[ ITEMS ]
[00:00:44]
>> MAYOR JONES: THE TIME IS NOW 2:03 P.M. ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19TH, AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO BUDGET SESSION IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL ROLL.
>> CLERK: THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. THIS IS A MEETING THAT WILL BE DISCUSSION ON THE FY '27 PROPOSED BUDGET SCENARIOS --
ERIK. >> WALSH: THANK YOU, MAYOR.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS IS THE WORK SESSION WE TALKED ABOUT AND ADDED AFTER LAST THURSDAY'S CONVERSATION WITH THE PROPOSED BUDGET. THERE'S TWO PRIMARY SCENARIOS THAT WE'VE PREPARED FOR YOU. THE FIRST WOULD BE ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS OVER AND ABOVE WHAT'S IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET TO OFFSET OR ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR THE ADJUSTMENT ON THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.
AND THEN THE SECOND SCENARIO, WHICH WAS REQUESTED, WHICH WAS MOVE THE UTILIZATION OF THE UNUSED INCREMENT IN FISCAL YEAR '28 AND MOVE IT UP TO '27, AND WHAT TYPE OF IMPACT THAT HAS ON REDUCTIONS THAT WOULD
BE NEED -- >> MAYOR JONES: SORRY, ERIK.
>> MAYOR JONES: WANTED TO MAKE SURE. WE WEREN'T AWARE THAT THEY WERE FILMING. THANK YOU. OKAY.
THAT'S COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ'S STAFF. OKAY.
GO AHEAD, ERIK, PLEASE. >> WALSH: I FORGOT WHERE I WAS AT, MAYOR.
SO THE TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT WE'LL LAY OUT TO YOU, I'LL TELL YOU THAT WE WORKED OVER THE WEEKEND TO DEVELOP THE OPTIONS FOR THE ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS, AND FREDDY'S GOING TO WALK THROUGH THEM.
WE'VE GOT LISTINGS IN THERE, AND THEN ALL THE DEPARTMENTS ARE HERE TO HELP KIND OF IDENTIFY WHAT POTENTIAL IMPACTS ARE IN CASE THERE'S FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS. SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU, FREDDY.
THANKS. >> MARTINEZ: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MY NAME'S FREDDY MARTINEZ -- MANAGER TALKED ABOUT IS ON ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS TO BALANCE THE BUDGET.
YOU RECALL DURING THE PROPOSED PRESENTATION ON AUGUST 13TH THAT THE CITY COUNCIL REQUESTED TWO ADDITIONAL SCENARIOS FOR THE '27 PROPOSED BUDGET AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE TODAY, THE FIRST BEING ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS TO OFFSET THE PROPOSED INCREASE TO THE CITY'S PROPERTY TAX RATE, AND SECONDLY, MOVING THE PROPERTY TAX REQUEST PROPOSED FROM FY '28 TO FY ' '27 REDUCED, BUT DOES NOT IMPACT MANDATED OR PRIORITY SERVICES FLTS AND IF YOU ALSO MOVED ELIGIBLE EXPENSES TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET AND OTHER FUNDS. THE PROPOSED BUDGET CURRENTLY USES AVAILABLE PROPERTY TAX KA TAASTY, AND FINALLY, IT INCREASES FEES TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE COSTS OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED TO THE COMMUNITY.
YOU WILL RECOGNIZE THIS SLIDE FROM LAST WEEK, HOW WE PROPOSED THE AUGUST 13TH -- BUDGET ON AUGUST 13TH AND BALANCE OVER TWO YEARS, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET INCLUDES $9.6 MILLION IN SPENDING CUTS, $30.4 MILLION IN ADJUSTED FEES AND OTHER REVENUES AND THEN THAT PROPERTY TAX CAPACITY THAT I MENTIONED IN THERE AT 90.2 MILLION.
'29 AND BEYOND. I WANTED TO SHARE THIS IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE BY DISTRICT. THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE EFFECT THAT THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET BY CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT. OVERALL, THIS REFLECTS A CITYWIDE MONTHLY INCREASE OF APPROXIMATELY $2.95 PER MONTH ON AN AVERAGE KNOWN RESIDENT'S HOMESTEAD OF $25,356. MOVING ON TO THE FIRST SCENARIO, THIS IS THE
[00:05:06]
FIRST ALTERNATIVE THAT REFLECTS NOT USING ANY AVAILABLE PROPERTY TAX CAPACITY. UNDER THIS SCENARIO, WE WOULD IMPLEMENT ANOTHER 75 MILLION IN REDUCTIONS OVER TWO YEARS FOR A GRAND TOTAL OF 164.6 MILLION IN SPENDING CUTS. WHILE WE MAINTAIN THE 34.4 MILLION IN NEW ADJUSTED FEES WE WOULD END FY '28 WITH A PROJECTED BALANCE OF $41 MILLION. THESE NEXT THREE OR FOUR SLIDES ARE GOING TO ILLUSTRATE THE ADDITIONAL SPENDING CUTS OF THE 75 MILLION THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BALANCE THE BUDGET -- AUDIO] -- TAX CAPACITY AS CURRENTLY IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET, SO YOU'LL HERE IN 3-1-1, IT WOULD ELIMINATE THE QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM.THERE'S A COUPLE IN ANIMAL CARE SERVICE, ELIMINATING THE TRAINING PROGRAM AND THE CASA TEAM. WE WOULD DO ANOTHER TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS IN DELEGATE -- EXCUSE ME, IN DISCRETIONARY DELEGATE AGENCY FUNDING, CUT THAT IN HALF.
WITHIN DOWNTOWN OPERATIONS WE WOULD -- CODE, WE WOULD ELIMINATE THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT TEAM IN FY '28. THERE'S SEVERAL THERE FOR DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, CLOSING THE ADDITIONAL PART-TIME -- THERE'S THREE IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET CURRENTLY.
E LEGAL LIMB NATE THE REMAINING FUNDING FOR CAFÉCOLLEGE, ELIMINATING SNAWKS -- SCENARIO WE WOULD ELIMINATE THE SENIOR ASSISTANT VOLUNTEER EXCHANGE SERVICES, AS WELL AS CITY CARES AND CHILDCARE FINANCES, AS WELL AS THE AMBASSADOR PROGRAM AND SENIOR SERVICES FINANCIAL COUNSELORS. THIS SCENARIO WOULD REQUIRE IN '28 AN ADDITIONAL OVERTIME OF FIRE OVER TIME IN 4 MILLION.
THERE IS ONE HEALTH ITEM WHICH WOULD ELIMINATE THE HEALTHY BEXAR COUNTY IMPROVEMENT PLAN -- WE'D ELIMINATE A CUSTOMER ANALYTIC SOFTWARE PROGRAM, ELIMINATE THE INTERLIBRARY LOAN PROGRAM, ELIMINATE GENERAL FUND SUPPORT FOR THE BOOK FESTIVAL OF 150,000, WE WOULD ELIMINATE ADULT SERVICES AT THE LIBRARY AND PROGRAMMING, WHICH WE WOULD REDUCE HOURS AT THE LIBRARY. WE WOULD REDUCE THE MINOR REPAIR PROGRAM OF 4.7 IN TWAICT, AND THEN THERE'S SEVERAL OUTSIDE CONTRACTS HERE THAT WE WOULD REDUCE OR ELIMINATE AND THOSE INCLUDE BIOMED SA, DREAM VOICE, LISC.
SCENARIO FOR THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WHERE WE WOULD ELIMINATE PROGRAMMING AT COMMUNITY CENTERS SUCH AS DANCE MUSICS, ARTS, EDUCATION AND CREATIVE PROGRAMMING, ELIMINATE CENTRALIZED PROGRAMMING AT PARKS FACILITY.
DECEMBER YOUTH PROGRAM, PARKS -- PROGRAM AND THEIR VOLUNTEER SERVICES PROGRAM.
YOU ALSO SEE THERE THAT WE WOULD ALSO BE PROPOSED TO ELIMINATE UNDER THIS SCENARIO SEVERAL FITNESS AND WELLNESS AND TENNIS PROGRAMS, AND SUPPORT TO THE WILLIE HEIGHTS COMPLEX. AND THEN UNDER PLANNING, WE WOULD ELIMINATE SUPPORT FOR THE SAN ANTONIO AREA SUBAREA PLANNING, A COUPLE UNDER POLICE WOULD BE REDUCING OVERTIME AND CALLBACK OR PAST SCHEDULED SHIFT. WE WOULD REDUCE NONSERVICE ALLEY MAINTENANCE IN PUBLIC WORKS IN '28, AND WE WOULD REDUCE PAVEMENT MARKINGS ACROSS THE CITY, 3.4 MILLION IN EACH YEAR.
THE FINAL ONES IS CONSOLIDATION OF THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TO PUBLIC WORKS, WHICH WOULD LEAD TO THE REDUCTION OF A COUPLE POSITIONS, AND THEN FINE ELIMINATING THE WORLD HERITAGE OFFICE, TRANSFERRING THOSE OPERATIONS TO THE SPANISH GOVERNOR'S PALACE AND THE WORLD HERITAGE CENTER TO THE ARTS DEPARTMENT. IN TOTAL OVER TWO YEARS THERE'S $75 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL CUTS AND IT WOULD IMPACT 171
POSITIONS, 132 IN '27, AND 39 IN '28. >> WALSH: BEFORE YOU MOVE FORWARD, LET ME JUST INTERJECT HERE, THE AREAS THAT YOU SAW -- THAT YOU SEE HERE FOR THIS SCENARIO ARE COMING OUT OF THE OTHER CITY SERVICES BUCKET THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AS A GROUP EARLIER IN THE YEAR.
WE HAD MANDATED, WE HAD CITY PRIORITY SERVICES, AND THEN WE HAD EVERYTHING ELSE WE DO. SO WE TRIED TO FOCUS ON STAYING AWAY FROM THOSE MANDATED AND COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES, AND FOCUS ON THE OTHER BUCKET. I MEAN, UNDOUBTEDLY, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS ON HERE THAT CAUSE ME SOME CONCERN, BUT WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO FOCUS AND BE CONSISTENT HOW WE APPROACHED IT IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
AND JUST FOCUS ON THE OTHER CITY SERVICES. THANKS, FREDDY.
[00:10:07]
>> MARTINEZ: SO MOVING ON TO THE SECOND SCENARIO, WHICH OFFERS AN OPTION USING ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX CAPACITY IN FY '27. THIS WOULD PROVIDE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE OF 127.4 MILLION COMPARED TO THE PROPOSED BUDGET OF 90.2 MILLION. THIS WOULD LOWER THE AMOUNT OF REQUIRED REDUCTIONS FROM THE 89.6 MILLION TO 57.6 MILLION AND LEAVE AN ENDING BALANCE OF 56.9 MILLION IN '28. WE WOULD BE ABLE TO RESTORE THE REDUCTIONS ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDES. SO UNDER THIS SCENARIO, WE WOULD NOT DO THE HIRING FREEZE IN '27 AND '28.
WE CAN RESTORE SOME RESCUED PARTNER INITIATIVE PROGRAM AND THE VACANT ACS ATTENDANT IN ANIMAL CARE SERVICES. RESTORE THE PRO POTIONS PROPOSED TO BE REDUCED IN CODE, RESTORE EVENT FUNDING FOR DOWNTOWN OPERATIONS AS WELL AS THE EXPLORER PROGRAM AT FIRE.
WE WOULD EXPLORE -- TEAM AT HEALTH. RESTORE THE TUITION REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM THAT'S IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR HUMAN RESOURCES, RESTORE THE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR THE SAN ANTONIO EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP OF 2.2 MILLION, RESTORE THE FULL FUNDING FOR BOTANICAL GARDENS AS THEY HAVE TODAY, RESTORE SOME SPECIAL INITIATIVES OVERTIME FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THEN WE WOULD PUT BACK THE 10.6 MILLION THAT'S CURRENTLY PROPOSED TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET AND RESTORE IT TO STREET MAINTENANCE IN THE GENERAL FUND. WE WOULD RESTORE THE TWO POSITIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE REDUCED IN PUBLIC WORKS.
OFFICE FOR VARIOUS PROGRAMS THAT TAKE PLACE IN THEIR DEPARTMENT.
ALL IN ALL, BETWEEN THESE TWO SLIDES, A TOTAL OVER TWO YEARS IT RESTORE REDUCTIONS AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET IS 26.3 MILLION.
SO WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND AS THE MANAGER SAID, WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM ALL THE DEPARTMENTS HERE TO HELP ANSWER QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU, FREDDY.
FOR THE -- DO YOU -- THE -- WHAT THE TAXIM PACT WOULD BE, DO YOU HAVE THAT -- THE TACT IMPACT WOULD BE
TTHE TAX IMPACT WOULD BE AS WELL. >> WALSH: WE DON'T HAVE THAT IN THE PRESENTATION. WE CAN CALCULATE IT
QUICKLY AND GET IT TO THE COUNCIL THIS AFTERNOON. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. WHAT WE'RE DOING ESSENTIALLY -- AND I DON'T SEE THE SAME -- SO IT'S STILL THE 30 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL FEES, IT'S 8.3% INCREASE, THOUGH, IN ONE YEAR VERSUS YET ACROSS THE TWO, CORRECT?
>> MARTINEZ: YES. WE'LL HAVE TO RECALCULATE THAT, BUT, YES, IT'S
ABOUT 8%. >> MAYOR JONES: BECAUSE LAST TIME WHEN WE DID THIS, WE TALKED ABOUT TAKING WHATEVER THE INCREMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN '28 -- '27 INCREMENT, TAKING IT TO '28. SO IF YOU JUST DID IT IN '27, IT SOUND T IT WAS GOING TO BE THE SAME NUMBER OF 8.3.
BUT, YES, HELPING OUT -- VERSUS THE 171 IN THE FIRST SCENARIO, WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF
POSITIONS ELIMINATED? >> MARTINEZ: IN THE -- YOU MEAN IN THE FIRST --
>> MAYOR JONES: IN THE FIRST SCENARIO YOU TALK ABOUT A TOTAL OF 171 POSITIONS WOULD BE ELIMINATED. I DON'T SEE THAT SAME LEVEL OF ANALYSIS FOR THE SECOND SCENARIO, SO WHAT IS THE NUMBER FOR THE
SECOND SCENARIO. >> MARTINEZ: WE WILL GET THAT FOR YOU.
>> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> TATE: JUSTINA TATE, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, SO THE INCREASE TO THE PROPERTY TAX RATE FROM '26 TO '27, IF WE WOULD TAKE THE SECOND SCENARIO, IS ABOUT EIGHT-POINT 7%.
>> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. SO IT'S HIGHER. >> TATE: IT'S A LITTLE
BIT HIGHER. >> MAYOR JONES: WHY IS IT A LITTLE BIT HIGHER.
>> TATE: SO THIS IS -- >> WALSH: IT'S HIGHER -- I'M SORRY, JUSTINA.
>> TATE: GO AHEAD. >> WALSH: IT'S HIGHER BECAUSE YOU'RE ADDING THE TWO PERCENTAGES OVER TWO YEARS, BUT IF YOU MOVE THAT ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENT IN THE FIRST YEAR, YOU'RE TAKING A PERCENTAGE CHANGE.
SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN JUST ADDING THE TWO PERCENTAGES.
>> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. OKAY. LAST TIME WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT IT, THE SIMPLE EXPLANATION WAS JUST TAKING IT ALL IN ONE YEAR, BUT YOU'RE SAYING IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT --
>> WALSH: IT IS. YOU CAN'T ADD THE TWO PERCENTAGES, YOU HAVE TO
CALCULATE THE PERCENTAGE CHANGE. >> MAYOR JONES: SO IT
GOES TO 8.7? >> WALSH: YES, MA'AM. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. AND FREDDY, THE AD ASSUMPTION CAUSE, IS THAT $30 MILLION IN THE FEES -- WHERE ARE YOU IN TERMS OF COMPLETING THAT ANALYSIS OF ADDITIONAL HEAD ROOM FOR MORE FEES THAT COULD BE TAKEN, RIGHT? I KNOW YOU WERE DOING
[00:15:02]
SOME ANALYSIS IN TERMS OF OUR COMPARISON OF DEVELOPER FEES, OURS VERSUS IN OTHER CITIES. SO UNDERSTANDING IF THAT NUMBER ULTIMATELY AT THE END OF THIS COULD BE CLOSER TO 40, 45, RIGHT, DEPENDING ON YOUR -- ON THE REVENUE MANUAL, BUT DO WE -- DO WE ANTICIPATE ADDITIONAL CHANGES, DO WE THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE A CAP IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL FEES?>> MARTINEZ: WE'RE LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL REVENUES BASED OFF THE CONVERSATION FROM YESTERDAY AND LAST WEEK, SO WHEN WE GET FURTHER ALONG IN THE PROCESS, SOME OF THOSE WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE FOLLOW-UP MEMO FOR YESTERDAY, BUT WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK ON
THOSE. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. >> WALSH: I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO SHIFT A LOT, MAYOR, BECAUSE -- TALK ABOUT SPEEDING, WE TALKED ABOUT BOOTING FEES, THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN MENTIONED LAST WEEK AND THIS WEEK, SO THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONAL THAT -- REVENUE THAT WE COULD BRING BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO
BE A HUGE DOLLAR AMOUNT. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR, AGAIN, THE NUMBERS, FREDDY. IT'S REALLY HARD TO ACCEPT SOME OF THESE.
SOME OF THESE I WOULD WELCOME ACTUALLY UNDERSTANDING, IF THERE'S THINGS WE MIGHT WANT TO PURSUE AT LARGE, JUST BECAUSE THEY MAY MAKE SENSE, BUT UNDERSTANDING OF SOME OF THE RISKS INVOLVED WITH THESE WOULD BE -- WOULD BE HELPFUL. FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT CONSOLIDATING THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT INTO PUBLIC WORKS OR, FOR EXAMPLE, MOVING THE WORLD HERITAGE OFFICE FUNCTIONS INTO THE ARTS DEPARTMENT, THOSE SEEM LIKE EFFICIENCIES WE MIGHT WANT TO EXPLORE IF WE'RE ABLE TO PRESERVE THE FUNCTIONS, SO I'D WELCOME UNDERSTANDING IN EACH OF THESE SCENARIOS THE RISKS, AS YOU ALL SEE IT, AS A RESULT OF THOSE -- THOSE CUTS.
I'D ALSO WELCOME UNDERSTANDING THE -- IF THERE ARE, FOR EXAMPLE, AN ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR THE READY TO WORK FUNDING TO POTENTIALLY -- WHEN YOU LOOKED AT CUTTING THE FUNDING FOR THE CAFÉCOLLEGE, IS THAT -- WOULD THAT ALSO POTENTIALLY BE ELIGIBLE FOR READY TO WORK FUNDS,
BASED ON THEIR CAREER GUIDANCE EFFORTS? >> TATE: MAYOR, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.
AS WELL AS YOUR ARTICULATION OF THE RISKS OF EACH OF THESE THINGS.
OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER GALVAN?
>> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, FREDDY, FOR THE -- WE HAVE SOME OF THIS DUE DILIGENCE DONE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND, RIGHT, WHAT ARE WE REALLY POTENTIALLY SACRIFICING HERE. IF WE DON'T INCREASE OUR REVENUES IN SOME WAY. THIS IS A BIG CONCERN, A LOT OF RESIDENTS WHO REACHED OUT TO MY OFFICE HAVE ASKED US, LET'S FIND A WAY TO SEE IF WE CAN CUT DEEPER. SO HERE'S WHAT THE CUTS WOULD LOOK LIKE IS REALLY CRITICAL FOR ME TO ABLE TO BE TRANSPARENT WITH MY DISTRICT RESIDENTS.
ULTIMATELY, THOUGH, I THINK LOOKING AT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHILE I CAN APPRECIATE SOME OF THEM AND UNDERSTAND THE RISK OF THEM, I THINK WE'RE CROSSING A WHOLE BUNCH OF RED LINES HERE, RIGHT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SENIOR SERVICE MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, WE KNOW THERE'S A BIG ISSUE IN OUR CITY, I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS COME TO COMMUNITY HEALTH ABOUT FINANCIAL ABUSE HERE IN OUR CITY PARTICULARLY AMONGST OUR CITIES SO THE IDEA OF SAYING WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND NOT TRY TO PREVENT THOSE THINGS OF HA HAPPENING WITHIN OUR SENIOR CITIZENS, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY WE WOULD DO THAT.
