San Antonio will begin work this week to install rainbow-themed sidewalk art along Main Street in the city’s Pride Cultural Heritage District — a step the city previously outlined when it agreed to remove the district’s rainbow crosswalks after the Texas Department of Transportation denied an exemption request.
District 1 Councilwoman Sukh Kaur said in a statement posted Wednesday on Instagram that crews from the city’s Public Works Department will begin work this week. Minor sidewalk repairs will take place before painting begins on the new art installation.
Kaur said the design was developed with input from the city’s LGBTQ+ Advisory Board and is intended to maintain the district’s visibility and inclusivity following the state’s removal of the crosswalks.
“Though we’re sad to see the removal of the Rainbow Crosswalk, we’re excited to show y’all what’s coming next for Main Street,” Kaur wrote.
The planned artwork has drawn criticism from District 9 Council member Marc Whyte and District 10 Council member Misty Spears, who released a joint statement Wednesday objecting to the use of Public Works funds for the project.
The council members said public money should prioritize basic infrastructure needs and argued taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund individual viewpoints.
“When taxpayer dollars are involved, our focus should be on addressing these essential infrastructure needs that directly impact public safety and our residents’ day-to-day quality of life,” Whyte wrote. “As Americans, we have the right to freely express ourselves. If private individuals or businesses wish to use their money to make a statement, they have the right to do so. But to use public dollars to paint colored sidewalks instead of allocating that money to core infrastructure needs is not in the best interest of our citizens.”
City officials have previously noted that the now-removed rainbow crosswalks were a community-driven project, with residents and nearby businesses raising funds for the colored striping and maintenance, “voluntarily removing the burden from city taxpayers.”
Spears said her opposition is also centered on the use of public money.
“I believe the elimination of the rainbow crosswalks was an important roadway safety decision made by the state of Texas and not intended to target San Antonio or the LGBTQ community,” she wrote. “Protected free speech is what makes America the best country in the world. However, tax dollars should not fund individual viewpoints.”
In response to the joint statement, District 2 Councilman Jalen McKee-Rodriguez, whom Kaur credited with proposing the sidewalk art concept, criticized the objections and defended the project.
“As a starting point, I join the majority of San Antonians who do not care what the D9 and D10 Council members have to say about the sidewalks,” McKee-Rodriguez said. “From the beginning, this was never about traffic safety. Data shows that this intersection was safer after the installation of the crosswalks. This has always been about bigotry and the state choosing time and time again to attack the LGBTQ+ community. They hoped to make the city complicit in it.”
McKee-Rodriguez echoed language previously used by Assistant City Manager John Peterek in a Nov. 25 letter responding to TxDOT’s denial of the exemption request.
“The City continues to believe that the crosswalks in question are safer than before the installation of the rainbow-colored paint, that the intersection is safer than comparable nearby intersections, and that it demonstrated the importance of the crosswalks to the Pride Cultural Heritage District,” Peterek wrote. “Nevertheless, the City will respect TxDOT’s decision.”
McKee-Rodriguez added that taxpayer dollars were used to remove the privately maintained rainbow crosswalks and said the sidewalk art complies with state regulations while preserving visibility for the LGBTQ+ community.
“By installing rainbows on the sidewalk, we are abiding by all regulations while demonstrating even greater, more permanent visible support to the LGBTQ+ community and I appreciate the majority of my colleagues’ support in this effort,” he said. “It is hypocritical to all of a sudden pretend to care about frugality and taxpayer dollars when they didn’t mind the City wasting tens of thousands of dollars replacing an intersection that was perfectly safe as is, and being maintained privately.”
McKee-Rodriguez said no additional cost would have been incurred had the state not required the crosswalks’ removal, and suggested concerns about spending be directed to the governor’s office.
“Taxpayers wouldn’t be paying anything if Greg Abbott didn’t force us to rip up and replace a perfectly good intersection,” he wrote. “Misty and Marc can direct their frustrations to his office, if they’re so concerned.”
