San Antonio Municipal Court presents FY2026 budget and specialty dockets focused on procedural justice and juvenile services

Presiding Judge Carlo Bledo and Municipal Court Clerk Fred Garcia told the City Council the Municipal Court’s proposed fiscal 2026 general-fund budget is $16,800,000 and supports 141 authorized positions.

Court role and resources: Bledo said the municipal court is a court of record with jurisdiction over Class C fine-only misdemeanors created under state law or city ordinance and listed the court’s 12 full-time and 11 part-time judges (appointments by the mayor and council). Garcia said the clerk’s office manages 113 support staff and that the court’s funding also includes restricted funds from the $14 consolidated court fee, which feeds the municipal court truancy intervention and prevention fund, the municipal court building security fund and the municipal court technology fund. The court also receives a Juvenile Justice and Truancy Prevention grant from the Texas governor’s office to support juvenile case managers.

Specialty dockets and juvenile services: Bledo described the SA Road Ready docket for young adults with driver-license requirement violations and the Community Court docket for people who identify as unhoused or lack permanent housing. He outlined juvenile interventions including diversion, teen court, reengagement dockets, transition and senior-summit programs; he said 371 youth participated in youth-enrichment classes last fiscal year and 92% of seniors who attended a spring summit graduated.

Youth Diversion and magistrate duties: Bledo noted the Youth Diversion and Early Intervention Act (effective Jan. 1, 2025) requires diversion for certain youth accused of Class C misdemeanors. He reviewed magistrate responsibilities under Article 15.17 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure — probable-cause determinations, admonitions and orders of emergency detention — and advised that municipal magistrate duties include juvenile admonitions, animal-seizure warrants and other judicial processing.

Operational trends and access to services: Garcia highlighted increased online service usage (up 88% year over year), growth in case filings for non-traffic criminal cases, and a shift toward online payments. He described the court’s case-management distribution across operations, judiciary and juvenile services and said the court uses text messages and kiosks to improve appearance rates.

Council questions and follow-up: Council members pressed for a review of the so-called “double magistrate” process — where municipal magistrations are followed by county magistrations — and asked for data to evaluate the magnitude of any duplication and opportunities for shared systems or other efficiencies. Council members also requested breakdowns of dismissals, rates of repeat code‑enforcement offenders, and a list of community partners that receive city funding to support court‑connected services.

Ending: The court said it would provide follow-up materials, and council committees signaled interest in convening subject-matter briefings to review magistration procedures, truancy metrics and potential efficiency gains.