REGULAR MEETING OF THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2025, AT 6 PM MUELLER ASSEMBLY ROOM (1111), AUSTIN ENERGY HQ 4815 MUELLER BLVD AUSTIN, TEXAS 78723 Some members of the Joint Sustainability Committee 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 remotely, contact Rohan Lilauwala telephone. To (rohan.lilauwala@austintexas.gov or 512-974-9394). to speak register CURRENT JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEMBERS Home Commission Electric Utility Commission Resource Management Commission Urban Transportation Commission Environmental Commission Zero Waste Advisory Commission Community Development Commission Austin Travis County Food Policy Board Economic Prosperity Commission Water & Wastewater Commission Parks & Recreation Board Design Commission Planning Commission Austin/Travis County Public Health Commission City Council Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Alternate Al Braden Member Kaiba White (Chair) Charlotte Davis (Vice-Chair) GeNell Gary Varun Prasad Haris Qureshi Vacant Vacant Andrew Smith Aaron Gonzales Chris Maxwell-Gaines Lane Becker Jon Salinas Josh Hiller Chris Crookham Justin Jacobson Vacant Vacant Vacant Marissa Bell Vacant Amanda Marzullo Shelby Orme Evgenia Murkes Peter Breton Vacant Vacant Rodrigo Leal Anna Scott Vacant Christopher Campbell Diana Wheeler Vacant N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL 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 1. Approve the minutes of the Joint Sustainability Committee Regular Meeting on October 22, 2025. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding Solar on City Facilities. Presentation by Rohan Lilauwala, Climate Project Manager, Austin Climate Action and Resilience. DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. 4. 5. Presentation regarding Austin Resource Recovery Fleet Electrification. Presentation by Nia Nickens, Environmental Defense Fund Climate Corps Fellow. Presentation regarding Commercial Landscape Survey. Presentation by Jen Cregar, Terra Lumina Consulting. Presentation regarding Farmland Acquisition and Preservation. Presentation by Andy Smith, Marissa Bell, and Matt Simon, Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Approve the creation of working groups for FY27 City of Austin Budget, funding, and priority policy recommendations. Approve …
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation Number 20251119-007: Staff for Climate Action and Resilience office in FY 2026 City of Austin Budget Date of Approval: November 19, 2025 Recommendation: The Joint Sustainability Committee recommends that the Austin City Council retain the Energy Program Manager and the Sustainability Program Manager positions for the Climate Action and Resilience office in the FY 2026 budget. Description of Recommendation to Council: The Energy Program Manager and the Sustainability Program Manager positions for the Climate Action and Resilience office were included in FY 2026 budget adopted by Council in August. The Joint Sustainability Committee believes it is important to preserve these positions in the new FY 2026 budget that Council will soon adopt. Rationale: The Energy Program Manager and the Sustainability Program Manager are vital to make progress on the city’s climate goals and will ultimately save the city money. The impact of these two positions on the budget is minimal, amounting to $124,276 from the General Fund and $104,274 from other sources. Given that these positions will help the City save money and utilize its resources more strategically, it would be more prudent to allocate space in the budget for this minor expense than to cut the positions. The Climate Action and Resilience office hasn't received new staff positions in years, despite the scope and responsibilities of the office expanding. Even with these two new positions, the office will still have unmet staffing needs; however, these two will help fill the most urgent gaps. The Energy Program Manager is needed to lead the effort to install solar energy systems and make energy efficiency improvements at City facilities. These upgrades will reduce energy consumption, thereby saving the City money and lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Capturing the financial savings in a revolving fund will enable the City to continually make informed investments that reduce energy use and emissions at its facilities. It will address a long-standing problem of deferring needed maintenance at City facilities. This position will allow the City to align its practices with the adopted goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan and the Austin Energy Resource, . Generation and Climate Protection Plan, both of which identify local solar and energy efficiency as key strategies to reduce emissions and affordably meet local energy needs. This work is extremely time-sensitive because of the expiring federal solar energy tax credits. The Sustainable Program Manager …
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation Number 20251119-008: Funding for Solar and Energy Efficiency Investments at City Facilities Date of Approval: November 19, 2025 WHEREAS, on August 8, 2019, the Austin City Council adopted a resolution declaring a climate emergency and calling “for an immediate emergency mobilization to restore a safe climate” and directing the city manager to take steps to accelerate local greenhouse gas emissions reductions; and WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, the Austin City Council adopted the Austin Climate Equity Plan, which established a goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions for the Austin Community by 2040; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2024, the Austin City Council adopted the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan to 2035, which reaffirmed energy efficiency, local solar, demand response and customer-sited batteries as priority strategies for meeting Austin’s energy needs; and WHEREAS, Austin’s Climate Implementation Plan identifies creating a climate revolving fund to invest in energy upgrades to city facilities, capture savings, and reinvest funds for additional investment as a foundational action and identifies installing solar at city facilities one of the few actions to create cost savings for the city; and WHEREAS, other cities and counties across the country have established revolving funds and successfully implemented them to address challenges; and WHEREAS, the City of San Antonio has invested $42 million into its revolving fund for energy efficiency upgrades and solar installations at city properties and the resulting savings are available for additional investments; and WHEREAS, most City of Austin buildings that could functionally support solar energy installations do not yet have them; and WHEREAS, many City of Austin buildings are in need of energy efficiency improvements, and other upgrades that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and cut costs; and . WHEREAS, investing in solar energy that is interconnected on the customer’s side of the meter yields the greatest financial benefit to the customer; and WHEREAS, solar installations of all capacity sizes are cost-effective and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and local air pollution; and WHEREAS, some solar energy developers and installation companies specialize on larger installations and others on smaller installations, while others work on both large- and small-scale solar installations and can balance costs and installation speed by doing some of each; and WHEREAS, the more solar energy installations the city can fund, the more money it will save; and WHEREAS, the climate crisis is worsening …
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING SPECIAL CALLED MEETING MINUTES October 22, 2025 The Joint Sustainability Committee convened in a hybrid meeting via videoconferencing and at City Hall Council Chambers. Board Members in Attendance in Person: Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Jon Salinas, Charlotte Davis Board Members in Attendance Remotely: Rodrigo Leal, Andy Smith, Christopher Campbell, Chris Crookham, Aaron Gonzales, Peter Breton, Varun Prasad Board Members Absent: Lane Becker, Haris Qureshi, Diana Wheeler, Chris Maxwell-Gaines City Staff in Attendance: Braden Latham-Jones CALL TO ORDER Chair Kaiba White called the meeting to order at 6:15pm. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL N/A APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Motion to approve minutes of the Joint Sustainability Committee Regular Meeting on August 27, 2025 Meeting. a. Adopted on a 11-0 vote on Davis motion and Salinas second. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding Green Infrastructure in the Right-of-Way. Presentation by Michelle Marx, Transportation Officer, Austin Transportation and Public Works. a. Marx: We are in discussion with many departments and agree that we’ll have to be at the table. The goal is to reconcile the various rules and regulations, and there’s been a willingness to collaborate from all departments. b. Marx: Focus has been on both private development and capital projects. As we update the manual, we’ll need to focus on these details. We’ll need to focus strategically on these and set up capital project review systems to catch that. c. A plan to expand existing requirements? d. Marx: Right now street trees are not rolled into residential streets, which would be an important conversation to have over time. e. Scott: Encouragement to focus on specific neighborhoods that meet an equity lens. f. Rodrigo Leal: DO you have the resources necessary in house to develop a green infrastructure plan, and how long might that take? i. Marx: We have staff capacity to develop analysis and prioritize target list. Don’t have a good inventory of street trees that are out there today and their condition. Need that to better understand where the gaps are. Inventory is a first step. g. Charlotte Davis: Question about the city-wide tree inventory, yes this is part of the conversation. h. Scott: Have y’all considered ways to expedite this process? i. Marx: Yes and we’ll continue reflecting on ways to do so. j. Andy: Encouragement for species selection, and exploring best guidance on which species would match. k. White: Ballpark funding estimate? l. Marx: Back of …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Recommendation Number: 20251020-05: Support for investing in farmland preservation and access in Austin and Travis County WHEREAS, the 2022 City of Austin State of the Food System Report indicates that less than 0.6% of the food consumed in Travis County is produced locally, and that approximately 16.8 acres of farmland are lost daily to development pressure, underscoring the critical need for agricultural land preservation e(cid:431)orts; and WHEREAS, farmland in Central Texas is continuing to increase in value and decrease in quantity, the opportunity to preserve a meaningful amount of farmland will disappear as development spreads and farmland is permanently converted to other uses; and WHEREAS, it is recognized by the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact and demonstrated by the Carbon Cycle Institute that agricultural land managed according to regenerative principles is vital to local food security, watershed protection, emergency preparedness, and climate resilience; and WHEREAS, farmland preservation supports multiple City priorities, including increasing local food production, improving water quality, wildlife habitat preservation, ecosystem biodiversity, stormwater management, carbon sequestration, and recreation; and WHEREAS, the Austin/Travis County Food Plan, approved by Austin City Council in October 2024, includes strategic, measurable, and time-bound goals and strategies to strengthen food security, promote environmental sustainability, and address climate change; and WHEREAS, Goal 1 of the Austin/Travis County Food Plan prioritizes expanding community food production, preserving agricultural lands, and increasing the amount of farmland dedicated to regenerative food production in Austin and Travis County; and WHEREAS, Strategy 1.1 of the Food Plan calls for the preservation of land for food production in Central Texas through conservation easements, fee-simple purchases, and land-banking, ensuring that farmland remains dedicated to agricultural use; and WHEREAS, Strategy 1.2 of the Food Plan directs the City of Austin to pursue capital funding sources to finance the preservation of land for agricultural use through conservation easements or direct purchases; and WHEREAS, preserving agricultural land also supports the goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan by promoting sustainable land use and reducing carbon footprints through localized food production; and WHEREAS, Natural Systems Goal 2 of the Austin Climate Equity Plan aims to protect 500,000 acres of farmland across the five-county region through legal conservation or regenerative agriculture programs by 2030; and WHEREAS, the ATCFPB passed Recommendation Number: 20250310-06A: Support for Agricultural Land Acquisition and Preservation in March 2025 encouraging the city to increase sta(cid:431) capacity to …