LOOKING AT THE PARKS, TALKING ABOUT AN INCREDIBLE SLEW OF PARKS PROGRAM THAT WE WOULD LOSE TO NOT ONLY STAFFING BUT VOLUNTEER SERVICES, SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAMS, ALL THE CULTURAL PROGRAMS IS JUST VERY -- I DON'T THINK IT'S WHERE OUR COMMUNITY WOULD WANT US TO BE AT A POSITION.
OF COURSE, IF THERE WAS -- TALKING ABOUT -- AND, OF COURSE, WE'D LIKE TO SEE SOME OF THE INFORMATION ON THE HI HIRE RATE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO $2 A MONTH, IN SOME DISTRICTS $2 A YEAR IN SOME DISTRICTS WE CAN HAVE MORE POTENTIAL DISCUSSIONS, LIBRARY LOAN SERVICES, I THINK THESE ARE THINGS OUR RESIDENTS EXPECT AS A BARE MINIMUM, NOT AS ANYTHING AD ADDITIONAL SUPPORT. THESE ARE THINGS -- EVEN PUBLIC WORKS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, I COULD JUST NOT TELL MY RESIDENTS, GO BACK TO THEM AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T DO 20 CENTS HERE TO YOUR MONTHLY BILL BECAUSE I JUST DON'T WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS CROSSWALK'S EVEN COVERED ANYMORE.
[00:20:04]
TO ME, THAT'S JUST TOO FAR. THAT BEING SAID, I ALSO THINK IF WE'RE LOOKING AT ANY INCREASES HERE, AND WE'RE STILL HAVING THE CONVERSATION, LOOKING TO -- WHICH ONE'S WE'RE COMFORTABLE IN CUTTING IN SOME WAY, LOOKING AT THE -- APPRECIATE THAT. ON SLIDE 11, I THINK SOME OF THEM WE CAN STILL DISCUSS AND GO THROUGH. WHAT I DON'T SEE HERE, RIGHT, AND MAYBE -- I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY MAYBE SOME OF THEM WOULDN'T BE HERE, I DON'T SEE THE LIBRARY ONE ON HERE, I DON'T SEE THE DARNER [INDISCERNIBLE] THOSE ARE KEY PRIORITIES FOR MYSELF AND MY COMMUNITY TO MAINTAIN, SO IF WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT RESTORING ANY CUTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT MAKING, THAT WOULD BE SOME OF MY PRIORITIES ALONG WITH EXTRA INCREASE WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH OUR COMMUNITY, I WOULD PREFER IT BEING BEEFING UP OTHER RESOURCES THAT ARE REALLY CRITICAL. ACS, RESPONSE TIMES, TALK ABOUT SOME OF THOSE SERVICES. -- IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK PEOPLE TO PAY MORE, I THINK THEY WOULD EXPECT STRONGER SERVICES, NOT JUST A LEVEL OF MAINTENANCE.SO, YOU KNOW, I STILL APPRECIATE THIS AND I'M GRATEFUL TO HAVE IT.
WOULD AGAIN, WANT TO ECHO THE MAYOR'S REQUEST FOR THE DATA ON WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE ON AN AVERAGE RATE TO OUR RESIDENTS, BUT I DON'T -- I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE DEEPER CUTS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO DO A BIT MORE DUE DILIGENCE ON SOME OF THESE -- THE RESTORATION THAT WE GO ANY FURTHER FROM WHAT WE CURRENTLY PROPOSED UPON LAST WEEK.
THOSE ARE ALL MY COMMENTS FOR NOW. THANK YOU, MAYOR.
>> MAYOR JONES: PLEASE. . >> TATE: JUST A FOLLOW-UP, CAFÉCOLLEGE IS MORE HELPING PEOPLE TO GET INTO COLLEGE, SO IT
WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GO INTO READY TO WORK. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT SCENARIO 1 AND SCENARIO 2, WHEN IT LOOKS AT -- ON SLIDE 11, WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT THE REDUCTIONS RESTORED, SOME OF THOSE REDUCTIONS ARE NOT REFLECTED, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE FIRST SCENARIO, SO I DON'T WANT TO MAKE ANY ASSUMPTIONS.
SO, FOR EXAMPLE, BOTANICAL GARDEN, FOR EXAMPLE, IT'S RESTORED IN THE SECOND SCENARIO BUT IT'S NOT TAKEN IN THE FIRST SCENARIO, SO I WANT
TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE. >>
>> VILLAGOMEZ: WE ARE HIGHLIGHTING THE ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS OVER AND ABOVE WHAT WE HAD INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET THAT WE REVIEWED YESTERDAY. SO THOSE ITEMS THAT WE'RE RESTORING ARE ON THE REDUCTIONS THAT WE PRESENTED YESTERDAY, NOT ONLY THE ADDITIONAL ONES
THAT WE'RE PRESENTING TODAY. >> WALSH: AND MAYBE -- MAYBE MORE TO THE POINT, YOU'RE SUGGESTING TO ELIMINATE THE REMAINING FUNDING IS ON OUR AMENDMENT LIST. SO WE'RE KEEPING TRACK OF -- AS YOU GUYS TALK ABOUT THINGS YOU WANT TO RESTORE, LIKE THE DARNER SENIOR CENTER AND/OR THE SUGGESTIONS YOU HAD YESTERDAY, MAYOR, TO -- AMENDMENT LIST, WHICH WE CAN SHARE WITH YOU ALL KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT BY THE END OF THIS WEEK BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS YOU'VE HAD SO FAR. THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF SUGGESTED SHUNS, AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE KEEPING TRACK OF THAT. .
>> MAYOR JONES: YEP. THANK YOU, ERIK. SO ON THE FIRST SCENARIO, THEN, JUST KEEPING WITH THAT EXAMPLE, ON THE FIRST SCENARIO, EVEN WITH THE ADDITIONAL 75 MILLION, IT'S STILL A MILLION DOLLARS TO THE
BOTANICAL GARDEN OR NOT? >> WALSH: YES, MA'AM. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY.
THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER ALDARETE GAVITO?
>> GAVITO: THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR Y'ALL'S HARD WORK ON THIS.
I KNOW THAT THIS ISN'T EASY. THIS WASN'T EASY, AND I KNOW THAT THESE ARE REALLY DIFFICULT DECISIONS, BUT I DO APPRECIATE YOU ALL SHOWING US THE WORK -- THAT WE'RE NOT RAISING PROPERTY TAXES ON OUR RESIDENTS, RESIDENTS BECAUSE THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO.
I KNOW EVEN THOUGH THESE ARE TOUGH DECISIONS TO MAKE INTERNALLY, THE IMPACT TO SO MANY RESIDENTS IS ALSO SOMETHING WE REALLY NEED TO KEEP IN MIND. THE ONE THING I WAS -- AND I'M STILL PROCESSING AND STILL LOOKING AT THE INFORMATION, SO I MIGHT HAVE MORE QUESTIONS LATER, BUT THE ONE THING I WANTED TO ASK YOU ALL RIGHT NOW IS I'M CURIOUS ON SOME OF THESE, LIKE THE -- ELIMINATES LIBRARY ADULT SERVICES AND PROGRAMMING. HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE TAKED ADVANTAGE OF THAT TO BEGIN WITH? YOU KNOW, IS IT FIVE, IS IT 500? I'M CURIOUS FOR A COUPLE OF THESE, LIKE MAYBE ELIMINATES FITNESS, WELLNESS, ATHLETIC AND TENNIS PROGRAMS. HOW MANY STUDENTS WERE TAKING PLACE IN THERE? SO NOT NECESSARILY SPECIFIC TO THOSE, BUT JUST THESE PROGRAMS IN GENERAL, HOW MANY RESIDENTS WERE TAKING
[00:25:03]
PLACE -- BECAUSE I WILL SAY, OUT OF ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS I'VE BEEN AT, U I'VE NEVER HAD SOMEONE COME UP TO ME AND SAY I NEED ADULT SERVICES LEARNING AT THE LIBRARY. YOU KNOW, I NEED TENNIS CAMPS. YOU KNOW, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING I'M HEARINGRESIDENTS ASK FOR. >> [INDISCERNIBLE] THE LIBRARY DIRECTOR AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION. THERE ARE ABOUT 40,000 PEOPLE UTILIZING ADULT SERVICES EVERY YEAR FOR THE LIBRARY.
>> GAVITO: OKAY. >> AND SO OUT OF THESE -- HELPING OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS WITH THEIR [INDISCERNIBLE], WITH THEIR JOB SEARCH, GED CLASSES, ALSO CITIZENSHIP EXAMS.
>> GAVITO: OKAY. >> SO ALL OF THAT SUPPORT COMES UNDER ADULT
SERVICES. >> GAVITO: AWESOME. THANK YOU.
BUT I THINK IN GENERAL, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE -- THE NUMBERS, I GUESS, OF RESIDENTS IMPACTED ON SOME OF THESE LINE ITEMS, I THINK, IN
GENERAL IS REALLY WHERE I'M GOING. >> RELATIVE TO LINE ITEM ON FITNESS, WE HAVE MORE THAN 6400 DLASES THAT ARE SERVING OVER 72,000 PARTICIPANTS. IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE, THERE IS -- SOME OF THOSE CLASSES ARE SPECIALIZED SO WE COLLECT A FEE.
SO THEN THAT WILL BE LOSS OF REVENUE, AN ADDITIONAL $16,000 IN ADDITION TO
THE REDUCTIONS LISTS THERE. >> GAVITO: YEAH.
AND I THINK SOME OF THAT -- THANK YOU, HOMER.
SOME OF THAT COLOR IS SO -- AND CONTEXT IS SO HELPFUL FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT ALTHOUGH IT'S ONE LINE ITEM, WHAT THAT ACTUALLY WOULD MEAN IN TERMS OF IMPACT TO RESIDENTS. LIKE, YOU KNOW, NOT ONLY THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS IMPACTED, BUT, YOU KNOW, AS WAS MENTIONED WITH THE LIBRARY, IT'S HELPING PEOPLE WITH RESUME BUILDING OR THAT KIND OF STUFF IS HELPFUL. I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S WAYS THAT WE CAN CONSOLIDATE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, YOU KNOW, AND STREAMLINE THE WORK, THAT IS AN EXERCISE I FEEL THAT WE SHOULD CONSTANTLY BE LOOKING AT, JUST AS A BIG ORGANIZATION. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I -- THE OTHER QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS, YOU KNOW, LOOKING INTERNALLY AT OUR OWN HIERARCHY, ARE THERE OTHER -- INSTEAD OF LIKE THESE SERVICES AND PROGRAMS TO RESIDENTS, ARE THERE OTHER WAYS THAT WE CAN ELIMINATE THE BUDGET MORE SO INTERNALLY? I THINK THAT Y'ALL LISTED OUT MAYBE SOME ANALYSTS THAT WE MAY NOT NEED OR THAT KIND OF STUFF.
I'M CURIOUS WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE INSTEAD OF CUTTING RESIDENT PROGRAMS, CUTTING INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONAL INEFFICIENCIES MORE SO.
BUT THOSE ARE ALL MY COMMENTS RIGHT NOW. I'M REALLY LOOKING AT THAT IMPACT. OH, ACTUALLY ONE MORE, ON CCDO, ELIMINATE DOWNTOWN EVENT ACTIVATION FOR 2.2 MILLION OVER THOSE TWO YEARS, I MEAN, ISN'T THAT WHAT CENTRO DOES? WHY ARE WE DOING -- I MEAN, CENTRO DOES A GREAT
JOB OF ACTIVATING DOWNTOWN. >> SO PRIMARILY WHAT THIS FUNDING DOES IS IT SUPPORTS LOGISTICS FOR MAJOR DOWNTOWN EVENTS LIKE NEW YEAR'S EVE, WHEN WE HOST FINAL FOURS, THE SAN ANTONIO MARATHON, THERE'S A LOT OF STAFF WORK THAT GOES INTO COORDINATING THE LOGISTICS ON THOSE TYPES OF EVENTS, AND SO THAT IS PRIMARILY WHAT IT IS.
IT'S SEPARATE FROM, LIKE, THE ACTIVATION TYPE EVENTS THAT CENTRO
HOSTS. >> GAVITO: OKAY. AND I DO THINK -- AND I'M SORRY TO BRING THIS TO ERIK, WE HAD A CITY-CENTERED EVENT JULY 4TH AT WOODLAWN LAKE PARK BUT WE WERE ALSO GIVING TO JULY 4TH
DOWNTOWN. >> SO FOR THAT EVENT WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY FUND IT FINANCIALLY BUT WE PROVIDED SOME LO JIS CAL SUPPORT LIKE STREET CLOSURES AND THINGS LIKE THAT BECAUSE IT WAS A CENTRO EVENT.
>> GAVITO: I THINK IF WE CAN SHORE THOSE THINGS UP, I THINK CENTRO DOES A WONDERFUL JOB ACTIVATING DOWNTOWN. BUT I THINK DUPLICATIVE SERVICES IS SOMETHING I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT ELIMINATING.
AGAIN, THIS LOOKS BLEAK, BUT I DO THINK IT'S A GREAT START, AND HOW WE NEED TO BE MORE EFFICIENT IS BEST. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILWOMAN, DAVID MCCARY, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU PROBABLY WANT TO MAKE A NOTE OF, FOR LIBRARIES WHAT'S PROPOSED IN THIS PART OF IT IS 53 POSITIONS.
ADULT LEARNING JUST REMOVING THAT IS OVER $5 MILLION.
SAME THING FOR PARKS, YOU'RE NOW LOOKING AT OVER $11 MILLION WITH AN
IMPACT TO ANOTHER 80 PLUS COWORKERS. >> GAVITO: AGREE.
>> MCCARY: -- WITHIN THESE SCENARIOS. SO I WANTED TO LET YOU
[00:30:02]
KNOW THAT WE'RE THOROUGH AS TO WHAT WAS ACTUALLY MANDATED VERSUS, YOUKNOW -- >> GAVITO: THE OTHER CITY SERVICES.
>> MCCARY: YES, MA'AM. >> GAVITO: TOTALLY. AND I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THAT CONTEXT, DAVID. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR, IF WE CAN HAVE THAT CONTEXT ON SOME OF THESE LINE ITEMS, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST SEEING LINE ITEMS. BUT IF WE'RE SEEING THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS IMPACTED BY SOME OF THESE LINE ITEMS OR THE NUMBER OF CITY POSITIONS IMPACTED BY SOME OF THESE LINE ITEMS, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL CONTEXT FOR US. AWESOME. THANK YOU.
THOSE ARE ALL MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU.
[INDISCERNIBLE] ERIK? >> WALSH: WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO PUT THIS TOGETHER, SO WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR TODAY IS WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO PURSUE ALTERNATIVE 1 OR ALTERNATIVE 2 SO THAT WE CAN GO DO ALL THAT RISK ASSESSMENT AND IMPACTS. WE DID NOT HAVE TIME TO DO THAT OVER THE LAST SIX DAYS. SO IN PARTICULAR, I'D KIND OF LIKE TO KNOW FROM THE COUNCIL WHICH WAY IS THE SHIP GOING? IS IT -- ARE WE GOING -- ARE WE GOING PROPOSED BUDGET OR ARE WE GOING ALTERNATIVE, ARE WE DOING SCENARIO 1, SPHAIR ROW 2? ARE WE GOING TO DO A MIXTURE OF SOMETHING? AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I NEED TO HEAR TODAY, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO CREATE PARALLEL BUDGET PROCESSES. WE HAVE TOO MANY WORK SESSIONS THAT WE'RE PLANNING, AND IT'S GOING TO GET REALLY CONFUSING, SO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO FOCUS ON AND IF YOU ALL ARE INTERESTED IN SOME OF THE CUTS, BUT NOT ALL OF THEM TO MAKE MAYBE SOME IMPACT ON THE TAX RATE OR ALTERNATIVELY, ARE YOU LOOKING TO DO MORE THAN WHAT WAS PROPOSED IN THE TAX RATE? [INDISCERNIBLE] GENERALLY SPEAKING, THAT'S THE GUIDANCE, FRANKLY, WE NEED AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE WE DID NOT DO THAT COMPLETE ANALYSIS IN
SIX DAYS, SO... >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. THAT'S HELPFUL.
THANK YOU, ERIK. COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN? >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, ERIK. I GO -- I WANT YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SCENARIO THAT DOES NOT LOSE PEOPLE'S JOBS. IF THIS COUNCIL DOES MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SCENARIO THAT LOSES 171 JOBS, I WOULD LIKE THE NAME AND DEPARTMENTS OF THOSE 171 PEOPLE AND THE DISTRICT THAT THEY LIVE IN BEFORE WE DO THAT. I WANT THIS TO BE A FIRM REALITY, BUT RIGHT NOW, I AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH ANYTHING OF THAT COURSE. I WILL GO OUT TO THE MEMBERS OF MY DISTRICT AND EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE USING THAT VARIABLE TAX RATE. I THINK ONCE WE EXPLAIN TO THE FACT, LIBRARY -- YOU'RE THE HOT TOPIC. THEY DO NOT WANT THEIR LIBRARIES CLOSED.
AND EVEN WITH THIS, WE'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOME NEGOTIATIONS TO MAKE SURE OUR LIBRARIES CAN STAY OPEN. SO I THINK TO MY RESIDENTS, ARE THEY THRILLED ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES? NO, THEY'RE NOT THRILLED ABOUT INCREASED PROPERTY TAXES? BUT DO THEY WANT THEIR LIBRARIES TO CLOSE? NO, THEY DEFINITELY DO NOT WANT THEIR LIBRARIES TO CLOSE. SO I'M GOING TO GO WITH THE SCENARIO, I THINK IT'S CALLED SCENARIO B NOW, WE'RE GOING TO GO -- I'M GOING TO GO WITH SCENARIO B, IF WE CAN MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION, U HOPE YOU GET CLEAR COMMUNICATION FROM THERE COUNCIL THERE.
I THINK WE'RE AT -- WE'RE UNDER THE GUN IN TERMS OF GETTING THIS DONE, AND WE NEED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. THE OTHER THING IS, WE'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO WORK ON THE NUANCES, BECAUSE THERE IS -- THERE IS -- THEY WANT -- SO THANK YOU FOR THE EFFORTS, THANK YOU FOR PUTTING TWO SCENARIOS OUT, BUT I THINK FOR MY CONSTITUENTS, TOO MANY OF THESE ELIMINATIONS THAT COME FROM THE FIRST SCENARIO WOULD IMPACT THEM NEGATIVELY, FINANCIALLY, AND SUCH, WAY MORE THAN THE VARIABLE FEE THAT YOU HAVE ON PROPERTY TAX RATES. THANK YOU.
>> MAYOR JONES: LET ME JUST CONFIRM. SO THERE'S -- I KNOW THERE'S TWO SCENARIOS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TODAY.
AND COUNCILWOMAN, YOUR SELECTION OF SCENARIO B, DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU ARE NOT IN FAVOR, THEN, OF THE ORIGINAL BUDGET THAT WAS PROPOSED?
>> VIAGRAN: I'M IN FAVOR OF SCENARIO B THAT RESTORES WHAT WE NEED TO
RESTORE, YEAH. >> WALSH: RESTORES AND -- BUT WE STILL NEED TO MAKE
SOME REDUCED SPENDING. >> VIAGRAN: YEAH. WE NEED TO MAKE SOME TWEAKS. THERE ARE STILL SOME -- EVEN THOUGH IT RESTORES -- LIKE THERE ARE SOME RESTORATIONS THERE, BUT MAYBE YOU GET CREATIVE AND WE GET MORE MONEY BACK TO THE LIBRARY, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S STILL -- THERE'S STILL THAT ORIGINAL WITH THE LIBRARY, BUT RIGHT NOW IN SCENARIO A, WHAT I SEE -- AND I HEAR FROM DAVID, IS MORE CUTS TO
[00:35:06]
THE LIBRARY. AND THEY'RE NOT -- THEY'RE ALREADY NOT HAPPYWITH THE CUTS TO THE LIBRARY. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY FOR EVERYBODY, SCENARIO B IS AN EIGHT-POINT 7% PROPERTY TAX INCREASE IN ONE YEAR. EF RICK, IS THAT
CORRECT? . >> WALSH: YES, MA'AM.
>> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. EIGHT-POINT 7% IN ONE YEAR, ERS VERSUS THE ORIGINAL WHICH IS 8.3% OVER TWO YEARS. OKAY.
. >> WALSH: MAYOR, WE'RE CALCULATING THAT COUNCIL DISTRICT IMPACT RIGHT NOW, SO WE'LL HAVE THAT FOR YOU SHORTLY, SO WE
CAN FLASH IT UP HERE. >> MAYOR JONES: GREAT. THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER MUNGIA? >> MUNGIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR.
