ITEM05/1-LATE BACKUP ITEM05/2-LATE BACKUP Zilker Neighborhood Association __________________________________________________________________ 2009 Arpdale, Austin, TX 78704 ● January 8, 2025 Along South Lamar over the last 20 years, VMU and other bonus projects have been building The site on South First is only half an acre. Applying the South Lamar bonus standard, one could Re: Case C15-2024-0040 600 Cumberland, Austin TX 78704 Agenda item 5, January 13, 2025 Chair and Board of Adjustment Members: The Zoning Committee of the Zilker Neighborhood Association is opposed to the variance requested at 600 Cumberland and 2612 South First Street. We agree with the Galindo and Dawson neighbors that the request does not meet the findings required for the variance. In addition, we must emphasize that the request absolutely impairs the purpose of the applicable zoning regulations. The regulations in this case are the terms of a transit-oriented overlay intended to discourage large parking garages on major transit routes and to encourage more affordable housing units. about 80 to 100 units per acre, including at least 10% of the units affordable to 60% MFI, onsite, for 40 years, with parking equivalent to about 60% of the previous requirements. To the extent that a voluntary bonus program can be considered “reasonable use,” those have become the standard dimensions for mixed use along the corridor. They represent a bonus, not a hardship. Now that parking minimums have been eliminated from the code, they likewise cannot be claimed as a hardship. reasonably expect a half-acre 5-floor multifamily project to have around 50 units (fewer if it includes a swimming pool, as this project does) and minimal parking (one and a half levels). There is no evidence that the City has ever denied that degree of reasonable use under the South First property’s GR-V zoning. Rather, in June 2023 the applicant received approval for a much larger deeply affordable project with 90 units and only 67 parking spaces. Rather than denying reasonable use, the City approved a site plan that far exceeded the capacity of the lot and the street. It was the applicant who declined the affordability terms and decided to go for an even bigger project (118 units, mostly market rate) with a very expensive underground parking garage (84 spaces) that conflicts with transit-oriented design standards. parking garage for circulation,” implying that a three-level parking garage is a reasonable use for a half- acre property fronting on a major …
Austin-Travis County Food Plan ATCFPB January 2024 – Staff Update City of Austin Food Plan Updates Response to Council IFC ● City Staff lead by Office of Sustainability ○ developing asset map of physical infrastructure in the food system ○ collaborating with the Central Texas Food Bank to develop social network analysis of stakeholder groups ○ identifying strategies within the Plan that can be led by City Departments ○ Identifying strategies that can be led by external organizations ○ Identifying funding needs to move Strategies forward, both internal City Department need and external organization needs ○ developing an on-line dashboard to track progress on all 61 Food Plan Strategies Implementation Coalition ● City and County staff are exploring a funding opportunity to support a Food Plan implementation coalition (Strategy 9.1) ● Staff are scoping and negotiating specifics and hope to have an Inter Local Agrement complete in spring 2025 ● RFP for support of an implementation coalition will be released in mid-2025 Report back to Council in Spring 2025 ● City staff will provide a Memo to Council in spring 2025 ○ Updates on Strategy progress including defined leadership roles and responsibilities for implementation of the various strategies within the Plan ○ Funding needs in the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 budget for investment in and implementation of the Plan and to identify strategy priorities to be included as part of the next bond package Thank You! www.austintexas.gov/food /austinsustainability
