Build it from San Antonio with the rhythm here we go up, bring it by to the night.

Drum so loud make the whole city high fight.

Turn it up, let the heart be hit.

Everybody come aloud when this thing's got to hit by the Alamon down to the river walk, go.

When I play the drums, everybody say, Whoa!

Check it out, build that go!

San Antonio with the rhythm and we go up and some power in the beat drums low.

Everybody, let's go!

Let's go!

Let's go!

Good morning, good morning.

The time is now 9 15 a.m.

on June 18th, 2026, and the meeting of the San Antonio City Council is now called to order.

Madam Clerk, please call roll.

Councilmember McKee Rodriguez.

Present.

Councilmember Villagran.

Councilmember Mungia.

Present.

Councilmember Castillo.

Councilmember Galvano.

Here.

Councilmember Alderete Gavito.

Here.

Council Member Mesa Gonzalez.

Present.

Councilmember Spears.

Councilmember White.

Mayor Jones.

Here.

Mayor, we have quorum.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Today's invocator is the guest of Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Over to you, sir.

Thank you, Mayor, and good morning, everyone.

Happy Pride.

Today is a beautiful and very busy day.

Uh, and thank you, Mayor, for your patience in starting the meeting.

Uh, we were running a little bit late today, so to quote the princess diaries, a queen is never late, everyone else is simply early.

And in the spirit of Pride Month, it is an honor and privilege to introduce Asia Rousey.

Asia is a proud, born and raised San Antonian and is deeply rooted in the vibrant culture of this city.

Her foundational upbringing within a large supportive family has instilled in her a strong sense of community and dedication.

Her journey within the drag community began in 2021, sparked by a profound commitment to philanthropy.

Her inaugural performance was a benefit event specifically organized to raise vital funds for the AIDS Foundation.

An experience that not only launched Rousey's drag career, but also solidified the passion for using performance as a platform of positive impact.

Professionally, she balances a multifaceted career.

By day she leverages her expertise as a business manager, and in the evening she transitions to the role of a host and entertain and entertainer, gracing stages across San Antonio.

These engagements allow Rousey to connect with diverse audiences and actively contribute to the fabric of our local community.

She previously held the distinguished title of Miss Texas forever.

Her current focus is dedicated to fostering greater unity and collective strength within the San Antonio community, striving to create lasting and meaningful change.

Please join me in welcoming Asia.

Good morning.

Thank you guys for having me.

This is such an honor.

Um I will greet you guys.

Um greeting mayor, city council, and my councilman, Jalen McKee Rodriguez, and everyone in the chambers.

It is an honor to be here for the for two the twice this time.

I wish you guys a happy pride today and every day.

Um if you guys can bow your head with me, I'm gonna say a little prayer for us.

From this point of the light within the mind of God, let light stream fort into minds of every person, every being.

Let light descend on earth.

Sorry.

From this point of love within the heart of God, let love stream into fort into the hearts of every person, every being, let love descend on earth from the center where the will of God is known.

Let purpose guide the will of every person, every being, the purpose which the holy master known of and survive.

Let good willing and the will to be good descending on earth from the center which we call from human race.

Let the plan of love and the light work out.

And many of seals of the deal, I mean, I'm sorry, of the door of evil dwells.

Let light of love and power descend upon earth.

Manifest and restore dividend divine plan of earth.

As attacks come from all angles, please pray for our LGBTQ folks, particularly our trans community, which we force ongoing hate and discrimination and attempt to assure.

Never let your own discriminations, our disagreement, our personal conflicts stop you from aligning where it matters most.

We also would like to extend our prayer to our LGBT youth.

Sorry.

Our LGBT youth who are fighting to find themselves in a place that is unsure, unsafe.

In this time we are already challenging, and we pray that they be granted and knowledge where they can find love, peace, and serenity.

Thank you.

Thank you, Asia.

Please remain standing, join me in 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 with liberty and justice for all.

Item three is approval of the minutes for the June 3rd and 4th, 2026 City Council meetings.

Are there any corrections or edits to the minutes?

Okay.

Hearing none, is there a motion for approval?

Make a motion to approve.

Okay, there's a motion to approve in a second.

Please vote.

The motion carries.

Thank you.

We have one uh proclamation today, a very important one.

Juneteenth.

I will uh now read the proclamation and then recognize Councilman McKee Rodriguez to speak.

Whereas the City of San Antonio recognizes that Juneteenth Day honors the historic moment when freedom was finally realized for the last enslaved African Americans in the United States, reaffirming the enduring ideals of liberty, equality, and human dignity.

And whereas June 19, 1865 marks the date when Union forces arrived in Galveston, Texas, announcing General Order Number Three and enforcing the Emancipation Proclamation more than two years after its issuance.

And whereas Juneteenth stands as the oldest nationally celebrated commemoration of the end of slavery in the United States and serves as a powerful reminder of resilience, justice, and the ongoing pursuit of civil rights.

And whereas this annual observance provides the San Antonio community an opportunity to honor African American history, culture, and contributions, and to recommit to fostering equality, understanding, and unity for all residents.

And whereas the Juneteenth Independence Day Parade organized by the San Antonio-Juneteenth Freedom Coalition will take place on June 20th, 2026, followed by the Juneteenth Festival at Comanche Park number two, celebrating through educational programs, community gatherings, and activities that highlight heritage and fellowship.

Now, therefore, I, Gina Ortiz Jones, mayor of the city of San Antonio, in recognition thereof, do hereby proclaim June 19th, 2026 to be Juneteenth Day in San Antonio, Texas.

Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mayor.

And as we reflect on Juneteenth this year, we remember it not just as a historical milestone, but as an ongoing call to action.

Juneteenth marks the day, as was said earlier, the day federal troops arrived in Galveston, Texas, two and a half years after the Emancipation Proclamation to enforce the end of slavery.

Two and a half years.

And the system of slavery didn't die easily, and its legacy didn't disappear with the stroke of a pen.

And if you ask many in the black community today, we'll tell you plainly.

Some systems of bondage never ended.

They just evolved.

And that's the uncomfortable truth that we're called to confront.

Did slavery really end on Juneteenth, or did it simply shape shift into something else?

What system of what systems of oppression still exists in our society today?

What's it what institutions were born under slavery and segregation but now operate under different names?

How have programs past and present continued to disenfranchise and limit the success of our black communities?

Even now we're seeing ice and various levels of law enforcement rip families apart.

And such violent and inhumane practices started with the separation of enslaved black families and have evolved.

Anti-blackness is pervasive in every system, and this is no exception.

What is done to one of us is done to all of us.

In San Antonio, we've made meaningful progress.

We've passed a non-discrimination ordinance, we've named racism a public health crisis, we've introduced equity frameworks to assess contracts, programs, and services, and these are important steps, but they're just that.

And undoing centuries of systemic racism takes more than statements.

It takes sustained, courageous, and often uncomfortable action.

We can't ignore the data.

Black Americans are incarcerated at more than three times the rate of white Americ white Americans, and that's not accidental.

Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr., Fred Hampton, all murdered, all for daring to demand dignity and justice for black lives.

And the list didn't stop there.

It continues with the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Brianna Taylor, Sandra Bland, Marquise Jones, Charles Roundtree, Darrell Zamalt Sr., George Floyd, and countless others whose names we know, and so many that we don't.

So when I and others challenge law enforcement practices or question long-standing norms and it makes you uncomfortable, I ask you to pause and consider the history of our lived experiences.

We're not asking you to debate our reality.

We're asking you as allies, as leaders, as neighbors to help us change it.

And it's not supposed to be easy because real change never is, but it's necessary to save lives and create a better future.

For over 400 years, this country and the state have worked to undermine the black community and still do in many ways.

Juneteenth celebrates the end of slavery, yes, but it also marks the beginning of a new kind of fight to end its legacy.

So I invite I invite you this year and every year to stand with us to speak out and to act.

I look forward to celebrating with my community this weekend at the parade on Saturday at 9 a.m.

starting at Sam Houston High School and the many events happening over the next week.

I'll see you in the streets surrounded by a powerful, resilient, and deeply rooted community that continues to lead the way.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Councilman.

Would anyone else like to speak?

Sorry.

Anyone else on the dais?

Great.

You're welcome to come to the podium, sure.

Please go ahead.

Good morning.

My name is Oscar Vicks.

We've been doing a jungle team parade for the last 27 years.

And we want to thank you all for recognizing and letting the city know that we'll celebrate liberty, equality, and justice for all.

And I'm not about Juneteenth because it's a holiday.

I'm about Juneteenth because of liberty, equality, and justice for all.

Not just black folks, but everybody.

When I came back from Vietnam, I went ahead around the world to fight for people freedom.

And I come back, and we had a colored restroom, a colored water fountain, and colored restaurants.

And I said from that day on, I will be fighting for liberty, equality, and justice for all.

So anybody that recognized that, I want to appreciate them.

This is Rita.

She's responsible for doing the presentation.

I'd like to give credit for everybody that supports us, and we hope that we'll see everybody's parade wave on Saturday at nine o'clock.

Thank you.

Thank you guys.

Thank you, sir.

Yep.

Oscar Vicks last week buried his wife.

And he took the time to come out.

To show you how important it is for us to all come together and enjoy and have a good time and celebrate our freedom.

Thank you.

Yes, let me foot stomp, encourage everybody to be out there at nine o'clock.

Um I look forward to it.

I hope as many of my colleagues can join me that morning as possible.

Um we've got a busy agenda here.

Um Eric, I'll turn it over to you for the city manager's report.

Thank you, Mayor.

Good morning, Mayor and Council.

Uh two items.

Uh, one uh wanted to have an opportunity to bring a very special uh city employee before the council this morning.

Uh Miss Anna Martinez is celebrating an extraordinary milestone of fifty years with the city.

Um that deserves a round of applause right there.

So Mrs.

Ms.

Martinez um uh currently serves as a deputy court clerk in municipal court um and is known for her professionalism, extensive court knowledge and commitment to excellence at the at the courts.

She's a certified court clerk through the court to the Texas Court Clerks Association.

Um she began her career in nineteen seventy-six with the city um in the city welfare department, which uh probably over time turned into the Department of Human Services as a grant-funded clerk, uh transcribing case manager reports, and then joined the municipal court team in nineteen eighty-five.

Um, and uh during her career has served in a variety of roles as she's moved up to the organization.

Uh, a proud San Antonio native, uh, a mother to a daughter and and a grandmother to three grand uh children.

And um uh she reportedly finds great fulfillment in uh supporting the judges and and uh the public uh assistance as they navigate the court system.

So I wanted to uh there is very often where we have a 50 year city employee.

And um Anna, thank you for joining us this morning, but I wanted to recognize you and your service and your and your your service to our community and the organization, and and thank you before the council this morning.

So thank you very much.

We'd like to come down and take a picture with you.

Um, and then uh the uh the second item uh is another great news story.

Uh today's video highlights an employee who's here today with us, uh Robert Ubarrow from the Solid waste department, who was recently awarded the National Waste and Recycling Association's public sector driver of the year for the entire country.

And so they the uh the National Waste and Recycling Association recognizes uh one public sector driver uh every year, and Robert is this year's uh awardee.

Uh, he started working for the city in December of 1994 and promoted into a driving position in 2003 in his 30 plus years with the city, he is accident-free.

Um, and the award celebrates the best of uh of of his industry, uh professionals with the skill, the discipline, and the commitment to set a safety standard for waste and recycling operations.

And so I wanted to thank Robert and congratulate him and have him an opportunity to come before the council this afternoon.

That is uh today's video, so let's roll the video.

This award is from the NWRA, which is the National Waste and Recycling Association.

This award will be presented to me in Washington, D.C.

So we will be going over there to accept the award.

I have been employed with the city of San Antonio for 31 and a half years.

Right now I'm a starloader equipment operator.

I collect the cart on route, servicing garbage, recycle or organics when needed.

I also have a role in helping train the new drivers.

The core values that I feel that we use a lot here, be teamwork.

We are always out there, but sometimes we do have delays.

So we we need other drivers to come and help.

We're all trying to get out back here safely.

The other one for me personally is integrity.

Because we are there about our sellers in the truck.

It's just us, we have to make decisions on the field, and it's just having pride in your work.

Even though no one's there to see it, we still gotta do the right thing.

It's a really unbelievable feeling.

Me and my wife being able to go to DC to receive my award.

You know, I never thought this job would take me places like that.

But to be honored that way, it's really exciting for me and my family.

It's not just for me, it's for the city, it's for our department.

My name is Robert Ibarra.

I'm a side loader equipment operator, and I was selected as the 2026 NWRA public sector driver of the year.

Congratulations again, Robert, and that's all we have this morning, Mayor.

Congratulations, sir.

Thank you, Eric.

There are no individual items scheduled for today.

Items 10 through 29 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.

Because item 26 is related to items five, six, and seven.

I recommend moving this item from the consent agenda to be voted on with the other Toyota related items.

Is there any objection to that?

Great, thank you.

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

Okay, hearing none.

Okay.

All right, item 26 has been pulled for individual consideration.

Um, and we are on.

We have no members of the public that have signed up to speak on items that remain on the consent agenda.

Okay.

Is there a motion to approve the balance of the consent agenda?

Second, okay.

There's a motion and a second to approve the balance of the consent agenda.

Any highlights or questions about the consent agenda?

Councilman Beyogran.

Thank you.

I this morning I would like to highlight item 11, an ordinance approving a construction contract for the Father Roman Community Center replacement project.

Uh this is part of the fiscal year 2025 budget.

The Father Oman Center is going to be approximately 12,000 square feet replacing the the recently demolished community center, which um had been up for years and had been a gathering place.

This modern uh iteration of the Father Ramon Community Center is going to include a lobby, a gym, two classrooms, community programs, and a dedicated office space for parks and racks.

So I look forward to moving that forward.

I would also like to highlight item 12, fire station 21 replacement.

This was part of the fiscal year 2024 budget.

Um, total of 12 million was authorized for the design.

This is fire station 21 replacing a very old fire station uh on South Flores.

So I look forward to that.

Um, seeing our our fight, our firefighters housed in a new facility, state of the art.

I'm very excited about that.

So I look forward to moving that forward.

Thank you, Mayor.

Is there any other items for highlight?

Councilwoman Core.

Thank you, Mayor.

I have two quick highlights today.

One is item 10, which is a contract for the Kenwood Community Center authorizing $8.5 million to do the entire construction of this community center.

This is one of the first things that my seniors asked me when I was elected three years ago that they really wanted this building was closed due to foundational issues, and they really wanted this building open again so folks can gather.

So I want to shout out DHS for their hard work in have helping us create a community design team that actually provided input into what the public art in the building was going to look like, where the bathrooms were going to be located, and DHS did an amazing job.

And thank you to the capital delivery department who has ensured me that there is a bonus for early completion in this project in the budget.

So I'm excited to hear that as well.

Um the next item I want to highlight is item number 28, which is a Methodist Health Care Right of Way Agreement.

I want to thank the city attorney's office for their diligent work in getting this done so it does not delay the construction for Methodist Healthcare.

I know Juan is here today, and he's been a great partner for the District One team.

And as your organization has for the entire community, they just opened up a dual care center in at Methodist in Tobin Hill.

So would love if anybody needs those services, they can access them pretty easily.

So thank you all for your partnership as well.

Thanks, Mayor.

Thank you.

Um Eric, uh, one clarification on item 22, which is the downtown accessibility and mobility study contract.

Uh, yesterday we had good discussion and uh from many of my colleagues, we want to make sure there's sufficient uh citizen input uh into the what that group one looks like, as well as uh the kind of longer, more strategic guidelines, objectives, goals that are considered as part of that.

So understand that's a one-year contract, but wanted to clarify that um that is going to be flexible enough to account for the feedback that we described yesterday.

Yes, ma'am, and I think what you talked about was having uh Councilman McGill.

That's right.

Kind of kind of lead the charge on kind of um getting some feedback.

Yes, ma'am.

Wanted to confirm that for the public.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay, there being no further discussion.

There's a motion and a second to approve the consent.

Excuse me.

Oh, okay.

Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mayor.

I wanted to highlight item 29, uh, an ordinance of uh appointing and reappointing our municipal court judges.

I want to offer my gratitude for all of those who applied and those who were ultimately chosen.

Uh, we were so impressed by those that we got to interview and uh we got to hear about your passion for service of our community and municipal court is often one of the first interactions that our constituents have with local government.

And so I wanted to once again say thank you uh for upholding the courts and the way that you have, and I look forward to working with you as chair of the municipal courts advisory committee.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Councilman.

Okay, any other just questions or highlights?

Okay.

There being no further discussion, there's a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda minus item 26.

Please vote.

Okay, the motion carries, thank you.

Um items five, six, seven, and twenty-six are all related to Toyota, and if there's no objection, we'll be presented, discussed, and voted on together.

Okay.

Hearing no objection, Madam Clerk, please read the caption for items five, six, seven, and twenty-six.

Item number five is an ordinance approving a 10-year tax abatement agreement with Toyota Motor Manufacturing Texas Inc.

to abate 100% of real property personal advoraum property taxes for improvements within an existing Texas Enterprise Zone.

B, a Chapter 380 economic development agreement for $9,500,000 for ready-to-work program funding and city fee waivers.

C, an endorsement to participate in CPS Energy's E16 writer program.

D, recommendation of SAWS fee waivers and amount not to exceed $4,515,950 subject to SAWS board approval.

E.

negotiation and execution of an advanced funding agreement between the City of San Antonio Bear County and the Texas Department of Transportation with the city contribution in the amount of $20 million to support road infrastructure improvements and F allocation of $4,500,000 for intersection improvements and appropriates funds accordingly.

Funding for the city incentive package is from Project Savings, the Economic Development Incentive Fund, Ready to Work Fund, and Debt Proceeds.

Item number six is a resolution approving the negotiation and execution of an advanced funding agreement between the City of San Antonio Bear County, Texas, and the Texas Department of Transportation Text Dot for the development of the proposed East West State Spurs project with a city contribution of 20 million dollars.

Item number seven is a resolution nominating Toyota Manufacturing Texas Inc.

for designation as a qualified business and a triple jumbo enterprise project under the Texas Enterprise Zone Program.

And item number 26 is an ordinance authorizing and approving publication and posting of a notice of intention to issue City of San Antonio, Texas combination tax and revenue certificates of obligation and a maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $25 million and providing for an effective date.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Staff has a presentation.

Thanks, Alex.

Good morning, Mayor and Council.

I'm excited to present for your consideration an incentive package intentionally designed to position San Antonio for a transformative economic development project.

I'll start with some background on the company.

Toyota has already invested over $4.7 billion at the company's south side location since 20 since 2003.

They directly employ over 3,700 people, and their local supplier network includes approximately 5,400 additional employees.

In 2022, we recommended a step or we commissioned a study of the economic impact associated with Toyota and its suppliers' investment in San Antonio and found that through 2035, they will contribute 208 billion dollars in GDP and support 15,000 jobs and 1.4 billion dollars in annual wages.

So for some perspective, this represents 7% of Bear County's GDP and 2.5% of the total wages in our county.

The project under consideration would include construction of a 2.5 million square foot facility to accommodate a new flexible production line, manufacturing over 200,000 vehicles annually.

They're planning to start construction by September of this year and be operational by 2030.

This expansion is planned at their current location, and this image shows the land they have available.

And while we've known an expansion of this caliber was a possibility, we've also known we'd have to compete for it.

In connection with this project, Toyota plans to invest $2 billion and create $2,000 jobs.

As part of this incentive package, we would require that the $2,000 jobs created would meet or exceed the Bear County average wage, which is currently $32.36, and which will be indexed annually.

Staff is recommending our wage expectations aligned with a Texas Enterprise Fund, which for this project is also being recommended.

The Texas Enterprise Fund, it's a state program, and it consists of and it includes total cash compensation rather than simply just base wages.

In the advanced manufacturing industry and specifically with a company like Toyota, shift deferentials over time and bonuses are significant, which is why this standard more accurately reflects the wages associated with these jobs.

Our incentive policy also requires that 10% of abated taxes be reinvested into wraparound support for their employees in the form of child care, transportation, or workforce development, which they have committed to doing should we be selected for this investment.

This incentive package recommended today was specifically developed to increase San Antonio's competitiveness for this investment.

We're recommending a 10-year 100% tax abatement with an estimated value of $88 million, along with $20 million for road improvement investments to connect the site to Highway 281 via a northeast entrance.

This entrance is critical to mitigate the impact of the additional vehicle traffic associated with this project.

Item number six on today's agenda authorizes an advanced funding agreement with TextDOT for delivery of this road improvement, and item 26 on the agenda would authorize debt to fund the improvement.

This debt will be backed by anticipated growth in CPS revenues associated with an increased energy load for this project.

And while TextOt has committed to an aggressive timeline for delivery of this road, they cannot guarantee its completion prior to the plant being operational.

So to improve more efficient access to the site in advance of the eastern entrance being available, we recommend additional infrastructure support for specific road improvements along the western entrance to the plant.

These improvements will be funded through the economic development incentive fund, along with savings from infrastructure improvements associated with Project Iceberg, which resulted in the rear axle manufacturing facility.

We're recommending ready to work support in the form of on the job training grants up to $8.25 million and incumbent worker grants up to $750,000.

To access each $5,000 on the job training grant, Toyota would be required to hire a participant from the Ready to Work Program.

And we're also recommending $500,000 in city fee waivers also to be funded from the Economic Development Incentive Fund.

Aside from city funded support, we're also recommending an E16 rider incentive, which is an economic development tool council can make available to significant power users.

The estimated value of this discount is $16.2 million over six years.

CPS will also be offering support in the form of additional infrastructure and for the project and a natural gas discount.

And SALS will also be offering infrastructure support and wave impact fees as noted on this slide.

Item number seven on today's agenda seeks approval of a resolution nominating this project to the Texas Enterprise Zone program, making them eligible for up to $3.75 million in state sales tax rebates.

And lastly, due to the speed of the project, we're also recommending a single point of contact with development services.

I'd like to take a few minutes to highlight some of the details on the impact this project could have in our community.

The city's total incentive value is estimated at 122.1 million dollars.

However, we've estimated city tax revenues of 34.7 million during the three years of construction, during which time they will still be paying property taxes along with sales taxes for all of the construction.

If you look 10 years after the abatement expires, we anticipate $92.4 million dollars in property taxes and sales tax sales taxes to the city.

So over the next 25 years, these revenues actually exceed our incentive costs.

And as far as direct impact to residents, if we take the 2,000 jobs created multiplied by the annual average wage, which is roughly $85,000, this project is anticipated to result in $178.8 million dollars in wages into our community every year.

And finally, the estimated economic impact for this project during the initial three years of construction is $3.2 billion, and then $7.6 billion annually once it's operational.

So mayor and council, given the proven commitment Toyota has demonstrated to the San Antonio community and the and to position San Antonio to aggressively compete for this transformational investment opportunity.

Staff recommends approval and authorization of the various items included in this incentive package.

And while this concludes my presentation, I'd like to invite Frank Voss, president of Toyota, Texas, to share a few remarks.

Yeah, thank you, Alex.

And uh good morning, Mayor Jones, Council members, and city staff, as well as the community members who are here today.

It's an honor to be here on behalf of the 3,700 team members of Toyota, Texas, as well as our 23 on-site suppliers, some of here, some of whom are here in the room today, and there are 5,400 team members to represent this exciting potential expansion right here in this community.

For over 20 years, Toyota's been building something great in San Antonio, not just high-quality vehicles, but also careers and livelihoods for thousands of San Antonios, San Antonians.

While our plant is proudly located on the South Side and has been an important catalyst for the significant growth and development happening on that side of town, our team members and our suppliers, team members, the hardworking people assembling Toyotas, Tundras, and Sequoias every day.

They live in every council district in this great city.

And so we hope that between our people and the high quality trucks and SUVs on the roads throughout this region, and the philanthropic impact that we've made over the last two decades, especially in STEM and education, you feel that Toyota is for everyone because it is.

We have two individuals uh from the public that have signed up to speak on this item.

Call them in the order that they have signed up.

Um, Jonathan Gerwitz.

Followed by Jack Finger.

Mayor and Council, as chair of the public policy committee of the Greater San Antonio Chamber, I'm here today to express support for the proposed tax abatement agreement with Toyota Motor Manufacturing Texas, and to thank Toyota for its long-standing commitment to our community.

For more than two decades, Toyota has been much more than an employer in San Antonio.

The company has been a true community partner, investing not only in manufacturing operations, but also in the people, organizations, and institutions that help our region thrive.

Toyota's presence has helped establish San Antonio as a globally competitive manufacturing hub, supporting thousands of direct and indirect jobs and attracting suppliers, investment, and talent to our region.

Their economic impact extends well beyond its facility, benefiting small businesses, families, and schools throughout our region.

Just as important, Toyota has consistently demonstrated a commitment to corporate citizenship with volunteerism, charitable giving, workforce development partnerships, and support for educational initiatives.

Today's actions support Toyota's continue continued investment in San Antonio while helping ensure our community remains competitive for future growth.

Communities across the country are competing aggressively for advanced manufacturing investments and tools such as tax abatements, help position San Antonio as a place where world-class employers choose to expand, innovate, and create jobs.

As we continue to diversify and strengthen our local economy, retaining and growing employers like Toyota is one of the most effective strategies for creating opportunities for economic prosperity and securing a strong future for generations to come.

On behalf of the greater San Antonio Chamber and our volunteer leadership, I want to thank Toyota for its enduring partnership and encourage City Council to support this agreement.

We appreciate Toyota's confidence in San Antonio and look forward to continuing to grow together for many years to come.

Thank you.

Jack Finger.

How many years has it been in San Antonio?