Solar on City Facilities Response to Council Resolution 20250522-052 November 19, 2025 Joint Sustainability Committee Agenda • Background and Context • Approach • Site Screening • Request for Proposals • Schedule and Next Steps 2 Resolution 20250522-052 • Conduct an analysis of City property and make recommendations for the areas that would maximize the installation of solar generation, prioritizing general fund properties. • Annually calculate any energy cost savings or revenue generated and utilize an equivalent amount of funding for projects that have a beneficial environmental impact. • Evaluate opportunities for the installation of solar capacity on properties owned or operated by other local governmental entities within the Austin Energy load zone. • Analyze and make recommendations for requiring solar contractors who install City-owned solar installations to comply with the highest level of worker protections , wage rates, benefits and utilization of Department of Labor registered apprenticeship programs and/or graduates from the Austin Infrastructure Academy. 3 A Changing Federal Solar Landscape Infl ation Reduction Act (2021) • Elective pay / direct allows cities to benefit from existing tax credits 30% tax credit available (+10% for domestic content) • One Big Beautiful Bill Act (2025) • Phases out tax credits for clean energy (including solar). • Projects must “commence construction” by July 4, 2026 to get tax credits. OR • Projects must be placed into service before the end of 2027 to get tax credits. 4 Assess Collaborative team effort Engage with building owning departments upfront Inventory and assess current city facilities Determine solar potential Procure Issue RFP for multiple sites to achieve economies of scale Evaluate proposals and ownership models: • City Owned • Solar Standard Offer Decide and Build Select winning proposal(s) and identify funding (if applicable) Build Solar ASAP to leverage tax credits Build O&M into the contract for long-term performance Approach 5 There are three types of sites for municipal solar projects Rooftop Canopy Ground-mounted 6 Goal: Identify technically feasible sites to put forward, ask solar developers to propose a portfolio that maximizes scale, cost-effectiveness, and community benefits. Facilities Screening Over 250 properties ~120 sites meet basic criteria: size, roof life, electrical capacity We are here Department validation In shortlist for RFP Solar proposed by vendors 7 Schedule and Next Steps 1 2 3 4 5 CWEP Council Committ ee: Update on our approach, process, and RFP release. (Dec 2) RFP Release: Two-steps: qualifications + proposal and …
ARR Fleet Electrification Plan Nia Nickens, EDF Climate Corp | November 19, 2025 Project Overview 2 Project Overview ● Zero waste by 2040. ● Austin Resource Recovery Comprehensive Plan ● Chapter 4: Sustainability (Transportation Electrification) ● Chapter 8: Infrastructure & Facilities ● Zero Waste Commission (ZWAC) Resolution 3 Project Outline ● Fleet Assessment: Identify electric alternatives for ARR’s refuse trucks; Propose phased electrification schedule and vehicle models as ICEVs age out of service. ● Charging Infrastructure: Estimate number, type, and location of chargers; develop a buildout timeline aligned with BEV adoption. ● Financial Analysis: Compare acquisition, O&M, end-of-service, and infrastructure costs to assess life-cycle savings. ● Operational Feasibility: Evaluate route feasibility, charging locations. ● Environmental Impacts: Quantify GHG, air quality, health, and community co-benefits. 4 Fleet Assessment 5 Overview – ARR’s Fleet Composition & EV Alternatives ● 189 front-line refuse trucks targeted for electrification ● Current mix: 1 BEV pilot, 2 CNG, majority diesel ● EV alternatives available across truck classes (11–33 yd, 240–500 kWh, 80–130 mi range) 6 ARR Fleet Electrification Timeline ) % ( e v i t a l u m u C V E B 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2 0 2 6 2 0 2 7 2 0 2 8 2 0 2 9 2 0 3 0 2 0 3 1 2 0 3 2 2 0 3 3 2 0 3 4 2 0 3 5 2 0 3 6 2 0 3 7 2 0 3 8 2 0 3 9 t n u o C e v i t a l u m u C V E B 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Results – ARR’s Fleet Composition & EV Alternatives ● BEV Alternatives Identified ● 11-yd Rear Loaders: 3 EV alternatives ● 25-33-yd Side Loaders: 8 EV alternatives ● 25-33-yd Rear Loaders: 3 EV alternatives 8 Charging Infrastructure 9 Overview – Estimation of New Charging Infrastructure Needed ● Assess charging needs based on the 60/40 fleet split between NESC & KGSC. Also consider possible transfer station. ● Compare technology options: all-DC fast charging vs. hybrid daisy-chain approach. ● Plan phased buildout aligned with fleet adoption and cost efficiencies. ● All infrastructure funding and associated O&M costs to be covered by Fleet Mobility Services. 10 North Austin Transfer Station: 20 DCFCs Proposed Charging 38 DCFCs 78 Daisy Chains 25 …
Commercial Landscaping Equipment Electrification Market Study Meet the Team Amanda Mortl (she / they) Austin Climate Action & Resilience Sarah Talkington (she / her) Austin Parks & Recreation Leonor Vargas (ella / her) Wisdom En Familias, LLC Jen Cregar (she / her) Terra Lumina Consulting 2 Why This Study Matters • Fossil fuel landscaping equipment = high noise + air pollution • Health risks for workers and community members In 2020, landscaping equipment in Travis County created an estimated: 154,400 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), like driving nearly 34,000 cars for a year 361 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx), like driving more than 161,500 cars for a year 128 tons of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), like driving more than 1.3M cars for a year 3 Background & Policy Context • Austin Climate Equity Plan: net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 • Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA Regional Air Quality Plan: maintain compliance with federal air quality standards • Council resolutions: ◦ 20240229-058: Green purchasing ◦ 20240307-020: Rebates + exchange programs 4 Methodology • Online survey (53 responses) • Interviews (32 local, 7 national) • Site tours • Diverse representation: ◦ City of Austin and other govt. staff ◦ Minority / woman-owned businesses City of Austin Staff Participation by Department ◦ Small and large businesses ◦ Local and national businesses ◦ Early adopters 5 Electric Equipment Benefits Electric Equipment Challenges • Quieter • Cleaner • Easier to handle (for some) • Safer (no fuel handling, improved ergonomics for some) • Less maintenance • Potential for lower lifecycle costs • Insufficient power output • Insufficient battery life • Charging constraints • Higher upfront cost • Maintenance & disposal uncertainty • Heavier and less ergonomic (for some) • Cultural resistance 6 Market-Ready Electric Equipment Not Yet Viable Electric Equipment • Smaller (< 20 bar) chain saws • Larger (≥ 20 bar) chain saws • String and hedge trimmers for light- • String and hedge trimmers for duty applications heavy-duty applications • Leaf blowers for light-duty applications • Leaf blowers for heavy-duty applications and some operators • Push, walk behind, automated • Larger riding mowers and (robotic) mowers, and smaller riding mowers for smaller-acreage and/or single-site applications automated (robotic) mowers for larger-acreage and multi-site applications • Carts / utility terrain vehicles 7 Lead by Example Recommendations • Prioritize outcomes over technology type. • Implement a phased rollout. • Develop citywide charging infrastructure. • Use lifecycle …
Investing in Farmland Preservation & Access in Central Texas Austin -Travis Couty Food Policy Board Commissioners Andy Smith, Matt Simon, Marissa Bell Food Access & Resilience Crisis • Less than 1% of food consumed in Travis County is produced locally. • More demand than supply - Central Texas’ production cannot realistically meet its total demand for food. ⚬ When prices rise, local food becomes inaccessible for families and small businesses • COVID-19 showed our fragile supply chain ⚬ Local producers were more resilient and quick to respond. Sources: 2022, City of Austin, State of the Food System Report; Central Texas Food Bank, Central TX Food System Dashboard Farmland Access Crisis Source: Central Texas Food Bank, Food Systems Dashboard Now is the cheapest and easiest time to break the cycle. Ripple Effects of Losing Farmland: • Food System Resilience ⚬ Less local food production capacity • Water & Flooding ⚬ Increased runoff, reduced aquifer recharge Remaining land becomes more valuable • Climate ⚬ Lost carbon sinks, more emissions from development • Biodiversity ⚬ Habitat loss and ecosystem function decline • Local Economy ⚬ Fewer viable farms, lost green jobs Farmland Preservation Supports Many City Priorities and Goals Austin-Travis County Food Plan: Food Plan Strategy 1.1: Preserve land for food production Food Plan Strategy 1.2: Pursue capital funding sources, such as general obligation bonds, to fund the conservation of agricultural land. Source: 2024, City of Austin, Austin-Travis County Food Plan Austin already protects land for water, wildlife, and open space. The same tools can be used to protect land for food production. Sources: (Austin Water, WQPL program, 2022; PARD, Our Parks, Our Future Plan, 2020; Austin Water BCP;) Case Study: Wilbarger Creek Conservation Alliance (WCCA) • 1978: Jon Beall acquires Three Creeks Farm after military retirement • 2011: Begins conservation easement discussions with Hill Country Conservancy • NRCS Funding: $1M awarded through Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Farm and Ranchlands Protection Program (predecessor to Regional Conservation Partnership Program – RCPP) ⚬ 2017 Easement Secured: with NRCS funds and matching funds from Travis County and others, the Wilbarger Creek Conservation Alliance protected 2,000+ contiguous acres of farmland. • Ongoing Stewardship: Land leased to sustainable agriculture producers aligned with conservation goals. Meet our WCCA Farmers: The Refugee Collective • Leased 20 acres since 2018 • Employs refugees in fair-wage, dignified work • Produces certified organic vegetables & eggs – 50,000+ lbs annually • Employs …
