for public land showed that for every dollar invested in parks and recreation, returned $3 in local benefits from reduced stormwater treatment costs, lower health care costs, improve public health outcomes, consumer savings on fitness and recreation, rising tax revenues and a boost to public private partnerships. Bike lanes, pedestrian paths and hike and bike trails cost as little as $50,000 per mile to build. Compare that to the nearly 1 million per mile cost for a multi-lane road with culverts, bridges and intersections. Building multiple small community spaces like parklets, art installations, dog parks spread around the city attract visitors and cost less to build and maintain than much larger ones. These types of public improvements through this bond [10:47:18 AM] measure will improve the quality of life for austinites, which will continue to attract visitors and residents to our lovely city. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Steve Kapnick, Meryl Foote, Amy Deluna, Alexandria Anderson, Francisco Chavez, Sylvia Stinson. >> Please begin. >> Good morning council. My name is Steve. I live in district two. I'm here to support the transportation aspects of this, specifically vision zero and also safe routes to schools. I could give you an abstract argument as to why these are good programs, but I decided to take my time to instead share with you stories about what this means to actual citizens in Austin. Here. My girlfriend lives in in district ten and she has two young girls. The oldest one is Olivia, age 11, and she has the privilege of being able to walk, bike, and walk to school every morning. I grew up in a rural area. I'm 40 now, so it's been a while since I was 11, but I [10:48:18 AM] didn't have any of this kind of infrastructure. And, you know, what this sort of represents to her is freedom. And, you know, 11 is a really complicated time. When you're a kid, you're just learning how to be in the world. And the fact that she has an age appropriate amount of freedom to, you know, go to school, come back from school, play with her friends in her neighborhood. It's like significantly increases her quality of life. And I think that's something that's a privilege for a child, but shouldn't be a privilege. It should be the right of everybody in Austin. And this infrastructure really, really helps make that kind of stuff safe for them to do. Two years ago, I was walking to go get groceries and I was struck by a car. I rolled up on the hood. I crunched their windshield and was thrown to the pavement. Luckily I wasn't injured. The driver drove off. And health care is expensive in this country. So I walked to the er because I was pretty sure I was okay. And it turns out, you know, just some minor scrapes and bruises. But, as I was leaving the er, the light turned green and I stepped off the curb and a truck blew through the red light, almost striking me again, literally as I was leaving the emergency [10:49:18 AM] room. So, you know, these kinds of safety improvements for people help, not just the young and not just the old, but, you know, they help all citizens and make our life better. So rather than thinking about the abstract aspects of bonds versus, you know, taxes and, and those kinds of things, you know, try to remember what this means to actual citizens here in Austin. Thank you. >> Thank you. And be careful when you leave. Whoever wants to go next. >> Okay. Let's see. Good morning. My name is Sylvia Stinson, and I'm here from district one, and I'm here to advocate for the George Washington carver museum cultural and genealogy center. Okay, y'all, I understand staff is recommending a delay of the bond election until 2028, and for city council to proceed with an interim funding package with the amount of up to $150 million, if the bond goes through for election. I advocate that the carver [10:50:19 AM] remains on the bond or is on the bond. If not, I am here to advocate for a recommendation that the carver be included in this interim funding package for the amount of $18 million, $18 million would be a huge win for the city. Not only is the 18 million recommendation supported by the community after close analysis, $18 million was also recommended by btf, allocating 18 million to the carver also aligns with the city's strategic approach of emphasizing project readiness. We're not, you know, we're trying to get away from funding things that never complete get lost and kicked down the road. The project review board scoring, released earlier this year in the January 31st, 2026 memo to the mayor and city council from the assistant city manager Mike Rogers and capital [10:51:20 AM] delivery services interim director at the time documented that the carver had some of the highest scores higher than most, and specifically in the areas of timeliness, readiness, efficiency and also community considerations. So I just want us to value our taxpayer time, effort, money. The decades that have gone into completing this process, we just need 18 million to get across the finish line. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, please. >> All right. Good morning. My name is Amy de Luna. I live in district nine. I'm here to speak on item two and encourage you to include active transportation infrastructure funding. I was born and raised in Austin. I've seen this city go through so much change, and I am impressed by the transformation of our roadways with bike lanes, sidewalks, and the increase in urban trails. Because of many of these improvements, I can now cycle more than drive for certain trips. I ride nine miles to [10:52:21 AM] work by bike. About two thirds of that ride is on protected bike lanes or along the red line in boggy creek trails. The other third of that ride is mostly on quiet neighborhood streets. I'm so thankful to have an option to bike to work instead of driving. My partner is a non-driver, so he has to either take the bus or ride a bike to work. He rides our bike to work seven and a half miles, and uses the protected bike Laine along shoal creek boulevard. We're thankful that he has this dedicated bike Laine to use for his commute. Portions of these routes I've mentioned were funded by previous mobility bonds. There are so many other improvements across town that I enjoy, make me feel safer and fight climate change, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I think it would be a major setback to our mode shift, climate and vision. Zero goals to not include funding for active transportation projects this year, we need to continue investing in roadway safety improvements, sidewalks, bikeways, urban trails, safe routes to school, vision zero [10:53:22 AM] and bus only lanes. Streets belong to everyone, whether they are driving, riding a bike, riding a scooter, walking, or taking the bus. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I have a remote speaker in the queue, Caroline Lunning. Miss, are you there? >> Caroline Lunning. >> Go back to in person Luke weber, Edgar Handel anush rasayan. Aarti Iyer, Dorothy Barnett, Alyssa vargas. >> Good morning, mayor and [10:54:23 AM] council members. My name is Luke weber. I'm a proud resident of district nine. I'm here to support a bond election to continue investment in transportation and safety projects. I work at atx kids club. We teach Austin children to ride public transportation across Austin to visit public parks, museums, and more. And recently, a parent told me that exploring the city from outside of their car has helped her daughter develop a sense of adventure, where she sees the entire city as her playground. How special is that? We see every day how the ability to move freely, safely and joyfully helps our youngest austinites connect with one another, grow confidence and enrich their relationship with their communities. I graduated from UT in may, and every one of my peers says one thing they want to live in walkable cities, and they're willing to move wherever that lifestyle is possible. Active transportation and street safety is life saving. It's common sense, and it helps austinites plant roots, [10:55:25 AM] start families, and grow rich lives. Please support the bond election and continue investing in these programs. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please. >> Council members, my name is arty and I'm here from district nine. I'm here to speak in favor of funding for active transportation. So about a year ago, I did not actually have a car in the city. And when I was apartment hunting, I couldn't just pick a place that I liked. I had to choose somewhere close enough to a grocery store. So I literally could have access to food. Because even grocery stores aren't reliably walkable or bikable here. So that was basically like, it wasn't even like a lifestyle choice. It was planning to survive. That goes beyond groceries. Because without a car, it was really hard for me to have a social life. I just moved here for a new job. I didn't have any [10:56:26 AM] friends, so I couldn't create a community here. It's hard to keep up with hobbies or to explore your own city that you're a resident in. I couldn't even fill up my weekends. Even if you live super close to downtown, I, it's really hard to get around unless you have a car because the trains, whatever train stations we have, we don't even have adequate parking Wright access. So we're leaving a lot of like potential ridership and a lot of car trips off the road. Yeah. So I, yeah, I'm advocating for more walkable, walkable city bikeways and urban trails. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> I'll go next, I guess. My name is Dorothy Barnett. I've lived in Austin since 1965. I'm [10:57:28 AM] 80 years old. I am a firm believer in the park system. I'm glad to see that they're considered for funding, but I am here to represent Mexico art museum. And I, I frequented, I frequent all the museums in town, even the carver, I frequent the libraries. I volunteer at the south Austin senior citizens center every week. I don't know how you guys are going to make the decisions you need to make to run this city. I am so glad today that I am not the decider. And I know that we you can't make us all happy, but it's a terrible decision you're going to have to make. Our city needs help, you know, and I would employ everyone that's listening to this to not think of your own little pocket that you need, but help, help outside of your, [10:58:30 AM] your box. I would like to thank you for your service and respectfully ask the Austin city council to support and include the mexic-arte museum building project in the 2026 bond election. Please support this Austin cultural legacy and anchor the fifth street Mexican American cultural district that contributes to our great city and community. It's needed. All of our museums are needed. The library, I was really struck by the, the, the crescent not having a library that's like an intellectual desert. We talk about food desert. That's an intellectual desert. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good morning. My name is Anna and I'm a resident of district three. I'm here in support of funding for bike lanes, sidewalks and trails. As someone who bikes with my kids regularly, I know how much bike lanes and trails have [10:59:30 AM] transformed what's possible for our family. Just yesterday, I bite my kids to the sappi to library. Using the new trail connecting our neighborhood to the library under seventh street. That connection has made it so easy for us to walk and bike to the library. We also regularly use the trail that connects us to go valley park and pool under airport. These recently added trails have made a real difference in how safely our family and neighbors can reach parks and libraries. One of our simple joys is biking my son to school every day, giving him a chance to start his day with some movement and fresh air. I've watched biking build my kids confidence, and I've noticed that when biking is how we get around, my kids are a lot more excited to be outside and active. Every one of these bike trips is a car trip we didn't take. Transportation is one of the biggest sources of climate pollution in Austin. So when families like mine have a safe way to get around without driving, it really adds up. A walkable bikeable Austin matters for our quality of life. My kids show up to school with [11:00:31 AM] more energy, our family spends more time outside, and our neighborhood actually feels connected to parks, libraries, and the city. Please continue to invest in these programs. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Congrats on the new baby to you. >> And thank you. >> Yeah, that fan clubs growing. >> Good morning, mayor and city council members. My name is Alyssa vargas and I'm the advocacy manager for Austin parks foundation. I have stood before you on this issue, and I'm here today because Austin parks cannot wait until 2028 for another bond. Nor can they make do with a smaller proposed package. These are the pools, parks and green spaces that our communities love and depend on and without real investment. Now there are four pools at risk of becoming inoperable, and playgrounds that will go without the desperate need of repairs. The 149 million from the 2018 parks bond has been fully expended and allocated by the Austin parks and recreation, producing more than 140 [11:01:32 AM] projects across the city. Trails and green spaces. Our parks have been operating on a six year funding cycle, and it is now been eight years. Our system faces a $1.8 billion in unmet needs, and they grow every month that we delay, parks have the unique opportunity to partner with private partners like Austin parks foundation and partners that are willing to bring money to the table to make every bond dollar go further. Neighbors and volunteers have expressed overwhelming support for this year's parks bond. The fiscally responsible decision would be to invest in our parks before they risk failing the very communities they rely most on. Give the voters the opportunity to decide in November. We've been waiting eight years and our parks cannot wait any longer. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good morning. My name is Meryl foot. I was called earlier and was late. I apologize, I live in district nine. I've been in Austin, resident since 1987, and I'm [11:02:32 AM] the founder of the 350 member Mueller dog park coalition. I'm here today to thank you, first of all, for your work on this proposal today. I know it's been hard to get here, and I know there's been a lot of things that have been hard to talk about and hard to, to make decisions about, and I appreciate what you're looking at today. Austin parks are the living, breathing heart and soul of our city. We love our parks, but they are now in desperate need of tender loving care and funding. The last parks bond election was in 2018. The parks and recreation department is out of bond money because they did what we told them to do. They built, repaired, and updated our park system, postponing this bond any further punishes pard for doing their job, and it also damages our parks and diminishes our ability to enjoy them. This bond isn't just about quality of life, it's about providing basic amenities. [11:03:33 AM] For example, one of the projects that I deeply care about will build finally, a brick and mortar restroom to replace the existing unacceptable porta potties that are at evergreen cemetery, east Austin's historic public cemetery. I also ask you to direct mossaad staff to look for opportunities to develop more dog parks in east Austin, including a >> Mueller dog park on existing city park land. An animal advisory commission working group concluded this year that off leash dogs are a growing problem in our city, and we need more designated off leash spaces for dogs and people to safely socialize, play and. Thank you again, and I ask you to please let the voters decide if we want to spend more money on our parks. I think the answer will be yes. >> Thank you. >> Hi, my name is Edgar Handel. I'm a resident of district three. I just want to echo a [11:04:33 AM] lot of my wife's comments about the importance of biking. Bike lanes, sidewalks, and trails to our family. But I also wanted to add that, sorry. Distracting. I wanted to add that I think that this, this type of investment has been a really big bright spot, I think for me, and I think a lot of other people, just anecdotally, when I was, trying to gauge people's opinions on previous votes, whether it's prop Q or just people's idea of spending in Austin, it seemed very common that one bright spot for everybody was the, investments in sidewalks, bike lanes, trails and that kind of thing. It really serves as a really concrete, thing that people can see that their tax dollars are going to, and that result in an improved quality of life for everybody improving safety. And just generally making people happier. So I think it would be really unfortunate if Austin kind of lost the opportunity to [11:05:35 AM] continue making these types of investments that people can really see, up front and value. And also I think the universe has a bit of a sense of dramatic irony or like divine irony because our newest baby really hates being in the car. So being able to, take her around in the outside and, walk and bike with her, she's a lot happier being able to see us and see the outside. And, you know, I think a lot of people feel that being inside of a car all the time is kind of, boring and sad sometimes. And, you know, I guess our, our infant also feels that too. So for the sanity of people like me, my wife and other parents like us, please continue making these investments so that, you know, I can have some quiet time with happy babies. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Ashley bills, Martha. Cotera. [11:06:35 AM] Sharon Blythe. Cecilia. Hogan. Zenobia. Joseph. >> Who goes first? >> Why don't you do it? >> Hi. Good morning. My name is Martha Cota. I'm a board member. I support including mexic-arte and the bond proposal. Mexic-arte is the only museum in Austin that presents and preserves our indigenous tejano culture and Mexican American culture. Now reduced our population, now reduced to 34% in Austin after massive gentrification of our neighborhoods. Our community is typically Austin smart. When I asked about supporting mexic-arte and the bonds recently, I heard what I heard, including the museum is at least the Austin the city can do with the earnings of [11:07:35 AM] hundreds of millions in property taxes on the equity extracted from the residents displaced at Rainey and from near east Austin neighborhoods. Especially since we all know those of us that have been here a long time, that we did fail time and time again to provide affordable housing in Rainey and also excluded the protection of its historic buildings, leading to its devastation. Also, for decades, the city disproportionately underfunded, and use cdbg funds, to, to avoid or say, to fail in Mexican American home improvements and housing, which led to the destruction of the neighborhoods in 2022. I conducted the palm cultural district study of Rainey and east Austin, stakeholders, individuals and groups, groups, [11:08:36 AM] all expressed then that as a trade off for displacement, as a trade off. The city should at least adequately fund hispanic cultural entities in the district, like Mexicana de la Pena palm school and palm park. All. Well. >> Thank you. And I can't imagine anybody here doesn't know you and love you. For the record, why don't you say your name? >> Thank you very much. >> Just state your name, please. >> Gracias. >> Okay. Martha. Cotera. Thank you. Miss Blythe will go to you next. >> Sharon Blythe, a district six. I was real happy to hear the parks people talking about a cemetery for once. Besides me. Yes, evergreen does need a restrooms, but my concern is the 2012 bond was for different things than what parks paid for. What they paid for was a very expensive oakwood cemetery chapel that cost them millions [11:09:37 AM] of dollars when they should have been putting in, infrastructure in evergreen as well as Austin memorial park. And they did not do that. No one was overseeing the expense of that, of that bond. So if you pass it, if you put it on the ballot and people pass it, please make sure that you have somebody overseeing the parks department really what they're supposed to use it for. Secondly, I think all these bike bike people, advocates, advocacy people. I think they're delusional for saying that the streets are safer. Safer, because I have never seen a biker stop at a stoplight or stop sign. They blow through them like they're not even there. I've seen many people almost run into them because they're not stopping and abiding by the laws of the city of Austin, and they're putting themselves in danger. So I hope you understand that, that these people are delusional and they don't need to have these bike lanes everywhere. If they're not [11:10:38 AM] going to stop at stoplights and stop signs. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Why don't we go here and we'll go that direction? >> Hi. My name is Ashley bills. >> I am a landscape designer with rialto studio in district four. So my opinion on the importance of open space might be a bit biased. But my education and professional experience lends credibility when I say public spaces are essential to foster a sense of community. In 2025, I made the decision to move here from Tennessee, Texas's cousin, because back home, I didn't see many people outdoors using public spaces, not for a lack of trying. We just didn't have many. So to see so many people outdoors in the middle of summer heat, having a good time felt really special. These spaces encourage small scale entrepreneurs, artists, musicians, bad comedians and residents just like me to embrace all our city has to [11:11:38 AM] offer. And since I've been here, I've volunteered with the Austin parks foundation, tree folks, Texas master naturalists. I've served on the acme grant review panel, where some of these parks pitch improvements that I'm not sure they'll realize, because a dollar only goes so far, but it caused me to integrate more into the communities and programs filled with passionate people that I've come to associate with Austin. And at the center of all of those experiences is the same thing that drew me to Austin and learn from this beautiful city, her parks and open spaces. So as a constituent of district four, I'd surely appreciate your support to put the full 2026 parks bond to a vote and give my neighbors a chance to show their love and supporting our parks. As much as I love the chance at designing them, thank. >> You, thank you. >> Okay. >> Good morning. I'm Cecilia hogan from district two, and I'm here to offer support for the proposed park bond package. I, through five years of I'm [11:12:41 AM] one of the founders of friends of grand meadow. Our neighborhood adopted park group for grand meadow park, a previously undeveloped park that is ten acre, ten acre meadow in southeast Austin. Through five years of community engagement, including canvasing and tabling and hosting events, I've spoken personally to hundreds of my neighbors to gather opinions for the future of our park, to gather stories. And along the way, I've learned that there have been at least three other attempts in 25 years to get this park developed, and these neighbors have told me that they had countless hours of getting excited with their neighbors, thinking up what features they want in their park, and then approaching the city for funds to help develop this park. And each time the city would tell them that it would be 3 to 5 years before there's maybe park bond funds available to get the park developed. And each time I hear this story, what I hear from them is feeling rather neglected from the city. They feel very disenfranchized, and each time the volunteer group would kind of just, you know, [11:13:43 AM] move along because it didn't feel like it was going to happen. Thankfully, this year the park is finally getting developed. Phase one is under construction and will open in the coming weeks. And we are very excited to have the first few features in our park. Once that's finished, we're going to also build our community garden and food forest, making it a true community hub. We're really excited to keep the progress moving. And phase two for our park is included in the current proposed park bond package. And we urge you to, not just for, for our park that's been waiting for so long, to vote for the package as it was. Oh, I thought this was three minutes. But there might have been other communities that have also been waiting for 10 to 20 years. So thank you for your consideration. >> Thank you, thank you, thank all of you. Is your name called sir? Was your name called? [11:14:43 AM] Please make yourself at home. >> Good. Good morning. My name is haydn brooks. My name was called previously. Good morning mayor. Mayor pro tem council members, I truly appreciate your time and consideration. As I mentioned, I am haydn brooks, a proud co-founder of zilker. 