At least 20.

20 years.

It has a big uh multi-billion dollar plant down the south side.

To say that it's going to just up and leave San Antonio is uh to me a little bit uh far-fetched.

Uh, if I was born at night, it certainly wasn't last night.

But we're about to find out how many of you were born last night.

You know, we uh in this big deal we have here, that's what what the headline says.

We're going to give a giveaway how many perks?

City offers Toyota 142.7 million in perks.

But for what?

Okay, Mr.

Audiovisual man, put that under that bottom part right there.

How many actual jobs is going to be new on this one?

We talk about all the thousands of jobs that are there, but uh so is tender that will add more than 400 jobs.

400 job.

I think that's the bottom line.

Return the camera if you would.

Now I calculated uh, oh, here you can put that up there now.

I just maybe I'm just an amateur at this, but I count a 400 job to 88 million bucks, and I said 220,000 per job.

220,000 per job.

That on top of the 30 some odd dollars that each job is all already providing.

Is 220,000?

Does that seem like a little bit much to you?

It does to me.

So anyway, yeah, return the camera if you would.

The uh we are already going to give them all kinds of giveaways and uh road improvements in uh well uh on the job training and um uh per uh waivers, fee waivers, utility waifers and so forth.

But I noticed that we're going to give them uh a 10-year 100% tax and abatement.

How many of our actual average uh mom and pop businesses here in town can get a commensurate type of tax abatement just like that?

Do we ever give such no uh and oh here's one?

It's a that uh that bottom uh second one there, second circular related area there.

Uh yeah, if you can blow it up a little bit, an incumbent worker training grant in the maximum amount of 750,000 dollars to upskill 150 existing employees.

Return the camera if you would.

Why are why don't they train their own employees on their own dime?

We are already training them with the on-the-job training.

Why are we giving them extra training?

Why don't they do it themselves?

Huh?

Thank you.

Thank you for the public comment.

We always appreciate that.

Um, because that one was incorrect, however, I do want to make sure that we're the public as that is paying a lot of attention to this understands.

Uh the news article that he referenced referenced a rear axle plant.

Uh that is not what we're talking about.

That is an issue that has already been settled, and we look forward to those 400 new jobs coming.

That does not have anything to do with what we are discussing today, but thank you for the public comment.

Those are all the individuals that have signed up to speak on item five.

Uh may I have a motion to approve items five, six, seven, and twenty-six, so we may begin council discussion.

So I make a motion to approve.

Well, move on, uh, now move on to council discussion.

Um, for clarity, because uh the numbers may be different for those that are paying attention.

The reason we're talking about item 26, you saw in there a reference to a uh 20 million dollar incentive.

Item 26 speaks to a 25 million dollar bond that we would have to pay, and that um accounts for uh additional costs and interests potentially with having to pay that off.

But those two things are related, but in case anyone's ones under anyone was wondering why those numbers were different.

And mayor, that's only if needed.

That's right, that's right.

Yeah, as needed, but they're related.

Okay, thank you.

Councilmember Mungia.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to thank Alex, Brenda, and the team for all your work, and Frank and Melinda for being here, and also uh Sarah Greater SATX.

So you all have done an amazing job putting together a wonderful package that I think is gonna be so beneficial, not just for for my district or the south side of San Antonio, but regionally speaking.

This is a huge investment for our community.

And we've had a great long-standing relationship with Toyota ever since you guys came here, and I think it's just paid uh the dividends are immeasurable.

So I thank you for all the work that you've done.

These are fantastic jobs.

Uh these are folks that you know my parents grew up with that worked there uh and are able to uh sustain a great family and a great sense of living for that.

So I just thank you for all the work.

This has been a lot of partners getting together, including SALS and CPS uh pitching in, and I know there's always curveballs and last minute things we have to figure out, but you know, ultimately this is best.

Not just again for the south side, but the entire region of San Antonio, Bear County, even south of us.

Uh a lot of folks that live outside the county benefit from these jobs as well.

So thank you again for all your work.

Thank you to the city.

Uh, and I look forward to passing this and hopefully getting these jobs and and uh hope to y'all will give me a tour once it's being built.

So thank you so much, appreciate it.

Councilmember Alter at the Gabito.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Alex, for the presentation, and also definitely wanted to echo Alex and Renda.

Thank y'all for y'all's help in getting it to the finish line.

Obviously, Sarah and Romani though with greater SATX.

I uh as Councilman Mungia says, it truly is a partnership.

Thank you, Frank, for your comments.

Of course, you Toyota has a great team.

I see Melinda in the audience too.

But I as you mentioned, Frank, I mean, there's so much that Toyota does to uplift our whole community.

I mean, I see Rosa Santana, I see Jorge Hereda.

Like the there's so much success that spews out of Toyota, you know, that that goes into our community.

I saw that y'all give 50 million dollars in community donations alone last year.

That tells us that you're invested here, that y'all are a partner with us, partner with our city, and so thank you for that.

Um, we we know all of us here on the diet, and in this whole in uh in chambers, we all have the goal to reduce generational poverty, and economic development is our key to that goal.

So we have to do, we have to continue landing big projects like this.

Um we have to continue doing the work.

If we're gonna truly uplift our city, this this is the kind of wins it's gonna take.

So thank you so much, uh, for all of the partnership.

Thank you to SAS and CPS for their willingness to work here.

Um, let's get it done.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Viegran.

Thank you.

Cornerstone employer on San Antonio's South Side.

Toyota has man maintained a manufacturing presence in San Antonio for approximately 23 years since its establishment and 20 years since production began, redirecting sustained investment in the future of our city.

This company Toyota has demonstrated a long-term commitment to San Antonio's workforce and community.

With this today, you continue to show that you have confidence in San Antonio's manufacturing capabilities.

Toyota's presence in San Antonio represents one of the most significant economic development success stories in our city's history and serves as a model for how strategic investment can transform an entire region.

We saw base closures come, impacting the middle class of the South Side, the South and the West side of San Antonio.

With Toyota's arrival, we had opportunity again, and this is what it has been since it is established its operations.

A 4.7 billion dollar investment from private sectors make it one of the largest ever made in this city that says we believe in San Antonio.

That we've helped position the South Side as a nationally recognized manufacturing and logistics hub, enhancing San Antonio's report reputation as a premier destination for advanced manufacturing.

We know we're going into a competition.

As stated, other people want advanced manufacturing.

But what you have here, what we have here is a community.

It's more than just a company.

Because it doesn't always come along.

The former councilwoman Rebecca V.

Sit and we knew what land Toyota had.

And as we went as sisters to events, we would ask, What are you going to do next?

What are you going to do next?

What's coming next?

And the opportunity for the rear axle plant came with our last council.

And that was exciting to see that kind of growth.

And now you have the opportunity, City of San Antonio and this council to continue to look at the improvements with a public-private partnership that it that allows employers like Toyota to expand and succeed.

Strong infrastructure is one of the most important factors companies consider when deciding where to invest.

By making these improvements today, San Antonio is positioning itself to compete for future employers.

Infrastructure is key.

Road infrastructure is important, and the improvements to roads and transportation networks help reduce congestion, improve safety, and enhance mobility for residents and businesses throughout the area.

The continued growth of Toyota is not only a district, a victory for the South Side and District 3, but it's a victory for the entire city of San Antonio and the state of Texas.

It strengthens our economy, supports our local businesses, our state businesses, expands employment opportunities, and reinforces our position as one of the nation's leading manufacturing centers.

I remain committed to working alongside Toyota, its community stakeholders, and everyone involved.

And today I am excited that the City Council of San Antonio gets to also say and commit to work alongside Toyota.

At this point, I would like to enter others that have indicated their support, and that's letters of support from the Alamo Community College District and the South Texas Business Partner into the record.

So thank you so much.

I look forward to the next steps.

I know this is a beginning of the process, but as we move forward, understand that the city of San Antonio and the community of San Antonio understands and recognizes the efforts you've put in, and in return, you have always understood and recognize the value of the people of San Antonio, their abilities, and the workforce that we have here.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Councilmember Meso Gonzalez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Toyota, for being here today, and to all city staff and Greater SATX that helped bring this together, as well as SAWs and CPS.

And folks have said this, and you'll hear it after I talk that Toyota has been a great partner for the last 20 years, and so I look forward to supporting this item today.

Just a couple of clarifying questions for the public because it's such a is such a huge investment.

For Alex, the 20 million dollars of self-supporting debt, what specific revenue stream did you say was pledged to service?

The additional the additional CPS revenue that will be generated through this project.

And is the reoccurring is there a reoccurring annual cost to our general fund operating budget at all?

Um for that debt, no.

That's why it's already it's all being included in that item 26.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

I think you know, for more than 20 years, Toyota has been a strong partner.

Um its presence has helped bring other manufacturers, including Navistar and JCB to the same part of the city, and I think we can expect a significant new investment like this from Toyota to signal to other major employers that our city has the resources, the talent, and the vision to be a reliable and effective city to do business with this investment represents a strong return for our residents.

Toyota is looking at roughly a $2 billion in private investment set against a city package of about 142 million dollars.

That's a close to 14 dollars of private investment for every public dollar we commit.

Just as important, I think most of the just as important most of our share is not cash out the door.

Um it is revenue we only forego once the $2 billion is actually built, and re in return, we gain a permanent expansion of our tax base and a forever revenue stream that continues long after these incentives have ended.

I think that's extremely important to note as our residents are watching uh what the votes that we take today.

So again, I want to thank uh city staff, Greater SATX, SAW CPS, obviously Toyota, our local uh partners that I see in the room today.

Um, thank you for your commitment to this city.

Um, I've known a lot of you folks for a long time, and the commitment is clear, and I think you love this city just as much as we all do, so thank you.

Um, so again, thank you for considering San Antonio, Toyota.

Thank you for considering San Antonio um for an investment of this scale.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Councilmember White.

Thanks, Mayor.

Um, I'll be brief.

Um, very excited about this.

Having having Toyota here in San Antonio for the last 23 years has been a huge win uh for our city.

Um, and the fact that we can do this today and allow Toyota to expand and hire more of our citizens again, another win for our people.

You know, we talk all the time about creating jobs for our citizens, good paying jobs.

We talk about uh bringing revenue um into our city.

Uh we know the the budget issues that we're having here um right now, and so how do we bring more revenue um into San Antonio into this region, help us do all the other things that we want to do?

It's things like this.

So uh I want to say thank you to Toyota, um, thank you to this council um for being so supportive of this.

Uh this is a win for our city, this is a win for our people, uh, and I look forward to um seeing all the great things the city of San Antonio and Toyota can do together moving forward.

Thanks, Mayor.

Thank you.

Councilmember Corps.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I'm want to thank city staff, Greater SATX, CDD department for all of your work and all the additional folks that Eric mentioned put their hard work into this.

Greater SATX, Sarah and your team, you've done an amazing job, and we've loved getting the opportunity to work for work with you on this.

Um, to the Toyota team, I want to say thank you for your investment into ready to work.

Ready to work is I think a very unique program that has the up potential to do so much for our community.

I actually had the chance to meet a son of a mom who works at Toyota as a part of the Ready to Work program, and that son has graduated from high school from Jefferson, is in college right now, starting his own business, and so as the Ready to Work Program was intended, it's truly changing generational lives.

So I want to thank you guys for the work that you have done in investing in our adult community that needs the opportunity to upskill.

I also um want to thank you for all of the investment that you've given into our community at large.

I had a chance to talk with one of your leaders at the Gemini Inc.

luncheon uh last year in front of the SA Book Festival.

And that book festival, although one of the ones that is potentially on the chopping block from the trial budget, has really changed lives for a lot of kids, and you all continue to invest in the community.

I also hope what you hear today is a group of folks that really believe in your company and that has continued to invest in you all as you have continued to invest in us.

This body really appreciates everything that you have done.

I wasn't on the council, obviously, when you guys first came to the city, but now having been able to vote for the 2024 rear axle plant and potentially this one today, it's an honor to be able to do that.

It's an honor to be able to work alongside of you guys to support our community and jobs for our community.

I also hope what you see is that in a time where we are having really tough conversations after this with a trial budget that's in a potentially a deficit, we still believe in you and believe in your organization and are willing to double down on our investment.

So when you're considering those potential other cities, just remember that we really want you all here.

And regardless of the conversations that have happen after this, this is a body that is going to do their due diligence, is going to make sure we get the best deal for our residents, and right now we believe that is doubling down on you all.

So, the our conversations after this do not mean that there is a a disbelief in our infrastructure that we cannot handle what you all need.

It is a sign that we really are going to do our diligence on every item.

And on this one, we feel confident that we have, and this is the a great package that we hope you will accept.

So thank you all for your investment again, and thank you to the team for everything that you've done.

Thanks, Mayor.

Thank you.

Councilmember Spears.

Thank you, Mayor.

It's hard to add to this because you can tell we're all just so excited about it.

I and myself included, but thank you again to city staff, Greater SATX, Mike, our economic development department, all of your hard work.

I know it takes a lot of work to get this accomplished.

So great job, Toyota, you've just been a strong corporate partner.

And it's been 20 years.

I can't believe that.

But uh, you know, it's not lost on me.

I have a family friend that works at Toyota, and that opportunity changed the trajectory of his life for himself, for his wife and his two kids.

So on a personal note, I'm grateful for that.

But you know, I often talk about the need to attract new businesses to San Antonio, and but I also believe showing that how we retain and expand our world-class employers already operating here is equally or more important.

And you've been a trusted partner for decades, and we're very fortunate to have you here.

Um 2,000 jobs is significant, it's a huge impact to our community in an area that needs it the most.

You've already demonstrated a great commitment to San Antonio, and it goes far beyond our operations, and it's through your workforce initiatives, education partnerships, and community involvement that this the company has become a part of the fabric of our city.

As you continue to expand, it's it's creating opportunities not just within the plant, but through the broader supply chain, and that's not lost on me.

It's opportunity for so many locally to support additional employers and our small businesses here and economic activity through our whole region.

So I just think it creates things for our residents and strengthens our workforce in a way that we can't accomplish on our own.

So we're grateful for that.

I appreciate your confidence in San Antonio, and I'm excited about the opportunities this investment creates for all of us and our workforce and the future generations.

I also want to shout out to TechStot, Bear County, and the city staff for their willingness to partner on this program, this project.

It's this kind of collaboration, is how we tackle our biggest transportation challenges.

So thank you for that.

Techstart has been a tremendous partner in San Antonio, and I really appreciate their continued investment in our infrastructure that supports our growing community.

Good infrastructure is not just about moving cars, it's about connecting people to jobs, supporting economic growth, and improving the quality of life.

And I think it's this long-term thinking behind this effort and the commute commitment to evaluating solutions that serve our community for decades to come that we really have to appreciate.

We've seen firsthand how important state transportation investments are to San Antonio and the region and to Bear County, and I look forward to our strong partnership with them.

This is just a great example of what can happen when a company sees value and continues to invest in San Antonio.

I appreciate so much all this hard work that's gone into this.

I know this has taken a lot.

So thank you again.

And it's encouraging to see a company of Toyota's size and reputation continue to choose San Antonio.

I'm really happy to support this item, and I look forward to seeing what this next face of phase of growth brings.

Thank you, Councilmember Castillo.

Thank you, and thank you, Alex, for the presentation.

I just wanted to emphasize the hard work of your team, and then of course, all the organizations and partners in this very large project, and of course, uh for being quick to respond to a handful of questions that my team had on very short notice.

So, just thank you to your team for y'all's due diligence and of course getting back to my team and I with those questions.

Uh, there were a couple of components within this agreement that I wanted to uplift, particularly Toyota's commitment to pay 100% of the additional 2,000 full-time employees uh entry wage of at least 3236 an hour, with that wage being indexed to count for future wage growth.

So uh really grateful to see that.

I'm also pleased that the agreement includes requirements that safety programs for the construction on site to include the OSHA 10 safety courses and the programs that will also address heat-related illnesses and these were changes to the incentive program that my team worked alongside labor and your team, Alex, to ensure that we can include this in any future incentive agreement.

So grateful to see that apply to this proposal.

Further, the city's tax abatement agreement with Toyota includes a commitment from Toyota to include 10% of its annual tax abatement value towards wraparound services each year.

And I understand the agreement supports community priorities that were identified in 2024 and approved by council.

But I'm hopeful that as part of the focus, Toyota and the City of San Antonio will continue to strengthen a local justice involved employment program, such as the one with Toyota Tsu, Toyota Supplier, and that they currently run.

So hopeful that that's a program that can be strengthened and also tied to this project as well.

Providing support for local high-quality child care providers who offer affordable high-quality care to working families, and I know that is a priority for you all.

And then, of course, increase the company's support to career training education program with our local ISDs.

And I'm grateful to see the work that's taking place with Somerset ISD and their trades program and their CDE programs, rather, but to continue to strengthen those partnerships with our ISDs.

The agreement requires the wraparound support plan at least 60 days prior to the first year of the abatement term, with investment completed by December 2031.

And I understand this is an agreement that will then require staff approval.

But my ask to Eric is if when this agreement comes forward, if it can come with the chair's agreement to EWDC, that we can review what those expectations are for council discussion and consideration.

Sure, absolutely, Councilwoman.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

And again, to emphasize what my colleagues have already highlighted, that we know that Toyota's commitment to the community is strong, and that's evident in the investment and education community, quality wages and benefits to our community members.

And then I wanted to highlight uh one of the programs, y'all's driving possibilities program with the East Central ISD, and that made, and also the additional uh donation of 70,000 to the Alamo Communities College Foundation to support STEM students uh and their training programs at Palo Alto and St.

Philip's as part of uh the Toyota experience.

So uh grateful and looking forward to the proposed plan and revisiting what those wraparound services uh can look like.

Um, and again, just wanted to emphasize um uh the work of Alex and her team because I had a handful of questions and they got back to me because I was particularly interested in the E16 writer, uh, the additional megawatts that that would uh potentially bring on board.

So uh appreciate the team answering those questions.

Uh those are my comments.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, thank you for the presentation and thank you to everyone for your work on this.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Voss, for being here.

It means a lot that you're here today.

Uh, I want to convey to you that I am a natural no vote on incentive packages, and I have to be convinced.

It's not easy to get me to agree to uh some of these major incentives, and I want you to understand the weight with which I view items like this.

And I'll start by conveying uh the challenge that's been alluded to that we have and what makes this vote such a significant decision by this council.

We are, as as many know, navigating a budget deficit in which our revenue is not keeping pace with our expenses.

And naturally, there are two primary ways to address this.

It's by uh significantly increasing our revenue through either the property tax, sales tax, or utility contributions, which poses a challenge as many face economic uh economic hardship and many can't afford to spend much more money on bills.

The second way is to decrease expenses by cutting city programs, which poses its own challenge as constituents rely on these services and these programs that have high expectations of service from us, and the cutting of departments often means job cuts, and that's more people losing income and facing financial uncertainty.

And so we're gonna be navigating that conversation in just a few minutes.

And so I view these consent packages with scrutiny, and I want to be sure that the number of jobs created and their wages and every other community benefit that we negotiate will in fact outweigh what we are asking our constituents at the end of the day to contribute to the deal.

And so speaking generally about any deal, will the jobs generated be associated with greater homeownership that increases our property tax base, or will the wages be enough for the employees to be able to spend enough to significantly increase our sales tax revenue?

And will both of those outweigh the property taxes that we're abating for a corporation of this size?

Will the capital projects that we spend millions of dollars on take from other much-needed infrastructure projects?

And I appreciate the slide that demonstrates when these benefits begin to manifest during construction, once employees are hired and post-abatement.

My challenge for future deals as you navigate many of those, right?

Uh, will be how do we make that some of those benefits occur faster?

And I would also like to establish a longer term master plan that shows us what combination of economic incentive packages and what quantity should we be aspiring to in order to significantly increase our revenue so that we aren't year after year balancing a budget and deficit.

That being said, I'm going to vote yes on uh today's incentive package because I feel everyone involved uh has done a great job negotiating beyond our expectations.

Uh many of the benefits, including the capital investment, the jobs created, and the wages, especially an entry wage above $32 an hour, is you know, some of these are phenomenal and aren't very common.

And Toyota has been a strong partner and one of the major employers choosing to invest in our residents.

I tell my constituents in my district all the time that the reason that we don't have uh the grocery stores, the movie theaters, the amenities, and the investment of private corporations and developers in our district is that they don't see the value in our community until we've been gentrified and new residents move in, new people that they deem worthy move into our district.

And you can't force investment, you can't force people to invest in communities that they don't care about or believe in.

And so those industries, employers, and companies that do choose to invest in you, you value them.

And so I appreciate the partnership that we've had with Toyota over the past 20 plus years, and this is us as an organization investing in you and in your success, and as you contemplate any number of cities willing to have you at the table, our hope is that you continue to choose and invest in us.

So thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

Would anyone else like to speak on the second round?

Okay, great.

Um, thank you, Alex, for the presentation.

Thank you as well to all the community partners that made uh that got us to this day.

Uh, it's a lot of work, and and yes, has been described this was a little bit of a start and stop, right?

Over a year ago, I guess is when this, before many of us were in the seat, actually, this was uh discussed, and so now we're here today.

Uh, 2,000 jobs is certainly something to be very excited about, um, especially when you think about a company that is um uh that has the reputation that that Toyota does.

I do, as alluded to by my colleague, want to make sure the public has sufficient transparency in terms of of what we are what we are doing here though.

Um, Alex, can you clarify for everybody um the exception that we made on the wages front?

So typically our incentive policy asks that we look at simply base wages, and we do index that amount annually.

Um, it's roughly $25 right now.

But in particular, for jobs like these, um, in a lot of in advanced manufacturing jobs, there is a lot of um cash compensation associated with shift deferentials with overtime and bonus.

So we wanted to uh use a formula that included those um that compensation to be more comprehensive and accurate.

Great.

Um, thank you, Alex.

And I uh just to put a finer point on it, uh, we were comfortable with making the exception because with the base wages and in accordance with our policy, we get there after six months, correct, Alex?

Okay, thank you.

Additionally, some may be wondering about the incumbent worker training program, which we um many of us were excited to kill and how that is still included here, and that is because uh that was included in the previous package, and again, wanting to be as successful as possible, we um decided it was in the best interest of this deal and our competitiveness to go ahead and include that.

So that is that is why that is still there.

I think for us, there's also been a very um important lesson here uh in terms of the 10% investment of the abatement.

Um, when you see there, it really speaks to the city's investment.

Unfortunately, due to Texas code, we were not able to account for SAWs and CPS's contribution as part of that.

Um, so that is something I've talked to Councilman McKee Rodriguez about including in our ledge agenda, because that is us leaving roughly 6.3 million dollars on the table because we could not account for that.

We could not rather count that toward the 10% that would have gone into things as mentioned by some of my colleagues, like child care and some of the other wraparound services that would have contributed to the quality of life of the employees.

So that is a lesson learned for us.

Um I do um, as mentioned, somebody uh councilwoman core alluded to certainly connecting this topic with an item that we will discuss shortly.

Um I remember, you know, as the Undersecretary of the Air Force, we would make our basing decisions um with great care.

And one of those not only would that environment support operations, but what how would that um uh location also support quality of life?

And certainly this is not a done deal.

We're thankful, uh Frank and team to where we are now.

Uh, grateful for the feedback by US and Japanese leadership.

That is again encouraged by what the city has done.

And I certainly don't want us to trip over ourselves or step on our own feet uh as a result of um sending sending any mixed signals about our ability to well manage and invest in the infrastructure that you need, not only uh when your employees are at work, but certainly when they're at home.

When they're at home, they also at home need clean drinking water, they need their toilets to flush, all those things.

And so we need to make sure that we are thinking strategically, certainly about this investment, but also the connectedness to the rate increase that we will consider here shortly with our water system.

Okay, thank you.

There's a motion and a second, hearing no further items.

Please vote.

Sorry, we good.

The motion carries.

Good morning.

The time is 1110, and we are back from recess, item eight is a briefing on the FY27 trial budget.

Um, staff over to you.

Mayor, thank you.

Uh, Freddie, as Freddie goes up to the podium, um, this is a continuation of the conversation that we had a couple weeks ago at the council budget work session, which was a great conversation, and we're thankful for the feedback we received from you.

We're bringing back to you today a trial budget and some recommendations, um, but also trying to answer some of the questions from the work session.

And so, looking forward to today's conversation.

Um, the next steps for us would be the development of the proposed budget that I would deliver to you on August 13th.

So we've got about a little over a little under two months to kind of finalize.

We are still dealing with some of the the challenges, and some of several of you pointed them out uh earlier uh already at the council meeting.

Freddie will cover those high level and we'll walk through where we're at with the trial budget and the recommendations.

Go ahead, Trent.

Freddie.

Thank you.

Uh good morning, Mayor and City Council.

My name is Freddie Martinez, and I'm the budget director for the city of San Antonio.

In today's trial budget presentation, we'll include a recap of the goal sitting session from May 22nd at the convention center.

Um we'll talk about the 27th uh trial budget and a little bit on the next steps in the budget process that the manager just alluded to.

Just a couple things on the uh trial budget.

Um, just a reminder, it's it's not a it's not a budget yet.

We'll come back in August with the proposed budget.

So it's just a preliminary preliminary allocation of resources.

However, unlike the five-year forecast that we did last month, we're focusing on the two-year plan for FY27 and FY28.

We build on those assumptions that were included in the five-year forecast that were what we presented last month.

And in addition, we will incorporate we've incorporated the city council uh feedback and discussion that occurred at the goal setting session last month.

Today's trial budget will also give an opportunity for the mayor and council to provide additional feedback so that we can take that back as the manager mentioned over the next roughly two months and produce a proposed budget that'll be presented to you on August the 13th.

