NRM San Antonio — “Would You Sign Your Name to It?”

5:30–8:30 p.m. | Free and open to the public

5:30 p.m. — Doors Open & Reception

Guests enter the new NRM office, meet staff, tour public areas, and enjoy refreshments from local vendors. Each attendee receives a voting card or digital ballot explaining NRM’s five-level Responsibility Risk Scale.

6:00 p.m. — Welcome to San Antonio

The San Antonio office director welcomes attendees and briefly explains why NRM has expanded to the city. A local business or community leader gives short remarks.

6:10 p.m. — Donna Lowenthal: “Would You Sign Your Name to It?”

NRM CEO Donna Lowenthal formally opens the event and introduces its premise:

“It’s easy to judge a decision after you know who made it. Tonight, we’re asking something harder: if the decision were yours, would you sign your name to it?”

She explains that names, political affiliations, companies, and other identifying details have deliberately been removed from each scenario.

6:20 p.m. — Scenario One: The Factory

Attendees receive the first case: a profitable company considering closing a 600-worker facility to save $40 million annually and improve its long-term competitiveness.

Guests vote on:

• Would you approve the closure?
• What conditions, if any, would you impose?
• What responsibility-risk level would you assign?

6:35 p.m. — The Reveal

NRM analysts reveal their assessment and explain why. Audience results appear alongside NRM’s rating. An analyst discusses where the public and NM agreed—and where they did not.

6:45 p.m. — Scenario Two: The Public Deal

A company receives substantial taxpayer incentives after promising jobs and investment, but changing economic conditions make fulfilling the original commitment significantly more expensive.

Attendees decide whether the company should be permitted to renegotiate, repay the incentives, fulfill its original promises, or pursue another solution.

7:05 p.m. — Scenario Three: The Conflict

A senior public official champions a major contract or development agreement. Months later, someone close to that official receives an opportunity from the benefiting organization, with no evidence the official arranged it.

This scenario quietly echoes the Alton case without identifying him initially.

After voting, NRM reveals the similarities and explains why circumstances of this kind can reach Level 3 — Ethically Questionable even without evidence of corruption.

7:25 p.m. — Scenario Four: The Hard Choice

The evening’s most divisive case: a hospital, bank, major employer, defense contractor, or other institution faces a decision where every available option harms somebody.

There is deliberately no clean answer. This demonstrates an important part of NRM’s philosophy: responsibility risk measures how a difficult decision is handled, not merely whether somebody suffers from it.

7:55 p.m. — Public Conversation with Donna Lowenthal

Lowenthal joins two NRM analysts for an audience Q&A.