Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Sports Entertainment District topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Audit committee discusses multimillion‑dollar program management and moves procurement items to Council

City of San Antonio Audit Committee · April 14, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Committee members reviewed RFPs for operational modeling (~$316,350; contingency to $350,000) and program management for the proposed sports-and-entertainment district (Phase 1 estimated ~$6 million), pressing staff on governance, accountability and local preference before voting to move items to individual Council consideration.

City finance and project staff briefed the Audit Committee on two related procurement efforts tied to the proposed sports‑and‑entertainment district: a services contract to model operations and new revenue opportunities (estimated $316,350 with contingency up to $350,000) and a program management/executive management services effort with Phase 1 planning estimated at about $6 million.

"Estamos buscando una firma que sea calificada para que nos pueda dar el costo del servicio..." Troy Elliot, the city finance director, said the operations modeling contract would produce a scalable operations model useful for the convention center, a proposed new arena and other venues. Staff reported receiving four responses to that RFP and recommended interviews and written evaluations before final selection.

Committee members raised procurement and accountability questions. Several members asked who would be ultimately responsible if projects fall behind schedule or exceed budgets; staff said the executive program manager (EPM) would implement city decisions and report to the Council, and that governance and escalation procedures would be built into the contract. Members also pressed for transparency on local‑preference scoring: staff described scoring categories that allocate points for SBE/local preference and veteran‑owned small businesses.

Given the project profile and expected public scrutiny, members asked that the Council receive a fuller, individual presentation rather than handling the items on consent. The committee made and seconded motions to move the items to individual consideration on the Council agenda; those motions passed by voice vote. Staff said they plan to return with interview results, recommended vendors, and visual maps/timelines for Council review.