THANK YOU, ERIK, FOR THAT -- SAYING EXACTLY HOW THAT IS.
I THINK RIGHT NOW THE CONVERSATION, FOR RESIDENTS, IS WELL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SLIGHT -- WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN INCREASE OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS OR NOTHING. I DON'T KNOW THAT ASKING RESIDENTS TO DO EVEN MORE THAN WHAT YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET IS IS GOING TO BE A GOOD CONVERSATION STARTER, GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENT, AND GIVEN OTHER ENTITIES, ALSO ASKING FOR INCREASES. SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE MOVING FORWARD IS THE PROPOSED BUDGET IN COMPARISON TO SCENARIO A, BECAUSE THAT ASSUMES NO TAX INCREASE. AND SO I NEED TO TELL RESIDENTS WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK YOU TO PAY ANYTHING EXTRA, THIS IS THE RESULT OF THAT.
THAT'S THE CONSEQUENCE OF WHAT THAT WILL BE. I DON'T THINK I CAN HAVE THE CONVERSATION WITH MY FOLKS ABOUT, WELL, WE WANT TO DO OVER TWO YEARS, BUT ALSO LOOK AT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE DID ONE YEAR INCREASE, I THINK THAT'S A TOUGHER CONVERSATION TO NAVIGATE.
AND THIS MAKES IT A LITTLE MORE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT IS TO BE EXPECTED AND WHAT'S TO BE CUT. AND I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF SNSCENARIO A TO BE CLEAR, BUT BEING TRANSPARENT WITH THE COMMUNITY AND EVERYTHING, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TELL RESIDENTS EXACTLY WHAT'S ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK FOR THAT. I'LL ALSO BE LOOKING OUT FOR THE IMPACT TO COMMUNITIES, BECAUSE I WANT TO SEE THAT. I WAS AT THE SOUTH SAN COMMUNITY CENTER, WHICH WE KIND OF SHARE IN OUR AREA IN D4 AND 5, I LEARNED THAT IT'S AN OPEN PLAY PLACE, AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS THERE'S NO STRUCTURED ACTIVITY. AND THE RESIDENTS WERE LIKE, HOW COULD WE GET A STRUCTURED ACTIVITY? I SAID, I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS THE YEAR TO DO THAT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING TO WORK TOWARDS. SO I THINK THERE'S ALREADY LOW AND NOT ENOUGH SERVICES IN SOME OF OUR DISTRICTS IN SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT TO FURTHER CUT FROM THOSE PLACES AROUND METRO HEALTH, AROUND PROGRAMS AT PARKS WOULD BE -- ESPECIALLY IF YOU CONSIDER ACCESS TO SCHOOL FACILITIES AND WHAT SCHOOLS HAVE THINGS OPEN. IF THERE'S OTHER PLACES BESIDES PARKS TO HANG OUT, BUT I THINK YOU SEE LESS OF THAT IN -- ESPECIALLY THE INNER CITY IN DISTRICTS 1 THROUGH 6 IN PARTICULAR.
SO THE ACCESS TO THESE THINGS ONCE THEY'RE CUT IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT IN DIFFERENT PLACES, AND I THINK WE HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.
I ALSO DO WANT TO ECHO WHAT COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN SAID ABOUT WHERE SOME OF THE WORKERS LIVE, THAT YOU MIGHT BE LOOKING AT, BECAUSE IF SUDDENLY THERE'S GOING TO BE AN UPTICK OF UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE IN DISTRICT FOUR, I NEED TO TOLL MY RESIDENTS THAT THEIR NEIGHBORS ARE NOW GOING TO BE UNEMPLOYED AND THAT COULD MEAN ALL DIFFERENT SORTS OF DIFFERENT THINGS FOR THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES THAT THEY LIVE IN, AND MAYBE EVEN RELATIVES OF THEIRS WHO LIVE IN THESE PLACES AND WORK THERE.
AND THE OTHER THING THAT I'LL KIND OF JUST GO BACK TO, I'M SURE WE'LL GET SOME MORE INFORMATION AS WE GO ALONG, BUT, YOU KNOW, I JUST KEEP LOOKING BACK AT THIS DEPARTMENT LIST THAT YOU GAVE US, I THINK LAST WEEK OR SO, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, THERE'S ONLY 12 DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE HAVING A NET DECREASE, AND I'M ASSUMING THESE ARE NET INCREASES AND DECREASES ON THIS LIST. AND SO I JUST NEED TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHY SOME DEPARTMENTS ARE GOING TO HAVE AN INCREASE, DESPITE THESE CUTS THAT WE'RE MAKING. EVEN WITH, YOU KNOW, GETTING RID OF SOME OF THE FROZEN POSITIONS OR VACANT POSITIONS, SOME I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY, RIGHT, FIRE, PLIES, MAKES SENSE.
THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE. ANIMAL CARE SERVICES MAKES SENSE THAT THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE, BUT SOME OF THE OTHER ONES I NEED TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE GOING TO SEE SOME DEPARTMENTS INCREASE, BECAUSE, AGAIN, IF I SHOW THIS AT MY TOWN HOWL TONIGHT AND PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAY WHY ARE THESE DEPARTMENTS GETTING ALL THESE INCREASES AND YOU'RE TELLING US OUR SERVICES ARE GOING TO BE THE SAME OR IF NOT LESS, YET THEY SEE THE INCREASE, IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO BALANCE THAT.
SO I WELCOME THAT INFORMATION LATER, KIND OF WALKING THROUGH HOW THAT IS. AND ALSO WITH SCENARIO A TO THE C & E TEAM, WE CAN PUT THAT ON THE SLIDE SHOW FOR MY BUDGET TOWN HALL THIS EVENING, I'D LIKE TO COMMUNICATE TO MY RESIDENTS BASED ON TODAY'S AGENDA WHICH I'M GLAD WE'RE HAVING TODAY, WHAT THAT COULD MEAN FOR THAT, AND AS SOON AS WE
[00:40:04]
HAVE INFORMATION ON IMPACT TO OUR PLACES I NEED TO KNOW THAT, SO I CAN ALSO TELL FOLKS THAT THEIR LIBRARIES WOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF NEGATIVE IMPACT, THEIR RECREATION CENTERS, THE PARKS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. AND ALSO THERE'S DATA ON RESIDENTS THAT USE THESE PROGRAMS THAT Y'ALL HAVE IN SCENARIO A, SO, YOU KNOW, MINOR HOME REPAIR, HOW MANY OF THAT WAS IN D4 MAYBE, WHO'S USING THE -- YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS, LIKE THE NONSERVICE ALLEYS, THAT'S H HAPPENED IN D4. I THINK THE SUBAREA PLANNING'S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T EVEN REACHED MOST OF DISTRICT FOUR, I THINK, IN THE SA TOMORROW PLAN, AND WE'RE WORKING ON ONE RIGHT NOW.AND JUST REAL QUICK QUESTION, WHAT IS THE BEXAR COUNTY COMMUNITY
HEALTH IMPROVEMENT PLAN? >> SO THAT'S THE COMMUNITY HEALTH IMPROVEMENT PLAN, THAT'S THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE COUNTY, OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND THE CITY. THEY HAVE FOUR FOCUS AREAS THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON, SO THIS WOULD ELIMINATE STAFF SUPPORT FOR THE CHIP. THE COLLABORATION WOULD CONTINUE, BUT THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE STAFF SUPPORT FOR THAT PROGRAM -- OR FOR THAT
PLAN. >> MUNGIA: I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD TO ADD ON TO SCENARIO A IF THAT'S THE COUNCIL'S DECISION TO MOVE ON WITH THAT.
ADDING ANOTHER COLUMN, OF THESE CUTS WHAT IS STAFF MAKING UP OF THAT.
SO IF IT'S THIS ELIMINATION OF THAT PLAN AND IT'S .9 OVER TWO YEARS, THEN WE KNOW THAT MANY STAFF POSITIONS ARE GOING TO BE GONE VERSUS IF THERE'S MONEY IN THE PROGRAM TO EXPEND TO HELP SOMEBODY, RIGHT? SO THE MINOR HOME REPAIR, IS THAT STAFFER YOU'RE ELIMINATING, IS THAT
STAFF OR STAFF AND FUNDING. >> TATE: FOR MINOR REPAIR, A MAJORITY OF IT IS FOR THE ACTUAL PROGRAM.
I THINK THERE ARE THREE STAFF ASSOCIATED WITH THAT REDUCTION.
>> MUNGIA: SO THAT'S THE OTHER TYPE OF ANALYSIS I'D LIKE TO SEE FURTHER, NO MATTER WHICH BUDGET SCENARIO WE GO DOWN, TO KNOW WHAT IS STAFF AND WHAT IS MAYBE FUNDING FOR THAT. THE OUTSIDE CONTRACTS THAT YOU HAVE ON HERE, TOO, I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF WE GO DOWN THIS PATH, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE SUPPORT TO OUR DIFFERENT DISTRICTS AND COMMUNITIES THROUGH LIFTFUND, THE PARTNERSHIP FOR ENERGY, LISC, YOU KNOW, BIOMED, JUST TO SEE WHAT THAT IMPACT IS. I REALLY WANT TO KNOW HOW DEEP THAT CAN GO INTO SOME OF OUR COMMUNITIES. I THINK THAT'S ALL FOR
NOW. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK
YOU. COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO? >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU.
AND THANK YOU, JUSTINA, FOR THE PRESENTATION AND FOR YOUR BUDGET TEAM RUNNING THROUGH THIS EXERCISE. YOU KNOW, AWES TERI IS FAILED ECONOMICS AND AUSTERITY LEADS TO BASED OFF OF THE 171 POSITIONS THAT WOULD BE ELIMINATED WITH THE 132 IN 2027 AND THE 39 IN 2028.
I THINK TO ENTERTAIN A PROPOSAL THAT PUTS NOT ONLY CITY EMPLOYEES, BUT OUR SHARED CONSTITUENCY AT RISK OF BEING UNEMPLOYED IS ASININE AND I I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A SM RESPONSIBILITY TO EXPLORE THE DIFFERENT EXERCISES TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MAINTAINING AND NOT PER PERPETUATING THE ECONOMIC INSTABILITY THAT FOLKS ARE FEELING THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF TEXAS. WITH THAT BEING SAID, IN TERMS OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS -- TOWN HALL WILL BE MONDAY AND I THINK THERE WOULD BE VALUE IN HAVING SCENARIO A, AND THEN OF COURSE, THE ORIGINAL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
THAT WAY D5 RESIDENTS COULD BE WHAT IS ON THE LINE IF WE DON'T CONSIDER THE PROPOSED BUDGET. FOR EXAMPLE, CAN SOMEONE WALK ME THROUGH FOR THE POLICE LINE ITEM THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED FOR REDUCING OVERTIME FOR CALLBACK TO DUTY AND DUTY PAST SCHEDULE SHIFT OVERTIME.
CAN SOMEONE WALK ME THROUGH WHAT THOSE TWO LINE ITEMS AND HOW WOULD THEY IMPACT JUST OVERALL OPERATIONS IN TERMS OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THE CALLBACK OVERTIME SPECIFICALLY IS -- THAT'S GOING TO BE FOR FY '28, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE FOR OFFICERS AND DETECTIVES TO RETURN BACK AND COMPLETE SOME KIND OF TAASING, SOME KIND OF INVESTIGATIVE FUNCTION. WE FEEL THAT ON THAT PARTICULAR ASPECT, WE'LL HAVE TO DO A BETTER JOB OF MAKING SURE WHEN PEOPLE ARE COMING IN, THAT THEY'RE GETTING WHAT THEY NEED TO GET DONE WHEN THEY'RE THERE. HAVING TO RETURN BACK, WE GET SORT OF MITIGATE THAT TO THE EXTENT SHOULD NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON PUBLIC SAFETY.
NOW, THE HOLDOVER ONE IS -- THAT'S THE REDUCES ON DUTY PAST SHIFT OVERTIME, THAT'S $1.5 MILLION REDUCTION, AND THAT WOULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON OUR OPERATIONS. AND SO THAT ESSENTIALLY IS WHAT WE CALL LATE CALL. SO IF AN OFFICER IS TIED
[00:45:02]
UP WITH A DWI, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET SOMEBODY ELSE OUT THERE TO HANDLE THAT CALL. IF AN OFFICER'S INVESTIGATING A SERIOUS CRIME, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THEM OFF OF THAT CALL AND THEN GET SOMEBODY ELSE OUT THERE ASSIGNED TO REDUCE IT TO THAT AMOUNT. SO THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON OUROPERATIONS. >> CASTILLO: SO WITH THIS SCENARIO THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THAT WOULD CONTRADICT THE ARGUMENT THAT I WANT MORE PUBLIC SAFETY BUT I'M ALSO ELIMINATING AN ITEM THAT IMPROVES RESPONSE TIME ON
THE FIELD? >> YES. YES, POTENTIALLY.
THEY'LL BE TIED UP WITH THE PREVIOUS OFFICER'S CASE, AND SO THAT'S GOING TO REDUCE THEIR VISIBLE, THAT'S GOING TO REDUCE OUR RESPONSE TEAM
CERTAINLY. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, CHIEF.
I APPRECIATE THAT. THE PROPOSED ELIMINATION OF ACS AND THE COMMUNITY ANIMAL SUPPORT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, AGAIN, RIGHT, THIS IS A PUBLIC SAFETY COMPONENT THAT DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENTS SEE MUCH VALUE, GIVEN THAT SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES AND LIMBS WHEN IT COMES TO ROAMING STRAY AND AGGRESSIVE ANIMALS, AND TO SUPPORT A BUDGET THAT ELIMINATES THIS ACCESS TO PUBLIC INFORMATION AND RESOURCES IS JUST SOMETHING THAT D5 RESIDENTS, I DON'T BELIEVE, WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH. BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH VALUE IN THE TEAM.
THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT HIRING MORE FULL-TIME STAFF TO GO OUT TO THE FIELD TO MITIGATE THE CRISIS WE'RE SEEING IN OUR COMMUNITY WITH ROAMING AND STRAY ANIMALS.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE POTENTIAL ELIMINATION OF THE SAFFE PROG AVES PROGRAM, AGAIN, THERE'S JUST A LOT HERE THAT I BELIEVE IF PRESENTED AT THE D5 BUDGET TOWN HALL WOULD ALLOW D5 RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WOULD BE ON THE LINE, WHICH ARE MANY PROGRAMS THAT THEY RELY ON, AND OFTENTIMES ADVOCATE FOR MORE INCREASED FUNDING.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS, BECAUSE THERE'S JUST SO MUCH VALUE, BUT, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO JUST SOME OF THESE REDUCTIONS AND HOW THEY IMPACT THE OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE AND PUBLIC HEALTH, AND POTENTIALLY ELIMINATE TK SUPPORT TO SAWS PLUMBERS, TO THE PEOPLE IS ALSO JUST ASININE AND RIDICULOUS.
THIS IS A PUBLIC HEALTH AND PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE FOR MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS IN THE INNER CITY AND THE SOUTH SIDE THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON SEPTIC TANKS AND HAVE LITERAL SEWAGE SITTING IN THEIR FRONT YARD.
SO TO -- THEIR FRONT YARD, THAT PROPOSE ELIMINATED AND/OR REDUCED.
SO I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR THE FEEDBACK FROM DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENTS AT OUR TOWN HALL WHAT THEIR EXPECTATIONS ARE, BUT WHAT WE CONTINUE TO HEAR IS THAT THEIR EXPECTATION IS THAT WHEN THEY GO TO THEIR COMMUNITY CENTER WITH PARKS AND REC OR INTO SAN ANTONIO PUBLIC LIBRARY, THAT IT'S FULLY STAFFED AND THERE'S RESOURCES.
AGAIN, BECAUSE BOTH SERVE AS A HUB AND THEY ULTIMATELY, WHEN WE LOOK AT JUST THEIR CONNECTION TO REDUCING CRIME IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, JUST SERVE AS JUST IMPORTANT HUBS. AND SEEING THAT THESE ITEMS WOULD IMPACT YOUTH SERVICES, PUBLIC HEALTH, PARKS PROGRAMMING, IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT I -- I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR FEEDBACK, CONTINUED FEEDBACK RATHER FROM MY CONSTITUENCY. SO, AGAIN, ERIK, I THINK THERE'S OPPORTUNITY WITH WHAT YOU'VE PROPOSED FOR US TO SIT BACK AND -- DO THINK THERE IS VALUE IN WHAT STAFF'S PROPOSED AND PROPOSING TO COMMUNITY, IN ADDITION TO SCENARIO A. THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE? >> WHYTE: THANKS, MAYOR. I'M THRILLED TO SEE MY COLLEAGUE IN DISTRICT FIVE SO INTERESTED IN PUBLIC SAFETY AND I HOPE SHE'S GOING TO JOIN ME IN SUPPORTING A REQUEST FOR AT LEAST 10 NEW OFFICERS TO PATROL THE STREETS OF SAN ANTONIO IN THIS NEXT BUDGET.
ERIK, LET'S SAY WE RAISE THE PROPERTY TAXES AS YOU HAVE PROPOSED, AND IT SEEMS AS IF MY COLLEAGUES SUPPORT. THE FORECAST FIVE YEARS
FROM NOW STILL HAS US IN A DEFICIT, DOES IT NOT? >> WALSH: IT DOES, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED, COUNCILMAN. I THINK WHAT I SHARED WITH YOU ALL LAST WEEK WAS THAT -- GIVE ME ONE SECOND.
>> WHYTE: WHAT'S THE NUMBER? >>
>> WHYTE: OKAY. SO WE RAISE PROPERTY TAXES AND FIVE YEARS FROM NOW WE HAVE A DEFICIT OF $135 MILLION. SO THE SOLUTION, I GUESS AGAIN, AT THAT POINT WILL BE TO RAISE PROPERTY TAXES AGAIN BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO CUT ANY OF THE PROGRAMS THAT ARE ON THE BOOKS, TA HAVE BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR A WHILE, CONTINUE TO BE ON THE BOOKS FOR THE NEXT FIVE
[00:50:04]
YEARS, RIGHT? SO THE CYCLE GOES ON AND ON AND ON.WHAT THE HELL IS THE POINT OF THAT? IS WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO RAISE PROPERTY TAXES ON THE PEOPLE OF SAN ANTONIO? IS IT DOESN'T WORK, RIGHT? SO WHY DON'T WE ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUE RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS THAT WE SPEND TOO MUCH DAMN MONEY. WE CANNOT DO ALL OF THESE THINGS.
NOBODY IS SAYING THAT THESE AREN'T ALL GOOD PROGRAMS, BUT YOU CAN'T DO THEM ALL. JUST LIKE YOU IN YOUR HOUSEHOLDS, THEY CAN'T GO BUY EVERYTHING THAT YOU WANT BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO DO IT.
7, WE NEED A LIST, WE NEED THAT INVENTORY OF ALL THE PROGRAMS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, AND I KNOW Y'ALL ARE WORKING ON GETTING THEM.
AND WE NEED TO KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY USE THESE PROGRAMS. I MEAN, I'M GOING TO TAKE IT BACK TO ZUMBA IN THE PARK.
500 GRAND A YEAR, NOT ONE PERSON WAS USING THE PROGRAM.
WE NEED TO SEE THE LIST OF ALL THE PROGRAMS -- AUDIO] -- I'M INTERESTED IN SCENARIO A HERE, LIKE WHICH PROGRAMS COULD BE PAUSED MAYBE WITHOUT A PERMANENT ELIMINATION? WHAT WOULD BE THE ONE-TIME SAVINGS IF WE PAUSED THEM? AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I THINK BACK TO LAST WEEK OR WHENEVER IT WAS WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THESE -- YOU KNOW, THE ZERO-BASED BUDGETING, THE COMPREHENSIVE BUDGET REVIEWS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE, THAT WE'VE SEEN, YOU KNOW, JUST THIS YEAR I THINK THE NUMBER WAS $12.8 MILLION IN SAVINGS.
WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO, WHAT WOULD BE THE COST TO ACCELERATE THESE REVIEWS SO WE CAN GET THIS DONE FOR ALL THE DEPARTMENTS NOW, SO THAT WE COULD REAP THE BENEFITS OF ALL THESE THINGS NOW RATHER THAN CONTINUE TO DO THESE ROLLING REVIEWS EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS? I MEAN, THAT WOULD INTEREST ME AS WELL. AGAIN, I CAN'T BELIEVE WE'D CONSIDER RAISING PROPERTY TAXES ON PEOPLE BEFORE WE'VE DONE ALL THE DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS TO FIND THESE SAVINGS. I DON'T -- I HONESTLY DON'T HAVE MUCH MORE TO SAY. MY SCENARIO IS NO RAISING OF PROPERTY TAXES ON OUR PEOPLE. MY SCENARIO IS TO DO THE HARD WORK AND MAKE THE TOUGH DECISIONS AND CUT FROM THIS BUDGET AND LET'S DO IT NOW SO THAT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW WE DON'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM. BECAUSE OUR STAFFS, OUR CITY STAFF, THE EXPERTS, OUR FINANCIAL PEOPLE ARE TELLING US, YOU RAISE TAXES NOW, YOU STILL HAVE A HUGE HUNDRED PLUS MILLION DOLLARS DEFICIT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, AND THEN WE KNOW, APPARENTLY, WHAT THE SOLUTION IS GOING TO BE AT THAT POINT, IT'S GOING TO BE RAISE PROPERTY TAXES AGAIN. WHEN DOES IT STOP? LET'S JUST FIX IT IN THIS BUDGET CYCLE. THANKS, MAYOR. COUNCILMEMBER KAUR,
PLEASE? >> KAUR: THANKS, MAYOR. THANK YOU ALL FOR DOING SO MUCH OF THIS WORK IN THE LAST FEW DAYS. WE KNOW THAT MUST HAVE BEEN A LOT OF LONG NIGHTS. THE ONE CHALLENGE THAT I'M HAVING EXPLAINING REALLYING AND EVEN UNDERSTANDING IN MY MIND AND COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ TRIED IS SLIDE 5.
SO OBVIOUSLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, THE NUMBERS DON'T REALLY -- IT'S HARD TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE A RESIDENT LOOKING AT THIS WHAT IT MEANS.
BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT -- SO AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE, ARE WE USING MEDIAN OR
TAXABLE VALUE. >> KAUR: SO THE MEAN. >> YES.
>> KAUR: OKAY. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEAN -- SO THE MEAN DOES NOT MEAN THAT IF I AM A PERSON LIVING IN A HUNDRED $65,000 HOME, MY HOME IS NOW GOING TO BE VALUED AT 176,000. BUT THAT'S WHAT THIS CHART IS MAKING IT LOOK LIKE. THIS CHART IS MAKING IT
[00:55:02]
SEEM LIKE MY HOME IS GOING TO BE VALUED WAY HIGHER THIS NEXT YEAR VERSUS A HOME THAT'S IN DISTRICT TWO IS GOING TO BE VALUED LESS BECAUSE MY $116,000 HOME IS GOING TO NOW BE VALUED AT 115,000.DOES THAT MAKE SENSE ABOUT WHY THIS CHART IS NOT THE BEST WAY TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE TAXIM THE TAX IMPACT IS GOING TO BE TO A RESIDENT? LANS.
YOUR HOMES IN THAT DISTRICT ON AVERAGE IS GOING TO BE VALUED
DIFFERENTLY IN ANOTHER DISTRICT IN THE CITY. >> KAUR: WAIT.
>> NOT IN TERMS OF APPRAISAL, BUT IN TERMS OF WE LOOK AT DISTRICT 10, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU LOOK AT FY '26 COMPARED TO FY '27, WHEN THE DISTRICT APPRAISED THOSE, BASED ON THIS, THEY HAD MORE VALUE LOSS THAN A DISTRICT -- HOUSE IN DISTRICT ONE, 2 OR 3 THAT MAY HAVE HAD A VALUE IN DISTRICT ONE
OVERALL IN THAT DISTRICT, THEIR VALUES WENT UP. >> KAUR: NO.
WHAT YOU'RE NOT HEARING ME SAY IS THIS IS NOT A GOOD METHOD TO COMMUNICATE TO A RESIDENT WHAT THIS MEANS. WHAT THIS IS SAYING SOMEONE WITH THE SAME VALUATION IN TWO DIFFERENT DISTRICTS ARE GOING TO PAY VERY DIFFERENT TAX VALUES NEXT YEAR, AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE. WHAT THIS IS SAYING -- WHAT I THINK YOU'RE TRYING TO SHOW, AT LEAST FROM MY BEST UNDERSTANDING, IS OVERALL DISTRICT ONE'S AVERAGE TAX VALUES ARE INCREASING BY $11,000.
>> ELLIOTT: ON AVERAGE WITHIN THE DISTRICT, CORRECT.
>> KAUR: IT'S NOT ON AVERAGE, IT'S NOT EVERY SINGLE PERSON.
IT'S THE OVERALL MEAN OF THE DISTRICT IS KRESESING.
INCREASING. SO THAT COULD HAVE MEANT THERE WAS A BRAND-NEW MULTIFAMILY CONDO BUILT THAT INCREASED THE HIGHEST VALUE ON THIS SIDE, THAT INCREASED THE TOTAL DISTRICT. SO, LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, I HAVE VERY WEALTHY PARTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE DEVELOPING, RIGHT? SO A WHOLE NEW SUBDIVISION IN THE QUARRY COULD INCREASE MY TOTAL BASE FOR DISTRICT ONE. THAT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT MY BEACON HILL RESIDENTS. MY TAX DID NOT CHANGE -- MY TAXABLE VALUE DID NOT CHANGE FROM LAST YEAR TO THIS YEAR. SO MY IMPACT IS GOING TO BE THE SAME AS ANY OTHER PERSON'S IMPACT WHOSE VALUE IS CHANGING BY X
PERCENTAGE. >> ELLIOTT: THAT'S CORRECT.
LOOKING AT THE DISTRICT AS A WHOLE. >> KAUR: SO PUT BACK THE SLIDE. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THIS IS NOT A GOOD WAY TO DEMONSTRATE TO A RESIDENT. BECAUSE WHAT THIS IS -- WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS IMMEDIATELY, YOU'RE SAYING WHAT THE IMMEDIATE CONCLUSION I'M MAKING IS A DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT IS PAYING $8 DIFFERENCE NEXT YEAR ON AVERAGE VERSUS A DISTRICT THREE RESIDENT IS PAYING 56 CENTS. AND THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT THE CASE.
>> IF I MAY, COUNCILWOMAN, AND I'M TRYING TO HELP.
ON DISTRICT ONE AND DISTRICT 7. >> MAYOR JONES: I THINK THIS IS THE POINT YOU'RE MAKING IF YOU LOOK AT THE TAXABLE VALUES OF DISTRICT ONE AND DISTRICT SEVEN, THOSE ARE ROUGHLY THE SAME.
BUT IF YOU GO TO THE FAR RIGHT COLUMN, THOSE ARE DIFFERENT NUMBERS.
I THINK THAT'S THE POINT THE COUNCILWOMAN'S TRYING TO MAKE.
>> KAUR: NO. BECAUSE THE REASON WHY IS THE MATH BLIND IT, BUT WHAT DAISHED BEHIND IT IT BUT WE REALLY WANT TO SHOW THE IMPACT TO AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDENT. A RESIDENT LIVING IN A MILLION DOLLARS HOME, THEIR IMPACT IS OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE X. VERSUS A RESIDENT LIVING IN $150,000 HOME. SO RATHER THAN SHOWING IT LIKE THIS, WHAT I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO SHOW IS IF YOU'RE -- IF YOUR HOME VALUE CURRENTLY IS ONE TO $200,000, THIS IS WHAT THE RANGE -- MONTHLY IMPACT OF YOUR RANGE WOULD BE. IF YOUR HOME VALUE IS 200 TO 300, THIS IS WHAT IT WOULD MEAN FOR YOU MONTHLY, BECAUSE THAT'S -- AUDIO] -- BASED ON THE AREA IN WHICH YOU'RE LIVING, BUT BEACON HILL IS NOT SUPER DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT THAN DIGNOWITY HILL AND THAT'S THE PERCEPTION THAT SOMEONE MIGHT SEE IF THEY SAW THAT.
>> ELLIOTT: AND WE CAN CERTAINLY GIVE THAT. WE CAN GIVE YOU 100,000, RANGES IF YOU'RE IN THAT RANGE OR THAT VALUE, THIS WOULD BE THE IMPACT.
THE OTHER THING THAT WE COMPLITTED TO THE LAST TIME WE TALKED WAS IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSED TAX RATE INCREASE, WE COULD GIVE YOU AN INDIVIDUAL CALCULATION SO PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT IT AS WELL FROM A
TEMPLATE STANDPOINT. >> KAUR: I'M JUST LOOKING FOR SPECIFICALLY FOR MY BUDGET TOWN HALL IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO SAY WITHIN THIS RANGE, AND NOT THAT, OH, EVERYBODY'S IN DISTRICT ONE'S ACTUALLY -- IN AUDIO] -- VALUATIONS ARE NORMAL. I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS AND HOW THE PROPERTY TAX VALUATIONS CHANGE ACROSS THE CITY FOR HOMES OF THE SAME VALUE. LIKE I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S MUCH DIFFERENT IN CERTAIN AREAS. DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? LIKE IS IT MUCH -- IS THE CHANGE IN VALUATION 3% IN
SOME AREAS AND 1% IN OTHERS? >> ELLIOTT: I HAVE NOT
LOOKED AT IT AT THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. >> KAUR: I'M JUST
[01:00:03]
CURIOUS, I DIDN'T KNOW, BECAUSE THAT OBVIOUSLY MAKES AN IMPACT.BUT I THINK FOR THE -- YEAH, I THINK FOR MY BUDGET TOWN HALL, IT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL TO HAVE THE DIFFERENT BREAKDOWN BECAUSE I KNOW NOT EVERYBODY IN MY DISTRICT'S GOING TO PAY $8.
THE LANGUAGE I'VE BEEN USING UP TO DATE IF YOU HAVE A $220,000 HOME WHICH IS AVERAGE HOMESTEAD, YOU'D BE PAYING A $3 INCREASE, RIGHT, AND THAT IS WHAT I FEEL LIKE WHEN YOU SAY THAT VERSUS MY 8.39, IT'S LIKE, WAIT, WHAT ARE YOU ACTUALLY SAYING? SO I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THAT. OKAY. I'M OFF MY SOAPBOX.
I -- OBVIOUSLY I'M STILL SUPPORTIVE OF THE PLAN THAT YOU ALL CAME UP WITH. AS I JUST DOVE DEEPLY INTO THE NUMBERS, IT GETS REALLY HARD TO DO 8% IN 1 YEAR FOR ANYBODY FROM A BUDGETING PERSPECTIVE, PARTICULARLY GIVEN SAWS IS COMING BACK IN OCTOBER, WE HAVE THIS BOND CONVERSATION COMING UP AND SO THERE'S A LOT AND POTENTIALLY CPS NEXT YEAR AS WELL, SO I DON'T WANT TO -- I THINK WE SHOULD BE HELPING AS BEST AS POSSIBLE TO PACE IT OUT. AND I DON'T NECESSARILY -- I THINK -- WOULD LIKE TO SAVE AND I MENTIONED THAT, BUT I DO THINK THE WORK THAT WAS DONE ON TRYING TO PACE IT OUT IS GOOD. I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT THAT SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES ARE MAKING WHERE IT'S LIKE, JUST TAKE IT ON AS, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS SAID, OH, WELL, THE PEOPLE WHO'S VAL WRAITIONS ARE MORE ARE GOING TO PAY MORE, BUT I STILL THINK HELPING FOLKS TO PACE IT OUT IS THE RIGHT MOVE TO MAKE.
SO I SUPPORT THE PROPOSED BUDGET AS IS, WITH POTENTIAL A LITTLE BIT OF CHANGES. LIKE THERE ARE SOME OF THE PROGRAMS WHERE I WAS LIKE, OKAY, WELL, IF THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY SUPER, LIKE, IMPORTANT, ARE THOSE -- AND THESE ARE SMALL AMOUNTS, RIGHT? $200,000 HERE. I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT SOME OF THESE PROGRAMS DO, SO IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO DIVE IN TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY OF THOSE THAT WE COULD SAVE TO HELP SUPPORT THE THINGS THAT I THINK SOME OF US HAVE AT LEAST MENTIONED IN TERMS OF LIBRARIANS, SUPPORT FOR THE SCHOLARSHIPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT OBVIOUSLY THERE REST SOME THAT ARE REALLY -- OUTSIDE CONTRACTS BEING ELIMINATED. COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO'S POINTS WERE VERY ON POINT TODAY BECAUSE SOME OF THESE PROGRAMS ARE TRULY, TRULY, TRULY, VERY IMPACTFUL. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE USING THE INTERLIBRARY LOAN, I USED IT A LOT IN COLLEGE BUT I KNOW UNIVERSITIES HAVE INTERLIBRARY LOANS AND EVERYTHING ONLINE, IT WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE WHO IS USING AN INTERLIBRARY LOAN.
ALL THAT TO SAY THERE MIGHT BE SOME OF THESE THAT WE COULD ACTUALLY PULL IN TO HELP SUPPORT SOME OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IN THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO US.
AND, OF COURSE, DEFINITELY NOT NONSERVICE ALLEYS.
THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO WORKED ON A LOT.
I GET A CALL ALMOST EVERY DAY -- A LOT ABOUT HOW TO HELP SUPPORT THOSE.
AND, THEN, OF COURSE, WORLD HERITAGE, THOSE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT THINGS.
SO I'M JUST REVIEWING SOME OF THEM. THE LAST REALLY QUICK QUESTION I HAD WAS THERE'S ONE THING ON REDUCE AGENCIES
DISCRETIONARY FUNDING. WHAT IS THAT? >> TATE: SO INCLUDED IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2028 PLAN IS TO REDUCE ALL OF DISCRETIONARY FUNDING FOR DELEGATE AGENCIES. THIS WOULD ELIMINATE IT EARLIER IN 2027 FOR
2.5 MILLION. >> KAUR: NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT.
OF COURSE I ALWAYS FIND THAT ONE SOMEWHERE. OKAY.
I THINK YOU GUYS DID A GREAT JOB THIS SUMMER. I SUPPORT IT.
I THINK WE CAN TWEAK AS WE GO ALONG TO FIGURE OUT WHAT OUR PRIORITIES.
ARE. THANKS, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: THANKS.
IN TERMS OF JUST CLARIFICATION FOR GUIDANCE FOR THE STAFF, SUPPORTING THE INITIAL PROPOSAL, HOWEVER YOU ALSO SAID YOU DIDN'T WANT TO SEE ANY CHANGE IN THE OUTSIDE AGENCIES, THEIR INITIAL ONE DID CHANGE SOME OF THOSE THINGS, SO YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THOSE? NO, NOT ALL OF THEM, THE HIRING OUR H HEROES, FOR EXAMPLE -- SOME OF
THAT WAS THIS YEAR,S WASN'T IT, FY '27? >> WALSH: YEAH, BUT THOSE ARE OUTSIDE OF THE DELEGATE AGENCIES THAT THE COUNCILWOMAN WAS
TALKING ABOUT. >> MAYOR JONES: SHE MENTIONED NO CHANGE TO THE OUTSIDE CONTRACT AGENCIES, SHE SAID THAT SPECIFICALLY SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS EXACTLY AS THEY PROPOSED IN THEIR INITIAL ONE.
>> WALSH: I THINK WHAT THE COUNCILWOMAN INTENDED WAS THE DELEGATE -- SHE MADE THIS COMMENT YESTERDAY, IT'S THE DISCRETIONARY DELEGATE AGENCY, IT'S NOT THE OUTSIDE CONTRACTS. RIGHT COUNCILWOMAN.
>> MAYOR JONES: YOU MENTIONED OUTSIDE. >> KAUR: SORY, ON THE PROPOSED CUTS THERE WAS SAWS PLUMBER TO PEOPLE AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WERE INCLUDED THAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WERE SUPPORTED.
>> WALSH: YEAH, THOSE ARE INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET, YES.
COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ? >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK
[01:05:04]
YOU. I DON'T KNOW WHERE I WANT TO START.I GUESS WE COULD START OFF AT SLIDE 5 REAL QUICK, JUST TO COUNCILMEMBER KAUR'S POINT, I REQUESTED THIS INFORMATION AT OUR GOAL-SETTING SESSION AND WHAT I REALLY WANTED TO GET AT IS WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE -- AND SPECIFICALLY FOR DISTRICT TWO, RIGHT, WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE IMPACT FOR MY RESIDENTS, THE AVERAGE, RIGHT? AND SO -- AVERAGE HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT TWO CAN EXPERIENCE, THIS IS WHAT THE MONTHLY TAX PAYMENT DIFFERENCE LOOKS LIKE FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON IN THE DISTRICT. THERE WILL BE SOME VARIANCES, THERE'S PEOPLE WHO HAVE IN DISTRICT TWO REALLY, REALLY EXPENSIVE HOMES AND THERE'S PEOPLE THAT HAVE VERY, VERY HUMBLE HOMES, AND SO IT'S -- EVERYONE'S GOING TO HAVE TO FIND THEIR PLACE, BUT THIS ULTIMATELY LETS ME KNOW, HEY, WHAT IS THE AVERAGE EXPERIENCE IN THE DISTRICT.
BEYOND THAT, IT MUST BE SO NICE TO HAVE YOUR TOWN HALL OR TO GO OUT AND DO YOUR COFFEE WITH THE COUNCILMEMBER OR OPEN OFFICE HOUR TOWN HALL MEETINGS AND TO NOT HEAR FROM PEOPLE THAT THEY NEED HOME REPAIR OR THEY NEED LIBRARY ADULT SERVICES OR PLUMBERS TO PEOPLE OR SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAMS OR ARTS OR FITNESS PROGRAMMING OR THE CASA PROGRAM.
IT MUST BE SO NICE, BECAUSE WHEN I HAD MY TOWN HALL ON MONDAY, I HAD NOTHING BUT PEOPLE ASKING FOR MORE. THEY WANTED MORE OF THEIR STREETS DONE, THEY WANTED IT DONE FASTER, THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE US ELIMINATE THE PAVEMENT MARKING OR SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS, WHICH WE'RE MAKING IMPROVEMENT. AND IT IS OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS THAT DISTRICT TWO HAS SEEN MUCH MORE -- MUCH MORE INVESTMENT, AND WE'VE MADE SO MUCH PROGRESS AND WHAT WE RUN THE RISK OF RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO BACKWARDS ON THAT. AND IT'S GOING TO BE THOSE DISTRICTS WHO HAVE -- WHO HAVE POOR HEALTH OUTCOMES, HIGHER LEVEL OF POVERTY, WHO HAVE WORST ITCH. IT'S GOING TO BE -- INFRASTRUCTURE. IT'S GOING TO BUTS WHO SUFFER THE MOST AND THE IMPACT IS GOING TO BE EXPONENTIAL. AND SO I CAN'T SEE A WORLD IN WHICH WE SUPPORT AS A BODY THE PROPOSAL A OR ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO A. AND, YOU KNOW, I DO THINK WE NEEDED IT, AND I WANTED TO -- I WAS ACTUALLY ASKING FOR THIS IN ADVANCE OF MY BUDGET TOWN HALL BECAUSE I WANTED TO PRESENT MY -- TO MY CONSTITUENTS, HEY, HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE PROPOSED RATE INCREASE AND HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS WITHOUT IT. AND WOULD YOU RATHER THE AVERAGE PERSON OR TWO PAY $1.64 EXTRA A MONTH OR YOU'RE LOSING ALL OF THESE PROGRAMS, PROGRAMS THAT DISTRICT TWO RELIES ON, PROGRAMS THAT DISTRICT FIVE RELIES ON, PROGRAMS THAT THE CONSTITUENTS OF OURS THAT NEED IT THE MOST RELY ON. AND SOMETIMES WE GET SO INTO WHAT WE'RE HEARING AT CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS OR FROM CERTAIN RESIDENTS AND CERTAIN LEADERS IN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY DON'T REALIZE THAT, YES, IT IS HARD TO MAKE A DECISION TO INCREASE THE PROPERTY TAX RATE, BUT WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE OUTCOME IF WE DON'T? AND YOU CAN ASK THE QUESTION, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY IT? A LOT. A LOT. A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO GET THE SERVICES THAT THEY RELY ON WHEN THEY GO TO THE LIBRARY OR WHEN THEY GO TO A COMMUNITY CENTER. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET THEIR HOME REHABBED, AND THAT'S BEEN ONE OF THE BEST PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE AS A CITY AND ONE THAT CONSTANTLY RUNS OUT OF CAPACITY.
