As a reader, I came to Senior Reporter Iris Dimmick’s Q&A with the nine candidates who want to be mayor of San Antonio with skepticism. Readers of the interviews published Saturday will recognize only a few of the candidates’ names, at best, so there was little reason to expect coherent responses or actionable ideas.
This is Texas, where anyone with a few bucks and a willingness to tilt at windmills can run for elected office. A name on the ballot is no guarantee the individual will campaign for votes, raise money, or develop an agenda.
Here are the nine candidates in the order of their filings: Antonio “Tony” Diaz, John Velasquez, Matt Piña, Ron Nirenberg, Carlos Castanuela, Tim Atwood, Bert Cecconi, Greg Brockhouse, and Michael “Commander” Idrogo.
I was wrong on my initial assumption. Several of the lesser-known candidates, however quixotic their journey, offered articulate expressions of what ails San Antonio.
I also came to the article believing that voters will conclude the best candidate for mayor already has the job. Mayor Ron Nirenberg should be strongly favored to win a second term on May 4, giving him the opportunity to prove a seasoned mayor is almost always more effective than a first-term mayor.
Nothing I read Saturday changed that assumption or my view of the big picture in San Antonio, a city seesawing between tremendous opportunity and serious challenges. If San Antonio is nearing the end of the Decade of Downtown, we might think of the next 10 years as the Decade of Destiny. How San Antonio evolves, or fails to evolve, over that time period will determine whether we belong on the list of thriving cities or end up on the list of also-rans, defined more by weaknesses than strengths.
(Click here to register to vote.)
We need smart leaders who can make the most of the opportunities and demonstrate that real, measurable progress can be made addressing our weaknesses.
City Councilman Greg Brockhouse is alone among the eight challengers – all men – who can mount a credible campaign. He has amassed strong name recognition for a single-term councilman, a reflection of a decade of work for other officeholders and the public safety unions. He has the backing of the police and fire unions, which presumably will include significant funding. He espouses a populist message with appeal to working-class voters who feel left behind in a growing economy driven by technology and disruption.
None of that makes Brockhouse a credible threat at this juncture, but it’s early. Those who judge his first term as an exercise in ineffective, back bench opposition would be foolish to dismiss his candidacy in a city where voters approved Propositions B and C in November.
What angers some voters is evident in the answers given by the lesser-known candidates Dimmick interviewed. San Antonio is held back by its poverty, unacceptably low education outcomes, economic segregation, and decades of public disinvestment in the minority-dominant urban core, a predicament that will take future leaders a generation or more to address.
Yet if some see Nirenberg and the City Council as indifferent to their plight, others see just the opposite. Many conservative suburban voters and some in the business community judge the current City Council as too progressive. Even in an era of historic tax cuts and growing income inequality, talk of using an “equity lens” somehow unnerves people who otherwise enjoy material comfort and security that others in San Antonio have never known.
Improving the lives of the neediest among us would pay dividends citywide, but not everyone sees it that way. As I wrote to a friend and widely admired local educator this week, it takes about $8,000-$11,000 a year to deliver high quality, all-day pre-K schooling to a 4-year-old, and that includes extended day programming and meals. Early childhood education, research shows, is the best shot at putting children on a path to a good education and an exit from poverty. Students who can’t read by the third grade are headed in the other direction, and the eventual cost to society is far greater, financially and morally.
It costs Bexar County taxpayers $100,000 a day to house 4,000 or more inmates, according to a 2016 report by the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition. The same report estimated an average daily cost of $18,000 for people incarcerated on pretrial misdemeanor charges and more than $79,000 a day for those jailed on a pretrial felony charge.
Investing in our public schools, neighborhoods, housing, safe streets and sidewalks, community policing, and mental health services benefits everyone. For the first time in my memory, we have a majority of elected city leaders committed to addressing these issues.
Nirenberg did not have much opportunity to accomplish great things in his first term. He inherited an intractable standoff with the firefighters union and spent a lot of political capital defending City Manager Sheryl Sculley, who, despite 13 years of extraordinary accomplishments, ultimately was the target of Proposition B’s passage.
Even with what some call a progressive agenda, Nirenberg will win the support and financial backing of the business community over a candidate known as the union’s “guy.” On the other hand, if latent voter discontent seen last November is stirred by unforeseen events, the new unpredictability of politics will make Brockhouse a more serious contender.
The Sculley era ends March 1 when a trusted deputy, Erik Walsh, ascends to the position. We will gain a better sense over the next 75 more days how voters feel about the incumbent mayor and whether they agree with the anti-establishment sentiment of Brockhouse and the other seven challengers, or conclude the best candidate already has the job.
This article rambles.
In other words, in your opinion, keep the status quo and don’t look behind the curtain at how the city decides who gets what.
That’s exactly what I read. That’s also why I’m running for City Council in District 7.
I grew up here, and I’ve heard all the same excuses my whole life. Enough talk, time for action.
http://www.trevor4sa.com
Aren’t you the frat bro who was playing beer pong incoherently drunk at the last UTSA football tailgate?
