Public Meetings - San Antonio, Texas

The Audit Committee of the San Antonio City Council met on June 3, 2026, at 10 a.m. under the chairmanship of Chair Via Gran. The committee reviewed multiple procurement briefings, approved contract awards, and considered two internal audit reports covering janitorial services and short-term rental compliance. All votes were unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 11:50 a.m. Consent Calendar - Approval of the minutes of the previous meeting (approved unanimously). - Acceptance of one audit item on the consent agenda (approved unanimously). Public Comments & Testimony - No members of the public signed up to speak. Discussion Items Briefing on Solicitation for Fire Station No. 33 (Item 3) - Presentation by Mike Shannon, Director of Capital Delivery, on a pre-solicitation for construction of a new fire station at 2935 Castroville Road (Council District 5). The project is a 2022 bond project with an estimated total value of $12,060,377. The contract term is approximately 400 days. Evaluation criteria emphasize experience (35 points), project understanding (30 points), local experience (10 points), pricing (15 points), and SBE prime (10 points). The solicitation is set to release after the meeting, with council consideration expected in October 2026. - Council members requested that the district council member (Councilwoman Castillo) be kept informed and that community engagement be provided during construction. No vote was taken; the item was for briefing only. Post-Solicitation Briefings for Three Construction Contracts (Items 4, 5, 6) - Father Roman Community Center (Item 4): New community center in District 3, estimated $7.7 million (certificates of obligation). 13 submittals, 4 non-responsive. Recommended vendor A based on highest scores. Price scores: vendor A received 11/15, while vendor F received 15/15 (lowest price). - Fire Station No. 21 (Item 5): New fire station in District 3, estimated under $10 million (certificates of obligation). 11 submittals, 7 non-responsive. After interviews, vendor B was selected over vendor A due to higher interview scores. - Kenwood Community Center (Item 6): Replacement in District 1, estimated under $6 million (certificates of obligation). 16 submittals, 5 non-responsive. Recommended vendor A. - Discussion: Councilwoman White expressed concern that the top-ranked vendors (A) for items 4 and 5 did not receive maximum price points, while lower-scoring vendors received full price points. She asked for an explanation of the price differential and emphasized the need for cost-effectiveness given the city's budget shortfall. Staff explained that evaluation committees are blinded to pricing until after technical scoring to prioritize quality; price points are relative to the lowest bidder. Councilman Meskinzals questioned the interview process, noting that for Fire Station 21, interviews flipped the recommendation, and suggested that interviews should be required for all high-dollar contracts. Chair announced a subcommittee to review procurement procedures. - Outcome: A motion to forward items 4, 5, and 6 to full City Council for consideration passed unanimously. Council consideration is scheduled for June 18, 2026. Post-Solicitation Briefing for Toxicology Laboratory Services (Item 7) - Presentation by Rick Riley (SAPD Assistant Director) for a contract to provide toxicology lab services (blood analysis for DWI/DUI cases). Estimated total value $5.6 million for three years with two one-year renewal options. Two submittals: vendor A (local, scored 76 points) and vendor B (46 points). Evaluation committee selected vendor A without interviews. - Discussion: No questions. The committee approved proceeding to council. Post-Solicitation Briefing for On-Call Marketing and Communication Services (Item 8) - Presentation by Alana Reed, Director of Communications and Engagement, for citywide on-call contracts across five service categories (advertising/marketing, graphic design, public relations, community engagement, video production). Total contract authority $23 million over three years with two one-year renewals ($4.6 million annually). 65 proposals received; 14 firms recommended (19 contract awards across categories). - Discussion: Councilwoman White asked about AI use, in-house capacity, and metrics. Chair noted the city has no formal AI policy. Councilman Meskinzals asked about SBE subcontracting and effectiveness metrics. Staff noted the contract is capacity-based; actual spending depends on department budgets and is subject to existing procurement rules. - Outcome: Motion to approve passed unanimously. Audit of Janitorial Services Contract at Convention Center and Alamo Dome (Item 9) - Presentation by Audit Manager Michael Gutierrez. The audit found that the Convention and Sports Facilities Department (CSF) is not effectively managing and monitoring the janitorial services contracts for both venues. Key findings: - Pre-employment screenings (background checks, drug tests, I-9 verification) were not performed by the prime contractor or subcontractors as required. Three unknown subcontractors were performing work. - Staffing levels were not properly tracked; sign-in sheets at the Alamo Dome were not maintained. At the Convention Center, staffing shortfalls were not documented within 48 hours. - Custodial and conversion work inspections were not consistently recorded. - Invoice accuracy could not be verified for the Alamo Dome; of 37 invoices totaling $553,000, 20 lacked sign-in sheets to confirm hours worked. - Physical access control procedures were inadequate at the Alamo Dome. - Subcontractors did not meet insurance requirements. - Patricia Muskiscantor (CSF Director) stated that all recommendations have been implemented as of June 2026, with new policies, forms, and training in place. - Discussion: Councilman White expressed concern about potential overpayment for unverified hours. Patricia assured that work was completed but acknowledged documentation gaps. Councilman Meskinzals asked if the Office of Municipal Integrity was involved; staff will follow up. - Outcome: Motion to accept the audit and management response passed unanimously. Audit of Short-Term Rental (STR) Compliance (Item 10) - Presentation by Audit Manager Abigail Esteves. The audit found that Finance and Development Services were not adequately monitoring compliance with hotel occupancy tax (HOT) ordinances for short-term rentals. Issues included: - STR properties not properly identified; 921 were operating without permits. - Revenue reporting was self-reported and not validated. - Notices for non-reporting were not sent, and past-due HOT was not pursued. - Contract monitoring of vendor Avenue was insufficient. - Troy (Finance) noted that an ordinance amendment effective February 2025 now requires platforms like Airbnb and VRBO to remit HOT directly, yielding a 72.1% increase in STR HOT collections ($9.6 million in FY2025). Currently 3,350 permitted STRs out of approximately 4,370 total. - Discussion: Councilman White emphasized the need to collect uncollected revenue before considering tax increases. Councilman Meskinzals asked about covenant/deed restriction acknowledgments and departmental coordination. Chair noted the audit provides a baseline for future policy improvements. - Outcome: Motion to accept the audit and management response passed unanimously. Key Outcomes - All motions were approved unanimously by the Audit Committee. - Items 4, 5, and 6 will be forwarded to the full City Council on June 18, 2026, with additional explanations on price scoring requested. - A subcommittee will be formed to review procurement procedures and best value criteria. - Both audits (janitorial services and short-term rentals) were accepted; management action plans are in progress with a completion date of June 2026.

