San Antonio Development Committee Meeting – April 28, 2026

The San Antonio Development Committee met on April 28, 2026, at 10:01 a.m. to discuss three major items: a proposed incentive program for housing vouchers, a proposed ordinance to prohibit source-of-income discrimination for veterans, and a timeline for amending the Unified Development Code (UDC) regarding data centers. The meeting featured extensive public testimony from veterans, property managers, advocates, and industry representatives.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of Minutes: The committee approved the minutes of the previous meeting by unanimous voice vote. A brief discussion clarified that an informational item under the consent agenda could not be passed as such; the consent agenda was approved after removing that item.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Anita Creckling expressed support for expanded housing access but argued that the proposed policy disproportionately burdens property owners and could reduce high-rent units, which she said San Antonio opposes.
• Marta Springs (retired government official) emphasized that stable housing is critical for veterans. She noted that 800,000 veterans in San Antonio deserve dignity and urged passage of the ordinance.
• Tony Fuentes (Executive Director, Coalition for Veteran Families) shared that his organization assisted nearly 300 veterans in 16 months and that 500 veterans served in three years, half being women living in cars with children. He called the voucher process too slow and urged approval.
• UT (name not given) , a retired social worker at the VA, described the cycle of hospitalization and homelessness for veterans with severe mental illness. She noted that 2024 rule changes now allow disability payments to be excluded from voucher income calculations, improving financial stability for veterans.
• Martín Gutiérrez (Vice President, Federal Affairs, San Antonio Board of Realtors) stated that 95% of vouchers and 93% of housing vouchers are already accepted by providers. He advocated for solutions like hiring dedicated staff to navigate the system and expanding the proposed incentive program, rather than a blanket ordinance.
• Brenda Rodríguez (Secretary, GI Forum America; active-duty Navy instructor) testified that he never heard of vouchers in his career and that many servicemembers face homelessness. He urged passage to protect past and present members, invoking “One Team, One Fight.”
• Vanessa Brown (property manager; daughter and sister of veterans) said she is not against vouchers but noted that owners often reject Section 8 due to stigma and slow payments. She asked the committee to address the broader Section 8 system rather than single out veterans, warning that the ordinance as drafted could harm veterans.
• Lawren Zumann (veteran of 21 years; former vice president of veterans) called for simplicity and argued that 93% acceptance should be 100% for a “Military City.” He referenced a “trifecta” package and alleged that some councilmembers received campaign contributions from real estate interests.
• Luisa Martínez (Executive Director of a nonprofit; spouse of a veteran) stated that housing is a basic necessity and that veterans with vouchers are often denied despite meeting all criteria. She called for fixing payment delays and inspections, not penalizing veterans.
• Harry Robinson urged the committee to pass the ordinance, noting that 13 active-duty members were killed in Operation Fury. He asked why the ordinance had not been brought to a vote and thanked those supporting it.
• Cintia García (advocate) said she has worked on the ordinance for over two and a half years. She argued that the ordinance costs nothing, does not remove property owners’ rights, and would allow veterans to live near medical facilities. She presented letters of support from Representatives Brian López and José García.
• Johnny García (lifelong public servant for veterans) supported the ordinance, stating that too many veterans are told they are not welcome because of how they pay. He noted that 800 veterans use vouchers and that cities like Dallas and Fort Worth have already acted. He called it a matter of dignity and justice.
• María Mayra Curry (10-year veteran; recently appointed to Veterans Commission) reported that veterans she spoke with have difficulty finding housing even when they meet all requirements. She emphasized the need to align city policies with the military city designation.
• Robert Mahara (retired officer; advocate for children) spoke on item 5. He argued that asking veterans to bear the cost of housing alone is unfair and urged the commission to recommend protections.
• Irene White (Air Force veteran’s spouse; social worker) supported adding source-of-income protections, noting that veterans with vouchers or disability pensions are still denied housing. She called for aligning investments with outcomes.
• Wayne Mirna (property manager) stated that 55% of his 158 managed properties house active-duty military. He highlighted a 69-day average payment delay and additional inspection costs as barriers.
• Mary Hutchinson (housing administration professional) said the proposal does not address program inefficiencies; delays of 30 days or more in inspections create financial burdens for small landlords. She urged faster inspections and rent protections during delays.
• Albert Acevedo (speaking for a veteran under his care) reported that the veteran was rejected eight times before finding housing in Canyon Lake, not in San Antonio. He urged passage so the veteran can return to the city.
• Erin Khan (Texas housing agency) cited MLS data showing only 8% of rental listings in San Antonio indicate acceptance of vouchers. She noted that 70% of veterans using BASP vouchers are concentrated in vulnerable areas and that 84% live in multifamily housing, limiting their choices.
• Chris Pérez (combat medic; retired federal employee) described visiting a homeless veteran community near Highway 35 and 410 on Thanksgiving 2023. He questioned why the “Military City USA” allows veterans to live under bridges.
• Jason Bridgman (property manager; veteran) said his company never denies anyone because of a voucher. He estimated that only about 5% of veterans are not served and suggested connecting those veterans directly to property managers.
• Pete Burnell (apartment association representative) cited inspection delays from 10 to 60 days. He argued that the real issue is the people being denied, and urged passage without relying solely on short-term incentives.
• Antonio Romanes (Marine Corps veteran) stated that the ordinance is simple: landlords should not deny housing because someone is a veteran. He noted the ordinance was passed two years ago and urged moving it forward.

Discussion Items

• Item 4: Voucher Incentive Program (CCR from Councilwoman Castillo) – Verónica González (Deputy Director, Housing Services) presented options to create a $500 landlord incentive for signing 12-month leases with voucher holders, funded by existing rental assistance allocations. The program would target new landlords and could support up to 900 families. Council discussion focused on ensuring funds are additive, tracking retention, and prioritizing veterans with BASP vouchers. Councilwoman Castillo proposed the incentive be part of the city budget.
• Item 5: Source of Income Protection for Veterans Ordinance – Verónica González outlined the proposed ordinance that would prohibit rental housing operators from denying a prospective tenant solely because they use a voucher (including BASP, Section 8, etc.). Enforcement would be complaint-based, with possible training and fees (not criminal penalties). Council debated applicability: should it apply to all multifamily properties or exempt small landlords (1–4 units). Councilwoman Socorro proposed a motion to recommend an ordinance applying to owners of five or more rental units, with no criminal penalties, and to return for full council review after further public input. The motion was seconded and passed.
• Item 6: UDC Amendment Timeline for Data Centers (CCR from Councilman Galván) – A presentation outlined the normal five-year UDC amendment cycle (next update 2027). Councilman Galván requested an off-cycle amendment process for data center regulations. After discussion, the committee agreed to convene stakeholder meetings in May and June 2026, develop proposed amendments, and bring them to the planning commission and full council for adoption on an accelerated timeline.

Key Outcomes

• Consent Agenda: Approved unanimously.
• Item 4: Motion to approve the creation of the voucher incentive program (focusing on new landlords and veterans) passed unanimously.
• Item 5: Motion to recommend a source-of-income protection ordinance for full council consideration, applying to landlords with five or more rental units, with a complaint-based enforcement system and no criminal penalties, passed unanimously.
• Item 6: Decision to proceed with an off-cycle UDC amendment process for data center regulations, with stakeholder meetings in May–June 2026 and a target for council adoption by late 2026. The meeting adjourned at 12:29 p.m.