Sep 17, 2024 City Council Budget Work Session

[ ITEMS  ]

[00:00:16]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE AND WELCOME TO OUR CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORK SESSION. WE'RE DRAWING NEAR TO OUR FAVORITE DAY OF THE YEAR, SEPTEMBER 17TH, 2024, AT 2:05 P.M. AND WE'LL CALL OUR MEETING TO ORDER.

MADAM CLERK, CAN YOU READ THE ROLL. >> CLERK: TODAY IS OUR PRESENTATION ON AMENDMENTS. AND SO I EXPECT A FAIR AMOUNT OF CHAOS BUT WE'LL GET THROUGH IT. AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO ROUNDS OF CONVERSATION, IF THERE'S MORE CLARIFICATION NEEDED WE COULD GO FROM THERE, BUT KEEP IN MIND THAT WE DO HAVE AN EXEC SESSION AFTER THIS. SO WE'LL TRY TO BE EXPEDITIOUS. ERIK GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR.

SO I SENT THE MEMO OUT YESTERDAY AND WE'LL GO THROUGH A VERY SHORT SIX-SLIDE PRESENTATION THAT JUST ENCAPSULATES THAT. YOU ALSO HAVE BEFORE YOU, UM, KIND OF AN UPDATED LIST.

I KNOW THAT TWO COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE GIVEN ME TWO SUGGESTED CHANGES OR CORRECTIONS.

AS YOU ALL WEIGH IN, IF THERE'S SOMETHING ON HERE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED, PLEASE SHARE WITH US AND THAT WAY WE CAN ACCURATELY REFLECT. THIS DOCUMENT WILL ROLL INTO ULTIMATELY THURSDAY, AND THE IDEA WOULD BE TO PRESENT THIS BACK TO YOU ALL TOMORROW SO THAT WE ARE ACCURATELY, UM, INDICATING YOUR FEEDBACK. AND AS THE MAYOR MENTIONED WE HAVE A BUDGET WORK SESSION THIS AFTERNOON. WE ALSO HAVE ONE TOMORROW AFTERNOON TO SHORE UP AND TO FINALIZE AND THEN THE BUDGET ADOPTION IS SCHEDULED FOR THURSDAY MORNING. SO WE'RE GOING TO RUN THROUGH A REAL QUICK PRESENTATION AND THEN TURN IT BACK TO YOU ALL TO, UM -- OH, [INDISCERNIBLE]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JUSTINA TATE AND I'M THE BUDGET DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. AND TODAY WE'LL BE DISCUSSING A COUPLE OF TOPICS, TO INCLUDE UPDATES ON MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES.

THE TWO-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW. THE TWO-YEAR PLANNED BUDGET REVIEW.

AND AN UPDATE ON CPS REVENUE AS WELL AS PROPERTY TAX APPRAISALS. AN UPDATE ON THE ARPA FUNDS ALLOCATION AND THE BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR REVIEW AND DISCUSSION.

THE FIFISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET WS PROPOSED ON OCTOBER 15TH. IT INCLUDES ESTIMATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 FOR BOTH REVENUES AND EXPENSES FOR ALL PRESENTED FUNDS.

AND SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE RECEIVED ADDITIONAL REVENUE COLLECTIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, AND THESE REVENUES HAVE BEEN EVALUATED BASED UPON ACTUAL RECEIPTS.

AND SO WITH THIS EVALUATION, WE ANTICIPATE THAT OVERALL THAT FISCAL YEAR 2024 GENERAL FUND REVENUES WILL EXCEED PROJECTIONS, INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET, BY $2.5 MILLION. NOW AS YOU MAY RECALL THAT DURING THE PROPOSED BUDGET PRESENTATION, THE CITY MANAGER PRESENTED CHALLENGES AND DISCUSSED CHALLENGES THAT EXIST FOR OUR FISCAL YEAR 2026 PLAN. WITHIN THE TWO-YEAR PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED, THE GENERAL FUND FACED A CHALLENGE OF $8.2 MILLION THAT WOULD NEED TO BE ADDRESSED NEXT YEAR THROUGH REDUCTIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 2026. AND WITH THIS PRESENTATION, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT $2.5 MILLION OF ADDITIONAL REVENUES THAT WE ARE PROJECTING FOR 2024 BE USED TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF CUTS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE IN FISCAL YEAR 2026. AND WITH THIS, I WANT TO PASS IT

OVER TO BEN TO TALK ABOUT CPS. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS.

SO I'LL GIVE YOU A QUICK UPDATE ON OUR PAYMENT FROM CPS ENERGY. BEFORE I TALK ABOUT THE POLICIES AND GO THROUGH THOSE AGAIN, I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT ABOUT HOW WE GOT TO THESE POLICIES. SO IF YOU RECALL BACK IN FY 22, AND FY 23 WE HAD SIGNIFICANT

[00:05:02]

AND WHILE WE TALKED ABOUT THEY WILL TYPICALLY FLUCTUATE QUITE A BIT FROM YEAR TO YEAR, THAT WAS A BIGGER CHANGE IN 2022 AND IT WAS DRIVEN BY REALLY H.O.T. TEMPERATURES AND WE HAD DAYS OVER 100°, AND GAS PRICES AND FUEL PRICES BEING UP THAT SUMMER THAT DROVE THAT -- THAT ADDITIONAL INCREASE FROM CPS. AND LAST YEAR, FY 2023, UM, AGAIN, SIGNIFICANT VARIANCE AGAINST THE ADOPTED BUDGET, BUT FOR A DIFFERENT REASON. WE GOT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CITY PAYMENT OFF OF OFF-SYSTEM SALES, EXCESS POWER, THAT CPS SELLS INTO THE ENERGY MARKET.

SO IF WILL RECALL RIGHT AT THE END OF THE BUDGET PROCESS LAST YEAR WE GOT AN OFF-SYSTEM SALES PAYMENT OF $16 MILLION OR $17 MILLION. AND WE DON'T GET THAT IN AN ENTIRE YEAR AND WE GOT THAT IN THE MONTH OF AUGUST. SO WE HAD THOSE ADDITIONAL VARIANCES COMING FROM THOSE TWO YEARS. AND WE HAD A CCR THAT GOT FILED LATE LAST SUMMER THAT PROPOSED TAKING PART OF OUR CITY PAYMENT AND USING THAT TO LOWER THE CPS FUTURE RATE REQUESTS. THEY WERE SCHEDULED TO COME IN LAST FALL.

WE TOOK THAT CCR TO GOVERNANCE AND TO B SESSION AND PROPOSED MODIFYING OUR POLICY SLIGHTLY TO LOOK AT ALLOCATING PART OF OUR DOLLARS BACK TO CPS TO HELP WITH THAT -- THOSE POTENTIAL FUTURE RATE INCREASES. AND WE THEN GOT TO DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR AND WENT THROUGH A RATE CASE WITH CPS ENERGY AND WE HAD STAFF THROUGH THERE AND MADE A RECOMMENDATION IN DECEMBER TO SUPPORT OUR RATE INCREASE.

THAT RATE CASE ABOUT THE CITY PAYMENT, AGAIN, AND THERE WAS EVEN A MOTION MADE AT THAT POINT IN TIME TO LOOK AT REDUCING THAT RATE INCREASE BY HALF, AND THAT WE WOULD FIND THE DOLLARS IN OUR BUDGET PROCESS. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN $42.5 MILLION OF RECURRING REVENUE.

SO POINT BEING THAT WE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATION, POLICY CONVERSATION, ABOUT CITY PAYMENT AND ABOUT CPS' ENERGY NEED FOR A RATE INCREASE AND THIS RATE PLAN THAT THEY'VE GOT TO SUPPORT THEIR CAPITAL PLAN. THEN FAST FORWARD TO THIS CALENDAR YEAR, A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS CHANGED. AND THIS CALENDAR YEAR WE ENDED UP SEEING, UM, CPS BEING ABLE TO ACQUIRE SEVERAL NATURAL GAS PLANTS, WHICH REALLY ALLOWED THEM TO HAVE GREATER EXCESS GENERATION TO SELL INTO THE WHOLESALE MARKET. WE CONTINUED TO SEE TIGHTNESS IN THE MARKET AND I HAVE MENTIONED THAT $17 MILLION PAYMENT LAST AUGUST, AND WE DON'T GET THEM THE WHOLE YEAR. AND WE EXPECT THOSE CONDITIONS TO CONTINUE FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS, BUT WITH THOSE ADDITIONAL NATURAL GAS PLANTS THAT WAS GIVING CPS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SELL ADDITIONAL POWER INTO THE MARKET. AND IT CERTAINLY WAS GOING TO BE A POTENTIAL FOR THE SCARCITY PRICING THAT DRIVES THE SIGNIFICANT RETURNS IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. SO IN ORDER TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE IN TERMS OF HOW WE COULD USE CITY PAYMENT, LOOK AT TH THE ERCOT MARKET AND THE EXTRA CAPACITY, WHAT COULD WE DO TO MANAGE THAT AND TO TRY TO MEET SOME OF THOSE GOALS? SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE ON THIS SLIDE IS WHAT WE PRESENTED DURING THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST PRESENTATION AND, AGAIN, A GOAL SETTING AND THESE ARE ALSO INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET. BUT OUR FIRST ONE IS ON CITY PAYMENT FROM OFF-SYSTEM SALES.

SO WE MODIFIED OUR OVERARCHING POLICY ON CPS ENERGY PAYMENT TO INCLUDE THESE TWO THAT ARE LISTED HERE ON THE SLIDE. THE FIRST ONE IS AN OFF-SYSTEM SALES.

IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT WE'LL TAKE THE FIRST $10 MILLION THAT WE GET FROM THE CITY PAYMENT FROM OFF-SYSTEM SALES AND WE'LL KEEP THAT, THAT'S BUILT INTO OUR RECURRING BASE BUDGET -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THAT. BUT ANYTHING THAT WE EARN ABOVE THAT, WE WOULD PUT INTO A CAPITAL RESERVE FUND, AND THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO FUND CPS ENERGY RESILIENCY AND RELIABILITY INITIATIVES WHICH, AGAIN, IS ON THE CAPITAL SIDE THAT WOULD HELP THEN AGAIN TO LOWER THE RATE INCREASES IN THE FUTURE. THE ONE CAVEAT IS THAT WE PUT IN THERE IF THERE'S A SHORTFALL, MEANING THAT WE'RE NOT MAKING OUR BASE BUDGET OUTSIDE OF THE OFF-SYSTEM SALES AND WE'LL TAKE THAT OUT FIRST BEFORE WE SEND ANYTHING OVER AND ANYTHING IS ELIGIBLE. THE SECOND ONE IS ON WHAT WE CALL THE BASE BUDGET FOR A CITY PAYMENT. THIS IS SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS THERE AND IT EXCLUDES THE OFF-SYSTEM SALES PIECE AND IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT IN THIS PART OF OUR BUDGET GROWS BY MORE THAN 10%, THE AMOUNT OVER 10%, WE WOULD SET THAT ASIDE AND THAT WOULD BE USED TO FUND CPS ENERGY RESILIENCY AND RELIABILITY PROJECTS. AND ALSO OUR REES FUND, OUR

[00:10:03]

SO WHEN WE TAKE THOSE POLICIES AND APPLY THEM TO WHERE THEY ARE AND THESE ARE ACTUAL PAYMENTS THROUGH AUGUST OF THIS YEAR, SO WE'RE STILL PENDING THE SEPTEMBER PAYMENT, BUT ON THE BASE SIDE -- THE PORTION EXCLUDING OFF-SYSTEM SALES -- WE ACTUALLY DOWN $9.4 MILLION AND THAT'S A TREND STARTING IN THE SPRING AND WE WERE WANT HITTING OUR COMMITMENT FROM SEPTEMBER INTO AUGUST AND WE'RE DOWN $9.4 MILLION ON. THE OFF-SYSTEM SALES SIDE I MENTIONED THAT WE'LL KEEP THE FIRST $10 MILLION SO YOU SEE THAT IN OUR ESTIMATE.

ACTUAL THROUGH AUGUST WE'RE ACTUALLY AT $40.6 MILLION, SO IN THE CAPITAL RESERVE FUND THAT WOULD BE $30.6 MILLION THERE. WHEN WE APPLY THE POLICY AGAIN THAT SAYS IF WE'RE SHORT ON THE BASE WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT OUT FIRST, WE WOULD TAKE THAT $9.4 MILLION OUT OF THE $30.6 MILLION AND WHAT IS ELIGIBLE TO BE SENT BACK TO CPS ENERGY IS $21.2 MILLION.

NOW THIS IS ALL PRELIMINARY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE SEPTEMBER PAYMENT YET AND WE DON'T HAVE A PROJECTION BUILT INTO THIS SPECIFICALLY, BUT WHAT WE WOULD DO IS COME BACK TO YOU IN NOVEMBER IN A B SESSION AND WE COULD HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION AND FINALIZE APPLICATION OF OUR FINANCIAL POLICY. NOW, THE ONE THING THAT WE COULD DO -- AND, AGAIN, THE POLICY SPECIFICALLY TALKS ABOUT CONDUCTING ANY SHORTFALL IN THE BASE PAYMENT, BUT YOU RECALL IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET WE HAD $8.2 MILLION SHORTFALL IN 2026 AS PART OF OUR TWO-YEAR BUDGET PLAN. SHE GAVE YOU THE UPDATE AND WE GOT BETTER REVENUES OF $2.5 MILLION SO THE SHORTFALL IS NOW $7.5 MILLION AND WE DEPARTMENT RECOMMEND OR PROPOSE IT BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT SENDING DOLLARS BACK TO CPS TO HELP WITH THE FUTURE RATE INCREASES BUT AN OPTION FOR YOU TO CONSIDER WOULD BE THAT WE HOLD $5.7 MILLION BACK IN ADDITION TO THE $9.4 MILLION FOR THAT SECOND YEAR -- THAT SHORTFALL THAT WE'VE GOT. THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BE IN LINE WITH OUR OVERARCHING CPS ENERGY FINANCIAL POLICY, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD CONSIDER AND WE COULD DISCUSS AS PART OF THAT B SESSION. AND SO THAT WRAPS UP MY PART OF THE PRESENTATION.

I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO TROY WILL GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON PROPERTY TAXES.

>> THANK YOU, BEN, AND GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AS BEN MENTIONED I'LL GIVE YOU A BRIEF UPDATE ON THE PROPERTY TAX. I THINK THAT IT'S PROBABLY HELPFUL TO GO BACK AND TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON, UM, WHERE WE ARE TODAY IN TERMS OF BEXAR COUNTY TAKING A VOTE ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, AND AS RECENT AS YESTERDAY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION THE STATE BASICALLY PASSED A STATUTE THAT BASICALLY AMENDED THE GOVERNANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF APPRAISAL DISTRICTS.

BASICALLY THEY ARE COMPRISED OF NINE POSITIONS NOW, THROUGH POSITIONS ARE ELECTED AT-LARGE AND FIVE ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND THEN THE, UM, THE TAX ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR.

