Bonus! 3 pm workshops, 8/18/26

(I combined the 3 pm public comment with the 6 pm public comment, in the first post.)

Workshop 1: The Budget

It is heavy-duty budget season!

July 25th is the day that City staff finds out exactly how much tax money we’ve received. This is the first concrete draft budget that Council has looked at.

The whole thing has to be approved in the next month.

….

Background: How’s San Marcos these days?

We’re growing:

That’s probably an undercount. The city thinks we’re more like 90,000 people.

The next two slides take some thinking.

First: here’s how much the median home owner pays in property taxes to the city:

So home owners pay more here than elsewhere.

However:

the city spends less per resident.

This is because the deck is stacked against San Marcos in some key ways. The only one they mention in this presentation is this, though:

We’ve got more tax-exempt land than most places, in part because the university is our central giant business, but they don’t pay taxes.

You all know about inflation. The city knows about it, too:

However, the city has not increased taxes to keep up with inflation. Department budgets have not changed in 3 years. This year it would take roughly $720K extra to keep up with inflation.

Note: Apparently many cities are going through layoffs and budget cuts right now. Here’s a bunch of major Texas cities with budget problems and here’s a story on Kyle.

We’ve been extremely careful in watching our pennies, and we are weathering this economy in a stable way. So that’s nice.

Onto the budget!

There are actually many different independent budgets. Each one has its own revenue and spending. So the Electric Fund is funded by utility rates and impact fees, the General Fund is funded by taxes, etc.

Here’s all of them:

The big one is the General Fund. Here’s how it gets funded:

Here’s some of the major pressures on it:

SMPD gets 5% raises and SMFD gets 4.5% raises, because they’re allowed to unionize. That’s what collective bargaining gets you. Texas outlaws all other public unions besides those, though. So everyone else gets 3% raises. It’s not the slightest bit fair.

Also: this year we had our first round of Participatory Budgeting experiment. The public was asked to submit project ideas, and then we all got to vote on which projects to fund.

Here’s how it went:

Lorenzo: That’s pretty sad. Only 117 votes?
Answer: It was our first rodeo! We’ll promote the projects and try to drum up more enthusiasm.

Back to the General Fund:

Basically, things are less grim than they feared.

We’re going to have a balanced budget this year, without raising taxes:

Graph showing that between 2027 and 2030, our budget should be between the minimal scenario revenue and the moderate scenario revenue.

For the next three years, we might be on track to have a balanced budget, or we might get unlucky.

The new property tax rate

Last year, staff presented three different options to Council. Councilmembers all said which one they liked best. City staff went and finalized a bunch of details before the final vote. Then half the council members changed their mind at the last second.

This year, staff did not outline multiple options. They just said, “Hey, we don’t need to raise taxes to make the budget work.”

[Note: I actually think this is a bad idea. The budget is not working! We are not keeping up with inflation. Small incremental tax hikes are much better than having to occasionally lob giant tax hikes at the public.]

Anyway:

Note on inflation and how Governor Abbott is going to try to screw over cities further next session.

They’re not actually voting on the tax rate until September. But for planning purposes, staff is working with the same tax rate as last year, ¢65.15. On a $300,000 house, that works out to about $1,950.

Question: Is Council okay with setting a maximum tax rate of ¢65.15? This is the tax rate we had last year.

Everyone is on board with this.

Note: This is just the tax rate cap. They’re just saying the tax rate won’t be higher than ¢65.15.

The rest of the budget

The other major funds are:

  • Hotel Tax Fund: this has to be used for tourism and museums and things like that.
  • Community Enhancement Fund: there’s a big discussion about streetlights, maintenance, and who keeps track of where they should be located.
  • Electric Utility Fund: your electricity supplier
  • Water and wastewater: ie all your water hook-ups to get fresh water and get your toilet waste taken away and cleaned
  • Stormwater: major projects to keep people’s homes from flooding when it rains
  • Resource Recovery Fund: think trash and recycling
  • Transit Fund: busses and bike lanes
  • Airport Fund: airport repair, etc.

Council has a big discussion about a lot of rate hikes:

Chart showing proposed increases of each utility service or fee.

So the average house would see a $7 increase in their monthly bills.

They spend a lot of time discussing the pros and cons of all these. For example:

The Community Benefit Charge: It’s supposed to cover streetlights and lighting. How do we decide which streets need streetlights? Who is being neglected because the city hasn’t installed their lights or repaired them?

The Electric fund: our bond rating got downgraded a few years ago. This means that it costs more for us to borrow money to complete electric projects. Can we fix this by raising rates? Would it save tax payers money in the long run? (Yes, it would.)

The Stormwater fund: it shows a $0 increase above, but that’s a mistake. This fall, they’re going to roll out a stormwater master plan, and it’s going to take a rate hike to pay for projects in the Wallace Addition and Bishop/Belvin. We have a lot of flooding in town, just from ordinary thunderstorms.

Bottom line: pretty much everyone says “Yes” to all of these increases (besides Alyssa), but none of this is binding yet. They’re just telling staff that they’re open to these rate increases.

……

Workshop 2: EMS billing

San Marcos-Hays County EMS was dissolved last year because they had decided to unionize. Police and fire can unionize, and private EMS companies can unionize. But the leaders in Hays County lost their fucking minds when their private EMS company decided to unionize. So Kyle and Dripping Springs each split off to form their own EMS, and San Marcos was stuck holding the bag.

We’re in the process of building San Marcos EMS now.

Question: How much should EMS charge for a ride?

The problem – of course – is that health care is super broken in the US. How do you set rates that are fair within a system that is a hopeless mess?

In San Marcos:

  • About half of all EMS calls are Medicare patients
  • About 6-12% more calls are from people covered by Medicaid
  • About 25% have insurance
  • The rest – 13%-19% – don’t have insurance and can’t really pay.

You make up astronomical rates in order to get payments from insurance. Then insurance covers some of it, or none of it, and then people are screwed over for the rest. It’s a terrible system.

(Obviously socialized healthcare is the way to go. You get much better health outcomes in your country for far cheaper.)

San Marcos cannot solve the real, underlying problem.

Here is what’s proposed:

Lots of acronyms without explanation.  ALS 2 is recommended to be $2700
ALS Emergency, non-emergency, $1800.  BLS: 1600. Plus some smaller charges, like oxygen, disposables, and blood administration.

The city can offer certain discounts to help residents:

How the City Can Protect its Residents: Resident Discount, Private-pay discount, charity care/TASPP

The other major problem is the time crunch. If Council doesn’t approve something, then the new San Marcos EMS can’t start the paperwork with insurance companies and Medicare and Medicaid, so that they can be operating by October 1st.

Everyone on Council was uncomfortable with everything. It was super rushed – they only had 15 minutes – and no one had time to thoroughly understand the details.

They did give it the thumbs up, so that EMS could make its October 1st opening deadline, but the plan is to revisit these decisions.

We’ll see!

Bonus! 3 pm workshops, 8/5/26

Workshop 1: Advertising the river

When San Marcos flooded in 2015, Council was worried about local businesses. They ran a campaign “San Marcos is Open”. It promoted river recreation and tourism.

It worked! Hotels did better than projected, and the Lion’s Club had their biggest year. But this is when the river began to get overcrowded.

By 2017, the city was more worried about over crowding and capacity issues.

Here’s a bunch of photos from a 2017 city presentation:

Photo of empty river at the falls, with a caption that says "We built it and they came"

Funny parks department!

Cover photo from the 2017 presentation on river parks overcrowding and capacity issues

Mostly a lot of photos of a ton of people.

