All right, good afternoon.

The time is now 2 01 p.m.

on Wednesday, August 13th, and the City of San Antonio special session is called to order.

Gavel.

Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Roll.

Councilmember Cor.

Councilmember Castillo Angiano.

Councilmember Via Gran is here virtually.

Councilmember Mungia.

Present.

Councilmember Castillo.

Here.

Councilmember Galman.

Here.

Councilmember Alderete Gavin Dominic.

Here.

Councilmember Meza Gonzalez.

Present.

Councilmember Spears.

Here.

Councilmember White.

Mayor Jones.

Mayor, we have quorum.

Great.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Okay.

So this meeting is to discuss the council consideration request process.

I'll provide some opening comments.

Um and then look forward to a good productive conversation.

The as always with my intent, uh, it is to make this all frankly, all that we do efficient, and as we navigate this very challenging time, we minimize risk to our community, right?

As I've shared with each of you individually, and I've outlined in in a memo uh what these enhancements are are designed to do.

Um I think uh part of the the challenge is I have uh shared with many of you is that um some of these things I've talked to you individually as I've it all is also shared um in speaking with former council members, um none of these actually enhancements are new um in practice.

Many were expectations and actually practices some of you were already doing.

Umfortunately, some of these things were not written down.

Um and so we are now in the process of writing them down to clarify expectations and again to minimize any any confusion.

Um I am also frankly not naive uh to believe that some of these things are um some of your feedback.

Um I trust comes from a of a genuine place, and I understand previously, you know, mayors have used this process to throttle ideas.

I can fully appreciate that.

Um I would ask, as I have demonstrated in in my actions and as I've explained the spirit and intent of these things, that these are all again designed for us to be efficient with our time and to minimize legal risk to our community.

Um, these are all about going faster, um, and we do that when we can all have confidence that the things people have said they did have in fact been done.

Okay.

As mentioned in both memos, our city attorney has repeatedly affirmed uh that these enhancements are not in conflict with the ordinance, um, and not a change, and a change to the ordinance is not required.

Um that all the enhancements are in accordance with the current ordinance.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Uh yes, uh, you had asked whether uh the changes you had you had made in your memo are legal, and I have said that they are.

And if I may, I'll give the three main reasons why, or the three reasons why I'm giving that opinion.

One is the changes are not contradictory to anything in the ordinance, they are supplemental.

Uh number two is the CCR ordinance presupposes a governance committee and associated council committees, which the mayor has the authority to create, modify, or disband.

Uh so that's reason number two, but probably most importantly, when it comes to legal risk to the city, uh, there's really no external legal risk to the city.

Uh therefore, in from my view, this is a matter solely within the council's prerogative.

Okay.

Uh thank you indeed.

Let me also just lay flat.

I think there are some some misperceptions, some mistruths in the in the public sphere about what this does and what this does not do.

Okay.

So what this does do is ensure we can all trust that the current process is actually being adhered to.

Unfortunately, you know, that mistruth was then uh reshared in a public document.

It was shared through a press release.

Uh we then had to retract that press release because that mistruth was out there.

So I think we can all appreciate the importance of when somebody says they have done something, that is in fact a true statement.

And I think we can save ourselves some time and some energy and some brain cells by doing what I have asked, which is having the city manager quickly initial that they have in fact been notified of the CCR.

And that's all that does.

That does not stop it in any way.

What it does is just give all of us comfort that we that we have now reviewed when reviewing that document the where it says I have notified the city manager, we can have trust that that process that is actually happened.

Um what it does also do by allowing the city manager an earlier um a notification of the CCR itself is allow him in his office to identify potential legal risks to the city.

Some may say, oh well, you know, other lawyers may have a different read on that.

Understood.

However, there is one city attorney, uh, there is one attorney whose client is the city.

And so I think we serve ourselves well uh by at least getting that read.

And again, um, you know, same with with Eric when when he is asked to notify be um acknowledged that he's been notified, he has just 24 hours to do that, right?

Similarly, the city attorney's office would have similarly just 24 hours uh to again initial that they have been notified of the CCR.

And at that point, um, if the city attorney has any legal concerns with the CCR, um that they would, if they are if you know notification, I've seen it, thank you.

Um, if there are in fact though, legal concerns that our city attorney has, he has 96 hours, right, to document those in writing.

And I think what that all affords all of us then, again, that doesn't give him any more power.

That did that gives us better awareness of potential legal risks to our community.

That doesn't give him any more power, let me reiterate that.

Doesn't give Eric any more power.

What it does is give us greater assurance, greater confidence uh that we are being thorough and and are minimizing any risks to our community.

What does what it does not do?

Let me also be very clear about that.

Uh, this in no way enhances the power of unelected um uh civil servants.

It does not do that.

It asks Eric very quick very again within 24 hours, please again initial, so we can all have confidence that the thing you have said is true on paper is adact on paper.

We don't have time to be guessing if somebody's lying on a piece of paper.

Okay.

Why would we not want that easy confirmation?

I would ask my colleagues.

Why would why would we not want that?

We can save ourselves some time.

Um again, asking Andy to provide an initial legal review to flag potential legal concerns doesn't give him any more power, it gives us more awareness.

And in this legal environment, in this, let me reiterate that.

In this legal environment, we need to minimize the risk to our community.

Again, if Andy has a legal concern with something, um, he will provide that in writing, in writing for everybody's consideration within 96 hours.

And then, as you, as elected officials representing your constituents, you can review that written document that the city attorney has to provide and weigh in and um and determine if you would still like to sponsor the the CCR.

Again, it doesn't stop anything.

What it does though is arm you with additional information.

Each of the the CCR also, excuse me, the legal review, again, it doesn't get stopped in in any way.

It just gives you greatest awareness of of what's going on.

What I also found in speaking with some of you and in speaking with former city council members, many of you are actually trying already to get a legal review, and so some of your offices are doing the exact same thing, which I think I find to be somewhat inefficient, which is why having that legal review early on by Andy gives you some can save some time and some some resources there.

No one in our community benefits by delaying an understanding of the potential legal risks to our community.

I will say and I appreciate those of you that have already used the current process, and I have found in the feedback that there has been no delay.

So there is no delay.

Again, I can empathize with you know previous situations and experiences where yes, there was a purposeful delay.

That is not my intent, which is why to address that I put the 24 hour uh the 24 hour clock on that.

Um, I I understand um the importance of letting folks know, of course, what you are working on.

Let's be also very clear.

This process in no way prevents anybody from issuing a press release about the CCR that they have submitted.

You're still free to do that.

Okay.

Um I am also thankful based on the feedback that I've received that the process has in fact worked as designed.

Um a council member um shared that a draft uh CCR that they were uh they wanted the city manager for initial for um for an initial in that conversation.

It was shared that what was being requested in that draft CCR was actually already going to be part of the proposed FY26 budget, um, and thus there wasn't necessarily a need for the CCR.

So again, that saves us time and energy because that's something that doesn't need to be reviewed because it's already in progress.

Additionally, um during in the process of uh of uh reviewing a draft CCR it was hand uh it was identified that it could actually be handled completely offline and that CCR uh my understanding from notification to city manager to legal review to um um completion and being addressed by the staff was completed in all of four hours.

And so, you know, when I looked at the number of CCRs that died on the vine in the last um in the last administration, um my intent is that we review these thoroughly.

We do as much of the work early on so that they don't die on the vine, and then we get these um, but we are only again looking at those things that actually require city council time and energy.

Okay.

I'll reiterate again the city attorney has been very clear that none of this is out of compliance with the current ordinance, and I uh really appreciate everyone that has um already worked uh in accordance with with these enhancements.

Um, and you know, again, these are all uh designed to ensure that we're doing the best we can for the city of San Antonio, being efficient with our time and also minimizing legal risk to our community.

Okay.

Let me let me just say one more thing.

It hasn't gotten a lot of feedback, but I think it's an important piece of this.

Um, you know, tomorrow we'll have um a discussion on the proposed budget, and as we know, we're going into a very difficult fiscal environment.

And so my request that you know, as you're submitting your CCRs, you do you know, put a sentence or two about your understanding of how this enhances or modifies a core service, I think is really important.

That ideally is all of a 30, 45-second exercise, but what I think that does is help us understand you know, some of the things that we understand to be to be core as we are entering a difficult fiscal environment, how we might consider that um CCR to uh affecting or modifying a core service in the context of our very constrained fiscal environment.

I know some of um some of you have reiterated uh your your desire that we focus on core, and I think again, one or two sentence acknowledgement of of some of whether something in fact has to do with a core service only helps us do that.

Okay, um, and of course, even if it's not a core service, that does not mean it doesn't get reviewed, it's just we are we're level setting about what something um touches and and and does not.

Okay.

This is the um comments.

Okay, great.

Um I've got a couple folks that would like to speak.

Councilwoman Castillo, please.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, I'd like to thank Councilman Adarete Gavito and Councilman Mark White for signing on to the three signature memo to have a conversation about the changes to the council consideration process.

Um we know that council consideration requests are one of the many vehicles that we use to improve the quality of life for our constituencies, and governing and governance is a team sport.

And having a conversation about what these changes are and are not uh is of value to the residents of San Antonio and to this body.

