Jan 22, 2026 City Council Special Session

[00:01:17]

>> MAYOR JONES: GOOD MORNING, THE DATE IS JANUARY 22E SPECIAL SESSION OF THE SAN ANTONIO COUNCIL IS CALLED TO ORDER. MADAM CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?

[ ITEMS]

>> MAYOR JONES: GREAT, THANK YOU, CLERK. THIS MEETING WILL HEAR A BRIEFING ON THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT.

WE HAVE A PENDING VOTE IN EARLY FEBRUARY SO THIS BRIEFING WILL LAY FLAT WHAT WE ARE. ERIK, OVER TO YOU FOR THE STAFF PRESENTATION.

>> YES, MA'AM. SO THE 9:00 THIS MORNING IS A SPECIAL SESSION ON THE GUAJOLOTE. WE WANTED TO HAVE -- ALLOW THE COUNCIL AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET A BRIEFING SESSION TO BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THE ISSUE.

BRIDGETT WILL WALK THROUGH WHERE WE STAND RIGHT NOW. THE PROJECT IS IN THE CITY'S EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION AND THE DEVELOPER HAS SUBMITTED A PETITION REQUESTING THE CITY'S CONSENT ON THE CREATION OF A MUNICIPAL COURT DISTRICT. BRIDGETT WHITE WILL BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON THE DETAILS OF THE PROJECT. THE MUNICIPAL UTILITIES REQUEST.

I DID SEE WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES OF SAWS IN THE ROOM AS WELL IN CASE THERE ARE QUESTIONS. WITH THAT I'LL TURN IT OVER TO BRIDGETT.

>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AS STATED, THIS MORNING THE BRIEFING IS ON THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT REQUEST.

THE SITE IN QUESTION IS IN NORTHWEST BEXAR COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO'S EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OR THE ETJ, NEAR SCENIC ROAD AND BABCOCK ROAD. IT IS APPROXIMATELY 160 ACRES AND THE OWNERS ARE GUAJOLOTE RANCH INCORPORATED AND SYDNEY AND MARCI EDWARDS.

LINEAR HOMES OF TEXAS PLANS TO BUILD THE SITE. THE PROJECT BEING PROPOSED FOR THIS SITE IS A 3,000 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT DEVELOPMENT.

THE SITE IS WITHIN THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM'S WATER CERTIFICATE OF CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY OR CCN AND NOT CURRENTLY WITHIN ANY ENTITY'S CCN.

TO FINANCE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY, THE DEVELOPERS ARE REQUESTING THE MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT OR MUD TO BE NAMED BEXAR COUNTY MUD NUMBER 2.

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE ON-SITE AND OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS, SUCH AS INDIVIDUAL LOT IMPROVEMENTS, STREETS, UTILITIES, DRAINAGE AND GRADING, OFF SITE DRAINAGE EXTENSION TO SCENIC LOOP ROAD AND THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF AN ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. THE DEVELOPER WILL PRESERVE APPROXIMATELY 500 ACRES -- 580 ACRES ARE 50% OF THE PROJECT AREA AS DEDICATED OPEN SPACE. COSTS ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE APPROXIMATELY $150 MILLION WITH REVENUE ANTICIPATED TO BE $106.5 MILLION. THE USE OF A MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT IS OUTLINED IN POLICY. ADOPTED IN 2023, THE POLICY CONFORMS TO STATE LAW WHILE OUTLINING HOW THE CITY CAN MANAGE GROWTH THROUGH VARIOUS GROWTH MANAGEMENT TOOLS. IDENTIFY TOOLS INCLUDE ANNEXATION, ALBEIT LIMITED GIVEN STATE REGULATIONS, SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND AGREEMENTS AND REGIONAL PLANNING AND COORDINATION. THESE TOOLS ARE WHAT THE CITY CAN USE TO MANAGE GROWTH TO THE EXTENT ALLOWED UNDER STATE LAW.

[00:05:02]

AND FOR THE DISTRICT TO EXERCISE ITS FULL POWERS. IF THE CITY DOES NOT CONSENT TO THE DISTRICT'S CREATION, THE LANDOWNER MAY SEEK AN ALTERNATIVE CREATION PROCESS THROUGH A STATE AGENCY OR STATE LEGISLATION. BY PARTICIPATING IN THE CREATION OF A DISTRICT, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS THE ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE THE TERMS OF ITS CREATION. AS MENTIONED A MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT IS BEING SOUGHT TO DEVELOP SEVERAL ON-SITE AND OFF SITE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING AN ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. THE DEVELOPER COULD RECOVER INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS THROUGH AD VALOREM TAXES, ASSESSMENTS IN THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS. THE TEXAS WATER CODE, SPECIFICALLY CHAPTERS 49 AND 54, PERTAIN TO WATER DISTRICTS AND PROVIDE REGULATIONS ON WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR THE CREATION OF THESE DISTRICTS. AS REQUIRED, THE DEVELOPER SUBMITTED A PETITION TO THE CITY ON NOVEMBER 10TH, 2025 FOR THE CITY'S CONSENT TO THE CREATION OF MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT WITH THE MUD TO BE CREATED BY THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL EQUALITY OR TCEQ.

UNLIKE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PETITIONS TYPICALLY RECEIVED BY THE CITY, A MUD PETITION HAS A 90-DAY REQUIREMENT FROM ITS RECEIPT FROM THE CITY TO CONSIDER THE RECEIPT FROM THE REQUEST. TODAY IS THE 73RD DAY AND THE CITY HAS TO MEET THE 90-DAY REQUIREMENT. I WANTED TO SPEND A FEW MOMENTS ON THE MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT PROCESS AND WHERE WE CURRENTLY ARE IN THAT PROCESS. ALL SPECIAL DISTRICT REQUESTS UNDERGO AN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW, WHICH TYPICALLY INCLUDES DETERMINING THE COMPLETENESS OF THE SPECIAL DISTRICT REQUEST APPLICATION AND COORDINATING WITH OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS AND EXTERNAL AGENCIES. PLANNING COMMISSION IS THEN BRIEFED AND THEY WILL HOLD A HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ITEM.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS BRIEFED ON THIS REQUEST ON DECEMBER 17TH OF LAST YEAR AND HELD A HEARING ON JANUARY 16TH, LAST FRIDAY. AT THAT HEARING THE ITEM BEFORE THEM WAS TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON WHETHER OR NOT TO CONSENT TO THE CREATION OF THE MUD AND THE CITY'S ETJ WITH AN EXECUTED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. A MOTION TO DENY PASSED 5-4. IN TWO WEEKS CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT TO CONSENT TO THE CREATION OF THE MUD IN THE CITY'S ETJ. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE TOP LINE, IF CITY COUNCIL CHOOSES TO APPROVE CONSENTING TO THE CREATION OF THE MUD WITH EXECUTED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE ITEM WOULD THEN GO TO TCEQ FOR THE DEVELOPER TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF CREATING THE DISTRICT. IF, HOWEVER, CITY COUNCIL CHOOSES TO DENY ITS CONSENT TO CREATION, OR TAKE NO ACTION, THE DEVELOPER CAN THEN MOVE TO FILE A PETITION FOR WASTEWATER SERVICES WITH THE CITY AND NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH SAWS. A PETITION RECEIVED WOULD START A 120 DAY CLOCK FOR AN AGREEMENT TO BE NEGOTIATED. IF NO AGREEMENT IS REACHED BETWEEN SAWS AND THE DEVELOPER WITHIN 120 DAYS, THE DEVELOPER CAN PROCEED TO TCEQ FOR THEM TO CONSIDER CREATING A DISTRICT. IF, HOWEVER, AN AGREEMENT IS REACHED BETWEEN SAWS AND THE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE WASTEWATER SERVICES, THE DEVELOPER CAN PROCEED WITH DEVELOPMENT. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IT WOULD NOT PREVENT THEM FROM SUBMITTING A PETITION FOR A SPECIAL DISTRICT FOR FUNDING THE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE IN THE DISTRICT. SINCE THE PETITION WAS BROUGHT FORWARD, SEVERAL CONCERNS HAVE BEEN RAISED REGARDING THE PROJECT, NOTABLY THE ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, THE LOCATION OVER THE CONTRIBUTING ZONE OF THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER AND CONSERVATION ISSUES. TO DATE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS HAVE OCCURRED: SAWS APPROVED THE UTILITY SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR WATER WITH INTENT RELATED TO SEWER IN FEBRUARY OF 2022. THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS APPROVED BY BOTH BEXAR COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IN FEBRUARY OF 2023 AND MARCH 2023 RESPECTIVELY. THE WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT WAS APPROVED BY TCEQ IN OCTOBER OF 2025. AND SAWS PROVIDED RESPONSES TO ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS RAISED AND BROUGHT FORWARD BY CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION REQUEST IN OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER OF 2025.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 212.172 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, THE CITY NEGOTIATES A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH ALL SPECIAL DISTRICT REQUESTS FOR CONSENT TO CREATION. THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT SERVES AS A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND AS WELL AS THE CURRENT AND FUTURE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS FILED WITH THE COUNTY AND

[00:10:02]

ALSO ALLOW FOR SAWS REVIEW ALL PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND DOCUMENTS, CONTAINING THE SEAL OF A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, AS WELL AS PLANS FOR OPERATION OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PRIOR TO INITIATION OF THE PLANT'S OPERATIONS AND ALSO ALLOW SAWS ACCESS TO THE REUSE SYSTEM AT ALL TIMES FOR INSPECTION AND TESTING.

ALSO NOTE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS THAT APPLY IN THE ANIMAL THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD COMPLY WITH, EXAMPLES ARE THE TREE ORDINANCE, WATER PROTECTION ORDINANCE, IRRIGATION, STREET ACTIVITY AND SIGNS. IT WOULD ALSO INCLUDE THAT THE CURRENT AND FUTURE OWNERS AGREE TO ANNEXATION IF A FUTURE COUNCIL DECIDES TO ANNEX THE DISTRICT AT THE END OF THE MATERIAL AGREEMENT AND IT WOULDED ASK THAT THE OWNER PROVIDE REPORTS. AND PAY AN ASSESSMENT FEE OF 175 PER BUILT RESIDENTIAL UNIT FOR A TOTAL OF $525,000.

THE WASTEWATER SERVICE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS SHOWN HERE AND ON THE NEXT SLIDE ARE SOME OF THOSE INCLUDED IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS RELATED TO DISCHARGE OF TREATED DOMESTIC EFFLUENT FROM A TREATMENT PLANT AS WELL AS THE SEWER PROVISIONS THAT SAWS NEGOTIATED WITH THE DEVELOPER IN ORDER FOR SAWS TO PROVIDE WATER TO THE DEVELOPMENT.

SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS INCLUDE THE PLANT BEING OPERATED AND MAINTAINED BY AN A LEVEL OPERATOR, SETTING ASIDE 50% OF THE PROJECT AS OPEN SPACE. 30% IMPERVIOUS COVER RESTRICTION.

THE DISCHARGE PERMIT ONLY SERVING THE DEVELOPMENT. SAWS SUPPLEMENTATION TO ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE SOIL ABSORPTION. COMPLYING WITH SAWS'S BACKFLOW PREVENTION REQUIREMENT. MONITORING OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. AN SITE PERSONNEL FOR ON-SITE NOTIFICATION PURPOSES AND DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF WET WELLS TO MAINTAIN PEAK DESIGN FLOW.

IN SUMMARY, CITY COUNCIL IS TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST FOR A CONSENT TO THE CREATION OF A MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT ON FEBRUARY 5TH. AS MENTIONED, THE ITEM WILL ALSO INCLUDE PROFESSIONAL APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AS A CONDITION OF THE CITY'S CONSENT. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS IN THE FINAL STAGES OF NEGOTIATION WITH THE DEVELOPER AND COULD CONTAIN THE PROPOSED TERMS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED ON SLIDE 8. CITY COUNCIL HAS THREE OPTIONS. THE COUNCIL CAN CHOOSE TO, ONE, APPROVE CONSENT TO THE CREATION OF THE MUD WITH THE EXECUTED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

TWO, DENY CONSENTING TO THE CREATION OF THE MUD. OR THREE, TAKE NO ACTION.

AS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS A CONDITION OF THE CITY'S CONSENT, IT WOULD ONLY BE ENTERED INTO WHEN CITY COUNCIL RAILROADS THE REQUEST ON FEBRUARY 5TH.

IT MAY NOT BE ENTERED INTO LATER IF CITY COUNCIL WERE TO CHOOSE TO DENY.

AND IF TCEQ WERE TO APPROVE CREATING A MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT.

MAYOR, THIS CONCLUDES MY BRIEFING ON ON GUAJOLOTE RANCH MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT. STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION, BRIDGETT.

A COUPLE OF CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. ON SLIDE -- WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT SLIDE 7, SOME OF THE CONCERNS RAISED, I KNOW SOME HAVE POINTED TO SEWERY ANALYSIS THAT HAS SPOKEN TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE'VE REACHED OUT TO SWRE FOR THEM TO PROVIDE A DIFFERING LEVEL OF ANALYSIS TO COUNTER WHAT SAWS HAS PROVIDED. AND THEY HAVE NOT RETURNED ANYTHING TO US. SO AT THIS POINT WE ARE UTILIZING SAWS'S ANALYSIS.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> MAYOR JONES: JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY WAS ON THE SAME PAGE WHEN IT COMES TO THAT. WOULD YOU ALSO PLEASE CLARIFY SO EVERYBODY IS ON THE SAME PAGE REGARDING THE STATUS OF THIS WITH THE

COUNTY? >> THE STATUS WITH THE COUNTY?

>> YES, MA'AM. >> BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT IS IN THE ETJ IT REQUIRES

[00:15:02]

2023 AND THE CITY APPROVED IT IN MARCH OF 2023. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU FOR THAT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE HAVE SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. I WILL CALL FOLKS UP IN THE ORDER THAT THEY SIGNED UP. EVERYBODY WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

ALL INDIVIDUALS WILL -- AND GROUPS OF THREE WILL HAVE A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.

THE FIRST INDIVIDUAL IS SOPHIA RIOS. BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY FOLKS WHO ARE GOING TO SPEAK I WILL CALL THE PERSON WHO IS TO SPEAK AND THE PERSON AFTER THEM SO IF THEY WOULD LINE UP AND WE CAN GO THROUGH IT QUICKLY.

SO SOPHIA RIOS AS WELL AS JUSTICE [INDISCERNIBLE]. JUSTICE? MESHA WHITE? CHERYL LAURIE? DAMIAN ROMERO.

IS THIS THE RIGHT LIST? OH, GOOD. OKAY.

DAMIAN ROMERO. OLIVIA VOWEL. PETER BELLA.

OKAY. >> JANE SAMES IF YOU WOULD COME UP, PLEASE, YOU HAVE A TOTAL OF SIX MINUTES.

SO ON THE LIST I'VE GOT PETER BELLA, KATE HALL AND JAMES SANDS.

IS THERE A GROUP OF THREE THAT YOU INTENDED? >>

>> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO PETER, WHO WERE YOU -- PETER, YOU'RE GIVING YOUR TIME TO JANE SAM? SO JANE SAM, YOU WILL COME UP FIRST, PLEASE. AND SUSAN BEVINS. SO YOU HAVE NINE MINUTES,

MA'AM. >> GOOD MORNING, MADAM MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. MY NAME IS KATE HALL.

I LIVE IN THE CITY OF GRAY FOREST AND I'M SPEAKING AS A MEMBER OF THE SCENIC LOOP ALLIANCE. I'M HERE THIS MORNING TO URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THE MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT PROPOSED BY LENNAR HOMES. IT COMES DOWN TO ONE OVERRIDING ISSUE, WATER. BENEATH SAN ANTONIO FLOWS THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER, A VITAL LIFE SOURCE FOR OUR CITY, CLEAR, CLEAN AND NATURALLY FILTERED.

ITS WATERS HAVE SUSTAINED GENERATIONS, NOURISHED OUR LANDSCAPES AND SUPPORTED OUR COMMUNITIES. IT IS THE LARGEST SINGLE SOURCE DRINKING WATER FOR SAN ANTONIO AND ALSO ONE OF THE MOST VULNERABLE. BECAUSE THE EDWARD'S IS A KARST AQUIFER, WATER FLOWS THROUGH FRACTURES, FAULTS, CAVES AND CON DUE IT'S WITH VERY LIMITED NATURAL FILLTATION. CONTAMINATION INTRODUCED AT THE SURFACE CAN REACH THE AQUIFER QUICKLY AND UNPREDICTABLY.

ONCE COMPROMISED, THIS RESOURCE CANNOT SIMPLY BE FIXED OR REPLACED.

THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER IS A CORNERSTONE OF LIFE AND WELL-BEING FOR ALL WHO CALL SAN ANTONIO HOME. THAT LIFE SOURCE IS NOW AT RISK.

THE DECISION YOU MAKE IN THE COMING WEEKS WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER REMAINS PURE AND ABUNDANT FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OR WHETHER WE ACCEPT PREVENTABLE HARM. IT IS A CLEAR CHOICE: PROTECT OUR PRISTINE WATER OR ALLOW IT TO BE PUT IN JEOPARDY. OUR CONSTITUENTS UNDERSTAND WHAT'S AT STAKE. MORE THAN 1,500 RESIDENTS FORMALLY OPPOSE THIS PROJECT AT TCEQ, WITH 400 APPEARING IN PERSON TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST IT.

JUST DAYS AGO OVER 150 RESIDENTS OPPOSED THE MUD BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IN EVERY HEARING IN THE PAST THREE YEARS, NOT A SINGLE PERSON HAS STOOD UP IN FAVOR OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. TODAY YOU'LL HEAR ABOUT MANY FACTORS THAT MUST BE WEIGHED. YOU'LL HEAR ABOUT LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE, FINANCIAL AND REGULATORY RISKS RELATED TO A MUD.

