Houston City Council Notes, prepared by Emily J Hynds

Notes on the Houston City Council Meeting on June 25, 2025

Agenda

1. Mayor’s Report
2. Consent Agenda (items that require a vote, like purchases, resolutions, ordinances, etc.)
3. Council Member Pop-Off*

*I am not covering pop-off today.

The Mayor’s Report

Today we met the mysterious Josh!! Mayor Whitmire invited Josh Sanders, Chief of Intergovernmental Relations (IGR), and Alexa Aragonez, Deputy Chief of Intergovernmental Relations, to report on the Texas Legislative session. Whitmire praised the IGR team and highlighted collaboration, years of experience, and relationships. This team had six members, down from 17 during the last legislative session. Mayor Whitmire implied that 17 is an unnecessary number who were likely friends and political appointments of former Mayor Turner.

Sanders thanked his team and Houston’s department heads and their liaisons. The city analyzed over 2,000 bills, narrowing it down to track about 1700. Sanders spoke very highly of his team and their system: “Our system is so completely flawless, it is the envy of every other municipality. They check with us constantly to see where we’re at and what positions we have and what information we have on bills.” You can read the full debrief at http://www.houstontx.gov/govtrelations.

A selection of successful initiatives:

• SB1164 dealt with mental health and involuntary commitment. It “clarified” anosognosia, which the National Library of Medicine defines as “a neurological condition in which the patient is unaware of their neurological deficit or psychiatric condition.” Sanders said this bill should “help compel folks into the treatment that they need,” and that it “fits within our homelessness priorities and is obviously in line with the mayor’s efforts to end street homelessness.”
• HB3611 increased penalties for bandit signs. Sanders and CM Castex-Tatum remarked on blight and the often predatory nature of these signs.
• HB 1532 created a dredging district for Lake Houston, which will trigger some financial capabilities … I think?
• SB1620 created a forensic science apprenticeship program funded by the state. Aragonez remarked on how the public sector is constantly losing expertise over to the private sector and the importance of forensic science to public safety.

• SB22 created a film incentive program with $300M every two years. There is a crew residency requirement so they hope it will boost the economy as well.
• HAR7 created a Water Supply Conveyance Coordination Office with “significant funding allocations” — $1B annually starting in 2027. Sanders hopes Houston can tap into this fund for water-related infrastructure.
• HB1584 requires electric utility companies to work with municipalities on a list of high-priority addresses for restoration during power outages.
• Sanders remarked on a successful presentation at the state’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) committee on Houston’s Ernst & Young efficiency report. He said it was “lauded and touted” and spun off legislation, like a bill that will require school districts to do similar studies.

The IGR team worked to amend some legislation to be more favorable to Houston. A selection:

• HB2477 had something to do with changing office buildings into mixed use buildings. The original bill did not consider the infrastructure updates needed and was amended to allow impact fees and other ways for municipalities to seek financial reimbursement.
• HB30 dealt with disaster recovery and started out by only reimbursing for debris removal. It was amended to include spending on emergency shelters, overtime for emergency workers, water testing and treatment, and more.
• SB38 was originally an anti-squatters bill and sped up the eviction process. It was amended to add more guardrails for tenants.

Some legislation was “unamendable,” so the city lobbied for its downfall. A selection:

• SB2858, aka the “super preemption bill.” This bill would have expanded on last session’s HB2127, already legally challenged and making its way through the courts.
• SB1065, “essentially a guns in public places bill.” Sanders: “This bill would have prevented private contracts for conventions, sporting events, concerts and other large events from banning firearms inside the venue.” Examples include the rodeo, conventions at the GRB, and concerts.

