Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:49]

>> GOOD MORNING.

IF YOU WILL PLEASE BE SEATED, WE'RE GETTING READY TO START THE MEETING.

IF YOU WILL PLEASE BE SEATED, WE'RE READY TO START THE MEETING.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.

IF WE COULD HAVE YOU TAKE YOUR SEATS, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.

WE HAVE A VERY LONG AGENDA TODAY.

>> THE JUNE 21ST REGULAR MEETING.

>> MAYOR, WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: GOOD

[1. Invocation]

MORNING.

GOOD MORNING, MR. LITTLEFIELD.

I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMAN TREVINO, TO WELCOME OUR INVOCATOR.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AND THIS MORNING I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME AND PLEASE CALL UP DR.

BART ROUSH.

HE IS A PASTOR OF MADISON SQUARE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN SAN ANTONIO.

BART BEGAN SERVING MADISON SQUARE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN THE FALL OF 2013 HAVING PREVIOUSLY SERVED A CHURCH OUTSIDE CHICAGO, NILS ILLINOIS FOR TEN YEARS.

BEYOND MADISON SQUARE HE SERVES THE WIDER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH BY SERVING THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON COMMITTEE FOR EXAMINATION.

BART ALSO TAKES AN ACTIVE ROLE IN THE COMMUNITY OF SAN ANTONIO.

RECENTLY MODERATING THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY DISTRICT ATTORNEY DEBATE SERVING IN LEADERSHIP FOR THE SAN ANTONIO SPONSORING COMMITTEE, AND INTERFAITH INSTITUTION-BASED ORGANIZATION WORKING FOR THE COMMON GOOD OF SAN ANTONIO.

AND SITTING ON THE BOARD OF THE CLASSIC THEATER OF SAN ANTONIO.

BART IS MOST PROUD TO BE A HUSBAND AND THE FATHER OF TWO ADOLESCENT BOYS.

WELCOME, REVEREND BART ROUSH.

>> ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE OF MADISON SQUARE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE PRIVILEGE TO OPEN TODAY'S COUNCIL MEETING WITH AN INVOCATION.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCILMAN TREVINO, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THE INVITATION.

WHATEVER YOUR TRADITION I INVITE YOU INTO THIS TIME OF INVOCATION.

LET US PRAY.

GOD OF ALL CREATION, WE THANK YOU FOR THIS DAY AND THE MANY BLESSINGS WE HAVE RECEIVED.

WE PAUSE BEFORE THE WORK OF THIS DAY TO CONFESS, TO GIVE THANKS, TO SHARE OUR HOPES AND TO PRAY FOR OUR CITY AND ALL IN CITY LEADERSHIP.

WE CONFESS THE WAYS WE HAVE BECOME WEARY AND WORN BY A POLITICAL PROCESS MORE OFTEN MARKED BY VENOM THAN BY GRACE.

GIVE US LISTENING EARS AND THOUGHTFUL WORDS.

WE CONFESS OUR PARTICIPATION IN OUR NATIONAL IDOLATRY OF GUNS AND THE STRANGLE HOLD OF VIOLENCE IN OUR COMMUNITY.

WE CONFESS THE WAYS WE GROW TOO RESIGNED TO THE WAY THINGS ARE AND SYSTEMS THAT REFUSE TO CHANGE.

GIVE US COURAGE AND OPEN HEARTS.

IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS HOLY, SAVE US FROM WEAK RESIGNATION, REMIND US OF OUR POWER TO SEEK THE WELFARE OF THIS CITY FOR ALL WHO LIVE HERE AND TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TO SETTLE FOR THE WAY THINGS ARE.

WE PRAY FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THIS CITY.

FOR ALL THOSE SEEKING FULL MEANINGFUL EMPLOYMENT, WE PRAY FOR FAIR WORK THAT PAYS A FAIR AND LIVABLE WAGE.

FOR ALL THOSE SEEKING EDUCATION, WE PRAY FOR POWERFUL TEACHERS AND WELL EQUIPPED SCHOOLS, NO MATTER THE ZIP CODE.

FOR ALL SEEKING SAFE, CLEAN, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE PRAY.

FOR ALL SEEKING ADEQUATE MENTAL AND PHYSICAL HEALTH CARE, WE PRAY.

FOR ALL OF THOSE WHO PROTECT AND SERVE OUR CITY, WE PRAY.

WE PRAY FOR THE IMMIGRANT AND STRANGER IN OUR MIDST.

HELP US TO RECOGNIZE ALL AS YOUR CHILDREN, WORTHY AND PRECIOUS.

IN THIS MONTH OF PRIDE, HELP US TO REMEMBER THAT SO MANY IN THE

[00:05:04]

LGBTQI COMMUNITY STILL LIVE ON THE MARGINS AND HAVE BEEN SHUNNED BY SEGMENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY IN WORKPLACES, ACCOMMODATIONS, AND HOUSES OF WORSHIP.

WE PRAY FOR A DAY WHEN ALL ARE WELCOME.

WE PRAY THAT WE MAY LIVE INTO THE HOPES AND DREAMS OF TRULY BEING A COMPASSIONATE CITY.

WE PRAY THAT GOVERNMENT, RELIGIOUS, AND VOLUNTEER ORGANIZATIONS, BUSINESSES, AND THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE DO EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER TO COME TOGETHER TO ACHIEVE THOSE GOALS.

THAT SAN ANTONIO BE KNOWN AS A CITY OF COMPASSION.

HOLY ONE, WE ASK THAT YOU MOVE IN THE WORK OF THIS CITY COUNCIL.

MAY EVERY DECISION THAT IS MADE, EVERY PHONE CALL PICKED UP, EVERY E-MAIL RESPONDED TO BE DONE WITH A GENEROSITY OF SPIRIT.

REMIND THEM THAT THEY ARE NOT ONLY LEADERS BUT ALSO SERVANTS WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SERVE THE COMMON GOOD OF ALL.

GRANT THEM AND US THE WISDOM AND COURAGE TO KNOW AND DO WHAT IS RIGHT AND GOOD AND TRUE.

MAY THEY AND WE SPEAK OUT WHEN IT'S TIME TO SPEAK OUT.

AND LISTEN PATIENTLY AND RECEPTIVELY WHEN IT'S TIME TO LISTEN.

MAY THEY AND WE ALWAYS BE GUIDED BY THE SPIRIT OF COMMUNITY, THE SPIRIT OF JUSTICE, AND THE SPIRIT OF LOVE.

REMIND US OF THE TRUTH OF JEREMIAH THAT IN THE WELFARE OF THE CITY WE WILL FIND OUR OWN WELFARE.

IN ALL WE DO AND ALL WE SAY, MAY WE SEEK THE WELFARE OF THIS CITY.

MAY IT BE SO.

AMEN.

[2. Pledge of Allegiance]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, PASTOR.

WE HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT FOR TRANSLATION SERVICES.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

[3. Approval of Minutes for the City Council Special Meeting of May 30, 2018 and the Regular Meeting of May 31, 2018]

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WE BEGIN WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 30.

AND THE MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 31ST.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 30 AND 31.

PLEASE VOTE.

[Additional Item 1]

MOTION CARRIES.

AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE OUR COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMAN SALDANA, WHO WILL PRESENT AN OFFICIAL COMMENDATION.

>> SALDANA: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

GOOD MORNING.

AS SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED, WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE WORLD'S FINEST NAVY WITH US IN THE CHAMBERS.

SOME SAILORS OF WHICH HAVE COME TOGETHER TO HONOR AND RECOGNIZE ONE OF THEIR OWN.

I THINK YOU ARE GOING TO BE BLOWN AWAY BY THE STORY THAT I AM ABOUT TO TELL YOU ABOUT ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUALS WHO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS A CIVILIAN, IF YOU CAN CALL HIM THAT, DEFINED THE TERM HERO.

AND SO WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO READ THE RECOGNITION OF THE HEROIC EFFORTS OF PETTY OFFICER SHELTON CARTER.

THIS IS COMING FROM AN E-MAIL I GOT LAST WEEK FROM CHIEF IGLESIAS.

ON JUNE 9, 2018, PETTY OFFICER SHELTON CARTER WENT TO THE RESCUE OF A WOMAN WHO WAS BEING ROBBED IN THE PARKING LOT OF THE WALMART IN MY DISTRICT.

HE TACKLED A YOUNG MAN ATTEMPTING TO TAKE AWAY A WOMAN'S PURSE.

OFFICER SHELTON WAS THEN ASSAULTED BY SIX OF THE ASSAILANT'S ACCOMPLICES.

OFFICER CARTER SUSTAINED SCRATCHING AND BRUISING.

HE WAS ABLE TO SAVE THE WOMAN'S PURSE FROM BEING STOLEN AND OF COURSE THE WOMAN, AND HE REMAINED WITH HER UNTIL THE SAN ANTONIO POLICE ARRIVED.

SO ON BEHALF OF A GRATEFUL CITIZENRY, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO OFFICIALLY COMMENDS PETTY OFFICER SHELTON CARTER FOR HIS ACT OF BRAVERY AND THIS AWARD OF HEROISM IS PRESENTED AS A TOKEN OF OUR APPRECIATION.

>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.

MY NAME IS SHELTON CARTER.

I'M ORIGINALLY FROM NORTH

[00:10:01]

CAROLINA.

CURRENTLY I AM ON ORDERS HERE IN TEXAS IN SAN ANTONIO.

I'M GOING TO TRY TO MAKE THIS AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE, BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY ON BEHALF OF EVERYONE THAT'S HERE, THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS ALL TOGETHER.

IT'S AN HONOR TO BE HERE THIS MORNING AND TO SEE ALL OF YOU.

I NEVER COULD HAVE IMAGINED I WOULD BE IN A POSITION LIKE THIS TO TALK TO ALL OF YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR AWARDING ME FOR SOMETHING I BELIEVE I WAS JUST TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THAT WAS RIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR THIS AWARD.

I APPRECIATE IT.

GOD BLESS EVERY ONE OF YOU.

[APPLAUSE]

>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF THE NAVY FOR TAKING THE TIME TO RECOGNIZE OUR SHIPMATE AND THANK YOU FOR MAKING AND KEEPING SAN ANTONIO A WELCOMING CITY TO EVERYONE IN THE MILITARY, TO EVERYONE THAT SERVES IN THE MILITARY.

WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SALDANA, FOR YOUR QUICK RESPONSE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I WILL RECOGNIZE NOW FELLOW NAVY OFFICER COUNCILMAN SHAW.

>> SHAW: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I WAS NEVER A COMMISSIONED OFFICER, I WAS ALWAYS ENLISTED.

I'M PROUD OF THAT ENLISTED.

BUT A SHIPMATE, I'M NOT SURPRISED.

I KNOW WHAT THE NAVY CAN DO.

I SERVED EIGHT YEARS AND I'M PROUD OF WHAT YOU HAVE DONE.

NOT ONLY FOR THE NAVY BUT FOR OUR COMMUNITY, FOR THOSE WHO YOU SERVE.

LIKE I SAID, GREAT MISTAKES DOESN'T MAKE MISTAKES.

THEY TRAINED YOU WELL.

THANK YOU FOR REPRESENTING OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR UNITED STATES NAVY AS THE BEST IT CAN BE.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SHAW.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU, OFFICER, ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY AS WELL.

BECAUSE IT TAKES PEOPLE LIKE YOU TO STEP UP AND TAKE ACTION WHEN THEY SEE SOMETHING WRONG.

AND EVEN WITH YOUR SAFETY IN PERIL YOU STILL STEPPED UP AND YOU TOOK ACTION WHEN YOU SAW SOMETHING WRONG HAPPENING.

SO I WANT TO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR DOING THAT AND BEING A GREAT REPRESENTATIVE FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND FOR OUR NATION.

THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: YES, THANK YOU, SIR.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS IS INDICATIVE OF OUR MILITARY.

YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.

THE MILITARY, WE DON'T RUN AWAY FROM HAZARDS AND THINGS THAT SHOULD BE DONE.

WE RUN TOWARDS IT.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR TAKING THAT ACTION AND IT SETS AN EXAMPLE FOR EVERYBODY ELSE TO FOLLOW.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE IT.

[APPLAUSE]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OFFICER CARTER, WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL FOR YOU.

WELCOME TO SAN ANTONIO.

I THINK YOU'LL FIND IN YOUR TIME HERE AND OUR CITY THERE ARE, IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS, THERE ARE VICTIMS, THERE ARE BYSTANDERS, AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO COME TO SOMEONE'S AID.

WE ARE A CITY FULL OF THE THIRD KIND OF PEOPLE.

THANK YOU FOR BEING A GREAT SAN ANTONIAN.

CONGRATULATIONS.

>> THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE]

[Consent Agenda]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MY COLLEAGUES IF THERE ARE ANY ITEMS WHICH THEY WOULD LIKE TO PULL FROM THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

LET ME GO AHEAD AND RECOGNIZE FOLKS.

I'LL BEGIN WITH COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: I WANT TO PULL ITEMS 26, 32, 33, AND 44.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMAN SHAW.

>> SHAW: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I'LL BE PULLING 55 FOR RECUSAL PURPOSES.

I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT 37.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

ANYONE ELSE? COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: 48.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

>> BROCKHOUSE: MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL 45.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: AT THIS TIME I HAVE ITEMS NO. 26, 32, 33, 44, 55, 37, 45, AND 48 PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

[00:15:06]

26, 32, 33, 44, 45, 48, AND 55.

ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA SAVE FOR THOSE ITEMS AS READ.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THERE IS ONE CITIZEN SIGNED UP FOR THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT.

JACK FINGER.

>> WELL, MAYOR NIRENBERG AND OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR ILLUSTRIOUS SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL.

FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS JACK M. FINGER.

YES.

A FEW ITEMS I WISH TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION AT THIS PORTION OF THE AGENDA.

AND ONE OF THEM IS ITEM 44, RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE INCLUSION OF A CITIZENSHIP QUESTION IN THE 2020 CENSUS.

YOU'RE OPPOSING A QUESTION IN OUR AMERICAN CENSUS ASKING A PERSON IF THEY ARE A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES? WHY? I MEAN, THE REASON THIS WAS INCLUDED IS BECAUSE, YES, THE QUESTION IS MEANT TO PROTECT VOTING RIGHTS.

YOU ARE FOR VOTING RIGHTS, AREN'T YOU? HA, HA.

BUT, NO, I MEAN PLEASE TELL ME WHAT DO WE HAVE TO HIDE? WHY ARE WE OPPOSING ASKING A PERSON IF THEY ARE A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES? I MEAN, YOU SAY IT'S BECAUSE OF UNDERACCOUNTING AND WE CAN'T GET THE BENEFIT FROM THE FEDS THAT WE SHOULD BE GETTING.

REALLY? WELL, JUST MAYBE COULD IT BE THR THE QUESTION MIGHT BE, OH, ILLEGAL ALIENS? WELL, I SHOULDN'T USE SUCH A POLITICALLY INCORRECT TERM.

I'LL JUST USE UNDOCUMENTED DEMOCRATS.

YES.

SO, YEAH, THAT'S OUR SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL FOR YOU.

OTHER ITEMS I WISH TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION.

ITEM 43.

NOPE.

42.

IT'S ABOUT AGREEING WITH VISIT SAN ANTONIO INCREASING THE HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FOR OUR VISITORS TO SAN ANTONIO.

PLEASE TELL ME, YOU KNOW, THE BACK UP DOCUMENTS SAY THAT WE HAVE SEEN A RECENT SHARE OF OUR ROOM NIGHT DEMAND DECREASE.

COULD BY CHANCE POSSIBLY OUR ROOM NIGHT DECREASE FOLKS HAVE BEEN DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE HAVE AMONG THE HIGHEST, THE MYSELF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX IN THE STATE, IF NOT THE ENTIRE NATION AT 16% PLUS? YEAH.

THAT'S HOW MUCH VISITORS HAVE TO PAY.

AND YOU WANT TO INCREASE IT EVEN MORE? DID IT EVER OCCUR TO YOU THAT JUST MAYBE YOU MIGHT BE LOSING MONEY IF WE ADDED MORE TAXES TO OUR CUSTOMERS WHO COME HERE TO SAN ANTONIO? YEAH.

WHY DON'T YOU TAKE THE MONEY WE ALREADY MAKE AND SPEND IT ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN OUR PRO HOMOSEXUAL ARTS AGENCIES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU.

DR. FREDERICK PRESTON IS SIGNED UP FOR AN ITEM THAT STAYED ON CONSENT.

DR. PRESTON, ARE YOU AVAILABLE?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE RIVERVIEW OWNERS ASSOCIATION.

AND I'M HERE TO MAKE VERY BRIEF COMMENTS ON ITEM 25A, B, AND C, WHICH WERE NOT FOR OR OPPOSED TO BUT HAVE A CONCERN RELATED TO THAT.

AND WE THOUGHT THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO EXPRESS THAT CONCERN TO THE COUNCIL AND THE CITY.

THAT CONCERN RELATES TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A PROJECT OR THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE IN TERMS OF AN EXTENSION OF THE GARAGE.

WE ARE IN GENERAL SUPPORT OF

[00:20:02]

CORPORATIONS LIKE USAA MOVING DOWNTOWN.

AND WE REALIZE THE BENEFIT.

HOWEVER, ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES FOR US WITH REGARDS TO THE VOLUME OF CONSTRUCTION DOWNTOWN HAS BEEN THE LEVEL OF NOISE, AND PARTICULARLY VIOLATIONS OF THE CITY'S NOISE ORDINANCE.

IN PARTICULAR, A FEW MONTHS AGO WE HAD A PROBLEM WITH USAA'S CONSTRUCTION WORK THAT HAD TO DO WITH REPAIRING A ROOF AND SOME REMODELING WORK THAT RESULTED IN A HUGE AMOUNT OF NOISE WAKING ALL OUR OWNERS FOR SEVERAL DAYS AT 4:00 A.M. IN THE MORNING.

IN FOLLOWING UP WITH USAA ABOUT THE PROBLEM, UNFORTUNATELY, DID NOT RESULT IN A CESSATION OF THE PROBLEM.

AGAIN, I'M HERE TO ASK THE COUNCIL AND THE CITY TO DO ITS PART IN MAKING SURE THAT OUR NOISE ORDINANCE DOWNTOWN, IN PARTICULAR THIS PROJECT, TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT FOR THOSE OF US WHO LIVE DOWNTOWN AND THE COUNCIL WE AGREE HAS EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO HAVE MORE PEOPLE LIVING DOWNTOWN.

A GOAL AS WELL SHOULD BE TO KEEP THEM DOWNTOWN.

AND KEEPING THEM DOWNTOWN MEANS THAT WE MAKE SURE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IS ONE IN WHICH IS APPROPRIATE FOR THOSE LIVING DOWNTOWN.

SO, AGAIN, I EXPRESSED THAT CONCERN.

HOPEFULLY THE COUNCIL AND, IN PARTICULAR, OUR CITY OFFICIALS TAKE THAT TO HEART AND DO WHAT IT CAN IN THE FUTURE TO MAKE SURE WITH CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS SUCH AS THIS.

THE RIVERVIEW IS RIGHT ACROSS THE RIVER FROM USAA, TO MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT AWOKEN AT 4:00 A.M. IN THE MORNING.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, DR. PRESTON.

TERRY BURNS.

>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS TERRY BURNS.

I'M A RETIRED PHYSICIAN IN AUDIO].

WITH SOME REQUESTED AMENDMENTS.

WE APPRECIATE SAN ANTONIO'S CONTINUED LEADERSHIP IN ADOPTING ENERGY EFFICIENT CODES.

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WAS THE FIRST MAJOR CITY IN TEXAS TO ADOPT THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODES.

AT THAT TIME, THE SIERRA CLUB LOBBIED FOR INCLUSION OF SOLAR-READY LANGUAGE FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION.

THIS LANGUAGE IS OPTIONAL, NOT REQUIRED.

AND UNFORTUNATELY THE 2018 UPDATES YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU STILL MAKE SOLAR-READY CONSTRUCTION OPTIONAL.

THIS IS A TERRIBLE MISSED OPPORTUNITY, WHICH I URGE YOU TO CORRECT.

THOUSANDS OF HOUSING UNITS HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED SINCE 2015 WITHOUT INCLUDING SOLAR-READY FEATURES.

WE URGE YOU TO REQUIRE THESE TO BE INCLUDED.

THE CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PROCESS WILL REQUIRE US TO ABANDON FOSSIL FUELS BY 2030 IF WE ARE TO HAVE ANY CHANCE TO MEET PARIS GOALS.

WE NEED AGGRESSIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMUNITY SOLAR.

WE MUST FIND WAYS TO OVERCOME THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUES A SOLAR REQUIREMENT MIGHT RAISE SO WE CAN EXPAND SOLAR INFRASTRUCTURE.

HOUSTON HAS ALREADY DONE THIS AS WELL AS AUSTIN, SEGUIN, LOUISVILLE, CORINTH.

WE NEED TO FOLLOW THESE LEADERS.

SIMILARLY THE CODES SHOULD INCLUDE REQUIREMENTS FOR EV CHARGING READINESS.

VEHICLES ARE OUR MAIN GREENHOUSE EMISSION SOURCE HERE IN SAN ANTONIO AND WE NEED RAPID AND BROAD DEPLOYMENT OF ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE TO IMPROVE OUR OZONE AS WELL AS OUR PARIS GOALS.

WE OPPOSE DELAYING THE 90% HIGHER EFFICIENCY RATING FOR LIGHTING FOR 18 MONTHS.

THE MANUFACTURERS ARE ALREADY MAKING THESE LIGHT SYSTEMS AND THEY ARE COST-EFFECTIVE AND A DELAY WILL JUST MEAN PAYING FOR LESS EFFICIENT SYSTEMS. IN FACT, WE WOULD RECOMMEND YOU GO TO 100% HIGH EFFICIENCY LIGHTING, AND CERTAINLY ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE 100%.

SOME OTHER QUESTIONS ARE QUESTIONABLE.

THE NEW EARTH AND CONSTRUCTION LANGUAGE IS APPRECIATED.

OUR DETAILED COMMENTS WERE E-MAILED TO YOU EARLIER THIS WEEK.

[00:25:02]

I HOPE YOU HAVE ALL HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THEM.

WE ARE IN GENERAL SUPPORT OF THESE UPDATES BUT STRONGLY URGE LANGUAGE REQUIRING SOLAR-READY FEATURES, ELECTRIC VEHICLE-READY FEATURES, AND NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION AND COMMERCIAL WHERE POSSIBLE.

WE URGE MAINTENANCE OF THE 90% LIGHTING EFFICIENCY PUSHED TO 100%.

THESE WILL CONTRIBUTE IMPORTANTLY TO OUR CLIMATE ACTION PLANS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. BURNS.

RUSTY WALLACE.

>> GOOD MORNING.

MY NAME IS RUSTY WALLACE.

I'M THE AREA MANAGING DIRECTOR FOR OMNI HOTELS HERE IN TOWN.

I'M ALSO THE SITTING PRESIDENT OF THE VISIT SAN ANTONIO BOARD AND A PAST PRESIDENT OF THE SAN ANTONIO HOTEL LODGING ASSOCIATION.

BEHIND ME ARE A GROUP OF PEOPLE.

THEY ARE THERE.

THAT'S GOOD.

MUCH MORE DISTINGUISHED THAN MYSELF FROM THE STATE HOTEL ASSOCIATION, THE LOCAL ASSOCIATION, THE TOURISM COUNCIL.

HAVE I FORGOTTEN ANYBODY? CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND VISIT SAN ANTONIO BOARD.

I THINK AS A HOTELIER AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, I CAN SPEAK FROM BOTH SIDES.

YOUR APPROVAL MOVING ON TO THE HOTEL COMMUNITY FOR THEIR VOTE IS AN IMPORTANT NEEDED STEP FOR SAN ANTONIO.

THESE GROUPS, THESE FOLKS BEHIND ME HAVE DONE EXTENSIVE RESEARCH ON THE CONCEPT OF A TPID AND HOW IT WORKS.

WE HAVE FOUND IT WORKS IN OTHER COMMUNITIES AND IT WILL WORK IN SAN ANTONIO.

ON BEHALF OF THE HOTEL INDUSTRY, THE TOURISM INDUSTRY, AND VISIT SAN ANTONIO BOARD, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH APPROVING THE TPID FOR SAN ANTONIO.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. WALLACE.

ALL RIGHT.

THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH IS ALL ITEMS -- COUNCILMAN SHAW.

>> SHAW: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I JUST WANT TO TAKE THIS BRIEF OPPORTUNITY TO HIGHLIGHT THE APPOINTMENTS OF THE NEW MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES.

AS MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES ARE AWARE THAT WE HAD SOME NEW POSITIONS COME AVAILABLE.

JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, THAT WE REAPPOINTED ALL NINE CURRENT JUDGES.

WE HIRED ONE NEW FULL-TIME AND THREE PART-TIME.

I BELIEVE ONE PART-TIMER IS HERE, THE REST ARE CURRENTLY WORKING IN THE COURTHOUSE.

BUT IF ANY OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES ARE HERE, DO YOU MIND PLEASE STANDING? I THOUGHT I SAW ONE OF THEM.

MR. JAVIER ROCHA, ONE OF THE PART-TIME.

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, SIR.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW AS WELL AS YOUR COLLEAGUES AS WELL AS THOSE ARE HERE AND WATCHING THAT MUNICIPAL COURT, THOSE JUDGES ARE USUALLY THE FIRST CONTACT THAT MANY OF OUR CONSTITUENTS FACE IN DEALING WITH THE COURT SYSTEM.

SO WE REALLY WANT TO EMPHASIZE CUSTOMER SERVICE, PROFESSIONALISM, AND THE ABILITY TO TREAT OUR CONSTITUENTS WITH RESPECT AND DIGNITY.

LIKE I SAID BEFORE, A LOT OF OUR CONSTITUENTS THAT GO INTO A MUNICIPAL COURT ARE THERE FOR OTHER ISSUES OTHER THAN TRAFFIC TICKETS.

THEY MAY RECEIVE A TRAFFIC TICKET OR CITATION.

THEY MAY RECEIVE A SIMPLE ASSAULT OR A SIMPLE POSSESSION CHARGE.

BUT MOST OF THE TIMES THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES GOING ON WITH THESE INDIVIDUALS.

SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE KEEP THAT IN MIND.

BE HOSPITABLE, GENEROUS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME REPRESENT THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO TO THE BEST OF YOUR ABILITY.

SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SHAW.

COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AND I WOULD JUST ADD MELANIE CASTILLO IS NOT HERE BUT SHE WILL BE ONE OF THE PART-TIME MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES AND I WISH HER WELL.

SHE SERVED ON THE ERB FOR DISTRICT 1 FOR QUITE A LONG TIME AND I WANT TO THANK HER FOR HER SERVICE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH IS ALL ITEMS SAVE FOR ITEMS 26, 32, 33, 44, 45, 48, AND 55.

PLEASE VOTE.

[Additional Item 2]

MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT.

IF I CAN ASK MY COLLEAGUES THEIR COURTESY FOR A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE HERE.

I WOULD LIKE TO CALL UP RENE DOMINGUEZ, DIRECTOR OF OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, TO WELCOME OUR NEWEST COMPANY TO SAN ANTONIO, THE HUT GROUP.

RENE.

>> MAYOR, VERY BRIEFLY.

THANK YOU FOR HIGHLIGHTING THIS PROJECT.

THIS PROJECT REALLY REPRESENTS A LOT OF LONG-TERM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS THAT WE HAVE HAD.

WE ARE RECRUITING U.S.

HEADQUARTERS TO HISTORIC

[00:30:01]

DOWNTOWN.

IT ACTIVATES THE COMMERCE BUILDING AND MORE IMPORTANTLY CREATING 165 BRAND NEW HIGH-PAYING JOBS.

THESE ARE GREAT JOBS.

SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS, ENGINEERS, SALES EXECUTIVES.

WITH THAT I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE DANIEL GRAY, WHO IS WITH THE COMPANY.

HE IS THE SENIOR VP OF SALES.

HE JUST MOVED TO SAN ANTONIO FROM L.A.

HE HAS ASSURED ME HE LOVES THE CITY.

ALREADY BOUGHT SOME BOOTS.

FITS RIGHT IN.

AND GREG RODRIGUEZ IS HERE ALSO.

GREG IS HERE.

BUT IN ANY CASE, MAYOR, WITH THIS PROJECT IT REPRESENTS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO SCALE THIS BUSINESS, TO GROW THIS BIDS RIGHT HERE IN THE HEART OF DOWNTOWN.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WELCOME TO SAN ANTONIO AND I'LL RECOGNIZE OUR COLLEAGUE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CHAIR, REBECCA VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK AT THE HUT GROUP YOU HAVE DONE.

WITH OUR TEAMS AND PARTNERS TOGETHER WORKING TO BRING THESE HIGH WAGE, THESE $70,000 OR MORE ANNUALLY DOWNTOWN JOBS.

165 NEW FULL-TIME JOBS INTO OUR AREA AND BUILDING UP OUR DOWNTOWN, IN A PHENOMENAL BUILDING TOO.

SO WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE INVESTMENT THAT YOU ARE MAKING IN SAN ANTONIO NOW AND HOW THIS IS GOING TO BUILD US FOR THE FUTURE AS WELL.

GLAD -- I KNOW IT WAS A LOT OF WORK BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, RENE, TO THE TEAM.

JENNA SAUCEDA FOR ALL OF HER WORK TOO.

AND SAEDF.

WELCOME.

