While the City Council was melting down over how to solve budget deficit last month, East Side Councilman Jalen McKee-Rodriguez (D2) was locking down funding for some major projects in his historically underserved district.
A new senior center and public pool for the East Side is expected to break ground in 2029, while he’s also closing in on another city land acquisition for affordable housing.
Once a progressive outsider on a business-friendly dais, McKee-Rodriguez, 31, is now in his third term on a council filled with like-minded members.
Together they join a growing list of progressives nationwide who are channeling their national policy frustrations into grassroots solutions — while bucking the traditional economic development models that they say have long failed to deliver on their promises.
“Right now people are exhausted of the tension and conflict and arguing at all levels of government. We see it at the federal level and it’s exhausting, and then at the state level, it feels even worse sometimes,” McKee-Rodriguez said in a wide-ranging Sept. 14 interview.
“When people see it happening at the local level, it feels like this is where the buck should stop, and where we should be most willing to compromise and work together.”
McKee-Rodriguez’s comments came as City Hall has been anything but collegial in recent months.
Despite electing a more progressive council last year, the city is still helping pay for a new downtown NBA arena for the San Antonio Spurs.
Private development that was supposed to follow the team’s East Side accommodations more than two decades ago never arrived — and last year’s contentious vote to help fund new ones has left deep divides between the council’s progressive and business-centric blocs.
Now slowed economic growth has also left less money for the type of community projects McKee-Rodriguez and his peers have embraced, and members representing wealthier districts are calling to pause non-essential spending.
But McKee-Rodriguez said his five and a half years on the council — longer than any of his District 2 predecessors served since the creation of term limits in 1991 — have given him the tools and relationships to keep moving forward anyway.
He’s using money from the Inner City Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) to build the new Eastside amenities, and just scored a position on the board of the Midtown TIRZ, which will oversee hundreds of millions of dollars spent on downtown projects in the years to come.
He took inspiration from the Spurs arena deal he opposed to fund the senior center, and he hopes to harness the same model for more downtown affordable housing in the coming years.
“I don’t know that all council members before me have fully realized what [this funding mechanism] could do for our district. I mean, that’s a learning curve,” McKee-Rodriguez said.
“… We have the financial tools and resources to build things that the community wants and needs and has asking for … opportunities for family-friendly activities, housing, amenities.”
While McKee-Rodriguez was finding traction for his own ideas, he also posted an unusual direct-to-camera social media video series criticizing colleagues for a “culture of sabotage” that’s pitted like-minded members against one another.
Such efforts to engage the public also led a second city ethics violation since taking office, over a response that shared a constituent’s address publicly.
McKee-Rodriguez chalked it up to a mistake, and he said he still hopes to make municipal government more responsive to the public.
“I think I’m known for being one of the best communicators on council, and for having really strong relationships,” McKee-Rodriguez said. “… Hopefully by being transparent, I’m opening the door for a better understanding.”
McKee-Rodriguez sat down with the San Antonio Report to talk about the lessons learned for a political newcomer-turned-elder-statesman, progressives’ vision for economic development, and how he gets by on a divided council.
The conversation has been edited lightly for clarity and length.
Why has District 2 seen so much turnover on the City Council, and what it has meant for residents?
District 2 is one of those districts that is extremely diverse in both population and need. We experienced pretty heavy gentrification at one point.
That continues and persists today, though we work to mitigate it, and so that’s created challenges for those seeking to represent the district, because you have to figure out the right balance for policy and of investment.
This seat also has some unusual power that not all of the others have. You get to appoint members to the Inner City TIRZ, which you’ve been able to leverage recently for your projects.
Do you think that’s driven some of the political maneuvering surrounding this seat? I’m thinking about the longtime Democratic state lawmaker who represents the East Side who ran her political allies against you.
