[00:00:02]
[PFC Board of Directors]
TO THE MARCH 28TH, 2023, ONE NOON PM SHARP CITY OF DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS, REGULAR MEETING HERE AT DALLAS CITY HALL.I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING.
MY NAME IS, UH, KEITH AL, PRESENT OF THE DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION.
LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AND MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER ONE.
ITEM NUMBER TWO, ROLL CALL WITH AARON.
WE JUST INDICATE WHETHER YOU'RE HERE AND I CALL YOUR NAME, UH, DIRECTOR SCOTT HOUSE.
VICE PRESIDENT KEN MONTGOMERY.
WE'LL NOW MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, PUBLIC TESTIMONY, AND THIS SECTION WILL, WILL RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS FOUR THROUGH TAKE CARE OF OUR MINUTES.
THAT'S, THAT'S IT AS ITEM NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE, PUBLIC COMMENTS OF ITEMS FOUR THROUGH SEVEN.
I HAVE A LIST OF SPEAKERS WHO ARE REGISTERED.
I WILL CALL YOUR NAME AND, UH, PLEASE COME FORWARD IF YOU'RE IN PERSON TO THE MICROPHONE UP HERE, UH, ON THE STAGE SO THAT THAT WAY THE PUBLIC CAN SEE YOU ON THE ZOOM, THE ZOOM CALL, AND IF YOU'RE ON THE ZOOM, WE'LL RECOGNIZE YOU.
THE FIRST SPEAKING WE HAVE IS WILLIAM ROTH.
WILLIAM ROTH IS, MR. ROTH IS HERE IN THE BUILDING.
CAN YOU MAKE SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS THEY GET THREE MINUTES? YOU GET, CAN YOU, YOU GET THREE MINUTES, SIR.
UH, MY NAME IS, UH, WILLIAM ROTH, 1150 FOREST CENTRAL DRIVE IN D.
I APPRECIATE YOUR ALLOWING US TO COME BACK BEFORE THIS BOARD TO DISCUSS THE SITUATION WITH MS. SUPREME.
UM, AS YOU, AS YOU REMEMBER, UH, MY PARTNERS AND I ARE PROPERTY DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS, UH, PROPERTY AND, UH, WHICH CONTINUES A DE RESTRICTION THAT AFFECTS NOT ONLY OUR PROPERTY, BUT THE PROPERTY OF EIGHT OTHER ACRES, UH, EIGHT ACRES TOTAL.
UH, ARE PEOPLE IN THIS AUDIENCE THAT ARE THE OWNER OF THOSE OTHER PROPERTIES TO REPRESENT THOSE OTHER PROPERTIES, UH, THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THE SPEED RESTRICTION? WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE, THE, UH, UH, ACTIVITY THAT'S GOING ON HERE, UH, IN THAT APPEAL.
THAT'S REALLY A TAKING, UH, OF THE DEED RESTRICTION FROM US, WHICH HAS BEEN IN PLACE TO REALLY CREATE A PLANNED, ORGANIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THAT COMMUNITY.
UH, WE ARE ALSO VERY MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRANSPARENCY AND THE, UH, UH, INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE OF HOW THIS WHOLE PROCESS OF CREATING THE LEASE BACK AND, UH, LOOKING AT THE ECONOMICS OF THIS BUSINESS DEAL BETWEEN THE DEVELOPERS AND THE CITY, UH, ARE BEING HANDLED, HOW IT'S BEING, UH, UH, DEVELOPED AND HOW IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY COMES TO, TO TERMS. UH, WE DON'T UNDERSTAND, UH, HOW A PROJECT THAT'S A 50 MILLION PROJECT, UH, THAT WOULD TYPICALLY GENERATE A MILLION AND A HALF DOLLARS PER YEAR IN POTENTIAL TAX REVENUE IN THE CITY, UH, WOULD BE ALLOWED TO NOT, UH, BE, UH, ALLOWED TO, TO NOT BE CHARGED FOR 75 YEARS TAXES.
THAT SEEMS TO BE THAT THAT'S A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS THAT THE CITY IS GIVING A PRIVATE DEVELOPER FOR A PROJECT OF 200 APARTMENTS.
WE, WE DON'T UNDERSTAND THE ECONOMICS OF IT.
WE DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE, UH, UH, LEASE WAS MADE.
WE DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE, UH, THE, THE, THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT FEES OF THE PARTICIPATION OF THE CITY PFC AND THE DEVELOPER IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
AND WE FEEL LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE TRANSPARENT TO THE, TO THE PUBLIC AND TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THIS, THIS, UH, POTENTIAL TAKING.
UH, THERE'S MAY, MARCH 18TH, THERE WAS A TREMENDOUS, UH,
[00:05:01]
COMMUNITY MEETING THAT HAD SIGNIFICANT OVERWHELMING NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT.THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME THAT THIS DISTRICT HAS BEEN BEFORE THESE, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD THEY HAVE HISTORICALLY FOR THE PAST TWO AND A HALF YEARS EXPRESSED THEIR OPPOSITION AND CONCERN ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
SEEMS TO ME THAT THE, THE CITY NEEDS TO LISTEN TO THE WISHES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS, AND TO, UH, ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE TAKING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
I, I'M ASSUMING MY, MY TIME IS JUST ABOUT A, SO THANK YOU FOR, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT TO YOU ALL.
THANK YOU MR. ROTH FOR CHAIR'S CLARIFICATION.
AARON, ARE YOU, ARE YOU, UH, TRACKING THE THREE MINUTES? YEAH, I'LL BE, I AM TOO.
SPEAKER NUMBER TWO, PHILLIP GOS.
HELLO, BOARD OF DIRECTOR CITY, STAFF, RESIDENTS, AND OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE.
MY NAME IS PHILIP GOS AND I'M A LAKE ISLANDS AND D 10 RESIDENT.
TODAY I'M SPEAKING IN VIGOROUS, ENTHUSIASTIC, AND OVERWHELMING SUPPORT OF CYPRUS WATERS AT FOREST LANE, DALLAS IS IN THE MIDST OF A HOUSING AND AFFORDABILITY CRISIS.
CYPRESS CREEK WOULD PROVIDE DEEPLY AFFORDABLE UNITS AND A HIGH OPPORTUNITY PART OF THE CITY THAT WOULD BEGIN TO ADDRESS THAT CRISIS.
THESE APARTMENTS WOULD BE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF A DART STATION IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO GOOD JOBS AND OTHER AMENITIES, WHICH WOULD BE A HUGE WIN FOR THE CITY, AND A FANTASTIC WAY TO BRING BADLY NEEDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO NORTH DALLAS.
DALLAS'S FORT WORTH REGION IS GROWING TO THE TUNE OF 700,000 PEOPLE A YEAR, BUT THE CITY IS MISSING OUT ON THIS GROWTH BECAUSE WE REFUSE TO BUILD HOUSING LIKE THIS.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL HAS ALREADY VOTED TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT BY 13 TO TWO.
WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL, NO HOUSING WILL BE POSSIBLE AT THIS LOCATION WITHOUT THESE AFFORDABLE UNITS, DALLAS WILL CONTINUE TO PRICE OUT WORKING CLASS RESIDENTS, EXACERBATE THE HOMELESS EPIDEMIC, AND LOWER EVERYONE'S QUALITY OF LIFE.
PLEASE SHARE, HAVE THE COURAGE TO DO, PARDON ME? PLEASE HAVE THE COURAGE TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT AND APPROVE CYPRESS CREEK TO USE THE WORDS OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBER.
GIVE US MORE NEIGHBORS TO LOVE.
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME, PLEASE.
UH, MR. GOSS, AND JUST UPON CLARIFICATION, CAN YOU CONFIRM YOUR, UH, STREET ADDRESS, PLEASE? MY STREET ADDRESS IS 7 0 71 MISSED FLOWER LANE.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO SPEAKER NUMBER THREE, UH, LAB.
IF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME, WHEN YOU ARRIVE AND YOUR ADDRESS.
UM, MY NAME IS SUE BARBIE, UH, 83 19 FLOYD LAKE DRIVE.
UM, IT'S MY FIRST OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT ALONG THE LINES OF MR. MR. ROTH, UH, WITH THE BANKING OF THE CITIES AND THE MAIN POWER, THE PFC, UM, I GUESS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I LOOK NEXT TO THE DAR STATION.
WE, WE ARE LOOKING FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, AND, UM, IN MY EYES, WHEN THE CITY GETS INVOLVED AND TAKES PROPERTY AWAY OR FAVORS ONE DEVELOPER OVER ANOTHER, AND THAT, THAT DISCOURAGES THIS COMMERCIAL, UH, DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA.
UM, AND IT'S, UH, HANDED OUT THE, UM, SOME PAPERS TODAY.
UH, THE FIRST ONE, UH, ON TOP IS A LETTER FROM STATE RAMOS, UH, EXPRESSING HER ACCUSATION, UH, TO THE PRO PROJECT.
I APOLOGIZE FOR AN INTERRUPTION.
CAN WE SILENCE THE OTHERS ONLINE PLEASE? UM, PLEASE CONTINUE.
UH, I MEAN, THERE'S, THERE'S MORE TO IT THAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UH, THERE'S THE ISSUE OF THE HISTORY OF THE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, AND, UH, IT'S BEEN HISTORICALLY, UH, BLACK AREA, UM, AND NOW, YOU KNOW, KIND OF PUTTING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, LIKE TECH ELEMENTS IN THE AREA, AND IT'S, IT'S A DIFFICULT ISSUE.
IT'S NOT CUT AND DRY AS SOME PEOPLE IN FAVOR WERE.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, MAY PRESENT IT.
UH, THE LAST ISSUE ISSUE, LIKE TO TALK ABOUT IS THE SALES AND PROPERTY TAXES EXEMPTION.
[00:10:01]
THERE'S A LOT OF PLANNED PROJECTS GOING INTO THE AREA.UH, I THINK THAT'S THIS ON THE SECOND PAGE, UH, HANDED OUT.
UM, AND IT'S ALL AROUND HAMILTON PARK.
I MEAN, THERE'S, UH, HOMELESS, UH, LONG-TERM HOUSING, SECTION EIGHT HOUSING.
IT'S ALL AROUND THIS HISTORICALLY BLACK NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND IF YOU KNOW, THE, THE, UH, FC AND THE CITY OF DALLAS CHOOSE TO GO FORWARD AND THERE NEEDS TO BE HELP FROM LIKE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT CODE COMPLIANCE, UH, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AND UH, UH, HAVING THE STATUTE EXEMPTION DOES NOT HELP WITH THAT AT ALL.
UM, BECAUSE THERE, LIKE WE SEEM LIKE HOW GREAT, UH, THE CITY HAS BEEN AND IT'S CODE COMPLIANCE AND ADDING POLICE OFFICERS, IT, IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT WE SEE, WE HAVE SEEN LIKE THE HELP IT HAS DONE AND THAT IS LED BY OUR COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO, UM, GIVE THAT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SPEAKER NUMBER FOUR, EXXEL, COLORADO.
IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE FROM YOUR NAME.
I LIVE AT 1 24 NORTH GARRETT AVENUE.
I'M RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF, I'M SORRY.
UM, ACTUALLY I'M HAVING TECHNICAL ISSUES.
I AM TRYING VERY HARD TO TURN MY CAMERA ON, BUT THE WEBEX IS GIVING ME ISSUES.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO SKIP ME WHILE I FIX THIS CAMERA ISSUE? YEAH, WE CAN COME BACK.
WE, WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU MR. COLORADO.
MOVING TO SPEAKER NUMBER FIVE, SERRANO KEITH BALD.
SECOND CALLING MR. SERRANO, KEITH BALD.
MOVING TO SPEAKER NUMBER SIX, LORENA VAUGHN.
MS. VAUGHN, IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
I WORK EARLY LIVE AT 92 59, MARK ANN DRIVE.
UM, I'VE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 26 YEARS.
THIS IS MY SECOND TIME COMING TO Y'ALL.
I CAME THE PREVIOUS TIME AND I DID GO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING.
NOTHING'S CHANGED, NOTHING'S CHANGING MY OPINION.
I STILL HAVE TROUBLE WITH THIS PROJECT.
UM, MY CONCERN STILL IS THAT IT'S BEING BUILT INTO 10.
UM, AS RUTH AND MR. ROKA HAVE SAID, WE HAVE ISSUES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT AREN'T BEING FIXED AND OUR CONCERNS ARE THE HOMELESSNESS, THE SAFETY ISSUES, THINGS THAT JUST, YOU'RE JUST GONNA ADD TO THE SITUATION.
HAVING THIS BEING BUILT, I KNOW THAT Y'ALL KEEP CALLING IT WORKFORCE HOUSING, BUT IN, IN REALITY IT'S CALLED, IT'S LOW INCOME HOUSING IN WHATEVER SENSE YOU WANT TO SAY.
AND THEY'RE TRYING TO BUILD ANOTHER ONE NEAR THE NEAR WE RELIVE TOO.
AND SO MY CONCERN IS TRY TO FIX WHAT YOU CAN AT THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN.
WE AS CITIZENS AND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE CONCERNED OF OUR OWN ISSUES.
I DON'T GO TO THAT DART STATION, I GO TO LBJ CENTRAL CUZ THERE'S NO SECURITY.
IF YOU WANNA BUILD THIS AND YOU WANT FAMILIES TO LIVE THERE, HAVE Y'ALL INFORMED R S D ABOUT ALL OF THESE CHILDREN THAT ARE, BEGIN BE GOING INTO THEIR SCHOOL SYSTEM.
AND THEN ALSO YOU WANT THEM WALKING FROM THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS THE STREET FROM AN, UM, FROM A HIGHWAY PASSING AND WALKING TO DARLING IN THAT WHOLE AREA.
PLEASE CONSIDER OUR, OUR SITUATION.
SPEAKER NUMBER SEVEN, DISTRICT CHAIN COUNCILMAN ADAM MCGOO.
I WANT TO THANK, UM, EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD, UM, FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.
UM, IF IT WEREN'T FOR THIS BOARD, UM, I DON'T THINK WE WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO EVEN HAVE, UH, ANY COMMUNICATE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ON THIS.
AND I'M THANKFUL THAT WE, WE HAVE, UM, I WAS NOT ABLE TO BE AT THE MEETING.
I'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THE DEATH IN THE FAMILY.
UM, BUT, AND I, I HEARD VARIOUS DIFFERENT THINGS ABOUT THAT MEETING, BUT SOME OF THE AFTERMATH WERE, I HOPE, I HOPE Y'ALL RECEIVED MY EMAIL THAT I SENT AS WELL, IS THAT THERE WAS SOME GOOD DISCUSSIONS,
[00:15:01]
THERE WAS THOUGHT ABOUTS, UM, POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT, UH, FORMING A PI.THERE'S TALKS OF CREATING AN AREA PLAN THAT COULD BE, UM, HELPFUL FOR THIS AREA.
CERTAINLY YOU'VE HEARD SOME OF THE, THE REQUESTS FOR THIS TYPE OF PLANNING ALREADY.
UM, REQUESTS AROUND INCREASE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AROUND CAMERAS, LIGHTS AND TECHNOLOGY AND, AND POTENTIAL PATROLS, ALL OF THINGS WHICH A GOOD DEVELOPMENT PARTNER COULD HELP, UM, TO HELP WORK ON TOGETHER.
UM, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I KNOW THIS COMMUNITY HAS ASKED FOR FROM THE BEGINNING IS JUST TO HAVE A GOOD PARTNER.
AND, AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE, UM, AS, AS DISCUSSIONS CAME UP ABOUT COTTONWOOD TRAIL OR EVEN THE NEED FOR TAX ABATEMENTS TO, TO BEGIN WITH, THE, THE RESPONSE THEY GOT IN THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY NO.
THE DEVELOPER THINKS THAT THEY CAN PUSH THIS THROUGH, UM, WITHOUT ANY, UM, ANY CONCILIATION OR WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY.
AND SO THEY'RE NOT, THEY HADN'T BEEN WILLING TO DO SO.
I HOPE WE HEAR DIFFERENTLY, UM, TODAY, AND I HOPE THAT THERE'S A CONTIN, SOME TYPE OF PROCESS WHERE THAT CAN BE, THAT CAN BE EARNED.
UM, I WILL TELL YOU, THIS IS NOT A, AT LEAST FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, NOT WHAT THE PFC WAS DESIGNED TO DO AS IT RELATES TO GETTING INVOLVED IN REMOVING DEED RESTRICTIONS AND PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.
UM, YOU, YOU HAVE A CASE HERE WHERE THIS IS COMING TO YOU NOT BECAUSE OF FINANCIAL NEED, BUT BECAUSE OF, UM, DEED RESTRICTIONS AND TRYING TO GET AROUND THOSE.
UM, THIS IS AN AREA ALREADY, IF YOU'VE HEARD THAT IS, UM, NOT JUST VERY DIVERSE, BUT IN A HISTORIC BLACK NEIGHBORHOOD AND NEAR AREAS THAT ARE, UM, THAT HAVE A LOT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALREADY.
UM, THIS, WE KNOW THIS DEED RESTRICTION IS GOING TO GO STRAIGHT INTO LITIGATION, AND I THINK, UM, THIS BOARD SHOULD CONSIDER THAT IN ITS DISCUSSIONS.
UM, AS IN CONTRARY TO WHAT WAS TOLD AT THE LAST MEETING BY THE APPLICANT, UM, THE STATE REPRESENTATIVE HONOR MARIA RAMOS IS NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROJECT.
UM, THERE'S JUST A NUMBER OF ISSUES AND I BELIEVE ALSO OUR STATE LEGISLATOR IS WATCHING THIS CASE PARTICULARLY, UM, TO LOOK AT WHAT THEY DID IN THE LEGISLATION AND WHAT THEY MAY DO, UM, TO, TO END THIS PROCESS.
AND SO, UM, LOOK, I WANT THERE TO BE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN DALLAS.
WE'RE WORKING ON TWO DIFFERENT PROJECTS RIGHT NOW WHERE WE HAVE DEVELOPERS THAT ARE, THAT ARE MEETING WITH COMMUNITY ALREADY, UM, LOOKING AT VANTAGE POINT, UH, A PARTICULAR PROJECT AND, UM, ANOTHER PROJECT THAT'S STTS AND FOREST AND YOU'RE HAVING DIALOGUE AND INTERACTIONS AND WAYS TO MAKE PROJECTS BETTER, THAT'S ALREADY HAPPENING.
AND SO I'M THANKFUL FOR THOSE STEPS AND BELIEVE THAT WE COULD, WE, WE SHOULD HAVE AND COULD DO BETTER ON THIS PROJECT.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I BELIEVE AT THIS POINT THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE REJECTED, UM, BY THE PFC.
UH, MOVING ON TO SPEAKER NUMBER EIGHT.
IT DOESN'T SEE WELL, SO HE WANTS TO GIVE HIS TIME TO ME.
I YIELD TO HER AND THEN I, I HAVE MY OWN TUCKED OUT.
SHE WANTS TO SPEAK WITH HER TIME.
HELLO, MY NAME IS DEREK SHERMAN.
I LIVE AT 62 19 CHURCHILL WAY AND I YIELD MY TIME TO SUSAN SHERMAN.
