SAN ANTONIO (Map, News) - Tourists to the Alamo City will continue to pay a visitor tax on hotels and rental cars if local voters decide to fund $415 million in civic improvement projects for the area.

As cities across Texas hold elections on local issues Saturday, voters in Bexar County will decide whether to extend a 1.75 percent tax on hotel rooms and 5 percent tax on short-term car rentals to fund four separate propositions: improvements to the San Antonio River, new youth and amateur athletic facilities, renovations of arts centers and upgrades to rodeo grounds and arenas, including the AT&T Center.

"We can't spend this money on streets, but we're allowed to spend it on some major quality-of-life issues," said Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff, a main advocate for the propositions.

In the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch, the councilman who pushed for one of the country's most sweeping anti-illegal immigration measures and a businessman who opposes the costs of trying to enforce the ordinance are vying to become mayor.

The Bexar County venue tax was originally approved in 1999 to help pay for the AT&T Center, where the defending NBA champion San Antonio Spurs play.

Wolff said that after it became clear the AT&T Center, which opened in 2002, would be paid off sooner than expected, he started looking at what else could be improved.

Officials were distracted briefly by the possibility of bringing another major league franchise to San Antonio, something that didn't pan out, before settling on the four proposals that are going before voters Saturday.

Wolff emphasized that Saturday's vote would simply extend the venue tax, not increase it.

Bill Brendel, president of the San Antonio Hotel and Lodging Association, said that while there was opposition to the original tax in 1999, the association is supporting the extension.

"We were a little bit more comfortable that the tax would not have an adverse affect on travel and tourism," Brendel said.

The river expansion and improvements would get $125 million, $80 million would go for 13 sports complexes and performing and cultural arts center upgrades would get $110 million. Another $100 million would go to the arenas.

There is no organized opposition to the propositions, but Jim Lunz, who was on the board that helped negotiate the original agreements involving the AT&T Center, said he had concerns about a lack of detail for all the projects.

"The whole package, $415 million ... no one is really defining what this money is going to go for in any of this," said Lunz, who added that nonetheless he would probably vote for all the propositions except the one involving the AT&T Center.

In Farmers Branch, residents will choose Saturday between Tim O'Hare, a first-term city councilman and personal injury lawyer, and Gene Bledsoe, a real estate agent who has served on several city boards and committees.

On the city council, O'Hare steered Farmers Branch into a November 2006 ordinance barring apartment rentals to illegal immigrants. The rule was revised months later to include exemptions for minors, seniors and some families with mixed immigration status.

Bledsoe was treasurer of a group that opposed the ordinance.

Residents endorsed the rental ban 2-to-1 in May 2007 during the nation's first public vote on a local government measure meant to combat illegal immigration.

A federal judge later blocked Farmers Branch from enforcing its ordinance. The case remains in court.

The council approved a new law this year to require prospective tenants to get a city license to rent houses and apartments. Their citizenship and immigration status would be run through a government database during the process.

The latest measure would take effect 15 days after a ruling on the ordinance currently being contested in court.

Nationwide, more than 50 local governments have approved rules on housing, employment and language aimed at illegal immigrants, according to the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, which tracks the information.

---

Associated Press writer Anabelle Garay contributed to this report from Farmers Branch.

Comments from Examiner Readers

8:52 AM MST on Sat., May. 3, 2008 re: "Familiar names file for Havre de Grace election"

Examiner Reader said:
This is an important election for me because I care what happens to downtown Havre de Grace. Does anyone know of candidates to vote for that would keep to the planning and zoning's mission statement, that is 'To perserve, protect and enhance the physical and built environment for its' historic heritage and for the properity of present and future generations ...'. Fred Cullum, Barry Anderson and others have recently publicly announced their support of the construction of a 4 story modern style 54 unit housing building. This building will share the same block with 8 existing residental homes. In addition only 27 parking spaces are being proposed in an area that is already challenging to park. Does anyone know which candidate would better support smart growth in Havre de Grace?

Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

9:58 PM MST on Wed., Apr. 9, 2008 re: "Nader taps former Supervisor Gonzalez for running mate"

Examiner Reader said:
For the record, Matt Gonzalez only narrowly lost to Gavin Newsom by 53-47 percent--not 43 percent, as your article states. And this was after being in the race for only 5 months. Democrat millionaire Newsom, meanwhile, had been campaigning for over a year (arguably two) and spent a whopping $6 million to the Green populist Gonzalez's impressive, but far more modest, $900,000.

10 agree | 10 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

7:31 AM MST on Fri., Mar. 28, 2008 re: "Some mull idea of Sen. Bill Clinton"

Examiner Reader said:
I still think Bill should be able to run again for president. He has been put of the white house for 8 years...We need him to lead again and bring us back to a balanced budget and take care of americans not Iraq's.

11 agree | 11 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

8:34 AM MST on Sat., Mar. 1, 2008 re: "Nader taps former Supervisor Gonzalez for running mate"

Examiner Reader said:
Right, Examiner Reader. Matt initially ran as a democrat, then quit in mid-election when he thought it would help him more in the Haight. After he lost for mayor, he quit even though he was the second most powerful political figure in SF, leaving no one except Chris Daly to call out Newsom on his many screw ups. Daly's lack of anger management made Newsom look better than he would have if Gonzalez had Cajones (spelling?)to stick around. I suspect Matt whored himself as a lawyer to build a political war chest on the backs of the SF taxpayers. Matt refused to run against Newsom in 2007 because he couldn't win(and he can win THIS?). No, Matt is running to elevate his political image. He is using Ralph, much like he has used the democrats and SF progressives in the past. If Nader truly wanted to elevate the debate, he could have supported Dennis Kuchinich, a more viable candidate who could have stayed in the race longer with more support.

55 agree | 46 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

4:56 PM MST on Fri., Feb. 29, 2008 re: "Nader taps former Supervisor Gonzalez for running mate"

Examiner Reader said:
Whatever... Matt Gonzalez is a big baby quitter. He lived across the street from me and I actually voted for him for major, my 1st and probably last green vote. When he didn't win he just quit. Now whenever I see him I try to scream 'QUITTER' as loud as I can. He was head of the Board of Supes and actually could have made a difference and a name for greens. But no, he just quit. Now he gets to ruin the election so McCain is our president. He'd probably quit if he and Nader got elected too. Quitter. Quitter Quitter!!!

62 agree | 59 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

4:12 PM MST on Fri., Feb. 29, 2008 re: "Nader taps former Supervisor Gonzalez for running mate"

Examiner Reader said:
Examinator, you are wrong. Matt Gonzalez, unlike Ralph Nader, has NO principals. He is only about himself. Matt ran for supervisor as a democrat, then jumped ship when he saw the democratic party affiliation wouldn't help further his political ambitions. He has been whoring himself as a lawyer to build a political war chest for a future run at Mayor. He was too much of a coward to run against Gavin (How I wish someone would have), and now he will use Ralph Nader as a springboard to become mayor of SF in a run against Aaron Peskin in 2012. The Irrelevant Party can make noise in SF which is fine. They will have no impact on the election. Most of their better ideas are stolen from the Democrats, and the rest are either communist, or are intended to fill their own pockets with cash from "publicly financed elections". The greens are different from the other parties, their just on the outside looking in.

56 agree | 47 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

8:49 AM MST on Fri., Feb. 29, 2008 re: "Nader taps former Supervisor Gonzalez for running mate"

EXAMINATOR said:
Does any one even remember the name of Nader's previous running mate(s)? The Democrats are already blaming Nader and Gonzalez for losing an election that's eight months away. By then plenty of people outside San Francisco will know who Matt Gonzalez is and that he, like Nader, is a man of principle. The Examiner story quotes from local Democratic party hacks but doesn't even go to the trouble of finding any Gonzalez supporters of which there are plenty in San Francisco. Watching Democrats squirm at the mention of Nader and Gonzales brings a lot of people including myself glee but reading the veiled threats against Gonzalez political future demonstrates exactly why plenty of people will vote for him and Nader because they're NOT Democrats.