Uh if there's misunderstanding on the practices and or intent, there is value in having conversations as a body of how this may or may not impact our policy making process.

Now, with that being said, with the recommended changes in the memo that was presented to council, uh what we know is that the adopted ordinance from 2023 is something that we deliberated, debated, and took action on.

One of those conversations that we had in 2024, rather, uh, was the recommendation for city council to check in with the city attorney.

Uh, and that recommendation was rejected by the council, and I understand councils change, leadership changes.

However, in terms of taking action on amending or changing an ordinance requires council action.

Um, and Andy, I I I kind of uh challeng, I I not kinda, I I challenge your interpretation in terms of the ability to change an ordinance without council action.

Uh I understand what you've shared is that if it does not contradict the current ordinance and or impact city services, it is something that can be done unilaterally.

However, I argue that CCRs are the vehicles in which we do impact city services, right?

Uh, as laid out uh in the mayor's points, right?

They can have financial impacts, legal impact.

So therefore, um by proxy, this memo does impact the overall impact to the ordinance.

So I I think that's something that I I disagree.

Uh in 2024, uh, Andy, you also stated that it was an opportunity under section 11 and 12 of the city charter that council has the authority to change the procedures within the governing process of city council.

Does that still not stand today?

That's correct, Councilwoman, which is why again my legal analysis is this is an issue.

It's a it's a family matter, and the family is the elected officials, and neither Eric nor I nor the clerk belong to the family.

To answer your question, yes, that's that's still applicable, councilwoman.

Okay, so so with that being said, I'd prefer to keep the council adopted CCR process in place.

Uh any proposed changes should be decided and adopted uh by this body into ordinance by full council because ultimately this is something that our constituency relies on.

And again, I I do value the clarification in the mayor walking us through how this is intended to be efficient and streamlined processes.

Um, however, right, I I I value your leadership.

Um, but again, right, you highlighted past leadership, and I can't think about the change in leadership.

I need to think about the governance structure as a whole and long-term, right?

We can't think about individuals, we have to think about their governing process and structure beyond our tenure on council.

Uh, and that's why I believe that it's important that if we do uh have discussion on amending the existing ordinance that council should deliberate and take action.

Uh so what I would like to see is that we keep the council adopted CCR process in place and any proposed changes should be decided and adopted into ordinance by full city council.

Again, with the current governance structure, um the process is that staff presents the reasons for recommending approval and or denial in a public meeting, whether council members can ask questions and provide more of that information.

Uh what we do get is that legal analysis from city staff, whether something is or is not preempted.

Um, but we have examples in which going through that process, right?

We've been told, for example, auto and metal recyclers who just show in the south side of district five.

Uh, we were told year after year that it's a state issue, uh, it's TCEQ, it's outside and beyond the preview of local government.

But through the persistence of the CCR process and through the governance process uh with council committees, we were able to ensure that one, there's a fire safety plan in place to keep our residents safe, and two, that there's more accountability in ensuring that those irresponsible um property owners are held accountable.

And that's highlighting that the argument was that it was preempted, it was the state's responsibility out of the hands of local government.

And I think that's an example.

While I understand the intent, um, what we hear is that the uh policies that our constituents rely on and expect us to put forward.

Uh, we're often told they're preempted, and there's a lot of examples I know my colleagues have, but ultimately this is about ensuring that we continue to have the ordinance in place that was adopted by council that can continue and allow us to meet those needs of our constituencies because that's their expectation.

Uh, I value uh the expertise of all of my colleagues.

You all were duly elected, and with the current process, right?

The expectation is we get support from four colleagues to move something forward.

Um, and I think that merits moving the process forward as adopted by council.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um councilwoman um well, actually, let me just go back to the city attorney.

Um, Andy, does your legal advice change depending on whether you provide an initial legal review before something reaches governance or when it's in governance?

It might change, Mayor, uh, depending on additional information or obviously changes in law or if a program uh uh changes in terms of ways to mitigate risk so it can evolve over time, yes.

Sure, understood, yes, in the back and forth.

But if you were presented um with the same legal issue, no changes in law, whether you looked at it before it reached governance or when it was in the governance committee, would your legal read of it change?

How does some let me say to say that a different way?

It shouldn't change unless again, I guess unless somebody, me or somebody on my team frankly just made a mistake on it, uh, but no, it shouldn't change.

Right.

So the the example that councilwoman Castillo raised of, well, initially it was raised as something that could be preempted during discussion, it was identified that there was actually a way to get to yes, that process as outlined in this CCR um enhancement memo, that is still an outcome that is possible, correct?

Yes, Mayor.

Again, the the legal analysis and recommendations could evolve over time as we get more information, or as the programmer initiative gets more discussed.

Yeah.

Um and the the um that's helpful.

The and maybe just to level set for folks, because I again much of my um much of my intent with uh bringing the legal review sooner is because we are in fact in a much different legal environment than the legal environment when this CCR, the original uh the 2023 CCR memo was written.

Can you give us your assessment, Andy, of the changes in the legal environment that require a um a more prudent um review of of potential legal risks to the city?

Well, I mean, the the legal environment as an is evolved evolved as you may mention, Mayor, nationwide, so there's a heightened awareness and making sure we comply with law, particularly federal laws.

So we just uh to your point, I guess we just uh have to be more cautious in uh in terms of what we look at what we're trying to do, and uh uh our role is to give the advice as best we can.

So just to recap, um, one the legal environment has changed, it's more charged, um legal risks are higher.

Secondly, um your legal review of something uh and whether or not um it it may evolve based on engagement um is the same, whether your legal review is before governance or after governance.

The benefit of that though is that others that may potentially consider supporting that CCR now have that at least the benefit of your initial analysis.

Have I captured that correctly?

Um I don't have an issue with what you said, Mayor.

Thank you.

Okay.

Councilwoman Castillo, may I may I ask, do you have um just to clarify where the contention is?

Do you have a challenge?

Um what what is the concern with having um city manager White initial to acknowledge that he's been notified?

Oh infrastructure for all with city manager of Mark Wyatt.

With Eric here you go.

What is the the rub with having the city manager initial it so that we can all have confidence that the statement I have notified the city manager is in fact a true one?

Yes, so with the uh council adopted uh ordinance, it does have that we notify the city manager.

Notification can mean text, call and or signature.

So um with the adopted ordinance, it does include notification to the city manager.

Um but again that's notification.

Yeah, no, and I understand that.

Um, in the example that I raised though with councilwoman Aldete Gavito submitted the first CCR, and it's and that says I have notified the city manager.

I asked the city manager if he had seen it and he hadn't been notified.

No notification and in any of the forms that you just described, which is why I think we can save our time, serve ourselves some time and energy by just having him initial it.

So that means that we have that he's actually that we we know he's actually been notified.

Well, what I would respond to that, right, is our city managers responsible for an organization with thousands of employees and micromanaging the governance process is uh something that I think our colleagues in terms of council deliberation discussion and commit uh committee debate is how we work through that process, right?

If something's not a good idea, it dies.

Um, but ultimately we're elected as a policymakers.

Eric, Andy are facilitators of those policy recommendations and/or ideas.

Um, and that's that's that's the rub.

Um, and with the current adopted ordinance, it is notification to the city manager and not necessarily a signature of the city manager.

So this the notification the current ordinance, right?

Is that he's notified?

So if the current ordinance is not adhered to, really again, him just initialing that is a way to ensure we can have confidence that the current ordinance is adhered to.

Um do you have other recommendations on on how you would like to ensure that everybody can have confidence that the city manager has in fact been notified?

Uh Eric, how how would you like this to go about having conversations uh with our policy recommendations uh to be considered for signatures from our colleagues?

However, y'all want it.

Really, this is an internal process.

Um the mayor's right.

She asked me the question.

The ordinance says notification of the city manager's office, you all have liaisons.

Um I'm always available however y'all want to do it.

Okay, and what I would emphasize on what I would like to see, it's keeping the council adopted CCR process in place.

Thank you, Mayor.

There, and to be very clear, this this doesn't change the notification.

What this does is make sure that the notification in fact takes place and people can have confidence when they sign on to something that no that the notification has in fact occurred.

Okay.

Uh Councilmember White.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to I want to tell a story that that is the background for how we got here today.

Uh, two years ago, I was elected my very first CCR.

I worked with Councilman McKee Rodriguez uh to create a fund for uh construction mitigation.

Uh we filed it, we talked about it too, councilwoman as well as with with Marina as well, was all proud, right?

Filed my first CCR, and then I remember somebody saying to me, good luck ever getting that heard.

And I said, Well, what do you mean?

And and the person said, Well, you know, these things get filed and uh they just stack up and they don't and they don't go anywhere.

I said, Well, uh, I'm gonna fix that.

And I went and found the CCR ordinance that existed at that time, and I said, I'm gonna amend this to make sure the process works.

And then I had somebody in this very building say to me, Mark, are you sure you want to amend the CCR process?

Because I know you agree with Jalen on this one, but Jalen comes up with all sorts of crazy ideas, and are you sure you really want to see those moving forward?

And I looked at the person and frankly, I couldn't believe it.

Because while it is true that Councilman McKee Rodriguez and I are gonna disagree on a lot, if Councilman McKee Rodriguez can get four other people to sign on to one of his CCRs to advance a policy initiative for debate amongst council, then his CCR gets to be heard just as much as mine or anybody else's.

