Good afternoon.

The time is now 2.05 p.m.

on Thursday, December 11, 2025, and the meeting of the governance committee is now called to order.

Madam Clerk, please call roll.

Councilmember Member Mickey Rodriguez.

Present.

Councilmember Viegran.

Here.

Councilmember Mungia.

Present.

Mayor Jones.

Here.

Mayor, we have quorum.

Great.

Thanks.

First item on the agenda is approval of the minutes.

Are there any corrections to the minutes from November 7th, 2025?

Okay.

Hearing none, can I get a motion and a second to approve the minutes?

I make a motion to approve.

We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Okay.

Motion carries.

We have several members of the public signed up to speak.

I will call individuals in order of sign-up for all items.

The first person is Alan Montempe-Mayor.

All individuals will have three minutes to speak, and groups of three or more will have a total of nine minutes.

So Alan Montabayor and followed by Peter Bella.

Good morning.

Or I should say good afternoon.

I'm Alan Montemayor, chair of the Alama Group of the Sierra Club.

We represent about 3,000 people in the local area.

I'm here to talk about Wahalote Ranch.

Uh and uh it this has gone way too far.

Uh Wahalote was originally platted to be low density development by the City of San Antonio.

Wahalote came in and proposed a ridiculous density, and now it's backed off on that sum, but it's still way too dense.

It's going to generate a lot of uh treated sewage that's going to go directly into Hilotus Creek and find its way into our aquifer ultimately.

Southwest Research has categorically said that that is probably going to result in at least marginal uh pollution to our aquifer, which we still depend on very heavily.

Uh City of San Antonio needs to do everything they can to dissuade this development and turn them to uh a development which is appropriate for the land.

Um the citizens of the Hilotus area have risen up and largely been ignored.

The TCEQ obviously is going to provide no protection for the citizens in this matter.

Uh the state, for their part, will probably do even less if it comes to that.

So I'm we're asking the city of San Antonio to really do everything they can to discourage this kind of high density development over these sensitive areas.

Um, in particular, if it comes down to uh a vote to determine whether or not uh uh Lenar homes can establish a MUD, a municipal utility district, I would hope the City of San Antonio would firmly say no, we do not want this.

I know that will probably just kick the can down the road, but regardless of that, we need to do everything we can to protect the quality of our water and the citizens of San Antonio.

Um the um the Wahalote Ranch uh is is a huge development for that area.

There are many reasons besides just the pollution of our aquifer to not do that kind of high density development.

The um traffic alone in that area is gonna be horrendous for the people that live there.

Um I know this is in the ETJ of the City of San Antonio, but regardless of that, I'm really hoping that that you guys will do your part and and not um allow this.

Um I was also signed up to speak on which item.

Um Sir, you signed up for uh two items, however, in total you have three minutes.

Okay, uh where am I?

I don't see the count.

Where's the count?

Oh, okay.

Well, uh obviously I think I'll just I'll just finish up with Wajalote Ranch then.

Um I know that this is a tough decision because you're weighing development against uh uh the protecting the citizens.

And protecting the citizens hard to put a value on that, but long term that is really what you guys are here for.

That's what city council is supposed to be doing.

Um has a lot of other places they can build, and this is really inappropriate uh to build in this area.

Um thank you so much.

Peter Bella, followed by Alison Greer.

Good afternoon.

My name is Peter Bella.

I'm simply an interested citizen.

And I wanted to speak on the data centers.

Thank you, Councilman Galvan, for bringing the CCR forward.

I think it's important that the city have eyes wide open when they're looking at these quick changes that are being required for both business and industry in the San Antonio region.

I'll be very interested in following the developments.

I saw the first item is to understand what the city rules, local state rules are that would be at your disposal when it comes to thinking about how this would work, how the data centers would be built out.

And I know that uh having heard Rudy Garza speak last night on the uh recording of the source that was on the 9th.

I know the demands that are coming for energy that he sees.

As a steering former steering committee member for the climate action and adaptation plan under Mayor Nirenberg, I'm very aware of the potential for environmental impacts, as well as especially the impacts on our citizens, the concept that they would be safe and they would be able to pay the rates that are required for the growth that is incumbent with these data center developments.

So, simply enough, thank you again for the CCR, and I definitely look forward to seeing what comes out of it as next steps, and especially how citizens can participate in giving input in that process as it moves along.

Thank you very much.

Alison Greer, followed by Deborah Ponce.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Council.

My name is Alison Greer.

I work for CHCS, the local mental health authority for San Antonio and Bear County.

A little later in the meeting, you will hear from Maria Villa Gomez about the formation of an ad hoc committee to discuss diversion, jail diversion.

And I am here speaking on behalf of our organization in favor of that idea.

We are seeing large increases in the behavioral health safety net population in Bear County, and we cannot incarcerate our way out of that.

We need a jail diversion center, a place where low-level offenders can go and get residential treatment, 90-day follow-up, a process that completely bypasses the jail, and I am asking for your support for the ad hoc committee, and we look forward to being your partners on that committee.

Thank you.

Deborah Ponce, followed by Didi Balmeras, good afternoon, uh Mayor, Council.

Um my name is Deborah Ponce.

I'm a district four community member and a climate justice organizer with Public Citizen.

I'm here to urge City to address the policy gap surrounding data centers before major projects begin locating in San Antonio.

Um I want to express my support for Councilman Galvan CCR to urgently focus on data centers and establish regulations that will protect the long-term safety of our city.

Knowing that a mid-sized data center can use up to 300,000 gallons of water a day, um, roughly, the use of a thousand homes keeps me up at night.

I'm asking for your support of the CCR so that San Antonio can take a proactive and responsible approach.

Um, I come from a part of town that has carried the burden of large industrial facilities, and I fear our community may be targeted again.

Um, but this is not just about district four.

Under the current system, the developers can choose a site, negotiate quietly, and move forward with all almost no public awareness, meaning that any one of your districts could be next without your knowledge and without a community's voice.

This is already happening now or has happened.

Um, whatever data centers choose to locate, they come with significant impacts.

They will use incredible electrical loads.

They will come with the loss of 100,000 to 300 gallons of water usage a day and need cooling demands, and of course, there's also the diesel generator testing that they do.

There's noise and stormwater drainage.

There's so much to consider.

Um, yet the unified development code that we currently have has no category, no zoning, district guidance, no development standards for data centers.

This leaves the city without the tools needed to ensure appropriate placement, environmental safeguards, community protections, because they set up in secret, you'll be the last to know.

With data center proposals already emerging, including including in areas connected to the Edwards Aquifer.

This is a risk that we can't afford.

Um we can't we can't um I guess we can't drink money, and so we must have our water.

Um, that's why I'm urging that we speed up the process, support the CCR, um, support anything that needs to be done to get some oversight for these data centers.

And lastly, I would like to um push that we need community involvement.

Um we need to take um the coverage off of these groups, these LLCs that are are moving into our areas so that we can actually um make um the safeguards needed.

Thank you so much.

Didi Balmeris, followed by Judith Temple.

Good afternoon, Council Mayor.

My name is Dee De Belmudis.

I'm a clean energy advocate with Public Citizen.

I would like to thank Councilman Galvan for bringing forward the data center response planning and policy CCR.

We have to protect our water, especially in this water scarce state.

We have to protect our power supply, our environment and ratepayers.

Data centers require a lot of water.

They use a tremendous amount of power when they use diesel backup generators, they pollute the air the neighbors are breathing.

Recently, CPS Energy's vice president of corporate development, Jonathan at the Hedina told C SET News, the utilities' current system peaks at 6,000 megawatts of power usage during the summer.

By 2035, he said they expect to add another 2,000 megawatts.

Large load customers drawing more than 40 megawatts are expected to make up about half.

The majority of them, he said, would likely would likely be data centers.

He said, when you're talking about growing 30 to 33% over the next decade, and 50% of that coming potentially from a large user like a data center or something equivalent.

That is a big change to the planning, the assumptions, the forecasting.

Who pays for that power generation that is being used to keep these data centers running?

CPS Energy has stated their upcoming generation plan will inform the next rate increase.

Ratepayers should not be subsidizing the cost for data centers because they don't benefit the average ratepayer.

The cell phone that you use, the tablet that you're using, is not needed.

We don't need data centers to power those.

Hopefully, Senate Bill 6 will address this.

In the meantime, this CCR, as the CCR moves uh to the PCDC, please ensure there are transparency and accountability standards for potential data center development and commission an independent study to look at the current impact of data centers while also including new demand for energy and water usage and the impact that it's having for the average ratepayer, and that any study come from that, that that be open to the public for looking at it and also giving feedback.

Thank you.

Judith Temple, followed by Steve Huerta.

Hello, my name is Judith Temple.

I am the coordinator of the environmental collaborative of San Antonio.

Some of our speakers here that you will hear are part of that collaborative.

I'm here to support the CCR proposed by Councilwoman Meza Gonzalez and Councilwoman Andrette Gavito with regard to the purchase of land known as the Guajalote Ranch.

Some have mentioned already, is that this is a huge amount of acreage that is going to be leveled, all the ecosystems are going to be destroyed for 2900 homes.

And that in the end, Lanier's homeowners, residents, business community will eventually be asked to fund the water treatment plant, which experts say could dump as much as one million gallons of treated wastewater into a lotus per day, which will undoubtedly affect the Edwards Aquifer.

The thing is that in extreme rain events, no matter how good the wastewater treatment plant prepares for those events, they cannot take care of the amount of water that goes through the system.

Which means that inevitably the event that occurred on July 4th in the Hill currently is going to hit the Halotus area.

It's not, it's not if it's when it's going to happen.

And so what that means is that this untreated toxic waste, the forever chemicals, the pharmaceuticals that come out of people's homes, that unfortunately they dump down their toilets.

So at this point, I want to say that I would like the mayor and the council members to consider this CCR because we don't know what's going to happen to the Edwards Aquifer.

We depend on that.

If this uh development goes through, uh I would like to see council find a way to slow down this process so that it would give opportunities for the uh property owners to look at other options before selling the property to Lanier.

For example, uh looking at ways that they could earn or have part of their property put into a conservation easements, um, give time for people to really evaluate the scope of the development, and to look at other options that have been done across the nation that have been able to bring about responsible sustainable development for homes for businesses in communities that do not have a detrimental impact on the environment.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Steve Huerta, followed by Barbara Acost.

Good afternoon.

My name is Steven Huerta.

I am the executive director of all of us, and then also the former uh re-entry sheriff for education and employment with the Brooke County Commissioners Court and currently serve as a advisory to our county commissioner on re-entry, Tommy Acosta.

Excuse me, Tommy uh Calvert.

And I'm here because I really want to support the policies that uh support second chance hiring.

Um I'm one of the original architectures of Band of Box and uh Clean Slate Initiative policies that we've been working on for the past 20 years.

