The campaign for City Council District 1 has been primarily about neighborhoods and how best the City can serve communities in some of the oldest parts of central San Antonio.
Despite Councilman Roberto Treviño‘s efforts in this area, he found himself in a runoff with challenger Michael Montaño, a 36-year-old technology attorney. Treviño, who was appointed to Council in 2014 and elected to a full term in 2015, fell just 113 votes shy of winning the May 6 election outright in a field of six candidates. He claimed almost 49% of the vote, finishing 17% ahead of Montaño.
Treviño, a 46-year-old architect, has been endorsed by Council members Rey Saldaña (D4) and Ray Lopez (D6), Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff, former Rackspace CEO/Chairman Graham Weston, Tech Bloc co-founder Lew Moorman, and political activist Rosie Castro, mother of former San Antonio mayor and U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julián Castro and his twin brother U.S. Rep. Joaquín Castro.
Montaño has received backing from two of the four former candidates, Robert Feria and Lauro Bustamante. He also has endorsements from groups such as the hospitality workers organization Unite Here, the local police and firefighters unions, Texas Organizing Project, and four local Democratic Party organizations.
Ahead of their June 10 runoff election, both candidates are focusing on community involvement, neighborhood protection, and public safety in a 22-sq.-mi. district that has more than 113,000 residents.
“We want to make sure neighborhoods are preserving their identity and that they feel like they’re in control of their destiny,” said Treviño.
With infill development and investor interest increasing in and around inner-city neighborhoods such as Tobin Hill, Alta Vista, and Beacon Hill, neighborhood associations in the urban core have sought help from the City. Treviño has tried addressing the issue by filing Council Consideration Requests (CCRs) that would foster full Council discussions on these subjects.
Treviño filed CCRs to strengthen Neighborhood Conservation Districts (NCDs) design guidelines in Alta Vista and Beacon Hill and to address overall preservation of historic structures and neighborhood character. A policy that will notify neighborhood associations of major projects coming their way was approved by City Council last week.
Some District 1 residents have voiced a preference for historic district designation over NCDs, believing the former could give them better protection from encroaching development.
The City’s Historic and Design Review Commission (HDRC) last week unanimously recommended approval for a historic district covering 33 single-family homes in the 400 block of East French Place.
“I believe it’s the best way to prevent houses from being demolished,” homeowner George Rice told the HDRC. “What we object to is people coming into our neighborhood and buying a house and tearing it down.”
On the other hand, the City’s Zoning Commission voted this week to oppose a proposed historic district in a small portion of Tobin Hill.
Some backers of the proposed Tobin Hill North Historic District complained that Treviño has not listened to their concerns about unwelcome development in the area. Treviño’s campaign website states that he has attended more than 30 neighborhood association meetings, including three meetings that his district office arranged.
“This is yet another developer win under Treviño’s watch and another loss for neighborhoods,” Montaño said of the commission’s vote. “His focus should be on advocating for neighbors instead of paving the way for disruptive development.”
Treviño said his office has been responsive to constituents’ concerns about neighborhood development and other issues, such as boosting public involvement in forming the Brackenridge Park master plan and parking space solutions in Southtown.
Residents also have embraced the different ways they and the San Antonio Police Department can partner on crime prevention, Treviño said. He cited the San Antonio Fear Free Environment, “Coffee with the Cops” programs, and more downtown patrol officers as examples of community cooperation to increase public safety in District 1. He has been active in discussions about the need to fill sidewalk gaps in neighborhoods such as Dellview.
Treviño also expressed enthusiasm for the voter-approved $850 million bond, which will allocate funds for projects such as infrastructure improvements in and around downtown and Southtown, and for a new police substation and park police headquarters in downtown.
“We feel we’re very engaged,” Treviño said.
Montaño, however, questioned that engagement.
“People feel like the Councilman and City Hall have been unresponsive to their concerns, especially on transformative projects,” he said.
After the May 6 election results showed Montaño had forced a runoff, Treviño said several people informed him about Montaño’s involvement in a case while he was a student at Yale University. In 2002, he was alleged to have made false statements on absentee ballot applications.
He was charged with nine counts of the alleged false statements while volunteering for a Democratic Party race in New Haven, Conn. An affidavit stated that none of the people whose names were on the application recognized Montaño’s name or his picture.
Montano and his campaign representatives said he never admitted to the nine counts. Montaño agreed to “accelerated rehabilitation,” according to The Yale Daily News; there was no plea nor jail time. The charges eventually were dismissed and the case record destroyed.
Montaño voiced disappointment about how the New Haven incident has arisen in this City Council campaign. For his part, Treviño said his campaign does not plan to dwell on the issue.
“I’ve been transparent about the whole thing,” Montaño said. “It should have no bearing on this race.”
