City Council Budget Meeting Transcript – 8/6/2026 Title: ATXN-1 Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 8/6/2026 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 8/6/2026 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. [9:58:59 AM] You're watching a meeting of the Austin City Council Council members [9:59:59 AM] six, 2026. I'll call to order the city council meeting of the Austin city council. We have a quorum of the city council present, and we are meeting in city council chambers located at city hall at 301 west second street in Austin, Texas. Members. We have a number of items on the agenda today. What I intend to do is. And by the way, yes, there's a new proposed amendment that I'm seeking co-sponsors. I call this the whatever it takes amendment. Yeah. And we take money from wherever we can, including if it wipes out most of our other proposed amendments. So, so we can we can do that anyway. Having said that, what we'll do is we'll go in the order of the agenda, except when we get to items two and four, as I put on the message board yesterday, items two and four might might very well. I want to get a feeling [10:01:00 AM] from the council about how we want to do that before we take the amendment. And we might take up four before we take up 2 or 2 before we take up four, because that deals with the ordering of the items on the agenda. But we'll we'll talk about that in more detail when we get there. As I always do, I want to point out what our schedule is today. Of course, we have this budget work session. We have the other agenda items. And then on Wednesday, August 12th, we will be scheduled to have the the first opportunity to vote on the budget. Thursday, August 13th and Friday, August 14th. We will also conduct public hearing and have council discussion in the council vote on those days. I just want to make sure that everybody's aware of what what the schedule is. Having said that, let us now go to item number one, which is posted as a presentation and discussion of the city manager's fiscal year 2026 2027 proposed budget. And we will start with speakers, and I'll turn to the city clerk when the city clerk calls your [10:02:01 AM] names. Many of you have already been here and know how this operates. But let me say it again. And for those that are new, she'll call out the names in batches of three, 4 or 5, maybe more. When your name is called, please come forward when your name is called and go ahead and take a seat if a seat is available. If a seat is not available at the desk, take one of these front row seats and that way we'll know you're here and we can efficiently hear your testimony. So with that, I'll turn to the city clerk. >> Thank you mayor. I have a few remote speakers for item one, Catherine Mcardle. >> Good morning. My name is Catherine Mcardle. I live in district nine, and I'm here today to again ask you to keep the police budget flat. Do not give APD a penny more than required by that ridiculous Texas law. No excuses about the cost of that new police union contract some of you voted for in 2024. Find other ways to cut APD's budget down to the minimum required can be done if you all have the courage and the backbone to do it, especially in the wake of yet [10:03:02 AM] another police killing. Do not reward them for that. I'm glad that there has been some discussion on using new property tax revenue to fund social services contracts. Thank you for this initial effort. However, even if it becomes reality, it is not enough. It is not enough because there is a greater need than to just maintain the existing social services contracts. We need to grow social services provision in the city. We desperately need more services to support our unhoused neighbors. We need more food access. We need more mental health support. We need more child care support. I could go on, but you already know these things, and you've been hearing for weeks from so many in the community about these needs, and it's so obvious that you could fund these needs by taking the proposed $25 million increase to APD and instead providing these additional social services, the things that will actually keep our community safe and thriving rather than killing our neighbors. And you all know that any money given to APD this year, above its current budget is money that cannot be used next year for literally anything else. And we'll be right back here next year fighting against more [10:04:03 AM] proposed cuts to the social services we need. I also ask that this out from APD and into an independent emergency communications department that can make the correct judgment calls on which type of first responder to send. We know that with 911 under APD, they send police officers for so many calls where another type of responder would be more appropriate and safer. We've seen how damaging this police department is. Please make it just a little less damaging by keeping their budget flat and moving 911 to an independent department. Thank you. >> Jen Powell. >> Good morning. Today, it seems to be my last day to yell about the budget and to see it get amended. So I'm just going to keep it simple, as everyone else has been saying, fund cib in full. Also, social services fundamental. Or I guarantee y'all the next round of yelling is just going to be people asking for a detailed educational and equity impact statement before implementation [10:05:04 AM] to make sure these cuts aren't as disproportionately targeted at schools and persecuted social groups as they look on paper, because it doesn't look good on paper. Now that funding does include the funding for the safe alliance in full and continuing the contracts with them, which I see that you guys have done a lot of the legwork on, and I appreciate that you can enter into a contract with brave up in cedar park as well. I get that, but that should be an additional contract and not a replacement. Now, here's the mean part. After the murder of Antonio, you guys know that you can't go through with the proposed raises for APD. Just keep the budget flat. And in the meantime, focus on two important matters. One move in the 911 call center out of APD and into some sort of civilian structure. Everybody should know that pretty much the whole council supports that. It's just that we need whoever in the city to finish pushing to get it done. So please finish pushing to get it done. And [10:06:04 AM] then two, require that both the police and the civilian dispatchers actually take the suicide by cop prevention training. It does exist. People have begged them. I don't even know how many times or for how long to do it. But you definitely cannot justify increasing the APD funding to any of your constituents until they actually take that training. If they pay attention, they might actually reduce up to 30% of killings that can be attributed to that cause. And last but not least, while you're in there, if you could give the civilian oversight committee actual teeth, financial teeth, when police handle a case correctly, they can incentivize, incentivize, and when they. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is snehal Patel. I'm a physician who provides care through Austin safety net health system. I treat people who are unhoused, people living in poverty, and people whose health and dignity are directly harmed by the current costly practice of encampment sweeps. I'm speaking [10:07:04 AM] here as a clinician who sees the consequences of these policies. My patients lose their medications because of sweets and end up hospitalized with serious illness that could have been avoided. I care for people who have lost their ids and housing paperwork and sweets, and then can't access shelter or benefits. These are our neighbors. Our clinical and social support teams are exhausted from picking up after the disasters that these sweeps cause in our patients lives, working countless hours, helping clients get new ideas, and investing hours of care. Helping people recover from preventable injury and illness due to these sweeps. I work through the pandemic and I will say these policies pushed forward by council are causing as much moral injury to our staff as the covid pandemic did. The public health evidence is clear forced displacement. Sweeps, confiscation and involuntary relocation. Worsens health outcomes. Increases overdose risk, interrupts continuity of care, destroys essential belongings, and drives people further from services. Sweeps harm health and do not produce durable exits from homelessness. Beyond the human toll, sweeps are [10:08:06 AM] fiscally irresponsible. They are expensive to conduct shift costs to emergency care and hospitals and fail to reduce homelessness. The city budget is a moral document. As you finalize Austin's budget, you have a responsibility to invest in what actually improves health, reduces harm and enhances public safety. You have an immediate opportunity to act first, stop these harmful sweeps, costly sweeps that displace people and destroy the fragile continuity of care. Second, expand the city's safe storage program. Safe storage reduces harm by preserving medications, ids, and housing documents when people are moved. While storage is not a complete solution, it is a concrete harm reduction step. Our unhoused neighbors have repeatedly requested. Third, keep the APD budget flat. Do not increase funding for policing at the expense of social services and. Fourth, restore and prioritize funding for. >> That's all the remote speakers I have for item one. So I'm going to be moving to in-person speakers. Philip is Gerald savanna Lee, Rebecca weber, Shelby Evans, Elliot [10:09:07 AM] Trahan. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. And all we ask is that when you begin your testimony, you state your name for the record. Mr. Fitzgerald, we'll begin with you. >> He said, we're going to start with me. >> Sure. >> Okay. Philip Fitzgerald, district one. So I originally wanted to come to, you know, talk about more things than just this. But obviously with shortened time, I'll just get with this. Yeah. Growing up, I used to have a coach that would always tell us stories about what's required to be a leader, and he would often reference the harming of, of, you know, women and children and said, if you ever did that, he wouldn't have forgiveness for you. But I think he also missed including old folks. And part of this budget calls for the cutting of the senior congregate meal program, which I've emailed some of you about. It's a program that runs across our city and no other area, but district one has has has more service locations than district [10:10:08 AM] one. In talking with some of the staff at these locations, they. They feed over 100 seniors in Austin a day. I think this cut would be a serious attack on that area, on an area that for far too long has had to play catch up with other districts in Austin. You know, district one has former teachers and restaurant workers and veterans. And I know a lot of you have a good understanding of what those people have given our city. But I think it's also important to understand how little they've been given in return. And I understand that we're we're we're over budget. We're not to make cuts, but we cannot sacrifice our seniors. This program offers them an ability to leave their homes and reach out and establish and maintain community, which is a warm blanket for a lot of people at a time in their life when they're often isolated. So please take a look at this budget again and find something else to cut. I have a little more time, obviously, with the news of Greg Abbott. He's he's going to push to deregulate [10:11:09 AM] Austin energy that's going to blow a hole in our general fund. So if people are upset about the cutting of social services now, wait until we lose $100 million. And I really would would ask that the city start preparing for that now. And that means reaching out to people in San Antonio and figure out how we're going to defend our city. >> Thank you. Thank you. Why don't we go with you and then we'll work down the row. >> Hello, council. My name is Shelby. I'm from hands off central Texas. The community's anger at APD is justified. But this is not just about keeping APD's budget flat to be punitive. It's about what that money could fund. Instead, data show that interactions with the incarceration system leads to worse outcomes for the person and for the community. It is costly and ineffective to use the police as a catch all for mental health, homelessness, poverty, substance use, recovery and crisis intervention. This system was not built to rehabilitate these issues, yet we continue to rely on violence and the threat of [10:12:10 AM] violence to manage them. Police are not trained or equipped to handle the conditions that are overwhelmingly represented in our carceral systems, but social workers are. Social services already experienced a 10% cut last year, yet we are told APD's budget must be increased to keep up with inflation. Social services don't have the resources to keep up with demand. While APD doesn't have the community buy in to meet the recruitment numbers, why must everyone else do more with less except the police? The cost to the city are stacking up and we need better investments. Move 911 out of APD, keep their budget flat, fully fund social services and please make the changes your community is begging you for. It is more than your legacy. It is our lives. Thank you. >> Good morning. My name is Savannah Lee. I'm with equity action and a resident of district one. I'm here in support of the community [10:13:12 AM] investment budget. I'm going to get to my written comments in a second, but I feel it really necessary to state that many of us just watched our neighbors be kidnaped outside of this building, and I can't sit with the reality that we're sitting here asking you not to give more money to the institution that helps their kidnapers we're nearing the finish line. But before we get there, I think it's important to emphasize that this process that brings so many of us here every summer when we could be with our families is really about we're here because you've been given the incredible responsibility of stewarding the hard earned dollars of the families that live here, and deciding how to reinvest them back into our communities. Over the past weeks, we've been very clear in how we want you to spend this money. We've all heard it over and over, but I am happy to say it again, because the asks are quite simple stop spending all of our money on APD. If you continue in this direction, you are going to back this city into a financial corner from which it cannot escape. We warned you in 2024 and we are warning you again now fully fund social services. Hundreds of people have given their time to make this ask, and it's because they know the real human cost of these cuts. Establish a joint [10:14:12 AM] communications department and move the 911 call takers out of APD. We have to make sure these departments can communicate, and we have to ensure that folks who are in crisis are met with professionals who know how to deescalate. The tragedy that happens when we do not get this right is too much to bear. Stop funding the sweeps. We are spending millions simply shifting vulnerable folks from one place to another while taking all of the things they value. This is a horrific waste of money and a moral failure, and we deserve better. Throughout this process, I've heard a lot comparing Austin spending to other Texas cities, what they spend on police or social services or whatever else. The truth is, we aren't like any other city in Texas, and we like it that way. Our community is what makes us special, and every dollar you have in front of you was handed to you by the people that live here. Please spend them wisely. Thank you. >> Good morning. My name is Elliot Trahan. I live in district ten, and I don't think I can say anything quite as eloquently as she just said it, [10:15:13 AM] so I think I'll just keep it short. I got here on bike, and as as soon as I arrived and pulled up, I happened upon our neighbors being kidnaped in a raid that looked like it was mostly facilitated by dps, but I know whether it was this one or past. APD has been in collaboration with these people, and I really want it to be so, so clear. I'm a history teacher and my normal day to day. Ice is our version of the fascist secret police. And right now, Austin police department is collaborating with them, whether it be by holding people in jail cells long enough for ice to pick them up, or by going specifically to arrest people in pulgas in northeast Austin, where ice shows up within minutes after that arrest happens. This organization is collaborating with our version of the fascist secret police. Anyway, it's like everybody said, ever since I moved back here a year ago, I've been showing up to these meetings. And what I keep [10:16:14 AM] hearing is we're dealing with less money than we were able to before. There's scarcity now. Why a city that has attracted so much wealth and has so many big name companies is dealing with scarcity. Is another conversation worth happening or having? But today, like everybody's saying, we need to talk about how we deal with that scarcity. So many people who represent so many wonderful orgs are saying, we need funds. Where can we get the funds? There's a very clear answer. It's APD keep their budget flat, please. No more dollars for organizations that murder teenagers and refuse to take accountability for it. That's all. Thank y'all. >> Good morning. I'm Rebecca weber, and I'm here on behalf of equity action, where I serve on the board and in my personal capacity as a lawyer who sometimes sues the city on behalf of victims of police misconduct, including pending cases. Right now, miss Brenda Ramos, whose son was killed six years ago now and is still waiting for justice from the city, and Samantha Liedtke, who [10:17:16 AM] was a policewoman who was treated horribly in her tenure at APD. I'm here in solidarity with all of the service provider employees who have been here, I think. I don't know if it's going on six meetings now. It feels like so many. Just they do such good work and they're here begging, you know, for the scraps to keep doing their really good work. And so I just, I ask, thank you for everyone who has worked on the 911 call move I it's such a, it's such a good, clean, simple solution. And so I'm really just grateful to everyone who has made that, who is going to make that happen. And I really appreciate everyone who has valued the community investment budget. And I ask you to pass the community investment budget and move 911. Thank you. >> Brian poppy, Sylvia Stinson, John pleasant, Jeffrey Bowen, Jeff Dickerson. [10:18:24 AM] >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Ryan poppy, and I'm speaking today on behalf of the united workers of integral care. I want to address the city manager's August 3rd memorandum on the proposed no wrong door coordinated crisis response program. Everyone supports better coordination for people experiencing mental illness, substance use disorders, or homelessness. Integral care employees have been doing this kind of work every day. Our concern is not with the goal, but how it's being funded. The memorandum says the city plans to realign existing programs and dollars to create a more coordinated crisis response, but never explains what happens to the services, staff or clients who rely on those programs every day. Behavioral health is not simply another budget line. It reduces pressure on emergency rooms, law enforcement and our jails while improving the lives and saving taxpayer dollars. Integral care's workforce is [10:19:25 AM] already stretched thin, and you cannot build a stronger crisis response by weakening the community based services that keep people from reaching crisis in the first place. As you finalize this budget, if you must, I urge you to strictly fund no wrong door with new investments, not by shifting resources away from integral care's existing programs. Protect the workforce, protect these services, and protect the people of Austin. Thank you. >> Mr. Bowen, why don't we go to you? >> Thank you, sir. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Mr. Mayor, council members. Jeff Bowen, district eight. Last week, I came up and talked about clarification, and that's based upon going to all the different town halls on the budgets. I attended another one last night. Well, actually two this week and be at another one tonight. But I want to just go back and [10:20:25 AM] remind about the clarification, because there seems to be a lot of miscommunications at times, even in the news media, about some of the increases. And I want to appreciate with Mr. Broadnax and miss Cary Lang about the fact that they're they're bringing out. And for those of us that do budgets and those type of things, we have to look at the overhead costs, which we've had some significant increases in, which are then sometimes misinterpreted as an increase in that budget, but that the fact that you guys have started separating those and bringing out that issue needs to really be clarified so that it's not getting misconstrued with other issues. So again, I urge to make sure that we have a lot of clarification on some of these issues where we are increasing here or taking away here, and so that it doesn't end up into [10:21:26 AM] another, I don't know, argument, whatever you want to call it, but it turns into from a discussion into more of a, a discussion that doesn't go anywhere. So please make sure that we're trying to clarify those, those misunderstandings so that people actually do understand what is actually happening with some of these budgets there. Again, thanks for your time. >> Thank you, Mr. Dickerson. >> Nickerson. >> Who who ever wants to talk. >> Oh I'm sorry. Good morning, council members. My name is John pleasant, and I'm here to ask you to reject the proposed $25 million increase to the Austin police department's budget. Two weeks ago, 17 year old Anthony Williams was shot and killed by three APD officers in a northeast Austin park. Officers mistook a water bottle in his waistband for a weapon and fired 20 shots, one officer reloading and firing again as Williams lay on the ground. He was unarmed and he was a child. Williams isn't an isolated case. Austin has a [10:22:27 AM] documented history of shootings where the person killed posed no real threat, including Michael Carothers, junior in 2021, killed when an officer fired at the sound of unrelated gunfire. This is a pattern, and it should worry anyone being asked to fund this department at a higher level. Before we hand APD more money, we should look at how this time is spent. A 2020 analysis of APD calls found violent crime made up less than 1% of all calls, and only 2.8% of officer time. Most calls, disturbances, burglar alarms, welfare checks, mental health crises don't call for a gun. They call for training. This department isn't investing in. According to bbc reporting, American officers spend roughly 71 hours on firearms training, but only 21 hours on de-escalation, among the lowest training standards of over 100 countries surveyed. The result? The U.S. Kills more people by police than any other developed democracy, and black Americans [10:23:27 AM] die at a disproportionate rate. Anthony Williams is what that gap looks like up close. We don't fix this by giving the same department more money to do the same thing. I'm asking you to reject this $25 million increase and invest instead in de-escalation training and non-police responses for the calls that don't need a gun. Thank you. >> Jeff Dickerson, district five. Good morning, mayor Watson, council members. Many of Austin peer cities, including Minneapolis, Houston, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, have expanded spending and borrowing. These cities did not become unaffordable overnight. They got their one budget, one tax increase, one bond at a time, each one being justified as necessary. This council is accelerating Austin down the [10:24:27 AM] path of higher spending, higher debt and greater long term financial obligation. The members on this dais should learn from their peers, experience, not blindly repeated. This year alone, you are proposing a $6.6 million budget increase of $301 million. Interesting. Your own city staff previously presented alternatives that included delaying debt. Major bond package until 2028. Why aren't you considering that they also proposed 2% tax rate increase? Council member Duncan, you pushed that through to get a larger increase. The question now is whether it's the right time to add millions of hundreds of millions of dollars of new borrowing while taxpayers are already paying higher taxes, higher bills and higher cost of living. Choose restraint over expansion. [10:25:29 AM] Choose accountability over assumptions. Choose affordability over unchecked spending. Choose affordability for all policies over more brie. For me, policies don't leave future taxpayers to pay for today's lack of discipline on the city council. Thank you. >> Peter hunt, Susana Almanza, Victoria. Godfrey. Hans. Maverick. Hans, are you here? Is robin Schneider. >> Here she is. >> Then you will have four minutes, Mr. Maverick. >> Good morning. >> Mayor Watson. Mayor pro tem vela. Council members, thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts with you today. I am a member. I live in [10:26:29 AM] council district ten, and I'm a policy and research organizer with grassroots leadership here in Austin. I'm here to speak in favor of the community investment budget, because we want the city to promote programs that are that help people, rather than hurt people who are impacted by the criminal, legal and immigration detention systems. Before I turn to my planned testimony, I need to point out that recent events have further undermined our faith in law enforcement. The murder, and I believe it deserves to be classified as a murder of Anthony Williams. Two. The second, to me, speaks volumes about how little so-called accountability and transparency actually do to keep our friends and neighbors safe. And just this morning, just outside this building, one of our neighbors was picked up by ice. I understand the nexus of that encounter was a person driving. Was the person driving the wrong way on lavaca street? I don't know whether APD or dps first saw the person driving the wrong way, but you'll forgive me if I'm inclined to think of a monolith of law [10:27:32 AM] enforcement as a monolith that collaborates with the trump administration's cruel and mindless immigration policy. Now back to my planned testimony. Every year, the Travis county district attorney secures roughly 3200 new felony convictions. That's 3200 more people every year in Travis county who will need extra help finding work, health care and a place to live. And no matter how long they are incarcerated. Help readjusting to life after release. I know because I've been there. One of the most glaring problems with the criminal justice system in our country is the recidivism rate, which is roughly 60 to 70% within the first five years post release. There are a lot of factors beyond our city's control that impact recidivism, but there are a few that we can influence. One is workforce development. What I wanted, and what most people I met in prison wanted was a decent, legitimate job after release. Another is access to health [10:28:32 AM] care, including mental health care. When you are forced to work, contract jobs or gig work because you have a criminal record, it's hard to get private health insurance, so you have to rely on public health care. The final and equally important factor is housing affordable housing options that recognize that formerly incarcerated people are routinely excluded from the legitimate housing market. This puts former incarcerees, especially in women, especially women, in positions where they are staying in unsafe environments where they are likely to be victims of crime. Therefore, I would like for you to fully fund social services programs like mental health, workforce development, and reentry, keep the APD budget flat, and make the 911 call center a separate department from APD. Please consider all these factors in supporting the community investment budget. Thank you. >> Would you please state your name for the record? >> Yes, Hans. Maverick district ten. [10:29:32 AM] >> Thank you. Thank Yo. Why don't we go with you and then we'll go to miss Almanza. >> Good morning. Council. My name is Peter hunt. I'm from district ten. I'm here in support first of the community investment budget, and also would like to ask that this council look really hard at ways to keep the APD budget flat and this budgetary cycle. I know that a lot of that budget is personnel, which is somewhat more complicated to cut, but there are a few places to look. First, the allocation for this year and the proposed budget listed $500,000 for additional recruitment efforts, including new hiring. I think that that is an unnecessary investment in APD, and also I know that some council members, in particular, council member duchen, have found other places where up to $1 million can be saved by making non-personnel cuts. I think this level of attention should be paid thoroughly across the entirety of the police budget, to look for ways to avoid adding another 25 million. There. I also think that it's worth acknowledging that APD is compelled in many ways to collaborate with ice, and if we [10:30:32 AM] have problems with that, we should acknowledge that more money going to APD is more money going to ice functionally. That's something that we just have to recognize that it's not necessarily about the individual decisions of officers, that there are legal compulsions involved, and that those are unavoidable and we should do something about that, I.e. Keeping the budget flat. But I want to end on a slightly more positive note, and thank this council for moving to create a joint communications department. In particular, I want to thank council member Laine for being such a consistent leader, champion, and clear eyed individual when it comes to advocating for that, and I hope that all of you will support the I. Fc that her office mentioned on the message board earlier this week. Both for creating that department and then appropriately funding it. Thank you. >> Thank you, miss Almanza. >> Good morning, mayor and city council members. I'm Susan Almanza with poder and also with sage seniors advocating for generational equity. Primero Guerra de los [10:31:33 AM] residentes la migra Eid es de nuestro vamos a Tener cuidado. First, I want to let our residents know that dps and ice is in our neighborhoods and they need to be careful. Actually saw them coming from a topless arresting someone so they are out. And I also would like to state that poder is in support of the community investment budget, specifically for our elders. You know, our senior luncheon program on topless was cut during covid and never got reinstated. So when you talk about seniors that live in poverty, that are isolated, this is something that shouldn't be happening and also want to recommend that you not cut any services for our children and our youth. A lot of people can afford private camps, private lessons for sports. It's very difficult for our community to pay $50 and $75 just to be part of soccer or football or basketball. So we really need to look at these issues. And I also want to address Natasha harper-madison, that it was Benjamin Chavis that coined the the name [10:32:35 AM] environmental racism, and that doctor Bob Bullard is the grandfather of environmental justice. And you deserve the first people of color summit. Adopting the 17 principles of environmental justice, I did. You were not appointed by president Biden to the white house environmental justice leadership council. You have not been dedicated your life to environmental justice. So please respect all the environmentalists, people of color and the community to come up here to testify. If not, I will make it my mission to be here every week to educate you, my dear. Thank you. >> Jj Ramirez. Cary Ann Smith. Alfredo Reyes Jr. August Lozano, Barry Jones and Eli Cortez. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. [10:33:54 AM] >> Good morning, city council. My name is jj Ramirez. I'm an organizer at vocal Texas. And here in a little bit you're going to hear from more people, closer lived experience on the reasons we need storage and to pause our sweeps. But I'm going to speak on the community for our community partners as a whole as well. We really support removing the 911 call center out of the a P D budget and keeping the a P D budget flat. Especially right now as we're struggling to find money to put the housing, social services and housing back on our agenda to really help people and not incarcerate them. So please, let's do that. Let's keep that a P D budget flat and I will finish my time. Thank you. Yeah. >> Hello, council members. Mayor. My name is Alfredo. I'm an organizer for vocal Texas. As you all know my story, I was homeless for seven and a half [10:34:54 AM] years. Basically, what I'm here to talk about is that being homeless, my medication I was swept myself and my medications and everything else was thrown away. If I had to find my help on my own to be able to find the storage and everything else, but which I basically got on the list for storage, which I was on the list for a year and a half and still wasn't called. Now, the city claims that approaches of homelessness with compassion, but over, over, over again, our belongings, medications, family photos and much more are thrown away on sweeps. That happens on a daily basis. To add insult to the injury, people living in camps are given numbers of violent keep safe, which basically, as we know, is full. Basically, it's a dead end. When. Especially when captain sweeps happened. I witnessed it myself because I've been through several of these sweeps that were given that information to call the violent storage or try to get into a shelter. [10:35:56 AM] Basically, some of these people that I run into are telling me that basically they're giving them dead ends instead of the help that they really, really need. Vogel, Texas member, asked for storages when they are faced with when they're faced with sweeps there, there, there was no no safe place to store their belongings. While more stores won't solve the issue or the problem, it will reduce the harm and help more people with storage and some of the important belongings that they have. Mr. Broadnax, when we had our meeting one on one, you had stated that homelessness was a priority to you because you have experienced that with your family member. Here we are, and that's not a priority. Last time I checked, a priority means it's something that is very important. >> Thank you. Please go ahead. Please begin. >> My name is Barry Jones. You all know me. I'm a leader with [10:36:58 AM] vocal Texas. Formerly I was homeless in Austin for ten years. And what I wanted to talk about today is commitment. And as we all know, that homelessness is a very big issue in Austin right now. And we've all said that this is one of our top priorities. However, it seems like we're not willing to commit to that priority to actually doing something about it. And what I wanted to bring up was that bring forward is that from what I understand, Dallas over the last two years has has removed 60% of their homeless people from the street by getting them housing. Okay. That's commitment. That is commitment. We know that this program isn't working. We know that it's only causing more harm. We know that we're just moving more people around. If you know, the least we could do is at least provide more storage for homeless people when they're swept so that they [10:37:59 AM] can have somewhere to put their belongings. But this is not commitment. If we are committed to to doing something about homelessness, we know what the answer is. Thank you members. >> Hello, my name is Cary Ann and I'm a leader with local Texas. I'm here today for the budget for storage. I was hoping that you guys would consider more money going to the storage and not a pd. The storage program helps people get keep their vital documents safe and secure. It's not just storage, it's the stability and dignity, and it's a pathway to helping them get back to sufficient self-sufficiency. Public safety shouldn't be measured by how much you spend on policing. It should be measured by how much you invest. Invest in solutions that actually help people rebuild their lives. When we fund [10:39:01 AM] stability instead of instability, people have a better chance to succeed. I'm asking you today to please prioritize the funding to go to the storage and not APD. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Eli Cortez and I'm a resident of district three and an organizer of vocal Texas. You've heard some from some of our members about the significance of expanding storage in our city today. This is especially relevant considering yesterday, the aclu of Texas and the Texas civil rights project delivered a letter to the city under urging the review of the daily encampment management strategy. Unhoused people are still residents of their districts and entitled to constitutionally protected rights. There are concerns that the current sweep operations could conflict with constitutional rights due to the seizure and destruction of property, especially when destroyed without sufficient or adequate notice. We continue to call for a pause to the current million dollar daily sweeps plan, and every day we continue to hemorrhage. Dollars on these operations, inflict more harm than good, and do nothing real to reduce the number of people [10:40:01 AM] living outside. In the face of our million dollar daily sweeps plan. We hope you. We have your support in making a much needed and under available resource accessible to the residents in your districts that are facing state violence every day while attempting to continue to navigate daily survival in this overbearing heat. If you are committed to continuing this million dollar daily sweep plan, you also have an obligation to pair your this strategy with an expansion of services and housing and shelter opportunities for people living outside. There are people in our city that are. That I speak to every day that are losing is just incredibly essential and valuable belongings. People have lost survival gear, generators, beloved ashes, important documents like social security and id cards. And when people are doing everything they can just to survive, just to figure out where they're going to get water, just to figure out how they're going to escape the heat. People have been promised for years or told [10:41:01 AM] in an encampment sweep to go to storage, to go put these essential belongings away. And there's been an over year wait list for years. So there's a real opportunity in front of you today to really help the residents in your districts that are facing these encampment sweeps. And I really hope that you take this opportunity to support them. Thank you. >> Thank you all. >> I have a few remote speakers on the line for item one, Paul tardy. Paul, are you there? >> I have a feeling they ain't going to get that 25 million. Hello? >> Yes, we can hear you. Please begin. Sir. >> Hi. Molly Patel. >> Hello. Can you hear me? >> Yes we can. [10:42:03 AM] >> Okay. Good morning, Austin city council. My name is Molly Patel. I am an internal medicine physician in Austin, Texas. I am here representing myself from district nine. I came back to Austin eight years ago, and I chose Austin as the only city I would return to in Texas, because I believe in what we represent. My position on this budget is neutral. I appreciate the need for a balanced budget in such economic times. I acknowledge and support funding to Austin energy, especially supporting the customer assistance programs and the renewable energy programs. I also support ems and the community health paramedic program, and the need to have adequate supplies to provide health care in our city. As a physician who has sent many patients to shelters, including marshaling yard, I also support funding the shelter to provide more wraparound and coordinated care. I will always support growth of housing, voucher programs and permanent supportive housing programs as well. Shelters are only a temporary solution. I [10:43:04 AM] also ask that we reconsider support for programs that fill critical need gaps and trust gaps for us. These include programs like caritas sunrise and elbow and San Martino. Elton is an organization that has built significant trust in our Spanish speaking communities, and it is an essential time to leverage their expertise. Lastly, I ask reconsideration of the APD budget and to keep it flat. APD led sweeps so far have cost $800,000, and these evictions do not lead to long term solutions. This money could have been routed to the aforementioned programs. Thank you for your time today. That concludes my testimony. >> Thank you. >> Janice Bookout, lily Hughes, Ignacio Rodriguez, pat vestararius, Michelle manning. Scott. [10:44:14 AM] >> Why don't we begin with you and we'll work our way down the road. Just state your name for the record, please. >> Council. My name is. >> I'll tell you what. You need to put that microphone in front of your face. Yeah. There you go. >> Good morning. Council. My name is lily Hughes. I'm a social worker in the capacity building manager at Texas harm reduction alliance. As I prepared to sit in front of you today, I thought back on all the times I've sat in one of these seats and shared the bravery, pain, and resilience of the community we work with at THA we have decades of data to demonstrate the return on investment in public health initiatives. Choosing public health is choosing community safety, all while saving taxpayers money. Despite this, I am yet again watching the city direct dollars into policing homelessness instead of solving it. We've had four years of investing in the police budget for recruitment, yet massive gaps in emergency calls persist. Homelessness continues to increase, housing instability continues to increase. Police violence has increased. Why are we spending limited funding, recruiting for an organization people do not want to join? Why can't we [10:45:15 AM] invest that money in social services that will address the social problems that police officers are not equipped to handle. Just last week, APD responded to a 911 call from a security officer regarding a person waiting on the public sidewalk in front of our drop in center. There was not a crisis prior to the verbal escalation instigated by the security officer, T H executive director Maggie Luna intervened and successfully de-escalated the situation. The reason behind the 911 call was solved long before the officers arrived. The organizations that reduced the financial burden on city services are facing drastic budget cuts, all while our city budget is reinvested into policies that have increased spending across multiple departments. H. Zo leadership states that the increased encampment management initiative costs upwards of $700,000 in just one month. H zo has maintained that this money already existed within the budget. That number does not include the budgets of nonprofits that do not have millions of dollars to move around. In between departments. T H has been spending an additional $404,000 a month to replace the vital documents and [10:46:16 AM] survival gear of our participants that have been destroyed in the sweeps. That number also does not include the emotional and mental health support our staff provides. It does not include the pain myself and my coworkers carry with us as we watch the immense suffering of our participants, we ask you. >> Thank you for. >> The police budget. >> Thank you, miss Bookout. >> Janice Bookout d4. I want to talk about the difference between the performance of government and public service. First, to clarify, at 54, I got a master's in public health due to a sponsorship inspired by my work in covid and recommendations from the director of public health and our chief resilience officer. I've lived in Austin for 30 years on a low income as a wife and mother of musicians who are undervalued by the very city that uses them to promote itself to tourists. I have worked alongside diverse array of leaders serving folks at 2 A.M. To ensure that they're warm during cold weather, and know about the changes that the services of services available. I am only one of hundreds speaking on the budget that represent a collective death, [10:47:17 AM] depth of professional and lived expertise. That blows my mind. Since covid, I have seen this council and management shift away from public service, evidence based policy, community engagement and transparency all in the name of efficiency and the status quo. But efficiency has a cost. The centralized covid vaccine hub served many thousands, but they were overwhelmingly white. When we finally were able to work through trusted organizations, the demographics of vaccine acceptance became proportionate. Inclusion is something is sometimes inefficient because it requires working with a diverse array of folks people trust. Sometimes they don't have the capacity to track all the metrics rfps demand, but that doesn't mean there aren't thousands of people who would be left out without their work. Occupancy of shelter at shelters more than quadrupled between 2021 and 2026, due to outreach of organizations that sometimes never got compensation for that work. But this administration seems to be intent on subverting that kind of work by reorganizing offices and demoting subject matter [10:48:17 AM] experts, the kind that tell the whole truth. With business minded folks committed to efficiency, those missing voices of staff experts from the city are now muted from speaking at council meetings, making pushing agendas easier. We have seen community recommendations subverted through the TRE, which bundled community priorities into something to put before a public vote. Now you're considering increasing the police budget. >> Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Please begin. >> Good morning. My name is Michelle Escott and I'm a resident of district seven. I am speaking today as another citizen in support of the community investment budget and for fully funding all of the social services the community depends on. I also wish to declare my strong objection as a tax paying citizen of this city to the following. Number one, the newest encampment clearing strategy the city implemented earlier this year. Based on information I've become aware of through multiple area nonprofit and mutual aid organizations who provide services to the low [10:49:17 AM] income and unhoused population of the city, many of whom you have already who have already spoken to you during these proceedings this month. These sweeps are potentially unconstitutional, incredibly harmful, inhumane, cost prohibitive, and just plain illogical based on what is most needed by the population being dehumanized, dehumanized by this ill conceived strategy. I also strongly object to any increase to the Austin police department budget, above what is legally required by previous agreements made as part of prior union contracts. Unfortunately, the inexplicable defunding of programs within, and the slow dismantling and undermining of the progress made by the equity division, the equity division, formerly known as the equity office, was created over 11 years ago after a coalition of community members, leaders and organizers requested. The city leadership at that time finally addressed the well known and documented racial and economic disparities that exist within the populations of this city. The conditions that created those [10:50:18 AM] disparities have been here since before the city was founded, and it took decades for those issues to even be acknowledged, let alone addressed. And in this current political climate we are in right now, the gains made in addressing those conditions the past 11 years plus are now eroding. We cannot afford to go backwards, nor should any of us be bullied into believing top down decision making knows better than the community it serves. Is the people in this community who are marginalized and left out of the decisions that affect them the most, and who are the ones we should be listening to the hardest? Who among you will continue to do the same? Thank you. >> Okay. City council. >> No no no no. >> Outside, you're cutting the social service. >> You're going to you're out of order and you need to leave the chambers. You need to leave the chambers. Thank you. Vice tirz. [10:51:20 AM] >> Thank you, mayor Watson, mayor pro tem vela and city council members. My name is pat and I live in district three. I am here to again speak about animal services and specifically to ask you to restore the full amount of funding for emergency veterinary care that was cut last year. Council member Laine, I am aware that you restored 100 zero zero $0 out of your. I think it's called discretionary funds. I'm not sure to offset some of that cut. Thank you very much. However, it didn't fully restore the 450 000. And mayor pro tem vela, I understand that you also helped find savings from the spay abort ordinance or directive, but that savings has not been realized, so the services have been cut. I am not here to ask you to increase general funds for restoring the cuts. The [10:52:22 AM] animal services office has a donations fund that currently has $1 million fund balance. Part of that fund balance, $500,000 has been set aside for a puppy play yard that I understand from this director. The prior director set that aside, thinking he could get a puppy play yard with $500,000. And apparently we cannot. And mayor pro tem, I understand that you're going to be looking into general something bessy O bonds certificates of obligation to look into a feasibility study for yet a bigger shelter footprint, and that will help with the puppy issue. So given that there's $500,000 in the donations fund, given that last year you cut 450 000 in vet services, please [10:53:23 AM] restore that. Thank you. >> I appreciate you being here. >> Missile. Ramos, Andrea Abele, Alicia. Fish. Fisher. Zenobia. Joseph. Rosa. Maria. Murillo. >> Why don't we start here and we'll go this direction since she's sitting down. And we'll just we'll go down the road. Please, sir. >> Hey, how are you doing? My name is Michelle Ramos, and before I speak, I want to bring attention that ice has detained people right outside city hall today. These individuals will need support as their families try to relocate and find their loved ones. We cannot let this happen on our city's land, and we need to demand more. Thank you, council members, for going through the budget proposal and working towards a budget that's equitable for all austinites. With the questions that have been asked and additional [10:54:24 AM] information provided, were seeing a public push towards money reallocation into our actual communities. With the current budget crunch, we're stripping almost $17 million away from the social services that support Austin citizens from mental health housing, workforce development, along with many other services that help communities survive and thrive. So I ask that you please move the 911 call center out of APD. Let's give our communities the investment they actually deserve. And please, if you can do anything to help those individuals that were detained earlier that I mentioned earlier today, that you share any call of actions that the public can engage on. We cannot let this happen on city land. That's it. Thank you. >> Please, if you'll go next, your state your name for the record. >> Hello, mayor and city council members. My name is Alicia fisher. I'm the food [10:55:25 AM] access director at farmshare Austin farmshare Austin's fresh for less is a food access program that provides fresh produce and groceries to 33000 people in need across 25 zip codes. Fresh for less consistently exceeds deliverables, providing over 700 opportunities throughout the year for customers to access nutrient dense foods. 95% of our customers increase their fruit and vegetable consumption as a result of shopping with us. Food access is different from emergency food. The majority of our customers use mobile markets and home delivery multiple times a P H. Metrics on contracts are geared toward providing one time services for a large number of people and penalize farmshare on our reporting. Since we don't register customers, we aim to eliminate as many barriers to healthy food as possible. Farmshare leverages city of Austin funding to increase impact. This is especially essential since city of Austin contracts do not allow for cost [10:56:26 AM] of living increases, indirect expenses or equipment such as vans and walk in coolers. We could not operate without leveraging other funding before the city makes cuts and eliminates access to healthy foods for thousands of people. Please look at how you're evaluating program effectiveness. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Good morning, mayor and council. I'm Andrea Abel. I'm the executive director of farmshare Austin and a resident of d3. And I'm here to oppose the reduction in funding that supported the convenient healthy food program. I'm also here to oppose the cuts to social services. The first line item that I mentioned is the the line item that funds the fresh for less mobile markets and home delivery. Farmshare also farmshare Austin also participates in two food as medicine programs. So I wanted to share some voices from austinites who have benefited from fresh for less. This is from a mom participating in our produce and pantry rx, which is partially supported by a P H. [10:57:27 AM] We stopped doing a lot of McDonald's and eating out. My daughter had the option of buying the groceries herself, so she say, okay, I'll pick them up, I'll pick them out and we can cook dinner. Now she comes home after school and we cook together before picking up my oldest, and we all eat dinner as a family. I think the program pushed it to happen. Here's a testimonial from a fresh for less home delivery customer. I used to live on a farm and haven't been able to get the same quality produce in so many years. With the prices of groceries these days, I'm so happy you all are able to deliver to my zip code. Since I have to travel with an oxygen tank, and going to the grocery store isn't an option for me. And this is from a food is best medicine participant, which is for postpartum food insecure moms. It has meant so much. We are over the income limit for snap by less than $45, and so we don't qualify. Access to food is a real struggle for our family. This program has meant so much to us. Honestly, I [10:58:28 AM] don't know what we would have eaten some days without this food. It helped us to be able to eat and feed our kids and it was healthy too. We are truly grateful. I'm heartened to see that council is considering a different process for evaluating nonprofit contracts with the city. And as you develop this process, we'd like to we welcome the opportunity to participate and provide a perspective from a practitioner. >> Thank you, doctor Murillo. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. I'm going to start with my ask. Please fully fund social services in February, council woman Fuentes directed city management to undertake a comprehensive, transparent, evidence based review of this investments. Five months later, we're still waiting for that. It is my hope that today the presentation reflects that. And [10:59:30 AM] as you evaluate the proposal today, please do not place one basic need against another or balance the budget on the backs of our neighbors with the fewest alternatives. Housing and food are connected. Behavioral health, workforce support, family stability and care for older adults are connected. Children do not thrive. Apart from the families and communities that surround them. Investing in youth also means investing in the parents who raise them, the older adults who care for them, the housing that keeps families together, and the food that nourishes them. Many providers already absorb the 10% reduction in this year, while some absorb a 25%. That equates to $1 million. Any restoration [11:00:32 AM] adopted today should become part of the city's ongoing base. So next year, council is not addressing the remaining projected reductions and not reopening the full $60 million that was proposed for fiscal year 27. Thank you for the opportunity. >> Thank you. Thank all of you. Miss Joseph. >> Thank you, mayor council, I'm Zenobia Joseph. I just want to start with last year's budget and with the contract >> What voters. >> Specifically, I want to remind you that the contract with voters specified corridor improvements in north Lamar was number one, but instead we have Eric bailly using the bond money like a blank check. I [11:01:34 AM] don't see my screen. >> I don't either. I do now. >> I'll continue. I want you to recognize that. See, preliminary engineering and design is what is actually being funded in fy 27. It's on page 317, volume two. You only have approximately $3 million for north Lamar. Next slide. I want to remind you that this is what the area looked like when Imam Islam mossad was killed. This is the same block Donald Norton was killed in 2016, January 30th. He died from his injuries February 3rd. Next slide. This is what vision zero should focus on. Respectfully, the city manager is not sitting there, but we pay him a base salary of $488,000, basically a [11:02:34 AM] half $1 million to make tough decisions. And he said that vision zero was not simply branding our policy, but in fact, it is. Next slide. This is the affordable housing development and it's in district seven. This is where the pedestrian hybrid beacon is being placed. And two council members Siegel. I just want you to know that the information you received on Tuesday was inaccurate as it relates to affordable housing. There are 101. >> Underscore 2026 underscore budget as a. >> There's 101 vouchers over at sparrow Rutland. Next slide. Item 171 units. My point here, mayor, is that you're not being honest. You made a good speech about trust on Tuesday, but you need to put your money where your mouth is. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> Continuing on with one Tracy Cornelius, Henry sands, Mary [11:03:34 AM] Kerri, Carol hurley, and Brian mcgiverin. >> Please. Whenever you're ready. Thank you. >> I'm Tracy Cornelius, a leader with central Texas interfaith, a member of all saints episcopal church, and a board member at capital idea. I'm here today to ask you to support level funding for capital idea. Capital idea helps adults in low wage jobs move into high demand living wage careers, creating a path out of generational poverty. Mayor Watson council members, you have said you prioritize programs with high roi that address the deepest needs and are highly impactful. Capital idea has a demonstrated 700% return on investment to taxpayers by increasing wages and reducing the use of social [11:04:36 AM] services. You prioritize programs that perform at a high level and are not duplicated. Capital idea offers one of the most comprehensive long term workforce development programs in Austin. Delivering a high level of student support, program completion and job placement capital idea has an 84% annual retention rate. 2025 graduates increased their average annual rate annual wage from 22,000 a year to 70,000 a year, a 250% increase. The city wants to prioritize basics public safety, parks, libraries. The city wants to be open for business, provide a talent pipeline for employers, and grow our tax base so that we can afford to do all these things well. Capital idea helps with these goals and has another priority. Making sure that people who have had barriers to entry get a chance to participate fully in the economic success that [11:05:37 AM] contributes to making life in Austin so great. Thank you. >> Thank you. Why don't we go next here? Why don't we start with you and then we'll go down the row. Is that okay? >> Good morning, mayor Watson. Mayor pro tem vela, council members and my fellow austinites. My name is Mary Kerri. I lived in Austin since 1986 and in district four since 1992. I'm a member of saint John's episcopal church and a leader with central Texas interfaith. It is my great honor today to speak to you regarding capital idea, capital idea. Founded in 1998, helps working adults choose new careers, connecting them with education, training, career development opportunities through partnerships with local major employers. Capital idea provides tuition, books, tutoring, childcare and other support to help students complete their training. [11:06:38 AM] Capital idea has made it possible for thousands of Austin area adults to work their way from low income employment to higher paying careers. Last year, 169 students found jobs in their field of study, earning an average starting wage of $33 per hour in 2023. The rey Marshall center at the university of Texas at Austin found that capital idea participants achieved an average increase of $19,924 in annual earnings. These are life changing results. It also found that for every dollar invested, the city receives nine $7 in increased tax revenue. My son, born and raised in Austin and a new cpa, my in-house accountant thinks this is a good idea to thank you. >> Please. >> Good morning, mayor and council. I am Henry signs, a [11:07:39 AM] member of our lady of Guadalupe catholic church. I am a native austinite and I am a proud retired member of the ups union. I am also a central Texas interfaith leader. I've been around long enough to remember when it was Austin interfaith capital. Idea was founded in 1998 by the organizing work of central Texas interfaith. It was built off the success of the summer youth employment program, helping kids to get professional experience, stay in school and get some money. Members of the business community saw the summer youth program success and came to us asking if we could build something similar with them for adults. And so capital idea was born 28 years ago. For almost 30 years, capital idea has been a leader in making sure that Austin and the surrounding [11:08:39 AM] region has a strong workforce that can meet the needs of our growing community. I urge you to continue, not just support this program, but to champion its continued work. Championing this program secures the future of austinites, being able to actually afford to live and thrive here. Thank you. >> Good morning, members of council. My name is Brian mcgiverin. I am the director of the Austin community law center, and I'm also on the vestry of saint John's episcopal church, which is a member of central Texas interfaith. And I can't tell you how many people I have helped liberate from and abuser with a protective order, who then turned to me and said, what's next? All too often people that I work with, they are young, they have children, and they have only a high school diploma. What's next is [11:09:39 AM] a very difficult answer. One of the few rays of hope in that scenario are programs like capital idea. The other speakers are not understating it when they say capital idea has a life changing impact, not just for the individuals served, but also generationally. I know that you have many hard decisions in this budget. But I also know that you all know what the right thing to do is here. I would strongly, strongly encourage you to fund fully fund capital idea and our social services. I know it's really difficult to make major alterations to a proposed budget, but I have faith that you have the courage and the strength to do it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please. >> Good morning. May it please the council and mayor Watson. [11:10:41 AM] My name is Carol hurley. I'm a parishioner at saint Mary's cathedral, and I have lived in district ten for 56 years. I am a central Texas interfaith leader. I am here today to encourage the council to prioritize funding for leading organizations that provide long term workforce development like capital idea. Capital idea targets a demographic that otherwise is not served. I am an attorney who has spent a number of years representing children in foster care, and I am the former foster parent and adoptive parent of two daughters who came through the foster care system in Travis county. These experiences have shown me how difficult it is for this population to live independently and successfully. This population does not have the support of typical families, and they frequently struggle with executive functioning. This program provides the kinds of supports and services that facilitate success, not typically available in colleges [11:11:42 AM] and technical schools or community colleges. Our homeless population is made up in large part by individuals who aged out of foster care. These individuals, through no fault of their own, end up using public resources. The community bears the cost to feed them, provide health care, often very expensive emergency health care and housing them in our jails and prisons. Capital idea allows these same individuals to take charge of their lives, obtain good, stable employment, and become tax paying residents of our city. This is the kind of program that sets Austin apart. Is the kind of program that makes me proud to be a person who lives here and has something to do with changing the way the world is, and I hope that each of you can take pride and do that as well. Thank you. >> Thank you. [11:12:42 AM] >> Mother Katy Luba, Monica. Guzman, Jacob. Reach Rivas, Susan. Spataro. >> We'll begin here and move down the road, please. >> Good morning, council members and mayor Kirk Watson. I'm mother Katy Luba. I'm the rector at saint Matthew's episcopal church located in district ten, past vice chair of capital idea, a board member of central Texas interfaith. My mom was a single mom with three children and a divorce. Through the efforts of our extended family, she was able to get her education leading to all of her children completing master's degrees. That's the kind of intergenerational effect the capital idea has. She was our [11:13:43 AM] capital idea, and I often wonder how her life would have been different if she had had an outside organization like capital idea to do that work even earlier. She did that incredible job. But not all are so resilient or so lucky. Today I am head of congregation at saint Matthew's. In an area where many people don't need a program like capital idea, but some still do, and the city of Austin has many that need it. It's one of the main places people move to after graduating. Capital idea getting a nursing job, working at a nearby hospital or health clinic in district ten and throughout the city. The program is important. We strongly encourage you to support it at past levels. Thank you. >> Thank you, miss Guzman. >> Good morning. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza. Yesterday, Garza submitted updated fiscal 27 budget recommendations. Specifically, changes to the [11:14:44 AM] early childhood and education recommendations. We remove the $100,000 for the program coordinator role at Austin economic development, and we updated the initial bullet to 75,000. Sustained funding for the Austin Travis county family child care educator network partnerships for continued support for home based child care. The reasons for the updates was to clarify. We're recommending funding for the FCC network to support the network activities and partnerships. In light of our understanding that the program coordinator position, also known as the FCC network coordinator, ended July 31st and will not be backfilled to support existing Austin public health and Austin economic development. Early childhood staff to work with community partners, including United Way for greater Austin, home grown raising Travis county and gave, who will be collaborating to ensure the continued positive impact and sustainability of the FCC network for home based providers established by the [11:15:45 AM] city of Austin and home grown bcn partnership in fiscal year 2025 and 2026, as it transitions to United Way by September 2028 as its sustainable organizational home. In addition, it's good that 4.7 million has been identified for use to restore funding to social service contracts. It's also important to fund critical social infrastructures, specifically 3 million for the family stabilization grant to economically stabilize about 225 households during this time of increased cost of living, 570,000 for legal representation services, and 250,000 for mental health services for immigrant supports to navigate this heinous political climate. While residents are being detained daily, especially in districts two, four and five, and well as outside city hall this morning. As well as funding the sib coalition's fiscal 27 recommendations. Thank you. We urge you to prioritize health and safety of Austin's vulnerable communities. Thank you. >> Miss Susan Spataro, district [11:16:46 AM] eight. I've talked a couple of times on the budget, and I haven't yet said and I believe. Thank you, manager Broadnax and your your staff, for putting this budget together and all the the work all of you council people have done. It is complicated. It is not easy. And it doesn't you know, everyone doesn't like much of anything, I guess. But I think you've done a really good job. I would first, I'm a governmental accountant. That's my wheelhouse. And so I want to talk about the increase first in a P D you know, I support public safety. I think it's the most important job of of local government. But the increase in the a P D budget is simple. And that is it is the contract that was approved by the city and a P a you've already agreed to that. The next thing it's the payment of pension obligations. You know, you talked a couple of times about the city's bond rating. And a couple of years ago, the city's bond rating went down because you weren't [11:17:47 AM] meeting the pension obligations. But you are now and you're at a triple a, what difference does that make? The higher your rating, the lower the interest you pay. So that's extremely important. The other primary increase is money from support services. In a government, you have these different funds and not all governments handle it the same. And so you've got support services over here. You've got other departments in the general fund here. You chop up the cost of these and you allocate them to the departments. So one of the big increases is the increase in social support services. The chief cannot control that. You can. So do not cut the police budget. It's an artificial cut. And please keep looking out for the taxpayers dollar. When people call 911, they want their government to help them. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Please revise district nine [11:18:51 AM] council. I am here once again to tell you to stop the nonsense, pay attention to our testimonies and listen to the community. $24.6 million. That is what you propose to give APD 24.6 million. Here's what that amount of money could do. Reopen safes forensic program so that people raped in the city of Austin can get the care they need. It can also restart their sane nurse training program. It can open supply and staff new homeless shelter here in Austin to get people off the street during this heat wave. And we all know how much APD spends on sweeping unhoused camps without providing any aid to those impacted. 24 million can ensure we're the last generation of austinites fighting AIDS. By opening safe needle exchanges. It can feed every child in aisd's lunch and breakfast program so they can focus on their education and not where their next meal is coming from. It can do so much good. Here's what 24.6 million will do in the hands of APD. Another dead, unarmed black [11:19:52 AM] teenager going through a mental health crisis will lose their life. Another trans woman of color slammed into the sidewalk while APD is responding to the call that they made. You know what $24 million looks like in the hand of APD? It looks like cops putting on their brand new gas masks 30s before dps fires, tear gas canisters while biological weapons banned in every other developed nation for being, you know, horrible into a crowd of protesters, APD claimed that they failed to adequately control $24 million in the hands of APD. Looks like a pregnant, unhoused woman a block away from a protest getting hit by downwind of said gas when she had nothing to do with it. We have been here so many times asking for this and we want a flat budget. We don't want like we want. We want what's good for the community. And it sounds like you don't listen. So listen. Please hear us and do what is right for the community because no one else is. And if you're responsible for that, that is horrible. [11:20:52 AM] >> Thank you. >> Good morning, mayor. City council members, my name is Jacob breach. I'm the chief operating officer for communities and schools of central Texas, and I'm also a resident of district eight. And I'm here to discuss potential reductions to our student support funding. Students come to school every day facing anxiety, depression, trauma, and other challenges that affect their learning, their attendance, their relationships, and their academic success. Communities and schools of central Texas embeds mental health professionals on school campuses so students can receive individualized counseling during the school day. In a trusted environment. The service is distinct from CI. S other city funding agreement. Our other contract focuses on case management, family engagement, academic attendance, behavioral outcomes, and we are very proud of our record in exceeding all of our goals and outcomes for that agreement. The expanding support for student program provides direct mental health counseling and behavioral health interventions to students who require more [11:21:54 AM] intensive clinical support. Cis acknowledges that the program that was cut fell short of our unduplicated client target. The shortfall reflected limited counseling capacity included shared staffing and shortages. We also did not include our del valle students who live in the city of Austin and who were served and, if included, would have met the targets while the number of students served were lower than anticipated, outcomes were still strong. Overall, 82% of demonstrated demonstrated improved life skills and met their benchmarks. If funding is preserved, sis will implement a focused and accountable service model that includes dedicated counseling in Austin and del valle schools. Clearer enrollment and outcome targets, stronger campus referral processes, and stronger corrective action within 30 days. Sis understands the city's budget constraints and recognized reductions may be necessary. Eliminating the agreement, however, could remove dedicated supports. Sis requests continued support of this agreement. We know the [11:22:55 AM] need exists in the service is distinct. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I have one more remote caller for item one, Paul tardy. >> Hi, my name is Paul tardy, district ten. I currently work with Texas harm reduction alliance and a former city of Austin park ranger. Both of those roles I have watched encampment sweeps fail and ending public camping, and that exacerbate conditions that contribute to homelessness. APD has been tasked with assisting in sweeps while lacking the resources, education and skills that could effectively bring homeless people into more stable living. Meanwhile, the city is aiming to cut funding of nonprofit service providers who are educated and trained wellsprings of resources that have already proven their successes in doing what zo fails to accomplish. Half of the 20 highest growing professions in the U.S. In the [11:23:55 AM] areas of medicine, therapy and recovery. Our culture is shifting, and it would be wise for the city to act accordingly. By discarding the multi tool utilization of the police officer, and instead support individuals who can act with greater precision and efficiency toward long term solutions. Nonprofit workers have unique and specific training through universities, internships, volunteerism, and lived experience all on their own dime and not on the city's ballot. The city would be saving money to keep nonprofit organizations funded as they alleviate conditions which may lead to criminal behavior. They respond to medical emergencies and even prevent deaths. Causes of homelessness include increased rent prices, low wages, health issues, incarceration and lack of employment opportunity. Police do not help people under these conditions, which is why we cannot afford to keep punishing the impoverished, but rather support them so that they will not be harmed by factors which are largely out of their control. Reported crime in [11:24:56 AM] Austin peaked in 2008 and has been steadily declining for the past four years, being the lowest in two decades, according to city data. APD has been understaffed in these recent years of lowest reported crime rates, which is testimony that they aren't needed at full staffing. Public safety is homes for the unhoused, food for the hungry, medical attention for. >> The elk. Thank you sir. >> Dignity and mental health treatment. >> Continue with the last of the remote speakers for item one. Michael Lofton Natasha, Terrance Hopkins, Alyssa Matthews, Mary Elizabeth and Daniela silva. >> Mr. Lofton will begin with you. Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. >> Mr. Mayor. Yeah. You want to start? I can go ahead. >> Okay. >> I'll go ahead. I'm sorry. Okay. Greetings, mayor and city council members. I'm Michael Lofton, the founder and [11:25:57 AM] executive director for the African American youth harvest foundation and the trauma recovery center. I want to say I'm very happy to be here today. In addition, I did send a letter last night to all the city council members to share where we're at with the trauma recovery center, but I also want to take my hat off to Austin public health for two reasons. This report that they just spent months on working describes all of the work that supported by the scale and safety and justice committee and the nonprofits here in Austin, Austin, over the last 3 to 4 years, crime has gone down, and it's due to the work that co-led by none other than sister Vanessa Fuentes and helping to bring the trauma recovery center here. I'm here because, you know, I've heard each of the council members over the last five or 6 or 7 days talk about the need for mental health counseling. And I [11:26:57 AM] agree with you. I agree with you. And I say that to say, but the sad reality of it is, while we're talking about the need for mental health counseling, we're about to close the trauma recovery center. And I realized, I'm gonna say this here. I realized that the funding in this contract was scheduled to close. But I'm also asking you this because we have identified funding for the trauma recovery center. It's probably going to require some input and support from the city council members. And so I'm asking for an amendment to the budget to add what is needed. I do plan to bring all of the other funders to the table and get letters as to what they are planning to do, because I think this here is a resource that city of Austin and Travis county cannot turn their back on. I'll say this also, over the last 3 or 4 weeks, we had 40 plus kids to talk about suicide. >> Thank you, Mr. Lofton. Why [11:27:58 AM] don't we start here and we'll work down the. >> Good morning. My name is Alyssa Matthews. I'm here on behalf of hands off central Texas, testifying in opposition of the proposed budget and in support of the community investment budget. I'm here to urge council to keep APD budget flat, to move 911 out of APD and to fully fund social services. As others have already discussed today. Data shows that when cities invest in policing and not in community services and social services, the outcomes are clear. It makes our community less safe, worsens the lives of your constituents, and it cost taxpayers more money in the long run. The last part is what I want to focus on today. When council invests in policing rather than the community, interactions with law enforcement increase and while following, aren't line items on council's budget. So council doesn't seem to care so much about it. Us, the taxpayers do. When we increase interactions with law enforcement, we increase the cost of our jails, our court system, the cost for public defense, and all these things we're hemming and hawing about providing resources for [11:28:59 AM] now housing, health care, all of these things, we pay for it as taxpayers. We just pay for it on the back end. I'm here to ask that city council stop passing the buck on investing in our community. We, the taxpayers, know that when you pass the buck on to the county or on to the state, ultimately it is us paying for it. So I am here to ask you today to do your jobs, to represent your community. That has been very clear about what they want. Move 911 out of APD, fully fund social services. Keep APD's budget flat. Represent your constituents. Thank you. >> Good morning council. My name is NICU Shaw and I'm a resident of district three. The public facing city communications team approved budget summary says that below the public safety header, it's all about ensuring safety and security through fair and equitable public safety responses. Well, based on the murder of 17 year old Antonio [11:30:00 AM] Williams and the fact that a few of our neighbors were just arrested outside this building by ice in collaboration dps, I'm going to ask which part exactly is fair or equitable in what's being proposed. All of our taxpayer money that you are asking us to pay more of is going into this budget that doesn't, quite frankly, seem in service of public interest. And city manager Broadnax message to the public was, like the community members we serve, we must live within our means. Whose means exactly are you living within? With this budget, I want you to use that standard when evaluating what line items are seeing, budget cuts and which ones are not. And to that end, keeping the APD budget flat would be the wise budgetary decision. A previous commenter has called out that 98% of this proposed increase of 24.2 million is just baseline personnel and wage cost growth under the existing five year contract that this council also approved in 2024. [11:31:00 AM] Fully knowing the consequences, except for council member zo qadri, who called this out back then. And what's also stark to me is that there are more than 300 positions within that contract that are authorized but not fulfilled. So again, how is this from a pure discretionary point of view, good use of public funds, and especially considering the lack of accountability and the many examples that were given by previous commenters, including the millions of dollars spent on daily sweeps that are really not seeing a long term solution to our homelessness crisis. How is this exactly good use of taxpayer money? And so I'm going to talk about social services, where your money should go, and I think we'll fund that fully. >> Thank you. Sorry, your time is up. Thank you. Yes. Please begin. >> How's it going, guys? My name is Mr. Terrence Hopkins. I'm a youth mentor at the African American youth foundation, and I speak it also eight different schools helping kids with their social emotional learning, teach them about the successes of education, communication, collaboration, censorship, [11:32:01 AM] creativity, character, and critical thinking. And also I work with the unhoused, helping them find job opportunity housing and help them get their social security cards and birth certificates and driver's license. It's all those essential things that they may need. But I also recall many times how I had I had many people come to me and say, Mr. Terrence, I was getting ready to take my life today, but you being here calls me to take a different route. I had others come to me and say, Mr. Terrence, I actually have my gun in my pocket. I'm getting ready to kill all these guys over here. But something told me to come over here and talk to you. And as I begin to talk to him and just tell him about different things of life, I say, all this to say is that most people don't care how much you know. They want to say how much you care. As an African American youth foundation, we're someone who cares for those who are in need. We helped over thousands of people, find job placement and also get into housing. And I say all this to say is that within our building, we have over 32 different nonprofit organizations, all under one roof, like a one stop shop. They said each one teach one and together we can reach one. [11:33:01 AM] And we allow for our clients to understand and know that victory is in the mind, your own defeat, if you believe you are. So we'll ask if you guys can continue to just allow for us to be funded as an organization. As we begin to do protection, we have provide protection for our communities, protection for our schools, protection for our neighborhoods, and all those who are in need. We do help as well. Thank you guys so much for your time. God bless and have a blessed day. >> Thank you. >> Good morning council. Good morning mayor. My name is Mary Elizabeth. I live in district one. I'm here today to ask that the city budget be amended to include the establishment of an independent emergency communications department staffed by civilians. Dispatch is the frontline of emergency response and and must be able to respond comprehensively to the public needs. 911 has for [11:34:04 AM] so long been seen primarily as a function of the police department, which has reduced some people's interest in calling. We're seeing in real time the need to expand this perception to include. It's the system's role in accessing mental health support for Austin citizens, an independent civilian communications system will be a factor in increasing the public's trust in 911. Trust is low in our community when it comes to calling 911 at this time, and it's getting worse. Emergency response systems only work when people trust them enough to use them. I hope you will follow the recommendation made by myself and many others to get the 911 [11:35:06 AM] system into an independent, civilian operated department. Thank you. >> Thank you, miss silva. >> Good morning, mayor and council. I'm Daniella silva from district three. Before I begin, I imploring you to please use your power and political connections to seek justice for the three construction workers who were chained and kidnaped by ice a little over an hour ago, just a few yards from here. I'm also here in my personal capacity to ask you to restore funding for the conveniently healthy food program. I'm a former employee at farmshare Austin, whose fresh for less food access program is under threat. If you choose to move forward with these funding cuts. For the record, the folks at farmshare have not asked me to be here and had no idea I was going to be here today. I just really care about this program. Fresh for us is so unique in that it brings farmers market quality produce and reedsville quality shelf stable goods directly to communities who otherwise may not be able to access them. The markets are held in schools, clinics, rec centers and other community spaces throughout the [11:36:06 AM] eastern crescent. It was at these markets that folks would tell me, all these eggs are so good. They remind me of the ones back at el rancho, or how they loved using local ingredients to make their traditional dishes. Like when athea brought me some tamales, she made using collard greens instead of corn husks. When the pandemic hit, the in-person markets were closed in order to meet the moment and continue serving those struggling with food insecurity and even more challenging conditions, the food access program pivoted to create the home delivery service. The service was and may still be the only grocery delivery service in Austin that not only accepts snap, but double up food bucks. The folks at farmshare Austin care so deeply about the people and the land here in central Texas. They are committed to the work of ensuring everyone, regardless of zip code or socioeconomic status, can have access to high quality, healthy food that actually supports the environment. This organization and the programs they run are exactly the type of thing I want my tax dollars being used for, not 25 million more for the best resource. City [11:37:06 AM] department in Austin, keep the police budget flat and protect services and programs provided by local organizations like farmshare Austin. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers for item one have been called. >> Thank you very much, members. As you've heard, all the speakers also want to ask our professional staff if they'll come forward and. Members. What I'm going to suggest is that we. We hear from professional staff. We have. We ask any questions we might have of them. And then, as we indicated, we're going to do is we would lay out proposed amendments, proposed ifc's. What I'm going to suggest that we do is I may suggest we'll see how long this part goes. Right. But what I may suggest we do is take a 30 minute break and then come back to lay out the amendments in the I, F, C, and the way I would suggest we do this is just I'm going to. [11:38:08 AM] Unless somebody has an objection, I'm just going to start with council member Ellis, and we'll just kind of come down the row and let people do that. Part of the reason I'm announcing that out loud is so that staff can be prepared to put up on the screens. The proposed amendments. Yes. Councilmember Fuentes. >> Mayor, the thing on the order in which we lay out our amendments might be more helpful to go by what staff sent us via email, the packet. That way we are just going through the packets already. >> Well, I'll look at that. Why don't we take a break? We'll see. He just indicated that that might be helpful to him too. I was just trying to do it in a way that was fair to the council members. But if you think that's fair, we'll do it that way. I still would suggest we take a 30 minute break when after they finish their presentation. It's all yours, director. >> Good morning, mayor and council Kerri Lang, director of budget and organizational excellence. I'm going to turn it over to deputy director Eric Nelson to go through the [11:39:09 AM] presentation. >> Good morning. Eric Nelson, deputy director, budget and organizational excellence. Thank you. Based on feedback we received at Tuesday's session, staff has gone back and updated its recommendation for the use of the additional $4.7 million of anticipated property tax revenue that we expect to get in the general fund as a result of the certified tax rule, we would still direct $4.7 million to be added to housings ongoing general fund budget for the local housing voucher program that will bring their total funding up to $6.8 million, which is nearly the entirety of the ongoing need. And we have provisions to fund the remainder in fy 27 and to get to the total ongoing need in the fy 28 plan, we would also reorganize some planned spending across several funds. But the ultimate effect will be [11:40:10 AM] to create $4.75 million in unrestricted one time capacity that could be available for social services grants. This is the somewhat convoluted flow of funds that's been made necessary, because there are restrictions on the use of downtown density bonus revenue within the housing trust fund, and so we've reorganized some spending to ensure that we're using those funds appropriately. But again, the ultimate effect is to reorganize the spending such that 4.75 million is made available for social services contracts. >> Members, I want to ask a couple questions so that we try to get clarity on what was first of all, and I posted on the message board that and that we've been working to try to achieve what we're predominantly two goals that we [11:41:11 AM] were hearing from council and from professional staff on how to deal with the $4.7 million of additional funding. When the tax rolls were certified, the two primary goals were a the concept of making a an allocation of the $4.7 million for funding of social services and. And I'll pause for just a second and say the 4.7 million for the potential funding of social services, where the money would be an allocation for social services. And we would then have staff as, as we indicated, look at the individual contracts. And if there's a performance issue, evaluate what we do with that. But the bottom line to it is, is it would put 4.7 million [11:42:11 AM] into potential social services. That was goal number one. Goal number two was what staff was recommending to us was coming up with some better way to stabilize the housing voucher program. And the concept there was that the housing voucher program, while funded, is funded out of one time money based upon the downtown density bonus program. And the goal was to get that where it was more sustainable because it was in it would be related to recurring funding, in other words, general fund funding. So those were the two predominant goals. Now I'm going to do my best to lay this out in my simple way in hopes that it it makes sense. And the public, all of us, can understand it. And I'm happy to have myself corrected. Actually, I won't be [11:43:12 AM] that happy about it, but I'm willing to do it. Have myself corrected to make sure we know what it is we're doing. But but it was it's to achieve those two broad goals. The first step was that we would take the 4.7 of additional funding and go ahead and put it into the general fund. So it would be in the general fund. The second step was that we would take the housing voucher program. The way I think of it, staff refers to it as an expense. I think of it as an invoice, right? A bill, the housing voucher program, invoice 4.7 million worth and move that invoice or that expense to the general fund. So now the vouchers will become a regular city program out of the general fund, which is the stabilization that professional staff was looking for instead of being funded as a one time [11:44:12 AM] expense every year. The next step would be to move $2 million of permanent supportive housing expense from the general fund to the housing trust fund, because keep in mind, we've just freed up $4.7 million from the in the housing trust fund because that invoice or expense is now over in the general fund. So 2 million of permanent supportive housing expense would go to from the general fund to the housing trust fund. They would also move $2.7 million, a $2.7 million invoice, or expense from the hope fund to the housing trust fund. Again, if we freed up 4.7 million in the housing trust fund. So now you would move to expenses over the housing trust fund to take care of that. With that one time money, it would leave $2.7 million in the hope fund for [11:45:16 AM] social services, and it would move. The next step would be to move $2 million. That's freed up by moving the permanent supportive housing dollars to the housing trust fund, to the budget stabilization reserve fund for social services. So what happens is you would have 2 million of budget stabilization river reserves for social services and 2.75 million of hope fund dollars for social services, for a total of 4.75 million of one time dollars for social services to draw down. As we follow the process that we've we've talked about on the dais. So what that does is I think I laid that out. You got a. It's very difficult to follow all of that, but it does achieve. The two goals that we have, I think, have consensus about. And those two goals are a. Provide [11:46:18 AM] greater stability for the housing voucher program by giving it recurring money and B, to find the to utilize 4.7 in this case, $4.75 million for social services. By changing the invoicing and expensing of certain things. What that does, by the way, is, for example, one of the proposed amendments that you all know I was proposing was to and I indicated I it could either be for the full 4.7 or it could be for the 2.2 roughly for for children and family services. But instead, what we would do with that is what we would do is we would make that one time allocation. This gives us the money to do that. And so I think staff's good work on this creative work puts us in a posture where that would be the that would end up being part of the base motion on the budget, [11:47:20 AM] and not require us to do some of the proposed amendments that we may even have some still shown up today because of the work that's been done since our last since Tuesday. Did I lay that out? Okay. >> You should be right here. >> No, no no no, not a job I'm seeking. Yes. Council member Ellis. >> Just a quick clarifying question. With this budget stabilization reserve proposal, is it still at 17% or has it changed? >> That was still the reserves will still be at 17%. >> Okay. >> Thank you. It's the movement of money to that that helps us with that. >> I figured that was the case. I just. >> Wanted I'm glad you asked it. I should that should have been one of the points. So. All right, councilmember Fuentes, you're next. And then followed by councilmember alter. >> Thank you. First and foremost, thank you so much to our budget staff for providing this alternative proposal. It's right in line with the conversations we had on Tuesday. So I really appreciate your hard work and helping us get to [11:48:21 AM] a consensus on how to ensure we are restoring the cuts to our social safety net, as well as providing stability for our local housing vouchers. A couple questions based on our conversation on Tuesday, we I had asked if we could put together a total amount of. Of the proposed reductions to the social services. How much of of the proposed reductions were related to homelessness? In other words, how many of of those reductions would be eligible to to be financed through the hope fund, knowing it needs to be related to homelessness related initiatives? >> Give me one second while I look that up. >> Okay. >> And I'd also just like to clarify, if I could, that all of these one time dollars are unrestricted. Okay, whether it's the hope fund or the srf, they can be used for any purpose. >> Okay, perfect. That answers my question. The other question I have is how I just want to get a flat numerical amount of [11:49:21 AM] how much did the city of Austin fund and social services at the end of fy 26? And what amount would we be with the restoration of the 4.7? >> So the fy 26 budget for social service grants was 74.2 million. Now, with the proposed budget, there's some moving around of dollars. So as as I mentioned earlier, there's about $20 million that has been moved to operating for public health and homeless strategy office for our shelters. So if you take out that that 20 million and then it and then we moved 3 million of the sobering [11:50:24 AM] center over to our budget stabilization reserve fund. And so that that gets us to about 51, 50 or 51 million total. And that amount includes the 2 million of the new investment that was in the permanent supportive housing wraparound services that we just discussed, moving around between general fund and, and housing trust fund. >> So with this staff proposal of for the recommended use of the additional revenue, we would the fy 27 budget, as proposed with this proposed amendment, would have social services funded at a $51 million level. Is that fair to say? [11:51:25 AM] >> Very close to it, yes. And the reason I say that is there is some recommendation for a small amount of those contracts. If you think about the community planning focus group, we sent a memo a few minutes ago or a little while ago about some of those contracts where there is a little bit of duplication in addition to the community planning focus area that we would recommend looking at eliminating. And so it would be close to a 50 or 51 million with those changes. >> Okay. So colleagues, just building off of our conversation on Tuesday, and perhaps we can continue this conversation as we lay out our amendments and ifc's I know there's two of them related to social services. I think the overarching question that we have is a dais that we need to, to make clear is, what is the level of funding for social services that we're comfortable at, knowing that right now it's a $51 million investment from [11:52:25 AM] the city that goes towards social services. You know, I don't want to be in the same situation next year. And so we need to provide direction to our city manager on what is our comfort level on that total amount. I don't know if we're going to get to that level or that number during this budget cycle, but I would like for us to kind of lay out an understanding and a timeline of when we come to that direction for the city manager. And last question on my end, you know, you mentioned the memo you sent that talks about the 900, the $845,000 worth of funding that would be eliminated from the proposed contracts. I just want to make sure I'm clear on this, because this staff alternative proposal is a 4.75 million investment back into social services. This proposed elimination of 800,000. That goes a little bit above the 5.4 or the that we're restoring. So we wanted to restore. So how [11:53:26 AM] are these deeper cuts? How does that related to the gap. >> With those reductions that would close the gap? It wouldn't be the 4.7 would be able to fully fund the remaining. I believe the remaining contracts. I think I think we would still go through the analysis to fully understand the performance of the remaining contracts and come back to council with a potential recommendations, but the dollars will be available. >> Okay. So colleagues, I just want to make sure we're all clear in this memo. It has the specific contracts that would be eliminated with this budget proposal. The rest of the 4.7 million, we're holding that investment for us to have a conversation on funding the categories of social services, not specific to the contracts that were previously listed for reductions. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Councilmember, can I clarify something? I was doing math in my head. And so sometimes that's not good. And so the fiscal year 27 actual social [11:54:29 AM] service grants amount in the proposed budget is $48.8 million. The difference is the 19.4 that is in the city owned shelters. That's moving into operating the 2.9 that is moving to the sobering center, which gets a full investment of 71.1. And the difference in that is the added dollars that we, as I mentioned, for the for the sobering center, excuse me, for the permanent supportive housing wraparound services. So that's where we're that's where we're at in. So 48.8 is the amount for fiscal year 27. >> And before I go to councilmember alter, I, councilmember Fuentes, what what she just said is, is accurate and about what we [11:55:30 AM] ought to be looking for for the next year. And, and in the proposal, the ifc that I laid out, one of the things that it says is, and if you remember from the message board that we would have a single allocation of the 4.7, which we figured out a way to do that they would do. Step two of that would be a review of what contracts and and what services we want to continue. And step three was that we would do a best practices analysis of where we want to be with regard to the social safety net, as you've described it, so that when we come back in 28, we would be in a position to to actually deal with that in a in a more thoughtful way. Councilmember alter also has an ifc that he's handed out a different version of it today, which incorporates some of my proposed changes to it. That actually probably is my, my ifc is, is probably subsumed that, that, that step, that third step of ifc is [11:56:32 AM] probably subsumed in his ifc, which would put us into the position of what you're talking about. Sorry to interrupt on that, but I just wanted to make sure that that was clear. Councilmember alter followed by the mayor pro tem. >> Yeah, I just want to start with both thanking staff for doing some gymnastics here and working with mayor. You on on this to define that consensus. Because, you know, I think, as councilmember Fuentes mentioned, is very important clearly, to all of us to not only make the restorations that we can to the social service programs and make those investments in the services that are needed, but also to provide that stability to the housing trust fund, I mean, to the local housing vouchers, which now, according to your slide, starting in fiscal year 28 and beyond, we will have fully resolved. So that's not going to be something that we have to worry about or try to plug that gap, which I think is just so critical. So I really appreciate y'all's work to get to that point. I want to just get a clarification on a couple [11:57:35 AM] of the questions that councilmember Fuentes was asking in the the proposed, you know, 5.355.4 reduction to social services, that number includes the eliminated contracts, correct. The value of the eliminated contracts. >> Yes. >> Okay. And I have it based on your spreadsheet of those eliminated contracts being totaling just over $2 million. But there is a separate memo that came out that she was alluding to about 850,000 worth of that 2.1. Are there not true eliminations? They're being folded into other contracts to still provide those services. Correct. >> Some of them are. So the community planning contracts, [11:58:38 AM] if you all remember, throughout this conversation, the community planning was the priority area that remained at the lowest level of priority. So those that I believe 250,000 or so will be eliminated. >> Okay. But if we think about though the 850 000, if you is it correct to think as that as a reduction off of the. 5.4 to say that there's really. 4.5 that you have your. 5.4 you take the 850,000 of eliminations that are counted in that 5.4, but those are just being moved to other contracts that are existing. And so there would still be around 4.5 worth of reductions or eliminations in the social service bucket, am I? Getting that right? [11:59:41 AM] >> I'm not following you. >> Okay. And we can let me try one more time. And if not, we'll during our break, we can try to clarify this. We have 5.35 in cuts or reductions. So far so good. Okay, that number includes the eliminated contracts. And within a subset of the eliminated contracts, the chart that we were sent last night, the councilmember Fuentes was talking about is $850,000 worth of eliminated contracts, but that are really being subsumed into other contracts somewhere else, just the 850, not all the cuts. There are 24 contracts being cut, but just a portion of the cuts were outlined in this memo. And so what I'm trying to understand is if you is that a reduction off of the 5.35. So does you take the 5.35, reduce [12:00:43 PM] 850 and say that there are 4.5 million left that are either reduced or eliminated? >> Yes. But I want to clarify, in the 850, 250 of that is not being rolled into other contracts. Now, that's the community planning piece that's not being rolled into other contracts. I think that's where I was getting lost. >> So then that's where then we would if if you incorporate that, that's 4.7 magically. Of contract of reductions that are unaccounted for essentially outside of that community plan. >> Correct. >> So through this, it would be a full then restoration of pretty much everything if we did that blanket. But as the mayor has put forward, and I think the the right approach, not to just say we're going to fund everything, like we've always funded everything. We're going to actually look at the service delivery and making sure that service is being [12:01:44 PM] delivered for the dollars being spent and make any kind of adjustments within that pool. But we do have the funds available to provide the level of services comprehensively as what was being reduced. >> Correct. >> Okay. I just wanted to. Good. Sorry, do a little math out loud, but I want to make sure I understood. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Councilmember mayor pro tem vela, followed by councilmember Laine. >> Thank you mayor. I just wanted to to highlight a comment that councilmember Fuentes just made where she said, what level of social service funding can we afford long term? And to me, that's just the critical question that we have. This process is not good for anybody in the sense that if we just save everything this year, we're really just setting ourselves up and setting our nonprofit [12:02:44 PM] organizations up for an even more difficult situation next year, or we might be able to do that for two years. But ultimately, we're going to reach a level where we would have to have very serious and deep cuts. And I would much rather do that in a gradual and steady way to get to a sustainable level of social service funding than to just kind of, you know, push it off and push it off and push it off until we hit that cliff where, you know, we just have to have, you know, very deep cuts. And I don't think I mean, I've been on nonprofit boards and, you know, worked with a lot of nonprofits. It's not good for them either. We need to, they need predictability. You know, they need certainty. They need to be able to plan, you know, people don't hire because they're not sure about the funding. People don't start programs because they're not sure about the funding. It's [12:03:45 PM] not good for anyone to have this kind of level of uncertainty moving toward the future. So I just think that's the absolute critical question is, what level of social service funding can we afford? And I want it to be as high as we can possibly make it, given the funding limitations that that we have. And I know I want to also kind of mention the the elephant in the room that has kind of gone unmentioned, which is the tax rate election that we had this a year ago almost at this point. And, you know, I supported that. I campaigned hard for it. We would be having a very different conversation if the TRE had passed. Unfortunately, it did not pass. And we are having to to deal with that reality. So I know folks are, you know, here and there saying, you know, we should fund this and we should fund that. And I agree, but we [12:04:48 PM] >> Are very limited in what we can fund in the funds that we have available. And that's just the, the, the reality that that we're facing. You know, earlier I asked, you know, because traditionally before the 3.5% cap, we would take an average of about 6% of additional property tax revenues per year. And I asked staff, you know, what's the difference if we would have gotten that, you know, been able to take 6% instead of the 3.5% cap that was put on us by the state legislature? You know, how many dollars is that? And they responded that for this year would have been about $16 million. Just to give people a sense of what we're talking about, and kind of the new financial reality that the city is facing, I just that's kind of gone unmentioned through this entire debate. And I just wanted to, to, to raise that and that, you know, we're, we're working within the system that the state of Texas has laid out. That is not the [12:05:49 PM] system that I would want to work within. That's not a system that I think is a is a good system, but it is a system that governs what we can and can't do. And we have to adjust to that. You know, 2020 reality. So anyway, I appreciate the thoughts and comments, councilmember Fuentes, and I just wanted to highlight those issues. >> Mayor. >> Yes. >> I need to make a point of clarification, and I do apologize. The social service investment at proposed budget, it was 48.8 million. We added 4.7 back with this staff recommendation, which makes the total investment 53.5 million. >> Well, then let me ask, how does that where do you put the 19.4 in shelters and the 2.9 in the sobering center that. >> That does not include those [12:06:50 PM] two amounts. >> But that if we're going to make comparisons. >> If we're going to okay. >> If we're going to make comparisons of last year and this year, which is what councilmember Fuentes was asking about last year was 74.2. And this year you're saying it's 48.8 plus 4.7. Then do you need to add in 2.9 and 19.4 to compare apples to apples. >> To compare apples to apples, that would make it 75.8. And the reason for that is the investment in the public and the permanent supportive housing increase, primarily of the $2 million. >> Right. And would you now explain and so that we can say it out loud again, why is the 2.9 and the for sobering center and the 19.4 not counted in our apples to apples comparison? >> Sure. So the sobering center, which has, I think, in fiscal [12:07:51 PM] year 26, was included in our social service contracts, was moved to our one time funding for fiscal year 27. As we continue to work with our partners to identify long term funding for the sobering center, the 19.4 that is the city's shelter. So that's our emergency and domestic violence shelters. That amount has been moved over to the operating budgets of our homeless strategy and operations office, as well as our Austin public health department. And that is because those dollars are more contract in nature than what we are transitioning. So social service grants to. >> Thank you. And and. Apropos of what both councilmember Fuentes and the mayor pro tem have said, I want to reiterate that we have by sea and we have [12:08:51 PM] councilmember alters ifc, which I think is the the broader, the broader, more detailed ifc. And mine is probably subsumed in that, that what it will do is precisely what councilmember Fuentes and the mayor pro tem are highlighting, which is it will put us on a track and a process to look at the social safety net in terms of what what is needed in our community, best practices for providing that, what can be afforded, and it should allow our social service providers, our nonprofits, time to prepare as we we take on this annual this this year long effort so that we are not back in the same place next cycle where we feel like people were caught by surprise, that that sort of thing. It's also very important that we emphasize, again, that what is happening with this [12:09:52 PM] 4.75 million is it is a single allocation of 4.75 million, but it is not a blanket restoration. It is also not a blanket cut. It is a blanket. It is the staff is going to look at the individual contracts as we go forward. As that money is set aside. Councilmember Laine. >> Thank you. I want to start by thanking all of the nonprofit service providers, the service recipients, the community members who are concerned, who have shown up to so many community meetings from Austin, public health work sessions, this council meeting, other council meetings and and our offices for individual question and answer to make sure that we as individual offices did understand more about where you work in the city and which part of the community you serve and what your history is and what the data is behind you. So that we and I, I thank you on behalf of me, could have a more informed [12:10:55 PM] discussion about how to approach this. And thank you to my more experienced colleagues who have brought forth structure that will absolutely help with that. I will not repeat any of the many comments I agreed with. I will move to my question. So and I think this is a question for the city manager because and I don't remember how much of what I'm going to include in it. You were in the room versus briefly out of the room. I don't know, but I suspect it will be a question for you by the time I'm done. So when I have asked in the past and most recently, I think was last week about whether geographic analysis had been completed, as you looked at social service contracts, I think it was two weeks ago actually. And the answer was no. And as I recall, and I asked that question in regards to two different ways that geographic analysis is important. One, if we were cutting funding across a variety of contracts that [12:11:56 PM] caused contraction to disproportionately impact a certain area. And so we would definitely see substantial negative impacts by removing so many contracts of different types from a single area. And that might be reason to slow down the reductions in that and then the other the flip side of that, which I speak about often as it relates to many departments, is in order to identify parts of the city that you, the social contract service contracts we have simply aren't reaching, aren't reaching at a level that's feasible for the type of population that's out there. And, you know, recognizing demographic shifts. So I've asked a version of that question to many departments in my time here, and the most recent one was of financial services as it relates to social services contracts. And the answer was no. And so the question that I have for the city manager, and it's going to be a nice little paragraph still, okay, is are we out of [12:13:00 PM] place as a city where, as you are doing this work that is being charged to you by my, my colleagues and I as I will vote for it? Are you at a place that the city where you can ensure that appropriate and effective geographic analysis of our services and their reach is part of the analysis. The paragraph that I'm going to add on is we are well into a restructuring of it. We're well into a restructuring of communications. We have some departments that have done amazing work in this area, built amazing tools. I will compliment transportation and public works, use of gis, and we know that the competencies that are within our city, in these individual departments. This is a moment, an opportunity to bring to the fore a solution that is coming out of these centralization [12:14:01 PM] efforts, if it's possible to do it. I don't know if we're at that point, and I would love to hear from you. I can give you a tldr if that's helpful. >> To long. >> Oh, come on everyone, I'm old. Everyone knows that by now, right? I different dictionary is your friend councilwoman? >> No, thank you for the question, but I'll answer it in the best way possible. I think one we do have staff. We do have quite a bit of information around whether demographic and or needs. And I think we're beginning to look at that think more intently, particularly as we're trying to focus more on results. I think part of the challenge with the current. Compilation, I think of the 200 plus different types of nonprofit and social service contracts that we have is that [12:15:02 PM] I think they are issue specific, and in some cases, depending on the organization, they may serve in certain areas and obviously their mission and what they do in the boundaries and the areas they serve may be more specific. I think I would say as it relates to, are we at a point where we can look at geographical equity and impacts down to a level to, to get at the results we want? I think at least as I see the process that I believe council wants us to undertake beyond just the performance issues of existing contractors, but really lay out from the amount to the service area and category. And then ultimately the overall desired community impact we want to have. I do believe we can factor in as it relates to our analysis and our approach going forward. That should be one of the variables as it relates to what we're going to do, how [12:16:03 PM] much we're going to do, and then how do we ensure through responses that we may get if, in fact, we do a total reset, that they can be responsive to how that is addressed based on information we may provide to them, demonstrating where we believe the need is. So I do believe that's something we can accomplish if, in fact, we go forward with the reset, as I think council has desired us to do, and working with the collective team and resources we have, putting together what that looks like, sharing that with the city council, as well as sharing it with the individuals who would ultimately want to come and continue service and or expand their services to meet the needs of the community. So it's something we could probably ensure is built into the new approach. >> Thank you. I appreciate that answer. And of course, what that looks like could be a range from as rudimentary as zip code analysis to a more sophisticated use of gis. And so I'm glad to know that that's possible. I hope that is possible no matter what happens with centralization, because I think it should be. But I know [12:17:03 PM] that we can definitely benefit from the efforts that you've undertaken to get a more useful and accessible and sophisticated approach to this. I do want to call out the very strong work that not just has been done by dpw, but our equity department, as they put together their levers of economic mobility. It's the first thing that I've seen come out in a gis fashion that that captures some of the demographic shifts that I've talked about frequently from the dais in the last five years. And I'll also note the group that works with the demographer, who certainly advocates very effectively for building this type of data up out of census tracks, because political boundaries are always shifting. I would love to be kept in the loop as as progress is made on this over the course of the next year. Thank you very much for your joint answers and how they have played out. I, too look forward to being able to provide, as a city the stability that nonprofits need in order to effectively, even [12:18:04 PM] to effectively seek private philanthropy, to complement city funding. So I'm really, really grateful for where we have landed on this. And I thank you for your time. >> Thank you, councilmember. All right, members, what I would suggest we do is, at this point, we take a 30 minute recess. And actually 32 minute recess, and we come back at 1250. Unless there's objection, we will be. The city council of Austin, Texas, will be in recess until 12:50 P.M. It is 1218. We're in recess. [12:19:05 PM] >> And Desanctis. [12:21:42 PM] And. No. One. Is. [12:22:57 PM] Okay. So. [12:51:00 PM] >> Good afternoon. It is 1251, and I will call the Austin city council back to order after a brief recess. Thanks, everybody. What we're going to do now is we're going to go like we've a practice that we've started on an annual basis where we walk through amendments. And if. Just to get them out there so that everybody gets to see them. I appreciate how council does this. And this may not take a long time, but and we have three other agenda items. But but we'll we'll start. And so we we have a packet. And councilmember Fuentes pointed out that we have the packet. So what we're going to do is we're also going to put up on the screen the the items and I will just call on the. Give the floor to the council member whose items are up and we'll just we'll just rotate that way. And councilmember Fuentes, I think you're first up, I think you have two proposed motions. >> Yes, that's right, colleagues. Amendment number one, it was a previously posted [12:52:02 PM] amendment where I was joined by my co-sponsors, council members harper-madison, Siegel, Ellis and zo qadri and seeking to restore the funding for social services at a 4.7 million. As we were presented today with staff's alternative proposal, of which I'm supportive of, I will be seeking to withdraw this amendment. >> Great. Thank you very much. And by the way, and also thank you for keeping a focus on all this. I think we have come up with something that will now be part of the base budget, but I think I speak for everybody in thanking you for keeping the focus. >> Thank you. So moving on to amendment number two, knowing that while we have restored 4.7 million of our social safety net, there's still a gap. So looking to identify where we can save funds to add to our social services, this amendment seeks to do a 10% cut to our consultant spending in the general fund, which would result in $114,000 savings that we would that would recommend us applying to our social safety net. Again, this is done [12:53:02 PM] knowing that last year we cut and reallocated 10% within social services. I think we should do the same to consulting spending within the general fund. >> Great. Thank you. Anybody have questions or comments? Yes, councilmember alter. >> So this gets me back to the question that we had before. Based on the eliminations and the 4.7, do we not have the full amount of funding to restore the proposed cuts? >> We do. Yes. >> So if we did this, which I'm I'm not necessarily against, I just I want to understand the impact. We would just be layering on this money to do as we do the review to find areas maybe where we think we need further investment. And this would be dollars for that investment. >> Yes. >> Okay. Very good. I appreciate it. And I like I said, I'm not opposed to the idea. I just want to make sure I understand the impact. >> Thank you. Thank you. Further questions or comments? [12:54:03 PM] Very good. We'll now go to the mayor pro tem vela followed by council member alter. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. I have just one amendment and this would be an amendment adding $32 million to the transportation public works capital budget, using certificates of obligation to support our active transportation investments including sidewalks, urban trails, bikeways, safe routes to schools, transit enhancements. We. We made the decision the other day. I know we're finalizing it today to to move forward with the bond package that that we identified the $260 million for parks and the $35 million for libraries. But given that the those active transportation programs are some of them in particular, sidewalks in particular, are running out of money. I want to make sure that the cruise and that the work that we have started and have been doing continues. So I will be moving [12:55:04 PM] to add that $32 million funding to the the transportation, public works, active transportation capital budget. >> Thank you. Mayor pro tem councilmember Fuentes. >> Thank you. This question is for staff. I'm curious. You know, with this proposed allocation to those budget areas as part of our cip planning process, how does this work with the memo that was distributed to council, I believe earlier this month, it would we take of that $32 million allocation, would we prioritize the projects in the staff memo, or is that up to council direction? >> I would say just from my part in the conversations we've had, they have their kind of matrix and kind of priority list, and we're giving them a lot of flexibility in this to, to, to use the money kind of in the areas that need the money within their prioritization matrix. I'll let. Director Mendoza. [12:56:05 PM] >> Thank you for the question. Councilman Richard Mendoza, director of transportation and public works. Yes, we have drafted a potential two year capital project list with this $32 million across these active mobility projects, we would work closely with all council member districts on what the next one year project list would look like. It'd be a combination of continued design to move high priority projects forward, and as well as finishing construction on some other projects. >> Yeah. So I think perhaps we can have a follow up meeting just so I could better understand, because the memo spoke to a $77 million spending plan over two years. And so how would this line up if this is a $35 million allocation? How would those proposed projects change? >> Yeah, we would work on that $32 million package as a one year program with each council district, but it would be a subset of that prior project list. >> So you would start with those projects identified in the memo as a baseline for those funds. Okay. >> Thank you, councilmember. [12:57:06 PM] >> Thank you. Mayor, I am fully supportive of this. Thank you for bringing it. I will add a little context for folks following along. When we did the $460 million active mobility bond in 2020, we allocated those buckets specifically to the program areas, and staff has had those matrix matrix matrices for a number of years. And so that's, I think what lends itself to the success of those programs is, you know, keeping the teams moving that are already doing such good work in, in all parts of town. So I'm just adding that context for other folks. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem. >> And I very much appreciate that. That context especially, I mean, I know we're on mobility and we talk about this all the time. The chair of of mobility. And it is important to, to kind of continue to keep that work going. And just to the kind of, I know we had talked about potentially a two year plan, and I would again, we'll deal with 27 when when I'm sorry. 28 when, you know. [12:58:08 PM] 28 is here. But my, you know, future intention would be to continue funding these programs with Theos until, you know, again, the this council, the future council, decides on a transportation bond to give that kind of six year timeline. But I don't want to to halt programs kind of, you know, for a year. I feel like we will really, you know, lose momentum and lose efficiency. You know, we've got these crews out there working and I think we need to keep them, you know, out in the field working, adding the sidewalks and bike lanes and trails that so many folks in our community enjoy. And mayor, if I may, I have it's not quite ready, but we I just wanted to mention it. We do have a potential budget amendment for the animal services, which is a $3 million at. In in capital money for animal services improvements. It's we're still finalizing it, but I will get it out as. >> Soon as. [12:59:08 PM] >> C oh yes, that would be the the plan. I know that that was also a potential bond, but that that's a very small item for a bond. But in speaking with animal services and city management, it's it's important for. I think our overall management of the, the, the animal shelter. >> So thank you. Mayor pro tem council member Laine, do you have a question? >> Am I able to make a comment? >> Sure. >> Okay. I just want to thank council member vela for his detailed and consistent work on this issue. And director Mendoza, for your work on figuring this out. And with the long timeline that. First of all, I will keep it brief. But first of all, we absolutely need bridge funding for these departments, and it is a critical need. And I can't agree more. And second of all, we also need planning because we are focusing on shovel ready projects. We also need some planning and design on these other urgent projects that haven't had planning and design yet. So I thank you both for figuring out how to make a plan [1:00:10 PM] in this area. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember councilmember, followed by councilmember Laine. >> Thank you very much. My first motion is motion number one. This is a $150,000 reduction out of the acme budget. This comes from their service prioritization list. They had a $324,000 option, as it were, related to reducing temporary staffing. We talked with them about what kind of savings could we have with still minimizing impact to the community. And that's where we landed on this $150,000 number to once again try to save some money to have available for some of the discussion we're having here today. >> Can I ask a question about that? So while this reads as a reduction of $150,000 in ongoing funds, it's really adding back. >> No, no, no, no, this is a reduction. So on their service prioritization list, this was [1:01:11 PM] not included in the budget. So was a reduction. >> Wait, wait. But but you say it's a smaller reduction allowing for. So the reduction in the budget is 324,000. >> No, there's no reduction in the budget. They proposed as one of their service prioritizations a potential reduction of 324. We decided not to go all the way to the. 324 and we're proposing a reduction of 150. >> Okay. Manager. Madam. >> You can finish. I guess I was your question, mayor. Okay. If you remove 150 000, where is it going? >> Is that. No, my, my, I'm reading a smaller reduction and I was trying to be clear if if the does this budget already have a 324 and I'm being told no, which that's. So I feel comfortable with that answer. >> Okay. Well, let me clarify at least a couple things. So. [1:02:12 PM] Or ask the question, I think, councilmember, by reducing this first one, are you planning to reallocate it somewhere else? That's one thing. Thank you. The second. >> Is. >> I would just say. >> Just bringing. >> Money, I'm sure for the benefit of all of my directors in the room as we go through our budget process, and we challenge them to identify potential reductions, reallocations or efficiencies, they go through that process. And oftentimes their first statement when they sit down. And even the last is that while we're sharing these, in many cases, they do not recommend them because they believe in many cases that it is a service impact. Now, there are some that are not that and they identify those right off the bat. I actually asked them to do that in priority order. And so as it relates to this particular reduction, I would just say the reason that it was [1:03:12 PM] not included in the budget was because of the service level impacts that they identified would actually occur, and that would be reduced staffing and support for key special events that while they've got regular and permanent staff that staff their centers, when they have larger and more out in the community kind of activities, and that then they may have to reduce their support for that. So I would just say it wasn't taken in. Many of them weren't taken, quite honestly, because I thought, at least at this perspective, that the council might not support the service level reduction in many cases. And so this is one of those, but I just want to clarify where it might be going. Should we take it? And so that was it. So I just wanted to say that for the benefit, as we start to look and we provide those sheets, I know my directors, I don't want them in the future to not submit worthy things to [1:04:14 PM] me because of the fact that they believe there may be taken without the level of understanding or discretion, that I may actually go through with them and sitting at a table for an hour. So I just wanted to share that at least on their benefits. So I at least keep my credibility with the directors. >> Well, and if I may, just a clarification. And we that's why we worked with the department to understand would there be any, any kind of reduction in hours or anything like that? That is not going to happen as a result of this. And, you know, the, the, the service prioritization in its name, right, is prioritization. So it's an opportunity for us to decide, is this the highest priority or could those dollars be spent elsewhere or elsewhere? I will have an amendment coming later that does have some dollars attached to it. I'm not tying these two together saying that this is to fund that. I'm trying to, you know, let us have that prioritization conversation. But, you know, [1:05:15 PM] bringing some money to the table and potentially taking some money off the table based on the totality of these amendments. But, you know, I have been very frustrated, to be honest, in the service prioritization to, you know, your your comment when we go talk to departments, a majority of them don't even feel like they're real, right? We, we say, what is this? And they say, well, actually, that's a savings three years from now. Or that's not actually something we can do because we're doing something else. And we have to have the ability to, to make prioritization decisions. I know that's you make the first pass at that. But then ultimately, in a policy making setting, deciding what is our highest priority. And so this is one where, you know, should it be the will of the council, we are saying that this is a slightly lower priority than something else. And that's why I'm bringing it forward. >> Councilmember. Go ahead. >> And so let me be clear. My [1:06:18 PM] statement was not to make an inference, as if council did not have the discretion to look at those, determine and ask the questions necessary to determine whether it is a priority. When I submit the budget, once I submit it to you, everything is on the table and the questions, responses we give and or the prioritization that we thought we had, that may not be the council's. That is clearly what y'all's role is. I just wanted to clarify that the one the reason was that it wasn't in the budget is because of the concern that I had thought staff identified. For me, if, in fact, the information that they provided to you is different than what they provided to me, then I guess that's an issue that I need to work out with my departments, particularly if it's different and or not accurate and whatnot. And so I think I'll work with the budget director on all of them to ensure that. But you are correct. Most of the things, and quite often that's the conversation we have about the realness of some of them and or the impacts. And so I [1:07:19 PM] appreciate the comment, but I just wanted to say that. Sure. Because, you know, again, I think folk may not have felt that their proposals would ever see the light of day beyond my table. So I just wanted to make that clarification. >> I appreciate that. >> Councilmember harper-madison, followed by councilmember Fuentes and councilmember duchen. >> I just wanted to say briefly that given the responsibilities that acme has taken over from Pritchard purview, most especially at the risk of engaging in ward politics, mayor, at so many of my district one assets are under the purview. And if I could just very immediately for your frame of reference, the millennium youth entertainment complex, we have staff shortages. And so I wonder if there isn't a surplus necessarily, because I do believe this would have impact to some of our assets that are [1:08:19 PM] already short staffed or otherwise need additional funds. So I my immediate reaction to this amendment is, one, a lack of support, but also some concerns about how that plays out, given that so many people's responsibilities from other departments, most especially part, were shifted to acme. So our culture, music and entertainment, because it's such a broad spectrum of items that get covered. I'm very concerned about taking any dollars from from them. So just expressing that concern early on. >> Thank you. Councilmember Fuentes, followed by councilmember duchen. >> Yes. Thank you. I'm wondering if we can have the director for acme join us. I want to better understand what this proposed $150,000 cut to the acme department would do. If you could go over specifically what cultural centers, what facilities would be impacted, and what that impact would actually entail. >> Good afternoon. Angela means, [1:09:21 PM] director for. >> The arts, culture, music and entertainment department. And I will say, while the department would work to minimize the impact to this reduction, our temporary staff within our facilities play a critical role in our programing. All of our cultural spaces spaces including the Mac, the Asian American resource center, the arts center, the George Washington carver museum and genealogy center, as well as the African American cultural and heritage facility, would be impacted by the reduction in their temp budgets. Now, the department relies heavily on temporary staffing, as I stated earlier, to provide programing and support for the much needed services that we provide to the Austin community. Our temporary staffing within our department is approximately a little over 100, so we have a full time permanent staff count of nearly [1:10:24 PM] 100, and we have the same amount in temporary staffing. And so to reduce 150 000 of that would mean we would need to take a look at all of our programing across the department to minimize the impact. But some of the programs that were flagged for potential that would be potentially affected were some of our long standing annual celebrations throughout the cultural facilities such as juneteenth, such as celebration. And so, of course, we do not want to reduce those for our Austin community, but we would need to strategize on how best to mitigate that throughout the department. >> Thank you. Thank you, councilmember Aldridge, for bringing forward this amendment. I won't be able to support this amendment, especially knowing what this reduction in temporary staff could entail for many of our beloved community events in our city that is experienced by many of our austinites throughout the [1:11:24 PM] year. So especially if there's not a there's not a program or other service that you're looking to have these funds go directed toward without having that identified. Yeah, I have concerns with it overall. >> Thank you. Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor. First, I want to thank councilmember alter for bringing forward this. This is very similar to one of the reductions that we identified as part of how to get to a potential 2.5% budget proposal. And I say that in the context of recognizing that no cut and no reduction, that we're ever going to volunteer, that the manager has asked his departments to volunteer is going to be easy or is not going to involve a reduction in service somewhere. And and so the question then to reinforce councilmember alter's point is, it's about priority. At that point, we heard today there's a program in workforce development that might be short [1:12:25 PM] $400,000. Do I want which is more important than for us? And how do we make those choices? Right. Funding a community service program that creates jobs and workforce development, or is it going to be funding? One of the cuts that we might propose is the. You might remember the conversation, the Dyess, the the fleet cut that would make take a little longer to repair fender benders for fleet vehicles. So we're going to have to make some potential trade offs here as we go forward over the next week with this budget. And I think it's important that we get clarity on that. I think it's important that we get the data from staff. So we're not just because every every director is going to come here, and I respect the heck of our directors, but they're going to come here and they're going to try and maintain their service levels, and that's their job. And I respect that. I mean, they're all going to come here and say that we need this. It's essential, but we ourselves are going to have to figure out where our priorities lay, whether they're in as we've we've very creatively done restoring some cuts to social services or the plan to do so. But there may be other priorities that we identify that are higher than the ones [1:13:25 PM] that are on the prioritization list. And that's where I think the tough calls are going to need to be made. So I appreciate councilmember alter bringing this forward, and I hope that we excuse me, I hope that we entertain similar reductions and have similar conversations around some of these items going forward as well. >> Thank you. Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember alter. >> Quick question for director means you mentioned your 100 permanent staff and about 100 temps. What does $150,000 represent out of your temporary staffing? >> It's it's less than 10%. Our temporary budget is nearly $2 million for our department. So 150 is, is not that okay? >> And you talked about, you know, some of the events that you put on. Obviously, you mentioned the marquee events, juneteenth and others, but you also, in your response talked about how those are, you know, very high priorities. I'm not asking for a perfect number, but how many events do we have on an annual basis at these facilities? Is it, you know, [1:14:25 PM] just the few that we all know about, or is there a lot going on all year long? >> There's quite a bit of activity within our cultural spaces where we celebrate different occasions, but each one of our cultural spaces has what they call a signature event where the community has come to celebrate whatever that is. And, you know, they receive quite a bit of support from the community. And so what we would want to do is continue that, but we would have to scale back what that looks like to stay within our budgeted targets. >> And would is the temporary staffing only for your signature events, or is it for events outside the signature events? >> It's for the entire operations of acme. >> So help me understand why. If the signature events are the most important events, why would we scale back our most important events? Instead of saying that's our most important event, we have still over 90% of our temporary budget. To do that, we're going to prioritize those, fully [1:15:26 PM] invest in those, and maybe have lesser events be impacted. Should we not have enough dollars to do everything we've done in the past? >> Thank you for that question. It's very it's a difficult choice. I it's hard to say what is the most important for our community within our cultural spaces. We have summer programs for our youth, which we did not want to touch because we understand the importance of the use of our facilities for our communities. And so that's something that was part of the 300,000, but we were hoping that that would not be considered. We have facilities that are open all day. We have some where our seniors rely on our facilities and they're enjoying those spaces. And so we did not want to touch that. The areas that we found to be the least impactful, unfortunately, is the senior or is the annual events. But there [1:16:27 PM] are hard choices that we had to consider, given the use of the space and what our community has told us that's important to them. >> Okay, we'll continue to work on this conversation. I would echo a little bit what councilmember duchen said. I mean, if we can't come up with less than 10% of a sub program of a sub, we will never be in a position where this budget isn't just growing, growing, growing. So I just. >> Sure. And we're laying out the amendments. We're not debating the amendments today, but it's appropriate for people to say how they're feeling about them, ask questions. But we're we're not going to get into full blown debates. It's my understanding. The next sheet we have members, says council member alter three, which. >> There was a. >> 2 to 2. So he's he has cut. He has cut two. So if that's right, I'm correct. Right. You are correct. All right. So we'll go to alter three. [1:17:28 PM] >> This is building on what councilmember vela was mentioning as it relates to some of our investments. The number one kind of capital neighborhood investment that we get contacted about is speed bumps. I think we had a really full discussion about speed bumps when we were talking about the neighborhood or the, the district service funds. And what this would do is add $1 million towards our vision zero and traffic calming, inclusive of speed bumps to have money available. Because the answer, unfortunately always for the neighbors is we don't have money, you know, great idea, but we don't have money. And so this would help. It's not going to solve nearly the whole list, but it would help us chip away at that list and create a little. >> This would also be by CEOs. >> Also CEOs, same story. >> So and this would not be this would not be duplicative of the 32 million. >> Correct. It's basically take it to 33. >> Okay. Councilmember duchen. [1:18:29 PM] >> Thank you, mayor. I just had a question for staff about this one, because I know we've had conversations earlier this year, and I, I thought I recall that there is a specific fund or line item that addresses this kind of traffic calming. And I think at one time I recall us saying that, that those dollars had been exhausted. So I'm trying to understand the current state of that, whether this is an ongoing item or if staff can clarify whether or not there is indeed like a pot of money that's set aside exclusively for traffic calming and the status of that. >> Councilmember, we do have a program, the speed management program, and we have used capital projects for hard infrastructure like roundabouts, chicanes, hard asphalt, speed tables, speed humps to manage speed. But then we also have an operating budget that we've used to put up speed, electronic speed, display signs, and to effectively slow traffic down. And I do believe, yeah, [1:19:31 PM] we have exhausted the capital portion of that budget. So this would augment that. It is separate from the active mobility program, programmatic funds that were previously postured. >> Thank you. If I can just clarify. So if I had a neighborhood or councilmember alter who has a community that says we want, we need some additional speed bumps in our community right now, that resource is exhausted and this would help replenish it. >> Yes it would. We we have the resources to conduct the speed surveys and engineering studies to determine the appropriateness. According to the municipal uniform traffic control devices. But then in terms of the hard capital. Construction, we do not. >> Last question is don't need it right now, but I'd be curious to know what is the average yearly spend in that in that category? Yeah. >> Certainly, councilmember, we can provide that. >> That'd be great. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Thank you, councilmember. Councilman Kim, I don't know [1:20:33 PM] what just happened. Thank you. Councilmember. Yeah, I hit a speed bump. That's right. Well done. Good one. Councilmember Ellis. >> I have a question. I'm not sure if this is for the director or for the author, but would living streets infrastructure be applicable for these types of dollars? Because I'm thinking, obviously when neighbors ask for speed reduction, they think of speed bumps. But there's also other ways of working through, you know, enhanced medians, narrowing the streets and other things that the department has done really well with lately. >> Yeah, I can only speak to my intention. It is all traffic calming. So speed bumps being the marquee one that we think about. But yes, there are a lot of other options, but I'll defer to. >> Yeah, councilmember, I do have a an answer to your prior question in terms of the funding. The speed management program was funded 7 million over six years from the 2020 bond. And then in terms of the living streets, I have, we've [1:21:34 PM] routinely funded that through our operating budget, and those have been more along the lines of either temporary treatments. They do have the effect of slowing down traffic, but they're typically on low volume residential streets that permit active, you know, neighborhood use of those streets other than vehicles. >> Okay, so you wouldn't use cos to install those treatments. >> We've not we've always we have thus far funded that those through our operating budget. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Yes, ma'am. Thank you, councilmember Walter, let's go to alter for. >> Great. So this is to add a one time appropriation of $500,000 for what are called FYI vouchers or foster youth to Independence. And what we're looking to do here. Well, first off, what those are are vouchers for individuals who have had who who've been in the [1:22:35 PM] foster care system. And what we have, what has just happened is typically there's a cap for various areas, and the housing authority is who pulls down these vouchers. And we have basically operated at our cap. Hud has recently removed that cap, and now communities can apply for as many as they're able to sustain. And for you to be able to pull more down, you have to show that you have the service dollars attached to those vouchers. What I'm hoping to attempt here is for the city to put up $500,000 as matching funds to attract outside investment, to say, we're going to match you dollar for dollar, to then have $1 million worth of funding available to pull these vouchers down. And if you look at this on a on roi just dollar basis, given the value of the vouchers and the [1:23:36 PM] matching funds, we would be achieving almost a 7 to 1 match on these dollars. And I think we have all seen we don't have enough dollars to go around to fund homeless services or, or our broader social safety net. But if we can take some of our money and leverage it in this way, I think it would be a really, really smart move, especially given now that this cap has been lifted. And, and I think this really builds I know the mayor and Cary have been working with the legislature on potentially increasing this funding, and this would be our signal that we're trying to participate in that as well. So I think this fits right into your focus on on kids and youth success. So hoping we can find a way to make this work. >> Thank you. Let's go to ultra five. >> Very good. This is my last one ultra five. This is to add $200,000 for a position for the electric transition of our [1:24:37 PM] equipment. We have. We are building the new maintenance facility out of zilker park. That's going to allow for us to better electrify our fleet, which not only good for the environment, but it will save us money from an operating perspective. In order for us to actually get that program off and running, there needs to be an individual in charge of of that program and making making sure it happens. So I don't want us to stall out on the investments we're making in electrification, because we don't have a person available to do it. This would be an option for where some of that money could go that we talked about earlier. Like I said, I'm not I'm trying to follow the process of not doing a cut here. Pay for here, just here, the here's the dollars and we'll decide the best way to spend them. But this is one way that I think would be really meaningful for our parks, for our environment, and overall to lower our maintenance costs in the long run. >> Thank you, councilmember Fuentes. >> I just want clarification on [1:25:38 PM] the process, because both of these last amendments call for additional dollars, but we don't know where they're coming from. And I think part of, of of my challenge as a policy maker is when I'm considering whether or not to support these amendments, I know that the manager is going to have to pull money somewhere to fund these new programs. And if one of the cuts is to, to, to jobs, and yet we're adding 200,000 for landscaping equipment, I need to know if the cut on jobs is to get us, you know, electric landscape equipment. So how, how, how can we better go about this conversation? >> Yeah. And this is a job. It's not the equipment. The $200,000 is personnel. But I that's, I think what we're relying on staff that we will come forward today with some of these ideas and they're going to come back with us of here are the options of how we pay for them. And that's the point at which we decide what's the higher priority. >> We'll have to we'll have to prioritize because they've provided us with a balanced [1:26:39 PM] budget. So unless unless they can find something that we want to cut, then some of these amendments won't be able to go forward. Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Laine, you have. Let's go with councilmember Laine one. >> Okay. So thank you, mayor. The first amendment I'm bringing forward is to restore funding for the community health navigator and community health navigator for seniors contracts for the Asian American resource center. Staff clearly indicated on Tuesday that the reduction in funding for these programs would directly result in a reduction of available services for its intended population, with no alternative in place. My district has the highest concentration of Asian Americans in the city, and that population includes many multigenerational immigrant families, with many elderly family members who have language challenges and other barriers to accessing services. The Asian family support services of Austin and the [1:27:40 PM] Austin Asian community health initiative have both expressed the need for and value of this program. Community organizations regularly refer clients to the Asian American resource center because it is a trusted hub that provides thoughtful, culturally responsive and accessible support. The services we choose to fund can only achieve their intended impact if people are able to access them. Community navigators play an essential role in bridging the gap. That gap by helping residents connect with resources they might otherwise be unable to navigate, particularly within targeted populations. I understand that the budget staff has done incredible work to find a way forward that aligns with the priorities this council has expressed, but this amendment is an insurance policy that these crucial services are fully maintained because we have no substitute service in place. >> Thank you, councilmember zo qadri. >> Yeah, I just wanted to thank councilmember Laine for for bringing forward this item. I've talked to a lot of folks in the aapi community. It's a very diverse community. There's a lot of languages even among, you know, certain groups. I [1:28:41 PM] know this is something that's been huge for for the community. And, you know, as someone who has one elderly grandparent now and on the east coast, I really wish this was something that we saw more throughout the country. So thanks for thanks for bringing it here in Austin. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Laine number two. >> Thank you. The second amendment I'm bringing forward provides operational gap funding to support new family shelter beds coming online in our city. One of the challenges we hear consistently from our homelessness service providers is that physical space is often not the primary barrier to expanding family shelter capacity. Providers frequently have buildings or available space that can serve more families, but they lack the operational funding needed to staff maintain an open those facilities. Recent reductions in federal grant funding have only widened that gap. Last year, I sponsored an ifc directing homeless strategy and operations to identify opportunities to expand family shelter bed capacity. While we're still working toward these goals, this amendment provides the resources needed to help translate those [1:29:41 PM] opportunities into additional shelter beds, as well as support the very limited number of family shelter beds available in north Austin. I am confident that this investment will help providers open their doors, expand capacity, ensure that more families have access to safe, safe shelter across our city. And I myself, I know that you all know this, but the value of allowing families with children who do not have stable housing to remain near their social network, near their school, near all of the things that provide informal supports is, is particularly critical when you're trying to raise children in these challenging circumstances. So I hope you'll consider my amendment favorably. >> Thank you, councilmember alter. >> I have one question on this for you or director, you use the word gap funding. So I'm and you might have laid this out, but is this this is funding for already existing family shelter. It's not to increase the family shelter capacity. >> I'll give an initial reaction, then I'll pass to director gray. Okay, so I am [1:30:42 PM] aware of interruptions in service where there is private support providing the building, but they do not have operational support and providers that have had extremely strong success factors with the city that are experiencing cuts. >> Okay. >> I'll pass to director gray to add on to that, because you have much more knowledge than I have in this area. >> Thank you. Councilmember David gray, director, Austin homeless strategies and operations. So, councilmember alter, we do have some community partners who are in the process of constructing new family shelter for our community, and they've been able to independently raise the funding for those capital dollars. However, they don't have not yet identified the operational funding. So our understanding of this item would be to identify funding to help get those new shelter beds online, which would add net new capacity for homeless families in our community. As far as the existing family shelters go, we [1:31:44 PM] currently have contracts with a lot of those providers that support those existing family shelter beds, and so this amendment will go towards increasing the number of shelter beds available for homeless families in our community. >> And is it your understanding that they need one time start up funds, or are you talking about operating? So is this something that they would need those ongoing operation operating dollars for? >> Thank you, councilmember, obviously, for ongoing costs, you would need to identify ongoing funding for those things. We've been having a lot of good conversations with our philanthropic community at large about homeless services and bringing our philanthropic community along to help sustain some of these operations. And so if this is one time funding or if it's ongoing funding, either way, we'll continue to have those conversations with philanthropic partners to see if they're able to also provide ongoing funding for these types [1:32:45 PM] of shelter beds. >> Okay. I appreciate the author bringing this. I, you know, I think this is such a critical area. I do just want us to be mindful of one time dollars into something that we think might be ongoing, will be in a position next year where people are coming and saying, well, if you don't fund this again, you're you're cutting our family shelter capacity. And that's eyes wide open. I just want to make sure we have eyes wide open. >> So if I could just share a little bit of additional information, because as director gray was speaking, I knew several of the examples and what he was referring to. But there was an example that I think he didn't pick up on that I was referring to. And I think I know where the disconnect lies. Without getting too specific, you know, this is the second year in a row that we've cut social services funding. And the example that I'm aware of is a provider who had been providing support services. And when that those cuts were made in the, I believe, in the prior fiscal year. And that was my mistake. They had to stop [1:33:46 PM] supporting the the services provided on a church site where there is a building that is now sitting vacant because. So it's a mix of these things, but I appreciate you bringing out the differences. Thank you. >> Thank you. Now we'll go to councilmember Siegel followed by councilmember Ellis members. Councilmember Siegel has a. He has three proposed amendments. Number one has a version two that I believe was passed out this morning. And it's not the one that's on the screen because apparently we they didn't get that to put on the screen, but it's in. It's on a very nice pink sheet. I've never seen it on a pink sheet before. But you know, councilmember Siegel goes his own way. No, actually, I want to thank the city clerk really taking care of me there. Yeah, I like it. Well, thank you, mayor Siegel motion sheet one is a budget amendment to support the transition of emergency communications into a [1:34:46 PM] standalone department in fiscal year 27. It involves a mix of one time and ongoing funds. This amendment would follow the recommendations of the recent staff memorandum by funding, quote, governance, operational and technology enhancements, unquote, to improve 911 response times. The new office of emergency communications will be funded for a new executive director, assistant director and support personnel. And after the first half of the fiscal year, the civilian call takers for 911, as well as civilian supervisor positions and expenses, would be funded through the new office of joint emergency communications. In terms of the dollars, the call taker position is already funded in the budget, so that aspect would just be a transfer of funds, representing a little over $5 million for the second half of the fiscal year. The staffing and programmatic improvements to 911 cost a total of $1.7 million over 18 months, 1.1 million of which would be spent in fiscal year 27. This amendment has a safety valve. If for some reason, city staff are unable to acquire the necessary certifications to [1:35:47 PM] stand up the new emergency communications department within the fiscal year. But that said, we believe this time frame is entirely reasonable based on past efforts such as setting up an independent forensics departments. Now, in terms of why this amendment is important, there's a lot to say here. First of all, last year during the budget process, a unanimous council directed staff to analyze how the city could form a standalone joint emergency communications department that was not under the direction of the police department. This resolution, sponsored by councilmember Laine, which I co- sponsored and which was developed in consultation with city staff, included a deadline of December 9th, 2025, to present a strategic plan to council. Unfortunately, that deadline passed and more than eight months after that deadline, we still don't have the strategic plan. So the will of council has been frustrated by staff inaction. This sort of delay erodes public confidence. And now, instead of having a well studied plan in preparation for the budget cycle, all we have is. All we have is a memo that council was sent approximately a week ago. Even in this memo [1:36:49 PM] that states that staff. Okay, sorry. Even though the memo states that staff don't believe moving 911 to an independent civilian department is necessary, it's still substantively underscores the need for an independent joint emergency communications department. And first and foremost, it's because we need to prioritize alternatives to police response. A shift to standalone 911 is necessary to ensure that we are truly reimagining public safety, as our city has declared its goal to be, and that we are rigorously living up to our goals to divert mental health calls and other nonviolent calls towards emergency responders who are best equipped to respond effectively. In the last year, council unanimously prioritized restoring full funding for 24 over seven mental health first response through mcot, we prioritize preserving our community paramedics who are called chippers. We unanimously passed the resolution to create a safe to call policy with working groups, which met for the first time last week, and we need to show the community that we are aware of the fundamental problem in this [1:37:49 PM] country that when we don't prioritize appropriate mental health response and alternatives to policing, then we do default to a police response and the odds of injury and death unfortunately skyrocket. Despite all the work we've done as a city, we still have a 911 system that, even in the name, presents police as the default. It's called APD 911, and it makes sense that this would happen when the call takers all report up to the chief of police. When the city moved its forensics department out of the police department, there were similar arguments that it wasn't necessary or it could be improved without such a shift. But I believe history has vindicated that move, and we can all agree that the department is stronger and performs better independently. And that brings me to the second point. 