[00:20:04]

YOU'LL HEAR FROM PEOPLE OFFERING A BRIGHTER, MORE RESPONSIBLE SOLUTION, ONE THAT PROTECTS OUR LIFE SOURCE AND ALIGNS WITH SAN ANTONIO'S OWN PLAN FOR THE NORTH SECTOR. A SOLUTION THAT PRIORITIZES LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP OVER SHORT-TERM CONVENIENCE. GOOD PLANNING IS NOT MEASURED IN MONTHS ORIFICE KEL QUARTERS, IT IS MEASURED IN DECADES, IN THE HEALTH OF OUR WTER, THE SAFETY OF OUR COMMUNITIES AND THE FUTURE WE LEAVE BEHIND. THE CHOICE BEFORE YOU TODAY IS NOT JUST ABOUT DEVELOPMENT, IT'S ABOUT THE RESPONSIBILITY AND A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER SAN ANTONIO KNOWINGLY INTRODUCES AVOIDABLE RISK TO ITS DRINKING WATER SUPPLY. I'D LIKE TO CLOSE WITH A QUOTE FROM COUNCILMAN MUNGIA. "AS THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTEE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, I PERSONALLY LED THE CHARGE BY MAKING THE MOTION TO DENY THE DEVELOPER'S MUD REQUEST FOR THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH PROJECT. I AM PROUD TO REPORT THAT THIS MOTION SUCCEEDED AND WE ARE OFFICIALLY RECOMMENDING DENIAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

THE RISKS TO OUR AQUIFER AND THE LONG-TERM SAFETY OF BEXAR COUNTY ARE SIMPLY TOO

> MAYOR JONES: MA'AM, Select to skip to this part of the video">HIGH TO IGNORE. ". >> MAYOR JONES: MA'AM, THANK YOU. YOU CAN SUBMIT THE REST OF THE COMMENTS FOR THE RECORD.

>> I HAD THREE EXTRA MINUTES. >> YOUR NAME, MA'AM.

YOU HAD SIX TOTAL. >> I'M ALMOST DONE, ONE LAST DONE.

THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO SHOWED UP TO ADVOCATE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

MY STANCE IS FIRM. I WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS MEASURE AT CITY COUNCIL NEXT

> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. SO NOW THIS IS THE PETER Select to skip to this part of the video">THURSDAY" THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. SO NOW THIS IS THE PETER BELLA, JANE SAMES GROUP? IS THAT RIGHT? MA'AM, YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. MY NAME IS JANE SAMES AND I LIVE AT 21035 ON SCENIC LOOP AND ON THE LAND THAT HAS -- I LIVE ON THE LAND THAT WAS MY LATE HUSBAND'S FOR OVER 140 YEARS, WHICH WAS VERY PRECIOUS TO HIM.

AND IT'S RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH. AS WE KNOW, A MUD IS A SCHEME BY DEVELOPERS TO ISSUE BONDS TO BUILD INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS AND IMPOSE TAXES ON THEIR OWN RESIDENTS TO PAY IT BACK. RECENT REPORTS IN THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE PUBLISHED ALSO BY THE SAN ANTONIO EXPRESS NEWS HAVE SAID HOW MUDS HAVE BEEN PROMOTED STATEWIDE BY DEVELOPERS AS BOOSTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT RATHER, HAVE RESULTED IN THE OPPOSITE. WHILE ALSO STRAINING THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

AMONG THE FINDINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS: NEW HOME BUYERS FREQUENTLY HAVE BEEN HIT WITH HIGH PROPERTY TAXES THAT ARE DOUBLE OR TRIPLE OF THOSE OF THE COUNTY OR NEIGHBORING CITIES, PLUS MONTHLY FEES FOR BASIC SERVICES FROM TRASH PICKUP TO POLICE PROTECTION. SHATTERING THE ILLUSION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

MANY HOME BUYERS ARE LURED BY ATTRACTIVE PRICE LISTS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO STAY BECAUSE OF THE HIGH TAXES AND THE FEES, CALLING INTO QUESTION THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE DEVELOPMENTS. FUDS HAVE RESULTED IN HIGHER TAXES OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, EVEN AS CITIES AND COUNTIES HAVE BEEN HELD ON THE HOOK TO PROTECT THE SERVICES OR PROVIDE THE SERVICES FOR EVEN TO MAINTAIN THE INFRASTRUCTURES OF MUD. THOSE COSTS OFTEN CANNOT BE FULLY RECOUP, FALLING ON ALL EXISTING TAXPAYERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS SUCH AS ALL OF US IN THIS ROOM AND OUTSIDE TO EXPAND OUR ROADS, OUR POLICE STAFF AND TO PROVIDE OTHER SERVICES. MOREOVER, MUDS OFTEN FUNCTION LIKE INVISIBLE OR PERMANENT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS BUT WITHOUT THE SAME LEVEL AND SERVICE AND UPKEEP AND WITHOUT THE SAME ACCOUNTABILITY, AND YOU, OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, COULD LOSE TOTAL CONTROL, WOULD HAVE NONE. ESSENTIALLY DEVELOPERS WITH

[00:25:07]

AND IT GROWS EACH YEAR. SHE ALSO SENT ME AN ARTICLE FROM A NEIGHBOR ON -- NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR THAT SAYS, QUOTE, HI NEIGHBORS, THIS IS OUR FIRST YEAR IN TEXAS. WE ARE AT TOTAL SHOCK OF OUR MUD TAX.

IT'S LIKE HALF OF THE DANG MORTGAGE. ANYONE ELSE HAS THIS SHOCK OR KNOW HOW WE CAN GET IT REDUCED? IT'S DANG-NEAR ALMOST OR MORE THAN OUR PROPERTY TAX HOW. HOW DO WE SAY THIS TO ALL THE PEOPLE MOVING INTO TEXAS, INTO MUDS THAT ARE NOT AWARE OF THIS HAPPENING TO THEM, JUST LIKE MY SISTER PAULETTE'S NEIGHBOR. I THINK IT'S A SAME THAT SHAME E DO THAT. THIS CLEARLY WOULD NOT BE PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITH A NUMBER 2 MUD IN OUR -- FOR SAN ANTONIO. I RESPECTFULLY AND ENCOURAGE YOU TO DENY THE MUD FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE REASONS THAT I HAVE GIVEN, AND I THANK YOU AGAIN FOR LISTENING TO ME AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR JONES: JIM BIRBIGLIA, FOLLOWED BY DIANA DUNCAN.

>> GOOD MORNING. COLONEL JIM BIRBIGLIA, 24 YEARS IN THE ARMY, 10 YEARS IN THE AIR FORCE. AND I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE I'M A MEMBER OF THE MUD BOARD NUMBER 1. HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED WHY THERE'S NO BOARD NUMBER 2? BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A TERRIBLE IDEA. IT TAKES $150 MILLION AND BORROWS IT AT WHATEVER INTEREST AND THEN WE HAVE TO PAY IT OFF, THE PEOPLE WHO MOVED IN. I'VE NOW BEEN PAYING $1,500 A MONTH -- $1,500 A YEAR FOR 39 YEARS. NOBODY [INDISCERNIBLE] IS GOING TO DO THIS.

NOBODY SAID HERE'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO PAY. SOMEWHERE IN THE PAPERS MAYBE IT WAS, BUT I DIDN'T SEE IT, MY FRIENDS DIDN'T SEE IT, NOBODY IN SAN ANTONIO RANCH SAW IT. BUT 39 YEARS LATER WE'RE STILL PAYING, AND THE DEVELOPER IS LIVING COMFORTABLY IN AUSTIN. HE NEVER PAID A DIME OF IT.

HE BORROWED THE MONEY JUST TO -- JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW CORRUPT THIS MUD BOARD CAN BE, WHEN HE SET UP THE PAYMENT, IT WAS 9% AND IT WAS YOU CANNOT PAY IT BACK. SO WE WAIT UNTIL 2027 TO PAY IT BACK.

AND THEN IT'S NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO GET RID OF THE MUD IF YOU LOOK AT TEXAS LAW. YOU SEE THIS IS AN AUTONOMOUS BODY OF FIVE PEOPLE APPOINTED FIRST BY THE DEVELOPER, LATER ON ELECTED, BUT IT'S AUTONOMOUS. IT DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PEOPLE IN THE HOUSING AREA. IT ANSWERS ONLY TO TEXAS LAW SO THINGS LIKE THIS CAN HAPPEN. A GROUP CAN GET TOGETHER AND VOTE THEMSELVES $400 A MEETING EACH AND NOBODY CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. SECOND, THEY CAN HIRE A LAWYER BECAUSE HE'S A BUDDY OF THE PRESIDENT, $700 AN HOUR.

[00:30:06]

THEY HIRED A VERY NICE SECRETARY WHO WORKS ABOUT THREE HOURS A WEEK AND SHE WAS PAID 39,000 PLUS CHANGE A YEAR. WE DO THE SAME THING FOR

LESS THAN 16,000. >> MAYOR JONES: SIR, IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL REMARKS YOU CAN SUBMIT THEM FOR THE RECORD. SIR, IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL REMARKS PAST YOUR TIME YOU CAN SUBMIT THEM FOR THE RECORD.

THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR JONES: DIANA DUNCAN FOLLOWED BY LAUREN HERNANDEZ.

OKAY. LAUREN IS GIVING DIANA HER TIME.

THE NEXT PERSON AFTER THIS THEN WILL BE STEWART BURNBAM.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO PASS THIS AROUND, IS THAT ALLOWED? IF YOU ALL WANT TO TOUCH THIS YOU CAN HAVE IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE. MY NAME'S DIANA DUNCAN AND I LIVE IN SAN ANTONIO OUT IN BEXAR COUNTY. I'M ORIGINALLY FROM NEW YORK, BUT NOW EVEN WHEN I WAS LIVING IN NEW YORK THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER WAS KNOWN TO ME. SOMEHOW IT'S IN MY CONSCIOUSNESS.

IT'S NOT JUST A LOCAL FEATURE, BUT IT HAS A NATIONAL REPUTATION RESPECTED AS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT AND SENSITIVE GROUNDWATER SYSTEMS IN THE COUNTRY. I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED MUD NUMBER 2 FOR GUAJOLOTE AND EXPLAIN WHY APPROVING IT WOULD PLACE PUBLIC HEALTH AND OUR WATER SUPPLY AT RISK. AT THE HEART OF THE ISSUE, AS JIM MENTIONED, IS GOVERNANCE. IF THIS MUD IS APPROVED, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WOULD HAVE NO OVERSIGHT OR ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY OVER THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. NO MEANINGFUL TRANSPARENCY A AND NO WAY FOR -- IT IS NOT THE DEVELOPER WHO BEARS THE CONSEQUENCES.

SAN ANTONIO HAS SHOWN REMARKABLE FORESIGHT IN PROTECTING ITS GROUNDWATER.

SINCE 2000 THE CITY HAS INVESTED NEARLY $2 MILLION TO PURCHASE LAND AROUND THE GUAJOLOTE.

THAT INVESTMENT AND ERASE DECADES OF PLANNING AND TAX-FUNDED PAYER PROTECTION.

LAST OCTOBER THE TCEQ ISSUED A PERMIT ALLOWING A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT TO DISCHARGE AND SPRAY TREATED EFFLUENT OVER LAND LOCATED IN THIS SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENT. AND IT IS NOT JUST THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER CONTRIBUTING ZONE. IT IS ALSO THE TRINITY, GLENN ROSE RECHARGE ZONE.

SO REMEMBER THAT. IT IS NOT JUST A CONTRIBUTING ZONE, IT IS A RECHARGE ZONE. THESE AREAS ARE MAPPED THIS WAY FOR A REASON.

1 MILLION GALLONS DAILY OF WASTEWATER OR ANYTHING APPLIED TO THE LAND WILL MOVE THROUGH THE SOIL AND EFFECTIVELY RECHARGE THE AQUIFER.

I BROUGHT A PIECE OF THE HELOTES CREEK WITH ME AND YOU ALL ARE LOOKING AT IT AND YOU CAN SEE THE HOLES IN IT. THAT IS WHAT THE GROUND IS IN HELOTES CREEK. THAT IS WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO POUR THE WASTEWATER.

SO CAN YOU IMAGINE? MANY PEOPLE MAY NOT REALIZE THIS, BUT KARST GEOLOGY IS DESCRIBED AS SWISS CHEESE LIKE THAT ROCK. WATER MOVES RAPIDLY THROUGH THE FRACTURES AND UNDERGROUND CON DUE IT'S WITH LITTLE KNOWN NATURAL FILTRATION. A FAILURE WOULD THREATEN PRIVATE WELLS AND THE DRINKING WATER SUPPLY OF MORE THAN 2.5 MILLION OF US. THE RISKS HERE ARE REAL AND THEY'RE DOCUMENTED. IT'S NOT A HYPOTHETICAL IF, IT'S A WHEN. OF THE 16 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS OVER THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER CONTRIBUTING ZONE, ONLY FOUR MEET DRINKING WATER STANDARDS AND OF THOSE FOUR THREE HAVE BEEN OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITHIN THE LAST THREE YEARS. ONE WAS FINED FOR SERIOUS VIOLATIONS. THE TYPE OF WASTEWATER PLANT PROPOSED BY LENNAR IS A MEMBRANE BIO REACTOR. AND WHILE THE MEMBRANE MAY LOOK CLEAN IT IS NOT TO TYPE 1 HUMAN CONTACT STANDARDS. AND IN PRACTICAL TERMS THAT MEANS THE PERMIT ALLOWS

[00:35:06]

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, GOVERNANCE, PUBLIC HEALTH RISK AND THE CITY'S PRIOR INVESTMENTS AND THE LONG-TERM INVESTMENT OF OUR WATER SUPPLY I RESPECTFULLY URGE YOU TO RECOMMEND DENIAL TO THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND

CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: STEWART

BURNBAM AND NETIE, ARE YOU TOGETHER? >> I'M GIVING MY TIME TO

STEWART. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: SIX

MINUTES, SIR, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO THANK THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOR ADDRESSING THIS VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. NOT JUST FOR SAN ANTONIO, BUT FOR THE SURROUNDING AREA THAT RELIES UPON THE TRINITY AQUIFER.

MY NAME IS STEWART. I LIVE IN HELOTES. I'M ASKING YOU TO REJECT THE MUD APPLICATION TO DEVELOP THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH. I HAVE A DOCTORAL DEGREE IN GEOLOGY. I AM AN EMERITUS ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR IN PLANTORY EARTH AND SCIENCES AT UT SAN ANTONIO. I AM ALSO ON THE BOARD OF THE TRINITY GLEN ROSE CONSERVATION DISTRICT IN WHOSE JURISDICTION THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH LIES. NOW, I'M NOT SAYING THIS TO TOOT MY HORN, I JUST WANT TO DEVELOP SOME LEVEL OF EXPERTISE FOR WHAT FOLLOWS. I ALSO HAVE TO SAY THAT MY COMMENTS ARE MINE ALONE. THEY DO NOT REPRESENT THE TRINITY GLEN ROSE CONSERVATION DISTRICT NOR DO THEY REPRESENT UT SAN ANTONIO.

BUT AS A PROFESSOR THERE WILL BE A QUIZ. [LAUGHTER].

I HOPE YOU'RE TAKING NOTES. SO DURING MY RESEARCH CAREER AT UTSA, I STUDIED LIMESTONE, KARST, WATER CHEMISTRY. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE FRAGILITY OF KARST AQUIFERS AND EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT OF LENNAR HOMES' PROPOSED PROJECT ON THE HELOTES CREEK WATERSHED. SPECIFICALLY THE INEVITABLE CONTAMINATION OF FIRST THE TRINITY GLEN ROSE AQUIFER, FOLLOWED BY CONTAMINATION OF THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER IN WHICH THE TRINITY IS A MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR IN THIS WATERSHED. I'D LIKE TO SPEAK AS AN EXPERT IN THE SCIENCE BEING IGNORED BY ALL INVOLVED WITH THE PROJECT, SPECIFICALLY PUBLICATIONS BY THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER ALLIANCE AND RECENTLY THE SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE INSTITUTE. THE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE IS THAT THE AQUIFER IS IN HYDRO LOGIC COMMUNICATION WITH THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER AND CONTRIBUTES A SIGNIFICANT VOLUME OF WATER TO THE RECHARGE OF THE EDWARDS.

THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS AN OBLIGATION TO PROTECT THE WATER RESOURCES OF OVER 1.5 MILLION SAN ANTONIANS AS WELL AS THE WATER OF THE CITY'S NEIGHBORS WHO RELY ON THE TRINITY-GLEN ROSE AQUIFER. CLAIMS BY SAWS CEO TO THE CONTRARY, THE TRINITY-GLEN ROSE DOES IN FACT RECHARGE THE EDWARDS IN THE SUBSURFACE. MR. PUENTE INADVOCACY THE PRESENCE OF THE INFORMALLY NAMED CAMP BULLIS HYDRO LOGICAL UNIT THAT ACTS IN HIS WORDS AS A BARRIER TO CONTAMINATION FROM THE GLEN ROSE INTO THE EDWARDS. RESEARCH DOES IN FACT FIND THAT THE CAMP BULLIS LAYER IS OF LOW PERMEABILITY AND THROUGHOUT MANY PORTIONS OF ITS EXTENT. HOWEVER, WHEN ROCKS ARE INVOLVED IN FAULTING, AS WE HAVE HERE IN THE BALCONES FAULT ZONE, THE ROCKS ARE SUBJECTED TO CRACKING, FRACTURING AND BECOMING EXCELLENT CONDUITS OF GROUNDWATER FLOW.

QUOTING FROM SAWS WEBSITE, THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER IS AN INTENSITY FAULTED AND FRACTURED CARBONATE LIMESTONE FORMATION. THE STORAGE CAPACITY, FLOW CHARACTERISTICS, WATER-PRODUCING CAPABILITIES AND EFFICIENT RECHARGING ABILITY MAKE THIS GEOLOGICAL ANOMALY ONE OF THE MOST WONDER ROUSE AQUIFERS IN THE WORLD. THE TRINITY AQUIFER IS LIKEWISE INVOLVED IN THE BALCONES FAULT ZONE AND IT IS IN FAULT CONTACT WITH THE HE DID WARDS AND IS ALSO FRACTURED, THUS PROVIDING COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE AQUIFERS.

TO QUOTE A DESCRIPTION FROM A GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, THOSE FAULTS WITH LARGE

[00:40:02]

POROSITY OF THE MEMBERS IS PRIMARILY ASSOCIATED WITH FRACTURES AND CAVES AND THUS IS INTERCONNECTED AND MORE PERMEABLE RELATIVE TO THAT OF THE UNDERLYING CAMP BULLIS MEMBER. SO EVEN IF THE CAMP BULLIS MEMBER IS I AM PERMEABLE, WHEN THAT WATER IS INTRODUCED ON THE SURFACE IT'S GOING TO SING INTO THE CAVERNOUS MEMBER, WHICH IS VERY PERMEABLE. AND WHEN IT REACHES THE CAMP BULLIS MEMBER IT'S NOT JUST GOING TO STOP, GOING TO FLOW LATERALLY UNTIL IT REACHES A PERMEABLE FRACTURE OR AS PRESSURE BUILDS UP IT WILL RISE TO THE SURFACE TO SPRING FLOW AND THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO THE BASE FLOW OF THE STREAMS IN THIS AREA.

