Recorded August 22, 2026
Video transcript (NOTE: transcriptions can make mistakes)
Farrah Abraham:
Thanks, Mo. I’m Farah Abraham running for District 5. So, please look forward. I appreciate your vote and I am an advocacy for action. So, I look forward to hearing everyone’s concerns, figuring out the best touch point pipeline and getting that done. Thank you.
Ryan Alter:
Hello. Thank you all for being here. I am Council Member Ryan Alter. I really look forward to this conversation. You know, environment and our energy systems are very important to me and so I look forward to having that discussion today. Thank you.
Liz Brink:
Hi, y’all. My name’s Liz Brink. I’m running for District 5. I’m a native South Austinite and I would like to rebuild the trust in City Council by having transparency and accountability. And I’d like to do that by seeing how our money is spent and are we getting what we’re paying for and asking for an audit before we spend any more money.
David Weinberg:
Good afternoon. I’m David Weinberg. I am a longtime environmental advocate both in Texas and elsewhere and I’m a 17-year resident of District 5.
Moderator:
Okay. Thank you all. First couple questions on climate change and air pollution. And we will start with the left with Farah Abraham. Austin is behind on meeting its existing greenhouse gas reduction commitment to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions for the entire Austin community by 2040. How would you get the City of Austin to prioritize and adequately fund climate initiatives to match the scale and scope of the Austin Climate Equity Plan? Please be as specific as you can in your one-minute response. Thank you.
Farrah Abraham:
Yes, thank you. So, however big the gap is, I just want to understand the goals, get the pipeline so that we can bridge that gap as soon as possible. I know there was CO2 with the natural gas plants. You can actually hold the CO2 in there so you can meet those goals sooner and more possible. The governor of Texas has great initiatives already locked in. So, I just want to keep along that path and if there’s other great incentives or new plans from our communities, I look forward to enhancing that and getting that going as soon as possible. Thank you.
Moderator:
Council Member Alter.
Ryan Alter:
Yeah, this is a huge concern of mine. It’s why in 2024 when I looked at the Climate Equity Plan and saw how far behind we were, I said, you know, we really need to invest in a climate bond and I was the leading advocate for that because we have these great plans that we come up with and then we put them on the shelf and these goals that we need to meet as a community, we don’t put the investment in to do it. And so out of that, we saw a $50 million investment in securing public lands, open space. That’s something that is going to yield protections for a long time. We need to continue to reduce our emissions from our buildings. That is largely through our energy systems and having Austin Energy be even more green than it is today. But there are a lot of goals that we have and we are investing in those goals so that we can meet those challenges that we have. Thank you.
Liz Brink:
Oh, is that mic on? Hello.
Moderator:
Move it a little closer. We’ll make sure that we can hear you. Okay.
Liz Brink:
Oh, gotta let go. Sorry. So, I’m a 25-year member of the IBW. My background is in labor and electrical. So I would rely on other experts to help me out with this issue. But I do believe that it is a lofty goal worth pursuing to have the net zero by 2040. I understand that we can offset some of this carbon by planting more trees and upgrading buildings to use less power. There’s different avenues that we can pursue and, like I said, I would reach out and invite anybody that had any ideas that we could work together to get this goal met. I would appreciate it.
Moderator:
Thank you so much, Dave Weinberg.
David Weinberg:
So, I’m going to give a little bit of a political answer to this question. And that answer is addition by subtraction. And what we need to subtract is our current City Council members who are casting crazy anti-environmental votes, as they have been doing all year. What am I talking about? I’m talking about secret votes to build natural gas peaker plants here in Austin. I’m talking about economic development policies to draw data centers to Austin, Texas. I’m talking about this Thursday at Austin City Council, the council coming up with a regulatory framework to bring data centers to Austin, a position which appears to be in some ways to the right of our governor, Greg Abbott. This council’s really gone off the rails in terms of our climate goals and environmentalism, and I would like to turn that around. Thank you.
Moderator:
All right. Thank you. Next question is just simply going to ask for a show of hands by all the candidates on the panel. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles like trash trucks are highly polluting. Switching to electric models reduces local air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and saves money over time, but it requires a significant upfront investment in the trucks, transfer stations, and charging stations. Would you commit to prioritizing funding the transition to electric trash trucks for Austin Resource Recovery? Would you commit to prioritizing that funding for that transition to electric trash trucks? Raise your hands if you would support doing that.