Two photos from City Park, showing tons of people.

By the Lion’s Club.

Two photos, one labeled City Park and one Rio Vista at Cheatham, both showing the parks are packed.

Down at the falls.

Two more photos of the same - City park and Rio Vista, lots of bodies packed together.

Just a lot of big crowds.

We stopped advertising the river, but it was too late. Basically, overcrowding at the river has looked like that ever since. (Except for 2020.)

The problem is that it started to destroy the river. Also the safety concerns got pretty unmanageable. (Links from old TSM)

As a quick preview of how this summer is going, they provided some stats:

As of July 26, 2026:
- Resident passes: 1,134
- Wristbands picked up: 148
- Rio Vista Day Passes sold: 13,049

I don’t know if this is good or bad!

Today’s presentation is by the VisitSanMarcos.com people: do we want to keep not-promoting the river?

So we no longer promote the river for recreation. We do things like education, rules. and anti-littering instead.

They played this video:

It is very nice and soothing! Council adored it.

What does council say?

Everyone gives lots of thank yous to staff.

Josh: Maybe we can promote downtown?
Answer: We already do. (They promote downtown a lot.)

Amanda: Can we talk to local stores about not promoting banned items?
Answer: We used to work with HEB, but Walmart and Academy blew us off. When Buccees opens, we’ll have a visitor’s kiosk. That’s baked into the development agreement.
Amanda: Maybe the Chamber of Commerce can take the lead here and work with retailers.

Jane: How far out is signage about banned items from Rio Vista gates? Do we put signage at the baseball fields?
Answer: No.  But sure! We can work on that.

Alyssa: Do we have a city TikTok account?
Answer: Nope. Governor Abbott has banned cities from having TikTok accounts. 

Alyssa: You could work with micro-influencers and collab with them, like Luis the food guy
Answer: We do have a relationship with Luis!

Bottom line: We’re going to keep our river messaging focused on education, stewardship, park rules, etc.

Workshop 2:  Covid funding 

A long time ago, we got two different sources of Covid money from the federal government.

Coronavirus Relief Funds - $2.67 million allocated, 88.2$ spent

and

ARPA Funds: $18.1 million allocated, 96.4% spent

Basically, we got about $20 million, and it made a huge difference.

Here’s how we spent it:

Now it’s all ending. All federal Covid money must be spent by December 31st. 

As projects wind down, you want to re-allocate that money and get it spent as fast as possible. 

Here’s the projects that have come in under budget: 

8 programs with funding leftover, totals $49K

Here’s where we’d like to spend it:

Just BR3T Rental and Utility Assistance Program

You can’t start any new projects – it has to already be part of Covid funding.   BR3T does emergency housing and utility assistance.  They’ve gotten about $250K in Covid money so far, so this brings them up to about $300K.

What does Council think? 

Alyssa: What does BR3T say? Can they use some of this on case management?
Answer: Yes, they would like to use some of this on case management.

Amanda: Yeah, I came in at the end but it’s great.  I hope we revisit our philosophy about only giving money for services and not case management.

Jane: Yes, big thanks.

Bottom line: 94.6% of Covid money has been spent, and we’re just trying to make sure we eke out this last bit by December.  

Bonus! 3 pm workshops, 7/7/26

Three great workshops!

  1. San Marcos is getting a new logo.
  2. Quick update on some water and wastewater fees
  3. What are we going to do with the river parks and Quail Creek Park?

Let’s go.

….

Workshop 1: Time for branding!

In this economy, with the price of a tank of gas pushing $4, you know what I could really go for?

A NEW CITY LOGO!

Now, San Marcos has already had a logo for the past decade or so:

Old San Marcos logo

I think it’s called “The Waterfall Logo”. But it’s stale, yes?

So we hired some consultants. They’ve been working on this for about a year. It cost $80K. (But it did not come out of taxpayer money. It came from the hotel taxes on visitors.)

First the consultants got to know us:

Screenshot of text that reads:
Site Visit + Familiarization Tour: Members of the North Star team will spend the better part of a week in San Marcos conducting research. An 
important part of this trip is a FAM tour, with an itinerary determined by your team.
Key Stakeholder Interviews + Focus Groups: With the assistance of your project team, we want to identify and speak to key stakeholders about San 
Marcos during our site visit.
Online Community Survey: We use some of the themes identified in the interviews and focus groups to craft a quantitative survey posted online for 
community-wide participation. We promote this survey using traditional and social media.

I guess. Then they summarized us:

Screenshot of text that reads:
Target Audience:  For those who value authenticity and aren't willing to settle for suburban sameness
Frame of reference: San Marcos, with space to stand out between austin and san antonio on I35

Ok, that’s pretty on-the-nose.

Apparently everyone said the same thing: we’re surrounded by cookie-cutter suburbs and San Marcos is kinda allergic to that vibe. We’re like authentic, man.

So […drumroll…] here’s what the new logo looks like:

New San Marcos logo, much swirlier

I don’t hate it? It’s kind of a cross between Willy Wonka and Splash Mountain:

Sure, why not.

….

Honestly: this is a completely normal, standard thing that cities do. The goal is to drum up tourism and visitors.

So what can we put our logo on?

brochures for San Marcos

Brochures, definitely.

What else?

How about those new signs on I-35?

Day AND night, yessir.

What about a flashy cut out fountain sign?

bigger gateway sign

We got you!

MORE SIGNS! Signs everywhere!

signs that you'd see around town

Your garbage can will get branded!

themed garbage cans

It’ll be on your new safety vest!

themed reflective vests

Your whole wardrobe is going to be on theme!

themed shirts, coats, and hoodies

Now we’re cooking with gas! Let’s go!

What else can AI hallucinate?

mural

Giant murals!

And your fine new necklace:

themed necklace

Or some pins, perhaps?

pins

This will be perfect for when you go off-roading with your bros:

stickers on a stanley mug, a keychain, and a themed spare tire cover on a jeep

And this will be perfect for off-roading with your grandma:

themed quilt

Savor the round, gold hardness of commemorative San Marcos coins:

themed coins

So circular.

And finally, drink some romantic San Marcos river water with your sweetie, in your very own San Marcos champagne flutes:

themed champagne flutes and bottle, out in the hill country somewhere

You’re going to be so popular, just you wait.

What does council say?

Question: How quickly will all this schwag show up?
Answer: Don’t hold your breath!

The free parts – meaning the digital images – will start immediately. None of that other stuff is getting ordered today, though.

For everything else, they’ll keep using the old stuff. Over the next five years, when a sign needs to be replaced, or a commemorative coin loses its sparkle, they’ll replace it with the new version.

Sidenote: Apparently everyone really hates Austin’s new logo:

Yeah, it’s not great! whoops.

….

Workshop 2: Water and Wastewater Impact Fees

Impact fees are fees paid by developers when they build something new. These fees would go to help fund water and wastewater projects.

We haven’t updated these fees in a while, so they’ve fallen behind:

screenshot of a detailed chart with 15 cities water and wastewater impact fees and when they last updated them.

Orange is where our fees were set in 2018. Red is the new, proposed fees in 2026.

Council all basically fine with it. Maybe some rebates for green infrastructure?

This will come back in September.

…..

Workshop 3: The River Parks and Quail Creek Park

First, the River Parks:

The river parks are a little confusing, because there are15 different names for this long stretch of land.

map of river parks

Let me help!