WE LOOK FORWARD FOR YOU ALL HITTING THE GROUND RUNNING AND SEEING WHAT WE CAN DO TO CONTINUE TO BUILD EACH OTHER UP.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I'LL JUST REITERATE AGAIN, WELCOME TO SAN ANTONIO.

WE ARE GLAD TO SEE YOU DOING BUSINESS IN WHAT WE BELIEVE IS ONE OF THE FUTURE TECH CITIES IN AMERICA.

THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING OUR STRENGTH THERE AND PLEASE BE IN COMMUNICATION WITH US AS YOU GET RAMPED UP.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR SUCCESS IS OUR SUCCESS AS WELL.

CONGRATULATIONS, GUYS.

THANKS, RENE.

[APPLAUSE]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL NOW TAKE THE ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

I AM GOING TO MOVE ITEM 55 UP

[55. Ordinance approving a Funding Agreement with H-E-B Grocery in the amount not to exceed $800,000.00 for the engineering and design of potential street improvements to Foster Road, in Council District 2. [Peter Zanoni, Deputy City Manager; Mike Frisbie, Director, Transportation & Capital Improvements]]

BECAUSE IT IS BEING PULLED FOR RECUSAL PURPOSES.

WE'LL BEGIN WITH ITEM 55.

>> ITEM 55 IS AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH H-E-B GROCERY IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $800,000 FOR THE ENGINEERING AND DESIGN OF POTENTIAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO FOSTER ROAD IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 2.

>> TREVINO: WE'LL TOSS IT TO YOU, COUNCILMAN SHAW.

>> SHAW: IS THERE A PRESENTATION?

>> YES, COUNCILMAN.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I AM THE DIRECTOR FOR TRANSPORTATION AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT.

THIS IS A FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH H-E-B.

A LITTLE BACKGROUND.

H-E-B IS THE LARGEST GROCERY RETAILER IN SOUTH AND CENTRAL TEXAS.

IT OPERATES 400 STORES IN TEXAS AND MEXICO.

H-E-B PURCHASED LAND AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST HOUSTON STREET AND SOUTH FOSTER ROAD.

REMEMBER IS PLANNING TO INVEST $130 MILLION OVER NEXT THREE YEARS.

PLANNING FOR FUTURE EXPANSION AND INVESTMENT AT THE SITE.

WILL EMPLOY 600 WORKERS BY 2020.

EXISTING ROADWAY SECTIONS TWO LANES ON THE ROADWAY.

THE KEY BENEFIT OF THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO BE WIDENING THE ROADWAY FROM EXISTING TWO LANES TO FOUR LANES, NEW TRAFFIC LIGHTS AT SOUTH FOSTER AND RIGSBY, AND DISTRIBUTION MAIN ENTRY.

NEW STRIPING AND, OF COURSE, SAFER TRAFFIC FLOW IN THE AREA.

PHASE ONE IS ESTIMATED TO BE $3.5 MILLION.

AND PHASE TWO WILL BE $4.3 MILLION.

THE PROJECT IS APPROXIMATELY TWO MILES LONG AND THIS AREA WAS RECENTLY ANNEXED.

THIS SHOWS THE MAP WHERE THIS H-E-B DISTRIBUTION CENTER IS GOING TO BE, AND THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INDUSTRIAL AREA AT THIS SITE.

DOLLAR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION CENTER ALSO LOCATED AT THIS

[00:35:01]

SITE.

AND ALSO WE HAVE SOMETHING UNDER DESIGN TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT THIS SITE.

FUNDING AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

OPTION TO REIMBURSE H-E-B FOR DESIGN.

OPTION ONE FY2019 AND FY2020.

OPTION 2, REIMBURSEMENT OF PROPERTY TAX ON ANNUAL BASIS.

DESIGN PLAN DOES NOT OBLIGATE CITY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS.

STAFF REQUESTS APPROVAL TO EXECUTE $800,000 FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH H-E-B.

I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> SHAW: THANK YOU.

I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN.

THANK YOU, RAZI.

WE HAVE CITIZENS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER.

MR. CHARLES WILLIAMS.

>> GOOD MORNING, MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL PERSONS.

WE ARE DELIGHTED TO BE HERE THIS MORNING AND WE THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SUPPORT A WELL-DESERVING PROJECT IN DISTRICT 2.

LET ME JUST SAY THIS TO YOU.

WE ARE FOR THE IMPROVEMENT IN THAT AREA.

FOR A LONG TIME NOW SAN ANTONIO HAS BEEN HELPING ON THE PERIMETER AND AROUND.

BUT WE SEE DEVELOPMENT TAKING PLACE IN DISTRICT 2, STARTING WITH DENVER HEIGHTS.

A LOT OF THINGS ARE HAPPENING DOWN THERE.

AND NOW THIS WILL BE A CATALYST FOR DEVELOPMENT EXTENDED OUT TO BRING BUSINESSES IN FROM FOSTER ROAD INTO W.W. WHITE ROAD.

LET ME SAY THIS TO YOU.

A LITTLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION.

44 YEARS AGO I WAS ONE OF THE FIRST AFRICAN AMERICANS TO DEVELOP A COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON W.W. WHITE ROAD.

I'M NEITHER BRAGGING OR COMPLAINING.

I HAVE ALWAYS TRIED TO HAVE AN INSIGHT OF WHAT'S BETTER FOR MY COMMUNITY.

AND I KNOW THIS COUNCIL PERSON IS GOING TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THIS COMMUNITY, PERIOD.

NOT ONLY JUST BECAUSE IT'S ON FOSTER ROAD IN DISTRICT 2, H-E-B PROVIDES GOOD SERVICE FOR PEOPLE ALL OVER THIS COMMUNITY.

AND WE CANNOT, CANNOT DO ANYTHING BUT SUPPORT THIS PROJECT.

IT'S A WIN-WIN SITUATION NOT ONLY FOR DISTRICT 2 BUT FOR THE ENTIRE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.

THEY ARE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYERS.

I WAS ALSO PRIVILEGED TO BE A VENDOR WITH H-E-B SOME 44 YEARS AGO.

SO I COME TO YOU ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT, FAIR, AND EQUITABLE FOR THIS CITY.

NOT JUST THE EAST SIDE.

AND I THANK OUR COUNCILMAN FOR TAKING THE LEAD, WHO IS TAKING THE BACKGROUND WORK, WHO HAS THE FORESIGHT TO SEE WHAT'S GOOD, NOT ONLY FOR DISTRICT 2, BUT FOR THIS CITY PERIOD.

I KNOW YOU ARE GOING TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND VOTE FOR THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MR. WILLIAMS. THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. SYLVIA ALANIZ FOLLOWED BY C.J.

LITTLEFIELD.

>> HELLO.

MY NAME IS SYLVIA ALANIZ.

830 STUDS DRIVE.

EAST GATE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESIDENT.

WE ARE LOCATED ON NORTHEAST LOOP 410 AND I-10 EAST.

WE ARE IN FAVOR OF ITEM 55.

WE ARE THE CLOSEST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION REGISTERED WITH THE CITY TO THIS LOCATION.

SO I'M HERE TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WE ARE IN FAVOR OF ITEM 55.

THANK YOU.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MS. ALANIZ.

MR. C.J. LITTLEFIELD FOLLOWED BY AUBREY LEWIS.

>> JUST WOULD LIKE TO SAY WE TALKED ABOUT GROWTH AND I COMMEND OUR COUNCILMAN CRUZ IN HIS EFFORT TO SEE THAT THE EAST SIDE OF THE CITY RECEIVES A SHARE OF GROWTH AS WELL AS ECONOMICS.

WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT A NUMBER OF YEARS OF GROWTH, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE ALWAYS WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ON THE TAIL END WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO DEVELOPMENT.

AND THEREFORE I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SAY I SUPPORT H-E-B AS WELL AS THE FIRE STATION THAT IS NEEDED, BECAUSE IT IS ESSENTIAL TO THAT PART OF THE CITY THAT WE BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE ADEQUATE SERVICES THAT IS NEEDED FOR THIS SEGMENT OF THE COMMUNITY.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MR. LITTLEFIELD.

AUBREY LEWIS.

>> AUBREY LEWIS, PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

WE'RE THE LARGEST ASSOCIATION LOCATED IN DISTRICT 2.

[00:40:01]

WE ARE IN FULL SUPPORT OF ARTICLE 55.

WE SEE THE GREAT NEED.

IT'S GOING TO BRING A BIG UPLIFT TO THE EAST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO.

SO MANY YEARS WE HAVE BEEN KIND OF ON THE DOWN SIDE AND NOW WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ON THE UP SIDE.

AND WITH THE NEW FIRE STATION GOING IN THERE, THERE'S A NEED FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO HAVE EASY ACCESS AND EGRESS OUT OF THE AREA.

SO WE ARE IN FULL SUPPORT.

THANK YOU.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MR. LEWIS.

MR. T.C. CALVERT FOLLOWED BY CHRIS DAWKINS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM TREVINO AND THIS COUNCIL.

THIS COUNCIL LOOKS YOUNGER AND YOUNGER EVERY TIME I COME BEFORE IT.

MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE THREE WOMEN ON CITY COUNCIL NOW.

THAT'S HISTORICAL.

BUT I WANT TO BE HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT THIS COUNCIL ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

TO SUPPORT H-E-B, WHO HAS BEEN A MAJOR ANCHOR TENANT FOR THE EAST SIDE.

I WANT TO COMMEND COUNCILMAN SHAW FOR HIS VISION.

BECAUSE WHERE THERE'S NO VISION THE PEOPLE WILL PERISH.

THIS IS A COMMUNITY FOR THOSE OF YOU ON THIS COUNCIL WHO DON'T KNOW THAT SEVERAL YEARS AGO SEA WORLD, WHICH IS NOW ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN, WAS SUPPOSED TO GO TO THIS PART OF THE CITY, BROTHER BROCKHOUSE.

SO WE'RE MOVING THINGS FORWARD TODAY BY SUPPORTING H-E-B WITH THIS ANCHOR TO PROVIDE 600 JOBS TO THIS COMMUNITY, TO A FIRE STATION THAT'S NEEDED FOR THIS COMMUNITY.

BUT THIS COUNCIL TALKS ABOUT AN EQUITY LENS.

THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT I GET, BROTHER PERRY, IS THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES IN DISTRICT 10 AND OVER IN DISTRICT 9 THEY SAY, CALVERT, WE ALWAYS GIVE THESE IMPACT FEES TO ALL THESE BIG CORPORATIONS.

BUT WE NEVER DO IMPACT FEES OR ANYTHING FOR SMALL, MINORITY, WOMEN-OWNED BUSINESSES, SISTER SANDOVAL, IN OUR COMMUNITY.

SO WE SUPPORT THIS ORDINANCE.

BUT WE WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD PUT TOGETHER A SIMPLE, SIMPLE POLICY, SISTER SCULLEY, JUST LIKE WE DO FOR THE BIG CORPORATIONS.

WE WANT TO DO IT FOR SMALL GROUPS.

AND WE JUST TAKE THE POLICY WE ALREADY GOT IN PLACE.

WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF MEETINGS ON IT.

SISTER VIAGRAN SAID SHE'S ALREADY WORKING ON IT.

SO LET'S MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

LET'S MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

WE SUPPORT H-E-B.

WE SUPPORT THIS PROJECT AND WE COMMEND THIS CITY COUNCIL FOR BEING THE YOUNGEST-LOOKING CITY COUNCIL IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

[LAUGHTER]

>> TREVINO: BIG THANK YOU, MR. .

>> AND THE CHURCHES SAY AMEN.

>> TREVINO: MR. CHRIS DAWKINS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM AND THE COUNCIL.

I WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH THIS FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE.

I REPRESENT AND AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE LAKESIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

WE ARE PROBABLY THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WILL BE IMPACTED BY THIS ORDINANCE, THIS BILL THAT'S BEING PRESENTED.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OVERGROWTH THAT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED ON THE NORTH SIDE AND WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE NEXT PHASE FOR SAN ANTONIO.

WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO BE DONE FOR H-E-B, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO BE DONE NEXT FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.

WE'VE GOT A NEW FIRE STATION THAT'S GOING IN.

THAT'S INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE COMMUNITY AT WHOLE.

WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT H-E-B.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEW DEVELOPMENT ON HIGHWAY U.S. 87.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT FOR SAN ANTONIO, NOT JUST WHAT'S FOR H-E-B.

IF YOU GET HUNG UP ON WHAT'S BEING DONE WITH THE BIG NAME OF JUST H-E-B, THEN I THINK YOU MISS WHAT'S GOING ON ON THE EAST SIDE.

WE NEED THIS DEVELOPMENT.

WE NEED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

AND AS THE CITY BEGINS TO EXPAND, THE EAST SIDE AND THE SOUTH SIDE, COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN, IS WHERE THAT DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

THIS IS JUST THE INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE AND WE EXPECT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT.

AND, AGAIN, LET'S NOT LOOK AT THE BIG NAME H-E-B, LET'S LOOK AT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT FOR SAN ANTONIO.

THANK YOU.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MR. DAWKINS.

JAMES MCNAMARA.

>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL MEMBERS.

IT'S GOOD TO SEE SOME OF YOU AGAIN.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE.

WHEN I WAS HERE LAST I WAS PRESIDENT OF THE CREST LAKE

[00:45:02]

HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, AND ALTHOUGH MY COLLEAGUE CHRIS HERE BOASTS ABOUT BEING ONE OF THE NEAREST NEIGHBORHOODS, GEOGRAPHICALLY MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS, ONLY BECAUSE I'M A LITTLE FARTHER EAST THAN HE IS.

JUST KIDDING, CHRIS.

[LAUGHTER]

>> AT ANY RATE, I'M HERE WITH A MOMENT OF TRUST.

A TRUST THAT YOU KNOW WHAT THE ISSUES ARE.

YOU HAVE ALREADY STUDIED IT AND YOU ARE PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A POSITIVE VOTE ON THIS ISSUE, GIVING THE EAST SIDE THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY.

I NEED TO TELL YOU, LASTLY, THAT I HAVE BEEN HERE IN THE CITY FOR 24 YEARS IN THE SAME PLACE.

AND I GO BY THIS AREA EVERY SINGLE DAY.

AND THE MOST I COULD SEE HAPPENING THERE WAS GROWING GRASS AND DYING GRASS, AND THAT'S IT.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY PROVIDED BY ONE OF THE LARGEST EMPLOYERS IN OUR AREA, ONE OF THE MOST PRESTIGIOUS BUSINESSES AND IT'S WILLING TO TAKE A RISK ON THE EAST SIDE.

THE EAST SIDE IS READY TO EMBRACE THAT RISK AND ASK THE CITY COUNCIL TO USE THE POLICIES USED ELSEWHERE TO APPLY IN THIS CASE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MR. MCNAMARA.

COUNCILMAN SHAW.

>> SHAW: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN.

THIS IS AN EXCITING TIME BECAUSE TO SEE DISTRICT 2 COME TOGETHER IN SUPPORT OF A DEVELOPMENT, A LOT OF TIMES WE ARE UP HERE ON COUNCIL WE HEAR OPPOSING VIEWS.

BUT TODAY IS A VERY SPECIAL DAY BECAUSE WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT ONE VIEW IS IMPORTANT.

THE MOVING FORWARD OF SAN ANTONIO AND MOVING FORWARD OF DISTRICT 2.

I APPLAUD ALL THE CONSTITUENTS WHO CAME OUT THIS MORNING TO SPEAK.

TYPICALLY THE SQUEAKY WHEEL GETS THE OIL.

BUT TODAY IT'S ABOUT COMING TOGETHER IN SUPPORT OF A PROJECT THAT I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF.

CAN I HAVE CHIEF HOOD? IS HE HERE? JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

ONE THING I THINK I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS IS A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN SEVERAL PARTIES.

ONE OF THE BENEFACTORS OF THIS AGREEMENT WILL BE THE FIRE STATION IN DISTRICT 2.

NOW, CHIEF, THIS AGREEMENT WITH THE FIRE STATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU FEEL IS NECESSARY FOR THAT FIRE STATION?

>> INFRASTRUCTURE IS ALWAYS IMPORTANT AROUND ANY OF OUR FIRE STATIONS.

WE DO OVER A MILLION MILES OF RESPONSES EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

SO HAVING GOOD SUSTAINABLE ROAD SYSTEM, THE INFRASTRUCTURE AROUND THE STATION ABSOLUTELY IS GOING TO HELP OUR EGRESS AND INGRESS OUT OF THE STATION INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS, BACK UP TO 410 AND I-10.

IT WOULD BE A BENEFIT FOR US, YES.

>> SHAW: AND THIS ONE FIRE, DOES IT SUPPORT JUST DISTRICT 2 OR OTHER DISTRICTS?

>> WE NEVER POLITICIZE FIRE RESOURCES, SO THE DISTRICT DOES NOT MATTER.

WE HAVE NO DISTRICT NUMBERS ON OUR FIRE TRUCKS.

OUR FIRE TRUCKS RESPOND TO ANY PLACE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.

THE EQUIPMENT WILL BE GOING ALL OVER THE CITY.

>> SHAW: WHAT'S THE CLOSEST FIRE STATION OTHER THAN THIS NEWLY-DEVELOPED FIRE STATION WE ARE PROPOSING.

>> 38, 30, 20S, 18S.

ALL THOSE STATIONS ARE IN THAT AREA, WHICH WE HAVE BATTALIONS.

ON ANY KIND OF RESPONSE, 54 IS GOING TO BE RESPONDING WITH THOSE OTHER FIRE COMPANIES.

>> SHAW: GOTCHA.

THANK YOU, CHIEF.

>> THANKS.

>> SHAW: ONCE AGAIN, I'M EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT.

I THINK IT'S A MOVE FORWARD.

THANK YOU TO CITY STAFF FOR ALL THE WORK YOU HAVE DONE IN PUSHING THIS FORWARD.

AT THIS TIME I MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SHAW.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I WANTED TO THANK CONSENT AGENDR ALL THE WORK HE'S BEEN DOING ON THIS AND I WANT TO THANK ALL THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE HERE TODAY.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS YOU POINTED ON IS THIS IS ABOUT A BALANCED AND INCLUSIVE GROWTH AND ABOUT EQUITY.

AND WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS WE KNOW IT'S ABOUT ALSO JOB OPPORTUNITY AND ACCESS AND THAT THERE ARE OTHER INDUSTRIES IN THIS SITE TOO.

BUT WE KNOW THIS AREA IS JUST OUTSIDE OF 410.

SO AS WE CONTINUE TO GROW AS A CITY WE HAVE TO DO OUR RESPONSIBILITY IN THIS AREA AS WELL.

SO I'M VERY HAPPY TO MOVE THIS FORWARD BECAUSE IT'S WITH AN EMPLOYER THAT HAS MADE A COMMITMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND INVESTMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL.

BUT TO THE RESIDENTS WHO HAVE COME OUT HERE, THANK YOU FOR BEING STEADFAST.

THANK YOU FOR BEING DILIGENT,

[00:50:01]

AND THANK YOU SO MUCH, BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS HOLDING US ACCOUNTABLE TO MAKE SURE WHAT HAPPENS IN OTHER PARTS THAT WE BRING THAT INCLUSIVE GROWTH TO ALL OF THE CITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> TREVINO: COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT.

I'M ALL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT DOWN THERE.

I ACTUALLY WENT DOWN THERE AND TOOK A LOOK AT IT.

RIGHT NOW THERE'S 18-WHEELERS USING THAT ROAD.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT ROUGH AND, YES, WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO UPGRADE THAT ROAD.

I SUPPORT THE DESIGN ON THIS BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION HERE TO GO WITH OPTION NO. 2 FOR THIS AGREEMENT.

AND LET'S GET THE DESIGN GOING ON IT.

IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHERE WE ACTUALLY COME UP WITH THE MONEY FOR THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION ON THIS.

AND THAT WILL BE TAKEN UP IN FUTURE BUDGETS HERE.

YES, MY MOTION IS TO GO WITH OPTION 2.

THANK YOU, SIR.

>> TREVINO: WE HAVE A MOTION.

NO SECOND? OKAY.

MOTION DIES.

>> BROCKHOUSE: I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

>> TREVINO: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANDY SEGOVIA.

>> THERE IS NO OPTION 2.

UNDER THE CONTRACT THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.

ONE, IF IT IS APPROVED BY THE BUDGET, AND THE SECOND IF IT'S NOT.

IT WAS NOT BEFORE THE COUNCIL AS TO WHETHER TO TAKE OPTION 1 OR 2 BUT SIMPLY TO ACCEPT THE CONTRACT AS WRITTEN.

>> TREVINO: COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: WELL, I'M JUST GOING WITH THE STAFF PRESENTATION WHERE THERE WERE TWO OPTIONS.

ONE TO PAY FOR IT AS LUMP SUM PAYMENTS.

AND THE OTHER OPTION WAS TO REIMBURSE WITH PROPERTY TAXES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

I'M SAYING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS PROJECT FUNDED ON THE PROPERTY TAX ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

AND IN THE ORDINANCE IT GIVES EITHER/OR IN THE ORDINANCE.

I'M SAYING THE MOTION TO CHANGE THAT TO REIMBURSE WITH PROPERTY TAXES.

>> WHAT I WOULD THEN RECOMMEND, COUNCILMAN, IS HAVE A MOTION TO REMOVE OPTION 1.

>> PERRY: OKAY.

SO MOVED.

REMOVE OPTION 1.

AND THE REASON BEING IS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS NOT IN OUR BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR AND THIS IS AN OPTION TO GET THIS DESIGN GOING.

H-E-B WOULD PAY FOR IT UP FRONT AND THEN WE WOULD REIMBURSE THAT $800,000 ON AN ANNUAL BASIS WITH PROPERTY TAXES THAT THEY WOULD NORMALLY BE PAYING ON THIS PROJECT.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M WANTING TO GET THIS PROJECT GOING.

BUT LET'S NOT TAKE IT OUT OF OUR BUDGET UP FRONT.

LET'S GET IT REIMBURSED TO THEM WITH THE PROPERTY TAXES OVER SEVERAL YEARS.

>> TREVINO: SO YOU'RE WITHDRAWING YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION?

>> I WOULD LIKE RAY TO GIVE SOME CLARIFICATION.

>> CURRENTLY THE CONTRACT REQUIRES FOR A TWO-STEP APPROACH TO THE FUNDING.

IF NO FUNDS ARE APPROPRIATED THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, THEN AUTOMATICALLY THEY ARE REIMBURSED ANNUALLY.

SO THE ONLY ACTION, IF YOU APPROVE THE CONTRACT TODAY, THE ONLY ACTION YOU HAVE TO TAKE IS NOT APPROVE ANY FUNDS IN THE FY19 BUDGET AND IT WILL AUTOMATICALLY GO TO THE ANNUAL REIMBURSEMENT.

>> PERRY: WHY CAN'T WE JUST SAY IT GOES TO THE REIMBURSEMENT UP FRONT?

>> YOU CAN DO THAT.

I'M JUST MENTIONING THAT IN ONE CONTRACT THERE'S A TWO-STEP APPROACH.

IF NOTHING IS APPROPRIATED IN FY19 THEN THE CONTRACT CONTINUES ON ON AN ANNUAL REIMBURSEMENT.

>> PERRY: I'M JUST SAYING, HEY, LET'S GET THIS PROJECT GOING AND LET'S GET IT REIMBURSED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

I THINK H-E-B WAS OPEN TO THAT.

YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE DIDN'T FORESEE THIS IN THE BUDGET AND THIS CAN GET THIS PROJECT GOING RIGHT NOW WITH H-E-B FRONTING THE COST AND HAVING IT REIMBURSED OVER THE YEARS.

YES, WITHDRAW OPTION 1 IS MY MOTION.

>> TREVINO: WE HAVE ANDY SEGOVIA AS WELL.

>> SO THE MOTION IS TO REMOVE OPTION 1.

WE NEED A SECOND, THOUGH.

>> TREVINO: SO WE WITHDREW THE ORIGINAL MOTION.

NOW WE HAVE A MOTION TO REMOVE OPTION 1.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> BROCKHOUSE: SECOND.

>> TREVINO: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE.

>> BROCKHOUSE: I JUST WANT TO BE VERY -- SO THE COUNCILMAN CAN MOTION FOR JUST THE ONE,

[00:55:03]

CORRECT? I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ON A POINT OF ORDER ON THIS PIECE HERE.

WE ARE GOING TO REMOVE --

>> CORRECT.

BY REMOVING OPTION 1, COUNCILMAN, IT DEFAULTS INTO THE REIMBURSEMENT METHOD.

>> BROCKHOUSE: OKAY.

YOU KNOW, I STAND ON THIS.

I MEAN, IF A MEMBER WANTS A FLOOR VOTE, I'M GOING TO STAND BY THEM FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PLACE A FLOOR VOTE, SO I SECONDED HIS MOTION BECAUSE I THINK ANY MEMBER WHO WANTS TO CALL SOMETHING LIKE THAT DESERVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD ACROSS THE BOARD.

I STAND ON MY SECOND FOR THAT PIECE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> TREVINO: OKAY.

SO WE HAVE TWO MOTIONS.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE COUNCILMAN PERRY'S MOTION FIRST.

COUNCILMAN PERRY'S MOTION IS TO REMOVE OPTION 1.

A YES VOTE IS TO REMOVE OPTION 1.

PLEASE VOTE.

>> TREVINO: MOTION FAILS.

WE WILL NOW TAKE COUNCILMAN SHAW'S MOTION.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION PASSES.

[26. Ordinance ratifying the Office of Emergency Management's application for, and authorizing acceptance, and appropriation upon award, from the 2018 Urban Area Security Initiative Grant Program, in an amount up to $1,500,000.00. [Erik Walsh, Deputy City Manager; Charles Hood, Fire Chief]]

[APPLAUSE]

>> TREVINO: WE'LL NOW HERE ITEM 26.

>> ITEM NO. 26 IS AN ORDINANCE RATIFYING THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT'S APPLICATION FOR AND AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION UPON AWARD FROM THE 2018 URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE GRANT PROGRAM IN AN AMOUNT UP TO $1.5 MILLION.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU.

CAN WE HAVE A PRESENTATION, PLEASE?

>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS PATRICK ZEPEDA, SAN ANTONIO EMERGENCY MANAGER.

TODAY WE ARE GOING TO TALKING ABOUT THE RATIFICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE GRANT PROGRAM .

IT WAS DEVELOPED IN 2003 AS A RESULT OF OUR TERRORIST ATTACK, 9/11.

BETWEEN THE YEARS OF 2004 AND 2010 SAN ANTONIO RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY $42 MILLION OF UASI MONEY WHICH WAS SPLIT WITH SAN ANTONIO, BEXAR COUNTY, AND 12 OTHER COUNTIES.

SAN ANTONIO RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY 67% OF THESE MONEYS, $28 MILLION.

WE LOST FUNDING OF UASI IN 2011, '13, '15, AND '16.

WE WERE AWARDED IN 2012, 14 AND 17, 1.2, $1 MILLION, AND $1 MILLION.

RISK ASSESSMENT GAVE US AN INCREASED AWARD THIS YEAR.

WE GOT $1.5 MILLION.

SOME OF THESE CHANGES THAT WERE SUGGESTED BY THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WERE GIVEN US CREDIT FOR SOFT TARGETS, FOR HARDENING OUR SOFT TARGETS.

SAN ANTONIO HAS A ROBUST SCHEDULE OF CELEBRATIONS WITH OUR TRICENTENNIAL, WITH FINAL FOUR, WITH THE LARGEST MARTIN LUTHER KING MARCH, AND PARADES THAT WE HAVE.

I HATE THROWING GRAPHS UP BUT THIS SHOWS THAT THE BASICALLY FEMA, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY CAN CHANGE WHAT THEY DO THEIR RISK ANALYSIS ON, WHAT COMPONENTS.

AND ALSO HOW MANY DIFFERENT URBAN AREAS THEY FUND THAT YEAR.

IF YOU LOOK AT SOME YEARS, THE URBAN AREAS WERE UP TO 64.

FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS IT WAS THE MARK OF 30.

1 THROUGH 30 GOT FUNDED.

WE HAVE BEEN AT THE PLACE OF THE LAST FEW YEARS AT 32.

WE JUST MADE A JUMP TO THE 28TH PLACE.

AND FEMA FUNDED 28 POSITIONS, SO WE DID GET FUNDED THIS YEAR.

THIS WAS DONE WITH A LOT OF ASSISTANCE FROM PEOPLE HERE IN COSA ALONG WITH EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

WE MET WITH BROCK LONG REGARDING THE FUNDING, FUNDING SAN ANTONIO.

[01:00:02]

WE MET WITH TOM, THE FEMA ASSISTANCE GRANT ADMINISTRATORS.

WE REQUESTED CHANGES TO RISK ASSESSMENT FOR MORE FUNDING.

WE MET WITH THE LEADERSHIP OF DHS DURING THE 2018 SA TO DC TRIP.

WE ALSO HAD A VISIT FROM BRIDGETT BEAN, WHO IS THE FEMA DEPUTY GRANTS DIRECTOR.

WE WALKED HER THROUGH NIOSA AND ALL OUR EVENTS HERE DURING FIESTA TO SHOW HER WHAT WE ARE EXPOSED TO AS FAR AS RISK WITH THE EVENTS THAT WE HAVE.

AND WE LUCKILY, DHS ADDED CHANGES TO THE 2018 RISK ASSESSMENT THAT INCREASED OUR FUNDING BY $500,000.

SOME OF THIS MONEY GOES TO SUSTAIN OUR FUSION HERE AND OUR FUSION CENTER SUPPORTS 42 DIFFERENT COUNTIES AS WELL.