AND SO IT'S -- CERTAIN FOLKS ARE TAKING, WHERE IT'S LIKE I CANNOT FATHOM THAT WE WOULD INCREASE PROPERTY TAXES FOR PEOPLE, I CANNOT FATHOM THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER THIS. THAT IS RIDICULOUS BECAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE IS THAT YOU CAN FATHOM THAT WE'RE GOING TO CUT 170 ADDITIONAL PEOPLE AND WE'RE GOING TO CUT ALL OF THESE PROGRAMS THAT MY CONSTITUENTS RELY ON, YOU CAN FATHOM THAT, YOU CAN FATHOM PEOPLE BEING UNEMPLOYED, HAVING TO RELY ON SOCIAL SERVICES THAT WE'RE NO LONGER GOING TO PROVIDE.
AND SO THE DIFFICULT DECISION HERE IS NOT TO SAY, OH, WE'RE NOT -- I CAN'T IMAGINE A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE, SO CUT EVERYTHING, BECAUSE THAT'S EASY. THE DIFFICULT DECISION IS, HEY, WHAT ARE -- WHAT'S THE -- LIKE WHAT IS THE NEGOTIATION -- OR ALL OF YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED IN SOME WAY HERE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE -- THAT'S REALLY THE CONVERSATION WE NEED TO BE HAVING. AND SO I'M DISAPPOINTED IN THE WAY THIS DISCUSSION IS GOING. I FEEL LIKE IT'S EASY TO SAY THAT THE HARD LINE IS THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE, AND SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CONSIDER ANYTHING ELSE. I THINK THAT'S ALSO NOT PRODUCTIVE TO THIS CONVERSATION. AND SO I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
I THINK -- I WOULDN'T -- I WOULD HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME CHOOSING BETWEEN ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO B KNOWING WHAT THE INCREASE IS GOING TO BE ON MY
[01:10:03]
RESIDENTS AND ON THE REST OF THE CITY, JUST SO I'M ABLE TO SHARE THAT COMPARISON AND ASK MY RESIDENTS ABOUT IT, SO THAT THEY CAN ALSO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS. BUT IT'S GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN ALTERNATIVE 2 AND THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, AND, AGAIN, MY HARD LINE IS I DON'T WANT TO SEE A SINGLE EMPLOYEE CUT. THANK YOU.>> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. IN CASE IT IMPACTS ANYONE ELSE'S COMMENTS, TROY, CAN I ASK YOU TO SPEAK TO THE SIDE -- AUDIO] -- BY THE DISTRICT, PLEASE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S CLARITY ON IT [INDISCERNIBLE] DISTRICT ONE AND DISTRICT 7, HOW THEY LOOK VERY SIMILAR UNTIL YOU GET THE LAST TWO COLUMNS, JUST LAY FLAT AS WE KNOW FOLKS ARE WATCHING AND WILL WATCH THIS, WHY THOSE ARE SO
DIFFERENT. >> ELLIOTT: THE REASON WHY THEY'RE SO DIFFERENT IS BECAUSE WE'RE COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT YEARS WITH VALUE --
>> MAYOR JONES: JUST VERY SIMPLY, RIGHT, DISTRICT ONE AND DISTRICT 7, YOU USED ROUGHLY THE SAME AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE, THE TAX PAYMENT LOOKS THE SAME IN COLUMN 3. IT LOOKS VERY SIMILAR-ISH IN COLUMN 4.
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK IN THE LAST TWO COLUMNS OF THOSE TWO ROWS, THEY'RE DIFFERENT, RIGHT? THE 8.39 FOR ONE AND THEN IN DISTRICT 7,
SO EVERYBODY IS LOOKING AT IT -- >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: LOOKING AT IT AND THE REASON THAT THE LAST TAB LOOKS SO DIFFERENT IS BECAUSE IN DISTRICT 7 THE VALUE DID NOT GO UP AS DISTRICT 1 SO
YOU'LL SEE A LARGER INCREASE. SO I DON'T KNOW -- >> MAYOR JONES: ONE SECOND.
TROY, I'D LIKE YOU TO EXPLAIN IT AND WE NEED TO INCLUDE THAT DISCLAIMER IN HERE SO FOLKS UNDERSTAND WHY THOSE ARE SO DIFFERENT IN CASE ANYBODY LOOKS AT THIS SLIDE BY ITSELF.
>> THERE'S TWO FACTORS BETWEEN 2026 AND 2027. ONE IS THE CHANGE IN THE TAXABLE VALUE. FOR DISTRICT 1, FOR EXAMPLE, IT'S GOING FROM 165 TO 176.
AND I BELIEVE THAT THE OTHER ONE WAS DISTRICT 7. AND GOING FROM 164 TO 166.
AND SO THAT CHANGE IN VALUE IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT BY DISTRICT.
AND THEN THAT'S GOING TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE TAX RATES FOR THOSE TWO YEARS.
WHAT IS REALLY DRIVING THE DIFFERENCE IN THAT LAST COLUMN IS REALLY THE CHANGE IN VALUE
FOR EACH DISTRICT, BETWEEN THE TWO YEARS. >> MAYOR JONES: IN CASE THIS -- AGAIN, PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT THIS AND NEEDS TO BE SHOWN THE EXPLANATION WOULD BE SUPER HELPFUL. SO FOLKS AWAY WITHOUT HAVING TO QUESTION IT.
GO AHEAD. >> IF I MIGHT, I JUST THINK THAT THE WAY THAT YOU GUYS SET THE MATH IN, THIS I WOULD STRUCTURE THIS DIFFERENTLY. I WOULD TAKE OUT THE FISCAL YEAR AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE. BECAUSE THE ASSUMPTION THAT YOU ARE SHOWING HERE IS THAT THE TAXABLE VALUE IS DIFFERENT BASED FOR EACH HOME, WHICH IT'S NOT AT THAT RANGE.
I WOULD REMOVE FISCAL YEAR 2026 COMPLETELY. AND I WOULD SAY FISCAL YEAR 2027, THE AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE IS THESE. YOUR ORIGINAL PAYMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN X, AND YOUR NEW FISCAL YEAR 2027 PAYMENT WITH A 4.5% INCREASE WOULD BE Y.
THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE IN AVERAGE PAYMENT FOR EACH OF THE DISTRICTS.
THAT'S HOW I WOULD SHOW IT, RATHER THAN LOOKING AT OVERALL DISTRICT VALUE.
FROM LAST YEAR TO THIS YEAR. DOES THAT M >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: YES, I MEAN THE CHALLENGE IS THAT IN 2026 WE WERE WANT USING THE RATE THAT WE ARE NOW AND SO THE VALUES HAVE CHANGED. SO SAYING IN 2027 THIS IS WHAT YOUR RATE WOULD BE IGNORES THE
FACT THAT THE VALUE HAS CHANGED. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> ALL OF THAT TO SAY --
>> MAYOR JONES: GO AHEAD, ERIC. >> YOU'D HAVE TO USE THAT FY 27 VALUE JUXTAPOSE IT WITH THE
CURRENT TAX RATE AND THEN PROPOSED RATE. >> MAYOR JONES: RIGHT.
>> THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENCE. >> MAYOR JONES: THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR.
>> ROCK 'N ROLL. >> MAYOR JONES: ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, TROY.
ALSO INCLUDE A BREAKDOWN OF VACANT VERSUS FILLED. >> OF THE 171 -- 154 ARE FILLED
AS OF TODAY. >> GONZALEZ: SO 154 ARE FILLED OUT OF THE 171.
OKAY. AND I GUESS THAT IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THOSE POSITIONS AS WELL, SOME OF THEM ARE PART-TIME, SOME ARE -- MOST ARE BEING REASSIGNED, CORRECT, IN THAT FIRST PROPOSAL? OR THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL?
[01:15:01]
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 101 POSITIONS -- >> GONZALEZ: 101, YES.
SO WE HAVE THE 101, WHICH OF 54 ARE FILLED RIGHT NOW. >> GONZALEZ: OKAY.
>> EXCUSE ME, COUNCILWOMAN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ANSWERED CLEARLY WHAT YOU ARE ASKING. I DON'T THINK THAT WE WILL HAVE WHERE THEY'RE GOING AND WE'RE
NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU THAT ANSWER UNTIL -- >> GONZALEZ: UNTIL IT'S PASSED, GOT IT. THANK YOU, ANDY. I THINK THAT IT'S ON SLIDE... -- SLIDE 10. ON SCENARIO B, THE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX WITH CAPACITY, WELL, I GUESS THAT WE ALREADY ANSWERED THAT, WOULD THAT EQUATE TO FOR PROPERTY -- ARE YOU, LIKE, MOVING EVERY BIT OF 28 INTO 27 OR WERE THERE CUTS MADE IN 2 28 THAT YOU COULD MAKE AND NOT MOVE IT -- LIKE, CUT-AND-PASTE INTO 27? I GUESS THAT I'M LOOKING FOR A SCENARIO -- LIKE A B MINUS SCENARIO, RIGHT? I THINK THAT SOMEBODY MENTIONED A MIX OF A AND B IN THAT SENSE WHERE -- OR DID YOU HAVE TO MOVE EVERY SINGLE BIT OF 28 INTO 27?
>> COUNCILWOMAN, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE PROPERTY TAX CAPACITY? >> GONZALEZ: YES.
>> WE DID, YES. SO WHAT WE HAD ANTICIPATED FOR 28, WE MOVED THAT TO 27.
>> GONZALEZ: OKAY. >> BUT THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS IF YOU'RE ASKING IF THERE'S AN
INBETWEEN -- CERTAINLY, THERE'S AN INBETWEEN, RIGHT? >> GONZALEZ: DID YOU ALL DO ANY
OF THAT IN BETWEEN BEFORE YOU MOVED IT, IS THERE A REASON WHY? >> BECAUSE THE REQUEST WAS TO MOVE THE 28 TO 27. BUT -- AND THAT HAD AS THE MAYOR POINTED OUT EARLIER, AN 8.7% INCREASE. IF YOU GUYS WANT TO SEE WHAT A 5.5% OR 6%, THE OFFSET WOULD BE JUST HOW MUCH OF THE CUTS -- THE PROPOSED REDUCTIONS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO RESTORE.
THAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE. >> GONZALEZ: OKAY. >> AND LET ME JUST ALSO ADD THAT TYPE OF SCENARIO IS PROBABLY VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT COUNCILWOMAN KAUR SAID WHICH IS THE PROPOSED BUDGET WITH SOME TWEAKS, WHICH COULD BE -- WHICH COULD BE THE SAME -- END UP IN
THE SAME RESULT, JUST TWO DIFFERENT WAYS. >> GONZALEZ: OKAY.
UM, YEAH, I MEAN, ULTIMATELY I THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO BE CAREFUL WITH SCENARIO A, BECAUSE IT'S JUST -- STARTS TO GET CLOSER AND CLOSER TO THE SERVICES THAT PEOPLE RELY ON.
AND JOBS, RIGHT? 171 JOBS. THESE ARE -- YOU KNOW, ON AVERAGE IT'S REALLY TIMES TWO, RIGHT, AND THIS IS IMPACTING A FAMILY AND NOT JUST THIS ONE POSITION. SO THAT NUMBER IS ETCHED IN MY HEAD, AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I'M COMFORTABLE DOING AT ALL. BUT I DO WANT THIS SCENARIO AT MY TOWN HALL TOMORROW AS WELL AS THE EXACT IMPACT ON DISTRICT RESIDENTS.
BECAUSE MY DISTRICT IS ON THE HIGH END, I THINK WITH DISTRICT 1 BEING THE TOP TWO.
SO HOW WE REALLY EXPLAIN THAT TO FOLKS IS IMPORTANT. BUT ALSO GIVING THEM THAT SCENARIO OF -- OF NO INCREASE. WHAT HAPPENS DOWN THE ROAD -- I THINK THAT SOMEBODY MENTIONED IN YEAR FIVE A $135 MILLION DEFICIT, WITHOUT A TAX RATE INCREASE.
WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE IN YEAR FIVE? OKAY.
>> YEAH, GO AHEAD, JUSTINE. >> SO WHEN WE PRESENTED THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST, UM, AS PART OF THAT WE HAD -- AT $264 MILLION WAS THE DEFICIT AS PART OF THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST.
>> GONZALEZ: OKAY. YEAH, I MEAN, THOSE ARE ALL OF MY COMMENTS SO FAR.
AGAIN, I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE SCENARIO A, UM, MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSAL THAT YOU SET LAST WEEK I THINK IS -- WHAT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO DIG INTO MORE.
I AM INTERESTED, UM, I MENTIONED THIS TO MARINA EARLIER TODAY, IN REGARDS TO THE BARGE TO GET FEE FOR NON-SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS. I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT IN A LIST OF INCREASES.
[01:20:03]
AND I WONDERED IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD LOOK INTO?>> COUNCILWOMAN, WE ACTUALLY FOR THE CONTRACT FOR THE RIVER BARGE, WE HAVE INCREASES IN CERTAIN YEARS OF THAT CONTRACT. FISCAL YEAR 2027 IS NOT ONE OF THOSE YEARS.
THAT SAID, UM, WE HAVE BEEN APPROACHED BY THE OPERATOR WITH AN INTEREST TO INCREASE THE NON-RESIDENT BARGE FEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027. SO WE ARE REVYING REVIEWING THAE CAN DISCUSS THAT IN AN ADDITIONAL COUNCIL, AND, AGAIN, THIS INCREASE WILL NOT IMPACT SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS. IT WILL BE FOR NON-SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS.
>> GONZALEZ: DO YOU HAVE A BALLPARK OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE?
>> $1.3 MILLION TO THE CITY. >> GONZALEZ: $1.3 MILLION IF WE RAISE THAT FEE?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> GONZALEZ: OKAY. IS THAT AN AMENDMENT THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING FORWARD OR ARE YOU BRINGING IT FORWARD AS A CITY?
>> WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH THAT ANALYSIS, IF IT PANS OUT WE'RE GOING TO ADD IT TO THE AMENDMENT LIST FOR YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER AND WE WOULD DO IT AS PART OF THE BUDGET ORDINANCE.
>> GONZALEZ: OKAY. AND I GUESS WHILE WE'RE HERE REALLY QUICKLY.
ON THE 3% COLA, I KNOW THAT LAST YEAR WE DID A LUMP SUM, I THOUGHT THAT WE DID A LUMP SUM LAST YEAR. WAS IT LIKE 3% IN A LUMP SUM, OR WHAT WAS IT?
>> WE DID A 2% AND THEN WE DID A ONE-TIME AMOUNT OF 750 -- $750 PER EMPLOYEE.
>> GONZALEZ: AND HAVE WE CONSIDERED THAT AN OPTION INSTEAD OF THE 3%, 2% AND A 1%
LUMP SUM? >> WE HAVE NOT LOOKED INTO THIS, NO.
>> GONZALEZ: CAN YOU? >> WE COULD DO THAT ANALYSIS, YES.
>> GONZALEZ: OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THOSE ARE ALL OF MY QUESTIONS. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN SPEARS.
>> SPEARS: THANK YOU, MAYOR. YES, I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE HARD WORK YOU'VE PUT INTO THIS.
I KNOW THAT IT IS REALLY HARD. AND, UM, TAKES A LOT OF TIME AND FOCUS AND LATE NIGHTS.
SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS I'LL START OFF WITH.
ON THE W WHEATLEY HEIGHTS CUT, S ANYONE TALKED TO COUNTY, I THINK THAT THEY WANTED THAT BACK
ANYWAY? >> THAT'S A CITY FACILITY, COUNCILWOMAN.
>> SPEARS: MAYBE WE SHOULD TALK TO THE COUNTY. I'M SUGGESTING.
>> WELL... YEAH. MARIA IS CORRECTING ME PART OF THE LAND BELONGS TO THE COUNTY.
THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE TRACKABILITY,.
AND IT IS -- IT IS CITY OWNED, CITY CONSTRUCTED. >> SPEARS: YEAH, WELL, I MEAN, IF THEY WANT IT -- AND WOULD MAINTAIN IT, AND WE COULD KEEP IT GOING -- NO? I MEAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO BE CREATIVE ABOUT WHO ALL WE COULD INVOLVE IF THEY WANT TO HELP
WITH SOME OF IT. BUT YOU DON'T LIKE IT -- >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I KNOW THAT
YOU TRUST THE COUNTY. [LAUGHTER] >> SPEARS: WELL, NO, I MEAN, I AM JUST TRYING TO THINK OF HOW WE COULD KEEP SOME OF IT -- YOU KNOW, IT'S A NICE FACILITY.
I LIKE WHEATLEY HEIGHTS. SO THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS. DOES THE BIOMED CUT EFFECT THE
ESTAG AT ALL, ARE YOU WORRIED, MAYOR? >> MAYOR JONES: $100,000, I THINK THEY'RE LOOKING AT OTHER FOLKS TO HELP TO SPONSOR THAT IN THE COMMUNITY SO $100,000 IS NOT
A LOT FOR OTHERS TO CHIP IN. >> SPEARS: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
SO WHEN YOU GO TO SLIDE 5, I'M LOOKING AT MY DISTRICT AND I AM THINKING HOW I'LL WALK IN THERE AND SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE YOUR TAXES. AND I JUST KNOW THAT THEY'RE ALREADY SAYING NO AND THEY'RE PAYING SO MUCH. AND IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO GO UP. AND I WANT US TO FOCUS ON ESSENTIAL SERVICES, AND I WANT US TO DEEP DIVE INTO ALL OF THE CONTRACTS THAT WE HAVE AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE SOUND AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO -- UM -- IF WE NEED IT -- IF IT'S STILL IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO -- OUR OUTSIDE CONTRACTS. I ALSO THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT EVERY DELEGATE AGENCY, EVERY SINGLE ONE, BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW THINGS LIKE HOW MANY RESIDENTS ARE BEING SERVED, WHAT IS THE COST PER CLIENT. WHAT ARE THE SALARIES LIKE? IS THERE SOMEONE ELSE WHO IS DOING THIS WELL OR BETTER? WHO CAN WE PARTNER WITH? THERE'S OBVIOUS CORE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO DO, YOU KNOW, THE DESIGNATED AGENCY SERVICES.
[01:25:01]
BUT IF THEY'VE BEEN GETTING MONEY FROM US FOR 20 YEARS, THA. BECAUSE, SEE, IT'S ALMOST LIKE WE GO IN -- YOU GO INTO CHURCH AND YOU WALK IN AND YOU HAVE TO PAY A FEE.AND THEN THE CHURCH GOES AND DONATES IT ON THEIR BEHALF FOR SOMEBODY ELSE.
THAT'S HOW -- I MEAN, IT'S HARD FOR ME -- IT'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE, A CORE SERVICE THAT THE CITY PROVIDES. IT REALLY JUST HAS TO BE. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IDEA FROM MY DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THAT EVERYONE IS JUST WEALTHY AND SO MUCH BETTER OFF.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK AND STRUGGLE AND USE THE SAME SERVICES. AND, UM, IT'S JUST HARD BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT A SAWS RATE INCREASE AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THE BOND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CPS.
I JUST CAN'T -- WE'RE PRICING PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR HOMES. IT'S A REALLY -- IT'S A REALLY DIFFICULT SITUATION TO HAVE TO GO IN THERE AND TO SAY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PAY MORE.
AND, UM, ON -- AND ALSO IT'S NOT ON ESSENTIAL SERVICES. AND, AGAIN, I KNOW THAT YOU'RE TIRED OF HEARING ME SAY IT, BUT IT HAS TO BE PUBLIC SAFETY, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS THE ONLY WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GROW OUR ECONOMY. IT REALLY IS.
SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THOSE THINGS. EVERY TAXPAYER DOLLAR JUST HAS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR. BUT I REALLY -- I REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO LOOKING AT MORE OF THESE -- OF ALL OF THESE DELEGATE AGENCIES. IT'S JUST ASTOUNDING TO ME HOW -- HOW WE'RE DOING SO MUCH OF THAT. I'M NOT SAYING ALL OF IT.
MAYBE IT'S JUST A SIMPLE THING WHERE WE JUST CUT BACK A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE ACROSS THE BOARD, OR STAIRSTEP PEOPLE DOWN. I DON'T WANT TO JUST CUT EVERYTHING.
I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS AND TO BE SMART ABOUT IT.