1 Austin Community Owned Food Retail Initiative Del Valle Food Co-op Update Drew De Los Santos Executive Director drew@acba.coop 512-222-7032 ACBA ● Co-op Economic Development ● Technical Assistance/Coaching ● Advocacy ● Community Building ● Solidarity Economy Work ● Sister Organization: Austin Cooperative Business Foundation ● Non-Extractive Financing for Worker-owned, democratically managed businesses Initiative History 3 Katie Novak: Cooperative Coaching Outreach Steering Committee Formed steering committee ● ● GAVA conducted door knocking and house meetings across eastern crescent Surveys were distributed ● ● Represented across eastern crescent ● 3 languages ● Met monthly ● ● ● Created business plan Reviewed Market Study Created Membership Benefits plan Developed pilot plan ● Capital Campaign Committee ● Meets monthly ● ● Identifies grants Develops partnerships with Foundations, Institutions Reports to Steering committee/Board ● 4 4 What is a co-op? ● ● ● ● People centered business Owned by the people that need the business Democratically controlled : 1 member, 1 vote Need profit to fulfill mission Co-op values: self-help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality, equity, and solidarity What is a Food Co-op? 5 ● A business focused on accessing food and other groceries, household goods; ● All profits go back into services or making co-op more affordable, or can be given to owners; ● Anyone can shop at the co-op. Ownership means: ● Investing in the business by buying a share ● Voting on your representative for the board of directors ● Access to owner-deals ● Access to financials of the business ● ● Open to all regardless of immigration Profit sharing status Membership Membership Role: Membership Benefits: ● Invest in the business through buying a 1 time share for $50 (required to vote but not to shop) ● Shop regularly at the co-op ● Vote for the Board of Directors ● Attend membership meetings ● Vote on who represents you on the Board of Directors ● Run for the Board of Directors ● Attend Members-only Meetings ● Special discounts/coupons ● Ownership in a local food retail ● co-op that meets and ensures food access to the local community Unique to our co-op: Product Development & Skill building classes and access to selling your product at the co-op 2025 Timeline 1. 2. October - November : November - December: 3. 4. 5. January - March: March - April: April - December: 7 ACBA and GAVA conducted a board election. 7 Board members elected! ● ● ● …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Recommendation Number: (YYYYMMDD-XXX) (XXX is the agenda item number): Defining and Supporting Regenerative Agriculture NOTE: The “WHEREAS”s should give the background and the “NOW, THEREFORE,” should state what the board is requesting Council to do. WHEREAS, the 2022 City of Austin State of the Food System Report indicates that 21% of all greenhouse gas emissions in our community are related to the food supply chain; and WHEREAS, implementing Regenerative Agriculture also supports the goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan, which aims to ensure that by 2030, 100% of Austinites, especially those who are food insecure, can access a pro-climate, pro-health food systems that prioritize regenerative agriculture; and WHEREAS, the goals and strategies in the Austin/Travis County Food Plan, approved by the Austin City Council in October 2024, prioritize regenerative agriculture implementation, with reference to regenerative agriculture and food systems occurring 44 times throughout the document; and WHEREAS, Regenerative Agriculture is defined in the food plan as an approach to farming that works to restore soil and ecosystem health, address inequity, and improve land, water, and climate for the future; and WHEREAS, the Austin/Travis County Food Plan also states that a more specific definition of Regenerative food production may need to be developed to implement strategies under Goal 1, which pertain to agricultural land use; and WHEREAS, a more specific definition is contained within the Resilient Farm Planning framework, which utilizes Conservation Practice Standards codified by the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and aligns with national standard parameters for climate smart, conservation focused, regenerative practices; and WHEREAS, the Resilient Farm Planning process utilizes COMET-farm modeling technology to quantify greenhouse gas sequestration potential from practice implementation, creating an avenue for measuring implementation predictions vs. results; and WHEREAS, the Resilient Farm Planning process has seen wide adoption and proof of concept in California for over a decade, with 137 Resilient Farm Plans (called Carbon Farm Plans in California) encompassing 71,440 acres; and WHEREAS, the Resilient Farm Planning process can be also be applied to outdoor spaces such as parks, flood plain, and greenbelts; and WHEREAS, the City of Austin Office of Sustainability has previously allocated funds for Texas’ First Resilient Farm plan at the Refugee Collective Farm, establishing a precedent of city support for plan implementation; and WHEREAS, the City of Austin currently lacks a dedicated mechanism to assist with the writing and implementation …
