City Council - Oppose Agenda Items 4 and 25: Protect Austin’s Ecosystems and Wildfire Mitigation Efforts

This Thursday, January 30th, the Austin City Council will consider Agenda Items 4 and 25 relating to managing wildfire risk on City watershed and wildlife protection plans. While addressing wildfire risk is crucial for Austin, these items require further discussion and should be tabled for now. READ MORE FROM HART HAGAN ABOUT WHY THIS $7,500,000 in contracts doesn't actually suppress wildfires.

Trees are not the enemy.  They provide critical watershed services and habitat for our endangered songbirds. They sequester carbon.  They facilitate water retention and aquifer recharge. In most situations, they resist wildfire much better than grasslands. While the “urban-wildlands interface” must be managed to protect people and structures, these proposals would undermine existing local research and could unintentionally harm our environment without reducing wildfire threats.

Sign up here to speak, in person or remotely, at the Thursday Council meeting at 10:00 to urge the council to honor the science of local ecosystems and not succumb to a fear of trees as fuel. You must sign up by noon tomorrow, Wednesday, January 29th.

Item 4: Redundant and Misguided Study 
The proposed U.S. Forest Service study (Item 4) duplicates research already conducted by Baylor University in 2009. The study would be carried out by forest managers with no local expertise, who have a history of over-cutting trees. Baylor’s study found that forests pose less wildfire risk than grasslands—contrary to the logging industry’s preference for clear-cutting and prescribed burns. Spending $198,467 to shop around for a different conclusion seems unnecessary when robust data already exists about what is best for our local environment.

Item 25: Risk of Degrading Parklands
Item 25 allocates $7.5 million for vegetation management, including prescribed burns and tree thinning. However, these methods often dry out soil, increase erosion, and encourage fast-burning grasses—creating hotter, drier landscapes that are more prone to fire. Recent prescribed burns in Austin resulted in significant carbon emissions without reducing wildfire risk. Rather than moving forward with these measures, the City should prioritize strategies that preserve tree canopies, improve soil health, enhance landscape hydration, and reduce human-caused ignitions through park patrols and fencing.

A Balanced Approach to Wildfire Mitigation
The fires in LA should not cause panic in Austin.  Pausing these items would allow time to talk about how best to pursue wildfire management, instead of simply reacting to current headlines.  
Thank you for your consideration in ensuring that Austin’s wildfire mitigation efforts align with both environmental stewardship and public safety.

We have some good news to share in case you missed it over the weekend. After months of hard work, hundreds of your thoughtful comment submissions, and a coalition effort from other dedicated groups including Save Barton Creek Association, Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, Austin Sierra Club, Austin Environmental Democrats, and Hays Residents for Land and Water Protection—the item that would have initiated an amendment to the Save Our Springs Ordinance for Milestone's proposed "Hays Commons" development has been withdrawn from consideration. This means we are calling off the action alert to speak at the Planning Commission today as originally planned. Hooray!!

This victory is thanks to all of you—our SOS members, allies, and partners who spoke out against this harmful proposal. We’ve made it clear that this is an awful idea for our community, and together, we’ve forced the pause on this development. The Austin Planning Commissioners heard the community’s concerns, raised key questions about the conflicts with the City’s growth plans, and highlighted the environmental damage that could have resulted from this project. Additionally, Council Member Paige Ellis announced she would not support the applicant's request for increased impervious cover on the site. This sent a strong signal that City Council would not back the proposal if it advanced.
​
This is a meaningful win in the larger fight to protect this critical area of the Recharge Zone. We must continue to ensure that City resources, including water, are not used to support unstainable growth in this area.

Continuing the WorkEven though we’ve won this round, there’s still more to do. 

• Save Our Springs Alliance is currently contesting a separate Municipal Utility District (MUD) proposal submitted to the TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality) for the Hays County portion of this property. 
• Milestone is also seeking a TLAP (Texas Land Application Permit) that would allow for spray irrigation of treated wastewater over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone—something that could seriously impact our water quality.

While there are a lot of moving parts, the key here is to limit the amount of development on this sensitive land and make sure the Edwards Aquifer is protected for generations to come.
Thank you to everyone who took the time to be part of this effort—whether by attending meetings, sharing your concerns, or helping spread the word. This victory wouldn’t have been possible without your involvement and passion for protecting our community’s natural resources.
Stay tuned for updates on the next phases of this project and how you can stay involved.

Exciting News – We're MovingSave Our Springs Alliance HQ is relocating to a new space closer to the springs—a permanent home where we can continue our important work. As we make this transition, please be patient with us. We’ll be out of reach for a few days while we settle into our new office.

In the meantime, we may have some free office furniture available, so keep an eye out for those posts in the coming days. We appreciate your understanding as we settle in and get up to full speed.
​
Thank you for your continued support!
SOS Alliance