They helped on it as well, and we all got together and we figured out how do we want to proceed as a council.

And we met with Mayor Nuremberg, and I met with Andy, and I met with Eric, and we went back and forth on what the process should look like, and it resulted in a B session, just like this, where we sat together, we talked about different ideas, and then that resulted in going to a session and a vote to amend this ordinance.

This thing right here controls how we operate in terms of CCRs.

And I want to read you the very first line of this ordinance.

It says sections 11 and 12 authorize city council, not Mark White, not the mayor, not Phyllis, no city council to determine its rules of procedures and order of business.

It's the city charter that puts the domain of talk of establishing rules and procedures and orders of business on this body, not on one person.

And that's the reason we had to have that vote two years ago to amend the ordinance.

The next portion talks about how in 2003, right?

This city council created this ordinance to set forth the CCR policies and procedures.

In 2007, City Council wanted to amend it again, and they did.

And then this body in 2024 amended it for the final time, and that's why we have this here today.

And Andy, you know, you and I have talked about this, and I'm not going to go back and forth with you on the legal out here, but I agree with the councilwoman that the changes that are being proposed by the mayor absolutely conflict with this ordinance.

And there was just a debate a second ago.

The mayor asked about whether it would be different if the legal analysis occurred before it goes to governance or after it goes to governance.

Well, guess what the statute says?

Guess what the ordinance says?

The ordinance says that a legal review can take place if the governance committee feels it's necessary.

So as of right now, the ordinance says the legal review takes place after the CCR is filed and it goes to governance.

The mayor's proposed changes want the legal review to go before.

So the mayor's changes, the proposed changes, very definitely conflict with the current ordinance.

And to change this ordinance to change the rules that we have all agreed to live by, we must go to an A session, and we must have a vote.

And guys, this is not about us here now or this mayor.

This is about future council members, future mayors.

We have to have rules, we have to have process.

You can't add language or interpretation to ordinances unless they're ambiguous, right?

You can't do it.

And two years ago, and Eric, you were in there, and Andy, you were in there too.

We went back and forth on this city manager notification.

And we decided to just put it in there as notify.

Because we talked about, as Eric said, you guys can notify me however you want.

Stop me in the hall, show it to me, send me an email, do what you want.

That's why it says notify, and it doesn't say written notification to the city manager.

Now, if this body thinks that we need to make sure that the city manager is being notified with some form of written notification, whether it's he's initialing it or we have to send him uh an email or whatever it is, let's change the ordinance.

Let's go to an A session and let's change section one here to say written notification if that's the will of this body.

But is it the will of this body that controls?

No, no one person.

As the councilwoman stated, and I won't, I won't um I won't go too much into it, but the CCR process, extremely important, right?

We are all in our communities in our districts every single day hearing problems from the residents, and then it's our job to come back here, work with our colleagues, find solutions to make their day-to-day lives better.

There's only really two methods for all of us on council to advance our policy ideas, right?

It's one through the three-signature memo process where we can get what we want on the agenda, and then the second is through this CCR process, which takes five people, right?

Almost half the council has to agree that a policy idea warrants further discussion to get a CCR filed.

The prerequisites for filing a CCR are very, very clear in this statute.

You have to have five signatures, and you have to notify the city manager.

Those are the two prerequisites.

The memo that the mayor sent everybody, right?

There's a section entitled prerequisites that adds a lot more than what's right here.

If this body wants to adopt these or anything else, let's do it.

But it has to be done with a vote.

All of us here get a say in that.

And so I would like to continue with the council adopted process as is.

Councilman White, in the instant you just laid out uh what you said the the folks have to notify the city manager um uh when that doesn't happen, as it didn't happen most recently, um what do you propose there?

How do you what what would again let's not forget?

I get you can folks are are debating, you know, their their comfort with uh an enhancement, but when something already is not happening the way that it is intended, so you're saying you know you're supposed to notify when it's not happening, that wasn't happening, right?

And I my understanding is that was happening 60% of the time-ish, right?

So there were many things that were supposed to be happening that weren't happening, and again, this is just codifying it having help helping folks have some comfort that what's said that was done was in fact done.

So, how would you help your other colleagues um ensure that did you want to do you want to call everybody and let them know, hey, I notified so and so like the you know city manager was notified.

How how can we very quickly and efficiently um you know understand that the city manager was was notified about a draft CCR anything simpler or more time timely or more timely and efficient in the time than with just a quick initial and I'm trying to understand why why why oppose to the initial per se?

So uh thank you for using the word codifying because that that's exactly what needs to take place.

If we are going to change it from notify to written notification, we need to codify it within the statute to answer your question, Mayor.

Click to clarify, it's not written notification, it doesn't have to be written occasion.

You can in fact let him know verbally, and then he can initial to acknowledge that he has been notified.

Sure.

So I explained that to you as well.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Thank you.

Uh his writing to me would be that he has received notification and he would be initialing in writing to tell us.

But but this is how I think we could do it, Mayor.

The city manager uh and the city attorney get notification every time a CCR is filed, right?

And so if if Eric sees No, they don't.

What do you mean it's it's part of not early on in the process, the very first step.

No, no, no, no, no, yeah, yeah.

I understand.

When a CCR is filed, right?

And it's filed, yes, that's correct.

It's filed.

Debbie will then make it in.

Give everybody notice that a new CCR was filed, like she's done for the last two years.

Eric and Andy will have will see it, right?

If they if Eric didn't get notified, right, he can very easily at that point say, I never received notification, and then you know what?

Then you're right, Mayor.

Then we could say the process wasn't followed, and then maybe the CCR should not proceed to governance.

So that would be one way to handle it.

Yeah, what we're trying to do though is as I elaborated and provided examples where things that were going to become a CCR, it was actually identified in the process of the initial notification to uh to Eric that they didn't have to be CCRs.

So my again, my intent, things that don't require council time and energy or review, because again, for me, the most important thing is the outcome, right?

What is the outcome that we're trying to get for the constituent?

And if that doesn't require city council action, as several examples have already shown, then it doesn't need to, right?

Then why even go through the hassle of uh of the other steps when you could clearly identify that early on?

So I would say, Mayor, respectfully perhaps watch how the system plays out for six months.

Yeah, be a part of it before you want to make a change to a system that you've never been a part of.

See how it works, and then perhaps you can make the recommendations because it's worked pretty well.

I think everybody around this table would tell you.

Well, I mean, respectfully, Councilman White, the fact that 30 some odd CCRs died on the vine shows there may be ways to improve your process.

But but you want to walk they died on the vineyard.

Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me, thank you.

I think also as the city manager, the city council, the city attorney has already just described the count the ch the legal environment has changed.

So I am always going to try to minimize the legal risk to our community.

I will also take steps always that prevent frankly embarrassing steps like needing to rescind a press release.

Um we don't need to do those things.

So let's save ourselves time and energy.

I this is you know, why would you not want an easy confirmation that he's been notified?

Why would you not want an easy, an early rather legal review that something may be uh potentially uh a legal risk for the community on the merits of this?

I I am struggling to uh to understand how this benefits um how this benefits the community.

Your your your pushback on those very simple uh simple enhancements.

Okay.

Um we've got okay.

Um de Gavito, please, councilwoman.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to also thank Councilman White and Councilwoman Castillo for your partnership in making sure our residents' voices are heard at City Hall.

I want to be clear, we report to the residents.

We don't, as council members, we do not report to the mayor.

We report to the residents of our districts and we report to the residents of the city.

Uh and that's important because the CCR is a tool that we use to get things done on our residents' behalf.

So to me, a unilateral decision to allow unelected city staff to potentially veto some of our ideas as representatives of the community.

I am going to take issue with that.

So I I do um wanna also make sure that I'm also clear on this, Eric.

I prefer to keep the council adopted CCR in place.

Any proposed changes should be decided and adopted into ordinance again by a vote of the full city council.

As Councilwoman Castillo pointed out, this is a team sport, you know, and so we need each other.

We need each other's support to push ideas through.

Um, you know, one of the conversations we were also having is my loose and dangerous dog policy proposal.

You know, I took that to the city attorney initially and also was told that is a statewide issue.

Um and what it would have happened if I just stopped there.

My team didn't just stop there.

We we didn't take no for an answer, and now we have a uh a very effective loose and dangerous dog policy proposal that is solving real life concerns for our residents.

So the CCR process is a council tool, and only the council should decide on how it is.

And and we're gonna keep it that way.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to uh correct your statement though, there is no unilateral veto in that process.

Um when they submit it to when it's submitted to Eric for notification, he doesn't veto.

There's no veto in this entire process.

When it goes to the to uh city attorney um uh Segovia, um, he will again initial that he has seen it, right?

Um, and if he has a legal concern, he'll write that and provide that to not only the sponsor, but for everybody's edification about the potential real legal risks.

The CC the draft CCR still moves forward.

No one vetoes anything.

So I want to make sure that you are clear on that point.

I am clear on that, but with the loose and dangerous dog policy proposal, again, we were taught we were told you know, dogs are property in the state of Texas, it's a statewide issue.

It could have stopped there, and we didn't take that for an answer.

