* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:02] EVERYBODY, IT'S [CALL TO ORDER] NINE 30 IN THE MORNING ON MAY 20TH, 2026. AND I'LL CALL TO ORDER THE MEETING OF THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL. WE ARE MEETING AT 3 0 1 WEST SECOND STREET IN AUSTIN, TEXAS AT CITY HALL, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, AND WE HAVE A QUORUM OF THE COMMITTEE PRESENT, UH, MEMBERS. WHAT I'M GONNA DO, I'LL RUN YOU THROUGH HOW I THINK THIS MORNING. WE'LL GO, UH, WE ARE GOING TO FIRST HEAR FROM PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEMS, UH, AS PART OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT. THEN WHAT WE WILL DO IS, UH, GO TO AN APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES AND THEN WE WILL GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND I'LL ANNOUNCE THAT IN JUST A SECOND. UM, AND WHEN WE COME OUT OF THE EXECUTIVE, AND WE HAVE TWO ITEMS TO TAKE UP IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND I'LL ANNOUNCE BOTH OF THOSE AT THE SAME TIME SO THAT WE'RE READY TO GO IN THERE. AND THEN WHEN WE COME BACK OUT, WE WILL TAKE UP THE, THE NEXT ITEM WE'LL TAKE UP WILL BE ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, WHICH IS A BRIEFING ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2025, SINGLE AUTO REPORT BY DELOITTE AND TOUCH. UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS IN THAT CASE? UM, I'LL CALL UP ITEM NUMBER ONE, WHICH NO, I'LL [Public Communication: General] GO TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, IS MY UNDERSTANDING. YES, SIR. SO FIRST SPEAKER, MARK MAY SECOND SPEAKER ON ITEM NUMBER SIX, ALYSSA VARGAS. UH, OKAY. HI, UH, UH, THIS IS MARK MAY. I LIVE IN, UH, D FIVE. UM, SO I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT, UH, TODAY THE BARTON SPRINGS, UH, BRIDGE IN THE, UH, FINANCIAL, UH, CONTEXT. SO KNOW THAT PROP, PROP Q FAILED. WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE CITY HAS A PRETTY BIG BUDGET PROBLEM, AND WE ALSO KNOW OUR PARKS NEED NEED A BOND. THERE'S A, A PROPOSED BRIDGE WITH THE COST OF $54.5 MILLION. NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PROJECT, THERE IS, THERE'S ACTUALLY AN UNNEEDED, EASTBOUND AND WESTBOUND LANE. THERE'S ACTUALLY 50 PLUS FEET OF PET AND BIKE PATHS FOR A TOTAL OF 109 FEET WIDE VERSUS LIKE THE PRESENT 59. IF YOU LOOK AT THE REPORT, THEY DID A COMPARISON WITH A, A REHAB VERSION, BUT IT MAKES NO SENSE 'CAUSE I ASSUME THE SAME FINAL 109 FEET WIDE. ANYWAY, I THINK THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE SCALED BACK AND REVISED TO SAVE DOLLARS AND BETTER FIT THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THE PARK. IF YOU STAND ON THE BRIDGE AND YOU LOOK EAST, I HAVE A PICTURE HERE. YOU SEE THERE'S A BIKE LANE ONE STRAIGHT THROUGH LANE AND ONE LEFT TURN TURN LANE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DOCUMENT THAT THEY ACTUALLY ACTUALLY, UH, PROVIDED IT'S FACTUALLY IN, UH, CORRECT, AND THEN IT SHOWS TWO STRAIGHT, UH, TRAVEL LANES AND THEY SHOULD ONLY BE ONE. SO WHAT WE'RE REALLY PROPOSING IS A ONE LANE ROAD, UH, CONNECTING TO A TWO LANE BRIDGE. THAT IS SILLY. THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD DIET IS WORKING, SO TWO LANES WILL NEVER BE NEEDED. IF YOU LOOK AT THE EASTBOUND LANE, YOU CAN SEE THAT TRAFFIC MERGES DOWN TO ONE ONE LANE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DOCUMENTATION, UH, PROVIDED, WE'RE BUILDING A TWO LANE BRIDGE TO NECK DOWN TO ONE LANE. THIS IS NOT WHAT THE CITY'S BUDGET NEEDS. A SMALLER BRIDGE IS A CHEAPER BRIDGE. THERE ARE 50 PLUS FEET OF BIKE PED PASS. UH, THINK ABOUT A COUPLE OF COMPARISONS. THE BUTLER TRAIL IS GONNA EXPAND TO 14 FEET WIDE. THE MOPAC P PED BRIDGE IS 14 FEET WIDE. THE GRANDDADDY OF THEM MALL, THE PFLUGER BRIDGE IS 23 FEET WIDE. WHY WOULD WE PAY FOR 50 FEET ON THIS BRIDGE? I ASKED FOR THE DATA FOR WHY THE PED AND BIKE PATH ARE SO WIDE. I WAS POURING TO TWO DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS I LISTED HERE. NEITHER ONE, UH, SUPPORTS THE CHOICE OF THE WIDTH. PLEASE TAKE ACTION. UH, DEMONSTRATE TO THE CITIZENS YOU HEARD PROP Q AND YOU VALUE OUR TAX MONEY. REVISIT THE PROJECT AND ASK THAT IT, UH, CONSIDER A SMALLER BRIDGE, FEWER LANES, BIKE PWIS. THAT MAKES SENSE. WE CAN SPEND OUR DOLLARS IN OTHER WAYS. IT'S A GOOD LOOK FOR FUTURE BOND VOTERS AND IT'S A GOOD LOOK FOR THOSE OF YOU FACING VOTERS THIS FALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING MAYOR AND COUN CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ALYSSA VARGAS AND I'M THE ADVOCACY MANAGER FOR AUSTIN PARKS FOUNDATION. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON THE PROPOSED FINANCIAL POLICIES BEFORE THE COUNCIL AND THEIR IMPACT ON AUSTIN PARKS FUNDING. I URGE YOU TO REJECT BOTH OF THE PROPOSED FINANCIAL POLICIES BECAUSE THEY UNNECESSARILY CONSTRAINED THE CITY'S ABILITY TO INVEST IN PARKS AT A TIME WHEN INVESTMENT IS URGENTLY NEEDED. INSTEAD, I ASK YOU TO SUPPORT A BOND'S PACKAGE OF AT LEAST 250 MILLION [00:05:01] FOR PARKS. THE PROPOSED POLICIES DELAY FUTURE BOND ELECTIONS UNTIL APPROXIMATELY 90% OF THE PRIOR BOND EXPENDITURES HAVE BEEN INCURRED. AUSTIN PARKS AND RECREATION HAS NOT ONLY MET THAT THRESHOLD, BUT IT IS WELL EXCEEDED IT. THE PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS FULLY ALLOCATED THE 149 MILLION PROVIDED UNDER THE 2018 BOND OPERATING UNDER THE EXPECTATION OF A SIX YEAR BONDING CYCLE. THE 2018 PARKS BOND PRODUCED MORE THAN 140 PROJECTS CITYWIDE, INCLUDING NEW POOLS, IMPROVED PLAYGROUNDS, AND EXPANDED TRAIL CONNECTIVITY SUCH AS THE MCBE RECREATION CENTER PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT IN DISTRICT FIVE, THE WILLIAM CREEK EAST GREEN BELT IN DISTRICT TWO, THE HIGHLAND NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IMPROVEMENTS IN DISTRICT FOUR AND THE WALSH BOAT LANDING IMPROVEMENTS IN DISTRICT 10. IT IS NOW BEEN EIGHT YEARS, AND OUR PARK SYSTEM FACES 1.8 BILLION IN UNMET NEEDS. WHILE THE ALTERNATIVE POLICY RECOMMENDATION IS AN IMPROVEMENT, IT STILL FALLS SHORT UNDER THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. ONLY CERTAIN CATEGORIES WOULD QUALIFY FOR THIS YEAR'S BOND CONSIDERATION. AND FOR PARKS, THOSE CATEGORIES INCLUDE AQUATICS, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND LAND ACQUISITION. WHILE THESE INVESTMENTS ARE IMPORTANT, CRITICAL CATEGORIES SUCH AS BUILDING RENOVATIONS AND PARKLAND IMPROVEMENTS ARE EXCLUDED. DESPITE THAT, THOSE FUNDS WILL BE PROJECTED TO BE NEARLY FULL EXPENDED ABOVE 90% WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR. THESE CATEGORIES FROM THE VARIOUS SPACES, RESIDENTS INTERACT MOST DIRECTLY WITH OUR RECREATION CENTERS, PLAYGROUNDS, SPORTS FIELDS, PICNIC AREAS, ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS, SHADE STRUCTURES, AND NEIGHBORHOOD PARK UPGRADES. EXCLUDING THESE CATEGORIES IGNORES THE REALITY THAT PARK SYSTEMS REQUIRE COMPREHENSIVE REINVESTMENT ACROSS ALL FACILITY TYPES, NOT SELECTIVE INVESTMENT THAT LEAVE CORE COMMUNITY ASSETS BEHIND ANY POLICY THAT PLACES ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON BOND FUNDING CREATES UNNECESSARY BAR UNNECESSARY BARRIERS TO CRITICAL COMMUNITY INVESTMENT. THESE CHANGES DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT DEPARTMENTS LIKE PARKS AND RECREATION THAT STRATEGICALLY ALLOCATE FUNDING FOR FUTURE PROJECTS AND LONG-TERM RESILIENCE. DELAYING REINVESTMENT WILL ONLY INCREASE COSTS IN THE FUTURE. EVERY YEAR WE WAIT MEANS HIGHER CONSTRUCTION COSTS, GREATER INFRASTRUCTURE DETERIORATION, AND FEWER RESOURCES REACHING THE COMMUNITIES THAT NEED THEM THE MOST. AUSTIN PARKS, POOLS, AND RECREATION CENTERS HAVE EXHAUSTED ALL OF THEIR AVAILABLE FUNDING. WITHOUT THIS BOND, MANY ESSENTIAL FACILITIES RISK, PERMANENT CLOSURE, OR CONTINUED DECLINE, SUCH AS WEST AUSTIN POOLS, GARRISON POOLS, AND LATE LITTLE STACY, I URGE YOU TO REJECT BOTH OF THE PROPOSED FINANCIAL POLICIES AND INSTEAD SUPPORT A NEW BONDS PACKAGE. FORD PARKS. THANK YOU. WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER. CHRIS FLORES. WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE SIGN UP KIOSK, SIR. THAT'S OKAY. PLEASE BEGIN. UM, GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS CHRIS FLORES. I RESIDE IN DISTRICT 10. I'M SPEAKING, UH, TODAY TO SHARE CITIZEN IDEAS FOR CITY FINANCIAL POLICY CHANGES FOR 2027 AND BEYOND. I'M A PARKS ADVOCATE, AND AS SUCH, I FOLLOW PARKS DEPARTMENT DOLLARS, PARKS, CONTRACTS AND PARKS, NONPROFIT DOLLARS AND CONTRACTS. I SEE THE TROUBLING FINANCIAL ACTIONS BROUGHT TO THE AUDIT DEPARTMENT BY CITIZENS, AND I HAVE SUGGESTIONS. ONE, THAT EVERY DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR SHOULD BRING THEIR FINANCIAL PAYOUTS BEYOND $5,000 TO THEIR GUIDING BOARD OR COMMISSION TO EXPLAIN TO THE PUBLIC WHY AND BE QUESTIONED ABOUT THEIR DECISIONS. TWO, EVERY DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR SHOULD BE A FIDUCIARY AND EXPLAIN HOW A SPEND IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE TAXPAYERS. THREE, REMOVE DIRECTOR SOLE DISCRETION AUTHORITY. NO ONE IN THE DEMOCRACY OF CITY GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE A SOLE AUTHORITY OVER SPENDING AND CONTRACTS TO ILLUSTRATE HOW HAZY CITY FINANCES ARE PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC. LAST