This template is a guide for liaisons. TEMPLATE FOR BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Recommendation Number: (YYYYMMDD-XXX) (XXX is the agenda item number): Defining and Supporting Regenerative Agriculture NOTE: The “WHEREAS”s should give the background and the “NOW, THEREFORE,” should state what the board is requesting Council to do. WHEREAS, the 2020 Travis County Climate Action Plan prioritizes a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below 2005 levels by 2030; and WHEREAS, the goals and strategies in the Austin/Travis County Food Plan, passed through a Resolution of Support by the Travis County Commissioner’s Court in October 2024, prioritize regenerative agriculture implementation, with reference to regenerative agriculture and food systems occurring 44 times throughout the document; and WHEREAS, the Austin/Travis County Food Plan includes strategic, measurable, and time-bound goals and strategies to strengthen food security, promote environmental sustainability, and address climate change; and WHEREAS, Regenerative Agriculture is defined in the food plan as an approach to farming that works to restore soil and ecosystem health, address inequity, and improve land, water, and climate for the future; and WHEREAS, the Austin/Travis County Food Plan also states that a more specific definition of Regenerative food production may need to be developed to implement strategies under Goal 1, which pertain to agricultural land use; and WHEREAS, a more specific definition is contained within the Resilient Farm Planning framework, which utilizes Conservation Practice Standards codified by the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and aligns with national standard parameters for climate smart, conservation focused, regenerative practices; and This template is a guide for liaisons. WHEREAS, the Resilient Farm Planning process utilizes COMET-farm modeling technology to quantify greenhouse gas sequestration potential from practice implementation, creating an avenue for measuring implementation predictions vs. results; and WHEREAS, the Resilient Farm Planning process has seen wide adoption and proof of concept in California for over a decade, with 137 Resilient Farm Plans (called Carbon Farm Plans in California) encompassing 71,440 acres; and WHEREAS, The Marin Carbon Project provides an example of County Government collaborating with Resource Conservation Districts, the equivalent of Soil and Water Conservation Districts in Texas, to implement regenerative agricultural practices; and WHEREAS, the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board offers funding for Regenerative Agriculture through its Texas Climate-Smart Initiative; and WHEREAS, Travis County has previously allocated funds for cheaper and longer leases on county owned agricultural lands if producers …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet – SIGN VARIANCE ITEM02 DATE: January 13, 2025 CASE NUMBER: C16-2024-0001 _______Thomas Ates (D1) _______Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) _______Jessica Cohen (D3) _______Yung-ju Kim (D4) _______Melissa Hawthorne (D5) _______Jeffery Bowen (D6) _______Janel Venzant (D7) _______Margaret Shahrestani (D8) _______Brian Poteet (D9) _______Michael Von Ohlen (D10) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) _______Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Michael Everett OWNER: Rowdy Durham ADDRESS: 6320 ED BLUESTEIN BLVD SB VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a sign variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-10-123 (Expressway Corridor Sign District Regulations): (B) (2) (a) to exceed sign area from 60 square feet to 210.36 square feet (B) (3) (a) to exceed sign height of 35 feet (maximum allowed) to 60 feet (requested) for a Freestanding sign in order to provide signage for a McDonald’s in a “GR-MU-CO-NP”, Community Commercial – Mixed Use – Conditional Overlay - Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (University Hills Neighborhood Plan), Expressway Corridor Sign District. Note: The Land Development Code Sign Regulations 25-10-123 Expressway Corridor Sign Regulations (A) This section applies to an expressway corridor sign district. (B) This subsection prescribes regulations for freestanding signs. (1) One freestanding