Understood, and in this process, you could still also take that forward.

As I shared, Andy could provide his and eagle is his initial legal assessment and work through uh some of the some of the other considerations.

As you rightly point out, we're also considered there.

So this doesn't actually change that in any form or fashion.

Um adding um uh an legal review early, um, only again gives the entire council the benefit of that legal analysis um as early as possible.

Okay.

Councilwoman Via Gran.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh sound public policy will always advance in due course.

And as it's customary with any new administration, adjustments are made and new initiatives are introduced.

Naturally, as with any significant change, there is a period of adaptation, and I value this open dialogue that we're having, but I I really do think we just need to kind of state our points and then kind of try and come together.

Because at key, when we move forward, we need to move forward together and we need to focus on our relationships with each other.

Uh, I believe it's prudent that any process proposed changes undergo a thorough legal review.

I I take my issues to Andy.

If I ask a certain question, and uh whatever recommendation he gives me, I adjust and make forward.

The other thing I do is I make sure that I discuss it with those I'm getting signatures for.

So sometimes I'll go to Andy multiple times as we make changes uh through this.

So um I think it's it's easy to let the the legal team look over it.

In terms of does the opinion need to come out.

If I find out that someone's gone to Andy, I'm pretty much good with how we move forward on this.

Um and there's just gonna be adjusted adjustments, and we're gonna need to pivot.

Um, I think it's important that we get the manager's notification on the office.

Uh I we could look into if it's just our liaison that we talk to, and then um before Debbie issues it out, we we make sure that Eric has put his signature on it if he needs to get a signature.

But I think working together, we can we can find a way to get this this process done.

I think um the more we streamline, the more we don't have to come back and have the um long drawn-out debates that we've had.

We've all had a CCRs where this has gone through uh the better.

And so the other thing is this this is a process, and we need to kind of um look at it together as a team, but these conversations can happen in two or three or four.

We we do not need to always have to come to a B session.

And the other thing that I think is critical is that we get to committee, and in committee, we can we can do a lot of work also.

So I want to make sure that as we go through committee and as we go through um, you know, the conversation that we continue to understand that um our relationships and how we talk to to each other is key, and I think we we need to do more of that.

So I I'm pledging now that I'm gonna do more uh where we can interact with each other in smaller groups so that we can make sure that we we're understanding what we're coming what what's coming from.

But I I think these are things that I had already been doing, so I'm okay with formalizing it.

I'm also if we're gonna have a larger conversation, we can have a larger conversation on this issue.

Um, but I think it needs to go to committee first before we do.

Thank you.

Would anyone else like to speak on this issue?

Yeah, please go.

So I I think uh one thing I want to understand is what the difference in outcome is between these enhancements and what's currently on the books, and um, you know, there's a discussion of the inputs and outputs of this process.

So just a clarifying question for uh for Eric and Andy, and I when I was a staffer and this was happening, I I did express concern at that time about the notification to senior manager only in the sense that it's completely wide open.

Um so you know, I I don't know Eric's uh how well you remembered things, right?

But it it kind of was like I could stop in the hallway and tell you if I see you and eventually can tell you it's it's slightly informal in that way, and I understand wanting to have that open process, but um so question on process for you for you to if I wanted to do a CCR, you know, just completely out there, right?

If I wanted to mandate that every private business in San Antonio um have unions, or uh which some of us probably would want to sign that, or if I, you know, based on the legal landscape that we currently exist in Texas, and I said I want the city's Metro Health Department to run an abortion clinic, I'm sure both of you would have a couple concerns with that.

But walk me through what you would do in those two situations and what I would be able to do after you have reviewed that.

What do you want me to do?

I mean, look, I mean that this is this is a process that governs y'all's consideration request.

Um it's really up to you.

It it's not um either way, right?

In either situation, it is the beginning or the initiating of a concept, an idea, proposal, uh a new ordinance or what have you.

It's the initiating part of it.

Um I'm indifferent.

You all decide how you want to do it.

I I don't think any other way, I don't think any one way is better than the other.

And and really it comes down to how you all want to do it.

Um the notifications in the past have been by text, they've been at my monthly meetings, they've been at city council chambers.

Um they've taken all different forms.

I'm indifferent to that.

Um it is and I and I think this was part of the the beef session conversation that Councilman White talked about that that occurred two years ago.

Um the the manager's job, I have a lot of responsibilities.

One of those things is not to stop concepts or ideas from the elected officials, because this is the initiation part.

The the mayor mentioned there was um um councilman McKee Rodriguez was considering resubmitting a a CCR on a topic.

He called me, I told him I said, Well, just so you know, in two weeks it's gonna be in the proposed budget.

So there are some benefits to that, but on around new concepts or new ideas, however, you want to notify me, you all decide.

It does not make any difference to me.

And just to clarify, councilman, um I am also agnostic as to the notification.

I really just wanting to make sure that it is in fact happened, right?

That's all that uh the initial to me um signifies is an acknowledgement that it's actually happened.

And Andy, if you want to elaborate on the two scenarios I suggested, and uh assuming you would have a legal opinion that was against that, what would happen at that point?

I I would uh provide that legal advice directly to you, uh councilman on that regard.

Well, to be clear, um you write it down, right?

You'd write down that that that legal counsel in in to the end in the instance that um um so initial initialing, say yep, I've seen it.

If there's a legal concern, you would identify what that is.

So that is it relates to CCR, yes, yes, sir.

Yeah, that's exactly right.

But but I guess what I want to emphasize is if he if he if any council member comes to me with a question, I would obviously answer the question in terms of the legal advice.

I think because his question was specific to the CCR process, I wanted to be clear clear about what that was.

So if I was to give you a CCR again, right, Metro Health to an abortion clinic, or every corporate entity in this city has to have a union, and that is contrary to state or federal law, you could put that in writing, but would I be able to still proceed with signatures with that acknowledgement and get that CCR to governance for discussion?

I think under the the memorandum the mayor issued, I would I would initial it, but I would give the written advice on it.

Yeah, so you're even though if it was against state and federal law, that would still move forward.

Correct.

I would I would I would initial again just saying that I had reviewed it.

Yes.

If we want to ban the first amendment, that can still go to governance.

I just want to be clear because that that's what everyone is getting at is correct.

What role and authority do you have to stop that?

I have no, I I have no ability to stop it.

Yeah.

It's this idea, this term unilateral veto is incorrect.

Not sure where it came from.

There's no veto in any way.

What it does is allow people to be informed early on of any legal risks, at least those that are understood initially.

Uh and if I could ask you, Mayor, something real quick.

Um again, the I think part of the confusion point was the word coordination with your office.

So again, if I wanted the C CR and I was gonna go a hundred percent against you a resolution to get rid of the mayor, you could not stop that or or prevent that from getting signatures or going to governance to address that.

So thank you for raising that.

As I understand, again, some of this was expectations and practice under under previous folks, but because it wasn't necessarily written down, that's also something that was adhered to Maso Menos, right?

Um so uh the intent there is not to have um the original intent was not to have uh my chief of staff in any way slow it down, but just as a heads up.

My understanding is again it was understood by others, and it was a practice to provide that professional courtesy uh from the sponsoring uh council member to the mayor's chief of staff that hey this is coming, and that's it.

Um that's all that that was intended to do.

Um I wouldn't it at this point still encourage folks to uh to um um raise that or share that with my chief of staff.

Um we are committed to everybody being successful, um, and that's the spirit and intent of of that.

Again, at this point, it is an encourage.

And Andy, uh just another question, so I get your feedback on that also.

The the mayor cannot stop a CCR herself, correct?

That's that's correct.

If I if I read the ordinance in the memo together, yes, that's correct.

And if there were to be further enhancements, that could still not be correct.

I'm trying to understand you mean the further enhancements.

Yes, well, there you know, if it's the current mayor or any future mayor, if they were to do some enhancements to this process, could there be anything for the mayor to unilaterally stop a CCR from progressing?

And I guess my my answer to that would be it would it would depend on how this council decides how they want to do that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh Councilwoman Spears.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I know I I am this will it I'm new to this entire process.

Um but my concerns lie with the speediness of getting out our CCRs for our constituents.

I'm concerned about the four-day turnaround with the city attorney's office.

Um I feel like that could potentially delay things getting on and getting through on my end and representing my constituents.

But um I also wanted to ask you, Andy.

So to your point, I do understand the spirit of what you're trying to do.

I'm concerned that should another mayor come in that doesn't have that same um intent, use this as a weapon in some way later on if we do change this ordinance.

Um further, on top of that, if we we are coordinating with the mayor's office in any way.

Did you did you consider at all if this would create a walking quorum at that point?

Or if you ever considered that.

Councilman, I want to make sure that you've seen the latest version of the memo, which does which removes the um the request for the to for coordination with my office.

So it's at this point it's encouraged if that's something we'd like to do.

I want to make sure that you're I want to make sure that you you understand that part.

Okay, I do.

Thank you so much.

Yes, no, but in in any event, should we decide to to take that and do as encouraged to talk coordinate with her office, would that not create a walk-in quorum?

Um if the if it's a discussion with the uh the mayor's uh chief of staff, uh it probably doesn't create a walking quorum issue.

It does not.

No.

Okay.

