OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Transportation Committee Meeting on Right-of-Way Communication and Bond Updates – Feb 3, 2026

Council Committees — Tuesday, February 3, 2026
BodySan Antonio, Texas
SessionCouncil Committees
DateTuesday, February 3, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:45:59

Transcript — Verbatim
0:05

Good afternoon.

0:06

If you could make your way to a seat.

0:08

Ideally not on the floor.

0:10

There are plenty of chairs available to you.

0:12

The time is now 2.06 p.m.

0:14

on February 3rd, 2026, and we will call our meeting to order.

0:18

Madam Clerk, can you please read the roll?

0:20

Councilmember Corr.

0:22

Councilmember Mungia.

0:24

President.

0:25

Councilmember Alderete Gavito.

0:27

Here.

0:28

Councilmember Spears.

0:30

Chair McKee Rodriguez.

0:32

Present.

0:33

Chair, we have quorum.

0:34

Wonderful, wonderful.

0:35

We will start off today.

0:37

We have three items in the agenda on the for briefing and possible action.

0:41

But first we'll get to approval of the meeting minutes.

0:44

I'll entertain a motion for their approval.

0:46

Motion to approve.

0:48

All in favor?

0:49

Aye.

0:50

Wonderful.

0:51

We'll now move on to item two, which is a CCR by Council Member Menina Aldere Govito.

0:59

Do we have a presentation?

1:01

Thank you, Chair and Committee.

1:02

For the record, Art Reinhardt, Public Works.

1:06

So today we're gonna provide a brief update on this CCR that uh came about last year by Councilwoman Aldorete Gavito.

1:12

We'll talk a little bit about the background and then how we're planning to address this moving forward.

1:17

So just a brief history.

1:18

Uh the council consideration request was submitted back in May of last year.

1:23

Uh in short, the the council consideration request focuses on creating a streamlined process for proactive communication between us as a city as well as our partners with uh different agencies and telecoms and trying to provide that information in real time and then also holding each other accountable for when we have those hiccups.

1:40

So a little bit of background.

1:41

So the CCR was submitted back in May, and then we presented to the governance committee and we're referred to the transportation committee, which we're here today.

1:49

So, in short, uh we put the the summary of the CCR on the screen, but it really comes down to four four main key points, and that's really to be proactive in our communication about not just plan projects but when we have outages, also require uh setting forth requirements for how agencies coordinate, not just with each other but also residents and our council offices, holding each other accountable when there's a lack of communication, which includes ourselves, and then also coordinating work when possible.

2:15

Before I go into how we're gonna address the CCR, just wanted to talk a little bit about what we do as public work, specifically our right-of-way management division.

2:23

So essentially we're tasked with managing the city's right-of-way, all of the construction activities that occur all across the city, and also enforcing how those activities are repaired, how the construction is repaired, governing the restoration of trenches and and things like that.

2:40

Um a little bit of information for last year.

2:43

So we as a city permitted over about 18,000 different right-of-way permits.

2:48

Uh, when you break it down by work days, that's about 70 permits a day that are coming out of the team.

2:52

And the good majority of those were our utility companies, saw CPS, and our telecoms.

2:57

Uh but you can see there we also permit our own projects, and then there's uh special events as well.

3:04

The regulations that we have date back uh many years, but really the first main ordinance was back in 2001.

3:10

That was the creation of the city's right-of-way ordinance.

3:13

Um that really specified how we govern our right-of-way and the requirements for restoring backfill uh trenches and and other things in the right-of-way.

3:21

Ultimately, we created the utility excavation criteria manual, and there's been subsequent revisions since then.

3:26

Uh the most substantive revision was in 2016 through a process where we started requiring contractors to provide signage for their projects and other advanced notification.

3:36

Currently, today we uh you can see on the screen kind of the main requirements that we have.

3:41

So we 30 days ahead of construction.

3:44

Uh people submitted application, which we call our project information form, which breaks down who's doing the work, what is the work, uh, the expected time frame, etc.

3:53

Then seven days prior for our major traveled roadways, they provide advanced notifications, uh digital message signage, uh notifying people in the area of the upcoming project.

4:03

Just prior to construction, door hangers will go on there, and then every project should have construction signage describing the type of uh project it is and who to contact, and the workers out there should have identifiable information on their uh out their uh gear explaining who they are and what project they're working on.

4:23

We also have regulations in place for violations.

4:26

So the current violations are up to six hundred dollars per day per violation type.

4:30

You can see here an example, a couple different examples of the type of violation.

4:34

So it could be working without a permit if they didn't go through our process, uh traffic control is inadequate, a lack of signage, or if they're running long and they're delaying the restoration.

4:44

Just over the last couple years, we've um tallied up over one almost 1.5 million dollars worth of violations.