351. We bring community together protect the ecology, honor the history, and broaden access to all 351 acres of zilker metropolitan park. I'm here today to ask for your support moving forward. The proposed 2026 bond. It's critical for many reasons and will benefit all people across Austin. Zilker 351 was formed in 2022, pursuant to council's recognition that park nonprofits are needed for our parks to thrive, we're here to partner with the city of Austin on the future zilker park and more broadly, on the future of Austin park system. We want it to remain inclusive, welcoming and accessible to everyone in the community. Zilker is Austin's central park. It [11:15:43 AM] serves residents from every part of the city and welcomes millions to the visitors each year. Investments in zilker benefit the entire community, and this bond also provides much needed funding for neighborhood parks, pools, trails, rec centers and green spaces throughout Austin. Zilker 351 and our members support and endorse the November 26th bond, which includes $250 million investment in the Austin park system. This matters because Austin parks haven't seen bond funding since 2018. Eight years ago. In the years since, our city has grown dramatically, park usage has grown, increased exponentially, and deferred maintenance is overwhelming the entire park system not just zilker, but neighborhood and district park. Citywide parks are not optional infrastructure. There were Austin families gather kids, play people, exercise and connect with nature and where our green spaces are protected for future generations. Please support this bond package and give Austin parks a reinvestment that's long overdue. Thank you for all your hard work. On [11:16:44 AM] behalf of the people of Austin, we are stronger because of you. >> Thank you, thank you. >> Michael, Michael torres, George Ellerman, Carlos Leon, Elvis de la Rosa. Emily arenas. >> Mr. Leon, if you don't mind, we'll start with you, and we'll work our way down the aisle. >> Okay? You got it, mayor. So, Carlos Leon, first and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to this item. Prefacing Thursday's item two bond for an extra $20 million for a P L paid by a property tax. Beyond the annual 3.5% increase, your [11:17:45 AM] budget already consumes. Backup says that the money will be for the construction, renovation, and expansion of the existing Hampton at oak hill branch library, as well as other branch libraries. Yet a P L still hasn't finished spending the 2018 bond money on doing the same for the unfinished William Kirk and old quarry renovations, or even started the planned manchaca branch improvements after last year's prop Q failure, mayor Watson said you all needed to rebuild public trust, so get a pls director down here asap to publicly testify about all this because she has not earned our trust. Drill down on her responses, force her to defend detailed plans, then split a bond from parks and rec so voters can separately decide each solicit and take into account independent public feedback and analysis throughout sunshining truth, transparency and accountability from start to finish. The exact [11:18:47 AM] opposite. How Broadnax kept us in the dark during the a P L director's search when he wrongly passed up top candidate Kathy Donelon, whose extensive back of house experience and competence planning and completing public improvement projects on time under budget for the San Antonio public library system, made her a trustworthy advocate for leading Austin's public library growth from the front, where she rightly belongs. Choices have consequences. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. Thanks, mayor. >> Thank you sir, please. >> My name is Michael torres and I served as the president of the board of Mexico art museum for several years. I support the arts and culture. I support the mission of Mexico art. My concern is not about the museum. My concern is whether the city is exercising fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers before approving another $20 million debt issuance. The project has been before the city for 20 years, 2006 5 million, 2018 15 million. [11:19:49 AM] And now they're asking to double their investment before making another investment. Every responsible lender, investor, fiduciary reviews previous commitments to see if they've met their commitments. Taxpayers deserve this diligence. During my time as board, we believe we had the necessary funding. The museum's remaining commitment was 3 million of private donations. Mackenzie Scott, ex-wife of Jeff bezos, gave us a million, reducing our fundraising target to 2 million. I believe we had the momentum to complete the fund. Instead, the museum's commitment was never completed. Today, rather than completing the original plan, the city is being asked to double its number. As president, I became aware of governance issues involving the organization, multiple parties, alleged hostile work environment, discrimination, harassment, harassment, harassment, sexism and microaggressions. The board retained outside counsel with human resource expertise nationally recognized crisis firm to investigate these issues. Both firms resigned because the executive director's material breaches non-disclosure of critical information, unprofessionalism and conduct, and customary with business interactions. All the [11:20:49 AM] recommendations were similarly dismissed, even blocking a board meeting to review the recommendations. Because I believe this was an issue to be invested by the city. I shared this with all of the council members in 22. I never heard back from anybody. I raised this issue today for governance matters. I believe every nonprofit requesting substantial tax funding must first, have operational fitness. You know, can they receive the money? Can they manage it? Second, can they keep their commitments? And third, what is the long term sustainability? Constructing the building is only the beginning. Who pays for it? Who maintains it? Who pays for the repairs? During my years on board, we knew that we needed to have. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Buenos dias. Soy soy performance de la Katrina de Austin. Tejas alcalde Y miembros del consejo. >> Good morning. My name is Emily arenas. I'm an artist and resident from district four and a member of the Katrina. Thank you and good morning, mayor and council members. [11:21:49 AM] >> Por medio del presente. El apoyo financiero de la ciudad de Austin para el desarrollo Y construction del museo Mexicano de un espacio cultural dedicado preservar exhibit Y el arte historia Y las traditions de méxico Y de la comunidad méxico americana Y también qué construido el crecimiento Y identidad cultural de NUESTRA ciudad. Austin, Texas. >> Today, we're here to respectfully request the financial support to develop and build el museo de arte Mexicano de Austin, known as mexic-arte, is a cultural space dedicated to preserve, exhibit and promote the arts. The history and traditions of Mexico, and the Mexican American community that has contributed to the growth and cultural identity of our city. >> Austin alberga Una de las comunidades mas grandes hispanas in Texas. Necesitamos van eenoo mexic- arte ofreciendo un centro de educacion creatividad. Y Su impacto [11:22:53 AM] cultural educative Y economic en la ciudad. >> Austin holds one of the most important hispanic communities of Texas. We need a new mexic-arte because it is. This project offers a center of education, creativity and exposes the cultural, economic, and educational impact for our city. >> Se convirtio en un symbol de inclusion diversidad orgullo para Austin Y los Anos reflejan el compromiso de NUESTRA ciudad con el reconocimiento de todas las culturas Forman parte de Su historia incluyendo méxico. >> We firmly believe that this museum will be a symbol of inclusion, diversity and pride for Austin and will reflect the commitment of our city with the recognizing all the cultures that are part of this history. >> Su tiempo Y consideracion el apoyo esperamos la oportunidad de colaborar con la ciudad para hacer realidad. Es Bueno. Qué es un importante proyecto para Toda la ciudad incluyendo me. [11:23:56 AM] >> We thank you for your time, consideration and support. We wait for the opportunity to collaborate with the city of Austin to make this important project a reality. And this is a dream for the city, including myself. >> Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> 2.5 minutes on my my stopwatch. >> Well, I'll it's you're supposed to have two minutes. >> Only two minutes, not four. Okay. >> Sorry about two and a half. We screwed up. >> Okay? My fault. Sorry. >> No problem. Yes, sir. >> My name is George Ellman. Part of district seven. And, I did sign up against the bond. That's primarily because I'm concerned about the size and the scope. It seems like we put a lot of things in the budget that maybe are not emergency types of things. I tend to agree with the staff that, you know, the, the city is in a very precarious place financially. And there's a lot of things that need to be considered where we are. And I [11:24:56 AM] think I'm very supportive of sidewalks and parks. I think we have some emergency things that need to be taken care of there. But as Michael was mentioning, when we look at our arts and cultural institutions, which I'm very supportive of and also very supportive of Mexican art and the mission, I'm just concerned about the growth in the amount of money that's going into that space. And I feel like, it's not an emergency situation. Whereas we have parks and infrastructure and sidewalks that are most definitely an emergency situation. And I would like to see, any money that is being, going into this bond, going into the things that are most critical to our city at this time. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Andrew Gonzales, Zach Faddis, Jennifer Palmero, Palermo. [11:25:57 AM] >> Howdy, council members and mayor. My name is Zach Faddis. I live in district nine. I'm president of aura, and I'm here to speak in favor of including funding for active mobility and a bond for this year. I live at 45th and Guadalupe. I specifically choose to live there because of all the pedestrian, bike and transit infrastructure in the area. My life is physically and financially improved by this infrastructure. I got here today by bike going down. Guadalupe. It's not awful, but it isn't great either. I'm able to do it because I'm a bit crazy. I don't mind me weaving around cars and using bike lanes with no physical separation, but you shouldn't need to be crazy to bike in Austin. I want to take my mother and my younger sister all over town by bike, but in order for me to do that, I need you all to continue our build out of bike infrastructure. We in Austin love to make pretty plans that look lovely on the shelf, but often fail to do the hard work of implementing implementing them. That's been the case with much of the bond money given to the transportation department for road and corridor improvements, but it's not the case with active mobility. They've been so good at delivering [11:26:58 AM] noticeable improvements all over Austin that they're about out of money. We should not penalize them for their success by allowing their funding to dry up. I know lots of hard choices are going to need to be made in the coming days, and you don't have easy choices in front of you. I have faith you'll see us through. Thank you for your time. Glad to see council member Fuentes back on the dais. >> Thank you sir. >> Mayor. All speakers for item two have been called. >> Just heard all the speakers on item number two have been called. So what we'll do is we'll go to item number two. And let me ask first if, before we, what I would suggest we do is we see if staff has any presentation, wants to make or any comments wants to make. If anybody has questions of staff, we can ask those questions. And then I'll get a motion in a second and we'll have discussion related to the motion. And second, assistant city manager Rogers. [11:28:13 AM] Yes, please. >> Good morning, mayor and council. >> Is your microphone on? >> Yes. >> There you go. Okay. >> So good morning, mayor and city council. Adriana Castaneda, capital delivery services director. And this morning I have assistant city manager Michael Rogers with me, as well as assistant director Marcus hammer. So this morning, we're here to have a discussion on a potential 2026 bond program. I wanted to start off with a timeline from the last time we were here with city council. Was back on may 19th and during city council work session where staff provided the following two recommendations to city council to hold a 2028 bond election, as well as to consider interim funding as part of the fiscal year 27 budget process for several bond proposition categories. On may [11:29:15 AM] 28th through three resolution, city council directed staff to provide supplemental information on proposed bond project proposals. On July 17th. Staff responded through to this resolution through a memo to the mayor and council last week. On July 28th, 2026, staff received additional guidance through the council message board to provide a bond package for discussion today with the following considerations. To base a bond package with the 390 million scenario outlined in the July 17th memo. Also to include, as part of this potential 2026 bond program, two propositions one for parks and recreation and one for libraries. We were also guided to reduce the funding for the parkland acquisition category, as well as removing the homeless resource center and shelter project, and that for active transportation and animal services, investments would be considered through [11:30:16 AM] other sources. So what would a potential 2026 bond program look like? On this slide, we have a $280 million bond program with the two propositions, parks and recreation for $260 million and libraries for $20 million. Parks and recreation is broken down into several projects programs, including buildings, parkland improvements, infrastructure, aquatics, and acquisition. On this next slide, we wanted to go a little bit more in detail by breaking out the proposition. Under the potential prioritize 2026 bond program projects. We listed the priority projects, in several districts, for instance, under buildings, that is a program, several projects such as Gus Garcia recreation center, Doris Miller auditorium. It's [11:31:16 AM] included as a prioritized project under the program buildings, specifically under that program and prioritize projects. There's approximately $43.5 million. Overall, the prioritized projects totaled approximately $177.8 million. With that, also, the program categories are included more intentionally. For instance, under buildings. That funding that bucket is for renovations and rehabilitation and additions of existing parks and recreation facilities for recreation and senior centers, including Ada and safety improvements under that specific bucket, there's approximately $22 million cumulatively under each. Under all the buckets, there's a total of $82.2 million. And cumulatively, the proposition totals $260 million. So what [11:32:19 AM] does that tax impact look like for a $280 million bond program? For every 100 million issued in debt, the current estimated annual tax impact to a typical homeowner would be approximately $14 with $0.10. Therefore, 280 million. A $280 million bond program would have a tax impact, an annual tax impact of $39.48. What is the next step for city council to consider the approval of an ordinance ordering a general obligation bond election to be held in November 3rd, 2026, and that would take place during the council meeting on August 6th, 2026. I'll turn it over to acme Rogers. >> Good morning. Mike Rogers, assistant city manager. Before we get into discussing the merits of the individual bond [11:33:19 AM] proposal, I wanted to really take a moment point of privilege to recognize the tremendous work that has brought us here to this point. I want to sincerely thank the city staff, as well as every single member of the bond advisory task force or tiff, for the countless hours that they dedicated to this process. This has been a thoughtful, transparent, and collaborative effort that required balancing many competing priorities. When you have $3.9 billion in capital needs across the community, I know the decisions that you made were not easy. Every project represented a worthwhile need, and every recommendation involved thoughtful deliberations and compromise. So on behalf of the city manager's office and myself, I wanted to express my sincere appreciation for the professionalism, expertise and commitment that you all have had to serve the city of Austin. [11:34:22 AM] Thank you mayor. >> Thank you. Does that complete the presentation? >> Completes our presentation. >> If members, I'll ask a couple questions. And if you if you want to be heard, hit your hit your button. I want to make sure I'm clear on what you just laid out. What you laid out was a response to requests staff's position on making a recommendation has been for a 2028 bond election. Is that changed because the way you I thought I heard you say something about a response, but in all the slides, you talk about a recommendation. >> So what we presented was based on the direction that we received on the council message board on July 28th. >> So you're being responsive to that. What is the staff recommendation with regard to a bond proposal? >> Staff recommendation remains the same as as it has been in every presentation that we had [11:35:23 AM] that we are our belief was that the 2028, would be the time for bond. And we are responding to the requests that have come, come. >> Sure. And I understand that. I just want to make sure that there's clarity with regard to that. What percentage of the 2018 bond funds have been obligated for Austin libraries? >> Approximately 89%. >> All right. Can any of the additional money, any of the unspent funds be used for the Hampton branch, which is on the proposal? >> I believe that you can spend funds, just as long as it is from library to library. Yes. >> So. If, if we wanted to shift funds to Hampton branch and not have an election with regard to, because that's the one library that's put on this [11:36:26 AM] proposal, if we wanted to shift funds there, would there be funds available? >> I would like to call the director of libraries. They have more detail in terms of the status of the project. >> Okay. >> Hannah Terrell, director of Austin public library. Thank you. Mayor. The short answer is yes. The longer answer is the money that has been obligated in the 2018 bond that is earmarked for projects that haven't been started yet. It would take away from them. So all projects have already been earmarked. Even if they have not been started. >> Got it in the. Thank you for that. We're it appears that we're adding as an amendment to [11:37:26 AM] the backup, the word design to the description under libraries, can design be fund funded with cash as part of the budget process. >> I believe so, but I would like to ask, I think Kim is in the audience. >> She is. >> Good morning council. Kim Olivares director of financial services. Utilizing cash for design services is absolutely an appropriate use of dollars. One of the things you need to be careful with when you're utilizing bond dollars for design purposes is that there ultimately will be an asset at the end of the day. That's why we are very, very careful about utilizing dollars for design purposes only, making sure that they are projects where there is confidence that there will [11:38:26 AM] be an asset of the day because the design engineering plans do not technically count as an asset according to accounting standards. >> But if we back to my question, if what we wanted to do was utilize in the budget process, utilize cash or even some other debt structure to to get to that cash, we would be able to do design. >> Yes, we, we absolutely. Wherever there is cash available, for initial design work, we definitely recommend that, it provides much greater flexibility in, in, in your uses and the programing. >> All right. Thank you for that. Maybe I've just been around this a while and so, but I've not, I don't recall, having a situation where we went to the voters on a single item, a single facility, an individual facility, construction, on a citywide bond vote. And maybe that's happened in the past and I just don't remember it. But in this [11:39:27 AM] case, with regard to libraries, we're only the proposal that that you've presented only has one library on it. Is that right? >> Yes. >> Were there. And I think I know the answer to this, but I want to make sure because we heard, testimony today about colony park and we know from a message board post and a proposed amendment to this that there was at least one other branch library that was also considered. Were there other branches, were there other areas that were recommended for library facility construction other than this one? >> Yes, sir. Colony park Hampton at oak hill, renovation and expansion and regional land acquisition. [11:40:29 AM] >> Okay. >> And Millwood branch, renovation. So two expansion projects. >> But this proposal just lists the one, of the projects that are listed on the proposal, which ones were not a part of the bond election advisory task force. >> Good morning. Mayor council, this is Marcus hammer assistant director, capital delivery services. So in short, all projects were inclusive that are on the list that were through the bond. All of them. Yes, sir. >> Okay, good. All right. Thank you very much. Councilmember Siegel pro tem thank you mayor. >> I had a. >> I guess, financial question. I don't know if director Olivares would ask it, answer it. Going to the slide about the tax impact. I just want to clarify that this slide, [11:41:31 AM] represents the tax impact of all of the proposed debt was sold in one year. Is that right? >> Correct. >> Okay. But if this debt was spread out over six years so that it was roughly $50 million or less annually, it would be about a $7 tax impact per year. >> Correct. >> And isn't it true that the city retires more than $50 million in debt each year? >> The amount of debt that we retire. It fluctuates, right now based on authorized but unissued. We would peak in issuance, with no additional, debt requirements. We would be, we'd peak in about 20, 30, 20, 31. And at that point is when you would start to see the curve, decline, relative to how much we have remaining to pay off. Right now, we just have such a significant amount of authorized, but an issue to still to issue that there just isn't that, that drop off. So with this additional, 280 as [11:42:31 AM] proposed, it would extend that issuance curve out, without having like doing a simple just divide by six that is based on the information we have about available right now. That is a reasonable, approach, but what we do do is, with our issue, our issuance is based on actual spending. So depending on how many dollars are going out in that fiscal year, that's what we follow up with and spend for our next gio sale. So it's, it's without having a clear spending plan for this. 280, it's hard to give you an exact number. So just that simple divide by six is the best we can do at this point. >> No thanks. Director. I guess the point I was trying to make is that each year we retire a certain amount of debt, right? And there's a range and sometimes we, we extinguish over $100 million of debt, close to $200 million of debt, something like that. Is that correct? >> It give me a moment to pull that. I'm, I'm, I'm guessing that, my treasurer is hopefully she's watching right now and she can give me that number on [11:43:33 AM] the fly. But. >> Let me just put it a different way. Sorry, director. This won't necessarily increase the debt rate at all, right? Because at the same time that we might be issuing debt to pay for new projects, we're retiring debt for completed projects. And so it's up to financial services to some extent to manage the issuance and retirement rate. And you all could manage it in a way that this doesn't impact taxpayers at all in terms of increasing the debt rate on a property tax bill. >> That's not correct. Because of our authorized but unissued, the, the tax rate will have the debt service portion of the tax rate will have to continue to increase. Regardless. >> So yeah, regardless of whether we do this though. >> Yeah. But this, this would also do the same. Because we are simply just not retiring as much debt as we are adding at this point that dynamic shifts without the, the, what's being considered today, that dynamic shifts in about 2030, 20, 31, which is when we are retiring [11:44:33 AM] more than is being added. So at this point, this and all of our authorized. What an issue. What would result in additional, impact on the tax rate. >> But I think you're lumping this in with the debt that's already been kind of voter approved, right. Or authorized by council. And so you don't know that this will actually increase the debt rate more than what it's already going to go up. >> It it would we do know that. >> Okay. >> We do know. >> That manager. >> And and thank you, Kim. And I know our cfo wants to speak. And councilman, I just want to just make clear and just underscore the point. I think as you can reflect on prior presentations that we've made, particularly the one focused on the debt and what we would say, I think the 20, 30, 31 kind of, as Kim mentioned, that was one of the driving reasons why staff was recommending that the bond program be delayed until 2028, so that we would actually crest with our debt side of [11:45:34 AM] things and then begin to go down that debt from the 2028, particularly in how we progress with projects wouldn't actually hit and or be issued until after 2030. So therefore, then it would begin again to do the trade off that I think that you're talking about. And so again, I think staff has shared that, and I think they're trying to do that with the questions being asked. But that's the fundamental reason why staff has pretty much held, I guess, consistent with our recommendation, because it's not about the projects, which they're all worthy. As acm, Rogers said, there are billions of dollars worth of need out there. The issue is really the cost curve, juxtaposed to even the operating side that we're trying to balance when it comes to the overall tax impact. >> Okay. Thank you manager. And then I guess I'll just conclude, I mean, just to sum up, it's going to the debt rate is going to go up a little bit, but the impact of this project will be roughly $7 annually for a typical homeowner. And I just [11:46:35 AM] want to follow up with cfo Benigno. Earlier, we heard some testimony that the city is in an emergency financial situation. And I just want to ask you, what's our current credit rating as a city? >> Our credit rating is credit rating is triple a and the highest you can receive. >> That's pretty good, right? >> The highest you can receive. >> Are there any Texas cities with a higher credit rating? >> There's no other Texas no other large Texas city that's triple a rated by all three rating agencies. There are a couple that are triple a rated by one, but not all three. >> So currently Austin is the highest rated big city in Texas. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. Thank you. Mayor. >> I did have a response to you since you asked the question. I did have that information about, our debt retirement schedules. I mean, I have all the details, but big picture, we're currently servicing 2.4 billion in general obligation debt. The net effect of retirement and projected sales based upon what we currently have nothing to do with a new bond election is by [11:47:35 AM] 2031, we would peak out at $3.4 billion. So we are retiring like director Olivares mentioned. But we are also issuing bonds as we continue to deliver on those previous bond elections. >> Thank you, council member, mayor pro tem, followed by council member Ellis. >> Thank you very much. Mayor, first I wanted to, as many of the speakers did, give props to, capital delivery services and transportation public works on so many of the active transportation projects that have gone out the door over the last 5 or 6 years. I don't need to reiterate all of the comments, but I mean, we're really seeing a transformation of our city. Recently, I yesterday I drove down, dessau and Cameron and saw all of the improvements there. And it's really impressive. And it's a different city than it was 15 [11:48:35 AM] years ago in terms of, bicycle access, in terms of the quality of sidewalks that we're putting in, you know, that that ten foot, I think it's a ten foot sidewalk on Ramberg, right there running between Webb middle school and Gus Garcia is just tremendous. And, you know, that protected hybrid beacon between the park and the middle school, just those kinds of investments and improvements are just tremendous. I was just thinking, I mean, burnet, Lamar, those Lamar sidewalks are going in right now. I saw him working on it. Cameron, the wishbone bridge, the Waterloo greenway, a phenomenal list of accomplishments, all extremely popular. I was not able to make it to the wishbone bridge, inauguration, but folks told me that there were thousands of people there. And everybody, I mean, people when they not from Austin, when they see that are immediately like, oh my god, this is just a tremendous project. >> They were there to see councilmember Velasquez run across. The bridge. The bridge [11:49:38 AM] is nice, but what you really needed to see. >> Yeah, like we got to get the video on that. Yeah. >> And I want to put that in contrast, with, one of our, our, our peer cities, Houston, which is, reportedly tearing out bike lanes on key arteries. I just think there's such a stark difference in the way that Austin is approaching transportation and the way that other cities are supporting transportation. And I just think, again, I just want to give props to, to the transportation staff and capital delivery services for doing just a tremendous job. That and just improving our quality of life. With all that said, I know the, the, the, the transportation, we're not considering the transportation bond. I just wanted to kind of address it real quickly because, and honestly, if transportation or I guess cds also, there are, there are lots of [11:50:38 AM] transportation bonds pending, I believe to be issued for a handful of largely major road projects. But my understanding is that the active transportation funds, we're talking about, sidewalks in particular, are, are running low at this point. Is that could you comment on that a bit? >> Yes. Just give us one second. Do you. >> Have it? >> And while you're doing that, I also got to give props to the, the bond advisory. They did a lot of really good work, and were largely drawing from what they identified. And again, I know that was a lot of meetings and a lot of discussion, but again, the, my appointees and all of the appointees just, I think they did an excellent job vetting this over like a two year period. >> So yeah. >> So some of those areas include, bikeways and sidewalks, as you mentioned earlier, as well as transportation safety [11:51:39 AM] improvements. >> And so that would largely be zo sidewalks were essentially after this year, we're going to be essentially out of capital money. >> We're hitting the 90%. Yes. >> Okay. And then, the, that would be kind of the, the, the safety improvements. It's kind of the vision zero treatments that we've been doing on various intersections that that's also running low. >> Yes. And, safe routes to school. >> All right. >> And I last year, if, if, if my memory serves, we appropriated $10 million in CEOs to the sidewalk, to sidewalks to continue the build out. And, you know, we've got the crews out there just knocking this work out at about a 20 ish million dollar a year pace of, of, of sidewalk improvements. And I appreciate the discussion that we've had around the bond cycle and that six year bond cycle. Right now, though, I feel like our transportation needs are more kind of immediate. And I just wanted to, to mention that we [11:52:39 AM] don't have the transportation stuff on here. I do fully intend to propose the issuance of cos to continue our work. Where we are lacking right now, in my sense is that that the vision zero, the sidewalks and the bikeways would be the areas that could use some money. That's not a conversation for today, but I just wanted to highlight that, because I know a lot of people are here to talk about the active transportation stuff. And another quick question for animal services actually, on the, the $3 million their capital needs to again, I know that's not, currently kind of on the, the, the proposal that's before us, but I did just want to understand that $3 million and. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Monica dangler. I'm the director of Austin animal services. And you wanted to know how the $3 million would be spent? >> Yes, please. >> Yeah, that would be for, design of expansion of the [11:53:40 AM] campus, as well as facility improvements. >> Okay. So this is, this is for basically design. And when would the money for the, when are we thinking the, the facility improvements would actually be funded and built. >> So we would hope to, be part of a 2028, potential bond for construction. >> Got it. So we want to kind of get ahead of the curve with $3 million in kind of engineering design. So that when the, again, assuming that there's a successful bond in 2028, we're ready to build and improve the, the animal services. >> Correct. >> Okay. Very much appreciate that. And, the, our, our animal services is eligible for certificates of obligation. For the design and construction of the, those types of improvements. >> I believe. So. >> No. >> The answer is yes, sir. Ed Benigno cfo. [11:54:43 AM] >> And I'm sorry, what was the answer was yes. >> Answer is yes. >> The answer is yes. >> Okay. I was unclear on that. And to the extent, again, I would hate to I want to get that $3 million in design and engineering and, and put animal services in a position to improve their facilities, but with such a small amount to put on a bond, that's my only concern with, with the number. I'm happy to to the extent that it doesn't make it onto this bond, I would be happy to to, you know, find an alternative funding. But I do agree that we need to get those in the pipeline so that we are able to improve our facility and make sure that that, you know, again, open intake ultimately would be the the goal. And we're not going to get there unless we make some improvements to our facility. I know we can't build our way out of out of the capacity problem, but we probably do need some more capacity, right? [11:55:44 AM] >> Correct. Yeah. And animal services is, you know, in favor of, looking for alternate funding sources, with the help of, city manager's office. >> Got it. Well, again, then just to the extent, the, to the extent that the money is not part of the bond, I do want to work to find that $3 million and get it into the, make sure that, that y'all kind of get that jump start on that facility. And I also just wanted to ask about, urban trails, to, I understand what is the situation with capital money for urban trails. >> I'm going to call Richard transportation public works. >> Thank you. >> Mayor and council. Richard Mendoza, director for transportation and public works, urban trails council member in terms of expand, is a little [11:56:45 AM] bit slower than the sidewalks and the other active mobilities. And, primarily for considerations, we're leveraging and been successful in getting federalized earmarked monies to stretch those bond dollars further. And of course, when you federalize projects, you have to go through a number of more steps. Coordination with txdot environmental studies. But we currently have all urban trails monies identified for the tier one improvements that were funded out of the 2016 and I believe 2020 bond programs 2018. We got a small amount to purchase the right of way for Bergstrom spur that's been purchased. So all the 2018 urban trails have been expended, got. >> And through our conversations offline, we were, I know that sometimes again, we talk about how we want to get money out the door, but sometimes we have to hold it because we're waiting for a federal match. And I just wanted to highlight that because, you know, we, you know, when we're $5 million is [11:57:46 AM] sitting in the kitty and everyone's like, spend it, spend it. It's because that's going to leverage, you know, maybe ten, $15 million in federal funds. So I just want to highlight that when we're talking about, you know, why don't we get that money out the door? Sometimes it's strategically waiting for a partner money down the road. And I just wanted to. Is that accurate? >> Yes, sir. That's very accurate for a number of the trails. And we do enjoy this committee does enjoy, tremendous support from our federal legislation identifying those federal funds. >> Yeah. And again, thanks to both the congressman Duncan and congressman Casar for their work in identifying earmarks for active transportation. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem council, councilmember Ellis. And if anybody else wants to speak, let me know. A minute ago, I hit the wrong button and erased everybody. So I may not that was not purposeful. It was not purposeful. Councilmember Ellis yeah, no, I'm calling on you. I'm calling on you. >> Thank you mayor. I wanted to speak briefly to the conversation around the Hampton branch library, because that's one that is hugely important to [11:58:46 AM] southwest Austin. It is our only public facing city building outside of zilker park. There's 100,000 constituents that live in southwest Austin. And it is, I believe, the second most circulated library in the entire library network. I am very mindful that having only one library here for voters to decide on, would definitely, you know, make people think about the libraries in their neighborhoods and what other investments are on the list. I know that council member harper-madison has talked about the colony park branch library numerous times, and we've seen from the advocates that come and and talk about how important colony park is to district one. I'm fully supportive of adding in other improvements and designs to make sure that colony park can truly realize the impact and investment that is so well needed and deserved in that part of town. So I'm certainly supportive of that. We don't have a lot of city buildings in southwest Austin, and so the only way that we're really going to get these detailed and [11:59:48 AM] prioritized investments is to specifically name where it is that we're going to invest those dollars. I have been a good team player for a lot of other bond proposals. And as we see drainage issues with other sorts of transportation projects through previous bonds, the ones in southwest Austin were the first ones on the chopping block. And so I'm firmly committed to making sure that the dollars that are going into the city budget, that voters are deciding whether or not they want to approve, are reinvested in the parts of town that don't always get that level of investment. But I'm perfectly happy to have a district eight and district one library investments within this bond package, because I think that's a really good partnership. As council member harper-madison and I have had over the years. We have seen a lot over the time that we've been sworn in and really worked on a lot of detailed projects together and want to make sure that we support each other through all of these different conversations. And I will say, as far as parks improvements, there's not a day that I'm out talking with neighbors that [12:00:48 PM] someone tells me, you know what? I think the city of Austin is investing too many dollars into our park spaces. It is the one department that year over year, people say there's not enough investment in our park systems. And as the years go by, people watch their children grow up and we might miss opportunities for them to be able to go to recreational programing and play on the swing sets and go to our pools and all of the things that actually make a childhood really, really good in Austin, Texas, and make people want to build a life here and grow their families here. I don't think we can invest enough in our parks, whether that's acquisition, recreation centers, summer programing, or other sorts of investments, have always been fully supportive of them and want to make sure that we continue to enhance what is already a great park system right now. And I will say as far as, being able to have some improvements for infrastructure in district eight, you know, looking at the needs of the zilker metro park, which is many would say the crown jewel of Austin, Texas park system, but it definitely gets beaten [12:01:50 PM] up a bit as people like to enjoy the space and utilize everything great that it has to offer. And so I know dealing with some erosion control issues, especially around barking springs, is, is going to be really important. There's a vision plan that council adopted in 2009 that specifically calls out where we need to make sure that trees are replanted and that we have these erosion control issues dealt with. So many, many years have gone by. And I think generally what I hear is that we need to up our investment in our park system and our libraries, and really make sure that families have access to the services that they routinely ask us as council members to deliver on, and I'll leave it at that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, council member, council member duchen, followed by council member Siegel. >> Thank >> You, mayor colleagues, I don't have a lot of questions right now, but I do want to add a few things to our bond conversation, and I do want to thank capital delivery services and Sam Rogers for hustling to [12:02:50 PM] put together a lot of different options for us over the last couple of months, and being very mindful and considerate for the pitfalls and opportunities of those options. So thank you all. But I want to appreciate the movement on the bond proposal that's happened up until now, which from what I've seen, is reducing the scope, lowering the cost, and primarily focusing on parks. I'd like to believe there is a broad understanding that our parks have the deepest need and most urgent needs right now. And so I consider all of these positive developments. That said, I'm also concerned that the conversation has shifted to how can we cobble together the bare minimum of votes that we need to pass a bond by focusing on certain district priorities, rather than keeping a focus on the big picture and our energy on consideration for what's best for the entire city and future austinites. And one of those things that I know I've talked to some of y'all about in this conversation, is trying [12:03:50 PM] to figure out a pathway to returning to a six year bond cycle. I know this is a priority, that our professional staff also agrees is important, and I think that's because they know that most cities and counties across the country have a 5 to 6 year planning process that comports pretty neatly to a 5 to 6 year bond cycle. And yet, for almost two decades, we've asked voters for bonds every other year. And I think that that approach is probably hurt our ability to deliver projects. I think it's fatigued and undermine confidence with voters. And it means that every two years there's a pretty messy process. If it could be even called that, where advocates and residents argue over which priorities get funded and when, with council and staff caught in the middle of that process. And so I'd like to think that an omnibus bond process where we broadly agree on a bond schedule we follow would address a lot of those issues. I'm also [12:04:52 PM] concerned about our bond options, all of which are fraught for different reasons. Right? The bridge option that staff has prepared for us is a definitely a more economical approach. But I'm also not 100% confident that everything in there meets the legal criteria of what's either emergency or an unforeseen situation. It does represent still for me, the safest option to address our most urgent park issues. You know, the broken hvac systems, the busted roofs, and things that could keep our park facilities literally inoperable. And that's because floating a bond that could fail, as we've been told by staff, has significant consequences. Also, if voters reject that spending, we can't spend our own dollars in debt to make those needed repairs for three years. And in this moment where I think we'd all agree that there are at least some public trust issues where we've got $1 billion of unspent bond dollars, that we're only going to hit the 90% threshold at some point next [12:05:53 PM] year. When we saw prop Q fail decisively last year, I think that's a real risk we have to consider. We're going to be stuck with those busses, hvac systems and roofs. And so far, up until this most recent bond proposal, I've been unwilling to take that risk. We had, as you all know, some of us have talked about we had our budget town hall last night. And one thing I mentioned to residents is that the debt portion of their property tax bill is already growing faster than it ever has. And for all I know, in the entire history of Austin, it's grown nearly 30% in just the last two years. And that's because of work we're already doing right to invest in our airport, our convention center, a lot of Austin water, a lot of energy projects, cap and stitch and so on. So adding to that burden in this moment where people are struggling to afford to live here for me is a tough call. I also want to mention a couple of data points from the survey that we shared last night at the town hall. And keep in mind, unscientific survey. But we had like twice as many people respond to it as we did last year, almost 700 [12:06:53 PM] responses. And of those, I think like 82% were from district ten. We saw 80% of people surveyed suggest that they either didn't want to bond right now, or wanted to spend the majority of our unspent bond dollars before we pass the new bond. And the other data point I thought was interesting that we're sharing with you all is that 60% of people said that it didn't matter that much that we spread the bond dollars equitably across the city. And so I think from my perspective, it's important that we recognize that some projects and some parts of town have a deeper need than others. So broadly, the thing I really want to offer to y'all is, that I could, I could be talked into supporting a bond proposal. If there are, if we can figure out a way to collectively agree to three things. One is to figure out how do we get back to that six year bond cycle? And I'm not sure I've seen that pathway yet. But specifically, I think there's a way that if we agreed that this parks bond was an [12:07:54 PM] eight year bond, and that means we'd have a bond election in two years from now, in 2028 with everything but parks on it. That means we could get aligned in 2034. And that would mean, again, a broad agreement. There's no bond election we're going to support in 2030 and 2032. Second is there would be a commitment that we focus on the only the most urgent items in this package. And frankly, I can't say I spent enough time with what's been added to this package in the last couple of days to be able to validate that if we move forward, I think there just needs to be broad clarity from everybody here that we prioritize the most urgent park projects across the city. And that also means, again, just a sort of disciplined commitment to continue to hold the line on the scope of this bond that although we moved, you know, I think, in the right direction since we started talking about a 700 plus million dollar bond and then $390 million bond, [12:08:55 PM] since this particular proposal has been rolled out, it looks like there may still be a trajectory to add and spend more rather than tighten our belts. So the part of the commitment I'm actually worried about the most is that first one, because just, you know, our culture and inertia from the last, you know, almost two decades seems like it would be hard to return to a six year bond cycle. Today we've heard people from all quarters speaking and asking for a number of really important priorities. And I'd like to reinforce that the advocacy here is good and it's helpful. And I've been an advocate myself. But what isn't helpful is when we feel a pressure so intense that we start to have ad hoc bonds every two years. I don't think that's going to stop unless we have somehow incredibly strong public commitment to make systemic changes for how we approach bonds. And that's why I'd like to challenge ourselves and our staff to figure out how we can resolve that before we move forward with passing a bond. [12:09:55 PM] And there's one last thing, that I'm going to ask you all to consider, which is, you know, as I've talked about last week, last two weeks in the process of rolling out a 2.5% budget proposal has 55 cuts, one enhancement, that proposal would reduce the tax burden about $50 a year, which could offset a bond that cost almost the same amount. So under that circumstance, I could see myself supporting the bond as well. The details of that proposal should be out later today. A possible of course, it depends on how long we take with this meeting. So I'm looking forward to getting it up and having that discussion when possible. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Councilmember duchen council members. What I may have filed this up, but what I was going to do was make sure we had questions and then get a motion and a second and then have discussion and people could speak. So we can do it however you want, but if, if you want to speak now, that's fine as [12:10:55 PM] well. But if you, if you want to speak after we get a motion in a second and maybe even go to the proposed amendment, and get and see where that goes, then we can do it that way as well. Councilmember Laine. >> I have comments. >> You want to speak as part of the discussion or do you want to go ahead now? >> I'll go now. >> All right. >> So I, I first want to express my very strong gratitude to our city staff for their collaboration and consideration of the very real and longstanding needs in district six, and also of the need to be very cognizant of what we are able to deliver in a timely fashion, what program, what needs have been long standing and, and really need to be addressed. And so looking at this, both citywide and from district six, I just am very grateful for all the work that has gone into bringing this additional project list to us. I know it hasn't been easy. It [12:11:57 PM] also hasn't been easy for us. But it's not always easy to confront challenges. And everyone has been very gracious as I've advocated for my needs, for my district needs. And we've all advocated for our city's needs. I want to thank council member vela for his comments and questions as it relates to transportation. I also very much value these areas and, and I'm happy to have that information elevated. I will be focusing on the parks and recreation libraries, proposal that's before us. So as you're all aware, the first version of the bond package only allocated 1.7% of the dollars to district six. And I pushed back hard. It was a hard no, because we live with the historical underinvestment in district six every day. But with this updated proposition, breakout, I am very happy to bring something to, to be in favor of bringing something to district six voters so that they can decide on, voting yes or no on this future in which [12:12:59 PM] targeted investments will improve quality of life in a meaningful way. In district six, I don't think we've seen a bond package that would deliver this substantially to the far north and northwestern corner of Austin, since most of the area was annexed. So thank you very much for that. I've also, made it quite clear during my time on the dais that I believe that what district six voters want as it relates to the city as, and what many, many of the voters in the city want as a whole is change. They do not want business as usual. They want to see that we are changing how we are doing things. Does that mean that we will actually deliver in a timely fashion? Absolutely. It means that it also means that when there are projects that have been so long standing that, to give an example of a frontage road of a middle school, that just got a crosswalk from the one sidewalk to be able to cross a very busy street to that middle school safely this year. It's been [12:14:00 PM] needed since annexation and I appreciate that very much. We have seen small change on the ground in district six. And with this proposition, I see more meaningful change that I need. I think my voters need the opportunity to see on a ballot. So I also believe that in the course of all of these various propositions and the level of review and the discussion, we have a very vetted list of projects here. And so and the dollar amount keeps going down and the projects that are there. As I said, I feel very comfortable with how vetted they are and how the focus that we are putting on being able to deliver. So with that, I want to highlight just a couple of things that, that do impact my district and that I am very excited about. I'll start with Singh libraries so important. And, the district six has one [12:15:03 PM] library and the 2023 Austin public library, comprehensive library strategic and facilities plan said of the spicewood springs branch that in 2022, it had the highest visitor count, highest circulation and highest hold fulfillment rate of any library branch in the system. It also boasted the second highest number of wi-fi sessions and was ranked number six on library computer sessions. Staff report that storytimes are so popular that the branch has at times had to issue tickets, despite the speed with which physical materials are checked out of this branch, staff report that items are returned even faster. They often find themselves with more items than will fit on their shelves, resulting in frequent weeding and appeals to other branches for shelf space. The lone community room. This is. This is the lone community. This is my observation right here. I was just reading directly from that report. My observation here, the lone community room in this library is in use for staff programing during most of the branch's hours of operations. And its [12:16:03 PM] needed programing that the library doesn't have other space available to handle. Going back to telling you exactly what's in this report, staff also report that the branch struggles to provide enough seating to meet demand, including space for customers to study and collaborate together in places to read and work quietly. Staff survey respondents also mentioned a desire to have more programable and usable outdoor space. The final recommendation is that this library should be replaced at a size of at least 30,000ft S, in order to meet current needs and prepare for rapid community growth in northwest Austin, Williamson county, part of Austin has been extremely high growing. And yet, and this is just an example of what I believe to be historical underinvestment. Yet spicewood springs library is not in the library long range plan for expansion, replacement, or supplementation. I'm okay with that. I don't need to see our library in this list of programs, but the reason that I am okay with it is, goes back to this issue of have we had a thorough vetting of what we are bringing to the table? And we [12:17:06 PM] consistently have a call for community convening spaces at many of the other things that are often handled through a library. But we don't we don't have let's see. What we find in this proposal that's new is and I'm very excited about this, the initiation of a recreation center in district six. The lack of convening spaces is something that I hear about from constituents frequently. As recently as an email received yesterday. While we do have the picfair community center, it is less than 2500ft S. It houses one micro gym and a second room, which is not enough space to offer even a single senior activity year round. We cannot host senior lunches. There is no kitchen. The space is not big enough to host a public meeting, like a budget town hall, and the only other city owned facility is that one room in the library. And so libraries are critically important and our city relies [12:18:07 PM] on them for so many things. I'm okay without having the library in here. Even if we do go to an eight year cycle until we hear the next. Because the need for space to bring our community together and for our city government to be able to interact with our community is so strong. And this this allocation will help us move in that direction and take some of the pressure off of this library. So bravo for bringing that in. I'm also so grateful to see saint Edwards, greenbelt and park in this bond. The original trailhead park to access bull creek from old spicewood springs road has deteriorated very badly. Shattered car windows are all over the parking lot. The parking lot itself has been shockingly neglected, and there isn't even a covered trash can along this stretch of three miles in each direction of mostly wildlands. Not a single public trash can, not a single public bathroom. This area. [12:19:08 PM] What has been in use as a for recreation and a natural beauty and gem in our city for over 100 years. And so seeing the investment needed to bring it up to a quality that is at all commensurate with the other other parks that we see is, is just very much, very much appreciated. I am going to wrap up never fear. Also very happy to see the city bringing some funding to the table. As it relates to springwood park. It is great in acknowledgment of Williamson county representative Bucy, who secured us $1 million to have the city bringing money for this busy, busy city park. Thank you all. I will say, just as unequivocally as I previously said, that I was a hard no. I will say unequivocally that this proposal, with its vetting and [12:20:09 PM] with its recognition of very significant needs that need investment, I don't believe that I could vote no on this, because my district needs to see that this city is bringing change, and they need to feel it and see it now. So thank you very much. And that that will be my sole comment. Thanks for letting me go ahead. >> Thank you, councilmember councilmember alter. >> I have. Two questions. >> One is the the moratorium question. If a proposition fails, councilmember duchen mentioned three years. I wasn't sure if it was three years or two years. He very well might be right. I just want to clarify. >> If the moratorium is for, if a bond proposition fails, you cannot utilize a non approved act in the three years cuauhtli. We also have outside counsel. Harris. >> Giovinazzo. >> Okay very good. I just wanted to clarify that it was three, not two. Okay. My second [12:21:12 PM] question is the, the timing of how our, our reimbursement, you know, we will sometimes either use commercial paper or other cash funding and then go to reimbursement. So if we assume that the bond passes in November of this year, when will be the first year in which. Utilization of the bond will actually hit property tax payers? >> Let me I'm I'm living in basically three different fiscal years right now. Give me a second. It would be fiscal year 28 when you would see the impact because, with the, if it goes to the voters, if the, the propositions are approved, there's a lot of different steps that occur before then by the time we actually appropriate the dollars, it [12:22:12 PM] would be around January of 27. Spending could immediately begin. We would then incorporate any anticipated spending through the remainder of that fiscal year as part of the bond sale, the gio bond sale that would take place in August September time frame. So then those debt service requirements would be part of the fy 28 proposed budget. >> Okay, so the first amount that would show up to a taxpayer will be next fiscal year for whatever we spend January through July, August ish, correct. Okay. And then on the moratorium question, we can't use non voter approved debt. Is there any limitation in going back to the voters for the same thing within that three year period? >> Right now there is not there was a bill introduced last session to add that into the mix, but it did not move forward. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Council member. I've got a couple questions based upon these and then we'll go to a motion. But there's [12:23:12 PM] been some discussion about we passed this today and then on other items that have been, some people have talked about, we might issue CEOs. But that impacts CEOs impact our debt capacity, just as these bonds, if they pass, impact our debt capacity. >> That is correct. Whether it's voter approved public improvement bonds or non voter approved certificates obligation, it still impacts the debt service portion of our tax rate. >> And that means it would also add to, the property tax bill on the debt portion of the property tax bill. >> Correct. >> It would also have the same impact as the CEOs would have the same impact as if this passes on the capacity we would have in 2028 if we want to have another bond election. >> Correct. >> All right. Thank you. Members, with that, I'll entertain a motion to go forward with the proposal and [12:24:13 PM] I'll recognize council member Siegel. Do you want to make the motion or do you want. Did I do it satisfactorily? >> That's fine. Thank you mayor. Yeah. The the the motion is the project's explained in the version two attached to backup advance to Thursday's meeting to call an election. >> Thank you. And seconded by the mayor pro tem. We'll now go to, I want to recognize council member harper-madison council. We have a motion and a second on the table. Council member harper-madison has a proposed amendment that she posted on the message board, and it has been passed out to everyone. It is labeled council member harper-madison. August 4th, 2026. Council meeting item two, 2026 bond election. And she moves. It's going to be a motion to amend the revised backup version one, page two, and I'll recognize council member harper-madison. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate it. Actually, council member Ellis did a really great job of prefacing my amendment already. You guys have heard us talk about colony park over the years. The, the [12:25:14 PM] beauty and the brilliance and the lack and, and frankly, disinvestment in the community. And so as we've been discussing the importance of libraries in our communities today, I'd like to amend, I'd like to make the following amendment. So the language is funding the design, construction, renovation, and expansion of the existing Hampton oak branch library with the addition of and colony park branch library. I'm sorry. >> Second, the motion to amend this item is made by council member harper- madison. Second by council member Ellis. Council member harper-madison, you have the floor. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Colleagues, I'd like to thank you all for your consideration of the motion today. I won't belabor the discussion. You guys have heard me talk about colony park for 7.3 quarter years. And we began this whole discussion about bonds, you know, with a universe of potential projects and a large number and, through the diligent service and effort of [12:26:15 PM] our staff and, you know, our staffs, we have whittled away at those numbers and gotten to virtually under 300 million, to council member duchen point. It looks like, you know, we may creep over at some point, but right now, I'm looking at, a proposal that I can be supportive of. I'd just like to acknowledge that for far too long, colony park and far east Austin communities have lacked real essential public assets. So, you know, when we enter these discussions about the importance of bonds, I had the opportunity to talk to my mom about bonds the other day. She says, what is it exactly? And I just gave her a real world, real world example. I said, mom, you know, 19th street, Baptist street Baptist church is right across the street from pecan springs elementary. I was able to say, do you remember that big board that was at pecan springs elementary that said, bond dollars being expended coming soon? You know, when they move the kids over to the portables? She said, yeah, I [12:27:15 PM] get it, you know, but I was watching the news. First of all, don't watch the news. Just ask me, mom. But also, I think far too often my mom's a voter. I think far too often we find ourselves in a position where the conversation we're having and what our constituents are hearing are incongruent. I would encourage us as an entity, the city, to just be more diligent about making certain that everybody is engaged in the same conversation. It doesn't do us any good if we're speaking French and they're speaking Russian. So I, I encourage us moving forward as we have these discussions about bonds, because they are so deeply rooted in a community's ability to fund itself in a community's ability to invest in itself. And, you know, sometimes that's the only way that's the only path forward. Single municipality can never provide all needs, all assets and all amenities for [12:28:15 PM] communities ever. It will never happen. We have to invest in ourselves. And so I really appreciate the opportunity moving forward to support this amendment, and I hope my colleagues will join me. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. Members, the vote is on the motion to amend the main motion, which is related to the having a sending forward to for Thursday a proposed bond proposition. The motion to amend made by harper-madison council member harper-madison has been made and seconded. You speak on the motion. The motion to amend. Okay. Council member Ellis. >> Thank you. Mayor, I know that I spoke to this earlier, but just really appreciate council member Harper Madison's leadership on this. And I think that colony park in and of itself has been a really prime example of what happens when the city and the neighbors and the advocates work together to create something really big and visionary. So I'm really happy that these libraries will get to be discussed together, and that it will include an extra 15 million for the libraries bucket, bringing it to 35 million. I think a lot of good [12:29:16 PM] can come from this. >> Thank you, council member. All right, members, that will take us to a vote on the motion to amend. Is there any further discussion on the motion to amend to amend? Hearing none. The motion to amend the main motion is, without objection is adopted unless somebody wishes to be shown as voting no. Council member duchen. >> I'll vote no on this. >> Thank you. Council member duchen will be voting no on the motion to amend. That will now take us back to the main motion, and council member Velazquez, you're recognized to speak on the main motion as amended. >> Thank you, mayor. I just wanted to start by saying that I absolutely love our parks. They're one of the things that make Austin special, and I strongly support investing in them. In district three, we're proud to have to be home to some of the most iconic parks Roig Guerrero, chicano park, Zaragoza, pan am, maple Davis and the blunt creek nature [12:30:17 PM] preserve. These spaces matter. They build community, preserve culture, and improve quality of life. But leadership is also about recognizing the moment we're in. Having another 10 or $20 expense may not mean much to some, but for others it means putting something back on the shelf at the grocery store. It means delaying a prescription and hoping that the car doesn't need repairs. I grew up in that struggle, and I know the fear and trauma that financial uncertainty creates, and that rings especially true for our seniors that are on fixed incomes. This is about more than just financial metrics. People are struggling. It's about recognizing that our residents are already caring enough. It's about weighing the costs versus the benefits. And I find it difficult to ask voters for more while we're fighting tooth and nail within our current budget to preserve social services, the same social services that these families rely on every day. That's why I support delaying a [12:31:17 PM] bond election until 2028. This has been a very an extremely difficult decision for me because as a born and raised east austinite, I have lived. Austin's tradition of disinvestment in the needs of the eastern crescent. But for me, this is about. This is the responsible path forward. I look to continuing work with the. Continue to work with the community and with my colleagues on a potential 2028 bond. We can continue investing in Austin's future while recognizing that not everyone can as easily absorb the impact of the decisions we make. That's the balance of believe our residents expect from us, and that's the responsibility I intend to uphold, and I will be I will not be supporting. >> Thank you, councilmember. >> Councilmember Ellis, did you wish to speak again? Okay. Councilmember Siegel, you're recognized. >> Thanks, mayor. And I'll just motivate the motion here. First of all, I want to thank again, acm Rogers, director Castaneda, [12:32:17 PM] and all your teams for all of your your work on this and also your flexibility responding to all the different council directions. And I think this proposal is laser focused on some of the greatest areas of need for our capital programs. The main proposal here is to fund parks improvements, which is essential for a city of our size that has grown so much in recent years and hasn't seen a parks bond program since 2018. The package in front of us has been updated to ensure fairness across council districts, and that was necessary because the original proposal was a comprehensive bond measure that included many different programmatic elements. We're emphasizing major investments in city parks and recreation buildings, including, for example, the Gus Garcia senior center in district four, which would fund a senior wing addition. That would be a place where seniors could make use of educational enrichment programs. Folks, we've heard from dozens and dozens of people who use Gus Garcia, but they don't have a dedicated space there. And this would create a permanent, dedicated space for seniors from north and east Austin. And it will be transformational for [12:33:17 PM] these communities. We're also prioritizing infrastructure investments for playscapes trails, athletic fields, and facilities, including the onion creek all abilities playground, which is an amazing, innovative and transformational recreational space. We've got major parkland improvements, including the Walter Eid Lang metro park and essential investments in renovating and replacing city pools including garrison municipal pool, big Stacy neighborhood pool, walnut creek municipal pool and civitan neighborhood pool. We all know how beloved Austin's pools are for this community, especially in these hot, hot Summers, and this investment makes sure we have access to water recreation for years to come. And finally, the bond does fund new park acquisition, which is needed in the recently added areas of the city and also in some of our residential neighborhoods that don't meet the goal of having a park within a ten minute walk. This bond proposal is small enough that it doesn't require a major burden on taxpayers. It's far less than the amount of debt we retire each year, and the program is balanced across the city. And that's thanks to everyone here who advocated for [12:34:18 PM] your constituents. And as to the affordability requirement or the affordability argument, city parks and recreational facilities offer some of the best opportunities for healthy activity at no cost or very low cost. Having more pool access in Summers is good for cost burden residents. So is having more parks, more play structures, more urban trails, better senior centers. And for libraries too, that should speak for itself. These are centers of learning, places for community gathering. And yes, also a public program that is available to all regardless of wealth. My wife still tells me stories about how every summer her parents just told her go to the library as their summer camp. And I know she was not alone in that experience. Parks and libraries are good for all of us, and so I hope that we will place this proposed parks and library bond measures on the ballot in November. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you, council member. I want to I don't have anybody else. So I'm going to speak and then I'll recognize the. Somebody have you punched your [12:35:19 PM] button? >> No. >> Not yet. Okay, then I'll recognize you. Councilmember Fuentes. >> I just wanted. >> To take a moment to appreciate the leadership from councilmember Ellis. I really appreciate your your fierce advocacy for your district. And you've been longtime champion, championing equitable investment from the city of Austin in all parts of our city. So I'm particularly pleased to see the Hampton library before us today. And I know that is due in large part to your hard work, with your community. So thank you for your leadership on it. And also just equally excited for colony park to see that library edition. And public health facility. Mayor, you asked earlier if we've ever had a proposition that was a singular building. We did have 1 in 2018 that was a dove springs public health facility. And that has been an incredible addition for my community. It has a child care facility that already has a wait list for it. So just want to recognize the potential we have here before us. And I know these two proposals, come in large part from both of y'all's leadership. So thank you. [12:36:20 PM] >> Thank you, thank you, councilmember Fuentes. I don't have anybody else signed up. So what I'll do is I'll speak and then I'll recognize the mayor. Pro tem is the maker of the second on that motion to close before we take a vote. How, how we reach our goals matter. And that's true even when the end result, the goal has merit. And over the past several months. Hang on. I set a time on y'all. I might as well set a time on me. Although I can't imagine I'm going to make it, but we'll see. Over the past several months, I've worked with council support to strengthen the public's trust in how this government makes its financial decisions. We created a bond election advisory task force. Rather than rushing to an election, we adopted stronger financial policies for our offices. We strengthen our financial management framework [12:37:20 PM] and adopted a decision TRE to discipline our decision making. We expanded oversight of nonprofit contracts and procurement, and just last week we approved the most comprehensive independent efficiency assessment in our city's history. Those aren't isolated actions. They are all part of the same commitment. Trust isn't created by promises. It's created by discipline. It's created by responsibility, failed discipline, and failure to responsibly follow policy. Financial policy is why we are today in this difficult position. There's talk of people wanting change. One of the things I believe the people want to see changed is how this government provides discipline. When it comes to financial [12:38:21 PM] responsibility. I've said from the beginning that this discussion has never been about whether Austin needs more parks. It does. It has never been about whether our cultural centers or libraries matter because they do. It has never been about whether there are worthy projects waiting for investment. There are. The question has always been something different. Can we as taxpayers to approve new debt before we've honored the financial policies we adopted to protect them? Can we abandon the very process we created because the answer it produced isn't the one some hoped for? Is this the right time to increase costs to our constituents? I don't believe it is that time to negatively impact affordability, or that we should abandon a process created to increase trust. We [12:39:22 PM] didn't create the bond election advisory task force to ratify a predetermined outcome. We created it to inform one. We didn't adopt financial policies because they would always be easy to follow. We adopted them because there would inevitably be moments when following them would be politically difficult. That's when policies matter most. Another process safeguard for assuring that we have fiscal responsibility includes following the recommendations of our professional staff. Lately, the conversation has shifted. Instead of asking what the process produced, we've begun asking what projects can be added to assemble enough votes on council. Instead of listening to the recommendations of the professional staff about the best financial approaches, we started asking staff to create ways to satisfy specific districts instead of evaluating proposals through established [12:40:22 PM] criteria. We're hearing new arguments appear about after the process has largely concluded. That's not the process we established, and it shouldn't become the way Austin makes major financial decisions. Some