WITH THAT CHANGE WE STARTED SEEING THE BEGINNING IN TARRANT COUNTY A LOOK AT MODIFYING THE RE-APPRAISAL PROCESS. TARRANT COUNTY WAS EVALUATING MOVING FROM AN ANNUAL REAPPRAISAL WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT BEXAR COUNTY DISTRICT DOES NOW, TO A TWO OR THREE YEAR. ULTIMATELY THEY MOVED FROM AN ANNUAL TO A TWO-YEAR APPRAISAL PROCESS. AND THAT BEGAN THE DISCUSSIONS AMONG THE BOARD AT THE BEXAR APPRAISAL DISTRICT AND THE NEWLY ELECTED MEMBERS. AND, UM, ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, IT CAME TO A VOTE IN FRONT OF THE BOARD AS FAR AS WHAT TO DO WITH THAT RE-APPRAISAL PROCESS.

THE CHIEF APPRAISER RECOMMENDED STAYING WITH AND CONTINUING WITH THE RE-APPRAISAL PROCESS WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD ON SEPTEMBER 10TH. THERE WAS A MOTION FILED THAT, UM, PROPOSED BASICALLY MODIFYING WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE A PROTEST.

UNDER THAT MOTION A PROTEST THAT WAS, UM, IN PLACE AND IF THAT PROTEST WAS SETTLED AT THE SAME VALUE OR A REDUCED VALUE, THAT WOULD FREEZE AND ROLL FORWARD INTO THE SUBSEQUENT TAX YEAR.

THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AND SOME CONFUSION AS FAR AS WHICH YEAR THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE EFFECTIVE IN. YESTERDAY THE BOARD MET AND PROVIDED CLARIFICATION THAT, UM, THAT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE WITH TAX YEAR 2025, WHICH IMPACTS OUR FISCAL YEAR 2026.

AND THOSE PROTESTED VALUES WILL FREEZE AND ROLL FORWARD INTO TAX YEAR 2026, WHICH WOULD BE OUR FISCAL YEAR 2027. THE IMPETUS FOR IS TO PROVIDE TAXING ENTITIES AN OPPORTUNITY TO STEP BACK AND SEE REALLY WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE AND TO EXPLAIN AT THAT POINT IN TIME THAT WE DO A TWO-YEAR BUDGET AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE.

SOME OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS WITH THE TWO-YEAR FREEZE ON PROTESTED VALUES, I THINK THAT IT REALLY INCENTIVIZED PROTESTS. SO BASICALLY IF AN INDIVIDUAL KNOWS THAT YOU PROTEST YOUR YOU

[00:15:01]

SO THAT BASICALLY MEANS ON OUR BASE THAT WE WILL SEE LIMITED GROWTH.

WE WILL, HOWEVER, SEE SOME GROWTH IN, UM, TAXABLE VALUES DUE TO THAT ABOVE THE HOMESTEAD CAP. BUT AS FAR AS THE MARKET VALUES WE'LL RELATIVELY STAY -- STAY, UM, ON STAY IT STEADY OR FLAT ON THE BASE. AS A REMINDER WHEN WE'RE PREPARING OUR FORECAST, I THINK THAT THERE'S ABOUT A 5.5% BUILT INTO OUR BUDGET, WHICH 3.5% WAS GROWTH ON THE BASE VALUES. WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I'LL TURN IT

BACK TO CHRI JUSTINEA TO CLOSE . >> THANK YOU. SO THE LAST PIECE THAT WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON IS THE ARPA FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR REALLOCATION.

SO AS MENTIONED DURING PROPOSED BUDGET PRESENTATION THERE WAS ABOUT $2.67 MILLION OF AVAILABLE ARPA MONEY TO BE REALLOCATED. SINCE THAT TIME, $250,000 HAS BEEN APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL FOR BUILDING BRIGHTER COMMUNITIES FOR RELOCATION SERVICES.

SO WITH THIS APPROVAL, A TOTAL OF $2.5 MILLION IS AVAILABLE IN ARPA FUNDING TO BE REALLOCATED.

FINALLY, LAST NIGHT WE PROVIDED A LIST OF POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS. I WANTED TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE LIST IN FRONT OF YOU, WHICH HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY UPDATED. THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED BASED UPON CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OVER THE PAST FOUR WEEKS.

AND TODAY WE ARE PREPARED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH YOU IN REGARDS TO THESE AMENDMENTS.

THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. WE'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. >> SO, MAYOR, JUST TO REITERATE A COUPLE OF POINTS.

NUMBER ONE, AS BEN SAID, THE CPS CONVERSATION IS NOT NECESSARILY A DECISION THAT THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO MAKE THIS WEEK. WE STILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL PAYMENT FROM CPS THAT WE'LL RECEIVE IN OCTOBER, SO WE'RE GOING TO SCHEDULE A B SESSION THE FIRST WEEK IN NOVEMBER TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THAT. AND -- AND WE'VE HAD PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT CPS TO BE HERE AS WELL. SO THAT -- THAT, UM -- THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT TIMELINE. REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO DO, UM, THAT -- THAT, UM, THAT'S A DECISION POINT FOR EARLY NOVEMBER. AND THEN, SECONDLY, BASED ON THE COUNCIL DISCUSSION TODAY, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKELY THAT I WILL BE ASKING IF THE COUNCIL ON THE AMENDMENT CONVERSATION, IF THE COUNCIL HAS ANY SUGGESTIONS ON REALLOCATION.

WHATEVER THE RESULT OF TODAY'S MEETING IS, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE FEEDBACK AND THEN IN LIGHT OF TOMORROW'S MEETING AND PREP FOR IT, WE'LL MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS OR LAY OUT ALTERNATIVES TO REALLOCATE FUNDING FOR AMENDMENTS TO MAKE THEM OUT OF TODAY'S

CONVERSATION. SO THAT'S THE LAST PIECE. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANKS, ERIK. SO WHEN YOU ARE SAYING REALLOCATION, YOU'RE SAYING THAT ANYTHING THAT WOULD GO ABOVE THE $2.5 MILLION BALANCE IN ARPA WOULD NEED TO BE REALLOCATIONS

FROM THE EXISTING BUDGET THAT YOU PROPOSED? >> YES, SIR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: AND THAT'S THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'LL HAVE PROBABLY TOMORROW.

>> YES, I MEAN, IDEALLY AS WE GET CLOSER TO THURSDAY, UM, WE WILL HAVE THE -- THE $2.5 MILLION -- IF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS HIGHER IN TERMS OF AMENDMENTS, THEN WE'LL -- WE'LL LAY OUT TO COUNCIL TOMORROW ALTERNATIVES ON HOW TO FUND THOSE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YEAH, OKAY. WELL, AND -- AND I WON'T GET AHEAD OF US IN TERMS OF THE CPS, UM, REVENUE POLICY, BUT, OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S EXCESS OFF-SYSTEM SALES, REVENUE, THAT WE WILL DISCUSS. I THINK THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPTED AND YOU PROPOSED A VERY STRONG POLICY FOR RATE MITIGATION, INCLUDING THOSE EXCESS REVENUES INTO CAPITAL RESERVE FOR CPS.

WE KNOW THE EXTRAORDINARY NEED IN TERMS OF THE TRANSMISSION THAT IS HAPPENING OVER THERE, SO I HOPE THAT POLICY IS NOT CHANGED. SO LET ME JUST SET THE TABLE AND

[00:20:04]

IN TERMS OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT I SUPPORT, UM, I DO THINK THAT, UM -- AND IT'S REFLECTED HERE IN THE NOTE IT'S THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR INDIVIDUALS, UM, ON THE VERGE OF EVICTION OR HOMELESSNESS IS CRITICAL. SO I'LL SUPPORT AMENDMENT NUMBER 1.

AND I ALSO PUT MY SUPPORT BEHIND THE SEED FUNDING FOR HEALTH EQUITY IN SOUTH TEXAS, THAT IS AMENDMENT NUMBER 2. LET ME SPEAK ON A COUPLE OTHERS. FIRST, THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSING EQUATION WE HEARD COMPELLING CONVERSATIONS FROM -- FROM CLOSE TO HOME, OR HOMELESS RESPONSE CONTINUUM OF CARE. AND SO THEY BELIEVE, AND THEY'VE PROPOSED, THAT THE CENTRALIZED ENGAGEMENT WILL HELP TO MAKE THE HOMELESS OUTREACH MORE EFFICIENT AND ALSO HELP, OBVIOUSLY, GET FOLKS RE-HOUSED WHICH IS A PRIORITY FOR ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS.

SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. AND THEN TWO MINOR ONES, OR SMALLER ONES, AMENDMENT NUMBER 6, WHICH IS THE INCREASE IN THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH FUNDING WHICH THEY'VE BEEN REQUESTING FOR QUITE SOME TIME. AND THEN THE SENIORS IN PLAY, WHICH IS ALREADY A GREAT SUCCESS, I'LL SUPPORT THOSE TWO. THOSE ARE FAIRLY SMALL, 6 AND 7.

AND I SAID EARLIER THAT I THINK THAT OTHER FOLKS HAVE SOME THINGS THAT THEY'LL PUT ON THE TABLE AND I'LL PROBABLY CHIME IN TO SUPPORT OR GIVE MY FEEDBACK ON THOSE WHEN THAT HAPPENS.

SO LET'S GET TO IT. COUNCILMEMBER ROCHA GARCIA. >> ROCHA GARCIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR AND I WOULD LIKE TO START OFF BY THANKING THE STAFF AND, TROY, THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATION OF WHAT HAPPENED AT THE BEXAR APPRAISAL DISTRICT. I FEEL THAT YOU DID A GOOD JOB, RIGHT, AND I APPRECIATE YOU. AND TO MY COLLEAGUES, THE MOTION THAT WAS PROVIDED FORWARD WAS THE MIDDLE GROUND ESSENTIALLY OF, LIKE, TROY EXPLAINED -- TWO TO THREE-YEAR CHANGES.

SO, UM, THE OTHER MIDDLE GROUND THAT WAS AGREED UPON IS THAT IT TAKES PLACE IN 2025-2026, INSTEAD OF 2024-2025, SO I APPRECIATED THAT. AND WE WERE ALSO LOOKING AT OUR DUTY TO TAXPAYERS, RIGHT, AND SO I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I REPRESENT 11 TAXING ENTITIES ON THE BEXAR APPRAISAL DISTRICT. SO THAT WAS A TOUGH DECISION TO MAKE, RI RIGHT, AND IT REALLY WS MADE WITH BOTH SIDES IN MIND. SO I WAS WONDERING -- IT'S A QUICK QUESTION BEFORE I GO INTO WHAT I'LL BE SUPPORTING -- SHOULD WE BE CONSIDERING SAVING SOME OF THAT MONEY, UM, POTENTIALLY FROM THE EXCESS FUNDING FOR ANY POTENTIAL REVENUE SHORTFALLS THAT RESULT

FROM THE CHANGES ON THE BEXAR APPRAISAL DISTRICT, DEREK? >> WELL, UM,, MAYBE.

BUT I THINK THAT IS A CONVERSATION FOR THE COUNCIL TO HAVE IN NOVEMBER WHEN WE HAVE

THE FINAL AMOUNT. >> ROCHA GARCIA: SURE, OKAY. >> THAT'S AN ALTERNATIVE THROUGHOUT, AND WE HAVE $5.2 MILLION, $5.3 MILLION THAT THE COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR POLICY IN NOVEMBER. THAT'S ANOTHER WAY OF LOOKING AT A POTENTIAL IMPACT THAT WE COULD SMOOTH OUT. THAT WE COULD -- AND, FRANKLY, THAT WOULD GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME BETWEEN NOW AND NOVEMBER.

I'M NOT SURE THAT WE'LL HAVE A LOT MORE INFORMATION, BUT I THINK THAT A LOT OF ENTITIES ARE PROBABLY TRYING TO GRASP THE POTENTIAL IMPACT TO THEIR BOTTOMS NEXT YEAR.

>> ROCHA GARCIA: GREAT. THANK YOU. AND, AGAIN, ERIK, THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS 2025 ROLLOVER TO 2026, INSTEAD OF 2024-2025.

BUT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT, RIGHT, BEFORE WE MAKE ANY DECISIONS ON THAT.

SO THANK YOU FOR ENTERTAINING THAT THOUGHT. AND THEN, UM, I WANTED TO APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUES AND SOME OF YOU HAVE ALREADY SHOWN SUPPORT FOR $600,000 IN ARPA FUNDING, SPECIFICALLY OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS FOR SEED FUNDING FOR THE, UM, THE CENTER FOR HEALTH AND EQUITY IN SOUTH TEXAS. THIS WOULD NOT BE A RECURRING EXPENSE AND, AGAIN, IT'S ARPA FUNDING SPECIFICALLY AND I KNOW THAT SOME OF Y'ALL HAVE ALREADY SEEN SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, AND IF YOU ALL WERE INTERESTED, AND YOU WANTED TO KNOW MORE. BUT WE KNOW THAT COVID-19 WAS DEVASTATING FOR OUR FAMILIES AND IN THE SOUTHEAST AND THE WEST SIDE ESPECIALLY, AND THE ESSENTIAL WORKERS -- A LOT OF WHOM LIVE SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 90, SO WE THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS CRITICAL TO SUPPORT.

AND SO, UM, I KNOW THAT, UM, WE LOST A LOT OF LIVES DURING COVID.

I WAS AT A PRESENTATION A FEW -- WELL, COUNCILMAN COURAGE AND I WERE AT A DINNER THE OTHER NIGHT, AND IT WAS REALLY SCARY, UM, BECAUSE, UM, THE DOCTORS IN THE ROOM WERE TALKING ABOUT THE

[00:25:09]

SO I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT WE'RE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION, UM, THIS, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF AFTER COVID THE 346 BEDS THAT WE LOST WITH THE CLOSING OF THE HOSPITAL.

SO THE ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT I WILL BE, UM -- THAT I WILL BE SUPPORTING, OF COURSE, ARE THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE. ITEM NUMBER 1. AND THEN ITEM NUMBER 4 IS ANOTHER ONE THAT I WOULD BE SUPPORTING AND THAT'S THE DENTISTRY CLINIC, THE PEDIATRIC.

AND SO, AGAIN, I FEEL THAT A LOT OF RESIDENTS DON'T REALIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING -- OF BEING ABLE TO ACCESS DENTAL HEALTH FOR HEART HEALTH ESSENTIALLY.

AND SO I'D LIKE TO THROW MY SUPPORT IN FAVOR OF THAT AS WELL TO HELP TO DECREASE THAT LIFE EXPECTANCY -- INCREASE THAT LIFE EXPECTANCY THAT WE SEE. AND THEN ALSO THE CIVILIAN PAYING FROM 3% TO 4%, NUMBER 5, AND NUMBER 6, THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH INCREASE AND I THINK THAT IT'S DUE TIME FOR SOME SORT OF AN INCREASE. AND THEN THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR SENIORS IN PLAY IS WHAT I HAVE FOR NOW THAT I WILL BE, UM, SUPPORTING AS WELL.