Just a recap of the goal setting session session from May 22nd.

So we have city council priorities as identified and community priorities that were identified as part of the budget survey conducted by uh C communications and engagement.

Uh on the city council side, you can see uh priorities included public safety, which include police, fire, and animal care services, infrastructure for streets and sidewalks, human services, which includes services for seniors, housing and homeless services, and then finally parks, community spaces, and library.

On the right there of the slide, you'll see that the community priorities were for the most part in line with what the council priorities are, and those included homeless services, affordable housing, police services, streets, and then fire and EMS.

Also during the goal setting session, we provided a program inventory analysis for 21 general fund departments.

The analysis included a program inventory for about 1.55 billion, which is about 92% of the $1.69 billion general fund budget.

Of these amounts, about 1.1 billion or 72% were considered mandated city services, of which 39.8% of those were priority city services.

Of the other 427, roughly million dollars, 27.6 are for non-mandated city services, of which 12.4% of those are for priority city services.

Moving on to the trial budget.

So the recommendation today is we recommend the use of a property tax increase that utilizes the unused increment as well as the state allowed revenue growth so that we can maintain our operations.

I do want to uh point out that uh any property tax increase would not uh affect our seniors or disabled, which accounts for about 46% of our homesteads for the rest of us.

Um that um property tax increase as presented in the trial budget would equate to about six dollars and seventy-five cents a month.

I just want to uh reiterate what you've heard in the past that um the property tax role is not final, that won't happen until the end of July.

So the finance department budget and city leadership will continue to work on those numbers, and you'll see those as part of the proposed budget in in August.

Um, the trial budget maintains mandated city services as well as priorities city services.

You'll see in some of the preceding slides.

Um potential reductions to other city services, and then we also have some potential adjusted and new revenues that I'll I'll walk you through here in a second.

Overall, for our uh 27 trial budget, this will include the recommended uh property tax increase using the unused increment as well as the 3.5% revenue growth.

Um, but before that, at the current tax rate, based on our current information from the appraisal district, we're projecting that our base values or base property values will decline, resulting in an approximately $8.2 million or $1.7 million dollar reduction to property tax revenue.

The next the next row would be the property tax rate increase that we're recommending with the 3.5% as well as the unused increment, which will generate about $53.8 million over two years or actually for next year, excuse me.

And then our sales tax, we're projecting a modest 2% increase in sales tax from 4.16.7 to 425.

CPS revenue, we are as part of the trial budget projecting a uh a slight 2% decrease or about 11 million dollars of um from the FY26 estimate of 559 million.

And then finally, we do have a uh a small point eight percent decrease in other revenues, and I'll explain the new revenues here in a sec, but we are including in the trial budget for 27, 9.8 million dollars worth of potential uh new and adjusted revenues.

So here are the uh potential fee adjustments used for uh to obtain cost recovery.

Um, in total over two years, they total 21.9 million dollars, and so that's included in the trial budget.

They include such items such as our EMS transport fee.

The proposal at this point would be to go from $1,500 of transport to $1,700 of transport, which would generate a little over $5 million over two years.

Uh, make uh adjustments to our prior fire prevention fee revenues that go to the general fund, about 2.6 over two years, and also make some adjustments to our fire hazardous material fees.

Um next would be uh another uh potential increase to the parks environmental fee.

It's currently $2, and the proposal here would be to go to $2.50 over two years.

So $2.25 per month in 27, and then $250 per month in 28, which generates $2 million and $27 and $4 million in 28.

We also have a proposal included in the trial budget for a library non-San Antonio resident fee of $10 annually.

And we anticipate that that would generate about a million dollars a year.

Another line that's new there that you'll see is to obtain additional cost recovery for city support for feast events.

So these will include the general fund expenditures that are allocated for events in Fiesta like parades and other events that are taking place during during the celebration.

So doing that cost share with those organizations would generate about 1.4 over two over two years.

And finally, we have a couple other adjustments.

We'll be looking at uh credit card fees, waste hauler permits, and um one other thing that we're going to be doing this summer is that we're going to be working with our departments to try to identify additional sources of of revenue, looking at rates and and uh and other revenues that haven't been uh fee adjusted in quite some time where we're not anywhere near cost recovery or at cost recovery, but we'll bring those back to you during the proposed budget in August.

This next slide talks about the anticipated general fund increase in expenditures that it's included in the trial budget.

Um, as you can see, compensation and employee benefits are gonna be the major cost drivers, and they're accounting for about 83 million dollars of this um 105.7 million dollar increase.

We also have some mandated costs of 10.8 million.

This includes operations and maintenance for some of our 22 bond projects that are coming online, our parks and linear quick weight development, and as well as some grant matches, and then we have other categories such as inflationary costs, contractual increases, technology, equipment, building maintenance fuel, all those put together total about 23.6 million.

And currently in the trial budget, we're uh anticipating a requirement of 11.7 million dollars in reductions to balance the two-year budget.

I talked a little bit earlier about the property uh tax increase at $58.3 million.

Um, our proposal would be to use those dollars to partially pay for some of the increases in our public safety.

So you'll see collective bargaining and healthcare benefits in our public safety uh section is fifty-five million.

Civilian comp mandated costs are about and inflationary and contractual increases are between four and five million, and then there's other costs for equipment, building technology, and other costs that are included as part of that $80 million projected increase in our public safety budgets.

So this slide illustrates our uh trial budget.

I'll call your attention to the top, to the top of the slide.

Um, the projected resources, so you'll see a note there that this does not include any um any of the reductions that we had in the two-year plan or any revenue enhancements.

Um, so we would be facing a deficit in 28 of 157.7 million.

So the strategies to balance our budget over over two years would be as I mentioned to utilize the property tax use of the unused increment, as well as the state allowed revenue growth of 3.5%.

Um, new revenues that we've identified that were on the previous slide will total $21.9 million over two years.

And then we will we would also have to do uh reductions of about $23.4 million over two years.

And then you see there, there's a number because of the increases and decreases that you see above, we would have to adjust our our financial reserves to maintain our $15% that's required under our financial policies.

What we also heard at the goal setting session last month is like what would it be?

What would it look like if there was no property tax increase and we had to uh cut our way out of the deficit?

Um, just keep in mind this is not what we're recommending today, but this is just kind of a a look at what those potential cuts would look like.

So currently um we're doing comprehensive budget reviews with the library, municipal court, police, fire, and human resources.

So we're anticipating at this point to generate about 3.6 million annually in savings or 7.2.

Um, there's also some uh street maintenance um programming in the general fund that's eligible that for debt that we can transfer to the capital budget, and we're also doing a uh detailed line item review with all departments across the city, kind of part of our new hybrid budget budget methodology that we're doing.

So we're taking a look at that, and between those two, we think we can save about 16 million dollars over two years.

Next, there are 46 vacant positions across approximately 15 general fund departments.

Um they're not critical positions, non-critical positions is what we're looking at, they're vacancies, um, not anything really vacant currently.

I mean, not currently, but from the last couple months, these are things that have been vacant six months to a year mostly.

Um, so we think we can generate about uh uh a little under eight million dollars in uh savings there.

Um we would propose a hiring freeze, pick up a million dollars in 27 and two million dollars in 28.

Um we're also working on some department reorganizations.

Um overall, we anticipate that we could save $7.9 million.

If we did those, it would affect approximately uh 46 positions, however.

Um, under that delegate agency discretionary funding, um, there's a portion of our delegate agency funding that's for discretionary contracts.

So, as part of this proposal or this uh scenario, um we would uh forego those 4.9 million dollars in discretionary um to those nonprofit partners that participate in delegate agency funding.

Um the biggest number on here, or the two biggest numbers are what's left is going to be we have looked at the program inventories and identify some program service level reductions.

Um these are across several general fund departments.

Um as you can see there, it does impact um a lot of positions.

Now we're still in the process, and we'll work over the summer to um if we need to go through this route to um work with the departments, work with it with leadership to determine the uh the impacts that we would have to city services if we were to reduce some of these or all of these programs.

So we would come back to you in August if um with some of those.

Finally, to achieve and to mitigate the deficit without a property tax increase, we would need to forego civilian compensation increases in FY27 as well as FY28.

And um, so all told those cuts would add up to about 138 million dollars, and there would be 209 positions affected if we were to go down this scenario and do these changes.

So next steps um what we're seeking for today is city council input on the staff recommendation.

Just as a reminder, that includes increase in the city property tax rate, um, the new and adjusted revenues that were presented today, as well as any potential reductions that were listed today.

Um, and as a reminder, once again, we'll be back, we'll go back and we're gonna work with the budget team, departments, and executive leadership to produce a proposed budget that will be presented by the city manager on August the 13th.

So, mayor and council, that concludes the presentation.

I believe I'll turn it back over to Eric.

Yep, thank you, Freddie, for the presentation.

So, I mean, I I think I think the the early work that we've done in the spring, the the very good conversation you all had as a group at the work session today puts us in a good position, a great position to balance the budget of the next two years.

And there are multiple pieces on the on the uh of the game on the on the table here.

Just to reminder that the thing that's kind of balancing uh the balancing piece for me is that just generally agnostically, our expenses are growing faster than revenues.

So we need to do both things.

We need to decrease our revenue.

I'm sorry, decrease our expenses and increased revenue where where we have an opportunity.

And as you heard from uh Freddie, just based on the last two and a half weeks worth of work, we've identified identified about two 22 million dollars over the next two years of new and adjusted revenue.

Um I think both property tax elements that that we've talked about, both the up to the three and a half percent state allowed and the use of the increment, an impact of six dollars and seventy-five cents.

But those two are very different, right?

If we if we use one and rather than the other, if the the um the increment is valued is gonna have a potential impact of three dollars and sixty-six dollars per month on on a household.

Um, the three and a half percent um has a three dollar and eight cents per month impact.

Um, and then the the reductions that um that that uh Freddie laid out on slide twelve, there's a lot of things on there that we're gonna need to do regardless of that we should do regardless.

The comprehensive budget reviews that we've done this year of police, fire, municipal court, human resources, and library, uh, you know, regardless of which path we take, you will likely see you are going to see those reductions because that's why we go through that effort is to identify the the uh the efficiencies.

We're gonna take every opportunity to take uh uh dollars out of our operating budget and move them into capital um uh to to save operating dollars.

We started that uh two years ago, we did some of that this year.

What Freddie laid out to you is the kind of the last piece that's remaining in the general fund, and we're gonna take advantage of that.

Um I we have 217 vacant positions in the general fund right now, and you saw on the slide.

We're we're we're gonna be recommending we eliminate 45 46 of those positions.

Um that's okay to do because I think we've got to ebb and flow and bring our expense rate down.

Um, and as and I'll just echo what Freddie said.

A lot of the work that we're gonna need to do over the next two months is make sure we're communicating to you all uh and ultimately to the public uh what those reductions mean in terms of uh service impacts.

And we we focused uh we will focus reductions, not in the mandated city service category and not in the priority city service category, but in that third category of all the other things that we're doing, kind of like we've done over the last two and a half weeks.

So appreciate the work of the budget office and the executive staff to get prepared for today.

So I hand it back over to you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you, Eric.

Appreciate that presentation, Freddie.

Uh a couple of clarifying points.

The uh, thankful for our CPS revenue, which is at this point the greatest contributor, right?

Uh, to to the budget.

Um we see that going down though, uh, from one year to the next, just for the public's benefit.

Could you please explain why that happens?

Yes, and um if you recalled last month when we did the five-year forecast and the goal setting, um, we uh picked up in the estimate the CPS revenue because of milder weather off-system sales that CPS energy is producing, selling that our ratepayers are not paying for they're selling that energy out into the market.

So we're a little bit more conservative with those offsystems and and not considering the same type of weather patterns that we do.

So it's it's a eleven million dollars is a lot, but it's about two percent of that uh 559 million dollar estimate.

My understanding there's also a tax credit.

Yeah, there was also a nuclear tax credit that CPS received from the federal government that is it had never happened before, and and and we're not banking that it's gonna happen forever.

Okay, wanted to provide that clarity, thank you.

Um, do we have anybody here from our our ledge team?

Maybe Sally or Jeff, you want to speak to it.

Jeff, they gave you the cheap seats, man.

Good morning, good morning.

Um, can you talk to us a little bit about um the the risk associated with potentially not taking uh the increment left, um i.e., you know, what has that looked like in the previous legislative session?

What can we expect to us for us to understand is there a threat risk of us losing it if we don't take it now?

It it rolls away as it's three years, right?

So so after the third year, that increment is gone.

So it's a it's a use it or lose it in the law.

Um it came about because when the legislature lowered the rollback rate from the previous eight percent to three and a half, uh a lot of government entities, including ours said three and a half is something we can live within, but we will never capture capture the ups, and we'll always deal with the downs, meaning property values are up during a hot real estate market, they're above 3.5%.

We can't capture that revenue, but if it's below that 3.5%, we have to live within that.

And so the legislature said we're gonna add this increment model to that to it so that you can tap into the unused property taxes when you've uh voluntarily kept your rate below the state allowed uh number and apply that to sort of smooth out the ups and downs of the real estate market.

So it's there today.

Obviously, anything can change at the legislature uh in terms of your question about risk, but um that tool is there for cities to be able to balance out the ups and downs.

And mayor, there were in previous legisl in the previous previous legislative session.

Stay up there, Jeff, for a second, to correct me.

But but we have it on both ends uh because in the last legislative session there was a bill that almost got to the finish line that reduced three and a half to two and a half, and then there was discussions and bills that would eliminate that increment that that uh is there for the reason Jeff just explained.

So there's there will be a risk in the future legislative sessions.

Yeah, so that's exactly right.

I think the one thing I would add is that the legislature had always seen it as this is this is local control that local officials have.

We're giving you the ability to adjust your rate to draw the amount of revenue you need.

We just don't want uh it to go up uncontrolled without any changes to the rate, if that makes sense.

Yep.

Got it.

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

Um, and just for for plain speak for the public that's watching, one of the um recommendations is transferring um items from our operational uh budget to the to the debt.

That essentially means not paying for it with cash today, but putting it on our credit card, uh, correct, Eric.

Uh yes, ma'am.

Okay, but we don't have a credit card that does that, just so that the other side too bad somebody already submitted the ORR.

Um, okay, Councilman Viegran.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation.

Uh this budget is is of course I knew was on the horizon after uh COVID and ARPA.

I didn't know it would come at the in this time where we would be in military conflicts around the world, which we should not be in, but that's another conversation.

So to go to slide the last slide where you want input from seeking slide 13.

Increasing city property tax rate.

Yes, I am for using the unused increments and uh seeing where we can do that.

In terms of new revenues, I think we need to look at our permitting process.

I think we have uh opportunities there with garage sale permits, uh, with permits of all the vendors that line up Southwest Military Drive and that.

So I think we need to look at that.

And then with the reductions, I think we just do we do need to look at our departments and spend this summer right sizing uh our right sizing just our commodities and our contracts and what we need, what can be done in-house, what what do we need to use our on call for, doing that in a timely manner?

I think that's the uh opportunity we have.

Uh when we talk about our economic in ecosystems and we talk about our budget, I want to be clear that a household budget is not a city budget, which is not a business budget.

So, my what I'm going to do for my summer project is I am going to work with my community stakeholders, and I'm so glad so many of the businesses are out here to do maybe a really budget workshop with the residents of district three where they come in together, they look at their household budget, and while the city gets their right size, that maybe we at in our our own homes look at how we write size our um commodities and our uh subscriptions and things like that.

So that I'll I look forward to seeing my residents in my field office this summer for that.

But what I would like, and if we can go to slide six, before I have that workshop, if we could pull up slide six, the uh trial budget, is we have that six seventy-five per month on average homestead, but do I have a percentage?

So if if residents are doing a worksheet and they know their their house is pretty small, pretty old, maybe only you know their taxes it's it's it's worth $80,000.

That happens on the south side.

Um, what would their increase look like?

So with the increment and the three and a half percent, it's about a six percent increase.

A six percent?

And that's using the average homestead.

Okay, so that that's the one thing I'd like them to see is like if I know my my um my property taxes are going to go up six percent.

What does that look like monthly?

So thank you for that.

Um, the other thing is I think we do need to look at um our seniors in disabilities, uh, those living with disabilities and making sure they're using the tax freeze.

And I look I look forward to working with the county on that as we take that information out you know for me this really is um I'm not for I don't want to cut any staff I I can understand hiring freezes and I know we have vacant positions but uh I I'm I'm okay with the hiring freeze but if we go to the slide uh 11 with the uh or no it's um 11 or 12 filled positions vacant positions I don't like the idea of of uh putting any of our employees um out there looking for a job when we know I know in district three alone we need there are departments that are understaffed so before we do that and I want to make sure that where we're needed in the departments that we're needed in terms of the the the hiring freeze that was that we do that before we start looking at um reductions that eliminate filled positions and that's six that 68 uh is problematic for me the 44s they're all problem anything that has a filled position where we're looking at cutting because we need to make our budget I just I I feel like the quality of service and no civilian compensation increase that's unacceptable we can ask the residents of San Antonio everything is going up in price we can ask them to increase that so they can that they can increase their property tax to maintain the quality of service that they have and to ask our civilians to take on more responsibility but we were not going to give you just a simple living wage increase is um is problematic and that would include LGC employees also.

Yes ma'am okay yeah that that is problematic so that is why I think this conversation where if the property tax rate is not increased where we're going to do this and then again if you bring me something where we're gonna cut projects we have to use an equity lens and a safety lens where we're cutting projects and that is also if we if we don't increase the property tax then we're going to have to do it from projects that that are flood projects that are sidewalk projects that are street projects that need to be done and what I would need is if this body cannot give you alternatives and there but they tell you they're not going to give you a property tax rate increase you need to tell me how much it's gonna cost in 2030 to fix the that street or to get that drainage because the price is not is only going to go up they're not falling concrete's only getting more expensive and we can sit here and we can hope oh the technology and we'll do this we all know that the first version of any techno technological program that's gonna help us do things better is expensive so I need to I want to do this smarter I want to do this um fairly but what I need to what I need you to understand is that the power of the city of San Antonio is in the people power and eliminating staff is not the answer.

So I am for the property tax increase I still think my city store idea is a great idea I don't know where Alex is I think we could get a lot of revenue from that but um again we just we need to start being creative and I I can give you a list of projects that I think might be um delayed but I I would still want that number that says if we delay this another year if we don't do this drainage project this year, this is how much it's gonna cost the year after.

And so um I nobody wants to raise taxes.

I understand that.

Everybody's stretched, me included, but we have to prioritize and we have to budget, and we have to get our residents in and ask them where are we spending money.

And the vendors had no problem making money these past few weeks.

So there are places that we can we can look at our budget and and be more effective.

And San Antonio is resilient and San Antonians know how to hustle.

And so um I think I think we will we need to have those conversations.

I'm look forward to hearing from my council colleagues and their solutions uh for that last slide.

Thank you.

Mayor, one thing I just the councilwoman was talking about um the uh senior and disabled tax freeze, just to remind the council of a stat that we share with you at the work session.

Uh 46% of our homesteads um are frozen in terms of city taxes because of the senior and the disabled tax freeze.

So when we talk about potential adjustments to the rate, um those that 40 46% of the homesteads will not be impacted because we've got that that freeze in place.

Thank you, Eric.

Uh, councilwoman Aldarte Gavito.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Freddie, for um the presentation.

Obviously, this isn't a great position for us to be in.

Uh, but you know, we were elected to represent our residents and to uh manage our city budget, and that includes making tough decisions.

So I I am appreciative of the diligent analysis.

Um I'm fully aware that this was tough and uncomfortable uh a tough and uncomfortable exercise to go through.

Um and I know that we're probably gonna have to go through some more iterations.

So um, you know, I but again we we have to make tough choices right now.

I am fully supportive of the fee adjustments on slide eight.

But in addition to that, I'd like us to explore other increases.

I know that my colleagues and I up here always hear feedback, and and Judge O'Gledo don't don't um uh don't get mad at me.

Uh, but my colleagues and I always hear feedback about speeding and code compliance issues.

So I don't I I'd like us to use this opportunity to do something about it and look at exploring an increase on speeding tickets and code compliance tickets.

Um I fully understand that judges will have the discretion to rule on what fine to impose, but if we want to disincentivize speeding, well then let's make it hurt.

If we want to disincentivize code compliance issues in our neighborhoods, then let's make it hurt.

Um, but you know, I I think I I'm saying all that because I just want us to explore what's legally feasible.

I I'm fully aware that there may be some legal restrictions, but um again, I think that this is a good time to look at that that kind of stuff, especially um so that maybe we can also uh be complaining about it a little bit less.

On uh slide 12, I'm fully supportive of everything on there, and I think that we can do more on um on some of these uh reductions and and um and all of the line items.

The only thing I am not uh in favor of is no civilian compensation increase.

Um I think that our city employees are going to have to do more with less resources and less um partners to lean on to get the job done.

So I do think, and I'm gonna stand firm that we um we treat our city employees fair and give them the cost of of living wage increase.

Um there might be less headcount at the city uh at the end of this all, but um, but that that should not take away from taking care of the city employees that we do have.

So um I just wanted to let y'all know I'm I'm not in favor of that, but right now I still think that we need to go through a couple a couple more iterations of this tough exercise, and so I I can't be supportive of a property tax increase right now.

Um, but I know we're still at the very very beginning of it, um, and there's still more work to do.

That's all my comments.

Thanks.

Councilman White.

Thank you, Mayor.

Well, uh, from the get-go, I'm gonna say that I'm absolutely opposed to any sort of property tax increase.

Uh I think we're living in a uh tough economic times right now, certainly, and raising the cost of living on people is unacceptable.

Uh, particularly when I don't believe um that we've done everything that we can as a city government to eliminate um all of the waste, the redundant spending, um, and frankly, made some of the hard decisions on the nice to have.

And my staff, and I and I want to say before I go further, that I am very thankful for city staff and and the work that's been done over the past couple of months because I I know that this is difficult, and a lot of work has been done uh to find uh these inefficiencies that I'm talking about to try to consolidate in different areas and to try to find um money to close this budget gap.

But I think that there's more that we can do.

And I'll tell you, my my staff did some great work, and we looked around at other cities across the country because they're they're facing similar challenges.

Um just to name a couple here.

Um Colorado Springs, they have a 31 million dollar shortfall uh that they were able to reduce with workforce reductions, furloughs, deferred compensation increase, uh, and some facility closures.

San Diego as well eliminated some um recreational services, arts funding, and others uh in Austin voters rejected a property tax increase, and now um their city government is looking at um at cutting some of some of the similar things there.

But I particularly want to want to point out something from Colorado Springs, because they eliminated what they call the Meadow Park Community Center, and I'll tell you why I want to bring this up.

And it says here the community center um is gonna close following an evaluation of program participation, staffing constraints, and availability of similar services at other nearby community centers.

But the reason I bring that up today is because these are the type of hard decisions that they were able to make, that they had to make, that I think our council needs to look at.

If it was brought before us to close a community center, I think we would all immediately say, whoa, no, we don't want to do that because we know the value that these community centers have for our residents.

But I use that as an example of the tough decisions that I believe we need to get to.

If we do this property tax increase based on our own staff's um financial analysis, all right, we are still going to have a general fund deficit of a hundred and fifty-five million dollars in 2031.

So a property tax increase it's just a band-aid to get us through the next couple of years.

It doesn't solve the problem.

We have a structural issue here with the way our city government is spending money.

We've got a right size.

We've got to make the tough decisions like some of these other cities are, and I do believe that we're on the path to doing so, and our budget team has done has done a great job of putting us on that path, but there is more to be done, and the time to do it is right now, and we should not use that band-aid and raise taxes on the citizens of San Antonio.

So with that uh I'll leave you with.

I I do agree on on the fee adjustments.

Um, I think that that is a a reasonable area where we can um where we can raise some some revenue.

Um I'm of course, a no uh on the tax increases, and I will say again, an area where we need more is in public safety, and I get the argument of well, Mark, we're in a budget deficit.

How can we add in any area?

And again, I'll say, when public safety is your number one priority, when you're putting a budget together, you start with what you need for public safety, and then you build out everything else around it, and that's what we should be doing here.

And so, with respect to the trial budget, and what I'd like to see in the fall is I would like to see funding for the additional 65 police officers.

That's all I've got, Mayor.

Thanks.

Council Councilmember McKee Rodriguez.

Sorry, Meso Gonzalez, excuse me.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, mayor.

Thank you for the presentation.

Um I think we've all stated this already, and again, we'll folks after me will say this is a hard time for everybody.

Uh we know budgets are tight for everyone personally, and we we see items on the news, right?

Alamo colleges is going through this, Bear County is going through this, some of the school districts are also talking about these um property tax increases, and and we're one of those entities as well.

So a couple of clarifying questions for the public.

Um I think on the potential fee adjustments listed.

Uh are there any other potential fee adjustments that are not listed, but we're we're talking through.

Yes, councilwoman.

There are other things that we're looking at that we'll be doing over the course of the summer.

Um, another thing we'll be doing is is one part of the budget process that we do is the budget office meets with every department and we go through any potential revenue adjustments that they can propose, and then we'll bring that to city leadership, and ultimately a lot of those will will be presented on the 13th of August.

I know that um a while back we take my daughter to the San Pedro driving range, and we had a municipal golf pass that we used for the year.

Um I didn't know if that was an option, you know, my colleagues would consider of uh having like a some sort of monthly parking pass for our parks.

Um maybe not so much.

I mean, that gives you some access all over the city, but um, and we make it like a monthly or a yearly pass, excuse me.

Um so I'd like for us to consider what that looks like.