Okay. And for the record, Farah Abraham, Ryan Alter, David Weinberg raised hands in support. Liz Brink not raising her hand.
Thank you all. Onto environmental justice and children’s environmental rights. The question, Austin has a long history of environmental racism with polluting facilities concentrated in East Austin and communities of color. People point to the recent Dogs Head agreement as a newer example of this. And also the potential placement they’re deciding where to possibly put newly approved Austin Energy gas peaker plants. It may also raise some of these concerns. How would you ensure that Black, Brown, and lower-income communities are not disproportionately burdened? Please be as specific as possible and limit your response to one minute. Farah Abraham.
Farrah Abraham:
Thank you. I believe everyone, no matter your age, your background, where you live, you deserve clean water. So environmentally across the board, there’s initiatives that were passed for children to be equitable, to be included. We can also do school TV shows and small shows that can help enable the education and their voices. So I look forward to going to our schools in District 5. I look forward to going to the communities in District 5 and hearing directly the feedback and stepping up more wherever we need. But right now, it’s been really good on the new act and the incentives and continuing on there. So, I look forward to just taking more part and getting it better and better for everyone. Thank you.
Moderator:
Ryan Alter.
Ryan Alter:
Yeah, our city has a really sad history when it comes to environmental justice, environmental issues. We put our dirty power plants in East Austin. We put our factories in East Austin. And so it is incumbent upon us not only to just do things equitably, but to make sure that we are making additional investments in East Austin being clean, being green. And when I first came to Council, one of the things we looked at was our tree canopy. West Austin has a thriving tree canopy and East Austin doesn’t. And so I tripled the amount of money to our neighborhoods program so that we can invest more money in getting trees in the ground in East Austin. That is meaningful in terms of heat island effect, in terms of clean air, and initiatives like that are how we should continue to invest in righting the historical wrong. Thank you.
Liz Brink:
So, I would commit to remove any environmental hazards from any part of the city that needs addressed. Make sure everybody has clean water, making sure that they’re not living next to hazardous environments that’s hurting their quality of life, their breathing. And I also want to address the displacement of residents due to the higher property taxes because I think that gets overlooked a lot too, especially in the development of East Austin. We have a lot of residents that are losing their houses because they can’t afford property taxes and I think we need to address that also.
Moderator:
Okay, David.
David Weinberg:
So, siting is an incredibly important public health issue when we talk about the environment. It is something that I’ve worked on at the Texas legislature. It is something that historically in this country has fallen disproportionately on communities that are poorer and browner. I think interestingly right now in Texas you’re seeing something of a rebellion in rural Texas with data centers, with them encroaching on communities and really being a burden on people. So everyone is affected by these issues. I can tell you the way that I would personally protect Black and Brown and lower-class Austin, working-class Austin, from the siting of natural gas peaker plants is by not building them.
Moderator:
All right, thank you very much. Next question. In the past, Austin has funded an Austin Youth Climate Equity Council to engage young people in implementing the Austin Climate Equity Plan and supporting school sustainability projects. Would you enhance programs like these or others to meaningfully include young people’s perspectives in the city’s environmental and sustainability policymaking process? Please be as specific as possible and limit your response to one minute. Farah Abraham.
Farrah Abraham:
Yes, for youth environmental inclusivity, as I mentioned prior. Continuing on with that, I support that. We can again do TV shows, initiatives to grow the local community, gathering places, organizations, but heighten that, grow that, empower them. I mean, with my daughter being born on TV, I just believe in growing and including young voices wherever it matters. I know my candidate right here with his young children, I’m sure he gets all of his new ideas and how he can incorporate his kids, too. So, I think that’s really great of the parents who are up here right now advocating for you. So, I love that. Thank you.
Moderator:
Ryan Alter.
Ryan Alter:
Yeah, I mean as she touched on, I have three young kids and the world that we live them, the environment that we leave them, is a scary idea right now. I mean, I’m truly worried about their ability to be able to thrive in our community. My daughter is in Girl Scouts and they learned about recycling and composting one day and the excitement about that and telling us what we should be recycling and not. These types of things, you know, getting those into kids at a young age. No one is more impactful on their parents than the kids. And so I think programs like that are wonderful where kids become the ambassadors that the adults should be the ones doing the teaching, but sadly we’re the ones who haven’t lived up to what we need to be living up to.
