Councilman.

Councilman Corps, can you hear us?

Yes, I can hear you.

Yay.

Round of applause.

The time is now 2 08 p.m.

on December 2nd, 2025, and we will call our meeting to order.

Madam Clerk, can you please read the rule?

Councilmember Corr.

Present.

Councilmember Mungia.

Councilmember present.

Present.

Councilmember Spears.

Chair McKee Rodriguez.

Present.

Chair, we have a quorum.

Wonderful, wonderful.

We're gonna start off with uh minutes of our November 4th, 2025 meeting.

I'll entertain a motion for approval.

Motion to approve.

What if we have a motion a second?

We'll take a voice vote from Councilman Corr.

Aye.

Okay, all in favor.

Aye.

Passes unanimously and let the record reflect that Councilman Spears is here.

Next item we have is public comment.

We have one resident spine signed up to speak.

Joey Pollock, are you present?

Okay.

Not present, so we have no other members of the of the public.

Uh we'll move on to item two.

It's going to be uh item two is gonna be a result of two requests, one from Councilwoman Dr.

Corps, who requested a holistic presentation on the ecosystem micro mobility and vehicles for hire, and the second is my request to begin discussion for what a pilot program could look like uh for e-carriages as we phase out horse-drawn carriages over the next few years.

And so for this discussion, we're gonna have uh two rounds at five minutes.

Okay, good afternoon, uh chair and committee members.

My name is Rick Riley, and I'm the assistant director for the San Antonio Police Department.

Today I'll be joined by Mr.

John Jax, uh, who will provide the micromobility uh portion of the brief.

I'm gonna present a briefing on the electric vehicle for higher service industry, kind of an overview, and Mr.

Jax, as I said, will take care of a micromobility transportation piece.

So today's briefing will cover the following uh a short background of chapter 33 as it pertains to electric vehicle uh for higher industry, uh then a micromobility transportation, and then at a conclusion, which we're going to ask uh the committee for some recommendations of how they'd like to move forward on a pilot program uh for additional electric vehicles.

So uh since November 2022, Chapter 33900 has governed the operation of electric vehicle for higher service industry.

So the first question is what's an electric vehicle uh service industry and how does that work?

So, as you see up there, it's a chauffeured vehicle, it's operated for any fare or compensation that includes tips and used to transport uh passengers.

The vehicle has to be propelled by an electric motor only, so that's non-combustion, that's non-human powered, so it has to be only that electric motor that that propels that vehicle.

It has a maximum speed of no more than 35 miles an hour, and it must meet all federal state motor vehicle standards for low-speed vehicles.

That includes a registration as a slow-moving vehicle with the state of Texas.

As you see there, the SAPD ground transportation unit enforces chapter 33, similar to taxi cabs, horse carriages, petty cabs, etc.

And as of today, we have not had any citations issued for any of the drivers or operators of the electric vehicle service industry.

So, as I mentioned, the uh electric vehicles are limited to streets posted uh with speed limits of 35 miles an hour or less.

That means that they traditionally operate in the downtown, South Town, uh, Pearl, and Blue Star area.

They currently we have three companies operating here in San Antonio, Ego, San Antonio Go, and Dest.

Twenty permits are allowed.

15 of those are standard permits.

The other five permits are exclusively for the via little runner contract, which provides that last mile of transportation for via as well as transportation for the UTSA students, faculty, and staff that come uh on this side of the freeway.

There are currently 33 permitted electric vehicle drivers.

You see some metrics there for 2025.

Um old slide, I apologize.

I'll just read them to you.

Average distance is two to three miles that they travel.

Uh cost per trip is about five dollars.

Uh that's a normal fare per person.

Those electric vehicles can also be rented out for an hour or on a tour basis if they so desire.

Uh average time per trip is seven to twelve minutes, and then uh estimated in 2025 there's been 25,000 trips thus far throughout the year.

And then estimated in 2025, there's been 25,000 trips thus far throughout the year.

So at this time I'm gonna uh ask Mr.

Jax to come forward and talk about the micromobility transportation piece.

Thanks, Rick.

Uh good afternoon, committee members.

John Jax with Center City Development and Operations Department.

Uh so currently today um CCDO oversees the two micromobility contracts that the city has uh with bike share and the dockless vehicle companies.

Uh the the bike share is the uh a fixed system and it's it have docking stations where the bikes have to be returned to.

That's currently operated by B-Cycle.

And then we have two contracts with uh bird rides and VO to operate uh dockless vehicles, which includes the scooters and the um kind of a sit-down bike version of a scooter, um if you will.

Each one of those companies is authorized to have up to a thousand vehicles in their fleet, so a total of two thousand uh permits issued for dockless vehicles.

Um these are familiar slides that you all saw a couple of months ago.

Um this is our dockless vehicle program.

It shows the uh primarily this the routes that are being taken or the highest usage.

Um is obviously in the downtown area, East Commerce Street, West Market, East Houston, and La Soya really are kind of primary thoroughfares through downtown, but um also a little bit um weighted on the east side of downtown where most of the uh visitor um attractions are people visiting either the Alamo or they're here for a convention.

Um this just shows you kind of the average trip that people are taking.

So somewhere between 10 and 12 minutes is the average uh length of a trip or the average time of a trip.

Um both companies very close in the uh average distance, really right around a mile is the average distance we're seeing per ride, and then in the bottom there is the cost.

Um, the average cost is for bird is six dollars and six cents plus tax, and then VO is five dollars and twenty-nine cents.

As far as bike share is concerned, um this is a this program started off, it was um really had a lot more stations throughout the downtown area, and over time it's kind of whittled down to really the the primary usage areas, which you'll see is is downtown and then south on the mission trail along the um along the uh the river trail there to all the different um missions.

Um the most utilized stations are 305 East Houston, Main Plaza, Mission San Jose, and then Blue Star.

Um there's it's broken into uh a couple of different options for users to use.

There's a one-hour pass for $15.

You can get a day pass for $25, and then a monthly membership for $33, and an annual membership for $160.

Average trip time is 41 minutes, obviously a lot longer on bike share than on the dockless vehicles because we're traveling much further distance, and a lot of people are using them to go up and down the um the trailway system to visit the the missions.

Uh B-Cycle has 111 bikes.

All of those bikes are pedal our electric pedal assisted bikes.

Um they have 18 stations, and the stations vary in size.

Some of them hold more bikes than others, so it's not a um you can't just divide 225 by 18 and get the number of bikes per station.

It really depends on the station and how much it's being used.

Um, but there are 18 stations and a total of 225 docks.

A dock is a is an individual um dock for a bike to go into.

And then I'll turn it back over to Rick.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

So uh today uh we're seeking input from the committee regarding uh potential electric vehicle pilot programs.

We're ready to have a conversation about uh if we want to transition the horse carriages to an electric carriage or something along that lines, and both Mr.

Jackson and I are available for questions.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Um so uh one, I appreciate the presentation and thank Councilman Corps for uh her element of this request.

I think it's important to fully understand the scope of these industries as a whole as we're discussing future RFPs for dockless vehicles, changes to regulations of the uh in limousine industry and the transition from uh horse carriages to e-carriages.

Uh the vast majority of my uh feedback today will revolve around that specific element of this presentation.

Uh and I'll remind my colleagues in 2023, Councilman Via Grande and I filed as C CR calling for a just transition from the horse carriage industry uh that prepared alternatives for those in the industry throughout the phase out.

And so this year council approved that five-year phase out of horse-drawn carriages, but we haven't yet begun the discussion on uh e-carriages and what a transition will look like.

Uh so we're not going to be discussing, you know, the phase out, we're not talking about the ban, we're not talking about horse carriages.

Uh today we're gonna be entirely looking for feedback on the establishment authorization of e-carriages and my particular feedback is short and sweet.

I don't know that I think when we were having the conversation with stakeholders and with uh the owners of the horse carriage industry.

I don't know that a one-to-one permit transfer isn't is necessarily uh the right move.

I don't know that 25 vehicles is uh a strong limit.

It might be, I think what I would request is that we convene the stakeholders, we convene those with uh stake and in this industry uh and ask them what you know what would you change about the perm about this the permitting process and those specific uh limits five per five limit of five businesses, five permits apiece.

What I heard that continues to uh concern me a little bit is that uh two of the I think four of those businesses are operated by two owners, and so I think some that's that's create a loophole where one owner is able to operate 10 uh horse carriages, and I think as we make this transition, I think it'd be important that we find a way to uh ensure equity and ensure equality in that way that one owner gets the five permits or whatever number of permits, and um, so I'd like to one, I'd like to move forward uh with a pilot program and uh I chair the inner city tourist board, and I know that during the original discussion we talked about any of those uh businesses that fall within that within that area.

We may be willing to or maybe able to uh help support the transition in some way.