I don't know if we have before or that's we can we'll have discussions with parks and rec and we can certainly bring that up and have a conversation on it.

Okay, thank you.

Um the library non-resident fee, how does that uh how's that implemented?

So the non-resident fee is currently proposed would be um kind of like um so the library is able to track those users that are not in the city limits, so they would uh impose if this would come to fruition and be passed as part of the budget, they would impose that ten dollar annual fee kind of kind of what like you just described to that parks parking pass.

It's a ten dollar fee, and it would be for uh Barrac County residents that are outside city limits.

And councilwoman, as we go through the budget and look at this, the the actual implementation of it is almost as important as what the dollar amount is.

So um I would anticipate if we do it, we wouldn't make it effective October one.

You we do like a January one that we didn't have to be notices, we want to make sure the people are advised of it, and then have a mechanism for them to be able to uh be aware of that uh impending potential charge when they're checking out books in September and October so that everybody's got a preparation, but we're gonna think through the execution of that as we go through the next two months.

And if I may, councilwoman is another example of a fee needs to be cost recovery, and the reason one of the reasons we can do that is because we are not recouping our current costs in terms of non-city residents.

Okay, thank you.

Um on the slide, I outlining the reductions, I think it's slide 11.

What is the um program service level reductions?

Can you provide some examples of that?

So, as a mayor, I mean, excuse me, as the manager alluded to, those are going to be out of that bucket of other city services.

So there's a variety of other city services across some general fund departments that would be part of that.

So as we go through the summer, we'll be looking at um reductions that we can do.

But these would be program-specific reductions that we would do.

So they would reduce the service level, but we would need to use the summer to look at what the impact would be of those reductions, and then that would be presented as part of the uh 20 2027 proposed budget.

Okay, thank you.

Um I think you know we've got the email from CNE about our um budget town halls, and my budget town hall and district eight is August 20th, and we're June 18th, right?

So these next two months, what are residents hearing from us from the city outside of a survey.

I don't know if anyone can help answer that question.

Well, councilwoman, we won't have after today, we're gonna start working on the proposed budget.

So um I think this was a conversation during the council work session a couple weeks ago.

If if you all want um to host budget conversations during the month of July or or have us organize in your districts uh additional council conversations or budget conversations in the month of July, more than happy to do that.

Uh but but we don't have we will not have a final product to be able to share with them.

So it's more about getting input, maybe explaining what the potential impacts could be, some of the things that we're looking at.

Um, but but we won't have anything final until the end of July, early August.

Yeah, I mean I I wouldn't I wouldn't be opposed to that.

I know July is hard and folks are traveling, but I just think because of the times that we're in and we're we're doing what we did in the last budget cycle, um, almost the same calendar.

I think I'm I'm even my town hall, I think is around the same month as I had it last year.

Um, and so just because we're in in such unique times with our budget, I feel like we should at least there should be an effort made to um maybe this time around uh go out for feedback, right?

Um, because how we relay this back to even if I mean it's as simple sometimes for me is um if CNE even has some like graphics on hand that they can just send out to the council offices, we end up making those a lot of times on our own, um, which is fine too, but uh just kind of to summarize some of these big conversations, right?

We try and do that, but uh as simple as that.

But I mean I think going out there to the community and asking for that input um is is important because if not we're really not gonna talk to them for another couple of months.

We we we can follow up with each one of your offices about whether or not you want to do some of that stuff in July and graphics and so forth, but um July is always gonna be busy.

No, I know but but I don't think that's any reason why we can't have evening events or weekend events, but we'll we can work with each of your offices.

Okay, thank you so much.

Um and I I guess the feedback you're looking for on slide 13 on reductions.

I'm I'm supportive of the reductions uh that we're making.

I know this is a tough time for city staff, and uh they are doing the work.

They don't um, you know, run for office to do this work, they're doing this every single day, uh, coming to work and going home to their families, and so uh to make sure that our our city staff is not impacted by this, um uh that's important to me.

Uh the new revenue, I I appreciate the work that our uh budget office is doing to look for that new revenue and uh ideas that my council members have.

Um, increasing the city property tax is not something that I can commit to at this time.

I think without talking to residents, um I've been to a few HOA meetings in the last couple of weeks, and uh the reaction I'm getting is what I expected.

Uh so can't support something like that at the moment, but I know we're just starting these conversations, um, and I also know residents expect to receive the type of services from the city.

They have expectations on the services that receive they they receive from us, so uh keeping that in mind, um I look forward to further discussions on this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Spears.

Thank you, Mayor.

So I've I've been meeting with my constituents.

Town halls teed up at the end of July.

And the one with C and E, I think mine's on the 19th.

So to Councilwoman Mesikonzales' point, yes, it'd be great if we can engage C and E more there.

Right now, my constituents are not supportive of the tax increase.

But I will say I do agree with the fee adjustment idea.

And this is just a really hard time, right?

It's hard for us to be up here and every day facing our constituents talking about how do we cut back on things when the needs are so great.

But uh I've got to remain focused on the basics of what we're supposed to do here and uh what our residents expect.

I know that our families are all the families in San Antonio and in the community are feeling a lot of pressure and a lot of higher costs everywhere they go.

Um, so I appreciate that we're having this serious conversation about our priorities and where we can find some efficiencies within the budget.

Um I do really want to look at that before we we really.

I appreciate that that's gonna take some time, but I want to really see how we can we can be more efficient with the dollars before we start really talking about the tax rate increase.

Um as always, public safety is my top priority, and residents need and want safe neighborhoods and fast emergency response times and enough officers on the streets to keep our community safe.

I say this too because there's this misconception that my district does not need more officers, but firsthand this week, I found that simply untrue.

I had two separate shootings in District 9 this week, one involving a teenager who was found deceased, and another involving a police officer.

These are stark reminder that our police department must remain a top funding priority as we work to recruit, retain, and support more officers.

And our fire departments have needs that we simply cannot defer.

Somehow they make it work with less.

And maybe we can ask them how we do that better ourselves.

But residents are paying their taxes and they expect the basics to be done well, and that is resoundingly public safety, infrastructure, streets, drainage, and core city services, and so we have to do those first.

Every dollar that we spend should be measured against, whether it's improving the quality of life of the taxpayers who are funding it.

I've heard loud and clear from my residents that they want us to look for savings, eliminate lower priority spending, and make tough decisions before considering the additional tax burdens.

This budget process is our opportunity to refocus on the fundamentals and ensure taxpayer dollars are being directed to services residents rely on most every day.

This is something I enjoy looking at, and uh I'm working I'm ready to dive in and help wherever needed on looking at how to be more efficient with our dollars, but also finding opportunities to work with Bear County with the state and the federal government as well.

Look for grants and funding opportunities that are available to us and pursue those in a way that makes sense.

Maybe we need to redesign certain things so that we're eligible for these programs and these ideas, and and I just think that's an important thing to consider too, as we're looking too at additional revenues for the city.

I believe we're designed we are defined by our resiliency.

I also think that if we are in a position where we do reduce programs, uh, we just remember we have an opportunity later to bring them back, maybe better than what we have right now and more effective and efficient.

So be sure to know that while this is the trial budget, I am actively working on how we can improve the efficiency of the and stretch our tax dollars, improve efficiencies within our government.

And this is hard and it should make all of us uncomfortable and concerned and worrisome and and you should lose sleep at night over it.

I know I do.

I worry about it.

So that's um that's really all I have to say.

Thank you for your for your hard work.

I know it's it's hard on you too.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Councilmember Corr.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor.

So, as I was mentioning earlier, we are in very tough times right now and having really tough conversations across all of our city governments and city government and governmental entities.

So I think it's important to take a minute to understand that no one right now is taking this lightly, that we have folks here that work for the city that are potentially going to have to find work elsewhere because we have to make budget cuts.

And just like us having to make budget cuts, we have to do so diligently and make sure we know that we're not creating impact on the areas that need it most.

I know Councilmember Spears just mentioned some of her areas.

I have different areas that I'd like to share, but I think what's most important from today's conversation to take away is that this is going to be a tough summer for all of our entities, and we have to make some really tough decisions because I do not think it's fair to just increase all of our rates across everything blindly and put this, put all of our problems back on our residents.

I think we have to be more judicious and think very strategically about what are the services that we absolutely need and how do we make sure we're doing justice by them by doing our due diligence.

So that being said, I wanna thank city staff for what you guys did in two weeks.

I think it's incredible that you were able to go through our four billion dollar budget and look through all of the uh places where you felt like at least you can make some recommendations.

I know these are just these are not final, but I just wanted to commend you because that's definitely not easy work.

Um I also think it's important to emphasize that we're not gonna be able to just budget cut our way out of this.

So I do think we're gonna have to figure out some type of compromise in this situation.

As far as um slide four, I wanted to mention uh Councilman Castillo and I at the Educational Opportunities Committee, the youth group actually took this slide and put it in comparison to what the youth felt their priorities were, and I thought that was a very interesting slide comparison.

So I'd love for the upcoming budget conversations if we could have that as well, so the rest of the council that's not on the committee that Councilmember Galvan chairs could see that.

But interestingly enough, their priorities for like homeless services and affordable housing were also their numbers one and two, but there's numbers three through five were different, and of those were parks and libraries were some of their top spaces that they really wanted.

And if you think about it, it's because they're the most active users of some of those spaces.

And if you look at this list that has been shared to us, parks and libraries, I would like to make sure when you guys come back that regardless of what the cuts happen, that those programs and services aren't going to be significantly impacted.

I do understand there's efficiencies to be had, but we have to make sure that the folks that are actually using the programs are still able to do so well.

So I just like that reassurance.

Um in addition, um, for the revenue increases slide, I forget which one that is.

I do support these revenue increases.

I think they're very innovative.

The one question that I wanted clarified is for the EMS fees.

We want to make sure that our most vulnerable aren't affected.

So, Justina, can you just comment about the EMS fees and who that's going to impact?

So most of the transport is from either private insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare.

And then for those that don't have insurance, we have the charity care program.

Okay, great.

So they they would still not have to pay the increase.

They would be alright.

I just wanted to make sure that our most vulnerable that are not scared to use EMS services because they don't have the ability to pay.

Um, in addition, I also wanted to say to share some of the topics that I mentioned that I would like more clarity on because I am going to provide some of the details of things that were suggested in the cuts and want to make sure that these ones are heard specifically.

So Cafe College, I think we also heard from the youth is an amazing resource for our kids, and they do a lot of great coaching and counseling.

I understand there is a CCR that has been put forward about the sponsorships, but I'd like to see how we can make sure we're do deduplicating those sponsorships if they're scholarships, sorry, if there is any, and coming back to us with a recommendation that continues to allow them to support the work that they're doing there because I think it's really important.

For historic preservation, I wanted to get some clarity on what that position is or if that would completely remove the cultural heritage district.

I don't know if you want to answer this now or if you want to want to get back to me.

Okay, you guys can get back to me on that.

And in addition, I would like some clarity on the NHSD waivers, so city fee waivers, inner city incentives, and minor home repair.

So I'll start with the minor home repair.

So, as we have been looking at our major and minor rehabs, we started partnering with outside agencies, specifically nonprofits, and because of those partnerships, we've been able to stretch our dollars further.

So we can do the same number of homes with less money.

So for that one specifically, my ask is to keep it at the same level because we can can we do we I would like in the follow-up when we talk about NHSD's budget in August to see if they could do more homes if they kept at the same budget.

Because that's the one thing that we know for minor home repair.

If we can keep people in their homes, then prevents them from becoming unhoused in the future.

And what about the city fee waivers and inner city incentives?

Sure.

So our inner city incentive uh program at in the past couple of years we funded mainly affordable housing.

So we've done the Cattleman Square acquisition, a portion of that has come out of the inner city incentive fund.

Uh the Casita pilot program is funded out of the inner city and then other affordable housing, and then for our fee waivers, those um waive city fee waivers for affordable housing, uh, small business and industry.

Okay, so I would love if my colleagues had any opinions about that to share because those I think are really important for our community, and so if we can preserve those as well, I'd really appreciate it.

So I do think what from based on what you have shared here, and of course, some of my colleagues have already mentioned, but absolutely 100%, as we saw the 50-year employee earlier today, it would break my heart to not give that person a raise for an a cost of living increase, not even a performance raise or longevity raise.

So I think absolutely we need to do our cost of living employee increases and make sure that everyone at the city, our entire employee population understands we value them, even though we're going through really tough times, like the conversation we just had.

Um, and then the last question that um I have is for just I I think you said this, but I wanted to clarify that the Fiesta events would be more cost sharing, so that we're shifting over the cost on that, right?

It's not like we're not gonna do them, we're just gonna cost share the events, yeah.

I think you can go ahead, Eric.

I didn't want to interrupt you.

That's okay.

So I was just gonna say, we yeah, we we've set targets in that trial budget that we would recoup 50% of that expense.

We have not worked on all that.

We're gonna be doing that over the next couple months, but but that will ultimately have an impact on some of the cost of those events, I suspect.

But we'll need to work through that.

And and uh the mayor and I talked a little bit about that in our briefing that it's setting a target and how we get there.

Okay, so I do think based on the work that you guys have already done, and I did some loose math for some of those ones that at least for I think our district would be the most important, that if we just did the unused increment and captured that and not the property tax increase, we could still get employee raises, fund some of the things that are some of the programs and affordable housing that are really important to our residents while um getting a balanced budget.

So that would be my uh feedback on that last slide is how do we get to where we need to get to with just our unused increment, and also let's continue to look through the budget this summer to see where else that we might be able to find uh places that we could have a little bit more efficiency in case there are things that come up this summer that folks want to fund uh to enhance our programs that we are already doing for our community members.

Um but again, thank you for your work.

I think we've done a lot in two weeks, and so I'm excited to come back in August to see what what y'all come up with.

Thanks, Mayor.

Thank you.

Um, Councilmember Mungia.

Thank you, Mayor.

A couple notes.

Can you go to slide six, please?

So when it comes to the the homesteads uh the senior and disabled tax freeze, I I do appreciate us recognizing that, and that's certainly something I'll be talking to residents about as a benefit.

But you know, in doing research, uh, it's about I think 47% of the city are renters.

And unless you are in a rent restricted property, um, those renters are gonna feel the tax increase uh fully, uh, probably disproportionately so that renter landlords here, some landlords not all here tax increase.

They tell the renter rents going up uh the next term.

So I do think about half the city, and I understand that this is a small percentage of folks that that will not feel that, but it is certainly something to consider when we have that many uh in this city.

And if we can go to slide about the fees, I'm not sure which slide that is.

Slide eight, please.

Thank you.

I think it's good to look at these.

I do uh, Madia, thank you for the presentation we had yesterday.

But the EMS transport fee, transports fee, that is uh paid through insurance.

Is that correct?

Yes, it's paid through either private insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare, is a majority of it.

And what happens when somebody doesn't have insurance?

So we have a charity care program that covers some of that cost.

Okay, and has that does that fund get tapped out every year?

It's a it's a pool of funding that municipals uh municipalities can apply for.

We submit our re or our um cost related to services that we provide for EMS for underinsured or uninsured, and then we get reimbursed for those costs.

Okay, thank you, appreciate that.

And I think when it comes to fees, I had a good conversation with you all yesterday, and I just want to put it out there too.

You know, I think there's an opportunity with some of the private towers to get a percentage out of that business as well, especially considering their fee is really underserved uh compared to the the market.

So I think if that's a possibility, at least matching the private tower fee to what our contractors are allowed to charge, because that is unbalanced right now.

Um, and so I think if we balance that out and charge 3% or something of that nature, or um, you know, I was talking to Councilman Castillo, maybe a permit fee attached to that too, is an extra revenue source.

I think we should really look into that and see what's possible.

I do understand the the Fiesti event and kind of cutting back on that, but I do just recalling the conversation we had at council about keeping some events free.

So I'd like to maybe understand later how that impacts events.

I know we obviously approved a five dollar admission, but uh that was not very well received by folks, and I think part of that issue uh for the fee was because of increased cost.

So we're gonna push that cost out again.

I just worry what that's gonna look like.

So take a look at that.

I think these cuts uh that are identified are definitely very, very difficult.

Uh I I do agree with colleagues that even if we're reducing it is worth looking at at least one two percent for staff um cost adjustments because we do have inflationary costs in our economy, and so I think even a very small percentage is something that benefits and helps.

I do know that we talked about the impact analysis.

So we look at those cuts that are going to be made on slide 12.

Without a property tax increase, you know, that that is quite staggering, especially the the debt transfers and and the program service level reductions is the largest amount I'm seeing there.

So I know we're gonna do an impact analysis on on which districts are gonna maybe feel that or which programs are active in certain areas of town that those things will now be removed, and I'll be very curious to see what that looks like for district four, because when I go to residents and I ask them, I'm gonna ask you to pay more, and they're gonna say, what more are we getting, right?

So if I say pay more, and we still are cutting 20 million dollars, and they're seeing the services be the same or less, that's a very difficult conversation to have.

So I think when it comes to a tax increase, we have to be really diligent in how we see the equity lens in that process because campaigning, right?

We're talking to residents all the time, they just feel like these services are not there, right?

And I I can I can talk to them, make the conversation, make the argument that you know without a tax increase it'll be worse.

But again, when they're asking to be paying more, they expect more, and I can't just say it's just an inflation cost, it's gonna be the same thing.

So that's a that's a very difficult thing that we'll have to explain to folks.

In addition to, I think what uh some other council members said, you know, Alamo Colleges is looking at their tax increase.

Uh uh Councilman Galvan and I are on the North Side uh bond committee and they're looking at a Vader, which is a tax increase on their school district.

So I welcome maybe if we look at some of the other entities that are evaluating those so we can get a better picture of what's gonna happen because you know we look at things very isolated, say well, the city is gonna tax increase, it's gonna be five dollars every month, right?

You talk about the SAWs increase, that's gonna be three dollars every month.

But all these other things start to add up on other taxing entities and other fees that we're charging more for.

So the larger picture in one fiscal year may not be the five dollars, it may be twenty dollars a month for folks.

So I think that analysis is gonna help us uh educate ourselves on what we're contributing to tax increases in general.

Did you want to add something there?

Wait till you're done, Councilman.

Yeah, that that's basically it.

I think you know, um those are conversations I'll be having with my residents and we're gonna have a good town hall with folks too, and I look forward to that analysis.

But uh those are certainly things that are top of mind for me.

Um thanks, councilman.

So um, you know, great conversation so far, but let me reiterate that um we're gonna have to reduce our expenses and it will have impacts.

Um and my primary responsibility is to make sure that that uh I deliver to you all the budget for the city of San Antonio.

So while other public entities may be going through something similar and there's a broader impact, um we're not gonna we're not gonna do that work over the summer.

We will show you kind of where they land, but that's not my focus, and it won't be my focus as I deliver the budget to you all.

I understand that that's a bigger issue going on with talk taxable values with the city or taxable values within the county and everybody's being impacted, but I also don't want you all to think that that is a consideration, a financial consideration as we deal with our employees, our services, and our budget, because it's not gonna be.

And I just don't want to, I don't want any misconceptions in that.

So, but happy to make sure that as we as we deliver the proposed budget and incorporate for you how what other entities are doing, we can do that easily.

I just don't I just don't want it to be misconstrued, what you're what you're asking for.

Yeah, absolutely.

I thank you for clarifying because that's exactly what I mean.

I think it's just prudent for us to acknowledge other things that are happening around us.

That's not our focus.

That's not things that we're voting on, but these are things that are affecting community members, and if we're asking them to pay more, right?

Again, we're looking at it as our tax increase is gonna be only this amount of money per resident per month per year.

I have a duty to look at the bigger picture for residents also, so which includes other things.

So I completely understand that doesn't affect what we're doing here.

We have our own budget issues, we have our own staff we need to take care of and our own services, but again, it's just a larger picture that should be identified.

And if that's also disproportionately affecting certain parts of town, right?

Not every school district is talking about tax increase.

So uh I think it's important to know geographically speaking, also where people are maybe getting bigger hits than other places.

So thank you for that.

Thank you.

Council uh member Castillo.

Thank you, and thank you, Freddie, for the presentation, as well as to the budget team for y'all's work on this recommendation.

This is something that I have been taking out to neighborhood associations to gauge uh engaged community.

And at the Los Jardines neighborhood association, a constituent asked me, right, what is your position on this?

And I shared with him, right?

Yes, it is a tough conversation, but the obligation is very clear that the City of San Antonio and Council has a responsibility to ensure that we continue to maintain city services and have uh stability in terms of operational stability.

And what that looks like is ensuring that one that we continue to do our due diligence as we navigate this conversation.

Uh, but what's also uh key and very important for District 5 residents uh is that folks want to continue to see Las Palmas, Bazan Library, Collins Garden fully staffed.

They want to continue to see full programming uh within parks in our community centers, and they want to continue to see and have access to healthy neighborhood programming and healthy food access.

Uh within Las Jardines, we do have a Promotoro that connects our residents uh to Metro Health Services.

Uh so again, right, that the goal and the conversation is how can we be strategic and intentional, but also highlighting how none of the work uh of this body up here gets done without city employees and the folks out in the field.

And that's why I'm uncomfortable with any recommendation to delay andor pause a cost of living adjustment.

And while I appreciate the potential fee adjustments, looking at the two-year total, uh that's 21.9 million dollars.

And I do believe there's opportunity to explore additional ways to continue to increase fees uh again to reiterate during the last budget conversation.

I mentioned uh the short to short-term type two rentals, right?

Airbnbs, and how this has a ripple effect in terms of housing and stability for long-term rentals for San Antonio residents that may result in us needing to increase relocation services, et cetera, and so forth.

So I believe there's opportunity for us to explore short-term type rental uh fees, and then of course, to echo uh regarding development services, exploring how we can uh have a cost recovery structure and increasing for vacant properties and nuisance properties.

And I know that's something we've explored through CCR for uh Dart properties, but again, how can we uh ensure that we're tackling uh these vacant and nuisance properties that serve as a host of so many issues, right?

Uh, from public safety, overgrown vegetation, so on and so forth.

Um, in addition to that, I highlight um the the total cost recovery adjustment uh totaling 21.9 million because if we look at the compensation for the cost of living adjustment for employees over two years, that's going to be 24 million, right?

So if I'm going to say I want to support a cost of living adjustment, I'm going to have to do my due diligence to find other ways to help support us get to that cost of living adjustment.

And with the current cost recovery potential adjustments, that doesn't get us there.

Um, so again, I just wanted to run through some of the non-negotiables for district five residents that uh we should continue to maintain support.

And I understand uh we're in this tight conversation, but um my district uh five residents expect that we continue to invest in community nutrition, uh community health and improvement plans, healthy neighborhood plans.

Again, that uh the Los Jardines Neighborhood Association, where they asked me very straightforward.

What is your position?

Um they they shared that you know, there's so many community resources that we do not want to see reduced.

Uh, in addition to human resources, we have to continue to support city employees with tuition reimbursement.

I think that's what makes uh the City of San Antonio such a great organization that folks want to work for up to 50 years because of the benefits, and I think continuing tuition reimbursement is something we should continue.

Uh, and then of course, supporting uh our um our part-time nutrition centers.

Uh as I mentioned, our libraries are just core to any uh civilization uh institution, and especially uh in district five, where many of our ISDs are facing school closures and their school boards have um essentially reduced their librarians in their school.

At Rodriguez Elementary and Carabajada Elementary, we've had parents come and meet with us to say how can we better partner with the Las Palmas Library to connect our kids because they don't have no longer have a librarian in their school.

So I want to ensure that we're fully supporting our library staff, so that way they can also support our students that are experiencing uh a short, not necessarily shortage, an absence rather, of librarians in their schools.

So ensuring that our libraries are fully staffed is a priority.

Those city fee waivers and inner city incentives have helped produce uh deeply affordable housing uh projects that are tax credit property, so that means they are rent stabilized for the duration of that tax credit.

Um so I'd like to see um that resource protected to ensure that we can continue to uh produce more affordable housing again.

Um my district five residents really value um parks and rec and their programming, so ensuring that the centralized programming uh is continue to be protected is something that uh we'd like to see.

Uh I I appreciate the conversations about uh public works and the ways in which we could potentially shift that to um capital improvements, but again, any reductions to street lights, uh crosswalks, so on and so forth, uh is something my constituents would not be comfortable with.

So I do think uh in part of the budget conversations, um I I think having within that presentation that if we do not explore a scenario in which property taxes are increased, we would potentially, well, not potentially that we would see a reduction uh in flashing speed signs, radar detectors, many of those things that we are receiving requests at every neighborhood association.

I get a request for a stop sign or a radar detector, and I think having that list of uh failing to consider any scenario would mean less uh in our streets.

Uh so again, same thing with pavement markings, um, not exploring a property tax increase can mean less or will mean uh less pavement markings uh is something that our residents deserve to hear.

Um but of course, as we navigate these times, ensuring that we continue to support resilience and sustainability, uh, which ties me back to another opportunity for a potential fee adjustment within our neighborhood associations.

Their expectations are with auto and metal recyclers.

How can we uh continue to explore more uh accountability in terms of what those fees look like?

So I'd like staff to consider um what is feasible in terms of increasing that fee for auto and metal recyclers.

Um, but again, uh tough conversation, but austerity is not a realistic budget plan uh when coming up with budget priorities, particularly in an economically segregated city.

Those are my comments, thank you.

Thank you to Joe.

Councilmember McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, mayor, and thank you all for the presentation.

Um, you know, as I typically say about this topic, this is a pretty bleak outlook.

Uh, and I appreciate the work staff has done to provide us the options that we've asked for, especially what it would look like to cut programs, departments and staff to balance the budget versus what would it look like to implement a rate increase and what the fee adjustments could contribute to uh mitigate both of those.

