BOA Monthly Report July 2022-June 2023 July 13, 2022 Special called meeting (Interpretation) Denied Appeal 1 1. 25-2, Subchapter E (Design Standards and Mixed Use) of the Land Development Code in connection with approval of a Site Plan application for construction of a Vertical Mixed-Use (VMU) development. The appellant contends that the Site Plan does not meet the Land Development Code, Subchapter E Sections 1.1, 1.5, 2.1, 2.2, 2.8, 3.1, 4.1, and 4.3 in a “GR-V-CO-NP”, Community Commercial-Vertical Mixed Use- Conditional Overlay-Neighborhood Plan zoning district (Windsor Park Neighborhood Plan). (Added july13# 2022) The deposition of the case items: Granted Postponed Withdrawn Denied Discussion Items Board members absent: Melissa Hawthorne/Barbara Mcarthur/Darryl Pruett 6 6 1 1 4 Item-9/1 Granted 6 July11, 2022 1. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback and 25-2-774 (Two-Family Residential Use) (C) (2) (a) for a Two-Family Residential use location 2. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum street side yard setback 3. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback and decrease the minimum front yard setback lot size requirements to decrease the minimum lot 4. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from a) size and b) setback requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback and c) building coverage and d) impervious coverage 5. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback 6. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum Rear Yard Setback Postponed 6 1. 25-10-123 (Expressway Corridor Sign District Regulations): a)(B) (2) (b) (i) to exceed sign area and b) (a) to exceed sign height 2. 25-2-899 (D) (Fences as Accessory Uses) to exceed the average height 3. 25-2-1063 (Height Limitations and Setbacks for Large Sites) a)(B) (1) from setback requirements to decrease the setback and b)(C) (1) (a) from height limitation to increase 4. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum interior side yard setback 5. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum Interior Side Yard Setback 6. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback (B) (3) 1 25-10-123 (Expressway Corridor Sign District Regulations) (B) (3), to exceed sign height Withdrawn 1 Denied 0 Discussion Items 4 July 2022. Interpretations 0 new inquiries (Added july11# 2022) The deposition of the case items: …
4507 NORTH INTERSTATE 35 Sign Proposal for Apple Tree Holdings Alex Ybarra Director, Apple Tree Holdings LLC 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 1 of 27 Item-3/1 INTRODUCTION The property at 4507 North Interstate 35 is uniquely situated at the I-35 split and is surrounded by several trees. 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 2 of 27 Item-3/2 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Relevant Code: §25-10-123 (Expressway Corridor Sign Districts) (B)(2)(b)(i) and §25-10-123 (B)(3)(a) which regulate the sign area and sign height, respectively. 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 3 of 27 Item-3/3 VARIANCE FINDINGS First: The existing sign is blocked from view by large trees, many of which are over 35 feet high. These trees are either on neighboring properties or city property; therefore, petitioner has no control over those trees. We would also like to preserve trees on the 4507 property to the fullest extent possible. The proximity to the I-35 split also causes visibility issues. 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 4 of 27 Item-3/4 SAMPLE FOOTER TEXT 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 5 of 27 Item-3/5 SAMPLE FOOTER TEXT 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 6 of 27 Item-3/6 SAMPLE FOOTER TEXT 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 7 of 27 Item-3/7 SAMPLE FOOTER TEXT 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 8 of 27 Item-3/8 SAMPLE FOOTER TEXT 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 9 of 27 Item-3/9 SAMPLE FOOTER TEXT 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 10 of 27 Item-3/10 SAMPLE FOOTER TEXT 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 11 of 27 Item-3/11 SAMPLE FOOTER TEXT 4507 N IH 35 SVRD Case Number: C16-2022-0004 Page 12 of 27 Item-3/12 VARIANCE FINDINGS Second: The granting of these variances will not have a substantially adverse impact upon neighboring properties as our assessment is that continued development of 4507 provides a benefit to the neighborhood through crime reduction, continued investment, and improvement of a previously abandoned property. Additionally, the LED sign is equipped with two photocells that ensure that the sign adjusts to ambient lighting conditions. This feature preserves ambient lighting conditions, whereas a traditional cabinet sign uses a light that is on a single fixed setting. These safeguards prevent any type of light pollution. 4507 …