Um, but I'd like them to provide feedback on the number of permits and number of businesses that should be established once we move to e-carriages.

Um beyond that, uh appreciate the presentation.

And I'm gonna start off with councilwoman core, uh, and then we'll continue our discussion from there.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you all for bringing this presentation to um to us today.

And thank you for agendizing it so quickly, Chair.

Um, I have a couple of questions.

One, do you think you could?

I know uh I'm guessing the petty cab slide, slide 17 was a backup slide.

That's correct, council member.

Would you mind just going over that so that we could it could set the um uh the stage for some of my questions on petty cabs as well?

Okay, sure, sure.

So uh petty cab and group cycles, we grouped it together as a backup slide.

Uh currently in the petty cabs, we have three companies with 15 max permits.

Uh you'll see you'll see the definition of a petty cab up there, and then uh group cycles, there's no maximum on the number of permits.

Uh, two two permits have been issued, one to each company right now.

Uh the group cycle is what uh those of you who've been to Austin and seen it's kind of a moving party, if you will, uh peddled by the the customers that are on it having a good time, and then the petty cabs have an electric motor assist.

That's why they're not considered a true electric vehicle.

Uh, as I briefed earlier, that's a human-powered with an electric motor assist on it.

Uh, both of which there's some discussion right now, and I'm sure you're aware, council member, of reducing some of the insurance requirements for both of those industries, and we're working with risk management uh to determine uh where we can reduce those insurance requirements to if risk management approves that.

Got it.

Okay, thank you for that.

Um, so I think I have a couple of things.

One, I I love what Chair was saying around focus groups, and I know he was specifically talking about the electric carriages, and I appreciate his push there.

I think we should do it holistically on each of these um uh mobility options.

So with the electric vehicles, right?

I know there's only three uh companies right now, but what would uh what is the scope of that and how can we help see what the data looks like in terms of usage and um what folks are saying, both who are driving, who own the companies and who are using the transportation.

So at least this is very anecdotal, but the thing that I've seen most successful is when there is a specific route that's been trans that's been going on in Southtown for one of those companies because it allows consistency for riders.

And so I think if we did a focus group for each one of these that includes maybe a separate focus group with owners and drivers so that we could get input from both, and then maybe riders.

So those three for each, so we can really hear from them like what do you see the challenges are and how could we improve?

Um, and then so I actually think the pilots should increase the number of permits for not only the carriages specifically, but also for electric vehicles and for petty cabs.

We had um we have some uh petty cab drivers that came to us and that live in district one and have been asking for the ability to grow and get their own permit so that they can manage their own hours, and I think that's awesome.

We want to support our residents to become entrepreneurial as well, and so they're not just driving for someone else.

So I think it would be great if we could increase the um and maybe like to council members' point of like the two companies in the carriage standpoint.

I think that's similar across, right?

How do we create I under and maybe you can try to share some highlights?

What is the um example in Austin they have a higher cap for 300 permits for petty cabs?

So what's the adverse effect?

Like why do we limit the number of companies and the number of permits?

What's the biggest fear there?

I guess unfortunately it there's really not been a um specific limitation as to why we have limited them.

It's more or less we didn't have people coming and knocking down our door for additional permits, so it's kind of set at that permit level because those permits have been filled.

To your point, councilwoman, if we have people that want to start a business and be entrepreneurs, then we need to really sit down, focus on that and see how much we have to grow a petty cab industry or an electric vehicle service industry.

Got it.

Yeah, I think for the petty cab specifically, because it's so individualized where you can only really transport one or two people, you know, they're kind of running their own routes, and it's uh um, I I think if we just increase the permits on that is what I would recommend.

But of course, always like listening to what they're saying.

But for the electric vehicle one specifically, I do think we should just increase the amount of permits to see what kind of results we get, and then maybe I know Chair mentioned inner city tours.

Maybe we can tack on a little um funding to see if we can help support those routes in different areas to see what they do for micro mobility.

Like as we grow downtown, we want folks to be using these options more.

And so if there are specific routes that we can say, you know, we'll help one, we'll help an organization or a company fund a route in River North for um for a portion of time or at Sunset Station from like Sunset Station down to South Town for a portion of time to see how they do and track the data.

I think that would be wonderful to be able to one start showing the community because we did that with the little runner, right?

I know I believe it was us and Central partnered together on um that for UTSA, and it proved successful.

They're now uh continuing that work.

So I think if we could find just determine a couple of other routes like that for the electric vehicles, increase the permits, that's what I would um support for that.

And then just for the um the scooters for Byrd and VO, is that the only ones that are because I see those prices now too, and they're much higher than when the prices that we first started the dockless vehicles.

Um they I feel like because they have a little bit more of a monopoly in the game, they can do that.

Is there have is that is there any merit to that or or can you speak to that at all?

Uh councilwoman, based on our our last um committee meeting with you all, we did some research just to look to see kind of where we're at in the market compared to um other cities.

And actually, we are kind of the most affordable city as it is in terms of uh scooters and dockless vehicles.

Um it's it's close, but other cities like um Austin, for example, it's um a dollar to unlock 49 cents per minute.

Um Nashville, very similar, dollar to unlock 58 cents per minute.

And it depends on the company, they're all but they're all within like five or 10 cents a minute apart.

Let's see, Washington DC, a dollar to unlock uh 49 cents per minute.

Um Seattle, a dollar, they're all a dollar to unlock and all around like 40 to 45 cents per minute.

Um I do think when we first started a lot of the companies were new upstart.

Um, I think they were um they really weren't profitable.

It was more of a um, you know, let's get in the market, we're using investor dollars to operate, try to get interest in it, and then over time the uh the rates started to meet the demand, and and they uh uh after a while the investors started to demand that they be profitable, and so I think that's why we saw a little bit of an increase in the in the cost.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Correin for the second round uh after a few other councilman.

Thank you.

Uh councilman Albert of Villan.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, thank you also for this presentation.

Yeah, I was also curious why uh the permits were capped at 20 for the electric vehicles, but what I'm hearing you say is it's just kind of always been the standard, no necessary no reason, no specific reason to cap it at 20.

So I answered the question on petty pair.

Oh, okay.

Uh as to electric vehicles, when those came about in November of 2022, there was a conscious decision to cap those at 20.

We didn't really know what the impact would be on the streets, congestion-wise, the number wise.

So we purposely made a conscious decision to cap those at 20, with five of those originally for the Centro UTSA now via links UTSA.

So do we know what some of the pros and cons would be to to increase that cap?

So uh each of the companies that currently operate have kind of carved out their own niche.

You have the via centro that takes the students, faculty, and staff.

You've got the other companies that some do tours, some provide uh rides from hotels.

They've worked out uh advertising agreements with hotels to say, okay, I'll take you from here to the convention center or here to the dome or wherever the case may be.

So uh currently we don't see the congestion, but we haven't done a full study to determine what the impact of adding an additional, let's say if we took all 25 horse carriage permits and turned them into either electric carriages or electric vehicles, what that what that impact would be on the streets.

Now I'm curious, and I I I'm not sure that there's a rush on it, but I'm curious what that study would find on, you know, is 20 the right number for us.

Is it are people um getting to where they need to go efficiently and effectively through uh through the electric vehicles and um seeing if it's enough?

You know, I I I think when when we when you all do that analysis, I'd be curious to for the results.

Yes.

Um I know that during July uh July 4th at Woodlawn Lake, there was a number of uh district seven residents who wanted to use uh electric vehicle service to get to the park because you know, usually people are walking blocks with chairs and kids and all that kind of stuff.

So I could see it uh I could see electric vehicles expanding to other areas too for special events.

You know, I'm sure that we all have different things that go on in our district where we could see some of this pop-up uh activation as well.

Um then yes, I I do agree, and I'm sorry, uh on on my confusion.

I do agree with councilwoman core to see uh petty cab companies and and maybe see a potential number of increase for those permits as well.

So that those are all my comments.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman.

Uh Councilmember Mungia.

Thank you for the presentation.

I think um, you know, ultimately these e-scooters, e-bikes, and these electric vehicles, I think will should be the future of transportation downtown San Antonio.

I think if I had you know a magic one, I think we would have no cars downtown and just have these types of micro mobilities to help us move around.

Um just for help of congestion of traffic and pedestrian mobility.

So that's that's my unrealistic goal for the future.

But uh real quick question the permits we were talking about, these EVs that are operating, are they only operating downtown?

So mostly downtown, South Down, the Pearl, and Blue Star.

Um and that's a result of you know, charging the vehicle, uh, where they can get the most uh bang for their buck, so to speak.

Uh I don't know if you've ridden in one, they're actually pretty comfortable to ride in.

Um they're not bad.

