Para las personas que prefieren escuchar esta junta in espanhol, pueden passar con nuestro equipo de intérpretes al fondo de la sala del Concilio de la Ciudad para receber assistencia.gov diagonal TV S.A.

Let's go, Council Members.

We're getting started.

The time is now 9 02 AM on February 5th, and the meeting of the San Antonio City Council is now called to order.

Madam Clerk, please call roll.

Councilmember Corr.

Councilmember McKee Rodriguez.

Councilmember Via Gran.

Councilmember Mungia.

Councilmember Castillo.

Councilmember Galvan.

Here.

Councilmember Alderete Gavito.

Councilmember Mesa Gonzalez.

Councilmember Spears.

Councilmember White.

Mayor Jones.

Here, Mayor, we have quorum.

Great.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Councilmember Spears is recognized to introduce today's invocator.

Sorry, there was a lot going on this morning.

A good dear friend of mine and well known in our community.

He is affiliated with Cornerstone Church, and he's a wonderful counselor here locally.

A pillar in our community, and I'm just thrilled that he's here to be our invocator today.

So thank you so much for being here.

Dear Lord, we pray today and thank you for the opportunity to be here and the good health to be able to be here today.

We pray as your scripture instructs us to pray for those in authority.

And we do that today.

We pray for their leadership.

We pray for this council, the mayor, and all those involved in important decisions for the city of San Antonio and our people and Bear County.

We pray for supernatural wisdom beyond natural what we can learn and experience in this lifetime.

We pray for your wisdom.

And last of all but not least, we pray for unity.

Irregardless of any differences.

Amen.

Thank you, Dr.

Jones.

Please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible liberty and justice for all.

Are there any corrections or edits to the minutes?

Is there a motion for the approval of uh of the minutes?

Second, okay.

There's a motion and a second to approve the amendment the minutes, please vote.

We're good.

Okay.

All right, the motion carries.

We have several proclamations.

Um it is a official rodeo season, uh kickoff proclamation uh that has been requested by San Antonio Stock Show and Rodeo Association, and then I'll invite uh Mr.

Barnett to come up and say a few comments.

Yeah, you're you're fine to stay there.

Yeah, yeah, please.

If you want to bring the group up, please all right.

Whereas the City of San Antonio recognizes the 77th annual San Antonio Stock Show and Rodeo, one of the largest and most prestigious events in the Alamo City, which will be held February 12th through March 1st, 2026 at the Freeman Coliseum.

And whereas the San Antonio Stock Show and Rodeo is a volunteer organization that emphasizes agriculture and education to develop the youth of Texas, and whereas since its inception, over 279 million dollars have been committed by the organization to the youth of Texas through scholarships, grants, endowments, auctions, the calf scramble program, and show premiums, with over 12 million committed in 2025, impacting 22,000 students.

And whereas the lifeblood of the organization is it's more than 7,000 volunteers, along with corporate partners and patrons who support the event and mission.

And whereas in 2025, over 1.5 million visitors enjoyed exciting activities such as world class entertainment, a carnival educational exhibits, family and activities and attractions, livestock and horse shows and sales, mutton busting, calf scramble, extreme bowls, and shopping for the entire family to enjoy.

And whereas on February 12th, 2026, the San Antonio Stock Show and Rodeo will kick off its livestock show to support its mission of educating future generations.

Now, therefore, I, Jean Ortiz Jones, mayor of the city of San Antonio, in recognition thereof, do hereby proclaim February 12th through March 1st, 2026 to be official rodeo season.

And Thursday, February 12th, 2026, to be official dress Western Day.

Okay, over to you, Mr.

Brenton.

Mr.

Barnett, excuse me.

Thank you, Mayor, Council members and staff.

I just want to the San Antonio Rodeo just wanted to thank you for the dedication of this proclamation and your continued support of the San Antonio Stock Show and Rodeo.

The Stock Show and Rodeo has been a part of the East Side for 77 years, and we are excited about our continued growth in this community.

Each year, the San Antonio Stock Show and Rodeo has a brings a 330 million dollar economic impact to the City of San Antonio just in the month of February.

We are committed to continue our youth, our efforts with our youth events, outreach effort.

Um and driving even greater impact as we look at expanding our year.

We are excited about the momentum as we're moving into February with events coming up this weekend like the Western Heritage Parade and a Vatquetto Cook-Off, which showcase our culture and bring our community together.

Um and looking ahead, our goal is to extend the energy and success that we have in February year round, continue to bring in more out-of-town visitors, generate tourism, and impact economic impact for the city of San Antonio.

Once again, we thank you all for your dedication for this proclamation, and we are ready for February to get get kicked off and this rodeo get going.

And like we always like to say, let's rodeo San Antonio.

See if my some of my colleagues would like to say a few words.

Councilman Viegadon.

Thank you.

Uh I want to thank you, and I want to thank you that a lot of this is volunteer work.

You guys are not getting these big paychecks to do it.

This is a passion of yours, and I'm so excited about this.

I think about uh one of my residents, Pat Ha.

I have many residents that are involved, but Pat Hasso is always the one that seems to be that cowboy hat comes out earlier and earlier every year.

So thank you so much for what you do.

You know, my personal story is this is not just uh for San Antonio, it's regional.

When I was a first grade teacher on Casterville, and I started there, they were like field trip.

Oh, the field trip is the rodeo in February, and we would take the kids out there, and it just really helped validate the community that they were living because it was rural, and it really just gave them something to look forward to in terms of what they were doing and and in the um in the in the FFA locally and what their brothers and their older brothers and sisters were doing with that.

And they did have one student do the musk mutton busting, and I heard about that all year long, of course, as a first grader.

But as we continue to grow and we continue to take our rightful title as a rodeo town, as a town that um appreciates all of our people, especially uh the the black cowboys, the vaqueros, all of the community that came to help build what we what we uh which I'll call the Western Heritage as we do that.

We want to make sure that we continue to tell the story and take our place.

So thank you so much for your efforts.

Thank you so much, Mayor, for recognizing this.

And I look forward to all the um the concerts and the rodeo going on to on uh on the east side.

Thank you so much.

Uh Councilwoman Castillo.

Thank you, Mayor, and good morning, everyone.

Uh as mentioned, just want to commend you all for the great work that y'all do.

I'm very proud to be an alumni and have one of the city's only urban FFA programs over at Burbank High School.

Uh so just grateful for the work that you all do there.

Uh and I also want to highlight right on February 3rd, we celebrated the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which is a historical uh treaty that kind of marks the history of a lot of Tejanos, Vaqueros, so on and so forth here in the state of Texas.

So just wanted to thank you all for y'all's continued work, particularly around scholarships and fundraising for our kids, and then of course, also providing support to Burbank High School.

Thank y'all so much.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilman Galvan.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just want to echo a little bit of what Councilman Via Grant mentioned about just the uh extraordinary efforts y'all go through uh as volunteers, making this uh incredible event happen every single year.

Uh we have a resident of district six who's very active in the Northwest Crossing Neighborhood Association or HOA uh Dusty, who is an extremely proud uh volunteer for the rodeo and always make sure that we're up to date on what's going on next uh for the next steps going on over there, and um I always think about the rodeo and sending sometimes my family there and how cold it always is.

Um, but also seeing some of my favorite concerts there.

Uh got to see my one of my favorite bands, Google dolls there.

I'll try to figure out if I'm gonna be able to make ludicrous this year.

Um so we'll see.

It'll be a good one.

Um, and I also um I have a specific notebook that I've used ever since I've uh got to council that I was gifted by the rodeo that has all my constituent services notes so far for my first year, and it's a rodeo uh notebook.

And so while I may have been a critic for Prop B.

Uh, there's always something special about that notebook for me.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilman Aldrete.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, well, I'm so excited about rodeo season.

It's a place that I well, it's an event that I love to take my two girls to every year, and we learn about um responsibly taking care of our animals and all that kind of stuff.

So they they learn they're constantly, and we're constantly making memories.

I too have so many residents uh who are really involved with rodeo.

I mean, it is a huge volunteer effort.

I know uh JD Morales and Audrey and then Ty Chumley, you know, they're they're super involved.

Um, and I think I don't know who said it, maybe it was Councilwoman View, where they're like the cowboy hat comes out earlier and earlier.

It does.

Um, but thank y'all so much for what y'all do for the city.

The economic impact that the rodeo has for San Antonio is tremendous.

So, and and it is um it is remarkable that it's all so volunteer driven.

So, thank you so much.

Um, it's an honor to honor y'all.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Spears.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I love the rodeo.

I'm so excited to go again this year.

I usually go for my anniversary on Valentine's Day.

So uh I'm so proud of all you do.

That everyone has to understand how what uh Councilwoman Aldrete Catito said about the economic impact.

It's enormous, but also what you do for our kids and kids all over the state is it's it's unbeatable.

You do so much with scholarships and education and character building, and we really can't um say enough about how much you do for the kids.

But also for San Antonio and me personally, all the memories I have.

I don't hop out to a cowboy breakfast at 4 30 in the morning in my Rockies anymore.

But um I it was always too cold and I didn't dress right.

But anyway, um I'm so many memories and all of the concerts.

Um I was more of the country vein, Councilman Gavan.

I would go see Alan Jackson and Clint Black, and I think this year I'm seeing Midland, so um Willie Nelson.

I don't know, it's just amazing.

I just love these two weeks.

It's always so much fun.

So thank you for everything you do and all the volunteer work, and it is the best rodeo in the state, and probably across the nation.

So thank y'all well.

And so we all are hoping for a very successful rodeo season, and we hope that everybody in our community, frankly, irrespective of their immigration status is able to enjoy this wonderful city celebration.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

February is also Black History Month.

Councilmember Miki Rodriguez is will be recognized to speak right after I read the proclamation.

Okay.

The City of San Antonio joins communities across the nation to commemorate February 2026 as Black History Month to honor the achievements, culture, and history contributed by Black Americans to our nation.

And whereas the 2026 Black History Month theme is a century of Black History commemorations, honoring 100 years since Carter G.

Woodson first launched Negro History Week in February 1926.

This theme highlights a century of intentional efforts to study, preserve, and celebrate the history, culture, and contributions of people of African descent.

And whereas the team the theme focuses on looking back at the evolution of Black history from its roots in 1926 to its modern day impact and examines how the public recognition of black history has shaped American society and helped transform the status of black people.

And whereas black Americans have contributed immeasurably to the strength and character of our great nation, giving them of themselves through their labor, voices, vision, and sacrifice to make our country stronger and better.

And whereas many local and national events and activities are scheduled during this month-long observance to reflect on the pivotal and profound work black Americans have done and continue to do in shaping our nation and advancing economic, social, and political rights.

Now, therefore, I, Gina Ortiz Jones, mayor of the city of San Antonio, in recognition thereof, do hereby proclaim February 2026 to be Black History Month in San Antonio, Texas, and call on all residents to reflect on the rich heritage and remarkable, enduring contributions of Black Americans, the progress made so far, and the work that remains to create a more just and equitable society for all.

Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, today it is a privilege and honor to recognize Black History Month.

Uh every year is centered around a theme that we collectively observe to reflect on the past, inspire us to action for the future, uh, and understand our power today.

This year's theme, as you heard, is a century of black history month to mark 100 years of Black History Month commemorations in this country.

In 1926, Carter G.

Woodson created Negro History Week to highlight the contributions of uh people of African descent had made to the movement of history and modern culture.

And later, it later became what we now know as Black History Month.

The Association for the Study of African American Life, or ASALH, who is credited with continuing the commemorations, asks that we also reflect on our country's founding and recognition of its 250th year this year.

And to be clear, this country has always been indigenous land, but we recognize that the current iteration of our government is 250 years old this year.

The ASALH shares this year, when we are also commemorating the 250th anniversary of United States independence, it's important to tell not only an inclusive history, but an accurate one.

We have never had more need to examine the role of Black History Month than we do when forces weary of democracy seek to use legislative means and book bans to excise black history from America's schools and public culture.

Black history's value is not its contribute contribution to mainstream historical narratives, but its resonance in the lives of black people.

While we recognize Black History Month in February, I lovingly and strongly suggest you make black history cognizantly a part of your everyday life.

Our contributions are already in the government you're affected by or serving in, the products you consume, the inventions that have made your life healthier, more efficient, and helpful.

We are all influenced by great black thinkers and writers like Frederick Douglass and Tony Morrison, by music of all kinds and by our culinary arts.

But many are also still reaping benefits from those of our ancestors who were enslaved and generated massive wealth from their free and stolen labor to the capitalism and imperialism abroad that harms black people globally and in our communities today.

We still have much work to do collect collectively, and it begins with knowing where we've been to direct a more just, equitable, and loving future and way forward.

In this hundredth year of Black History Month commemorations, I'm grateful to stand on the shoulders of giants, and I hope to also be a stepping stone for my daughter and for black children everywhere to thrive.

Uh thank you, Mayor, and happy Black History Month.

Councilwoman Corr.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just wanted to quickly shout out SACAM, which is in District One and all of the work that they are going to be doing to have the second largest Black History Museum in all of the country.

I think that's right, right, second largest.

Great.

Thank you so much to the SACAM leadership.

Thanks, Mayor.

Any other colleagues on this side?

Councilman Viegodon.

Yeah, I think thank you, Mayor.

And thank you, Councilman, for your words.