NIGHT AT THE PARKS BOARD MEETING, THE TRAIL CONSERVANCY NONPROFIT SPOKESPERSON IN HER SPEECH CONTRADICTED HER OWN ORGANIZATION'S WEBSITE AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ON A SIMPLE FISHING PIER PROJECT. WE, IN THE AUDIENCE CAN ADD, AND WE FOUND THE PRIVATE ORGANIZATION'S MISREPRESENTATION OF THE DOLLARS TO BE FRANKLY DISRESPECTFUL. UH, TTCS WEBSITE SAID THE SPEND OF THE PIER WAS $917,000. CITY PARK STAFF SAID, COUNCIL APPROVED SPENDING 899,000 PUBLIC DOLLARS ON THE PIER. SO THAT LEAVES 18,000 A BALANCE, AND WE ASSUME THAT CAME FROM TTC, BUT THE SPEAKER FOR TT C SAID HER ORGANIZATION SPENT 770,000. SO IT DOESN'T ADD UP. AND SO AS THE PUBLIC, WE, WE ARE LISTENING. WE'RE TRYING TO FOLLOW EVERY DOLLAR WE ARE. WE ARE IN AN AUSTERE BUDGET ENVIRONMENT, AND SO WE DON'T LIKE THE HAZY ARRANGEMENTS. WE THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE AUDITABLE [00:10:01] SUNLIGHT AND TRUTH IN ALL OF THE SPENDS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DOES THAT GET EVERYBODY? YES, SIR. GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK Y'ALL FOR BEING HERE. ALRIGHT, THE NEXT ITEM [1. Approve the minutes for the April 15, 2026, meeting of the Audit and Finance Committee.] WE'LL TAKE UP IS ITEM NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 15TH, 2026 MEETING OF THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE. THE MOTION'S MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER UCHIN TO APPROVE THOSE MINUTES SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER, UH, WITHOUT, UH, OBJECTION. THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED WITH, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER FUENTES, UH, ABSENT AND BECAUSE OF THE BIRTH OF HER CHILD MEMBERS. WHAT [Executive Session] WE WILL NOW DO IS WE WILL GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION. UH, WE WILL GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO TAKE UP TWO ITEMS. ONE IS PURSUANT TO 5 5 1 0 7 4 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. WE WILL CONDUCT INTERVIEWS IN ORDER TO APPOINT MEMBERS OF THE THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. IN ADDITION, WE WILL ALSO, PURSUANT TO SECTION 5 5 1 0 7 6, 1 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE TAKE UP AUSTIN LOT PUBLIC LIBRARY WIRELESS ASSESSMENT. THIS IS A DELIBERATION REGARDING CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, A CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY. UH, IF THERE'S ANY OBJECTION TO GOING IN, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. THERE BEING NO OBJECTION. WE WILL NOW GO INTO A CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 9:41 AM UH, FOR THOSE IN THE PUBLIC, I ANTICIPATE THIS WILL TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO BE INTERVIEWING PEOPLE, BUT WE WILL BE BACK OUT. AND AT THAT POINT, WE WILL TAKE UP ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, WHICH IS THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 SINGLE AUDIT REPORT BY DELOITTE AND TOOSH. AND THEN I ANTICIPATE WE WILL GO IN THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA. THANKS. IT'S 9 41. WE'RE ON MAY 20TH, 2026. AND, UH, WE ARE NOW OUT, THE COMMITTEE IS NOW OUT OF THE CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION. WHILE WE WERE IN THE CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION, WE, UH, TOOK UP ITEMS NINE AND 10. NUMBER ITEM NINE IS, UH, RELATED TO THE APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 5 5 1 0 7 4 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. AND WE COVERED, UH, ISSUES RELATED TO THE AUSTIN PUBLIC LIBRARY WIRELESS ASSESSMENT, WHICH WAS A DELIBERATION REGARDING CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY PURSUANT TO SECTION 5 5 1 0 7 6, 1 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. I TOLD EVERYBODY [2. Discussion and possible action to appoint members to and designate the Chair of the Municipal Civil Service Commission.] THAT WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE'D COME BACK AND PICK UP ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, BUT BEFORE WE DO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, I THINK WE OUGHT TO GO BACK UP TO ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPOINT MEMBERS TO AND TO DESIGNATE THE CHAIR OF THE THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. UM, WITH THAT BEING SAID, UH, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL THAT WE FILL THREE POSITIONS ON THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, UH, BY APPOINTING KEVIN MULLEN, WHICH IS A REAPPOINTMENT APPOINTING COURTNEY CARUTHERS AND APPOINTING RON BENNETT. AND AS PART OF THIS RECOMMENDATION THAT KEVIN MULLEN BE RECOMMENDED TO BE REAPPOINTED AS THE CHAIR MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER UCHIN, SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TIM, IS THERE DISCUSSION WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE ITEM IS APPROVED AND THAT RECOMMENDATION WILL BE MADE. AND, AND FOR THE RECORD, UH, COUN COUNCIL MEMBER FUENTES WILL NOT BE PRESENT TODAY AND NOT BE COUNTED IN THE VOTES THAT WE TAKE TODAY. [8. Fiscal Year 2025 single audit report by Deloitte & Touche LLP [Marija Norton, Controller, Austin Financial Services].] NOW WE WILL GO TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, WHICH IS THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 SINGLE AUDIT REPORT BY DELOITTE AND TOUCH LLP. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS TRACY COOLEY, AND I'M THE MANAGING DIRECTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SERVICES THAT WE PROVIDE TO THE CITY. UM, I HAVE WITH ME MADELINE MORRIS, WHO'S ONE OF OUR AUDIT MANAGERS, AND WE WERE HERE ABOUT A MONTH AGO TALKING ABOUT THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO COVER TODAY RELATES TO THE TWO COM THREE COMPLIANCE AUDITS THAT WE DO FOR THE CITY. WE HAVE THE FEDERAL AND STATE SINGLE AUDITS, AS WELL AS THE PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGE AUDITS. WE'LL START WITH THE SINGLE AUDIT RELATED TO FEDERAL PROGRAMS. UH, FROM A SINGLE AUDIT PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON IS THE COMPLIANCE. IT'S NOT AS MUCH THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS AS, AS MUCH AS THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE GRANT CONTRACTS, UM, AS WELL AS ANY FEDERAL REGULATIONS. UH, FROM A FEDERAL PROGRAMS PERSPECTIVE, THE CITY SPENT ABOUT 147 MILLION IN FEDERAL EXPENDITURES IN FISCAL 25. UH, WE ARE MORE FOCUSED ON WHAT WAS SPENT, NOT WHAT WAS AWARDED. SO WE REALLY DO FOCUS ON THE EXPENDITURES IN ANY GIVEN YEAR. THE MAJOR PROGRAMS THAT WE SELECTED ARE LISTED ABOVE. UH, THERE ARE AUDIT, UH, REQUIREMENTS FOR US AS FAR AS HOW WE'RE SELECTING WHICH PROGRAMS TO TEST. SO WE FOLLOW OUR AUDIT [00:15:01] STANDARDS. TYPICALLY, WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE IS THE LARGER PROGRAMS FOR THE CITY. SO ANYTHING OVER 3 MILLION, WE HAVE TO TEST AT LEAST ONCE EVERY THREE YEARS. SO THERE'S A BIT OF A ROTATION CYCLE FOR THE LARGER, UH, FEDERAL GRANTS THAT THE CITY HAS. UM, WE'LL COVER, UH, THE RESULTS OF THE AUDIT IN JUST A FEW SLIDES, BUT I'LL COVER THE STATE PROGRAMS AS WELL. SO SMALLER, MUCH SMALLER FOR ABOUT $4 MILLION FOR STATE PROGRAM EXPENDITURES DOING 25. WE HAD TWO MAJOR PROGRAMS THAT WE SELECTED AND TESTED IN 2025, UH, RELATED TO THE STATE SIDE OF PROGRAMS AS PART OF OUR PROCEDURES FROM A COMPLIANCE STANDPOINT. WE DID NOTE THAT THERE WERE, UH, THERE WERE FOUR FINDINGS THAT WE HAD, UM, IDENTIFIED IN THE 2025 AUDIT. UM, THE FIRST ONE, WE, WE HAVE THEM LISTED HERE, BULLET POINTED, UM, MARIA WITH THE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE. WE'LL, UM, TALK ABOUT THESE AFTER I GO THROUGH A GENERAL OVERVIEW. UM, THE FIRST ONE RELATES TO THE RYAN WHITE GRANT. UM, THE, THE NUMBERS TO THE SIDE ARE THE, THE FEDERAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS FOR THESE GRANTS. UH, SO THERE'S SOME UNIFORMITY AMONG, YOU KNOW, CITIES AND COUNTIES AND STATES. BUT REALLY FROM A RYAN WHITE PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WE NOTED IS THAT THERE ARE SOME REQUIRED REPORTS THAT THE, UH, CITY SHOULD SUBMIT WHEN IT COMES TO THE SUBRECIPIENTS THAT THE CITY IS USING UNDER THE RYAN WHITE PROGRAM. AND THIS IS UNDER THE FEDERAL FUNDING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY ACT. AND WE NOTED THAT THESE WERE NOT APPROPRIATELY FILED, UH, DURING THE FISCAL YEAR. THE NEXT ONE THAT WE NOTED RELATES TO THE AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THERE WERE, AGAIN, SOME REPORTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE, UM, SUBMITTED TO THE GRANTOR. WE NOTED THAT THESE WERE NOT FILED APPROPRIATELY DURING THE YEAR. UM, THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT DID INFORM US THAT THEY WERE HAVING, UH, ROUTINE CONVERSATIONS, ORAL REPORTS TO THE FEDS, AND DIDN'T SUBMIT THEM IN WRITING. BUT, UM, THEY WERE HAVING THOSE COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE, UM, FAA, UH, THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS. THE LAST ONE RELATES TO BOTH THE, UM, HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR, UH, FOR, UH, PERSONS WITH AIDS, THE