The Historic Design Review Commission (HDRC) met on Wednesday, June 3, 2026, at 3:00 PM. Chair Maurice Gibbs presided over the meeting, which lasted approximately five minutes. All nine commissioners were present: Neme, Seve, Velázquez, Galloway (arrived late), Guevara, Gru, Travieso, Holland Setzer, and Gibbs. The commission approved the minutes of the May 20, 2026 meeting and then considered a consent calendar of five items, all of which were approved unanimously with staff stipulations. Consent Calendar - The commission voted to approve the minutes of the May 20, 2026 meeting. Motion was made, seconded, and passed unanimously (9-0). - A motion to approve agenda items 1 through 5, with staff stipulations, was made, seconded, and passed unanimously (10-0 after Commissioner Galloway arrived and voted). - The approved addresses (as read aloud) were: Commerce, West Racer 20 25, West Finalia 22 25, Normain, and 2 18 Donaldson. These are presumably properties for which Certificates of Appropriateness were granted. Public Comments & Testimony - No public comments or speakers were present. Discussion Items - No separate discussion items were considered; all business was handled via the consent calendar. Key Outcomes - The commission unanimously approved the consent calendar for all five agenda items, with staff stipulations. - Certificates of Appropriateness will be issued within ten days for the listed properties. - The meeting adjourned at approximately 3:05 PM.

The City Council met on June 2, 2026, to discuss real-time train notification systems, a transition of the horse-drawn carriage industry to electric vehicles, and updates to limousine, pedicab, and taxi regulations. The meeting began with approval of minutes, followed by public comments and a series of staff presentations. Consent Calendar - Approval of Minutes: The council approved the minutes from the previous meeting via motion, which passed unanimously. Public Comments & Testimony - Armartinez Guevara (representing Yellow Rose, Blue Bonnet, and Lalipop carriage companies) requested an extension of the deadline for the law passed during the holidays, citing implementation challenges, delays in route changes, and a need for more time to pilot programs. He also urged that all policies apply equally to the horses. - Andrés Hernández (President of the CGA Transport Committee of San Antonio) stated he does not support the staff recommendation attached to the document regarding the limousine industry (Chapter 33). He asked the council to consider the recommendations provided to them, including the proposed change, and expressed doubt about the current approach. Discussion Items - Real-Time Train Notification System: Councilmember Jalen Mackie Rodriguez introduced a request to create a real-time notification system for trains, especially at railroad crossings. Staff reported progress since February 2026, including partnerships with Waymo (Houston), SWRI (local), and other technology providers. The system would predict train presence and speed, and potentially provide public information via city websites or apps like Apple Maps and Google Maps. The pilot program cost was discussed, and council members expressed support for moving quickly and collaboratively. Concerns were raised about evaluating public impact, acoustic issues in quiet zones, and integration with navigation apps. It was agreed to bring the proposal back to the committee for final review before any pilot. - Police Department Recommendations on Limousines, Carriages, Pedicabs, and Taxis: Assistant Director Rick Riley (San Antonio Police Department) presented recommended changes to Chapter 33. Key points: - Limousine Service: Expand definition to include limo buses and vans, rename to "luxury vehicle service" to reflect industry trends. - Horse-Drawn Carriage Transition: Phase out by 2030 per December 5, 2024 council decision. Currently 25 permits across 5 companies owned by 3 owners. Staff recommends authorizing 21 new electric vehicles (7 per owner) to be exchanged for horse-drawn permits over time. Insurance requirements would be adjusted: remove $1 million property damage requirement, maintain commercial insurance with $200,000 for personal injury. - Pedicabs: Updates for shared bicycles and taxis, noting a cap of 15 and three companies. Out-of-town operators from Austin and Houston cannot obtain permits for large events. - Taxi Permits: Discussion on permit limits and availability; staff noted only 4 taxi companies currently active, and the need to revisit historical studies that set permit numbers. Council members voiced support for the limousine and carriage recommendations, though some questioned the speed difference between horse carriages (3 mph) and electric carriages (20 mph) and their traffic impact. Councilmember Spears expressed concern about removing horse carriages without adequate transition support and asked about financial assistance for electric carriage purchases. Others emphasized fairness to existing owners and the need for a phased approach. A council member noted that electric carriages could be ordered within 3-6 months at a cost of approximately $20,000. There was a request to provide business plan guidance and financial support. Key Outcomes - Motion to Move Item to B Session: A motion was made and seconded to send the carriage/limousine/pedicab/taxi recommendations to the next B session for further discussion. The motion passed with a vote of 3 in favor and 1 opposed. The meeting adjourned at 3:16 PM. - Train Notification System: Staff will return to the committee at the end of the calendar year with a final review before any pilot implementation.

