[00:00:01]
[Austin Fiscal Year 2027 Budget News Conference on July 16, 2026.]
AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.I HOPE Y'ALL WERE ABLE TO LISTEN TO THE BUDGET PRESENTATION THIS MORNING AS WE WENT OVER THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET TIMELINE OVERVIEW, HIGHLIGHTS, AND NEXT STEPS.
IF YOU WEREN'T, THE VIDEO OF THE MEETING WILL BE AVAILABLE ON AUSTIN TEXAS.GOV.
YOU JUST NEED TO VISIT THE AT NX VIDEO ARCHIVE, AND YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIND IT THERE.
ALL BUDGET DOCUMENTS ARE ALSO AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE.
THERE'S A DIRECT LINK FROM THE HOMEPAGE, AND OF COURSE, OUR MEDIA TEAM IS ABLE TO HELP DIRECT YOU TO ANY OF THAT INFORMATION.
AND YOU CAN ALWAYS SEND INQUIRIES TO MEDIA@AUSTINTEXAS.GOV.
TODAY'S PRESENTATION LAID OUT A BALANCED BUDGET THAT MEETS THE NEEDS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE PRIORITIES OF OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
THOUGH WE JUST SPENT A LOT OF TIME EXPLAINING IT IN DETAIL, WE WANTED TO PROVIDE THE MEDIA WITH AN OPPORTUNITY IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
UH, AND I APPRECIATE YOU JOINING US TODAY.
AND I'M ALSO JOINED BY, UH, BUDGET DIRECTOR KERRY LANG, UH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR ERIC NELSON, AND OF COURSE, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER ED VINO HERE OFF TO MY RIGHT.
AND SO WITH THAT, UH, WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
COULD YOU SPEAK JUST A LITTLE BIT, AND AGAIN, THIS WAS COVERED A LITTLE EARLIER, BUT UM, SPECIFICALLY FOR SOME OF THE SOCIAL SERVICE CONTRACTS, IT'S BEEN A LONG REVIEW OVER THE PAST TWO MONTHS.
JUST KIND OF WHAT, WHAT IS THAT PRIORITIZATION, EVALUATION, FINAL DECISIONS LEADING UP TO THIS PROPOSAL? WHAT DOES THAT ALL LOOK LIKE? SURE.
AND I THINK, UH, MS. LANG TALKED, UH, VERY BRIEFLY ABOUT IT, SO I WILL TURN IT OVER TO HER TO PROBABLY GO THROUGH A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT WE'LL GO THROUGH OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL WEEKS AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THE LAST MONTH.
SO, UM, WE'VE BEEN WORKING FOR THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS ON, UM, NOT ONLY DEVELOPING THE RUBRIC THAT COUNCIL ASKED US TO DEVELOP, BUT EVALUATING THE CONTRACTS, EVALUATING THE FOCUS AREAS THAT WE HAVE.
AND SO WHEN WE COME BACK NEXT WEEK, WE'LL TALK THROUGH THAT RUBRICS, THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS, WHAT THE REDUCTION, UM, ACROSS THE BOARD REDUCTIONS LOOK LIKE, WHAT A MORE STRUCTURED OR STRATEGIC REDUCTION WOULD LOOK LIKE TO HELP COUNCIL MAKE A DECISION ON WHAT THOSE FINAL CUTS MAY END UP BEING.
I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THE FUNDING.
I SAW THAT THERE WAS 6 MILLION IN NEW INVESTMENTS IT LOOKS LIKE FOR HSO UNDER THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
IS THAT MONEY COMING FROM NEW REVENUE OR IS IT REALLOCATED MONEY? SO THOSE DOLLARS ARE, UM, A MIX OF A, A FEW THINGS THAT ARE NEW REVENUE.
IT IS $2 MILLION OF NEW ONGOING FUNDING IN THE GENERAL FUND, AND THEN THERE'S $4 MILLION IN THE HOUSING TRUST FUND, WHICH IS FUNDED THROUGH, UH, DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS FUNDING.