Thank you for that.

I think I feel I do understand the spirit of why you're trying to do this.

I feel like I personally would like to experience the process as it stands today, the CCR process, but as we move along and we see a desire to make any changes that we could vote on this as a council.

Um again, I completely understand the spirit and the nature of of of the reasoning behind this.

Um I'm concerned about potential future leadership, though, using it in a way that we that isn't of that intent.

So can you elaborate on that?

I'm not I'm not sure what you mean.

Well, I mean, if someone comes behind you and can use some of these as a way some of what I'm sorry, these notifications and and the process to uh slow down CCRs or stop them in some fashion.

Yeah, councilwoman, everyone in this room excluded.

I do not believe that in anyone in this room.

Councilwoman, the the the requirement for a notification to the city manager is already in the current ordinance.

Um the only thing that I have asked for um is again because a previous CCR was submitted, they said they notify the city manager that was a lie.

There was a put on a public document, we had to rescind a press release, right?

And so the only thing I'm looking for, I'm not saying you must talk to only the city manager on Monday and notify them in writing and all follow that that's not the case in any way.

You are free to notify the city manager however you'd like to, in accordance with the current ordinance.

I'm just asking for, hey, give us confirmation that that's actually happened.

So an initial is is all that is uh is all that that is.

I'm not sure how that can be how that can be weaponized.

Um moreover, the earlier legal review again, just every gives everybody um um uh comfort in at least what is the initial reading to to minimize duplicative um legal reviews that I understand is already happening in some offices.

Okay, thank you for your feedback here.

Councilman Galvan.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I think into the question that I've been hearing from council members about you know what happens if this doesn't happen or what happens if this doesn't happen.

I want to ask kind of more point blank.

If you know if council members uh say this process is approved and we go forward with the new way of going with the CCRs, um and the notifications, the confirmation notification is not met, um hours they'll submit the CCR to the city clerk's office.

What would happen that if the prerequisites are not met for the C CR process, what would happen to CCR?

Well, I mean that one to your point, the one that I described was um um out of alignment with the current ordinance, and we only caught that because I asked.

So um in that in my mind was not a valid CCR, that's why it was pulled back.

Um but again, that's just that's just the current ordinance.

That's no changes um to to what I've had.

I just I asked the question, Eric said nope, no idea.

Never ran it by me.

No notification to my office.

So um again, and a press release was issued.

So uh given that many press releases are issued after these, after these are submitted.

Um again, I I think we all deserve um just solace and and and comfort that the notification has in fact taken place.

Yeah, no, I think that's helpful.

And I guess my question is it goes forward to your point.

That's a I mean, what you what we just did right here is exactly what happens when we don't have some acknowledgement that it's happened.

We have to guess.

Right.

And we shouldn't spend any time or energy guessing that somebody has done the thing they said they did.

Yeah.

And so a not a not valid CCR would just mean that it has to give the signatures or get the notifications first, then come back around to get agenda on the governance committee, correct?

That's what I'm saying.

Yeah.

Just making sure.

Okay.

Um I mean that but what that if I if I may, just in that in that point.

Um the with the enhancement, right, with um the city manager initialing that, um, it would actually never get to Andy, right?

If you don't have that that signature yet from Eric, which you will have in 24 hours, but that again gives everybody solace that the current steps um and requirements place are actually being adhered to.

So by having that initial um early on, we adhere to the process.

Like, thank you, Mayor.

Um I'm trying to see where this question will go to.

I'm gonna ask the question.

I guess it can either be through to city clerk, mayor, or Andy.

Um generally for chairs of committees, uh, no government committees a bit different with C CR specifically, right?

But for other committee chairs, uh whether it's governance or not, um they all have discretion to uh agenda something or not, correct?

Again, I don't know which where I'm going with this one, but in the in the previous uh charge to committees, yes, that's correct, councilman.

Okay.

And when you say previous charge, you're just saying just because it or because the mayor has not covered the issue.

Right.

Yeah.

Okay, so I guess my uh my thought on this currently is that the mayor is exercising their ability to agendize pieces as chair of the government's committee, correct?

Agenda C CRs.

Correct.

Okay.

And then um and then Andy, I heard something, and I want to make sure I heard it correctly.

Um when my colleague from District 4 mentioned if a new mayor wanted to change this process or the pr the prerequisites, um, could they do so with the memo?

And I believe your answer was uh if council decides or agrees.

I just wanted to make sure that you for letting me clarify the question.

As long as it's consistent with what the ordinance was it doesn't that directly conflict with the ordinance.

Um and uh and as long as the the the council again is pointed out by councilman wine has the ability to determine their own rules and procedures, they can do that by ordinance, they can do that, but they can do that in a variety of ways.

They can do that by ordinance, they can do that, but they can do that in a variety of ways.

But again, it's it's up to council.

I see.

Okay, so just making sure I'm understanding is that it can be done in different forms than just an ordinance.

Um it's up to the council to decide what the procedure is.

Okay.

Uh those are all the questions.

I'll come back around in the second round, listen to the conversation a bit more.

Do you have who also signed up?

Yeah, did you sign in, councilwoman?

Okay.

I'm just saying that we've got we've gotten others, but you go ahead, councilwoman.

Okay.

Right now it will actually I've got councilwoman core.

Are there others that would like to speak in the first round?

Okay, councilwoman core, please.

And uh thank you all to my council colleagues who brought this forward.

I think it's always great having discussion and start off since we're having all these Spurs discussions.

If you ask anybody what they love about the Spurs the most, they're the hardest team to hate.

And the reason why they're the hardest team to hate is because we're about teamwork.

And they that they really believe in working, like if you we had a significant leader on the Spurs team a little few years ago, went off to Toronto and won his ship, but he wasn't a good fit for our team because he he wasn't about teamwork.

So I think what our community wants from us is just to work together as a team to figure out what our policy making process is gonna be that works for everyone.

And so with that, uh, I don't have any issues with actual requests of what the uh process is uh included in the mayor's memo.

Our office, when we do policy making, we're always focused on listen, we actually get our ideas from the people that are on the ground or things that we're seeing from community members, and we generally work very hand in hand with the city manager's office to make sure that there is data and need for it, that there is potential funding if that's a decision that needs to be made.

And we'll often, if it is a legal issue, we will call Andy as well when we were working on the memo that would need to be signed between SAWs, City and CPS for our infrastructure issues.

We made sure that there was uh accountability metric in that uh memo to sign, and that was a legal uh legal help that Andy's team provided.

So we generally go through these measures.

I think this came up because in an instant that didn't happen.

And you know, when we're in a classroom and you have a set of norms and the norms don't uh get fulfilled, you can either change the process to ensure accountability, or we can reset on those norms.

And so I think what what we have an opportunity to do is work together as a team to reset on the norms that we want to always hold each other to, and um whether that means a signature is necessary or not, I'm totally open for if we feel like that is the accountability metric we need, or we can say, yes, you know what, we're gonna make sure that every single uh CCR we put forward from now on does get the city manager's look on it.

There are times when we put policy forward that we don't necessarily agree on.

I we were really uh we worked really hard on this public works audit that we were uh wanted to do from an external consultant, and you know, I I told Eric, I was like, Eric, you're not gonna love this one, but this is important for our community, and he didn't stop it because that's as he said, it's it his his job is not to prevent us from policy making, but it's still the right thing to do is tell them like this is why we're doing it, this is what our community wants to see.

All of that to be said, um, I think we just need to come together and reset on the norms that we want to hold ourselves to.

And the one thing that I was thinking about that actually came up that I I hadn't thought about before, thankfully, because I didn't have to term out, but um, what happens when someone turns out?

Like we don't actually have that in the ordinance, and I think we should add something for that, and just to decide whether if the leading council person is no longer on the dais, do we keep theirs going?

This actually happened when I actually came on because the council member before me had started an update to the short-term rental ordinance, and that was already underway, so they kept that process going.

So maybe there needs to be something that we can add to it for um for council members that have termed out.

Like I don't know, uh, you know, there are some that were put forward right before folks left earlier this spring that I understand since we're re-filing, we may not, I guess, reconsider those, but I think that would be something to add.

Um, in addition, there's just one clarifying question that I had from the memo mayor.

Um, and I don't know if you want to answer it now, but it's just about the financial impact.

Like that one is tricky, right?

Because if we don't have finances for something, we can put together uh CCR, but sometimes it allows us to help budget it moving forward.

So for example, the street light gap analysis that CCR that council member McKee Rodriguez, I think he did it before my time, but now it's something that we actually fund in our budget has been really helpful.

Um, I think we need to put more money in our budget for that, Eric.

But um that is that is an example of one that did not actually have uh funding tied to it uh that we were able to fund later on and it it helped to make an impact that the policy had already gone through, and then you know, we located funding.

So all of that to say I think there is an opportunity for us to rediscuss and and share norms about what's possible.

I mean, councilwoman Sears mentioned that like you know, she's just getting used to this uh CCR making process.

I remember that.

It took me seven months before I filed my first CCR.

The first one I did was in um combination with council member white, but he did most of the heavy lifting on that one because I was still learning, and so I think it'd be great maybe we come back and maybe we go straight to an A session and just have a discussion on it right after budget since I feel like everything is gonna be pretty hectic uh during budget, but give us a couple of months for the new folks to get underway and then let's do an A session and talk about what is it that we want to see?