That definitely has to do with some of it. There are developers who have projects and want a council person who’s going to grant them money for their market-rate development in the district. I think we’ve seen some of that play a role in why so many people are interested in the D2 seat and why other people have sought to play a hand in it.
When I first got elected, what was interesting to me is how many developers sat on the board, and people who did not live in District 2, who sought to gain from this tool that was seen as a blank check for developers at the time.
Removing those developers and putting folk who live in the district, who are organizers, who are experts in housing and tourism and the like, having those people sit on the board, I think, has been really valuable.
I don’t know that all council members before me have fully realized what [this funding mechanism] could do for our district. I mean, that’s a learning curve.
In recognizing that District 2 has incredible need, former council member Mario Salas was one of the folk who helped champion having a TIRZ. This is a tool that’s being used in other places around the country, and so he continues to sit on the TIRZ board as one of my appointees.
When we think about East Side development, it would seem like a lot of the vision is coming from the county right now. They pushed for a plan to repurpose the Frost Bank Center and surrounding area as part of their agreement to move the Spurs downtown. What do you think about the county’s East Side development vision?
It’s great that the county is working on a plan to address the Freeman Coliseum and the Frost Bank Center after the Spurs divest from the East Side, but ultimately, I don’t think that we can count on that to shape the future of the whole district or the East Side itself.
I’m looking at: what are the biggest opportunities that we have? What are the financing mechanisms that we have? And how could we be as creative as possible to make sure we have a shovel-ready project by the time I leave office, so that the next person can really build on that?
I think my role is set up District 2 so that we have at least two catalytic projects that are going to really shape the future of the East Side.
There are two projects we’re looking at that I’m really excited about. One is the senior center and that entire complex at Copernicus Park.
[Another is the] Mid Crown Drive-Eisenhower Road complex, next to Pre-K 4 SA, where we’re going to have a community center, a park and affordable housing for seniors. It’s sort of like the sister project to the [Copernicus Park] project.
Those are two pretty large investments. But aside from that, I’m working on hopefully getting a large investment in housing in the district fairly soon.
There’s a pretty major property acquisition we’re working on that’s not quite ready yet. We’re looking at a few different sites and a few different opportunities to do major projects.
These sound like fundamentally different views of economic development. The county has a developer-driven plan, which is supposed to bring a hotel and restaurants to an expanded rodeo district. Then there’s your vision, which is more about public investment in free or low-cost amenities.
What do you believe drives the kind of revitalization that residents are asking for on the East Side?
Candidates for office in District 2 have all said, “We don’t have enough grocery stores, we don’t have enough restaurants, we don’t have things for our families to do.”
What I have found is that if somebody does not see value in your community, if they don’t see you as worthy of investment, they’re not going to make that investment no matter what.
That can be said of the major retailers, it could be said of any of these corporations, it could be said of private developers.
If they don’t see value in you, they’re going to wait until they see an opportunity where the demographics are changing, or you’re being pushed out of your neighborhood, and that’s how that development is going to happen.
We have the financial tools and resources to build those things that the community wants and needs and has asking for — maybe not restaurants — but opportunities for family-friendly activities, housing, amenities. I’m not going to wait for a developer to tell me that they have the property for it, I’m going to take the initiative myself.
When did it become clear to you that this is the right approach?
After I had finished my first term in office and I was navigating my second term, I was becoming a little bit more comfortable with the different financing mechanisms that we have.
Since I’ve been able to acquire land and I’ve seen what’s possible with these public resources, I think it’s become clear to me that the opportunity has always existed. The city, the county, they invest in the things they want.
I’ve had so many conversations with Santikos, H-E-B, different restaurants and the like. They have the means, they have the resources, there is land, and if they’re not interested, they’re just not interested.
There’s nothing that one council person can do to force their hand, so what are the city alternatives to that?
We’re seeing the idea of municipal grocery stores and municipal banks and things like that. There’s also investments in housing and in green space and recreational activities. And so, I see that that as possible, and I think that’s the path forward.