1101 Quaker Ridge Variance Request Item-4/1 1101 Quaker Ridge ´ Case: C15-2022-046 ´ Owners: Jeffery and Leslie Socha ´ Presented by: Ricca Keepers, Keepers Land Planning and Permitting Item-4/2 1101 Quaker Ridge ´ The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum Street Side Yard Setback from 15 feet (required) to 10 feet (requested), in order to erect an addition above the garage in a “SF-2”, Single-Family zoning district. ´ Variance is requested for the following reasons ´ Large, 19” Red Oak in the backyard, see attached tree survey and arborist’s, prohibits building any structure in the backyard ´ The house backs up to a beautiful walking trail and park. The owner’s are hoping to avoid obscuring the view to the park by building over the garage. ´ Current house is two stories, proposed addition would be no higher than the current height of the house ´ House is on a corner lot, corner lot setbacks are significantly different than that of an interior lot resulting in less area in back and side yard to build on Item-4/3 1101 Quaker Ridge Pictures Front of the house, showing garage and current height Item-4/4 1101 Quaker Ridge Picture Side of house and garage leading up to the park in the back of the house Item-4/5 1101 Quaker Ridge Entire garage shown, as well as height of current house. Item-4/6 1101 Quaker Ridge Showing the fence in the back of the property, including the park and walking trail that is behind the house. You can also see the 19” Red Oak that prohibits building in the back Item-4/7 1101 Quaker Ridge Arial view of the property to include the park and waking trails. Development in the backyard would obstruct the current view of the park. Item-4/8 1101 Quaker Ridge Survey Item-4/9 1101 Quaker Ridge You can see from this image, the backyard leaves little room for an addition due to additional setbacks and protected trees. Specifically, the tree on the corner in the backyard further prevents construction in the backyard. Item-4/10 1101 Quaker Ridge Arborist’s Report showing tree noted on survey in the back of the house, 19” Red Oak, noted in ”Good Condition” Item-4/11
The Plan 38th Street 509 E 38th Street Case #C15-2022-0043 Eric Goff L i b e r t y S t r e e t • Original lot (outlined in green) is 14,027 SF corner lot with a 1954 home on it. Home is in good condition. • Subdividing into Lot 1 and Lot 2 • New Lots: • Lot 1: faces and has driveway access to 38th Street, is 8,230 SF, and contains the existing 1954 house • Lot 2: has access on Liberty street. 5,770 SF . Has 50 ft of frontage (minimum allowed by code). Plan is to build a home on this lot Item-6/1 The Variance 38th Street 509 E 38th Street Case #C15-2022-0043 Eric Goff L i b e r t y S t r e e t • Lot 2 (the new lot) does not need any variances, it meets code. • Lot 1 (with existing house) • Due placement of the existing house, we need a 1 foot variance to the set back requirement. • The house needs a 10 ft set back, but is 8 inches too far toward the back of the lot. Item-6/2 The Findings 509 E 38th Street Case #C15-2022-0043 Eric Goff Required Findings: (A) reasonable use: A subdivision would require the demolition of the existing 1954 house that is representative of the character and scale of the area. (B) Hardship unique to property and not general: The Property includes an existing 1954 house that is typical for the area and worth preserving. The placement of the house by 8 inches presents a challenge that not all area lots share. (C) Adjacent Property: a one foot variance to the setback will not impair the use of any surrounding properties Item-6/3 509 E 38th Street Case #C15-2022-0043 Eric Goff The Potential Outcomes If variance is granted: The Variance will allow the new house to stay as is. If variance is not granted: Without the variance, the house will have to be demolished before the subdivision can be approved. See back up materials for a letter from COA Subdivision official that says the variance or demolition is needed before subdivision can be approved Item-6/4 The House Built in 1954 509 E 38th Street Case #C15-2022-0043 Eric Goff Item-6/5 Preservation Austin 509 E 38th Street Case #C15-2022-0043 Eric Goff July 27 – the Advocacy Committee of Preservation Austin voted unanimously in support …
REGULAR MEETING of the ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION AUGUST 8, 2022, 6 P.M. AUSTIN CITY HALL, Room 1101 301 W. Second St. AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 Some members of the Commission may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, call or email Belinda Hare, by Sunday noon, August 7, at phone 512-978-0565, or email Belinda.Hare@austintexas.gov. Please know emails work best. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS Craig Nazor, Chair Nancy Nemer Palmer Neuhaus Jo Anne Norton Luis Herrera Kristen Hassen, Parliamentarian AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Ryan Clinton, Vice Chair Lisa Mitchell Katie Jarl Lotta Smagula Beatriz Dulzaides Dr. Paige Nilson The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. Speakers for specific agenda items may sign up prior to the meeting or in person at the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Animal Advisory Commission Regular Meeting on July 11, 2022. 