Uh it is uh a function of getting people that kind of that last mile, and that's that's the via little runner model, but for the the normal electric vehicle, the three companies, that's where they concentrate their efforts.

And remember, they have to be on streets where the speed limit is no more than 35 miles an hour, so they can't get up on uh a big major thoroughfare, so to speak.

Yeah, absolutely.

That's a good point to make.

Uh but yeah, I think you know, opening up those permits more and letting folks know the opportunities outside of these areas are important.

I don't know that this particular model, I talked to John Gary about this for Petrink, for example, right?

Because there's so much congestion there that we really do need some sort of quick EV mobility mechanism to get people up and down that street.

Because I deal realistically, people are coming out of their neighborhoods on Petrinko, going back and forth on that street for different things, and then going back home.

And so there's just a lot of congestion from you know that type of uh mobility that could be used from this.

So I think there's other places that can use that, utilize that.

So I think you know, seeing what type of um additional permits we can make available for those is helpful.

Um and then going back to the electric um carriage, in one of your backup slides for that, you put on there, I guess an initial recommendation of a one-for-one permit.

And so I don't know if you put on here how many permits existed before the ban.

So currently there are 25 permits that exist.

Five companies to council member McKee Rodriguez's point, uh two owners own four of those companies, and then a third owner owns one.

So that's the inequity that uh council member McKee Rodriguez pointed out is you have one owner with five permits, and basically the other two owners with 10 permits each.

So we have to figure that puzzle out.

Yeah.

And um, I guess to the councilman's point, would you be looking at reducing the number of permits in total of 25 down to the city?

I I think our choices are either we reduce or we increase to to level the playing field, so to speak.

And I don't know without doing the analysis and the impact of what does that do to congestions on the street if we're trying to keep congestion to a minimum.

Is putting an electric carriage on the street reducing congestion, or is that increasing congestion if we allow more permits, or how do we do that?

So that's a study I think we have to undertake.

And there's no maximum amount of permits that any individual can obtain for which industry, sir.

For the electric for any of these so for the electric vehicles, it's five.

So we've limited each company to five because we learned our lesson with the horse carriages that okay, we need to make sure this is fair across the board from the beginning.

So we've limited them to five.

Okay, but that limitation doesn't currently exist for the electric carriages.

It does not currently address for horse carriages because we don't have an electric carriages on the street currently, but you are correct that for horse carriages that does not exist.

Gotcha, okay.

And that's an older industry, so that's why that probably exists the way it does.

Yeah.

So I think, yeah, just trying to you know be careful about who owns what and making sure that there's not just separate subsidiaries that look like different companies but are owned by the same person.

I think that consideration is important.

And I just echo what Councilman McCor said about the petty cabs.

You know, I think that's a very niche mark in district one.

So however they can be helpful on that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Spears.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, I I looked through your through your presentation.

Can you provide the operating costs for these different industries?

I see a lot of the just the benefits listed, but like the actual numbers that's nothing y'all could provide.

I don't I don't know those.

I know for for example, an electric carriage to get into that industry, it's gonna cost about 20,000 dollars for the electric electric carriage.

The gym vehicles are eight or nine about eight to nine thousand dollars, which when I say the gym vehicles, that's your electric vehicle.

So that's your startup cost.

That's a a basic plug-in into the wall, no special uh EV charger or anything like that.

So I couldn't tell you uh what the electricity is, and I don't know what those companies pay those their drivers.

That's their proprietary information competing against one another.

We we can certainly reach out and find out if another city is willing if if they track that information, we don't, but we can certainly do that.

I just think it would be interesting to know because it can it's part of the considerations to me.

Like what what are what is SAPD identifying as benefits for transitioning from the horse carriages to the EVs?

Um because I'm thinking about like use of electricity, how much does the insurance cost, what is your annual, what is your startup?

Is this attainable for the horse carriages to do and still because see they're gonna have to continue to maintain their animals, you know?

So for the for the purposes of this discussion, we're not discussing the transition per se.

The phase out is happening, the phase out is happening over the next four years, so those those horses are eventually going to go.

Uh the transition to the e-carriage portion of that is I think the easiest thing to do is to transition those those businesses that want to switch their part their permits over into that.

That's questioning though, how is that attainable?

Like how much does it cost to do that and still maintain your existing horse carriages or well the horses, I guess, you know, because they're gonna remain, they're not gonna be put out to I hope, you know, they're not gonna be put down.

So it's I in my mind I'm seeing them, you know, letting their horses live out their lives, and then they're trying to maybe start up their EV company.

What does it cost to do that?

And I didn't see that in the presentation just to see how how do you go about starting up or applying for the permits and what is the cost to do that?

So uh as I mentioned, council member, it's a $20,000 roughly for the e-carriage.

Um and then your drivers could transition from your horse carriage to the e-carriage.

That's a a flat cost.

Um obviously, you know, if you talk about electricity, I I couldn't tell you what the electricity cost is, but if you make the argument I'm no longer doing horse carriages, you know, maybe I'm not mucking as many stalls, maybe I'm not changing shoes.

So there's a I think there's a trade-off there to cost that that would require a deeper dive than what I can do standing up here today.

Um I'm more than willing to do that and start talking to some of those uh companies.

I know that three of those companies have expressed interest and have raised their hand and said, hey, we're willing to give e-carriages a try.

Just let us know how and when.

So, but I I'm not prepared to sure no, I understand that.

Can we try to do that?

And I'm happy to help in my office to do that because I am a horse carriages fan.

I understand what you're saying.

Uh I don't understand why they're mutually exclusive, but um I do want to see if there's a way to help them transition out of one industry to another.

Um, in doing so.

And do we have minimum standards for these vehicles, like like their battery capacity that we're gonna require or anything like that?

So the minimum standards for the electric vehicles, you're talking about headlights, turn signals, stop, slow-moving vehicle sign, a windshield that we require on the neighborhood electric vehicles.

So that's what you see on the little runner.

Uh that would be that would be one change I think we would talk about is on the uh electric carriage.

Maybe we don't require the windshield.

So we require that the city requires that, not that's not required by the state, so to speak, but you're talking about a registered vehicle, otherwise to complete with registration sticker, VIN, et cetera, for both both of those industries.

Okay, but and no, but and then I guess the battery capacity of some sort.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you, councilman.

Uh councilman Dr.

Corr.

Thanks, Chair.

I only have just a couple of things that I was gonna finish on, which is gonna say thank you for getting that details on the dockless vehicles.

Do we have um do we do also comparison on like the number of companies that are operating in different cities?

Uh councilwoman Cora, I assume you're talking about the scooters and dockless vehicles.

Yes.

Um, we're telling the the cost each yeah, I probably should have mentioned that earlier.

It's very comparable.

Um Austin has two, um, Nashville has three.

Um Washington, DC has three, Seattle has two, and Dallas has three.

So it's it's either two or three seems to be the uh most common common number.

So the market's just died down on it, I guess.

Yeah, you know, I think some of the novelty is worn off, and so it's it's turned more into a um you have a probably core users and then you have probably visitors who are using them.

But it seems to be that that that number is pretty consistent across the country.

Okay.

Okay, so just to recap, I think that I wanted to echo um Councilman on the Thicovito's point around Woodlawn.

I love the idea of doing event-based micromobility and think that's a really great last mile solution that we've talked about with upcoming development.

And so if we could identify, you know, 10 events over the next year that we could have like all of our permit, all of our um companies and their drivers run a route and test to see how it goes.

Um even if we just picked them at different locations, do maybe we'll lawn at New Year's, um, set some of those events that are coming up to test and see if, like, hey, if we funded this, what would that look like?

And I mean, if if I know we're already past budget, but I I'm I'm happy to support in any way, whether through carryover or um if we can look at other sources of fundings, but I do think if the more we try to create uh strategic pilots for these, we can get folks using them and we can see if they can serve the capacity that we have because they are kind of small, but if you have you know 20 of them going at the same time, is it sufficient or et cetera?

So maybe if you guys come back, if you if we do uh a SA speak up survey and some focus groups and then come back and see what a structured pilot could look like for electric vehicles over the next year, is what I guess my request would be for them.

And then for petty cabs, I really just think it's as simple as increasing the permit limit.

But I think electric vehicles is something we wish we should really uh continue to be strategic about as we uh move forward.

And that's all I have.

Thanks, Chair.

Thank you, councilwoman.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none.

Um I guess uh I'll just close out by I guess reitering what I reiterating what I've heard, and I think in this specific instance when we're talking about micromobility and the electrical vehicle services industry, we want to be uh I think we've tested the waters in a number of ways, and I think we want to be really intentional, and I think a part of that, as I've heard is gonna be engaging with the stakeholders, whether that's the uh the industry itself, the business owners, and then drivers as well.

