Introduction to the Public Information Act: ICRC Zachary Brown, Law Department, Assistant City Attorney Open Government, Ethics & Compliance Division Chapter 552, Government Code that government is the servant and not the master of the people, it is the policy of this state that “Under the fundamental philosophy of the American constitutional form of representative government that adheres to the principle each person is entitled, unless otherwise expressly provided by law, at all times to complete information about the affairs of government and the official acts of public officials and employees[.]” In Plain English The Texas Public Information Act (PIA) mandates: Information pertaining to the ICRC’s business is subject to the PIA This includes information not stored in City accounts like: text messages, social media posts and interactions, and emails in non‐City accounts When determining whether information is subject to the PIA, it is the context, not the device or account, that matters Retention Therefore, it is important to keep records retention in mind. • Use your City email account for all communications related to the ICRC • If you receive/send ICRC business from a personal account, forward it to your City account (and ask the sender to use your City account in the future) • Same for text messages • Save any other communications or records Public Information Request (“PIR”) In accordance with Texas Public Information Act, the City of Austin has designated the following methods for receiving public information requests. A member of the public may make a written request for public information under the Public Information Act by delivering the request using one of the following methods: ▪ United States mail: P.O. Box 689001, Austin, Texas, 78768-9001. ▪ Electronic mail: public.information@austintexas.gov ▪ Hand delivery: City Hall, 4th Floor, 301 W. 2nd Street; or ▪ City’s online Public Records Center: www.austintexas.gov/pir The City does not accept written requests for public information through facsimile transmission. Your request will not be considered received unless it is sent to the proper address. Responding to a PIR • The City’s PIR Team receives and routes all requests • May ask requestor to clarify or narrow the scope of the request. • Must provide information “promptly” (ASAP) • Or request decision from AG for confidential/excepted information • Work with your staff liaison Law Department’s Role • PIR Team – Processes incoming requests and organizes release of information to requestor. • Open Government, Ethics …
Austin Parks and Recreation Department Fiscal Year 2021-22 DRAFT Approved Budget as of August 17, 2021 Fact Sheet As of August 17, 2021, the total Fiscal Year 2022 Approved General Fund Budget for the Parks and Recreation Department (PARD) is $106M (728.25 FTEs), and the approved Golf Fund Budget is $8.7M (41 FTEs). The General fund base budget increased by $4.4M (24.50 FTEs), while there was an increase to the Golf Budget by $600K (no additional FTEs). Here are the budget highlights of what was adopted in the Budget for FY2022. City-wide Across the Board Increase – A 2.0% across-the-board increase in base pay for employees who have been in a regular position hired on or before April 1, 2021 and are not covered by contract negotiations or appointed by Council. The proposed pay increase will be implemented October 1, 2021. One-Time Stipend – $1,000 for full-time civilian employees earning less than $90,000. $500 for full-time civilian employees earning $90,000 or more. Part-time and temporary employees will also receive stipends ranging from $250 to $500 depending on number