Public Meetings - San Antonio, Texas

The San Antonio City Council held a meeting on September 3, 2025, to review the city's Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) policies. The presentation, led by Chief Financial Officer Troy Allen and Director Veronica Garcia, covered both city-initiated and developer-initiated TIRZ, their financial mechanisms, current districts, and contributions to affordable housing, infrastructure, and economic development. Councilmembers discussed TIRZ board representation, affordability requirements, displacement risks, and the need to align TIRZ investments with broader city priorities. Discussion Items Overview of TIRZ Policy - Troy Allen explained that TIRZ are authorized under Chapter 311 of the Texas Tax Code, allowing cities to capture incremental property tax revenue within a designated zone to reinvest in public improvements, affordable housing, and economic development. City-initiated TIRZ are established by council action, while developer-initiated TIRZ involve a private petition and reimbursement for upfront infrastructure costs. - For fiscal year 2025, total TIRZ contributions are approximately $45 million, with 60% going to the general fund and 14% to the land fund. Of that, $37 million is dedicated to city-initiated TIRZ and $8 million to developer-initiated TIRZ. These figures represent about 5% of the city's total general fund revenue. City-Initiated TIRZ Districts - Allen presented nine city-initiated TIRZ districts: Houston Street (established 1999, extended to 2022), Inner City (ends 2035), Brooks City Base (ends 2039), Verano (ends 2039), Mission Drive (ends 2039), Midtown (ends 2041), West Side (ends 2060), Northeast Corridor (ends 2034), and Hemisphere (ends 2037). Each district's financial status and major projects were detailed. - Key projects include: Houston Street TIRZ supporting Mission Ballpark; Inner City TIRZ funding Austin Community Center, Maverick Plaza, La Villita; Brooks City Base TIRZ funneling funds to Brooks Development Authority; Midtown TIRZ supporting San Antonio Zoo, Botanical Gardens, Pearl infrastructure, Brackenridge Park; West Side TIRZ funding CC Expansion, YWCA Learning Center, Market Square; Northeast Corridor TIRZ supporting Morgan's Wonderland and accessible housing. - Financial balances were provided for each TIRZ. For example, Houston Street TIRZ had an ending balance of $6.9 million; Inner City TIRZ showed growth; Midtown TIRZ had a balance of $4 million after $18 million in expenses. Developer-Initiated TIRZ - Veronica Garcia explained that developer-initiated TIRZ allow private entities to propose zones in underutilized areas. The developer funds infrastructure upfront and is reimbursed from the incremental tax revenue over time. Eleven such districts were presented, mostly in Districts 2, 3, and 4. - Projects include: Mission del Lago (2,500 single-family, 520 multi-family units), Lackland Hills (171 single-family), North East Crossing (1,364 single-family, 250 multi-family), Hunter's Pond (425 mixed units), Day Meadows (400 homes with affordability), Neighbors TIRZ (637 single-family, 340 multi-family), Somerset Grove (603 single-family), Valisol (650 single-family), Lone Oak (975 single-family), and Rosillo Creek (5,239 single-family, 67 acres multi-family, plus 50 acres donated to San Antonio Housing Trust). - Reimbursement periods vary from 2028 to 2054, and participation percentages differ (city typically 60-100% of tax increment). Council Discussion and Concerns - Councilmember Munguía praised the TIRZ policy for enabling development in areas lacking infrastructure, especially noting Verano TIRZ's role in creating housing near Palo Alto College and Texas A&M-San Antonio. He asked about inflation adjustments for reimbursements; staff noted that newer TIRZ may account for inflation but older ones do not. - Councilmember Villagran expressed strong support for TIRZ, particularly developer-initiated ones, as they have transformed underserved areas in District 3 (e.g., Brooks, Verano, Mission Drive). He highlighted challenges with coordination among multiple stakeholders in Mission Drive TIRZ. - Councilmember Corr emphasized the value of TIRZ for community amenities like the zoo and botanical gardens, and advocated for using TIRZ funds to support affordable housing and educational access. She suggested creating pilot programs for home rehabilitation in older neighborhoods. - Councilmember Castillo raised concerns about lack of affordable housing in some city-initiated TIRZ (e.g., Houston Street, Midtown, Hemisphere). She noted that only four of thirty projects include affordable units, and called for better representation of councilmembers on TIRZ boards. She also questioned whether TIRZ funds are being used equitably, especially in areas with high poverty. - Councilmember White defended the TIRZ policy as a long-term investment that has yielded significant growth, and supported continuing current practices. - Councilmember Castillo-Indianos (multiple interventions) argued that TIRZ are essential for addressing historical disinvestment in the East Side and South Side, and that removing TIRZ would slow progress on health, education, and housing equity. He urged the council to use TIRZ strategically to benefit vulnerable residents. - Councilmember González asked about ensuring affordability in developer-initiated TIRZ, and was told that developers identify infrastructure costs and the city caps reimbursement. - Councilmember Korr noted that TIRZ funds come from incentivized development, so balancing market-rate and affordable housing is necessary. She suggested using funds from