a fast growing fast moving
community with something new
happening almost every day.
That's why each week I go right
to the door with one of the
newsmakers who is driving this
train should throw joining us.
Join us for the conversation a
lively discussion with the
reporters and community leaders
about the issues that matter to
us now as we go on the record.
And now Jim forsight Hi I'm Jim
Forsyth and welcome again to on
the record on unrehearsed
discussion of the key issues and
challenges facing us today in
San Antonio.
Our guest today is Doug Melnick.
He is the chief sustainability
officer for the city of San
Antonio.
Doug thank you very much for
joining us today on the record
thank you for having me.
Sustainability is a big
mouthful.
Can you tell us what it is how
it will benefit us and how you
plan on achieving it in the
interests of making a better
city.
And that's one of the challenges
that we have just what the term
sustainability.
It's pretty much a very all
encompassing term and part of
the keys is really defining it
for San Antonio.
And so as I've been here for the
past four years working with
internal departments working
with community stakeholders
working through different
planning processes such as the
SA tomorrow planning process
really trying to pin down on
what our major issues are and
you know I think one of the big
ones is growth.
When we look at adding a million
people by 2040 what does it
mean.
What does it mean for our
roadways.
What does it mean for our air
quality.
What does it mean for
affordability for people being
able to basically live in the
homes that they've lived in for
years or move here and find
someplace to live.
There's some pressing issues
around climate change.
What is our contribution to
that.
How is it going to impact us and
what can we do.
So I think one of the things
we're really trying to translate
sustainability into is what it
means for people's lives.
Now what are the problems with
issues like sustainability is
when the average person hears it
frequently their reaction is
they want to take away my right
to do something that I enjoy
doing.
They want to force me to get out
of my car.
They want to make it so I can't
live on two and a half acres in
the outskirts of town that I
have to change my barbecue
patterns or something like that.
Right.
Talk a little bit about what
sustainability really means and
reassurance that you're not here
to essentially take our rights
away.
And that's and that's absolutely
key.
It's about the value
proposition.
It's about translating things
that we should be doing because
they have multiple other
benefits other than just
sustainability.
A simple example could be street
trees.
The humble street tree.
Lots of people might not want a
tree.
They might need to drop their
leaves they might drop fruit.
They have to be maintained.
But when we look at their value
in terms of air quality a tree
lined street improves property
values a tree lined streets if
designs well can help reduce
stormwater runoff and reduce
flooding risk.
So I think it's about
translating these things that
may seem like burdens into
benefits for different
stakeholders.
Well let's talk about them the
challenges that we're facing.
Let's start first of all with
the fact that we are out of
attainment with the EPA for our
air quality.
How serious is that and how do
you think that we should move
more efficiently to get back
into that compliance
And I think that's a big issue.
I think there's a couple of you
know impacts associated with
that.
I think the most important thing
we need to remember is that the
end of the day the reason why we
have this EPA ozone standard is
it's about public health.
And if if we don't reduce our
ozone ground level ozone numbers
you know it's going to impact
people it's going to impact
people's children's asthma rates
it's going to impact people
having to miss work or school.
So we have to really realize
that.
But at the same time there's
economic impacts with
designation comes regulatory
requirements from the EPA where
we are now is at the lowest
level at marginal.
So we really have sort of
skirted sort of the worst of
those impacts.
However if we don't make the
necessary changes and
adjustments quickly we will be
moved up to a higher category.
So I think what we're doing now
is really trying to mobilize
know internal departmental
players community partners
community stakeholders business
industry residents
transportation sector and really
start having conversations
around how do we start getting
our handle handle on this and
start making adjustments and how
basically we're we're moving
around the city.
How if there's opportunities to
adjust our business operations
around key ozone days and really
do everything we can to make
sure that we reach attainment as
quickly as possible.
Whenever we run a story about
sustainability or about air
quality problems or anything the
reaction that we get is they
want to get me out of my car and
they want me to take a bus and I
don't want to take a bus.
How do we get over that.
Or is it important to get over.
You know I think we have to look
at everything.