UM, THERE WAS ALSO SOME DISCUSSION EARLIER JUST ON KIND OF THE, THE OVERALL, UH, TAX RATE AND REVENUE CHANGES, UM, CHANGES.
COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE DECISION TO GO WITH THAT 3.5% TO START WITH THAT AS THE, THE KIND OF THE BASE BUDGET RATHER THAN MAYBE A, A LOWER AMOUNT? SURE.
AS WE LOOK AT OUR BUDGET YEAR TO YEAR, UM, AND WHEN WE WERE IN THE FORECAST, WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT THE NO NEW REV, WHAT THE NO NEW REVENUE BUDGET WOULD LOOK LIKE COMPARED TO GOING TO A 3.5% AND WITH THE NO NEW REVENUE BUDGET, IT WOULD ANTICIPATE AN ADDITIONAL, UM, ABOUT 26 MILLION MORE DOLLARS OF REDUCTIONS THAT WOULD BE NEEDED TO BALANCE THE GENERAL FUND.
AND AS WE LOOK AT THE CHALLENGES OF A 3.5% REVENUE CAP, IF WE DO NOT GO TO THE FULL 3.5% IN EACH YEAR, WE FOREVER LOSE THAT REVENUE.
AND SO THE GROWTH IS LOWER, WHICH MAKES IT HARDER FOR US TO BALANCE OUR ONGOING NEEDS AND NOT JUST THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, BUT IN FUTURE YEARS.
AND WE HEARD SOME PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY PUSHING FOR GREATER AFFORDABILITY, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE TAX RATE INCREASES ARE PROBABLY GOING TO HAPPEN.
HOW IS THE CITY WRESTLING, UM, WITH THOSE TWO SIDES OF THINGS? TRYING TO GET REVENUE FOR THE CITY FOR THE LONG TERM, BUT ALSO PRIORITIZING, UH, RESIDENT PRIORITIES? I THINK IT'S A COMBINATION OF, UM, LOOKING AT THE REVENUE AVAILABILITY, BUT ALSO WORKING TO CURB OUR EXPENDITURE GROWTH.
UM, AND LOOKING AT HOW WE CAN REFOCUS SOME OF THE EXISTING, UM, INVESTMENTS INTO WHAT ARE THE PRIORITIES OF THE COMMUNITY.
IT'S A BALANCE THAT WE'LL LOOK AT EVERY YEAR AS WE ARE LOOKING AT WHAT THE ADDITIONAL PRIORITIES ARE OR WHAT NEW PRIORITIES COME UP VERSUS BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE THAT, UM, NEEDED REVENUE FOR NOT JUST THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AGAIN, BUT FUTURE YEARS.
IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS MAYBE SOME DEBATE UP ON THE DAIS ABOUT WHETHER SOME OF THE FUTURE SAVINGS THAT WERE ANTICIPATED, LIKE ONE A TS WERE HYPOTHETICAL, OR IF YOU GUYS ARE CONFIDENT THAT THOSE WOULD EVENTUALLY KICK YOU INTO A SURPLUS, UM, HOW CONFIDENT ARE YOU THAT THOSE WILL SAVE THE CITY MONEY? SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON ONE A TS FOR, UM, A LITTLE BIT OVER A YEAR NOW, AND THERE IS, THERE
[00:05:01]
ARE, UM, ANTICIPATED SAVINGS THAT WE REALLY THINK CAN, CAN GROW OVER THE FORECAST PERIOD AS WE GET THROUGH THE FIRST TWO YEARS.THE INFORMATION IS REALLY MUCH MORE, UM, CONCRETE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OUT YEARS OF ANY FORECAST, IT IS THE REVENUE PROJECTIONS, THE SAVINGS PROJECTIONS IS A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, HYPOTHETICAL I GUESS IN, IN THEORY.