4:52

The process we have in place is really um a coordination process.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Engineering And Infrastructure█████████████████████████████████████████████55%
Infrastructure█████████████████21%
Community Engagement███████8%
Public Engagement███4%
Procurement and Contracting███4%
Government Structure██3%
Bond██2%
Economic Development██2%
Procedural█1%
Summary of Proceedings

Transportation Committee Meeting on Right-of-Way Communication and Bond Updates – February 3, 2026

The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee met on February 3, 2026, at 2:06 p.m. to receive presentations on two major items: a Council Consideration Request (CCR) to improve proactive communication and accountability for right-of-way construction, and an update from the newly formed Capital Delivery Department on project delivery, bond status, and coordination with utility partners. The meeting included one public speaker and extensive discussion by councilmembers on signage, communication to residents, and project timelines.

Consent Calendar

  • The meeting minutes from the previous session were approved by unanimous voice vote.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Herschel Boyd, III was signed up to speak but was not present when called, so no public testimony was heard.

Discussion Items

Item 2 – CCR on Right-of-Way Communication (Councilwoman Menina Aldere Govito)

  • Art Reinhardt (Public Works) presented background on the CCR, submitted in May 2025, which aims to create a streamlined process for proactive communication between the city, agencies, and telecoms, and to hold all parties accountable for communication gaps.
  • The city permits about 18,000 right-of-way permits per year (roughly 70 per workday), mostly for utilities (e.g., CPS, SAWS) and telecoms. Current regulations date to 2001, with the most substantive revision in 2016.
  • Current requirements: 30 days ahead of construction – submit a project information form; 7 days prior – digital message signage for major roadways; door hangers just before construction; and on-site signage with contractor and project info. Violations are up to $600 per day per violation type; the city has issued nearly $1.5 million in fines over the past two years.
  • An online "infill map" shows all issued permits but is buried on the city website and not updated in real time.
  • Coordination meetings occur at various frequencies (e.g., weekly downtown closures, bi-monthly executive meetings). Emergency work (e.g., water main breaks) is a key gap: residents may not learn about the work unless they are customers of the affected utility.
  • A survey was sent to utility partners in late 2025 to understand their internal structures, communication practices, and accountability mechanisms. Findings will be reported back in spring 2026.
  • Councilmember Aldere Govito (sponsor) emphasized the need for simple, clear signage (project description, start/end dates, a contact), consistent across all agencies. She recommended a resident-experience focus rather than engineering jargon. Councilmember McKee Rodriguez supported a color-coding system by utility type (e.g., blue for SAWS, orange for CPS). Councilmember Corr added that the infill map should show active construction in real time, not just permits issued; also, multiple streets in one permit make it hard to know which street is being worked on when. Councilmember Mungia noted that staff emails about right-of-way permits are helpful but that damaged utility boxes (e.g., AT&T, Paragon) often remain unrepaired; there is no active permit to require fixing. Councilmember Spears asked about fines for inaccurate line locating by entities like USIC, noting that hitting a line even three feet off can disrupt projects. Chair McKee Rodriguez requested that future reports include meeting notes and that the timeline for Phase 2 (winter 2026) be expedited, noting that "winter 2026" is current (as of February 3, 2026). Staff agreed to return with an update before the summer solstice (by June 21, 2026).

Item 3 – Capital Delivery Department Update and Bond Project Status (Mike Shannon, Director of Capital Delivery)

  • The new department, formed October 1, 2025, has 188 positions (taken from Public Works) and manages a $250 million annual capital portfolio ($221 million in project funds, $29 million for staffing).
  • There are 208 active capital projects: 9 from the 2017 bond (still in construction or design), 151 from the 2022 bond, and 45 non-bond projects (e.g., funded by fiscal year capital budgets).
  • Key focus areas: delivering projects on time and within budget, and adopting "overcommunication" as the standard. Strategies include:
    • Incentives and accountability: Using liquidated damages (LDs) for late projects, and new incentives for early completion (e.g., a three-year project finished a month early would receive additional payment). Staff will monitor for schedule padding.
    • Partnership MOU with SAWS: The first major project under the MOU, the Marbach Street and drainage project in District 4, was approved under a CMAR contract.
    • MOU with CPS: Discussions underway, expected to be finalized in coming months.
    • Project delivery methods: Using various procurement types (CMAR, design-build, job order contracts) as appropriate. A cradle-to-grave project management model (one team from design through construction) is being implemented in Q3 2026, based on a Robert Kishner study recommendation.
    • Business-focused strategies: For disruptive projects, staff are conducting monthly meetings with business leaders, using business-centered scrims, wayfinding sidewalk stamps, and a pilot shuttle service (e.g., the "Old Town Trolley") to help visitors reach local businesses during construction. Six weekends of shuttle service have been provided, timed with conventions.
  • Bond status:
    • 2017 bond: 93% complete, 5% under construction, 2% in design (some delays due to litigation at Brackenridge Park and design changes on Roosevelt and ProBand due to TxDOT decisions).
    • 2022 bond: 59% under construction, 19% complete; 82% of projects are on schedule (153 of 187 tracked). Goal: 91% of bond projects under construction or complete by the end of 2026; overall 90% on-time delivery target.
    • Pedestrian mobility: 25 of 58 projects complete (43%); staff terminated one task order contractor for performance issues but awarded two new task orders in Q1 to catch up.
    • F Street reconstruction: 125 of 147 projects complete (85%).
  • Councilmember Mungia asked about ensuring business-assistance funds are budgeted up front rather than provided after disruption. Shannon noted that the strategies used downtown (shuttles, scrims) should be applied to large business-corridor projects citywide, not just downtown. Councilmember Corr praised Shannon's responsiveness on the South Alamo and Zona projects, citing a stakeholder comment that Shannon is "the best thing we've ever seen come out of City Hall." Councilmember Spears requested that staff develop a consistent metric for project response times (e.g., to change orders) and a public "bad actor" dashboard for contractors. Shannon agreed to explore the feasibility. Councilmember Mungia asked about the expected lifecycle of F-street projects versus IMP projects; Shannon said the department will track and report on performance. Chair McKee Rodriguez noted that the 2017 bond infill map has functionality issues; staff will check. Councilmember Mungia also inquired about the cost of downtown-specific strategies, suggesting that staff should account for higher costs in downtown project budgets.