describe these latest additions as efforts to achieve equity. Equity is, of course, an important value, but equity isn't created simply by saying the word, and it's not created by singling out districts for earmarks. Equity requires transparent criteria and not just geographic criteria. It includes the types of projects that people want or need. Things like we've heard about mexic-arte, the carver museum, and others. Equity requires transparent criteria, and equity requires consistent application, a process that can be explained and defended. Otherwise, it risks becoming [12:41:24 PM] something else entirely, something like ward politics. I've also heard suggestions that waiting somehow means we're against investment. That's a false choice. Responsible government isn't opposed to investment. Responsible government protects investment by making sure it happens in the right way and at the right time. That's stewardship. Responsible government doesn't ask taxpayers only one question is this worthwhile? Of course parks are worthwhile. Of course, community investments are worthwhile. But that's not the only question. Responsible government also asks is this the right time? Is this the right way to pay for it? Those aren't obstacles to progress. They are questions that make progress. Sustainable government isn't defined by the size of its ambitions. It's [12:42:26 PM] defined by its ability to achieve those ambitions responsibly. And leadership isn't measured only by how often we say yes or what we get for our specific interests. Sometimes leadership requires the discipline to say, not yet, because preserving public trust today makes it possible to accomplish even greater things tomorrow. That's the kind of government that I believe Austin deserves. We're asking the voters to trust us. We've done real work to create greater trust. Every safeguard we created over the last two years was designed for exactly this moment. Financial policies, the decision TRE, the bond election advisory task force, professional staff recommendations. They weren't designed to help us. When everyone agreed, they were [12:43:28 PM] designed to guide us when there was pressure to do something else. Good government is disciplined. Government not rigid, not ideological, but disciplined. It follows the process it creates. It doesn't change the rules because they're inconvenient. It earns trust by demonstrating that its principles actually govern its decisions. We have spent months building a process designed to earn the public's confidence. We shouldn't abandon that process because it becomes inconvenient. We shouldn't weaken the trust we've worked so hard to rebuild. And that is why I'll vote no today. Not because I'm against parks, not because I'm against investment, but because I'm for disciplined [12:44:30 PM] government. And disciplined government is how public trust is earned. Mayor pro tem, you're recognized. >> Thank you. Mayor. I just wanted to close by highlighting the in putting the projects together for the bond. We've been very conscious of operational costs and operational needs. And I just wanted something like the garrison pool, improvements in particularly the pool investments, a lot of those, the hvac discussions, a lot of those are long term, will reduce operating expenses for a lot of these facilities. So I think in talking about, you know, capital and operating, you know, you can let your facilities age and not invest in them. But that's going to drive up your maintenance costs and with, with the choices that we're facing in terms of the 3.5% property tax cap, and our [12:45:32 PM] capital investments, investments in capital can oftentimes reduce long term operating expenses. So I think that's just an important element of this. We the longer we go without investing in our facilities, the larger the greater the operating expenses. And to me, that's not good governance. We've got to invest in our facilities to make sure that we have, you know, newer, well run efficient facilities and not aging facilities that require lots of repairs and maintenance. So I just, I know we haven't talked about that a lot. And that's been kind of underneath the surface of the conversation that we've been having, but we're really not adding a lot of operational expense on this bond. We're investing in, in, in more kind of hard assets and in potentially operation reducing, items. So I just wanted to end with that. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you. Mayor pro tem members, we will now take a vote on the main motion made by councilmember Siegel, seconded by mayor pro tem, as amended by [12:46:33 PM] council member harper-madison amendment. The vote is now on the main motion. And what I'll do is I'll ask for a show of hands so that I make sure I don't miss anybody. Those in favor of the motion, the main motion, as amended, please raise your hand. Those opposed, raise your hand. Somehow. I'm. Kessler alter. How'd you vote for. There being eight votes in favor and three votes in opposition council members duchen the mayor and council member Velazquez. The motion passes, as amended. So we'll see. They will be on the agenda for Thursday to determine whether or not we put it on the ballot. Thanks, everybody. [12:47:34 PM] Thanks for a good discussion, members. Unless there's objection, what I would recommend we do is we recess until 115. We recess until 115, when we'll come back and take item number one. Without objection, the Austin city council is in recess until 115. It is 1247. Thanks, everybody. [1:16:34 PM] Back to order. It's 116. We have been in a brief recess and we will now go to item number one, which is a presentation and discussion of the city manager's fiscal year 2026 2027 proposed budget. Members, the way I suggest we do this is we hear from the public that has signed up to speak on this item. And then we, go to any presentation and there is a presentation that has been prepared. And then we will go to questions from council. So I'll turn to the city clerk. >> We'll start with remote speakers. Monica Guzman. Monica, are you there? >> Yes. Can you hear me now? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon. I'm Monica Guzman, [1:17:34 PM] district four resident, speaking in opposition to the proposed fiscal 27 budget, especially the proposed 25 million for the Austin police department, or APD. Current and previous councils have given APD a blank check. Continuously padding a record high budget by draining vital resources for programs and services that truly, truly keep us safe. Instead of adding to an already bloated budget, use a proposed 11 million. In accordance with the contract. Reallocate 30.5 million in APD vacancy savings to fund overtime, retirement recruitment, etc. In their fiscal 27 budget and use the remaining proposed 14 million to invest in the community's health and safety by funding 3 million for the family stabilization grant to economically stabilize about 225 households during this time of increased cost of living [1:18:34 PM] expenses, 570,000 for legal representation services and 250,000 for mental health services for immigrant support during this heinous political climate, resulting in many hiding in their homes. Instead of going to work, school and enjoying life and funding other basic and critical needs detailed in the community investment budget coalition fiscal 27 recommendations, I urge you do not continue to fund APD history of violence, as evidenced with the death of Anthony Williams II and Alex Gonzalez junior and many others. Thank you. >> Imani van eenoo. Imani, are you there? Ayana Houston. Hello? [1:19:42 PM] Yes, please go ahead. >> Okay. Oh, hi. Yes, my name is Ayana Houston. I am the director of youth programing for the sickle cell association of Texas. Marc Thomas foundation. But most importantly, I am a sickle cell warrior myself. I have first hand on, how the Marc Thomas foundation has supported and advocated and educated the sickle cell community and the city of Austin. As a whole. The Marc Thomas foundation is an organization. It's the only organization with these services, for the sickle cell community. We have several families that are affected and will be affected by this budget cuts if, passed. I am speaking against item one. I first found this foundation about ten years ago as a UT student, and it helped me find a er and a hematologist to help me manage my disease. Without my parents, since it was the first time that I was living with a [1:20:43 PM] chronic disease by myself. They offered support groups, which was a tremendous help with peer to peer support, which was unmatched. Finding someone that understood my disease and how I can help improve my life expectancy. With that knowledge and advocacy piece, please reconsider the budget cuts as lives depend on it. Thank you and thank you for your time. >> That's all the speakers I have at this time. So I'll move to in person, starting with Paul Secord, Linda Medina Lopez, Alexandria Anderson, Susan Spataro, Sylvia Stinson. If your name's been called, please go ahead and come down and sit at an empty chair and state your name before you begin speaking. Okay. >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson and members of the Austin city [1:21:44 PM] council. My name is Linda Medina Lopez, and I'm the proud executive director of Conway qadri, a youth organization, youth serving nonprofit organization. Today, I'm asking you to protect the city's $56,000 investment of Kahn MI madre. While $56,000 may seem like a small line item in the multi-million dollar dollar budget, for us, it means you're cutting pathways to college and economic mobility. This funding is an investment with long term returns at a time when so many families are facing uncertainty by reducing support for prevention and education programs. Since the wrong message, Kahn MI madre has been a long standing partner with the city of Austin, consistently meeting contract goals every year, submitting strong reports, and have been receiving nothing but positive [1:22:46 PM] feedback from city staff. We are being eliminated for neurological or apparent reason, and other nonprofits similar to ours have maintained their funding. Out of 155 nonprofits, we're one of the 24 being eliminated. Transparency matters. The city of Austin is all about investing in our youth and building community. Conway madre has been doing that for 34 years. We simply ask that the city continue investing alongside us. The proposed reduction undermines Austin's goal for educational attainment, workforce development and economic mobility. I respectfully ask you to preserve funding in order to continue building a brighter future for tx. Thank you for your time and your continued commitment to the next generation for the next generation. >> Thank you very much. >> Susan Spataro, district eight. The first I want to make one brief comment. Then I want to talk about businesses. But in the state of Texas, [1:23:48 PM] constitutionally, local governments cannot give a gift. So if you are making contributions to social service or nonprofit agencies and they are not performing, I think it's a question. Is that a gift? Please look at that. You don't really need someone coming up and suing the council over that. What I really wanted to talk about is small businesses, because when in fact, a person's taxes go up and you own a small business, you know, the person's home taxes go up, but then they go to their business and that tax goes up as well. And so now they've got a double push on them and they have to make a choice of do they cut people raise their prices. How do they get to pay this. And then the products that they use are probably also from a company that's got increased taxes. So the the impact of these tax credits are kind of circular. And that is they are they're very impactful in a negative way. And I'm afraid we have gotten that way. And the other thing with small businesses, we've seen that [1:24:49 PM] we've seen, restaurants who have been here for years saying they can't stay here anymore. And, you know, I think that's a real loss to Austin, these local businesses. And what are they saying? We can't pay the taxes if you have to pay taxes, which everyone does. This is a serious tax increase, and I encourage you to keep it as low as you possibly can. Thank you very much. >> Thank you very much. >> Linda wade, Richard Bondy, Silvia orozco, Lisa Barden, Richard green. >> Welcome, everyone. Do you want to start? >> Oh me oh thank you. >> And we'll work down that way from your side of the dice. [1:25:49 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Sylvia roscoe. I'm the executive director of Mexico art museum. Today, I'm speaking to urge you not to eliminate Mexico art museum's education programs that is funded funded under Austin public health. Last Friday, we received a letter that our social service agreement for community arts and screening program is proposed for elimination, eliminating funding and. This program will leave thousands of students in title one schools across Austin without vital art education. These include screen at a museum award winning program that. Where students create and print designs on tote bags and t-shirts. Mural murals in the schools where students and paint murals in the schools. Art, which provides workshops and summer camps. Through these three programs, mexic-arte serves 2066 youth under the current contract at 13 title one schools located in district one, two, four, five, eight and nine [1:26:50 PM] and is projected to serve 177% of the contract goals. Mexic-arte has served over 10,000 youth in the past five years. What does this elimination mean? It means thousands of the title one students will no longer receive these services. 4 to 6 art educators will no longer have employment education staff members at the museum will be impacted through this program. Children and families have benefiting. Supporting violence prevention programs like these keep our students safe in class and deterred from engaging in delinquent behavior. The Austin youths deserves a chance to engage in positive, constructive activities. We thank you for your service and respectfully, respectfully ask that the city council not to eliminate mexic-arte museum art education program, community arts and screening program currently funded under social service agreement and the Austin public health. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much, ma'am. [1:27:56 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor and members of the city council. I'm Linda Thomas wade, CEO and co- founder of the sickle cell Texas Marc Thomas foundation. Thank you for your support of our organization. Because of the city's investment, we have been able to leverage those dollars to secure additional state and federal funding, multiplying the impact of your investment. Today, I respectfully ask that the additional 4.7 million identified last week be used to restore the proposed social service cuts. Specifically, I ask that you maintain level funding of 350,000 for fiscal year 2027 for sickle cell programs and services. This is especially critical following the 10% reduction in funding we received last year. Further, reducing our funding would directly impact our ability to serve the community. We already operate with limited resources, and additional cuts would mean reducing essential programs and [1:28:57 PM] losing three experienced staff members. Our foundation is the only foundation in Austin dedicated exclusively to serving families living with sickle cell disease and trait. We provide advocacy, transportation assistance, limited financial assistance, certified case management, community education, youth programs, and so much more. And these are the services that fill critical gaps in in our community safety net system. Our crucial services also help to mitigate ems usage and er visits, which assist in relieving the financial burden placed on the medical systems. Approximately 1 in 12 African Americans and 1 in 36 hispanics carry sickle cell trait, meaning thousands of families in our community are impacted. I respectfully ask that you restore our funding and maintain level funding of 30 350,000 for fiscal year 2027. Thank you so much and god bless. [1:30:01 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. My name is Richard Bondi. I serve as chair of the commission on aging and director of community advocacy at meals on wheels, central Texas. I see firsthand how important these programs are to helping older adults age safely in our community. I urge you to restore the proposed 73000 reduction to the congregate meal program. Congregate meals provide far more than nutrition. They bring older adults together for a shared meal, social connection, wellness checks, and information about other services. They help people stay healthy and continue living independently in their own homes. Both meals on wheels congregate and home delivered meal programs work together to help high risk older adults remain stable. These programs help prevent crises before they happen. Reliable nutrition, regular contact and supportive services reduce medical emergencies, [1:31:03 PM] hospitalizations and help older adults remain in their homes. They also help prevent homelessness before it begins. The city is already investing in senior programing at its recreation centers. The congregate meal program makes that investment far more effective by bringing older adults through the door, meals become the gateway to exercise, health, education, social engagement and wellness checks. Cutting the meal funding diminishes the value of the city's broader investment. I respectfully ask you to restore the 73,000 in congregate funding. Please don't let a relatively small budget reduction create a much larger impact on Austin's older adults. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Bond, sir. >> All right. Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is Richard green. I'm a museum educator, artist and district eight resident. I am against the current proposed [1:32:03 PM] reductions of social service funding as they exist today. I am the program manager of mexic-arte museum's contract under the office of violence prevention, and one of the 24 programs proposed to be entirely eliminated in the budget reductions. We currently provide in-school programs, after school programs, and summer camps across Travis county that teach art education, mindfulness practices, and engagement that actively prevents violence and delinquency. We have a program happening at this very moment at Austin central library called nuestro sitio, which is our style where youth are learning sewing techniques, the history of garment making, and how craft skills support individuality and a sense of community. This culminates in a fashion show where youth are the stars and they get to wear their pieces down the runway. I cannot be there right now to support these youth, because I have to be here advocating for the thousands of kids we serve every year and the teaching artists that we employ. If the museum is eliminated from funding, this will be the last year of camp for these kids. [1:33:05 PM] Anywhere from 4 to 6 teaching artists would lose a stream of income, and two of which have joined me today when we met with city staff regarding the proposed elimination, no metrics or reasoning were provided beyond strategic alignment, and we are on track to meet 177% of our goal this year, which is serving over 2400 youth and 10,000 in the past five years. I strongly support the efforts outlined in councilmember Fuentes and co-sponsors motion amendment last Thursday as well, or on the board last Thursday, and yesterday's message board post from the mayor's office. Programs deserve transparency and clear reasonings for reductions. Nevertheless. Eliminations. I implore you to fully and transparently support social service programs and the youth of Austin and future generations. >> Thank you very much, sir. >> Good afternoon. My name is Lisa Barton. I'm a resident of district four, executive [1:34:06 PM] director of keep Austin fed. Serving all of your districts and a member of one voice, central Texas. I want to start by thanking the mayor and council member Fuentes and the other council members who have supported amendments to the budget to restore funding social service contracts. One voice supports accountability and advocates for the full restoration. Restoration of social service funding. Having read through yesterday's detailed recommendations on the contract reductions and eliminations, I agree with mayor Watson that, first, there isn't a clear explanation for the decisions, and second, staff flags real harm in cutting, eliminating several of these programs. Unique services with no alternative provider, programs that the city funds entirely, and families who would lose support mid service. And I agree with council member alter's reply that accountability matters, and I think all nonprofit leaders can agree with mayor pro tem suggestion that we need to understand what a stable level of funding is. So both the city and our nonprofit partners don't endure the uncertainty, stress and time involved. Budget after budget keep Austin fed does not receive city funding, so I'm not here to [1:35:07 PM] protect my organization's budget. I'm here because I see what happens when the social safety net is weakened, when families and individuals of all ages lose access to critical resources, more people experience hardship, and organizations like ours are asked to do more with the same limited resources. The proposed budget already makes significant investments in housing. The question before council is not whether housing matters. It is whether Austin can preserve the essential social services that help people obtain and remain successfully housed. Housing and wraparound services are complementary investments, not Kahn not competing priorities. This is not a choice between housing and social services. Austin needs both. Today, I urge you to fully restore the social service funding and give the staff proper time to review each contract with, to quote council member Laine transparency, collaboration and a commitment to strengthen rather than diminish the services our community relies on. Thank you for your time today. >> Thank you very much. >> Henry vandeput, Philip Fitzgerald, Savannah Lee, Sharon Blythe. [1:36:23 PM] >> Good morning, mayor, mayor pro tem and council members. My name is Savannah Lee. I'm with equity action and I'm a resident of district one. I'm here in support of the community investment budget. We're grateful to see the intention of many council members to restore the cuts to social service contracts. Avoiding cuts is the first step in ensuring that this budget cycle is one that truly invests in the families who need us most. I wanted to take my time today to touch on something within the cib that still needs investment. The cib asked that the city establish a joint emergency communications department to ensure that when folks in Austin call for help, they can get the right response. The first time. When someone calls 911, one of the most important decisions happens before anyone arrives who gets sent. Right now, that initial call taking system operates under a pd, which can make police response the default. Even when someone is experiencing a mental health or medical crisis. Not only is this dangerous for the people involved, but it drains police resources. We know the system is not working the way that it should. The city's own 2018 audit found that people [1:37:23 PM] experiencing mental health crisis in Austin face a higher risk of fatal police encounters, and that APD's policies and training did not consistently meet best practices, and that police were often dispatched to calls that were non-criminal and better suited for health professionals. Austin's already built alternatives that can provide the right response, but these alternatives are only as effective as the system that connects them, the people to them. If a person in crisis calls 911, they should not have to use the perfect words or know exactly what kind of help they need to get the appropriate response. That's why we're asking council to amend this budget to establish a joint emergency communications department and move civilian 911 call takers out of APD and into the department with consistent specialized training across emergency response systems. This ensures that our police, ems, fire, and mental health response are all sent out accurately and in time. If we're serious about public safety, we have to make sure our first response is the right response. I urge you to include this investment, this budget cycle. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. [1:38:24 PM] >> Myra Pisano, robin Schneider, Peter hunt, Peter, are you here? Is Jennifer Palermo here? >> I believe she had me. >> Okay. Well then just two minutes, Peter and then Zenobia. Joseph. >> Is the first. >> Hello. Robin Schneider, resident of district three. First I wanted to thank council member Fuentes and and others to for your efforts to restore social service funding, given the additional property tax revenue the city can now, use for that. I want to echo, what the previous speaker, Savannah Lee, said in terms of moving the, 911 out of a pd and putting that, having a joint communications department, [1:39:25 PM] hopefully it can address some of the issues that we're having geographically as well. That council member Laine has, has spoken up about, you know, we can do better, by moving 911 out of a pd. Other cities have shown the way and we should learn from their experience in San Francisco. The street crisis response team found that crisis teams can resolve the majority of their calls without the use of the police department. Arrests are down. Use of force is very rare. People in crisis are connected to the care they need, rather than into the criminal legal system. And the police are then freed up to do what they really should be responding to. And so I think it's a win win all around. If we, have the appropriate responses, because [1:40:26 PM] dispatch is basically destiny. So, when it comes to some of these calls and hopefully we can honor, people whose lives have been tragically taken by doing something really positive, during this business, this budget cycle and, make our 911 system something that people don't have to be afraid of. >> Good afternoon council. My name is Peter hunt. I'm from district ten. I first want to say I'm here in support of the community investment budget, as plenty have, people have been before me and will be after me and want to echo what some of the previous speakers have said, saying that I think it's a good thing that council is looking to move the nine one call center out of APD. I'll be here to speak more about that on Thursday. I wanted to for council and for the record, speak a little bit more about the police budget and how that relates to these issues. Because I think that there has been a little bit of confusion about what exactly is [1:41:27 PM] contractually required in relation to what has been provided to police in the proposed budget. And I think it would be good to have some clarity about that. Now, the proposed budget would allocate an additional $25 million to police, some portion of which is contractually required by the 2024 police contract. One of the requests of the cib has been to keep the police budget flat. The way to do that is not by reneging on any contractual obligations, but instead looking for other parts of the police budget that could be taken out or reduced to offset that. Now, I know at last night's district ten, town hall council member duchen identified about a million at least that he had already seen could be removed, offset part of that. And I'm sure there's more with the level of attention that has been paid to, social service contracts going five, $10,000 at a time. I'm sure that similar amounts of proportional savings could be found in the police budget, looking at over $500 million there. If that same kind of attention was paid. When people [1:42:27 PM] talk about budgets, we talk about them being reflections of our values. They are reflections of our values, not just in where the money is, but where the attention is paid to find that money. And I encourage council to do that kind of work, to keep the police budget flat, and to look for things to offset the contractual obligations from the previous police contract. Thank you. >> Thank you. Hi. My name is Myra rose and me and my husband Jared Jordan live and work in Austin, Texas as muralist, art teachers and agents of change, but most importantly, children of god. We worked alongside many organizations teachers, mental health professionals, and many students. Students who are impacted by the laws, policies, and propositions made in the rooms that we stand in today. So much to say and so little time. The words that are written in our hearts were spoken to us from mouths that aren't our own. I don't like coming to school, but painting [1:43:28 PM] this mural makes being here worth it. This mural helps me to discover a new version of myself. Teachers only see me as a troublemaker. As a person who has so many problems. This gives me a purpose to show them that I'm not a bad kid, to show them that I could do good. I just needed a chance for someone to believe in me. This school is always filled with drama, but this mural and the things that are painted in it, give us a reason to have hope to be heard. When we don't always get a chance to speak. When we truly feel. To tell our story, to bring light to a dark place, we all come back to see us again. I hope you do, because we'll still be here. These are the words spoken to us by the kids who are part of the metro mural after school program facilitated by the Mexican art museum, specifically lbj high school, Burnett middle school and Paredes middle school. Lastly, I would like to finish with the words of a project we're now starting, the greatest story ever written is the one with you in it, but it's your choice [1:44:30 PM] to determine which side of history you want to be a part of. Your choices determine the future for generations to come. So with that being said, what's your next move? >> Thank you. >> Carlos Leon, Karen Gonzalez, Andrew Hairston. >> Mr. Leon, we'll start with you whenever you're ready. >> You got it, mayor. So regardless, Leon, first and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to apple's projected funding. Broadnax is telling you to give APL about $11,000 more from the general fund than last year, wrongly rewarding their ongoing insubordination against you under Hannah Terrell, who added Millwood branch not in her written bond proposal on [1:45:31 PM] answering mayor Watson's item two question this morning. Since August 2023, a P L's library used to be 315 d1 and d2 have not complied with your superseding rules for public use of city properties or paramount constitutional law. In addition, their intentional wrongdoing appears to have captured your library commission who is supposed to accommodate you? Not a P L at the July 25th meeting was a serious violation of the Texas open meetings act. The intentionally locked, closed door preventing us members of the public from accessing the fourth floor conference room meeting location at new central library. I had to bang on the glass to be let in. That door remained locked after I told library commission to unlock it to follow the law on record. During my public comment, which I later communicated to deputy city clerk hall and city attorney Thomas a P L rules for thee, but not for me. Double standard bull crap must not be [1:46:34 PM] tolerated because they must not be above the law and anti-constitutional lawless society endangers us all. Mayor Watson is right. Building public trust is not just about financial discipline but administrative adherence. Therefore, rightly punish a P L by reducing their funding. Repurpose that savings toward reviving one of the law abiding results producing social programs. Testifying here today that Broadnax is telling you to defund. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. Do what's right. Thank you, mayor Watson. >> Thank you sir. Yes. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Karen Gonzalez. Today I thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I'm here respectfully asking you to vote no on the proposed social service budget cuts in the city manager's budget, specifically to advocate to restore the city of Austin funding. I come before you wearing several hats, and each one allows me to speak to the impact this organization [1:47:34 PM] has had, not just on me, but on thousands of students and families across Austin. Today, I stand before you as the board chair of Conway qadri, deeply concerned about what this funding loss would mean for the students and families we serve. This funding provides far more than programing. It provides mentorship, opportunity, leadership, development, and most importantly, a safe space. I also come before you as a former staff member, where I had the privilege of serving students who were brave enough to ask for support in showing them that college and a brighter future was possible. But most importantly, I stand before you today as a qadri alum. When I was a student at Paredes middle school, which closed around closure, I am grieving. My counselor saw that I was struggling and referred my mother and me to my mother. Looking back, we know that that referral changed the course of our lives. A crisis was avoided because we found safety support and a community that believed in me before I believed in [1:48:35 PM] myself. That belief carried me through college, inspired me to earn a master's degree, and led me to dedicate my career as a social worker serving communities across Texas. Today, life has come full circle. In just a few weeks, my daughter will begin sixth grade and we recently completed her application so she can receive the same gift my mother and I received. When you invest in me madre, you aren't just investing in one student or one family. You're investing in generations. I'm standing before you today because someone invested in me and my family, and I believe that our current students and those to come deserve the same. >> Thank you. Yes. >> Good afternoon all. My name is Andrew Hairston. I'm a democratic socialist and civil rights lawyer who lives in district one. I currently serve as one of the co- chairs of the Austin democratic socialists of America, and I commend our members for offering their perspectives on the police budget over the past two weeks. I personally was in Minneapolis [1:49:35 PM] on the day that the news of Antonio Williams murder entering the public consciousness. I was in George Floyd square, Singh, in a time zone that had been established over the past six years where people can receive free clothes, have community meetings, and generally exchange with one another in a public space. We recognize in this black August the struggles of black folks across American history, whether our comrades George Jackson, Angela Davis, or kwame ture, who were fighting against the prison industrial complex and the ever expanding policing infrastructure of America. And we recognize that regardless of what happens today or later on in this budget process, that that resilience and that persistence will endure, that we certainly encourage you to not add a single cent to the police budget, more than what you're legally required to do [1:50:35 PM] in this moment, and to shift 911 out of the Austin police department's control. But that long history of struggle and resilience of black folks will persist. We will indeed achieve a better world eventually, because of the sacrifices of our forebears, my contemporaries, and those who will labor in the future. So I offer that perspective and a better world awaits us all. >> Thank you mayor. >> All speakers for this item have been called. >> Thank you very much, members. As you've heard, all the speakers on item number one have been called. So I'll look to city staff to come forward and make a presentation. [1:52:19 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor and council Kerri Lang, director of budget and organizational excellence. We'll just walk through a couple of slides before we get going on discussion. For today's work session, we would like to give an update, additional update on the typical ratepayer, as well as talk through some of the budget reductions that have happened over the last couple of years. Have further discussion on social service grants. A brief update on the housing department, local housing vouchers in particular, and a update on the capital improvement plan. Planned spending for the forecast period and next fiscal year. This is the timeline that we've talked about. We have today's work session and then one on, the six where council will talk through their amendments for budget adoption next week. >> Eric Nelson. [1:53:19 PM] >> Eric Nelson deputy director, budget and organizational excellence, following up on the property tax revenue update that we presented last Thursday when we, when we received the certification, we also request the updated property tax rolls so we can recalculate the value of our typical homestead property. As of the certified roll, the median assessed value of a homestead that does not receive the senior or disabled homestead exemption is $471,603. This is a decline from the proposed budget estimate of 484 907, which was derived from the notice property tax roll released this spring. Nearly half of these homestead protested their initial notice value, achieving average reductions of more than $70,000, or 9.6%. Applying the officially calculated voter approval rate and the general homestead exemption to this new typical homeowner value nets an annual property tax bill of [1:54:20 PM] about $2,188 per year, or $182.34 per month, which is an increase of 5.5% over the prior year. Looking at the total basket of rates, fees and taxes paid by our typical homeowner, inclusive of this certified property tax number, the total monthly bill would now increase by $23.82 per month, or 5%, which is down from the 6.1% projected as of the proposed budget. >> So now I want to talk a little bit through some of the fiscal year 26 and 27 reductions. As you all know, balancing the budget each year is an interplay of available revenue and department reductions or reallocations. There have been several points made of discussion about the reductions taken from city departments to help balance the budget, particularly in relation to the proposed [1:55:20 PM] reduction to social service grants. This slide is to demonstrate the levels and amounts of reductions taken over the past two years to our general fund, support services and internal services departments, and our effort to ensure a balanced budget while continuing to invest in the services that the city delivers. Noted that the savings listing listed for both support services and internal services, represents the full savings for those departments. The general fund, proportionate share of support services savings is about 50%, but when you look at the internal services funds, that savings to the general fund can range from 8% to 40% based on the service that is provided. Going into a little bit more detail of the reductions made to the general fund after over the past two budget cycles, 11 of the 13 general fund departments have some level of reduction over the last two years, resulting [1:56:21 PM] in $19.5 million in fiscal year 26 and $5.3 million in million dollars in the proposed budget. That is separate from the support social service grants reductions of that $8 million, the social service grants investments. If you look at fiscal year 26, it, did not reduce in fiscal year 26 as part of the 26 budget. You all may remember, there was a $14.1 million, one time funding that was transferred in from reserves to sustain those contracts during the budget amendment process, funding within the social service grants was reallocated. However, the the city's full investment remained at the 74 million. Those reallocations did result into several contracts within our social service grants, having a 10% reductions as. Across the board reductions were taken to reallocate those dollars to other priorities. [1:57:25 PM] Looking more closely at our social service grant funding, this slide walks through the past six fiscal years and is showing the increased investment in social service grants over the last six budget cycles, with a growing investment of about 10.9. Compound average annual growth rate. The growth in social service investments has outpaced departmental growth, with ranges between 3.9% in municipal court to 8.5% growth for public health and homeless strategies and operations combined. Of note, as you look at this chart here, the green portion of the investment represents the city owned shelters. Prior to fiscal year 27 proposed, these investments were categorized as social service contracts or grants in the proposed budget. The investment is not reducing. However, it is transitioning to department operating budgets to more accurately reflect the [1:58:26 PM] nature of these contracts compared to the investments in the social service grants. This also does not represent the other investments across the city, including investments in local housing vouchers, which we'll talk about in a bit, as well as rental assistance and the sobering center. If you all remember, we moved that to one time funding for fiscal year 27. And then I wanted to walk a little bit through the conversation that we've been having about the social service evaluation process. We've been discussing these investments during, we began discussing it during the fiscal year 26 process, primarily due to the continued constraints the city has on revenue growth compared to expenditure growth. As we begin the details of this work at the beginning of the of the calendar year, we we received direction from the council through a resolution that asked staff to create a rubric to assess and prioritize which of the city's existing social service grants should be fully [1:59:26 PM] funded, partially funded or eliminated, weighing several factors, to, to review this. And we created a rubric and shared with the public health committee in may, after several months of conversation and engagement with the community vendors, partners, and departmental subject matter experts in reviewing the focus areas and contracts, there are 14 contracts that were exempted based on the direct impact to city operations, like the shelters or the city's or regional's grant funding. That requires local investment to continue receiving federal funding. Department partners then took the rubric and looked at, a completed a strategic review of the contracts based on the foundation of the rubric and including the factors of reviewing whether there's duplication, opportunity for consolidation, performance, the degree of strategic alignment, whether or not they were closely aligned or not aligned [2:00:27 PM] to the strategic plan and historical spending. Historical underspending to reach their targets. I think I want to focus on the rubrics just a little bit and just walk through the guiding principles. This rubric looked at five major areas as was included in some of the direction. And this was a guiding principle to identify the level of priority for the focus area. The contract analysis included, the contract analysis by staff then included those five other areas that I mentioned earlier, the city's audit, the city auditor's recent report on social service contracts, although focused on contract management of those contracts, identified performance as a key concern in several of the contracts review. As such, because of the timing and the the the dynamic of these conversations, the focus of the conversation has shifted to performance, but it's important [2:01:27 PM] to navigate through the full review intended. It has always been the goal of the team to continue this work beyond the current review, identifying the appropriate level of investments for social service grants. As we continue to grapple with the constrained fiscal realities of the city, we are committed to continuing the work that aligns the city council's direction to implement continued outreach, build upon the creative rubric and refining the analysis where needed to restructure the city's social service framework to a level that is sustainable and addresses the priorities of this community and the and the council. The city manager has articulated a goal and vision to restore structural balance to the general fund. The review of this framework cannot be completed in isolation. The social services investment should align with the city's investments in core services such as our parks, health and human services, libraries, and public safety. The goal is to invest in our core functions, ensuring that we can achieve [2:02:29 PM] structural integrity in the general fund. Thinking through our housing, local housing, voucher investments. There's been some questions about the funding and the request for the $7.8 million. And this slide really focuses on, the properties that are included in those investments. The city's investment in local housing vouchers is key to the success and sustainability of the city's investments and properties, and are instrumental in the full social service framework. The overall investment required is the $7.8 million for these seven properties. And this is through the city and is an ongoing investment need. The cost, as you see here, is the average cost per unit for the 374 units that are currently online. Speaking a little bit about our capital budget, I think there were some questions are asked to look at our capital spend [2:03:30 PM] over this fiscal year, over the five year forecast. And so if you look at our, spending plan for, this 2027 planned year through fiscal year 2020, 2031, you'll see that there's a $4.25 billion planned spending for this coming fiscal year. Our enterprise departments are about 80% of that spending. The large projects that you all are aware of, Austin energy, aviation, Austin water pills are $252 million. And that includes the existing bond programs. And then the others include the expansion of the convention center and smaller other funding sources such as grants or loans. You'll see this tapering down of our capital spend plan through this forecast period, primarily as the reduction of or the completion of the convention center expansion project. [2:04:31 PM] There's continued investment in the dark green that you'll see of the continued work at aviation, and then the lighter green and dark blue represents the work of our Austin water department and Austin energy, respectively. These next two slides walk through the individual department spend plans showing the individual spending plans for fiscal year 27, as well as the combined spending plans for 28 through 31 and the total for each of these years. Again, this this second slide also walks through the spending plan for the departments. I think there were some questions about parks and recreation. I know there was just a conversation about the spending plan spending for these departments. And so I just want to show the summary of the intended spend based on current funding. That was included in the fiscal year 27 [2:05:31 PM] proposed budget. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you members, if you want to be recognized, please. Make sure I know about it. Let me start with a couple of questions, maybe less questions. And. Members. As I posted on the message board, I'm I'm concerned about how we got where we are on social services and, how it's being perceived publicly. And I want to make sure that we as a policy making body, take the time and ask the right questions to get us where we might want to be as a policy making body. And miss Lang direct Lang. I want to make sure the, the initial estimate for necessary cuts to social services that staff identified last fall began at $16.8 million. Is that right? >> That's correct. [2:06:32 PM] >> And and now we're ultimately down to 5.3 million because staff decided to implement the 16.8 million in cuts over two years, and set aside another 2.9 million for the sobering center in the reserves. Is that correct? So I'd kind of like to back up and talk about the original 16.8 million in reductions, because everything after that has been a result of the manager setting that amount as a goal for for whatever reason, it was set as a goal. It became the goal. And, and for whatever reason, items that were set there to be reduced, that became the goal that that served as the basis of the proposed budget. Right? >> Yes, sir. >> So, to me, trying to analyze this budget and trying to analyze the needs of the community, some of the rationale for the cuts feels like it's pretty simple. And [2:07:34 PM] it's to meet a $5.3 million goal in this year and ultimately a $16.8 million goal, because of course, we're going to be back here next year doing the same thing. Isn't that right? >> Yes. >> So members, as I, as I point out on the message board, I would prefer for us to have a better foundation, what I believe will be a better foundation for decision making on these services based upon some mechanism for process that will give us a more thorough analysis of, of the world of need that is in the community, and making sure we have clear goals that are set so that when it comes to performance reviews, when it comes to things like strategic plan, strategic. What's the, what strategic alignment is the new word of the, of the week? That we are, we're actually into some form of strategic alignment. As I pointed out on the message board, one of the concerns I [2:08:34 PM] had, we all received a memo that was over 100 pages long, at 7:00 on Friday, and that's 12 days before we have to make a decision about social services. And one of the things that bugged me about that memo, and I sat through it, and I actually started counting, in some instances, the phrase strategic alignment meant it got a reduction or it was the justification for a reduction. And in some instances, strategic alignment was there was no reduction. So it was impossible for me to tell. So the question, the first question I have is whose strategic alignment. >> So as part of the resolution, there was some direction to look at the city's strategic plan and the community health investment, plan to identify [2:09:35 PM] whether or not these contracts align with the current contracts, align with those plans. And I think the instructions were also to, look at other plans that the city had put in place. And so when we say strategic alignment, it's based on looking at the citywide strategic plan and the other plans that have been put in place across the city, and then we're looking at which which contracts are closer, invest, are closer, closer, aligned to those plans and further align to those plans. And so I recognize that there was some, misunderstanding about what we meant by strategic alignment and the, the goal that the staff was trying to, articulate was if a contract was maintained, then it was closer to that strategic alignment. If a contract was reduced, then it was further