UM, I'M SUSAN SHERMAN AND I LIVE AT THE SAME ADDRESS.
UM, GARRETT EARNED A BBA IN REAL ESTATE FROM THE COX SCHOOL OF BUSINESS S SMU.
HE EARNED A CERTIFICATE OF REAL ESTATE AND MORTGAGE BANKING CERTIFICATE FROM S SMU IS A LICENSED TEXAS REAL ESTATE BROKER.
HE HAS TRANSACTED THOUSANDS OF APARTMENT UNITS AND BILLIONS OF SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.
HE IS CONSIDERED A REAL ESTATE EXPERT, AND I ATTENDED THE PUBLIC MEETING, UM, AT FOUR SCREEN LIBRARY.
IT WAS THE MOST PRETENTIOUS AND TENSE PUBLIC MEETING THE TWO OF US HAVE EVER ATTENDED.
AT ONE POINT, THE HOUSING DIRECTOR WARNED US ALL THAT IT'S A MISDEMEANOR TO DISRUPT A PUBLIC MEETING.
TWO UNIFORMED POLICE OFFICERS WERE PRESENT.
OBVIOUSLY, THE OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT WAS OVERWHELMING BECAUSE OF THE OPPOSITION.
IT IS CLEAR TO ALL THAT THE BOARD MUST CANCEL OR TABLE THIS MATTER.
THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE A JUDICIARY DUTY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE PROPERTY OWNERS, AND THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY.
THIS MEANS THAT YOU MUST SUBORDINATE YOUR INTEREST AND YOUR PERSONAL POLITICS TO THE EXPRESS WISHES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AGAIN, PLEASE STOP THIS MATTER AND TO NOT GO FORWARD WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE APPEAR TO YOU TODAY, UM, TO DISCUSS THE TAX ABATEMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 11 5 20 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
[00:20:01]
THIS PROPERTY IS FULLY DESCRIBED AS 2.5 ACRES, ONE OF NUMBER ONE.THE SITE IS INCAPABLE WITH OR INCOMPATIBLE WITH APARTMENT USES BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION ALONG EXPRESSWAY WITH HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF VEHICLES PASS EVERY DAY.
14 LANES OF TRAFFIC ARE SITUATED DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
AN EXIT RAMP IS ALSO LOCATED IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AND HAS VEHICLES DECELERATING FROM HIGH FREE WAY SPEEDS APPROACHING 80 MILES AN HOUR.
THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS AND ALL NEIGHBORING USES ARE COMMERCIAL.
IT WOULD ONLY BE A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE A CHILD WOULD FIND HIM OR HERSELF IN THE ROADWAY GETTING RUN OVER OR KILLED.
NUMBER TWO, THE PROPERTY HAS DULY RECORDED DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT ALLOW ONLY RETAIL OFFICE AND HOTEL USES.
THE CITY OF DALLAS PROPOSES TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CIRCUMVENTING THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THE CITY WOULD THEN LEASE THE PROPERTY TO AN APARTMENT OPERATOR FOR 75 YEARS.
NUMBER THREE, THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN NORTH DALLAS, WHICH CURRENTLY CONTAINS MORE LOW INCOME APARTMENTS AND REGULAR APARTMENTS THAN ANY OTHER AREA IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS MORE APARTMENTS THAN ANY OTHER CITY IN THE NORTH TEXAS REGION.
THE DALLAS FORT WORTH METROPLEX HAS MORE APARTMENTS THAN ANY OTHER METROPOLITAN AREA IN THE UNITED STATES AND IS AMONG THE HIGHEST IN THE WORLD.
CONTRARY TO WHAT THE CITY STAFF WOULD HAVE, YOU BELIEVE THERE IS NO HOUSING CRISIS WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS.
NUMBER FOUR, MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND NEIGHBOR ARE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF APARTMENTS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
COUNCILMAN ADAM MCGOO JUST SAID HE STRONGLY SUPPORTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY AND THEREFORE OPPOSES THE APARTMENTS FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
NUMBER FIVE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER, WILLIAM ROTH, HAS ALREADY SPOKEN.
HE IS A DALLAS LAWYER, OWNS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND CONTAINS AN OFF OFFICE BUILDING.
HE WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY DAMAGED IF APARTMENTS ARE BUILT BECAUSE HE WILL LOSE THE DESIRABILITY OF THE PROPERTY AND TENANTS THAT HE NOW HAS.
THE OTHER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, INCLUDING UN DEPOT, MAY BE DAMAGED AND COULD FACE THE PROJECT OF THE STORE.
THE APPLICANT FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE CITY TAX ABATEMENT DOES NOT HAVE STANDING BECAUSE HE DOES NOT CONTAIN OR CONTROL THE PROP PROPERTY OR HAVE THE PROPERTY UNDER CONTRACT.
THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT THE APPLICANT.
NOTE TO DENY ANY TAX ABATEMENTS THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION DO NOT HAVE A MAJORITY TO DENY THE ABATEMENT THEN PLEASE AT THIS TIME, TABLE THE MATTER AND GRANT A HUNDRED AND DAY, 180 DAY POSTPONEMENT AS A VOTE.
PLEASE DO NOT EMBARRASS THE DALLAS CITY CO COUNCIL OR SUBJECT COUNCIL MEMBERS.
TORY UH, CITIZENS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR, TO SPEAKERS EIGHT AND NINE, WE'LL NOW MOVE TO SPEAKER NUMBER 10.
JEFF SCHUL SEEING, I DON'T, WE DON'T SEE HIM HERE OR ONLINE.
MOVING TO SPEAKER NUMBER 11 OR A LARGE HELLO.
CAN YOU GUYS GET MY VIDEO? DO YOU SEE IT? NO, WE CANNOT.
MY NAME IS CARRI LARGE AND I LIVE AT 88 11 LAAL LANE AND I LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD JUST EAST OF THE PLAN LOCATION FOR CYPRESS CREEK.
EVERY YEAR I HAVE WATCHED OUR COMMUNITY BECOME INCREASINGLY UNSAFE AND I FEEL NOW THAT WE ARE IN A CRISIS.
ADDING ANOTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WILL CREATE A POCKET OF POVERTY IN AN ALREADY STRUGGLING COMMUNITY.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY FOREST MANNER IN ST.
THE AREA SURROUNDING IS ROUGH AND IMPOVERISHED.
WE HAVE AN EXTREMELY HIGH CONCENTRATION OF HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS.
TWO DANGEROUS EXTENDED EXEL EXTENDED STAY HOTELS, UH, A CRIME-RIDDEN DART RAIL STATION, AND NOW AN ABANDONED COTTONWOOD TRAIL AND MANY OTHER DANGEROUS RETAIL LOCATIONS.
THIS WILL ALSO BE A STRAIN IN OUR PUBLIC RESOURCES.
THE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS DOTS ROLLED AT AN I'M AT STOTTS ROAD ELEMENTARY IS ONE OF THE MOST UN UNDERPERFORMING RSD SCHOOLS AND HAS LIMITED RESOURCES, INSUFFICIENT FACILITIES, AND SITS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE PARENTS DO NOT SEND THEIR CHILDREN BECAUSE OF THE SCHOOL'S LOW PERFORMANCE.
[00:25:01]
PARENTS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD OPT OUT FOR PRIVATE EDUCATION AND DISTRICT TRANSFERS.WHY SHOULD THIS SCHOOL BE CHALLENGED WITH MORE OBSTACLES? THE CHILDREN THAT ATTEND THE SCHOOL DESERVE MORE FROM OUR COMMUNITY AND NOT TO BE PUSHED ASIDE BECAUSE IT'S EASIER TO ADD ON TO AN EXISTING PROBLEM.
THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL EXASPERATE THE PROBLEMS THIS COMMUNITY ALREADY FACES.
THANK YOU MS. LARGE SPEAKER NUMBER SE SPEAKER NUMBER 12.
NOT SEEING CAROL SCOTT IN THE ROOM OR LINE.
MOVING ON TO SPEAKER NUMBER 13, ADAM LAMONT.
HELLO, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR.
PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
I LIVE AT 94 3 2 AMBERTON PARKWAY, UH, DALLAS, TEXAS.
UM, AND I'M A DISTRICT 10 RESIDENT.
UH, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT.
UM, I'VE, UM, YOU KNOW, SEEN IT, UM, AND FOLLOWED IT THROUGHOUT MULTIPLE ITERATIONS.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND THE LONG PROCESS THAT IS TAKEN TO GET THIS POINT.
AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN FINALLY APPROVE, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT THIS LOCATION.
UM, JUST A COUPLE BRIEF NOTES.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, YES, IT IS NOT IDEAL THAT IT IS SITUATED NEXT TO A HIGHWAY.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, THE WAY THAT OUR ZONING WORKS AND THE WAY THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECT THE, YOU KNOW, PROTECT THEMSELVES AND BAR ANY SORT OF APARTMENTS, UH, ESPECIALLY IN NORTH DALLAS FROM BEING IN NEIGHBORHOODS.
THERE'S NOT ANOTHER LOCATION FOR THIS.
SORRY, CAN YOU STILL HEAR ME? YES, SIR.
UM, AND SO YEAH, WE CANNOT, YOU KNOW, LET PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF GOOD IN THAT WAY.
UM, I'LL ALSO JUST NOTE, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF TAXATION THAT THROUGH THE PFC, CAN YOU HOLD ON ONE SECOND, ADAM, YOUR CAMERA IS ISN'T WORKING.
I'M A TEACHER HERE, SO I HAVE TO, UM, GET A TEACHER TO COVER ME.
SO, UM, SO YEAH, UM, THE OTHER THING THAT I'LL NOTE IS THAT YEAH, THE PFC DEAL, UM, YOU KNOW, ENDS UP WITH THE CITY GETTING, YOU KNOW, PORTIONS OF REVENUE, UM, FROM THIS PROJECT.
AND LITECH, UM, PROPERTIES ALSO ARE WORTH LESS IN TAXABLE VALUE BECAUSE THEY HAVE SO MUCH, UM, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT PURELY MARKET RATE.
AND SO, UM, WE SHOULD ALSO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE LOSS OF TAX REVENUE IS MUCH LESS.
UM, JUST FINALLY FROM A PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, I AM A TEACHER.
I'M A LOT OF MY STUDENTS, UM, I TEACH IN D I S D, THEY GO TO, UH, THEY LIVE IN A LITECH, UM, APARTMENTS.
AND THOSE ARE THE KIDS WHO HAVE STABLE HOMES.
UM, THEY'RE ABLE, THEIR BROTHERS, THEIR SISTERS HAVE GONE BEFORE.
UM, THEIR FAMILIES ARE ABLE TO BE ESTABLISHED IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WITHOUT THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITH MARKET RATE, IT IS MUCH HARDER FOR A FAMILY IN DALLAS TO MAINTAIN THOSE ROOTS.
SO, WHEREAS NORMALLY YOU MIGHT THINK OF, YOU KNOW, LOW INCOME HOUSING AS CREEK DESTABILIZING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AS A TEACHER, IT ACTUALLY STABILIZES ONE AND CREATES MORE STABILITY.
UM, SO I HOPE THAT YOU APPROVED THIS PROPERTY, UM, CUZ STRONG SCHOOLS AND STRONG COMMUNITIES CAN COME FROM FORT HOUSING.
MIGHT STILL BE SPEAKING PLUS YOUR AUDIO THERE FOR A SECOND.
OH, WE WERE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UH, SPEAKER NUMBER 14 SWEET HANSEN.
PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
I LIVE AT 99 25 LAKE DALE DRIVE, AND I'M HERE TO DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON THE AGENDA.
UM, I'M THE FOUNDER OF SMART LIVING RESIDENTIAL, A MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPANY WHOSE MISSION IS TO DEVELOP HIGH QUALITY, WELL DESIGNED MIXED INCOME HOUSING AT AFFORDABLE PRICE POINTS.
IN SHARP CONTRAST, THE MOST PROSPECTIVE PSE PROGRAM APPLICANTS LOCALLY AND STATEWIDE.
MY PARTNERS AND I ARE LONG-TERM INVESTORS WHO HAVE DEVELOPED, MANAGED AND CONTINUOUSLY OWNED SEVERAL THOUSAND ATTAINABLE MULTI-FAMILY UNITS FOR CLOSE TO 60 YEARS FOR US, A 75 YEAR INVESTMENT PRIZE AND IS NOT THEORETICAL AS IT IS FOR MOST PFC APPLICANTS.
WE BELIEVE THE PROGRAM HAS MERIT AND GREAT POTENTIAL.
HOWEVER, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE FC STRUCTURE, INCLUDING AN OPTION FOR THE SPONSOR TO TERMINATE THE LEASE.
SPECIFICALLY THIS IS DRIVEN BY THE NEED TO ONE, DEMONSTRATE SOME RESIDUAL VALUE AND ABILITY FOR SPONSOR TO CONTROL THE PROPERTY BEYOND 75 YEARS TO ENSURE IT CAN CONTINUALLY BE FINANCED OVER A LONG TERM HORIZON.
AND TWO, PRESERVE THE INCENTIVE TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY AND NOT ALLOW IT TO FALL INTO DISREPAIR,
[00:30:01]
THEREBY BECOMING A LIABILITY RATHER THAN AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY.WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON BRINGING 153 UNIT PROJECT TO MARKET IN SOUTHERN DALLAS WITHIN THE CEDAR NEIGHBORHOOD OF MAYOR PRO 10 ARNOLD'S DISTRICT FOUR.
WE HAVE SOUGHT AFTER AND RECEIVED BROAD AND DEEP COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT AND LEARNED ALONG THE WAY THAT BOTH SOUTHERN DALLAS AND CEDAR CREST SPECIFICALLY WENT LONG-TERM STAKEHOLDERS INVESTING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE THE PFC PROGRAM IS CURRENTLY STRUCTURED, UNINTENTIONALLY DISCOURAGES THE KIND OF LONG-TERM THINKING AND INVESTMENT ORIENTATION THAT WE KNOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD DESIRES FOR TWO REASONS.
FIRST, THE TERM OF THE LEASE IS RELATIVELY SHORT WHEN COMPARED TO THE TYPICAL EASILY FINANCABLE GROUND LEASE STRUCTURE OF 99 YEARS IN CONTRAST TO THE PFC.
SHORTER IN CONTRAST, THE PFC SHORTER 75 YEAR TERM ESSENTIALLY ASSUMES THE DEVELOPER IS A SHORT-TERM MERCHANT BUILDER LOOKING TO ARBITRAGE THE PFC STRUCTURE.
MANY DEVELOPERS ARE, BUT WE ARE NOT.
RATHER, WE ARE HIGH QUALITY LOCAL OWNERS COMMITTED TO LONG-TERM INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY.
FOR US, THE INABILITY TO CONTROL THE ASSET AT THE END OF THE LEASE CREATES UNACCEPTABLE FINANCIAL UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE VALUE OF THE PROPER PROPERTY AFTER ROUGHLY YEAR 25 OF THE LEASE TERM.
SECOND, UNDER THE CURRENT STRUCTURE, THE UNCERTAINTY AROUND CONTROLLING THE ASSET ULTIMATELY WILL INCENTIVIZE THE TENANT TO ENGAGE IN EXACTLY THE BEHAVIOR THE PFC AND THE CITY OF DALLAS WISHED TO DETER I E PERMITTING THE PROPERTY TO FALL INTO DISREPAIR, THEREBY BECOMING A LIABILITY RATHER THAN AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY.
PLACING TRUST IN A POTENTIAL FUTURE GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATION IS EASY FOR THE TYPICAL SHORTHOLD MERCHANT BUILDER TO ACCEPT.
SINCE THE RISK OF THIS DISCUSSION IS TRANSFERRED TO A BUYER AFTER CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE WE INTEND TO HOLD A PROPERTY LONG TERM, THAT RISK IS INHERENT TO US.
WE BELIEVE THE SOLUTION IS AN ADDITION OF AN OPTION TO TERMINATE THE LEASE.
IT SOLVES BOTH PROBLEMS, MEETS THE POLICY OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM, AND IS A RESPONSIBLE REVISION STRUCTURE THAT BALANCES THE CITY'S INTEREST.
MY COLLEAGUES AND I ARE ACUTELY AWARE THAT WITHOUT PROPER ALIGNMENT OF INTEREST, A PFC TRANSACTION CAN TEND AMOUNT TO A DEVELOPER GIVEAWAY.
PLEASE KNOW THAT WE'RE SENSITIVE TO THE REAL REALITY.
THE PFC BOARD HAS INVESTED CONSIDERABLE TIME POLITICAL CAPITAL.
IF, UH, MR. COLORADO'S BACK ONLINE.
I ALSO, I BELIEVE I SEE, UH, UH, MR. REYES ON THE LINE, DISTRICT SIX.
UH, CAN WE CON CONFIRM THAT HE IS HERE ON THE RECORD? VERY GOOD.
AND WE'LL MOVE BACK TO SPEAKER NUMBER FOUR, HEX, COLORADO.
AND CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR.
YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE 30 MINUTES.
PLEASE AGAIN, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
UH, MY ADDRESS IS 2124 NORTH GARRETT AVENUE.
UH, I LIVE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
I'M A RESIDENT HERE AND I WAS BORN HERE AND I'VE LIVED IN D F W ALL MY LIFE.
IN 20 18, 18, I LIVED IN AN APARTMENT JUST ONE MILE, UH, SOUTH FROM WHERE THE SITE IS IN DISTRICT 10.
I CURRENTLY LIVE SEVEN MILES SOUTH.
I ATTEND CHURCH A HALF MILE AWAY AT HAMILTON PARK, UM, C AND I'VE PATRONIZED THE FOOD MARKET AT THE NEARBY BUDDHIST TEMPLE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS.
I BEGIN MY COMMENTS BY DESCRIBING MY RELATIONSHIP TO THIS AREA BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO KNOW WHO IS AND IS NOT AFFECTED BY THIS PROJECT.
IN OTHER WORDS, WHO COUNTS AS BEING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD? IS IT EXCLUSIVELY THOSE WHOSE PROPERTY VALUES WOULD BE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED? MULTIPLI PULSE STUDIES SHOW THAT THE NEW, THAT NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS HAVE NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES.
WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO MUST LIVE WITH CRIME? THE PROPOSED PROJECT MAY BRING STUDIES SHOW THAT NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS LOWER CRIME RATES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO WOULD SEE THE PROJECT FROM WHERE THEY LIVE? I HAVE WALKED IN THIS AREA SEVERAL TIMES, AND THERE IS NO VANTAGE POINT FROM HOUSING WHERE THE PROJECT CAN BE SEEN.
I HAVE ON THIS, UH, AS PART OF MY CAMERA, UH, A PICTURE OF THE EMPTY LOT WHERE THE PROJECT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DIRECTLY BEHIND.
IT IS A WAREHOUSE FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES.
AND AS WE ALL KNOW THIS, THIS LOT IS SURROUNDED BY SEVERAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, AND IT'S NOT A GIANT AC DOOR BUTTING ANY RESIDENTIAL.
HERE'S THE VIEW FOR OF, UH, FROM THE NEAREST HOUSE IN THE HAMILTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS ROUTE BECAUSE I WALK IT EVERY TIME I GO TO CHURCH AT HAMILTON PARK.