Moderator:
Okay. Liz Brink.
Liz Brink:
Yeah, I think the youth should be highly involved in these decisions. They have very strong ideas and they can be very insightful. My kids are older. I’ve got a 23 and 25-year-old. But when they were both in Scouts, and Scouts can be very in tune with what’s happening, and they can have some really good ideas and can help guide on how they think things should go, and they can come up with things that you never even thought of. And yeah, don’t discount them. And you know, it’s important to make them feel like they have a voice and that they’re heard because there’s plenty of adults now that don’t feel that way. So, if we can make sure that the youth is included and feel a part, then I think we’ll see a greater array of ideas come forward.
Moderator:
And David Weinberg.
David Weinberg:
So, I will say as a general matter, I would support wholeheartedly robust environmental and public health education and inclusion with the youth of Austin, the youth of Texas, the youth of America. I mean, one thing that’s very that I am excited to see as sort of a middle-aged person is that a lot of this climate movement is being led by young people. Greta Thunberg is an excellent example and, you know, I would certainly personally be interested to hear Greta’s testimony if she were in Austin on Thursday and testifying at City Hall when they’re developing this regulatory framework to bring data centers to town. I think that she may not be totally in support of that. But I will leave it there and pass the mic. Thank you.
Moderator:
Thank you very much. On to energy. The Austin City Council adopted a goal of achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions for the entire Austin community by 2040 and a carbon-free goal by 2035 for Austin Energy. That’s the city’s electric utility. But Austin City Council also recently approved the purchase of 400 megawatts of methane gas known as natural gas power plants. Would you support cancelling the contract for Austin Energy to build new gas-burning power plants? Would you support cancelling that contract to build the new gas power plants? Please respond yes or no and limit your response to 30 seconds. Farah Abraham.
Farrah Abraham:
No, I would not cancel that because when our solar and our wind goes down, that is a backup. We needed another plant given that we were having freezing and our backups weren’t working. So, at this time, we can still move forward with that and I look forward to working with everyone so that helps those in need like on oxygen and everything else when their power goes down that they have those services.
Moderator:
Thank you, Council Member Ryan Alter.
Ryan Alter:
Yes. I think I made my position on natural gas production very clear. I was against it when we were building or developing the generation plan. If we can fill these needs, and we do have growing capacity needs, we should do it with solar and with batteries, hopefully geothermal. We’re doing a geothermal pilot. We need to think to the future and fossil fuels are the way of the past.
Moderator:
So, just to be clear, you would support cancelling the contract for Austin Energy to build the new natural gas-burning plants then?
Ryan Alter:
Yes.
Moderator:
Liz Brink.
Liz Brink:
No, I would not support cancelling the contract. I think it’s important to keep many options open as far as our energy is concerned because we currently have coal, natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind, biomass, and hopefully more geothermal. And I think it’s important to keep everything diversified. It doesn’t mean that we have to use so much of it, but just to keep it in your back pocket.
Moderator:
Thank you, David Weinberg.
David Weinberg:
Yes, I would cancel it and I would also work very hard to finally, finally, finally get Austin out of power generation at the Fayette coal plant. Texas is the nation’s leader in utility-scale wind energy and now I believe the leader in utility-scale solar. I believe that’s the direction we should keep going and that’s what I support.
Moderator:
Okay, next question. Austin Energy needs additional local clean energy resources. The question: Do you support committing City of Austin and Austin Energy funds to establishing programs that empower low- to medium-income residents to host batteries and solar installations that are owned and operated by third parties without any out-of-pocket costs? Please respond yes or no and then keep your answer to 30 seconds. Farah Abraham.
Farrah Abraham:
Yes, I would support that. I was excited to read more about this. So, our residences can be paid to host these. So, $25,000 to host these at your house. I think that’s great income without working and other initiatives that can benefit everyone. So, I look forward to hearing more, growing that, scaling that, and if it’s nothing out of anyone’s pocket, more the merrier. Thank you.
Moderator:
Ryan Alter.
