San Antonio council weighs $4 billion 2026 budget amendments amid $157 million shortfall; police staffing and agency funding draw sharp debate

San Antonio city staff presented potential amendments to the proposed 2026 budget at a Sept. 17 work session, outlining restorations and one-time additions while warning of a multi-year shortfall. The presentation, from Justina Chey, the citys budget director, and follow-up discussion by councilmembers, centered on employee pay, police staffing, agency delegations, capital allocations and several targeted program restorations.

The budget director said the proposed budget is approximately $4 billion and that the city faces a two-year structural shortfall of nearly $157,000,000. The city staff framed the amendments as attempts to balance priorities with limited new revenue and to protect essential and mandatory services. Chey told the council the package of potential restorations and additions was compiled from previous council feedback and district requests.

Why it matters: Council choices this fall will determine whether recurring services are sustained and how the city addresses public safety, housing repair programs and community partner contracts while navigating uncertain federal funding that affects Metro Health and other programs.

Key proposals and funding details

- Employee compensation: The amendment list includes a proposed across-the-board employee pay increase described by staff as a 2% adjustment to base pay. Staff characterized this as a policy priority to help retain municipal employees.

- Police staffing: The proposed 2026 budget currently includes funding to add 25 new officers. Multiple councilmembers pushed to restore funding so the city reaches 65 new officers as previously discussed (an additional 40 officers beyond the budgeted 25). Council discussion focused on the cost trajectory of adding officers (salaries, vehicles and ongoing costs), recruitment and vacancy counts reported by the Police Department, and timing of academy classes.

- Major repairs and housing: Staff proposed restoring $1,000,000 to the major repairs program (raising that program from $7,000,000 to $8,000,000 in the package under review). Several councilmembers asked whether scaling repairs (fewer repairs at lower cost per unit vs. deeper repairs for fewer homes) could increase reach.

- Small-business and community agency funding: The amendment list would restore $1.4 million for a small-business fund and increase several delegated agency contracts from reserves rather than new general-fund dollars. Specific items include: - Big Mama Safe House: $144,000 designated - American Gateway: increase of $50,000 - Family violence prevention services: increase of $150,000 and consolidation of two contracts into one (per staff summary) - Other delegated agency adjustments: staff noted use of the delegated-agency reserve for several recommendations and cautioned that using reserves reduces competitive funds available later in the year.

- Events and program restorations: The proposed list would restore the book festival allocation (from $197,725 to $247,725) and allocate $1.4 million in preservation-related funds.

- Capital and district projects: The staff memorandum proposes adding $1,000,000 per council district for capital projects. The capital program also includes $3,000,000 for street-lighting improvements and additional line items for facility and equipment purchases for clinics and community partners.

- Reinvestment zones and pilots: Proposed reinvestment-zone support includes $250,000 for Prosper West; a $150,000 pilot for pet-deposit assistance; $200,000 for a King memorial/concept; and $300,000 for a campus study (CSS campus study, per staff list).

- Fees and revenue adjustments: Staff proposed raising a parks/environment fee; staff estimated that the fee change would generate roughly $4 million to support parks and environmental services and to help the general fund cover costs.

Council debate and councilmember priorities

Councilmembers voiced a mix of support and caution. Several said public safety remains the top voter priority and urged finding funds to deliver the 65-officer commitment they said had been promised to residents and the Police Department.

- President Villagrn (Council President Villagrn) and Councilmember White emphasized the safety case and cited a UTSA study referenced in the discussion that, according to them, showed additional officers reduce crime in high-crime areas. White said the chief has indicated a staffing goal that the council should meet.

- Councilmember Spears, Councilmember Meza Gonzlez and other members pushed for maintaining or restoring funding for housing, repairs and delegations that serve vulnerable populations, while asking for clearer metrics on how restored funds would be spent and monitored.

- Several councilmembers expressed concern about using the delegated-agency reserve to fill near-term requests because doing so could reduce competitive capacity for other nonprofit applicants later in the fiscal year.

- Members also discussed Alamo Promise (a college tuition and workforce-readiness program discussed in the session). Councilmembers asked staff to minimize bureaucratic barriers in the programs application process (referred to in the session as ready-to-work or verification forms) and to work with local colleges on enrollment and verification steps so students are not excluded from benefits.

Staff-level clarifications requested and follow-up

Councilmembers asked for follow-up information on: the long-term cost of adding police officers (including vehicles and training), the precise funding sources if the parks fee is increased, the staffing and vacancy breakdown in the Police Department (numbers in the session ranged across presentations), the impact of Metro Health federal funding reductions on programs that expire in 2026, and distinctions among delegated-agency recommendations that repurpose reserve funds versus those that change base allocations.

What the session produced

No formal votes or ordinance adoptions were recorded at the Sept. 17 work session. Staff said they would return with updated amendment materials later that night and again the next morning and that council would continue consideration in subsequent sessions and committee review. City staff emphasized that the more acute fiscal challenge is projected for fiscal year 2027 when some federal and one-time funds expire.

Closing and next steps

Staff said they would revise the amendment list based on council feedback and provide updated materials for additional meetings planned before final budget adoption. Councilmembers requested specific follow-up numbers on police vacancies, recurring cost estimates for added police classes, and clearer explanations of which agency restorations are drawn from delegated-agency reserves versus ongoing general-fund increases.

Speakers quoted or referenced in this article appear in the articles speaker list below. Direct excerpts supporting this article appear in the meeting transcript provenance entries.