Regarding budget appropriations, Sanders said their goal was to draw down as much money for Houston as possible. A selection:

• $100M for the Lynchburg pump station, which provides 60% of the region’s drinkable water and services 600 petrochemical facilities. Sanders said, “Houston water provides water in seven counties. We have over 5.6 million customers. So we are not just the city of Houston’s water utility. We really are the region’s water utility system.”
• $60M for the Trinity River Authority to improve the Lake Livingston Dam
• A lot of funding for small neighborhood parks
• $10M for 200 police vehicles
• $5M for a re-entry program

Mayor Whitmire and many CMs praised and thanked the IGR team. Mayor Whitmire said, “It’s a blessing to watch y’alls chemistry and the direction that you took us. Of course I had vision and subjects. I didn’t hesitate to call someone when you asked me to.” And, “People ask me, what’s one of your greatest accomplishments? It’s the team. It’s the team that I put in place.”

CM Peck said that past legislators didn’t want to work with Houston because the city was “just against legislation.” She said this is what “true partnership” looks like.

CM Flickinger attributed this year’s successes to the fact that state legislators are happier with Houston now.

CM Davis thanked the mayor for his “professional leadership.” He said, “The word of god said, where there is no vision, people perish.”

In conclusion, Sanders thanked the Houston area legislative delegation, the largest in TX. He said it includes leaders of both parties, is bipartisan, and collaborative.

Agenda Items, Selected Works

• Item 4 accepted final work and approved the final payment of $664K for swimming pool upgrades at Tuffly Park.
• Item 5 accepted final work and approved the final payment of $664K for work done at the McWilliams Dog Park in Hermann Park.
• Item 6 approved $199K for drug burn services for the police department. This service destroys narcotics-related property and evidence, which sometimes includes hazardous substances.
• Item 7 approved $81K for two pairs of night vision goggles for the police department’s dive team.
• Item 9 approved an additional $244K grant for Career and Recovery Resources, which provides employment training and substance use disorder services to people transitioning out of homelessness.
• Item 10 updated the city’s guidelines for home repair assistance related to Winter Storm Uri in 2021. It included increasing the max award amount from $6K → $10K. Mayor Whitmire said this item illustrated the city’s commitment to home repairs. He referenced “misinformation” about his commitment to home repairs. He said he is working to repair the city’s relationship with the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and blamed previous administrations for a lack of transparency, misuse of funds, and general corruption.
• Item 14 approved $200K for forensic documentation consulting services.

Item 36: The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Budget

The CIP is a rolling five-year outline of infrastructure projects and their funding status. It has limited, dedicated funding from multiple sources. This year’s plan includes $16.7B over five years. CMs Ramirez, Peck, Jackson, Castex-Tatum, Alcorn, and Castillo proposed amendments.

• CM Ramirez (At-Large 1) proposed three amendments that all aimed to increase the information and engagement that CMs have when CIP projects are changed. He ended up withdrawing them all but it instigated a lengthy discussion on the CIP process. Complaints included:
  • Length of time it takes for projects to make it through the CIP to completion. Some projects have been in the pipeline for 10-15 years.
  • Mystery around what projects are moved on and off the CIP and why. Lack of communication regarding CIP projects in general.
  • Many projects are put in the CIP with no funding allocated, which creates unrealistic expectations for the community.
• Mayor Whitmire criticized the CIP process and said it is “essentially a wish list.” He criticized past administrations for telling department heads to withhold information from CMs.
  • CM Pollard said, “I don’t remember a time when council members couldn’t go to a department head and speak to them directly about something.” He offered to speak anytime with the mayor about the way things were. “You continuously reference what happened before you were here.”
  • Mayor Whitmire said, “You can’t rewrite history.” He referenced videotapes, his own remarks, documentation, and conversations with existing and former city directors. He said, “It was very clear the direction that council members and directors received, and it’s documented on council meetings.”
• CM Peck (District A)
  • P6.02 proposed using money from the Dedicated Drainage and Street Renewal Fund (DDSRF) for major drainage work in Spring Shadows. CM Peck (and later CM Alcorn) advocated for using the DDSRF because it consistently has over $200M in unassigned funds. Finance Director Dubowski and Houston Public Works (HPW) Director Macchi both explained how the DDSRF works and why those funds are not available, but it was still unclear to me. CM Alcorn agreed, she said, “I’m not convinced,” and wants more explanation. Peck strongly advocated for this project, which includes areas where homes repeatedly flood, but ultimately withdrew it.
• CM Jackson (District B)
  • J7.01 asked for $18M to rehab the Lakewood Library which was destroyed in Hurricane Harvey in 2017. Mayor Whitmire said the money is spoken for and asked what Jackson would like taken off of the CIP to offset it. She said she doesn’t want anything taken off, which led to a bit of an awkward standstill. The mayor basically just repeated that there’s no money for it, he wishes things were otherwise, but that’s how it is. Jackson withdrew this amendment.
  • J7.02 asked for the North Regional Library to be added back onto the CIP list. Similar to J7.02, it was ultimately withdrawn.
  • J7.04, J7.05, and J7.06 all dealt with drainage funding. The mayor said, again, there is no funding available. There was some discussion on the futility of adding projects to the CIP without dedicated funding. CM Jackson stoically pushed for a vote. Only she and CM Plummer voted yes, so these amendments failed.
• CM Evans-Shabazz (District D) withdrew all of her amendments. She advocated for the removal of the Blodgett Street bike lanes, as she is wont to do, saying, “The people want those bike lanes removed.”