Investing in Farmland Preservation & Access in Central Texas Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Board Members Andy Smith, Matt Simon, Marissa Bell Food Access & Resilience Crisis Less than 1% of food consumed in Travis County is produced locally. More demand than supply - Central Texas’ production cannot realistically meet its total demand for food. When prices rise, local food becomes inaccessible for families and small businesses COVID-19 showed our fragile supply chain Local producers were more resilient and quick to respond to feed our community. Sources: 2022, City of Austin, State of the Food System Report; Central Texas Food Bank, Central TX Food System Dashboard Farmland Access Crisis 2017 Total Acres 2022 Total Acres 5 year loss 2017-2022 Decrease Travis 212,782 193,523 19,259 9.10% Williamson 541,344 368,663 172,681 31.90% Hays 254,999 129,788 125,211 49.10% Bastrop 321,934 247,205 74,729 23.20% Caldwell 269,665 229,140 40,525 15.00% Region 1,600,724 1,168,319 432,405 27.00% All farmland in the 5 county region will be developed by 2035 if this rate of loss continues. Source: 2022, City of Austin, State of the Food System Report, Central Texas Food Bank, Food Systems Dashboard Now is the cheapest and easiest time to break the cycle. Ripple Effects of Losing Farmland: Food System Resilience Less local food production capacity Water & Flooding Increased runoff, reduced aquifer recharge Remaining land becomes more valuable Climate Lost carbon sinks, more emissions from development Biodiversity Habitat loss and ecosystem function decline Local Economy Fewer viable farms, lost green jobs Farmland Preservation Aligns with Many City Priorities and Goals City Goal Area Alignment / Impact Reference (Plan & Goal #) Food Security Climate Action Preserves agricultural lands and expands regenerative food production, building local food system capacity. Austin-Travis County Food Plan — Goal 1 Regenerative farmland protects carbon-rich soils and supports carbon sequestration on working lands. City Strategic Plan — CH3. Austin Climate Equity Plan — Natural Systems Goal 1 (Needs Support). Farmland Protection Advances target to protect 500,000 acres of farmland in 5-county region; currently off track. Austin Climate Equity Plan — Natural Systems Goal 2 (Off-Track) Economic Growth Supports the creation of green jobs and entrepreneurship. Austin Climate Equity Plan — Green Jobs and Entrepreneurship- Strategy 1 Watershed Protection Regenerative farmland increases infiltration, reduces runoff, and supports aquifer recharge. City Strategic Plan — CH3.2, CH3.3.2; Watershed Protection Master Plan Biodiversity Regenerative farmland maintains wildlife habitat and soil biodiversity. Resolution 20230126-054 — UN …
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 20251119-007 Date: November 19, 2025 Subject: Staff for Climate Action and Resilience office in FY 2026 City of Austin Budget Motioned By: Seconded By: Recommendation The Joint Sustainability Committee recommends that the Austin City Council retain the Energy Program Manager and the Sustainability Program Manager positions for the Climate Action and Resilience office in the FY 2026 budget. Description of Recommendation to Council The Energy Program Manager and the Sustainability Program Manager positions for the Climate Action and Resilience office were included in FY 2026 budget adopted by Council in August. The Joint Sustainability Committee believes it is important to preserve these positions in the new FY 2026 budget that Council will soon adopt. Rationale: The Energy Program Manager and the Sustainability Program Manager are vital to make progress on the city’s climate goals and will ultimately save the city money. The impact of these two positions on the budget is minimal, amounting to $124,276 from the General Fund and $104,274 from other sources. Given that these positions will help the City save money and utilize its resources more strategically, it would be more prudent to allocate space in the budget for this minor expense than to cut the positions. The Climate Action and Resilience office hasn't received new staff positions in years, despite the scope and responsibilities of the office expanding. Even with these two new positions, the office will still have unmet staffing needs; however, these two will help fill the most urgent gaps. The Energy Program Manager is needed to lead the effort to install solar energy systems and make energy efficiency improvements at City facilities. These upgrades will reduce energy consumption, thereby saving the City money and lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Capturing the financial savings in a revolving fund will enable the City to continually make informed investments that reduce energy use and emissions at its facilities. It will address a long-standing problem of deferring needed maintenance at City facilities. This position will allow the City to align its practices with the adopted goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan and the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan, both of which identify local solar and energy efficiency as key strategies to reduce emissions and affordably meet local energy needs. This work is extremely time-sensitive because of the expiring federal solar energy tax credits. 1 of 2 The Sustainable Program Manager …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation Number: (20240430-002): Environmental Investment Plan Funding Needs List of Funding Needs Cross-Sector Funding Needs ......................................................................................................................... 2 1. 2. Outreach and Engagement for Sustainability Incentives ............................................................ 2 Austin Civilian Conservation Corps .............................................................................................. 3 Energy and Water Conservation Funding Needs .......................................................................................... 4 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Expand Austin Energy’s energy efficiency programs ................................................................... 4 Expand Austin Energy’s demand response programs ................................................................. 4 Invest in battery energy storage.................................................................................................. 5 Utility-owned or contracted rooftop solar .................................................................................. 6 Shut down/retire AE’s portion of Fayette coal plant .................................................................. 6 Air sealing task force and training program ................................................................................ 7 Passive House incentive program ................................................................................................ 7 10. Decarbonizing municipal buildings .............................................................................................. 8 11. Water leak detection programs ................................................................................................... 8 12. Improve rebates for residential and commercial landscape conversions ................................... 9 Consumption & Waste Reduction Funding Needs........................................................................................ 9 13. Circular economy & waste reduction programs .......................................................................... 9 14. Low-carbon concrete fund ........................................................................................................ 10 15. Pro-climate, pro-health foods ................................................................................................... 11 16. Sustainable purchasing and carbon accounting ........................................................................ 11 17. City-owned composting facility ................................................................................................. 11 Natural Systems Funding Needs ................................................................................................................. 12 1 18. Preservation of existing agricultural land .................................................................................. 12 19. Revolving loan fund for Working Farms Fund pilot ................................................................... 12 20. Energy and water dashboard for city facilities .......................................................................... 13 21. Comprehensive public tree inventory for the city of Austin ..................................................... 13 Transportation and Land Use Funding Needs ............................................................................................. 14 22. Austin Resource Recovery Fleet Electrification ......................................................................... 14 23. Austin Resource Recovery Transfer Station .............................................................................. 14 24. Expand All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network, Urban Trails, Sidewalks, and Shared Mobility 14 25. Extend Pickup Service Zones ..................................................................................................... 16 26. Downtown High-Frequency Circulator ...................................................................................... 17 27. Neighborhood E-Circulators ...................................................................................................... 18 28. Heat Resilience Infrastructure ................................................................................................... 19 29. CityLeap ATX Plan: convert travel lanes on arterial roads to protected bike or bus lanes ....... 21 30. Establish a city-owned all-electric carshare service .................................................................. 21 31. Low-cost, accessible charging stations at City of Austin owned facilities ................................. 22 32. Install charging stations at multi-family homes with priority in low and moderate income communities ....................................................................................................................................... 23 33. E-mobility solutions pilot program ............................................................................................ 24 Cross-Sector Funding Needs 1. Outreach and Engagement for Sustainability Incentives Details: The City of Austin has numerous sustainability incentive programs aligned with the goals of the Climate Equity Plan. However, many of these programs are underutilized, especially among low-income households. A part of the challenge is awareness. The city should host a …
November 17, 2025 RE: Retain new staff positions for Climate Action and Resilience in FY26 Budget Dear Mayor Watson and City Council Members, We urge you to prioritize keeping the two new positions for the Austin Climate Action and Resilience office in the FY 2026 budget. The Energy Program Manager and the Sustainability Program Manager are vital to make progress on the city’s climate goals and will ultimately save the city money. The impact of these two positions on the budget is minimal, amounting to $124,276 from the General Fund and $104,274 from other sources. Given that these positions will help the City save money and utilize its resources more strategically, it would be more prudent to allocate space in the budget for this minor expense than to cut the positions. The Climate Action and Resilience office hasn't received new staff positions in years, despite the scope and responsibilities of the office expanding. Even with these two new positions, the office will still have unmet staffing needs; however, these two will help fill the most urgent gaps. The Energy Program Manager is needed to lead the effort to install solar energy systems and make energy efficiency improvements at City facilities. These upgrades will reduce energy consumption, thereby saving the City money and lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Capturing the financial savings in a revolving fund will enable the City to continually make informed investments that reduce energy use and emissions at its facilities. It will address a long-standing problem of deferring needed maintenance at City facilities. This position will allow the City to align its practices with the adopted goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan and the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan, both of which identify local solar and energy efficiency as key strategies to reduce emissions and affordably meet local energy needs. This work is extremely time-sensitive because of the expiring federal solar energy tax credits. The Sustainable Program Manager is needed to develop and implement environmentally sustainable purchasing policies, procedures and programs at the City. The City of Austin’s largest source of greenhouse gas emissions is in the products and materials it purchases. A significant section of the Austin Climate Equity Plan, which focuses on reducing emissions by adjusting purchasing policies and practices, has languished due to a lack of staff to complete the work. The City has considerable purchasing power and should utilize procurement …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation Number 20251119-008: Resolution on Funding for Solar and Energy Efficiency Investments at City Facilities WHEREAS, on August 8, 2019, the Austin City Council adopted a resolution declaring a climate emergency and calling “for an immediate emergency mobilization to restore a safe climate” and directing the city manager to take steps to accelerate local greenhouse gas emissions reductions; and WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, the Austin City Council adopted the Austin Climate Equity Plan, which established a goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions for the Austin Community by 2040; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2024, the Austin City Council adopted the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan to 2035, which reaffirmed energy efficiency, local solar, demand response and customer-sited batteries as priority strategies for meeting Austin’s energy needs; and WHEREAS, Austin’s Climate Implementation Plan identifies creating a climate revolving fund to invest in energy upgrades to city facilities, capture savings, and reinvest funds for additional investment as a foundational action and identifies installing solar at city facilities one of the few actions to create cost savings for the city; and WHEREAS, other cities and counties across the country have established revolving funds and successfully implemented them to address challenges; and WHEREAS, the City of San Antonio has invested $42 million into its revolving fund for energy efficiency upgrades and solar installations at city properties and the resulting savings are available for additional investments; and WHEREAS, most City of Austin buildings that could functionally support solar energy installations do not yet have them; and WHEREAS, many City of Austin buildings are in need of energy efficiency improvements, and other upgrades that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and cut costs; and WHEREAS, investing in solar energy that is interconnected on the customer’s side of the meter yields the greatest financial benefit to the customer; and WHEREAS, solar installations of all capacity sizes are cost-effective and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and local air pollution; and WHEREAS, some solar energy developers and installation companies specialize on larger installations and others on smaller installations, while others work on both large- and small- scale solar installations and can balance costs and installation speed by doing some of each; and WHEREAS, the more solar energy installations the city can fund, the more money it will save; and WHEREAS, the climate crisis is worsening and the opportunity to avoid catastrophic …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation Number: (20240430-002): Environmental Investment Plan Funding Needs List of Funding Needs Cross-Sector Funding Needs ......................................................................................................................... 2 1. 2. Outreach and Engagement for Sustainability Incentives ............................................................ 2 Austin Civilian Conservation Corps .............................................................................................. 3 Energy and Water Conservation Funding Needs .......................................................................................... 4 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Expand Austin Energy’s energy efficiency programs ................................................................... 4 Expand Austin Energy’s demand response programs ................................................................. 4 Invest in battery energy storage.................................................................................................. 5 Utility-owned or contracted rooftop solar .................................................................................. 6 Shut down/retire AE’s portion of Fayette coal plant .................................................................. 6 Air sealing task force and training program ................................................................................ 7 Passive House incentive program ................................................................................................ 7 10. Decarbonizing municipal buildings .............................................................................................. 8 11. Water leak detection programs ................................................................................................... 8 12. Improve rebates for residential and commercial landscape conversions ................................... 9 Consumption & Waste Reduction Funding Needs........................................................................................ 9 13. Circular economy & waste reduction programs .......................................................................... 9 14. Low-carbon concrete fund ........................................................................................................ 10 15. Pro-climate, pro-health foods ................................................................................................... 11 16. Sustainable purchasing and carbon accounting ........................................................................ 11 17. City-owned composting facility ................................................................................................. 11 Natural Systems Funding Needs ................................................................................................................. 12 1 18. Preservation of existing agricultural land .................................................................................. 12 19. Revolving loan fund for Working Farms Fund pilot ................................................................... 12 20. Energy and water dashboard for city facilities .......................................................................... 13 21. Comprehensive public tree inventory for the city of Austin ..................................................... 13 Transportation and Land Use Funding Needs ............................................................................................. 14 22. Austin Resource Recovery Fleet Electrification ......................................................................... 14 23. Austin Resource Recovery Transfer Station .............................................................................. 14 24. Expand All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network, Urban Trails, Sidewalks, and Shared Mobility 14 25. Extend Pickup Service Zones ..................................................................................................... 16 26. Downtown High-Frequency Circulator ...................................................................................... 17 27. Neighborhood E-Circulators ...................................................................................................... 18 28. Heat Resilience Infrastructure ................................................................................................... 19 29. CityLeap ATX Plan: convert travel lanes on arterial roads to protected bike or bus lanes ....... 21 30. Establish a city-owned all-electric carshare service .................................................................. 21 31. Low-cost, accessible charging stations at City of Austin owned facilities ................................. 22 32. Install charging stations at multi-family homes with priority in low and moderate income communities ....................................................................................................................................... 23 33. E-mobility solutions pilot program ............................................................................................ 24 Cross-Sector Funding Needs 1. Outreach and Engagement for Sustainability Incentives Details: The City of Austin has numerous sustainability incentive programs aligned with the goals of the Climate Equity Plan. However, many of these programs are underutilized, especially among low-income households. A part of the challenge is awareness. The city should host a …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation 20251119-010: Support for investing in farmland preservation and access in Austin and Travis County Date of Approval: November 19, 2025 WHEREAS, the 2022 City of Austin State of the Food System Report indicates that less than 0.6% of the food consumed in Travis County is produced locally, and that approximately 16.8 acres of farmland are lost daily to development pressure, underscoring the critical need for agricultural land preservation efforts; and WHEREAS, farmland in Central Texas is continuing to increase in value and decrease in quantity, the opportunity to preserve a meaningful amount of farmland will disappear as development spreads and farmland is permanently converted to other uses; and WHEREAS, it is recognized by the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact and demonstrated by the Carbon Cycle Institute that agricultural land managed according to regenerative principles is vital to local food security, watershed protection, emergency preparedness, and climate resilience; and WHEREAS, farmland preservation supports multiple City priorities, including increasing local food production, improving water quality, wildlife habitat preservation, ecosystem biodiversity, stormwater management, carbon sequestration, and recreation; and WHEREAS, the Austin/Travis County Food Plan, approved by Austin City Council in October 2024, includes strategic, measurable, and time-bound goals and strategies to strengthen food security, promote environmental sustainability, and address climate change; and WHEREAS, Goal 1 of the Austin/Travis County Food Plan prioritizes expanding community food production, preserving agricultural lands, and increasing the amount of farmland dedicated to regenerative food production in Austin and Travis County; and WHEREAS, Strategy 1.1 of the Food Plan calls for the preservation of land for food production in Central Texas through conservation easements, fee-simple purchases, and land-banking, ensuring that farmland remains dedicated to agricultural use; and WHEREAS, Strategy 1.2 of the Food Plan directs the City of Austin to pursue capital funding sources to finance the preservation of land for agricultural use through conservation easements or direct purchases; and WHEREAS, preserving agricultural land also supports the goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan by promoting sustainable land use and reducing carbon footprints through localized food production; and WHEREAS, Natural Systems Goal 2 of the Austin Climate Equity Plan aims to protect 500,000 acres of farmland across the five-county region through legal conservation or regenerative agriculture programs by 2030; and WHEREAS, the ATCFPB passed Recommendation Number: 20250310-06A: Support for Agricultural Land Acquisition and Preservation in March 2025 encouraging the city to increase …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2025, AT 6 PM CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 301 W 2ND ST AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 Some members of the Joint Sustainability Committee 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 remotely, contact Rohan Lilauwala telephone. To (rohan.lilauwala@austintexas.gov or 512-974-9394). to speak register CURRENT JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEMBERS Home Commission Electric Utility Commission Resource Management Commission Urban Transportation Commission Environmental Commission Zero Waste Advisory Commission Community Development Commission Austin Travis County Food Policy Board Economic Prosperity Commission Water & Wastewater Commission Parks & Recreation Board Design Commission Planning Commission Austin/Travis County Public Health Commission City Council Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Alternate Al Braden Member Kaiba White (Chair) Charlotte Davis (Vice-Chair) GeNell Gary Varun Prasad Haris Qureshi Vacant Vacant Andrew Smith Aaron Gonzales Chris Maxwell-Gaines Lane Becker Jon Salinas Josh Hiller Chris Crookham Justin Jacobson Vacant Vacant Vacant Marissa Bell Vacant Amanda Marzullo Shelby Orme Evgenia Murkes Peter Breton Vacant Vacant Rodrigo Leal Anna Scott Vacant Christopher Campbell Diana Wheeler Vacant N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL 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 1. Approve the minutes of the Joint Sustainability Committee Regular Meeting on August 27, 2025. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. 3. Staff briefing regarding Green Infrastructure in the Right-of-Way. Presentation by Michelle Marx, Transportation Officer , Austin Transportation and Public Works. Staff briefing related to response to Council Resolution 20241121-073 regarding Bird- Friendly design. Presentation by Leslie Lily, Environmental Conservation Program Manager, Austin Watershed Protection. DISCUSSION ITEMS 4. Discussion of 2026 Bond Process. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 5. Approve the 2026 annual meeting schedule for the Joint Sustainability Committee. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. For assistance, please …