Meanwhile, Montaño faulted Treviño for devoting too much attention to what he called “pet projects.” In particular, Montaño pointed to Treviño’s push for a public standalone bathroom downtown and the Under 1 Roof program that helps eligible disadvantaged homeowners replace aging roofs with reflective material to reduce energy use.
“This is an inordinate amount of focus on things that don’t improve the basic quality of life,” Montaño said.
Treviño defended these initiatives. He said a standalone bathroom serves people seeking a public, open bathroom anytime in the central business district. Under 1 Roof, which began as a pilot program one year ago, has affected nearly 40 homes.
“It’s not a pet project, it’s helping homeowners save money on their energy bill,” Treviño said.
Treviño charged Montaño with spinning these and other initiatives in District 1 into negatives.
“My opponent is trying to hide the good work that is being done and misrepresenting the facts,” he said.
As the incumbent, Treviño seems to have the funding to wage a solid runoff campaign. As of May 3, his campaign had $36,271 cash on hand while Montaño had $17,294.
Montaño said he has knocked on the doors of more than 4,000 residents, simply listening to their frustrations. He added that he’s not accepting support from “special interests.”
“There’s an upswell in a desire for change in leadership. This is a coalition of the neglected in District 1,” he said. “A majority of voters reject the status quo.”
Treviño expressed concern that Montaño, being a first-time candidate with an anti-establishment stance, does not fully realize how city government functions. Montaño’s previous civic involvement includes working for the pro-PreK4SA campaign in 2012.
“I think my opponent is disconnected with what’s happening in the neighborhoods, and has a lack of understanding of how the City and the bond issue work,” said Treviño.
“[My office] is available. We understand there’s many needs in the district. What people need is someone in office who listens and who is responsible and honest about the limits and capacity of working in our City to help make a real impact.”
Early voting for the runoff election begins May 30.
Are they both voucher supporters or only Trevino?
Neither supports vouchers, nor do city council people have any say in school funding policy (which is the domain of the state legislature) or school operations (which it the domain of the independent school district boards.)
If Montaño thinks that a zoning commission decision is somehow a Trevino-led developer decision, he
1.) doesn’t understand how the zoning commission works
2.) doesn’t understand the very strong feelings that homeowners themselves have about historic districts. This is not a homeowner vs developer issue. Many homeowners in potentially historic districts oppose historic designations for a variety of reasons that are valid and important to them.
Montaño seems to want to divide us rather than build bridges.
Oh, and anyone who counts Lauro Bustamante as a supporter? Don’t get me started.
The Zoning Commissioners are appointed by their respective Councilperson for each district. They are essentially representatives of their Councilperson.
Trevino has sold out residents of Southtown in every issue where there has been conflict between commercial and residential purposes. He repeatedly supported waivers to permit new businesses that don’t have code-required parking. He has been non-existent in his concern for the consequential parking woes of the beleaguered residents of Lavaca, LoneStar and KW. He has shown no interest in improving public transit. He appointed a 20-something as the District 1 zoning commissioner. She’s sharp but has no experience or credentials, only an embarrassing parrot for Trevino’s contributors. As for his failure to attend neighborhood gatherings, he will appear if there is a high-level photo opportunity. I’ve been watching him for years now and have concluded that Trevino only acts if there is some substantial reward for advancing himself. He has shown no interest whatsoever in District 1 voters. Even his staff doesn’t return calls. Yeah, I’m backing Montano and hoping that we residents will get some respect for a change.
Rosa,
Thank you for your thoughts. As district 1 zoning commissioner I welcome constructive criticism that can help me better serve district 1. Please contact me with concerns you may have. On another note, I am 30 years old. Thank you for the compliment.
-Siboney
Great, comprehensive piece on this race. I’m still amused by the almost-daily emails from Trevino that started the day after the recent election.
“We want to make sure neighborhoods are preserving their identity and that they feel like they’re in control of their destiny,” said Treviño.
We wish, as neighborhoods, Mr. Treviño actually believed this and acted accordingly. We invited him to many neighborhood meetings, and even planned one around his schedule. He failed to show at any of them, including the one planned around his schedule.
Oh, and 40 out of 113,000 is an amazingly small number of people affected by a pet project. Perhaps that money could be spent on sidewalks, or maybe curbs along streets, speed reduction controls, better community lighting, crosswalks in streets, bike lanes, or other things that bring value to EVERYONE in the community.
“What people need is someone in office who listens and who is responsible and honest about the limits and capacity of working in our City to help make a real impact.” I could not agree more, and you are not that person, Mr. Treviño.
“Steve” does not seem to understand that the Zoning Commissioners are appointed by the council members. So yes, they are representing a position of the council member. If that council member is pro-developer, it stands to reason the appointed commissioner will likely be of similar ideas.
Of course they are appointed by city council, but there are 10 members and there are regularly split decisions or decisions when the Rep from the district in question is over-ruled.