I think we want to as uh Councilman Mungia said we if we could wait wave our magic wand, we'd all be Glinda for a day, and we can uh you know, we could have more, we could replace all cars with the vehicles, but I think just being realistic and sensible, we know that drivers have to exist.

We know that the way our city is built, drivers are going to need to come from whatever suburbs and the outskirts of town to uh to be downtown.

And so, how do we how do we get to the future that we want while managing the reality of today?

And so I would um I guess what I what I've heard is for sure a stakeholder group that includes all of these different industries.

Um I don't know if it would make sense, or maybe it could be rolled into it as I think maybe the horse-drawn carriage, maybe that's a discussion that's happened whole that happens holistically with all of these industries together is what is the impact of e-carriages on petty cabs, on the all of those other vehicles and whatnot, and how do you create um a very intentional transition?

And then also uh to Councilman Spears' point, how do we make that transition if if it is going to be directly from horse-drawn carriage operators to e-carriage operators?

How do we make that transition as just as I as I've said as possible, and make sure that you know they have support along the way and that they're a part of crafting the authorization ordinance?

Uh wonderful one for we have one more question, Councilmember Mungee.

Real quick.

Since we're on the topic, um you know, we heard about Waymo and possibly Commissioner San Antonio.

Where would they fall into with these topics?

So Waymo is gonna be more like an Uber and Lyft, and they're going to be regulated at the state level is what we anticipate seeing.

They will not be regulated by the city and as part of chapter 33.

Yeah, it's already in state law, councilman, that that the regulation is at the state level.

And they're they're operating in San Antonio right now for uh Google and Waymo employees, so that they're they're operating in town as we speak.

Okay, good to know.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

Uh, do you have everything you need to move forward?

All the do you have all the feedback you need to move forward?

Yes, council member, I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Perfect, thank you so much.

Um, we'll move on to items.

We're gonna do items three, four, and five all together.

Uh discussion will be uh seven minutes for the first round and then five minutes for the second round.

Good afternoon, uh Chairman Council.

Uh I'm Juana Yala, I'm the interim uh public works director.

Uh and uh I'm gonna brief you today on the lowering the prima fascia speed limits in the city and improving safety in our neighborhoods.

Um let me just go through the uh the C CR that was submitted by District 7 uh in January of this year.

Uh and it again is to lower the prima fascia speed limits in the city and improving uh safety on city streets.

Um prioritizing speed limits in neighborhood streets within streets within a quarter mile of schools, community centers and parks, uh funding fabrication placement of the new speed limit signage within those priority areas, heightening enforcement in those areas, and formalizing an initiative with the city's government affairs team to support legislation, and I will brief you here later on the legislation that's already taken place in some of our uh uh some of our sessions, the biannual sessions up in Austin.

Um in the governance this was presented to the governance committee and it was passed on the C CR to Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

The current transportation code, I I just want to go over this.

Uh one of the important things that I want to emphasize is that uh any city, any municipality can change the prima uh fascia speed from 30 to 25.

However, in order to do that, the first thing that has to be done is that you have to have an engineering study.

And the engineering study is required by state law.

Uh it applies only to two-lane undivided highways.

It's effective uh when the governing body, that's that's us, that's that's you, uh, enacts uh, you know, enacts this this uh this change.

Um and before we ever do that, uh we have to, we the municipality, whoever enacts this has to post signs, has to notify the public of the prima fascia or the speed limit going from 30 to 25.

At the end of this, if we do do this, or if the cities do this, uh municipalities are required uh to publish a report to the state and and post it on the city's website uh contain uh with comparisons of traffic data previous years, uh traffic citations, uh speed limit violations, and a number of warning citations issued for speed limit violations.

Like I mentioned before, uh this has been tried.

Uh our government affairs team is here, Sally Basuto is here.

If you have questions on that, 89th, uh 88th uh Texas legislative session.

And and if you look at the three bills, what I think is uh well, I don't think it is a common denominator is the fact that they wanted to take away the the uh engineering study.

And I know councilwoman uh you and I spoke about this yesterday, and it it is again it is a state requirement for us to do uh the uh the engineering study.

So the next steps uh for fiscal year 27 is the traffic study.

So if we really uh if we want to do this, if we want to take this initiative, we have to conduct the traffic studies.

Uh we have to fund for the new signage, uh, and of course the public notification.

Um right now there's no funding in our 26th budget.

Uh, but what I recommended to the councilwoman yesterday is that we do a pilot.

And the pilot uh again would be because you filed the CCR would be in District 7, and you would identify to us uh what streets uh within a quarter mile of radius of schools, community centers, or parks, that would be what uh you would uh identify uh as a priority location.

We would do the engineering study, and then we would probably go we would go from there uh to see what the next steps forward.

Again, it's a funding issue uh and uh and whatever the engineering study says.

Uh we have uh we looked at the record and back uh God it was a few years ago on on on Prima Fasha and some of these uh studies that have been done.

I think D5 did one uh several years ago uh and the results and I'll pass the results on.

I just scanned them because we pulled them up today.

Uh was that the placing of the signs.

Now, again, this is one pilot study here in San Antonio.

The placing of the signs didn't make much of a difference.

Uh however, the difference will uh be made if you add other things, other traffic calming uh elements to the the actual uh lowering of the speed.

Um so that's that's the next steps.

And then cross-department uh coordination uh again, how do you enforce it?

Uh so you have to talk uh SAPD and then the annual reporting to the state, but also to municipal court, and then we also have to get with our ITSD folks to make sure that it's uh it's done properly and we have everything in place.

Uh and so again, uh just to finalize it in conclusion.

I think we need to sit down with D7 and find, and you need to tell us uh what you want us to look at.

Okay.

Well, and we're gonna move to item four, so you're you're gonna stay there, and then followed by Mike for item five.

Okay, uh, this is a holistic traffic calming.

This was uh submitted by D5.

Um, and again, I'll go over the C CR.

So the uh request to establish a more holistic, robust way to measure and analyze traffic calming requests that address, of course, uh resident residents' concerns and uh to be evaluated by public works, by transportation and the planning departments, and to create a web interface uh to make sure that the status of these traffic calming requests and the projects and where they're at.

The equipped bill solutions, solutions to neighborhood traffic traffic calming book, and that has been completed.

Uh promote complete streets, which is a policy in the multi-agency team to assess roadway conditions when fatalities and injuries occur.

And it uh presented to the governance committee on 16 April 2025.

So, what's the process now?

The process now is you go into the website uh if you want to uh for a tra uh traffic calming request.

Uh and let me just remind you that these traffic calming requests are uh to address extraordinary traffic problems uh within those residential areas, unusually high traffic areas, volumes, and our speeds.

And the data that we collect is collected during peak periods.

We don't collect it during the summer break for school, uh we collect it uh mainly September to November, January to May, because that is when the high volume of uh traffic is uh going through the neighborhoods.

Uh there's no funding for speed humps uh in the operating budget, uh, but there's a one million dollar uh uh traffic calming uh on Vision Zero, uh and that's where that that funding would come from.

We've improved program refinements, and uh it wasn't me, it was Rossi uh on this uh number of signatures needed.

So in order to apply, you have to have a sheet with signatures from citizens, and it had to be uh in the past, two-thirds of the citizens that were affected by building the humps or whatever the travel, whatever the calming uh element was.

It was reduced uh uh from two-thirds to 51% of the adjacent property owners.

The measured speed uh operating speed was reduced from 35 to 32, and 500 vehicles, a lot of vehicles, it was eliminated.

There's no minimum value or volume anymore.

And the elimination of uh location approval once the speed hump installation has been funded.

And what that means is if you sign U.S.

citizens sign that application that's in the back of our of the website, you're agreeing that the speed hump may be in front of your house.

Uh, and so that that has been a change.

Again, it's when funding has been approved, not when construction begins.

And then there's a we're testing right now a digital neighborhood traffic calming application with ITSD, which means now you can go online uh and do this in a in a more efficient manner.

Uh the calming uh traffic calming uh handbook.

Uh it's it's we we are going through it.

We public works department and other and transportation departments, and we should have it out to you uh by the end of this month or early uh 2026, and it defines the advantages and and and usage of areas, uh, well to avoid and the limitations for each one of the treatments.

The traffic calming book has about 20 applications of traffic calming, and they're everything from speed humps to uh I mean you've seen them, they're uh cones, uh markings on the sidewalk, there's all types.

There's about 20 of them, and we'll get that out.

And then we'll also get out some pictures of the council on examples of those recently installed applications.

Uh I have uh the transportation department here.

Uh if you have any questions for them after uh some of their uh efforts.

So the city policy of uh it's a policy complete streets uh passed in uh 2024.

Um it's uh created a multimodal transportation commission uh which is going up uh for council of uh for approval here pretty soon, and it's uh developing a complete street uh design guide.

