← All meetings

• 1 Results pendingunofficial

  Presentation and discussion of the City Manager’s Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Proposed Budget.

  The City Manager brings the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 to Council for presentation and discussion. This is the starting point for how Austin plans to spend money across city services in the coming year, giving Council and the public a first look at the numbers before final decisions get made.

  "presentation and discussion of the city manager's fiscal year 2026 2027 proposed budget"

  • Budget director Kerri Lang presented an updated certification adding $4.7 million in new general fund property tax revenue
  • Chief Davis discussed a proposed internal telephone crime reporting unit that could save ~$2 million
  • Extended discussion of APD's $549M budget and the $24-25M increase described as largely contractual
• 2 Passed 9-0unofficial

  Approve a resolution adopting a maximum proposed property (ad valorem) tax rate that will include an increase for the operations and maintenance of the City for Fiscal Year 2026-2027; and setting a public hearing to receive and consider public comment on the Fiscal Year 2026-2027 property (ad valorem) tax rate (Suggested date, time, and location: August 12, 2026, at 10:00 a.m., Austin City Hall, 301 West Second Street, Austin, Texas). Funding: This item has no fiscal impact as it is not the final action to set the Fiscal Year 2026-2027 tax rate.

  This sets a maximum proposed property tax rate for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 that includes an increase for the City's day-to-day operations and maintenance, and schedules a public hearing where Austinites can weigh in. The public hearing is proposed for August 12, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. at Austin City Hall. This isn't the final vote to set the tax rate, so the item itself carries no fiscal impact.

  "The motion to approve the resolution adopting a maximum property tax rate of $0.579948 per $100 valuation ... passes again. That is a vote of nine in favor"

  • Roll call vote required by state law
  • Ben Sotheby urged setting the rate at the voter-approval ceiling; Jeff Dickerson urged rejecting the increase
  • Harper-Madison and Fuentes later added as voting in favor
• 3 No vote recorded

  Approve the following items for inclusion in a November 3, 2026, special charter amendment election: A) clarifying that the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission is independent of Council control, allowing the ICRC to review City districts after changes to the City’s boundary lines, providing an effective date for the redistricting plan adopted by the ICRC, increasing the number of individuals in the pool of potential appointees to the ICRC, clarifying the method and timing of filling vacancies on the ICRC, and allowing City staff to communicate with the ICRC outside of a meeting; B) deleting language providing that the Council shall meet at least once each week; C) deleting language requiring the Council to determine its rules and order of business by ordinance; D) clarifying the meaning of the term “election” and to provide that the campaign contribution and expenditure limits shall be modified each year by January 1st instead of with the adoption of the budget; E) providing that initiative elections and petitioned charter amendment elections must be held on the next available November election date that occurs in an even-numbered year and that allows sufficient time to comply with other requirements of law; F) providing that a petition for an election to recall a Council Member other than the Mayor must contain valid signatures of at least 15% of the qualified voters of the respective Council district, instead of the current 10%, and clarifying that the affidavit on the recall petition must be signed by a petition circulator; G) providing that the Council appoints and removes the City Attorney; H) making the time frame for the automatic resignation provision for municipal court judges the same as that provided in the Texas Constitution for other officials; I) ensure that City financial practices are consistent with generally accepted accounting principles, reflect current practices for appropriations for department-level work programs; J) removing appointees and employees of the office of the City Auditor from the classified civil service; K) making non-substantive corrections of typographical errors, punctuation, and sentence structure, and to change or remove language that is moot or unenforceable because it has been superseded by state law or by a final court order; L) removing the restriction that officeholders must wait until after leaving office to solicit and accept political contributions to pay unpaid campaign expenses or to reimburse campaign expenditures made from personal funds and to impose contribution limits on such officeholders; M) requiring an independent affordability and efficiency initiative before any tax rate increase and requiring the independent contractor to identify annual and multi-year savings; N) any other charter amendments proposed by the City Council or the public.

  This item bundles a slate of proposed changes to Austin's city charter for voters to decide in a November 3, 2026, special election. The changes touch a lot of how City Hall runs: reworking rules for the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission, dropping the requirement that Council meet weekly, shifting how the City Attorney is appointed and removed to the Council, raising the signature threshold to recall a Council Member (other than the Mayor) from 10% to 15% of a district's qualified voters, and requiring an independent affordability and efficiency review before any tax rate increase. It also covers campaign finance timing and limits, initiative and petition election dates, accounting practices, City Auditor staffing, and cleanup of outdated or superseded charter language.

• 4 Passedunofficial

  Authorize a contract for a comprehensive efficiency study of City departments for Austin City Auditor’s Office with Public Works LLC, for an initial term of three years with up to two 1-year extension options in an amount not to exceed $5,230,000. Funding: $200,000 is available in the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Operating Budget of the Office of the City Auditor. Funding for the contract term is contingent upon available funding in future budgets.