The Transportation Infrastructure Committee met on June 2, 2026 at 2:02 PM with Chair Jalen McKee-Rodriguez presiding and a quorum present. The meeting included approval of minutes, public testimony, and three major agenda items: a real-time train notification system, an update on city-owned facilities, and recommendations for limousine, horse carriage, and petty cab/group cycle regulations. The committee voted to accept staff's recommendation on the train notification system and to send the third item to a B session. Consent Calendar - The committee approved the minutes of the previous meeting by a unanimous voice vote. Public Comments & Testimony - Art Martinez, representing multiple horse carriage companies, urged the committee to grant an extension to the negotiated window for horse carriage operators due to lost holiday season income (the majority of their annual revenue). He noted that city staff admitted implementation issues last season that hindered operations. He also expressed willingness to participate in a pilot for electric carriages but requested the extension to allow time for tweaks and vehicle procurement. He also asked for a consistent city policy regarding working animals, similar to those applied to police horses and rodeo events. - Andres Hernandez, president of CTA Schooper Transportation, expressed strong support for the staff recommendation related to the limousine industry (item four). He emphasized the importance of safety and enforcement of Chapter 33 regulations, noting that many operators lack proper insurance, which poses a risk to the public. He commended the direction of the recommendations. Discussion Items Item 2: Real-time Notification System for Train Approaching or Stopped at Railroad Crossings - Council Member McKee Rodriguez introduced the CCR filed in February 2026, aimed at developing a real-time information system for blocked railway crossings. The goal includes partnerships with third-party navigation apps, advanced detection technologies, pilot testing on high-impact corridors, and equitable implementation in rail-adjacent, often underserved areas. - Art (Public Works) reported that since March, the city partnered with ITSD's Emerging Technologies team. Matt Reed (ITSD) presented the research approach: three layers—detection (sensors), predictive modeling (train speed and length), and communication (SMS, CAD systems, navigation apps, city websites). No single vendor solution exists, so a prototype is recommended. - Matt Reed outlined five considerations: no single vendor; limited railroad data sharing; need for public dissemination; existing city infrastructure as an asset; and the pilot would determine total cost of ownership. - Art detailed a proposed pilot with Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) using their Activision AI camera-based detection system (currently not trained for trains) and a data exchange/communication platform developed for Florida DOT. The pilot would occur in three steps over several months: (1) detection phase, (2) predictive algorithm development, (3) information dissemination. Staff recommended moving forward with the pilot, funded through operations, and reporting back to the committee by end of 2026. - Council members expressed strong support, noting the speed of progress and collaboration with SwRI. Questions included how to evaluate public impact (not yet integrated into navigation apps), cost (being finalized), and potential to integrate with apps like Apple Maps in the future. A committee member also suggested the system could help identify quiet zone issues. - Motion: To accept staff's recommendation. The motion was seconded and carried by a voice vote. It was agreed that an update should come back to the committee before a B session. Item 3: Briefing and Update on the Conditions of City-Owned Facilities - Mike Shannon presented an update. The city has 898 total facilities/structures, of which 322 are primary buildings (police/fire stations, libraries, etc.). The oldest is the Spanish Governor's Palace (1722). Over the last 10 years, about $56 million has been spent on deferred maintenance (roofs, HVAC, etc.), and over $350 million in facility improvements have been completed on more than 200 of the 322 primary buildings. A comprehensive list has been compiled, including age, type, and investment history. - Council Member Core had requested a spreadsheet with building details, department, condition, last maintenance, and cost estimates for 5- and 10-year needs. Staff agreed to provide a sortable spreadsheet within a week and to meet with each council office to review it. - Council members discussed the need for a standard scoring system for building condition (similar to pavement condition index), equity in funding across districts, and how to assess useful life left. Staff committed to developing a building condition index within a year. The committee also noted the importance of using this data for the upcoming bond discussions. - No action was required; the item was for briefing and discussion. Item 4: SAPD Recommendations on Limousine Permits, Horse Carriage Transition, and Insurance for Petty Cabs/Group Cycles - Rick Riley (SAPD Assistant Director) presented staff recommendations for three areas: 1. Limousine Service: Change the entry requirement from two stretch limousines (or one stretch plus two luxury SUVs) to allow a combination of stretch limos, limo buses, and limo vans. Also rename Chapter 33 from "Limousine Service" to "Luxury Vehicle Service." 2. Horse Carriage Transition: Authorize 21 new electric vehicle-for-hire permits for current horse carriage permit holders (7 per owner) to exchange their horse carriage permits. Once exchanged, the horse carriage permit is void. Insurance requirements for electric vehicles would be reduced from $1 million to $200,000/$500,000/$200,000 based on risk management recommendations. 