SO I'D LIKE TO QUOTE AGAIN FROM THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, THE TRINITY AQUIFER ALSO PROVIDES RECHARGE TO THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER BY SUPPLYING BASE FLOW TO SEVERAL STREAMS AND CATCHMENT AREA THAT FLOW SOUTH AND DOWNGRADEIENT OVER THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE. RECHARGE MAY ALSO OCCUR THROUGH LATERAL SUBSURFACE MIGRATION OF GROUNDWATER INTO STRATIGRAPHICALLY YOUNGER ROCKS THAT ARE FAULTED AGAINST THE TRINITY GROUP.

SINS I'M OUT OF TIME I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT I'M ASKING YOU TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND DENY THE MUD APPLICATION. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR JONES: STEVE LEE, FOLLOWED BY ANISSA MUNSON. >> I'M NEAL HERNANDEZ.

I OWN THE LARGEST CAVE SYSTEM IN BEXAR COUNTY. I DONATE MY TIME.

>> MAYOR JONES: >> MAYOR JONES: JOHN HERNANDEZ.

SO NUMBER 35, GOT IT. >>

SIX MINUTES. HE HAS A HANDOUT. >> NOT A HANDOUT, BUT A

DISPLAY. >> MAYOR JONES: ANISSA MUNSON, YOU WILL BE NEXT.

>> OKAY. GOOD MORNING. AND THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. MY NAME IS STEVE LEE AND MY FAMILY LIVES OUTSIDE OF GREAT FOREST ON LAND THAT'S BEEN IN MY FAMILY FOR MORE THAN 160 YEARS.

AND WE GET OUR WATER FROM A WELL IN THE TRINITY-GLEN ROSE AQUIFER.

WE GOT INVOLVED IN THIS ISSUE BECAUSE LENNAR'S DEVELOPMENT AT GUAJOLOTE RANCH WOULD RELEASE AN AVERAGE OF ONE MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF TREATED SEWAGE INTO THE HELOTES CREEK WATERSHED, WHICH DIRECTLY RECHARGES THE TRINITY-GLEN. THAT WATERSHED ALSO CONTRIBUTES UP TO 15% OF THE TOTAL RECHARGE OF THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER. THE PRINCIPAL WATER SOURCE FOR ABOUT 2.5 MILLION PEOPLE ACROSS THIS REGION. AT FRIDAY'S PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, A LENNAR REPRESENTATIVE SHOWED A MAP, WHAT YOU SEE HERE, OF OTHER EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS IN THE CONTRIBUTING ZONE OF THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER WHERE GUAJOLOTE RANCH IS LOCATED. DAVID GROVE, LENNAR'S REGIONAL PRESIDENT FOR TEXAS, SAID ON TEXAS PUBLIC RADIO THAT THOSE PLANTS ARE OPERATING, QUOTE, SAFELY AND EFFECTIVELY, UNQUOTE. WELL, THAT MIGHT NOT BE THEIR BEST TALKING POINT BECAUSE HALF OF THE 14 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IN THE CONTRIBUTING ZONE THAT HAVE REPORTED DATA VIOLATED DISCHARGE LIMITS OF DANGEROUS POLLUTANTS DURING THE PAST THREE YEARS. AND TWO HAVE [INDISCERNIBLE], ACCORDING TO U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REPORTS.

THE NON-COMPLIANT FINDINGS INCLUDED POLLUTANTS SUCH AS E-COLI, AKNOWN I CAN'T, NITROGEN, PHOSPHORUS AND TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS. AND WHILE LENNAR MAINTAINS THAT THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH PLANT WOULD BE ADVANCED, THREE OF THE FOUR MOST

[00:45:03]

HIGH NITRATES ARE LINKED TO BLUE BABY SYNDROME IN INFANTS, CAUSING BRAIN DAMAGE OR DEATH, WHILE HIGH PHOSPHORUS PRODUCES ALGAE BLOOMS WITH TOXINS HARMING AQUATIC LIFE, ILLNESS AND LIVER DAMAGE IN HUMANS. WE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH THOSE E.P.A. REPORTS IF YOU'D LIKE. ALSO LENNAR'S PLANT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FULLY TREAT FOR PERSISTENT AND DANGEROUS COMPOUNDS SUCH AS PFOS AND HEAVY CHEMICALS AS WELL AS HEAVY METALS AND POLIO VIRUS, ALL SERIOUS POLLUTANTS THAT ACCORDING TO THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND E.P.A. ARE PRESENT IN EFFLUENT AND NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO REMOVE ONCE THEY ENTER THE AQUIFER'S HIGHLY POROUSED KARST SYSTEM. FINALLY, AND ALSO AT THE FRIDAY MEETING, ANOTHER LENNAR REP WAS ASKED ABOUT HIS COMPANY'S OWN COMPLIANCE RECORD. AND HE REPLIED THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER.

AND HE WAS RIGHT. HE DIDN'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER.

BECAUSE IN 2019 LENNAR VIOLATED SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS OF A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS WELL AS TCEQ-ISSUED PERMITS TO MEET CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIREMENTS FOR ITS 4S RANCH DEVELOPMENT IN BULVERDE.

AND BY THEN IT WAS TOO LATE TO SECURE PERMANENT PROTECTION OF RECHARGE FEATURES THAT WERE VIOLATED. IN LIGHT OF ALL OF THIS, WHY SHOULD LENNAR BE TRUSTED NOW? I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU THAT YOU PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING, DENY THIS MUD FOR LENNAR. THANK YOU AGAIN AND FOR THIS

OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU TODAY. >> MAYOR JONES: ANISSA

MUNSON FOLLOWED BY AUSTIN BROWNING. >> GOOD MORNING.

I'LL BE DONATING MY NAME TO [INDISCERNIBLE] MUNSON. >> MAYOR JONES: NUMBER 32.

AUSTIN BROWNING, YOU'RE NEXT. I'M SAYING AUSTIN IS AFTER YOU, MA'AM. YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS LYNETTE MUNSON AND I REPRESENT THE -- ON BEHALF OF THE SCENIC LOOP, HELOTES CREEK COMMUNITY. OUR COMMUNITY SUBMITTED A PUBLIC -- I APOLOGIZE.

OUR COMMUNITY SUBMITTED A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST ON NOVEMBER THE 24TH, 2025 REQUEST RO TWO 4090125, SEEKING ALL DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE FIRE MARSHAL'S REVIEW OF THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

WE ASKED FOR THREE VERY SPECIFIC CATEGORIES OF RECORDS.

ANY RECOMMENDATIONS OR REQUIRED MODIFICATIONS THE FIRE MARSHAL MADE TO THE PRELIMINARY EDP, WHETHER THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE INCLUDED IN THE FINAL PLAN.

ALL DOCUMENTATION SHOWING REVIEW OR APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL TO USE A SINGLE INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ROUGHLY 3,000 UNITS, DESPITE THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENT OF TWO ACCESS POINTS.

AND ANY DOCUMENTATIONS RELATED TO A ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION INCLUDING THE CLAIM THAT SCENIC LOOP ROAD IS AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY, EVEN THOUGH TXDOT HAS NOT DESIGNATED AS SUCH AND THERE ARE NO PROJECTS THAT ARE FUNDED TO UPGRADE IT.

THE FIRE MARSHAL'S RESPONSE WAS SIMPLE AND ALARMING, AS YOU CAN SEE.

WE HAVE NO RECORD RESPONSE FOR YOUR REQUEST. THE BEXAR COUNTY FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE HAS NO -- HAS HAD NO CONTACT WITH THE DEVELOPER OF THIS PROPERTY.

PATTILY ME REPEAT, THAT'S A 3,000 DEVELOPMENT UNIT, ONE OF THE LARGEST PROPOSES IN THIS AREA, HAS HAD NO CONTACT WHATSOEVER WITH THE BEXAR COUNTY FIRE MARSHAL? NO REVIEW, NO RECOMMENDATIONS, NO SAFETY ANALYSIS, NO APPROVAL FOR A

[00:50:08]

NOT ONLY IS IT POTENTIAL INJURY AND DEATH TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS, BUT MY FAMILY HAS A LONG-STANDING HISTORY OF FIRST RESPONDERS. MY FAMILY WAS ONE OF THE FOUNDING MEMBERS OF THE MILAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENTS.

MY GRANDFATHER SERVED ON THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR OVER 30 YEARS.

MY GREAT UNCLE WAS A CHIEF ON THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND NOW MY DAUGHTER IS A SAN ANTONIO FIRE DEPARTMENT PARAMEDIC. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ASKING OUR FIRST RESPONDERS TO ASK ADDITIONAL RISK IN WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE, THAT HITS VERY CLOSE TO HOME FOR ME. A SINGLE ACCESS POINT FOR 3,000 HOMES IS NOT A MINOR DEVIATION. IT IS A CATASTROPHIC RISK IN THE EVENT OF WILDFIRE, STRUCTURE FIRE, MEDICAL EMERGENCIES, ROADWAY BLOCKAGE.

SCENIC LOOP IS ALREADY OVERBURDENED AND IT IS NOT AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY.

THERE IS NO FUNDED PLANS TO MAKE IT ONE. YET THE DEVELOPER IS MOVING FORWARD AS THESE FACTS SIMPLY DON'T MATTER. IF THE FIRE MARSHAL HAS NOT REVIEWED THIS PROJECT, THEN THE PUBLIC HAS NOT BEEN PROTECTED.

IF THE FIRE MARSHAL HAS NOT APPROVED A SINGLE ACCESS POINT, THEN THE PROJECT DOES NOT MEET THE UDC. AND IF THE FIRE MARSHAL HAS NOT BEEN CONTACTED, THEN THE MDP IS INCOMPLETE AND SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADVANCE. WE ARE ASKING THIS BODY TO ENCYST ON WHAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED FROM THE BEGINNING, A FULL DOCUMENTED, TRANSPARENT FIRE SAFETY REVIEW BEFORE ANY ACTION, ANY ADDITIONAL ACTION SHOULD MOVE FORWARD. OUR COMMUNITY DESERVES DEVELOPMENT THAT IS SAFE, THAT IS LAWFUL, AND IS GROUNDED IN REAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE STANDARDS.

NOT ASSUMPTIONS, NOT SHORTCUTS, AND NOT SILENCE. I ASK THAT YOU DO THE RIGHT THING AND VOTE AGAINST THIS. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR JONES: AUSTIN BROWNING, FOLLOWED BY JUDY HALL.

>> GOOD MORNING ALL. I WOULD LIKE TO DONATE MY THREE MINUTES TO MY GOOD

FRIEND AUSTIN BROWNING. >> MAYOR JONES: JUDY HALL. SO SIX MINUTES TOTAL.

THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING MAYOR, GOOD MORNING COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS AUSTIN BROWNING AND I AM THE TREASURER OF THE SCENIC LOOP HELL ELECTORAL VOTES CREEK ALLIANCE AND WE REPRESENT A NEIGHBORHOOD IN SAN ANTONIO THAT WILL BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH PROJECT.

I'M HERE TO SHARE TWO SERIOUS CONCERNS THAT AFFECT THE PUBLIC.

FIRST THE PEOPLE OF SAN ANTONIO AND BEXAR COUNTY SHOULD NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINANCIAL RISK OF 150-MILLION-DOLLAR MUD. THIS PROJECT IS ALLOWED ONLY BECAUSE OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION LIMITED TO 1,000 HOMES.

NEARBY LANDOWNERS HAVE CONFIRMED THERE WILL BE NO ADDITIONAL ACCESS OR EXIT ALLOWED, MEANING THE PROJECT CANNOT GROW BEYOND THIS SIZE.

THE RISK SHOULD STAY WITH THE DEVELOPER, NOT THE TAXPAYERS.

FIRST SLIDE, PLEASE. ON THIS SLIDE THE DEVELOPMENT INCORRECTLY LABELED THE ROAD AS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL ROAD. THEY DO THIS BECAUSE THE CITY DOES NOT ALLOW A PROJECT THIS LARGE TO BE BUILT ONE MILE FROM A TRUE ARTERIAL ROAD, LIKE 1604 OR I10. WHAT THE TRUTH IS ACCORDING TO TXDOT, THE MPO, SCENIC ROAD IS ACTUALLY A COLLECTOR ROAD AND NOT AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. ON THIS SLIDE YOU SEE THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS APPROVED DOES NOT PROTECT THE PUBLIC.

IT MAINLY BENEFITS THE DEVELOPER. NEXT SLIDE.

THE DEVELOPER IS ONLY REQUESTING AN IMPROVEMENT TO A SMALL SECTION OF THE INTERSECTION OF BABCOCK AND SCENIC LOOP, WHICH IS A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET EAST AND WEST OR NORTH AND SOUTH. THE REST OF THAT EXPENSE WOULD BE BORNE BY SAN ANTONIO AND THE BEXAR COUNTY RESIDENTS. THAT COSTS COULD ESCALATE TO OVER $200 MILLION TO FIX THE ROAD TO MAKE IT AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY.

[BUZZER]. THERE ARE NO SCHOOLS, THERE ARE NO STORES.

THERE'S NO GROCERY STORES OR SERVICES WITHIN FIVE MILES OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.

[00:55:04]

THE COSTS AND THE FIX TO EXPAND THIS ROAD WILL FALL ON THE PUBLIC, NOT THE DEVELOPER, BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER WILL BE LONG GONE BY THIS TIME.

PLEASE CONSIDER THE GREATER GOOD FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DENY THIS MUD. THE DEVELOPER SHOULD PAY FOR THEIR OWN COSTS, NOT THE TAXPAYERS. WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MUD NUMBER 2.

I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE

TODAY. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: MICHAEL

SCHICK FOLLOWED BY KEN KEMP. >> MADAM MAYOR, MR. KEMP AND I ARE IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD AND ADDRESSING THE SAME ISSUES, A TAG TEAM, PERMISSION TO SPEAK

COLLECTIVE SIX MINUTES. >> MAYOR JONES: SURE. THANK YOU.

MICHAEL PHILLIPS, YOU WILL BE NEXT. >> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS MIKE. I'M HERE TODAY TO RAISE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT THE HARDSHIP VARIANCE GRANTED TO THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH SUBDIVISION IN NOVEMBER OF 2022. THIS VARIANCE WAS APPROVED BASED ON REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY LENNAR'S ENGINEERING FIRM IN A LETTER TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OFFICE.

IN THAT LETTER THE FIRM CLAIMED THAT PERMANENT EMERGENCY ACCESS WOULD BE PROVIDED AT THREE MINUTES ALONG THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROCEEDED SUBDIVISION AS WELL AS TO THE SOUTH AND WEST. SADLY THAT CLIMB IS DISTURBINGLY FALSE -- CLAIM IS DISTURBINGLY FALSE. NEXT TO THAT IS A DEVELOPMENT CALLED CANYONS OF SCENIC LOOP. MY BACKYARD ABUTS THE EASTSIDE OF THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH.

FROM LENNAR TO REQUEST THE CANYONS ACCESS EMERGENCY OR OTHERWISE.

IN FACT, AS YOU WILL SOON HEAR FROM MR. KEMP, OUR BOARD PRESIDENT, THE CANYONS HAVE MADE OUR POSITION PERFECTLY CLEAR, WE ARE A PRIVATE, GATED SUBDIVISION AND GUAJOLOTE RANCH WILL NOT BE GATED. GRANTING ACCESS WOULD MAKE THE CANYONS INTO AN OPEN COMMUNITY WHICH WE REJECT. ADDITIONALLY RANCHES TO THE NORTH AND WEST HAVE PUBLICLY STATED REFUSAL OF ACCESS THROUGH THEIR LAND.

TEXAS LAW IS CLEAR, UNLESS AN EASEMENT IS GRANTED OR STREETS DEDICATED, YOU CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO PROVIDE ACCESS. THE CLAIM THAT ANY KIND OF ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED AS IF THIS IS A FAIT ACCOMPLI, IS NOT ONLY SPECULATIVE, IT IS MISLEADING AT BEST. TO COMPOUND MATTERS THE VARIANCE APPEARS TO BE APPROVED BY AN ENGINEERING ASSOCIATE WITHOUT AN OFFICIAL SEAL.

THIS LEAVES QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF THE APPROVAL ITSELF.

IN LIGHT OF THESE FACTS I URGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO RE-EXAMINE THE BASIS OF THE HARDSHIP VARIANCE REQUIRED DOCUMENT AND PROOF THAT'S WRITTEN OF GRANTING EMERGENCY ACCESS BEFORE GIVING ANY FURTHER APPROVALS, INVESTIGATE WHETHER MISLEADING REPRESENTATIONS WERE KNOWINGLY MADE TO THE CITY OFFICIALS AND ENSURE THAT VARIANCES IN THE FUTURE ARE REVIEWED AND SIGNED BY LICENSED PROFESSIONALS WITH APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY. I WAS ON HOLIDAY IN MAUI LAST MONTH STAYING A COUPLE OF MONTHS FROM LAHAINA. TWO YEARS AGO 100 PEOPLE DIED IN THAT FIRE, INCLUDING MANY WHO DIED TRAPPED IN THEIR CARS BECAUSE OF CLOGGED ROADS. COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE ONLY EXISTING AND PERMANENT INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THE LAND AT GUAJOLOTE RANCH IS A NARROW CHOKE POINT THAT YOU SEE CIRCLED THERE IN PINK. THIS IS THE CHECKPOINT. THIS IS THE ONLY INGRESS AND EGRESS ON TO THE TWO-LANE SCENIC LOOP ROAD. WHY ANY DEVELOPER WOULD PUT THE LIVES OF THOUSANDS OF MEN AND WOMEN AND CHILDREN AT RISK IS BEYOND COMPREHENSION. PLEASE DENY THE MUD. IT'S NOT JUST A MATTER OF TECHNICAL COMPLIANCE, IT IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC TRUST, LEGAL INTEGRITY AND COMMUNITY SAFETY. PLEASE VOTE NO ON THE MUD. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS KEN KEMP. I RESIDE IN THE CANYONS AT SCENIC LOOP BY THE ASSOCIATION, AND THE -- AS PRESIDENT OF THAT ASSOCIATION, THERE'S BEEN NO CONTACT WITH US AND THERE WILL BE NO PERMISSION GRANTED TO LENNAR TO USE OUR

[01:00:02]

>> MIKE PHILLIPS FOLLOWED BY LISA PACK. >> GOOD MORNING LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. MY NAME IS MICHAEL PHILLIPS, I'M A COUNCILMAN WITH THE CITY OF GREAT FOREST. TODAY I'D LIKE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE COST AND CONSEQUENCES OF FLOODING ALONG SCENIC LOOP ROAD. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE AND YOU WILL SEE ON THE MAP THERE THAT THE CITY OF GREAT FOREST OWNS ABOUT .75 MILES OF SCENIC LOOP ROAD AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU THAT WE WILL NEVER [INDISCERNIBLE] THAT STRETCH OF SCENIC LOOP ROAD. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

FURTHER THAT LITTLE STRETCH NORTH OF GREAT FOREST UP TO BABCOCK WHERE YOU SEE THE WORD GATE, THE COUNTY CANNOT AFFORD TO WIDEN THAT PORTION OF SCENIC LOOP ROAD AND I'LL TELL YOU ABOUT THAT LATER. ACCORDING TO SWRI, THEY GET ABOUT TWO INCHES PER MONTH.

