Out of curiosity when Austin was mentioned I decided to look up what are the requirements for a petition in Austin:
"The governing body shall submit a proposed [ordinance] to the voters for their approval at an election if the submission is supported by a petition signed by a number of qualified voters of the municipality equal to at least five percent of the number of qualified voters of the municipality or 20,000, whichever number is the smaller."
They also have the 180 days to collect the signatures.
Source:
http://austintexas.gov/page/initiative-petitionsSan Antonio Prop A:
"Within one hundred eighty (180) days after the enactment by the council of any ordinance which is subject to a referendum, a petition signed by qualified electors of the city equal in number to at least ten percent of the electors qualified to vote at the last preceding regular municipal election, or by twenty thousand (20,000) qualified electors, whichever number is less, may be filed with the city clerk requesting that any such ordinance be either repealed or submitted to a vote of the electors."
So it seems pretty clear San Antonio would essentially have the same requirements as Austin.
The bond rating argument is an argument that I feel holds water. A reduced bond rating would truly increase our borrowing costs.
Now, San Antonio and Austin have both enjoyed AAA bond ratings since at least 2010 according to an article and a press release I've found:
"
http://www.austintexas.gov/news/rating-agencies-reaffirm-highest-bond-rating-austin""
https://therivardreport.com/city-receives-aaa-bond-rating-for-9th-year-in-a-row/"How can a rating agency justify reducing our bond rating when a city just north of us has had the same referendum requirements and a AAA rating since 2010?
I am open to be persuaded...Pick holes in my argument... What am I missing?