What's happening
City Council is in the midst of its annual budget review, which includes several opportunities for resident feedback.
After interim City Manager Jesús Garza unveiled his proposal in mid-July, officials started moving through a series of workshops and public meetings to gauge community thoughts on various topics and float their own amendments to Garza's outline. Several more public meetings are scheduled through early August before council members move to final votes on the FY 2023-24 budget and city tax rate beginning Aug. 16.
Following a July 19 briefing from Garza and city staff covering highlights from the 1,000-page document, dozens of residents shared their thoughts on July 26 during the budget's first public hearing. The next chance to share feedback will be on Aug. 1, and additional workshops are scheduled for Aug. 3, 8 and 10.
What they're saying
Only three of the nearly 60 Austinites who registered to testify about the budget on July 26 were in favor of Garza's proposal. Among the rest, opposition centered on the direction of work on homelessness and public safety, and the reorganization of Austin's government structure.
Many residents expressed support for the alternative "community investment budget" endorsed by around three dozen neighborhood, political and environmental advocacy groups. The community plan calls for nearly $100 million in spending targeted at health, safety, sustainability and affordability efforts through funding items such as pay increases for medics, tenant support, homeless outreach and abortion care assistance.
District 4 resident Jordyn Middlebrooks said she opposed Garza's plan given its lack of many items called for in that community plan.
She and several other speakers also shared negative reactions to the proposed $31.65 million increase in the Austin Police Department's budget—especially given the city can't ever reduce its police budget once it's been raised, due to a new state law crafted to punish cities found to be "defunding" their law enforcement.
“If we do not continue to fund these services, we will not be able to solve them through additional policing," Middlebrooks said.
A chief concern among those commenting at the meeting was the budgetary realignment of several city offices handling work related to equity and sustainability.
Garza's proposal calls for several of those standalone entities to be combined within a different department, leading many to state concerns about the potential sidelining of work related to vulnerable groups and future planning.
Brion Oaks, Austin's former chief equity officer, called in to ask to reverse what he called the "disturbing" downgrading of executive positions, including his previous role.
“I really hope that I’m not the last chief equity officer for the city of Austin," he told council.
Joyce James, president of the namesake consulting firm that helped implement lessons on race in Austin's police training, said her experience with the city showed independence is needed for the offices to function well.
“There are not many places across the country that have publicly acknowledged institutional and structural racism and have put in place departments like the office of equity, so they should not have to have any layers in between them and city leadership," she said.
Mayuri Raja, who said she participated in the recent creation of a civic climate plan, said reshuffling the quality of life offices could hurt goals tied to that initiative as well.
“The Office of Sustainability and the Climate Equity Office were able to carry out the Climate Equity Plan process because of their autonomy and the way that they can make recommendations to other city offices and departments on equal standing with those departments," Raja said. "Folding them under another department and defunding them—taking away their authority in this way—will hinder their ability to carry out the Climate Equity Plan.”
Later in the meeting, Garza responded to pushback to the reorganization by saying the offices' leaders will retain some authority despite moving under a new department head and one of his assistant city managers. He also said the move, which he called "additive, not diminishing," was partly inspired by a desire to make city operations less political.
"I think what we've got to do is not play the politics, to be professional," he said. "I know there are people that are wanting us to advocate for things. Our job is to make a professional judgment, a professional recommendation, but to not be the advocates for something that we think is outside our purview."
Council Member Vanessa Fuentes said she still felt some unease with the change coming at this particular time.
“What gives me a lot of pause right now is the state climate that we’re in. ... What kind of message does it send as a city for us to consolidate these very, very important divisions?” she said.
Learn more
The late July public hearing was followed by a staff briefing about the $1.34 billion general fund, the largely tax-supported portion of the budget made up of public-facing city departments, including police, parks, housing and libraries.
Key takeaways from general fund departments are included in the staff presentation, which can be viewed below.