Uh the mission, the goal of complete streets, and I and I think you know this making our streets safer and more accessible to all users and streets that accommodate all needs or all modes of uh travel.

The in 2024 complete streets policy passed, and uh it was updated from a 2011 uh policy to meet national best practices, talking about national best practices, uh Smart Growth America, which uh analyzes and looks at this rated uh San Antonio's uh complete streets policy is number one uh in the nation at this point.

Uh complete sheets uh workshop.

Uh they held a workshop uh to look at complete streets uh in September of 2025, and they completed the training and they did create the multimodal transportation commission.

I think that was one of the uh one of the requirements or one of the uh one of the requirements on the on the CCR.

It's a 13-member board.

Uh council members, you're gonna nominate your own uh from each district to be on this uh complete streets uh council, and then there's 13 of them, so it's it's 10 and it's via AMPO, and I can't remember the other one.

Uh, and then we're completing or developing a complete uh street design guide expected to be out in the summer of 2026.

Easy to use, uh user-friendly, we're taking a look at it, and it's gonna integrate uh complete street elements in the street designs.

So, what are the current efforts that our uh transportation uh department is doing right now?

Uh they've done these studies, the high injury network studies, analysis of five years, as you see uh 2019 to 2023.

And this what this looked at is the most the quarters, the quarters that had the most severe crashes.

Uh, these are the level one trauma type crashes uh that that you know the life and death type of things, and and we'll pass these out to you.

And they also did a high-risk network analysis of nine roadway uh and attributes for 10 years, as you can see there from 2023, and then they compared them to uh roadway attribute has a corresponding factor.

So, in other words, what they did as an example.

They went if a road has a speed limit of 45 miles an hour, what was the probability that it's a high risk network?

And we've got those charts, and we'll get them out to you.

Uh and then we're developing uh high uh uh injury network dashboard for uh public access uh on the website.

I think it's ready.

I'm talking to the team, and we'll try to get it out here as as soon as possible.

Some more uh uh current efforts that are going on right now.

Uh are uh the say safe streets for all.

Uh we we transportation received a grant.

It's it's a little bit more than 520 uh thousand dollars, uh, but it identifies um the uh a quick build guide what we're trying to do, and it's in three phases.

And it's in three phases.

I'm not gonna read them to you, but it's ID uh demonstrate in evaluation.

Uh and that the evaluation, the the timeline on this identify in 2026 the three phases to develop the draft and then demonstrate them in uh 2027 and then the evaluation in 2028.

Uh that concludes my brief on both of these uh uh CCRs, and uh I'll um and I know there's a brief behind me, but we're standing by uh if you have any questions.

Thank you so much.

All right, good afternoon uh committee chair and council members.

I'm Mike Shannon, I'm the director of the Capital Delivery Department, and I'm gonna uh go over another CCR real quick, real quickly that was established uh um uh a little bit earlier this year called ensuring integrity in local contracts.

So um this uh CCR was submitted by uh City Council District 5 back in February of this year, went to governance also in April, uh like the others.

Uh but this one's a little bit different uh in terms of it's not speed limits and some of the street designs and stuff, but this one is uh looking to update our city's uh ordinance on uh wage and labor standard provisions.

Uh so we have an ordinance right now, but uh they the the CCR is asking us to look at that, maybe strengthen it, um, look at other Texas cities uh for ordinances on wage theft databases and uh any repeat offenders and those type of things.

Uh looking at maybe establishing if there is a repeat offender list, if there are any contractors out there that are uh not paying the prevailing wages that is required by our local ordinance, uh, and maybe um update some language in the ordinance on anti-retaliation.

Uh so this was referred uh to this committee uh back in April.

So uh just a little history.

Uh we haven't we've had an ordinance, a city ordinance, and there are some state and federal laws uh that that um that cover this as well.

But in 1990 was our first city ordinance on this, uh it was updated in 2008.

Um really what it says is for city contracts or contracts uh to build something with city funds, uh, it requires wage and labor standards uh for uh those construction projects, and that we have a monitoring mechanism in place right now in the CDD department uh called our labor compliance office.

Uh so it applies to all of our construction projects that receive city funding.

Uh the workers have to be paid no less than the prevailing wage rates uh by U.S.

Department of Labor.

Uh we have categories for different workers, uh those are set by our contracts.

We have pre-bid meetings, et cetera, uh pre-construction meetings, make sure it's all clear.

Uh and then the city uh actually monitors that so those weekly payments um the payrolls come to the city.

Uh we review those, and we find any errors, uh, we have to make sure they're corrected by the contractor.

We can withhold contractor payments by the current ordinance.

Um, and uh again, our uh we have staff in our department that does that um all day every day.

So, what does it look like uh for our labor compliance office uh team members?

Again, uh during solicitation and pre-bid, it's a standard part of our process.

Uh we'll determine based on the construction uh project the type of workers that we need, whether it's building, highway, heavy, um, either industrial, so the specific wages that are assigned to each person uh that will be on the job.

Uh that's discussed again at the pre-construction when we select and start the process.

Um, and uh we we look at those weekly, they're submitted weekly to us, and we go over that.

Uh, there's a program called LCP tracker uh that the contractor uses to submit those.

Our team reviews those.

Uh we also do job visits, job site visits to interview workers, that's part of the ordinance.

Uh we also do investigations if we get any calls from workers uh that say they haven't been paid or there's wage theft uh uh compliance issues, uh, and then we will issue penalties if needed.

Uh but again at the project close out, we won't close out our project until everything's all square and in compliance.

So uh just a little again on our uh monitoring how we do it.

That LCP uh tracker, it's a there's a web-based application that the contractors use, they submit it to us.

Uh those payrolls are entered by the contractors.

We looked at over 24,000 payrolls uh last year.

Um so they're entered.

We look at them weekly.

Um we also have on-site interviews, right?

We have to do uh three times per quarter or technically once a month.

We go on-site, interview some workers, uh, make sure they're they they know the rules, uh, the notices are up there per the per the code, and uh that the approved payrolls um uh are uploaded.

So uh if we do get complaints, now we don't get a lot of complaints.

We only get a couple a year that are what we call reactive complaints, but we will investigate those.

Uh our team will do that if we find any you know errors or findings, we we follow the rule to correct that.

Um and we can enforce penalties, right?

If there are penalties per day penalties until it's corrected by the contractor.

The CCR has several proposals.

So those are kind of on the left.

What's existing is on the right.

Um, and and really what I think is proposed in the ordinance is taking our existing ordinance and really strengthening it.

Uh for example, uh, the ordinance currently says if we find repeat violations, we may terminate uh the the contract, or we may um hold that against them in future bids.

Uh I think the proposal wants us to uh turn that to a shall if we find someone that consistently does it uh or a habitual um you know person that you know violates the wage provisions, uh, that we shall not use them and put them on a list for three years.

Now that mirrors our responsible bidder ordinance that we created a few years ago.

Uh I think that's one of the main uh proponents of this um this uh uh of this proposal.

Uh also uh give more time to workers is a proposal.

Right now, the ordinance that we had since 08 says uh if you want to complain or or send in a complaint that uh you're being in violation of this if you're a worker, you have 60 days to do that.

Uh the proposal is to increase that to 180 days, uh similar to uh the Texas payday law.

And then uh again, there's some other standards out there like the uh the Fair Labor Standards Act that contains a two-year uh work.

Now they can still go through the Texas Workforce Commission if they don't want to go straight through the city as well.

A couple others, they asked us to look at other cities and what they're doing with any theft databases and coordinators, so we can certainly do that.

Um establish a repeat offender list if there is one.

Now we have uh I think I told you we did 24,000 or so payroll uh reviews last year.

Uh we found a hundred and about a hundred and seven errors.

Uh, when those were identified, uh the the contractor quickly made amends to that.

Uh we found miscellaneous errors like uh something was typed in wrong, uh maybe the person was assigned the wrong wage category when they entered in the payroll.

Uh we didn't find this year any habitual uh errors that weren't corrected immediately.

So uh but if we did uh this would give us um a more teeth to keep them off the list uh for low bids in the future, similar to our responsible bidders.

Uh we could uh also uh as proposed update uh some specific anti-retaliation.

We have some language in our code right now that that says hey uh a worker shouldn't be retaliated against if they make a claim.

Uh there was some proposal in this ordinance to strengthen that language and make it a little bit more clear.

So this is one of those where I recommend that we put a group together of stakeholders, kind of a diverse group, because this is really we have our lab labor compliance office and some other city staff, maybe city attorney's office.

Uh but because this also has some state and and federal rules, uh, we we need the industry there.

We need we need uh labor organizations, we need contract organizations, uh whether it's union or or not, uh, but I would recommend we put that together and we return to this committee uh in a few months with some recommendations uh for an updated ordinance.

