City Council Budget Adoption Meeting Transcript – 8/12/2026 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 8/12/2026 6:00:00AM Original Air Date: 8/12/2026 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [10:00:05 AM] Well good morning, everybody. It is 10 o clock in the morning on August 12, 2026 and I will call to order this Austin city council budget meeting. Typically, when we start these meetings, I run through what the schedule is going to be. And we finally made it to today. Which is the first day that we will have the opportunity to vote on the actual budget. Let me tell you how we're going to operate. And I posted it on theessage board, but if somebody hadn't seen it, let me be clear. What we're going to do today is the first thing we're going to do is we're going to run through a number of public hearings, items one through six on the agenda are public hearings. We will open the public hearings, we will hear from people, and then we will close the public hearings. We will then go to the next set of. We're going to go to the next set of items. And as I indicated on the message board, we will take those items up, sort of like a consent agenda. When we get to the end of everything, including the amendments from [10:01:05 AM] staff and the amendments, proposed amendments from council, then we will recess and we will also have a moment. We'll go to Austin housing finance corporation board of directors meeting and the Miller local government corporation meeting. We will, at the. Just by way of advice on this, what we will do is when we have finished the amendments, we will take a short recess so that the financial staff will be able to do. Make sure the math, maths and we will come back and. And look at how that plays out to see if we need to do any. And we probably will if I anticipate this right, some adjustments in that regard, the way we will vote today. Just again, I want to be really clear, will be first vote we will take today after we've done all the listening, we'll be item number seven. Then we'll go to item number six, [10:02:06 AM] eight, nine, ten, 111. Then we will have the consent agenda as I've described it, W will be items 12 through 22. So treat that folks. Treat those like the consent agenda. And if you have an item you want to pull from that consent agenda, we will do that. And I anticipate that that will happen. Then we will I'm not going to adjourn the meeting at that point in time, even if everything's done, I'm going to recess the meeting so that we can have the a board meeting and the Miller board meeting, and then we will come back. And the only reason I'm doing that is in case somebody thinks of something while we're doing those board meetings, I just want to make sure we've crossed T's and dotted eyes and and can take care of it. If we can take care of it today and not need to come back if if we need to come back, it's no big deal. But you get what I'm saying. So with that members, it's unless there's questions. Yes. [10:03:07 AM] Councilmember alter. >> I just have one question for the public's edification on the website. Like I'm looking at item seven, which I believe is the budget. I'm just wondering where the public can find all the amendments. And I, I guess just the amendments so that they can speak to the most recent versions. >> Mr. Benigno, help us out. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. Ed Benigno chief financial officer those are the final compilation is being handled right now. There was some changes even this morning, but it'll be posted very, very soon. >> Okay, good. Thank you. All right. Unless there's other questions or comments. Yes. Councilmember Fuentes. >> Along the same lines, will around what time will we receive an updated packet? I assume in the next few hours. Will council receive the updated packet with the updated amendments? >> I'm sorry. Which the packet beyond the packet of. [10:04:08 AM] >> The packet of amendments or ifcs the the updated version. When do you. >> Think that to you. At the same time it's posted to the to the website. >> And you think that's any time now? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Well good morning everybody. It's it's a big day. So what I'lloo now is we will go to item number one. Item number one is a tax rate hearing. Without objection we will open the public hearing on agenda item number one. The proposed property which is the ad valorem tax rate of the city of Austin. There being no objection, the public hearing is now open, and I will turn to our city clerk to call folks to talk to us. >> Thank you, mayor, for item one, Jen Powell, Valerie Menard, ssica Martinez, Kate Graziani, and Barry Jones. Please come on down and take a seat in an open desk. And remember to state your name when you begin speaking. >> Please begin. Whenever [10:05:09 AM] you're ready, just state your name. >> All right. Good morning. My name is Jennifer Palermo. Shout out to zo Laine and Michelle Ramos as well. I can tell by everything I've seen over the last couple of months as we worked on the budget, that you guys are not only listening, but you're actually acting on what the public is saying. So first and foremost, thank you so much. This is that for that reason, today is just a reminder. It's just a reminder to continue funding the safe alliance, to continue contracting with them, to support the cib, to keep the police budget flat for this year. And that includes paying special attention to the items that have been been proposed by Ellis, especially item number 17 listed here today in a further motion to expand that budget, please continue to listen to the public and say no to those items. Finish moving the call center. I know you all want it. Just a reminder to finish up doing it. And then also civilian oversight [10:06:09 AM] committee. You know, the recent case of Antonio Williams is going on. We should continue to push for an actual review of that case by civilian oversight and to give civilian oversight the teeth to do something about it. I know that's new, but it's the next step in the process. When police have done something good, they should have the ability to commend the police, and when they've done something inapprate, they should have some sort of economic sanctioning power or to force further training, for example, on suicide by cop. And with all of that, I was happy to take a moment before going over to Austin pets alive to speak to you guys, to remind you to ank you, to acknowledge you, and just to let you know once again. And we've got 20s left. So I just want to invite everyone to just take one deep, mindful breath because you deserve it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Appreciate you being here. Please just state your name for the record. >> Jessica Martinez. Great. [10:07:10 AM] Good morning, mayor and council members, and I thank you for allowing me to opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Jessica. I work with the sickle cell association of Texas Marc Thomas foundation. I've been working there for the past ten years. I'm here to speak on behalf of individuals and families living with sickle cell disease in central Texas, and to emphasize the importance of continuing and strengthening the social service and support in this community. For the past 29 years, the Marc Thomas foundation has been a trusted resource for individuals and families affected by sickle cell dissese. For nearly three decades, the organization has provided more than just services. It has provided education, advocacy, resources, guidance, and most itantly, a see of community for families who are often navigating an incredibly challenging disease. Sickle cell affects much more than a person's physical health. It can impact a child's education and parents, parents ability to work, and the family's financial stability, mental emotional well-being, and the ability to navigate medical and social system systems. Families [10:08:11 AM] and support need the a strong support system beyond the hospital and doctor's office. That is why social services are so important in the community that we're in. When funding is available, organizations like the Marc Thomas foundation can help families connect to resources, understand their options, advocate for themselves, and feel less alone, and managing the challenges that come with sickle cell disease. So today I, I respectfully ask the council not to defund the Marc Thomas foundation program, but instead increase the funding so that the organization can continue meeting the needs of this community and reaching even more families. Investing in these services is an investment in healthier families, stronger communities, and a better quality of life for people living with sickle cell disease. I ask that we show that we show up for these families and individuals, and for the families that we serve here in this community. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Continue with item one. Puma. Basa. Hannah. Daphne. Lovett. [10:09:13 AM] Grissom, Susan. Spataro. Nadia. Barbo, please come on down. If your name has been called. >> If you don't mind, we'll start with you. And THA you. >> Susan Spataro, district eight and I have a few very brief comments. First of all, I appreciate council member duchen proposal. I like the fact that it's what families do and that is you look look at your budget. You look at the money coming in, decide what you have to have and those things that maybe you could do without. So I really think that is a fine proposal. Okay. Secondly, I am very concerned because legislators coming to town, we need to remember that and remember when in fact, the legislature and their people felt unsafe in Austin, Texas, dps came in to maintain safety [10:10:15 AM] there. They're coming in a couple of months. So safety should be big, big for us. The third thing I'm very concerned with at this point with the social service agencies, is that article three, section 52 of the constitution, prohibits local governments from giving gifts. If you are not sending out procurements, there's not a deliverable. Or if there is, you're ignoring it. They're getting paid before that. Or anyway, I think that's in violation of the constitutn. I think one of the things that needs to be done is you need to get that money back. If you've paid money for no services, we need the money back or stop that contract right away. Stop paying until they provide the services. And if they do, neither do not do business with them. Again, we cannot give gifts even though it may be something that you know, we think is not a bad idea as as a community, this budget to me [10:11:17 AM] looks like another attack on public safety. I'm sorry. And the police and I don't know why we would do that. Continuing to say our community is safer is a joke. So I hope you will consider that for your constituents. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Yes, ma'am. >> My name is Nadia Barbo. I'm with moms demand action. I want to thank councilmember Fuentes as well as my own council member, harper-madison, for coauthoring an amendment to the budget to remove the 26% cut to CVI funding in the social services contracts, and to allocate that $4.7 million back into those groups that are doing incredible work for community safety. So thank you for the work you've been doing these last few weeks and listening to our feedback. Want to call on the entire council to fund the full sib budget, as many organizations and residents have given input there, and that those efforts [10:12:17 AM] are the that investment will be valuable. Moms demand action, in case people don't know, is a national member nonprofit. We have lots of members here in Austin and chapters all over the country, which supports evidence based strategies to reduce gun violence, community violence intervention. CVI is a proven, evidence based strategy and an investment that cities all over the country are using to pull down our rates of gun violence in the country. These numbers that we've seen in Austin prove that the amendment that you are, I think, posed to approve today works homicides were at a 90 in 2021 here in Austin and dropped to 55 last year in 2025. That was based on the investments that we had been making for multiple years. One homicide can cost up to $2 million. And so by reducing that, we're actually helping our overall budget. So I just want to thank you for what [10:13:18 AM] you're doing, and good luck for the rest of today. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Annette price, Ben zohaib, Mary Qureshi, Henry sands. >> Hello. My name is Ben sutterby, mayor and council. I wanted to speak to on this item to add some context to our conversations today. I know this is sometimes gets very in the weeds about Texas property tax code. The the rates that they allow. I think it's a good starting point to realize that the state has already artificially tied your hands behind your back. They have imposed austerity on local governments all across the state. And we're seeing the effects. So my first ask is not to further that. Don't tie the [10:14:20 AM] other hand behind your back. Use the full extent of your authority to move resources within our city. To my second point, the dollars that we spend on our social services and prevention help us save money. I heard them earlier mischaracterize as gifts. That is such a short sighted view that I respectfully disagree with. We know that an ounce of prevention beats a pound of cure, and keeping people housed is a lot cheaper than helping people get off the street and rehouse them. Feeding kids early on and helping them access education leads to workers in our city later on who are grown ups, who are aiding in all the collective work that we do here. And ultimately, I'd like to propose an idea of approaching this with this mindset. Someone could, you know, say somebody who drives a cab could think that they save money by skipping oil changes, and maybe [10:15:21 AM] in the short run they might, but they would be damaging the very tool that they use to keep the economic, their their economic livelihood alive. And that is our economic engine in our city. When we take care of people, that helps our city thrive. And when we starve people by denying them the resources, by not fully funding our community investment budget, we would damage our economic engine. >> Thank you, Mr. Zenobia. >> Mayor, that's all the speakers for item one. >> Thank you. We appreciate people showing up. Those are all the people that have been signed up for item number one. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number. >> For item number one. And I didn't hear my name called. I apologize for interrupting. >> Well, what is your name? I'm sorry. What is your name? >> My name is Hannah. Daphne Lovett. Grissom. >> Your name was called. >> I did not hear it, sir. Maybe it was. >> Well, I did, so if you want to come forward and speak [10:16:21 AM] instead of standing in the back of the room and speaking, we'll listen to you. >> Sure. Is this it? >> Sure. A for. >> Profit criminal justice system is legalized slavery. >> Appreciate your being here. That does conclude all the LE that have signed up to speak on item number one. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number one. The public hearing is now closed. Goodbye. Thank you. That will take us to item number two, which is also a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number two, which is related to the proposed rate and fee changes for Austin resource recovery. Without objection, the public hearing is now open on item number two, and I'll turn to the city clerk. >> For item two, Adrian Macias, Valerie Minard, Susana Almanza. >> Please come forward if your name has been called. [10:17:43 AM] Welcome, miss Almanza, you have the microphone. >> Good morning, mayor and city council members. I'm Susana Almanza with poder. Poder opposes all increases for Austin recovery. Austin water, Austin drainage charge and Austin energy Y Austin residents P pay incrases for everyday services. When the city of Austin will provide $1.6 billion through 80% contribution of city tax increments to endeavor real estate and Amazon billionaire, the $1.6 billion city tax increment mean shifting costs away from landowners to the public. Again, we oppose increases in our services while subsidizing millionaires and billionaires. Thank you. >> Thank you might want to hang on because you signed up on miss Almanza. You've also signed up on number three. We're getting ready to open the public hearing on that. >> So that's the same. >> For all. Good deal. Thank you very much. >> That is all. Speakers for [10:18:44 AM] item two. Mayor. >> Thank you members. That concludes all the speakers on item number two. So without objection, we will close the public Hearin item number two. And the public hearing is now closed. We will go to item number three. Without objection. We will open the public hearing on item number three, which is the proposed drainage charge rate change for the watershed protection department. The public hearing is now open on agenda item number three. And I'll turn to the city clerk. >> Item three Adrian Macias, Valerie Menard, Susana Almanza. >> Miss Almanza just told us she wasn't speaking on three because the comntnts she made on item two, she wants us to take into consideration for that as well. All right. I don't see anyone coming forward. So that concludes all the speakers on item number three members. Without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number three. And the public hearing is now closed. On item number three. We'll go to agenda item number four, which will for agenda ite number four, which is the proposed rate and fee changes for Austin water. The public hearing is now open, and I'll turn to the city clerk. [10:19:45 AM] >> For item four, Adrian Macias, Valerie Menard, Susana Almanza. >> Miss amanii is already spoken to us on this. So without. There's no one coming forward to speak at the public hearing on item number four. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number four. And the public hearing is now closed on item number four, members. That will take us to item number five, which is the proposed rate and fee changes for Austin energy. Without objection, we will open the public hearing. This is also a public hearing. Open the public hearing on item number five. There being no objection, the public hearing is now opened on item number five, and I will turn to the city clerk. >> Thank you. Mayor. I have a remote speaker, kaiba white. >> Miss white. >> Hello. >> My name kaiba white, and I'm speaking on behalf of public citizen's Texas office. [10:20:47 AM] I have spoken to you before about the Austin energy rate increase request for another 5% rate increase, which we expect to be followed by subsequent requests for the next four years. We are asking you respectfully, to please reject that element of the rate changes for Austin energy. We're hold off on increasing rates until after the utility has gone through a complete rate review and rate case process that allows customers of all types to engage with the utility and the information provided that backs up that request for increasing rates. I'm sure that you have all seen that governor Abbott is saying that he is prioritizing a opening up of not just Austin energy, but other city owned utilities to competition within the state of Texas. This is something that we are extremely concerned about, and we would urge you to take that into consideration. A demonstration that the city council is taking [10:21:47 AM] its regulatory responsibility seriously will help fight off that serious threat at the legislature. And that threat is, you know, very serious, not just for Austin energy, but for city finances. As you know, any sort of degrading of Austin energy's market share, which would almost certainly happen if there was competition, will result in a reduced revenue to the city from Austin energy. I'll leave it at there because you've heard from me before on this, but I really hope that you'll take this seriously. And it's just a pause. It doesn't mean that Austin energy won't get a rate increase, it just means that they need to wait until next year until after they've done a rate case. Thankyou very much. >> Thank you. >> Moving over to in person for item five, Marian Sanchez, Adrian Macias, Valerie Menard, Susana Almanza. >> Miss Almanza is waiving your GHT to speak on this. Welcome. Please just state your name for [10:22:47 AM] the record. >> Good morning, city council. My name is Marian Sanchez. On behalf of poder, I'm here today to express community concerns regarding yet another 5% rate increase, as proposed by Austin energy this past may. You voted for the city to invest in an expensive, harmful and polluting natural gas Peaker plant in the name of reliability and affordability. Since then, Austin's energy Austin energy's projected capital expenses for power generation have now increased by approximately $1.33 billion for 2026 to 2030, at a time when many city departments and crucial programs are facing critical budget cuts, Austin energy customers are now being expected to help pick up this unjustifiable check after last year's 5% increase and the 2% increase from the year before. I ask you to consider the communities that are already fighting to survive Austin's ever increasing cost of living and will no doubt be disproportionately impacted by these continued rate hikes. I ask that you reject Austin energy's proposed rate increase. [10:23:49 AM] The city and Austin energy should prioritize delivering clean, reliable and affordable energy and continue to implement and expand upon renewable solar energy technologies that are readily available, cost effective and truly dependable. Thank you for your time and consideration. >> Thank you mayor. >> That's all speakers for item five members. >> As you've heard, that's all the speakers and the public hearing on item number five related to the proposed rate and fee changes for Austin energy. Without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number five. The public hearing is now closed. We'll now go to agenda item number six, which is a public hearing on the proposed fee fines and other charges for the city of Austin. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number six and the public hearing is now open. I will turn to the city clerk. >> For item six. Adrian Macias, Valerie Menard, Susana Almanza. >> Everyone's been called. I don't see anyone coming forward. So without objection, we will [10:24:49 AM] close the public hearing on item number six. Members. The public hearing is now closed on item number six. As I indicated, we will now take public comments for all other items that are on the council agenda at this time, and that were not included as part of a public hearing item. Those items, the remaining items that we have are items seven through 22. So with that, we will now go as we do ordinarily at a council meeting. It will treat this as sort of a consent agenda and we will go through. She will the clerk's office will call speakers on each item individually, but we will go through item seven through 22 and I'll turn to the city clerk. >> Thank you, mayor, for item seven. I have a couple speakers requng Spanish translation. I'll start with them. Valentina Celestino. >> Adelante. Valentina. >> Okay. >> Well. [10:25:53 AM] >> Okay. Buenos dias. MI nombre es Valentina. Celestino. >> Good morning. >> El la ayuda. Aqui Esta Santa Cecilia. Porque. >> Mas alto, por favor. >> Okay. Quiero agradecer infinitamente a a todos los Gaar Han hecho posible a porque Han ayudado tantos. Estos momentos no no tenido para lo mas bajo la Renta el para los. [10:26:57 AM] Porque posible todo eso para ayudar a nuestros hijos aqui. Okay con Su escuela. >> La pausa, por favor. Thank you for helping us and for giving me this, this help this support with the grant because it helps our families a lot to pay rent, to pay bills, to pay the food for my children. Siegel. Por favor. >> Okay. Por el. El trabajo tan grande hacen ustedes de poder llevar a casulo a tantas familias. Lo necesitamos a. No hay palabras para agradecer tanta. You do. >> I would like to congratulate [10:27:58 AM] you and thank you for the immense work that you do, because this gives not just support but emotional support to so many families. And I cannot thank you enough for all the all your kindness. Algo mas. >> Okay. I lo posible para estos fondos sigan Deegan ayudando a tantas Caminos no necesitan. >> And let's make it possible to continue helping as many families as possible. >> Todo muchisimas. Gracias. >> This is everything. Thank you very much. >> Gracias. Thank you. >> Aurelio Rodas. >> De la. >> Unos dias. Buenos dias. [10:29:02 AM] >> Good morning. My name is Alyssa Rojas. >> Estoy aqui para la recomendacion de financiero de establecida estabilizacion familiar para familias nuevas. >> I'm here to support the budget recommendation from dawa to support the the financing, the grants for family stabilization for families, for new families. >> Anteriormente. We Una de las en lo cual fue de gran ayuda en momentos dificiles. >> I'm here to give my testimony that I received these payments from the grant, and it was a great help in difficult moments. >> Oh. Ahora result Aun mas necesario por la incertidumbre affronta la comunidad trabajadora. >> Now is even more imptant [10:30:03 AM] given the uncertainty that the working community is facing. >> Como los costs de los alimentos, el combustible elevados. >> As you all know, the cost of food and gas is extremely expensive right now. >> Los empleados de limpieza Pero no recibido ninguna aumento en el equidad. >> I have two cleaning jobs, but I have not received any increase, so there's no equity. >> Trabajadora con cuatro simplemente no es suficiente. >> I'm a working mom with four children and simply my salary is not enough. >> Una vez mas. Familia. >> For this reason, I want you to support again the family stabilization grant. [10:31:06 AM] >> Para. Familias en tiempos de incertidumbre. >> So you can support new families in these uncertain times. >> Beneficio. Muchas gracias. >> I help you with all my heart that you consider this benefit. Thank you very much. >> Gracias. Thank you. >> Gracias. >> We have one person in person that has requested Spanish interpretation. Obdulia. Aniceto. >> Obdulia. Aniceto. >> Obdulia. Aniceto. >> I don't think she. >> She's not. >> I haven't heard from her. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Continuing on in person for item seven, I have Jen Powell, I have Aly. Sorry. Haley. Easley. Haley, are you here? Is Sabrina Shaw here? >> If your name has been called, [10:32:07 AM] please come forward. >> Sabrina Shaw. Lucy Nguyen. Okay, then Haley will have four minutes and ten dawa Brewster. >> Is Haley Easley here? Please come forward. >> Good morning. I'm the executive director of the Austin Asian community health initiative. My name is Haley Easley. Before I start, I just want to clear up the name because it confuses people. Our legal name is the Asian American resource center, inc. We're a nonprofit different than the organization of the city of city's Asian American resource center. So today I'm asking your vote on council council member lane's amendment. It restores $61,000 in ongoing funding for our two Austin public health contracts. First, [10:33:08 AM] with the money pays for. We have five community health navigators. They're licensed community health workers who speak Vietnamese, Korean and burmese, and they come from those communities themselves. People hear that and think interpreter, but that's the smallest part of their job. They explain which services are available and what someone qualifies for. They book the appointment and they work out how the person gets there. They sit in the room and they push back. When a provider isn't listening and they make sense of a bill that comes afterwards. Already we've served this year 299 people across our two contract and 98% of them need help reading their own medical papek. And there's no substitute for this. Nobody else in Austin is doing year round in language navigation like this. If we stop, these families don't go somewhere else. They get go without a second. The reduction. On July 22nd, the council asked staff to set each of the contracts cut based on its own performance, rather than a single percentage. Ours was cut by ten and 8.8%. Last [10:34:09 AM] November's cuts already lowered what we were contracted to do, and despite this, we passed our new goal of 255 255 in 9 months, and of those clients reported healthy outcomes. Our seniors contract is still in its first year, but we've already hit our goal of 34 in the first nine months. Both of the contract outcomes haven't been measured yet, so there's no outcome data for themt all. So it got cut before there was outcome data to look at. If it stands, our staff's caseload will go from the 50 that they should have that they normally have based on our ten years of experience to an average of 61 of them is already at 76 clients. We try not to have waiting lists because being turned away isn't a delay. It's the end. They don't come back and the people they've told don't come either. But after November's cut, there were people we had to turn away anyway. $61,000 is three quarters of a navigator. That [10:35:09 AM] work moves to the to four who are left. The average goes from 60 to 70 against the standard of 50, and then more people get turned away. I'd also like to ask you not to assume we can take it T T of the admin. We've tried that. November's cut to our operations manager. So our program director and I absorbed the finance work and our reimbursement request fell behind. This isn't a saving, it's just moves the problem. So that's the budget side. And I'd like to tell you about some people on the other end of it. A woman in her early 50s was referred to us, a refugee with no income, living alone after an abusive husband L her. Her legs were red and swollen because she'd run out of medication and she could barely walk. She didn't speak engli over the next few months, our navigator got her medication, enrolled her in snap, referred her to a domestic violence agency, and got her on central health's medical access program for preventative care. She told us, I know it's going to be my lucky year. I felt it the first day I became a client. Another client, 64, with hypertension, [10:36:10 AM] diabetes and thyroid cancer. Her insurance denied her cancer treatment. Our navigator helped her appeal. It was denied again, so she appealed again. After five months of back and forth with doctors, hospitals and the insurer, the client was finally approved with all costs cover for her cancer treatment. Her family said they couldn't have done it themselves. Their English wasn't strong enough and they didn't know how to fight it. In our reporting to the city, that case appears as a single client when we turn someone away. This work. This is the work that stops. Council member Laine, thank you for bringing this forward. >> Thank you. >> Please just state your name for the record. >> Brewster. Good morning, mayor and council.'m just here to speak on the budget and asking that we don't make any cuts or look at the cuts that we're trying to make to social services. Social services really do help so many people, and not just one program, but many of the programs we have, like Texas harm reduction that keeps helps in so many ways. With mental health situations, [10:37:13 AM] cleaning up encampments, homeless encampments that the police are having to do. If we make those cuts to that program, that puts a lot on the police. Giving the police a bigger budget kind of criminalizes poverty. And we ha a lot of austinites that are living in poverty. A lot of our citizens are living in poverty. Then there's a housing instability. We need those programs that are going to help to navigate through, as our last speaker said, navigate through for the citizens. Everyone doesn't know how to navigate through these programs alone. There's always barriers, especially in communities that are less funded, less looked at. And so I just think that it's important that we look at family stabilization grants, look at these things that are important and not keep saying putting them off or making changes that are ineffective to the all of Austin or just supporting one part of Austin. We are Austin as a whole. Everyone deserves to live in [10:38:13 AM] affordable Austin, and that's about all I have to say. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I'm returning back to some remote speakers. Gabriel reed. Gabriel, are you there? Michael ward. Michael, are you there? Okay, we're going to check our connection on remote. I'll go back to in person. Alma Ruiz. Lily Harris, J. Maverick, Savannah Lee, Adrian Macias. I'm going to call a couple more to Hannah white, Valerie Menard, [10:39:14 AM] Susana Carranza, Adam Greenfield. Alyssa Matthews. >> Great. Please begin. Ood morning, mayor, mayor pro tem and council members. My name is Savannah Lee. I'm with equity action and a resident of district one. And I'm here in support of the community investment budget. First, I want to thank council member Laine and council member Siegel for introdug amendments to create a joint emergency communications department. This is something the community has been asking for for years, and it's heartening to feel heard by your representatives. I also want to thank council member Fuentes and the others on the dais who have led the fight to restore social services. We encourage you to pass these amendments today. In my policy work, I've seen many thoughtful conversations about what it takes to make a public service function better. The time, the planning, and the attention to detail. I understand that there has to be a balance between urgency and prudence, especially when we're working th limited resources. But I also believe that when we know something is the right thing to [10:40:14 AM] do, we have a moral obligation to do it as quickly as we can, because every day we spend debating whether to act is another day when vulnerable people fall through the cracks. So I will ask you this the next time a teenager calls 911 in a vulnerable state, don't you want him to be met by a trained professional whose job it is to get him the right help? The next time one of our community members is detained by ice, do they have the time to wait for legal help, or do they need it before they disappear into a detention center? In a few months, when it gets cold, will our neighbors living on the street have somewhere to go, or can they wait until the next budget cycle? And this winter, when overdose rates rise, will the programs distributing narcan have the resources to reach everyone who need it? Or will we lose more of our neighbors? These are the questions you have to answer. We can get caught up in red tape, or we can acknowledge how senseless it is to leave vulnerable people in the gaps between our systems. We can roll up our sleeves, get creative, and make sure this city is there with a helping hand when our neighbors need us most. Because the one thing I [10:41:14 AM] know for sure is that we do not have the time to waste. And if we choose to waste it, who do we lose in the meantime? Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Please. >> I am Susana Carranza. I live in district nine, and I thought I was going to speak later, but I'm here to request that amendments to carve back money out of thehe police budget and into social services in general should be approved, because that's a way better use of money. It's a lot less expensive and morally correct to spend money on prevention, on helping our community serving us and not policing. And again, in light of the police department not being able to handle a 17 year O it's clear that we need to [10:42:16 AM] invest in preventative and supportive services and not in punishment. I know one of the services that happens a lot. It is supporting victim victims of sexual assault, and there was a lot of funding that was lost to for due to current federal administration. So we want the city to step up. And last but not least, we really need to help support services to help of immigrant communities. Because as, as, as driving down here on Guadalupe, I don't know if it was actually ice, but there were like eight state troopers around that was blocking the street. So I can't tell for sure what it is. But in the city, in the south, like in this state, when we see that usually means only one thing that they're just harassing some hard worker immigrants. [10:43:19 AM] And that is just heartbreaking. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Greenfield. >> Good morning, madam mayor pro tem and Austin city council members Adam Greenfield of safe streets, Austin, speaking today to request that you fully fund our active transportation and street safety programs in the coming years. Budget. This is excellent value for the taxpayer. For example, the safe routes to school program since 2016 has had $47.5 million of funding every year since then. On average, the comprehensive crash cost savings to the taxpayer is 47 million. So for a one time bucket of 47.5 million, we save 47 million every year. With bikeways, we funded 60 million since 2016. Every year, comprehensive crash savings to the taxpayer is 103 million. And another example [10:44:21 AM] vision zero 65 million since 2016 are funding comprehensive crash cost savings 78 million per year. This is great value to the taxpayer. The taxpayer expects these investments. We see the taxpayers using them. It's changing our city. We really need to keep this going and keep them funded at current levels. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Going back to remote speakers, Gabriel read. >> Good morning. >> Ladies and gentlemen, and the great people of the city of Austin. Thank you for this opportunity. My name is Gabriel read, representing the universal pet movement. We are a workforce readiness nonprofit here in the city. We help hundreds of clients into the work, prepare to enter the workforce, career change. And we are for the city of Austin budget. One of our clients, [10:45:23 AM] I'll call her Miriam for this story. She was unemployed for several months. She is an immigrant. She has two small kids. She came to our program, got a cybersecurity professional certificate at no cost to her. And then after several months, she landed a job with Austin regional clinic, making 82 G's a year. And so this is just one testimony of the impact that your generosity allows us to have on the people in the city of Austin. And we beseech you to continue to support us and programs like us so that we can continue to to serve our fellow austinites. I want to thank you for your hard work, your long nights, the brunt that you take for the people. I'm a returned peace corps volunteer and americorps alumni. And you know, my my heart is in service. And we definitely can't do the service that we do now with the universal tech movement without your support. So thank you. And [10:46:25 AM] I hope you all stay blessed by the best. >> Thank you. >> Michael ward. >> Hello, mayor and council members. It's a pleasure to speak with you all again. My name is Michael ward junior. I'm the president and CEO of universal tech movement, representing district one. I'm also a member of equity action. I'm proud supporter of the community investment budget. And thank you all for the progress you all have made so far in alignment with the community investment priority, specifically, council member Fuentes motion to restore social service grants and council members. Motion to establish an independent office of joint emergency communication. These proposed amendments provide critical relief, but to build lasting strength, we must also combine these immediate investments with long term stability to our communities. Move forward instead of backward. It's the difference between giving someone a fish and teach them how to fish. So I really want to emphasize workforce [10:47:25 AM] development as a prevention model. This crisis, before they start it increases household earnings. It drives mobility and prevents displacement while reducing reliance and crisis response downstream. And last year alone, the universal tech movement, which is all about getting communities inside the tech industry. We serve 379 clients, awarded 189 credentials and placed over 120 people directly into tech, jobs, tech fields and tech roles, thus allowing them to increase their average salary by 3000. A stable job is the most durable social service there is, and I D love to continue partnering with the city of Austin to do this for all austinites to lay the foundation for a truly innovative. Austin, we ask you to commit to four structure priorities. Embed social service funding into the baseline budget, keep a pd budget flat, and reject expanding police line items into park safety. Fully funded joint communications using [10:48:26 AM] smart administrative reallocation. As we're seeing in the proposed budget and fully support the cip and directly invest 2 million in workforce development funding once we fund. Thank you. >> Very much, Mr. Ward. >> Brian poppy. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Ryan poppy. I represent cwa local 6154 and the united workers of integral care. We support the creation of an independent 911 emergency communications department, and we urge the council to fund and establish it in this budget. When someone calls 901, the first and most important decision is made. Who gets sent today? 911911 call taking operates within a pd. That structure can make law enforcement the default response. Even when someone is experiencing a medical or behavioral health crisis, we certainly can do better. Austin [10:49:28 AM] ld have a 911 system that is independent, professionally trained, and designed to identify the nature of an emergency and send the correct response the first time. That means police when police are needed, fire, ems, medical emergencies require them, and the bioral health professional. When someone is experiencing a mental health crisis, integral care already provides Austin with that fourth option. If behavioral health professionals respond to mental health emergencies through 911 and can help people in crisis without automatically involving law enforcement, but the system is only as effective as the call that initiates it. We need to get the right person answering the phone, asking the right questions, and sending the correct responder. And the changing of that system means investing in the people that make it work. Austin has recognized the competitive compensation is necessary to retain its own workforce. We ask the city to extend that principle to integral care employees and the resources [10:50:30 AM] necessary for a 4% cost of living adjustment. Create an independent 911 department, trained the workforce and send the correct responder and invest in the people who make Austin emergency response systems work. Thank you. >> Edwin montao. >> Yes, good afternoon, mayor and city members. My name is Edwin Duarte. I am here in support of universal tech movement and the and the many organizations working every day to create real pathways to economic opportunity for Austin residents. I ask you to protect funding for social services and specifically the workforce development programs that help people build skills, find meaningful employment, and become economically self-sufficient. So when we talk aboutorkforce development, we are not talking about an abstract government program. We are talking about people. We're talking about [10:51:31 AM] someone gaining technology skills that can change the trajectory of their family. We are talking about someone returning to the workforce who needs training, mentoring and a second chance. And we are talking about employers who desperately need qualified workers. Universal tech movement demonstrates what happens when Austin invests in that work. Last year, utmb served over 370 people and helped place over 120 people into jobs, with a median wage of approximately $25 an hour. That is not simply a social service outcome. That's an economic development. Those individuals who earn wages support their families, spend money in the local economy, pay taxes and contribute to the strength of the city. Workforce development funding may save money on paper today, but it risks creating much greater cost tomorrow. Austin cannot build a strong economy while weakening the very organizations connecting residents to that economy. Technology continues to transform the workforce. The question is whether all Austin [10:52:33 AM] residents will have an opportunity to participate in that future. Organizations like utmb help make sure the answer is yes. I respectfully, respectfully ask council to protect social service funding, preserve workforce development investments, and continue investing in organizations with measurable results. Investing in people is not an expense, it's an investment. Austin's workforce, Austin's economy, and the future of Austin. Thank you and god bless. >> Lucy frost. Lucy, are you there? Soon? Anita. Allen. Connor. Sundiata. Franck. Natasha. Okay, we're going to [10:53:36 AM] check our connection again. I'll return to in person. Alicia Castillo. Doris Adams, Clarice cross, Peter hunt Rivas, Susana Almanza. >> Oh, me. >> For you. We'll go down the. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> My name is Doris Adams and I live in district five. I'm an organizer with undoing white supremacy. Austin. That is a part of the community investment budget coalition. Today, I'm here to advocate for an amendment to the proposed budget for $3 million for the family stabilization program. Austin and other municipalities [10:54:37 AM] have demonstrated proven success with a guaranteed income program in reducing housing, food, and other insecurities of economically disadvantaged residents. And you've heard from many of those from Austin that are recipients of that program today. This is this prevention strategy is a way to impact our unhoused city crisis and other negative outcomes that come from struggling to provide for basic needs. Prevention is a shift in thinking. Too often, we are faced with huge social issues created by our inattention to prevention. This is facing you today. The family stabilization program begins to afford a way to invest in solving the problem. I request that the council choose to fund the amendments that restore social services, a restorative strategy that you will think deeply about, about why the [10:55:38 AM] police budget is so huge as a punitive versus restorative or preventive strategy, and that you will choose to add an amendment to the proposed budget to include $3 million, or at the very least, the previously funded $1.3 million, and reinstate the family stabilization program. Because this is a preventative strategy. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please. >> Good morning. My name is Alicia Castillo. I'm here representing the Texas civil rights project, and I am a resident of district three. I want to just name that I registered against the proposed budget today because of the proposed increases to the police budget. But I'm here being supportive of all of the asks of the community investment budget, of which tc Erp are proud members of that coalition. But one of the reasons I feel so strongly about this is in addition to the recent death of Anthony Williams, we just learn about a 19 year old mother who was a [10:56:40 AM] resident of district four, who called the police in June for help when she was being abused by her partner. The police report says that the police officers believed she was being deceptive about the abuse she experienced, and soy arrested her and she is now sitting in ice detention. She is 19 years old. She has a seven month old baby. She's a nursing mother. She's been denied access to a breast pump while in Pearsall detention center. And this is all because she called 911 for help, and they believed that she was the perpetrator of violence rather than the victim, even though she had called in the past for health. And Abdi had documented her injuries of abuse from when her partner choked her. This is absurd. And this is not the first time this has happened and this is unjust, and we need to do everything in our power to prevent this from happening to another young mother in this community. And so we ask that in addition to that, you all support the items that would do that, like council member qadri [10:57:41 AM] item to support victim services, please restore the social service funding, support immigrant legal services, and thank you, council member vela for your work on that in the past, support the family stabilization grant. Support all of those social services that prevent this harm and violence from happening to our communities. Instead of further supporting the police department that clalaborates with ice and the federal administration. >> Thank you very much. Please. >> Hi, Rivas. District nine council. Budgeting is a hard thing. I should know. I work in the service industry, but when you approach a budgetary process, you have to prioritize what is needed and what isn't. If. If APD operated last year with less, why should the community give them more? The only gifts, as someone put it rlrlier, that APD has given the community is bullets and full compliance with federal agents snatching our neighbors off the street. Social services work. They have always worked. The [10:58:43 AM] reason why people think they don't is because social services are almost always on the chopping block. First, to give money to who you ask APD of course. Why don't we pay less for consultants? Why don't we stop cross talk while testimony is happening? Why don't we stop the sweetheart deals for large corporations that waive taxes for decades? Plus, there are other avenues to a thinner waist versus an outright starvation of our social services. Despite the crumbs we've brushed back onto the plate. Please heed our your fellow councilors with these amendments. Please make 901 independent and restore public services and give APD a flat budget. I have been here throughout this whole process and I have to say that while I feel heard, I don't see the full action that needs to happen. We are saying as community that more action needs to be taken, and I am still registered as against this, and I will continue to be against it from the standpoint of even why these amendments are giving approximately, what [10:59:45 AM] was it, 4.7 million back to our social services? You're still slating to cut $20 million from them. That is not a return on investment >> And when it comes to a P D, which is not going to spend their money wisely, we know it. We've seen it on our streets. And they will continue to abuse marginalized commues here in Austin and only serve the corporations that aren't paying their taxes here in the city of Austin. >> Thank you all. >> Good morning council. My name is Peter hunt. I'm a resident of district ten and a volunteer with Austin justice coalition. I'm here in support of the community investment budget coalition. And I also want to thank council members Laine and Siegel for their work proposing and then funding and independent joint communications department. I want to speak a little bit about some of the research that's been done regarding joint communications department or emergency communication centers, as they're generally called, and the good that that [11:00:46 AM] brings to a city. And I want to connect that to what Austin has been working on for plenty of time and with some success, which is alternative emergency response and alternative 911 response. I want to connect that to some research that's been done by the university of Chicago health lab and the Marshall project, looking at alternative nine one response and looking at how that then relates to. I think I'll just give you the headline quote from the health labs transformer 901 project, which was a several year program involving dozens of experts. Emergencymunication centers need autonomy to address issues that affect the greater public safety mission of a jurisdiction. This has proven practically difficult when X are housed within law enforcement or fire agencies, there's a dominant mindset that often prevails in nine one response, which is when in doubt, send cops out. This is a particularly difficult mindset to overcome. When those nine one call takers have sworn officers as their ultimate supervisors. Now, the aclu of D.C. Has also said that this [11:01:47 AM] response is not just a matter of use of force errors. Police response may be harmful not because of excessive force, but because they aren't able to provide effective treatment. If you called for emts to help with a broken leg and they sent someone who doesn't know how to set a bone, you're not providing effective care. So this is something that Austin has been working on for several years, and you've heard speakers talk about it before. We need good alternative nine one response that more efficiently uses city resources, and we need a governance structure for nine one, one that ensures that the right people are set out, that they have training and intuitions that enable them to send that proper response, and we need it this year. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please. >> Good morning. My name is Clarice. I'm with Asian family support services of Austin. I'm a proud resident of district nine and also wanted to thank council member Laine for proposing an amendment to reductions for arches programs. So for the past ten years, orgy has been a trusted resource for afscme in Asian communities in Austin, helping people navigate health care and connect to the services they need. If you [11:02:48 AM] didn't already know, apsa supports survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking. At afscme, we see how interconnected the work being done in our community is, especially when it comes to systems navigation. We provide some systems navigation for families in our prevention programs and direct services, but there are many more people in our community who struggle to navigate or access health care. When those needs fall outside of our scope, we rely on partners like acme to connect people to the right provider to ensure they access care in a way that works for them. Like afs, acme creates a trusted doorway where people who have low trust or confusion can learn how to access systems in ways that are meaningful and beneficial to them. Orgy make health care more accessible by connecting them to primary health care, while also supporting them in navigating the complex medical structures that help with things like chronic disease management. Without orgy, our community members may not be able to [11:03:49 AM] navigate the maze of providers, services, and locations required to get the care they need. We rely on one another to make sure people do not fall through the cracks cracks simply because their needs cross organizational boundaries. Health navigators help connect people to doctors, hospitals, benefits, transportation, community services and strengthen the entire network of care in Austin. I hope you consider the amendment to the budget for arches programs, so that afscme and community members can continue to refer people to access the critical services that will get them back on their feet. >> Thank you. >> Okay. I'm going to return to remote speakers with Shelby Evans. Shelby, are you there? Lucy frost, are you there? >> Hi. Can you hear me? [11:04:50 AM] >> Yes. >> Hello? Can you hear me? Yes. Great. Thanks. Good morning. I'm Lucy frost. I'm a board member of haam, south central Texas. I'm here. Not here, but on the phone, asking the council to consider two budget items on behalf of our most vulnerable. This will sound familiar. We ask that you fully fund safe alliance and critical soalal services and create a 911 dispatch service outside of APD that directs the right kind of help to each emergency. You know, I've lived in Austin since 81, and I remember when survivors of domestic violence and child abuse and sexual crimes had to try to navigate a patchwork of disconnected services. It was frustrating to try to help friends who experienced those kinds of things. Fortunately, in 2017, the Austin children's shelter and the former safe place were merged to create safe alliance, and since then, safe alliance has been a lifeline for people [11:05:53 AM] experiencing their darkest moments. Now, during that same time period, we've had lives that were sadly, sadly and needlessly lost to police action. So I'm asking city leaders to deeply consider one moving 911 dispatch out of APD, because not all emergencies are best handled by police, and two fully funding safe and other social services. Instead of returning to patchwork of services. I appreciate your attention. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Franck Netzer. >> Hi. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Hi. I'm a district one resident, loud and proud. And also a Texas state employees union. I'm calling to give me. Don't know if all the amendments have been added already, but I'm calling in support of the community investment budget. That includes the the joint [11:06:54 AM] communications department, the $1 million for victim services, and $1 million in displacement and prevention. And of course, keeping the APD budget flat. As we know, governor has demanded that APD wait, what is called a reasonable amount of time for ice to come meet them when they suspect that they have detained an undocumented immigrant? That leads to massive overtime spending, spending by APD, as well as things like just a couple of weeks ago, one of my neighbors had a wellness check on them that involved fire, ems, and police all showing up. Fire left pretty much as soon as the door was open. Ems stuck around to make sure everybody was okay. APD stuck around for over 12 hours. That's a lot of overtime. It's a lot of spending and waste on their part. I also had to stick around outside my house and worry about whether [11:07:55 AM] or not my neighbor was going to get attacked by APD, because as we know, these wellness checks don't go very well. We've seen it happen in the past. That is because we call 911. We should not be sending people who are completely on rated to the issue, the event. I cannot imagine a more inappropriate response for someone having perhaps a mental health issue than for sending armed goons. And knock their door down. That seems like a bad idea. So joint communications department seems like a fantastic idea. And make sure that Austin has our. >> Sundiata Allen Connor. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is sundiata Allen Connor and I'm here in support of the community investment budget. I want to begin by thanking you for the [11:08:56 AM] work you're doing to restore funding for social services. The families we serve feel the difference when Austin chooses to invest in them. I currently lead marketing and operations at universal tech movement, where we connect underrepreed austinites to careers in technology. I came to this work after spending more than 13 years walking alongside people who were trying to rebuild their lives. Where I saw again and again that what stood between someone and a good job was so rarely a lack of ability. It was a lack of access. And someone willing to help bridge that gap. That's the work that we do at utmb. Last year alone, we served 379 people and helped place over 120 of them into jobs. So I'm asking you to protect and fully fund workforce development. And because that is how we take care of the work of this budget and turn into lasting change for the people of Austin. Thank you so much for your time. [11:09:57 AM] >> Thank you. >> Shelby Evans. >> Hi. Can you all hear me? >> Yes we can. >> Oh. >> Thank you so much. Good morning council. My name is Shelby Evans. I'm from district one and I'm with hands off central Texas. I wanted to thank the council members for the amendment. Seeking to restore social services, move 911 out of APD and support our housing and secure neighbors. I want to personally thank council member zo qadri for proposing $1 million for survivor resources. These services aren't just life saving, they are life shaping. If I had access to programs like the forensic exams at safe house 17 years ago after my first assault, it would have changed my life. It took me seven years. Seven years of shame, seven years of silence, seven years of self-blame. Trauma like that shows up in [11:10:57 AM] insidious ways when it's ignored. I didn't see a lifeline on my own, especially not at a young age. Finding a voice and path to healing took help from others. Seven years to speak up about one instance, and I promise you, everyone in the room at city hall is or knows someone impacted by sexual assault. We have the tools to support the survivors. We need the resources to use them, fund social services, keep APD's budget flat, support survivors. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, that's all the speakers for itemen. So I'm going to return to in person. Excuse me, Daniela silva, Carlos Leon, Liz. Schoenfeld. Phyllis. Everett. Rosa. Maria. Murillo. Doctor Murillo, are you H is Lisa Barton here? Okay, then you'll have four minutes and then Shelby Evans. [11:12:00 AM] >> Mr. Leon, why don't we begin with you and we'll work down the. You got it. Mayor soy Carlos Leon. >> First and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me expose. Proposed a P L budget. Expenditures that don't make sense as part of its $80 million budget. A pls Hannah Terrell expects a one time, $1.1 million funding increase to support audio,eo, lighting technology and a new loading dock to enhance archival management material handling at the Austin history center campus for some security cameras and lights, which should already be there. And if the existing loading dock is bad, why wasn't it upgraded or replaced when the Austin history center was just renovated with 2018 bond money, a P L has yet to finish spending. This morning I saw a city employee with a city truck use that loading dock with no problem. Therefore, reject that request. Redirect that money to all these social programs you're about to defund. She [11:13:01 AM] also wants $1 million more for this year's transfers, debt service, and other requirements than last year for citywide information technology and administrative support, plus citywide contributions to shared employee benefits. But 16aplit positions supporting Austin technology services were transferred out as part of broad citywide information technology centralization to save money. Thus, this year's a P L funding request in this area should be significantly less than last year. In fact, per apple's own numbers, apple's total budget should be $3 million less than last year because their 16 I.T. Positions are gone yet. You're about to give Terrell the same 80 million as last year while starving out all these social programs, wrecking public trust. I pray you do what's right. In [11:14:03 AM] Jesus name I pray. Amen. Thanks, mayor. >> Thank you sir. Doctor Schoenfeld. >> Good morning, mayor council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Liz Schoenfeld, and I serve as the CEO of lifeworks, a nonprofit here in Austin dedicated to solving youth homelessness. I want to begin by thanking you and city staff for your collective leadership throughout the budget process. I know that the last several months have required difficult decisions, balancing the need to invest in our community, while also remaining mindful of the affordability challenges that facing so many Austin families. And I especially want to thank you for your commitment to restoring $4.7 million of the proposed reductions to social service contracts. That decision reflects Austin's values and recognizes that strong communities are built by investing in solutions that prevent crises and create lasting opportunity. I would also like to ask for your support of council member alter's amendment, creating a $500,000 matching grant fund for supportive services tied to foster youth to Independence vouchers at lifeworks. Much of our work focuses on the [11:15:04 AM] intersection between foster care and homelessness. Nearly 60% of the young people experiencing homelessness in Austin have a history of foster care involvement, and we also know what changes that trajectory. Stable housing, coupled with the right supportive services. Our community has already demonstratedational leadership on this issue, and the city has been an indispensable partner in moving that work forward. I especially want to thank David gray and Carrie Rogers for their support today. The opportunity is even greater. Hud has removed the cap on the number of FYI vouchers that communities can draw down, and the limiting factor is no longer the availability of these vouchers. It is whether communities can provide the supportive services to make those vouchers successful. This amendment positions Austin to seize that opportunity and sends a powerful signal as we head into the next legislative session, that our city is willing to invest alongside state and federal partners, it allows us to leverage substantially more federal housing dollars, serve more young people exiting foster care, and continue establishing Austin as a [11:16:05 AM] statewide and national model. This amendment builds on the recommendations from the human rights commission and council member Velasquez's associated resolution. Thank you. >> And good morning, mayor and council. My name is Daniela silva. I'm the Austin policy coordinator at workers defense action fund. I'm here to provide testimony on behalf of two of our members. Since they could not be here today. Tina loves the parks and rivers in Austin and asks that you prioritize their maintenance in the budget. She also asked for staff to patrol the parking lots and public spaces to prevent car break ins. Tina finds it incredibly important that there be funding for educnal and workforce development programs for vulnerable populations. She struggles with the rising cost of living that are not being met rising wages, and is frustrated that state laws are making I harder for immigrants to get professional certifications. Finally, she asks that you keep the police budget flat and instead use that money to give people opportunities and support. Mugabe would like for you all to prioritize the budget, to [11:17:07 AM] support kids in schools and fund gun violence prevention programs to keep our kids safe from school shootings. What he appreciates about living in Austin are all the businesses that are nearby where he can find whatever he needs, and would hope that the budget would be used to support more local businesses. What he doesn't like about living in Austin is all the traffic and the many ways the and the ways the roads are set up, like on 35 and palmer. It's incredibly difficult to change directions. He asks that you not give more money to police who are hunting our community. Whenever someone calls 911 for help, the police don't show up. But when it comes to hunting immigrants, they're there. Mugabe's wishes that you don't get manipulated by the real minority population in Austin, which are the rich who want to take advage of our community. Finally, he asks that if you, as council members, are asking the community to make financial sacrifices by cutting our programs, you should also make a sacrifice by cutting your salaries. Thank you for the amendment. Seeking to restore social services, workers defense supports the community investment budget and hopes that you pass a budget that reflects the real values [11:18:08 AM] of austinites and shapes a city where all people can thrive. >> Mario. >> Good morning mayor. Council members, I'm Jose Maria Murillo. I'm the chair of the one voice, central Texas. I am also the chief executive officer for sammaritano. One voice appreciates the council's movement to restore a significant portionf the proposed fiscal year 27 social services reductions. This shows that you are listening to the community concerns. And are Ng to preserve those services, those essential services. Ask you to build on that progress by restoring the full $5.4 million. These funds support housing stability, food security, health care access, workforce participation, behavioral health, aging services, family stability, and [11:19:08 AM] other essential needs. Full restoration will help prevent service disruption and provide greater certainty for residents and providers. One voice supports accountability and responsible stewardship as requested by items 14 and 22. Effective accountability depends on transparency. Reliable evidence, consistently applied standards, and meaningful participation by stakeholders. One time funding may address the immediate challenge, but Austin needs a sustainable path forward. Council should make preservation of the total fiscal year 27 social services funding level inclusive of the full 5.4 million restoration a policy priority during development of the fiscal year 28 budget. We also ask council to direct the city manager to present recurring revenue [11:20:09 AM] scenarios, fiscal implications and implementation timeline, and the service and community impacts of funding below that level. This request does not prescribe a particular funding source or appropriate fiscal year 28 funds. It gives council and the public the information needed to make future budget decisions based on community need, fiscal responsibility and long term outcomes. Please complete the full fiscal year 27 restoration and establish a sustainable path for fiscal year 28 and beyond. Thank you. >> Continuing with item seven, Christina delgado, Ben suddaby, Annette price, Monica Guzman, Chris Harris. >> Oh. >> Sorry. I had an issue. [11:21:10 AM] >> With. >> The chair. >> Good morning, council members. My name is Christina delgado. I'm the national organizing manager for community justice. And I'm here before you, not just in my position, but representing hundreds of advocates, fellow survivors of gun violence and our one safe central Texas coalition. I would like to thank you all for your time today. First, I have to give thanks to holy. Sorry, Jose Velasquez at peace. Teams of life anew and jail to jobs and amber Goodwin, representing the Travis county da's office for their continued support and cultivation of the one safe central Texas coalition. Bridging the gaps between community and municipalities to build a roadmap for peace. Thank you for fully funding CVI and committing to continuing this unique ecosystem. While the nation is seeing continued incidents of violence in various forms, we've been able [11:22:11 AM] to see some of the highest impacted areas in Austin and Travis county. See see decreases in homicides where the ecosystem has a strong presence from the community to the hospitals that serve those directly impacted. This ecosystem holds a crucial function for immediate and long term care and support to ensure the cycles of violence do not continue in the communities. When the survivors return to their homes for recovery, the nation has taken notice. National leaders and organizations recognize the amazing work of Austin and the ecosystem. Built through years of work and commitment with community partners. And now the one safe central Texas coalition. We are grateful to know we have the commitment by this council to continue being a model for peace, for the nation and for the state of Texas. Thank you all. >> Thank you very much. Miss Guzman. Do you to go next? >> Good morning. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at [11:23:12 AM] Garza. I'm reading a resident statement. My name is grace Dar. I live in district three. I arrived in Austin in 2016 as a refugee. I was not working until 2024, taking care of four children a full time at home. Responsibility. One of my children has asthma and is under medical care and I treat them at home. My family was facing financial hardship, difficulties of readjusting to life in a new location. It wasn't easy to get a job because of language barriers, no experience and no transportation. My family was struggling to pay for rent, food, bills and health care, transportation and school supplies. I was very blessed. After receiving family stabilization grant support, it helped my household secure basic needs like rent, food, bills and health care. It also helped with career training and esl classes. Thank you so much, city council. I request that you approve the family stabilization grant again, for those who are struggling so they can have a better life. Yesterday, it was brought to his attention that there hasn't [11:24:12 AM] been a family stabilization grant, fsg amendment since it's considered new. It's not new. You approved it for fiscal 26, including adding it to the base budget, then tied it to prop Q instead of voting to fund outright. It wasn't funded due to voters voting against an increased tax rate they could not afford. The fact that voters couldn't afford an increased tax rate and today still struggle to pay rent, utilities, groceries and other needs makes it clear that the fsg needs to be added to the fiscal 27 budget. We urge you to amend the proposed budget by at least 1.3 million for the family stabilization grant, and in the few seconds I have left. Thank you, mayor pro tem for the update regarding the immigrant support legal representative funding. >> Thank you. Good morning. I am Annette price and I'm a resident of district one. I'm also the executive director of grassroots leadership. City [11:25:15 AM] council has a choice to make about who we are as a city, a choice about how we respond to human struggle and a crisis in our community. I know firsthand what happens when we respond human struggle with handcuffs, instead of with help. Likeo many in our city, I am vulnerable to the systems that's built on racial profiling. Instead of, excuse me, on racial profiling that criminalize us and not protect us. We do not need to ask the police to do better. Instead, we need to ask ourselves, should the police be doing this at all? Every dollar we spend on the police is a dollar we do not spend on people and systems that actually prevent crises. We could have a crisis team and counselors who respond within minutes. We could have mental [11:26:15 AM] health professionals available 24 over seven. We could have peer support specialists trained to talk people down, to listen and to help. But instead we have armed officers with guns showing up to situations where de-escalation and care is what was actually needed. Austin budget reflects our priorities. Right now, our priority is policing, and policing has always been targeting black communities. We are asking the city to move toward a different vision of safety, one where 911 calls for mental health crises do not go to armed officers. One where we invest in responders and services that actually keep people safe in our community. >> Thank you very much. We appreciate your being here, Mr. Harris. [11:27:16 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor. Council. My name is Chris Harris. I'm here today representing equity action. I'm a resident in district nine. I just want to firstly say that. You know, this is a really disappointing time and process coupled with the cuts made in in the wake of the failure of prop Q, you know, the cuts that continue through this budget, you know, this city is is weaker and less resilient than than it was before you got here, mayor. You got here. City manager Broadnax people in our community are struggling more. And, and many of the choices that much of the austerity that we face has come from other places. And we understand that it also, of course, has come on the strength of choices made by this body, particularly those of you here in 2024 that voted for the police contract that ey're now robs us of many of the funds we need to, to just see the social services that many rely on kept whole, much [11:28:18 AM] less the vast increases in those services that are actually needed by the people in this community, needed by people like Anthony Williams. With that said, I do want to say that you have some opportunities to salvage this budget process today and to, to, to improve things. One, when firstly, thank city manager, city council member Laine for leadership establishing an independent joint communications center at 911 call center. I want to thank councilmember Siegel for your efforts to fund that and to make that move quicker, and I hope you all will support both of those measures. I want to thank councilmember VEL mayor pro tem vela for your efforts on additional transparency around policing, alter around your efforts to to look more closely at that police budget, as well as in serving foster youth. Councilmember Fuentes, in your efforts to to reclaim and ensure and support social service funding, as well as your ongoing leadership around the family stabilization grants. Thank you. [11:29:25 AM] >> Mayor and council. My name is Ben, said a resident of district four. Tough act to follow both miss price and Mr. Harris spoke to the sentiments that I was going to express and I. I really do agree with everything they said. The perspective that I have as someone who pays property taxes is that everything they described are things that help us reduce costs in our city. And what was originally proposed was spending money downstream on things that aren't prevention. I know that the conversation has to start somewhere, and I understand that process, but I really urge you to fully implement the community investment budget. These are the items that, yes, help our community, but also save us money. They are [11:30:25 AM] efficient and good government. This morning I saw some polling that up in New York. Mayor Imam is enjoying 70% of his constituents, thinking that he's doing a good job and responsive and working hard. And this is done through good communication, through showing people the practical ways that good governance benefits their lives. And you have a great opportunity here in Austin to do the same. Collectively, we can improve people's lives and do things that benefit us all. And also, in the long run, invest in our community. That is the the drive. And what I see when I look at the community investment budget is doing things that make both financial sense for our long term financial health as a city, but also make sense in the well-being of our community in. In. That will move a lot to restore the, the trust and the, the relationship between you [11:31:27 AM] and your constituents. >> I do have one more remote speaker for item seven, Jordan Middlebrooks. Yeah. Hi. >> Council members, I am calling to support the community budget and to express my thanks for the amendments that have been added so far. I would encourage an ask to allocate 1 million for victim services, 1 million for eviction and displacement prevention, a one time funding of 4.7 million for social services, 600 000 in maternal health funding to help austinites access reproductive care and to advocate for a joint communications department to move 911 out of APD. As we've seen in other cities like San Francisco and Oakland, having independent alternative responses work and can help keep our community safe and [11:32:27 AM] prevent unnecessaryalation and violence. I am also calling to ask to please decrease and to stop funding the sweeps of the existing encampments. That is in no way a good use of our city dollars to take people's resources, put them in the trash, forcing them to reengage in the same services, to get the same documents. And it just creates this cycle that doesn't actually help anyone get further along. I echo what other speakers have said before me in support of the community investment budgets, and really hope that our budget can reflect proactive and preventative care instead of responsive, escalated responses that ultimately can put more community members in the hands ice, can result in more violence and do not actually keep any of us safer. Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers for item seven have now been called. >> Thank you. Please go to item [11:33:28 AM] number eight. >> Yes, of course, numbe eight, Carlos. Leon. >> Tom Clinton is on deck and Scott Johnson also. Mr. Leon, you have the floor. >> Thank you, mayor Watson soy Carlos Leon. First and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to this items. Connection to overarching classification problems to address asap. MC S rule 1.25 defines a city employee as an individual selected or directly appointed to a position in the classified municipal civil service. Yet per city charter, city charter article nine, section one B department directors, assistant city managers, city manager and city attorney are not employees with an MC S, neither are you. Therefore, like you, they are not governed by city's MC S rules or personnel policies. [11:34:29 AM] Thus, your two tiered system requires city employees to comply with laws, regulations, ordinances, rules, procedures, and administrative bulletins. But not you or your unelected bureaucrat executives. Illuminating why Broadnax was not bound by merit or fitness when he passed over top candidate Kathy Donelan to wrongly appoint Hanna Terrell, a Pio director who continues not revising a pls unconstitutional, rules 15 d1 and 15 d2 to not comply with your superseding rules for public use of city properties. And Stephanie hayden-howard, who knew all that when she was running the search, still has not sent her rules. Update to the city auditor promised 11 months ago, which Deborah Thomas continues allowing because there are no codified in-house accountability measures, forcing those four to toe the line, you haven't drawn. Efficiency audits will not solve this part of your public [11:35:30 AM] trust problem. Officially reclassifying yourselves to require you all to abide by the same legal instruments as your employees, followed by enacting measures producing results such as the approved revision of a P L out of compliance rules following city code 1-2 would. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. Thanks, mayor. >> Thank you. >> Item 11 Tom Clemmons 13. Scott Johnson, item 14, Lisa Barden, Scott Johnson. >> Mr. Clemens, was your name called? Please come forward. You'll be the first one to speak on item number 11. And then we'll have Mr. Johnson speak on item number 13. >> Mayor and city council. I've considered Austin home for 27 years after working with state departments of transportation for 40 years, focused on productivity. I came out of retirement six years ago, but when I became aware of a far superior solution to fix failed [11:36:32 AM] roads, with road maintenance being a big part of Austin's budget, our roads are failing at a faster rate than ever due to greatly increased truck traffic, more extreme weather events, especially flooding, and our difficult Texas soils. A failed road can now be rebuilt by recycling all the existing material in place, mixed with a small amount of added material, resulting in a new 20 to 40 year extension in the life of that road, the solution cost about the same as the industry standard approach, which is to mill off 2 to 3in of asphalt, removing the cracks and potholes, and put down 2 to 3in of fresh asphalt. That looks really nice, but milling and resurfacing is typically a cosmetic treatment at best to the base failure. A few years later, we were doing it all again, with great disruption to traffic and poor value for the [11:37:32 AM] dollar spent. You might be thinking city staff take care of roads that staff and design consultants we hire are the experts. That's true, but the reality is the private sector has little incentive to be innovative or Progressive with regard to this huge city asset and the change in these processes represents a high risk to staff. It's like expecting the designers and makers of razor blades to increase, to introduce a new product that lasts three times as long and cost less. It won't happen in this area. You, the elec official who are looking for significant dollar savings in the millions, help preserve. >> Thank you sir. We appreciate you being here and appreciate your comments. Mr. Johnson. >> Goo morning, mayor and council members. My name is Scott Johnson. I'm in district four. I support item 13 and want to expand on it a bit, and [11:38:33 AM] that is related to the special events. Back ten years ago, there was a task force called the parkland special events ordinance done by the ace folks, and those recommendations are vast, and it's unclear whether those have been fully implemented or are still being implemented. And I would like very much for the for the climate, water environment parks committee to review that and ask for a presentation from the ace folks and or pard at that time. There's some opportunities there that are not being realized when you walk around special events within the city that clearly we could do better there. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Please just identify yourself. >> Good morning. My name is Lisa Barton. I'm a resident of district four, executive director of keep Austin fed. Serving communities in all districts and a member of one voice, central Texas. I want to start by expressing my support [11:39:33 AM] for item 14 with the amendment from council member Fuentes. One voice supports accountability and advocates for the full restoration of social service funding. We also look forward to working toward a sustainable solution as we plan for future years. As I mentioned before, keep Austin fed does not receive any city funding, so I'm not here to protect my own organization's budget. I'm here because we partner with more than 90 nonprofit and community organizations that provide mental health services, job training, shelter and affordable housing, education, and other services that address the root causes of food insecurity. We are just one small part of the ecosystem of nonprofits working to make Austin a livable city for everyone. So as a member of that ecosystem, I ask you to recognize and respect Tork of Austin's nonprofit organizations. Item 14 acknowledges that the city has moved away from directly providing many services, and instead relies on nonprofits to achieve effective results, often at lower cost and with greater cultural competency. As you undertake deeper reviews of social service contracts and consider incorporating [11:40:34 AM] performance into future funding structures, I ask that you apply the same understanding of real world conditions to nonprofits that you apply to other city contractors, nonprofits to face rising costs, employee turnover, pandemics, extreme weather, and unexpected disruptions that can affect our ability to meet a target. We absolutely should be accountable for meeting a challenging but realistic goals, but organizations should also have the opportunity to explain the circumstances behind a shortfall before funding is reduced or eliminated. Again, I urge you to fully restore social service funding and give city staff the time to review each contract with transparency, collaboration and a commitment to strengthen, not diminish, the services our community relies on. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. >> Hello again. Scott Johnson from district four fully support the adding back of the funding that's been proposed for social service contracts. A lot has been said on that, and I'm very supportive of the comments that were applied earlier. My focus in this arena, [11:41:34 AM] as some of you know, has been on student homelessness and still is through the utility bill funds, homeless student assistance fund and the parks and libraries fund, which the parks portion gives scholarships to families who couldn't afford a summer camp or a sports league, and that can help divert the attention of these young people for more productive means. So please consider that when you're looking at the social service contracts, there is always this need to be sure, whenever possible, to have the contract be one. That is, if it's for homelessness that can support families, not only single males, single females. And that's something that's important to me. I'll be following this process throughout. As I mentioned before, before the council, if you yourself have the means and the interest, please look at all of the utility bill funds, including the plus one that is well [11:42:37 AM] funded by Austin energy, but the homeless student assistance fund and the parks and libraries fund can use your support and any staff from your office's support. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> I have a remote speaker for item 14, Alex latimer. Alex, are you there? Okay, one more in-person speaker for 14 Rosa Maria Murillo. On deck for 15 is Philip Fitzgerald and Susan Spataro. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. Doctor Murillo, you have the floor. >> Thank you. >> Mayorncil. I'm doctor Murillo, chair of Juan boys, central Texas, and CEO of [11:43:38 AM] samaritano. Council member Ryan alter and co-sponsors. Thank you for bringing forward item number 14. One voice supports items 14 comprehensive review of community need, regional coordination, performance and accountability before the fiscal year 28 budget and any solicitation. Council member Fuentes amendment now incorporated strengthens item 14 by directing the city manager to use the adopted fiscal year 27 social services funding level as the fiscal year 28 baseline. We asked council to preserve that protection and ensure the fiscal year 27 level includes the full $5.4 million restoration. This request does not prescribe a source of funding or appropriate fiscal year 28 funds. The city manager should present recurring revenue options, fiscal [11:44:39 AM] implications and a timeline for council action before fiscal year 28. Budget or solicitation decisions. The review should name a lead andublish a schedule, methodology, data sources and findings. Providers and people with lived experience should review data. Correct errors, provide context and respond before recommendations are final. Our final I'm sorry new performance and payment standards should apply prospectively without disadvantaging smaller, culturally specific providers. Finally, coordinate items 14 and 22 through one calendar contract record evidence, standards, provider submission process, and final decision authority. Item 22 findings should inform the broader review not duplicated. Thank you. >> Miss pitaro. >> Thank you, Susan Spataro, [11:45:42 AM] district eight. You know, I sit here and I listen to the continual attack on the police who are putting their life on the line for us. And they don't, it seems, have a voice. The examples that people bring up, some of them are just not true. The murders in Austin are not going down, folks. They're just not. From 210 to 219, there was an average of 32.5 murders a year. And then what did we do? We decided to reinvent public safety and lay off and eliminate 150 positions in the police department. And we treated them so badly without a contract that there was a mass move to retirement. And the city council canceled two cadet training programs. Okay. Since that time, here is the fact, and that is that in between [11:46:45 AM] 2020 and 2025, we're just half through 26. The average murders were 68.5 a year. That's compared to 32.5. That's 110% increase. Then we have a national organization, the council on criminal justice reporting, showing how many. They studied 36 cities, how the homicides went down. And it said Austin, Texas reported the largest spike from 2019 to 26, with a 74% hike in reported homicides. If we're doing some looking at things, let's look at what happened with reinvented public safety. The arguments you were hearing today were were heard then. And what has happened a year ago when you were looking at the budget, the same things were were brought out. And I mean, we need to start facing reality. And I want a police department. >> Thank you, Mr. Stahl. Yes, [11:47:45 AM] sir. >> Hi. Philip Fitzgerald, district one. Those are some great statistics. I also like to point out that murders have gone down year after year over the last four years, 2020 and 2021. There was a severe impact on murders across the nation due to covid. People went crazy, yada, yada, yada. I wasn't going to talk about that. Okay, so in general, I'm in favor of keeping more metrics. I think keeping performance metrics in any industry is important when it comes to hiring and laying off or giving, you know, promotions. But I'd also, as we all know, there's no mechanism that the city has to reduce the budget at all. So, I mean, adding more metrics to measure performance seems kind of frivolous. Seems more like hand waving to show that we have control. And we're actually giving these budget increases for a reason. I'd also like to point out that we, you know, people got really upset when [11:48:46 AM] they found out that some of our nonprofits were getting money and they were not hearing metrics. And then we see all the requisite cuts that came afterwards. So we have an ability to cut those immediately and people get up in arms. Then I think we should also get up in arms to the fact that the police are pretty routinely not answering calls when they're supposed to, and often going over budget, or we've had a ballooning and overtime pay. They're not hiring people at the rates that they should because they want to dip into that overtime pay. So I yeah, ideally, keeping metrics is important, but if we have no mechanism in place to cut the budget, then it just seems kind of pointless. Thank you. >> For item 16. Philip Fitzgerald and ava Johnston. And then for 17 Philip Fitzgerald, Alyssa Matthews, rey vas Ben zohaib. >> Please begin, sir. >> Yeah. Philip Fitzgerald, district one. All I had to say for this was I'm pretty in [11:49:47 AM] favor of it. We have to give people a better ability to create the businesses. Not everyone is cut out for corporate life or working behind a desk or or working behind a or in a cubicle, I should say, or a job site. So enabling people to create their business, whether it's a home based business or as a term here, microbusiness is a really great thing. I think a lot of wealth has flooded into Austin, and it's important that we allow the citizens of Austin to to share in that wealth. >> Please. >> Hello, mayor Watson and Austin city council. My name is ava Mouton Johnson, and I'm speaking today both as a district one constituent and as a city policy coordinator for institute for justice's cities work initiative. Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of item 16. Over the past three years, cities work has conducted research on what it takes to start a small business in Austin. We found that in comparison to 25 other cities, Austin is the most [11:50:48 AM] regulatory complex and the third most expensive city to start a restaurant. And this reality falls hardest on the smallest entrepreneurs. Our microbusinesses. These businesses don't have the same money and resources that chains and larger businesses have to hire attorneys to navigate the permitting process for them. And for many austinites, this means the difference between starting a business and staying on the sidelines. Agenda item 16 takes the first step in reducing these barriers. This resolution begins with a simple but overdue step, formally recognizing microbusiness as a distinct classification in city policy so the city can target its programs, policies, and regulatory relief where they're needed the most. It helps align Austin's policies with the kind of city it wants to be, and ensure its growth remains inclusive and accessible for all entrepreneurs, and not just those with money. These local and creative micro businesses are what makes Austin the beloved city it is today, and [11:51:49 AM] the one I've called my home for my entire life. We're grateful to council member Fuentes for sponsoring this item, and council members Velazquez, zo qadri and Laine for co-sponsoring this resolution that recognizes microbusinesses for the value they bring to our community. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Hi. Are we on item 17? Just double check. Okay. Thank you. I saw the scroll and I don't want to. >> Item 16 is the current item. >> Item 16. >> I was called it for 17. >> Which speakers for 16 have been called? Okay, okay. >> Sorry, I just wanted to double check. Rivas district nine. I want to make it evidently clear that any acquired, developed, deployed or activated equipment in our parks are not ai enabled. I am a part of the no. Lpr coalition, along with other anti ai and anti-surveillance groups. Here in Austin. We have the trust act in place, I know, but any [11:52:50 AM] honeyed words claiming that the technology is ai enhanced or assisted by ai will be seen through immediately. The issues facing our parks are systematic and are not going to be remedied by flock or Oracle. If certain privileged austinites can have an issue with O unhoused in our parks, let us turn our eyes to support services such as the ones that were being cut for those impacted, prioritized for the deployment to city parks with a history of violent crimes directly from what was in the agenda today, is oftentimes coded language to deploy cops to parks in marginalized communities and public spaces. That means using racial profiling as a weapon of racial disparity and defunding our public spaces. We don't need more arrests in park. We do need more support holistically for our community so we can all enjoy our public spaces without the fear of surveillance and police action. I want to take this last little bit to share a personal anecdote. I work [11:53:52 AM] downtown on 11th street. There was a homeless man who was lost his life in the heat. He was around the corner. My fellow coworker walked around the corner and said, want to see a dead body? And so they were sitting there motionless, and we called APD to come or 911 services, and the response time was slow. And I think that if we want to tackle what is being hinted to in this proposition, with the disparities here, we need to face the holistic and systemic issues versus the ones that could have helped prevent that person from dying what they did. >> Thaou, Mr. Sappi. >> Hello, Ben zohaib, district four resident. Our parks are a beautiful and important part of what makes Austin a wonderful place to live. So as we talk about those and all all the investments that we do in improving those parks, if there are barriers that make people feel like they can't access them to the extent that they'd [11:54:53 AM] love to, yeah, that's a topic of discussion, right? But we also have to make sure that, you know, the systems that we put in place are in accordance with our community values. And our community has been very clear that they don't want anything that's ai tied, anything that's, you know, in these mass surveillance systems. So please make that explicit in this. I'm glad to see there's an amendment to make it very clear that this will not only, you know, conform the trust act, but that put it into the language of this so that it's clear to everyone, you know, for fourth amendment mass surveillance reasons for, you know, the state of Texas using these dragnet surveillance states in cooperation with the federal government to abuse our neighbors and, you know, seek people who have sought health care outside of the outside of the state, all kinds of reasons. But going back to helping people access our beautiful parks, something that I love to [11:55:53 AM] do. You know, we can look at things that can take us, you know, things off of theofficer's plates by having like a park ranger who's unarmed helps someone know about the different programs that are happening in our parks, you know, keeps an eye on somebody's vehicle so it doesn't get broken in, lets them know about other options for getting to the park, like a bus or our, our bike share system, which is coming back online soon. You know, there are lower cost options that do a better job than, you know, some of the systems that everyone fears and help us shift our view on how to make it better. >> Mr. Fitzgerald. >> Hi, Phil Fitzgerald, district one. So if you rode on mopac, I-35 or south Lamar to get into this meeting, you are currently under investigation. And whether you committed a crime or not, you pass by flock cameras that were set up by the state. So if a crime occurs anywhere along that path, [11:56:54 AM] you're immediately a potential suspect. And that's the reality of what these cameras are and what you're trying to bring to Austin. Going back to governance, as that gentleman was talking about earlier, this council has been given the opportunity to lead the city, and we're being asked to trust in a governance that has so often been disappointing. People are screaming about grocery, grocery prices and child care costs in our schools closing, but y'all are focusing on adding more surveillance to our streets. And I feel like this council is treating flock cameras in a very similar fashion to how it's treating data centers. People are saying no to data centers, but some of y'all are trying to frame it as no. Unless, no, unless they pay for their water. No,nls they pay for electricity. But people are saying no, period. The trust act, which was passed this past spring, is just an attempt to pacify those objecting voices. But the day the state steps in and requests access to those cameras, it will be given do I know this? Well, the city used to have a lot of street murals. The city also updated policies [11:57:54 AM] for APD not to work with ice. What happened? Greg Abbott stepped in applied pressure, threatened to defund some money, so the city turned over it, removed the murals and had APD work with ice. So there's an established pattern here of this council not putting austinites first. And the bottom line is the trust is gone between the community and the city council. Installing these cameras invites fear and paranoia into our community. Austinites will always wonder how APD is using our data and who else is watching. So please do not put these cameras up. >> Mr. Fitzgerald, do you want to speak on item 18? >> I feel like I'm yapping today. So just briefly, I'm. I'm speaking in favor of this. We have to create more connection in our city, whether it's through roads, sidewalks, walking paths, bike paths, bus paths, everything. I wanted to point out that on July 5th, an [11:58:54 AM] austinite was involved in a hit and run. He was riding his bike 12 miles to work on west 35th street. His name. Forgive me if I say his name wrong. His name was Carl long. She. He was 65 years old. He immigrated from Taiwan. He was a UT student and he was an austinite. And I find it really disheartening that so many people from the biker community feel unsafe on our streets. When we talk about public safety, I think a lot of people have the knee jerk reaction of thinking we need more police, when in fact we can increase public safety by doing something like putting up barriers to protect our bike riders. If we're wanting to be a more mobile city, it's not just about creating the illusion of option. We also have to make sure that those options are safe and accessible to people. I did not know this man, but but it pains me to to see that he was essentially guilty of just trying to get to work. So I think more emphasis everywhere. And as miss Zenobia pointed out last week, there's a lot of places in our city that were promised infrastructure increases. And [11:59:55 AM] as we've seen, there's a lot of sidewalks, a lot of streets that look like. So please, we have to pick up the pace on this. Thank you. >> Did you >> Do you want to speak on item 19 as well? >> Yeah. 19 my general thoughts were last week when when member Siegel brought up that what I believe was an amendment for spending this off, he. He also laid out a timeline and financing for this. And I found that very encouraging. What I did not find encouraging was that the the gentleman that was speaking to this was not bullish on our ability to meet that timeline, and I find that attitude to be to be very disappointing. You know, we live in the same country that was able to put man on the moon, but we can't stand up an office and get people certified and working in six months. And if that's the personality that this city has, I mean, we can only point to its leaders, right? When people are stressing the needs that we need, and we're telling you how to use our tax money. And there just seems to be slow movement, [12:00:56 PM] slow movement, slow movement. But when dog's head comes around, we annex the land and get the tax loan approved in a matter of months. So I, I really, I really would encourage you all, if possible, to have some urgency with your movements about delivering services to people, saving, saving some of our money, and just aspiring to be more ambitious in our goals. Yeah, because I think that that, that mentality kind of, you know, trickles down to the rank and file. And my belief is if, if they say that they we can't do that in six months, well, maybe we should find people that can get it done in six months. >> I have a remote speaker for item 19, Mike Castellano. Mike, are you there? Please unmute. For item 19. I have David Weinberg, Ben zohaib, Susan [12:01:57 PM] Spataro. >> Go ahead. >> Everyone wants to start. >> Okay. Susan Spataro, district eight. I think this is a really terrible idea. I'm I'm looking at a line here and it says that all civilian 911 call takers in all non-sworn positions, which are required to support or manage the work of the civilian call takers. We talk about competent. I don't know how. I can't remember the number of of weeks, months it takes to train to be a police officer. It's something like 6 or 9 months. I don't remember how long. So we're going to put civilians in there that have none of that training whatsoever. They don't know anything about police work, and they're going to decide who [12:02:58 PM] goes out. The other question I think that needs to be asked and is not being asked is, will social workers and mental health professionals be willing to go to these sites without police? Because the idea is there's some savings there. Where is the savings? And if in fact you do implement this, I hope that you will have an official recording that is open to the public, showing who sends who to these difnt calls. It is easy to to again, criticize the police in this horrible incident where this young man was killed. Everyone has to be horrified for that. But the call was there is a there's a young man in the park with a gun in his waistband. That's what the media. I'm assuming that's correct. I don't know what you misinterpret about that or where the police screwed up on that. It's an unfair situation. We need to keep the call center [12:03:58 PM] here. Miss Laine, you have an absolute need to have more communication out in your district. I agree with that. That can be done with the present system. If you're going to hire two more people, put them in there and technology that's needed, we don't need to change it. Maybe just improve it. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. Sotheby. >> I Ben zohaib, district four. The reality is we have cians currently taking our 911 calls, and they do an excellent job. But having that housed in a department that has so much on its plate makes that sometimes a budgetary afterthought. There's there's too much happening. Right. So it is a good idea to move this to its own independent, you know, department headed up through civilian, you know, focus focused on civilians, focused on this task. Because theeality is, is as our city grows, especially in districts like district six on, on the [12:04:59 PM] border with many other jurisdictions, there is so much interplay with different entities. And having someone who can focus on that actually helps by taking something off the plate from our officers and the folks who are going to be responding to those mental health calls, have been asking for us to look at methods to send them to those calls. This is a cost savings, right? This initial investment will allow us to reap rewards in the long term and again, restore trust. The reality is that in many of our neighborhoods, people are reticent to call 911 for many different reasons. But if they know that they are calling someone in a department that is independent from the police, who can connect them to, you know, the care that they're seeking that can help restore the relationship between our [12:05:59 PM] our city and the folks that that you all serve. I know that in my neighborhood that when the someone has needs for emergency assistance because of health or fire or mental health, one of the first concerns or the first things you hear people shout is la policia. Don't call the police because of the fear. So this is actually something that helps in that area. >> For 19. I'm going to try Mike cosimano one more time. Mike, are you there? >> Mr. Sappi, don't go too far. Hello. >> Thank you so much. >> My name is Mike cosmano. I live in district seven. I want to thank my council member, Mike Siegel, for co-sponsoring this item, and I want to thank Krista Laine for leading on it. 911 should work for everyone, and it should be independent that it can operate without bias by balancing each agency's needs. Besides its own operational requirements. I [12:07:02 PM] believe experts should lead in their respective fields, and an expert in policing is not the same as an expert in operating an effective call center, which is what 911 is. It's an extremely important high pressure call center, but it is a call center. Call takers and dispatchers are specialized empls with specific skills, and they should be managed by someone who knows their technological and managerial needs inside and out. This resolution offers us an opportunity to future proof our emergency communication. There have been great strides in staffing and response times in recent years, which is amazing. But now that the vacancies are filled and our calls get picked up right away, we need an independent director with civilian expertise to make sure we continue this forward. Progress through technology and process improvements. So please vote in favor of the joint emergency communications resolution. Thank you very much. [12:08:05 PM] >> For item 20. Ben suddaby and then on for 21, I have Susan Basta, Susan Spataro, and Ben suddaby. >> This is airection to the city manager. Oh, sorry. Ben sappi district for this item is a direction to the city manager to explore something that has come up, a reality that came very clear as part of the bond advisory task force process, was that the needs in our city outstrip our. Our capacity and flooding is an area that many people feel has has been, you know, kind of left behind in our, you know, in addressing it. So we need to explore different options for how to fund that. This is not something that's deciding it. It is looking for more information. And I think this is a good, good practice. So I encourage this. And I also [12:09:07 PM] also don't believe that we will find one silver bullet. It's going to be many different approaches T are going to find the funding to address some of these needs. And because the duff is tied to impervious cover, this is actually something that I think will yield a lot because, you know, those who are, you know, preventing the most water from filtering in will have to bear more of the cost that they're generating in their neighbors. And I think that makes sense and encourages also future building to be, to tread even more lightly when we build out stuff. Thank you. >> I'm on 21. >> Yes. >> Susan Spataro, district eight. This is my last time. I promise you that. The first thing I think it's important to define what a G file is, and that is the Texas local government code does define it. And it's a separate internal and confidential file that law [12:10:07 PM] enforcement agencies may maintain on police officers and firefighters. Here's the most important thing it typically contains of unsubstantiated complaints, internal memos, or allegations of misconduct that did not result in a formal disciplinary action. That law doesn't allow that information to be public. But when you all signed a contract with the police, it was included. So here there is more of an invasion into the police officers or firefighters, even though there have been no no, you know, the claim is unsubstantiated. The other thing that's important is people shouldn't think there isn't oversight in the police department. You've got the chief, you've got internal affairs, then you've got the office of police oversight, which has 18 employees and a $3.7 million budget. And then there's the citizens oversight committee. And when the law passed, and I know people that voted for it but didn't realize this, that on the citizens [12:11:08 PM] committee, you couldn't have anyone that had any experience with law enforcement. I honestly, I just don't understand that people want to be safe. I want us to be able to recruit really good police. And I want people to feel free in Austin. It people to be able to live here, go to the park, go to restaurants. And that's not happened since we decided defunding the police was the way to go. And I encourage you, again, if you're looking at performance, look at agencies that are not performing and look at reinvesting, reinventing public safety because it has been an abysmal failure. Promises for everything, deliver next to nothing. And thank you very much for your time. >> Hello, Ben sappi, district four. This item is actually about government transparency and making the data that we already have accessible, as included in the in the draft language, a local media outlet received an estimate of $27,000 [12:12:11 PM] or more to respond with information that the city has. That's that's onerous. That's, you know, that's difficult for our our, you know, fourth estate to do the important component that they have in our democracy, informing us and keeping the public up to up to speed. So what we're talking about here is actually just creating a system that allows a searchable database. This is something that reduces cost, you know, man hours, person hours, personnel hours at the city in responding to repeated requests and stuff, you know, puts the work on the, on, on the person requesting the information really to be able to search a database. This is no different than many of the other databases that the city of Austin makes available for the public to look at what's happening. You know, I love looking at the, you know, permits and things in my area to see what's coming. You know, [12:13:11 PM] that's how I get the heads up on the new sidewalk that's coming in. But if someone had a concern about an officer, you know, maybe having a pattern of behavior that's not conforming to the standards, they can look into it and not have to make a costly request. And again, T this is information that's already housed within the city. As mentioned in the contract, this is already available. We're just making it easier for people to access. This is a reasonable and a cost savings measure. >> For item 22. Alyssa Matthews, brie vas. Andy Miller, Rosa Maria Murillo, Linda wade. >> Please come forward if your name has been called. Please begin. >> Hi. Council. Rivas, district nine. I have been up here a lot over the past few weeks. I have talked at nauseam about what [12:14:11 PM] social services are to this community. You've heard it hopefully from everybody here. Social services to me really does look like community care. I don't see that with the Austin police department. Safety, maybe, but then again, we need to see what they're protecting. Private property, high rises that are empty, things that are over budget and just are all incentivized not to give back to our community. When data centers are built, 75 jobs go up and they ship people in and they don't live the community. And then it's set up, up and running, and everyone around data centers suffers. I believe in city government, and I believe in your ability to do good. I just need you to do it. I see a lot of these proposals, and I want you to pass every single amendment to the budget. Do not get me wrong, I am in full favor of that. However, what I do stand against is that when the community is asking for [12:15:13 PM] something and we get those crumbs, a lot of the times we look at that as a community and say, wait, hold on, we said, we need this. We said, we need that. We want dogs that to have taxes on it. Because who else is paying the taxes around here other than the governments were, or the corporations were just letting slide? Where are the protections for our communities that are not in a press memo or a declaration here at city hall that highlight the broad diversity of Austin, but then lead to nothing. So I strongly advise you to please listen and take community action when it comes to this. This is not an issue that can be solved by giving cops more money. Cops with more money get more guns, and we have a lot more issues than we are able to solve as a community. When it comes down to it. Thank you. >> Doctor Maria. Let's start with you. And then we'll go to this direction. >> Doctor Murillo. >> You probably need to move that microphone closer to your mouth. [12:16:14 PM] >> Thank you doctor Rosa Maria Murillo share of one voice central Texas and CEO for sammaritano. I don't know if this is going to be my last time here, but let's hope so. Mayor Watson, thank you for sponsoring item 22 and calling for a complete assessment before awards are awards change, we absolutely support item 22. Focus on accountability and community need. However, we have serious concern that this assessment will be done within 3540 days. We are asking council to extend. Because of that, we are asking council to extend the contracts at their current scope and funding of and funding levels. Until this assessment is completed, provided providers have an opportunity to respond and final decisions are complete. [12:17:15 PM] Residents should not lose services because the review remains unfinished. And I will stress we have serious concerns that this will be done within a month. Item 22 addresses immediate decisions, while item 14 guides the broader fy 28 review. Both should be coordinated and use one calendar contract, record evidence standards and provided submission process and final decision authority. Item 22 findings should inform, not duplicate or conflict with item 14 review. I appreciate your time. >> Thank you. Thank you very much, miss wade. >> Good afternoon. I'm Linda Thomas wade, CEO of the sickle cell assocon of Texas Marc Thomas foundation. And I also would just like to thank all of you, council members for your [12:18:17 PM] support. And council member Adler, as well as mayor Watson for item 14 and 22. Because of the city's investment, we have been able to build upon that funding to secure additional state and federal resources, significantly extending the reach and impact of the city's investment. I am in favor and respectfully ask you to identify 4.7 million to be used to restore the proposed social service cuts and reductions. Specifically, I ask that you maintain level funding of 350,000 for fiscal year 2027 for sickle cell programs and services. This is especially critical following the 10% reduction in funding we received last year. Further, reducing our funding would directly impact our ability to serve the community. We already [12:19:19 PM] operate with limited resources, and additional cuts would mean reducing essential programs and losing three experienced staffmembers. Our foundation is the only nonprofit in Austin, central Texas, dedicated exclusively to serving individuals and families affected by sickle cell disease and trait. We provide patient advocacy, limited financial assistance, mental health counseling, certified case management, community education support groups, youth programs, and outreach. And these are the services that fill critical gaps in our community safety net. 1 in 12 African Americans suffer from sickle cell trait and 1 in 36 hispanics. Thank you so much for your time. >> Appreciate you being here and what you do. Yes, sir. >> Good morning, mayor Watson and city council members. My name is Andy Miller and I'm the executive director for Austin child guidance center, located in district seven and serving [12:20:20 PM] children and families throughout our community. First, I do want to thank you for restoring funding to Austin social service safety net. That investment matters tremendously to the children and families who depend on these services. Ac DC has been faithfully serving the community for 75 years. We provide specialized mental health services to children and families, including children with complex behavioral health needs. As you consider item 22 and the evaluation of social service contracts, I ask you to be very careful about how success is measured. The study must reflect the complexity of serving children's mental health needs beyond simply counting unduplicated clients. For example, one child might need five sessions, while another might need 20, 30, or even 50 sessions. Along with family engagement and care coordination. Yet both are counted the same as one client. A simple client count does not reflect service intensity, clinical complexity, or the true impact being done in the [12:21:21 PM] community. Austin strives to be one of the best places in the country to live, work and raise a family. If we want that vision to include children, we must invest in services that actually help them thrive. Please consider severity of need, intensity of service outcomes, family engagement, prevention of higher cost interventions and the the expertise required to serve children effectively. Acjc is proud to be part of Austin social service safety net, and I respectfully ask that the evaluation process. Recognize the Val and complexity of that work, not just the number of people served. Thank you for your service to our community and your support of Austin's children and families. >> Thank you sir. >> Mayor. All speakers for all items have not been called. >> Thank you very much. Members, as you as you have heard, we've concluded all of the public hearings that were on the agenda, and we've heard from all of the speakers on council meeting items. And I want to say thanks to everybody for [12:22:21 PM] participating in that process. Speakers for the Austin housing finance corporation and the Mueller lgc meetings will be heard when we when we come back, when we recess the council meeting and we come back for those two meetings and convene those meetings, members staff is still putting together the amendments, and I'm not sure we're actually going to end up with all the minutes. My understanding that one office has dropped 15 amendments while we've been meeting here today. So I guess. Welcome to budget day, everybody. Merry Christmas. And but anyway, so what I'm going to recommend that we do is that we recess for approximately 45 minutes to allow staff to get us where we need to get on that. And we have a little bit of time to look at those things and maybe talk to whoever is playing Santa Claus for us and see where that goes. That being said, unless there's an objection, council, Austin city council will be in recessntil [12:23:23 PM] 1:10 P.M. It is 1223. [1:25:45 PM] We're going to start in just a second. We've got a quorum, but I want to make sure we got everybody. Okay. >> I don't. >> Thank you. >> I told the council member, but he has duplicate numbers on a couple of them. So he's going to renumber. >> Okay. [1:26:53 PM] >> I wonder where. >> Rosie. Garcia-pittman. Haydn. Orlowski. You know how this plays out. Eric and I. >> Okay. >> Well good afternoon. Goodafternoon everybody. I'm going to call the Austin city council back to order. It's7 P.M. On August 12th, 2026. Members. [1:27:56 PM] What we're going to do is next we will go to item number seven. Item number seven is an ordinance adopting the city's budget for fiscal year 2026 2027. We conducted the required public hearing on the proposed budget on July 30th, 2026, and we also allowed for public comment on this item earlier today. I'll. The way we're going to proceed is I will take a base motion or a main motion or primary motion, whatever I may end up calling it as we go along through the day, but we will take a primary base or main motion. That, and what I'm going to ask for is a motion to accept, to adopt the city manager's proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 2027 that was filed on July 10th, 2026. After that motion is made, we will take up staff's recommended [1:28:57 PM] amendments. Then we will take and we'll vote on those. So we will then, I anticipate, have the main motion, as amended. Then we will take up the council amendments that don't change the total budget dollar amount as moved and amended. In other words, that a revenue neutral and I will be clear, I'm not sure we have any of those, but we're going to verify that before I say we don't have any of those, then we will take up council amendments that do change the total budget dollar amount, and we'll get motions and we'll discuss those and amendments, and then we will come back and vote on the main motion, as amended. With that being said, is there a motion and a second to adopt the city's fiscal year 2026 2027 budget filed on July 10th, 2026? Council member harper-madison moves approval. It is seconded by council [1:29:58 PM] member Ellis. With that, let me turn to our professional financial staff and ask for you to talk about our status and any proposed recommended amendments from staff. >> Thank you. Mayor Cary Lang, director of budget and organizational excellence. We do have some staff amendments that are included in item seven, exhibit a members. >> You have you have an item seven, exhibit a that five pages. And these are staff amendments. Think of them as cleanup items, although they also include things such as the agreement we all had with regard to the protection of the investment of the $4.7 million in social services, that that sort of thing. So please go ahead. >> Thank you. And so if when you look at this item, the first three pages, as the mayor [1:30:58 PM] mentioned, includes the conversation and presentation we presented last week on the addition of the $4.7 million of property tax revenue that we received with the certified tax roll. That is the first line in a and then the next several lines through page three are the changes to the proposed budget to address that $4.7 million to to fund local housing vouchers in the general fund, as well as move items around from the housing trust fund and the hope fund in order to allow for $4.7 million of funding in one time for the social service grants to continue through fiscal year 27. Moving forward to page four of the amendments, all of page one through three is staff [1:31:58 PM] recommendation number one, page four. Staff recommendation number two is to implement the 3% or $1,590 increase. The city manager presented a memo last week to increase the staff under $53,000, with this option for their wage increase, and this item two includes the cost to the general fund as well as enterprise departments for this $18,000. The remaining items three is an addition of two positions in the golf fund. This is cost neutral. The dollars were already appropriated for fiscal year 27, as well as a grant funded position that is going to be reimbursed by donations for parks and recreation. There is an additional fire lieutenant included that will be reimbursed by an interlocal agreement with the Austin independent school district, as [1:33:00 PM] well as a carry forward of. This is item six of the pay for success fund for the homeless strategies and operations office to make those dollars available in fiscal year 27. Item eight is the carry frd for mayor and council for the unexpended dollars in fiscal year 26. And then finally, there are 40 cadet positions in the fire department to support their modified academy. These 40 positions are cost neutral. That is, the total of staff recommended amendments. >> Members. You have any questions or comments for staff before I seek a motion? All right. The motion would be a motion and a second to approve. The staff recommended amendments to the main motion, which is the budget. Is there such a motion? Motion is made by council member Siegel. It is second by council member. Fuentes. Is there discussion on [1:34:00 PM] the motion? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion to approve the staff recommended amendments to the budget is adopted. All right. Now what we'll do is we will go to the proposed council amendments to the budget. The way I'm going to do this is just go straight through the packet that we have. I indicated before we. Recessed that there may be additional ones. Those are primarily, if not exclusively, cuts to the budget. The way we will address that, assuming our director doesn't disagree with me on this, the way we will address that is we will go through all of the amendments that are [1:35:02 PM] neutral. Then we'll go through all of the amendments that cost the budt.t. We will recess briefly so that, as I indicated earlier, we make sure the math, maths, and when they come back, if they say the amendments have put the budget out of balance because we're spending more money than than we got, then we have two approaches that we can follow. One is those proposed amendments that create cuts can be considered at that time, and or we will have staff make any recommendations it has about what ought to be cut in order to meet the amendments that have passed. Is that is that copacetic with everybody? Okay, then that's the way we'll go. So, members, if you want to speak on an amendment, let me know. But the first amendment will be Fuentes amendment number one to the to the budget [1:36:02 PM] motion. And I will recognize councilmember Fuentes. She will be followed by council member Velasquez. So just council member, you'll be on deck. Councilmember Fuentes, you have the floor. >> Thank you. I move to amend the proposed fiscal year 2026 2027 budget by reducing funding for general fund consultant contracts, excluding social service types of consulting contracts or las by 10%. The city manager is directed to utilize the city social service grant evaluation rubric to allocate the 114,520 and $0.90, and funding that results in the amendment to social services receiving proposed reductions or eliminations. >> Motion is made by councilmember Fuentes to approve Fuentes amendment number one to the main motion. Are you second, it's seconded by council member. Alter discussion on that item. Councilmember alter. >> Just one question to make sure that it won't be accidentally limited. In this it says, and forgive me for just catching this. My brain [1:37:02 PM] when you read it. Two social services receiving proposed reductions or eliminations. But if through the restoration process, we are able to restore all the contracts we think we need to restore, and then think maybe a certain service should get additional funding. I just want to make sure this that language won't limit our ability to invest in programs that we think just could use that additional investment, because they're serving a high priority. That's yeah, really, that's for staff. I want to. >> And the question is, would this additional investment limit you? >> I just want to make sure that the language at the very end that says two social services receiving proposed reductions or eliminations won't limit your ability to invest these dollars in a potential like, let's just say the food bank ends up with no reductions or eliminations. But at the end of the day, when everything settles, we feel like this extra $100,000 would be best served going there. [1:38:03 PM] That that wouldn't limit your ability to make that proper investment in something that's a high priority. >> I don't believe that would limit us. >> If I could just jump in. It is not my intent to limit that discretion. If anything, it is. It's geared towards the categories. >> And that's what I, I assume, and that's why just and I wish I'd read this again in my mind before, but because I know what what you're trying to do and I agree with it wholeheartedly. So I don't want to box us in. >> Okay, good. >> I think we're good. >> Perfect. Just thank you very much. >> Okay. Sure. Councilmember harper-madison. >> A couple quick questions. One, I'm wondering if the author would be open to us rounding up $0.10 and make it a nice round number, instead of dealing with that $0.90 on the end. >> And this is from the number was, I think, confirmed and verified by city staff based on a 10%. >> I just wonder if a whole [1:39:04 PM] number might be helpful. >> A whole number is fine. We have it at the whole number. That's fine. >> The 20 okay. >> Yes. >> And then the other question is, and this is also a staff question. I'm generally okay with this amendment. The one question that comes to mind for me is things that are kind of an anomaly. Like, for example, our interlocal agreement with Travis county for the northeast planning district, we couldn't have gone forward with the other, you know, sort of elements of that plan that would exist in perpetuity without the interlocal agreement. And it says interlocal agreements and consulting contracts. I just want to make sure one like that one couldn't potentially be. Excluded from consideration because of this action. I don't know that it will be. I just want to make certain it wouldn't be. >> So it's excluding the interlocal agreement, so it wouldn't be. The reduction doesn't include those interlocal agreements. >> Okay, I misread that. Thank you, I appreciate it. >> Great. Good. Other questions. [1:40:04 PM] Comments. Any more discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Fuentes number one to amendment Fuentes. Amendment number one to item number seven is adopted. That will take us to Velasquez amendment number one to item number seven. Council member Velazquez has two proposed amendments. He'll be followed by the mayor pro tem council member Velazquez, you are recognized on Velazquez. Motion to amend item number seven with Velazquez. Number one. >> Thank you. Mayor. I move to amend the proposed fiscal year 2026 2027 budget by increasing appropriations in the Austin homeless strategies and operation general fund operating budget by an ongoing amount of 350,000, and add three full time equivalent positions and add for and and for for street and community outreach. Contingent upon the [1:41:06 PM] condition that these amendments will not reduce or eliminate funding from social service funding restoration, that's Velazquez one. Velazquez two is. >> Hang on. Before you do that, let's let's do number one. Velazquez number one motion to amend number one to item number seven is he moves approval. It is seconded by council member Siegel discussion regarding Velazquez. Motion to amend item number seven with Velazquez. Number one, hearing none. Without objection, Velazquez number one is adopted. That will take us to Velazquez number two. And folks, for the record, this is Velazquez motion to amend item number seven with Velazquez. Number two. >> Thank you. Mayor. I move to amend the proposed fiscal year budget of 2026 2027 by increasing appropriations in the Austin parks and recreation general fund operating budget by an ongoing amount of 500,000 to maintain funding for operations and maintenance costs. Again, contingent upon [1:42:07 PM] the condition, contingent upon the condition that this amendment will not reduce or eliminate funding for social service funding. >> Restoration members, you've heard Velazquez motion to amend item seven with motion. Velazquez number two, is there a second? Is there a second? Second by council member? Alter is there discussion? Without objection. Velazquez number two is adopted. I would like to be shown voting no on Velazquez. Number two. That will take us to mayor pro tem vela. He has. Two proposed motions to amend. We will go to vela proposal number one to amend item number seven. Mayor pro tem, you're you're recognized. >> Thank you. Mayor, I move to amend the budget by authorizing $32 million for the public transportation public works capital budget to be used for [1:43:08 PM] safety and mobility projects. We've done a great job keeping up with the sidewalk and urban trails and mobility build out. If we don't add additional funds, it's going to stall. So I want to make sure and keep those crews working and moving forward. >> Mayor pro tem moves approval. It is seconded by council member Ellis discussion. I just want to verify that this would come from the issuance of certificates of obligation. >> It's the amendment will be funded throu certificates of obligation or other appropriate funding at the city manager's discretion. >> Very good. Further discussion? Yes. Council member duchen. >> Just to comment. Concern around both approving the $295 million bond in the ballot that might get approved, a budget that's currently at the maximum tax rate. And now we're talking about taking elements of the bridge proposal and approving them also. So I'll be voting no on this one. Thank you. >> Further discussion? Hearing [1:44:09 PM] none without objection. Vela amendment number one to item number seven is adopted with council member duchen and the mayor being shown voting no. >> And thank you, mayor. >> You're recognized on number two. >> Thank you. Mayor. This would be a very similar amendment, but this one is for the Austin animal services capital budget for a one time amount of $3 million for construction, renovation, expansion, imements to the the facilities. Again, this would be funded through certificates of obligation or other appropriate funding at the city manager's discretion. >> Thank you. Mayor pro tem mayor pro tem vela moves vela amendment number two to item number seven as he's described it. Is there a second? Second by council member Siegel discussion with regard to vela amendment number two to item number seven. Without objection. Vela amendment number two to item number seven is adopted. Iwould like to be shown voting no. Members that will now take us to council member alter. [1:45:11 PM] Councilmember alter has. >> You. >> I think. Four but I'll make sure because I think the numbers, the numbers you have on your sheets may not be accurate. So I will do my best to call out those numbers and council member alter. Correct me if you think I blow it in some way. Alter motion to amend item number seven. Number one, you're recognized on that. >> Thank you very much. And this is tied to item or motion six, which is the last of that series of four, ironically. But what we're trying to do is reduce the fees that we talked about as related to sound permit fees. If someone's going to have that type of event in their backyard, let's just say a lot of people aren't applying for these, but when they do, it's often money that's taken out of the pockets of our musicians that, like I said, is gointoto be a future amendment, [1:46:12 PM] but it has a $62,000 cost, which is reflected here in this amendment, number one. So this is to reduce the appropriation so that it's a net neutral. When we get to that other one by 62,000, it is related to the temporary staffing that we talked about last week. Whenever that that was. It's hard to keep track, but this is in a much amount. So remember we were talking about less than 10%. Now we're talking about, you know, a couple percent of that overall staffing budget, our temporary staffing budget. And so I would move adoption of alter motion number one. >> Alter councilmember alter moves approval of alter motion to amend number one for item number seven. Is there a second? Second by mayor pro tem discussion on alter motion to amend number one to item number seven. Hearing none. Without objection, it. I'm sorry. Okay. [1:47:12 PM] Without objection, alter motion to amend. Number one is adopted, with councilmember Fuentes being shown voting no. Okay, good. All right. Thank you. I don't mean good. I mean, thanks for calling it out. So I want to make sure I'm clear. I have I have council members Fuentes, harper-madison and Siegel voting no. And the motion to amend item number seven, alter motion to amend number one is adopted. That will take us to alter motion to amend. Number two, it is labeled alter motion number three, but we will call it alter motion number two. So for clarity purposes, councilmember alter you are recognized on alter motion to amend item number seven with alter motion number two. >> Thank you very much. I move to amend the fy 27 budget by adding $1 million in appropriations to the transportation public works department capital budget for [1:48:13 PM] the enhancement of speed bumps and other traffic calming program using either one time funding for certificates, obligation or other appropriate funding. Source. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Seconded by councilmember qadri. Discussion with regard to alter motion to amend item seven with motion number two. Hearing none. Do you want to discuss? >> I was going to second it. >> Okay. Councilmember zo qadri already did. >> So sorry. Keep moving. >> That's all right. Thank you. Got a third. I now know how she'soting. With that being said, without objection, alter motion to amend number two for item number seven is adopted with. I would like to be shown voting no on that item. That will take us to alter motion to amend number three, it is labeled in your packet alter motion number four. This is [1:49:14 PM] amending amending item number seven again. But councilmember, your alter your your recognized. >> Thank you very much. I move to amend the fiscal year 2627 budget by increasing appropriations in the Austin homeless strategies and operations department and by one time funding amount, $500,000 from the hope fund to provide a matching grant fund for supportive services tied to the foster youth and independent voucher program, something that will allow for us to leverage these dollars almost 7 to 1 and serve some some kids who really use it. >> Mayor pro tem seconds. The motion made by councilmember alter for alter motion to amend. Number three. Is there discussion? Without objection, alter motion to amend item number seven with alter. Number three is adopted. That will take us to alter motion to amend item number seven with motion number four. Although it is labeled motion number six, [1:50:19 PM] you're recognized. >> Perfect. Got us there. So this is the last one like I mentioned, relates to the first one. So the the fst amendment was to decrease the budget. This is decreasing the revenue. So everything is level. And we will have a fee amendment when we get to the fee item item number six. But this is to reduce it reflects the reduction in the sound permit application fee. >> Thank you. Councilmember alter moves approval of alter motion to amend number four for item number seven. Is there a second? Second by councilmember harper-madison. Is there discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, yes. Councilmember harper-madison. >> So one of the things that I like about how some of our colleagues lay out their amendments is they offer the rationale. Can you sort of get to that with this for me very quickly, please? >> Yes. So this is the the dollar amount attached to the fee. And that one has the [1:51:20 PM] rationale on it. But we have when someone wants to have amplified sound, let's say in their backyard or at any kind of event, they have to get a sound permit fee. That fee is really high. And so most people either don't get it, or when they're figuring out how much they can, either can they afford to have a musician or how much they're going to pay that musician. That fee really eats out of their ability to support our musical scene. And so the idea here is if we can limit those fees, make them much more approachable, that will allow for more people to invest in our musicians. And this is just the the fiscal cost of taking that permit cost down. >> Thank you both. Further discussion? We are voting on the motion alter motion to amend item number seven with alter number four. There being no further discussion. Without objection, alter motion to [1:52:21 PM] amend number four for item number seven is adopted. We're going to go to council. Councilmember Laine. But first, council member Velasquez would like to be shown voting no on alter motion to amend. Number one, we that, if you recall, alter motion to amend number one had three no votes. Councilmember Velasquez would like to be shown voting no. It will not change the outcome of the vote. So I'll move that he be shown voting no on that item. Item your number one, seconded by the mayor pro tem. Is there any discussion? Without objection, council member Velasquez will be voting no on alter motion to amend number one to item number seven. It does not change the outcome of the vote. Item number one alter motion number one to item number seven is still adopted. All right. That will take us to council member Laine. >> Thank you mayor. My my first motion is I move to amend the [1:53:23 PM] fiscal year 2026 through 27 proposed budget with following allocation adding $61,000 in ongoing funding to the Austin public health support service. Grants general fund operating budget to fully restore funding for community health navigator services. And I'll go ahead and offer a little bit of rationale, please. So this amendment intends to restore ongoing funding for this program. If you are here in the morning, we I would like to thank those speakers who came forward to describe the outcomes of the service, which were not available at the point in time when the proposed reduction was made, and I certainly concur with the importance of supporting these programs when there is no other viable alternative. And just to restate a few of the successes of this program, out of 400 clients served, 10% of those clients were from the new senior navigator program. 92% of clients had reported positive outcomes for their health care service after [1:54:23 PM] receiving navigation assistance. These successful results for a targeted population is exactly the type of programmatic outcome that I believe aligns with our city's priorities, and simply to state as well that some of these navigation services are beneficial to the Asian community. And while we tend to think of the Asian community as a whole, and they are a whole the aapi community, they're extremely diverse in linguistically, culturally, and in many ways that it's difficult to replicate this type of service. So that's the rationale for this one. >> Thank you, thank you. Laine moves a adoption of Laine motion to amend item number seven with Laine. Number one, is there a second? Second by council member? Velquez? Is there discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Laine number one motion to amend number one for item number seven is adopted. I would like to be shown voting no. All right it's adopted. That will take us to Laine motion to amend item [1:55:23 PM] number seven with Laine. Number two, council member Laine, you are recognized. >> Thank you. I move to amend the fiscal year 2026 through 27 proposed budget with the following allocation adding $250,000 in one time funding to homeless strateg and operations general fund operating budget to establish operational gap funding for family shelters. And again, I'll give a rationale. One of the challenges we hear consistently from our homelessness service providers is that physical space is often not the primary barrier to currently, not the primary barrier to expanding shelter capacity. We have heard from providers who have buildings or available space that could serve families, but they lack the operational funding needed to staff maintain and open these facilities. Recent reductions in federal grant funding have only widened that gap. There's currently very, very limited family shelter availability across all of north Austin, which makes it challenging for these families to connect with their informal and formal support networks in their schools. Lastear, I [1:56:25 PM] sponsored an ifc directing homeless strategy and operations to identify opportunities to expand family shelter bed capacity while we are still working towards those goals, this amendment provides the resources needed to help translate those opportunities into additional shelter beds. I believe this amendment is how we meet the moment when family homelessness is increasing and access to basic needs is declining from federal cuts, and I hope that you can support this amendment. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Laine moves adoption of Laine motion to amend item number seven with Laine. Number two, is there a second? Second by councilmember harper-madison councilmember, you wish to speak? >> I do, I have a real quick question. I thought I saw David Kerri in the room earlier, but I don't see him anymore. >> There he is. >> Oh, there we go. I don't have on my glasses. Hi there. Just curious to know. Functionally. So there was an amendment earlier, council member alter had an amendment [1:57:26 PM] that was explicitly designated for youth aging out of the foster care system and their relationship to being unhoused. I'm curious to know, because I don't know the practical application of the resource. I don't know, I think when I hear youth, I'm making the assumption that our homeless youth are, to some degree taken up family shelter, bed space. But is that not the case? Are they? Is it a completely separate consideration? >> Question? Council member David gray, director, Austin homeless strategy and operations. So there's different types of shelter for these subpopulations. There are specific community shelters for youth and young adults who are unaccompanied. And oftentimes those youth will stay in those shelters specifically for youth. You could think of like the lifeworks shelter that specifically serves unaccompanied youth and mors. On the family side, those do tend to be for households with youth under the age of 18. So you could think of like the Salvation Army and the [1:58:26 PM] Rathgeber center. So we do have different community partners that are able to serve those different subpopulations. You don't find unaccompanied minors in family shelters. You'll find those individuals in the youth shelters. >> Okay. So it's it's not there won't nobody will have the opportunity to say that our efforts are duplicative, that multiple that, you know, a certain population is getting more than. >> Wright from, from. >> So what I'm. >> Asking, right from sos perspective and through our conversations with the council offices regarding their amendments, these are two different populations that would be served. Appreciate it. Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. Council member, any further discussion with regard to Laine motion to amend item number seven with Laine. Motion number two. Hearing none without objection. Laine. Motion to amend number two of item number seven is adopted, and I would like to be shown voting no on that item. Thank you, councilmember Laine. That will now take us members to [1:59:27 PM] councilmember Segal's motions to amend. And I want to verify with councilmember siegel,while we've been walking through these so far, I believe your staff has handed out changes. They're labeled Siegel budget amendment one a and Siegel budget amendment one B, but those change the ones that we had in the packet. Is that correct, mayor? They are corrections in. >> What. >> Was shared in the packet. The rationale for each of the items was switched. So they just put the rationale with the. Okay, so members, what you have been handed. In other words, what I would suggest you do is you pull out the ones that were in the packet and replace them with the ones that his staff just provided us. Also, for the record, what I'm gng to do there, there are three proposed amendments by council member Siegel, and just for the record and ease with numbering, I'm [2:00:28 PM] going to label those one a will become Siegel number one one B will be Siegel number two, and number two Siegel. But proposed budget amendment number two will become Siegel number three. That's just for ease with the way we're doing all these, and hopefully it is ease. >> Mayor. >> Yes. >> Can staff get a copy of that change? >> Director I give you all the permission by Katy powers. >> Very briefly recently. >> Good. Okay, members, that will take us to Siegel budget amendment number one. This is a proposed amendment to item number seven, council member Siegel. You're recognized. Thank you. Mayor. Amendments one and two are part of council member lane's ifc as well. This is part of the move to establish a new office of joint emergency communications, and the difference between 1 and 2 is one is the expense piece and [2:01:29 PM] two is the pay for us and staff at basically at staff's request, we separated the amendment into two pieces. So for amendment one, I move to amend the proposed budget to establish and fund a new office of Joi emergency communications in the general fund by making the following expenditure and funding amendments first, to add ongoing funding and for positions to the new office of joint emergency communications and the amount of $766,000 581 for governance, operational and technology enhancements to improve 911 response times. The total annual cost will be approximately $1.7 million. And second, to add funding to the new office of joint emergency communications in the amount of $599,306 for one executive level position, one assistant director position an three support positions. These needs are projected to increase to 979 $139 in annual ongoing costs beginning in fiscal year [2:02:29 PM] 28, to create capacity to hire personnel as necessary to establish and facilitate the transition to an independent joint emergency communications department, and then finally, to add funding to the new office of joint emergency communications. The amount of $37,500 in fy 27 for one time start up costs for the new office, I would move Siegel amendment one. >> Approval of Siegel amendment. Proposed amendment number one to item number seven. It is seconded by council member zo qadri. Discussion on the item. Councilmember duchen. >> Understanding is we're going to have, I think, a more substantive or at least ask some questions to staff during the I. Fc portion of this. Well. >> The only the only suggestion. Sure, you can do it that way, but we will have passed item number seven before we get to the ifc. Sure. So if you have questions that relate to whether or not you would want to vote for this funding, you probably ought to ask that now. [2:03:32 PM] >> I'm going to go ahead and see if I can get staff to help me with a few questions. >> Fair enough. >> As part of this and part of my reluctance here, my M hesitation is, as we talked about last week, we have a presentation from our consultants on this that's supposed to be issued in mid to late September. And we haven't had that. And they identified certain rationales and concerns and legal issues that I think would be helpful for me to better understand before I can get behind this kind of change. So in the meantime, like to see if I can get public safety up here. Police, fire, ems, or maybe acm Batista if he's here also. >> And Mr. Mayor, my hand is raised, but I think councilmember duchen may be doing exactly what it was that [2:04:32 PM] I was intending to do. So you don't have to call him. >> We'll we'll after he finishes, we'll call look at you and you tell me what you want to do. Councilmember duchen, you have the floor. >> Thank you. So I'll offer this to all the chiefs. Really. I'm trying to figure out what the impact of the J. E, C may have or will have on, say, a F D or M S or APD's response times and the ability to manage the and the ability to manage your particular workflow in the call center. If you want to start, chief Davis. >> Thank you, council mayor. I guess I'm really not sure what it's going to do when it comes to that. And certainly looking at, you know, T brydan report and the work that we've done. And I believe you have a powerpoint of just since my time here, the improvement that has been gained in the response times. I've been here for two years and everything I've done [2:05:33 PM] is to align these areas with the vision and the mission that we've set, and we're getting there. The people that were here, and I know you talked about the missions critical report. They stated to me that this 911 center, this communication center is in the top 0.5% of call centers and communication centers in the country. So when you talk about where the need is, that's what problems are we trying to fix. And if we see gaps, let's go fix those gaps. And I feel confident that we can do that. So as far as you know, these response times, they have improved greatly where they'll go if they're not under police. I cannot say that. >> Thank you chief. >> Yeah. Similar to chief Davis, I there was some unknowns here. I think in the current proposal it would focus primarily on the civilian call takers. However, [2:06:34 PM] you know, if moving forward, this becomes a. More of a joint communication center, it would have an impact. You know what we do each and every day and how it is we structure how it is that we respond to these emergencies. The communication center is really the brains, and it's one component, as the chief alluded to, to how it is that we ensure that we're able to get to the most life threatening emergencies in a timely manner. And so, you know, having the ability to make sure that we can manage those processes and look at the best places for us to address any deficiencies we have are really critical for us. >> And again, I would say something very similar for us. You know, the initial 911 call taking stuff is handled directly by a pd. Our dispatchers and our dispatching wouldn't be directly affected by any of the the changes right on the front end. And we don't know what the impact would be down the road. >> What about specifically for fire related concerns in terms of getting your trucks to areas [2:07:36 PM] of concern that are in the further area, further reaches of the city, right. And d10 and d6. >> So right now, the way we operate with telus and with automatic aid, we don't have significant issues in getting our folks to where they need to be right now from the fire side. >> Okay. All right. Is is chief Batista here or acm? Oh, there you go. >> There's only one chief. Acm. >> I think there's a saying about that. Too many chiefs. In your opinion, would the creation of this department create a real gc or how does this play out. >> In council discretion? It doesn't create a new department. This this is creating an office. >> Well, he gets to ask questions. >> Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor pro tem council member duchen Ramon Batista, acm. The. What would. What's the question you're [2:08:36 PM] saying you're asking if the department. The creation of another department. Excuse me. >> So is this in your opinion, would this create what the creation of this department create kind of a a real gc as as has been, as we've been talking about and portrayed? And is that going to produce the sort of results that people hope THA will, in your view? >> So as I've said privately and publicly, that this will not create a real joint emergency communication center, because if and when we ever got to a place where there was a director in place, that director could not oversee fire and ems. >> Would this affect the ability to have public safety departments collaborate efficiently or effectively? Does that change anything for you? >> We've had a consultant that came in and examined the operations our systems and said that it isorking effectively as it is today, [2:09:36 PM] adding another system, another bureaucracy into the system will add another layer of complexity in how the calls get processed, from the initial intake to the distribution to police, fire and ems. >> And how do you think having a director is going to impact the chief's jobs and their and their workflow? >> It would be incumbent on whoever is hired to have a very collegial relationship with fire and ems, as well as police. And moreover, police would never leave the 911 communication center because there's. I imagine no way that the police chief is going to be okay with not having someone that represents her interests and public safety's interests in making sure that calls are properly classified and dispatched in that center to work alongside that director. >> Do you foresee this creating any jurisdiction challenges then, based on what you just said, between not just police, but the other public safety [2:10:36 PM] departments or chiefs? >> I don't believe any jurisdictional issues. >> Okay. And then overall, what's your sort of current recommendation here regarding the creation of this? >> It still remains the same that I believe option a, as presented to us by the consultant, is the best option. >> Okay. Thank you. And the last question I've got is for the city manager, since I know that he just sent a memo this morning, I believe, and I'm curious what prompted that or did something change for you? Can you shed some light on the 11th hour memo on this topic? >> Yes, councilman. And so I think understanding that the discussion, whether on council member Segal's amendment and or the later I. Fc one of the requirements to establish a new department is that the city manager offers a recommendation. And so I felt it was [2:11:37 PM] appropriate to memorialize via memorandum what my thoughts and our recommendations were to clear the way for any decision that council could make, particularly since we are adopting and codifying through ordinance today the budget and any departments or offices wanted to make sure that that was taken care of. >> Thank you. And last question then, for everybody is going to be what of the concerns you laid out? For those that haven't read that memo, what is the chief concern that you've got? >> I think similar to whether it's the memorandums that have been shared by myself or my team and or the verbal testimony and or statements today by the three chiefs, as well as assistant city manager Batista, that we have received not in writing at this point. In final draft recommendations from a consultant that speak to, I think, the issues and challenges that could come [2:12:38 PM] about. Should we remove and or create a separate office to facilitate a current process amongst the three public safety entities that we believe is working effectively, that that would add a level of complexity and have cautioned us about what best practice is and the approaches to doing that. I think at this point in juncture, until one that's done and council has the fullness of that report, that we should not be one prematurely establishing an office and or a department. I think allocating resources that in the final end may or may not be moved back, because some decision might change later. That I think, is premature. And I think if there was any type of action like this one, it would need to obviously have some time for an understanding of the implementation process and allow us to work through any [2:13:39 PM] challenges or issues. And I think at least as worded, whether in this amendment and what I've seen in the ifc, it is already a foregone assumption, as written,hat we would be transitioning to a joint emergency communication center. But then in the same document, speak as if we may not do it. So it seems as if it's conflicting, at least how I read it. But it would be not. It would not be my recommendation, honestly, that council approve this budget amendment and or get in front of a study that we have paid for and not received the final results of before we make a decision of that magnitude. And so that's at least what I shared in my recommendation. I think I've shared that publicly. And if not, today is the first time it's beenhared. But I know I've shared it individually as I've met with council members. >> Thank you, Mr. Broadnax. I'm just going to say 1 or 2 things quickly, which is I agree with [2:14:40 PM] the concerns about the process, that there have been issues as we've started this a year, year and a half ago, whenever it was to form the joint emergency communications department. And I'm concerned about that process, and I think we have failed to meet deadlines, and those things need to be addressed. But at the same time, I don't think we can allow that failure to make allow us to make a decision that we're lacking information currently for specifically consultants that are experts in this space that have not yet shared that with us. And despite the amount of concern that we've heard from the community and other people, you know, I hope that the presentation in September could be moved up so that we could try and have that information by today. I understand that's not possible, but instead, I feel like we're potentially moving forward without seeing that information. Hearing why our consultants made the recommendations. They did. And I have T concerns about that. One is that might look like we were behaving rashly. The other is that we're [2:15:42 PM] in the middle of important discussions about how we're even approaching consulting agreements, and we've had challenges with including scale in the back, and we've had concerns and challenges around, you know, if we're going to invest in these contracts and then disregard them when they're most relevant, that's one issue. I think there's also an issue where we we pay for strategic plans and other consulting work, and then they sit in shelves and we don't use them to the extent that they ought to be. So I'd rather see us being intentional about this mcp work and Barry done and the other reports that we've got that speak to this. I know that, as the manager mentioned, he weighed in this morning, and I think staff sounds like they're they've got concerns around this. I think in his memo that outlined some some concerns that are, you know, that that involve our city charter. And so I understand that he'd be supportive of it if council overrode every professional decision that we're we're we're considering here. That does [2:16:43 PM] give me concern as well. And I'm hearing the main concern is how we're operating. But our experts are saying that we're at the top of our game and that our response time information, at least the stuff that I just requested, suggests that things are trending in the right direction. So it's not clear to me how operationally this is going to make the difference that we hope it will. But it's also going to have challenges that I don't think we fully understand or can foresee at this point. So at this point, I understand councilmember harper-madison has some questions too. I'm going to yield the rest of my time. And just to say, I supported the resolution to go investigate this, but without having that full rationale, understanding, I'm not supportive of the change at this time. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember, councilmember Siegel and then councilmember Laine. >> Thank you, mayor, and I apologize, councilmember duchen, fo interjecting. Earlier, my concern was that you were responding to an earlier draft of this budget amendment, which that draft did propose [2:17:44 PM] transferring the civilian call takers out of the police department into a new department. But myself, our sub quorum, we listen to city management. That kind of presented a strong objection to that. And so this this amendment is actually a much smaller baby step towards a joint emergency communications office that is entirely consistent with the consultan report, which hasn't been fully delivered to us, but which was summarized in a memo. And so this amendment allows for the investments recommended by the consultant to take place to basically, I understand we have good response times, but this consultant identified six areas of improvement to first, reduce duplicate call transfers and triage questions. Second, to strengthen quality assurance, third, to modernize technology. Fourth, to expand and update performance measurement measurements. Fifth, to improve coordination between nine one and 311. And then finally to change the leadership structure. This is our consultant change the leadership structure. So it's not just sworn APD [2:18:44 PM] leadership. And I want everyone to be clear this is something I've learned. There's a difference between the call takers and the dispatchers. Right. And so there has never been a proposal to take the dispatch out of the police department. The dispatch is where the sworn personnel for each of our three public safety departments sit. This is a reform to the civilian call takers. But we're not moving any of those folks now. But we are creating a small office with a leadership structure, as recommended by the consultant. And then at a later time, council will decide what to do with this leadership structure, whether to turn it into a standalone department or potentially return it to one of the public safety departments. And so I just want to clarify that this is not the movehat was originally objected to by the city manager, and it allows for all of the operational efficiencies to be achieved, and it allows council to decide, after we receive the final strategic plan from the consultant on what to do next. And so I just want to clarify that. Thank you, mayor. >> Followed by councilmember harper-madison. [2:19:45 PM] >> Thank you, mayor. I want to start out by thanking everyone who has brought their their input from the public, from our staff, from the dais. It's much appreciated. I would have hoped that their order of this meeting would have allowed discussion, and I. I'm fine with how it is, but I just would have hoped that it. We could have discussed the ioc, merits of the ifc before moving on to a specific amendment, because, as you noted, mayor, the challenge with this order is that comments are made, questions are asked. And so I will go ahead and bring forward some of the questions that I have now and some of the comments that I have now. And so before. >> The reason we did it that way is because there's a regiment to passing a budget, and ifcs are separate from the passage of the dollars and cents in the budget. And so [2:20:47 PM] we're following the typical way we do that. And it's not meant to slight in any way. >> I'm sorry if thatmed. I didn't take it as a slight. I was simply saying that I'm saying more now than I would later. >> Fair enough. >> So so I, I want to, I want to speak to my motivation in bringing this. And I want to ask a few questions. And so I want to start. As it relates to APD with the structure that we W have. I agree, we all agree. There have been amazing improvements in 911 response time. I appreciate having a report that shows that these improvements continue, continue. Improvements have been made in my district as well as the rest. But because we've improved doesn't mean that we've gotten where we need to be. And this ifcnd the budget amendments [2:21:47 PM] as well are intended to refocus us on improving where people, our people in this city have been left behind, where families have been traumatized, where response time has cost lives. So I'm, I'm going to focus away from APD in my comments, beyond simply acknowledging the work that's been done before me, that I certainly don't want to undermine any of that work. And I >> I appreciate the partnership that I've been able to forge with chief Davis. I've seen meaningful improvements in my district, and I'm going to turn. With that, I'm going to turn to fire. Well, actually, I have a general question. So. So we got we have a memo that describes the contents of a consultant report. I see substantial recommendations within alternative a that would improve our response time. My question for whoever would like to lead on this is why haven't [2:22:50 PM] these improvements already been made? And I say this with I bring this forward because the issues that we experience in district six have been like this largely since annexation, which is decades. So I'm just wondering if we don't need a change in how we're handling emergency communications. Why haven't we previously made these types of improvements? >> Are you talking about the the recommendations that were in the report itself? >> Yeah. And and yes. >> Yeah. So I think we all received this report last week sometime is when we saw this. But to your point, everything is about continuous improvement. Are there gaps? Are there areas of improvement? Absolutely. There always are. Every shooting we have, we had unfortunately officer involved shootings always, always looking at thoses opportunities. How do we get better? How do we move beyond this? That is exactly what we're doing. And so when we look at communications and I've talked with you about it, I would love to walk with you and [2:23:51 PM] see exactly through your eyes what you're seeing specifically in district ten. How can we close those gaps? How can we make those changes necessary? And you have my commitment to that. I am all about that and how we can, you know, continue with these, even the response times, as much as they're down, they're not good enough. We still need to improve on those and we will continue to improve on those. But that's it is we I've been here for almost two years and we've made these improvements. We're on the right track. We are on the right track, but we will continue to get better. We will continue to address those gaps. >> Did I hear you correctly that you saw a report last week? >> I think it was the first report you guys saw. I saw it when we had phone calls about the not the report, just the the findings that you're talking about the six areas. >> Theemo. >> Yes. >> Okay. So you haven't seen a report from. >> No, I have not seen a report. >> No. Thank you. Thank you for that information. Going to. >> Council member Laine. Yes. I don't want to interrupt you, but but here's what I'm willing [2:24:52 PM] to do because of the way the conversation is going. What we what we can do is hold these proposed amendments to the budget. We will not pass the budget item number seven, even as amended, until after we come and we go through the ifcs that way, we can have the discussion because one of the concerns I've got with this, this proposed amendment, is that it assumes there's going to be the shift, and there may be, but it assumes that there's going to be a shift. And regardless of whether it's updated and that kind of thing, it makes an assumption that may not be the case with the ifc. As you pointed out, if you wanted to have that discussion first. So what we could do is for eaeater clarity, get the other amendments out of the way, then go to the ifcs, get to the [2:25:54 PM] number 19, pull it off the so-called consent agenda, do the consent agenda, then go to item number 19. And when that is completed and we know where that is, come back to the budget at that point. Take up this these these proposed amendments by council member Siegel. And then we take the recess that allows staff to tell us where we are budget wise. Would that help you? >> I'm I mean, I'm prepared either way. And it is your right as the chair of this meeting and the mayor to determine the order. So it's fine. Well, I would like to say one, if we are going to switch it, I would likeoo make a 1 to sentence statement before. >> Well then let's go ahead. Let's let's not switch it. Let's just go