from that strategic alignment. >> Okay. But you can understand why now, eight days before we [2:10:36 PM] have to vote, it makes it even more difficult because of how that process played out. >> Yes, sir. >> And, and the other thing that, that I saw, we all saw in, in the over 100 page memo was that in some instances, performance served as a justification for a reduction. Now, I must admit, and and I'm now told I did it wrongly, but I admit I thought that that was somehow based upon the audit, which I think, frankly, I probably am representative of the community in that regard, that the community thought that that when we're talking about performance, we were probably talking about the audit. But I'm told that that's not the case. That is a performance evaluation that was done specifically by staff. Is that right? >> That is correct. Performance was one of the factors that staff reviewed in the review of all the contracts. And so if if [2:11:36 PM] you remember, we started with the, the creation of the rubric to identify the focus areas, and then staff went down into the individual contracts and reviewed it. And performance was one of the indicators for that review. >> So while now we've got strategic alignment, whatever that might be, and we've got performance, whoever makes that determination of what it might be as the reasons for reductions, the logic of my message board post, I think, is the same. We as a council and an audit and finance committee, and the council wanted an audit because we felt very strongly that we wanted to be sure that the services were being provided services that we said we wanted and were part of our strategy of how to to govern as a as a council. We wanted to make sure those services were [2:12:38 PM] actually being provided, not to use it as a de facto way to do away with the services. And there hasn't been, in my view, a, a clean, if you will, description of why we are now saying we want to utilize performance or strategic alignment again, whatever those might mean to do away with the actual services, we may want those services. Now, what may happen is we look at performance and we say, well, you're absolutely right. The performance was was wrong. Kirk's kids, for example, which is not a non nonprofit by the way, but it would be a good one. Kirk's kids isn't performing the way it ought to perform, but we still think those kids need to be fed. So can we take that money and put it with chito children? And make it [2:13:42 PM] work that way? But you. So you get my point. I don't think we are. So what I've recommended and I'll just go to my recommendation, what I've recommended is that we do a one time appropriation for the. In my case, I focused on children. I focused on children, but I think it applies across the board. And that is, we say we're going to make an appropriation of this additional money and it will be. Then what we're. It's just it's a one time appropriation. Appropriation. It's a 1 in 1 fell swoop. And then what we're going to do is we're going to ask that the evaluations of the contracts come back. We actually evaluate those contracts. We use the audit. We use whatever performance standards are appropriate. But if it comes back and we and we find that that's not a contract we want to continue, we make the decision about whether it's a service we want to continue. And then the next. So that's step one and step two. And step [2:14:44 PM] three is we look at overall our social service spend over the next year so that when we come back next year and we're faced with this kind of budget, we do it in such a way that we're making a full determination about what we want to, as part of our strategic plan, see our social services to be. Now that does two things. At least. One is it's not a blanket reauthorization. It is also not a blanket reduction or cuts. It is a more, in my view, more methodical, thoughtful approach to get to the point that we. That, I think, is the sense of the council and the sense of the community before we. We have a blanket reduction. This thing is going to start chiming here in a second, so I'm going to shut up. And I'll pass it to, council member Siegel followed by council member zo qadri then council member alter. >> Thank you mayor. I'm really [2:15:45 PM] glad you made that point that, even if a particular vendor isn't living up to their contract, doesn't mean we want to defund that programmatic area, right? We want to fund mental health and then rely on staff to have the right mental health providers, right, who are living up to that. >> Exactly. That's exactly right. >> So really appreciate that point. Director Lang want to see if I could follow up on a couple questions. I don't mean to press you all. I know your team is absolutely swamped with work, but we are running up against these deadlines to file amendments. And so I wanted to follow up, I guess previously on Thursday, I had some questions about the police department funding line item for the blue Santa's warehouse. And, I think y'all were going to start researching, the costs for that program. I'm wondering if you have that now. >> We do. We're pulling it up. >> Thank you ma'am. [2:16:48 PM] >> While we're looking it up, do you have another question? >> I got a couple. Thank you. I guess last Tuesday we were asking for a cost breakdown of the. The homeless encampment management program. We would like the cost breakdown across departments for that program. Do we have those numbers? >> I thought that was answered in the cb. Q but let me check with the team. I thought we had that answered. >> Okay. >> Director gray is going to take that one. >> Fantastic. Thank you. Director. >> Hey, council member David gray, director for Austin homeless strategies and operations. I'm going to pull up the information for you. We would like you to go to your next question, but I'm going to stay here until we get you that answer. But we do have the answer. I just have to pull it up. >> Okay. Third bucket. I wanted to ask some questions about the housing vouchers program. I don't know if these should be directed to, budget or to [2:17:49 PM] housing. >> Could be. >> Could be one or both. >> Okay. >> I'm looking at the presentation here and I guess it's. Is it page 14? I'm curious about the different properties listed. Which of these are city owned properties. >> Of the seven. >> Haydn director of Austin housing council member you're talking about of the. >> Seven yes, ma'am. >> Katy all of those seven with the exception. Well, not all the seven, but six of those. The seventh being Katy lofts is not owned by a. I see. >> Thank you. And director, do you know the different mfi levels at these properties? Do we have access to that information today? >> All right. I'm going to have my housing officer come up. >> Thank you. We need some more [2:18:49 PM] chairs over there. >> Yeah. >> Good afternoon. Nicole Jocelyn, housing and community development officer for Austin housing. I do not have the breakdown in front of me of the mfi levels. Generally they're mostly 30% and 50% mfi units. There are two properties on here Karen point, Cameron and espero that are not solely permanent supportive housing. So they have a mix of permanent supportive housing residents and then other residents that are served by the program. >> Thank you. And do you know the kind of breakdown of of unit size, you know, single occupancy versus three bedroom, etc. >> These are all efficiency units. >> Okay, great. And then the last question and this kind of strand here, after fiscal year 27, if staff is unable to find, I guess, the additional million dollars for housing vouchers, how would we account for the impacted units that don't receive funding? >> If units that are supported by the local housing voucher program today are not supported [2:19:52 PM] through the rest of their housing assistance payment contract, those properties will not be collecting that rent for those units, and those properties will likely be defaulting on loans that have been made to those developments and their obligations under those loans to be serving people exiting homelessness. >> Okay. Thank you very much for that context. Director, back to you or. >> Director gray is ready. >> Sorry, sir. Go ahead. >> Hey, council members, the total cost for that homeless encampment management operation for that reporting period of may 11th to June 5th was $719,361. Of that, 62% was staff cost. And that staff cost lives in separate departments. I could outline that for you now, or we can, send your staff the cb. Q. >> We can take a minute more on this one if you want to just do the high level summaries. Sure. >> So in terms of overall cost [2:20:53 PM] for Austin resource recovery, it was $147,000. Austin police $127,000. Transportation and public works $102,000. Watershed protection $182,000. Homeless strategies and operations $127,000. Parks and recreation $20,000. And emergency management $12,000. >> Thank you so much, director. That's all for that category of questions. >> Thank you sir. >> Are we ready on blue Santa? >> Yep. The $1.2 million new allocation for police at the grove is split between the police equipment division and the office of the community liaison. It's about 5050. And also it's split about 5050 for both of those units in terms of warehouse space versus office space. And then within the office of community liaison, they have salt, autism awareness, blue Santa, national night out, African American quality of life, Asian American [2:21:53 PM] quality of life, and lgbtq plus quality of life. So when you net all that out, the amount that's actually being used for the blue Santa storage is a small proportion of that 1.2 million. >> Fraction of a fraction. Do we have a sense of how much total funding goes into blue Santa like, or is it is the the warehouse cost the only cost, or are there other costs that are budgeted for this program? >> I believe there's staff, but they do those other programs as well. So it's proportionate amount. So the staff covers blue Santa as well as the other initiatives that Eric just mentioned. >> Okay, great. Thank you. I did have a quick Austin water question. If, if our general manager or I'm sorry, I'm sorry, not Austin water, I misspoke, director Austin energy, my apologies. And then, director gray, if you have the answer to this question, those increases you mentioned, are those all an increase from the prior policies or were any of those [2:22:54 PM] expenditures already budgeted is a follow up question I had, but, thank you, GM Riley. So this is about the rate changes. We're in volume two of the budget. Oh my god, I have screwed up my notes here. I was supposed to be asking about Austin water after all. So, everybody, you're seeing the, the ugly side of the budget process here. Staff is smarter than the council member. Director gray, do you have a follow up on on my question, please? >> Yes, sir. Thank you. Council member so the bulk of those costs, about 62% of those costs were for staff salaries. So that was already in the departments budgets. The other costs were for, disposal fees, cleaning crews that we contract with et-cetera. And those costs were also already budgeted for in those departments budgets. So the money was allocated. We just shifted it from the old way that we used to do the [2:23:54 PM] encampment management work into the new process. >> Okay. Thanks, I appreciate it. >> Thank you sir. >> And director roalson, with my main remaining, minute and a half or so, for the rate changes on page four, one two, volume two of the budget, we see a 56% increase in fee for the lowest tier of the consumer or customer assistance program. Would you please explain the increase and how this might impact customers enrolled in the cap? >> Yes. Thank you for the question. So our rates are designed to maintain a about a 49% discount for our cap customers. And as we are making our adjustments, across the board, the, the cap lowest rate will go from $1.37, to $2.14. And that, that is a 56% increase. But it is, it is that, [2:24:56 PM] that 137 to $2.14 increase. >> Thank you. And, how does this increase increased fee impact. How far customer assistance dollars will go in terms of supporting these customers? >> Joseph Gonzalez deputy director, Austin water, as shay mentioned, you know, the, the proposed rate updates would provide a 49% discount for, for cap customers in the current year, that discount is about 52%. But with the recent enrollment growth for, for our cap customer programs, you know, we're, we're actually at a deficit in terms of our community community benefit charge revenues that we use to fund those discounts. So we moved the discount down to 49%, to, to get to a closer alignment between the revenues [2:25:56 PM] that we have available to fund the program and the current enrollment levels. >> Thank you, sir. Thank you. Mayor. >> Thank you, councilmember, councilmember alter. I'm sorry, councilmember zo qadri, councilmember alter, councilmember Fuentes, >> I just had a quick question. I came across some great work that council member harper-madison and councilmember Allison alter had done back in 2022. Before my time on council, they had requested an audit and the audit came back. This is obviously from from 2022 that crashes involving city owned vehicles cost the city $8.4 million. And then in that audit, it showed that there was 1855 crashes that resulted in $8.4 million in repairs and replacements, and that 47% of those, they found out was the fault of the city. And I think the biggest thing that's come out in recent times is a. And there was an article that came out in, I think KXAN, about a former APD officer who was [2:26:57 PM] texting and driving and hit two folks who were seriously harmed. So, you know, unfortunately, the city city is at fault at times of that, $4.8 million of that 8.4 was when vehicles were completely totaled. And I know in the article it mentions the city tries to offset some of this cost by auctioning off totaled vehicles. Any money generated from auctions is transferred to the city's general fund and enterprise departments, according to audit, the city's fleet management does not budget for for replacing totaled vehicles, except for for police vehicles. And in fiscal year 22, they budgeted for ten reserve vehicles for APD at a cost of approximately half $1 million. So my question and I couldn't find this. So that's why I wanted to ask in fiscal year 27. What's that number? >> Mr. Mayor, may I I don't know that it was an audit. I think it was a special report, if I remember correctly, special report. So they're not. >> Thank you. [2:27:57 PM] >> Councilmember. >> I'm looking for the fleet director. >> I see she's working her way down here. Director walls is on her way. >> Okay. >> Jennifer walls, director of fleet mobility services. I have Rick Harlan here, our deputy who manages the accident program. We should have that number for you. >> Trying to pull this number as quickly as possible. Sure. Rick Harlan, deputy director. About 20 reserve vehicles are what we're setting aside for APD this year. >> For for fiscal year 27. And what's the cost on that? >> There? Stand by. I will tell you didn't have that number right off the top of my head. [2:29:12 PM] >> Councilmember, as he's looking for that detail. Do you have another question? >> Well, I guess my follow up question would be from it was 1010 vehicles in fiscal year 22. Now it's 20. Is there a reasoning that it's jumped up? It's doubled. >> So we we build a reserve fleet for APD based on the number of total vehicles that they have in the current year or in the prior year. Sure. So we're forecasting the amount of vehicles that would potentially be totaled and building up that reserve fleet. As you know, the lead time and kind of complexity of a police pursuit vehicle is nothing that you can go by on the street. So you've got to kind of plan ahead for these sorts of things. So we've looked at accidents in the prior year and fy 25 forecasted out 20. The total number, the total dollar amount in fy 27. Is $3.5 million. >> 3.5 million. Okay, great. Thank you. [2:30:14 PM] >> Thanks, councilmember, councilmember. Councilmember Fuentes, councilmember Lang. >> Thank you. I just I want to start with, you know, I put on the message board last night and I know we had this discussion a little bit whenever it was we met last, as a body about what should we do with the additional revenue with the certified rolls, the 4.7 million and staff made a recommendation to use those funds for the housing, local housing vouchers. And I think that that would be a really wise way for us to try to or to be able to provide stability to that program. It doesn't foreclose our ability to also make, the same level of investments in the social service contracts. But we every [2:31:14 PM] budget, we show up, we have five crises we have to figure out, right, how are we going to fund the vouchers? How are we going to fund rental assistance? How are we going to fund social services? How are we going to fund this or that? And we are facing next budget. If we keep things as they are. Once again, another question about social service contracts. But also this $5.7 million question Marc of the local housing vouchers. And if instead we take this 4.7 and we dedicate it to that, it dramatically closes that gap to just be a $1 million question Marc that is much more manageable, but will also equally free up dollars, both in the housing trust fund and in the hope fund of the similar amount that we can dedicate to the social services that have been discussed many times. And [2:32:15 PM] so I, I think if we can take at least one crisis off the table, it would be really prudent of us to do so and follow that recommendation. And I think it would also allow for us to feed into or to, to better be able to, to go through the social service reset that I know the manager is working on. And then through that process, be able to identify this would be something that should be funded from the housing trust fund, or this should be something that should be funded from the hope fund. There are a lot of those things that that we can do. So, I would just ask for open consideration of that. I don't think it forecloses any of the desires of this body to, to make the restorations to social services to the best of our ability. And I want to just get staff's clarification or reiteration that I, is there anything I said that doesn't line up or if. Can you just [2:33:15 PM] give us a very clear explanation of why you made that recommendation? >> Yes, sir. As we were looking at the 4.7 million, when we found out that that amount was available, I think I've hopefully tried to articulate, we want to make sure that we are at those local housing vouchers based on the things that, director Dean and her team have said is something that the city has to do. So the recommendation was to fund the housing vouchers through the general fund at the 4.7 million, which would allow for additional funding available in the housing trust fund. We could, then transfer about 2.3 million from the hope fund into the housing trust fund to support emergency rental assistance, and that would allow for additional dollars in the hope fund to be [2:34:17 PM] used for, the social service contracts that that was the desire of the council. I think when we talked about it last Thursday, we didn't specifically say for social service grants. We were looking at, trying to allow for some flexibility for any of the things that were, priority for council. But there are some items that are currently funded through the social service grants that could be funded, partially in the housing trust fund and partially in the hope fund. >> Okay. But the net result would be still because you're just, it's how you allocate those dollars. We would have 2.5 million potentially of the housing trust fund, two and a quarter out of the hope fund. So still that 4.7 ish available for social service grants. When once you made those allocations. >> Yeah. Yes, there would be, [2:35:18 PM] between and I'll have to go back and look at the exact details, but I will be between two and a half and 4 million available. However, I, I think, speaking to some of your, as a council's thoughts and concerns, I think there are some, changes and variations that the, that the staff would recommend as far as if there are specific contracts that, you know, we would recommend eliminating, regardless of if it was 5 million or 3 million available. And so I think we would look at all of those elements and variables to make a final recommendation. >> Right. >> And that, I think is really important and feeds into what the mayor was talking about earlier. I do think we could make that allocation out of those funding sources to whether it's a subset or the larger set. As I know, the mayor pro tem has, also voiced have that allocation, the contracts within that be reviewed to see which ones are [2:36:18 PM] performing, which ones are not, which ones are the highest priority. How can we make these dollars get the services to the people and in a high quality way? But I just, I think that would be a, a. A better way long term for us to do this. And so I just want to kind of to put that on the table as this conversation moves forward. I do want to get one clarification, and you might have said this, but forgive me, I, I got lost in when you were talking about the social service grant funding. Slide ten. The, the 68.8 million in your notes, it says it does include city owned shelters, but then the next bullet says that it doesn't include the marshaling yard, which is a city owned shelter. So I. >> You're confused. I'm very confused. >> You okay? Let me clarify. Last year when we, added the $5 [2:37:22 PM] million, of revenue that was received after certification, similar to the 4.7, we added those dollars in, but we added into the operating budget of zo. And so the 68.8 does not include that that now 8 million because the 3 million we added in fiscal year 27 is the full amount that is in operating. And it reflects the changes that. 19.4 that we're moving over to operating as well. >> But in terms of looking at the previous years, we do have some shelter operations, like, let's just say the 68 in fiscal year 25 or the 74 in fiscal year 26, do those include some. >> Of those include shelter operations because we the methodology was that was part of the social service contracts. >> So apples to apples fiscal year 27, we would add to the 68.8. The 8 million at a minimum for the marshaling yard, because that is how we've accounted for it previously. >> Yes. >> Okay. I just want to make [2:38:24 PM] sure I have the numbers all correct. I will just say kind of closing out, I have had some of the same frustrations that the mayor talked about a little bit ago. I don't think the public understands, and rightfully so, how we don't know which Conway are performing and which ones aren't. And I think it does us a disservice and, and does not lend credibility to our ability to say which are the, you know, the lowest performing contracts. And how can we make sure that we get those dollars either reallocated to chito children or to another priority? And I get that it's complicated. And I get that there are a lot of external factors. But, you know, everybody in their daily life, whether the job they're in, you [2:39:24 PM] know, their, their job gets measured somehow. And for us to not be able to kind of put that measurement on the table, it has been a frustration for me. And I think, the general public has not really understood how we don't just know what's the bottom of the list and what's the top of the list. So I know we're trying to do a broader look at this next year, and I am confident that that that is going to be part of that broader look. But I do want to just kind of lend voice to some of that frustration that that's out there and recognize that. There, there could be more information that we have and we just don't. And, and that's the reality. We have a week left to, to figure it out. So I appreciate the, the time. >> I caught it with one second left. It didn't, councilmember Fuentes, councilmember Laine. [2:40:25 PM] Councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you. >> Colleagues, I just want to pick up that thread in saying that now there's a supermajority of us on the dias who have expressed support for restoring at least a portion of the cuts made to social services. So I'm really pleased to see us united in in that effort. I think some of the concerns that have been outlined here by my colleagues, I just want to reiterate and emphasize, is that we were just given the memo that gave us more detailed information on the rubric that we wanted to have implemented in advance of these cuts, and just having a weeks out time frame to consider them, to dig deep on them, just isn't enough for me to feel comfortable with these cuts. It's also part of the reason why I, along with my colleagues, councilmember Ellis Siegel, harper-madison and zo qadri, have brought forth, brought forth an amendment seeking to restore 4.7 million of those cuts to social services, and it is very much in line to what the mayor and his effort has outlined in creating a process in which we [2:41:25 PM] hold the funding to fund the services as we make time and space to dig through the individual contracts, we're actually less so about the individual contracts, but more of the service itself, right? That is what our intention is, is preserving the social safety net overall and, and having and giving us time and space to have more conversations as to, okay, what is the appropriate funding level for the social safety net overall, we just haven't had the time