  • Dog Park is by Walgreen’s
  • Skate Park is by the library
  • Memorial Park is by the Activity Center
  • City Park is the Lion’s Club
  • Plaza Park is the stage for Movies in the Park, Music at the Park, Sights & Sounds, etc
  • Children’s Park is the big playground
  • Rio Vista is where the falls are.
  • Ramon Lucio is the baseball fields

Today we’re talking about just this part:

same map, but with a circle around the park that are west of I35 and excluding plaza park.

Within that, they’re really focused on the down river parks: Children’s Park, Rio Vista, and Ramon Lucio.

Here’s some issues:

  1. Parking.
    There’s not enough parking by the Children’s Park and Rio Vista. But you also don’t want people to park too close to the river, because that’s bad for your river.

2. The outdoor pool at Rio Vista

  • No one really uses it, mostly because of all the traffic to the river. We need a big city pool that residents can get to more easily.
  • This is where Quail Creek park comes in. Can we put the pool out there?

3. The baseball fields

  • Should these be relocated somewhere else, where they wouldn’t compete with the river traffic?
  • Can we put these out at Quail Creek?

City staff floated like eight different versions of what it could look like, but here is staff’s main proposal:

concept plan of river parks redevelopment

I know, super tiny.

Council mostly focused on the children’s park, the pool, and the baseball fields:

zoomed in concept map to children's park, tennis courts, baseball fields

Here are the main changes:

  • Parking lot by Children’s Park is moved closer to the street, has way more spots, and has a roundabout.
  • Street parking is angled and head-in, instead of parallel parking like it is now. This makes a lot more street parking.
  • No more pool, but yes to splash pad.
  • Tennis courts stay.
  • Only one baseball field.

What does Council say?

Right now there are four baseball fields and one softball field. Everyone HATES the idea of getting rid of these.

(Apparently some people felt the baseball fields were unaesthetic? Like if you’re driving by on I-35, you might see them and shudder? And then go kick a puppy?)

Anyway, the baseball fields are staying.

Amanda: It’s a problem that we don’t have any drop-in soccer fields. The ones at Five Mile are off-limits, unless you are part of a league. Lots of people just want to play pick up games.

Josh: In El Paso, there were little soccer fields all over the place.

Staff: We can consider that!

Amanda:
– Soccer fields could be small. Just some area for people to play.
– How about some tables with built in chess/checkerboards?
– We need some community theater space.
– Is there going to be plenty of shade?

Answer: We’re planting lots of trees, and there will be little shade structures. Chess boards can work. The theater part will take some thinking.

….

Let’s go on to Quail Creek.

Quail Creek is a new park that we bought in 2022, located here:

Map showing quail creek park off Highway 21

I’ve never been there, but Google maps tells me that not a whole lot is going on:

Google overhead shot of quail creek park, showing overgrown golf course

Basically, it’s an old golf course that’s gone to seed.

So what do we want to do with it?

Maybe this?

concept plan of quail creek park

Again, that’s super tiny, I know.

Zooming in:

Zoomed into see details of quail creek concept plan

So basically, we could get:

  • Big pool, splash pad, playground
  • a few soccer fields
  • a lot of tennis and pickleball
  • a bunch of baseball diamonds
  • a disc golf course
  • a dog park

There’s plenty of space, and we’re just in the dreaming stage.

What does Council say?

If we’re keeping all the baseball diamonds at Ramon Lucio, do we still need 9 more here?

Everyone says yes, let’s have all 9. One perk is that we could send baseball tournaments out to Quail Creek, especially on busy river weekends.

(Softball is all played across the street at the Gary Softball Fields.)

Final note: dreaming is cheap! Building all this stuff and maintaining it is expensive. None of this is going to happen soon.

Bonus! 3 pm workshop, 6/17/26

New City Hall! (Discussed Oct ’25, April ’25, Nov ’24, Feb ’24, and Nov ’22)

Our city hall is located here:

and it looks like this:

via

It was built in the early 1970s, when San Marcos had 18K people. So cute! Little baby San Marcos. Now we have about 80K people.

There are some problems with it:

  • It’s way too small. Whenever there’s a hot topic, the seats fill up immediately, and everyone crowds into the lobby and out onto the lawn.
  • It’s falling apart.

Apparently they have to evacuate for water and gas leaks. There’s a window that just shatters whenever it gets cold. The foundation is a mess. The roof leaks.

Spontaneous window combustion! They said that it’s because the frame has warped over time.

So we definitely need something new.

We’d like to make it bigger and better:

….

The main debate right now is where to put the new city hall.

There are three options:

Option A: the current location.

Pros: We already own the land.

Cons: In a floodplain.
– Not a big splashy location.
– Council would need temporary space during reconstruction.

Option B:

Pros: I hate this location and refuse to list any pros.

Cons: In a floodplain
– It’s park land! Don’t use up your park land!
– Do you really want your skate park to be pressed up against your new city hall, like Big Brother looming over you?
– Lots of people showed up to protest against this option.

Option C:

Pros: It’s a really great location! Probably the best of the three.
– Revitalizes a stagnant part of downtown and supports downtown businesses.
– San Marcos River Foundation prefers it, because it’s not in a floodplain

Cons: Not owned by San Marcos.
– Would have to work with a private developer
– We might get hosed.

This is the developer:

We could get hosed, or maybe we’re able to make a good deal. It’s hard to know.

$$ Price tag $$

No matter what, the big problem is the price tag.

Big projects cost big money:

  • Reclamation Water Facility will cost $120 million
  • the Library expansion cost $14.5 million
  • More bond projects here

The problem is that we fund big projects by taking out bonds. Texas has a law that cities can’t fund their own city halls by taking out a bond. You have to get voter approval for city hall bond money.

(The problem with San Marcos is Texas. Always.)

Here’s what they’re projecting for the city hall:

That’s really expensive!

We’ve saved about $13 million. We have a few ways that we could fund the rest of this:

I kind of hate all of these! We do not have good options here.

But still:

  • Red, orange, purple, and blue are all about equal. They’re different ways of shifting taxpayer money around.
  • Teal is a wildcard. It could be okay, or it could be terrible.
  • Green is two options. Leasing our land is another wildcard, but selling it is the worst option.

Don’t sell off public land. Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever. You don’t get land back.

….

My $0.02: We need to have a cheaper version in mind as a back-up option, on par with renovating the library.

Either convince San Marcos that the downtown location is worth the price tag, or walk away from the price tag.

For what it’s worth, we haven’t spent that much money yet:

A LOT of people showed up at Citizen Comment!

We love the Downtown option! (5 people)

  • Downtown business association supports it, but don’t raise taxes
  • San Marcos River Foundation supports it, but has some extra recommendations to protect the water table.
  • Yes, but I’m nervous about the developer
  • Steering Committee recommends downtown location.

We have concerns: (8 speakers)

  • This whole thing is really expensive, and we can’t afford it.
  • We want more public engagement and town halls
  • Stick with options A and B.

Miscellaneous:

  • Please consider a dedicated performing arts space. Groups like Broke Thespians contribute to the richness of San Marcos, but there are very few venues for them to perform in. (I agree!)
  • Encourage the community that there are low cost rain guages, which can be life saving in a flood.

….

What does Council say?

First they discuss the steering committee. Amanda, Lorenzo, and Josh never got to appoint anybody to it. (In fact, they were intentionally excluded.) This got dealt with at the 6 pm meeting – they’re each going to pick two members and the committee will get six new people.

Everyone wants lots of town halls for the community. Everyone wants all three locations – A, B, and C – to be presented at these town halls, too. Town halls should be held all over town.

Bottom line: Town Halls will be coming to a neighborhood near you. Hopefully.