HOPWA GRANT, AND RYAN WHITE. UH, BOTH OF THESE, UH, GRANTS HAVE SUB-RECIPIENTS UNDER, SO BASICALLY, THE CITY ASK ACTS AS A PASS THROUGH AND THE FUNDING GOES TO THE SUB-RECIPIENTS. AND WE JUST NOTED THAT THERE'S A LACK OF ROBUST MONITORING RELATED TO THE SUB-RECIPIENTS WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE SUB-RECIPIENTS WHO ARE RECEIVING SINGLE AUDIT REPORTS. SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE ROBUST, UH, MONITORING OF THOSE SUBRECIPIENTS. THE LAST ONE WE HAD WAS A STATE PROGRAM FINDING. THIS WAS FOR THE COMMUNITY YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. THERE ARE CERTAIN ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, UM, FOR STUDENTS WHO WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS. THE PARTICULAR PROGRAM, WE NOTED THAT THERE WERE STUDENTS THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE PROGRAM THAT DIDN'T MEET THOSE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA. UM, THE CITY ACTUALLY IDENTIFIED THESE SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER THE STUDENTS HAD BEEN ENROLLED. UM, SO THE CITY DID SUBSEQUENTLY DISCHARGE THOSE PARTICULAR STUDENTS. UM, FOR ALL OF THE FOUR FINDINGS THAT WE NOTED. I I WANNA BE CLEAR THAT WE DIDN'T NOTE THAT THERE WERE ANY QUESTION COSTS RELATED TO THE PROGRAMS, MEANING THAT THE CITY SUBMITTED REIMBURSEMENT FOR CERTAIN EXPENSES THAT WERE DISALLOWED. WE DIDN'T NOTE THAT THESE WERE REPORTING, MONITORING AND ELIGIBILITY FINDINGS. UM, NEXT SLIDE IS THE PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGE AUDIT. UH, THIS IS A LOT OF WORDS, BUT I'LL, I'LL MAKE IT SHORT. AND SO WE DID NOTE ANY FINDINGS WHEN IT RELATES TO THE PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGE AUDIT. UH, NO FINDINGS RELATED TO THAT ONE. SO THAT SAYS NO FINDINGS, THAT SAYS NO FINDINGS, BUT IT GOES THROUGH THE REPORTS, THE REPORTS THAT WE DID ISSUE. YOU KNOW, I WONDER WHAT AN AUDIT WOULD SHOW OF THAT. NO FINDINGS. YEAH, NO FINDING. GO AHEAD. UM, SO THAT'S, UH, BEEN A CHARACTERISTIC OF THE PFC AUDIT. WE TYPICALLY DON'T HAVE FINDINGS IN THAT. THE CITY, UM, USES THOSE FUNDS FOR DEBT SERVICE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE NOTICED. ALL RIGHT. UM, THAT'S CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. SO WE'RE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT, UH, THE COMMITTEE HAS. WHY DON'T WE, UH, GO HERE FIRST AND THEN WE'LL OPEN IT UP IF ANYBODY'S GOT QUESTIONS. GOOD MORNING. MARIA NORTON, CITY CONTROLLER WITH AUSTIN FINANCIAL SERVICES. OH, THERE YOU GO. OKAY. I DUNNO IF I DID, DID THAT. . UM, I'D LIKE TO BEGIN BY THANKING DELOITTE FOR THE PROFESSIONAL MANNER IN WHICH THEY CONDUCTED THIS AUDIT. UM, AS THEY MENTIONED, UH, THE CITY'S SINGLE AUDIT COVERS THE CITY'S COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE GRANT REQUIREMENTS. AND IT WAS ISSUED ON APRIL 23RD, UH, 2026, AHEAD OF THE JUNE 30TH DEADLINE. UH, THE REPORT CAN BE FOUND ON THE LINK ON THE SLIDE, BUT WE ALSO DELIVERED THE PHYSICAL BOUND COPIES [00:20:01] TO EACH OF Y'ALL, UM, EARLIER THIS WEEK. SO, AS DELOITTE MENTIONED, THERE WERE FOUR FINDINGS NOTED IN THIS YEAR'S REPORT RELATED TO STATE AND FEDERAL GRANT COMPLIANCE. UH, THE FOLLOWING SLIDES LIST EACH OF THOSE FINDINGS AND CORRESPONDING MANAGEMENT RESPONSES. REPRESENTATIVES FROM EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS ARE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AT THE END OF THE PRESENTATION, SHOULD YOU HAVE THEM. SO, FOR FINDING 20 25 0 2 RELATED TO RYAN WHITE, UH, MANAGEMENT REPORTED THAT THE OVERDUE, UH, SUB-AWARD FILING HAS BEEN COMPLETED. AND ANY NEW PROCEDURES, STAFFING AND INTERNAL CONTROLS, ARE NOW IN PLACE TO ENSURE ACCURATE AND TIMELY FUTURE REPORTING. REGARDING, UH, FINDING 20 25 0 3 RELATED TO THE AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. UH, MANAGEMENT REPORTED THAT AFTER IDENTIFYING DOCUMENTATION AND DEADLINE GAPS, THE AVIATION, UH, DEPARTMENT IMPLEMENTED DEDICATED STAFFING, FORMALIZED REPORTING PROCEDURES, CENTRALIZED TRACKING AND MAN MANDATORY TRAINING TO ENSURE ALL FAA PERFORMANCE AND CONSTRUCTION REPORTS ARE SUBMITTED ACCURATELY AND ON TIME GOING FORWARD FOR FINDING 20 25 0 0 4. RELATED TO THE, UM, HOPWA AND RYAN WHITE GRANTS, UH, MANAGEMENT REPORTED THAT A PH IS STRENGTHENING SUB-RECIPIENT OVERSIGHT BY CLARIFYING AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS, FORMALIZING AUDIT TRACKING PROCESSES, ASSIGNING CLEAR REVIEW RESPONSIBILITIES, ADDING SUPERVISORY CHECKS, AND PROVIDING TARGETED STAFF AND VENDOR TRAINING TO ENSURE PROPER MONITORING OF THE SINGLE AUDIT REPORTS. AND REGARDING THE LAST FINDING ON THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT, UM, COMMUNITY YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, UM, MANAGEMENT REPORTED THAT A PHS STRENGTHENING ITS REPORTING AND DOCUMENTATION PRACTICES BY IMPLEMENTING MONTHLY FILE CHECKS, STANDARDIZED PROCEDURES AND SOPS, ENHANCED ELIGIBILITY AND DOCUMENTATION VERIFICATION QUARTERLY AND ANNUAL REVIEWS, AND CLEAR STAFF ROLES TO ENSURE ACCURATE, TIMELY, AND COMPLIANT PERFORMANCE REPORTING GOING FORWARD. SO WILL, THAT WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM, COMMITTEE MEMBERS, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THESE ITEMS. I, I, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THE TWO RYAN WHITE FINDINGS. COULD I GET YOU TO HELP ME OUT? I KNOW THAT WE'VE RECENTLY GONE THROUGH NOT ONLY THIS REVIEW, BUT REVIEW, UH, FROM THE, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. YES, SIR. AND I GUESS WHAT I WANNA KNOW IS, CAN YOU HELP ME DETERMINE WHERE, WHAT THE CONFORMITY BETWEEN THE TWO AND WHETHER WE'VE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE T'S ARE CROSSED I'S ARE DOTTED WITH THOSE TWO FINDINGS? SO WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY IS THERE ARE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE FINDINGS BETWEEN THE TWO VISITS. YES. THAT'S FAIR ENOUGH. YES, SIR. UM, AND SO WE WEREN'T SURPRISED, UM, BY ANY OF THE FINDINGS, UM, ONCE WE HAD OF DELOITTE BECAUSE THEY WERE BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHEN THEY CAME. AND SO THE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE ARE SIMILAR. RIGHT. SO WHEN YOU SAY THEY'RE SIMILAR, WHAT'S DIFFERENT? WHAT'S DIFFERENT BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE TELLING THE, THE FEDS WE'RE GONNA DO AND WHAT WE'RE SAYING WE'LL DO AS PART OF THE THIS AUDIT, THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. AND, AND THE, THE FEDS HAVE SIGNED OFF ON THAT AS WELL. WE JUST GOT THE, UM, FORMAL REPORT BACK FROM THEM. AND SO WE WILL SUBMIT THOSE RESPONSES, BUT AS YOU ARE AWARE OF, WE HAD THE CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM AND SO NOW WE'RE IN THE FORMAL RESPONSE PROCESS. GOT IT. OKAY. THAT, THAT'S HELPFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. YOU'RE WELCOME. APPRECIATE IT. APPRECIATE THE WORK. ANYTHING ELSE? WELL, LET'S SAY THANK YOU TO DELOITTE FOR WHAT YOU'VE DONE. UM, AND WE APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. SO THANK YOU MEMBERS. THAT'LL [3. Discussion and possible action regarding proposed changes to membership requirements of the Joint Sustainability Committee.] TAKE US TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO MEMBERSHIP REQUIREMENTS OF THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE. I GUESS I NEED TO ASK WHO'S GOING TO MAKE THAT PRESENTATION? I, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A PRESENTATION. I THINK IT'S JUST A, I WAS GONNA GIVE A COMMENT AND WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO THE NEXT. OKAY. NOW THEN WE'LL THEN WE'LL HEAR FROM YOU. SO JUST A CONTEXT FOR THIS, WHEN THERE, THERE'S A MEMBER OF THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE WHO IS APPOINTED BY COUNCIL COMMITTEE. THAT COUNCIL COMMITTEE IS CURRENTLY THE PUBLIC HEALTH COMMITTEE. 'CAUSE WHEN, UH, THAT WAS ESTABLISHED, THERE WAS NO CLIMATE WATER ENVIRONMENT PARKS COMMITTEE. AND SO THAT WAS THE COMMITTEE THAT WAS THE MOST RELEVANT TO THE JSC. UH, NOW THAT THE CWP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, IT MADE THE MOST SENSE TO HAVE THAT BE THE APPOINTING COMMITTEE. SO THIS IS JUST KIND OF A CLEANUP OF, NOW THAT WE HAVE THE NEW COMMITTEE [00:25:01] AND, AND DO WE NEED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT CHANGE? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING? CORRECT. SO WE'LL JUST RECOMMEND THE, THERE'S AN ORDINANCE ATTACHED OR PROPOSED ORDINANCE ATTACHED, AND WE WILL JUST RECOMMEND THAT TO THE FULL COUNCIL. ALRIGHT. UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER MOVES THAT WE RECOMMEND THIS CHANGE TO THE FULL COUNSEL. SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER UCHIN. IS THERE DISCUSSION WITHOUT OBJECTION? THE MOTION IS ADOPTED. UH, [4. Discussion and possible action on proposed changes to Fiscal Year 2027 financial policy.] NOW WE WILL, TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WHICH RELATES TO PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 FINANCIAL POLICY. UM, AND I'LL, UH, UH, CALL MR. VINO, MS. LANG. GOOD MORNING MAYOR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. ED VINO, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER JOINED TODAY BY CARRIE LANG, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE. THIS IS THE PART TWO THAT WE PROMISED LAST, UH, AUDIT FINANCE MEETING TO A REVIEW OF THE CITY'S FINANCIAL POLICIES. PART ONE WAS PRIMARILY FOCUSED ON, UH, OUR GENERAL FUND POLICIES AND OVERVIEW OF THOSE. AND SPECIFICALLY DRILLING DOWN MORE INTO SOME CHANGES. STAFF HAD PROPOSED TO OUR GEO DEBT POLICIES. PART TWO. UM, MS. LANG IS GONNA GO THROUGH SOME PROPOSED POLICY TO, UH, SOME PROPOSED CHANGES TO POLICIES IN ENERGY AND AUSTIN WATER. UM, WE WILL THEN RE, UH, ITERATE THE CHANGES WE'RE PROPOSING TO THE, UH, GEO DEBT POLICIES, INCLUDING, UM, AN ALTERNATIVE FOR ONE OF THOSE. SO I ANTICIPATE THERE'LL BE SOME MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT VARIATIONS OF OUR GEO DEBT POLICIES, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE WHEN WE GET TO IT. OKAY. DIRECTOR. THANK YOU, ED. CARRIE LANG, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE. WE'RE GONNA START WITH THE PROPOSED FINANCIAL POLICY CHANGES FOR AUSTIN ENERGY. UM, THIS INITIAL PROPOSED CHANGE IS TO PRIMARILY JUST CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE OF THIS, UH, POLICY, MAKING IT CLEAR FOR THE, UH, READER OF WHAT, WHAT THIS POLICY REALLY INDICATES. THE NEXT SEVERAL, UM, EXCUSE ME. NO, THIS ONE IS, UH, FOCUSED ON JUST ONE CHANGE, UM, TO THEIR DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE, REMOVING THE NOTE THAT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY INCLUDED IN THIS POLICY. SO IT'S JUST GONNA SPEAK TO THE POLICY AS A WHOLE AND NOT TALK ABOUT THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. THE NEXT SEVERAL CHANGES ARE RELATED TO, UM, ADDRESSING THE UTILITIES RESERVES, INCREASING THE RESERVE POSTURE TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE BEST PRACTICES AND INDUSTRY STANDARDS. UM, THIS TAKES A SUM OF ALL RESERVES, PO RESERVE POLICIES FROM 150 DAYS TO 200 DAYS FOR AUSTIN ENERGY. AND THEN IT DIGS A LITTLE BIT DEEPER INTO THE INDIVIDUAL POLICY. SO, UM, THIS NEXT ONE IS THE CONTINGENCY RESERVES, AND IT IS INCREASING THAT FROM 60 DAYS TO 90 DAYS. THIS FIRST SLIDE HERE SHOWS THE CURRENT POLICY WHERE IT STATES THE 60 DAYS OF BUDGETED OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSE. THE NEXT SLIDE GOES IN AND SHOWS THAT CHANGE TO 90 DAYS OF BUDGETED OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES. CAN I, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YOU SURE CAN. IF YOU GO BACK THREE SLIDES, MAYBE IT'S TWO SLIDES. YEAH. AND, AND THIS MAY BE A DUMB QUESTION, BUT I'LL, I'LL SHOW THE CURRENT POLICY ON THAT ONE INDICATES THAT YOUR BUDGETING OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSE, LESS POWER SUPPLY COSTS, BUT THAT'S NOT PART OF THE PROPOSED POLICY. I HAVE JOHN DAVIS HERE WITH AUSTIN ENERGY TO SPEAK TO THE DETAILS OF THE CHANGE. UH, WELL, UH, GOOD. AND THEN THE NEXT TWO SLIDES DO, THERE'S NOT A CHANGE AND, AND, AND THEY MAY BE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF IT, BUT WE, WE DO PUT IN THE LANGUAGE OF LESS POWER SUPPLIES WHEN WE MAKE, EVEN, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE MAKING A CHANGE THERE IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF DAYS. AND, AND I, I, I'D KINDA LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT, WHAT THAT MEANS. YES, MA. SORRY. YES, MAYOR. UM, SO THE WORKING CAPITAL OPERATING POLICY INCORPORATES THE POWER SUPPLY COST TO DETERMINE WHAT THE DAY IS CASH ON HAND NEEDS TO BE. SO IN OTHER WORDS, WE PAY FOR POWER SUPPLY COST OUT OF OPERATING RESERVES. SO TO CALCULATE WHAT THE OPERATING RESERVES NEED TO BE, WE NEED TO INCLUDE POWER SUPPLY COSTS WHEN DETERMINING THAT THE, UM, CONTINGENCY RESERVE IS SET ASIDE ONLY FOR CONTINGENCIES SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE A CAPITAL RESERVE, AN OPERATING RESERVE, AND A CONTINGENCY, UM, UH, RING CAPITAL RESERVE AND, UM, CAPITAL RESERVE. THE CONTINGENCY RESERVE IS SET ASIDE ONLY FOR CONTINGENT SITUATIONS. [00:30:01] WE ALSO HAVE A POWER SUPPLY RESERVE THAT COVERS POWER SUPPLY NEEDS. SO THEREFORE THE CONTINGENCY RESERVE DOESN'T NEED IT. EXACTLY. GOT IT. OKAY. GOOD. GOOD ANSWER. THANK YOU. STAY IN CASE. YEAH, KEEP YOUR SEAT. UM, SO THIS ONE GOES INTO THE POLICY SUPPLY STABILIZATION RESERVE, AND IT IS INCREASING, UM, THAT RESERVES FROM 90 DAYS TO 120 DAYS. THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, RIGHT? YES, YES. OKAY. THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE INCREASE IN THE PROPOSED CHANGE, AND THEN IT GOES TO THE, UM, THE, THE FINAL RESERVE CONVERSATION IS LOOKING AT THE, OH, I'VE LOST MY PLACE IS LOOKING AT THE, UH, CHANGE IN IT DISCUSSES THE ORDER IN WHICH THE RESERVES ARE FUNDED AND INCREASES THE TOTAL CLASS EQUIVALENT AGAIN FROM 150 DAYS TO 200 DAYS. AND IT CONFIRMS THE UTILITY WILL ESTABLISH A PLAN TO BECOME COMPLIANT IN THE SUBSEQUENT FORECAST SUBMITTAL IF THE, IF THE RESERVES FALLS BELOW THAT 200 DAYS. OKAY. AND YOU CAN SEE IT ON THIS SLIDE. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. OKAY. YES, COUNSELOR, JUST TRYING TO CL UNDERSTAND. IT USED TO BE WE'RE GOING FROM 60 AND 90 TO A, FROM A TOTAL OF ONE 50, BUT TO 90 AND ONE 20, WHICH IS A TOTAL OF TWO 10. BUT THE POLICY ITSELF SAYS 200. CORRECT. EACH RESERVES IS BASED UPON A DIFFERENT RATIO SINCE WE WERE JUST MENTIONING A MINUTE AGO. UM, WHEN WE HAVE TO REMOVE POWER SUPPLY COSTS FROM SOME OF THE RESERVE CALCULATIONS, BUT INCLUDED IN OTHERS, THE DAYS VARIES FOR EACH OF THE RESERVES. BUT IN THE AGGREGATE, THE GOAL IS THAT ALL THE RESERVES TOTAL UP TO A TOTAL OF 200 DAYS, UH, OPERATING CASH BASICALLY. SO YOU CAN'T SUM UP THE INDIVIDUAL RESERVE DAYS TO COME UP WITH THAT 200 BECAUSE EACH OF THOSE IS MULTIPLIED BY DIFFERENT RATIO. OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S ANY PRACTICAL IMPLICATION THAT'S GONNA IMPACT AUSTIN ENERGY OVER THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO. 'CAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THERE WAS GONNA BE A WINDOW IN I THINK NEXT YEAR WHERE THEY SLIPPED SOMEWHERE, MAYBE EVEN BELOW 150 DAYS OF WORKING CAPITAL. UM, AT LEAST THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION FROM THE BUDGET CONVERSATION LAST YEAR. I THINK THAT WAS LAST YEAR. AND WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA SEE CHANGES COMING UP IN THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE. UM, THE GOAL HERE IS BASICALLY TO ALIGN OUR DAY'S CASH ON HAND WITH WHAT THE STANDARDS ARE THAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE MARKETPLACE FOR THE BONDS. SO EVEN OUR CURRENT FINANCIAL POLICIES REQUIRE 150 DAYS CASH ON HAND. WE'RE TARGETING 200 DAYS CASH ON HAND. IN FACT, MOST OF OUR PRESENTATIONS ARE BASED UPON 200 DAYS CASH ON HAND, BECAUSE THAT'S THE GOAL WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO ACHIEVE. SO, UM, EITHER WAY WE ARE REFLECTING DAYS CASH ON HAND IN THE BUDGET, BUT OUR MILESTONE GOAL IS ALWAYS TO ACHIEVE 200 DAYS CASH ON HAND. SO IT DOESN'T REALLY CHANGE WHAT OUR BUDGET'S GONNA REFLECT. IT JUST MOVES THE GOAL POSTED A LITTLE BIT TO PUBLICLY STATE THIS IS WHAT OUR GOAL IS. OKAY. OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU. OKAY. FINALLY, THIS POLICY THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE ADDRESSES AUSTIN ENERGY'S OPERATIONS WITH OPERATING WITH A STRUCTURALLY BALANCED BUDGET USING CURRENT REVENUE TO COVER CURRENT EXPENDITURES. THE PROPOSED CHANGE ALLOWS THE UTILITY TO ADDRESS ANY STRUCTURAL IMBALANCE THROUGH A RATE DESIGN. THANK JOHN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. WE ALSO HAVE PROPOSED FINANCIAL POLICY CHANGES FOR AUSTIN WATER, THIS, AND IT'S ONLY ONE, UM, FINANCIAL POLICY CHANGE RECOMMENDED BY THE WATER UTILITY. AND, UM, IT IS RELATED TO THEIR CAPITAL PROJECTS. THIS CHANGE WILL GIVE THE UTILITY TO HAVE, UH, THE ABILITY TO HAVE VARYING LEVELS OF EQUITY CONTRIBUTION RATIOS BASED ON THE PROJECT TYPE. UM, AND SO YOU'LL SEE THAT IT GOES FROM JUST ONE EQUITY CONTRIBUTION RATIO OF A RANGE OF 35 TO 50 TO TWO FOR AT LEAST 20% UP TO 35 FOR GENERAL, UH, PROJECTS, TO 35 TO 50 FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT. SO IT'S JUST GIVING THEM TWO DIFFERENT LEVELS FOR THOSE, FOR THOSE RATIOS. AND NOW WE'LL GO THROUGH SOME OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT, UH, POLICY CHANGES THAT WERE DISCUSSED IN, UH, LAST MONTH'S CONVERSATION. UM, AND I WILL TURN IT OVER TO ED TO TALK THROUGH THOSE CHANGES. I THINK I SWITCHED IT UP ON HIM A LITTLE BIT. . YOU DID, YOU SAID YOU WERE GONNA DO 'EM AND YOU PROBABLY WOULD'VE BEEN QUICKER GOING THROUGH 'EM THAN ME, BUT, UH, HERE WE ARE. UM, SO, UH, LEMME SEE THE CONTROLLER. HE'S OUTTA ORDER. YEAH, WE SKIPPED ONE. UH, SO THE FIRST ONE IS REALLY TAKING TWO POLICIES AND CONSOLIDATING IN AN INTO, INTO ONE AND MAKING IT MORE FLEXIBLE. SO THESE FIRST TWO GEO DEBT [00:35:01] POLICIES PERTAIN TO VARIOUS FINANCIAL METRICS THAT THE RATING AGENCY YOU UNIT, UH, AGENCIES USED TO LOOK AT AND CONSIDER IMPORTANT TO THE CITY'S FINANCIAL CREDIT. UM, THOSE ARE STILL GOOD CRITERIA. THEY'RE JUST NOT USED BY THE RATING AGENCIES ANYMORE. AND THOSE CRITERIA, UH, CONTINUE TO EVOLVE. AND SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO REPLACE THOSE CRITERIA WITH A BROADER, MORE GENERALIZED PROPOSAL