SOME MONEYS WENT TO EQUIPMENT FOR SPECIALIZED TRAINING FOR SAPD BOMB SQUAD.

HELICOPTER UNIT, SWAT, TACTICAL MED PROGRAM FOR PD, AND A NEGOTIATIONS UNIT.

SPECIALIZE EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING FOR HAZMAT AS WELL AS OUR TECHNICAL RESCUE TEAMS AND OUR MEDICAL SUPPORT, MSOU.

SOME OF THESE MONEYS ALSO SUSTAIN THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING.

STAFF MAKES A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THIS GRANT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, PAT.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, CHIEF.

WE WANTED TO PULL IT TO HIGHLIGHT THE WORK THAT HAS GONE ON WITH THIS.

WE HAD TO WORK WITH OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND ALL OUR COMMUNITIES HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.

THIS IS GOING TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT, BUT IS THIS FOR PERSONNEL AS WELL?

>> EXACTLY.

THERE'S PERSONNEL, THERE'S A LOT OF EQUIPMENT ON HERE, EVEN FOR OUR SAPD HELICOPTERS FOR MAPPING.

AND THERE'S A LOT OF TRAINING HERE AS WELL.

>> VIAGRAN: AND SO THIS TRAINING, IT'S FOR THE SPECIALIZED GROUP SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY HOUSED IN ONE AREA.

WILL IT GO TO THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT?

>> SOME OF IT GOES THERE.

MOST OF IT GOES TO SUPPORT SPECIALIZED GROUPS THAT NEED SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING.

>> VIAGRAN: AND TRAINING FOR THE EVENTS THAT MAY HAPPEN IN THIS AREA.

>> CORRECT.

WE ALSO GOT A LOT OF NEW HAZMAT MONITORING EQUIPMENT.

SOME OF OUR EQUIPMENT WAS ON THE OLD FORMAT, OLD BASE THAT'S NOT SUPPORTED ANYMORE.

SO WE BOUGHT A LOT OF NEW EQUIPMENT AS WELL.

>> VIAGRAN: I KNOW THAT THERE WAS FEDERAL FUNDING THAT HAD BEEN DECREASED AND WE HAVE BUILT IT UP TO THIS POINT RIGHT NOW FOR SAN ANTONIO TO GET MORE.

SO THIS MAY BE FOR YOU.

THIS MAY BE FOR JEFF.

THIS MAY BE FOR OTHERS.

WHAT IS OUR STRATEGY MOVING FORWARD AS WE TRY TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WE WANT OR WE'RE TRYING TO GET?

>> WE MADE A BIG PUSH.

I HATED TO MENTION ONE OR TWO NAMES.

I'M SAYING IT WAS A BIG COSA EFFORT BUT WITH -- THE S.A. TO D.C. TRIP, THAT WOULD BE A COMPONENT.

WE STARTED TO SEE IF WE COULD GET CREDIT FOR OUR PROXIMITY TO THE BORDER, BECAUSE EVERYTHING COMES THROUGH SAN ANTONIO.

WHAT WE'RE DOING IS SENDING THEM E-MAILS EVERY DAY.

BASICALLY WE'RE THE SQUEAKY WHEEL Y'ALL TALKED ABOUT.

THEY SEE US WALKING DOWN THE HALL, THEY TURN THE OTHER WAY.

WE'RE TRYING TO GET CREDIT FOR BEING CLOSE TO THE BORDER.

YOU LOOK ATKINS, THE ACCIDENT THE OTHER DAY.

THE PATIENTS WERE TRANSPORTED HERE .

WE HAVE STOPS THAT HAPPEN HERE.

WE ARE DRUG TASK FORCE TEAMS IN THIS REGION.

EVERYTHING COMES THROUGH SAN ANTONIO.

I WANT TO GET CREDIT FOR BEING PROXIMITY TO THE BORDER, WHICH WE DON'T GET CREDIT FOR.

>> I JUST WANT TO ADD, COUNCILWOMAN, THAT IT'S NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE OF THE FUNDING BEING AVAILABLE.

IT'S BEEN THE ELIGIBILITY OF THE CITIES AND HOW THEY HAVE APPLIED IT.

SO PAT'S RIGHT.

A MAJOR POINT OF EMPHASIS HAS BEEN TRYING TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE NEED IS GREAT HERE FOR A LOT OF THE REASONS HE JUST MENTIONED.

WE'VE HAD CONGRESSMAN HURD HAS BEEN A HUGE CHAMPION FOR US ON THIS.

HE HAS COME DOWN SEVERAL TIMES DURING MAJOR EVENTS, THE FINAL FOUR AND FIESTA AND TOURED THE OPERATIONS SETUP THAT WE HAVE HERE.

HE'S BROUGHT FOLKS FROM HOMELAND SECURITY.

I BELIEVE THE MAYOR JUST MET WITH THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HOMELAND SECURITY IN BOSTON A FEW WEEKS AGO.

SO WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO MAKE THE POINT TO THEM AND ALSO DEMONSTRATE EFFECTIVE USE OF THE FUNDING SO THAT THEY ARE HAPPY WITH HOW IT'S BEING UTILIZED

[01:05:02]

HERE AND MORE LIKELY TO FUND AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.

>> VIAGRAN: OKAY.

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION AND FOR GETTING US TO THIS POINT TO INCREASE OUR DOLLARS.

WITH THAT, MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NO. 26.

COUNCILMAN SALDANA.

>> SALDANA: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE CHIEF.

YOU HAVE BEEN A PAIN IN THE NECK TO A LOT OF FOLKS IN D.C. WHEN IT COMES TO FIGHTING FOR THIS GRANT THAT WE HAVE BEEN RECEIVING FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

I WOULD SAY ATTRIBUTE TO YOU DIRECTLY THE INCREASE THAT WE'RE GETTING.

BECAUSE YOU AND YOUR TEAM, OF WHICH WE SAT DOWN IN THE S.A. TO D.C., WHEN WE WALKED INTO THAT MEETING, THEY KNEW YOU, THEY KNEW OUR CASE.

YOU ALL HAD A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP AND THOSE KINDS OF RELATIONSHIPS IS WHAT LEADS TO THE SUPPORT WE GET FOR PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT.

SO JUST TO SAY KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK.

I KNOW THAT YOUR TEAM HAS BEEN TRAVELING BACK AND FORTH AND BRINGING THEM TO HOST TO SEE HOW WE CAN, YOU KNOW, HARDEN UP SOME OF THESE TARGETS OR IMPROVE SOME OF THESE SOFT TARGETS THAT WE HAVE TO KEEP OUR FOLKS SAFE AND OUR VISITORS SAFE.

THANK YOU, CHIEF, FOR YOUR WORK WITH THAT.

>> THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SALDANA.

THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NO. 26.

[32. Ordinance amending the Ethics Code and the Municipal Campaign Finance Code to increase transparency through additional disclosures, clarify sections of the Code, and codify current practices. [Kevin Barthold, City Auditor]]

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NO. 32.

>> ITEM NO. 32 IS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ETHICS CODE AND THE MUNICIPAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE CODE TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY THROUGH ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES, CLARIFY SECTIONS OF THE CODE, AND CODIFY CURRENT PRACTICES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

I BELIEVE THERE IS A PRESENTATION.

>> COURAGE: YES.

IS THERE A PRESENTATION?

>> THERE IS A PRESENTATION FROM THE CHAIR OF THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD, IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT.

AND MICHAEL BELDON IS HERE TO DISCUSS THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE TASK FORCE.

>> COURAGE: LET'S HAVE THE PRESENTATION.

>> THANK YOU.

MAYOR, COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY.

AS I MENTIONED YESTERDAY AT THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, IT WAS A REAL PLEASURE BEING ON THIS COMMITTEE.

WE HAD DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW BUT WE MANAGED TO FIND A WAY FOR A COMPROMISE THAT EVERYBODY WAS PLEASED WITH.

ALSO WANT TO COMMEND THE CITY STAFF THAT I WORKED WITH, THE CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE, THE AUDITOR, MAYOR, STAFF.

EVERYBODY COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MORE HELPFUL AND MORE PLEASANT IN OUR DEALINGS.

THIS WAS REALLY A NICE TOUR OF DUTY, IF YOU WILL.

SO AS WE SAW OUR RESPONSIBILITIES IN THIS, OR WE FELT WE HAD FOUR ISSUES TO ADDRESS.

DISCLOSURE, THE AMOUNT OF MAXIMUM CONTRIBUTIONS, TO LOOK AT BOTH A TWO FOUR YEARS OR FOUR TWO-YEAR SCENARIOS AND SEE IF THE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MAYOR'S RACE AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO COUNCIL RACES WAS STILL APPROPRIATE.

I THINK YOU ALL HAVE A COPY OF THE REPORT.

DO YOU NOT, MAYOR?

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> OKAY.

ON A DISCLOSURE WE HAD A WIDE RANGE OF VIEWS IN OUR COMMITTEE FROM TOTAL DISCLOSURE ON.

AND WE EVENTUALLY DECIDED THAT THE TOTAL DISCLOSURE, MEANING WHO YOU WORK FOR AND WHAT YOUR JOB POSITION IS IS APPROPRIATE FOR CONTRIBUTIONS OF $100 AND MORE.

FOR CONTRIBUTIONS BELOW $100, SIMPLY NAME AND ADDRESS WAS SUFFICIENT.

THE FEELING WAS THAT THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY OF RETALIATION FROM EMPLOYERS AND IT MIGHT IMPEDE CERTAIN PEOPLE FROM MAKING SMALL CONTRIBUTIONS, AND THAT POINT OF VIEW CARRIED THE DAY.

THE SECOND ISSUE WAS THE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN THE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MAYOR AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COUNCIL.

WE WERE UNANIMOUS IN FEELING THAT THE DIFFERENCE OF DOUBLE WAS AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT.

SO WE WERE ALL TOGETHER ON THAT.

THE NEXT ISSUE WAS SHOULD WE RAISE THE MAXIMUM CONTRIBUTION.

SOME FELT THAT WE HAD ENOUGH MONEY IN POLITICS ALREADY.

OTHERS FELT THAT INFLATION HAD TAKEN A TOLL.

WE HAVE NOT RAISED THIS AMOUNT SINCE ABOUT 15 YEARS AGO.

THERE WAS A CONCERN BY SOME THAT IT WAS VERY HARD TO RAISE MONEY AND CAMPAIGN AT THE SAME TIME AND THAT THE $500 MAXIMUM FOR A COUNCIL RACE MADE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO DO BOTH.

AND SO THE COMPROMISE WE REACHED WAS INCREASING BY 50% FOR OUR MAXIMUM FOR A COUNCIL RACE FROM 500 TO 750.

FOR THE MAYOR'S RACE FROM $1,000 TO $1500.

AND WE SAW NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER, WHETHER IT'S TWO FOUR-YEAR TERMS OR FOUR TWO-YEAR

[01:10:04]

TERMS. THIS IS PER ELECTION CYCLE AND I BELIEVE THE CITY ATTORNEY MAY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE EFFECTIVENESS, WHEN IT BECOMES EFFECTIVE.

>> I THINK THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION PROPOSAL THAT THAT BECOME EFFECTIVE JULY 1ST.

IS THAT CORRECT? JULY 1ST.

>> YES.

WHICH MEANS IT'S EFFECTIVE FOR THE NEXT CYCLE.

THE CYCLE BEGINNING JULY 1ST.

SO THAT'S MY REPORT, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: IS DR. GARCIA ALSO -- DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION TOO, DOCTOR? OKAY.

THANK YOU, MIKE.

>> GOOD MORNING.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

SO TODAY I'M REPRESENTING THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD AND WE ARE PROPOSING RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.

YOU ALL HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THAT.

THE OVERALL GOAL OF THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD IS TO REVIEW OUR CODE AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO FURTHER INCREASE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

WITH THAT SAID, WE ARE ALSO TASKED WITH BRINGING CLARITY TO ITEMS THAT MAY NOT BE SO CLEAR.

TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S CONSISTENCY IN PRACTICES AND TO CODIFY CURRENT PRACTICES.

AGAIN, YOU HAVE HAD SOME TIME TO LOOK AT SOME SUBSTITUTE CHANGES THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING TODAY, BUT I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON THE ONES THAT NEED SOME CLARIFICATION.

WE'LL START WITH THE ETHICS CODE.

WE PROPOSE IT INCLUDES ANY BUSINESS, FINANCIAL OR PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP TO WHICH A DUTY OF CARE, CONFIDENCE, TRUST, OR PRIVILEGE APPLIES.

SECOND, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT ENTERTAINMENT BE ADDED TO THE CODE AT THE SAME LEVEL AS MEALS.

THIS MEANS ENTERTAINMENT IN EXCESS OF $50 PER OCCURRENCE WOULD BE PROHIBITED IN TOTAL AGATE VALUE CANNOT EXCEED $500 IN A CALENDAR YEAR.

ENTERTAINMENT MIGHT INCLUDE CONCERT TICKETS, SPURS TICKETS, RODEO TICKETS, ET CETERA.

THERE ARE LIMITATIONS FOR MEALS AND GIFTS BUT NOT FOR ENTERTAINMENT SPECIFICALLY.

WE RECOMMEND A CHANGE TO ALLOW SELF-REPORTING OF AN ETHICS CURRENTLY THE CODE ONLY ALLOWS TO ISSUE OPINIONS TO FUTURE ACTIONS.

WE RECOMMEND A CHANGE TO REMOVE THE OPTION OF SELF-REPORTING TO THE CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE TO HONOR THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITY PRIVILEGE.

CURRENTLY IF AN OFFICIAL SELF-REPORTS TO THE ATTORNEY A CONFIDENTIAL PRIVILEGED RELATIONSHIP IS FORMED.

WE ARE CLARIFYING THAT THE SELF-REPORT SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COMPLIANCE AUDITOR OR DIRECTLY TO THE ERB SO THEY WILL BE AWARE OF THE ISSUE AND CAN ADDRESS IT ACCORDINGLY.

WE ARE ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY CLERK NOTIFY A RESPONDENT, THE PERSON BEING COMPLAINED ABOUT, THAT A COMPLAINT HAS BEEN FILED.

CURRENT CODE DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY ALLOW THIS AND HAS CREATED INSTANCES WHERE THE SUBJECT OF THE COMPLAINT LEARNED ABOUT THE COMPLAINT FROM THE MEDIA OR OTHER OUTSIDE SOURCES, WHICH ISN'T FAIR TO THE RESPONDENT.

THE ERB IS RECOMMENDING ALL COMPLAINTS BE FORWARDED TO THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF THE ERB.

THIS ENSURES THAT THE ERB SEES ALL COMPLAINTS AND HAS THE ABILITY TO WEIGH IN INDEPENDENTLY ON THEM.

REGARDING REQUESTED WAIVERS TO REVISION OF THE ETHICS CODE.

WE RECOMMEND INCLUDING LANGUAGE THAT ANY WAIVER REQUEST MUST BE HEARD BY THE ERB AND THAT COUNCIL CAN TAKE ACTION ON A WAIVER ONLY AFTER A RECOMMENDATION HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE ERB.

THERE WAS ALSO A REQUEST NOT TO ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO GRANT WAIVERS.

HOWEVER, SINCE THE COUNCIL IS THE RULE-MAKING BODY, LEGALLY THEY CANNOT BE PRECLUDED FROM GRANTING WAIVERS TO THE CODE IT PROVIDED.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING THE REQUIREMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FOR PARTIES SEEKING RESOLUTION, SUPPORT MULTI-FAMILY TAX CREDITS OR APPROVAL OF REVENUE BONDS THROUGH HOUSING TRUST OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES BY OR THROUGH CITY-CREATED ENTITIES.

CURRENTLY DURING THE ZONING CHANGE PROCESS, THE APPLICANT REQUESTING A ZONING CHANGE AND OWNERS OF THE OFFICERS OF ENTITIES REQUESTING A ZONING CHANGE ARE PROHIBITED FROM MAKING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS.

HOWEVER, PROPERTY OWNERS AND PEOPLE REPRESENTING THE ZONING APPLICANT INCLUDING LOBBYISTS, ATTORNEYS, OR CONSULTANTS NAMED AS A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE APPLICANT ARE NOT PRECLUDED FROM MAKING CONTRIBUTIONS.

WE ARE PROPOSING THE DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM MOVING QUICKLY ON TO THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE QUOTE.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES FOR FINANCE REPORTING.

THE ERB RECOMMENDS INCREASING THE FREQUENCY OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT FROM SEMI

[01:15:02]

ANNUALLY.

REPORTS WOULD BE REQUIRED IN APRIL AND OCTOBER OF NON-ELECTION YEARS IN ADDITION TO THE CURRENT JANUARY AND JULY REPORTS.

IN MAY ELECTION YEARS, AN OCTOBER REPORT WOULD NOW BE REQUIRED.

THESE ADDITIONAL REPORTS WILL PROVIDE TIMELY CONTRIBUTION DATA FOR EVALUATING HIGH-PROFILE WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING THE ELIMINATION OF THE FINANCE REPORT.

THIS REPORT IS FILED THREE DAYS BEFORE AN ELECTION DATE AND ONLY INCLUDES CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS BUT NOT EXPENSES.

THIS REPORT IS NOT REQUIRED BY THE STATE AND SEEMS EXCESSIVE GIVEN THERE IS ALSO A 30-DAY AND EIGHT-DAY REPORT WHICH CAPTURE CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENSES.

TOTAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS WOULD INCREASE FROM SEVEN TO NINE OVER THE TWO-YEAR CYCLE.

REGARDING HIGH PROFILE CONTRACTS.

WE RECOMMEND SPECIFIC ADDING SUBCONTRACTORS TO THE LIST OF PROHIBITED CONTRIBUTES.

WE DISALLOW SUBCONTRACTOR CONTRIBUTIONS SINCE THEY ARE INDIRECTLY SEEKING HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACTS.

BUT THIS CHANGE WOULD MAKE THAT PROHIBITION CLEAR.

ALSO WE RECOMMEND EXPANDING THE CURRENT PROHIBITION OF SPOUSES.

THIS EXCLUDES SPOUSES BUT ALSO EXPANDS TO EXCLUDE PARENTS OR ADULT CHILDREN IN THE SAME HOUSEHOLD.

SHOULD YOU ALL ACCEPT ALL OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY, WITH THE HOUSEKEEPING CHANGES AND THOSE INVOLVING INTERNAL PROCESSES WOULD BECOME EFFECTIVE JULY 1ST.

IMPLEMENTATION FOR SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES WOULD TAKE PLACE JANUAR.

THIS ALLOWS FOR OUTREACH TO STAKEHOLDERS, TO TRAIN STAFF ON UPDATES, AND TO UPDATE ALL NECESSARY FORMS AND APPLICATIONS AS WELL AS MAKE ANY I.T. RELATED CHANGES.

THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT THE ERB'S RECOMMENDATION.

I WOULD LIKE TO THANK ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE ERB AND STAB MEMBERS WHO HELPED US ALONG THIS PROCESS.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU BOTH.

COUNCILMAN COURAGE COURAGE: THA.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION.

AND THE REALLY GREAT WORK THAT BOTH OF YOUR COMMITTEES DID OVER A VERY EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME TO HELP US CLARIFY OUR POSITION AS A CITY GOVERNMENT WHEN IT COMES TO CAMPAIGNS, ELECTIONS GOVERNMENT.

THERE IS A LOT TO UNPACK IN THIS ITEM.

AND I WOULD THEREFORE LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE SEPARATE THE ITEM INTO TWO COMPONENTS AND THAT WE ADDRESS THEM INDIVIDUALLY.

THE FIRST COMPONENT I WOULD SUGGEST WOULD BE THE MUNICIPAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE CODE IN WHICH WE HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS TO GO AHEAD AND INCREASE DISCLOSURE BY CITING OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYER OVER $100.

AND IT ALSO INCLUDED THE NEW CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS OF $750 AND $1500 FOR COUNCIL AND MAYOR, RESPECTIVELY.

I THINK THOSE WERE CLEAR AND EASY FOR US TO ADDRESS.

THE OTHER CHANGES IN THERE WERE ACTUALLY JUST INCLUDING SOME CLARIFYING LANGUAGE.

AND THEN THE SECOND COMPONENT I WOULD ASK US TO CONSIDER WOULD BE THE CITY CODE CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE III, THE CITY ETHICS CODE, WHERE WE SEEM TO HAVE MORE ITEMS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THAT.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THESE BE ADDRESSED SEPARATELY AND THAT WE FIRST ADDRESS THE MUNICIPAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE CODE FOR APPROVAL.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR SEPARATING THE ITEM IN TWO PARTS.

ONE BEING THE FINANCE CODE.

THE OTHER BEING THE ETHICS CODE.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR -- SO WITH THESE TWO THEN THE FIRST ONE, BREAKING IT UP, YOU STILL WANT TO KEEP THE RAISING FROM $500 TO $750 TOGETHER WITH THE DISCLOSURES OF $100?

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> VIAGRAN: ALL RIGHT.

I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS OF CLARIFICATION THAT I NEED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ANDY WANTS TO WEIGH IN.

GO AHEAD.

>> I WANTED TO CLARIFY, THOUGH.

I THINK, COUNCILMAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FINANCE CODE THAT WERE RECOMMENDED BY THE RECENTLY-FORMED COMMITTEE.

OTHER CHANGES WERE INCLUDED IN THE ERB RECOMMENDATIONS.

JUST TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS SEPARATE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE COMMITTEE AND NOT THE ENTIRE CAMPAIGN FINANCE CODE.

>> VIAGRAN: OKAY.

I'M CONFUSED ON THAT.

[01:20:01]

I'M CONFUSED ON THAT.

SO WE HAVE THE ERB RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEN WE HAV.

HOW ARE YOU, MIKE? GOOD TO SEE YOU.

AND THEN THE NEW CAMPAIGN TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO I'M GOING TO GO TO THEM.

MY QUESTION IS FOR BOTH OF THEM THE NEW TASK FORCE AND THE ERB RECOMMENDATIONS.

WHEN DOES THIS GO INTO EFFECT?

>> THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES THAT THE ERB IS RECOMMENDING GO INTO EFFECT JANUARY 1ST, COUNCILWOMAN.

YES, JANUARY 1ST.

THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE MADE BY THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE TASK FORCE, THOSE GO INTO EFFECT JULY 1ST.

>> VIAGRAN: SO THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION OF THE $750, THE INCREASE, AS WELL AS THE DISCLOSURE OF THE $100 WOULD GO INTO EFFECT --

>> JULY 1.

>> VIAGRAN: NEXT WEEK.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> VIAGRAN: BUT ALL OF THE NEW DISCLOSURES, ET CETERA, WOULD GO INTO EFFECT JANUARY 2019.

>> CORRECT.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

I DO HAVE ONE POINT THAT I DID WANT TO TALK ABOUT WITH MY COLLEAGUE HERE.

I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS HERE.

BUT FIRST OF ALL I WANT TO THANK YOU BOTH FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE.

THANK YOU, DR. GARCIA, FOR ALL OF THE WORK YOU HAVE DONE LEADING THE ERB.

I THINK YOU HAVE MADE SOME PHENOMENAL RECOMMENDATIONS HERE.

AND MIKE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR STEPPING UP SO QUICKLY AND TAKING THE REIGNS ON THIS SO WELL.

IT'S VERY NICE TO HERE THAT IT WAS A COLLEGIAL EXPERIENCE.

NOT MANY OF THOSE DO WE HAVE HERE IN THE COMMUNITY SOMETIMES ON CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR DILIGENCE AND YOUR HARD WORK AND ALL OF THE BOARDS AND THE TASK FORCE.

ONE OF THE POINTS I DID HAVE AND I HAVE ASKED MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUE, COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL, TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, IS TO STRIKE THE CLAUSE FROM THE SECTION 2-59 IN DISCLOSURES A-4 WHERE IT GOES RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT OR NO OBJECTION FROM THE CITY OF THE MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT SEEKING HOUSING TAX CREDITS.

THAT'S ON SLIDE NO. 5, ACTUALLY.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ANDY -- SORRY.

>> SORRY TO INTERRUPT, COUNCILWOMAN.

THERE'S A CURRENT MOTION ALREADY ON THE FLOOR.

>> VIAGRAN: NO.

I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION.

I'M JUST --

>> I APOLOGIZE.

>> VIAGRAN: I'M SAYING HOW I SPOKE TO MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUE.

THAT ONE, AND THE REASON I HAVE ASKED HER TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, TO STRIKE THAT CLAUSE IS BECAUSE THIS PAST YEAR WE TRIED SOMETHING NEW WITH THE CITY.

I THINK WE ALL TALKED ABOUT IT.

IN HAVING NEW MEETINGS FOR THE COMMUNITY FOR AND WHAT THAT CAUSED WAS A LOT OF DISCORD AND STRIFE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

AND THIS HAPPENED IN DECEMBER.

WHAT ALSO HAPPENED WAS MANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO EVEN SOUGHT LETTERS OF SUPPORT OR NO OBJECTION, THEY DIDN'T EVEN END UP GOING FORWARD TO THE TDHCA.

SO THEN IT CREATED EVEN MORE STRIFE ON TOP OF THAT.

THEN, WHEN YOU ADD THAT DISCLOSURE ON THERE AND IT DOESN'T EVEN COME TO THE STATE, IT CREATES THAT ANIMOSITY AND THAT DISCORD.

SO BECAUSE OF THAT, ONE, I'M HOPING WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THIS PILOT PROGRAM TO SEE THAT WE RESTRUCTURE IT AGAIN.

BUT SECONDLY, REMOVING THAT DISCLOSURE WILL ALSO HELP STOP THIS IN-FIGHTING THAT CAN HAPPEN OR EVEN THESE NARRATIVES THAT CAN BE BROUGHT FORWARD WHEN IT'S NOT THE CASE AT ALL.

THAT'S WHY I'M MAKING THAT SUGGESTION TO MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUE ON THAT.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT -- ANOTHER ITEM I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT IS WHO, IN THAT SAME SECTION WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE BY THROUGH CITY-CREATED ENTITIES.

ANDY OR KEVIN OR JOHN.

DO YOU ALL HAVE A LIST OF ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS, BUSINESSES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT SAGE? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND THIS IS JUST DISCLOSURE.

>> THE TO ANSWER YOUR -- SORRY.

TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN, YES, WE DO HAVE A LIST.

AND THERE'S ABOUT 275, YES.

>> VIAGRAN: 275.

[01:25:02]

AND THIS IS DISCLOSURE OF THOSE 275?

>> IF THEY ARE HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACTS, YES.

JUST DISCLOSURE.

>> JUST TO CLARIFY, THERE'S 275 NONPROFIT ENTITIES THAT THE CITY CURRENTLY HAS CONTRACTS WITH OR DOES BUSINESS WITH.

THOSE WERE NOT ALL THROUGH THE HIGH PROFILE PROCESS.

THIS IN THE CODE WOULD BE THOSE APPLYING -- WOULD BE WITHIN THE HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACT DESIGNATION AND SEEKING THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT OR NO OBJECTION WITHIN THIS PROCESS, WHICH YOU TALKED ABOUT ALREADY IN THE DISCLOSURES REQUIRED.

>> VIAGRAN: AND SOME OF THESE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE COMPANIES, THE PROJECTS THE CITY CREATED, THOSE INCLUDE SAGE, WDC, BROOKS, PORT, AND ALL OF OUR NONPROFITS TOO, CORRECT?

>> THE DRIVER IS THE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY WHO IS BIDDING, BUT THE DRIVER IS WHAT THE PROCESS IS FOR.

>> VIAGRAN: SO THAT'S WHAT'S DRIVING IT.

>> IT WOULD INCLUDE NONPROFITS, CITY-CREATED NONPROFITS IN SOME CASES OR OTHER NONPROFITS OR ENTITIES OUT THERE THAT ARE IN THAT -- LOOKING FOR THOSE PROJECTS.

>> VIAGRAN: SO ONE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE, MAYBE IT'S FOR KEVIN.

WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HIGH-PROFILE, THE DEFINITION OF HIGH-PROFILE IS WHAT?

>> THE DEFINITION IS SET BY THE FINANCE AND PURCHASE DEPARTMENT.

BUT THE CRITERIA BEING THE OVERALL VALUE OF THE CONTRACT IS $1 MILLION OR MORE.

IF IT'S A CONTRACT WHICH IS BELIEVED TO BE OF HIGH PUBLIC INTEREST, OR IF IT'S A CONTRACT THAT IS HIGHLY COMPLEX IN NATURE.

ANY ONE OF THOSE THREE CRITERIA COULD GET IT CLASSIFIED AS HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACT.

AND THEN IT GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS.

THERE ARE ABOUT 40, 42 HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACTS SOLICITED IN THE LAST YEAR.

SO THAT'S GENERALLY THE NUMBER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

>> VIAGRAN: SO 42 HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACTS IN THE LAST YEAR.

SO WE HAVE ONLY DONE OVER A MILLION DOLLARS, 42 TIMES IN THE CITY FOR CONTRACTS?

>> IN A SINGLE CONTRACT IT SHOULD MEET THAT DEFINITION.

I'M LOOKING FOR FINANCE.

YEAH, THAT IS TRUE.

>> VIAGRAN: WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE CONTRACTS THAT WE DO ARE CONSIDERED THE HIGH-PROFILE OF THE WORK THAT THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO DOES.

MY QUESTION IS SHOULD WE INCREASE THE THRESHOLD OF WHAT HIGH-PROFILE MEANS FOR MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS?

>> SCULLEY: MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER HERE IN FRONT OF ME.