And I think it is important to look uh, as you mentioned, to the history, but understand the history that's being made now.

And um thank you, Councilman, for your leadership and the history you're making and the fact that from years from now, people will um be here at this dais and women and men of color because of your willingness to serve and lead.

So thank you, thank you.

I look forward to celebrating the month.

Thank you.

Councilman Mungia.

Thank you, Mayor.

I think it's important to recognize that while this is a month that we celebrate this, we should really think about the um plights of the black community in our country every day, not just uh in February, not just for the MLK march.

And I was reminded recently that um the city doesn't do enough for Juneteenth, right, which is a uniquely Texas uh thing.

So there's a lot more work to be done, and we have to carry um these issues with us every day when all of our decisions and especially what's happening now with the federal government and all that's happening locally with that.

Uh we have to remember those struggles and keep that in mind.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Castillo.

Thank you, Mayor.

As my colleagues have mentioned, this is something that we should continue to keep at the forefront.

And I want to commend Councilman McKee Rodriguez for continuing to lead uh one of the nation's largest MLK marches.

And I think um, as we talk about budgets, we need to continue to support the councilman and the MLK Commission to continue to have the financial support um to provide uh the events all throughout the year during Dream Week.

So I just want to commend uh the councilman and also highlight the work of the Office of Historic Preservation uh with their historic landmarks and districts uh in District 5.

OHP has exignated uh the Mar Elementary School, which was one of the which was a black elementary school in District 5, um, segregated, demolished uh when the school district was reviewing which schools to demolish first.

And then, as my colleagues have mentioned, when we look at the uh demolition of public housing, it was the courts on the east side that were set to be demolished first, and I think that's history that we should continue to ground ourselves uh in the decision-making process uh and as we move forward.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilman Galvan.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you to Councilman McKee Rodriguez for uh for the words today.

Uh as someone who finds history to be uh front and center of just anything I think about, uh something I studied in college, something that has always been very important to me.

Understanding San Antonio's history, particularly in its integration with black history, uh, is crucial uh not only for the East Side but throughout an entire city.

I think a lot about uh the black neighborhoods in the West Side uh during the time of segregation, uh, that still continue to make up a lot of our neighborhoods today and continue to make up my neighborhoods in District 6.

I think about West Ridge in the Edgewood area where uh Edgewood was one of the first school districts in San Antonio to integrate and continue to honor and uh try to emphasize uh that role uh in their own history.

Um they're one of the first school districts also hire black principals and black teachers here in our city.

Um and the school uh ET Ren Elizabeth uh Ren Middle School has since closed, but was named after the first black principal hired in Edgewood ISD.

And so again, just kind of showing that kind of intrinsic history uh of black history and the commitment that our city must continue to make in bigger strides to address uh the disparities that we have here with black health, with black mortality, uh black income barriers, uh, or income inequality.

Um one big point I want to also mention too, right, is the connection to uh Kelly Air Force Base, which of course is no longer a Air Force base here, but it's crucial and integral for both um black residents and Latino residents as well to move up in the economic mobility ladder because it was an integrated uh Air Force base.

Um again, as we celebrate Black History Month, we must continue to make sure that we are pushing on these strides every single day, honoring the history that is here or that's been here in our city and moving forward with it too uh hand in hand.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilwoman Mesa Gonzalez.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just want to um thank the councilman for highlighting uh this important month for this community, and I look forward to um all those celebrations that will happen throughout the city.

Um I think another council mentioned the MLK March, uh, which is uh uh just a beautiful reminder of uh what this community uh can do when we work together um and how uh ordinary people can do extraordinary things every single day, and so uh being here on the dice, you get to see that front center, and so I look forward to uh the celebration this month.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Spears.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, this is a month where we can celebrate and recognize the strength, faith, and resilience of black families who have helped to build San Antonio and across our city, black owned small businesses, veterans, educators, and community leaders contribute every single day to our local economy and our neighborhoods.

And this month is about honoring that hard work and their service and the belief that opportunities should be within reach for everyone.

I encourage residents to support black owned businesses all year long and attend local events and celebrate the people who continue to move our city forward.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you.

Um I'm gonna take a point of personal privilege because one of the um effects of our city being so economically segregated is that we're also racially segregated.

And so sometimes growing up on one side of town, you won't hear about the history of another side of town, which is so critical.

So um one person, frankly, that I didn't know a lot about until I became mayor, um, was St.

Artemisia Bowden, uh, who is responsible for the only his uh historical black college, which is also actually a Hispanic serving institution here in our great city.

So I'm gonna read a little bit about her, um, and I'll challenge everybody listening, in particular our youth, though, uh, to understand why this woman continues to be so important in our community.

Artemisia Bowden was born in Georgia in 1879 to parents who were formerly enslaved.

She graduated in 1900 from St.

Augustine's Normal School in North Carolina and taught for two years in the state before moving to San Antonio in 1902 to take over as principal of St.

Phillips Day School.

When Bowden arrived, the day school primarily taught sewing to young African American girls shortly after arriving, Bowden renamed it to St.

Phillips Industrial Girl School for Girls.

In 1927, under Bowden's leadership, and after gaining private junior college status in 1926, the school became St.

Philip's Junior College.

Bowden served at the school until her retirement in 1954.

She carried the college through the Great Depression, and later in 1954, saw the San Antonio Union Junior College Board here and subsequently deny a petition from St.

Phillips to integrate campuses and allow African American students to enroll in San Antonio College.

The following year, the board relented, African American students were admitted to San Antonio College, and white students were admitted to St.

Phillips.

The college is the only historically black college or university in San Antonio.

So a proud legacy of history, a strong black woman that is uh done so much.

I encourage you uh to learn more about um how important that woman continues to be, certainly not only for our community, in particular on the east side, and if you haven't been to it, you gotta go to Dr.

Lawson's um high tea for her each year.

Okay, all right.

We don't have any personal points of privilege, correct?

Okay, good.

Is there any objection to taking the consent agenda before the individual items so that we may clear the business for the day?

Great.

Item seven through 15 are on the consent agenda.

This means they will be considered as a group and there will not be a staff presentation unless pulled for individual consideration.

Okay.

None?

Okay.

Are there any items council members would like to pull from the consent agenda to be heard individually?

Okay.

Okay.

Hearing none, we have several members of the community that have um signed up to speak on the consent agenda.

Items four and five.

If you signed up to speak on those individually, um you'll you will speak once because we'll we're going to vote on them once.

So uh and we've noted that in the uh when I call you up.

Okay.

Excuse me.

Okay.

We have um Jack Finger.

Uh, if you have three minutes, sir, to speak on the consent agenda item.

Madam Mayor, other members of our illustrious San Antonio City Council.

For the record, my name is Jack M.

Finger.

I wish to bring your attention on this portion of the agenda.

Item number 13 is about uh oh settlement of a personal injury lawsuit uh that deals with the fact that a policewoman uh collided with uh a civilian's car and caused about uh oh 149,000 dollars in injuries and damage and so forth.

My question is always uh do the uh employees who cause these problems do they ever get reprimanded in any possible manner?

I mean, we would like we the citizens would like to know if that ever happens because uh if you continue to let these city employees keep driving around and continuing to call it cause accidents, uh does anybody ever get spanked on these things?

Yeah, we uh have a real problem with that.

Also, item number 11.

Well, let's Mr.

Oliver Vision uh put up item number 11 on the on the ejector.

Let's see.

Approving the appointment of Eric Alva, Eric Alba to the Ethics Review Board for the remainder of term of office to expire April 24th, 2027.

Return the camera if you would.

The uh the ethics review board.

I looked up the definition of ethics.

It says dictionary says it's a it's a system of moral principles.

I don't know if anyone realized it, but Mr.

Alva decorated Marine because of he was injured in the in the war that had had his lead uh amputated and so forth.

Unfortunately, Mr.

Alba has been an advocate for the homosexual agenda.

Yeah, uh miss that he's a member of the homosexual community.

And by definition, that means you you engage in homosexual acts.

You know, we have real problems with a person who engages in homosexual acts being a part of an ethics committee.

We're not gonna tolerate hate speech here.

Your time is up, thank you.

Yeah, well, very good.

Thank you.

No, uh, Madam Mayor, uh, we still don't want it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Security.

Thank you.

Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda?

Second.

Did you say?

Yeah.

Did you get them?

Okay.

We have several highlights um on the consent agenda.

Councilman Wongia.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'd like to highlight um item number 12.

It's my pleasure to recognize Logan Martinez for his appointment to the C of San Antonio's higher education student advisory board.

Logan isn't just a dedicated student, he's actually a valued member of our district four family as a part-time staff member.

His dual perspective serving our community by day and navigating local higher education by night makes an ideal voice to bridge the gap between City Hall and the next generation of San Antonio leaders.

Uh, and he's a proud student and works a lot with Palato College, so I'm very proud to appoint him today.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilwoman Castillo.

Thank you, Mayor.

This morning I would like to highlight item nine.

I'm grateful for this grant on its ten-year target for targeting in truancy prevention in our youth.

There's a number of reasons why San Antonio missed youth, and given the current climate, what we're hearing from our independent school districts, it's primarily due to concerns around uh mixed family status.

Uh so we're seeing schools having to dissolve uh many of their bilingual education programs.

However, for um other students who find themselves outside of the classroom for a number of reasons, this uh grant is going to help uh ensure that four caseworkers and one supervisor work to address truancy and chronic absenteeism in San Antonio.

Some youth do need this special push to get to the finish line and seeing that maybe some of their families are scared, as I mentioned, of immigration or others feel that they should focus on working versus focus on getting their studies.

As always, I'm grateful for the work of Judge Oblado and her team for their truancy uh programming where they bring in youth and their families all throughout the city of San Antonio and get connected to a wide range of resources that improve the quality of life for all of their families, including access to ready-to-work programming, having housing services, and many nonprofits there that help improve the overall uh quality of life at home for our families.

So just grateful for Judge O'Glado again and the municipal courts team.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilwoman Mesa Gonzalez.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'd like to highlight item seven.

This is an ordinance approving a construction contract with easy belt construction for Babcock Road.

This is a 2022 bond project in District 8 that includes reconstructing and widening of Babcock along with new turn lanes, sidewalks, driveway approaches, pedestrian lighting along the park path, and much more.

As we know, the UTSA area is continuing to grow rapidly, and it is my hope that this construction will help make the area safer and more convenient and enjoyable.

Also hope that uh phase three of this project makes the list for the 2027 bond for anybody that's listening.

Uh, I have high expectations of the work they will complete and have no doubt they will meet uh these expectations.

I want to sincerely thank the residents who took the time to vote on this project and make their voices heard.

Your engagement and trust in this process truly matter, and I'm grateful you're for your commitment to the safety and future of our community.

Um, as we talk about community engagement, just want to remind District 8 residents of our SAWS Town Hall tonight at the San Antonio Board of Realtors headquarters starting at 6 p.m.

Um, also just want to fully support this project.

Excited about what this will bring for safer spaces, stronger infrastructure, and a city better prepared and a district better prepared for what comes uh ahead of us.

Thank you.

Great.

Um, Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mayor.

I was planning to highlight item nine, I believe Councilmember Castillo just highlighted it, uh, but I do want to shout out the municipal courts team.

Thank you for all the work that you're doing.

I'd also, uh mayor, if I may, uh, would love to uh shout you out for the appointment of Eric Alva.

Uh and if I may, I'd love to address uh Mr.

Finger.

You know, you come up here several times uh a month, and we laugh and we giggle about some of the things that you say that are really hateful in nature.

And I want you to know that sometimes when people have become figures that are routine at City Council, uh, you know, the day that they pass, we remember them and we think about uh all the great times that we had up here.

And when you pass I don't think I don't think that'll be happening.

I think we'll remember every single hateful thing that you said, every person that you heard.

And that'll be your legacy.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I'm proud uh to appoint um staff sergeant Eric Fidelis Alva retired Marine Corps uh as my appointee to the ethics community to the ethics committee, excuse me.

Um Alva is a native of San Antonio.

He grew up in a family, military family, hence some middle name like Fidelis.

Um he joined the Marine Corps in 1990 at the age of 19.

And when he joined, like I, when I joined, knew we could not be open about our sexuality.

So our country with us was fine with us dying for our country, but we couldn't be open about who we were.

Um, staff Sergeant Fidelis uh was the first Marine, the first Marine seriously injured in the Iraq War.

And he has been instrumental in his service.

He was instrumental in leading the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

He continues to this day to give back as an adjunct professor at the University of Texas, San Antonio.

Um, and I'm very proud to appoint him and I congratulate him and his husband, Danny Ingram, also a veteran on their continued service to our community.

There being no further discussion, there's a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda.

Please vote.

The motion passes.

Item four is a resolution providing the city of San Antonio's consent to the creation by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality TCEQ of a municipal municipal utility district MUD to be named the Bear County MUD number two, generally located northwest of the intersection of Scenic Loop and Babcock Road in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of San Antonio, Bear County.

Item number four is an ordinance approving a development agreement between the City of San Antonio and Guajalote Ranch Inc.

and Sydney and Marcy Edwards, landowners of approximately 1,159.87 acres of land generally located northwest of the intersection of Scenic Loop and Babcock Road in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the city of San Antonio, Bear County, Texas.

Staff, but please proceed with your presentation.

Thank you.

Good morning, Mayor Council.

Bridget White, Director of the Planning Department.