One of the first things that passed our policies was Boston and some really excited that um well thank you.

Really excited that there's something that's gonna be happening here.

So I really just want to sort of put some truth as to why policies like this are really important for the city of San Antonio.

Because when people with records um get decent work, it's not just for a problem, it's a billion dollar problem for the city.

Based on conservative projections, San Antonio is losing an estimate of one to 1.5 billion every year in wages, spending, and tax revenue because of unemployment or underemployment among people with criminal records.

That's money that we are choosing to leave on the table.

We're not talking about a small group.

Roughly one in six adults in our county is impacted by the justice system in some way.

That is a workforce, the size of a mid-sized city living within our city that we are keeping on the sideline.

The research is clear.

When people get a fair shot at work or have the records cleared, wages jump by 20 to 23% within the first year.

And the likelihood of reoffending goes down, not up.

In fact, people who get the relief are less likely to be arrested than the general population.

So if our concern is also public safety, the safest thing that we can do is make sure that we get people with records stable jobs.

This is also a children and families issue.

Nearly half of kids in this county have a parent with some kind of record.

When that parent can't work, that child pays the price in housing instability, school outcomes, and mental health.

So what can this committee do?

First, make San Antonio a model second chance employer, strengthen fair chance hiring, and set clear targets for hiring just as impacted residents.

Second, the incentives to our contracts, give scoring preference, or modest incentives to vendors that adopt second chance hiring policies that meet hiring benchmarks.

And I'll put a note on that that as um chairman of our subcommittee and employment committee at the county level.

Uh, I worked very uh vigorously with our contracting department, and the Bear County contracting now has that.

So uh employers that contract with the county do get incentives uh when it comes to making sure that they have those type of policies.

Thank you, sir.

Uh, you can submit the rest of your comments for the recording.

Thank you very much for your time.

Barbara Acost, followed by Destiny Delarosa.

Hi, good afternoon.

My name is Barbara Acosta.

I'm a director with the participatory defense and pathway to freedom and an active member of all of us are non-tex.

Dear members of the governance committee for many San Antonios, a criminal record is more than a mark on paper.

It's a lifetime barrier.

It can mean being turned away from jobs, excluded from housing, denied credit, and left with the dignity without the dignity of providing for your family.

It is painful to watch skilled hardworking people be judged by their worst mistake rather than their best potential.

I know this pain because I live it.

I myself have a background.

I have been just as impacted as well.

I faced it, I faced rejection after rejection when applying for work, even jobs that I was qualified for, career path that I dreamed of, they were shut off to me entirely.

My family and I have lived on house did live on housing, public housing for six years because many apartments wouldn't accept my background.

And when I tried to buy a home, I also ran into more hurdles.

Some of the lenders checked the backgrounds, and it just was a headache from there.

Still I preserve today.

But I know that for every one, every one of me, there are thousands more who never get the second chance.

They are blocked not by not by lack of will, but by lack of opportunity.

This is this work to me is personal.

I do lead the participatory defense program under the Pathway of Freedom Project, and I work every day with Justice Impacted People re-entry or re-entry programs through our communities.

We're trying to heal, provide, and participate.

My father, Tommy Acosta Sr.

Was a leader in the movement, and he was instrumental in passing band the box in San Antonio in 2016.

His legacy of service lives on through me.

And today I will continue to fight for that legacy to continue the legacy by asking to support the CCR 2025 003.

Thank you.

Destiny Delarosa, followed by Alexander Testa.

Hi, my name is Destiny Delarosa, and I'm a member of the Big Homey Street Mentoring.

I'm directly just as impacted.

And because of my background, I continue to face major barriers in my life.

I struggle to find employment and housing that will accept my history.

And when I am honest, willing and fully qualified.

Recently I was offered a great job opportunity.

I completed every step of the hiring process and was completely transparent about my background.

One week before starting, I received a call informing me that I no longer qualified.

Solely because of my record, situations like this continue to close doors and limit my ability to move forward.

I'm asking for a CCR 2025 to be approved so that people like me can receive real second chances.

A second chance is more than a job or a place to live.

It is the opportunity to rebuild the life.

Support a family and not be defined forever by my past mistakes.

I do not want my background to follow me for the rest of my life.

With CCR 2025, individuals like me can finally access opportunities we need to grow, contribute, and succeed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

I'll be speaking on item six, the CCR for the diversion center.

Uh my name is Alexander Testa.

I'm an associate professor at University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health on our San Antonio campus.

In October 2023, I was commissioned by the Bear County uh Commissioner's Court to conduct an evaluation of the processing of an arrested persons at the Justice Intake and Assessment Annex.

My report, which is publicly available online, uh highlighted a number of areas of improvement for the way that we process arrested persons.

One of those chapters focuses on the need for better mental health, substance use, and intellectual developmental disability screening and diversion processes, and called for uh the um implementation of a dedicated diversion center in the city.

Uh San Antonio Bear County will now become the only uh major metropolitan area without a dedicated diversion center focused on mental health processing of arrested persons.

Harris County, Travis County, Dallas County, and Terran County all have established or are currently establishing one.

From a research standpoint, detaining individuals with mental health issues who are low risk to public safety.

Uh at the pretrial stage or in jail longer than necessary is associated with number of adverse mental physical health outcomes as well as recidivism.

Diversion centers offer a lot of potential to improve outcomes.

It's a complicated path forward, but I do believe that the city and county has the talent, the uh the dedicated personnel to make it happen.

And I myself, as a researcher who's worked on this issue, I'm happy to make myself available to both the city uh and and county actors who are uh working on this issue.

So I would like to voice my support uh in favor of this uh CCR, and I am here if there's any follow-up questions.

So thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Uh that being our final speaker, we'll move on to the action items.

Madam Clerk, please read the caption for item two.

Item two is a council consideration request by council members Iva Lice Mesa Gonzalez, District 8 and Marina Aldarete Gavito, District 7 on the Wajalote Ranch Project.

Uh Eric, please make the presentation.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh Bridget will uh present on item two uh on the CCR.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Committee members.

Bridget White, director of the planning department.

The Wajalote Ranch Project CCR was submitted on October 1st by districts eight and seven.

As a matter of background, the Wahalote Ranch Project is a proposed 1,100 plus acre residential development located in Northwest Bear County in the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction or ETJ, near the intersection of Scenic Loop Road and Babcock Road.

It is anticipated to be developed with approximately 3,000 single family residential units.

It is over the Edwards Aquifer Contributing Zone.

The council consideration request or CCR includes three items as shown here on the slide.

One, an assessment of possible dangers or impact of the proposed Wahalote Ranch project.

Two, an evaluation of funding sources for potential land acquisition, conservation easements, or other protective measures, and three, council briefings on aquifer threats.

There are several considerations related to this request.

First, responses were received from SAWs and the Edwards Aquifer Authority for item number one.

Those responses were attached to the memo.

Second, the project is to be developed as a special district, which can be created by the county, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality or TCQ, or the state.

The property owners or developers submitted to the city on November 10th a petition for consent to the creation of a municipal utility district.

These districts are under the Texas Water Code, specifically chapters 49 and 54.

In addition to the water code, staff must refer to the Texas Local Government Code.

There is a 90-day requirement from receipt of the petition for a consent or denial on the creation of the district.

Therefore, the petition will need to be considered no later than February 10th, and we've noted a February 5th council date next year.

There is also a limit to the restrictions and conditions that can be placed on a district in exchange for consent.

Staff recommends that this item not go to a council committee but proceed to the entire council for consideration of the municipal utility district petition given the state's 90-day requirement.

Mayor, that concludes my presentation on the submitted CCR, and staff is available for questions.

Great.

Thank you.

Um one of the sponsors will come speak.

Good afternoon, thank you.

Um since 2000, San Antonio has been the tip of the spear when it comes to land conservation for the purpose of protecting the Edwards Aquifer.

Nearly 70% of our drinking water comes from this source, and it has been described as one of the most prolific and pristine aquifer systems in the world.

We are currently blessed to have the aquifer and the San Antonio voters have approved allocation of their sales tax four times since the Edwards Aquifer Protection Program began.

Since 2000, the city has protected 187,388 acres, predominantly across Uvalde, Medina, and Bear Counties in perpetuity.

Other partners include Texas Parks and Wildlife SAWS and the Nature Conservancy.

We have all vested interest in ensuring the safety of our primary source of drinking water from irresponsible development.

We filed the CCR to bring attention to the concerns raised by this development.

It also underscores the need for us to evaluate the policies and procedures that we currently use to identify and prioritize the prop the properties that should be protected to give stakeholders the greatest return on our investment.

We should prioritize conserving properties in our own backyard.

These properties are most at risk for development, which could potentially harm the aquifer, but also present risk of other environmental concerns.

So it's our request that we, in addition to the full council hearing with the MUD request that the community health committee begin to look at the policies surrounding conservation easements in order to identify and prioritize available properties located over the contributing and recharge zones of the aquifer, specifically in Bear County and the city's ETJ.

Wahalote is a way wake up call for all of us, and we can be sure that unless we take measures now, there will be more of this development in the future.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, as has been mentioned, even during public comment, this is a long-standing issue in our community and lots of discussion.

Um seeking to further better understand the actual risks uh to the water supply.

Um so appreciate the the intent of the CCR with much of this addressed in in other ways.

Um let me um I also want to there's a specific point of the the CCR council briefings on aquifer threats.

Um, as many know uh we have moved to having the utilities come brief the full council um every two months, they alternate, right?

Um monthly updates to us, and certainly uh council briefings on aquifer threats is certainly part of SAWS's um responsibilities to the council already.

So um that is not a that is not a new requirement.

Um let me um move on to my councils here, my council colleagues here.

We'll uh allow five minutes for the first round and three minutes for the second round of comments.

Um councilman Mungia.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to thank the councilwoman for co-authoring this, and I was um proud to sign that CCR.

I went out there also and took a tour and uh heard the plight of the residents and people who actually live out there.

And uh it was very important to note that uh one of the uh council members of Great Forest, um, you know, hadn't really heard anything about the city or where we were until the CCR was filed, and so I think that was a really good communication piece for them.

So I do support obviously us voting on this.

I do also support the second request of land acquisition conservation easements also going to check for further conversation.

I think we should still respect that request.

Um, and so I do support that.

Thank you very much.

Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mary.

Uh yes, I'll agree with the sentiment as well, and I'll be fairly short.

Um I do agree with city council having the of course we have to do what we must by law and then having the conversation uh as a full body, I think is important.

Uh but I do when five when CCRs have been filed, uh I do appreciate when um you know as much of the request gets met as possible, and so I think just that alone doesn't meet the request that uh we evaluate funding sources sources, look at potential land acquisitions, conservation easements, all those things.

Uh and so I would support uh the I don't know that a motion has been made yet, but um I will support that as well.