911 is too important to be a sub department. The memo we received last week shows there are critical improvements that we should make to our 911 system, and without this memo, we never would have been presented with this information. These improvements include first, reducing duplicate call transfers and triage questions. [1:38:50 PM] Second, strengthening quality assurance. Third, modernizing technology. Fourth, expanding and updating performance measurements. Fifth, improving coordination between 911 and 3 one one and, tellingly, six changing the leadership structure so that it's not just sworn APD leadership. The findings suggest that these improvements would shorten emergency response times, which we all know could be the difference between life and death. Why weren't these improvements identified sooner? I believe it's because 911 reports up to the police chief, whose primary focus cannot be improving synergy between call takers and dispatchers in various departments. She's the chief of police. She has so many other priorities. Managing civilian call takers will never be at the top of her list. If we create an independent department with a specialized director whose sole focus is making our 911 system the best it can be, we won't need another consultant contract like this to alert council of what we are missing. We'll have somebody whose job it is to improve how we take calls. An official entirely focused on [1:39:50 PM] improving coordination between departments and keeping up with the latest best practices, trainings and technologies. In Austin, we're very or fairly unique in that we have a separate ems department that isn't folded into another public safety department. That's part of what makes our ems services so good. We have a separate department, so our ems chief is focused on making ems the best it can possibly be. Ems performs some of the most important functions in our city. Ems isn't secondary, secondary, and also forensics is not secondary. And 911 shouldn't be either. Thank you, mayor. >> Council member zo qadri. Councilmember duchen, remember, what we're trying to do is ask questions and. And make a comment if you want to. But we don't have all the time today to debate these. Thank you, councilmember zo qadri. >> Yes, sir. No debates on my end on this. I just have some clarifying questions. What's the total cost to establish the office of joint emergency communications? So I know it's broken down, but I haven't I [1:40:51 PM] don't have a calculator. >> No. So it's it's basically it's $1.7 million, 1.1 of which would be in the first fiscal year and then a six, six months after that for the other 0.6. >> Got it. And then and then just more out of curiosity, are there other cities that have a similar model of an office of joint emergency communications? >> One of the Texas examples is there's a joint emergency communications department in north Texas that several small municipalities participate in. >> Okay, great. >> Thank you. Thank you, councilmember qadri. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you. I've got a question for staff on this. So councilmember Siegel referred to the memo and my understanding from that memo, and I'll just go ahead and read it. But that we're supposed to be getting a briefing next month about this from the consultant. And I think it's probably important that I put this, that I that I get this out there because this is what it says. The staff's going to bring the item to council on September 22nd. The work session for mcp, the consultant, to present their final report and recommendations. This [1:41:53 PM] report will provide a comprehensive overview of the study's evolution, outline the legal and operational constraints that shape the analysis, and further delineate the challenges and costs associated with creating a standalone joint emergency communications department. This clarity is essential to ensure the complete understanding of the findings, the factors that rendered certain options infeasible under current conditions, and make recommendations to prioritize operational enhancements over organizational restructuring. At this time, we look forward to presenting the details. Et cetera. Et cetera. The report. My question for staff is does this need to be accelerated? Can it even be accelerated if the ideas that we are voting on this next week? >> Obviously, we have to be the cfo we originally buried deliberative in establishing a new culture in such a critically important service. You just simply have to get it right. My understanding of [1:42:53 PM] council member and there are certain credentials and and requirements that are necessary before we could have a standalone call center. My understanding, councilmember Siegel's budget amendment is that it would leave the positions in Austin police, and it would leave half of the funding in the Austin police department for those call takers in anticipation that within six months we would have met the necessary certifications, we would have the director for the new department established, at which time those dollars could be moved over. And if that timeline wasn't achievable, which I have to say, I think that's going to be difficult to achieve. But if it wasn't achievable, then the the dollars would still be in this new department. They could be transferred back to the police department so that, you know, we would have the continuity of the call center. But essentially, until the call center was ready to operate, had the necessary to call operations or the department, I should say that that those [1:43:54 PM] positions would not be moved under the proposal. That's before council. >> So if I can just clarify quickly, it's this is authorizing essentially the funding for the new department and and those and the requisite changes that are involved with that. >> Yeah. There's two parts of the consultant study. One spoke to what it would take to stand up a department, and one spoke to service enhancement technology and operational enhancements. It could be made at the center that included additional staff positions and technology. So this proposal from council member Siegel would put money, new money into the budget to fund those operational enhancements. It would also put money in the budget for a director, assistant director and support personnel for the new department. And then looking over at the current police budget, it's the last bullet on the slide up here is transferring a portion of the money that's currently in police into this new department. [1:44:55 PM] Again, in anticipation that within six months, this new department would really be ready to take over and at which time the staff could be moved into the new department. And again, if that didn't happen, they would remain in APD until that could actually happen. >> Meaning that the plan would still be to get the briefing in September by mcp. And at that point, we would make whatever decision council makes regarding the recommendations and if and if we instead chose to fund the first the the first recommendation, the $1.7 million recommendation, we would that would continue. But if we made a different decision at that time to not proceed with funding a new department based on whatever our conversation, the legal and other things that we may not know at this moment, this funding would revert back. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. Thank you. My my concern is just that we may be getting ahead of our skis on this one based on not yet [1:45:56 PM] having that mcp. That work session with the mcp final report, their recommendations and their understanding around this item. >> Thank you. Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember, alter. >> The question for a P D if the chief could come to an answer, and once she does well, she does come down. I do have a clarifying question. On the first two bullets, there's the $859,000. That's addition. And then there's a separate addition of 600,000. Is the 600,000 part of the 859 or is it 859 plus 600,000? >> It's plus. And that smaller amount in the third bullet, a 37000 is is is also a plus. The it was it was presented this way because this is how it was presented by the consultant to staff. And then staff summarized in that memo is the first bullet really speaks to these operational enhancements that the consultant identified that had a price tag of 1.7 million over an 18 month period, [1:46:56 PM] which is how it was presented. But it's kind of a it's not very helpful to talk about 18 months when you're in a 12 month budget discussion. So the 859 is the amount of funding that would be needed in fiscal year 27 for those operational enhancements, accounting for the delayed timing of hiring positions and and whatnot. The $600,000 is the cost associated, again, with the delayed timing of the hiring of these positions, the 600,000 is the amount that would be needed in fiscal year 27 for the new director and assistant director, and would be three support personnel. >> Okay, so 1.46 million ongoing. Yes. Okay. My question for the chief is which this this speaks to the civilian personnel. Remind me the sworn personnel involved with the call center. I know, I think that the top supervisor is a sworn person, but can you [1:47:56 PM] remind me all the sworn personnel involved with the 911 call center. >> It's commander Lee Davis and one lieutenant. >> That's it. And so if this was moved out of pd, those two individuals would just be reassigned to some other duty. >> I guess we'd have to see how it works. I think there would have to be some kind of liaison work that's done, you know, between the two for sure. >> Okay. >> Thank you. And if. >> I could. >> If I could just add, you said 1.4 million ongoing, which is correct, but there would be a cost escalation in fiscal year 28, as you moved from partial year funding for those positions to full year funding. So the full the full annualized cost beginning in fiscal year 28 would be closer to $2 million. >> Thank you, councilmember Siegel. Let's go to Siegel two. >> Well, the one correction, because the version two that we handed out had a an update. The mid-year funding transfer would be $8.8 million. And the difference is because the cfo [1:48:57 PM] correctly added the associated C tech costs, that would be part of the the mid-year transfer. And I guess just to the timing question to respond briefly, I know we're not doing debate, mayor, but one reason why we think this is possible is because previously the city was able to stand up the forensics department and a similar amount of time and obtain certifications in a similar amount of time. All right. Thank you, mayor. So I'll go to Siegel motion sheet two. This is for violet. Keep safe storage. So I'm bringing a budget amendment to add $500,000 in ongoing funding to the violet keep safe storage program. When our homeless strategies and operations office explain the new ramped up encampment enforcement plan, we were told the plan involved offers of storage for people's belongings before sweeps through the violet keepsake keepsake storage program. However, it's now clear that's not happening. We've spoken to both zo and the downtown Austin community court, which manages violet keepsake, and we've learned that there's a wait [1:49:58 PM] list of over 100 people, and the demand has exceeded capacity for some time. This means that, unfortunately, people are having their belongings, including valuables and vital documents, swept and tossed away without recourse. Yesterday, the city received a letter from attorneys at the aclu of Texas and the Texas civil rights project outlining not just the inhumane Ness of the situation, but also the fact that the city could be sued for violating the constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure and the right to due process. The letter, I quote, says we have received reports from community organizations that raise concerns about whether the city of Austin's current practices comply with these constitutional guarantees. People have reported tense, sliced open by city staff and the seizure of belongings, including medication, birth certificates and other government issued identification documents. People have reported that these items were then thrown into dumpsters after officials gave people only minutes or sometimes seconds to gather what they can carry. People further reported that affected individuals are not offered ways to store their belongings, and that they have been threatened with arrest during [1:50:59 PM] these encounters. Unquote. My office spoke, spoke with Robert king at the downtown community court, and he assured us that this extra with this extra funding, they would be able to double the capacity of the violet deep safe storage program and partner with organizations to provide the service in locations across the city. Director gray also agreed there is a great need for this enhancement due to his department's enforcement initiative. Given all this, I believe it is our moral and legal obligation to prioritize this funding. >> Councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And generally speaking, this is an item that I would be happy to support, but especially given that it was referenced during councilmember Siegal's commentary, I'd really like for the council to have an opportunity. We haven't talked about that letter, the contents of the letter or the implications of the letter yet. So I feel uncomfortable with us making reference to it in relation to this amendment. Until we as a body have had an opportunity to be briefed and discussed the letter and its [1:51:59 PM] implications. >> Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember Siegel, let's go to item three. >> Thank you mayor. This last item is for fare free voting. This amendment would transfer $75,000 to capmetro one time to fund one day of fare free transit service during early voting for the 2026 general election. This is following the resolution council adopted in may and the African American resource advisory commission recommendation in April to increase access to the polls by expanding the existing and successful program run by capmetro, which provides free transit service on election day. This program has been demonstrated to increase ridership and the amendment builds off the staff memo of July 31st and will provide free ridership on the highest voter participation day of the early vote period. My goal is also to connect with county officials who express an interest in matching the city's contribution, to add one more day of free ridership during early vote. And I'd love your support for this amendment. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember Ellis will go to you. >> All right. >> Thank you, mayor. I will flag that my motion sheet, number one is partnered with [1:53:01 PM] the ifc's. So I guess the question is, are we going to go through the ifc's after we do all the amendments? >> That was the plan. Okay. We also have some other items on the agenda. So but but I'm I'm at the will of the council. So however you want to do it. >> Well, I didn't write a speech for this one. So I will just flag that it partners with the ifc just in case we need to reallocate dollars. But it is to look at park security and safety. And so we have parks and recreation department security audit findings and recommendations report, which will be the foundational resource for it. But it is in response to issues with crime and shootings in parks and how to better amplify our public safety response until we get parks, police back. So that that is a placeholder. And I'll go over the ifc later. >> If we get to it. >> Okay. Councilmember zo qadri, I'm sorry. Yes. Councilmember Fuentes, I'm sorry. >> Not for today's conversation, but for next week. If we can [1:54:02 PM] have staff speak to the surveillance component of investing in this type of technology and equipment, just flagging that for next week's discussion. >> Good. Thank you. Okay. Councilmember zo qadri on zo qadri one. >> Great. Thank you mayor. So the first sheet everyone should have in front of them is Sam qadri. Amendment number one. The amendment provides $1 million in additional funding for critical services, supporting survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault and child abuse. This investment will help ensure survivors and families continue to have access to safe housing crisis support and services that that promote long term stability. >> Yes, councilmember Walter. >> Is this type of service within our bucket of social services, or is this something separate? >> This is separate. >> Okay. >> That's thank you. Councilmember zo qadri on item two. >> Great. Thank you. Mayor. Item number two, for those of you who are who are on the council back in 2023, I brought [1:55:02 PM] forward a a pilot program, a sip safely pilot program, which at the time was the largest local funded drink spiking prevention pilot in the country since launching in April of 2024, more than 70 bars and venues have participated everywhere from Rainey street to sixth street to the east side. And it's been a valuable, you know, resource for for prevention across across Austin. So I'm bringing forward this amendment to continue that investment and cover the relatively minimal cost of purchasing test strips and other supplies needed to sustain the program. The pilot itself was $100,000. What we're looking at is ongoing funding amounting to about $20,000. And this is a modest investment, in my opinion, in a preventative tool that APD has identified as effective, particularly given that an estimated 10 to 14% of reported sex crime cases have a connection to a bar or nightclub. >> Thank you, councilmember zo qadri. Now we'll go to zo qadri three. >> Great. Okay. Last amendment [1:56:04 PM] zo qadri amendment three. I wanted to daylight an item that we're excited to bring forward. We learned that the amendment that that is in front of y'all will have to be turned into an ifc. So we're going to work on that. But I wanted to thank councilmembers harper-madison Fuentes, Velasquez, and alter for working with our office on this item, and also wanted to thank staff and our local housing experts also with their help. But throughout our budget work sessions, we have been collecting more details on the future of our displacement prevention services, historically funded through the housing trust fund. Through many discussions with staff, it appears we do not have funding into fiscal year 27 to maintain many of our important legacy services we have been providing, such as displacement navigators, which is something that councilmember Fuentes has championed, and tenant representation, education and legal services, which I know is a key priority of many of us in council. These housing related services run out Austin's commitment to keeping people in their homes and communities, both upstream and downstream of eviction. Our amendment calls [1:57:05 PM] to restore ongoing funding to these services and our displacement prevention program, and to evaluate their performance and impact alongside our social service contracts. Some of these programs listed here aim to continue to fund important work, such as the displacement navigation program and our upstream legal services. Others are new programs such as a court based downstream legal services contract and a tax and estate planning program. Both data driven programs are helpful in rounding out displacement prevention. Lastly, all remaining funds would go towards additional relocation assistance as we see this funding bucket run out quickly every year. The request from our community is $3 million every year, and this item would get us $260,000 closer to that goal. Our item also calls for these programs to be evaluated and prioritized in the ongoing work on social services, so that they are not overlooked as meaningful contributions to our housing and homelessness goals. >> Thank you, councilmember. Okay. That will take us to councilmember duchen duchen. >> Thank you mayor. I'd like to [1:58:07 PM] introduce duchen one, which is an amendment to help the parks department acquire a wood chipper. Currently, our understanding is that Austin resource recovery enterprise department charges parks around $80,000 a year for similar services, and this would allow parks to be able to acquire chipper and essentially pay for the item within 2 or 3 years at most. I also understand that parks has found a partner for this that is, quote unquote, chipped in for the chipper. Which is why the cost. >> Is probably for you till now. >> So I'll just say very quickly, I think this is the kind of economics we ought to be investing in, both in terms of leveraging other dollars as well as. As well as the quick turnaround in the roi on this. So look forward to discussion next week. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Velasquez, you're recognized if you won't be as chippy. Oh, man. [1:59:10 PM] >> See, I was gonna I was going to support your amendment for our elevators and now I'm going to have to. I can't do that anymore. Mayor and colleagues, I apologize. I don't have a speech for each one of my items, but we were waiting for a few answers. So mine are don't aren't in the in the backup, but we will be putting up a message board post so that everybody has access to them. I Velasquez number one is going to be 350 to a hso to change the status of three full time temporary positions to full time permanent and 250 in funding to continue street and community outreach contracts with partner organizations. Number two is going to be to parks increase April budget by 500,000 to maintain funding for operations and maintenance costs. And the third one is a library allocation to a P L for social worker related community support and library locations across the city as appropriate. And I hope that was quick enough. Yes, ma'am. >> Very well done. >> Can we get copies of those? I have everybody else. >> No, no, no, that's what I [2:00:12 PM] was saying, is that we were waiting for answers, but they'll be on the message board soon. >> Thank you, council member and members. I had the proposed amendment. But we. Because of what council I mean what staff is doing with regard to the change in the base budget. I'm not spending time going over it. Councilmember duchen you want to be recognized again? >> Yeah. Thank you. So I forgot to mention I know the conversation came up. Councilmember Fuentes referred to it earlier about sort of how do we pay for this items? And so I just want to briefly call to your attention to review when you have an opportunity. The what I posted on the message board yesterday afternoon, which is essentially a collection of proposals for that could eventually arrive at a reduced budget, even a 2.5% budget. I recognize we're not going to agree on some of those items being included on there, but I do believe we could agree on some of them that could ultimately fund some of the priorities that we're talking about this afternoon. The ifc's investments. Very briefly, we [2:01:12 PM] worked very hard to work with departments, get information and try and identify kind of the most palatable or most tolerable cuts, knowing that all of those cuts, really any of those cuts are not easy cuts to make. I do think they're well distributed across 20 plus departments. I'd certainly be happy to entertain other cuts that other members would like to offer, but at this time, I think other than myself and council member alter, we don't have a lot to choose from. So I'd encourage you all to consider that there is value in least working through some of those items and having the appearance of considering kind of both sides of our ledger, because I think we're in a moment, especially now that we've got a bond on the ballot. I think there's value in showing that we can exercise the same kind of discipline and circumstance that pretty much every family and business in our community also has to consider. So, and that there's wisdom in doing that. That's all. >> Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember duchen councilmember Fuentes, did you want to say something? Yes. >> I just wanted to highlight for my colleague comes from my [2:02:14 PM] second amendment. It seeks to cut 10% from consultant spending on the general fund. So also providing an area where we can save costs. Councilmember duchen, I really appreciate you taking the time to identify cuts overall with the city of Austin. I can tell you spent a lot of time on it, and a lot of hard work and consideration went into it, and I think it would be fair. Manager, perhaps next week you could offer a response as to what those proposed cuts, how they would impact city services instead of going line by line. Maybe we can just have a general comment on it that would be helpful for the conversation. >> I agree, thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember. All right, members. I think we're ready to go to proposed ifc. And we'll go in the order of the packet. Councilmember, alter your recognized first on alter ifc1. >> Very good. This is around a a parks maintenance study. When we set our fees for. In this [2:03:16 PM] case, when people use our parks and have to restore them. We have not just done the cost of study analysis as it relates to both the maintenance of that space to restore it, and some of the fees, things like load in times and just associated costs with those. So this is to charge staff to go for the park staff to go do that study and then come back to us and give any recommendations on how our fee structure might need to be updated as a reflection of this. And the hope is to then use any additional dollars, if there are some from that recommendation, to go into a fund we established last year to provide supplemental funding for our parks, which is something we're always trying to find but never really able to do. So that's I have seen number one, and I appreciate well, I wish I had to list my [2:04:18 PM] co-sponsors if if you're I know councilmember Ellis is I can't remember everybody else. I'm sorry, but I appreciate you very much. >> Yeah. Well, spread the love and and but and part of what can happen with the layouts of these is if somebody wants to sign on to an ifc, we now have it's it's laid out there and let, let us know or let staff know and we'll get that get that done as well too. >> And I do want to just make one clarification on the update. We worked with councilmember harper-madison office to make sure that we're recognizing that some this funding and this study should look at some of our parks, like Walter long, that have not been invested in. And we should be doing that. So I really appreciate your addition there to that. >> I see two. >> Number two, this is looking at the fiscal year 2728 social service conversation. And I really want to thank you, mayor Watson, for your starting this process as it relates, you know, [2:05:19 PM] going back and looking at our social services and figuring out what's the right framework for that. And then through this budget being, you know, figuring out how we can make the smartest investments in the most prudent investments in the current budget. And I think this is hopefully intended to build on that. And as you mentioned in your ifc, we're going to you're asking the manager to come back and work with the council, and this just kind of lays out some additional metrics or parameters for that work so that we can be part of the process and understand what exactly is going on so that we're not caught at the end. And I know, manager, you always intend to to keep us well informed. So this is not an indictment of that, but I think utilizing our committees as a potential space to do that. And we have listed here some of the categories where it makes most sense with the committees. And so I think that's going to be a good venue for us to have that [2:06:22 PM] discussion before we do any kind of solicitation as part of the social service reset. And I appreciate my cosponsors. Councilmember Velasquez Fuentes, zo qadri and the mayor. >> Thank you. Let's go to alter 3ifc3. >> This is hearkening on the discussion I had with a P D just having them go look at their kpis and figure out, are they really the type of outcomes focused targets we want, rather than just looking at some of the the front end of the system, let's focus on what results we want to see. And so this will have that study occur, that review, and then go to the public safety commission committee, where I know chair Velasquez will pick it up and make it happen. And that's it. >> Okay, then we'll go to councilmember Fuentes, and then she'll be followed by councilmember Ellis. >> Thank you colleagues. My I [2:07:22 PM] fc, it relates to adding and emphasizing micro businesses. These are businesses with 20 employees or less into the city's economic framework. They've developed a map that has a number of new economic development tools. And really, I just want to underscore and emphasize micro businesses. Your true small mom and pop shops. So direct staff to look at creating a fee waiver program for those emerging businesses. And it provides direction around that program. >> Thank you. Okay, let's go to councilmember Ellis. >> Thank you mayor. So my first resolution is going to be the one that I had alluded to earlier, and it is for our park security items. Approve a resolution directing the city manager to develop a security implementation plan. I've had a really, really great conversation with chief Davis yesterday, and so we're going to keep working through some of those details. But it does specify that it would be in full compliance with the trust act and also makes reference to, I think we're going to update the language to, say, city [2:08:23 PM] parks with a history of violent crime. We had started with crimes against persons, and the reasoning behind that is specifically around we know that, you know, different parks, different users, different neighborhoods have different desires about how park safety is going to work for them. But I know that I have had a murder on my side of Barton springs. Ryan has had a murder on his side of Barton springs. And we just need to make sure that our parks are not a free for all for crime. And they aren't the places where people go to commit crimes because they don't think anybody's around. So that is what this item aims to tackle, and I appreciate my co-sponsors. Krista Laine Ryan Marc duchen and chito vela. And then should I move on to the. >> Go to this is I have seen number six. Yes. Councilmember Siegel councilmember Ellis, would you accept an amendment that basically precludes artificial intelligence powered cameras? >> The intent is not to use ai. >> Okay. >> Or cloud storage or anything like that. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, that's perfectly in line with what I'm hoping to [2:09:24 PM] achieve. >> And because we have the trust act and what she and as she laid it out, she indicated that the trust act would be followed. The council passed the trust act with the idea that it would be what we could then utilize to create guardrails for these sorts of things. And, and so now that we have that, people can have confidence and we want to make sure that everybody understands that. Thank you. Thank you, councilmember Ellis. >> And this next item is to solve a very interesting problem in circle C, which is that we have an amazing circle C metro park, which is soon to get its phase one dog park. And we have the hilshire tract greenbelt, and there's about 250ft that separate connecting the the trail into the metro park. But what is next to it is water quality protection land that's fenced off and a little pocket hoa within circle C, and so we're just trying to fill that 250 foot gap, talking with [2:10:24 PM] Austin water and talking with parks and recreation to help figure out how we can all be team players and achieve the goals of connecting parks and trails together, while also being able to keep and maintain our water quality protection land standards. >> Thank you. >> Questions and thank you to the co-sponsors. >> All right. That'll take us to councilmember Laine on what is ifc7 in your packet? And I will be mayor pro tem vela. So, councilmember Laine. >> Thank you, mayor, I would like to speak to my budget resolution creating an office of joint emergency communications within the management services department. I'd like to thank my co-sponsors on this. Councilmember Velasquez, let's hope I do not forget someone. Councilmember Velasquez, councilmember alter, and councilmember Siegel, thank you very much for helping me to bring this forward. The ifc allocates resources. I'm sorry, [2:11:24 PM] the office that the ifc directs to create is our first step towards creating an independent 911 department. It allocates resources towards those efforts and allows city staff to determine the best path forward, while ensuring that council stays engaged in the process. I, I am not bringing a budget amendment for this ifc, and so I know we have councilmember Siegel's budget amendment. I thank him for. He's been very helpful. But because of that difference, I would like to ask a couple questions myself of staff. I think that they'll primarily be for acm Batista, but feel free to talk to him if you do. Thank you. Thank you for coming forward. Acm Batista, [2:12:25 PM] welcome to Austin. So my first question, have you had the opportunity to review the ifc that I'm bringing forward in its entirety? >> Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, pro tem council, councilmember Laine yes, I have. >> Okay. Do I thank you? Do I have staff support for this ifc in its entirety or do I not? >> You do have our support in moving this forward. >> Thank you. And when you say that I have staff support in the. Ifc contemplates a couple of different stages. Why did I have comments related to his comments? The ifc contemplates stages the first stage in year one being the creation of an office of joint emergency communications. When you say that I have staff support, I would like to understand what level of first hire for that [2:13:28 PM] department is supported. Is it a director level hire? Is it a. Some form of manager or coordinator level of hire? What level of hire are you supportive of? >> We're supportive of a director level hire, with the caveat, of course, that we have indications from the consultant that this is not the preferred method. But at the end of the day, if this is the way that the council wants to go, we're prepared to go in that direction. Another major caveat is the amount of time that it would take in order to be able to complete this transfer in a safe way, because unlike the forensic science, vela is the entry point to all emergency communications with the city and our response to those calls. So it is vitally important that we get that right. And that's what requires more time and more staff work in order to get it off the ground safely. >> Thank you. If the intention of my ifc is to ultimately create an independent [2:14:29 PM] department of joint emergency communications, what do you believe to be the most effective first, hire this director level hire or something different? >> I would tend to go with the recommendation from the consultant, but if the wish is to start with a director, we can start with the director and begin to lay the path. Frame the path towards creating a joint emergency communications center. >> My next question is for director Lang. Sometime within the last week or so, I asked for the cost difference between. If we think of the memo lays out alternative a with a 911 communications manager and alternative C with a director and assistant director and support staff. And so I asked a week or two ago to understand what the what the cost difference is and the salaries for three levels the director, the assistant director, and this 911 communications manager that you're more supportive of [2:15:30 PM] if you were given a choice, I assume. Batista and so have you been able to find the answer to that? >> We have that answer, councilmember. >> Thank you. Mr. >> The what we're estimating for the these are all fully loaded salaries, benefits, retirement contributions, everything. The director position about 284,000 annually. Assistant director 240 000 and the like a manager level civilian leadership position for the center $190,000. >> And then salary amounts independent of the fully loaded figures you just provided. >> I don't have them in front of me, but we absolutely have them and could could get them to you, you know, take about 35% off of those, you know, about 35% of that total number is probably for, you know, benefits and retirement. But we can provide you that information. And, you know, pursuant to the consultant's report, it's the that civilian [2:16:30 PM] leadership position. And what the consultant recommended was a manager level position. If we went with the standalone department and had a director and an assistant director, you wouldn't need that position. Those would be duplicative. >> Can either of you describe the difference in skills and experience that you believe would come from this level of manager versus a director level hire? >> My experience is that a manager of this level would be able to work in order to address the outlying issues regarding call processing times, the acquisition of technology, and bringing expertise from the communications world into the communications center. Yes. >> So years of experience type of experience. Any difference for this manager versus the director? >> I think the director would bring those things. It would just be obviously at a higher level with a higher expectation in their mind of what their [2:17:33 PM] responsibilities would be in the long term. >> Okay. So. As I said, I haven't brought a budget amendment. I haven't found a source of funds. You have stated that you are, as staff recommendation, fully supportive of my ifc, which would preserve fully preserve the possibility of efficiently establishing an independent joint emergency communications department. So with that in mind, is staff prepared to bring their recommendation of a source of funding for alternative a, with the exception that a director level hire is made as the first hire of the office. >> And yes, the answer is yes. But we also, you know, we have a number of resolutions from council members requesting us to identify different funds. And so that's what we're going to be working on over the course of the next week, is looking at your proposals and how they might be funded, and what opportunities or recommendations we can come back with. Yours is one of those, but yes, we will do that work well. [2:18:33 PM] >> So, director Benigno, would you be able to provide me as follow up a draft of some sort of outline, or is it better to just wait until you can consider all of them. >> And outline for the funding sources. >> Sources of funding? Yeah. >> I can't do that right now because, you know, we're going to be looking at if there's anything on the revenue side, we're going to be looking at other reductions that could be, you know, potentially made. At the end of the day, the budget has to be balanced. You know, there's a difference between one time funds and ongoing funds, capital funds. So we're going to be looking at all the recommendations and trying to come up with a way to get you where you want to be when when we come back to you next week, hopefully with some type of omnibus package. But, you know, it's kind of a complex equation. So I don't have right now for you what the outline for how we're going to get there, what it will be. But we'll be figuring that out over the remainder of this week, over the weekend and leading up to next Wednesday's budget adoption hearing. >> Okay, this is where I need to thank council member Siegel for. He was not an original [2:19:36 PM] co-sponsor when I brought this ifc last year, and he came to me and asked if he could join in co- sponsorship in order to help with finding sources of funds. I hope I'm not divulging too much here, and I was very grateful for any assistance in that department, and I. I'm going to continue this thought in a moment. I have one more question first, which is councilmember alter asked about the ongoing costs of my ifc with councilmember singles amendment. Okay. And you provided an answer. Do you have an estimate of the ongoing cost if a director level hire is made and alternative a is implemented in full. And if you don't, I would love to have that as a follow up. >> So you're saying the consultant's recommended alternative a, but with the director level position, we'll [2:20:36 PM] provide the number for you in a response as well. But looks like that would be about 1.25 million. >> Okay. And I ask for that ongoing cost because one, I know that some of the financial minds up here really want to know about recurring costs. I do as well, and I'm certainly aware of the possibility that a consultant report comes in and staff makes recommendations and all this, and the director level hire is made. And then an ultimate conclusion is presented to council that perhaps passes and that does not form that independent department. Instead, it sticks with this office. I myself. Need to have a director level hire as the first hire to preserve the possibility of the independent department, which is the intent of the ifc in order to to support anything other than councilmember Segal's amendment. So saying that in public. And now I am returning to questions. [2:21:40 PM] >> Councilmember, you have less than a minute. >> I'd like to be called on again. If I run out of time. >> Well, that's what we'll have to do. >> Okay. Sounds good to me. I have one last question. In that case, thank you for letting me know. Sure. Actually I'll return. Thanks. >> Okay. Thank you. Councilmember. We'll go to council member to mayor pro tem vela. He has two proposed. >> Thank you very much, mayor. The first one is, and just to be frank, the result of the horrible flooding that we saw in the hill country both last year and then again this year. The. And then just discussion with with watershed, we really need to invest in our flood [2:22:41 PM] control in Austin. We have many, many low water crossings. We have many different small spots that will flood, that do flood in, in even sometimes a moderate rain and are just capital needs for flood control and watershed just so far outpace the dollars that we have available. I know that the the staff is proposing an increase to the drainage utility charge that everybody pays on the on their as part of their utility bill. And just to make a point that that charge is a authorized by state statute that that this was, I think, a response decades ago to major flooding to give us an avenue for investing in flood control. I just there's an urgency to that right now. And [2:23:43 PM] so I'm proposing an ifc to direct the city manager to go back and look at the amount of the increase and see if it's a sufficient and if not to, to raise it and to dedicate that additional money that's brought in from the increased surcharge specifically to capital improvements, that that's really where I think we, we need to, to get the money. And again, we're not going to solve this in one year. We're not going to solve this in two years, but we just need a steady and sustained investment in our watershed and flood control systems over a matter of decades to in order to protect people and property here in Austin, Texas. So that's my my first one. Okay. >> Very good. Yes. Councilmember Fuentes. >> Councilmember mayor pro tem vela this I see that we have in our that I'm looking at and I don't know if there's been some updates sent to us via email says that it's an increase by [2:24:44 PM] 9% within this year's budget. It's directing, supporting an increase of 9%. >> Yeah. And I there's going to be a version two of this that is going to leave it up to the the manager and staff to look at that number and come back to us with a number. Right now, the increase was, I think it's about a 6% increase year over year. And my thought would be, again, to bump it up to a 9% increase, but I'm going to leave that. I'm going to I'm going to give that to, to staff to, to puzzle with and, and see what, what they would recommend. >> But it would be separate from our budget conversations, but it would affect this year's fiscal year. >> Yes. So my understanding is that there is a publication notice where they have to give a 30 day notice before any adjustment to the increase, and I will turn it over to director [2:25:45 PM] morales to go through the details of that. >> Good afternoon. Councilmember George morales, director of watershed protection. So, yes, that's part of this budget. We're proposing a 6.2 increase to the drainage utility fund. And if we want to go higher than that, we definitely would have to do a second posting and come back with a different public hearing for that. >> Okay. So we couldn't just you couldn't just offer an amendment to increase it due to posting requirements, which is why we're considering it via ifc. Okay. >> That was my preference would have been a straight budget amendment, but in conversation with staff, we realized that that's not that that wouldn't be appropriate. >> I a conversation for next week, but I just want to have more a better understanding as to the rationale of adding an additional 3% and how you got to that number. >> Director morales, of that 6.2% increase, what proportion will go to capital and what proportion will be for operating? >> Yes. That roughly would be about 3.5 million increase to [2:26:47 PM] the 25 million that we're proposing this year. >> Okay. And do you know, in terms of and of that amount, though, what goes toward the capital versus operating like, what's it? Because I know we've had that conversation before. And again, I believe that the drainage utility fee essentially at this point funds most of the watershed department. >> So 99.9% of funds the operation and the cip. So the 25 million we're speaking of is cip specifically. So this would increase that specifically, as you requested, to cip. >> Okay. And that would be the increase would largely. My suggestion, again, to the manager and staff would be to to to boost that cip, especially given that my other concern, I know we couldn't get watershed into the the, the bonds that that, you know, for 2026. But when was the last watershed bond. >> In 2018? Bonds were the last ones. >> So that was my other concern [2:27:48 PM] is that they they do have some, you know, capital funds through the, the, the, the duff there, but they're not going to have any additional capital money until presumably watershed gets included in a 2028 bond. And even then, you know, there's going to be a little bit of a lag time. And so that's also driving my concern is that they don't really have a lot of capital funds to make the improvements that I think we badly need. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem, just to clarify, we do have an annual cash transfer to cip, but as we've presented through the various bond conversations, there's a lot of additional cases to increase that annual cash transfer. >> And thank you. And just to add to that, I know that the additional million dollars or so that a you know, a further increase is not going to, in and of itself solve the problem. I don't think we're going to do that in the next five years. This is kind of over the next 20 years, though, you know, that that slight increase, I [2:28:48 PM] think will be able to, to, to make improvements that that we would otherwise not be able to make. Again, like I said, it's not going to help a bunch in, you know, 27 per se, but down the road, again, to relaying a conversation that director morales and I had, we've been lucky that that rain didn't hit the Austin metropolitan area. And if it had. And again, please, director morales, correct me if I'm wrong, we would have seen catastrophic flooding here in Austin. >> Yes, that's correct. Generally speaking, we've got flash flood alley here in Austin, as we've discussed. And so we have many systems that are undersized. >> Thank you sir. >> You want to go to your next one? >> Yes. I'll go to my next one relates to the G file, which as part of the the vote to approve the the police contract back in 2020. For now, the contract included the full opening up of [2:29:48 PM] the G files, both, I guess, the Austin police oversight act and the contract in combination essentially opened up the G files. Unfortunately, it's. It's been very difficult. I know a lot of files have gone out, but comprehensively speaking, it has been difficult just kind of administratively to get those documents out. And this my resolution would first ask for a list of the, you know, G file information in terms of the the officer, you know, the allegation and the outcome. And then also ask staff to prepare a cost estimate if we were to go through there, because there's going to be a lot of work involved in pulling, scanning, redacting whatnot, you know, potentially thousands of pages of documents. What would be the cost estimate for that? >> Great. Thank you. Mayor, I would just like to be added as [2:30:49 PM] a co-sponsor of ifc number nine, please. We'll make sure that gets listed. Okay. Thank you, mayor pro tem all right. The next one is mine. And. What this is what this does is what we've been talking about with regard to the allocation of the also goes into the second step which is the evaluation of the contracts. It has a third step right now. And that is the the longer term. But the amendments that I offered to council member alters ifc that he's already laid out, as I indicated earlier, probably what I'm doing is subsumed in that. So count on me to make a couple of amendments this. Ifc so that it's more in harmony and not. There's that there's no conflict between the two. Yes. Councilmember Fuentes. >> And this ifc and you, you have it here directing the manager to notify council and the providers of any changes to [2:31:50 PM] their contracts. >> Yes. >> I just want to make sure that we get to a process that allows us to provide direction on that overall funding amount, because, you know, is this what you're laying out here? Does that give like, when does that happen? And does that give us enough time to provide direction to the manager on the the category? >> And I've talked to the manager about that, and he wants specifically enough time to make sure that we have input. And so I'll make sure that the ifc lists that. And I'll. And if you have an idea, feel free to share that. And we'll, we'll make sure it corresponds. Yeah. We clearly, clearly the goal is, and I've said this over and over again, and I know you agree with me, is that the, the, the audit that was done, the concept of performance, the what whatever strategic alignment was, those sorts of things don't necessarily say we don't want the surface. If we [2:32:50 PM] have a contractor that is not providing the service, we may very well want the service. And so that's why this talks in terms of making sure that the. We deal with it holistically and the council priorities are there. And in some instances there may be money goes to another provider in order to make. The example I gave the other day was with food for kids and that one might be failing and the other one pick it up. So we're going to need to have an appropriate amount of time to make those sorts of evaluations. But ultimately, we're going to have to have a recommendation from the manager based upon what the contracts do, what they were supposed to do, what they've indicated is a performance issue or what they've indicated is outside of strategic alignment, something like that. Thank you. Anything else on that? Okay, then, councilmember, I don't have any other ifc. Let me make sure I'm correct on that. I think that concludes all of the ifc S that were filed. So with that, I'll [2:33:52 PM] go back to councilmember Laine. >> Thank you mayor. I stopped before because before my time was up, because I wanted to eliminate some of the things, some of the questions and the things that I was going on the dais with at least one different example of why this is needed, why this change is needed. And I will share those examples with you offline during our next meeting. Acm Batista. I am skipping running through them now. Some of them are quite compelling. I will note that there are examples relating to mental mental health response, active fire incidents, and wildfire evacuation, and any form of staged evacuation that may be needed. I know that that last one is near and dear to your heart. Council member duchen, as it is to mine and council member Ellis and much of this dais, I cannot, I cannot leave, I cannot stop talking before I have shared that the only [2:34:54 PM] reason that this report is coming next month is because staff did not follow the unanimously passed guidance. I also would like to have the benefit of reading a report before I am in the second budget cycle in which I am bringing this forward, but I don't have that benefit, not because I haven't been deliberative and careful and thoughtful in how I have approached the process of bringing this I. Fc forward. I have been nothing but that. I have had countless meetings. I won't ask you to raise your hands now. Leadership, but you might want to ask in a leadership meeting at some point. City manager, how many of your staff have been in meetings with me on this topic individually to then within the last month, still be hearing comments from people unnamed who I hope by the end of this will not agree with this statement anymore, saying, but aren't we already doing this? [2:35:55 PM] The thing you're concerned about? No, we are not. And I have been working on this since the day I arrived because as you all know, there are very real problems in my district that this ifc is designed to solve for. And now I need to return to my. Thank you to my colleague, council member Siegel, because I've done my very best as a newcomer to the political game, as a newcomer to city politics, city dynamics, city council, all of these things, my district, we don't get down here that often. I came here, as I have said, to work for change and I mean change in city services that are more effective and more efficient for all of us. And I've worked my hardest. But you know what? My colleague, council member Siegel has a lot more experience with this than I do. And I knew that if I couldn't come up with sources of funding, I ran the risk of this getting delayed even more because despite very clear guidance to council that we wanted to report back by the [2:36:56 PM] end of last year, despite my many attempts to get this on the agenda of the public safety committee as vice chair. But no, we're not ready yet. Finally, to have a special called meeting about one month ago that I chaired then. Thank you very much for everything you do on public safety committee, my fellow chair and co-sponsor on this council member, Velasquez. Were it not for some of these things I've said for the dias, we wouldn't be getting a report next month. I feel quite confident because I have seen plenty of signs that a good faith. I won't say that I have seen plenty of signs that insufficient effort has been put forth to follow the guidance in that unanimously passed ifc. And so now I return to the difference between the ifc that I am now bringing forward. Thank you very much. With staff support, I do very much appreciate that shift. I'm glad it has come in the last couple days. But I will tell you this, I don't feel like I [2:37:58 PM] have been treated nor my co-sponsors, who previously included council member vela with respect to following the guidance that was offered in the ifc that I passed last year, I do not believe that sufficient effort has been put forward, and I can tell you unequivocally that lives are lost in my department, in my district over this. And I can also tell you that I believe we wouldn't be here today even talking about an ifc related to this that had staff support, were it not for councilmember Siegel, and were it not for all of you who have sat through this meeting for this long to get to the point that what is said about the joint emergency communications office or department and the amendment and what the funding will be and and how much we are suggesting that the ioc, with or without amendment that passes, will do. I thank you for coming, because it's challenging representing a district that is only outlying areas. I know the same [2:38:58 PM] experiences are happening that I give examples of from my district all around the outlying areas of the city. I actually have a few of them at this point. But you know what else I know? Even with me working in the most appropriate ways, and I know that what I'm doing right now may not be viewed as appropriate. But even with me, working in the most appropriate way is bringing my professional experience and demeanor and the way that I look and where I come from, this still would have failed were it not for the very many advocates who began to show up to public safety committee meetings asking for an update, who have shown up time and time again. And while I did not coordinate with those of you who are in the room whatsoever, when I put together this ifc. Please know that I appreciate you, I hear you, I appreciate you. It is time to move past the things that are buying us down in this city. Our job as [2:39:58 PM] council members is to have the tough conversations in public and transparently. And that does mean doing things differently within public safety. It means at least bare minimum, the ifc that is now supported. I look forward to seeing funding sources. But here's the thing. If I already feel borderline like I haven't been treated in good faith, I can't imagine how all these advocates feel, because it's one thing to stand up here and say that the outlying areas of our city haven't received the same focus and resources, regardless of the color of your skin or your religion, or any of the other things that distinguish or income or any of these things. It's one thing to say that, and it's another thing to hear the pain and the heartache and the suffering that comes from delaying action on these matters. Councilmember Siegel was not at all involved in my original ifc one year ago. [2:41:03 PM] But there's it's not a coincidence that we've ended up on the same side this time. And so I thank everyone in this room and outside of this room and all of my colleagues, every single one of you who have helped bring this through. I also thank staff because I know even though I just had some criticisms, I will say I am a big fan of our city manager and the many hires he has brought in, including ac and Battista and some others, as well as long standing staff who do very important work very effectively, like Mr. Van van eenoo and director Lang. However, I will say this this is the difference between my ifc and my my ifc combined with council member Siegel's amendment. The difference is whether we trust that the city will work in good faith for the next year and put sufficient early effort into [2:42:03 PM] this matter. That didn't happen last year. So that we do have the ability to make decisions fully informed and without delay, because these matters impact everyone in this city. And so thank you for allowing me to give a few comments. I again extend my thank you to my co-sponsors and mayor. I don't this was this was a legitimate oversight and I apologize. But thank you also for joining me last year in supporting this measure, because I know the work that you do to try to bring resources and comfort and improvement to this city. I believe this is an important part of that. So thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember duchen. >> Thanks, mayor. I just have a very quick question for either chief Davis or really request chief Davis or acm Batista on [2:43:03 PM] this. And while they're coming up there, I'll just ask it to save time. It's probably been 6 or 9 months since I read the Barry Dunn report. I'm just curious if between now and when we take this up next week, you all can share any information that's in there about this particular issue. >> The Barry Dunn recommendation does not recommend that we remove police from communications. >> Any. Well, can you send the report in any details? It's gotten there about context around this issue is really what the request is between now and next week. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Council member. All right. Members. I think that completes item number one. I'm inclined to just adjourn us. But but so that'll take us to [2:44:04 PM] items two, three and four obviously. And we have. So we have three items. We have three items that all relate to elections. And we have people that have signed up to speak. What I think I'll do is, is go ahead and have the speakers called. And then I want to, before we start on the items I want to have legal come up so we can talk about what we need to do because there are there are some legal aspects to what we need to do to call these elections, but we do have people signed up to speak. And so I'm going to turn to the city clerk and ask that you call those people mayor. >> My calling for all items or my. >> You know that let's do it that way because we have three items and there is one. I think I know how the council is going to want to go on the order we do that. There is a question about that. So why don't you call two, three and four? >> Okay. Thank you sir. Starting with item two, I have a remote speaker, Pamela Vance. [2:45:10 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor, city manager and council members. My name is Pamela hall Vance, and I'm calling in today as a member of the George Washington carver ambassadors. I want to remind this council that the citizen led bond election advisory task force, the equity department and the city's own professional staff all explicitly recommended that the carver museum expansion be added to a bond package. They recognize the outstanding promises to the citizens of Austin, who overwhelmingly passed prop C in 2022, which legally mandated the expansion of the George Washington carver museum cultural and genealogy center. With that in mind, I have a direct question for council member Christa Laine and council member Natasha harper-madison. Is it possible to amend proposition B to revise our spending and finally [2:46:11 PM] complete that 2022 voter approved mandate? The carver expansion is still waiting on the completion of phase one and phase two due to hyperinflation and massive spikes in local construction costs, that voter commerce sits stalled and underfunded in the architectural phase. While we fully understand and respect the need for your important new project, we cannot leave this historic east Austin infrastructure stalled in limbo due to cost inflation. Can we reallocate these funds so that the Hampton library, colony, park and carver expansion all received crucial support by adjusting the split to 10 million for Hampton, 15 million for colony park and 10 million to finish the carver. That way, we create a fair, revenue neutral solution under the existing $35 million cap. [2:47:12 PM] >> Thank you very much. Thank you. >> I will now go into in-person speakers for item two. Philip Fitzgerald, Barbara Scott. Barbara, are you here? >> Yes. >> Is Brian Dolezal here? Dolezal okay? Yes. Four minutes for miss Scott. Jeff Dickerson, Zenobia Joseph, Monica Guzman and bill bunch. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. Miss Scott will begin with you and you'll have four minutes. >> Good afternoon. I'm Barbara Scott. I'm representing the colony park neighborhood association. I'm here today to thank the council members who voted to include colony park library project and the proposed November 2026 bond, as well as those who voted to advance the resolution. This project represents more than a new building. It is an investment in the colony park community and the eastern [2:48:12 PM] crescent, bringing educational opportunities, access to technology and a gathering place for families and residents of all ages. It is a step toward addressing years of disinvestment, and we hope that items two, three and four on today's agenda will continue to move forward. I would also like to offer a special thank you to council member Natasha harper-madison. Your support for colony park has always meant so much because it comes from lived experience. You grew up in our community, attended our schools, and understood firsthand both our challenges and our potential. You have never forgotten where you came from, and you have never stopped advocating for the people of colony park and lakeside. You have made sure our voices have been heard, and you have fought to bring long overdue investments to our neighborhoods. Your support for this library will leave a [2:49:12 PM] legacy that will benefit our children, families, and future generations. Council member harper-madison, we want to thank you for your leadership, your partnership, and your unwavering commitment to our community. We wish you every success and every blessing on your next journey. Thank you council. >> Thank you, miss Scott. Miss Guzman, do you want to go ahead? >> Good afternoon. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza gio Austin. Vamos. Austin Garza resident leaders living in the rundberg area. A community with increasing urban heat and existing urban canopy deficit and limited access to walnut creek metropolitan pool have been advocating for a splash pad at the Garcia recreation center for almost four years. Four years. Over the past five months, they advocated at the bond advisory, election task force and parks board meetings, as well as sent emails to Austin parks and [2:50:14 PM] recreation April requesting updates. We received confirmation that April heard the residents. They agree the rundberg area is a priority. That extreme heat, urban canopy deficit and other factors make it a priority. Unfortunately, it is unclear if they agree that it is a priority now since they view it as new. Considering an aquatics facility such as a splash pad is an amenity from the original 2008 Gus Garcia vision plan almost 20 years ago, how can a P R consider it to be new director Aguirre, mayor Watson, mayor pro tem vela and council, we urge you to add this amenity, specifically a Gus Garcia splash pad to a prs extreme critical needs priorities for the Austin 2026 bond package. Thank you. [2:51:15 PM] >> Hi, my name is Philip Fitzgerald, district one. Sitting here all day, I find some of the conversation to be quite discouraging. When I look at the services that were cut to meet this budget, and we're told that we just don't have the money. And I understand, you know, money's tight, but we we always seem to be able to lock in higher raises for, for the police. We can't find money for the parks. So we have to have this bond election to support our parks. And I'm fully in favor of it because because our parks are a huge draw for our city and they get people outside. But the reason we're having to have this bond election is because we don't support our parks year after year. So the small cracks that you may see at a pool or a TRE falling down in the park is not addressed year after year. So ten years down the road, we have to do a major overhaul. So if we want to avoid these bond elections, then we should be funding these services year after year. But it also goes back to as as member duchen [2:52:16 PM] said, about priorities and what's been clear to me, because I come week after week and I hear people speak and I hear people advocate for for funding these services. What's clear to me is the priorities of the city council is not to fund these services. And in fact, a lot of you believe that the only reason you're up here is to advocate for business and to fund the police. And that's the way we're going to solve our problems, is just by giving more money to the police. So we splash them more money. We give them 5%, 6% raises. That's higher than inflation. That's higher than the 3.5% property tax increase. You know, every time we give them more and more increases, that's locked in by the state. We can't cut it. So we have to cut services year after year. And I think, frankly, a lot of y'all are okay with that. You want private businesses to step up and you're just going to divert our money to them. But what we're seeing year after year is those needs are not being met. You have to be more aggressive in your vision and aspire to do more. Thank you. [2:53:17 PM] >> Please. >> Good afternoon, mayor. Council members, I wonder if you heard how many times my jaw dropped on the table when I heard about spending reductions? None. Council members, you still have a spending problem and still have not learned the lessons of property. Council member duchen you supported an increase in tax rate. That is a permanent increase in the base tax rate. Council member Bella, I disagree with your spend spend, spend mentality. There is a reason the tra was soundly rejected by the majority of taxpayers. We cannot afford all the grand products, projects and visions that you like. It does not help low income, fixed income, unemployed with the affordability mantra that I keep hearing and reading about what you guys are doing doesn't [2:54:17 PM] address this issue. Let's talk about the gold bond and the 26th bond. Your co. Yes, it's $32 million. But let's be fiscally honest, the total repayment would probably be $50 million. Oh yeah. We forgot about the 18 to $22 million in bond interest payments that come out of the general fund. Taxpayers pay for that. The 295 million bond package is geared towards cip. This is a gold bond masquerading as a cip, because you guys did not put it in the budget at 4%. The total cost of this will be $428 million. Where does the 295 million come from? That's fiscal insanity. To use a popular phrase by many speakers. Why don't we flatten the [2:55:17 PM] spending budget? Thank you. >> Thank you sir. >> Mr. Dickinson, I also have you signed up for item three. Would you like to speak to item three? >> Mr. Dickerson. >> Would you like to speak on item three? >> Yeah, let me get my paper. >> While we wait for him to get his paperwork together. Miss Scott, I just wanted to say I. Of course, I had to use the restroom the moment that I. That somebody said something nice to me today, so I just really appreciate your heartfelt thank you. And I would just say boomerang, thank you very much for your leadership and your guidance and for the opportunity to work alongside you to do the work that we've gotten done so far. And it's just so far. >> Thank you. Council member harper-madison yes, please. Mr. Dickerson on item three. >> Jeff Dickerson, district five mayor, council members. City ordinances are written for [2:56:18 PM] the public, but many are written in a legal style. I made some difficult for ordinary residents to understand. Hereby adopted pursuant to as specify in incorporated in part of this. Really. This is not for the average citizen. And I'm talking about charter as well as ordinances that simplify this. This creates three problems. It reduces public understanding. Residents should not need legal training. It offers less transparency. It offers lower participation. If you guys are so concerned about wordiness of charters and length of charters, why can't you simplify these ordinances and what you say and what you provide for the public future ordinances? Proclamations, charters, you shorter citizens [2:57:18 PM] to find the technical terms, explain the legal action, explain actions before getting into legal jargon. Government documents should be precise, but they should be written so that people they serve can understand what is before them. Thank you, thank you sir. >> Thank you. >> For item four. Jeffrey Bowen, Jeff Dickerson, Susana Almanza, Luis Gonzalez, Zenobia Joseph, Monica Guzman, and bill bunch. >> Afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Mayor, council members. >> Jeffrey Bowen, district eight on item four. I just would like to remind everybody that we need to make sure that our that the language on these [2:58:20 PM] meets the secretary of state requirements. We want to make sure that they're very clear, concise. Hopefully, we don't want to go through the process that we went through last year. So just a just a friendly reminder to make sure that our ballot language and I have to also endorse what my colleague over here, Mr. Dickerson, just said about making them very clear so that people are understanding exactly what they're voting on. I just wanted to make sure that we're getting that word out. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for this time. >> Thank you. Mr. Mr. Bowen, please. >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson. Good afternoon, council members. My name is Luis Gonzalez, a resident of district ten and the current chair of the independent citizens redistricting commission. Before I begin my written testimony, I just want to commend everyone today for their time and their testimony. This is how democracy works and the reason why I applied to be on the icrci support keeping the a P D budget flat and let's [2:59:20 PM] please prioritize support for mental health, food security and our neighbors. Expressing experiencing homelessness as established by the city charter, the icrc has the the sole legal standing to create and adopt maps for our city council districts while maintaining strict Independence from influence by city council. The city council will vote to approve a proposed amendment to the city charter that would directly impact the work of the icrc and will help the next group of commissioners in 2031 accomplish their goal of producing a new map that prioritizes >> The equal representation resident input and takes into consideration the rapid growth our our city has experienced over the last decade. Well, this amendment may appear small today. The proposed new city charter language will define independent as free from city council influence, though free to utilize necessary city resources. The language will specify an effective date for future maps. The new language will increase the number of qualified applicants eligible to serve on the commission, and clarify the method and timing for filling vacancies. These changes appear minor, but speaking from direct experience, they will provide efficiency [3:00:21 PM] and clarity to future commissioners as they focus on the work of redistricting and prioritizing public testimony. Rather than worry about administrative red tape. While I have seen concerns that this proposed charter amendment will change the definitions and rules that keep our commission independent, I would say as someone who helped draft the proposed amendment language, that is not its intention. The icrc is and should always remain independent with a capital I hour. But the fact is that our meeting just last week would not have been possible without staff support, city expertise and communication. And for one clarification, a student commission, a student commissioner is already a requirement for the icrc. However, clarifying eligibility eligibility language is a good thing. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> Thank you mayor council, I'm Zenobia Joseph. I just wanted to mention, as it relates to the independent redistricting citizens commission or committee, I just wanted to call to your attention that when this committee met [3:01:23 PM] previously, the chair had some problems and that was in the news. And so I'm not quite sure why you would amend the guidelines to ensure that the chair is able to speak to staff off the record. I know miss Greenberg gave you testimony as well in this regard, and I would also ask you to recognize it is problematic that you would not have the rules that govern the work that you do in the charter. And so it is difficult to trust the work that you do. As you are well aware, whether we're talking about the bond or whether we're talking about the budget. And so I would ask you to be transparent and to recognize the need to ensure that that does not change. And so that is my opposition. I did want to tell you, however, as it related to some of the opaque decisions that you've made, I would just give you the example of the marshaling yard. For example, we were told that that was an emergency temporary solution back in 2023. Now it's permanent as it relates to the [3:02:23 PM] vision zero. I mentioned that before. The city manager said that it wasn't simply a policy, but in fact it is. And you've not used the data. You've been told that in 2023, 2026, and here we are today. And so it is difficult to understand why you would want to have more leniency when we, the taxpayers, don't even know what you're doing now. And so that is my opposition. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> You're welcome. >> Mr. Dickerson. >> Jeff Dickerson, district five. Why are we throwing up more barriers and less protection for current petition bringers? Why was the wording changed from petition? Generally proceed to the next election by state law, till they must wait until the next November election? The impact of this is longer delays, fewer elections, longer waits for [3:03:24 PM] voters to decide. Citizen petition. This is an unnecessary barrier. There's no justification, reason or evidence for doing this. The other thing is campaign reimbursements, the original restriction said office holders should not accept or solicit political contributions while in office. However, somebody changed the wording and minced several things. In here. They mix campaign debt reimbursement, reimbursement of personal campaign spending, office accounts and future campaign fundraising altogether to make this obtuse. It is not understandable by the average voter. This amendment also removes the barrier of accepting political contributions in the current and create a pathway for office holders to raise money for unpaid campaign future expenses. [3:04:27 PM] This is unethical and this should be reviewed, looked at again, and should be retained. Back to the original wording is don't fundraise while you're in office. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers for these items have been called. >> Okay. Thank you very much, members. All the people that have signed up on items two, three and four have now had an opportunity to speak. I'm going to ask legal staff to come up so that we can deal with a couple of items and get some clarity on a couple of things before we go to taking motions and discussion. And the first thing that I want to ask about is whether there are any legal requirements on how these items are supposed to appear on the ballot, and whether legal staff has looked at that from the perspective of how we organize those items on the ballot. >> Sure. Good afternoon, >> Mayor, council members, I'm [3:05:27 PM] Neil Falgout, deputy city attorney. I have wajiha Rizvi, assistant city attorney, and Matt Hines, our outside bond counsel, who's been working with us on the bond matters. Mayor, you're correct. There is a new law that went into effect after the 89th legislature, sb 506, and that legislation requires that ballot propositions like the bond proposals and the charter amendment proposals, be submitted to the voters with quotes such definiteness, certainty and facial neutrality that the voters will not be misled. And so we've worked very diligently to draft these amendments and the ballot language in a way that the voters can understand, while also meeting the legal requirements that the ballot language reflect what is actually being amended in the charter. >> Along those lines, so that no one. Have you looked at a [3:06:29 PM] mechanism for placing items on the ballot and the order? They might appear on the ballot, so no one can come in and say, oh, you you didn't have a good reason for doing it that way. You manipulated it, or you're acting in a political way or anything like that. You have a a recommendation in that regard. >> Yes, mayor. So like I said, the the propositions have to be presented neutrally. And again, we believe that the order that they are presented in also has to be neutrally just for point of interest. There are ten ballot propositions that are being presented. That means there would be about 3.6 million different variations on how they get presented to the voters. So when you calculate that all out. So we have to settle on one. And the one that we have settled on for the charter amendments is to just list them in the way that they appear in the charter, with the final amendment being the [3:07:30 PM] non-substantive edits to the entire charter. >> So, in other words, the first item that we would put on in terms of the charter amendments would be something that would appear highest in the charter. If you were reading the charter, the second would be the second, and we'd go that way. >> That's correct. And so that precedes all through the charter amendments in that order, like I said, with the last one being the non-substantive changes. >> Now, that would include not only those that were approved last week that came from the charter commission or a staff recommendation, but that would also be the petition, correct? >> Yes. The the petition item is listed in the order that it also would. >> Appear appear in the charter. >> Correct? >> Okay. Thank you. Does the council have any discretion? We've got three items on the agenda today that we will vote on to determine whether we're going to put that on the ballot. But does the council have any discretion in what order those [3:08:32 PM] go on the ballot? >> Yes, they do, with the caveat that the election for council offices has to be first. After that, you can either do the bond or the charter amendments for purposes of not misleading the voters. We recommend putting the bond propositions together and then the charter amendment propositions together. >> Okay, so I wat to say this back just to make sure we're right or that I understand we have three election items. We are required to put the election for council members first. Correct. Then we have discretion. But the recommendation of council is by council, I mean legal counsel is that we go with the bond propositions first and then the charter propositions. >> I think you could either do the bond propositions first or [3:09:32 PM] second, but we recommend. >> First or second after the election officials, correct? >> Yes, mayor. >> Yeah. But you're making a recommendation. Yes. Okay. Fair enough. Now, on the the determination of letters, if we go with the bond proposition. Well, let me ask it this way. We made it. We know, and we're reminded frequently during days like today, we made it all the way to Q and and so as I learned it, the next letter is R, correct. Then there may be dispute about that. Now, bone. Bone will dispute that. But we finally got bone to agree. So that that good. So the next letter is R. However it's my understanding that if you have a certain number you're allowed to start over. Would you describe that. >> Yes. So the next letter in the alphabet alphabet available to us is R between R and Z. [3:10:33 PM] There are nine letters. We have ten ballot propositions. So we could either do R through Z and then double a. Or we could just start at the beginning of the alphabet again. >> So the. So our rules do allow us. If you're going to go past Z you can just start over again. >> Well the city code says that if there are more propositions than letters remaining in the alphabet, then you go back to a. >> Got it? Okay. The ordinance that's been provided in our backup, it has blank spaces for all the letters. So why'd you do it that way? >> Yes, mayor. Because we wanted to allow council to have the flexibility to decide which which order. The bond and charter amendments wanted. You wanted them to go in. >> Okay. Members. Council member Siegel. Thank you, mayor, [3:11:35 PM] and I appreciate the back and forth a lot. And I just wanted to kind of subject my my motion to the same scrutiny. And so colleagues, I, I before the mayor posted his motion, I posted a motion that kind of presented a way to organize the letters for the ballot measures. And basically, I proposed that we would present the ballot measures to the voters in three chunks. First, we would list the spending items, the two proposed bonds. Second, we would present the city initiated charter amendments as a chunk. Then third, we would present the petition initiated charter amendment. And so my my understanding was this would also be consistent with state law that it's with definiteness, certainty and facial neutrality. And I also believed it would avoid voter confusion by not mixing. In the petition initiated charter amendment with the city initiated charter amendment. And I want to ask Mr. Gallagher the same question. Do you think that is a facially neutral way to present the [3:12:37 PM] ballot measures. >> Council member, as you have laid it out, I believe that would be a defensible, facially neutral manner. >> Thank you. Mayor. All right. So with that, what I'm going to ask us to do is go to the items unless somebody else has a question and I. Okay. We'll go to the items. And the legal staff is recommending that we put the bond propositions before we put the charter provisions. Unless there's disagreement on that, then we will go to item two. If there's some disagreement, I want to hear about that because we might go ahead and take up item four first. Fair enough. What's your question? >> When we vote on item four, are we fighting? Excuse me, are we voting one by one or are we voting for the whole. >> We're voting for the. We have a single ordinance to call [3:13:38 PM] the special election. However, the motion that I will ask for is that we get. Give guidance to legal staff on what the lettering will be. So, for example, if we go. If if the council. The city council is of the opinion, we go with the bond propositions first. I guess we have two questions. Question one is, do we want to start with R or do we want to start with a? And then we would. If we. If we start with a, for example, the bond propositions would be a and B, then that would take us when we get to item four. That would take us to that. And we would. We would need to give guidance about the order we go. If we follow the legal recommendation that they've they've offered to us, it would be see through, I guess. J and so I would ask that we do that as part of the motion so that when they start [3:14:40 PM] drafting things, they'll be able to do it. But it's just today is just a vote on approving the ordinance, calling the election. >> Thank you for. >> That clarification, >> Mayor, if I may, I think we would like to have council adopt the ordinance ordering the general election for council offices first, so that then we can move on to the proposition ordinances, the two proposition ordinances. >> Okay. Although we're legally required to do that anyway regardless. And y'all, y'all are the ones that wrote the agenda. Just pointing that out. Okay. All right. Well, he's edited his own agenda. So now we're on item number three. Item number three is to approve an ordinance ordering a general election to be held in the city of Austin on November 3rd, 2026, for the purpose of electing city council members for district one. District three. District five. District eight [3:15:40 PM] and district nine. And I'll note single member districts for those districts and then providing for the conduct of the general election, authorizing the city clerk to enter into joint election agreements with other local political subdivisions as may be necessary for the orderly conduct of the election and declaring an emergency. That being the case, you have something else you want to add? Okay. Is there a motion? Council member Siegel moves approval. It is seconded by council member duchen. Is there discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Item number three is adopted unanimously. Now that will take us back unless I hear. I hear dissent and we'll have a discussion about it. We'll go back to item number two because this will be to put item number two on the agenda, which is the bond, the general obligation bond election and the motion that I. [3:16:40 PM] Well, I'll ask for a motion. Y'all can modify it if you want to. The motion would be to approve an ordinance ordering a general obligation bond election to be held on November 3rd, 2026 in the city of Austin, Texas, on a proposed bond issue for parks and recreation and library improvements. The funding would be. Debt service on the general obligation bond programs and be funded through an annual property tax levy, and the items would be listed on the agenda as item a and item B. I'm not on the agenda on the ballot items a and item B. Council member Siegel moves approval at a second by councilmember harper-madison. Is there discussion with regard to that motion? >> Mayor, may I please. I would assume it's following the order that's presented in the ordinance with a being the parks and B being. >> That that is the. My assumption as well, since that's the way we've listed it in the ordinance. But I'll ask [3:17:40 PM] for council if anybody on city council has dispute about that item a would be parks item B would be library improvements. There being no further discussion. Without objection, item number two is adopted unanimously. That will now take us to item number four. For clarity purposes, I'll read what the motion will be and provide a recommendation. And then when we get the motion, we'll know whether we have that motion. The motion would be to approve an ordinance ordering a special election to be held in the city of Austin on November 3rd, 2026, to submit to the voters proposed charter amendments, including a citizen initiated charter amendment certified sufficient on June 22nd, 2026, providing for the conduct of the special election, authorizing the city clerk to enter into joint election agreements with other local political subdivisions as may be necessary for the orderly conduct of the election and [3:18:41 PM] declaring an emergency. The funding it would funding is available in the fiscal year 2025 2026. Operating budget of the city clerk. The motion would be to approve that ordinance with the assignment of the charter amendment proposition letters in the following manner. Proposition C through proposition J with. Based upon the recommendation of legal staff, is there a motion motions made by council member harper-madison. Is there a second seconded by the mayor pro tem is there discussion on the motion? Council member Siegel. I guess. >> Mayor, I would prefer that we move forward. Consistent with the motion I filed, that the city amendments be placed first and then the citizen initiated amendment be placed after that. >> My only concern about. I have a number of concerns about that, but one of the concerns I have about that is that I think if a petition, whether I agree with the petition or not, and [3:19:43 PM] before we vote, I'll say I don't agree with that petition. And I have publicly said I don't agree with the petition. But if the citizens bring us a petition, I'm not sure we should relegate the citizens petition to something. After what the council has decided to put on the ballot. With that being said, is there any further discussion? The motion has been made and seconded. The motion would be to approve the ordinance providing the letters proposition C through proposition J, and those would be in the order that has been recommended by our legal counsel. There being no further discussion. Without objection, the motion is adopted. Councilmember Siegel, do you want to be shown voting? Council member Siegel vote so it passes unanimously. Members, first of all, did we cover everything that you guys need covered? >> Yes, mayor. >> Thank you. Good. Thank you. Appreciate all the thought and time you've put into this. And thank you very much, members. [3:20:45 PM] We moved quickly to these items and probably did not say enough of a thank you to our professional financial staff. I saw them leave, but I want them to know that we really do appreciate them, particularly when it comes to items like we first discussed, where we're dealing with that $4.7 million, and they put such creativity and innovation into helping us get to where we wanted to get in a variety of ways that appear to be in conflict. And they figured out a way to help us with that. And I appreciate all the time they gave me in those discussions so that we could get to that point. So I want to say thank you to them. That being said, there's no further business to come before the Austin city council at this meeting of the Austin city council. We will meet again on Wednesday, August 12th, Thursday, August 13th, and Friday, August 14th that we will conduct another public hearing. We will have council discussion and we will vote on the budget. At that time. There [3:21:47 PM] being no further business to come before the Austin city council at this meeting of the Austin city council. Without objection, the Austin city council is adjourned at 3:21 P.M. Thursday, August 6th. Thank you very much, council. Thank you for all the members of the public that attended. >>