1. ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 10, 2024 The Animal Advisory Commission convened in a regular meeting on June 10, 2024, at 301 W. 2nd St in Austin, Texas. Chair Clinton called the Animal Advisory Commission Meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Ryan Clinton, Chair, Travis County Ann Linder, Vice Chair, D3 Amanda Bruce, D10 Laura Hoke, Mayor’s Appointee Sarah Huddleston, D9 Paige Nilson, D4 Lotta Smagula, D1 Larry Tucker, D7 Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Beatriz Dulzaides, D2 Luis Herrera, D6 Whitney Holt, D5 Commissioners Absent: Nancy Nemer, Parliamentarian, Travis County PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Samantha Haywood – AAC Stray Intake Rochelle Vickery – Trap-Neuter-Return Lyndsey Gauthier – Experience & Exposure Suggestion APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve the minutes of the Animal Advisory Commission Regular Meeting on May 13, 2024. 1 The minutes from the meeting of May 13, 2024, were approved on Commissioner Nilson’s motion, Commissioner Huddleston’s second on a 10-0 vote. Commissioners Bruce and Dulzaides were off the dais. Commissioner Nemer was absent. Staff briefing regarding monthly reports provided by the Animal Service Center. The presentation was made by Stephanie Hayden-Howard, Assistant City Manager, Don Bland, Chief Animal Services Officer, Austin Animal Services, and Jason Garza, Deputy Chief Animal Services Officer, Austin Animal Services. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS A discussion item related to Animal Services strategic planning was requested by Chair Clinton and Vice Chair Linder. A staff briefing on animals/pets at cooling centers was requested by Commissioner Smagula and Vice Chair Linder. A recommendation to Council on animals at cooling centers was requested by Commissioners Smagula and Linder. A motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:46 p.m. was made by Vice Chair Linder, seconded by Commissioner Nilson, and accepted without objection. The minutes were approved at the XX, meeting on Commissioner XX’s motion, Commissioner XX’s second on a X-X vote. 2
Information is from October 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024 Information compiled via ASO Power BI dashboards. Difference of outcomes - intakes Outcome Year (fiscal) Intake Year (fiscal) Dog totals Cat totals Totals Dog totals Cat totals Totals Dog totals Cat totals Totals Cats Adoption Transfer Euthanasia Died Missing Total Dog Adoption Transfer Euthanasia Died Missing Total RTO/RTO Adopt SNR (former SCRP) RTO/RTO Adopt 2024 4075 4291 8366 2024 4012 3854 7866 2024 -63 -437 -500 2024 2422 121 890 89 54 2 370 3948 2024 2647 590 678 66 20 2 4003
June 2024 AUSTIN ANIMAL SERVICES REPORT 1 Animal Services News • The live outcome rate for June was 96.65%. • A total of 1,117 animals were brought to the shelter which included 603 cats, 449 dogs, 45 wild animals, 9 guinea pigs, 3 rabbits, 2 chickens, 1 turkey, 1 snake and 1 tortoise. • A total of 740 animals were adopted (189 adult dogs, 144 puppies, 315 kittens, and 92 adult cats). • A total of 80 dogs and cats were returned to their owners (RTOs and RTO-Adopt). • On June 3, there were 1,343 dogs and cats within the ASO inventory (682 onsite, 656 in foster, and 3 at a vet clinic and 1 at Austin Pets Alive!). • On July 1, there were 1,278 dogs and cats within the ASO inventory (683 onsite, 592 in foster, and 1 at a vet clinic). Animal Protection • Animal Protection Officers (APOs) returned 51 animals to their owners in the field. • Officers handed out 37 fencing assistance applications and implanted 5 microchip(s). • Officers impounded 189 injured animals and delivered approximately 95 wildlife animals to Austin Wildlife Rescue. • Officers entered 249 rabies exposure reports and submitted 42 specimens for rabies testing. We had 3 decomposed bats and 1 decomposed raccoon. • 63 total coyote related activities o 33 Wild Sick o 24 Sightings o 6 Encounters • Out of 63 coyote related reports, 30 reports fell within the reported behavior types. Behavior types include Sighting, Encounter, Incident, and Observation. “Observation” is defined as hearing coyotes howling and finding scat or footprints. o Encounters: Pets were a factor in 6/6 (100%) of encounters reported. ▪ An encounter involved a coyote being chased by a dog and then turned around and chased the dog back. ▪ An encounter involved a coyote with mange “approaching” caller and dog. ▪ An encounter involved a coyote following a caller, kids, and dog. ▪ An encounter involved a coyote growling and following caller and dog. ▪ An encounter involved a coyote following caller and dog. ▪ An encounter involved a coyote with mange interacting with dogs (no contact), growled, and showed teeth to dog. 2 o Incidents: No incidents were reported. • Out of 63 related activities, 33 fell within the reported behavior types (wild sick, wild speak, and wild injured). • There was 70% increase in reports from June 2023 to June 2024 • …