There's not one easy answer or a
solution to air quality.
I think it's a lots of different
things.
And I think when we start
talking about people having to
get out of their vehicles I
think the first question that I
would ask is is the
transportation system and or the
transportation options there to
allow people to make that
decision.
And I know that's a major
initiative of mayor and city
council and different partners
as you know we need to build
that modern transportation
system so people have that
option.
You know at the end of the day
you asking somebody to double
their commute because it's going
to help improve the air the air
quality and our environment
while it is a laudable request
it may not be practical.
So I think you know when we
start looking at tackling air
quality it's related to
everything else that's related
to our transportation system our
growth patterns.
And that's why the work of
bridge and Bridget White and the
planning to our department
around looking at regional
center planning and connecting
those regional centers by high
capacity transit we need to make
smart decisions going forward to
provide people the real
opportunity to make different
decisions.
As you mentioned the mayor and
the county judge will have a
major transportation initiative
on the ballot in 2019.
What would you from where you
sit like to see as part of that
initiative.
You know I think at the end of
the day you know we're in the
midst of a major climate
planning initiative called essay
climate ready and you know the
goal of that is twofold It's to
reduce our greenhouse gas
emissions that are contributing
to global climate change and
basically preparing our
community for those impacts when
we start digging into the data
and we start looking at where
those emissions come from you
know from our community side.
You know almost 50 percent come
from buildings and then the
second part is just about 40
percent come from transportation
of that 40 percent.
The majority is from passenger
vehicles.
So I think whatever this
proposal is that's put before
the taxpayers has to provide
those diverse options to give as
many people the ability to take
different modes whether it's
some sort of high capacity
transit whether it's a an
integrated priority bike system
whether it's just a you know
very well connected system of
sidewalks.
We need to make sure that all
users have different choices
other than I just need to rely
on my single occupancy vehicle.
Now people like their single
occupancy vehicles they've grown
up with them.
It's almost a birthright
especially in Texas to be able
to drive to work in your car.
Do you feel that if those
options were available that a
large number of San Antonians
would give up that birthright
and be willing to try
alternatives.
You know it's about options and
being able to take a look at
what they are and evaluate
whether it's better than what
you have now I think you know me
personally.
I would like to think that if
given the option of sitting in
my car in traffic a couple of
times a day with unproductive
time as opposed to if there was
high quality transit there was
going to get me to where I
needed to go faster.
I might make that different
choice.
Now obviously the highways are a
problem now.
We're talking about a million
more people being in this
community in the next 22 years.
Not a whole long time from now.
How could we deal with that.
I mean we continue to be a place
attracting folks from all over
the country continue to be a
magnet city.
But that has its downside.
And much of that falls on you.
What are some of your proposals
to deal with it.
You know I think one of the
things about the work that I do
in sustainability is we walk we
work across departments.
So one of the things that we do
is really try to help facilitate
sort of inter departmental
thinking.
And so the work's already going
on in these departments
particularly when you start
talking about some of these
transportation issues you know
building a modern transportation
system is going to take time.
In the interim you know things
that are currently being worked
on by our transportation capital
improvement department is
something called Transportation
demand management working with
major employers to provide as
many opportunities for their
employees to take different
transportation options it could
be incentivizing carpooling.
It could be providing free or
reduced transit passes it could
be allowing remote work or
compressed work weeks so I think
we need to go deep into the
toolbox and figure out what
options we have other priorities
that we have that are sort of
we're beginning to work on is
the whole idea of electrifying
our city in terms of providing
that infrastructure for people
to shift towards more efficient
electric vehicles.
So there's I think there's lots
that we can do now that will
help mitigate some of those
impacts from the exploding
growth.
I think one of the really
important things is really
having a community conversation
around where we really need to
be in the next 15 20 years to to
get ahead of that growth.
To wrap this up I'd like to blue
sky a little bit with you.
Let's imagine that this is now
September 26 of 2014.
I walk outside this building on
Broadway just north of downtown.
How will the world icee be
different.
What will I see then that I
won't see now how will my daily
life be different.