Uh Councilman White and I have a philosophical disagreement on this issue, and I want to convey something simple that if our revenues remained the same, if our revenues remained the same, and every department stayed the same, the police and fire budget would grow because it is mandated by our collective bargaining agreement, even without new positions.

And so we would need to every year that the police and fire budget grew.

If our revenues stayed the same, we would need to continue to cut departmental budget.

And as time goes on, the police and fire department would grow even without any new positions added, and we would be cutting new, we would be cutting more positions every year.

And so I want to make that point, and I'll circle right back to that.

To Councilwoman Spears' point, and I contemplate this question with uh my residents frequently regarding the shootings that you identified in your district.

And I want to pose the question respectfully and with all seriousness because I want us to find a shared understanding, and I have this conversation frequently in my district.

I would ask what role do we expect the officers to play in a shooting?

Was their response inadequate?

Do we need more officers because we know shootings will happen and their response just isn't strong enough?

We want to be faster.

Is that the reason?

Is that the purpose?

Is there's some way to be strategic there?

Or do you believe that if we hired more police officers, the shooting wouldn't have happened?

Someone who is looking to give back at someone for shooting their friend or relative, they're not going to retaliate because the city hired 60 more officers, or would the shooting have happened anyway?

And so I believe that when we have this conversation, we constantly say, Oh, there was a shooting, and so we need more police.

We are placing an un an unrealistic expectation on the police department, and it's our constant it's to our detriment, it's to their detriment, and it's to our constituents' detriment that we allow that expectation to exist.

And so if the response if the if we want to acknowledge, you know, the shootings are gonna happen and we want to be able to respond to them, then maybe that is the answer.

Maybe it is more police.

If it's we want to prevent the shooting from happening, we are going to be taking steps that deeply impact our ability to do that.

We cannot expect police to exist on every corner where conflict is occurring and to just so happen to be in the place where shooting is going to occur.

We need to be addressing the root causes.

And unfortunately, the root causes of crime can only be addressed by the very programs and social services that we would cut here.

The safest cities in the world do not focus a third of their investments in policing and in military.

They invest in health care, housing, transportation, education, and overall community well-being.

And so cuts to departments are the band-aid, cuts to the departments are the band-aid that rip off a scab and leave an open wound.

And it won't get us out of a deficit.

It is not going to improve our standing structurally.

Police and fire are the departments that we're all most sensitive to.

No one wants to say, oh, you know, police and fire, we understand the services that you are providing, and we understand that your departments do a lot with sometimes not enough.

And so what I would ask is that we look into an independent, comprehensive analysis of both fire and police to identify efficiencies and identify areas, both CBA mandated and non-CBA mandated that we could identify savings in that would not impact their services, not impact the resources they have.

You can't tell me that within 600, 700 million dollars, we can't find some amount of savings.

Some we can't find five, 10, 15 million dollars that could potentially go to hiring more police, more fire.

And so that's I we need that task.

I think it needs to be done independently.

Uh, and I would ask that we do that as quickly as possible so that we can then identify some of those CBA mandated areas, we can incorporate those into topics of discussion in our future CBA uh discussions.

And with what you've laid out today, with no rate increase, we're looking at a loss of over 200 jobs.

That is a pretty significant portion of the jobs that we're looking to create with one of our economic incentives, and I'm not comfortable with that.

200 positions that we're cutting here, and we're gonna be looking to make up by abating taxes for another corporation somewhere down the line, with over 132 of those being filled.

That's 132 households losing income, losing benefits and access to health care.

And so those of you who are comfortable with the cuts that have been identified and the departments that are going to be losing resources in those positions that are they're going to be fired.

They're going to lose their income.

Some of them are the only people in their household with an income.

And so that's 132 families wondering what's next and how they're going to get their next meal.

132 families at risk of homelessness.

And that is above all what I want to protect in all of this.

We have to look out for our employees, and every time that we acknowledge the work that they put in and the fact that they make our city run, it would have all been a lie if what we're saying today is that we're willing to cut their positions.

And so for that reason, we can't afford to cut any filled positions at the bare minimum.

Beyond that, all eyes will be on our employees to do more with less.

And so they do deserve that cost of living adjustment, and we need to make sure that we can deliver on that.

I'm also concerned, and as I just alluded to, right, I'm concerned about what these cuts mean for our service levels.

There are certain people that may find very little value in certain departments and programs, but it's largely because they don't need them.

But you cut parks programming, you cut housing programs, you cut library services, you cut services that prevent people from becoming homeless, and we're looking at a detrimental commute we're looking at detrimental community outcomes, including increased poverty, lower educational attainment, poorer health outcomes, increased crime born out of desperation, increased homelessness, and increased need for the very services that are facing cuts today.

And then you'll ask for more police officers to respond to all of those outcomes.

So there are going to be very difficult decisions made this year, and there will be some difficult, a lot of difficult conversations in our districts.

And so I would like to know, this is information that I'm that I'm requesting.

What is the average property tax bill impact per district?

So what's the dollar amount each district can expect on average the homeowner's uh bill will be rising?

And if if as well, and this one's gonna be a little bit more uh time consuming, but if we can get reports from the department to being considered for cuts, I would like to know the programs and services that are being utilized by my district, and I'm sure that would be beneficial to uh my colleagues as well to know is you know what is the fairest trade-off.

If your bill is going to go up $30 to $4,400 or $50 to $60, is that worth knowing that the programs that our district utilizes the most and that the impact and utilization service levels can continue, like is that trade-off worthwhile?

And I want to be able to have that conversation at our budget town hall.

So sometime between now and then we can get that information.

That would be really helpful.

And lastly, can we find out?

Uh, and this was uh someone else had brought this up earlier, but can we find out how many property tax bills are frozen by district or yeah, by district?

Uh, because people do want to know that when we talk about a property tax increase, one of the first things you hear is what about seniors on a fixed income?

And so being able to communicate to them, hey, we have this property tax freeze for seniors and persons with disabilities, this is the number of people, this is how they get access to this, this is how they qualify.

And so that I think will also help people be a little bit more comfortable if they're unaware right now that that's something that takes place, is that you know you can rest assured that those seniors that you're that you want to protect that they're not gonna be impacted by this.

Overall, there is an incongruence with the expectations that we and our constituents have of city services with uh with the outlook.

Should we make these departmental cuts, and so we're gonna have to navigate those alongside our constituents because we will not get better services with less resources.

And so to make it easier, I'll lay out a concern that I hear.

It's that services on the east side, and I'd imagine on the south and west side, there's a belief that those services are not up to par with the services on the north side in districts eight, nine, and ten.

You drive past city parks on the north side and they're never on mode.

Construction doesn't take as long up there, code enforcement isn't slow or unresponsive.

Folk up there are okay with cutting departments because they've never experienced lackluster service or unequal services that have been inequitable in the way that our constituents have.

And regardless of whether or not that's true, that's the perception.

And so, if there is any reality to that, if there is any truth to that, we need to identify uh how we can make these cuts as equitable as possible in nature, and I've heard that said a few times up here.

Residents uh in districts with the greatest need to have improved services, and you balance that with cuts to services where they aren't needed.

And so rather than a departmental programmatic based cut system, maybe it's a over here, this is what this is the level of service we're gonna we're gonna provide and try to make better over here.

If the services aren't as needed, we're not gonna offer them to the level that we've been.

And there's got to be a balance some way somehow there.

Overall, thank you all so much.

Uh there's a lot of staff in the audience.

You are all appreciated.

Hopefully, none of y'all are one of the two the 132 positions that are up for grabs and know that I'm here for you, and hopefully my colleagues will agree.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Councilmember Galvan.

Thank you, Mayor.

And thank you, Freddie, for the presentation and all the stuff we've been working on this uh in the back end for months, and I know we'll continue to do that very difficult work over the next several or the next months.

Um, cut straight to it, right?

I think when we talk about uh the tax part of this conversation, uh I think it's critical for the public to understand too, and for us to understand right that where we're at with this, is that we're structural structurally limited here at the local government level on what kind of taxes we can raise, what kind of fees we can raise, all the such uh compared to other cities across the country.

Um there's a different view here in our our state capital about kind of how we can function, uh what kind of revenue we can raise, who we can raise it from, and so some of these things that we're looking at the property tax increase, and it uh is one of the only mechanisms we have to raise revenue in some form.

And even then it's also capped, right?

And so I think there's a lot of conversation here about, you know, not just here but in general.

Um, amongst the public about you know, is there other ways that we can get this revenue?

And it's somewhat, but very little to no other way.

And so when we talk about how can we make sure that our city has the best quality services possible, this is the primary source, right?

When we see development slow and we see things like that change, this is the primary source of revenue that we can get here.

Um, and it's a tough one, right?

Because of course we all have to pitch in for it in some way.

Um, and so understanding what you know what we get of it is the most critical point to a lot of my council colleagues' points about if we're gonna pay for more, at least from my constituency standpoint, how to make sure that we're getting more and we're gonna see more robust services in some way.

Um there's a lot of need out there, and so I want to just make sure.

In the last budget presentation we had, um, I believe that cost estimate for the median household uh median homestead was $70 a year.

Is that correct?

Was that accurate?

So with both the increment as well as the three and a half percent, it's about eighty-one dollars per year.

For the average homestead.

For the average, okay, but not the median, right?

For the median, I have that.

70% for the median it was 70.

Okay, got it.

I would be I'd appreciate uh what Councilman McKee Rodriguez laid out about a little bit of the district breakdown too would be helpful.

Um, of course, understanding that these things are all happening in 10 other entities as well.

Uh I think you know, we can go on with our community uh community to a council mission's kind of laid out getting some information from city staff on any kind of branded material that we can share about here's what the the cost is, here's what we're looking at here.

Here's what we're discussing, right?

Nothing's set in stone just yet, but this is what we're kind of debating.

I mean, overall, I think uh I'd prefer to see uh minimal staff productions as possible and looking instead into ways that we can adjust uh any kind of unnecessary spending as much as possible.

Uh I appreciate the look at some of the you know, even the food and travel, some of the merchandise or the branded merchandise that we have here, um, anything like that, I prefer to look, even if it's minimal, right?

If we're talking the hundred thousand, even the eighty thousand dollars uh in that range for the total city, I'd rather look at that versus looking at um an entire program being cut off because that's also the same amount there, right?

Some of the programs that we have listed in the back end um are only in the $100,000 range, some of them even less so.

And so I would like to see how we can reduce those costs in other places.

I mean, if it's it's not gonna be practical, there's always gonna be different limits here, but if it's just cutting pens and pencils, whatever, like I'd rather look at all those options available here, so we can get to that final mark here.

Because I think again, we don't want to make our our services any less than they have to be.

Um so I prefer to look at that.

For myself, um I'm supportive of uh of looking at the increment in rate uh at this moment and of course, seeing where we can uh where we can get to that point.

If we can protect our education-related programs, our health programs, human services, park sustainability programs as much as possible.

That's my goal.

And then if we of course look at efficiencies, we still gotta do that.

Let's do that and go forward with the efficiency part of it within those programs, but or within those departments, I guess.

But what I want to make sure that we're doing, I think it's what a lot of folks are saying related to the equity part, is that community impact that's gonna have, right?

In district six, we got a kind of a mixed bag of a district.

Um, there's some folks who uh have well, have the largest HOA in uh in the entire city, the second largest in the state in my district, and so there's a lot of amenities that uh that particular neighborhood has.

Other neighborhoods do not have that.

There are no community centers, there are no pools, there are no uh like large park spaces that people can uh participate at without driving to even further out of the neighborhood.

There are a lot of places that do not have these amenities that other places have, some places no libraries, etc.

Um, and so just a matter of making sure that as we're looking at scaling any program down in any form, looking at the impact it has to the community on educational achievement in the area, health disparities in the area, income, and then of course access to those same services.

I've talked a lot to uh Melody and the team at uh DHS about the part-time nutrition centers, right?

I I have uh one in my district that's really critical uh to that community because it's not only uh a part of our part-to-nutrition center they've had for a long time, um, but it's also one that is there is nothing else in that area.

There is no other senior center nearby.

And so, yes, we can make sure that people transport it over to a comprehensive senior center that uh are functionally better, right?

Um it's a different thing to talk to a community and say there is nothing near you in your part of town that you've grown up in that you're connected to that you've gone to school in, et cetera, et cetera.

You have to go outside 410 to get to one, or you have to go several several miles away.

And so figuring out how we can kind of plan for that a little bit and seeing how can we make sure that those folks are not left without something is really critical to me.

And so finding ways to preserve those set those centers is really critical until we get to uh I'd prefer comprehensive senior centers in those areas.

Otherwise, I think it's just saying that same story that Councilman McKee Rodriguez has laid out about this particular side of town, simply is not gonna get that service.

Um, and so again, if we're gonna scale down somewhere else, um I think we go to somewhere where there's similar services to where Councilman White's point was about if there's something in HOA nearby that can uh provide those services, let them do that.

Let's figure out how we get to the places that don't have those services at all, that rely solely on the public um the public uh to do that work.

I think we gotta do it, figure that one out.

In public works, you know, I want to preserve as much there as possible, of course.

I think if we can get some kind of analysis about what the current maintenance needs are for some of these things listed out, whether it's for striping from some of the minimal work that we do and see where those timelines are at in certain areas.

I think that's really critical too.

Uh what I don't want to see is that areas that have not seen that sidewalk, that slap sign, that uh maintenance on the crosswalk, etc.

for I don't know how many years exactly here, but for a significant amount of time, um, I don't want them to get deferred even more.

I'd rather those be prioritized to be addressed, and the other ones that are doing okay, let them continue doing okay.

Um I know we're still working on making sure that all of our sidewalks are ADA compliant.

Um let's make sure we get sidewalks in every district and every neighborhood first, um, address all the gaps before we get into places that have a sidewalk that could be a bit better.

Um I think there's some of that analysis gonna be critical here, and I know Philip works as a lot of that already, so just being able to see that within these recommendations are gonna be critical too, I believe.

The fees make sense on slide eight.

Um I think for slide 12.

I know there's a lot of it of uh what are we doing without uh property tax increase?

I but kind of want to see a bit of a mixture there.

Uh, what things can we still do in the reductions, uh whether it's the vacant positions or department reorganizations or the comprehensive budget reviews.

Um, but of course, understanding that you know we're still gonna need it.

I believe we're still gonna need that support for the civilian compensation increase.

So some kind of mixture there and seeing what impact that would have to our property tax increase request um to our residents, or well, yeah, to the city would be helpful.

Uh if it goes down in any way, would be interested in seeing that.

If not, understanding understandable.

There's we'd like to see that uh laid out in front of us.

Um again, want to reiterate my uh support for continuing that cola adjustment for our city staff.

Um, I mean, we're talking about other rate increases here and there, including the tax rate.

We've got to make sure folks are able to afford uh the daily life as we see our economy continue to adjust.

I think those are all the big things.

Um I mentioned all the stuff around the kind of uh non-information non-informational merchandise uh through city departments, including, I mean, I would say even our own city council office as much as possible.

Um, I get it, we all have our own way to communicate to our residents.

I have my own way too.

But I'd rather reduce those uh that stuff, whether it's food and travel budgets, etc., before I start cutting staff anywhere else.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

On to the second round, Councilwoman Viegeran.

Thank you.

Um, so I want to begin a lot of good conversation uh information.

Some things that I I don't think they're addressing quite what you asked us to address uh in some cases, so I am just gonna kind of go there, uh, go through a thing.

I appreciate Councilman Galvan talking about the resource.

The reason this is easy for me to say we need to raise the rate is because that is the property tax that we have.

Uh, and unless Jeff comes and tells me the state is looking at a state income tax, this is this is our resource property tax.

And I don't think the state is thinking that, but I could be wrong.

We'll talk about that in legislative session.

Um, in terms of city council responsibilities, Eric, I appreciate you staying laser focused on our uh budget, and while we do have a lot of Texas taxing entities within Bear County, in my district alone, I have four school districts.

So I do not want you, and thank you, city staff for being here, having my city staff spend time on looking at other people's business uh tax rate increases.

And that's why I would like to come in, give you some significant answers to say yes, we're moving forward with this six percent or this median income, so then we can send a letter, me to my school districts and school boards who are all elected officials also, and the Alamo Community College is saying we've just raised property tax, we've just done this to make our budget.

Please be considerate as you as your board decide what you're gonna do next.

But I think we as the city need to lead on that.

So thank I appreciate you saying that.

When it comes to public safety, and this is why I want to kind of level set them um on there.

I don't think we should spend more time on looking at do we need more officers?

One, we're in the midget middle of a budget negotiation.

I think we need to stick there on focus on that.

The other is the I don't think unless PD has come knocking at your door, we are in the transition of leadership currently, and I think we need to get that set before we're like, oh, here's another 50 officers, decide what you want to do, and we barely have any substations or the the substation toilet at East is broken.

So I I really want to make sure that we're thoughtful about that.

But the one thing that Councilman McKee Rodriguez brought up that I think is very key is how I would love to see if we could work with our stakeholders to see how much law enforcement do we actually have in Bear County because if we think about it and we think about school school police, Alamo College has law enforcement, our smaller units municipalities about ACOG.

When we're looking to move forward in hiring, maybe what we the constables, the Bear County Sheriffs.

There's just a lot of law enforcement out there, and maybe what we need is when we get the new, not new officers, but better coordination between between our law enforcement agencies, and maybe as we go out there and we look for a new chief, we let that that new um chief of police understand these are the amount of um law enforcement entities out there.

How do we manage it and how do we we address calls and information that and we just made the park rangers at um the missions?

We got that from the state of Texas so that they could they can arrest and detain.

So I think that's really important before we have these long larger conversations about I'm gonna cut a whole department so that I can bring on 40 new officers that we may or may not need because the constable can do that job.

So I think I think we need to look at that before we have that conversation.

But um I will be around this summer, and Eric and the team and Maria and Justina knows already.

You are surely going to hear from me when we talk about this reorganization because all I heard was equity lens this, equity lens that, and that is completely important.

But if that department goes away because we had to reorganize, if part of my legal department goes away because of we had to reorganize, where are we then?

So I'm really I know this is tough, and there's gonna be a lot of questions coming from District Three, and um the ideas of taking this median income into the district and seeing how that is going to impact them.

I think is key.

But I would really like us as a city of San Antonio to get out of the gate so that the other taxing entities understand this is what we've done, this is the move we're making, and follow, please try and follow our lead and be as thoughtful as possible when you talk about your needs because I can see us foregoing uh increase and then others saying, Well, woo-hoo for us because we can just raise it eight percent.

So thank you.

Okay, council member Meso Gonzalez.

Uh just quickly wanted to add on the I think we've talked about the Airbnb fees increasing those.

Um is that is that part of the discussion?

Because I know we have like a three-year permit, but other cities do a yearly permit that if you look at Houston and Dallas, it's almost double what we do.

So I don't know if anyone's no, I think it's definitely on the table.

And and and uh councilwoman uh Castillo brought that up uh at the work session.

We didn't have all the time over the last two and a half weeks.

You will I I think it's safe to say that you will see a proposed recommendation in the budget in August that uh changes those fees.

Okay, thank you.

Any other comments on the second round from my colleagues?

Okay.

Um thank you, staff uh for the hard work always.

Uh, but certainly over the last uh two and a half weeks, as was mentioned.

Um, for the public's benefit, um, I also asked for um kind of what it looks like, the what is possible by the increment.

So I know when we have a follow-on discussion, we'll understand what's possible if we just took the increment from 25.

If we just took it from 26, if we took both of those minus and didn't do the 3.5, kind of where does that get us?

It's still not a pretty picture, but I think for the fidelity that all of us are looking for, that'd be that'd be very helpful.

It's hard to commit here to uh supporting a property tax increase when we've just really done a numbers exercise.

We have no idea, as many have alluded to about the actual operational impact on the community.

So we look forward to that analysis.

As was looking through this, understand it's not recommended for discussion only, but some of these cuts actually some agree with, and I will come back to that.

Uh, but some of these cuts, I mean, we're we're looking at um some of these cuts that would disproportionately impact our our most vulnerable.

So when we talk about the just department restructuring, it's not just any lawyers, it's lawyers that are in our compliance opportunity and access office, the artists formerly known as DEI.

And these folks serve the underserved and reassigns language access to comms and CNE equal access to public works and the civil rights manager to the city attorney's office.

I'm sure there are some efficiencies there, but in some of these restructurings, there is still a uh nine positions that would be impacted there.

When we're to my colleague, Councilman Mungia's point, as we're also looking about at the broader context within which these cuts may take place, uh we're looking, especially on the nutrition side as Councilwoman Castillo also mentioned.

Um, I mean, in a state that has an expanded Medicaid, and as we also look at the impacts of the one big beautiful bill, the fact that we'd be decreasing any positions related to to health improvement and community nutrition, closing four part-time nutrition centers to for a savings of just under a hundred million dollars.

I mean, again, it's really important that we excuse me, one million dollars, not a hundred million.

Um, it's really important as we're gonna have uh the other conversation shortly after about saws when we look at not only does um where does work potentially get delayed, but who which parts of our community are most impacted by the fact that they even need a nutrition center.

Um so I am again need to understand um the operational impact of of some of these things to the things that I actually agree with on some of these cuts.

Um look, if you are a private entity charging a ticket fee.

Uh, for example, look, you just happen to be on the list, San Antonio Botanical Garden.

Um, but we're reducing our funding from 1.2 million to 1 million.

They charge a ticket fee.

They have a uh an event called Bubbles and Blooms.

They'll be okay.

I want to see a full list of these things, Eric, that if you charge a ticket fee, then you can figure it out.

And so I would like to see that go to zero, 1.2 million to zero.

Okay.

If we're talking about cutting nutrition centers, um, we're not gonna fund the botanical gardens.

I think this is actually also what my colleague, councilwoman um um uh spears was was discussing.

These entities that we subsidize that are profit-making.

So the full list of those Eric's would be Eric would be appreciated.

Um similarly, when we're talking about um only cutting half of the subsidized um the things that we subsidized for Fiesta, that's 700k I know is just one event, and that's only 50%.

And I know you're gonna have to talk to your central buddies and some of the other folks about about what that means for them.

But I again, if you charge a ticket fee, we should not be subsidizing your things, and you can figure out how to write uh right costs that some of these other things I do agree with the consolidation of communications functions.

I feel like we have approved recently several communications contracts, and if that work can be um conducted by those comms contracts, or if there needs to be also a writing of the the distribution of of work across the contracts and and the civilians, but I uh agree that there can be a consolidation of of functions there.

I want us actually to look at um seeing if we can increase the number of folks for the audit team.

My understanding is when we look at um kind of number of auditors per capita, we may be a little bit short compared to some other cities.

Uh but when I look at what they were able to identify, and you've heard me share my concern about um some of the practices that lead to I think an insufficient level of oversight into things that drive up costs.

So uh I appreciate here the audit team's identification of and now our ability to find three million dollars across three years or two years regarding reducing overtime through the implementation of management and monitoring a leave of leave policies.

So if we can increase the audit team to similarly find uh cost-saving measures in the future, I think we'll do ourselves um ourselves well.

The mayor's fitness council understood.

Gotta cut it.

Um, I'll find, we'll work to find a private sponsor, right?

That's just what it is.

And a lot of these things, I mean, frankly, we shouldn't be funding these things at all.

San Antonio Book Festival, corporate philanthropy, foundations, like pick this up.

150K in each year, that's nothing.

Those folks can, I'm not saying we don't need a book festival.

I was just there this last time, and it was great.

But these are not things that the public needs to be paying for military and veteran affairs, greater chamber.

Can you pick that up?

Somebody others can pick this stuff up.

Um the other things I'd like to see before we start talking about a rate increase.

Um, I want to understand what can come in from the TURS, Eric.

Is even in 27 as well as 28.

Uh, when folks I think see some of the things that are um being invested in at the cost of other things and us potentially having to raise the property tax.

Um, we need to understand what can come in from the TURS.

Um Freddie, I know you're also doing a deep dive into other things that can come from the revenue manual.

Thank you for that.

Um I also understand and I appreciate Councilman McKee Rodriguez's um recommendation that as part of this we review the outstanding private debt due to our community.

Okay.

So we'll look for that next time.

Justina, uh, the 20 million dollars that you found due to the deep dive for the Medicaid 1115 waivers, um, do we can you give us just because you know we're talking about public health, we've just talked about some of the things that would be impacted as a result.

Um, do we have an understanding now of of how we might uh think about investing the that money that's been identified?

Sure.

We went to uh the uh we presented to the community health committee last week, got some good feedback from them.

So we are working on a file a plan that will be uh discussed with uh the city manager and then presented as part of the proposed budget.

Great, thank you.

I appreciate that.

Mentioned the audit.

Um, not sure if we have Renee here from HR.

Um, but my understanding when we went through this exercise last year is that 90% of the city employees make under 100,000 dollars.

Is that correct?

Okay.

Um I bet money on it because I remember that number.

Um, but all that to say, I certainly am thankful for everybody that um dedicates their time and their talents to serving our city.

I do want to make sure though that we are if if it come push comes to shove, Eric, that we are giving the pay increase to to those that are the neediest, frankly, so keeping that to uh those that are making under 150k that work for the city.

Thoughts and prayers to your uh your increase.

So, Mayor, I'll just jump in there.

That will unlikely be my recommendation.

I don't I think you know, um past councils have talked about that and actually done it in past city managers have done it.

Yeah, I think it creates kind of a division within the employee workforce.

So uh I I won't be making that recommendation in August, but certainly that we'll be prepared for you all to talk about that if you want to do that as part of the the review of the proposed budget.