So that would be my proposal, and again, as Juan uh mentioned, I'm here to answer any questions.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you both for your presentations.

Uh we're gonna take any motions on these items individually at the conclusion of our initial discussion.

I'll reiterate uh the first round will be seven minutes, and then the second round will be five minutes.

I do have a question for clarification.

Uh I know item five includes a staff recommendation that in my opinion does require a motion uh for items.

Item three lists next steps, but it was mentioned to begin a pilot program, uh, but item four just lifts lists current efforts.

Um so I'm I wonder are you requesting an action in support of these items as well.

Councilman Thanks.

I think in support of the pilot program, absolutely.

Okay, I think that'd be helpful.

So for item four, we're not looking for a motion, but item three and five, we are looking for a motion.

Correct.

Okay.

Um so I'm gonna start off.

I mentioned some time ago that uh Councilman Aldera Tikavito and I filed a C Cr calling for a citywide traffic analysis that could recommend solutions to speeding congestion speeding congestion and all of that.

Uh and I think in the confusion of many ordinance changes and committee changes that sort of disappeared.

Uh, but it sounds like as a result of this CCR that Councilman Alderette Covid has filed, that we have the opportunity to get to that point anyway, um, starting with the pilot program in District 7, which I'll be supporting.

Uh, but I do also want us to use this as an opportunity to think about our our code uh and the way that especially new subdivisions are designed.

Currently, the code allows for designs that encourage speeding if you think about long, straight, wide paths.

Uh the drivers tend to get a little uh you know gas heavy on.

Um I think it makes sense ahead of our UDC amendment process to conduct some sort of analysis of our code to determine which provisions lend themselves to dangerous traffic conditions.

Uh so that would be a personal request of mine.

Uh for item four and five.

I do have uh two letters from Councilman Castillo.

Uh I'll ask that they be entered into the record.

One is a letter of support for staff's recommendation of item five, which I'll also support today.

Um the second is a question for clarification that maybe many of us have experienced.

I know that when we've gotten traffic calming applications and folk are going out to collect signatures.

Uh we've often been told that renter signatures count towards that 51% threshold.

Uh, but on the in the slides, it only says property owners.

So can I get some clarification?

Uh final clarification, I guess.

Do renters count towards that 51%?

Yes, uh, I should have clarified in the slides.

Yes, renters do count.

Perfect.

Thank you so much.

Uh we'll start off with uh councilman Aldreticovito.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh yeah, we know that speeding impacts every single district.

I mean, I think it's one of our top resident concerns that we hear about again and again.

And for district seven residents, I mean it's been a concern since before I took office.

So that's why, you know, I'm proud to have filed this CCR to try to get to to work towards a solution.

Uh, you know, we this specifically just as um as one had mentioned, the CCR would create speed limit change speed limit changes around neighborhood streets near community points of interest, such as schools, churches, and libraries.

Um I y'all have heard me say this before.

I'm gonna say it again.

None of us speed through Alama Heights or Almost Park or Castle Hills because we know we're gonna get a hefty ticket and we know we're gonna be forced to pay it.

Uh we we can't police our way out of this.

We can't hire enough police to catch every single speeder.

So for us, we're trying to attack this problem at different angles.

Um we we have to address resident concerns, right?

They're constantly telling us at neighborhood meetings, speeding is a problem on resident streets.

Um, you know, I I understand the state um bureaucracy.

I don't know if there's a better way to say it, but you know, the uh hefty charge for a citywide study, and I I mean I kind of liken it to our loose and dangerous dog policy proposal, like yes, we're gonna constantly get caught up at the state.

We can work that angle, but we could also take matters in our own hand and see what we can do at a municipal level to to address our resident concerns.

There's uh we have several videos like this uh on my phone, um, but there's a car flipping uh example at in Monticello Park neighborhood.

But I'm sure that we as as council members get those videos from our residents all the time, taking on their ring cameras, caught a car speeding down a neighborhood street, um, hitting another car.

Uh it it doesn't make sense, and we have to do something to s to stop it.

So the intent of the CCR is to highlight concerns I've heard from my neighborhood associations and from residents, um, and to determine if there's data that merits supporting lowering speed limits in other high priority areas.

I'm I'm glad to start the pilot in district seven, but I would love it if we all had uh areas that we could work towards together in in each of our districts.

Uh so thank you so much for for the presentation and um hope to earn y'all's support to move this forward.

I'll go quickly on item four and uh five.

So wanted to thank Councilwoman Castillo for bringing uh on item number four this policy forward.

Uh some of the most requested infrastructure from my residents is traffic calming improvements.

We receive several requests for speed bumps, signalized lights, stop signs, you know, even when I'm on a run, residents are stopping me for flashing stop lines, stop signs and that kind of stuff.

It's for me, it's very fuss frustrating to see how long these items take to come to life, and usually they're caused by horrific accidents like deaths and stuff.

You know, one of the first things I heard about when I first was elected is a traffic signal at fine silver, and we're barely just getting that done.

You know, I think it takes what two or three years to get a traffic signal done.

Um there's one in in the Thunderbird Hills neighborhood with motorcycle crashes, and that results in a fatality, and then we're reacting.

So I I was glad that Councilwoman Castillo brought this forward, because I think we need to do we we can do better as a city, and I think the CCR is taking us in the right direction.

Really quickly on number five.

Um, I also want to thank Councilwoman Castillo for bringing forward the CCR.

It's it's crucial that we ensure people that literally build our city are getting paid fairly for their work.

Uh we know that wage theft is unacceptable, especially when it's done uh when it involves taxpayer dollars.

So I'm supportive of the recommendations uh to form a stakeholder group and take a deep dive into the proposed changes.

That's all I have.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilwoman.

Uh Councilmember Mughea.

Thank you.

For item number three, uh, when we're talking about reducing the speed limit, is that just reducing it from 30 to 25?

Yes.

Uh and it's in the it's in code, it's in the law.

Yeah, so you can't get a street that's 50 and reduce it down to 25.

Uh no, we we we can't.

Uh let me look more into that, but uh uh I asked that question and and it was no.

Uh-huh.

Okay.

Yeah, I just am curious about that because uh and how much does a study cost to do something like that?

If you're gonna look at an individual council district, how is it cost?

I think it depends on the geographic boundaries, councilman.

If there's a particular sheet you want us to take a look at, if people I just want to know the average, right?

So, you know, if councilwoman's gonna have to come up with that funds, and if there's other districts right at the same time, if we can afford to pay for that with our own budget, I think that's something we would be looking into as well.

That's a great question.

And again, it does uh matter where it's done, uh geographic location.

But the last one we did was about 40k.

40,000.

Okay.

And it stayed 25.

Uh I uh well, it was an engineering study.

I don't I don't know, don't know if it was a force.

The district five example that you gave is did that remain at 25?

Yes.

So it's still 25 to this date.

Oh no, no, uh, district five has not lowered their their prima flash it at uh no one what the councilman's asking about is in the the pilot example that you use from several years back, there was an engineering study that was done.

The speed limit was lowered to 25.

We studied whether that had any impact on drivers, right?

There seemed to be very little impact.

I think the question is, is it still 25 today?

And it is.

Yes.

It is okay, great, good to know.

Um, and so I think you know, uh what I always try to focus on, especially with traffic calming, is is of course the outcomes, right?

So I think certainly I got an ask about this the other day at an HOA, right?

About lowering the speed limit.

So I think that helps, and that's something to do from 30 to 25.

I don't know how much reduction that there is or measurements after the fact there is.

I think item number four is a really important because that's actually traffic calming that physically reduces speed.

Uh and to the chair's point, was something that we've talked about already, is looking at our new builds, right?

Because it happened in my district, we have Vita, brand new subdivision.

Within a year, here's an application for speed humps.

That should not exist, right?

And so if we talk about roundabouts, right, another subdivision of my district, Solana Ridge had two roundabouts installed.

We were gonna do a third.

Anthony remembers they came back and Hamden Hod and said no, we don't want those.

If we have neighborhoods built with roundabouts already in them as traffic calming for some of the larger ones, that's we're solving that problem before it even gets onto our books as the street.

So I think there's definitely an appetite for UDC changes, especially at PCDC for those types of changes for for development because we shouldn't have streets that are produced that we know cars are gonna be speeding on just by the data that we have.

And I think traffic has a data to back that up, right?

Where we look at the conditions of the streets where we are putting speed humps on, compare that to new streets.

We can assume that there's gonna be a similar speeding incident on those streets, also.

So I think that's important, um, especially for UDC things going forward.

Have you all looked at the traffic calming form?

You know, I appreciate the the changes you all made.

I think those have been beneficial.

I think it's been easier for folks to get those.

Uh what I do think is a an issue still is sometimes in some neighborhoods, it's difficult for resident to get signatures just for barriers' sake, right?