2. Presentation by Don Bland and/or Jason Garza regarding Austin Animal Center and Animal Services Reports 3. Presentation by Don Bland regarding AAC Staffing and Services 4. Presentation by AAC Staff regarding AAC Public Communications on Services STAFF BRIEFINGS DISCUSSION ITEMS 5. Presentation by Parliamentarian regarding Roberts Rules of Order 6. Presentation by Austin Pets Alive! regarding APA! Quarterly Report DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 7. Discussion and Possible Action on AAC Monthly Reporting of Data 8. Discussion and Possible Action on Transferring Austin Animal Center Animals to Other Communities 9. Discussion and Possible Action on the Austin Animal Center Space Crisis and Recommendations from the Space Crisis Working Group 10. Discussion and Possible Action on Austin Animal Center Staffing Request for FY 23 11. Discussion and Possible Action on Hold Period Ordinance 12. Discussion and Possible Action on Inclusion of Animal Services in the City of Austin next Five-Year Strategic Plan 13. Discussion and Possible Action on 311 Flow Charts and Information FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed …
1. REGULAR MEETING of the BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 8, 2022 AT 5:30PM Austin City Hall, Council Chambers, Room 1001 301 West 2nd Street, Austin, Texas 78701 Some members of the BOARD/COMMISSION may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required email for elaine.ramirez@austintexas.gov or call 512-974-2202. remote participation by telephone. To remotely, register speak to CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS: ___Thomas Ates ___Brooke Bailey ___Jessica Cohen (Chair) ___Melissa Hawthorne (Vice Chair) ___Barbara Mcarthur ___Ryan Nill ___Darryl Pruett ___Agustina Rodriguez ___Richard Smith ___Michael Von Ohlen ___Nicholl Wade ___Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (Alternate) AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first (4) four speakers signed up/register prior (no later than noon the day before the meeting) to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustment Regular meeting on July 11, 2022 and Board of Adjustment Special called meeting on July 13, 2022. On-Line Link: Draft minutes July 11, 2022 On-Line Link: Draft minutes July 13, 2022 PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Discussion of staff and applicant requests for postponement and withdrawal of public hearing cases posted on the agenda. Previous Postponements Sign cases: 3. C16-2022-0004 Apple Tree Holdings LLC, Tony Nguyen 4507 N IH 35 SVRD NB On-Line Link: Item 3 PART1; PART2; PART3; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a sign variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-10-123 (Expressway Corridor Sign District Regulations): a) (B) (2) (b) (i) to exceed sign area of 107 square feet (maximum allowed) to 200 square feet (requested) and b) (B) (3) (a) to exceed sign height of 35 feet (maximum allowed) to 50 feet (requested) in order to provide signage for a multi-tenant professional office in a “LO-NP”, Limited Office-Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (Upper Boggy Creek Neighborhood Plan) Note: The Land Development Code sign regulations 25-10-123 Expressway Corridor Sign Regulations (B) This subsection prescribes regulations for freestanding signs. (1) One freestanding sign is permitted on a lot. Additional freestanding signs may be permitted under …
AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD POLICY BOARD MONDAY, AUGUST 8th, 2022, FROM 6:00 TO 8:00 PM City of Austin Permitting and Development Center 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive, Room 2103 Austin, TX 78752 Some members of the Board may be participating by videoconference Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely by telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation. To register: Call or email the board liaison at amanda.rohlich@austintexas.gov or 512-974-1364. The information required is the speaker’s name, item number(s) they wish to speak on if applicable, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). BOARD MEMBERS: Sharon Mays, Chair Andrea Abel Lisa Barden Joi Chevalier, Vice-Chair Frances Deviney Kacey Hanson Cecilia Hogan Adrian Lipscombe Karen Magid Emily Nicola DeMaria Rosamaria Murillo Errol Schweizer AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM JULY MEETING 1. Approval of minutes of the Austin Travis County Food Policy Board – Regular Meeting 2. Edwin Marty, Food Policy Manager, Office of Sustainability: State of the Food System, Food on July 18, 2022 STAFF and COMMUNITY BRIEFINGS Policy, and COA Food Related Budget DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. Board Infrastructure & Protocol a. Review board members’ meetings with City and County officials AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD POLICY BOARD MONDAY, AUGUST 8th, 2022, FROM 6:00 TO 8:00 PM City of Austin Permitting and Development Center 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive, Room 2103 Austin, TX 78752 Some members of the Board may be participating by videoconference 4. Review prior board recommendations and discuss City and County budgets 5. Community engagement 6. Board vacancies and appointments 7. Discuss Annual Internal Review DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 8. Discuss strategic planning meeting 9. Update from Joint Sustainability Committee Meeting 10. Update from Working group and individual project briefings 11. Update from Good Food Purchasing Program Recommendation 12. Update from Healthy Food Access Working Group 13. Update from Food System Planning Working Group 14. Update from Community Agriculture Working Group 15. Update from Charitable Feeding Organization Working Group …
REGULAR MEETING of the ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION AUGUST 8, 2022, 6 P.M. AUSTIN CITY HALL, Room 1101 301 W. Second St. AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 Some members of the Commission may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, call or email Belinda Hare, by Sunday noon, August 7, at phone 512-978-0565, or email Belinda.Hare@austintexas.gov. Please know emails work best. AGENDA ADDENDUM DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 14. Discussion and Possible Action on the reconsideration of Austin City Code section 3-1-26 (D), Notice to Rescue Organization, regarding an animal exhibiting visible signs of pregnancy The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least two days (48 hours) before the meeting date. Please call Commission Liaison Belinda Hare, Animal Services Office, 512-978-0565 or at Belinda.hare@austintexas.gov, for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. For more information on the Animal Advisory Commission , please contact Belinda Hare at 512- 978-0565 or at Belinda.hare@austintexas.gov
REGULAR MEETING of the LGBTQ QUALITY OF LIFE ADVISORY COMMISSION MONDAY, AUGUST 8, 2022 7:00 P.M. City of Austin Permitting and Development Center, Room 1401 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Dr., Austin, Texas 78752 Some members of the Commission may be participating by videoconference. Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once, either in-person or remotely, and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, contact Alyssa Parra, the Commission’s staff liaison, at 512-974-2934 or Alyssa.Parra@AustinTexas.gov. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Ryn Gonzales, Chair Kanoa Arteaga Emily Bush Charles Curry Rebecca Dreke Dr. Victor Martinez Christian Vieira Melissa Taylor, Vice Chair Marti Bier Kannou Curette Nan Dowling Katelyn Jones Darcy Rendon Brandon Wollerson AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first ten speakers signed up before the meeting is called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. MOTION TO SUSPEND ROBERT’S RULES OF ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Approve the minutes of the Commission’s Regular Meeting on July 11, 2022. Staff briefing regarding Monkeypox. Presented by Janet Pichette, Chief Epidemiologist and Assistant Director of Epidemiology and Public Health Preparedness, and Ana Urueta, 3. 4. 5. Program Manager for Public Health Emergency, Austin Public Health. (Sponsor: Staff; Strategic Outcome: Health & Environment) Staff briefing regarding Equity Considerations in Contracts and Program Funding. Presented by Neal Falgoust, Assistant City Attorney, Law Department. (Sponsor: Staff; Strategic Outcome: Government That Works for All) Staff briefing regarding the City of Austin's 2022 Disparity Study conducted by the Small & Minority Business Resources Department. Presented by Edward Campos, Director, Small & Minority Business Resources Department. (Sponsor: Staff; Strategic Outcome: Economic Opportunity & Affordability) Staff briefing regarding the new position in the Equity Office. Presented by Jeremy Garza, Commissions & Neighborhood Liaison, Equity Office. (Sponsor: Staff; Strategic Outcome: Government That Works for All) Discussion of the FY2022-23 budget process, recommendations, and endorsements. (Sponsor: Curry; Strategic Outcome: Government That Works for All) Discussion of the vacant at-large commission position. DISCUSSION ITEMS 6. 7. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 8. 9. 10. Discussion and possible action to approve the Commission's Annual Internal Review for July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2022. …