Going to check.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Viecadon.

Yeah, I support staff uh recommendation to take this to full council so that we can discuss it there.

I think there is a a lot of information regarding what is the contributing zone, who is going to be regulating what, and what people can do with their own property.

So uh there's a lot to unpack here for the ETJ.

I think we've had an initial conversation.

I think we need to take it to B session to have a larger conversation and see what our um best case scenarios are.

And I do support chess looking in to uh more opportunities as we we do this, but I do believe that we need to bring all our stakeholders together because while the city holds uh large responsibility due to the fact that we do um that SAWS is a city-owned mutil utility.

I think we need to understand that there are other actors in this process that we need to engage with.

Thank you.

Eric, do you want to just lay out the process for folks in terms of timeline?

Um, this is already obviously scheduled to come to the council for for action, which is required by law.

Um, so if you wanted to talk through what or or the city staff, you want to talk through the um the timeline, please.

So, in terms of the timeline, because of state law, there is a 90-day requirement.

So the options for city council are two options.

Um, you can approve.

If you approve the item would proceed to TCQ for their approval for the consent for the creation of the MUD.

If City Council chooses to deny or make no action, the developer or property owner would then have to go through the process of filing another petition to ask for and negotiate services with the city or SAS.

That's a hundred and twenty-day requirement.

With that particular um decision making process, if the decision is made that services to be is to be provided within 120 days, the developer can then choose to develop, they can also still choose to come back to sit to the to the city for the creation of a special district more for a funding mechanism.

If city council chooses not to provide service within that 120 days, they can then opt to go back to TCQ.

Mayor, may I may I clarify because I think there's there's some confusion.

The governance committee um is not determining whether the mud request will go to full council or not.

That's going to go to full council understood.

And that's exactly why.

Yeah, no, that's exactly why I made the comment in that there's already a process in place by which this information will be part of that discussion.

Correct.

And the the governance committee has the ability to pro to move to check the two items that the councilwoman suggests, in which they're not mutually exclusive.

And and so the timeline that Bridget laid out with an end point within that within the statutorily um required time would likely come by February 5th.

I I think to you to your question also, Mayor, uh there would be some council conversation at uh one of our four meetings in February in January, um, either at B sessions or A sessions, and we'll need to schedule that and gauge that based off of the next steps.

We wouldn't just put it on the February 5th agenda.

So there's probably some lead up time we need to do um I know as part of that it was referenced actually during public comment.

One of the things we'll want to make sure um that we have clarity on is um uh the real frankly um assessment that we agree upon, which outlines the which is going to be our common understanding of of the threat.

I recognize even State Senator Um Campbell again raised it, it was raised here by one in somebody in public comment um and understanding that um there are differences of of opinion in terms of the actual um the actual threat.

So we'll need that um as part of course of those discussions.

Okay.

Um the second piece, we've talked about this more broadly, Eric, um, but in terms of evaluating uh excuse me, evaluate funding sources for potential land acquisition.

We've talked about how some aspects of of CCRs may come with um significant budgetary considerations.

Um do you have a recommendation on how to um how you would bring that before us for consideration?

Well, so we have a we have a uh a current funding source for the acquisition of um uh sensitive property over the aquifer right now.

It's funded through SAWS revenue and a commercial uh paper debt program.

Um I think I think based on what the councilwoman's suggestion is is to have a further briefing about that vehicle at the committee level.

Uh beyond that uh source of revenue, we don't have it currently identified, and and the council would need the prioritizer, we would need to develop a new revenue source.

Okay.

Um the second round, any other questions?

Um, Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you.

I I'll just to that point that that's a funding source that already exists.

Um I think one of the challenges I have is I don't know that I've ever received a notice from SAS or from city staff that like prior to all of this, we received nothing from city staff that there was a threat to the aquifer.

And so what what elevates to that level that uh makes you say, oh, we should this is this is a step we need to take.

And so I don't need that and it'd be nice to get an answer in a little bit, but for that purpose, I'd say that element of two and three might be helpful uh to go to check for briefing purposes for action if they so choose to move on something later on.

But I do think that's a discussion that's worthwhile having, especially uh in light of all of those.

Yeah, I mean, I think it's the it's a two-part answer.

Part of it uh the mayor answered already is that um with the regular utility briefings.

The expectation I think from the the mayor and the council is that if if SAS is going to be in here six times a year, giving you all an update, if there's something over the hill outside our city limits, uh that's an opportunity for them, or inside the city limits, it's an opportunity for them to share publicly what they're dealing with.

That in this case um this case began in 2019 at the SAS board.

It's outside the city of San Antonio and has gone through a number of different steps.

Um our involvement at this point as an organization was whether there was a potential pit application that was coming to the city, um, and we've known about that for the last couple of months as a potential, and then the current situation we find ourselves in with a municipal utility request.

But I think it's clear um based on uh the request that councilwoman uh Govito sent to SAS and neighborhoods Aquifer authority several weeks ago, and the responses we included in addition to the mayor's comments that these types of situations that may be um boiling up or simmering right outside that are gonna impact uh the water quality or water access uh to the entire community that there'd be a little bit more of a heads up for sure, and I would just say like looking at the looking at the letter from SAWs, it basically if I were to sum up the the six or so pages, it's basically yes, this is this could be concerning, but we've done what we needed to do for it to no longer concern us.

And I would just say like looking at the looking at the letter from SAW is it basically if I were to sum up the the six or so pages, it's basically yes, this is this could be concerning, but we've done what we needed to do for it to no longer concern us.

That would that was my takeaway.

And maybe I maybe I completely misread it, but would you like the SARS representative in the room to come address you here?

Okay, thank you.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council members.

So my name is Donovan Burton with the San Antonio Water System.

Uh the letter certainly there are a lot of complex complexities with the the there are a couple of letters out there.

Uh we we we believe that a lot of the risks have been significantly um uh mitigated through the clauses that we put into the contract, into the water uh contract um with the developer, plus they were followed up by some things that Metro Health uh the uh Metro Health did um at the TCEQ level, and then we believe that the geology of the aquifer mitigates some risk further.

So we we don't see a significant threat to the aquifer.

Um certainly if there we're not going to say that there can't be any water at all get into the the Edwards aquifer, um, and any water is is concerning to some extent.

We certainly are not going to let any any kind of um uh we we're required to provide good pure uh drinking water to our customers.

But we at this point don't see a significant threat from this particular development as it stands today.

Thank you.

I guess all that being said, this does not require action, but what we're discussing about the parts two and three of the requests do require uh action if we want to send it.

So I'll make them I move to uh if we could go to slide three real quick, just for easy reference.

Can we continue discussion after motion's been made?

Yeah, okay.

Then I'll make them I move to uh send the discussion on item two and three to the check committee.

Reminder, um the third item is something that um SAS provides to the full council.

Yeah.

So are you looking for different information than what they provide to the full council?

Um I think for that specific it could even be uh a slightly uh briefer presentation to the committee than what they would give to uh full council, but what I'm looking for is item two in relation in the context of item three of request three.

Does that make sense?

Okay, we can make sure that that it's captured.

Additional comments, second round.

You good?

Okay, got it.

Okay, um actually, Donovan, since we've got you to lay flat, actually, because it speaks exactly to again the concern with the threat, um, but also the different analysis that exists, in particular from Sweary.

Um, so can you give folks here maybe that the two-minute explanation, if not shorter, of of why uh you disagree with our analysis?

Yeah, and so the SWERI analysis, um uh well there are a couple of major differences in what we see versus what the uh uh what that report showed.

Uh some of it is mapping of the underground geology, so the the aquifers.

Uh there's a major fault there called the Habe fault, and over time the the aquifer levels have shifted.

And so one of the our our analysis is that where this water goes could possibly go into the aquifer would be the upper Trinity aquifer, and then as it goes into or through that fault, if it does get through that fault, it would go into a very dense area of the Edwards Aquifer.

And so we think that would prohibit a lot of of that water from going in.

Plus, just generally that fault is gonna keep a lot of water from going into the Edwards Aquifer.

I'm I'm trying to avoid speaking in blanket.

I can't say that there won't be a drop again that could that could get over there, but we think largely that that water will not cross into the through the Hay B fault through that dense layer of Edwards to get into to that area.

The other major thing I would uh I would point out is um there was a there was a well study done, some dye tracing that had been done and used in that study from 2006, I believe, and that was done at a time where the the particular well that they put dye trace into was drilled into both formations, the Trinity and the Edwards Aquifer.

Um and so there was there was dry dye found in both of the aquifers.

They assumed they were mixing, but actually they they weren't uh blocked off.

And so the well was later um capped off, not capped off, but but uh the the wells, I'm sorry, they were blocked off from the various layers, and so that water going into the well wouldn't go into both aquifers.

So those are the two kind of major issues of difference that we see with the SWERA report versus what we're seeing.

You know, the discharge point is about anywhere from 11 to 13 miles away from any of our wells, even seven or eight miles from after it get gets in gets into the Edwards Aquifer.

We think there are a whole lot of things that happen within the aquifer that's going to uh that could prevent it from getting to any of our wells.

And then finally, we um that water is moving constantly.

The Edwards Aquifer is not just a uh a static pool of water sitting there, it's moving constantly through throughout the system, going from west to east, and so some of that will will move out.

The so that's the difference in the the science that we see of the of the particular aquifers.

Then you get into the mitigation that we've put in place in the contracts that were require them to have uh nutrient removal in the in the wastewater process.

Um and so and then to have an operator, a class A operator.

There are nine things that we put into the uh into the contract that would mitigate a lot of the um a lot of the threats that could get into the water.

Thanks, Donovan.

Um we you don't have any geologists up here, so uh we will take your word for it.

Um however, I know again recognizing the the the public to include uh an elected official continues to reference the Suiri report.

Uh you've just provided your explanation as to why you have a difference of uh of analysis.

Um I don't know if Sweary has responded to your difference of analysis, um, but we will make sure you know councilman and governance committee will make sure that you know obviously before this comes to the council as part of the the MUD discussion that we we have that okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions for Donovan?

Go ahead.

Oh, go ahead.

Uh no questions for Donovan, but just I guess I understand the confusion and what my motion was in relation to part three.

So I understand that city that city council will be receiving briefings from uh from SAWS uh on any new and emerging threats and whatnot.

What I would specifically like to see to go to check is the totality of request number two with one, of course, any right now an update.

Are there any uh uh current or upcoming threats um as well as any past ones that maybe have risen to a level of concern?

Uh and then what is the threshold that what are the different types of threats and uh issues and whatnot that we can start?

So we have I guess what I want is that those metrics.

I want the discussion to take place at check on what is a threat, what is not, what level rises the level that saws would present it to full council.

Does that make sense?

And it does, councilman.

Um, and there'd probably be benefit well because we don't want the others to have the exact same question.

