 And we throw around these numbers all the time, and I think it's important just to stop for a minute, make sure we all know the construction of all this. So the state of Texas has 6.25% of that. So, so a fairly large percent that we're sending to the state of Texas from our sales tax. The city of San Antonio separately has 1% of that. And what we're looking at tonight is just one piece of this last line, which is the additional 1% that voters can approve in any given city for particular sorts of projects. And we are at that cap right now so that extra 1% is the most the city can add. And so we are currently at the cap of 8.25%. So I think that's important to understand. Now, the measures we discussed tonight are the 1% is shown in the pie chart in the table at the bottom. And so within that 1%. All we're really talking about with these three ballot measures are the green and purple slice of the pie. And these are shown in the bottom table as the pre K for SA, of course, and the expiring Edwards aquifer in green waste trails so both of those have one eighth of a percent. One eighth of that 1% that is in question here. So we have to go through the ballot measures logistically real quick before we get into the substance of it. So the first ballot measure and it's a little confusing because there's two prop eight. The first ballot measure is city of San Antonio proposition a. And that question is going to be whether or not this is the simplest one, whether or not to to extend pre K for SA for eight additional years. And this is, we simply continue to pay that one eighth of a cent that we have already supported. If that measure is not approved, then the program ends and we stop in that one eighth of a percent. Now the second ballot measure is city of San Antonio proposition be. And this is whether or not to use that one eighth cent that had been dedicated to the Edwards aquifer and greenway trails and transfer that now to ready for ready to work as a program. Now it's approved. That is the best sense for the ready to work program would start being collected. When the Edwards and greenway tax is finished being collected which will be sometime in 2021. If it's not approved, that would be collected until December 31 of 2025. So it has a hard end date, no matter how much money has been collected from the eighth of a cent. That's when it would end. If it's not approved, then we stop paying that eighth of a cent. Yes, the Edwards aquifer and greenway trails program is not on the ballot. So with proposition be does not pass we simply stop paying that one eighth of a cent, at least until 2026 and I'll come up in one second. And just want to make this clear the Edwards aquifer and greenway trails programs would not regain that eighth of a cent solely because proposition be is not approved. We have the ATD proposition a the advanced transportation district proposition and that's how it appears on the ballot. Now it's approved that eighth of a cent, the same one that have been used for the Edwards aquifer in the greenway trails would go to the ATD for transportation projects, beginning on January 1, 2026 and continuing in perpetuity. So if both San Antonio be an ATD a pass be would have it until the end of 2025, and then would pass it on to the ATD. Whether or not proposition be passes. If ATD proposition a passes it won't start until January 1 of 2026. And just the last piece of this is that if any of these fail, and one or the other of these wanting to the sense are floating around unused. In the future, Council could consider placing another proposition on the ballot, but that could not happen because of state law which requires you to separate your sales tax elections that could not happen until May of 2022. So hopefully that helps you. Oh, and just trying to put in a plug here for the vote 411.org. If you need information on any valid issues that's a great place to go for all this information. So, hopefully that helped and we can take the visual off now and we will move to our first channel, which is going to be city of San Antonio proposition a. I will just set the stage for this and then I will introduce our two panelists. So, proposition a again is to continue to dedicate the sales and use tax for the pre K for essay, early childhood education program. It would renew the adoption of the sales tax at the rate of one eighth of 1% for the purpose of continued financing of authorized programs of the early childhood education municipal development Corporation for maximum period of eight years so this one does have an eight year limit on it. The goal of pre K for essay is to improve the education of San Antonio's youngest learners in order to improve the knowledge and skills of the San Antonio workforce within one generation, and includes four elements of demonstration schools. We serve over 2004 year olds and full day pre kindergarten programs, parent trainings, professional learning, and grant sharing successful teaching methods. So, we will have two panelists and they will each have five minutes. We are starting each of these with the side in favor, and all of our panelists tonight have wonderful backgrounds and long bios but we are going to go with very short. Given the titles that are relevant to the issues we're talking about tonight. So, on the fore side, we have Kate Rogers, who is a member of the key pre cake for essay campaign committee. And Miss Rogers will be supporting arguing in favor of support of proposition a. And on the opposite side, we have Councilman Clayton Perry, and the Councilman has represented District 10 and San Antonio City Council since 2017. We will start with Miss Rogers, and each of you will have five minute presentation, and I will follow up with a lot of good questions that we have received from attendees tonight. So, Miss Rogers, the floor is yours. So, good evening, Dr Romero, thank you to you for hosting this into the League of Women Voters. So, from historical perspective as you mentioned, especially for those who may not have voted eight years ago or been part of that really important initiative. I see that was formed by then Mayor Julian Castro that was co-chaired by Charles Bud of HEB and General Joe Robles of USA and it included community business education leaders from across the city. And the charge from Mayor Castro was to say, if we were to invest this one eighth of a cent in something to improve our future workforce in the future of our city. What would it be and that committee after about a year of analysis and hearing from experts all over the country, settled on early childhood education, where national studies from University of Chicago, Rutgers and others have shown time and time again that the return on investment usually hover somewhere around 13% for dollars invested of public money invested in high quality early childhood learning. Back then, there were five promises that were made to the voters of San Antonio of the program. The first was to nurture responsible citizens for San Antonio, to become a national leader in childhood education, to build a sustainable workforce for the future to elevate education and family prosperity, and to use the funds to maximize the impact of the program citywide. So eight years later we fast forward and since that time, the program pre K for SA in total has served more than 450,000 four year olds from throughout San Antonio. And the question is, how, how do we arrive at that number because I think what's most known to most voters are the four centers the centers of excellence which you described early earlier and those serve about 2000 children per year that's who is enrolled in that and that serves a wide variety of populations that are defined, defined by the state, not the least of which is our military families who are eligible to receive free pre K at those four centers. Since the beginning, the, the staff and the board at pre K for SA had the foresight to do a robust evaluation of the program really from the get go, and a UTS a longitudinal study that has been been conducted on the first round of of graduates of the program who've gone on to take their third grade reading test and math test the star test that's administered by the state shows definitively that those four year olds perform better on both math and reading, and they have better school attendance and their peers who either did not attend a pre K program, or one that was not as high quality as pre K for SA. That's the four centers. In addition to the centers as you