How do we make sure that what we're not having to go back and recheck?

Because I totally agree with you.

We want to make sure that what we're doing, we're we don't want to we want to make sure we hold ourselves to a high standard even in policy making process.

So I don't have any issues with the changes.

I just agree with let's come together and show the community that we're a team.

We're 11 people that want to uh collaborate and find the right process to do policy making.

Thanks, Mayor.

Councilman Mulgeo.

Uh Councilwoman Court, you brought up a good point about the STR, and I'll just say that um after your predecessor left office, that was not moving anywhere, but my predecessor um brought that forward at her committee, so that was something that she took upon herself to continue to work on.

Um so I think we it does merit a discussion about returning council members and CCRs and and sponsorship.

I think also another point that might be helpful.

Uh, I know councilman White uh raised some legal issues, and I I think there might be some hesitation and some answers uh given the public discussion that it could also warrant a future uh if not near term executive session discussion um since it it is pertaining to a lot of legal issues or legal matters here.

So I think that could be beneficial for all of us also for this discussion.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Um the uh the uh the move uh to have folks resubmit um CCRs that did not get across the finish line is really in line with every other legislative body um the state, federal, etc.

And I think what it also does is give due respect um to the folks that have been newly elected uh to ensure that there remains sufficient um support for that.

Um so I think that's why that is important uh for me out of again respect for the constituents who just voted in a new member uh think white and I think my seven sails will go first because she has not spoken.

Oh, go ahead.

So uh councilwoman Meso Gonzalez okay, thank you.

Uh the refiling, is that stated anywhere?

Has that been sent out in any way, shape, or form, or is that how has that been discussed?

Uh it's been discussed in both of the memos that went out.

It was in the memo, yeah.

This one that you just sent on Friday.

Yep.

Okay.

I must have missed that one.

Okay.

And the um, I guess can I get some clarification on the 2024 ordinance says that once the CCR is in governance is when, if necessary, CCR submit the CCR for financial legal appropriate department review.

Uh the the current memo says that legal process will be ahead of it being agendized in governance.

You can do both.

That's right.

Andy city attorney said that is not having an early legal review is not out of compliance with the current ordinance.

So if we can do both, what are we changing?

If you're looking at me, Council.

What's the different outcome if we're council members can come to me at any point in time and ask for legal advice?

Any point in time, you can come to me and ask for legal advice.

And the statement which outlines how the proposed CCR creates or improves a core service for the city that's a new process.

That's a new statement that you that's a that's a that's a 30-second exercise.

I think you were at the meeting where folks have said, hey, we need to we need to focus on core.

I think that's a great idea.

Um I think we also so having folks say this is related to a core service, or it's not related to a core service.

Even if it's not though, help us understand, especially if it's related to a core service.

I think we'd want to know that um in terms of any fiscal considerations or how that may even be prioritized when it gets to governance.

Um I think again that also helps us understand how many of these actually have to do with core.

Let me just say, when I also looked at all the the CCRs that died on the vine, um, there were varying levels of um relation to core, let's just say.

However, they take time and and energy.

And so um make in especially in this fiscal environment and ensuring we're we're really looking at those things that only require council member time and attention, um, I think that best serves us and allows us even more time um and energy to serve on those things that only require our attention.

Even if it's not related to, as I share in the memo, though, even if it's not a core service, they can still move forward.

Many of the things that died on the vine were not related to core services.

So I'm trying to understand the changes, and so if if we can talk to the city attorney whenever, and we can provide a statement or not, then what are we changing?

Okay.

Um notifying the city manager was not happening all the time.

Um that is the very first line in your CCR uh submission.

I would like comfort, and I think others would like comfort as well, that that step is actually taking place.

So having the city manager just initial it that they've been notified, one, two, given the changes in this legal environment, we are all well served by understanding and getting an initial read from the city attorney what the legal risks may or may not be associated with that draft CCR.

I think that also helps the other council members whose signature may be requested as part of that gives them more understanding of um if there is something a legal issue related to that, they now know earlier than when they signed on to it in case they want to have additional conversations with the sponsor to determine if that CC draft CCR actually captures um what they think it does.

But I think a legal read from the city attorney um early in the process only helps minimize risk to the city.

That's what that does.

Um the yeah, um, you know, help us understand is this related to a core service or not?

One or two sentences.

Um and can some can someone walk me through the horse strong carriages CCR process?

I wasn't here for that.

But how did that if if we were to just to put this kind of a timeline of what happened in the old way?

In 2024, let's go back.

What was that?

What was that like versus how it would be now?

That it got okay.

That that initiated prior to the 2024 and it got filed.

And there was a request to delay moving that CCR forward by the sponsoring council members.

Um it and and from what I recall, that was a request made to the mayor at the time to not bring it um in a timely manner.

That's what I remember as being significant about that one.

And so if it were in if if that would have moved if that would have been brought up now, what the current I'm sorry.

No, go ahead.

The the current ordinance has timelines associated by by which they've got to those CCRs have got to move to governance.

made to to the mayor at the time um to not bring it um in a timely manner that's what i remember as being significant about that one and so if it were in if if that would have moved if that would have been brought up now what the current I'm sorry no go ahead the the current ordinance has timelines associated by by which they've got to those CCRs we've got to move to governance be agendized and discussed okay um well I think I I do believe that in agreement with a lot of folks here that I think any sort of changes that we're considering I think to uh council member sook's point um I do think they should be discussed and discussed and approved by full council I think that's based on what we've done in twenty two thousand three two thousand seven what happened in twenty twenty four um I think we can can should continue that um and have full council discussion whenever we want to change uh something like this so on the on the merits of the issue though um do you uh is there an issue with having Eric an initial it to acknowledge actual notifications so we can have comfort in that is there is there an issue on the merit of that I mean there might be an issue on the the notification in general but that's part of they could change the notification well but that's already part of the ordinance I'm not I'm not talking about that part.

But now you're asking that we sign off that the the managers sign off specific notification.

Well right no no no no no let's be clear okay let's be clear yeah please please so um notification to the city manager must take place and if it must take place what I'd like to know is and I think others have expressed to me they also would appreciate knowing that it has in fact taken place so all that I'm not again there's no change to how you choose to notify the city manager but I think we do need to know that that step has actually taken place currently there is no way to verify that unless you literally call him and we shouldn't have to waste that time or energy that's what the initial does so the change is how he notifies us how he acknowledges that he has actually how he acknowledges that he's actually been notified okay yeah and that's not your we're not considering that a change to the ordinance if he's been that's an that's a how do you help but how do you help that what that does is help us understand that that step is actually taken place yeah it is a change otherwise I mean do you otherwise do we call him every single time and hey Eric did you actually look at that thing they said you did I don't know if you did can you tell me if you did like that seems like a huge waste of time so a signature initial it saying thanks Eric you know now we all now we all know that's all that that does do you also have um the on the merits of uh of an early legal review do you have um do you have ch issues with the with the merits of an e an an uh excuse me earlier legal review I think the the the main point that I want to get across is that any sort of changes or discussion we have about the CCR process should be done by the full council.

Okay that's really my my only point okay so the the on the merits though of an earlier legal review there's no there's no issue with that do you do you see that there would be benefit to an earlier legal review in light of this legal environment I think I think legal review is I mean I think all of us I want to avoid any sort of legal risk to our community right every one of us I mean I can say that for myself right yeah um any time I send an email right that's a open records I mean we're always considering the legal risk to this community so that's almost under well for me it's understood before I take any action um and I think that process excuse me that's the that's the issue that's I think that process no no one second that that's the issue though it wasn't it wasn't happening right it was it was ad hoc um the challenge as well though is that again this is not meant in any way to delay anything but have people understand the city attorney has looked at it here is a written um a written explanation of their legal concerns as they see it you council members if you would still like to sign on to it to co-sponsor it do so do so though fully informed by what the city attorneys um initially provided in their assessment that's all that that does that's all that that does okay oh okay uh councilman you still have five minutes okay uh council member aldrete gavito thank you I do want to talk uh quickly about the um refiling of the existing CCRs what do you mean when in your past memo you said um all C CRs not actioned in the previous term need to be refiled yeah what is actioned if it didn't get across the finish line so if it went through governance correct if it's if it if it did not complete full action right fully through that process um then I think it does need to be resubmitted for consideration giving there's um several new members on this committee so for your awareness sometimes CCRs take months to to

What do you mean when in your past memo you said um all CCRs not actioned in the previous term need to be refiled?

Yeah.

What is actioned?

If it didn't get across the finish line.

So if it went through governance?

Correct.

If it's if it if it did not complete full action right fully through that process, um, then I think it does need to be resubmitted for consideration, giving there's um several new members on this committee.

So for your awareness, sometimes CCRs take months to to finish to cross the finish line.

Oh, I'm very familiar.

I mean, that's why so many died on the vine.

Yeah.

So then re- so you're saying if they were almost done, 90% done, they need to be refiled.

Those that in line, councilwoman, with every single legislative body, those ones that didn't cross the finish line need to be resubmitted.