3. Petty Cabs and Group Cycles: Lower insurance requirements from $1 million to $350,000 per occurrence, based on risk management advice. - Council members expressed general support for the limousine and horse carriage recommendations but raised several points: - The horse carriage operators lost the holiday season and may need an extension. - Questions about procurement and cost of electric carriages ($20,000, 3-6 months delivery). - Concern about allocation: one owner has 10 permits (two businesses). Staff suggested that owner could convert 7 to e-vehicles while continuing horse carriages until the phase-out. - Council Members McKee Rodriguez and Mungia suggested that these regulatory discussions may be better housed under the Transportation Department than SAPD. - Council Member Core requested ridership data for all transportation options before a B session. - The petty cab permit cap of 15 was discussed; several inquiries have been received but permits are maxed out. Staff will research the history of the limit. - Motion: To send the item to the next available B session for further discussion. The motion was seconded and carried with 3 ayes and 1 opposed. Key Outcomes - Approved: Staff recommendation for a pilot on a real-time train notification system with Southwest Research Institute (voice vote, unanimous). - Directed: Staff to provide a comprehensive, sortable spreadsheet of city-owned facilities within a week, meet with each council office, and develop a building condition index within a year. - Referred to B Session: The three SAPD recommendations (limousine, horse carriage transition, insurance for petty cabs/group cycles) will be discussed at a future B session (motion carried 3-1). - Data Requested: Ridership data for limousine, petty cab, horse-drawn carriage, and electric vehicle operators to be shared ahead of the B session. Meeting Adjourned at 3:16 PM

The San Antonio Zoning Commission met on June 2, 2026, at 1:02 PM to consider multiple rezoning requests, site plan amendments, and continuances. The meeting, chaired by Commissioner John Bustamante, lasted approximately six hours and involved extensive public testimony and deliberation on 11 agenda items. Key outcomes included approvals, denials, continuances, and a recommendation of denial, with several votes reflecting divided opinions among the 11-member commission. Consent Calendar - Items 10, 12, 13, and 14 were approved unanimously without public comment. These included zoning changes from R5 to R5 CD with a conditional use for three dwelling units (811 Hortensia Street), C3NA to C2 (3423 Pleasanton Road), R6 to R6 CD with a conditional use for two dwelling units (609 Ripley Avenue), and I1 to C3 (1798 Austin Highway). All required overlays remained the same. Public Comments & Testimony - Item 1 (15511 Oak Grove) – Multiple neighbors spoke in opposition, citing ongoing code violations, noise, parking congestion, and the property's history of noncompliance. The Hills and Dales Neighborhood Association submitted formal opposition. - Item 11 (9330 NE Loop 410) – Sylvia Alanis, representing the Eastgate Neighborhood Association, opposed the expansion of a truck repair facility, expressing concerns about increased large truck traffic, neighborhood safety, and drainage improvements. - Item 9 (1301 Roosevelt Avenue) – Jeff Hunt (Roosevelt Park Neighborhood Association), Jacob Stedham, and other residents opposed the rezoning for a bar/tavern, citing high crime rates, prostitution, drug dealing, and insufficient parking. - Item 2 (1139 New Laredo Highway) – Residents including Larry Garcia, Deborah Ponce, and Cheyenne Rendon opposed a vehicle sales/storage facility, citing proximity to an elementary school, health impacts, and gradual commercial encroachment. - Item 5 (2007 Frio City Road) – Neighbors from the Via de Esperanza subdivision and Kelly Park Neighborhood Association opposed a long-term vehicle storage lot, arguing it would detract from beautification efforts and attract crime. - Item 8 (1802 West French Place) – Support was voiced by a business associate; no opposition speakers appeared. - Item 15 (2635 Woodbury Drive) – One resident spoke against the proposed duplex development, citing historical significance of nearby Pape's Farm homestead and concerns about water wells and building height. Discussion Items - Continuances – Items 3 and 11 were originally set for continuance. After public comment, Item 11 was separated and heard individually later. Item 3 was continued to June 16, 2026; Item 15 was continued to July 7, 2026 after a full presentation and public input. - Item 1 (Food Service Establishment) – Staff recommended denial based on noncompliance and commercial encroachment. The applicant argued the use was a synagogue with no-profit food service. After extensive questioning, the commission voted (9-2) to continue the case to July 7, 2026 for further negotiation. - Item 9 (Bar/Tavern) – Staff recommended approval. The neighborhood association and multiple residents opposed. A motion to deny failed (5-6), and after reconsideration, the commission voted to continue to June 16, 2026. - Item 2 (Auto Sales Full Service) – Staff recommended denial due to inconsistency with the community plan. The applicant requested a C2-CD with conditional use. A motion to approve failed (4-6), then a motion to deny passed (7-3), resulting in a recommendation of denial to City Council. - Item 4 (IDZ3 for Three Dwelling Units) – Staff recommended denial citing excessive density. The commission voted 6-4 to approve the amended request for three units on an undersized lot. - Item 5 (Vehicle Storage) – Staff recommended denial. After discussion about site plan deficiencies, the commission voted to continue to July 7, 2026 for a revised site plan. - Item 6 (RM4 for Duplex) – Staff recommended an alternate R4-CD. The commission voted 8-2 to approve the RM4 request as submitted. - Item 7 (IDZ3 for Lumberyard) – Staff recommended denial due to floodplain issues and prior violations. The commission voted 9-1 to approve, citing the need to resolve existing problems and avoid vacancy. - Item 8 (Rental Equipment Storage) – Staff recommended denial. After the applicant amended the request to include an 8-foot fence, the commission voted 8-0 (with one recusal) to approve. - Item 11 (Major Site Plan Amendment) – Staff recommended approval. The neighborhood association opposed. After questioning, the commission voted to continue to June 16, 2026 to allow further community outreach. Key Outcomes - Approvals (with recommendations to City Council unless noted): - Consent items 10, 12, 13, 14 (unanimous). - Item 4 (IDZ3 for three dwelling units) – 6-4. - Item 6 (RM4) – 8-2. - Item 7 (Lumberyard IDZ3) – 9-1. - Item 8 (Rental equipment with 8-ft fence) – 8-0 (one recusal). - Denial (recommendation to Council): - Item 2 (Auto sales C2-CD) – 7-3. - Continuances: - Item 3 to June 16, 2026. - Item 1 to July 7, 2026. - Item 9 to June 16, 2026. - Item 5 to July 7, 2026. - Item 11 to June 16, 2026. - Minutes – The May 19, 2026 meeting minutes were approved unanimously. - Adjournment – The meeting adjourned at 6:51 PM.

