San Antonio City Council B Session: Housing Fund Awards and Veteran Voucher Protections – April 1, 2026

The San Antonio City Council convened on April 1, 2026, for a B session to discuss two major agenda items: the post-solicitation award recommendations for the Housing Bond (2022) and Community Land Trust (CLT) funds, and a proposed ordinance to protect veteran source-of-income (voucher) holders from housing discrimination. The meeting began at an unspecified time and included presentations by Veronica (Housing Department staff), comments from council members, and public testimony from two veterans. No votes were taken; the council directed the items to committee (PCDC) for further refinement.

Consent Calendar

• No consent calendar items were identified.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Two veterans spoke in favor of the source-of-income protection ordinance. One veteran, describing himself as a veteran with a traumatic injury, pleaded with the council to remove the barrier that allows landlords to reject vouchers, stating, "It's a simple barrier to get veterans off the street." He noted that veterans often hide their struggles out of pride and urged the council to pass the ordinance, referencing that Dallas and Fort Worth have already done so.
• A second veteran emphasized that veterans need housing near transit, hospitals, and clinics, and that the current system forces them to accept whatever is available, even if it isolates them from services.

Discussion Items

• Post‑Solicitation Awards for Affordable Housing (Article 1, Item 1):

  • Veronica presented recommendations for awarding approximately $18.8 million from the 2022 Housing Bond (including $14.7 million from the Housing Trust Fund and $4.7 million from federal CDBG/Home funds) to seven rental and homeownership projects.
  • Rental projects recommended (4 projects, total $14.3 million):
    • Project 111 (Downtown, near Silver Line): $4.5 million – rehabilitation with relocation plan; residents not permanently displaced.
    • Judy Advita (District 4, near Texas A&M–San Antonio): 60 units for homeless/at‑risk individuals, including 14 units at 30% AMI; $5.6 million CDBG loan.
    • Aurora MLK (District 2, near St. Phillips College): 288 units (44 at 40% AMI), $1.7 million CDBG loan – located on Silver Line corridor.
    • Heritage en Medina (District 4): 86 units for seniors, targeting veterans, $2.5 million from Housing Trust Fund.
  • Homeownership projects recommended (2 projects, total $4.2 million):
    • Rancho Verano (Habitat for Humanity, District 4): 47 units, $4 million CDBG/Home; expected sale price $160,000 per unit.
    • Casita Project (District 5): small homes (2-bedroom, 1-bath) on small lots, serving households at/below 80% AMI; $200,000 in CDBG funds (total project cost $4.2 million).
  • Community Land Trust (CLT) awards (2 projects, total $2.18 million):
    • Silk Road CLT (Districts 1,5,6,7,8): $1.5 million to acquire and rehab homes near frequent transit (within 1 mile).
    • Esperanza CLT (District 7): $681,400 to rehabilitate existing properties; offers tenants the option to become homeowners.
  • Council members praised the transparency and strategic focus on transit‑oriented development (TOD), but Councilman Maky Rodriguez expressed concern about the scoring system and the high per‑unit cost of the West Travis project (rehab), urging leadership to review how costs and competitiveness are evaluated.

• Source‑of‑Income Protection for Veterans (Article 2, Item 2):

  • Veronica explained the proposed ordinance would prohibit landlords from denying housing or disqualifying applicants solely because they use a veteran voucher (e.g., HUD‑VASH, Section 8). She noted that San Antonio has ~90,474 veterans (2024 Census), 830 active HUD‑VASH vouchers, and 40 voucher holders currently searching for housing.
  • The ordinance builds on existing local protections (e.g., 2013 non‑discrimination ordinance, 2021 Housing Incentive Policy requiring all city‑funded projects to accept vouchers).
  • A working group (including property managers, landlords, veteran advocates, and city staff) has been meeting quarterly to address barriers: inspection delays, slow payments (30–60 days, now improved to ~17 days), and lack of landlord participation (only 300 of 3,000 known landlords currently accept vouchers).
  • Council members debated whether to pass the ordinance immediately or send it back to committee (PCDC) alongside a planned Council Consideration Request (CCR) by Councilwoman Castillo that would address administrative burdens and landlord incentives.
  • Councilwoman Villagran cited Fort Worth’s similar ordinance (class D misdemeanor) and urged focusing on veteran‑specific needs, including proximity to VA clinics (only 14 clinics in the region, 13 north of Highway 90).
  • Councilwoman Spears expressed anxiety about military city reputation and wanted to ensure veterans are cared for, noting the importance of incentives and education for landlords.
  • Councilman White stated he supports veterans but argued the program has had “fallas en los procesos de inspección, retrasos de los pagos, y una carga administrativa,” and that requiring private landlords to accept vouchers without addressing those failures could be harmful. He supported sending the item back to PCDC.
  • Councilman Mungia emphasized the need to pair the ordinance with landlord incentives and a broader strategy to address credit/background history barriers. He supported the committee route to include Castillo’s CCR.
  • Councilwoman Rodríguez (Makki) insisted the council could move forward immediately with the ordinance as drafted while simultaneously advancing the CCR, saying, “Nada nos puede parar eso todavía pudiera suceder en la línea de tiempo que tenemos proyectada.” She urged colleagues to adopt the policy quickly because “el grupo de veteranos han estado pidiendo esto por años.”
  • Councilwoman Galván wanted data on how many units would be affected (small vs. large complexes) and suggested exploring connections with DHS or ACOG to expand case management support.
  • Councilwoman Cabello (District 7) supported the projects but agreed that the ordinance should go through PCDC with Castillo’s CCR to ensure “hagamos esto correctamente.”
  • Mayor Jones noted she is a VA user and has visited the Audie Murphy VA clinic, underscoring the practical challenges veterans face. She welcomed the direction to PCDC but stated, “No debería darle la bienvenida a retrasos… Ellos han estado rogando por esto los últimos dos años.”

Key Outcomes

• Housing Fund Awards (Article 1): No vote was taken. Council members expressed general support for the recommended projects and directed staff to continue with the awards process. Councilman Maky Rodríguez requested a detailed list of all prior Housing Bond awards with cost percentages.
• Veteran Source‑of‑Income Protection (Article 2): The council did not vote on the proposed ordinance. The consensus (expressed by Councilwoman Villagran, White, Mungia, Cabello, and Galván) was to send the item back to the Planning, Community Development, and Culture (PCDC) committee for further review, to be combined with Councilwoman Castillo’s CCR addressing landlord incentives and administrative improvements. Councilwoman Rodríguez and Mayor Jones voiced support for moving forward immediately, but the majority direction was to the committee. Next steps: PCDC to discuss at its next meeting (presumably April 2025, as per presentation slide) and return to the full council with a revised ordinance.