Item 39 – Making Public Comment Meetings More Accessible

Item 39 proposed moving one public comment session per month to Tuesday evening at 6pm. Public comment sessions are now at 2pm on Tuesdays. This item was brought by CM Castillo using Proposition A and co-signed by CMs Alcorn and Peck.

• CM Castex-Tatum is not convinced the public wants evening public comment sessions. She cited zero public engagement at the related public hearing, which was held on Tuesday May 27 at 10am. She complained that evening meetings would cause hardship for councilmembers returning the next morning at 8am. She also doesn’t want to interfere with attendance at PIP meetings and civic clubs.
• Mayor Whitmire agrees with the concept but he thinks it needs more work. He suggested that a quorum requirement be added in because “it’s downright disrespectful when we’re doing the people’s business and there are four of us here.” He suggested it might be good to take the public comment session to different locations around the city.
• CM Castillo argued that public speakers have remarked about how inconvenient it is. “Hearing from our constituents is a core function of our job. And as council members, we signed up for this; this is part of it, public session. Giving people an option to address us at a time that’s more convenient, that works for more constituents — it’s something we can figure out how to make work.” He wants to pilot this and see how it works. It can be adjusted later if needed.
  • Responding to Castex-Tatum’s claim that no one showed up to speak at the public hearing, he said, “We had people here to speak on it. And I say this with love, council member Plummer’s presentation took about an hour and a half and then we took a veteran’s proposal because the veterans had to leave. So by the time the item came up, we lost quorum and half the room, including the people that were there to speak.”
• Mayor Whitmire said, “I hope (meetings are) reflective of Houstonians that are residents that are impacted. Not people we have to clear the chamber of because they’re disruptors.”
• CM Castex-Tatum and CM Davis tagged this item. It’s unclear what happens next. Maybe it will be heard at a committee. Maybe there will be another public hearing. IDK.

Who took these notes? And what resources did they use?

My name is Emily Hynds. I am a writer, small business owner, producer of the monthly storytelling series Grown-up Storytime, and lifelong Houstonian. I am not a journalist or government official. I am a local government enthusiast who believes meaningful change starts at home. These notes are presented from my point of view and with my framing and are not comprehensive. Your notes will certainly be different and I would love to read them if you attend.

I watched this City Council meeting via HTV: https://www.houstontx.gov/htv/

While compiling these notes I used the following sources:
https://houston.novusagenda.com/agendapublic
https://houwatch.com
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513361/

You can find your City Council Member and their contact info at: https://www.houstontx.gov/council/whoismycm.html

Thank you to the volunteers who proofread these notes.

My Patreon is patreon.com/emilytakesnotes.