alluded to pre K for SA also awards competitive grants to other early childhood providers parochial schools and others across our community, every single year. And since the beginning, they have awarded more than $21 million in grants to over 52 different organizations throughout San Antonio to help improve the quality of those programs at the same time. In addition to that the pre K for SA staff offers very high quality professional development and learning for early childhood teachers across San Antonio each and every year. And when we say early childhood we mean teachers teaching all the way up through third grade. And right now, as defined by the state teachers in those early years are required now to have a reading certification and pre K for SA is offering those reading academies to our school districts and other providers at no charge. So since the beginning they've served about 10,000 educators per year for a total of 218,000 hours of quality professional development that's been delivered and time and time again we hear from our district partners. So well received that professional development and learning is by the educators, and then the fourth pillar has been family engagement. And I think that during the past few months as we've watched the pandemic unfold. You've seen some examples of that by pre K for SA offering food distributions job referrals and support for families. We've been offering hot spots and devices so families could stay connected, but also even offering a innovative partnership with books, early learning books so that children throughout San Antonio could have access to high quality literature at a time when maybe they couldn't get to the library to check out a book. So family engagement has always been one of the pillars and pre K for SA has always served as a model on that front. Let's talk about specifically the return on investment. The return. There was a separate study that was conducted by Penn, and by, you know, Columbia, the teachers college at Columbia, and that study showed that the return on investment is even higher for pre K for SA than other programs across the country so we're looking at about 13% on average, seven to $10 for every $100 invested, but in San Antonio that return has been shown to be about $156 for every $100 invested. That's almost $4,000 per child 16,000 for the families who've benefited who also have the luxury of having those pre K centers open until 6pm, which is a wonderful benefit for working families. And then about $7,000 per year for the community, or $59 million that's been returned in benefit over the past eight years. So I think, again, great foresight on the part of the early organizers and conveners to really measure in a very careful and thoughtful way the program's impact from the very beginning so that they could be confident in saying that they delivered on those promises made to voters. And so what does this mean for eight years going. What does your time is just about up. Yes, so eight years going forward. I think what what we hope is that it will allow the program to serve families at even a wider range of income levels to be able to open the program up to those families, earning as much as $65,000 per year in current eligibility which is about $45,000 per year. So that's all I have again I want to thank you for the time this evening and the opportunity to be with you. Okay, thank you and we will have time for questions as we move along. Councilman carry. Yes, thank you very much and thanks for this this evening this is this is great, great opportunity for people learn. First off, I want to say that I am not pre K. Against that I think that's a wonderful program. But let me tell you what I have a problem with. I have a problem with the city duplicating a program that we've never been in the business of education before. Part of the problem I have is that we have a city charter that inside it tells us where our core competencies are road streets firemen policemen drainage libraries that kind of thing. And nowhere in it doesn't say that we should be providing education services. And that's where it starts out so I've gone back and taken a look at this. We should not be in the business of running an entire school system by the city. We have school districts, we've got private schools we got charter schools we got head start programs we got all of these other professional agencies. But school systems out there running very competent school systems. I just don't think that we should be in that business of educating our youngsters and to top that off we're actually being double taxed and that's what people really need to understand. We're being double taxed because the state legislature the last last legislature they actually approve full day pre case services for our public schools. So they're now offering that and they're setting that up and they have been they've been offering that as well so Really, are we trying to compete with a public school system. I don't think we should be at that point. So we're actually being double tax you're paying property taxes you're paying school taxes the state is taxing also and then helping to fund some of these programs so you're actually being double taxed by providing a separate school system that the public schools you're already paying for that. I don't think that's right. And, you know, we're talking about 2000 students and I've heard over over the last eight years that there's probably a population about 40,000 kids that could could receive that service. And we're only servicing 2000 and and we're paying and we've been averaging $40 million per year for those 2000 children, and I'll get to a little better that little bit later also but those 40,000 40 million dollars per year do the math on that for 2000 kids that's $20,000 per child. The state pays about $9,000 a child so look just do the math on that it's it's very simple, and I don't agree with that. The admission is free for about 75% of that 2000 children and others are actually selected by a lottery system. So it's not all just for the very needy here in San Antonio it's for a lot of different children around San Antonio so $20,000 per child. No. It was mentioned about grants. Being given to other school systems. Okay, that's great. That's about over $20 million for the last eight years. And, but there's no metrics for that you ask for the metrics where what's the data that shows that there, we're getting a good return on investment actually that's my phrase that I've been saying on City Council since the beginning but what's the return on investment on that 20 million for the last eight years and they're projecting over $20 million again over the next eight years. So, they're saying 450,000 students have been uplifted and so many teachers. I would say, well let's stop spending $40 million per year on our system and fund $20 million over eight years that you get a much bigger return 450,000 students versus only 2000 per year in our school system. Let's turn that around let's let's go ahead and do the 450,000 students for only $20 million over eight years. So, to me that that shows a good return on investment. You know, and what is quality education you hear that a lot. I say that our public school systems and charter school systems do offer quality education. You'll hear that they don't but let me tell you you go out and tell one of these public school teachers or charter school teachers that they're not a quality teacher. You'll probably hear something different from them. I just don't agree with saying that this is the only system that has quality educators. We have plenty of quality educators in these other school systems so I just want to say that more money does not necessarily getting a better service and that's basically what we're doing paying more money. Double taxing our residents here in San Antonio and others traveling through because this is a sales tax it's not just San Antonians but other people coming through town spending spending their vacation dollars that kind of thing which is great. And I need you to wrap up your comments. Okay, you're basically being taxed twice for the system and are your dollars really being spent wisely by continuing this program. So thank you very much. I appreciate it. Okay, well, let's get right to this question. This is the most common question we got from several citizens. So during the last legislative session, as Council mentioned, House Bill three was supposed to fund full day pre came for