I WALK FROM THE DART STATION NEARBY BECAUSE I DO NOT OWN A CAR.
HERE'S A VIEW FROM, UH, VANGUARD WAY, WHICH IS THE CLOSEST HOUSE IN PROXIMITY TO THE PROPERTY.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS NO VANTAGE POINT BECAUSE IT IS SEPARATED BY THE CREEK AND BY THE RAIL AND BY, UH, LANDSCAPING.
HERE'S THE VIEW FROM THE OPPOSITE SIDE, WHERE YOUR ONLY CHANCE TO SEE THE PROPERTY IS FROM,
[00:35:01]
UH, UH, IF YOU LIVED ON THE UPPER FLOOR OF A MULTI-FAMILY, UH, BUILDINGSO WHO IS TRULY AFFECTED BY THIS PROJECT'S? EVERYONE LIVING IN THIS? YES.
WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO, UH, WE HAVE COMPLETED THE LIST FOR THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE PRE-REGISTERED ONLINE.
YOU'LL MOVE ON TO THOSE WHO SIGNED IN AT OUR SIGN, SIGN IN SHEET HERE AT CITY HALL.
THE FIRST SPEAKER ON THAT LIST IS, UH, DARYL.
MR. BAKER, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
I LIVE AT 63 0 6 ELDER ROAD DRIVE IN DALLAS.
I'M WITH A GROUP THAT SWORN THAT'S CALLED FAIR SHARE FOR ALL DALLAS.
I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, OF THIS PROJECT ON THE MERITS OF HOUSING, ON THE MERITS OF EQUITY, ON THE MERITS OF AFFORDABILITY, THIS WILL BE AFFORDABLE TO THE LOW INCOME, THE BASICALLY THE 20 TO 50% IN ADDITION TO THE 60 AND 80%.
AND HALF OF THE UNITS ROUGHLY ARE GOING TO BE MARKET RATE.
SO THIS IS A TRUE MIXED INCOME, UH, PROJECT.
SINCE APARTMENTS, UH, HERE ARE BEING RESERVED FOR, UM, ALSO THE 70, 80% AREA MEETING INCOME, UH, IT WILL BE ATTRACTING PEOPLE LIKE MALE CARRIERS, NURSES, PRESCHOOL TEACHERS, CORRECTION OFFICERS, AND EVEN DALLAS CITY HALL EMPLOYEES.
ULTIMATELY, IN MY DISTRICT, DISTRICT THREE, WE HAVE 19 TAX CREDIT PROJECTS.
SO WE'VE HAD 19 OVER THE YEARS.
UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY 9% PROJECTS LIKE THIS ONE.
WE DON'T HAVE HIGH SCORING PROJECTS LIKE THIS ONE.
UH, THIS IS AN, A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA.
IT'S IN AN AREA SURROUNDED BY AMENITIES, IS CLOSE TO TRANSPORTATION AND RETAIL.
THIS DEVELOPER IS BROUGHT ONE OF THE BEST PROJECTS, IN FACT BY UNDERSTANDING THE BEST HIGHEST SCORING PROJECT, UH, EVER TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
AND I THINK THIS HAS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
AND IT'S ONE OF THE HIGHEST SCORING PROJECTS THAT THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, WHICH IS THE ULTIMATE FUNDER OF PROJECTS IN IN THE STATE.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE CONCERNS OF NEARBY RESIDENTS MUST BE CONSIDERED.
I THINK TO BE FAIR, WE HAVE TO CONSIDER WHAT IS NEARBY BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LOCATION OF THIS PROJECT, TO GET TO IT FROM ANY OF THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS, YOU'D HAVE TO CROSS CENTRALLY EXPRESSWAY, CROSS GREENVILLE AVENUE OR CROSS FOREST, UH, FOREST LANE.
AND SO IN THE TRADITIONAL PLANNING SENSE OF THE WORD, THIS PROJECT IS NOT GOING TO HAVE THAT TYPE OF NEGATIVE IMPACT ON EXISTING SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, LET'S SEE WHAT ELSE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, UH, YOU WERE SAYING THAT, UM, WELL, LET'S SEE.
FAIR SHARE FOR ALL ABOUT SUPPORTING THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT SUPPORTS THE COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING POLICIES GOAL OF PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING THROUGHOUT THE CITY, NOT JUST IN OUR SOUTHERN SECTOR.
AND TO HAVE A HIGH QUALITY PROJECT COME BEFORE YOU LIKE THIS, I THINK IS A REAL GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU.
THANK YOU, MR. SUPPORTING YOUR VOTING FAVOR OF IT.
UH, PERSON TWO, SUSAN SHERMAN.
PERSON THREE, GAR SHERMAN HAVE SPOKEN FOR.
IT'S BEEN SPOKEN WHEN ROTH HAS SPOKEN NUMBER SIX, UH, CARL WEISBROD.
UH, MY LIVE AT 56 21, UH, MEAD OAKCREST DRIVE IN DALLAS.
UM, I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF THE, UH, OFFICE BUILDING THAT'S DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.
UM, THE POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS ABOUT THIS TRANSACTION IS THAT, UM, WE'RE HERE BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER
[00:40:01]
FAILED TO DO HIS DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE CONTRACTING TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY FOR THIS PURPOSE.UM, THE, HE FAILED TO, THEY FAILED TO, UH, DO BASIC DUE DILIGENCE AND, AND BY WHICH THEY WOULD'VE DISCOVERED THAT THERE ARE DE RESTRICTIONS THAT PROHIBIT THIS TYPE OF, UH, DEVELOPMENT FROM BEING, UH, DONE ON THIS PROPERTY.
SO NOW, UM, THE DEVELOPER IS USED ATTEMPTING TO USE GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY, UH, TO IMPROPERLY, UH, PERMIT, UH, UH, HIM TO AVOID THE, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, THE SAME, UH, I WANNA SAY WE'VE DONE, UH, A LOT OF, UH, LEGAL RESEARCH FROM, UH, UH, THE, UH, APPELLATE, UH, THE APPELLATE SECTION OF THE, OF A PROMINENT FIRM HERE IN DALLAS THAT, UH, THAT TELLS US THAT THE CITY AND THE PFC, UM, WILL NOT BE PROTECTED BY, UH, SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY BECAUSE THIS IS BEING USED, UH, TO, TO FAVOR A, UH, A PRIVATE, A PRIVATE ENTITY.
THIS, UH, AND I WOULD UH, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU, UH, DO FURTHER RESEARCH ON THIS BEFORE FURTHER LEGAL RESEARCH ON THIS.
I WOULD URGE YOU TO, BEFORE YOU PROCEED, TO RECOMMEND THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
UM, THE SAME, UH, GAMBIT TO GET AROUND THE, UH, TO GET AROUND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, UM, WAS TAKEN TO THE COUNTY FIRST, NOT LONG AGO, JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO.
THE COUNTY, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, AGAIN, THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT WE SPOKE WITH, UH, AT FIRST WERE, UH, LOOKED FAVORABLY ON THIS AND WERE PREDISPOSED TO, UH, MAKE THIS, UH, UH, ACCOUNTING PROJECT DO THE SAME THING BY THE PROPERTY LEASE, IN FACT.
UH, BUT, UM, THEIR LEGAL, THEIR LEGAL, THEIR ATTORNEY, THEIR COUNTY ATTORNEY RECOMMENDED AGAINST IT, UM, FOR REASONS.
AM I PAST MY HEARING? YES, SIR.
SO JUST, JUST CHECK IT OUT IS ALL I'M ASKING.
UH, ARE WE ON BOND? HAS, HAS SPOKEN SIGN IN NUMBER EIGHT.
IF YOU COULD, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.
MY NAME'S MARK MELTON, 29 21 LEASH AIR DRIVE IN DALLAS.
I AM THE FOUNDER OF THE DALLAS EVICTION ADVOCACY CENTER, WHICH IS A NON-PROFIT LAW FIRM THAT REPRESENTS TENANTS FACING EVICTION ACROSS DALLAS COUNTY.
UH, SINCE THE PANDEMIC BEGAN, WE'VE REPRESENTED MORE THAN 12,000 FAMILIES IN DALLAS COUNTY FACING EVICTION.
AND THROUGH THAT WORK, WE UNFORTUNATELY HAVE TO SPEND A WHOLE LOT OF TIME TRYING TO REHOUSE PEOPLE THAT HAVE EITHER BEEN EVICTED OR ARE NEAR EVICTION.
AND SO WE ARE QUITE FAMILIAR, I HAVE A FRONT ROW SEAT TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS IN DALLAS.
AND FOR THOSE THAT SAY IT DOESN'T EXIST, THAT IS 100% FALSE.
WE HAVE A HUGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS IN DALLAS, ESPECIALLY IN THE LOWER VANS OF INCOME APARTMENTS THAT WERE 700 TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH THREE YEARS AGO.
THEY JUST COST 1100 TO $1,500 A MONTH NOW.
SO WE'VE GOT AN ENTIRE SWAMP, PEOPLE THAT HAVE MUCH FEWER OPTIONS.
SO WE'VE GOTTA GET AS MANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS BUILT ON THE GROUND SHELVES IN THE DIRT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
NOW, I'VE HEARD A LOT OF FEAR, UH, FROM CERTAIN PEOPLE, UM, ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS.
I UNDERSTAND THE FEAR, BUT IT'S IRRATIONAL.
AND IT'S BASED ON A FALSE PREMISE THAT POOR PEOPLE BRING BAD THINGS.
FIRST OF ALL, UM, YOU HAVE A FEW PEOPLE IN THE HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS WHEN THEY HAVE HOMES.
BUILDING HOMES DOES NOT PUT MORE PEOPLE UNDER A BRIDGE.
THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS WALKING THIS INTO A DARK TRAIN.
IT'S NOWHERE NEAR, UH, OR AT LEAST NOT DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO ANY SINGLE FAMILY OR THEIR HOMES.
[00:45:01]
AND THESE BEERS ARE FRUSTRATED.YESTERDAY, ONE OF THE PRIOR SPEAKERS WAS QUOTED IN THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS IS SAYING THE FOLLOWING, WHICH I THINK IS THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE ARE TRULY AFRAID OF.
HE SAID, WE HAVE PLENTY OF POOR PEOPLE LIVING HERE AMONG US.
I DON'T WANNA SHARE NORTH DALLAS.
CAUSE I LIKE IT JUST THE WAY IT IS.
AND I DON'T WANNA DESTROY IT BY BRINGING IN ALL THIS POPULATION HERE.
URBANIZING DALLAS, MAKE SURE I GET THIS BOOK RIGHT.
URBANIZING DALLAS WILL RUIN MY WAY OF LIFE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS, DALLAS, BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND GREAT.
UM, IF YOU THINK IT'S GONNA RUIN YOUR WAY OF LIFE.
SO I DO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT AS I SUPPORT MOST AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, BECAUSE WE ABSOLUTELY DO NEED THEM.
UM, AND IF WE HAVE THE SPOT ON EVERY SINGLE ONE OF SIX, SOMETHING LIVES FINE, ALWAYS DOESN'T WANT TO, IT WORKS OUT JUST FINE.
UH, JENNY LOU COULD PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND, UH, ADDRESS PLEASE.
UM, MENT PROPERTY ADDRESSES 1 16 15, UH, FOREST CENTRAL, WHICH IS, UH, BASIC NEXT TO THE PROJECT.
AND, UH, THIS IS AN OFFICE BUILDING, UH, THREE FLOOR.
AND, UH, IN FACT, I'M NOT SURE THE PEOPLE HERE KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENED A FEW YEARS AGO.
THAT'S LIKE, UH, WHAT HAVE A BIG THUNDERSTORM BASICALLY LIKE DAMAGE THE, THE THE BUILDING NEXT TO US.
SO THAT'S A PROJECT RIGHT NOW, UH, IS, UM, APPLY FOR.
AND UH, BEFORE WAS LIKE, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S THE 60,000 BUILDING, UH, OFFICE BUILDING, UH, MR. ROSS BUILDING.
LIKE MINE BUILDING IS THE 50,000 OFFICE BUILDING THREE, UH, FLOORS.
I LOCATED THE BUILDING FOR FIRST, UH, FIRST LANE AND, UH, 75, RIGHT BETWEEN 75.
AND OUR BUILDING, IT IS, UH, RACING AND WENDYS.
SO THEN LINE UP, NEXT ONE OFFICE BUILDING IS THIS BUILDING USED TO BE A 60,000, 60,000 OFFICE BUILDING, UH, UP THE TRUTH OF THE DAMAGE.
AND, UH, BEFORE, SO, AND AFTER THAT IT IS THE MR. ROSS BUILDING.
MR. ROSS BUILDING IS THE 70 SOUTH.
YOU CAN SEE THE ENVIRONMENT USED TO BE THERE.
IT'S A LINE OF THREE, YOU KNOW, BIG BUILDINGS, OLD OFFICE BUILDINGS.
WE HAVE, UH, CORPORATE, UH, OFFICES OVER THERE.
WE HAVE A DIFFERENT, IN DIFFERENT INDUSTRY.
WE HAVE A HEALTH PROFESSIONALS BECAUSE WE SURROUND BACK EIGHT MORE THAN EIGHT FOURTH METERS WITH DIFFERENT, UH, SPATIAL CASE.
SO WE HAVE A HEART AND AINE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM US.
AND WE HAVE A, HAVE A, BOTH ME, I BELIEVE, UH, MR. ROSS AND THE BUILDING DAMAGED BY THE STORM.
WE, WE HAVE QUITE A FEW OF HEALTH PROFESSIONAL BUILD, UH, OFFICE OVER THERE THAT'S A CORPORATE.
AND WE HAVE, UH, LAWYERS FOR THOSE, UH, FOR THOSE, UH, KIND OF PRACTICE.
WE HAVE, UH, CPAS, WE HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE QUITE A DIFFERENT, UH, OFFICES FOR DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES BECAUSE THE LOCATION, THE NATURE OF LOCATION IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE CENTRAL, I THINK FOR, FOR INVESTMENT.
UH, IN, FOR FROM INVESTMENT'S PURPOSE FROM, UH, CUSTOMER'S PURPOSE, WHICH IS A TENANT SPHERE, RIGHT FROM THE, I I BELIEVE THIS, UM, THE PROJECT IS APPLYING.
IT IS, UM, CITY SUBSTANCE PROPERTY FOR THE CITY'S PURPOSE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF AITE, EITHER LOW OR APARTMENT TENANT ITSELF.
PROJECT FOR ALL THE ASPECT IS UP NOTHING BUT ART.
THEY SAY, WHY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU KNOW THIS, THIS LAND ONLY BURIED LIKE TWO ACRES LATER.
AND WE GOT, WE'RE GOING THE HORSE LIKE OVER LIKE ONE METER WAS 200.
WHICH I CUT MORE TIME, YOU KNOW, I NOTICED BACK AND FORTH THAT POSSIBLE.
NO, WE CROSS SO MANY SPEAKERS.
I MEAN, SO MANY SPEAKERS DIDN'T.
OH, THANK, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
IS THERE, I'VE REACHED THE END OF THE LIST ON THIS SHEET.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE IN PERSON? VERY GOOD.
[00:50:11]
IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS YOU.MIKE NELSON, 86 35 GRAYWOOD DRIVE.
I'M A VOLUNTEER FOR THE NORTHLAND ESTATES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION DIRECTOR, THE BISHOP ORANGE HIGH SCHOOL DATE OF DALLAS.
UM, GREW UP IN SOUTH DALLAS AND OAK CLIFF BEFORE MIGRATING TO NORTH DALLAS IN 1979.
I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF NORTH WEATHER STATES FOR 24 AND A HALF YEARS.
THE NORTHWOOD STATE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSES THE CYPRESS CREEK PROJECT FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
FIRST ROUND IS THERE IS A DEEP RESTRICTION, AND THE DEEP RESTRICTION DEALS WITH THE FACT THAT THERE CANNOT BE APARTMENTS, LAWS, ROOMS, YES, EVEN DEEP RESTRICTIONS ARE PUT THERE FOR GOOD REASONS.
SOME MAY BE IMMEDIATELY OBVIOUS, OTHERS MAY NOT BE, BUT TO IGNORE A DEED RESTRICTION LOOKING THE OTHER WAY.
JUST BECAUSE A DEVELOPER CAN PAY A MILLION DOLLAR FEE IN EXCHANGE FOR TAX EXEMPTIONS SENDS A DANGEROUS SIGNAL AND SETS INTO MOTION OF SHAKY PRECEDENT MOVING FORWARD.
BY THE WAY, I'M SURE SOME OF THE FOLKS HERE ARE AWARE THAT THERE HAS BEEN A BILL PENDING OR AN ACTUAL BILL INTRODUCED IN THIS TEXAS HOUSE BY PAUL BIENKO THAT WOULD SEEK TO LIMIT, IF NOT IN EVERY WAY, ERADICATE, UM, UM, UH, EXEMPTIONS, UH, FOR, UH, INVESTORS.
WHAT ABOUT THE HUMAN SIDE OF THIS STORY? WHAT WILL THE REAL DAY-TO-DAY QUALITY OF LIFE LOOK LIKE FOR FAMILIES AND FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN LIVING LESS THAN 50 YARDS FROM THE FEEDER LANES OF THE MONSTER, WE CALL 75 CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
AND WE'RE BEING TOLD THIS IS THE LOCATION FOR THIS APARTMENT COMMUNITY.
ARE YOU KIDDING ME? WE ALL KNOW THE ANSWERS.
THE PROPOSED LOCATION FOR CYPRESS CREEK DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY IS AN AREA ALONG THE UNFORGIVING NORTHBOUND LANES OF 75 CENTRAL, JUST SOUTH OF FLORES LANE, AND BORDERS THE NORTHERNMOST AREA OF NORTH FOR THE STATES.
BUT CYPRESS CREEK IS JUST THE TIP OF AN ICEBERG.
OUR COMMUNITY IS BEING BARRAGED WITH PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS SOME DRIVEN BY CITY OR COUNTY MANDATES.
OTHERS LIKE CYPRESS CREEK ARE DRIVEN BY DEVELOPERS AND INVESTORS.
IT'S AS IF OUR COMMUNITY IS BEING SYSTEMATICALLY TARGETED OR SOMEHOW DEEMED TO NEED A FIX.
WE DON'T NEED FIXES FOR THE RELATIVELY SMALL AREA OF D 10 AND LAKE HIGHLANDS REPRESENTED BY NORTH FOR THE STATES.
WE FIND OUR COMMUNITY IS RECEIVING AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF ATTENTION AND FOCUS AS COMPARED TO OTHER AREAS IN LAKE HIGHLANDS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. NELSON.
BUT I HAVE SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT TO SAY.
IT'S NOT THAT WE ARE OPPOSED TO, UH, HOUSING.
WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE TRULY BELIEVE THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD IN OUR COMMUNITY.
WE HAVE AN ANOTHER SPEAKER COMING FORWARD.
IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
MY NAME IS KIRK PRESLEY AND MY WIFE AND I LIVE AT, UH, 63 0 4 WEST UNIVERSITY DRIVE IN DISTRICT SIX.
UM, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR ADDRESS? YEAH.
63 0 4 WEST UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD.
UM, THANK YOU BOARD MEMBERS FOR YOUR TIME THIS AFTERNOON.
MY HIGH SCHOOL CIVICS TEACHER TAUGHT ME THE POLITICS IS HOW WE DECIDE WHO GETS WHAT, WHERE, AND WHEN.
I'M ASKING THE TODAY TO SUPPORT THE NEW MIXED UP IN INCOME DEVELOPMENT FORCE AND CENTRAL.
THESE ARE THE CLERKS AT HOME DEPOT.
THE TEACHERS IN HAMILTON BAR ARE THE 10,000 WORKERS AT TI.
OUR CITY'S LARGEST PRIVATE EMPLOYER.
THESE PEOPLE NEED SOMEWHERE TO LIVE.
WE NEED TO EQUIP OUR WORKFORCE WITH THE RESOURCES IT NEEDS TO KEEP COMMERCE THRIVING IN THIS CITY.
HOUSING IS ABSOLUTELY ONE OF THOSE RESOURCES.
WHAT HOUSING? HOUSING THAT PROVIDES ACCESS TO JOBS, MEDICAL SERVICES, AND UPWARD MOBILITY AND WILL HELP ALLEVIATE THE POVERTY, THE PRESSURES OF POVERTY.
[00:55:01]
I OFTEN HEAR WELL-INTENTIONED NEIGHBORS RAISE CONCERNS THAT SHARE A COMMON LENGTH, CRIME OR HOMELESSNESS.THESE ARE SYMPTOMS OF POVERTY.
I WOULD CHALLENGE YOU ALL TO SEE THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS A CURE TO HELPING ALLEVIATE POVERTY, NOT SOMETHING THAT WILL MAKE IT WORSE.
WHERE WHILE THE PLAN COMMISSION HAS ALREADY DECIDED THAT THIS SITE IS APPROPRIATE FOR HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE, I WOULD ASK YOU TO CONSIDER HOW PERFECT THIS LOCATION IS FOR NEW DENSITY.
SOMEONE IS GOING TO BUILD SOMETHING HERE.
IF THE CITY DOES NOT TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE THAT THAT WILL BE NEW HOUSING.
IT IS A LOST OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDING HIGH QUALITY MIXED INCOME TO AN AREA THAT IS PROXIMATE TO JOBS IN TRANSIT.
AND FINALLY, WHEN NOW, I WOULD ASK RESPECTFULLY THAT YOU SUPPORT THE C CYPRESS CREEK DEVELOPMENT AND OTHERS LIKE IT IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE THE TIME IS NOW TO START GETTING HOUSING RIGHT IN THIS CITY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. PRESLEY.
SEE NO OTHER, UH, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OR HANDS HERE IN PERSON MISSION TO SPEAK.
I'D LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE WHO SIGNED UP AND WHO SPOKE EITHER, UH, ONLINE OR HERE IN PERSON, UH, HERE AT THE DALLAS FACILITIES FELLOW PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION AND IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
YOUR VOICE WILL BE HEARD AND WE APPRECIATE EVERYONE FOR TAKING THE TIME OUTTA YOUR DAY TO SPEAK REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU LIVE OR WHAT YOUR VIEWS ARE.
NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE JANUARY 24TH, 2023, CITY OF DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION MEETING.
IF THE BOARD HAS HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES FOR THE JANUARY 24TH, 2023 MEETING, WE HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE.
WE HAVE A CORRECTION FROM DIRECTOR STENSON.
PLEASE STATE YOUR CORRECTIONS.
FIRST, I'D LIKE TO, UH, ACKNOWLEDGE A NEWLY ASSIGNED STAFF MEMBER, MS. SCHROEDER, WHO TAKES UP MINUTES.
UH, NOW ON OUR LAST PAGE OF THE, UH, MINUTES NUMBER FOUR, UH, THESE JUST LITTLE HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS, UH, NEXT TO THE LAST, UH, SENTENCE IF NOTES THAT, UH, UH, PRESIDENT OL CALLED A, UH, VOTE TO DEFER.
ACTUALLY, THERE WAS, UH, VICE PRESIDENT, MR. MR. MONTGOMERY.
THEN FROM THERE, IT SHOWS THAT, UH, UNDER ADJOURNMENT, ONCE AGAIN, IT SHOULD BE VICE CHAIR MONTGOMERY.
I'M, I'M SORRY, YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE FEBRUARY MEETING MEETING MINUTES.
YEAH, I'M REFERRING TO THE JANUARY.
DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE JANUARY MEETING MINUTES? AND MOTION DIRECTOR TALLIS.
WE HAVE THE SECOND, SECOND, SECOND, MR. RUSSELL, DIRECTOR RUSSELL.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SECOND BY SAYING AYE.
NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE, DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 28TH, 2023.
CITY OF DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION DIRECTOR STENSON.
I GUESS I WILL READ THE, UH, THE AGENDA THEN.
OH, ONCE AGAIN, UH, I THINK MR. SCHROER, MR. SCHROEDER GOT MY FIRST TWO.
UH, BUT ONCE AGAIN, PRESIDENT PALM MCCA, UH, ON NUMBER FOUR, UH, NEEDS TO BE REPLACED WITH, UH, VICE PRESIDENT MONTGOMERY.
THEN UNDER ADJOURNMENT, ONCE AGAIN, PRESIDENT PALM MCCALL NEEDS TO BE REPLACED WITH, UH, VICE CHAIR OF MONTGOMERY, AS WE FORGOT TO INVITE PRESIDENT PALM MCCALL BACK IN AS WE ADJOURN.
AND THEN THE LAST SENTENCE STATES THAT WE ADJOURNED AT 1244.
NO, WE ADJOURNED AT, UH, FOUR O'CLOCK.
THAT WAS A, UH, THOSE WERE MY, UH, NOTICES OF HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.
AND TO ADD TO DIRECTOR STINSON'S
[01:00:01]
COMMENTS, I DON'T HAVE A COPY IN FRONT OF ME THAT I BELIEVE THERE'S SOME GARBLED SENTENCES RIGHT AT THE VERY END WHERE IT SAYS, VOTED TO MOVE, VOTED TO MOVE TO MOVE.SEVERAL TIMES, AT LEAST IN THE COPY THAT I RECEIVED, WE COULD JUST CLEAN UP THAT LANGUAGE.
I BELIEVE THAT WAS ALREADY CLEANED UP, AT LEAST IN THE COPY THAT I SEE.
UH, DO WE HAVE A, A MOTION TO PER THE MINUTES WITH, UH, DIRECTOR S STINSON'S CORRECTIONS MOTION? SO MOVED BY DIRECTOR RUSSELL, DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, UH, VICE PRESIDENT MONTGOMERY.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, DISCUSSION ON APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE NEGOTIATIONS AND EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR SAAS CREEK AT FOREST LANE.
AND PARTNERSHIP WITH SYCAMORE STRATEGIES TO BE LOCATED AT 11 5 20 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, DALLAS.
AND AS IN THE, THE LAST MEETING, I HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN THIS ITEM, SO I'LL HAVE TO STEP AWAY AND WE'LL TURN THE, UH, UH, CHAIR THE MEETING OVER TO VICE PRESIDENT MONTGOMERY.
PLEASE CALL ME BACK IN AT
YOU DON'T SEE TENNESSEE IN TEXAS, ONLY ME ONCE.
SO, UH, THAT'S FROM GEORGE W. BUSH QUOTE.
I'LL DEFINITELY BRING YOU BACK IN PRESENT PALM MCCA.
THANK YOU, UH, FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
WE ARE NOW DISCUSSING, UH, ITEM NUMBER SIX.
AND AS A REMINDER, WE WILL TAKE A MOTION, THEN WE'LL HAVE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION, UM, INCLUDING ANY AMENDMENTS.
UM, AND THEN AT, UH, AT THAT POINT, WE'LL TAKE A VOTE.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, UM, IS THERE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO, UH, FOR, UM, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION OF AN M MOU MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR CYPRESS CREEK FORCE LANE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SYCAMORE STRATEGIES TO BE LOCATED AT 1520 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, DALLAS, TEXAS, BEFORE A MOTION IS MADE? IF I MAY, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
UM, I, I, I JUST WANNA REMIND, UH, MY FELLOW DIRECTOR WHY WE'RE HERE, UM, AND WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE PFC IS.
AND I'M READING DIRECTLY FROM, UH, BYLAWS.
SINCE THE CORPORATION IS ORGANIZED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF ASSISTING THE CITY IN FINANCING, REFINANCING, OR PROVIDING PUBLIC FACILITIES, IS DEFINED IN THE ACT AND IS APPROVED BY THE GOVERNING BODY, GOVERNING BODY, BEING THE CITY COUNCIL, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THESE LAWS AND THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, UM, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF DISCUSSION TODAY.
UH, GOOD DISCUSSION, UH, ABOUT A NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT REALLY ARE NOT THE PROVINCE OF THIS BOARD TO ADJUDICATE.
UH, THE ISSUE OF THE, UH, DEED RESTRICTION IS A VIABLE ISSUE AND ONE THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED.
BUT IT'S NOT OUR PLACE TO RESOLVE IT.
IT'S NOT OUR PLACE TO GET INVOLVED IN ZONING.
IT'S NOT OUR PLACE TO GET INVOLVED IN, IN ISSUES RELATING TO BUILDING.
IT IS OUR PLACE, AND IT IS OUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY AS DIRECTORS TO THE PFC TO ACT ACCORDING TO HIS CHARTER, WHICH IS TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE PROJECTS THAT WOULD ENHANCE, UH, HOUSING FOR, FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON AROUND HERE, BUT IT IS NOT WITHIN OUR RESPONSIBILITY, NOR OUR PURVIEW, NOR OUR AUTHORITY TO RE TO RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES.
THOSE ARE LEFT TO EITHER OTHER DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY OR AS IT RELATES TO DE RESTRICTIONS, UH, WHICH I HAVE A LOT OF FAMILIARITY WITH.
THAT'S UP TO EITHER THE PARTIES TO NEGOTIATE OUT OR THEY CAN LI LITIGATE IT, BUT THAT'S NOT, NOT WITHIN OUR, OUR FOCUS.
TALLIS, UH, I WOULD JUST OFFER, IT'S GONNA BE A SUBJECT OF, OF MY DISCUSSION AND MIGHT BE A MATTER TO MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH.
I DO RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE THAT THE NEED RESTRICTIONS AND THE POTENTIAL LITIGATION THAT MAY COME FROM THEM MAY SUBJECT THIS CORPORATION TO LITIGATION RISK.
AND AS FIDUCIARIES AND AS BOARD MEMBERS
[01:05:01]
OF THIS CORPORATION, WE DO HAVE A DUTY TO ASSESS THAT RISK, UH, DETERMINE IF THERE IS WAYS TO MITIGATE IT OR OTHERWISE PROTECT CORPORATION IN DELIVERING ITS DO IN DELIVERING ITS DUTIES.BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE NEED TO BE FIDUCIARIES, UH, AROUND THIS CORPORATION.
UH, AS, UH, WE ARE NOT NECESSARILY, WHILE WE ARE QUASI-GOVERNMENTAL, UH, THERE COULD BE SITUATIONS WHERE OUR INTERESTS CONFLICT.
AND I JUST WANT US TO BE AWARE OF THAT AS A BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAT, UH, WE ARE NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENTED BY THE DEVELOPER'S, ATTORNEYS.
WE HAVE OUR OWN COUNSEL THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULD SEEK LEGAL ADVICE, UH, FROM WITH REGARDS TO THIS, UH, THIS PROJECT, THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS TO ASSESS, UH, WHAT IS, UH, WHAT IS POTENTIAL, UH, LEGAL LIABILITY FROM THE, UH, LITIGATION THAT HAS BEEN AT LEAST ASSERTED FROM SEVERAL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS THAT HAVE BEEN HERE WITH US TODAY.
UH, I WANNA SUPPORT WHAT, UH, DIRECTOR HOLMES JUST SAID, AND WITH ALL OF DUE RESPECT, DISAGREE STRONGLY WITH WHAT, UH, MY COLLEAGUE DIRECTOR LYSIS JUST SAID.
BY THE TIME THIS PROJECT GETS TO US, THERE IS A PRESUMPTION MADE THAT ALL OF THE ANALYSIS RELATED TO ZONING DE RESTRICTIONS OR OTHER MATTERS HAVE ALREADY BEEN DONE.
AND WHEN THIS GETS TO THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AFTER THE FACT, THEY ASSUME THAT WE HAVE ALREADY LOOKED AT EVERYTHING.
AND ONCE WE LOOK AT IT, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE A BUNCH OF CITY STAFF OR CITY DEPARTMENTS THAT GO BACK AND REANALYZE OR DECEPT THE ISSUE.
SO OUR VOTE IS VERY SIGNIFICANT IN TERMS OF WHAT IS RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO IF, UM, AND I, I KNOW THERE WERE, UH, A FEW DIRECTORS THAT HAD ASKED QUESTIONS OF, UM, BOTH OUR COUNCIL AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
IF EVERYONE IS, UH, AMENABLE TO IT, WHAT WE CAN DO IS HAVE THAT LEGAL DISCUSSION.
I THINK THERE ARE TWO ASPECTS TO IT.
UM, THERE'S THE, THE DEED RESTRICTION PIECE OF IT, UM, BUT THEN ALSO GOING FORWARD, UM, REPRESENTATION, UM, AROUND THE, THE PFC AND HOW THAT WOULD WORK.
SO, UM, IF EVERYBODY'S AMENABLE TO IT, WE'VE GOT KYLE IS, UH, IS JIM ON, AND, AND, UH, JIM IS, IS HERE ACCORDING TO THE PARTICIPANT LIST.
SO JIM, YOU'RE, YOU'RE READY, WILLIAM, AND ABLE TO TALK ABOUT AND ADVISE THE PFC ON OUR ASPECTS OF THIS.
SO, UM, AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS, UM, LET, LET'S DO LIKE A, A NORMAL, UM, DISCUSSION AND Q AND A AND WE'LL JUST LINE EVERYBODY UP TO ASK QUESTIONS OF, OF JIM, UM, AT BRACEWELL.
AND THEN, UM, ALSO KYLE, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
ARE THEY ONLINE OR THEY'RE HERE? OH, NO, THERE, YOU'RE, WE'RE SORRY.
I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T SEE YOU OVER THERE.
JUST TO CLARIFY, WE'RE PRESENT, BUT WE'RE HERE FOR PARLIAMENTARIAN PURPOSES ONLY.
NOT TO ANSWER LEGAL QUESTIONS.
SO, UM, DIRECTOR, POSSIBLE FIRST.
WELL, I JUST WANTED TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WHY YOU'RE NOT HERE TO PROVIDE ANY LEGAL ADVICE.
IF NOBODY HAS QUESTIONS FOR JIM.
UM, I'M NOT SURE, DO WE JUST, JUST WANT YEAH, INFORMAL, INFORMAL RECORD.
HOLMES WILL, UH, WE'LL START US OFF.
THANKS FOR BEING WITH US HERE TODAY.
UM, I WANTED TO JUST, UH, ADDRESS THIS, UH, THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS DEAL, UH, BY THE CITY.
UH, AND THE, AND THE STRUCTURE HAS KIND OF COME TO US, UH, PRE-PACKAGED.
AND THOUGH, UH, ALTHOUGH THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS THIS PROJECT, WE HAVE THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE PROHIBITING DEPARTMENTS FROM, UH, BEING BUILT.
WE'VE HEARD FROM, UH, FROM, UH, SOME OF THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY THAT THERE, UH, COULD BE, UH, INVERSE CONDEMNATION, LITIGATION, UH, COMING IF WE WERE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL.
AND THE COUNCIL GOES FORWARD WITH IT.
UM, AND WITH THE PROPERTY BEING AS THE WAY IT'S BEING PROPOSED OWNED BY THE P F C.
UH, I'M ASSUMING THAT ANY TYPE OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION SUIT WOULD INVOLVE NAMING THE P F C AS WELL IN ADDITION TO THE CITY.
[01:10:01]
CHANCES OF THAT ARE FOR THE PFC? THE CITY WOULD BE THE PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INVERSE CONDEMNATION, BUT YOU CAN REST ASSURED THAT YOU WOULD BE BROUGHT INTO ANY LITIGATION AS THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER AS THAT LITIGATION PROCEEDS.JIM, WE LOST YOUR CAMERA TOO, IF YOU COULD.
SO I'M NOT SURE YOU GUYS ARE MONITORING.
I, I, SO, KYLE, YOU TELL ME IF, UH, IF THERE'S A, A PROBLEM.
SO, IN TERMS OF THE, IN TERMS OF THIS, UH, UH, OF THIS POTENTIAL LITIGATION OF WHICH I'M TRYING TO ASSESS THE RISK TO THE P F C OF, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, WE'VE HEARD FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THAT THE, THE ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY, UH, PREVENTS THE RESTRICTIONS FROM BEING RE ENFORCEABLE AGAINST THE CITY, WHICH I AGREE WITH, NOT ENFORCEABLE IN TERMS OF RESTRICTING THE USE OF THE PROPERTY BY THE CITY.
BUT AGAIN, AN INVERSE CONDEMNATION LAWSUIT, UH, IS SEEKING RELIEF IN TERMS OF MONETARY DAMAGES, NOT ENFORCEMENT OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
WOULD THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THERE ARE, UH, TWO SECTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE IN TERMS OF OUR RE OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY AND THE POTENTIAL PLAINTIFFS, UH, 2 72 0.001 AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, UH, WHICH ALLOWS TO SELL THE CITY TO SELL TO THE DEVELOPER.
UM, IT SAYS A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION MAY ACQUIRE OR ASSEMBLE LAND OR REAL PROPERTY INTEREST EXCEPT BY CONDEMNATION AND SELL, EXCHANGE OR OTHERWISE CONVEY THE LAND OR INTEREST TO AN ENTITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF LOW INCOME OR MODERATE INCOME HOUSING.
THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION SHALL DETERMINE THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE TRANSACTIONS SO AS TO EFFECTUATE AND MAINTAIN THE PUBLIC PURPOSE.
THE CONVEYANCE OF LAND UNDER THIS SUBSECTION SERVES A PUBLIC PURPOSE.
THE LAND MAY BE, UH, CONVEYED FOR LESS THAN HALF ITS FAIR MARKET VALUE.
AND THEN IT SAYS IN THIS SUBSECTION, THE ENTITY MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL CORPORATION PARTNERSHIP OR OTHER LEGAL ENTITY.
AND THEN I WOULD ASK YOU TO BOOKMARK THAT, ESPECIALLY THAT CLAUSE, EXCEPT BY CONDEMNATION.
AND I'LL ALSO POINT OUT TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 3 0 3 0.041 C, WHICH I KNOW YOU'RE VERY FAMILIAR WITH, BECAUSE THAT'S OUR AUTHORIZING STATUTE FOR THE P F C.
AND C HAS A, A PRESCRIPTION IN IT THAT SAYS A SPONSOR, WHICH IN THIS CASE IS THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY OF DALLAS, MAY NOT DELEGATE TO A CORPORATION, WHICH I WOULD BELIEVE WOULD BE US, THE POWER OF TAXATION OR IMMINENT DOMAIN, A POLICE POWER, OR AN EQUIVALENT SOVEREIGN POWER OF THIS STATE OR THE SPONSOR.