well-performing TIRZ to cross-subsidize affordable housing elsewhere. - Mayor (presiding) clarified that councilmembers can be appointed to TIRZ boards through an ordinance change, and that ultimate approval rests with the full council. He noted that a strategic discussion on TIRZ priorities had not occurred since fall 2021, and that such a conversation would be helpful during upcoming budget talks. Key Outcomes - No formal votes were taken; the meeting served as an informational review and policy discussion. - Staff was directed to provide additional documentation on the number of affordable housing units produced through TIRZ (currently 700 units within city TIRZ, plus 240 home rehabilitation units) and the percentage of total units that are affordable. - Councilmembers requested a breakdown of general fund contributions from TIRZ terminations (four TIRZ closed in the last three years, contributing approximately $1 million total). - The council expressed interest in exploring ways to accelerate return of funds from well-performing TIRZ to the general fund, and in holding a strategic workshop on TIRZ priorities, particularly regarding affordable housing, displacement mitigation, and board representation. - Staff agreed to bring forward a revised plan for Midtown TIRZ and to analyze potential changes to TIRZ policies, including the possibility of requiring affordable housing components or contributions to a housing trust fund from all TIRZ projects. - The meeting was adjourned at 3:47 PM.

The San Antonio Historical and Design Review Commission (HDRC) held a meeting on September 3, 2025, beginning at approximately 3:34 PM. The meeting was conducted in Spanish. Commissioners present: Sabino, Velázquez, Galloway, Mesuca, Ivara, Group, Cervantes, Cohen, Fetzer, and Gibbs. The commission reviewed a consent agenda, heard public comments via voicemail and letters, and deliberated on six individual cases. Consent Calendar - Approved minutes from the August 20, 2025 meeting. - Approved consent agenda items 1 through 10 (with items 4 and 6 pulled for discussion) with all staff stipulations. Approved addresses included: 201 Newell, 22 Wix, 3350 West Commerce 101, West Grayson, 102 Thoring Boulevard, 142 Armor, and others. Public Comments & Testimony - Case 2025-21 (Item 10): Robin Foster, representing the Monticello Neighborhood Association Architectural Review Committee, supported staff recommendations for a new accessory structure and noted the garage should be re-evaluated for functionality. - Case 2025-213, 32 Lamar Street (Item 11): Robin Foster, again on behalf of Monticello, supported a continuous concrete walkway and opposed removal of original fish scale siding. - Case 2025-209, 407 Donaldson Avenue (Item 13): Robin Foster requested an additional stipulation requiring horizontal siding to maintain the Monticello Park character. - Case 232 La Vaca Street (Item 14): The La Vaca Neighborhood Association voiced support for the design based on staff recommendations. Discussion Items - Item 4 (201 Newell, et al.): Applicant Conrad Martínez presented a request for blue tinted reflective glass at a Goodwill site. Commissioners asked about glare impact on drivers and neighbors. The applicant stated the glass matches an adjacent building. Approved with all staff stipulations. Vote: unanimous. - Item 6 (125 Suite Street): Pulled by Commissioner Sabino for clarification on previously completed work (balustrades and columns). Applicant Chris Coker participated virtually. Staff explained the review was for tax certification only, not work approval. Commissioner Sabino noted the balustrade style was unusual but consistent with existing conditions. Approved with staff stipulations. Vote: 8-1 (Sabino dissented). - Item 11 (32 Lamar Street): Applicant not present. Request for a flagstone pedestrian walkway and tax certification for historic designation. Staff recommended approval of tax certification but required a continuous concrete walkway and restoration of original fish scale siding. Voicemail from Guild François (neighborhood review committee) opposed the flagstone walkway. Commissioner Mesuka noted the walkway appeared unsafe. Motion to deny item 1 (walkway as proposed) and approve item 2 (tax certification) with stipulations: replace with continuous concrete and restore fish scale siding. Motion passed unanimously. - Item 12 (2018 San Pedro Avenue): Applicant Faustino Mancha proposed adding a second arch and a front tower to a former restaurant. Staff recommended denial because the alterations would change the mid-century character of the building. Commissioners noted the proposed changes conflicted with the existing period architecture and removed original elements. Applicant indicated openness to working with the commission. Motion to approve staff recommendation (denial) passed unanimously. - Item 13 (407 Donaldson Avenue): Applicant Paul Hunter requested a detached garage. Staff recommended approval with stipulations including double garage doors, horizontal siding, wood garage door matching the wall, and staff review. Commissioner Group asked about horizontal vs. vertical siding; applicant preferred horizontal for cost and historical era. Motion to approve with staff stipulations and an additional stipulation of horizontal siding passed unanimously. - Item 14 (232 La Vaca Street): Applicant Clint Bellou (virtual) sought conceptual approval for a porte-cochere and attached garage. Staff recommended approval with stipulations on height, stucco finish, metal roof, and zoning variance. Applicant agreed, noting the structure height is now one foot lower than the front house. Commissioner