four year olds. Why would San Antonio need to supplement that funding give Ms Rogers will start with you and if you can please we can get to a couple more questions. Yeah, so what I would say to that is so House Bill three was a great a wonderful step in the right direction on the part of the state legislature and it did a number of things but one of those was at long last funding for full day pre K for currently eligible populations. So I think the hard part about that is that there's only four populations that are eligible for pre K in the state of Texas, defined by the state so if you're in the foster care system if you're military dependent. If you're ESL learner English as a second language learner. Those are some of the criteria, it didn't actually expand the option for high quality full day pre K to other children. And sort of to think that that was going to fix the issue. It's wonderful but it's not going to get us there nor did it offer after care services like pre K for essay does for working families so it just gets you to the end of the school day if you will for a four year old. That's the big thing the second thing is that because of the pandemic our state budget heading into the next legislative session is quite precarious right we took a double hit, not just with sales tax which hit us in the local level but also at the state level, but also oil and gas, and I feel quite uncertain for the budget for the next session and so I think the campaign feels very strongly that this is not the time to back away from our local investment in our children and in our future. This is the time to double down on a national model that we have created that we should take great pride in people come from all over the country and the world to study how we've done this in San Antonio with voter support. So now is not the time to back away from that and I wish that House bill three, I hope and pray that it will remain intact through the next session, but we just don't know that at this juncture. Yeah, I think it's going to stay. I think there was a big push for it last time and talking with other legislators that we have around San Antonio, I think that's going to stay as an important requirement for them. And why do we want to, you know, continue funding this program when the state is already stepped up to do it. And they will, I'm sure that they're going to continue to do that, because not only here in the city but at the state, you know, the economy is turning around faster than we thought it would. And yes, there's still deficits out there. I don't want to say deficits, but shortfalls from our previous legislature, but I think they're going to find those resources available to fund this program and to keep it going. So, again, I don't think we should be double dipping and paying extra for the same service that's already being funded by the state to open it up for a full day pre K services. And I think that's a disservice to our citizens and to our economy here in San Antonio and I just might add that some of the metrics that were mentioned, you know, some of those metrics were saying you're going to get this return on investment. When the child goes out to get a job, you know, they're only getting through third grade right now, how can we predict what they're what they're going to be making in the economy I've seen those numbers also so I just, I just wanted to say that, you know, a lot of presumptions are being made on what this program is going to give us back in the city. Thank you. And I wanted to get back to the study that you mentioned, Ms Rogers, and I saw a comment about this from a citizen that, and I guess it said gets into the weeds a little bit about statistical analysis but when you have findings that show that there's an impact for students who attended pre K for who are going to do well in third grade. What controls were put into that study to ensure that there was not some other factor that's impacting both of those, for example, simply coming from a home environment that really pushes studying that could cause both those things. How do we know that it's pre K that's causing the third grade performance. Yeah, and I mean I would say with all due respect to the Councilman. I'm not. I wouldn't question people who spend their, their lives doing research and evaluation as a formal practice. I will say that this was a randomized control trial which is the gold standard and research and evaluation so this was a group of students a cohort of students who were carried up against a like cohort of students to compare the results right so in a randomized control trial. That's the gold standard in terms of trying to isolate any other influences with which might have impacted the cohort, because the thinking that within the cohort that received the intervention in this case pre K for essay versus the one that didn't. Those variables would all be at play in the same 400 children so in this case it includes 400 children who were part of the, of the cohort who received the intervention and 400 children who didn't, and the profiles of demographics the home situations of those of those two cohorts would have been relatively the same. I just want to say that I think that the other thing I would like to mention on House bill three is that it wasn't like the passage of that bill meant that the districts had that money to stand up pre K overnight. There are facility questions at play. There are teacher hiring questions at play. So it wasn't like all 16 or 17 of our local school districts were going to be able to turn on a dime in the next two years and they have several years to implement that program and be able to offer full day pre K, beginning with this next school year and now they've been set back even further because of the current situation. Okay, Councilman Perry, especially on the question about the study did you want to respond to that question. You know, I've seen lots and lots of studies over my lifetime. And I respect the studies but at the end of the day, you don't know what those results are until it actually happens. For example, you know these studies were were taken at at the third grade level which is great. But what education influences are there from third grade through 12th grade. Are they going to maintain to be the best students out of out of everybody, or are they going to still learn at the same pace and be, you know, at the same level as there as their, you know, peers graduating from high school, or even beyond going into college. We don't know that here in San Antonio because we haven't been it been there yet. But I would say, again, I'm all for this, except not paying it out of city resources, let the state do it. Education experts, the public school systems, the charter school systems, the private school systems, those organizations that have been doing it for multiple years. I mean, decades I mean how far does this public school system go back to and parochial schools private schools. I say let them who have been doing it. Let them who have to do it and not get the city involved because every time you get a city involved or government involved in any kind of program. I'm talking in not just this but any kind of program. You add bureaucracy, you add waste, and you know it, the list just goes on and on and on and it's a mushroom. It just keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger government programs and that's what I'm against. Thank you both so much. We have limited time for each of these miss Rogers we really appreciate your being here thank you Councilman Perry we will see you again offer the third item. Yes, so we will move on then to proposition be the ready to work essay workforce program for job training and scholarships. This is for the purpose of financing authorized programs related to job training and the awarding of scholarships, and this this one just when you see this on the ballot it's a little bit confusing because the same municipal development corporation that is used for pre pre K for essay will be used for proposition be so it's a little confusing when you see San Antonio early childhood education municipal development corporation is listed on this one as well. So our two panelists for this one, and I know it seems that size sounds offered to say you're against something, and I realize there's a little more nuance to this. But in support of this we have a Councilwoman, Dr. Adriana Rocha Garcia, who was represented district district for since 2019. And on the