JIM, I'LL ASK, IS THE CITY'S PROPOSED STRUCTURE, AT LEAST THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE P UH, P F C COMPORT WITH THESE SECTIONS? YES, BECAUSE THE CITY IS NOT ACQUIRING THE PROPERTY BY CONDEMNATION, THEY WILL ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY BY A CONTRACT AND A SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED, UM, DIRECTLY FROM THE CURRENT OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, IT MAY PASS THROUGH THE PARTNERSHIP AND THEN TO THE CITY, AND THEN THE CITY WILL CONVEY PURSUANT TO THE SECTION OF 2 72 THAT YOU MENTIONED TO THE PFC, AND THE PFC WILL THEN ENTER INTO A LEASE TO THE PARTNERSHIP.
THE CITY DOES HAVE THE OPTION TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY, CONTINUE THE HOLD TITLE, AND TO LEASE THE PROPERTY TO THE P F C AS OPPOSED TO CONVEYING IT TO THE P F C.
AND WE HAD INITIALLY ASKED THAT THAT BE THE STRUCTURE.
THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS INDICATED THAT THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO ENTER INTO A LONG-TERM LEASE, THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO A CONVEYANCE TO THE P F C AS PART OF THIS TRANSACTION.
UM, I THINK, JIM, ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE HEARD TODAY AS WELL, UH, AT LEAST FROM SOME OF THE STAKEHOLDERS THAT HAVE SPOKEN TODAY, UM, THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT, UH, IMMUNITY, UH, WILL BE WAIVED IN ANY TYPE OF INVERSE INVERSE CONDEMNATION LAWSUIT.
UM, SO IF THE CITY AND THE P F C HAVE NO IMMUNITY TO THE SUIT, UM, AND THERE WERE DAMAGES TO BE RECOVERED, IT COULD THAT POTENTIALLY BE A LIABILITY OF THE PFC? FIRST OFF, THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS INDICATED THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THERE WILL BE NO RIGHT TO AN INVERSE CONDEMNATION SUIT, UH, AGAINST THE CITY, THAT THE CITY DOES HAVE SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY BECAUSE THEY ARE ACQUIRING THIS PROJECT
[01:15:01]
FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE, AND THAT IS PROVIDING LOW INCOME HOUSING.SO THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS INDICATED THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THE CITY SHOULD HAVE NO LIABILITY IN AN INVERSE CONDEMNATION SUIT.
CITY ATTORNEY HAS ALSO APPLIED THAT THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE CONVEYANCE TO THE PFC CHANGES THAT STRUCTURE FOR EITHER THE CITY OR THE P F C.
WE HAVE NOT DONE DETAILED RESEARCH WITH REGARD TO WHETHER OR NOT THE P F C COULD BY THE CONVEYANCE TO THE P F C, WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY'S, UM, SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY REMAINS IN PLACE AND WOULD SHIELD THE P PFC.
I BELIEVE THAT OUR SAFEST ANALYSIS SHOULD BE THAT WE WILL BE BROUGHT INTO A LAWSUIT.
WE DO NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER PARTY PAY FOR THE DEFENSE OF THAT LAWSUIT.
WE HAVE NEGOTIATED WITH THE DEVELOPER AN INDEMNITY AND A COVENANT TO PROVIDE US WITH, UM, DEFENSE IN THAT LAWSUIT.
THE M O U THAT YOU HAVE ATTACHED TO YOUR BOARD PACKET INDICATES THAT THAT INDEMNITY IS LIMITED.
WE HAVE GONE BACK TO THE DEVELOPER AND HAD THE DEVELOPER REMOVE THE LIMITATION, AND THE DEVELOPER WILL FIGHT US WITH A COMPLETE INDEMNITY.
WE HAVE ALSO ASKED THE CITY, FOR THE CITY TO AGREE THAT THEY WILL PROVIDE US WITH A DEFENSE IN THE EVENT THAT THE DEVELOPERS INDEMNITY IS, FOR WHATEVER REASON, NOT EFFECTIVE OR THEY DON'T HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO DO IT.
WE BELIEVE THAT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST FOR THE CITY, SINCE THE CITY IS ASKING US TO DO THIS FOR THEM.
THE CITY HAS INDICATED THAT THEY, THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS INDICATED THAT THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO DO THAT.
UM, AND, AND, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IS A REASONABLE REQUEST FROM THE CITY SINCE THEY ARE THE ONE ASKING US TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS TRANSACTION.
UM, ULTIMATELY, LEE, THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS THE DEFENSE IN THIS TRANSACTION.
UM, THAT WILL BE THE LARGEST COST ITEM, I BELIEVE.
UM, AND I BELIEVE THAT IF YOU WISH TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS TRANSACTION AND WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING A NON-BINDING AGREEMENT, AND WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE TO YOU IS THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH AN EXPRESS UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WILL HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD WITH A SATISFACTORY ANSWER TO THE INDEMNIFICATION QUESTIONS, AND WE WILL GO DO THE LEGAL RESEARCH TO GIVE YOU AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE LEGAL ISSUES, AND WE WOULD BRING THEM BACK TO THIS BOARD IN THE EVENT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZES THIS PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD.
THEN AT THAT POINT, YOU ARE NOT BOUND TO PARTICIPATE AT THAT POINT, AND YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON THAT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE WILLING TO BE BOUND TO DO THIS TRANSACTION.
SO, JIM, TO, UM, TO CLARIFY WHAT, AND I, I THINK PART OF THIS IS BECAUSE WE'RE USED TO A CADENCE WHEREBY, UM, A TERM SHEET COMES TO THE, UM, THE PFC BOARD, WE APPROVE OR DENY THE, THE TERM SHEET.
IF WE APPROVE IT, THE TERM SHEET THEN GOES TO CITY COUNCIL.
UM, IF CITY COUNCIL, OF COURSE, CAN GO THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN IF THEY GO, UH, IF THEY APPROVE IT, THEN THE NEXT TIME WE SEE THAT IS WHEN WE TYPICALLY, WE HAVEN'T HAD AN INSTANCE WHERE WE HAVEN'T APPROVED ONE, BUT WE HAVE ANOTHER APPROVAL OF THE FULL DEAL WITH THE, THE LEASE TERMS. UM, THE, THE CONTRACT AS IT WERE, UM, THAT IS AT THAT POINT BINDING.
[01:20:01]
SO WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS THAT WHERE THAT LAST STEP IS NORMALLY, UM, UH, KIND OF IT, IT'S NORMAL, A RUBBER STAMP BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN IT THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS.UM, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT'S A FINAL OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE AFTER IT'S BEEN, UM, RESEARCHED AND WE HAVE ANSWERS TO SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS, UM, THAT'S GONNA BE SOMETHING WE REALLY NEED TO DIG INTO VERSUS, UM, WHAT WE, TRADITIONAL OF WHAT WE HAVE, HAVE DONE IN THE PAST, WHICH IS, UM, JUST KIND OF KEEP IT, KEEP THE PIPELINE MOVING.
I THINK IT'S A VERY FIRST SUMMARY.
UM, AND BECAUSE OF THE CONTROVERSY ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT, UM, WE FELT LIKE WE NEEDED TO KNOW WHETHER THE BOARD SUPPORTED THE PROJECT AS A GENERAL CONCEPT BEFORE WE REALLY DUG IN.
AND, AND I PERSONALLY BELIEVE PUSHED BACK HARD ON THE CITY ATTORNEY, UH, TO PROVIDE US SOME OF THE ASSURANCES THAT I THINK QUITE FRANKLY ARE FAIR, UH, GIVEN THAT THEY ARE ASKING US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS STRUCTURE.
AND I WOULD JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, AS WE'RE, AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS AND LOOKING AT THIS AS A NON-BINDING TERM SHEET FOR THIS PROJECT, I THINK THERE'S A LOT, THERE'S A, THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES WITH, YOU KNOW, CITY COUNCIL PROVING AND, AND AUTHORIZING TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS.
BUT THEN THE CONVEYANCE STOCKS AND OUR ACTUAL LEASE ARRANGEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO HAVE ALL OF THE PROTECTIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE SPELLED OUT PROPERLY.
SO THAT AS JIM'S DOING HIS RESEARCH TO THE QUESTION OF THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT WE HAVE, THE APPROPRIATE PROTECTION, THE INDEMNITY THAT WE'RE PLACING INTO THOSE LEGAL AGREEMENTS, AS WELL AS THE CONVEYANCE STOCKS BETWEEN US AND THE CITY, BECAUSE WE'RE ENTERING INTO A TRANSACTION WITH THE CITY, MAKING SURE THAT ALL OF THAT STUFF IS IN LIGHT.
AND WE ALL HAVE APPROPRIATE TIME TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THAT, THAT THAT INFORMATION, UH, AT A LATER DATE.
WE DON'T KNOW IF, IF CITY COUNCILS EVEN GO INTO SUPPORT, RIGHT.
UH, ENTERING INTO THIS TRANSACTION, ALL WE'RE DOING IS CONSIDERING AS A, AS A CONCEPT, LIKE, LIKE JIM SAID, UH, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ENTERTAIN AND THEN AT A LATER DATE, MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ALL OF THE CORRECT LANGUAGE TO SATISFY OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY AS WELL AS THE DEVELOPER.
I THINK, AND KYLE, TO YOUR POINT, I THINK THAT, THAT, THAT IS AN IMPORTANT FACT THAT I WANT TO BRING OUT AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT I'M GET FACT CHECKED HERE.
SO THE, THE, WE RECEIVED SEVERAL PIECES OF MAIL FROM, UH, SUPPORTIVE CITIZENS THAT KEPT REFERENCING THE CITY COUNCIL 2021, UH, MEMO, UH, UH, RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.
I FORGET THE, THE TERMINOLOGY, BUT AS I RECALL, AS I RECALL, AND I THINK IT WAS BROUGHT OUT IN OTHER DISCUSSIONS, THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS WEREN'T DISCOVERED UNTIL AFTER THAT MEMO WAS APPROVED BY COUNSEL.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO IN A SENSE, THAT VOTE WAS TAKEN BY COUNSEL WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS EVEN EXISTING, CORRECT? YEAH.
BUT IT, WHEN WE, WHEN WE DO THE, THE WAY WE, WE REVIEW, AND THAT'S A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT BASED ON OUR HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM ANNUALLY.
WE, WE RECEIVE APPLICATIONS AT THE DEADLINE IN, IN DEC AT THE END OF DECEMBER OF THE YEAR.
WE RECEIVE THE APPLICATIONS AND THEN STAFF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION.
WE REVIEW EACH PROJECT TO MAKE SURE THAT ONE, THE PROJECT IS, IS COMPLETE AND THEN IT MEETS ALL OF OUR THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS AND ZONING.
AND, AND ANY SORT OF ZONING CHANGE ISN'T ACTUALLY PART OF THAT DISCUSSION.
UH, WE GET PLENTY OF PROJECTS THAT NEED TO GO THROUGH ZONING CHANGE, AND I WOULD CONSIDER THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS TO BE, IT WOULDN'T HAVE, IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A CONSIDERATION BASED ON OUR REVIEW AND WHAT QUALIFIES PER OUR COMPREHENSIVE POLICY POLICY FOR A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT.
SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT.
I, I, I, I, I, AND MAYBE THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GOING, MAYBE NOT, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE THE CITY IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE DEEDS RESTRICTIONS ARE IN INAPPLICABLE FOR THEM ANYWAY.
BUT WE STILL HAVE THAT QUESTION OF DO WE HAVE DERIVATIVE IMMUNITY AT THE PFC LEVEL? I I KNOW THE CITY CAN GO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, MAYBE THEY SHOULDN'T.
BUT DERIVATIVE IMMUNITY TO THE PFC, UH, IS GONNA REQUIRE SOME ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS AROUND WHETHER WE EXERCISE.
AND JIM, YOU CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, WHETHER WE EXERCISE DISCRETION, UH, OR, AND WHETHER IT WAS BASICALLY HANDED TO US BY THE CITY THAT YOU WILL DO THIS, AND I DON'T KNOW, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE GOT RIGHT IN FRONT OF US, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED, UH, BY JIM AND, UH, OTHER COUNCIL.
WELL, I CAME IN HERE TODAY WITH A NUMBER OF REASONS WHY I WAS GONNA ASK EACH OF YOU TO TABLE THIS ISSUE OR VOTE AGAINST IT, AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND PASS OUT THESE MAPS.
[01:25:01]
THAT I JUST HEARD, MR. PLUMER, UM, THAT THE COMMENTS I JUST HEARD MR. PLUMER PROVIDED US, SCARED ME TO DEATH.AND I WANNA STRONGLY ENCOURAGE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU TO SUPPORT TABLING THIS ENTIRE PROCESS, THIS ENTIRE PROJECT, UNTIL MR. PLUMER AND HIS STAFF HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE RESEARCH THAT HE SAYS NEEDS TO BE DONE TO D DETER TO DETERMINE THE ISSUE ABOUT SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.
HE HAS INDICATED IN NOT SO MANY WORDS THAT HE HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THE CITY STAFF HAS, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS TOLD HIM.
THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS TOLD US THAT THEY ARE NOT GONNA COMMENT ON IT.
I THINK THAT WE ARE, WE ARE ABOUT TO WALK INTO SOME DEEP WATERS IF WE DON'T FIRST UNDERSTAND ALL OF THESE FACTS BEFORE WE MAKE A DECISION TO DO ANYTHING WITH THIS PROJECT.
NOW, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MENTION TO YOU, I'VE NEVER SEEN THE CITY STAFF PUSH A PROJECT AS HARD AS THIS ONE IS BEING PUSHED, AND I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S BEING PUSHED.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, MAY I ASK THE APPLICANT A COUPLE QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIR, MR. VICE CHAIR, WHATEVER, WHATEVER YOU NEED.
AND THEN I HAVE MORE COMMENTS.
BEFORE WE GO TOO FAR, THE, THIS, THIS ORIGINAL CONVERSATION WAS AROUND, UM, UH, JIM PLUMBER AND THE, THE LEGAL QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE.
SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS WITH REGARD TO LEGAL ASPECTS, UM, THAT ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS TO JIM? I THINK MY QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT MIGHT LEAD DIRECTLY TO THAT.
UM, NO, THE, SO JIM IS OUR COUNSEL, SO IF YOU HAVE LEGAL QUESTIONS, WE'RE GONNA GO TO JIM.
OTHERWISE, WE'RE GONNA ENTERTAIN A MOTION AND THEN DEBATE THE MOTION.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS ENTIRE PROJECT UNTIL MR. PLUMER AND HIS LOCKER FIRM HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE APPROPRIATE RESEARCH TO ADVISE US ON SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION THAT'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM BEFORE? HAS THAT FIRST MOTION BEEN VOTED ON? NO, WE'VE NEVER HAD A, WE HAVEN'T HAD MOTION.
THERE, THERE'S ONE, ONE POINT.
WHY ARE WE GOING TO ASK A LAW FIRM TO SPEND MONEY RESEARCH AN ISSUE IF WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA RECOMMEND A PROJECT OR NOT? THAT DOESN'T, HOLD ON, LET ME FINISH.
I MEAN, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DEVELOPMENT, AND YOU DON'T SPEND MONEY UNTIL YOU KNOW YOU HAVE A DEAL.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS PROJECT MEETS THE PARAMETERS OF THE PFC.
AND IF IT DOES, THEN, OR WE DON'T RECOMMEND TO GO SPEND MONEY AND WE'RE GONNA BE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY IF YOU DON'T KNOW IF, IF, IF THIS IS A PROJECT THAT, THAT WE'RE ULTIMATELY, UH, GOING TO ENTERTAIN, UM, WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE PFC.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I TOWELS, THEN YOU WOULD BE SHORT.
I THINK IT WOULD BE REMISS OF US TO, UH, FOREGO THIS CHANCE THAT HAVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROJECT ITSELF BEFORE, UH, MOTIONING TO DISMISS UNTIL WE GET MORE LEGAL REVIEW.
I SAID, I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THIS TIME NOW TO DISCUSS IT FIRST, AND THEN WE CAN TAKE IS THERE? HE'S RIGHT.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW SINCE WE'RE DISCUSSING DIRECTOR BOSS, UM, WHAT I JUST HEARD, I WOULD AGREE WITH LET'S, LET'S TABLE THE MOTION TO THE MOTIONS ON THE TABLE.
SO WE, WE'VE GOT, SO YOU'RE SAYING TABLE YOUR MOTION TA YEAH.
TABLE THE MOTION TO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION TABLE? THE MOTION TO WITHDRAW THE ENTIRE PROJECT UNTIL WE HAD FIRST HAVE THE DISCUSSION TO FIND OUT WHAT PEOPLE THINK ABOUT THE PROJECT.
[01:30:01]
BECAUSE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MR. TALLIS, IF WE GO AHEAD AND MAKE A VOTE A FAVORING THE PROJECT, WE JUST WALKED INTO THE DEEPWATER SPIRIT OF THAT, BECAUSE IT'S NON, NOBODY'S DOING ANYTHING EXCEPT SAYING, HEY, SUBJECT TO LITANY OF ISSUES.WE LIKE THIS PROJECT AS BEING AN APPROPRIATE PROJECT WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE PFC.
BUT BEFORE WE APPROVE THIS PROJECT, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, IF WE GET SUED, WE'RE INDEMNIFIED, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
SO TO BE CLEAR ON, ON YOUR MOTION, SO WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR BRACEWELL TO DO THE RESEARCH AT OUR COST BEFORE WE CONSIDER THE MOTION TOGETHER.
IS THAT ACCURATE? IS THAT HOW WE WOULD HAVE TO WORK? WHAT I'D LIKE FOR US TO DO IS TO HAVE OUR DISCUSSION AROUND THE, THE HORSESHOE, ABOUT WHAT WE THINK ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND ASK THE APPLICANT QUESTIONS.
HE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW THIS GROUP IS LEANING AND THEN WE CAN DO, TAKE A VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT TABLE THE ENTIRE VOTE UNTIL MR. PLUMER COMPLETES HIS.
SO WOULD YOU LIKE, LIKE TO WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION? UM, PENDING DISCUSSION PENDING.
I'LL WITHDRAW PENDING DISCUSSION.
SO, UM, WHO ELSE HAS, UM, DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM BEFORE WE TAKE A MOTION? DIRECTOR? STINSON, I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF MR. PLUMER TO BE CLEAR WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WE HAVE NO, UH, MOTION ON TAPE ON THE, UH, BEFORE US, CORRECT.
AND WE'RE GOING INTO FULL DISCUSSION.
MR. RICK STINSON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR, UH, EXPERTISE AND YOUR INSIGHT.
HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE YOU TO, UH, RESEARCH, UH, THIS PARTICULAR QUESTION OF QUESTIONS SURROUNDING A PARTICULAR CHALLENGE HERE? FIRST OFF, I AM NOT A CONDEMNATION EXPERT.
I WILL DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT MY FIRM HAS A CONDEMNATION EXPERT.
IF WE DO NOT HAVE A CONDEMNATION EXPERT, THEN WE WOULD WANT TO JOIN A, IT IS A CONDEMNATION EXPERT, UH, INTO THIS RESEARCH.