  This item authorizes a contract with Public Works LLC for a comprehensive efficiency study of City departments, run through the City Auditor's Office. The deal runs an initial three years with up to two 1-year extension options, at a cost not to exceed $5,230,000. Of that, $200,000 is available in the current Fiscal Year 2025-2026 budget for the Office of the City Auditor, with the rest contingent on future budgets.

  "item number four is unanimously adopted"

  • Mayor questioned Public Works LLC on independence and alleged Texas tax delinquency; Eric Schnur said they had actually overpaid
  • Auditor recommended Public Works with Dr. Marc Funkhouser as project manager, projecting potential $75M+ annual savings
  • Zenobia Joseph opposed the $5.2M contract, arguing prior audits already flagged the issues
• 5 Postponedunofficial

  Conduct a public hearing and take possible action on the proposed City of Austin Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 beginning on October 1, 2026, and ending on September 30, 2027.

  This is the public hearing on the City of Austin's proposed budget for the fiscal year running October 1, 2026 through September 30, 2027. It's the chance for Austinites to weigh in on how the city plans to spend and prioritize its money before council takes action on the spending plan.

  "we will take action by having a vote to postpone the budget adoption until the August 12th meeting"

  • Public hearing recessed after Antonio Williams's family and protesters disrupted the chamber over his police killing
  • Extensive testimony urged keeping the APD budget flat and restoring social service cuts; AFSCME sought a progressive COLA
  • Farmshare, Safe Alliance, and Harvest Trauma Recovery Center speakers pleaded against social-service reductions
• 3A Passedunofficial

  "item three a, as amended, is adopted with council members, harper-madison and Fuentes temporarily off the dais"

  • Council member Alter's amendment clarified language so students aren't excluded from the ICRC
  • Alter thanked resident Jack for calling attention to the student exclusion issue
• 3B Passed 6-4unofficial

  "There being six votes in favor, four votes in opposition ... Item three B is approved"

  • Mayor noted the charter already requires weekly meetings not practiced; Siegel argued canceled-meeting workaround suffices
  • Siegel and Alter foreshadowed voting no to limit number of ballot amendments
• 3C Passed 7-3unofficial

  "there being seven in favor, three in opposition and one councilmember, Fuentes off the dais. The motion to adopt item three C is approved"

  • Mayor pro tem vela argued this aligns council with other governing bodies that set rules internally
• 3D Passed 7-3unofficial

  "There being seven in favor and three in opposition ... Item three D is adopted"

  • The three in opposition were alter, Laine and qadri
• 3E Passed 8-2unofficial

  "there being eight in favor, two in opposition and one abstaining. Item three E is adopted"

  • Robin Schneider opposed, citing the SOS petition and delayed accountability
  • A UT student speaker explained the trade-off between long federal-election ballots and low-turnout May elections
  • Fuentes abstained; Watson, alter and duchen opposed
• 3F Failed 4-7unofficial

  "The motion to adopt item three F fails and item three F will not be on the ballot"

  • Watson amendment restored the recall threshold from 15% back to 10% (passed 10-1)
  • Harper-Madison opposed, warning low-turnout districts could target Black council members
  • After amendment, several members who had opposed the 15% now voted against the item entirely
• 3G Passed 8-2unofficial

  "there being eight in favor. Two in opposition. Mayor Watson and councilmember zo qadri and councilmember Siegel abstaining. The motion to approve item three G is adopted"

  • No public speakers signed up on this item
• 3H Failedunofficial

  "Item three H fails. And ... the record will reflect that it failed unanimously"

  • Council member Ellis, who made the motion, asked to withdraw it but was told it belonged to the whole council
  • Vela said he agreed in substance but wanted fewer ballot amendments
• 3I Failed 1-10unofficial

  "there being one vote in favor, councilmember duchen and ten in opposition item three I fails"

  • Only Duchen supported the accounting-practices amendment
• 3J Results pendingunofficial

  "there being no motion on item three J we will now go to"

  • No motion was made to place the item on the ballot
• 3K Passedunofficial

  "item three K is adopted with those two being shown voting no"

  • Siegel and qadri voted no on the non-substantive corrections item
• 3L Failedunofficial

  "Item three L is does not have a second. So it will not be on the ballot"

  • No motion or second was made; Jeff Dickerson still spoke against removing the officeholder contribution restriction
• 3M Passedunofficial

  "item M is adopted. And will be will appear on the ballot"

  • This item came from a certified citizen petition, requiring it be placed on the ballot
  • Speaker Philip Fitzgerald urged passage focused on performance and finding overlaps
• 3N Results pendingunofficial

  "There being no further items on item two to take up on item three"

  • No council member or member of the public brought forward additional proposals