of hours worked. To be eligible employees need to have been hired on or before April 1. Staff are expected to receive their payments in December. Service Incentive Pay – Regular employees who have completed five years of continuous service by December 1 will receive Service Incentive Pay in their December 10, 2021 paycheck. COVID-19 Related Leave – City will provide up to two weeks’ leave for any City staff who become exposed to, or sick with, COVID-19, and who can show proof that they have been vaccinated. It follows the expiration of federal support for paid time off for employees with COVID. The measure is designed to incentivize staff who are still unvaccinated to get their shots. PARD General Fund • Operations and Maintenance funding: $660K – This additional funding is for the operation and maintenance of new, expanded, and redeveloped parkland and facilities for which related projects will be completed over the course of the next fiscal year. This additional funding will aid the PARD’s Grounds Maintenance, Facilities Services, Forestry and Aquatics divisions in partially keeping up with service demand. This funding does not include any of the requested FTEs (4.5 FTEs for Facilities Maintenance and 3 FTEs for Grounds Maintenance) who would have assisted with building maintenance and repairs, playground maintenance, graffiti abatement, horticultural maintenance, as well as irrigation, …
What Does the 2020 Census Tell Us about Austin’s Population Growth? Independent Citizen’s Redistricting Commission August 18, 2021 Content Population Growth Austin’s Unique Diversity Areas of Growth Austin’s Population Growth Austin Population Growth, 1870 to 2020 The ideal city council district size would be approximately 96,186. 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 .961 million 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Censuses 1870 – 2020. 4 Austin is the 11th largest city in the country but growth rivals that of the largest cities. Numeric Change among 11 Largest U.S. Cities, 2010-2020 New York Houston Austin Phoenix San Antonio Dallas Los Angeles San Diego Philadelphia San Jose Chicago .961 million 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, P.L. 94-171 Redistricting Data, 2010 and 2020. 5 Austin sees large gains while suburbs see fast growth. Place 2010 2020 Numeric Change Percent Change Manor Leander Buda Hutto Kyle Cedar Park San Marcos Georgetown Pflugerville Bastrop Austin Round Rock 5,037 26,521 7,295 14,698 28,016 48,937 44,894 47,400 46,936 7,218 790,390 99,887 13,652 59,202 15,108 27,577 45,697 77,595 67,553 67,176 65,191 9,688 961,855 119,468 8,615 32,681 7,813 12,879 17,681 28,658 22,659 19,776 18,255 2,470 171,465 19,581 171.0% 123.2% 107.1% 87.6% 63.1% 58.6% 50.5% 41.7% 38.9% 34.2% 21.7% 19.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census, P.L. 94-171 File. 6 Austin’s Unique Diversity Austin Race/Ethnicity Composition, 2020 0.2% 6.9% 32.5% 0.5% 0.1% 3.9% 8.9% Hispanic or Latino White, NH Black or African American, NH American Indian and Alaska Native, NH Asian, NH Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, NH Some Other Race, NH Two or More Races, NH 47.1% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census, P.L. 94-171 File. Note: NH = Non-Hispanic Change in Austin’s Racial-Ethnic Composition, 2010 to 2020 2010 2020 Percent of Total, 2010 Percent of Total, 2020 Numeric Change Percent Change Percent of Total Change 277,707 312,448 35.1% 32.5% 34,741 12.5% Hispanic or Latino American Indian & Alaska Native, NH Asian, NH Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander, NH Black or African American, NH Some other race, NH Two or more races, NH White, NH 1,967 2,002 49,159 85,853 401 528 60,760 66,002 1,448 4,841 13,677 37,187 0.2% 6.2% 0.1% 7.7% 0.2% 1.7% 0.2% 8.9% 0.1% 6.9% 0.5% 3.9% 385,271 452,994 48.7% 47.1% 67,723 790,390 961,855 Total Source: U.S. …