UM, IT IS NOT EFFICIENT TO HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT EXPERTS DOING THIS RESEARCH.
I, I'D MUCH, MUCH RATHER HAVE YOU BE GETTING THE ABSOLUTE BEST ADVICE AT THE LOWEST COST.
SO I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT I MAY CHOOSE TO ASK ANOTHER FIRM TO ASSIST US IN THIS RESEARCH.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN GET IN A POSITION, UM, PROBABLY WITHIN A COUPLE OF WEEKS WHERE WE WILL HAVE THE RESEARCH DONE.
AND I ALSO BELIEVE, UM, THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE FURTHER NEGOTIATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, UM, WITHIN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
WOULD THAT ALSO ENTAIL, UM, BRINGING SOME CONTRACT BACK TO US? IF YOU HAD TO, UH, BRING IN ANOTHER PARTY, SAY A SUBCONTRACT, UH, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT ENTAIL? I CAN DO THAT, OR I CAN SIMPLY, UM, UH, SUBCONTRACT SOME OF THE WORK WITH YOUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL, UH, OF A FIRM WITH A, A, UM, ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR YOU.
AND THEN FINALLY, UH, MY LAST QUESTION OF YOU, AN M O U MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, DOES THAT CARRY, UH, THE LEGAL WEIGHT, UH, AS A CONTRACT LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE? NO, NO.
THIS, UM, IF, IF YOU WERE TO APPROVE US TO MOVE FORWARD, UM, WE, WE WOULD ONLY DO IT
[01:35:01]
WITH IT BEING VERY EXPRESSED THAT THIS MEMORANDUM IS NOT BINDING.UM, AND THAT YOU HAVE NO LIABILITY WHATSOEVER, UH, WITH REGARD TO, UM, THIS PROJECT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS YOU ENTER INTO DEFINITIVE DOCUMENTS.
I, I, JUST TO KIND OF FOLLOW UP ON SOME OF THE, THE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW LONG IT'LL TAKE TO, YOU KNOW, ENGAGE A POTENTIALLY IF WE, IF WE, IF WE WERE TO GO DOWN THAT, THAT ROUTE, WE'RE NOT TECHNICALLY SUPPOSED TO BE TALKING ABOUT ANY POTENTIAL CONTRACTS PER THIS ITEM THAT I WAS JUST TOLD BY THE, THE CITY ATTORNEYS.
BUT I WOULD SAY I WOULDN'T WANT TO EXPEND ANY, I I, I WOULD BE HESITANT TO EXPEND MONEY TO DO THIS UNTIL I KNOW THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS MADE SOME SORT OF AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OR ACTION THAT THEY'RE ALIGNING, DOING THE DEED FROM ENTERING INTO THIS TRANSACTION AND, AND ACQUIRING THE LAND BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITHOUT THAT.
SO EN ENGAGING, ENGAGING OUTSIDE FIRM TO DO THIS, UH, WITHOUT THEIR KIND OF, YOU KNOW, BLESSING OF THIS.
CUZ IT'S A, THIS IS A, A, A VERY CONTENTIOUS PROJECT, AS WE ALL KNOW.
AND, UH, ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO CITY COUNCIL ON WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS.
AND THEN IF THEY WERE TO ULTIMATELY SAY YES, THEN WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE OUR DOCS IN ORDER, KIND OF, LIKE I SAID, SAID BEFORE, WHERE WE WOULD COME BACK TO THE BOARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INDEMNITIES WE HAVE ARE, WILL PROVIDE US THE PROTECTIONS THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING, DISCUSSING TODAY.
THE, THERE'S, SO WHAT I AM CRYSTAL CLEAR ABOUT IS WE CAN DO THIS ONE OF TWO WAYS FOR THE, THE LEGAL RESEARCH.
AND WE TALK ABOUT A LOT ABOUT BEING PHYSICALLY, UM, RESPONSIBLE.
UM, BECAUSE THIS HAS, AND, UM, OUR PFC PROJECTS THUS FAR HAVE HAD TAX INCENTIVES OR TAX, UH, EXEMPTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE REVENUE THAT FAR EXCEEDS THAT IN MOST CASES, INCLUDING THIS ONE.
UM, BUT WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M HEARING IS IN THAT EFFORT TO BE PHYSICALLY RESPONSIBLE, IF WE MOVE FORWARD AFFIRMATIVELY, THEN THAT THOSE COSTS ARE GONNA BE SHARED WITH US.
IF WE TABLE IT AND HAVE BRACE WELL AND HIS COLLEAGUES, UM, WHETHER IT'S INSIDE THE FIRM OR OUTSIDE THE FIRM, DO THAT RESEARCH, THEN WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE COSTS.
AND I, I THINK THAT'S A, UM, I THINK WE, WE NEED TO BE WIDE, WIDE-EYED ABOUT THAT.
AND, UH, I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO SHARE THE COST BECAUSE THERE'S SOME CERTAINTY AT THAT POINT.
IF COUNCIL DECIDES THEY DON'T WANNA MOVE FORWARD, NOTHING'S GONNA HAPPEN.
THAT'S MY 2 CENTS ON THE, ON THIS PIECE.
I DON'T THINK WE AS A BOARD WANT SPEND MONEY ON GOOSE CHASE MM-HMM.
AND I THINK PERHAPS THE FIRST QUESTION BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER IS, HEY GUYS, ARE YOU GONNA, DO YOU HAVE OUR BACK? UH, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT NEEDS THE PARAMETERS SO THAT THE BFC, YOU MAY LIKE IT, YOU MAY NOT LIKE IT.
THERE'S A LOT OF HAIR ON THE PROJECT.
LET'S STEP UP AND YOU'RE GONNA HOLD OUR BACK, HAVE OUR BACK IF WE GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THAT.
NO, AND I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST STEP.
YOU HAVEN'T HEARD THAT? NO, WE HAVEN'T HEARD HER SAY THAT.
WELL, NO, WHAT WE HEARD IS THEY WON'T.
SO I THINK, I THINK WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE CITY'S ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND SAY, GUYS, IF YOU WANT US TO FULFILL OUR OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CHARTER OF THE PFC AND YOU WANT US TO DO THIS DEAL, OR YOU LIKE THIS DEAL, WHETHER WE APPROVE IT OR DON'T APPROVE IT, WE NEED TO FIRST KNOW THAT YOU HAVE OUR BACK.
YOU'RE GONNA, YOU'RE GONNA STEP UP WITH, WITH AN INDEMNIFICATION.
AND WHILE THE DEVELOPER IS GIVING US AN INDEMNIFICATION, WE ALL KNOW THAT INDEMNIFICATION IS ONLY AS GOOD AS THE DEPTH OF THE DEVELOPER'S POCKET.
SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST STEP.
HOWEVER, THAT WOULD BE PART OF, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO SAY, LET'S MOVE THIS, LET'S, LET'S MOVE THIS FORWARD SO THAT WE CAN START ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT DEFINITIVE DOCUMENTS AND HOW THIS TRANSACTION WORKS AND IS STRUCTURED WITH THE, WITH THE CITY.
BESIDES, YOU KNOW, THE, THE CITY UP TILL NOW HAS BASICALLY JUST SAID, WE ARE GOING TO CONVEY THIS PRO.
WE WANNA BUILD THIS, THIS HOUSING HERE.
WE WILL CONVEY THIS TO THE P C.
[01:40:01]
WE GET COUNCIL SUPPORT SAYING THAT YES, AS A POLICY DECISION CITY COUNCIL APPROVES ENTERING INTO THIS TRANSACTION, THEN WE CAN START WORKING THROUGH THE DIVI DEFINITIVE DOCUMENTS AND LANGUAGE THAT WILL BE SATISFACTORY TO PROVIDE THIS BOARD, UH, PROTECTION IN THIS TRANSACTION.UH, I AM READING HE LEAVES HERE, BUT AS WAY THIS PROJECT ARRIVED TO US AND WITH THE, THE, THE CONSTANT REMINDER THAT 2021 MEMO, I THINK WE KNOW WHERE COUNCIL MAY RESIDE ON THIS PROJECT.
SO IT IS, I I'M MERELY GUESSING THAT WE'LL BE SPENDING THE MONEY.
ONE QUESTION FOR YOU, UH, CHAIRMAN MONTGOMERY WAS WHEN YOU SAID SHARED, UH, IF WE GO FORWARD, WE'LL BE SHARING SOME OF THIS EXPENSE.
I WAS A LITTLE CLOUDY ON WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
DO YOU MIND CLARIFYING THAT FOR ME? WELL, FOR INSTANCE, ON A, A TYPICAL, UM, LEASE, THE, UM, DEVELOPER OWNER OPERATOR CARRIES THE COST OF OUR LEGAL ADVICE.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
SO DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD, LEMME ASK, SO DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD ALSO BE THE CASE IN THE SENSE WHERE, SAY THIS WORD TO PROGRESS TO COUNSEL, COUNSEL GOES, WELL, YES, WE WANT TO PROCEED WITH THIS PROJECT, THEN THE BALLS BACK IN OUR COURT, SO TO SPEAK, TO ENGAGE PLUMBER OR WHOEVER THE IDENTIFIED EXPERT IS.
ARE YOU SAYING AT THAT POINT THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE SHARING THOSE LEGAL COSTS OF OUR COUNCIL? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S PROBABLY PRUDENT.
IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR AN INDEPENDENT OPINION, I STILL PAY FOR IT.
SO AN OPINION, THEY PAY FOR IT, WHICH IS WHAT WE DO.
EVERY DEAL WE'VE DONE SO FAR, THE LEGAL ADVICE HAS BEEN PAID, UM, BY THE DEPART.
BEFORE WE GO TO SECOND ROUNDS, ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY.
I WANTED TO ASK THE APPLICANT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UH, ZACHARY SMORE STRATEGIES AND, UH, PHIL KINGSTON'S HERE AT ANY LEGAL KIND OF QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE OF US.
UM, I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO EDEL, UH, HOW YOU ENDED UP COMING TO THE PFC WITH YOUR APPLICATION IN THE FIRST PLACE.
UM, WELL, AFTER WE MADE A FEW ATTEMPTS TO NEGOTIATE WITH MR. ROTH AND MR. WEISS BROAD, UM, TO GET THROUGH THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, YOU KNOW, AND SECOND ARRANGEMENT TO ALLOW THEM TO RELEASE US TO DO THE PROJECT, UM, THEY DECLINED TO DO SO.
SO, UM, WE HAD THE ADVICE OF COUNSEL THAT A WAY TO GET AROUND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAS TO PARTNER WITH A PUBLIC ENTITY.
SO CAME FROM, IT CAME FROM CO YOUR COUNSEL? CORRECT.
SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS, DO YOU CURRENTLY HAVE AN ACTIVE, OPEN, ENFORCEABLE CONTRACT TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY WITH THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? UH, WE ALLOW THEM TO MARKET IT.
RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT WE DO NOT.
BUT AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION OF THE PFC WE DID, AND WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT TO PUT IT BACK INTO REINSTATED IT IF THE PFC WERE TO PASSIVE.
AND SO THE, THE SELLER OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE IN AGREEMENT WITH GIVING UP THE DEED, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS? ABSOLUTELY, YES.
DIDN'T, DIDN'T THE STATE OF TEXAS PASS, UH, SOME LEGISLATION BACK AROUND 2018, UH, THAT SAYS WHEN DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE IN ENFORCE, UM, A VOTE OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS IS REQUIRED AND AT LEAST TWO THIRDS OF THOSE MUST APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS? UM, I DON'T, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS CORRECT IN ALL CASES.
UM, IT IS CORRECT IN SOME CASES, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT STATUTE WOULD ACTUALLY APPLY BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A VOTE TO REMOVE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS BECOME UNENFORCEABLE AS A MATTER OF LAW BECAUSE THE CITY'S, UM, HAS THE POWER TO DO THAT.
AND SO IT, IT WOULD NOT BE A REMOVAL.
UM, IT IS SIMPLY THE, THE CITY'S SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY, UM, THAT KEEPS THE DEED RESTRICTIONS FROM BEING ENFORCEABLE.
IN ALL OF YOUR WORK WITH THE STATE LEGISLATURE, UM, RELATED TO IMPLEMENTING THE PFCS, WERE DEED RESTRICTIONS EVER CONSIDERED? NO, MA'AM.
[01:45:01]
NO, MA'AM.THEY WERE NEVER, NOT AS FAR AS I KNOW, THEY'VE NEVER EVEN BEEN DISCUSSED.
SO THIS MIGHT, THIS MIGHT BE A TOUGH CASE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT PFCS ACTUALLY HAVE THIS TYPE OF POWER.
UH, IT, IT'S NOT A POWER OF THE PFC, IT'S A POWER OF THE CITY.
UM, BUT, BUT THE, THE ABILITY OF THE P S C TO BE SHIELDED BY THE CITY'S SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY MAY BE A TEST CASE.
OKAY, THANK YOU MS. CROTCH TANGLE, WHILE WE HAVE YOU HERE, ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? UM, THIS IS A REALLY UNIQUE PROJECT AND A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA.
UM, YOU'VE HEARD A LOT OF OPPOSITION.
UM, THERE'S JUST NOT A SINGLE STATISTICAL REASON OR, OR FACTUAL REASON OR DEMOGRAPHIC REASON TO NOT PUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE.
UM, THE, THE REASONS FOR OPPOSITION ARE JUST UNFORTUNATELY BASED MORE ON EMOTION THAN THE FACTS OF DEMOGRAPHICS.
THE FACTS OF STATISTICS, THE FACTS OF HOW THESE PROJECTS HAVE TO BE EVALUATED AND THEY HAVE TO BE EVALUATED USING THOSE KIND OF EMPIRICAL THINGS.
THAT'S THE WAY THE STATE EVALUATES THESE PROJECTS.
THAT'S THE WAY THE CITY EVALUATES THESE PROJECTS.
THAT'S THE WAY THE COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING POLICY WORKS.
AND THIS IS A LOW POVERTY RATE CENSUS TRACT.
THIS IS A CENSUS TRACT THAT WOULD BE THE SECOND, OR WOULD BE THE ACTUAL LOWEST MINORITY CONCENTRATION CENSUS TRACT TO HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR FAMILIES PLACED IN IT IN DALLAS SINCE AT LEAST 2017.
THERE JUST ARE NOT HOUSING PROJECTS BROUGHT TO NORTH DALLAS ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND THERE'S NOT LAND AVAILABLE TO DO THAT ON A REGULAR BASIS.
SO I, I UNDERSTAND THE OPPOSITION.
UM, BUT FROM A PURELY FAIR HOUSING POLICY, COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING POLICY, STATE POLICY, AND EVERY STATISTIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC PIECE OF EVIDENCE, THIS IS A SITE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THAT, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, AS MUCH AS I CAN SAY ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
DIRECTOR TELLS, LET ME ASK A QUESTION, NOT YOU.
I, I LIVE LESS THAN A MILE AWAY FROM THE SITE AND I HAPPEN TO LIKE THE PROJECT, BUT THAT'S NEITHER HERE, THERE, I DON'T LIKE, I DON'T LIKE PUTTING THE PFC IN A POSITION WHERE WE NEED TO SPEND MONEY AND WE DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY WAS GONNA BACK US UP.
SO IS IT APPROPRIATE, I'M ASKING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DO DEFER THIS, BUT WE DEFER THIS TO ALLOW THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OR WHOMEVER THE CITY MAKES THESE DECISIONS TO SAY, WE GOT YOUR BACK, OR WE DON'T HAVE YOUR BACK.
UM, I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT SPENDING MONEY OF A NONPROFIT THAT'S OWNED BY THE CITY.
UH, AND GETTING OURSELVES INTO LITIGATION WHERE WE POTENTIALLY COULD LOSE THE BENEFITS OF WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
I, I THINK WHAT WE COULD, I, I, AND KYLE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG HERE, BUT I THINK WHAT WE COULD DO IS MAKE THAT PART OF THE RESOLUTION THAT GOES IN FRONT OF COUNCIL SO THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAKING THAT DECISION.
AND JUST PROCEDURALLY HOW, LIKE THE WAY WE GET THE CITY'S, I GUESS, CITY ATTORNEYS AND CITY COUNCILS BACK, OR HAVE THEM GIVE, GIVE US THEIR LIKE BACK US UP ON THIS, IS TO SEND US TO COUNCIL AND SAY LIKE, UN UN BASE VALUE THE MERITS OF THIS DEAL.
WE, WE SUPPORT THIS, HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SUBJECT TO, THIS IS NON-BINDING SUBJECT TO ONE THEIR SUPPORT.
AND THEN ULTIMATELY US COMING INTO AGREEMENT, THE CITY ATTORNEYS.
SO WE'RE ALL WORKING TOGETHER AND WE'RE ALL MAKING SURE THAT OUR GOALS ARE ALIGN.
SO PROCEDURALLY THIS WOULD HAVE TO GO TO, TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THEM TO OPINE AND SAY, YES, WE WANNA WORK ON THIS.
CUZ THE CITY ATTORNEYS AREN'T GONNA START DRAFTING DOCUMENTS AND WORKING THROUGH ALL THE LEGAL AND INDEMNITY ISSUES UNTIL THEY HAVE DEFINITIVE SUPPORT FROM CITY COUNCIL.
SO THAT'LL BE, THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP TO GET DIRECTOR TALLIS THE, THE CONFIRMATION THAT YES, THEY WILL HAVE OUR BACK AND WE WON'T BE WASTING DOLLARS RESEARCHING SOMETHING THAT ULTIMATELY MAYBE THIS CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T EVEN WANT TO DO.
THEY COULD, THEY COULD VOTE NO ON THIS AND SAY THIS IS TOO MUCH OR WE DON'T WANT TO OPINE ON PRIVATE DRES RESTRICTIONS AND, AND SURE.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF PROCEDURALLY HOW WE WOULD GO FORWARD.
JUST, UH, TAKE ADVANTAGE HERE.
UH, JUST ASKING A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, WE HEARD A NUMBER OF, UH, COMMENTS.
[01:50:01]
WERE IN OPPOSITION, UH, MADE A NUMBER OF, UH, CHARGES AGAINST THIS TYPE OF PROJECT, UH, PAIRED.ONE, ONE OR TWO PEOPLE SAY SOMETHING ABOUT, UH, NO SIDEWALKS, UH, WILL THERE BE SIDEWALKS, UH, AROUND THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT HAS TO BE CITY CODE ON ONE SIDE OF THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT, UH, WHICH WOULD BE THE SOUTH SIDE, WHICH FACES THE, UM, THE LAW OFFICE BUILDING, UM, THAT HAS A LOT OF CONCRETE, BUT WOULD THAT ALSO HAVE, UH, THAT SOUTH SIDE HAVE SIDEWALKS? IN OTHER WORDS, THE WHOLE PERIMETER NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST.
I BELIEVE WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE A SIDEWALK THERE FOR OPERATIONAL REASONS.
UM, THERE, THERE'D BE A FENCE THOUGH ALSO.
WELL, I WAS GETTING IT IN
SO, SO ACTUALLY ON THAT SOUTH SIDE, THERE WOULD NOT BE A SIDEWALK BECAUSE THERE'S JUST NO ACCESS THERE RIGHT NOW.