Item 4 – Bond Program Update (Mike Shannon continued)

  • The department is already preparing for the 2027 bond: project identification, scoping, and cost estimating are underway, regardless of whether the election is May or November 2027.
  • Councilmember Corr asked about lessons learned from facility projects in District 2 that ran over budget; Shannon cited the need for better cost estimating and early scope-setting. Councilmember McKee Rodriguez added that when budgets are reduced during the public committee process, staff should be explicit about the resulting scope changes.
  • Goal: return for regular bond updates (quarterly or semi-annually) to the committee.

Key Outcomes

  • The committee directed staff to return with an implementation plan for the CCR on right-of-way communication before June 21, 2026, including recommendations on signage standards, real-time project tracking on the infill map, and accountability measures for utility coordination.
  • The Capital Delivery Department will develop key performance metrics for project delivery (design, procurement, construction phases) and report quarterly to the committee. A 90% on-time delivery target for bond projects was set, with 91% of 2022 bond projects to be under construction or complete by the end of 2026.
  • Staff will explore creating a public contractor accountability dashboard, similar to the city's apartment inspection program, and will provide data on liquidated damages and contractor performance.
  • The committee requested that business-assistance funds for construction disruption be budgeted upfront in future large corridor projects, rather than allocated after complaints.
  • Staff will review and fix the 2017 bond project map for functionality.
  • The meeting adjourned at 3:52 p.m.

Meeting Transcript

Good afternoon. If you could make your way to a seat. Ideally not on the floor. There are plenty of chairs available to you. The time is now 2.06 p.m. on February 3rd, 2026, and we will call our meeting to order. Madam Clerk, can you please read the roll? Councilmember Corr. Councilmember Mungia. President. Councilmember Alderete Gavito. Here. Councilmember Spears. Chair McKee Rodriguez. Present. Chair, we have quorum. Wonderful, wonderful. We will start off today. We have three items in the agenda on the for briefing and possible action. But first we'll get to approval of the meeting minutes. I'll entertain a motion for their approval. Motion to approve. All in favor? Aye. Wonderful. We'll now move on to item two, which is a CCR by Council Member Menina Aldere Govito. Do we have a presentation? Thank you, Chair and Committee. For the record, Art Reinhardt, Public Works. So today we're gonna provide a brief update on this CCR that uh came about last year by Councilwoman Aldorete Gavito. We'll talk a little bit about the background and then how we're planning to address this moving forward. So just a brief history. Uh the council consideration request was submitted back in May of last year. Uh in short, the the council consideration request focuses on creating a streamlined process for proactive communication between us as a city as well as our partners with uh different agencies and telecoms and trying to provide that information in real time and then also holding each other accountable for when we have those hiccups. So a little bit of background. So the CCR was submitted back in May, and then we presented to the governance committee and we're referred to the transportation committee, which we're here today. So, in short, uh we put the the summary of the CCR on the screen, but it really comes down to four four main key points, and that's really to be proactive in our communication about not just plan projects but when we have outages, also require uh setting forth requirements for how agencies coordinate, not just with each other but also residents and our council offices, holding each other accountable when there's a lack of communication, which includes ourselves, and then also coordinating work when possible. Before I go into how we're gonna address the CCR, just wanted to talk a little bit about what we do as public work, specifically our right-of-way management division. So essentially we're tasked with managing the city's right-of-way, all of the construction activities that occur all across the city, and also enforcing how those activities are repaired, how the construction is repaired, governing the restoration of trenches and and things like that. Um a little bit of information for last year. So we as a city permitted over about 18,000 different right-of-way permits. Uh, when you break it down by work days, that's about 70 permits a day that are coming out of the team. And the good majority of those were our utility companies, saw CPS, and our telecoms. Uh but you can see there we also permit our own projects, and then there's uh special events as well. The regulations that we have date back uh many years, but really the first main ordinance was back in 2001. That was the creation of the city's right-of-way ordinance. Um that really specified how we govern our right-of-way and the requirements for restoring backfill uh trenches and and other things in the right-of-way. Ultimately, we created the utility excavation criteria manual, and there's been subsequent revisions since then. Uh the most substantive revision was in 2016 through a process where we started requiring contractors to provide signage for their projects and other advanced notification. Currently, today we uh you can see on the screen kind of the main requirements that we have.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com