Are there examples of where this sort of nontraditional economic development model is working well?
In 2024 I visited Redmond, Washington, to see their new senior center that had just been built. It was a beautiful facility — part senior center part community center. It had a gym, a rock wall. They have childcare.
There’s other community facilities I’ve seen that have food pantries and grocery stores and medical offices. I’ve seen bits and pieces everywhere, and I’m seeing that as an opportunity in our own community.
For example, with the senior center on Lord Road, the design that we have right now has a small movie theater auditorium where seniors can go. That’s something that we’ve heard from people, they want an opportunity for a movie theater. That complex is going to have an aquatic center that the public will be able to use.
So I’ve seen bits and pieces in other cities. I’ve seen what community centers can look like and how innovative they can get. I’ve seen amenities. I’ve seen housing developers be a little bit more creative in the types of amenities that they offer, whether it’s community meeting spaces or pre-K.
There’s all these things that other that other entities and other developments have been able to include. What’s the right combination when we’re looking at a new site or a new community center or a new anything?
Since you were first elected in 2021, this council has added a number of like-minded members who wanted to change the way the city makes deals with businesses and developers. In particular, Mayor Gina Ortiz Jones ran and won criticizing the way the Spurs arena deal was handled. Do you feel like that group is flexing its strength?
I think over the past few years there has been sort of a change. When I was first elected, and even before I was elected, if you looked at the economic development incentives, I think there was a philosophy of just give to everyone.
Quantity over quality.
Now, being a part of executive sessions where we’re discussing corporations and developers that are looking to come to San Antonio, we’re a lot more picky. We have higher demands for what a community benefit looks like. We’re definitely not the same city that would give a tax abatement to everyone because we were desperate.
We’re expecting that you’re going to offer above and beyond a minimum livable wage. You’re going to offer better benefits. You’re going to invest in and be a part of Ready to Work. You’re going to increase the number of jobs … and you’re going to do so by hiring people who live within San Antonio and in specific zip codes.
I don’t think that’s where we were several years ago.
We’re having very important conversations that were not being had prior, and we’re taking a direction that’s definitely more aligned with where our community stands on economic development.
You recently published a three-part social media video titled, “What the hell is wrong with City Council?” This was as members were trying to close a budget deficit and things got pretty ugly, much of which you chalked up to lasting divisions over Project Marvel.
What motivated you to weigh in on council relations and why do it in that way?
Something that’s always frustrated me, just as a resident looking at elected officials at all levels of government, is if there’s an issue, like why don’t you just tell us that?
If you can’t vote a certain way, or if you’ve made a decision, or if there’s some sort of conflict going on, why don’t you just tell us so that we understand it and so that we know why certain decisions are being made the way that they are?
People will regularly ask, “What’s with City Council? Why is there this conflict? What does the mayor have to do with it? What does the council have to do with it? Is there this sort of mean-girl situation happening?”
That’s been a very difficult topic for everyone to discuss, but it’s a question that we continue to get asked.
I [want to] be as transparent as I can be about what’s been going on and what’s been the culture of City Hall. I think everybody wants to be reassured that we’re all still working in their best interest, and that we’re able to work together to navigate difficult decisions.
Although that maintains a priority for each of us as individual members of council, I think people need to know — and deserve to know — that it’s become increasingly challenging to ensure that that’s always the case.
Some people may critique me for posting the video in the way that I did, but this is my workplace. I didn’t run for office to just be absorbed in this culture of conflict. I want to see a path forward, and sometimes that means that you have to push through, and you have to bring things to light so that you know everyone is challenged to address it.
Hopefully by being transparent, I’m opening the door for a better understanding for not just our residents, but for council members themselves to say, “Is this what we’re supposed to be doing right now? Could we be doing better?”
Because we owe it to our constituents to do that. We owe it to ourselves to to ourselves and to our constituents to reflect on this past year and a half.