THAT ONE MILLION GALLONS A DAY ON AVERAGE THAT LENNAR PLANS TO DISCHARGE ON TO THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH GREEN SPACE EQUALS ABOUT 2.3 INCHES OF RAINFALL PER MONTH, EFFECTIVELY DOUBLING THE RAINFALL GOING INTO THE HELOTES CREEK.

WHICH CROSSES SCENIC LOOP ROAD SEVERAL TIMES AS IT FLOWS INTO AND THROUGH GREAT FOREST. THE CITY OF GREAT FOREST ALREADY HAS TO CLOSE ITS ONE LOW WATER CROSSING ON SCENIC LOOP ROAD HERE ON BLUE HILL PASS A COUPLE OF TIMES PER YEAR DUE TO FLOODING. YOU CAN SEE THAT'S A CURVE. THAT'S WHAT WE OWN.

THAT'S A CURVE AND YOU SEE THE UTILITIES THERE. MY BEST GUESS BASED ON MY RESEARCH IS THAT WOULD COST THE CITY ABOUT $10 MILLION. THAT'S 10 YEARS OF OUR BUDGET. WE'RE NEVER GOING TO WIDEN THAT.

EVEN IF THE COUNTY GAVE US THE MONEY, THE CITIZENS WOULD RUN US OUT AT THE TIP OF TORCHES AND PITCH FORKS IF WE TRIED TO WIDEN THAT. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

FURTHER NORTH ON THIS SLIDE HERE IS SAMES RANCH ROAD. IT'S HARD TO SEE, BUT THERE ARE TWO LOW WATER CROSSING GAUGES THERE. THAT WHOLE STRETCH IS ABOUT.TWO OF A MILE. MY BEST YES, SIR GUESS IS WITH THAT ROAD THERE AND ANOTHER PRIVATE DRIVE RAISING THAT UP TO JUST CULVERT LEVEL IS ABOUT -- IT WOULD COST THE COUNTY ABOUT $40 MILLION FOR THAT .2 OF A MILE STRETCH WITH ALL THE OFF RAMP AND THE RAISING OF THE CULVERT LEVEL, THE CITY CAN'T AFFORD TO RAISE IT.

I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THE COST OF WIDENING, OF REPAIRING SCENIC LOOP ROAD FOR FLOODING AND NOW I'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES.

SO ONE-THIRD OF GREAT FOREST HOMES ARREST AT RISK FOR FLOODING, DOUBLING THE EFFECTIVE RAINFALL AND HELOTES CREEK WATERSHED ALONG THE HELOTES CREEK WILL DOUBLE THEIR RISK. WE'VE HAD SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF PROPERTY ALONG SCENIC LOOP ROAD AND MANY NEAR MISSES IN LIVING MEMORY, INCLUDING A SCHOOL BUS LOADED WITH CHILDREN. AND FINALLY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'VE HAD LOSS OF LIFE. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS WAS NOT A LOW WATER CROSSING.

YOU CAN SEE THERE THIS IS NORTHBOUND SCENIC LOOP ROAD APPROACHING MENCHACA THAT IS A RAISED BRIDGE. IMPROVING THIS MEANS DOUBLING THE CHANCE OF A TRAGEDY LIKE THE LOSS OF MS. RA. THANK YOU FOR NOT PUTTING MY CONSTITUENTS AT RISK, THANK

YOU FOR SAYING NO TO THIS MUD. >> MAYOR JONES: LISA PACK

FOLLOWED BY PHILLIP MANNA. >> GOOD MORNING COUNCIL MEMBER AND MAYOR.

MY NAME IS LISA. I LIVE AT 15760 SCENIC LOOP ROAD AND I'M THE SECRETARY OF THE HELOTES CREEK -- SCENIC LOOP OF HELOTES CREEK ALLIANCE.

PUBLIC MONEY RAISED THROUGH SALES TAX REVENUE WAS USED BY THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER PROTECTION PLAN PROGRAM TO PURCHASE MORE THAN $50 MILLION OF -- IN THE HELOTES CREEK WATERSHED ALONE. THIS AREA WAS DEEMED ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE IN THE 2010 NORTH SECTOR PLAN. I HAVE PRIVATE PROPERTY ALONG THAT WHICH INCLUDES ALMOST HALF A MILE OF HELOTES CREEK.

SO I AM -- AND I HAVE AN EASEMENT. I AM PERSONALLY INVESTED IN THIS FIGHT. DR. FRANCINE ROMERO, HEAD OF THE EAPP PROGRAM, HAS CONCLUDED THAT THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN ADAPTED TO THE CITY'S NEEDS TO PROTECT THE RECHARGE AND CONTRIBUTING ZONES BEYOND THE REGULATORY AUTHORITY THAT THEY HAVE.

[01:05:01]

THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: PHILLIP MANNA, KATHY, YOU'RE TOGETHER? AND THEN RANDY NEW MAN, YOU WILL FOLLOW.

-- RANDY NEWMAN, YOU WILL FOLLOW. >> I WOULD LIKE TO ALLOCATE

MY NAME TO PHILLIP. >> MAYOR JONES: YOU WILL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

RANDY, YOU ARE NEXT. >> I'M THE PRESIDENT OF [INDISCERNIBLE] FARMS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THE PLANNING CHAIR OF THE LEON CREEKS COMMUNITY PLAN. AND I'VE ACTIVELY PARTICIPATED IN VARIOUS PLANS WITH THE CITY, INCLUDING THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN I WANT TO TALK ABOUT, ONE, BEING A PLAN PARTNER, TWO, WHAT LENNAR GOT TO BYPASS WITH REGARDS TO THE E.P.A., WHO NEEDS A PLAN AND THE CONCESSIONS.

REGARDING A PLAN PARTNER, I ALWAYS FIND IT DISINGENUOUS WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES TO A PLANNING DISCUSSION AND DISCOUNTS ANY OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. DURING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, LENNAR DISCOUNTED THE RELEVANCE OF THE 2010 NORTH SECTOR PLAN SIMPLY BECAUSE OF ITS AGE.

OUR VARIOUS CITY PLANS ARE ADOPTED AS COMPONENTS OF THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN AND REMAIN RELEVANT UNTIL THEY ARE UPDATED OR EMBODIED WITHIN A NEWER PLAN. UNTIL OUR COMMUNITY FINISHES THE SA TOMORROW PLAN, THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN IS THE CITY'S GUIDING STAR FOR ANY OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IN THIS COMMUNITY. THESE PLANS ARE NOT MADE IN A VACUUM AND TAKE MONTHS TO YEARS TO DEVELOP WITH INPUT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND DSD TEAMS WORKING WITH DEVELOPERS, REALTORS, BUSINESSES, RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS.

ALL THESE COMPETING PARTIES COME TOGETHER AS PARTNERS AND WORK WITH THIS PLAN TO BUILD THEM. I ALWAYS HOPE THAT DEVELOPER WISHING TO JOIN NEIGHBORS WITHIN A COMMUNITY DOES SO AS A PARTNER, BUT HAS NOT THUS FAR.

THEY HAVE ZERO -- WE HAVE ZERO OUTREACH FROM LENNAR AS WE WENT THROUGH THESE PROCESSES. REGARDING WHAT LENNAR GOT TO BYPASS WITH THE ETJ, WITHIN CITY LIMITS A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES A LOT OF REVIEWS, APPROVALS AND COMMUNICATION. HAD THIS REPLAT PROCESS OCCURRED WITHIN THE CITY, SIGNIFICANT DSD WOULD HAVE SHOWN LOTS OF PROBLEMS WITH REGARDS TO THIS REQUEST.

THE LAND USE CHANGED AND THE NORTH SECONDER PLAN SAYS IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE COUNTRY TIER, ONE LOT PER ACRE. SO IT'S ONE LOT BIGGER THAN 10 ACRES AND THE MEDIUM DENSITY IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING HERE, WHICH IS 11 LOTS PER ACRE.

SO IT WENT FROM ONE PER 10 ACRES TO 11 IN ONE ACRE. AND THE LOTS THAT ARE 45 BY 140 VERSUS ACREAGE LOTS. BUFFERS WITHIN CITY LIMITS, UDC REQUIRES DENSITY TRANSITIONS THAT PREVENT SUBMEDIUM DENSE ACTIVE LOTS FROM ABUTTING LOW RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. SO IN THIS MAP HERE -- SECOND PAGE HERE.

SO YOU WILL SEE THAT THE WAY THAT THE -- NEXT PAGE. YOU WILL SEE THAT WE HAVE -- THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE BUFFERS ACROSS THAT IF THIS IS DONE IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO SO IT'S NOT HERE IN REGARDS TO THIS PLAN. ROADWAY REVIEW, THE MAJOR COLLECTOR ABUTTING THIS PROPERTY WOULD HAVE BEEN DEEMED INCORRECT SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE SA PLAN TOMORROW SEEKS A MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAY AND

[01:10:03]

AND SO -- BUT THEY'RE BYPASSING -- AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO TAKE THE OPTION OF CHOOSING TO DO IT BY RIGHT. SO THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE HERE.

AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE PARTNERSHIP. SO WHO NEEDS A MUD? DURING THE PLANNING MEETING, LENNAR STATED THEY WERE GOING TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY WITH OR WITHOUT THE MUD. WHY ARE WE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION? SO THAT SHOULD BE IN THE STORY RIGHT THERE.

SO IN A SUBURB NEAR DALLAS CALLED MIDLOTHIAN CITY, THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINED THAT DEVELOPERS SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING THE DEVELOPMENT IN AND AROUND THEIR CITY AND INSTEAD DEVELOPERS SHOULD COMPLY WITH HOW THEIR CITY WANTS TO DEVELOP.

SO RECENTLY PASSED A RESOLUTION THAT OPPOSES THE FORMATION BY A DEVELOPER OF ANY AND ALL SPECIAL DISTRICTS, INCLUDING MUDS IN THEIR CITIES AND THEIR ETJS. THEY CITED THAT SPECIAL DISTRICTS HAVE BEEN IMPROPERLY USED BY CERTAIN DEVELOPERS TO AVOID COMPLIANCE WITH CITY AND COUNTY INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS AND THAT CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENTS SHOULD HAVE THE PROPER AUTHORITY TO REGULATE GROWTH OF THEIR RESPECTIVE CITIES AND COUNTIES.

THIS MEANS FOR MUDS PROPOSED BY DEVELOPERS IN MIDLOTHIAN THE CITY HAS ALREADY STATED ITS REJECTION, REQUIRING THE TCEQ TO ACT AGAINST LOCAL DESIRES IF THEY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. AND SO RECORDS SHOW THAT TCEQ GENERALLY DOES NOT ACT AGAINST THE LOCAL DESIRES. SO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO SHOULD CONSIDER A SIMILAR RESOLUTION AND REJECT THE MUD REQUEST AS TCEQ WILL LIKELY NOT ACT AGAINST THESE DESIRES. FINALLY, WHAT CONCESSIONS DO WE HAVE? THE LANGUAGE OF THE SAWS CONSENT AGREEMENT APPEARS VAGUE, LIKING ENFORCEABLE DEFINITIONS, NO MEASURABLE THRESHOLDS OR OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS. SO HOW DO WE MANAGE ANYTHING THAT'S NOT BINDING AND SPECIFIC WITH [INDISCERNIBLE] MUD SO IT'S CREATED, SO WE WALK AWAY AND DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL ANYMORE. ONCE THE MUD IS ESTABLISHED WE BELIEVE IT WILL EXIST TO BIND A CONSENT AGREEMENT. THE OPPONENTS OF THE MDC DO PROVIDE COMPONENTS OF THE CONTRIBUTING ZONE WITHIN THE ETJ AND SHOULD BE EXPLORED.

AND UDC105 IT BRINGS UP THIS NOTION WITH REGARDS TO THE DRAINAGE PLAN, WHICH IS ADOPTED BY THE CITY, WHICH INCLUDES A REPORT BY TATE DAWSON WHICH SAYS THAT HELOTES CREEK IS A LEAD TO THE GROUNDWATER. I ASK FOR YOU TO PROTECT

THIS. >> MAYOR JONES: RANDY NEWMAN, FOLLOWED BY SUSIE

DICKERSON. >> SUSIE DICKERSON IS DONATING HER TIME TO ME AS

IS TRACY SMITH. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. NINE MINUTES, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU TODAY. MY COMMENTS FOCUS ON RISK VERSUS REWARD. THE RISK VERSUS REWARD OF APPROVING OR REJECTING THE PROPOSED MUD FOR THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH PROJECT. THIS IS NOT A TYPICAL MUD REQUEST AND THE USUAL INSTINCT TO APPROVE IN ORDER TO EXTRACT CONCESSIONS DOES NOT SERVE THE CITY'S LONG-TERM INTERESTS HERE. BUT BEFORE I GO FURTHER, I WANT TO NOTE THAT THE GREATER EDWARD'S AQUIFER ALLIANCE, APPROXIMATELY 80 NEARBY RESIDENTS, THE SCENIC LOOP HELOTES CREEK A39, THE CITY OF GREAT FOREST AND ANN TOPPERWEIN HAVE FILED A LAWSUIT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW IN TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT YESTERDAY CHALLENGING THE PERMIT FROM THE TCEQ TO MUNICIPAL LLC, THE CONTRACTOR FOR LENNAR HOMES. THIS UNDERSCORES THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE CONCERNS SURROUNDING THIS PROJECT. GUAJOLOTE RANCH SITS ON A HIGHLY SENSITIVE RECHARGE ZONE. THE STAKES HERE ARE NOT ABOUT ROAD WIDTHS OR PARK LANDS, THE STAKES ARE CLEAN WATER AND AQUIFER PRESERVATION.

A CONCESSION CANNOT BE NEGOTIATED. CONTAMINATION CANNOT BE UNDONE. WE'VE HEARD CLAIMS THAT A DENIAL SIMPLY PUSHES THE DEVELOPER TO THE TCEQ OR THE STATE LEGISLATURE. THAT IS TECHNICALLY POSSIBLE. THOSE WHO UNDERSTAND THESE PROCESSES AGREE THAT APPROVAL AFTER A CITY REJECTION IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

[01:15:02]

THIS INCLUDES THE NINE CONCESSIONS THEY HAD IN THEIR WATER AGREEMENT.

ONCE WATER IS CONNECTED AND AN INDEPENDENT MUD BOARD TAKES OVER, ONE THAT DID NOT NEGOTIATE THESE TERMS, THE ENFORCEABILITY OF THOSE CONCESSIONS BECOME UNCERTAIN. IF THEY CANNOT BE ENFORCED, THEY ARE NOT PROTECTIONS.

A DENIAL OF THIS PERMIT TRIGGERS 120-DAY PERIOD FOR FURTHER NEGOTIATION, PARTICULARLY WITH SAWS, WHICH CANNOT YOUR CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. THAT GIVES THE CITY SIGNIFICANT LEVERAGE.

CONTRARY TO WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TOLD, A NO VOTE DOES NOT NECESSARILY REDUCE THE CITY'S INFLUENCE. IN FACT, IT INCREASES IT. IT ENSURES THAT ANY FUTURE NEGOTIATIONS BEGIN WITH AQUIFER PROTECTION AND ENFORCEABLE AGREEMENTS AS PREREQUISITES. APPROVING A MUD GIVES AWAY THE CITY'S STRONGEST LEVERAGE. ONCE THE MUD EXISTS, THE DEVELOPER CONTROLS THE BOARD AND THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE CONCESSIONS BECOMES UNCERTAIN.

THAT IS THE REAL RISK HERE, NOT THE RISK OF SAYING NO. A NO VOTE PRESERVES THE CITY'S NEGOTIATING POWER AND ENSURES THAT DEVELOPMENT IF IT OCCURS HAPPENS RESPONSIBLY AND WITH ENFORCEABLE PROTECTION. THIS DECISION IS ABOUT HOW DEVELOPMENT OCCURS, WHO CONTROLS IT AND WHETHER THE CITY CAN ENFORCE THE PROTECTIONS IT PROMISES TO PUBLIC. THROUGHOUT THIS BRIEFING YOU'VE HEARD NUMEROUS REASONS TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE DEVELOPER'S PROCESSES, FROM PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES TO PROCEDURAL PROBLEMS TO ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS THAT CANNOT BE REVERSED. UNREGULATED OR LIGHTLY REGULATED DEVELOPMENT ATOP THE BALCONES FAULT ZONE, ESPECIALLY HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, DISCHARGING UP TO A MILLION GALLONS PER DAY OF TREATED WASTEWATER, POSES AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK TO OUR FRAGILE AQUIFERS. SAN ANTONIO NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT A MUD HERE DOES NOT PROVIDE IT. INSTEAD IT ADDS SIX-FIGURE COSTS TO EVERY HOME WHILE PLACING THE CITY'S PRIMARY DRINKING WATER SOURCE AT RISK. WE'RE LEFT WITH A PROPOSAL THAT THREATENS PUBLIC HEALTH, THREATENS AFFORDABILITY AND THREATENS THE WATER SUPPLY OF THE NATION'S SEVENTH LARGEST CITY, ALL TO BENEFIT A DEVELOPER WHOSE INTERESTS ARE NOT ALIGNED WITH THE LONG-TERM HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THIS COMMUNITY.

190 YEARS AGO, PERHAPS THE MOST FAMOUS LETTER IN TEXAS HISTORY, LEFT AN OLD BUILDING JUST A FEW BLOCKS FROM HERE. A SMALL GROUP OF CITIZENS STANDING UP FOR A LARGE IDEAL SENT A MESSAGE THAT STILL ECHOS IN THIS CITY'S MEMORY. IF YOU'LL PERMIT ME I'D LIKE TO TAKE A BIT OF POETIC LICENSE TO RECREATE THE SPIRIT OF THAT MOMENT FOR US TODAY.

CITY HALL, SAN ANTONIO TEXAS, JANUARY 22ND, 2026. TO THE PEOPLE OF SAN ANTONIO AND ALL WHO DEPEND ON THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER, WE STAND AT A MOMENT OF CONSEQUENCE, A PROPOSAL HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE YOU THAT WOULD BRING HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, A MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGE AND UNUNACCOUNTABLE MUD BOARD DIRECTLY ATOP ONE OF THE MOST FRAGILE RECHARGE ZONES IN TEXAS.