The San Antonio Zoning Commission met on June 2, 2026, at 1:02 PM under the chairmanship of John Bustamante. The meeting addressed multiple zoning requests, with the commission voting on consent items, hearing public testimony, and deliberating on several controversial cases. Key actions included approvals, denials, and deferrals. Consent Calendar - Items 10, 12, 13, 14: Approved unanimously without discussion. These included a rezoning at 811 Hortensia Street (R5 to R5C, 12 units), 3423 Place and Road (C2 to C2L), 609 Replay Avenue (R6 to RCCD, two dwelling units), and 1798 Austin Howe (I-1 to C3). All had no opposition or public comments. Public Comments & Testimony - Item 1 (15511 Grove Drive - food establishment): Howard Gem, a veteran and restaurant owner, spoke in opposition, citing multiple code violations, unpermitted operation of a restaurant for two years, and a pattern of non-compliance. He stated that the applicant (Rabbi Shah) had been arrested for trespassing and cutting down 15 trees. Mary Moulton, a 30-year resident, opposed the commercial use, noting it would increase traffic on a road not designed for it. Paul Dodsencott, an adjacent neighbor, opposed due to noise from parties and DJ events, and concern that commercial zoning would reduce his property value. - Item 2 (1139 New Laredo - auto service): Larry Garcia (1442 Fanamin) opposed, saying the area already has many auto service centers. Cheyenne Rendon (Quintana neighborhood) opposed, citing proximity to a primary school, pollution from paint shop, and the neighborhood's history of fighting for zoning compliance. - Item 5 (2007 Frio City Road - vehicle storage): Beatrice Rendon (Via de Esperanza) opposed, presenting 33 signatures, worried about toxic fumes, crime, and negative impact on the neighborhood. Maria Emilia Garcia initially supported cleanup but later opposed due to the industrial nature. Larry Garcia opposed, stating it would create an eyesore at the community entry. - Item 11 (9330 NE Luff - truck repair expansion): A neighbor (Ms. Niz) opposed, stating the operator had been truthful in the past but now wants to expand, and she fears future sale of the property could bring less responsible owners. She noted the council previously helped them stay but she cannot support expansion. Discussion Items - Item 1 (15511 Grove Drive): Applicant Rabbi Shah requested a conditional use for a food establishment within an R20 zone, claiming it is a kosher kitchen for the Jewish community only. Commissioners questioned past violations, online presence (Yelp reviews), and parking issues. Staff reported a determination by the building official that the primary use was a restaurant. The applicant offered to work on parking and noise abatement. After extended debate, the commission decided to defer to July 7 for further negotiations, noting that a second deferral would send the case to city council with a recommendation for denial. - Item 2 (1139 New Laredo): Applicant sought C2 CD for full-service automotive sales and repair. Staff recommended denial due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan (neighborhood commercial vs. community commercial). The planning commission had recommended approval. After hearing opposition from residents and a petition of support, the motion to approve failed 4-6. A motion to reconsider passed, then a motion to deny passed 6-4, sending the case to council with a denial recommendation. - Item 4 (2814 Veracruz - IDZ for three container units): Applicant proposed three tiny homes (320 sq ft containers) on a small lot in a low-density area. Staff recommended denial due to intensity and incompatibility. The commission debated whether IDZ was appropriate; some favored approval as experimental, others opposed density. Motion to approve as amended (R4 with conditional use for three units) passed 6-4. - Item 5 (2007 Frio City Road): Applicant sought C2 CD for vehicle storage (74 spaces). Neighbors objected to the industrial use at the entrance of their subdivision. Chair Bustamante noted lack of a proper site plan with buffers and driveway access. The applicant agreed to a deferral to July 7 to refine the plan. - Item 6 (1311 North Sarsamora - RM4 for duplex): Applicant sought RM4 to build two units on a lot with existing structures. Staff recommended R4 with conditional use for two units, but applicant argued setbacks made it infeasible. The commission approved the RM4 request. - Item 7 (1005 North Sarsamora Street - sawmill/lumber storage): Applicant sought IDZ-3 for a lumber yard in a floodplain with past code violations. Despite concerns about feasibility of flood mitigation and non-permitted construction, the commission approved after the applicant committed to addressing water quality and replacing the access bridge. - Item 8 (1802 West French Place - equipment rental): Applicant sought C2 NA for equipment rental, with an 8-foot fence. Staff recommended denial, but the planning commission recommended approval. After hearing support from a neighbor and noting the business's long history, the commission approved as amended. - Item 11 (9330 NE Luff - truck repair expansion): Applicant requested a major site plan amendment to expand existing truck repair. Staff recommended approval. Opponent Ms. Niz spoke, and commissioner Lose expressed concerns about heavy industrial use next to residential. The case was deferred to June 16 for further community engagement. Key Outcomes - Consent Items: Approved unanimously (Items 10, 12, 13, 14). - Item 1: Deferred to July 7, 2026 (second deferral); will go to city council with a denial recommendation if not resolved. - Item 2: Denied (6-4). Will go to city council with a denial recommendation. - Item 3: Deferred to June 16 (as part of earlier action). - Item 4: Approved (6-4) as amended. - Item 5: Deferred to July 7, 2026. - Item 6: Approved as submitted. - Item 7: Approved (unanimous). - Item 8: Approved as amended (8-foot fence). - Item 11: Deferred to June 16, 2026. - Minutes of May 19, 2026: Approved unanimously.