Policy Questions Why is your resolution called the GRACE Act? The GRACE Act stands for Guarding the Right to Abortion Care for Everyone. Austin wants to be a source of safety and grace for the people suffering under the Texas trigger ban and other laws criminalizing reproductive health choices. What is the GRACE Act? The GRACE Act is a policy recommendation in 2 parts: 1. City funds shouldn’t be used to solicit, catalog, report, or investigate reports of abortion. 2. Police should make investigating abortion their lowest priority. Why just a policy recommendation? Under Texas law and the Austin City Charter, the City Council cannot dictate to city employees how to handle a criminal case. We can declare the policy preferences of the Council and recommend that staff not use city funding, and we can recommend that they place it very low on their list of priorities. City executives, under the direct authority of the City Manager, decide whether and how to implement Council policy. How does it help if it’s just a policy recommendation? City executives, under the direction of City Manager Spencer Cronk, will implement the GRACE Act’s recommendations once it passes. Who supports the GRACE Act? Mayor Steve Adler and Council Members Vanessa Fuentes, Paige Ellis, and Kathie Tovo are our co-sponsors. Texas open meeting laws prevent us from talking to more than 4 fellow voting members about any resolution, but I can confirm everyone we have spoken with is in support. The population of Austin has demonstrated repeatedly that we are a city that supports reproductive health choices. Will the GRACE Act pass? I am confident that the City Council wants to protect abortion in Austin. CM Vanessa Fuentes’s resolution banning reproductive discrimination passed 10-1 with no discussion. There is significant support for actions like the GRACE Act on the Council and among our constituents. Legal Questions How does the GRACE Act supersede state law? The GRACE Act does not supersede state law. It is a statement of policy that provides guidelines for the city on how to prioritize enforcement of the abortion ban among hundreds of more important crimes, and it determines the amount of funds which can be dedicated to the project. It does not conflict with the state’s designation of abortion as a crime, and it does not prohibit or limit the investigation of any crime. Does the GRACE Act stop the State …
COMMISSION FOR WOMEN RECOMMENDATION 20220713-6: Support the GRACE Act July 13, 2022 Date: Subject: Support the GRACE Act Recommendation to Council WHEREAS, the Commission for Women (“Commission”) of the City of Austin (“City”) serves as an advisory body that advocates for and inspires the City Council (“Council”) and City Manager to prioritize women’s quality of life, so that Austin becomes the most equitable city in the nation for women and girls; and WHEREAS, all people have a basic human right to bodily autonomy, safe and effective medical treatment, and control over private medical decisions; and WHEREAS, access to safe and legal abortion is a deciding factor in long-term health, safety, and quality of life; and WHEREAS, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the 1973 landmark ruling, Roe v. Wade, which previously prevented individual states from directly banning abortion care; and WHEREAS, cisgender women and girls, transgender men and boys, non-binary people, and others who can become pregnant are restricted from access to abortion in Texas and many other states; and WHEREAS, Texas Senate Bill 8 bans abortions after six weeks gestation and allows private citizens to sue abortion providers, Texas House Bill 1280 criminalizes abortion at the felony level with a sentence of up to 99 years in prison and no exception for rape or incest, and Article 4512 from the 1925 penal code has been put forth as still in force and states that whoever furnishes the means for procuring an abortion knowing the purpose intended is guilty as an accomplice; and WHEREAS, Black and Latina individuals, and those of all races living in poverty, will likely be disproportionately impacted by bans and criminalization of abortion; and WHEREAS, children and adults who get pregnant through sexual assault, rape, incest, sex trafficking and other forms of sexual violence will experience forced pregnancies; and 1 WHEREAS, individuals who are denied abortion access are at risk of experiencing increased anxiety and other mental health issues; and WHEREAS, individuals who identify as female in Austin are experiencing higher levels of poor mental health overall than males (per data presented to the Commission by the Community Advancement Network on July 15, 2022), and transgender and nonbinary individuals in Austin are disproportionately impacted by mental health issues and access to care and resources (per the LGBTQIA+ Quality of Life study), compounding the mental health impacts for these individuals who are capable of becoming …