As noted, items four and five on today's agenda for City Council's consideration of first consent to the creation of municipal utility district to be created by Texas Commission of Environmental Quality, and second, approval of an associated development agreement.

The site in question is in Northwest Bear County in the City of San Antonio's extraterritorial jurisdiction, or ETJ, near the intersection of Scenic Loop Road and Babcock Road.

The site is approximately 1,160 acres, and the owners are Wahalote Ranch Incorporated and Sydney and Marcy Edwards.

Lenar Homes of Texas plans to develop the site.

The developer is requesting a municipal utility district or MUD to be named Bear County MUD No.

In order to finance development of a 3,000 single family residential development.

The site is within San Antonio's Water Systems Water Certificate of Convenience and Necessity, or CCN, and not currently within any entity's CCN for sewer.

Proposed improvements include on-site and off-site improvements, such as individual lot improvements, streets, utilities, drainage, and grading, an off-site drainage extension to Scenic Loop Road, and the construction and operation of an on-site wastewater treatment plant.

The developer will preserve approximately 580 acres or 50% of the project area as open space.

Costs are estimated to be approximately 150 million dollars, with revenue anticipated to be 106.5 million dollars.

Municipal utility districts operate on a reimbursement model, and the developer could recover infrastructure costs through Adver Alm taxes, assessments, and the issuance of bonds for the on-site and off-site improvements proposed.

The Texas Water Code, specifically chapters 49 and 54, pertain to water districts and provide regulations on what is required for the creation of these districts.

As required, the developer submitted a petition to the city on November 10th, 2025 for the city's consent to the creation of a municipal utility district with the MUD to be created by TCQ.

A MUD petition has a 90-day requirement from the its receipt for the city to consider the request.

Today, February 5th, is the 87th day of the 90-day clock.

As you can see in the upper right hand corner of this slide, the planning commission was briefed on this request on December 17th, 2025, and held a hearing on January 16th of this year.

At that hearing, the item before them was to make a recommendation to City Council on whether or not to consent to the creation of the MUD with an executed development agreement.

A motion to deny passed 5.4.

In regard to council's action today, as you can see from the top line, if City Council chooses to approve consenting to the creation of the MUD, the item would then go to TCQ for the developer to go through the process of creating the district.

If, however, City Council chooses to deny its consent to the creation of the MUD or take no action, the developer can then move to file a petition for wastewater services with the city and negotiate an agreement with SAWS.

A petition received would start a 120-day clock for an agreement to be negotiated.

If no agreement is reached between SAS and the developer within 120 days, the developer can proceed to TCQ for them to consider creating a district.

As far as actions taken to date, SAS approved the utility service agreement for water with conditions related to sewer in February 2022.

The master development plan was approved by both Bear County and the City of San Antonio in February 2023 and March 2023, respectively.

The wastewater permit was approved by TCQ in October 2025, and SAWS provided responses to environmental questions raised and brought forward via a city council consideration request in October and November 2025.

In accordance with Section 212.172 of the local government code, the city negotiates a development agreement with all special district requests for consent to creation.

The development agreement serves as a contractual agreement between the city and the current as well as future owners of the of the property.

The development agreement is filed with the county and runs with the land.

The items noted on this slide are terms that would be included in a signed development agreement for Bayer County MUD number two.

They include the city's development related terms typically found in development agreements for special districts, as well as water quality protection terms because of the unique nature of this project given its location.

The water quality protection terms are from the SAWS Water Utility Service Agreement from February 2022 and the settlement agreement from December 2024.

I will go into those in more detail in the next two slides.

Two additional water quality protection terms in the development agreement that are not in either of those two are one SAW's review of plans for construction and as built documents containing the seal of a professional engineer, and two, SAW's ability to inspect the facility at its discretion upon reasonable prior notice to the developer.

As far as development includes items such as one, which subdivision regulations apply in the ETJ that the developer will comply with, such as the tree ordinance, water quality protection ordinance, irrigation permitting street connectivity and signs.

Two, noting that the owner will agree to provide increased road network access points for single family residential subdivisions, which are located within fire and flood prone areas.

Three, language pertaining to the district's debt, including a cap on the district's bond issuance of 150 million dollars, the timing on when the last bonds can be issued, and the ability for the city to charge customers within the district a post-annexation surcharge as permitted by the Texas Water Code to compensate for its assumption of obligations of the district if the city were to choose to annex at a future date.

Four, the current and future owners agreeing to voluntary annexation if a future city council chooses to annex a district at the term of end of the term of the development agreement, five, a third-party conservation easement holder, and six applicable application provisions and fees, such as the owners providing annual updates to the city on the progress of the development and paying the city an operations assessment fee of 175 per built residential unit for a total of 525,000.

The nine conditions agreed to with the SAWS water USA are noted here.

Two pertain more to development of the land with the other seven related to water quality protection.

Conditions include but are not limited to setting aside 50% of the project as open space, a 30% impervious cover restriction, the discharge permit can only serve the 1160 acre property, the plant will be operated and maintained by an A-level wastewater operator, and soil supplementation to allow for adequate soil absorption.

From the 2024 settlement agreement, there are 10 conditions, including but not limited to the plant being operated and maintained by an A-level wastewater operator, the type of conditions that need to be met and where the reused water can be used, complying with SAS's backflow prevention requirement, soil requirements, monitoring of the wastewater treatment plant and lift stations, providing 24-hour answering services as well as on-call staff, GPS monitoring equipment for expedited response times, on-site personnel for adequate notification purposes, and design and construction of wet wells to contain peak design flow.

For city council's consideration today is item number four, consent to the creation of the Bear County Municipal Utility District No.

In which council can approve, deny, or take no action.

And item number five, approval of a development agreement.

At the January 22nd briefing, there was a question as to which development agreement conditions would remain and if the MUD request and development agreement were not approved.

What would remain would be one, the nine conditions approved with the SAWS Water USA in February 2022, the two, the two conditions contained in the settlement agreement from December 2024, and three, if the developer would still developer would still have to comply with the subdivision regulations applicable to the ETJ, such as the tree ordinance, street connectivity and signs.

These three items are what are noted on slide seven, the first bullet and the two associated sub bullets under water quality protection and the first bullet under development.

Items such as the following would go away.

The developer providing SAS all plans for construction and as built documents containing the seal of a professional engineer.

Two, to the developer allowing SOS to inspect at its discretion upon reasonable prior notice of the developer.

Three, increased requirements such as the road network access points, also noted on slide seven, as well as the military protection area related lighting and sound standards.

The developer would have had to comply with because the site is within five miles of the Camp Willis military installation.

Four, language related to the debts cap, uh district's debt, including cap on the bond issuance, the timing of the bonds and the post-annexation surcharge.

Five, the current and future owners agreeing to voluntary annexation.

Six, the open space to be reserved as a conservation easement and conveyed to a third-party easement holder.

Seven, the applicable provisions and fees, such as the annual reports and the one-time assessment fee.

And as I mentioned earlier, the eight, uh the agreement running with the land, thus mining any successors, and also any pre-approved language that must be included in every deed, informing buyers of the district, its ability to tax, and potential future annexation by the city.

Finally, with special district requests, staff will typically have a signed development agreement when the item is presented to city council for consideration.

However, as of this morning, the developer has not signed the development agreement and has indicated that they will not be signing.

Mayor, this concludes my presentation on items four and five.

Thank you for the presentation.

And just a point of clarification before we go on to the public.

It indicates it informs their um informs their comments.

The items on slide eight, nine, and ten.

We all are all coming to the city irrespective of irrespective of whether or not we approve the mud, right?

Just the items on eight, nine, and ten.

Yes, that's correct.

Okay, got it.

Thank you.

All right.

We'll move on to those that have signed up to speak from the public.

Okay.

Um, I'll call individuals up in the order that they signed up.

All individuals will have three minutes.

Groups of three will have a total of nine minutes.

Um, and I'll call several folks up so you can please line up so we can get through this efficiently.

Um, Susan Bevan, followed by Kate Hallfeist, followed by Lisa Pack.

Yeah, yeah.

Good morning.

Susan Bevan, and I'm giving my time to Stuart Burnbaum, who will follow me.

Uh let's find it.

Number eight, okay.

Okay, you have six minutes.

Thank you.

I'm just I'm just taking three minutes.

I'm not Stuart.

Sorry.

All right, so Susan, so Susan Bevan.

Um, so go ahead and if you're giving it to Stuart and Stuart's here, then Stuart, you have six minutes right now, sir.

Thank you.

We sort of have an organized delivery, so if it's okay, I'll start.

I'm Catherine Feist.

Hold on, one second.

Okay.

We'll go down the um the list then as people have signed up.

Okay, so Kate Hall Feist, is she available?

That's me.

Okay, go ahead.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you to the San Antonio City of Council and Mayor Ortiz Jones for allowing your neighbors to the north, the Scenic Loop Pilotus Creek Alliance, this second opportunity for public comments on the proposed MUD for the Wahalote Ranch Project.

As you know, more than 50 people spoke against the MUD at the Planning Commission meeting.

Councilman Mungia, you were there, you heard everything.

That was followed by another 18 speakers right here at the last city council meeting.

Today we're only going to focus on those issues that continue to raise alarming questions.

To be clear, the Scenic Loop Holotus Creek Alliance is not rejecting all MUDs as a funding tool.

A MUD can be appropriate when it aligns with city planning goals, when it protects public resources, and when it poses no unacceptable threat to the environment, especially when we're talking about our most treasured resource.

Holotus Creek watershed is extraordinarily sensitive, and we cannot ignore that fact.

Additionally, there are unresolved legal and scientific issues surrounding the wastewater permit, which is currently under judicial appeal in Travis County.

This appeal identifies 10 significant errors in TCQ's approval of the permit, which can be found on our website, scenicloop.org.

Before we move on into a deeper dive into the science regarding the Wajalote Ranch and the proposed wastewater treatment plant, we would like to thank Councilwoman Alderete Gavito and Councilwoman Mesa Gonzalez for introducing a CCR that raised questions about the science behind this issue.

We would also like to thank Mayor Ortiz Jones for her specific inquiries regarding the report from the Southwest Research Institute.

Clarifying the science is key to understanding why a no vote on this mud is critical to protecting the drinking water source for 2.5 million people, and most importantly, their health.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

Lisa Pack, followed by Mark D'Arazio.

Good morning, Council and Mayor.

I'm donating my time to Jane Sams and Lynette Munson.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yep, great.

Okay.

Then whoever is speaking will have nine minutes.

Come on, man.

Okay.

May I ask who's speaking?

Go ahead.

No, no, go ahead.

Okay, good morning.

Good morning, Mayor, and good.

I'm sorry.

You have slides.

They have slides.

They do.

Okay.

Is it may I ask who speak?

Is it Jane Sam?

Yes.

Good morning.

My name is Jane Sams, and this is my niece, Lynette Munson, and thank you for allowing us to take your time today to speak to you this morning.

Lynette and I live on the Sam's Ranch family that has been in our family for over 140 years and is adjacent to the Wahaloti Ranch.

The e-flux from will leave that property and immediately enter the Sam's Ranch are as we call it ground zero.

We all reply, we all rely on private wells as our waste at our water source.

Clean water is so important to not only us at ground zero, but over the 2.5 million other people that rely on good healthy water.

First, let me thank the council members that toured our property and participated in our demonstration.

As you saw in the area by the main headwater, there were tons of holy rocks.

I believe a few of you that came out might have taken one or two home for your family members to look at, which I appreciate y'all taking something from our property to remember us by.

And you clearly saw how fast the water ran through the holes of the Karstrock.

Next slide, please.

Oh, okay.

Our land as well as the Wahaloti Ranch sits in one of the largest geological areas in our state.

To understand karst, think of holes are a lot of Swiss cheese, that the water is just going through it immediately.

Not waiting to go, but it's going down immediately.

And you it and if you've been to the hill country, that you've seen a lot of holy rocks, and they are a key part to what makes the hill country unique.

Karst refers to either features or terrain formed by dissolution, making them full of holes and fractures.

It also leads to underground drainage systems where surface water and groundwater systems are linked through the karst features.

And rain provides recharge to the groundwater supply that will wash contaminants from the surface into the groundwater system below.

Karst landscape, such as ours, which my niece will show you from her slides, that it is sensitive to our development, which underscores the need for good stewardship and innovation to protect our water supplies.

A quarter of the world's population depends upon water supplied from the karst area.

Well, over 2.5 million people rely on water from the Edwards and the Trinity aquifers in Central Texas, and that water needs to be protected for all of us that rely on water from whatever aquifer zone you are in.

But please protect the Edwards and the Trinity.

Thank you.

Next slide, and this is my niece.

Good morning.

As Jane mentioned, a few of you visited and saw what our land looks like.

You saw the karst rocks laying in the creek beds and how quickly the water went through it.

But I want to show you what my backyard looks like.

What you see here is what the rest of the land looks like.

As you can see, the karst rocks is not only underground, but they protrude to the surface.

What you see on the top goes all the way down.

So just think about when you poured that bottle of water on that rock and what happens.

It went straight through.

Well, that's what happens when it rains on our land.

It goes straight through into those rocks.

There is no filtering, there is no layering.

Those little holes don't have filters in them to stop contaminants.

I've literally fought these rocks for 30 years.

I've scraped them, I've picked them up, I've crushed them.