THE DEVELOPER HAS ASKED FOR APPROVAL WITHOUT ENFORCEABLE PROTECTIONS.

THEY HAVE OFFERED CONCESSIONS THAT MIGHT NOT BIND A FUTURE MUD BOARD AND THEY SEEK TO SHIFT LONG-TERM RISKS TO THE PUBLIC WHILE KEEPING THE BENEFITS FOR THEMSELVES. WE ANSWER THIS REQUEST WITH A SIMPLE TRUTH: SAN ANTONIO'S WATER IS NOT NEGOTIABLE. OUR AQUIFER IS NOT REPLACEABLE. OUR HEALTH IS NOT FOR SALE. THEN I CALL UPON THE COUNCIL IN THE NAME OF PUBLIC SAFETY, IN THE NAME OF RESPONSIBLE STEWARDSHIP AND IN THE NAME OF EVERY FAMILY WHO RELIES ON CLEAN WATER TO STAND FIRM AND REJECT THIS MUD. IF THIS CALL IS NEGLECTED THE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE BORNE NOT BY THE DEVELOPER, BUT BY THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY IN HIGHER HOUSING COSTS WEAKENED AQUIFER PROTECTIONS AND RISKS THAT CANNOT BE UNDONE.

[01:20:01]

IN THE NAME OF EVERYTHING THAT IS SACRED, REMEMBER THE AQUIFER.

DRAW A LINE IN THE SAND. SAY NO TO A MUD. THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE]. >> MAYOR JONES: SHELBY, FOLLOWED BY RUBY JIMENEZ.

SHELBY? RUBY? ERIKA CEROS.

NOEL SIGAPELLI. ELLEN MONTOYA, FOLLOWED BY ISABEL HERRERA.

>> GOOD MORNING, I'M ALLEN, CHAIR OF THE ALAMO GROUP OF THE SIERRA CLUB.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY.

I REPRESENT ABOUT 3,000 PEOPLE IN THE SAN ANTONIO AREA WHO ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT. I WANT TO START WITH A QUOTE FROM JONI MITCHELL, DON'T IT ALWAYS SEEM TO KNOW THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'VE GOT UNTIL IT'S GONE.

THIS SITE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY WAS DESIGNATED IN SAN ANTONIO'S OFFICIAL NORTH SECTOR PLAN AS COUNTRY, SUITABLE FOR PROPERTIES 10 ACRES OR LARGER. OBVIOUSLY LENNAR WANTS TO FAR EXCEED THIS AND PUT MANY, MANY HOMES PER ACRE. THAT'S INAPPROPRIATE FOR THIS LAND USE THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS DETERMINED A LONG, LONG TIME AGO IN 2010.

THE SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE, AND MAYOR, I WOULD ASK YOU NOT TO DISCOUNT THEIR PLAN, ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE IN THIS CASE.

SOUTHWEST RESEARCH SAID ADDITIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEMS FROM RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE HELOTES CREEK WATERSHED REGARDLESS OF TYPE WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY DEGRADE THE WATERSHED AND QUALITY OF WATER RECHARGING THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER.

YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR A LOT OF TESTIMONY ABOUT POTENTIALLY, BUT THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE DICTATES THAT YOU STAY ACCOUNTABLE TO THE CITIZENS OF SAN ANTONIO AND PROTECT THE QUALITY OF OUR DRINKING WATER.

AGAIN, I'M GOING TO KEEP MY COMMENTS VERY SHORT. I DON'T WANT TO GET IN THE WAY OF THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO SPEAK HERE. I KNOW YOU HAVE OTHER MATTERS TO GET TO. BUT DON'T IT ALWAYS SEEM TO GO THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE GOT UNTIL IT'S GONE? WELL, I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT THE CITIZENS OF SAN ANTONIO AND EVERYONE WHO IS HERE TODAY DOES KNOW WHAT WE HAVE.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT WE HAVE AND WE CANNOT LET IT ESCAPE, JUST FOR THE GREED OF ONE DEVELOPER WHO NOT ONLY IS NOT BASED IN SAN ANTONIO, BUT WHO SO OBVIOUSLY WILL DISREGARD AND DO ANYTHING THEY CAN TO MAINTAIN THEIR PROFIT MODEL.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TODAY. >> MAYOR JONES: ISABEL

HERRERA FOLLOWED BY PATRICIA SIDENBURGER. >> GOOD MORNING.

I AM ASKING YOU TO REJECT MUD. A PERMIT TO DUMP 1 MILLION GALLONS OF TREATED SEWAGE PER DAY INTO THE AQUIFER SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED. EDWARDS AQUIFER, SPECIFICALLY, THE J 17 WELL IS 40 FEET LOWER THAN NORMAL. WE ARE IN A DROUGHT.

THE COMMUNITY IS RAISING THESE CONCERNS REGARDING THIS DEVELOPMENT AND WE ARE BEING IGNORED. LENNAR DEVELOPMENT HAS QUIETLY MADE PLANS TO ADD A GAS STATION, A SHOPPING SPACE, AND FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS.

ON TOP OF THAT HAS SAID THAT THE BRANCH DIVISION IS COMING WITH OR WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. THIS SAYS A LOT.

DON'T IGNORE IT. THE AQUIFER IS A PRIMARY SOURCE FOR ABOUT 2.5 MILLION PEOPLE ACROSS MULTIPLE COUNTIES. RIGHT NOW, SAN ANTONIANS ARE STRUGGLING IN THE MIDST OF AID BEING CUT, ICE IN OUR STREETS, LIVING PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK, NEEDING RENT AND UTILITY HELP. SAN ANTONIO IS LIVING IN POVERTY. WE ARE RANKED THE THIRD POOREST METRO IN THE U.S.

WE HAVE ENOUGH VACANT HOMES AND INDIVIDUALS ARE STRUGGLING.

ABOUT 11,000 VACANT HOMES AND ABOUT 4,000 INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.

[01:25:05]

MAKING IT EASY FOR LARGE CORPORATIONS TO AVOID SCRUTINY FOR THEIR WASTEFUL USES OF NATURAL RESOURCES. DO NOT IGNORE OUR VOICES. THESE DEVELOPMENTS ARE HURTING US. INDIVIDUALS ARE DEALING WITH CONTAMINATED WATER AND WATER SHUTOFFS ALREADY, SO MOVING FORWARD

>> MAYOR JONES: PATRICIA SIDENBURG ERFOLLOWED BY PAUL GUERRERO.

>> GOOD MORNING. I URGE YOU TO DENY THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH MUD REQUEST BECAUSE IT PROPOSED 2900 HOMES ON 1167 ACRES WITH A WASTEWATER PLANT SENDING 4 MILLION GALLONS DAILY OF TREATED SEWAGE AND PHARMACEUTICALS DOWN THE HELOTES CREEK AND THE EDWARDS AQUIFER WILL SIGNIFICANTLY DEGRADE THE WATERSHED AND THE QUALITY OF THE WATER RECHARGING THE EDWARDS AQUIFER.

ACCORDING TO A TWO-YEAR STUDY BY THE SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF SAN ANTONIO . 14 LEGISLATORS HAVE GONE ON RECORD TO OPPOSE THIS PROJECT, AS WELL AS BEXAR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, MAYOR RON NIRENBERG, STATE SENATOR DONNA CAMPBELL, AND ROLAND GUTIERREZ. JUST RECENTLY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON JANUARY 16TH. THERE IS ONLY ONE EXIT FROM THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH DEVELOPMENT OF 2900 HOMES TO SCENIC LOOP ROAD.

LANDOWNERS ADJACENT TO GUAJOLOTE RANCH ON THE SOUTH AND WEST REFUSE ACCESS TO LENNAR HOMES. THE INCONSISTENT CURRENT LOSES IN THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN POSE A REAL THREAT TO SAN ANTONIO'S WATER SUPPLIES AND THE WELL BEING OF NEIGHBORS. IN ADDITION, SCENIC LOOP ROAD IS A TWO-LANE ROAD WITH NO RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE OPTION OF ADDING LANES FOR THE PROPOSED 2900 RESIDENCES. THE PROPOSED LENNAR HOME COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ACROSS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COULD GENERATE 4732 DAILY VEHICLE TRIPS.

THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH ITSELF RESIDENTIAL COULD GENERATE 25,488 DAILY TRIPS FOR A TOTAL OF NEW TRAFFIC OF 30,220 TRIPS A DAY. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATED THE TWO-LANE ROADS HAVE A DESIGNATED CAPACITY OF ONLY 5500 CARS PER DAY. THE LANGUAGE OF THE CONCESSIONS IN THE SECRET LENNAR SAN ANTONIO METROPOLITAN HEALTH DISTRICT AGREEMENT IS VAGUE AND LACKING IN ENFORCEMENT DEFINITIONS OR OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS.

THUS, LENNAR HAS NO CLEAR OBLIGATIONS TO FULFILL THE INTENT OF A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. IN 2020, THIS WAS DEMONSTRATED WITH THE GREATER EDWARDS AQUIFER ALLIANCE, FINING LENNAR HOMES FOR A SETTLEMENT OF $175,000 FOR VIOLATING A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REGARDING THE 4S RANCH HERE IN SAN ANTONIO WHICH RESULTED IN A NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY BEING TOTALLY FLOODED. THE EDWARDS AQUIFER IS AN IRREPLACEABLE STATE TREASURE REQUIRING IMMEDIATE AND LONG-TERM PROTECTION. AND ELECTED OFFICIALS AT EVERY LEVEL, ALONG WITH NON-ELECTED REGULATORY BODIES SHOULD ADVOCATE FOR IT. BY VOTING NO FOR THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH, YOU CAN STOP A CATASTROPHIC PROJECT FROM FULLY DESTROYING SAN ANTONIO'S DRINKING WATER FROM THE EDWARDS AQUIFER AFFECTING 1.7 MILLION PEOPLE HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.

>> MAYOR JONES: PAUL GUERRERO, YOU'RE THE FINAL SPEAKER.

>> MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND CITY STAFF. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND THANK YOU FOR THIS SPECIAL SESSION. MY NAME IS PAUL GUERRERO.

I'M MAYOR OF GRAY FOREST, TEXAS AND A DAILY CONSUMER OF THE SAN ANTONIO WATER .

IN MAY 1946, THE DIRECTOR OF SAN ANTONIO'S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ORDERED THE SPRAYING OF DDT ALONG OUR STREETS AND OUR ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOODS, BELIEVING IT WOULD PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM DISEASES LIKE POLIO. CHILDREN RAN BEHIND SPRAY

[01:30:05]

OFFICIALS WERE CONFIDENT THE SCIENCE, THEY SAID, WAS FIRM.

IN APRIL 2014, THE CITY OF FLINT, MICHIGAN SWITCHED ITS DRINKING WATER SOURCE TO THE FLINT RIER . THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTALS AUDIO] AND THE DECISION TO SWITCH WAS PRIMARILY MADE BY THE CITY UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF A STATE-APPOINTED EMERGENCY MANAGER, PRIMARILY FOR COST SAVINGS.

IN JANUARY 2018, THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY RENEWED A PERMIT AUTHORIZING BIOSOLIDS TO BE USED AS FERTILIZER ON FARMLAND NEAR GRAND VIEW TEXAS IN JOHNSON COUNTY SOUTH OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS . WE KNOW DDT CAUSES LONG-TERM HARM TO HUMANS, EFFECTS ON THE NERVOUS SYSTEM AND ASSOCIATION WITH BREAST CANCER, LIVER CANCER, AND PERSISTENT ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE.

WE KNOW THAT CORRODED PIPES IN THE FLINT RIVER CAUSED LEAD TO LEECH INTO THE DRINKING WATER. THOUSANDS OF RESIDENTS WERE EXPOSED TO ELEVATED LEAD LEVELS WHICH RESULTED IN BRAIN DAMAGE, DEVELOPMENTAL DELAYS, AND OTHER SERIOUS HEALTH ISSUES. WE NOW KNOW THAT IN FEBRUARY 20F DISASTER WAS DECLARED IN JOHNSON COUNTY, TEXAS. AFTER OFFICIALS REPORTED FISH AND CATTLE DEATHS AND WATER WELLS NEAR THE APPLICATION SITES HAD FOREVER CHEMICALS AT LEVELS HUNDREDS OF TEAM THE EPA SAFE LIMITS DUE TO THE BIOSOLID FERTILIZER ON THE FARMLAND. IF THIS MUD IS APPROVED AND SUBSEQUENT WASTEWATER PLANT BUILT, PFOS WILL BE IN OUR SYSTEM AND THEY ARE LINKED TO CANCER, IMMUNE DYSFUNCTION, DEVELOPMENTAL HARM, AND REPRODUCTIVE ISSUES.

THE TRAGEDY WASN'T THAT LEADERS ACTED, IT'S THAT THEY ACTED WITHOUT HEEDING EARLY WARNINGS AND DISMISSED CONCERNS AS FEAR OR INCONVENIENCE.

PUBLIC HEALTH FAILURES ARE RARELY CAUSED BY LACK OF INFORMATION, THEY'RE CAUSED BY DELAY, DENIAL, DELUSION, AND THE BELIEF THAT TODAY'S PROBLEM COULD BE MANAGED TOMORROW. CITY COUNCIL'S RESPONSIBILITY IS NOT TO WAIT UNTIL HARM IS UNDENIABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE. I URGE YOU TO TREAT THIS THIS AS A DECISION WITH LEGACY IMPACT. LEARN FROM THE MISTAKES OF

THE PAST AND VOTE NO ON THE MUD . >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU.

THAT WAS OUR FINAL COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO COMMENTS FROM TH

>> MAYOR JONES: THE TIME IS NOW 10:45 AND WE HAVE COME BACK FROM RECESS.

OKAY. LET ME THANK THOSE FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT CAME IN TO SPEAK TODAY. WE UNDERSTAND, OBVIOUSLY NOT ONLY HAS THIS BEEN A LONGTIME DISCUSSION AND CONTINUING DIFFERING ANALYSIS ON WHAT THIS MEANS THREAT-WISE. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, THOUGH, I ALLUDED TO IT EARLIER. WE OF COURSE TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY, NOT ONLY YOUR CONCERNS, BUT THOSE THAT HAVE ALSO BEEN ELEVATED BY OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT. WE DID DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE.

AS I SHARED, WE DID REACH OUT TO SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE BASED ON THE ANALYSIS YOU REFERENCED TO SEE IF THEY HAD A MORE UP TO DATE ANALYSIS IN LIGHT OF SAWS' ANALYSIS THAT OFFERS A DIFFERENT CONCLUSION. LET ME ASK ERIK TO SUMMARIZE

HIS -- THE RESPONSE THAT HE RECEIVED FROM SWERI. >> WALSH: I SPOKE TO MR. HAMILTON FROM SOUTHWEST RESEARCH AND ASKED IF THEY WERE GOING TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION GIVEN THE SAWS' INFORMATION THAT HAD BEEN SHARED WITH THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNCIL. MR. HAMILTON SAID THAT THEY HAD NOT BEEN ENGAGED AND WOULD NOT ENGAGE FURTHER IN THIS ISSUE. HE DID POINT OUT THAT THE ORIGINAL SWERI DATA AND REPORT WAS ABOUT THE AREA IN GENERAL AND THAT HE DID NOT ANTICIPATE THAT ORGANIZATION DOING ANY ADDITIONAL WORK AND HAD NOT BEEN ENGAGED TO

[01:35:05]

DO ANY WORK. >> MAYOR JONES: I'LL TURN TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR THEIR COMMENTS. COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ HAS STEPPED AWAY, HOWEVER COUNCILMEMBER KAUR IS GOING TO READ A STATEMENT ON HIS BEHALF.

>> KAUR: COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ WILL NOT BEING SUPPORTING THE MUD REQUEST. 3,000 HOMES WILL GO FORWARD WITH OR WITHOUT THIS MUD.

THE CITY SHOULD NOT BE AN ACCOMPLICE. >> MAYOR JONES:

COUNCILWOMAN ALDERETE GAVITO. >> GAVITO: THANK YOU.

I WANTED TO FIRST OFF THANK ALL THE SPEAKERS WHO ARE HERE TODAY.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT INITIATIVE THAT Y'ALL TOOK THE TIME TO LET US KNOW WHAT Y'ALL ARE THINKING ABOUT IT AND FEELING ABOUT IT IS IMPORTANT.

SO I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR ENGAGEMENT. I DEFINITELY WANT TO CALL OUT PHILLIP MANNA, HE'S A DISTRICT 7 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESIDENT.

PAUL AND ALL THE OTHER SPEAKERS WHO ARE HERE. I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE HEAR YOU. I HEAR YOU. I HEAR YOUR CONCERNS.

COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ AND I HAVE PARTNERED TO LEARN MORE.

THAT'S WHY WE CO-AUTHORED THAT CCR ABOUT THIS INITIATIVE.

THAT'S WHY I WROTE THE MEMO TO SAWS AND THE EDWARDS AQUIFER AUTHORITY TO PUSH.

BECAUSE RIGHT WHEN WE FIRST STARTED ENGAGING WITH THIS PROJECT, YOU KNOW, WE DO HEAR A LOT OF COMPETING INFORMATION. YOU KNOW, MISINFORMATION ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. SO COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ AND I ARE REALLY FOCUSED ON FIGURING OUT THE TRUTH, MAKING SURE THAT Y'ALL'S CONCERNS WERE HEARD.

I DO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR Y'ALL'S HELP IN UNDERSTANDING THAT.

REALLY WHAT I DO WANT TO FOCUS ON TODAY IS I WANT TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS SO THAT MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES AND I, AS WELL AS YOU ALL, ARE CLEAR ON THE NEXT STEPS.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY. AT THE END OF THE 120-DAY PERIOD THAT WE'RE IN NOW, IS FAILURE TO ENTER AN AGREEMENT CONSIDERED CONSENT TO THE MUD PROCESS? SO TO THE MUD PROCESS, STARTING ON SLIDE 6, IF ON FEBRUARY -- IS IT FEBRUARY 4 OR 5? IF WE DENY OR NO ACTION THEN

WE ARE BASICALLY SAYING LET'S START THIS PROCESS? >> SEGOVIA: I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. YOU'RE ASKING, COUNCILWOMAN, IF THE COUNCIL DENIES THE MUD AND THEN THEY TRY TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH SAWS, IF THAT AGREEMENT ISN'T ENTERED, THERE'S NO MUD. BUT THEN THEY COULD PROCEED

TO TCEQ. >> GAVITO: WHAT I REALLY WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION ON

IS RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT THE 120-DAY PERIOD. >> SEGOVIA: UH-HUH.