for us to have that conversation yet. One approach, councilmember, alter that you've outlined here and having the manager's recommendation of the funds going first to the housing trust fund, a question I have is that by going about it that way, is that it wouldn't allow us to fund social services in a more comprehensive way. In fact, my understanding, by having those funds going first to the housing trust fund and the hope fund, that those are more restrictive. So we would only be able to fund that. Good. >> So the dollars in the housing trust fund is more [2:42:26 PM] restrictive. It can support housing and homelessness. And so there is, you know, the downtown density bonus funds that are restricted to those primary sources. And, but then the hope fund, is general revenue and that there is no formal restriction on those. There is the city's ordinance to focus on homelessness and housing related things with the hope fund, but there are things such as basic needs and, or, some levels of the, the child and youth area that could be within that hope fund as well. So there is some flexibility there. And one of the, hearing the conversation as we work through what the updated recommendation would be, it may be to move some more of the homelessness in, homelessness funding into the housing trust fund to free up ability in other areas. So we'll look at [2:43:27 PM] that in detail as we get over the next couple of days. >> Okay. >> Yeah. If we could have a breakdown of how much funding would be, would correlate with homelessness and housing related initiatives that could fall under the housing trust fund and the hope fund, I think that would be helpful for us as we have these conversations further, further this week. One other or a couple questions I have just to kind of take it a step back here. Of the, you know, we are targeting the $16.8 million reduction overall to the safety net, over the next two years. Can you share a little bit more as to how staff got to that recommended level of 16.8 million? >> And before Kerri probably gives you the more dazzling detail. I kind of want to back up. And so the, the premise of all of that, if you might recall, in 2026, before I think we moved to the prop Q TRE assessment was the level of the [2:44:29 PM] structural imbalance of the city's overall budget last year, when we started at $30 million. And the fact that when we looked at what we needed to pay for, whether it was our ongoing services and our core functions and the social service aspects of what we had undertaken, I made the recommendation, I believe it was last year, to actually spend one time dollars out of our reserves to fund the social service, elements of our budget at that level, because I didn't feel like it was fair, to give one and a half months notice whether to council or to the nonprofits. Before we were going to propose such large reductions. And so, I think I said at that time, that we would then begin to undertake and assess how we went about resetting, our overall spend. And then I think that led to [2:45:30 PM] ifc's, that further asked us to do more and go out and do outreach as well as come up with the rubric, I think, as Cary described. And so, there was actually a one year head start. And we are where we are today. And it seems as though, we're challenged, but even the issue of the amended budget when prop Q failed and our approach as it relates to across the board related reductions, were not fun or easy. And I think even the timing and notice was difficult for some of our nonprofits. And so I think there's been at least the starting point was there was a $14 million issue that we couldn't continue to do without reducing other city core services that I put on the table for us to recalibrate, determine, as I think has been discussed here, the levels and areas and the the actual results oriented from homelessness to behavioral health to violence, interruption to education and children, determining what those levels of funding should be in those areas. That's the [2:46:30 PM] work I think we were trying to do to get settled on that. And so that number is really just predicated on what the gulf was for, what we needed to find a way to find additional revenues for. And so that was the starting point. Chose to phase that over two years to smooth it out and even it out. And that's kind of what got us to the 16.8 was really finding a level and a sustainable level that we can continue to support. And you saw the revenue or the expense growth over the years where we've actually increased that amount by $28 million. And that's great. But that in some cases comes at the expense of the things that we're not able to do in departments that need resources to do the things that I think people expect us to do. So Kerri, I don't know if you've got any more specifics. >> I think that was great. >> Well, and just to to make sure I'm understanding here. So the 16.8 million was largely in [2:47:31 PM] part due to addressing the structural imbalance of the budget, which was then at a 16.8 million. Am I right in understanding, though, that in this past year, you've identified over 20 million in in cost savings, not including the social service cuts, right? >> Yes. So in balancing fiscal year 26, we did reductions across several departments. And that we, we completed those 19 or so million dollars of reductions and we transferred in the 14.1 million of revenue of, of reserves to continue to support our social service contracts in fiscal year 27 proposed, there are additional reductions to general fund and support services departments to help us balance. So every year for the last several years, we've looked at reduction options as well as, reallocation options to kind of get us to that point. I think [2:48:32 PM] one of the things, the manager asked if I had a little more detail, one of the things that I think we lose, I want to make sure we keep, sight of is as we do the planned year, there are things that we talk about will not be continued. So last year we said we don't think we'll be able to do a 3% wage increase for employees. And we heard from council, we had the conversation, we saw how revenue was coming in and we made those adjustments. And so the plan year is assuming that our revenue projections come in the way that we project. And as we get different information and newer information about that, we can adjust the Spann accordingly. I think the overall goal is to, to the manager's point, make sure that we are in a place where we are structurally balanced year over year and not having a situation where we're saying, yeah, we're balanced for two years, but we have a deficit in year three through five. The goal is to get to a point where we can [2:49:33 PM] maintain the work that we're supposed to do as a city, both internally for our departments and whatever the level of investment that we should have for our, our, external partners as well. >> Right. >> Yes. And I certainly appreciate that. And I, and I want to acknowledge, I mean, there has been tremendous efforts in cost reductions across the department. And I see that through the presentations we've had in the weeks leading up to today. I think, though, it begs the question of if we found 19 million in cost reductions across the department this year, you know, to what extent do we need to be moving towards that $16.8 million goal line and cutting our social safety net, given how incredible you all have been in finding savings otherwise? So that that's why I want us to to hopefully well, I would love for us to preserve our social safety net at the full amount, which would be 5.4 million. But the amendment we are providing and offering colleagues is at a 4.7 million. So there will be reductions of what the contracts that were on [2:50:34 PM] the memo, how many or what is the total amount for the contracts that were listed as elimination or eliminated? Do we know the total amount of the eliminated contracts? >> Give me one second. I think we do have that amount. >> Okay. >> And then, I'm running out of time here. But the last question I'll ask you is, from my understanding, all of the social service contracts will be re solicited next year. >> I think part of the goal has been to do a reset of the full framework. And so as we continue to talk to council and understand what the areas of priority are and the funding levels are priority, then we would look at doing a full reset and re soliciting all of the contracts. >> So, so colleagues, if we know that all of the contracts are going to be revisited next year, I really think it's it. This is an opportune time for us to preserve the social safety net with a $4.7 million that we have to give us time to [2:51:36 PM] have that evaluation of the rubric. Is it working as we intended? Do we need to tweak it? You know, what services do we want to continue funding and at what level, and give staff and the community time to process that. All of these contracts, all of the services will be solicited next year? >> Thank you. >> And to answer your question, councilmember, the total eliminated amount was 2.2 2.1 million. >> Okay. >> In the in the staff proposal. >> Very good. Thank you. >> Thanks. Councilmember. Councilmember Laine. Councilmember harper-madison. Councilmember duchen. >> So I want to thank you, mayor, for your remarks, opening our discussion on this agenda item. Your suggestions, I think, have moved us forward in important ways, both on the message board and here today. Also really appreciated councilmember alter's and councilmember Fuentes's remarks, as well as, of course, the very hard work of our staff. I just have two questions. The first [2:52:36 PM] one relates to Austin community court as Austin community court staff come up, I want to daylight that the integral care contract for behavioral health care is proposed to be reduced by over 50%. The explanation given in the staff memo is that the agreement is being right sized for their new location. However, smaller location does not mean that the overall need for this service has also consolidated. Can you speak to how the city is mitigating the impact of this reduction on the population it serves? >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. My name is Laura Martinez, business process consultant with Austin community court. With the reductions in the proposed budget as it is, the service levels would be reduced. So under normal circumstances, if the funding remained in our budget, we would look for ways to mitigate those reductions through other community partners and services. As it is right now, our case managers would just try to look for ways to navigate with other existing community resources. [2:53:37 PM] >> Okay. Thank you for that information. I'm glad to have asked, the other my other question relates to Austin public health. It was really concerning to see reductions for the Asian American resource center, community health navigators, including navigators for seniors. We have heard from Asian family support services that the a R C is a critical resource hub for the community, especially those needing navigation assistance who have language or other accessibility needs. And the rationale. It also states that there is no alternative program providing these services. What does a reduction in these services look like for those who use them? And will it impact availability for new participants? Thank you. >> Thank you. You said that really quickly. I'm sorry. >> Sure. Just repeat. >> The last part of your question. >> Yeah, yeah. So I ended with, two questions. So the first question was, well, I'll just start here. We have heard from Asian family support services that the a R C is a critical resource hub for the community, [2:54:37 PM] especially those needing navigation assistance who have language or other accessibility needs. In the rationale, it also states that there is no alternative program providing these services. So what does a reduction in these services look like for those who now use them? And will it impact availability for new participants? >> Thank you. Adrian Sturrup Austin public health. The short answer is that yes, there will be a reduction in services. My hope is that the department will be able to work with community partners to see how we can leverage remaining resources. The city, the public health does has a, a very robust program that serves that community. It cannot do what Archie does. I will say that. But how we work together in this time will be important, how we can leverage what we do as a department for whatever is remaining with Archie will be important. And so that is the strategy to date. But the short [2:55:38 PM] answer is yes, that there will be a reduction in services. >> So I'm just going to go ahead and daylight. My concern with that because, I appreciate very much that you have a robust, offering for the Asian American community. But, I do note that a lot of those resources are dedicated in other parts of the city, whereas district six has a lot of Asians in the city. And I certainly have personally experienced the challenges of connecting with to services. And also note the proclivity within the Asian community to really need to feel comfortable with the provider as understanding their own community's needs, much like any community feels that way. However, we don't have very many resources that are able to provide that assurance. And so that does raise a concern for me. The elimination of services that I don't think are adequately provided from another means. Thank you. >> Thank you. Council member, council member harper-madison, followed by councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor. I want to thank council member zo qadri [2:56:38 PM] for reminding me about that report that council member alter and I asked for, a little bit of rationale there. There was, a series of accidents that had occurred at the time. And I remembered, in the Austin fire department, if you wreck a fire truck, they will never let you forget it. One by way of a punitive approach through leadership. And then frankly, your peers don't let you forget that you wrecked a fire truck. And I just wondered if there was the same level of peer accountability and punitive action in our police departments. I wanted to know how many police cars were getting wrecked. And you guys got to see this graph. It was wildly disproportionate. How many pd cars were getting wrecked? And then I did a little digging, deeper digging. I'm thinking, well, you know, they are pursuing suspects, right? That wasn't where most of the cars were getting wrecked. And so, chief, I want to ask you a question about, process and protocol there. [2:57:41 PM] Since you got here. I know you've done a really extraordinary job with, you know, kind of tightening up the ship and getting your staff moving in the direction, you know, following your, your leadership. And I'm just curious to know if that report brought about any sort of protocol practice changes. >> In the report. Is this I'm sorry, ma'am. >> So I asked for a special report from our auditor about fleet, accidents, but primarily like who's wrecking the most cars. And it was by and large pd. And I'm just curious to know if that report produced any changes in the department. We just heard that. How much did he say $3.1 million set aside. >> Yeah, I think. >> Fleet up from 1 million. And then like I said, just thinking comparatively with our emergency services departments, the fire department and ems, they're begging for more vehicles. You guys have $3.1 million worth of them set aside already just based on previous [2:58:42 PM] behavior. So I'm just curious to know if there's something that's been implemented that will protect those assets. >> Yeah, absolutely. I think it's important to note too that as a, as a city service, we are the only 24 over seven functioning city service who is roaming the streets of Austin. So we are on the road a lot more than fire. Who is responding to calls, you know, themselves. So, I think that's an important context, but also, you know, certainly discipline is Progressive. You know, when you're looking at a categories for, number of accidents that you're at fault, it's absolutely Progressive, but we currently have a problem solving project that we're working with, doctor Tamara, Harold and commander, Jeremy Compton who was currently or was formerly over internal investigations and just noting that we had a high number of officers that were involved in accidents. And so now we're, we're doing a problem solving project on how we can take that number, drastically down. So we are working on that. >> I'd be really curious to see [2:59:43 PM] that. And just in your opinion, what behaviorally, you know, like I said, in addition to like just your peers making fun of you for wrecking vehicles, I know that's the comparison for me, but I'm a layperson, behaviorally. What, what makes the difference there? >> Yeah. >> I think. >> There are many lieutenants and commanders that will put officers on walking beats if they have had auto accidents. So certainly when you're looking at at what discipline is and, and as it progresses and the number of accidents someone's having, taking that approach of if you drive with a partner, you're not driving the car. We're going to, you know, get you drivers training. And we have that at the academy where they come out and get that extra driving attention that they may need. But also, there's absolutely peer pressure. You don't want to total a car or, you know, wreck a car because that it does, it takes that car out of service. And, you know, these sectors feel that. And so there's absolutely peer pressure within the sectors for that. [3:00:43 PM] >> And you know, financial implications. If you think about the difference between 1 million and 3.1, that's $2.1 million that, you know, could have gone back into the. >> Absolutely. Right. And so I'm excited and we'll bring that through the public safety committee, that problem solving project on how we're doing, and certainly with the goal of reducing the number of, of those of those accidents. >> I appreciate that. Thank you. Councilman. Oh, I'm sorry. >> I just wanted to make a quick correction. It was mentioned that the 20 vehicle reserve fleet was a $3.1 million cost, that the correct number is 1.6 million. >> Thank you. >> That vehicles are about 80,000, about 80,000 each for the vehicles. 20 of them is 1.6 million. >> Thank you. I appreciate that, chief. I had I did have one more question or comment maybe. So and this is so councilmember zo qadri and I are working on an item. We've had an uptick in criminal activity, burglaries, vandalism, etc. And our kind of shared manor road corridor and [3:01:44 PM] some of what our constituents are hearing, you know, back in the day, it doesn't happen anymore. And again, I attribute this to your leadership back in the day, patrol officers would say things like, well, if response times are not to your satisfaction, go talk to council. They did it, you know, and that stopped you. And I had a conversation about that. And I think other council members probably talked to you about hearing a lot of that from our constituents. It stopped. I haven't heard anybody say that anymore. But what we're hearing from these constituents that we're working with on manor road is we're not responding to middle of the night burglaries because we've all been pulled away for camp cleanups, for homeless. Exactly. In which case, if we're hearing that repeatedly, it's being said repeatedly, I just want to make certain that that is not, in fact, the case. And on the record for our constituents who are asking that question, is that the reason. >> That is absolutely. >> Not the case are not being responded? >> No. And if if if that is happening, are not being responded to, please give them my phone number and I'd be more [3:02:45 PM] than happy to talk to them. But that cleanup has nothing to do with that. >> I didn't think so, and I appreciate that. Thank you very much. >> Thanks. Council member. Council member duchen. >> Thank you mayor. I want to make a brief comment on the social service contract, since that's what's dominated a lot of our discussion this afternoon at our town hall last night, we shared a couple of slides from staff back in February when they were giving us information about the work they were doing in this space, and it showed a comparison of our funding approach here in Austin against our big Texas cities. It showed us, I think, against Portland and Denver. And my sense was that staff's conclusion was, in many ways, I think they actually have on the slide many ways we're an outlier. We appear to over rely on the city to address social services challenges, whereas a lot of other places that they looked at have much more diverse funding distributions, right? They're looking at grants, looking at philanthropy, looking at county, state, regional bodies and other help. And my hope is that whatever happens with this process, we [3:03:47 PM] can continue to have this discussion and explore these other options going forward, because I want to reinforce that at least where I'm sitting mathematically, it's not possible to have a city that's solely additive when it comes to the budget with no other considerations. I think the end result is of that approach is where we are today, where we've got systemic deficits, and we've got to make lousy choices. So we process, as others have talked about, for evaluating the work, for reinvesting and what does work and making changes to what we discover underperforms is duplicative or has local substitutes we can rely on. And that means looking at any line items that we want to prioritize, including social services. If we're going to go prioritize them, we've got to go look elsewhere then in the budget for what we can trim. That might just be collectively a lower priority. And that's why I want to talk about travel right now, which is something that we talked about last year and got some information from staff. And I've got a few questions. And while I'm asking for management services and [3:04:47 PM] public health, to come up, maybe hr also, I wanted to say. It's, it's odd to me that we are having to make these tough calls with social services contracts. At the same time, our travel budget seems to remain the same even after myself and councilmember alter sent a memo a few months ago trying to figure out how do we better manage costs here? How do we get better reporting? How do we get better explanations for how travel is being expensed? And so for the departments, I'd like to figure out, for things that are budgeted for professional development, for. [3:17:55 PM] Our experience is that it often isn't, and that this continues to be a significant problem in my district. We learned in the last work session that our current emergency response center doesn't even have a relationship with Round Rock ISD police department. Almost half of Round Rock ISD campuses have Austin addresses, and almost 95% of my district is served by Round Rock ISD, and I can state that Round Rock ISD has attempted to initiate mou and other forms of collaboration. I've sat on the Round Rock ISD safety and security committee for the last three years. I'm the only representation from the city of Austin on that committee. This is an obvious gap that the office of joint emergency communications could fill in service of the safety of our children. Currently, emergency communications falls under the Austin police department management structure. While I know that APD is concerned with response times, it's not their sole focus. APD leadership has many other priorities which [3:18:55 PM] understandably take up the majority of their attention. Hiring a civilian director who will eventually manage our civilian call takers will set the stage for a future department that is truly focused on nothing but making 911 work better. We have already, as a city, made enormous improvements in how 911 works. We certainly don't want to sacrifice that improvement. However, we have an obligation to have those improvements actually reach all of our city. I know we can't solve these problems overnight, but these steps can ensure that we have a dedicated team with call center experience working on our response time issues so that we can build relationships with neighboring jurisdictions and truly improve response times citywide and the process becoming more effective. Thank you for letting me lay it out. You will see an eye fc come. I very much appreciate all the input that has gone into this effort over the last more than a year. Thank you. >> Thank you, council member. [3:19:56 PM] For the public. We were just discussing that today at the end of business. We are hopeful that council will have ifcs proposed ifcs and proposed budget amendments so that we will be able to look at those on Thursday, Thursday, August 6th at 10 A.M. We will have a council meeting. We will have the discussion, as I just indicated, of proposed amendments and ifcs. We will also have, discussion and, ordering of a general bond election. If that's the vote from because based on the votes that we had today, ordering a general election and ordering a special election for charter amendments, then on Wednesday, August 12th through Friday, August 14th, we will have public hearing and we will have the votes on the budget approval. That by the way, those on those days, August 12th, August 13th, and August 14th, that those meetings start at 10:00 in the morning. [3:20:56 PM] Council. There's no other business to come before the Austin city council at this meeting, the Austin city council. So without objection, we are adjourned at 3:21 P.M. Thanks, everybody.