Sabino commented the height should be further reduced to not be more prominent than the historical structure. Motion to approve conceptual design with staff stipulations passed unanimously. Key Outcomes - All consent agenda items approved. - Item 4: Approved with staff stipulations. Unanimous. - Item 6: Approved with staff stipulations. Vote: 8-1 (Commissioner Sabino voted no). - Item 11: Denied item 1 (pedestrian walkway as proposed); approved item 2 (tax certification) with stipulations requiring continuous walkway and restoration of fish scale siding. Unanimous. - Item 12: Approved staff recommendation to deny the application for facade alterations. Unanimous. - Item 13: Approved with staff stipulations and additional stipulation of horizontal siding. Unanimous. - Item 14: Approved conceptual design with staff stipulations. Unanimous. - Next steps: Applicants must obtain required permits, comply with stipulations, and work with OHP staff for final certifications. The commission announced a new Preservation Academy educational series on September 20, 2025.

The meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 3, 2025, with a quorum present. The purpose was to discuss tax increment reinvestment zones (TIRZs), both city-initiated and developer-initiated, as part of budget planning and to explore opportunities to strengthen the general fund. Discussion Items - Overview of TIRZs: Chief Financial Officer Troy Elliott and Director of Neighborhood Housing Services Veronica Garcia presented on the structure, types, and financial mechanisms of TIRZs under Chapter 311 of the Texas Tax Code. They explained the difference between city-initiated TIRZs (created by council to support diverse projects) and developer-initiated TIRZs (petition-based, used to reimburse developers for public infrastructure). - FY2025 Contributions: Total city TIRZ contribution for FY2025 is approximately $45 million – $37 million from city-initiated TIRZs and $8 million from developer-initiated TIRZs. This represents about 5% of the total property tax levy of $819 million. - City-Initiated TIRZs: Nine zones were reviewed: Houston Street, Inner City, Brooks City Base, Verano, Mission Drive In, Midtown, West Side, Northeast Corridor, and Hemisphere. Details included establishment dates, termination dates, participating taxing entities, and balances. Notable projects include the Missions Ballpark (Houston Street), ITC property purchase (Midtown), and Hemisphere Park operations (Hemisphere). Several TIRZ plans will need updates due to recent term sheets (sports and entertainment district, missions ballpark). - Developer-Initiated TIRZs: Ten zones were reviewed, all located primarily in Districts 2, 3, and 4. These include Mission del Lago, Lackland Hills, Northeast Crossing, Hunters Pond, Theo Meadows, Neighbors, Somerset Grove, Valley Sole, Lone Oak, and Rosillo Creek. The developer bears upfront costs and is reimbursed from the increment generated. The Rosillo Creek TIRZ, the largest, includes 5,200 single-family homes and 30 acres donated to the San Antonio Housing Trust for affordable housing. - Affordable Housing: Staff reported 721 affordable units produced from city-initiated TIRZs and 2,300 units (54% affordable) from developer-initiated TIRZs. Four developer-initiated TIRZs have been terminated in the past three years, returning about $1.2 million to the general fund. The 2022 TIFF policy requires projects to not cause displacement and to include contributions toward affordable housing, but some recent projects (e.g., downtown sports and entertainment district, missions ballpark) do not include affordable housing components. - Board Representation: Council members discussed the lack of council representation on some city-initiated TIRZ boards (e.g., Brooks City Base, Midtown, Hemisphere). Several council members advocated for having at least one council member on each city-initiated TIRZ board to ensure accountability and alignment with city priorities. City Manager Eric Walsh clarified that adding council members does not require a city ordinance change; it can be done by council appointment. - Equity and Displacement: Council members expressed concerns that TIRZs have historically concentrated wealth in certain areas and produced primarily market-rate housing, while deep affordability needs remain. The displacement impact assessment (DIA) requirement from the 2022 policy will apply to the Hemisphere sports and entertainment district project. - Future Planning: The mayor and council agreed to incorporate TIRZ policy into the broader fall budget strategic conversation, focusing on affordable housing goals, performance measures, and aligning TIRZ investments with city growth plans. Key Outcomes - Staff will provide a breakdown of affordable housing units by AMI (area median income) for city-initiated TIRZs, including pre-2022 and post-2022 policy periods. - Staff will produce documentation explaining why the TIFF policy was not followed in certain projects (e.g., downtown sports district) and how adherence will be ensured moving forward. - Staff will research how other cities use TIRZs and provide comparative analysis. - Council requested the total incremental revenue generated since inception for each city-initiated TIRZ (not just current balances). - The Governance Committee will review potential changes to board composition for city-initiated TIRZs to include council representation. - A longer-term strategic discussion on TIRZ policy, including how to capture some increment for the general fund sooner, will be scheduled as part of the fall budget planning. - The meeting adjourned at 3:46 p.m.