>>

>> RIGHT NOW WE ARE IN THE 90-DAY PERIOD. THAT 90-DAY PERIOD STARTED

NOVEMBER 10 OF LAST YEAR. >> GAVITO: YEAH. >> BY FEBRUARY 8, COUNCIL NEEDS TO MAKE ONE OF THREE DECISIONS: EITHER YOU CONSENT, YOU DENY, OR YOU TAKE NO ACTION. ONCE A DECISION IS MADE AND THE DEVELOPER SUBMITS A

PETITION, THAT PETITION WILL THEN KICKOFF THE 120 DAYS. >> GAVITO: SORRY.

AND THANK YOU FOR THAT. BUT ON FEBRUARY 5TH, IF COUNCIL VOTES TO TAKE EITHER NO ACTION OR DENY IT, THEN THAT KICK STARTS SLIDE NO. 6.

>> NO. A PETITION HAS TO BE SUBMITTED.

>> GAVITO: THAT PETITION WOULD BE SUBMITTED TO KICKSTART SLIDE NO. 6.

>> ONCE A PETITION IS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY, THE DEVELOPER WILL THEN NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH SAWS. DEPENDING UPON THE OUTCOME OF THAT DISCUSSION, EITHER THEY WILL MOVE TOWARDS TCEQ, IF NO AGREEMENT IS REACHED, OR IF AN AGREEMENT WAS REACHED WHERE THEY CAN PROVIDE SERVICES, THEN

DEVELOPMENT COULD OCCUR. >> SEGOVIA: I WANT TO EMPHASIZE, COUNCILWOMAN, ATTEMPT TO NEGOTIATE WITH. THERE'S NO OBLIGATION FOR EITHER PARTY TO REACH AN

AGREEMENT. >> GAVITO: LET ME RECAP ALL OF THAT.

FEBRUARY 5TH COMES. COUNCIL EITHER VOTES YES, WHICH IS ONE THING.

OR COUNCIL VOTES NO OR NO ACTION. AND THEN IN THAT CASE, THE DEVELOPER THEN SUBMITS A PETITION, WHICH KICKS OFF SLIDE NO. 6 FOR THAT MUD

PROCESS. >> THE 120. >> GAVITO: THE 120 DAYS.

>> THE 120 STARTS WHEN ANOTHER PETITION IS SUBMITTED.

>> GAVITO: THANK YOU. WITH THAT, ALSO, I DO WANT US TO BE CLEAR.

[01:40:01]

IF ON FEBRUARY 5TH, CITY COUNCIL VOTES NO TO THE MUD, ITEMS NO. 1 THROUGH 15 ARE

THROWN OUT THE WINDOW? >> WELL, THESE WOULD BE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. ONE, THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT -- SO THAT'S ACTUALLY PART OF -- I GUESS A LAWSUIT THAT WAS ALREADY SETTLED.

SO THERE'S THAT. BUT THESE WOULD GO AWAY AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WOULD NOT BE -- IT WOULD BE

OFF THE TABLE. >> GAVITO: YES. JUST TO BE CLEAR, IF WE VOTE NO OR WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY ACTION, THE WASTEWATER SERVICE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS

NO. 1 THROUGH 15 GO AWAY. >> IT'S A B BIT NUANCED. >> SEGOVIA: LET ME TRY IT, COUNCILWOMAN. THERE'S PROTECTIONS THAT ARE IN THE AGREEMENT WITH SAWS.

USA WITH SAWS THAT WILL STAY IN PLACE. THERE'S PROTECTIONS IN THE SETTLEMENT THAT WAS REACHED WITH THE DEVELOPERS RELATED TO THE TCEQ PERMIT THAT WILL

STAY IN PLACE. >> GAVITO: DO WE KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE?

>> SEGOVIA: YES. THERE ARE MANY OF THE ONES LISTED HERE.

SO THE ANSWER IS THEY'RE NOT ALL GOING TO GO AWAY. >> GAVITO: SO NOT ALL OF THEM. BUT CAN WE SEE WHICH ONES WOULD STAY AND WHICH ONES WOULD GO AWAY? I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

>> YES. SO AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT -- THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ITSELF LISTS OUT A NUMBER OF THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENTS.

THERE ARE ABOUT 12 TO 13 ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS THAT WERE PART OF THAT PARTICULAR SETTLEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS AND THE CITY.

THERE ARE THEN NINE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS THAT WERE AGREED TO WHEN SAWS AGREED TO THEIR WATER USA FOR SEWER. AND THEN AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

>> LIKE INSPECTIONS AND TESTING. >> GAVITO: I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR MY COLLEAGUES TO SEE AND KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN IF WE WERE TO VOTE NO TO THE MUD ON FEBRUARY 5TH, MAYBE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 15 WOULD GO AWAY BUT WHAT ARE THE 12 OR 13 THAT WOULD STAY? I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO KNOW SO WE COULD SEE WHAT THAT PATH FORWARD WOULD LOOK LIKE.

>> AND IT SHOULD BE NOTED TOO THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IF COUNCIL WERE TO CONSENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IT WOULD BE FILED WITH THE COUNTY SO IT WOULD RUN WITH THE LAND. SO NO MATTER WHICH PROPERTY OWNER OWNS THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY, IT WOULD BE PART OF THAT DEED.

>> GAVITO: YEAH. YEAH. WHEN CAN WE -- ANDY, WHICH

CAN WE GET WHICH ONES OF THE 15? >> SEGOVIA: WE SHOULD BE

ABLE TO GET THAT BY TOMORROW. >> GAVITO: YEAH.

THAT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK WITH THESE WASTEWATER SERVICE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS AND I'D HATE TO SEE THAT ALL GONE AWAY. YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT COUNCIL'S GOING TO HAVE AN IMPORTANT VOTE ON FEBRUARY 5TH.

AGAIN, I JUST WANT YOU ALL, THE SPEAKERS THAT SIGNED UP OR THAT ARE WATCHING, TO KNOW THAT WE HEAR YOU AND WE DO HEAR YOUR CONCERNS. THIS COMES UP, YOU KNOW, I WAS HAVING A DONALDSON TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING AND IT'S NOT TOO FAR FROM HERE. THIS ISSUE IS COMING UP AT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS . WE DO -- OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, AS A SOCIETY, WE ARE GETTING MUCH SMARTER ABOUT OUR WATER AND FOREVER CHEMICALS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE TAKEN

SERIOUSLY. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES:

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

THANK YOU, BRIDGETT FOR THE PRESENTATION AS WELL AS TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC FOR GIVING YOUR COMMENT. IN ONE OF MAYOR RON NIRENBERG'S CLOSING SPEECHES HE HILD THAT ONE OF THE GREATEST ROLES THIS BODY HAS IS TO PROTECT THE WATER SOURCE AND THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. I SHARE THE CONCERNS THAT THE PUBLIC HAS ESTABLISHED IN TERMS OF LACK OF GOVERNANCE WITH THE MUD .

ON TOP OF THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT MUDS AND THE WAYS IN WHICH NEARLY HALF OF THE STATE'S SPECIAL DISTRICTS, NEARLY 50% ARE MUDS.

AND AS CITED BY THE TEXAS COMPTROLLER, MUDS HAVE ABSORBED AND SYPHONED IN

[01:45:02]

AND IT'S JUST IMPORTANT FOR THE FISCAL RESPONSIBLE THING TO DO, JUST THE OVERALL RESPONSIBLE THING TO DO IN TERMS OF OUR ENVIRONMENT TO ENSURE WE'RE ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS AND OF COURSE PROTECTING OUR WATER SOURCE.

AND, AGAIN, JUST HIGHLIGHTING, AS MENTIONED IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT, WITH KATY TEXAS, IN PARTICULAR. FOLKS -- THEIR TAXES ARE GOING HIGHER AND HIGHER AND IT IS SOMETHING THE GOVERNOR HIGHLIGHTED IS A POTENTIAL LOOPHOLE BECAUSE TOO MANY FOLKS ESTABLISHING THESE MUDS ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE FOLKS WHO LIVE IN THEM. AS MICHAEL STATED, THE OPTIONS AS LAID OUT, NEITHER OPTION APPEARS FAVORABLE BECAUSE DENIAL MEANS THAT THE DEVELOPER CAN STILL POTENTIALLY DEVELOP ON THE PROPERTY AND THAT MEANS POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION ON THE RECHARGE ZONE. BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, APPROVAL IS STILL DEVELOPMENT ON THE RECHARGE ZONE. SO THOSE ARE THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE.

BUT WE KNOW, AS FOLKS ALREADY EMPHASIZED COMMENT AFTER COMMENT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE RECHARGE ZONE IS LONG LASTING AND OFTEN IRREVERSIBLE AND FOLKS TOUCHED ON WHAT GOES INTO OUR WATER SOURCE. WE KNOW THAT WATER DOESN'T KNOW CITY LIMITS, DOESN'T KNOW COUNTY LINES AND THAT'S A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY THAT THIS BODY HAS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION TO TAKE CARE OF OUR WATER SOURCE AND TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS SO FOLKS KNOW THE IMPACT IN THEIR COMMUNITIES.

I THINK THE EXAMPLES YOU LAID OUT IN TERMS OF ACCESS TO THIS PROPOSED COMMUNITY AND THE CONGESTION THAT IT MAY PROVIDE, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT MORE CARS ON THE ROAD, WHICH I THINK IS A LARGER CONVERSATION THAT WE ARE HAVING, BUT THE RISK OF PUTTING FOLKS IN DANGER, WHETHER IT'S A FLOOD, A FIRE.

THAT'S SUCH HIGH DENSITY WITHOUT THE APPROPRIATE INFRASTRUCTURE TO FACILITATE FOLKS GOING IN AND OUT OF THAT CUL-DE-SAC OR THAT POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

I WANT TO THANK MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES, COUNCILWOMAN ALDERETE GAVITO AND MEZA GONZALEZ FOR INITIATING THIS CONVERSATION WITH THEIR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION REQUEST BUT AS WELL AS COUNCILMAN MUNGIA FOR HIS LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF OUR GREATEST RESPONSIBILITIES, AS HIGHLIGHTED BY THE FORMER MAYOR, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'M HOPEFUL THAT MY COLLEAGUES AND I WILL BE ON THE SAME PAGE IN TERMS OF ENSURING THAT WE CONTINUE TO

PROTECT THE RECHARGE ZONE. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: DONOVAN, I SEE YOU HERE FROM SAWS. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN THIS FORUM, THE RISKS ASSOCIATED, AS YOU SEE THEM, AND WHY SAWS BELIEVES THOSE TO BE MITIGATED.

>> MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, DONOVAN BURTON. WE'RE HERE AS A RESOURCE WITNESS. WE TAKE NO POSITION ON THE MUD.

WE HAVE DONE AN ANALYSIS. WE HAVE LOOKED AT SOME OF THE WATER ISSUES AND WE BELIEVE WE'VE, THROUGH ALL THE CONDITIONS THAT YOU POINTED OUT AND SOME OF THE GEOLOGY THERE, WE BELIEVE A LOT OF THE SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS HAVE BEEN MITIGATED. THE SIGNIFICANT WATER QUALITY CONCERNS HAVE BEEN MITIGATED AS IT RELATES TO THE SAWS WATER SOURCE, IN TERMS OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS -- THE SUBSURFACE IS COMPLICATED.

THESE AQUIFERS ARE FRACTURED AND HAVE BARRIERS AND THAT SORT OF THING IN THEM SO IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED ANALYSIS. WE THINK THE WATER DOES GO INTO SOME OF THE UPPER TRINITY AQUIFER. WE HAVE WELLS IN THE LOWER TRINITY, PROBABLY EIGHT MILES AWAY. ACTUALLY, THEY'RE NOT OUR WELLS. WE PURCHASED THEM FROM SOMEBODY ELSE.

AND THEN AS IT GOES IN THROUGH WHAT WE CALL -- WHAT'S CALLED THE HABE FAULT, WE BELIEVE A LOT OF THAT WATER MOVES WITHIN THE TRINITY AQUIFER AND THEN IT HAS A HARD TIME GETTING THROUGH A DENSE LAYER OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER TO GET INTO THE AREA OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER THAT'S PULLED FOR DRINKING WATER.

WE BELIEVE A LOT OF THOSE RISKS HAVE BEEN MITIGATED THROUGH THESE CONDITIONS THAT WE PUT INTO THE AGREEMENT. AGAIN, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AS WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF THE WATER GOING IN AND HAVE THOSE CONDITIONS BEEN

[01:50:01]

SO WE DO BELIEVE THAT A LOT OF THE WATER QUALITY RISKS HAVE BEEN MITIGATED FOR THE

SAWS' WATER SYSTEM. >> MAYOR JONES: WHILE YOU'RE THERE, SOME OF THE CONCERN, AS YOU HEARD, IS REGARDING THE ABILITY TO MONITOR, IF THERE IS SOME NON-COMPLIANCE WITH EITHER OF THE RESTRICTIONS OR IF THERE IS -- IF SOMEBODY'S GEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT IS IN FACT DIFFERENT THAN YOUR OWN AND TURNS OUT TO BE CORRECT.

CAN YOU HELP THE BODY UNDERSTAND THE MEASURES THAT YOU ANTICIPATE PUTTING IN PLACE. ARE ANY OF THOSE BEING TRIED FOR THE FIRST TIME? HAVE WE SEEN THOSE WORK EFFECTIVELY IN OTHER PLACES TO THE CONCERNS RAISED EARLIER ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THESE SIMILAR PROJECTS, NOT TOO FAR FROM HERE, THAT ARE NON-COMPLIANT. SO SPEAK TO, PLEASE, HOW THE MEASURES THAT SAWS RECOMMENDS PUTTING IN PLACE HAVE BEEN TRIED PREVIOUSLY, ARE WORKING EFFECTIVELY, OR IF SOME OF THESE ARE DONE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN WHICH THERE MIGHT NOT BE A

REFERENCE POINT FOR US. >> SURE. SO A LOT OF ISSUES THERE BUT A LOT OF THEM, AGAIN, WITHIN THE NINE CONDITIONS THAT SAWS PUT INTO THE AGREEMENT, IT'S ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY. IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS, MAKING SURE THAT THE STORMWATER FLOW IS NOT INTO THE SENSITIVE RECHARGE FEATURES THAT ARE EITHER ON SITE OR CLOSE BY. SO THAT'S THE FIRST LAYER IS MAKING SURE THAT IT DOESN'T GET INTO THE AQUIFER. THEN WE HAVE MONITORING ALL OVER BEXAR COUNTY. WE UTILIZE THE USGS AS WELL IN SEVERAL AREAS OF THE STREAMS. AND SO WE HAVE A LOT OF THOSE, GENERALLY IN THE AREA. WE MAY, IF THIS ULTIMATELY COMES TO FRUITION, WE MAY CHANGE SOME OF THE LOCATIONS TO ENSURE THERE'S ADDITIONAL ENHANCED MONITORING IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA. BUT AT SAWS WE TAKE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF SAMPLES OF OUR SYSTEM EVERY MONTH, EVERY YEAR, CERTAINLY, WHERE WE ANALYZE THE WATER QUALITY AND ARE CONSTANTLY LOOKING AT THE WATER QUALITY THAT COMES OUT. ULTIMATELY DELIVERED TO OUR CUSTOMERS.

THERE ARE LOTS OF REGULATIONS IN PLACE FROM THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL TO ENSURE THAT WHATEVER WE PROVIDE, REGARDLESS OF THE SOURCE WATER, WHATEVER WE PROVIDE TO OUR CUSTOMERS MEETS ALL REGULATORY EXPECTATIONS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. >> MAYOR JONES: IT DOES.

TO CLARIFY, NONE OF THE MEASURES YOU ARE PUTTING INTO PLACE YOU'RE PUTTING IN FOR THE FIRST TIME. THESE ARE PROCESSES YOU HAVE USED CURRENTLY OR PREVIOUSLY

THAT YOU HAVE FOUND TO BE EFFECTIVE? >> THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY BEING PUT IN FOR THE FIRST TIME IS THE LEVEL OF TREATMENT THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS AGREED TO THAT WE HAVE WORKED WITH THEM TO ENHANCE SOME NUTRIENT REMOVAL.

PHOSPHORUS, NITRATE, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS, TO ENHANCE THE NUTRIENT REMOVAL WITHIN THE WASTEWATER PROCESS. THAT'S A PROCESS THAT'S PRETTY STRINGENT AND IT IS NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED IN A LOT OF OTHER AREAS WITH THESE PACKAGED TREATMENT PLANTS THAT ARE IN LOTS OF DIFFERENT AREAS THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

I THINK THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS A HUGE IMPROVEMENT AS COMPARED TO OTHER

DEVELOPMENTS OF THIS NATURE. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ.

>> GONZALEZ: THANK YOU, MAYOR AND THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY THAT'S BEEN HERE TODAY. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD BEFORE THIS. SO I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT STATE LEGISLATION THAT STRIPPED MUNICIPALITIES OF MEANINGFUL LOCAL CONTROL, INCLUDING THE AUTHORITY TO ANNEX LAND IN OUR OWN BACKYARD, MEANINGFUL LOCAL CONTROL COULD HAVE EITHER PREVENTED THIS PROJECT ALL TOGETHER OR PROVIDED US BETTER OPTIONS TO PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY. BUT HERE WE ARE NOW AND I APPRECIATE THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS THAT THE CITY MENTIONED IN SLIDES 9 AND 10.

BUT I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS ITEM ON FEBRUARY 5 AND I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, JUST TO CLARIFY.

IF THE DEVELOPER DID SUBMIT A PID REQUEST? >> THE DEVELOPER SUBMITTED A

PID APPLICATION TO THE COUNTY. >> GONZALEZ: AND THAT CAN -- I GUESS THE COUNTY CAN REVIEW THAT WITHIN THOSE 120 DAYS, I'M ASSUMING?

>> APPLICATION TO THE COUNTY MARCH 28, 2023. THE COUNTY TOOK NO ACTION ON THAT PID APPLICATION. SO TYPICALLY, WITH PID APPLICATIONS THAT THE CITY WILL LOOK AT, WHEN WE GET TO CITY COUNCIL, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT WE'LL TYPICALLY HAVE A

[01:55:01]

BECAUSE THE COUNTY TOOK NO ACTION ON THAT PARTICULAR PID APPLICATION, IT'S JUST OUT THERE. SO THE COUNTY HAS TAKEN NO ACTION ON THE PID

APPLICATION THEY RECEIVED FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. >> GONZALEZ: AND THEY STILL -- SO IT'S BEEN SITTING AT THE COUNTY FOR TWO YEARS BUT THEY STILL

HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IT UP? >> THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR THE COUNTY. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF A MUD APPLICATION.