Ryan Alter:
Yeah, we were supposed to have a program like this, the Solar for All, that was yanked by the Trump administration. And so when that happened, I put a resolution together asking Austin Energy to come up with another way for us to get solar, get batteries for our lower-income residents to have that benefit. They’re working on that. I think that a residential solar standard offer is one great way to achieve that. But we have to expand our local solar and that doesn’t just apply to residential. I also brought forward what is going to be the largest city-owned solar on city facilities in the nation.
Moderator:
Okay, Liz Brink.
Liz Brink:
So, my first inclination is to support this, but with any good idea, the devil’s in the details. So, I would need to look at it and make sure that there weren’t any unforeseen costs that go into the solar because, you know, does their roof support it? You know, do we have to redo the panel? There’s a lot that goes into it. So, it just, I don’t want to just say yes, but it would need willing to look at it seriously just to make sure that there’s no undue burden to the residents.
Moderator:
Thank you, David Weinberg.
David Weinberg:
So, I did six years of environmental work at the Texas Capitol and I’ll be honest with you, and we were trying to push these distributed energy bills. Sometimes the utilities were the biggest problem in terms of getting them moved forward in the legislative process. But, so there might be some push and pull with Austin Energy there, but you can trust me to be a huge proponent of distributed energy, building that out in Austin. God, I mean, how much solar energy could we be producing this afternoon? Probably tons.
Moderator:
All right, next question. Do you support updating city zoning to exclude larger-scale data centers to enact essentially a de facto ban? You can respond yes or no and limit your response to one minute. Farah Abraham.
Farrah Abraham:
I would say no. I’m not going to limit. I think we can have ordinances. We can grow our districts and we can flourish in the growth everyone together.
Ryan Alter:
Yes, data centers shouldn’t be here in Austin. And it’s been conveniently described by someone on this panel that we’re inviting data centers here. That’s just not factual, but that’s par for the course. So, what is factual is that we are creating the tool to prohibit data centers from being here. Right now, we don’t have that tool. As a city, we can zone and through zoning, we can exclude data centers. And I went on the message board this week saying that what was put forward by the city manager was nowhere strong enough. We need to say no data centers in any existing zoning category and create a data center zone so that if someone who wants to do a data center like we have at UT for research or something like that, small scale, we the public through the council have that decision. But we should not have large-scale data centers here in the city. That’s just an easy answer.
Moderator:
Thank you, Liz.
Liz Brink:
Okay, so like I said, I come from a labor background and these data centers are producing massive amounts of work for our plumbers, pipe fitters, electricians, iron workers, you name it. We’re getting tons and tons and tons of work from these data centers. And there are currently, I believe, somewhere in neighborhood of like 50 data centers in Austin already. We have two major ones. We have Skybox. We have, oh my goodness, SEBI, and those are major data centers that are already in the area and there’s, I think, currently about 56 being planned or started between Temple and San Antonio. So they’re here. But I think what we can do is work with environmentalists and making conditions to where we reduce the amount of strain on the energy cost with on the electricity by using maybe some different means of—oh, I’m out.
Moderator:
Okay. Yeah, let us time out. I do want to just clarify. So you would not support a de facto ban then as to the question, you not support that. Okay. David Weinberg.
David Weinberg:
So this is an environmental forum. We’re here to discuss environmental matters. But just so everyone knows who I am, David Weinberg, as a matter of governance, I do not believe in paternalistic government. I don’t believe in I’m here to tell you what the right answer is. I believe that government is supposed to be something that listens to people and is responsive to people. And what I’m hearing from people in District 5 and what I’m hearing from Austin environmental groups is that they want to put the brakes on this sort of rampant development of data centers in Austin. And I support that point of view. With my 20 seconds left here, I’ll say, so the City Council passed an economic development resolution in May and in its first version, which Ryan Alter was a sponsor of, it explicitly spelled out that one of the things that we want to bring to Austin and find new ways, creative ways to do it, is data centers.