THAT SAYS, UH, THE CITY SHALL STRUCTURE ITS BOND ISSUANCE AND MANAGES LONG-TERM BOND SALE SCHEDULES IN A MANNER NOT LIKELY TO RESULT IN A DOWNGRADE TO THE CITY'S CREDIT RATING. AND THAT LANGUAGE NOW EXACTLY MIRRORS THE LANGUAGE OF THE COUNCIL APPROVED, UH, BOND DECISION TREE FRAMEWORK. SO WHAT THIS ALLOWS IS, AS THE CREDIT RATING CRITERIA CHANGES, WE'LL JUST CONTINUE TO KEEP PACE WITH THOSE FINANCIAL METRICS, ENSURING THAT WE MAINTAIN A STRONG CREDIT RATING. UH, THE SECOND POLICY, UM, HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS, BUT HAS TO DO WITH THE TIMING OF OUR GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. AND THE CURRENT POLICY SAYS THAT WE WILL NOT CALL FOR ANOTHER BOND ELECTION UNTIL WE HAVE AN ESTIMATED TWO YEARS OF AUTHORIZED UN ISSSUED BONDS REMAINING. UM, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO CHANGE THAT WITH IS A, A POLICY THAT I JUST THINK IS A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND LANGUAGE. IT DOESN'T REALLY CHANGE THE TIMING IN THAT INSTEAD OF USING THAT TWO YEARS OF AUTHORIZED, BUT AN ISSUED BONDS REMAINING IS TO SIMPLY SAY WHAT THE INTENT IS, WHICH IS, UH, TO NOT CALL FOR ANOTHER BOND ELECTION UNTIL THE PRIOR BOND PROGRAMS HAVE REACHED SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. AND HISTORICALLY, WE'VE MEASURED THAT TO BE ABOUT 90% OF SPENDING COMPLETED. UM, WE'VE ALSO ADDED THE LANGUAGE THAT MORE FREQUENT BOND ELECTIONS MAY BE HELD IN RESPONSE TO AN EMERGENCY OR OTHER EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCE. SO IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, WE'RE A MID CYCLE ON A BOND AND SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT COMES UP HIGH PRIORITY, UH, EMERGENCY, UH, WE WOULD BE WITHIN POLICIES TO GO TO THE VOTERS AND, UM, SEEK APPROVAL OF A, OF A BOND PROPOSITION. WE DID PROVIDE ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE 'CAUSE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION AT THIS COMMITTEE ABOUT THE CURRENT POLICY, WHICH SPEAKS TO A BOND PROGRAM. WE DON'T DO THE NEXT BOND PROGRAM UNTIL THE PREVIOUS PROGRAM IN ITS ENTIRETY HAS REACHED SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. AND IS THAT THE PREFERRED APPROACH, WHICH IS OUR CURRENT APPROACH OR TAKING A DIFFERENT LOOK, WHICH WOULD BE TO HAVE THAT THRESHOLD BE AT THE PROPOSITION LEVEL. SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT KIND OF TERMINOLOGY WE'VE GOT, SAY FOR EXAMPLE, 2018 WAS A BOND PROGRAM AND IT INCLUDED MULTIPLE PROPOSITIONS. IT INCLUDED A PROPOSITION RELATED TO PARKS, A PROPOSITION RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION, A PROPOSITION RELATED TO, UH, PUBLIC FACILITIES, OPEN SPACE. UM, SO WHAT THIS WOULD SAY IS, WITHIN A PROGRAM, IF A SPECIFIC PROPOSITION WERE TO REACH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION, THEN IT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH POLICIES TO HOLD ANOTHER BOND ELECTION SPECIFIC TO THAT PROPOSITION. UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THE PREVIOUS POLICY, THE ONE THAT WE HAVE LISTED AS PROPOSED POLICY CHANGE. UM, BUT WE DID WANT TO PRESENT THIS ALTERNATE ALTERNATE AS WE KNOW THERE'S BEEN INTEREST, UM, IN THAT AMONGST A VARIETY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS. NEXT POLICY IS, UH, HAS TO DO WITH THE SIZING OF EITHER THE PROGRAMS OR THE PROPOSITIONS. AND HISTORICALLY WE'VE SIZED PROGRAMS FOR A SIX YEAR, UM, UM, SCALE. UM, SO WE HAVE A PREDICTABLE CYCLE FOR ONCE EVERY SIX YEARS COMING BACK TO THE VOTERS WITH OCCASIONAL ONE-OFF, UH, MID-CYCLE, UM, ELECTIONS ALSO BEING, UH, COMMON, MUCH MORE COMMON IN THE LAST DECADE THAN PRIOR TO THAT. BUT THAT'S WHAT THIS ONE SAYS. AND IT WOULD HOLD TRUE WHETHER WE LOOKED AT IT FROM A PROPOSITION PERSPECTIVE, IF WE WERE TO HAVE A, UH, A PARKS ONLY PROPOSITION OR A TRANSPORTATION ONLY PROPOSITION TO SIZE THAT PROPOSITION FOR SIX YEARS, OR IF WE'RE DOING A FULL MULTI PROPOSITION PROGRAM TO SIZE THAT PROGRAM FOR A SIX YEAR DELIVERY. AND SIMILAR TO THE OTHER ONE, WE DO LEAVE OURSELVES SOME WIGGLE ROOM PROPOSING TO ADD SOME WIGGLE ROOM TO THE CRITERIA THAT LARGER OR SMALLER, UH, PROPOSITION SIZES COULD BE USED IF THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY OR SOME OTHER TYPE OF UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE. AND THEN THE FINAL, OH NO, SECOND TO FINAL ONE HAS TO DO WITH REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTIONS WHERE WE'RE JUST PROPOSING TO ELIMINATE THE SECOND SENTENCE OF THE CURRENT POLICY, WHICH IS JUST UNNECESSARY. UM, SIMPLIFY THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT, BUT NOT CHANGE ANY OF THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS. AND THEN THE FINAL ONE IS A NEW POLICY THAT CAME THROUGH DISCUSSIONS, PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS WITH THIS COMMITTEE ABOUT, UM, ENSURING THAT FUTURE BOND PROGRAMS ARE STRUCTURED IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS FLEXIBILITY IN THE PROJECT DELIVERY THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR A SIX YEAR BOND CYCLE, UH, CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE, PRIORITIES MIGHT CHANGE. AND SO TRYING TO DESIGN OUR PROGRAMS IN A MANNER THAT MAINTAINS FLEXIBILITY FOR STAFF AND THE COUNCIL TO ADJUST TO CHANGING CONDITIONS AND THAT, OH, AND THEN WE HAVE ONE, UH, POLICY THAT I THINK I HIGHLIGHTED LAST TIME THAT, UM, [00:40:01] THE, THE CITY IS PROJECTING AT THIS TIME BECAUSE OF THE, UH, BUDGET PRESSURES THAT WE HAVE. UH, WE ARE PROJECTING AT THIS TIME THAT FOR FISCAL YEAR 27, WE WOULD NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS CURRENT POLICY ABOUT OUR CAPITAL REHABILITATION FUND. AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT. THAT'S ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE'RE GONNA BE WORKING ON TO STAFF AND BRINGING FORWARD TO COUNCIL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 27 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT, WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN FUND SOME OR ALL OF THIS POLICY IN OUR FISCAL YEAR 27 BUDGET. BUT THE FISCAL YEAR 27 BUDGET PLAN THAT WAS, UM, PART OF THE FY 26 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS LAST YEAR DID NOT FUND THIS BECAUSE OF ANTICIPATED REVENUE, UH, SHORTFALLS. UM, BUT AGAIN, WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THAT AND WE'LL ALSO BE LOOKING AT, UM, PERHAPS, UH, ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCES, DEBT SOURCES THAT COULD, UM, FUND SOME OF THESE, UH, IMPORTANT PROJECTS IN OUR FACILITIES IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO MEET THIS POLICY. AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. LEMME START WITH THAT. DOES ANYBODY GOT ANY QUESTIONS? AND THEN WHAT I WOULD ANTICIPATE WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE FULL COUNSEL, OR INSTEAD BRING IT TO THE FULL COUNSEL AND HAVE A, WE HAVE OUR DISCUSSION, BRING IT TO THE FULL COUNSEL AND LET THE FULL COUNSEL, UH, ADDRESS IT. AND I, AND IF WE WERE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, I WOULD, IF I HEAR MR. VINO CORRECTLY, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD HAVE A MOTION THAT, UH, MAKES A RECOMMENDATION THAT DID NOT MAKE A RECOMMENDATION YET WITH REGARD TO THE LAST SLIDE WE SAW RELATED TO A CAPITAL REHABILITATION FUND. THAT'S WHAT I, WHAT I UNDERSTOOD YOU TO SAY. SO WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHANGE TO THAT POLICY, JUST HIGHLIGHTING YOU JUST SAYING YOU'RE HIGHLIGHTING THAT HIGHLIGHTING WE'RE OUTTA WHACK YEAH. BASED UPON THE FISCAL YEAR 27 PLAN. UNDERSTAND THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD LAST YEAR. I MISUNDERSTOOD YOU. WE PROJECT BEING OUTTA COMPLIANCE WITH THAT POLICY, BUT IT'S A HEADS UP REALLY FOR THIS, BUT I GOT IT. I, I MISUNDERSTOOD. SO THAT, THAT'S NOT A, THAT WOULD NOT BE PART OF ANY MOTION. THAT'S JUST A HEADS UP TO THE COMMITTEE AND THEN WE'LL BE A HEADS UP TO THE, THE COUNCIL. GOOD. I'M GLAD I BROUGHT IT UP. YES. MEMBER TEMP. UH, AGAIN, I THINK THE GENERALLY, UH, SUPPORTIVE OF, UH, ALL THE FINANCIAL CHANGES, THE POLICY CHANGES, LIKE IT'S THE ONLY ONE WHERE THERE'S REALLY KIND OF ANY DECISION TO BE MADE WOULD BE THE, THE, UH, UH, WITH THE GEO DEBT. AND WHETHER WE KIND OF LOOK AT IT AS A WHOLE OR LOOK AT IT, UH, BY, UH, BY PROPOSITION. UH, AND AGAIN, MY SENSE WOULD BE TO, UH, I LIKE THE ALTERNATE POLICY, UH, MORE THAN THE, THE, THE CURRENT POLICY. UH, I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY KIND OF DISCUSSION OR DEBATE THAT WE HAVE AT THIS TIME. I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT. I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. I THINK THAT, THAT WHAT, WHAT I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST IS THAT IF, IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION AND, AND, AND THE MOTION, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT BEFORE WE TAKE THE MOTION. 