Side note: There was actually a lot more covered during the presentation – details of funding, what the different possibilities for Option C might look like, etc. But that is all getting kicked down the road, while the town halls play out. If you’re curious, go here.

Bonus! 3 pm workshops, 5/19/26

Citizen comment:

One speaker!

Max Baker, organizer of the San Marcos Civics Club:  We’ve been trying to put people on boards and commissions.  But the city website has a lot of problems, like:
– HSAB still says they meet Thursdays, 2 months out of the year. They actually meet Wednesdays for longer than 2 months.
– the online calendar is out of date on library meetings
– etc
SMCC told the city about these details back in 2023, and they’re all still problems.

(Max is definitely a details guy.)

Workshop 1: Budget Update

Next year’s budget it chugging along! It takes 9 months to birth a budget:

Our little budget fetus is about 15 weeks old. It’s the size of an avocado.

So how does it look?

First off, San Marcos is growing:

Our budget has not been keeping up.

This is city spending, per resident:

So we’ve had a balanced budget, but we’re stretched more thin than we were a few years ago.

What’s the revenue look like next year?

We get two kinds of revenue:

  • Sales tax
  • Property tax

First, sales tax:

We’re up from last year.

  • Last year, we pulled in $ 22,567,986 by this point in the year.
  • This year, we’re at $23,442,368 so far.

That’s great! It’s also good because we had about 1.5 years of declining sales tax, so it’s good that we’ve finally turned that around.

I am just including this slide because I was entertained by how incomprehensible it is.

It’s labeled as though it’s giving you the revenue from sales tax, smoothed out using a 12-month average. But that’s not at all what the graph is showing! The graph is showing the rate of change of the rolling average.

[Confidential to staff: Yes, yes, you’re very smart. But listen: no one wants to wrestle with the graph of the first derivative! Put the calculus away, and just show the actual rolling 12-month average sales tax graph.]

On to property tax:

Property tax value also went up! But in an uneven way.

First, home values went down a little:

But there were new builds, as well:

About 2/3 of the new value comes from residential, and the other 1/3 comes from commercial.

So the total of all property value in San Marcos went up a little bit. Not a ton, but a bit.

So we’re also expecting a little more in property taxes.

….

Overall, we think we’ll have a little more breathing room than we thought we would.

Here’s where we thought we were at, back in February:

And here’s how the revenues and expenses have changed since then:

and here are the main budget cuts that we have made:

And there are still a lot of unfunded needs:

As they say, nothing is more expensive than deferred maintenance.

But nevertheless, all of that taken together probably gets us to a balanced budget this year:

This is great!

Now, there’s still a looming $7.5 million budget hole in 2028. But we’d be okay in 2027.

Amanda: Our fees increase incrementally every year, so that no one ever gets walloped with a giant increase. Have we applied that philosophy to property taxes? A very small, regular increase, to prevent a giant shock?
Answer: No one answers this.

Although no one said so at the meeting, the answer is definitely “yes, we should”.

Tax hikes are unpopular! People are broke. Better not to shock everyone’s budget, but still show fiscal responsibility.

Also in the first workshop, two small unrelated items:

Announcement #1: Community Benefit Charge:

If you’re getting a city utility bill, there’s going to be a new line, called the “Community Benefit” fee:

You’re not paying any extra money, though. It used to be rolled into the other charges, and now they’re itemizing it.

Then when you go to look at the details, you can see exactly what’s getting covered in the Community Benefit charge:

Council is worried about how to explain this on a large scale so that no one freaks out. How about a mailer inside of all the envelopes?

Josh: How about a QR code right on the bill?
Answer: Maybe!

Announcement #2: Destination services:

The Convention and Visitor Bureau wants to rebrand itself as “Visit San Marcos!”

Great. Done.

Workshop 2: Utility assistance program

This has been going on a LONG time:

Basically, we had a pretty big utility assistance program, but people kept getting disconnected anyway. And we had $45K in customer donations, but it never got spent helping people.

This is mostly because we were giving the money to Community Action. Community Action is a great organization! But not a good fit for utility assistance.

The problem is that Community Action gets federal money, which means they require a massive amount of paperwork from anyone who needs assistance. They can get you help in six weeks, but by then, your power might have gotten shut off a month ago.

Alyssa was really the driving force in reforming this. She kept drilling down into the details over and over again, until the program finally started to work.

So here are some of the changes:

In 2025, council decided to give money to three more groups for utility assistance:

This is great! Those other three organizations can hand out money on a quick turnaround.

A bunch more improvements:

Great.

Here’s some nitty-gritty on how it gets administered:

Basically everyone who needs help gets sent somewhere.

When they do have to disconnect utilities, they avoid certain situations:

So they’re not going to disconnect you in extreme heat, cold, or right before a weekend.

How many people are we helping?

So people are still getting disconnected, even with utility assistance.

and here’s how many people are getting assistance:

Here’s a snapshot of the demographics of who gets assistance:

Seniors are struggling more, recently.

Communities in Schools connects directly with students. One problem is that some SMCISD students live outside of city boundaries, and so their families aren’t eligible for this money.

(Community Action and Salvation Army have other sources of funding to help these families, but it may come with more paperwork.)

….

Here’s the biggest problem:

They’re blowing through their money.

At the start of FY2026:

  • BCL gave out all their money, $21K, in 28 days. They got an extra $11K in March, and gave it out in 18 days.
  • Salvation Army gave out $45K in 4 months.
  • Communities in Schools can only assist students that are enrolled in their program, and can’t help in the summer.
  • Community Action is SUPER slow, because of the whole Federal paperwork deal.

On the one hand, you WANT agencies to give out the money. You don’t want agencies to hoard funds like a dragon. But there’s also nowhere to go for help right now, and it’s about to be summer.

Fundamentally, we probably need to quadruple the funding in this program.

Listen: La Cima has an $86.7 million bond. Their city services are locked down and guaranteed for 30 years. Kissing Tree gets $1.8 million every year, and they are entirely gated off! They could be spending that money on Day-Glo lights for golf carts, and we wouldn’t know.

If it takes $400K to keep the lights on for all residents, doesn’t that seem do-able?

Since that’s not on the table, Staff had a few suggestions to try to stretch the money a little further.

Discussion item 1: How often can people get assistance?

Right now, they help you with back payments and the current bill, so you can get help on 3 months worth of bills. You can also come back four times a year.

Council settles on saying that if you get help with back payments on your, it uses up two of your instances. Soevery year, you can come in four times if you just need help with 1 month payment, or you can come in twice a year with a big backlog.

Discussion item 2: What counts as hardship?

They’re looking at this slide:

Jane doesn’t like the “children under 5” category. Specifically, if you’re not low income, why should you get assistance just because you have small children?

Everyone explains that it’s about childcare costs. You may have a pretty good job, but if you’re paying for daycare on two kids, you still can’t make ends meet.

Jane says she understands, but what about actually wealthy people with babies cashing in on this?

Everyone: That’s not a thing. That just never happens. Wealthy people with small children do not spend half a day at the Salvation Army to get help with their electric bill.

Jane wants more time to think about this one.

Discussion item 3: Reconnection fees and late fees

Right now, the utility assistance covers reconnection fees and late fees. However, this money is going in a circle: the city is giving money to the utility assistance program, to pay for the city reconnection fees and late fees.

Can the city just waive these fees altogether, in these cases? It would help the utility assistance dollars stretch further.

Everyone likes this.

Discussion item 4: Do we want to split the pot of money into four chunks for each season?

That way the agencies would have a little money available at the start of each season, instead of running out for the whole year.

I think council was interested, but wanted more info.

Basically, this will all come around for an official vote in a future meeting.