ahead and do what we're going to do. I was trying to make it easier, but I can't I can't seem to get there. >> Your effort and I will try to move through. So when we talk about the improvement in response time, our. I would [2:26:57 PM] like to understand a little bit better your understanding of. When the response time clock begins, so does it begin when I pick up the phone and dial 911? Is that when I see this report of response times, am I seeing. I dial 911 and. >> The officer is dispatched. >> Okay, so it's the time from when the officer is dispatched. So is there any analysis going on or even tracking of the time it takes from when I call 911 until the officer is dispatched? >> Yes, I'm sure we would have that. >> I mean, are you sure that you have it? >> Am I sure that we know the time you call and the time it's dispatched? >> Yes. >> Yes, I'm sure we have. We would have that time. >> Okay. I gave I've given a few examples in the past in these very deliberations. And so I'm going to raise a couple of them. Okay.nd the first [2:27:57 PM] couple will relate to motor vehicle accidents, pd type of response. But then I'll be shifting over to fire and some other areas. So I recounted on my way into city hall from district, a car went off the road, off the bridge into bull creek, a couple cars in front of me. There was already another car that had gone off the road about a quarter mile back. Emergency response was already there. I stopped my car because I was right behind the accident, and I called 911. And I thank you for coming forward as well, Mr. Stoner. At the point when I reached an operator and they said, where, where are you calling from? What is the address you're calling from? I believe is what they said. I said, there are no addresses here. It's woods on both sides. I'm really close to old country, old, old country preschool. I'm sorry. Slipping my mind on old spicewood springs road. And then they said, we need an address. And [2:28:57 PM] if you had called 911, we would have it. And so why would it? Why would I get a response from the person when I called 911 telling me, if only I had called 911, they would know they would be able to address locate where I was calling from. >> And that starts when the officers dispatched, right? Yeah. So are you talking about a cell tower has gone down? >> I mean, I'm asking I amasking you. I was on the road. I was two cars behind a car going off the bridge into the creek on its side. I called 911. There was some issues with connecting, but then I connected and I was talking to an operator of some sort and they asked me for my address and I said, there are no addresses where I am. I can see though, this preschool down the road, that's the closest address. And they said to me, well, if you had called 911 we [2:29:59 PM] could locate your, your location, but you didn't, but I did. And so it's a two part question. And the first part of the question is, why would I have and this is me, you know, who had this experience? Why would that have happened? If in the system, as you understand it. >> I would think and this could probably be for James, but it would be more of a cell tower location type issue. >> Yes, ma'am. So a couple of things C have happened there. And I and I don't have the call in front of me. So we don't have that line out. So recognize I'm going to posit the possibilities for something like this to happen. The first one is, is that it was the call was received by, say, a different piece app. So it could have been received by wilco, it could have been received by someone else. And they transferred the call to us over an administrative line. In that case, the information that was there doesn't come with the call. So that's a very that's a [2:31:00 PM] very real possibility in this case. Again, I don't kno that this call in particular, so I can't speak directly to it, but there are ways in which that that could have happened. And that's one of the reasons why the the protocol exists. Where are you calling from is to ensure that, you know, we, we, the call taker knows where you're calling and can verify that information on the screen if it's there and if it's not there to, to put it there. >> Thank you. So a transfer was made to a different operator. Data was stripped. That made it. >> Very possible. So so. Possibly that's. >> Possibly data was stripped. So then they couldn't use the technology that that would be available in more central areas of the city. I mean I can attest that that slowed down response time for me because we had a whole conversation about whether I could give an address and why I didn't call 911. And so in addition, there was a transfer that occurred of that call. So when you are tracking response times, ultimately that operator said, oh, someone else [2:32:01 PM] called in with the address. So we don't need any more help is on the way. Great love that went to go see how I could help them. So at the point that you are tracking the call response time off of the example that I gave, is it from the time that I called 911, or is it from the time that dispatch happened? What data do we have available to us currently? >> Specifically, if the nine one call is routed to us as the primary piecepp, we do start. There are many es where we can start the call, but. Call tracking starts the moment the call is seized from the originating service provider. So whether that be from your cell phone or, you know, Verizon, AT&T, whomever that is, there could be the wired phone in your house. From the moment that call is seized to the moment it's received in a piece app, that information is tracked. And that's true for all 901 calls. Now we receive those when they come directly [2:33:01 PM] to us and we have that information if it goes first to wilco or another another jurisdiction, they would have that information. So I'm going to set the different jurisdiction part aside. If we receive the call primarily, we know the moment the call from the call is received all the way up through the time the call is hung up or transferred. >> So, and this report on call response times for the calls that started in Williamson county got transferred over to us. Are we seeing the time from when someone called 911 until help arrived? Do you have access to that data now? And it is being integrated into these reports that you're handing out. >> As I said, we don't have that information because it starts at a different starts in a different place. We have it if it comes directly to us first. >> Okay. And so I am going to not keep going. I trust that you all are aware that I've, I run a lot of examples down through private meetings that [2:34:03 PM] lead to the conclusion that I don't find this data reliable without some focused looking at what's happening. Service, first place a call, what happens on the ground. However, I have examples of fire trucks waiting 45 minutes. Okay, a mile and a half from the station provided those examples to chief baker. We've got someone different here. Rotating responsibility. We need consistency. We need focus. We have a consultant report that, yes, we haven't been able to read, but our city manager staff has been able to read. And it came up with quite a number of recommendations that they track. They track with the meetings that I've had. And I, I think we all agree that they need T be made. I hope we do. I hope that we are ready to make forward progress. But the thing is that making progress on these issues that are costing lives, it isn't free and talk is cheap. It costs [2:35:04 PM] money. And so we need a budget amendment if we're going to move forward. Yes, that consultant report will be in our hands. Yes, there will be an initial hire if the money is allocated as an amendment. And we have a choice before us of whether we allocate enough money to move forward at the pace that makes sense, taking into account ultimately being able to read that consultant report and a new hire and their consultations with all of you and us. And so I am frustrated. I am not frustrated at you, mayor whatsoever, but I am frustrated at the amount of time that has gone in to then and conversations and tracking the data down and all of the things I am concerned, because these private meetings haven't moved us towards change, which is why I brought it communications. Have we started? Yes. Is it good enough? No, it [2:36:05 PM] is not. And I thank every co-sponsor who sat in meetings hearing me talk like this, who are very valued. And I am wrapping up right now. But I will tell you something. It does not help me stay calm and focused and project what I think people would like me to project. Nor does it help me have trust myself in the path that we're walking down. When there is resistance to making it possible to move forward. And that is how I perceive this. And so I thank council member Siegel. I thank every co-sponsor who has done their best. My staff is having panic attacks themselves, I'm sure, because I feel urgency on this. I don't feel urgency to do it wrong. I feel urgency to have money to put behind our words. And I think that as a city, we are more than capable to do better with emergency communications for everyone who lives here, not just a select few. And so I will share, [2:37:07 PM] without giving any more examples of why, that I fully support these amendments, because I don't want to be back here talking about money again until the next budget cycle, and I'd like to be able to make the progress that is appropriate to the need. And it is there. Thank you. >> Manager. Did you want to say something? >> Thank you councilmember. Thank you, mayor. And so, councilwoman Laine, I share your sense of, I think, urgency on ensuring that our communications and handoffs and response times are improved. I think, as you asked all three chiefs about what is functioning, even I think the detail, I guess, example that you were sharing with Mr. Stoner and he walked you through the scenarios. I think all of those things and your concerns about them, and I think their responses are accurate. I think the information that was requested, I think, by council member duchen, that we ultimately then shared with the full council. I'm not quite sure why there's [2:38:08 PM] a jaundiced eye on the validity or the accuracy of the information. While everything is specific, as Mr. Stoner said, any incident you can look at and track back and understand what happened. But to broadly suggest that because the overall data does not comport with a specific instance or other instances, I think is really dismissing, I think, the vae and I think the specificity that data is tracked in any call center, not just in Austin but in the country. But notwithstanding that, to your point about the budg amendment and not wasting or spending more time waiting another year, the sense of urgency to do something different, we all share that. But the budget amendment and then the items within the budget amendment, which again, the biggest one is creating an office and or department to solve for the things that you have discussed. That is not [2:39:09 PM] going to change anything by moving, even creating a civilian administrator within or outside of this area is not going to improve. Anything that they just told you happens in the center. So that's one and that's my one concern. Secondly, the budget amendment and the things offered in the preliminary report spoke to the improvements that you suggested, and you would like to move the resources to. But it did not, say, create a separ office or remove it from the police department. So I want to clarify that because that was stated, I thought earlier, and that's why I went to the side to make sure I don't remember that being the case. So to make the improvements, to move the resources to create the additional position, fundamentally scenario a recommended that what I said all along was if you or this [2:40:09 PM] council would like to do that and invest those resources, we're 100% on board because we believe that might change and change some things to improve the center from communications within from the external stakeholders perspectives on how that center runs. No objection from us on that. I think where we have had some concerns is getting to the end, and that is already assuming that we were going to create an office for which, again, the consultant said is not recommended. And we've saidthat it is not recommended. And I think the minute that the professional staffs, the three chiefs, notwithstanding anybody's perspective as it relates to the respect for what I have to say about it, that decisions are made when they are the ones responsible for the life, health and safety of the community. That overrides that for a budget amendment or a desire or a community concern from people who are not sitting in those seats, who have the [2:41:10 PM] responsibility when it's done. I would just say that is one of the reasons I'm supporting the chiefs and I'm against, at this point, moving forward with moving anything beyond the resources to address the issues that you've raised, that you've talked about over the last several month it has nothing to do with it being created and put in a separate office, in my opinion, as well as what you've heard from the professional staff who sit in front of you today. So again, I respect council's choices and opportunities, but to do something that I think the three chiefs say will not enhance service, other than making the improvements that are recommended. Again, I'd have to stand with my three chiefs when I say I think that's where we need to be. Until you see the report and it justifies and documents why they feel the way they do. >> Thank you, manager. >> Mayor, I just wanted to also add a clarification the city staff has not received a report yet. We've not read a report. Knowing that the report was not from mission critical partners was not going to be [2:42:11 PM] available until after the budget. And knowing how important this issue was to the city, doctor stoner, acm, Batista and myself, we had a call with the consultant to find out where they were and to get some sense of what their preliminary results were, knowing the study wasn't done, but we felt it important to try to give as much information as we could to council, which led to the memorandum that we sent you. So, you know, we're going to see their final report as soon as it's available. We will share it with the city council. But I just wanted to clarify that the memo that we put together was based upon that phone conversation, trying to get you some useful information before budget, but it was not based upon us receiving or reading a report. We would have given that to you had we had it. >> And I won't. I want to call on the people that signed up, but I want to ask a question about the bud if if what we wanted to do, if we passed this budget today and it doesn't have the Siegel amendments one and two related to this item, [2:43:15 PM] and if we don't pass the ifc that's related to this item today, and we wait to get the report back, what would be the mechanism at that time to come forward with an ifc based upon that report and an emotion to amend the budget? How would we do that so that if there's a discomfort about voting on something before we have that report, how would we go about doing that? And can it be done? >> Sure. I mean, that would be done through a mid-year budget amendment. Essentially, the budget. >> Would we have to wait to mid-year? >> No, we wouldn't have to wait until mid-year. I would we would want to be cautious around. And I don't think we would have an issue with this. But we don't want to be cautious around the the new state legislation around becoming being tagged a defunding agency. But that would be the only thing that I would caution in regards to when he's talking about amending the police budget mid-year, particularly if it were to remove some cost, as [2:44:15 PM] some of these variations have discussed, doing. If it wa just about whether or not we're going to be able to add money to a new office or within a P D add money to address some of the things that the consultants identified and finding other places to cut the budget. Then there would be no worry. But if we're going to try to do a mar action, that would actually remove call takers and significant expenses from the police department's budget, again, as some of the flavors of of these discussions have included. We just want to be cautious with that. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem, you want to say something, >> Mayor, I this is there's been a lot of changes to both the amendment and to the item. And I would really like to debate them kind of in tandem and honestly debate the ifc before we discuss the amendments. And so I would move to to table until after we discuss the the joint emergency [2:45:16 PM] communication center. So I see. >> Okay, so a motion to table is a subsidiary motion that would set aside the motion to amend. That's on the table. Are you suggesting you would move to table what Siegel budget amendment number one. And what we know is Siegel budget amendment number two, until after that dcussion. >> Until after first let's discuss and you vote on the I, F C. Then once we've done that, I think we'll be in a better position to understand what we need to fund, what we don't need to fund what's going to happen. >> All right. So there's a motion to to table to the time certain of that following the ifc. Councilmember harper-madison seconds that motion discussion on that motion. Yes. Councilmember Fuentes. >> Thank you. I would like to know or like to hear from the amendment author, councilmember Siegel. >> I was going to let him close. Yeah. Councilmember. >> Yeah, my my only question was I had some questions around [2:46:17 PM] the, the doc that was sent to us around response time. I could ask those questions if. >> Let's get, let's get to the ifc and, and I'll handle how we pass the budget appropriately based upon what we're doing here. Councilmember Ellis. >> Could I request that those of us that have already raised our hanave a chance to ask questions before we go through like six more people reiterating. >> And you'll be you'll be the first one that we call on. I'll make a note of that before we wipe that out. Thanks. Fair enough. Councilmember you have something else you want to. >> Well, you know, I did have my I was in the queue to speak, but I don't want to belabor what it was that I had to say. I think we've already gotten to the point where it's been tablished that we need to have more discussion and deliberation. But as a part of that, one of the things that is my motivation for needing more clarity, I've made reference to it again, but in my observation, anecdotally, having had conversations with friends and, you know, loved ones who function as emergency services personnel, what the feedback [2:47:19 PM] that I've received is that the flaw in the system, the kink, so to speak, where we need to make adjustments is dispatch, you know, the deployment of the appropriate resource. And I just want to know, ultimately, it doesn't feel like the discussion around the centralized call center and the discussion around deployment of resources via dispatch, the considerations, the prompts, etc. One of our speakers today made reference to it. He said, you know, something happened. Ems, fire and police all showed up. So what we're talking about is the deployment of all the resources unnecessarily, something that happened along the way. It used to be if there was an accident, fire couldn't deploy a tow truck. They had to wait for pd to arrive to deploy the tow truck. So things like that within the system that need repair. I just wonder if that's an adjacent discussion or a completely separate discussion dispatch and call center operations. I'd like more clarity there, but my hope is that it W come organically throughout the course of this discussion. [2:48:20 PM] >> Great. Thank you. Thank you, councilmember Siegel. I'm going to allow you, even though you're not the maker of this specific motion, you're the maker of the main motion, the motion to amend. So I'm going to recognize you to close. >> Thank you. Mayor. Well, I am against the motion to table this. I think we should just finish this conversation that we started. But I want to say that, you know, in response to our initial motion, I met with my team, met with the chief financial officer of the city, assistant city manager for public safety. I met with the manager directly, and I was told pretty clearly that the option that's now on the table was much more acceptable. And so I feel like I'm being told one thing in private and a different thing in public. And so I'm very disappointed that that there's this effort to portray this very reasonable step forward as something that's irresponsible or dangerous. The consultant did not recommend against an independent office or department. The manager was actually very careful in his language. He said he did not recommend one way or another, [2:49:20 PM] so we could go back and talk to this consultant about that. But again, as a council member who supported the original demand for a strategic plan over 12 months ago, the idea that I'm having to argue with a document that hasn't been shared with me, and I haven't been able to speak with this consultant. And so I'm just disappointed about the way staff is kind of advocating. It's like there's a 12 council member advocating against this item that there's a lot of community support for. And so I think I would like my peers to ask their questions now and finish the discussion. I don't think we're going to ve time by postponing the discussion a couple hours. So I'm against the motion to table. >> The motion that we will vote on is the motion to table by the mayor pro tem second by councilmember harper-madison. Those are in favor of the motion to table the. And it would be to. Table Siegel proposed amendments to item number seven, number one and number two. Siegel amendments. Proposed amendments number one and number two to item number seven. Those in favor of [2:50:21 PM] tabling that motion until after. Until we get to the I, F C or after the the the determination is made with regard to the ifc, which is item number 19. Please raise your hand. Those opposed, raise your hand. I've got 12 people, so I'm not. I'm worried. And councilmember Siegel, I didn't. Council manager, so I apologize. I don't know how I did that, but there were one [2:51:24 PM] two, three, four, five, six seven. But there clearly seven no votes on the motion to table. So the motion to table fails. So we're now back to Siegel motion to. And by the way the seven are Laine Siegel. Harper- madison. That's that's where I got to 12 I can't there's so there's only six. I counted you twice. Yeah. There you go. So so here's here's the the no votes. Laine. Siegel Fuentes. Qadri. Velazquez and Ellis. So that's six no's. So the motion to table fails which will now take us back to the motion we were discussing, which is Siegel motion to amend number one. And with that being the case, I am going to recognize councilmember Ellis, councilmember harper-madison, councilmember alter, mayor pro tem, and councilmember zo qadri. >> Thank you for the recognition, mayor. And I think we're close. So I was excited that maybe we can keep moving [2:52:24 PM] forward with this conversation. I've been fortunate to be involved in a lot of different conversations around how we improve first responder dispatch, how we improve response times. Right now, we are facing an amendment that says it's going to increase response times, and a memo that was previously distributed that says that's not going to improve responseimes. And so whichever one we want to agree with, that's just a fact of the day that we're all needing to sort through on this dais, this particular presentation that was handed out today shows that district eight has the slowest response times out of any council district in the city. It's something I've spoken to for a number of years that people want to know when they call 911, that they have the appropriate first responder to show up in a timely manner. I know the officers want to show up in a timely manner. I know that fire, ems, mental health services all have a dedication to show up as fast as humanly possible to help folks in need. [2:53:24 PM] I was here when we added mental health as the fourth option. When you call 911 police, fire, ems, mental health, I've been able to visit the call center twice now and actually listen in on a couple of calls. So I think that we're all sharing a very similar need here. I wholeheartedly agree with what councilmember Laine is laying out, that there's confusion around when you're calling. Where is the information going? Are you getting the appropriate department even to show up? I'm now hearing that there's folks in the southern end of my district that get dispatched to hays county, and then it gets pushed through to APD. So I think there's obviously something that needs to be worked through there. But I'm also fortunate to have been through a lot of conversations on this dais where we who are not dispatchers and not first responders, come in and we say, this is how it should work. I've seen some of those conversations turn into really fruitful new developments in how we respond to public safety. But I've also seen that haven't gone as well. I have an [2:54:25 PM] item on later today about park security, because the parks police hasn't been functioning in the way that it used to for five years now. And chief Davis is doing everything in her power to make sure that we have the the appropriate personnel to be able to respond to that. They've offered to send mounted patrol. They have offered everything they can to help make sure that the needs of the community are being addreed, addressed, and that people are getting the response that they need. But I am worried that this might be one of those situations where we, as council members, can unpack it and try to put it back together in the way that we see fit. But in reality, without knowing, having your hands on it, having your ears on it, having your eyeballs on it to make sure that you know how this works. And without having the first responders who do this work every day, be able to walk us through it step by step, I worry that this could be something that inadvertently slows down response time and creates confusion and chaos at the worst possible moment. And so I would prefer for us to [2:55:27 PM] wait for this report. I know I was able to talk to mission critical and provide my input over the years that I've been able to have these conversations, and I D know what that report says yet. I don't know what part of my feedback was incorporated or what part of all the other council members feedback will be incorporated. And so I'm just worried that allocating dollars and, and standing up a new office in a time where we're not sure what the best recommendation will be, is getting a little bit over our skis and would certainly be open to this conversation moving forward to help work through some of these issues. I don't know that I have many questions other than, you know, if the the aim is to increase response times. You know, what is already happening through dispatch to help do that. And do you think having a separate office would would make response times faster or slower? If anyone wants to take that question. Everyone's looking at each other, ma'am. >> I'll take it. >> Ramon Batista, acm. >> Acm the recommendations from the consultant, who is a very [2:56:28 PM] professional group, recommended a. And it's the slew of recommendations that councilmember Laine has enumerated that would help call processing times. It would help with the implementation of new technologies. It would rebrand the 911 call center as the city of Austin's call center, and it would make improvements over the long run in addressing process issues called transfer times, technology issues. If there's a cell tower that's not functioning or or malfunctioning, or we're not getting the information we need, then a professional administrator that was recommended, not a director, but an administrator to work under the police department would be able to bring a level of consistency and professionalism to addressing the these these issues that were identified in option a, and I've said publicly and privately that that those are good recommendations. And I [2:57:29 PM] still stand by that. I think that those improvements could lead to shorter response times. But shorter response times are not just call processing times. It is the availability of officers in the field. And the consultant mentioned that in that verbal briefing that they gave us, they said, a lot of this is also dependent on the availability of your personnel to be able to be in the moment within that district, to respond to calls for service. I would say that in a nutshell, that to me is the best alternative, because it does put us on a better path to achieving some of the things that have been brought forward in the short time that I've been here. >> I appreciate that. And then structurally, how would creating a new office work? Would people be moving their desks and their computers, or would it just be a conceptual. There is a new office with a new org chart, but they would still be office in the exact [2:58:29 PM] same location because that's where all the equipment is. >> Yes, they'd still be office in the same area structurally, they'd report to a different person under option C, which is the last not recommended option, and it would be under a different director reporting probably to me. >> Okay, okay. That's helpful information. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I, I honestly don't know that I have anything substantive to contribute to the discussion thus far, but some of my concerns are the process doesn't feel complete. It doesn't feel comprehensive. It doesn't feel like we have enough information for consideration, in which case I don't want to get out in front of. I have been a part of the council where we had regrets about things that we did, and it's not a great feeling, especially when you knew there was an rtunity to get it right on the front end. So I don't know that we're in a position to get something this important right on the front end yet, so I'm hesitant to be [2:59:30 PM] supportive of the move forward. And I think most of my questions have been answered with the exception of, I will say, from a response time perspective, and I understand why. So year to date for response times, district one is the winner by far, honestly. And that said, I, I think response times are being mentioned, but there's enough being mentioned. That's not about response times. And I don't know that we're having that cehensive conversation. And it makes me uncomfortable. It feels like we're having a veiled discussion, which feels really uncomfortable. I, I want folks to just lay it plain. What are we actually talking about? In which case I'm hesitant to. To cast a vote that would be contrary to what our emergency services professional personnel [3:00:31 PM] recommend. And I'm going to say that I'm going to lean my vote in the direction of what our emergency services professional personnel, the folks who have been doing this work for cumulatively decades, recommend as the safest, best practice for our city. And I'll leave it there. >> Thank you, councilmember councilmember alter, followed by councilmember zo qadri. >> I think councilmember harper-madison said it very well because that's exactly what where I want to pick up in terms of what exactly are we talking about? And I think this it's so convoluted, you know, this this system, because it's not as the acm Batista talked about, we don't have a unified system where everyone is operating under the exact same rules, right? Fire has a little different rules than ems, a little different rules than police. And so I just want to really hone in on what exactly it is that we're talking about [3:01:32 PM] here, because I think we've gotten, you know, we've zoomed out to the, the, the problem, which is response times. But I look back at a, an audit from 2020, when we were talking about 911 and how to improve 911. So obviously this is a conversation that's been going on since, you know, before I was here. And I'm sure that wasn't the first time we talked about it then. And so I just, I guess my first question is just for clarity's sake, and you touched on this a little bit, chief Davis, someone calls 911, that call goes to an individual currently under your purview. That's a civilian call taker who then determines they ask police, fire, ems or mental health. And then depending on that answer, that call is sent [3:02:32 PM] to police, fire, ems, or mental health, correct? >> That's correct. >> And it's then let's just say they chose ems. Then that is when your personnel step in chief Luckritz, and will then dispatch the appropriate responder to meet that emergency. Correct. >> Well, the first step would be the ems would go through the medical call processing as well. So they would ask the medical questions. They would be giving pre-arrival instructions, telling them how to stop bleeding, do cpr or whatever. And then concurrently it will then route to a dispatcher. >> Okay. >> But what we're talking about setting in motion, potentially with councilmember lanes, ifc and the funding element here is not the step of the process of once that call reaches, let's say, an ems call taker, it is that upstream, just that that first piece of the equation of when they call the civilian [3:03:32 PM] call taker and who is responsible for that individual, is that cor? >> And that's what I'm assuming.yes. >> Okay. And the reason I'm trying to just really wrap my hands around what a, you know, the, the personnel we're talking about is because, you know, conversations about will this impact a fire dispatch or ems dispatch? If, if we're just talking about that first group, the first portion of the call. And really at the end of the day, who manages those, those call takers, right? That they have a certain job and then they send it off to one of three of you O mental health through integral care. Those issues in terms of getting those resources, whether it's placement or otherwise. That's a separate question. What what this question is all about is really just the management of that first step. Is that fair [3:04:33 PM] to say? >> I'm honestly to think what you know, how would that change outcomes? And so when youk about response times, how doing all of this and all of the change that that would take, how does that improve on that other end? >> Yeah. And I and the parallel in my mind, and we've changed it a couple times. So it may be a good parallel or not, but I know when we were as a city, I don't know what year it was, but homelessness was housed within public health. Okay. Right. And then within public health, we created the homeless stra division, still housed within public health, but had a different person in charge of really focusing on homelessness. And then that person was made into an officer still within public health, but a different title, a different reporting structure. And then eventually [3:05:34 PM] that it was determined that it would be better if that office was taken out of public health and made into its own standalone entity to really focus on homelessness. And I every issue is different, but in my mind, I can see a parallel here where you are doing an admirable job, but maybe there is benefit in having some other professional manage that first step. As in an office. Is it a, you know, the nomenclature we could debate up here all day, but we're talking about just who manages that first step. And then the fundamental or the next question of should it remain in office or go to a department. And so I, I guess that's not really a question for you, other than to make sure that I'm not there's no whether or not those call [3:06:34 PM] takers are managed through APD and someone within your leadership structure or managed by someone else, I. I guess I'm just getting a little confused how we can say that there might be or that, you know, safety impacts to fire ems when or police for that matter, when it's the dispatch element or once the call reaches them that is unchanged in this conversation, it's who's getting the call to them. And, and that's a part of the process. We, we're trying to wrap our hands around here. >> Yeah, I think for my purposes, for, you know, as a chief, certainly as I'm looking at, calls are picked up within 15 seconds of you calling 911 and then setting that system of getting all that information, where do you need to go? Police, fire, ems, mental health, what do you need? And then getting that to them, the most appropriate place. And I think it is important to talk about the changes made by this council in 2020. After having a 48% vacancy rate in that space and the changes that were made [3:07:35 PM] there, you know, giving them a career path, giving them raises, that type of thing, but also the morale that changed to be able to say, you work for the Austin police department, and then to take that and add another layer, I, when I think about the option a of having a manager there that can kind of coordinate all those things, totally support that. I can see where that would be valuable, all of that. But to remove that from the police department and, and to remove 104 employees from the, from, from the Austin police. I don't see the benefit in that. I don't see, as I'm looking at 15 seconds above the national average to answer a call to get that where that needs to go, any changes, any gaps that we see, I am in the best place to make those changes. >> Do you feel and I'm really want your your genuine opinion on this. Do you feel that the concern is lack of you potentially losing control over that process, that that you feel like certain rules either need to be followed or not? And if that is taken outside of [3:08:36 PM] your purview, you would not be able to have that level of just control. >> I think it does add a layer right of to the point of bureaucracy. When you're adding another director, you're adding someone else in charge of that. When there are problems, when there are concerns, instead of me being able to immediately make those changes, I then have to have this other layer of this other person coming in and let's meeting about this. Let's get the data, all of that. So I think when you're looking at looking at that continuous improvement, ensuring that those calls are answered and all the changes, if we need to make these changes that they're able to happen in that process is seamless. >> Okay. Well, I appreciate it. And my, my last question, not for any of the chiefs here. Thank you for for helping just clarify for me exactly what it is we're talking about. The what, what is in front of us right now, which I know we're talking about kind of multiple things at the same time, because we've got the ifc, we've got this amendment, but this amendment right here is, [3:09:37 PM] is making an allocation of dollars for the operation should the operation occur. It's councilmember lanes. Ifc is actually creating the office. This is saying if that office is created, here's the money to make it work. Is that fair? I'm going to direct that to you, Mr. Benigno. >> Yeah, I think if this amendment passes, it's clear in the amendment that we'd be standing up in office as a separate department or office from the from the police department. Councilmember lanes resolution speaks to doing that, but also provides additional direction to the manager on to carry out a variety of additional tasks, looking at moving from an office to a full blown department. >> Okay. And, and I worked with councilmember Laine on, on the ifc to make it really clear that we're not predetermining the, the final outcome of, of what it's going to be. I think [3:10:37 PM] it's really important to generate a plan, figure out how we're going to make this move and make it in a way that is operationally better not to do it, just to do it and not to do it in a way that could potentially be harmful. And I believe that acm, Batista and the chiefs in front of us are going to ensure that happens. But under that kind of make a plan and execute that plan approach. The manager is the one who has to do the execution. And so this doesn't require the manager to, let's say, hire an assistant director, right? It creates the funding necessary should he choose to do so. Is that not correct? We can't instruct the manager. We can give him money, but we can't make him spend it. >> That's correct. >> Okay. And, and so I, I have I have seen in the past when we would like to do something, the [3:11:38 PM] barrier be that there's not funding available, but I think it's this creates that availability. Still, though, within the framework of the ifc to allow the manager to come up with a plan and execute on that plan andt get those, get the process started and create that ability so that that's not a barrier. So I just, I appreciate the, the clarity for, for at least my sake, hopefully help somebody else. But thank you for, for your time. >> Thank you. Council member, mayor pro tem. >> Thank you mayor, I support the goal that we are moving towards. I think that a an independent joint emergency communication center under the direct supervision of an assistant city manager makes a lot of sense to me. This is a [3:12:40 PM] very delicate area. This is the hub of everything that we're talking about. I mean, 24 over seven, 365 day operations. I am extremely hesitant to fiddle with anything relating to the joint emergency communication center, particularly when currently we're we're operating well. Like I said, I support the goal, but I'm not seeing a real a coherent kind of plan or a process. And this does not. This. I think both council member Ellis and council member harper-madison. I completely agree with their comments. So I'm going to be abstaining on the the budget amendments. I really it's an important conversation. I support the goal, but I just do not want to rush into this and cause any damage whatsoever. I just think we have to move very carefully and deliberately here and be [3:13:41 PM] thoughtful about it, and not just rush it because it's budget time or because there are goals or whatever the case may be. So I'm going to be abstaining on the on the items. >> Thank you. Mayor pro tem councilmember zo qadri. >> Thank you, mayor. I just had. A few questions. I was looking at the the packet that was that was given to us. And one of the things that it says on page six is a geographic size is one of the several factors that can influence response times. What are some other things that can influence response times? Because I was looking at, I mean, at the very least, on page eight, the APD response time for August 2025 and some of the slowest response times are are the east side districts. Right. I was looking at a report by housing works. The districts with the highest poverty, the lowest median income is districts one through four, and three out of four of those districts have the lowest response times and then the wealthier districts in the city [3:14:42 PM] districts nine district ten have some of the fastest. But what other factors outside of geographic size and some of these districts are there's a lot of density. You know, d9 is, you know, I could throw a rock in any which way. And I'm still probably in district nine. Other districts are a little bit more spread out. But there are other districts on here that I think are almost as compact as d9, but have much longer response times. So what are some of those factors? >> Well, I think you have to look at the crime that is being committed in there. So if it's an area that has more crime, you're going to have more calls for service, which means more officers are going to be responding to those different calls for service and other areas. And certainly geographic locations matter as well. How long does it take to get from, you know, if I know and you know, Krista Laine where our sub is, it takes, you know, half an hour from where the sub is to, to get to the highest point of where that location is. And so you've got drive times, things like that for certainly at the beginning of a shift. So those things, you know, come into play as well. But certainly the amount of crime, [3:15:43 PM] the calls for service, that volume, how many officers we have working, we know we're working in a deficit right now. So all of those things come into play for where the police is concerned. >> I think similar to what chief Davis said, a lot of it comes D to unit availability, and that's why a lot of the initiatives, when we talk about this being response time being a broader piece beyond just the communication center, is how it is that we maximize unit availability and ensuring that, you know, we're focused on those highest, highest priority calls and that we keep those units available for those resources. We also have to make some adaptions in our department because we leave our district very often, right? So every time someone needs to go to the hospital, you're leaving, you're leaving your home area. And so we need to maximize the ability to ensure that there's the resources available in wherever the calls may be occurring. >> Nothing much more significant really. Just call volume and unit availability and the ability to make sure that our dispatchers are keeping an eye on things and moving units around appropriately, so that we do [3:16:44 PM] have units available in all areas, even when other incidents are going on. >> Got it. And then I'm not sure if any of you all can can answer this. I think you've answered as chiefs of your respective departments around why councilmember Siegel proposal is either good or bad or works or doesn't work, but from a, from a, from a, from a provider's point of view. I don't know if anyone can comment on it. You know, I'm thinking about, you know, you know, folks in the mental healthare space and thinking about integral care, where would they be on this? I don't know if I'm asking the question correctly, but I wonder what, what, what benefits them and what doesn't, what would hurt them, I guess with this. >> So integral care came online about 2019, 2020, and since that time we've been able to APD has been able to successfully reroute about 35,000 calls for service that were mental health related [3:17:45 PM] >> At the at the entry point and diverted them to integral care. So with respect to what would change along those lines. I don't know. I know that they've routed thousands of calls in their direction when it's come in, that it's some type of mental health issue. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you councilmember. I don't have anybody signed up. Anybody else with their light on so I'm going to say just something real quick. And that is actually I'll set my time for me. The from my perspective. I just can't imagine that what we would do is when we've hired a professional consultant and we don't have that consultant's report that we would get out ahead of that consultant's report. In addition, when the manager said, pursuant to our [3:18:46 PM] charter, when the charter requires us to consider the recommendation of the manager's office, and prior to having that professional Conant's report, the manager recommends that we don't do it. I would think we would consider that, especially, again, when you don't have the report. And then finally, I would add that when our chiefs all say what they're saying here today in front of us, we would want to, at a minimum, wait until we have the report. This this budget amendment does in fact, in fact, set us down a course. And I would think that if we're going to pass an ifc today that does this, I would hope that what we would pass is an ifc that says we will get the report and then subject to the findings in that report, we would decide as a council what we would direct the manager to do at that point. I you know, one of the [3:19:46 PM] interesting things is we've debated back and forth for a little while the concept of what we ought to do with consulting contracts. Well, the truth of the matter is the, the, the most inefficient way to spend money on a consulting contract is to hire consultant, spend the money, and then move before we have the consultant's recommendations. But set that aside, we do have some recommendations that we can start moving on. And that's that in the memo was alternative alternative a. Mr. Benigno, I'd like to ask you, there were three alternatives alternative a, alternative B and alternative C talk about the difference between alternative a and alternative C. >> Sure, I'll start with alternative B because it's the easiest, which was don't do anything, just leave it the way it is. Sure. That's why you hear alternative a and C being mentioned. More so, alternative a would have would include the [3:20:49 PM] addition of a civilian leadership position to the call center. That would work right alongside the lieutenant at the call center. And, you know, be somebody who would be solely focused on and expert in 911 call taking and just be solely focused on that. So there would be that one leadership position and alternative, a alternative a also is where the consultant identified a number of opportunities for improvements. And one of the big ones was a quality assurance unit. So some of these things we hear about. Here's a situation that happened with a call. And the response they got was you need to call 911 when they had already called 911. This quality assurance unit would be able to bird dog those issues, find out what happened and recommend improvements to so that that doesn't happen again. I'm going to let doctor stoner speak to some of the software improvements, the kind of. The final aspect of alternative a was making a variety of software improvements to improve response times. [3:21:49 PM] >> So a lot of the software requirements or software parts are driven directly by technology. One is to eliminate the success of automatic call taking greetings at the beginning of the call. So every time you don't get it 3 or 4 times, there's a. One of the amazing things that Pete has done to bring the call takers back and reduce that vacancy rate of of many years ago was to offer. A different schedules, an eight hour shift, a ten hour shift, those type of kinds of things. That brings scheduling into, into an issue. So the, a particular type of scheduling software would be necessary to maximize call taker work. And that was one of their recommendations. Modify the nine one greeting. That's more of a branding discussion. Make sure it's Austin 911 not, you know, police 911, those type of kinds of things. Those I think [3:22:52 PM] are the, are the biggest pieces, including the, the, the qa part. >> We'll talk about option C. >> Yes. >> Sorry. Just to recap then alternative a was this a senior senior leadership, civilian position quality assurance unit and the software enhancements alternatives. C then was something that was directed in the isc from council member Laine to look at was creating this as atatandalone department, and it would include all of those things that we just talked to would include everything an alternative, a, but it would also include an assistant director and. Three support personnel as part of standing up a new department. The full alternative C would then also include the transitioning of the call takers. Roughly 113 civilian call takers and supervisors currently in the police department budget. Transitioning those positions [3:23:53 PM] into this new department. Under this new department structure of a of a director, assistant director, etc. So and that's not none of those that the full alternative C is not what's being proposed today with either the I fc from council member Laine or from the budget amendment from council member Siegel. It's more of a precursor to the full alternative a the. The proposal from council member Siegel would be everything. An alternative, a plus the assistant director and the three support personnel. >> The three support personnel that are mentioned. >> And then councilwoman lane's I. Fc, you know, directs us to start the process for achieving cole certification so that this could actually eventually become a full standalone. >> If that's where we're at. Right. Very good. Thank you, members. I'll just reiterate that that. We're at a pivotal point, and I think we can make some decisions that that move continue to move things forward the way we've talked about it. [3:24:55 PM] But I'm not I'm not confident we want to do that before we have the final report, particularly under the circumstances of the recommendations that we have from the manager and from our chiefs. With that, I'll cognize council member qadri, and then I'll go to council member Siegel to close on the motion to amend. >> So I just came across this. My my question is for you, please, chief Davis. So in your former stomping grounds in Cincinnati, Ohio, they operate an emergency communication center. It's a standalone department and separate from the police force. It's been recognized by the international academies of emergency dispatch as an accredited center of excellence. What was your experience with that? >> That came after the death of Kyle plush, where the dispatcher there were some dispatching errors there. So all of that came from a combination of that. Certainly being there at that time. You know, it's hard for any city to [3:25:56 PM] do that. But I do think that was also an opportunity where changes could have been made, you know, at the level where the police could have made those changes as well. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks. Council member. Council member Siegel, you're recognized to close on your motion to amend the members. This is Siegel motion to amend number one to item number seven. And we will take a vote on that. And then we'll go to Siegel motion to amend number two. >> Thanks, mayor. Well, I'm hopeful this this amendment will pass. I really heard your concerns, mayor, about the timing of the budget amendment versus getting the full report. But I just want to clarify for everyone that we're going to get this report in September before the next fiscal year begins. And so if for some reason we hear something that report that that, you know, should change our direction, we still have plenty of time to do that. And the manager has authority to decide when these hires are made in the course of the fiscal year. So it's not like we're going to hire four [3:26:56 PM] new people on the first day of the fiscal year. There's there's time and there's space to do this in a deliberate way. So I would urge this amendment to be passed. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you, council member. Members. The vote is on. Siegel motion to amend number one to I to amend item number seven. And I think we know what we're voting on. With that bei said, those that are in favor of Siegel number one, please raise your hand. Those opposed, raise your hand. >> Standing in opposition. >> Okay. >> I'll abstain. >> Okay. There being six votes in favor of the motion to amend [3:27:59 PM] two in opposition, duchen and Watson, and three in abstention, the mayor pro tem council member harper-madison and council member Ellis Siegel. Motion Siegel. Motion to amend item number seven. Number one is adopted. That will take us to Siegel. Motion to amend number two. Folks, remember that Siegel motion to amend number two was previous labeled Siegel budget amendment number one B. But for purposes of the record and clarity, we're going to label that. Number two. It reads at the top of the page budget motion sheet, INT emergency communications, be council member Siegel. You're recognized. >> Thank you. Mayor. I move to amend the proposed budget by making the following $1,174,043 in reductions, and to direct that funding towards the establishment of a new office of joint emergency communications in the general fund. First, to reduce the Austin police department's [3:29:00 PM] budget by $250,769, such that the police budget will increase from the prior year's budget by 3.6%, instead of 8.7%. Second, to eliminate $425,000 in one time funding for the Austin police department service enhancement two, which is, quote, one time funding for head hunter pilot program and a year round advertising program, end quote. Third, to reduce the consultant contract budget for internal services from the internal services fund by 10%, for a total reduction of $996,548, the general fund portion of which is approximately $498,274. The rationale is that these payfors include reductions to proposed increases in the police department's budget that could be covered with asset forfeiture funding, as detailed in volume two of the manager's budget, the 26 fiscal year budget included approximately 1.6 million in expenditures from federal asset forfeiture funds, but the department is on track to spend only $339,945 [3:30:01 PM] for the year. Both the commodities reduction and the one time recruitment items could be funded with the asset forfeiture dollars. Although this motion does not propose any reduction to APD's existing budget due to the potential availability of asset forfeiture funds. In addition, the amendment amendment suggests funding the new office by reducing consultant contracts within internal services by 10%. I move the amendment. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Siegel moves approval of Siegel budget amendment number two to item number seven. It is seconded by councilmember zo qadri discussion. Councilmember alter. >> I just want to clarify something because this was a question I had before. We can't direct the use of asset forfeiture funds. Correct? >> That is correct. >> So because I believe that both these items, the commodities and the recruitment position are important and should be funded if we wanted that to be funded out of asset [3:31:01 PM] forfeiture, the chief would have to make that decision. That's not something we can direct to bone. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Can I ask the chief to. >> Chief Davis if you'd come forward? >> I just want to clarify with you that I know you obviously you included these in your budget. I've heard you speak of at least about one of them, the recruitment position. If the asset forfeiture funds aren't available, source of funding for these, is that something you would look to to cover these needs? >> Well, recruiting is certainly a priority for me and for this office as we move forward. So I will do whatever it takes to ensure that this department is at the numbers that it needs to be. >> Okay. Very good. Thank you very much, mayor. [3:32:02 PM] >> Thank you. Councilmember. Alter any. >> Further, I just want to clarify, the one position cannot be funded through asset forfeiture because that's an ongoing cost. So we have to be aware ofhat. >> Okay. Thank you. Further discussion. Those in favor of Siegel motion to amend number two. Yes. >> Can I ask councilmember Siegel, does that change your your position, recognizing that that position won't be funded, that that's an ongoing expenditure? Does that change your perception of your item? >> Which position are we talking about here? I'm sorry. >> It's the one position, the one recruiting position that's included. >> No, but I will say, council member, it doesn't change my positiont the full text of the amendment does allow the manager to use other funds as determined by the manager. [3:33:02 PM] >> In other words, when we take the recess for them to math the math, they're going to have to find money. >> Jesus Christ. >> I feel uncomfortable casting the vote that for which we han'n't met the math yet. >> That's right. >> Councilmember, I just want to clarify the $425,000 that we're removing from the police department's budget is one time funding only, so we're not removing that. That isn't a recurring funding item. So we're not taking recurring funding out. >> I guess what I'm talking about specifically is the director Lang was very explicit in having us recognize that we're talking about more than a one time expenditure. We're talking about an ongoing expenditure, and that's different from now. I'm readingthis differently, is what I'm trying to say. And I don't know that I feel comfortable moving forward with a vote on an item for which we we don't know whether or not the math works. The assumption for me moving through some of these other amendments is that I know that you guys have been working exhaustively with staff and [3:34:02 PM] getting appropriate recommendations and suggestions about where the dollars will come from. And so that's just a little different. That was different information for me. >> Director Lang, can you clarify the position you're talking about? >> The one recruiting position is that not still in the amendment? I'm sorry, did I have the wrong information? >> I don't think I, I don't think that's in the amendment. >> Just the. 425. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Then my apologies. It's just the one time the ongoing is still in the amended of the proposed budget. >> Thank you. I appreciate the clarity. >> Thank you. I appreciate the question and the clarity you created. All right. The vote will be on Siegel motion to amend number two to amend item number seven. Those that are in favor of Siegel motion to amend. Number two, please raise your hand. Those opposed. [3:35:06 PM] Those abstaining. All right. There beingix in favor of the motion to amend, three in opposition to three are due. Duchen, Watson and Ellis and two abstaining. The mayor pro tem and council member harper- madison Siegel motion to amend number two is adopted. Will take us to Siegel number three. >> Thank you mayor. Hopefully this one's a little easier. I moo amend the fiscal year 27 budget by increasing appropriations for the violet keep safe storage program operated by Austin community court in the Austin municipal court. General fund operating budget in the amount of $500,000 to double the capacity of the program and open new sites across the city. The rationale is that the violet keep safe storage program is currently at capacity, with a waitlist of over 100 people. Demand for storage has increased due to the new hcm encampment enforcement program, so director gray has confirmed that additional capacity is [3:36:07 PM] necessary. The Austin community court manages the violet keep safe storage program, and has stated that it could double the capacity of violet, keep safe storage with this funding and establish sites across the city, and this amendment is also requested in the community investment budget. I would move the amendment, mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember Siegel moves approval of Siegel amendment number three. It was previously labeled number two. It's seconded by council member Velasquez. Any discussion on Siegel amendment number three, councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you. I appreciate the recognition. The only question that I have can be answered later. We have some constituents who have approached us about the expenditure that they incur, which is storage units. I recognize that they are not currently people who are living unsheltered, but they're right there on the verge and teetering on the edge. And they're things are always at risk of being forfeited. So I'd like to expand on the conversation of people existing [3:37:08 PM] below the poverty line and their storage needs moving forward. This just motivated a future facing conversation I'd like to have with my colleagues. Thank you. >> Thank you, council member. All right. We have a motion, a motion to amend. Number three. Seconded. A any further discussion? Yes, councilmember alter. >> So I'm very much in support of this item, this purpose, what I'm trying to understand, and maybe this will illuminate itself during the break, but something like this, which has an ongoing cost. After the break, staff is going to come back and say, here is how you pay for it. And at that point, we decide whether or not the trade is worth. >> That's what's going to. Yes. >> Okay. Okay. Well. [3:38:08 PM] >> Well, it's almost certain I haven't been doing the math as we go along, but we're going to take a recess after we finish this, before we take the final vote. And what's going to happen is we'll come back and staff's going to tell us that we're out of budget. I mean, we're out. We're not balanced. And then we have two options. As I see it. Option one is for them to give us recommendations where we say, okay, we'll take that recommendation to fill in this, or we'll say, well, we don't want that amendment anymore, and we will move to reconsider that. But that's going to be a complicated discussion. The second option is that councilmember duchen has a list of potential amendments that also bring about cuts that we could we could evaluate and determine whether or not those are what we balance the budget on, but we're getting ready to vote to be out of balance. >> Okay. >> And frankly, that's one of the reasons that you have seen me voting no so many times today. I love some of these [3:39:10 PM] things. Frankly, this is one of the things iove. But but we're going to be out of balance. >> Yeah. Okay. Well, and that's it's really understanding what the trade is because in the in isolation, as you mentioned, these are all good things. But knowing what we're trading it against. So I'll support it for now. But when we're trying to balance everything I this and the others for that matter, we have to decide what's more important. So. >> Well, with that being said, you get your chance right now. All those in favor, if the way I'll do it is without objection. Siegel budget amendment proposal number three to item number seven is adopted, with the mayor and council member duchen being shown voting no. All right. It passes. Councilmember Siegel, I think that's all you had. Right. Good, good. Okay. That will take us to council member zo qadri. [3:40:10 PM] Councilmember zo qadri has one motion to amend. It is labeled councilmember zo qadri amendment number two. But it's going to be number one because he's withdrawn some. So I'll now recognize councilmember zo qadri on council member zo qadri amendment proposal number one to item number seven. >> Great. Thank you. Mayor. I move to amend the proposed fiscal year 2026 2027 budget by increasing appropriations for the expanded drink spiking tester program, the arts, culture, music and entertainment gal fund operating budget by an ongoing amount of $20,000. And I think I've said this before when initially we laid this out, but APD has stated that the pilot was an effective preventative measure and that between 10 to 14% of reported sex crime cases and Austin have a connection to a bar or nightclub. And I think this program does a good job at combating that. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember zo qadri moves approval of zo qadri amendment number one second by councilmember Fuentes. Discussion. Councilmember [3:41:11 PM] harper-madison. >> I just wanted to make sure to be clear about my rationale here, especially because we're at the point where we're literally scraping for pennies. I, I watched a liquor brand blow $90,000 a couple weeks ago on promos, and I just wonder if this is the sort of really valuable programmatic effort that we can put the onus on the producers of the booze and the proprietors of the establishments, as opposed to the city. I can just see a lot of other immediately impactful uses for this $20,000. And so I'm, I'm hesitant to be in support, but not because of the spirit of the motion. I just think there are ways that we can get private dollars to cover this. This is one of those things where it would be nothing for a Tito's or some other alcohol brand to give us $20,000 to help with prevention for sexual assault. Thank you. >> Thank you, council member councilmember zo qadri moves, and it's been seconded that we [3:42:11 PM] adopt zo qadri amendment number one to item number seven. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Councilmember zo qadri, amendment number one to item number seven is adopted. I would like to be shown voting no. And councilmember harper-madison is abstaining. >> And also committing to contact those very residents and asking them. >> Very good. Thank you, members. I believe that takes us to our last proposed amendment. The reason I'm saying that is because if I'm wrong, y'all need to cry out while we're discussing this one. And that is council member duchen council member duchen. Motion number one to amend item number seven. Councilmember duchen, you're recognized. >> Thank you. Mayor, I'm moving to amend the proposed fiscal year 2627 budget. This is the chipper amendment that's now been reclassified as a horizontal grinder, which I did not exactly. I had some [3:43:11 PM] concerns about that language on the dais, which is why we called it a chipper amendment last week. >> You ground us down. Come on, come on, people, you're not you're not that sleepy. Go ahead. >> You heard the rationale last week. This is a one time $200,000 going to be paid out of debt in all likelihood. And the idea is that this pays itself off and at most three years, maybe even less than that, based on what's currently happening between ar and ar. So with that, I move adoption. >> Councilmember duchen moves approval of duchen number one to item number seven. Is there a second? Second by councilmember Siegel discussion. Councilmember zo qadri. >> Do you have a serious question? What's the difference between a chipper and a horizontal grinder? >> I'm going to let staff answer that. [3:44:15 PM] >> Good afternoon. Jesus. Aguirre, Austin parks and recreation. Glad to be here as this meeting grinds down. I had to do it. >> I now have I now have a real amendment to the parks budget. >> Council member. The chippers are sort of the equipment that we're used to seeing towed behind trucks that that are maintenance staff are forestry staff and land management staff used to just deal with the regular maintenance and bringing it down. Some of the things that they that they pick up, there's grinder is obviously a much more, much larger. And the purpose here is to take the larger pieces of wood or trees, large trunks that then get converted into mulch. And so the idea, addition to the savings on the what we paid to Austin resource recovery, this would also help us create our own mulch and have some savings there as well. >> Thank you. >> Any further? Sorry, comments or discussion? All right. [3:45:16 PM] Without objection. Duchen number one, amendment number one to item number seven is adopted and I would like to be shown voting no. All right. Here's the thing. I don't think we have any more council proposed amendments. Anything else was withdrawn. But I'm going to look at professional staff and make sure I'm either right or they don't know something I don't know. >> Those are all the proposed amendments other than uncil member duchen I do have I have one question for point of clarification. >> Please. >> For. For Laine 010, the $61,000 is that in addition to the restoration of the 4.7, or is the expectation that that's included with the 4.7. >> If if the 4.7 already referred already restores the services, it is not N addition [3:46:17 PM] to that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. Council member anything else? Members. What we're getting ready to do is take a 30 minute recess. Yes. Councilmember duchen. >> I just wanted to add, I'm not sure what staff will come back with with being over, but there are probably at least 3 or 4 of the amendments that we wrote that I'm going to encourage us to strongly consider bringing up regardless, because there might be a rationale, or at the very least, a healthy discussion around those items that we might agree might be worth reducing or making changes to, regardless of the outcome from staff. So I just want to highlight that. And as we break, I'll try and visit with some of y'all about those items. >> Very good. In fact, before we recess, everybody just be cool for a second. Director, do you I know we're going to make sure you make you check your math and then we're. And you're going to make some recommendations to us based upon where we where we landed. What I would like to do is take, [3:47:19 PM] have us take it to 30 minute break. But, but I would also like, if you have some number for us, as we can think about before we come back, because we, I think we're getting ready to have some work to do. >> Yes, sir. Our initial review of the amendments to about a $2 million overage of what we currently have available in the general fund. So there's a $2 million deficit at this moment. >> Okay. So that gives you some idea of where we are. All right. Without objection, we will be in recess until 415, 415. It is 348. We're in recess. [4:15:10 PM] It is 415, and I indicated that we would be recessed until 415, but I'm told they're still making the math. Math. And if that's the case, we're going to wait another 20 minutes. So we will be in recess until 435. So anybody within the sound of my voice. 435 thanks, everybody. [4:37:05 PM] I. >> Anyway, we're probably not ING to make the wild Turkey by six, but 5:00, 5:00. So we'll just be in recess till 5:00. [5:06:06 PM] While they're printing out the last part of what we need to in order to pass. Item number seven is. Except I've got a. I've got a. What I would what the chair would entertain is a mtion to table item number seven until 5:30 P.M. Is there a motion made by council member alter seconded by council member Siegel. Is there discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion to table item number seven until 5:30 P.M. Is adopted. Members, that will take us to item number six which relates to fee fines and fees, fines and other charges. We're going to take up item number six, which is an order. As I indicated, it's an order that authorizes fees, fines and other charges. [5:07:48 PM] Are you okay if we take up item eight? >> Yes, sir. >> All right. We're going to take up item number eight, approving an ordinance establishing classifications and positions in the classified service of the Austin fire department. Is there a motion in a second on item number eight to approve the ordinance? Motions made by mayor pro tem, second by council member alter. So we have a motion, a second to adopt the Austin fire department classifications ordinance. Is there discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Item number eight is adopted on three readings. Unanimously. Item number nine is approving an ordinance establishing classifications and positions in the classified service of the emergency medical services [5:08:50 PM] department. Is there a motion in a second on item nine to approve the ordinances made by council member zo qadri seconded by council member Ellis. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, item number nine is passed unanimously on all three readings. Item number ten is approving an ordinance establishing classifications and positions in the classified service of the Austin police department. Is there a motion in a second on item number ten to approve the ordinance? Motion made by council member. Alter. It is seconded by council member. Siegel. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Item number ten passes unanimously on all three readings. Members. That's going to take us to [5:09:51 PM] items 12 through 22. These are items from council and additional staff items. As I indicated earlier today, we would treat these as a consent agenda. For purposes of the consent agenda, I'm going to ask that we remove item number 19 from the consent agenda. Are there any other items that anyone would like would like to move remove from the consent agenda as laid out? Hearing none. Item 19 will be taken out, so it will be items 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 22. Is there a motion and a second to approve items? The items that I've read. Council member Siegel moves approval. It is seconded by council member zo qadri. We have a motion and a second to approve those items. [5:10:52 PM] Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. The consent agenda again, I'll read it is 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 22 is adopted unanimously. >> I just want to confirm please. Item 16 is version two. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Hang on. I'll double check that. That's my memory. Yes. >> Thank you. >> Members. Without objection, we will recess the meeting of the Austin city council budget meeting at 5:11 P.M. There being no objection, we are recessing the Austin city council budget meeting. [5:17:00 PM] I will now call back to order the Austin city council meeting. And that will take us to item number 19. And I'll recognize council member Laine on item number 19. >> Thank you. Mayor. I want to begin with a brief but heartfelt thank you to our staff for your long hours, tireless commitment to our city, to our community, for making your voices heard, and to my colleagues for your commitment and perseverance in working towards improvements to the hard problems that our city faces. We're all tired, but we can see the light at the end of this particular tunnel. To everyone who has come together in these final days to improve the joint emergency communications, ifc, I thank you for making it possible for us to emerge together, stronger together, and to the light at the end of this tunnel. Emergency response is a core [5:18:01 PM] city service that must reach every corner of our city quickly and reliably. The passage of the joint emergency communications resolution will bring renewed clarity and focus to the next steps that will continue to build on the significant improvements our city has already made to 911 response in recent years, ensuring that these gains are universal across our city's geography, establishing a stronger foundation for continued improvements in emergency response across all three of our pubc safety agencies, and improving coordination with non-emergency response, including 311. I want to thank my co-sponsors on this. Ifc council members alter, Velasquez and Siegel, all of whom have been co-sponsors sponsors from the beginning, over a year ago and have been invaluable throughout this effort. And finally, thank you to everyone who has come together today to pass a resolution that asserts Austin's commitment to ensuring that excellence in emergency response extends to all of our residents. I very much look forward to working with all of [5:19:02 PM] you to continue to focus on solving these very real life and death problems faced by our community, and so I welcome all of your support and any discussion that we may want to have. Thank you. >> Councilmember Laine moves approval of item number 19. It is seconded by council member Velasquez. Is there additional discussion?ll right then. Those in favor of item number 19, please raise your hand. Those opposed to item number 19, please raise your hand. Those abstaining, please raise your hand. [5:20:11 PM] There being six votes in favor, two votes in opposition, those being council member duchen and the mayor, and three abstaining. The mayor, pro tem council member harper-madison and council member Ellis. Item number 19 is adopted. For the record on item number 15. I want to make sure the record is clear. That was version three. What did I say? That's right. Okay. I'm sorry. And I and item number 14. It was also version number three. Yeah. Want to make sure the record is clear on that. Good. Okay. Mayor. Yes, please. >> Item 17. Also version number three. >> Okay. Item 17 was version three as well. Folks, I'm told we are printing. So. Y'all talk [5:21:15 PM] amongst yourselves. I had a clerical motion on 19 that since we have a minute. You'reright. So council member Siegel moves that we reconsider the vote by which item number 19 passed. Is there a second? Second by the mayor pro tem. So item number 19 is going to be reconsidered and I'll recognize council member Siegel council member you're you're right. I had it in front of me. I just didn't know. Thank you. Mayor, we're all trying to get out of here. The motion is just a brief update so it matches the budget amendment. It replaces, quote, management services department with, quote, general fund. I would move adoption of Siegel amendment one to item 19. Council member Siegel moves adoption of Siegel amendment one to item number 19 and second by council member Laine. Discussion on the motion to amend. Hearing none. Without objection, the motion to amend [5:22:15 PM] item 19 is adopted. That will take us back to the main motion, which is item number 19, now, as amended, and. I'm going to. Well. Without objection, item number 16, item number 19, as amended, passes on a vote of six in favor, two in opposition, those being duchen and the mayor. Three abstentions, those being Ellis harper-madison and the mayor pro tem. Everybody cool with that? All right. Ite number 19 is adopted, as amended. >> Excuse me. Mayor. Yes, I think there council member [5:23:16 PM] Fuentes misspoke on 16. There is no version two on 16. >> I was representing councilor alters. >> I see, which was item items 14 and 15. For the record, let's be really clear. Items 14 and 15, version three passed and that was the reference you were making. We also I, I said 16 but you recognize that there is no version two on item 16. It is just it is just item 16. All right. Good. Thank you for clarifying that. Appreciate that. All right. >> 2021. >> We pass those. We pass those as part of the consent agenda. So. Go back to talking amongst yourselves. We're going to be in recess until 540. It's 5:24 P.M. Without objection, we're in recess until 540. [5:40:00 PM] >> Well, I'm going to call us back to order. I'm gonna call us back to order. It is 5:40 P.M. And so we've been in a brief recess. We're going to go to item members. The order we're going to go in is item seven, six, 11, and one. The way we'll proceed. But by the way, for the record, the vote on the consent agenda and on item number 19, which was one item pulled off of the consent agenda on the I, F C. Those were all the latest version of what we were going to vote on. I called out some of those specifically, but for the record, let me be clear for item number 19, that was version two, 2021 and 22. Those were all version two, but it was just the it was the latest version of. And we don't always do that. I'm not sure why we're doing it so much today, but that's the way it is. That [5:41:00 PM] being said, we're now going to go back to item number seven, and I'm going to turn to our financial staff to walk us through making the money balance. And let me just say that I've been told that there are two items that were amendments made by council, that the council members now are considering withdrawing those amendments. They added to the cost, and they're going to withdraw those amendments. The way we will proceed on that, if that is the case, is I will ask that council member at the appropriate time to move to reconsider the vote by which that amendment was put on, will get a second. We will reconsider it. And if they do still want to withdraw it, they will withdraw that amendment. And that will that will be the way we create the record for that. So with that being said, madam director, you have the floor. >> Thank you. Mayor, I'm turning it over to deputy [5:42:01 PM] director Eric Nelson. >> Okay. Seems fair. >> Sorry for the delay. Beginning with staff recommendation nine, we would recommend reducing the general fund contribution to buying down dsd fees. Last year, we were able to buy them down to a 10% maximum increase. This year we would propose going to a 15% maximum increase, thereby freeing up 427,000 in the general fund. Staff recommendation ten would be to recommend a decrease in appropriations for various departments travel budgets. We will have a backup document showing the departmental allocation of those cuts. It would be $250,000 across support services funds, $250,000 across the general fund. The support services fund has a trickle down effect of about 50%, so the net general fund reduction would be [5:43:02 PM] $375,000. Our next recommendation would be to approve duchen zo for a further reduction to contractual expenditures across collections, facilities, maintenance and it support units in the library for about $326,000 in savings. We recommend modifying Fuentes oh one, reducing the expenditure piece of about $114,000 entirely and specifying the exact reductions in consulting contract spending, which would be in the housing and planning departments for the amounts listed. >> Can I interrupt you? I apologize, Fuentes oh one was what was adopted. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. So Wright, what I will do before we take a motion on your. I want to do what I was just indicating so that we have it off the books. Okay? Okay. [5:44:04 PM] >> We would modify Velasquez oh one by reducing the amount to $300,000 rather than $350,000, but maintaining the addition of three ftes. We would reverse Velasquez oh two. I think that's another one you're going to want to handle separately, Mr. Mayor. >> Yes. >> We would return alter oh one to the originally proposed reduction of $150,000 for various expenditures within the acme department. We would reverse Laine oh one, which was going to add $61,000 to support services grants in a P H or, excuse me, social services grants. We believe those cuts have already been restored through the earlier staff amendment. We would specify that the one time funding. This is Laine oh two for operational gap funding for family shelters [5:45:05 PM] would now be taken from the housing trust fund, as opposed to the srf. One time funding is available in that fund. We would modify Siegel oh two. We would not change any of the additional expenditures. We would maintain the $425,000 cut to one time funding with respect to the other reductions identified in the amendment, we would propose a total reduction in ATS consultant contract funding of $650,000, which would have a $325,000 impact in the general fund. Finally, for Siegel oh three, we would recommend moving this funding for violent keepsafe storage, the violet keep safe storage program to the htf and making that one time. And finally, we'll have a version two. I apologize. We also need to specify that alter oh three would not be that funding would not be drawn from the hope fund, but would also be drawn from the housing trust fund. And the [5:46:16 PM] net impact of all these changes would be general fund budget that is balanced and reserves at exactly 17%. >> Councilmember will call on you in just a second. But before I do, I want to make sure I've got clarity so that I can take whatever motion I need. Here's what I'm considering doing, and I want to make sure you all are comfortable with that. On the two items related to Fuentes. One is my my idea is that what we do is we have that previous motion to amend Fuentes. Number one, we nsider it, we withdraw it, and then when we pass your suggested changes, it will be in. In that way I would also. But but I want to make sure. And I would do that certainly for Velasquez oh two, because there's a reversal there. But I want to make sure I'm clear on. Velasquez oh one alter oh one. [5:47:21 PM] Laine two Siegel two Siegel both for both of them on Siegel two Siegel three and alter three. Those are all just modifications of an amendment that's already been adopted, right? >> Correct. >> So the motion members that I'll take when we take up the staff recommendation here will be for the modification of any amendments that have been pre any council amendments previously adopted, and I'll call those out the way I just did. Is that everybody cool with that? Are you all cool with that? Okay. All right. Councilmember alter. >> I was wondering if staff could tell us what the ending balance of the housing trust fund is. After all the shifts here and from the previous staff amendment. [5:48:27 PM] >> Off the top of my head, I believe it would be about $4 million. >> Okay. And I know under the. Proposed budget housing trust fund for proposed 28 was relied upon heavily, but I. My recollection schiera recollection serves that most of that was related to housing vouchers, which we have now stabilized. And we were almost drawing it down to zero, but that's we've taken care of that. So we don't have to worry about not having enough for the proposed 28 budget. >> That's exactly right. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Councilmember Fuentes. >> Thank you. If staff can just go over my amendment and what you're recommending here, colleagues, as you all know, I propose an amendment that was adopted that would cut 10% from consultant spending in the general fund and direct it towards social services. Staff [5:49:27 PM] here has a modification recommendation. I'll go over that. The changes or the proposal here. >> Yes. So staff's recommendation is to take that 10% reduction from general fund consulting contracts. And then and that reduction would be from the planning department and the and the housing department. So that would be the. One. 14 however, because the $4.7 million earlier staff recommendation fully funded the social service grants, there's no need to apply that savings to the socialervice grants in particular. So we're letting that savings help balance the general fund as a whole with the other amendments that we mentioned. >> And so can you go over what particular what specific those other items are that would balance that? We would be balancing with this 114 000. >> It would include the the hso [5:50:30 PM] amendment of 300,000. And of course, it's a give and take of all of it. So we look at it totally from the bottom line. But the H. So as well as the $20,000 for the drink spike. >> The remainder of the neutral. >> And the remainderthe new joint emergency communications department. >> Okay. So colleagues, just for our understanding, instead of the consultant contract cuts that were proposed and adopted going to social Sers, those funds would be redirected to support the homelessness strategy outreach team. The drinks test strips effort and the joint emergency communication. I am comfortable with that recommendation. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember Fuentes, council mayor pro tem, followed by councilmember zo qadri. >> Thank you. Mayor, can I, director Morris from dsg, I just want to ask a couple of [5:51:32 PM] questions about the residential fees, the proposed increase. And I do also want to ask about the the library cut. Just as a little heads up. Good. Good afternoon, director Morris. >> Some might say evening. >> Yeah. The we've had this conversation. I think we we had it the other day. The the residential fees again, we. The last year they were capped at a 10% increase. This year, the. Again, there were also proposed again to be capped at a 10% increase. How do Austin's residential fees compare to the. The fees of other Texas cities. >> Evening. Afternoon. Mayor. Council. Keith Morris, director. Austin. Development. Services. [5:52:32 PM] Let me give you a couple examples. So going back to the the base question from the work session, the. For average residential projects. Those include plan, review and inspection. The. On average, for the. For city fees would be roughly $3,000 in comparison from 2025 numbers. So we're off roughly a year, 1750 with San Antonio. Dallas is 2100. And then back of napkin going from the 10% cap to 15% cap. Would increase to 3075. So again, the as proposed 2966, going from 10 to 15% would be 3075. So the net change there is about $200. [5:53:33 PM] >> Thank you. And that's exactly the numbers that I was thinking about. Given that our residential fees are already well above our peer cities, at least in in Texas, I can't support raising them. Honestly. I already have some kind of heartburn at 10%. I mean, again, I understand the financial situation, but I just do not support trying to, you know, balance the budget on, on, on the backs, especially of the, the residential homeowners. So I can't support the amendment with that in there. Thank you very much. Director Mars and I have some library questions as well. There she is. >> Transferring the 10%. That's what I was. [5:54:35 PM] >> Good. Good evening director. >> Good evening, mayor pro tem. >> Could you tell me a little bit about this proposed reduction again says reduce contractual expenditures across collections, facilities maintenance and information technology support units. A total of $326,000 reduction to the library. Could you tell me a little about what that means? >> Thanks for the question. The areas of collections, facilities, and technology. This would be a cut to our contractual spending. That would mean, you know, outsourcing things like repairs on our facilities, contract, you know, contracted for technology. That would be software. Of course, we are going through one Atmos and that still has to settle out. So still unsure about that. And then of course collection. Those are contracts that we have digital and print. [5:55:37 PM] >> So these would be kind of again, magazine subscriptions, different kind of website subscriptions, those kinds of things like that that people come to the libraries for sentially. Yes, sir. Again, colleagues, I can't support this. I think I mean, our libraries are already run, I think, on a shoestring budget. I talked to my in walnut creek and winter park and saint John's library branches. And, you know, they've had to do more with less. They have a lot of demand. I can't support this. I would offer again, I'm sorry, I don't have a written version of this one, mayor, but I would say to the extent that that we want to move forward with all these additional spending, then I would move to pull it out of reserves. Those two proposed cuts, the staff recommendation nine and staff, I'm sorry. Duchen. Zo for those two, I would pull those out of reserves and not cut, not raise residential fee rates or cut [5:56:39 PM] from the libraries. >> Mayor, if you're taking a second, I would second the motion. >> Hang on. I want to make sure I understand what the motion is. I'm sorry, mayor pro tem, I got the new you have duchen oh four. The third one down. >> Yes. >> What was the other one? >> The oh nine. The first one. The staff recommendation. >> Oh nine okay, I got it. >> And so basically those two, instead of the, you know, reducing, I mean, instead of increasing the residential fees and instead of cutting the libraries, take both of those numbers and pull them out of reserves. [5:57:40 PM] >> Okay, I'll tell you what. Hang on before I get a motion in a second on that. >> No problem. I would put it forward again as an idea for discussion. >> Right now. That's why I'm so good. Director, do you want to say something? >> Yes, sir. In regards to moving those costs to the reserves. The reserves are one time funding and these are ongoing costs for the general fund. And so that would that would cover them for 27 but not ongoing beyond that. >> I mean it's okay with me. >> Okay. I'm going to come back to all that here in a second. I'm going to go in order. So council member zo qadri, followed by council member Siegel and council member Ellis, and then councilmember duchen. Councilmember qadri, you have the floor. >> I just also going off of a question that councilmember vela just mayor pro tem vela had asked. Councilmember duchen [5:58:42 PM] duchen number four, how does that affect the Austin history center? >> We would plan to maintain the investments that were detailed in the proposed budget for the history center, and this would be savings in the in the line items that the director discussed. So it wouldn't it wouldn't necessarily compromise the opening of that center. >> Okay. And then and then another question. After all, the shifting that's gone around are the housing trust fund funds proposed to be fy $26 or the fy $27? >> They are dollars that have accumulated from receipt of downtown density bonus revenue in prior years, and are currently available in fund balance. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Thanks, councilmember. Councilmember Siegel. Councilmember Ellis. Councilmember harper- madison. [5:59:42 PM] >> Thank you. Mayor. I just want to say I'm comfortable with the modifications to Siegel oh two and Siegel oh three. And then I also care about, you know, reversing this proposed cuts to the libraries. And I did want to read out what the prioritization memo says about this proposed change. It says any changes to resources, supporting collections, maintaining our legacy facilities and maintaining the software for customer interface could have unintended effects, particularly for under-resourced or underrepresented communities who rely more heavily on these services and spaces. And so I would like to avoid that. Cut. And council has approved a reduction to the commodities budget of the police department, in association with my prior amendment of 250,769, which is now no longer reflected in the budget amendments. And so I would like to offer that as a way to have recurring funding for the library to restore those dollars. Thank you, mayor. [6:00:51 PM] >> Thank you, councilmember Ellis. Councilmember harper-madison, councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor, and I appreciate councilmember duchen for creating a very approachable list. I may not agree with everything that was proposed, but at least we have all the information in front of us. I also don't want to see cuts to the library system in this moment, but I do Thi there might be a case to be made for a duchen 11, the fleet mobility service item that was $425,000 as well. So that may be a way for us to be able to keep those library dollars and just swap it for another suggestion that's been made and not have to dip into reserves, which I really don't want to do. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember harper-madison. Councilmember duchen. Councilmember zo qadri. >> I think councilmember Ellis already alluded to my general concerns, but you know, something that occurred to me earlier, one of our speakers said something and I was thinking, unless you're, you know, a city council nerd and you follow this sort of relatively obscure subject matter, what he was referring to, I was thinking, the general [6:01:52 PM] public has no idea what he's talking about. And so your hesitation, councilmember, to dip into our reserves, I echo that hesitation and just haven't had the opportunity over the years to recognize how important it is maintain our status in terms of our credit rating and maintain our reserves. Has me thinking. I wonder if our general audience of constituency even understand what that means to dip into the reserves. I know, you know, everybody has the commitments that they have to various causes, but I want to make certain that everybody understands the implications of dippin into the reserves. And I was hoping staff could give a very brief explanation of that. So everybody is having the same conversation. >> Mr. Benigno, why don't youanswer that? >> So dipping into reserves is just our casual way of saying that we're withdrawing money, essentially from our savings account to pay for something [6:02:53 PM] that we want to afford. Now, the council approved reserve policy is to hold 17% of our general fund budget back in reserves for unexpected circumstances, to respond to emergencies or disasters. So we have this 17% reserve level, which the budget, before you meets that council approved policy and then dipping into reserves, would be pulling money out of that, lowering our reserve level in order to fund some some other priority. >> Thank you, councilmember councilmember duchen, followed by councilmember zo qadri. >> Thank you, mayor. I want to thank councilmember Ellis. She kind of beat me to the punch there, but there's a number of items that we've volunteered that might be more palatable cuts or reductions than some of the ones that staff has recommended, or that my colleagues have pointed out that they're less comfortable with. In particular, I'd volunteer and might recommend that we have brief dssions [6:03:54 PM] around. Let's see here the fleet item as well as duchen 12, which is an hr reduction. >> And which numbers the fleet one. >> Fleet is duchen 11. >> Thank you. >> There's also duchen ten, which is about the labor day program. And then there is. One more. Actually, I'll start with those three, I think. [6:04:55 PM] >> Okay, members, he's called out duchen ten, 11 and 12 as potential. Modifications or amendments. Councilmember zo qadri. >> Sorry, my question, mayor, you said ten, 11 and 12. >> Is that. Yes, duchen ten, 11 and 12. >> Great. I just had more questions around my previous questions. Are we going to be dipping into the 2.25 million in rental assistance funding at all? Is there any danger of that happening? >> No, that does not impact the rental assistance. >> Okay. And then what is what's our remaining balance in the hope fund? >> I think it's about $50,000, $50,000. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay, members. Those are. Councilmember alter. >> Just two points of [6:05:56 PM] clarification. Duchen ten, 11 and 12. Those are all basically 50% of the general fund. They're all support services or internal services. Correct. >> Fleet's only about 40% to the general fund support services. Our rule of thumb is 50%. >> Okay. And then my second question, piggybacking on the the question councilmember harper- madison asked the gfoa, the the our reserve level is based on a gfoa policy of having two months worth of balances accumulated, two months of city expenditures, worth of savings. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And two months iswo did by 12, 16.67%. And we chose to round up to 17%. Correct. >> Yeah. I mean, we could talk about whether their 30 day or 31 day months, I guess, but roughly speaking, yes. >> Okay. The only reason, if [6:06:57 PM] we're even talking about reserves at 750,000, which is what was mentioned by the mayor pro tem, that's half of a 10th of a percent. That's 0.0 so take us from 17 to 16.95. So whether or not we're talking about 231 month days or day months, we're still above the recommended gfoa level, correct? >> That's correct. I don't think staff would be worried about the magnitude of the expense more the principal. And if we were to adopt that as a broader policy. >> Sure. Fair enough. And I just want to make sure the magnitude we're just. Thank you. >> Councilmember duchen apologies. >> I meant to also add duchen 14 to the list, which staff's feedback on it was that it would have minimal service impact for us to consider to. >> Okay, he's now put out in [6:07:59 PM] front of us ten, 11, 12 and 14. Okay. Thank you, members, the way I think I'm going to do this so that we have a cleaner record, as we can put together under these circumstances and make sure we get full discussion on it. Oh, councilmember harper-madison, your light's on. It is. Go ahead. Please. I'm sorry. >> I just wanted to offer some clarification after council member Kahn contributed to that discussion around the reserve. And so to your point, it's a matter of I've heard far too many times us use precedent as a reason. And for what it's worth, I've seen very different iterations of this body, and we know who's going to be sitting up here. I know I for one, won't be here as of January, but we never know who's going to be sitting up here. And I don't want us to not have control over having [6:09:00 PM] set a precedent to make a dip, because this time it's 0.5 percentage points. But next time, how much and how close can we get? And who's talking about gfoa? Whatever the hell you said, I mean, honestly. And so all that to say, I just wanted to be clear that as a matter of principle, I don't think we should make a habit of dipping into our reserves. And that was my point. Not the amount, but the action. >> Thank you. You want to say something? You got your finger on them? >> I do, mayor, I think appreciate the conversation, particularly around the reserve piece. But I think to Carrie's point that she, I think, tried to indicate is that I think what we would be funding in many of these cases would be ongoing. And the reserves is one time I think that is, I think, why she buzzed in. And I think to. I don't know where we're going, but we're talking about 427,000 plus, I guess, [6:10:01 PM] 326. >> Yes. >> The challenge and I think particularly around the fees, I know the general fund and we've got several programs, whether it was one that we created to try to stave off higher levels of fee increases in the development services department by introducing this subsidy by the general fund over the three years. I know we also fund items to help when folks want us to help buy down for affordable housing, there may be some flexibility in what we set aside for that that we could look at to determine what our annual and typical spend is, that there may be some flexibility there to actually not put as much towards and in that area as we traditionally do based on historic spending, that we actually might be able to reduce that 700 or $800,000 or $750,000 by around $400,000. [6:11:03 PM] So that may be an effort. And so I guess we can talk through many more of councilmember duchen items that he had put forward. But I would go back to what I said previously, and that is the reason, in fact, that we did not reduce and or take those items in the initial budget was because we didn't believe in many cases that they were viable and or worthy to reduce. And I just want to say it, and I'm going to be quiet after this. Mayor, I appreciate you giving me the time that. We're talking about now, going and digging further, probably in some things that you're uncomfortable with, whether it's the fee increases or not, to add more layers of recurring expenses in the budget over and above what was proposed. And we're doing now budget gymnastics to try to fund more things and eliminate things that are actually, in some cases, core services and things that departments and have resources to use and do the [6:12:05 PM] work. Even, for example, the fleet consideration, are we going to not repair our vehicles and have them sit there and wait for another year before we fix a dent or paint them? To me, that doesn't make sense. But oh, by the way, we won't do that for police vehicles because that's what the amendment would say. That doesn't seem to kind of fit the bill for what we should be doing as an organization. You wouldn't do that, or you might do that with your own car. If you've just got general liability and not collision. But I would say that wouldn't be something that we would expect for our people to either ride around in a car that's up or, you know, sit in the, in the car lot and waiting on something to happen. So I would just offer, if we're going to go through those amendments, at least allow us to come and describe what the impacts are, because I'm sure, for example, the police commodities budget that funds things like uniforms and equipment that the police department needs. And so I think there needs to be some attent to the specifics of how those things show up. Thank [6:13:07 PM] you, mayor. >> Thank you. All right, members, here's what I think I will do. Multi-step process here. The first thing I'm going to do is I'm going to call for a motion to withdraw prior prior adopted amendments. I want to make sure that our financial staff grades my paper to make sure I've got the right ones. Right now, the way I'm approaching this is the use of oh one. We're going to have to reverse that out. So I'm going to call for a motion that we we reconsider and then we withdraw. And but on vela and Velasquez oh one is an amendment of how that money is used. So if you're if this item seven, exhibit B is adopted, that would go ahead and make that [6:14:07 PM] amendment without the need for us to have him withdraw that motion, we would just be amending his previous amendment. Am I making sense to you? Well, lit up that end of the dais. Yeah. Councilmember Fuentes yes. >> I just I'm trying to understand what is the rationale in in having to withdraw my amendment if it's if staff is seeing it as a modification. >> I just for clarity purposes, want to your amendment is going to go in, but it's going to go in for these. As part of this. And what I'm trying to do is make sure we don't have conflicting amendments. And you're right, it's written down here, but I'm just trying to make it as clear as I can. >> Okay. Because it's referencing Fuentes one. And then there won't be a document that specifies housing and planning as. >> Yes, yes, there will be. >> This would be this exhibit. >> This exhibit. >> Okay. Okay. [6:15:11 PM] >> Councilmember zo qadri. >> I was sitting here. >> Oh, okay. And then those are the two that I would think we would want to just go ahead and withdraw and then make those amendments as part of this amendment. Everything else I would see as an amendment of something that's already been passed. Am I correct in that? >> Say that one more time. I'm sorry. >> Let me just say it this way. Fuentes one, we would withdraw the amendment that passed, but this one would be subsumed in this exhibit B and would go to housing and planning the way you have it identified. >> Yes. >> Velasquez one would be there' need to withdraw that because you're just amending it. And and the amount [6:16:13 PM] is that correct? >> Correct. >> Velasquez two, you are wanting to recommend it go away. So I would have him withdraw that and then it would be gone. >> Correct. >> Alter one would be an amendment. Of what originally passed when alter one passed. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Laine one would be a reversal. And so there would be the need to withdraw that. >> Correct. >> Laine two is a change of in the spending. So it would be an amendment of her original amendment. >> Correct? >> Siegel two would be an amendment of his original [6:17:15 PM] amendment. Siegel two. >> Correct. >> Because you're breaking it up into those two different parts, correct? >> Yes. >> Siegel three would be, again, a change in spending. So that would be an amendment as well of his original amendment. >> Yes. >> And then alter three, which is not on your sheet, but I want to make sure we get a record. Tell me about that again. >> We'reust moving the funding from the hope fund to the housing trust fund. >> All right. So, members, when I take a motion at some point on item seven, exhibit B, which is the staff recommendation, it should have at the bottom of that modify alter three should to, to, to keep the process here, modify alter three, [6:18:18 PM] change spending from the hope fund to the housing trust fund. What's the amount? >> 500 $500,000. $500,000 accurate. >> That's captured in their version two. The second line on page two they have it as alter four. >> I don't see it. Apparently they didn't give me a version two. >> I was emailed. That's what I'm looking at. >> The printouts are coming. >> Okay. Is that the only change between version one and version two? >> Yes, just the alter. >> Okay. Very good. The members then what I'll do is, is when we get version two, that that'll be the motion I take, but that's helpful. Thank you. Okay, so here's the way we'll operate. First, we'll get the withdrawals that we need to get. Second, we'll get a motion on [6:19:18 PM] item seven, exhibit B, version tw okay. Then if anybody wants to offer an amendment to item seven, exhibit B, version two, we'll take those up. Does that make sense? Everybody with me. Director, are you okay with that? >> I'm sorry. Mayor, say it one more time, okay. Cfo said we're good, so we're good. >> I want to make sure everybody's happy. So we're going to do the withdrawals first. Then I'm going to get a motion on item seven, exhibit B, version two. Then I'm going to ask if any members have any motions to amend item seven, exhibit B, version two. And we will take up those amendments. If they pass, that will be. Exhibit B, version two, as amended. At that point. [6:20:19 PM] Everybody. Cool? All right. With that being said. Council member Fuentes moves that the vote by which Fuentes one to amend item number seven was adopted, be reconsidered. It is seconded by council member Velasquez. Is there any discussion? Without objection. Fuentes motion to amend number one for itemumber seven is reconsidered. Councilmember Fuentes, do you withdraw that item? Councilmember Fuentes withdraws her motion to amend number one to item number seven. Councilmember Velasquez moves to reconsider the vote by which Velasquez motion to amend number two for item number [6:21:19 PM] sewas adopted. It is seconded by council member Ellis. So we now have back in front of us Velasquez motion to amend number two for item number seven. Council member Velasquez moves to withdraw that motion to amend. Is that correct? Yes,. All right. So now that is not part of our discussion. With that being said, the mayor. Okay. I thought you were getting ready to say something. All right. Like in an auction, you kind of move and I react. The mayor pro tem well, I don't want to. He won't want to do that. I need a motion to approve item number seven. Staff's recommendation labeled. Okay. What? >> Laine. >> Oh, you're right. Council [6:22:19 PM] member Laine moves to withdraw. Laine. Motion to amend. Number one to amend item number seven. Is there a second? It is second by councilmember alter. She is moved to reconsider. I'm sorry. She did not move to withdraw. She moved to reconsider the vote by which Laine motion to amend number seven. Number one was adopted. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion to reconsider Laine number one for item number seven is reconsidered. Councilmember Laine now withdraws her motion to amend Laine number one for item number seven. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Thank you very much. All right. Good. Good catch. Thank you. All. Okay. Is there a motion to adopt the staff recommendation to amend item [6:23:20 PM] number seven with item number? The document labeled item number seven, exhibit B, version two. With the understanding that it amends or modifies Fuentes one. It amends or modifies Velasquez one. It amends or modifies alter one Laine two Siegel two Siegel three and alter three is there a motion motion made by council member Siegel. It is seconded by council member. Alter. Now, members, we have a motion in front of us on item number seven, exhibit B, version two. As I've read it in the record. Let me ask, is there any motion [6:24:22 PM] to amend the staff recommendation on to to amend item numr seven with exhibit B, version two? Director. >> Thank you. And with exhibit B, version two. One change that we could make in staff amendment oh nine is to make a reduction in the general fund subsidy of dsd fees as a whole. So not focusing on the residential fees. And so that would give us the for. 27 replacing it from residential fees to the transfers that the general fund does to dsd to supplement other waivers. And then. Duchen ten instead of doing duchen. >> Before we do that, I want to make sure we know what what it [6:25:22 PM] is, and I want to make sure I'm clear. What would you say in your notes you're doing. >> Reduce general fund transfer to development service department for fees and waivers. And it wouldn't be specifically to the residential. It would be the other fees and waivers that are approved by council. >> Mayor pro tem vela. >> Thank you. Mayor, I just want to make sure and again, I untand that we waive a lot of affordable housing fees and whatnot. But that said, because of interest rates, because the, you know, rents are down and whatnot, I know we're not seeing the flow of, of projects moving through. So my, my sense would be that the anticipation would be that there would not be as much of a demand for those waivers as there have been in, in years past. Is that is that a fair description of, of, of the thinking? >> My understanding is that we [6:26:23 PM] have seen a reduction and we work to true it up every year. And so the 3 million was based on what the reduction that we've been seeing. And so we would just reduce that another 400,000. >> Okay. I'm fine with that. Mayor. >> So mayor pro tem moves to amend exhibit B, version two. And I want to get the record clear. So I would like for you, rector, to state it again so that the record is clear and it would be a motion by the mayor pro tem. >> To reduce the general fund transfer to development services for fees and waivers approved by council. >> Members. Mayor pro tem the mayor pro tem moves that we amend the staff recommendation to amend item number seven [6:27:25 PM] labeled exhibit B, version two on the top category. Staff recommendation oh nine to reduce the general fund fund transfer to the development services department for fees and waivers approved by council. Is there a second to that motion? Seconded by council member Velasquez members, we are voting. Councilmember zo qadri, do you wish to speak? >> I just had a question for clarification with councilmember Fuentes. Item and the drink spiking program. That's just. Does that have to explicitly be in, you know, in exhibit B, version two, or is it just understood that it's it's it's funded. >> Okay, say that again. >> The drink spike testing the strip drink spike testing strip program of ours is it? I know it's going to be funded through councilmember Fuentes item. Does that have to be explicitly stated anywhere on this exhibit B Rita. Or do you guys have it on on the back end? >> No, we were just trying to [6:28:26 PM] say that the funding freed up by by doing those cuts to the consulting contracts would be applied generally to new investnts, which includes the drink strips and the zo investments. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember zo qadri, councilmember Fuentes. >> Thank you. Council mayor pro tem vela. So I guess how is your amendment different than what is in the staff exhibit B, version two? I know you mentioned it's a reduction in expenditures, but is it a difference in amount or is the difference from where it's coming from? >> So and I'll lay this out as I understand it, we will use general fund money to essentially pay for certain fees and waivers. In other words, we're not making the, the, the in most often affordable housing developer pay some certain kind of fee or waiver. We pay it out of the general fund. But the, the, the sense would be that given interest rates and whatnot, that the amount of waivers that [6:29:26 PM] we normally provide might be a little bit lower. In other words, they think there's a little bit of room to play with that. And again, my sense W please correct me if I'm wrong. We're going to reduce the amount from about what, 3.4 million to 3 million. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. You know, so again, we still have $3 million available for waivers for affordable housing and whatnot, but it's going down from 3.4 to 3 so that we don't raise the residential rates any more than, than we're already doing. >> So can staff speak to the impact of having this more focused on affordable housing development fee waiver program versus on residential development fees? >> Yes, councilman. Let me and I think director Mars or someone will correct me. I think we're talking about two different pots of resources. The initial 427 reduction that we were proposing was the general funds contribution to the development services fund [6:30:27 PM] to offset specific affordable housing and or housing related fees that were scheduled to go up. It was basically keeping them flat at 10%, basically, and not allowing them to increase to recover the full cost for basically paying for that delta, the 400. So we're moving away from that because I think council had some discomfort in rai fees. There's also a general fund contribution and or set aside for when affordable housing and other projects come through the door and they quafy, they would be charged the normal fee, the ones that we're holding flat. But then the general fund would also then write a check to pay for those specific fees for them. I think the councilman, as well as the team, believes we have about $3.4 million in that portion, that we've historically spent about 3 million a year. And so therefore reducing it from the [6:31:29 PM] 3.4 to 3 million, we believe we can keep up with our typical flow. I think the council member was explaining that that might even be lower, given where some of the challenges are in the housing market, and they may not be coming forward as much as they have historically done. I think that's what he was trying to say. But we believe going from 3.4 to 3 million would be sufficient to cover what we typically see coming across for the general fund to write checks to support. >> Very good. That's helpful, and I support that change. >> Mayor. Yes, the only change, additional change to staff amendment recommendation oh nine is that we would have to make sure we reduce the notes in in the document to make it clear that it is not related to residential fees. >> I just said that it's two different pots. >> Yeah. [6:32:33 PM] >> So let me read this. The motion back. The motion has been made and seconded. That staff recommendation to amend item number seven set forth in exhibit B, version two, staff recommendation nine would be to amend staff staff recommendation number nine to decrease the general fund transfer to developments. The development services department for fees and waivers approved by council, and tossure that it is not addressing residential fees. >> Correct. >> So that's the motion. And the second members, any further discussion? And what we're voting on now is the motion to amend the staff recommendation to amend item seven exhibit labeled exhibit B, version two, and it's the first one. Staff recommendation number >> Councilmember zo qadri. >> Could I could I just get [6:33:34 PM] clarification and I want to make sure I have everything right because I don't want to miss anything. We still have to go over. Councilmember duchen items 1011 1214. >> Is that correct? If somebody wants to make a motion. Okay. But right now we're only got one motion in front of us. >> So if this motion passes, then. >> We get to talk about other stuff. >> Okay. Got it. Okay. >> Got it. Okay. Go ahead. What? You want to talk? >> Well, I was going to speak to duchen ten, but that's what I'm saying. Let's go ahead. >> Yeah, we have a motion, folks. We have a motion to amend item number seven, the motion to amend item number seven is a staff recommendation labeled item number seven, exhibit B, version two. There's also been a motion to amend that staff recndation, that motion to amend the staff [6:34:34 PM] recommendation applies to staff recommendation number nine at the top of the page, and that is to decrease the general fund transfer to the development services department for fees and wrs approved by council, and to assure it does not address residential fees. We are voting on that motion to amend the staff recommendations. Motion. Staff recommendation to amend council member duchen. >> I just want to confirm. Fter this zo qadri you're not going to get to talk about anything else. Yeah. Councilmember duchen. >> After we take this vote, there's still the opportunity to introduce. >> This is just one motion to amend, a motion to amend. So if anybody has other motions to amend, get ready. Councilmember zo qadri. >> Sorry, could I ask a question about duchen 12 right now or. >> No. >> No, no, I can't, I can't. >> We've got a motion to amend with a motion and a second and we're gonna vote on that. >> Got it. Okay. [6:35:34 PM] >> Everybody ready? Is there any further discussion on the motion to amend the staff recommendation? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion to amend the staff recommendation number nine on exhibit B, version two is adopted. And so that exhibit B, version two is amended. Councilmember zo qadri, I'll recognize you for a question. >> Great. I'm going to have a question on number 12. If I want to know what the savings would have been if we only eliminated three fte for tuition reimbursement, but we still kept tuition reimbursement for temporary employees. >> I just got that question from your staff, and I'll have my staff run it down as quickly as we can, but I don't have an answer for you. Okay. Great for you right now. >> Councilmember Fuentes. >> Thank you. Colleagues, I'm going to take it back to the modification of my amendment to have the consultant spending cuts be focused directly to the housing and planning [6:36:34 PM] departments. Can staff speak to the proposal of having the 10% cut concentrated in their departments? I just want to better understand the impact to those departments on the consulting services. >> Good. >> Evening. Andrea Bartz, interim director for the Austin planning. Our budget can absorb the reduction if necessary. >> Okay. >> Very good. Thank you. >> Okay, members, I'm going to open the floor for any other proposed. Amendments to the staff. Recommendations that are labeled item seven, exhibit B, version two. And I'm going to [6:37:34 PM] start with the director. >> Thank you mayor. Staff recommends changing the duchen for D ten duchen for three, 26, 321 and moving that to a cost from reserves. >> Members. I want to say this back and correct me if I say it wrong. Director. What staff is recommending is that we amend their recommendations so thatwe take out duchen for, which was a reduction to the Austin public library by $326,321, and instead replace the the the [6:38:36 PM] source of the funding of $326,321 from our reserves. Did I say that right? >> Yes, sir. >> Councilmember Siegel, do you wish to speak or you wish to make a motion? >> I'd like to move that staff. >> Thank you. Councilmember Siegel moves that the council amend the proposed amendment, and we have a motion on a proposed amendment, which is the staff recommendations labeled to to amend item number seven, exhibit B, version two, so that we would remove the item that reads D ten duchen for Austin public library et-cetera and replace the 326 321 from reserves. It is seconded by council member Velasquez. Is there by councilmember Ellis. You wish to speak? >> I do, I just have a concern [6:39:37 PM] with utilizing one time dollars. I mean, first of allpping below the reserve threshold, but also utilizing one time dollars for something that we know our library system is going to need moving forward is what would be the most appropriate way to offer a different set of Marc duchen financial opportunities here. >> Well, we're not going to come into mint, mint, mint. So what we'll do is we'll vote on the motion that we now have on the table. If it passes, it passes. If it doesn't, then we will turn to look for. If it fails, we will look for other sources of funding. >> Okay. I just I know we're going to have the social service contract next year again. And that conversation and adding libraries into it is a big concern of mine. >> Fair enough. Good. Councilmember zo qa okay. Yes. Manager. >> So let me clarify. While we removed council member duchen if you wanted to call that a a part of our recommendation, we [6:40:38 PM] identified that solely because it was on the list of potential reductions that if y'all wanted to consider them to fund the other 2 million, it does not replace the library related ongoing expenses that will remain. This was a suggestion to actually take it from that, to do the other things that council wanted to do. And so that's I want to clarify, we're not going to be here talking about libraries and trying to find $300,000 for their materials budget, because that will not be impacted if we remove that. And so it would be lining up to your same point, that it would then be one time funding to fund all the other things that council wanted to do over and above what we had recommended. So the easiest thing to do if we want to go home, is to not do $326,000. >> The one keeping us here? >> No. You see what I'm saying? That would be the easiest thing, is to remove $326,000 or go through duchen ten 1112, and we [6:41:38 PM] continue to hunt for $326,000. I think someone offered, maybe we should just take it from reserves, and we would relent if that's what council wanted to do. But if you want to continue to go through and look for other reductions, I think we can have at that. But I just want to clarify, it is not then if this is removed, we wouldn't be taking money from the libraries if in fact this is rejected. So I just want to clarify. >> Okay. Thank you for that. And I'll hold my speech on this item, mayor, and just let us vote. >> Thank you, councilmember zo qadri. Councilmember Fuentes, I don't know whether you had previously hit your button, and I just didn't delete it. Okay. Thank you, councilmember duchen. >> I'll wait to introduce the motion. I just will say I agree with councilmember Ellis's concern. And I worry that the signal that this sends that the first thing that we do is tap into reserves, as opposed to have to make some of the more difficult decisions that might be on the table, given the priorities that we've laid out [6:42:40 PM] today. Thank you. >> Yes. Okay. With that being said, I don't have anybody else signed up to speak. I want to say that there's no further discussion. So here's what we're voting on. We're voting on a motion and a second to amend the recommendations of staff to amend item number seven, labeled exhibit B, version two. It is the third item on their list, and it would be to delete their initial recommendation of D ten duchen four related to the Austin public library, and to replace the funding of that money that. 326321 from reserves. >> Yes. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Those in favor of that replacing it? The make this simple. Replacing that with reserves. Please raise your hand. Those opposed raise your [6:43:52 PM] hand. There being seven in favor and four in opposition. The four in opposition are duchen council members. Duchen harper-madison Ellis and the mayor. The motion to amend the staff recommendation is adopted. Are there any other motions to amend the staff recommended amendment to item number seven labeled exhibit B, version two. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you. I'm like to start with amending item seven, exhibit B, version two with duchen number 14, which is the Austin homeless strategy operations extreme weather shelter operating fund for $53,000. [6:44:53 PM] >> I want to make sure I understand what it is you're doing. Are you just adding money in now, or is there something specific you're targeting? >> I wanted to bring up these four items that I laid out in the message board post. I thought they might be able to even be swapped out with the decision we just made. If we decide to approve them. >> Okay, why don't we do this? If that's the case? I mean, we'd have to amend something. We already passed. Yes, director. >> So with that particular amendment, we are with the reduction of the Velasquez amendment of 300,003 positions that would impact hrsa's overall budget. So we were covering the additional cost, anticipating that 53,000 would be used for that. We're not reducing that money from their budget, but we are using that money to make sure we're paying for the hs03 positions. So it's [6:45:56 PM] already accounted for. >> Okay. What's your reaction to that? >> That's a surprise to me. But based on that, I will I volunteer instead to the next item, which is the fleet item that we talked about. >> You're gonna need to be a little more specific. >> Yeah, let me get the number for that. I believe it's 11. Yeah, I believe it's 11. >> Duchen 11. And what is it you recommend? What is it you before I recognize you for a motion to describe what you're thinking. >> I'm thinking about decreasing the appropriations of fleet by $425,000. Based on the staff prioritization list. I can expand on that when we get into the motion, and thereby potentially restore one of the items that's been cut already on this list in order to make this budget whole, whether it's the one we just talked about or another priority the council has identified. >> So before, before I [6:46:57 PM] recognize you for a motion, we have a vote and all that. Let me ask the council to to weigh in. If you look at duchen 11, what he's what he's offering as a possibility is that we decrease appropriations to fleet mobility services by $425,000 and use that in some way to balance the budget, including if we wanted to reverse what was just voted on with regard to reserves. Let me ask if if people want to play with T council member.ellis. >> Just a question. Now that we're through that last vote, I do worry, even though I supported wanted to find different ways to fund those library services, I do think that at this point, if we start adding more money in and starting to mess with the spreadsheet, we could be here night. And unless there's something else in the spreadsheet that someone is super unsatisfied with, which it seems like we've addressed the two things that mayor pro tem vela addressed. I think the [6:47:59 PM] spreadsheet might be tight, and we should probably not work against our own interests. >> Okay, is anybody else want to weigh in? Councilmember Siegel. >> Mayor, can I call the question on the motion to amend. >> You would be calling the question on the overall motion. So, yes, and of course you can, and you just did. But I want to make sure and I know you'll you'll be flexible if anybody else has anything that they really feel like they want to address in exhibit B, version two, I would prefer not to cut them off, but the questions being called. Yes. Council member Ellis. >> Last question is, with that library dollar allocation being taken out of budget stabilization reserves, what is our total percentage? Right now it's below 17. But how far below 17? >> 16.9837%. >> All right. I'll give that a good thought. >> Which is a $250,844. [6:49:03 PM] >> All right. I'll ponder what that means to me. >> All right. So the question has been called by council member Siegel. So we are now going to take a vote. The vote will be on whether we adopt item, whether we adopt the staff recommendations to amend item number seven that are contained in exhibit B, version two, as amended by the two amendments that we've taken. That is the question before us. There being no further discussion, because the question has been called without objection. Exhibit B, the staff recommendation to amend item number seven, labeled exhibit B, version two, as amended, is adopted, with council member duchen being shown voting no. Is there anyone else wishing to be shown voting no as to that amendment? [6:50:06 PM] Okay, nice work and thank you. Mr. How? Check my math. But I think that puts us in a situation where we can now vote on item number seven. Okay. Okay. Mem, we've considered and we have voted on all the staff amendments and the council amendments to the budget. We have a motion and a second. We are now able to take a vote on item number seven, adopting the city's fiscal year 2020 627 budget, as amended. Is there any further discussion on [6:51:07 PM] that motion, as amended? I'm going to say something because I'm. I'm I'm a little disappointed. I'm and I'm discouraged. And so and I'm going to vote in a way that I think is going to surprise some people. I think that we've made such good progress over the period of time in terms of dealing with the stability and the confidence, but I, I am bothered by. Where we where we're ending up. And and I'm going to say it. I'll not give a long speech. I'll just give a couple of things. I am bothered by the the 911 parts O this budget. And as I indicated by my votes earlier today, I don't [6:52:09 PM] I don't want it to be a part of this budget. And I voted no O those. I'm also bothered by the use of CEOs that are in this. Particularly after the council has already voted on bonds and added to. And I'm not going to go into all the details because it's a late night. On how much debt over the past couple of years that we've added, including, for that matter, efforts that were made to reduce the amount of debt we were going to put into caps on I-35. But we went ahead and did that. And and I really do feel like we're at a point in time where we probably could have done more. Not probably we could have done more to meet the needs of people that are struggling in our community. I feel like that the struggles of the people in our community continue. I think that there are even stronger now than they [6:53:12 PM] were a year ago, and I'm troubled when we add with the number of amendments that we added, we add to the the additional cost. So like I say, I'm not going to go into a lot of detail, but I'm going to be voting no on the budget. And I believe that's probably the first time I've ever voted no on a city budget. But I want to I want to make those. Get those comments on the record. Is there any further discussion? Council member duchen. >> I mean, if this is the opportunity for us to weigh in on this process, as you've just done. >> Discussion before we vote, so that that would be the time to do it. >> And I appreciate your comments, mayor, because they reflect a lot of my frustrations with this process also. And my hope was that my, my, my sort of understanding earlier in support of some of the amendments was that I'd be making those votes to support them in exchange for the opportunity to talk about some other opportunities to make [6:54:13 PM] revisions or cuts, or talk about some other opportunities we haven't even had discussions a, about how to approach this budget and respectfully to the manager. You know, I feel like not all reductions are the same, and not all destructions are catastrophic and apocalyptic, and we've got to be able to have those discussions as a as a council, as a community about what our priorities are and, and be and be candid. I mean, that fleet discussion, it's it's affecting a quarter of our non-sworn fleet vehicles. And it's it's basically. Delaying the time that certain vehicles that have fender benders are going to get repaired and people will just have to drive on the street for maybe a month longer for whatever analysis we have, which, frankly, people in the community do every day. The idea that we're we're special and different from people is a, is a strange concept to me. Last year, I supported the 3.5% increase, and under the circumstance, I thought it made sense. I thought we had just worked through a really tough [6:55:13 PM] tax rate, election and increased process, and I was happy to support that. But the standard that we've tried to approach this budget this year is, have we done everything we can to scrutinize or reprioritize our spending? And I don't think we've got there. And I think maybe that's what the mayor was suggesting also. And if that seems harsh or overly critical to this process, I want to say I'm really grateful for all the energy that staff and my colleagues ve put into this process, but I just didn't see a reflection of how much time we've spent talking about adding things to the budget and how little time we spent talking about scrutinizing or what could be lower priorities for us to consider. And I don't think that's about big or small government. I don't think it's about political identity. I think it's just about basic budgeting and trade offs that anybody has to do in any organization, whether it's a business or hoa or a family budget, and recognizing that [6:56:15 PM] every time we add to the budget, we are creating a future obligation we're making even in small, little incremental ways, we're making life more difficult or challenging for future councils and staff and the public for how they can afford everything. And that's something I'm thinking about. Every single line item that we're that we're talking about here. And so however noble or effective we think these investments are, the carry a consequence that I just don't feel like we really talked about today. I mean, I sort of I was ready to camp out for the next three days working on this. And I'm just surprised we got through today. There's been more than a few times over the last few weeks where I've stopped and wondered, are we even in a budget deficit? I feel like the conversations we've had are are few and far between forhese prioritizations and reductions. You know, I look at other cities across the country that are facing similar, sometimes even much larger shortfalls. And, and they're having those difficult conversations about [6:57:16 PM] what they're going to scale back on. And so it just, you know, I wish I had a different way of talking about it, but it just sort of strikes me as business as usual. And it feels very surreal, especially if we're in a situation, as councilmember Ellis pointed out, next year, where we're we're staring down another, what, $8.8 million in social services cuts and that our entire budget hinges on 1ats and other processes that will are going to improve our economic fortune. So I do want to say I'm grateful for all the advocates who came and shared their perspective and and priorities and for staff doing the same thing. But we also haven't heard a lot from people over the last few weeks that are busy working or otherwise might struggle to be here. People who may not be associated with a nonprofit or advocacy group or organization, people who just might be struggling to afford to live here. And I may not even have the understanding of how much their voice carries some weight here. I have a [6:58:17 PM] sense that thuilding is very insular at times, and outside. Every indication that I get is that people are struggling in an economy that's kind of limping along. If you guys read the jobs report that came out five days ago, I think we shed nationally like 23,000 jobs and had to revise two months back worth of numbers by over 100,000 jobs. I don't know how immune Austin is to those national trends, but I got to conclude that the national economy has some impact on how residents feel about their ability to live here, and affordability. We also know that wages are struggling to keep pace. I think at a historic level, gas prices are up 36% since February. That's the that's our environment right now that we're that we're sort of passing a mass tax rate increase and and a $395 million bond. And we seem to think a few hundred dollars is no big deal for people right now. But, you know, I disagree. If you guys spent time with the city [6:59:18 PM] survey and we did a district survey and got, you know, hundreds, 700 responses, that was very much in line with the city survey that you all ran. And I want to point out that just 14% of people said they wanted more services. That meant higher taxes, which was down 6% from last year. So a full 81% of people in our survey said that people either wanted to reallocate what we had to maintain services and spending, or to reduce spending to fund higher priorities, or simply to just reduce spending overall.nd their conclusion was pretty stark. Residents want smarter spending, not new taxes. The most common budget stance is reallocation of current revenue, a mandate for efficiency over expansion or contraction. So I talked more than I kind of intended to, but I've got no prioritization, no no challenges with like the reprioritizing the dollars as I think residents want. But I [7:00:18 PM] fundamentally come back to the idea of, did we do everything we can to explore this on both sides of the ledger? And I don't think we did. I was even hoping at the end to be able to support the budget by going through a couple of T items that we had researched and proposed, and we didn't even have that opportunity. And that's one reason I'm in agreement with the mayor that I'm hoping that going forward, we can we can do something different because even a, I was going to sell it for like 3.25%, but even like a 3.4% budget would demonstrate that we've gone through a more rigorous process that we can show to people that we considered not just the things that we think we ought to have, but also the things that we might want to eliminate, cut, or reprioritize. So I will also be voting no on this budget. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember, councilmember, councilmember Siegel. Councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you very much, I first [7:01:18 PM] want to thank Cary your team, y'all, every year work. I know an unimaginable number of hours to get us to where we are today, and I really appreciate the work that that y'all have done. I know we have a lot of staff here in the room, and all of you have done a lot of work helping to shape this budget, figuring out what what are the priorities and how can we make sure that, you know, you look beyond just your budget, but the city as a whole to M sure that we have the resources to invest in our communities and to the public who came here day after day after day to make sure that the concerns that are being felt in the community are being heard in these halls. And so while I do agree with the [7:02:19 PM] comments about the struggles people are facing because they are real, and I have had numbers of conversations with people about just that. The answer to that is ensuring that we have a, a strong safety net underneath our community, that we invest in our community so that the people who are truly struggling don't go to bed hungry every night. That's why we're investing over $2 million in food access and food security. You know, it's making sure that kids who the system has failed them. And who are looking for a bed to sleep in, we are making those investments so that they don't end up on the street or in a jail. It's why we are investing millions of dollars in mental health, [7:03:22 PM] because right now, the biggest provider of mental health in our community is the jail. And that's not right. And so we are making those investments here today because we're choosing our values. We're choosing a future where people don't live at the edge, at the margin, and worry about the most basic things that nobody should be worrying about. And I think about an individual I talked to the other day, I was knocking on his door and he was very firm and he said, Yo, you guys need to draw the line. And we had a conversation about what that meant to him, and it meant cut the things that can be cut, fund the programs that need to be funded, but have have some kind of line. And that's what we have here. We [7:04:22 PM] don't talk about it a lot, and it didn't end up in a slide until, I think, our fifth budget conversation. But even to get here, we were facing a $50 million deficit and the budget office, through work O our team and our city employees, was able to identify $24 million in cuts because they were the nice to haves, not the need to haves. We have scrutinized when we were down to the very last, you know, discretionary spending to try to make this budget work. And we chose to strengthen our social safety net because that was the must have for a lot of people. And so I don't want it to go. No budget is perfect. [7:05:26 PM] I've seen a ton of them. And every single budget you can pick something you don't like. But in the end, this budget is responsible. It's balanced. It reflects our commitment to our people, our commitment to our values, and our commitment to a future that's better than today. And so I'm proud to vote for this budget, and I appreciate the work that's been done. >> Thank you. Councilmember, councilmember Siegel. Councilmember harper-madison, councilmember Fuentes. >> Thank you. Mayor. I also want to thank staff for your amazing professionalism. I know dozens and dozens and dozens of people worked on this budget, and we really appreciate it. I also want to thank the manager for leading a process that really produced a lot of collaboration and consensus. And I want to thank my colleagues, because I think each of you, each of us, are fighting for Austin's values. Despite these relatively tough fiscal times. But I see this budget as generally positive. We ensured that our civilian [7:06:26 PM] workers of the city, like their public safety colleagues, will continue to receive compensation that keeps up with the cost of living. We continued extremely valuable housing programs to keep roofs over the heads of our some of our most vulnerable neighbors. We prevented cuts to lifesaving social programs, and we've continued the work of the city. You know, these really beloved programs and services that the people of Austin depend upon. And yes, I acknowledge we're in a defensive position financially. As a city, we have to endure reductions and cuts. We have to raise fees and fines more than we'd like to. Things might improve if leadership changes at the state or federal governments, or if our local economy takes off again. But until that time, we'll have to work increasingly hard to keep what we have. And I'm ready to do that work, and I look forward to doing it with all of you. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you, councilmember, councilmember harper-madison, councilmember Fuentes, councilmember zo qadr >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for the acknowledgment. I won't belabor the discussion. I've heard lots of talk about people ready to get out of here, but I [7:07:27 PM] will say this. This is my last one. I've had the opportunity for seven consecutive years as of this one, to weigh in on the city's, what I call it, my super bowl. You know, when I'm talking to friends and family and I'm extra unavailable or a little less patient than I generally am, I will say something that I think is important to note, because I think it offers us the opportunity to recognize that this is a process and there are no winners and there are no losers. We did our best and the collective effort will land us where it lands us. I will say I really appreciate the portunity to work a diverse body of people, our lived experiences, we bring them up here, you know, they really help to influence how we make policy. I I'm guilty of having said, if you've never pawned anything, don't talk to me about poor people. And what that represents for me and for my colleagues. They know what I [7:08:27 PM] mean when I say that. They know that my lived experience makes it more often than not that I can identify zo very clearly. Like in the minute somebody in my immediate family is experiencing the things that my colleagues and I discuss. But as a part of being on a diverse body, you recognize that nobody requires us to be ideologically aligned. And I appreciate that. I appreciate that we're all bringing something different, but I also appreciate when we are in alignment. And councilmember duchen, I will be voting for the budget today. Listen, it's a boom, boom, boom three in a row. Council member Siegel, I agree with what you said, which Wu. I, I say that to say I think generally we got to a good place and I agree with you and council member alter as you were speaking, I was thinking while I agree with some of what you say, I also [7:09:28 PM] fully recognize that sometimes always being there, being that social safety net is not the best position for a municipality to be in. That's not how we should be conducting business. And my honest opinion, that's both by way of observation, my anecdotal experience with what happens at the tail end of always being there for our constituents to our detriment, frankly, let's be honest. And so it's a set up for poor people, honestly. So you qualify for this program today and this funding today. But when it is insecure and let's just say without doom and gloom, I can tell you the day is coming where it will be insecure. And we didn't give people the oppnity to grow beyond resilience, to be antifragile, because we always made the sacrifice. And I think to some degree, without operating in a realistic, pragmatic perspective place, we compromise our future and the [7:10:30 PM] sustainability of the dollars that are frankly, finite. So I tend to be a lot more financially conservative than people would assume I would be because, you know, folks love to make assumptions. Councilmember duchen, I appreciate everything that you said about there being something that lacks in how vigorous and robust the process is. But let me just say, because I'm old hat at this point, we always do it like this. I've every year hesitantly voted yes on a budget every year. So I have two choices right now. I vote no on this one because I don't love it, or I vote yes. And, you know, do what we've always done. What I would like to say and impart on my colleagues who are going to stick around and ke doing this. First of all, thank you all. But how about we don't keep doing this like we've always done it. Nothing about our environment, our world, our politics, our [7:11:32 PM] religion, our health, our wellness. Nothing is the same as it's always been. None of it. And we don't know what the future looks like, but we already know. What did you say? You recognize we're in a defensive position. That means we have to get offensive. And I don't know that this budget, this process, the dollars in terms of how they're allated, I don't know that it says to our constituents that we're thinking from a pragmatic perspective, as people operating a business. And one of the we teeter between 10th and 11th, one of the largest major metros in the country, and growing our debt grows, our needs grow, and our social safety net is going to have to grow. And we can't always do it. I think if we're not going to do it like we've always done it, one of the things we need to get real serious about is finding dollars that don't belong to the city's purse. [7:12:33 PM] There are dollars in our community to help communities be more resilient and to be antifragile. I think we haven't taken all the opportunities to councilmember duchen point to be creative about finding dollars, and frankly, to take a real hard look at how we expend the dollars that we already do. It seems frivolous, but I just had a conversation with a staffer tonight. My somebody who works in one of our departments pointed out for me that this thing that we could buy for $5 on Amazon, the city pays $85 for it and a lot of it. And there are a lot of instances where procurement had to really be drilled into to take a look at duplications, to take a look at these contracts that we've had forever and have funded forever and didn't need to be continued. We have to constantly dohat efficiency. I, I think we could have done a better job going into this budget discussion by looking at more inefficiencies [7:13:34 PM] systemically. And my hope is and I'll close. Mayor, I see you looking at me. I'll close by saying my hope is that this what I'm saying doesn't sound negative. My hope is that it sounds inspirational. If things are bad, what a great opportunity to get creative and to move smart. And I hope that's what we do moving forward. >> Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Fuentes. Councilmember zo qadri, councilmember Ellis. >> Thank you. I certainly thank you, councilmember Madison. I greatly appreciate your service, and it has been a pleasure serving with you on council. And certainly, you know, I just want to provide some some uplifting comments here because there have been a lot of hard work and a lot of progress made with the city of Austin. And I know oftentimes it doesn't seem that way. And certainly with this budget process, it is, you know, very easy to say, well, weouould have looked at this and we should have more conversations on that. And, councilmember duchen, you know, I would have loved to have had [7:14:35 PM] greater conversation on the amendments you filed, but we just got them today when you technically filed them officially. Right. And so just hours before this morning. And so we have made great progress in identifying areas of the city that we should be operating more efficiently. The manager has outlined several different reset processes across our city and across the enterprises, and we have been more efficient with our dollars. Let's not forget, the manager and his team have identified over $20 million of reductions as part of the base budget proposal. We areututting the city services and finding, you know, duplications and redundancies and identifying those efficiencies. 20 million. That is significant. Also, counsel, we've had several amendments that have cut spending, particularly in consultant spending. That is progress. I haven't seen that those levels of cut on council. My six years in serving on council. And you know what I think is really uplifting of [7:15:36 PM] this budget process is that we very quickly came together and set out that social safety was a number one priority us, and we coalesced that around it as a priority this budget cycle. And when I think about when you're in an economic downturn, that's not the time to be reducing your social safety net. That's when people need you the most. And I view government as a way to of helping people. I know my family, I personally benefited from government services and resources. I know the impact that that can have on, on families, particularly working families. And so knowing that we have the privilege and honor to represent the city of Austin and to be able to deliver a budget that truly prioritizes and provides sustainable services for everyone in the city is something incredible. Knowing that we didn't pull back on cost of living adjustments, how important that is for city employees and ensuring that remaining competitive. All of that goes hand in H in creating a city that works for everyone, and that we're able to deliver a [7:16:37 PM] city that has services that are high quality, reliable and and dependable. So I just really want to thank my colleagues here for the policy considerations and conversations that we've had.and just really uplift the work that has happened in a way that I don't want it to get drowned out by some of the comments we've had today, because there are a lot of things that we should be celebrating and grateful for. So thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember councilmember qadri, followed by councilmember Ellis, then mayor pro tem. >> Thank you mayor. I think this was really difficult budget year and the process was was challenging at times. It was it was confusing. There weren't really any easy choices in front of us. But but I do want to acknowledge the budget staff and all their hard work. I want to thank staff. I want to thank folks who came in and spoke to, you know, to the council, to our offices. I want to thank folks who are who are tuned in to this at 7:17 P.M. On a on a Wednesday, they could [7:17:37 PM] be doing anything else, but they're watching this because they care. And I think that, you know, throughout this process, my priority and the priority of everyone else on the council was making sure that the folks who rely on the city the most weren't the ones being asked to bear the brunt of difficult decisions. I've knocked on thousands of doors the past few past few months, and the one thing that I that I constantly hear from folks are about protecting critical social services and making sure that austinites aren't being left behind. And I think that's something that this budget does. I think this budget protects folks. I think this budget speaks to the issues and concerns of people. And I think ase were getting a bunch of spreadsheets thrown at us that, you know, the programs aren't just numbers on a spreadsheet. They're people. They're people that are staying in housing, that have access to food and health care, that support their families and get through some of the most difficult moments of their lives. We work to [7:18:38 PM] protect the people who keep the city running, and making sure we're continuing to invest in the basic services that austinites expect from their local government. There are absolutely things I wish we could have funded more of. It was a challenging fiscal year, and we had to make some incredibly tough calls about where limited resources could could have the greatest impact. But a budget is ultimately a reflection of our values. And even when resources are tight, we have a responsibility to make sure Austin continues to show up for the people who need it most. So I'm grateful to everyone who showed up during this whole proce share their priorities with council, and advocated for their communities. The. This budget isn't perfect, but I'm proud that we were able to protect some of the services austinites depend on most. While putting forward a responsible budget for the year ahead. I agree we still have much to do to help Austin residents, and I know this council is up for the challenge. >> Thank you, thank you, councilmember zo qadri councilmember Ellis, followed by the mayor pro tem. >> Thank you mayor. I've had quite conflicting feelings about this budget, not necessarily about what was proposed, but just about the uphill battle that we're facing, [7:19:39 PM] trying to make sure that we can provide enough city services so that our residents feel like they are getting the attention that they deserve for the taxes that they pay, and also making sure that our employees are rewarded fairly for the hard work that they put in every day. So I am appreciative of those items going in. And as I knock on doors, I hear quite a different story, which I'm imagining. All 11 of us are going to hear different stories as we go out and talk with the folks in our community. A lot of what I'm hearing is that people want to make sure that they're safe in parks, that their kids are safe in the parks, that our roads are safe, and that when they call 911, that someone shows up quickly. And that recurring theme that I hadn't been hearing over the years as much as I'm hearing now. And that's why I am concerned about how we approach, you know, changing the 911 call center before we have our report. I hope that I'm wrong, and I hope it goes really smoothly, because I know that our chiefs have stepped up to the challenge. Our manager is stepping up to the challenge, but I've been able to work across different forms of [7:20:40 PM] leadership in both city management and with our public safety divisions, and I think these folks are up to the challenge. But I have seen some of the ideas that we've proposed go well or go not so well. We still don't have parks police back. We don't have a motors unit yet. And I really want to make sure that the charts about response times increasing continue to go down, because that is the largest investment in our general fund, is to make sure that we're supporting public safety and that people have the attention that they need from our officials. Iproud that this budget does do a lot to increase public safety. It protects our four person staffing as much as possible, which we're going to keep our eyes on the overtime and make sure that we can maintain that, because city ordinance dictates that it should. And we've been able to do a lot of park safety improvements, and I appreciate thecese support of our work to help make sure that people are not being killed in our parks. These are really, really big concerns to be addressing. But I think on the whole, this budget does the best that we as [7:21:41 PM] a diocese have been able to do to address all of those needs, try to make sure that every dollar is stretched as far as possible. And so there may be bits and pieces of this that I don't necessarily love. But I think, all in all, we have to move forward with a budget that stretches as far as it possibly can to provide the services that our residents desperately need, and that appreciates the people who work for the city of Austin. Every day, I wan make sure we continue to be the best employer in town, and I think that this sets us up for success in that way. >> Thank you, councilmember mayor pro tem. >> Thank you. Mayor, I just want to thank I'm not going to repeat everything that everybody said, but I want to thank my colleagues and you, mayor, we have some tough debates. There's a lot of disagreement, but I follow city council's all around the state, and this is a very professional, civil, respectful body. We have policy discussions. I never see [7:22:42 PM] personal attacks on the dais. I just I can't tell you how seeing drama in other cities that shall go unnamed. It's it's I just, I like my, my colleagues, the staff. We have just a very professional civil policy focused council. And I am feel so grateful to be serving on this body with folks that are engaged in the policy stuff and not just throwing bombs at each other. We see that way too much. And I want to thank you, mayor. I know you know of the voting against the budget, and I know you didn't like a couple of my amendments, but you play it fair. You know, you're you're not there's no shenanigans. You've been very civil and professional and, you know, you let people speak and have their say. And again, I just appreciate serving on such a, you know, professional, courteous, civil body. And [7:23:43 PM] thank all my colleagues. Really appreciate. >> You all. Thank you. Mayor pro tem councilmember qadri. >> I'm going to make one comment. Me and Jose do have beef, so I want that to be. >> Just to clarify. >> Okay. It looks like that's all the folks that want to speak. Let me pause that. We're going to take a vote. I do want to say it's been said several times, but on behalf of the entire council. We really appreciate our professional financial staff. You guys, I mean, you're wonderful. And we and we, we lean on you and rely onou so much. So thank you very much. And all of the staff. I was bragging the other day at a deal I was at, about how amazing it is to me that a council member can have some intricate little question that they want to ask, and some member of the staff, all y'all that are sitting out there can come up and almost always answer that question in some way that tells you how deep your knowledge is of this [7:24:43 PM] government. So we we deeply appreciate that. So thank you to everybody. With that, I'm going to ask the city clerk, please call the roll as required by Texas state law. So each council members vote is recorded with regard to item number seven. >> Mayor Watson, no. >> Mayor tem vela. >> Yes. >> Council member. Harper-madison. >> Yes. >> Council member. Fuentes. >> Yes. >> Council member. Velazquez. >> Yes. >> Council member. Alter. >> Yes. >> Council member. Laine. >> Yes. >> Council member. Siegel. >> Yes. >> Council member. Ellis. >> Yes. >> Council member. Zo qadri. >> Yes. >> And council member. Duchen. >> No. >> Members. The motion to adopt the city's budget for fiscal year 2026 2027, as amended, passes on a vote of 9 to 2. Thanks, everybody. Now we will [7:25:44 PM] go to item number six. Item number six is an ordinance authorizing fees, fines and other charges to be set or charged by the city for fiscal year 2026. Members. There are proposed amendments to this. And so what I'm going to do is I'm going to get a motion and a second to approve the ordinance for fees, fines and other charges. The mayor pro tem moves approval of item number six. It is seconded by council member harper-madison. Do you want to say anything? >> Yes. We added the proposed staff amendments to the fee schedule so minor language changes. >> It's my 20th wedding. >> I don't see it as. >> Yes members, you have a sheet that looks like this. And so the first item that we're going to take up are the [7:26:44 PM] proposed staff recommended amendments. And I'll first ask if any member. Sorry, any members of the council have questions of our staff with regard to proposed staff amendments to item number six. In that case, I'll entertain a motion to adopt the staff amendments. The mayor pro tem moves approval of the staff amendments that are recommended to the ordinance for fees, fines and other charges. It is seconded by council member harper-madison. Is there any discussion on the motion to amend? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion to amend the staff with the staff recommendations to the. The change in the ordinance is adopted with council member Siegel off the dais. We're now ready to discuss amendments from the council that the council members may have to. E ordinance for fees, fines and other charges. Council mber alter has proposed two [7:27:47 PM] motions motions to amend item number six, and I'll recognize you on alter motion number one to amend item six. >> Thank you very much. This is to amend the film permit application fee. It was going to be increased to $425. This takes it down to $250. You know, we want to foster the creative community here in Austin. And this is one way to do that. So I move adoption. >> Council member alter moves adoption of alter number one to amend item number six. It's seconded by council member Laine. Is there any discussion on alter motion to amend number one to item six? Hearing none. Without objection. Alter motion to amend >> Item number six with alter. Number one is adopted with council member Siegel off the dais. That will take us to council member alter. Motion alters motion number two to amend item number six. >> Thank you very much. This is. We've talked a bit about it [7:28:47 PM] before. The sound permit fee change and I move. Adoption. >> Council member alter moves adoption of alter number two to item number six. Is there a second? Second by council member Velazquez? Is there any discussion regarding alter motion to amend item number six with alter motion number two? Hearing none. Without objection. Alter motion number two to amend. Item number six is adopted with council member Siegel. Off the dais, we have a motion and a second to approve the ordinance for fees, fines and other charges, as amended. Is there any discussion on the ordinance, the motion item number six to on the fees, fines and other charges charges ordinance as amended. Council member. >> Alter just to clarify for the record, that was version two on alter two. It didn't say it at the top, but on the backup it's posted as V two. >> In the backup it is V two and that is the motion that we. [7:29:47 PM] It's. The latest motion is the one that. The latest item is the one we were taking up and that was the version two. Thank you. All right. Is there any discussion on the fees fines and other charges ordinance as amended. Hearing none. Will the city clerk please call the roll so that each council member council members vote is recorded? >> Mayor Watson? >> Yes. >> Mayor pro tem vela. >> Yes. >> Council member. Harper-madison. >> Yes. >> Council member. Fuentes. >> Yes. >> Council member. Velazquez. >> Yes. >> Council member. Alter. >> Yes. >> Council member. Laine. >> Yes. >> Council member. Siegel. >> He's off the dais. >> Council member. Ellis. >> Yes. >> Council member. Qadri. >> Yes. >> Aouncil member duchen. >> Yes. >> There being ten yeses and council member. Siegel off the dais. Item number six is adopted, as amended. Members [7:30:53 PM] that will take us to item number 11. Item number 11 is to ratify the property tax increaset's reflected in the budget as required by state law. This is not a vote on the tax rate. We will take a separate vote on the tax rate after we take this vote. The motion that I will call for is a motion to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the fiscal year 2026 2027 budget adopted by the city council today. Is there a motion to ratify the party tax increase reflected in the fiscal year 2026 2027 budget adopted by council today, council member Ellis moves adoption. Is there a second? Seconded by the mayor pro tem. We have a motion and a second to ratify the property tax [7:31:54 PM] increase reflected in the fiscal year 2026 2027 budget. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Item number 11 is adopted. I would like to be shown voting no. Council member duchen will be voting no. And council member Siegel is off the dais. That will take us back to item number one. And by the way, there is method to the madness in the way this is all done. Members. Item number one is to approve an ordinance adopting and levying a property or ad valorem tax rate for the city of Austin. Austin for fiscal year 2 2027. We already conducted the public hearing for this item today. State law requires this to be a roll call [7:32:55 PM] vote and requires the motion to be made as follows. So the motion I will accept is the following motion that the property tax rate be increased by the adoption of a tax rate of $0.579948 per $100 valuation, which is effectively an 8.3% increase in the tax rate and which includes a debt rate of $0.135312 per $100 valuation, which is a $0.000014 increase above the minimum debt rate of $0.135298 per $100 valuation for necessary bond paying agent [7:33:56 PM] fees. And I will only accept a motion ttt you say it back to me verbatim. The mayor pro tem moves approval of the motion as I read it. Mr. Howe, you're making me very nervous. >> The ordinance with the numbers. >> Okay. Very good. Thank you. I just want to make sure that you weren't standing to object or something. Council member Laine seconds the motion. Is there discussion on the motion? [7:35:18 PM] >> Council. >> Members, you have version two, which is a red line [7:36:18 PM] version, and that is the motion that I have accepted. It is to adopt that ordinance. For the record, I'm going to read it one more time. Mr. Howe, I want to make sure you check my math. The motion that is made and seconded is that the property tax rate be increased by the adoption of a tax rate of $0.579948 per $100 valuation, which is effectively an 8.3% increase in the taxate and which includes a debt rate of $0.135312 per $100 valuation, which is a $0.000014 increase above the minimum debt rate of $0.135298 per $100 valuation for necessary bond paying agent [7:37:18 PM] fees. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Will the clerk please call the role as required by state law, to record the votes of all the council members? >> Mayor Watson? >> No. >> Mayor pro tem vela. >> Yes. >> Council member. Harper-madison. >> Yes. >> Council member. Fuentes. >> Yes. >> Council member. Velazquez. >> Yes. >> Council member. Alter. >> Yes. >> Council member. Laine. >> Yes. >> Council member. Siegel. >> Yes. Off the dais. >> Council member. Ellis. >> Yes. >> Council member. Zo qadri. >> Yes. >> And council member duchen. >> No. >> The motion to approve the ordinance to adopt a property tax rate passes on a vote of eight in favor passes on all three readings. A vote in eight in favor, two in opposition and [7:38:18 PM] one person off the dais. Council member Siegel. So it is adopted. For the record, council member Siegel is celebrating a 20th wedding anniversary and that's why he is not with us right now. Members. Mr. Howe, I'm going to look at you one more time to make sure, but I think we have covered every agenda item. Yeah. Take your time. >> Shabani. Did we do? Two. Three. Four five. >> Members? It appears that we have completed all of the business to come before the Austin city council. At this budget meeting. We have passed the budget on all three [7:39:19 PM] readings. Again, we couldn't do it without the people in this room and this wonderful staff. So thank you all very, very much. And I want to echo that how much I appreciate the members on this dais and the amount of work that they put into all this. This is a this is not an easy thing. And we may disagree from time to time on various issues, but I do appreciate the congeniality of this council. With that being said, unless there's objection and I won't recognize it. If there is, we are adjourned without objection at 7:40 P.M. Thank you all very, very much.