>> SEGOVIA: THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS YES, THEY STILL CAN BRING IT UP.

>> GONZALEZ: THEY STILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY. I GUESS IF THEY DO CHOOSE TO APPROVE A PID, WHAT BENEFIT DOES THAT GIVE THE CITY? DOES THAT GIVE THE CITY ANY

SORT OF BENEFIT? >> IN TERMS OF? >> GONZALEZ: A SEAT AT THE TABLE. DOES THAT OFFER US ANY SORT OF --

>> SEGOVIA: SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN, EVEN IF THE COUNTY APPROVES THE PID. AGAIN, CONCEPTUALLY, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO COME

BACK TO THE CITY. >> SAME PROCESS. >> GONZALEZ: SAME PROCESS.

OKAY. HAVE WE EVER APPROVED A MUD AT THE CITY?

>> NO. >> GONZALEZ: AND -- >> WELL, WE DON'T APPROVE MUDS. WE HAVE THE -- WE GET A REQUEST TO CONSENT TO THE CREATION OF A MUD. THAT REQUEST HAS NOT COME BEFORE US.

>> GONZALEZ: ON THE AGREEMENT THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO HAVE WITH SAWS, IF WE DENY THIS MUD, DOES THEM NOT BEING IN THE CCN AFFECT ANY OF THAT?

I'M SORRY. DOES THAT CHANGE OR... >> THAT MAY BE A SAWS'

QUESTION. >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

KEITH MARTIN, SENIOR CORPORATE COUNSEL WITH THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM.

IN THEIR ATTEMPT TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH SEWER SERVICES WITH SAWS, THOSE SERVICES WILL NOT BE IN SAWS SEWER CCN. SAWS IS NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SEWER SERVICES IN THE AREA AND THE DEVELOPER -- AND CONVERSELY, SAWS DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES IN THE AREA.

BUT THEY WILL -- THE SECOND STEP OF THIS PROCESS, THE 120 DAYS WHEN THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS, SAWS WILL PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROCESS WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY, IF NECESSARY, TO ATTEMPT TO SEE IF THERE ARE OTHER THOUGHTS OR IDEAS THAT COULD BE PURSUED THAT HAVEN'T ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE

ORIGINAL USA REQUEST. >> GONZALEZ: WOULD THAT REQUIRE THEM HAVING TO BE IN

THE CCN THEN? >> NO. SAWS, AS A MUNICIPAL UTILITY OWNED BY A HOME RULE CITY, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SERVE

OUTSIDE OF OUR CCN AND ANYWHERE THERE'S NOT A CCN. >> GONZALEZ: GOT IT.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

I ALSO THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REEVALUATE THE PROTECTION PROGRAM AND BETTER UNDERSTAND THE CURRENT METRICS IN PLACE FOR IDENTIFYING AND CONSERVING PROPERTY. I UNDERSTAND THE VALUE IN CONSERVING PROPERTY WEST OF BEXAR COUNTY BUT I DO BELIEVE WE ARE ABLE TO ACHIEVE MORE PRIORITIES FOR THE PUBLIC BY CONSERVING PROPERTIES WITHIN BEXAR COUNTY THAT ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE DEVELOPED WITHIN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE. I KNOW THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION IN THE COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMITTEE AND I LOOK FORWARD TO EXPLORING THAT WITH MY COLLEAGUES. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILWOMAN SPEARS.

>> SPEARS: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR COMING TODAY. I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG TIME.

I ACTUALLY WAS AROUND WHEN THE PID WAS FIRST FILED IN 2023 OVER AT THE COUNTY.

SO I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROJECT. I HAVE BEEN OUT TO THE GUAJOLOTE RANCH AREA, DID THE LONG TOUR WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND SEEN THE HEADWATERS AND I CARE VERY MUCH ABOUT THE WATER BECAUSE I ALSO REPRESENT A DISTRICT THAT'S OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE AND MANY KARST FEATURES EXIST IN MY DISTRICT.

I'M FULLY AWARE OF HOW IMPORTANT WATER IS FOR OUR STATE, OUR CITY, OUR WHOLE REGION. IT'S THE TRUE GOLD OF THE STATE.

SO WE REALLY NEED TO BE PAYING ATTENTION TO THE WATER.

I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CREATION OF THE MUD, SPECIFICALLY.

A LOT OF THEM ARE FOR CLARITY AND I'LL JUST ASK THEM.

I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT A MUD IS A SEPARATE TAXING AUTHORITY THAT LEVIES ITS OWN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX ON TOP OF CITY, COUNTY, AND SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES,

CORRECT? >> YES. >> SPEARS: OKAY.

[02:00:02]

ITS INITIAL INFRASTRUCTURE IS PAID FOR? >> NO.

>> SEGOVIA: NO, COUNCILWOMAN. >> SPEARS: SO IS IT TRUE THAT EVEN AFTER THE ORIGINAL BONDS ARE RETIRED, THAT A MUD CAN CONTINUE TO EXIST

AND LEVY TAXES? >> SEGOVIA: THAT IS CORRECT.

>> SPEARS: ALL RIGHT. IS IT CORRECT THAT A MUD CAN ISSUE ADDITIONAL BONDS IN

THE FUTURE BEYOND THE INITIAL BOND AUTHORIZATION? >> SEGOVIA: THAT IS

CORRECT AS WELL. THEY CAN. >> SPEARS: WHO DECIDES WHETHER NEW BONDS ARE ISSUED? IS IT THE CITY COUNCIL OR A

MUD BOARD? >> SEGOVIA: THE MUD BOARD, COUNCILWOMAN.

>> SPEARS: SO IN THE EARLY YEARS OF A MUD, WHO CONTROLS THE BOARD?

IS IT RESIDENTS OR A DEVELOPER? >> IT WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER BECAUSE THE MUD WOULD JUST BE CREATED, HAVING JUST BEEN CREATED.

>> SPEARS: DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE FOR RESIDENTS TO HAVE FULL CONTROL OF THE MUD BOARD? DO WE HAVE ANY REFERENCE POINTS THERE?

>> JUST BASED ON THE PETITION THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION. THEY'RE LOOKING TO HAVE THE AD VALOREM TAXES AND THAT ALL PAID OFF WITHIN 30 YEARS. AND THE 3,000 HOMES

DEVELOPED WITHIN 12 YEARS. >> SPEARS: POTENTIALLY AS LONG AS 12 YEARS.

>> ACCORDING TO THE PETITION THAT WAS SUBMITTED. >> SPEARS: OKAY.

I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT, THAT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE MUD WOULDN'T HAVE CONTROL OF THE BOARD UNTIL POTENTIALLY 12 YEARS FROM ITS CREATION.

>> I BELIEVE ACCORDING TO STATE LAW IT'S FIVE BOARD MEMBERS.

>> SPEARS: FIVE BOARD MEMBERS. HAS THE DEVELOPER ASKED

ABOUT FUTURE ANNEXATION BY THE CITY? >> THAT WOULD BE A PART OF

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> SPEARS: SO IT IS IN

THERE? >> YES. IT'S IN THE DRAFTED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND THAT WOULD BE IN ALL OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.

THIS ONE IS A LITTLE UNIQUE SO WE DO HAVE INFORMATION THAT WOULD INCLUDE DEBT AND

FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS. >> SPEARS: WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

>> SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PID AND A MUD IS THAT WITH A PID, IF CITY COUNCIL CHOOSES TO ANNEX A PID AT A FUTURE DATE, WE DON'T TAKE ON THE DEBT OF THE PID.

WITH A MUD, IF CITY COUNCIL CHOOSES TO ANNEX THE MUD, WE COULD TAKE ON THE DEBT OF THE PID. HOWEVER, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT IN THE PRESENTATION, I MENTIONED THAT SOME OF THE PROPOSED TERMS INCLUDE A CAP ON THE DISTRICT'S BOND ISSUANCE. SO IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WE DO NOTE THAT IF THE DEVELOPER WISHES TO INCREASE THAT $150 MILLION, THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL. BUT THEN ALSO WE HAVE INFORMATION WHEN THE LAST BONDS CAN BE ISSUED. BUT IF CITY COUNCIL WERE TO ANNEX AT A FUTURE DATE, WE HAVE THE ABILITY, PER STATE LAW, TO THEN CHARGE THE RESIDENTS IN THE DISTRICT A POST-ANNEX SURCHARGE. THAT'S ACCORDING TO TEXAS WATER CODE.

>> SPEARS: THE RESIDENTS THAT DON'T LIVE ANYWHERE RIGHT NOW BUT THAT WOULD

POTENTIALLY LIVE THERE? >> YES. >> SPEARS: WE COULD ASSESS

THAT. >> PER THE TEXAS WATER CODE. >> SPEARS: HAS THE DEVELOPER ASKED FOR ANY OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE OR TALKED ABOUT OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS AND NEEDS IN THE MUD AT THIS POINT?

>> NO. WE ARE JUST BASING OFF OF THE PETITION THAT WAS

SUBMITTED AND WHAT THEY PROPOSED TO DEVELOP. >> SPEARS: THANK YOU.

I DO ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT BEXAR COUNTY DID PASS THE RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR REHEARING FOR THE TCEQ ON DECEMBER 16TH OF THIS PAST YEAR.

I REALLY DO BELIEVE IN PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS BUT I DO HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT A MUD. IT CREATES A SEPARATE GOVERNMENT WITH ITS OWN PERMANENT TAX RATE AND THAT TAX LAYER SITS ON TOP OF CITY, COUNTY, AND SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES AND LASTS INDEFINITELY. A MUD CAN ISSUE NEW BONDS AND EXTENDS THAT TAX BURDEN FOR DECADES. FUTURE HOMEOWNERS DESERVE CERTAINTY. THEY DESERVE TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE PAYING FOR AND HOW LONG THEY'LL PAY AND WHEN IT ENDS. UNDER A MUD, DECISIONS ARE SHIFTED FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS TO A SEPARATE BOARD, OFTEN DEVELOPER CONTROLLED IN THE EARLY YEARS. IF THIS AREA IS ANNEXED IN THE FUTURE, A MUD WOULD REQUIRE THE CITY TO ASSUME ITS OUTSTANDING DEBT.

WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT FUTURE TAXPAYERS FROM INHERITING DECADES OF OBLIGATIONS AND SO FOR THESE REASONS I CANNOT IN GOOD CONSCIENCE SUPPORT THE

CREATION OF THIS MUD. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES:

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN. >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING.

I WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE PRESENTATION OF THE SPEAKERS.

[02:05:02]

IT IS DIFFICULT BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE EASIER IF YOU WERE YOUR OWN MUNICIPALITY LIKE WINDCREST, LIVE OAK, OR THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT YOU COME TO SAN ANTONIO AND YOU ASK US TO LOOK AT THINGS AND WE'RE TRYING TO MANAGE AS BEST WE CAN.

SO I DO WANT YOU TO EXPAND ON THE TAKE-NO-ACTION PIECE. IF WE TAKE NO ACTION, DOES THAT INDICATE -- AND I DON'T KNOW WHO CAN TALK ON IT. IF WE TAKE NO ACTION, DOES

THAT INDICATE SUPPORT FOR OR AGAINST ON THIS ISSUE? >> IF WE TAKE NO ACTION, COUNCIL, THEN IT'S SOMEWHAT LIKE A DENIAL BECAUSE IT'S NOT APPROVING THE CONTENT.

>CONSENT.>> VIAGRAN: AS WE LOOKT WATER AND WE LOOK AT WATER ISSUES, I THINK AUDIO] COMPELLING ARGUMENT -- THANK YOU. MADE A COMPELLING ARGUMENT THAT THIS NEIGHBOR, IN PARTICULAR, IN TERMS OF TALKING ABOUT BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR, THAT THIS NEIGHBOR, IN PARTICULAR, HAS NOT DONE WHAT YOU'VE REQUESTED AND HAS NOT BEEN AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE IN THIS PROCESS.

SO THAT IS THE ONE THING IS TAKING THEM AT FACE VALUE AND WHAT THEY SAY REGARDING THE WASTEWATER AND WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO IS PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BASICALLY GONE OUT TO THE COMMUNITY LIKE WE WOULD LIKE THEM TO GO OUT TO THE COMMUNITY. BUT I DON'T WANT TO SHUT THE DOOR IN TERMS OF MUDS IN THE FUTURE. IF SOMEBODY COMES TO ME -- AND MAYBE NOT OVER -- I'M LEANING AGAINST ANYWHERE WHERE THE EDWARDS AQUIFER IS.

BUT IF THEY COME TO A DIFFERENT PART IN THE ETJ AND THEY SAY WE WILL BRING YOU A STATE-OF-THE-ART WASTEWATER FACILITY, I'M KIND OF LIKE I WANT TO SEE THAT. BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE -- AND I KNOW THEY'RE DOING IT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE AND THE WORLD WHERE IT GOES FROM TOILET TO TAP.

SO I DON'T WANT TO CLOSE THAT DOOR. BUT I DON'T WANT THIS PROJECT, IN PARTICULAR, HAS BEEN AS FORTHCOMING AS POSSIBLE.

AND SOME OF THE QUOTES THAT Y'ALL PROVIDED ABOUT WHAT THEIR EXECUTIVE SAID AT MEETINGS, THAT WAS PROBLEMATIC. I'M FAMILIAR WITH LENNAR AND THE DEVELOPMENT IN MY AREA SO IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT I KIND OF WANT TO -- I HEAR MORE KIND OF INFORMATION REGARDING THAT TAKE NO ACTION.

BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SHUT THE DOOR COMPLETELY TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND THE ETJ, BECAUSE WE HAVE IT AROUND THE ENTIRE CITY. IF WE DO, IN THE FUTURE, NEED TO INPUT ON A MUD THAT OUR EXPECTATIONS ARE A WASTEWATER FACILITY THAT IS STATE-OF-THE-ART. SO I KNOW SAWS IS HERE AND THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SAYING YOU'RE STATE-OF-THE-ART AND THE CITY HAVING AND SAWS HAVING EXPECTATIONS OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF WASTEWATER FACILITY IS VERY DIFFERENT. I WANT TO THANK Y'ALL FOR COMING IN, FOR GIVING US THAT INFORMATION, FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. I LOOK FORWARD TO ALL THE WORK THAT PLANNING DID, THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THAT OF COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ.

THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: ANDY, TO CLARIFY A POINT.

IF WE DECIDE TO TAKE NO ACTION ON THIS, THAT HAS NO BEARING ON OUR FUTURE REVIEW

OF MUD APPLICATIONS, CORRECT? >> SEGOVIA: NO, MAYOR.

THEY ARE EACH INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATIONS. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU.

COUNCILMAN WHYTE. >> WHYTE: THANKS, MAYOR. I WANT TO BEGIN BY THANKING MY COLLEAGUES MEZA GONZALEZ, ALDERETE GAVITO, COUNCILWOMAN SPEARS AND THE EDWARD, THE COUNCILMAN AS WELL. THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK DONE LEADING UP TO TODAY'S MEETING. I THINK MOST OF US GOT A CHANCE TO GO OUT AND VISIT THE SITE. BUT THEN EVEN AFTER THAT, SO Y'ALL'S WORK WAS REALLY IMPORTANT IN GETTING US HERE TODAY.

I'M GOING TO BE BRIEF BECAUSE ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE REALLY NAILED THIS ONE.

I'M A PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS GUY TOO. WE LIVE IN TEXAS.

LAND IS KING AND FOR THE MOST PART YOU SHOULD GET TO BE ABLE TO DO WITH YOUR OWN PROPERTY WHAT YOU WANT. HOWEVER, THE EXCEPTION TO THAT IS WHEN SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DO WITH YOUR OWN PROPERTY MAY REALLY HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OTHERS.

[02:10:03]

IT'S A UNIQUE RECHARGE SYSTEM WHERE RAINWATER FILTERS DIRECTLY INTO THE AQUIFER AND SO CONTAMINATION IN ONE AREA CAN CERTAINLY AFFECT THE ENTIRE WATER SUPPLY. THIS HAS BEEN AN ISSUE THAT I KNOW IS SENSITIVE TO A LOT OF FOLKS. IT'S NOT JUST THE LANDOWNERS IN THE AREA BUT, AGAIN, IT'S EVERYBODY THAT'S SERVICED BY OUR WATER SYSTEM. SO I STAND WITH MY COLLEAGUES ON THIS. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MUD.

THANKS, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN GALVAN.

>> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU TO ALL THE SPEAKERS WHO CAME IN TODAY TO VOICE THEIR CONCERNS AND THEIR THOUGHTS ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY INVOLVED WHO MADE THE TOUR POSSIBLE FOR COUNCILMAN MUNGIA AND I. THOSE TOURS MAKE US AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY IN PLACES THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE DISTANT FROM WHERE WE'RE AT. GOVERNMENT CANYON IS WITHIN DISTRICT 6 SO WE'RE NOT TOO FAR AWAY. THIS HAS BEEN A TOPIC IN A LOT OF MY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT KIND OF GET CLOSER AND CLOSER TO THAT PART OF TOWN.

GIVEN THAT, I'M GRATEFUL TO KEN AND DISTRICT 6 WAS ABLE TO JOIN US.

HE HAS BEEN A VOCAL ADVOCATE AS WELL, NOT ONLY WITHIN DISTRICT 6 BUT DISTRICT 7 WITH THE NORTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE . I WANT TO PUT THOSE PIECES OUT THERE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO KEEP OUR FOLKS ENGAGE AND NOTE THEY HAVE BEEN ENGAGED ON THIS TOPIC FOR QUITE A WHILE. I THINK COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO FOCUSED IN ON THE MUD COMPONENTS REALLY WELL. WE HAVE ALL BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE WATER AS WELL. I'LL LEAVE THIS FINAL POINT ABOUT OUR CITY HAS BEEN TRYING TO MOVE AWAY FROM SUBURBAN SPRAWL AND ENABLING THAT FOR QUITE A WHILE, ULTIMATELY TO AVOID HIGHER INFRASTRUCTURE COST, REDUCE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, AND STRENGTHEN THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE HERE WITHIN OUR CITY LIMITS.

THIS WOULD IMPACT THE GROWTH PATTERNS AND NATURAL LANDSCAPE NEAR AND AROUND MY DISTRICT, BUT IN GENERAL TO THE WORK WE'RE DOING HERE. THE STATE WANTS TO DO LOCAL PLANNING FOR US. I DON'T THINK IT'S REQUIRED OF THE CITY TO TRY TO ENGAGE IN THAT. WE DO OUR BEST TO KNOW AND TO WORK WITH THE FOLKS THAT ARE HERE ON THE GROUND AND THE STATE DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT, IT'S UP TO THEM

TO FIGURE IT OUT. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN

MUNGIA. >> MUNGIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AGAIN, THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY WHO WAS OUT HERE TODAY.