Yeah, no, I appreciate that, and I think there's probably already a bit of division considering 90% of folks make under a hundred K.

On the library piece, just because Councilman uh sorry, Mesa Gonzalez, I had the same question in terms of like, hey, how does that work?

As explained, it works when people are checking out and their their card is identified.

As somebody, again, that was raised by a single mom, public library, very important uh to our community.

I also wanted to understand, hey, what does this actually look like in in practice?

Um, I don't support, I know we pay a little bit more than uh sorry, we we offset some of the county's expenses as it relates to that, but the library is just not where I'm uh supportive of of cuts or charging that fee.

Okay, okay.

Um thank you again for the hard work.

Uh let me.

Yeah, thank you again for the hard work, and we'll uh look forward to uh the proposed budget in August.

Yeah, Mayor Council, this is this is exactly what we need to hear.

We really appreciate the conversation, the continuation from the work session.

Look at the end of the day, you can rest assured and anybody that's concerned about it, can rest assured that we're gonna deliver a two-year balanced budget to you in August.

So the feedback you're giving us today, the feedback from the work session, um, we'll work diligently, and at the end of the day, you know, we'll all get squared up and and as long as we set the framework uh and and not put ourselves in a position where it's a short-term gain and and a long-term impact, then then I'm confident that I'm not gonna put propose to you all that, and that's something that you all won't want to do either, but but um the conversation is helpful for us as we launch off into that deep dive over the next uh two months.

Thanks, Mayor.

Yeah, Eric actually um reminded me the um lots of attention on um frankly the biggest parts of our budget, and I know there was interest by many of my colleagues in some kind of audit, even a portion of as it relates to uh the police department.

Are we in the interest of cost savings?

Are we interested to do even a portion of that to inform the 27 budget?

So uh actually on that list of reductions, you see about six million dollars reduction in police overtime.

So uh secondly, and I don't know if Buddy's in the room, but I think he is I think he is launching off into an audit of police overtime, just like he just recently completed the overtime of fire overtime.

So will we have that for twenty-seven?

Uh well I already jumped ahead and said we're gonna cut six million dollars out of it, so we'll do the we'll do the deep dive of that.

I think I think his process piece will be important to what councilman McGee Rodriguez said, which is are there issues within the CBA that we need to identify from a practice standpoint.

But uh you will likely see reductions to police services to police overtime in the proposed budget.

And I'll check with with Buddy about where he's at on his overtime.

Okay, so to be clear about what you've just said, so there's the recommendation of six million.

Um, there is an audit around specifically the overtime, which may yield additional savings.

I don't know what the I don't know what the audit will will yield.

Well, but those are two separate issues.

They are two separate issues that there will be service impacts if we reduce overtime in certain areas in the police department.

And we'll come back to you all in in uh if we do those, we'll come back to you in August and say, these are the impacts of services, whatever they are.

Uh I don't know what Buddy will come up with, but he's gonna review the processes and procedures and the approvals and the adherence to both the collective bargaining agreement and the rules and regulations of the police department.

That's the scope of his audit.

Yeah, appreciate that.

Because the fire department's um audit, it it didn't necessarily say a reduction of overtime, it yields a decrease in service.

Some of that was because I mean it was a management.

It was a management issue, right?

Got it.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

On to Saws.

Item number nine is an ordinance approving adjustments to the San Antonio water systems rates for the residential general irrigation and wholesale customers for 2026 through 2029.

I'm gonna take a 10-minute break.

All right, we're gonna reconvene and get started.

Great.

Okay.

The clerk has already read the caption over to staff for a presentation.

Mayor, I'm going to turn it over to Mr.

Puente to do the presentation.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Council members.

Thank you again for the opportunity to be in front of you.

Relatively short presentation.

A lot of the issues that we've had, we've been discussing with you.

So on I use this slide at different times, especially at your town hall meetings where I have been going and talking to your residents about our needs.

When I present this slide, I usually talk about we've been able to do all these, meet all these challenges, and not have a rate increase.

Those challenges have not uh could not have been made without transparency, accountability, and a disciplined financial management.

That fact that we went five years without a rate increase demonstrates they were not we were not simply passing costs to our customers.

We absorb those pressures while containing investment in our critical infrastructure.

The primary driver of this rate proposal is infrastructure investment.

During the last five years, SAUS has successfully managed and delivered approximately two point six billion dollars without a rate increase.

With the expectation that projects that began in the latter years and remain under construction, we have completed and are completed as planned.

But we now face a larger challenge, a $3.2 billion program over the next five years.

And we will continue that same level of countability going forward.

Our capital program.

It is important to note that it is not an audit, it is a capital operational review focused on identifying opportunities for improvement.

The preliminary findings confirm that SALS maintains a very sophisticated ability to identify and manage large-scale infrastructure projects.

The study specifically highlighted our strong balance sheet, technical competence of our workforce, and integrated management systems.

At the same time, the study acknowledged that utilities today operate in a very different environment, a more complex and expensive environment.

Aging infrastructure, resiliency requirements, workforce challenges, and escalating construction costs all require us to continuously improve.

The recommendations from the study focus on governance, communication, strategic planning, and stakeholder engagement.

Once the board formally accepts this study, we stand ready to brief this council and implement those recommendations as we incorporate them into our operations.

Water stewardship or what we what other people call non-revenue water.

One of the most frequent frequent criticisms directed at SAWS involves water loss from breaks and leaks from our water distribution system.

And frankly, it is Chris's criticism that was well deserved.

That is why in 2023 we renewed our focus and established the Office of Nonrevenue Water.

Since then, we have reduced real water losses by approximately 25%.

25% in just these last two years, three years, a reduction of that issue that was really highlighting the news a few years ago.

There's even more work ahead, and we recognize that, but we are one of the leaders here in Texas.

Houston currently, for example, experiences twice the volume of real water loss that SAWS does.

In fact, the country of Denmark invited and sponsored a visit by SAWS staff to discuss different approaches on how to tackle this issue.

We are not declaring victory, but we are demonstrating measurable progress and a clear commitment to for improvement.

Data centers.

Although it's not part of this rate increase, Councilman Galvan asked us to talk a little bit about data centers.

Currently we have eight to ten under consideration, probably closer to eight.

We meet bi-weekly with CPS Energy to coordinate our efforts to find out what's happening, what they're doing versus what we're doing.

CPS sometimes has challenges because of non-disclosure agreements, but we've been working with them to make sure that we know what each other is doing and what is coming down the pike for that so that they can be ready and we can be ready.

Just this very next month, our board will be considering a recycled water master plan, and part of that plan will be how we how are we going to handle redundancy and reliability, specifically with data centers on how they're going to be involved in this process.

Some policy items to review and implement for next year are that they require maximum use of recycled water.

That evaporating cooling is something that we want to have as least possible, as few possible of that kind of operation.

The loop system is much much better.

A modified rate and free struct fee structure we will all also talk about, and also any contamination controls that need to be implemented.

Why a four-year rate plan matters?

This slide illustrates why this four-rate plan is so important.

Infrastructure planning does not occur one year at a time.

Contractors, engineers, suppliers, financial markets all need certainty regarding our ability to fund projects over the years.

The 2026 through 2029 capital program totals $2 billion in construction activity.

If rates were only approved for the near term, projects scheduled for 28 and 29 become uncertain.

Delays create significant risks.

Meaning projects become more expensive the longer that we delay them.

Delayed projects increase the likelihood of lost water, of infrastructure failures, regulatory challenges, and future water supply constraints.

A four-year plan allows us to efficiently sequence those projects, secure competitive pricing, and deliver infrastructure at the lowest cost possible for our customers.

This proposal reflects extensive collaboration between SAWS and the city's public utilities office.

The recommended rate plan before you today is not simply SAWS's proposal.

It reflects a thorough review by city staff, several adjustments that reduced our revenue requirements, knowing that those adjustable reduced amount of revenue required, preserving our infrastructure needs, and to maintain reliable service.

In other words, a lot of the compromises we made with the Office of Public Utilities was on the ONM side.

I think they recognize that this capital infrastructure is needed for the future.

It demonstrates that SAWS and City work together to scrutinize those costs to be a fair rate plan for our customers.

This slide shows the agreed upon rate plan, the agreed upon plan that this rate supports.

The investment is focused on infrastructure our community depends on every day.

This includes wastewater treatment, water supply reliability, system reliability, water stewardship initiatives, replacement of aging infrastructure, and growth-related projects.

These are not discretionary projects.

These are necessary projects.

They are investments necessary to maintain regulatory compliance, protect public health, accommodate growth, and ensure water security.

The city and SAOS agree that the projects are essential and should move forward.

This slide reflects the rates that were ultimately agreeing upon by SAOS and your Office of Utility Utilities.

The plan before you today requests a compromise that balances affordability with our infrastructure needs, provide certainty for customers while allowing SAOS to responsibly plan and execute our program.

Importantly, this recommendation has already undergone significant review and refinement through the city's evaluation process.

And what I just uh what was just circled is that review by the public utilities office where the rates went down a little bit through the first two years and then a ceiling and a floor for the latter four uh third year and fourth year.

This is not simply our proposal, it is a rate plan recommended by your office, and after months and months of analysis.

We heard you during your budget discussions, these are not easy easy decisions, but we have a program that things that I believe helps us in this endeavor.

One of the one of the most important elements of this proposal is the expansion of affordability programs.

We are not we are increasing reliability from 125 to 150 percent of the federal poverty level.

We are increasing funding for other assistance programs and sit and strengthening community outreach efforts.

I want to highlight the fourth bullet in this uh slide.

Today we know neighborhoods that have significant number of households already receiving uplift benefits.

For example, if we see we have a computerized program where we can look at down to the block level, if you take up uh 20 houses on that block, if 12 of them are on the uplift program, if 12 families are on that program, chances are that the other people, other families on those on that block also need the help and assistance that we can provide.

Under this program, we will use that data and census track information to identify those areas.

And frankly, we know where those areas are.

It's easy to drive through San Antonio and know exactly what neighborhoods we need to uh put into this pilot program.

We will then automatically enroll them into these households and provide them with six months of complete quality before they have to complete the qualification process.

In other words, they will be automatically enrolled into this program, and six months we will help them continue the qualification if they do qualify to stay on that program.

This is a more targeted and more productive and more equitable approach to this affordability assistance.

And by the way, this potential rate increase does not affect any customer already on that program.

Even after this 2026 rate adjustment, SAS will continue to have some of the lowest residential water and wastewater rates among Texas cities.

And as you can see, many of those cities, even our closest neighbors, Houston, Austin, Corpus have the highest rates here in Texas.

That affordability has been achieved while investing in long-term water supplies, infrastructure reliability, environmental stewardship, drought resilience, and still maintaining the highest credit rating SAOS has ever had.

So SAUS as a utility are able to continuously have these low rates and still meet those requirements that this community relies on.

So, Mayor, Council, I know it's a brief presentation, but I think we've been in front of you.

I've been to your town halls, met with you individually, and I stand ready to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you, Robert.

Yes, at my town halls.

Now it's like, where's Robert?

Just kidding.

Um excuse me.

We have public comment, we have several folks that have signed in to signed up rather to speak on this item.

Uh the first person is Kevin Dennon.

You have three minutes, sir, followed by Eric Ledaker Latiker, excuse me, and then Jonathan uh Gurwiz.

Thank you, Mayor Jones.

Council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

My name is Kevin Dennon.

I'm honored to serve as chairman of the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce.

I know many of you who serve on council, and I sincerely thank you for your service.

I'm here today in support of the proposed San Antonio Water System four-year rate adjustment.

This support comes with the unanimous endorsement of the greater chambers board of directors.

No one, including myself, welcomes higher utility costs.

However, leadership requires us to look not only at today's cost but also at tomorrow's consequences if we fail to invest in the infrastructure that our community depends upon.

Water is not simply another utility, it is the foundation of public health, economic development, and quality of life of the children and families who call our community home.

The proposed rate adjustment will help fund critical improvements to aging infrastructure, strengthen wastewater treatment and collection systems, modernize operations, reduce water loss, enhance system of resilience.

These are not optional investments.

These are essential investments.

At the same time, the business community believes strongly that investment must be accompanied by accountability.

We support continued transparency, public reporting, and measurable outcomes so ratepayers can clearly see how these dollars are being invested and what results are being achieved.

This decision is ultimately about stewardship.

It is about making prudent investments today so that we can avoid much higher and greater cost, deferred maintenance, and insufficient infrastructure in the future.

Just ask our neighbors in Corpus Christi about that path.

The easiest vote is often to delay infrastructure investment for whatever reason.

The responsible vote is to make the investment before a crisis forces it upon us at a much greater cost.

On behalf of the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce, I respectfully encourage your support of the proposed SAW's rate adjustment.

And again, I want to thank you for your leadership and devotion to the people of San Antonio.

Mayor, I hope most of you who know me personally know that I care about every quadrant of this city.

East, south, west, north, all of them.

I've done this for many, many years in many capacities.

This is a hard decision.

I don't want my water bill to go up.

But when I look at what is happening with water loss, it is stunning to me.

If I had a pipe leaking at my house, I'd get it fixed.

I'd find the money to do it because I can't waste that incredibly valuable resource.

Goodness, look what's happened in Austin.

I drive through Alamo Heights, they're on stage four.

Thank goodness the SAWs board some years ago took action on the Vista Ridge project.

Thank you for your leadership.

God bless.

Thank you.

Eric Lidecker.

Followed by Jonathan Gurwitz and then Jack Finger.

What's up, guys?

It's been a while.

I really didn't want to come up here and sound too angry, so I thought I'd write some jokes instead.

So CEO Robert Wente makes a base salary of $593,000 a year.

And he recently received a bonus of over $132,000 a year.

At $725,000.

That's about 10 times as much as y'all are making from this job.

That's kind of funny to me.

I don't know.

Maybe not to y'all.

It's a little funny that some of y'all might not want that some of y'all might want to approve this ordinance so that SAUS doesn't ask for a bond later on because you know we can't afford it.

Maybe we could afford it if we cut out some of the nonsense like y'all were talking about earlier, because most rational people understand that San Antonio has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

You know, this ordinance has to be a joke, you know, at a time when most average Americans and American families are struggling at a time where we don't know how much gas is going to cost from week to week because of what's going on in foreign countries.

Mr.

Puente came to my community in District 10 about two weeks ago trying to sell us on this idea, telling us it's only going to be a couple bucks more a month.

But someone making over $700,000 a year doesn't understand what it's like to be broke at the end of month, wishing you had that couple extra dollars.

He doesn't understand that.

So someone making that kind of money asking we the people for more money is a joke.

Mr.

Puente has been in power since 2008, and the average water bill has increased 41 to 61% since then.

And he wants another 30%.

What a joke.

And I also want to point out that Mr.

Puente is past retirement age, so maybe he should stop enriching himself and step down and let somebody else do the job.

Thank you.

Jonathan Gerwitz, followed by Jack Finger.

Mayor and Council, I am uh chair of the Greater San Antonio Chamber's public policy council.

The chamber recognizes the critical importance of continued investment in our region's water infrastructure to support long-term economic growth, system reliability, and quality of life.

The Greater Chamber supports thoughtful and strategic infrastructure investment, including the proposed investments necessary to maintain and modernize critical water infrastructure as and as well as the associated rate adjustments proposed by SAWS.

I'll note as you did, Mayor, that transformational economic investments like the one Toyota is making are only possible because of the water and energy infrastructure investments of our public utilities.

Support for this rate adjustment must be accompanied by strong accountability, operational clarity, and measurable progress in addressing the infrastructure and system management challenges currently facing the community.

A particular concern is the urgent and ongoing issue of widespread water loss throughout the community.

Water loss at the scale currently being experienced represents not only financial inefficiency, but also the loss of an increasingly scarce and valuable public resource.

SAWS cannot effectively deal with this loss without the proposed capital program.

Greater chamber supports these infrastructure investments that position San Antonio for long term long-term success and strengthen the reliability of our water system.

The proposed rate adjustment should be accompanied by clear accountable accountability measures, clear reporting, improved coordination, and demonstrated progress in addressing the operational and infrastructure challenges most affecting our community today.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jack Finger, followed by Luis Rodriguez and then Jessica Palacios.

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

For the record, my name is Jack M.

Finger.

You know, it's a classic tactic among negotiators.

One side will say, I propose that I'll I will sell you these widgets for a mere hundred percent increase over uh what we've been doing in the past.

The other side says, are you out of your mind?

A hundred percent increase now.

Okay, okay.

I'll make it a mere 75% increase.

Are you stupid?

I'm not gonna accept a 75% increase.

Okay, okay.

I'll get real.

I'm here, 50% increase in this cost of these widgets.

Well, you reciprocated so much here.

I I guess I'll I'll try the 50% area there.

When the 50% was what the other side was planning all along.

What is SAWS planning to do with our bills, and what are you planning to give them?

Well, what did the headlines say once again?

See what the audiovisual has to say.

City backed smaller saws hike.

Yeah, and uh if let's see if we can reread the red underlined area there and blow it up a little bit.

This week city staff recommended a lower range of rate hikes, ultimately raising bills between 26% and 30% by 2029.

26, thank you.

Return the camera if you would.

By my calculations, that's about 30% over three.

That's almost somewhere between eight and ten percent a year.

Eight and ten percent a year, not one or two percent, not three or four, eight or ten percent a year.

Now, I'm sorry, I they say this is going for infrastructure.

We gotta fix all our leaks that are in all our aging aging pipes.

I thought we were already paying for that with our rates, rate pay paying bills there.

Huh?

I thought isn't that what we we expected Saws to do?

I remember I go back so far so long to remember that I remember back in the uh 80s and 70s and 80s and 90s when they had multiple leaks all around the city with the plastic PCB uh piping that they had replaced.

We said we've got to have a rate increase for that.

We gave we keep giving them rate increases, and I like to know where does the money going?

What happened to all the money we paid in the past?

Well, maybe it's going to Mr.

all these exorbitant salaries.

Do you think?

Thank you.

Luis Rodriguez, followed by Jessica Palacios and then Rebecca Viegran.

Good afternoon.

My Luis here.

He's not here.

He's not here.

Okay, so then we'll go straight to you.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mayor Jones and City Council members.

My name is Jessica Palacios, and I serve as the director of government affairs at the San Antonio Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, proudly headquartered in District 4, representing nearly 900 business members throughout the entire city.

The San Antonio Hispanic Chamber of Commerce supports the SOAS proposed rate adjustment as a necessary investment in long-term reliability of our water and wastewater infrastructure and our city's continued economic growth.

On average, San Antonio grows by 20,000 residents every year.

The reality is that as San Antonio continues to grow, so does the demand place on critical infrastructure systems.

Reliable water and wastewater service remain essential, not only for residents, but for employers, housing development, workforce growth, and future economic investment.

We appreciate that SAWS has engaged extensively with stakeholders throughout this process and has continued to refine its proposal based on discussions with city leadership.

We also recognize the modifications made following the June 10th Council B session, resulting in the lower proposed in a lower proposed rate than originally presented.

At the same time, our support for infrastructure for this infrastructure investment must be accompanied by ongoing collaboration and partnership and transparency as outlined in a letter sent to you at the beginning of the month.

The San Antonio Hispanic Chamber of Commerce encourages SAWS to provide accessible updates on how these investments are being implemented, including measurable progress toward infrastructure improvements and water loss reduction efforts.

We also encourage continued collaboration with the business community to increase awareness of available conservation programs, rebates, and other resources that can help residents and employers better manage utility costs.

And finally, we support continued efforts to strengthen affordability through cost management, ongoing evaluation of contracts and expenditures, and exploration of additional funding and partnership strategies that can help strengthen affordability while ensuring critical infrastructure investments remain on track.

Thank you for your time and your consideration and commitment to San Antonio's future.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Rebecca Viacran.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council members, city manager, city attorney.

My name is Rebecca Viagran, and I am proud to serve as the president and CEO of South Texas Business Partnership.

And our board of directors are in strong support of the proposed SAWS rate adjustment.

Our mission is to promote sustained economic prosperity across South Texas through collaboration and advocacy.

A critical part of that mission is to ensure that all businesses, families, and communities have access to infrastructure necessary to grow and thrive, and that the foundation of that infrastructure is water.

Every resident, business, school, and hospital depends on reliable access to safe drinking water every day.

Investing today allows us to replace aging infrastructure before it becomes a public health emergency.

This discussion is about more than rates, it's about securing infrastructure investments necessary for long-term growth across San Antonio.

Nowhere is that more important than on the South side, where aging systems and increasing demand are converging.

These investments ensure that South San Antonio is not left behind, but positioned to thrive as our city grows.

And growth is already happening.

In 2024 alone, the county issued over 8,300 residential building permits.

Reliable water and wastewater systems are also essential to economic competitiveness.

Businesses can locate anywhere.

They choose communities that can guarantee dependable utilities, including long-term water security.

When companies like Toyota, Texas, and JCB invest in San Antonio, they are not just creating jobs.

They bring new families, housing, school suppliers, and commercial development.

Growth of this magnitude depends on one critical resource: reliable water and wastewater infrastructure.

We also recognize the importance of affordability, and we appreciate that continued investment is going to happen in the uplift program.

We are encouraged that SAOS has already committed to continued transparency, strong oversight, and clear reporting on how rate-supported investments improve service and create opportunity.

We encourage you all today to act boldly and decisively today.

Supporting this rate adjustment is a commitment to safe drinking water, system reliability, and long-term water security for all San Antonians, and demonstration that South San Antonio's infrastructure needs will be met with the same amount of urgency as the rest of the city.

We respectfully urge your support of this proposed rate adjustment, and thank you all so much for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Thank you.

It was our final speaker.

Is there a motion to approve item nine so we may begin council discussion?

I make a motion to approve.

Great.

We'll move on to council discussion.

There's going to, we're each going to share our comments, but I'm not going to bury the lead because we've been here a little bit later than we anticipated.

The request before us is in fact the cheapest option to our community and minimizes the risk that we know of at this point to the greatest extent.

Correct, Mr.

Puente.

Yes, Mayor.

Our board, you on our board has a little bit different options.

And the cheapest option was this four-year rate spread that allows us to do it in that manner.

The other options actually increased the rate increase for the third and the fourth years if we just had a two-year rate increase.

Okay.

So this is the cheapest option for our community, keeps rates the lowest, and it minimizes the risk that we know of.

Correct.

Okay.

So delaying increases the risk to our community and increases the cost to our community.

Both happen if we push this down the road, yes.

Thank you.

Can you there's also been um some question about, you know, previously there was um the uh at a time when SAWs decreased the rate, and so part of the angst now, right, is we're faced with a rate increase in part to address what was a decrease previously.

So just to level set for the public and for some of my my colleagues, would you please explain why that decrease took place?

SAWS was part of the reason why this uh community was able to grow the way it grew the last few years, along with CPS Energy with a along with programs that our city puts in place, it attracted a lot of people wanting to move to San Antonio and then move to San Antonio.

Uh this influx of residents on the residential side caused a lot of revenue coming into SAWs.

It was uh more than what the cost of service was to provide them that service under state law.

Uh we we can only charge what it cost us to provide that service.

Uh and so all that revenue is coming in.

We felt it was the right thing to do to come back to council and say the residential rates are too high.

Uh reduce them, please, and council unanimously voted to reduce them 11.7 percent on the residential side.

Great.

Thank you.

Um, and while I've got you, just because again, we just heard from Toyota, it's fresh on the mind.

Sir, can you go to slide nine?

I think it's slide nine.

Um can you point out which of these things here would directly impact our ability to support a Toyota expansion?

Uh the two the 289.8 million dollar water supply.

It's uh ASR DCAL, expanded Carissa water recycled.

Toyota means that we're growing.

Toyota means we're gonna have more jobs, not just jobs in the factory, but ancillary jobs throughout that area.

Uh more suppliers will come in, uh, more people will probably live closer to what wanting to work closer in that area.

We're growing, and we can't saw us utilities cannot plan for a water project one or two years in advance.

It's long-term planning.

The fact that Toyota is coming today, I guarantee you they looked at our water supply and wanted to know is that box checked, and it is checked.

We want to continue to check that box, and that's what that particular uh uh project is for, those projects are for.

So delaying the rate increase um threatens our ability to provide the things that allow us to compete well for Toyota.

I believe so, Mary.

Yes.

Okay.

Cecilia, it's not in the slides, but I know you have it committed to memory.

Uh can you just level set for us again some of the fines that we would face if any of our water infrastructure knowingly goes uh goes down, excuse me.

So in relation to our treatment uh water recycling centers, um, depending on if we were to receive uh permit violations, we're we're talking about um per day, right?

So it could be a hundred thousand dollars per day if we had those violations, and if we had those on top of each other, we had certain violations on top of each other.

We we've said it, we provided it in our February um uh B session responses that we'd be looking at another consent decree.

And at that point, our last consent decree was 1.2 billion dollars over 10 years.

Corpus right now is in excess of uh I believe three billion dollars.

Houston is in excess of five billion dollars, five billion dollars, and so at that point, just like we were last time, we were required uh to provide um, we were required to uh perform all of the activities that were within that consent decree for our collection system, and that led to us to have to increase our sewer rates uh significantly over those 10 years.

That would be required if we were to get into another consent decree as well, it would be a requirement at that point from the federal government uh as well, not just us needing those rates, but at that point it would be a requirement by federal government that we would need those rates and move that forward.

Thank you.

I see Ed, did you want to say something?

Yeah, I just wanted to caveat that, and that obviously SAWS performs at a level where we are meeting our permit requirements right now.

We will continue to do that as best we can.