opposing side we have Councilman Roberto Trevino who is represented district one since 2014, and you will each have your initial five minutes and I really miss having the lead people here so they can help me with timing. But when your time is up, I'm going to wait my 10. So Councilman Rocha Garcia, we'll start with you. Thank you thank you for the. Good morning. I think. Sorry, I think it said that I was muted. So I said ready to work is the opportunity to improve the future of San Antonio by voting for a program that invest in training, upskilling certifications and access to educational attainment that would essentially begin to break the cycle of generational poverty and unfortunate legacy of economic segregation in our city. I say ready to work gives folks the opportunity to take care of the families for a lifetime, creating upward mobility for families who have been left behind for many generations. And the best part is that there's an entire ecosystem at work supporting them. So sorry, here we go. Thank you. Sorry, yes. We're working with the community colleges and the universities to look at how we offer wraparound services to make sure our participants make it through the program successfully. I recently read an article in the Hashinga report that pointed out that unemployed folks will need to acquire new skills, and the colleges can help with this through restrictive learning opportunities that make learning accessible to those who can participate in traditional learning environments, but can benefit from weekend evening or online programs. The reimagination of learning will include on the job training and more importantly, adjust to the job market in a timely manner by offering programs that meet the current job market. We engage in many community partners with successful proven track records including Project Quest, who we are modeling the program after and by the way has an ROI of $19 and 32 cents per every dollar invested, and both say 90% are placement participants. So I'm glad that we're modeling this after a nationally recognized model. And it's not just Quest that has been successful. All of our community partners are experts at what they do, and they will partake in the intake, the assessment, the training and the employment of individuals enrolled in the program. In fact, I listened to managing the workforce podcast on the Harvard Business Review last week, where they referenced our investment in job readiness programs and the impact on family sustaining wages. And in the last few minutes of the podcast, the host Joe Fuller, who's a Harvard Business Professor, said that not in his lifetime had there been a level of instability in the workforce, combined with a very rapid and accelerated rate of change in business that has heightened the issue of economic inequality. He acknowledged that programs such as this can make America more competitive for the future of the world economy and gives more Americans economic independence. He also said that he hopes more municipalities and states start emulating what we are pioneering in San Antonio. And I'd be happy to tell Dr. Fuller that in San Antonio, employers have been at the planning table with community members since this summer. We had Toyota, HEB, Valero, USA, RAP space, and local chambers meet together to to to dedicate some time to build up this educated and not skilled workforce. And this isn't the first time that we hear that they want this. We have been warned about this for years. This just puts that plan into action. The chambers also advocated for on-the-job training opportunities for both corporate and small businesses. And this plan built that in. And an example of our current workforce efforts proves that there's already excitement for this. Since September 28, we've had 23 local small businesses partner with us, offering 136 on-the-job training opportunities. But it's going to take all of us. It's going to take your support and a continuation of these public-private partnerships to get our community back on its feet. Consider that this morning, 50 of our neighbors began four week training sessions to become cybersecurity associates, automotive technicians, bookkeeping and accounting clerks, IT customer service specialists, and they're also taking general ops in business management. And I do have to brag that the leadership at Port San Antonio and District 4 had an innovative solution to training during a pandemic and repurposed an old gym with plenty of space into a training facility. And that's what it's going to take. It's going to take all of us working together. And yes, we each have our parts, but we are one community supporting the SA Ready to Work to support a collective vision for San Antonio. And I want to just remind you all that SA Ready to Work fills a void by giving individuals access to skills training that will help them with placement and in-demand occupations. It'll take some persistence, but together I think that we can do this. Many economists have already shared that. Councilman, I need you to end your comments. Sure. There will be a disparity in job losses different than the recessions in 90 and 2001 and 2008. So we have to be specific and purposeful about how we're investing in our training. So thank you. Okay, thank you. Councilman Trevino, you have five minutes and I will wave my pen when you're giving it the end. I'll be looking for that pen. Thank you, Francine. Thank you. Thank you to all the women voters for this opportunity. Since 2000, residents have been able to vote on the 1-a-cent sales tax to continue to help fund the Edwards Awkward Protection Program and the Greenway Trails Program. However, they were robbed of the opportunity to do so at this time and are being directed to now vote on the new proposal for the use of the 1-a-cent sales tax. I will give you a solid answer or direction on what will happen to the Greenway Trail and how it will continue to be funded. Edwards Aquifer impacts everyone. The new proposal only impacts a select group. 1-a-cent sales tax usage is 38 million plus annually for four years to help about 10,000 people annually. This program is focused on initially assisting residents who've lost their jobs due to COVID-19. However, it leaves out seniors, those disabled who cannot work. There's no mention whether or not this would also support our undocumented citizens. And what about those who simply want to go back to the jobs they once had? Our workforce development has been funded at a total of $75 million. $75 million, $2.7 million from the coronavirus relief fund, $10 million from other federal grants, and $62.3 million from our general funds. Why? So we can park that money in a time that we need it the most. We simply park that money because we know we can't spend it by the end of the year when the other federal funding requires us to spend that money by the end of the year. So far, we're now asking for an additional $38 million over the course of four years. That's $3,850 total for every person to go to school. The cost to go to school to San Antonio College, if a student lived with their parents, would cost approximately $8,745 a year. I guess I just don't understand the math, and I'm pretty good at math. Emergency Housing Assistance Program has been funded $57.5 million to date. Housing Assistance Program has assisted 17,284 households with a city average of three people per household. This means that this funding has helped approximately 51852 individuals. Housing Assistance supports all in the vulnerable population. 