How will the mechanics that I
use to navigate my daily life be
different in your opinion in the
interest of sustainability.
How do you see that evolving.
I think one thing that pops into
my head is just as a simple
notion when you walk outside
that door you know you are in a
what is a sustainable city in a
city that embraces that concept.
I think when we go to different
cities across the country and
around the world you get that
vibe that clearly this is a city
that's embrace embracing that
thinking.
I think you see more people on
bikes I think the streets are
going to be more crowded because
there's more people here.
I think you're going to see high
capacity transit going up and
down the streets.
You're going to see more robust
mature street trees and green
infrastructure managing that
stormwater.
You're going to see solar panels
on buildings you can see a smart
city a city that is connected
where you basically take out
whatever smart device you happen
to have.
And it's going to tell you where
you need to go from A to B.
Here's the quickest way that
you're going to do it.
Maybe even smart kiosks around
the city that are telling you
current air quality measurements
or current renewable energy
that's being generated by the
city in real time.
So I think it's a city that's
basically going to be more in
tune with what a sustainable
city is.
Thank you very much.
Sounds like an interesting
future.
Doug Melnick is the chief
sustainability officer for the
city of San Antonio.
Thank you very much for joining
us today on the record.
And stick around the
conversation is coming up next.
And welcome to the conversation.
Let me introduce our all star
panel for today.
I'd like to welcome Brian
Chesnoff who is the metro
columnist for The San Antonio
Express News and also from the
San Antonio Express News senior
reporter Josh Baugh
Thank you both very much for
joining us in a very busy week
here in the conversation.
If I could just ask both of you.
What happened last Thursday
night in what was supposed to be
a town hall meeting to discuss
the three charter amendments
proposed by the firefighters
union.
And what does that tell us about
where we stand about the
dynamics and potential future of
this very very divisive issue.
Well I mean I think that you
know there's a town hall meeting
that was scheduled for 7:00 p.m.
on Thursday night.
It was supposed to feature mayor
run near Breard union President
Chris Steel and Frank Garza who
is a municipal law expert and
attorney.
People had already started to go
into the facility at UTSA
downtown campus in preparation
for this town hall to take place
and about two hours before the
event was supposed to kick off
Chris Steele told the moderator
through an associate that he was
not going to show up and they're
going try to send somebody in
his stead.
And at that point the mayor
declined to participate as well
because the whole town hall
event that was sponsored by UTSA
and the Santin Express News had
been billed as a debate between
Chris Steele and Ron Nuremburg.
So why would the mayor Brian
miss an opportunity to speak to
an engage group about why he
thinks these charter amendments
should be defeated.
Well I think it highlighted the
fact that Christie is the one
who bailed out and sabotaged the
entire debate himself.
There's a there's a term that
was coined after what went down
in the 2016 presidential
election with Russian
interference in the back
campaign discourse saboteurs and
I think that Chris Steele
embodies that he is not
interested in having an honest
discussion about these
amendments that his own union
has proposed.
Instead he is playing dirty
tricks.
He is he he's trying to short
circuit an honest debate about
what these amendments would
actually do.
I think what was kind of amazing
about the situation was that you
know I think both sides probably
attempted to pack the house
there's a limited number of
seating there prepare for
overflow seating.
And and you know the pro charter
amendment people who were there
began chanting Where's the
mayor.
There's a retired firefighter
who's very active in the
campaign for the charter
amendments he went on to
Facebook Live and was was
casting the episode as being
that the mayor didn't show up
because the union had Renette
King available to debate.
And so there was just two
completely opposite narratives
of what actually took place in
the end the fire union and its
allies were pushing this idea
that the mayor bailed and that
it wasn't Chris Steele who
walked away from it from the
beginning.
Now Brian the point that the
fire union made was that the
fire union gathered the petition
signatures to get this on the
ballot.
But now that it's on the ballot
now that it's being endorsed by
some entities their argument is
that it's now no longer a
firefighter's issue.
It's now the approved by
Citizens Committee which Ms King
represented.