Bonus! 3 pm workshops, 5/5/26

Citizen Comment:

Two people spoke:

  • Stop putting up Native American creation imagery because it’s hostile to Catholics.
  • Virginia Parker, director of the San Marcos River Foundation: yay EAHCP! They put in Dog Beach, Rio Vista, Ramon Lucio stepped entries into our park.

Workshop 1: Incidental Take Permits

Here is the Edward’s Aquifer:

The green part catches all the rainfall. The light blue part is all the porous caves and springs, where the aquifer is right at the surface. The dark blue part is the storage tank of the aquifer.

The water only pops up in two places: the San Marcos and Comal rivers.

In 1991, the Sierra Club sued the US Fish and Wildlife Service, for not protecting the endangered species in these rivers. They won the lawsuit, and the Edwards Aquifer Authority was created with legal status to protect the flow of these two rivers. (Here is all the history you might ever want to know, and then some.)

So the Edwards Aquifer Authority’s job is to keep the rivers flowing. They are required to have a plan, and the plan has to get approved by the US Fish and Wildlife department.

The old plan is going to expire in 2028, and so we’re working on the new one:

“EAHCP” stands for Edwards Aquifer Habitat Conservation Plan.

A big part of the new plan is the Incidental Take Permit:

Incidental Take Permit means “you’re going to disturb the endangered plants and fishies, so let’s plan to do it legally”. Otherwise you could get sued.

Here’s the things you might do that would be bad for endangered species:

  • swimming and playing in the river
  • Pumping water out of the Edwards Aquifer
  • Construction things that happen alongside the river

The biggest thing is pumping water out of the aquifer.

Here’s who gets permits to pump water:

  • Edwards Aquifer Authority – Total water available is about 500,000 acre-feet of water.
  • San Antonio Water System – gets allotted about 235,000 acre-feet of water/year
  • City of San Marcos – gets about 5000
  • City of New Braunfels – about 9000
  • Texas State University – about 2000

Next up on the ITP: making sure recreation on the San Marcos River doesn’t hurt the protected species.

Here are the specific activities we want to allow, in the EAHCP:

Here’s the type of thing EAHCP has done, so that people can swim without destroying the river:

They built the steps on the left, and fence off the stuff in the middle.

So we used to have a barren bank, very bad for the river, on the left here:

and now we have nice steps and a protected, healthy river bank. Hooray!

San Marcos is expected to also do some work:

Basically:

  • Keep people from swimming and messing with protected parts of the river, and help people have fun in designated areas.
  • Pick up a lot of litter.
  • When the river gets super low, we have to keep the habitat from getting hammered, by limiting how much people are going in the water.

The plan lays out how to measure whether or not the river is healthy enough for the species to survive.

They have to measure a bunch of things:

For example, here’s some of the goals for springflow:

Average flow of the San Marcos river is 175 cfs (cubic feet per second). Right now it’s about 90 cfs. It’s been about 90 cfs for the past few years.

The absolute lowest that’s okay is 45 cfs, and only if it doesn’t stay that low for very long. I can’t imagine the river only having half as much water as it does right now.

What’s the plan when the river gets low?

The Edwards Aquifer makes everyone cut back on pumping during a drought:

So San Marcos normally gets 5433 acre-feet per year. But if we were in a Stage 5 drought, we’d only be allowed to use 3042 acre-feet.

So that’s the blue line at the bottom of this chart: the amount of water that we’ll always be guaranteed to get from the Edwards Aquifer.

I might have misunderstood this next part. I think the Edward’s Aquifer Authority is going to buy back 100K acre-feet of water, and then use that to protect the river when it gets low.

….

Here’s another goal for the river:

they measure the amount of endangered plants, and plant more good plants, and remove more bad plants.

So we also have to take care of the plants:

They measure the animals:

Listen: if I hadn’t been listening to the presentation, I might have been freaked out by the photo on the top right. Doesn’t that guy look a little spooky, laying facedown like that?

They also raise the endangered species outside of the river:

in case of some natural disaster.

In total, here are all the conservation measures that San Marcos and Texas State University are supposed to implement:

It’s mostly things we’ve already been doing, under the old plan. They help us fund these, too.

So how much does this all cost?? It is expensive! About $28-30 million/year.

Cost of water rights will probably go up over the next 30 years, to pay for all this.

What does Council say?

Josh: How much does it cost to put this plan together?
Answer: Mostly staff time. About $2 million in grant money.

Amanda: Is the city already able to hold up our end of the bargain?
Answer: Yes, we contract out a lot of the conservation measures. It’s a lot of continuation of what we’ve been doing.

Jane: You say that we need to controlling access during extremely low flow events. What do you think this will look like?
Answer: There are a lot of unknowns. Could be paid access, parking access, might depend on what locations have been degraded. River hasn’t been at 45 cfs since the 1950s.

Jane: Are the fences along the banks less ugly?
Answer: Yes, they’ve been replaced with more aesthetically pleasing black fences.

Jane: We’re trying to stop promoting the river to tourists. Like the TxDot sign on 35 advertising river recreation.
Answer: It’s hard to get them to take their signs down.

Conclusion: We’re going to have a future conversation about how to downplay the river to tourists. Especially since water is such a big topic these days.

Workshop #2: Water and wastewater fees

We’re going to be raising impact fees later this summer. This presentation is mostly informational.

What’s an impact fee?

Great. This presentation is specifically about water and wastewater fees.

Developers only pay impact fees new developments. Nothing existing is going to have to pay any of these fees.

Here’s the past history:

Great.

There are rules for impact fees:

You can only charge an impact fee in your service area. So here’s where we can charge impact fees:

and here’s where we think people are going to build:

In order to compute impact fee rates, they need to know two things:

  • What’s the total cost of projects that need to be paid for by impact fees?
  • How many developers are going to be sharing those costs?

Let’s take those one at a time.

First: total cost of projects:

So they know where the growth is expected to happen, and so they can map out what kinds of water and wastewater projects will need to be completed so that all the new homes and buildings can get water impact.

Second: how many developers will be sharing the costs?

You want to charge them different amounts, according to how big the development is. So we go according to meter size.

Here’s how we translate meter size into number of homes:

In other words, we assume a 10-inch meter is equivalent to 350 homes.

After doing all that conversion, here’s the total number of “homes” that we’re providing water to:

So that would give the city what they need to compute the new impact fee rates:

Actual proposed rate hikes will come in June and July.

Council questions:

Josh: How do we compare to neighboring cities? Are we scaring off developers?
Answer: We benchmark with neighboring cities. We’re in line. It basically depends on how recently they’ve updated their impact fees. If they’re still going on 2015 rates, we’re higher.

Amanda: Do we incentivize reducing impact? Do we have reward programs for water re-use?
Answer: We’ll take this input and get back to you.

The city has a big reclaimed water facility. It doesn’t produce drinking water, but you can use it for cooling and irrigation. We run “purple pipe” to a bunch of places, like the Kissing Tree golf course, the power plant, the downtown plants, and some parts of the university.

Shane: What if they use reclaimed water. Does the purple pipe give a discount or anything?
Answer: No, it’s an entirely separate thing. This is only clean drinking water. It means they use less water, though, so that reduces their costs.

Lorenzo: Does the university pay impact fees?
Answer: Yep.

This is important, because the university skips a lot of local taxes, in general.

Workshop 3: Public Art Policy

In the last 20 years, we’ve put up way more public art!

There are a lot of decisions about what gets funded and where it’s located. How should we be transparent with the public on how these decisions are made? We need a Public Arts Policy.