36% of those impacted by this were children under the age of 18. That's 23,852 children under the age of 18 have been supported by this program. If we're going to be redirecting funds from the 1-8 cents sales tax away from the Edwards-Ockford Program and Greenway Trells, then it should go to its programs to support everyone like the Edwards-Ockford Protection Program and the Greenway Trells Program. That's one of my concerns, and to me it's a question of balance. The current market doesn't have a skills gap, it has an opportunity gap. This isn't me saying it, this is the Brooks Institute, Brookings Institute. There's also concern for many in our community that feel that who will receive this training, those who need it the most, or those who are closest to success. I mean, this is not being driven by the needs of the people, but the interests of business. It is time to listen to the voice of our most vulnerable. I want to point out to you from the Brookings Institute that one of the things that we that we that is ignored in social dynamics in the skills gap narrative is things like race, class, age, and gender bias in the hiring process. There is no racial segregation and stunted access to professional networks. Many talented black, Latino, or Hispanic and indigenous workers never get a real opportunity to compete for key jobs in the emerging economy. Again, you know, the the issue is for me about balance. And the key is that I think we need to we need to find a way to make room for things like housing in our community. Thank you. And so again, there's some questions that have been repeated quite a bit and this is the most common one comes when we'll start with you and I'd really ask you both to keep your answers fairly brief so we can get quite a few questions in here. How will you measure the effectiveness and success of the workforce development program and what specific promises are being made about this program that is measurable and useful for accountability. Well, thank you for that question and so definitely we are we are fortunate right now and that we've already had some allocation to workforce and so what that means is that we are able to see what is working successfully and what is not working. And so we would be able to adjust and we really have the opportunity to pivot and really change as we learn and so the beautiful thing about this is that working together with our partners. We have access to data. The city has already invested and working with 311 and ITSD. We are looking specifically to see why people might not be getting enrolled in programs that they're applying for. So once we have training which just started last month and we'll have some more metrics to look at to see what programs are are successful, what programs are helping people get placed in jobs. And so the opportunity then becomes to really use the data that we have to be able to make powerful decisions to change something going forward. Okay, Councilman. I think that that's that's important to point out that the that there is no accountability and and there doesn't seem to be any metrics attached to this. Many council members have asked about this. I'm one of those that doesn't have an understanding or clarity on the plan, and we're being asked to vote on this it feels almost rushed. I think people need to to fully understand that and I'm on this panel today because I have those concerns, the metrics simply aren't there. And I just want to make sure that we are truly taking care of we're most vulnerable. Okay, thank you. Councilman, I know you alluded to this, but a citizen asked this and this kind of stands. Prop B and the ATDA. So I'm going to ask it here. The EAPP funding is neither secured or guaranteed. The future of maintenance and planned expansion of greenway trails program is questionable at best, and could very well be eliminated. What do you say to voters who feel essential and successful programs being abandoned midstream by redirecting these funds. Thank you. Well, you know, you're right. I alluded to that in my comments and it's, it's unfortunate that a program to very, very popular programs that have proven their success and have have been proven their popularity aren't given a chance to be on the ballot to continue. The issue for me is, again, that we're rushing through something. And there's this new program that sort of took the place of a program that we all know that is so important. And the Edwards-Ockford Protection Program is popular because water is something that everybody needs. And the trailways program is popular because it is truly connecting our city in the most wonderful and unique way. And it's going into neighborhoods, vulnerable neighborhoods, that is helping to improve the quality of life in those areas. And we're sort of stopping midstream. And I just, I think it's unfortunate. It's not very clear. Thank you, Dr. Romero. I would say that my residents can't wait. And the residents that are dying of COVID-19 because they have not had access to healthcare and to a healthy quality of life just can't wait. So I would make that argument. But I've also noticed, and I voted for this, we have found a very creative solution that allows our CFO and our team flexibility to be nimble enough to use opportunities such as commercial paper to yield a faster return. So when we're looking at also the commitment that the county has made, and they voted for this back in March commitment, and then also we've had a letter of support from the judge. We are actually working together to really try to figure out how it is that we can continue this investment as well in our aquifer. This is not an either or. We can do both of this. And I think that the solution that our city staff has brought forward was something and something that was very valid and creative and the reason that I decided to support it. And so I definitely think this is not an either or and that we can achieve both of this and it looks like we do have a solution and whether, you know, whether whether folks choose to acknowledge that there is that commitment already or not. It's there and it's been touched out. Okay, thank you. This is a pretty common question to start with you, Councilman, what measures if any will be taken, taken to mitigate the possibility of losing trained workforce seeking highest paying jobs with which maybe outside of San Antonio. And then on so how do you guard against people taking advantage of the training and leaving San Antonio, and then a question from the other side the reverse. What about people for coming from other areas moving here just for this opportunity who are not in fact currently San Antonio residents. Sure. So the focus is obviously on San Antonio residents and what we are have specifically been working on is marketing to people who actually do need this and so the way that we've been partnering right now with our different organizations and also doing some reverse marketing if you will, we are targeting the city census tracks that have an equity at the score of eight nine 10 people of color women veterans formerly incarcerated disabled homeless elderly and those experiencing poverty. So the efforts include door to door engagement and then also marketing through the financial housing and recovery center that highlights this job training support. So if people find out about it outside of San Antonio. It might be by way of yes they're listening to the Harvard business review. However, we have been specifically focused on targeting these, these folks who really need it. We've been sending text messages and roll calls to folks who have received the emergency housing assistant, we assistance we've also done virtual call in social media specific to neighborhood associations were partnering with different organizations so we're getting the word out to the community that most needed, again specifically focused on on these poverty tracks, which by the way, we know that COVID has impacted disproportionately. And so we continue to do our targeting. And what is really going to keep people here is a quality of life. And so what we get to do when we give access to better jobs, we create an overall quality of life that also benefits us as a community. So, beyond that the social return on investment is going to be far greater than folks can imagine, have successful programs that have already done this but when people make more money, they buy houses, they eat at full service restaurants, they shop retail. Just think of the revenues at the city, county school districts and other taxing entities will benefit from when folks have the ability to actually spend money. It's an investment that we feel confident in making and it's an investment for all of us. You know, again, that's that's just not data those are just promises and I, you know, I'm concerned because in here I'm holding up a figure this is 154,000 displaced workers in San Antonio as of July 17. This is about balance and and we've been funding as a city workforce development for for many years, and I support that. Again, the point is is that we shouldn't be building something on the backs of our most vulnerable. We also have programs that help with housing help with homelessness, and those things will suffer. You know, we were, we just heard that the Edwards offer program is going to be funded through our general fund. Those dollars are taking away from other city programs. They just are it's just simple math, you know, every