So it's not right to cast
aspersions on Chief Steele for
not showing up at the debate
because he's done his job.
He's heading off to Baton to
somebody else.
It was just clearly a dirty
trick to bail out two hours
before the debate started.
It was I believe it was a
deliberate effort to throw it
into chaos and try to flip the
script and just so chaos and
division.
So where does that lead us Josh.
Well that's a good question.
I don't think anybody knows the
answer.
There are other news
organizations that are
attempting to put together
debates between Chris Steele and
Ron Nierenberg.
And whether that actually
happens I think is unknown.
I'm not sure that the the go
vote no campaign or run
Nierenberg are interested in
debating that.
King RanIt forget her or what
her last name is now.
But she's you know a former
district 10 candidate she had
run for commissioners court.
You and I have been I think
virtually every press conference
that's been held by the fire
unions since this campaign
kicked off in the spring.
And I think we can recall seeing
RadNet and many of those press
conferences but never once has
she been thrust out to the
lectern and asked to speak on
behalf of this group to a tee.
It has been Chris Steele
speaking on behalf of the Union
and on behalf of the campaign
San Antonio first campaign.
Nobody in that association has
ever been willing to go on the
record and make any kind of
statements regarding any of this
stuff other than Chris Steele.
And so you know it's fine to
have a spokesman.
And there's nothing wrong.
Nobody's suggesting that you
shouldn't have a spokesman but
it was a very abrupt moment
where she was rushed into the
union is still arguing that this
is a firefighters campaign.
At the bare County Democratic
headquarters where they
announced just last week that
the party had endorsed
supporting the amendments.
They framed it in that manner.
They said the firefighters are
heroes and do this for the
firefighters.
They're clearly playing the
firefighter card.
Firefighters being
overwhelmingly the most
universally popular city
employees.
Obviously the three proposals
that will be on the ballot in
November.
One of them would cut the salary
of a future city manager not the
current city manager.
The second one would allow
referenda on what city council
does and the third is a very
narrowly worded proposal that
would require disputes between
the union and the city to be
settled by binding arbitration.
Now Josh you say you've done
reporting that indicates that
maybe that key second one is not
what a lot of people think it
is.
Yes so the charter is has got
multiple elements to it.
It's a voter approved document.
That's the kind of guiding
document for the city.
And it outlines exactly what you
need to do for referendum for
unissued and for recall.
And what's interesting about
this campaign is it is attacking
the referendum only and so
whether it wants to do is reduce
the threshold for signatures
expand the amount of time that
you have to collect signatures
specifically to overturn actions
that are taken by the City
Council.
But they're not addressing
initiative which is what the
Texas Organizing Project
recently used to put the paid
sick sick leave in front of the
city council.
So if this charter men were to
pass it would address referendum
only.
And so if you want to overturn a
tax rate or an appropriation
made by the council you could go
to a megachurch and get your
20000 signatures in a matter of
a couple of services but if you
wanted to initiate something
like paid sick leave you would
still have to go collect.
At this point sixty nine
thousand five hundred signatures
in a 40 day window which is what
top did.
And they actually collected 100
44000 signatures which a lot of
people point to saying that the
charter works as it exists that
if there's true community desire
for an initiative that there's
the wherewithal to gather those
signatures so that kind of pokes
a hole in the whole
firefighter's proposal that this
is giving power to the citizenry
that this is empowering the
public.
It is not necessarily doing that
is it.
Well that's probably a question
for Christine but I think it's
putting the hands of power in
the hands of a small smaller
group of people obviously as one
then it does.
And so you got to ask yourself
they say give the power back to
the people but which people you
know who exactly and if it's
that small amount of signatures
that are required that just
lends itself to special
interests becoming more
powerful.
Obviously if you're a special
interest and they pass something
you don't like it's a lot easier
for an organization to come up
with signatures in a heartbeat
than it is for the people.
I mean a lot of people would
know where to begin to collect
20000 which money can can do it
very quickly as the fire union
demonstrated.
