Sep 18, 2024 City Council Budget Work Session

[00:00:07]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. WELCOME TO OUR CITY COUNCIL BUDGET AMENDMENT SESSION. TODAY WE'RE GOING TO FINALIZE THE LIST OF AMENDMENTS FOR OUR BUDGETED DOCKET TOMORROW. THE TIME IS 2:10 P.M. ON THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024. WE'LL CALL OUR MEETING TO ORDER.

MADAM CLERK, COULD YOU READ THE ROLL? >> CLERK:

MAYOR, WE HAVE QUORUM. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: AND ANDY IS PRESENT AS WELL

AND HAS THE FLOOR. >> SEGOVIA: SORRY, MAYOR, I HATE TO OPEN WITH A CORRECTION, THE COUNCIL IS NOT FINALIZING ANYTHING TODAY, WE'RE TALK ABOUT POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS AND THE BUDGET, IF PASSED, WILL

BE TOMORROW. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: GOT IT.

WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THE BUDGET AMENDMENTS HOPEFULLY TO BE ADOPTED TOMORROW. WITH THAT CORRECTION, ERIK, OVER TO YOU.

WE'RE READY TO GET STARTED. WE'VE GOT A BRIEF EXEC

[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:  ]

FIRST. >> WALSH: WE'RE GOING TO DO A REAL QUICK EXEC.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT. WE WON'T BE LONG.

THE TIME IS 2:11 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 18TH, 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 TO CHAPTER 551 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.087, THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.072, (REAL PROPERTY), LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO LITIGATION INVOLVING THE CITY PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071 (CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY) LEGAL ISSUES RELATING TO EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. THE TIME IS 2:24 P.M. CITY COUNCIL HAS

[ ITEMS  ]

ERIK? >> WALSH: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. SO ONLY ABOUT AN HOUR AGO, MAYBE A LITTLE LESS, WE SENT OUT A MEMO THAT KIND OF ENCAPSULATED SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED YESTERDAY. AND I'LL HAVE JUSTINA, WE'VE JUST GOT TWO SLIDES. SHE'LL WALK THROUGH THE AMENDMENTS. SO THE PURPOSE OF TODAY IS TO KIND OF REPORT BACK TO YOU WHAT WE HEARD YESTERDAY. OBVIOUSLY TODAY, ANY POTENTIAL AMOUNTS OR CHANGES WE'LL INCORPORATE INTO ANOTHER DOCUMENT THAT WE'LL SHARE WITH COUNCIL IN PREPARATION FOR TOMORROW.

THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS I WANTED TO POINT OUT IN THE MEMO.

ONE, JUST REMINDER, WE HAD $2.51 MILLION BALANCE FROM ARPA, AND THEN YOU'LL SEE IN THE MEMO I SENT OUT, TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS IN ADDITIONAL GENERAL FUND DOLLARS, SO WE WERE NOTIFIED TODAY OFFICIALLY BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE THAT WE RECEIVED A GRANT THAT WE DIDN'T ANTICIPATE, AND BECAUSE THE COUNCIL HAS NOT APPROPRIATED MONEY, YOU'RE SCHEDULED TO DO THAT TOMORROW, THAT $2.5 MILLION IS AVAILABLE. AND SO WE HAVE TAKEN -- WE'VE MADE AN ATTEMPT, AND I'M GOING TO ASK JUSTINA TO GO THROUGH THE NEXT TWO SLIDES, TO PULL TOGETHER THE THINGS WE HEARD YESTERDAY. I ALSO NOTE IN THE MEMO, WE DID MEMORIALIZE THE PROPOSAL THAT COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ SUGGESTED YESTERDAY THAT SEVERAL OF YOU WEIGHED IN REGARDING THE INNER CITY TIRZ FUNDED PROJECTS, THERE WERE FIVE OF THEM THAT WERE NOTED IN THE MEMO.

AND JUST A REMINDER, THAT WAS -- THOSE ITEMS STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, THEY STILL HAVE TO GO TO THE TIRZ BOARD.RD I THINK COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ IS PROPOSING THAT WE BE EFFICIENT ON THE BACK END OF THE PROCESS, SO THEY'RE INCLUDED IN MEMORIALIZING THAT MEMO AS WELL. SO JUSTINA, LET'S JUST TALK THROUGH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AS THEY ARE RIGHT NOW, BASED ON WHAT WE HEARD, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY I THINK WE'LL WALK OUT OF HERE WITH GOOD DIRECTION AT THE END

OF THE DAY. >> TATE: THANK YOU. SO THE NEXT TWO SLIDES -- MY NAME'S JUSTINA TATE, THE BUDGET DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.

[00:05:01]

THE FIRST IS TO ADD 1LGC PORTION TO THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT'S 3, 4, 6, 8 AND 10. AND OVER THE TWO YEARS -- SO THIS HAS A TWO-YEAR IMPACT, THE TOTAL COST IS $1.2 MILLION.

THE SECOND IS SEED FUNDING FOR CENTER FOR HEALTH EQUITY IN SOUTH TEXAS. OVER THE TWO YEARS, THE IMPACT IS $600,000.

THE THIRD IS OUR HOUSING ASSISTANT FOR INDIVIDUALS ON THE VERGE OF EVICTIONS OR OTHER FORMS OF HOMELESSNESS. THIS WOULD INCLUDE RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND UTILITY ASSISTANCE. SO A MILLION DOLLARS IN 2025. NUMBER FOUR IS A UT HEALTH SA RICARDO SALINAS PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY CLINIC FOR $150,000 IN 2025.

THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH, INCREASING THE FUNDING FOR THAT MARCH FROM 100,000 TO 300,000. THIS IS INCLUDED IN BOTH YEARS, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $400,000. AND THEN WE HAVE THE SENIORS IN PLAY, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD INCREASE THE FUNDING AVAILABLE FROM 100,000 TO 150,000.

SO THIS WOULD BE FOR ONE YEAR, IN 2025, OF A TOTAL IMPACT OF $50,000.

AND FINALLY ON THIS SLIDE, WE HAVE THE URBAN TREE CANOPY, SO $300,000 IN 2025. ON THE NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE THREE AMENDMENTS.

NUMBER EIGHT IS THE EAST SIDE YOUTH CREATIVE CONTENT PROGRAM.

THIS WOULD BE $180,000 IN 2025. THE CRISIS NURSERY FEASIBILITY PROGRAM, 100,000 IN 2025, AND THEN A REVISED EXPENSE THAT WOULD GO TOWARD THE 2026 DEFICIT OF $1 MILLION. SO IN TOTAL OVER THE TWO YEARS, THE IMPACT ON THE BUDGET IS ABOUT $5 MILLION.

THAT CONCLUDES THE AMENDMENT OVERVIEW, AND I'LL TURN IT BACK TO

ERIK. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ERIK, YOU SAID WE DIDN'T ANTICIPATE THE GRANT, BUT I DO THINK CREDIT GOES TO SALLY AND THE FOLKS UP THERE THAT WERE WORKING HARD TO DELIVER FOR OUR COMMUNITY, SO CONGRATULATIONS.

ANOTHER WIN FOR JEFF, SALLY AND THE TEAM. SO LET'S GET RIGHT INTO THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE AMENDMENT LIST. START WITH COUNCILMEMBER

MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AND THANK YOU FOR THE REALLY BRIEF PRESENTATION.

OVERALL, I THINK I'M HAPPY AND I CAN LIVE WITH THIS LIST AS IT EXISTS.

I DO WONDER ABOUT SOME OPPORTUNITY. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF SOMEONE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET A COST BREAKDOWN. IF WE WERE TO DO -- BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING OF YESTERDAY'S CONVERSATIONS AND CONVERSATIONS BEFORE THAT WERE THAT THERE WAS CONSENSUS AROUND A 4% INCREASE FOR CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES RATHER THAN A 3%.

I UNDERSTAND THAT'S MORE COSTLY THAN WHAT'S AVAILABLE AT THE MOMENT, BUT I WONDER WHAT WOULD -- WHAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE IN COST IF WE SAID MAYBE A 1% ADDITIONAL BONUS, ONE-TIME BONUS, FOR EMPLOYEES MAKING LESS THAN 85K, FOR EXAMPLE. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT

CAN BE PREPARED FOR TOMORROW? >> WALSH: SURE.

I MEAN, YEAH. AND, REMEMBER, PART OF THE NUMBER WE SHARED YESTERDAY WAS THE IMPACT ALL THE OTHER FUNDS, SO THE GENERAL FUND CERTAINLY COULDN'T AFFORD TO DO THAT WITHOUT MAKING A PERMANENT RECURRING

CUT. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: UH-HUH. >> WALSH: BUT MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN AFFORD THOSE KIND OF ADJUSTMENTS WITHIN OPERATING DEPARTMENTS LIKE SOLID WASTE, SO DOES THAT HAVE A RATE IMPACT? STORMWATER? WE CAN BREAK OUT A TOTAL BY THAT, WE'LL SEE IF WE

CAN GET THAT PUT TOGETHER. >> THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR THE 4 PERCENT WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN RECURRING, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ADDED ON TO THEIR BASE WAGE.

WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS ALMOST A COMPROMISE, I DON'T KNOW THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE WANT TO MOVE IN, BUT I THINK IT'S INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IS A ONE-TIME 1% BONUS FOR THOSE MAKING 85,000 OR LESS.

>> WALSH: OKAY. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I WOULD LIKE AN UPDATE ON THE REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE FUND. I KNOW WE HAVE NOT YET APPROVED CONTRACTS, BUT WHAT DO WE EXPECT TIMELINE-WISE.

>> WALSH: SO WE HAVE A B SESSION SCHEDULED IN MID OCTOBER.

THE POSTSOLICITATION PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: AND

DO WE HAVE THE A SESSION SCHEDULED AFTER THAT? >> WALSH: PRESUMABLY,

YES, SIR. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: DO WE KNOW WHEN THAT WOULD BE?

>> WALSH: AFTER THE B SESSION. IF EVERYTHING'S FINE AT

[00:10:01]

AND IT IS SCHEDULED IN OUR B SESSION SCHEDULE. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: SO I'M IMAGINING THAT BECAUSE IT'S TAKEN SO LONG -- WE STILL HAVE NOT YET ALLOCATED THE FUNDING, BUT BECAUSE IT'S TAKEN SO LONG THAT THAT $500,000 WON'T BE SPENT UNTIL BASICALLY NEXT BUDGET CYCLE, THAT WOULD

BE THE EXPECTATION? >> WALSH: YEAH. I MEAN, YOU'RE RIGHT, WE HAVEN'T SPENT ANY OF THAT MONEY. PRESUMABLY, WE WILL TAKE CONTRACTS TO COUNCIL AFTER THE B SESSION, AND THEN BEGIN SPENDING MONEY

IN FISCAL YEAR '25. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: WHAT I WOULD -- SO WHAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN, AND I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES, IS IF THERE'S ANY WAY TO MAKE ANY, MAYBE SMALLER ADDITION FOR THIS UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR TO ADD ON TO THE $500,000 AT THE SAME BREAKOUT THAT WE HAD -- OR THE SAME BREAKDOWN OF UPSTREAM,DOWN STREAM, ALL OF THAT, ADD THAT TO THE 500K. OR AS A PART OF THE '26 BUDGET, START TO PLAN TO INCLUDE A REUP OF THOSE FUNDS, BECAUSE I DO THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE NEEDED. THEY WERE NEEDED THIS PAST YEAR, AND THEY STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ALLOCATED, AND SO THAT'S CONCERNING TO ME AND TO I'M SURE A NUMBER OF OTHER FOLK, BUT I WOULD LIKE SOME OPTIONS, AT LEAST, AND FOR STAFF TO BEGIN THINKING THAT.