The San Antonio Board of Adjustments convened on June 1, 2026, at 10:02 AM with nine members present (later rising to ten) to hear ten cases involving variances, special exceptions, and appeals related to zoning and development codes. The meeting included a continuance, approval of previous minutes, and votes on numerous requests for setbacks, fence heights, buffers, and accessory dwelling unit placements. Decisions were based on findings of fact regarding unnecessary hardship and public interest. The meeting adjourned at 4:42 PM after a break and concluding announcements. Consent Calendar - Minutes Approval: The minutes from the previous meeting were approved unanimously (motion by Commissioner Brackman, second by Commissioner Manna). - Continuance (Item 2 – BOA-26-103008): A request by Fernando de Leon for accessory dwelling unit variances at 219 Palo Grande was continued to June 15, 2026, by unanimous consent. Public Comments & Testimony - Item 3 (13649 Forest Rock Drive): Speaker Robert Weimer, the applicant, described structural issues and requested a continuance to hire an architect; the board granted a continuance to July 6, 2026. - Item 4 (929 Rice Road): Two neighbors spoke in favor: Suzanne Martinez (932 Rice Road) praised the gate and its positive impact; Diane Quayar (202 Glen Oak Drive) expressed safety concerns related to the property's future use but clarified she supported the gate itself. The applicant, Carolyn Randall, explained the gate's height (13 ft) was due to budget constraints and a desire to beautify the neighborhood after the property had been abandoned. - Item 5 (1726 Nolan Street): Neighbor Leroy Davila (1730 Nolan Street) spoke about the carport and gutter, confirming he had no issues and that the applicant maintained the fence well. - Item 6 (22315 Roman Forest): Two speakers from the HOA ACC committee, Ken Albrecht and Randall Holt, opposed the side-yard ADU, citing HOA covenants requiring detached garages behind the house and concerns about scale and aesthetics. - Item 10 (8209 Landing Avenue): No public speakers; one written opposition (item 3 only) cited an easement concern. - Item 11 (8042 Pinebrook Drive): No public speakers. Discussion Items - Item 9 (202 Wilkins Avenue – ADU Variance): Applicant Susan Haime (SG Construction) and owner Ramona Montoya Coyot requested a side-yard ADU and a 1-inch side setback for a shed. The property has limited rear yard due to interstate right-of-way. Staff recommended approval; board unanimously granted the variance (10-0). - Item 1 (607 McElvain Street – Fence and Clear Vision Variance): Applicant Adrian Zertuce requested a corrugated metal fence (side/rear) and an 11-ft clear vision area (vs. 15-ft). Staff recommended denial for the fence (material and safety concerns) but approval for the clear vision. The applicant amended to include a cap on the fence. Board granted both variances unanimously (10-0). - Item 3 (13649 Forest Rock Drive – Side Setback Variance): Applicant Robert Weimer requested a variance for a patio/deck addition built without a permit near a zero-lot-line. Staff recommended denial due to fire and water runoff concerns. After discussion, the board granted a continuance to July 6, 2026, for the applicant to obtain a survey and architect. - Item 4 (929 Rice Road – Fence Height Variance): Applicant Carolyn Randall requested an 8-ft variance to allow a 13-ft gate (predominantly open). Staff recommended denial but the board granted the variance (10-0), limiting it to the gate only, citing neighborhood support and improved security. - Item 5 (1726 Nolan Street – Multiple Variances): Applicant Carmina Flores sought variances for a carport, home addition, accessory structure, impervious cover (artificial turf), fence height, and clear vision. Staff recommended denial for most, approval for clear vision. Board voted separately: first, the fence height special exception (6 ft 2 in) was granted unanimously (10-0); second, all remaining variances (setbacks, impervious cover, clear vision) were granted unanimously (10-0) with the condition that the impervious cover remains as currently configured with artificial turf over gravel. - Item 6 (22315 Roman Forest – ADU Side Yard Variance): Applicant Elizabeth Campbell requested a variance to place an ADU in the side yard due to mature trees, slope, and a drainage easement in the rear. Staff recommended approval. Despite opposition from HOA representatives, the board granted the variance (10-0), citing tree preservation and reduced impervious cover. - Item 7 (10903 Lazy Oaks Drive – Carport Variance): Applicant Jose Esquivel Vega requested variances for a carport (front and side setbacks) that had been previously approved but permits expired. Staff recommended denial, but after applicant amended to include gutters, the board granted the variances (10-0), noting other carports in the area and the applicant's willingness to complete inspections. - Item 8 (1730 Nolan Street – Carport and Clear Vision Variance): Applicant Leroy Davila requested variances for a carport (6-in side setback) and an 11-ft 6-in clear vision area. Staff recommended denial for the carport, approval for clear vision. The board granted both (10-0) after applicant agreed to add gutters. - Item 10 (8209 Landing Avenue – Commercial Setback and Buffer Variance): Applicant David Garcia requested a 20-ft rear setback reduction (to 10 ft) and buffer reductions (north to 6 ft, east to 12 ft) for a print shop. Staff recommended approval for the setback, denial for buffers. Board granted all variances (10-0), emphasizing that the property is adjacent to a vacant lot and the buffer requirements would still be met with landscaping. - Item 11 (8042 Pinebrook Drive – Car Wash Buffer Variance): Applicant Emily Weissler requested a 5-ft reduction (from 15 ft to 10 ft) of the Type C landscape buffer for a new express car wash. Staff recommended denial, citing inadequate screening. The board granted the variance (10-0), noting the existing absence of any buffer and the improvement in screening and aesthetics. Key Outcomes - All decisions were unanimous (10-0 or 9-0 when only nine members were present). - Continuances: Item 3 continued to July 6, 2026; Item 2 continued to June 15, 2026. - Variances granted with specific conditions (e.g., gutters on carports, caps on metal fences, artificial turf configuration). - Board discussed a letter from the Short Term Rental Association of San Antonio requesting stricter enforcement, and the upcoming UDC rewrite process expected in 2027. Board members noted vacancies on the board and encouraged applications.