I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THINGS LIKE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES AND EMERGENCY SHELTER -- THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SEVERAL -- SEVERAL AGENCIES THAT DO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BUT WHO IS REALLY DOING IT? AND WHO IS GETTING PAID WHAT AT EACH OF THEM? AND HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE THEY SERVING? I JUST NEED TO SEE THAT KIND OF STUFF TO DECIDE WHO WE'RE GOING TO CUT. I WANTED TO SEE THOUGH -- WHEN -- I'M GLAD FOR SLIDE 5, BUT I WANTED TO SEE THE AGGREGATE NUMBER OF WHAT DISTRICT 9 IS PAYING.
LIKE, THE WHOLE TAX BILL COMING OUT OF DISTRICT 9 AND 10 AND 1 AND 2.
THAT'S WHAT I GET ASKED FOR, SO IF YOU COULD HAVE THAT FOR 2026, AND THEN, UM, 2027.
IT'S ALARMING TO ME THAT THE APPRAISALS ARE GOING DOWN. I MEAN, AND I SHOULDN'T SAY ALARMING -- IT IS EXPECTED BECAUSE IT DID GO UP SO MUCH SO FAST.
BUT, UM, IT IS ALARMING TO SEE THAT. THAT TO ME.
OR AT LEAST IN MY DISTRICT. I SEE IN SOME OF THEM THEY'RE GOING UP.
BUT I KNOW THAT -- I THAN IT WENT UP TOO HIGH, TOO FAST. I ALSO WANTED TO LOOK AT OUR NON-ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY PURCHASES. WE'VE GOT TO FOCUS ON CYBERSECURITY AND THINGS THAT, UM, ACTUALLY IMPROVE OUR BOTTOM LINE.
BUT I THINK THAT -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- BUT I THINK THAT IT'S $710,000 FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF PUBLIC AND STAFF COMPUTERS AND MOBILE DEVICES IN THE LIBRARY SYSTEM.
IS THAT ALL NECESSARY? MAYBE SOME OF IT IS, BUT IS IT ALL NECESSARY? THOSE ARE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE ABOUT HOW WE'RE PURCHASING EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY.
AND THEN, UM, REVIEW HOW OUR SPENDING ON -- I MESSED UP MY PAGES -- LIKE OUR OFFICE FURNISHINGS. YEAH, OFFICE FURNISHINGS. I THINK THAT THERE WERE SOME ROLLERS -- SOME CHAIRS THAT I ASKED FOR, $3,000 FOR THESE LITTLE CASTERS? YEAH, I DON'T UNDERSTAND. SO I JUST WANT TO LOOK AT SPENDING ON FURNITURE, FURNISHINGS, DECORATIVE IMPROVEMENTS AND RENOVATIONS. I DIDN'T GET THEM, BY THE WAY, JUST SO THAT YOU KNOW. BUT I'M JUST SAYING, LIKE, WE'VE GOTTA BE LOOKING AT ALL OF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. SOME IS NECESSARY BUT IS IT ALL IT NECESSARY JUST BECAUSE IT WAS PLANNED? OBVIOUSLY ADA COMPLIANCE IS NEEDED AND, YOU KNOW, EMERGENCY -- YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT ARE BROKEN OR SOMETHING UNEXPECTED THAT WE HAVE TO DO ALL OF THAT. BUT I JUST -- I MEAN, THIS IS HARD.
[01:30:05]
AND IT'S PAINFUL. BUT I CAN'T -- I JUST CAN'T -- I CAN'T DO A TAX INCREASE.I JUST CAN'T DO IT. THERE'S NO WAY I CAN ASK THE RESIDENTS TO PAY MORE.
AND THEN WHEN THEIR APPRAISAL GOES DOWN THEY'RE GOING TO PAY EVEN MORE.
AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO MAYBE PAY A SAWS RATE INCREASE IN THE BOND AND EVERYTHING.
SO THAT'S WHERE I STAND TODAY. THANKS. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN. ON THE SECOND ROUND, COUNCILMAN GALVAN.
>> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. JUST TO BE CLEAR FOR ERIC, SO CERTAINLY OPPOSED TO SCENARIO A AND SUPPORTIVE OF THE CURRENT PROPOSED BUDGET PATH. OF COURSE I WANT TO SEE TWEAKS HERE AND THERE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AND WE'LL GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT CONVERSATIONS TOO. I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ON WHERE WE'RE AT, RIGHT? THIS IS A TOUGH CONVERSATION FOR SURE, AND I THINK THAT ALL OF US AGREE THAT WE DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY KIND OF RATES GO UP FOR OUR RESIDENTS IN ANY KIND OF WAY. WE DON'T WANT TO PUT ANY NEW COSTS ON RESIDENTS AND THERE'S A LOT OF COSTS GOING UP FOR FOLKS. SO I'M ALSO INTERESTED -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN GIVE A SCENARIO AND I DON'T MEAN TO SOUND FACETIOUS EITHER, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME OF THESE MAJOR PROGRAMS THAT IN SCENARIO A AS A COMPARISON -- YOU KNOW, HOW MANY -- WHAT IS THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH THESE PER DISTRICT? BECAUSE I DON'T HEAR FROM FOLKS WHO ARE TALKING ABOUT -- I DON'T WANT TO EVER TOUCH PROPERTY TAXES OR ANY FEES OR THIS SORT -- FAIR ENOUGH, UNDERSTOOD. THEN WHY ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE INVESTING IN THE SERVICES IN YOUR AREA? I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD CONTINUE TO THEN FUND THE LIBRARY PROGRAMS IN YOUR AREA AND THE SENIOR CENTERS IN YOUR AREA. I AM SOMEONE THAT BELIEVES THAT ALL OF OUR FOLKS SHOULD HAVE QUALITY SERVICES WHERE IT'S MY DISTRICT OR NOT. IF WE'RE NOT WILLING TO PUT OUT THE BUCK FOR IT, OR WE'RE OKAY TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, LET'S DO THE FULL $5 MILLION, LET'S MAKE SURE THAT FOLKS THAT DON'T WANT TO DO THAT DON'T GET IT. IF YOU DON'T WANT APARTMENTS IN YOUR AREA, THAT'S FINE, LET'S HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE SENIOR CENTER SERVICES IN YOUR AREA, THAT'S FINE, LET'S HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.
BECAUSE WHAT I DON'T LIKE TO HEAR IN A BROAD SENSE THAT WE CAN NEVER DO THIS AND THEREFORE, WE CAN CUT IT DOWN. BECAUSE YOU'RE CUTTING INTO MY SERVICE IN MY AREA THAT MY RESIDENTS CAN ONLY GO TO. THERE'S NOT ANOTHER PLACE TO GO TO.
THERE'S NOT SOMETHING NEARBY THEY CAN DRIVE TO, SO THEY DON'T HAVE VEHICLES THAT THEY CAN EVEN USE ANYMORE. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THESE PLACES AND WHY I GET SO PASSIONATE ABOUT THE SENIOR CENTER IN PARTICULAR, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE GAP IN WEST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO IN TERMS OF PUBLIC SENIOR CENTERS THERE. THAT ARE QUALITY AS OTHER PARTS OF OUR CITY, INCLUDING OTHER PARTS OF DISTRICT 6, IT JUST GETS FRUSTRATING TO SAY, WELL, WE'VE GOT TO BE CREATIVE AND CUT INTO ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS HERE.
OKAY, FINE, WE'LL CUT INTO THEM. THE NORTHEAST CORRIDOR, AND $250,000, I DON'T SEE WHY WE'LL NEED THAT ONE AND IT'S NOT AFFECTING STAFF. AND IT'S $250,000 THAT WE CAN GIVE BACK TO THE FUND IN SOME FORM. IF WE'RE LOOKING AT SOME OF THE YOUTH PROGRAMS, THAT'S FINE. AND SOME DISTRICTS CAN'T AFFORD TO USE THEM ANYMORE.
THAT'S -- I THINK THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE COSTS BROKEN DOWN TO LOOK LIKE, BECAUSE I'M SURE THAT WE COULD GET SEVERAL MILLION OUT OF THOSE AREAS THAT JUST DON'T WANT TO DO THAT ANYMORE. THAT IS FINE. I KNOW THAT MY DISTRICT 6 RESIDENTS WHEN WE HAD A TOWN HALL YESTERDAY SAID THAT THE WAY THAT WE PREVENT CRIME AND VIOLENCE IN OUR COMMUNITY IS BY INVESTING IN OUR YOUTH PROGRAMS AND PARKS PROGRAMS AND OTHER PROGRAMS HERE. AND IF WE START LOSING THEM, AND IN THESE AREAS AND THEY SEE RECURRING ISSUES OF CRIME AND VIOLENCE, AND THAT WE ALWAYS LOOK AT THE SAME HEAT MAP AND SAY THAT WE SHOULD REALLY ADJUST THIS PART OF THE AREA, BUT CUT ALL RESOURCES BACK, WE CAN'T JUST DO IT, BECAUSE THE MAYOR DOESN'T WANT TO PAY FOR THAT. FINE, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THE SAME SERVICES ACROSS THE BOARD. OF COURSE EMERGENCY SERVICES ARE NEEDED AND THAT'S STATE LAW AND SOMETHING THAT IS REQUIRED. AND FOR THE SPECIAL FLUFF THAT THEY ARE NOT OKAY TO RAISE RATES ON, THEN DON'T. YOU DON'T HAVE TO. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT BROKEN DOWN BY DISTRICTS AND THOSE WHO DON'T WANT TO SEE THE COST GOES UP IN ANY FORM OR FASHION AND MAYBE WE CAN GET THE DOLLARS BACK BY CUTTING THE PARKS PROGRAMS OR LIBRARY SERVICE PROGRAM THERE IS. AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE BRANCH LIBRARY TO LOSE FUNDING FOR THEIR LIBRARY. BUT IT WAS LISTED ON THERE, TWO POSITIONS TO BE PULLED BACK.
IF WE GO THROUGH WITH THE WHOLE $75 MILLION WE LOSE MORE SERVICE THERE IS AND IT'S THE ONLY LIBRARY IN THAT PART OF THE CITY. CITYEVEN SOME COUNTY RESIDENTS E BECAUSE IT'S THE CLOSEST ONE TO THEM. SO I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR, RIGHT, WHEN WE TALK OF PLAYING HERO THAT WE COULD NEVER RAISE THESE COSTS.
OKAY, THEN MAYBE YOU DON'T HAVE THE SERVICES IN YOUR AREA EITHER.
TALK TO YOUR RESIDENTS ABOUT THOSE THINGS. BECAUSE I HAVE TO SAY YOU THAT CAN'T HAVE YOUR SENIOR CENTER ANYMORE AND YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR PARK SERVICE ANYMORE AND YOU CAN'T EXPECT TO HAVE THIS PAVEMENT TO BE ADDRESSED IN ANY FORM.
I DON'T THINK THAT IS FAIR, FOR ME TO GO TO MY RESIDENTS TO SAY THAT, BECAUSE SOME OF US ARE OKAY TO SAY TO CUT DOWN ON THIS. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL IS READY TO MOVE
[01:35:05]
FORWARD ON OTHER CONVERSATIONS, OF COURSE WE'LL SEE IF WE COULD PULL BACK IN SOME WAYS ON THINGS THAT ARE NOT FRONT FACING BUT THAT'S THE CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE AT HERE.AND IT'S NOT THEORETICAL, MAYBE WE COULD CUT BACK HERE AND THERE.
THESE ARE REAL CUTS, MAN. THESE ARE REAL THING FOR PEOPLE'S LIVES THAT THEY RELY.
I SAID THAT LAST WEEK. WHEN THAT PERSON WHO IS STRUGGLING DAY IN AND DAY OUT TO MAKE MEETS IN THEIR HOME AND THEY CAN'T AFFORD A FIX ANYMORE BECAUSE THERE'S NO MONEY LEFT IN THEIR BUDGET, AND THEY JUST WANT TO GO SOMEWHERE NICE FOR A SECOND AND IT'S THEIR PARK NEARBY AND YOU SAY, AH, WE CAN'T MAINTAIN IT ANYMORE, SORRY. BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO RAISE
A RATE BY JUST A COUPLE DOLLARS? COME ON, MAN. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU,
COUNCILMAN ALDERETE ALDERETE GAVITO. >> ALDERETE GAVITO: JUST A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS. FIRST, I KNOW THAT -- ERIC, I THINK THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT YOU WILL HAVE TO PUT THIS TOGETHER IN SIX DAYS AND I KNOW THAT I MENTIONED DURING MY BUDGET BRIEFING I HAD ASKED FOR THIS, SO I THINK THAT IT'S BEEN MORE THAN SIX DAYS.
I'M A LITTLE FRUSTRATED WITH THE CONVERSATION TAKING PLACE ON THE DAIS BECAUSE I HEAR THE CONCERN FROM COUNCILMAN GALVAN HAS, WELL, IF YOU DON'T WANT A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE, CUT IN THE DISTRICTS. BUT I'M ALSO CURIOUS WHY SOME OF THESE LINE ITEMS Y'ALL PUT AS CUTS. BECAUSE I ACTUALLY THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT MORE INTERNALLY AS A CITY ORGANIZATION THAT WE CAN CUT, VERSUS RESIDENT-FACING SERVICES.
FOR INSTANCE, NO -- I'M NOT KNOCKING TVSA, I THINK THEY DO A PHENOMENAL JOB.
BUT WE CAN ALL TURN ON AND SEE, LIKE, THIS WHOLE PRODUCTION OF PEOPLE TALKING AROUND A TABLE ABOUT SERVICES IN SAN ANTONIO AND I AM LIKE HOW MUCH DID THAT COST? HOW MUCH, LIKE COUNCILMAN SPEARS SAID, DO OFFICE FURNISHINGS COST? HOW MUCH DOES ALL OF THIS COST. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IT'S INTERESTING THAT Y'ALL -- Y'ALL PUT THESE LINE ITEMS THAT REALLY IMPACT RESIDENTS AND START RILING UP UP AGAINST EACH OTHER.
AND THE ARGUMENT IS NOT EACH OTHER FOR OUR RESIDENTS. I THINK THAT THE ARGUMENT SHOULD BE HOW DO WE CUT THE FAT INTERNALLY? OUR BUDGET IS $4.4 BILLION.
WE CA CAN CUT THE FAT INTERNALLY AND I HATE THAT LINE BUT I JUST CAN'T THINK OF SOMEBODY ELSE RIGHT NOW. SO I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S HEALTHY OR FRUITFUL FOR US TO START GETTING TERRITORIAL ABOUT OUR RESIDENT SERVICES, BECAUSE WE DO KNOW THAT A LOT OF THESE SERVICES ARE NEEDED. YOU KNOW, THEY ARE NEEDED THROUGHOUT ALL 10 DISTRICTS.
ABSOLUTELY. BUT I WOULD LOVE TO TAKE -- STILL THE SAME APPROACH OF NOT RAISING PROPERTY TAXES AND LOOKING AT THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATION.
I KNOW THAT EVERY SINGLE ROLE AT THE CITY HAS AN IMPACT TO RESIDENTS.
BUT I THINK THAT INSTEAD OF DIRECT IMPACT TO RESIDENTS LIKE SOME OF THESE LINE ITEMS ARE -- WHAT IS THE MANAGER REPORTING TO A DIRECTOR REPORTING TO A VP LOOK LIKE? CAN WE ELIMINATE SOME OF THOSE POSITIONS? CAN WE ELIMINATE THE HIERARCHY? CAN WE ELIMINATE JUST ORGANIZATIONAL FLUFF? I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT.
BECAUSE, AGAIN, I STILL DON'T WANT TO RAISE TAXES ON OUR RESIDENTS.
AND I'M STILL ADAMANT ABOUT THAT. I JUST THINK THAT WHAT Y'ALL SERVED UP HERE IS A LONG TIME TO LOOK AT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO US TAKE A DIFFERENT APPROACH ON THAT. I ALSO THINK, YOU KNOW, UM, AT THE START OF OUR FIRST -- OUR FIRST, UM, TERM, COUNCILMAN MARC WHYTE RAISED UP ZERO-BASED BUDGETING AND I SUPPORTED HIM ON THAT. I KNOW THAT SINCE THEN IT'S -- IT'S SAVED THE CITY AROUND $6 MILLION OR $7 MILLION. BUT NOT EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT HAS GONE THROUGH IT.
SO WHAT WOULD A WORLD LOOK LIKE WHERE WE AGGRESSIVELY WENT THROUGH ZERO-BASED BUDGETING AND DID A WHOLE SLEW MORE OF DEPARTMENTS? AND SAID, ALL RIGHT, YOU START AT ZERO AND TELL US WHAT YOU NEED. HOW MUCH MORE CAN WE FIND IF WE JUST PUSHED THE GAS PEDAL ON THAT EFFORT? AND FOUND SOME -- SOME -- SOME DOLLARS TO TRIM. AND SO THAT'S -- THAT'S ANOTHER, UM, ANGLE.
YOU KNOW, I REALLY WANT US TO -- TO -- TO LOOK AT TOO. YOU KNOW, IS IT GETTING VERY AGGRESSIVE ON ZERO-BASED BUDGETING. AND THEN THE SECOND -- THE SECOND THING IS WHAT I TALKED ABOUT -- I'M STILL VERY MUCH AGAINST RAISING PROPERTY TAXES ON RESIDENTS. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE OTHER LINE ITEMS THAT MOSTLY CUT THE FAT INTERNALLY FROM AN ORGANIZATION PERSPECTIVE, RATHER THAN SERVICES TO RESIDENTS.
THOSE ARE ALL OF MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR, COUNCILWOMAN, THE HYBRID APPROACH, WE DO IN EVERY DEPARTMENT EVERY YEAR AND HAVE DONE FOR LAST TWO YEARS.
[01:40:05]
SO I DON'T WANT YOU TO THINK THAT WE DON'T DO THAT IN EVERY DEPARTMENT.WE DO THAT AND WE DO THAT BEYOND THE GENERAL FUND. AND IT HAS -- IT HAS, UM, IT'S BEEN A WORTH WHILE APPROACH TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE LINE ITEMS IN THE DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS ARE ALIGNED WITH THEIR SPENDING AND NOT NECESSARILY THE PREVIOUS YEAR BUDGETS.
SECONDLY, UM, LOOK, I RECOGNIZE THIS IS A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION.
AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE ARE A RATHER LEAN ORGANIZATION ADMINISTRATIVELY.
AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SOLVE OUR ISSUE WITH ADMINISTRATIVE CUTS.
PERIOD. NOW, MAYBE -- CERTAINLY WE SHOULDN'T BE SPENDING $3,000 ON CASTERS, RIGHT -- AND THANK YOU, EMILY AND THE COUNCILWOMAN FOR NOT DOING THAT.
BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO SOLVE OUR PROBLEM IN THAT SENSE. BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY WE STILL HAVE TO MANAGE CONTRACTS, WE ARE AUDITED AND WE HAVE A PAYROLL EVERY TWO WEEKS AND WE HAVE INTERNAL FUNCTIONS AND WE HAVE THE LEGAL OFFICE. AND YOU SAW IN SCENARIO A US MAKING A MILLION AND A HALF DOLLARS WORTH OF CUTS IN TERMS OF ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS INCLUDING HR AND THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, BUILDING SERVICES AND JUST WE WOULD IDENTIFY THAT.
BUT I DON'T -- I AM STRONGLY ENCOURAGING YOU ALL TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT CUTS IN SERVICES. BECAUSE THIS IS NOT AN ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUE.
WE SPEND VERY LITTLE MONEY IN TERMS OF ADMINISTRATION. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT -- I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS CONVERSATION, UM, GENERATES THE PASSION THAT IT HAS.
BUT I'M NOT TRYING TO PIT YOU GUYS AGAINST EACH OTHER. THIS IS HARD.
AND THE QUOTE OF THE DAY, WE'LL PUT IT ON NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET COVER, IS THESE ARE REAL CUTS, MAN. THIS IS SERIOUS STUFF. WE NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO OUR REVENUE AND WE NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO OUR FUNDING. YOU CAN'T SOLVE IT ALL IN ONE.
AND I APPRECIATE THE POSITION, THE DIFFICULT POSITION, THAT YOU ALL ARE IN.
AND WE'RE IN A DIFFICULT POSITION AS WELL. I TOLD YOU THAT -- I DISAGREE AND WOULD NOT PROFESSIONALLY RECOMMEND TO YOU ALL SOME OF THOSE CUTS IN SCENARIO A, BUT THAT WAS THE REQUEST. AND THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE CAN LOOK AT IT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO WALK OUT OF THE ROOM TODAY THINKING THAT, UM, THAT YOU ALL THINKING THAT WE'RE PITTING YOU GUYS UP AGAINST EACH OTHER. THIS IS -- THIS IS REAL STUFF.