Credit: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census P.L. 94-171 File183183A360TRAVIS36035351183PFLUGERVILLE13013045351183183290ANDERSONMILLWINDSORPARKWESTUNIVERSITYMLKSOUTHRIVERCITYMLK-183OLDWESTAUSTINBOULDINCREEKWALNUTCREEK--PIONEERHILLUNIVERSITYHILLSWINDSORROADJESTERGALINDOHYDEPARKWESTOVERHILLSGRACYWOODSPLEASANTVALLEYSOUTHLAMARPECANSPRINGS-SPRINGDALEFOURPOINTSPONDSPRINGSUTHIGHLANDDOWNTOWNHANCOCKTECHRIDGESAMSUNG--PIONEERCROSSINGWESTAUSTINNGMONTOPOLISBARTONHILLSGATEWAYWOOTENHOLLYMANSFIELD--RIVERPLACEGEORGIANACRESEASTCESARCHAVEZNORTHLOOPMCNEILRMMADAVENPORTLAKEAUSTINZILKERLBJDELVALLEROBINSONRANCHBULLCREEKHERITAGEHILLSOLDENFIELDCHESTNUTROSEDALENORTHBURNETDECKERLAKEGOVALLENORTHSHOALCREEKRIVERSIDEUPPERBOGGYCREEKWESTOAKHILLCORONADOHILLSNORTHLAMARRUNDBERGHIGHLANDPARKROSEWOODALLANDALECRESTVIEWAVERYRANCH--LAKELINECENTRALEASTAUSTINHARRISBRANCHBARTONCREEKMALLTRIANGLESTATENORTHUNIVERSITYST.JOHNSJOHNSTONTERRACENORTHWESTHILLSJOLLYVILLEBRENTWOODNORTHLAMARSPICEWOODWINDSORHILLSROGERSHILLEASTOAKHILL183183A360TRAVIS36035351183PFLUGERVILLE13013045351183183290ANDERSONMILLWINDSORPARKWESTUNIVERSITYMLKSOUTHRIVERCITYMLK-183OLDWESTAUSTINBOULDINCREEKWALNUTCREEK--PIONEERHILLUNIVERSITYHILLSWINDSORROADJESTERGALINDOHYDEPARKWESTOVERHILLSGRACYWOODSPLEASANTVALLEYSOUTHLAMARPECANSPRINGS-SPRINGDALEFOURPOINTSPONDSPRINGSUTHIGHLANDDOWNTOWNHANCOCKTECHRIDGESAMSUNG--PIONEERCROSSINGWESTAUSTINNGMONTOPOLISBARTONHILLSGATEWAYWOOTENHOLLYMANSFIELD--RIVERPLACEGEORGIANACRESEASTCESARCHAVEZNORTHLOOPMCNEILRMMADAVENPORTLAKEAUSTINZILKERLBJDELVALLEROBINSONRANCHBULLCREEKHERITAGEHILLSOLDENFIELDCHESTNUTROSEDALENORTHBURNETDECKERLAKEGOVALLENORTHSHOALCREEKRIVERSIDEUPPERBOGGYCREEKWESTOAKHILLCORONADOHILLSNORTHLAMARRUNDBERGHIGHLANDPARKROSEWOODALLANDALECRESTVIEWAVERYRANCH--LAKELINECENTRALEASTAUSTINHARRISBRANCHBARTONCREEKMALLTRIANGLESTATENORTHUNIVERSITYST.JOHNSJOHNSTONTERRACENORTHWESTHILLSJOLLYVILLEBRENTWOODNORTHLAMARSPICEWOODWINDSORHILLSROGERSHILLEASTOAKHILLDemographic LandscapeAsian (non-Hispanic) Geographic Distribution, 2010-2020Census 2010Census 2020Census BlocksCensus BlocksLess than 10%10% to 20%20% to 40%40% to 60%60% PlusPercentage of theTotal Populationthat isnon-Hispanic Asian
Credit: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census P.L. 94-171 FileLAKEAUSTIN35118313036035351183183290WALTERE.LONGLAKE130AUSTINBERGSTROMINTERNATIONALAIRPORTWINDSORPARKDAWSONWESTUNIVERSITYMLKSOUTHRIVERCITYMLK-183OLDWESTAUSTINBOULDINCREEKWALNUTCREEK--PIONEERHILLSOUTHEASTUNIVERSITYHILLSWINDSORROADJESTERGALINDOHYDEPARKMCKINNEYWESTOVERHILLSGRACYWOODSPLEASANTVALLEYSOUTHLAMARPECANSPRINGS-SPRINGDALEST.EDWARDSUTHIGHLANDDOWNTOWNHANCOCKTECHRIDGESAMSUNG--PIONEERCROSSINGWESTAUSTINNGBLUFFSPRINGSMONTOPOLISBARTONHILLSGATEWAYWOOTENHOLLYGARRISONPARKGEORGIANACRESEASTCESARCHAVEZNORTHLOOPMCNEILRMMAZILKERLBJWESTCONGRESSDELVALLEBULLCREEKHERITAGEHILLSOLDENFIELDCHESTNUTROSEDALENORTHBURNETBERGSTROMDECKERLAKEGOVALLENORTHSHOALCREEKRIVERSIDEUPPERBOGGYCREEKCORONADOHILLSNORTHLAMARRUNDBERGHIGHLANDPARKROSEWOODPARKERLANEALLANDALEEASTCONGRESSCRESTVIEWCENTRALEASTAUSTINHARRISBRANCHBARTONCREEKMALLTRIANGLESTATENORTHUNIVERSITYST.JOHNSJOHNSTONTERRACENORTHWESTHILLSJOLLYVILLESOUTHMANCHACABRENTWOODFRANKLINPARKNORTHLAMARSWEETBRIARSPICEWOODWINDSORHILLSROGERSHILLLAKEAUSTIN35118313036035351183183290WALTERE.LONGLAKE130AUSTINBERGSTROMINTERNATIONALAIRPORTWINDSORPARKDAWSONWESTUNIVERSITYMLKSOUTHRIVERCITYMLK-183OLDWESTAUSTINBOULDINCREEKWALNUTCREEK--PIONEERHILLSOUTHEASTUNIVERSITYHILLSWINDSORROADJESTERGALINDOHYDEPARKMCKINNEYWESTOVERHILLSGRACYWOODSPLEASANTVALLEYSOUTHLAMARPECANSPRINGS-SPRINGDALEST.EDWARDSUTHIGHLANDDOWNTOWNHANCOCKTECHRIDGESAMSUNG--PIONEERCROSSINGWESTAUSTINNGBLUFFSPRINGSMONTOPOLISBARTONHILLSGATEWAYWOOTENHOLLYGARRISONPARKGEORGIANACRESEASTCESARCHAVEZNORTHLOOPMCNEILRMMAZILKERLBJWESTCONGRESSDELVALLEBULLCREEKHERITAGEHILLSOLDENFIELDCHESTNUTROSEDALENORTHBURNETBERGSTROMDECKERLAKEGOVALLENORTHSHOALCREEKRIVERSIDEUPPERBOGGYCREEKCORONADOHILLSNORTHLAMARRUNDBERGHIGHLANDPARKROSEWOODPARKERLANEALLANDALEEASTCONGRESSCRESTVIEWCENTRALEASTAUSTINHARRISBRANCHBARTONCREEKMALLTRIANGLESTATENORTHUNIVERSITYST.JOHNSJOHNSTONTERRACENORTHWESTHILLSJOLLYVILLESOUTHMANCHACABRENTWOODFRANKLINPARKNORTHLAMARSWEETBRIARSPICEWOODWINDSORHILLSROGERSHILLDemographic LandscapeBlack (non-Hispanic) Geographic Distribution, 2010-2020Census 2010Census 2020Census BlocksCensus BlocksLess than 20%20% to 40%40% to 60%60% to 80%80% PlusPercentage of theTotal Populationthat isnon-Hispanic Black
Credit: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census P.L. 94-171 File3601TRAVIS45360351183MANOR13035118318318329013071ANDERSONMILLWINDSORPARKDAWSONWESTUNIVERSITYMLKSOUTHRIVERCITYMLK-183OLDWESTAUSTINBOULDINCREEKWALNUTCREEK--PIONEERHILLSOUTHEASTUNIVERSITYHILLSWINDSORROADJESTERCIRCLECSOUTHWESTGATEGALINDOBRODIELANEHYDEPARKMCKINNEYWESTOVERHILLSGRACYWOODSPLEASANTVALLEYSOUTHLAMARPECANSPRINGS-SPRINGDALEFOURPOINTSST.EDWARDSUTHIGHLANDDOWNTOWNHANCOCKDITTMAR--SLAUGHTERTECHRIDGESAMSUNG--PIONEERCROSSINGWESTAUSTINNGBLUFFSPRINGSMONTOPOLISCHERRYCREEKBARTONHILLSGATEWAYWOOTENHOLLYGARRISONPARKMANSFIELD--RIVERPLACEGEORGIANACRESEASTCESARCHAVEZNORTHLOOPMCNEILRMMADAVENPORTLAKEAUSTINZILKERLBJWESTCONGRESSVILLAGEATWESTERNOAKSDELVALLEROBINSONRANCHBULLCREEKHERITAGEHILLSOLDENFIELDCHESTNUTROSEDALEDELVALLEEASTNORTHBURNETBERGSTROMSOUTHBRODIEDECKERLAKEGOVALLENORTHSHOALCREEKRIVERSIDEUPPERBOGGYCREEKWESTOAKHILLCORONADOHILLSWHISPERVALLEYONIONCREEKNORTHLAMARRUNDBERGHIGHLANDPARKROSEWOODPARKERLANEALLANDALEEASTCONGRESSCRESTVIEWCENTRALEASTAUSTINHARRISBRANCHBARTONCREEKMALLTRIANGLESTATENORTHUNIVERSITYST.JOHNSJOHNSTONTERRACENORTHWESTHILLSJOLLYVILLESLAUGHTERCREEKSOUTHMANCHACABRENTWOODFRANKLINPARKNORTHLAMARSWEETBRIARSPICEWOODWINDSORHILLSROGERSHILLEASTOAKHILL3601TRAVIS45360351183MANOR13035118318318329013071ANDERSONMILLWINDSORPARKDAWSONWESTUNIVERSITYMLKSOUTHRIVERCITYMLK-183OLDWESTAUSTINBOULDINCREEKWALNUTCREEK--PIONEERHILLSOUTHEASTUNIVERSITYHILLSWINDSORROADJESTERCIRCLECSOUTHWESTGATEGALINDOBRODIELANEHYDEPARKMCKINNEYWESTOVERHILLSGRACYWOODSPLEASANTVALLEYSOUTHLAMARPECANSPRINGS-SPRINGDALEFOURPOINTSST.EDWARDSUTHIGHLANDDOWNTOWNHANCOCKDITTMAR--SLAUGHTERTECHRIDGESAMSUNG--PIONEERCROSSINGWESTAUSTINNGBLUFFSPRINGSMONTOPOLISCHERRYCREEKBARTONHILLSGATEWAYWOOTENHOLLYGARRISONPARKMANSFIELD--RIVERPLACEGEORGIANACRESEASTCESARCHAVEZNORTHLOOPMCNEILRMMADAVENPORTLAKEAUSTINZILKERLBJWESTCONGRESSVILLAGEATWESTERNOAKSDELVALLEBULLCREEKHERITAGEHILLSOLDENFIELDCHESTNUTROSEDALEDELVALLEEASTNORTHBURNETBERGSTROMSOUTHBRODIEDECKERLAKEGOVALLENORTHSHOALCREEKRIVERSIDEUPPERBOGGYCREEKWESTOAKHILLCORONADOHILLSONIONCREEKNORTHLAMARRUNDBERGHIGHLANDPARKROSEWOODPARKERLANEALLANDALEEASTCONGRESSCRESTVIEWCENTRALEASTAUSTINHARRISBRANCHBARTONCREEKMALLTRIANGLESTATENORTHUNIVERSITYST.JOHNSJOHNSTONTERRACENORTHWESTHILLSJOLLYVILLESLAUGHTERCREEKSOUTHMANCHACABRENTWOODFRANKLINPARKNORTHLAMARSWEETBRIARSPICEWOODWINDSORHILLSROGERSHILLEASTOAKHILLDemographic LandscapeHispanic/Latino Geographic Distribution, 2010-2020Census 2010Census 2020Census BlocksCensus BlocksLess than 20%20% to 40%40% to 60%60% to 80%80% PlusPercentage of theTotal Populationthat is ofHispanic Origin