1 City Staff Watershed Protection Building Services Liz Johnston, Leslie Lilly, Elizabeth Funk Matt Hollon, Sean Watson Austin Energy Green Building Garret Jaynes, Heidi Kasper Development Services Department Farhana Biswas Kit Johnson, Nate Jackson Animal Services Emery Sadkin Planning Jordan Feldman 2 Resolution 20241121-073 ▪ Came out of a recommendation from a working group and Resolution 20210902-050 on Lights Out Austin ▪ Directs staff to: ▪ Update on Light’s Out Austin ▪ Explore integration of bird-friendly building techniques for new low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise buildings ▪ Conduct a feasibility analysis on the potential impacts of these standards ▪ Seek input from stakeholders, including developers, environmental organizations, and the public. 3 Migration and Habitat ▪ Austin was designated a Bird City in 2023 ▪ Austin within North America’s Central Flyway ▪ Over 400 species of birds ▪ Edwards Plateau and the Blackland Prairies habitat ▪ Premier destination for birdwatchers throughout most of the year. ▪ Birding generates more than $5 billion in annual ecotourism revenue in Texas ($279 billion nationwide) 4 The Problem ▪ Birds do not perceive glass as a barrier. ▪ In daytime, birds encounter reflective or translucent glass. ▪ At night, birds encounter artificial sources of light. ▪ Birds fly to these confusing features without seeing the glass barriers. ▪ The collision is deadly. An estimated 1 billion birds die every year. 5 Solutions Glass Strategies Bird-friendly design includes: ▪ Reducing the use of glass ▪ Reducing glass exposure (using solar shading, external insect/solar screens, louvers, etc.) ▪ Incorporating bird-friendly signals (markers) in or on the glass ▪ UV coating, glazing, and etched or fritted glass patterns that follow the "2x2 rule” 7 Lighting Exterior ▪ Eliminate uplighting, use fully shielded fixtures that direct light downward, and avoid event searchlights ▪ Use lighting management systems that can automatically reduce non-essential lighting during peak migration ▪ Also beneficial to bats and lightning bugs year-round ▪ Use warmer lightbulbs (as white/blue light can disorient birds) Interior ▪ Program automatic controls with timers and occupancy sensors ▪ Use window treatments to reduce light spillage ▪ Schedule janitorial services during daylight hours 8 Benchmarking What have other cities done? New York City (2021) Arlington County, VA ▪ 90% of the first 75 feet of a new building’s ▪ Bird friendly design tied to voluntary envelope use bird-friendly materials, including alterations to existing glazing. density bonus incentives ▪ Evaluates facade 8 and 36 …
RESPONSE TO COUNCIL RESOLUTION 20241121-073 BIRD-FRIENDLYDESIGN REPORT 10/15/2025 Response to 20241121-073 Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 4 Overview of Bird Friendly Design .......................................................................................................... 5 Migration and Habitat in Austin............................................................................................................ 5 Glass and Building Design Elements ..................................................................................................... 6 Lighting Standards to Minimize Light Pollution .................................................................................... 9 Behavioral practices ............................................................................................................................ 10 Benchmarking Report on Bird Friendly Design in North America ....................................................... 11 New York City, NY ............................................................................................................................... 11 Madison, WI ........................................................................................................................................ 12 Portland, ME ....................................................................................................................................... 12 Berkeley, CA ........................................................................................................................................ 13 Toronto, ON ........................................................................................................................................ 13 Arlington County, VA........................................................................................................................... 14 Bird Friendly Design in Austin ............................................................................................................. 15 Austin Energy Green Building ............................................................................................................. 15 Lights Out Austin! ................................................................................................................................ 16 Site Specific Regulations ..................................................................................................................... 16 Glass and Lighting Requirements in Code ........................................................................................... 17 Case Studies of Bird Friendly Projects in Austin.................................................................................. 17 Considerations for New Construction ................................................................................................. 19 Co-Benefits of Bird Friendly Design .................................................................................................... 19 The 100/100/100 rule ......................................................................................................................... 21 Best Practices for Low-, Mid-, and High-Rise Buildings ...................................................................... 21 Feasibility of Bird Friendly Building in Austin ....................................................................................... 23 Cost Estimates ..................................................................................................................................... 23 Building Plan Review ........................................................................................................................... 25 Inspection and Compliance ................................................................................................................. 26 Education ............................................................................................................................................ 26 Stakeholder Engagement .................................................................................................................... 26 Boards and Commissions ................................................................................................................... 28 Staff Considerations ........................................................................................................................... 29 1. Land Development Code Amendment ............................................................................................ 29 10/15/2025 Response to 20241121-073 2. Austin Energy Green Building Program and Policy Updates ........................................................... 29 3. Residential Educational Campaign .................................................................................................. 30 Contributors: ..................................................................................................................................... 31 References:........................................................................................................................................ 32 Appendix A: Benchmarking Data and Regulations ............................................................................... 33 Appendix B: Austin Energy Green Building Program Requirements ..................................................... 34 Appendix C: Stakeholder Engagement Plan ........................................................................................ 36 Appendix D: Bird Friendly Design for Residential ................................................................................. 37 10/15/2025 Response to 20241121-073 Executive Summary implementation, In response to City Council Resolution 20241121-073, staff conducted comprehensive research on bird- friendly building design including stakeholder engagement with developers, environmental organizations, and the public through virtual sessions, public tours of the Austin Airport IT building, and professional roundtable discussions in collaboration with the American Institute of Architects (AIA). The following analysis provides an overview of the impact that building collisions have on bird populations and how Austin can address the problem through assessing local case studies, cost feasibility, and regulatory frameworks from peer cities including New York, Madison, Portland, Toronto, Berkeley, and Arlington County, VA. The report explores how Austin's built environment and land development regulations present many opportunities for bird-friendly design implementation, including already existing regulatory mechanisms and programs like Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning and the Austin Energy …
2026 JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE – PROPOSED 1. January 28, 2025 2. February 25, 2025 3. March 25, 2025 4. April 22, 2025 5. May 27, 2025 6. June 24, 2025 7. July 22, 2025 8. August 26, 2025 9. September 23, 2025 10. October 28, 2025 11. November 18, 2025 12. December 16, 2025
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE HYBRID MEETING FORMAT August 27th, 2025 at 6 pm City Hall Council Chambers 301 W 2nd St, Austin, TX 78701 Some members of the Committee 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, email or call Rohan Lilauwala at (Rohan.lilauwala@austintexas.gov or 512-974-9394). CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS: Home Commission Electric Utility Commission Resource Management Commission Urban Transportation Commission Environmental Commission Zero Waste Advisory Commission Community Development Commission Austin Travis County Food Policy Board Economic Prosperity Commission Water & Wastewater Commission Parks & Recreation Board Design Commission Planning Commission Austin/Travis County Public Health Commission City Council Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Alternate Al Braden Member Kaiba White (Chair) Charlotte Davis (Vice-Chair) GeNell Gary Varun Prasad Haris Qureshi Vacant Vacant Andrew Smith Aaron Gonzales Chris Maxwell-Gaines Lane Becker Jon Salinas Josh Hiller Chris Crookham Justin Jacobson Vacant Vacant Vacant Marissa Bell Vacant Amanda Marzullo Shelby Orme Evgenia Murkes Vacant Vacant Vacant Rodrigo Leal Anna Scott Vacant Christopher Campbell Diana Wheeler Vacant N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A For more information, please visit: www.austintexas.gov/jsc AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL 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 1. Approval of minutes from the June 25th, 2025 meeting of the Joint Sustainability Committee STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff Briefing on Solar on City Facilities – Rohan Lilauwala, Office of Climate Action and Resilience DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. Discussion on JSC priorities in approved FY26 City Budget 4. Update from the Electric Utility Commission on Solar for All – Kaiba White 5. Update from Resource Management Commission on Texas Gas Service Rate Case Filing at the Texas Railroad Commission – Charlotte Davis 6. Update from Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board on efforts to advance Food Plan Implementation and the upcoming Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board strategic planning session – Andrew Smith DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with …