BUT WE'VE, THE WORK THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO THROUGH ONE A TS AND OTHER SHARED SERVICES REVIEW, WE ANTICIPATE RECEIVING SAVINGS, UM, ACROSS THE, THE ORGANIZATION AS A WHOLE.
AND THAT MAY LOOK VERY DIFFERENTLY FOR ENTERPRISE DEPARTMENTS VERSUS GENERAL FUND, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT A HOLISTIC VIEW ACROSS THE CITY, AND I THINK IT WAS COUNCILMAN SIEGEL THAT SAID, IT'S THE SECOND YEAR IN A ROW THAT SOCIAL SERVICE CUTS ARE LIKE THE FIRST TO GO.
CAN YOU KIND OF GIVE AN INSIGHT INTO THE PROCESS ON HOW Y'ALL DETERMINE WHAT AREAS, UM, WILL RECEIVE MORE FUNDING VERSUS WHICH AREAS WILL BE CUT? WELL, WHEN, UM, YOU THINK ABOUT THE BUDGET, EVEN BEGINNING IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET, WE STARTED THE BUDGET PROCESS, OF COURSE LOOKING AT THE REVENUE AVAILABILITY.
BUT IN THIS CURRENT YEAR WE DID A TRANSFER IN FROM OUR, UH, RESERVES TO MAKE SURE WE WERE ABLE TO MAINTAIN OUR SOCIAL SERVICE CONTRACTS FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.
AND WHEN WE LOOK AT THE, UM, REDUCTIONS THAT WERE MADE, THERE WERE REDUCTIONS MADE OVER OUR GENERAL FUND, UM, IN PUBLIC SAFETY, POLICE AND FIRE, UM, AND ACROSS SEVERAL OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
SO IT'S NOT A, UM, IT'S, IT'S A HOLISTIC REVIEW THAT WE DO.
SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS THAT WE SPOKE ABOUT HAD SOME LEVEL OF REDUCTION, BUT THEY ALSO HAD A, A FEW INVESTMENTS BASED ON THE ONGOING PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS THAT WE HAVE.
IT IS NOT A, WE'RE JUST GONNA PICK ON ONE AREA OR THE OTHER.
WE TRY TO MAKE A HOLISTIC VIEW AND DECISION ON WHAT CUTS AND WHAT INVESTMENTS TO MAKE.
I THINK IT WAS ALSO COUNCIL MEMBER SIEGEL THAT, UH, VOICED SOME SUPPORT FOR SOMETHING THAT THE COALITION FOR COMMUNITY BUDGET HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT, WHICH IS CUTTING SOME OF THAT POLICE SPENDING AND REALLOCATING THAT MONEY TO SOCIAL SERVICES.
CAN YOU KIND OF WALK ME THROUGH WHAT YOUR DECISION MAKING WAS AROUND COMING UP WITH THE POLICE SPENDING BUDGET FOR THE SEASON AND THEN CUTTING SOCIAL SERVICES CONTRACTS? WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE POLICE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 27, THE PROPOSED BUDGET, MANY OF THEIR INCREASES ARE BASED ON THEIR CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS WITH THE POLICE ASSOCIATION.
AND SO YOU'LL SEE, UM, ABOUT 11 MILLION INCREASE FOR THEIR 5%, UH, WAGE INCREASE.
THE, UM, OTHER INCREASES ARE WHAT WE CALL, UH, ALLOCATIONS, COST ALLOCATIONS, WHICH ARE INTERNAL SERVICES COST TO DEPARTMENTS.
THAT'S ABOUT $10 MILLION THERE.
SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL 24 MILLION, THAT WAS INCREASED FOR, UM, POLICE, HALF OF IT WAS PRETTY MUCH THEIR, UH, CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT AGREEMENTS.
AND THE OTHER HALF WAS OUR, UH, INTERNAL ALLOCATIONS.
THE ONLY BRAND NEW INVESTMENT THAT THE POLICE RECEIVED WAS ONE CIVILIAN POSITION FOR RECRUITING.
DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.