Moderator:
Thank you. Okay, I remind you all you’ll have a minute at the end of this if there’s anything else you want to pick up on, but I’m going to move forward right now just for time purposes. We are on to water quality. The Dogs Head agreement recently approved by council reduces the environmental standards for the critical water quality zone of the Colorado River. The question is, would you support reinstating the standard critical water quality zone to 400 ft in a Dogs Head and to keep the trail next to it, but out of the critical water quality zone? So, I’m going to just ask this question again a little more simply. Raise your hand if you would support reinstating the prior water quality standard for Dogs Head. I think that’s the heart of this question. Would you support reinstating the prior water quality standard for Dogs Head? Everybody raise their hand. Everybody raise their hand.
Okay, next question. Water conservation. In 2024, Austin Water, that’s our local water utility, our city water utility. The pipe system for Austin Water lost 17% of our water through leaks. Replacing old pipes is more cost-effective than expanding supply. The question: Would you support an average $1 per month increase in residential water bills dedicated to fixing leaks and a similar but higher fee charged to commercial customers for the same reason? Would you support an average $1 per month increase residential and a similar but higher fee to commercial for fixing leaky pipes in Austin? You can respond yes or no and then have 30 seconds to talk. Farah Abraham.
Farrah Abraham:
Yes. My response is no. I hope that we fix our internal infrastructure so that way we don’t install the wrong pipes, have these leaking pipe problems. And I don’t want to encourage more costs for our residents and our commercial and our others who are wanting to own companies and businesses and be commercialized. I don’t want to pass that off to them either. So, I think just getting great, trained infrastructure is the best way before I have everyone have more money out of their pocket. Thanks.
Moderator:
Thank you, Ryan Alter.
Ryan Alter:
Yeah, I think the critical thing there is average, right? I would want to see that be applied to our larger water users. I don’t think those who are conserving or on the lower end financially should be bearing that brunt. We saw just two years ago that three Lady Bird Lakes worth of water was being leaked by our water supply system every single year. That’s unacceptable. We have made some improvements, but we have got to invest in our infrastructure. That was one of the things I wanted to invest in in a climate bond, but we need to make sure that we’re not leaking our water.
Moderator:
Liz Brink.
Liz Brink:
No. I would not support an increase. While I do admit, yes, we definitely need to fix our infrastructure, but we are getting nickeled and dimed to death. We need an audit to know where is this money going, how is it being spent, what are we getting for our money.
Moderator:
Thank you, David Weinberg.
David Weinberg:
So, no, no on the residential increase, yes on the commercial. Similar affordability concerns, what Liz was just talking about. I mean, I think this is a sort of—it’s not as black and white of a sort of policy question as it may appear. It’s certainly a big concern. There are excellent, excellent water experts in this city, in this room, Byron Hess, my neighbor Sarah Foust. I would certainly look to work with those people on how can we best address this.
Moderator:
Thank you very much. Next question. Currently, requests to extend water service to a development in the drinking water protection zone requires council approval. This is to help protect some environmentally sensitive areas, but it does not address companies like data centers and chip manufacturers using too much drinking water. The question: Would you support requiring council approval, city council approval, for all industrial and commercial service extension requests that use large amounts of water, and this is regardless of where they’re located in the city? Would you support council approval regardless of where they’re located in the city? Please raise your hand if you support council approval of large water user service extension requests.
Everybody raised their hand. Everybody supports this idea. Thank you.
On to democracy and transparency. Texas state law allows City Council to vote in secret on some decisions for Austin Energy. That’s our city’s electric utility. This was recently used to allow a secret vote on what appears to be an over $1 billion investment in natural gas generation, raising concerns in the community. The question is, would you support a city ordinance that would require the Austin City Council to vote in public on all Austin Energy matters? Please raise your hand if you support council voting in public on all Austin Energy matters.
Okay. And we have Farah Abraham, Liz Brink, and David Weinberg raising their hand in agreement. And Council Member Ryan Alter not supporting the idea to vote in public on all Austin Energy matters.
All right, next question. This one is about NDAs and also lobbying during council sessions. If you’ve been tuning in for a while, you might have heard it before. Non-disclosure agreements, or NDAs, are sometimes used by developers and other businesses to share information with city officials while keeping that information from the public. Likewise, recent controversial votes like the one on the Dogs Head have raised concerns about lobbying by business interests during city council meetings outside of public view. The question is, would you support a city ordinance that defines transparency practices like prohibiting the use of NDAs by elected officials and their staff and prohibiting lobbying during city council meetings out of public view? Would you support such an ordinance? And if you want to break those two down into two different things, by all means, you have 30 seconds to do so after you respond yes or no, but 30 seconds to answer the question. We began with Farah Abraham.