sign is permitted on a lot. Additional freestanding signs may be permitted under Section 25-10-131 (Additional Freestanding Signs Permitted). (2) The sign area may not exceed: (a) on a lot with not more than 86 linear feet of street frontage, 60 square feet; or (b) on a lot with more than 86 linear feet of street frontage, the lesser of: (i) 0.7 square feet for each linear foot of street frontage; or (ii) 300 square feet. (3) The sign height may not exceed the greater of: (a) 35 feet above frontage street pavement grade; or (b) 20 feet above grade at the base of the sign. (C) A roof sign may be permitted instead of a freestanding sign under Section 25-10-132 (Roof Sign Instead Of Freestanding Sign). (D) Wall signs are permitted. (E) One flag for each curb cut is permitted. (F) For signs other than freestanding signs or roof signs, the total sign area for a lot may not exceed 20 percent of the facade area of the first 15 feet of the building. Source: Section 13-2-867; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. No. 20170817-072, Pt. 9, 8- 28-17. BOARD’S DECISION: December 9, 2024, POSPONED TO JANUARY 13, 2025; POSTPONEMENT REQUEST …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment- Sign Variance Decision Sheet ITEM03 DATE: January 13, 2025 CASE NUMBER: C16-2024-0002 ____Y___Thomas Ates (D1) ____Y___Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) ____Y___Jessica Cohen (D3) ____Y___Yung-ju Kim (D4) ____-___Melissa Hawthorne (D5) - ABSTAINED ____Y___Jeffery Bowen (D6) ____Y___Janel Venzant (D7) ____-___Margaret Shahrestani (D8) OUT ____Y___Brian Poteet (D9) ____Y___Michael Von Ohlen (D10) ____-___Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) ____-___VACANT (Alternate) (M) ____-___Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) OUT ____-___VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Michael J Whellan OWNER: Mark Worsham ADDRESS: 12221 MOPAC EXPY SVRD NB VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a sign variance(s) from the Land Development Code: Section 25-10-124 (Scenic Roadway Sign District): (requesting) (existing) (maximum allowed) to 90 square feet (requesting) (requesting), to 3 feet (requesting) Section 25-2-191 (Sign Setback Requirements) allowed) to 0 feet (requesting) (F) to allow for internally sign illumination for three (3) signs (requesting) (G) to decrease signs from the right-of-way of at least 12 feet (minimum required) (B) to allow more freestanding signs from one (1) (maximum allowed) to eight (8) (B) (2) to increase overall sign height from 12 feet (maximum allowed) to 17 feet (E) to decrease the setback of 12 feet from the street right-of-way (minimum (B) (1) (b) to increase the maximum sign area on a lot from 64 square feet (F) (1) to increase height of not more than 30 inches (maximum allowed) to 17 feet (F) (2) to reduce clearance of at least nine (9) feet (minimum allowed) to zero (0) (requesting) feet (requesting). in order to remodel Free-standing sign(s) for Emergency Services/Hospital Services in a “PUD”, Scenic Roadway Sign District. Note: 25-10-124 - SCENIC ROADWAY SIGN DISTRICT REGULATIONS. (A) This section applies to a scenic roadway sign district. (B) One freestanding sign is permitted on a lot. (1) The sign area may not exceed the lesser of: (a) 0.4 square feet for each linear foot of street frontage; or (b) 64 square feet. (2) The sign height may not exceed 12 feet. (C) Wall signs are permitted. (D) For signs other than freestanding signs, the total sign area for a lot may not exceed 10 percent of the facade area of the first 15 feet of the building. (E) In a Hill Country Roadway corridor, a spotlight on a sign or exterior lighting of a sign must be concealed from view and oriented away from adjacent properties and roadways. (F) Internal lighting …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM 04 DATE: Monday, January 13, 2025 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0031 _______Thomas Ates (D1) _______Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) _______Jessica Cohen (D3) _______Yung-ju Kim (D4) _______Melissa Hawthorne (D5) _______Jeffery Bowen (D6) _______Janel Venzant (D7) _______Margaret Shahrestani (D8) _______Brian Poteet (D9) _______Michael Von Ohlen (D10) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) _______Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Victoria Haase OWNER: Austin Area School for Dyslexics, Inc. ADDRESS: 2615 ½ HILLVIEW RD VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section: o feet (requested) o (required) to 15 