San Antonio City Council B Session: 2027 Bond Process & Homelessness Framework – May 13, 2026

This combined B session covered two major presentations: first, an update on the proposed process for the 2027 municipal bond program, including guiding principles, potential election timeline, and debt management strategies; second, a briefing on the long-term shelter and housing framework for the homeless response system, outlining gaps in prevention, shelter, and permanent housing. Councilmembers provided extensive feedback on bond categories, variable tax rates, district-specific propositions, housing bond priorities, and the need for coordinated homeless services.

Consent Calendar

• No consent calendar items were discussed.

Public Comments & Testimony

• No public testimony was taken during this session; 15 individuals were signed up for public comment after the presentations, but the meeting adjourned at 5:32 p.m. before they could speak.

Discussion Items: 2027 Bond Program Process

• Presentation by Mike Shannon (Capital Delivery Director), Veronica (Housing), Troy (CFO), and Eric (Interim City Manager): The team outlined a proposed process for the 2027 bond program, noting that the 2022 bond is 66% complete (59 completed, 64 under construction, 63 in design). Guiding principles include plan alignment, public health/safety, resiliency, economic viability, and council input. Two timeline options were presented: a May 2027 election or a November 2027 election. The bond capacity remains uncertain due to declining property values; a fixed 21-cent debt service tax rate would produce a smaller bond program, while a variable rate could allow for a larger bond but might require tax-rate increases.
• Councilmember McKee Rodriguez expressed support for the proposed categories but advocated for a separate proposition for downtown/entertainment district infrastructure, arguing it merits its own discussion. He also requested an analysis of the return on investment for economic development projects and a clearer understanding of the capacity of the San Antonio Housing Trust. He supported a May 2027 election to avoid cost escalation.
• Councilmember Mungia supported maintaining the 2022 bond committee structure and advocated for a housing bond at the same or greater level. He suggested expanding the definition of permanent supportive housing and focusing on deeply affordable housing. He also supported a separate downtown proposition and requested more transparency on how district-specific propositions would be structured.
• Councilmember White strongly opposed any variable tax rate, calling it a tax increase on citizens. He supported a fixed rate and a $625 million bond cap, stating “we need to live within our means.” He supported a May 2027 election but opposed district-specific propositions.
• Councilmember Villagran emphasized making every taxpayer dollar go further. She requested breakdowns of homelessness data by gender, foster youth, veterans, and mental health issues. She raised concerns that a separate downtown proposition could lead to many sub-propositions (up to 10) and urged keeping the bond at $1.2 billion. She supported a May 2027 election and formalizing the tri-chair approval process for bond committees.
• Councilmember Mesa Gonzalez supported a May 2027 bond and the bond committee structure. She asked for data on home rehab applications by district and waitlists. She expressed concern that a smaller bond capacity would defer critical infrastructure needs. She was open to a downtown proposition but wanted clarity on which projects would be included.
• Councilmember Castillo supported replicating the 2022 bond committee process, urged using an equity lens in project analysis, and advocated for a May 2027 election. She supported a separate downtown proposition and requested that public arts funding continue (1.5% of each proposition).
• Councilmember Spears emphasized listening to residents and raised concerns about project necessity vs. desirability. She opposed a variable tax rate and district-specific propositions, citing unintended consequences in other cities. She requested dollar-and-cents examples of potential tax impacts.
• Councilmember White (continued) and Councilmember Galván both emphasized careful scrutiny of long-term operating costs for new facilities. Galván requested a comparison of revolving loan fund models for the housing trust.
• Councilmember Aldrete-Gavito supported current categories but opposed a separate downtown proposition. She stressed that now is not the time for tax or rate increases and supported tri-chair approval by council majority.
• Mayor Jones supported a November 2027 election to maximize public participation, noting the May 2022 turnout was only 8%. She requested an analysis of how 2017 bond projects were classified as citywide vs. regional and asked for a clearer understanding of the sports/entertainment district’s scope. She emphasized leveraging private and philanthropic dollars and wanted to understand the gap in deeply affordable housing (30% AMI) to guide housing bond investments.