Okay, well, and I think that that's important because I do understand where you're saying respect for the new council members, but I also think it's disrespectful to the public servants who have been here for a while working on CCRs.

For instance, I have the cluster mailbox CCR that impacts all of our districts.

It went through uh governance, it went through public safety.

Um they were supposed to present back in August to public safety.

This is something that residents have been waiting on for months.

Um to me that's a huge amount of waste, a huge amount of bureaucracy.

Um again for us to deliver for our residents.

Um I cannot speak to um how the current how the former pop um administration handled those.

Um my intent as everyone else's is to action these as quickly as possible.

So once those are resubmitted, we can do that.

So I mean, Andy, is there anything that states about refiling our existing CCRs?

Because again, this is work of city staff.

This is the work of us, this is the work of our teams to again respond to a resident request for for awareness for everybody for cluster mailboxes, cluster mailboxes keep getting broken into.

That turns it into identity theft for residents.

This is a federal problem, but we're trying to do what we can at the local level to address concerns for our residents.

So it that is a concern for all of that work to be wiped away.

I I don't have the timeline in front of me.

I believe I filed that CCR last November, it went to governance in January, it was heard in public safety in in March.

Um I might be a little off on those timelines.

But again, all of that work happened, it took place, and again, I think out of respect for us who were serving as public servants to solve a resident request, um, I see that as disrespectful to wipe it away.

Councilman White.

Yeah, I I completely agree.

I mean, it it's disrespectful to the council members that were here before that were valid and existing council members that worked with their teams, reviewed a CCR, decided it was something that should be put put forth, and so to then all of a sudden say, well, you don't matter now just because you're gone isn't right.

And in fact, we discussed this with Mayor Nuremberg um two years ago, and the mayor's position at that point was that we as council members build off of one another, right?

And so we specifically did not put anything in the ordinance regarding uh CCRs expiring once the council member is gone.

We left it silent.

So therefore the ordinance controls and the ordinance just says after a CCR is filed, here's what happens.

So I don't see any reason why all of a sudden a CCR should be expired.

Um and the councilwoman makes a great point.

The taxpayer money that has already been spent um developing the CCR, having it heard by multiple committees to all of a sudden throw that away and say we're gonna do it again isn't right.

And I would ask the question, umor you you mentioned is is it disrespectful to the new council members?

Are there new council members here that will feel disrespected if we have to continue working on a CCR that began with a previous council?

I haven't heard that from any of the other council members.

So if that is an issue for the new council, um I I haven't heard it.

The the next thing I would say is again, and I think we have consensus here that for for any for any amendment or changes to the ordinance, we've got to go through a vote.

But but I had a lawyer friend tell me the other day.

But but I had a lawyer friend tell me the other day how scary it would be if quote enhancements to an ordinance could simply be done by the by the mayor.

If just those two people could decide to enhance ordinances, where where would that end?

I mean, are we talking about the disconnection ordinance, the dangerous dog ordinance?

All these things could just be changed, right?

Or are you saying just this ordinance can be can be enhanced because it's a quote family ordinance?

I mean, uh again, I I ordinances all need to be looked at as the same.

They're all city law.

I mean, what what we're talking about here, if we don't have to have a vote, we could have a memo that comes down that says before you file a CCR, you have to stand on city hall steps and do a little dance, and then you can go file your CCR.

What is to stop a memo coming out from saying that?

It it wouldn't conflict with anything that's in here.

It just it just doesn't work like that in in in the law.

And I'm happy, again, that we have a consensus here that says we have to have a new vote if we're going to change the way we do the CCR process.

Uh so let me ask you, Andy, um, can we um uh based on this discussion here, direct city staff to uh uh you know perhaps amend the ordinance to say that any changes or supplements to the ordinance have to be done by a council vote?

Is that something that we could do and then and then vote upon at an A session?

Uh I'll answer your question, but before I answer your question, I I need to very very clearly clarify something you said.

You said can the mayor and the city attorney, I did not I did not author any memo to the city council.

Never have, never will, unless it's legal advice I give to the C City Council.

So I was I was not author to that memo, Councilman.

Yeah, and and and and I'm glad and I'm glad you clarified that.

And I and I didn't mean that as any as any direct coming at you, but but but what the mayor is doing is saying, well, Andy says that this is okay.

So so again, the mayor could issue a future mayor.

A future mayor could say, you want to file a CCR, you do a little dance on the on city hall steps, and then if the city attorney said, Well, mayor, yeah, you can do that because it doesn't conflict, then all of a sudden that would be what what would have to happen.

And of course, that that would be ridiculous.

But but but again, you didn't know that's a good idea.

Your question, you answered can't can this council amend that ordinance to add whatever they want, and frankly, including doing a dance in front of city council.

If the council wants to do that and add that as a provision of the ordinance, they have every ability to do that.

So um in terms of we could again with consensus here or by a three-signature memo, we could get on the agenda at an A session, um, an amended ordinance that says any changes to this CCR ordinance or any supplements uh can only be done through a council vote.

Is correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

I want to clarify when you talked about the expired CCRs, um, how how far back would you like to go?

CCRs submitted early 2000s, how far would you like to go?

Yeah, that's that's a great question, and I'm and I'm glad that and I'm glad that you asked it.

And and I think that this council um should have a discussion because I heard a suggestion that said if the author of the CCR is still here, uh then it should continue.

Uh so if the author wasn't still still here, then maybe it doesn't.

I've also heard a suggestion that if the CCR is filed but hasn't gone to governance committee yet, maybe those go away.

But if it's gone to governance committee and governance is taken in action, then those should stay and go through the process.

That is something, Mayor, that I think this body together needs to discuss and and uh come to a uh consensus on.

Appreciate the feedback.

Um Councilman Castillo, please.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh Eric, I'd like to hear what you're hearing from council and discussion.

Well, um I'm generally hearing that um that um most of the feedback is around um if there are any adjustments to the process um or languages the councilman was just talking about or any anything.

Eric, can I stop you just because I want to make sure that your comments, whatever they are, are reflective of everybody's.

Is that is that okay?

Is that okay, Councilwoman?

There's one more person to speak and then I would like to hear uh Eric's recap.

Go ahead.

He could follow up if necessary.

That um that any changes to the process be um included in an in the ordinance that was originally that that is in place right now, um, regardless if it is um the type of notification to the manager's office or any potential future changes that that that be included in the ordinance is what I'm generally hearing.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Eric.

Thank you, Mayor.

Eric, did you hear Andy say that all these uh enhancements are in accordance with the ordinance and are and they're not required to they'll require a change to the ordinance?

Mayor, I'm just kind of reporting back what I'm hearing here.

I mean, I obviously I think the council's weighing in on being involved in a larger conversation about how you all do your business.

So I I think my that's what I'm hearing today.

Councilman Galvan.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I think it's a similar question to what Council Member Castillo was asking.

I I want to kind of get clarification for this meeting itself.

I know it's a briefing, no, it's a conversation.

I guess what is the end goal of this conversation based on the feedback we give.

Is it going to a vote?

Uh what are the next steps on this?

Is the city staff going to be acting upon this, or is mayor, are you just taking feedback?

Just want to make sure this is a discussion only briefing.

Okay.

Yep, that's the intent.

There's no action being taken today.

Okay.

Um, mayor, I guess uh if we hear that the majority of the body is wanting to stay with the current process, or rather further discuss the conversation about the changes that you proposed.

Um what would be your next steps, I guess?

Yeah.

Well, I mean, I will take those under advisement as well as take it under advisement what our city attorney has said, which is that these are all in line with the with the current ordinance.

Um I can fully appreciate you know, much of the feedback, some of the feedback has been based on what has happened under a previous mayor.

Um I am not Ron Nuremberg.

I'm not slow rolling these things.

That is not the intent.

This is a different point in time than we were.

And let me just recap again the very simple enhancements.

You gotta let Eric know.

Great.

Have Eric just initial the document so we all know.

Um that wasn't happening that didn't happen.

We shouldn't have to call him and ask him and ensure ensure that the step is actually taking place.

Um an earlier legal review by the attorney to ensure that everybody that wants to sign on to that has the full benefit of their initial legal review.

Great.

We're entering to entering into a very difficult fiscal environment.

Help us understand if what you're um talking about in your CCR has to do with a core service.

That's it.

Um again, these I think are are simple asks and uh totally in line with the current ordinance.

Thank you, Mayor Francis's questions.

So Daddy's thinking on the piece about uh the merits of the conference or merits of the changes.

I'm interested to look more into the pieces about the resolutions.

Um compared to budgetary ask and see what those would look like in terms of how they go through the governance uh committee, what those actions are.

Um I think maybe resolution may be a bit faster on certain uh certain C CRs that relate to I think about street renaming, think about other kinds of pieces like that that aren't as a heavy load for the city to take on.

Uh if there's a way that we can make those a bit faster, that's always appreciated.

Um but I think you know currently I'm uncomfortable moving forward on these news changes.

Um absolutely preferred uh council discussion and a vote similar to the ordinance before, uh, or the process of going through an ordinance before.

Um I still see the value in coordinating with the city manager's office and city attorney's office.

I think uh many council members have done that with their CCRs before those other actions, and so I think that's always helpful and makes it go a bit easier for the most part.

Um I think but I I want to make clear that I think that is the that is a choice of the council member.