AND DON'T FEEL SPECIAL. EVERY OTHER MAJOR TEXAS CITY IS GOING THROUGH THIS.
SO WE NEED TO BE THOUGHTFUL. WE NEED TO BE DILIGENT. WE NEED TO BE PERMANENT IN TERMS OF OUR REVENUE AND OUR EXPENSE CUTS. THIS IS GOING TO BE A DIFFICULT BUDGET PROCESS OVER THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS. SO THAT -- I JUST WANTED TO
RESPOND TO THAT COMMENT THAT YOU MADE. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU, ERIC.
DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE, GO AHEAD? >> ALDERETE GAVITO: IF I MAY RESPOND, WHEN I SAY PIT AGAINST EACH OTHER ON SORRY, I CAN SAY IT ANOTHER WAY.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT, WHILE I THINK THAT THESE LINE ITEMS ARE -- IMPACTS TO RESIDENTS, I AM CURIOUS ON WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF MORE OF THESE LINE ITEMS WERE ADMINISTRATIVE VERSUS IMPACT SERVICES TO RESIDENTS. NO DOUBT Y'ALL RUN A LEAN AND MEAN ORGANIZATION.
BUT, AGAIN, SOMETIMES I DO THINK THAT WHEN WE'RE WATCHING TVSA ON OUR TVS AND WATCHING FULL-BLOWN PRODUCTIONS ABOUT HIGHLIGHTING CITY SERVICES -- I SCRATCH MY HEAD AND I SAY HOW MUCH DID THAT COST? AND THAT IS -- THAT IS THE KIND OF THING THAT ORGANIZATIONALLY I WANT TO HAVE TO US LOOK AT INTERNALLY BEFORE WE HAVE THE CONVERSATION TO IMPACT RESIDENTS. NOW I'M NOT SAYING THAT ALL OF THIS CAN BE DONE INTERNALLY.
I DO THINK THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IMPACTS TO RESIDENTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF -- I'M JUST SAYING HYPOTHETICALLY.
IF HYPOTHETICALLY WE CAN LOOK AT THIS LIST AND 50% IS INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE-WISE AND 50% IS IMPACT TO RESIDENTS, THAT IS A CONVERSATION THAT I THINK THAT IS WORTH HAVING.
BUT RIGHT NOW ALL WE'RE SEEING IS LINE ITEMS OF IMPACTS TO RESIDENTS AND I THINK THAT IS WHERE YOU ARE SEEING THE PASSION COME OUT. AND I THINK THAT IT'S THE WRONG CONVERSATION. BECAUSE I STILL THINK THAT THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE ROOM
TO SQUEEZE INTERNALLY. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU.
COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I'M ALSO FRUSTRATED IN THAT I DO FEEL LIKE I'VE PERSONALLY RESPONDED TO THIS ARGUMENT EARLY AT THE BEGINNING OF THESE BUDGET CONVERSATIONS AND SOME OF IT. AND IT'S THE POINT THAT ERIC JUST MADE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO CUT, LIKE -- ADMINISTRATIVE CUTS ARE NOT GOING TO GET US OUT OF THE DEFICIT.
I OUTLINED THAT YOU COULD CUT 10, 15, 20 WHOLE DEPARTMENTS AND WE'D STILL HAVE TO FIND MORE TO
[01:45:01]
CUT. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU WILL FIND WITHIN THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET. AND I HEARD THE COMMENT, CUT THE CITY MANAGER'S SALARY.YES, WE COULD HAVE A FULL-TIME VOLUNTEER CITY MANAGER AND THEN WHERE WOULD WE BE AS A CITY? AND WE'LL STILL HAVE TO FIND $149.5 MILLION TO CUT. SO THERE'S REALISTIC SOLUTIONS THAT NEED TO BE POISED AND IF YOU LOOK AT EVEN THE BINDER THAT WAS GIVEN -- OR THE PIE CHART THAT SAYS HOW MUCH IS CITY EMPLOYEES AND WHATNOT -- THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT THAT IS FOR PROGRAMMING THAT WE CAN CUT THAT WOULD THEN GET US OUT OF THIS STRUCTURALLY.
SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP JUST YET -- WE ARE GOING TO AT SOME POINT -- DO YOU KNOW WHEN WE'LL BE CONSIDERING THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT WITH THE POLICE
ASSOCIATION? >> THEY'RE VOTING LATER THIS MONTH.
I THINK THAT WE'LL GET THE RESULTS OF THEIR VOTE ON EITHER AUGUST 30TH OR SEPTEMBER 1ST.
THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I'M ALWAYS HAVING WITH MY CONSTITUENTS IS ABOUT POLICING AND IT'S ABOUT OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND IT IS ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY THEY ACTUALLY HAVE IN THE DEPARTMENT. AND IT'S A LOT OF EMPLOYEES. IT'S A LOT.
THEIR HIGHEST FUNDED DEPARTMENT IS POLICE. I DON'T EXPECT THAT IS GOING TO CHANGE. BUT WHEN I BRING UP TO MY CONSTITUENTS, HEY, YOUR EXPECTATION IS THAT YOU'RE GETTING MORE -- OR YOU'RE SPENDING MORE MONEY AND THE EXPECTATION IS THEN THAT THE SERVICES ARE GOING TO INCREASE OR THAT IT'S GOING TO IMPROVE.
WHEN I SAID TO MY CONSTITUENTS RIGHT NOW THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE INCREASING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET BY $102 MILLION, THAT'S NOT A SINGLE NEW POLICE OFFICER.
THAT IS ENTIRELY PAY RAISES. THAT IS AN AREA THAT NOT ONCE HAS ANYONE ELSE ON THIS DAIS -- I WON'T SAY ANYBODY ELSE ON THIS DAIS -- THAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING, NO, WE CAN'T RAISE PROPERTY TAXES. THAT'S AN AREA THAT Y'ALL HAVE NOT ONCE SAID LET'S SCRUTINIZE THAT. MAYBE WE CUT THAT BACK A LITTLE BIT.
AND WHAT DOES IT HAVE IT TO DO WITH IT IS THAT IS $102 MILLION THAT ADDS TO THE GENERAL DEFICIT
THAT WE'RE CUTTING INTO OTHER THINGS. >> [INDISCERNIBLE]
>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: WE'RE CUTTING HOW MANY POSITIONS? >> [INDISCERNIBLE]
>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THE DIFFERENCE IS A 3% RAISE OVER A 16.59% RAISE.
THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. >> MAYOR JONES: HOLD ON, PLEASE DIRECT YOUR COMMENTS TO THE
CHAIR. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: MAYOR, AND SO -- AND SO ULTIMATELY I THINK THAT WHAT WE AS A COUNCIL SHOULD DO TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE TAXPAYER IS THAT WE SHOULD RE-EVALUATE THAT. AND MAYBE $102 MILLION ISN'T RIGHT FOR US RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT CUTTING ALL OF THESE SERVICES. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT ANYWHERE ELSE EXCEPT CUTTING SERVICE DEPARTMENTS AND I HATE THAT WE'LL GET TO A DAY WHEN WE VOTE ON THE POLICE CONTRACT AND THERE'S GOING TO BE PEOPLE UP HERE CRYING -- CRYING ABOUT HOW WE NEED TO DO MORE. BUT WE CAN'T. WE LITERALLY CAN'T BECAUSE YOU'RE -- YOU WON'T HELP US TO RAISE REVENUE. YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO LOOK AT THAT. I WISH I COULD REPEAT SOME OF THE FACES THAT ARE BEING DONE ACROSS THE DAIS. IT'S JUST VERY -- THE BIGGER POINT IS THAT THIS IS VERY -- THERE'S HYPOCRISY AND THERE'S INCONSISTENCY AND THERE'S AN UNWILLINGNESS TO BE PRODUCTIVE AND TO CONTRIBUTE. THERE'S AN UNWILLINGNESS TO INTERNALIZE THE VERY REAL REALITY THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CUT OUR WAY OUT OF THIS.
THERE'S NOT ENOUGH FAT IN THE FURNISHINGS BUDGET. LIKE, DO WE -- I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOME FURNITURE AND I TRIED TO BUY SOME FURNITURE OFF AMAZON AND I WAS TOLD NO.
I GET IT. I WOULD LOVE TO LOWER THE PRICES OF FURNITURE.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO SAVE US $160 MILLION. IT'S NOT.
I DON'T KNOW -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT MORE THERE IS TO SAY. REASONABLE PEOPLE ARE HERE AND I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE WORK THAT YOU DO. YOU AND EVERY DEPARTMENT -- ALL OF THE WORKING ACROSS THE CITY -- I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU DO.
I HATE THAT SOME OF YOU ARE SITTING THERE AND WONDERING AND WORRYING ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE YOUR JOBS. BECAUSE PEOPLE UP HERE CANNOT BE REAL. IT IS DISHEARTENING FOR YOU AND FOR ME.
MAYOR, I -- I DON'T KNOW WHY WE GO FROM HERE. THANK YOU.
>> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO. >> CASTILLO: A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR PREPARATION FOR MONDAY. SO SCENARIO A IS MAINTAINING THE
CURRENT PROPERTY TAX RATE, CORRECT? >> OH, YES, IT'S THE CURRENT
PROPERTY TAX RATE, YES, MA'AM. >> CASTILLO: AND THE IMPACT FOR 2027 AND 2028 IS GOING TO BE
ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS UP TO $75 MILLION, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> CASTILLO: WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IS FOR OUR SAN ANTONIO FIRE DEPARTMENT IS REDUCING THE
[01:50:04]
OVERTIME BUDGET BY $4 MILLION, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> CASTILLO: OKAY, THANK YOU, ERIC. WHEN I THINK OF THE DATA FOR DISTRICT 5.
STRUCTURES AND THE CALLS FOR EMS AND FOR SENIORS WHO HAVE FALLEN AND NEED ASSISTANCE TO GET UP, THERE'S SO MUCH VALUE THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING A BUDGET THAT ADEQUATELY FUNDS OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT SO THEY CAN RESPOND TO THE VACANT FIRES AND THEY CAN RESPOND TO INDIVIDUALS FALLEN IN THEIR HOME AND NEED ASSISTANCE. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT POINT THAT MAINTAINING THE CURRENT RATE STRUCTURE IS ESSENTIALLY DEFUNDING OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT'S OVERTIME.
AND BY PROXY, DEFUNDING OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT'S OVERTIME AS WELL.
THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER WHITE.
>> WHYTE: THE ONE THING THAT I WILL GIVE TO YOU IS THAT LEAST WE KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO CUT, RIGHT? IF YOU HAD YOUR WAY, YOU'RE GOING TO CUT POLICE.
GOT IT. AT LEAST -- AT LEAST THAT'S SOMEWHAT OF A SOLUTION.
OKAY? I'LL GIVE YOU THAT. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE REST? WHAT DO YOU WANT TO CUT? I MEAN, I HAVEN'T HEARD -- LIKE, I HAVE HEARD WHAT YOU THINK THAT ARE BAD IDEAS TO CUT. BUT WHAT ARE THE GOOD IDEAS TO CUT? AND -- NO, BUT, TO YOUR POINT, COUNCILMAN GALVAN, ALL RIGHT, SO INTERESTING IDEA, RIGHT? OUR DISTRICT DOESN'T USE THE SERVICES, UM, OR DOESN'T WANT TO PAY FOR THE SERVICES, WE DON'T GET THEM. WILL THE SAME APPLY TO POLICE? I MEAN, CAN WE GET -- CAN WE GET POLICE FOR OUR DISTRICT IF THEY DON'T WANT THEM FOR THEIR DISTRICT?
>> WE ARE NOT GOING TO SPLIT UP SERVICES AND HAVE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF SERVICE AROUND THE.
COMMENTS ARE ALSO BEING CATEGORIZED INCORRECTLY. >> MAYOR JONES: UNDERSTOOD.
OKAY, PLEASE FINISH YOUR COMMENTS, COUNCILMAN WHYTE. THANKS.
>> WHYTE: WE ALL HEARD THEM. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPLIT UP SERVICES.
SO I'M GLAD THAT WE TALKED THAT THROUGH. THIS IS -- AGAIN, LIKE, OH, IT'S JUST A DOLLAR. OH, IT'S JUST $2. IT'S NOT.
RIGHT? IT'S A COUPLE BUCKS HERE AND THERE ON PROPERTY TAXES.
AND IT'S ANOTHER $3 ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEE THAT IS GOING ON THE CPS BILL.
AND YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO RAISE PROPERTY TAXES TO GET A BIGGER BOND, RIGHT? WE HAVE ALREADY HEARD THAT. SO IT'S NOT -- IT ALL ADDS UP. AND THEN IN FIVE YEARS, RIGHT, SOME OF US WILL STILL BE HERE, AND THE DEFICIT WILL BE $134, OR 136 OR WHATEVER IT IS, RIGHT AND WE'LL SIT AROUND THIS DAIS AND CAN'T CUT THAT, LIKE THAT, CAN'T CUT THAT.
OH, LET'S RAISE PROPERTY TAXES AGAIN. SO WHERE DOES IT END? ARE WE NEVER GOING TO MAKE THE HARD DECISIONS AND DECIDE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO CUT? AND WE'VE HAD SOME TALK TODAY ABOUT ADMINISTRATIVE INTERNAL CUTS VERSUS FRONT-FACING SERVICES. IT'S INTERESTING. HOW DO WE COMPARE TO OTHER CITIES I WONDER IN TERMS OF, UM, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET IS PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATION, VERSUS OTHER CITIES? I MEAN, CAN WE GET A LOOK AT
THAT? >> YEAH, WE CAN -- WE CAN GO THROUGH THE OTHER MAJOR TEXAS
CITIES PROPOSED BUDGETS AND DO A COMPARISON. >> WHYTE: I MEAN, I THINK THAT
IT'S -- IT'S WHAT? >> [INDISCERNIBLE] >> WHYTE: WELL, I MEAN, LOOK, IT'S INTERESTING WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WE RUN A MEAN AND LEAN OPERATION HERE.
WELL, I MEAN -- WHAT IS THE STANDARD? YOU KNOW? WHO DO -- HOW DO WE DETERMINE IF WE ARE RUNNING A MEAN AND LEAN OPERATION? THE ONLY THAT I KNOW -- OR ONE OF THE WAYS -- IS TO LOOK AT OTHER CITIES.
YOU KNOW, WHAT DO THEY DO IN TERMS OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATION COMPARED TO WHAT WE DO. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW. BUT WHERE DO PEOPLE WANT TO CUT? I DON'T KNOW, OTHER THAN -- OTHER THAN POLICE, YOU KNOW, THAT I HEAR.
OR NOT RAISING POLICE PAY, ALL RIGHT, IF THAT CHARACTERIZES IT BETTER.
WHAT ELSE DO PEOPLE WANT TO DO? I MEAN, THAT'S ALL THAT I'M SAYING.
IF WE'RE GOING TO BE IN THE SAME SPOT IN FIVE YEARS, THIS IS JUST A BAND-AID.
AND ANOTHER THING THAT I WANT TO BRING UP IS, YOU KNOW, HOMELESSNESS -- WE JUST -- MY TEAM FOUND A -- FOUND A STUDY THAT SAYS THAT WHEN -- WHERE IS IT HERE?
[01:55:05]
2020, U.S. GOVERNMENT OF ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE STUDY FOUND THAT $100 INCREASE TO MEDIAN INCREASE -- INCREASE IN THE MEDIAN RENT IS ASSOCIATED WITH A 9% INCREASE IN THE ESTIMATED HOMELESSNESS RATE. RIGHT? IF WE THINK THAT A PROPERTY TAX HIKE TO LANDLORDS -- IF WE THINK THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PASS THAT ON TO THE RESIDENTS, WE'RE CRAZY. OF COURSE THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT.OF COURSE RENT IS GOING TO GO UP. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR THE HOMELESSNESS RATE WHICH WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT AND WANT TO BRING DOWN? AT SOME POINT THIS YEAR, NEXT YEAR, FIVE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, GOT TO GET A HANDLE ON THE
SPENDING. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER KAUR.
>> KAUR: I HAVE AN IDEA. IF YOU'RE LIKE EACH DIRECTOR SHOULD PICK A COUNCIL PERSON OR THE OTHER WAY AROUND AND JUST SPEND A DAY WITH THEM GOING LINE-BY-LINE IN THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM, AND HELP TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEIR BUDGET IS ALLOCATED FOR. I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY EASY TO SIT UP HERE AND TO POINT FINGERS AND TO SAY, LIKE, OH, YOU NEED TO CUT MORE FAT AND SOMETIMES IT'S NOT AS EASY FOR DIRECTORS TO BE LIKE, THAT IS A PERSON. AND SO I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO REALLY DIVE INTO WHAT SOME OF THE.
HAVE TO DO. BUT AS -- I AGREE WITH THE HYBRID ZERO-BASED BUDGETING MODEL AS WELL, BECAUSE THAT STUFF TAKES TIME. AND I KNOW THAT ONE OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS THAT WERE IMPACTED THIS YEAR WAS THE LIBRARY SYSTEM WHICH WE'VE SEEN HOW HARD THAT'S BEEN AS A CONVERSATION FOR THE COMMUNITY. AND WHERE SOME FOLKS STILL FEEL THEY NEED THAT ADDITIONAL SUPPORT, THAT MIGHT NOT BE -- THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE COME OUT OF THAT BUDGET. SO I THINK THAT THE HYBRID MODEL ALLOWS US TO TAKE IT ONE STEP AT A TIME.
DOING -- I'LL DO IT WITH YOU, ART, IN PUBLIC WORKS. [LAUGHTER] WE CAN SPEND TIME LOOKING AT EVERYTHING THAT IS HAPPENING THERE.
AND, I MEAN, IF WE'RE CUTTING FEEDBACK, WHAT ELSE IS THERE? MAYBE THE HARD TIME IS THAT YOU'RE NOT GETTING EXAMPLES BECAUSE FOLKS DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE THERE IS.
SO MAYBE YOU COULD GO SPEND TIME, MARK, WITH THE CHIEF AND ASK HIM WHAT IS IN HIS BUDGET LINE. AND SEE WHO -- CHOOSE A DIFFERENT EXAMPLE? OKAY. HOW ABOUT KRYSTAL JONES AT ARTS. AND GO SEE WHAT SHE'S DOING WITH THE LEAN TEAM THAT SHE'S DOING IT AT. AND SEE WHAT YOU FEEL LIKE YOU CAN REMOVE FROM THE ARTS PROGRAM. WHICH, ACTUALLY HAS ITS OWN SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR A LOT OF IT. SO MAYBE ALSO NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE. ANYWAYS, Y'ALL GOT MY POINT. JUST THINK ABOUT THAT IT'S EASY TO SIT UP IN THESE CUSHION CHAIRS AND SAY Y'ALL OVER HERE NEED TO DO SOME MORE WORK.
BUT I WOULD ASK THE RIGHT -- I WOULD ASK THESE FOLKS QUESTIONS ABOUT WHERE -- WHAT YOU REALLY THINK THAT THEY SHOULD BE DE-PRIORITIZING, BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY, AS SOMEONE WHO RAN AN ORGANIZATION PREVIOUSLY, OF COURSE THE FIRST THING TO GO IS LIKE THE TEAM CELEBRATIONS.
LIKE, WE DON'T EVEN GET TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW. BUT TEAM CELEBRATIONS BUILD MORALE. SO, YEAH, WE DO PAY SOME MONEY ON FOOD, BUT THESE ARE STAFF AND IT'S AN ORGANIZATION AND IT'S A BUSINESS AND THEY HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO KEEP PEOPLE MOTIVATED. SO, ANYWAY, DONE MY RANT. THANK YOU, MAYOR.
>> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER SEARS. >> I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO BE SMART AND THINKING ABOUT WHAT IS WORKING AND I HAD A CONVERSATION I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS YESTERDAY OR THIS MORNING ABOUT A HOMELESS COLONY IN MY DISTRICT AND IT'S HEARTBREAKING AND IT'S IN OUR DRAINAGE SYSTEM. AND IT LEADS INTO SOME PRIVATE PROPERTY.
AND I DO NOT HEAR CRITICISM OF OUR DEPARTMENTS THAT WORK IN THIS, BUT THE REALITY FROM MY DISTRICT IS THIS: THERE'S A HUG. IT'S A HUGE COLONY. IT'S BEEN ABATED 11 TIMES THIS YEAR AND 48 TIMES TOTAL. AND THERE'S SOME CHURCHES NEARBY HOSTING SOME SERVICES, WHICH IMPACT THAT, RIGHT? BUT, FOR INSTANCE, HAVEN, AND THEY HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO COME OUT TO DISTRICT 9. DID Y'ALL KNOW THAT? AND THEY NEED THAT.