Either they're elderly, the neighbors have fences, there's dogs issues, right?

Have you all thought about doing mail out applications?

So if there's a special request or certain threshold you meet, you basically mail that application to those people on the street, have them sign off yes or no, and send it back.

It's a lot like the street lights, right?

When we do street light approvals, we send out four mailers, we get that back, right?

Versus having someone have to go down the street and get signatures all the way through.

Uh since I've been uh here, uh no, but let me ask the team.

Have we thought about that?

Yeah, no, we we haven't, but uh certainly we can we can pilot it.

Yeah, let's pilot it in district four.

Let's do that.

We'll pilot in district four.

Yeah, D7 gets one I get one.

All right, Marcos, take that down.

So I think that's important, right?

I think that's a way to help facilitate that in barriers because we we can help where we can, but as soon as one person hears that we went down a street to get signatures, everybody suddenly needs speed humps also.

So there's a capacity issue for for help in that, and I think uh mailing out something is is helpful to them as well, even if there's a cost to it, I think it's it's worth it looking into it.

Let's see here.

And yeah, I don't know.

I mean I talked to John Pateric about this recently with the traffic signals.

We have a few in D4 that are still needing to be constructed, and I think it's taken longer than the traditional two or three years.

Um and so I know that there's very specific issues with each one of those as a reason why it hasn't been done yet, but I think um we're not always adhering to the two-year rule.

Uh and so when it comes to, you know, I've got similar to what you uh the councilwoman said.

We have residents that text me every single time there's an accident, right?

On military and um, you know, Ingram, wherever that is, because that's where we're going to have a traffic signal, they know we're gonna put one up, has been placed yet, and accidents continue to happen at that intersection.

And so it's hard for me to tell them it's it's coming, it's coming, it's coming, and there's still accidents happening.

So I don't know what it is about certain you know, locations that have trouble.

I don't know if it's parts and labor, it's been paid for, it's been uh you know studied, and so I think that's something we have to do a little tightening on to make sure that we get those in a timely manner when they need to be um installed.

I agree, we'll look at it, and you're right.

A lot of it is uh you know, contractor issues, a lot of it is timing, a lot of it is weather.

I mean, is it there's all kinds of issues, but we'll that you're right, we'll take a look at it.

Yeah, and John's helping too, so I appreciate that.

Uh and then as far as item number five goes, I mean, I I appreciate this.

I think it's the right thing to do to get a large amount of stakeholders.

I think uh Michael Shannon, if he's still here, uh here you are, I can see you.

Uh you're really good about getting stakeholders and together, and I wouldn't say the T word, but uh I think you'll do something like that, and I think it'll be a good uh task force, just so everybody knows he's done a lot of task forces.

So please get as many people as you can uh on the inputs.

Appreciate that.

We'll get a group together.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Just a quick question for clarification.

So for the um pilot program in D S and it kind of goes back to the point of average cost, right?

Would it be possible to get in?

I'll start off with this question.

What would be the scope of said pilot program?

Would it be looking solely at changing the speed limits or is there an opportunity to include um other traffic calming solutions within that?

So I I just want to be clear and I'll let Juan go.

The the need that we have to have is to be able to change the speed limit, right?

The engineering study.

Uh but what we know from our own experience and from the science that exists around traffic calming is changing it to 25 has a small impact, but what has the larger impact is changing the speed limit to 25 and then offering some sort of other friction in the roadway, right?

Whether that be you know, you know, a speed bump, whether that be a bulb out at an intersection, whether that be allowing parking so that it feels narrow, right?

Like there needs to be a combination of events, and and we can work with the engineering study to to make those recommendations as well.

But we know them intuitively, like they're in the traffic handbook, right?

But but what's necessary and to try and keep costs down is to study the speed limit portion, right?

And so it could, but I think it would increase the cost if I would be to be clear about it.

So I guess with a wider scope, I would be interested in if it's possible to get you know it what would it cost to do that looking back at citywide traffic analysis, right?

Looking at every council district, looking at district seven, what would it take to do uh just the speed limit analysis versus the whole the all of it?

And then maybe that's something that districts and do that for every district, and then we can figure out is that something that each district would be willing to contribute to?

Is it something that could be done at a later budget budget cycle?

I mean we could, uh but uh like John was saying, uh the most effective is when you have reinforcing other uh friction, like he said.

Um and there's temporary uh solutions, uh, the quick build stuff.

I I don't like the word quick build because that's temporary, and it also takes a traffic study to put anything on the road.

Uh but yes, uh speed humps, anything, uh, those 20 items in the traffic calming book.

Plus the speed limit signs.

I was just talking to some of our SAPD folks.

Are you all here?

Uh is that uh you know, the the speed limit signs just you know, people look at them and you know they stole speed.

I'm with y'all, y'all don't have to sell me any further.

I I got you with you and I think whatever whatever the pilot is, uh you know, well, you know, you you you tell us what you'd like us to do.

Gotcha.

I guess just the information that I'm requesting and that I'd like to get in a follow-up memo would be what would it look like to have the just the speed, the speed limit analysis, what would that cost for every council district if they wanted to do district wide, and then for the more holistic traffic calming, what would that look like to do that analysis?

And it's just right.

Yeah, and we can work on that, councilman.

I just want to be clear that we're gonna not the pilot isn't the entirety of district seven, right?

Like we're gonna pick a specific geographic area, you know, in in a quarter mile of a certain you know, school or church or or community center, whatever that is, right?

It's not the entirety, right?

Those will be large numbers.

We're happy to work on that, but I just I just want us to think about how we move forward in a real way versus presenting a very large number that you know is scary and overburdened.

I want the scary number.

Tell me what the full need is.

That's the same thing.

Yes, Councilwoman.

And if I may, I mean, I I think um what councilman Munge has said is spot on in that as we're opening up these new developments, we need to just be doing this uh forward thinking and and and pause you know, doing things right because I feel like I I'm curious.

Yes, we can do the analysis of uh lowering the speed limit and all the other things, right?

Speed bumps, uh, but I'm also curious on the today's cost of us constantly reacting and waiting and unfortunately deaths in some instances.

So while I think it would be hefty to look at a speed limit change across each district, um you know, maybe that cost is digestible when compared to the alternative of us constantly reacting and um you know uh just unsafe streets.

So just just wanted to throw that out there.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

Uh Councilman Spears.

Thank you, Chair.

Um I was thinking along the same vein.

So I was wondering if there's a way, like let's say I had a traffic study on one of my roads that meets this criteria within the past five years, and it gives me the the impact to have rumblers and and all the different um road calming uh mechanisms we have.

Can you combine that then with just the 25 mile per hour portion of that study?

And maybe we could even expand that further if you've done that in the past five years.

Do you see how it could be a soft a cost savings if we're if we're doing that?

I mean, we're always doing these traffic studies, and they do have that in the analysis on what's the most impactful, and then just add this the speed limit component to that.

Yeah, to make sure I'm understanding too, because I think I'm right here with you.

So if you've already done a traffic study, is that proof enough that you can lower the speed limit?

Or would it reduce the cost to just be able to do that?

What I heard the councilwoman saying is that that maybe there's been a previous engineering study to offer a traffic calming solution, not the speed limit change.

And and we now, so that that old study exists to add a speed bump or to add a bulb out or to add a rumble strip or you know, a traffic table, um, you know, those sorts of things, speed table, sorry.

And now she wants to study the speed limit in that same area.

Yes, they could be combined.

Yeah, the past the past study.

You still have to study the speed limit portion, but if you wanted to add another one of those elements in in the same geographic area, I think it could be used.

So let's say we start in one of your streets and we love it, then I can maybe roll that out on several, I don't know, what's a reasonable number, past five years of traffic studies on those roads?

Or is that reasonable?

Study what it what it what it says.

Uh but I but like I said before, I think uh when you combine the traffic calming with the speed, I think it's the most effective from what I've seen and from the studies that I've seen, is that uh you it's not one or the other, it's both.

I completely agree.

And when in my work at the county, it was very challenging because uh development might come in and you wouldn't be able to see the impact.

You could anticipate, but then something inevitably would come up.

There wasn't the exit wasn't put in the right spot, da-da-da-da-da.

And now we've got huge problems and bottlenecks, etc.

So there's this part that's kind of like, well, it is better to wait just till you see the true impact, but then are there things we can do on the front end, like you said, that would be cost effective and make sense.

But um, I do I do like that idea.

I think that that makes a lot of sense to combine those where possible.

But so to add more complication to that is what about I have issues on my farm to markets.

How are we gonna be able to integrate those?

Because that's text.regulated, and I have schools all over my farm to markets, my blanco northwest military part.

In fact, most of them are on farm to markets now that I think about it in my district.

So that would be an additional challenge, I would think.

Do you have anybody else have that same problem, or is it just district nine?