APH IMMUNIZATIONS UNIT: MPOX EPIDEMIOLOGY Our case patients are overwhelmingly male (98.1%), mostly white (63%), and the median age is 33 years old. Exposure is almost always via sexual contact. Hispanic : 39.9%, non-Hispanic : 49.4% unknown ethnicity :10.7% Most identify as Gay (MSM) 2 LOW RATES ARE GOOD BUT MAKE EDUCATION MORE CHALLENGING - many people had the sense that it was over and nothing to worry about - We try to utilize what we know from Epi data to focus education/outreach BARRIERS TO VACCINATION We rolled out our mpox survey to gauge hesitation and views on mpox vaccination. Anecdotally, we have heard the following : - many people are not educated on what mpox is even though they may be at risk. - Some are unsure whether they are at risk; PCP’s not suggesting it - hard to get through to appointment lines. - low rates are making people worry less - unsure about vaccine effectiveness, despite education 4 EDUCATION/OUTREACH - updated our APH website about mpox -I quality check the vaccine locator on CDC -Collaborated more closely with our HIV targeted testing team - outreach at Package, Sir Rat, Austin Eagle - table at Ashwell clinic peer support group - host pop up vaccination clinics at Vivent Health who no longer offer the vaccine. -mpox education is offered at all of our tabling events around Austin 5 MEDICAL PROVIDER EDUCATION - Hosted 2 TCMS provider Townhalls -Nurse-centered townhall is upcoming -Educating urgent care practices around Austin LGBTQIA+ FOCUSED ONLINE SPACES Ongoing public campaign in the following dating sites: 7 FILLING GAPS - Built rapport with Vivent Health to host pop-up vaccination clinics for mpox -Collaborate with our targeted testing team to focus vaccination and education on unhoused population at Walgreens/Little Walnut Creek Library - Hosted a pop-up vaccination clinic at RBJ Sexual Health Clinic - Upcoming: Collaborating with Medical Reserve Corps to host a larger scale vaccination event at Montopolis Rec Center. - Continue Gift Card Incentives 8 An Example of an Instagram story post FINAL TAKEAWAYS We want to maximize our limited resources • We have been meeting CDC deliverables and creating strong rapport and connection both within APH and externally. • We would love feedback on any spaces that we should work to be in. • Would love to be connected by you if possible! 9 THANK YOU Isabel Cantu, Mpox/Flu Program Coordinator 512-972-5426 isabel.cantu@austintexas.gov …
Joint Sustainability Committee Resolution 20240708-02: Supporting the Environmental Investment Plan WHEREAS, the purpose of the Joint Sustainability Committee is “to advise the council on matters related to conservation and sustainability; and review City policies and procedures relevant to the Austin Community Climate Plan and the Austin Climate Equity Plan, including planning, implementation, community engagement, goal setting, and progress monitoring”; and WHEREAS, it is the duty of the Joint Sustainability Committee to “promote close cooperation between the council, City management, City boards, commissions, committees, and taskforces, and individuals, institutions, and agencies concerned with the politics, procedures, and implementation of the Austin Community Climate Plan and the Austin Climate Equity Plan with the goal of coordinating all similar activities within the City and the community in order to secure the greatest public benefit”; and WHEREAS, the Joint Sustainability Committee has had working groups for the past two and a half years that have gathered information from city staff, the Austin community and experts and advocates in other cities to identify funding needs to implement the Austin Climate Equity Plan; and WHEREAS, the Joint Sustainability Committee solicited and received public input on what needs funding through the Environmental Investment Plan to meet existing environmental goals through a written form, at a public hearing on March 27, 2024, and at the April 30, 2024 Joint Sustainability Committee meeting; and WHEREAS, the public comments received by the Joint Sustainability Committee on the Environmental Investment Plan emphasized the need for action, including more funding to meet a variety of environmental and climate goals established by the City of Austin; and WHEREAS, on August 8, 2019, the Council unanimously approved Resolution No. 20190808- 078 declaring a climate emergency in the City and calling to accelerate the timeline for achieving the City's climate goals; and WHEREAS, the climate crisis continues to worse each year and the window of opportunity to preserve a livable climate is rapidly closing due climate tipping points are likely already being reached; and WHEREAS, it is a scientific fact that greenhouse gas emissions reductions made sooner will yield climate benefits sooner and are therefore more valuable in avoiding tipping points that could make preserving a livable climate impossible; and WHEREAS, land acquisition, increasing the use of solar energy and battery storage, and tree planting are strategies that are adopted within multiple City of Austin plans (including the Climate Equity Plan, Water Forward, Austin/Travis County …