So all of those things about fines, possible penalties, those are theoretical, hypothetical if we were to have a failure at the plant if we were to have permit violations.

So I just want to make sure that that's also clear.

This isn't something that we're saying is absolutely going to happen.

These are all hypothetical theoretical situations that we have seen in other cities, and that we have experienced here with our own consent degree.

So I just want to make sure that that's also understood.

Yes, thank you.

And Mayor, on that same uh set of slides you asked about water supply.

I I want to emphasize what uh Cecilia and Ed said about on the wastewater side.

We also are looking at expanding our big uh wastewater treatment plant, the Klaus plant.

Um, as we grow, obviously uh we are water and wastewater, water supply and wastewater, they both grow together, and uh this particular these particular projects are also to expand our Klaus plant.

Great.

Thank you.

Um and thanks, Ed, for of course clarifying the the risk.

Um certainly we know that if it was something that we were expecting tomorrow, it's something that we wouldn't even be discussing, but I think laying out the risks, the full range of them as it relates to, I mean, that's exactly what your capital project is based on, right?

Your worst to first, and so um addressing those risks helps us avoid those fines.

Not addressing those risks increases the odds of facing those fines.

So we wanted to know how expensive they could be.

A hundred thousand dollars a day seems like a lot of cash that we don't need to spend.

Okay, thank you.

Councilwoman Viegran.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, San is San Antonio is fortunate to have such strong utility uh partners with both CPS and SAWs that have consistently demonstrated a commitment to serving our residents while maintaining responsible stewardship of our public resources.

So I think the question, uh, and I don't know if it's for you, Robert, or for Andy or Eric.

Uh, if we postpone today, what does that do?

Does that impact our credit rating and how does that impact um Robert?

You can answer for y'all's credit rating.

Postponing means uh projects become more expensive.

It means that the rating agencies are looking as to why was it postponed?

Uh, what are the circumstances of that postponement?

The credit rates agencies are already looking at us because of the fact that uh a 20-year tenured CFO retired.

They look at those things.

They want to see continuity, they want to see how you're replacing those uh individuals.

Uh, they want to see assurances so that they can tell the bondhold uh uh the bondholders that SAUS is a good credit risk, and so delay is something we would have to explain.

Not only because our owner uh is asking for a delay, but because of the increased cost that we're now going to have to uh address because of the delay.

Eric, would that impact our bond uh rating?

Um, maybe indirectly, councilwoman.

I mean, we do the we do the annual ratings with the the agencies in July.

Um the last seven or eight years as I've been city manager.

We generally don't get a lot of questions about the utilities of CPS or SAS, but but that's not to say that they're that they could that they couldn't ask us.

Okay, just wondering, uh, get some information on that.

And then Robert, the last time you were out up here where we did a rate adjustment, and I think that was for our business community.

That was that 2002 or 2003, uh the last full rate increase we had was in 2022, but it was a five-year rate increase for Vista Ridge.

Okay.

So it was 2015, it ended in 2020.

Okay, um, and then that's when we we uh looked next and we kind of reduced the rates after.

That was in 2022.

Okay, 2022.

So uh, and I thank the board for being here today, and and Pat Hasso, who was a board member of one of the quadrants, was there too, and she would constantly tell me you need SAS needs help, SAS needs help.

And preparing me and understanding that yes, we are going to make that adjustment today, but eventually we are going to need to get to the point where we will need to um have a rate adjustment for residentials.

So I think this is not new to me.

I we knew that this was coming after the pandemic.

Um SAUS has identified the need to adjust the current water and wastewater rate, structures to meet projected revenue requirements and to maintain the long-term fiscal health of their utility system, and we are the rate approvers.

This is our policy, this is what we do.

We do not sit on the board.

When I did get elected, there was talk of like, hey, why don't you sit on the boards of the utilities?

I was like, no, there needs to be a clear separation between the council as the owner, what we do, and the board in terms of the responsibilities you have, and I do want to applaud you because I feel like we're not showing appreciation for you and your efforts and what you've done.

And so thank you so much for your service.

I understand that that's been thoughtful.

The fact that the city, because I see Troy standing there, and Robert, I'm gonna ask Troy a question now.

Troy, I, and you know what I think of your work and and how great I think it is.

So your work saw very minuscule changes with with what they brought forward in terms of that rate increase for their need.

Yeah, it's consistent with what Mr.

Puente mentioned in the slide deck.

We looked at those items on the OM side and made recommendations that they adjust that, and we're in agreement with those recommendations.

Thank you.

So uh the the story I want to tell them is we tell the the South South story, and while it's like, and I appreciate you saying these were all hypotheticals, however, and y'all know where I'm going with this.

Mitchell Lake, everything from the North flowed south, and we found ourselves in a crisis with the federal government, and SAWs came in and they had to make the adjustments, and they have to stay within regulations, and they have been doing that consistently.

So you never know when this is going to happen.

I sit on the South Side that sees tremendous development, everything annexed in, and Robert, you and I have this conversation all the time, and my team has the conversation with your staff, is all that was serviced on the South Side was bare met.

We didn't know what Met was doing.

So when SAUS took over in 2012, they weren't sure what was where.

I have properties still on wells.

I have properties on septic tanks, because we don't have the infrastructure in part of the southern sector.

So when I go to my neighborhood associations, which is where I had most of the team go to talk about this rate adjustment, they were like, does that mean you're gonna address XYZ?

And they understood that this is what this rate adjustment meant.

That we were able to maintain the service and address the problems that we had because of our aging infrastructure.

Pecon Valley, I was with them before a few weeks ago.

They understood this because they want their pipes fixed.

They want to have that they want newer pipes, they want newer meter systems.

That's what they want there.

And that is why for me, I'm asking my council to support this because my residents are in need of this.

You'll you can come with the story how this doesn't have that or they're still still on septic tanks, or this is that.

Yes, because they were on a completely different system.

It was called bare met, and we go in and public work is trying to be as strategic as possible.

So I don't want to delay this, I don't want to put this off, I don't want to make this more expensive by waiting a while to do this.

I wish I had told you no when you told me we're gonna reduce the rates.

If I could go back in a time machine, I would.

But it just made sense there because we were coming out of a pandemic, and we thought that this would be a good break for our ratepayers.

But I I knew this wouldn't last forever.

I knew what was coming on the south side, but we were taking it in increments as development comes.

And I see thank you, business community and the developers that signed on.

Because y'all are here and y'all are there because you're like for the time after the pandemic, y'all have put forward and done what you could for new development.

But there is a price where we need to get our residential rate payers to put in to have a bigger voice.

So I'll be approving this today.

Um I understand that there are there are other issues, and I I hear the the I'm voting this way because of the leaks because of that, but my confidence is in city staff, my confidence is in the board, my confidence is in that Robert brought us Vista Ridge when we needed it, and that we can have that conversation and we can have the accountability we need.

We just need to get in the room and have conversations about that.

So I I am moving forward today knowing that we have old infrastructure, we need to address that, and if we want equity infrastructure, it takes investment, and I need to have the residents, the ratepayers with skin in the gate, because if they don't, they will not take it seriously about water conservation, about how they maintain their own pipes, and when when they invest, and I I can't explain to you how um Pecon Valley was encouraged to hear about this, that they could the changes were coming because we were identified the south side, southeast side was identified as as an area that needed significant investment, is that they understood, okay, and then we can plan for our homes and our pipes and our plumbing in our house, but they don't want to make that investment if they know they're going into pipes that may or may not work, or it's gonna dig up again.

So um the the decisions we make today will shape the quality of life for future generations.

Our focus should remain on creating a resilient, sustainable future for all residents, and um we know we need the flexibility.

I I need y'all to be fluid in the decisions you could make, Robert, and that's why any conversation of being very rigid on how we do things does not help as as we are 10 different districts with uh 10 different needs.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Councilmember Aldate Gavito.

Thank you.

Um I'll keep my comments short.

You know, I know I have um not been confident in SAWS plan throughout this process, and today my concerns remain.

I cannot vote yes on the current proposal until there has been a level of accountability from SAWS.

For me, it is hard to approve a proposal that increases salaries for execs for execs and staff adds positions, and all the while the city literally just got out of a conversation of us potentially having to cut our city staff.

And it's hard for me to accept this proposal while water is still running down our streets, and while it places the burden on residents in this unforgiving economy.

It still boggles my mind that we wouldn't wait to have this rate increased discussion before we have the results of our audit that my colleagues and I have asked for.

I feel that there are major operational inefficiencies that SAS needs to work through.

And these operational inefficiencies could potentially save cash and reduce the need for us to ask the residents to pay for it.

I'm open to continuing the discussion down the line.

Once these issues have been addressed, I think you saw in a lot of uh the chambers' letters, and I do think want to thank the business community and the chambers, but still there was that sentiment of accountability needs to be had at SAWS.

And so I I there's that theme there, and um, you know, I am happy uh I I am open to having the discussion once these inefficiencies have have been uh addressed.

I was happy to collaborate with my colleagues to come up with a list of action items for SAWs to work through prior to coming back, maybe later October or whenever y'all come back.

Um this list includes basic things like addressing water leaks and making sure that SAWS does not leave streets that the city of San Antonio spends really, really good money on, and SAWS later comes back and does some fixes there or fixes a pipe or whatever and then leaves the street in disrepair.

That all impacts our residents' daily lives, and so um, you know, we need to take that in consideration, and also again, I'm gonna hone in on happy to have that conversation once we have the findings of the audit.

Um again look look forward to to um having a more thorough conversation once a good plan is presented, and we'll wait to see when that happens.

Thank you.

Robert, if you'd like to respond, then I'd like to have the chair come up and speak to the audit piece.

Thank you, Mayor.

Council.

So a lot of has been said about requesting us to do an efficiency audit.

Um I have a different recollection of that process.

I was asked specifically at a B session if we had ever done an efficiency audit.

Uh, much and they referenced the CPS energy efficiency report or efficiency review.

And my response to the council, I believe it was Councilman White at that time was no, we had not.

And the reason we had not was because of the ongoing, very robust benchmarking that SAWS has and continues to have on every one of the areas that the CPS energy efficiency review covered.

So we look at that on an annual basis, it informs the uh executive and mission alignment, which handles compensation and creates the scorecard for the for the organization every year.

We look at those at that benchmark data and we use it to inform the targets that we set for the performance of the organization on an annual basis.

And so I I brought the CPS uh efficiency review with me today.

So when I look at that table of contents, it covers exactly the benchmark areas that SAWS already conducts today.

The blind spot we had, and I had a meeting with districts 10, 7, and 1 in 2020.

Uh, they shared with me a great deal of concern they had related to the capital planning and delivery and interface with uh public works.

We didn't have a capital department at that time, it had been uh collapsed into public works, and they shared with me some very specific concerns they had regarding our interface with the city and how we were delivering capital.

And as a result of that, that feedback, feedback I was receiving from the community in that same realm, and after the discussion with me about the need for an efficiency review or an audit, as they say, we created, we did a number of things.

We engaged our consultant to look at our capital planning and delivery process.

We had them specifically look at our coordination with the city of San Antonio.

I'm happy to say, as a result of that meeting, I met with the city manager and asked why was the capital projects division and public works collapsed and why were processes that we established as early as 2007 no longer being done.

I didn't realize they weren't being done.

And so as a result of that, we created the MOU that we entered into with the city over two years ago that outlines how we classify projects.

Once we determine the projects are in an area where the city or SAS do not have as built, we engage the subsurface review process so we can know as much as we can early on and include that information in the design and construction process so we know exactly what we're paying for.

So that's been in effect, and I think the Marbok project is probably one of the first projects where the MOU is now being implemented in that project.

The second thing the board did was create a capital oversight committee of the Board of Trustees at SAWS in anticipating, in anticipation of implementing the most complex and the largest capital program that we've seen in many years.

So the consent decree was very different.

It was all wastewater piping.

This includes wastewater treatment, wastewater distribution, water distribution, water supply.

It is a very complex and long-term capital program.

And so we think the work that we're doing with the consultant is very timely as we final this four-year program.

We've already seen some initial recommendations presented to the board oversight committee.

The board oversight committee has some additional work that they're asking that consultant to complete.

We are anticipating that this program will be approved so we can final the recommendations from that consultant.

And when the committee has done its work, the plan is to present that plan to the board so we will know what the implementation process, the options we have for delivery of that program, the timing and the sequential processes that we need to consider to successfully deliver this project on time and on budget.

Thank you, Chair.

Eric, did you want to say something?

No, it it's not pertinent to the matter before the council.

I disagree about how we got there, but I think the point is that we have an MOU with SAWS that better coordinates and frankly now has SAS as a as a as a signatory on those high profile contracts, which was at the end of the day the thing that needed to happen, but that's not pertinent to y'all's conversation.

Okay, thank you.

Councilmember Mesa Gonzalez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you for the presentation.

And to SAZ and your team for getting us here as well as our uh our team at the city, Troy and your team, thank you so much.

Um every resident, I think, regardless of what district you're from in this city wants two things, and I've heard this from my residents clearly, uh, they want these two things from their water utility, water they can depend on, and water they can afford.

Most of the time, the systems that support them seem invisible, right up until main breaks, a bill spikes, or an extreme weather event overwhelms a system that wasn't prepared for it.

Uh, this vote in front of us today, I think is keeping both of those promises to San Antonio at the same time.

I don't think any household should have to choose between an essential service and the rest of their budget.

I'm encouraged by the joint recommendation the city and SAWS has brought forward.

Um it takes the needs of our residential ratepayers seriously while still giving SAWs the resources to do the work our city genuinely needs.

Um, a couple of a few clarifying questions on the capital efficiency study.

When was that conducted and when was it finalized?

The capital efficiency study was started uh earlier this year.

It's not finalized, phase one is complete.

There's another phase coming.

Uh what our board wants to do is have this capital committee that our chair woman talked about look at it, address the things, ask the questions, and then go on to the full board for their acceptance and approval.

And of the recommendations it's produced, which has SAWs already implemented and which remain outstanding.

Well, they they didn't make any specific recommendations yet, and that's what phase two is about.

Okay.

But what they did address was uh the challenges that we're gonna have and that other uh utilities are having, and that is um the uh slide four, please.

Focus on governance, communication, strategic planning, and stakeholder uh engagement.

It's uh preliminary recommendations there at the bottom.

Those are the initial findings that they have that they want us to look at and address.

And do we think that is it too soon to ask this question, but do we think that there would be any additional savings in phase two that could ease future rate pressure?

Um I don't know.

Uh, but it is safe to say, in my opinion, that uh when you look at those uh things that uh those preliminary recommendations, uh strategic planning, does does that necessarily save money today?

It's planning into the future.

Governance, uh, how do we report back how we're doing uh to the board and to council and to the community?

So those those savings are more uh uh efforts that are long term and the savings therefore are long term.

Okay, thank you.

Um, you know, as we start talking about our next bond, uh which we've started already with preliminary discussions.

Um, SAS needs a capacity to be able to replace mains at the same time that we do our street reconstruction product projects, and so um my question is for art.

If SAS does not have the financial capacity to replace mains at the time of our reconstruction projects, how would that impact our projects?

The city.

Hi, councilwoman.

So, as far as planning for the bond program and how SAS does that, they could answer that.

Um, but the city primarily has two programs, as you know, the bond program as well as our annual street maintenance programs, and so on the bond project, SAWS typically joint bids with us on that, and they can plan for that as the bond program gets developed.

Um so as we're talking about the 2027 bond program through capital delivery, they will be looking and planning for that.

The on the operating side for Republic Works through our annual street maintenance program projects, um, that's where we've seen in times uh as we ramp up our funding, SAWS has a priority level, they work through different uh tiered level on how they replace their projects, and so that's where sometimes we may need to move forward uh to replace the pavement on a roadway on an old line because it's not at the same priority level on the SAW side.

Can you explain that last part again?

Yeah, so as we are doing our street primarily our mill and overlay and reconstruction projects, that's where we have heavy coordination with SAS to see are they going to replace an aging water line or sewer line?

And so they have a t a tiered priority level on that.

Uh so right now, currently the focus is on the reconstruction project.

So as we consider our annual programs and those ramp up, SAS has to make a decision if they if they have the capital to proceed with the replacements, or if we will just proceed with replacing the pavement on top of order lines.

Okay.

And especially at a time when we do large projects to prevent them having to rip them up again.

Um, and so in delaying this, I feel that we're saying opposite, right?

Of what we are all expecting when we talk about this coordinated effort with projects that uh we want this coordination, but we're not gonna give you the tools to do that such coordination.

Um, and so I just I I want, I mean, I know that I'm thinking about that because as I was sitting here thinking about bond projects and thinking of this was a city department, right?

It would us basically be saying uh public works, you hold off on all your project capital projects, but everyone else, you know, keep moving.

None of that can happen, right?

It all has to happen at the same time for us to keep that goal of coordination.

Um, and so I think for me, I am uh approving this proposal and um want this to move forward today because I think water and wastewater service is the baseline that lets every home, school, business in this city function, and the longer we wait to invest in it, the more expensive it becomes, and the more we put at risk.

Um again, I think what makes this a clear decision for me is that this does not ask our residents to carry that weight alone.

The agreement between the city and SAS lowers the increase, our residential households would otherwise have faced while still equipping SAWS to deliver the improvements our growing city demands.

I believe this is a fair balance that puts our residents first.

Um, and that's why again I will be approving this uh increase.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Castillo.

Uh thank you, and thank you, Robert, for the presentation.

Um, I'm going to emphasize what I stated during the last briefing, right?

That we know that our residents deserve access to clean water whenever they turn on the tap, and reliable water infrastructure is public health, as many of the public commenters expressed.

The proposed projects are necessary to avoid sewer overflows, boil water notices, water supply issues, service interruptions, pipeline failures, and costly regulatory violations.

As I've emphasized before, delaying the proposed projects will only increase costs at the risk of public health issues as well.

SAWS rate structure is equitable and ensures every family has access to safe and affordable water.

SAWS is also increasing funding for its assistance program.

Uh and I'm hearing many of the concerns and hearing the emphasis on accountability, but I want what I want to encourage is for folks to sit with the 2025 water management plan that your team has laid out and has presented to council.

And I'd like to understand, like what are the components that this body would like maybe increase, right?

And I appreciate the plan in terms of water detection addressing leaks, and many of the recommendations, many of which are already in practice, is to ensure that we're hiring more personnel to go out and detect water leaks before it turns into more gallons out on the road.

So again, highlighting that it takes personnel uh and it takes resources to address those capital improvements.

Um, so just one want to commend you and your team for the 2025 water management plan and laying out the direction and the needs of needs of SAWs.

Um but in addition to that, right, we can't expect you all to do more with less.

And clean water is a scarce resource and should be protected and not uh commodified.

Uh, and that's what I really value about the leadership of your board is ensuring that we ensure that those who uh that everyone that needs water access continue to have the um access to quality water.

Um, but I I don't have uh any current questions.

Uh the presentation was made it very clear, and I appreciate you being accessible, uh Robert, but I I did want to pivot over to some of the public health aspects, right?

Um, so Eric, if I may, I did have a couple of questions for Metro Health in in terms of understanding the public health importance of preventing contamination events like boiler water notices and service interruptions.

So uh if someone can help walk us through how reliable water systems protect vulnerable populations such as children, seniors, and people with compromised immune systems.

All right, thank you, Councilman.

Uh Councilman Casile, just know that uh Dr.

Jacob representing Metro Health, and I'm joined by our medical director and local health authority, Dr.

Junda Wu.

So, in short, just know that our task is making sure that safe water, snake-driven water is critical to public health.

Um, as we talk about the public health function, our our mandate is to assure the conditions where all can be healthy.

So just know for our more vulnerable populations, having reliable water service is especially important for residents who are more likely to be affected by water quality issues to avoid preventable illnesses.

Much of the material removed from municipal water supplies cause diarrheal illness, which impacts infants, pregnant women, seniors, and those who may be immunocompromised.

And this can progress to more serious conditions to severe hydration, dehydration and hospitalization, possibly.

So in the end, we the integrity of the system is important, so that's why we just want to make sure that in concert with the public works department with SAWS, we provide any technical assistance as your local health department.

Right.

Thank you, Dr.

Jacob and Dr.

Wu.

And I'm curious if you all can provide some examples from other communities where underinvestment in water systems have led to significant health concerns.

I would say the clearest example is what happened in Flint, Michigan, not too long ago.

Again, I think they're a decade in into that recovery efforts.

Again, in Flint, Michigan, that uh showed the impacts of divestments.

Um, so just acknowledging at least the clearest public health example that we've been talking about in this century, uh, and that happened not that long ago.

I didn't know if there's anything else you wanted to add.

All right, well, thank you, Dr.

Jacob and Dr.

Wu.

And uh I I thought it was important for us to emphasize that connection uh of water being public health, and it's a non-renewable resource, right?

Potable water is a non-renewable resource.

Uh, and I appreciate the work and you all sharing that context uh for my colleagues and I.

Thank you, Dr.

Jacob and Dr.

Wu.

Uh, and and that context is important because as councilwoman Via Gran has laid out, right?

Uh, the water runs south, uh, and it is areas that do not have water and or sewage connections.

Uh, and I'm grateful again with the coordination with SAWS, right?

We've been able to work through those issues, find a solution to pilot uh and increase funding for laterals to the people.

Um, again, right?

Identifying the issue, saw's board came up with a solution that we could support, but all that to say, um, failing to invest in this infrastructure.

Again, we just talked about how our cities economically segregated.

There are specific parts of the city of San Antonio that uh are still waiting for basic infrastructure, and by delaying and/or putting off supporting SAWs with their rate adjustment, is delayed improvements uh to long-neglected parts of our city.

Yes, councilwoman, and I appreciate your questions about public health.

Um, and there's been a lot of questions, a lot of comments about accountability.

We are held accountable every single time someone turns on their water to cook, to bathe, to do anything with water.

We are held accountable.

We do over a thousand lab tests a month, making sure the water is safe for those specific purposes of protecting public health.

Thank you.

I appreciate that, Robert.

Uh, lastly, again, just reiterating the point, right?

We're seeing it with uh bond projects that we're still waiting to see complete.

Um, with our IMP, CIP, NAP projects, right?

The costs continue to rise, and with these large-scale capital improvement projects, a delay and or kicking the can further down the road can potentially mean an increased rate request in a couple months or a year, uh, and again, just delaying the improvements that our constituents deserve.

Yes.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

In case it informs the rest of the comments of my remaining colleagues, um, those that have asked for uh or considering rather a delay, do you have an operational risk assessment that would help us understand the risks to our community as a result of those delays?

Potential delays, excuse me.

We uh not a specific operational risk, a formal one, but we we recognize the fact that we have been running this system for this period of time that these delays will happen.

For example, we've had a very wet spring.

Uh rain uh causes uh more flow that goes into our plants, which causes it to uh be potentially a violation because of so much flow going in.

Our plants have to be able to accept a certain amount of gallons, a million gallons per day.

Uh, and so that that's an operational risk if we are not able to expand our treatment plant.

So, yes, uh we it's not a formal assessment of of the risks involved, but we know what those risks are risks are if we're not able to um fund these projects that we have online.

Okay.

Thank you for clarifying that because if there was a risk assessment that was done, you would provide it.

Oh, definitely.

But it sounds like there are some folks on this dias that are contemplating a delay absent an understanding of the operational risks to our community, which exacerbate potentially some of the public health risks just identified by Dr.

Jacob.

Correct?

You're absolutely correct.

So asking for a delay and not understanding the operational risk is is where we're at.

Okay.

Yes, it's very um it we're trading on where we don't want to go.

We want to be able to take care of our system.

We've identified the projects that will keep us in compliance, the projects that will continue to allow us to grow the projects that we need to invest in because it costs more to continue to maintain them than to actually um improve them and rehabilitate them.

Yeah, thank you.

I just wanted to make that the point because it really parallels, you know, what we just had, what we just discussed with the budget, which was again that was a numbers exercise, but we have yet to understand the the true impacts of some of those costs.

Similarly, here folks are contemplating a delay without understanding the impacts of what a delay would mean beyond the cost.

Okay.

Do you want to add something?

Yes, go ahead, Chair.

Mayor, can I add something?

Because over the past six years, the board has been reviewing all of the master plans for all of the systems at SAWs.

And so from that standpoint, we are very aware and feel obligated now that we know the condition and the assessment for our water, wastewater infrastructure.

And we know the worst first.

And that was base, that was the basis for the direction to staff to create this program because we are aware that much of the infrastructure is ready for replacement.

And so just the risk factor of knowing that information and not being proactive in putting a program before the council to replace this equipment is in and of itself not accountable or transparent.

And so I just wanted to add the fact that for the past six years, the board present and the board prior has been evaluating all of these master plans for the various systems, treatment, production, distribution, as well as the development of the water development plan.

And I want to thank Councilwoman Castillo for recognizing that, because it was a great deal of work that went into that.

It was delayed a bit because we wanted to incorporate the board target of the 50% reduction of non-revenue water loss in that plan.

And so it bears sharing with the council the effort that the board took to create this equitable plan focusing on worst first.

But there is operational risk knowing that what's in that master those master plans and not acting on them.

Councilmember Galvan.

Thank you, Mary.

Thank you for the presentation today and to the SAS team for the constant conversations we've had over the past several weeks and months as well.

I appreciate all the follow-ups that uh you and the team have provided me uh over this week and the past several weeks as well, and some of the questions that I've raised, um, both here on the DIES, and then following up after uh through communications with my residents.

You know, rate increases are never something that I take lightly.

Uh, been skeptical about this one since the beginning.

Uh when we first kind of came to council talking about the budget uh needs uh for SALS overall, kind of questioning about some of the rate structure and things like that.