Discussion Items: Shelter & Housing Framework (Homeless Response)

• Presentation by Mark Carmona (Chief Housing Officer/Director of Homeless Services and Strategy): The framework identifies three focus areas: preventing homelessness, guiding people off the streets, and keeping people in housing. Current system capacity serves ~5,991 households annually. Key gaps include 550 emergency shelter beds, 728 units of interim housing, 283 additional vouchers, and 464 permanent supportive housing units. The city’s FY26 investment is $30.5 million (not including ~$23 million in indirect police/fire costs). Strategies include encampment decommissioning, outreach restructuring, a day work program, and leveraging bond programs.
• Councilmember McKee Rodriguez requested that the CCR calling for a day labor program, increased low-barrier shelter, and a cost-benefit analysis of homeless strategies be heard before budget discussions. He advocated for encampment decommissioning over routine sweeps, arguing the latter erode trust and waste money.
• Councilmember Aldrete-Gavito expressed confidence in the plan and stressed the importance of including foster youth and leveraging the faith community. She noted that resident gratitude for cleanups must be balanced with the need for long-term solutions.
• Councilmember Villagran requested demographic breakdowns of homeless populations (men, women, veterans, foster youth, etc.). She called for regulating hotels that function as de facto low-barrier shelters and advocated for permanent supportive housing as a key solution.
• Councilmember White asked for success metrics and wanted to know how many unsheltered individuals declined services vs. being turned away due to capacity. He supported encampment cleanups but raised concerns about no-barrier shelters where services are optional, arguing the public expects accountability.
• Councilmember Galván stressed the need for expanded low-barrier/no-barrier shelter and trauma-informed care. He asked about creating neighborhood-based service hubs and improving coordination of outreach workers.
• Councilmember Mesa Gonzalez requested a breakdown of the $19.8 million in homeless spending by partner and by function (e.g., day center, street outreach). She emphasized the cost-effectiveness of upstream prevention over shelter and rehousing.
• Councilmember Mungia reminded that requiring conditions for housing after getting people off the street is counterproductive. He asked for rental assistance profiles and highlighted the need for better communication with residents about outreach efforts.
• Councilmember Spears requested identification of “leaders in each lane” of homeless interventions and expressed concern about mixing populations (e.g., domestic violence victims with substance users) in low-barrier shelters. She advocated for targeted approaches for seniors and foster youth.
• Councilmember Castillo supported the framework and highlighted the importance of reentry programs for justice-involved individuals. She urged prioritizing mental health services, especially in light of Laurel Ridge’s closure.
• Councilmember Cory asked for investment metrics for each homeless program (e.g., day center vs. street outreach) and requested better stakeholder engagement between outreach teams and businesses/residents. She advocated for geolocation data in HMIS and more dedicated low-barrier housing options.
• Mayor Jones asked for planning assumptions for the unhoused population through 2032 to inform bond deliberations. She requested targeted approaches for veterans, foster youth, and seniors, and emphasized the need for a public information campaign about the 30-day hotel tax exemption. She also asked about ensuring public-financed housing is not among the highest evictors.

Key Outcomes & Next Steps

• Bond Program: Staff will incorporate council feedback and return in August with the certified tax roll, providing specific bond capacity options (fixed vs. variable rate) and examples of potential tax impacts. Further work sessions with the community and bond committees will occur summer 2026. Council direction on election timeline (May vs. November 2027) and proposition structure (including whether to create a separate downtown district proposition) will be refined.
• Homeless Framework: Mark Carmona will facilitate external stakeholder work sessions over the summer and return in August with a final framework plan as part of the FY27 budget presentation. Staff will provide requested demographic breakdowns, investment metrics by program, and more detailed gap analysis. The next steps also include developing a five-year strategy with measurable objectives and key results.
• No formal votes were taken; the session was a briefing and discussion for council feedback.

Other Items

• Councilmember McKee Rodriguez requested support for a new D2 Senior Center at Copernicus Park, to be funded through an extension of the Inner City TIRZ through 2050, which would avoid competing for bond dollars.