THEY NEED THOSE EIGHT TOUCHES, I THINK THAT I MAY HAVE THAT NUMBER WRONG AND THEY NEED THAT TO GET OUT OF THEIR SITUATION AND WE NEED THAT ACROSS THE CITY.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE TRIED TO COME UP WITH SOME SOLUTIONS -- THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER BEING TOLD THAT HE'S ON HIS OWN AND HE HAS TO DEAL WITH IT, EVEN THOUGH IT'S BECAUSE IT'S PART OF OUR
[02:00:04]
OWN INFRASTRUCTURE, ANDTON AND TXDOT,AND IT'S NOT EQUAL ARE CITY.AND THE PARK I'M JUST SO PROUD OF -- HUGELY FUNDED WITH A PRIVATE INVESTMENT.
WELL, THEY DID FUNDRAISING FOR IT, WHICH IS THE ACCESSIBLE PARK OUT AT STEUBING RANCH OR MITCHELL'S LANDING. SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN MY DISTRICT IS PAYING SO MUCH INTO WHAT COUNCILMAN WH WHYTE SAID WHEN WE START TO ADD UP ALL OF THESE FEES AND THEY'RE ASKING ME AND BEGGING ME FOR MORE POLICE AND PATROL. AND EVERYONE IS SAYING, NO, NO, NO, WE NEED TO DO MORE OF THE, UM, I DON'T KNOW, BALLET CLASSES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT MAYBE THREE PEOPLE GO TO -- I'M NOT -- I MEAN -- MY KIDS ARE IN DANCE AND I SEE THE VALUE OF IT.
I GOT IT. BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT MAYBE THAT IS NOT FOR US TO DO.
AND, UM, AND ALSO THAT'S NOT IN DISTRICT 9. SO THERE IS SOME DISPARITY IN WHAT IS HAPPENING. I THINK THAT IT SHOULD GO WHERE IT'S NEEDED, BUT IS IT REALLY CORE SERVICE? AND IT'S JUST HARD FOR ME TO SAN HALL TONIGHT.
I MEAN, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY WE WANT MORE POLICE, AND WE WANT MORE POLICE AND MORE FIRE.
AND WHAT COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO WAS SAYING, AGREE, WE CAN'T CUT BACK THERE.
I THINK THAT A SOLUTION IS MORE FTES BECAUSE THAT DOES REDUCE OVERTIME.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT GOES BOTH WAYS. WE HAVE TO SAY, YES, WE CAN CUT -- I DON'T WANT TO CUT ALL OF THIS PROGRAMMING. I THINK THAT THE NUTRITION CENTER FREAKED ME OUT. I DON'T WANT TO CUT THAT NUTRITION CENTER.
I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF A LOT OF IT. AND I THINK THAT THERE'S OTHER WAYS, DEFINITELY THINK THAT THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT AREN'E DOWN ON, ON WHAT COUNCILWOMAN GAVITO WAS SAYING AND IT'S A QUICK TURN AROUND FOR YOU, ERIC, AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO LOOK AT. I KNOW THAT IT WAS A QUICK TURN AROUND.
BUT, YOU KNOW, EVEN THE LIBRARY THAT IS REALLY COOL, BECAUSE IT HAS A DRIVE-THRU.
IT'S BECAUSE WE RE-PURPOSED A MEXICAN RESTAURANT. I MEAN, WE WERE THINKING ABOUT IT, RIGHT? SO WE DIDN'T HAVE TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING AND WE TRIED TO BE RESOURCEFUL. AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST -- I ALSO WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT ON LEGAL, YOU KNOW, WHAT ABOUT OUR LAWSUITS? YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT MAYBE ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT OPENLY, BUT ARE WE MITIGATING OUR RISK IN EVERY WAY SO THAT WE DON'T GET SUED A LOT OR ARE SUING A LOT? THOSE THINGS CAN END UP COSTING A LOT OF MONEY AS WELL -- WELL, THEY DO, I KNOW. BUT THE LAST THING THAT I WANT TO END ON A HIGH NOTE, ARE WE PURSUING EVERY GRANT POSSIBLE AND QUICKLY TURNING ON THAT? I FFOUND MONEY IS THE BEST MONEY AND IF WE CAN GO AFTER IT AND GET IT AND THINK ABOUT HOW TO DO THAT, I WOULD REALLY JUST LIKE TO SEE US DOING THAT MORE AND MORE.
AND A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES ARE WILLING I THINK TO GO AFTER IT IF NEEDED AS WELL.
SO WHERE WE CAN FIND MONEY THAT WOULD GO SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT IF WE ASK FOR IT, IT WILL COME HERE. I THINK WE HAVE TO BE MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THAT AND EXHAUSTING THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, BECAUSE GRANTS COME UP ALL OF THE TIME AT THE FEDERAL AND THE STATE. AND JUST -- I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GOING AFTER ALL
OF THOSE. SO THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER VIAGRAN. >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO I THINK THAT WHAT I'M HEARINE MONTHS AGO AND I ASKED Y'ALL TO CUT AND TELL ME WHERE Y'ALL WANTED TO CUT.
THAT'S WHY I SAID THAT I WASN'T WILLING TO CUT. WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO LOOK AT RAISING PROPERTY TAXES. AND TO HEAR SOMEONE USE MY LINE ABOUT WHERE DO WE WANT TO CUT WHEN THEY WANT TO CUT EVERYTHIN5 MILLION WORTH OF PROGRAMS, I AM LIKE YOU COULD HAVE SAID THIS MONTHS AGO. BUT I DIGRESS THERE. ERIC, HOW MANY JOBS DID WE LOSE
DURING THE PANDEMIC WHEN COVID CAME? >> NONE.
>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU. AND, AGAIN, I WANT IT REITERATE, I WANT TO KNOW WHERE THOSE 171 EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO COME FROM. I WANT TO KNOW WHERE THEY LIVE AND I WANT TO KNOW HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BECAUSE IT'S THE DAUGHTER OF SOMEONE WHO WORKED FOR OVER 30 YEARS, THIS IS IMPORTANT TO ME.
I DO WANT TO SEE HOW WE CAN EXPLORE. I THINK THAT WHAT I'M HEARING, WHICH I'M ENTHUSED ABOUT, IS THAT WE KNOW THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT VARIABLE RATE.
BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO LOSE JOBS. BECAUSE THIS IS SAN ANTONIO, AND WE ARE A COMMUNITY AND WE'RE COMMUNITY STRONG. I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO
[02:05:01]
CUTTING OUR WAY OUT OF THE BUDGET. WE NEED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO CONTINUE. AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE NEED TO RAISE PROPERTY TAXES.AND THE BEST TAX IS SEALS IS SA. RIGHT NOW WHAT I SAW WHEN I GOT HERE IN THE PANDEMIC IS SALES TAX THAT IS NOT HAPPENING BECAUSE WE HAVE A COMMUNITY THAT IS EITHER NOT MAKING ENOUGH, OR JUST NERVOUS ABOUT INVESTMENTS AND SPENDING. SO HOW DO WE DO THAT? AND THE ONE THING THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT WE AS A COUNCIL CAN HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS AND GO BACK AND FORTH, BUT WHAT I NEED.
AND WHAT I NEED THE DIRECTORS TO DO IS THAT YOU HEAR US AND WE NEED YOU TO -- YES, TIGHTEN THE BELT -- BUT WE NEED TO BE CREATIVE ON WHAT IS OUR RETURN IN INVESTMENT WHEN YOU COME AND YOU DO YOUR PRESENTATIONS. BECAUSE I THINK THAT WHAT YOU ARE HEARING IS THAT WE HAVE LEADERS THAT ARE GOING TO GO OUT THERE AND SAY IT'S EITHER YOUR NEIGHBOR LOSES YOUR JOB, WHICH IT IS. OR -- OR WE RAISE THE TAXES AND WE GET TO KEEP THIS PROGRAM.
AND I THINK THAT THE MAJORITY -- AND THAT'S WHY I AM STRESSING RIGHT NOW -- AND I AM TRYING TO GET MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES TO AGREE WITH ME, IS TO LOOK AT THAT -- THAT ONE-TIME 8.7%, OR THAT -- THE SCENARIO B, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT IN THE SITUATION NEXT YEAR.
AND I THINK THAT WE CAN PUT IT BACK INTO OUR LIBRARIES, BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE KEY, BECAUSE THAT -- THAT AND PARKS. IF YOU HAD COME AND SAID THAT YOU WERE GOING TO CUT THE PARKS, WHICH I KNOW THAT THEY'RE ON THA LIST -- YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD HAVE HEARD A LOT MORE FROM THE NEIGHBORS. BUT YOU -- YOU KNOW, LIBRARY WAS THERE AND YOU TRIED THAT AND I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS WORKING. WHEN WE ASK WHAT DO OTHER CITIES DO -- OTHER CITIES RAISE THEIR PROPERTY TAXES. DALLAS, I THINK THAT IT'S BEEN A DECADE, BUT IF YOU COULD FIND THAT OUT, THEY RAISE PROPERTY TAXES. IT'S BEEN, WHAT, 33 YEARS FOR US. HOUSTON -- THEY WOULD RAISE THEIR TAXES, THAT THE VOTERS HAD TO VOTE TO TELL THEM THIS IS THE REVENUE CAP. DON'T RAISE TAXES ANYMORE.
AUSTIN RAISED THEIR PROPERTY TAX RATE, I BELIEVE IN AUGUST 2026. EL PASO LAST RAISED THEIR PROPERTY TAX RATE IN 2019. AND IF Y'ALL COULD GET THE STATS AND VERIFY IT, I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL FOR OUR, UM, FOR OUR TOWN HALL MEETINGS AND OUR OTHER BUDGET CONVERSATIONS TO SAY THESE OTHER CITIES THAT WE'RE COMPARING TO, THEY HAVE BEEN -- THEY DID NOT KEEP THEIR PROPERTY TAX RATES STAGNANT FOR 33 YEARS. IF YOU COULD FIND ME -- FIND ME A TEXAS CITY THAT DID NOT RAISE THEIR PROPERTY TAX RATES FOR 33 YEARS AND HOW THEY DID.
AND SO I'M -- I KNOW THAT THIS IS HARD, I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF, UM, BACK-AND-FORTH, BUT I THINK IF WE TAKE IT OUT TO OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND THAT, AND YOU DO TAKE SCENARIO A OUT, I THINK THAT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IS THAT THEY WANT, UM -- THEY WANT TO SEE US PROVIDE THE SERVICES AND DO THE BEST SERVICES THAT WE CAN POSSIBLY.
I DON'T KNOW THAT -- THE OTHER REASON THAT I DON'T LIKE ZERO-BASED BUDGET IS BECAUSE IT MAKES YOU FEEL LIKE AS A CITY THAT YOU HAVE TO GO OUT AND TO JUSTIFY WHY YOU HAVE A LIBRARY, AND WHY YOU HAVE PARKS AND WHY YOU HAVE ARTS AND CULTURE. AND I THINK THAT FOR A LOT OF THIS COMMUNITY MEMBERS, THAT'S JUST -- THAT'S JUST PREACHING TO THE CHOIR.
THEY WANT ALL OF THOSE THINGS HERE. AND IT'S EVIDENT ON HOW THEY
PARTICIPATE. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR.
>> MAYOR JONES: GO AHEAD. >> SO WE'RE WORKING ON THAT HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE WITH OTHER TEXAS CITIES. YOU MENTIONED EL PASO AND EL PASO RAISED THEIR TAX RATE YESTERDAY WHEN THEY ADOPTED THEIR BUDGET. BUT JUSTINA HAS ALL OF THE RAW INFORMATION IS WE'LL SYNTHESIZE AND SUMMARIZE IT AND SHOW YOU OTHER TEXAS CITIES.
THERE'S CERTAINLY NOT ANY LARGE TEXAS CITY THAT HASN'T DONE IT IN 33 YEARS.
IT'S A PRETTY FREQUENT ACT THAT THOSE CITIES HAVE TAKEN. BUT WE'LL GIVE THAT TO YOU BY
THE END OF THE WEEK. >> MAYOR JONES: ERIC, DID YOU HAVE THAT SLIDE THAT YOU WANTED TO SHOW? WAS IT READY? OR -- DO YOU WANT TO SEND IT
AFTER THE FACT? >> IS IT READY TO GO? YEAH, LET'S PULL IT UP.
EVEN THOUGH IT RUNS COUNTER TO COUNCILWOMAN KAUR'S QUESTIONS. IT'S THE SAME FORMAT.
BUT WE'LL WORK ON THE REVISED FORMAT. >> MAYOR JONES: THIS WAS THE
[02:10:03]
CHART FOR SCENARIO B, CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY.
I WANT -- IT WAS JUST MENTIONED, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MANAGING FOLKS' EXPECTATIONS AND CERTAINLY FOR THE PUBLIC LISTENING. WE DON'T EXPECT -- OR AS YOU ALL HAVE ARTICULATED, WE EXPECT TO BE IN KIND OF A SIMILAR SITUATION NEXT YEAR, RIGHT, IN TERMS WHAT WE ASSESS TO BE THE STATE OF PROPERTY TAXES. IS THAT A FAIR ASSESSMENT, ERIC?
>> YES, MA'AM, WE'RE CONSERVATIVELY ESTIMATING.
IN 2028. >> MAYOR JONES: SO, UNFORTUNATELY, WE'LL BE IN SOMEWHAT OF A SIMILAR SITUATION NEXT YEAR. OKAY.
>> THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE THIS OVER TWO YEARS. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY, THANK YOU, ERIC. YEAH, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS OF MY COLLEAGUES AND ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO HAVE REALLY WANTED TO LOOK AT THIS OVER FIVE YEARS, AND THINKING ABOUT WHAT THIS DOES TO OUR -- TO OUR DEFICIT. AS WE LOOK AT SOME OF THESE VERY DIFFICULT, DIFFICULT CUTS.
WHICH IS WHY TO THE QUESTION OF, UM, WHERE CAN WE POTENTIALLY LOOK AT ADDITIONAL REVENUE STREAMS, ERIC I THINK THAT IT IS WORTH LOOKING AT -- BEFORE WE ASK -- OR ARE ASKING TO RAISE THE PROPERTY TAXES OF OUR -- OF OUR NEIGHBORS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY TAXES THAT WE HAVE ALREADY COLLECTED. I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION HERE SHORTLY ON THE TIRZ AND ACTIONS TO EXTEND ONE, AND OTHER ACTIONS IN OTHER AREAS.
BUT I'D LIKE US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT WOULD MEAN IF WE TOOK, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, 20%, UM, FROM THE -- FROM THE CITY INITIATED TIRZ. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WOULD BE ABOUT $7 MILLION. AND WE COULD HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IF WE WANTED TO SEE SOME OF THE IMPROVEMENTS AND SOME OF THE MID TIRZ ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FUNDING HERE. I'VE BEEN VERY CLEAR ABOUT SOME OF THE CONTRACT AGENCIES THAT I THINK THAT IS WORTH EXPLORING. AGAIN, I LOOK FORWARD TO THE ORI ANALYSIS OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THOSE, BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE BOTANICAL BOTANICAL GARDEN, THA2 MILLION IN LIGHT OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT CUTTING. BECAUSE THE INTELLECTUAL EXERCISES HAVE BEEN SO HELPFUL, IF WE WANTED TO FIND ANOTHER $10 MILLION IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE COULD DO THAT. I KNOW THAT THE ANALYSIS IS COMING ABOUT WHERE ARE THE DEVELOPERS FEES ARE IN RELATION TO OTHER CITIES. HOWEVER, IF WE WANTED TO FIND ANOTHER $10 MILLION IN SERVICES FEES, HOW -- WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE?
SO WE COULD ALSO BALANCE -- BALANCE THAT. >> MAYOR --
>> MAYOR JONES: PLEASE. >> IS THAT $10 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE?
>> MAYOR JONES: PLEASE, THAT'S RIGHT. >> NOW, WE CAN CERTAINLY FOLLOW UP ON THAT. THAT REVENUE IS DEPOSITED NOT JUDGE THE GENERAL FUND BUT IN THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT. OKAY.
>> MAYOR JONES: OKAY, OKAY. BECAUSE WE ARE REALLY, UM, WE ARE HOPING THAT 2029 WILL BE BETTER, I THINK THAT AS MUCH AS WE CAN DO TO HELP OURSELVES, UM, SO LOOKING AT, UM, MAXIMIZING THE FUNDING OF THE MEDICAID 1115 WAIVER IN YEARS 2027 AND 2028. SO WE CAN MINIMIZE ANY HEALTH CARE CUTS ANTICIPATED. AND I WANT US TO LOCK AT MAXIMIZING THE READY-TO-WORK FUNDS IN 2027 AND IN 2028. THROUGHOUT SOME OF THE OTHER -- CERTAINLY SOME OF THE DELEGATE AGENCIES BUT ALSO SOME OF THE INTERNAL DEPARTMENT ACTIVITIES THAT CAN BE FUNDED WITH THAT MONEY. SO THERE I THINK THAT THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL RESOURCES.
AND WE MAY VERY WELL STILL NEED TO -- AND TO BE VERY CLEAR -- I SUPPORT CONTINUING WITH THE INITIALLY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR PLANNING PURPOSES. HOWEVER, I THINK THAT AS HAS BEEN ARTICULATED BY ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THESE THINGS TO OUR NEIGHBORS. SO CONTINUING WITH THAT INITIAL PATH FOR PLANNING PURPOSES, BUT ALSO THEN BEING VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHERE WE HAVE MADE CHANGES, BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE CANNOT DO THINGS, UM, IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE HAVE BEEN. WE HAVE TO BE THE BEST STEWARDS OF THE PEOPLE'S RESOURCES. BECAUSE AS JUST A REMINDER, WE HAVE YET TO SEE THE DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN AND WE HAVE NOT YET SEEN WHAT EACH OF THESE THINGS WOULD DO OVER TIME.
WE ARE, UM, I'M GOING TO JUST STATE THE OBVIOUS HERE. BUT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE -- THE CUTS THAT WE'RE HAVING TO CONSIDER ARE QUITE DIFFICULT. AND I HOPE THAT WE CONSIDER THIS AND WE REMEMBER THIS CONVERSATION BECAUSE WE'RE REALLY JUST AT THE BEGINNING.
BUT I HOPE THAT WE REMEMBER THIS AS WE ARE GIVING GUIDANCE TO ERIC AND WHEN HE NEGOTIATES WITH
[02:15:01]
THE SPURS OWNERS. THE GENERAL FUND IS UNSTRUCTURAY UNBALANCED.WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES TO SHORE OURSELVES UP, WHICH IS WHY IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE TO NOT HELP OUR SUCCESSORS, THOSE IN THESE SEATS SEVEN IN 10 YEARS FROM NOW, TO NEGOTIATE HARD FOR MORE THAN WHAT WE ARE GETTING NOW. AND IN MY MIND I'VE SAID IT -- IT LOOKS LIKE REVENUE SHARING. THIS FINANCIAL SITUATION DID NOT HAPPEN OVERNIGHT AND WE ARE DEALING WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF OUR PREDECESSORS. WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SET OUR CITY UP FOR SUCCESS. AND I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD DO THAT.
>> MAYOR JONES: PLEASE. >> WERE YOU DONE? >> MAYOR JONES:DONE WITH MY
COMMENTS. >> ARE YOU GETTING READY TO CLOSE THE MEETING?
>> MAYOR JONES: YES, SIR. >> WE WILL GET IT FIGURED OUT. EVERYTHING WILL BE OKAY.
AND IT'S PART OF THIS PROCESS AND I KNOW THAT IT IS DIFFICULT AND I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU ALL WILL APPROVE A BALANCED
BUDGET AND WE'LL TACKLE WHAT WE'VE GOT TO DEAL WITH. >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH, THANK YOU.
I DID WANT TO FLAG, AN IMPORTANT CHANGE IN THE SCHEDULE. I KNOW -- ARE WE STILL ANTICIPATED TO TAKE THAT ACTION ON THE TIRZ ITEMS ON THE 3RD OF SEPTEMBER?
>> NO, MA'AM, WE WILL PROBABLY SLIDE A WEEK. YEAH.
IT'S TOO SOON TO DO THAT, BOTH BRIEFING AND ACTION THE SAME WEEK.
>> MAYOR JONES: AGREED. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THE TIME IS NOW 4:19
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.