Credit: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census P.L. 94-171 File183LAKEWAYJONESTOWN183A360351290TRAVIS4536071351183MANORPFLUGERVILLE1301304535118318318329013071ANDERSONMILLWINDSORPARKDAWSONWESTUNIVERSITYMLKSOUTHRIVERCITYMLK-183OLDWESTAUSTINBOULDINCREEKWALNUTCREEK--PIONEERHILLSOUTHEASTUNIVERSITYHILLSWINDSORROADJESTERCIRCLECSOUTHWESTGATEGALINDOBRODIELANEHYDEPARKMCKINNEYWESTOVERHILLSGRACYWOODSPLEASANTVALLEYSOUTHLAMARPECANSPRINGS-SPRINGDALEFOURPOINTSPONDSPRINGSST.EDWARDSUTHIGHLANDDOWNTOWNHANCOCKDITTMAR--SLAUGHTERTECHRIDGESAMSUNG--PIONEERCROSSINGWESTAUSTINNGBLUFFSPRINGSMONTOPOLISCHERRYCREEKBARTONHILLSGATEWAYWOOTENHOLLYGARRISONPARKMANSFIELD--RIVERPLACEGEORGIANACRESEASTCESARCHAVEZNORTHLOOPMCNEILRMMADAVENPORTLAKEAUSTINZILKERHAYSWARTHALBJWESTCONGRESSVILLAGEATWESTERNOAKSDELVALLEROBINSONRANCHBULLCREEKHERITAGEHILLSOLDENFIELDCHESTNUTROSEDALEDELVALLEEASTNORTHBURNETBERGSTROMSOUTHBRODIEDECKERLAKEGOVALLENORTHSHOALCREEKRIVERSIDEUPPERBOGGYCREEKWESTOAKHILLCORONADOHILLSONIONCREEKNORTHLAMARRUNDBERGHIGHLANDPARKROSEWOODPARKERLANEALLANDALEEASTCONGRESSCRESTVIEWAVERYRANCH--LAKELINECENTRALEASTAUSTINHARRISBRANCHBARTONCREEKMALLTRIANGLESTATENORTHUNIVERSITYST.JOHNSJOHNSTONTERRACENORTHWESTHILLSJOLLYVILLESLAUGHTERCREEKSOUTHMANCHACABRENTWOODFRANKLINPARKNORTHLAMARSWEETBRIARSPICEWOODWINDSORHILLSROGERSHILLEASTOAKHILL183LAKEWAYJONESTOWN183A360351290TRAVIS4536071351183MANORPFLUGERVILLE1301304535118318318329013071ANDERSONMILLWINDSORPARKDAWSONWESTUNIVERSITYMLKSOUTHRIVERCITYMLK-183OLDWESTAUSTINBOULDINCREEKWALNUTCREEK--PIONEERHILLSOUTHEASTUNIVERSITYHILLSWINDSORROADJESTERCIRCLECSOUTHWESTGATEGALINDOBRODIELANEHYDEPARKMCKINNEYWESTOVERHILLSGRACYWOODSPLEASANTVALLEYSOUTHLAMARPECANSPRINGS-SPRINGDALEFOURPOINTSPONDSPRINGSST.EDWARDSUTHIGHLANDDOWNTOWNHANCOCKDITTMAR--SLAUGHTERTECHRIDGESAMSUNG--PIONEERCROSSINGWESTAUSTINNGBLUFFSPRINGSMONTOPOLISCHERRYCREEKBARTONHILLSGATEWAYWOOTENHOLLYGARRISONPARKMANSFIELD--RIVERPLACEGEORGIANACRESEASTCESARCHAVEZNORTHLOOPMCNEILRMMADAVENPORTLAKEAUSTINZILKERHAYSWARTHALBJWESTCONGRESSVILLAGEATWESTERNOAKSDELVALLEROBINSONRANCHBULLCREEKHERITAGEHILLSOLDENFIELDCHESTNUTROSEDALEDELVALLEEASTNORTHBURNETBERGSTROMSOUTHBRODIEDECKERLAKEGOVALLENORTHSHOALCREEKRIVERSIDEUPPERBOGGYCREEKWESTOAKHILLCORONADOHILLSONIONCREEKNORTHLAMARRUNDBERGHIGHLANDPARKROSEWOODPARKERLANEALLANDALEEASTCONGRESSCRESTVIEWAVERYRANCH--LAKELINECENTRALEASTAUSTINHARRISBRANCHBARTONCREEKMALLTRIANGLESTATENORTHUNIVERSITYST.JOHNSJOHNSTONTERRACENORTHWESTHILLSJOLLYVILLESLAUGHTERCREEKSOUTHMANCHACABRENTWOODFRANKLINPARKNORTHLAMARSWEETBRIARSPICEWOODWINDSORHILLSROGERSHILLEASTOAKHILLDemographic LandscapeWhite (non-Hispanic) Geographic Distribution, 2010-2020Census 2010Census 2020Census BlocksCensus BlocksLess than 20%20% to 40%40% to 60%60% to 80%80% PlusPercentage of theTotal Populationthat isnon-Hispanic White
1 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MOTION 20210818 004b Date: August 18, 2021 Seconded by: Rachel Scott Subject: Proposed changes to the Land Development Code for urban trails Motion by: Kevin Ramberg RATIONALE: WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the City staff are requesting changes to Land Development Code for urban trails specifically requesting: (1) An amendment to LDC 25-8-341 and 25-8-342 to cut and fill requirements to allow cut and fill of up to 8 feet for a public trail if the cut or fill is not located on a slope of more than 15% or within 100 feet of a classified waterway and the trail is constructed in accordance with the Environmental Criteria Manual and (2) An amendment to LDC 25-8-261 to clarify the language to formalize the current interpretation making clear that a trail within the critical water quality zone is limited to 12 feet plus one foot compacted subgrade shoulders on each side. THEREFORE, the Environmental Commission recommends the above noted changes to the Land Development Code. VOTE 7-0 For: Qureshi, Brimer, Scott, Thompson, Barrett Bixler, Ramberg, and Coyne Against: None Abstain: None Recuse: None Absent: Bedford, Bristol, Guerrero Approved By: Linda Guerrero, Environmental Commission Chair
