01/04/2026
21 Questions. Zero Cost Disclosures. Bexar County Deserves Better.
Article by Patrick Von Dohlen
April 1, 2026
I have spent 28 years as a fiduciary financial adviser. My entire professional life has been built on one obligation: tell clients the truth about what things cost before they commit. I do not get to skip that part. Neither should our county government.
Last month, the Alamo Area Council of Governments and the City of San Antonio released a 21-question public comment survey on the Alamo Area Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) — a sweeping regional blueprint covering greenhouse gas reductions, vehicle emissions mandates, building electrification requirements, and land use changes across all 13 counties. The survey asked residents to support, oppose, or remain neutral on dozens of proposed measures.
Not one question disclosed what any measure costs.
Not one question showed cost per metric ton of CO2 reduced. Not one question identified the total projected cost to Bexar County taxpayers. Not one question asked whether the same investment in a different approach might produce a better environmental outcome at lower cost to families.
As someone who has reviewed a myriad of financial plans, I can tell you exactly what a plan looks like when the numbers have been left out on purpose. This is that plan.
Three Questions That Tell the Story
The Residential Energy Trap
The survey asked respondents whether they support "Modernize Homes Through Electrification for Comfort and Savings." Who opposes comfort and savings? The aspirational language is the point. Buried inside that measure title is a requirement to transition home heating, cooking, and water systems from natural gas to electric alternatives. The survey never mentions that electrification mandates add significant cost to homeownership.
Those costs hit families with the least financial cushion first. I have spent my career protecting clients from recommendations that look attractive on the surface but hide the real cost in the fine print. This survey was structured the same way. A fiduciary does not present a financial plan that way. Neither should county government.
The Commercial Energy Question Without Numbers
The commercial energy section asked whether respondents support eliminating energy waste and modernizing commercial buildings through electrification. The plan projects significant greenhouse gas reductions from these measures. It provides no cost-per-business or cost-per-ton analysis.
Before endorsing mandates that will hit small and minority-owned businesses across all 13 counties, Bexar County deserves an independent economic impact study -- not a survey question with a reassuring title and no price tag attached.
The Wastewater Section: What the Survey Did Not Seem To Want You to See
The wastewater measures are projected to reduce 0.2 percent of 2021 regional emissions by 2050. That is the smallest projected reduction in the entire plan — smaller by a factor of more than ten compared to other sectors. A responsible financial framework demands that investment be proportional to impact.
The survey never disclosed that number. It just asked whether you support clean water. Everyone supports clean water. That is not the question. The question is whether this specific spending produces the best environmental outcome per dollar invested. That question was not asked. In my profession, we call that a material omission.
The Federal Funding Problem Nobody Mentioned
The CCAP was developed entirely to qualify AACOG and the City of San Antonio for EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grants -- up to $4.6 billion nationally in competitive implementation funding authorized under the Inflation Reduction Act. That fact does not appear anywhere in the survey.
Respondents expressing support were not told that their responses may be incorporated into a federal grant application. They were not told that when federal grants end, local taxpayers typically absorb the ongoing program costs. And they were not told that these specific grant programs are under active reconsideration at the federal level right now.
Bexar County cannot build its environmental strategy on a federal grant pipeline that a single administration decision can eliminate. That is not fiscal stewardship. That is fiscal exposure.
What I Asked for in My Public Comment
I submitted formal public comment to AACOG today on behalf of Bexar County residents. I asked for three things.
First: a full cost-per-measure analysis -- every proposed measure, every projected dollar, every tradeoff disclosed before any county commitment is made. If AACOG and the City cannot tell taxpayers what these measures cost, they cannot ask taxpayers to support them.
Second: technology-neutral competitive analysis. Nuclear energy, natural gas efficiency improvements, and market-driven approaches deserve evaluation alongside every proposed measure. The best environmental outcome will come from honest comparison, not a survey engineered to reach a conclusion already decided.
Third: a local contingency analysis. If the federal grant funding disappears -- and that is a real and present risk in 2026 -- what is Bexar County's financial exposure? That question must be answered before any county commitment is made, not after.
What This Means for November
I answered No on the survey's final question asking whether the proposed actions would affect my community positively. Not because I oppose clean air and clean water. I support both as foundational commitments for Bexar County's future.
I answered No because a plan that cannot tell taxpayers what it costs is not a plan. It is a wish list. A public comment process that withholds cost, hides alternative approaches, and omits the federal grant dependency from every question is not genuine public input. It is a public relations exercise.
Bexar County residents deserve a county judge who asks hard questions before committing their money. That is the job. That is what I will do.
PATRICK VON DOHLEN | CANDIDATE FOR BEXAR COUNTY JUDGE
VotePatrick.org
Patrick Von Dohlen is a candidate for Bexar County Judge in the November 3, 2026 general election and a 28-year fiduciary financial adviser based in San Antonio.
VotePatrick.org | | | |