The Historic Design Review Commission (HDRC) convened on Wednesday, September 3, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. with a quorum present. Chair J. Maurice Gibbs and Vice Chair Jeffy Fetzer led the meeting. The commission addressed 14 agenda items, including a consent calendar, public comments via voicemail, and discussions on individual certificates of appropriateness, tax certifications, and conceptual approvals. All decisions were made with staff stipulations where applicable. Consent Calendar - Items 1–10, less items 4 and 6, were approved unanimously with staff stipulations. The consent agenda covered addresses: 201 Newell, 222 WICs, 3350 East Commerce, 109 West Grayson, 102 Thrain, 142 Armor, 135 West Linwood, and 327 Donaldson. A voicemail from Robin Foster (Monticello Park Neighborhood Association) on item 10 (327 Donaldson) expressed concern about the scale and roof line of a proposed accessory structure and the carport’s proximity to the main house, recommending re-evaluation. A letter of support from the King William Association was noted for item 2 (though initially mislabeled as a voicemail). Public Comments & Testimony - Item 10 (327 Donaldson) – Robin Foster, representing Monticello Park Neighborhood Association, voiced opposition to the proposed accessory structure’s scale and carport placement, requesting design revisions. - Item 11 (322 Lamar) – Louis Francois, chair of Dignity Hill Historic Neighborhood Review Committee, opposed the newly installed non‑continuous walkway and noted removal of fish‑scale siding, urging restoration before tax certification. - Item 13 (407 Donaldson) – Robin Foster, again for Monticello Park, supported staff recommendations but requested horizontal lap siding instead of vertical board‑and‑batten. - Item 14 (232 Lavaca) – Melissa Stendhal, representing Lavaca Neighborhood Association, voiced support for the conceptual design with all staff stipulations. Discussion Items - Item 4 (343 West Houston) – Applicant Conrad Martinez (R VK Architecture) requested approval for reflective blue‑tinted glass windows. Commissioner Galloway questioned potential glare impacts; Martinez noted the same glazing used on the Frost Tower across the street. The commission approved the request with staff stipulations. - Item 6 (125 Sweet Street) – Applicant Chris Coker sought tax certification for work completed without prior certificates of appropriateness. Commissioner Savino noted that the front baluster railing assembly was an aberration from historic guidelines. Staff confirmed the work was eligible despite the anomaly. The commission approved the request with staff stipulations; Commissioner Savino dissented, citing the railing design. - Item 11 (322 Lamar) – Applicant absent. Staff recommended denial of the non‑continuous front walkway (charcoal gray pavers with white gravel) and conditional approval of tax certification upon violation remediation. The community also reported removal of fish‑scale siding. Commissioner Group moved to deny item 1 (walkway) and approve item 2 (tax certification) with stipulations that the walkway be replaced with a continuous matching walkway and that all four gables’ fish‑scale siding be restored. Motion carried unanimously. - Item 12 (2018 San Pedro) – Applicant Faustino Mancha proposed modifying the front facade with a stucco arch, window changes, and a front entry tower, which staff found counter to historic guidelines. Commissioner Savino noted the design would erase the building’s mid‑century character. The commission voted to deny the request per staff recommendation, with an invitation for a Design Review Committee (DRC) site visit for alternative designs. Motion carried unanimously. - Item 13 (407 Donaldson) – Applicant Paul Hunter sought approval for a 484‑square‑foot detached rear garage. Staff recommended stipulations including a double‑bay garage door, horizontal lap siding (or board‑and‑batten with specific dimensions), and final garage door specifications. The Monticello Park Neighborhood