The San Antonio Zoning Board of Adjustment met on June 1, 2026, at 2:00 PM to hear and decide on ten zoning variance, special exception, and appeal cases. The board, comprised of 11 commissioners (9 present at start, 10 by the end), voted on each case after public testimony and deliberation. Key outcomes include approval of variances for accessory dwelling units, fence materials, carports, and commercial buffers, as well as a postponement. Consent Calendar - Agenda Item 2 (BOA 26-13088) was postponed to June 15, 2026, at the applicant's request. The case involves a variance for accessory structures, fence material, and height at 1215 sq ft. No opposition. - Meeting minutes from the previous session were approved unanimously. Public Comments & Testimony - Case 3 (13649 Forest 5): Applicant Robert Weiner requested a 4 ft 11 in lateral setback variance for a deck addition. He explained the deck was built without permits due to contractor error. Neighbors did not speak, but the board expressed concerns about fire access and property lines. Weiner requested and was granted a continuance to July 6, 2026, to hire an architect. - Case 4 (929 Rice Rd): Applicant Caroline Randall requested a 13 ft front gate variance. Neighbor Susan Martinez spoke in favor, praising the improvements and increased security. Another neighbor, Diane Cuellar, expressed concerns about homeless individuals but clarified she was only asking about the gate. The board focused solely on the gate variance. - Case 5 (26 Nolan St): Applicant Carmina Flores requested multiple variances for a carport, side additions, and impervious cover. Neighbor Leroy Dávila supported the project, noting it improved the neighborhood. He raised a concern about a downspout that was later addressed. - Case 6 (22315 Ronforest): Applicant Elizabeth Campbell (through designer Angel Ruiz) requested an ADU variance to place the unit in the side yard. Two members of the homeowners association (Ken Albrecht and Randall Hold) spoke in opposition, citing the two-story design, tree preservation, and electrical utility conflicts. The board voted to approve, noting the lot’s size and drainage. - Case 7 (1093 Ley C Ox Dr): Applicant Jose Esquivel Vega requested a variance for a carport that had been built without final inspection after a previous variance expired. No public comments. The board approved after Vega agreed to add gutters. - Case 8 (1730 Nolland St): Applicant Leroy Dávila requested variances for a carport setback and vision clearance. No public comments. - Case 10 (8209 Landing Ave): Applicant David Garcia (representing De Haro) requested a rear setback variance and buffer reductions for a metal printing shop. No public comments. Staff recommended approval of the setback but denial of buffer reductions. Garcia offered to provide landscaping buffer. The board approved with conditions. - Case 11 (8042 Pinebrook Dr): Applicant Lady Wash (representing Griffin in Fairmont) requested a 5 ft buffer reduction for a car wash at an existing site. No public comments. Staff recommended denial due to noise impacts, but the board approved, noting the proposed landscaping was an improvement over the current blighted condition. Discussion Items - Case 1 (BOA 26-103074) – 607 McLean St: Applicant Adrian Sertuche sought an exception for corrugated metal fencing and a 4 ft vision clearance variance. After discussion, the applicant amended the request to include a protective cap on the metal edges. The board found the variance not contrary to public interest given the alley security and open-bar design. Approved 10-0. - Case 9 (BOA 26-103096) – 2021 Wilkins Ave: Applicant Ramona Montoya Cuella requested a variance to allow an ADU in the side yard and a 4 ft 11 in setback for a carport/shed. Staff recommended approval due to limited rear yard and unique lot configuration. No opposition. Approved 10-0. Key Outcomes - Case 1: Approved (10-0). Variance for corrugated metal fence with protective cap and vision clearance. - Case 2: Postponed to June 15, 2026, by unanimous consent. - Case 3: Continued to July 6, 2026, to allow applicant to retain an architect. - Case 4: Approved (10-0). Variance for 13 ft front gate only (not entire fence). - Case 5: Two separate votes: (a) fence height variance approved 10-0; (b) remaining variances (setbacks, impervious cover, vision clearance) approved 10-0 with condition that artificial grass is considered pervious. - Case 6: Approved (10-0). Variance for ADU in side yard, preserving mature trees and accommodating drainage. - Case 7: Approved (10-0). Variance for carport setbacks, with condition to install gutters. - Case 8: Approved (10-0). Variances for carport setback and vision clearance. - Case 9: Approved (10-0). Variance for ADU in side yard and shed setback. - Case 10: Approved (10-0). Variance for rear setback (20 ft to 10 ft) and buffer reductions (15 ft to 6 ft on north, 15 ft to 12 ft on east), with landscaping requirement. - Case 11: Approved (10-0). Variance for buffer reduction from 15 ft to 10 ft along rear and east property lines, with landscaping. The meeting adjourned at 4:42 PM.