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the City of Austin honors the rights of pregnant people to bodily autonomy and control over their private medical decisions; and WHEREAS, access to a safe and legal abortion is a deciding factor in long- term health, safety, and quality of life; and WHEREAS, the Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the 1973 landmark ruling, Roe v. Wade, which previously prevented individual states from directly banning such care; and WHEREAS, on June 16, 2021, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed into law HB 1280, which criminalizes abortion at the felony level with a sentence of up to 99 years in prison and no exception for rape or incest, and which will take effect statewide 30 days after the Supreme Court judgment overturning Roe v. Wade; and WHEREAS, anti-choice legislators have weaponized the language of criminal law to stigmatize reproductive choice, and the Council considers the phrase “abortion, miscarriage, or other reproductive healthcare acts” to accurately encompass all criminalized acts under Texas laws that seek to criminalize pregnancy outcomes; and and including abortion; and WHEREAS, people have a basic human right to medical treatment, up to WHEREAS, eliminating legal access to abortion has been empirically proven to dramatically increase the risk of death, bodily injury, and infertility, especially within low-income communities and communities of color; and Page 1 of 4 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 WHEREAS, the resources of the City must always be dedicated to the health and wellbeing of its residents; and WHEREAS, the Council has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to abortion access in Resolution Nos. 20130321-045, 20140925-082, 20141120-038, 20151015-039, 20170126-045, 20181004-035, and 20210930-111; and WHEREAS, in the 1973 Roe v. Wade majority opinion, Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun stated, “[The] right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy”; and WHEREAS, the right to privacy should protect doctors, patients, and all others providing abortion-related medical care from …
Annual Internal Review LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission This report covers the period of 7/1/2021 to 6/30/2022 The Commission’s mission statement (per the City Code) is to: (1) Serve as an advisory body to the city council regarding issues actually or potentially affecting persons within the LGBTQ community or the LGBTQ community as a whole; (2) serve in an advisory and consultative capacity to the city council and any identified City departments with the aim of improving the ability of the City and its vendors, contractors, and consultants to serve, support, and employ the LGBTQ community; (3) recommend to the city council measures designed to enhance the health, safety, economic opportunity and affordability, mobility, cultural and learning opportunities, and government access and accountability for the LGBTQ community; (4) coordinate and/or participate in educational programs to promote equal treatment, opportunity, and understanding of persons within the LGBTQ community, and facilitate gatherings such as meetings, institutes, forums, or courses of instruction designed to lead to greater understanding and crafting of solutions for issues of concern of the LGBTQ community; (5) work with other city commissions to address issues of intersectionality; (6) create, guide, support, and evaluate LGBTQ quality of life initiatives; and (7) perform additional functions as required by the city council. Page 1 of 4 Annual Internal Review LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission Describe the board’s actions supporting their mission during the previous calendar year. Address all elements of the board’s mission statement as provided in the relevant sections of the City Code. As it relates to our mission to serve as an advisory body to the city council regarding issues actually or potentially affecting persons within the LGBTQ community or the LGBTQ community as a whole: • The Commission released our landmark LGBTQIA+ Quality of Life Study in October 2021. The Study proved that while Austin is home to a large and vibrant LGBTQIA+ community, there is much that the City can do to improve the safety, health, economic stability, access to education, and equal rights of LGBTQIA+ Austinites. Key recommendations include: o Enhancing sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI+) data collection. o Developing affordable housing opportunities. o Addressing health disparities and creating a pipeline of culturally competent providers. o Leading with anti-racist policies, investments, and strategies. o Bolstering support for queer Black, Indigenous, and people of color. o Prioritizing the needs of transgender and gender-expansive individuals. o …