I've even had a bobcat come out, and every time I would pull up a big holy rock, there was another holy rock right underneath it.

And guess what?

With the little rain, that soil starts to erode again.

So every time I pick up a rock or crush a rock, it rains a little, and the next thing you know, all of my holy rocks are back on the surface.

So when I hear concessions, such are going to put four inches of soil down.

I'm here to tell you that four inches isn't going to do anything.

It's going to get into that karst rock and it's going into our drinking water.

And as soon as they put the four inches of soil down, it's going to quickly erode, like I see it happen all the time in my backyard.

What are they going to keep doing?

Keep putting soil down?

It won't stay.

Trust me, I've tried.

I wish it would.

It will not stay.

And who's going to ensure that they abide by these concessions?

So while I understand they've made some promises, those promises carry little value or little comfort for us.

They won't keep those contaminants from reaching our well water or any of the other communities drinking water that rely on our aquifers.

So why is contamination of any groundwater acceptable?

Why is an out-of-state developer not being checked to ensure that there don't impact our environment?

Next slide, please.

The headwaters of Holodus Creek sits on our property.

Even in the worst drought conditions, our springs have opened twice, July of 24 and May of 25, with just as little as four inches of rain.

The fact is, as science predicts, when our fling our springs are flowing within hours, a day at the most of these rains.

And you can take a look at these pictures.

When those springs open today, we have clean, clear water coming out.

Now, if there's water coming out of them, and we release any type of effluent into that creek, it's going to go down into those same holes that that clean water is coming out of.

So all of that nasty water with PFOFs and PFAST and all the other stuff are going straight down into those holes.

And we also know, due to the fact that it's a karst environment, those springs will be polluted anytime they open up if we don't prevent this mud.

The water will be tainted forever.

We cannot clean it up.

No number of promises will stop it from being impacted.

It is not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.

We thank you for your time and listening to our concerns.

Thank you.

Mark DeRazio.

Thank you, Mayor.

Council members, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak.

My name is Mark DeRazio, and I'm the state representative for House District 122, where this MUD would be located.

Let me start off by saying that I've been working with my constituents for almost three years on this issue.

I've spoken to hundreds of maybe thousands of people on this issue.

They're stay-at-home moms, businessmen, doctors, retirees, and even a geologist or two and a medical doctor.

They are Democrats, Republicans, and independents.

I've never once heard anyone say they wanted this mud or really anything to do with a Wahalote ranch.

San Antonio has been my home.

I've been involved in politics in my community for about 38 years.

I have never once, not once seen an issue that has united people like that, like this one.

It's brought together progressive environmentalists, government limited government champions in a way that I didn't think was possible a couple of years ago.

I was elected to represent the people of House District 122.

So let me say it again.

No one in my district wants this mud.

It goes beyond District 122.

Every single member of Bear County House delegation signed on to a letter I wrote opposing this project just this summer.

Something you'll hear is that this mud will only tax those who live in Guajalote Ranch, but that just isn't true.

When you have a project of this size, so far away from basic services, you're going to need a lot of taxpayer money to support it.

Roads will have to be widened, repaved, and maintained much more often after you drop several thousand people into this rural area.

You'll need more emergency services, new fire stations, more police cars, more linemen, more technicians, more everything in the surrounding area.

The idea that Guajalote Ranch will pay for itself with this mud isn't true.

Every single person who lives in Bear County is going to pay for this development.

If you own a home or business, your taxes are going to go up.

If you rent, your rent is going to go up to cover the taxes of your landlord pays.

That's why we have triple net leases on commercial buildings.

Because you just can't anticipate the increase in taxes.

This mud is just another government taxing authority that no one wants but everyone will pay for.

In our issues that we deal with in Austin, property taxes are still the number one or very high issue.

That all sounds good enough, but I haven't said what I haven't said the one word yet, and that's water.

The idea that we could pass property tax to support a project will threaten our water when property taxes are crushing people and water is getting more and more expensive in the middle of a drought.

Well, it's just crazy.

There is 600,000 acres of the Edwards Aquifer.

15 percent of that is recharged by by in this area.

That's 140 square miles.

Please stand with me to oppose this mud.

No one wants it, and everyone will pay for it.

I'm Mark DeRazio, and I'm a state representative for House District 122.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Nettie Burnbum.

Nettie Burnbum.

Okay.

Steve Lee.

Steve Lee, followed by Stuart Burnbum and Philip Manna.

Yeah, so we're calling folks based on how you signed up.

So Steve, I've got Steve Lee.

Steve Lee, Stewart Burnbum, and then Philip Manna.

Thank you.

I'm going to have two people give, excuse me.

I'm going to have two people give time, and they're coming up right now.

What are their names, sir?

Come on.

My name is Karen Leidner, and I am giving my time to Steve Lee.

Okay.

And who's the other person, sir?

Good morning.

I am Michael Phillips.

I am donating my time to Mr.

Steve Lee.

Michael Phillips, is that right?

Oh, okay.

Yes, Mayor.

Thank you.

Okay.

You have nine minutes, sir.

Very good.

Well, good morning.

Uh, and thank you again for this privilege to address you once again.

Excuse me.

My name is Steve Lee, and we live outside Grey Forest on land that's been in my family for more than 160 years.

My family and I rely on a Trinity well for our water supply.

For the benefit of all here today, I would like to highlight some of the critical observations from letters that Dr.

Ronald Green and Dr.

George Vinny sent to each of you.

Dr.

Green's letter, he soundly refutes Saw's claims that the nine so-called controls it negotiated for Lenar or with Lenar for Guadalupe Ranch for wastewater treatment as part of a water services agreement will make this project safe.

He says that even with the stated conditions, effluent from Lenar's wastewater treatment plant could reach either private wells or public supply wells in days or weeks.

And he repeatedly characterizes public assertions by Saws as simplistic or not correct and lacking any scientific citations.

In contrast, Dr.

Green's letter includes numerous study citations and exhibits throughout, and a listing of 37 references at the end.

He writes, even with the controls, the dominant factor will remain the total mass load of affluent released to the environment.

This is because the limited soil, karst, limestone, and rolling terrain of the hill country provide minimal minimal retardation to water applied to the land surface, whether by precipitation or land application.

The characteristics of the hill country in the Guadalupe tract will remain dominant even with the nine controls.

Central to Saw's claims is that the Habe crossing fault, which crosses the area, prevents flow from the Trinity Aquifer to the Edwards Aquifer.

But Dr.

Green cites studies showing multiple faults comprising the offset between the two aquifers, many producing pathways to flow.

Both the Southwest research study and another one by the U.S.

Geological Survey characterizes the Habey Crossing Fault as a conduit rather than a barrier to flow.

Dr.

Green's letter says.

He notes that dye tracer studies by the Edwards Aquifer Authority further confirms the hydraulic relationship between the Trinity and the Edwards Afers, with travel times of the dye in groundwater of approximately one mile per day.

And he disputes Saul's claim that the distance from the proposed Quahlotia Ranch wastewater treatment plant to the Edwards aquifer would be far enough for the affluent to quote unquote naturally attenuate.

Dr.

Green says that pathogens like bacteria and viruses can persist in groundwater for weeks and months.

And that karst aquifers like the Trinity and Edwards are particularly vulnerable to degradation because of rapid groundwater speeds and short travel times.

And even Saw's typical new street well on the west side of San Antonio, 14 miles away in two weeks.

That well already has been contaminated, by the way.

He notes a study showing that pathogens in a fluent applied to a field over similar karst geology in Canada seeped into a public water supply, killing seven people, and making 2300 others critically ill.

Dr.

Vinny also was compelled to write you because of Saw's October 10th letter, which he says contains technical information that is limited, out of date, and flawed.

Excuse me.

He says that Saul's view ignores substantial and direct evidence from a groundwater tracing program that he himself conducted and was reviewed and published by the Edwards Aquifer Authority.

Excuse me.

We injected non-toxic dyes into the Trinity Glen Rose and discovered them in the Edwards Aquifer wells, he says, crossing as many as seven faults, the digital groundwater models and some researchers previously believed were barriers to groundwater flow, he writes.

He also notes that the 30% impervious cover standard in the nine conditions is not scientific.

Research shows water quality declines sharply once a watershed exceeds roughly 15% impervious cover.

And yet, despite all this, and yet, despite all this overwhelming evidence provided by Doctors Green and Vinnie in their letters, saw's last night on KSAT continued to peddle its inaccuracies, claiming rigorous studies.

It is fair to ask, where are those studies?

And as SALS already is signaling a rate hike increase for for water users, it could cost them and ratepayers billions more dollars to remediate pollution from this project.

No.

The the science, the scientific consensus is clear on this.

When the city needed answers about the Hilotus Creek watershed, you hired the Southwest Research Institute, the same institution trusted by NASA, the Department of Defense, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Their conclusion was unequivocal.

Any additional wastewater systems from residential development in this watershed will significantly degrade water quality.

And now two of the most respected aquifer scientists in the world, and by extension, all the other scientists they've cited have warned you that this project threatens our water supply.

These are not activists.

They are not lobbyists.

They are the people you would call if your life depended on the answer, because in this case, it does.

The stakes could not be higher.

Mayor Paul Gerrell of Great Forest said it plainly two weeks ago.

Cities do not get to make mistakes with their water.

Not twice, not ever.

Flint, Michigan, was told the science is fine, and the models say it will be okay.

They trusted the wrong voices.

The consequences will last generations.

Flint is not an outlier.

Flint is a warning.

Stuart Burnbum.

Hold on, one second.

Stuart Burnbum is who I've got on my list.

So Philip Mann first?

Nope.

Stuart Burnbaum.

And then Philip Manna.

Thank you.

Hello, I'm Nettie Bonbaum.

I'm giving my time to Stuart Burnbaum.

Okay.

Six minutes, sir.

Thank you.

And I'd like to remind.

What is it?

Nine minutes, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I'll have a couple of slides.

That one first.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor and Council Members, for allowing me this opportunity to address you regarding the mud application before you today.

My name is Stuart Birnbaum.

I live in Holotus, and I am asking you to reject the MUD application to develop Guajalote Ranch.

I'm a geoscientist with a doctoral degree in geology, and I'm an emeritus associate professor in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at UT San Antonio.

I am also on the board of the Trinity Glenrose Groundwater Conservation District, in whose jurisdiction Guajalote Ranch lies.

I preface my comments by saying these comments are mine alone.

I do not represent UT San Antonio nor the groundwater conservation district.

When I had the privilege of speaking to you on January 22nd, I presented an extremely rapid overview of the current state of scientific knowledge regarding the nature of the Holodus Creek watershed and the hydrologic connection between Trinity Glenrose and Edwards Aquifers.

Since then you have received letters from two highly respected hydrogeologists with a combined 80 years' experience studying the Trinity and Edwards Aquifers.

I believe you also just recently received a third letter from another expert with vast experience in the Holodas Creek watershed, Gary Schindel, corroborating the letters of Drs.

Green and Vinny.

The letter from Dr.

George Vinney provides evidence of direct hydrologic communication between the aquifers.

Dr.

Vinney recently retired as the executive director of congressionally created National Cave and Carst Research Institute in New Mexico.

And he's the author of the authoritative book, Caves of Bear County, Texas.

Vinney earned his undergraduate degree at UTSA, was a colleague of mine when he taught at UTSA, and considers San Antonio his home.

In that letter, Dr.

Vinney states that in the past he would have perhaps at least partially agreed with the SAW's statement regarding the confining nature of the Campbellus rock layer.

However, as is the case with all good scientists, when new data presents itself, interpretations change.

In describing his research at Natural Bridge Caverns, Dr.

Vinny states, and I quote, the Campbellis unit transmits great volumes of groundwater from the Glen Rose to the Edwards Limestone portion of the Edwards Aquifer.

The Camp Bullis unit is not the confining unit Saws believes it to be.

The second of these letters is from Dr.

Ronald Green, a senior author of the 2020 Southwest Research Institute study that is so critical in this debate, showing that the development like Guajalote Ranch would degrade the Edwards Aquifer.

Although Dr.

Green is now retired from South Earth's research and clearly states he is not representing the institution, we may safely expect accept his authority as on the science provided in that report.

Let me show you two depictions of the Trinity of the faulting across the Trinity and Edwards.

So here we have an image that was provided by Saws without attribution or citation that shows a simplistic and out-of-date interpretation, and you'll notice that they have the Habe Crossing fault as a barrier fault.

The next image is from a 2010 peer-reviewed publication based upon tracer studies that reveal the complex details across a fault that connects the Trinidad Edwards Aquifer.

And I'd like to point out that Gary Shindel and George Vinny were authors of this particular paper.

I've highlighted wells in yellow and caves in blue for easy identification.

And here I would be pointing, but you have an operator.

The gray colors represent the Glen Rose, while the blues and pinks represent the Edwards.

Trace of dyes were added to caves in the Edwards, and those traces appeared in Glenrose Wells and then again in Edwards Wells.

The blue arrows show the flow from the Glenrose Aquifer into the Edwards Aquifer across numerous faults.

This peer-reviewed research reveals that the two aquifers behave as a single interconnected hydrologic system.

The science is clear and is clearly being ignored.

I do not understand why SAWS persists in perpetuating old and largely refuted science.

Perhaps it is convenient to use a one-size-fits-all approach to aquifer management.

This is both dangerous and a potentially costly error if the Edwards becomes unnecessarily contaminated.

