After a months-long process of community and official discussion about possible amendments to the City of San Antonio’s charter, potential mayoral contender and Councilwoman Melissa Cabello Havrda (D6) threw two more suggestions into the mix Tuesday — one week before the council votes.
The move drew the ire of Mayor Ron Nirenberg, who terms out next year, along with some of her council colleagues, including some — like Havrda — who are potentially vying for the mayor’s seat.
City staff outlined six proposed rule changes about the city’s ethics board, council and city manager term limits and pay, city staff political activities and removing outdated language from the city’s constitution.
Havrda proposed two additional rule changes that would allow city council to directly hire and fire the city attorney and add two elected positions to SAWS and CPS Energy boards.
“We’ve been focusing on propositions that directly impact City Hall operations and our government officials,” Havrda said. “These are important changes to the city charter, [but] we’re missing opportunities to propose amendments that directly affect our residents’ daily lives, we need propositions and empower the people we serve, not just the way we serve them.”
Nirenberg stiffly rebuked her suggestions.
“I think it would be a disservice to our community and to the process if we just made this an open season [for] any idea that y’all had to put on the ballot,” he said on the dais after Havrda concluded her comments.
He denied Havrda’s request to respond immediately to him, but she addressed Nirenberg’s comment directly later during the second round of council comments.
“This is the first [time], in my view, the first opportunity we had to bring up items that have come to us from the community,” she said. “I submit that these issues are germane today, and they will be germane again next week when we vote on these items.”
The councilwoman did not mention her proposals when council first reviewed the Charter Review Commission’s final recommendations in June. The commission was established in November by Nirenberg, who directed members to prioritize his list of potential changes. The mayor typically establishes this group as-needed because changes to the charter can only be made every two years.
That group chose not to review other suggested changes that were brought to them during public meetings, including increasing city spending on youth programs, installing ranked-choice voting in municipal elections and ending a prohibition on campaign activity by city employees.
However, charter amendments are not required to be vetted by the commission and the commission’s recommendations aren’t automatically supported by the mayor. For example, city staff included the change that would allow city employees to engage in political activity, and Nirenberg said in June that the commission’s six-figure recommendation for council pay was too steep — both of which most council members seemed to agree with Thursday.
City Council can place any proposition on the ballot with a majority vote.
Council is slated to vote on whether to put each proposed charter amendment on the November ballot — and what the proposition would say — next Thursday, Aug. 8. The deadline to place items on the ballot is Aug. 19.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Nirenberg disagreed with Havrda’s claims that council members weren’t included in the process so far, and that the charter changes won’t directly benefit the residents of San Antonio.
“My office solicited input on both the composition [of the commission] as well as the subjects of the city charter review process,” he said. “Changes to the way we govern and the policies that we deliver are important for us to consider, particularly as it relates to the city’s constitution. … Everything that we do has an impact on San Antonio families. That’s why we want to improve it.”
There seemed to be general consensus among council members to place most of the six staff-proposed items on the ballot, though there were some disagreements on details.
Many agreed that council terms should be extended from two to four years, but there was division on whether to stagger district elections and whether to allow some council members to serve up to 10 years as the city transitions into the new terms. (If a council member who is running for their final term in 2025 wins, they could serve an extra two years beyond the 8-year maximum.)
Those details will likely be hammered out on the dais next Thursday.
City attorney
Havrda’s two added proposals received little enthusiasm from her colleagues on the dais Thursday.
Councilman Marc Whyte (D10), the council’s lone conservative, said he discussed Havrda’s proposals before Thursday and supports at least one — the one that would give city council the direct authority to hire and fire the city attorney.
“This is about accountability and transparency … for years into the future,” Whyte said. “We need to make sure that it’s not just the mayor, the city attorney and the city manager that filter everything to the city council, we got to be able to have open dialogue, open communication, and have all of the information so that we can relay it to our constituents and make the best decisions possible for them.”
The proposal to give city council the power to hire and fire stems from concerns Havrda, Whyte and three other council members had in May over City Attorney Andy Segovia’s interactions with council regarding sensitive negotiations with the firefighters’ union. At the time, Havrda called for Segovia to be fired.
Now, she’s not “unhappy with Andy,” Havrda said after the meeting. “I think that the structure, the way it’s set up, is not conducive to representation of the people.”
A 2010 Texas Municipal League survey she and Whyte pointed to found that 73% of home-rule cities in the state authorize their council to appoint the city attorney directly, according to research by the city of Austin, which will have that change on its ballot in November.
Utility boards
Councilwoman Sukh Kaur (D1) briefly expressed support for adding two elected positions to each public utility board.
Currently, the mayor serves on both SAWS’ and CPS Energy’s boards in an official capacity and other trustees are appointed by City Council.
Havrda proposes two “Rate Payer Representatives” that would be elected by voters. She cited other smaller utility groups in McAllen, Kansas City and Sacramento that have fully elected boards.
In San Antonio, “the public does not have a process for helping to choose the current members of these boards” she said, suggesting that these board positions could be on the ballot when municipal elections take place.
She responded Thursday to political observers, including Councilwoman Adriana Rocha Garcia (D4), who have speculated that her dispute with Segovia and these proposals may be part of a political strategy to boost Havrda’s name recognition and credentials ahead of a looming mayoral announcement.
“It’s insulting to hear that because I’ve been doing this all along,” she said. “I think people are maybe paying attention to me a little more now because they think I’m gonna run for mayor.”
The mayor said he would not speculate on Havrda’s motives.
“Obviously, there are going to be races happening and there’s politics in the background of a lot of things that happen at the city,” Nirenberg said. “I’m confident that my colleagues can separate the two.”
Councilman Manny Pelaez (D8), who like Councilman John Courage (D9) has already announced his bid for mayor, said the proposals would unnecessarily politicize the City Attorney’s Office and the utility boards.
“Whether it’s political or not, it’s a poorly thought out policy proposal that is the wrong fit for a large organization,” he said.
Rocha Garcia, another possible mayoral contender, said it “certainly seems like” mayoral ambitions are behind Havrda’s proposals.
But she said she has been more focused on the broad community support for another change that would mandate city spending on children and youth — a proposal led by the UP Partnership and a host of local agency and nonprofit partners.
Its proposal suggests setting aside 20% of annual growth in the city’s budget, an estimated $10 million to $56 million, for youth services, according to UP.
A May survey of likely voters showed that 76% would support a measure to set aside 20% of the city budget each year to fund “child care, job skills training for youth, youth violence prevention, support for children facing homelessness and foster youth, mental health services and before- and after-school activities.”
Whether that funding — and how much — comes through a charter amendment, ordinance or budget discussions, Rocha Garcia said, “we need to talk about it” as the city anticipates budget cuts.
City Council should prioritize community-led proposals, she added.
“I have grandiose ideas about what should be included in the next charter amendment, but it’s not about me,” she said. “It’s about what the community needs at that time.”
The outcome of council’s vote next week will likely sway Rocha Garcia toward her final decision on running for mayor, she said. “I’m 98% certain [I will run], depending on what happens next week.”
If term limits may be extended, it’s possible that she could serve District 4 for an extra two years.
“That’s a game changer for continuity in my district,” she said. “I have to see what’s best for my residents.”