And I think it's also you know
it's important to note that it's
not just the actual act of
collecting signatures and
holding a referendum vote but
the threat of it as well.
I think that you can come in and
if you a powerful special
interest you can quietly work.
City Hall offices and explain
you know if you don't do x y and
z we will go out and in a matter
of you know a couple of days you
know and use a paid paid people
to go get signatures and we'll
overturn the project that you're
most proud of.
Brian you've done interesting
reporting on how this campaign
is being waged while the mayor
is talking about Bond Ratings
and Standard and Poors and
something that a lot of people
probably don't really
understand.
The supporters of these three
proposals are doing
microtargeting.
They're using Mimis.
They're kind of dumbing down the
argument can you talk about how
that's working and how effective
you think that'll be.
Sure.
I mean I brought up the 2016
presidential election.
One thing the fire union is
doing is attempting to stoke
divisions online with these
these means for example the
issue of the cenotaph being
moved outside of the footprint
of the Alamo is a hot button
issue for conservatives.
And if you look there are
injecting that issue into this
even though nothing whatsoever
and this would have anything to
do with the Senate.
Well I guess you could they
might argue that this is the
city City Hall City Council run
a muck and doing things that the
people don't want them to do.
That would probably be their
argument.
But on the flip side you know
yes it does take a lot longer to
explain to folks how these
abstract concepts will affect
them personally if that is what
the govt.
No campaign has begun to do
actually this week they began
microtargeting individuals by
geography by the neighborhoods
they live in.
And they're sending out ads that
these these folks receive that
would attempt to explain very
simply for example in Beacon
Hill the folks who live in
Beacon Hill are concerned about
and concurrent development
popping up in their residential
neighborhood.
The argument there would be this
would allow developers with
money to collect signatures and
you know create a referendum on
a zoning change.
So Josh let me start with you.
How do you see this playing out
over the next six weeks and
let's look in our crystal ball
and see if we can determine what
we think the outcome of this
will be.
Let me start with you.
Well I think that that's the big
question that we will have an
answer to until November 6th.
It feels like you have spent a
lot of time talking to both
opponents and proponents of the
charter amendments and it feels
like there is a little bit more
organization on the GO Vote No
campaign right now than the
supporting campaign run by the
firefighters union.
There seems to be a growing
groundswell of support and
understanding about the about
the campaign to shoot these
amendments down.
And I think you know Chris
Steele kind of slipping away
from the public view may be a
sea change moment for how this
stuff plays out over the next
couple of months.
Brian how do you see this
playing out.
Well I've been pretty skeptical
about defeating these these
proposals just because you know
the firefighters have been
savvy.
The fire union I would I should
say has been quite savvy they
know that for example the city
manager poll is very low in this
city they've been she's been
hammered for years by not only
the fire union but the police
union over her salary and of
course they're tying the city
manager salary into this entire
campaign even though it wouldn't
actually affect the current city
manager and only affect future
city managers.
So I think they've been they've
been politically savvy and I
would say you know I think
there's still a lot of
uncertainty and a lot of fear on
the part of folks who realize
how destructive these amendments
would be that they actually
might pass.
So where is a fiery union
president Steele
Why do you think that he's not
willing to show up on shows like
this one up here at debates.
What is his end game in this.
Do you think you know he's he's
kind of lit the fuse of a
ticking time bomb dropped it and
run away.
And my experience has been that
in the times that we've had an
opportunity to ask him questions
that he he has issues that he
wants to say he wants to put his
his perspective on things out
and then he's he's not
particularly receptive to
detailed questions and asking
for kind of factual rebuttals.
And I think that if you put them
on a TV show put them on stage
at Town Hall where where he
isn't in control of when it
starts and when it stops then
he's forced to answer those
questions and I think that's a
position he probably doesn't
want to be in.
Thank you very much Josh Baugh
is the senior reporter from the
San Antonio Express News Brian
Chazov the metro columnist for
The San Antonio Express News.
This is certainly an issue
that's not going away until as
you mentioned November 6 that
we'll probably be talking about
it after that.
Thank you very much and please
join us next time for on the
record.