Association requested horizontal siding. Commissioner Savino argued that horizontal lap siding was more appropriate for the neighborhood’s era. The commission approved with the additional stipulation of horizontal lap siding. Motion carried unanimously. - Item 14 (232 Lavaca) – Applicant Clint Balou requested conceptual approval for a two‑story rear accessory structure with porches and a carport. Staff recommended height/footprint reduction, setback verification, traditional stucco finish, and a 10‑foot driveway width. Balou agreed to all stipulations and had already reduced the height to one foot below the front house. Commissioner Savino suggested further height reduction to better match historic structures. The commission granted conceptual approval with staff stipulations. Motion carried unanimously. Key Outcomes - Consent agenda (items 1–10, less 4 and 6) approved unanimously with staff stipulations. - Item 4 – Approved with staff stipulations. - Item 6 – Approved with staff stipulations (Commissioner Savino voting nay). - Item 11 – Walkway (item 1) denied; tax certification (item 2) approved with stipulations requiring restoration of walkway and fish‑scale siding on all gables. - Item 12 – Denied per staff recommendation; DRC site visit offered. - Item 13 – Approved with stipulations, including horizontal lap siding. - Item 14 – Conceptual approval granted with staff stipulations; final approval required after detailed plans. The meeting adjourned after completing all agenda items.

This was a public hearing held by the San Antonio City Council on September 3, 2025, to receive public input on the proposed budget and property tax rate for fiscal year 2025-2026. The meeting began at an unspecified time and included a presentation by the budget director and testimony from one member of the public. No agenda or minutes were available, but the transcript provided details. Presentation - Cristina Tay, Director of the City of San Antonio Budget, presented the proposed FY2025-2026 budget totaling $4 billion, a 2.2% increase over the previous year. The budget consists of three main components: a General Fund of $1.69 billion (1.6% increase), a Capital Budget of $1.1 billion, and Restricted Funds of $1.2 billion (funds with specific revenue sources). - The proposed property tax rate is 0.545% (54.5 cents per $100 of assessed value), with no increase for the 33rd consecutive year. Despite no rate increase, the city projects a 1.4% increase in property values from the July appraisal district certification. The budget includes $152 million in property tax relief, including $54 million for homestead exemptions and other relief for certain groups. - Tay noted that fee adjustments for food establishments will shift from employee-based to sales-volume-based calculations effective December 1, 2025, to partially recover inspection costs. - This was the first of two public hearings; the second hearing is scheduled for September 11, 2025, and council adoption of the budget and tax rate on September 18, 2025. Public Comments & Testimony - Jack Finger (self-identified taxpayer) expressed opposition to the city’s characterization of no tax rate increase, arguing that property values have risen 2-3% in the past year, effectively raising taxes. He urged the council to reduce the tax rate by 10%. He suggested cutting the Department of Arts and Culture ($13 million budget) and criticized funding for programs promoting sexual content and diversity/inclusion initiatives. He also referenced a previous $21 million deficit and offered to provide suggestions for budget reductions. - No other public speakers were noted; the speaker list initially included John Bachman, but only Jack Finger spoke on record. Key Outcomes - No votes were taken; this was a public hearing for input. The council will hold a second hearing on September 11, 2025, and will consider adopting the FY2025-2026 budget and tax rate on September 18, 2025. - Public comment was officially closed at 5:00 PM (approximate time from transcript).