Hey Jack –
Keep to the message of the article. Voting on the issues is important. Don’t gossip because you dislike a candidate.
Never was in a frat, and I don’t really drink. Maybe you’re thinking of someone else?
He’s not fit for district 7.
The experience by Mayor Nirenbergs’ first term and the fact that San Antonio is seen as great destination to relocate and start a new family should continue uninterrupted. Additionally, the momentum gained to chip away at San Antonios’ sad history of economic segregation. As a life long resident, (now in my 50’s) of Bexar County the issue of GENERATIONAL ECONOMIC INEQUALITY has never been front and center at City Hall, until now. As the second worse city in the nation for fighting inequality, initiatives to overcome this must be maintained. https://therivardreport.com/san-antonio-ranked-among-nations-highest-poverty-cities/
Remarkably objective and surprising. I think ang hope this mayor and most CC members are an shaky ground after indicating willingness to dictate wages policy to businesses. We have a Chamber if Commerce trying to attract business and the city leadership discouraging them. He and they are Leftists in my view and Leftism destroys everything in it’s path.
The current mayor, Ron Nirenberg is nothing more than a puppet for those that have created and encouraged the problems described in this article. The economic divide in this city and other issues affecting the forgotten communities in our city must be address! Ron Nirenberg will do nothing but represent the establishment. The only candidate that can affect real change is a candidate like Greg Brockhouse with a proving tract record that has worked for and defended regular citizens.
We can not allow city hall insiders, developers, and their lobbyists to continue running city hall at the expense of our citizens. Look around San Antonio our city is being taken over by outsider’s, that have only one interest, themselve and their profits. To add insult to injury our curent mayor has supported these investors with city subsidies and city abatements. THE TIME FOR A NEW MAYOR AT CITY HALL IS NOW!
Agreed. This city has an almost 55% poverty/near poverty rate. Let that sink in when you look at the future of SA. The city has been run-and run down- by the same people for decades and now they are represented, under the current mayor, on task forces, city nonprofits and committees to tell us how they will fix what they let this city become…and get rich…again…in the process!
We have an uneducated, unskilled, generationally impoverished population and until you fix that nothing will change. As the city expects an increase of a million people what do you think the city will be like if we don’t fix this problem???
Anyone who would pass on the Republican National Convention doesn’t understand the effects of economic impact! Or is valuing left wing politics over economic generation for our community. Shame on you Mayor, city council, and the chamber of commerce for selling out!
Totally agree. Turning down RNC is enough for me to vote for Brockhouse.
Calls for a new mayor…for new council people…that is the simple mans easy answer and what we hear at beginning of each campaign season. San Antonio needs to re-elect Mayor Nirenberg. He has the vision to move our city forward. One term is not a sufficient amount of time to see huge projects accomplished. Nirenberg is that leader. Instead of tearing down …let’s get behind him and help him accomplish goals that he is setting for us!
No way Jose. Nirenberg is an enemy of the people. He crams his extreme left wing policies down our throats.
Improvements in education are certainly needed. But outsiders with outside money is crucial for San Antonio to grow to improve the built environment and change the perception of San Antonio as a poor uneducated city. For those locals who get educated, they leave maybe never to come back. To bring in educated people outsiders or natives that may have left you need big business, developers and incentives. Big businesses, folks, provide big paying jobs. To leave it to the locals to try and solve our problems only leaves San Antonio stagnant like it has been since I was a kid. Downtown has remained unchanged for 50 years until now. Change and development is good. The alternative is stagnant and dying city.
I read a lot of anger in the replies, with the thought that someone else can come along and do it better. A better choice is for all to rethink how to change attitudes that have become entrenched between conservatives and progressives. Although I am moderate, many friends consider me a wild-eyed liberal. It seems to me that many smug, complacent folks who contend that they worked hard to have what they have totally overlook the fact that they were randomly born into a family with means and that there was very little struggle to get a good education and succeed in life. That attitude results in an “I’ve got mine, so go work for yours.” They never consider that they could have been born into a struggling, poor family with few benefits, and these are the people who do not have a charitable bone in their body. As for me, I’ve got mine, but I want others to get theirs as well. My soapbox is getting too high here so will let it rest.
One term is not enough for any San Antonio mayor to get anything done. I will vote for Ron so he can put up or shut up. As for Brockhouse, he needs to do something meaningful as a councilman.
I agree 100% Brockhouse has done nothing for district 6 the streets are getting worse , at least with Lopez the potholes were taken care of , he only wants what is best for Brockhouse and his firefighter cronies
Poverty is brought up in this article…How should it be addressed?
One statistic, to keep in perspective: Ninety-two percent of poor households in America have a microwave, the Heritage Foundation’s analysis notes. Nearly two-thirds manage to have cable or satellite TV. Almost 75 percent have access to a vehicle.