I dont have a strong opinion or stake in the north tobin hill zoning in particular. What I know is what I’ve read in rivard report and elsewhere, where it seemed like there were some significant issues with the process.
https://therivardreport.com/zoning-commission-opposes-tobin-hill-north-historic-district/
But in the article it made clear that there were numerous homeowners not in support. It was unclear whether the required 51% was reached, due to issues with the process, and the vote was 6-1 to oppose.
My point was, it seems like in Tobin Hill, Mahncke Park, and other neighborhoods, there is no “developer” fighting to oppose historic districts. In fact, some landlords like historic districts in the hope that new housing isn’t built and rents will go up.
The opposition is typically other homeowners who, (for reasons of perceived financial burden, or philosophical opposition to having someone else tell them what color they can paint their trim) simply don’t want it.
I recommend that anyone interested in Tobin Hill North read carefully the article cited above (Rivard Report 5/17/2017) and bear in mind that Councilman Treviño’s constituents were on both sides of the issue. Everything is complicated.
Wow. That posted weird. Comment stands.
I was at the zoning hearing for Tobin Hill North, and video of it was posted by NOWCastSA. 15 people spoke in favor of the Historic Designation and 8 people opposed it. Of those 8, one was from Houston, one was from Helotes, and one is a developer. Of the 8 opposed, only three live within the proposed Historic District.
It’s a shame that the Zoning Commissioners failed to recognize what the homeowners in the proposed district overwhelmingly supported, what the HDRC unanimously recommended, and what Staff recommended for approval as well. Since our Zoning Commissioner, appointed by Roberto Treviño, is the one who moved to deny the recommendation, it calls into question just who the Commissioner, and in turn our Councilman, is actually representing here.
The experience with Trevino (and his staff) has always been positive. Trevino was instrumental in canceling the development of a gated community (La Marquesa Estate) on a 10 acre site behind St Anthony High School in the Monte Vista Historic District. The District is grateful for his and his office support on this and other zoning issues that have confronted our historic district. For the record, I am no fan of developers encroaching on historic districts, NCD’s or older neighborhoods with their high density cookie cutter developments…..which was the primary reason an application for historic designation was submitted on behalf of Tobin Hill North. The only problem was that the application was flawed from the beginning….. submitted with a “perceived” gerrymandered map which did not include ALL the residents of the Tobin Hill North area. So lets go back to the drawing board and submit a well grounded application that Trevino and his appointed Zoning Commissioner can support without question. In summary, Trevino has in the past supported our efforts in protecting the historic fabric of our neighborhood…..and for that….we are grateful.
It’s so, so easy to say what one could have/would have/should have done about any complex issue. Councilman Treviño can point to many actual accomplishments, and to let him go in favor of someone who can’t do the same would be unjustified, not to say unwise.
Many people think they understand how City Council works because they read books or watch a lot of TV. Look, I have never seen any of you at any events, coffees with councilman or anything. But you make statements like you are a well informed constituent.
When you volunteer and participate in planning and events, you will see the good coming from all of Treviño’s hard work. As far as you neighborhood meetings and preservation, Treviño pushes and pushes. He is only one of a few Councilman who stays late on Wednesdays to listen to the concerns of constituents. Instead of you waiting for him, did you ever think to go to those open to the public meetings?
He leaves the office at city hall, goes to the field office and then tries to go home. But most of the time it is only to change so he can go help people or see people or do things for the people.
You don’t see this because you are not involved. I do. Roberto Treviño is one of the most passionate and hard working council members. His office provides a lot of support to the community and spends a lot of hours making things happen for EVERYONE.
He will win and he will continue to make our community great. And if you still don’t get involved as a constituent, then don’t complain. The world has enough negativity without your ugly comments.
I hope that whoever wins realizes they aren’t just serving middle and older age homeowners. If they take the whole community, future generations and the city at heart, they will support development that provides diversity in housing types that fits everyone’s needs (not just the select few). The future of development needs to rest well within the SA Tomorrow/Comp Plan. It needs to support affordability (which means density/supply), it needs to support transit (which means density), and it needs to be sustainable for future generations (which means density). Renters are notoriously left out of the conversation; over 50% of occupants in downtown and near downtown neighborhoods are renters. They need to be included in the decision-making. I live and own and a home in Beacon Hill and I understand the importance of renter inclusion for improved decision making on the future of our city.
I have been to zoning/planning meetings and am still learning how process works. Yes, there are issue’s with “gentrification” in Center City. Most recently, I attended zoning? case(Dig Hill) where new home owner wanted to build a rental unit on over size lot and applicant was denied- then I learned applicant can still proceed to City Council (within 6 months) if desired,but not approved would be commission finding.
Reports of council district elected official/office not being responsive has led to CCD7 incumbent being ousted; Infill development is a two edged sword and District 1 residents will decide which blade they have been receiving. Note: the Charter Review Comm has city council consideration requests and Councilmen Trevino has 2 of 3; ethics code amendment and planning commission composition.