So I would argue that we would bring that to you, we'll just have that provided as part of the next session update to the entire group so everyone can have their questions answered at the exact same time.

Because even if you're not on check to your point, you care about the aquifer and threats to it.

So we'll have that full discussion the next time they come before us.

Um okay.

Did you want to um just to be very did you want to modify your um your motion then based on I think it's a good briefing of full cast basically?

Okay, so you want to retract your motion?

I think it's fine.

Leave your motion, leave your motion.

Okay, so um you still want just to be very clear um aspects of two uh related to threats related to parts of two.

Is that correct?

Why don't you restate exactly what your motion is?

For sure.

So my motion is for all of requests two uh as well as some of the items that I just talked about, the an update on threats, uh past present, upcom and uh emerging, as well as those thresholds and that those metrics for what constitutes uh threat and environmental issue that is going to go to full council.

Uh I would like for that to be presented to the check committee.

Thank you.

Okay, so there's the motion for those things to to um go to the check committee again, though those will be shared again during the during the B session.

Uh particularly potentially the exact same briefing.

Um okay, so there is a um additional comment on here.

No.

Okay.

Uh there's a motion and a second um as stated.

Um so you move.

Is there a second based on the motion?

Okay.

Please vote.

Aye.

All opposed.

Okay, motion passes.

Uh Madam Clerk, please read the caption for item three.

Item number three is a council consideration request by council member Terry Castillo, District Five on a second chance fair hiring initiative.

Um over to you for the staff presentation.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Um the CCR was submitted on October 2nd, 2025 by Councilwoman Castillo, um the city to enter into local agreement with Bear County to develop a second chance workforce initiative program for justice affected residents, including those with felony convictions, is the request.

Oh, thank you, sir.

Uh coordinate with Chrysalis Ministries.

Uh Nino is here with us today.

Um Bear County Reentry Center to identify existing initiatives and employers currently practicing fair chance hiring.

The exploration of federal grant opportunities to expand existing proven models as outlined in the manufacturing institute's second chance initiative case study, research best practices that effectively utilize background checks and familial criminal history to not impede hiring opportunities and to work with the city attorney's office to determine options and implementing those best practices for employers that receive COSA incentives and are selected for city contracts.

Research best practices and ordinances that promote individual individualized assessments and hiring for justice impacted applicants, emphasis on city employment practices, certified contractors, and private industries receiving city tax incentives.

The budget uh will be consumed by staff time, needing to research, implement, and monitor any incentives and integration of potential changes to hiring practices, budget identification for the additional incentives provided to employers, and from the city attorney's office, the legal implications to comply with state preemption law.

City must not adopt any hiring policy that exceeds regulations set by the Texas labor code nor regulate vendors' employment practices, should avoid funding commitments or appearances of selective endorsements to specific agencies to ensure a fair and open process.

If this um CCR remains an incentive, um that preemptive law is not a factor.

Coordination would be with Bear County, Christmas Ministries, and other city departments.

The next steps staff recommends this item to be referred to the economic and workforce development committee to review and evaluate best practices around second chance hiring and the use of incentives for employers.

Staff also recommends the city engage the county to determine their interest in developing an interlocal agreement to establish a joint second chance workforce initiative and incentive program for residents with felony convictions.

We've had some preliminary discussions with Bear County, and they seem very open to the prospect.

That concludes my presentation.

Staff is available for additional questions.

Thank you.

Uh the sponsor of the CCR, Councilmember Castillo is recognized to speak for three minutes.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, members of the governance committee.

As mentioned during today's A session, I believe this council consideration request compliment the work of Ready to Work.

Uh I'm supportive of staff's recommendations and would like to express my thanks to the members of the public who expressed support for these CCRs.

Um I would be remiss if I didn't highlight that.

Barbara is the daughter of Tommy Acosta, who's a violent who was a violence interrupter with the Metro Health Department, but who has since passed.

Uh and I think uh again, this is the work that we should be doing to ensure that we continue to build an inclusive San Antonio.

Uh and I'm grateful for the partners here today uh that are doing that work in and in day in and day out to identify those gaps to ensure that we can get uh more folks into high-paying jobs.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, can I get a motion in a second so we can be begin discussion?

Second.

Okay, great.

Um appreciate this CCR, Councilmember Castillo.

Um, given as you point out, the data um about the rate of uh individuals in our community that have been justice impacted.

Um I don't talk about it often, but as a young person, I myself was involved uh in an altercation.

Let's just say that.

Um that resulted in me being placed on probation for six months and uh had to pay a fine, etc.

etc.

And you know, thankfully I was 14 years old when it happened.

Uh 13 probably actually, 13.

And so you know, I was able to have my record expunged and go on to do other things.

Um and and was thankful uh for the folks that came into my life and and helped me get me on a different different path.

So um when I think about giving folks in our community a second chance, um, in all ways, we should absolutely do that, especially given what's happening at the federal and at the state level.

That is making it harder, in fact, uh, to do that, but making it easier to jail people.

So I very much appreciate certainly the intent, and again, thanks to the folks that came to speak here today.

Um recognize my colleagues who'd like to speak on this item, Councilman Mungia.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, and thank you for sharing that story.

I think that's important to know that, and thank you to Councilman Castillo.

I was happy to sign on to this.

Um when I was reading the CCR when I signed it, I was just so interested in the unfortunate number that there's been a 34% increase in juvenile felonies the last year for multiple reasons, um, which is a high level of uh THC vaping, right?

And so I think schools are doing a relatively good job trying to give second chances, but if a young person is out there with a vape pen, THC pen, um that's an automatic felony for them without intervention, and so I think just about how that can have the potential to really affect their life after that.

And so I think this is a really good opportunity to do more in this section.

I remember the band the box uh back in 2016 when I first started here, and there are still some gaps that we need to fill.

So I support this um going to EWDC for for the review.

Thank you for our edification.

May I ask Mike, how many folks?

What percentage of our ready-to-work participants are just this uh just as impacted?

Um there are about 2800 self-identified justice impacted individuals participating and ready to work, but we believe that number is hard because it's a voluntary disclosure.

Okay.

What percentage of that would you say is the of the folks that have gone through the program and been successfully placed in a position?

Oh, successfully placed in a job.

We have about 3500 approved job placements.

And if my I don't want to quote the wrong number, we'll have to get back to you with the exact number that are justice involved.

Okay.

It'd be helpful.

I mean, obviously, even our in our own programs, right?

I mean, this is something we want to encourage folks to do, but if we are talking about the challenge that many have even completing the program to get placed, if we see a higher percentage of folks that are just as impacted in that group, then it speaks to the necessity of of this effort.

Uh and so it would welcome helping us understand that piece of it.

Thanks, Mike.

Absolutely.

Councilman, Councilman McKee Rodriguez.

Thank you.

If you wouldn't mind going to, I think the slide right before this, it's five for me, thirteen for you.

Uh could you just help me understand that legal piece once uh so in a number of our contracts, I believe that we have certain standards that we set for those who for those who are awarded contracts in our city.

And I just want you to clarify them.

Let's not adopt any hiring policy that exceeds regulation nor regulate vendors' employment practices.

Uh correct, councilman.

Uh that's a general statement on law.

Obviously, the uh the analysis would be in terms of what the committee intends to do and will do in an analysis once there's an implementation plan.

We just wanted to state really what the potential challenges are.

Um, but we will work with the committee to come up with a plan that will work through this challenge here.

Okay.

So in other words, I don't I don't want you to feel that that's uh uh and a limiter into what the the committee can do.

We'll work with the committee to make sure we stay uh true to this again a general law statement that we can't preempt state law, but there's a lot of things you're right that council can do and has done that is complementary to state law and doesn't it doesn't specifically uh uh doesn't specifically contradict it.

So we couldn't uh you know I'll I'll leave it alone for now, but my eyebrows are raised, and that brings me pause, but I and I don't want it to I don't want it to negatively impact what the CCR is is capable of, and I I don't think it will based off of that little bit you just said, but we'll we'll see.

And in fact, I've already told my team we need to look at what we put in the language here because we don't when we don't want to have that intent.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

Councilman Via Gran.

Yeah, I look forward to taking this to EWDC.

Thank you, uh Councilman Castillo for putting it forward.

Thank you, Councilman McKee Rodriguez, for uh bringing that point up.

I know exactly what you're talking about, and I'll give direction to Andy regarding uh specifically where this may be limited or where the city can adjust their processes.

But I look forward to getting together with a very hard-working committee, as y'all know, and uh working through this so we can get something out to the council.

Thank you.

Um I see him in the audience, um, and I want to know I want him to know that this is also gonna come to him.

Um, Councilman Galvan, uh is it back there?

Councilman Galvan.

Uh we know you know a lot of uh part of the part of the the challenge can be some of the um educational barriers, right?

Um literacy, for example, in particular, uh, as to why um we see rates of recidism and recidivism in our community.

Um so please go ahead.

I'm sorry, maybe I didn't mean to interrupt, but we've already had five council members speak on this topic.

Okay, okay.

So councilman Galvani, you just got to listen.

So we'll have this issue also come to you to understand if there is a role for your committee to play as we try to address this as holistically as possible.

Okay.

Any additional discussion from the from the members here.

Okay.

So there being no further discussion, we have a motion and a second to move this as recommended by staff.

Please vote.

All in favor say aye.

Okay.

All opposed.

Okay.

The motion carries.

I'm sorry.

Okay.

Madam Clerk, please read the caption for item four.

Item four is a council consideration request by council members Terry Castillo, District 5, and Edward Mungia, District 4 on a formal community benefits agreement policy CBA.

Good afternoon.

I'm here to brief you on this CCR that was filed by Council Members Castillo and Munghilla in early October regarding the creation of a standard community benefits agreement policy that could be used by community as a template for all discretionary projects or for discretionary projects that the city oversees or for which we provide an incentive of any kind.

So for background, a community benefits agreement or a CBA, they're associated with projects with very specific projects.

They're legally binding, enforceable agreements between community groups and developers or companies.

These agreements provide private sector funding or specific benefits, or they mitigate impacts that the local community might be imp or might experience or be affected by the proposed development.

CBAs are primarily used on larger projects that could have a significant impact on the quality of life of those individuals around the actual project.

As previously mentioned, the CCR calls for the development of a formal community benefits policy for council consideration.

And it requests that the policy be grounded on four principles.

That the CBA is be negotiated between the developer and an inclusive representative and accountable coalition of community and labor partners who effectively represent the interests of the impacted community before city incentives are awarded.

That they be clear, that they include clearly defined and legally enforceable means by which community can hold developers or any other parties accountable of their obligations with clear metrics, timelines, transparency, and reporting processes, that CBAs assign roles and responsibilities to determine compliance and outline a process to address non-compliance, and that CBAs the negotiation process be transparent, inclusive, and accessible to community and provide specific meaningful benefits which deliver what community needs.