Joint Sustainability Committee Resolution 20240708-03: Resolution on Climate Fee WHEREAS, it is the Joint Sustainability Committee’s responsibility to advise “on matters related to conservation and sustainability and review City policies and procedures relevant to the Austin Community Climate Plan and the Austin Climate Equity Plan, including planning, implementation, community engagement, goal setting, and progress monitoring”, and WHEREAS, the greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal established by the Austin City Council in the Climate Equity Plan is to achieve “net-zero community-wide greenhouse gas emissions by 2040, utilizing a steep decline path followed by negative emissions” that translates to approximately 75% reduction in emissions by 2030; and WHEREAS the Joint Sustainability Committee identified over $2.24 billion in one time costs and $96.14 million in ongoing expenses for implementing the Austin Climate Equity Plan and associated city plans; and WHEREAS increasing pressures on the city budget and utility rates will make funding the identified sustainability needs very difficult without a new source of revenue; and WHEREAS other cities have implemented dedicated fees to fund sustainability needs; and WHEREAS the City of Austin already utilizes dedicated fees to fund certain sustainability needs, including at Austin Energy, Austin Water and Austin Resource Recovery; and WHEREAS funding from existing fees is insufficient in magnitude to fund all existing needs and existing fees can only be used to fund certain programs; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Joint Sustainability Committee recommends that the Austin City Council and the City Manager actively pursue establishing a new Green Fee to help fill the funding gap for implementing the Austin Climate Equity Plan and associated city plans, including: ● Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan ● Austin Strategic Mobility Plan ● Austin Resource Recovery Master Plan ● Water Forward ● Watershed Protection Strategic Plan ● Austin/Travis County Food Plan ● One Austin: Climate Resilience Action Plan ● Central Texas Regional Air Quality Plan ● Urban Forest Plan This new fee should be structured to be progressive, not regressive, should provide predictable revenue and should be paid by residents, businesses, corporations and/or visitors.
Strategic Planning Update to Animal Advisory Commission Stephanie Hayden-Howard | Assistant City Manager| July 8, 2024 The Assignment • City Auditor’s Report • Develop a Strategic Plan • Work with City Manager’s Office, Animal Services Office, Animal Advisory Commission, and key stakeholders to develop a strategic plan • Align with the City’s animal welfare priorities Strategic Planning Update 2 Planning Discussions • First planning meeting was held on June 25th • Attendees included city staff, two commissioner and Dr. Larry Schooler County capacity. • Whitney Holt will join the planning team in her Travis • The planning group will consist of city, county, two commissioners and Dr. Schooler. Strategic Planning Update 3 Assessment Phase • Dr. Schooler has begun key informant interviews • Currently he will interview several partners and stakeholders: • The planning team • City and County staff, Commissioners Clinton, Linder and Smagula • Leaders from Austin Pets Alive, Human Society and Emancipet • Community Members Pat Valls- Trelles • Former Officers Strategic Planning Update 4 Assessment Phase • Dr. Schooler will conduct external sessions • Audrey Muntz will conduct internal sessions • Online survey via SpeakUpAustin.org • Information from the Auditor’s Office • Including information shared in community engagement sessions • Recent community engagement by Animal Welfare partners Commission • Information from Sessions with the Animal Advisory Strategic Planning Update 5 Proposed Strategic Plan Working Group Participants • All Planning Members • Austin Lost and Found • Austin Pets Alive • Emancipet • Humane Society • Trappers • Individuals • Pat Valles-Trelles Strategic Planning Update 6 Strategic Plan Working Group Task • Review information from the assessment report • Produce the core components of the strategic plan • Earlier sessions will be used to build trust • Develop a shared vision for Animal Welfare • Discussion of the mission and vision including establishing goals Strategic Planning Updates 7 Strategic Plan • The plan will include all aspects from the assessment phase • Documenting the work of the working group • Input from the survey • Mission, Vision and Goals • Communicate the plan • Roles and Responsibilities for carrying out the goals • Metrics to measure progress after implementation Strategic Plan Updates 8 Next Steps • Continue with internal and external meetings key stakeholder meetings • Schedule the Working Group meetings • Community Engagement Discussions • Plan to attend commission meetings monthly for an update Strategic Planning …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION Recommendation Number:20240708-005: Allowing of companion animals into designated City of Austin Cooling Centers WHEREAS, current city policy only allows service animals into City facilities, including the places used for Cooling Centers; and WHEREAS, any person with a companion animal would have to be aware to notify staff at a cooling center to contact Animal Services for a cooling truck; and WHEREAS, this would delay the person from being able to enter a cooling center while awaiting a response from Animal Services; and WHEREAS, Animal Services, only if available, will bring a cooling truck to the cooling center, where the companion animal can stay while their person is inside the cooling center; and WHEREAS, this would render that vehicle and the Animal Protection Officer unavailable to answer any calls for assistance while performing this function; and WHEREAS, if Animal Services does not have an available vehicle to send, the person and their companion animal would not be able to enter a cooling center for relief. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to designate a number of cooling centers located throughout the City of Austin that persons with companion animals may go to for relief during times of intense heat when cooling centers are activated. Date of Approval: Record of the Vote: Attest:
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION Recommendation Number 20240708-005: Allowing of companion animals into designated City of Austin Cooling Centers WHEREAS, current city policy only allows service animals into City facilities, including the places used for Cooling Centers; and WHEREAS, any person with a companion animal would have to be aware to notify staff at a cooling center to contact Animal Services for a cooling truck; and WHEREAS, this would delay the person from being able to enter a cooling center while awaiting a response from Animal Services; and WHEREAS, Animal Services, only if available, will bring a cooling truck to the cooling center, where the companion animal can stay while their person is inside the cooling center; and WHEREAS, this would render that vehicle and the Animal Protection Officer unavailable to answer any calls for assistance while performing this function; and WHEREAS, if Animal Services does not have an available vehicle to send, the person and their companion animal would not be able to enter a cooling center for relief. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to designate a number of cooling centers located throughout the City of Austin that persons with companion animals may go to for relief during times of intense heat when cooling centers are activated. Date of Approval: July 8, 2024 Record of the vote: The recommendation was approved on Commissioner Smagula’s motion, Commissioner Herrera’s second on an 8-0 vote. Chair Clinton, Commissioners Bruce, Holt, and Tucker were absent. Attest: _____________________________________________ Eric Anderson, Staff Liaison, Office of the City Clerk
Brigh Alim Corporation December 19, 2023 Page 1 of 6 December 19, 2023 VIA EMAIL ONLY Brigh Alim Corporation 17 Garden st, apt 3R Brooklyn, NY, 11206 Attn: Anuar Yelemessov Dear Mr. Yelemessov, Re: CEASE AND DESIST FROM DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES We are counsel to Miki Agrawal (“Ms. Agrawal”) and we are writing to demand your immediate cooperation to resolve the matter described below before we take further steps and prosecute a legal action against you. We have become aware of your deceptive trade practices and blatant misconduct in relation to the renovations (“Renovation”) of Ms. Agrawal’s property located at [*] (the “Property”). Ms. Agrawal hired you to complete the Renovation on the false promise that you would (i) supervise the project and your workers, (ii) communicate effectively and respond promptly, (iii) complete all of the items listed on Exhibit A in the Renovation, which still remain incomplete, and (iv) use the Two Hundred Thirty-Nine Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($239,500), advanced by Ms. Agrawal in good faith (“Funds”), to purchase materials and supplies for the Renovation. Instead, you disappeared for months and evaded Ms. Agrawal, allowed unsupervised workers to facilitate and lead the Renovation, and misappropriated the Funds to commence a larger construction project, while failing to purchase the materials and supplies as promised to Ms. Agrawal. ACCORDINGLY, WE HEREBY DEMAND YOU IMMEDIATELY CEASE AND DESIST FROM COMPLETING ANY FURTHER WORK TOWARD THE RENOVATION AND REFUND THE FUNDS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN UTILIZED AS PART OF THE RENOVATION. Further, Texas’ Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“DTPA”) outlines several elements that are necessary to prove when asserting a DTPA claim. The elements of a DTPA claim are (1) the plaintiff was a consumer1; (2) the defendant either engaged in false, misleading, or deceptive acts (i.e., violated a specific laundry-list provision of the DTPA) or engaged in an unconscionable action or course of action; and (3) the DTPA laundry-list violation or unconscionable action was a producing cause of the plaintiff's injury. Hunt v. City of Diboll, 574 S.W.3d 406, 431 (Tex. App. 2017); Amstadt v. U.S. Brass Corp., 919 S.W.2d 644, 649 (Tex. 1996); see Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex. 1995). A “false, misleading, or deceptive acts”2 means an act or series of acts which has the capacity or tendency to deceive 1 “Consumer” means an individual, partnership, corporation, this state, or a subdivision or …