I GOT TO HEAR MANY OF YOU LAST WEEK AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE TO LEAVE YOUR HOMES VERY EARLY TO COME HERE DOWNTOWN AND IT TAKES A LOT OF EFFORT TO BE AS ORGANIZED AS YOU ALL ARE. KUDOS TO Y'ALL.

THIS IS SUCH A WELL-ORGANIZED GROUP OF FOLKS ADVOCATING.

YOU DESERVE A LOT OF CREDIT FOR THAT. I DO CREDIT JUDY FOR INVITING ME TO THE TOUR. I WAS VERY HAPPY TO BE OUT THERE.

I DON'T THINK I HAD EVER BEEN TO GREY FOREST BEFORE . YOU HAVE A VERY BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY. I GOT TO MEET A BUNCH OF YOU THERE.

PETER, STEVE, JUDY, RANDY, LYNNETT, MAYOR WAS THERE ALSO.

I GOT TO DO THE TOUR WITH COUNCILMAN PHILIPS AND THAT WAS REALLY INFORMATIVE.

I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES WHO DID THE CCR BECAUSE I LEARNED THAT UNTIL THAT CCR, A LOT OF THE RESIDENTS DIDN'T LET THEM KNOW HOW WE FELT ABOUT IT.

AND SO SAFE DRINKING WATER IS JUST -- WE TAKE THAT FOR GRANTED HERE IN SAN ANTONIO, BEING ABLE TO PUT A GLASS UNDER THE TAP AND DRINK IT. I WENT TO COLLEGE IN NEW ORLEANS AND I HAD NEVER HEARD OF A WATER-BOIL ADVISORY BEFORE AND IT WAS SHOCKING TO ME THAT PEOPLE HAD TO BOIL WATER TO CONSUME IT IN NEW ORLEANS.

AND THAT IS A FREQUENT ISSUE THERE. AND I JUST HOPE THAT THAT NEVER EVER HAPPENS TO THE CITIZENS OF BEXAR COUNTY. BECAUSE WE ARE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE OUR AQUIFER. SOMETHING I SAID LAST WEEK WAS REGARDING THE TREATMENT FACILITY. I THINK SOME OF WHAT WE HAVE TO DO HERE A LOT OF TIMES IS NOT ONLY THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE START OF THE DEVELOPMENT OR THE FIRST MONTH BUT 20, 30 YEARS FROM NOW WHAT DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT DOWN THAT LINE. I JUST SIMPLY DON'T KNOW THAT THAT FACILITY WOULD BE UP TO PAR IN THAT TIME-FRAME. ESSENTIALLY, IT WOULD BE THE

[02:15:06]

I HAVE WORKED WITH A LOT OF HOAS BUT THEY CAN BARELY KEEP WITH A HUGE FACILITY. AND, YOU KNOW, I'M GLAD MR. LEE BROUGHT UP THE OTHER WASTEWATER FACILITIES IN THE COUNTY THAT HAVE BEEN TICKETED AND FINED BY TCEQ.

I SAID THAT LAST WEEK. I DON'T BELIEVE TCEQ IS CAPABLE OF HAVING TEETH TO THEIR FINES. GREAT EXAMPLE ON THE FAR SOUTH SIDE, NOT THAT LONG AGO WE HAD A PROPERTY FULL OF TIRES, JUST WATER CONTAMINATION WITH THOSE TIRES, MOSQUITOES. IT WAS A HUGE QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUE.

TCEQ WAS INVOLVED. THEY WERE GIVING FINES BUT IT TOOK YEARS TO GET THOSE TIRES OUT OF THERE. AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS FACILITY STARTS TO FAIL? AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S ANOTHER WINTER FREEZE AND SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THAT FACILITY? THE ABILITY TO GET THAT QUICKLY IS GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT. AND SO THE ARGUMENT THAT IT'S OKAY TO PUT WATER OUT THERE, THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO GO TO THE AQUIFER, WON'T BE CONTAMINATED, THAT THERE'S NATURAL DEVICES WITH THE SOIL. WE KNOW THAT LANDSCAPE CHANGES OVER TIME. WE ARE IN SEVERE DROUGHTS. WE HAVE HAD A SEVERE FREEZE AND SO WE KNOW THOSE THINGS WILL CHANGE OVER TIME. SO WE HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT. I JUST LOVE ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT COUNCILWOMAN SPEARS BROUGHT UP. THOSE ARE WELL-APPOINTED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ACTUAL PROCESS OF THE MUD AND PEOPLE NOT REALIZING WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET INTO WHEN THEY BUY A HOME. IT COULD BE ON PAPER BUT WE HAVE HEARD RESIDENTS NOT KNOWING WHAT THEY ARE GETTING INTO WHEN THEY PURCHASE THEIR HOME.

I APPRECIATE THAT. I WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS. WE DON'T NEED TO HELP THIS ALONG AND I REALLY HOPE THAT SAWS CAN WORK, SHOULD THIS BEDBE DENIED IN AN AGREEMENT, LISTENING TO ALL YOUR CONCERN. I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THE ROCK. I HAPPEN TO HAVE MY OWN PIECE HERE TOO.

IT'S A LOT SMALLER THAN YOURS BUT IT REMINDS ME OF THE THINGS WE HAVE TO DO UP HERE AND WHAT WE HAVE TO FIGHT FOR AND THE QUALITY OF WATER SO MANY OF US DEPEND ON. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND WE'LL SEE YOU IN A COUPLE OF

WEEKS. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: JOHN, A QUESTION FOR YOU. THE LAST BULLET ON THE SUMMARY SLIDE IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, THE TAKEAWAY. WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT CREATION OF THE MUD.

THE ONLY OPTION ALLOWS FOR CITY CONDITIONS. CAN YOU SPEAK TO, AT THIS POINT, TO THE EXTENT YOU'RE ABLE TO. I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE ONGOING NEGOTIATIONS. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO GET A SENSE OF HOW THE DISCUSSIONS ARE GOING AROUND SOME OF THE PROPOSED TERMS. AND I SAY ALL THAT, AS YOU'VE HEARD SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS REFERENCE THE OTHER LENNAR PROJECTS IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO THERE ARE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE WILL HAVE TO PARTNER. AND SO RECOGNIZING ANY APPETITE FOR SUPPORT FOR SOME OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WE'VE ASKED FOR, YOU KNOW, EVEN ABSENT OUR CONSENT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE VERY INTERESTING IN OUR UNDERSTANDING.

WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE AT THIS POINT BUT THEN AS WELL AS WE APPROACH THE

VOTE ON THE 5TH. >> SURE, MAYOR. I THINK WE HAVE OUTLINED WHAT WE HAVE SHARED WITH THE DEVELOPER. WE HAVE HAD SOME INITIAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THOSE ITEMS. THERE --

>> MAYOR JONES: I WAS GOING TO SAY IF YOU WOULD BRING UP THAT SLIDE.

SLIDE 8. >> I THINK IT'S 8 AND 9. YEP.

AND THEN THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE'VE SHARED THESE WITH THE DEVELOPER.

WE HAVE HAD SOME INITIAL DISCUSSIONS. THERE'S BEEN PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS. AT THIS POINT THERE'S NOT A SIGNED DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. THAT'S OUR INTENT FOR THE NEXT TIME WE COME BEFORE YOU AT A SESSION. BUT THERE HAS BEEN NO LARGE PUSHBACK ON THESE AT THIS POINT. THERE'S BEEN GOOD, PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION.

OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NOT A SIGNED DOCUMENT SO WE CAN'T SAY WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT TO ALL OF THESE AT THIS POINT, BUT WE'RE WORKING TOWARDS IT.

>> MAYOR JONES: AND TO THE EXTENT OTHER COMMUNITIES HAVE HAD EXPERIENCES WITH MUDS OF VARYING LEVELS OF POSITIVITY, CAN YOU SPEAK TO --O FOR THE LEGAL TEAM -- THE SITUATION WHERE WE MAY FIND OURSELVES IN WHERE WE DO NOT CONSENT TO THIS.

AND THEN IT MOVES FORWARD. AND THEN WHAT LEVERAGE HAS OTHER COMMUNITIES HAD IN ASKING FOR SOME OF THOSE CONDITIONS. CAN YOU HELP US LAY THAT OUT? I UNDERSTAND EACH OF THESE SITUATIONS ARE DIFFERENT BUT

[02:20:02]

ORIGINALLY ASKED FOR. >> SEGOVIA: WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT BUT MY INITIAL REACTION, MAYOR, IS ONCE IT GETS OUT OF THE REALM OF THE CITY AND IN TCEQ, REALLY NO

MUNICIPALITY WOULD HAVE VERY MUCH LEVERAGE AT THAT POINT. >> MAYOR JONES: THAT'S ALSO MY INSTINCT. I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU HAD SOME OTHER CASE STUDIES THAT WOULD HELP US, GIVEN MUDS ARE MORE PREVALENT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE. OKAY. THANK YOU.

LET ME -- THIS IS, AS YOU ALL WELL KNOW, NOT A NEW TOPIC.

THIS IS ONE THAT SAWS HAS REVIEWED -- THE PREVIOUS MAYOR, OBVIOUSLY WORKED ON THIS WHILE HE WAS ON THE SAWS BOARD, REVIEWED THAT ANALYSIS AS WELL.

AND WE FIND OURSELVES HERE MANY, MANY YEARS LATER. OBVIOUSLY AS MENTIONED HERE WE'RE TRYING TO BALANCE A COUPLE OF THINGS, WHICH IS NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE, UNFORTUNATELY COMPETING -- EXCUSE ME. OH.

YOU DIDN'T LET ME KNOW. OKAY. WELL, ALL RIGHT.

LET ME FINISH HERE. WE'RE BALANCING A COUPLE OF COMPETING THINGS HERE.

THE NEED OBVIOUSLY TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR WITH UNDERSTANDING WHEN WE ARE GOING TO HAVE LEVERAGE AND WHERE WE MAY NOT. WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER IN TERMS OF HOW THIS PROJECT MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN SOME OF THE OTHERS. BUT OF COURSE WE TAKE WITH A GRAIN OF SALT MANY OF THE POINTS YOU ALL RAISED HERE, WHICH IS FRANKLY THE EXPERIENCE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE THAT DEMONSTRATE A CHALLENGING OUTCOME, LET'S JUST SAY.

BEFORE I GO FURTHER, LET ME LET MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILWOMAN KAUR, PROVIDE

SOME COMMENTS. >> KAUR: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR COMING. THOSE OF YOU THAT SPOKE. I ACTUALLY LEARNED A LOT MORE ABOUT THIS AREA AND THIS ISSUE BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT ARE MADE. ERIK AND I WERE TALKING EARLIER ABOUT EVEN THE SMALL, NARROW PARTS OF THE STREET AND THE DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT MUST ALSO OCCUR.

YESTERDAY DURING B SESSION WE WERE TALKING A LOT ABOUT THE DRAINAGE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE THROUGHOUT THE CITY AS A WHOLE AND HOW WE ALREADY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH FUNDING TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE LAYERING ISSUES THAT COME, LIKE COUNCILMEMBER GALVAN MENTIONED, BECAUSE OF SUBURBAN SPRAWL. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE BEING JUDICIOUS AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD ON WHAT WE'RE INCENTIVIZING AND WHAT WE'RE NOT. I UNDERSTAND WE'RE STUCK BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE AND I THINK MOST OF YOU ALL KNOW THAT. WE WISH THAT WE COULD SAY, HEY, IF WE NEXT WEEK OR TWO WEEKS FROM NOW VOTE, DO NOT APPROVE OR DO NOT TAKE ACTION ON THIS THAT THIS WOULD BE DEAD AND THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE DEAD.

UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK ALL OF YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

THERE WILL PROBABLY STILL BE A MOVEMENT FORWARD. JUST SO WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE, COULD YOU HELP US EXPLAIN, AFTER THE SAWS NEGOTIATION PIECE, ASSUMING THAT SAWS SAYS THEY'RE NOT NEGOTIATING, WHAT HAPPENS AT THE TCEQ SPOT ON THAT CHART

THAT COUNCILWOMAN ALDERETE GAVITO WAS MENTIONING? >> ON SLIDE 6, WHAT WOULD

HAPPEN IF -- >> KAUR: SAY THAT -- ASSUMING SAWS AUDIO] THEY WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY BUILD UTILITIES ALL THE WAY OUT THERE, RIGHT?

>> IF SAWS WERE TO REACH AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER, THERE ARE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ALSO BUILT INTO STATE LAW REGARDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE TIME THAT SAWS WOULD NEED TO PROVIDE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SAWS WOULD BE DISCUSSING WITH THE DEVELOPER.

>> KAUR: SOLELY BASED ON ACTUALLY BUILDING OUT THEIR UTILITY TO SERVICE THIS

AREA. >> THAT'S THE AGREEMENT. IF NO AGREEMENT IS REACHED WITHIN THE 120 DAYS, THEN THE DEVELOPER WOULD GO TO TCEQ FOR CONSIDERATION.

>> KAUR: AND TCEQ COULD OR COULD NOT APPROVE THE MUD? >> THEY COULD CONSIDER CREATION OF THE MUD

>> KAUR: WHILE I UNDERSTAND THIS MEANS IF WE DON'T TAKE ACTION ON THIS IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS, WE MIGHT LOSE A LITTLE BIT OF OUR AUTHORITY FOR A SEAT AT THE TABLE. AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S A LITTLE GLIMMER OF HOPE THAT TCEQ DECIDES THEY DON'T WANT TO BE A PART OF THIS. I KNOW THE MAYOR IS LOOKING AT ME LIKE THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. BUT AT THE SAME TIME THERE'S THAT LITTLE HOPE. IF WE DON'T TRULY BELIEVE IN WHAT THIS IS DOING TO OUR COMMUNITY, THE POTENTIAL THREAT -- AND I READ THROUGH --H ALL THE ARTICLES, READ THROUGH THE SAWS' BRIEFING, READ THROUGH WHAT THE EDWARDS AQUIFER SAID.

IT'S TRICKY. TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER MUNGIA WAS SAYING, ENVIRONMENT IS

[02:25:04]

SO WHILE IT MAY NOT BE AFFECTING THE WATER AS DEMONSTRATED BY WHAT THE FAULTS AND THE SAWS SAID CURRENTLY BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT COULD HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE IN 30 YEARS. THAT BEING SAID, I DON'T SEE THE BENEFIT IN THE SITUATION OF THE FEW LET TCEQ MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. THE LAST THING I WANT TO ASK ABOUT THOSE PROTECTIONS, THAT COUNCILMAN WAS ASKING ABOUT THIS TOO.

IN THE LETTER WE GOT FROM SAWS, THERE WAS A LIST OF NINE ITEMS THAT WERE ALREADY NEGOTIATED VERSUS THE ONES THAT WE ARE SHOWN IN THE SLIDES.

THERE'S 15. DO THOSE NINE ITEMS INCLUDE 50% OPEN SPACE, 30% IMPERVIOUS COVER AND A RATING, THOSE WILL STILL STAY NO MATTER WHAT,

CORRECT? >> THE NINE THAT SAWS APPROVED, INCLUDING THE 50%, 30% IMPERVIOUS COVER. THERE ARE ACTUALLY TEN WITH THE SETTLEMENT.

BASICALLY I JUST DID A COMPILATION FOR THAT -- THOSE SLIDES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS. THERE IS SOME OVERLAP, FOR EXAMPLE THE CLASS A OPERATOR. THE SETTLEMENT WILL STAY AND THEN THE WATER CONNECTION, THOSE WILL ALSO STAY AS WELL. BUT I DID MENTION IN TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WOULD RUN WITH THE LAND.

THAT WOULD BE A PART OF THE DEED. >> KAUR: THAT WASN'T A CLEAR ANSWER TO ME. THE NINE AGREEMENTS AND THE SAWS, THOSE ARE GOING TO STAY NO MATTER WHAT IF WE DO THE MUD OR NOT. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY. THE NINE AGREEMENTS THAT SAWS HAS COME UP, ALREADY INCLUDES AN A OPERATOR AND IMPERVIOUS COVER, THOSE ARE GUARANTEES NO MATTER WHAT IN TERMS OF WHAT OTHER ACTION WE TAKE IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.

>> TWO OF THE NINE. >> KAUR: THOSE ARE TWO OF THE ONES.

THOSE ARE SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ONES. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S A GOOD OPERATOR. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IMPERVIOUS COVER IS BEING LIMITED. I UNDERSTAND WE'RE GIVING UP OUR LAND USE RIGHTS IF WE DON'T PARTICIPATE IN THE MUD. BUT I DO THINK THAT RIGHT NOW WE SHOULD JUST HOPE THAT WE CAN GO -- YOU ALL CAN GO ADVOCATE AND LOBBY TCEQ AND MAKE SURE THAT THE MAYOR REALLY DOESN'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

BUT I REALLY BELIEVE IF YOU GUYS GO CALL EVERY SINGLE STATE PERSON THAT YOU KNOW AND TRY TO GET THEM TO SEE THE POTENTIAL FOR NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR WATER THAT MAYBE THERE WOULD BE A CHANCE. THANKS, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR JONES: FOR ANDY OR FOR BRIDGETT. CAN YOU, JUST FOR HISTORICAL CONTEXT. AGAIN, ON THIS HOPE STRATEGY.

CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND IF THERE ARE SIMILAR APPLICATIONS THAT TCEQ HAS

REVIEWED, SIMILAR TO THIS ONE, AND HOW THOSE FARED? >> I'M NOT AWARE.

I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU FOR THAT, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY.

>> SEGOVIA: WE CAN TAKE A QUICK LOOK AND PROVIDE COUNCIL SOMETHING, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR JONES: IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH HOPE WE SHOULD PUT IN THAT APPROACH. AND THEN AS A RESULT OF THAT, WHAT CONDITIONS WE'RE ACTUALLY ABLE TO PUT IN PLACE. OKAY.

THANK YOU AGAIN. THERE'S A COUPLE OF DUE OUTS BOTH FOR THE LEGAL TEAM AND FOR THE STAFF THAT CAN HELP US PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL CONTEXT SO WE UNDERSTAND FULLY, YOU KNOW, BEFORE WE GO INTO THE VOTE ON THE 5TH OF FEBRUARY.

THANK YOU AGAIN TO EVERYBODY THAT TOOK THE TIME TO BE HERE AND APPRECIATE THE PARTICIPATION. THANK YOU. THE TIME IS NOW 11:41.

THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.