Considerations from a fiscal perspective include the staff cost to draft, administer, monitor such a policy depending on the specifications that may ultimately be included.

And then from a legal perspective, the slide states that the state of Texas allows for CBAs under Chapter 312, which is part of the tax code that we authorize tax abatements through, and chapter 380 of the local government code, how we operate a lot more of our economic development programs.

They're not prohibited, I should say that.

It doesn't specifically say that we can.

Community benefits plans, they're they're not exactly the same because they're not legally binding.

But they're not again, they're not legally binding.

Actually, there was a recent executive order that ceased community benefits plans.

Um, there's been some back and forth, but as of right now, they're still suspended.

The grants associated with these, at least from the Department of Energy, um, they are suspended.

So, while we don't have a lot of federal precedent that we could really use to develop this type of policy, we do have some local um here in San Antonio some examples.

Um, and specifically our TERS policy, which identifies that projects can address additional community benefits, and then further, TURS boards can actually establish priorities and goals for specific community benefits that they want to include in again specific funding or development agreements.

And another example is our economic development um incentive policy, which requires a company to reinvest 10% of um whatever incentive value they get from the city back into uh wraparound services, uh, and and specifically we've identified transportation, child care, and workforce development training.

So 10% of the value of the incentive they receive needs to go back into those types of investments.

Um then we've just got other examples recently.

Um, the sports and entertainment district and the community benefits agreement that's being considered there as well.

So we do have some local examples as well.

Our recommendation is to evaluate and assess this type of policy as part of the economic development strategic framework that we're currently updating.

Um this process includes significant stakeholder engagement, um, which we think is critical not just to to that framework, but to this type of policy as well.

I included these two goals from the strategic framework because I it specifically aligns with um some of the considerations from the CCR.

Um, and again, specifically when we're working to retain, expand, and attract business, um, and then for goal number two, when we're working to accelerate place-based redevelopment projects.

So, with that, our recommendation is that we um update the economic and workforce development committee in the spring.

We will have our preliminary findings for this updating, this refresh of the strategic framework.

It should be final and ready for the for final review in the summer in of 2026.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh the sponsor of the uh CCR is here.

If you'd like to speak for three minutes, or both of you actually, yeah.

Go ahead.

Yeah.

Councilman, I'll say I can go first.

Yeah.

Um, I'll just say I appreciate staff's work on this recommendation.

I um right away reading this, I do not agree with this recommendation.

And I'll tell you, it's because the umic development strategic framework was not the centerpiece of our last two major deals that we are having this context conversation with as far as CBAs go.

Um there was also mentioned TURS in this development project for the baseball stadium, TURS policy was uh overridden to do that project, and so those were not centerpieces of those development projects.

Now they obviously did check out in the framework, right?

That it met these two projects met all the metrics of that framework, but this was not the centerpiece for those two projects.

And so to redevelop this, I I I can support that.

If this is going to be the new centerpiece for CBAs, I can get that.

But I don't know that it has been, and I don't know that it would be if it was refreshed.

So I appreciate you know the the committee that can work on this and and try to develop that.

But um, to be quite honest, I don't agree that that's going to be the best route for CBAs.

Now, again, I understand, right?

There are certain issues when we have our manufacturing that's predominantly on the south side of town.

You can't have um community way in when there's other cities still competing for that to have a competitive edge.

I understand that part.

There are some projects that are tax abatements, which means we forego property taxes in order to have this development, so there's not necessarily a public funding to that project, and I guess that's a different tier than what we're talking about with the baseball stadium and the Spurs Stadium.

Um, but I think we can have some metrics on that.

And I also I think I hope that when we talk about the 10% incentive value to support those three categories, we can revisit that, especially with workforce development and training.

If you are an employer and you have staff, you should be training your staff and developing your own workforce.

We also have ready to work where we saw plenty of employers are taking advantage of that.

Now the child care needs, absolute transportation, yes.

We could also say eventually 5% or somewhat less of that is a cash deposit to the city for community benefits across the city.

So I was talking to some of my colleagues about this, you know, and we've got some great expansions happening on the far south side of town.

That money that we're gonna forego in property tax revenue impacts every single council district when we do not collect that money.

How are residents in district nine, district A and District 10 going to benefit if they're not even going to work on a far south side of town for those development projects?

So I think we need to do a rebalance of that in this framework.

And again, I think the CBA goes beyond the strategic framework for economic development.

Uh but those are my thoughts, and I welcome the chair allows Councilwoman Castillo to add in a little bit more about that.

Councilman Castillo.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Alex, for the presentation, and I want to thank Councilmember Mungia.

This is a council consideration request that was circulated about a year ago.

Uh and the councilman calls it the CCR that never was, uh, because that was a conversation about CBAs not being possible, but here we are discussing a Spurs community benefits agreement.

Um so given the comments of uh Councilman Mongia, I believe that could be a this and approach, right?

I believe there is value in revisiting the strategic framework, um, but ultimately right ensuring that we are meeting uh what the expectation of a community benefits agreement is in terms of project-based CBAs uh with Toyota, for example, as mentioned, and then of course the most recent example with the Spurs arena.

Um but I I look forward to hearing the committees uh discussion uh in terms of uh of what uh next steps are.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Um Andy, on oh, did you want to say something?

Okay.

Um Andy, on um on the considerations page, or maybe Alex, uh, it talks about the current administration issued on EO ceasing work on C BPs, but it has rescinded and DO we indicated activities related to CVPs are voluntary.

However, grants have been suspended because of ties to a CBP.

Um how would we I guess help us understand what the what the landscape looks like as we are considering this in general, regardless of the framework, but what is what could this mean for other types of funding that we're uh we're seeking?

The Mayor Mayor, the the comment there on the legal was specific to those that are funded by federal agencies.

So, in other words, it would only apply to those projects in which we get funding from the federal government and not not across everything we're doing.

Um do we have an understanding of well, I I think the same the point holds though, right?

I mean, if we're gonna go after those kinds of grants in in the future, we now need to know the potential ramifications on whether how that how that request may be impacted or reviewed.

Correct.

That's correct, Mary.

And and as we enter into a project in which we we will get funding, obviously that'll be something we will look at.

Yeah, okay, got it.

Can we also talk a little bit about, you know, when I look at the language of the of the um CCR, this um CBA is being legally enforceable contracts uh between a coalition of community-based organizations and the developer of a proposed project.

Um, as was mentioned, you know, we're looking at a CBA as part of the the downtown arena, proposed downtown arena.

So from a from a legal standpoint and an enforceability standpoint, can you understand how help us understand how this would work in practice uh based on this description here?

Thank you, Mayor, for that question.

Is that because I I think we do need to clarify terminology here.

Uh, the way I understand community benefits agreements as in as described in the CCR, it is a binding legal agreement between the city, the developer, and a community group or a number of community groups.

So we're adding under under my definition of a community benefits agreement as described in the CCR, we're adding a party or parties to what otherwise would be an agreement between the city and and another third party.

Um so when when we say we have a community benefits agreement as part of the either baseball or the the downtown district, that's not I think what's described in the CCR.

Because really that's just a community benefits component of an agreement the city has with a third party.

And for example, I mean our our term sheet and the CBA that we would negotiate with the Spurs um, right?

We would not include a third party as part of that.

Right.

That's correct, Mayor.

Okay.

And the enforceability and the transparency and reporting in that example would be our responsibility with the contracting party.

I think Alex, you heard here my the colleague, my call, my excuse me, come my comments from the comments from Councilman Mungia.

Um, in general, there's a appreciation for how we understand economic development, right?

More broadly, right?

And so I think to the point of this and how we do that, I think there is it's it's clearly a desire.

Not only should a CBA be reflective of some uh percentage of the amount being invested, but certainly the amount being invested itself demonstrate an ROI that helps justify the things that are not being invested in as a result of that, right?

So as we think about that framework that you're talking about, it would include that as well, right?

Because we're when we're looking at other things that we would apply a CBA to.

I mean, you could think about data centers, right?

You could take it think about a number of things that would frankly be we'd be forgoing investment in as a result of supporting that effort.

Um so I think more broadly, what would also be helpful as as part of this is um a more strategic conversation about how we understand ROI on economic development, um, of which CBAs are a part, um, but as mentioned here, abatements, other things, tours, etc., that helps us recognize um the investment that we are making as a result of the funds that are foregoing in our community.

Is that clear?

Okay, thanks.

I mean, I'm also just gonna state the obvious.

Um, having a community benefits agreement policy doesn't mean you have a good CBA, right?

Um so part of this is also the council um, you know, while we could have something on paper, um, frankly having the courage to ask for what we deserve.

Um, and and frankly having the courage to also look at what other communities have gotten as a result of their major investment for for example in in sports arenas.

Okay.

Um, Councilman Mugia, um, additional comments from the two council members.

Is there a motion?

Would you like to make a motion, please?

Go for it.

Uh I I make the motion, and I can go next.

I make the motion that we move forward with staff suggestion that the economic workforce and development committee get the updates on the economic development strategic framework.

Uh we refresh in the spring, and then we can take this in.

Uh, I'll just say right now, a community benefits policy feels one size fits all, and I do not appreciate that for my district.

I think it is your job as the council person to go in and see what is coming into your district and work with your council colleagues to see what you can get.

Just because business comes in does not mean that they are going to bring a community benefits agreement.

We have had the privilege of the uh Spurs uh for their arena coming in and uh asking for this and getting this on the table or volunteering it because it was something there.

That is not all cases with all developments.

So I want to see development continue to happen in my district.

So a template for if somebody wants to come in is great, but if you need jobs, you need jobs.

The other thing is a CBA is a tool in negotiation, and this is a tool that should be used, I think, where we we can set our intentions, which I would like to see in the framework, but I would like to, I I don't want to go into the room.

I want to send Ben into the room, I want to send Troy into the room, I want to send Eric into the room with expectations of what I expect, but what I expect in District 3 may not work in District 10 or District 8.

So I want to, I want my I want our framework.

I want the understanding that yes, as as San Antonio becomes desirable to do business and have businesses, that we work with our partners at Greater SATX and we communicate what we want.

I think we can we can have a template without formalizing a policy because if I were business, and it was like you want to do business in San Antonio, you have to bring a CBA.

I might not be looking at San Antonio anymore.

So this is where I want to get the strategic framework first in terms of what we're going to be going after, who has a desire to come to San Antonio before we say uh we're gonna put forward this policy.

And this is conversations that we as council members need to have with each other and what works in my district.

Uh don't get me wrong.

And the Southeast side of San Antonio.

And that means what my priorities there, which are not eight, nine, and ten, are hospitals, our animal care services, our uh mixed affordable housing, and that's not the case all around.

So if a developer comes in and and is gonna offer a community benefits that eight, nine or ten don't need what's that what's the policy gonna reflect?