AND I'D LOVE TO HEAR MY COLLEAGUES' THOUGHTS. THERE WAS ALSO CONSENSUS BASED ON MY NOTE TO EXPAND TRANSPORTATION FOR SENIORS TO THE SENIOR CENTERS. OUTSIDE OF THE GENERAL FUND, ARE THERE ANY OTHER FUNDS THAT COULD SUPPORT THIS OR THAT MAYBE WE COULD BEGIN THINKING

ABOUT? >> WALSH: NOT WITHOUT MAKING FURTHER CUTS RIGHT

NOW. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

I'M JUST WONDERING, ARE THERE ANY OTHER FUNDS THAT ARE ELLIMBINGABLE, EVEN IF THERE'S NOT MONEY RIGHT NOW, IF THERE'S SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT I

COULD -- >> WALSH: I DON'T KNOW. WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY -- ARE YOU TALKING

ABOUT GRANT FUNDS. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GRANT FUNDS, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S, SAY, TIRZ, FOR EXAMPLE, I DON'T KNOW IF

IT'S ARPA, I DON'T KNOW. >> WALSH: I WOULD HIGHLY ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL NOT TO USE TIRZ FUNDS FOR THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE OPERATING EXPENSES.

BUT WE CAN LOOK AT THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY OTHER FUNDING SOURCES TO DO THAT. THAT'S CONCERNING. OKAY.

I'LL THINK ABOUT THAT. I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING MY COLLEAGUES' FEEDBACK.

THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCI COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE?

>> WHYTE: THANKS, MAYOR. I -- AS FAR AS THIS LIST GOES, I GUESS I CAN LIVE WITH IT AS WELL. I'LL SAY AGAIN, MY BELIEF IS THAT OUR DOLLARS SHOULD BE SPENT ON WHAT OUR CITIZENS EXPECT THEM TO BE SPENT ON.

WE DO A SURVEY EVERY YEAR OF THEIR PRIORITIES. I BELIEVE WE DO IT FOR A REASON. THEY WANT THEIR MONEY SPENT ON CORE CITY SERVICES, PUBLIC SAFETY, INFRASTRUCTURE, CLEANING UP HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS.

THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO BE SPENDING OUR DOLLARS. I'M LOOKING AT THIS LIST HERE, THOUGH, AND I DON'T SEE -- NOW THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT IT, THE ADDITIONAL MONEY FOR NAMP, ERIK, IS NOT ON HERE?

>> WALSH: NO, SIR, IT'S NOT. NOT IN THE MEMO WE SENT

TODAY. >> WHYTE: I SWORE THAT YESTERDAY THERE WAS CONSENSUS AROUND AN ADDITIONAL $100,000 IN NAMP FUNDS.

SO I TODAY WILL PUT FORTH AGAIN MY BELIEF THAT WE SHOULD ADD $100,000 TO EACH DISTRICT'S NAMP FUND. IF WE NEED TO REPLACE ONE OF THESE ITEMS ON THE LIST OR KNOCK DOWN THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THEY'RE GETTING, THAT IS -- THAT IS WHAT I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD DO. AGAIN, THESE ARE THE ISSUES WE'RE CALLED ABOUT EVERY SINGLE DAY BY THE PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, NAMP FUNDING COULD HELP EVERYONE, AND SO I'M FOR THAT.

OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK THAT STAFF HAS DONE A GREAT JOB PUTTING TOGETHER THIS BUDGET AS BEST AS THEY CAN, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO PASSING

THE BUDGET TOMORROW. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER

WHYTE. COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO? >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND THANKS, STAFF, FOR THE PRESENTATION AND FOR THE UPDATED MEMO.

I DID HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING LINE ITEM NUMBER 4, UT HEALTH.

I NOTICED FOR 2026, IT NO LONGER HAS FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING

[00:15:02]

AND WHILE I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH WITH THE $200,000 INCREASE THAT HAS TWO YEARS OF SUPPORT, I WANT US TO THINK ABOUT OUR PRIORITIES, RIGHT? IS IT CHILDREN AND THEIR ACCESS TO DENTAL CARE IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO? AND WHILE MARCHS ARE VERY IMPORTANT AND SERVE A PIVOTAL ROLE, I THINK LOOKING AT THE REMOVING OF THE RICARDO SALINAS CLINIC FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR IS A BIT CONCERNING.

I'M GRATEFUL TO SEE THAT THE URBAN TREE CANOPY'S RECEIVING SUPPORT.

OFTENTIMES WHEN WE CONNECT CONSTITUENTS TO THE CITY'S ARBORIST, THEY REFER THEM TO THE URBAN TREE CANOPY, BUT RIGHT NOW THEY SHARE THAT THEY'RE OUT OF FUNDS. SO GLAD TO SEE THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO TACKLE SOME OF THE CONCERNS AND CASES OF SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS.

IN REGARDS TO THE SEED FUNDING, GRATEFUL TO SEE THAT THAT'S BEEN SECURED FOR BOTH OF THE YEARS. I DID ALSO HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE FUND ON THE JUNE 16TH SPECIAL SESSION MEETING, STAFF SUGGESTED THAT THERE COULD BE A $400,000 EAR MARK WITH THIS UPCOMING BUDGET. I APPRECIATE STAFF FOR FOLLOWING UP AND SHARING WITH ME THAT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE, BUT CAN SOMEONE HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT MAY HAVE CHANGED FROM THE SPECIAL SESSION WHEN IT WAS SHARED THAT 400 WOULD BE EAR MARKED, AND WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US TODAY?

>> WALSH: I BELIEVE THAT WAS A MISSTATEMENT BY DR. WOO, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. THERE HAD BEEN NO PLANS IN OUR PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT BUDGET PREPARATION. THEY HAD NOT EVEN DONE THE SOLICITATION. THERE WERE ESTIMATES MAYBE WITHIN HER MIND, BUT WE DIDN'T KNOW, BECAUSE WE HADN'T DONE THE SOLICITATION AT THAT POINT WHAT EXPENSES WERE GOING TO BE RESPONDED TO.

AND SO WITHOUT KNOWING THAT, THAT WAS PROBABLY PREMATURE FOR HER TO SAY. AND HER AND I TALKED ABOUT THAT AFTERWARDS.

>> CASTILLO: AND THAT'S A BIT FRUSTRATING, RIGHT, BECAUSE I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WOULD BE BAKED INTO THE BUDGET, GIVEN THAT IT WAS PRESENTED TO US THAT THAT WAS THE CASE. I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT, BUT BECAUSE OF THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T ASK FOR IT DURING THE AMENDMENT PROCESS AND -- BECAUSE WE WERE UNDER -- I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WAS EAR MARKED BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WAS COMMUNICATED TO US.

>> WALSH: WELL, THEN I SHOULD HAVE MADE THAT CLEAR AT THE SPECIAL SESSION, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION AT THAT

TIME. >> CASTILLO: AND THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING, GRATEFUL TO SEE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE AN UPDATE IN OCTOBER, BUT TO STRESS AND ECHO WHAT COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ HAS SHARED, RIGHT, THERE'S AN URGENCY TO GET THESE FUNDS OUT, AND I'M JUST CONCERNED HOW LONG IT'S TAKEN US. I UNDERSTAND IT'S THE FIRST TIME THAT AN RFP LIKE THIS HAS GONE OUT, SO IT'S VERY UNIQUE, BUT JUST DISAPPOINTED THAT, ONE, THE FUNDS HAVEN'T BEEN DISPERSED, AND, TWO, THAT WE WERE GIVEN MISINFORMATION THAT FUNDING WOULD BE EAR MARKED FOR THIS FUND. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE, AGAIN, THE NAMP FUNDING.

INFRASTRUCTURE CONTINUES TO BE A HUGE PRIORITY FOR DISTRICT FIVE RNTDS.

I HEARD CONSENSUS, I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO REVISIT POLICY AND POTENTIAL CARRY-FORWARD POLICY REGARDING THAT, BUT I WOULD LIKE ASSURANCES THAT DISTRICT FIVE CONSTITUENTS ARE GOING TO SEE THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS THAT THEY DESERVE.

IF WE CAN JUST GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT STAFF'S THINKING

REGARDING NAMP, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. >> WALSH: WELL, WE SENT OUT INFORMATION YESTERDAY. THERE WERE SOME UPDATES, THIS MORNING YOU HAD AT YOUR PLACE THE CURRENT BALANCES THAT WERE REQUESTED YESTERDAY. FRANKLY, I WAS GOING TO SEE WHAT THE COUNCIL WEIGHS IN ON. THIS ISN'T PART OF OUR MEMO THAT WE INCORPORATED ANYTHING IN. I THINK THERE WERE A NUMBER OF POLICY ISSUES THAT CAME UP YESTERDAY. I THINK IT'S CLEAR THAT -- THAT THERE ARE SOME DIST DISTRICTS EFFICIENTLY MOVING, I THINK THERE'S OTHER DISTRICTS THAT PULL TOGETHER MONEY OVER TIME TO DO SOMETHING LARGER.

I THINK EVERY DISTRICT DOES IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

I THINK IT'S CLEAR, THOUGH, THAT WE NEED TO ALLOCATE THAT MONEY TO PUT IT IN THE PRODUCTION. BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE MEMO THAT REFERS TO THE POLICY AND FRANKLY, WE PROVIDED YOU THE LATEST INFORMATION SO YOU ALL COULD CONTINUE TO WEIGH IN AND HAVE THAT

CONVERSATION TODAY. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

AND IN REGARDS TO THE ADDITIONAL 1% FOR CIVILIAN PAY, I UNDERSTAND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FOLLOW-UP CONVERSATION REGARDING THE CPS POLICY, AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD LOOK INTO WITH THE OFFSYSTEM SALES ON HOW WE CAN SUPPORT CITY EMPLOYEES WITH THE ADDITIONAL 1% COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT. BUT ULTIMATELY, THOSE ARE ALL MY COMMENTS. I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN FIND A RESOLUTION REGARDING NAMP, BECAUSE I KNOW MY CONSTITUENTS COUNT ON IT AND WE HAVE A

[00:20:04]

THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO. SO I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING AT THE TOP, BUT I DO THINK THE NAMP DISCUSSION DESERVES SOME CONVERSATION.

WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ACCURATE TO THE CENT AND DOLLAR FIGURE, ERIK, THERE'S BEEN REQUESTS THAT PROBABLY HAVEN'T BEEN TOTALLY VETTED OR SCHEDULED, BUT AS OF TODAY, WE'RE LOOKING AT A TOTAL NAMP BUDGET SURPLUS -- OR I'M SORRY, TOTAL NAMP BUDGET BALANCE OF $4.1 MILLION.

IN ADDITION, THE CIP PER DISTRICT, WHICH DIDN'T EXIST THREE YEARS AGO.

I THINK WE ADDED THAT THREE YEARS AGO. IS $11 MILLION.

THAT'S A TOTAL OF $15 MILLION THAT'S SITTING ON THE SHELF NOT IN PRODUCTION. SO I HAVE A HARD TIME THINKING WE SHOULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL $100,000 PER DISTRICT TO THAT BALANCE WHEN WE'VE ALREADY GOT $15 MILLION ON THE SHELF. NOTED, THERE ARE SOME DISTRICTS THAT HAVE ZERO, THAT ARE GOING TO NEED TO SCHEDULE SOME PROJECTS VERY SOON. KEEP IN MIND, WE'RE NOT TOUCHING THE CURRENT NAMP BUDGET. SO ON OCTOBER 1, EVERY SINGLE DISTRICT IS GOING TO GET AN ADDITIONAL $1 MILLION IN THE CIP PER DISTRICT, AND AN ADDITIONAL $550,000. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST ON THE NAMM IS THAT WE CONTINUE WITH STATUS QUO, LEAVE IT THERE, EVERYBODY'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO BUDGET ADDITIONAL PROJECTS EVEN IF THEY'RE AT ZERO WRIGHT NOW.

RIGHT NOW. LET'S HAVE A POLICY DISCUSSION ABOUT DISTRICTS THAT NEED MORE ARE GETTING MORE. CLEARLY THEY'RE NOT BEING SPENT DOWN IN EVERY SINGLE DISTRICT THE SAME WAY.

I WOULD URGE US TO TALK ABOUT AMENDMENTS, NOT TRY TO PULL -- OR MAKE ADDITIONAL CUTS SO WE CAN PUT MORE MONEY INTO A BALANCE THAT'S ALREADY AT $15 MILLION. LET'S HAVE A POLICY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT BEFORE WE -- DOING OTHER THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT THE SALINAS CLINIC GETS FUNDED NEXT YEAR, MAKING SURE THAT THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO THAT ARE URGENT, THAT CAN USE THAT MONEY IN PRODUCTION, CAN BE USED.

THAT'S MY SUGGESTION. >> WALSH: YEAH. AND MAYOR, I MEAN, I THINK -- I THINK, TO YOUR POINT -- SOME OF THESE, I KNOW SPECIFICS ABOUT.

DISTRICT ONE HAS A BIG PROJECT THAT YOU ARE WORKING THAT JUST HASN'T BEEN IMPLEMENTED YET. SO -- AND -- AND THERE'S BEEN MONEY THAT HAS BEEN PULLED TOGETHER. DISTRICT THREE, THERE'S A BIG PROJECT COMING.

AND SO PART OF THAT POLICY CONVERSATION IS THAT ONCE THERE'S EVEN AN INKLING, WE KIND OF KNOW -- I'M ASSUMING IT'S PROBABLY DIFFERENT BY DISTRICT, BUT JUST THOSE TWO EXAMPLES, I KNOW WHERE THAT MONEY'S GOING. WE OUGHT TO PULL IT AND PUT IT OVER THERE SO IT'S NOT THERE IN BALANCES. AND I THINK -- SO I THINK THERE'S SOME CLEANUP ON OUR END IN TERMS OF BALANCES. NOW, SOME OF THESE -- SOME OF THESE ARE PROBABLY AVAILABLE BALANCES, AND THERE'S THINGS THAT COME UP DURING THE YEAR, BUT I MEAN, AS SOON AS WE CAN IDENTIFY THE $200,000 OUT OF THE CIP IS GOING TO X, WE OUGHT TO EXECUTE THAT. IF YOU WANT TO GIVE ME THE AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE IT, WE'LL EXECUTE IT. MOVE IT OUT SO THE BALANCE IS CLEAN AND EVERYBODY UNDER UNDERSTANDS WHERE WE'RE SPENDING MONEY.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YEAH, I THINK THAT'S THE DISCUSSION WE NEED TO HAVE BEFORE WE, YOU KNOW, MESS WITH THE ADDITIONAL BALANCES.

THE OTHER THING IS, THERE WAS A CCR, I THINK FROM COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE, TO LOOK AT CONSTRUCTION CAPACITY IN THE COMMUNITY.

I MEAN, PART OF THE REASON WHY, AGAIN, I THINK THAT WE'RE -- SOME OF THESE PROJECTS ARE TAKING SO LONG IS THAT WE'VE GOT CONTRACTORS THAT ARE TRYING TO WORK MULTIPLE JOBS AND THEY ONLY HAVE SO MANY CREWS.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY PROJECTS CAN WE ACTUALLY LET THAT ARE OF THAT SIZE THAT CAN BE DONE EFFICIENTLY? SO THAT'S ANOTHER DATA POINT THAT I THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER, BUT -- JUST, AGAIN, NOBODY'S PROJECT IS GOING TO SIT SHELVED. WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE ADDITIONAL CUTS TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, PROJECTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT GET DONE AT THIS MOMENT BEFORE WE HAVE THAT POLICY DISCUSSION. COUNCILMEMBER ROCHA GARCIA?

>> GARCIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND I APPRECIATE THE MEMO PUT FORTH BY CITY STAFF. I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT WASN'T ACKNOWLEDGED WAS THE CONVERSATION ON THE CPS EXCESS REVENUE, RIGHT? AND SO -- BUT I KNOW EVERYBODY'S GOING TO BRING IT UP IN THEIR OWN WAY HERE. THE 1% CIVILIAN INCREASE, I STILL THINK THAT I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES. I THOUGHT THERE WAS CONSENSUS AS WELL TO HOW TO FIGURE THAT OUT. BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU MADE THE MATH WORK, SO THANK YOU, ERIK. I AM WORRIED THAT THE

[00:25:03]

AND THEN I HAD THE SAME QUESTION, SPECIFICALLY FOR THE REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE. HAVE WE HAD -- I KNOW WE HAVEN'T DONE MUCH AND WE HAVE AN RFP OUT, BUT HAVE WE COLLECTED DATA IN THE MEANTIME? DO WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT, LIKE -- LIKE IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE TO KIND OF SHOW WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING IN THE MEANTIME AS TO WHAT'S NEEDED AND SEE THE ALLOCATION OF UPSTREAM/DOWNSTREAM, ET

CETERA, DO YOU KNOW? >> WALSH: COUNCILWOMAN, I'VE NOT BEEN BRIEF ON THE SOLICITATION. THAT WILL PROBABLY HAPPEN BY END THE OF THE MONTH

IN ANTICIPATION OF THE MID OCTOBER BRIEFING. >> GARCIA: WONDERFUL.

A REMINDER, ALSO THE OTHER THING I SAW THAT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE MEMO WAS KIND OF THINKING ON HOW -- I KNOW WE HAD FOCUSED ON FUTURE RATE MITIGATION, AND I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT FIGURING THAT OUT A BIT, BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE NEW APPRAISAL PLAN THAT WILL AFFECT US.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I SAY IT AGAIN, THAT I THINK THAT SOME OF THAT FUNDING SHOULD BE USED PROBABLY TO HOLD OFF OR TO AT LEAST KIND OF PREPARE US FOR THE IMPACT IN '26, '27.

BUT THAT WAS IT. >> WALSH: AND WE NOTED THAT YESTERDAY, AND WE'LL MA UMAKE SURE WE'RE PREPARED FOR THAT WHEN WE COME BACK IN NOVEMBER FOR

THAT CPS CONVERSATION. >> GARCIA: GREAT. THANK YOU.

THOSE ARE MY ONLY COMMENTS. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER ROCHA GARCIA.

COUNCILMEMBER ALDARETE GAVITO? >> GAVITO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M GOING TO GO OVER MY LIST IN PRIORITY ORDER.

NAMP IS STILL THE TOP ONE, JUST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE JUST TALKING AND IT IS CONSTANTLY PLAYING TETRIS WITH PROJECTS THAT IMPACT PEOPLE'S DAILY LIVES. SO I THINK INCREASING OUR FUNDING WOULD BE HELPFUL AND HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT ON OUR RESIDENTS. I DO THINK THAT THE -- THIS SHEET WITH THE NAMP AND CIP BALANCES CAN BE A LITTLE BIT MISLEADING, BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE A NAMP BALANCE BUT WE ALSO HAVE PROJECTS SLATED THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TURNING IN ON THE 27TH. THE SECOND ONE -- PRIORITY -- I MEAN, IN GENERAL, THIS LIST LOOKS GREAT, BUT I KNOW WE HAVE TO MAKE DOLLARS AND CENTS WORK, SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE SEED FUNDING FOR THE CENTER FOR HEALTH EQUITY IN SOUTH TEXAS. THE UT HEALTH SA RICARDO SALINAS PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY, SENIORS IN PLAY FOR NUMBER FOUR, NUMBER FIVE, THE URBAN TREE CANOPY. THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH INCREASE, AND THEN THE EAST SIDE YOUTH CREATIVE CONTENT PROGRAM.

AND THAT'S ABOUT ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU -- >> WALSH: CAN I ASK A

QUICK QUESTION REAL QUICK? >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YES.

>> WALSH: I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO'S COMMENT ABILITY THE DENTAL CLINIC AND CESAR CHAVEZ AND KEEPING THOSE THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE. DOES -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING THAT MAYBE WE CAN ADJUST ONE TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE SECOND FOR THE -- THE SECOND YEAR FOR THE DENTAL CLINIC.

>>

COUNCILMEMBE R VIAGRAN? >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THANK YOU FOR THE MEMO, ERIK. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK. JUSTINA, ANOTHER EXCELLENT JOB AT THE NINTH HOUR. VERY GOOD. WELL DONE.

SO I LIKE ALL THE AMENDMENTS I SEE THERE. I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF REDUCING THE AMOUNT TO THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH ON THOSE YEARS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE UT HEALTH PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY CLINIC GETS FUNDED FOR TWO YEARS. AND ALSO IF WE NEED TO REDUCE IT A LITTLE MORE, TO MAKE SURE SOMETHING ELSE THAT MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES BRING FORWARD NEED TO DO THAT, BECAUSE FROM 100,000 TO 300,000, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE A PLAN FOR THOSE DOLLARS. AND AS WE HAVE DIFFERENT FESTIVALS AND ACTIVITIES, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CONTINUE TO FUNDRAISE. AND IF THIS IS A RESULT OF A LACK OF FUNDING COMING IN OR IS THIS -- I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE, BECAUSE THAT'S QUITE A BIG JUMP IN THE AMOUNT. I WAS THINKING WE'D JUST GET TO 100 TO 200,000,

[00:30:09]

ON THE CRISIS [INDISCERNIBLE] FEASIBILITY PROGRAM, I'M JUST REALLY INTERESTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT GETS ON A TIMELINE AND STARTS TO MOVE AS IT NEEDS TO, AND THAT WE'RE NOT WAITING VERY LONG FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT PROGRAM. AND I JUST WANT TO ECHO WHERE THE REPRODUCTIVE FUND THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, IS THAT IS MOVING A LITTLE TOO SLOW FOR ME, SO IF WE NEED -- THE REASON IT'S MOVING SLOW IS BECAUSE WE NEED MORE DOLLARS, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK -- TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. AND I THINK THESE OFFSYSTEM SALES -- AND I THINK YOU -- WE SAW A CONVERSATION YESTERDAY THAT OUR UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT IT WOULD MEET OUR -- THE BUDGET NEEDS, SO I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU, ERIK. HOW MUCH DID WE RAISE THE EMS RATE TO? BY HOW MUCH MONEY? AND HOW MUCH MONEY ARE WE GETTING FOR THAT WHEN WE

DID THAT? >> WALSH: IT'S INCREASING FROM 100 TO 1500.

>> VIAGRAN: SO ANNUALLY, WE'RE GETTING -- 5.2 MILLION.

SO I THINK, THEN, 5.2 MILLION OUT OF THE OFFSYSTEMS SALES SHOULD GO BACK INTO BUDGET. BECAUSE I THINK WE NEED TO -- WE HAVE MORE OF A NEED. AND HOW MUCH DID WE CUT FROM THE BUDGET IN TERMS OF STAFF AND THE OTHER CUTS THAT WE MADE IN REDUCTIONS?

>> TATE: OVER THE TWO YEARS, IT WAS 36-POINT --

>> VIAGRAN: YEAH. SO WHEN YOU COME TO ME AND SAY -- WHEN Y'ALL COME AND SAY, OH, BUT WE'RE GOING TO SAVE THIS OFFSYSTEM SALES FOR RATE MITIGATION, AND I HAVE -- WE'VE HAD TO CUT 36 MILLION, AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, I HAVE POSSIBLY THE -- WHAT TROY MENTIONED, IS THAT BCAD COMING AND OUR THINGS ARE GOING TO GET HOLD. WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE DOING. AND THEN I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING WHO'S GIVING US THIS ESTIMATE OF -- AND I GET THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO OVERSELL AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO MAKE 20 MILLION, AND THEN WE ONLY MAKE 10.

AND THEN WE'RE HAVING TO MAKE CUTS. BUT WHEN WE'RE CONSISTENTLY GETTING MORE DOLLARS AND WE HAVE, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT WE -- WE'RE FULLY WORKING WITH. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THAT CONVERSATION AND I LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING WHERE WE GOT -- HOW WE GOT TO THE POINT WHERE WHAT WE THINK WE NEED FOR THE CITY'S BUDGET AND WHAT WE DON'T NEED -- I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT HAVING THE NAMP BUDGET AND SEEING THE INCREASES THERE, BECAUSE I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE -- THERE ARE -- THERE ARE CAPACITY ISSUES, AND WE'RE NOT SEEING THE VENDORS COME OUT LIKE WE USED TO TO APPLY.

AND WE DO NEED TO LOOK AT HOW WE HANDLE JOB ORDER CONTRACTS BECAUSE WHEN MY COUNCILMEMBER TO THE LEFT OF ME AND MYSELF TELL YOU WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THESE SAME CONTRACTOR, WE NEED TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AND WE NEED TO BE HEARD. AND WE NEED TO CIAC SHUN TAKEN.

AND THEY MAY DO A GREAT JOB IN DISTRICTS TO THE NORTH SIDE, BUT THEY DIDN'T DO IT ON THE SOUTH SIDE. SO I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND POLICY CONVERSATIONS, BUT THAT IS ALL MY COMMENTS FOR THAT. AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN FIND THE NECESSARY FUNDS, WHETHER IT COMES FROM OFFSYSTEM SALES OR WHETHER WE DESIGNATE THE EMS DOLLARS WE'RE GOING TO GET FOR SENIOR TRANSPORTATION.

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

VIAGRAN. COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE? >> COURAGE: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO BE CERTAIN BY ASKING THE CITY MANAGER IN THE MEMO YOU SENT US, YOU LISTED TWO ADDITIONAL -- OR TWO RESOURCES WE COULD USE TO FUND THE 10 ITEMS THAT ARE ON THAT LIST AS WELL. ONE IS ARPA FUNDS, AVAILABLE BALANCE.

AND THE OTHER ONE IS 2.5 MILLION IN GENERAL FUND.

NOW, ARE WE SURE THAT THE ARPA FUNDS FALL INTO THE CATEGORIES HERE, OR ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE? BECAUSE I KNOW ARPA HAS CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS ON HOWMONEY CAN BE USED.

>> VILLAGOMEZ: YES, COUNCILMAN. SO THE ANSWER IS YES, WE CAN UTILIZE IT FOR THESE USES. THE ARPA BALANCE THAT WE

[00:35:03]

IT HAS MUCH MORE FLEXIBILITY THAN THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE

ACTUAL GRANT AWARD. >> COURAGE: OKAY. AND THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. AND SO, ERIK, YOU DON'T SEE ANY OTHER RESOURCES AT THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR THAT COULD BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY OF THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT AREN'T ON THE LIST, MAYBE

THEY WERE ON THE LIST YESTERDAY. >> WALSH: NO, NOT WITHOUT MAKING ADDITIONAL CUTS, REDUCTIONS AND SPENDING DOWN, COUNCILMAN.

I DO WANT TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THAT JUST BASED ON WHAT WE SENT OUT EARLIER TODAY, WE ARE STILL PROJECTING A TWO AND A HALF MILLION

DOLLARS DEFICIT FOR '26. >> COURAGE: YOU KNOW, AND THAT BRINGS UP A POINT THAT I THINK SOME OF US HAVE DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT, AND THAT IS WE WERE ORIGINALLY LOOKING AT A 30-SOMETHING MILLION DOLLARS DEFICIT FOR THIS YEAR. THAT WAS DISCUSSED BACK IN, I BELIEVE, APRIL OR SO, PROJECTION. WE'VE ACTUALLY MADE CUTS OF $36 MILLION AS JUSTINA JUST MENTIONED. AT THE SAME TIME, THOUGH, WE'RE LOOKING AT PROJECTIONS FOR NEXT YEAR FALLING FROM OVER 8 MILLION DOWN TO 2.5.

SO I'M WONDERING IF NEXT YEAR, WE SHOULDN'T BE AS WORRIED ABOUT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, BECAUSE WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE END OF THE YEAR. AND ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT SOMETIMES WE OVERESTIMATE, SOMETIMES WE UNDERESTIMATE, BUT THE NEEDS ARE ALWAYS THERE.

AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT NEITHER BECAUSE WE OVERESTIMATE OR UNDERESTIMATE, WE LEAVE NEEDS UNMET. SO THAT'S MY COMMENT ON THAT. I WILL ASK, ANDY, BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT USING THE MONEY FROM CPS, THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE FROM THEIR OFFSYSTEM SALES, TOMORROW THEORETICALLY, COULD SOMEBODY MAKE A MOTION TO USE THAT MONEY TO PAY SOME OF THESE EXPENSES OR TO SUPPORT SOME ADDITIONAL ASKS THAT THE COUNCIL MIGHT BRING FORWARD TOMORROW AT THE

COUNCIL MEETING? >> SEGOVIA: I'LL ASK [INDISCERNIBLE] HELP ON THAT, BECAUSE MY SENSE IS, COUNCILMAN, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE NUMBERS

ARE, THEREFORE WE CAN'T REALLY EAR MARK THEM ON. >> COURAGE: WELL, WE KNOW 30 MILLION RIGHT NOW IS PART OF THAT MONEY AND 10 MILLION IS PROJECTED TO GO BACK TO THE BUDGET FOR CPS FOR THEIR SHORTFALL, SO THAT'S 20 MILLION WE'RE PRETTY SURE OF. BUT MY QUESTION IS, CAN

WE MAKE THAT KIND OF. >> WALSH: YES. >> COURAGE: -- MOTION AT THE MEETING TOMORROW, OR WOULD IT BE OUT OF ORDER BECAUSE IT ISN'T ON THE

AGENDA, ET CETERA. >> SEGOVIA: IT DOES RELATE TO THE BUDGET, SO,

YES, COUNCILMAN. . >> COURAGE: OKAY.

THEN THAT'S MY QUESTION. I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO BE HAMPERED BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN TOLD, WELL, AS A POLICY WE APPROVED, AND I WOULD NOT WANT TO HEAR THAT, OH, WELL, WE CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE THERE'S A POLICY WE APPROVEDMENT BUT THE COUNCIL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CHANGE A POLICY FOR THE PURPOSES

OF BUDGET PURPOSES IF IT FELT NECESSARY, RIGHT? >> SEGOVIA: ABSOLUTELY,

THAT'S CORRECT, COUNCILMAN. >> COURAGE: OKAY.

AND I KNOW WE ALSO SAID THAT WE'RE LIKELY TO CONSIDER ANOTHER MEETING LATER ON, LOOKING AT THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT WILL BE COMING FROM CPS THAT WE WOULD BE ACCEPTING BASED ON HOW WELL THE REVENUE COMES IN FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST, WHICH HAS BEEN A PRETTY HOT MESS -- I MEAN, SEPTEMBER, EXCUSE ME. WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE ESTIMATE FROM AUGUST.

SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN KIND OF CONSIDER MAKING A COMMITMENT AS A COUNCIL TO REALLOCATE THAT ADDITIONAL FUNDING. WE ALREADY FIGURED IT ALL OUT FOR THE BUDGET AS OF TOMORROW, IF WE COME TO AN AGREEMENT, BUT THAT EXTRA WHATEVER IT IS, WHETHER IT'S 2 MILLION, 3 MILLION, 5 MILLION, THAT, I'M WONDERING IS -- IF IT'S SOMETHING WE COULD BRING UP IN ANOTHER MEETING, A FOLLOW-UP BUDGET SESSION, THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE, AS A COUNCIL, TO DECIDE, LET'S ALLOCATE THAT MONEY TO SOME OF THESE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE'VE SCRATCHED OFF THE LIST. SO DOES THAT SOUND

LEGAL? >> SEGOVIA: IT'S CERTAINLY LEGAL,

COUNCILMAN, YES. >> COURAGE: OKAY. I HAD AN ASK THAT I HAD TALKED TO THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT QUITE A WHILE AGO, AND WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE BUDGET SIX MONTHS AGO, WE WERE A LITTLE MORE OPTIMISTIC ABOUT IT. AND WE HAD A VERY SUCCESSFUL WEAPONS EXCHANGE PROGRAM LAST NOVEMBER, AND WE WERE HOPEFUL THAT THE CITY COULD BECOME A PARTNER IN DOING THAT THIS NEXT NOVEMBER, BECAUSE WE ARE SCHEDULING TO DO IT AGAIN. WE HAVE A PARTNERSHIP

[00:40:03]

WE -- SAN ANTONIO AREA FOUNDATION. 900 WEAPONS WERE TAKEN OUT OF PEOPLE'S HOMES THAT DIDN'T WANT THEM ANYMORE.

AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK I HEARD CHIEF SAY THERE'S BEEN A SLIGHT DECLINE IN VIOLENT CRIME. I'M NOT GOING TO TIE THOSE TWO VERY DIRECTLY, BUT I THINK THE MORE WEAPONS WE GET OUT OF PEOPLE'S HOMES THAT THEY NO LONGER WANT IN THEIR HOMES, THE SAFER PEOPLE ARE IN THEIR HOMES.

BUT BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH A TIGHT BUDGET PRESENTATION TODAY, I'M NOT GOING TO ASK THE COUNCIL TO GO AHEAD AND TRY AND ALLOCATE MONEY THAT WE DON'T SEEM TO HAVE HERE, BUT I WILL ASK THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER IF THEY CAN -- FROM SOME OF THEIR CARRY FORWARD, BECOME PARTNERS IN THIS PROGRAM SO WE CAN EXPAND IT THIS YEAR, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.

THAT'S ALL, MAYOR. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE. COUNCILMEMBER KAUR?

>> KAUR: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A POLICY DISCUSSION ON OUR FUNDS. I THINK THERE IS -- IF YOU LOOK AT IT, PEOPLE ARE USING DIFFERENT FUNDS FOR DIFFERENT THINGS.

AND LIKE YOU MENTIONED, WE'RE TRYING TO ABLE TO COUNT THEM AS QUICK BUILD AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WAITING ON RESPONSES BACK FOR HOW MUCH THINGS COST, BUT SOMETIMES FROM PUBLIC WORKS IT WILL TAKE US TWO MONTHS TO GET A COST ESTIMATE BACK ON A PROJECT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO DO ALL OF THIS ANALYSIS ON A CROSSWALK, WHETHER IT'S EVEN POSSIBLE OR NOT. SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING, SINCE, I THINK, FEBRUARY, ON TRYING TO GET A CROSSWALK OUTSIDE ALA.

A LOT OF THESE CHALLENGES COME UP, IT'S LIKE A BACK AND FORTH, AND THEN WE HAVE OUR PERSON AT PUBLIC -- I'M KIND OF RANTING RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M JUST SAYING I THINK WE NEED A POLICY DISCUSSION SO WE CAN SET SOME GUIDELINES ON WHEN WE GET THINGS BACK. BECAUSE FOR US, NAMP HAS BEEN SO EFFICIENT BECAUSE WE HAVE A DEADLINE FOR WHEN WE NEED TO GET PROJECTS QUOTED BY AND WE GET QUOTES RIGHT BACK WITHIN AN X AMOUNT OF TIME. CIP IS NOT THE SAME WAY, AND SO I THINK WE NEEDE AN OVERALL DISCUSSION ON WHAT'S WORKING ON OUR COUNCIL BUDGETS, IF WE CAN HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITIES TO DO DIFFERENT PILOTS.

EVEN THE EAST SIDE YOUTH CREATOR CONTENT PROGRAM OR THE PILOT THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WITH NEEDLES, ET CETERA, OR SOMETHING AT THE PARKS.

I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY OF WHAT WE CAN USE OUR FUNDING FOR IN GENERAL. IF WE HAVE AN IDEA THAT WE THINK WILL WORK FOR OUR DISTRICT, I KNOW THAT'S TRICKY, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY, BUT REGARDLESS, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT THAT ON THE SCHEDULE FOR A B SESSION IN -- SOON. I'LL JUST SAY SOON. THE ONLY OTHER COMMENTS THAT I HAD ABOUT THIS BUDGET WAS I DID SEE THAT WE GOT A MILLION DOLLARS FOR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU MENTIONED WE HAVE OVER EIGHT FOR MAJOR/MINOR HOME REHAB PROGRAMS AND I WAS TRYING TO PULL IN A LITTLE BIT BEFORE THIS CONVERSATION, BUT -- RELOCATION ASSISTANCE, BUT IS THAT -- IF THEY WERE TO GET A MILLION DOLLARS, WOULD THEY SAY THEY WANT IT FOR RELOCATION, OR COULD WE ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE TO ALSO ADD TO THE MAJOR/MINOR HOME REHAB PROGRAMS? THOSE PROGRAMS ARE JUST SO SUCCESSFUL, SO WANTED, AND SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE GETTING -- IF WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA FUNDING, THAT THEY'RE GETTING THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW OR IF WE

SHOULD -- WE PROBABLY SHOULD, SINCE... >> WALSH: DO YOU WANT TO PUT IT TOWARDS MINOR/MAJOR REHAB? ARE YOU SAYING TAKE A

PART OF THAT MILLION AND DO THAT? >> KAUR: I GUESS MY REQUEST WOULD BE TO PUT A MILLION AND A HALF TO NHSD AND ALLOW THEM TO SPLIT IT UP WITH -- BETWEEN RELOCATION AND MAJOR/MINOR HOME REHAB.

>> WALSH: OKAY. KAWRSZ SO THAT THEY CAN DECIDE.

YESTERDAY, THERE WAS A NUMBER, IT WAS LATER ON, IT WAS LOWER IN THE LIST THAT DIDN'T MAKE IT FOR MAJOR/MINOR HOME REHAB, AND WE GOT A MILLION FOR RELOCATION. BUT EVEN IF -- IF WE DON'T GET AN EXTRA 500K FOR THAT, I'D STILL THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THEM TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO DETERMINE WHAT THEY FEEL LIKE IS MOST IMPACTFUL FOR THOSE DOLLARS. AND THEN THE LAST THING I WANT TO ECHO THE COMMENTS AROUND THE REPRO JUSTICE FUN, I THINK IN JUNE ALL OF US KIND OF MENTIONED WE FELT THAT ONE HAD BEEN DRAGGING A LITTLE BIT AND ECHOING WHAT COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO AND COUNCILWOMAN ROCHA GARCIA ABOUT THE TIMING THERE.

IF WE WERE TO TAKE SOME FUNDS, WHICH I THINK COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ IS GOING TO PUSH FORWARD IF WE MOVE SOME FROM ANY OF THE ADDITIONAL ITEMS HERE, THAT WE SHOULD AT LEAST TRY TO ALLOCATE SOMETHING FOR FISCAL YEAR -- FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR. AND THEN THE LAST THING -- THE LAST QUESTION I HAD WAS, ARPA FUNDS HAVE TO BE, AS I UNDERSTAND, SPENT BY DECEMBER OF NEXT YEAR. SO ARE WE CONFIDENT THAT ALL OF THE THINGS THAT ARE ON THIS LIST RIGHT NOW FOR NEXT YEAR ARE

[00:45:04]

AND A HALF? OR IT'S 2.8, I GUESS. >> VILLAGOMEZ: YES, COUNCILWOMAN, WE THINK WE CAN -- WE'LL SPEND WITHIN THE TIME FRAME.

>> KAUR: SO THE LGC POSITIONS CAN BE USED FOR ARPA, OR ARE YOU GUYS GOING TO MOVE THINGS AROUND ON THE BACK END TO ESSENTIALLY --

>> VILLAGOMEZ: SO ARPA FUNDS CAN ONLY BE USED FOR ONE-TIME EXPENSES.

SO THE LGC POSITION WILL BE FUNDED OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND.

>> KAUR: SO THAT WOULD ONLY PUT 2.2 MILLION SPENT FOR 20 TWIEF SENT FOR ARP MA, SO ARE Y'ALL MOVING THINGS AROUND FOR THE GENERAL FUND? SO I GUESS IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER THEN, THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR THESE ITEMS? OKAY. OKAY.

SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS FOR NOW. THANKS, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER KAUR. WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO A SECOND ROUND --

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: OH, NO. MAN, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GETTING ANYWHERE, Y'ALL. I THINK A PART OF THE PLOT IS BEING MISSED THAT WE HAVE TO BE GIVING DIRECTION, AND THAT THERE HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF -- I'M NOT HEARING ANYTHING ON ANYTHING, AND SO EVERYTHING IS GOING TO REMAIN EXACTLY AS IT IS UNLESS WE START TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE.

I AM -- I'D BE SUPPORTIVE OF -- ONE REAL QUICK QUESTION FOR THE UTHEALTH, WITH THE DENTISTRY CLINIC, IS THAT AN OPERATIONAL COST OR IS

IT A CAPITAL -- WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE FUNDING? >> WALSH:

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: DOES ANYBODY WHO SUPPORTED IT OR PROPOSED IT, CAN

SOMEBODY ELSE ANSWER FOR ME. >>

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: OKAY. SO I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE AS WELL MOVING SOME OF THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH FROM 100K TO 200K, AND THAT WOULD FREE UP ABOUT $200,000, IF WE PUT 150,000 TOWARDS THE DEN TRIS TRI CLINIC FOR YEAR TWO, THEN THAT LEAVES ABOUT 50,000 LEFT. I'D BE INTERESTED IF THERE IS MORE MONEY TO EXPLORE MAYBE ADDING TO THE REPRO JUSTICE FUND OR ANYTHING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT IF $50,000 IS ALL WE'RE LEFT WITH, I WOULD SUPPORT ADDING IT TO YEAR 2 OF THE SENIORS IN PLAY, SO AN ADDITIONAL $50,000 FOR 2026 FOR SENIORS IN PLAY.

I'D ALSO BE INTERESTED IN -- WHAT ARE WE PLANNING TO DO WITH THE OFFSYSTEM SALES? WHERE IS IT GOING? I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE IDEAS, BUT I WANT TO HEAR WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IF WE DON'T AGREE ON

SOMETHING. >> WALSH: NOTHING. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: WE'RE

NOT DOING ANYTHING WITH THAT MONEY. >> WALSH: IT'S GOING TO HOLD UNTIL WE GET THE CLOSURE OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND WE'RE GOING TO COME -- SO WE'VE GOT -- THERE'S A CHECK THAT WE'LL RECEIVE, A PAYMENT WE'LL RECEIVE BY MID OCTOBER, COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL BEGINNING NOVEMBER WITH CPS, TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THIS IS -- THIS IS WHERE WE ENDED THE YEAR. THE COUNCIL POLICY CONVERSATION EARLIER IN THE YEAR -- WELL, BEGINNING LAST FALL, WAS TAKING SOME FUNDS AND REINVESTING THEM BACK INTO CPS FOR RATE MITIGATION PROJECTS.

THAT HAS TO HAPPEN, AND YOU ALL HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT DOES THAT MEAN. CPS IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE HERE TO BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN IF -- IF THERE ARE FUNDS AVAILABLE -- TBAWS THAT MONEY IS CITY'S MONEY. WE'RE SENDING IT BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND.

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: AND BASED ON WHAT I THINK WE LEARNED YESTERDAY, WE CANNOT USE IT FOR ANYTHING BUT CPS RATE MITIGATION?

>> WALSH: ACCORDING TO OUR CURRENT POLICY, THAT'S WHAT IT'S THERE FOR. THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T ASSUME.

WE BUILT THE BUDGET ON THAT. AS COUNCILMAN COURAGE ASKED ANDY A SECOND AGO, YOU GUYS WANT TO SPEND ALL THAT MONEY TOMORROW, YOU CAN MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO DO THAT. IT'S JUST NOT IN

ACCORDANCE WITH OUR POLICY. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THAT WAS EVERYTHING I NEEDED TO HEAR. I'M GOOD. SO I AM INTERESTED IN, AGAIN, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE'RE -- WE'VE ALL EXPRESSED SUPPORT OF, HISTORICALLY, INCLUDING MAJOR AND MINOR HOME REHAB, THE REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE FUND. I WOULD STILL LIKE FOR US TO EXPLORE, YOU KNOW, A BONUS FOR EMPLOYEES. I'M INTERESTED IN WHAT THAT WOULD COST FOR THE BREAKDOWN THAT I BROUGHT UP.

TRANSPORTATION FOR SENIORS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE FUNDED.

I'M NOT JUST TALKING TO YOU, I AM TALKING TO MY COLLEAGUES AND I'M HOPING

THAT SOMEONE SAYS SOMETHING OF RELEVANCE AND SUPPORT. >>

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: ARE YOU LISTENING, MY GOOD SIR? MY SIBLINGS IN CHRIST.

PLEASE! >> VIAGRAN: JALEN, YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: A MINUTE AND 15 SECONDS. AND THEN I ALSO WOULD BE

[00:50:05]

I'M INTERESTED IN HOW TOMORROW GOES AND HOW THE REST OF THIS CONVERSATION

GOES BUT I AM NOT IMPRESSED. THANK Y'ALL. >> VILLAGOMEZ: , COUNCILMAN, I WANTED TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ON THE CLINIC.

THE REQUEST IS FOR OPERATING EXPENSES, SUPPLIES, SPECIFICALLY.

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

COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE. COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN CAN CAN ROLL THE DICE.

COUNCILMEMBER ROCHA GARCIA. DID YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING?

>> WALSH: I WAS GOING TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REPORT WHAT I'M HEARING SO FAR, WHICH MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR THE COUNCIL. OKAY.

SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT WE'LL ADJUST FOR THE SECOND YEAR FOR THE DENTAL CLINIC.

ADJUST CESAR CHAVEZ TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. I THINK IT'S MAYBE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE SECOND-YEAR SENIORS AT PLAY. AND THEN TAKE THE REVISED EXPENSES THAT WE HAVE SET ASIDE FOR THE '26 DEFICIT AND TAKE THAT MILLION DOLLARS AND ADD NAMP. THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M HEARING SO FAR.

AND THAT IS BARRING ANY SORT OF OTHER REDUCTIONS, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF BIG ITEMS ON YESTERDAY'S AGENDA AND WE WILL NEED TO TURN TO REDUCTIONS.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING SO FAR, BASED ON THE FIRST ROUND OF COMMENTS ABOUT

ADJUSTMENTS WE COULD MAKE. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ERIK, EXPLAIN THAT LAST PART AGAIN. YOU'RE TAKING FROM LINE 10. WHAT IS THAT?

>> WALSH: IF YOU LOOK AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT SHEET, WE'RE KIND OF KEEPING A RUNNING COUNT FOR THE COUNCIL. THERE'S $1,029,000 BECAUSE

WE STILL NEED TO SOLVE FOR THE '26 -- >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THAT'S

A CONTRIBUTION TO THE DEFICIT NEXT YEAR. >> WALSH: WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SOLVE THAT IN THE FALL ANYWAY BUT WHAT I'M HEARING FROM COUNCIL SO FAR TODAY IS THAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR MORE NAMP DOLLARS.

I AGREE. WE NEED TO HAVE THAT POLICY CONVERSATION BECAUSE THAT MONEY SHOULD BE SPENT IN ONE YEAR AND THEN GONE. LIKE EVERY --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: AGAIN, I HATE TO BE THE ONLY PERSON SAYING THIS BUT CLEARLY THAT'S NOT HAPPENING. AND UNTIL THE POLICY CHANGES, IT'S STILL GOING TO

BE ACCUMULATING A BALANCE. >> WALSH: WELL, I DON'T WANT TO ARGUE WITH YOU, MAYOR, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU. I GUESS WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS IF WE DO THAT, THEN WE SPEND, ON NAMP -- CAPITAL IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED, AS COUNCILWOMAN KAUR TALKED ABOUT.

NAMP, WE SPEND FOR THE YEAR AND WHATEVER IS NOT SPENT FALLS BACK INTO THE FUND BALANCE, LIKE EVERY OTHER DEPARTMENT. IT'S OPERATING DOLLARS THAT WE'RE TYING UP. BUT WE MADE SOME ADJUSTMENTS THIS YEAR ON NAMP PROCESSES.

IF WE NEED TO MAKE MORE, THEN WE'LL DO THAT. BUT IF WE DO THAT AT THE END OF FISCAL YEAR '25 WE WON'T HAVE ANY MORE NAMP BALANCES ROLLING FORWARD.

THE OPERATING DOLLARS ARE NOT THE APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR US TO BUNDLE UP AND BUILD BALANCES. ON CAPITAL IT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

THEY ARE LONGER TERM. THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN IS BUNDLING UP CAPITAL DOLLARS FOR SOME BOND PROJECTS.

COUNCILWOMAN KAUR IS BUNDLING UP FOR THE D1 FIELD OFFICE AND THE LIBRARY AND

ADVANCE JACKSON, THAT WHOLE AREA . >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YOU'RE

JUST TALKING ABOUT CIP. >> WALSH: I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT NAMP.

WE SPEND EVERYTHING FOR THE YEAR AND WE START SQUARE. THAT WAY WE MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS OUT IN PRODUCTION. IF WE'VE GOT TO REORIENT

INTERNALLY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT, WE DO THAT. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

>>

COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE. >> COURAGE: ERIK, ALL OF THE REVISIONS YOU'VE BEEN HEARING THAT YOU JUST COMMENTED ON ARE BASICALLY GOING TO COUNCILMEMBER OUT

OF THAT $1,029,700. >> WALSH: YES, SIR . AND WE WILL HAVE THAT '26

[00:55:08]

NUMBER WOULD GO UP TO $3.5 MILLION. >> COURAGE: I DIDN'T HEAR, COUNCILMAN. I WANTED TO ASK WHERE THAT MONEY WAS COMING FROM.

I UNDERSTAND NOW. >> OTHER THINGS MENTIONED BY SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS BUT I PRESUME YOU'RE LISTENING TO NOT JUST A COUNCIL MEMBER OR TWO. YOU TRY TO HEAR IF THERE'S A CONSENSUS ON SOME OF THESE THINGS TO HAVE AN IDEA OF THE DIRECTION WE MAY WANT

YOU TO GO IN. IS THAT RIGHT? >> WALSH: I TRY REAL HARD,

COUNCILMAN. >> COURAGE: SO ONE OR TWO OR THREE PEOPLE SAYING SOMETHING MAY OR MAY NOT BE A CONSENSUS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR YOU TO MAYBE REACH OUT AND FIND OUT DO WE AGREE WITH WHAT THESE THINGS ARE AND IF THERE'S SEEMS TO BE A CONSENSUS THEN I WOULD PRESUME YOU WOULD MOVE FORWARD TO HAVE THEM PREPARED FOR TOMORROW. BUT IF IT'S ONLY ONE OR TWO

OR THREE PEOPLE -- >> SEGOVIA: IF I MAY, COUNCILMAN.

CONSENSUS IS A MATTER SOMETIMES OF SUBJECTIVITY. WE ARE NOT COUNTING VOTES.

WE'RE NOT COUNTING VOTES. SOMETIMES IT'S SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS MAKING COMMENTS AND THAT'S WHAT ERIK IS TRYING TO DO. BASED ON THE COMMENTS HE'S HEARING. WE'RE NOT COUNTING. HE'S TRYING TO GET SOME SORT

OF CONSENSUS. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I'LL ALSO SAY IT'S A MATTER OF COUNCIL DISCUSSION. ULTIMATELY WE'RE ASKING ERIK TO MAKE HIS PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATION TO US AS A BODY. IT COULD BE ONE PERSON, TWO PEOPLE. IF IT'S AN IMPORTANT THING IN HIS PROFESSIONAL

RECOMMENDATION, HE'S GOING TO MAKE IT TO US. >> WALSH: COUNCILMAN, THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO GIVE YOU THE MID-MEETING WHAT I'M HEARING SO YOU CAN REACT I'M HEARING SO FAR. NOT EVERYBODY TALKED ABOUT IT BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO

LISTEN. >> COURAGE: OKAY. WELL, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE GETTING ENOUGH INPUT TO MAKE THE KIND OF DECISION THAT CAN BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL TOMORROW. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE. I WILL COME BACK AROUND.

COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE. >> WHYTE: WELL, MAYOR, HAPPY TO TALK AGAIN.

LISTEN, I THINK, YOU KNOW, COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ PUSHING FOR CHANGES AND STAFF'S COME UP WITH I THINK AS GOOD A PLAN AS POSSIBLE FROM WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT YESTERDAY. I HAVEN'T HEARD, AS HE STATED, ANY CONSENSUS ON DOING ANYTHING DIFFERENT WITH THIS PLAN OTHER THAN POTENTIALLY -- I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY FOLKS I HEARD TALK ABOUT ADDING NAMP DOLLARS. SO, AGAIN, I THINK NOBODY'S EVER GOING TO BE COMPLETELY THRILLED WITH EVERYTHING IN THE BUDGET, CERTAINLY.

BUT I THINK ERIK AND HIS TEAM HAVE DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF COMING UP WITH WHAT THE CONSENSUS WAS BASED ON OUR CONVERSATION YESTERDAY. REGARDING THE OFF-SYSTEM CPS SALES THAT I THINK HAS TO BE ADDRESSED NOW THAT IT'S COME UP THREE OR FOUR TIMES TODAY, I'M GOING TO AGAIN SAY THAT THIS COUNCIL NEEDS TO HAVE A BIG-PICTURE, LONG-TERM VIEW OF WHAT IT IS WE WANT TO DO HERE. AND I'LL REMIND EVERYBODY AGAIN OF THE 6-5 VOTE THAT WE HAD BACK IN NOVEMBER THAT REALLY -- YOU KNOW, THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT WHAT STARTED. WE HAD A PROPOSAL FROM COUNCILWOMAN HAVRDA TO LOOK AT HOW WE WERE DOING THINGS WITH RESPECT TO CPS. WE HAD A 6-5 VOTE ON THE RATE HIKE AND I THINK MANY OF US FELT THAT IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO CONTINUE RAISING RATES ON OUR CITIZENS. WE'VE DONE IT TWICE NOW IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. AND SO WE CAME UP WITH A POLICY EARLIER THIS YEAR THAT I THINK WAS A REALLY GOOD ONE. TO REINVEST IN OUR UTILITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF MITIGATING THESE FUTURE RATE HIKES.

AND, YES, WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE RATE HIKES IN THE FUTURE. BECAUSE SURELY THERE WILL BE AT SOME POINT.

BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY HELP OFFSET THE AMOUNT OF THOSE RATE HIKES BY REINVESTING IN THE UTILITY. TO COME UP WITH THE POLICY IN THE SPRING OF THIS YEAR AND THEN GET INTO OUR VERY FIRST BUDGET SEASON KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING TO

[01:00:01]

A LACK OF SELF-CONTROL. AND I THINK WE REALLY, REALLY NEED TO THINK HARD BEFORE SOMEBODY GETS UP ON THE DAIS TOMORROW AND PROPOSES THROWING THE POLICY OUT TO SPEND MORE MONEY ON WHATEVER THE IDEA IS. I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

THANKS, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE.

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

I WANTED TO RUN THROUGH A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT THE DENTAL CLINIC IS REQUESTING. THESE RANGE FROM SURGICAL HAND PIECES, STAINLESS STEEL CROWN REFILLS FOR MOLARS AND IT GOES THROUGH THE TEETH THEY WORK TOWARDS FIXING WITH OUR KIDS. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE COVERED WITH THE FUNDING. I'M PLEASED TO HERE IN ERIK'S SUMMARY OF WHAT HE HEARD IS TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THAT.

AND I WANT TO EMPHASIZE ONE THING, RIGHT? I THINK CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED. I DON'T THINK CITY STAFF OR COUNCIL ANTICIPATED THE PROPOSED CHANGES WITH THE BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT AND I THINK THAT MEANS WE HAVE TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND REEVALUATE THE POLICY THAT WE DID RECENTLY APPROVE, BUT CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A DEFICIT, I THINK WE NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE ARE RETURNING MONEY TO CPS ENERGY SO IT'S SOMEWHAT OF A MANUFACTURED DEFICIT BECAUSE WE'RE RETURNING MONEY THAT TYPICALLY WOULD GO TO THE CITY'S COFFERS. SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE WE EMPHASIZE THAT POINT. I KNOW WHAT I HEAR FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

THEY ASK QUESTIONS AROUND THE POTENTIAL CUTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BE MAKING AND PROPOSED DEFICITS. BUT I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THIS IS A POLICY THAT, YES, THIS COUNCIL APPROVED BUT CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED SO WE SHOULD REANALYZE OUR POSITION ON HOW WE CAN ENSURE THAT SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS CONTINUE TO HAVE THE INVESTMENTS THAT THEY REQUEST AND THAT THEY PAY FOR THROUGH THEIR TAXES AND

THROUGH THEIR UTILITY BILLS. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK

YOU, COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO. COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN. >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANTED TO KIND OF ECHO COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ'S --S IN PLAY, IF THEY'RE GETTING ONLY $50,000 BECAUSE THEY CAN APPLY AS A DELEGATE AGENCY IN THE NEXT ROUND WITH MELODY AND DHSD, THAT'S FINE.

I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WOULD ONLY BE GETTING THAT 50. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF WE COULD MOVE SOME OF THE MONEY FROM THE CESAR CHAVEZ MARCH TO THE REPRODUCTIVE FUND OR TO SENIORS IN PLAY, DEPENDING ON THAT. OR JUST, YOU KNOW, DIVIDE THAT UP INTO TWO SEPARATE YEARS FOR CESAR CHAVEZ. I DO WANT TO TAKE A SECOND, BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION AND YOU KNOW THIS CONVERSATION STARTED WELL BEFORE I KNOW SOME OF YOU WERE ON THE DAIS. EVEN WELL BEFORE I WAS ON THE DAIS. ABOUT WHAT WE DO WITH THESE OVERAGES.

IT WAS $50 MILLION THAT WE HAD THE LARGE DISCUSSION ON. AND I THINK THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH BUT WE REALLY JUST WANTED TO SEE IT OVER AND DONE WITH.

AND SO THAT WAS A CLOSE VOTE BUT WE SAW IT MOVE THE WAY IT WAS AND THEN WE CAME WITH THIS POLICY. AND THEN YOU HAVE TO BE SUBJECT TO SURPRISES AND THINGS CHANGE. AND WE WENT INTO A NEGOTIATION WITH THE FIRE AND WE SAW WHAT THE BEXAR APPRAISAL DISTRICT IS DOING AND WE FIND THERE'S A LOT OF NEED WITHIN OUR NONPROFITS. SO THINGS CHANGE AND THIS ISN'T OUR FIRST BUDGET.

THIS IS -- SOME OF US THIS IS THEIR EIGHTH BUDGET. SOME OF US, THIS IS THEIR TWELFTH BUDGET. SO THIS IS WHAT WE DO AT THIS POINT.

AND I THINK WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO ADDRESS AND WHY I'M ALL FOR LOOKING AT THE OFF-SYSTEM SALES FOR OTHER THINGS IS WE DO NEED TO ADDRESS OUR CITY EMPLOYEES.

WE'VE GIVEN THEM 4% IN THE PAST AND SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE IDEAS ABOUT LOOKING AT DIFFERENT WAGES. BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE 4% ACROSS THE BOARD FOR MORALE FOR THE FACT WE KNOW WE HAVE ISSUES KEEPING STAFF. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NAMP AND

[01:05:10]

I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS UNREASONABLE AND I THINK IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF WHAT MOVES THIS CITY FORWARD BECAUSE I THINK OUR RESIDENTS WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR GARBAGE TRUCKS GET PICKED UP ON TIME. THAT CODE OFFICERS CAN MAKE IT OUT TO THE FIELD. AND THAT ACS OFFICERS ARE GETTING HIRED.

AND RIGHT NOW WE NEED TO RETAIN THE EMPLOYEES WE HAVE.

AND I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GOOD MOVE FOR IT. SO WE CAN HAVE THIS CONVERSATION LATER ON AND MAYBE WE CAN GIVE IT MID-YEAR OR AT LEAST INCORPORATE IT FOR 2026. BUT WE NEED TO START HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS AND DEALING WITH THE REALITY WE FACE. WE FACE SOME BUDGET CRISIS.

YOU GUYS HAVE DONE AN INCREDIBLE JOB THIS YEAR. I APPLAUD YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU BROUGHT FORWARD THIS YEAR BUT THERE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO DO -- AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE MEET EARLIER THAN APRIL BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE A VERY EARLY TIME TO MEET. BUT WE DO NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB WITH OUR PROJECTIONS THAT ARE COMING FROM CPS. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN. COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE

GAVITO. >> GAVITO: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

JUST REALLY QUICK. ERIK, I HAD WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU WERE AWARE THE PRIORITY I MENTIONED THE FIRST TIME AROUND. THAT WAS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WOULD STILL PUSH A MILLION DOLLARS-PLUS TOWARDS NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET DEFICIT. I THINK WE ALL NEED TO BE PRUDENT AND THINK ABOUT THAT. BECAUSE, IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO BE SCRAMBLING AND I DON'T THINK -- WE ALL HAVE WISH LISTS BUT WE NEED TO BE RESPONSIBLE.

SO I STILL DEFINITELY WANT US TO PUSH A MILLION-PLUS TOWARDS NEXT YEAR'S DEFICIT.

AND THE PRIORITIES ARE STILL THE SAME AS I MENTIONED THE FIRST ROUND.

THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO. COUNCILMEMBER -- WELL, NOW WE'RE INTO A THIRD ROUND, IF ANYBODY NEEDS IT. WHICH I THINK WE OUGHT TO

TAKE. COUNCILMEMBER ROCHA GARCIA. >> GARCIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND I HAD PLUGGED IN EARLIER BEFORE ERIK'S RECAP.

SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE MOVES AS HE WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH THE CESAR CHAVEZ AND THE DENTISTRY CLINIC. AND SO AND JUST TO REITERATE COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO'S POINT, I APPRECIATE THAT MY COLLEAGUES UNDERSTAND THAT OUR FINANCIAL POSITION HAS CHANGED FROM A YEAR OR SO AGO AND THAT WE JUST HAVE TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING, RIGHT? I JUST WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR WANTING TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

ANYBODY ELSE? WITH RESPECT TO THE ANTICIPATED DISCUSSION ABOUT REVENUES AND IT ALSO RELATES AGAIN TO HOW WE'RE BUDGETING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, INCLUDING BY DISTRICT. THERE'S TWO THINGS. ONE, THE MORE WE CONTINUE TO CUT UP OUR BUDGET BY TEN MOVES US FARTHER AND FARTHROM TY PRINCIPLES THAT WE ADOPTED OUR FIRST BUDGET ON. CLEARLY THERE ARE DISTRICTS THAT NEED MORE THAN OTHERS IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE BUDGET. AND WE SHOULD BE ADDRESSING THOSE NEEDS HOLISTICALLY AS A CITY, NOT AS A, YOU KNOW, DISTINCT COUNCIL DISTRICTS.

IF WE HAVE A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET IN INFRASTRUCTURE YET A DISTRICT CAN'T COMPLETE A SIDEWALK PROJECT, THERE'S A PROBLEM AND WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT. AND WE CAN'T ADDRESS THAT IF WE'RE USING OUR FOCUS AND FRAMEWORK ON EQUITY. THIS IS RELATED TO THE NAMP CONVERSATION .

THE SECOND ONE IS -- I'LL AGAIN PUT IT OUT THERE. WE'RE NOT HAVING THE DISCUSSION YET BUT IF IT DOES COME UP TOMORROW, I DO NEED TO SAY WE ARE IN A DIFFERENT FISCAL POSITION, LIKELY AS A RESULT OF THE ACTION THAT BCAD TOOK.

[01:10:04]

THE CPS BILLS FALL HARDEST ON THOSE WHO ARE OF LOWER INCOME.

IF OUR REVENUE CONTINUES TO SHIFT MORE TOWARDS CPS REVENUES TO DO BASIC SERVICES AND LESS FROM PROPERTY TAX, WE ARE PUSHING MORE OF THE BURDEN TO DO BASIC SERVICES ON TO LOWER-INCOME RESIDENTS OF THIS COMMUNITY SO WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT DOING THAT. SO AS IT RELATES TO THE POLICY THAT WE PASSED LAST YEAR, I STAND BY IT. I THINK IT'S A GOOD POLICY.

WHEN WE HAVE DON'T PAY, WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO A SURPLUS HERE, WE'VE ADOPTED THE POLICY TO HELP BRING DOWN RATES BY CONTRIBUTING TO CPS'S CAPITAL RESERVE.

CPS'S NEEDS ARE NOT GOING TO AWAY. THEY NEED TRANSMISSION.

THEY NEED GENERATING CAPACITY. THEY NEED TO ACCOMMODATE GROWTH AND MAINTENANCE. WE ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE COSTS THROUGH THESE OFF-SYSTEM SALES IF WE STICK TO THE POLICY. THAT WILL HELP MITIGATE RATES. IT WON'T MAKE RATE INCREASES GO AWAY BUT IT WILL HELP SLOW THEM DOWN, EVEN JUST A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT CONTRIBUTES TO THAT CAPITAL THAT'S NEEDED TO DO ALL THOSE THINGS. IF WE GET AWAY FROM THAT POLICY, WE'RE SHIFTING THE BURDEN AGAIN MORE ON RESIDENTS WHO ARE, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO PAY A HIGH ENERGY BILL EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE LESS INCOME TO DO IT.

SO, AGAIN, THAT'S MY TWO CENTS. JUST A WORD OF CAUTION.

I WILL OPPOSE ANY DRAMATIC USE OR CHANGE IN OUR POLICY TOMORROW ON THE DAIS BECAUSE I THINK WE NEED TO STICK TO IT. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, ERIK YOU'RE RECOUNTING OF THE CONVERSATION TODAY IN MY VIEW IS PRETTY ACCURATE.

I DON'T THINK EVERYBODY IS AGREEING ON EVERYTHING BUT I THINK IT'S PRETTY ACCURATE.

I LIKE THE LIST YOU PUT OUT LAST NIGHT. IF IT CAME IN AS WRITTEN, I'M FINE WITH THAT WITH THESE MINOR ADJUSTMENTS INCLUDING KEEPING THE SALINAS CLINIC FUNDED FOR THE SECOND YEAR. I CERTAINLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. JUST MY TWO CENTS. NOW, ANYBODY ELSE, BEFORE I GIVE IT BACK TO ERIK TO WRAP IT UP AND MAKE ANY CLOSING COMMENTS?

>> TO HAVE ABOUT POLICY, REGARDLESS ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE.

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: SO THEN THE QUESTION IS -- BECAUSE WHAT I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IS IF WE'RE GOING TO ADD THE MILLION DOLLARS FOR NAMP DOLLARS, ARE WE GOING TO KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO BE DISTRIBUTED EVENLY OR EQUITABLY TOMORROW OR ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL A CERTAIN POINT LATER ON IN THE YEAR --

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: IF WE ADD DOLLARS TO THE NAMP TODAY, THE POLICY IS WHAT IT IS. IT WILL BE A $650,000 NAMP BUDGET FOR '25 AND YOU WILL STILL HAVE THE BUDGET, THE BALANCES YOU HAVE THIS YEAR. WE HAVE NOT HAD THAT POLICY DISCUSSION YET. SO, AGAIN, MY SUGGESTION IS -- ESPECIALLY IF WE WANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEFICIT FOR NEXT YEAR, KEEP THAT LINE 10 THE SAME, WOULD BE KEEP STATUS QUO, LET'S HAVE THE POLICY DISCUSSION ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, COUNCILMAN. EVERYONE WILL BE FUNDED. NO PROJECTS WILL SIT UNDONE.

WE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, IF WE WANTED TO PULL BACK THOSE FUNDS GOING TO THE DEFICIT AFTER WE HAVE THE POLICY DISCUSSION. BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE PREMATURE TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW BEFORE WE HAVE THAT DISCUSSION ABOUT EQUITY

VERSUS PROPORTIONALITY. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: A QUESTION WOULD BE CIP AN

NAMP BOTH COME FROM THE GENERAL FUND, RIGHT? >> WALSH: NAMP DOES.

CIP COMES FROM OUR CAPITAL BUDGET. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: IF SOMEONE HAS A BUNCH OF MONEY IN NAMP AND THEY WANT TO FUND SOMETHING ELSE, COULD THEY TOMORROW OR SOME LATER POINT ASK THAT IT BE MOVED FROM THEIR NAMP BUDGET TOWARDS A DIFFERENT PROJECT? SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF COUNCILMAN COURAGE WANTS TO PUT MORE MONEY TOWARDS HIS WEAPON BUYBACK PROGRAM AND HE HAS A BALANCE OF $405,000 IN NAMP. HE THEN CAN SAY I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE MY CARRY FORWARD TO THAT AND START FRESH WITH MY NAMP BALANCE. IS THAT SOMETHING HE COULD DO? I'M USING THAT AS A HYPOTHETICAL.

>> WALSH: TECHNICALLY -- WELL, THESE DOLLARS THAT ARE AVAILABLE ARE PRIOR-YEAR COMMITMENTS. I GUESS PRESUMABLY A COUNCILPERSON COULD TAKE THE $550,000 IN THEIR '25 PROPOSED BUDGET AND DO SOMETHING ELSE LIKE THAT.

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: GOTCHA. SO KEEP THE MONEY IN THE

[01:15:03]

>> WALSH: THAT OLDER MONEY ON THE TOP PART OF THAT SHEET, THAT MONEY IS -- DEPENDING ON THE DISTRICT FROM 21-$23. THEY ARE ALL OLD DOLLARS THAT HAVE BEEN CARRIED FORWARD. I'LL EVEN GO SO FAR, IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT TO NAMP TOMORROW IN TERMS OF AN EQUAL DISTRIBUTION , THAT PART OF THAT POLICY CONVERSATION IS WE SPEND ALL THAT MONEY

EVERY YEAR, THAT OPERATING MONEY, THAT NAMP BALANCE. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I GUESS I'M JUST LOOKING FOR A SIMPLE YES OR NO OF WHAT'S POSSIBLE TOMORROW.

>> WALSH: IF YOU WANT TO REDUCE NAMP AND DO SOMETHING ELSE --

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M ASKING. SAY I AM LOOKING AT MY BALANCE RIGHT NOW. IF I WANTED TO EITHER TAKE --

>> WALSH: YOU CAN DO IT IN THE BLUE PORTION. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: SO SOMEONE CAN DO THAT AND THEY WILL STILL HAVE THEIR REMAINING BALANCE FROM

WHATEVER THEY HAVE AS OF RIGHT NOW. >> WALSH: YES.

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THAT'S AN OPTION FOR FOLK. JUST WANTED TO PRESENT THAT.

IT DOES LOOK LIKE A LOT OF FOLK USE NAMP AT HEAVIER RATES THAN CIP.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH CARRY FORWARD, MAYBE PEOPLE HAD A BUNCH AND HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SPEND IT DOWN. SOMETHING I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO IS USE NAMP DOLLARS -- BECAUSE I HAD A BUNCH OF NAMP DOLLARS CARRY FORWARD FROM PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEMBERS. I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO USE THAT TO SUPPLEMENT CIP PROJECTS.

I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO USE CIP FOR NAMP. IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED IN THAT

SOME SEEDS. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YEAH.

WE'RE IN A THIRD ROUND. COUNCILMEMBER KAUR. >> KAUR: QUICK QUESTION.

ON CIP, BECAUSE IT COMES FROM THE CAPITAL BUDGET. WOULD WE HAVE TO GET FLEXIBILITY FOR CIP? IS THAT -- WOULD THERE BE A DIFFERENT REQUEST THAT WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE TO BE ABLE TO LOOSEN UP CIP FUNDS? BECAUSE IT'S FROM THE

CAPITAL BUDGET. >> WALSH: YES, MA'AM. SOME OF THE EXAMPLES YOU GAVE IN ONE OF YOUR EARLIER ROUNDS. WE COULDN'T USE CAPITAL

FUNDS. >> KAUR: WE WOULD HAVE TO CREATE A POLICY CHANGE.

>> WALSH: YOU CAN'T SPEND THAT MONEY ON THOSE THINGS. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE.

IT'S AN OPERATING EXPENSE. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER KAUR.

ANYTHING ELSE? COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE. >> COURAGE: YEAH, ERIK, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT IN THE PAST ABOUT TAKING A LOOK AT THE RESTRICTIONS ON HOW THE MONEY'S SUPPOSED TO BE USED AND TRYING TO DEVELOP SOME MORE FLEXIBILITY. I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT IT WITH CCPF MONEY AND I THINK THE SAME RE-LOOK AT NAMP AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DOLLARS THAT WE GET NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED SO THAT WE DO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY OF TAKING ON ADDITIONAL PROJECTS THAT MAY CROSS THE LINE A LITTLE BIT BUT ARE STILL GENERALLY SIMILAR IN NATURE TO DOING THINGS THAT WE NEED TO GET DONE. FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE'RE DOING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND IT'S GOING TO COST MORE THAN WE HAVE BUT THERE'S MONEY IN NAMP THAT CAN LET US GET IT DONE, WE WANT TO KNOW IF WE CAN

CREATE THAT KIND OF FLEXIBILITY IN THE FUTURE. >> WALSH: THAT TYPE OF EXAMPLE IS ALLOWABLE. THAT WOULD GET PROJECTS MOVING ALONG.

WE LOOSENED UP THOSE NAMP REQUIREMENTS OR PROCESSES THIS YEAR.

IF WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT -- NAMP IS OPERATING DOLLARS.

WE HAVE GOT TO PUT IT IN PRODUCTION. IF WE DON'T, HISTORICALLY BALANCES BUILD UP AND WE DON'T LET THE DEPARTMENTS DO THAT AND I THINK WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THAT INTO PRODUCTION A LOT FASTER.

YOU ALL HAVE A NUMBER OF PROJECTS AND PRIORITIES THAT COME UP DURING THE YEAR.

THE ONE THING THAT I'LL SAY -- AND WE'LL BE PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT THIS WHEN WE HAVE THE POLICY CONVERSATION --T DOING, YOU KNOW, SMALL DOLLAR PROJECTS SOMETIMES IS ALMOST AS TIME CONSUMING AS DOING THE LARGER ONES. SO WE WANT TO BE IMPACTFUL.

AND I THINK A LOT OF YOU ARE DEALING WITH THAT. OBVIOUSLY SOME OFFICES ARE VERY GOOD AT PRODUCING AND GETTING THOSE THINGS OUT THE DOOR WITH THE STAFF.

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

>> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. A COUPLE OF THINGS.

I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR A POLICY CONVERSATION REGARDING NAMP DOLLARS.

WHILE I SEE THERE ARE SOME BALANCES I TRUST MY COLLEAGUES ARE WORKING WITH THEIR CONSTITUENCY TO IDENTIFY THOSE PROJECTS TO SUBMIT FOR THE UPCOMING DEADLINE. I'M A BIT FRUSTRATED IN THAT I HAVE HEARD CONSENSUS TO SUPPORT THE INVESTMENT IN NAMP. AND WITH DISTRICT 5 IN PARTICULAR, WE RECENTLY GREW WITH REDISTRICTING AND INCORPORATED AN AREA WITH A

[01:20:05]

THIS IS A NEW SCHOOL IN OUR DISTRICT AND THERE'S AN URGENCY FOR THESE NAMP DOLLARS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A BALANCE AND MONEY THAT CAN AND SHOULD BE SPENT BUT ULTIMATELY D5 RESIDENTS GET THE SHORT END BY HAVING TO WAIT. AND THAT'S MY FRUSTRATION AND I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO

WORK THROUGH IT BUT WE'RE TIRED OF WAITING. >> WALSH: COUNCILWOMAN, I'M ASSUMING YOUR COMMENTS ARE DIRECT TO YOUR COLLEAGUES BECAUSE Y'ALL DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE THAT POLICY CONVERSATION.

I'M LOOKING TO HOW WE BALANCE THE BUDGET TOMORROW. THAT'S A CONVERSATION AMONGST YOU ALL ABOUT THAT ISSUE. THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY PART OF THE BUDGET AMENDMENT. THAT'S PART OF THE COUNCIL'S DISCRETION.

>> CASTILLO: AND MY CHALLENGE TO THAT IS I'VE HEARD CONSENSUS, RIGHT? SO I UNDERSTAND AROUND NAMP AND THE APPETITE TO INCREASE IT.

AND THAT'S NOT BEING REFLECTED, RIGHT? SO THAT'S --

>> WALSH: I'M SORRY. I'M GOING TO DISAGREE WITH YOU.

I GAVE YOU KIND OF MY MID-MEETING UPDATE. THAT'S CLEARLY WHAT I'M HEARING AND THAT'S WHAT I SAID A SECOND AGO. Y'ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT A POLICY LEVEL OR A B SESSION OR SOME SORT OF OTHER MEETING.

THAT'S UP TO YOU ALL. I HEARD THE FIRST PART OF THE CONVERSATION AND THAT'S

WHAT I REPORTED BACK TO THE COUNCIL. >> CASTILLO: WHAT I HEARD WAS INCREASE 100

HOW TO RESHIFT THOSE FUNDS IN AN EQUITABLE WAY. >> WALSH: I DID NOT SAY

THAT AT ALL. >> CASTILLO: THAT'S WHAT I GATHERED.

>> WALSH: THOSE ARE THE MAYOR'S COMMENTS. THOSE WEREN'T MINE.

>> CASTILLO: THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: LET ME AGAIN RESET. EVERYBODY'S GETTING THE WHOLE FUND REPLENISHED IN TWO WEEKS. THE ISSUE OF NOT GETTING PROJECTS DONE IS NOT ABOUT THE BALANCE THAT'S IN THERE. IT'S NOT ABOUT THE MONEY THAT GOES IN EVERY FISCAL YEAR, IT'S ABOUT THE POLICY. IF YOU'RE GETTING $650,000 VERSUS $550,000 ON OCTOBER 1 IN YOUR NAMP BUDGET, NO ONE HAS BEEN ABLE TO SPEND THE 550 BASED ON THE CURRENT POLICY. SO WE HAVE TO FIX THAT POLICY.

WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS THAT WE DO THAT BEFORE WE ADD AN ADDITIONAL $100,000 TO THE BALANCE. BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND IT ANYWAYS.

>> CASTILLO: I APOLOGIZE, ERIK. >> WALSH: WHAT I'M HEARING IS THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE IT. THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT

THINGS. >> CASTILLO: WE WERE ZEROED OUT BUT WE HAD A PROJECT REFUNDED SO NOW THERE'S A BALANCE. TO DEMONSTRATE THAT, FOR D5 THERE IS A NEED. THOSE PROJECTS ARE BEING IDENTIFIED AND THE FUNDS ARE BEING ALLOCATED. THERE'S A NEED FOR MORE AND I'M HEARING THE CONSENSUS FOR MORE BUT I'M NOT SEEING IT REFLECTED IN THE BUDGET IS MY POINT.

>> WALSH: THAT'S WHAT I SAID A LITTLE WHILE AGO. CLEARLY I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING DIFFERENT AND DISTRICT 4 DIDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS.

THEY HAVE AN $8,000 BALANCE. I THINK -- >> WE HAVE MORE.

>> WALSH: THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING, COUNCILWOMAN. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ANYBODY ELSE? COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE

GAVITO. >> GAVITO: THE ONLY THING -- THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THE ONLY THING I WANT TO CLARIFY FOR NAMP IS THAT FOR US, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LIKE OUR BACKLOG OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. I FEEL LIKE FOR US WE'RE CONSTANTLY HAVING TO PLAY TETRIS. WE CAN DO THIS PROJECT BUT THESE OTHER PROJECTS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT. TO ME, IF WE HAVE THESE FUNDS, WE'LL USE IT GLADLY. AND IT WILL HELP US WITH SOME OF THESE DECISIONS.

LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S FRUSTRATED THE CRAP OUT OF ME IS WE NEEDED SOME LINES PAINTED SO PEOPLE CAN CROSS THE CITY PARKING LOT TO THE WOODLAWN LAKE SWIMMING POOL, SO HEAVILY UTILIZED. PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO CROSS THE STREET AND I'M LIKE IT'S LINES. LET'S PAINT THEM.

IF WE ARE ABLE TO GET MORE FUNDS, WE COULD DO THAT QUICKER.

WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AFTERWARDS BUT I THINK IT HELPS A LOT OF US WITH LARGE INFRASTRUCTURE BACKLOGS TO GET THINGS DONE. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THANKS. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

IT'S BEEN A GREAT DISCUSSION. REALLY INTO THE WEEDS OF NAMP. AGAIN, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IF GETTING PROJECTS -- IS F WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH RESOURCES TO DO PROJECTS AND WE DIDN'T HAVE A POLICY ISSUE, THAT $4.4 MILLION BALANCE WOULD NOT BE THERE. THERE IS AN ISSUE THERE THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS. SO I'M ALL FOR GETTING MORE PROJECTS DONE AND MORE PROJECTS DONE FASTER, ESPECIALLY IN THE DISTRICTS THAT NEED IT.

BUT WE HAVE A PROBLEM TO SOLVE IF THAT BALANCE CONTINUES TO ROLL OVER AND INCREASE EVERY SINGLE YEAR. THAT'S MY POINT. THAT'S IT.

AND THAT'S THE DISCUSSION WE HAVE TO HAVE. COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: WE NEED TO HAVE A LARGER DISCUSSION. I DON'T WANT YOU TO PUT ANY

[01:25:05]

BECAUSE WE NEED TO HAVE A LARGER DISCUSSION. BECAUSE GIVING IT ACROSS THE BOARD IS NOT GOING TO BE HELPFUL. AND THE OTHER THING IS THE COORDINATION BETWEEN SAWS AND CPS AND SOME OF OUR PARTS OF TOWN NEED TO BE LOOKED AT ALSO. I THINK THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE LARGER CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE IS HOW DO WE STREAMLINE THIS PROCESS. NOW, IF WE NEED TO INCREASE THE BUDGET OR A DEPARTMENT FOR THAT, THEN THOSE ARE CONVERSATIONS WE NEED TO HAVE. BUT AS BUDGET DAY COMES TOMORROW, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO INCREASE NAMP WITH THE AMOUNT OF OVERAGES THAT SOME PEOPLE HAVE.

AND WE NEED TO DIG DEEP ON WHY WE CAN'T GET THESE PROJECTS DONE.

JUST TO BE CLEAR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I FEEL LIKE THE MERRY-GO-ROUND IS GOING TO COME BACK AROUND TO WHERE WE ARE NOW. IF NOBODY ELSE HAS ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, ERIK HAS GOT LESS HAIR THAN HE STARTED WITH AT 3:47.

ANYTHING ELSE, ERIK? >> WALSH: NO, SIR. I'M CRYSTAL CLEAR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: IT'S 3:47 -- >> WALSH: I SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN GLIB. WE'RE GOING TO PRODUCE A MEMO AND YOU'LL GET IT TONIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO WORK ON IT AND TRY TO REFORMAT SOME OF THIS AND SEND IT TO THE COUNCIL TOMORROW IN ANTICIPATION OF TOMORROW'S MEETING. SEND IT TONIGHT IN ANTICIPATION OF TOMORROW'S

MEETING. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: AT 3:48 ON SEPTEMBER 18, 2024 WE ARE AD

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.