I think it should be.

So I think less so on the particular m memo itself, but even the ordinance of the past.

I think it's just I think it'd be my preference to talk to city management a little bit and talk with them, but I don't think I want to require my colleagues to do so.

Um is it more effective if they do?

Sure.

Is it more effective that they let other council members know too that aren't signing on to the C Cr that's going through?

Absolutely.

But I think I think it's up to them to do that that piece, and if they don't, and it's up to the chair to figure out what that piece is next, right?

If that if you feel as the chair, my understanding from the city attorney that those are some things that they have to be done, that's up to you personally for the the as a chairperson of the committee.

Um but I would be personally uncomfortable uh at least agreeing on on these pieces right now.

Can you clarify the notification piece?

I think you um I want to make sure I understand that last part.

I well, I was saying was that I'm currently uncomfortable with the the changes, but I think I see the value in coordinating with the city attorney's office, see the value in accordance to city management office, but I don't think that it should be a requirement for council members to do so if they want to push forward a policy.

Um I think we'll get those presentations about um what's possible, what's not possible.

I understand your piece about does it take more time to do so?

Absolutely, but I just don't think that that should be a requirement for council members currently.

Or yeah, yeah, and and to be clear, I never said coordinate with the city manager.

Um this is literally just doing the current process, but letting everybody know that it's actually being done.

So the notification that the current ordinance says needs to be provided to the city manager, no change there.

Yeah, it would be just literally initialing it so the rest of us know that that is actually taken place.

So there's no coordination.

There's also um it's not a coordination with the city attorney, it's just a an acknowledgement that they've seen it.

Um and that frankly, if there's anything patently illegal, um, I think we should all we would all benefit from an awareness of that as early as possible, given again this legal environment.

Um more?

Oh, okay.

Councilman, please.

Um so I'm only here for two months.

Um I just want to put that out there.

Um so I just hearing what everybody's been saying, but yes.

Um I think that it's just a lot.

Um, but let me just start with um okay.

I have to I have two questions.

Um so if a CCR has changes along the process, will new signatures need to be collected along that process.

If a CCR um from the last administration did not get across the finish line, then that would need to be resubmitted.

Correct.

Okay, so under this new one, and let's say we're following the guidelines, uh, but we want to make some more changes to the CCR, can we make changes to that CCR and will we still need new signatures for that CCR?

I mean, the C C there's no change to the CCR process if it's if it's a new CCR, it just goes to the regular process.

The the discussion here was about those that were CCRs in the previous administration that did not see completion, and they would have to be resubmitted.

Um, so that this council um has uh again the full weight and opinion of this council, not the previous one.

Right, okay.

So in terms of this council, if a CCR is filed, we have to go through the signatures now.

If we want to make more changes, again, my question is will new signatures be required.

Mayor, I'll I'll take a stab at answering that.

So um typically what happens um as the as the policy issue is going through the committee, the council committee process, there could be adjustments to it, right?

But it does not require resignatures because it's in process of either committee review or staff review or policy debate.

And and sometimes they ebb and flow depending on the conversation, but it doesn't require a reset and a uh of signatures to keep up with that.

Okay, cool.

So that clarifies my first part.

Um, and I know that this is a briefing, so there's like no action that's gonna be taken, but with these new enhancements, are are they just gonna happen regardless or because I know you're like it's it's all feedback.

Um, so are we just if we walk out of this room, are we just expected to follow the new enhancements?

Uh because my office has already been doing that just to prepare.

Um, and I I think it's great to ask us, like personally, if I filed a C CR, I would want to know if I'm being sued.

Um, so I think that we're all kind of doing our part with just making sure that that aspect is taken care of.

Um, so yeah, like I I guess going back to next steps.

Uh when we walk out of this room, which process are we following with the CCRs?

Well, I appreciate the feedback here, and I'll take it under advisement.

Thanks.

Okay.

Okay.

Um yeah, then I guess all that I can say is I'm I'm much of an outsider coming into this process.

Um, I definitely appreciate the fact that we're having this policy conversation.

I think my only concern is that when you ask most of our residents, um, the CCR process doesn't really impact their lives too often unless until it does, right?

And this can be whether it's a housing policy to help tenants or a new code compliance to help residents just come into appliance more easily.

Um so I I think the only suggestion I have, and again, uh it it might just be more beneficial to move this to an A session and have the full council decide on this.

Um but my only issue is like when when our outs uh when our constituents read CCRs, they kind of don't really understand the process of that.

And so I would like to consider making it something more accessible, like a policy request or something, um, just so that we just have full transparency um with our constituents as well.

Um, but I I think that's the only feedback that I have.

Um I I think I'd rather stick to the one that we have now, because if if if the council thinks that we as a body, you know, uh when it comes to CCRs, this is our council tool, then it should be within our right as a council to just kind of decide that and figure out what we want to do because we have budget, we have product marvel, like we have bigger issues that we need to handle.

Um, and so I I I think we need to just move this forward, vote on it, and then let's and then let's let's move on.

But thank you, Mayor.

Um Councilman Corr.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, I just wanted to ask a quick clarifying question.

Um, so I know the mayor's already said we have to refile for this last one.

If that was something we wanted to take up, could we add that to the ordinance for the net for like four years from now?

Yes, yes, councilwoman, the answer is I do think that would be good, something I know that that you've already respect that the mayor's already made the decision.

I think that we should discuss that because I think it is um like there's policy.

I I mean I think it'd be a good conversation to have because maybe it's whether you if you're still on the dais, your policy moves forward if you were the signer or one of the signers.

Um, and if we're no longer than maybe those kind of sunset for similar to the process, I think I totally hear the argument about this similar to other legislative bodies, but the difference is we don't have a set um time frame in which we are legislating.

We're full-time, so we are constantly uh evol evolving and constantly making policy, and sometimes a policy that is in the works might be um affecting budget for the following year, so we don't necessarily have to do like the way our state does, where you know it's every two years and that's the only chance they get, and two years down the line it might be completely different, um, even though often policies do resurface.

But um, so I do think since we are constantly making policy, we don't have like a set six month period for CCRs that it's a little bit different.

And I actually think it makes us more nimble because we don't have to be because a lot of the the challenge that we see um at the state is they're having to redo everything that they did.

That's that like some of those laws that got uh basically vetoed at the very end by the governor, they have to start all over again.

Uh I know the dangerous dog one was one.

There's several that the governor vetoed, and that's I think that is hard.

Uh so I think us being able to continue to work on policy at all times is a good flexibility that we should maintain.

Um, but of course, since it's we will obviously abide by the current decision.

And the only other thing I wanted to mention was um just as some of the the conversation that has come up around like what the the proper notification process is, if we do decide, which I you know, one of the ways we could do this in an efficient way is docusign, so we could get uh uh membership or docu sign so that it's also a pain.

I don't know if you guys have like when we're signing CCRs and you have to literally take it like, hey, are you at City Hall?

Can I come and bring it to you?

And then I had to take the same document and bring it.

And that's why often at B session, we're like sitting over here passing out CCRs.

So if we did decide um at our at the end of our discussion that we want uh Andy and um Eric to sign it off at the same time, we could send a docusign out, and then everybody could do it at the same time, and we wouldn't have to wait two days.

So uh that's my pitch if we decide that let's get a uh enterprise version of that.

I know Craig's gonna hate me for that, but I think there are ways to make it efficient, um, like the mayor is saying of the process.

Councilwoman to clarify uh the initial could have been hard, like with an actual pen or um e-signature.

Um, but that was only when you if you don't have the enterprise version, you have to wait for one person to send it back to you, and then you have to take it and send it to the other person, versus if you pay for it, you can sit it at the same time.

Sure.

Yeah, yeah.

Um I wanted to just clarify though, it's not an act, it didn't have to actually be like a hard signature.

Okay, just want to make sure you understand.

Thanks, Mayor.

Okay.

Um second.

Um, well, thank you uh for the comments.

Um, we've done two rounds and uh we will um go into executive session.

Again, the the intent here was always to do a couple of things, right?

Be efficient with our time, focus only on the only on the things that we need to focus on as a council, minimize risk to it.

Um the in terms of you know, asking Eric to initial it, an early legal review, um, and then some discussion about you know whether or not it's core.

I think those are all um things that are not heavy lifts in any way.

Um I think the um I get look, I get it, the scar tissue from previous administrations that tried to throttle your stuff.

I get it.

Um, but I am not that person.

Um and again, each of these things are designed to move faster and uh and minimize legal risk to our community.

Okay, let me do this.

Is that the right time?

The time is now 3 50 p.m.

on August 13th.

Um the City Council of City of San Antonio will now meet in executive session to consult with the city attorney's office pursuant to chapter 551 of the Texas government code and to deliberate or discuss the following items economic development negotiations pursuant to section 551.087, the purchase exchange lease or value of real property pursuant to section 551.072, and legal issues related to litigation involving the city, emergency preparedness and collective bargaining, all pursuant to section 551.071.

Okay.

The time is now 4.25 p.m.

on August 13th, and the San Antonio City Council will reconvene in open session.

No official action was taken in executive chef session.

Excuse me.

The meeting is now adjourned.

Okay.

Meeting is now adjourned.

Thanks.