FY 2023 Boards & Commissions Recommendations and Feedback Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer QoL Advisory Commission Recommendation Summary Department(s) Department Response Link The LGBTQ Quality of Life Commission recommends to City Council that the FY22-23 Budget continue funding of existing youth LGBTQIA+ focused mental health services at the current level of $100,000 through Austin Public Health’s Health Equity contracting portfolio. Austin Public Health APH currently has an agreement with OutYouth for mental health services for LGBTQIA Youth - $100,000. APH recently conducted an LGBTQ2IA+ Community Health Needs Assessment which included funding and promoting accessible mental healthcare resources as a key recommendation. APH will be renewing a contract with OutYouth for $15,000 for tobacco prevention programming for LGBTQ+ youth and young adults. APH funds Northwest Austin Universal Health Care $ 100,000 and YWCA $50,000 annually to provide mental health services for the Asian Pacific Islander community Housing and Planning HPD is working to update its demographic reporting requirements in order to better communicate diversity and inclusion within the city's affordable housing portfolio. link The LGBTQ Quality of Life Commission recommends to City Council that, tax-supported affordable housing development contracts include language that requires tenant application and selection processes to convey that affordable housing is supportive to all and that annual reporting of complete demographic information regarding the tenant application and selection process be required of developers and made available by the City to the community to support the perception of diversity, inclusion, and respect with regard to the City’s affordable housing efforts. *responses as of July 20, 2022 link 42 FY 2023 Boards & Commissions Recommendations and Feedback Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer QoL Advisory Commission Recommendation Summary Department(s) Department Response The LGBTQ Quality of Life Commission recommends to City Council to include in the FY 2022-23 Budget funding for one FTE position with the title of LGBTQIA+ Community Liaison (or similar) through reallocation of a current vacant position Budget Office briefing on the Adopted Budget for member Commissions of the Joint Inclusion Committee not later than October 31 of each fiscal year, 2. Budget Office briefing on the Proposed Budget process and outlook not later than November 30 of each fiscal year, Management Services Department response in progress Financial Services The Budget and Performance team is committed to provided a briefing prior to October 1. link Link link 43 *responses as of July 20, 2022
City of Austin Small and Minority Business Resources Overview 2022 Disparity Study Edward Campos, Director Tamela Saldana, Ph.D., Assistant Director Objectives Background Disparity Study Purpose and Objectives Quantitative & Qualitative Analysis Key Findings Study Recommendations Next Steps City of Austin | SMBR 2 Background • Jan. 2020 – Colette Holt & Associates (CHA) was contracted to conduct the 2022 Disparity Study • Spring 2020 – Two virtual Public Kick-off webinars were held • Spring 2020 – Launched disparity study website and e-mail account City of Austin | SMBR 3 Disparity Study Purpose and Objectives • Complies with constitutional mandate to regularly review evidence supporting race- and gender-based programs • Provides a legal defense if the programs are challenged • Develops accurate data for annual and contract goal setting • Gathers feedback for program improvements City of Austin | SMBR 4 Quantitative Analysis • Study analyzed FYs 2013-2018 contracts $50,000 or greater § Final Contract Data File 1,002 prime contracts totaling $826,453,073.73 842 subcontracts totaling $249,783,337.28 • Geographic market § 19 counties with Austin, San Antonio, Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston metro areas captured 82.9% of the Final Contract Data File • Product market § 204 NAICS codes in Final Contract Data File City of Austin | SMBR 5 Study Contract Data Contract Type Total Contracts Prime Contracts Subcontracts TOTAL 1,002 842 1,844 Share of Total Contracts 54.3% 45.7% 100.0% Final Contract Data File Net Dollar Value Business Type Total Contract Dollars Prime Contracts $826,453,073.73 $249,783,337.28 Subcontracts Share of Total Contract Dollars 76.8% 23.2% Source: CHA analysis of City of Austin data City of Austin | SMBR 6 City’s Utilization of M/WBEs • MBEs: 9.6% § Blacks: 1.7% § Hispanics: 5.8% § Asians: 2.0% § Native Americans: 0.1% • White Women: 6.8% • M/WBEs: 16.4% • Non-M/WBEs: 83.6% Source: CHA analysis of City of Austin data City of Austin | SMBR 7 Weighted Availability Black Hispanic Weighted Availability for City Contracts Asian MBE MBE/WBE Native American 0.4% White Women 6.5% Non- MBE/WBE 85.6% Total 100.0% 1.5% 4.7% 1.4% 8.0% 14.4% Source: CHA analysis of City of Austin data City of Austin | SMBR 8 Disparity Ratios Black 118.0% Disparity Ratios by Demographic Group White Hispanic Women 104.4% Native American 20.0%‡ 142.5% 119.5% Asian MBE 122.1% MBE/WBE 112.7% Non- MBE/WBE 97.9% Disparity Ratio ‡ Indicates substantive significance Formula: DR = U/WA DR – Disparity Ratio U – Utilization Rate WA – Weighted Availability …