No, I'm I'm I'm not gonna speak to the same problem, but I think it would take a larger coordination at the state level, right?

I think you realize that, but it would be a much larger change, but one that we could advocate for in the next session.

So is there a way then too we could incorporate complete street elements into this routine maintenance that we're already doing to reduce the long term infrastructure costs at all, or is that something we're considering?

Or is that something we're considering?

What's the question?

I th I think um the move towards complete streets are are taken into account as we work on large-scale bond projects, right?

Um regular street maintenance is altering some pieces of the roadway, but it isn't um you know necessarily changing the entire structure of the roadway.

So it's happening, but uh at a slower pace through Brown projects.

Okay, I understand.

Um so then that kind of covered four for me, I guess.

Uh number three.

Uh is our ITSD ready for this sort of shift um once we have those all this new new data on the prima faucet speed limits.

Yes, uh, they are.

And like I said, I think we probably roll it out, try to roll it out early 2026.

Good.

That's good to know.

Um do you have any idea the cost estimate to replace the the signs with the 25 mile per hour signage?

Or even just our pilot area?

Do we know?

Um, we can get that for you.

Yeah, I just uh we just we just did 33 signs for uh I can't remember what it was.

I think it was for you.

33 signs and it was $1,500.

So that's just an estimate.

1500?

Okay.

Yeah, but that's just that that was for the homeless encampments, yeah.

That you would ask for.

Yeah.

It was 33 signs that I recall, and that was without that was a cost.

Okay.

So I don't know if that's the same cost for a lot of people.

Right, it was something like that.

Something like that, yeah.

Okay, that's good.

That's good to know.

Okay, thank you so much.

On number five, um I like the idea of the board.

Do we have any more ideas or have you thought about what you want the board, how big you want it to be?

Any criteria there.

Yeah, usually something like this.

I'll reach out to um a few organizations.

I'll certainly work with the councilwoman district five, it was her C CR.

Um, but usually about a dozen to 15 people is about as high as you'd want to go.

There's been a few I've done where we got to about 20, but those are a little bit bigger um in my previous life, a development code related items where we had a lot more uh maybe stakeholders, but uh I'm thinking about a dozen, a dozen or so is probably about the the right the right number.

Plus or minus.

Don't hold me to that.

A baker's dozen.

There you go.

Um let me ask, I had a couple of things that came to mind.

Um so in these projects, often you'll have a bunch of different subs that you use.

How are is there a way to identify sometimes like the the award goes to an entity, but really it's maybe one of their subs that is violating how do we make sure we're not penalizing the sure well uh the current ordinance, so we look at subs and the prime.

So the prime and the sub the ordinances for um and any of those on the on the city project, uh city funded project.

Uh the the code right now does say the prime is ultimately responsible uh to ensure their subs follow uh the prevailing wage requirements.

So uh but we we do find if it's a sub, we'll work with that sub.

And we think if we develop some language or language updates, we would have to include something to the effect of uh how to identify that sub if they were the ones that were put on the uh the call it the three-year banned list if they were in the violation if we went with something like that.

We have to identify that and then we'd have to preclude them on uh solicitations in the future, but maybe not this the prime.

Okay, unless we find out through investigation that the prime uh was I don't want to say in on it, but not doing their job uh because like I said, ultimately it's very clear in our code today.

It's really the prime's responsibility.

Um and we hold our primes pretty pretty hardcore to that now.

I don't I wouldn't want to change that too much.

But I would want I would want the group to tackle that a little bit because having contractors and subcontractors and our labor organizations, I would want them to kind of hammer out that level of detail.

Okay, just one more question.

Um I just want to make sure that so this is being monitored by the TWC and the Department of Labor currently.

This wouldn't be making it more restrictive than the state level.

Uh right now we're not proposing to do that to be more restrictive than I think I think what's proposed, our initial review is certainly in line with what we can or allowed to do by the state and and and and um and the federal uh one of the on these stakeholder groups we would always have our city attorney uh in on those to make sure we stay within those guardrails uh so that when I whatever we do bring back to you as a recommendation, we know uh is for lack of better term legal, right?

Right.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, councilman.

Uh councilman Dr.

Kor.

Yes.

Councilman, was that was that your comments?

Gotcha.

Sorry about that.

Um, can you hear me?

Yes, yes, we can hear you.

Okay.

All right, thank you all so much for the presentations and for the discussion.

I have I'm gonna uh do the last traffic calming first.

Or I'll start with traffic calming because that's the biggest thing.

Everything councilman other at the Govito said, echo all my council colleagues.

Like it's this is the number one biggest thing that we get at our um at the doors at neighborhood meetings.

Unfortunately, there's not great solutions because of we've asked for the solar radar feedback signs with the speeds on them, and there was a backboard on them.

It took us over a year to get any of those processed.

So it is like her frustration around timing, we all feel it.

And we I don't know what else we can do aside from like go find new contractors to get us these materials to put these signs up because we're saying it's so low cost, and at the same time, we just can't seem to move forward on um some of these traffic calming projects.

Like our office basically started going off.

So let's start with the online system specifically.

You just mentioned the online system is ready to go.

We created our office created a QR code on our own, which initially was told to us like back and forth, back and forth.

We can't accept online submissions.

Um I've been waiting for that code, still haven't received it.

So can I do we have a link ready to send to my office for that?

Councilwoman, we're working on that link and we'll we'll send it to you.

Like I said, uh, we should have it ready here to go.

We're going through it here uh in on in my internal staff.

Okay.

Just for just for public sake, we've been asking for it for um a really long time now, what I feel like has been a year, but we've just been using our own internally, um, which we kind of uh because when we leave a door hangers at the door when we're trying to knock, we leave a QR code so people can go in and respond.

But that's one specific challenge for that.

The um second specific challenge that we have is for um quick build.

So uh y'all have heard me talk about quick build significantly.

And I know every time we bring up Quick Build in a committee meeting, we talk about this grant that we just got, which I'm super excited about.

I just don't feel like we should have to wait for the handbook to be um created and for five projects to be selected from these large strategic plans for us to be able to use our dollars in our offices on quick build solutions.

So again, as as much I would love to push as much as I can for us to just have a large workshop on what quick build could look like.

Each of us bring all of the and I know Councilwoman Castillo has uh spaces too because this was her CCR where she wants to really implement this and just say let's try it.

Let's not be scared to put plastic in the streets because plastic is much cheaper, and if it gets hit by a car, it's okay.

We can replace it.

Concrete's so expensive and takes so long.

So whatever we can do to help shift mindsets, if it's lunch and learns, if it's workshops, would love to just submit projects that require quick build, and then three months later, even three months later for it to be installed.

But right now we're waiting like a year to get any feedback on some of our projects that we submitted.

So I don't know.

I I understand that we're trying to do things in a process with this uh with the quick go grant that we received, but I I don't know what the timeline for that is like, and we have projects that are ready to go.

So my push is let's just allow for us to try things.

Um we can order materials and implement them and see how they go while we're doing this long-term strategy of building a handbook, determining five spots and testing them there.

Let's let offices, let's let council offices that see some of these real big traffic concerns have a little bit more input and um just let's just try them.

Um as far as the speed uh speed limit concern, like I mentioned, we get this a lot, but the radar feedback signs is what people have been asking for.

I'm happy to see what the pilot does.

I honestly I feel like people drive whatever they want to drive regardless of what the sign says.

Um, but happy to see if this like that like was said that proactively this makes a difference.

I also think we do have to work on enforcement because if we don't like it just think about it.

Everybody knows if you go into Helotus in a school and you speed, you're gonna get a ticket.

Like there's just certain areas, even Alamo Heights, they have a rep, right?

So it you have we have to help create that same uh in accountability for speeding.

Um, and so I think that's really important, and also um thinking about just what other traffic calming solutions we can create.

When we have these massive streets through our neighborhoods, like we you know, we yes, they allow for more speeding than if we had bulb outs.

We're going through this right now with via and um green line stuff coming up.

But anyways, all of that and then integrity and local contracts.

I like the plan, and I'm thankful that for the CCR and um ready to see how that moves forward with stakeholder input.

All right, that's all I got.

Thank you, Council Councilman.

Okay, so we'll take motions individually.

We're looking for motions for items three and five.

So we'll start with item three.

I'll entertain a motion.

So move to approve um item three.

Second, the pilot program specifically.

The pilot program specifically.

Thank you.

Uh second.

All in favor?

Uh thank you.

Thank you, man.

Support.

Uh, we'll move on to item five.

I'll entertain a motion.

Move to approve item number five about ensuring integrity in local contracts.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Wonderful.

Uh so the time is now 3 39.

We got through five items in an hour and 39 minutes.

Thank y'all.

Have a wonderful rest of the day and see y'all at B session.