'CAUSE WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT THE LUXURY OF SOME TIME HERE IS EITHER THE MOTION WOULD BE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WOULD NOT BE THE ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE THAT YOU INDICATED OR THE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ALL ITEMS, EXCEPT THAT ONE, WHICH IS THE, THE BOND PROPOSITION CATEGORY, ALTERNATE. AND, AND, AND A MOTION COULD BE MADE IN THAT REGARD. I WILL SAY THAT I WOULD PREFER THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. AND, AND SO, UH, I JUST MENTIONED THAT AS, AS, SO WE HAVE THE, THE CONVERSATION COUNCILMAN WALTER. SURE. AND AND I, AS YOU KNOW, WE TALKED LAST TIME AROUND, I, I DO THINK OUR BOND PROGRAM SHOULD BE MORE SEGMENTED. I THINK DOING EVERYTHING AT ONCE HAS PROVEN TO HAVE SOME PROBLEMS IN HOW WE DELIVER. BUT GIVEN THAT KIND OF READING THE TEA LEAVES HERE, UM, I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO JUST SEND THAT DECISION UP TO THE COUNCIL RATHER THAN, UH, HAVING IT, YOU KNOW, HAVING IT OUT HERE. , I WOULD JUST, YEAH. 'CAUSE I THINK, I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE A FULL DISCUSSION ON THAT, THAT ITEM. YEAH. AND, AND, AND WHAT I'LL SAY, BECAUSE I JUST DON'T WANT THAT, THAT, THAT COMMENT TO BE JUST HANGING OUT THERE AS, AS, AS TRUTH. AND WHILE I DON'T THINK IT'S UNTRUE, I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM WE'VE GOT HAS NOT NOT BEEN THE SEGMENT, THE FAILURE TO HAVE SEGMENTATION. I THINK THE PROBLEM WE SIT ON TODAY IS WE'VE HAD TOO MUCH SEGMENTATION THAT WHAT'S HAPPENED IS THE, THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED, THE POLICY WAS NOT FOLLOWED. AND NOW WE FIND OURSELVES IN A SITUATION, WE'RE TRYING TO CORRECT SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED JUST BY FOLLOWING THE POLICY. AND NOW WE'RE IN THE BOX, IF YOU WILL, OF WANTING TO, WANTING AND NEEDING TO DO THINGS. I WANNA BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. I SEE REAL NEED AS WELL, [00:45:01] BUT WANTING AND NEEDING TO DO THINGS THAT WE, WE CAN'T DO WHAT WE WANT, MAYBE CAN'T EVEN DO WHAT WE NEED BECAUSE WE DIDN'T FOLLOW THE POLICIES. WELL, AND I JUST, I, I, I'M, I'M VERY HESITANT TO TRY TO FIX A PROBLEM THAT COULD BE FIXED JUST BY FOLLOWING THE POLICIES. BUT THAT BEING SAID, THAT'S WHY I SAID AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS, WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. WE CAN JUST TAKE THIS TO THE FULL COUNCIL. I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY, I I THINK THIS IS A FULL COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND I, WE WOULD, WE WOULD HAVE, WE WOULD HAVE THAT ANYWAY. YEAH. BUT SINCE, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER IS READING THE TEA LEAVES, WE CAN ALL READ THE TEA LEAVES. NEITHER MOTION WILL PASS HERE. MM-HMM . RIGHT. SO, UM, THAT'S THE WAY I COUNT 'EM. SO, UM, LET'S HAVE, WE'LL, WE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION HERE. I APPRECIATE Y'ALL LAYING IT OUT TO US. WE WILL TAKE THIS TO THE FULL COUNSEL. CAN I JUST GET CLARIFICATION, YOU'RE TAKING ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FULL COUNSEL? WELL, OR JUST TELL, TELL ME WHAT YOUR CONCERN IS. WHAT, NO, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT, THAT YEAH, THAT WOULD BE UNLESS OKAY. UNLESS WE WANTED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO THE, UH, ENTERPRISE FUNDS, BUT I JUST THINK WE TAKE 'EM ALL TO THE COUNCIL. I AGREE. IS THAT FAIR? THE ONLY CLARIFICATION OF IS SEEK IS, UH, TYPICALLY WHAT WE DO IS AROUND THIS TIMELINE, WE'LL GET A, A DIRECTION FROM THIS BODY TO RECOMMEND TO THE FULL COUNSEL, CHANGES TO THE POLICIES, WHICH THEN CARRY, WILL BAKE INTO THE BUDGET, AND THEN EN ADOPTING THE BUDGET. COUNSEL WILL ENTERTAIN THOSE POLICIES. UM, THE STAFF PROPOSAL FOR THIS POLICY UNDER CONSIDERATION IS REALLY JUST A, A REWARDING, AND IT IS VERIFICATION OF THE EXISTING POLICY. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS A MOTION THAT WAS FROM THIS BODY SAYING, WE SUPPORT STAFF MAKING THESE CHANGES IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET, THAT'S WHAT'LL COME BACK TO THE FULL COUNCIL. AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SOME CLARIFICATION THAT IN PARTICULAR TO THIS SIZING OF THE BOND PROGRAMS. HERE'S, HERE'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION. THE, THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN IS, I THINK PROBABLY THIS COMMITTEE WOULD RECOMMEND EVERYTHING BE, BE IN A POSITION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON EVERY PROPOSED CHANGE AND PROBABLY WOULD BE A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THIS COMMITTEE ON ALL OF THOSE CHANGES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THAT ONE WHERE YOU'VE CREATED AN ALTERNATIVE. OKAY. AND I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE A TWO TO TWO VOTE, WHICH WOULD NOT CARRY THE DAY IN EITHER WAY. RIGHT. SO, I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS THAT YOU WANT, BUT IF, IF, IF YOU WANT US TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE, I LEMME JUST SAY IT THIS WAY. YOU, YOU ASKED FOR GUIDANCE. DOES ANYBODY DISAGREE WITH WHAT I JUST SAID? NO. SO I THINK YOU'VE GOT A COMMITTEE THAT IS SAYING EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE RECOMMENDED, BUT FOR THAT ONE ITEM, WHICH THERE IS A SPLIT OF THIS BODY, AN EVEN SPLIT OF THIS BODY AS WE SIT IN FRONT OF YOU RIGHT NOW, THAT WOULD, UM, YEP. THAT YOU HAVE THAT DIRECTION. OKAY. THAT ONE. BUT, BUT BECAUSE OF THAT ONE, AND BECAUSE THAT IS SUCH A FUNDAMENTAL ONE TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, UH, I THINK WHAT WE DO IS WE TAKE IT TO THE WHOLE COUNCIL AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT ELSE TO TELL YOU. NOPE, I FOLLOW THAT. OKAY. MS. L DOES THAT, IS THAT, NO, MY ONLY QUESTION WAS WHETHER OR NOT, IF YOU ALL TOOK IT TO THE FULL COUNCIL BY MAY 28TH ON AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, THEN WE COULD HAVE THAT FINAL UNDERSTANDING. WELL, UH, WHATEVER THE LAW ALLOWS, WE'LL GET IT TO THAT. BY THE WAY, THE 28TH PROBABLY WILL BE MEETING UNTIL AFTER THE BUDGET HAS PASSED. . UH, THAT'S IF I, IF I UNDERSTAND THE AGENDA. UM, THAT'S CLEAR. THANK YOU. YEAH, MAYOR PRO. TIM, JUST TO CLARIFY THEN, WE ARE KICKING THIS UP ON MAY 28TH TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION ON THESE FINANCIAL PLANS. THAT'S RIGHT. GOT IT. GOOD. EVERYBODY COOL? YEP. GOOD. HELPFUL. THANK YOU. UM, THAT WILL TAKE US TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE. [6. Discussion of potential 2026 bond election under the adopted bond decision framework.] LEMME JUST, LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER SIX REAL QUICK. WE HAD A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT YESTERDAY WITH THE FULL, WITH, UH, A WORK SESSION. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE REGURGITATED BROUGHT UP? AGAIN? ANYBODY SAID SOMETHING YESTERDAY THEY WANT TO TAKE BACK OR THEY DIDN'T SAY ENOUGH? ALL RIGHT, THEN, THEN WE'RE GONNA, THAT TAKES CARE OF ITEM NUMBER SIX. IS THAT EVERYBODY COOL WITH THAT? YEP. OKAY. LET'S GO TO ITEM [5. Discussion and possible action regarding possibly calling an election in 2026 to amend language in the City’s charter to include changes to fix inconsistencies, update the charter language to be current with applicable law, and possible changes to add, delete or revise language related to City administration, budget or any other provision in the charter.] NUMBER FIVE AND I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CHAIR THIS. SO THIS IS, UH, ABOUT POTENTIALLY CALLING A CHARTER ELECTION IN 2020, IN NOVEMBER OF 2026. UM, WE FORMED THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION BACK IN 2023 TO BEGIN THIS PROCESS TO LOOK AT THE CLEANUPS AND UPDATES [00:50:01] TO OUR CHARTER. THEY MADE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A 2024 ELECTION. THAT ELECTION ULTIMATELY WAS NOT HELD BECAUSE OF A POSTING RULE THAT INVALIDATED OUR, UH, ATTEMPT TO PUT THINGS ON THE CHARTER. SO NOW THAT WE, UH, ARE BACK IN KIND OF THAT TWO YEAR CYCLE OF TRYING TO DO THIS, UH, WHEN WE HAVE EITHER A PRESIDENTIAL OR GUBERNATORIAL ELECTION, UH, WANTED TO START THAT CONVERSATION, BRINGING BACK ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, AND THEN WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT TWO, UH, THAT HAVE COME ONE, ONE HAS COME OUR WAY. ONE WAS JUST A, A THOUGHT FOR THE COUNCIL THAT, UH, REALLY I CAN MAKE ARGUMENTS EITHER WAY, BUT IT'S AN IDEA THAT I THINK WE SHOULD DISCUSS AS A BODY. AND SO, UM, HAPPY TO DISCUSS THOSE NOW. OR I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA GO THROUGH THE OLD STUFF. IT'S UP TO YOU WHAT I WOULD, UH, UH, UM, I'M GO ANY EITHER WAY. UM, BUT IF I MIGHT JUST PIGGYBACK ON WHAT YOU JUST SAY IT, UM, MEMBERS, WE'RE GONNA NEED, WE, WE, WE OUGHT TO, UH, WE'RE GONNA NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT TO HAVE A CHARTER ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, UH, TO, IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO CALL THAT ELECTION IN A TIMELY MANNER. UM, WHAT I UNDERSTAND THAT IN MY DISCUSSIONS WITH, UH, THE VICE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER WHAT I, UH, WHAT I THINK WE'RE WANTING TO DO HERE IS WE'RE WANTING TO SET IT UP THAT WE CAN HAVE THIS FULL DISCUSSION. UM, WE HAD A NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT WOULD'VE BEEN ON, AND HE SAID THIS, BUT I WANT TO REITERATE IT, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN ON THE BALLOT, BUT FOR, UM, A PROBLEM WITH POSTING. AND AS A RESULT OF THAT, THEY DIDN'T GO ON THE BALLOT. AS HE'S ALSO POINTED OUT, THEY GOT TO US THROUGH A PROCESS. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, IF WE, WE GOT AN ELECTION, THERE'S GONNA BE AN ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, THEY TELL ME, UM, AND IF THERE'S GONNA BE AN ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, WE OUGHT TO BE CONSIDERING THIS. WHAT I WOULD ASK THAT THE COMMITTEE DO IS BE PREPARED. HE, HE'S, HE'S HIGHLIGHTED THIS, ASK HIM TO PROVIDE TO THE FULL COMMITTEE, UH, ANY OTHER PROPOSALS, BUT THAT THIS COMMITTEE BE PREPARED AT THE NEXT MEETING ON WHETHER OR NOT IT'S GOING TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE FULL COUNCIL. BUT THIS IS AN EFFORT TO GET THE PUBLIC TO LOOK AT WHAT IT IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND HIGHLIGHT IT AND, AND, AND DAYLIGHT AT WHATEVER'S THE RIGHT CHOICE OF WORDS. IS THAT FAIR? FAIR. ABSOLUTELY. SO, UH, AND THEN AS I KIND OF ALLUDED TO THESE TWO OTHER ONE, UH, JUST KIND OF RECENTLY CAME UP, AND THAT IS WITH REGARD, WHILE WE WERE TRYING TO DO OUR SOLAR ON CITY FACILITIES MM-HMM . UM, IT TURNS OUT THAT TRYING TO DO, LIKE IF YOU WANTED TO PUT A, A SOLAR ARRAY OVER, LET'S SAY PARKING IN A, IN A PARK BECAUSE OF OUR RULES AROUND PARK YES. MONETIZATION AS IT WERE. UH, THERE'S A LIMITATION THERE, EVEN THOUGH WE MIGHT ALL WANT TO SEE THAT. AND SO TRYING TO CLEAN UP JUST OUR ABILITY TO UTILIZE THESE, YOU KNOW, EITHER BUILDING OR CONCRETE SPACES FOR SOLAR PRODUCTION, I THINK IS JUST SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE, WE MIGHT NEED TO TINKER WITH SOME LANGUAGE TO, TO GET TO THAT RESULT THAT I ONCE AGAIN THINK WE WOULD ALL AGREE AS A, A POSITIVE RESULT WITHOUT HAVING UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES RELATED TO THAT. SO THAT'S ONE THAT JUST HAS KIND OF RECENTLY POPPED UP THROUGH THE SOLAR ON CITY FACILITIES CONVERSATION AND, AND WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT. THE OTHER IS AROUND, AND, AND THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TALKED A LOT ABOUT PETITIONS. THEY LOOKED AT A NUMBER OF ISSUES, BOTH THE LETTERING, THE THRESHOLDS. UM, ONE THING THEY DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THAT I WOULD, I, I THINK IT'D BE INTERESTING CONVERSATION FOR US, IS RIGHT NOW THE PUBLIC CAN GATHER SIGNATURES AND BRING SOMETHING TO PUT ON THE BALLOT, BUT THE COUNCIL HAS NO AUTHORITY TO PUT ANYTHING ON THE BALLOT. AND I THINK THAT COULD BE A BENEFIT, COULD, UH, BE ABUSED. AND I THINK WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IF, IF THERE'S AN INSTANCE WHERE IT'D BE APPROPRIATE TO PUT A QUESTION TO THE VOTERS, UH, BUT ALSO NOT DO SO IN A WAY THAT IS BOTH SHIRKING OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND COULD BE, UM, USED AS A TOOL TO, I DON'T WANNA SAY HARM, BUT I MEAN, IT, IT COULD BE USED IN A WAY THAT'S NOT PRODUCTIVE. RIGHT. SO, SO WE OUGHT TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. OKAY, GOOD. WELL THEN, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION OR FURTHER COMMENT THAN WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE AS A COMMITTEE HAVE POSTED FOR OUR NEXT MEETING OF THIS COMMITTEE A FULL DISCUSSION [00:55:01] AND, AND THAT'D BE ONE OF THE ITEMS WE GO THROUGH, UH, TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL. FAIR ENOUGH. UH, GOOD IDEA. GOOD. GOOD. ALL RIGHT. WELL THANK YOU AND THANK YOU COUNCILMAN WALTER. UH, THAT'LL [7. Briefing on pedestrian safety audit [Patrick Johnson, Assistant City Auditor; Henry Katumwa, Supervising Senior Auditor - Austin City Auditor’s Office].] TAKE US TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, WHICH IS A BRIEFING ON PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AUDIT. FIVE FIVE. WELCOME. GOOD MORNING COUNCIL MEMBERS. UH, MY NAME IS HENRIK TUA FROM THE CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE. THE OBJECTIVE OF THE AUDIT WAS TO DETERMINE IS THE CITY EFFECTIVELY PROMOTING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY? AUSTIN WAS ONE OF THE FIRST CITIES IN TEXAS TO ADOPT, UH, VISION ZERO, COMMITTING TO THE GOAL OF ELIMINATING TRAFFIC FATALITIES AND SERIOUS INJURIES. TO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, THE CITY USES A THREE PART STRATEGY. THIS IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE THREE IS ENGINEERING, EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT. AND I'LL DISCUSS THIS IN THE FOLLOWING IN THE UPCOMING SLIDES. THERE ARE SEVERAL GROUPS INVOLVED IN PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING AUSTIN, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS, PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES, AND OUTSIDE THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PLAYS A KEY ROLE. THIS CHART SHOWS PEDESTRIAN CRASHES PER HUNDRED A THOUSAND RESIDENTS BY INJURY SEVERITY. OVER THE PAST 10 YEARS, THE NUMBERS HAVE GONE UP AND DOWN, BUT SINCE, UH, 2023, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE HAS BEEN DECLINES ACROSS EACH CATEGORY. FOR EXAMPLE, FROM 2023 TO 2025, FATALITIES DROPPED, UH, FROM 3.8 TO THREE. UNER INJURIES DROPPED FROM 7.5 TO FIVE. OUR FIRST FINDING THE CITY HAS MADE EFFORTS TO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, BUT INCOMPLETE DATA AND JURISDICTION AUTHORITY LIMIT PROGRESS. ADDRESSING THESE GAPS IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE OUTCOMES THAT AUSTIN RESIDENTS EXPECT. WE TALKED TO SOME PEER CITIES AND THE REPORTED SIMILAR CHALLENGES LIKE WE ARE FACING HERE IN AUSTIN. WE HEARD FROM SEVERAL OF THEM. THEY LOOK TO SEE WHAT AUSTIN'S DOING. ALWAYS. NOW, STARTING WITH THE EFFORTS, THE CITY HAS FIRST DEVELOPED SEVERAL PEDESTRIAN SAFETY GUIDING PLANS, INCLUDING THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ACTION PLAN, WHICH SERVES AS THE, UH, PRIMARIES FRAMEWORK FOR GUIDING THIS WORK. SECOND, THEY HAVE IMPLEMENTED A RANGE OF INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN TO PROTECT PEOPLE WHO ARE WORKING ON THE STREETS. THIS INCLUDES INSTALLING CROSSING ISLANDS AND FLASHING BEACONS AMONG OTHERS. CITY STAFF ALSO CONDUCT PUBLIC OUTREACH, HELPING RESIDENTS UNDERSTAND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY RISKS AND ENCOURAGING SAFER BEHAVIORS. ALTHOUGH NOT ON THIS SLIDE, THE CITY ALSO DOES SOME ENFORCEMENT OF TRAFFIC REGULATIONS. HOWEVER, THIS ENFORCEMENT HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE SINCE THE PANDEMIC. UH, THIS IS DUE TO OUR STAFFING SHORTAGES AND OTHER COMPUTING OPERATIONAL PRIORITIES. THE CITY COLLECTS PEDESTRIAN, UH, CRASH DATA TO GUIDE DECISION MAKING. HOWEVER, THIS DATA IS INCOMPLETE. STAFF SAID SOME CRASH INCIDENTS ARE NOT REPORTED SPECIFICALLY FOR CASES WHERE PUBLIC SAFETY AGENTS, UH, AGENCIES ARE NOT CALLED. THEY ALSO SAID THAT THEY NEED INFORMATION FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES AND HOSPITALS RESPONDING. OFFICERS DO NOT ALWAYS PROVIDE SPECIFIC CRASH INFORMATION THAT WOULD ALLOW CITY STAFF TO IDENTIFY WHERE ON THE BLOCK THE CRASH OCCURRED, OR EVEN WHICH SIDE OF THE STREET WAS INVOLVED. UH, THE STATE, UH, OWNS JUST OVER 14% OF [01:00:01] AUSTIN'S ROADWAY MILES. HOWEVER, THESE CORRIDORS ACCOUNT FOR ROUGHLY 64 OF THE CITY'S PEDESTRIAN, UH, UH, FATALITIES. GIVEN THIS NUMBER OF HIGH FATALITIES ON THESE ROADS, STRONGER COORDINATION BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE STATE IS REALLY CRUCIAL. BOTH THE STATE AND THE CITY SHARE A GOAL OF ELIMINATING TRAFFIC FATALITIES. CHALLENGES ARE IN HOW THE ROADS ARE DESIGNED. STATE ROADS ARE BUILD, UH, TO MOVE CARS QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY, WHICH OFTEN MEANS FEWER SAFER CROSSING PLACES AND HIGHER RISKS FOR PEOPLE WALKING. IN CONTRAST, THE CITY'S APPROACH FOCUSES ON SAFETY FOR EVERYONE, WHICH TYPICALLY MEANS DESIGNING FOLLOWER SPEEDS AND SAFER CROSSINGS. BECAUSE THE STATE OWNS THESE HIGH SPEED ROADS, THOSE DESIGN D UH, DESIGN DIFFERENCES LIMIT HOW MUCH THE CITY CAN DO TO ADD PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ON THESE ROADS, BOTH CITY AND TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STAFF REPORTED IMPROVED COORDINATION BETWEEN THEM TO HELP, TO HELP ACHIEVE THESE SHARED GOALS. OUR SECOND FINDING, BASED ON CITY DATA, ABOUT 40% OF FEDERAL PEDESTRIAN CRASHES INVOLVE PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. THEREFORE, MORE TARGETED EFFORTS ARE NEEDED TO PROTECT THIS POPULATION. THE CITY AND TECH DOT HAVE MADE SOME EFFORTS TO ENHANCE SAFETY FOR INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS ON THESE ROADWAYS. THESE EFFORTS INCLUDE ADDING PHYSICAL BARRIERS TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM CAMPING UNDER ONLY HIGH SPEED ROADWAYS, AS SHOWN IN THE TWO PICTURES ON THE LEFT OF THAT SLIDE, RAISING THE CENTER MEDIUM BARRIER ALONG I 35, AIMED AT PREVENTING PEOPLE FROM TRYING TO CROSS THE HIGHWAY. AND THUS, PICTURE IS SHOWN ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SLIDE, THE HOMELESS, UH, STRATEGY AND OPERATIONS OFFICE STAFF ALSO CONDUCT OUTREACH FOR PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. AS SHOWN ON THIS SLIDE, THE PERCENTAGE OF PEDESTRIAN, PEDESTRIAN CRASHES OF FATALITIES INVOLVING PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESS HOMELESSNESS HAS GONE DOWN OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. HOWEVER, IT IS STILL HIGH AND THEREFORE MORE TARGETED AND SUSTAINED EFFORTS ARE NEEDED TO FURTHER REDUCE THE RISK OF DEATH OR SERIOUS INJURIES TO THIS VULNERABLE POPULATION. WE HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL OBSERVATION, UH, FOR THIS AUDIT. UH, CONCERNING FUNDING CHALLENGES FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY EFFORTS, THE CITY MAINLY RELIES ON BOND MONEY, FUND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY EFFORTS. OTHER FUNDING SOURCES INCLUDE FEDERAL AND STATE GRANTS. CITY STAFF SAID THE BOND MONEY WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SPENT BY 2026. THEY ANTICIPATE THAT FUTURE BOND FUNDING AS WELL AS FEDERAL GRANTS FACE AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE. ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES REPORTED BY PEERS, PEER CITIES INCLUDE GENERAL FUNDS AND A MIX OF TAXES AND FEES. HAVING ADEQUATE FUNDING IS IMPORTANT FOR THE SUCCESS OF ANY PROGRAM. REDUCED FUNDING WILL, LIKE, WILL MORE LIKELY HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ACHIEVE ITS GOALS RELATED PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. WE ISSUED, UH, THREE RECOMMENDATIONS AS SHOWN ON THIS SLIDE. MANAGEMENT AGREED WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS. THIS ENDS MY PRESENTATION, AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MEMBERS. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YES, SIR. YES, MEMBER, TIM, JUST A, A QUICK COMMENT. UH, THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. UM, APPRECIATE IT. I THINK IT'S ACCURATE AND, AND TRUE. UH, I ALSO, I JUST WANT TO THANK, UH, TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS, UH, IN DISTRICT FORM, PARTICULAR ALONG CAMERON AND PEYTON, JEN AND RUTLAND, AND SO MANY OTHER STREETS THAT THESE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AND THEY'RE MAKING A TREMENDOUS IMPACT. UH, YOU KNOW, HAVE A VERY WORKING CLASS DISTRICT. A LOT OF PEOPLE WALK TO GET TO SCHOOL, TO GET TO WORK, BIKE, TO GET TO SCHOOL, GET TO WORK, UH, AND IT'S, IT'S MAKING A, A TREMENDOUS DIFFERENCE. THOSE LITTLE PEDESTRIAN ISLANDS MAKE IT SO MUCH SAFER TO, UH, CROSS THE STREET. THERE'S SO MANY OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. I JUST WANTED TO, TO SAY, UH, THANK TO, UH, TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS IN PARTICULAR [01:05:01] FOR ALL THE, ALL, ALL THE GOOD IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'VE BEEN PUTTING IN. GOOD. THANK YOU MAYOR PRO TIM? YES, CUSTOMER UCHIN. THANK YOU FOR THIS. AND THANK YOU FOR, UH, UH, PULLING US ALL TOGETHER. I JUST WANNA BUILD ON A CONVERSATION STARTED ON MONDAY, WHICH IS WHAT DO YOU SENSE THE PLAN IS FOR ADDRESSING THE DATA ISSUE? BECAUSE I KNOW I'VE LOOKED AT THAT DATA SET TOO, AND HAD AND STRUGGLE WITH IT AND, AND, AND THEN IN THE DETAILED REPORT YOU HAD, THERE'S ALSO ISSUES WITH THE VISION ZERO DATA AS WELL. UM, AND I'M NOT SURE IF THEY'RE SOURCING THAT DATA FROM THE A PD DATA OR NOT, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S ISSUES WITH THE GEOLOCATION STUFF THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. LIKE I SENSE PART OF THIS IS DATA STANDARDIZATION. CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHAT SPECIFIC IDEAS YOU GUYS HAVE TO TRY AND ADDRESS THESE ISSUES? OR IF YOU'RE SEEING IT DIFFERENTLY THAN I AM? YEAH. PATRICK JOHNSON, UH, CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE. UM, AND I WOULD INVITE, UM, VISION ZERO, JOEL OR, UM, RICHARD, IF THEY'D LIKE TO COME UP AND, AND MAYBE ANSWER MORE SPECIFICALLY. UH, I THINK FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, RIGHT, SO VISION ZERO DOES GET, UH, DOES SOURCE DATA FROM, UH, THE STATE REPORTING SYSTEM, UH, AUGMENTS THAT DATA DOES A LOT OF WORK, ESPECIALLY ON THE FATALITIES AND THE, AND THE SERIOUS INJURY. UH, AND, AND REALLY BUILDS THAT OUT. I THINK WHAT'S MISSING ARE, UH, AGAIN, JUST SOME OF THE, UH, THE HOSPITAL OR, OR ER, UH, DATA. AND THEN I THINK JUST COORDINATING WITH PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES IS, IS RIGHT. IT'S, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT SOME PROCESS FLOWS, UH, THAT MAY BE ABLE TO BE CHANGED. AND SO I, I THINK THEY'RE LOOKING TO, UH, HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS, UM, HOPEFULLY IMPLEMENT THOSE CHANGES AGAIN, TO MAKE THE DATA SET MORE COMPLETE. UM, AND, AND MAYBE GET A LITTLE MORE DATA IN THERE, MORE SPECIFIC DATA, UM, OF THE DATA THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. BUT I, I WOULD TURN IT OVER, UH, TO OUR, OUR COLLEAGUES. THANK YOU. AND, UH, THANK YOU MAYOR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M RICHARD MENDOZA, TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. I'M JOINED BY JOEL MEYER, OUR VISION ZERO, UM, TRANSPORTATION OFFICER. SO YES, UH, I DO AGREE WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION. AND THE DATA COLLECTION IS CR CRUCIAL FOR US. PRIORITIZING WHERE THE MO MOST NEEDED, UM, PROJECTS AND IMPROVEMENTS IN EDUCATION ARE, ARE, UH, GOING TO PROVIDE THE MOST BENEFIT, UH, FOR SAVING LIVES. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST IN GENERAL, THE OVERALL CHALLENGE FOR US IN TPW IS WE HAVE TO RELY ON OTHER PARTIES, OTHER AGENCIES, OTHER DEPARTMENTS FOR THE SOURCE OF THAT DATA. WHILE WE CONTINUALLY DO WORK WITH THEM TO RELAY THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT FACTUAL, UH, DATA TO INFORM OUR PROGRAM GOING FORWARD. UH, IT WILL BE AN ONGOING CHALLENGE, BUT WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM AND I'LL INVITE JOEL TO, UH, SHARE SOME OF THE MORE RECENT IMPROVEMENTS WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO MAKE. YEAH, THANKS A LOT. AND, AND COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY, A A LOT OF THE CHALLENGES ARE RELATED TO THE DATA STANDARDIZATION AND TRYING TO MATCH UP, YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INVOLVED IN CRASHES AND ALL THE DIFFERENT PUBLIC SAFETY RESOURCES THAT MAY RESPOND TO A CRASH, UH, DOES PRESENT A CHALLENGE, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ARE REALLY COMMITTED TO DOING. UM, WE'RE CURRENTLY GETTING DATA FROM AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY EMS ON TRAFFIC INCIDENTS. WE'RE GETTING DATA FROM AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT AND WE'RE WORKING ON, ON, ON THE BACKEND. HOW DO WE MATCH THOSE UP AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE, WE'RE NOT DUPLICATING RECORDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO I THINK I WOULD SAY WE'RE ALREADY A LEADER IN, IN TERMS OF THE CRASH DATA WE'RE GETTING AND THE QUALITY OF THAT DATA. I THINK THIS NEXT ITERATION IS GONNA BE ABOUT ENHANCING THAT WITH OTHER DATA SETS. OKAY. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS A, THERE IS A VISION FOR HOW TO MOVE FORWARD TO STANDARDIZE THIS, TO MAYBE WORK WITH DIFFERENT PUBLIC SAFETY ENTITIES TO GET THAT KIND OF, UM, COMPLIANCE AND STANDARDIZATION AS THEY GO THROUGH AND REPORT THINGS. AND AGAIN, WE DISCUSSED LAT LONGS THAT EITHER ARE MISSING OR MIGHT NOT MAKE SENSE. WE DISCUSSED, UM, EVEN THE WAY THAT WE'RE CLASSIFYING THINGS INTO CATEGORIES THAT WE CAN'T CONFIRM WHETHER THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN THE RIGHT CATEGORY OR NOT, RIGHT. SUSPECTED. UH, SO YEAH, I, I WOULD, I'D VALUE ANY KIND OF, UM, STRUCTURED PLAN THAT YOU GUYS CAN, CAN DO TO WORK WITH THOSE, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT CROSS, CROSS DEPARTMENTAL, UH, ORGANIZATION CAN SOMETIMES BE A LITTLE BIT TRICKY. SO, UM, I GUESS I'D LOOK FORWARD TO ANY, ANY FURTHER UPDATES YOU GUYS CAN SHARE WITH US IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS OR YEAR ABOUT HOW YOU'RE PROCEEDING WITH STANDARDIZING THAT DATA. YEAH, AB ABSOLUTELY. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE WANT TO DO IN RESPONSE TO, TO THIS RECOMMENDATION IS REALLY DEVELOP OUT A ROADMAP AND, AND FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN LAYER THESE DIFFERENT DATA SETS IN OVER TIME. I THINK IT DOES REQUIRE RESOURCES TO GET TO THAT END POINT, BUT THERE'S A TON OF VALUE TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF ITERATE ON THIS AND IMPROVE AS WE GO. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE ALL OF YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, MEMBERS, THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS TO IDENTIFY ITEMS TO DISCUSS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS. WE HAD ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THIS AGENDA, WHICH WE WILL MAKE SURE IS ON THE NEXT AGENDA, UH, RELATED [01:10:01] TO A POTENTIAL CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTION. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ANYBODY'S GOT OFF THE TOP OF THEIR HEAD RIGHT NOW? NOPE. OKAY. UH, THAT BEING SAID, THAT CONCLUDES THE AGENDA OF THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL, UH, FOR THIS REGULAR MEETING ON MAY 20TH. IT IS 11:22 AM AND WITHOUT OBJECTION, WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANKS EVERYBODY. THANKS EVERYBODY BEING HERE. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.