Austin adopts budget with 8.3% tax rate increase and a new 9-1-1 office

The Austin City Council adopted the city’s fiscal 2026-27 budget on a 9-2 vote at its Aug. 12 meeting. Mayor Kirk Watson and Council Member Marc Duchen (District 10) voted no.

In a separate 8-2 roll call that night, the council set the property tax rate at $0.579948 per $100 of valuation. Watson read into the record that the rate is “effectively an 8.3% increase in the tax rate.”

The budget also pays for a new Office of Joint Emergency Communications, a first step toward civilian leadership of 9-1-1 call-taking. That piece split the council. Six weeks later, the city’s consultant recommended keeping call-taking inside the Austin Police Department under a new civilian leader.

The votes settle what Austin will spend and collect this year. They leave open a question many residents pressed during budget hearings: who should answer when someone calls 9-1-1?

“I am bothered by the, the 911 parts of this budget.”

Watson said it was probably the first time he had voted against a city budget. He also objected to new debt in the budget and to the cost of the amendments added that day.

Council Member Mike Siegel (District 7), who sponsored the 9-1-1 office, said the full consultant report would arrive “before the next fiscal year begins,” leaving time to change course.

Who voted how?

Voting yes on the budget were Council Members Natasha Harper-Madison (District 1), Vanessa Fuentes (District 2), José Velásquez (District 3), José “Chito” Vela (District 4), Ryan Alter (District 5), Krista Laine (District 6), Siegel, Paige Ellis (District 8) and Zohaib “Zo” Qadri (District 9).

The same members, minus Siegel, voted for the tax rate. Siegel was off the dais; Watson said he was celebrating his 20th wedding anniversary.

Duchen said the council had spent far more time adding to the budget than looking for cuts. He cited a District 10 survey whose conclusion, he said, was “Residents want smarter spending, not new taxes.”

Supporters said the budget protected services in a lean year. “We prevented cuts to life saving social programs,” Siegel said. Fuentes said that in an economic downturn, “that’s not the time to be reducing your social safety net.”

What it costs

The record of the Aug. 12 meeting does not say what the new rate means in dollars for a typical homeowner’s bill.

The city’s budget director said $4.7 million in extra property tax revenue from the certified tax roll would keep social service grants running through fiscal 2027.

After the council’s amendments, staff found the general fund about $2 million short. Vela won a change that trimmed the city’s payment of development fee waivers, mostly for affordable housing, from about $3.4 million to $3 million rather than raise residential development fees.

The council also used $326,321 from reserves to avoid cutting library contracts. Staff said that left reserves at 16.9837%, just under the city’s 17% policy.

The fight over 9-1-1

Siegel’s amendment created the office with nine positions, including an executive and an assistant director. He said its total annual cost would be about $1.7 million, partly offset by cuts that included $250,769 from the police department’s commodities budget.

It passed 6-2, with Watson and Duchen opposed and Vela, Harper-Madison and Ellis abstaining. A companion resolution from Laine passed by the same count.

City Manager T.C. Broadnax urged the council not to “get in front of a study that we have paid for and not received the final results of.” Police Chief Lisa Davis said consultants had told her the 9-1-1 center ranked among the best in the country.

Laine described years of slow responses in District 6 and said improvements need money: “it isn’t free and talk is cheap.” Ellis, whose District 8 had the slowest response times in a presentation handed out that day, worried a new office could cause “confusion and chaos at the worst possible moment.”

What residents asked for

Dozens of speakers addressed the council at its Aug. 6 budget work session. Most asked members to keep the police budget flat, fully fund social services and move 9-1-1 out of the police department.

“Establish a joint communications department and move the 911 call takers out of apd.”

Mary Elizabeth, a District 1 resident, said, “Emergency response systems only work when people trust them enough to use them.”

Others disagreed. Susan Spataro, a District 8 resident and governmental accountant, said the police increase reflected the police contract, pensions and shared costs: “So do not cut the police budget.” Jeff Dickerson of District 5 said, “Choose restraint over expansion.”

What happens next?

At a Sept. 22 work session, Mission Critical Partners recommended a civilian communications leader reporting to the police chief, a quality assurance unit and technology upgrades. A company vice president said a fully unified center “cannot be implemented under current legislative and contractual conditions.” The firm put a standalone call center’s cost at $11.8 million to $12.2 million.

Speakers split again. Jennifer Stevens of the Central Texas Public Safety Commission said moving call-takers “does not by itself make an emergency response faster.” Peter Hunt of the Austin Justice Coalition said police-run centers tend toward “when in doubt, send cops out.”

The council took no votes. Laine proposed quarterly progress reports to the Public Safety Committee before deciding where the civilian leader should report, and Broadnax recommended putting that civilian leadership in place first.

Voters will also decide parks and library bond propositions on Tuesday, Nov. 3, which would be repaid through the annual property tax levy, according to the Aug. 6 election ordinance.

Siegel said the money already approved should go to hiring that leader and staff.

“Our goal ultimately is to save lives and dispatch resources more quickly and dispatch the appropriate resource for each emergency,” he said.