There's there is there is uh there's too many of us to make just a blanket.

We can talk template, but that's not what how it's written doesn't feel like template, Andy.

It feels like something very specific.

Uh so I'm supporting what staff has moved forward that we wait until we get the updates for the strategic framework.

Is there a second on the motion?

The motion is to um proceed with the staff recommendation.

So I guess what I'm trying to get at, which I'm not getting a direct answer, so I'll I'll do it.

This what would you like to see happen, uh, council member?

I think it has to be a larger discussion, and I'd welcome eventually a B session.

I I can support this going to EWDC.

I think the refresh is gonna happen no matter what we do with the C BA conversation.

I think we need to weigh in fully, right?

And I think I just want to clear up some things that my colleagues said.

This is not a one-size-fits-all situation, right?

Um when we talk about tax abatements, that is more or less a template when people come to San Antonio.

These are the things we're offering you to move your business here.

We're not putting money into that development.

We are saying we are gonna forego future tax dollars for that reason.

That is very different than going to say we are going to invest X amount of sales tax and property tax, whatever money into a project with a private developer to get something out of it, which is more or less the Spurs and the and the baseball stand situation.

Every of those every situation of those larger components is a bigger conversation.

It's not a one size fits all for any of that.

I do think when it comes to the incentive policy, we do have to start relating how this development in my district or anybody's district helps everybody else.

Because when we forego property tax revenue for a tax abatement, that is less money than all of us in the whole city of Santana are going to get as a result of that for 10 plus years.

So when we start taking money off the futures of our budgets, that impacts all of us, and we have to have a better conversation about what that means and how it helps other people, right?

Because even though Toyota's in my district, people from all across the city work there and take advantage of the child care, maybe the transportation and the workforce development.

So I think it's a larger discussion at B session for CBAs.

I think the strategic framework refresh is a very appropriate conversation at EWDC.

I just don't think that is the centerpiece for CBA conversations.

And I would argue what you said earlier, what we are doing with CBAs is quite different than other communities.

And I don't think that's the situation we have with the Spurs right now, is what we set in motion and what may have worked for the time, but that's not necessarily what other communities are doing across the country.

And so I think that warrants a much larger B session conversation with the full council, in addition to this refresh at EWDC, which is going to happen no matter what we do today.

So I guess and I will second the motion, but I guess and so I wasn't here when this uh CCR was filed, and then my interim council member uh Castillo and Guayana, I do remember at that time uh discussing it with him and with uh uh with my staff.

Uh this CCR, another one that was just filed today, I believe yesterday or sometime recently, it was another CBA related one filed by uh councilman core.

Um specific to the Spurs, and then I think there was another CCR that was filed about the Spurs, and I think it also had something to do a dashboard, and it was also about benefits and the like and whatnot.

That one was more about when the board composed.

So there's a board composition CCR that was filed by Councilman Corps, and then Councilman Castile just filed a sort of a tracker for the development of that project.

Um again, these are again, we're all we're doing very piecemeal components of a CBA because we don't have a policy in place.

We don't have anything that says we need a dashboard attracting information.

We don't have anything to say this is how how CBA board should be composed, and that's why you're getting several CCRs now, because we don't have a comprehensive policy for it.

I hear the challenge I have is it's the same, it's almost the same people signing all these same C CRs, and it feels like everybody really wants to have this conversation as a full council about uh about ACBA policy.

I do think it makes sense for us to and thinking about this way.

It's all it's just like our economic uh our economic development incentive policy that we have that says, hey, these are the expectations that we have for these abatements.

This one isn't even outlining specifically what benefits we would expect.

It would just say this is what a CBA is in relation to any any support you receive from the city, and these are the metrics of accountability and the expectations that we have as it relates to it.

So I think that in and of itself is not, I don't think that's I don't think that's a hard thing for us to discuss.

I do think in the context of everything else we want to do with the CBA that during an ongoing negotiation, I think that's a little bit more of a uh I think that makes this conversation something else entirely than what this alone uh proposes.

And so I I guess okay, so I would I'll support it going to the to economic and workforce development committee, but I would also recommend uh request and recommend that we do have a bigger conversation that sort of encompasses all of these CCRs and requests that have been filed as of late into one at least what makes sense for it to be one.

Some of them like still need to come to governance, still be their own thing, but I think the overall topic and the things that they're each trying to achieve, I think is B session or multiple B session worthy.

Yeah, it'd be it anything out of the comments.

Yeah, it'd be helpful to have um that wrap up of so we're not looking at these piecemeal and and having different discussions about the exact same thing 18 times.

Um so I appreciate that.

I think we also have the opportunity in a B session um uh, and we talked about this a little bit earlier, uh, about the two CBAs that we kind of have before us, right?

One, the baseball stadium, as well as the one proposed by um by the Spurs.

Uh and there we can look at um kind of what those one even a little bit of a history lesson in terms of those came about a little bit differently.

Um one was informed by the other, and they certainly have different orders of of magnitude.

But I think to hear, I mean, really the important part of this CCR is the last part, the CBA process will be transparent, inclusive, and accessible to the community, um, and uh and provide specific meaningful benefit, which will do which deliver what the community needs, uh what the community needs.

So, what I would ask um, just so the community sees that we are being thoughtful about the very opportunities before us, Eric.

I would ask that on on those two, we have a B session uh that helps lay out what those proposed CBAs are at this point, uh, what we understand to be to the community investment as a result of those, um, and then give us uh kind of a a bit of a a history and and timeline in terms of how those came about.

Understanding again, both of those term sheets are non-binding, but I think it'd be really illustrative for the whole council, but also for the public to see how we're weighing these.

Yeah, yeah, Marin, and uh we we will do that in January because as we talked uh earlier, um we we um owe you all an update publicly on on those matters, especially the the uh the hemisphere park area.

And I'll go I'll go one step further if you if the committee's in agreement.

Since there are other CCRs that have just been filed this week that are related, we're gonna lump it all into that so that you so the council's got the ability to kind of have a global conversation.

And then part two, um, as Alex said, the that we've got to go through that framework refresh generally about over the economic development issues.

The council will need to refresh that ordinance by by this time next year under state law.

So uh it almost feels like we need to have that B session in mid-spring time sooner rather than later, make a pit stop at the economic workforce development committee, have the full council conversation so that to your point, Mayor, what what are some of the broader economic development issues?

There is there are times where we want to be consistent and there's times where we're gonna want a little bit of latitude, but have that conversation earlier rather than than later in the spring.

That way we have time to go back and do the work and and and uh bring it back to you all by the end of the year.

But there are some direct linkages, I think, and this has been helpful because we you know the the the C CR and Councilwoman Castillo and I talked last week.

The CCR talks about economic development, it talks about in field, it talks about redevelopment, it's a bunch of different things, and uh we'll do that based on those conversations.

I think for our discussions, and again, right, given given what we're in the midst of, what is and is not a CBA in a CBA, right?

Would somebody consider naming rights a cut of that as part of the CBA, right?

So understanding what this does and and does not cover, and then where those other things that we may also be interested in, how do we account and um for that conversation?

Okay.

Go ahead, councilwoman.

Yeah, and just one more thing, because I think we need to do this because legally, based on what we have in front of us, and when we talk policy, somebody has to be willing to go to court to enforce this if they don't.

And that's the one thing about bringing in those third parties, or if we're gonna do public private, or if it's gonna be us in conjunction with the county or or an organization, is who's who's taking it to court if and when they do that.

Within some of the incentives we give within economic workforce and development, we claw back.

Andy's team knows that we have the lawyers to do that, and that's where I think as we have this bigger conversation, we understand who's who's going to court and when whose responsibility that is.

So I'd like that presented to anyone.

If I may, Mayor, uh, thank you, Councilman, which which is again why I would like to reinforce as we have the consuming going forward, we keep the two buckets, although related, separate.

One is a community benefits provisions, right?

In a city agreement with a developer third party.

Another one is collective bargaining agreements, where essentially it's the community group negotiating.

In other words, it's not the council that's gonna decide what's acceptable or not, it's the community group who'll have a separate lawyer, separate financial advisors.

So we're bringing in another third party uh to the negotiation.

So I want to make sure that as we go forward, Mayor, we make those two distinct because they have different implications.

Okay.

Um any further comments from my colleagues?

Yep, Councilman Wongio.

Yeah, and then I think the intent of this, right?

And it's not to just look backwards and say what we should have done.

It's as a growing city, if we get a major league baseball team, if we get a hockey team, if a football team comes, if another golf course PGA wants to come and have us invest a lot of money, we cannot be caught flat footed again on that.

And I think that's where we were on this process.

So it's for future goals uh and for future projects that will come to San Antonio as a growing metropolis.

So I appreciate the conversation.

Yeah, understood.

I think there will be some some lessons learned though as we have that discussion, giving those term sheets are non-binding.

Um, so there is so there's two things.

Um Eric has the uh the B session where we'll talk about these two uh CBAs before us, which will be in January, and then there is the motion for the uh to support the staff recommendation okay.

Um all right, so there being no further discussion, we have a motion and a second.

Um all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Okay, the motion carries this one.

This is numbers.

This is number five.

I've got six on my agenda to five or six.

Raise this up a little bit.

Good afternoon, Mayor Council members.

Um, I'm Shannon Miller Miller, the director of the city.

One second.

Um Madam Clerk, would you please read the uh we're gonna move on to item five or six?

Oh sorry.

Item five.

Okay, please read the caption.

Item five is a council consideration request by council member Terry Castillo, District Five on vacant and nuisance property program and policy enhancements.

Okay, go ahead, please.

Thanks.

Sorry, I I got over anxious there.

Um, as I said, I'm Shannon Miller, I'm the director of the Office of Historic Preservation, and I'm here to uh present on a CCR submitted by councilwoman Castillo related to vacant and nuisance nuisance properties.

And um obviously much of what is discussed in the CCR and what this policy entails includes touches on the work of several departments.

Um Amin is here from development services, uh Veronica is also here from neighborhood and housing services, and all of us will be available to answer answer questions if there are any.

And then, of course, we work closely with the city attorney's office on all of these items.

Um HP does administer the vacant building program that was established originally in 2014 as a pilot, it was made permanent and expanded twice since then.

And it does apply only to buildings that are 100% vacant, and it only applies in certain program areas that were adopted by council, so it's not citywide currently.

Um, it also does not apply to vacant lots, which I know are also a major concern for um quality of life and public safety issues, and so um we do understand that there are opportunities to expand how we're dealing with vacant and underutilized properties.

So the council consideration request uh has asks staff to explore six things specifically, and they're in three general areas.

Um so under kind of the umbrella of property registration and inspection, um, it asks us to look at ways to bring more unregistered vacant properties into the program, and then also require property owners to submit a maintenance plan.