year we're fighting for every dollar to to create programs that they're helping those in greatest need. So, again, I just, I think that, you know, we're not taking into account our seniors we're not taking into account the the the many food industry workers that that simply want their job back. And how can we help them stay afloat in this time that the city has asked them to stay home as we have asked people to to put a pause on all this activity, we should be providing that support to and I just don't think we're doing that. All right, we're going to have one more last fairly quick question here and I know it kind of echoes the first question I asked, but I want to ask it again because this was a more specific take at this and Council will start with you. Specifically, if this passes, who will oversee the programs financial and performance accountability. Okay, I'm sorry. That's a that's a great question in fact that that is what also concerns me is that we know that it's it's it's it's off to it's not off to a great start. And, and you know, the fact that we're this close to to the election and still haven't really answered that or proven out. The key questions is very, very concerning. We need to have some accountability when it comes to this amount of funding. We're talking about $154 million over four years. To not have that clearly laid out or spelled out is something that that we should take pause. And as a council member, I again I don't have that clarity. I don't know how the community has that clarity. There are many people who've reached out to my office to get a better understanding of how this will work. Again, I asked that we that we have a better understanding of what workforce development means in our community, right size it and focus on our priorities. Those that are most vulnerable right now are impacted by this pandemic. We're in the middle of a pandemic. And we need to respond to that. We have a fire and we're, and instead we're talking about building fire stations. Thank you, Councilman. Can you give us as the citizen a specific answer to that question who will oversee the programs financial and performance accountability. Yeah, absolutely. It's going to take a primary workforce partners and the city to do this and so the city has already like I mentioned earlier initiated a customer relationship management system with 311 and ITSD to create and track really assessment and training referral processes. So this system will allow us to have better data collection tracking regarding maybe resident interest, timely partner agency follow up participant enrollment and most important like like I mentioned earlier reasons for not reporting. And so this is going to facilitate that data informed adjustment and let us recalibrate as the program continues to ramp up its face. And so I'll give you an example of some of the questions so some of our partners, they've already hired additional staff, they've already purchased additional hardware licenses it's going to take scalability. And so if this program has only been in place for one month. I ask that people that have questions suggestions recommendations reach out to the folks who have been working on this and actually take the time to to give us a comment or any feedback that would help us, but we do need to continue to have all of our partners work together, and that's going to be held responsible. We have have nonprofit organizations, delegate agencies with the city that have been submitting quarterly reports to us. This should not be any different than as I believe that as of October we will start receiving those reports because again, the program just started. And so people are receiving as much information as they can as quickly as possible but again, realizing that we've only had one month of the program. So much data yet, but the data that we do have we have moved on, we received 1500 calls in the in less than two weeks. So we know that there's interest, we know that people need it and we know that it works. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. I know we rushed through this, but we got a lot of great information out so thank you both so much for joining us this evening. Thank you. Thank you so much for coming on now to Advanced Transportation District Proposition A. And so just reading a little bit of the ballot language on this one is to provide enhanced public transportation and public transportation mobility options. Our panelists for this item on the pro side is Marina Alderete Gavito, who is on the VA Board of Trustees, and on the anti side, not that he's against transportation but against this particular measure, Councilman Perry. And again, you will both have five minutes for your statements and we will start with you Ms. Gavito thank you for being with us and I will wave my hand and you get to five minutes. Yes. Thank you so much for having me. I'm excited to be here tonight and wanted to share with y'all a little bit about via and why we are asking for y'all's help in November. So via gives a passenger, we get 36 million passenger trips a year that date is from 2019. So that each passenger trip represents us connecting a person to a job. It represents us connecting a person to a doctor's appointment, and it represents us connecting people to their family and friends. That's 36 million passenger trips a year that I just wanted to keep to get a grasp of that number. You also take into consideration the average via writer is a person of color. 58% have no access to a motor vehicle. So public transportation is their only means to get around 58%. Our average via writer rides via to work five to six days a week. And also our average via writer has a household income below the poverty level. So you can see that public transportation is needed for our most vulnerable residents for all residents. But especially our most vulnerable. You also should take into consideration that we provide 4000 per transit boardings each day, 30% of your writers can do not cannot walk and therefore cannot drive. A frequent and reliable public transportation system is key to us as a city closing the opportunity gap. So one of the other things I wanted to point out with y'all and I know that we've heard a lot of statistics tonight and there's a little bit more, but but I again, I just want to show scale. During, during the pandemic, we also need to think about 40% of San Antonio's household incomes spent almost 45% of their income on public transportation. So if we think about that like what else could they be putting that money towards schools to food to everything else when so again 40% of San Antonio's household spent 45% of their monthly income on public transportation. You know, one of the other things I really would ask us to consider is that in the say 2020 plan. Public transportation was really one of the only levers that remain stagnant and that's partly because we have not seen an increase in funding since 1977. I think one of the things that I know as a board member I hear and probably some of y'all here is, but what about all the big empty buses. So I want to address that so one via needs some big buses to move 36 million people around. But we, we are also exploring innovative ways to solve those challenges so we're exploring mobility on demand, which is we piloted with via link on our northeast side. Basically you have an app, you can say hey via come pick me up at my house, no more waiting at bus stops. They pick you up at your house and they take you to the closest transportation center and then you're on your way. So we're looking at putting our buses in the most dense areas, primarily like inside 410. And then using expanding our mobility on demand in our less dense areas so you could think of several areas that will help. Many more of our customers have a good experience and easy experience not have to wait at bus stops. One of the other great things about mobility on demand is that with it we will be able to offer 24 hour service that is always one of our biggest customer that you know, many of our customers who are on late night shifts third shift what have you cannot access via at two or three in the morning and with extended mobility on demand, they can. There's a whole lot of other things to to note about our keep essay moving planet keep essay moving calm. I want to also point out that got it that with with the councilman, the city had invested $10 million in additional funds to be to focus on key on 14 key routes. What we did