The San Antonio City Council held a combined public hearing on Wednesday, September 3, 2025, at 5:01 PM to receive public input on the proposed Fiscal Year 2026 budget and property tax rate. The meeting opened with a presentation from Budget Director Jacina Tate, followed by testimony from one registered speaker. The hearing is the first of two such hearings, with the second scheduled for September 11, 2025. Public Comments & Testimony - Jack M. Finger addressed the council, expressing opposition to the claim that taxes had not been raised for 33 years, noting that rising property valuations effectively increased tax burdens. He proposed a 10% tax rate reduction to alleviate burdens. Finger suggested cutting the arts and culture budget (approximately $13 million) and the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) budget, citing objections to funding for the Esperanza Peace and Justice Center, which he accused of promoting “homosexual promotions” and “sex work.” He urged reallocating those funds to other priorities. Discussion Items - Budget Presentation by Jacina Tate (Budget Director): Tate outlined the FY2026 proposed budget of approximately $4 billion, a 2.2% increase over FY2025. The general fund is $1.69 billion (1.6% increase), capital budget $1.1 billion, and restricted funds $1.2 billion. The property tax rate remains unchanged at 54.159 cents per $100 of valuation for the 33rd consecutive year, including exemptions for homesteads, seniors, disabled persons, and child care providers, and a tax freeze for certain individuals. The budget includes $152 million in property tax relief. Tate also noted fee adjustments for food establishments, switching to a gross-volume basis effective December 1, 2025, to partially recover inspection costs. The next public hearing is September 11, 2025, and the budget and tax rate adoption is scheduled for September 18, 2025. Key Outcomes - The public hearing was officially closed at 5:11 PM. The council will hold a second public hearing on Thursday, September 11, 2025, at 9 AM, and formally consider and adopt the FY2026 budget and tax rate on Thursday, September 18, 2025, at 9 AM.

The San Antonio City Council convened a budget work session on Tuesday, September 2, 2025, at 2:00 PM to receive presentations on the proposed Fiscal Year 2026 budgets for the Convention & Sports Facilities Department, the Department of Arts & Culture, and Visit San Antonio. Presentations covered hotel occupancy tax trends, the expansion needs of the Henry B. González Convention Center, deferred capital projects, proposed fee increases, arts funding allocations, and marketing strategies to maintain San Antonio's competitive edge. Consent Calendar - No consent calendar items were presented or voted upon during this work session. Public Comments & Testimony - No public comments or testimony were recorded in the transcript. Discussion Items - Hotel Occupancy Tax Overview: Justina Tate, Budget Director, reported that the city receives 9% of the 16.75% hotel occupancy tax, with 7% allocated to conventions, the Alamo, tourism (Visit San Antonio), historic preservation, and arts/culture. Projected fiscal 2025 collections increased 4% over 2024, attributed to short-term rental compliance. Fiscal 2026 is projected to increase 2.6%. - Convention Center & Alamodome Update: Patricia Moscoso–Cartos presented a 2026 proposed budget of $91.9 million, including $59.2 million for operations, $2.9 million for Visit San Antonio incentives, $1.4 million for the Carver Community Cultural Center from the general fund, $4.4 million for a state reimbursement program, and $23 million in capital projects. The team reported that since 2019, the Convention Center has lost $700 million in potential business due to space constraints. Council members requested written justification for the urgency and costs of the $23.3 million in capital projects, including escalator/elevator replacements ($8.9M), HVAC renovation ($3.9M), and Alamodome upgrades ($3.3M). - Proposed Fee Increases: Staff recommended increasing the Convention Center rental fee by 3% (first increase since 2016, generating $39,000) and raising the ticket access fee from $1–$2 to $3–$5 per ticket (generating $69,500). A $2 per-ticket fee for Ticketmaster was also proposed to exempt events from that system. - Department of Arts & Culture: Director Crystal Jones reported that the arts generate $5.1 billion in economic impact and 20,000 direct jobs. The 2026 proposed budget allocates 65% directly to artists and nonprofits through grants: $6.2 million to 41 agencies, $874,000 to 25 events, and $490,000 to 54 individual artists. Seven new public art dedications are planned; 50 public art projects are in progress through 2028. Crew noted the Executive Office used a $300 million state film incentive and a local 7.5% rebate on local spending. Councilmember Munguía and others requested district-level data on where arts funds are invested and how to better connect residents to arts resources outside the central core. - Visit San Antonio (VSA): Mario Paz reported 39 million visitors in 2024 (equal to pre‑pandemic levels), including 2.3 million international visitors (up 15% from 2023). The 2023 economic impact was a record $21.5 billion. VSA booked 127 contracts with local artists. Staff explained that for every $1 provided to VSA, $33 in economic impact is generated (Trinity University study). Council members questioned the potential loss of convention market share to Dallas, Austin, and Houston, which are investing billions in expansions. The mayor set a goal to outcompete Chicago and Phoenix for convention business. - River Walk Infrastructure & New RFP: Councilmember Munguía raised concerns about outdated infrastructure, trash, odor, and a pending Request for Proposals for a 10–15 year River Walk contract. The City Manager agreed to bring the RFP discussion to the full council before finalization. - Alamodome Capital Projects & Major Events: Councilmember Core noted that a 33% increase in projected revenue from Fiscal 2025 to 2026 is driven by adding two major concerts (from five to seven). Councilmember Villagran confirmed that the Alamodome has only 49 available event dates left to sell in 2025. Key Outcomes - Council requested a written analysis of the $23.3 million capital projects, including justification for urgency and costs, and a breakdown of which projects could be deferred or canceled. - Council asked for a comparative memorandum on hotel occupancy tax rates and occupancy rates in other Texas markets. - Council requested district-by-district data on arts funding, attendance, and economic impact. - Council asked for a written analysis of the potential economic impact of the Convention Center expansion, including year-by-year projections and how the 33‑to‑1 return ratio is calculated. - Council asked for data on the demographics of the 150,000 hospitality workers, including their home districts and mode of transportation. - The City Manager committed to bringing the River Walk RFP update to the council before finalizing. - Staff agreed to explore a visitor information center partnership with the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce. - No formal votes were taken; the session was a pre‑budget discussion to inform the final Fiscal 2026 proposal.