I would like to provide an analogy based upon a personal life-altering experience.

I retired from UTSA for medical reasons, having been diagnosed with cancer in 2007.

I stand before you today because advances in medical science were utilized and a new targeted gene therapy saved my life.

In contrast, I get the feeling that if the TAW's approach to science were implemented, it would be analogous to a patient with migraines having a hole drilled in their head to allow the evil spirits to escape.

Two weeks ago there was discussion of whether Southwest Research planned follow-up study since five years had passed.

Dr.

Green said in his letter that he reviewed all available and relevant technical reports and peer-reviewed journal articles on the Edwards and Trinities aquifers for a text he was preparing, and indicates that he has not run across anything new since the uh Southwest report.

And he states, like any scientific evaluation, my conclusions may change if and when contradictory evidence or data become available.

Neither are provided in the Puente letter.

No doubt informed by the same erroneous information it continues to rely upon today.

Clearly SAWS has not updated its environmental assessment.

As science advances, management policy should take heed and adapt.

I'll close by reminding you that when I was last here, I promised you a quiz.

Your vote today is that quiz, and it is past fail.

There is no partial credit.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Philip Manor.

Philip Manor, you'll be followed by Austin Browning.

So Philip Manna, Alma Farmsteads, and I'm going to cede my time to Randy, and please vote no.

Randy Newman.

My name is Austin Browning.

I'll give my time to Randy Newman.

Thank you.

Mr.

Newman, you'll have nine minutes.

Mayor and Council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Randy Newman, chair of the steering committee of the Senior Glue Pilotus Creek Alliance.

I'm here today representing thousands of residents who are united in one message.

We do not want the Wahaloody wastewater plant built, and we expect our city to defend the water that sustains two and a half million Texans.

This is not a philosophical debate.

It is a legal, scientific, and moral one.

The law is not optional, and the law is on the side of protecting water.

The Texas Water Code provides clear, enforceable protections.

26.003 requires the protection of water quality.

11.086 prohibits harming downstream properties.

26.121 forbids unlawful or improperly permitted discharges.

And 54.016 gives the city full authority to deny a mud when it is not feasible, practical, or in the public interest.

The Wahaloody permit is under judicial challenge, as you've heard, for 10 alleged errors, including failure to apply anti-degradation standards and reliance on flawed dissolved oxygen model.

If the permit is remanded or vacated, any discharge from a mud-financed plant would be unlawful.

The law is clear, the protections are clear, and the city's authority to say no is clear.

Approving a MUD now is premature, dangerous, and unnecessary.

If the court overturns the permit, the city will have approved a MUD whose core infrastructure cannot legally operate.

That exposes the city and the taxpayers to avoidable legal, financial, and environmental liability.

It would be imprudent to approve a financing mechanism for infrastructure that may be illegal to use.

A no vote preserves the city's leverage and reflects the will of the citizens of San Antonio.

A no vote triggers a 120-day negotiating period, after which the developer can seek TCEQ approval.

But during that 120-day time, the city can require a binding development agreement, establish enforceable environmental protections, define infrastructure obligations, and ensure alignment with long-term planning goals.

A no vote keeps the city in control.

A yes vote hands authority to a developer-controlled taxing entity in one of the most sensitive recharge zones in Texas.

This is not a procedural choice.

It is a choice about who governs growth in San Antonio, the elected city council or a private developer acting in its own interest.

As you've heard, the science is unequivocal.

The Wahalodi threatens the drinking water of two and a half million Texans.

Think about this with me for a moment.

If SALS were to withdraw, as its user service agreement allows, and not provide water to the Wahlode Ranch, the likely fallback is a Trinity aquifer well, drilled directly beneath the same fractured karst of the Balcones Fault Zone, where they plan to discharge a million gallons of sewer effluent every single day.

That means the contamination they are willing to impose on two and a half million Texans becomes the contamination they would have to drink themselves.

And then comes the unavoidable question.

Who buys a home where the tap water may be flavored with its own wastewater?

Cancer-causing PFOS, PFAS, pharmaceuticals, illegal drugs, and heavy metals.

What realtor wants to explain that?

What family wants to risk that?

The harm they are willing to impose on the entire region would become the harm they would have to live with themselves.

That's not just irony, it's a beautiful symmetry.

Lenar's plan is self-serving, not community serving.

Lenar's own attorney has already declared that the subdivision will be built, the wastewater plant is coming, and nothing the city does can stop it.

That statement alone proves that the developer does not need a MUD.

Only that a MUD would benefit the developer by enabling high-density housing while keeping the apparent cost of homes artificially low.

This is not about public need, it's about private profit.

This may be the most consequential vote of your time on council.

Entertainment districts come and go, bond packages come and go, even airports evolve, but nothing is more foundational to a city than clean, abundant water.

No one will fault you for voting to protect the aquifer.

Section plans were built to balance growth with aquifer protection, appropriate density, and safe roadway development.

These plans reflect the will and the wisdom of the San Antonio community.

And now an out-of-state developer seeks to override all of it, threatening our water, disregarding our plans, endangering our citizens, and dictating what the City of San Antonio must accept.

That is blatantly wrong.

When environmental review becomes box-checking, when legal processes are manipulated, and when citizens say enough, it becomes the solemn duty of this council to act in the collective best interest of the people of San Antonio.

Clearly, the developer does not care about San Antonio's water supply.

Clearly, they do not care about the will of neighbors, the safety of the residents of the development or the community, and clearly their interests regarding both a PID and a MUD are totally self serving.

Texans do not surrender their water, their land, or their sovereignty to outside pressure.

If Lenar's opening shot is that the city is powerless, then the city of San Antonio should answer with the full force of its authority and protect the water that protects us all.

On behalf of thousands of residents, I respectfully ask that you vote no on the creation of this mud.

Thank you.

Judy Hall, followed by Emory Bloom.

And then what's somebody can?

Lisa Moria's PAC is the same Lisa Pack, correct?

Okay.

So then it's Judy Hall, Emory Bloom, and then Rachel Haynes.

Hi.

I don't donate my time to Emory, and if you would pass these around.

You have six minutes, sir.

Go ahead.

Howdy, my name is Emory Bloom.

I'm the president of Cine Clue Palotus Creek Alliance, a registered neighborhood and city of San Antonio if you'll slow slide one that will that will overlap with this Guajalote Ranch project.

We would like to extend our sincere appreciation to you, Mayor, each council member individually, and to the city manager for the time you allocated to understand the details surrounding the situation and the concerns it raises among citizens across San Antonio and Bear County.

If you would switch to the next one.

Thank you.

We would also like to extend our appreciation to Representative Mark Terezio for leading the Bear County delegation of state representatives and to all of our Senate uh Texas State Senators for standing with us in opposition to this project, both in Austin at TCEQ and here locally.

And there's uh Representative Derezio's here with us, you heard him earlier, and also there's representatives from Senator Campbell's office here with us today.

I'm gonna segue into something we just learned.

This is I want to take a moment to recognize the leadership shown this week by State Representative Ray Lopez of House District 125.

Representative Lopez, one of 10 members of the bipartisan Bear County legislative delegation, who unanimously opposed the Oahute Ranch Wastewater Permit, has formally requested that Representative Brooks Langraff of Odessa, Chair of House Environmental Regulation Committee in the state of Texas, initiate a study on wastewater discharge into environmentally sensitive areas like the Edwards Aquifer contributing and recharge zones.

Representative Lopez emphasized that such a study would provide essential guidance for the upcoming 90th legislature legislative session, helping lawmakers evaluate how Texas can better regulate or limit wastewater discharges that threaten water quality.

It is anticipated that the full Bear County delegation will join Representative Lopez, both in his request and in supporting any legislation that may likely result from this study.

Several other legislators have also reached out to the Cineclu of Politics Creek Alliance seeking information and input on these issues.

We gratefully, we we are grateful for this growing engagement and the and this morning we want to publicly thank Representative Lopez for his foresight and his responsiveness to the community concerns and his commitment to protecting our shared water resources.

We'd also like to thank Bear County Commissioners and Judge who instrumental who were instrumental in unanimously ensuring this project was not funded by a 138 million dollar public improvement district.

That PID request died due to a lack of support at Commissioner's Court before even making it to a vote, and is the reason we are here discussing the MUD today.

And to our friends in Hilotus and Grey Forest, who city councils and their mayors have repeatedly voted on record their staunch opposition to this Guajalote Ranch project.

My neighbors, some of whom you have heard here today, do an outstanding service to this community by selflessly donating their time and energy to provide our community leaders a wealth of fact-based, scientifically affirmed information about why you should deny this MUD request today.

We don't stand here shaking a fist.

We reach out with a helping hand.

The opportunity moving forward lies with our constructive collaboration with you, the San Antonio City Council.

And together we can work to ensure the departments and agencies that we trust to represent our community's interests, align with the citizens' desires to support responsible growth that enhances quality of life, and that ensures every development project contributes to a safer and stronger San Antonio for all.

Council, your constituents look to you for your leadership in continuing to strive to ensure any projects as detrimental to our region as this Guajalote Ranch project does not make it this far in the process in the future.

Again, thank you for all your service to this community, and thank you again for voting to deny the 150 dollar, 150 million dollar Gualete Ranch MUD.

Rachel Haynes, followed by Lewis Vetter and then Patricia Seidenberger.

Good morning.

Thank you, Mayor and Council, for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Rachel Haynes.

I'm the policy director at the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance.

I'm here on behalf of our 16 Bear County member organizations to urge you to deny Lenar's request for the creation of a Wahalote Ranch Municipal District.

We request that you vote to deny this application for a MUD for the following reasons.

The applicants were originally informed informed the city was interested in discussing the purchase of a conservation easement through the Edwards Aquifer Protection Program.

They apparently did not consider this option, which could have provided a lucrative and more environmentally protective alternative.

The site is currently designated in this North Sector Plan as country, suitable for properties 10 acres or more.

Lenar's proposal is too dense to comply.

The proposed density, besides being inconsistent with current land uses, poses a real threat to San Antonio's water supplies and to neighbor well-being.

The development plan for the MUD has an impervious cover limit of 30%.

Given the importance of this site in recharging the Edwards and Trinity aquifers, 15% is more appropriate to reduce flooding and to preserve water quality.

The city could have negotiated better terms in the settlement agreement between San Antonio, Metro Health, and Lenar, which are substantively the same as the requirements that SAWs insisted on as conditions of the water utility service agreement with Lenar.

SAWs in the city should have required Lenar to pay for post-development water quality testing of private wells that might be at risk from wastewater and stormwater contamination.

Adequate stormwater management plans and non-point source pollution from the development should have been addressed.

The concessions outlined in the settlement agreement are vague, lacking enforceable definitions, measurable thresholds, or operational requirements.

Lenar faces no clear obligations to fulfill the intent of these concessions.

If this MUD is approved and the project proceeds, the city would need to constantly monitor all aspects of the project to ensure Lenar's compliance with the negotiated terms.

In 2020, GIA received 175,000 settlement from Lenar and its contractors for violating a negotiated settlement agreement and for violating the Clean Water Act at its 4S Ranch subdivision.

The 4S Ranch construction site flooded a downstream neighbor's property the prior year, causing over 100,000 in damages.

It is our experience that the terms of negotiated settlement agreements are not always scrupulously followed by LENAR.

We agree that affordable housing is needed.

We do not believe this development will provide homes that are affordable to most San Antonio families.

Even if the sales prices are considered affordable, the additional property taxes to be obsessed assessed on homeowners in this MUD could equal or surpass the assessments collected by the county.

There are plenty of sites in San Antonio where affordable housing could be built without threatening San Antonio's groundwater supplies.

Thank you for your attention to this really important issue, and please consider the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance as a resource that you can rely on for important information related to water issues.

Lewis Vetter.

Followed by Patricia Seidenberger and then George Rice.

Good morning, Mayor.

Council, I appreciate you having the opportunity for us to speak today.

I'm Lewis Vetter, President of the Conservation Society of San Antonio.

And I speak on behalf of our more than 1,000 members and 10,000 volunteers when I can rise to speak against the passage of the MUD number two.

The purpose of the society is to protect things and preserve things that are important to Texas and historic, and that includes our waterways and our parks.

And this becomes specifically in line with what we're concerned about, because preserving this by not allowing uh the potential contamination is going to be critical.

Yeah.

The cost to address this problem is somewhat already known.

And the first solution is don't put the sewer plant there over the aquifer.

Early on, it was mentioned it could be somewhere between 20 and 40 million dollars for SAS to extend a sewer line and put it into their system where it's not being disclosed or discharged over the riverway.

So simple as that.

Is it function of money?

Is a function of the profit margin that Lenar is looking for, and willingness for them to pass the risk and the cost of dealing with it later is what's at risk today.

So I ask you to each think about what you will be drinking and what your children will be drinking in the years to come for when that problem does occur with your water source.

Respectively, I ask that each of you consider it and vote no against the mud.

Thank you.

Patricia Seidenberger, followed by George Rice and then Isabel Heretta.

Good morning.

My name is Patricia Seidenberger, and I have been against the Lenaro Homes Guajalote Ranch development and its wastewater plant for the last three years.

I urge the San Antonio City Council members to deny the NAR Homes ordinance or resolution for a municipal utility district MUD number two for the Guajalote Ranch, high density development with an on-site wastewater treatment plant, which would dump 4 million gallons of treated wastewater from the proposed 2900 homes into the Edwards Aquifer, destroying San Antonio's drinking water for 1.7 million people.