feet (requested) o (required) to 5 feet (requested) o (requested) o percent (requested) Impervious Coverage to increase from 45 percent (maximum allowed) to 60 Setback Requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback from 10 feet Building Coverage to increase from 40 percent (maximum allowed) to 60% 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations): Setback Requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback from 25 feet Height Requirements to increase the height from 35 feet (maximum allowed) to 50 25-2-832 (Private Schools) (1) a site must be located on a street that has a paved width of at least 40 feet (required) to 30 feet (requested) from the site to where it connects with another street that has a paved width of at least 40 feet (required) to 30 feet (requested) in order to erect school buildings and structured sub-grade parking facilities in a “SF-3- NP”, Single-Family-Neighborhood Plan zoning district (West Austin Neighborhood Group). BOARD’S DECISION: POSTPONED TO November 14, 2024, BY APPLICANT; November 14, 2024 Postponed to December 9, 2024 due to the absence of a sufficient number of Board Members required for a formal vote on each case; December 9, 2024 POSPONED TO JANUARY 13, 2025; January 13, 2025 POSTPONEMENT REQUEST TO FEBRUARY 10, 2025 FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: 3. The variance will not alter the character of the area adjacent to the property, will not impair the use of adjacent conforming property, and will not impair the purpose of the regulations of the zoning district in which the property is located because: Elaine …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM05 DATE: Monday January 13, 2025 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0040 _______Thomas Ates (D1) _______Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) _______Jessica Cohen (D3) _______Yung-ju Kim (D4) _______Melissa Hawthorne (D5) _______Jeffery Bowen (D6) _______Janel Venzant (D7) _______Margaret Shahrestani (D8) _______Brian Poteet (D9) _______Michael Von Ohlen (D10) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) _______Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Leah Bojo OWNER: Chris Affinito ADDRESS: 600 CUMBERLAND RD VARIANCE REQUESTED The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code: Article 3, Additional Requirements for Certain Districts, Division 5 –Combining and Overlay Districts, Section 25-2-654 (Density Bonus ETOD (DBETOD) Combining District Regulations: (H) Compatibility Requirements (3) Any structure that is located less than 50 feet from any part of a triggering property may not exceed 60 feet (maximum allowed) to 2 feet -4 27/32 inches – 5 feet 6 inches (requesting) from 25 feet (minimum width allowed) to 2 feet -4 27/32 inches – 5 feet -6 inches (requesting), in order to erect a Condominium Residential Building in a “GR-V-ETOD, DBETOD and GR-ETOD-DBETOD”, Community Commercial-Vertical Mixed-Use Building-Equitable Transit-Oriented Development and Community Commercial-Equitable Transit-Oriented Development-Density Bonus ETOD. (H) Compatibility Requirements (4) (a) from compatibility buffer to decrease the Compatibility Buffers). Note: The Land Development Code Section 25-2-654 (Density Bonus ETOD (DBETOD) Combining District Regulations (A) (B) (H) This section applies to a property with density bonus ETOD (DBETOD) combining district zoning. This section governs over a conflicting provision of this title or other ordinance. Compatibility Requirements. (1) A building is not required to comply with Article 10 (Compatibility Standards) in Subchapter C. (2) In this subsection, (a) TRIGGERING PROPERTY means a site: (i) with at least one dwelling unit but less than four dwelling units; and (ii) is zoned urban family residence (SF-5) district or more restrictive; and (b) STRUCTURE includes a portion of a structure. (3) Any structure that is located less than 50 feet from any part of a triggering property may not exceed 60 feet. a triggering property. (4) Compatibility Buffer. A compatibility buffer is required along a site's property line that is shared with (a) The minimum width of a compatibility buffer is 25 feet. (b) A compatibility buffer must comply with Section 25-8-700 (Minimum Requirements for BOARD’S DECISION: November 14, 2024 Postponed to December 9, 2024 due to the absence of a sufficient number of Board Members required for …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM06 DATE: Monday January 13, 2025 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0041 ___Y____Thomas Ates (D1) ___Y____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) ___Y____Jessica Cohen (D3) ___Y____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___Y____Jeffery Bowen (D6) ___Y____Janel Venzant (D7) ___-____Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y____Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) ___-____Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) ___-____VACANT (Alternate) (M) ___-____Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) ___-____VACANT (Alternate) (M) OWNER/APPLICANT: Thomas M Schiefer and Meghann Elena Rosales ADDRESS: 1607 10TH ST VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from impervious coverage requirements to increase from 45 percent (maximum allowed) to 65 percent (requested) in order to attach a Single-Family Residence in a “SF-3-NP”, Single- Family - Neighborhood Plan zoning district (Old West Austin Neighborhood Plan) BOARD’S DECISION: November 14, 2024 Postponed to December 9, 2024 due to the absence of a sufficient number of Board Members required for a formal vote on each case; Dec 9, 2024 The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Madam Chair Jessica Cohen’s motion to Postpone to January 13, 2025; Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne seconds on 10-0 votes; POSTPONED TO JANUARY 13, 2025; January 13, 2025 The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne’s motion to Approve; Board member Michael Von Ohlen second on 9-0 votes; GRANTED. FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: Home 1 and Home 2 were written independently and then collaborated together, maybe had some unintended consequences for a small lot amnesty, it could be covered in the neighborhood plan, in keeping this house and making the addition to the back with the neighbor’s encroachment is very reasonable, the new Home 2 remove the small lot amnesty for just a single family as opposed to the preservation portion of it. 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: it is a legal lot, it has the existing encroachment, it has a historic house, all these complications make it incredibly unique to this piece of property. (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: the road expansion makes it even more interesting; your neighbor’s living room is usually not on your property. 3. The variance will not alter the character of …
ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Monday, January 13, 2025 ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION REGULAR CALLED MEETING MINUTES Monday, January 13, 2025 The Electric Utility Commission convened in a regular called meeting on Monday, January 13, 2025, at Austin Energy Headquarters, 4815 Mueller Blvd, Austin, TX 78723. Vice Chair Kaiba White called the Electric Utility Commission meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Kaiba White, Vice Chair; Commissioner Cesar Benavides; Commissioner Chris Kirksey Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Dave Tuttle, Chair; Commissioner Ayo Akande; Commissioner Raul Alvarez; Commissioner Lauren Bellomy; Commissioner Cesar Benavides; Commissioner Jonathon Blackburn; Commissioner Randy Chapman; Commissioner Joshua Rhodes PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL • Scott Johnson- Utility Bill Funds APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Electric Utility Commission Regular Meeting on November 18, 2024 and Approve the minutes of the Electric Utility Commission Special Called Meeting on December 2, 2024. The motion approving the minutes of the Regular Electric Utility Commission meeting of November 18, 2024 and the minutes of the Special Called Electric Utility Commission of December 2, 2024, were approved on Commissioner Chapman’s motion, Chair Rhodes’s second on an 8-0 vote with Commissioners Alvarez and Benavides off the dais and Commissioner Reed absent. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ON RECOMMENDATIONS 2. Recommend approval of an ordinance amending the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Austin Energy Fund Operating Budget (Ordinance 20240814-007) by increasing transfers out to the Austin Energy Power Supply Stabilization Reserve (Ordinance 20240814-007) in the amount of $30,000,000; and amending the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Austin Energy Power Supply Stabilization Reserve Fund by increasing transfers in for the same amount. Funding is available in the Austin Energy Operating Fund balance. ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Monday, January 13, 2025 The motion to recommend approval of an ordinance amending the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Austin Energy Fund Operating Budget by increasing transfers out to the Austin Energy Power Supply Stabilization Reserve, was recommended on Commissioner Kirksey’s motion, Chair Tuttle’s second on an 10-0 vote with Commissioner Reed absent. 3. Recommend approval authorizing a contract for vegetation management services on energized transmission lines for Austin Energy with Wright Tree Service, Inc., for an initial term of two years with up to four one-year extension options, for a total contract amount not to exceed $42,000,000. Funding: $5,250,000 is available in the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Operating Budget of Austin Energy. Funding for the remaining contract term is contingent upon available funding in future …
ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2025 The Animal Advisory Commission convened in a regular meeting on January 13, 2025, at 301 W. 2nd St in Austin, Texas. Chair Clinton called the Animal Advisory Commission Meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Ryan Clinton, Chair, Travis County Ann Linder, Vice Chair, D3 Sarah Huddleston, D9 Beatriz Dulzaides, D2 Dr. Paige Nilson, D4 Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Nancy Nemer, Travis County Luis Herrera, D6 Whitney Holt, D5 Larry Tucker, D7 Commissioners Absent: Laura Hoke, Mayor’s Appointee Lotta Smagula, D1 PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Kayla Murray – Adoption difficulties Pat Valls-Trelles – Animal Services Budget Laura Ransan Nesmith - TNR Wendy Weiss – TNR Deborah Ro – TNR Rochelle Vickery – Abandoned Dogs 1 Robert Corbin – Off leash dogs APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Animal Advisory Commission Regular Meeting on December 9, 2024 The motion to approve the minutes from the meeting of December 9, 2024, was approved on Vice Chair Linder’s motion, Commissioner Huddleston’s second on an 8-0 vote. Commissioner Nilson abstained. Commissioners Hoke and Smagula were absent. The motion to take up Item 3 before Item 2 was approved on Vice Chair Linder’s motion, Commissioner Huddleston’s second on a 9-0 vote. Commissioners Hoke and Smagula were absent. STAFF BRIEFING 3. Staff briefing on the draft Animal Services Office Strategic Plan 2025-2030. The presentation was made by Susana Carbajal, Assistant City Manager, Don Bland, Chief Animal Services Officer, Animal Service Office, and Audrey Muntz, Budget and Performance Manager, Financial Services Department. Vice Chair Linder requested that staff provide the introduction and background for the Strategic Plan and any additional language that precedes the Strategic Plan. DISCUSSION ITEM 2. Receive feedback from members of the public regarding the draft Animal Services Office Strategic Plan 2025-2030. Discussed. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Community cat processing Working Group (Clinton, Huddleston) A motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:24 p.m. was approved on Commissioner Nilson’s motion, Commissioner Dulzaides’ second on a 9-0 vote. Commissioners Hoke and Smagula were absent. 2 The minutes were approved at the February 10, 2025, meeting on Commissioner Nilson’s motion, Commissioner Huddleston’s second on a 10-0 vote. Commissioner Hoke was absent. 3
LGBTQ QUALITY OF LIFE ADVISORY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, JANUARY 13, 2025 The LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission convened in a regular meeting on Monday, January 13, 2025, at 6:30 PM at the City of Austin Permitting and Development Center, 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Dr., Austin, Texas, 78752, Room #1401/1402. Commissioners in attendance in person: J. Scott Neal (Chair) Jerry Joe Benson (Vice Chair) Alexander Andersen Brigitte Bandit KB Brookins Garry Brown Katie Coyne Morgan Davis Mariana Krueger Taylor Treviño Brandon Wollerson Commissioners in attendance remotely: Rocío Fierro-Pérez Kitty McLeod Chair Neal called the meeting to order at 6:40 PM. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Clayton Gibson spoke on the LGBTQ Cultural Center Feasibility Study. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission's regular meeting on December 9, 2024 The minutes were approved on Commissioner Krueger’s motion, Commissioner Benson’s second, on a 13-0 vote. DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. Presentation regarding the upcoming Texas Legislature Session and potential draft bills pertaining to the LGBTQ+ Community. Presentation by Equality Texas. Presentation provided by Landon Richie, Policy Coordinator, TENT. 3. Presentation regarding the status of the transgender community in Austin Presentation by Landon Richie, Policy Coordinator, Transgender Education Network of Texas (TENT). Page 1 of 4 Presentation provided by Landon Richie, Policy Coordinator, TENT. 4. Presentation regarding the state of the transgender youth community in Austin. Presentation by Jaryn Holbrook Janeway, Director, OutYouth. Presentation provided by Jaryn Holbrook Janeway, Director of Operations, OutYouth. 5. Presentation regarding Austin’s LGBTQIA+ healthcare outlook. Presentation by Christopher Hamilton, Texas Health Action. Presentation provided by Christopher Hamilton, CEO, Texas Health Action. 6. Discussion on ways in which commissioners may assist members of the LGBTQIA+ community with U.S. Passport applications. Discussion was held. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 7. Discussion and possible action to create a working group to monitor the upcoming Texas Legislative Session and provide a report on what LGBTQIA+ related laws have been passed. The motion to form a working group to monitor the upcoming Texas Legislative Session and provide a report on what LGBTQIA+ related laws have been passed was approved on Commissioner Krueger’s motion, Commissioner Davis’ second, on a 13-0 vote. Members include Commissioners Anderson, Bandit, Davis, Fierro-Pérez, and Treviño. 8. Discussion and possible action to create a working group to form a comprehensive resource packet for transgender and gender-expansive Austin residents needing related resources. The motion to form a …
MEETING MINUTES January 13, 2025 Austin/Travis County Food Policy Board The Austin/Travis County Food Policy Board (ATCFPB) convened on Monday, January 13, at the City of Austin Permitting and Development Center, 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Dr, Room 1406, Austin, TX 78752. Board Members in Attendance: Andrea Abel, Lisa Barden, Marissa Bell, Joi Chevalier, Beth Corbett, Larry Franklin, Hilda Gutierrez, Kacey Hanson, Natalie Poulos, Matt Simon, Andy Smith Board Members Absent: Mark Bethell Staff in Attendance: Edwin Marty (City of Austin), Amanda Rohlich (City of Austin), Angela Baucom (City of Austin), Yaira Robinson (Travis County) CALL TO ORDER Chair Joi Chevalier called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION None APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Board Member Kacey Hanson motioned to approve the meeting minutes from the Regular Meeting on December 9, 2024, with Board Member Hilda Gutierrez, seconding the motion. Minutes passed on an 11-0 vote. 2. Briefing on Austin-Travis County Food Plan Implementation, Edwin Marty, Food Policy Manager at City of Austin and Yaira Robinson, Assistant Director of Environmental Programs at Travis County (see back-up materials for presentation). STAFF BRIEFING DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. Presentation from Drew De Los Santos, Executive Director at Austin Cooperative Business Association on the Del Valle Food Co-op (see back-up materials for presentation). Natalie Poulos stepped off the dias at 6:57 pm 4. Discuss the draft recommendation to support Goal 1, Strategy 1.12 of the Austin Travis County Food Plan: Fully fund City and County park plans that include strategies to support community agriculture (such as the Vision Plan at John Trevino Jr. Metropolitan Park) and include support for staff to implement community agriculture programs in these locations and distribute food grown to surrounding communities. Board Member Andrea Abel and Board Member Lisa Barden. a. Suggestion to add in the Austin-Travis County Food Plan strategy number, reference the specific strategy from the Austin Climate Equity Plan, and change language to a more specific dollar amount request or remove the language of “fully” funding. b. Suggestion to also include “medically relevant”. c. Suggestion to reference state code that makes this recommendation relevant. 5. Discuss draft recommendation(s) to support Goal 1 of the Austin Travis County Food Plan: Expand community food production, preserve agricultural lands, and increase the amount of farmland dedicated to regenerative food production long-term in Austin/Travis County, Board Member Marissa Bell (land acquisition) and Board Member Matt Simon (regenerative agriculture). a. Farmland Acquisition and …