The San Antonio Zoning Commission met on September 2, 2025, at 1:02 PM, chaired by John Bustamante. The meeting covered the consent agenda, continuances, and four individual hearing items. Key actions included approval of several zoning amendments, a continuance, and a denial of a conditional use for a boarding home for foster youth. Three new commissioners were welcomed. Consent Calendar - Items 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15 were approved by a single motion. These included: - Amendments to Chapter 35 (Unified Development Code) to conform to state law from the 89th Texas Legislative Session. - Rezonings at: 11625 Old Corpus Christi Road (to MXD, 25 units/acre); 2512 SW Loop 410 (to C-2 CD with conditional use for lumber yard); 3218 Thousand Oaks Drive (to C-2 CD with conditional use for auto body repair with storage, screened from public view). - Public comment included a voicemail from Sarah Jones expressing concern about lack of time to review and insufficient information on the change. Public Comments & Testimony - Item 5 (334 Como Street): Neighborhood residents opposed the rezoning for a boarding home for eight foster youth (ages 18–23). Renee Watson (Coliseum Willow Park Neighborhood Association) argued the use is a "shared housing concept" different from a boarding home, raised concerns about density, square footage, parking, and saturation of similar homes (at least 10 in the area). She expressed willingness to support six residents but not eight. Other speakers echoed concerns about impact on seniors, safety, and lack of track record. - Supporters, including the applicant Ian Riles and his business partner Quarmetra Hughes, highlighted the program's structured supervision, job training, and alignment with DFPS regulations. Robin Hill, a nurse with 20 years of group home experience, argued the stigma against foster youth is unfair. Discussion Items - Item 4 (4211 Boxwood Road): Request to rezone from R-20 to R-6 CD (conditional use for two dwelling units) – later amended to straight R-6 for single-family. Applicant Elizabeth Russell mailed 13 letters; no responses received. Commissioner Hinojosa asked about outreach. The amendment removed the conditional use. Staff supported consistency with Strategic Housing Implementation Plan. Motion to approve as amended passed unanimously. - Item 5 (334 Como Street): Request to rezone from R-4 to R-4 CD for a boarding home with up to eight residents for foster youth transitioning to adulthood. Staff recommended approval. The neighborhood association opposed eight but accepted six. Applicant explained the program (supervised independent living), planned renovations, and parking. After extensive questions, Commissioner Losef moved to approve; motion failed 2–9. A motion to reconsider passed, then a motion to deny passed 9–2. The recommendation is denial. - Item 10 (1915 Pleasanton Road): Request to rezone from C-2 NA to C-2 NA CD for a tattoo parlor. Applicant Sandro Diaz confirmed no minors, ID enforcement, and covered windows. Staff recommended approval. Motion to approve passed unanimously. - Item 13 (4031 South Flores Street): Request to rezone from RM-4 to RM-4 CD for a tobacco/retail store (CBD, tobacco, cafe). Applicant Max Moscovich, also attorney and owner, explained he wants to keep residential base zoning. The tenant runs two other professional shops. Commissioner Hinojosa had questions about products and hours. Staff confirmed that non-residential uses in residential districts have restrictions: no exterior signage except a small nameplate, hours 7 AM to 6 PM. Commissioner Sipes proposed a friendly amendment to prohibit temporary signs, wind banners, pennants, and snipe signs; accepted. Motion to approve as amended passed unanimously. Key Outcomes - Consent Agenda approved by roll call vote (11–0). - Item 4 approved as amended (11–0). - Item 5 denied (9–2). The applicant may appeal to City Council within six months; Commissioner Bustamante encouraged continued neighborhood dialogue. - Item 10 approved (11–0). - Item 13 approved with friendly amendment (11–0). - Continuances: Item 8 continued to September 16, 2025 (approved 11–0); Item 3 continued to October 7, 2025 (approved 11–0). - Meeting adjourned at 3:01 PM.