So coming into compliance with the standard of care is currently required by the ordinance, but obviously that is often an enforcement issue because people don't necessarily do it.

Um under the umbrella of fines, penalties, and enforcement, um, we've been asked to look at establishing an ILA with Bear County to accelerate liens, and then also look at the legality of using a sliding scale for property uh vacant property fees.

Um, for example, if the longer a property has been vacant, then the fee might increase.

And then under the umbrella of acquisition and receivership, looking into tools that we might be able to utilize more effectively, such as the receivership and land banking.

And so I'll talk a little bit more about each.

Um sorry, I went one too far.

So could the current um vacant building program includes six staff members, and so that is five in the Office of Historic Preservation that are primarily like case managers and dealing one-on-one with the with the property owners, and and also identifying new properties, and then the sixth position is a new position that was included in the budget this year in development services, and that position is currently being filled, and we're looking forward to what that will be able to enable us to do in terms of enforcement.

Um, as I mentioned, the standard of care coming into compliance with that standard of care is a current requirement, um, but it is always an obstacle to getting people to really actually submit those plans, and so we agree that working with this new enforcement officer to help bring up those compliance rates will it will be really important.

And then one of the other exciting things about the new position is that having someone help us focus on the enforcement side will enable the case managers to be in the neighborhoods more and identify proactively additional vacant properties that we may not have had the capacity to identify previously.

Um oftentimes we rely on council offices or citizens to let us know about vacant properties because there's not capacity to be out in the field at all times.

So that additional help from development services will help us in that way as well.

Um so as it relates to the fines, penalties, and enforcement, um, the CCR talks about foreclosing on liens, and state law does limit the types of liens that we can foreclose upon.

We can't foreclose on code liens, but the county can foreclose on properties with delinquent property taxes, and so certainly exploring how we can work with the county to accelerate though that foreclosure process is an ongoing conversation.

We did initially look into the idea of a sliding scale for the registration fees with the city attorney's office, and there's no obvious legal restrictions that we've identified to date, and so we will be exploring what that might look like.

There are examples in other cities that have taken this approach, and so we do believe that that could be a viable solution for properties that have been vacant for longer periods of time.

And then we also know that you know the city code states that demolition should be a remedy of last resort, but sometimes we are there, and so development services and OHP will be looking at how in those cases where demolition is truly warranted that we can streamline that process within the bounds of state law, of course.

And then under the the acquisition and receivership, um, we several of these things are underway in some form or another.

Um Veronica is here, as I mentioned, and neighborhood and housing services has been working on the landmaking program specifically and will continue to work on that on developing that.

Um we also have collaborated with the city attorney's office a number of times to look into using the receivership as an option for these substandard properties, and there are obstacles to that program as it's allowed for in state law because a receiver has to spend money up front, and then there the money is tied up in that property, but they don't own it, so they can't sell it, and they can't necessarily recoup it until the receivership period ends.

And so one of the things that could result from this assessment is identifying a funding source that a receiver could access that isn't theirs, so they don't have the challenge of the carrying cost, and maybe housing funds housing funds could help support that receivership effort on the front end.

So we are excited about looking into those types of strategies.

So in summary, uh staff is in agreement that existing regulations related to vacant buildings and vacant lots could always be enhanced, and that we we absolutely agree that we should strengthen enforcement efforts within what is allowed for in state law.

And so we're we're really excited about looking more into this, and I appreciate all the suggestions that Councilwoman Castillo offered.

And so what our recommendation is that we would refer this item to the planning and community development committee for additional assessment and ultimately a recommendation.

And as I mentioned at the outset, um it is really a joint effort between the Office of Historic Preservation, Neighborhood and Housing Services, Development Services Department, and of course the city attorney's office.

And I'm happy to answer questions.

Thank you.

Uh the CCR sponsor is here, Councilmember uh Castillo, you recognize the speaker if you'd like.

Uh thank you, Mayor, and thank you for the presentation.

This council consideration request is in response to the budget surveys as well as to district five residents who continually bring up during our neighborhood association meetings their concerns with vacant lots and vacant structures.

Uh, I am comfortable with staff's recommendation.

Look forward uh to discussing with the planning community development committee.

Thank you, Mayor.

Is there a motion and second so we may begin discussion?

I make a motion.

Second.

Okay, great.

Thanks.

Um, thank you to the staff uh for the presentation.

Of course, thanks for the uh thanks for the CCR itself.

Um appreciate the staff's um incorporation of um the how we might include um and review demolition, which to your point is a key part of this, potentially wasn't initially part of it, but I think it we've got to look at all opportunities.

Okay.

Um council colleagues that would like to speak on this.

Councilman Mungia.

I just want to thank Councilman Castillo for um doing the CCR and as we border our districts, and there's a lot of the vacant lots in District 4 and structures, and we even had one um situation where vacant house really detrimental, bad conditions right next to an elderly woman.

Turns out the man that owned that house apparently just walked out of the house years ago, never came back and just left it abandoned.

It felt like we couldn't do much, and there were you know rat infestations uh impacting neighbors around their area.

So there are a lot of negligent property owners.

Uh I live right next to two vacant lots, and every day I pass by them and go to my home, there's always legal dumping.

It feels like they've always got tickets and abatements by the city, and they keep on doing that.

We don't hear from those property owners.

So I think this is a step in the right direction to kind of get some programming and some action on that.

So I look forward to discussing this at uh PCDC.

Thank you.

Who's your council member?

Dang.

Comments.

Who's my development of services director?

No.

Councilman, anything?

No.

Okay.

Uh there being no further discussion.

We have a motion and a second uh to um comply with the or to take up the staff recommendation, which is moves this to planning and community development committee.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Okay, the motion carries.

Uh let's move on to item six.

Madam Clerk, please read the uh caption.

Item six is a council consideration request by councilmember Terry Castillo, District 5 on City County Ad hoc committee for diversion and recovery center.

Good afternoon, members of the governance committee.

I'm Maria Viego Mes Deputy City Manager.

Um, this particular CCR before you was submitted by Councilmember Castillo on October 6, 2025.

And what this CCR is requesting is that they're requesting the creation of a joint CD and county ad hoc committee to begin the conversation on a potential mental health and intellectual development disabilities diversion center.

This work again uh is recommended to be done with individuals that represent the city, the county, and also partners like the Center for Healthcare Services, who is our mental health authority.

Um the CCR also recommends the review of recommendations by Dr.

Testa, who spoke earlier today about the work that he did for Bird County in terms of specifically how to address those individuals that may have uh low-level offenses but also have mental health issues, uh, an alternative to incarceration.

So, one of the things that um we have been uh discussing with the Center for Healthcare Services is actually their board this week approve the release of a request for proposal um specifically to be able to do a feasibility study that that would evaluate the need for a potential um center diversion center.

So the appro the appropriateness of having the center operational requirements, financial impact, as well as stakeholder participation again to establish a jail diversion center Ember County.

So a lot of uh in reviewing the scope of work of that particular proposal aligns with the CCR.

So what we would recommend to the governance committee is to move this forward to the public safety committee for further discussion and for the city to participate in this uh feasibility study that again aligns quite well with the request of the CCR.

The departments that would be working in this particular CCR include our mental health department as well as a police department, um municipal court, uh the city manager's office.

So that is a recommendation and happy to answer any questions, Mayor.

Councilmember Castillo, if you'd like to say a few words.

Thank you, Mayor and thank you, Maria, uh, for the presentation.

The City and County Ad hoc committee for a diversion and recovery center is the beginning of a humane necessity to break the cycle of jailing low-level offenses, usually caused by people in need of mental health treatment.

This CCR aims to bring in stakeholders involved in the justice process, the mental health field, and or policy in order to build the infrastructure necessary to divert our constituents from being caught in the justice system.

By starting this process, we will join other major Texas cities who have invested in change and a future of rehabilitation and recovery.

Uh, and I'd like to thank um the members of the public from community um health care services as well as Dr.

Testa um for giving public comment on this issue.

Uh my team and I have received uh a letter of support from Sheriff Salazar as well as County Commissioner Justin Rodriguez, uh, that each of you all should have received.

Um I think uh again this is the work that uh we should be doing and just grateful to hear that this is going to the public safety committee.

Um and I'd be remiss if I didn't think council member Garavan, who when was on the D5 team uh led and would oversee the work of this uh CCR.

So thank you, Councilman Gabon.

Thank you, Mayor.

Is there a motion and seconds so we may begin discussion?

Anyone that would like to speak on the uh on the CCR propose?

Go ahead, Councilman Vigadan.

Thank you.

I want to thank uh councilman Castilla for putting this forward.

I'm glad it's going to the public safety committee.

I think that's a good place to start, but I think when we talk about mental health, we do need to talk about um it in a larger section about all of our communities.

It's not something that needs to stay uh in a silo.

So I look forward to um seeing what comes out of public safety and hoping we can we can do more to kind of normalize conversation about mental health and the fact that if not taken care of it it can lead to some of these circumstances.

So thank you, Councilman Castillo for being very busy today.

Thank you.

Other comments, Councilman uh Mungia.

Yes, thank you, thank you, Councilman Castillo.

I feel like it's Terry Day governance committee with all the CCRs.

Uh no, I I appreciate this.

I think this is gonna go really well.

I think it's uh in our time that we can be very sensitive and um treat everybody as an individual going through this, and not everybody needs to be in jail that has uh an issue with the law.

So I think this is gonna really help uh people uh with recovery and get to the places they need to be.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Um Councilman uh McCumovers now.

Um I think it was uh I forget one of the during public comments.

Somebody um pointed out how we are the only major county that doesn't have something like this already.

Um and so as part of that discussion that ultimately will come to the full council, it'd be helpful uh just to provide the like the history is always important on this, right?

So when things like the Nix Hospital went away, and we saw and then COVID and all the other things, I think it's helpful for kind of key decision points that have contributed to what we're seeing today.

Um, frankly highlight the need for us to not only catch up in our own community, but certainly catch up with the rest of the state and how they're working to address this.

Uh, and then certainly the you know the costs as we are looking at uh potential bond dollars uh to to address this.

Do you want to add something, Eric?

Um well that was we it the the presentation didn't say anything about bond dollars.

No, it didn't.

I did.

Oh if we wanted to, you know, if there were some potential dollars that may need to go to you know some actual structure in the in the in the future.

Oh the city would fund the county building.

But well, I mean, we would potentially what I welcome understanding potential ways in which we fund a larger, a larger piece of this.

Yeah, yeah, I and I do know I think in and it says it in the C Cr and I think what you're alluding to both of you and Councilwoman Viewbrunn are alluded to.

Yeah, and I do know I think in it says it in the C CR, and I think which you're alluding to both of you and Councilwoman Viewbrunn are alluding to there's there's a much higher level issue here that probably needs to come to the full council also later on in the year, Mayor.

And that says it relates to the engagement of the other partners on this ad hoc effort, the county, UHF, Center for Healthcare Services, the City, the hospital systems, and if um if if you all would like that to see that sooner rather than later, we can schedule that for uh B session in the springtime as well.

Let the public safety committee take uh take some time to hitch the initial issues and then bring something uh and schedule it now for the springtime for full council B session.

I think that makes a lot of sense.

I think the discussion we're having tomorrow, too, uh regarding the tabletop.

Um, as frankly, as we're seeing some of these cuts um one be implemented potentially sooner than we anticipated, and some of these cuts disproportionately falling to public health only raises the the need for us to be thinking about this sooner rather than than later.

So I think that's a good idea.

Okay.

Okay, so there is a uh motion and a second to refer this item to public safety.

Um all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Okay, motion carries.

Moving on to item seven.

Madam Clerk, please read the the caption.

And my item number seven is a council consideration request by council member Rick Galvan, District Six on data center response planning and policy.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council.

My name is Amin Tomas, director of development services.

I'm here to talk about the data centers response planning and policy.

A CCR was submitted on October 29, 2025 by Councilman uh Galvan with District 6.

And the request is for development services to present an overview of certain topics related to data centers.

The first one is to look at the scope and the authority of the city to regulate data centers.

Look at any related state laws and regulations as well for data centers.

Look at utility consumption, mainly water and electricity.

Explore any potential amendments to the unified development code, and finally explore partnership with local research institutes and the utility partners also, obviously, the data center uh and entities.

So next steps is to do a research and identify any local and state applicable regulations and codes.

Engage the stakeholders, including the municipal utilities.

Again, as I said, elect electric um electric and uh water, SAS basically and CPS.

Uh look at any um chances to change the code or utilize the code as authorized, and then finally present our findings uh to planning and community development committee.

And I'm here available for any questions you may have.

Okay, great, thank you.

Um we know the sponsor is here but cannot speak.

Okay.

Oh, you can?

You can speak this time?

Okay, and this one you can.

Okay, all right.

Please, thanks.

Thank you so much, Mary.

Thank you.

Uh to the members of the committee uh for this long meeting.

Uh and decided to be best for last.

Um and thank you to all the signatories for the CCR.

I really appreciate uh the support there.

Uh and the conversation we've been having in different places as well regarding the CCR.

Uh the CCR came to be uh from residents uh in the Westover Hills neighborhoods uh that are representing district six, given the concentration of data centers uh in district six compared to any other place in the city.

Um our residents, of course, uh just like we all are seeing different kinds of news uh in the national media, state media, and even our local uh talking about the effects data centers have been having uh the rapid developments across the country, across our state in particular, and even here locally, not only in our city, but in our region as well.

And began to ask questions about uh how do these centers in this particular industry impact our water usage, our energy usage, our rates associated with the uh that need uh the environmental impacts as well, given not only noise ordinance or noise concerns, but also tree coverage and other kinds of developmental concerns, uh and then of course too, the economic impact, often conversation about uh how many jobs are being employed uh locally with these kind of new developments, uh what kind of tax payments are there, if there are any, uh, and then how is it largely connect to the larger economic uh economy here in our community?

All those things were what inspired me to put the CCR together and submit it.

Um, and again, thank you to the folks who signed on to it.

Uh I think this is a first step in the right direction and creating that public conversation, making sure that we're clearing the air on what this industry is, what it means to our community, how it affects our utilities and other kinds of impacts here locally.

And again, to be frank in our our review of this kind of work, I think that's something the public is owed.

Um, and as this industry has changed and evolved and grown over time, of course, there's changes in their own uh industry, and uh that I think is worth discussing publicly as well, so we can clear the air about what's going on across the board, right?

And making sure that our residents have a productive way to also just express their concerns on this particular industry and this growing industry, um, and some of the benefits as well, potentially.

Um I'm excited to see uh, of course, the council conversation or committee conversation uh on this item.

I know I want to thank Councilman Via Gran uh for talking with me about this as well and its context to the economic workforce development committee as well.

Uh so eager to see uh how we can uh make sure that it is discussing both the kind of UDC zoning kind of conversation as well as the larger economic impact as well and open to supporting wherever I can.

Thank you all.

Uh thank you, Councilman.

Uh is there a motion and second on this item.

Move to send it into our simply send on some of these.

I'll say okay.

Uh so there's a motion and there's a second.

Okay, you got it.

Um thank you, Councilman, uh, for this very thoughtful CCR.

And frankly, just based on this exchange, you can see that this could actually go to a number of council of committees, rather, right?

Um, economic development, uh, community health.

Uh, when you look at some of the the public health concerns that have arisen as a result of uh the placement of data centers near residential areas, but even public safety.

Uh, the unique needs um in particular of the fire department would have based on uh the type of um the type of uh um infrastructure around certain data centers.

It there are clearly some some budgetary and training considerations uh needed for fire the fire department, as we've seen in other communities.

So I really appreciate the uh the very thoughtful uh CCR.

Um, in light of not only the emergence in our community, but also because we have a unique consideration in that, yes, uh huge um frankly, strains on our utilities of which we of which we both own.

Um, and and while we do recoup uh via you know the our contribution into the general fund, um, really it dovetails on the conversation we had earlier, which is how do we understand um that the benefits of these um outweigh the costs?

And so a thoughtful discussion driven by your CCR helps to do that.

Um let me see if my colleagues would like to chime in.

Yep, uh councilman Via Gran.

Yeah, uh, thank thank you for the presentation.

So uh Amin, I think we have uh a race.

No, it's not a race, I'm just kidding.

Uh no, I really do feel uh if the majority of the council and staff wants to take this to PCDC.

I'm no longer on that committee, so have fun.

But I do know how hard it is to do unified development code, and um the one thing that I heard from the speakers is we want this done quickly.

That's not normally the way we do unified development code.

So I do want to see it go through PCDC, see what sort of codes we have.

I think you have a great presentation uh there in front, but I think uh in terms of economic workforce development, what we can do and into the mayor's point of does it need to be a CCR or can it go straight to committee?

Is that kind of work parallel within committee with council members that are on the committee to kind of see what what we can do to bring stakeholders together and really get a San Antonio solution to the future of data centers in San Antonio, where where can they go, where does it fit, and how does it work with our um our utilities?

So I'm looking forward to having uh the economic workforce development team, including Rick, uh work on that and uh see what we can bring forward also, and then getting your results and then seeing how we marry that into something that um the city and the rest of the council can kind of uh work with and and give their insights on too.

So thank you so much to the community that came out and spoke on it, and I look forward to hearing from y'all.

Um, so uh thank you again for just all the efforts that we do and making sure that as the city moves forward, we ask the right questions and we find San Antonio solutions.

Thank you.

Thank you, um, councilwoman.

Um I would say this actually dovetails also on the CBA discussion that we just had.

You're actually seeing a lot of communities um think about uh because again, the the jobs are really on the front end, right?

When you build the thing and not necessarily when the data center is up and running, which is why the need to kind of be thoughtful about what it looks like after it's built and up and running and the need for a CBA.

So when you are looking at that, councilwoman, I'd ask that you include that as part of your discussions.

Thank you.

Okay, um, Councilman McGill.

Uh thank you, Councilman Galvana.

I was happy to sign on to your CCR.

I think it's uh an important discussion, and for as much as we talk about uh data centers, I think there's a lot of uh you know information being tossed around that I think we need to decipher what's fact and what's myth about these facilities.

I've actually never been into a data center, so I welcome anybody who works here to take me on a tour because I don't even know what it looks like on the inside.

Um I think that's important before we make regulations, right?

What exactly do they have in there?

And I think it's also going to be a conversation about like the Council of Via Grande where it makes sense, right?

I don't think it data centers are gonna be on West Houston Street where there's a lot of density given the amount of technology and heat and resources needed, it's probably you know, district six, four, three, where you have a lot more space uh and room.

Um I also think when we talk about incentives and things of that nature.

We I would like to see data centers if especially because of the notion that they use a lot of water to uh maybe chip into the purple pipe expansion.

Right.

We have a purple pipe system in San Antonio.

We know that expanding that's uh recycled water opportunity is gonna come on a cost.

SALS is not going to pay for that unless we give them more money, and we're certainly not going to pay for that.

We have to find a way to expand that.

It's it's currently on the western side of the city, it goes all the way down to Pearsall Park.

And I think more commercial businesses utilizing Purple Pipe helps take people off of or reduce the consumption of regular drinking water, and so I think that's important, and we should have a conversation with CPS on exactly the data centers we have here, what usage they are using, uh, because I guarantee there's still gonna be other entities that use a lot more energy than they do.

Um, but we have to make sure that um they're part of the the help also on expanding our um energy ability.

So I think there's a lot of room to to move work on that.

Yeah, thank you.

No, that's a really good point in that uh we should probably have a conversation.

I know we do them one off, um Eric, right?

They alternate SAWs and CPS, but a discussion in general on just kind of here's the state of data centers in our community.

Um we talk about just the sheer number, but then also understand the perspectives uniquely of CPS and and saws, especially as we you are going into discussions, considerations about a rate increase, um, and how it's frankly our folks that are that are paying for the infrastructure that would allow for these things to come in.

I think um level setting on that again early in the early next year would be very helpful.

We'll follow up on that, Mary.

Absolutely.

Um Andy, legally as well, there's uh I'd heard discussion about um the the military bases looking at potentially um extra land that they've got uh potentially allowing a data center to be set up on those.

Certainly, then I mean if they do they use their own kind of modular energy, that's that's one thing, but certainly they don't have their own water.

So I think as part of that discussion, we'd want to understand um those entities that are exercising their own agency, what that may mean.

Um, if that's a unique consideration, how do we how do those come before the body and how do we review those?

Thank you.

Okay.

Any other okay, Councilman McKee Rodriguez?

For sure.

Yeah, I think uh uh specifically for this request as it relates to the regulation of data centers, specifically for uh code and whatnot.

I think it does make sense for to go to uh PCDC.

Of course, I think there's gonna be uh I know that there's gonna be interest in talking about uh the economic development impacts and all those sorts of uh conversations that are had.

It would take a couple leaps.

I know I'm also and then check, of course, for the environmental uh concerns and whatnot.

I'm not on any of those three committees, and it would take a couple leaps and bounds to get to the municipal court advisory committee.

Or it's a transportation infrastructure.

It was funnier for me to say municipal utilities.

I mean municipal courts.

Uh, but I look forward to supporting by item.

Thank you.

Are there any other further comments on this?

Okay.

Uh there's a motion and a second to move this to planning and community development committee.

Um, and then Eric has for action the um the larger discussion before the uh at a B session early next year.

Um all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Okay, great.

Motion carries.

All right, thank you, everybody.

Thanks to the staff as well.

The time is now 4 09, and the meeting is adjourned.