there is we said okay let's increase the frequency of those routes and see if ridership increases. What we found is ridership did increase it increased by 28%. So it's almost kind of like if you build it, they will come and if we provide frequent and reliable public transportation system, it will get used. Okay, thank you. Great, thank you. It's good to be back again for the second part here. Anyway, I want to say that I am not against public transportation and thanks to Marina for bringing up some of the some of the key points that I wanted to talk about also but I'm not against it. I know it's needed. In fact, I was one of those councilman that supported that additional it wasn't one time $10 million $10 million per year, coming out of the city resources to help support via. And I was one of those that supported it. But, you know, more money doesn't necessarily mean better service either. I think via needs to really concentrate and focus on areas that the bus system is really needed as Marina said they opened up some of these routes that increased ridership I think they need to do that more. But overall, ridership is down. Why do they need that more money at this point ridership is down. We don't need to expand beyond their means and I'll give you an example that big huge parking facility up there and stone out our next to stone out. That's mostly empty all the time. And that was over $30 million that took to build that facility up there. We need to be more innovative this thing with via link I think was very innovative. In fact, it was my district Marina that volunteered for that because I was getting so many complaints about empty buses all the time. Let's get rid of some of those bus lines and come up with something innovative which was a via link. And I totally supported that. And that's doing very well. So I'm looking forward to those additional plans for that. So, you know, I'm concerned about, we saw via reimagined. And now we're seeing keep essay moving. Well, to me, that's just the same, same thing with a different wrapper on it. One of the issues that I had with those original plans was we're going to put in dedicated bus routes all over San Antonio additional lanes building additional lanes. That's going to cost billions of dollars for this city. And again, we keep saying how poor San Antonio is but we keep putting more and more and more on the requirements, you know, more money, we need more money. In this case and a lot of what I'm seeing in this plan is we need more money to increase the frequencies. Well, is that going to really increase the ridership and Marina you said it has in some instances but I can tell you that ridership is still down. But I saw a chart that said in 2013 we had 44 million passengers 2013 then in 2018 it fell all the way down to 34.8 million passengers. Now you said it's 36 up into 2019, but that's operating under our existing resources that via is getting why not concentrate on that and improve those routes without getting additional money and see where we're going to go on that. So on top of that I've asked for what the utilization rate is on all of those buses all those seats either on a day a week, month or even a year. How many seats are available out there, and then how many seats are taken because that will then tell you, wow, we got a lot of empty seats on these buses that we're riding around maybe we need to concentrate more in the mornings, or in the evenings, get rid of some of these constant buses that are riding around empty all the time. So that we should have a permanent allocation of tax dollars at this point, that we don't know be requiring. So, I'm asking everybody on this collar you really ready to tax yourself that one eighth cent sales tax five years down the road. That means five years in the future you're going to tax yourself. And not only that but that tax is going to be forever and ever will never be able to recall that. What is the real requirement going to be five years down the road. I see no reason that we need to vote for this right now. We can wait. If this workforce development gets passed, we can wait towards the end of that requirement. And then take a look at what our real requirements entrant. Nobody knows what our transportation requirements are going to be. Nobody knows what kind of cars we're going to be driving. You know, when I was a kid, we were going to all be flying in Jetsons flycars by the time it was 2000 year 2000. Well, but, you know, what is future transportation going to look like five years down the road. And with technology advancing as fast as it is. I don't think we should be signing up for this right now because I say that this is an antiquated system. And it's going to be even more antiquated five years down the road. So that's my concerns with it at this point be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. All right, thank you. I do want to start with a couple of questions that get to the structure of some of the things you brought up Councilman. So one of the questions. And this is going to be till we'll start with you so you can get ready for these. I'm going to give you two though. So somebody's referring to the other one saying that San Antonio's Proposition A is for a maximum of eight years. Proposition B cannot extend past December 2025. Why does the advanced transportation proposition have no end date, or maximum dollar amount. How does San Antonio justify using this tax for ATD forever. And then another question on structure. Why are voters being asked to approve this in November 2020 when it would not come into being until January 2026 a lot can change in five years. Sure. Thank you for those questions. So one of the things I think that it's important for all of us to understand is via has been historically underfunded. When we look at our neighboring cities in Texas, Austin, Houston, Dallas, you know, we see that they're not able to do so much more because they are properly funded with a full set of sales tax. So San Antonio is not there yet we are via CEO often has a good analogy that we have to spread the peanut butter thing, but meaning that we have to offer service to San Antonio and surrounding cities on on very minimal on a very minimal budget. So the answer to the question of why does this have no end date it's because via is underfunded and we were trying to right size that that the budget for us. I think the second question was what was the second question again. I'm not at now when it would not be enforced for five years. Very great question. That was us in talks with the mayor about and working through. Hey, we're in the middle of a pandemic is there ways we can work through with the workforce training program. So that's why that came about it. If we had it our way we'd have it tomorrow, but you know, it's just us working with the best interests of the city. Did you if I go to the councilman just to clarify for people can you just real briefly explain the difference between ATD and via. Well, ATD is the taxing entity. And that's how we can legally ask for that amount of money via is not the taxing entity is they get their money through the ATD and so that's advanced transportation district. And that's why it's worded that way on the ballot language, which, you know, I don't think via is even listed on the ballot language so yeah that's that's the reason why. Okay, thank you there have been there's some confusion with that with voters. And I think people need to understand that the via board essentially is also the ATD board in different format. If you'd like to respond anymore to the in perpetuity, why five years in advance, you had raised that as well. Well, and I think I said that in my comments there's no reason in this world that we need to vote five years in advance of them getting this 1 8 cents sales tax. There's no reason in the world to do that. We can wait, we can wait till after this workforce training is done. Or, you know, let's put it on the ballot after that, if that even gets passed. But here, here's, I think part of the issue was, let's say if the workforce training or workforce development doesn't get passed. Well, if that fails via is going to fall right into that spot, they will then automatically get that 1 8 cents sales tax on day one, after the November election. If the workforce training fails via is sitting there with their handout ready to start taking that 1 8 cents sales tax. And I, I, I'm pretty sure that's the way it would happen. But for right now, I