We already have one, but it’s old:

For awhile it was just donations. Then around 2018, we commissioned the mermaids statues and Big Wavey:

Since then, we’ve gone on to do a lot more.

Some are big, like this mural behind Industry:

and some are little, like these traffic boxes:

I really love that traffic box.

Here’s the program that commissions and maintains these public art pieces:

So we’re trying to lock down some details and create a more formal Arts Policy. It’s going to cover things like: how do we maintain art? How do we approve things? How do we ensure these things sustain after we’re gone?

This is the planning stage.

Council questions:

Amanda: If we’re collaborating with a private organization, how are they consulted?
Shane: What about the public?
Answer: We hold lots of meetings with the collaborators, and at least one public meeting, unless it’s a super small project.

Alyssa: It’s great that we’re getting a reputation as a creative community.

Shane: What happens if someone tags a mural?
Answer: Murals actually prevent graffiti. People are less likely to tag murals. When it happens, we remove it or work with original artist to repair the mural.

Jane: What about murals on private buildings?
Answer: We go in halvsies. They have to keep it up for at least five years.

Then we get to The Big Conversation:

Jane: For major art, I want it to come to Council. I’m so embarrassed that we omitted the rattlesnake on the big mural, but we have a bobcat.

Jane is talking about this:

You see this mural as you’re driving on LBJ from I-35 towards downtown.

It makes Jane lose her mind every time, because there is a bobcat:

which obviously represents Texas State, but there is no rattlesnake in the mural, to represent SMCISD.

Jane is so upset about this mural that she wants a line-item veto on every major art piece that comes through San Marcos, because if she’d seen this design, she’d have asked, “Where’s the rattlesnake?”

I happen to totally agree with her – that mural needs a rattlesnake. However! Council should not have a line-item veto on artwork.

Listen: Edge cases make bad policy. If you have a single unusual bad situation, it’s going to have a lot of unique aspects, and you should not write general public policy with that case in mind. (And in fact, the very next time a mural came around, Jane tried to apply the lessons of the bobcat mural standard. She tried to ban a cactus painting for being prickly. It was a total mess.)

Staff: Best practices is that council and community provide the prompt up front, and give them what to go by.
Jane: That wouldn’t have saved the rattler problem. I want to see the art before it’s too expensive or too hard to change.

Shane, Matthew: YES!

Josh: We could make a list of ten principles! Artists could be required include three of ten!

(Note: oh god, this is how you end up with bland mush.)

Jane: Nope. I want to see the art and proofread it to make sure there’s a rattlesnake in it.

Amanda: Art is super subjective. We don’t want to tie the hands of the artists.

Josh: I don’t want to weigh in on art.

So what went wrong with that mural? Here’s the process of how murals are designed:

  • The arts commission talks with the building owner
  • Hold public meetings, get community direction and input
  • Call for qualifications to get a style
  • Pay 2-3 artists a stipend to get designs
  • Arts commission votes on 2-3 designs. Makes minor changes.

With that mural, the artist included every single thing that was mentioned in the community meeting.

City staff: And actually, it was not a Texas State bobcat. It was an actual bobcat, like a wildlife thing.

(Note: the bobcat is literally standing in front of Old Main, so I’m pretty sure it’s a Texas State bobcat.)

Alyssa: No. I don’t trust our judgement. Don’t you all remember our insane Gateway Sign discussions? We have terrible instincts. Leave it to the experts on the Arts Commission.

Josh: does the arts commission weigh in on highway signs?
Answer: No, that’s graphic design. It’s art but also functional.

(Apparently all the council members have gotten a lot of phone calls from community members who hate the gateway signs.)

Jane: Do you all know WHY we even have an arts commission?
Amanda: I don’t.
Jane: It was my idea!
Shane: in 1821.
Jane: it was 1998. I was on CDB, we were asked to do a lot of art design, and I was like, “I’m not qualified. We should have a commission.” Boom, you’re welcome.

Bottom line: they’re going to probably get to micromanage the art. We’ll see what the next draft of the Arts Policy looks like.

Bonus! 3 pm workshop, 4/21/26

Workshop #1: The Homeless PIT count

“PIT” stands for “Point in Time”. The PIT Count is a fixed day in January, where cities nationwide try to actually figure how many people are homeless in their communities.   Each city assembles a team of people who go out into the community and try to actually count and talk to as many homeless people as they can find on that day. (PIT count 2024, PIT count 2025)

The rules are set by the Housing and Urban Development agency, (HUD). If you complete a PIT count, it helps you apply for federal funding.

For unsheltered, think people in cars, and people outside.

For sheltered, think Hays County Women’s Shelter, Southside, Marla’s Place, but not people in hotels or motels.

The PIT count is not perfect. But it gives us useful information.

The blue column is people that they saw, but didn’t get to talk to. The blue is included in the orange group.

The gray column – Sheltered – is much smaller in 2026 than in 2025. This is because in 2025, the PIT count day ended up being a “cold weather night”, where Southside was open to everyone.

(I’m not sure why the chart has those weird gaps.)

Ages of people they were able to talk to:

and gender:

and race:

Generally homeless people have significant obstacles in their lives:

Almost all the homeless people in Hays County are in San Marcos:

They drove out to Wimberley and Dripping Springs, but did not see any people there. In Wimberly, they saw evidence of encampments, but didn’t actually see any homeless people.

Here’s where we’ve landed over the past six years:

Again, PIT counts aren’t perfect. You have to be careful when you’re looking at data like this. You can’t conclude that we’re solving homelessness – it could be that people are hiding, because they’re worried about ICE.

One presenter says that whenever ICE rumors pop up on social media, the line at the Food Bank gets cut in half. (That is so deeply depressing on so many levels.)

We also have a second source for homeless data: the public schools.

All the school districts collect this data at the beginning of the school year:

This year’s data:

So SMCISD has an estimated 105 K-12 students who are housing insecure. This doesn’t include their parents or any baby siblings who aren’t yet in school.

One offhand comment by the presenter: Statistically, apparently babies are the age group most likely to be evicted, and children aged 2-5 are the next most likely to be evicted.

Pretty grim commentary on our society!

At last year’s presentation, they said there was an urgent need to include homeless people in emergency action plans. For example, if we have a winter storm, how do we keep homeless people safe? How do we prevent families from freezing in their cars?

This year: progress! Relevant groups have come together and are working on this.

This year’s ask: the Homeless Management Information System. (HMIS)

It’s extremely difficult for case managers to keep track of details of homeless people. Which doctors has this person seen? What medications are they on? Do we need to locate their birth certificate or social security card? Etc.

HMIS is the system run by the Texas Homeless Network, so that everyone can pool their data and coordinate care. It costs $450 per user.

Can San Marcos help pay for this?

Answer: You bet! We’re planning on putting $9000 towards this at the May Homeless Coalition meeting.

Workshop #2: Homeless Action Plan

In 2024, we gave Southside $50K to come up with a Homeless Action Plan, and then another $800K to carry it out. This came out of federal Covid money, so it all has to be spent by December 31st, 2026.

This is their report on how it went!

Here’s the overview:

They focused on families primarily. Like we saw a moment ago, there are at least 105 kids in SMCISD who are housing-insecure.

(But not exclusively – they did also help individuals.)

There are three main tentpoles to their plan:

The presentation walked through each of the tentpoles individually.

So first, Emergency Assistance:

Think: car repair so someone can get to their job, or covering a two-week gap in pay when they get a new job, or covering part of a high electric bill, etc. You don’t want a small emergency to snowball into a big emergency.

Next: Eviction Prevention

Both of those categories are where you see the most bang for the buck.