Great Streets Recommendations on Fee-in-lieu Options “Planning for the transportation as a component of the development of an active and vibrant downtown must begin with the premise that ‘Streets are for people.’” From: 1991 AIA Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) Goals and Objectives of Great Streets Balance use of the public right-of-way Create Streets as Places Create Interactive Streets Occupy the wider sidewalk zone with an array of well designed, functional elements Encourage private sector initiatives to activate the street scenes Public Art Goals and Objectives of Great Streets The Great Streets program is the main source for providing: • Shade trees to incentivize an active and safe pedestrian realm for walkability • Specific street furniture: benches, bike racks, trash receptacles • Consistent street lighting These elements work as part of an infrastructure system Fee-in-lieu Recommendations Applicability of Great Streets Standards Certain properties in Downtown are eligible to participate in the Downtown Density Bonus Program (the Program) as outlined in 25-2-586. In accordance with Program requirements, the applicant is required to execute a restrictive covenant committing to provide streetscape improvements along all public street frontages, consistent with the Great Street Standards (the Standards). General Boundary of Great Streets with locations of improvements highlighted Conflict with extra-jurisdictional control • Properties in the Rainey St. Subdistrict of the Waterfront Overlay are eligible to participate in the Program per 25-2-739. • Certain properties in the subdistrict front on Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) right-of-way (ROW). • On such portion where properties front said ROW, the City of Austin has no jurisdiction to require streetscape improvements. Any proposed improvements outside private property on said frontage are to be coordinated with TxDOT. Downtown Austin with Capitol View Corridors TxDOT ROW and jurisdiction: 5,584 linear feet outside of CVC Council Direction Resolution No. 20200312-040 • Recommendations for creating FIL option • Applies to specific projects • Establishing an administrative process • Establish a fund to collect FIL contributions to be used for Great Streets Staff Recommendations • • Specify an initial range costs average of $55-$60 per square foot for construction of Great Streets improvements based on calculations used for the South-Central Waterfront initiative which will be implementing Great Streets. Include an additional amount of 10% of the cost for construction ($5.50-$6 per square foot) to cover maintenance of any Great Streets improvements, including landscape elements, trash receptacles, benches, bike infrastructure, and streetlights. This additional amount …
Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission (ICRC) August 18, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. Video Conference Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/98278207374?pwd=eEhDSFpzNjVlZWFXNGcyYWpOKzZvZz09 Meeting ID: 982 7820 7374 Passcode: iqY34Q CURRENT COMMISSION MEMBERS: Prabhu Kannan Brigham Morris Errol Hardin Eugene Schneider Erin Dempsey Luis Gonzalez, Vice-Chair Dr. Sterling Lands Hoang Le Shaina Kambo Sara Inés Calderón Selina Yee Christina Puentes, Chair Joshua Blank Camellia Falcon Staff In Attendance Matthew Dugan, City's Planning Manager George Korbel, Mapping Specialist Christine Granados, ICRC Administrative Manager Members in Attendance Christina Puentes, Chair Luis Gonzalez, Vice Chair Joshua Blank Sara Inés Calderón Erin Dempsey Camellia Falcon Errol Hardin Prabhu Kannan Dr. Sterling Lands Hoang Le Eugene Schneider Selina Yee MINUTES Meeting Goals: Receive Information about Census Data and City's Boundaries; Receive Updates from Working Groups/Subcommittees CALL TO ORDER Chair Puentes called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. with 11 members present. Commissioner Kannan joined the meeting at 6:05 p.m. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first three speakers who register to speak no later than noon the day before the meeting will be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. Peck Young addressed the ICRC and opted to withhold comment at the public meeting. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Discussion and possible action on the Aug. 11, 2021, ICRC meeting minutes. The Aug. 11, 2021, meeting minutes were approved without objection. 2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS The ICRC may discuss and take action on the following agenda items A. Update from Public Forum Working Group on calendar changes Vice Chair Gonzalez gave update about county public forums being pushed back a week. 3. NEW BUSINESS The ICRC may discuss and take action on the following agenda items A. Presentation from Lila Valencia, Austin City Demographer City Demographer Lila Valencia shared findings from 2020 U.S. Census. B. Presentation from City Attorney on open meetings Assistant City Attorney Lynn Carter reviewed Open Meetings Act; Assistant City Attorney Zach Brown reviewed the Public Information Act. C. Update from Communications Working Group Commissioner Calderón discussed social media policies and the work done placing paid advertising on social media and legacy media. D. Update from Finance Subcommittee Vice Chair Gonzalez discussed the $2,000 in expenditures for Zoom moderator, website maintenance and overtime charges related to public forums. E. Update from Final Report Subcommittee No update. F. Discussion on mapping process Commissioner Yee made a motion to allow commissioners to voluntarily meet one-on-one …
Rodriguez, Lisa From: Sent: To: Subject: HPD ICRC Commissioners Wednesday, August 18, 2021 8:01 PM HPD ICRC Commissionsers DL FW: Dist 1 Redistricting Forum From: outlook_22023918880C600B@outlook.com <outlook_22023918880C600B@outlook.com>On Behalf Ofoutlook_22023918880C600B@outlook.com < Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 1:00:58 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik To: HPD ICRC Commissioners <ICRC.Commissioners@austintexas.gov> Subject: Dist 1 Redistricting Forum *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Sent from Mail for Windows I was wondering why this forum meeting was not offered on zoom. Looks like the other districts forum could be attended on zoom. CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 1