THE, UM -- AND ACTUALLY I THINK THAT THOSE ARE ALL -- I WANT TO HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES AND I SPECIFICALLY WANTED TO HEAR COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ'S THOUGHTS ON SOME OF HIS PROPOSALS AND COUNCILMAN HAS SOME, AND I WILL HOLD MY REMARKS FOR THE REST OF THAT.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR, CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION.

WE HAD A CONVERSATION, IF THAT'S AN AMENDMENT, MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT DR. JACOB IS ON THAT COMMITTEE AS WELL, AS WELL AS, UM, CITY ENGAGEMENT.

WITH A LOT OF PUBLIC ENTITIES THAT ARE PART OF THAT AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT A

SEAT AT THE TABLE. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN.

AND COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WILL ECHO ANY CPS ENERGY SURPLUS AND I BELIEVE THAT WE ORIGINALLY SAID THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE ANY SURPLUS GO TO THE RATE MITIGATION, AND THE BELIEF AT THE TIME OR WHERE WE WERE FINANCIALLY WAS THAT OUR -- OUR BUDGET WAS GOING TO BE BALANCED AND WE WEREN'T GOING TO SEE A DEFICIT. SO I DO THINK THAT THERE'S A NEED FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GOOD FINANCIALLY BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WE OFFER CPS ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDING. AND REGARDING SOME OF WHAT -- WHAT'S ON THE LIST RIGHT NOW -- I'M SUPPORTIVE OF HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR INDIVIDUAL -- NUMBER ONE -- NUMBER ONE -- THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR INDIVIDUALS ON THE VERGE OF EVICTION.

SEED FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CENTER FOR HEALTH, EQUITY IN SOUTH TEXAS.

WHICH IS NUMBER 2. AND I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT NUMBER 3, THE ADDING POSITION, BECAUSE I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE MONEY WAS ALREADY IN THE BUDGET.

IT WAS JUST BEING DIVERTED TO A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION, OR TO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.

WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED WITH THE MONEY? >> SO, UM, THAT MONEY WAS ALLOCATED TO CASA FOR TWO YEARS AT THE TIME, UM, WHEN THAT WAS DONE.

AND I THINK THAT SEVERAL OF US HAVE GONE BACK TO THAT MEETING. IT WOULD BE ADDED BACK IN IF PRIORITIZED BY THE COUNCIL. IT WAS NOT AUTOMATIC. THAT'S WHY IT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET. SO THE CASA FUNDING WAS FOR A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT -- KIND OF A

ONE-TIME. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: YES. NO, I HEAR YOU.

MY UNDERSTANDING WITH H.R. IS THAT ALL COUNCILMEMBERS AND THE MAYOR ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE THE SAME NUMBER OF FTES AND THAT'S A POLICY THAT WE HAVE. SO THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT THEY WERE JUST UNFUNDED -- THEY DID NOT GET THOSE FTES AND THE FUNDING WENT ELSEWHERE, UNTIL --

UNTIL WE STOPPED GIVING MONEY TO CASA? >> I UNDERSTAND -- NO, SIR, THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED. THOSE POSITIONS WERE NOT CREATED IN THOSE DEPARTMENTS AND IT WAS IDENTIFIED THAT TIME -- MUCH LIKE IT WAS A BUDGET WORK SESSION LIKE TODAY -- THAT IF IT

WAS GOING TO BE PRIORITIZED IN THE FUTURE WE WOULD ADD IT. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: OKAY, SO I'M DOWN TO SUPPORT THAT ONE AND I THINK THAT IT JUST MAKES SENSE. I THINK THAT IN THE FUTURE I WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO BE A POSSIBILITY FOR COUNCILMEMBERS TO SAY, HEY, I DON'T NEED THIS FTE, CAN I FUND OTHER PROJECTS? BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED

[00:30:02]

AGAIN, PHILHARMONIC -- SUPPORTIVE OF THAT ONE. I THINK IS IT FOR THE LIST.

I DID WANT TO EXPRESS TO MY COLLEAGUES, UM, I HAVE TWO -- I HAVE A LOT OF ASKS -- I HAVE $3.178 MILLION IN ASKS BUT I HAVE A PLAN. I CHAIR THE INTERCITY TOURIST BOARD AND I HAVE FIVE INITIATIVES THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FUNDED WHICH TOTAL AROUND $3 MILLION AND I WOULD LIKE TO PREAUTHORIZE SO THEY COULD GO TO THE BOARD AND THE BOARD WOULD EITHER AUTHORIZE IT OR NOT BUT I WANTED TO PREVENT US HAVING TO WAIT TO THE MID PART OF THE BUDGET FOR IT TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND FOR ANYTHING TO ACTUALLY COME INTO EFFECT, AND I WANTED TO EXPEDITE THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT. THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT YOU HAVE HEARD ME SAY BEFORE, INCLUDING THAT MIDNIGHT BASKETBALL IS A METHOD OF CRIME PREVENTION THAT YOUNG PEOPLE CAN PARTICIPATE IN WORKSHOPS AND THEY JOIN A LEAGUE FOR BASKETBALL. AND IT'S PROVEN TO REDUCE CRIME IN HIGH-NEED AREAS SO I'D LIKE YOUR SUPPORT ON THAT. I'D LIKE TO HAVE FUNDING FOR LAND BANKING, AS WELL AS SOME SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT IN THE -- THROUGH A FACADE GRANT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY DONE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO CREATE A SMALL BUSINESS INTERNSHIP, WITH THE UNIVERSITY, THAT SMALL BUSINESSES CAN WORK WITH OUR SMALL BUSINESSES ON THE EAST SIDE AND IT WOULD BE A R RECIPROCAL BENEFIT TO THE BUSINESS OWNERS.

AND I'LL ASK FOR BASICALLY YOUR SUPPORT IN GETTING THE PREAUTHORIZATION FOR THOSE FIVE THTHINGS. AND THEN I HAVE ONE ARPA REQUEST AND I WAS GOING TO ASK FOR TWO THINGS BUT I'LL JUST ASK FOR ONE. THE CREATOR PROGRAM, THE FILM PROGRAM FOR STUDENTS ON THE EAST SIDE AND IT'S EXPANDED A LITTLE BIT BEYOND JUST THE EAST SIDE RECENTLY. BUT THE STUDENTS GET TO PARTICIPATE IN A AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM FOR SIX WEEKS WHERE THEY LEARN FROM PROFESSIONALS IN ACTING, SCRIPT WRITING, DIRECTING, FILMMAKING -- ALL OF THE THINGS -- AND THEY HAVE REALLY BEEN PROVIDED SOME FANTASTIC OPPORTUNITIES -- INTERNSHIPS. AND MANY HAVE BEEN OFFERED AND SOME HAVE BEEN SIGNED TO PROFESSIONAL AGENCIES AND THEY'VE ALL PARTICIPATED IN NUMEROUS FILM FESTIVALS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE $180K FOR THE YOUTH CONTENT CREATIVE PROGRAM. THOSE ARE MY BIG ASKS AND I'LL THROW OUT THE PET ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND ALSO SUPPORT FOR THE HORSE CARRIAGE INDUSTRY, SHOULD WE TRANSITION TO E-CARRIAGES, BUT THOSE WILL BE THE LOYALTIEST OF ASKS AND THE BIGGEST ARE THE FIRST ONES.

THANK YOU ALL. >> JUST, UM -- JUST TO CLARIFY FOR THE REST OF THE COUNCIL -- AND MOST OF YOU KNOW THAT TOURIST PROJECTS COME TO -- GO TO THE TOUR OF THE BOARDS AND THEN COME TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. SO WHAT THE COUNCILMAN IS SUGGESTING -- AND HE AND I HAVE SPOKEN -- IS ON THOSE -- THAT LAND BANKING AND THE MIDNIGHT BASKETBALL, THE FACADE GRANT, THE SMALL BUSINESS MARKETING INTERNSHIP, AND SOME PARK IMPROVEMENTS IS ESSENTIALLY A PREAUTHORIZATION BY COUNCIL. THEY STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. THEY STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH TERS AND ALL OF THAT STUFF STILL HAS TO HAPPEN. I THINK THAT -- AND I'M GOING TO PUT IT IN MY WORDS, COUNCILMAN -- I THINK WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO IS WITHIN THE ALLOCATION APPROVAL OF THURSDAY, YOU ARE TRYING TO GET TO THE PROGRAMS FASTER WITHOUT ADDING A STEP ON THE BACK END.

AND THAT'S BEEN COORDINATED AND I JUST WANTED THE COUNCIL TO KNOW THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING

ABOUT THAT. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ.

AND COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND THANK YOU, STAFF, FOR THE PRESENTATIONS. AS ALWAYS ON MONDAYS WE HAVE OUR OFFICE OF THE PEOPLE AND OUR OPEN OFFICE HOURS AND WE CONTINUE TO HEAR THE NEED FOR CONTINUED INVESTMENT IN N.A.P.

AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF INCREASING THE ALLOCATION TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE TACKLING MORE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. AND INCREASING IT BY $100,000 PER DISTRICT.

[00:35:05]

AND ONE THING THAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE CITY EMPLOYEES THROUGH OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THE ITEM 5, THE 1% FOR CIVILIAN PAY -- I AM ALSO SUPPORTIVE OF THE CESAR CHAVEZ INCREASE, IT'S ONE OF THE LARGEST IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO INVEST IN IT TO ENSURE THEY HAVE THE APPROPRIATE RESOURCES. A GAP THAT I SEE AND I CONTINUE TO HEAR FROM OUR CONSTITUENT SERVICES IS BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS WITH TREE MAINTENANCE.

OFTENTIMES WE HAVE SENIOR COMES INTO OUR FIELD OFFICE NEEDING ASSISTANCE BECAUSE THE COST OF REMOVING A TREE IS SO EXCESSIVE AND THEY'RE JUST CONCERNED THAT IT MAY TOPPLE AND, YOU KNOW, IMPACT THEIR ROOF OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE. AND THERE'S A NON-PROFIT CALLED URBAN TREE CANOPY AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN BE SUPPORTIVE OF $300,000 FOR THE URBAN TREE CANOPY TO HELP TO ASSIST THE SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS AND THE SENIORS IN PARTICULAR WHO DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO REMOVE A TREE THAT IS DYING OR WILTED.

AND IT'S JUST A GAP THAT IS FREQUENT AND WE SEE SO VERY OFTEN COME INTO OUR FIELD OFFICE. I'M ALSO SUPPORTIVE OF THE PHILHARMONIC AND ENSURING THEY RECEIVE SUPPORT, AND, OF COURSE, THE COUNCILMAN'S REQUEST FOR THE TERS ITEMS THAT HE LAID OUT AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF MOVING THOSE ALONG. AND THEN, OF COURSE, THE CLOSE TO HOME CENTRALIZED ENGAGEMENT, IT'S SOMETHING THAT, AGAIN, I KNOW THAT MY COLLEAGUES HERE AND AT EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING IS A CONCERN WITH UNHOUSED FOLKS AND GETTING THEM CONNECTED TO SERVICES. I BELIEVE THAT $1 MILLION INVESTMENT WILL HELP US TO GET TOWARDS SOLVING OUR HOUSING ISSUES. AND ULTIMATELY THOSE ARE THE ITEMS THAT I HAVE NOW AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING MY COLLEAGUES AND THEIR PRIORITIES.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO.

AND COUNCILMEMBER KAUR. >> KAUR: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HAVE ONE, UM, REQUEST THAT I HAD MADE DURING THE PRESENTATION BUT I THINK IT KIND OF GOT MISSED IN THIS.

BUT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE WITH UNS COMMUNICATION BOTH INBOUND AND OUTBOUND.

SO WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT HOW 311 COMMUNICATES WITH SA SPEAK UP. AND THE TISD HAS DONE RESEARCH ON WHAT CRM'S SOLUTION IS THAT COULD BE HELPFUL. AND WHAT THEY FOUND IS THAT THE TOOL THAT WE'RE ALREADY USING HAS MODULES THAT COULD BE ADDED TO IT, SO I'M ESSENTIALLY REQUESTING $300,000 TO AD AN ENTERPRISE SOLUTION TO WHAT THE CNE SYSTEM, AND THE TEAM USES CURRENTLY. THIS ALLOWS US -- FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE WANTED TO SEE THE RESIDENTS IN A CERTAIN ZIP CODE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE PARKS IN THEIR AREA, WE COULD TAG THEM AS SUCH AND THEN BE ABLE TO SEND THE COMMUNICATION TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS.

SO RESIDENTS COULD SAY THEY WANT INFORMATION ABOUT X AND THEN IT BASICALLY WOULD AUTOMATE MORE WHAT COMMUNICATION WE COULD SEND OUT TO SPECIFIC RESIDENTS. IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW US TO CONNECT THE 311 SYSTEM TO THOSE PROFILES. SO ESSENTIALLY ENHANCING OUR CRM CAPABILITIES AS A TEAM. AND SINCE IT'S SUCH A SMALL TEAM I THINK THIS WOULD REALLY HELP THEM BUT HELP OUR OFFICES TO DO BETTER AT COMMUNICATION WITH THE RIGHT TOOLS.

SO MY REQUEST IS $300,000 FOR THE CNE TO BE ABLE TO EXECUTE ON THAT.

THAT'S MY ONE BIG BUDGET REQUEST. FOR ADDITIONAL SUPPORTS, I WANTED TO ECHO NUMBER 1, OBVIOUSLY, THE HOUSING ASSISTANT ONCE -- THE SEED FUNDING FOR NUMBER 2. AND THE POSITIONS FOR NUMBER THREE.

AND THE MINOR REHAB HOME PROGRAMS FOR 15. AND OTHER DISTRICT REQUESTS I WANTED TO ECHO COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ AND HIS SUPPORT FOR TERS AND THE EASTSIDE PROGRAM. AND COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO'S PROGRAM, WITH THE TREE CANOPY, I HAVE ACTUALLY WORKED WITH THEM AND THIS IS A REALLY GOOD IDEA BECAUSE THE SENIOR PROBLEM THAT WE STARTED LAST YEAR -- THE CHALLENGE IS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CODE VIOLATION FOR FOLKS TO BE ACTUALLY ACCESSING THE FUNDS TO HELP WITH THAT. SO I THINK IF WE USED THIS SOLUTION THAT SHE'S PRESENTED, PEOPLE THAT JUST NEED THE ASSISTANCE WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCESS IT AND THAT NON-PROFIT HAS REALLY GOOD LEADERSHIP. SO I SUPPORT COUNCILMAN

[00:40:03]

AM I RIGHT AND READING THAT CORRECTLY WHERE OUR CONVENTIONS AND THEY PRESENT A DEFICIT EVERY YEAR? DO WE SUPPLEMENT THOSE FACILITIES FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE?

>> YEAH, SO THOSE TWO FACILITIES, COUNCILMAN, ARE SUPPORTED BY THE REVENUES THAT THEY GENERATE AND ALSO BY THE OCCUPANCY TAX THAT INDIRECT REVENUE GENERATED BY THE

FACILITIES. SO THAT'S HOW WE SUPPORT THEM. >> KAUR: SO THE INDIRECT REVENUE

WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT CHART? >> CORRECT. IT'S ONLY BY THE ACTIVITIES IN

THOSE FACILITIES. >> KAUR: SO LIKE TICKET SALES, ETC., JUDGES.

>> KAUR: BUT H.O.T. TAX GOES TO SUPPLEMENT THOSE FACILITIES. AND I THINK THAT FOR OUR VISIT SA, IT WOULD BE GREAT IF ANYBODY COULD BE A MEMBER WITHOUT PAYING FOR THAT MEMBERSHIP AND THAT,

KTHATEQUATES TO $500,000. >> FOR WHAT? >> KAUR: MEMBERSHIP DUES FOR VSA AND YOU HAVE TO PAY A DUE TO BE PART OF VSA AND THAT COULD BE A POLICY QUESTION THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED WITH THEM. I THINK THAT THOSE WERE MY BIGGEST REQUESTS.

AND ALSO WANTING TO HEAR WHEN COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ TALKS ABOUT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND WHAT THAT CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER COULD DO TO SUPPORT THAT.

>> SO, MAYOR -- THE.

WEEK -- WE HAVE A MODULE. I WOULD, UM, ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL NOT TO ALLOCATE ANY MORE MONEY UNTIL WE LOOK AT THAT MODULE. IF THERE'S A NEED THAT IS THERE -- I MEAN, I HEARD CLEARLY LAST WEEK, FOUR OR FIVE OF YOU TALKED ABOUT IT AND WE HAVE I.T.

MONEY SET ASIDE FOR PROGRAMS AND IT'S OBVIOUSLY A HIGHER PRIORITY AND IF WE NEED TO E AL REALLOCE COULD DO THAT. I WOULD NOT TRY TO FIND ADDITIONAL DOLLARS FOR THAT AND IT'S CLEAR THAT FOUR OR FIVE OF YOU BROUGHT THAT ISSUE UP AND WE'LL NEED TO FIND A WAY TO

TACKLE THAT. >> KAUR: OKAY, I'LL HOLD YOU TO THAT, ERIK.

>> I THINK WE'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND TO LOOK IT'S THE MODULES AND WE HAVE TO GET ALL OF THE COUNCIL OFFICES ON THOSE MODULES AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT IS NEED WEED NEED TO PRIORITIZE

THAT INTERNALLY. >> KAUR: IS ALANA HERE BY CHANCE?

I DON'T THINK SO. >> IS COYLE HERE? >> KAUR: IT'S LIKE -- SO WHEN HE IS SAYING MODULES HE'S TALKING ABOUT ESSENTIALLY THIRD-PARTY ADD-ONS TO THE SYSTEM THAT WE

USE THAT COULD BE PULLED IN TO CONNECT. >> RIGHT.

>> UNDERSTOOD. >> KAUR: ALL RIGHT. OKAY, WE CAN FOLLOW-UP.

>> YEAH, I THINK THAT IT WAS CLEAR LAST WEEK THAT SOME OF YOU WANT TO DO TAT BETTER AND WE COMMIT TO.

WHAT WE HAVE AND THEN IN THE OFF CHANCE WE NEED TO ADD SOMETHING TO IT, THAT WE'LL RE-PRIORITIZE

WITHIN THE I T. BUDGET TO DO THAT. >> KAUR: IT'S AN ADDITIONAL COST AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS HAD ENOUGH FUNDING IN THAT BUDGET TO EXECUTE.

>> WE'LL MAKE ADDITIONAL FUND FOR EXAMPLE IT, IT'S A HIGH ENOUGH PRIORITY.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER KAUR. AND COUNCIL MEMBER.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BUT I WANTED TO GO OVER MY PRIORITIES.

FIRST IS ITEM 3, EVENING OUT THE NUMBER OF FTES AT EACH COUNCIL OFFICE HAS.

AND THEN, UM, ITEM 5, THE ADDITIONAL CIVILIAN PAY FOR, UM, FOR CITY EMPLOYEES.

AND ITEM 4, AND ITEM 2. AND I HAVE A QUESTION THOUGH ABOUT IT.

AND IN THE BUDGET BOOK THAT WE'RE GET AGO AM I RIGHT THAT THEY'RE GETTING $1.5 MILLION?

THE ASIAN RESOURCE CENTER? >> YES. >> SO THEIR ASK WAS A MILLION,

THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WHY IS IT $1.5? >> THEIR ASK WAS $1.5 MILLION

AND THE HOPE WAS $1 MILLION. >> THEIR FULL ASK IS $1.5 MILLION?

>> YES. >> I COULD HAVE SWORN THAT IT WAS A MILLION.

ARE WE SURE ABOUT THAT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> SO $1.5 MILLION IN THIS

BUDGET? >> YES, AND HOPE LODGE WHICH IS THE OTHER -- I'M THROWING THAT IN THERE BECAUSE THAT WAS THE OTHER KIND OF NON-CITY ENTITY THAT WAS ASKING FOR CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION AND THEY'RE A MILLION -- BOTH OF THOSE WERE ALSO -- I KNOW THEY HAD SIMILAR

REQUESTS OVER AT THE COUNTY FOR BOTH OF THOSE. >> OKAY, I FEEL REALLY STRONGLY

[00:45:01]

THEN WE'RE DONE HERE. THANK YOU. THANKS, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER CABELLO HAVRDA. COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO.

>> ALDERETE GAVITO: THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER AND I SEE Y'ALL'S CARS HERE LATE AT NIGHT, SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. FIRST OFF, I WANTED TO SAY THAT I'M IN SUPPORT OF HOLDING $2.5 MILLION IN GENERAL FUND SURPLUS TO REDUCE THE DEFICIT FOR NEXT YEAR.

AND ERIK, JUST TO CLARIFY -- THIS CPS DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE IN NOVEMBER, RIGHT, IS THAT WHAT

YOU WERE MENTIONING EARLIER? >> YES, MA'AM. WE'VE GOT TO GET THE OCTOBER CHECK WHICH WE'LL GET IN MID-OCTOBER AND SCHEDULE THAT CONVERSATION AGAIN IN PART OF

NOVEMBER. >> ALDERETE GAVITO: OKAY. AND I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN CASTILLO THAT WE NEED TO REVISIT HOW WE WOULD SPEND THOSE FUNDS AND I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION BACK AND FORTH SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS CLEAR WHERE WE LANDED. AND LOOKING AT THESE REQUESTS, FIRST AND FOREMOST, I DO SUPPORT.

DISTRICT. I THINK THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS A TOP PRIORITY TO ALL OF US.

SO THAT -- THAT WOULD BE MY -- MY TOP PRIORITY ITEM. AND SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS ARE NUMBER 1, HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR INDIVIDUALS ON THE VERGE OF EVICTION.

LET'S SEE, THE -- NUMBER 2 -- THE CENTER FOR HEALTH EQUITY IN SOUTH TEXAS.

AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF NUMBER 4, THE U.T. HEALTH PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY CLINIC THAT DOES SUPPORT A LOT OF DISTRICTS AND RESIDENTS AS WELL, SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

AND HOPEFULLY IT HAPPENS. IN FULLY SUPPORT OF THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH INCREASE AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR SENIORS IN PLAY. AND OBVIOUSLY WE WERE PUSHING FOR AN ADDITIONAL CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND THIS WOULD HELP US TO HOLD PROPERTY OWNERS ACCOUNTABLE. WE'RE JUST SEEING A LOT OF PROPERTIES LEFT IN BAD SHAPE, AND IT REALLY HURTS, YOU KNOW, OUR NEIGHBORHOODS' CHARACTER. I'M IN SUPPORT OF COUNCILWOMAN'S CASTILLO FOR THE URBAN TREE CANOPY FUNDING. AND I ALSO IN SUPPORT OF THE ADDITIONAL INCREASED PAYMENT OF 1% INCREASE FOR CIVILIAN PAY. I'M IN SUPPORT OF NUMBER 3, ADDING ONE LGC POSITION TO THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND THE DISTRICT 4, 8 AND 10.

AND ALSO IN SUPPORT OF INCREASING TO THE SENIOR TRANSPORTATION FOR THOSE COUNCIL DISTRICTS THAT HAVE GAPS, ITEM NUMBER 8. I DID ALSO, UM, WANTED TO EXPRESS SUPPORT FOR COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ'S REQUEST FOR THE TERS, NUMBER -- I DON'T KNOW

WHAT IT SAYS TERS NUMBER 11 HERE. >> [INDISCERNIBLE]

>> ALDERETE GAVITO: SO I'M IN SUPPORT AND THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING HOW THAT WOULD WORK, ERIK. AND THEN I'M ALSO IN SUPPORT OF THE EASTSIDE YOUTH CONTENT CREATOR PROGRAM. I'LL STOP THERE. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THANK YOU. THANKS, MACER. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU

COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO. AND COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE. >> WHYTE: THANK YOU.

I'M IN SUPPORT, ERIK, OF THE $2.5 MILLION IN THE GENERAL FUND AND HOLDING IT OVER TO THE 2026 TO HELP TO OFFSET SOME OF THE DEFICIT THERE. AND REGARDING THE AMENDMENTS THIS YEAR, I'M IN SUPPORT OF NUMBER 1, OF THE N.A.P., ADDITIONAL $100,000.

TOP PRIORITIES. IT CERTAINLY IS FOR ME IN DISTRICT 10.

SO SUPPORTIVE OF ADDITIONAL FUNDING. AND NUMBER 2, SUPPORTIVE OF THE DENTISTRY CLINIC, WHICH IS I THINK THAT LISTED HERE AS NUMBER 4.

AND NUMBER 3, CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER -- I THINK THAT ALL OF US AROUND THIS TABLE, WE GET COUNTLESS CALLS FROM PEOPLE IN OUR DISTRICTS WHERE -- WHERE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S CODE

[00:50:06]

AND SO AN ADDITIONAL CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER I THINK IS -- WOULD BE IT A GOOD USE OF OUR MONEY THAT WOULD GO DIRECTLY TO BENEFIT THE DAY-TO-DAY QUALITY OF LIFE OF OUR RESIDENTS. THAT'S WHAT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING WITH OUR DOLLARS. AND THEN NUMBER 4, THE ADDITIONAL LGC POSITION, I THINK IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING THAT EVERY COUNCIL DISTRICT SHOULD HAVE THE SAME NUMBER OF LGC POSITIONS. LASTLY, ON THE CPS REVENUE, I KNOW THAT'S GOING TO BE DISCUSSED AT A -- AT A LATER DATE, BUT I DO WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY ABOUT THE -- ABOUT TWICE NOW IN THE PAST FEW YEARS WE HAVE RAISED RATES ON OUR CITIZENS.

AND, UM, WE SPECIFICALLY TALKED AT THE END OF LAST YEAR AT THE RATE HIKE DISCUSSION, AND THEN THEREAFTER, ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO STOP RAISING RATES ON OUR CITIZENS.

OR AT LEAST MITIGATE THE FUTURE RATE HIKES. AND CPS HAS ALREADY TOLD US THAT THEY'RE COMING BACK FOR ANOTHER RATE HIKE DISCUSSION IN 2025, AND THEN MAYBE AGAIN AFTER THAT.

AND EARLIER THIS YEAR, I THINK IT WAS APRIL WHEN WE STARTED BUDGET DISCUSSIONS, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW WE WOULD PUT THIS NEW POLICY INTO PLACE AND IT WAS SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT IT WOULD BE TO MITIGATE FUTURE RATE HIKES. AND I DON'T WANT US TO FORGET THAT JUST BECAUSE WE'RE NOW 10 MONTHS REMOVED FROM THAT RATE HIKE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD BACK IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR. BECAUSE MANY OF US SITTING AROUND THIS TABLE WILL BE ASKED TO, UM, RAISE RATES AGAIN ON OUR CITIZENS. IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE PUBLIC TO CONTINUALLY ASK THEM TO PAY MORE AND SO RATHER THAN SPENDING THE MONEY ON SOME OF THESE OTHER THINGS WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT CAN DIRECTLY REALLY GO TO OUR CITIZENS IN THE FORM OF RELIEVING THEM OF HAVING TO PAY, UM, ADDITIONAL MONEY OUT OF THEIR POCKET FOR ENERGY.

SO THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANKS, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU,

COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE. COUNCILMEMBER PELAEZ. >> PELAEZ: THANK YOU.

ERIK, I -- COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ AND I FILED A CCR RELATED TO THE CREATION OF A CRISIS NURSERY PROGRAM IN ORDER TO GET US READY FOR THAT AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US INVEST $100,000 IN FEASIBILITY STUDY TO UNDERSTAND THE GAPS AND HOW THAT MIGHT WORK.

THE URBAN TREE CANOPY IS -- SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT IDEA -- I SUPPORT THAT.

AND THEN AS FAR AS THE EASTSIDE CONTENT CREATIVE PROGRAM, I SUPPORT THAT 100%.

I DO PROPOSE, HOWEVER, THAT EITHER NOW OR AT A FUTURE DATE THAT WE TALK ABOUT EXPANDING THAT CITY-WIDE TO ALL TITLE I SCHOOLS. I DON'T THINK THAT I'VE GOT TITLE I SCHOOLS IN MY DISTRICT, BUT I DO THINK THAT PROGRAM HAS PROVEN TO BE WORTH OUR INVESTMENT. AND I'D LIKE TO SEE THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TOWN GET THE ADVANTAGE OF BEING ABLE TO -- TO USE THAT. AND SO IF WE DO THAT THIS TIME, THEN I PROPOSE A $360,000 SPEND, AS OPPOSED TO $180,000, OTHERWISE.

AND BESIDES THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I HAD IN THE PAST AND CONTAINED IN YOUR MEMO ARE -- I INCLUDE THOSE BY REFERENCE. THANKS. THOSE EVE ARE MY COMMENTS, MAYO.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER PELAEZ. COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE, I DON'T

SEE YOU IN THE QUEUE, BUT GO AHEAD. >> COURAGE: THANK YOU.

I SUPPORT EVERYTHING THAT EVERYBODY HAS SAID, AND EVERYTHING ON THIS LIST.

BUT I HAVE TO ASK THE CITY MANAGER, HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR THIS STUFF? ALL THE STUFF THAT COUNCIL IS TALKING ABOUT TODAY. YES.

>> W WELL WHEN YOU ARE DONE WITH YOUR ROUND I WILL ASK THE MAYOR TO ASK YOU ALL IF YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO GET SOME FEEDBACK TO YOU, AS I MENTIONED AT THE END OF JUSTINA'S PRESENTATION WE'LL TAKE TODAY'S FEEDBACK AND DELIVER BACK TO YOU ALTERNATIVES TO FUND THESE THINGS. AND, UM, AND IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE TO US REALLOCATE AND

REDUCE. >> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT REFUNDING OR REALLOCATING, THAT'S WHAT YOU DID WHEN YOU ORIGINALLY REDUCED OUR BUDGET BY, WHAT, $23 MILLION?

RIGHT? THOSE CHANGES THAT YOU MADE. >> COURAGE: $23.5 MILLION IN

[00:55:02]

FISCAL YEAR 2025. >> AND WE ARE ASKING -- AND I REALIZE THAT NOT ALL WILL GET TOTAL SUPPORT AND THEY MAY NOT ALL GO THROUGH, BUT RIGHT NOW YOU SAY THAT WE STILL HAVE AN $8 MILLION DEFICIT FOR THE SECOND YEAR OF OUR TWO-YEAR PLAN, RIGHT?

>> COURAGE: IF WE ROLL OVER WE'LL HAVE ABOUT $5.5 MILLION. >> THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PART OF WHAT WE DO THEN, AND WOULD BE WOULDN'T LOOK AT 250 -- WE WOULDN'T BE LOOKING AT $2.5 MILLION THAT WE FOUND AVAILABLE WITH EXTRA REVENUE -- UM, OR 2.5 OF THE ARPA, ONE OF THOSE TWO

WOULD HAVE TO BE GONE FROM OUR DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW, RIGHT? >> YES.

>> COURAGE: AND I DO SUPPORT ALL OF THESE THINGS BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'LL COME UP WITH 8 OR 10 OR 12 MILLIONS MORE OF DOLLARS TO MAKE THESE THINGS HAPPEN. EVEN IF WE GO TO A TERS, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY HAVE AVAILABLE. AND EVEN IF WE SET UP THESE OTHER THINGS THAT WERE MENTIONED THAT AREN'T EVEN ON THE LIST, LIKE TREE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.

OR INCREASE N.A.P. FUNDING WHICH IS A MILLION DOLLARS RIGHT THERE FOR 10 DISTRICTS.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO -- WELL, I GUESS THAT I WOULD JUST SAY THAT YOU NEED TO GO AHEAD AND ASK US HOW WE THANK WE COULD GO AHEAD AND PAY FOR THAT.

BUT I REALLY DO THINK THAT ALMOST EVERYTHING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IS WORTHWHILE BUT WE NEED TO LIVE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE REVENUE THAT WE HAVE. I WILL SAY THAT I WOULD CERTAINLY SUPPORT US DISCUSSING THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT COMES IN FROM CPS FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, MAYBE IN OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER. BUT I THINK WE'RE ALSO SAYING THAT WE'RE COMMITTED TO ALL OF THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT CAME IN FROM CPS, AND IT'S GOING TO GO BACK TO CPS OR TO THE REES FUND. AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE WERE OPTIMISTIC A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS. BUT I'M NOT AS OPTIMISTIC NOW, AND I HATE TO SEE US TO SAY THAT CPS HAS MADE THIS EXTRA MONEY AND SO WE'LL SEND IT BACK TO THEM, BUT THEN WE HAVE TO CUT THINGS. WE CUT $23 MILLION AND MAYBE WE'LL HAVE TO CUT ANOTHER 5, 6, $10 MILLION TO PUT SOME OF THESE THINGS IN PLACE.

PLUS THE SECOND HALF OF THIS TWO-YEAR PLAN IS ALREADY IN THE HOLE.

IT MAY CONTINUE TO BE IN THE HOLE. AND THEN THAT WORRIES ME.

AND IT SHOULD WORRY ALL OF US. JUST SO THAT WE RECOGNIZE WITH CPS HAVE DONE A LITTLE BIT OF WORK, AND YOU SAW AT THE BEGINNING THAT THEY SHOWED THAT THEIR OFF-SYSTEM SALES GAVE THE CITY A RETURN OF $40 MILLION. AND THE ACTUAL OFF-SYSTEM SALES THAT CPS RECEIVED WAS A TOTAL OF ABOUT $215 MILLION. THEY'RE GIVING US 40, SO THAT MEANS THAT THEY STILL HAVE $170 MILLION, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT'S ABOUT WHAT THEY BUDGETED FOR THEMSELVES FOR OFF-SYSTEM SALES. WELL, ACTUALLY THEY BUDGETED 170 AND THEY MADE 214 OR 215.

THEY'RE GIVING US 30, SO THEY'RE STILL COMING OUT AHEAD OF WHAT THEY BUDGETED.

BUT I -- I HAVE A HARD TIME JUST SAYING IF WE GET ANOTHER 5 OR 6 OR $7 MILLION, WHICH MAKES SENSE TO ME -- THAT'S PROBABLY HOW MUCH OFF-SYSTEM ALLEGES ARE SALG TO GET AND IT'S BEEN A VERY HOT AUGUST AND LET'S CONSIDER USING THAT FOR SOME OF THE THINGS HERE THAT WE WANT THAT MAYBE WE DON'T WANT TO HURT OUR BUDGET NEXT YEAR, OR EVEN THE YEAR AFTER, BY MAKING THESE COMMITMENTS AND MAKING CUTS NOW. SO THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN. >> VIAGRAN: I RECOMMEND TO USE THE OFF-SYSTEM SALES FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: NUMBER 1, NUMBER 2, NUMBER 3, NUMBER 4, NUMBER 5 -- FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2025. NUMBER 6, AND NUMBER 7. I THINK THAT SOME OF THESE ARE -- I THINK NUMBER 2 IS DEFINITELY ARPA AND I'D LIKE TO SEE IF NUMBER 4 COULD POSSIBLY BE DESIGNATED AS AN ARPA GIVE, AND I BELIEVE THAT COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ, THE TWO THAT -- THE ONE THAT HE MENTIONED IS ARPA ELIGIBLE TOO. SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE ARPA SOMEWHAT COVERED AND I THINK -- I HEAR -- I HEAR WANTING TO HELP WITH RATE MITIGATION, BUT UNLESS

[01:00:09]

NOW IF YOU HAVE A STAFF THAT'S WORKING FINE, AND YOU ARE MANAGING IT, AND YOU WANT TO, UM, TO TAKE THAT MONEY AND GIVE IT TO ANOTHER ONE AS COUNCIL -- ANOTHER PROJECT AS COUNCILMAN PERRY DID, THAT IS FINE. BUT TO COME BACK AFTER TWO YEARS AND SAY THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN, UM, IS PROBLEMATIC. I THINK THAT WE ARE -- WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, WE'RE GETTING OUT OF THE PANDEMIC. AND WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRY AND STAY AS CLOSE TO OUR BUDGET AS POSSIBLE. I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE -- THERE ARE STRUGGLES THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE IN THE FUTURE AS WE LOOK AT THIS -- WHAT BEXAR APPRAISAL DISTRICT IS PROPOSING.

AND IF WE COULD TAKE WHAT WE HAVE IN OFF-SYSTEM SALES, INVEST IN WHAT WE FEEL IS THE MOST PRESSING ON OUR BUDGET AMENDMENTS, AND THEN USE THE REST TO SEE -- TO ADDRESS OUR SHORTFALL COMING IN 2026, I'D BE MORE AMENABLE TO THAT BECAUSE I JUST DON'T SEE CPS NOT COMING AND ASKING FOR A RATE INCREASE. IT MAY NOT BE AS LARGE, BUT THEY'RE STILL GOING TO COME AND ASK FOR A RATE INCREASE, AND THEY WON'T GIVE US THAT GUARANTEE THAT THEY WON'T BE HERE. SO, UM, THAT -- THOSE ARE JUST MINE.

AND I THINK THAT FOR THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH INCREASE AND IF WE START AT JUST $100,000 MAYBE AND SEE HOW WE COULD MOVE FROM THER. BUT WE, LIKE THE REST OF THE NATION, NEED TO FIND -- NEED TO FIND A WAY TO -- TO GET OUR BALANCE -- OUR BUDGET BALANCED. AND WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE MONEY. OF COURSE, I ALWAYS TELL YOU, ERIK, I THINK THAT IT IS IN PARKING DOWNTOWN, BUT WE CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION LATER. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN. AND SO, ALL RIGHT, THAT WAS ROUND ONE. LET YOU COLLECT YOUR THOUGHTS FOR A SECOND ROUND.

LET ME JUST REACT TO A FEW THINGS THAT I HAVE HEARD. AND WE DON'T HAVE TO BELABOR THE POINT, WE'LL HAVE FULL CPS CONVERSATIONS, BUT, YES, CPS ENERGY WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL RATE SUPPORT. IT'S JUST A FACT OF LIFE. THERE'S OVER -- ALMOST $2 MILLION JUST IN TRANSMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S NEEDED TO POWER, UM, WHAT IS COMING ONLINE OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS IN TERMS OF CAPACITY. AND THAT'S IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR CAPACITY AND GENERATION NEEDED TO POWER THE HOMES AND THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE BEING BUILT HERE. SO I DO EXPECT THAT CPS ENERGY WILL CONTINUE TO NEED ADDITIONAL RATE SUPPORT. WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE I THINK THAT CAN BE MITIGATED BY THE POLICY THAT WE ADOPTED. THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF IT. SO OFF-SYSTEM SALES, WHICH ARE NOT PAID BY RESIDENTS. THOSE ARE IN SOME PART -- IN SOME WAYS TEMPORARY AND UNPREDICTABLE, BASED ON WEATHER. AND TEMPORARY IN THE SENSE THAT THERE ARE NEW PLANTS THEY BOUGHT AHEAD OF WHEN THEY ARE ACTUALLY NEEDED. SO THAT THEY CAN ANTICIPATE THE CAPACITY NEEDS DOWN THE LINE. THOSE ARE GENERATING A LOT OF OFF-SYSTEM SALES RIGHT NOW.

THOSE AREN'T GOING TO BE THERE FOREVER, IN TERMS OF THE ADDITIONAL REVENUES.

SO MY CAUTION IS THAT WE ADOPTED THE POLICY BECAUSE WE WANT THOSE REVENUES -- EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT BEING PAID BY RESIDENTS -- TO HELP TO DRIVE DOWN THE RATES THAT WOULD BE REQUESTED THAT WE KNOW ARE COMING. AND THE REASON WHY I THINK THAT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE STICK TO THAT IS THAT IF WE WERE GENTLEMANOFF-SETTING WITH CPS WH ULTIMATELY CPS ENERGY RATES THAT

[01:05:09]

ALL OF THAT BEING SAID, I DO WANT TO SAY -- TO PROVIDE SOME IDEAS.

YOU'VE HEARD MOW ME SAY BEFORE T IT'S GROWN, AND IT'S OVER TWICE OF THE SIZE AS IT HAS BEEN IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS AND I RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE SOME DISTRICTS THAT NEED MORE N.A.P.S. FUNDING SO MY QUESTION TO YOU AND YOU, ERIK, IS -- IS THERE A BALANCE CURRENTLY CITY-WIDE IN THE N.A.P.S. BUDGET, IRRESPECTIVE OF DISTRICT? AND I'M AS NOT ASKING FOR DISTRT NUMBERS IS THERE A REVENUE IN THAT CATEGORY?

>> SO OVERALL --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: $4.4 MILLION ALLOCATED THAT IS SITTING ON THE SHELF?

>> NO, THAT'S JUST N.A.P.S.. YES. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: SO HERE'S WHERE I THINK -- SO COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO BROUGHT THIS UP AND I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE. AND IT MOVES AWAY FROM THE EQUITY APPROACH THAT ASSIGNS DOLLARS WHERE THEY ARE MOST NEEDED IRRESPECTIVE OF THE DISTRICT LINES.

SO MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE, ERIK, TO TAKE THAT BALANCE AND TO CUT THAT BALANCE BY 10, AND DISTRIBUTE THAT TO THE DISTRICTS EVENLY. OKAY.

I'VE ALREADY HEARD REACTION. [LAUGHTER] WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT HOWEVER YOU SLICE IT, THERE'S ALREADY MONEY THERE THAT COULD BE PUT INTO PRODUCTION IN CERTAIN DISTRICTS AND IF AT THE END OF TWO YEARS, THAT $4.4 MILLION IS NOT SPENT DOWN -- YOU CAN DO IT AGAIN. BUT ULTIMATELY IT WILL GO WHERE THOSE -- WHERE THOSE FUNDS ARE NEEDED THE MOST AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO CONTINUE TO ADD TO A BUDGET THAT MOVES FURTHER AND FURTHER AWAY OF RESOURCING THE PUBLIC WORKS IN A MORE EQUITABLE MANNER.

YOU KNOW -- YOU ARE DISAGREEING WITH ME, COUNCILMAN, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY IN SUPPORT OF WHAT YOU NEED. MY POINT IS THAT DISTRICT 2, DISTRICT 5, DISTRICT 7, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF DISTRICTS HERE THAT HAVE REALLY CHALLENGED INFRASTRUCTURE.

IF WE REBALANCE THE BALANCE THAT'S THERE -- OR IF WE REDISTRIBUTE THE BALANCE THAT'S NOT BEING USED, UM, IT WILL GO TO THOSE DISTRICTS THAT NEED IT. WE DON'T HAVE TO LOOK FOR ADDITIONAL REVENUES TO DO THAT. AGAIN, JUST SAYING IF THAT NUMBER IS ACCURATE, THERE'S $4.4 MILLION THAT IS JUST SITTING NOT IN PRODUCTION RIGHT NOW THAT COULD BE.

THAT'S MY POINT. AND LET ME OFFER MY SUPPORT TO THE CRISIS NURSERY PROGRAM AS WELL. I'VE BEEN BRIEFED -- I THINK THAT IT IS GREAT.

A GREAT NEW APPROACH. THERE'S A COALITION OF NON-PROFITS.

MY HOPE IS THAT THE NON-PROFITS AS AN ENTIRE INDUSTRY THAT SERVE IN THIS PURPOSE WILL WORK TOGETHER, THAT WE'RE NOT -- THAT THERE'S NO NON-PROFITS COMPETING FOR THESE DOLLARS.

WE NEED THEM ALL WORKING IN THIS SPACE OF, UM, CRISIS NURSERY RESPONSE.

OR HOWEVER YOU WANT TO PHRASE THAT. SO, UM, OTHER THAN THAT, THAT'S

ALL FOR ME NOW IN MY SECOND ROUND. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I GUESS I DON'T NEED TO SEE THE SLIDE, BUT IT SAID THAT WE WERE PUTTING $250,000 OR ALLOCATING $250,000 TO BUILDING BRIGHTER COMMUNITIES.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR WES AND URBAN IS PAYING THEM AND WE ARE PAYING FOR AUDIO], RIGHT? NO ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ARE COMING OUT OF?

>> THAT'S CORRECT, YES, SIR. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: OKAY, JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. 100 2,500-DOLLAR GRANTS.

WE ALREADY HAD THIS CONVERSATION. TO DO IT AGAIN.

[LAUGHTER]. I DON'T WANT TO DO IT AGAIN.

I GUESS I'LL RESPOND TO -- SO WHAT I HEARD WAS THE 4.5-MILLION-DOLLAR BALANCE

DISTRIBUTED EVENLY OR DISTRIBUTED EQUITABLY? >> EITHER ONE.

[01:10:01]

RATHER THAN DOING THAT LET'S TAKE $4.4 MILLION AND PROVIDE THAT TO THE DISTRICTS THAT NEED PROJECTS DONE. I WOULD LOVE IT IF WE COULD APPLY THE EQUITY APPROACH TO IT THAT WE DO NOW, BUT EVEN IF WE DON'T IT'S A BETTER

USE OF THOSE FUNDS THAN WHAT IT IS TODAY. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: SO I HAVE HAD TO USE THEM TACTICALLY, SAME THING WITH CIP.

THAT'S WHY I'M ASKED FOR MONEY TO BE ALLOCATED TO CIP BECAUSE IT'S A LARGER FUND AND WE CAN USE CIP FOR NAP PURPOSES, BUT WE CAN'T USE NAP FOR ALL CIP PURPOSES.

BECAUSE WE DON'T FUND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS AT A VERY GREAT NUMBER AT ALL, WE HAVE TO -- WE'LL ASK A PUBLIC WORKS CAN YOU DO SIDEWALKS AND THEY'RE LIKE SURE, BUT FUND IT OUT OF NAP AND WE ONLY HAVE SO MUCH MONEY THERE SO IT MIGHT ONLY FUND ONE OR TWO PROJECTS. SO I WAS COUNTING ON THIS YEAR GETTING ADDITIONAL NAP DOLLARS THAT WAY I CAN FUND A REALLY BIG PROJECT FROM NAP.

SO THAT WAS MY INTENTION. SO THAT'S -- FOR ME THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF CARRY FORWARD AND THAT'S WHAT I LOOK FORWARD TO, BUT I UNDERSTAND OTHER DISTRICTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY DOING THAT. SO A GREATER CONVERSATION OR -- I DON'T KNOW, A GREATER CONVERSATION MAY BE NEEDED. IF WE HAVE ALREADY SAID THESE THINKS AND WE'RE INDICATED AS HAVING REQUESTED SOMETHING, DO YOU

NEED TO HEAR US SAY IT AGAIN? >> I'M SORRY?

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: IF WE SAID WE SUPPORTED SOMETHING PREVIOUSLY OR REQUESTED

SOMETHING, DO YOU NEED TO HEAR US SAY IT AGAIN? >> I WOULD SAY THAT ON THE SECOND ROUND IF ANYBODY HAS SUGGESTIONS ON THINGS THAT MAY BE LOWER PRIORITIES, NOT THAT THEY'RE NOT IMPORTANT, BUT LOWER PRIORITIES, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO LEND SUPPORT TO THE TREE MAINTENANCE, I GUESS IT WOULD BE CALLED THE TREE MAINTENANCE FUND OR IS IT URBAN TREE CANOPY IS THE NON-PROFIT? OKAY. I'LL LEND SUPPORT THERE.

I DIDN'T HEAR TOO, TOO MUCH ELSE ON ANYTHING ELSE THAT I DIDN'T ALREADY ECHO, BUT WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER AMENDMENT SESSION TOMORROW. OKAY.

SO IF I MISSED ANYTHING THIS TIME TO MY DEAREST AND MOST BELOVED COLLEAGUES, I WILL -- I'M WILLING TO SHARE TOMORROW, BUT I'M INTERESTED IN SEEING WHERE WE ARE AFTER

TODAY. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THAT

DOESN'T HELP, BUT -- COUNCIL MEMBER KAUR. >> KAUR: THANK YOU, MAYOR. JUST TO SHARE MY PERSPECTIVE FOR THE NAP PROGRAM.

THAT IS THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SMALL DOLLAR REQUESTS.

SO A BARRIER TO A NEIGHBORHOOD GETS BROKEN DOWN AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER WAY TO FUND IT, I HAVE TO FUND IT THROUGH NAMP AND I CAN ONLY MAKE EIGHT REQUESTS EVERY SIX MONTHS. SO I THINK THE CHALLENGE ALSO IS THE STRUCTURE.

SO IF I MAKE EIGHT SMALL LEVEL DOLLAR REQUESTS AND THEY ONLY COME OUT TO 200K, THAT'S HOW MUCH I CAN SPEND ON NAMP. SO I THINK IF WE COULD RESTRUCTURE THAT THAT WOULD HELP, BUT I ALSO AGREE THAT FOR SOME OF US THAT HAVE SMALL STOP SIGNS OR -- THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALL REQUESTS THAT WE GET AND WE DON'T HAVE A FUNCTIONALITY TO BE ABLE TO FUND THEM BECAUSE CIP REQUIREMENTS IS 100K PER PROJECT. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE BREAKDOWN FOR THAT 4-POINT X MILLION TO SEE WHAT ARE SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT FOLKS ARE FACING WITH SPENDING THOSE DOLLARS, SPECIFICALLY FOR NAMP. I KNOW THAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT DOLLAR AMOUNTS, BUT FOR NAMP SPECIFICALLY IT HELPS US TO BE RESPONSIVE TO OUR CONSTITUENTS WHERE THEY SAY WE HAVE AN ISSUE -- IT'S A 25, 30-THOUSAND DOLLAR REQUEST AND THEN WE'RE ABLE TO FUND IT.

SO THAT'S WHY I PERSONALLY THINK THE NAMP PROGRAM HAS BEEN REALLY HELPFUL FOR DISTRICT 1. DID YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT?

>> I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT MAYBE DEPENDENT ON THE REST OF THE COUNCIL CONVERSATION, WHAT JUSTINA SHARED WAS THE BALANCE THROUGH THE MONTH. THERE MAY BE SOME IN PROCESS

SO WE'LL CLEAN THAT UP OVERNIGHT. >> KAUR: BECAUSE OUR

CURRENT REQUESTS ARE DUE -- >> END OF THE MONTH. >> KAUR: YEAH.

OKAY. THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. AND ALSO, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST YEAR BECAUSE THE SAME THING CAME UP LAST YEAR WHERE THE SUGGESTION CAME UP TO ADD MONEY TO CIP AND IT GOES BACK TO THE QUESTION OF EQUITY.

AND I HEAR THAT AND I SUPPORT THAT FOR THE OVERALL CITY BUDGET, BUT WHEN WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS THEY COME TO US SPECIFICALLY WITH REQUESTS.

AND IF I STREET IS NOT ON THE PLAN FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IT MAKES IT SO DIFFICULT FOR US TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. AND FOR SOME OF OUR CONSTITUENTS THAT HAVEN'T GOTTEN THEIR STREET PAVED FOR 15 YEARS, IT ENABLES US

[01:15:02]

SO THAT'S WHY I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE IN EQUITY NEED OVERALL INFRASTRUCTURE AND I THINK THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO GIVE MORE MONEY TO THAT IN OUR CITY PROGRAM, BUT I ALSO THINK IT'S REALLY HELPFUL TO HAVE THIS FOR US.

CRISIS NURSECY PROGRAM I WANTED TO ECHO THAT AND WANTED TO ECHO SUPPORT FOR

THE PHILHARMONIC. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER KAUR.

AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING DOING AWAY WITH NAMP, JUST AGAIN THOSE BALANCES.

COUNCIL MEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO. >> GAVITO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT NAMP BECAUSE I KNOW YES, OUR PROJECTS ARE DUE TO 9-27 SO WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH OURS.

JUST LIKE COUNCILWOMAN DR. KAUR IS WAS SAYING, WE'RE ALWAYS IN A PRIORITIZATION GAME. AND THE WORST THING IS WHEN A RESIDENT TELLS YOU, I HOPE Y'ALL CAN FIX THE STREET BEFORE I DIE. I'M LIKE OH MY GOD.

IT'S LIKE -- I MEAN, IT SUCKS. SO I'M STILL FULLY IN SUPPORT OF INCREASING OUR NAMP BUDGET. THANK YOU.

THANKS, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO. COUNCIL MEMBER ROCHA GARCIA.

>> GARCIA: THANK YOU. I WANTED TO GO BACK, AND WE'LL HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT CPS AT A LATER TIME. I WANTED TO USE [INDISCERNIBLE] ALWAYS FOR THE SUPPLEMENT FOR THIS YEAR, RIGHT? WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. SO I WAS KIND OF LIKE PROPOSING HOLDING SOME OF IT AS A JUST IN CASE, SO WE DIDN'T HAVE TO MAKE SO MANY DRASTIC CUTS.

AND THEN I THINK THAT ITEMS 1, 2, 4 AND 7, ERIK, COULD BE FUNDED OUT OF ARPA.

AND THEN I DON'T KNOW IF ALL OR PART OF 12 BUT FOR SURE 1, 2, 4 AND 7 COULD BE FUNDED OUT OF ARPA. AND I FAILED TO LIST A SENIOR TRANSPORTATION ON THERE. I'D LOVE SUPPORT FOR THAT AS WELL.

WE HAVE SOME RESIDENTS THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM THAT. THE FIRST TIERS CONVERSATION I KNOW WE'LL HAVE LATER, BUT I WOULD SUPPORT MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ THAT I THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL IDEA THAT THERE'S A MARKETING PAID INTERNSHIP PROGRAM WITH THE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES BUT THAT MIGHT BE BECAUSE I TEACH MARKETING.

TAKE IT FOR WHAT ITS WORTH. I LOVE THE LAND BANKING IDEA AS WELL.

I THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT. THE MIDNIGHT BASKETBALL FOR CRIME PREVENTION.

AND THEN THE FACADE AND GRANTS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO HAVE A DEEPER CONVERSATION OF NAMP. THE REALLOCATION OF FUNDS I THINK IS A GOOD IDEA, LIKE TO BE EQUITABLE. WE SEE THIS IN PROGRAMS TIME AND TIME AGAIN, LIKE THE -- SENIORITY PROGRAM THAT COUNCILMAN ALDERETE GAVITO CHAMP I DON'T UNDERSTAND. SO SOME OF OUR DISTRICTS DIDN'T USE IT AND SOME OF US ARE OVER. SO I THINK WE HAVE TO FIND A BETTER WAYS.

AND I KNOW I HAVE REALLY GOOD-HEARTED COLLEAGUES LIKE COUNCILMAN COURAGE SAID, TAKE MY MONEY IF Y'ALL NEED IT. SO I HAVE A FEELING IF WE ALL JUST COME TOGETHER AND SAY HEY, LOOK, THIS IS A NEED, THAT WE ALL WILL GET TO A SOLUTION. LOOKING FORWARD TO MORE INFORMATION ON THE NAMP ALLOCATION, BUT DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO SUPPORT SOME ADDITION SOME SOME OF THESE DISTRICTS. AND I LOVE THE URBAN TREE CANOPY IDEA THAT COUNCILMAN CASTILLO BROUGHT UP, THE TREE MAINTENANCE AT 300,000.

I HAVE A LOT OF SENIORS AND I WAS PERSONALLY REALLY, REALLY UPSET BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE MY DAD GOT RIPPED OFF TWO WEEKS AGO BY SOMEONE THAT CAME JUST TO HIS HOUSE TO CUT DOWN BRANCHES AND CHARGED HIM LIKE $500. YEAH, IT WAS RIDICULOUS.

AND I WAS IN A COUNCIL MEETING WHEN THEY CALLED AND I ASKED IF IT WAS AN EMERGENCY AND MY MOM SAID NO. WELL, THEY WROTE A CHECK.

SO IT WAS JUST REALLY HEARTBREAKING BECAUSE THEY'RE MY PARENTS.

I TRY TO TELL THEM ABOUT SCAMS, I TRY TO TELL THEM NOT TO.

BUT THERE'S PEOPLE THAT ARE FALLING FOR THIS. AND I COULDN'T HELP BUT THINK HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE DID THEY GO AFTER THAT DAY, RIGHT? AND SO IT WAS LIKE A RED FLAG IF WE COULD DO SOME ADDITIONAL TREE MAINTENANCE FOR OUR SENIORS.

AND THEN I'D BE SUPPORTIVE I THINK OF $100,000 THAT HE HAS STUDIED FOR THE CRISIS NURSERY PROGRAM. I'VE HEARD A LOT FROM OUR RESIDENTS AND IN PARTICULAR FROM ECO SLIDE TO DO THE WORK AND ANY BABY CAN THAT ACTUALLY FUNDS THE FUNERALS FOR THE CHILDREN. A LOT OF THE CHILDREN THAT ARE DYING ARE FROM DISTRICT 4. SO I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO HELP EXPEDITE THE CRISIS NURSERY. AND I THINK THAT'S IT FOR ME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER ROCHA GARCIA.

AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A POLICY DISCUSSION THAT'S NEEDED ABOUT NAMP AS WELL.

[01:20:04]

ANYBODY ELSE? COUNCIL MEMBER CASTILLO? >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANTED TO EXPRESS SUPPORT FOR THE CRISIS NURSERY FEASIBILITY STUDY AS WELL AS IDENTIFYING A WAY TO SUPPORT THE MAJOR AND MINOR REHAB IN CONVERSATION WITH ERIK AS I MENTIONED POTENTIALLY TAPPING INTO A TIRZ TO SUPPORT THOSE SLOTS. I UNDERSTAND THERE IS ALSO THE CONSTRUCTION PIECE, RIGHT, BUT ULTIMATELY WE ALWAYS HAVE OUR MONEY, DISTRICT 5 RESIDENTS FLY AND THERE ARE SLOTS FOR THIS PROGRAM AND IT'S VERY MUCH NEEDED.

AND IN ORDER TO NAMP, DISTRICT 5 I BELIEVE IS THE ONLY DISTRICT THAT I BELIEVE IS ZEROED OUT AND DISTRICT 5 RESIDENTS CONTINUE TO WAIT FOR BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

I WANT TO ENSURE WHETHER IT'S INCREASING BY $100,000 OR THE SOLUTION IDENTIFIED WITH THIS UPCOMING BUDGET IT HAS TO HAVE MORE FUNDING TO SUPPORT DISTRICT 5 RESIDENTS BECAUSE THE NEED IS SO HIGH AND WIDE RANGE, AND I'M EXTREMELY GRATEFUL FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS TEAM AND OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ENSURING THAT WE'RE IN CONSTANT COMMUNICATION WITH DISTRICT 5 RESIDENTS AND SIGNING OFF ON PROJECTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE REQUEST IS MATERIALIZED. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER CASTILLO.

COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE. > >> COURAGE: THANK YOU, MAYOR. ERIK, I'LL TELL YOU UP FRONT WHERE I THINK THE MONEY IS GOING TO COME FROM AND I THINK IT'S CPS REVENUE THAT IS EXTRAORDINARILY HIGHER THAN WE USUALLY GET. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT POLICIES GET SET BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT EXIST AT THE TIME. AND SOMETIMES THINGS CHANGE. I DON'T THINK ANY OF US ANTICIPATED THAT WE MIGHT BE IN A DEFICIT OF $100 MILLION LESS IN REVENUE THAN WE EXPECTED.

I DON'T THINK WE BELIEVE THAT CPS WOULDN'T DO AS GOOD AND IT DID IN ITS NORMAL CYCLE. WE DIDN'T THINK WE WERE GOING TO SEE A DECLINE IN SALES TAX, WE DIDN'T THINK WE WOULD SEE A DECLINE IN PROPERTY TAX, BUT WE DID, AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO RESPOND TO THE MOMENT AND I THINK THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD THINGS THAT WERE MENTIONED HERE. AND WE ALREADY WENT BACK AND KIND OF, I WOULD PRESUME, YOU CUT TO THE BONE WHERE YOU COULD I LOOKED OVER THAT LIST AND SOMETIMES I SAID TO MYSELF WHY DID WE HAVE THESE THINGS IN THE FIRST PLACE IF WE CAN CUT THEM NOW? BUT BE THAT AS IT MAY, I THINK YOU MADE A LOT OF DECISIONS THAT NEEDED TO BE MADE AND WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT A DEFICIT AND WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT NEXT YEAR, THE SECOND YEAR OF A TWO-YEAR PLAN, HAVING A DEFICIT.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO RESPOND TO THAT NOW AND I'D ASK THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER MAKING A CHANGE IN THE POLICY THAT WOULD ENABLE US TO USE THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE FROM CPS TO GO AHEAD AND EVEN THINGS OUT FOR NEXT YEAR AND TO ALLOW US TO DO -- CARRY FORWARD SOME OF THESE THINGS HERE. YOU KNOW, I AGREE, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO GIVE EVERYBODY FOUR PERCENT PAY RAISE. AND SO IF WE CAN TAKE MONEY FROM CPS REVENUE TO US, PART OF OUR 14 PERCENT, AND WE CAN GIVE EVERYBODY AN EXTRA ONE PERCENT PAY RAISE, I'M FOR IT. WE SHOULD ALL BE FOR THAT.

BUT WE JUST CAN'T GIVE THAT RAISE AND GO INTO THE HOLE ANOTHER SIX MILLION DOLLARS MORE TO DO THAT. AND THE SAME THING FOR A LOT OF THESE THINGS HERE.

THE LAST ITEM ON THIS LIST I HAD SAID WE OUGHT TO TAKE THE 2.7 MILLION OFF AND USE IT FOR YOUTH THINGS. WELL, WE'VE SET ASIDE A QUARTER OF THAT OR 250,000 OF THAT. SO WE STILL GOT TWO AND A HALF MILLION.

AND I SAY WE OUGHT TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT AND WE OUGHT TO FOCUS ON YOUTH.

AND IT IS ARPA RELATED AND IT IS A ONE-TIME THING. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO SO THAT WE HAVE A CARRY-FORWARD EXPENSE GOING FORWARD IN A YEAR.

I THINK THAT SHOULD GO TO PROBABLY THE CITY -- OUR COUNCIL HEALTH COMMITTEE, LET THEM DECIDE HOW TO ALLOCATE THAT BETWEEN OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT WORK WITH YOUTH. THOSE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE US DO AS WELL AS BE SUPPORTIVE OF SOME OF THESE OTHERS. IF WE DECIDED TOMORROW TO LOOK AT EVERYBODY'S CONVERSATION TODAY AND KIND OF PRIORITIZE WHAT THE MAJOR ARE SAYING THEY FAVOR, AND THEY COME UP WITH A LIST, AND I'M SURE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HE'S THINKING ABOUT. SO LET'S SAY 10 OF THESE THINGS HE'S GOING TO SAY YOU YOU KNOW, WE HAD A LOT OF POSITIVE FEEDBACK ON THESE, BUT IF YOU ADD THEM UP AND THEY COME TO EIGHT OR $11 MILLION, HOW ARE WE GOING TO FUND THEM UNLESS WE HAVE ANOTHER SOURCE OF REVENUE THAT WE CAN USE TO DO THAT.

[01:25:02]

BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD $10 MILLION MAKE THIS YEAR IF WE WERE TO TAKE 10 MILLION OUT OF THAT EXTRA CPS REVENUE, AND GIVE THEM BACK THE OTHER 20 OR SOMETHING? WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD THAT MAKE IN THEIR RATE HIKE? PROBABLY NOTHING AT ALL. LAST RATE HIKE THEY WANTED WAS GETTING THEM ABOUT $80 MILLION A YEAR MORE REVENUE. SO MAYBE IT WILL BE A LITTLE BIT MORE, MAYBE THEY WILL NEED $100 MILLION IN REVENUE IN THE NEXT RATE HIKE, BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD 10 MILLION MAKE THIS YEAR? NOT MUCH.

BUT WHO KNOWS, THEY MAY CONTINUE TO MAKE ADDITIONAL MONEY OFF OF THEIR OFF-SYSTEM SALES. IT THEY COULD CONTINUE TO SEE A POTENTIAL RATE HIKE ACTUALLY GOES DOWN. SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW WE OUGHT TO GO AHEAD AND COME UP WITH THE MONEY TO GO AHEAD AND CARRY THESE THINGS FORWARD.

ALL OF THEM ARE WORTHY, HOW WE PAY FOR THEM IS THE DECISION WE NEED TO MAKE AS

A COUNCIL. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE. COUNCIL MEMBER WHYTE.

>> WHYTE: YEAH, BRIEFLY AND RESPECTFULLY, I THINK THAT'S JUST FLATOUT SHORT SIGHTED. IT'S JUST SHORT SIGHTED. WE'RE SITTING HERE WITH A NICE LIST IN FRONT OF US OF ALL THESE THINGS WHICH IS RIGHTFULLY SAID, THESE ARE GREAT AND IT WOULD BE NICE TO DO THEM ALL. WE KNOW WE CAN'T.

BUT TO COME UP WITH A POLICY EARLIER THIS YEAR AND I THINK IT WAS MARCH OR APRIL OF WHENEVER WE DID, AND TO TURN AROUND FIVE MONTHS LATER AND SAY, WELL, SCRAP THE POLICY, WE'VE GOT TO CHANGE IT ALREADY BEFORE IT EVEN GOES INTO EFFECT, IT FRANKLY -- IT'S SHORT SIGHTED. THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO PUT IT. I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY WITH THE MAYOR, I HAVE TO SAY AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY NEED TO BE CONSCIOUS OF.

OUR CITIZENS IN ASKING THEM TO CONTINUE TO PAY MORE. AND I REMEMBER AT THE RATE HIKE DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS'' POSITION WAS WELL, IT'S ONLY A FEW BUCKS A MONTH AND EVERYBODY WILL DEAL WITH IT.

IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT. AND SO, MAYOR, I'M FOR STICKING WITH OUR POLICY THAT WE -- CITY MANAGEMENT AND EVERYONE CAME UP WITH JUST SIX MONTHS AGO.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THAT DISCUSSION. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER WHYTE. I GUESS EVERYONE WILL REMEMBER THE DAY AND THE

TIME ON THAT ONE. [LAUGHTER]. >>

>> COUNCIL MEMBER VIAGRAN. >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

YOU KNOW, WE CAN TALK ABOUT POLICY AND I JUST HOPE ON THURSDAY PEOPLE REMEMBER OUR HOUSING POLICY AND SHIP, BUT LET'S FOCUS ON THE CITY PAYMENT FROM OFF-SYSTEM SALES ON SLIDE 5. AND IT SAYS FROM OFF-SYSTEM SALES ABOVE 10 MILLION RESERVED IN THE CPS ENERGY CAPITAL RESERVE FUND WITH ANY SHORTFALL IN THE CITY'S PAYMENT-BASED BUDGET AT YEAR END DEDUCTED FROM THE FUND TO DETERMINE WITH AMOUNT ELIGIBLE TO BE TRANSFERRED TO CPS ENERGY FOR RESILIENCY AND RELIABILITY INITIATIVES. SO MY ARGUMENT IS IN THIS POLICY, AND THIS FEELS LIKE THE 50-MILLION-DOLLAR CONVERSATION WE HAD THE FIRST TIME WHEN I SAID LET'S STICK A PIN IN IT AND TALK ABOUT THIS LATER, IS THAT YOU PROPOSED A BUDGET.

WE ARE TELLING YOU BASED ON OUR AMENDMENTS THE SHORTFALL IS BIGGER THAN THAT 9.4 MILLION. AND THESE ARE PRIORITIES WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE DONE.

NOW, DO WE NEED TO GO BACK AND PREDICT THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET MORE THAN 10 MILLION OR 20 MILLION? AND CLOSER TO THAT $40 MILLION? MAYBE WE DO. BUT I -- MY BELIEF IS WE HAVE THE REVENUE, OUR DOLLARS ARE GOING TO MEAN MORE TODAY THAN IT MEANS IN 2026, AND WE NEED TO -- WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES. THE ONE I FORGOT TO SUPPORT, WHICH IS AMAZING TO ME

[01:30:03]

THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN FLEET, BUT MADE CUTS BECAUSE YOU KNEW WE WERE FACING CUTS, AND WE LET YOU AND NOW WE'RE SAYING THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE IT.

SURE, CUT, NET NAMP, GET THE 4.5 MILLION FROM NAMP ANDRAS THE ISSUES WE HAVE.

BECAUSE I THINK WHEN WE TALK ABOUT REHAB, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ASSISTANCE FOR EVICTION, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT TREE MITIGATION AND UNDER THE CANOPY THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING, MAYBE THAT'S MORE IMPORTANT THAN NAMP RIGHT NOW.

OR MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE 4.5. BUT IF WE HAVE PROJECTS IN NAMP AND YOU TELL US QUESTION WITH ADD MORE PROJECTS, I KNOW I HAVE PROJECTS WITH SHORTFALLS AND GAPS THAT WE CAN COMPLETE AND I KNOW THAT OTHER OF MY DISTRICT MEMBERS DO. BUT 4.5 MILLION IS A LOT OF MONEY.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE -- IT SHOULD GO TO THOSE WHO HAVE GAPS BEFORE IT GOES TO EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PROJECTS AND A LOT OF WORK TO DO, AND WE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE PROJECTS AND WE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING MORE TO DO. AND IF PEOPLE TALK ABOUT A ZERO BALANCE BUDGET, DO YOU KNOW WHO GETS THE MOST MONEY? THE SOUTHERN DISTRICTS WILL GET THE MOST MONEY BECAUSE WE HAVE THE MOST NEED. GEOGRAPHICALLY DRAF DISTRICT 3 IS THE LARGEST SO GEOGRAPHICALLY I HAVE MORE F STREETS, MORE SIDEWALK GAPS, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO BE EQUITABLE AND WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT PARTS OF DISTRICT 10 DON'T FALL INTO DISARRAY LIKE THEY HAVE IN SOME OF OUR DISTRICTS THAT HAVE BEEN LONG-SINCE IGNORED. SO I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO WITH CPS, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS WITH WHEN THEY COME IN OCTOBER THAT I'LL HAVE REGARDING WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TOWARDS TOWARDS THE FUTURE. WE DIDN'T -- WE DON'T EVEN TALK ABOUT HOW SAWS DOESN'T MEET THEIR NUMBERS AND WE DON'T GET REVENUE FROM THEM HARDLY.

SO I'M GLAD THAT THE MUNICIPAL UTILITIES COMMITTEE IS BACK ON TRACK AND WORKING FORWARD, BUT RIGHT NOW WE HAVE REAL NEEDS THAT WILL HELP OUR RESIDENTS OF SAN ANTONIO AND I DON'T THINK IT'S A LOT TO ASK. I THINK MAYBE ALTOGETHER IT'S 10.5 MILLION. FOR ONE YEAR YOU HAD 15 MILLION.

AND WE'RE NOT SAYING YES TO ALL OF IT. I MEAN, THERE ARE SOME THINGS I'M DEFINITE NO'S ON, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT AND MOVE FORWARD.

THANK YOU. >> COULD WE JUST CLARIFY A ZERO-BASE BUDGET?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER VIAGRAN.

SO IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE FOR THE SECOND ROUND? ALL RIGHT.

SO CLARIFYING CONVERSATION. WHAT WERE YOU GOING TO ASK? >> I WANT TO SAY IT'S ZERO-BASED BUDGETING, NOT ZERO-BALANCE BUDGETING. AND I KNOW ERIK --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THAT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SUBJECT ON A TOTALLY DIFFERENT DAY.

ANYBODY ELSE ON ROUND 2? THIS HAS BEEN A GOOD CONVERSATION.

ERIK, SO NOW REFLECT IT BACK AND WHAT ELSE DO YOU NEED FROM US TODAY?

>> ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR REALLOCATIONS? TO COVER AMENDMENTS.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ARE YOU HOPING TO HEAR THAT TODAY?

>> YES, SIR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I'LL OPEN IT UP --

>> SHORT OF THAT -- I'M SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF, MAYOR, BUT SHORT OF THAT WE'LL TAKE TODAY'S FEEDBACK AND COME BACK TOMORROW AFTERNOON. I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO START

TO CINCH THIS UP INTO SOMETHING THAT IS BALANCED. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: SO MY SUGGESTION ON THAT -- LET ME TRY TO TAKE A STAB AT THIS. CLEARLY THERE'S A LOT OF WORTHY AMENDMENTS HERE BUT OBVIOUSLY YOU WILL HAVE TO CULL THAT LIST TO WHAT HAS CLEAR CONSENSUS. I'VE HEARD WHAT I THINK THEY ARE.

I TRIED TO MAKE MY SUGGESTIONS S WITHIN THE ARPA BALANCE. PROBABLY WENT OVER A LITTLE BIT WITH RESPECT TO NAMP. I HEAR MY COLLEAGUES. WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS THAT THERE'S A HEALTHY BALANCE IN NAMP. IF THERE'S INFRASTRUCTURE REQUESTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENTS, LET'S PUT THAT NAMP MONEY TO WORK BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST SITTING ON THE SHELF. THAT WOULD BE ONE WAY WE COULD REALLOCATE IN MY OPINION. SO ANYBODY ELSE TO ADDRESS WHAT ERIK PUT ON THE TABLE? AND AGAIN, WE DON'T HAVE TO SOLVE THE CPS CONVERSATION TODAY. IT'S GOING TO BE FOR LATER MONTHS.

[01:35:07]

COUNCIL MEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO? >> THE ONLY THING I DID WANT TO CLARIFY IS WITH THAT NAMP BUDGET WE REALLY WON'T KNOW WHAT'S LEFT UNTIL AFTER ALL OF US SUBMIT OUR PROJECTS ON 9-27. SO I JUST DON'T -- I DON'T FEEL LIKE THAT 4.4 MILLION IS AS -- I UNDERSTAND IT WAS FROM LIKE MAYBE JUNE OR

JULY. >> WE'LL UPDATE THAT THIS EVENING.

>> GAVITO: I JUST FEEL LIKE WE WON'T HAVE A TRUE ASSESSMENT OF WHAT'S LEFT

OVER IN NAMP UNTIL 9-28. >> YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT BECAUSE THERE'S PROBABLY SOME OF YOU HAVE POINTED OUT YOU'RE WORKING ON PROJECTS, THE DEADLINE IS THE END OF THE MONTH. INCH TO GO OUT A LIMB, I THINK THE MAYOR IS PROPOSING A CONCEPT AND THERE ARE -- I WAS LOOKING AT THE LIST. I THINK THERE WILL BE BALANCES AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER. ONE OF THE THINGS WE'LL DO OVERNIGHT IS DOUBLE-CHECK WITH ALL THE COUNCIL OFFICES TO MAKE SURE WE'RE LOOKING

AT THE RIGHT INFORMATION. >> GAVITO: OKAY, YEAH. SURE, IF THERE'S LIKE LEFTOVER MONEY SOMEWHERE, THEN YEAH, WE SHOULD PUT THAT ON A SHEET SO WE COULD

TALK ABOUT IT. I'D STILL PUSH FOR -- >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION AND MAYBE THIS WILL GIVE US A LITTLE BIT OF PERSPECTIVE. DID THE NAMP BUDGETS CHANGE BETWEEN LAST FISCAL YEAR AND THIS FISCAL YEAR, THE OVERALL BUDGETS? AND IF NOT, WAS THERE A BALANCE AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR IN THE NAMP BUDGETS FROM LAST YEAR?

>> SO THEY ARE REMAINING FLAT AT $550,000 EACH DISTRICT.

AND THERE WAS A BALANCE OVERALL. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: DO YOU

KNOW ROUGHLY HOW MUCH THAT BALANCE WAS? >> I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP

OF MY HEAD, BUT WE CAN GET THAT. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: IF THERE'S $4.4 MILLION IN OVERALL NAMP, I FIND IT VERY HARD TO BELIEVE THAT IN ONE MONTH THE COUNCIL OFFICES COLLECTIVELY CAN SPEND ON AN AVERAGE $440,000 EACH.

>> CONSTRAINTS OF THE NAMP PROGRAM THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT.

THERE NEEDS TO BE A POLICY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. ANYBODY ELSE?

COUNCIL MEMBER VIAGRAN? >> GO TO NAMP. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YOU'RE SAYING FOR REALLOCATION. COUNCIL MEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ?

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I ASKED FOR THIS IN THE BUDGET MEMO FOLLOW-UPS.

WAS ANY VACANCIES THAT HAVE GONE UNFILLED FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME IF MAYBE

THERE'S OPPORTUNITY THERE FOR -- >> WE PROVIDED THE VACANCIES THIS MORNING, JUSTINA, THE MEMO THAT WENT OUT THIS MORNING.

>> AND REMEMBER, WE BUDGET TURNOVER IN DEPARTMENTS. SO EVERY DEPARTMENT HAS GOT A TARGET THEY'VE GOT TO HIT. YOU'LL SEE THE LIST ON THAT

MEMO THAT WENT OUT THIS MORNING. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I

GUESS THAT WAS JUST A QUESTION. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ANYBODY ELSE? TAKING HANDS OUT. COUNCIL MEMBER ROCHA

GARCIA. >> GARCIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

ON THE APRIL 18TH PRESENTATION ON FINANCIAL POLICIES, I PULLED UP THE POWERPOINT THAT JUSTINA SENT OUT. AND IT SAYS ANNUALLY ASSESS THE CITY'S PAYMENT FROM CPS ENERGY TO DETERMINE THE PORTION, IF ANY, DEEMED UNUSUAL, OUT OF THE ORDINARY AND ONE-TIME IN NATURE, AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT AMOUNT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION FACTORS SUCH AS THE CITY'S OVERALL FINANCIAL POSITION, IMPACT ON SERVICE DELIVERY, BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY AND RESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP. WOULD THAT ALSO APPLY TO WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING

TODAY? LIKE WITH THE OSS? >> YES.

BUT WITH A SLIGHT CLARIFICATION. >> PERFECT.

>> YES, MA'AM. SO THAT WAS THE POLICY THAT WAS IN PLACE LAST YEAR.

THESE TWO POLICIES FIT UNDER THAT OVERARCHING ONE, BUT THESE WERE DEVELOPED BASED ON ALL THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD OVER THE PAST YEAR, NUMBER ONE.

NUMBER TWO, THEY WERE DESIGNED TO HELP US MANAGE WHAT WE KNEW WAS GOING TO BE INCREASED VOLATILITY IN THIS REVENUE STREAM SO THAT WE COULD MAKE SURE NOT ONLY ARE WE MANAGING OUR BUDGET TODAY, TOMORROW, BUT FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

AND REMEMBER, WE'VE GOT DEFICITS OUT IN YEARS THREE TO FIVE, SO THAT'S WHY WE

PUT THOSE IN PLACE AND RECOMMENDED THOSE CHANGES. >> CAN I SEE THOSE RECOMMENDED CHANGES? I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND THE UPDATED POLICY. AND SO I ALREADY MADE A MISTAKE LAST WEEK MAKING AN ASSUMPTION SO I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THAT SAME MISTAKE. CAN I SEE THAT? MAYBE THAT'S A BUDGET FOLLOW-UP. SO JUST INCLUDE IT FOR US,

JUST TEEN. >> LET ME MAKE SURE I'M FOLLOWING YOU.

ARE YOU ASKING FOR THE ACTUAL POLICY? >> SO AGAIN, BECAUSE I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE WERE GOING TO TAKE OFF THE FACT THAT WE COULD CONSIDER IT BASED ON THE CITY'S OVERALL FINANCIAL POSITION. SO I'M WONDERING WHEN THAT

[01:40:01]

CAME OFF. >> THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN PART OF THE CONVERSATION -- LAPS LAPS. PART OF THE DISCUSSION WE HAD BEFORE WE REALIZED, FOR INSTANCE, WE ARE NOT HITTING OUR BASE BUDGET FOR CPS REVENUE THIS YEAR.

SO THE IDEA WOULD BE TO, MUCH LIKE TODAY'S CONVERSATION, KNOWING THAT CPS WAS LIKELY GOING TO SELL MORE OFF-SYSTEM SALES IN A TIGHTER TIGHT ERCOT MARKET IN A POTENTIAL HOT SUMMER, THAT WE HIT THE MINIMUM BASE REQUIREMENTS AND PROVIDE SOME COVER OVER THE EXPECTATIONS WE HAVE FOR REVENUE. NOT ANYTHING OVER BUDGET, BUT JUST OUR MINIMUM

BUDGET. >> SO WOULD YOU SAY THEN THAT IT'S IMPLIED? ? THAT STILL OUR FINANCIAL POSITION IS IMPLIED IN THIS

NEW POLICY? >> SO THE POLICY WE HAD IN PLACE IN LAST YEAR IS STILL THERE. THESE ARE UNDER THERE, SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT OUR FINANCIAL POSITION, THAT'S WHY I SAID DURING THE PRESENTATION IF YOU ALL WANT TO CONSIDER THE 5.7-MILLION-DOLLAR SHORTFALL WE HAVE IN FY'26, THAT IS OUR BUDGET, THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.

THAT'S WHAT WE THINK WE'RE SHORT AT THIS POINT, NOT ADDING SPENDING, NOT AMENDMENTS, BUT WHAT WE'RE SHORT IN THE SECOND YEAR, THAT'S PART OF OUR FINANCIAL POSITION. YOU COULD MAKE THAT CHANGE, RESERVE THAT 5.7, BILLION OFF THE SECOND YEAR AND WE WOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH BOTH OF THESE POLICIES AND

THE OVERARCHING POLICY. >> I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M GETTING AT, RIGHT? I WAS TRYING TO FIND OUT IS IT -- ARE WE REALLY VIOLATING OUR OWN POLICY IF WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION THAT'S TALKING ABOUT THE FINANCIAL HEALTH FIRST OR

ARE WE NOT? >> NO, WE'RE NOT. I THINK THAT CONDITIONS ALWAYS CHANGE AND ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT THOSE POLICIES ARE REALLY DESIGNED FOR ARE TO PROVIDE GUIDEPOSTS FOR US AND CONDITIONS ALWAYS CHANGE.

>> OKAY. >> AND HERE'S A CONDITION WITH THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT. WE HAVE AN UNKNOWN IMPACT NEXT YEAR.

IT WAS NEVER PROJECTED. IT WAS NEVER ANTICIPATED UP UNTIL TWO WEEKS AGO.

SO HOW DO WE PLAN FOR IT? IT ALL GOES BACK TO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE BEING THOUGHTFUL IN HOW WE PLAN AND ADDRESS. AND YES, IT IS KIND OF A ONE-TIME DOLLAR AMOUNT TO FIX -- TO SMOOTH OUT A FUTURE RECURRING ISSUE, BUT MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THAT THOUGHTFULLY I THINK IS WHAT'S KEY.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK

YOU, ROCHA GARCIA. COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE. >> COURAGE: THANKS, ADR ADRIANA, YOU BROUGHT UP A CONCERN I HAD AND I TALKED TO ERIK ABOUT IT.

I SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO SAY I MAY HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD THAT POLICY WHEN WE PUT IT IN PLACE BECAUSE ALL ALONG I THOUGHT THE POLICY WAS IF THE CITY WAS SHORT IN OUR BUDGET THAT WE COULD USE SOME CPS REVENUE TO MAKE IT UP.

WHAT I'M HEARING IS NOW, WELL, WE CAN ONLY USE THAT EXTRA CPS REVENUE TO MAKE UP A SHORTAGE IN THE CPS BUDGET. BUT NOT ANY KIND OF SHORTAGE IN OUR WHOLE CITY BUDGET. SO I PRESUME NOW FROM THE EXPLANATIONS I'M HEARING THAT I MISUNDERSTOOD THAT. BUT I THOUGHT ALL ALONG SINCE OUR REVENUE FROM CPS GOES INTO THE GENERAL FUND AND IS USED FOR EVERYTHING, THAT IF CPS WAS SHORT IN THEIR NORMAL BUDGET AND WE COULD TAKE MONEY FROM -- FROM THE OFF-SYSTEM SALES, IT COULD BE USED IN OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR ANYTHING.

NOW WE'RE SAYING NO, IT'S ONLY USED TO SUPPLEMENT WHAT WE'RE SHORT IN A REGULAR CPS PROJECTIONS. AND THAT'S DISHEARTENING TO ME.

LAST TIME WE WERE FIGHTING OVER 55 MILLION. THIS ONE-TIME WE'RE FIGHTING OVER, WHAT, 30 OR 40 MILLION. NOT FIGHTING, BUT WE'RE DEBATING AND DISAGREEING AND NOT UNDERSTANDING MAYBE. BUT WE NEED TO THINK OF ANY REVENUE THAT WE CAN BRING IN AFFECTS EVERYTHING WE DO ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

THE EXTRA MONEY CPS GETS FROM THEIR OFF-SYSTEM SALES, THEY DON'T SEGREGATE IT AND SAY IT'S ONLY TO GO AHEAD AND DISCOUNT FUTURE RATE HIKES.

THEY USE IT FOR EVERYTHING. AND I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY IF THERE'S MORE COMING IN THAN WE BUDGETED FOR, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO USE IT FOR THAT PURPOSE OR AT LEAST SOME OF IT. I'M NOT SAYING TAKE IT ALL, BUT IF WE'VE GOT SOME PRIORITIES RIGHT NOW, LET USE PART OF IT FOR THOSE PRIORITIES. SO ANYWAY, THAT'S -- I WAS JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY MY

OWN THINKING ON THAT. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE. ERIK, DID YOU WANT TO --

>> WELL, IT IS -- AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PLENTY OF TIME AT THE BEGINNING OF NOVEMBER, BUT ONCE WE KNOW THE FINAL NUMBERS.

[01:45:03]

BUT TO USE ONE-TIME MONEY TO SOLVE AND ADDRESS SERVICE ISSUES IS GOING TO CREATE ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL PRESSURE ON TOP OF WHAT WE'RE ALREADY GOING TO FEEL. WE ARE RETURNING TO NORMAL. WE HAVE A POTENTIAL NOW IMPACT ON PROPERTY TAXES COMING UP. AND WE -- AND I KNOW THE COUNCIL WILL BE CERTAINLY THOUGHTFUL AS THEY TALK THROUGH THAT, BUT THESE MEASURES ARE PUT IN PLACE SO THAT WE ARE NOT IN A BONE-CUTTING SITUATION.

THIS YEAR WAS NOT BONE-CUTTING. THIS YEAR WAS REALIGNING BUDGETS. AND THERE ARE POTENTIAL IMPACTS.

EVEN IF WE DIDN'T MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS BEGINNING OCTOBER 1T WE'RE GOING TO START MAKING -- I SHARED WITH YOU DURING THE PROPOSED BUDGET PRESENTATION, THIS FALL WE'RE GOING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CLOSE THE GAP IMMEDIATELY.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO WAIT UNTIL NEXT SPRING OR SUMMER TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO FINISH COVERING THAT EIGHT-MILLION-DOLLAR PROJECTED GAP.

THE SOONER WE DEAL WITH THOSE ISSUES, THE BETTER OFF WE'LL BE.

AND I'M CONFIDENT THAT AS WE GET CLOSER TO NOVEMBER WHEN WE HAVE A CLEARER PICTURE, WE'LL HAVE AN IDEA OF WHERE WE'RE SITTING IN SOME OF THOSE OTHER AREAS AS WELL.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANKS, ERIK. ANYBODY ELSE?

COUNCIL MEMBER KAUR. >> KAUR: [INAUDIBLE]. FROM NAMP AND THEN TREE CANOPY PRESERVATION FOR THE URBAN TREE CANOPY PROGRAM. SO LOOKING AT THE BUDGET LOOKS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT OF SURPLUS THERE.

>> THE TREE MITIGATION TOO, BUT WE'LL DO THAT WORK TONIGHT.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ANYBODY ELSE? ERIK, IS THAT A LITTLE BIT

OF -- >> EVERY LITTLE BIT COUNTS, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY. IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, ANDY, WE DO HAVE AN

EXEC? >> WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING TONIGHT TO DO THIS.

WE'LL TRY TO GET YOU A MEMO BEFORE THE MEETING. IT WILL NOT BE TONIGHT.

BUT WE'LL TRY TO GET IT BY MIDDAY TOMORROW. THAT WAY YOU ALL HAVE A

CHANCE TO SEE IT BEFORE WE COME IN IN THE AFTERNOON. >> WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO GET US A LIST OF THE AGENCY FUNDS AND HOW MUCH -- AS IT'S BEEN SINCE IT FEELS

LIKE IT'S BEEN UPDATED? >> WE'LL UPDATE THAT EMAIL TONIGHT.

>> PERFECT, THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

AND THAT'S A YES, ANDY? >> YES, WE DO HAVE AN EXEC. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

[EXECUTIVE SESSION At any time during the meeting, the City Council may recess into executive session in the Presidio Conference Room to consult with the City Attorney's Office (Texas Government Code Section 551.071) and deliberate or discuss any of the following:  ]

ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17TH, 2024, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WILL NOW MEET IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSULT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PURSUANT SO CHAPTER 551 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE AND DELIBERATE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, ECONOMIC, PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY.

LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO LITIGATION INVOLVING THE CITY.

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PURSUANT TO 551.071.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON.

TIME IS 4:58 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2024. CITY COUNCIL HAS RECONVENED FROM ITS EXECUTIVE SESSION. NO OFFICIAL ACTION WAS TAKEN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

OUR MEETING IS NOW

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.