Being evicted is expensive, destabilizing, and sends families down a cascade of trauma. But preventing eviction can be quick, cheap, and help get someone through an isolated hard time. Win-win.

….

This last category morphed over time. This is for families who have lost their housing.

They started with Rapid Rehousing:

What they said was that San Marcos doesn’t yet have the infrastructure to carry out this kind of program. Also, HUD used to fund this kind of program under Biden, but of course now everything is a dumpster fire.

It was leading to staff burnout and having to turn away lots of families, and generally awful for everyone involved.

So for Phase II, they switched to Transitional Housing:

Basically, they’d have 20 families stay for 60 days at Southside, all together as a cohort. They’d work with these families really closely, bring in a ton of community partners, and try to transition them to permanent housing.

Here’s a bunch of partners they collaborate with:

So that’s an outline of the main programs they implemented.

….

But wait! There’s more! With the $800K, they also spruced up Southside:

which is good.

Some budget details:

This shows how expensive the Rapid Rehousing was in Phase 1, and how many more families they were able to serve with the second model.

And here’s some general financial breakdown:

and some general takeaways:

What does Council say?

The million dollar question is: what happens when the Covid money runs out? Can we keep all this going?

They are working on it! They have enough money to keep it going through January 2027, and they are pursuing grants and stuff to keep these programs going.

Listen, let me be a moral scold for a sec:

We know how to solve homelessness. There is no mystery. We just aren’t willing to pay for it.

Nationally, it would cost under $10 billion to end homelessness. But homeless people cost over $11 billion each year, as is! Think ER visits, untreated mental illness and addictions, and jails.

It’s more expensive to be cruel to people! Isn’t that wild?

Again, there’s no mystery here. Republicans slash funding for homelessness programs, over and over again, and here we are.

Bonus! 3 pm workshop, 4/7/26

Citizen Comment: Five people talk.

They all talk about EMS, so I’ll put their comments down below.

The backstory:

There are nine different Emergency Service Districts, called ESD #1 – #9, which make up Hays County. Some are fire, some are just EMS, and some are both.

The districts with EMS are 1, 2, 3, 7 and 9:

Hays County ESD #1: Dripping Springs, Driftwood, Henly.
Hays County ESD #2: Buda
Hays County ESD #3: San Marcos
Hays County ESD #7: Wimberley.
Hays County ESD #9: Kyle and all the country bits around those towns.

This map of the districts is hard to read, but it’s the only one I could find:

In 2020, Wimberley and Buda were running their own EMS.

The other three ESDs all shared an EMS service. We all contracted out with San Marcos-Hays County EMS, (SMHC-EMS), a nonprofit EMS.

Great!

In 2022, SMHC-EMS decides to start forming a union:

It took them about 2 years, but they finally negotiated a new contracted with their board of directors which included things like this:

Great!

About 30 seconds later, ESD #1 and ESD #9 both cancel their contracts with SMHC-EMS, and vote to open their own EMS departments. Pretty much textbook union-busting.

So San Marcos is stuck holding the bag, by ourselves. What do we want to do? Last August, we commissioned a study with some consultants.

January 2026: The consultants give us three choices:

  1. Renew the contract with SMHC EMS and just carry on.
  2. Roll EMS into our fire department. This is called Fire-based EMS.
  3. Make a new standalone City EMS department.

There’s a long conversation about collective bargaining and labor rights, and whether a City-based EMS could be granted some form of negotiating power.

A majority of council votes for Option 3, but they ask city staff to look into the laws around collective bargaining and EMS.

Let’s talk about union-busting for a sec.

Forming a union is a big hassle, and so my guess is that the grievances with management were significant. (I don’t have any details, though.)

Pre-union-busting, how much did EMS cost everyone? Here’s what I found from 2022:

ESD #1: $3.3 million in taxes (here)
ESD #9: $3.84 million in taxes (here)
San Marcos: $4.22 million in taxes (here)

Total:  $11.36 million of taxpayer money to SMHC-EMS.

Post-union-busting, we now have three separate departments. Here’s what tax-payers are paying in 2026:

ESD #1: $8 million in taxes (here)
ESD #9: $10.2 million in taxes (here)
San Marcos: I can’t locate this for the life of me.  Let’s ballpark $9 million in taxes, for our City EMS, based on the consultant study from January.

Total: $27.2 million of taxpayer money, to three separate EMS departments.

Bottom line: Way to go, asshats. You’re spending $16 million extra of taxpayer dollars, but at least you’re screwing over the people who keep us alive in an emergency.

Which brings us to tonight! 

The point of the workshop is to update Council on how it’s going, planning for a new City EMS department.

The staff presentation

First off: city staff say there is absolutely no way to give EMS collective bargaining power under state law.

Police and Fire Departments can unionize, which is known as “Civil Service”.

But EMS doesn’t qualify as Civil Service, because San Marcos is too small:

You have to have 460K people or more. So Austin can do this, but not us.

The first step is to hire an EMS Chief:

After this, we’d start hiring everyone else. Current SMHC-EMS workers would have first dibs on applying, and then we’d open it up to anyone else.

There’s a whole lot of medical mumbo-jumbo about credentialing, medical directors, clinical operating guidelines, physician consultations, etc, which I honestly do not have the background to follow.

What do people say at Citizen Comment?

Five people speak:

  • Former SMPD commander: This is great! City EMS services are the way to go. State of Texas has bad laws around civil service, but the EMS workers are okay letting collective bargaining go.
  • Citizen rep on Hays County EMS Board: Same!
  • Two longterm field workers: This is the best of a bad situation. City EMS is the way to go.
  • Zach Philips, president of the EMS union: you don’t need to rush this process. Our contract runs until 2028. Why not finish the contract and carefully plan your new City EMS to start in 2028?

What does Council say?

Alyssa: How did you build the job description for the EMS Chief? What’s the timeline?
Answer: We looked at other city EMS chiefs, and based it on those. We want someone who can build an EMS department from scratch, and also build lots of partnerships. Maybe down the road, we can do mobile community healthcare or something. The hiring process will probably take two months, but it’s flexible.

Amanda: Austin uses a process called “Consultation” instead of collective bargaining. Can we do that?
Answer: Austin has a special bracketed carve out in state law. We may be able to do something called “Voluntary Consultation”.

Note: What is Voluntary Consultation?

It sounds like a soft version of collective bargaining. Here’s an explanation about how it’s used in school districts:

 

While the law explicitly prohibits collective bargaining, many school districts have adopted consultation policies allowing school boards to meet and confer with educators about educational policy and employment conditions. These consulting agreements are related to the concept of collective bargaining but constructed in such a way that the input given is considered advisory rather than legally binding, and therefore does not qualify as a collective bargaining agreement by law. The school districts are not required to act on the input received from the employees and final decisions on matters discussed through the consultation process are decided by school board members.

So it’s not binding, and it would be voluntary by the city. At best, it’s a good-faith effort to foster communication. At worst, it’s thoughts-and-prayers.

City Manager Reyes: this means that certain city employees would get a perk not offered to the rest of city employees. Something to consider.

(Note: We could offer Voluntary Consultation to everyone. Just saying.)

Amanda: Is it viable to keep the current contract in place to 2028?

No one really answers this, but this is the central question. Should we build an EMS department from scratch in 5 months? Or should we see whether it works to just keep our contract with SMHC-EMS?

There’s this chart:

Sorry about the screenshot. I know it’s tiny and hard to read. (It wasn’t in the packet, because it was only requested the day before.)

I think this chart is supposed to show that it saves more money to build our own EMS department by October. But it really doesn’t.