Farrah Abraham:
So yes, I’m in support of that. So everything can be public and everyone can see everything. So nothing hidden from the public. Thank you so much.
Moderator:
Okay, Council Member Ryan Alter.
Ryan Alter:
Yeah, I certainly think the NDA problem is a real problem that should not exist. The lobbying question, you know, I have received texts from someone in this room, Kaiba White, has given me some great questions when we’re having various conversations. And I think it’s really important for the public to be able to communicate with people. If we drew the line at one person and not another, I worry you’d have a First Amendment violation. But I think that everything that we do is public information. You can submit a public information request anytime and I gladly do it. But I think that having that information and being able to ask the hard questions, sometimes we don’t have all the answers. So, I am not the mayor, so I can’t do that.
Moderator:
I just want to clarify. So, you’d be in favor then of the NDA ordinance, but you think it’s a little bit more complicated to answer the lobbying ordinance?
Ryan Alter:
The lobbying question is, yes, I think it’s more complicated than it sounds on its face. Thank you.
Moderator:
Liz Brink.
Liz Brink:
All right. I would support both of those. I think that this position, you are a public servant. The money comes from the taxpayers. We owe it. If I were elected, I would feel obligated that the taxpayer knew exactly what I was doing, exactly what was going on at all times. And yeah, transparency. Thank you so much.
Moderator:
David Weinberg.
David Weinberg:
Yeah, 100% support of both of these measures. I think our current Austin City Council has become way too close with a handful of big special interest groups that dominate policymaking at council these days and I would fully support both of these measures.
Moderator:
Thank you very much. All right. We are on to the part where you will each get one more minute to kind of reexplore any questions raised here. Just take the platform where you want to take it. Farah Abraham, one minute.
Farrah Abraham:
Thank you for having me. Thank you for voting for me in advance. I look forward to being an advocate for you and supporting you however I can. Thank you so much.
Moderator:
Council Member Ryan Alter.
Ryan Alter:
I really appreciate y’all being here. You know, over the past four years, I have been one of, if not the leading environmental voice on the council advocating for many, many things. Whether it’s when we were doing the generation plan against investing in fossil fuels and asking the hard questions, taking the time to really press on Austin Energy, whether it’s just recently a resolution to limit the large-scale water users and making sure that they don’t suck us dry, whether that’s a data center or someone else. Water is critical and if we just give it away, we will not be able to survive as a city. Whether it’s putting solar on city facilities, having what will be potentially the largest solar installation on city facilities in the country. That’s because of work that I have done. And so the list goes on and on. Investing in new park space, new open space. These are things that I have had the chance to work with many in this room on and I will hope to continue to do that in the next four years.
Moderator:
Liz Brink.
Liz Brink:
All right. I just wanted to touch on me voting no for the EV heavy trucks. I drive by those city buses that are parked off of Ben White, the EV buses, and they’re just sitting there. And I would not want the EV trash trucks to end up like that. So I wouldn’t want to see a plan on how we’re going to make sure they’re being charged, make sure they’re being used. What’s going to happen should we lose power? You know, are there backup generators? There’s a lot of questions to be asked before you just blanketly say yes. And then I also want to touch on data centers, how labor and environmentalists work together to find ways to make these projects happen. That way labor can get the jobs brought into the area and we can protect the environment at the same time.
Moderator:
Okay. Thank you, David Weinberg.
David Weinberg:
So we didn’t get to do a lot of bio talking up here. So just quickly, I was thinking as I was coming up here today, 25 years ago, one of my first jobs out of college was working for the Public Interest Research Group network, and some of the things I did back then were passing some of the nation’s first clean indoor air laws, expanding or protecting bottle bills. Here in Texas, I worked for six years as head of the Texas League of Conservation Voters, three sessions up at the state Capitol. So I have been doing environmental and public health work in the public interest for almost all of my adult life. And I will bring the fight and the vigor and the enthusiasm that I brought to all of those things over the last quarter century to my position being the council member for District 5 in Austin. Thank you.
Moderator:
Right. I want to thank all the candidates that are here today for participating. Thank you for your thoughts.