Here are a few thoughts:
1. I’ve had the opportunity to see Urban Ventures play a role in breaking the cycle of generational poverty in Minneapolis. Leaders from Urban Ventures often say they do three things in an effort to break the cycle of generational poverty—jobs, families, and education. They orient their programs around job training, support of families, and support of children in their educational development. Through these targeted three areas, Urban Ventures is providing a proactive strategy around which partner organizations like businesses, foundations, churches, and other community groups may come together and break this cycle locally.
2. One study indicates a behavioral problem. If you “act” rich, you will become rich. If you “act” poor, you will become poor.
Growing gaps between rich and poor in recent decades have been exacerbated by a divergence in the behavior of the two groups. No feasible amount of income redistribution can make up for the fact that the rich are working and marrying as much or more than ever while the poor are doing just the reverse. Unless the poor adopt more mainstream behaviors, and public policies are designed to move them in this direction, economic divisions are likely to grow.
An alternative definition was suggested, one that was more behaviorally oriented. It was based on the idea that in order to achieve a middle-class life, an individual must do a few specific things: graduate from high school, defer having a baby until marriage, and obtain steady employment.
Option 2 would indicate that we need to incentivize good behavior and punish bad behavior in a public policy way.
Potential solutions?
1. Do you close inner city schools and split kids up so they are bussed to nearby districts so that way they can interact every day with kids that are not in their own socio-economic situation?
2. Do you simply throw a lot of public money to the inner city school to try to improve it?
3. Do you try to “help” the parents with their parenting by giving the kids fre pre-K?
4. Or other?
I’d like to see a thoughtful, research-filled article that shows some concrete examples of success. Otherwise, all of the US is simply struggling with the same issue and no one has figured out a good answer yet.
Thank you, TC. Excellent response based on research. As an outsider who was born upper middle class I do empathize with the struggle that abounds in SA. We cannot change nor can we give enough to help all, but education is a way out. Handouts only keep people down, it doesn’t fuel a fire to rise up. I will admit that I have never lived in a city with so many undereducated citizens as well as lower income. It has been an adjustment. What is really startling to me is that from the outside San Antonio seems that it would be a college town, with so many institutions of higher learning. I do believe SA will continue to grow as it becomes the city it deserves to be in spite of the low wages and low public education. Those people who relocate here will make changes where needed for their own families. You see it happen all over the country. “Be the change you wish to see” is a favorite saying of mine.
8-11k for Pre-K? Article published a couple of weeks ago stated SA Pre-K at 21k per kid per year? What gives?
I am not sure where you read the higher figure. My numbers come directly form Pre-K4SA. –RR
The math doesn’t work for their answer.
$35M in taxes collected (approx…other articles state btwn $35 &
37M)
-4.2M given in grants
=30.8M / 2060(#of students in PKSA) = $14,951 per student
(These are 2016/2017 figures)
From The Texas Tribune:
The per-student spending is high for Texas, which spends between $9,000 and $10,500 (depending on who is doing the calculating) on average per K-12 student, but only around $3,800 per preschooler.
Students who qualify for pre-K in their home district pay no tuition to enroll in Pre-K 4 SA. In 2016-17, 1,311 of the program’s 2,060 students qualified for free tuition because of their family income or their status as English language learners or as children of military parents. Others who qualify are in foster care or homeless.
Pre-K 4 SA is funded through a one-eighth-cent city sales tax that generates around $35 million per year. The program currently reports spending about $11,500 per year per student, along with about $4.2 million annually in grants to other pre-K providers and school districts to help expand full day pre-K and teacher certification. The program also spends over $2 million per year on professional development and coaching, which it makes available to any pre-K through third grade teacher in San Antonio.
For all of our common issues & concerns, why not focus on the city’s adopted long-term plan, SA Tomorrow, which dictates where millions of public resources will be spent & what agenda is being supported? I see an aggressive, “economic growth”, built environment agenda favoring the commercial real estate industry (30 yrs running), with the illusion to become a “world class” city but a metro region in reality, widening our socioeconomic divide, thanks to an “urban planning” model which has led our city to be ranked No. 1 in the U.S. in economic segregation. Nirenberg is smart but is he courageous enough to replace the city’s urban planning model to better address our socioeconomic needs? If not, citizens will see a “status quo” candidate & will choose Brockhouse if only to vent their anger/concerns for a more equitable, human capital-oriented agenda. Two stark choices — a clear contrast of the city’s priorities, needs, and values. Hope you can agree.
This city has so many plans it’s difficult to see the reality in any of them! Most people just stop listening…How many task forces, non-profits, plans, schemes, etc do we need? City council abdicates their responsibility to us by outsourcing problems to these groups, most members of which are NOT experts! Is there anyone who doesn’t know the dire straits SA will be in if nothing-or worse-the wrong things are done? We already have a nearly 55% poverty/near poverty rate! Where are the bold plans to remedy this? It is more of a threat to our future than anything else. (And by remedy I mean having a population that is educated and skilled, working in good jobs for good wages, not subsidized by taxpayers.)