Equity Considerations in Contracts and Program Funding Austin Arts Commission February 24, 2022 Neal Falgoust, Assistant City Attorney Purpose • Discuss legal risks associated with using race, gender and protected-class criteria in determining awards of contracts and program funding. 2 Why Now? • Recent federal court decisions that put race-focused programs at risk. • Law Department deliberative process. • Briefing to City Council. 3 Acknowledgement • History of intentional racial segregation – 1928 Master Plan and “Negro District.” • Oppression of BIPOC – 1954 Federal Housing Act, “urban renewal,” and seizing of Black-owned land. • City Council has committed the City to correcting its racist practices. (Resolution 20210304-067) 4 City’s Programs • As part of Project Connect, community members developed displacement mitigation strategies and an equity tool to guide decision making. (“Nothing About Us Without Us”) • EDD also wants an equity focus for the Cultural Arts and Heritage Tourism grant programs. 5 Legal Foundation • 14th Amendment – Equal Protection Clause • No government may “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” 6 “Tiered Scrutiny” • Strict Scrutiny (Race, National Origin, Religion, Alienage) – Government must demonstrate the policy is narrowly tailored to meet a compelling purpose. • Intermediate Scrutiny (Gender, Sex, Sexual Orientation?) – Government must demonstrate the policy is substantially related to an important purpose. • Rational Basis (Age, Disability, Wealth, Felony Status) – The policy must have a rational connection to a legitimate interest. 7 Strict Scrutiny Any government program that takes race into consideration faces strict scrutiny by the courts. Strict scrutiny is the most rigorous judicial review. Courts start with presumption that policy is invalid and government must prove its interests. 8 Compelling Government Interest The government must demonstrate: • actual discrimination in the relevant market, and • that the government either actively or passively perpetuated the discrimination. 9 Narrowly Tailored The government must demonstrate: • it considered other race-neutral policies; • race-neutral policies failed to achieve the compelling interest. 10 City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. • “Generalized assertions” of past racial discrimination would not justify “rigid” quotas; • 30 percent quota could not be connected to “any injury suffered by anyone;” • Race-neutral measures must be seriously considered. 11 Evidence Acceptable to a Court Disparity studies are conducted to determine if there is discrimination in the studied market and if the government is an active …
Versión en español a continuación. Historic Landmark Commission Meeting of the Architectural Review Committee Monday, August 8th, 2022, 4:30 PM Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely by telephone. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation. Community members may register for public communication but may not speak on specific cases on the agenda. The opportunity for public input on specific cases will occur at a subsequent meeting of the Historic Landmark Commission. This meeting is not televised. Community members may also register to receive call in information and listen to the meeting via telephone. To register for remote participation: • Call or email the board liaison at (512) 974-3393 or preservation@austintexas.gov no later than noon, Sunday, August 7th, 2022 (the day before the meeting). The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). • Once a request to speak has been made to the board liaison, the information to call on the day of the scheduled meeting will be provided either by email or phone call. • Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start time in order to speak, late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. • Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. • Handouts or other information may be emailed to preservation@austintexas.gov by noon the day before the scheduled meeting. This information will be provided to committee members in advance of the meeting. Reunión del Historic Landmark Commission, Architectural Review Committee FECHA de la reunion 8 de agosto 2022 a las cuatro y media de la tarde (4:30 p.m.) Se permitirán comentarios públicos en persona o de forma remota por teléfono. Se requiere registro a más tardar al mediodía del día anterior a la reunión para la participación remota. Los miembros de la comunidad pueden registrarse para la comunicación ciudadana pero no pueden hablar sobre casos específicos en la agenda. La oportunidad para la opinión del público sobre casos específicos ocurrirá en una reunión posterior de la Comisión de Monumentos Históricos. Esta reunión no es televisada. Los miembros de la comunidad también pueden registrarse para recibir información de llamadas y escuchar la reunión por teléfono. …