UM, THE, THE BEST SIDEWALK IS ON THE, UH, EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH CONNECTS TO THAT BONNER DRIVE AND ALLOWS YOU TO WALK ALL THE WAY UP TO FOREST.
WHAT'S THE NORTH SIDE? BONNER IS THE NORTH SIDE, UH, THE INTERIOR.
THE, THE NORTH SIDE AND THEN IT CONNECTS TO THE, UM, EAST SIDE.
SO THERE'S A WAY TO WALK ALL THE WAY OFF THAT AREA.
BUT, UM, IN TERMS OF ON THE FRONTAGE, THERE IS NO CONNECTING SIDEWALK.
WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY BUILD OUR PORTION OF SIDEWALK.
UM, BUT THE WALKABILITY AND THE MAIN ENTRANCE IN AND OUT OF THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE ON THE EAST SIDE.
ON THAT INTERIOR, UH, STREET, THEY WOULD ALLOW FOR THE CAR ENTRANCE AND EXIT.
THE AMENITIES WOULD BE ON THAT SIDE CIRCLE AND THE WALKABILITY WOULD BE ON THIS SIDE.
SO THE, UH, INGRESS EGRESS IS GOING TO BE FROM FOREST CENTRAL? YES.
SO THERE WON'T BE ANY, UM, ANY ON THE, UH, THE SERVICE ROAD WEST SIDE? YEAH.
CAUSE THERE WAS A PARTICULAR CHARGE THERE.
UH, SO WE ARE LOOKING AT AT LEAST THREE SIDES.
ALL THE SIDEWALKS ARE SIX FEET.
WE'RE, WE'RE PARTICIPATING IN THE, UM, MCH D V AS WELL.
SO THAT ACTUALLY REQUIRES THAT AS WELL.
WHAT ABOUT YOUR LIGHTING? WILL IT BE ORIENTED, UH, DOWN TOWARD THE PROPERTY AND AWAY FROM OTHER PROPERTIES? YES.
UH, YOUR PARKING, HOW MANY SPACES DO YOU HAVE FOR A HUNDRED NINETY, EIGHTY NINE UNITS? I BELIEVE WE'RE AT, UH, 1.4 PER UNIT.
AND THEN EVERYTHING IS WRAPPED, WHICH IS, THERE WILL BE NO STREET PARKING PER SE? THAT IS CORRECT, YES.
ALL SPACES ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE BUILDING.
MR. CHAIR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'D JUST LIKE TO PASS THAT OUT FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NOT SEEN THE PARTICULAR SITE.
UH, AS I STATED LAST MEETING, UH, I PERSONALLY VISITED THE SITE AND I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH THINK IT'S ABOUT EIGHT, EIGHT, UH, 10 SHEETS HERE.
UH, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FIRST IS TO THE, UH, TO THE SOUTH.
AND THAT'S CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, UH, BRIDGE GOING OVER, UH, AQUEDUCT, A LITTLE DRAINAGE CREEK THERE.
SO WE'RE LOOKING SOUTH AND, UH, SORT OF TO THE WEST THERE TO RIGHT, WHICH IS CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
SECOND SHEET IS LOOKING SOUTH AND EAST, WHICH IS STILL CONNECTED TO THE FIRST SHEET.
SO JUST WALKING AROUND LOOKING AT THIRD SHEET IS, IS STILL PART OF THAT.
BUT IT ALSO SHOWS TO THE, UH, EAST SOME OF THE, UH, PORTION OF THE BUILDING.
THE LAW IS FILLED, THE PULL SHEET DOWN OVER ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AT BONNER, LOOKING SOUTH THERE YOU SEE THE LAW OFFICE BUILDING ACROSS THE SIDE.
CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY IS TO YOUR RIGHT BAR CENTRAL IS TO YOUR LEFT.
AND I'M STANDING ON BONNER LOOKING SOUTH.
SIX PAGES IS THE SAME SEVEN PAGE.
I'M ON THE NORTH SIDE STANDING AT BONNER, LOOKING NORTH AND EAST.
SO WE HAVE SOME TYPE OF, UH, UH, COMMERCIAL BUILDING THERE ACROSS THE STREET.
NEXT PAGE SHOWS OF ME LOOKING TOWARD FAR CENTRAL TOWARD THE EAST, LOOKING AT A HOME DEPOT, UH, ACROSS THE STREET.
THE NEXT SHEET, I'M BACK ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LOOKING NORTH AND WEST IS TO MY RIGHT TO MY LEFT.
AND, UH, FOREST LANE IS ABOUT, UH, TWO TO THREE BLOCKS AHEAD OF ME NORTH.
[01:55:01]
THE NEXT SHEET, I'M ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LOOKING NORTH ACROSS THE PROPERTY.AND, UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, LOOKING AT THE WHAT SURROUNDS IT, A LOT OF, UH, PEOPLE CLAIM THAT THERE WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I WAS PRETTY WELL IMPRESSED BUT SHOCKED THAT I DON'T SEE A NEIGHBORHOOD OF RESIDENCE OF HOMES.
AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE FOREST LANE.
THERE WERE A COUPLE OF, UH, PEOPLE WHO SPOKE SUPPOSEDLY FROM HAMILTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I'VE GOT TO WALK ACROSS THIS PROPERTY DOWN FOREST CENTRAL, TWO FOREST LANE, AND I CAN NOW SEE A DART TRAIN STATION.
I, I'D SAY THIS WHOLE THING PROBABLY WAS ABOUT A QUARTER OF A MILE, BUT IT'S WALKING BUSINESS, UH, AT SCHROEDER, WHICH IS THE LIFE RIGHT THERE AT DETROIT TRAIN STATION.
I COULD SEE THE BACK OF A, OF A, UH, LARGE CHURCH.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S HAMILTON PARK BAPTIST CHURCH OR HAMILTON PARK, UNITED METHODIST, BUT NO NEIGHBORHOOD ONCE AGAIN.
UM, THE NEXT PAGE IS, I'M LOOKING SOUTHWEST SIDE OF PROPERTY, LOOKING EAST.
THEN ON BACK OVER AT THE, AT THE LAW OFFICE BUILDING, AND THIS IS WHERE I CAME UP WITH THE, UH, YOU SEE A CAR, WHICH IS MY CAR SITTING THERE IN A LARGE TREE AND I'M LOOKING AT THE PARKING LOT.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF CONCRETE THERE.
AND I DIDN'T SEE HOW A, UH, ALREADY THE NEED FOR A SIDEWALK THERE, BUT IF IT'D BE COULD, I'D SAY, HEY, THAT'D BE GREAT.
BUT I WOULDN'T WANT THE TREE TAKEN OUT SOUTHWEST LOOKING EAST AT THAT PARTICULAR POINT.
BUT I'M LOOKING AT THE OFFICE BUILDING AND OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE BACKGROUND.
AT THE END OF NORTH, AT THE END OF, UH, FOREST CENTRAL IS A CUL-DE-SAC, SO IT'S A DEAD END, BUT YOU HAVE A, A STORAGE OPERATION THERE.
AND THEN MY LAST SHEET SHOWS LOOKING NORTH, ALL OF THE OTHER BUSINESSES, SOME TYPE OF CAR SALES.
UH, I'M LIKE, WHERE IS THE IMPACT? WHAT IS IT ADJACENT TO OTHER THAN PROPERTY THAT MAY AFFECT IT, IF ANYTHING? BUT, UH, I DID NOT SEE, UH, THAT PARTICULAR PROBLEMS WITH THIS PARTICULAR, UH, DEVELOPMENT ON A NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALSO, IT'S ONLY SPEAKING TO 189 UNITS IN OUR AREA OF TOWN.
MY AREA OF TOWN OLD, CLEAR, UH, I HAVE NOT, I DON'T THINK I'VE HEARD OF 189 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX BEING BUILT.
SO ALL MY LIFE I'VE GROWN UP WITH ALL OF THIS BEING THROWN INTO MY NEIGHBORHOODS NOW.
NOT COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS, BUT MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO ONCE AGAIN, HERE IS A GRAPH THAT I'LL PRESENT TO YOU.
LOOK AT THE SECOND, THE SECOND, UH, RED TAB, AND IT WILL SHOW YOU HOW LIX.
AND THIS IS PULLED FROM A PRESENTATION BY A CITY STAFF ON COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING.
BUT THAT SECOND TAB, PAGE 27, WILL SHOW YOU THE DIFFERENCES SINCE 1990 OF HOW LIX HAVE BEEN PRESENTED, NORTH VERSUS SOUTH, THE GREATER ADVANTAGE HAS ALWAYS BEEN WITH THE NORTH.
UH, GREATER DISADVANTAGE IS WHAT I HAVE GROWN UP WITH.
IT'S JUST BEEN A FACT OF LIFE THAT IT'S ALWAYS BEEN PUSHED BACK.
IF THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE DECIDES ON THIS, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS CONUNDRUM THAT WE HAVE HERE.
UH, I'M MORE THAN WILLING TO LISTEN TO FEEDBACK FROM ANY LEGAL SOURCES.
BUT, UH, MR. UH, WHAT I GOT FROM WHAT MR. PLUMER HAS SAID IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE STILL PROCEED AND THEY'LL HAVE AN ANSWER.
THE CITY, UH, STILL DOES NOT HAVE TO, UH, EITHER RATIFY THIS DEAL OR IT'LL COME BACK TO US ANYWAY FOR RATIFICATION.
BY THAT TIME, I BELIEVE WE'LL HAVE MUCH MORE.
AND THEN FINALLY, I'LL JUST SAY, UH, AND THIS IS JUST IN DEFENSE OF US.
UH, I'VE SERVED ON MANY, UH, COMMITTEES,
[02:00:01]
COMMISSIONS, AND UH, UNFORTUNATELY NOBODY'S EVER PAID ME A THOUGHT.OH, I MEAN, IT, IT'S A LOT OF WORK.
BUT, UM, SOME OF THE, UM, COMMENTS HAVE BEEN CHANGEDD WITH, UH, CERTAIN FEELINGS AND FEARS WHICH HAVE BEEN MENTIONED.
I WON'T GET INTO ALL OF THAT CAUSE YOU, YOU ALL KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, HOMELESSNESS AND WHICH IS THERE WALKING UP AND DOWN FOREST LANE, WHICH IS UNDER THE BRIDGE AND FAR, UH, AT CENTRAL, WE HAVE IT IN SOUTHERN AREAS OF DALLAS.
THERE ARE PEOPLE I DON'T WANT TO, UH, HANGING OUT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THERE WAS NO NEIGHBORHOOD THEY'RE HANGING OUT IN, THEY'RE WALKING BACK AND FORTH.
IT'S UP TO THE CITY TO COME UP WITH THIS PARTICULAR POLICY.
BUT IN DEFENSE OF US, UH, THERE HAVE BEEN CHARGES AND IMPLIED, I JUST SAY THREATS CAUSE I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER WORD FOR IT.
BUT, UM, I TAKE IT THAT EACH ONE OF US DECIDED TO ACCEPT, UH, AN APPOINTMENT TO THIS BOARD.
AND I COULDN'T SAY IT, NO, COULDN'T SAID IT, NO.
CAUSE I CAME OFF THE PLAN COMMISSION AND I WAS ASKED, HEY, WOULD YOU CARE TO GET ON THIS BRAND NEW BOARD THAT WE CONSTRUCTED? NONE OF US KNEW WHAT WAS HAPPENING WHEN WE FIRST STARTED.
AND I THINK WE'VE GOTTEN MUCH, MUCH BETTER IN THIS YEAR.
BUT I WILL STAND UP AND JUST SAY, HEY, EVERYBODY I KNOW HERE HAS BEEN UPSTANDING WITH ME, WILL I AGREE WITH YOU OR NOT ON YOUR PARTICULAR ISSUES? AND EMOTIONS ALWAYS GET THERE, BUT THIS IS MAINLY FOR THE PUBLIC'S SAKE.
BUT THOSE WHO, THOSE WHO HAVE CHARGED US WITH CERTAIN THINGS AND SAID CERTAIN THINGS, UH, WHY DON'T YOU JUST GET UP OFF YOUR BIG RUMP AND COME ON AND SERVE ON THE BOARD.
I'VE, I'VE DONE IT SINCE 19 85, 86 BEING DIRECTOR, UH, TOLEDO STARTED OUT ON THE FIRST DALLAS POLICE REVIEW BOARD, NOT THE CURRENT ISSUE THAT THEY HAVE NOW, BUT THE VERY FIRST ONE BACK IN THE LATE EIGHTIES, WE STARTED OUT AND SET THAT PROCESS IN PLACE.
SO I KNOW HE TOO HAS ALWAYS LENT HIS EXPERTISE AND HIS TIME TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
AND I DON'T QUESTION HIS MOTIVES.
I DON'T QUESTION ANYBODY'S MOTIVE, THAT'S YOUR OWN DEAL.
BUT FOR MY PARTICULAR MOTIVES, I'M HERE AS A SERVICE, BUT I DEFEND MY PARTICULAR AREA OF TOWN.
AND IN MY AREA OF TOWN, I'M SURE MR. HINES AND MR. QUINTO WILL TELL YOU FROM EVEN WHEN I WASN'T ON A BOARD, THAT I APPEARED AT MEETINGS AND I VEHEMENTLY PROTESTED MULTIFAMILIES COMING IN UP TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS IMPACTS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ON HOMES BECAUSE THEY'RE SITTING DOWN THE STREET AND NEXT DOOR.
BUT HERE THEY'RE DOWN THE STREET AND THEY'RE NOT NEXT DOOR TO ANY HOMES.
THEY'RE DOWN THE STREET AND YOU CAN'T SEE 'EM.
AS ONE GUY POINTED OUT, I WENT AROUND TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT BLOCKS.
I COULDN'T SEE THE SITE SAID, WHERE IS THE IMPACT? AND SOMEONE MENTIONED ABOUT THE THOUSANDS OF CARS ON CENTRAL.
HOW IS THAT GOING TO CHANGE? HOW IS THAT GOING TO CHANGE? YOU GOT A DOOR STATION, SO LIKE PEOPLE WON'T BE USING THE CARS.
SO I'M JUST SAYING, AND I'LL CONCLUDE THIS, UH, THAT, UH, THIS IS WHERE I WAS IN DEF.
I WAS IN DEFENSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD LAST MONTH, BUT ONCE I WENT OUT AND SAW THE SITE, THERE WAS NO ONE TO TALK TO.
I DIDN'T NEED ANYONE TO TALK TO AT THAT POINT.
BUT THE FACTS ARE THAT, UH, NORTHERN DALLAS IS GOING TO HAVE TO SHARE SOME OF THE PAIN THAT THE RISK OF DALLAS HAS ALWAYS CARRIED.
THE LARGEST PART OF DALLAS WITH THE MOST PEOPLE HAS ALWAYS BEEN BURDENED, WHETHER THEY WERE GOOD CONCEPTS OR NOT, AND WE PUT UP WITH 'EM.
BUT ALL THIS STUFF ABOUT THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE CRIMINALS AND BRINGING CRIME AND THEY'RE HOMELESS, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
THEY'RE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO LIVE WHO WILL HAVE JOBS.
AND THIS IS AN INCENTIVE HOPEFULLY TO HELP THEM OUT.
ONE OF MY PROPOSALS TO THE CITY AND THE CITY STAFF HAS ALWAYS BEEN COME UP WITH SOME TYPE OF INCENTIVES AND BUILD SOME HOMES IN MY AREA SO PEOPLE CAN OWN SOME HOMES, HELP 'EM OUT TO
[02:05:01]
OWN HOMES, BUILD SOME WEALTH.BUT RIGHT NOW, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S LOOKING AT US, REST OF THE CITY IS LOOKING AT US AND OTHER SURROUNDING CITIES.
SO I DON'T MEAN TO PREACH TO ANYBODY AND I WILL NOT PREACH TO ANYBODY.
THIS IS JUST THE FACTS OF THE MATTER OF THE WAY I FEEL.
UH, WE'RE NOT THE GREATEST, BUT WE ARE THE BEST AT WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.
ANYBODY WANTS TO REPLACE US? PLEASE GIMME A CALL.
IF ANYBODY WANTS TO JOIN ANOTHER BOARD, THERE ARE PLENTY OF VAES UNDER EACH AND EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER DALLAS NEEDS YOUR HELP, BUT THROWING ROCKS AT US AS IF WE ARE IN COLLUSION WITH SOME GRAND SCHEME.
AND THERE'S A LOT OF SCHEMES OUT THERE.
SORRY, MR. CHAIR, MR. BOARD DIRECTORS, UH, THAT'S MR. UH, COMING OFF THE TOP, YOUR HONOR.
LEFT MY NOTES AND, UH, I APOLOGIZE.
I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ARE APPROVE THE NON-BID M O U, BUT WE DO SO SUBJECT TO, UH, A REVIEW, UH, BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND A COMMITMENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT IF THERE IS IN FACT LITIGATION, THE CITY WILL STAND BEHIND INDEMNIFICATION OF THE DEVELOPER.
UH, AND AFTER WE GET THAT APPROVAL FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, WE GO FORWARD AND HAVE MR. PALMER'S FIRM DO THE RESEARCH THAT'S NECESSARY TO DETERMINE WHAT OUR RISK IS AND THEN WE, WE CAN MAKE A DECISION FROM THERE.
CAN WE GET THAT MOTION HERE RECORDED? WE'LL GO BACK.
IS THERE A SECOND? DIRECTOR? RUSSELL SECONDS.
IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? DIRECTOR, BOSS.
WELL, UM, I WAS IN SUPPORT OF DIRECTOR TA'S FIRST MOTION, WHICH IS NOT ON THE TABLE, WHICH IS THAT WE DEFER THIS UNTIL ALL OF THE APPROPRIATE RESEARCH CAN BE DONE.
I SPEAK STRONGLY AGAINST THE CURRENT MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT REASONS.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, THE CITY COUNCIL DIDN'T PUT US HERE, UH, TO PASS TO THEM A LOT OF LOOSE ENDS DUE DILIGENCE THAT HAD NOT BEEN DONE.
THEY'RE EXPECTING US TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BASED UPON SOUND REASONING AND FACTS.
WE'VE ALREADY ADMITTED TO OURSELVES IN A LOT OF THIS DISCUSSION THAT WE DON'T HAVE NEARLY THE FACTS THAT WE NEED.
WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.
OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE TOLD US THAT OUR CITY ATTORNEY REFUSES TO OPINE ON THE ISSUE AT LEAST DIRECTLY TO US.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS TOLD US HE DOES NOT HAVE A CURRENT CONTRACT FOR THIS PROPERTY ANYWAY.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SELLER OF THE PROPERTY ACTUALLY THINKS ABOUT SELLING THE PROPERTY AND REMOVING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
WE HAVE NOT HEARD ANY OF THAT INFORMATION.
UM, JIM PLUMBER, UH, HAS TOLD US THAT WHEN THE PFC WAS ESTABLISHED, IT DID NOT CONSIDER DEED RESTRICTIONS IN PART OF THE LEGISLATION.
WE DON'T EVEN KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT PURVIEW CURRENTLY IS.
WE KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT SAYS THAT HE WAS ADVISED BY HIS COUNSEL TO COME TO THE PFC, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE PFC HAS GOT THAT LEGAL AUTHORITY.