Lorenzo makes an excellent point: this chart supposedly compares City EMS and SMHC-EMS. Some of the numbers should be identical either way – for example, the amount of revenue from ambulance rides should be the same. But they’re not – they’re off by $1.3 million. (This is the first row of the chart, comparing the 1st entry and the 4th entry.)

In several places, numbers that should match don’t actually match. This is probably because nobody actually knows the real estimates, and they used different sources to get projections in the different columns.

Point being: no one can really say which will be cheaper, the current contract or a City EMS.

Amanda: This is not solely about revenue. I’m focused on the quality of care and taking care of our community, not taking the cheapest option.

But Lorenzo wasn’t arguing that we should go for the cheapest option. He was arguing that we haven’t really thought through just staying with the current contract. It is a viable option, but we’re acting like it’s off the table.

My read is that staff came in with a lot of momentum towards building a new EMS department. There just isn’t a lot of oxygen in the room to discuss continuing the current contract.

Josh: I value people and communication more than I value the nitty-gritty details!

Josh is both right and wrong. He’s correct that when people with power operate in good faith, and value their employees and value communication, you have the best possible scenario. But he’s also wrong: when people with power stop operating in good faith, the only leverage that employees have are the details that are spelled out. When things go sideways, the devil is in the details.

I think Josh believes “Look, I have good intentions and I like being a good boss. That’s enough to make sure we’re in the good scenario!”

So what’s the timeline?

If everything was put in motion today, it would take 6 months for the state license to come through. Then we’d coordinate with Medicare, Medicaid, DEA, etc etc.

Matthew: Where would we put city EMS?
Answer: We’d talk to their landlord and try to rent out their current building.

Hopefully everything would be ready to go on October 1st, but otherwise we’d have a contingency plan, which we also would build out.

Jane: How long did ESD 1 and ESD 9 take to create their own plan?
Answer: ESD 1 took 6-8 months, ESD 9 was a bit longer.

Jane: can we compare benefits plans?
Answer: We’re working on it.

Note: It’s not just benefits. At the January meeting, they also mentioned looking to make sure seniority transfers over. Otherwise you are going to lose your most experienced EMS workers.

Alyssa: This is big and complicated, and there are so many ways for it to go disastrously wrong if we rush it.

Fire Chief Les Stevens: The Medical Practitioner oversees these transitions and would not allow care to lapse for one second.

Amanda: In the next legislative session, maybe we can lobby for fixing the Civil Service rules?

….

Ok Council:

1.  Who wants to stick with City based EMS?

Yes: Matthew, Shane, Jane, Josh, Amanda
No: Lorenzo and Alyssa

Alyssa says that she is just not yet satisfied with the open questions about labor protections.

2.  Who wants to look into Voluntary Consultation as a lite-collective-bargaining?

Yes: everyone.
No: no one.

So there you have it.

At the very end, the union rep Zach Phillips weighs in again:

  • I still have concerns about the timeline and labor protections
  • EMS will absolutely not generate revenue. Do not look at this as a revenue source, I promise.
  • Yes on lobbying the state legislature. We think we can make progress on this by 2028, which is one reason to wait.
  • You all will be the 2nd largest city based EMS, after Austin. What’s the rush?

Alyssa: Will we put a union rep on the hiring committee for the EMS chief?
Answer: Absolutely. Yes.

Final notes: How are we going to pay for this? We’re already looking at a $4 million budget hole. As Zach said, this will not generate revenue.

My guess is that that will be a big, messy conversation, and so there just wasn’t time to roll that conversation into the this workshop.

What a mess! Sure do wish we hadn’t done this last year:

But here we are.

Bonus! 3 pm workshops, 3/3/26

Back during the pandemic, San Marcos got a bunch of Covid money. First there was $6 million in Covid Relief, in 2020, and then $18 million from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) in 2021.

By the end of 2024, it all had to be contracted out. We did that.

Here’s what the Covid Relief money went to:

(Note: For the Covid Relief money, they only mention $2.67 million of the $6 million in today’s presentation. I assume the rest got spent years ago.)

Here’s what we’ve spent the $18 million ARPA money on:

It has to all be spent by the end of 2026. So everything is wrapping up.

Which brings us to today

As projects finish up, there’s often a little bit of money left over. We’re allowed to put that towards one of the existing contracts, but you can’t start anything new.

We’ve got about $320K freed up from these projects:

What should we do with this extra money?

Here’s what staff recommends:

Operation Triage and Mission Able are both nonprofits that go in and fix houses.

In other words: suppose you’re 70 and you bought your house in 1980, and you’ve worked low-wage jobs your whole life, and now you’re in danger of being homeless because your house needs $50K in repair so that it’s not condemned. This is the kind of program that comes in, fixes your foundation and your air conditioning, so that you can safely and happily stay in your home.

The grant consultant is the person who understands all the federal rules, so that we don’t risk losing this money due to mismanagement. We were going to have to pay this $120K either way.

What does Council say?

Jane: How about $5K to buy pet food for the PALS pet food drive program? That’s allowed because we had a covid contract with them already.

Alyssa: I need way more information. What are the deliverables? What’s the selection process? What’s the socioeconomic status of the recipients? Is this equitable? Where in the city do the recipients live? Do our neighbors trust them? I have so many questions.

Amanda: I’d like the extra info, but I’m good with Mission Able and Operation Triage.

Lorenzo: How about the food bank and BR3T?

(Note: BR3T is rent assistance and homelessness prevention.)

Alyssa: Can we get info on those, too? I want info on everything. BR3T funding is evaporating.

Jane: Maybe the consultant will come in under budget, and we can find $5K for PALS pet food from there.

Josh: I’m fine with the staff recommendations.

Shane: Me too.

Matthew: Me too.

Bottom line: This will come back at a city council meeting. Staff will bring back lots of information on Mission Able, Operation Triage, PALS, the food bank, and BR3T.

Bonus! 3 pm workshop, 2/17/26

SMPD is a rather large chunk of the general fund. The General Fund this year is $126 million:

and SMPD is the biggest chunk of that, at 22%.

Obviously there’s huge disagreement within the community on this point. Maybe you think all cops are trigger-happy jerks with daddy issues, or maybe you think cops are upright citizens with a zest for being helpful. Most likely, you’re somewhere in between.

At any rate, as a community, we have to come together and make decisions.

Here’s a question: does SMPD need more staff?

(First off, yes: all of our city departments need more staffing.) But anyway, in order to answer this in an unbiased manner, we hired some consultants.

Here’s what they say:

and

You can read the whole report here (scroll down past the slides). It’s very detailed.

Here’s just a highlight of the slides:

Afternoons and late night is when they get the most calls.

The university has its own separate police force with its own rules. But they sort of overlap and cooperate around the edges:

So how long does it take for police to show up?

They do not show up to minor car crashes anymore, because of those budget cuts we’ve been talking about.

The consultants made a big deal out of “proactivity”.

It’s basically the things that get done in between crises. If you’re always swinging wildly from crisis to crisis, you can never harass brown people for broken tail lights assist the grandmothers when they have a flat tire.

Next up is Dispatch:

That seems very sympathetic.

and admin:

Ok.

And investigations:

Sure.

Loose, disorganized thoughts:

  • It’s good to have this information
  • This whole report is inherently pro-cop, because it is pro-status quo. This is not a conversation about how we can re-imagine safety in San Marcos. However, a majority of San Marcos does support SMPD.
  • All departments are being squeezed right now. If we conducted staffing studies on all departments, we’d get big needs across the board.

That’s all I got!