I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK WITH OUR FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

BUT WE DO HUNDREDS OF CONTRACTS ANNUALLY.

>> VIAGRAN: YES.

BUT HUNDREDS OF HIGH-PROFILE OVER A MILLION DOLLARS?

>> SCULLEY: NO.

42 OVER THE PAST YEAR.

>> VIAGRAN: ONLY 42 OVER A MILLION DOLLARS WITH THE CITY LAST YEAR.

>> SCULLEY: YES.

42 THAT MET THE CRITERIA THAT KEVIN JUST IDENTIFIED.

AND THAT POLICY WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AS WELL.

WHEN THE HIGH-PROFILE COMMITTEE WAS SET UP A FEW YEARS AGO.

>> VIAGRAN: IF YOU CAN GIVE ME THOSE 42, THAT WOULD BE GREAT, PLEASE.

RIGHT NOW WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS YIELD THE FLOOR BECAUSE I KNOW MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES HAVE MORE GREAT THINGS TO ADD TO THIS CONVERSATION.

BUT I MAY HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS COMING BACK FOR THIS.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I DO WANT TO SAY IS I DO HAVE A BIG PAUSE ON INCREASING THE AMOUNTS TO $750 AND TO $1500.

SO I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT RIGHT NOW.

THANK YOU.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU.

COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES.

>> GONZALES: THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM.

AND THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE.

IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU, MR. BELDON.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SEEING THIS THROUGH.

AND SO LET ME JUST START WITH SOME BASIC QUESTIONS.

CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS RIGHT NOW? BOTH OF THESE ISSUES.

>> FROM THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD'S PERSPECTIVE AND THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.

APPROXIMATELY TWO TO THREE YEARS IT HAS BEEN THE PROCESS OF THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD TO REVIEW THE ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE CODE FOR POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS AND POSSIBLE CHANGES THAT ARE REQUIRED.

THE PROCESS THEY GO THROUGH AS A BOARD REVIEWING THE CURRENT CODE AND LOOKING FOR POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS, BUT THEN THEY ALSO SEEK INPUT FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, THE CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE AND MY OFFICE AND THE COMPLIANCE AUDITOR, ISSUES WE MAY HAVE DEALT WITH OVER THE PAST YEAR OR TWO WHERE WE SEE, BECAUSE OF QUESTIONS WE ARE GETTING FROM CONSTITUENTS OR BUSINESSES WHERE THERE'S AREAS FOR POINTS OF CLARIFICATION IN THE PROCESS.

IT'S KIND OF A NORMAL COURSE OF

[01:30:02]

OUR PRACTICE TO DO THIS.

AND SO THAT STARTED A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, TWO YEARS AGO, AND HAS CULMINATED WITH THIS.

AS WE WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS THIS YEAR THERE WAS A REQUEST MADE FOR US TO CONSIDER FOR THE ERB TO CONSIDER INCREASING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

WHEN DR. GARCIA DID THE RESEARCH TO SEE HOW THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST, SHE FOUND OUT IN THE PAST WHEN THAT WAS LOOKED AT THE MAYOR HAD CREATED A SPECIAL TASK FORCE TO TAKE THAT UP.

DR. GARCIA THEN MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO MAYOR NIRENBERG, WHO THEN CREATED THE TASK FORCE WITH THE TASK FORCE THAT MR. BELTON MENTIONED EARLIER.

AND SO THAT'S HOW IT GOT SEPARATED.

AND SO THE ERB DID NOT ADDRESS THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMIT INCREASES BUT INSTEAD THE TASK FORCE DID THAT.

SO THAT'S THE GENESIS OF THESE TWO PROCESSES THAT ARE NOW COMING TOGETHER.

>> GONZALES: AND THE IDEA THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH THEM AT THE SAME TIME IS ALSO JUST COINCIDENTAL? WHY ARE WE DEALING WITH THEM TODAY?

>> IT'S COMING TOGETHER COINCIDENTAL WITH SOME EXTENT BECAUSE THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AFFECTING THE MUNICIPAL FINANCE CODE AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TASK FORCE HAS ONLY AFFECTED THE FINANCE CODE.

ERB'S COINCIDENTAL BUT ALSO LOGICALLY, TO PUT THEM TOGETHER.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME SET OF CODES.

>> GONZALES: AND DIDN'T SOME OF ANY COLLEAGUES CIRCULATE A CCR? SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN IDEA OF HOW THIS IS ALL COMING TOGETHER.

>> THERE WERE THREE CCRS SUBMITTED.

THEY WENT THROUGH THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE AND WERE FORWARDED ON TO THE ERB.

ONE OF THOSE CCRS HAD TO DO WITH DISCLOSURE OF OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYER.

>> GONZALES: IS A DISCLOSURE CCR AND THAT WENT THROUGH THE ERB, AND THAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED TODAY OR WAS THAT ALREADY PART OF THE WORK THAT YOU WERE DOING SINCE YOU TALK ABOUT YOU HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR A YEAR AND A HALF OR SO.

BUT THE CCR WAS JUST ENTERED SOMETIME AGO.

I GUESS HE'S BEEN HERE A YEAR.

>> SEVERAL MONTHS BACK AGO.

THE ERB DID TAKE THAT SPECIFIC CCR UP.

THE ERB'S RECOMMENDATION -- THE ERB AT THE TIME RECOMMENDED AGAINST THE ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYER FOR CONTRIBUTIONS OF $100 OR MORE.

AND THAT WAS THE ERB'S RECOMMENDATION.

WHEN THE TASK FORCE WAS CREATED THEY THEN ALSO TOOK UP THAT SAME ISSUE.

AND THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION THAT IS BEING PROPOSED TODAY IS THAT TO ADD THAT DISCLOSURE OF OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYER.

>> GONZALES: WAS THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION ALSO TO ADD THE DISCLOSURE? YOU SAY THE ERB SAID WE SHOULD NOT ADD THE DISCLOSURE.

THE TASK FORCE SAID WE SHOULD?

>> WE SHOULD, YES, MA'AM.

SO THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY IS TO ADD THE DISCLOSURE.

>> GONZALES: BUT ERB ORIGINALLY SAID NO?

>> ORIGINALLY IN THE PROCESS THEY SAID NO.

AND THEN IT GOT DEFERRED TO THE TASK FORCE, YES, MA'AM.

>> GONZALES: I GUESS WHY DOES ONE SUPERCEDE THE OTHER? WHY WOULDN'T YOU HAVE GONE WITH THE ERB'S RECOMMENDATION THAT SAID NO DISCLOSURE?

>> JUST GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS, YOU KNOW, THE TASK FORCE WAS GIVEN THAT TASK ALSO.

THAT WAS THE MOST RECENT RECOMMENDATION.

JUST FROM A TIMELINE.

>> GONZALES: WHO DECIDED THAT? WAS THAT YOU?

>> IT WAS CERTAINLY NOT ME.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: LET ME CLARIFY REALLY QUICKLY.

SO THERE WERE DELIBERATIONS ON THE ISSUES OF DISCLOSURE.

THERE WAS NO CONCLUSION ON THE DISCLOSURE ISSUE SO THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDED WE ASSEMBLE A TASK FORCE

>> SO THERE WERE THREE SEPARATE TASKS FORCE?

>> NO, JUST THE TWO.

THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD, WHICH ALREADY EXISTS, AND THEN THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDED THAT WE APPOINT A TASK FORCE SPECIFICALLY TO LOOK INTO THE DISCLOSURE ISSUE TO BRING THAT TO A RESOLUTION.

THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE HEARING THE RECOMMENDATION TODAY.

>> WELL, I GUESS I'M ALSO NOW A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED BECAUSE THERE WAS ALREADY A TASK FORCE TO REVIEW CONTRIBUTIONS, NOT DISCLOSURES.

>> THAT WAS THE SAME TASK FORCE --

>> SAME --

>> AND THE SAME -- IN THE SAME --

>> SAME TIME, SAME PROCESS.

>> YES, SO, IN FACT, THE TASK FORCE MET THREE TIMES THROUGH MAY AND JUNE AND ADDRESSED BOTH THOSE ISSUES CONCURRENTLY.

>> AND THEN AT WHAT POINT DID THE CCR COME THROUGH ASKING FOR THAT? WAS THAT SEPARATE AND APART --

>> THAT CCR -- THE ORIGINAL CCR I'M GOING TO SAY MAY HAVE COME THROUGH ABOUT A YEAR AGO.

I DON'T RECALL THE --

>> I GUESS BEFORE OR AFTER THE TASK FORCE WAS WORKING ON THAT ISSUE?

>> YES.

>> GONZALES: BEFORE OR AFTER?

>> WELL BEFORE THE TASK FORCE WAS EVEN CREATED, YES, MA'AM.

>> GONZALES: OKAY.

JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, LIKE, ALL THE DYNAMICS.

AND SO THEN ANOTHER -- SO NOW IT'S BEING PRESENTED AT THIS TIME JUST FOR -- WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE TIMELINE? IS THERE A REASON THAT WE HAVE TO APPROVE THIS RIGHT NOW OR IS IT BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN WORKING A LONG TIME AND

[01:35:01]

TIME TO PRESENT IT OR --

>> WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT.

IT'S COME TO A, YOU KNOW, CONCLUSION OF BOTH OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.

NOW, THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE TASK FORCE BECAUSE IT'S AFFECTING THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS AND DISCLOSURES, IS THAT NEXT CAMPAIGN CYCLE STARTS JULY 1.

SO FROM A LOGICAL PERSPECTIVE THAT WOULD BE A GREAT TIME TO START THIS, AND SO THEREFORE THERE ARE SOME TIMELINESS ISSUES.

THOSE THAT ARE -- THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE ERB, THOSE ARE ADMINISTRATIVE IN NATURE, INTERNAL CLARIFICATION.

THOSE COULD BE EFFECTIVE ALSO JULY 1 BUT THAT WILL REALLY HAVE NO IMPACT ON OUTSIDE CONSTITUENCIES.

>> GONZALES: AND WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR -- I THINK -- I DON'T KNOW IF THERE -- MR. BER THE QUESTION.

WHAT WAS THE REASON -- IT SEEMS LIKE WHEN THEY WERE DECIDED IT SHOULD BE $500 IT WAS JUST AN ARBITRARY NUMBER AND SO NOW WE'RE DECIDING 750 OR -- HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHAT YOU THINK IS THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT FOR A CONTRIBUTION ESPECIALLY JUST GIVEN THE RANGE OF POTENTIAL CONTRIBUTIONS FOR ANY --

>> THERE IS -- THERE'S NO MAGIC TO IT.

IT'S JUST SITTING DOWN AND TAKING A LOOK AT IT AND SAYING, DOES IT MAKE SENSE.

>> GONZALES: I MEAN, COULD IT --

>> YOU'RE IN A COUNTY IN WHICH THERE'S UNLIMITED CONTRIBUTIONS, AND OUR CITY HAS PROBABLY MUCH MORE PREDICTIVE THAN A LOT -- RESTRICTIVE THAN A LOT OF OTHERS SO WE LOOKED AT IT AND SAID WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR US.

BUT IT'S NOT IMAGINE I THINK.

THERE'S NO FORMULA.

IST JUST WHAT WE ALL -- IT'S JUST WHAT WE FELT MADE SENSE.

15 YEARS AGO PEOPLE THOUGHT THAT 500 AND A THOUSAND MAKES SENSE SO THE QUESTION IS WHAT MAKES SENSE TODAY.

>> GONZALES: I THINK THAT'S ALSO JUST IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, IT IS JUST AN ARBITRARY NUMBER THAT WAS DETERMINED BY A GROUP OF PEOPLE.

I'M NOT SAYING I SUPPORT IT OR DON'T BUT JUST IS THERE ANY MAGIC TO THOSE NUMBERS.

>> NO MAGIC WHATSOEVER.

>> OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND I GUESS ANOTHER QUESTION THAT I HAD REGARDING SORT OF THE DISCLOSURE, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE FORMS AND THEY'RE PRESENTED ON-LINE.

I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT COMES TO CONTRIBUTION TIME I LOOK AT ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES' CONTRIBUTIONS AND SEE WHO'S GIVEN TO THEM AND PERHAPS THEY MIGHT LIKE TO GIVE TO ME TOO.

SO IN THAT -- WHERE WOULD IT -- ON JUST SIMPLY THE FORMS, WHERE DOES IT LIST THE EMPLOYER?

>> SOMEONE WILL HAVE TO HELP ME ON THAT.

>> THE CURRENT APPLICATION THAT ALL CANDIDATES USE TO -- ALL CANDIDATES USE TO SUBMIT THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS, THERE IS ALREADY A FIELD IN THAT -- ON THAT FORM.

THERE'S TWO FIELDS ACTUALLY.

ONE SAYS OCCUPATION/JOB TITLE, THE SECOND ONE SAYS EMPLOYER.

THOSE FIELDS ARE OUT THERE.

THEY'RE AVAILABLE.

THEY'RE NOT USED BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED, SO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE THERE WILL BE NO SYSTEM CHANGES REQUIRED.

IT WILL JUST BE A REQUIREMENT TO START USING THAT FIELD.

>> GONZALES: SO THEN WHEN I GO TO LOOK AT, FOR EXAMPLE, COUNCILMAN SALDANA -- WHEN I GO TO LOOK AT HIS FOMPLE, FORM,S GOING TO SHOW THE OCCUPATION OF ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO HIM?

>> YES, THE REPORTING --

>> GONZALES: AND FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT IF THEY SAY -- I'M JUST THROWING AN EXAMPLE OUT HERE.

WHAT IF THEY SAY THEY'RE A CPA AND THEY WORK FOR -- NAME A BIG ACCOUNTING FIRM.

>> DNY --

>> DNY?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> ERNST & YOUNG, THEY'RE CPAS, RIGHT? SO COULD THEY JUST PUT CPA? DO THEY HAVE TO PUS EARNS OH PUT ERNST & YOUNG?

>> UNDER THE JOB TITLE THEY WOULD HAVE TO PUT ERNST & YOUNG, SPECIFIC JOB TITLE AND THEN UNDER EMPLOYER, YES, THEY WOULD NEED TO DISCLOSE.

IF THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION IS FOR $100 OR MORE THEY HAVE TO DISCLOSE THE EMPLOYER, WHICH IN THIS CASE IT WOULD BE --

>> I JUST MADE THAT UP RIGHT AT THE MOMENT.

>> (VOICES OVERLAPPING).

>> GONZALES: AND IF THEY DON'T, RIGHT, IF THE PERSON DOESN'T PUT IT, WHAT IF -- AND -- WHAT IF BY THE TIME THAT THEY SUBMIT IT TO THE TIME THAT THE DISCLOSURE IS MADE THE PERSON IS NO LONGER EMPLOYED THERE.

IS THERE THEN SOME CONCERN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE DISHONEST IN DISCLOSING THAT INFORMATION?

>> NO, MA'AM, BECAUSE WHEN YOU PUT THE DISCLOSURE, THE KEY THERE IS WHAT WAS THE DATE OF THE DISCLOSURE, THE DATE OF THE CONTRIBUTION, I'M SORRY.

AND SO ALL THE INFORMATION THAT IS PROVIDED IS AS OF THE DATE OF THAT DISCLOSURE, SO WHEN THEY MADE THAT DISCLOSURE, WHAT WAS THEIR OCCUPATION, WHAT WAS THEIR EMPLOYER, NAME AND ADDRESS, THE SPHACT THAT THERE WAS A CHANGE -- THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A CHANGE AFTER THAT YET BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF THAT REQUIREMENT IS -- HAS NO IMPACT.

IT'S THE DATE OF THE DISCLOSURE WHAT WAS THEIR OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYER.

>> GONZALES: AND YOU USE THAT SAME INFORMATION WHEN YOU ARE TRYING TO CONFIRM WHETHER OR NOT THE PERSON IS ELIGIBLE TO CONTRIBUTE?

>> I'M SORRY? I DIDN'T --

>> GONZALES: WHEN -- THE DATE OF THE SUBMITTAL, OR THE DATE OF THE CONTRIBUTION, THAT'S HOW YOU DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE PERSON IS ELIGIBLE TO

[01:40:02]

CONTRIBUTE?

>> YES.

YES, ALL THAT WOULD APPLY, AND EVEN WHEN WE DO, FOR EXAMPLE, HIGH PROFILE CONTRACT REVIEWS AND THOSE PROHIBITED PERIODS, WE GO BY CONTRIBUTION DATE.

>> GONZALES: AND ISN'T THERE STILL A CLAUSE, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY WERE EMPLOYED BY A COMPANY THAT WAS NOT ELIGIBLE TO CONTRIBUTE, BUT THEN THEY'RE NO LONGER EMPLOYED, DO YOU STILL HAVE TO RETURN THE MONEY AND --

>> THE ELIGIBILITY PROHIBITION APPLIES GENERALLY ONLY TO EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OR BOARD MEMBERS OR THE SIGNATORIES OF A CONTRACT, OF A HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACT.

SO THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO ALL EMPLOYEES OF A COMPANY.

TAKE A --

>> GONZALES: ARE YOU SURE? BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE, AGAIN, WHY I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE, BECAUSE ISN'T THAT WHAT THIS SAYS HERE, THAT YOU CANNOT CONTRIBUTE IF YOU ARE A SUBCONTRACTOR OR YOU ARE IN ANY WAY AFFILIATED WITH A COMPANY THAT IS -- HAS A CONTRACT? SO, FOR EXAMPLE, EVERY EMPLOYEE OF, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE H.E.B. BECAUSE WE JUST --

>> NO, THAT AFFILIATION WITH THAT COMPANY, THAT ALWAYS APPLIES IN THE CODE, IT'S FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT.

FOR EXAMPLE, H.E.B., IF THEY ARE BIDDING ON A HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACT THE EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP TEAM OF THAT COULD NOT MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS DURING THE PROHIBITED PERIOD BUT EACH AND EVERY EMPLOYEE OF H.E.B.

IS FREE TO GIVE CONTRIBUTIONS.

THAT IS HOW IT IS TODAY AND HOW IT WILL REMAIN, THE EXCEPTION BEING WITH THIS PROPOSAL, IF IT'S A HUNDRED DOLLARS OR MORE THEY WOULD HAVE TO SAY I WORK FOR H.E.B. AND THEIR TITLE.

>> GONZALES: AND THEIR TITLE.

SO I AM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T OPPOSE EVERYTHING THAT'S BEING PRESENTED.

THERE ARE SOME, OF COURSE, THAT I -- I THINK ARE REASONABLE AND I'M ALSO VERY GRATEFUL FOR THE RECOMMENDATION OF A COMMITTEE THAT IS CHARGED WITH MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS.

I'M VERY RESPECTFUL OF THAT BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT Y'ALL ARE VOLUNTEERS AND THAT YOU GIVE YOUR TIME, BUT SOMETIMES THERE'S UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO IMPROVE ON.

YOU KNOW, I CURRENTLY DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A FLAWED SYSTEM, AND I KNOW THAT I TRY MY VERY BEST TO COMPLY.

EVERY CHANCE I HAD, I'VE GIVEN THE EXAMPLE BEFORE THAT BEFORE I SUBMIT ANYTHING I HAVE A PROFESSIONAL CPA REVIEW ALL MY DOCUMENTS.

MY HUSBAND AND I GO THOROUGHLY ONE BY ONE TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE'RE DOING OUR PERSONAL DISCLOSURES THAT WE HAVE TO SUBMIT EVERY YEAR THAT WE DON'T MAKE ANY ERRORS, THAT WE DON'T JUST COPY THEM FROM THE YEAR BEFORE, WE HAVE TO SIT WITH OUR BANKER AND OUR CPA AND MAKE SURE WE'RE PROPERLY DISCLOSING EVERYTHING AND THERE'S A FEW ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AS WELL.

EVEN THE HUNDRED DOLLAR CONTRIBUTION THAT IS -- WHERE YOU'RE SAYING NOW WE HAVE TO SAY FOR $100.

WELL, IT COSTS ME MORE THAN $100 JUST TO HAVE A PROFESSIONAL REVIEW ALL THOSE DOCUMENTS, SO THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED ALSO BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF MY SUBMITTAL OF THE PAPERWORK.

IT JUST GETS REALLY COMPLICATED, AND I ALWAYS WANT TO COMPLY.

I DO MY VERY BEST, NOT JUST TO BE ETHICAL BUT TO APPEAR ETHICAL.

THAT'S -- I MEAN, WE HAVE TO HAVE BOTH.

>> RIGHT.

>> WE CAN'T JUST FOLLOW THE LAW.

WE HAVE TO GIVE THE APPEARANCE THAT WE'RE FOLLOWING THE LAW.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE ALL BELIEVE IN TRANSPARENCY.

I KNOW THAT I DO.

I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF WAYS THAT THINGS ARE NOT TRANSPARENT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS ONE OF THEM.

SO I JUST -- I MAY CHIME BACK IN BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT.

AND I ALSO FEEL, YOU KNOW, SINCE I DO HAVE THE FLOOR, I WANT TO JUST TALK A LITTLE ABOUT THE SORT OF CHANGING DYNAMIC OF CAMPAIGNS AND THE WAY THAT THEY'RE RUN AND THE WAY THAT INDIVIDUALS AND NONPROFITS RAISE MONEY.

WHEN WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, CONSULTED WITH PEOPLE WHO DO FUNDRAISING FOR A LIVING, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY SAY, ESPECIALLY THE MILLENNIAL GENERATION, THEY WANT SOMETHING FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTION.

THEY DON'T JUST WANT TO GIVE.

THEY WANT TO WALK AWAY WITH A T-SHIRT OR A MUG OR AT A MINIMUM A FEELING LIKE YOU'VE, YOU KNOW, CONTRIBUTED TO A CAUSE, SOMETHING TANGIBLE, REALLY, THAT THEY WANT.

AND SO AS WE ARE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO CONTRIBUTE NOT JUST TO US BUT TO CONTRIBUTE TO NONPROFITS, WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE WAY THAT WE COMMUNICATE WITH PEOPLE, AND THAT'S TRUE NOT JUST FOR THE FUNDRAISING WORLD BUT IT'S TRUE IN THE MARKETING WORLD, IT'S TRUE IN THE MEDIA WORLD.

EVERYBODY IS CHANGING THE WAY THAT THEY COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR CONSTITUENTS OR THEIR CUSTOMERS.

AND SO A $500 NUMBER THAT WAS JUST ARBITRARY THAT WAS DECIDED 15 YEARS AGO BEFORE WE HAD A VERY DIFFERENT LANDSCAPE IS JUST -- SEEMS VERY ODD TO ME.

WHY ARE WE DOING THIS TO OURSELVES WHEN WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO CHANGE WITH THE TIME AS WELL.

SO IF WE HAVE AN EVENT, WE PROBABLY NEED TO GIVE THEM A T-SHIRT.

WE PROBABLY NEED TO GIVE THEM SOMETHING, A MUG, A WATER BOTTLE, SOMETHING THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU, AND THERE IS AN EXPENSE TO

[01:45:01]

THAT AS WELL.

SO I JUST -- I'M GOING TO YIELD THE FLOOR.

I MIGHT CHIME BACK IN IF I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS AS THEY EVOLVE, BUT I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO DISCOUNT ALL THE HARD WORK THAT WAS DONE, AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, JUST TO COUNT LIKE THE REASONS WHY THESE SORT OF EVOLVED, YOU KNOW, PART OF IT WAS JUST THE DESIRE TO REVIEW EVERY YEAR BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THE LAWS CHANGE, THE WORLD IS CHANGING, WE HAVE TO REVIEW THESE THINGS EVERY NOW AND THEN, BUT PART OF IT WAS, YOU KNOW, JUST TIMING AND PART OF IT PERHAPS IS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED AS WELL.

SO WE HAVE TO TAKE ALL THOSE THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE DO THIS, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I -- WITH THE GRACE OF GOD AND THE HELP OF MY CONSTITUENTS, CAN SERVE ANOTHER THREE YEARS, BUT AS I EVOLVE AND MOVE OFF THIS COUNCIL I HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT IN A COMMUNITY LIKE MINE WHERE 93% OF THE PEOPLE ARE LOW INCOME, THAT THEY REALLY CANNOT CONTRIBUTE TO MY EFFORTS AND LIKELY CANNOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE EFFORTS OF WHOMEVER COMES BEFORE ME.

SO WE HAVE TO BE VERY CREATIVE IN OUR FUNDRAISING EFFORTS, AND SOME OF THAT, YOU KNOW, MEANS THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY IN HOW WE DO THAT.

SO I'LL YIELD THE FLOOR AND MAY CHIME BACK IN LATER.

SO THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN GONZALES.

COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE.

>> BROCKHOUSE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

COUNCILMAN GONZALES, YOU MAKE VERY GOOD POINTS, AND I WROTE DOWN WHEN YOU SAID THIS IS NOT A FLAWED SYSTEM, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE -- YOU KNOW, I PUT THAT ON THE RECORD AS I'M 100% IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU THAT THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM.

AND I THINK WHAT YOU SEE HERE TODAY -- THIS IS ONLY THE THIRD SPEAKER IN, AND THE AMOUNT OF QUESTIONS ARE -- I MEAN, THEY'RE PLENTIFUL.

THERE'S A LOT OF UNCOMFORTABILITY WITH WHAT'S OCCURRING ON THIS VOTE.

WE CAN SIT HERE AND SAY, OH, WE'VE BEEN AT THIS FOR YEARS AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO THIS OR THAT, AND SOMETIMES IN A LEADERSHIP ROLE YOU CAN ANALYZE ANALYZE ANALYZE AND COME OUT AT THE END AND REALIZE WE'RE DEALING WITH SOMETHING THAT'S PRETTY GOOD AS IT IS.

LIKE, IT DOESN'T REQUIRE -- IF IT AIN'T BROKE, BREAK IT MENTALITY, RIGHT? IF IT'S WORKING, IT'S WORKING.

AND I THINK EVERYBODY UP HERE AND I THINK THE COUNCILWOMAN PUT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.

LOOK, I'M COMPLYING.

I WANT TO DO THE BEST I CAN.

THERE'S TIME TO FILL THESE THINGS OUT, I DO THEM MYSELF AND PASSING THEM AROUND, MAKING SURE THEY'RE RIGHT.

I'M DOING THE BEST I CAN.

I THINK EVERYONE ONE OF US INHERENTLY WANTS TO DISCLOSE, IN THE MOST HIGHEST AND BEST USE POSSIBLE.

WE WANT TO GIVE AS MUCH INFORMATION AS WE CAN, GET IT RIGHT.

ARE THERE PEOPLE IN THE PAST THAT MAY HAVE ABUSED THE SYSTEM? OF COURSE, IN ANY POLITICAL OR ELECTED OFFICE THERE'S SOMEONE THAT'S GOING TO FIND THAT LINE TO GET THE EXTRA BUCK OR DO THOSE THINGS.

I DON'T DOUBT THAT.

WE PUT THE RULES IN PLACE TO PROTECT THAT, BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH NOTING LOUDLY, THIS IS NOT A FLAWED SYSTEM, AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S A REASON TO PUSH ADDITIONAL WORK HERE WHEN PERHAPS ON THE EDGES WE CAN MAKE A FEW CHANGES HERE OR THERE THAT ARE VERY BENEFICIAL TO THE SYSTEM, AND SOME PROCEDURAL CLEANUP THINGS.

I KNOW THE ERB HAS WORKING ON THINGS, MR. GARCIA, YOU RECOMMENDED, WE MET TWO OR THREE TIMES, YOU CAME TO MY OFFICE AND WE SAT DOWN AND TALKED ABOUT IT.

SO I THINK THE RUSH CONCERNS ME TO GET THIS DONE BY JULY 1, RIGHT? I DON'T GET IT.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THE SYSTEM, AND I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN TAKE TIME TO GET THINGS RIGHT, IT'S OKAY, SOMETIMES, RIGHT? AND THE FACT THAT IT HAPPENED AND THIS HAD BEEN WORKED ON BEFORE WE WERE ELECTED, I MEAN, OH, WELL.

I MEAN, WE DID PLENTY IN THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL THAT WE LOOK AT NOW AND SAY THAT'S A DIFFERENT COURSE WITH FIVE OR SIX DIFFERENT FACES UP HERE, A DIFFERENT MAYOR.

THERE'S NOW A DIFFERENT LEADERSHIP MENTALITY THAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THE BEGINNING -- OR, YOU KNOW, THE ORIGINAL GENESIS OF WE GOT TO FIX THIS SYSTEM AND DO SOME HOUSECLEANING THINGS, WHICH ULTIMATELY TURNED INTO RAISING CAMPAIGN LIMITS AND A SERIES OF OTHER THINGS.

AND WE DON'T REALLY EVEN ADDRESS THE NEED FOR AN INDEPENDENT ETHICS OFFICER.

I MEAN, OF THE BIGGEST AND MOST GLARING PIECES OF OPPORTUNITY HERE, THE ACCOUNTABILITY METRIC, WE DIDN'T REALLY EVEN ENHANCE THAT.

WE HAVEN'T JUMPED ON THAT.

THAT'S BEEN SITTING OUT THERE FOR YEARS.

I JUST THINK THIS IS -- I WOULD -- I'M NOT -- THE TIME IS NOT NOW.

SO I'M GOING TO MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS ENTIRE DEBATE ON THIS ITEM, PERIOD, UNTIL AUGUST, SO THAT WE CAN GET IT RIGHT.

IF YOU NOTICE -- IF ANYBODY WATCHES CITY HALL WILL NOTICE THAT WHEN PEOPLE ARE MOVING AND THERE'S PAPERS FLYING, THERE'S UNCERTAINTY, YOU CAN SENSE AS A LEADER UP HERE WHEN THINGS ARE NOT NAILED DOWN TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.

THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS STAND UP HERE AND SAY,

[01:50:02]

WELL, I VOTED ON IT SO I COULD READ IT LATER TO SEE WHAT IT'S ABOUT, RIGHT? THAT'S THE SIGN OF IT'S OKAY TO SLOW DOWN AND TAKE SOME TIME.

THERE HAVE BEEN MEMBERS THAT HAVE SAID, WELL, WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS.

I GET IT, BUT IF THIS IS THE RESULT OF YEARS, WE'VE GOT SOMETHING BETTER WE NEED TO DO ABOUT THIS AND WE'RE SPLITTING IT INTO THREE PARTS WHEN PROBABLY IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE LIKE THAT ORIGINALLY.

WE'RE GOING TO MAKE MORE AMENDMENTS TO THESE INDIVIDUAL PARTS, SO WE'RE GOING TO SPLIT THEM INTO TWO PARTS, THEN MAKE AMENDMENTS ON THOSE PARTS, WHEN PERHAPS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUTTONED UP AND ADDRESSED BETTER.

NOW, THE B SESSIONS WE'VE DEBATED THIS BACK AND FORTH.

SOME OF THESE THINGS LIKE CAMPAIGN FINANCE DIDN'T COME WITH A WHOLE LOT OF HEFTY INFORMATION TO THE FULL COUNCIL UNTIL NOW, SO I'M GOING TO -- I THINK IF I'M CORRECT THERE'S ONLY ONE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, AND THAT'S COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S --

>> COURAGE: THAT'S CORRECT, COUNCILMAN, BUT YOURTH MOTION TO DELAY ACTUALLY TRUMPS ALL THE OTHER MOTIONS CURRENTLY ON THE TABLE.

SO THE FIRST ONE TO CONSIDER WOULD BE THE MOTION TO DELAY.

>> BROCKHOUSE: OKAY.

SO THEN MY MOTION TO DELAY BECOMES SUPERIOR, AND DO I MAKE THAT DATE SENSITIVE?

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> BROCKHOUSE: I THINK IT'S WORTH SAYING AT THIS POINT LET'S POSTPONE AND TAKE THE TIME TO GET IT RIGHT, TABLE THIS EVENT UNTIL -- THIS VOTE UNTIL AUGUST 9.

THAT GIVES US OUR FIRST MEETING BACK ON THE 2ND.

WE CAN CLEAN THIS THING UP APPROPRIATELY, HAVE FAIR VOTES.

FOR INSTANCE, I'D LIKE TO ASK COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE TO AMEND HIS -- RIGHT -- WE CAN DO IT AUGUST 2.

I CAN AMEND IT TO AUGUST 2.

[LAUGHTER] I'LL MAKE -- I'LL FIX IT IF I HAVE TO, BUT I'D LIKE TO ASK COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE, WE NEED TO SPLIT DISCLOSURE AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE INCREASES.

I THINK THIS COUNCIL SHOULD VOTE ALONE ON RAISING THE FINANCE RATES, RIGHT? I MEAN, YOU CAN TELL THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE OPPOSED.

I THINK WE SHOULD TACKLE THAT SEPARATELY.

SO I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO TO GET THIS READY FOR A VOTE SO THE PUBLIC CLEARLY UNDERSTANDS WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON, SO I ASK -- I'M GOING TO CLARIFY THE MOTION ONE MORE TIME.

IS THERE A DATE SPECIFIC THAT MAKES BETTER SENSE?

>> I WAS GOING TO SAY, COUNCILMAN, THE OTHER THING YOU CAN DO IS SIMPLY SAY THAT IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED BY THE END OF AUGUST TO GIVE FLEXIBILITY.

YOU CAN DO THAT AS WELL.

>> BROCKHOUSE: I MOTION TO POSTPONE DEBATE ON THIS ISSUE UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST, AND I'M GOING TO YIELD THE FLOOR AT THIS MOMENT.

WE'LL -- I WILL RETURN, THOUGH, BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE, DEPENDING ON THE POSITION OF THAT MOTION, THAT WE COME BACK AND ATTEMPT TO SPLIT COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S VOTE ONE MORE TIME, BECAUSE I THINK IF WE HAVE TO VOTE TODAY WE NEED TO VOTE CLEANLY ON RAISING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS IN THE CURRENT ENVIRONMENT.

SO I'LL YIELD THE FLOOR AT THIS MOMENT WITH MY MOTION PENDING.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DELAY OF DEBATE UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST -- OR BEFORE THE END OF AUGUST.

>> MAYOR, COULD I ADDRESS THAT SINCE IT WAS RELATED TO MY MOTION?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WELL, HE'S NOT -- HE'S NOT ASKING TO AMEND THE MOTION YET, UNLESS THIS MOTION FAILS.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE UP THIS MOTION FIRST.

THERE IS A MOTION AND SECOND TO DELAY ITEM 32 FOR DEBATE UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST.

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: IT WILL? CAN YOU MARK IT DOWN? LET'S CLEAR THIS MOTION FIRST BECAUSE HE WANTS TO DELAY ANY DISCUSSION OF IT UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST, SO I THINK IT WOULD BE RIGHT.

WE HAVE IN THE QUEUE, CAN WE GO AHEAD AND WRITE DOWN THE QUEUE? OKAY.

ONE SECOND.

SO THE MOTION AND THE SECOND WHICH WE'LL TAKE UP NOW IS TO END DEBATE, DELAY DEBATE, UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST ON THIS ITEM 32.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

OKAY.

THERE IS CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT A YEA VOTE AND A NAY VOTE ARE, SO IF THERE IS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE ITEM WE CAN DO THAT.

IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY.

THERE IS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE ITEM, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMAN?

>> I'D LIKE TO -- I WOULD REQUEST AS A POINT OF PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY OPEN THIS UP FOR DEBATE.

THIS IS A VERY CLOSE ISSUE, AT THIS POINT IT'S A 6-5 VOTE.

I THINK WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT AND DEBATE THE MERITS OF EXTENDING THIS SO THAT EVERY MEMBER HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO ON THE RECORD.

THIS DESERVES AT THIS CLOSE OF A VOTE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO FLOOR DISCUSS THIS ITEM AS OPPOSED TO YOUR PUSH

[01:55:02]

TO IMMEDIATELY VOTE ON IT, SIR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I'M CONFUSED BY YOUR MOTION.

>> MY POINT OF PARLIAMENTARY -- PROCEDURAL INQUIRY HERE IS WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DEBATE OF POSTPONING.

I DON'T SEE WHY YOU CALLED THE VOTE IMMEDIATELY.

THERE'S NO VOTE NECESSARY.

WE CAN DEBATE THE MERITS OF POSTPONING.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE -- STIFLING A DEBATE.

>> THE COUNCILMAN CAN FILE -- OR PUT FORTH A MOTION TO OPEN DEBATE, TO RECONSIDER.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

SO THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND TO RECONSIDER DEBATE.

PLEASE VOTE.

>> I'M SORRY, COULD YOU PLEASE RESTATE THE MOTION THAT WE ARE --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THE MOTION IS TO RECONSIDER THE ITEM, WHICH WILL BRING THE ITEM BACK TO THE FLOOR --

>> THE ITEM BEING ITEM 33?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ITEM 32.

>> AND TO OPEN DEBATE, COUNCILWOMAN.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: TO OPEN DEBATE BACK UP ON ITEM 32.

>> OKAY.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

WE ARE BACK.

COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL?

>> SANDOVAL: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

NOW THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING THE ITEM AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S PRIOR MOTION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST --

>> SORRY TO INTERRUPT AGAIN, COUNCILWOMAN, BUT AGAIN, THE ONLY THING THAT RIGHT NOW IS ON THE FLOOR IS THE MOTION TO DELAY, AND SO THE DEBATE SHOULD BE LIMITED TO WHETHER TO DELAY THIS ITEM OR NOT.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

COUNCILWOMAN, DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS ON DELAY? OKAY.

COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

>> PELAEZ: THANK YOU.

THERE'S NEVER A BAD TIME TO TALK ABOUT DISCLOSURE AND ETHICS, AND THAT'S WHY I'M GOING TO OPPOSE THE MOTION TO DELAY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

COUNCILMAN COURAGE?

>> COURAGE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, AND THIS IS RELATED TO THE MOTION TO DELAY, THE REASON WHY PEOPLE ARE THINKING ABOUT DELAYING THIS IS I THINK BECAUSE THERE'S SOME CONFUSION ON MY ORIGINAL MOTION, WHICH WAS SIMPLY TO DIVIDE THIS INTO TWO ISSUES, AND THEN WHEN WE DECIDE TO DIVIDE INTO TWO ISSUES, WE TAKE UP EACH ISSUE SEPARATELY.

AND WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF EACH OF THOSE ISSUES WE CAN MAKE WHATEVER AMENDMENTS OR CHANGES WE WANT.

I WAS JUST SAYING THERE WAS ONE ORDINANCE PRESENTED TO US THAT HAD A LOT OF LANGUAGE IN IT THAT TALKED ABOUT BOTH CAMPAIGN FINANCING AND ETHICS REVIEW, AND I JUST SAID LET'S BREAK IT DOWN INTO THE SEPARATE COMPONENTS OF THOSE TWO ISSUES.

LET'S HANDLE CAMPAIGN FINANCING AND THE CHANGES RECOMMENDED.

AFTER WE DO THAT HANDLE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD AND THE CHANGES RECOMMENDED, AND YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON ANY AMENDMENTS OR CHANGES ON EITHER OF THOSE ISSUES AS WE ATTENDED TO THEM.

WHAT WE'RE SAYING NOW IS LET'S POSTPONE THE WHOLE THING, COME BACK AND DO IT ALL OVER AGAIN IN A MONTH.

I THINK EVERYBODY HAS RECEIVED THIS MATERIAL AND HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK IT OVER, ATTEND THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.

I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY STILL BE QUESTIONS OR CONFUSIONS TO BE ASKED, BUT THE PEOPLE ARE HERE TO ASK.

SO I WOULD VOTE AGAINST POSTPONING THIS DISCUSSION.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

COUNCILMAN PERRY?

>> PERRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

I THINK IT'S EVIDENT FROM THE DISCUSSIONS UP HERE THAT THERE STILL IS THAT CONFUSION UP HERE, AND, YOU KNOW, I COMPLAINED ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST B SESSION WHEN WE GOT TWO COMMITTEES DOING THINGS THAT ARE FINALLY COMING TOGETHER AT THE A SESSION AND ONE OF THEM DIDN'T EVEN MEET THE B SESSIONS TO DISCUSS THIS.

SO I THINK THERE IS ENOUGH OUT THERE, ENOUGH DISCUSSION, ENOUGH CONFUSION.

GETTING LETTERS FROM NONPROFITS, YOU KNOW, AND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE FOR THIS -- FOR THESE CHANGES, YEAH, I'M STILL CONFUSED.

I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HAVE THAT EXTRA TIME.

SO I'D SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DELAY THIS.

I SEE NO REASON TO RUSH THIS THROUGH TODAY.

YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE ARE SOME FOLKS SAYING, HEY, WE CAN GET AN INCREASE IN OUR FUNDING FOR THIS -- THIS CYCLE.

I DON'T -- I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT.

THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, SO THESE CHANGES MERIT ADDITIONAL TIME FOR US TO TAKE A LOOK AT, STUDY AND

[02:00:03]

ASK QUESTIONS AND GET SMART ON THIS BEFORE WE APPROVE SOMETHING ON OURSELVES, PLUS FUTURE COUNCILS.

THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PERRY.

COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE.

>> BROCKHOUSE: THANK YOU, MAYOR, THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PERRY.

I WANT TO JUST REITERATE YOUR POINTS THERE.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR 60 DAYS.

IF A MEMBER IS ASKING FOR SOME MORE TIME TO GET -- TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS, THIS KIND OF WORK, ESPECIALLY THE MERITS OF IT.

WE DON'T HAVE A CAMPAIGN FINANCE ISSUE RIGHT NOW.

THESE PROBLEMS DON'T EXIST.

WE'RE NOT FACING OR STARING DOWN ANY IMPROPRIETIES OR ANYTHING JUMPING OUT FROM A REPORTING PERSPECTIVE.

IT SURE DOES LOOK LIKE, AND WE TALKED ABOUT FOR THE COUNCILMAN -- TO THE COUNCILMAN'S POINT THERE'S A LOT OF PERCEPTION ISSUES TOO, US TRYING TO GET THIS DONE BY JULY 1.

LOOKS LIKE WE WANT TO GRAB MORE MONEY INTO OUR CAMPAIGN COVERS.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S THE CASE -- COFFERS.

I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST IT.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED MORE MONEY IN THE SYSTEM.

BUT THE PUBLIC IS SITTING OUT THERE, WHY ARE WE RUSHING TO GET THIS DONE BECAUSE WE'VE HAD TO DO THE HARD WORK FOR A YEAR.

IT'S BEEN DIFFICULT.

IT'S BEEN OUT THERE FOR A COUPLE YEARS AND I APPRECIATE THE WORK OF BOTH COMMITTEES BUT THE COUNCILMAN IS RIGHT, THEY'RE TWO SEPARATE COMMITTEES AND SOME OF IS THIS HASN'T COME BEFORE US YOU MEAN NOW.

WE'VE ASKED QUESTIONS ON OUR OWN INDIVIDUAL PIECE, BUT I THINK IT IS EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS A LOT OF DISCUSSION, AND TO COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S POINT, WE'LL SPLIT THEM UP AND VOTE, BUT THERE'S A REASON WE'RE DOING THAT BECAUSE IT WASN'T CONFIGURED APPROPRIATELY.

PROCEDURALLY IT MAKES SENSE, SPLIT IT UP, GET IT STRAIGHT.

COME BACK AT A DATE CERTAIN AND TIME.

IF YOU HAVE FIVE MEMBERS ASKING AT THIS POINT -- IT WAS A 6-5 VOTE, IF YOU HIT THE BUTTON CORRECTLY, 6 TO MOVE FORWARD, YOU HAVE FIVE MEMBERS OF THE BODY ASKING FOR MORE TIME.

60 DAYS.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

WE'LL COME BACK AND PICK IT UP IN AUGUST AND KNOCK THEM OUT AND VOTE IT INDIVIDUALLY AND GET IT RIGHT AND EVERYBODY FEELS CONFIDENT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS APPROPRIATE, PLUS WE DON'T HAVE TO JAM THROUGH THE ABILITY TO GRAB MORE CAMPAIGN FINANCE DOLLARS IN THE SYSTEM.

THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO DO THAT BY JULY 1.

THERE'S NONE, OTHER THAN THE ABILITY TO GRAB MORE CASH.

SO I'D MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S PUT ON THE TABLE, AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS MANY PEOPLE ON THE BODY HAVE THIS MANY CONCERNS ABOUT IT, I THINK IT WARRANTS THE COMMON COURTESY OF LET'S LOOK AT IT, MAKE SURE IT MAKES SENSE AND BRING IT BACK IN A BETTER FORMAT AND THEN WE VOTE IN AUGUST.

WE HAVE A LOT OF BIG THINGS COMING IN AUGUST, WE CAN GET IT DONE EARLY AND IT MAKES SENSE FROM A COURTESY PERSPECTIVE TO MAKE SURE WE GET THIS RIGHT.

THEN WE COME BACK -- WE LEFT OUT THE ETHICS AUDITOR.

WE HAVE A LOT OF GAPS IN THE SYSTEM WE CAN ADDRESS AND I DON'T THINK THIS AS A WHOLE IS GETTING IT DONE.

TO BE VERY CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC, THE SYSTEM IS WORKING -- TO COUNCILMAN GONZALES'S POINT.

THIS IS NOT A FLAWED SYSTEM.

PEOPLE ARE WORKING WELL.

THE SYSTEM WORKS WELL.

MAYBE THERE ARE TECHNOLOGY THINGS AND SLIGHT DISCLOSURE IMPROVEMENTS WE CAN DO, SURE, BUT THE SYSTEM FUNCTIONS WELL FOR THE GOVERNMENT, FUNCTIONS WELL FOR THE PEOPLE.

CAN ALWAYS BE MORE INFORMATION, BUT PROCESS-WISE THIS SYSTEM WORKS AND WORKS EFFECTIVELY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE.

WELL, WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DELAY.

I WILL JUST SAY THAT THE PERCEPTION THAT IS UNDERSCORED IN MY MIND ON THIS WHOLE ISSUE IN THIS DEBATE IS THAT WE HAVE A GROUP OF CITIZENS, SOME OF THEM APPOINTED, WHO HAVE DELIBERATED FOR THE BETTER PART OF TWO YEARS ON WAYS THAT WE CAN MAKE SAN ANTONIO PERHAPS A GOLD STANDARD WITH REGARD TO OUR ETHICS AND OUR GOVERNANCE IN RESPECT TO CAMPAIGNING.

IT'S NOT LOST ON ANY CITIZEN, AND IT SHOULDN'T BE, AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD GIVE THEM A FALSE IMPRESSION THAT SAN ANTONIO IS ANYTHING BUT A GOLD STANDARD WHEN IT COMES TO RESTRICTIONS ON MONEY IN CAMPAIGNS.

WE HAVE SOME OF THE MOST RESTRICTIVE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LIMITS THAT CAN BE FOUND IN TEXAS, IF NOT BEYOND THAT.

WE -- MR. BELLVIN, YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THE COUNTY WE RESIDE IN ARE TEARN TO HEART.

THERE ARE MANY JURISDICTIONS THAT CAMPAIGN WITH NO RESTRICTIONS WHATEVER, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN BODIES DELIBERATING AND TELLING US BETTER HOW WE CAN DO IT WHO BACK DECADES AGO DECIDED THERE WAS NO POINT AND THERE'S NO GOOD THAT COMES OUT OF CORPORATE DOLLARS DIRECTLY INTO CAMPAIGN ACCOUNTS.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, LOWERING THE LIMITS TO $500, WHICH AS YOU SAID THERE'S NO MAGIC IN IT BUT SOUNDS REASONABLE.

WHAT WE HAVE ARE TWO BODIES OF CITIZENS WHO ARE DELIBERATED ON WAYS WE CAN IMPROVE THAT SYSTEM.

NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT AND I THINK EVERYONE SAID THAT BUT HOW CAN WE CONTINUE TO STRIVE FOR PROCESS IMPROVEMENT.

IN NI MIND THE DEBATE HAPPENING ON THE DAIS THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE CUT OUT FROM DELIBERATING IS THIS.

THE -- WE WILL NOT HAVE THAT UNTIL WE HAVE PROPER CHARTER

[02:05:02]

REFORM, OBVIOUSLY, BUT IN MY MIND IT MEANS THAT WHEN WE GET RECOMMENDATIONS, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN DELIBERATED ON BY INDEPENDENT CITIZENS OVER THE BETTER PART OF TWO YEARS, WE OUGHT TO PAY ATTENTION, WE OUGHT TO LISTEN TO THEM.

SOME OF THEM MAY MAKE OUR LIVES MORE DIFFICULT, BUT I THINK IN THE END IT HELPS WITH PUBLIC CONFIDENCE AND TRUST THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE TAKE CARE OF HERE IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.

SO I DO NOT SUPPORT DELAY.

I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD AS CLOSELY TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS POSSIBLE AND THAT'S WHAT I HOPE WE DO TODAY.

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMAN T OF WHAT YOU WERE ATTEMPTING TO DO, I NEED YOU TO RESTATE YOUR MOTION FOR DELAY SO WE CAN TAKE UP THAT MOTION NOW.

>> BROCKHOUSE: I MOTION TO DELAY THE ITEM UNTIL AUGUST 2.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DELAY OF ITEM 32 TO AUGUST 2.

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YES, THERE IS.

COUNCILMAN PERRY YOU SECONDED IT? PLEASE VOTE.

AND TO CLARIFY, A YES VOTE IS TO DELAY, A NO VOTE IS TO CONTINUE DEBATE WITH THE MOTION THAT COUNCILMAN COURAGE PUT FOR FORTH.

COUNCILMAN SHAW?

>> SHAW: ARE WE GOING TO HAVE DISCUSSION OR JUST GO AHEAD AND VOTE? COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE MADE A MOTION TO OPEN DIALOGUE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WE JUST DID.

>> SHAW: I PUNCHED IN AND I WAS --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WE HAVE TO TAKE UP THAT MOTION FIRST? IF THAT MOTION FAILS WE WILL CONTINUE WITH THE DISCUSSION THAT INCLUDES COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S MOTION.

ANDY?

>> IF COUNCILMAN SHAW WANTS TO SPEAK ABOUT THE DELAY, MAYOR, I THINK HE --

>> SHAW: OKAY, I KNOW I'M NOT CRAZY.

[LAUGHTER] JUST A LITTLE BIT, BEING UP HERE.

[LAUGHTER] THIS IS MY STANCE.

I'M GOING TO BE VERY BLANKET AND VERY CLEAR ABOUT THIS.

TO ME IT'S ABOUT PUBLIC PERCEPTION.

WE NEED TO KEEP OUR HANDS OUT OF THIS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AND FROM MY OPINION, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC TRUSTS US AND WHAT WE'RE DOING IN TERMS OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE.

AS LONG AS EVERYTHING IS EQUAL BETWEEN ALL CANDIDATES, IF WE HAVE TO WORK HARDER WE HAVE TO WORK HARDER.

I'M NOT HERE TO PICK AND CHOOSE AND GO THROUGH WHAT'S EASIER FOR ME, HOW MUCH MONEY I RAISE.

I REALLY DON'T CARE, OKAY? I JUST WANT TO GET THIS THING DONE AND TAKEN CARE OF.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT AS A BODY, THAT WE ARE PUTTING PUBLIC TRUST BACK INTO US.

WE HAVE A NATIONAL ISSUE THAT'S AFFECTING THIS COUNTRY.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO IT LOCALLY.

I'M JUST CONFUSED RIGHT NOW.

I APPRECIATE THE THIRD PARTY AND WHAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE.

I DID NOT GET ANY INPUT GIVE INPUT, I DIDN'T GET INVOLVED IN ANY WAY, BECAUSE YOU'RE THE CITIZENS, YOU'RE THE ONES WE APPOINTED TO THESE POSITIONS.

YOU DELIBERATED, YOU MADE YOUR DECISIONS, I'M OKAY WITH THAT BECAUSE IT SHOWS COMPLETE TRANSPARENCY AND I WASN'T INVOLVED IN THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF MY COLLEAGUES FEEL THE SAME WAY.

I DON'T KNOW.

BUT I'M JUST CONFUSED.

I'M DONE, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SHAW.

COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: YEAH, JUST A QUICK ONE ON THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S NOT PUBLIC TRUST UNDER OUR CURRENT SYSTEM.

THAT'S THE ISSUE.

WE DO HAVE PUBLIC TRUST AND WE DO HAVE TRANSPARENCY UNDER OUR CURRENT SYSTEM, AND TO ME THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT.

THAT'S ALL, SIR.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PERRY.

OKAY.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DELAY OF ITEM 32 TO AUGUST 2.

A YES VOTE IS FOR DELAY, A NO VOTE IS TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION ON COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S MOTION.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION FAILS.

COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL.

>> SANDOVAL: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S MOTION REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF THE ITEM AND SPLITTING IT BY MUNICIPAL FINANCE VERSUS ETHICS.

I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THAT, THAT WE CONSIDER IT BY PROCESSES INSTEAD.

WE HAD TWO VERY DISTINCT PROCESSES FOR WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY.

ONE OF THEM WAS -- WAS LED BY THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD.

IT WAS -- IT WAS LONG.

[CHUCKLE] WE HEARD IT MULTIPLE TIMES.

WE DISCUSSED IT.

WE MET ONE-ON-ONE, SO I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THAT, CONSIDER THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS SEPARATELY FROM THE ONES OF THE TASK FORCE HEADED BY MIKE BELTON.

WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT AMENDMENT, COUNCILMAN?

>> COURAGE: I BELIEVE THAT PRETTY MUCH WAS THE INTENT OF WHY I WANTED TO DIVIDE THESE INTO TWO PARTS, AND SO IF WE AGREE TO DIVIDE THESE AND HANDLE THE FINANCE ISSUES IN ONE ACTION AND

[02:10:01]

THEN HANDLE THE ERB ISSUES IN A SECOND ACTION, THEN I'D BE AGREEABLE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE FINANCE ISSUES TO DIVIDE THAT FURTHER TO ADDRESS EACH OF THOSE INDIVIDUAL CONCERNS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY HAVE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ANDY?

>> AGAIN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE COUNCIL IS COMPLETELY CLEAR ON WHAT I THINK THE MOTION IS, COUNCILMAN, AND COUNCILWOMAN.

THE MOTION AS I UNDERSTAND IT IS THAT FIRST THE COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE TASK FORCE HEADED BY MR. BELTON, WHICH INCLUDE RAISING THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS AND THE DISCLOSURE WITH RESPECT TO EMPLOYER AS ONE ACTION, SEPARATE FROM THE SECOND ONE, WHICH WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE ERB THAT COVER BOTH CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND THE ETHICS CODE.

>> COURAGE: YES.

>> SANDOVAL: OKAY.

SO THAT IS THE MOTION.

>> YES.

>> SANDOVAL: ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

NOW THAT I UNDERSTAND THE MOTION, I WOULD -- SO THAT HAS BEEN SECONDED.

WILL WE VOTE ON THAT AT THE END? I FEEL LIKE WE COULD -- I WOULD REQUEST THAT WE VOTE ON THAT NOW.

THE SEPARATION OF THE TWO.

>> IS THAT CAN BE VOTED ON FIRST -- THAT CAN BE VOTED ON FIRST, MAYOR, BUT IF THERE'S COUNCIL PEOPLE THAT WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT SPECIFIC MOTION, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: IS THERE ANY DEBATE ON THE FURTHER SEPARATION OF COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S MOTION? COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES.

>> GONZALES: IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THREE SEPARATE VOTES, SO WHEN THE COUNCILMAN MADE HIS MOTION TO ONLY HAVE TWO, I WAS -- AND THEN THERE WAS THE POTENTIAL FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO VOTE ON THEM SEPARATELY, THREE SEPARATE MOTIONS, NOT TWO.

SO --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR NOW --

>> GONZALES: YOU'RE SAYING TWO AMENDMENTS, NOT --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: A YES VOTE WILL DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAD INTENDED TO DO.

>> GONZALES: I INTEND TO -- I WANT TO SUPPORT THE INCREASES IN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS BUT NOT --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ANDY?

>> GONZALES: BUT I DON'T SUPPORT THE OTHER ITEM.

SO I THOUGHT YOU SAID THEY WERE GOING TO BE VOTED ON TOGETHER, WHICH MEANS A YES VOTE FOR I WANT TO SUPPORT THE QUESTION IN CONTRIBUTIONS BUT I DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT ALL THE OTHER LANGUAGE.

SO I THINK THIS IS WHY I --

>> THE CURRENT MOTION ON THE FLOOR, COUNCILMAN, IS TO SEPARATE IT INTO TWO ITEMS. ONE IS THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH ARE TWOFOLD: INCREASING THE CONTRIBUTION LEVELS AND THE NOTIFICATION ON EMPLOYER.

THOSE WOULD BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER.

>> GONZALES: RIGHT, BUT THAT'S WHERE I'M TALKING ABOUT WANTING THE SEPARATION.

>> THEN IT WOULD REQUIRE --

>> GONZALES: DO I NEED TO MAKE A SEPARATE AMENDMENT FOR THAT OR --

>> YOU WOULD NEED TO REQUEST AN -- A SECONDARY AMENDMENT TO SPLIT THEM INTO THREE VERSUS TWO.

>> GONZALES: OKAY.

THEN I WOULD MOTION TO SEPARATE THEM INTO THREE INSTEAD OF TWO.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMAN ?

>> COURAGE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I THINK THIS IS WHAT WILL -- THAT WILL TAKE PLACE EVEN IF WE JUST GO WITH THE MOTION THAT I PRESENTED BECAUSE WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THE FINANCE ISSUE SEPARATELY.

THERE'S TWO PARTS TO THE FINANCE ISSUE.

YOU CAN SEPARATE THOSE TWO PARTS AS WE CONCENTRATE OUR DISCUSSION ON THE FINANCE ISSUE.

WHEN THAT'S RESOLVED, THEN WE WILL LOOK AT THE ETHICS ISSUE SEPARATELY.

SO YOU REALLY DO HAVE THREE DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT COME UP.

>> GONZALES: OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING.

>> COURAGE: SO IF YOU WOULD WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE ONE I'VE GOT ON THE TABLE.

>> GONZALES: I THINK WE DIDN'T GET A SECOND ON THAT ONE SO MOTION --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WE NOW HAVE COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES'S MOTION ON THE TABLE.

>> NO, SHE DIDN'T GET A SECOND.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ON THE FLOOR -- OH, OKAY.

CLARIFY WHERE WE ARE, ANDY?

>> WHERE WE'RE AT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT COUNCILMAN GONZALES WITHDREW HER MOTION, SO WE'RE BACK TO THE MOTION -- THE MOTION IS TO SEPARATE THE ITEM INTO TWO.

THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE CAMPAIGN TASK FORCE HEADED BY MR. BELDON, NO. 2 WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATION SUBMITTED BY THE ERB.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU.

EVERYONE FOLLOWING ALONG? OKAY.

THE SPEAKER QUEUE IS CLEARED.

>> MAYOR, POINT OF PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WHAT'S YOUR INQUIRY?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO FLOOR DEBATE THE ITEM ON COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S AMENDMENT BECAUSE I WOULD -- I'D LIKE TO VOTE INDIVIDUALLY ON -- I'D LIKE TO DEBATE THE MERITS OF VOTING ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS BY THEMSELVES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I'M CALLING FOR DEBATE RIGHT NOW.

>> I'M SORRY.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I'M

[02:15:01]

CALLING FOR DEBATE RIGHT NOW ON WHAT IS IN THE SPEAKER QUEUE.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM?

>> I THOUGHT -- THE CONFUSION IS RUNNING RAMPANT HERE TODAY.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT, SIR.

I'M JUST THINKING YOUR AMENDMENT IS TO LEAVE THEM IN TWO PARTS, CORRECT? TO VOTE --

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> ALL RIGHT.

WELL, I JUST WANT TO -- GOTCHA.

I GOT LOST IN THE STREAM OF ITEMS THERE.

SO COUNCILMAN COURAGE, I THINK WE SHOULD SPLIT OFF THESE PARTICULAR PORTIONS.

I THINK THERE'S MERIT INTO VOTING BY ITSELF ON THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION AMOUNTS, AND THEN SPLITTING OFF THE OTHER PIECES WITH THE DISCLOSURE.

I THINK THERE'S MERIT IN MORE INFORMATION IN THE SYSTEM.

I'M NOT AFRAID OF PLACING MORE DATA, YOU KNOW, WHO'S DONATING AND WHERE IT COMES FROM.

I THINK THERE'S VALUE IN THAT.

BUT I'M AGAINST RAISING THE LIMITS, SO I THINK AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT -- WE'RE GOING TO -- YOU KNOW, DO I HAVE TO MOTION TO SPLIT THAT, THEN?

>> YOU'RE --

>> BROCKHOUSE: WE'RE JUST DISCUSSING IT?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: DO YOU WANT THE FLOOR? COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

>> COURAGE: YES.

WE'RE JUST SEPARATING THE TWO FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

WE ARE NOT APPROVING EITHER OF THOSE.

WE'RE JUST SEPARATING THEM FOR THE POINTS OF DISCUSSING THE MERITS OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT PARTS OF THAT THAT WE CAN DISCUSS AND APPROVE PART OR NOT APPROVE PART.

AND THEN SEPARATELY AFTER WE HAVE FINISHED WITH THAT GO ON TO THE ERB.

SO IT'S JUST BREAKING THEM INTO TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS.

BUT IT'S ONLY FOR DISCUSSION.

IT'S NOT FOR APPROVAL, UNTIL EVERYBODY DISCUSSES AND MAKES ANY AMENDMENTS THEY MAY NEED TO.

>> BROCKHOUSE: YEAH, AND THAT'S -- JUST LISTENING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.

IT'S MUCH MORE COMPLICATED THAN I THINK IT NEEDED TO BE ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

ALL I'M LOOKING FOR IS TO BE ABLE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF YOUR DISCLOSURE AND AGAINST INCREASING THE LIMITS.

THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING.

IT'S JUST GOTTEN CONVOLUTED.BERD THE FLOOR?

>> YES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR SEPARATION OF ITEM 32 AS STATED.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

>> UNANIMOUS.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

THERE IS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO SPEAK ON THE MERITS OF EITHER ITEM.

COUNCILMAN SALDANA.

>> SALDANA: OKAY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

LET ME DO MY BEST, AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE PRETTY SIMPLE.

I SUPPORT BOTH OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE COME FORWARD FROM THE ERB AND THE TASK FORCE, AND THE QUESTIONS OF THE PARTICULARS ARE PRETTY SIMPLE IN MY MIND.

I BELIEVE THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN WE SHOULD PROVIDE MORE LIGHT INTO WHO'S GIVING AND TO ADD TO -- OR TO COMMEND COUNCILMAN COURAGE TO ADD THE EMPLOYER.

IT WASN'T SOMETHING I AGREED WITH ORIGINALLY.

I WAS WORRIED ABOUT FOLKS WHO MIGHT NOT BE GIVING FOR FEAR THAT THEIR PARENT COMPANY OR THEIR BOSS OR THEIR BOSS'S BOSS MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT A DISAGREEMENT OF SUPPORTING ONE CANDIDATE VERSUS ANOTHER, BUT I BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, IN OUR JOB, IN GOVERNMENT, YOU CAN'T EVER BE IN A POSITION OF ARGUING AGAINST MORE SUNLIGHT INTO OUR PROCESS.

AND THERE'S THE OTHER POINT THAT CAME UP FROM MR. BELDON'S DISCUSSION, WHICH WAS ON SHOULD WE -- WELL, I GUESS THIS WAS -- BOTH WERE ON YOURS, MR. BELDON, THE DISCLOSURE OF EMPLOYERS AND THE INCREASING OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE LIMITS.

SO FOR ME I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO TRY TO TIE THE REASON I AM SUPPORTING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMIT INCREASES TO WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION THAT'S COME FROM THE ERB, AGAIN, ON TRANSPARENCY, I BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE REPORTING MORE THAN JUST TWICE A YEAR.

TODAY FOLKS CAN LOOK INTO THE FOLKS WHO HAVE GIVEN TO MY CAMPAIGN ONLY TWICE A YEAR, AT THE BEGINNING OR THE END, IN THE JULY TIME FRAME.

AND I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TIMES FOLKS CAN LOOK INTO THE FOLKS WHO ARE GIVING TO OUR INDIVIDUAL CAMPAIGNS, NOT ONLY FOR THE SAKE OF TRANSPARENCY BUT FOR THE SAKE OF KEVIN'S -- KEVIN BARTHOLD, OUR CITY AUDITOR, HIS JOB, ONE OF HIS TASKS IS TO MAKE SURE THAT SOMEBODY WHO IS GIVING TO OUR CAMPAIGNS AND MAYBE GIVING IN HIGH NUMBERS IS ALSO SOMEBODY HE CAN IDENTIFY DURING THE PROCESS, IF THERE'S A BIG CONTRACT ON THE TABLE.

WE AS POLICY MAKERS, AS POLICY OFFICIALS, HAVE TO VOTE ON MULTI-MILLION-DOLLAR

[02:20:01]

CONTRACTS.

I WANT TO KNOW IF A TON OF MONEY IS BEING FUNNELED INTO A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE THAT MAY PERSUADE THE WAY THAT CANDIDATE OR THAT COUNCIL MEMBER FEELS ABOUT A SUBJECT MATTER.

I WORRY THAT IF IT'S DURING -- IF THE TIMING IS OFF WE MAY NOT FIND THAT OUT FOR SIX MONTHS LATER.

SO I -- BECAUSE WE HAVE TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TIMES THAT WE REPORT AND BECAUSE THOSE REPORTS ARE SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO EMPLOY PROFESSIONALS TO DO THOSE THINGS AND THEY DO CHARGE BY THE HOUR AND IT'S REALLY EXPENSIVE TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE ALL YOUR T'S DOT -- OR YOUR T'S CROSSED AND YOUR I'S DOTTED BECAUSE IF NOT YOU'LL PAY A PENALTY FOR IT, I WOULD SAY THAT YOU INCREASE A COUNCIL MEMBER'S ABILITY TO RAISE AN EXTRA $250, BECAUSE I DO WANT TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TRANSPARENCY.

I DO WANT TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TIMES THAT WE REPORT WHO GIVES TO OUR CAMPAIGNS, AND FOR THAT REASON I'M SUPPORTING THE INCREASE, AND I -- YOU KNOW, PART OF -- PART OF THE PROFESSIONAL COURTESY THAT WE NEED TO HAVE TO THE FOLKS WHO COMMIT TWO YEARS OR, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL MONTHS' WORTH OF STUDY ON AN ISSUE, PART OF THE PROFESSIONAL COURTESY THAT WE NEED TO HAVE AS COUNCIL MEMBERS IS DOING OUR HOMEWORK AND PREPARING AND PULLING YOU INTO MEETINGS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE PARTICULARS ONE BY ONE, AND I KNOW YOU'VE DONE THAT, DR. GARCIA, WITH MANY OF THE -- THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO ARE UP HERE.

I'LL TAKE YOUR HEAD NOD OF AGREEMENT THAT YOU'VE DONE THAT WITH AT LEAST EVERYONE -- EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN WITH THE ERB.

THE QUESTION IS NOT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER YOU SHOULD AGREE 100% WITH EVERYTHING SHE'S PRESENTED.

THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU HAVE ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED TODAY TO MAKE A DECISION? SOME FOLKS FEEL LIKE THEY DON'T.

I FEEL LIKE I DO.

AND I'VE HAD THAT SAME KIND OF CONVERSATION WITH MR. BELDON AND HIS TASK FORCE, AND TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, WHEN YOU HAVE ELECTED OFFICIALS CREATING RULES AND GOVERNING AND MAKING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS FROM THE DAIS AFTER MONTHS OR YEARS OF WORK, UB NEED TO BE VERY -- YOU NEED TO BE VERY WARY OF WHAT CHANGES ARE GOING INTO THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE BY A THIRD PARTY, BECAUSE I WOULD BE VERY SUSPECT THAT WE TRY TO MAKE CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS THAT ARE TO OUR BENEFIT.

SO I WILL TAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU'VE BROUGHT BEFORE US AND AGREE THAT THIS IS NOT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE PUT CAPS ON THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT CAN COME INTO LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

BEFORE YOU COULD WRITE -- BEFORE 2003 YOU COULD WRITE ME A $10,000 CHECK, AND I THINK THAT KIND OF MONEY IN POLITICS IS TOXIC.

IT'S TOXIC TO THE PURCHASE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS.

IT'S TOXIC TO THE PURCHASE OF IDEAS, AND I THINK WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE THEN IS WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHENEVER WE TINKER WITH THIS.

AND SO GENERALLY SPEAKING I WOULD NOT HAVE SUPPORTED INCREASING MORE MONEY FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THEIR CAMPAIGNS, BUT I DO BELIEVE WE NEED TO REPORT MORE OFTEN, AND THOSE REPORTS NEED TO BE PROFESSIONALLY DONE, AND UNFORTUNATELY SOME OF US HAVE TO OUTSOURCE THAT, SO THAT FOR THAT REASON I'LL SUPPORT THE ERB'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND THOSE COMING FROM THE TASK FORCE LED BY MR. BELDON.

MIKE, DO YOU WANT TO CHIME IN?

>> JUST TO ADD A LITTLE MORE DEPTH TO OUR REPORT, OUR COMMITTEE WAS ABSOLUTELY UNANIMOUS IN WANTING MORE DISCLOSURE.

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE WAS EXCLUDING PEOPLE UNDER $100.

BUT THE COMMITTEE WAS UNANIMOUS ON WANTING GAP] AMOUNT WAS A DIFFERENT STORY ALTOGETHER.

THERE WERE THOSE WHO WANTED TO DOUBLE IT AND THOSE WHO WANTED TO LEAVE IT ALONE, AND THE 50% INCREASE WAS INDEED A COMPROMISE.

BUT THE DISCLOSURE, WE WERE UNANIMOUS IN WANTING MORE DISCLOSURE.

>> SALDANA: THANK YOU, MAYOR, I'LL GIVE THE FLOOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN.

TO BE CLEAR, WE ARE LIMITING DISCUSSION ON THE FIRST PART OF THIS ITEM, WHICH IS THE FINANCE ISSUE FROM MIKE, YOUR COMMITTEE.

COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

>> PELAEZ: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

FIRST OF ALL, MIKE BELDON, YOU'RE A CHAMP, JUST HAVING TO STAND UP THERE FOR THE PAST SIX HOURS OR HOWEVER LONG YOU'VE BEEN UP THERE.

[LAUGHTER] IS MUCH APPRECIATED.

AND I'VE GOT NO QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

FEEL FREE TO SIT DOWN WHILE I'M UP HERE RANTING AWAY.

AND YOU TOO, I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

SO SERIOUSLY, TAKE A REST.

YOU'VE EARNED IT.

I DO WANT TO POINT OUT TO ANYBODY WHO'S OUT THERE LISTENING STILL THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE ERB AND THE MEMBERS OF MIKE BELDON'S COMMITTEE ARE TO ME PARAGONS OF ETHICS, EACH OF THEM, AND I'LL NAME A FEW.

THERE'S WAY TOO MANY TO NAME, BUT PAULA MCGEE, MELANIE CASTILLO, MIKE BELDON, WADE SHELTON, ALL OF YOU HAVE REPUTATIONS FOR

[02:25:01]

ETHICS AND FOR ALWAYS DOING THE RIGHT THING, AND THERE'S NO BE IN SAN ANTONIO -- NOBODY IN SAN ANTONIO THAT CAN EVER SAY THAT YOU ALL ARE, YOU KNOW, CYNICAL, YOU KNOW, CRONIES OF ANY OF OURS.

AND SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, AND I SEE PAULA HERE AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE.

I DON'T OPPOSE ANY OF THE ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE BURDENS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED.

WE'RE IN THE BUSINESS OF CREATING MORE TRUST, MORE TRUST IN GOVERNMENT AND NOT LESS TRUST.

AND OUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE TOLD US, AT LEAST MINE HAVE TOLD US LOUD AND CLEAR, THAT THEY WANT A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW WE DO BUSINESS BECAUSE THEY FEEL THAT OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH INFLUENCERS ARE SUSPECT.

THEY GIVE THOSE RELATIONSHIPS SIDE EYE.

THAT'S WHAT MILLENNIALS LIKE MIKE BELDON AND JOHN COURAGE CALL IT.

SIDE EYE.

[LAUGHTER] NOW, WHILE I DON'T THINK THAT ANY OF US UP HERE ON THIS DAIS DO HAVE OBJECTIONABLE RELATIONSHIPS, I ALSO THINK THAT MY COLLEAGUES UP HERE ARE ABOVE REPROACH, AND I WORK WITH THEM EVERY SINGLE DAY AND I KNOW THAT THEY'RE ALWAYS STRIVING TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

DESPITE THAT MY CONSTITUENTS STILL WANT MORE LIGHT SHOWN ON RELATIONSHIPS, AND I'LL TELL YOU, THEY FEEL ABSOLUTELY NO PITY OR EMPATHY FOR ANY OF US WHEN WE SAY, IT'S TOO HARD, OR IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE, AND I'M ALREADY DISCLOSING ENOUGH, OR IT'S TOO INCONVENIENT.

SO I DO THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THEY FEEL THAT IF, YOU KNOW -- IF DISCLOSURE IS SOMETHING TO WHICH WE ARE ALLERGIC, THEN MAYBE WE OUGHT TO FIND SOMETHING ELSE TO DO TO FILL OUR DAYS AS OPPOSED TO SERVING IN GOVERNMENT.

NOW, MIKE, WITH THAT PREAMBLE, I AM GOING TO SUPPORT YOUR TASK FORCE'S RECOMMENDATION TO INCREASE THE CONTRIBUTION LIMITS TO 750.

HOWEVER, I DO WANT FOR THE RECORD, RIGHT, TO MAKE SURE THAT MY SUPPORT COMES WITH A FOREWARNING THAT I WILL AT A LATER DATE THIS YEAR URGE THIS BODY TO INCREASE THE LIMITS ABOVE 750, AND FRANKLY I THINK 500 IS ALREADY UNREASONABLY LOW, AND I THINK THAT 750 IS ALSO UNREASONABLY LOW.

FOR FEW REASONS.

NUMBER ONE, I'LL POINT OUT THAT NO OTHER LOCAL OFFICIAL IN SAN ANTONIO OR NO OTHER BODY IMPOSES UPON THEMSELVES THESE DRACONIAN LIMITS OR AND YOU TEAR LIMITS, RIGHT? FOR GOODNESS SAKE, NOT EVEN THE CONSTABLE HAS THESE KINDS OF AUSTERE LIMITS ON THEM.

AND I AM SENSITIVE TO THE ARGUMENT, AND I GET IT, I GET THE ARGUMENTS ABOUT UNDUE INFLUENCE OF MONEY, AND COUNCILMAN SALDANA, YOU'RE RIGHT, $10,000, YOU KNOW, AT ONE POP, THAT'S -- THAT'S -- THAT SHOULD GIVE PEOPLE PAUSE, AND THAT SHOULD GIVE PEOPLE A REASON TO SUSPECT THAT SOMETHING UNTOWARD IS HAPPENING THERE.

AND PEOPLE WERE RIGHTFULLY OFFENDED WHEN AN OUT OF TOWN INJURY LAWYER GAVE OUR DISTRICT ATTORNEY A MILLION DOLLARS.

THEY WERE OFFENDED WHEN A FOREIGN BILLIONAIRE PUMPED A MILLION DOLLARS INTO THIS YEAR'S D.A.'S RACE.

I WAS OFFENDED, AND I WAS OFFENDED WHEN I SAW A LOCAL LAW FIRM PUMP HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS INTO THE D.A.'S RACE AND THE COUNTY JUDGE'S RACE AND THEN SOON AFTER WON THE OPIOID LITIGATION CONTRACT.

NOW, WHILE I THINK THAT OUR CURRENT D.A. AND OUR COUNTY JUDGE ARE ALSO ABOVE REPROACH, THOSE ARE TWO VERY ETHICAL MEN, AND THAT NONE OF THOSE TWO MEN -- NEITHER OF THOSE TWO MEN WILL EVER CAVE TO DONORS, YOU CAN'T BLAME CITIZENS FOR BEING OUTRAGED AT THOSE OPTICS.

I GET IT.

BUT 500, 750? SO I WILL POINT OUT THAT -- I WANT ALL OF US -- BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT WE'RE ALL CONSIDERING THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF KEEPING THESE LIMITS THAT LOW, RIGHT? AND ONE OF THOSE IS THAT I BELIEVE THAT WE'RE STIFLING VOTER TURNOUT.

RIGHT NOW EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US ON THIS DAIS HAS TO DO VERY -- WITH THESE SMALL BUDGETS THAT WE'VE GOT FOR CONTRIBUTIONS -- FROM CONTRIBUTIONS, WE HAVE TO DO SURGICAL STRIKES ON NEIGHBORHOODS TO TARGET SPECIFIC VOTERS AS OPPOSED TO -- AND THOSE SPECIFIC VOTERS ARE KNOWN QUANTITIES.

WE GO AFTER THE VOTERS THAT HAVE PROVEN THAT THEY COME OUT AND VOTE.

WE DON'T GO AFTER VOTERS WHO HAVE NOT SHOWN AN APPETITE FOR VOTING.

AND THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT.

BECAUSE INVESTING IN A VOTER WHO HASN'T COME OUT TO VOTE IS AN INVESTMENT I WOULDN'T BE MAKING ON A VOTER WHO I KNOW WILL SHOW UP ON -- ON ELECTION DAY.

[02:30:01]

WHAT WE DO IS -- BY LIMITING OURSELVES IS WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT WE'VE GOT THE SMALLEST OF MEGAPHONES ON THE ONE HAND, AND ON THE OTHER HAND, WE CONTINUE TO GRIPE ABOUT VOTER TURNOUT, VOTER TURNOUT.

REMEMBER THAT SAN ANTONIO HAS LESS THAN 13% OF THE ELIGIBLE VOTERS SHOW UP TO OUR RACES, AND YET WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING POSSIBLE BY KEEPING THESE LIMITS LOW TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE GOING TO KEEP IT THAT LOW.

AND SO I BELIEVE THAT ANYTHING WE DO THAT LIMITS CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT IS WORTHY OF SIDE EYE, RIGHT? AND ESPECIALLY AT A TIME WHEN WE ALL AGREE THAT THE PHENOMENON OF LOW VOTER TURNOUT DOES VIOLENCE TO PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY, AND I THINK THAT SAN ANTONIO IS A PIONEER IN AREAS OF, YOU KNOW, ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SUSTAINABILITY AND EQUITY AND ALL THAT, BUT BOY, WE ARE NOT, YOU KNOW, PIONEERS AND WE'RE DOING AN ABYSMAL JOB OF GETTING PEOPLE OUT TO THE ELECTION POLLS.

SO I DO THINK THAT IF WE WERE TO JUST INCREASE THE VOTER TURNOUT BY 1%, ONE POINT, WE'D GET THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF MORE SAN ANTONIANS PARTICIPATING, RIGHT? AND THOSE ARE PEOPLE THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE ENGAGING WITH THEIR CITY AND WHO ARE EXPRESSING THAT THEY WANT A STAKE IN THEIR COMMUNITY'S FUTURE.

SO I ALSO RECOGNIZE THE COUNTER ARGUMENTS, AND SOME PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAY THAT I'M USING THIS VOTER TURNOUT ISSUE AS A PRETEXT AND WHAT I WANT IS JUST MORE MONEY IN MY CAMPAIGN WAR CHEST, AND TO THAT ARGUMENT I'LL REMIND PEOPLE THAT IT'S REALLY HARD, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE, TO BUY A C CITY COUNCIL MEMBER'S VOTE FOR 500 BUCKS, ESPECIALLY THE ONES GAP], AND IT'S REALLY NAIVE TO THINK THAT 150 [INAUDIBLE] OR $500 IS ENOUGH TO TEMPT ME TO SELL MY VOTE OR TO RISK HAVING TO GET A VISIT FROM THE TEXAS RANGERS OR THE F.B.I.

AND LASTLY I'LL REMIND EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM THAT ONE OF THOSE LARGE CAMPAIGN SIGNS THAT WE VERY THOUGHTFULLY AND CAREFULLY, STRATEGICALLY PUT OUT, YOU KNOW, ON CERTAIN STREET CORNERS AND NOT OTHERS, EACH ONE WITH JUST A SINGLE COLOR, NOT MULTI-COLOR ONES, COSTS ABOUT 200 BUCKS.

WITH 500 BUCKS I CAN BUY TWO AND A HALF SIGNS.

WITH $750 I CAN BUY 3.75 SIGNS.

AND THAT'S -- AND THAT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT, AND IT -- YOU KNOW, WHEREAS A CONSTABLE, YOU KNOW, CAN GO OUT AND DO THEIR PART IN INCREASING VOTER TURNOUT, I CAN'T.

AND SO, MIKE, YOUR JOB THAT YOU'VE DONE ON THIS COMMITTEE IS PHENOMENALLY APPRECIATED.

I THINK YOU'RE STUPENDOUS AND I THINK THAT THE WORK THAT YOU GUYS DID -- YOU AND I ARE GOING TO AGREE NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN AND THIS IS THAT ONE INSTANCE WHERE WE DON'T AGREE BUT I'M WILLING TO MEET YOU HALFWAY AND I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE WORK THAT YOU DID.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

WE ARE

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

>> COURAGE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE CAMPAIGN FINANCING CODE THERE REALLY SEEMS TO BE TWO MAJOR ISSUES THAT WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING.

ONE IS DISCLOSURE, WHICH INCLUDES THE OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYMENT OF INDIVIDUALS WHO CONTRIBUTE AMOUNTS OVER $100.

AND THE OTHER ISSUE IS THE AMOUNT OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS THAT ARE CURRENT AS OPPOSED TO THE PROPOSED INCREASES.

THERE'S ALSO I KNOW ONE OR TWO OTHER ISSUES THAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS.

I KNOW NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS HAVE EXPRESSED A CONCERN THAT THEY MAY BE CAUGHT IN THE WORDING OF THE CURRENT RECOMMENDATION, WHICH MIGHT PUT THEM AT A DIFFICULT SITUATION.

AND SO I THINK THAT MAY BE A THIRD ITEM THAT MAY BE UP FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCIL.

BUT I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON JUST ONE.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE DISCLOSURE PART OF THIS CODE.

THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO ASK IS THAT WE VOTE TO APPROVE THE DISCLOSURE PART OF THE CODE AND LEAVE THE OTHERS UP FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION BY OTHER MEMBERS.

AND I WOULD WELCOME A SECOND.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ANDY.

>> AGAIN, TO CLARIFY YOUR MOTION, COUNCILMAN, YOU ARE IN EFFECT MOTIONING TO SPLIT THE CURRENT DISCUSSION ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY MR. BELDON'S TASK FORCE INTO ONE, ON THE DISCLOSURE, AND A SECOND VOTE ON THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

IS THAT CORRECT?

>> COURAGE: THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE A VOTE ON THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

I'M ONLY CALLING FOR A VOTE ON

[02:35:05]

THE DISCLOSURE.

>> OKAY.

>> COURAGE: THAT LEADS THE REST UP FOR DISCUSSION AND FURTHER ACTION.

>> BUT BY DEFAULT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A SECOND CONSIDERATION OF THE OTHER RECOMMENDATION.

>> COURAGE: THAT'S CORRECT, YES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: CAN YOU CLARIFY THE MOTION, ANDY?

>> THE MOTION IS TO CONSIDER THE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS BY MR. BELDON'S TASK FORCE SEPARATELY.

ONE TO CONSIDER THE RECOMMENDATION ON THE DISCLOSURE OF EMPLOYER.

AND THE SECOND IS TO VOTE ON THE RECOMMENDATION CAN TURN IN THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LIMITS.

>> SECOND.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR SPLITTING THE TWO -- FURTHER SPLITTING THE CURRENT ITEM.

WE WILL CONTINUE WITH DISCUSSION ON THAT PARTICULAR MOTION.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

DON'T WORRY, MIKE.

I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

ANDY -- MY QUESTION WILL BE FOR THIS ONE AND ALL THE REST OF THEM.

WHERE IN OUR DOCUMENTS AND MAYBE OR IN THE ORDINANCE DOES IT HAVE THE EFFECTIVE DATES? WHERE IS THAT LOCATED?

>> THE ORDINANCE HAS THE EFFECTIVE DATE, COUNCILWOMAN.

>> VIAGRAN: SO JANUARY -- I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHERE IT IS IN HERE.

SHOW ME WHERE IT IS IN HERE.

>> I'M SORRY.

FOR THESE TWO IT'S JULY 1.

>> VIAGRAN: AND THAT'S LOCATED IN OUR ORDINANCE OR IN THE BACK UP DOCUMENTS?

>> IT WILL BE IN THE ORDINANCE.

IT'S NOT IN THE MATERIAL YOU HAVE NOW BUT IT WILL BE IN THE ORDINANCE.

>> VIAGRAN: WHEN WILL IT BE IN THE ORDINANCE? RIGHT NOW?

>> IF THE COUNCIL VOTES TO APPROVE IT IT WILL BE IN THE ORDINANCE.

>> VIAGRAN: THAT IT STARTS JULY 1.

>> CORRECT.

>> VIAGRAN: I'M LOOKING AT THIS -- ONE, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE BROKEN THIS UP TO 32A, B, C IN THE FIRST PLACE, SO I'M LOOKING AT THIS ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE SAN ANTONIO CITY CODE CITY ETHICS.

AT THE BOTTOM, I GUESS SECTION 4, THE REMAINDER OF THIS ORDINANCE AND [INDISCERNIBLE] SHALL -- SO IT'S BOTH OF THEM.

THE ERB AND THE TASK FORCE, THAT THEY SHALL BE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2018.

>> THE TASK FORCE IS SECTION 3, COUNCILWOMAN.

THAT'S RESERVED.

>> VIAGRAN: SO TASK FORCE SECTION 3 SAYS THAT IT IS GOING TO BE JULY 1, 2018.

>> YES.

>> VIAGRAN: AND THAT'S IN HERE?

>> IT WILL BE IN THERE ONCE THE COUNCIL APPROVES IT.

>> VIAGRAN: MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE IN THERE.

ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHERE -- IT'S NOT PART OF THE LANGUAGE RIGHT NOW, SO THAT CONCERNS ME AS TO WHY THIS IS NOT A PART OF THE LANGUAGE.

INCLUDING THE ERB RECOMMENDATIONS WHERE YOU ALL SAY IT'S JANUARY 2019.

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT LATER IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE DISCUSSION ON THAT.

>> SO WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND THEN, COUNCILWOMAN, AS THE MOTION IS MADE TO SPLIT WE MAKE IT VERY CLEAR IN THE MOTION THAT WE'RE SPLITTING WITH THE -- BOTH PROPOSALS HAVING AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF JULY 1.

>> VIAGRAN: I GOT IT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE.

>> BROCKHOUSE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN COURAGE, FOR THE MOTION TO SPLIT THE TWO.

I DO PLAN ON SUPPORTING YOUR CALL FOR INCREASED DISCLOSURE.

AND TO COUNCILMAN SALDANA'S POINT, I THINK MORE INFORMATION DOESN'T HURT ANYBODY.

I WASN'T EXACTLY THERE AT THE BEGINNING BUT OVER THE COURSE OF TIME YOU AND YOUR TEAM PUT TOGETHER A LOT OF INFORMATION ON IT.

I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO LEARN A LITTLE BIT MORE AND I DON'T THINK IT HURTS THE PROCESS, AS YOU PROVED IN SOME OF YOUR RESEARCH.

MR. BELDON, WHERE DO YOU STAND YOURSELF PERSONALLY ON INCREASING THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LIMITS AS SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN AROUND THE POLITICAL SYSTEM AND THE --

>> I WAS PART OPPOSED DECREASING IT.

>> BROCKHOUSE: WHAT WAS YOUR RATIONALE FOR OPPOSING?

>> I THINK THERE'S TOO MUCH MONEY IN POLITICS ALREADY AND I THINK THAT ALTHOUGH CERTAINLY INFLATION HAS TAKEN PLACE SINCE THE $500 WAS SET 15 YEARS AGO, THE WAY WE CAMPAIGN HAS CHANGED A LOT TOO AND SOCIAL MEDIA HAS DRAMATICALLY REDUCED THE COST.

I MEAN, IN OUR OWN BUSINESS THE CHEAPEST ADVERTISING WE DO TO GET LEADS IS THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA, THE INTERNET, THAT SORT OF THING.

AND THE SAME THING IS TRUE IN CAMPAIGNS.

AND SO I WAS QUITE CONTENT TO LEAVE IT.

I'M NOT DRAMATICALLY OPPOSED TO THE INCREASE TO $750.

THAT'S STILL NOT A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY.

[02:40:01]

IT'S NOT ENOUGH WHERE YOU ARE BUYING SOMEBODY'S VOTE.

I MEAN, I WAS QUITE CONTENT BUT I HAVE NO HUGE OBJECTION TO THE 750.

AS I SAID EARLIER, IT WAS A COMPROMISE BETWEEN THOSE WHO WANTED TO DOUBLE IT AND THOSE WHO WANTED TO LEAVE IT ALONE.

>> BROCKHOUSE: I APPRECIATE THAT.

IT SPEAKS VOLUMES CONSIDERING THE POSITIONS YOU HAVE HELD AS TREASURERS AND BEING A PARTICIPANT BOTH AS A DONOR AND COMMUNITY LEADER THAT YOU ARE CONTENT WITH THE $500 AMOUNT.

I WANT TO ASK YOU THAT BECAUSE I PLAN TO OPPOSE ANY INCREASE TO IT AND TO PUSH BACK A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT COUNCILMAN PELAEZ, SOME OF THE POINTS HE WAS MAKING WITH REGARDS TO CAMPAIGNS.

HAVING RAN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST AN INCUMBENT MYSELF I CAN TELL YOU IT'S INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TO RAISE ANY MONEY.

SO THE MISS ISN'T TO GIVE THE INCUMBENT THE OPPORTUNITY TO GRAB MORE CASH.

THE LIMIT IS TO PROTECT THE CHALLENGER TO MAKE THE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.

BECAUSE THE CHALLENGER IS NOT GOING TO GET THOSE BIG DONATIONS.

THEY ARE GETTING THE GRASSROOTS LOWER DONATIONS.

I HAVE SEEN THIS ONE.

COUNCILMAN SALDANA AND I WERE YOUNG ROOKS WITH NO EXPERIENCE WALKING NEIGHBORHOODS AND HE WAS RELYING ON SMALLER CONTRIBUTIONS AND THOSE TYPES OF ITEMS TO BUILD UP A WAR CHEST.

THE PURPOSE OF THE MINIMUMS, IN MY OPINION, OF 500, IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE AT LEAST IT KEEPS THE GAME CLOSE.

IT KEEPS THE CHALLENGER IN THE GAME.

BECAUSE I CAN GO -- NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WHO DONATE THESE LARGER SUMS ARE GOING TO GIVE TO THE CHALLENGER BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO ACCEPT AUDIO].

THE LOWER DOLLAR AMOUNTS IN A MUNICIPAL ELECTION IS TO PROTECT PEOPLE WHO WANT TO STAND UP AND MAKE A RUN.

I GET IT.

YOU SURGICALLY TARGET AND STRIKE AND IT'S ABOUT WHO VOTES AND WHO DOESN'T VOTE.

BUT I HAVE SEEN IT.

BACK TO COUNCILMAN SALDANA'S POINT WHERE IT WAS SHOE LEATHER AND THE DOORS I KNOCKED THERE'S THINGS THAT ARE INTANGIBLES THAT DON'T COME IN WITH THAT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTOOD THERE ARE MANY OF US WHO DON'T NEED MORE MONEY IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING YOURSELF, WHO HAS BEEN A PREEMINENT VOICE IN CAMPAIGNS FOR DECADES.

AND AS AN ELECTED OFFICIALS MYSELF THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO GET CHALLENGED.

I'M GOING TO SAY KEEP IT CLOSE.

AT THE END OF THE DAY THE IDEA IS GOING TO WIN.

COUNCILMAN PELAEZ IS RIGHT, 250 BUCKS DOESN'T BUY A RELATIONSHIP EITHER WAY BUT IT SEPARATES OPPORTUNITY FROM SOMEBODY WHO -- NOBODY ON MY LIST OF PEOPLE, THEY WILL COME AND TRY TO ASK THE SAME PEOPLE WHO DONATED MONEY TO ME.

THERE'S A FEAR FACTOR IN THE DONOR COMMUNITY TO GIVE ANY MONEY TO ANYBODY CHALLENGING ANYONE.

IF WE RAISE THAT IT'S ONLY RAISING THE INCUMBENT AMOUNTS.

THE PERSON WHO IS CHALLENGING IS BRINGING IN THE SAME MONEY.

BECAUSE IT'S FAMILY, IT'S FRIENDS, IT'S THAT KIND OF DOLLAR COMING INTO THE SYSTEM TO CHALLENGE IT.

IN THAT POSITION DOES IT OPEN UP THE DOOR TO KEEP A RACE FOR ME TIGHT? IT SURE DOES.

I'M OKAY WITH HARD WORK EARNING THE SEAT AND IDEAS EARNING IT AND SHYING AWAY FOR I HAVE TO PAY MORE FOR A SIGN.

FRANKLY I GOT TO HELP COUNCILMAN PELAEZ SOME OF WITH SOME OF HIS PRINTING COSTS.

I DON'T KNOW WHO IS PAYING $200 TO A SIGN.

I'LL TURN YOU ON WITH A NUMBER AFTER THIS MEETING.

LET'S TRY TO DO THE BEST WE CAN TO LEAVE IT AS IS.

THAT'S WHY I'M HAPPY TO VOTE ON THIS INDIVIDUALLY.

TO COUNCILMAN SALDANA'S POINT AGAIN I THINK MORE INFO IS A GOOD THING AND THE MORE WE CAN PUT OUT THERE, MAYBE THE FREQUENCY OF IT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH BUT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MORE DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION AND STANDING FIRM OF WHO IS PUTTING THE MONEY IN THE CAMPAIGN AND WHERE IT STANDS.

>> I ALSO HAVE A SELFISH MONEY.

THE $500 IS ALL YOU GUYS CAN ASK ME FOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE.

COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS.

BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE VOTING ON.

AND SO MIKE, MY ONLY QUESTION TO YOU -- AND I THINK YOU JUST REVEALED SOMETHING THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT.

YOU HEADED UP THIS TASK FORCE.

TELL ME ABOUT THE TASK FORCE AND THE RECOMMENDATION AND HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT IT.

IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

AND SO TO ME IT'S ABOUT VOTING ON THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.

AS YOU JUST POINTED OUT THERE WAS NO MAGIC TO IT.

IT WAS SOMETHING THE TASK FORCE WORKED OUT.

JUST TELL ME ABOUT WAS THIS A FAIR PROCESS WITH PEOPLE WHO THOUGHT INDIVIDUALLY AND THOUGHTFULLY ABOUT WHAT THEY RECOMMENDED?

>> IT WAS A GREAT PROCESS.

WE WENT AROUND THE ROOM.

EVERYBODY EXPRESSED THEIR OPINIONS.

THERE WAS NO ANIMOSITY.

IT WAS A VERY CIVIL PROCESS.

[02:45:01]

WE DIDN'T ALWAYS AGREE BUT WE DISAGREED AGREEABLY AND IT'S ONE OF THE FEW TIMES AUDIO].

AND WE WERE ABLE TO WORK OUT SOMETHING EVERYBODY WAS COMFORTABLE WITH.

I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION.

I THINK THE INCREASE FROM 500 TO 750, IT'S THERE.

IT PROBABLY MAKES SOME SENSE BASED ON IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE.

IT'S HARD TO RUN A CAMPAIGN.

I HAVE RUN CAMPAIGNS OF MY OWN FOR THE EDWARDS AQUIFER AUTHORITY.

RUNNING CAMPAIGNS IS EXPENSIVE.

ALTHOUGH I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE IT STAY THE SAME, I DON'T HAVE A HUGE OBJECTION TO THE INCREASE BUT I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF FULL DISCLOSURE.

UNDERSTAND I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THOSE WHO FEEL SOME PEOPLE MAY BE INTIMIDATED WITH SMALL AMOUNTS OF MONEY, THAT THEIR EMPLOYER MIGHT BE UNHAPPY ABOUT THAT.

I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS.

IT WAS A REALLY GOOD PROCESS.

PLEASANT PROCESS AND I THINK EVERYBODY WALKED AWAY FROM THE TABLE VERY COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU.

I WILL CERTAINLY BE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

YOU DO OUTLINE MORE DISCLOSURE.

THESE ARE ITEMS THAT CAME BEFORE THIS COUNCIL WITHOUT ANY INFLUENCE ON OUR PART.

SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A PROCESS THAT WAS FAIR AND WE SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THAT BY SUPPORTING WHAT YOU'RE BRINGING TO US TODAY.

SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING TODAY, MAYOR.

THANK YOU, MIKE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

WE HAVE TWO ISSUES HERE.

ONE IS THE DISCLOSURE BUSINESS AND THE OTHER WITH THE LIMITS.

AND I DON'T SUPPORT MOVING THE LIMITS UP.

I AGREE WITH YOU ON YOUR INITIAL THOUGHTS ON THAT, YOU KNOW, $500.

I HAVEN'T PAID MYSELF BACK YET BUT I KIND OF LOOK AT THAT AS THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

YOU KNOW, I WANTED TO RUN FOR THIS POSITION WHETHER I RAISED THE FUNDS TO PAY MYSELF BACK OR NOT.

WHAT YOU'LL FIND IS THIS WILL NOT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE AMOUNT OF FUND RAISING THAT PEOPLE WILL WANT TO DO.

THEY ARE STILL GOING TO GO OUT THERE AND RAISE AS MUCH AS THEY CAN TO BUILD THEIR WAR CHEST UP AS HIGH AS THEY CAN.

AND IT'S NOT GOING TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT, WELL, I GET TO THE CERTAIN LEVEL AND I'M NOT GOING TO DO ANY MORE FUND RAISING.

NOW, ON THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT MAYBE IF WE PUT A LIMIT, AN UPPER LIMIT ON HOW MUCH YOU CAN ACTUALLY RAISE DURING A CAMPAIGN, MAYBE THAT WOULD BE WORTH TAKING A LOOK AT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, INCREASING IT TO 750 IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY PARTICULAR IMPACT ON THE AMOUNT OF FUND RAISING FOLKS ARE GOING TO DO.

SO I'M AGAINST RAISING THE LIMIT KEVIN, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU ON THE DISCLOSURE BUSINESS.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMAN, THE DISCUSSION IS LIMITED TO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE, WHICH IS TO SPLIT THE TWO ITEMS. OR SPLIT THE FINANCE PART INTO TWO ITEMS. ANDY, WHAT IS THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR?

>> THE CURRENT MOTION ON THE FLOOR, MAYOR, IS TO SPLIT THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE FINANCE TASK FORCE HEADED BY MR. BELDON INTO TWO ITEMS. ONE ITEM WOULD BE THE DISCLOSURE RECOMMENDATION.

THE SECOND ITEM WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LIMITS.

>> POINT OF ORDER.

>> COURAGE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE DISCLOSURE.

THAT WAS THE MOTION THAT I MADE.

THE INTERPRETATION IS THAT WE'RE SPLITTING THOSE TWO.

BUT MY ACTUAL MOTION WAS TO APPROVE THE DISCLOSURE.

>> IF THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE DISCLOSURE, MAYOR, THEN THE DEBATE HAS TO BE WHAT ON THE DISCLOSURE AND APPROVING THE DISCLOSURE AGAIN BY DEFAULT MEANS THERE WILL BE A SEPARATE VOTE ON THE --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: RIGHT.

MY UNDERSTANDING, COUNCILMAN, IS WE WOULD HAVE TO SPLIT THE ITEM IN ORDER TO VOTE ON THE DISCLOSURE.

IS THAT CORRECT, ANDY?

>> THAT FRANKLY, MAYOR, FROM MY STANDPOINT IS THE CLEAR WAY TO DO IT.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: AS SOON AS WE VOTE ON SPLITTING THE ITEM DISCLOSURE.

[02:50:05]

COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: OKAY.

SO WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT NOW?

>> YOU ARE CONSIDERING WHERE TO SPLIT THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE TASK FORCE INTO TWO ITEMS. ONE ITEM BEING THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.

THE SECOND ITEM RAISING THE CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

>> PERRY: SO WE'RE JUST DISCUSSING WHETHER TO SPLIT THESE ITEMS?

>> CORRECT.

>> PERRY: BECAUSE I HEARD A LOT OF OTHER DISCUSSION THAT WAS NOT ABOUT SPLITTING.

THAT'S WHY I'M CONFUSED.

IF THAT'S ALL THE DISCUSSION IS TO SPLIT, I FULLY SUPPORT ON SPLITTING.

THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMAN COURAGE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR SPLITTING THE FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION INTO TWO.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT.

COUNCILMAN COURAGE, DO YOU WANT TO RESTATE YOUR MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF DISCLOSURE?

>> COURAGE: YES.

AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS ON DISCLOSURE REGARDING OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYER.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE DISCLOSURE ITEM AS PART OF THE FINANCE DELIBERATION.

COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES.

>> GONZALES: I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT, THE REPORTING OF THE DISCLOSURE.

IS THERE A FEE ON THE CITY'S SIDE FOR US REPORTING OUR DISCLOSURES? JUST LIKE MAINTAINING AND THEN MAKING THEM AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC?

>> SPECIFICALLY CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION?

>> GONZALES: RIGHT.

OUR DISCLOSURE FORMS THAT WE SUBMIT TO YOU ALL NINE TIMES EVERY REPORTING PERIOD.

>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.

THE ANNUAL DISCLOSURES AS COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT Y'ALL --

>> GONZALES: THE ANNUAL DISCLOSURES AND NINE DISCLOSURES NOW THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.

DIDN'T WE RECENTLY HAVE TO BUY NEW SOFTWARE SYSTEM TO MAKE IT MORE TRANSPARENT?

>> I'M NOT AWARE OF SOFTWARE ISSUES.

>> GONZALES: I KNOW THERE WAS A RECENT CHANGE IN OUR DISCLOSURE SYSTEM MAYBE LAST YEAR.

LETICIA, DIDN'T WE BUY A NEW SYSTEM? I DON'T KNOW IF WE BOUGHT ONE.

BUT WE USED TO DO THEM MANUALLY AND NOW WE DO THEM ALL ONLINE.

>> WE DO THEM MANUALLY WHEN THERE WAS CHANGES MADE BY THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION AND THE I.T. DEPARTMENT HAD TO REPROGRAM OUR SYSTEM.

OTHER THAN THAT IT'S THE SAME FORM.

WE DIDN'T GET A NEW SYSTEM.

>> GONZALES: WAS THERE A FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT?

>> I'M SORRY?

>> GONZALES: WAS THERE A FEE ASSOCIATED WITH IT?

>> I'M NOT SURE.

THAT WOULD BE ITSD.

>> GONZALES: I'M JUST TRYING TO, AGAIN, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A FULL DISCLOSURE.

WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT ADDING AN OCCUPATION WHICH, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT REALLY GETS TO THE HEART OF TRANSPARENCY IN THIS REGARD.

I MEAN, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NINE REPORTING PERIODS.

WE HAD SEVEN.

WE ARE ADDING TWO MORE.

THERE IS A FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

I PAY ABOUT $100 EVERY TIME I SUBMIT A FORM FOR THE PURPOSES OF MAKING SURE THAT I'M BEING TRANSPARENT AND THAT I DON'T MAKE ANY ERRORS.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE IS ALSO -- IT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S A COST INVOLVED IN THAT.

AND I DO THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT -- WELL, I THINK WE'RE HAVING JUST A DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE, BUT AND I ALSO, AGAIN, AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT -- DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING, JOHN?

>> COUNCILWOMAN, JUST AROUND THE TECHNOLOGY THAT THE CLERK USES, THERE'S ALREADY A FIELD FOR EMPLOYER.

WE WOULD JUST SIMPLY MAKE THAT FIELD REQUIRED.

SO IT ALREADY EXISTS TODAY SO THERE'S NOT AN ADDITIONAL STEP THAT ITSD HAS TO DO.

IT ALREADY EXISTS.

THERE'S NOT AN ADDITIONAL FEE.

IT'S READY TO GO.

WE HAVE TO MAKE THE FIELD REQUIRED.

IS THAT CORRECT, LETICIA?

>> GONZALES: I KNOW I HAVE SEEN ALL MY COUNCIL MEMBERS' FORMS ONLINE.

AREN'T THEY ALWAYS OPEN AND AVAILABLE?

>> THEY ARE PUBLISHED.

WITH EACH REPORTING CYCLE THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE WITH THE SOFTWARE, THEY WILL NOW OPEN UP FOR THE NEXT REPORTING CYCLE, SIX MONTHS, WHICH EVER IT MAY BE.

IT IS THEN OPEN AS THAT TIME APPROACHES.

BUT ONCE THE DATE HAS BEEN ENTERED AND HAS BEEN FINALIZED BY THE CANDIDATE OR THE COUNCIL

[02:55:01]

PERSON, THEN THAT INFORMATION IS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.

>> GONZALES: ANY TIME.

I COULD GO BACK AND LOOK AT, FOR EXAMPLE, MY OWN CONTRIBUTION THREE YEARS AGO.

>> YES.

>> GONZALES: ALL THE PUBLIC HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT AT ANY POINT.

EVEN AS WE ARE DISCUSSING THIS WHOLE ISSUE.

THE REASON WHY I HAVEN'T WANTED TO SUPPORT IS I DON'T THINK THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THE SYSTEM.

AND BY COMPLICATING IT AND BY ADDING ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THERE IS A COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, YOU KNOW, TRANSPARENCY IS NOT FREE.

THERE IS A COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AT EVERY LEVEL.

MY LAST QUESTION, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING YOU THE QUESTIONS EARLY ON ABOUT THE EMPLOYER AND IF THEY HAD TO PUT, YOU PUT, YO, THEY COULD PUT THEIR OCCUPATION BUT DID THEY HAVE TO HAVE THEIR EMPLOYER.

AS WE ARE TRYING TO BE MORE AND MORE TRANSPARENT IF, FOR EXAMPLE, I HAD A FUNDRAISER WITH MY SISTER-IN-LAW WHO WORKS AT H-E-B.

I'M JUST MAKING UP SOMETHING.

AND WE HAVE 100 PEOPLE THERE AND THEY ARE ALL VERY GENEROUS AND THEY GIVE ME $500.

ISN'T THAT GOING TO THEN ALSO GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT H-E-B CONTRIBUTED TO ME HOWEVER MUCH FOR MY CAMPAIGN? I THINK THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES OF DOING THAT.

I SAY THAT BECAUSE MOST OF US ARE GOING TO THE SAME PEOPLE ALL THE TIME.

WE ARE ONLY GOING TO OUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY.

MOST OF OUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY ARE GOING TO WORK WITH US IN SOME CAPACITY.

IT HAS THAT UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE, WHICH IS WHY I DON'T SUPPORT ANY CHANGES TO THE SYSTEM, OTHER THAN INCREASING THE AMOUNTS, WHICH I EXPRESSED MY CONCERN FOR THAT.

GIVEN THE DIFFICULTY OF HOW WE HOST EVENTS THESE DAYS AND THE EXPECTATION THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN EVENT THAT PEOPLE WANT TO ATTEND.

EVEN GIVEN KIND OF THE WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITIES ALL OVER THE CITY TO DO THINGS, WHO WANTS TO SPEND A SATURDAY MORNING, YOU KNOW, AT MY EVENT IF WE HAVE NOTHING TO OFFER THEM BUT TACOS? IT'S JUST NOT AN APPEALING WAY TO SPEND YOUR TIME OR MONEY.

SO WE HAVE TO GO OUT OF OUR WAY TO HOST MORE INTERESTING, MORE DYNAMIC, MORE THINGS THAT PEOPLE WANT TO ATTEND.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR WHY I DON'T SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEFORE US.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE DISCLOSURE PORTION OF THE FINANCE DELIBERATIONS.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

AT THIS TIME WE ARE GOING TO RECESS FURTHER DELIBERATION UNTIL 1:00 P.M.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

OUR AFTERNOON WARRIORS.

THANK YOU FOR STAYING WITH US.

WE RECONVENED FROM A BRIEF AND MERCIFUL RECESS.

WE DO HAVE A COUPLE POINTS OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE.

I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE OUR COLLEAGUE COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE.

>> BROCKHOUSE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE THIS QUICK.

MY PARENTS ARE IN THE -- TODAY IS THEIR 48TH WEDDING ANNIVERSARY, SO -- [APPLAUSE] SO THEY'RE RELIVING THEIR YOUTH AND HOW THEY FIRST MET WALKING AROUND DOWNTOWN SAN ANTONIO.

THEY'VE BEEN TO THE ALAMO, THEY'RE GOING TO THE SPANISH GOVERNOR'S PALACE AND THEY DROPPED IN HERE.

I WANT TO TELL MY COLLEAGUES.

MY MOM IS HERE SO FOR THE NEXT 15 MINUTES I HAVE TO VOTE ON PRETTY MUCH ANYTHING YOU WANT ME TO.

SHE TOLD ME, DON'T BE MEAN.

WE HAVE A SMALL WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY HERE TO [INAUDIBLE] QUESTIONS.

TO MY PARENTS' ANNIVERSARY, THANK YOU FOR THE SURPRISE DROP-IN -- AND HOPEFULLY YOU'LL ENJOY THE NEXT FEW MINUTES OF THIS AFTERNOON BUT CONGRATULATIONS.

I LOVE YOU BOTH.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE, AND WELCOME, MR. AND MRS. BROCKHOUSE, TO OUR CHAMBERS.

I ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE OUR COLLEAGUE.

WE'RE ALREADY DONE EATING THE CAKE BUT IT IS COUNCILWOMAN'S -- COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN'S BIRTHDAY ON MONDAY, SO WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, WE USUALLY DO IT BEFORE THE LUNCH, BUT HERE IT IS AFTER THE LUNCH.

WE'LL SING HAPPY BIRTHDAY.

[APPLAUSE]

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND WHAT A SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING THIS

[03:00:01]

IS FOR ME.

[LAUGHTER] THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

WELL, WE WILL RESUME NOW WITH THE ITEMS BEFORE US ON THE AGENDA.

WE'LL BEGIN WITH ITEM NO.

32, AND THE LAST TWO SEPARATIONS.

WE DO NEED DELIBERATION ON THESE TWO ITEMS. IS THERE SOMEONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN DISCUSSION? THIS IS FOR THE SECOND PORTION OF THE FINANCE LIMITS, WHICH IS THE CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: I'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.

I THINK I -- I GUESS I WAS SPEAKING ON A DIFFERENT SUBJECT EARLIER, BUT I'LL GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE THAT SUBJECT NOW.

I'M AGAINST RAISING IT, AND I CAN APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THAT.

I DON'T SEE THAT AS A LIMITING FACTOR ON WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.

I THINK THAT THE FUNDRAISING WILL GO ON AND CONTINUE AS IT ALWAYS HAS, TRYING TO GET AS MUCH IN YOUR WAR CHEST AS POSSIBLE, AND RAISING THE LIMIT IS NOT GOING TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF FUNDRAISING GOING ON OUT IN THE COMMUNITY.

SO I'M -- I'M GOOD WITH LEAVING THE CAP WHERE IT IS TODAY AND NOT INCREASING IT.

THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PERRY.

COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE ACCEPT THE CONTRIBUTION LIMITS AS RECOMMENDED BY THIS TASK FORCE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONTRIBUTION LIMITS PRESENTED BY THE ETHICS REVIEW CAMPAIGN FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND.

COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES.

>> GONZALES: I'M SORRY, I WAS TAKING A BREAK.

CAN YOU JUST

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: SURE, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR FOR APPROVAL OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ON CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

>> GONZALES: CAN YOU JUST STATE WHAT IS THE -- THE CONTRIBUTION --

>> INCREASING IT BY 50%, FROM 500 TO 750 FOR COUNCILMAN AND FROM A THOUSAND TO 1500 FOR THE MAYOR'S RACE.

>> GONZALES: THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS ON CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION FAILS.

OKAY.

THE THIRD SECTION? WE NEED THE THIRD ITEM.

IS THERE SOMEONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN DISCUSSION?

>> CAN I HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, MAYOR?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: SURE.

>> WHY DOES IT FAIL IF IT'S A TIE?

>> YOU NEED SIX VOTES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YOU NEED A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL TO VOTE TO SUPPORT FOR THE MOTION FOR IT TO BE APPROVED.

>> THAT'S CORRECT, MAYOR.

[INAUDIBLE] ALSO NEED SIX VOTES TO PASS A PROPOSAL.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

SO WOULD ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES LIKE TO BEGIN DISCUSSION ON THE THIRD ITEM RECOMMENDATION? COUNCILMAN COURAGE? OH, I'M SORRY, COUNCILWOMAN -- COUNCILMAN COUNN COURAGE.

>> COURAGE: YES.

THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL ITEM WITHIN THE -- THE FINANCE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I WANTED TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT TO, AND IT'S FINANCE CODE CHAPTER 3, SECTION 309A (2).

WITHIN THAT IT WAS SPECIFYING WHO NEEDED TO GO AHEAD AND BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR REPORTING, AND IT INCLUDED LOBBYISTS FOR THE FIRST TIME AND A FEW OTHER LEVELS OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROCESS OF APPROVING HIGH-END CONTRACTS.

AND I'D LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT TO THAT, AND I'M GOING TO READ THIS.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND A REVISION TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO MUNICIPAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE CODE 2-309A2, AND I'D LIKE IT TO BE REVISED TO SAY, "ANY OWNER, OFFICER, OFFICER OF BOARD OR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF AN ENTITY SEEKING A HIGH-PROFILE CONTRACT EXCLUDING" -- AND

[03:05:01]

THIS IS THE AMENDMENT, "EXCLUDING BOARD OFFICERS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS OF IRS CODE 501(C)3 AND 501(C)4, NONPROFITS, AND 501(C)6 NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS, NOT CREATED OR CONTROLLED BY THE CITY WHOSE BOARD SERVICE IS DONE STRICTLY AS A VOLUNTEER WITH NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION AND NO ECONOMIC GAIN FROM THE NONPROFIT ENTITY." THE PURPOSE IS THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO SERVE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OR -- WITH NONPROFITS, I SHOULD SAY, WHO FEEL THAT THIS WOULD LIMIT THEIR ABILITY TO MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS TO CAMPAIGNS EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE NO FINANCIAL GAIN, NO FINANCIAL INTEREST IN SERVING ON THE BOARD BECAUSE WE'VE MENTIONED OFFICERS OF BOARDS IN THIS NEW WORDING, WE WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE SURE THAT IT DID NOT INCLUDE OFFICERS OF BOARDS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR NONPROFITS.

SO THAT'S THE -- THE REASONING BEHIND THAT RECOMMENDATION.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THANK ADOPT I MOVE TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS OPPOSED BY THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD.

THANK YOU.

>> THERE IS A MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE IN THIS TO STRIKE THE CLAUSE IN SECTION 2-59.

A4.

A RESOLUTION OF -- TO STRIKE THE CLAUSE, A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT OR NO OBJECTION FROM THE CITY, FOR A MULTI FAMILY HOUSING PROJECT SEEKING HOUSING TAX CREDITS THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS.

IS THAT A SECOND? OKAY.

AND -- OKAY.

THANK YOU.

AND THE REASON IS.

I SHARED THAT STATEMENT EARLIER IN MY FIRST REMARKS BUT BECAUSE WE IMPLEMENTED THIS NEW PILOT PROGRAM THE ERB, SO IT WASN'T IN THE DISCUSSION AND DISCOURSE PRIOR TO THEIR --

>>> OKAY.

AN DID I DID YOU HAVE --

>> I WANT TO CLARIFY.

DID COUNCILMAN COURAGE GET A SECOND ON HIS MOTION TO AMEND? OKAY.

THEN, THAT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED FIRST BEFORE WE CONSIDER WO COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN'S.

>>> IS THERE DISCUSSION ON COUNCILMAN COURAGE -- COUNCILMAN PELAEZ?

>> PELAEZ: I SECOND IT -- WELL, THEN, I THIRD IT.

>>> COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL.

>> SANDOVAL: JUST ANOTHER POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

ARE WE VOTING ON AMENDMENTS INDIVIDUALLY OR SHALL THE PRIMARY MOTION HAVE TO CONSIDER EACH ONE?

>> THE VOTE SHOULD FIRST BE ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROPOSED, AND THEN IF THERE'S MORE AMENDMENTS, THEN VOTE ON THE AMENDMENTS BEFORE THE MAIN MOTION.

>>> OKAY.

SO, TO CLARIFY, ANA, COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL'S MOTION IS PRIMARY AND AMENDED BY COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

>> CORRECT.

>>> SO WE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT OF THE MAIN MOTION FIRST.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> CAN I MAKE A CLARIFICATION ON THAT ITEM, PLEASE? CURRENTLY WE DO ALREADY DO THIS.

WE HAVE PROHIBITION FROM OWNERS OR OFFICERS, ALL WE WERE DOING IS CLARIFYING THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU WILL SEE IF WE ADD THIS CLAUSE FOR 401C3 AND 501C4, ALTHOUGH WE MIGHT BE GIVING THEM AN AHN FAIR ADVANTAGE OVER SOMEONE WHO

[03:10:01]

IS NOT A 501C3 OR C4 THAT STILL HAS TO REPORT THEIR OFFICERS.

WE DIDN'T DISCUSS THAT AS AN ERB BOARD.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS CLEAR.

>>> THANK YOU, DR. GARCIA.

COUNCILMAN PERRY?

>> PERRY: THIS IS AN EXAMPLE WHY I AGREED WITH DELAYING THIS.

PORTION BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS ON THIS.

TO ME I DON'T KNOW WHY WE TRY TO RUSH THIS THROUGH TODAY.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ABOUT DELAYING THIS SO WE CAN GET ALL OF THIS STUFF FLUSHED OUT.

SO, WITH THAT, I WILL TRY AGAIN TO -- I'LL MAKE ANOTHER MOTION TO DELAY THIS, UNTIL AUGUST.

>>> COUNCILMAN THERE'S TWO MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW.

ANDY?

>> YES, MAYOR, COUNCILMAN PERRY, THAT WAS ALREADY BROUGHT UP AND VOT VOTED ON, THE MOTION TO DELAY.

>> PERRY: IT CAN'T BE BROUGHT UP AT THIS POINT SINCE THIS IS ANOTHER SECTION?

>> NO.

ONCE IT'S VOTED ON, UNLESS IT'S -- UNLESS THERE'S SOME DIFFERENCE TO IT, IT'S ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED.

SO, NO, YOU CAN'T BRING IT UP AGAIN, COUNCILMAN.

>> PERRY: OKAY.

>>> DO YOU FIELD THE FLOOR, COUNCILMAN?

>> PERRY: YES, SIR.

COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

>> PELAEZ: DOCTOR, I APPRECIATE THAT.

YOU WHAT I HEARD THERE'S 42 HIGH PROFILE CONTRACTS IN 2014.

>> CORRECT.

>> PELAEZ: OF THOSE HOW MANY 5001C3, 4 OR 501C6S?

>> PELAEZ: I AGREE WITH YOU.

WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN YOU RAISED WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE AND IT'S A SMALL PROBLEM.

FOR US WHAT WE'RE CREATING, THOSE WHO VOLUNTEER AND SERVE ON BOARDS AND GIVE UP OF THEIR TIME TO DO CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FOR A NON-PROFIT REASON JUST TO HELP OUT PEOPLE LIKE THE FOOD BANK, FOR EXAMPLE, RIGHT? NOW THEY ARE BEING GIVEN THE CHOICE, EITHER PARTICIPATE THERE OR PARTICIPATE YOUR GOVERNMENT AND EXERCISE YOUR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH BY WAY OF MAKING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS OR LOBBYING YOUR COUNCIL.

I DON'T THINK I WANT TO PUT A VOLUNTEER IN THAT POSITION.

IF IT GIVES THE FOOD BANK AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE TO BE ABLE TO COME AND JUST TALK TO US, THEN -- THEN WE GOT OTHER PROBLEMS. AND SO WE -- WITH THAT SAID, I -- I HESITATE TO PUT THOSE PEOPLE IN A POSITION -- BECAUSE THIS IS NOT IN A POSITION OF OBLIGATION ON US THAT'S BEING SUGGESTED IN THIS MOTION.

WHAT IT IS IT'S AN IMPOSITION OF AN OBLIGATION ON THE BOARD MEMBER, RIGHT, WHICH WOULD THEN SPLASH UP ON TO THE ORGANIZATION AS A WHOLE AND MIGHT ACTUALLY BAR THEM FROM BEING ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE CONTRACTS IF UNINFORMED, WELL INTENTIONED BOARD MEMBER WERE TO SEND COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL EVEN $1 ONLINE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A MORE ARTFUL WAY OF SAYING THAT, NEW THAT'S JUST NOT COOL.

I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE WAY WE WANT TO DO BUSINESS.

THANK YOU.

>>> THANK YOU.

COUN COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

>> PELAEZ: IT GOES BACK TO MY COMMENTS, IT'S CREATING ADDITIONAL REPORTING NOT JUST FOR US BUT FOR EVERYBODY THAT WANTS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS.

IT'S ADDITIONAL REPORTING.

IT'S NOT TRANSPARENCY.

I FEEL I NEED TO CONTINUE TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

I DON'T SUPPORT THE MOTION.

I DON'T SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS.

WE DON'T NEED TO CHANGE THAT PARTICULAR PART OF THE SYSTEM AND I THINK WE SHOULD LEAVE IT ALONE.

AND I'LL YIELD THE FLOOR.

>>> THANK YOU WOMAN GONZALES.

COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: OKAY.

ON A GLOBAL SCALE, THIS LAST ELECTION, HOW MANY DONATIONS WERE MADE ACROSS ALL OF THE -- ALL OF THE CANDIDATES THIS LAST

[03:15:03]

ELECTION? TAKE A GUESS.

>> I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER.

I WOULD SAY THOUSANDS.

>> PERRY: THOUSANDS.

>> I HAVE NO IDEA.

>> PERRY: AND HOW MANY ISSUES DID WE HAVE?

>> WITH HIGH PROFILE CONTRACTS SPECIFICALLY ACROSS THE BOARD, THERE WERE, WITHIN A YEAR, THERE MAY BE FIVE, SIX, SEVEN COMPANIES DISQUALIFIED FOR GIVING --

>> PERRY: HOW MANY DID WE HAVE THIS LAST TIME?

>> 42.

IF YOU'RE TALKING HIGH PROFILE DISCRETIONARY?

>> PERRY: HOW MANY WERE DISQUALIFIED?

>> I'M GOING TO SAY SIX OR SEVEN.

I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER WITH ME.

>> PERRY: I ONLY REMEMBER ONE AND WE JUST DISCUSSED THAT LAST WEEK.

>> WITH THE AUTO COMMITTEE.

CORRECT.

BUT THERE ARE MANY DISQUALIFIED BEFORE IT MAKES IT TO THAT PART OF THE PROCESS.

>> PERRY: FROM THOUSANDS OF DONATIONS.

I LOOK AT OUR CONTRACTORS HERE IN TOWN.

THEY KNOW THE RULES AND THEY KNOW WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, AND IF THEY MAKE A MISTAKE, YEAH, THAT'S ON THEM.

IT'S INCUMBENT ON THEM TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE DOING THIS RIGHT AND IF THERE ARE A FEW OUT OF THE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS THAT ARE SUBMITTED, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S A TESTAMENT THAT WE DO HAVE A SYSTEM THAT WORKS NOW.

IT'S CURRENTLY WORKING.

I MEAN, WHAT'S THE STATE REQUIREMENTS.

ARE WE MEETING STATE REQUIREMENTS? ARE WE EXCEEDING THE STATE REQUIREMENTS TODAY?

>> WITH RESPECT TO --

>> PERRY: REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, ALL OF THAT KIND OF THING.

>> MOST REPORTING REQUIREMENTS MEET THE STATE REQUIREMENTS.

TO THE LEVEL THEY MEET STATE REQUIREMENTS CASE BY CASE IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

>> PERRY: OKAY.

>> ONE ISSUE IS INCREASING FREQUENCY OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS.

THE THREE DAY REPORT HAS STATE REQUIREMENTS.

THE STATE REQUIREMENTS ARE SEMI ANNUAL PROCESSES.

THE DISCRETIONARY CONTRACTS -- I KNOW OUR PURCHASING PROGRAMS ARE BASED OFF STATE REQUIREMENTS.

IT'S A VERY STATE REGULATED PROCESS.

I'M NOT IN PURCHASE SO I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILED EXPLANATION TO THAT.

I CAN'T SPEAK TO CLORNT WE'RE ABOVE STATE REQUIREMENTS AS IT RELATES TO HIGH PROFILE COMMENTS.

>> PERRY: AGAIN, IS OUR CURRENT POLICY AND PROCEDURES TRANSPARENT?

>> YES.

IT IS TRANSPARENT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE --

>> PERRY: YES, WE CURRENTLY HAVE A TRANSPARENT SYSTEM.

AND WE HAVE VERY, VERY FEW ISSUES.

WE'VE HAD VERY, VERY FEW ISSUES COMPARED TO WHAT IS DONE ON AN ELECTION CYCLE.

SO, WHY ARE WE GOING IN THERE AND TRYING TO MAKE CHANGES? WHO ARE THESE CHANGES FOR?

>> BUT LET ME CLARIFY SPECIFICALLY ON THIS POINT OF THE OFFICER OF THE BOARD.

THE CURRENT PRACTICE AND INTERPRETATION OF THIS ORDINANCE BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE CURRENT LANGUAGE THAT SAYS ANY OWNER OR OFFICER -- THE INTERPRETATION IS THAT ALREADY MEANS OFFICER OF THE BOARD.

THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN INTERPRETED.

THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN ENFORCED FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S BEEN ENFORCED THAT WAY.

IN THIS LANGUAGE WRITING, OFFICER OF THE BOARD, IT'S SIMPLY A CLARIFICATION SO IT MINIMIZES QUESTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES.

>> PERRY: BUT IF WE LEFT OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS OR ORDINANCES, IS THAT A PROBLEM?

>> WE COULD LEAVE IT.

AGAIN, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS THAT CLARIFIES A CURRENT -- BECAUSE OFFICER --

>> PERRY: WE HAD AN ISSUE WITH THIS BEFORE.

>> WE HAD QUESTIONS.

>> PERRY: HAD QUESTIONS AND THEY WERE ANSWERED.

>> YES, SIR.

.

SO, AGAIN, ARE WE -- ARE WE TRANSPARENT TODAY, WITHOUT THESE CHANGES?

>> YES.

WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT'S WORKING.

I AGREE WITH WHAT IS SAID.

AGAIN IT'S TRYING TO MAKE IT MORE EFFICIENT, MORE CLEAR.

>> PERRY: WELL, ALL OF THESE CHANGES -- WHAT'S THE GOAL NEXT? I MEAN TO REPORT THIS STUFF MONTHLY, WEEKLY, DAILY? WHAT WE HAVE TODAY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS -- EXCEEDS THE REQUIREMENT, STATE REQUIREMENTS.

SO, I AGREE WITH WOMAN GONZALES.

I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO MAKE THESE TYPES OF CHANGES IN THIS PORTION.

SO, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY FOR NOW, SIR.

THANK YOU.

>>> THANK YOU.

COUNCILMAN PERRY.

COUNCILMAN SHAW?

>> SHAW: AS I STATED BEFORE I'M LOOKING FOR A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.

I NEED TO MAKE SURE WE PROTECT -- QUESTION, AT ANY TIME DOES A NON-PROFIT AND FOR-PROFIT

[03:20:04]

COMPETE FOR THE SAME CONTRACTS?

>> YES, THAT DOES OCCUR ON OCCASION?

>> SHAW: DOES IT HAPPEN OFF?

>> HIGH PROFILE -- TWO TIMES A YEAR, CERTAINLY NOT OFTEN BUT IT DOES HAPPEN.

>> SHAW: I'M IN SUPPORT WE EITHER EXCLUDE ON BOTH PROFIT AND NON-PROFIT OR INCLUDE IN BOTH PROFIT AND NON-PROFIT.

>> CURRENT CODE, THEY ARE EVEN.

THEY'RE BOTH EXCLUDED.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT FOR EXCLUZ --

>> SHAW: NON-PROFIT BOARD MEMBERS FROM MAKING DISTRIBUTIONS DURING THE PLAQUEOUT PERIOD

>> SHAW: MY STANCE IS WE KEEP THEM BOTH PROFIT AND NON-PROFIT ON THE SAME LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>>> THANK YOU COUNCILMAN SHAW.

ARE THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS -- COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN?

>> VIAGRAN: I WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, COUNCILMAN COURAGE TO ATTACH A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FROM YOUR AMENDMENT TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAUSE FROM A4 FROM SECTION 2-59 FROM THE ETHICS CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO THE CLAUSE THAT READS A4 A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT OR NO OBJECTION FROM THE CITY FOR MULTI FAMILY HOUSING CREDITS SOAKING HOUSING TAX CREDITS THROUGH THE TEXAS HOUSING COMMUNITY.

WOULD YOU ACCEPT THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>> PERRY: ANY, I WOULD ACCEPT THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>>> ANDY?

>> NOW I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND -- THERE'S AN AMENDMENT TO AMEND --

>>> COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN OFFERED TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION BY COUNCILMAN SANDOVAL.

>> THE ISSUE THE AMENDMENT TO AMEND NEEDS TO BE RELATED TO THE AMENDMENT, COUNCILWOMAN.

>> SO I KEEP THE ONE THAT WAS ON THERE ORIGINALLY.

>> WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND, LET'S CONSIDER COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S AMENDMENT THEN CONSIDER YOUR AMENDMENT.

THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION.

>> VIAGRAN: FINE.

THANK YOU.

>>> OKAY.

I THINK WE ARE CLEAR NOW.

THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR CONSIDERATION AT THIS TIME IS COUNCILMAN COURAGE'S AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION.

AND CAN WE STATE WHAT THAT AMENDMENT IS AGAIN, ANDY?

>> THE AMENDMENT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT FROM THE COUNCILMAN IS TO LOOKING AT SECTION 2-309A2 TO STRIKE -- OR, NO, TO ADD, EXCLUDING IRS AND I THINK THE COUNCILMAN HAS THE EXACT LANGUAGE.

CAN YOU HELP ME WITH THAT COUNCILMAN?

>> 501C3, AND 6 BOARD MEMBERS FROM BEING INCLUDED FROM THOSE WHO HAVE TO REPORT CONTRIBUTIONS.

>>> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

SO THERE IS A MOTION AND SECOND FOR AMENDMENT OF THE MAIN.

I JUST LIKE TO SAY THERE'S BEEN SO MUCH DISCUSSION.

I AM AT A POINT WHERE I THINK MY BEST COURSE OF ACTION IS TO CONSIDER AND TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITIZENS COMMITTEES AS THEY STAND.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP THE MOTION TO AMEND.

SO, THE MOTION AND SECOND PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP THE SECOND MOTION NOW, WHICH IS THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL?

>> SANDOVAL: THANK YOU.

JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ON THIS AMENDMENT.

FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK YOU AGAIN.

I KNOW I TALKED YOU EARLIER.

BUT THANK YOU AGAIN.

DO YOU WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS PARTICULAR LANGUAGE WAS ALREADY RECOMMENDED BY THE ERB? IT WAS REVIEWED WITH US INDIVIDUALLY AS COUNCIL MEMBERS.

IT WAS REVIEWED AT B SECTION.

IT WAS REVIEWED AT GOVERNANCE SESSION.

IT WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF REVIEW BY THE BOARD MEMBERS.

SO I THINK THAT PROVIDES SOME AMOUNT OF VETTING AND SOME

[03:25:03]

SUPPORT FOR THIS, AND IT WAS AT MY SUGGESTION.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING IT UNDER CONSIDERATION THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

IT WASN'T EASY TO ADD IT ON BUT I WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BACKGROUND ABOUT WHY I ORIGINALLY MADE THIS SUGGESTION.

THERE'S SORT OF AN ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM.

IT'S OUT THERE.

ALL RIGHT? THE QUESTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

WE HAD A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT IT YESTERDAY.

THE COUNCILMAN ALLUDED TO IT IN A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND HOW SHE FELT THEY CREATED STRIFE AND I THINK WHAT WE REALLY TALKED -- ONE THING THAT BECAME CLEAR IN YESTERDAY'S DISCUSSION AT "B" SESSION, WHEN WE HEARD HOUSING TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS, IS THERE'S A LACK OF CLEAR INFORMATION IN THE PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING MEANS AND WHAT IT DOESN'T.

UNTIL WE DO A GOOD JOB OF PROVIDING THAT EDUCATION, WHETHER IT'S US OR WHETHER IT'S THE DEVELOPERS OR WHOMEVER, I THINK SOME OF THAT STILL MA WILL EXIST AND STRIFE WILL COME FORWARD. SOME HAS TO DO WITH CHANGE AND ADDITIONAL DENSITY.

WHAT I WANT TO SAY, I THINK -- I CAN HEAR YOU OVER HERE COUNCILMAN.

WHAT I DO THINK WE NEED TO DO SOME EDUCATION.

BUT THAT IS A VERY SEPARATE ISSUE FROM REQUIRING DISCLOSURE HERE.

WHAT HAPPENS IS SOMEONE COMES TO CITY COUNCIL FOR A -- WHAT IT -- IT WOULD BE ANYTHING.

BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS A LETTER OF SUPPORT, OR NO OBJECTION.

THEY ARE ASKING FOR OUR VOTE.

AN ENTITY, PROFIT OR NON-PROFIT IS ASKING FOR OUR VOTE ON SOMETHING.

WHAT I AM SUPPORTING IN YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS IS THAT WHEN THAT ENTITY COMES AND ASKS OUR BLESSING OR VOTE YES, THAT IT IS DISCLOSED WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE MADE A CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION.

IN THE INTEREST OF BUILDING PUBLIC TRUST AROUND THE VOTES THAT ARE TAKEN ON THIS DAIS.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT ASKING FOR THAT LEVEL OF DISCLOSURE CREATES STRIFE I BELIEVE IT CREATES TRUST IN THE PUBLIC PROCESS AND IN THE VOTE THAT'S COMING UP.

I APOLOGIZE FOR TAKING TOO LONG TO SAY THAT.

THAT IS VERY SEPARATE FROM THE EDUCATION AROUND WHAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS OR ISN'T.

I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AFENDMENT.

I WILL SUPPORT THE ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE.

THANK YOU.

>>> THANK YOU COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL.

ALL RIGHT THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR AMENDMENT OF THE MAIN MOTION.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION FAILS.

ALL RIGHT WE'LL TAKE UP THE MAIN MOTION WHICH IS APPROVAL OF HE ERB RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED BY THE PREVIOUS VOTE FROM COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

THERE IS A MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ERB RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED WHICH WERE THE EXCLUSIVE OF 501C34 AND 6 OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS.

DID I GET THAT RIGHT, ANDY?

>> OKAY.

NOW, THIS IS THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED.

PLEASE VOTE.

[33. Ordinance amending the land use categories in Chapter 35 of the City's Unified Development Code to implement the SA Tomorrow Comprehensive Plan. [Peter Zanoni, Deputy City Manager; Bridgett White, Director, Planning]]

MOTION CARRIES.

P.M. ALL RIGHT.

ITEM NUMBER 33.

ITEM NUMBER 33 IS ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND USE CATEGORIES IN CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO IMPLEMENT THE SA TOMORROW PROGRAM.

COUNCILMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: I WAS NOT GOING TO ASK FOR A PRESENTATION, BUT WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS TO -- WE HAVE BEEN GETTING A LOT OF FEEDBACK FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, IN AND AROUND DISTRICT 3 AND OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY, REQUESTING MORE TIME AND MORE PUBLIC OUTREACH TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO SEE WHAT KIND OF IMPACT THIS IS.

SO, BECAUSE OF THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION BEFORE THE END OF AUGUST, TO HAVE CONVERSATION, AND MAYBE GO UP TO

[03:30:02]

ANOTHER COMMITTEE MEETING, TOO.

SO, THANK YOU.

>> SO, WOULD THE RECOMMENDATION BE IT WOULD GO TO --

>> COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING?

>> YES, YES.

>> THANK YOU.

>>> THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR CONTINUANCE OF ITEM 33.

COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I WANT TO POINT OUT, I WANT TO RECOGNIZE A LOT OF THE LETTERS WE'VE RECEIVED LAST MINE.

ALMOST PARK TERRACE.

MON THAT VISTA, TERRACE RIVER ROAD.

WEST END, COLONIAL HILLS.

TILBIN HILL.

THIS MORNING WE LOOKED AT LAND USE PLAN AS PROPOSED IN MF-33.

DO NOT MATCH A SINGLE RECORD AND THIS PLAN WE'RE MOTIONING TO DELAY THIS.

WE NEED A MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION THAT INCLUDES THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND ALL INTERESTED STAKEHOLDERS.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PROCESS.

I HOPE THAT WE CAN TRY TO CREATE A STRATEGY TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY FEELS COMFORTABLE.

THAT'S TOO MANY PEOPLE AND NOT COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THANK YOU.

>>> THANK YOU.

THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR CONTINUANCE OF ITEM NUMBER 33.

[44. Resolution opposing the inclusion of a citizenship question in the 2020 Census [Jeff Coyle, Director, Government and Public Affairs]]

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM 44.

>> ITEM NUMBER H 44 IS RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE INCLUSION OF A CITIZENSHIP QUESTION IN THE 2020 CENSUS.

>>> COUNCILMAN VIAGRAN?

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, MEGAN.

COULD YOU PLEASE GIVE A PRESENTATION ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS RIGHT NOW THIS.

>> YES COUNCILMAN.

I HAVE SOME SLIDES.

>>> WE DO HAVE CITIZENS WHO HAD ORIGINALLY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE STILL PRESENT.

IS RICHARD PETTIS STILL HERE?

>> HE'S NOT HERE, BUT YOU SHOULD HAVE A LETTER FROM HIM AT YOUR SEATS.

>>> COUNCILMAN?

>> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THIS RESOLUTION AND ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CITIZEN -- OF THE CENSUS IN 2020.

TO START OFF, I WOULD LIKE TO TALK WITH YOU ALL ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING AN ACCURATE COUNT HERE IN SAN ANTONIO FOR THE 2020 CENSUS.

AS YOU MAY KNOW, THE CENSUS, EVERY TEN YEARS, HELPS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DETERMINE DISTRIBUTION OF ABOUT 675 BILLION DOLLARS IN FEDERAL FUNDS.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT USES THOSE NUMBERS TO DISTRIBUTE THAT FOR BEEN B132 FEDERAL GRANT PROGRAMS THAT COME TO COMMUNITIES MUCH LIKE SAN ANTONIO.

THOSE INCLUDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS, SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITIONAL PROGRAM, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS S.N.A.P.

HEAD START FUNDS AND MANY OTHERS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY.

ALSO, IT HELPS ENTITIES DETERMINE FORECASTING FOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AND CENSUS DATA DETERMINES ELIGIBILITY FOR ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS AND ALSO DETERMINES A PORTION OF SEATS TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

AFTER THE 2010 CENSUS, TEXAS GAINED FOUR CONGRESSIONAL SEATS, AND BASED ON POPULATION ESTIMATES IF WE GET A COMPLETE COUNT IN 2020, T-T-IS ESTIMATED TO GAIN AN ADDITIONAL -- I'VE SEEN ANYWHERE FROM 3 TO 4 SEATS AFTER THE 2020 CENSUS.

THIS IS HELPS MANY ENTITIES PLAN FOR DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS, HELPS OUR CITY DEPARTMENTS DEVELOP VARIOUS PLANS AND ALSO HELPS PRIVATE BUSINESSES PLAN FOR GROWTH.

ALSO IT HELPS EVERY TEN YEARS TO DETERMINE REDISTRICTING.

MOVING ON I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT KEY CHANGES THAT ARE GOING TO TAKE PLACE THAT THE CENSUS BUREAU IS ROLLING OUT FOR 2020 CENSUS.

FIRST THERE'S A REDUCTION OF FIELD CANVASSING.

THERE'S AN ENHANCED EFFORT AT LOCAL COMMUNITIES, AND EXPECTATION COMMUNITIES LIKE SAN ANTONIO DO A LOT OF WORK ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF TAKING PART OF THE CENSUS AND COMPLETING THE QUESTIONNAIRE.

WE'LL DO A COMPREHENSIVE EFFORT LOCALLY TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE ARE PARTICIPATING AND GET AS ACCURATE COUNT AS POSSIBLE.

THAT'S DUE TO FIELD CANVASSING.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A GREATER EMPHASIS ONLINE.

THERE'S A FIRST YEAR IN 2020 THAT PEOPLE TAKE THE QUESTIONNAIRE ONLINE AND VIA PHONE.

CREATES OPPORTUNITIES BUT ALSO A

[03:35:02]

CHALLENGE BECAUSE OF THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN SAN ANTONIO.

THERE'S RE-ENGINEERED FIELD OFFICE.

THEY ARE GOING TO FOCUS ON USING DATA AND ELECTRONICS TO CAPTURE COUNTS AND RESPONSES AND I WANT TO POINT OUT PEOPLE CAN START TAKING THE QUESTIONNAIRE ON MARCH 23RD AND SINCE THIS DAY IS OFFICIALLY APRIL 1ST.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF WORK DONE IN THE MEANTIME TO INFORM OUR RESIDENTS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF PARTICIPATING IN THE CENSUS AND MAKE SURE THEY HAVE WHAT THEY NEED TO COMPLETE THE SURVEY, THE QUESTIONNAIRE.

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW IT LOOKS IN SAN ANTONIO.

THE CENSUS BUREAU COMES UP WITH LOW RESPONSE SCORES FOR EACH COMMUNITY.

THOSE LOW RESPONSE SCORES ARE BASED ON PAST PARTICIPATION RATES AND OTHER CENSUS SURVEYS AND AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEYS AND BASED ON VARIOUS VARIABLES IN EACH CENSUS TRACTED.

BASED ON THOSE NUMBERS 20 PERCENT OF SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS CONSIDERED LIKELY TO NOT SELF RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE IN 2020.

SO, WE WILL DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO TARGET WHAT ARE CONSIDERED HARD ACCOUNT AREAS AND MAKE SURE EVERYONE IN SAN ANTONIO KNOWS THEY SHOULD PARTICIPATE.

I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT FROM THE 2000 TO 2010 PARTICIPATION IN BEXAR COUNTY WENT DOWN 1 PERCENT AND ACCORDING TO ANALYSIS.

66 PERCENT OF TEXANS LIVE IN TRACTS THAT ARE HARD TO COUNT THAT EXCEED THAT LOW RESPONSE SCORE.

MUCH HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT B WHAT'S IN THE 2020 QUESTIONNAIRE.

IT DOESN'T INCLUDE A CITIZENSHIP QUESTION.

THE PROPOSED QUESTIONS WERE SENT TO CONGRESS IN LATE MARCH.

AS YOU MAY KNOW, THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT APP REQUESTED A CITIZENSHIP QUESTION BE INCLUDED TO HELP ENFORCE THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT.

THE PROPOSED QUESTIONS THAT THE PLAN -- THAT ARE PLANNED TO BE IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE INCLUDE AGE, CITIZENSHIP, HISPANIC ORIGIN, RACE, RELATIONSHIP, SEX, WHETHER YOU'RE AN OWNER OR RENTER AND OTHER OPERATIONAL QUESTIONS SUCH AS LIVING IN THE HOUSEHOLD.

I WANT TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW ON THE HISTORY THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION.

THE LAST TIME IT WAS ASKED OF ALL HOUSEHOLDS WAS 1950.

SINCE THEN, IN 1970 THEY ROLLED OUT A SHORT FORM AND LONG FORM OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE.

THE LONG FORM INCLUDED A LOT OF SOCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONS INCLUDING CITIZENSHIP QUESTION.

SO THAT LONG FORM QUESTIONNAIRE WENT ABOUT -- THE CENSUS BUREAU USED THE SURVEY THAT THEY USE EVERY YEAR.

HOWEVER THAT QUESTIONNAIRE ONLY GOES TO 3.5 MILLION HOUSEHOLDS.

MANY GROUPS HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN AND OPPOSITION TO THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION.

OUR VIEWPOINT HAS BEEN THAT BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A GREAT EMPHASIS LOCALLY TO GET AN ACCURATE COUNT BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITY TO GET THAT COUNT FOR FEDERAL FUNDS AND OTHER REASONS, WE'RE CONCERNED WITH THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT WOULD LEAD TO DEPRESSED PARTICIPATION IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE.

I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THERE WAS A LETTER SENT A FEW MONTHS AGO BY SIX OF THE FORMER CENSUS DIRECTORS EXPRESSING CONCERN WITH WHAT A CITIZENSHIP QUESTION COULD DO TO AN ACCURATE COUNT AND THE FACT IT WAS ADDED LATE IN THE PROCESS AND CAN'T BE TESTED, THERE'S A LOT OF TESTING THAT TAKES PLACE TO PREPARE FOR EACH CENSUS.

THERE'S A TEST UNDER WAY IN RHODE ISLAND BUT THE QUESTION WAS ADDED LATE, SO IT'S NOT -- THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION IS NOT BEING TESTED IN THAT TEST.

SEVERAL PENDING LAWSUITS, AS I'M SURE YOU'VE HEARD.

THERE'S FIVE PENDING LAWSUITS FILED BY A NUMBER OF ENTITIES INCLUDING SEVERAL CITY, SEVERAL STATES.

GROUPS LIKE ACLU.

THE MOST RESENT ONE FILED SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED CITIES LIKE SAN ANTONIO AND IMPACT THAT A CITIZENSHIP QUESTION COULD HAVE ON CITIES LIKE OURS.

ALSO.

I MENTIONED THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE A LETTER FROM RICHARD PEREZ WITH THE CHAMBER, THE SAN ANTONIO CHAMBER, EXPRESSING THEIR CONCERN WITH THE IMPACT THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION COULD HAVE ON ON ACCURATE COUNT.

WITH THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COUNCIL COMMITTEE JUNE 13TH AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION OPPOSING AN INCLUSION OF CITIZENSHIP QUESTION IN THE 2020 CENSUS.

I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU MEGAN, VERY MUCH FOR THAT THOROUGH PRESENTATION AND SHARING WHAT IT WAS OUR CONCERNS.

I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMAN SALDANA WHO BROUGHT IT FORWARD

[03:40:01]

SO WE COULD HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT TIME OF THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES AND ALSO AN IMPORTANT TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US THAT GETS COUNTED BUT THAT WE DO NOT LIVE IN FEAR WHEN WE ARE WANTING TO BE COUNTED AND RAISING OUR HANDS.

WE KNOW THIS QUESTION IS ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE GET THE RESOURCES THAT WE KNOW AND GET THE RIGHT