say, we don't know what the requirements are going to be five years down the road, much less what kind of cars we're going to be driving what kind of transportation systems there will be there might be something else that comes out. Wow, that's a great idea. And all this planning and the voting and everything that we're going through now will all go out the window. And the forever thing. Yeah, that that's another issue. You know, we're not doing pre K for essay that way. Everything else pretty much has a time limit on it or a dollar limit on it. I think the voters should have a say in that on where they want their tax dollars to continue to go to fund all of these different projects around. So yeah, I don't, I don't think it should have that either forever. No end date. I want to make sure we clarify this point because I'm not sure that's correct. I think from people I talked to today that if Cosa proposition B fails. And ATDA passes that it would still wait until 2026 to begin collecting the tax. That's the ballot measure is Marina. Can you confirm that? Yes, that is correct. I stand corrected on that. That's what I was told initially and again, everybody had all kind of questions about all three of these propositions and that was what was explained to me back then but even, you know, that makes the argument even stronger. Why do we have to do it now? Why not wait until that time gets here so that we have a clarity in the program what the requirements are. And that is why we're here to clarify some of those confusions that people have. Marina a question and somebody actually did read the ballot language and this is not everything that's listed. But they have asked for some clarification on each of these phrases used in the ballot language. What will this actually mean? Yeah, so they point to passenger amenities, innovative advanced public transportation and public transportation mobility enhancement. I think you you got to the last one but Marina if you could address for a voter who wants to know what exactly did those things mean in the ballot language. Sure it was passenger amenities and what was the second one I'm sorry. Innovative advanced public transportation. So passenger amenities are bus stops, you know and everything to make the passenger experience good transportation centers are transit centers are transit hubs and bus stops so that's what we mean by there by that. I know that San Antonio and has one of the I think one of the highest percentage of shaded bus stops in Texas which is very important in Texas. So we would be increasing that for the innovative advance. I think I'm sorry you said and then innovative advanced rapid public, not rapid just innovative advanced public transportation. Yeah, so this this is actually what we would do with that money would would be to be would be increasing that mobility on demand which was what I was referencing earlier, think of via link where you have the app you can call the via shuttle to your house to pick you up and then it takes you to a transportation center. We are looking at different ways that via can move people around versus versus just buses. I think, you know, right now we're exploring different ways on should be a be partnering with rideshare companies what does that look like how can we move people around frequently and reliability reliably and consistently to our in our city. Well, I don't, I don't know what those really mean, it would be great to have that kind of detail out there also on what, what is really, what is really meant, and how much money would be going to each one of these. You know, it's not unified it's not, it's not listed out out there anywhere. So, again, you know, this is a, at this point, a very mushy plan at best on what this is going to be used for. And, you know, why is it going to take this entire 18 cent sales tax. All right, and I'm going to finish this one with a similar question to the last one and we'll start with you, Councilman Perry. Back to the idea that this does not include reauthorization by voters. So if this does in fact pass. Can you explain to us exactly how it will work in terms of overseeing who will oversee it. How can the public play a part in overseeing the programs financial and performance accountability. Okay. Well, absolutely would need a need oversight course via has our own board of which Marina sits on that and they would be responsible for this program and the expenditure funds, the budgeting for it in the execution of those programs. Public has an opportunity to always comment on that. City Council certainly could make comments on that and provide input into those programs so absolutely, but I haven't seen anything specifically on what the plan is for this whether they would use the existing structure to manage this program or if they would institute some additional checks and balances along the way to make sure that that money is going in the right place and it's being spent the right way. But again, there's no reason to be doing that this November for something that won't even start for another five years down the road and that's where I have the biggest issue at the moment is why do we need to do this now. Let's wait until we know what the requirements are, and wow, five years down the road, a lot can happen between now and then. So, that's, that's my comments on that. Thank you. I don't know how do we handle accountability for this. Yeah, I did want to really quick answer that this is the as only funding source. So this is why Councilman Perry to your point about why now this is why we're going after it right now because, you know, again be has been historically funded, and we need to go for this. We're not going to let an opportunity pass this by, but talking about transparency on via website we have a dashboard that is fully transparent about the rights we give about our customer service satisfaction has a lot of metrics that you can see and, and, and people can judge for themselves how how well we're doing I mean we also have a public meeting every month that people can engage with one of the other things is, you, I mean be has always been extremely transparent with our customer service our budgets, our reports. So, all of that is out in the open for anybody to consume. And the other ways that people can engage if they want to learn more is we have a via transportation community council and that's been a great way for us to engage with the community and and hear their needs hear their concerns and take that direct feedback to the board. We also have our advanced transportation accessibility committee for our paratransit writers to give open feedback at all times so, and these are not quarterly meetings these aren't my annual these are monthly meetings that we're getting that feedback and input and also sharing all of our data. Okay, thank you. Well, I, I believe we'll end with that. I wanted to thank Miss Kavito comes man Perry, all of our panelists thank you for being so polite and not interrupting one another or me. And thank you all for your public service and I just want to remind everybody watching that these propositions will be at the very end of your ballot so hang in there you need to get through the whole ballot. And thank you all for coming I'm going to turn it back to my do and again thank you to all the panelists and to our audience this evening. Yes, on behalf of the league I want to thank everyone, especially all the voters. I'm very impressed that you are sticking till the end so these ballot questions are definitely important in your minds also. I certainly hope that you get got at least some answers to your questions. And as Francine was mentioning earlier, go to vote 411.org, a lot of the information is available there, and we will also be putting the recording of this session on vote 411.org and also on our website. So if you have friends who would like to listen to this you know you can direct them to that. So I want to thank Dr Francine Romero, and all our panelists Kate Rogers, Councilman Kate and Perry, Councilman Trevino, Councilwoman Garcia, and Marina Gavito for participating this evening. A special thanks to all the voters as I said make sure you vote early and vote safe. We want to thank our co-sponsors, Can We Talk and the San Antonio Women's Hall of Fame. The last but not least I want to thank our webinar host this evening, Kim Tindall and associates for doing such a good job and allowing us to this medium educate the voters. Thank you all and good night.