72 agree | 49 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

7:13 AM MST on Fri., Feb. 29, 2008 re: "Nader taps former Supervisor Gonzalez for running mate"

Examiner Reader said:
Of course Matt Gonzalez is running for mayor! Peskin vs Gonzalez. This is merely a way to keep his name in print for the next couple of years. At least he isn't filing lawsuits against the city to fill his political coffers anymore.

48 agree | 58 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

7:08 AM MST on Fri., Feb. 29, 2008 re: "Nader taps former Supervisor Gonzalez for running mate"

SF NATIVE said:
The problem with this is that my Green Party friends try to tell me there is no difference between the democrats and republicans. I beg to differ. Too bad they couldn't perceive the difference between Gore and Bush. Now, can't they tell the difference between Obama, Clinton and McCain? Is Obama "more of the same". I for one don't think so. While I agree on many of their positions, The Greens, and particularly Nader, are becoming political gadflies, the Wendell Wilkie adn Bull Moose party of our generation.

61 agree | 69 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

12:54 AM MST on Sat., Feb. 16, 2008 re: "Some mull idea of Sen. Bill Clinton"

Examiner Reader said:
Bill Clinton is an idiot who benefited from his doing absolutely almost nothing during a fundamentally quiet time nationally and internationally speaking. He did manage to drop 4 perfectly laser guided bombs on a Chinese Embassy, destroy our borders and economy with NAFTA and in the view of those of you who continually reality check themselves, would make a great Senator. We already have several hundred Demo Senators who have their heads up their A---s and neither do we need either or both Clintons in politics at the same time nor any longer. Popularity and hucksterism do not politician make -- That depends upon what "IS IS" Cut me a break, the Clintons need to be led out to pasture -- unless you want to start to scrutinize Hillarys malfeasance as BOTH a first lady, the worst our nation ever had; and as a Senator beginning with her lies regarding her campaign funds. Care to join my Netroots group? We are out to get the Clintons for their criminality!! Wake up okay?

126 agree | 96 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

9:20 AM MST on Sun., Feb. 10, 2008 re: "McCain wins big on Super Tuesday"

Examiner Reader said:
To the reporter who wrote this -- why did you describe Romney's campaign as "lackluster?" One year ago, no one knew who Romney was ... yet last Tuesday, he either beat McCain or came in just a few percentage points behind him in numerous states. Huckabee, meanwhile, won only the states where evangelical Christians are the Repulbican majority (which for him, was the equivalent of rounding up your relatives to vote for you.) Yet you choose to use the word "lackluster" to describe Romney's campaign? I'm a working journalist, so I know what it's like to work under tight deadlines. But deadlines are never an excuse for sloppy, sensational writing.

89 agree | 100 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

10:24 AM MST on Wed., Feb. 6, 2008 re: "San Franciscans vote in record numbers"

Examiner Reader said:
Can someone tell me why CNN, CBS and ABC projected that Clinton won in California when some polls (four in Northern California and two in Southern California) were still open. With them still open projections should not be put out on the radio and television until all polls in that state are closed.

105 agree | 94 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

8:48 AM MST on Wed., Feb. 6, 2008 re: "No clear winner in Clinton-Obama tug-of-war"

Examiner Reader said:
This is wrong. The article says "Clinton took the two biggest prizes, California and New York." Clinton did not "take" California. California is NOT a winner take all state. Most likely the two will spilt California delegates evenly (Obama may win more in the end).

109 agree | 103 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

5:04 PM MST on Mon., Dec. 31, 2007 re: "Life is good in Ward 3, but challenges await new council member"

Lefteris said:
Cool.

184 agree | 179 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

11:00 PM MST on Fri., Aug. 17, 2007 re: "Candidate says he will sue over �slanderous statement�"

Jeannette said:
The Eric Bouchat I knew was always a kind and considerate person. To say someone never have trouble in a marriage or in life for that matter would be a falsehood. In this case, Eric's life is out in the open. I did look at the court records and it seems that the wife was a bit on the aggressive side also. It sounded like a bad marriage, so go ahead and cast the first stone. Signed, Jeannette (Pfannenstiel) Gover St Louis, MO

399 agree | 436 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate