[00:00:54] >> MAYOR JONES: ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, THE TIME IS NOW 2:05 P.M. ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21ST, AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO B SESSION IS CALLED TO ORDER. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL ROLL. >> CLERK: [ BRIEFING ONLY  ] >> MAYOR JONES: GREAT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. TODAY IS ONE OF THE MOST AWAITED OF THE YEAR, RIGHT, OUR DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN. UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S NOT WONDERFUL NEWS, BUT IT IS -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL REMEMBER DURING THE BUDGET SEASON WHEN TROY ANNOUNCED THIS NUMBER OF 500 MILLION, I DON'T THINK MY JAW WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT DROPPED, RIGHT, WHEN WE CONSIDER WHAT OUR BOND CAPACITY HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN, 800 MILLION IN 2017, 1.2 BILLION IN 2022, AND AS HE WILL PRESENT, WE ARE WELL, WELL SHORT OF THAT, EVEN AS WE ANTICIPATE WHAT IT MAY BE IN 2027. SO AS WE LOOK AT BALANCING, AS WE HAVE ROUTINELY TALKED ABOUT, RIGHT, THE NEEDS BETWEEN MAJOR INVESTMENTS DOWNTOWN WITH THE NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY, THIS NUMBER, WHICH IS GOING TO BE ROUGHLY HALF OF WHAT IT WAS IN 2022, IS REALLY GOING TO CALL FOR US TO BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT HOW WE PRIORITIZE -- IDENTIFY AND THEN PRIORITIZE THOSE NEEDS ACROSS THE COUNCIL -- ACROSS THE CITY, RATHER. OKAY. ERIK, OVER TO YOU. >> WALSH: THANK YOU, MAYOR. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, SO AS THE MAYOR LAID OUT, THIS IS THE WORK THAT WE TALKED ABOUT DOING FOLLOWING OUR AUGUST CONVERSATION ON THE DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN. SO TROY IS GOING TO -- WE WENT BACK AND INTERNALLY AND WITH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISERS LOOKED AT OUR UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN UTILIZING FOR SOME TIME NOW, LOOKING TO SEE HOW OTHER MAJOR METROPOLITAN CITIES IN THE STATE ARE ADDRESSING THESE ISSUES, AND WE'LL LAY OUT KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF THAT WORK. TROY WILL DO THAT ON THE FIRST PART OF THE PRESENTATION. THE SECOND PART OF THE PRESENTATION, MIKE SHANNON WILL WALK THROUGH BECAUSE WE WANTED TO TALK HIGH LEVEL ABOUT WHAT A BOND PROCESS IS, WHAT A BOND PROGRAM PROCESS IS, WHAT THE RELATIVE TIMELINE IS WITH IT. I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT ON THE BACK END. WE'RE NOT ASKING YOU TODAY TO SIZE THE BOND PROGRAM. WE'LL COME BACK BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVE TODAY TO YOU LATER ON IN THE YEAR, AND, YOU KNOW, THE LAST THING I'LL SAY, AND THEN HURRY UP AND HAND IT OVER TO TROY SO WE CAN BEGIN, YOU KNOW, A BOND PROGRAM -- A MUNICIPAL BOND PROGRAM IS ONE OF THE BASE ECK THINGS THAT WE DO. AND THERE IS A FAIR AMOUNT OF ASSESSMENT IN TERMS OF NEED, CAPACITY, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, AS I LOOK AROUND THE DAIS, THERE ARE THREE COUNCILMEMBERS THAT WERE HERE DURING THE LAST PROCESS. AND SO WE WANTED TO TAKE THE TIME TODAY TO WALK THROUGH -- YOU'LL SEE TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. WE HAVE TIMELINES ASSOCIATED WITH A MAY '27 BOND PROGRAM AND A NOVEMBER '27 BOND PROGRAM. ALL RIGHT. JUST SO YOU CAN SEE THE STEPS NECESSARY TO GET TO A POINT WHERE THE COUNCIL COULD BE IN A POSITION TO CALL FOR AN ELECTION, THE VOTERS OF THE BOND PROGRAM. TROY? >> ELLIOTT: THANK YOU, ERIK. AS ERIK MENTIONED, WANTED TO KIND OF CIRCLE BACK AROUND TO THE COUNCIL. I KNOW LAST TIME WE SPOKE DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS BACK IN AUGUST, I PROBABLY DID TAKE YOU BY A BIT OF SURPRISE BY TALKING ABOUT THE CAPACITY. I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW WE MANAGE OUR BOND PROGRAMS HISTORICALLY, IT MAKES SENSE HOW THAT CAPACITY IS PRODUCED, [00:05:03] ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT OUR PROPERTY VALUES HAVE FLATTENED OUT -- BACK AROUND IN ADDITION TO LOOKING AT OPTIONS MAYBE WE CAN INFLUENCE OR INCREASE OUR BONDING CAPACITY. IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO PAIR IT UP WITH STORMWATER REVENUE BONDS SO WE CAN ACTUALLY, BETWEEN THE TWO, HAVE A HIGHER CAPACITY AMOUNT THAT WE CAN ISSUE IN CAPACITY OF DEBT. ONE THROUGH OUR GEO BOND PROGRAM AND ONE THROUGH OUR REVENUE PROGRAM. DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE TALK A LOT ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES BUT WE TEND TO TALK ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY TAX. TODAY'S CONVERSATION WE'RE GOING TO SHIFT A LITTLE BIT AND HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE DEBT SERVICE COMPONENT AND HOW THAT ACTUALLY INFLUENCES THE AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT WE HAVE OUTSTANDING. OUR PROPERTY TAX RATE TODAY IS 54 CENTS PER $100 OF TAXABLE VALUATION. TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TAXABLE VALUATION, THAT'S GOING TO BE A TERM WE USE THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT TAXABLE VALUATION, IT IS REALLY A PROJECT OF BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT APPRAISING OR ASSESSING OUR VALUES, AND THEN THERE'S A NUMBER OF EXEMPTIONS, ABOUT 21, THAT WE ACTUALLY DEDUCT FROM THE ASSESSED VALUE AND COME BACK TO TAXABLE VALUE. THAT TAXABLE VALUE IS THE BASIS OF WHAT OUR PROPERTY TAX IS APPLIED TO AND WHAT PRODUCES THE REVENUE THAT SUPPORTS OUR GENERAL FUND AND OUR DEBT SERVICE FUND. OUR M & O TAX RATE AT 33 CENTS, THAT GENERATED ABOUT $472 MILLION IN SUPPORT OF OUR GENERAL FUND OPERATIONS. ON THE FLIP SIDE, OUR 21 CENT TAX RATE FOR OUR DEBT SERVICE FUND GENERATES ABOUT 302 MILLION, AND IT SUPPORTS OUR $2.6 BILLION IN OUTSTANDING DEBT RIGHT NOW AS PART OF OUR AD VALOREM DEBT PROGRAM. THERE'S PRIMARILY THREE COMPONENTS OF THE AD VALOREM DEBT. ABOUT $1.7 MILLION OUTSTANDING THAT SUPPORTS OUR '22 BOND PROGRAM THAT WE HE HELD LAST IN TERMS OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, STREETS, DRAINAGE, FACILITIES, PARKS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE ALSO HAVE OUR TAX NOTES. IT'S ABOUT $92 MILLION OUTSTANDING, THOSE ARE RELATIVELY SHORT IN DURATION, ABOUT SEVEN YEARS. AND OUR CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATIONS, TYPICALLY ABOUT A 20-YEAR DEBT, ABOUT 800 MILLION OUTSTANDING. WE USE OUR C OF OS TO FILL IN. WE USE THE CAPACITY TO FILL IN FOR TAX NOTES AND CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATIONS BETWEEN THOSE FIVE-YEAR BOND PROGRAMS. FOCUSING ON PROPERTY TAX IS A LITTLE BIT MORE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE M & O, THERE ARE CERTAIN STATUTORY CAPS THAT ARE IN PLACE TODAY. I THINK YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH SB 2, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT A LOT. IT LOCKS OUR GROWTH IN AT 3.5%. NEW IMPROVEMENTS ARE UNCAPPED. CITY COUNCIL DOES HAVE THE DISCRETION TO INCREASE THAT RATE UP TO 3.5%, AGAIN, THAT AFFECTS AND SUPPORTS OUR GENERAL FUND, IT DOES NOT SUPPORT AND CANNOT BE USED TO SUPPORT OUR DEBT SERVICE. COUNCIL ADOPTED A TAX RATE WHICH WAS OUR SAME TAX RATE AT 33 CENTS. AND JUST FOR CONTEXT, IF WE WOULD HAVE GONE UP FROM 33 CENTS AT 3.5% CAP, WE WOULD HAVE HAD AN ADDITIONAL PENNY OR 1.6 CENTS THAT WE COULD HAVE INCREASED THE TAX RATE ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT 33 CENT TAX RATE UP TO ABOUT 35 CENTS. SO THERE WAS CAPACITY IN 2026, BUT WORKING WITH YOU AS COUNCIL DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE DID NOT WANT TO RAISE THE TAX RATE. ANYTHING ABOVE THAT 3.5% WOULD REQUIRE A VOTE OF THE PUBLIC. SIMILARLY ON THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE, THERE ARE CAPS IN PLACE, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT CAPS. THERE IS A STATUTORY CAP AND THERE IS A CITY CHARTER CAP. AND JUST BACKING UP A LITTLE BIT, WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE, AND YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THIS ON A LOT OF THE SLIDES THAT I PRESENT, OUR DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE FISCAL YEAR 2004. WHEN WE SIZE THE CAPACITY FOR OUR DEBT SERVICE, OUR DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE IS SIZED TO BE SUFFICIENT TO COVER OUR CURRENT ANNUAL DEBT SERVICING REQUIREMENTS. IN TERMS OF THE STATUTORY CAP, WE CANNOT EXCEED 10% OF OUR TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION. THAT WOULD MEAN THAT WE COULD GO UP TO -- WOULD NOT DO THIS, BUT WE CAN GO UP TO $21.2 BILLION IN DEBT CAPACITY UNDER THAT STATUTORY CAP. IN COMPARISON, OUR CURRENT OUTSTANDING DEBT IS ROUGHLY 3.1 BILLION FOR ALL AD VALOREM DEBT, NOT TAKING OUT OURSELF-SUPPORTING. COMPARED TO THAT 10% CAP, IT P PUTS US AT ABOUT 1.5% OF THE TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION, SO THERE IS ROOM UNDER THE CAP -- FLEXIBILITY TO ADJUST THE TAX RATE. SIMILARLY, UNDER THE CITY CHARTER, PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED FOR DEBT CANNOT [00:10:02] EXCEED $1.50 PER $100 OF TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION. TODAY WE'RE, AS I MENTIONED, WE'RE AT 21 CENTS. THAT WOULD GIVE US ANOTHER $1.28 ABOVE THAT 21 CENTS TO GO UP TO $1.50. SO SIMILARLY, A LOT OF CAPACITY THERE AS WELL. WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR DEBT MANAGEMENT HISTORICALLY, BONDING CAPACITY HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN A FUNCTION OF FOUR OR FIVE DIFFERENT PRIMARY COMPONENTS. THE FIRST OF WHICH IS MAINTAINING A DEBT -- MAINTAINING A STABLE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE OF 21 CENTS. AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT THROUGH 2004. THE OTHER PIECE IS PROPERTY VALUES, I HAVE A SLIDE I'LL SHARE WITH Y'ALL IN A LITTLE BIT OF HOW THE BONDING CAPACITY IS INCREASED, HAS REALLY BEEN A FUNCTION OF THAT STABLE TAX RATE, AND THEN OUR INCREASING PROPERTY VALUES OVER TIME. THE DURATION OF OUR DEBT, IS THE AVERAGE LIFE. ON THIS SLIDE I THINK IS ROUGHLY OUR AVERAGE DEBT, LIFE IS ABOUT OVER SIX YEARS. BY MAINTAINING A SHORT AVERAGE LIFE, IT PROVIDES US WITH A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY AND A LOT OF LEVERAGE TO ACTUALLY MANAGE OUR DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN AND OUR PROGRAM IN TERMS OF CAPACITY. BY HAVING A SHORT AVERAGE LIFE, IT ALLOWS US TO PAY OUR DEBT DOWN FASTER AND ALSO ALLOWS US TO PAY LOWER INTEREST COSTS ACROSS THE LIFE OF THAT DEBT. THEN LASTLY, BASED ON THE CURRENT ECONOMY AND MARKET CONDITIONS WHAT THE PREVAILING INTEREST RATES ARE AT THE TIME WE'RE ISSUING OUR DEBT, AS WELL AS HOW THOSE INTEREST RATES ARE INFLUENCED BY THE CREDIT RATINGS ASSIGNED BY THE THREE MAJOR CREDIT RATING AGENCIES. AND THEN UNDERLYING FOUNDATIONALLY IN ALL OF OUR ASSUMPTIONS, BEING MODERATELY CONSERVATIVE IN OUR PROJECTIONS. THIS NEXT SLIDE ESSENTIALLY BRINGS TWO OF THOSE MAJOR COMPONENTS INTO ONE VISUAL GRAPHIC. THE GREEN BAR OR THE GREEN LINE -- DOTTED LINE ACROSS, I GUESS, THE CENTER OF THE TABLE, THAT BASICALLY IS OUR TAX RATE AS SEEN BY THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE AXIS ON THE LEFT SITE AT 21 CENTS. IT HAS NOT CHANGED. IN COMPARISON, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE OUR PROPERTY VALUES THAT ARE SIGNIFIED BY THE INDIVIDUAL BARS. IN 2004, THOSE PROPERTY VALUES WERE ROUGHLY ABOUT $40 BILLION. FAST-FORWARD TO TODAY IN 2026, ABOUT $159 BILLION. SO BY HAVING THAT STABLE TAX RATE OUR BOND HAS BEEN INFLUENCED BY THAT. OVER THAT 20-SOME-ODD YEAR PERIOD, WE'VE HAD AVERAGE GROWTH OF ABOUT 6.3% OVER THAT PERIOD. IF YOU LOOK TOWARDS THE MIDDLE, ABOUT 2010 THROUGH 2013, OUT OF THOSE 20-PLUS YEARS, THERE'S BEEN FOUR YEARS THAT YOU'VE SEEN WE ACTUALLY HAD DECLINING GROWTH. THE REST HAVE HAD GROWTH THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM. ALSO WANTED TO KIND OF ADD ON TO THAT, TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT OUR ASSUMPTIONS ARE GOING INTO OUR DEBT MODEL, THE GREEN BAR IS ON THE RIGHT, THAT IS WHAT IS INCLUDED IN OUR CURRENT FORECAST. SO ON THE LEFT YOU HAVE HOW THAT VALUE HAS GROWN OVER TIME, THAT TAXABLE VALUE, AND THEN OUR FORECAST SHOWS IN 2026, WHICH IS BASED ON THE CERTIFIED ROLL FOR THIS YEAR, OUR GROWTH WAS LESS THAN 1%. OUR FORECAST ASSUMES IN 2027, LESS THAN HALF A PERCENT. AND THEN WE START SEEING, BASED ON OUR MODELING AND RECOVERY OF 1.75%, 2% AND 2.5%, AND THEN OUR MODEL HAS THREE% OUT IN THE OUTER YEARS. SO WHEN YOU LAYER IN OUR STABLE TAX RATE OVER -- SINCE 2004, AND YOU CAN KIND OF START TO SEE THE PICTURE OF HOW OUR BONDING CAPACITY WAS INFLUENCED OVER TIME, AND NOW WITH OUR GROWTH MODEL RATING, IT IMPACTS OUR CAPACITY, AND THAT'S WHAT DROVE ABOUT OUR $500 MILLION IN CAPACITY WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME. THIS BASICALLY SHOWS THE BONDING CAPACITY THAT WE HAVE HAD HISTORICALLY, SO THE GRAPHICS I SHOWED YOU ON THE PRIOR TWO SLIDES BEGAN IN 2004. AS THOSE PROPERTY VALUES INCREASED IN 2007 BY THOSE BLUE BARS AT THE BASE OF EACH OF THOSE STACKS, WE HAD $550 MILLION IN OUR GEO BONDING IN 2007. THAT GREW TO 592 MILLION IN 2012, 850 MILLION, BASED ON THE VALUES 1.2. AND THEN BASED ON THE MODERATION, THE 500 MILLION THAT I SPOKE ABOUT LAST AUGUST. I ALSO MENTIONED THAT IN BETWEEN THOSE MAJOR BOND PROGRAMS AND SIGNIFIED BY THE COLORED BARS ON TOP OF THOSE STACKS, WE HAVE OUR CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATIONS, OUR TAX NOTES AND OUR SELF-SUPPORTING DEBT. THOSE WERE ISSUED BETWEEN THOSE MAJOR BOND PROGRAMS TO ACTUALLY FILL IN IN EACH OF THOSE DEBTS AND PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR OUR [00:15:02] CIP. ANOTHER THING -- ANOTHER SLIDE I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE OF VALUE TO SHOW YOU, THIS IS OUR DEBT RATIO. THIS IS OUR PROPERTY TAX DEBT OUTSTANDING AS WE COMPARE IT TO OUR TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATION. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT DEBT RATIO BACK IN 2007, 2008, 2009, IT FLUCTUATED BETWEEN 1.5, 1.48 AND 1.6. FAST-FORWARD TO TODAY, IT'S IN THAT SAME RANGE. SO IN TERMS OF LAYERING ON DEBT COMPARED TO OUR ASSESSED VALUATION, WE'RE COMPARABLE TO WHERE WE WERE BACK IN 2007. SO IN MY MIND, THAT DEBT RATIO SHOWS THAT WE'RE BEING RESPONSIBLE IN TERMS OF OUR DEBT ISSUANCE AND MANAGEMENT AND THOSE DEBT LEVELS IN COMPARISON ARE COME PABL COMP RABL TO WHERE IT WAS IN 2007. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CENTERPIECE GOING FROM 2009 TO 2016, THAT INCREASE IN THE CENTER IS LARGELY BECAUSE OUR DEBT PROGRAMS WERE INCREASING AND OUR VALUES WERE DROPPING, SO YOU SAW THAT INCREASE IN OUR DEBT RATIO FROM 2009 AND DROPPING BACK DOWN AGAIN IN 2015. SO THAT KIND OF COVERS KIND OF HISTORICALLY HOW WE'VE MANAGED OUR DEBT PLAN. IT REALLY IS A FUNCTION OF PRIMARILY OUR TAX RATE AND OUR VALUES AND THE DIRECTION OUR VALUES ARE TRENDING. I WANT TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN OPTION FOR Y'ALL'S CONSIDERATION AS WE MOVE FORWARD, AND I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF INFRASTRUCTURE, STREETS, OUR DRAINAGE, OUR BUILDINGS, OUR FACILITIES, AND YOU BALANCE THAT OFF BETWEEN PROPERTY TAXES AND OUR INVESTMENT THAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE MAKING IN PROPERTY TAXES, THIS PROVIDES YOU AN ALTERNATIVE OR AN OPTION THAT HOPEFULLY PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT OF BALANCE BETWEEN THE SIZE OF OUR BOND PROGRAMS AND INVESTMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY AND THE TAX RATE. SO WHAT WE WOULD SUGGEST OR WHAT WE WOULD ASK FOR Y'ALL'S INPUT ON I IS RATHER THAN HAVING OUR VALUE AND WHERE THEY ARE DRIVE OUR CAPACITY, LOOK AT WHAT DO WE WANT TO TARGET IN TERMS OF CAPACITY. BASED ON THAT TARGETED CAPACITY, IT'S 1.2 BILLION, THEN WE WOULD NEED FLEXIBILITY IN MANAGING OUR DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE. SO IN PERIODS OF TIME WHERE YOU HAVE VERY, VERY HIGH GROWTH YEARS, WE COULD MAINTAIN THAT TAX RATE OR LOWER THE TAX RATE IN ORDER TO MEET OUR CAPACITY NEEDS. ON THE FLIP SIDE, IF WE'RE SEEING OUR VALUES AND OUR TAXABLE VALUES DECLINE, STABILIZE, OR JUST FLAT, WE MAY NEED SOME FLEXIBILITY AND INCREASE THAT TAX RATE. AND BASICALLY, BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THAT CAPACITY THAT WE MAY NEED. AS I MENTIONED ON THOSE GRAPHICS WE SAW HISTORICALLY, PROPERTY TAXES OR PROPERTY VALUES HAVE INCREASED OVER TIME, ON AVERAGE ABOUT 6% OVER THE 20-PLUS YEARS, AND SO IF HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF, THEN THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD IN THAT CAPACITY AND ACTUALLY POTENTIALLY EVEN LOWER THE TAX RATE OVER TIME, BUT THERE MAY BE YEARS -- AUDIO] -- THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT INCREASING THAT TAX RATE. ONE OF THE THINGS BEFORE ACTUALLY BRINGING -- IF THIS IS AN OPTION OR -- THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO PURSUE, WE WOULD DEVELOP A FINANCIAL POLICY TO HELP GUIDE HOW THAT TAX RATE WOULD BE MANAGED, WHAT LEVERAGE WE WOULD PULL AND WHEN IN TERMS OF THE DURATION OF OUR DEBT, THE TAX RATE AND HOW WE MANAGE THAT. AND THAT WOULD KIND OF GUIDE US IN THE FUTURE AS FAR AS HOW WE WOULD ACTUALLY ESTABLISH THAT TAX RATE. THE TAX RATE WOULD PROBABLY BE THE LAST LEVER WE WOULD PULL. WE'D LOOK AT OTHER THINGS BEFORE EVEN MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION. AS FAR AS THE ACTUAL SCENARIOS WE'VE LOOKED AT, WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE 500 MILLION IN BONDING CAPACITY, THAT 500 MILLION, THOSE ASSUMPTIONS HAVE NOT CHANGED. THEY'RE STILL 500 MILLION. THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGED TODAY IS WE WOULD NOT BE TARGETING A 2025 ELECTION, OF COURSE. THAT'S PASTED. PASSED, NOW WE'D BE MOVING FORWARD. SO WE'VE PROVIDED ADDITIONAL SCENARIOS 1 THROUGH 3, KIND OF THE UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS EMBEDDED IN HERE IS A 25-YEAR AUTHORIZATION. HISTORICALLY WE GO BACK, WE'RE LOOKING AT 20-YEAR AUTHORIZATION. WE HAVE EXTENDED THOSE TO GAIN MORE CAPACITY. I'D LIKE TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THAT. OUR GOAL WOULD BE TO SHORTEN THAT, BUT TO GET TO THESE CAPACITY NUMBERS, WE USE 25 YEARS AS A BASE. THIS ALSO INCLUDED $150 MILLION IN TAXABLE BONDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. TO THE EXTENT COUNCIL WOULD WANT TO INCREASE THAT, THAT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT ON OUR MODELING BECAUSE TAXABLE DEBT IS MORE EXPENSIVE AND WE'D HAVE TO INCLUDE THAT. FOR EXAMPLE, IF COUNCIL WANTED TO MOVE FROM 150 THAT'S INCLUDED IN OUR SHIP PROGRAM TO SOME OTHER LEVEL. SIMPLY MOVING TO THE MAY 2027 BOND ELECTION, OR NO SOONER, WE COULD GAIN CAPACITY UP TO $625 MILLION IN BONDING. [00:20:07] BASED ON THOSE ASSUMPTIONS I JUST LAID OUT. THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS, AND THAT MAINTAINS A STABLE TAX RATE AT 21 CENTS TO GET THAT 625 MILLION IN BONDING CAPACITY. UNDER THE SECOND SCENARIO, IF WE WANTED TO TARGET $1 BILLION IN BONDING CAPACITY, WE WOULD STILL TARGET A DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE OF 21 CENTS, BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO -- OUR PROPERTY TAX TAXABLE VALUATIONS WOULD HAVE TO GROW TO 3.25% STARTING IN 2028, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR MODERATELY CONSERVATIVE ASSUMPTIONS. FOR 2028, WE HAVE 1.75%. SO THERE'S A DELTA BETWEEN WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR ASSUMPTIONS, WE WOULD HAVE TO HIT TARGET GROWTH OF 3.25%. IN THE EVENT OUR GROWTH IS BELOW 3.25%, A TAX RATE COULD BE REQUIRED TO MAKE UP FOR LOWER VALUE GROWTH, OR THERE COULD BE OTHER LEVERS WE COULD EVALUATE BASED ON THE FINANCIAL POLICY THAT WOULD BE IN PLACE. ON THE FLIP SIDE IN THE HIGHER GROWTH PERIODS, THE TAX RATE COULD BE LOWERED. AND AS YOU'VE SEEN HISTORICALLY LOOKING BACK, FOUR YEARS OUT OF THE 20-PLUS YEARS, WE ACTUALLY HAD A DECREASE IN VALUES, WHICH MAY REQUIRE A TAX RATE INCREASE LOOKING AT THAT HISTORICALLY. OVER TIME, I THINK MORE LIKELY, IT WOULD BE THAT YOU'D HAVE A TAX RATE REDUCTION OVER TIME, SO IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF A GIVE AND TAKE, TAX RATE FLEXIBLE, HAVE TO BE INCREASED, HAVE TO BE LOWERED, TO HIT THAT BILLION DOLLARS IN CAPACITY. SCENARIO 3, VERY SIMILAR, IT'S $1.2 BILLION IN BONDING CAPACITY. AGAIN, A CONSTANT DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE OF 21 CENTS. WE'D HAVE TO HIT A GROWTH OF 3.5 -- 3.5% TO PROVIDE THAT 1.2 BILLION IN BONDING CAPACITY. SAME ASSUMPTIONS IN TURMS OF THE TAX RATE WOULD BE FOR THE 1.2 BILLION VERSUS 1.5 BILLION. THIS GIVES YOU A DIFFERENT LOOK AT IT, FOR THE 625 MILLION, FIRST SCENARIO, BASE GROWTH OF 2% BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF OUR FORECAST. ASSUMES A BOND ELECTION NO SOONER THAN MAY OF 2027 WITH A DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE OF 21 CENTS. 625MILLION BASED ON OUR CURRENT DEBT PLAN WOULD BE VERY MANAGEABLE. IN THE EVENT THAT WE WANTED TO MOVE TO SCENARIO 2 OR 3, WE WOULD HAVE TO HIT GROWTH LEVELS OF 3.25% AND 3.5% IN SCENARIO 3. AGAIN, TARGETING A BOND ELECTION NO SOONER THAN MAY OF 2027, AND THEN AS FAR AS THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE, AGAIN, WE WOULD TARGET 21 CENTS, BUT THERE WOULD NEED TO BE SOME FLEXIBILITY UNDER OUR FINANCIAL POLICIES TO BE ABLE TO MOVE UP OR DOWN ON THAT TAX RATE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN SERVICE OUR DEBT ASSOCIATED WITH A BILLION DOLLARS PROGRAM OR A $1.2 BILLION PROGRAM. I WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABILITY WHY I CHOSE THE 3.25% AND THE 3.5 ON THE PRIOR SLIDES. AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE PROPERTY VALUE TRENDS, THERE WERE ONLY FOUR YEARS IN WHICH HISTORICALLY WE WERE BELOW 3.25% OR 3.5%. SO OVER THAT 22-YEAR PERIOD, THE MAJORITY OF THOSE YEARS WE SAW POSITIVE PROPERTY TAX GROWTHS, SOME YEARS WERE PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL, ABOVE 10%, AND THOSE FOUR YEARS WERE IN THE NEGATIVESMENT BUT OVERALL, ABOUT SIX% GROWTH OVER THOSE YEARS. THE OTHER ITEM WE COMMITTED TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IS OUR STORMWATER REVENUE, OUR STORMWATER REVENUE FUND. TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY AND BACKGROUND, OUR MONTHLY STORMWATER FEES WERE ESTABLISHED IN MAY OF 1993 IN RESPONSE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ACT OF 1987. IN 2016, THE RATE STRUCTURE WAS CHANGED BASED ON AREAS IMPERVIOUS COVER AND A FIVE-YEAR PHASED IN RATE INCREASE TO FUND ADDITIONAL MOWINGS, STORM DRAIN ASSESSMENT, HIGH WATER DETECTION MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL PROJECTS. OUR LAST STORMWATER RATE INCREASE WAS IN 2020 AND THIS WAS TO PROVIDE SERVICE ENHANCEMENTS TO THE STORM DRAIN TUNNEL, MAINTENANCE AND NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS. WE DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN OPPORTUNITY AND A LITTLE BIT OF FLEX BBILITY WHEN IT COMES TO OUR STORM REVENUE BONDS. CURRENTLY OUTSTANDING, WE ARE NEAR THE END OF PAYING THOSE OFF. WE HAVE ABOUT $24.5 MILLION IN OUTSTANDING DEBT. THAT $24.5 MILLION IS REALLY THE REMNANTS OF BONDS THAT WERE ISSUED IN 2003. WE ORIGINALLY ISSUED 44.15 MILLION TO SUPPORT 46 PROJECTS. AGAIN, WE HAD AN ISSUE OF 61 MILLION IN 2005 FOR AN ADDITIONAL 41 PROJECTS. THEN IN 2013, WE CAME BACK AND REFUNDED THOSE BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $70 MILLION. THOSE BONDS TODAY, THEY [00:25:01] MATURE IN FISCAL YEAR 2030, AND, AGAIN, ABOUT $24.5 MILLION OUTSTANDING. AND THEY ARE CURRENTLY CALLABLE, WHICH GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESTRUCTURE THOSE BONDS IF WE NEED TO. AND ALSO CREATE SOME ADDITIONAL CAPACITY FOR THE FUTURE. IN TERMS OF THE STORMWATER RATES TODAY, CURRENT RATES ARE DIVIDED INTO TWO DIFFERENT COMPONENTS, YOU HAVE YOUR RRNS SHALL AND YOUR NONRESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL. IN TERMS OF THE RESIDENTIAL RATES, THERE ARE THREE TIERS. AND THEY ARE MONTHLY FEES ARE BASICALLY ESTABLISHED BASED ON THE AREAS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. TIER 1 IS FOR AREAS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER LESS THAN 2,750 SQUARE FEET AT A MONTHLY FEE OF $3.75. TIER 2 IS FROM THAT LAST TIER UP TO 4,220 AREA SQUARE FEET FOR $4.94, AND THEN THE FINAL TIER IN THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT IS TIER 3, IT'S GREATER THAN 4,220 SQUARE FEET AT $10.45 ON A MONTHLY FEE. ON THE NONRESIDENTIAL SIDE, YOU HAVE FOUR TIERS BASED ON THE PERCENT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. YOU CAN SEE THE TIERS BELOW, LESS THAN 20%, AND THE LAST TIER GREATER THAN 65. AND YOU CAN SEE THE MONTHLY FEES RANGING FROM .31 IN THE FIRST TIER, .73 IN THE LAST. I ALSO THOUGHT THERE WAS VALUE TO SHOW KIND OF IN OUR ADOPTED BUDGET WHAT OUR STORMWATER GENERATES TODAY IN TERMS OF STORMWATER REVENUES. $56.8MILLION, ROUGHLY ABOUT 53 OR 54% OF THAT IS GENERATED BY THE COMMERCIAL REVENUES WITH THE BALANCE ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE. THEN YOU HAVE $59 MILLION IN EXPENSES WHICH SUPPORTS OUR STORMWATER OPERATIONS, ABOUT $70 MILLION IN DEBT SERVICE AND $5 MILLION IN CIP OR PAY GO FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS. A COUPLE SCENARIOS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, FIRST SCENARIO BASICALLY IS WITH NO RATE INCREASE, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT CAN DO IN TERMS OF BONDING CAPACITY. WITH NO RATE INCREASE FOR A 25-YEAR TERM, THE BONDING CAPACITY IS FAIRLY SMALL IN TERMS OF $10 MILLION. AND THE REASON WHY THAT HAPPENS IS BECAUSE I MENTIONED ON THE PRIOR PAGE IN YOUR FUND SCHEDULE, A LARGE PORTION OF THAT IS OPERATIONS. WELL, THOSE OPERATIONS WILL GROW OVER TIME AND WILL PERFORM AND EAT INTO THAT CAPACITY, SO IT GENERATES ABOUT $10 MILLION OVER A 25-YEAR TERM. WE ALSO HAVE THREE OTHER SCENARIOS THAT CONTEMPLATE POTENTIAL RATE INCREASES. SCENARIO 2 OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS STARTING IN '27, LOOKING AT PUTTING IN PLACE A 2% INCREASE EVERY YEAR FOR A TOTAL OF 10% OVER A 25-YEAR TERM COULD GENERATE RESTRUCTURING OUR EXISTING BONDS AND USING THE RATE AND THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO GENERATE AN ADDITIONAL $106.7 MILLION IN BONDING CAPACITY FOR STORMWATER PROJECTS. THE THIRD SCENARIO LOOKS AT PUTTING A 5% RATE INCREASE IN THE FIRST YEAR, AND THEN 2% FOR THEREAFTER FROM '28 TO THAT 2031, FOR A TOTAL OF A 13% INCREASE OVER THE FIVE YEARS, AN ADDITIONAL $140 MILLION IN BONDING CAPACITY. AND THEN FINALLY, 5% INCREASES IN THE FIRST TWO YEARS, 2% IN THE LAST THREE, FOR A TOTAL OF 16.2%, OVER A 25-YEAR TERM, IT LOOKS AT $174.3 MILLION IN BONDING CAPACITY. THERE'S ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO KIND OF LEVERAGE THE GEO BOND AUTHORIZATION COMBINED WITH THE STORMWATER REVENUE BONDS. WE COULD DO SOME STRUCTURING AND LOOK AT HOW WE COULD GENERATE AND USE OUR GEO BOND AUTHORIZATION TO DO THE DESIGN FOR OUR STORMWATER PROJECTS, DRAINAGE, FLOOD CONTROL, FREEING UP MORE CAPACITY FOR STREETS OR ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE IN THE GEO BOND PROGRAM. AND THEN SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE, FLIP BACK AND USE OUR REVENUE BONDS SOLELY FOR CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE THE DESIGN WOULD HAVE BEEN COMPLETED UNDER THE GEO BOND PROGRAM. SO THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER THING FOR CONSIDERATION, WORKING AND PAIRING IN TANDEM WITH OUR GEO BOND AUTHORIZATION. IN TERMS OF WHAT DOES THAT MEAN AS FAR AS AN IMPACT ON OUR RESIDENTIAL RATEPAYER, WE HAVE ABOUT 366,000 RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS. OF THAT, 50% FALL WITHIN TIER 2 OF OUR STORMWATER RATE. AND SO I WANTED TO KIND OF SHOW FOR PURPOSES OF THE IMPACT OF THE RATE INCREASES FOR EACH OF THE SCENARIOS, WHAT THAT WOULD HAVE ON A TIER 2 CUSTOMER. SO OUR TIER 2 RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS CURRENTLY PAY, AS I MENTIONED $4.94 PER MONTH, ROUGHLY $60 PER YEAR. IF YOU MOVE TO SCENARIO 2, WHICH HAD THE 2% INCREASE YEAR OVER YEAR FOR A TOTAL OF 10% FOR THE YEAR HAS 1.20 IMPACT [00:30:01] IN 2027. DOUBLES IN 2028, AGAIN, ENTWINE AND '30, FINISHES UP WITH AN ANNUAL INCREASE OF $6.12. IF YOU MOVE TO SCENARIO 3, FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE WE HAD THE 5% INCREASE IN THE FIRST YEAR AND 2% THROUGHOUT, IN 2027 YOU'D HAVE AN INCREASE FOR THE YEAR OF $3. THROUGH 2031 OF $8.16. AND THEN YOU CAN ALSO SEE IN SCENARIO 4 THE TWO FIVE% INCREASE, THE 2% THEREAFTER, IT GOES FROM $3 TO $10. THE LAST AREA I WANTED TO FOCUS ON, AND IT'S OUR AIRPORT REVENUE BONDS. I SHOWED THIS LAST TIME IN AUGUST, GOT ABOUT $740 MILLION OUTSTANDING IN OUTSTANDING DEBT. YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT'S KIND OF ALLOCATED OUT BETWEEN OUR GENERAL REVENUE AIRPORT BONDS AT 106 MILLION, OUR PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGE REVENUE BONDS AT 68.1 MILLION, CUSTOMER FACILITY CHARGE BONDS AT 113. AND AIRPORT SYSTEM REVENUE AND REFUNDING BONDS OR INTERIM FINANCING AT 452. THE REASON WHY I WANTED TO SHOW YOU AND START PUTTING IT ON YOUR RADAR, IS AS YOU KNOW, COUNCIL APPROVED THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE CONTRACT WITH HENSEL PHELPS IN DECEMBER 18TH, ABOUT $1.3 MILLION. WE'RE STARTING TO CLEAR GEAR UP, WORKING WITH THE AIRPORT, PUTTING THE FINANCE PLAN TOGETHER IN WHEN WE'RE GOING TO ISSUE THOSE BONDS. WE PLAN ON BRINGING TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION IN APRIL 2ND THE ISSUANCE OF AN P.M. AMOUNT OF A BILLION TO $1.2 BILLION IN REVENUE BONDS IN SUPPORT OF OUR TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT AND ALSO THE ENABLING PROJECTS OR OUR CIP OUT AT THE AIRPORT. WHAT THAT MEANS IS PROVIDE SOME CASH IN TIME TO INVEST INTO THE TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM WITH CLOSING ON THE BOND ON JULY 15TH, AND THEN WE WOULD ACTUALLY GO TO MARKET IN THE JUNE 16TH, 17TH TIME FRAME. SO THIS SLIDE IS REALLY THE MAIN POINT I WANTED TO MAKE TO THE COUNCIL, IS THAT WE WILL BE COMING BACK TO YOU AND ASKING FOR YOUR APPROVAL TO ISSUE THOSE REVENUE BONDS IN SUPPORT OF THE TDP AND OUR CIP. . SO IN ITE SUMMARY, WE COVERED A LOT, WE TALKED ABOUT OUR HISTORICAL BONDING CAPACITY, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SOME ALTERNATIVES, GIVING US FLEXIBILITY WITH OUR TAX RATE TO ACTUALLY GENERATE ABOVE AND BEYOND 625 MILLION UP TO POTENTIALLY A BILLION OR 1.2 BILLION OR ANYWHERE IN BETWEEN. WE TALKED ABOUT STORMWATER REVENUE BONDS AND WHAT WE CAN DO IN TERMS OF PAIRING THAT UP WITH OUR GEO BONDS, AND BY LAYERING A STORMWATER RATE INCREASES OVER TIME, HOW WE CAN ACTUALLY INCREASE OUR BONDING CAPACITY FOR THE REVENUE -- FOR STORMWATER REVENUE BONDSCH WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE AIRPORT REVENUE BONDS AND THE TIMING FOR THE UPCOMING REVENUE BOND ISSUANCE. WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO TURN IT OVER TO MIKE WHO'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT ALL THE EFFORT THAT NEEDS TO GO INTO ACTUALLY PUT IN PLACE A BOND PROGRAM OR A BOND AUTHORIZATION. MIKE? >> SHANNON: THANK YOU, TROY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MIKE SHANNON WITH CAPITAL DELIVERY, I'M GOING TO GO OVER JUST IN A FEW SLIDES TO WRAP IT UP. BUT REALLY I WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT A GENERAL BOND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE. IT IS NOT A SHORT PROCESS. IT IS NEEDED TO BE RELATIVELY LONG BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF STEPS IN IT. IT IS DESIGNED TO NOT ONLY IDENTIFY AND PRIORITIZE A LIST OF PROJECTS, HUNDREDS OF PROJECTS, THAT OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS. IT'S DESIGNED -- A LOT OF CONVERSATION WITH YOU IN DIFFERENT SETTINGS, MOST OF THEM THROUGH THE B SESSIONS YOU'LL SEE UP THERE, AND THEN A LOT OF COMMUNITY INPUT THAT WE DO IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WAYS NEAR THE END THROUGH SOME BOND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. SO WHAT I HAVE UP HERE ON A SLIDE IS IF WE WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, YOU KNOW, TODAY OR SOME TIME SOON, SAY LET'S SHOOT FOR MAY '27 ELECTION, WHICH WOULD BE IN OUR TYPICAL FIVE-YEAR CYCLE THAT WE'VE HAD SINCE, YOU KNOW, THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE CYCLES, WE WOULD START BY PROGRAM INITIATION AND DEVELOPMENT, CITY STAFF HAS IDEAS ON PROJECTS THAT WE KNOW WERE PRIORITIES EVEN FIVE YEARS AGO THAT DIDN'T MAKE THE CUT BASED ON OUR $1.2 BILLION, SO THERE ARE SEVERAL OF THOSE. THERE ARE ALSO SEVERAL OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM COMMUNITY, YOU ALL, OTHER AREAS EITHER COMMITTEES, SO WE -- WE HAVE A LIST TO START WITH THAT WE WILL START WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS. BUT THAT LIST WILL GROW AFTER MORE CONVERSATIONS WITH COMMUNITY AND OUR STREETS AND ADVISORY BOARD, WE HAVE TWO BOARDS THAT WE INTERACT WITH ON A MONTHLY OR BIMONTHLY BASIS, SO THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST PART THAT WE WOULD START NOW, WINTER 2026. SHORTLY THEREAFTER THAT [00:35:02] MOVING INTO THE NEXT FIEZ OR MILE SEWN, WE WOULD DO TWO THINGS -- PHASE. OUT OF THESE HUNDREDS OF PROJECTS HOW MUCH IS THE ESTIMATE FOR EACH OF THESE SO WE CAN START TALLYING UP WHAT THE COST WOULD BE OR THE NEED PROJECTS. WE WOULD CERTAINLY START HAVING MORE CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU IN SETTINGS LIKE THIS, B SESSIONS, WE WOULD PROPOSE AN OVERVIEW, WHAT IS OUR OVERALL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS, OUR GUIDING PRINCIPLES, I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A BIT. THAT WILL CONTINUE THE PROCESS INTO THE SUMMER WHERE WE REALLY START LOOKING AT PROJECT SCOPING AND ESTIMATING, COMING BACK TO YOU ALL WITH ACTUALLY STAFF-RECOMMENDED PROJECTS, SO THINGS THAT WE THINK ARE PRIORITIES, THAT SCORE WELL WITH MAYBE A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WE AND THE BOARDS WILL USE. ALSO TALKING ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY MEETING AND OUR PROCESSES AND PROGRESS TO THAT POINT. IN THE FALL, WE WOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU AS THE WORK CONTINUES, BUT WE WOULD ACTUALLY START TALKING ABOUT OUR PROPOSITIONS AND OUR PROJECTS THAT YOU FEEL ARE IMPORTANT, GIVING US SOME GUIDANCE. WE WOULD THEN CONTINUE TO WORK ON DETERMINING FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE WHAT IS OUR OPERATIONAL IMPACT, WHAT WILL IT DO, WHAT CAN WE DO MORE OF, BETTER FOR THE COMMUNITY. WE WILL ALSO START TALKING TO YOU ABOUT COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS, THOSE BOND COMMITTEES. LAST TIME, IN 2022, WE HAD 163 BOND COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON FIVE COMMITTEES, SO THERE'S A LOT OF INPUT WHERE YOU ARE SELECTING PEOPLE TO SERVE ON THESE THAT WILL HELP US RUN THESE PROJECTS THROUGH A PROCESS TO EVENTUALLY BRING BACK TO YOU IN APPROXIMATELY JANUARY, FEBRUARY OF NEXT YEAR, THAT WOULD BE AN A SESSION WHERE YOU ALL -- YOU ACTUALLY DECIDE ON AND VOTE ON THE LIST OF PROJECTS, AND SHORTLY THEREAFTER, WE WOULD HAVE A CALL FOR AN ELECTION. THE REASON JANUARY/FEBRUARY'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE BY LAW, I THINK IT'S 78 DAYS, PRIOR TO 78 DAYS OF THE ELECTION, YOU WOULD HAVE THAT CALL FOR ELECTION, SO WE WOULD FOLLOW THOSE RULES FOR THE MAY VOTE. NOW, THAT IS JUST A GUIDELINE OF THE MEETINGS. THE BIG ROCKS, I HAVE FOUR MEETINGS WITH YOU ALL AND SOME OF THE BIG STEPS, A LOT MORE HAPPENS IN BETWEEN THERE. WHAT I ALSO SHOW ON THIS SLIDE IS IF WE WERE TO NOT SHOOT FOR MAY '27 AND WE WENT TO NOVEMBER '27 FOR THE CALL, WE JUST SHIFT THOSE MILESTONE CATEGORIES BY SEVERAL MONTHS AND WE GET STARTED WITH A SIMILAR PROCESS. THAT IS THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE USED SEVERAL BONDS NOW IN SOME FORMAT, BUT IT IS DESIGNED TO BE ESSENTIALLY A YEAR-PLUS PROCESS AND RIGHTFULLY SO. THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE BY STAFF, A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE WITH YOU AND YOUR STAFF, AND ESES SPECIALLY WITH OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS. THE NEXT SLIDE IS I WANT TO TALK JUST TO REMIND US IN THE 2022, THESE WERE THE BOND PROGRAM PROPOSITIONS THAT WE LANDED ON. AND ACTUALLY GOING BACK TO 2007, THEY WERE GENERALLY ABOUT THE SAME WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE HOUSING COMPONENT. THE HOUSING COMPONENT WAS ADDED IN 2017 WITH A $20 MILLION INITIAL FIRST-TIME HOUSING PROPOSITION, AND THEN LAST YEAR WAS THE LARGEST -- REALLY LARGE ONE -- LAST BOND CYCLE, 2022, WAS THE $150 MILLION. BUT STREETS, OF COURSE, STREETS AND SIDEWALKS, DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL, PARKS AND REC, LIBRARY FACILITIES, PUBLIC SAFETY, THAT IS A CONSTANT SET OF NEEDS. NOW, THOSE ARE NOT SET IN STONE, BUT CERTAINLY THOSE DO TEND TO CALL OUT THE BUCKETS OF WHERE OUR NEEDS HAVE LANDED AND WE COULD USE THOSE AGAIN OR MODIFY AS NEEDED. AND THEN LASTLY, BEFORE I HAND IT BACK TO ERIK, I JUST WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WILL TALK TO YOU ABOUT AND REALLY REESTABLISH OR MODIFY BASED ON THE WILL OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL, OF COURSE, IS GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT SHOULD HELP US ALONG TO IDENTIFY AND PRIORITIZE PROJECTS. CERTAINLY THINGS LIKE CONNECTIVITY, RIGHT? HOW DO WE CONNECT THE CITY THROUGH OPPORTUNITIES WITH ADOPTED PLANS, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS THAT WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT AS A CITY TO DO, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY, OF COURSE, RESILIENCY, FUNDING COMMITMENTS, LEVERAGING FUNDING, THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE WILL USE OR IDENTIFY AND SOLIDIFY UP FRONT IN ONE OF THOSE EARLY PHASES WITH YOU ALL THAT WILL HELP NOT ONLY CITY STAFF, BUT THE REST OF THE PROCESS MOVE FORWARD TO THAT ESSENTIALLY APPROVAL OF THE PROJECTS AND THE CALL FOR ELECTION. SO THAT'S JUST A BROAD OVERVIEW. AGAIN, WITH THAT, I'LL HAND IT OVER TO ERIK TO KIND OF WRAP IT UP FOR US. >> WALSH: THANK YOU, MIKE. WE'RE LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK AND POLICY CONVERSATION TODAY ON A NUMBER OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE LAID OUT. AGAIN, WE'RE NOT -- LET ME REITERATE, WE'RE NOT SETTING THE BOND PROGRAM AMOUNTS OR TIMELINES TODAY. WE JUST WANTED TO COME AND LAY OUT THE ALTERNATIVES WE TALKED [00:40:02] ABOUT IN AUGUST. SO LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK ON THE SIZE OF THE BOND PROGRAM, SO FEEDBACK ON THE ALTERNATIVES, YOU CAN TELL FROM TROY'S PRESENTATION, THERE ARE SOME BASIC FINANCIAL ASSUMPTIONS THAT HAVEN'T CHANGED IN 21 YEARS, AND SO LOOKING FOR SOME FEEDBACK FROM YOU ALL ON THAT. THE STORMWATER REVENUE PIECE, YOU SAW WHERE THE CITY ISSUED STORMWATER REVENUE BONDS IN 2003 AND 2005. WE'VE NOT DONE THAT SINCE THEN. WE HAVEN'T HAD THE ABILITY TO DO THAT, BUT BECAUSE WE'RE NEARING THE END OF THAT -- THAT DEBT AND IT'S CALLABLE NOW, NOW IS THE TIME TO START TALKING THROUGH WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE. AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, SOME FEEDBACK FROM YOU ALL ABOUT HOW WE SHOULD INTEGRATE AND LEVERAGE A POTENTIAL GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROCESS. AND THEN -- AND THEN, YOU KNOW, LASTLY, THE TIMELINE POTENTIAL, RIGHT, BOTH BEN -- I'M SORRY, BOTH TROY AND MIKE SAID NO SOONER THAN MAY OF '27. WE GAVE YOU ONE OTHER ALTERNATIVE, LOOKING FOR SOME FEEDBACK FROM YOU ALL, AND I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT A MUNICIPAL BOND PROGRAM BASED ON YOUR FEEDBACK TODAY, WE WILL GO BACK AND DESIGN AND LAY OUT A PROCESS, BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF STEPS THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH WITH YOU ALL, BOTH INTERNALLY AND BOTH WITH YOU ALL PUBLICLY. THE INVESTMENT IN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, WHETHER IT'S MAINTAINING OLD OR NEW, IS CRITICAL, AND -- AND IN LARGE PART GOES BACK TO AND IS DIRECTLY TIED BACK TO OBVIOUSLY THE THINGS YOU GUYS ARE WELL AWARE OF, THE QUALITY OF LIFE, THE SERVICES, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL THAT WE HAVE HERE IN THE CITY GOING FORWARD. SO A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF WHAT WE DO AND LOOKING FORWARD TO THE CONVERSATION AND YOUR FEEDBACK TODAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: CAN WE GO TO -- IT WASN'T PART OF OUR INITIAL DECK, BUT IT'S A VERY HELPFUL SLIDE, THANKS FOR INCORPORATING IT, BEN AND TROY. CAN WE GO TO SLIDE 6, PLEASE, WHICH IS THE FIVE-YEAR OUTCAST -- SEVEN, PLEASE. THANKS. IN CASE IT HELPS WITH ANYBODY ELSE'S QUESTIONS. AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS THE LAST TIME, UNFORTUNATELY WE SAW A SIMILAR DIP, RIGHT, WAS SHORTLY AFTER 2008, THE RECESSION THERE. SO CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR ASSUMPTIONS ARE AS TO WHY THIS DIP HERE WOULD ONLY BE A MATTER OF POTENTIALLY THREE YEARS VERSUS WHAT WE HISTORICALLY SAW? >> ELLIOTT: WHEN WE'VE SEEN RECOVERY, GOING BACK TO TWO THOUSANDS AS YOU MENTIONED THE RECESSION, WE SAW A DIP ABOUT FOUR YEARS AND THEN RECOVERY AFTER THAT. SO USING THOSE SAME TYPES OF ASSUMPTIONS IN MODELING, IN LOOKING AT HISTORICALLY PROPERTY VALUES HAVE GROWN 6% OVER THE LAST 22 YEARS, I DON'T THINK PROPERTY VALUES ARE GOING TO START GOING DOWN ANY TIME SOON. I THINK WE'LL SEE COMPARABLE GROWTH IN THE FUTURE, THE QUESTION IS, WHEN DOES THE RECOVERY BEGIN. >> MAYOR JONES: SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT, THE POINT -- IF I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, YOU DON'T EXPECT PROPERTY VALUES TO DECREASE? OKAY. THERE WAS A LOCAL OUTLET THAT JUST REPORTED 86% OF SAN ANTONIO AREA HOMES LOST VALUE OVER THE LAST YEAR, SO HELP US RECTIFY THOSE TWO POINTS. >> WALSH: WHAT HE'S SAYING IS WE DON'T ANTICIPATE IT HAPPENING FOREVER. >> MAYOR JONES: SURE, FOREVER. >> WALSH: WE'RE KIND OF IN THE PERIOD, IF YOU LOOK AT THE CHART, FROM 2010 TO 2013, RIGHT, WHERE IT WAS -- IT DECREASED, AND, YOU KNOW, IF YOU JUXTAPOSE THE BOND PROGRAM BACK THEN, THE 2012 BOND PROGRAM WAS 592 MILLION. THE BOND PROGRAM BEFORE WAS 550. SO THE COUNCIL IN 2012 WAS DEALING WITH MUCH OF -- SOME OF THE SAME CONDITIONS. AND THAT'S WHY THERE WAS NO LARGE GROWTH -- THEY THINK THE PREVIOUS BOND PROGRAM WAS 550. THE NEXT ONE IN 2012 WAS 592. WE'RE KIND OF IN THAT -- IN THAT SAME PERIOD, AND THE QUESTION -- AND THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT WHEN WE DO THE MIDYEAR BUDGET AS WELL, BECAUSE IT AFFECTS OUR OPERATING BUDGET, WHEN DOES -- WHEN DOES IT START TO CHANGE, RIGHT? BECAUSE -- AND THAT'S THE PART THAT WE'RE BEING PRETTY CONSERVATIVE IN THE SENSE RIGHT NOW, BUT, YOU KNOW, IN OUR -- AT LEAST IN OUR FORECAST, THIS WAS LAST YEAR'S FORECAST, YOU'LL SEE THE UPDATED FIGURES IN MAY, WE'RE ANTICIPATING IT TAKING A COUPLE YEARS TO GET BACK UP THERE. BUT THAT'S JUST FROM -- AND GENERALLY, WE'RE PRETTY CONSERVATIVE IN THAT SENSE. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. WE'LL GO TO MY COLLEAGUES HERE. COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN? [00:45:02] >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU. THAT WAS FUNNY, GENERALLY, YOU'RE CONSERVATIVE. YOU GUYS ARE CONSERVATIVE. SO OUR VIEW OF THE CITY'S DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN IS A CRITICAL STEP IN ENSURING WE CONTINUE TO MEET OUR INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS WHILE MAINTAINING LONG-TERM FISCAL STABILITY. THE DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN ENSURES THE CITY'S CLEAR ABOUT WHAT DEBT WE CARRY, HOW IT'S STRUCTURED AND HOW IT WILL BE REPAID OVER TIME. FOR DISTRICT THREE, THIS MATTERS AND I'LL GIVE THIS SPEECH AGAIN BECAUSE TRADITIONALLY, WE WERE RED LINED, WE WERE FORGOTTEN AND WE ARE STILL TRYING TO MAKE UP FOR THE STREET IMPROVEMENT WE NEED, THE DRAINAGE, THE SIDEWALKS, THE FLOOD MITIGATION AND IT DEPENDS ON THE CITY MAINTAINING SOUND FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, WHICH YOU HAVE BY BEING FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE, AND INFORM HOW MUCH CAPACITY WE CAN RESPONSIBLY ASK VOTERS TO CONSIDER FOR FUTURE BOND PROGRAMS. SO CAN WE PULL UP SLIDE NUMBER 11. SO AS I LOOK -- AS I LOOK AT SLIDE NUMBER 11 AND AS I'VE BEEN HERE FOR THE LAST BOND AND THEN WATCH THE CITY GROW AS A CITY EMPLOYEE AND THEN JUST AS A RESIDENT, A LIFE-LONG RESIDENT OF SAN ANTONIO, IS WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD IN OUR BONDING CAPACITY. I THINK SCENARIO NUMBER 2 IS THE ONE I FEEL MOST COMFORTABLE ABOUT, BUT I WILL ENTERTAIN ANY OF MY COUNCILS WHO WANT TO TALK REGARDING -- OR IF WE COULD GET SOME MORE DATA REGARDING SCENARIO NUMBER 3. BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THE ASKS THIS -- THAT THE NEEDS ARE WELL BEYOND THE 1.2 BILLION THAT WE NEED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. BUT, AGAIN, AS WE LOOK AT THIS, THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE HAS REMAINED UNCHANGED SINCE 2004. 22 YEARS. 22 YEARS, AND WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GROW SO MUCH, BUT I THINK THE -- WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DO -- WE CANNOT AFFORD TO WAIT ANYMORE. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO JUST WAIT AND SEE. WHERE WE -- THE CLIMATE AND THE SITUATION WE LIVE IN RIGHT NOW IS GOING TO TAKE ACTION, AND WHICH NEED TO BE FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE BEFORE WE ARE SENT BACKWARDS, BASICALLY. SO I THINK WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT, WE NEED TO LOOK AT SCENARIOS NUMBER 2 AND 3. I THINK ON -- IF YOU COULD PULL UP SLIDE NUMBER 17, I THINK HERE WITH THE STORMWATER FEE AND THE INCREASE, I THINK WE DO NEED TO LOOK AT SCENARIO 2 AND 3 REGARDING THE DATA AND HOW THAT WOULD PLAY OUT. AND THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. THINGS ARE JUST GETTING MORE EXPENSIVE ALL AROUND, AND TO PRETEND LIKE THEY'RE NOT AND DO NO RATE INCREASE GIVES US $9.8 MILLION TO DEAL WITH A SEVERE PROBLEM IN TERMS OF STORMWATER AS I SEE WHEN WE DO HAVE THE TORRENTIAL RAINS, IT ALL HEADS SOUTH. SO WE ARE CONSTANTLY ON AN ONGOING DISCUSSION AT THE STATE LEVEL REGARDING OUR LIMITS ON PROPERTY TAX, OUR REVENUE GROWTH. WE CONSTANTLY FACE STRUGGLES EVERY TWO YEARS AT SESSION ABOUT WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DEFEND AND HOW CAN IT AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO SUPPORT ADDITIONAL DEBT. SO I ENCOURAGE MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES AS WE LOOK AT THIS BOND, THAT WE -- I'M HOPING WE CAN GET DONE IN MAY 2027, THAT WE LOOK TOWARDS THE FUTURE AND WE LOOK AT SAN ANTONIO GROWING AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE STRONG FINANCIALLY FOR THE FUTURE. SO IF WE CAN GO TO SLIDE NUMBER 22, I -- I WANT TO CONTINUE THESE DISCUSSIONS. I SUPPORT IT BEING MEASURED, I SUPPORT IT BEING DATA DRIVEN, BUT I MORE THAN ANYTHING, SUPPORT A SAN ANTONIO SOLUTION. SO WE HAVE BEEN DOING BONDS FOR -- AT LEAST UNTIL 2004. WE'VE BEEN DOING BONDS FOR I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG, ERIK, AND WE HAVE BEEN CONSERVATIVE AND WE HAVE -- WE HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE VOTERS EF RIFF TIME. EVERY TIME. I THINK AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE CONFIDENT IN THIS CITY THAT IS GROWING. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT HOME VALUES ARE GOING DOWN, BUT I ALSO SEE THE GROWTH OF NEW HOMES COMING IN AND AROUND THE SOUTHERN SECTOR AND THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO. SO I -- WHEN I LOOK AT THAT, I KNOW THAT OUR TAX REVENUE -- OUR PROPERTY [00:50:03] TAX REVENUE IS GOING TO INCREASE BECAUSE THESE ARE NEW HOMES THAT ARE NOT ON THE ROLLS YET TRULY, AND I THINK AS SAN ANTONIO AND THE SOUTH SIDE IN PARTICULAR GETS CREATIVE, THAT WE NEED TO SHOOT FOR THAT MAY 2027 PUBLIC VOTE DATE BECAUSE I THINK WAITING EVEN THE FEW MONTHS THAT WE DO, I'M CONCERNED ON HOW IT WILL IMPACT OUR STORMWATER -- THE PROJECTS WE NEED TO DO ON STORMWATER. AND SO, MIKE, IF YOU COULD COME UP AND ANSWER REGARDING STORMWATER, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE MY SCENARIO 2 AND 3 IS KIND OF -- I'VE -- WHAT DO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP THE CITY SAFE, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S NOT -- I KNOW IT'S NOT 9.8 MILLION. BUT IS -- BUT I DON'T WANT TO -- I DON'T WANT TO ASK FOR MORE THAN WE NEED. SO IS SCENARIO 2 SUFFICIENT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T SEE THE LARGE-SCALE FLOODING THAT WE SEE OR DOES SCENARIO 3 NEED TO BE CONSIDERED MORE? >> SHANNON: WELL, I THINK -- I MIGHT ASK ART TO COME UP AND HELP ME WITH THIS, PUBLIC WORKS, ART WILL OVERSEE THE STORMWATER AND NEED AND IT'S SIGNIFICANT. I DON'T WANT TO MISSPEAK. SO, ART, WELCOME TO SAN ANTONIO. >> THANKS, ART REINHARDT, PUBLIC WORKS, NICE TO BE BACK. JUST TO KIND OF PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE STILL CLOSE TO ABOUT $4 BILLION OF DRAINAGE NEED. A LOT OF WORK'S BEEN DONE OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS, CLOSE TO $2 BILLION WORTH OF WORK, A LOT OF THOSE NEEDS ARE LOCALIZED NEEDS AS WELL. THE MORE WE CAN DO THE BETTER. THAT'S KIND OF THE PERSPECTIVE. >> VIAGRAN: NO, AND I APPRECIATE THAT, ART, BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN WITHIN THE CITY BEFORE AND YOU KNOW HOW IT FLOODS AND THE RISKS WE HAVE, AND THE FACT IS WE TALK AND WE MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR HOMEOWNERS AND OOUR HOUSES IF THEY ARE NOT INSURED PROPERLY FOR WHAT WE SEE WHEN THE RAINS COME. I REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CONSCIOUS, UNDERSTANDING AND I APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY WHERE WE -- 24, IF YOU COULD BRING UP NUMBER 24, SLIDE NUMBER -- OKAY. I'M SORRY, GO BACK TO THE ONE WITH OUR -- THE ONE BEFORE THIS, WITH ALL THE -- NO, ALL THE LITTLE -- 23. THAT ONE. I LOVE THE COMMITTEES THAT WE HAVE. I THINK, THOUGH, RIGHT NOW AS WE THINK ABOUT OUR FUTURE AND WE THINK ABOUT OUR CHILDREN AND WE THINK ABOUT OUR YOUTH IS THAT IN EACH OF THESE CATEGORIES, THEY NEED TO BE CONSIDERED AS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE GOING TO PRIORITIZE. AND I KNOW YOU DIDN'T ASK FOR THAT, BUT I DO WANT TO LOOK AT THAT AS WE -- AS THEY FAISES THE CHALLENGES THAT WE THEY DO MOVING FORWARD. SO THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. ERIK, IF I DIDN'T ANSWER, I THINK I GOT SIZING OF THE BOND, STORMWATER, YES, I WANT A COORDINATED EFFORT, AND IN TERMS OF TIMELINE, MAY 2027 LOOKS GOOD. THANK YOU. >> WALSH: MAYOR, JUST ONE OTHER THING THAT I DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE UP YOUR TIME, COUNCILWOMAN, BUT JUST ON THE STORMWATER RATE, WE HAVEN'T CHANGED THAT RATE SINCE 2019, AND THAT STORMWATER RATE PRIMARILY FUNDS THE ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF OUR DRAINAGEWAYS. WE HAVE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE FUNDED OUT OF THAT AND AS -- AS, YOU KNOW -- ASIDE FROM THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT LEVERAGING FUTURE DEBT OUT OF THAT -- OUT OF THAT FUND AND OUT OF THAT RATE, WE WERE AT SOME POINT GOING TO NEED TO TALK ABOUT INCREASING THAT RATE, BECAUSE -- BECAUSE THE COST OF THAT SERVICE HAS GONE UP. WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT CONVERSATION, AND THE CONCEPT THAT WE'RE BRINGING YOU TODAY IS, LOOK, IF WE'RE GOING TO -- IF WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH A RATE EXERCISE WITH STORMWATER, THEN PART OF THE -- WE ALL KNOW -- YOU ALL KNOW CERTAINLY AND THE PUBLIC KNOWS THAT THERE'S DRAINAGE WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, THAT WE DO THAT SO THAT WE CAN ADDRESS THE CONSTRUCTION OR THE CAPITAL NEEDS. WE STILL HAVE THE OPERATIONS THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO MONITOR EVERY YEAR AND MANAGE. I SPOKE TO ONE OF YOU YESTERDAY ABOUT THE CLEARING OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT, THAT'S CONSTANT. AND SO REGARDLESS OF TODAY'S CONVERSATION ABOUT THE BOND, AT SOME POINT WE WERE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THAT'S A NECESSARY FUNCTION AND CERTAINLY WE COULD PROBABLY MOW AND CLEAR TWICE AS MUCH AS WE DO NOW IN THE SIZE OF OUR CITY, SO... THANK YOU, MAYOR. COUNCILMAN WHYTE? >> WHYTE: THANK YOU, MAYMAYOR. I'LL BEGIN BY JUST NOTING COUNCILWOMAN SPEARS HAD [00:55:04] TO LEAVE BUT SHE ASKED ME TO RELAY THAT SHE IS OPPOSED TO THE RATE INCREASES AND, ERIK, SHE SAID SHE'LL GET WITH YOU SOON ON THAT. AND I AGREE, IT IS -- IT'S REALLY UNFATHOMABLE TO ME THAT WE WOULD BE SITTING HERE TODAY TALKING ABOUT RAISING THE TAX RATE ON OUR CITIZENS AND NO MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL, I GUESS, AS WE'VE HEARD, HAS -- HAS RAISED THIS RATE ON THE CITIZENS SINCE 2004. AND NOW IS MOST CERTAINLY NOT THE TIME TO DO IT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT IS AHEAD THIS YEAR, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RAISING -- RAISING THE TAX RATE HERE, THE STORMWATER RATE, WE KNOW WE'VE GOT SAWS COMING AND ASKING TO RAISE RATES HERE IN A COUPLE MONTHS, CPS ENERGY RAISED RATES, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AND ARE COMING AGAIN LATER THIS YEAR TO ASK FOR A RATE INCREASE AGAIN. SOLID WASTE FEES HAVE INCREASED RECENTLY AS WELL, AND NOW WE WANT TO RAISE THE TAX RATE ON THE CITIZENS. IT IS, AGAIN, AS I SAID, IT'S UNFATHOMABLE TO ME THAT WE WOULD DO THAT. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS COUNCIL WOULD SERIOUSLY THINK TWICE BEFORE MOVING FORWARD IN THIS REGARD. INFRASTRUCTURE IS IMPORTANT, OF COURSE. A $625 MILLION BOND IS STILL A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY AND IF WE NEED MORE MONEY THAN THAT, THEN WE NEED TO DO WHAT WE DID DURING THIS PAST BUDGET CYCLE, WHICH IS LOOK WITHIN. AND WHEN WE DID LOOK WITHIN, WE FOUND, WHAT, 30 MILLION OR SO IN EFFICIENCIES WITHOUT CUTTING SERVICE IN THIS LAST CYCLE, AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO APPROACH AROUND 100 MILLION OVER THE TWO-YEAR BUDGET CYCLE. WE'VE GOT TO LOOK WITHIN OURSELVES, WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO PILE DEBT ONTO THE CITIZENS OF SAN ANTONIO AND TAKE MORE MONEY OUT OF THEIR POCKETS BY RAISING THEIR RATES. QUESTION ON SLIDE 3, HOW MUCH OF THE 2.6 BILLION IN OUTSTANDING DEBT ARE WE RETIRING OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, DO WE KNOW THAT? >> ELLIOTT: WE HAVE THAT. I DON'T HAVE IT ON ME TODAY, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT TO YOU. THE MAJORITY OF THE DEBT, THE AVERAGE LIFE IS 6.72 YEARS, SO THE MAJORITY OF OUR DEBT WITHIN THE NEXT 10 YEARS WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY DECLINING. >> WHYTE: OKAY. AND THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION, BY THE WAY. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW HOW MUCH WORK AND EVERYTHING YOU AND YOUR TEAM PUT INTO THIS, SO I DO APPRECIATE THAT. YOU KNOW, ON THE SCENARIO'S CHART WHERE WE TALK ABOUT IF WE GO WITH SCENARIOS 2 OR 3, THE RATE COULD -- COULD BE LOWERED IF WE HIT A CERTAIN GROWTH AMOUNT, BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT WOULD, RIGHT? SO UNDER WHAT SCENARIOS WOULD WE KEEP THE RATE -- THE INCREASED TAX RATE? >> ELLIOTT: IT REALLY DEPENDS. I MEAN, OVER TIME YOU LOOK AT THAT HISTORICAL SLIDE AND YOU SEE THAT PROPERTY TAX, THE PROPERTY VALUES GOING UP. I MEAN, I THINK THOSE WOULD BE CONSIDERATIONS OR OPTIONS FOR THE FUTURE COUNCIL, FOR FUTURE BOND PROGRAMS, IF YOU WANTED TO INCREASE THAT CAPACITY, THEN YOU CAN MAINTAIN THE CURRENT TAX RATE, OR YOU COULD DECREASE IT, BASED ON WHERE THOSE PROPERTY VALUES ARE AT THE TIME. >> WHYTE: YEAH. SO IT'S REALLY -- WHAT I'M ASKING IS, IS -- THERE REALLY AREN'T ANY SAFEGUARDS THAT ARE IN PLACE HERE TO AVOID SHIFTING THAT FINANCIAL PRESSURE ONTO FUTURE COUNCILS, RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN SPEND OR THAT A FUTURE COUNCIL CAN SPEND THE EXTRA MONEY ON. >> ELLIOTT: I MEAN, THERE'S GOING TO ALWAYS BE NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY. ONE THING WE WOULD DO THROUGH THE DRAFTING OF THIS FINANCIAL PATROLSY IS TRY TO PUT THE GUIDE POSTS UP THAT WOULD GUIDE US OF WHEN WE WOULD INCREASE THE TAX RATE AND DECREASE THE TAX RATE, BASED ON THE FACTORS AT THE TIME. >> WHYTE: YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT POINT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE THOUGHT THAT THE TAX RATE WILL SOMEHOW GO DOWN DURING -- DURING HIGHER GROWTH PERIODS, I JUST -- I JUST FRANKLY DON'T BELIEVE IT, RIGHT? THERE WILL ALWAYS BE [01:00:02] SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE CAN SAY WE NEED TO SPEND THE MONEY ON AND THE TAX RATE WILL REMAIN AT WHATEVER WE RAISE IT TO. SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE MUCH MORE ON THIS, MAYOR. I JUST -- YOU KNOW, AGAIN, NO MAYOR OR COUNCIL HAS DONE THIS IN OVER 20 YEARS, AND IN THE FISCAL CLIMATE THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW, WE SHOULD NOT BE TAKING MORE MONEY OUT OF PEOPLE'S POCKETS. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: ERIK, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? >> WALSH: YES, MA'AM. SO, COUNCILMAN, YOU KNOW, WE THOUGHT LONG AND HARD ON ANY FINANCIAL METRIC, ESPECIALLY WITH THE CITY LIKE SAN ANTONIO THAT HAS FRANKLY THE REPUTATION OF BEING VERY WELL FINANCIALLY MANAGED AND GOVERNED, WHAT THIS MEANT, RIGHT? AND ASSUMPTIONS CHANGE AND CONDITIONS CHANGE. YOU KNOW, AND I KIND OF WANT -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR THAT THE SCENARIO 2 AND 3 SAY "COULD" ON BOTH SIDES, RIGHT? AND TROY TALKED ABOUT THE LEVERS THAT WE USE NOW THAT WE WOULD NEED TO CONTINUE TO USE. WE HAVE AN AVERAGE LIFE OF 6.72 YEARS. IF WE MAKE THE AVERAGE LIFE 8.72 YEARS, THEN THAT'S A FINANCIAL LEVER WE HAVE TO MANAGE. AND SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THE RATE WOULD HAVE TO GO UP, IT SAYS IT COULD GO UP, JUST LIKE IT COULD GO DOWN. AND THE -- THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE ON THE CHART THAT SHOWS THE 21 CENTS STAYING FLAT SINCE 2021, HAD THAT BEEN THE CASE FOR THE LAST 21 YEARS, IF THIS WAS -- IF WE WERE DEALING WITH A DIFFERENT FINANCIAL ASSUMPTION, THAT NUMBER WOULD HAVE EBBED AND FLOWED WITH VALUES AND IT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED MULTIPLE COUNCILS OVER THAT 21-YEAR PERIOD TO EVALUATE THAT. BUT IT'S NOT A GIVEN. IT'S A CUSHION TO ALLOW US TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT, AND CERTAINLY IT IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW -- IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE TOOK A COUPLE OF MONTHS TO DO THIS HOMEWORK BECAUSE WE WANTED TO THINK THROUGH HOW WERE OTHER CITIES DOING THIS FROM THAT STANDPOINT. IT -- IT IS -- WE ARE AN OUTLIER TO SAY THAT WE HAVE THE SAME DEBT SERVICE RATE FOR THE LAST 21 YEARS, GIVEN THE GROWTH. AND WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO MANAGE THROUGH THAT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT -- THAT THE PUBLIC WATCHING DOESN'T TAKE AWAY FROM HERE THAT THE RATE'S GOING TO GO UP IF WE DO A BILLION DOLLARS IN BONDS POTENTIALLY. THE RATE COULD GO DOWN, RIGHT? THAT'S -- THAT'S -- THE WORD "COULD" IS IN BOTH SIDES OF THAT FORMULA. AND LIKE COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN REITERATED, WE'RE CONSERVATIVE. OUR AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH OF 6.4% -- AUDIO] -- OF THE 3.25 -- OF THE 6.4%, ON AVERAGE, WE'RE GETTING ABOUT 2% ON NEW IMPROVEMENTS, SO 2/3 OF THAT 3.25 ARE NEW IMPROVEMENTS, NEW HOMES, NEW COMMERCIAL. AND WE DON'T EXPECT THAT TO EBB AND FLOW LIKE THE OVERALL VALUES. >> WHYTE: YEAH. AND I'LL JUST SAY THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND I'M NOT -- I'M CERTAINLY -- DON'T WANT TO DEBATE YOU ON THAT, BUT I THINK THE REALITY IS THAT THE PRACTICAL REALITY IS, IS YOU GIVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO RAISE THE RATE, THE RATE'S GOING TO BE RAISED. ONCE IT'S RAISED, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE -- IT'S NOT GOING TO BE LESSENED. OKAY. THAT'S JUST -- THAT'S JUST HOW THINGS WORK, RIGHT? YOU PUT -- YOU PUT THREE COOKIES IN FRONT OF A KID, HE'S GOING TO EAT ALL THE COOKIES. HE'S NOT GOING TO LEAVE ONE THERE, OKAY? I MEAN, THERE IS ALWAYS GOING -- THERE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO BE NEEDS, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO SPEND, SPEND, SPEND AND PUT IT ON THE CITIZENS. SO I HEAR YOU THAT "COULD" IS IN BOTH OF THOSE, BUT I DO NOT SEE THE TAX RATE BEING RAISED AND THEN LESSENED. WE SHOULDN'T RAISE IT AT ALL. COUNCILMAN GALVAN? >> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, TROY, FOR THE PRESENTATION AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK ON THE BACK END TO PUT THIS TOGETHER. A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS AROUND THE CAPACITY. I'M TRYING TO SEE THE NOTES I HAD. FOR SLIDE 10, DO THESE SCENARIOS INCLUDE UTILIZING A STORMWATER REVENUE BOND OR IS IT ALL -- LET ME MAKE SURE IT'S SLIDE 10. >> ELLIOTT: THE SCENARIOS WE SHOWED ON 11, 12 AND 13 ARE ALL FOCUSED ON THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND WHICH ARE SEPARATE FROM THE SLIDES LATER ON IN THE PRESENTATION WHICH WERE FOCUSED ON THE REVENUE BONDS FOR STORMWATER. >> GALVAN: WITH COORDINATION WITH BOTH OF THEM, DO WE ANTICIPATE ANY INCREASED CAPACITY WITHIN THE GEO BONDS BY USING THE STORMWATER BONDS? >> ELLIOTT: I THINK IT'S WITHIN. IF COUNCIL WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A BILLION OR $1.2 BILLION, DEPENDING [01:05:04] ON HOW WE STRUCTURE THE PROPOSITIONS, YOU COULD DO -- FOCUS ON STORMWATER DESIGN, WHICH WOULD FREE UP AND UTILIZE THE REVENUE BONDS FOR THE STORMWATER FOR THE THAT WOULD FREE UP ADDITIONAL CAPACITY WITHIN THE $1.2 BILLION FOR POTENTIALLY STREETS . OR IF YOU WANT TO DO ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE. BUT IT GIVES YOU MORE FLEXIBILITY AS A COUNCIL BETWEEN THE BOND AND ANOTHER $100 MILLION IN A REVENUE BOND. >> GALVAN: DO WE ANTICIPATE THE REVENUE BOND WOULD COVER CAPITAL COSTS? >> ELLIOTT: IT COULD. >> GALVAN: THAT'S HELPFUL. I KNOW YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THE HOUSING BOND. IF WE INCREASED THAT $150 MILLION TO HIGHER, THAT IT WOULD BE MORE COSTLY. COULD YOU GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN OR EXPAND UPON IT? >> ELLIOTT: OUR CHARTER WAS CHANGED TO ALLOW US TO ISSUE BONDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AFFORDABLE HOUSING CERTAINLY IS A PUBLIC PURPOSE. BUT FOR I.R.S. TAX PURPOSES, IT IS WHAT WE CONSIDER A PRIVATE ACTIVITY. AND SO THAT HAS -- YOU HAVE TO ISSUE TAXABLE BONDS, WHICH COST MORE ON THE MARKET. SO IN TERMS OF OUR ASSUMPTIONS FOR TAX-EXEMPT DEBT, WE MAY FOCUS ON A 4.5% OR A 5% RATE BUT IT MAY COST US 6% FOR TAXABLE BONDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IT COSTS MORE TO ISSUE BONDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAN FOR A PUBLIC USE. >> GALVAN: IS THAT JUST BECAUSE OF DIFFERENT FINANCING? WHAT'S THE REASON BEHIND IT? JUST TO PAY IT OFF? >> ELLIOTT: IN THE I.R.S. CODE, TAXABLE DEBT IS MORE EXPENSIVE, BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF DEBT IT IS. >> GALVAN: THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY ASSUMPTIONS BETWEEN THE 2027 AND MAY 2027 TIMELINE? >> ELLIOTT: WHICH ONE? >> GALVAN: IF WE HAD THE ELECTION -- >> ELLIOTT: THERE WOULD BE LITTLE. AT THAT POINT IN TIME WE HAVE SET THE CAPACITY NUMBER. WE WOULD HAVE A CERTIFIED ROLL BUT THAT WOULD GIVE US INSIGHT AS TO WHERE WE'RE SITTING IN THE TAX RATE NOT SO MUCH THE BOND CAPACITY . >> GALVAN: ON THE STORMWATER ONE AGAIN, DO WE HAVE ANY DATA ON HOW MUCH STORMWATER -- HOW MUCH REVENUE WE'RE GETTING FOR STORMWATER FEES PER COUNCIL DISTRICT? >> ELLIOTT: I DO NOT HAVE THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF ART -- >> GALVAN: IF WE DON'T HAVE IT NOW, YOU CAN SEND IT LATER. >> COUNCILMAN, I DON'T HAVE A BREAKDOWN WITH ME BUT THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 400,000 ACCOUNTS CITYWIDE SO WE WOULD NEED TO PARSE IT OUT PER DISTRICT. THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD FOLLOW UP ON. >> GALVAN: THAT WOULD BE GREAT. I KNOW WE FOCUSED ON RESIDENTIAL ONES BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THE NON-RESIDENTIAL AND SEEING THE COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TOTAL REVENUES FROM BOTH ENDS AS WELL AS EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT. >> OF THE 400,000, APPROXIMATELY 50,000 ARE NON-RESIDENTIAL. BUT THAT MAKES UP ABOUT 55% OF THE OVERALL REVENUE. ABOUT 80% OF THE TOTAL IMPERVIOUS COVER. >> GALVAN: WOW. IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE COULD STRUCTURE IT TO WHERE THE NON-RESIDENTIAL -- WE COULD INCREASE THE RATE ON THE NON-RESIDENTIAL VERSUS THE RESIDENTIAL? >> JUST A BRIEF BIT OF HISTORY. WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS TEN YEARS AGO, SO THE RATE WAS DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY TO RECOVER THE REVENUE THAT WE NEEDED FOR THE OVERALL OPERATION. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK AT OVER A LENGTHY PERIOD OF TIME. >> GALVAN: WHAT WOULD THAT TIME-FRAME LOOK LIKE? WOULD IT BE IN TIME FOR THE BOND? >> WALSH: COUNCILMAN, LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT INCREASING THE RATE OR MAKING RATE CHANGES JUST ON NON-RESIDENTIAL? >> GALVAN: YES. FOR STORMWATER. >> WALSH: I THINK WE NEED SOME TIME TO THINK THROUGH WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD DO THAT. I CAN -- WE CAN GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT. >> GALVAN: I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO LOOK AT THAT AND SEE WAYS -- IF WE COULD DO IT, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE LOOK AT NOT ONLY THE STORMWATER THAT COMES OFF BECAUSE OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, 80% FROM THESE RESIDENTIAL PLACES, THAT JUST ANTICIPATES INCREASED NEED FOR STORMWATER. AS WELL AS IF WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR CLIMATE GOALS, TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE REDUCING IMPERVIOUS COVER, IT MAKES SENSE TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF A STICK APPROACH BUT ALSO A CARROT IN SOME WAY. THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHT ON THAT. I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE IF WE COULD DO THAT FOR THIS BOND, IN PARTICULAR. I'LL LEAVE THAT ONE THERE. BUT, THANK YOU. I'M ALSO INTERESTED, I GUESS, WHAT WOULD -- GIVEN THE FACT THAT IMPERVIOUS COVER GOES BY SQUARE FOOTAGE, IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR SMALLER-SIZED HOMES, IS THE STORMWATER FEE HIGHER [01:10:10] FOR THOSE HOUSEHOLDS VERSUS LARGER HOUSEHOLDS THAT HAVE MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER DUE TO LARGER YARD SIZE? >> SO THE STRUCTURE THE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL. THE RESIDENTIAL IS BROKEN INTO THREE TIERS. RATHER THAN TRYING TO MEASURE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON 300-PLUS THOUSAND, IT WAS BROKEN INTO TIERS ON THE RANGE. THE TIERS THAT HAVE THE SMALLER PERCENT PAY A LESSER FEE BECAUSE THEY'RE LESS IMPERVIOUS. SIMILAR CONCEPT ON THE NON-RESIDENTIAL, IT'S JUST A COST PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET. THE COST IS LESS IF YOU HAVE LESS IMPERVIOUS COVER. >> GALVAN: THAT IS HELPFUL. I THINK MY QUESTION -- I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL WITH THE COUNCIL DISTRICT BREAKDOWN. I'M THINKING SOME OF THE MORE DENSE AREAS, THAT THEY ARE SMALLER LOT SIZES BUT LIKELY LARGER IMPERVIOUS COVER, GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT'S MOSTLY BUILDING ON THAT SIDE. WOULD WE SEE A HIGHER RATE VERSUS A LARGER HOUSEHOLD? >> ON THE RESIDENTIAL, IT'S SQUARE FOOTAGE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER, NOT LOT SIZE. THE PRIOR RATE MODEL WAS PURELY LOT SIZE. YOU COULD HAVE TWO ONE-ACRE LOTS AND THEY PAID THE SAME AMOUNT. THEY PULLED THE TIERS BACK UP. YOU CAN SEE THERE FOR RESIDENTIAL TIER ONE, THAT'S LESS THAN 2750 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS AREA. THAT'S THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE, DRIVEWAYS, ANYTHING ELSE. SO IT'S A LESSER FEE THAN IF YOU HAVE MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER. >> GALVAN: THANK YOU. THAT'S HELPFUL. ON THE HOUSING BOND, I KNOW WE'RE NOT GIVING NUMBERS, BUT I ANTICIPATE A LARGER NUMBER FOR THE FUTURE ONE. I'LL WAIT TO TALK ABOUT THAT. I DO STILL THINK, IF WE CAN, IDENTIFY A WAY TO PUT IT WITHIN THE HOUSING TRUST FUND OR SIMILAR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND TO CREATE THAT PERMANENT CAPACITY WITHIN OUR HOUSING DOLLARS. THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR ANY BOND WE DO IN THE FUTURE FOR HOUSING BOND DOLLARS. I THINK GENERALLY WITH ANY KIND OF LARGER GUIDELINES FOR THE BOND, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING ABOUT WAYS WE CAN INCORPORATE MORE COMPLETE STREETS WITHIN OUR BOND PROGRAMMING. I KNOW MY TEAM REACHED OUT TO THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TO SEE WHAT WAYS THAT IF WE ARE LOOKING AT USING OUR BOND DOLLARS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS LARGELY FOR COMPLETE STREETS, HOW MUCH WOULD WE GET IN A RETURN? WE WOULD HAVE LESS MAINTENANCE COSTS. I'M INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND SEE IF THAT BALANCES OUT WITH SOME OF OUR BOND EXPECTATIONS FOR DIFFERENT AREAS OF OUR CITY. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. OH, I WANTED TO ASK. I KNOW DURING MIKE'S PORTION WE TALKED ABOUT THE KIND OF TIMELINE. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN AUDIO] FALL 2026. IS THERE ANY REASON AS TO WHY WE DON'T HAVE -- IS THERE ANY WAY WE COULD HAVE BOND COMMITTEES BEFORE WE HAVE THE EXACT PROJECT SCOPING AND COST ESTIMATES? >> WALSH: NO. THERE'S NO REASON. IF WE STAY ON A TRACK FOR A MAY '27, THAT GUIDING PRINCIPLES CONVERSATION WITH THE COUNCIL IN B SESSION, THAT IS A POTENTIAL FOR YOU ALL TO ADJUST THE TIMELINE PART. >> GALVAN: OKAY. I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO HAVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EARLIER THAN THAT IN TERMS OF THE BOND COMMITTEE SO WE CAN HAVE OUR RESIDENTS GIVE A BIT MORE INPUT ON WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. OF COURSE WE HAVE OUR RECOMMENDED LIST BUT I THINK I WOULD PREFER OUR RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO GET SOME KIND OF GUIDANCE DURING THAT CONVERSATION PRIOR TO GIVING THEM A LIST SAYING THIS IS WHAT WE CAN APPROVE, NOT APPROVE, ADJUST MINORLY. AND THEN WE MISS SOME OF THE THINGS BEFOREHAND. THOSE ARE ALL MY COMMENTS FOR NOW. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: ERIK, CAN YOU CLARIFY THE COMMENT THAT YOU JUST MADE THAT THE INPUT THAT THE COUNCILMAN WAS ASKING FOR YOU SAID WAS ATTAINABLE BY STICKING TO THE MAY TIMELINE. WHY IS IT SPECIFIC TO THE MAY TIMELINE? >> WALSH: NO, I WAS JUST USING THAT AS AN EXAMPLE, MAYOR. IF WE GIVE YOU TWO TIMELINES. BUT IF THE COUNCIL -- IF THE CITY MOVED TOWARDS A MAY '27 TIMELINE AND WE USED THE '22 PROCESS AND THE 2017 PROCESS, THE COUNCILMAN'S POINT IS THE CITIZEN BOND COMMITTEES HAPPENED AT THE END OF THE COUNCIL DETERMINATION TO REVIEW THE COUNCIL PROPOSED LIST. AND THEN THE CITIZENS COMMITTEES COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITH ANY SUGGESTED CHANGES AND YOU GUYS CONSIDER AND ADOPT IT. I THINK WHAT THE COUNCILMAN [01:15:01] IS SUGGESTING IS CAN THAT PROCESS HAPPEN EARLIER. AND THE ANSWER IS YES. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK YOU. I WAS HOPING COUNCILMAN WHYTE WOULD BE BACK IN TIME > I AM. Select to skip to this part of the video">FOR ME TO SAY "UNFATHOMABLE." >> I AM. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: GOOD. ON SLIDE 25, GENERALLY WE HAVE CONSIDERED A NUMBER OF RATE INCREASES ON MY TIME ON COUNCIL AND I DON'T THINK I HAVE EVER VOTED IN SUPPORT OF ONE. THE REASON WHY IS THEY AREN'T TO BE TAKEN LIKELY AND I HOLD TWO CORE BELIEFS IF I WERE TO EVER SUPPORT A RATE INCREASE. ONE IS THAT IF RESIDENTS ARE PAYING MORE THAN THE SERVICE THAT THEY'RE RECEIVING SHOULD IMPROVE. YOU SHOULD SEE AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE WORST STREETS IN OUR CITY. YOU SHOULD SEE COMMUNITY CENTERS EXPAND AND GROW AS WELL AS ALL OF THEIR OFFERINGS. LIBRARIES SHOULD EXPAND THEIR REACH, THEIR SERVICE, AND THEIR CAPACITY. PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES SHOULD MEET OUR GROWING NEED. AND WE SHOULD BE MAKING OUR BUILT ENVIRONMENT SAFER. AND SO I THINK ABOUT ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT OUR BOND PROGRAM ALLOWS US TO DO. AND THEN BALANCE THAT WITH THE SECOND CORE BELIEF, WHICH IS THAT THE FOLK WHO WILL FEEL THE INCREASE THE MOST SHOULD FEEL THE BENEFIT. AND SO WHERE THE NEED IS OVERLAPS ALMOST PERFECTLY WITH WHO WOULD MOST FEEL THE IMPACTS OF ANY SORT OF RATE INCREASE. I THINK SHOULD WE MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY SORT OF RATE INCREASE. I DO THINK WE NEED TO DOUBLE DOWN ON OUR EQUITY LENS AND DOUBLE DOWN ON MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE INVESTING AND WHERE IT IS NEEDED THE MOST. ALL THAT TO SAY THAT COMMITTING TO EQUITY, NOT THE BASTARDIZED DEFINITION OF EQUITY THAT I'M STARTING TO SEE CREEP UP IN DIALOGUE AROUND THE CITY. SO AS IT RELATES TO NO. 2 AND 3, I'M IN SUPPORT, I BELIEVE, AT LEAST FOR SOME OPTIONS AND FOR US TO CONTINUE CONSIDERING IT. AND THEN COUNCILMAN GALVAN ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT BULLET 4, WHICH IS THERE A MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN MAY AND NOVEMBER 2027. IF THE CAPACITY ISN'T THAT MUCH GREATER, I WOULD PREFER WE GO WITH MAY BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET FROM THE APPROVAL OF THE 2022 BOND PROGRAM TO THE DESIGN PROCESS. AND TO THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE STARTING. SO I THINK JUST OUR CONSTITUENTS WOULD BENEFIT FROM SEEING THEIR PROJECTS COME TO LIFE SIGNIFICANTLY QUICKER, WHICH IS -- THAT'S GOING TO BE OUR OWN ACCOUNTABILITY THING AS WELL. WITH SLIDE 24, I ALSO, ON THE ISSUE OF BOND FUNDING AND LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT THAT LAST ONE AND LEVERAGING FUNDING FROM OUTSIDE AGENCIES AND PROJECT CONTINUATION. WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE BUDGET THIS YEAR AND IT WAS LARGELY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO PUT ON YOUR OWN MASK FIRST IF YOUR PLANE IS GOING DOWN. AND WE WERE CONSIDERING, YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF -- WHAT COULD OUR PARTNERSHIPS LOOK LIKE AND CAN WE AFFORD CONTINUE SUPPORTING NONPROFITS. I STRUGGLE A LITTLE BIT MORE WITH THE BOND WHEN I KNOW THAT WE HAVE ALL RECEIVED PRESENTATIONS AND REQUESTS FROM A NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS AND WE CANNOT AFFORD TO SPEND $30 MILLION ON A SINGLE ORGANIZATION'S PROJECT WHEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SENIOR CENTERS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS THAT NEED JUST AS MUCH. AND SO ALL THAT SAID -- I'M GOING TO LEAVE THAT THERE -- BUT DEFINITELY WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT THAT AS WE'RE SETTING OUR PROJECTS. I ALSO THINK -- IF WE COULD GO TO SLIDE 22. OKAY. I THINK GOING BACK TO WHAT COUNCILMAN GALVAN WAS SAYING, I STRUGGLE A LITTLE BIT WITH THAT SHIFT. I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE IDENTIFY SOME POTENTIAL PROJECTS ON OUR END THAT MAYBE CONSTITUENTS DON'T ALWAYS USE. I THINK A LOT OF OUR CONSTITUENTS AREN'T GOING TO USE OUR PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES. THEY'RE NOT -- THEY WOULDN'T HAVE NECESSARILY THOUGHT TO SUPPORT A VETERINARY HOSPITAL. THOSE WERE PROJECTS THAT WE WERE ABLE TO INTRODUCE TO THEM. I THINK WHAT WE COULD DO AND WHAT MY PLAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN WAS TO CONVENE MY OWN GROUP OF CONSTITUENTS WHO I THINK I WOULD WANT TO SERVE ON THE BOND COMMITTEE ANYWAY. AND WE START HAVING OUR OWN MEETINGS, OUR OWN INPUT GATHERING AND WE COME TO THOSE COMMITTEE MEETINGS PREPARED WITH WHAT WE WANT, WHAT WE NEED, WHAT COMMUNITY FEEDBACK WE'VE RECEIVED SO FAR. [01:20:03] I THINK IT'S POSSIBLE TO DO BOTH. THAT BEING SAID, WHAT DAY IS IT? IS TODAY WEDNESDAY? WE HAD OUR TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE MEETING YESTERDAY AND WE HAD TWO PRESENTATIONS. ONE WAS ON STATUS OF THE CREATION OF A FACILITY INDEX, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE ALL OF OUR CITY-OWNED FACILITIES, WHICH IS OVER 500, AND PARKS AND WHATNOT. AND THE SECOND ONE WAS ABOUT THE DISPOSITION PROCESS OF OUR SURPLUS PROPERTY. AND THERE WERE TWO REASONS. ONE, FOR THE FIRST PRESENTATION I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT AS WE PROPOSE BOND PROJECTS AND AS WE'RE MAKING DECISIONS AS IT RELATES TO OUR BOND PROGRAM, WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE NEED IS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE SURPRISED IF WE WANT A MINOR RENOVATION TO THIS COMMUNITY CENTER AND THEN WE GET IT THROUGH THE LIST AND WHATNOT AND WE FIND OUT THAT IT NEEDS WAY MORE THAN WHAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY THOUGHT. AND WE HAVE TO START CUTTING PROJECTS AND WHATNOT. I'D LIKE US TO BE ABLE TO MAKE AT LEAST SOME OF THOSE PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATIONS OF PROJECT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT INFORMED BY DATA AS WELL AS THE QUALITATIVE AND USE THAT IT HAS, ALL OF THAT. BUT THEN IN ADDITION, THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY WITH SOME OF OUR VACANT CITY-OWNED PROPERTY THAT -- ONE OF MY GOALS IS TO TURN SO MANY PROPERTIES INTO PARKS IN MY DISTRICT, TO IMPROVE OUR PARK SCORE AND INCREASE ACCESS TO GREEN SPACE AND THE LIKE. AND SO YOU ALL SHOULD BE RECEIVING, FAIRLY SOON, A LIST OF ALL THE SURPLUS PROPERTIES IN YOUR DISTRICT AND MAYBE YOU CAN USE THAT TO THINK CREATIVELY. ALL THAT TO SAY I AM SUPER -- I'VE BEEN EXCITED ABOUT THE BOND PROCESS SINCE 2022. I'M READY TO GET THIS ONE STARTED AND I THINK THAT WE OWE OUR CONSTITUENTS THE BEST. I DON'T THINK WE CAN GET THAT IF WE LEAVE THINGS AS-IS AT THE $625 AMOUNT. WE JUST WON'T. I'LL TOUCH ON A FEW THINGS SINCE I HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. I WANT TO LAY OUT TO Y'ALL WHAT'S HAPPENING IN DISTRICT 2 RIGHT NOW. WE HAD MAJOR FACILITIES AS A PART OF ONE OF THE BOND PROPOSITIONS. ONE WAS THE ELLA AUSTIN COMMUNITY CENTER AUDIO]. WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE DONE WITH THAT. WITH THIS LAST BOND. I THINK IT'S GOING TO IMMEDIATE MORE. THE CARVER LIBRARY. WE GOT TO THE DESIGN PHASE, FOUND OUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT IT INTO TWO PHASES. IT'S GOING TO TWICE AS MUCH. WE'RE GOING TO NEED SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS TO COMPLETE THAT PROJECT. WE HAVE THE YMCA, THE SENIOR CENTER THAT'S CURRENTLY IN DESIGN RIGHT NOW THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FUNDED. I HAVE A LOT OF FACILITIES AND I DON'T SEE A WORLD IN WHICH DISTRICT 2 EATS UP THE ENTIRE FACILITIES BOND. AND SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE MY COLLEAGUES' SUPPORT IN IS WE HAVE THE INNER CITY TIRZ IN MY DISTRICT AND I WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH CITY STAFF TO TRY TO FUND SOME OF OUR PROJECTS THAT ARE FACILITIES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE REALLY COMPETITIVE IN A BOND. I'D LIKE TO TRY TO FUND THEM IN ALTERNATIVE MECHANISMS. THAT WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO GO TO THE TIRZS BOARD AND COME TO COUNCIL. I WOULD ASK THAT AS THOSE START TO ARRIVE, IF AND WHEN THEY DO, THAT YOU GUYS KEEP THAT LENS IN MIND, THAT THAT'S THE PURPOSE FOR IT. IT'S NOT JUST A BUNCH OF SUPERFLUOUS PROJECTS FOR THE SAKE OF IT, IT'S PROJECTS THE COMMUNITY REALLY WANTS AND HAS BEEN ASKING FOR. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ. >> GONZALEZ: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. WHERE DO I START? I GUESS I'LL START WITH -- I THINK YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, IF OUR VALUATION IS HIGHER, I THINK THEN IN 2022, YOU SAID? WHY IS THE BOND CAPACITY LOWER? DID YOU SAY IT WAS HIGHER IN 2022? >> ELLIOTT: I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, COUNCILWOMAN. IF BOND CAPACITY WAS HIGHER IN 2022. IS THERE A SPECIFIC SLIDE I CAN REFER TO? >> GONZALEZ: I THOUGHT IT WAS IN -- WAS IT 6? I CAN'T REMEMBER WHERE I SAW THAT. WAS THERE A VALUATION HIGHER? >> ELLIOTT: I GUESS IN TERMS OF CAPACITY. I'M NOT SURE THIS IS YOUR QUESTION, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE VALUES I PRESENTED ON SLIDE 6 AND 7, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE A DIRECT CORRELATION IN TERMS OF HOW IT TRANSLATES TO CAPACITY. [01:25:05] AS THE VALUES GREW, WE WERE ABLE TO LAYER IN OUR CAPACITY BASED ON THAT STABLE TAX RATE. AND THEN THE RISING TAXABLE VALUES. FROM $550 MILLION IN 2007 TO 2022, TO GENERATE $1.2 BILLION IN 2022. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION . >> IS YOUR QUESTION IF OUR VALUES HAVE BEEN GROWING SINCE 2022, WHY ARE THE VALUES DROPPING? WE STILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DEBT TO ISSUE. YOU DO DESIGN UP FRONT AND CONSTRUCTION ON THE BACK END. WE HAVE TO LAYER IN ALL THAT DEBT THAT WE STILL HAVE TO ISSUE TO COMPLETE 2022 AND THEN YOU'RE TRYING TO LAYER IN A NEW BOND PROGRAM. WE'RE DOING IT IN A CYCLE WHERE OUR TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATION HAS FLATTENED OUT. WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT CHANGE IS GOING TO OCCUR. THAT THING WILL CYCLE BACK UP. SO THE FLEXIBILITY WE'RE ASKING FOR ON THE TAX RATE IS REALLY TARGET 21 CENTS BUT YOU FLEX A LITTLE BIT ABOVE OR A LITTLE BIT BELOW, DEPENDING ON WHAT VALUES YOU'RE DOING. WE TAKE OUT SOME OF THE TIMING. WE HAPPEN TO BE IN A DOWN CYCLE WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO FINISH I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. AND HAVE WE EVER DECREASED THE RATE IN THE PAST OF BONDS? >> ELLIOTT: PRIOR TO 2004, THAT RATE WAS FLUCTUATING. THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES DURING THE PAST YEARS WHERE WE HAVE SHIFTED THE RATE BETWEEN DEBT SERVICE AND O&M. IT HAS GONE DOWN BUT NOT SINCE 2004. >> WALSH: OVERALL OUR RATE HAS GONE DOWN SEVEN TIMES IN THE LAST 32 YEARS, COUNCILWOMAN. >> ELLIOTT: OVERALL THE LAST 33 YEARS I THINK OUR RATE HAS GONE DOWN. I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THIS IN A WHILE BUT I THINK IT'S GONE DOWN ON SLIDE 10, IF GROWTH IS SLOWER, IS THERE -- WOULD THERE BE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO SCALE BACK THE ISSUANCE OF DEBT SO IT DOES NOT IMPACT THE HOMEOWNER? >> ELLIOTT: ONCE WE GO FOR A BOND AUTHORIZATION -- I HAVE TO TALK TO BOND COUNSEL. WE HAVE MADE A COMMITMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY TO DELIVER THOSE PROJECTS. >> GONZALEZ: OKAY. >> ELLIOTT: IF THE RATE OR VALUES CONTINUE TO DECLINE, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT WE WOULD LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS OR OTHER LEVERS THAT WE CAN PULL BEFORE PULLING THE TRIGGER ON A RATE INCREASE. BUT WE WOULD LOOK AT THE LIFE OF OUR DEBT. THERE ARE OTHER FACTORS THAT ARE GOING TO CHANGE, IN TERMS OF WHAT THE FEDS DO IN TERMS OF RATES, DEPENDING ON HOW THE ECONOMY STARTS MOVING AGAIN. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS, A LOT OF ASSUMPTIONS WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT AT THAT TIME, IN ADDITION TO THE LEVERS WE WOULD BE PULLING. >> GONZALEZ: I APPRECIATE THE EXPLANATION OF HOW OUR PREVIOUS PLANS, WHERE TAX RATE DRIVES CAPACITY. THIS IS WHERE WE ARE NOW ALLOWED TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE -- SWAY A BIT. BUT I ALSO THINK, TO YOUR POINT, IT REQUIRES US TO BE MORE INTENTIONAL WHAT WE'RE PUTTING IN THOSE PACKAGES. THE NEED IS MORE CLEAR IN OUR COMMUNITIES. AND SO I HAVE SEEN IN OTHER BOND CYCLES WHERE PROJECTS COME IN AT THE END. WANTING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE MORE INTENTIONAL. I DO APPRECIATE THE PROCESS OF THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL VALUABLE TOOLS WITH RESIDENTS PARTICIPATING SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. I WANT TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF SCENARIO 2 IN SLIDE 10, AND ALSO IN SCENARIO 2 OR 3 IN SLIDE 15. BUT JUST MAKING SURE, AGAIN, THAT WE'RE MUCH MORE INTENTIONAL OF WHAT PROJECTS MAKE THEIR WAY TO THAT LIST OF BOND PROJECTS. BECAUSE THE NEED IS GREAT AND WE KNOW THAT. I THINK THAT'S IT FOR NOW. I'LL COME BACK MY SECOND ROUND. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANKS, TROY FOR THE PRESENTATION. TROY, YOU MENTIONED ON SLIDE 7 THAT OUR CURRENT FORECAST IS SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS 2007. WOULD THAT COMPARABLE ALSO APPLY TO THE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION TAX NOTES, SO ON [01:30:01] AND SO FORTH? >> ELLIOTT: IT WOULD. I MEAN, OUR CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION AND OUR TAX NOTES ARE ALL SUPPORTED BY OUR AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX. WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT CAPACITY, IT WOULD ACTUALLY INFLUENCE THE AMOUNT OF COS THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE AS WELL. >> CASTILLO: SIMILAR TO MY COLLEAGUE IN TERMS OF THE STORMWATER RATES, I'M CURIOUS TO WHAT IT WOULD GENERATE, IF WE LOOK AT THE NON-RESIDENTIAL RATES AND BRING THEM TO AN EQUAL OF THE RESIDENTIAL IN TERMS OF RATES. AND WHAT WOULD WE POTENTIALLY GENERATE IF WE INCREASE NON-RESIDENTIAL MONTHLY FEES. IS THAT SOMETHING Y'ALL COULD PROVIDE TO US? >> COUNCILWOMAN, COULD YOU REPHRASE THAT? ONE OF THE POINTS I MENTIONED EARLIER IS ON THE NON-RESIDENTIAL SIDE, ABOUT 55% OF THE OVERALL REVENUE IS COMING FROM THE NON-RESIDENTIAL. BUT THEY HAVE ABOUT 20% OF THE OVERALL NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS. >> CASTILLO: YES, UNDERSTOOD. MY QUESTION IS CAN WE SEE HOW MUCH THE NON-RESIDENTIALS COULD GENERATE IF THEIR MONTHLY FEE IS EQUAL TO THE CURRENT RATES OF RESIDENTIAL RATES? >> THE WAY IT'S DESIGNED, THE NON-RESIDENTIAL MONTHLY FEES ARE MUCH, MUCH HIGHER THAN RESIDENTIAL. ON AVERAGE, THE RESIDENTIAL FEE IS ABOUT $4.05. THE NON-RESIDENTIAL IS $110. THESE RANGE FROM $65 A MONTH TO OVER $10,000 A MONTH FOR SOME OF THE BIG USERS . IT'S A DRASTIC VARIATION BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. >> CASTILLO: YEAH. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, AGAIN GOING BACK TO WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF IT'S EQUAL TO THE RESIDENTIAL USERS. I KNOW THE COUNCILMAN REQUESTED SPECIFIC BY DISTRICT, AND I THINK BASED OFF THE DENSITY AND THE SIZE OF THE PARCELS WITHIN OUR DISTRICTS. BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT. I SHARE A SIMILAR SENTIMENT, WE'RE HAVING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT CPS/SAWS RATE INCREASES. I THINK THERE'S A RESPONSIBILITY FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH INTENTION BALANCING WITH WHAT'S SUSTAINABLE FOR THE CITY BUT ALSO REASONABLE FOR THE RESIDENTS. AS FOLKS HAVE HIGHLIGHTED, THERE IS SO MUCH NEED WITHIN OUR SPECIFIC COUNCIL DISTRICTS. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE DO SET PARAMETERS IN WHICH WE PRIORITIZE CITY-OWNED FACILITIES IN TERMS OF INVESTING BOND DOLLARS. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE WORKING WITH, YOU KNOW, A VERY FIXED BUDGET AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GENERATE BASED OFF THE SCENARIOS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO COUNCIL. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US REALLY FOCUS ON CITY-OWNED FACILITIES FOR THAT PROPOSITION. I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S VALUE WITH THE CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE THAT WAS ESTABLISHED WITH THE 2022 CYCLE. I KNOW MY CONSTITUENTS FELT INCLUDED AND HEARD AND THAT COUNCIL DID REFLECT THE WILL OF SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS IN TERMS OF WHICH PROJECTS WERE INCLUDED WITHIN EACH PROPOSITION. AGAIN, I WANTED TO HEAR THE CONVERSATION FROM MY COLLEAGUES BECAUSE I WANT TO ENSURE THIS ISN'T A REGRESSIVE TAX. WE WANT TO HAVE THE GREATEST IMPACT WITHIN OUR COMMUNITIES BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE BUFFERS IN PLACE THAT WE ARE SEEING THE GREATEST IMPACT WITH THE PROJECTS THAT DO MOVE FORWARD, THROUGH COUNCIL DELIBERATION. I WANTED TO SEGUE TO THE HOUSING BOND -- AND THIS IS SOMETHING I HAVE SHARED BEFORE. I DO BELIEVE THERE IS VALUE IN INCREASING CAPACITY FROM THE 150 TO MAYBE $250 MILLION. BUT WITH A FOCUS PRIMARILY ON LAND BANKING. WHAT WE KNOW IS THERE'S A LOT OF PARCELS WITHIN THE URBAN CORE WHERE THERE'S BACK TAXES. THOSE ARE TAXES THAT ARE NOT COLLECTED. AND IF WE PRIORITIZE LAND BANKING -- SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO SPEND MONEY TO MAKE MONEY. A LOT OF THESE PARCELS ARE SITTING UNCONNECTED AND THESE PROPERTIES HAVE LIENS, HOW CAN WE CLEAR THESE LIENS TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE TAX-GENERATING PROPERTIES RATHER THAN SITTING THERE SERVING AS NUISANCE PROPERTIES AND TAXES ARE NOT BEING COLLECTED. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE . AGAIN WITH THE STORMWATER FEE, THERE ARE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DRAINAGE NEEDS ALL THROUGHOUT THE CITY. I KNOW DISTRICT 5 BEARS A LOT OF THAT NEED SO I JUST WANT TO ENSURE THAT AS WE EXPLORE WHAT THAT STORMWATER FEE COULD LOOK LIKE THAT WE'RE ALSO FOLLOWING THE DRAINAGE ADVISORY BOARD AND THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW WE PRIORITIZE THOSE PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED. BECAUSE THERE'S JUST SO MUCH NEED. BUT I WANTED TO ASK IF THERE'S OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS END -- FOR EXAMPLE, I KNOW IT WAS MENTIONED THAT POTENTIALLY THE STORMWATER FEE, IF INCREASED, COULD BE USED TO SUPPORT PLANNING. AND THEN THE BOND TO SUPPORT CONSTRUCTION. BUT JUST GIVEN THE VAST NEED, I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE US FOCUS PRIMARILY ON PLANNING AND NOT NECESSARILY THE CONSTRUCTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THOSE [01:35:05] PLANS. >> WALSH: YEAH. I THINK WHAT TROY DESCRIBED WAS JUST A SUGGESTION. BUT ULTIMATELY, IT COULD BE A THIS AND THAT, NOT JUST AN EITHER/OR. >> CASTILLO: I APPRECIATE THAT 37 THIS MORNING I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH SEVERAL CONSTITUENTS AND THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE OVERALL IMPACT THAT THE POTENTIAL SPORTS DISTRICT IS GOING TO HAVE IN INCREASING PROPERTY TAXES ALL THROUGHOUT THE CITY . AND THEIR ASK WAS THAT IF THERE IS A REQUEST, WHICH WE KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE IN TERMS OF THE SPORTS DISTRICT, THAT IT IS ITS OWN PROPOSITION. THEY DID SHARE WITH ME SOME DATA, WHICH SHOWS THAT OVERWHELMINGLY, YOU KNOW, IN OTHER BEXAR COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES, THEY OVERWHELMINGLY VOTED FOR THE SPORTS PROPOSITIONS. WHEREAS WITHIN AN ANTONIO, IT WAS A CLOSE 52-48. FOLKS WHO ARE NOT GOING TO PAY WITH THIS BOND ARE SUPPORTIVE OF IT SO WE SHOULD ALLOW SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY YEA OR NAY IN TERMS OF A SPORTS DISTRICT FUNDING THROUGH THE BOND. SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BE HOPEFUL THAT THERE'S COUNCIL SUPPORT TO ALLOW SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS A SAY, A VOTE AT THE BALLOT BOX IF THEY ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THESE INFRASTRUCTURE DOLLARS FOR A SPORTS DISTRICT. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: AND THE GAVITO KIDS ARE HERE TO SPECIFICALLY ADVOCATE FOR PARKS IN THE BOND. IS THAT WHY WE ARE HERE, LADIES? COUNCILWOMAN ALDERETE GAVITO. >> GAVITO: THANK YOU. YEAH, THESE GIRLS DO LOVE THEIR PARKS. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION, TROY. IT WAS EXTREMELY HELPFUL. I ECHO THE SENTIMENT OF A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES. BONDS ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND THEY DO MUCH-NEEDED WORK ACROSS OUR CITY. THIS WILL BE THE FIRST TIME I'M GOING THROUGH THE BOND PROCESS ON COUNCIL. I DEFINITELY WANT TO GET MY COLLEAGUES' FEEDBACK ON WHAT'S WORKED AND WHAT HASN'T WORKED IN THE PAST. AND KIND OF UNDERSTAND ESPECIALLY WHAT'S WORKED AND WHAT HASN'T WORKED WITH COMMUNITY INPUT. I LIKED WHAT COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO SAID, A FOCUS ON CITY FACILITIES, YOU KNOW, FACILITIES THAT SERVE MANY. AND SO WITH THAT -- HOLD ON. LET ME LOOK. FOR THE -- CRAP. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. I FORGET WHAT SLIDE IT'S ON. FOR THE DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF SCENARIO 2 AND 3 BUT MOSTLY 2. ALSO, TOO, REGARDING STORMWATERWATER, YOU KNOW, AND E HEARD CHRISTINE DRENNEN AND OTHER FOLKS TALK ABOUT HOW THE CITY HAS BEEN BUILT AND KIND OF CHASING THE TAX BASE UP NORTH. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, LIKE COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO, Y'ALL SEE THE DRAINAGE ISSUES IN DISTRICT 5. WE TOO SEE A LOT OF DRAINAGE ISSUES IN DISTRICT 7. AND SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONTINUE TO INVEST, TO MAKE THAT RIGHT FOR ALL PARTS OF TOWN. ALTHOUGH, I WOULD SAY ALL DISTRICTS FEEL IT SOMEWHAT. AND SO REGARDING THE STORMWATER FEE INCREASE, I'M DEFINITELY SUPPORTIVE OF SCENARIO 3, EVEN POTENTIALLY SCENARIO 4 FOR THAT. ALSO TOO, I THINK WHEN WE KEEP PUSHING OFF THE STORMWATER FEE INCREASE, WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT MORE OF OUR RESIDENTS FIND THEMSELVES ON THE FEMA FLOOD MAP. THEY SEND UP HAVING TO PAY A TON OF MONEY IN FLOOD INSURANCE. I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US, AS A CITY, TO TRY TO MITIGATE THAT AS BEST AS POSSIBLE. ART, THANK YOU FOR MENTIONING WE HAVE BILLIONS OF STORMWATER WORK TO BE DONE AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO BE AGGRESSIVE ON THAT FRONT. THOSE ARE ALL MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN MUNGIA. >> MUNGIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE PRESENTATION. WHILE I WASN'T A COUNCIL MEMBER, I CERTAINLY WAS HERE ON STAFF FOR BOTH BONDS AND THAT PROVIDED SOME GOOD HISTORICAL CONTEXT. I REMEMBER 2017, MAYOR TAYLOR CALLED IT THE BACK TO BASICS BOND. THERE WAS A PUSH FOR A BASEBALL STADIUM THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN BACK THEN AND THERE WAS A LOT OF DOWNTOWN FUNDING THAT WAS IN THAT BOND, IT WAS SO UNPOPULAR IN 2022, WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE THAT CITYWIDE BOND CATEGORIES OR PROJECTS ANYMORE. AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY'RE ALL IN DISTRICTS. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT CONTEXT TO REMEMBER. THE OTHER THING I'LL SAY IS LEVERAGED PARTNERSHIPS CAN BE A LITTLE TRICKY. [01:40:06] ALTHOUGH THEY DO HAVE PRIVATE FUNDING INVOLVED IN THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME RESTRICTIONS. ANYTHING THAT HAS A LEVERAGED FUNDING IS NOT 100% PUBLIC AND THEREFORE HAS SOME RESTRICTIONS. WE'VE HAD SOME BEAUTIFUL NATATORIUMS IN DISTRICT 4. THE PUBLIC CAN'T ACCESS THOSE 24/7 LIKE THEY COULD A PUBLIC POOL FOR THOSE HOURS. I THINK THE LEVERAGED PARTNERSHIPS ARE A LITTLE BIT TRICKY BECAUSE THEY DO BRING MONEY BUT THEY DO LIMIT THE PUBLIC CONSUMPTION OF THAT BENEFIT. AND I'LL ALSO ADD THAT I SUPPORT TRUE EQUITY. I THINK THE PAST SEVERAL BONDS HAVE BEEN ROUGHLY EQUAL FOR DISTRICTS. OF COURSE, THAT MEANS THAT ONE DISTRICT MIGHT HAVE MORE IN THE STREETS AND SIDEWALKS AND THEN LESS IN DRAINAGE. AND THEN VICE VERSA. BUT ULTIMATELY, EVERY DISTRICT HAD ROUGHLY THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY INVESTED AND THAT HAS KEPT SOME DISTRICTS BEHIND INCLUDING MINE. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE LOOK AT ONE OF MY FAVORITE TOPICS, CLAY SOIL THAT'S IN CERTAIN PARTS OF THE CITY. IF YOU LOOK AT ZARZAMORA IN MY DISTRICT, WHICH WAS A 2012 BOND PROGRAM AND YOU COMPARE IT TO ANOTHER 2012 BOND PROGRAM SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY, MINE IS GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE, AND IT IS. WE HAVE TO REINVEST IN A PREVIOUS BOND PROGRAM PROJECT, WHICH IS JUST NOT GREAT FOR OUR DISTRICT. SO I DO SUPPORT THE INTENTION OF IT. I THINK THIS BOND WOULD REALLY HAVE TO BE A BACK TO BASICS BOND, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE GOING TOWARDS SCENARIO 2, WHICH I DO SUPPORT. AND I THINK IT'S TIME TO REALLY INVEST IN A LOT OF STREETS, SIDEWALKS, AND ALL THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO GET VERY MUCH WITH 625 DIVIDED BY 10, IF THAT'S EQUAL, THAT'S HARDLY ANYTHING WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT LARGE PROJECTS OF THAT NATURE. SO QUICK QUESTION. YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THE FEDERAL INTEREST RATES GO UP. THEY COULD GO UP. WHAT EFFECT WOULD THAT HAVE ON OUR CURRENT BONDS THAT WE ARE REPAYING, IF INTEREST RATES INCREASED? >> ELLIOTT: ON OUR CURRENT BONDS ALREADY ISSUED? THOSE RATES ARE ESTABLISHED AND WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE INVESTORS. IT WOULDN'T IMPACT THOSE. THE ONLY TIME THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED IS WHEN RATES WENT DOWN, WE WOULD LOOK AT REFINANCING OR REFUNDING THOSE BONDS. BUT IF THEY GO UP, WE'RE SET. THERE WOULD BE NO IMPACT. >> MUNGIA: OF COURSE IF THEY INCREASE AND WE GO UP FOR A BOND, THAT'S JUST LESS. >> ELLIOTT: THE ONLY IMPACT IT WOULD HAVE IS NOT SO MUCH ON THE BONDS, BUT IF FEDERAL INTEREST RATES GO UP, THERE IS ABFUND THAT WE HAVE TO PAY BACK. AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE PAYING ON OUR DEBT SERVICE, THERE WOULD BE NO IMPACT . >> MUNGIA: I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT A 3.25, 3.5% GROWTH. SO KIND OF WALK ME THROUGH THIS A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE I KIND OF HEARD MY COLLEAGUE EARLIER TALK ABOUT INCREASED TAXES FOR FOLKS. IF THE GROWTH WAS ABOVE THAT PERCENTAGE IN PROPERTY TAXES, PEOPLE WOULD BE PAYING THAT, RIGHT, THROUGH THEIR TAX BILL? >> ELLIOTT: SO IN THE EVENT, IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION RIGHT. BASED ON AN ESTABLISHED TAX RATE, IF VALUES GO UP, THEY WOULD BE PAYING HIGHER TAXES. IF THAT'S YOUR QUESTION. >> MUNGIA: YES. IF WE WENT WITH SCENARIO 2 AND WE WERE HOPING FOR 3.25 GROWTH, IF WE DIDN'T MEET THAT, WE WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE THE DEBT SERVICE TAX. BUT IF THAT GROWTH CAME, WE WOULDN'T HAVE DO INCREASE THE DEBT SERVICE TAX BUT PEOPLE WOULD MAY MORE, REGARDLESS. >> ELLIOTT: I GUESS THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD IS LOOKING AT THE TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS, THAT IN THE EVENT THAT WE DIDN'T MEET THE 3.25 ASSUMPTION, BEFORE WE RECOMMENDED TO THIS COUNCIL TO INCREASE THE TAX RATE, WE WOULD LOOK AT OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN ADJUST, BEFORE COMING BACK. IN THE EVENT THAT THAT TAX RATE GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND OUR ASSUMPTIONS, IT WOULD BE A DISCUSSION WITH THIS COUNCIL IF YOU WOULD WANT TO MAINTAIN THAT TAX RATE. BUT STAFF WOULD PROBABLY BE RECOMMENDING A POSSIBILITY OF DECREASING THAT TAX RATE TO ALIGN WITH OUR CAPACITY ANALYSIS. >> MUNGIA: AND DOING LESS. >> WALSH: YEAH. AND THE ANSWER TO THE OTHER PART OF YOUR QUESTION IS IF VALUE GOES UP AND THE RATE DOESN'T CHANGE, THEN THE HOMEOWNER OR THE PROPERTY OWNER ISN'T PAYING ANY MORE. THEIR VALUES ARE GOING UP BUT IF THE RATE DOESN'T CHANGE, THEY'RE NOT PAYING ANY MORE. WHETHER IT'S THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, CITY, COUNTY, WHATEVER. REGARDLESS OF THE VALUE CHANGE, IT'S GOT TO BE TIED [01:45:02] TO THE RATE. SO IN YOUR QUESTION, JUST BECAUSE VALUES GO UP, DOESN'T MEAN NECESSARILY INDIVIDUALS, PROPERTY OWNERS ARE GOING TO PAY MORE. IT JUST MEANS THEIR PROPERTY IS WORTH MORE. >> MUNGIA: BUT TAXABLE VALUE RAISES. >> WALSH: BUT IF THE RATE DOESN'T CHANGE, IT DOESN'T CHANGE. >> MUNGIA: NO, I HEAR YOU ON THAT. I THINK IT'S CERTAINLY WORTH TAKING A LOOK. I GUESS I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN WHAT THE AVERAGE COST WOULD BE. I KNOW IT'S HARD TO PINPOINT THAT BUT IF YOU HAD A $250,000 HOME AND WE HAD TO INCREASE THE DEBT SERVICE, WHAT KIND OF COST THAT PUTS ON THE HOMEOWNER, IF WE WERE TO GO TO SCENARIO 2 OR 3. NUMBERS WITH THAT WOULD HELP ME TALK TO RESIDENTS ABOUT THAT. >> ELLIOTT: WE CAN DO THAT. WE CAN LOOK AT YOUR AVERAGE HOMESTEAD VALUE, WHICH IS ABOUT $233,000. WE COULD SHOW YOU WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. >> MUNGIA: IF FOLKS END UP PAYING $5 PER MONTH OR IF IT'S $100 PER YEAR AND WE'RE GOING TO GET DOUBLE THE BOND CAPACITY, I THINK THAT'S A REALLY STARK NUMBER THAT FOLKS NEED TO KNOW AND PAY FOR. SO THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DATA POINT THAT JUST HELPS US RELAY THAT INFORMATION. ALSO THE STORMWATER FEES WOULD BE HELPFUL TOO. I WOULD LIKE US TO LOOK INTO SCENARIO 2 FOR THAT ONE. AND THE STORMWATER IS COLLECTED THROUGH THE SAWS' BILL. >> ELLIOTT: IT'S A LINE ITEM ON THE SAWS' BILL. >> MUNGIA: I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO INCLUDE IN THAT PROJECTION. TO BE INTENTIONAL, I TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, TRYING TO ASK MY RESIDENTS TO PAY MORE FOR A CPS RATE INCREASE IS A LITTLE DIFFICULT RIGHT WHEN I TELL THEM IT'S GOING TO MAKE THIS CHEAPER BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY MORE. THIS IS QUITE DIFFERENT TO SAY YOU MIGHT HAVE TO PAY MORE BUT THIS IS FIVE MILES OF ZARZAMORA THAT'S GOING TO GET DONE OR THREE MILES OF RAY ELLISON. PERHAPS A POOL ON THE SOUTH SIDE. MY DISTRICT ONLY HAS ONE PUBLIC POOL AND THAT'S ON THE NORTHERN SIDE OF OUR DISTRICT. THOSE ARE BIG NUMBERS FOR FOLKS TO LISTEN TO AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD TALK. I THINK THAT'S -- OH. AND TO MY COLLEAGUE'S POINT EARLIER ABOUT TIGHTENING THE BELT MORE, I DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING HERE. WHEN THE BUDGET IS 80-PLUS PERCENT STAFF AND 66% OF OUR BUDGET IS PUBLIC SAFETY, THERE'S NOT MUCH ROOM TO CUT. AND THAT'S TWO SEPARATE TAX LINE ITEMS. THERE'S THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION AND DEBT SERVICE, SO THERE'S TWO LINES THERE. AND OF COURSE YOU COULD PAY M&O, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION TAX FOR DEBT BUT YOU COULDN'T DO IT VICE VERSA, CORRECT? >> ELLIOTT: IT'S VERY HARD TO SHIFT THE TAX RATE BETWEEN THE TWO BECAUSE IT'S SUBJECT TO SB 2. DEFINITELY CANNOT SHIFT THE TAX RATE OVER TO THE O&M WITHOUT AN ELECTION, POTENTIALLY. AND ALSO FOR ANY SHIFTING OF THE O&M TAX RATE OR THE O&M TAX RATE TO THE DEBT SERVICE IS CERTAINLY GOING TO HAVE BUDGET IMPLICATIONS. >> MUNGIA: THANK YOU. I DO SUPPORT COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO'S MENTION THAT ANY SORT OF SPORTS-RELATED OR ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT BOND HAS TO BE COMPLETELY SEPARATE BOND PROPOSITION. AND THE PUBLIC INPUT MIGHT BE PARALLEL BUT SEPARATE TO THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROCESS THAT WAS OUTLINED ON THE SLIDES. THANK YOU. >> WALSH: MAYOR -- COUNCILMAN, LET ME DOUBLE BACK BECAUSE MARIA, JOHN, AND BEN BEHIND ME TOLD ME I DIDN'T ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> >> KAUR: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, TROY FOR THAT PRESENTATION. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND GOING OFF OF SOME OF THE LINES OF QUESTIONING, JUST TO BETTER UNDERSTAND. I'M SORRY IF I JUST MISSED THIS. YOU ARE PROJECTING NEXT YEAR TO HAVE A 68-CENT RAISE. DEVELOPMENT.CAN YOU GO TO THAT ? YEAH, THE FORECAST. SO YOU'RE PROJECTING A .86% INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX VALUES. >> ELLIOTT: THAT'S BASED ON THE CERTIFIED ROLL THAT WE RECEIVED AND PRESENTED TO Y'ALL. >> KAUR: THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT IT WAS? >> ELLIOTT: BASED ON THE CERTIFIED ROLL. THAT MAY CHANGE A LITTLE BIT BUT THAT'S BASED ON THE CERTIFIED ROLL. >> KAUR: ARE YOU SAYING THAT IN SCENARIO 2 WE WOULD BE PROJECTING 2027 TO BE [01:50:05] 3.25% AND ANYTHING SHORT OF THAT WE WOULD INCREASE THE TAX RATE TO COVER? >> ELLIOTT: WHAT WE'RE SAYING -- AND IT FOCUSES ON 2028 TO GO UP TO 3.25 OR 3.5. IF OUR FORECAST, THAT 1.75 WOULD MOVE TO THOSE RATES -- >> KAUR: DOES THAT ASSUME .4% FOR 2027? >> ELLIOTT: YES, MA'AM. 2026 AND '27 WOULD BE INTACT AND IN '28 WE WOULD HAVE THE ADJUSTED GROSS. >> KAUR: YOU ARE CONSERVATIVELY BUDGETING 50% LESS THAN WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT IN 2028? >> ELLIOTT: THIS IS BASED ON THE FORECAST. WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT IN THE EVENT WE WOULD MOVE TO SCENARIO 2 OR 3 -- >> KAUR: YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING THAT IN THE EVENT THAT SOMETHING CHANGES IN THE ECONOMY THAT WE HAVE NOT FORECASTED FOR AND IT IS LESS THAN 3-P 3.25%, WE WOULD CHANGE THE PROPERTY TAX RATE. IF IT STAYS AT THIS FORECAST FOR 2028, HOW MUCH WOULD THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE HAVE TO INCREASE TO GET TO THAT 3.25% PROJECTION FOR OUR BOND CAPACITY? >> ELLIOTT: SO FOR -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. WHEN WE LOOKED AT SCENARIO 2, IF WE CAME IN AT OUR FORECAST AND WE DID NOT HIT THE 3.25%, IT WOULD BE ABOUT HALF A CENT INCREASE IN OUR TAX RATE. >> KAUR: IF WE CAME IN AT 1.75% INSTEAD OF THE 3.25, WE WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE BY HALF A CENT? >> ELLIOTT: THAT'S CORRECT. THAT WOULD BASICALLY BE, BASED ON OUR MODELING, THAT WOULD BE THERE THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF OUR MODEL. FOR THE SCENARIO 3, IF WE HIT OUR FORECASTED NUMBERS AND WE DID NOT MAKE THE 3.5%, I THINK IT'S ROUGHLY A FULL CENT INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE. >> KAUR: OKAY. SO I DID THE MATH REALLY QUICKLY AND I COULD BE WRONG SO I DON'T KNOW IF SOMEONE CAN CHECK THIS. YOU SAID THE HOMESTEAD VALUE IS $233,000. YOU DIVIDE THAT BY 100, MULTIPLY THAT BY HALF A CENT. IT SEEMS TO COME OUT AS $11.05. 11.50. >> ELLIOTT: A FULL INCREASE WOULD BE 23.39. >> KAUR: FOR SCENARIO 2, I THINK THE VALUE IN GOING FROM A $400 MILLION INCREASE VERSUS $11 IN OUR HOMESTEAD TAX ON OUR BILL MAKES IT MORE RELATABLE FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO SAY. THE REASON WHY I'M SAYING THAT IS BECAUSE I GET CALLS EVERY SINGLE DAY ABOUT A SIDEWALK -- Y'ALL HAVE HEARD ME RANT ABOUT SIDEWALKS FOR DAYS. ABOUT PARKS. WE HAVE A LIST OF 50 PARK IMPROVEMENTS THAT FOLKS WANT, WHETHER IT'S SHADE COVERING -- AND WE DID A PUSH FOR THAT BUT WE STILL HAVE ADDITIONAL, WHETHER IT'S DOG PARKS OR MAINTENANCE OF SPACES THAT ARE ALREADY EXISTING. TREES, WE ALWAYS GET REQUESTS FOR TREES. WE HAVE A LIST OF 50 PROJECTS AND A LIST OF ABOUT 200 SIDEWALKS AND 150 STREETS THAT WE HAVE HAD REQUESTS FOR AND HAVE NO FUNDING FOR. AND THAT'S JUST IN DISTRICT 1. I'M SURE EVERY SINGLE ONE -- I KNOW COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ MENTIONED A FEW OF THE PROJECTS THAT HE HAS FOR HIS FACILITIES. WE HAVE ALL OF THE ARTS FACILITIES IN DOWNTOWN ARE ALREADY PLANNING FOR WHAT THEY WANT TO ASK FOR IN THE 2027 BOND PROJECT. I WENT TO VISIT A FACILITY IN DISTRICT 5 AND THE HISTORIC THEATER THERE AND THEY'RE ALREADY ASKING FOR -- LIKE THINKING ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO TO REVAMP THAT THEATER. I THINK EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR FACILITIES IS GOING TO ASK FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING AND SUPPORT. AND THERE'S JUST SO MUCH NEED. AND I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE REALLY JUDICIOUS DECISIONS ABOUT HOW WE'RE SPENDING THESE DOLLARS. I'M GOING TO DOUBLE DOWN ON WHAT COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ SAID. JUST BECAUSE WE ARE TEN DISTRICTS AND WE'RE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS DOESN'T MEAN THE NEED IS THE EXACT SAME SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE BUILDING THIS BOND PLAN VERY STRATEGICALLY THAT USES DATA TO DEMONSTRATE WHERE THE HIGHEST NEEDS ARE AND INVESTING IN THOSE HIGHEST-NEEDS AREAS. SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. THE SECOND THING I THINK IS MAKING SURE THAT -- AND I KNOW THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT THE ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT CAME UP. BUT MAKING SURE WE'RE FIGURING OUT WHAT IS THE ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT VERSUS JUST WHAT MY NEIGHBORHOODS NEED. LAVACA SIDEWALKS SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED IN THAT SAME COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM. OR TRAFFIC-CALMING STUDY [01:55:01] AROUND FLORIDA AND CAROLINA AND ALL THE TRAFFIC ADJUSTMENTS NEED TO OCCUR THERE, REGARDLESS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY IS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS BOND SO WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE SEPARATING, IF WE CHOOSE TO DO THAT WAY. BEFORE WE JUST SAY EVERYTHING DOWNTOWN GETS NIXED. TO ME, MY DOWNTOWN IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I WANT TO REPRESENT JUST THE WAY THAT WE ALL REPRESENT EACH OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL. THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF 2 AND POTENTIALLY EVEN SCENARIO 3. ANYTHING THAT I'VE LOOKED UP FROM LIKE FINANCIAL LITERATURE IS THAT A VARIABLE DEBT SERVICE RATE IS HELPFUL, FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE, TO BE ABLE TO MANAGE DEBT. OUR DEBT SERVICE -- THE AMOUNT THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR DEBT SERVICE FLUCTUATES BASED ON WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE MARKET. SO WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO BE REACTIVE AND ADJUST TO THAT. SO I WOULD SUPPORT THAT OPTION WITH CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT, OF COURSE. THE SECOND QUESTION THAT I JUST HAVE ON THAT, SPECIFICALLY -- BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THE HOUSING BOND WAS IN A SEPARATE CATEGORY. BUT ON THIS CHART -- LET ME GO BACK TO SLIDE -- WHAT'S THE CHART WITH THE 2022 BOND THAT SHOWED ALL THE HISTORICAL BONDS? I FOUND IT. SLIDE 7. IN THE TAX NOTES ON THIS -- SO THIS IS LISTED AS A 1.2 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND AND THE HOUSING BOND WAS IN THE GO BOND. I THOUGHT THE HOUSING BOND HAD TO BE A TAX NOTE? >> ELLIOTT: IT JUST HAS TO BE TAXABLE IN TERMS OF HOW WE ISSUE IT. >> KAUR: THIS SLIDE. ANNUAL BASIS. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE MAY BE AN SAPD HELICOPTER IN THERE OR THINGS OF THAT NATURE. TYPICALLY WE ALIGN THE USE OF THAT LIFE WITH A SEVEN-YEAR TAX NOTE. A TAX NOTE IS A TOOL WE USE TO FUND THE NEEDS OF OUR CIP. >> KAUR: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. ON THE STORMWATER CONVERSATION, CAN YOU HELP ME BETTER UNDERSTAND -- THIS IS WHAT COUNCILMEMBER GALVAN AND COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO WERE TALKING ABOUT. ON SLIDE 14 -- ART WAS LIKE WE DID THIS A LONG TIME AGO. I THINK I'M A SLIDE OFF. SO IT'S THE NEXT SLIDE. IT'S THE NEXT ONE. NOT THIS ONE EITHER. IT'S WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE IN CURRENT RATES IN IMPERVIOUS -- THIS ONE. OKAY. SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND -- I KNOW YOU SAID THERE WAS HISTORICAL CONTEXT. BUT WHAT PERCENTAGE IS COMING FROM RESIDENTIAL -- I KNOW YOU SAY THERE'S APPROXIMATELY -- YOU EXPLAIN HOW MUCH RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH OF THE FUNDS ARE COMING FROM RESIDENTIAL VERSUS NON-RESIDENTIAL. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE BREAKDOWN IS? >> IN A BRIEF RECAP. PRIOR TO 2015, THE RATE STRUCTURE WAS BASED SOLELY ON THE AMOUNT OF LAND. SO A THREE-ACRE PROPERTY, REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER IT HAD, PAID A FLAT RATE. WITH THE NEW RATE DESIGN, WE LOOKED AT IMPERVIOUS COVER. UNLIKE WATER METERS THAT YOU CAN MEASURE, THERE'S NO DIRECT MEASUREMENT FOR STORMWATER. THE BEST CORRELATION IS IMPERVIOUS COVER. SO WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS OF THE USER GROUP, WHICH WAS ABOUT 400,000 ACCOUNTS, THE 366,000 THAT YOU SAW ON THE SLIDE IS RESIDENTIAL. THE REMAINDER, THE 50,000 OR SO IS NON-RESIDENTIAL. THAT'S THE ACCOUNTS. BUT THEN WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT IMPERVIOUS COVER, THE STATISTIC I MENTIONED EARLIER -- I THINK IT'S 77%. BUT ROUGHLY 80% OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER IS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE NON-RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS. THAT'S JUST BASED ON THE LAND AREA, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. THE REVENUE COMING FROM THOSE NON-RESIDENTIAL IS MORE LIKE 55% OF THE OVERALL REVENUE. IT'S A FRACTION OF THE ACCOUNTS BUT THEY'RE MAKING UP MORE THAN HALF OF THE REVENUE. >> KAUR: OKAY. I'LL COME BACK ON THE NEXT TIME. THANKS, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN GALVAN. >> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. FOR THE STORMWATER ONE, I WANTED TO ASK HOW MUCH, FOR ANY OF THE INCREASES IN REVENUES, HOW MUCH WOULD THAT BE FOR FUNDING VERSUS OPERATIONS? THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. >> WE CAN GET YOU THE EXACT NUMBERS BUT WHEN WE MODELED THIS, YOU HAVE A BASE OPERATIONS. THOSE OPERATIONS ARE GROWING BY 3% INTO THE FUTURE. [02:00:04] AND SO THIS RATE WOULD COVER THE GROWTH IN OPERATIONS BASED ON THE ASSUMED INCREASES BASED ON CPI. WE WOULD ALSO USE THE BALANCE. >> GALVAN: I WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW IT JUST BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO BE BUILDING MORE THINGS RELATED TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR STORMWATER, I WANT TO GET IN THE SITUATION WHERE WE'RE OUTPACING OUR CAPITAL NEEDS -- OUTPACING MAINTENANCE VERSUS CAPITAL NEEDS. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR MIKE. I KNOW THIS IS THE ONGOING. WHAT THINGS ARE CHANGING TO DELIVER OUR BOND PROJECTS ON TIME OR WITHIN BUDGET? I KNOW WE TALKED EARLIER ON ABOUT MAKING SURE THE GOOD NIGHT CONSTRUCTION ORDINANCE COULD BE LOOKED AT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THOSE THINGS ARE IN THE TIMELINE. >> WE'RE GOING TO BE AT THE TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE DEPARTMENT CHANGES WE'VE MADE, SOME THAT WE'RE PLANNING TO MAKE AS WE NOT ONLY ARE WORKING ON THE PROJECTS WE HAVE, THE 200-PLUS PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ACTIVE. BUT, YOU KNOW, MOVING INTO THIS DISCUSSION. BUT, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY THINGS LIKE JUST SEPARATING THE DEPARTMENT. WE ARE FOCUSED ON OUR BOND PROJECTS. WE'RE LETTING PUBLIC WORKS FOCUS ON THE OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE NEEDS. THAT HAS HELPED. WE HAVE KIND OF STRUCTURALLY REORGANIZED FROM WITHIN. WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED SOME THINGS LIKE INCENTIVES ON THE CONTRACTS. MANY OF THE CONTRACTS YOU HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS INCLUDE AN INCENTIVE CLAUSE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO FINISH EARLY. NOT JUST THE PENALTY CLAUSE, LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. SO WE HAVE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE'RE IMPLEMENTING. HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION, LIKE OUR CONSTRUCTION GOOD NIGHT, GOOD NIGHT THAT I WORKED ON A FEW YEARS AGO, THAT MAY BE SOMETHING WE WANT TO KIND OF MODIFY A LITTLE BIT SO THAT PEOPLE CAN WORK A LITTLE BIT LONGER TO GET THOSE JOBS TO CLOSURE. SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN DONE. SOME OF THOSE ARE STILL IN THE WORKS. I KNOW WE'LL HAVE A CONVERSATION, NOT ONLY WITH THE COMMITTEE BUT I EXPECT SOME OF THAT WILL BE PART OF THAT FIRST B SESSION WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PROJECTS, THE PROCESS, AND HOW WE CAN DELIVER MORE ON TIME AND MORE IN BUDGET. KIND OF A TIMELY QUESTION BUT THAT'S WHERE MY THOUGHTS ARE AT RIGHT NOW. >> GALVAN: THANK YOU FOR THAT. LAST COUPLE OF QUICK POINTS. I FEEL THE MAY 2027 TIMELINE IS FINE. IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAKING SURE WE'RE STAYING ON TIME. I SUPPORT THE SPORTS DISTRICT FACILITIES OR INFRASTRUCTURE, SPECIFIC FUNDING PROPOSITIONS FOR THE BOND PROGRAM. OPEN TO SCENARIO 2 AND 3 FOR THE BOND CAPACITY AS WELL AS OPEN TO SCENARIO 2 FOR STORMWATER. I THINK TO THE COMMENTS EARLIER, THIS HASN'T HAPPENED IN A LONG TIME. I THINK ABOUT [INDISCERNIBLE] WHERE THE ROAD IS COMPLETELY UNUSABLE. PEOPLE HAVE DIED. I HAVE A BEST FRIEND WHO WAS SEVERELY TRAPPED AND I THINK 20 YEARS OF WAITING SAYING HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET THE MONEY NEXT TIME IS NOT WORTH IT. I THINK 20 YEARS OF TRAFFIC RELATED DEATHS ON CULEBRA, GRISSOM, SUNRISE IS SIMPLY TOO LONG TO SAY WE KNOW THE STREET IS DANGEROUS. WE CAN'T KEEP WAITING FOR $100,000 OF NAMP FUNDING TO HOPEFULLY IMPROVE IT. WE NEED BIG CHANGES ON THESE ROADS, INCLUDING THE ONES IN MY DISTRICT. I THINK 20 YEARS OF MINIMAL IMPROVEMENTS TO LIBRARIES IS NOT TALKING ABOUT THE REALITY WE'RE FACING HERE AND FOR OUR GROWING CITY TO BE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE BEST. WE TALK ABOUT ALL THE THINGS TO MAKE OUR CITY A HIGHER-QUALITY PLACE TO LIVE IN. THIS IS WHERE WE MEET THE MOMENT. THIS IS WHERE OUR CITY COMES IN. I THINK A LOT ABOUT DIFFERENT FOLKS WHO HAVE PUSHED FOR THINGS AT A LOCAL LEVEL ACROSS THE COUNTRY WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE THAT OUR TAX DOLLARS THAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE PAYING FOR THE HIGHEST QUALITY AND THE BEST SERVICE POSSIBLE WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS. ANYTHING LESS, WE ARE FAILING OUR RESIDENTS. IF IT MEANS WE HAVE TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF A PUSH ON SOME THINGS, WE HAVE TO DO IT IF WE WANT TO DELIVER FOR OUR RESIDENTS. OF COURSE OUR RESIDENTS GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON THAT AND SAY WHETHER THEY SUPPORT THAT OR NOT. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ. YOU'RE RIGHT. I'M SORRY. MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ AND THEN MEZA GONZALEZ. THANK YOU. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: GOT TO TAKE WHAT YOU CAN. FORGOT TO SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GALVAN'S REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FOR DISTRICT BY DISTRICT BREAKDOWN AS WELL AS THE NON-RESIDENTIAL RATE INCREASE AND WHETHER WE CAN ADJUST THAT RATE WITHOUT ADJUSTING RESIDENTIAL. [02:05:02] I THINK THAT'S ALSO AN INTERESTING QUESTION. AND TO ECHO COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO FOR SPECIFICALLY IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT A RATE EQUAL TO RESIDENTIAL RATES. EVEN IF WE WERE JUST UP TO THE FIRST THREE TIERS FOR RESIDENTIAL, THEN ALSO ECHO A SPORTS DISTRICT PROPOSITION, SPECIFICALLY. AND I THINK TO ANSWER COUNCILWOMAN KAUR'S CONCERNS THERE IS IF NOT FOR PROJECT MARVEL, WHICH PROJECTS WOULD WE NOT BE CONSIDERING. WHAT WOULD WE HAVE CONSIDERED TO BE TOTALLY AS A PART OF THAT BOND PROPOSITION IF WE WERE JUST DOING IT IN ISOLATION. THAT, TO ME, THAT'S THE SEPARATION POINT. AND I'M SURE THAT IT WILL BE POPULAR AND IT WILL PASS OVERWHELMINGLY. I DID -- CAN YOU JUST REAL QUICK, FOR MY CURIOSITY BECAUSE SLIDE 16, THE STORMWATER RATES -- THIS WILL BE ANOTHER ART QUESTION. THIS DOESN'T -- I JUST DON'T KNOW. WHEN WAS THIS REWORKED? >> IT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL BACK IN 2015. IT WAS ABOUT A TWO-YEAR PROCESS AT THE TIME. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I WONDER -- I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED BECAUSE I THINK THE DIFFERENT MEASUREMENT METHODS CREATE A PRETTY STARK IMBALANCE AND I WONDER IF PERCENT IMPERVIOUS COVER -- WELL, IT DOES. PERCENT IMPERVIOUS COVER AREA IGNORES SCALE. YOU COULD HAVE A SMALL LOT THAT'S MOSTLY PAVED AND THAT CAN EASILY FALL INTO TIER 4. WHEREAS YOU COULD HAVE A REALLY LARGE CORPORATE CAMPUS THAT HAD SOME LANDSCAPING, HAS SOME GREEN BUFFERS AND THE LIKE AND WHATNOT. AND THAT COULD FALL INTO TIER 1 AND TIER 2. THEN THEY PAY LOWER RATES. THE RESIDENTIAL TIER JUMPS UP VERY STEEP FROM 494 TO 1045 BETWEEN TIER 2 AND TIER 3. I FEEL AS THOUGH WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THIS ANYWAY JUST AS A STRUCTURE. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T -- I UNDERSTAND BUSINESSES WHO USE MORE WANT TO PAY LESS PER UNIT OF MEASURE. BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO ME. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S EQUITABLE. I THINK IT'S, LIKE COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO MENTIONED, A REGRESSIVE TAX WHERE ALL THE SMALLER USERS ARE SUBSIDIZING THE MUCH LARGER USERS, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE LARGER USERS MAKE UP AN EIGHTH OF THE TOTAL BASE? THE TOTAL UNIVERSE THAT'S 400,000, 50K. >> A LITTLE LESS THAN 20% OF THE TOTAL ACCOUNTS ARE NON-RESIDENTIAL, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: WHAT WAS I LOOKING AT? HOW MANY USERS ARE THERE? >> 415,000, I THINK. COUNCILMAN, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE TOO MUCH TIME, BUT THE WAY THIS STRUCTURE WAS BUILT --E RESIDENTIAL, IT WAS REALLY LOOKED AT BREAKING DOWN THE USER GROUP INTO QUARTILES SO THAT MIDDLE TIER IS ROUGHLY 50% OF THE TOTAL ACCOUNTS. THERE IS A DETAILED ANALYSIS ON WHAT DO THE RATES NEED TO BE TO COVER THE REVENUE WE WERE LOOKING FOR. THE WAY THE NON-RESIDENTIAL WAS BROKEN DOWN TO, THERE'S A FLAT BASE FEE THAT YOU DON'T SEE ON THIS CHART, THAT'S ABOUT $67. THAT FLAT FEE COVERS SOME OF THE COSTS THAT ARE NOT -- HARDER TO JUDGE ON THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER LIKE MOWING OR STREET SWEEPING. THAT WAS A FLAT FEE. RESIDENTIAL, THERE'S A $67 FLAT FEE AND THEN YOU SEE THE COSTS, 31 CENTS. THAT'S PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET. IT'S A GRADUATED COST AS YOU GO THROUGH THE TIERS OF THE NON-RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: AND JUST BECAUSE THAT MATH JUST THREW ME OFF A SECOND AGO. YOU SAID THERE ARE 50,000 NON-RESIDENTIAL? >> CORRECT. ACCOUNTS. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: NON-RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS. THERE ARE 400,000 ACCOUNTS TOTAL. >> 415. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE DIVIDE 50,000 BY 415K. >> ROUGHLY 12%. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THAT'S NOT A FIFTH. I THOUGHT -- I REALLY THOUGHT I WAS BEING CRAZY AND I'M LIKE -- THAT WAS NOT GOING TO BE OKAY FOR ME. YEAH. I JUST WANT TO REVISIT THAT. THAT'S THE POINT. WANTED TO ECHO ALL THOSE THINGS. I WOULD LEAN TOWARDS SCENARIO 3 FOR THE BOND, THE RATES. THAT ONE. THE STORMWATER ONE, I DON'T KNOW. SORRY. DID YOU SAY YOU COULD NOT -- BECAUSE I THINK COUNCILMAN GALVAN ASKED THIS QUESTION [02:10:03] AND IT WAS ABOUT WHAT AMOUNT OF THAT TOTAL RAISED IS FOR OPERATING NEEDS VERSUS THE BOND CAPACITY. DID YOU SAY THAT YOU COULDN'T ANSWER THAT? CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE ONE WITH THE FOUR SCENARIOS FOR STORMWATER? WAS IT? NO. IT WAS GREEN. IT WAS STORMWATER. IT WAS THE GREEN SLIDE. AT THE BOTTOM I'M LOOKING AT, FOR SCENARIO 4, $174.3 MILLION. HOW MUCH OF THAT WOULD BE USED FOR PROJECTS VERSUS THE OPERATING NEEDS THAT WE HAVE? >> ELLIOTT: WE CAN GO BACK AND PULL THAT FOR YOU BECA.YOU CAN SEE WHAT PORTION IS GOING TO BE LEVERAGED FOR THE OPERATING COST. >> WALSH: >> ELLIOTT: THAT'S CAPACITY. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: OKAY. GOTCHA. OKAY. >> WALSH: THE UPSIDE LYING PRO FORMA WE CAN LAY OUT OVER 25 YEARS. THOSE SMALLER BOXES WOULD BE THE CAPITALIZED. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I KNOW I'M RUNNING SIGNIFICANTLY OVER MY TIME. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS OUR TOTAL DRAINAGE NEED. WHAT ARE THE LARGEST THREATS TO US AND, YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN WE AFFORD TO LET GO OF. BUT THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ. >> GONZALEZ: JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. I KNOW IN AUGUST YOU MENTIONED POSSIBLY SOME SHORTER BOND CYCLES. BECAUSE WE TRADITIONALLY DO EVERY FIVE YEARS. HAS THAT BEEN PART OF YOUR ANALYSIS OR WHERE ARE Y'ALL ON THAT IDEA? >> ELLIOTT: WE DIDN'T RUN SHORTER BOND PROGRAMS. WE LOOKED AT SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS BASED ON SOME OF THE ASSUMPTIONS. IF THAT'S SOMETHING THE COUNCIL WOULD WANT US TO LOOK AT AND COME UP WITH SCENARIOS, WE COULD DO THAT, BUT THESE ARE ASSUMING A FIVE-YEAR. >> WALSH: LIKE TROY SAID, WE COULD LOOK AT 2028 AND WHAT IS ANOTHER YEAR. YOU CHANGE THE TIMELINE. BUT THE CHANGE ON DOING IT SOONER, YOU ALL -- WE WOULD HAVE NEEDED TO BE IN THE BOND PROCESS IN THE FALL AND IN THAT POINT RIGHT NOW. BUT IN TERMS OF FURTHER CHANGES TO THE TIMELINE, IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU GUYS ARE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT, WE CAN RUN DIFFERENT ANALYSIS ON THOSE ASSUMPTIONS. >> GONZALEZ: IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN AUGUST SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT COMPLETELY WENT AWAY. HAVE WE EVER INCENTIVIZED REMOVAL OF IMPERVIOUS COVER? OR IS THAT LIKE THE RIVER AUTHORITY, DO THEY DO THAT? >> THE FEE STRUCTURE ITSELF DOES INCENTIVIZE LESS IMPERVIOUS PARCELS BY THE TIERS BEING A LOWER TIER. THERE WERE ALSO SOME CREDITS THAT WERE TALKED ABOUT AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL PROCESS FOR LOW-IMPACT DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN EVEN SAWS HAS REBATES BUILT INTO SOME OF THEIR PRACTICES. >> GONZALEZ: THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN WHYTE. >> WHYTE: YEAH. I JUST WANT TO KNOW -- I MEAN, WHAT WOULD BE TOO MUCH? RIGHT? WE HEAR THIS IT'S ONLY $11. I MEAN, WHAT'S THE NUMBER WHERE WE WOULD SAY IT'S TOO MUCH? WE GOT $11 HERE, RIGHT? SAWS, I THINK IF THEIR PLAN GOES FORWARD ACCORDING TO THIS ARTICLE, IT'S ABOUT A $20 A MONTH INCREASE IN THE WATER BILL BY 2029. $19, TO BE EXACT. A COUPLE BUCKS IN SOLID WASTE. WHO KNOWS WHAT CPS IS ASKING FOR. ADD IT ALL UP, WHEN IS ENOUGH ENOUGH? WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE FACT THAT WAGES AREN'T RISING, THEN WHAT? SOMEHOW OTHER MAYORS AND OTHER CITY COUNCILS HAVE MADE IT THE LAST 22 YEARS WITHOUT TOUCHING THE TAX RATE. I MEAN, THEY'VE HAD NEEDS. THEY'VE WANTED TO SPEND MONEY ON INFRASTRUCTURE. SOMEHOW WE HAVEN'T HAD TO DO IT THEN. BUT NOW, NOW WE NEED IT SO BADLY THAT WE'VE GOT TO DO IT. AND COUNCILMAN GALVAN BROUGHT UP -- I GUESS THAT ROAD IN YOUR DISTRICT AND SOME OF THOSE OTHER AREAS THAT NEED ATTENTION. I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU ALL THAT IF THAT'S THE CASE, RIGHT, AND THAT ROAD IS AS BAD AS IT IS, I MEAN, WHY [02:15:02] HAVEN'T WE DONE SOMETHING ABOUT THAT IN ALL THE YEARS PREVIOUSLY THROUGH OUR REGULAR ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS AND PUBLIC WORKS PROCESS? WHY DO WE HAVE A ROAD ANYWHERE THAT'S CAUSING ALL THAT KINDS OF HAVOC THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR A BOND TO DO? WHY HAVEN'T WE ADDRESSED IT EARLIER? TO ME, THAT'S A PROBLEM IN HOW WE GO ABOUT BUDGETING EVERY YEAR AND THE PRIORITY OF OUR PROJECTS. I MEAN, THAT SOUNDS LIKE A PRETTY IMPORTANT ONE THAT WE NEED TO GET ON TOMORROW. SO, AGAIN, THE THOUGHT THAT IT'S ONLY A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY OR WE HAVE TO DO THIS TO ADDRESS THESE AREAS WHERE PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE IN DANGER, I REJECT THAT. IF PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE IN DANGER IN A PARTICULAR ROAD OR CROSSING SOMEWHERE IN SAN ANTONIO, WE SHOULDN'T BE WAITING FOR A BOND TO DO IT, WE SHOULD GET OUT THERE AND START DOING IT TOMORROW. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILWOMAN KAUR. >> KAUR: I'M NOT AN ASPHALT ENGINEER, BUT THE THING THAT I HAVE LEARNED IN THE LAST TWO YEARS IS ASPHALT REQUIRES MAINTENANCE. THE REASON WHY WE ARE IN THIS PROBLEM RIGHT NOW IS BECAUSE OF SUBURBAN SPRAWL. WE BUILT SO FAR OUT AND KEPT SAYING DEVELOPERS, GO BUILD, GO BUILD. AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY TO MAINTAIN ALL OF THIS ROADWAY. I WENT TO THIS URBAN LAND INSTITUTE SESSION ONCE AND THEY BASICALLY TALK ABOUT HOW THE AMOUNT OF ROADWAY WE HAVE IN SAN ANTONIO COULD TAKE US FROM SAN ANTONIO TO THE EAST COAST TO VEGAS AND BACK. IT'S INSANE THE AMOUNT OF ROADWAY WE HAVE BUT WE HAVE THIS ROADWAY NOW AND WHEN WE DON'T FUND MAINTENANCE OF IT, THE HOLES GET BIGGER AND OUR OFFICES GET MORE AND MORE CALLS. THE PROBLEMS ARE GOING TO INCREASE IF YOU DON'T MAINTAIN ASPHALT. UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE YOU CAN POUR IT AND FORGET ABOUT IT. YOU HAVE TO COME BACK OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THE POLICY THAT PUBLIC WORKS HAS BEEN TRYING TO DO IS LET'S DO OUR BEST TO KEEP THE STUFF THAT'S NOT FAILING, NOT FAILING. TRYING TO MAINTAIN. BUT UNFORTUNATELY THE STUFF THAT'S A LITTLE TOO FAR GONE JUST KEEPS GETTING PILED UP AND PILED UP AND PILED UP. AND THOSE PROJECTS COST MORE AND MORE MONEY AND SO WE GOT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO FUND THEM. AND THE ONLY WAY THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS OUR BOND. AND SO UNLESS WE PRIORITIZE THOSE BIG PROJECTS IN OUR BOND, WE WON'T HAVE A WAY TO ADDRESS THEM. I AGREE WITH YOU. THIS NEXT BOND SHOULD INCLUDE THAT STREET. IT SHOULD INCLUDE BASSE. I DON'T WANT ANOTHER CALL ABOUT BASSE ROAD. AND I'M SURE EACH OF US CAN TELL YOU ABOUT A PROJECT THAT HAS NEED. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CONSIDERING THE RIGHT NUMBERS FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL. THIS WOULD BE AN $11 INCREASE IN AN ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX BILL NOT A MONTHLY BILL. SECOND, IT'S OUR JOB TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ARE THE PROGRAMS TO PUT IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRULY FEELING THE PAIN OF THAT DON'T SUFFER THE MOST. THAT IS WHAT MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUE SAID. I THINK THE CITY OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE'RE IN THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE EVERYBODY IS ACTUALLY DOING THOSE WORKSHOPS THAT'S SHOWING THEM HOW TO FIGHT THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILL AND IT'S LIKE, OKAY. WE'RE REALLY GOOD AT FIGHTING OUR PROPERTY TAX BILL AND SO NOW WE'RE IN THIS SPACE. BUT I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. WE HAVE TO KEEP DOING THAT BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ENGAGING IN THAT NEED IT AND THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO CONTINUE TO DO. ARE THERE MORE INNOVATIVE WAYS TO MAKE SURE, UNDER HOMESTEAD -- I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. IS THERE A WAY TO DIFFERENTIATE TAX RATES? NO. I THINK WE HAVE TO KEEP CONSIDERING DIFFERENT WAYS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE HELPING THE MOST EFFECTIVE FOLKS. OKAY. I'VE DONE MY RANT. THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE ABOUT THIS, ART, SORRY. THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE ABOUT THE IMPERVIOUS COVER SITUATION. SO THIS IS 31% FOR HOW MUCH OF EACH? LIKE -- 31 CENTS FOR LESS THAN 20%. WHAT DOES THAT MONTHLY FEE COME OUT TO BE? >> I'LL GIVE YOU A QUICK EXAMPLE. I RAN A NUMBER ON TIER 3. TYPICALLY, COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ARE MORE LIKE THAT 65%. LIKE A THREE-ACRE SITE, THAT'S USUALLY A SMALL RETAIL SITE. 65% IMPERVIOUS COVER. IF YOU DO THE MATH ON 58 CENTS, SO THAT'S 58 CENTS PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET. IT'S NOT NOTED THERE. THAT COMES OUT TO ABOUT $46. THERE'S A $67 BASE FEE. IT'S $116 A MONTH FOR A THREE-ACRE PROPERTY. >> KAUR: THE MONTHLY FEES FOR RESIDENTIAL ARE -- >> FLAT FEE. FOR THAT RANGE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. >> KAUR: I THINK WHAT WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL -- I ACTUALLY THINK THE TIER 1, 2, 3 STRUCTURE HELPS FOR THAT RESIDENTIAL IMPERVIOUS [02:20:04] AREA. IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THOSE ARE REALLY THE BIGGER LOTS HAVE MORE NEED FOR WATERING. AND SO AN ADDITIONAL OTHER THINGS THAT AFFECT THOSE BIG AREAS. I THINK I WOULD LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE >> KAUR: KIND OF WHAT MY COLLEAGUE SAID, HOW CAN WE LOOK AT THIS BREAKDOWN AND SEE WHICH MEMBERS -- LIKE WHAT PERCENTAGE IS IN OUR DISTRICT, WHAT PERCENTAGE IN OUR DISTRICT, TIER 1, 2, 3. IS THERE ANOTHER LEVEL THAT WE CAN SPLIT UP THERE? BUT I UNDERSTAND THE LOGIC OF THAT. AND IF THERE IS A WAY TO HELP INCREASE THE RESIDENTIAL A LITTLE BIT -- OR NONRESIDENTIAL -- EXCUSE ME, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT PRIOR TO LOOKING AT AN INCREASE FOR OUR RESIDENTS, BUT, AGAIN, I THINK STORMWATER IS REALLY IMPORTANT AS WELL. THANKS, MAYOR. COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN? >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO STICK WITH THE STO RAT STORMWATER RATES BEFORE I GO AND ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED EARLIER. I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT INCREASING THE MONTHLY FEES, BECAUSE I THINK WE NEED TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT OUR ENVIRONMENT AND WE NEED TO HAVE LESS IMPEF IMPEFERROUS AREAS. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THAT. WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO GET CREATIVE ON WHAT WE HAVE ON OUR BUSINESS' FRONTS. WHAT IS TOO MUCH? ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS, $150? BECAUSE WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE IS LOSS OF LIFE AGAIN. AND THAT'S WHAT I SAW. DOWN MILITARY DRIVE, A MOTHER CROSSING THE STREET TRYING TO GET BACK TO HER APARTMENT, THE LIGHT NOT WORKING, GETTING HIT. HAVING HER FAMILY TELL ME, WHAT WE WANT IS HER DEATH NOT TO BE IN VAIN. THAT'S WHY I WANT SCENARIO 2 OR 3, THAT'S WHY I'M WILLING TO PAY. BECAUSE THIS MOTHER'S LIFE WAS CUT SHORT. AND YOU ASK, WHY CAN'T WE DO IT OVERNIGHT? BECAUSE WE DID -- ONCE SHE LOST HER LIFE, WE WERE ABLE TO WORK FASTER, BUT WHEN YOU ASK US TO HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH THE COUNTY AND THE STATE IN HOW WE TAKE CARE OF OUR STREETS AND OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, IT TAKES A WHILE. I DON'T KNOW, AND PUBLIC WORKS WOULD HAVE TO TELL ME AND RAZI WAS THE ONE, WHAT IT COST AND WHERE WE HAD TO TAKE FROM TO CHANGE THAT YELLOW FLASHING LIGHT TO A RED FLASHING LIGHT. WHAT IT TOOK TO MOVE -- YOU'D HAVE TO ASK VIA WHAT IT TOOK TO MOVE THAT BUS STATION FROM ONE LOCATION TO THE OTHER. THE AMOUNT OF STAFF HOURS IT TOOK MY STAFF AND CITY STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT THAT DONE. SO IF IT'S GOING TO COST ANOTHER $30 A YEAR IN MY PROPERTY TAXES, I'M WILLING TO DO IT BECAUSE MY RESIDENT'S LIFE IS WORTH THAT MUCH. AND I AM IN AGREEMENT THAT WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE CITY FACILITIES AND CITY STREETS, AND WE NEED TO SHOW THE STATE OUR COMMITMENT TO KEEP OUR STREETS SAFE AND TO KEEP THEM DRIVABLE BECAUSE LIKE COUNCILMAN MUNGIA, PART OF IT -- THE ACCIDENTS, IT IS THE FACT THAT WE HAVE CLAY ROADS AND PEOPLE ARE TAKING THOSE DIPS AND LOSING MUFFLERS THROUGH IT OUT. THAT IS WHAT IT'S WORTH. I DO NOT WANT TO LOSE ANY MORE LIVES THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO IF WE CAN BE THOUGHTFUL AND WORK IN COORDINATION BEFOREHAND. THIS IS OUR JOB AS CITY COUNCILMEMBERS, AND SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT IS TOO MUCH, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS ANYTHING IF WE CAN SAVE LIVES BY INVESTING IN INFRASTRUCTURE. AND WE CAN. AND WE DON'T -- WE SHOULD HAVEN'T TO THINK ABOUT IT LIKE THAT, BUT WE DO. THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN ALDARETE GAVITO? >> GAVITO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I DID JUST WANT TO CHIME IN ALSO BECAUSE I'M IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT, WE DO NEED TO PRIORITIZE OUR STREETS, WHAT COUNCILMAN GALVAN WAS SAYING ABOUT THE STREET THAT'S BEEN LONG OVERDUE, YOU KNOW, YOUR BEST FRIEND ENCOUNTERED. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF US IN THE CERTAIN PART OF THE CITY WHO FACE THAT. I KNOW DISTRICT 7 HAS THE SECOND HIGHEST F RATED STREETS IN THE CITY, AND, YOU KNOW, QUITE FRANKLY, WE JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH IN OUR IMP OR OUR NAMP BUDGETS TO COVER IT. OUR BACKLOGS ARE JUST TOO GREAT, PROBABLY GREATER THAN SOME OTHER DISTRICTS. AND SO IT'S CONSTANT. AND SO UNFORTUNATELY, WE DO HAVE TO RELY ON BONDS TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT AS [02:25:01] THEY WERE SAYING. ALSO, THOUGH, TOO, I KNOW OTHER COUNCILS BEFORE DIDN'T APPROVE IT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE OUR STANDARD BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WE ARE PUT IN A PLACE TO MAKE HARD DECISIONS. AND, YOU KNOW, SURE, IT'S EASY TO PASS THE BUCK, BUT I THINK THAT WE'RE ELECTED TO SOMETIMES DO HARD THINGS, AND SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO REALIZE THAT AND TAKE THAT TO HEART. ALSO, TOO, WHAT COUNCILWOMAN KAUR WAS SAYING, YOU KNOW, ASPHALT, WE DO HAVE TO MAINTAIN THAT. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST THE NATURE OF THE CITY'S HISTORY. I MEAN, WE WERE CHASING THE TAX BASE UP NORTH. SO THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE SHOULD LEAVE OUT THE REST OF THE CITY, PARTICULARLY THE CITY'S SOUTHEAST AND WEST SIDES. SO I THINK WE HAVE TO -- THIS COUNCIL SET WITH BALANCING ALL OF THOSE NEEDS, AND SOMETIMES IT'S A HARD DECISION, BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT DO WHAT WE'VE GOT TO DO. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: HAS EVERYONE SPOKEN ON THIS ISSUE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? OKAY. THANK YOU, TROY AND BEN FOR THE PRESENTATION. I THINK IN THIS INSTANCE, AS MANY OF YOU ALLUDED TO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A TIME OF GREAT ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY, AS WE ARE BALANCING NOT ONLY REQUESTS FOR RATE INCREASES FROM SAWS, FROM CPS -- ACTUALLY AND THE SAWS POINT, IS RELATED TO THE POINT THAT MANY OF YOU HAVE MADE, WHICH IS THE SAWS STORY IS REALLY A STORY OF DELAYED MAINTENANCE, RIGHT? THEY JUST KICKED THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD, SO NOW WE ARE PAYING THAT, AND UNFORTUNATELY WE'RE PAYING IT AT A TIME OF TARIFFS, HIGHER LABOR COSTS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, SO WE RECOGNIZE THE RISK OF CONTINUING TO DELAY THESE THINGS, TO THE POINT THAT ALSO COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN MADE, THERE'S NOT JUST THE COST IN TERMS OF FINANCIAL, BUT THERE'S ALSO THE COST OF LOSS OF LIFE IF WE'RE NOT MAKING THESE INVESTMENTS WHERE WE NEED TO. TIME HELPS US, WHEN I SPOKE TO BEN, IT SOUNDED LIKE WE COULD ACTUALLY REVISIT THIS ENTIRE CONVERSATION AS WELL IN JULY, AND BY THAT TIME, THE ECONOMY WILL BE IN BETTER FOCUS. BY THAT TIME, WE WILL ALSO HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT THAT INITIAL BOND FOR THE DOWNTOWN INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE. SO I THINK THOSE ARE IMPORTANT BEFORE WE COMMIT OURSELVES TO SOME LEVEL OF BOND CAPACITY HERE. I THINK WHAT WE ALSO NEED AS PART OF THAT, AND I KNOW BEN IS WORKING ON THIS, IS WE NEED TO TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT OF THE PFZ IS GOING TO COVER THE INFRASTRUCTURE RELATED TO THIS DOWNTOWN INVESTMENT. I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE ARE FRANKLY, SQUEEZING AS MUCH AS WE POSSIBLY CAN OUT OF THAT, AS THE COUNCILMAN -- COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ POINTED OUT, THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO BE WORKING ON, IF NOT FOR THAT. I THINK WE ALSO HAVE TO BE CREATIVE. I KNOW, BEN, YOU AND I HAVE HAD A CONVERSATION AND I ASKED, YOU KNOW, HOW EXACTLY IS INFRASTRUCTURE DEFINED AS PART OF WHAT'S ALLOWABLE UNDER THE PFZ. IF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS NOT PART OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PFZ, I WOULD REQUEST -- IF WE NEED TO TAKE THAT TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO MAKE SOME TYPE OF AMENDMENT, THAT WE DO. WE HAVE SAID WE WANT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE ARE NOW FACING A REALITY WHERE WE HAVE A MUCH LOWER BOND CAPACITY, AND I THINK, FRANKLY, MAJORITY OF US AROUND THIS TABLE WOULD MAKE A STRONG ARGUMENT THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS VERY IMPORTANT INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE WORKING AT EACH OF THESE MAJOR FACILITIES, SO I'D WANT TO UNDERSTAND IF THAT'S NOT -- IF THAT'S A CHANGE THAT WE CAN MAKE AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL IN TERMS OF HOW WE DEFINE INFRASTRUCTURE, IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO TAKE TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE. WE HAVE TO BE CREATIVE IN TERMS OF MEETING THE VERY REAL NEEDS THAT HAVE JUST BEEN DESCRIBED HERE. PLEASE GO TO THE SLIDE WHERE IT'S GOT -- WHERE DID IT GO? THE DEBT RATIO SLIDE, PLEASE, WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT NET TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATION OVER PROPERTY TAX OUTSTANDING DEBT. I'VE GOT SLIDE 8, BUT I KNOW THERE WERE SOME ADDITIONAL SLIDES THAT WERE ADDED. OKAY. HERE. SO WE'RE AT 1.52 AT THE END OF 2025, AND SO THAT MEANS OF THE 2.6 BILLION IN PROPERTY TAX OUTSTANDING DEBT, MY UNDERSTANDING THEN IS THAT IS THE DENOMINATOR THERE IS 171 BILLION, RIGHT, BEN, AS YOU MENTIONED? IN THE -- IN MY PREBRIEF? OKAY. SO THAT IS WHAT IS NET TAXABLE, RIGHT? SO THAT MEANS THERE -- WHEN WE LOOK AT GROSS, THOUGH, THAT'S A MUCH HIGHER NUMBER. AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING HERE ABOUT WHAT THE PROJECTS WE WANT TO PUT IN THERE, OUR CAPACITY, ET CETERA. THE OTHER COMPLIMENT, I THINK, TO THIS DISCUSSION, THOUGH, IS OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROPERTY TAXES THAT WE ARE FOREGOING, RIGHT? THAT WE ARE FOREGOING, [02:30:04] WHETHER YOU TALK ABOUT TIRZ, WHETHER YOU TALK ANT SOME OF THESE OTHER ECONOMIC INCENTIVES, CEMETERIES, RIGHT, ALL THESE THINGS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO A SMALLER TAXABLE BASE, WHICH THEN AS WE'RE SEEING HERE, RESULTS IN OUR LOWER BOND CAPACITY. SO I THINK WHAT'S -- WHAT WE NEED TO BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT, AND COUNCILMAN MUNGIA, I'D LIKE TO YOU LEADING THE PLANNING COMMITTEE, FOR YOUR COMMITTEE TO PUT SOME THOUGHT INTO WHAT ARE SOME THOUGHTFUL POLICIES THAT WE CAN PROTECT THE TAXABLE VALUE, POTENTIAL TAXABLE VALUE, IN THE CITY. CASE IN POINT, YESTERDAY I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH CPS AT A PIECE OF PROPERTY THEY WERE LOOKING TO ACQUIRE, AND I SAID, WHERE IS THAT? AND LET'S JUST SAY, IT WAS IN A VERY VALUABLE PIECE OF LAND DOWNTOWN. AND I SAID, WELL, IF YOU BUY THAT, WILL YOU PAY PROPERTY TAX? AND THEY SAID THEY WOULDN'T. I SAID, WELL, MAYBE I, AS THE CITY, DON'T WANT YOU TO BUY THAT, RIGHT? MAYBE THERE'S ANOTHER OPTION THERE, BECAUSE AGAIN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S PROPERTY TAXES WHEN IT EITHER COMES TO OUR GENERAL FUND OR IT COMES TO OUR BONDING CAPACITY. SO THESE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT. IS THERE A MORATORIUM ON CEMETERIES IN THE CITY LIMITS, RIGHT? ET CETERA, ET CETERA, THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE'VE GOT TO HELP OURSELVES WITH. AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION, I KNOW WE'RE DUE FOR A REFRESH, ERIK, IN TERMS OF OUR ECONOMIC INCENTIVE DISCUSSION, THE POLICY ON THAT, HAVING A REALLY STRONG DATA-DRIVEN APPROACH THAT SHOWS THAT THE ROI OF THESE ECONOMIC INCENTIVES, IN FACT, MAKE UP FOR OUR LOST ABILITY, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN IT COMES TO BONDING CAPACITY. SORRY, BILL. BEN, FOR CONTEXT, CAN YOU GIVE US AN IDEA OF, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TAKING -- WHAT IS THE GROSS NUMBER FOR THE PROPERTY TAX VALUE? I KNOW YOU SAID RIGHT NOW NET IS 171 BILLION. BUT WHAT WOULD GROSS BE? >> GORZELL: ROUGHLY 209 BILLION. >> MAYOR JONES: 209 BILLION. OKAY. >> GORZELL: YES. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. SO MAYOR, I'LL GET YOU THE SCHEDULE AND THE BUDGET DOCUMENT. WE'LL GET YOU THE PAGE NUMBER WHERE THERE'S A SCHEDULE IN THERE THAT WALKS DOWN FROM THE GROSS VALUATION DOWN TO OUR TAXABLE VALUATION, SO IT HAS OUR EXEMPTIONS IN THERE -- >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH. >> GORZELL: WE'LL GET IT FOR YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. SO JUST SO EVERYBODY'S CLEAR, RIGHT, $38 BILLION IS WHAT IS NOT COMING INTO -- COMING INTO THE TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUE AS A RESULT OF WHAT WE ARE FOREGOING. SO AN ACCOUNTING OF THAT, TO HELP EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND WHAT COULD COME BACK INTO US WOULD BE -- WOULD BE HELPFUL. SO THANKS FOR LAYING THAT OUT, BEN. AND WHEN WE DO HAVE THAT OTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT TIRZ, RIGHT, THIS -- THIS IS WHY THAT CONVERSATION IS IMPORTANT. ON THE STORMWATER DISCUSSION, I WANT TO ECHO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES RAISED. WHEN WE GO TO THE SLIDE ABOUT THE OPTIONS, THOUGH, WHAT I ODE LIKE IS -- I THINK WE STILL NEED TO -- I KNOW SOMETIMES WE COMPARE OURSELVES TO OURSELVES. I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL, JUST LIKE WE DID IN THE BUDGET SEASON, THOUGH, TO COMPARE HOW WE -- RATE OUR TIERED STRUCTURE VERSUS HOUSTON OR DALLAS OR AUSTIN SO WE UNDERSTAND WHERE THERE MAY BE SOME LESSONS LEARNED THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL HERE. BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT RATE -- THAT TIERED RATE STRUCTURE CORRECT, THEN THESE NUMBERS MAY NOT BE CORRECT, RIGHT? ADDITIONALLY, ONCE WE ARE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT OPTION, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND AN OPTION THAT GETS US TO A NUMBER THAT WE ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT HAS NO IMPACT ON RESIDENTS. GOING BACK TO THE FORECAST SLIDE, PLEASE. THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST SLIDE. COUNCILWOMAN KAUR HIT UPON THIS, AND SO TO BE VERY CLEAR, THOUGH, OPTION 1, WHICH IS THE DO NOTHING OPTION, EVEN THAT, WE DON'T ASSUME -- WE DON'T SEE THE ASSUMED 2% INCREASE UNTIL 2029, CORRECT? SO IT MAY BE EVEN POSSIBLE THAT WE HAVE A BOND CAPACITY THAT IS LESS THAN 625; IS THAT RIGHT? >> [02:35:06] MODELING, WE'RE MODELING THOSE FORECASTED NUMBERS INTO OUR MODELS AND IT PRODUCED $625 MILLION. >> MAYOR JONES: RIGHT. BUT ON YOUR OPTION SLIDE, YOU ASSUMED AT LEAST EACH YEAR 3.25. >> ELLIOTT: ON SCENARIOS 2 AND 3. >> MAYOR JONES: IF WE LOOK AT THIS, THOUGH, EVEN ON THE FIRST OPTION, YOU ASSUME 2%. EVEN IN YOUR OWN FORECAST, YOU DON'T GET TO 2% UNTIL '29, CORRECT? >> ELLIOTT: THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S AN AVERAGE OF 2% ON THE 625 MILLION. THE MODEL ACTUALLY ASSUMES THOSE PERCENTAGES IN THE FORECAST. SO FOR PURPOSES OF THAT ONE SLIDE, THAT 2%, THAT IS AN AVERAGE. THESE FORECASTED NUMBERS ARE ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN OUR MODEL FOR THE -- AND PRODUCE THE $625 MILLION. >> MAYOR JONES: UNDERSTOOD. I SHARE THE SKEPTICISM, THOUGH, OF SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES WHERE WE WOULD GO FROM .4 TO QUADRUPLE THAT, IF NOT MORE, IN ONE YEAR BASED ON WHAT WE'RE ALREADY SEEING. YEAH. >> ELLIOTT: UNDERSTOOD. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. IN TERMS OF THE TIMING OF THE BOND, I'M ALWAYS GOING TO SUPPORT A NOVEMBER ELECTION, THAT IS WHEN WE JUST HEAR FROM MORE VOTERS, AND I DON'T -- I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO -- THE MAY VERSUS NOVEMBER, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SEE AN EXPEDITED NUMBER OF PROJECTS JUST BECAUSE WE DO IT IN MAY. SO HEARING FROM MORE VOTERS, GIVING US MORE TIME TO UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE, AGAIN WE'RE NOT JUST SEEING THESE RATE INCREASES ON OUR UTILITIES, WE WILL HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF HOW WE INTEND -- HOW THE CITY MANAGER INTENDS TO PROPOSE -- PROPOSALS ON HOW TO CLOSE THE GAPS, RIGHT? WE STILL HAVE $142 MILLION BUDGET GAP GOING INTO FY '27 THAT WE NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR, AND WE'LL HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF HOW OUR COMMUNITY IS DEALING WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ONE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL, RIGHT, CUTS TO MEDICARE, MEDICAID, CHIP AND SNAP. I THINK TIME HERE REALLY HELPS US UNDERSTAND WHAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE ECONOMICALLY. ON THE BOND -- AND I APPRECIATED THE COMMENTS HERE IN TERMS OF BEING INTENTIONAL, BECAUSE OF THE LOI LOWER CAPACITY. I KNOW I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH MANY OF YOU IN TERMS OF LET'S MAKE SURE WE DON'T FUND THAT KIND OF THING AGAIN. WHAT I WOULD ASK IS THAT WE ALSO ARE INTENTIONAL ABOUT THE THINGS THAT WE WILL NOT FUND, RIGHT? NOT JUST PRIORITIZING, BUT WHAT ARE THOSE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO NOT FUND. SOME OF YOU HAVE SAID, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD NOT FUND ANOTHER UNIVERSITY'S RIGHT? WHAT ARE THESE OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE KNOW WE SHOULD NOT BE FUNDING. COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN, I'M GOING TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT WITH LEADING THE ECONOMIC AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, IF YOU'D KIND OF HELP STEER THAT CONVERSATION, I'VE APPRECIATED YOUR FEEDBACK ON THAT, SO WELCOME A LIST OF THINGS THAT WE ARE GOING TO NOT FUND, &-ÚL OURSELVES FROM FOR THE PROJECTS -- THE TYPE OF VERY GOOD PROJECTS THAT YOU IDENTIFIED. >> NO. THANKS. OKAY. GOT IT. AS WE HAVE ALL VERY CLEARLY IDENTIFIED THE NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND WE ARE BALANCING IT WITH WHAT POTENTIAL INVESTMENT DOWNTOWN MAY LOOK LIKE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE DO THE DUE DILIGENCE ON THINGS, AND SO FOR THOSE FOLKS TO SAY, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH IS TOO MUCH? YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY YOU DO THE DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE YOU SIGN THE COMMUNITY OUT FOR $489 MILLION WHEN YOU HAVE ALL THESE OTHER NEEDS POTENTIALLY WITHOUT A TRUE UNDERSTANDING OF THE IMPACT OF THOSE -- OF INVESTMENTS. AND WHY IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE NOT ONLY HAVE -- GIVE PEOPLE A SAY IN WHETHER OR NOT SOME OF THESE PROJECTS GO FORWARD, BUT ALSO CONTINUE TO ASK MORE FOR WHAT CAN GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND TO PAY FOR THESE VERY REAL NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH MY COLLEAGUES ON THAT PROJECT. I WILL SHARE, WE JUST HAD A CONVERSATION IN GOVERNANCE EARLIER ABOUT THE CBA, THE CBA, JUST AS WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE HERE, THE CBA, $2.5 MILLION ANNUALLY, SPEED BUMPS BEING 16K A POP, THAT'S 156 SPEED BUMPS A YEAR. [02:40:04] THAT'S ALL THAT CBA COVERS ANNUALLY, SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO ASK FOR MORE FOR WHAT OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS AND DESDESERVES, WE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY DO THAT. THERE ISN'T ANY ADDITIONAL RESOURCES COMING OUR WAY. OKAY. THANK YOU, AGAIN, TO THE STAFF FOR THE PRESENTATION. I APPRECIATE ALL MY COLLEAGUES' VERY THOUGHTFUL COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK. THANK YOU. [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:  ] COLLEAGUES, WE'LL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE TIME IS NOW 4:45 P.M. ON JANUARY 21ST, 2026. 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 AND TO DELIBERATE OR DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS PURSUANT TO TEXAS SECTION 551.087, THE PURCHASE EXCHANGE, LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO -- CAN I GET QUIET IN THE ROOM, PLEASE? THANKS. THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT SECTION 551.072 AND LEGAL ISSUES >> MAYOR JONES: THE TIME IS NEW 6:26 P.M. ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21ST. THE TWE'LL RECONVEN * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.