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.