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING MEETING MINUTES June 25, 2025 The Joint Sustainability Committee convened in a hybrid meeting via videoconferencing and at Austin Energy Headquarters. Board Members in Attendance in Person: Kaiba White, Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Charlotte Davis, Josh Hiller Board Members in Attendance Remotely: Marissa Bell, Anna Scott, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Crookham, Jon Salinas, Haris Qureshi, Yure Suarez Board Members Absent: City Staff in Attendance: Rohan Lilauwala, Matthew Duree, James Scarborough, Amanda Mortl CALL TO ORDER Chair Kaiba White called the meeting to order at 6:19 pm. Public Communication 1. Approval of minutes from the April 23rd, 2025 meeting of the Joint Sustainability Committee. • Davis motion, Maxwell-Gaines second. Davis amendment to remove bullet point under ‘Public Communication’ that says ‘Tom’. • Passes as amended on a 10-0 vote (Leal off dais) DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. Staff Briefing on the Environmentally Preferable Procurement Program – Matt Duree, Capital Procurement, Financial Services Department; Amanda Mortl, Office of Climate Action and Resilience. • Davis: How are smaller purchases scrutinized? How are keywords tied to procurement? • Duree, Mortl: Education, programs, OCAR support can help departments. Large contracts (e.g. office supplies) dealt with by central procurement, contracts written to eliminate non-environmentally friendly options. • Scarborough: category experts look at contracts, identify where to take action based on keywords, set targets/workplans, help departments make decisions. • White: How many staff can make purchases? • Mortl: Around 2000; OCAR supports educating these staff • Duree: Future OCAR partnerships to develop more detailed training • Bell: How does keyword turn into a measure/requirement? How are keywords/targets determined? • Duree: needs policy direction. • Mortl: working on developing action plan for each purchasing category • Scarborough: keywords can change, but need a year or two for contracts to catch up • Mortl: not always simple to make requirements. E.g. easy to require electric landscape equipment, but market might not be ready, small business/competition might not be ready. E.g. concrete – needs specs. Changing contract requirements could lead to reduced bids/competition. • Mortl: Purchasing emissions in 2022 – 206,000 MT CO2e, approx. 4x our municipal GHG footprint 3. 2024-2025 Joint Sustainability Committee Annual Report • Davis suggests offline coordination to pull a draft together for July JSC meeting, if commissioners have suggestions. 4. Recommendation in support of Solar on City Facilities and a Revolving Fund • Meeti FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS • ADJOURNMENT White adjourned meeting at 8:26 due …
Solar on City Facilities Response to Council Resolution 20250522-052 Resolution 20250522-052 • Conduct an analysis of City property and make recommendations for the areas that would maximize the installation of solar generation, prioritizing general fund properties. • Annually calculate any energy cost savings or revenue generated and utilize an equivalent amount of funding for projects that have a beneficial environmental impact. • Evaluate opportunities for the installation of solar capacity on properties owned or operated by other local governmental entities within the Austin Energy load zone. • Analyze and make recommendations for requiring solar contractors who install City-owned solar installations to comply with the highest level of worker protections, wage rates, benefits and utilization of Department of Labor registered apprenticeship programs and/or graduates from the Austin Infrastructure Academy. 2 A Changing Federal Solar Landscape Inflation Reduction Act (2021) • • Elective pay allows cities to benefit 30% tax credit available One Big Beautiful Bill Act (2025) • Phases out tax credits for clean energy (including solar). • Projects must “commence construction” by July 4, 2026 to get 100% of the federal tax credits. OR • Projects must be placed into service before the end of 2027 to get 100% of the federal tax credits. • New restrictive Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) rules (details TBD) starting next year. Case Study: San Antonio ● Planned 13.1 MW of solar on 42 facilities and parking lots with $30 million investment, $$7- 11 million net savings over 25 years ● Leveraged 30% elective pay tax credits + $2.5 ● Sites identified and narrowed based on technical feasibility, system size estimated ● Flexible RFP offered with 80 sites ● Big Sun Solar Selected as master million low-interest SECO loan developer, separate O&M contract signed Lessons Learned: San Antonio • Do upfront analysis to de-risk RFP and increase competitive responses. • • Engage with departments and building managers early in the process. Streamline internal procurement processes to speed timelines. • Use a multi-site approach and bulk purchasing for economies of scale. • Consider long-term operations and maintenance. Assess Inventory and assess current city facilities for solar potential Prioritize sites that maximize benefits Engage with building owning departments upfront to build support Engage with procurement and finance Procure Issue RFP for multiple sites to achieve economies of scale Evaluate proposals and ownership models: 1. City Owned 2. Power Purchase Agreement 3. Solar Standard Offer Decide and …
Austin FY 2026 Budget Updates on Climate Initiatives August 27, 2025 CLIMATE ADVANCEMENTS • Climate Revolving Fund and Energy Program Manager • Sustainable [Purchasing] Program Manager • Electric lawncare pilot program • Solar recycling • Local clean energy • Water conservation • Litter abatement and furniture reuse • City lands for climate projects • Austin Civilian Conservation Corps 2 SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS Climate Revolving Fund: established to pay for energy upgrades at city facilities, including energy efficiency improvements and solar energy systems. Bill savings will return to the fund to pay for more energy upgrades. $300,000 in seed funding allocated from the General Fund. Energy Program Manager: new position at the Office of Climate Action and Resilience to run the Climate Revolving Fund Local clean energy: $3.7 million, plus five new staff for clean energy programs at Austin Energy, including battery incentive Water conservation: $1.4 million for water conservation and meter accuracy at Austin Water 3 CONSUMPTION Sustainable [Purchasing] Program Manager: new position for the Office of Climate Action and resilience to lead development of comprehensive environmentally sustainable purchasing policies and practices Electric lawncare pilot program: $323,000 for the Parks and Recreation Department to purchase at least one riding electric mower and charging infrastructure, likely at Zilker Park Litter abatement and furniture reuse: $619,000 for the Furniture Reuse Warehouse and six new litter abatement staff at Austin Resource Recovery Solar recycling: resolution directed evaluating creating a fee for a comprehensive program to recycle solar generating equipment 4 NATURAL SYSTEMS AND OTHER City lands for climate projects: resolution directed conducting an evaluation of city land for climate projects. This can include carbon sequestration, solar energy, sustainable agriculture and other uses. Austin Civilian Conservation Corps: $864,000 allocated. 5 ADDITIONAL CLIMATE INVESTMENTS FOR FY 2026 Measure Climate Revolving Fund Energy Program Manager Sustainable [Purchasing] Program Manager Electric lawncare pilot program Local clean energy rebates Local clean energy staff position Water conservation Litter abatement and furniture reuse Austin Civilian Conservation Corps Total Amount $300,000 $124,276 $104,274 $323,000 $3,720,309 $114,655 $1,375,038 $619,000 $864,000 $7,544,552 6 Thank You Kaiba White kwhite@citizen.org
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE HYBRID MEETING FORMAT June 25, 2025 at 6 pm Austin Energy Headquarters Shudde Fath Conference Room 4815 Mueller Blvd, Austin, Texas 78723 Some members of the Committee 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, email or call Rohan Lilauwala at (Rohan.lilauwala@austintexas.gov or 512-974-9394). CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS: Home Commission Electric Utility Commission Resource Management Commission Urban Transportation Commission Environmental Commission Zero Waste Advisory Commission Community Development Commission Austin Travis County Food Policy Board Economic Prosperity Commission Water & Wastewater Commission Parks & Recreation Board Design Commission Planning Commission Austin/Travis County Public Health Commission City Council Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Alternate Al Braden Member Kaiba White (Chair) Charlotte Davis (Vice-Chair) GeNell Gary Vacant Haris Qureshi Vacant Vacant Andrew Smith Aaron Gonzales Chris Maxwell-Gaines Lane Becker Jon Salinas Josh Hillier Chris Crookham Vacant Vacant Vacant Vacant Marissa Bell Vacant Amanda Marzullo Shelby Orme Evgenia Murkes Vacant Vacant Vacant Rodrigo Leal Anna Scott Yure Suarez Christopher Campbell Diana Wheeler Vacant N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A For more information, please visit: www.austintexas.gov/jsc AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL 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 1. Approval of minutes from the April 23rd, 2025 meeting of the Joint Sustainability Committee STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff Briefing on the Environmentally Preferable Procurement Program – Matt Duree, Capital Procurement, Financial Services Department DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. 2024-2025 Joint Sustainability Committee Annual Report DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 4. Recommendation in support of Solar on City Facilities and a Revolving Fund. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT 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 2 days (48 hours) before the meeting date. Please contact Rohan Lilauwala at rohan.lilauwala@austintexas.gov or 512-974-9394 …