The San Antonio Building Standards Board met on May 28, 2026, to approve minutes, receive staff reports on emergency demolitions and code compliance, hear presentations on housing assistance, deconstruction, and vacant property programs, review board processes and statistics, and conduct administrative business. The board acted on a policy amendment and deferred cases to individual panels. Consent Calendar - Approval of Minutes: The minutes from the October 16, 2025 meeting were approved unanimously with no corrections or amendments. The motion passed by voice vote. Discussion Items - Staff Report – Emergency Demolitions (Jenny Ramírez): Five emergency demolitions were reported, all due to fires between April 30 and May 12, 2026. Properties at 3506 Woodland Avenue (District 7), 1608 Menchaca Street (District 1), 325 East Courtland Plaza (District not specified, accessory structure), 3926 West Martin Street (District 5, main structure), and 9248 Toronto Drive (District 2, mobile home) were demolished on May 12–26, 2026. No further board action required. Board members had no questions. - Director’s Report – Code Compliance (Assistant Director Dani Lígues): The director reported on performance metrics for fiscal year 2025-2026. The department is meeting its goal of responding to violations within one to two days. The overall compliance rate is 89%, with 90% of pending investigations current. The department aims to inspect 60,000 properties annually. A reduction in reactive calls (3% drop) was noted, attributed to fewer vacancies, staff turnover, and increased community education. Legal advisor Sarita Wright added that code officers are being pulled to assist with new programs, which may also reduce call volume. - Housing Assistance Programs (Housing Department Manager and Emma Rodríguez): Two programs were presented: Rental Assistance (temporary aid for rent and utilities, up to three months, with a maximum of $3,000, open for applications the second Wednesday of each month from 1–2 PM) and Relocation Assistance (help with security deposits, utility connections, application fees, and moving expenses for households facing eviction or displacement). Eligibility requires income at or below 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) and documented housing instability (e.g., eviction notice). Applications are accepted via an online portal. Board members asked about the short application window (1 hour per month), explained due to capacity, and questioned outreach effectiveness. Staff noted partnerships with schools, libraries, property managers, and community organizations. Code compliance officers provide information on these programs early in the enforcement process. Board members expressed appreciation but concerns about limited awareness. - Deconstruction Program (Stephanie Phillips and Leticia Sánchez): The program, adopted by city council in September 2022, applies to residential structures ordered for demolition built in 1945 or earlier (or 1960 in conservation districts). It requires deconstruction by approved contractors, with materials reused for affordable housing projects or donated to a Materials Innovation Center (still in pilot). Leticia Sánchez, representing Esperanza Community Land Trust, emphasized the program’s success in recovering 70% of original materials and saving 30% in costs compared to new construction. She invited board members to visit the reuse center at 816 South Colorado. Board members noted the cost is higher than demolition but offset by material reuse and environmental benefits. - Vacant Properties Program (Brittany Williams): The program started as a pilot in 2014 and became permanent, now covering half of the city’s square miles (including historic districts, conservation districts, military bases, and school zones). It requires registration of vacant properties, including owner contact, a six-month action plan, and a transfer form for police access. 60% of owners are individuals, not businesses. Since inception, 1,100 properties have been reoccupied. Staff assists with connecting owners to resources, including help with legal title issues. Board members asked about success rates in complex cases (e.g., multi-generational properties) and property types (mostly single-family homes). - Code Compliance Assistance Fund (Rusty): The fund has collected $1,147,641.50 in fines and owes $1,574,047. A balance of $977,365 was available for grants to property owners for tree removal, vegetation, and debris cleanup. 53 applications were received; 77,995 was spent. Board members questioned why unspent funds do not carry over (funds revert to general fund) and noted difficulties in collecting fines. Staff are working on making the application process easier. - Board Process Overview: Staff presented the detailed timeline from initial inspection, notice, judicial orders, evidence collection, internal reviews, and finally hearings. The board learned that all records must be kept for 10 years due to potential claims. The process includes multiple layers of review and contact with owners. - Organizational Chart Update: A new organizational structure was presented, aligning code compliance, vacant property program, and building standards under Kathy Rodríguez. The board noted growth in staff. - Kathy Rodríguez Report: The board calendar for the rest of 2026 was shared. All nine board seats are filled; five members are newly appointed. Attendance for Panel A was 100%, Panel B 87%. No hearings were rescheduled due to lack of quorum. Rodríguez thanked members for their voluntary service. - Case Statistics (Alice Guajardo): From October 2025 to April 2026, Panel A and Panel B heard a total of 91 cases: 51 dangerous structures, 40 demolitions (30 with penalties, 10 without), and 0 maintenance cases. No emergency demolition hearings were needed (34 emergency demolitions occurred without board action). No appeals were filed. Cases by district: District 1 (17), District 2 (1), District 3 (10), District 4 (5), District 5 (21), District 6 (6), District 7 (6), District 8/9 (0), District 10 (1). Total 91. - Executive Session: The board entered executive session at 11:33 AM and returned at 12:26 PM. No official actions were taken during executive session. Key Outcomes - Deferrals and Ethics Presentation: The board agreed to defer items on the agenda to individual panels. The ethics code presentation will be conducted in individual panels. - Policy Amendment: Board member George Crimes Jr. moved to remove Section M from the board’s Policies and Procedures (specifically Section 8, subsection M). The motion was seconded and passed with a vote of 10–0. The removed item had pertained to property owners’ right to examine materials presented to the board. - Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at approximately 12:30 PM.