And we do those pieces uh with you all very diligently.

Um residents across the district voiced uh their understanding of the critical need when the uh SAWS representatives would come out to the neighborhood meetings or HOA meetings, uh, understanding the cost that's associated with it.

Um but wanted to also understand too, right?

How SAL is looking to reduce the impact to rate pairs as much as possible, right?

They asked things around how do large commercial industrial customers uh compare to residential, how can more conservation programs help all rate payers reduce their water use effectively and uh more comfortably too, uh thereby reducing cost and strain to the SAWs?

How is SAWs taking into account data center growth and water demand?

How SL's working to address street repair concerns for their line work, and how can folks on fixed incomes of working should working families uh shoulder this um this rate request?

Since then, uh again asked those questions uh and SAS is answered a few years ago, right?

SAWs changed their restructured impact fee policies to ensure that those who use more water pay more.

Point blank simple.

Those developing on the edges of our city pay more for that infrastructure too.

Understanding that's gonna require new infrastructure out there in places that are undeveloped.

So I was conservation plan, uh, which uh I'm very grateful to see uh Councilman Castillo have brought that big old book out and said, Oh, I know that uh that cover uh because it's a critical part of it, right?

These aren't things that are just sprouting up out of nowhere.

These things that y'all have been working on uh year after year after year.

Um, and part of the conservation plan specifically looks right um through 2075, focusing on reducing the system wide water demand to 87 gallons per capita per day.

And as of last year, they are already at 11 gallons per capita per day.

And they're committed to doing more direct outreach to residents, committed to making sure that we're working through the policy work that even the city of San Antonio has to work on through our land use policies and development codes as well.

And I know that'll be a big conversation later next year.

Similarly, right, looking at the uplift program, constantly looking at ways to make it more affordable for the folks who can uh least afford a rate uh increase, um, and again have showed today, right, the targeted pilot program in many of our districts to figure out how we can make sure that the folks who are uh not seen within this program are enrolled as quickly as possible.

Um, and folks who are just outside those edges, how can they still uh find support somewhere, whether it's through conservation programs or other kind of means on data centers.

I appreciate slide six being shown uh today.

But of course, all the conversation we had uh prior to this in our own conversation about the city council consideration request uh that my office put forward along with um some of the conversations we had in March, uh talking about, of course, all the work you'll do over the next over the rest of the summer, uh some of things that will be coming back to us, all the key things that our residents uh my residents in particular have been asking about are related to rate and fee structure, contamination, uh the evaporative cooling issues there, and then of course the use of the recycled water system, which is has a lot of capital needs still, um, but regardless, looking at ways to continue to show us how we're gonna be able to get there one day, whether it's for data centers or beyond large industrial um or large uh water users in our city.

Of course, continue to work with uh coast public work staff to address uh some of those logistical issues that are talked about in the other council when it comes to uh the pipe work and of course post-construction uh quality assurances, um, and many other pieces there, and so given all those answers that uh SALS provided, and given the the kind of back and forth we had about what's the kind of longevity for these work, the the timeline for it all, I feel comfortable moving forward with these critical investments, the expansion of the uplift program to ensure our most vulnerable residents will not be impacted by this rate increase.

They continue to address all these issues that we just talked about uh today, and of course, through my comments too.

And I trust that that work will continue as SAT returns to brief this council over the next several years as you have those kind of regular uh meetings.

I do want to note, right, uh I know there's skepticism, right, from many of my colleagues, and I and some questions about you know how the operation will go, how we can make sure this is all taking place, and et cetera.

Um I don't think that should go unnoticed, right?

I don't think it has by SALA's leadership.

Um making sure that we're addressing these things are really critical to give us confidence to continue working uh very well with y'all.

Of course, we're always gonna try to work well to support a public utility.

I believe we have to.

Um but I just want to make clear, right?

I think those those among us who are looking for some more critical actions to take place and next steps to take place prior to committee to this rate increase shouldn't be pushed aside as not uh not looking for some kind of answers here.

Uh should address these kind of long-term issues they've seen in their communities.

Um that's what I've raised with these ones, right?

There's some key concerns that I've always heard, um, whether I was working as a staff member in a different district or while as council person here as a neighbor association leader as well.

These are things that continuously have come up, and so it's just critical to get those things um addressed.

So uh I'm inclined naturally, I think, uh, as a kind of a gut reaction uh to support a delay.

I understand the risk, and I'm trying to make sure that I'm uh I'm cognizant about that through this conversation today, but I I still think it's fair for our council colleagues to kind of get those answers that are seeking in some way, but eager to hear the rest of the council conversation today and just sharing my perspective on it.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to clarify that because you said you understand the risks, but they haven't done an operational risk assessment.

So which risks are you talking about?

Understanding the risk about potentially seeing an increased rate, possibly later on, the cost overall, understanding of course the delay in their projects and the kind of capital uh investment they'll need to make regardless.

I get them.

And I'm not trying to say that they're diminished in any value.

I'm not trying to say them those things.

I think it's just we're having this conversation now, right?

And we've been having it for a while.

I think council colleagues who are seeking some more information deserve to get that information, and so just eager to hear what they're thinking as well on this conversation.

Thank you.

I wanted to clarify because there has been no risk assessment done to understand the operational risk of any delay.

There's none.

We understand the cross made, the cost will increase, as has already been laid out.

This is the cheapest cheapest.

This is the the cheapest that it would be the rate increase.

This is the best way to minimize the risks that we know.

Delaying this only increases the odds that we will actually hit the ceiling of the cost, if not bust it.

And we don't know the impacts on our infrastructure that has already been identified as needing upgrade or repair.

So for folks to say I understand the risks, you don't because they haven't been laid out because they haven't done the analysis.

They've done the analysis for what they've presented.

They have not done an operational analysis that would support nor justify a delay.

The uplift program.

I don't know if folks necessarily understand who we're talking about.

So for a family of three, a family of three in our community, that means that we're we were helping somebody who was making family of three, somebody who was making $17.78 an hour.

We are now, as a result of going to 150% of the federal poverty line, we're gonna be helping somebody, a mom and two kids who was making $21.34 an hour.

That's who we're helping the most vulnerable.

We should not delay this.

Can we also maybe um Robert or somebody else on your team that can speak to the distribution of our current uplift uh um uh customers as well as where we would see most likely see an increase based on um based on raising the the um the upper limits of who we would be helping?

Yes, Mayor, we have a a heat map, excuse me, a heat map that shows where these uh families live.

Uh but as we know our city, as you know our city, and uh every council member knows their city, uh they're concentrated in the uh core of the city, district five, district three, uh district two.

Um they're concentrated there, four and six.

Um, and that's not to say there's not families in district seven, eight, nine, seven, eight, nine, and ten.

They're throughout the city, but that's where they're concentrated in the uh inner city.

Great.

Thank you.

Councilmember Mungia.

Thank you, Mayor Robert.

I just want to say um thank you to uh the conversations that we've had.

Thank you to coming to the town hall that I invited you to do.

I know that was there were some tough questions and some of our residents can be uh a little prickly sometimes about it, but I do appreciate you standing up there answering the tough questions.

Not everybody's prepared to do that, and I do appreciate that very much.

Thank you.

I think we've had some very productive conversations, you and I.

I think uh you understand the needs and concerns that I expressed to you uh and some of the problems that I feel that have been long-standing issues that require some solutions for.

Uh and so I appreciate I'm glad we're having a large conversation today about Southside and other east side and west side parts of town that have seen underdevelopment, but I do want to recognize, especially with the bare met situation and other things my colleagues have pointed out when it comes to the septic systems and the wells.

It's not necessarily SAWs, it's building out the pipe work to take people off of that.

Uh, and I think that is a problem.

And I understand that is a cost issue, and that's gonna be something that we talk about later, but I do want folks to understand that we are we're making people who live there or people who are building out communities and commercial development, that they have to pay for that.

And I think it's a little different.

I've never been a developer, so I I don't know the world where I can't say that I do, but I can imagine that 20 30 years ago when there were other parts of our city that were booming, the framework, the existing network of piping wasn't quite the gap system we have with bare met.

We all know that situation.

We all know the gaps that exist there, probably because these were large tracts of land at some point that didn't require laterals all the way down the street.

But that's a cost is being put on to uh the private sector uh and by small individuals, and I've I've shared examples with the council about individuals, you know, small businesses and residents that are having to being asked to foot the bill for that.

And I think that is a travesty when we talk about development on the South side and what we're trying to do over there.

Um, and I think there are some other issues that we talked about that you know require some more due diligence to take a look at.

Uh, and I do think and I have faith that you and the board can work on that and provide solutions.

I do think with a little bit more time, I will feel more comfortable with that.

Uh, but I do thank you for all that you've done.

And I would actually like to ask Julin to come up for for a little bit too.

Thank you also for the conversation that we had.

We had a long chat last week, and I understand uh you took a lot of time and effort to understand the issues I had.

You've given me some responses to that.

Uh you do have a very good reputation in the city, and people do trust your leadership, and I do as well as the board chair.

Thank you.

And I think you all have done some amazing work under your tenure there and with the board.

I do think there's a lot more to do, and I think you recognize that too.

You're not one to say, hey, this is it, we're done.

You're constantly changing and on the go.

Uh, but again, you know, what I see and I explain to you are some systemic issues that that keep happening.

And what I don't want to do, and I know that it's it's very easy for me to pick up the phone and maybe call folks and say, hey, this is an issue I have.

Can you address it?

And then it could get addressed.

But what about all the issues and folks that don't have access to me or or know that they can call me or know you all as individuals, right?

And so these are a lot of examples, there's a lot of examples out there of folks who uh just don't have that access.

And so I'm looking at systemic solutions, right?

Well beyond anybody who's here.

I mean, in 20 years, none of us will be in this room, hopefully.

Uh, but that's what I'm kind of looking for.

I want to be here, but I may not be able to do that.

Well, yes, yes, we'll all be on Earth, but not in this room, hopefully.

Um, but I do think with a little extra additional time that we talked about, we can really get there, and I think my concerns can be uh addressed in a really good way that I'm looking for.

So I do appreciate that.

I also appreciate my former boss uh who's here, Dr.

Rocha Garcia, she's always been very helpful and took my calls and my concerns too.

And she represented she sat here and she understands these issues too, and and what's kind of going on through the development of things.

So I'm just didn't know if you wanted something to add something.

Well, I appreciate your comments and thank you for the comments regarding um my tenure as well.

I it's very well appreciated.

I say often, I'm not a native, but I really am committed to this community, so thank you.

Um I too share your concerns, and I look forward to an opportunity to write some of the poor management decisions by Bear Met historically, and quite frankly, some of the strategic decisions that the city water board made not to invest in the South Side of San Antonio.

I'm aware of that history, but I will tell you to delay for a couple of months is not going to bring that solution forward.

Um I am committed, and I'm sure my colleagues share my concern about the overall our current philosophy of development paying for itself.

And we are excited about what's happening on the south side of San Antonio.

When I was here, I led the effort to get Texas AM in our community.

I thought it would be great for San Antonio to be the only city in the state of Texas with both frag flagship institutions in our community.

So lots of work to get done.

That will be a heavy lift.

I don't want to stand behind that, but I am ready to roll up our sleeves, work with our stakeholders.

If it requires us to go back and engage a rate consultant to help us determine how we would look at that, I'm I'm willing to do that.

Uh, in addition, though, we're gonna need your help because it will require us to work with the city appointed capital improvements committee to look at how we structure impact fees.

Absolutely.

That's why I was saying it it's not a couple a month or a couple of week deal.

Right.

Um, it's gonna take some time to work through it, and if it means we're gonna work on that in the in the you know, right now and begin that process, I'm all in.

Absolutely, and I think some hard concrete planning efforts that reassure us of that, those timelines are gonna be helpful.

Uh, you know, and I've seen this happen every time.

You know, there's important infrastructure that needs to be funded.

I get that, I understand this program, but at some point, we have to get some better assurances on these solutions to happen.

One of the aspects of the efficiency plan is a communication plan and how we need to implement that ongoing and our decision making process and and internally to make sure that those projects are delivered.

And so that work is being done with our oversight committee, and we look forward to bringing that back to the council so they can understand that plan, but we need a final approved plan to do that.

I appreciate that.

Well, so with that discussion, I may at this point I move to continue this item to an A session in October for the council to consider potential SALS rate adjustment for 2027 and 2028 with necessary briefings and the requested plans for city council before that meeting on the requested items discussed and provided.

Second, there's a motion and a second to the continue to continue the item to October.

Um the uh as as was just mentioned um by the by the chair, however, the the things that you've asked for councilman are are probably not going to be addressed as she just said.

Um secondly, we also don't have an operational risk assessment that helps us understand the risks of delaying and further delaying this only increases the costs of these potential projects.

So those are the challenges that we would knowingly face as a result of continuing this item.

For those that are just returning, there's a motion and a second to uh to continue the item until October.

Um please sign in if you'd like to speak.

Oh, okay.

Councilwoman Via Gran.

So I understand that there was a list.

I have not seen the list.

Um I am as chair of I'm I'm speaking as chair of economic workforce and development.

And you might want to elaborate on the list.

The list that went uh okay, okay.

Let me start this way.

Robert, was a list sent to you uh regarding what they'd like to see and uh you or Jalen can answer?

Uh yes, uh last night councilman Corps sent me a list of some items that she wanted to address.

Okay.

I have I have not seen that list.

Okay, then I uh so uh I did not get it.

It's not in my email.

So I have a problem with uh delaying for a list um that was made by council members, but we do not have the list of who the council members were, and I'm concerned.

I'm concerned about, of course, protocol and um the appearance of a walking quorum possibly on this issue if we don't have that.

So I would rather I will not be supporting this list because it's it I will not be supporting a delay because it's shrouded in too many questions for myself.

Who was part of it?

Did we have a walking quorum?

Should we even have a list?

Things like that.

So I again I I do believe that we could pass this today, uh, and that we could get the answers that we want and and the accountability that we need because I know I see Art here and Mike and John Peteric was here, and when we talk about our team and even Rod and Rossi, you know, um my belief is that they will be the shot callers on as anything we move forward in these projects and and keep a very good um eye on this to make sure that uh any memo of understanding anything is is kept on track.

So I will not be supporting a delay.

I do not see that a delay I I from what I'm hearing um a delay does not I will not change at least three votes on this dias, uh because of the three no's that I'm certain of that have expressed that.

Um they're not gonna get the changes that they want.

So uh I I would like to move forward and not do the delay.

Thank you.

If I may, mayor, can I make a couple points?

Sure.

One, uh, if we're talking about can you clarify have you seen the list, Andy?

I I was provided a uh, you were provided the list, okay.

Thank you.

And uh the first uh comment, Mayor, is that we're gonna have issues in terms of walking quorum that should be discussed in the executive session since it is a compliance issue.

Second, the list that that was shared with me, I understood it as a list of issues that some of the council members had concerns about, and uh I read it may made it clear that whatever vote that is taken today can't be contingent on either uh the CEO, Mr.

Puente, or the board taking certain actions.

Certainly, as as the rate-making body, you can ask all the questions you want, raise whatever issues you want, but whatever vote is taken can't be tied to a particular action by either um Mr.

Puente or the board.

Thank you.

That's very helpful because um of the items on that list.

I'm very concerned, veer into what is not the purview of this body, and more so are related to operations and personnel, which is squarely in the bucket of the board.

Um we want to make sure uh that we are certainly compliant, but also are not inviting any undue attention to ourselves needlessly.

Is there any other discussion on the motion to continue?

Oh, Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, and I entered this meeting undecided, and I'm going to talk you all through my thought process, and I'm going to try to be as gentle as I can be.

And I think in this context, a delay could grant more confidence in whatever vote I cast.

Uh, it could get me closer to a yes.

Uh, it could be what's needed to get me there.

Um, and this has probably been one of the most challenging uh rate increase discussions that we've had.

And in the last presentation that I responded to, I described a few of the things that I appreciate about SAW's approach, uh, especially the rate structure that ensures that the largest users pay more.

Uh that's something that our community really values with SAWs, whereas they critique uh the inverse that uh CPS's approach in which they incentivize who use the incentivize those who use more with lower rates.

And I appreciate the SAS does not prioritize corporations overworking families.

I appreciate that this request seeks to minimize impacts on our most vulnerable uh and to capture as many of those households as possible by increasing increasing the threshold uh uh for participation uplift and and the like.

I also have discussed a few challenges, and today I'm comp I'm contemplating all of that.

Uh number one is there is, of course, a critical need to make these infrastructure investments, and when I think about uh some of the mayor's words when she first got elected and described her priorities, it was uh those areas we cannot uh we cannot afford to fail.

And we don't disagree on that at all.

Uh and so the idea that these are projects that we cannot afford to not fund really weighs on me as I know that it does all of my colleagues.

Uh we just had this discussion around a property tax rate increase, and we're balancing that discussion on top of this one on top of any other see or anything else impacting quality of life for the affordability of our residents.

And I understand a delay may make these projects more expensive and may necessitate uh a higher increase in the future.

What exactly that number is is uh to be determined.

Uh to that point, I do have a few challenges with how we got here.

So we're talking about uh infrastructure that at a recent meeting you said and have said that if it you know it could fail in the immediate future, and that makes me really concerned about the long-term planning efforts of SAWs.

And just a few years ago, and this has been brought up too, right?

Is uh it was a rate decrease was proposed.

And I asked, hey, does this make sense?

There's nowhere that you could utilize these funds or mitigate a future rate increase.

And are you just going to come back for an increase later?

And the response that I got was it's always possible that we can come back for a rate increase.

And it was not stated that we were going to need money for capital investments that were due or die within a matter of a few years.

And that leads me to believe that you either as an organization did not know that you needed to make these major capital investments, or that your long-term planning did not meet my expectations.

And so either one, either one of those to me is unacceptable, and I'll allow you to uh respond to that after I'm uh after I'm done.

But there's also been a number of major projects that our community relied on and were excited for that were delayed because SAWs didn't know where their infrastructure was, or uh because SAWs otherwise coordinated poorly with the city and the contractor, and I understand any time there's multiple parties involved, the onus is not fall squarely on one entity, but businesses were closed, and they closed in the slowest, most painful way possible, and that represents dozens and hundreds of jobs lost.

People were who were ultimately impacted by a lack of accountability in public institutions, and that led to an erosion of trust in both SAWS and major city projects that should be a net positive for our community that we ask them to support with eagerness and excitement.

And every single time that SAWS was asked and is asked about a major issue, it's always someone else's fault.

And so the city-led efforts to create an MOU to address those issues with SAWs related to our projects, or that led to those efforts, but every conflict to that point is a finger-pointing blame game.

And I think back to one of my first major interactions with you, Robert, via email, where I shared my concerns regarding water shutoffs and apartment complexes where residents paid their rent, paid their utilities, and the apartment management neglected to use that money that was paid to them to pay their bill.

And the response was to punish the residents and shut off their water, or to threaten that.

And they could not cook, they could not bathe, they could not brush their teeth.

And so when I emailed this concern to you asking for a change, I would describe your response at the time as snippy, and it made me incredibly angry at the time.

And largely because, to me, your response neglected the impacts that the shutoffs or even the threat of a shutoff had on the residents.

And it was not the only approach that SAOS could have made, but it was the most convenient, though one of the most inhumane.

And so we as a council had to take action again to address that approach.

And then you look at Grayson Heights and the water leaks there, you look at leaks across the city, and it was always someone else's fault.

It never saws.

And so there's never anything that SAWs can do.

And so if I were to compare that with any department head in our city, if I reached out to them with a concern that has even two degrees of separation from their direct purview, they would never say it's not their responsibility, that it's somebody else.

They would work on a solution, identify partners, and address the issue.

And that's not the case with SAWs, and that is incredibly frustrating.

And we've since had conversations, and I do believe the tone of your responses has changed, and you've internalized my feedback.

I do believe I do believe that.

But a part of me feels that it's all been in service to earning my vote for a rate increase.

And so why is it now when trust is wilted that there are plans to improve?

Now all of our questions can be answered, and there's a plan to address our issues, and it's at this point when a rate increase is needed.

It's not at any other point over the past several years when concerns have been raised.

But on this topic, uh, and we've discussed trust and the desire for each of us as individual or for each of us as individuals to trust you and to trust one another.

Um, and I want to get there, and I know that we'll both work to get there and we will be fine.

Um, but on this topic, multiple things can be true.

It can be true that uh you've navigated SAWS through challenging times and led the utility well, and I don't want to neglect that.

You could be the best leader that SAWs will ever have in its history, and so I don't want to neglect that.

That's possible.

It can also be true that something is wrong here and that there are balls being dropped along the way, and something needs fixing.

And I don't know what, and I don't know what that is.

It may also be true that the rate increase is needed to do the work our community needs and expects of you, expects of all of you and expects of all of us.

And it is also true that there has been a gap that has gotten us to the point where without a rate increase, our infrastructure can fail.

Gotten us to the point where the location of SAWS infrastructure is casually guessed and leads to businesses shutting down, people losing jobs, and the trust in our ability to deliver much needed infrastructure improvement eroded, gotten us to the point where a large contingent of our council, or a sizable one at least, is contemplating not supporting this increase that you need much to the detriment of our city.

And so there's still a question of whether or not uh we believe these projects will be done well if done it, you know.

We've talked about projects that our community needs and are excited for that have not been done well, have not been done timely.

What is to say that the projects that you need and that the projects that you that are priority that are of utmost importance and significance, how do we know that those are going to be done well?

Because we don't have that trust right now.

And when and when we as a body rubber stamp a request without addressing those deeply troubling issues, we disappoint our community and the people who place their trust in us.

And someone needs to atone for that.

And so I had to ask myself if there is a point where I could confidently support a rate increase.

And the answer is yes.

Many of my colleagues have tremendously uh points made here today are clear.

This is a public health issue.

That is one area that I don't neglect.

This is something that our residents are counting on us for and counting on us to do and to make this difficult decision.

And I desperately want to avoid this conflict, and I hate that we're at this point today.

Um, and I also don't know that I need any new information, right?

What I do think I need is I need purpose and I need intention from Saws, and I'm not sure that that's yet been conveyed.

I do think we're on our way there.

I think there's leadership who's made some very clear points and has expressed a desire to get to that point.

So my vote is still approaching the end of my 10 minutes, still undetermined, but a yes vote for me would only be out of fear.

It would not be a confident yes vote.

And that concerns me because I don't cast votes that way.

Thank you.

First, I appreciate the fact that you have an open mind that you're giving me and SOS the opportunity to convince you to say yes to this very needed rate increase.

So I appreciate that.

Secondly, I am troubled on how much to respond because I don't want to come across as defensive, I don't want to come across as not being able to take any blame or anything like that.

But let me just tell you what our position is.

For one of the things you talked about is long-term planning, whether some of these projects uh that we're saying are needed now because of an impending uh because of a potential violation uh in the near future.

One perfect example of councilman is Winterstorm Uri.

The project that we have on the books that we want to uh start this uh fall uh was originally scheduled to start in 2022.

Uh in 2021.

Hurricane Uri happened.

The state government passed Senate Bill 3 and told utilities uh you have to do some things.

Uh they didn't tell the private sector, they just told the public sector.

Um, and uh to be more resilient that if power goes out, you still have to be able to provide at least uh 20 pounds of pressure to the to the residents.

That Center Bill 3 cost us over $300 million.

That $300 million would have paid for some of the projects in 2026, later this year, and in early 2027.

So we we believe that we do have uh long-range planning.

Please don't take that as as me being defensive.

I will admit that that's some, and I'll I'll say this out loud to everybody.

That's something that Jolyn and my board told me about is that uh don't be so defensive.

So I'm working on it, and I'm glad you recognize uh that uh my attitude has changed for to some extent.

Uh um you mentioned the streets.

Uh Councilman uh Mr.

Gonzalez uh mentioned the streets, and I talked to Eric about it last night.

And one of the things that he told me, and and if hopefully I get this right, Eric, is that he's been trying to tell you you, the council, that these issues that come up are only one, maybe two percent of the time that SAWS works with the city on these governmental projects.

Um, that unfortunately that one or two percent are very visible.

Uh it causes a lot of complaints, it causes a lot of uh angst by the businesses that are affected, the residents that are affected, and they call you.

Uh they call you, and uh we need to address that.

And one way we addressed it is this MOU that's been talked about, memorandum of understanding, where we are signatories to the construction contracts that the city enters.

Uh, when we're when you when y'all are doing drainage or street repair, and we're doing uh changing out of our sewer or water infrastructure.

So I believe, councilman, that those issues are starting to get taken care of.

Um the other one about um the apartment complexes, um, this and this was a concern of Council District 7 also.

Only 45 minutes was an apartment complex out of water, however, the threat, and it made a lot of news, it caused every other apartment complex to fall in line and to start paying their bills to where we don't have that type of problem anymore.

Now, the email that you talked about, if I was snippy, I hope I wasn't, but I I do remember uh telling you, I don't know if it was in the email or or over the phone, because one of your big concerns was just the mere threat of turning off their water causes a lot of uh angst on that uh renter that had uh that paid their rent, did everything they were supposed to do, and their water could be cut off because we were notifying the residents that their water could be cut off.

That in and of itself was a um an event that they shouldn't have to have gone through.

I admit that and and I and because of our conversations, we don't do that anymore.

We haven't done that anymore.

I I believe I was responsive to you, even to the extent, for example, that there was a complex outside of District 2, but in the county, that we kept you your your staff apprised of as to how um they were paying or not paying, and their big problem was a whole lot of leaks out of their uh internal infrastructure.

So, councilman uh to wrap up to go full circle, um thank you for having open mind.

I ask that you uh give us the opportunity to earn your trust again.