City of Austin Council Message Board

Because of my absence from Council this week (while at the New Mayors Program at Harvard), because there will be insufficient time after last night’s Planning Commission meeting to assess and react to their testimony, debate and action, because it appears another Commission that is required to review this ordinance still has not heard the matter (and we should be very leery of waiving such deliberative protections), because of the importance of this issue and my involvement in helping to craft some of the compromise elements, I respectfully request this matter be postponed until December 17 or into January.

If, for posting reasons, council feels we should proceed with the public hearing on this item, I want you to know that I would be okay with that, so long as action is deferred. But if there is any desire to take action at the same time as public testimony, then I would request public testimony be postponed as well.

I have concerns about splitting the ordinance up for action, as this may cause confusion with the public and result in a fractured process and because the draft ordinance sections are very interconnected. Even if it were possible to handle non-controversial issues separately (if that were possible), it seems handling those later would not increase subsequent burden because such matters would be non-controversial. If there is to be a division,I would prefer council consider that possibility next week.

Thank you for your consideration.

Steve

Since the Mayor will not be present at our Council Meeting tomorrow (Thursday, December 10th) I would support the Council honoring the Mayor's request to postpone the short-term rental public hearing, discussion on the dias and any action until he can be present.

I also share the Mayor's concern regarding splitting the discussion and action on the ordinance over multiple Council meetings and would prefer everything to be addressed during one meeting.

Dear Colleagues,
Thank you for participating in the discussion on Tuesday and on this message board regarding timing of the short term rental ordinance. As I mentioned in Tuesday's session, I would advocate that at a minimum, we move forward with removing the" testing the waters" provision in the ordinance [ie. (G) in section 25-2-791 LICENSE REQUIREMENTS]. Our Austin Code staff long ago -- between 9-12 mos. ago, I would estimate -- recommended eliminating the "testing the waters" provision as it makes it very difficult for them to enforce our existing ordinance. I do not believe we've heard significant concern about eliminating this provision - if indeed we've heard any concerns at all.

I would like to be able to vote on at least 25-2-791 in December, but I could support this more limited approach if we have the ability to do so. I have been in touch with legal staff to determine if it is possible to consider a section of the tomorrow, and I am awaiting their answer.

Best,

Kathie Tovo

I am going to honor the Mayor request to postpone, since we have in the past honored other members request to postpone.

I, too, will honor the Mayor's request for postponement so that we can have the comprehensive discussion at one time upon his return.

Thank you,
Ellen Troxclair