Southwest Research Institute did a two-year study for the city and found that any discharge from the Guajalote Ranch would significantly degrade the watershed and the quality of water, recharging the Edwards Aquifer, destroying our rink drinking water forever with dangerous compounds, forever chemicals, illicit drugs, pharmaceuticals, and antibiotic resistant bacteria.

Linair Home's request for a mud for the Guajalote Ranch development would allow them to issue 150 million in bonds that would saddle new unsuspecting homeowners with property taxes double or triple those of the country or neighboring cities, negating the promise of affordable housing in this area.

The new homeowner, in essence, would not only be paying for their new home, but would be paying for all the infrastructure of the development.

In addition, approval of the MUD might rely on county resources for new schools and roads and other infrastructure to support the high-density growth in Guajalote Ranch, meaning new additional taxes for San Antonio residents who don't even own a home in this development.

Lanier's track record has no clear obligations to fulfill the intent of a negotiated strategic partnership agreement with the city.

In 2020, with the Greater Edwards Aquifer find Linair homes 175,000 for violating a negotiated settlement treatment settlement agreement regarding the 4S Ranch subdivision.

By voting no for the Guajalote Ranch Mode Development 2, you can stop this catastrophic project from fully destroying San Antonio's drinking water from the Edwards Aquifer affecting 1.7 million people in San Antonio and 2.7 million people from Brackettville to Kyle, Texas, who depend upon the Edwards Aquifer.

Thank you.

George Rice, followed by Isabel Heretta and then Gary Schindle.

Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to speak to you.

My name is George Rice.

I'm a groundwater hydrologist, but you don't need to be any kind of a hydrologist to understand that discharging sewage effluent into a stream that recharges your main source of drinking water is a bad idea.

No kind of a science degree is required to understand this.

All that's understood, all that's required is common sense.

So I ask you to please exercise your common sense and vote no.

Thank you.

Isabel Heretta.

Followed by George Schindle and then Alan Montamayore.

Good morning.

I'm here to speak in opposition to the Guajelote Ranch development.

Recently, Hayes County judge called for an immediate transition to stage four water restrictions due to historic low water levels.

It was an emergency response tied to real data.

And yet today you are being asked to approve this development that would introduce millions of gallons of treated wastewater per day into Gilotis Creek, which is directly connected to the aquifer recharge and contributing zones.

This is not just a San Antonio issue.

This is a regional water security issue.

TCEQ did file a legal illegal action citing numerous errors in the permitting process, but has now approved a permit to allow the wastewater to be discharged into our aquifer.

A study by the Southwest Research Institute conducted that even with proposed safeguards, treated wastewater from this would still reach groundwater and nearby wells.

So when we are told sufficient protections are in place, we have to ask according to whom and based on what evidence.

You can require a truly independent hydrological study, one night one not funded by the developer or SAWS.

You can vote no on the development agreement itself, and other jurisdictions have required zero discharge or closed loop reuse systems, specifically because they sit over a recharge zone.

Those options exist, and when the risks are irreversible, the burden should be on the developer Lenar homes, not on the public to absorb the consequences.

This week we saw another example of what happens when decisions are rushed without meaningful community process.

A federal detention center was approved inside city limits without coordination with the zoning commission or the city.

We are seeing a pattern.

When developments are rushed, communities pay the price.

Unfortunately, the wrong ice is melting.

While communities across the nation are living in fear, here at home, our most vital resources is quietly slipping away.

Let me remind you, water is not renewable.

Once groundwater is contaminated, it cannot be reversed.

The treatment of wastewater relies on chemicals and gases that carry documented risks.

Across Texas, lakes are drying up.

This is not a local drought.

We are living in a global water bankruptcy.

You acknowledge that there are horror stories across the Texas where muds failed.

These municipalities were told there were sufficient protections too.

The city of San Antonio is not required to consent to the creation of this mud.

Without your consent, TCEQ cannot create this mud.

Council members, a development should never come at the cost of water security.

Today you have the ability and responsibility to act.

Deny consent to the mud.

Vote no on this ordinance and protect our aquifers for the millions of community members who depend on it.

Gary Schindle.

Gary Schindle, Alan Montamayor, and then Don Leidner.

I'm Alan Montemeyor.

I cede my time to Gary Schindle.

I'm Diana Duncan.

I'm giving my time to Gary.

You have nine minutes, sir.

Thank you very much.

I thought uh it was important that I address the council to maybe clarify uh some misconceptions that were made about some of the work that I've previously done.

To give you some background in my uh myself, uh again, my name is Gary Schindle.

I'm a carst uh Texas professional uh geologist and practicing carst hydrogeologist.

Have more than 45 years experience working on water resource, water quality, and hazardous waste management issues in more than 30 states and 10 countries.

I've served as the chief technical officer for aquifer science director and senior hydrogeologist with the Edwards Opera Authority for more than 23 years before retiring.

I was hired by the EAA to create the science research and data collection programs to provide technical assistance to the board direct of directors.

Among the many tasks at the AIA, I supervised the development of the aquifer's groundwater management models, set up and ran the DIT Tracy Research Programs, established the 250 uh water well level monitoring network and established the first extensive well and spring and water quality sampling program.

Under my direction water sampling group from a few wells along the saline water line with limited parameters sets to include over 100 well sampled on a yearly basis for a wide range of parameters.

I was the liaison for the city of San Antonio Service Aqui Protection Program, formerly known as Prop 1, where I performed the supervised geologic assessments for approximately 100,000 acres.

I was the senior author of the US EPA's guidance document on source water protection and karst areas, a national model for protecting car supplies.

This document was referenced in the Federal Register during the updates for the Safe Drinking Water Act.

It noted that carst aquifers are the most vulnerable aquifer type 2 contamination.

I've been a keynote speaker for UNESCO conferences.

I've lectured extensively in Europe and the United and the U.S.

universities.

I've been professional certifications in five states.

I've managed investigations for the National Priority List Superfund sites, properties.

Basically, thank Love Canal and Valley, the drums type sites.

I'm also the past president of the National Speological Society and have visited thousands of caves on four continents and set up and manage the state of Kentucky's groundwater section and branch and was the senior author on the state's groundwater protection strategy.

I've served as a subject matter expert on caves in the San Antonio Fire Department and also for Texas Parks and Wildlife.

So you may say that I may know my rear from a hole in the ground.

I've directed experience working on the hydrogeology of the Holodas Creek Basin, specifically within the Great Forest area.

I performed geologic assessments on more than 1,000 acres in the area and made recommendations to the City of San Antonio on the acquisition of properties to protect the water quality of the Edwards Aquifer.

I speak to you today as an independent hydrogeologist with only the interest of the citizens of Citizen of San Antonio, and I am receiving compensation.

I am not receiving compensation here today, represent only myself and do not live in the Holodus Creek watershed.

I ask that you turn down the request for Lenaris mud application for the Wallahuate Ranch with the concern that high density development in the Lotus Creek watershed and within the Edwards Aqua contributing zone will adversely impact water quality in the Trinity and Edwards Aqua.

This will place private and public water supply wells at great risk.

High density development will exceed the capacity of the shallow aqua and soils to filter and retain chemical and biological waste.

Small public treatment systems do not treat waste contaminated with oil, grease, paint solvents, PFOS, heavy metals, et cetera.

These materials will be discharged into the waste stream and into Holodas Creek where they enter the Trinity and Edwards Aquifers.

Water from the Trinity and Edwards Aquifers receives very little treatment until it reaches the consumer, where it is highly filtered through our livers and kidneys, priorities and undue burden on the body and increasing cancer risk.

Groundwater contamination in cars is exceptionally difficult to investigate and remediate.

Water wells will commonly require advanced treatment systems or be entirely abandoned, such as those wells around the West Avenue Landville here in San Antonio from back in the 60s.

The old saying that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure is absolutely true in karst terrains.

I also want to speak directly about the about the letter submitted by the San Antonio Water System in support of the formation of the mud.

In response to their comments regarding the Glean Rose Aquifer, I have directly observed cave and karst features with all of the units of the exposed Glen Rose limestone within the Holotus Creek watershed.

This is all also reflected in the absence of surface water and much of Holodus.

Most water flows within enlarged fractures and bedding planes in the subsurface of the basin.

The SAWS letter also stated that the Haby Crossing Fault is a barrier to groundwater flow from Trinity to the Edwards Aquifer.

However, there's no evidence, such as groundwater level data, tracer data, or aqua pump tests that support that assumption.

The deplacement of the Havy Crossing Fault in the Holodus Creek area is approximately 200 feet.

Dye tracing studies that I directed, I designed and carried were carried out under my direction by George Vinny and associates and the employees of the EAA show clearly that dye can pass across major faults in the Edwards Aquifer.

The dyes and therefore water crossed five major faults in the Panther Creek Creek area, Campbell Springs Basin, I'm sorry, and where one of the faults had more than 300 feet displacement.

And this is greater than the Habe Crossing Fault displacement in Holodus.

Two dye tests in Poor Boy Cave occurred within the Camp Bolas unit of the Glen Rose limestone, the one noted by SAWS as being resistant to water leaching downwards into other off formations.

These tracer tests showed an estimated groundwater velocity from 6,900 feet per day to 11,600 feet per day.

It is reasonable to assume that most faults do not function as barriers to flow in the Edwards Aquifer, but actually act as avenues for movement of water between geologic units.

We know this from the dye tracing data referenced above, as well as from direct observation of fault control and the occurrence of flow at four major spring sites in the Edwards Aquifer.

This includes the San Pedro and San Antonio Springs formed along major faults on the north side of downtown San Antonio.

Other examples are Comel Springs, Comel Springs Fault and New Brown Pulse, and also the fault that occurs at San Marcos, where uh there's uh about 400 feet of displacement.

Other springs near uh or on faults in the Edwards Aquifer include Barton Springs in Austin, Waco Springs on the Guadalupe River, Comel County, and Fort Clark Springs in Bracketville and San Felipe Springs in Del Rio.

All the reference faults allow water to flow up or down depending on hydraulic head.

For example, during droughts, San Pedro and San Antonio Springs are dry and will allow surface water from the Omus Creek basin to enter the subsurface and potentially contaminate the Edwards Aquifer.

The data presented by SAWS related to water chemistry also appears to be select very selective and not representative of the entirety of the Trinity or Edwards Aquifer.

Generally, the water chemistry between the Trinity and Edwards Aquifers is remarkably similar and hard to differentiate.

The water chemistry of both aquifers was formed from dissolution of the limestone matrix.

The comparison of two wells is not reflective of water chemistry of these two complex aquifers.

The components that is most useful for differentiating water between the two aquas is strontium, which was not used in the saws analysis.

In addition, large amounts of data looking at well depth, the geologic unit they're completed in, well casing water levels, etc.

would need to be accounted for.

The use of the only two data points is very simplistic and misleading.

The sensitivity of contamination of the Evers Aquifer along the Lotus Creek watershed is also reflected from the impacts from the Hodus mulch fire.

The fire occurred on the Del Rio Clay, a supposedly impervious geologic unit above the Edwards Aquifer.

However, the leachate from the fire entered the Edwards Aquifer, most likely through the Del Rio Clay and resulted in contamination nearby Evers Wells.

This highlights the extreme vulnerability of the Everest Aqua to the Lotus Creek watershed.

Further south, near Bronze Station was the site of a major outbreak of Cryptosporidis in 1984 from the Edwards Aqua Public Water well.

Approximately 200 people became sick from this outbreak.

Cryptosporidia protozoan is commonly associated with cattle waste and the outbreak was most likely caused by transmittal through the vulnerable carst aquifers.

As is apparent from the paragraphs above, high density development in the uh contributing zone or recharge on the Evers Aquifer places an undue burden on the citizens of San Antonio, and I ask that you deny the request for the mud application.

Thank you very much.

Don Leidner.

And would someone someone please confirm Catherine Feist is the same as Kate Hallfeist, correct?

Same person?

Okay, thank you.

So Don Leitner and then David Werner and Jennifer Nottingham, please.

Don Leitner.

Okay.

David Werner.

Excuse me?

You did.

David Werner, okay.

Jennifer Nottingham.

Okay, thank you.

Jack Finger.

And then followed by our final speaker on this topic, Ronald Green.

Well, Madam Mayor, other members of our illustrious San Antonio City Council, once again, my name is Jack M.

Finger.

I guess the question is, do you really want to risk polluting our drinking water?

You've uh heard a lot of facts from a lot of people here today.

In fact, I'm I'm really amazed this is the one issue where the tree huggers and the conservatives actually have gotten together and say, don't do this.

They, yeah, uh they don't want our water being polluted.

Now the other people say, well, we're going to treat the wastewater.

You near you do not need to worry about it.

Can you trust that?

Huh?

Do you realize what's happening here?

Sewage water gets treated and then gets thrown back into our aquifer.

And we think we can trust that water.

I don't think so.

Can you see you others talked about this karst formation, those that material that has all these little holes in it?

That's the thing that filters out the bad stuff.

But if it gets clogged with sewage, treated sewage, eventually it will not do its job.

That's what makes the Edwards aquifers such a gem.

We have pure water, filtered water, and we've had it for generations.

And you want to destroy it.

Do you really want to destroy it?

We've had this conversation time and time again over the last several decades.

And time and again, it has been a real question mark.

Do we really want to destroy our one and only gym?

Our drinking water.

Because if we do, you think our water bills bills are high now?

Just think of the the question marks you're going to have to faced with even higher bills from SAUS when the time comes because we we our water is so polluted we have to look elsewhere for better pure water.

Pretty much comes down to that.

Why take a chance?

Why take a chance?

Thank you.

Ronald Green.

Madam Mayor and City Council, my name is Ron Green.

I'm a groundwater hydrologist with experience on the Trinity and Edwards Aquifers.

I was a senior member of the research team that conducted the 2020 evaluation of the impact of wastewater facilities located in the contributing zone of the Edwards Aquifer.

The site for the evaluation was the Holotus Creek watershed.

The study concluded that regardless of the type of facility, the impact to water recharged to the Edwards Aquifer is dependent on the amount of mass load discharged to the environment, regardless of the wastewater disposal facility type.

To my understanding, there have been no additional studies conducted that refute this finding.

Saw's claims that the project would not risk would not risk the safety of the Edwards Aquifer.

Its argument is based on opinions, not science.

Saw's claims are not backed by any studies, data, information, either informal or peer-reviewed.

I prepared a technical brief that represents a clear consensus of the technical community from the last three decades.

I shared this technical brief with the mayor and members of City Council two weeks ago.

The technical community that I cited includes the U.S.

Geological Survey, the Edwards Aqua Authority, the University of Texas San Antonio, the University of Texas Austin, the Bureau of Economic Geology, which is a state geological survey, local research institutes, and others.

Their positions on the subject are clear and unambiguous.

Ill-advised development over areas which recharge the Edwards Aquifer will degrade water quality.

The remaining questions are when will the health and safety of the community be impacted, and when will this impact be irreversible?

Once ill-advised development of the contributing and recharge zones in Northwest Bear County goes forward, the source area for the Edwards Aquifer will be put at risk that could otherwise be avoided.

Please make any decisions regarding development on astral science and not opinions.

Thank you.

That was the final speaker on items four and five.

May I have a motion to approve item four so we may begin council discussion?

I make a motion to approve.

Okay.

Okay.

I'll also entertain a second motion to approve item five so we can talk about them at the same time.

I make a motion to approve.

Okay, thanks.

Okay, thanks.

Well now we'll move on to council discussion.

Ms.

White.

I'm trying to colleagues, please sign in if you'd like to speak.

My system is broken.

Is it frozen?

Okay, we'll figure that out.

Can't see you.

Okay.

Great.

Uh Ms.

White, thank you for the presentation.

Um for clarity.

Um the seven, and just as a reminder, um, irrespective of whether we take action or approve deny the mud, uh, we still um would receive the two developmental protections as well as the 17 water quality protections outlined in your presentation, correct?

Yes, so on slide seven, where I list out the water quality protection, the wastewater development controls.

So on that would include the nine for that were negotiated with the SAWS water USA, and then the 10 with the settlement agreement.

Okay.

Those would remain.

Great, thank you.

Actually, if we would just keep up slide seven, please, thank you.

Um because we are trying to understand, as you point out on your last slide, some of these development protections are only afforded to us if we approve the MUD.

The likelihood of those um being entertained or even potentially reviewed entertained by the developer are are not very high, as you pointed out.

The uh the and and when this goes to TECQ, it sounds like was it one if I remember the statistic one that was has been denied over the years?

Yes, based on conversations that we had with TCQ, they denied in about 20 years they denied one, but it was actually based on the application itself.

That's what we were told.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Um so on this slide on the left-hand side, the water quality protection, that first bullet and the two sub-bullets, that is reflective in the um and the in the what you just described, the two development and then the 17 water quality protections, correct?

Yes, the USA and the settlement agreement.

So the last two things then would be new as part of the city's development agreement, correct?

Those two were added as part of the development agreement.

Okay.

How can you help us understand?

So SAWS review of final sealed as built plans.

Is that in any way comparable to what is already covered in the water uh quality protection plans that we would already receive?

So when we were looking at developing or negotiating the development agreement, we did share it with SAWS, so that's an addition to, so it's actually the plans of the actual um plant.

So we they were they added that as a condition of the development agreement.

So it's a in addition to the nine and yeah, no, I understand it's an addition.

I'm trying to understand what is the material addition as a result of what is already in um in the SAWS plan.

It's actually looking at the plans itself.

It's not just looking at the plans.

Yes, looking at the plans themselves.

And then the second one would be inspecting the ability to inspect the wastewater plant at their discretion upon a reasonable notice to the developer.

That's not included in the nine and then the additional ten.

Okay.

Maybe if I if I may make it clarification, you're asking about the development agreement, what additional protections.

The uh correct me if I'm wrong, but Lenar's made it very clear, they're not gonna sign the development agreement.

Yeah, we're gonna do that.

So we're we're we're we're we're essentially talking conceptual.

Uh understood, but you're right, we're going to vote on it.

So I wanted to understand what is being asked that is different than what we already get.

Right.

Understood.

Because just they because they haven't signed it now, doesn't mean that they might not sign it in the future.

There is a possibility for that.

That's why I want to understand what additionally would we get that is only available currently.

Okay, thank you.

So those two are the additional ones, Mr.

Thank you.

On slide nine, help me if you would, Ms.

White, help me understand.

So that last point there, SAWS's ability to inspect the wastewater treatment plant.

How is that different than point the last part of point three on slide nine?

That would be a question for SAWS.

We added the bullet about the wastewater treatment plant itself, while this I believe has to do with their backflow and the actual system.

Got it.

Thank you.

And appreciate the um as we are trying to to balance, right?

Certainly the water protections, but also the development protections.

Um in the original, there's only two development protections.

The the uh the MUD comes with several more development protections.

Um and thank you for for providing examples of what those protections would mean um in the instance that we may potentially need to annex this this piece of piece of property in the future, which I know is a concern of of many of my my colleagues given frankly some of the terrible stories across the state uh where they annexed a piece of property, which was let's just say less than desirable.

Um can you help us understand uh the the development protections here that would only come about with approving this MUD?

How would you um uh how would you compare those to the two development protections that we currently have?

May I ask which slide you're referring to?

Um slide seven.

Yeah.

So those new development things that we only get if we approve the MUD, how important are those?

What more do they add in terms of protection or development protection on top of the two development provisions that we already received?

So it's really more or less an added layer of uh protection.

So right now, as I mentioned in my last slide, if the ones that would remain would be the first bullet under water quality protection, and then the first bullet under development.

So the additional kind of layer, so to speak, would be the second two underwater quality protection would be which would be looking at the plans, and then also the ability of SAOs to look at the wastewater treatment site itself, plant itself, but then also under development would be the additional annexation and then additional things like that.

Is that what you're referring to?

No, I was trying to better help um quantify, or maybe John, if you want to come up here and potentially explain how the additional development protections talk about the additional uh protection that they offer over the two things that we've got now.

I mean, when we had our discussion, I think as you've also shared with my colleagues, um, you know, the the challenges potentially with absorbing um a MUD in the future and and what this affords us, that the current protections would not.

Yes, Mayor, I think I would highlight that um with any future annexation of this property, the development agreement would ensure that we would not incur the debt of the MUD.

So there would either be a payoff of that debt or a structure in which that community would continue to service that debt, so we would never absorb it.

Um just to be very clear based on what you just described, in the future, if we don't have that protection, we could have to take something on that has debt.

If there were a future annexation, it could be a possibility.

This is just a protection that we could put in place now.

Okay.

Go ahead, please.

And I would like to say that annexation is a little tricky.

So typically it has to be adjacent to the municipality.

So in this case, because this area is not adjacent, um, because it's future and we we don't want to bind a future council, but if a future council uh wants to annex, as you mentioned, Mayor, making sure that development is done in us in a certain way.

So, yes, as John is saying, um, it allows us to annex through voluntary annexation.

So that means 3,000 property owners would need their signatures, they've already agreed to that.

But then also the cap, if we do annex, if the district does have debt, we can, as I mentioned, um, have a post-annexation surcharge.

So with annexation, we just have to be mindful of the laws that they can change.

So we may or may not even be able to annex in the future, but this allows us, or this the future council the opportunity to do so.

Okay, thank you.

Mayor, I would also just point out that the third party conservation easement.

So uh Lenar has committed to keeping a piece of land as a green area.

So this development agreement would put in place that a third party would hold a conservation easement for that piece of the property so that um uh you know, some third party who um uh could make sure that Lenar keeps that green and follows the conservation regulations around that piece of land.

That's another protection in this as well.

I think we covered the annexation one and then the development standards a little bit.

The first bullet?

Yeah.

So because the area is in the ETJ apps, there's some applicable subdivision regulations.

So as I mentioned, the tree ordinance, science connectivity.

I also mentioned that some would go away.

And so ones that would go away would be those related to like the increased road act access, but and also the military protection on lighting and sound.

So declare those go away if the mud is approved?

Those would go away if the development agreement would not be approved.

So no development agreement, what are the things then that we are opening ourselves up to?

So yes, so if the development agreement were not in place or would would not be approved, so for example, the the area itself is in five miles of a military installation.

However, it's not within our designated ETJ MPA, a military protection area.

So the development agreement includes uh language that has a developer complying with lighting and sound.

So if the development agreement is not approved, then they would not have to comply with uh those particular um standards.

So that's an additional thing that the development agreement includes okay.

Yeah, I know it's uh and I'm asking you to to do something, and part of it to your point is actually uh asking what a future council may consider, but to the extent we can actually help a future council and and potentially help ourselves of the one, two, three, four, five, of the six developmental uh protections that we would be adding through a development agreement um combined with the two that we already get.

How important if we were to take this on, how important are the six that we would be adding versus the two that we're getting?

I believe uh Mayor, that really would be a policy question.

Yeah, yeah.

Um, and talking to council, each of you have different um priorities, and so I know conservation is important.

So if the development agreement is not approved, then the ability to have that being held by a third party would not be included, but then also the ability for SAOs to look at the wastewater treatment plant and really kind of have eyes on the facility.

Um so the nine the nine plus the the ten that are included, yes, we'll look at water quality protection.

So it's really looking at um the weighing, the the water quality protection plus the additional um term that it would be part of the development agreement.

Um and then one of my final questions here.

The uh appropriate the development um protection that comes only if we approve the mud is appropriate ingress and egress to the development, right?

Increased road network access points.

So if we don't have that, um if we don't have that as part of this, what is that what is that development ultimately look like?

So the development agreement, as I mentioned, the site is in the ETJ, so it does follow some applicable subdivision regulations, including connectivity.

Um but given the access, that's an additional um point that was added in our development agreement.

So it looks at increased road network access points.

So as the site is developed, they would have to go back and go through DSD in terms of looking at the MVP.

So that's in addition to the connectivity point or term.

Okay.

And the fact that that's not currently part of the development, um we wouldn't necessarily I mean you'd really then up to whatever the developer wants to do.

Really, the short of it is these development agreements allow for city regulations in this area.

If I've captured correctly what John explained last time.

So, yes, it's an added layer of protection.

And does run the development agreement runs with the land.

So if the development agreement is approved, it is file with the county.

Uh Councilman Alter Segavito.

Thank you.

Uh thank you to um for the presentation, and thank you so much to all the speakers who made time again and again to be here today.

You know, uh, right when I first learned about this issue, I mean, it's very clear that water is personal.

I mean, we think about it every single day when we fill up our kids' water bottles for school.

And so I understand why y'all are organized around this fight.

I understand um why y'all want to continue fighting.

I understand y'all's passion.

Uh when this again was first brought to my attention, we dug right in.

We uh sent that memo to SAS and the Greater Edwards Aquifer authority.

Councilwoman Mess and I uh co-signed that C CR that y'all mentioned.

We went out to visit.

We've uh had several conversations and meetings about this.

Uh this today is um an important milestone.

So with that, I stand with y'all today and I will be voting no.

Thanks.

Councilman Via Garan.

Um thank you, Mayor.

Um the culture of the ETJ is something very different here.

And based on recent report, there's no single consolidated number of municipal utility districts that have been formally disapproved in the entire South Texas region, as these proposals are generally handled on a case-by-case by local city councils or the Texas uh TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

I think what we have here today is while um Holodis is only 30 minutes away.

Uh for for me, representing the South and the Southeast side, this is a whole different community culture and priority priorities.

And it was obviously demonstrated by today through the number of speakers that there is a lack of familiarity with this council, who this council is and the rest of San Antonio and what they represent.

Uh so I'm gonna have Donovan come up because there were things said about SAWs that I didn't appreciate.

So I want Donovan to come out and um talk specifically in terms of where SAWS stands and what they're compelled by state to engage in with this uh developer.

Uh yes, thank you, Councilwoman.

Um, for for the record, I'm Donovan Burton with San Antonio Water System.

Uh I do uh thank you.

Uh SAWS takes no position on this the mud district, the creation of the mud district, uh, there are decisions much beyond even the water and wastewater side.

So that's a that's a different decision.

Uh our focus is making making sure and agreeing with everybody who's who's spoken that the quality of the water in the Edwards Aquifer is our principal um thing that we are we want to make sure is is covered.

Um so that is our focus, and and so you have to look at that from various lens lenses, and I I think one thing that's been really discounted is what those conditions that the mayor and others were talking about, those conditions are some of the most stringent in the state, and almost to drinking water standards, say for human contact, say for food crops, um, and that sort of thing.

And so those standards are very important that a SAWS board put in place in that contract.

And the we we we s and I want to distinguish this because as you know and and many of you here know, in terms of uh the climate sustainability, sustainability and resiliency, that's very important to me.

And I think it's important that we get the difference between what is recharge, you know the term recharge, and that this is a contributing zone, correct?

Correct.

This is a contributing zone, and so the water that that would collect in the area, like Hilotus Creek and other other creeks tributaries would would collect in that area and ultimately flow over the recharge zone of the Edwards Aquifer.

Yeah, and and that's what I wanted to be uh very specific about because I know that we have taken efforts to make sure that we are protecting no development in the actual recharge zone in some of the portions of of uh of the Edwards Aquifer, and we have that uh owning the the water the development rights basically in some areas.

So I think there's more dialogue and efforts between communities, the county and the state that have to be created when we're talking about MUDs.

Thank you, Donovan.

You can sit down because I'm gonna take the next portion of my time to really because of what was brought up by the speakers is um PFAS is a problem nationwide and statewide, and we have that problem as a majority as the river as everything flows south.

That is my creekways, my portion of the river of the south part of San Antonio.

So when we have those conversations, understanding that that is not just specific to this area, that it is specific to the entire city in the entire zone, and the other is that we seriously do have to consider um the toilet to tap future that other nations and parts of this state are using.

Uh direct potable resource use is already used in El Paso, Big Springs, which tall falls, El Paso is looking at that, and that's why as we talk about this today.

One is this is Hilotus, it's it's not San Antonio, but you this developer came to San Antonio to try and get this agreement.

I am not going to approve it because I don't think it is what we we in San Antonio need to prioritize.

But I do want the passion that you brought today, I want that in the future as we talk in San Antonio's because other MUDs will come, other developments were will come.

I will continue to sit here from the dais and say when we talk about wastewater, we need to talk direct potable reuse.

When we talk about how we're treating the water and PFAS, we need to talk at the state level of what sort of what sort of requirements are coming down.

So thank you for your passion.

I am I hope that the enthusiasm you have to get involved with us now continues into the future because we have got a lot of work to do in order to protect our water and to move forward.

And I do again want to want to be confident in that we just had our meeting with SAWS, and we are as a city council that runs the public utility working with them to make sure that they are doing what is necessary, and we all need to get on board with what that script is as we go up to the state and we go up to the federal government asking for help to protect our water system.

So thank you for that.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilwoman Spears.

Thank you, may thank you, Mayor.

I just had a couple of quick questions off of what the mayor was asking.

So does this in fact expand the ETJ if it were passed, and how much?

Is this expanded E TJ?

No.

It won't expand our ETJ if we pass that annexation agreement.

No, no, the the district is within our ETJ.

So it's not going to change the boundaries of our ETJ.

Okay.

So then you said, or maybe it was John, said that this would be um the debt would be absorbed by the community.

I can explain that.

So basically, what happens with a mud, if the municipality chooses to annex that particular particular district, if there's outstanding debt, then the municipality would take on that debt, unlike a PID.

So according to the Texas water code, the municipality can have a post-annexation surcharge that would only be charged to those within the district.

But it's only if the municipality annexes the district in the future.

Only if they vote to annex it, right?

Only if they annex.

Okay.

So I mean, I said this before.

I'm pro-property rights and really pro-development, but I just think we really have to be responsible about that and um make sure that it's infrastructure that for our region that will cause us to all thrive.

Um development needs to be fair to homeowners and smart for our taxpayers and very much protective of our water.

And I'm I've talked about this before because my district in District 9 sits over their Edwards recharge zone, and I really appreciate the Sam family.

I did see your headwaters.

I appreciate you help explaining what the carst features are, how they operate, what they look like, because I'm always explaining that.

Um we too have very little soil on top, and it's a huge thing.

So we have a lot of carst features, and we're very protective of them in San Antonio and in my district.

So I completely understand where you're coming from, and thank you for that.

And groundwater is proving to be more and more impactful and important to our aquifer overall.

So thank you.

Um, but it is important to also note there is still a pending appeal before the TCEQ, which is under review.

And we need to rem remember that before we take any any sort of action here.

That water is definitely our most precious thing we can ever protect.

And um, but shifting gears towards the financing structure of this.

Uh the fact remains that this creates a separate government with its own permanent tax rate.

It is taxing future homeowners without their consent and their input.

And it's managed by a a uh board that is not us, it's not elected, it's a board of the developers initially.

Um they can issue debt and issue bonds, and it can be a burden on taxpayers for decades, whether they vote to annex or not.

And uh I think that future homeowners deserve certainty.

They deserve to know what they're paying for and how long they'll pay.

Um, and I don't think a MUD provides that clarity.

It's not project specific, it is not finite, and it does not end once the infrastructure is paid off.

Um I also think that that it's a false sense of security and can and control uh to think that we would gain anything in developing this mud at the city.

So for these reasons, I uh am going to be against both five and four and by councilman Castillo.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Bridget, for the presentation, as well as to the members of the public for giving your comment.

Um my position remains the same during the last B session.

I have a number of concerns, primarily with the MUD structure.

What we know, and as my colleague has mentioned, this is a taxing entity that has a uh representation by unelected officials, and the Texas controller has identified that MUDs uh is a large growing special taxing district, which is totaling over 12.7 billion dollars being diverted from the state of Texas into these specific districts again with no elected representation determining where those dollars, how they get allocated, uh, and how they could impact um the overall state.

Uh again, these are dollars that can otherwise be going towards public safety, education, public health, so on and so forth.

Uh, further, as folks have mentioned in their public comment, we know that this is a threat to our water quality.

Um, as folks have also mentioned, we cannot make more water.

So when we talk about forever chemicals, the impact that's going to have to the overall health, uh, this is something that we should be taking into account today.

Uh yesterday we had a very robust conversation around uh saws, particularly around the impact of growth throughout the city of San Antonio and how that is going to impact our overall water water quality.

And when we talk about the high density over our recharge zone, this will impact our water quality.

Uh lastly, what we know is in terms of the infrastructure in this location, it does not have the basic infrastructure to support such a large and high amount of density in this area.

Uh so it's important that we keep into consideration the egress, uh, so on and so forth to ensure that folks can safely commute in and out of this area.

So, with that, again, as I mentioned during the last B session, I'll be opposing this MUD because of the taxing structure and the impact to our water quality.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilman Mungia.

Thank you, Mayor.

Want to tell everyone, thank you again.

Y'all have been fantastic.

Um I know it's a long drive for many of you to be here.

You've been very organized.

You reached out to all our offices, uh, which I know isn't easy.

You've come up here and speak before us, and I'm sure many of you didn't think that you'd have to be up at front of the San Antonio City Council so many times to talk about this project.

But it shows your dedication, right?

And I was able to be out there with y'all and see firsthand.

Uh, and I think what's so special is a lot of the long-standing heritage so many of you have with the land that you live on, right?

So many of you, it's a multi-generational property, and you have wells that you've been drinking and using water out of.

So it's very, very personal and important to you and your families.

And I have to say, you know, nothing brings people out like water.

Uh, right.

We had many, many years ago, the Apple wide reservoir was a huge, huge controversial issue.

People came out.

Uh PGA was a huge water issue.

Many, many years ago, people came out.

Uh Vista Ridge, another huge water issue, people came out.

And so uh this of course it hasn't changed anything.

Um so you know, my concerns have always been the long-term um management of the wastewater treatment facility.

Um I just do not think that that belongs there.

Um, and that that neighborhood will be equipped to handle the long-term maintenance of that for 30 years plus, long after we're all out of here in office, uh, especially with the weather being what it is, freezes, uh changes in topography.

I just don't have faith in that.

And you know, in my district, we have a lot of concerns with water because uh we have some we've had pollution with Kelly Air Force Base, right?

And a lot of folks in the King Thanna neighborhood where my mother grew up had wells that they used, and those wells became polluted and groundwater became toxic.

And there are so many examples in that neighborhood of people dying from cancer.

Um we are very sensitive to that.

And my residents have been right there with y'all, even though we're miles away, they have constantly come up to me and said, Councilman, please do not support that project.

Uh so they know how much it matters for all of our community, not just your own neighborhood.

Uh and I know that the battle is going to continue, right, with TCEQ, and this is not the last of it, but I hope today with our votes that we'll be making is gonna be a good story to tell, right?

Of people who came who organized, who showed some great examples, and ultimately uh convinced the city council to deny this request.

And I think that is a really positive, great story to tell.

Uh and so that's why I'm proud today to vote against this item.

And uh and I wish you all the very best and let us know how we can continue to help you.

Thank you.

Councilman Massa Gonzalez, thank you, Mayor, and thank you uh to everybody that was here today.

Um, that has uh was here in the last B session.

Um proud to support your efforts and um just to be very clear, I will be voting no on the mud today.

And uh item item five as well.

I wanted to just get clarification for item four and five.

Uh if if it's a no to four, would it logically extend to item five as well or uh uh councilman, yes.

Uh it's structured so that uh one depends on the other, but they're separate items, so it'll be two votes.

Okay.

Okay.

Uh so again, thank you to everybody for being here today.

We know that our city is growing.

I see it firsthand.

Um, just getting on 1604 in my district and the Kyle Seal area, Hills and Dales.

Um, everybody knows that, right?

They are seeing that growth.

Um, they have front row to that growth, actually.

So um, I just again want to sub appreciate everyone for coming out.

Um, thank you for the t-shirt.

And um, you know, with the the saying to whom much is given, much is expected.

Um, and we've been given the aquifer as our uh water resource, and I think uh we should be expected to protect it at all costs.

And so we're doing that here today.

I want to thank all of my colleagues for supporting our CCR, the councilwoman and ICCR, um, and I look forward to voting no.

Thank you.

Councilman White.

Thanks, Mayor.

Um I just want to thank uh begin by by thanking everybody that came out uh and really for all the organization and and the education uh that I know for me for sure I I went through over the past few months.

Um this one is really relatively easy for me.

Um I am a uh pro-land rights guy.

I'm a um believe in development if done responsibly, and and usually if you got your own land, you can do what you want with it.

Uh the exception, of course, comes uh when it could hurt other people.

And here we have a situation uh, as we really talked about yesterday.

Water is um a very, very valuable resource, and it's uh unfortunately becoming uh somewhat scarce uh here here in our state.

And uh from what I've seen, uh at the very very least.

Um the science is is conflicting.

And the fact that there may uh be some harm done to our water system is just unacceptable uh to me.

It's a risk that we cannot take.

Uh my colleagues have talked about the mud structure, the taxes that could fall uh on our citizens in the future.

Um I think that's part of it as well, but for me, it really comes down to uh protecting our water source, and that's why I'll be voting no on these items today.

Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mayor.

I think everything that could possibly be said has been said, and so I just want to uh convey it to you all.

I was a no on this from the jump, and I have not been moved.

Um thank you all for all the time and planning and coordination.

I am a big fan of organizing and looking at you all and how you've maintained this energy first for all of this time is really inspiring, and I hope you continue to do so uh for all of the positive efforts.

Um I'll be voting now.

Thank you.

Okay.

Great.

Okay.

Councilman Corps.

Just echoing what I the comments that I made a couple weeks ago, voting no, go get them at TCEQ.

Councilman Govon.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you to everybody uh who has been active on this issue for being here today for talking to my office, all the residents in District Six who have reached out to me as well in my office and remind us about this important vote today.

Um I don't have anything more to say aside from the voting no on both.

Thank you.

There being no further discussion is moved and a second to uh excuse me.

Yeah.

There being no further discussion, it is moved and seconded to approve items item four.

We'll again vote on these separately.

Item four, um, please vote.

The motion fails.

There being no further discussion.

There being no further discussion, it is moved and seconded to um approve item five.

Please vote.

The motion fails.

The time is now 1145 p.m.

on February 5th.

The city of San City of Council of the City of San Antonio will now meet in executive session uh 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 or 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 five five one dot zero seven one.

The time is now twelve forty-five uh PM on February 5th, 2026, and the San Antonio City Council will now reconvene in open session.

No official action was taken in executive session.

Uh Madam Clerk, please read the caption for item six.

preparedness and collective bargaining all pursuant to section 551.071 the time is now 1245 uh p.m on february 5th 2026 and the san antonio city council will now reconvene in open session no official action was taken in executive session uh madam clerk please read the caption for item six item number six is a resolution providing specific bars and extension of additional time to february first twenty twenty seven to comply with chapter eleven city code retrofit requirements to install automatic fire sprinkler systems uh this item was added to today's agenda as a result of a special meeting memo from council members core mckey rodriguez and castillo staff has a presentation uh go ahead with the presentation thanks good afternoon mayor council i call to uh i call to question on the um do you want to make a motion now yeah i want to make a motion uh move to postponed postpone february twelfth okay there's a motion and a second to move the presentation this item to february twelfth okay all those in favor say aye or opposed okay motion is postponed to february twelfth the time is now twelve forty seven p.m on february fifth two thousand twenty six the city council of the city of san antonio will now meet in executive session to consult with city attorney's office pursuant to chapter five five one 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 the time is now 237 p.m on february 5th 2026 and the San Antonio City Council will now reconvene in open session no official action was taken in executive session the time is now 237 p.m and this meeting is adjourned