City Council Votes 5-6 to Reject $489M Spurs Arena Ballot Proposal
San Antonio City Council voted 5-6 Monday to reject Mayor Gina Ortiz Jones’ proposal to put the city’s proposed $489 million contribution toward a new downtown Spurs arena before voters in November.
The vote means the city’s contribution will not appear on the Nov. 3 ballot, allowing the city to continue moving forward under the existing Project Marvel framework without another public vote on the arena this year.
Council members in Districts 1, 3, 7, 8, 9 and 10 voted against placing the measure on the ballot. Council members in Districts 2, 4, 5 and 6 joined Jones in voting in favor, resulting in the defeat.
Monday’s decision came after an extended public-comment period and council discussion that exposed sharp divisions over whether last year’s county election settled the public-vote question or whether San Antonio residents deserved a separate vote on the city’s $489 million commitment.
Public Comment Shows Divide Over Another Arena Vote
Before council took up the proposal, public comment reflected strong views on both sides.
A number of residents, business leaders and major organizations urged council to reject another arena vote, including representatives from Bartlett Cocke and the San Antonio Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, along with Spurs reps such as R.C. Buford and Sean Elliott.
Others backed Jones’ proposal, arguing that San Antonio voters deserve a direct say on the city’s share of the project.
One speaker supporting another election pointed to the confusion surrounding the arena debate, saying people were “online and in the street slinging mud” because “no one knows what’s going on.”
She pointed to what she described as conflicting information coming from the Spurs organization, including its multimillion-dollar advertising campaign and more recent neighborhood meetings.
Opponents of another vote also directed sharp criticism at Jones.
One speaker said, “She can’t govern” and argued that if the mayor “can’t control her office staff,” she should not be trusted to handle what he described as the city’s biggest project.
The speaker defended major public investments as part of San Antonio’s history, saying, “These investments are how we got the River Walk, Hemisfair and the Spurs.”
He closed with a political jab at Jones, saying there may be one election voters would want to redo — “the mayor.”
Supporters continued to frame another vote as a matter of public accountability and transparency, as one speaker summed up the disagreement by saying, “A compromise is when both sides aren’t happy.”
Council Divides Over Whether Voters Already Had Their Say
Council members spent much of their discussion revisiting two central questions: whether the 2025 county election amounted to sufficient public approval for the broader arena financing plan and whether the city’s proposed funding could instead be used to address San Antonio’s budget problems.
During the discussion, council members emphasized that revenue tied to the Project Finance Zone and Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone cannot simply be transferred into the city’s General Fund to address the projected budget deficit.
That distinction became an important argument for members opposing another election.
District 1 Sukh Kaur who voted against Jones’ proposal, said residents were never kept in the dark about the broader financing plan.
“We always knew the deal,” she said, noting that approximately 53% of voters in District 1 supported Proposition B last year and that the citywide vote was roughly 52% in favor.
She also pushed back on the idea that voters should repeatedly reconsider decisions once an election has occurred.
“If I could go back and revote on the president, I would,” Kaur said.
She also pointed to other major public investments that were not individually placed before voters, including the Toyota plant, and questioned where government should draw the line on putting economic-development and infrastructure investments on the ballot.
District 9 Misty Spears also opposed the proposal, arguing that the arena and its financing were debated extensively before last year’s election.
“For three months it was debated, discussing the entire financing,” the council member said, arguing that after those meetings, residents went to the polls and approved Proposition B.
“We cannot ignore the election that already occurred,” the Spears said.
While acknowledging that the existing term sheet is nonbinding, she argued that it still carries weight and should be taken seriously.
The discussion also returned repeatedly to questions about the funding itself. When the question was raised whether TIRZ revenue could instead go into the General Fund, the answer presented during the discussion was no.
East Side Concerns Drive Support for Another Vote
Council members voting with Jones argued that the county election did not eliminate concerns within their districts about the city’s separate financial commitment.
District 2 Councilman Jalen McKee-Rodriguez emphasized concerns he has continued to hear from constituents, particularly residents on the East Side.
He said voters in his district remain heavily opposed to the project and deserve to have those concerns heard, particularly amid longstanding concerns about disinvestment.
“The Eastside is getting the horrible end of this deal,” he said.
District 5 Teri Castillo also supported Jones’ proposal, arguing that the principle should have been clear from the beginning of Project Marvel: public money should mean a public vote.
District 6 Councilman Ric Galvan also voted yes. Galvan said both he and economists he has consulted are not supporters of using public financing for sports arenas.
District 4 Edward Mungia also supported the proposal, arguing that backing the Spurs and supporting another vote are not mutually exclusive.
“You can be pro-Spurs and pro-vote,” the Mungia said.
What Monday’s Vote Actually Decided
At the center of the debate is a distinction that has followed Project Marvel for months– Bexar County voters approved the county’s share of the arena financing last November, but they did not separately vote on the City of San Antonio’s proposed $489 million contribution.
Bexar County voters approved Proposition B in November 2025, authorizing up to $311 million in county venue-tax revenue for the proposed arena.
The city’s contribution is separate.
Under the preliminary financing framework, the Spurs would contribute at least $500 million toward construction, Bexar County could contribute up to $311 million and the City of San Antonio could contribute up to $489 million.
City officials have maintained that the revenue sources contemplated for the city’s contribution do not legally require a citywide referendum.
Jones nevertheless argued that an investment of that size should receive direct voter approval.
Monday’s 6-5 vote rejected that argument — at least as it relates to placing the question before voters this November.
Arena Negotiations Continue Without November Vote
The rejection does not mean City Council approved a $489 million check Monday, nor does it represent final approval of every element of the proposed arena project.
Instead, the decision leaves the existing Project Marvel framework in place while the city, Spurs and other parties continue working through the agreements necessary to finance, build and operate the proposed downtown arena.
The vote also does not resolve the broader political debate over Project Marvel.
Questions remain over the final financing structure, what happens if projected revenue falls short, the effect of development surrounding the arena and what the project ultimately delivers for neighborhoods throughout San Antonio particularly the East Side.
For now, however, council has answered the immediate question facing City Hall as San Antonio voters will not get another arena-related vote this November.