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING MEETING MINUTES April 23, 2025 The Joint Sustainability Committee convened in a hybrid meeting via videoconferencing and at Austin Energy Headquarters. Board Members in Attendance in Person: Kaiba White, Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Isabella Changsut, Charlotte Davis Board Members in Attendance Remotely: Diana Wheeler, Shelby Orme, Marissa Bell, Alberta Phillips, Anna Scott, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal Board Members Absent: Amy Noel, Chris Crookham, Chris Campbell, Yure Suarez City Staff in Attendance: Rohan Lilauwala, Braden Latham-Jones, Michelle Marx, Richard Mendoza, Eric Bailey, Marcus Hammer, Barbara Shack CALL TO ORDER Chair Kaiba White called the meeting to order at 6:06 pm. Public Communication • Tom 1. Approval of minutes from the March 26rd, 2025 meeting of the Joint Sustainability Committee. • Davis motion, Maxwell-Gaines second, passes on a 10-0 vote (Salinas abstains, Leal and Bell off dais). DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. 2026 Bond Development Process – Eric Bailey and Marcus Hammer, Capital Delivery Services Department; Braden Latham-Jones, Office of Climate Action and Resilience. • Scott: How will changes in bond rates affect bond? • Bailey: If rates go up, total amount available will decrease. Prioritization matrix will help identify the most important things. Rates set on a yearly basis when the funding is needed, when city goes to market. • White: will GHG assessment be done on all projects? Life cycle? In-house? • Bailey: one of technical criteria is sustainability/environment. Working through how projects will be scored. Not enough staff to evaluate all projects – could need consultant support (probably available on existing rotation list). • Davis: how is the size of the bond package decided? • Bailey: multiple factors: bond capacity of city; how much city can deliver in 6 years. Decided as part of public process, with BEATF, council, etc. In Aug 2026, council will call for bond election – that’s when language and total dollar value will be finalized. • White: what is general range of bonding capacity? • Bailey: all debts (incl. non-voter approved bonds) affect capacity. When needs assessment was first completed, list was 600 projects, $10b. Evaluating projects against eligibility, it’s now 200 projects, $4b. Safe assumption that it’ll land under $1b, but work to be done. • Phillips: How do certificates of obligation fit in? • Bailey: Not part of 2026 plan, defers to Financial Services Department for further info. 3. I-35 Cap and Stitch Updates – Richard Mendoza …
Environmentally Preferable Procurement Program Matthew Duree| Division Chief, Capital Procurement Environmentally Preferable Procurement Program Agenda Procurement Structure: Policy and Authority Levels Environmentally Preferable Procurement (EPP) Program Procurement Categories: EPP Targets & Existing Measures Partnering for Progress: Projects Facilitated through Office of Climate Action and Resilience (OCAR) Collaboration Procurement Data Provided: Reporting Method Examples Procurement Policy and Authority Levels $.01 to $3,000 ➢ Purchases made based on a single quote ➢ Method of Payment: Pro Card or departmental purchase order (PO) ➢ Approver: Department $3,000.01 to $5,000 ➢ Purchases made based on three quotes including two contacts certified M/WBE businesses ➢ Method of Payment: Pro Card or Departmental PO ➢ Approver: Department $5,000.01 to $50,000 $50,000.01 and Above ➢ Informal solicitation conducted ➢ Formal (advertised) solicitation conducted ➢ Method of Payment: Central Purchase Order (CT) ➢ Method of Payment: CT or MA or Master Agreement (MA) ➢ Approver: Central Procurement ➢ Approver (up to CM Authority): Chief Procurement Officer ➢ Approver (above CM Authority): City Council Environmentally Preferable Procurement (EPP) Program FSD Central Procurement facilitates the EPP Program and partners with the Office of Climate Action and Resilience (OCAR) who identifies product targets, provides program guidance, and administers training. The FSD Central Procurement Manual identifies: ➢Environmentally Preferable Procurement: ▪ “Products or services that have an improved impact on human health and the environment when compared with competing products or services that serve the same purpose. This comparison may consider raw materials acquisitions, production, manufacturing, packaging, distribution, reuse, operation, maintenance, or disposal of the product or service.” ▪ “City employees will procure materials, products, and services in a manner that integrates fiscal responsibility, social equity, and environmental and constituent health impacts. Each City Department shall comply with this policy and encourage their staff to find innovative ways to build upon the sustainable practices herein.” Construction Category Description ➢Professional services ➢Construction services EPP Target: Construction ➢Keywords: ▪ Post-consumer materials ▪ Low toxicity ▪ Locally-sourced ▪ LEED certifiable ➢Avoid: ▪ Mercury ▪ Lead ▪ Chemically-treated wood Existing EPP Measures ➢Engineering and Architectural design services ▪ LEED ➢Construction services ▪ Low carbon concrete ▪ Equipment emissions reduction ▪ Stormwater pollution prevention ➢Wage ▪ Prevailing wage ▪ Wage theft Electric Utility Category Description EPP Target: Power ➢Spending to support ➢Keywords: ▪ Energy efficient ▪ Carbon neutrality ▪ Solar power Austin Energy operations such as: ▪ Power generation ▪ Power distribution ▪ Utility regulatory and market consulting …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation Number 20250625-004: Resolution on Revolving Fund for Solar and Efficiency Investments at City Properties WHEREAS, on August 8, 2019, the Austin City Council adopted a resolution declaring a climate emergency and calling “for an immediate emergency mobilization to restore a safe climate” and directing the city manager to take steps to accelerate local greenhouse gas emissions reductions; and WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, the Austin City Council adopted the Austin Climate Equity Plan, which established a goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions for the Austin Community by 2040; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2024, the Austin City Council adopted the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan to 2035, which reaffirmed energy efficiency, local solar, demand response and customer-sited batteries as priority strategies for meeting Austin’s energy needs; and WHEREAS, Austin’s Climate Implementation Plan identifies creating a climate revolving fund to invest in energy upgrades to city facilities, capture savings, and reinvest funds for additional investment as a foundational action and identifies installing solar at city facilities one of the few actions to create cost savings for the city; and WHEREAS, other cities and counties across the country have established revolving funds and successfully implemented them to address challenges; and WHEREAS, the City of San Antonio has invested $42 million into its revolving fund for energy efficiency upgrades and solar installations at city properties and the resulting savings are available for additional investments; and WHEREAS, most City of Austin buildings that could functionally support solar energy installations do not yet have them; and WHEREAS, many City of Austin buildings are in need of energy efficiency improvements, and other upgrades that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and cut costs; and WHEREAS, investing in solar energy that is interconnected on the customer’s side of the meter yields the greatest financial benefit to the customer; and WHEREAS, the climate crisis is worsening and the opportunity to avoid catastrophic impacts of global warming is rapidly diminishing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Joint Sustainability Committee of the City of Austin recommends that the Austin City Council move swiftly to ensure that the City Manager establishes a revolving Sustainable City Facilities Fund to pay for solar energy installations on city buildings and other city properties and to make energy efficiency and water efficiency upgrades and stop refrigerant leakage at city facilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that …
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING MEETING MINUTES June 25, 2025 The Joint Sustainability Committee convened in a hybrid meeting via videoconferencing and at Austin Energy Headquarters. Board Members in Attendance in Person: Kaiba White, Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Charlotte Davis, Josh Hiller Board Members in Attendance Remotely: Marissa Bell, Anna Scott, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Crookham, Jon Salinas, Haris Qureshi, Yure Suarez Board Members Absent: Aaron Gonzales, Lane Becker, Diana Wheeler, Christopher Campbell City Staff in Attendance: Rohan Lilauwala, Matthew Duree, James Scarborough, Amanda Mortl CALL TO ORDER Chair Kaiba White called the meeting to order at 6:19 pm. Public Communication 1. Approval of minutes from the April 23rd, 2025 meeting of the Joint Sustainability Committee. • Davis motion, Maxwell-Gaines second. Davis amendment to remove bullet point under ‘Public Communication’ that says ‘Tom’. • Passes as amended on a 10-0 vote (Leal off dais) DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. Staff Briefing on the Environmentally Preferable Procurement Program – Matt Duree, Capital Procurement, Financial Services Department; Amanda Mortl, Office of Climate Action and Resilience. • Davis: How are smaller purchases scrutinized? How are keywords tied to procurement? • Duree, Mortl: Education, programs, OCAR support can help departments. Large contracts (e.g. office supplies) dealt with by central procurement, contracts written to eliminate non-environmentally friendly options. • Scarborough: category experts look at contracts, identify where to take action based on keywords, set targets/workplans, help departments make decisions. • White: How many staff can make purchases? • Mortl: Around 2000; OCAR supports educating these staff • Duree: Future OCAR partnerships to develop more detailed training • Bell: How does keyword turn into a measure/requirement? How are keywords/targets determined? • Duree: needs policy direction. • Mortl: working on developing action plan for each purchasing category • Scarborough: keywords can change, but need a year or two for contracts to catch up • Mortl: not always simple to make requirements. E.g. easy to require electric landscape equipment, but market might not be ready, small business/competition might not be ready. E.g. concrete – needs specs. Changing contract requirements could lead to reduced bids/competition. • Mortl: Purchasing emissions in 2022 – 206,000 MT CO2e, approx. 4x our municipal GHG footprint 3. 2024-2025 Joint Sustainability Committee Annual Report • Davis suggests offline coordination to pull a draft together for July JSC meeting, if commissioners have suggestions. 4. Recommendation in support of Solar on City Facilities and a Revolving Fund • Discussion was interrupted due …
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE HYBRID MEETING FORMAT April 23, 2025 at 6 pm City Hall – Council Chambers 301 W 2nd St, Austin TX 78701 Some members of the Committee 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, email or call Rohan Lilauwala at (Rohan.lilauwala@austintexas.gov or 512-974-9394). Alternate Randall Chapman Member Kaiba White (Chair) Charlotte Davis (Vice-Chair) Genell Gary Diana Wheeler Haris Qureshi Melissa Rothrock Vacant Vacant Richard Brimer Craig Nazor Miriam Garcia Rosamaria Murillo Luis Osta Lugo Vacant Shelby Orme Ben Luckens Alberta Phillips Vacant Vacant CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS: Home Commission Electric Utility Commission Resource Management Commission Urban Transportation Commission Environmental Commission Zero Waste Advisory Commission Community Development Commission Austin Travis County Food Policy Board Marissa Bell Economic Prosperity Commission Water & Wastewater Commission Parks & Recreation Board Design Commission Planning Commission Austin/Travis County Public Health Commission City Council Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Mayor’s Representative Amy Noel Chris Maxwell-Gaines Lane Becker Vacant Vacant Natalie Poindexter Vacant Rodrigo Leal Anna Scott Yure Suarez Christopher Campbell Heather Houser For more information, please visit: www.austintexas.gov/jsc AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL 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 1. Approval of minutes from the March 26th, 2025 meeting of the Joint Sustainability Committee DISCUSSION 2. 2026 Bond Development Process – Eric Bailey and Marcus Hammer, Capital Delivery Services Department; Braden Latham-Jones, Office of Climate Action and Resilience 3. I-35 Cap and Stitch Updates – Michelle Marx, Transportation and Public Works Department 4. Update from the Electric Utility Commission on the Solar for All Program – Kaiba White, Electric Utility Commission DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 5. Recommendations for Climate and Sustainability in the 2026 Bond 6. Recommendation on the I-35 Cap and Stitch 7. JSC officer elections for the 2025-2026 term FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications …
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2025 The Joint Sustainability Committee convened in a hybrid meeting via videoconferencing and at Austin Energy Headquarters. Board Members in Attendance in Person: Anna Scott, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Charlotte Davis Board Members in Attendance Remotely: Heather Houser, Christopher Campbell, Marissa Bell, Lane Becker, Rodrigo Leal, Melissa Rothrock, Yure Suarez Board Members Absent: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Amy Noel, Chris Crookham, Alberta Phillips, Diana Wheeler City Staff in Attendance: Rohan Lilauwala, Braden Latham-Jones, Michelle Marx CALL TO ORDER Chair Kaiba White called the meeting to order at 6:29 pm. Public Communication • Adam Greenfield on item 2, in favor of the Austin Core Transportation Plan. Suggestion to convert all remaining one-way streets to two-way streets. Also in support of protected bike lanes, bus lanes, trees. • Scott Johnson speaks in favor of low-carbon concrete and residential landscape incentive program. • Zenobia Joseph speaking in opposition to light rail plans on civil rights grounds. 1. Approval of minutes from the February 26th, 2025 meeting of the Joint Sustainability Committee. • Qureshi motion, Scott second, passes on a 10-0 vote (Suarez off dais). DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. Austin Core Transportation Plan Update – Michelle Marx, Transportation and Public Works Department. • Qureshi – does this change transit routing? Marx – CapMetro has provided info on routing that has been incorporated into the plan. • White – should JSC consider recommendation to maximize one-way to two-way conversions. Marx – not a panacea for improving safety. With tight intersection spacing in East Downtown, allows for signal coordination to reduce speeds. Context dependent – would work in places with wide streets, widely spaced intersections. 3. CapMetro Sustainability Updates – David Carr, CapMetro • Qureshi – can you comment on lack of electric buses on new rapid routes? Carr – Proterra bankruptcy has affected commissioning of new buses. New Flyer buses in service now. Charging infrastructure still being installed – especially in-route charging. • White – why is CapMetro backing away from electric bus purchases? Carr – very expensive. MetroRapid costs being covered by grants and other sources. Range performance capabilities aren’t there yet. • Carr – issues with a lack of parts and service from Proterra. New company has taken over – CapMetro pause until they catch up with servicing and parts. Nationwide issue. • Rothrock - can charging infrastructure be shared? Carr – theoretically, yes. New buses use …
Capital Delivery Services Public Improvement Bond Program Integrated Bond Program Development and Delivery Plan Joint Sustainability Committee Update Eric Bailey Deputy Director Capital Delivery Services “Effectively and Efficiently Deliver Quality Projects with the Concept of Speed” 1 AGENDA • CDS Overview • What is a General Obligation Bond Program? • Improved Bond Development Process • Staff Work Completed to Date • Guiding Principles, Technical Criteria, & Scoring Matrices • Progress to Date & Upcoming Milestones “Effectively and Efficiently Deliver Quality Projects with the Concept of Speed” 2 Created in 2023 with the goal of reducing project delivery time Who we are • Engineers • Architects • Project managers • Community Engagement Our partners • Consultants • Contracting teams • City asset owners • Community members • Mayor & Council Role in 2026 Bond Program One City – One Team – One Approach to effectively and efficiently deliver quality public projects. • Convene asset owner departments to develop needs assessment • Guide the process to ensure projects are vetted and scopes/schedules/budgets are accurate and realistic • Coordinate projects across departments to achieve mutual benefits What is a General Obligation Bond Program? Typical Bond Projects: • Flood and Erosion Control Improvements • New or Replacement City Facilities • Rehabilitation of Existing Facilities • Housing Infrastructure/Housing Projects • Street and Thoroughfare Improvements o Sidewalks o Traffic Signals • Park and Recreation Facilities • Public Safety Facilities (Fire/EMS/Police) • Land Purchase 4 What is a General Obligation Bond Program? Types of work NOT included: • Routine operations and maintenance activities o Potholes o Minor street repair o Landscaping maintenance o General building maintenance Improvements for short term leased space • • Code enforcement initiatives • Employee salaries (including police & fire) • AE/AW Capital Projects typically funded by using debt are funded via AE and AW revenue bonds, not General Obligation debt and thus are not for the 2026 GO Bond Program City of Austin | Capital Delivery Services Department | One City, One Team, One Approach to Capital Delivery 5 Improved Bond Delivery Process for 2026 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 Council calls for Bond Election (Aug) Bond Election (Nov) BEATF Meetings, Council, and Public Engagement HOW WE’VE DONE BONDS IN THE PAST: Project Proposals RFP’s/RFQ’s Project Planning to develop scope, schedule, budget Design Construction WHAT WE’RE DOING NOW: Needs Assessment and Project Evaluation Project Planning to develop scope, …
2026 Bond Development Update Joint Sustainability Committee - 4.23.25 Resolution 20240718-093 Resolution 20240718-093 was approved in July 2024. Staff was directed to bring two items to Council. 1. A comprehensive bond package that funds and addresses climate, infrastructure, and any other public improvements for the purpose of conducting an election no later than November 2026, and 2. A comprehensive climate implementation program of which one component is a climate bond proposition contained in the comprehensive bond package. Funding for this implementation program shall not be limited to general obligation bonds but should include grants, fees, utilities, general fund, cost sharing, etc. 2 OCAR’s Role ● Lead ● Advise ● Coordinate 3 How OCAR is supporting the bond process ● Lead: Developed a list of GO bond eligible projects that support climate action ○ Environmental Investment Plan ○ Comprehensive Climate Implementation Program ● Advise: Subject Matter Expert (SME)- Supporting Asset Owner Departments ○ Answering Questions ○ Developing Criteria ○ Advising Departments ● Coordinate: Participating in cross-departmental bond development working group. 4 Definitions Sustainability: Actions that avoid, reduce, or capture greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. Resilience: Actions that increase our ability to prepare for, withstand, and recover from shocks and stressors related to climate change. Climate Equity & Resilience Framework Climate Equity Plan — Mitigation Resilience & Climate Adaptation Actions that avoid, reduce, or capture greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. Actions that increase our ability to prepare for and recover from shocks and stressors related to a changing climate. Sustainable Buildings, Energy Generation, and Water Demand Transportation Electrification Natural Systems Regional Collaboration & Green Jobs Climate and Environmental Data, Research, & Modeling Long Range Planning Recovery & Economic Resilience Materials, Purchasing, Food and Product Consumption Mass Transit, Planning, Land Use, and Housing Social Infrastructure and Community Preparedness Green Infrastructure (creeks, rivers, trees, landscape) Utility Infrastructure (water, power, drainage) Equity and Affordability Strategies for consideration 1. Projects funded by a bond (that meet all the criteria for voter approved bonds) which directly address climate change (reducing GHG emissions or adapting to a changing climate). Example: Land purchase to protect water quality, ecosystem protection, and carbon sequestration. 2. Integration of principles, policies, and approaches to reduce GHG emissions and increase resilience to a changing climate into Departmental Bond Proposals. Example: New library is built, achieves LEED Platinum certification, has solar + batteries to serve the community in times of need. …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation Number 20250423-006: I-35 Cap-and-Stitch WHEREAS, the Joint Sustainability Committee and the Office of Climate Action and Resilience have identified billions of dollars of needed investments to meet the goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan; and WHEREAS, there is not currently sufficient funding from taxes, financing, grants or other sources to meet all needed local climate investment needs; and WHEREAS, climate investments will already be competing with all other community needs (such as pools, senior centers, and libraries) when bonds are put forward to voters in 2026; and WHEREAS, capping and stitching segments of I-35 won’t advance the goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan because this strategy won’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and WHEREAS, capping and stitching segments of I-35 won’t reduce local air pollution at the regional or neighborhood level;1 and WHEREAS, capping and stitching segments of I-35 will require a tremendous amount of concrete and steel, both of which contain embedded greenhouse gas emissions from their production, resulting in increase in Austin greenhouse gas footprint; and WHEREAS, the large fans that will be installed to run when traffic is stopped under the caps (which is likely to be often), will require energy to run and will increase the city’s greenhouse gas footprint; and WHEREAS, the ongoing cost of maintaining the caps will be a perpetual drain on already-tight city finances, forcing more trade-offs that will likely reduce funding availability for climate projects; and 1 Neighborhood level air pollution could be improved if longer sections of the highway were capped and the air from inside the tunnel was captured and vented high into the air, but this would still contribute to the region’s air pollution. WHEREAS, air pollution is well-known to be elevated beyond healthy levels within 500-1,000 feet of major roadways, especially busy highways like I-35; and WHEREAS, the “park” resulting from capping the segment of I-35 between Cesar Chavez St and 4th St would be adjacent to 8 lanes of traffic on one side and 20 lanes on either end, making this a high-risk area for children, the elderly and anyone with respiratory or cardiac conditions; and WHEREAS, the City of Austin owns or can purchase better quality and better situated land at a more affordable price that will better suit the needs of the community, compared to capping and stitching segments of I-35; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation 20250423-005: Climate and Sustainability in the 2026 Bond Date: April 23, 2025 Subject: Recommendations for Climate and Sustainability in the 2026 Bond Motioned By: Kaiba White Seconded By: Charlotte Davis Recommendation The Joint Sustainability Committee recommends that the city contract with a qualified third party to conduct comprehensive climate impact analyses for each bond project under consideration. The consultant should also be tasked with recommending mitigation measures for any negative emissions or other impacts. The Joint Sustainability Committee also recommends that greenhouse gas mitigation and meeting the goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan weigh heavily in the scoring criteria for project selection for all bond projects. The Joint Sustainability Committee also recommends that community impacts (including environmental, financial, and health) of all projects be evaluated. Impacts on underserved communities that are disproportionately impacted by environmental injustice should be carefully considered. The process outlined in the Equity Assessment Tool of the Austin Climate Equity Plan should be utilized. The results should be communicated to the community using a variety of methods that are accessible to residents of all demographics. Vote: 13-0 For: Kaiba White, Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Isabella Changsut, Charlotte Davis, Diana Wheeler, Shelby Orme, Marissa Bell, Alberta Phillips, Anna Scott, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal Against: Abstain: Absent: Amy Noel, Chris Crookham, Christopher Campbell, Yure Suarez O(cid:431) Dais: Attest: Rohan Lilauwala, Sta(cid:431) Liaison