Joint Sustainability Committee Resolution 20240708-02: Supporting the Environmental Investment Plan WHEREAS, the purpose of the Joint Sustainability Committee is “to advise the council on matters related to conservation and sustainability; and review City policies and procedures relevant to the Austin Community Climate Plan and the Austin Climate Equity Plan, including planning, implementation, community engagement, goal setting, and progress monitoring”; and WHEREAS, it is the duty of the Joint Sustainability Committee to “promote close cooperation between the council, City management, City boards, commissions, committees, and taskforces, and individuals, institutions, and agencies concerned with the politics, procedures, and implementation of the Austin Community Climate Plan and the Austin Climate Equity Plan with the goal of coordinating all similar activities within the City and the community in order to secure the greatest public benefit”; and WHEREAS, the Joint Sustainability Committee has had working groups for the past two and a half years that have gathered information from city staff, the Austin community and experts and advocates in other cities to identify funding needs to implement the Austin Climate Equity Plan; and WHEREAS, the Joint Sustainability Committee solicited and received public input on what needs funding through the Environmental Investment Plan to meet existing environmental goals through a written form, at a public hearing on March 27, 2024, and at the April 30, 2024 Joint Sustainability Committee meeting; and WHEREAS, the public comments received by the Joint Sustainability Committee on the Environmental Investment Plan emphasized the need for action, including more funding to meet a variety of environmental and climate goals established by the City of Austin; and WHEREAS, on August 8, 2019, the Council unanimously approved Resolution No. 20190808- 078 declaring a climate emergency in the City and calling to accelerate the timeline for achieving the City's climate goals; and WHEREAS, the climate crisis continues to worsen each year and the window of opportunity to preserve a livable climate is rapidly closing due to climate tipping points are likely already being reached; and WHEREAS, it is a scientific fact that greenhouse gas emissions reductions made sooner will yield climate benefits sooner and are therefore more valuable in avoiding tipping points that could make preserving a livable climate impossible; and WHEREAS, land acquisition, increasing the use of solar energy and battery storage, and tree planting are strategies that are adopted within multiple City of Austin plans (including the Climate Equity Plan, Water Forward, Austin/Travis …
Joint Sustainability Committee Resolution 20240708-03: Resolution on Climate Fee WHEREAS, it is the Joint Sustainability Committee’s responsibility to advise “on matters related to conservation and sustainability and review City policies and procedures relevant to the Austin Community Climate Plan and the Austin Climate Equity Plan, including planning, implementation, community engagement, goal setting, and progress monitoring”, and WHEREAS, the greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal established by the Austin City Council in the Climate Equity Plan is to achieve “net-zero community-wide greenhouse gas emissions by 2040, utilizing a steep decline path followed by negative emissions” that translates to approximately 75% reduction in emissions by 2030; and WHEREAS the Joint Sustainability Committee identified over $2.24 billion in one time costs and $96.14 million in ongoing expenses for implementing the Austin Climate Equity Plan and associated city plans; and WHEREAS increasing pressures on the city budget and utility rates will make funding the identified sustainability needs very difficult without a new source of revenue; and WHEREAS other cities have implemented dedicated fees to fund sustainability needs; and WHEREAS the City of Austin already utilizes dedicated fees to fund certain sustainability needs, including at Austin Energy, Austin Water and Austin Resource Recovery; and WHEREAS funding from existing fees is insufficient in magnitude to fund all existing needs and existing fees can only be used to fund certain programs; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Joint Sustainability Committee recommends that the Austin City Council and the City Manager actively pursue establishing a new Green Fee to help fill the funding gap for implementing the Austin Climate Equity Plan and associated city plans, including: ● Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan ● Austin Strategic Mobility Plan ● Austin Resource Recovery Master Plan ● Water Forward ● Watershed Protection Strategic Plan ● Austin/Travis County Food Plan ● One Austin: Climate Resilience Action Plan ● Central Texas Regional Air Quality Plan ● Urban Forest Plan This new fee should be structured to be equitable and responsive to Austin’s wealth gaps and the fee should provide predictable revenue. A legal analysis of options that could be paid by residents, businesses, corporations and/or visitors should be conducted and presented to the City Council for consideration as soon as possible. Motion: Anna Scott Second: Alberta Phillips Vote: 11-0 Yes: Diana Wheeler, Lane Becker, Kaiba White, Heather Houser, Jon Salinas, Alberta Philipps, Anna Scott, Rodrigo Leal, Melissa Rothrock, Chris Campbell, …
