After a marathon public comment session yesterday that lasted from 10am till 10pm, Council came to a consensus around a maximum 5-cent tax rate election (TRE) on top of the base budget, with more discussion on amendments to come today.
Speakers were split between homeowners admonishing Council for past spending – and those specifically peeved at Council Member Mike Siegel’s proposal to cut spending to basic municipal services like public safety, even if a TRE should not pass – and those nobly pledging to advocate to their neighbors the urgency of ponying up $20 or so in property taxes each month in the face of draconian federal funding cuts.
Council has been raising property taxes from 1 to 8 cents each budget prior to 2019, when the state legislature capped its ability to levy taxes at 3.5 percent without an election. The Lege is currently trying to tighten that to 2.5 percent in its special session.
A late “omnibus” motion from Mayor Pro Tem Vanessa Fuentes and Council members Ryan Alter, Chito Vela and José Velásquez passing made a significant portion of Council angry when it passed, and brought the base motion to 5 cents, which is the highest that most on Council, including the mayor, will support. Council members Krista Laine and Paige Ellis were concerned about keeping the city’s reserves – or rainy day fund – at 17 percent by 2029.
Fuentes shot back: “The rainy day is now. Many of the amendments I have put forth are because organizations are losing federal funding, and to think that we’re talking about where our reserve policy is three, four years from now, as a point of contention, to me, is just wild.” Fuentes reminded Council that “when I entered in 2021, our reserve policy was 14%.”
“I know that our reserve policy has changed over the years, but I want us to remember why we changed it and that we need to actually stick with it,” Ellis urged. “What it does, in actuality, is it allows us to borrow money at a lower interest rate because we have the dollars saved up in case something terrible happens.”
Other than debating the urgency of the moment, the issue most Council members had with the 5-cent motion is that no one could offer an amendment without it going beyond the TRE that would realistically pass. Siegel remarked, “if the public’s having a hard time, I’ll just say my staff is having a hard time figuring out how to move forward now that we have a new base motion.”
Laine offered that “the subquorum that crunched these numbers” – Alter, Fuentes, Vela, and Velásquez – “has had a lot more time to consider what’s in here, as have your staff.” Ellis indeed warned that “having an amended base motion that already pushes beyond five pennies makes me feel like I’m in a position to abstain on everything else that’s being proposed.”
Council calmed down somewhat near 10pm, having passed some amendments, including ongoing funding for the family stabilization grant, a climate revolving fund, among others.
Upon recessing, they still had 17.64 percent in the reserves with the amendments approved, assuming 5 pennies for a TRE. At 9:53pm, Ellis echoed everyone still watching: “It’s still a bit unclear where we’re at.” They’ll start again tomorrow at 10am.
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.
Correction, August 14, 2025 11:35 am: This story has been changed to clarify the motion passed last night and to correct the proposed increase, which would amount to roughly $20 per month, not per year.