The San Antonio City Council held a budget workshop on September 2, 2025, beginning at 9:00 AM and concluding at 12:39 PM after an executive session. The meeting focused on the proposed Fiscal Year 2026 budgets for the Airport System (SAT and Stinson) and Development Services (DSD). Council members discussed growth, capital projects, fee adjustments, and community programs, with no formal votes taken during this workshop. Discussion Items - Airport Budget (SAT & Stinson): Airport Director Jesús presented the FY2026 proposed budget. Key points include a 4% growth in operations to $69.4 million, a capital program of $648 million, and an $86.3 million non-aeronautical revenue projection (up from $65 million in 2019). Passenger numbers are expected to reach 11.3 million in 2026, up from 11.1 million in 2025 and 9.1 million in 2024. The airport’s economic impact grew from $5 billion to $7 billion since 2017. New nonstop destinations include 11 in Mexico (a 95% increase from 2019), with a total of 48 nonstop destinations. The terminal expansion will add 18 gates and 900,000 square feet, with a guaranteed maximum price expected at 90% design. The airport received $272 million in grants since 2020, including $87.3 million for FY2026. Parking improvements include frictionless entry/exit (reducing wait times from 2 minutes to 2 seconds) and a reserved military lane. Concessions will feature local brands like BBQ, Panda Express, and Rosario. A senior assistance program for disabled travelers was highlighted. - Development Services Budget: Director Alinton presented the DSD budget of $63.3 million, with $18.5 million from the general fund and $48.8 million from the enterprise fund. A 7% reduction in permit activity is anticipated, leading to 48 frozen positions (vacancies not filled). The department processed 373 new residential permits and 18,700 in-person transactions. Building inspections met 99% of on-time goals, with 210,000 inspections year-to-date. Code enforcement closed 90% of cases within 45 days, and 62,598 graffiti locations were cleaned. Short-term rentals: 3,278 registered, with 82% compliance after enforcement. Street lighting: $2 million proposed for FY2026 to install 2,000 lights (solar at $8,500–$10,000 each), but 3,241 lights remain unfunded. Fee increases were proposed for vacant properties ($50 to $500), metal recycling permits ($1,000), and dangerous premises cleanup ($200–$250). A $100,000 senior assistance program completed 57 homes. Proactive apartment inspections covered 61,000 units, with 49 violations; 25 properties remain in the program. Public Comments & Testimony - Councilmembers expressed support and raised concerns: Councilmember Castilla Anguiano thanked the code enforcement team and supported fee increases for vacant properties and metal recycling. Councilmember Villagran praised airport progress, requested a San Antonio-themed store and souvenirs, and emphasized historic preservation at Stinson. Councilmember White questioned permit processing times (commercial: 209 days; residential: 15 days) and urged efficiency. Councilmember Castillo supported expanding the senior assistance program and increasing street lighting funding. Councilmember Spears expressed support for the airport's non-aeronautical revenue and requested data on local business contracting goals. Councilmember González asked about coordination with CPS and flood control, and supported more street lighting. Councilmember Bungía supported the airport’s work and requested a breakdown of vacant DSD positions. Councilmember Galván commended the airport team and asked about hotel tax collection from short-term rentals. Councilmember Alberte Gabeto supported the fee increases and noted the SOS program for code violations. Councilmember Core suggested using community safety funds for lighting and advocated for strategic placement near schools and bus stops. Mayor Jones noted the importance of maintaining the general fund and highlighted the airport’s resilience (second in Texas only to Dallas-Fort Worth). Key Outcomes - No formal votes were taken; the meeting was a budget workshop. Council directives included: 1) Staff will explore additional funding for street lighting, potentially using the community safety fund. 2) DSD will provide a breakdown of the 48 frozen positions and their impact on services. 3) The airport will share monthly reports on local and small business contracting goals. 4) Council requested improved communication between 311 and code enforcement case tracking. 5) The executive session from 11:30 AM to 12:38 PM covered economic development and legal matters under Texas Government Code Section 551.001; no action was taken. 6) The meeting adjourned at 12:39 PM.