Push to consolidate city boards and commissions draws criticism from UTC

The Urban Transportation Commission (UTC) voiced opposition to a City Council-backed proposal to consolidate several of Austin’s boards and commissions, including a plan to merge the Bicycle Advisory Council (BAC) and Pedestrian Advisory Council (PAC) into the UTC. The proposal, aimed at streamlining city operations and reducing administrative burdens, could come back to Council for consideration this spring.

During the meeting, commissioners expressed concerns about the merger effort as a whole, highlighting the unique citizen-led nature of the BAC and PAC and potential conflicts that could arise from integrating these advisory councils into a sovereign commission. After considering objecting to the consolidation as a whole, the commissioners voted to recommend against the merger and the renaming of the UTC to the “Urban Mobility Commission.” They also committed to collaborating with the BAC and PAC to enhance communication and better define their relationships.

The proposed restructuring stems from a December 2024 City Council resolution and an earlier city auditor’s report identifying commissions with persistent vacancies, frequent cancellations or overlapping responsibilities.

Three dozen boards and commissions under consideration for consolidation or dissolution include several that are idle or no longer relevant and others that have significant overlap.

Commissioner Spencer Schumacher said the three mobility-related groups likely cover too much subject matter to effectively handle as one body. He also questioned whether advisory groups that have little in the way of official governmental sanctioning could be forced to merge with a board or commission that has more authority based on city code.

“The BAC and PAC are not boards and commissions. They are not task forces. They are not city of Austin entities, and they have never sought to be city of Austin entities. They are associated entities,” he said. “I think you can question whether City Council actually has that authority to tell the BAC and the PAC to merge with a city of Austin entity.”

Commissioners were divided on whether consolidation could improve efficiency. Some, like Commissioner Daniel Kavelman, saw redundancy between the advisory councils and the UTC, citing instances where presentations were repeated across meetings.

“I served on the Pedestrian Advisory Council for two years, and the reason I stepped off was because of redundancy with what I saw in this commission,” he said. “You can apply for the PAC and it’s chosen by citizens and the learning curve is a little smaller than this commission. It’s not as intense to have to go ask your Council member for an appointment. But at the same time, it sounds like we have a pretty great nonprofit advocacy infrastructure in the city that … has activities like walk audits and bike audits and stuff like that.”

The commission’s recommendation also calls for revising the group’s bylaws to better define its focus and commitment to pedestrian- and bicycle-related matters.

Input from the targeted boards and commissions will be forwarded, along with staff recommendations, to City Council’s Audit and Finance Committee, which is scheduled to discuss the consolidation at its Feb. 19 meeting.

In picking apart the push for consolidation, Schumacher said the broad term of “mobility” could in theory give the body purview over operations and decisions related to the local aviation sector.

“Something to consider is, imagine what would happen if the City Council just deleted the Airport Advisory Commission, said you’re merged with the UTC,” he said. “Think about the workload that would now be under ours. Think about the people that would be emailing you to get recommendations onto the agenda because the Airport Advisory Commission can’t do them anymore. That will happen with BAC and PAC things. There are a lot of things we keep off of the UTC’s agenda that the UTC does not want.”

Photo made available through a Creative Commons license.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.