Rodriguez, Lisa From: Sent: To: Subject: HPD ICRC Commissioners Friday, August 20, 2021 4:09 PM HPD ICRC Commissionsers DL FW: Inquiry: Rules and procedure for Invited Testimony from Organizations to Independent Redistricting Commission From: Vice President - NWACA < Sent: Friday, August 20, 2021 9:08:12 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik To: HPD ICRC Commissioners <ICRC.Commissioners@austintexas.gov>; Rodriguez, Lisa <Lisa.Rodriguez@austintexas.gov>; Dugan, Matthew <Matthew.Dugan@austintexas.gov> Cc: Subject: Inquiry: Rules and procedure for Invited Testimony from Organizations to Independent Redistricting Commission < < *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** To the Commission, I see on your posted agenda for August 28th - located here http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=366131 - that a private organization has been invited to give testimony under 3. New Business, Item C. m m m m V I have checked all the emails to our organization and do not recall seeing an invitation for similar invited testimony, or rules being previously communicated. Please let me know if this is an oversight on my part. What are the rules and processes for other private organizations to be allowed to give invited testimony? If all organizations in the City, and relevant State/Federal level advocacy groups, are not allowed to provide invited testimony, under what rules is it fair for a single private organization to provide that testimony? 1 Please let us know what actions we can take so that our organization - and our members - can participate on an equal basis with other private organizations. CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 2
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: HPD ICRC Commissioners Thursday, August 19, 2021 7:39 AM HPD ICRC Commissionsers DL FW: ICRC citizen input on: (1) Commissioner Yee's request for socio-economic City of Austin data PXL_20210819_114536587.jpg Rodriguez, Lisa From: Philip Wiley < Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 12:38:48 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik To: HPD ICRC Commissioners <ICRC.Commissioners@austintexas.gov> Subject: ICRC citizen input on: (1) Commissioner Yee's request for socio-economic City of Austin data *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Commissioners, Commissioner Yee inquired in yesterday's ICRC meeting about socio‐economic data for the City of Austin. I let data astute people interested in policy know. This is what came back, lots of really good stuff here. Prepared by consultants for the City of Austin, the 2020 report is entitled "City of Austin Comprehensive Housing Report", but it's much more. https://austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Housing/Austin%20HMA final.pdf I've taken a photo of one chart below, which to me was a pretty good proxy for generalized socio economic grouping from 2013 when your predecessors created a map. Next to that is how the City has evolved since. My reading of the charter is that this map is a solid place to center identification of communities of interest ‐ but the last ICRC chose another approach ‐ it's your turn, and our best hope is that every map iteration improves on the hard work of those who came before. 4) the geographic integrity of any local neighborhood or local community of interest shall be respected in a manner that minimizes their division to the extent possible without violating the requirements of any of the preceding subsections. A community of interest is a contiguous population that shares common social and economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation. Communities of interest shall not include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates. This wasn't the only response I got, but as it's a public City asset, it seemed like the best first response. Please don't hesitate to ask if more of any type of data might be helpful. Time is short, and it takes a village. Thanks again ‐ your time commitment and effort is extraordinary! Philip Wiley Downtown resident ‐ D9 1 CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be …