AND I WOULD ASK YOU TO ALL THINK BACK TO YOUR CIVICS CLASSES IN HIGH SCHOOL AND WHERE PROTECTION OF PROPERTY IS NUMBER ONE IN THE FIFTH AMENDMENT.
AND I WOULD ASK YOU TO ALL THINK BACK ON WHAT IT'S LIKE.
UM, IF THAT 2018 RULING THAT I DISCUSSED IS IN EFFECT, UH, FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE, AND I CAN'T TELL I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT THE RULING DOES SAY THAT IT TAKES A TWO-THIRDS VOTE TO MODIFY CHANGE OR REMOVE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND FROM LISTENING TO ALL OF THE, UH, PEOPLE WHO OWN PROPERTY AROUND THIS LOCATION, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET IT TWO-THIRDS VOTES.
I KNOW WE WERE BOMBARDED WITH LETTERS, UH, IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT.
[02:10:01]
TO ALL COME FROM ONE, UH, ORGANIZATION.UM, I WAS AWARE THAT THERE WERE OTHER LETTERS THAT WERE SENT TO THE CITY STAFF OPPOSING THE PROJECT.
I DIDN'T SEE THOSE GET CIRCULATED.
UM, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY WHERE ALL INFORMATION IS REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED TO THE BODY MAKING THE DECISION.
I DON'T FEEL LIKE THAT HAS BEEN THE CASE.
YOU ALL READ THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE CITY STAFF WHERE THEY SAID THAT THIS IS ATTRACTIVE.
IT IS CLOSE TO THE MALLS, IT IS CLOSE TO THE GROCERY STORES.
I PASSED THIS LOCATION ON A REGULAR BASIS, BUT I WENT BACK BY THERE LAST NIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RAINSTORM AND TOOK THE PICTURE THAT YOU SEE ON THIS LITTLE MAP THAT I HANDMADE AND PASSED OUT TO YOU.
BUT IT SHOWS YOU THE GROCERY STORE.
THAT IS THE GROCERY STORE THAT IS HALF OF A MILE AWAY FROM THIS LOCATION.
THE OTHER LOCATIONS FOR GROCERY STORES, KROGER.
WELL, UM, I'VE GOT THE INFORMATION ON THE KROGER.
IT'S ONE AND A HALF MILES AWAY.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO WALK ALL THE WAY DOWN FOREST TO ABRAMS ROAD TO THE EAST.
THE TOM THUMB IS 2.2 MILES AWAY.
UM, AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO CROSS CENTRAL AND GO ALL THE WAY TO THE WEST.
AND THE SAME FOR THE CENTRAL MARKET, WHICH IS 3.4 MILES.
I CLOCKED THESE MYSELF LAST NIGHT AND I ENCOURAGE ALL OF YOU TO DO IT.
AND DIRECTOR STINSON MADE SOME VERY GOOD POINTS ABOUT HOW THERE ARE NO NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND HERE.
THERE IS NOTHING AROUND THERE OTHER THAN MAYBE THIS GROCERY AND CHECK CASHING STATION, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IT'S ONLY GONNA HOLD ABOUT 20 OF US AT ONCE.
IT'S NOT GONNA HOLD ALL THE RESIDENTS AND THE 7-ELEVEN, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO THE DART STATION AND THEN THE DART STATION.
BUT YOU CANNOT WALK TO ANY AMENITIES OTHER THAN THESE, YOU CANNOT WALK TO ANY AMENITIES OTHER THAN THESE.
THIS IS NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD, THIS IS NOT PAST THE, BUT FOUR, THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER DEVELOPERS WHO CAN BUILD IN THIS PROPERTY WITHOUT TAKING THE, THE 75 YEAR TAX ABATEMENT, UH, WITHOUT PUTTING US IN JEOPARDY OF LEGAL, UH, ISSUES.
I DON'T HAVE TIME FOR DEPOSITIONS FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS, AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF YOU DO EITHER.
I HOPE YOU WILL ALL OPPOSE THIS MOTION THAT DIRECTOR TAAS HAS MADE.
AND THEN LET'S GO BACK AND RECONSIDER DIRECTOR TA'S FIRST MOTION, WHICH IS JUST TO DEFER THIS UNTIL WE GET A FULL LEGAL OPINION AND WE DO OUR OWN HOMEWORK AND WE UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL IS NOT GOING TO APPRECIATE US JUST SENDING IT ON TO THEM AND LETTING THEM TRY TO FIGURE IT OUT.
THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THIS COMMITTEE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? DIRECTOR HOLMES.
UH, I ECHO A LOT OF WHAT, UH, DIRECTOR PAUL IS SAYING.
UM, I SAID AT OUR LAST MEETING THAT I FELT LIKE WHEN WE WERE PRESENTED, UH, THIS, UH, PROJECT, UM, IT CAME TO US IN A VERY EXTRAORDINARY WAY.
UH, AND IT CERTAINLY DIDN'T LOOK LIKE ANY OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAD CONSIDERED IN TERMS OF PRESENTATION, UH, IN TERMS OF, UH, THE WAY ALL OF OUR DEALS HAVE BEEN PRESENTED IS TOO, TOO FAR.
SO I SAID ONE OF THESE THINGS DOES NOT LOOK LIKE THE OTHERS.
AND I THINK THROUGH THE, THROUGH THAT MEETING LAST MONTH AND THROUGH THE DILIGENCE THAT I THINK ALL THE DIRECTORS AND STAFF THAT HAVE BEEN CONTINUING TO DO IN BETWEEN OUR MEETINGS AND THEN THE DISCUSSION TODAY, I THINK WE CAN CLEARLY SEE THAT THIS PROJECT IS, DOES NOT LOOK LIKE THE OTHERS, DOESN'T HAVE, UH, THE SUPPORT OF THE, UH, COUNCILMAN IN THE DISTRICT.
IT DOESN'T HAVE THE SUPPORT APPARENTLY OF THE STATE REP.
UH, ACCORDING TO THE LETTER THAT WAS PRESENTED TODAY, IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE THE, UH, SUPPORT OF THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF THE, UH, MARCH 18TH, UH, EVENT I ATTENDED ON THE 18TH, WHICH IS W CAN CAN SAY IT WAS, UH, W DID A GREAT JOB KEEPING THAT THING TOGETHER BECAUSE IT WAS, UH, IT WAS WILD.
UM, AND UH, I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK THE BUT FOUR IN ADDITION TO DIRECTOR POSSES, BUT FOR IN MY MIND IS, BUT FOR THE DEED RESTRICTION, THIS WOULDN'T BE IN FRONT OF US.
[02:15:01]
THAT CREATE SOME CONCERN FOR US? I THINK IT SHOULD.AND THEN LET'S ASSESS THE ATTENDANT RISK THAT WE CLEARLY HAVE IDENTIFIED TODAY.
WE PROBABLY HAVEN'T IDENTIFIED CUZ WE'RE NOT WILLING TO MAYBE DO THE RESEARCH AND WITH ALL DUE CONSIDERATION TO DIRECTOR CALLAS AND DIRECTOR MONTGOMERY'S CONCERNS ABOUT NOT WASTING RESOURCES, GET THAT.
UM, I JUST FEEL LIKE THE CITY HAS TOLD THIS TO US AND TO I WILL, I WOULD COUNTER WHAT DIRECTOR PAA SAID THAT WE, THAT THEY WANTED US TO FIGURE IT OUT.
I THINK THEY ALREADY HAD IT FIGURED OUT AND IT'S HERE BEFORE US BECAUSE OF ONE REASON.
AND IT'S THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND SO I THINK WE OWE IT TO ASSESS THE RISK TO THE PFC BECAUSE WE ARE NOT EVEN SURE THAT GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNE THE CITY CAN BE, CAN KEEP THE PROJECT AND KNOW IT'LL BE FINE.
SO WHY IS IT SO, WHY IS IT WITH US? AND SO I THINK BECAUSE THEY'RE ASKING US TO, TO BE ACCOMMODATED, UH, BE ACCOMMODATE THIS TRANSACTION.
LET'S FIGURE OUT THE RISKS OF THIS TRANSACTION, WHAT IT POTENTIALLY PUTS THIS, THIS CORPORATION UP AGAINST.
BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS, UH, IN THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE GOING TO OPPOSE IT.
AND THAT INVERSE CONDEMNATION LAWSUIT IS COMING.
IT'S THE REASON WE'VE GOT THE INDEMNIFICATION IN THE FIRST PLACE FROM THE, FROM THE DEVELOPER.
UH, ONE WAS, I, I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE OTHER CONTRACT TO SEE WHERE WE GOT THAT VERSION OF INDEMNIFICATION LANGUAGE.
AND I ASKED, UH, UM, UH, ZACHARY AT THE, AT THE LAST MEETING, YOU WHY IS THIS LANGUAGE HERE? BECAUSE OF THE ANTICIPATED INVERSE CONDEMNATION LAWSUIT.
SO THAT LAWSUIT THAT THAT LITIGATION IS COMING.
UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S CAUGHT BEFORE THE HORSE OR WHAT OTHER BAD ANALOGY I CAN USE, BUT WE OWE OURSELVES SOME REAL LEGAL, INDEPENDENT LEGAL OPINIONS FROM OUR COUNCIL THAT CAN BRACE US FOR WHAT'S COMING BECAUSE IT IS DEFINITELY COMING.
BUT LET ME TELL YOU, I ALMOST SENSE THAT EVEN THOUGH WE ARE PART OF THE CITY QUASI, I ALMOST FEEL LIKE WE HAVE CONFLICTING INTERESTS AND THIS BECAUSE OF THAT IMMUNITY ISSUE.
AND I WOULD LOVE TO GET A BETTER FEEL OVER WHERE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FEELS THAT THEIR SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY BECOMES DERIVATIVE OF IMMUNITY TO THIS.
BECAUSE THERE'S CASE LAW OUT THERE THAT SAYS TO THE EXTENT THAT WE EXERCISE CONSENT AND IT'S NOT AT THE FULL FORCE AND DIRECTION OF THE CITY, THAT THERE IS NO IMMUNITY TO BE HAD BY US.
SO ALL WE NEED TO DO AT THIS POINT IS TALK TO JIM AND LET'S CALCULATE THE DAMAGES BECAUSE THAT'S THE CHECK IF SOMEBODY'S GONNA BE WRITING THROUGH THE DERIVATIVE, THROUGH THE INDEMNIFICATION LANGUAGE, OR MAY NOT BE THE, UH, DEVELOPER DEPENDING ON THE FINANCIAL, UH, QUALIFICATIONS THERE, THE STATUS ARE THERE.
AND APPARENTLY IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE CITY IN CASE THE IN CASE THE IN INDEMNIFICATION LANGUAGE CAN'T BE FULFILLED.
SO I, I JUST THINK THEY'RE, THIS THING DOES NOT LOOK LIKE THE OTHERS.
SO IT PROBABLY COSTS FOR DIFFERENT STEPS THEN I WOULD SUPPORT THE, THE NO VOTES ON THIS MOTION AND POTENTIALLY SUBSTITUTING THE PRIOR MOTION FROM, FROM DIRECTOR BELLS TO CARL'S POINT, THOUGH, FOR US TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE JUSTIFY AND SPENDING MONEY, WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME INDICATION OF HAVING A DEAL OR WE DON'T HAVE A DEAL, THAT'S FINE.
SO ALL WE'RE SAYING IS LET'S TAKE THE NEXT STEP AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WITH CITI SPEND, MAKE, MAKE SURE WE SPEND MONEY TO INVESTIGATE THIS, BUT DOING IT IN A BURDEN FASHION, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S BROKEN UP ANYWAY.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? DIRECTOR WONDERS, UM, IN ADDITION TO DIRECTOR, UH, COMMENTS, LIKE, NOT EVEN JUST, I THINK THERE'S A, UH, LEGAL RISK THAT WE FACE, BETTER OR WORSE TO, I THINK WE, THE EXPECT
UM, I KNOW WITH SENATOR BEFOR, UH, BILLS ON THE FLOOR IN THE LEGISLATURE, UH, YOU KNOW, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, A LOT OF THE, THE PSE DEALS DONE IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE, YOU KNOW, CREATED A LOT OF RED FLAGS FOR THE PFC ALREADY.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT SOME OF THE DEALS WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED IN THE PAST HAVE REALLY TRIGGERED SOME OF THOSE, BUT I THINK GIVEN THE, YOU KNOW, THE RELATIVE ANONYMITY THAT WE OPERATED BEFORE THE FEBRUARY MEETING, UM, I DON'T THINK ANY, ANY OF THOSE DEALS REALLY, REALLY GOT OUTSIDE OF THE SPHERE OF THE PFC.
UM, I THINK WITH THE CONCERNS OVER THE THEATER, JUST HAVING THE PFC LEVERAGE TO GET THROUGH THAT, I THINK DEFINITELY GETS AROUND THE SPIRIT OF WHAT THIS IS, OF HOW THIS IS FOR AND HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO OPERATE.
YES, WE SHOULD BE TAKING OPPORTUNITIES TO
[02:20:01]
BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE JUST HAVE THE LUXURY OF JUST IGNORING RED FLAGS ON THE WAY TO DOING THAT.ANY OTHER DIRECT PLEA? I HAD A QUESTION.
I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO, UH, POSE A QUESTION, EITHER MR. ROTH OR MR. UMBR ABOUT THE DEED RESTRICTION.
UM, THIS, UH, APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S EFFORT, TIME.
I WAS THERE TWO SATURDAYS AGO WITH, WITH, UH, DIRECTOR HOLMES.
UM, SINCE THE DERE RESTRICTION IS SUCH A CRITICAL ISSUE, I HELP ME UNDERSTAND, CUZ THIS, THIS BODY, THIS IS JUST GOING OFF PAST MEMORY.
WE'VE APPROVED FOUR PROJECTS THAT ARE, HAVE GONE FROM COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL.
SO I THINK YOU MADE THE COMMENT, MAYBE IT WAS AT SATURDAY OR MAYBE IT WAS ANOTHER TIME, ABOUT HIGHEST AND BEST SUVS BEING COMMERCIAL.
AND THEN, AND I, I LIVE RIGHT DOWN MR. TOWN.
I LIVE RIGHT ACROSS THE HIGHWAY FROM THIS, THIS PROJECT.
SO I KNOW HIM VERY, VERY WELL.
I, I THINK IT'D BE, I SHARE THE, THE SENTIMENTS OF MR. STINSON THAT THERE'S REALLY NO NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT THERE, BUT AS YOU DRIVE UP AND DOWN CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, WALNUT HILL AND CENTRAL, ALL MULTI-FAMILY, THE, UM, BACK HIS DEAL AT MEADOW, LARGELY MULTI-FAMILY.
I MEAN, THERE'S SOME SENIOR LIVING, ET CETERA, COUPLE, COUPLE HOTELS YOU GO ACROSS FOREST LANE FROM YOU, IT WAS A, IT WAS A, UH, YOU KNOW, DRIVING MOVIE THEATER AND THEN IT GOT ANOTHER USE AND NOW IT'S RESIDENTIAL.
I MEAN, THERE'S A BIG RESIDENTIAL PROPONENT RIGHT BEHIND THE, THE, ALL THE FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS YOU DRIVE UP AT RICHARDSON, LET'S GO UP FOUR EXIT.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE TEARING DOWN, YOU KNOW, 10 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL AND THEY'RE BRINGING IN RESIDENTIAL.
SO, SO IT, IT JUST STRUCK ME TO GOD THAT ON, ON THIS ONE SITE THAT I, UH, THE RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE A HEIGHT AND BEST USE.
IF YOU, IF YOU COULD JUST ELABORATE ON THAT AND MAYBE, IS IT, IS IT TOO MUCH RESIDENTIAL? IS IT THE INCOMES OF THE PEOPLE LIVING THERE, OR IS IT JUST NO RESIDENTIAL AT ALL? IF YOU COULD NO, IT, AND, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE, THE QUESTIONS.
SO IT IS AN INSIGHTFUL QUESTION AND IT'S AN IMPORTANT QUESTION.
UM, THE ISSUE IS, IS THAT THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPERS OF THAT PROPERTY HAD A, HAD A, HAD A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEY HAD A VISION, THEY WANTED TO HAVE OFFICES, THEY WANTED TO BE A COMMERCIAL AREA.
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO PLAN AREAS AND TO, TO LEVEL AND TO MODERATE, UH, USES AND NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE PEOPLE AND THE ACTIVITY LEVELS.
AND THEIR VISION WAS TO HAVE OFFICES IN THERE, TO HAVE COMMERCIAL OP OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE IT WAS ACCESSIBLE TO THE FREEWAY, WHICH IS REALLY CRITICAL.
UH, TRAFFIC FOREST AND CENTRAL'S A MAJOR INTERSECTION IN THE, AND IT WAS DESIGNED TO ATTRACT BUSINESSES, DESIGNED TO ATTRACT CERTAIN USES AND DESIGNED TO BE A BUFFER TO THE OTHER USES THAT ARE FURTHER ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO THAT PLAN AND THAT VISION IS SOMETHING THAT FOLKS LIKE OURSELVES, AND WE'VE BEEN IN THAT PROPERTY FOR NEARLY 25 YEARS, AND THE OTHER OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, WE'VE SPENT LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, FIVE LEASE PROPERTIES WITH THE IDEA THAT WE HAD A A CAN YOU MOVE TO THE SITE SO THAT THEY CAN SEE YOU ON THE, THE ACTUAL FILM THE CINDY ATTORNEYS HAVE, HAVE ASKED.
SO, SO
IF YOU TAKE AWAY THAT, THAT, RIGHT, IT'S, IT REALLY IS A THANK SOMETHING THAT'S FUNDAMENTAL, NOT JUST TO US, BUT TO EVERYBODY IN THAT COMMUNITY.
WHY IS THIS NOT THE, WHY THE DEPARTMENT'S NOT THE HIGHEST OF BEST USE THERE, BECAUSE IT ISN'T, IT REALLY ISN'T THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THAT PROPERTY IS FOR A COMMERCIAL USE.
THAT WOULD BE A BEAUTIFUL PLACE FOR THE CITY TO BE ENCOURAGING A COMPANY TO BRING THEIR HEADQUARTERS HERE TO DEVELOP MORE, MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR, TO BUILD ONTO THE, THE, UH, LEGACY OF THE, THE HOSPITAL COMMUNITY THAT'S ALREADY THERE TO BUILD UPON
[02:25:01]
THE LEGACY OF THE, OF THE, UH, UH, OTHER TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND THE, AND THE OTHER, UH, INDUSTRIES THAT ARE IN THAT AREA.THE TECH INDUSTRY THAT THE, UH, BUSINESS INDUSTRIES, THE, THE HOSPITAL, THE, THE, UH, FINANCIAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES THAT ARE ALL THERE.
THAT'S, THAT GENERATES TAX REVENUE FOR THE CITY.
IT, IT CREATES VALUE FOR ALL THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS.
IT ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO COME AND, AND SPEND MONEY AND TO, AND TO MAKE INVESTMENTS IN BUSINESSES AND BRINGING PEOPLE TO THE COMMUNITY THAT PROVIDES MILLIONS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TAX REVENUE THAT YOU CAN USE TO PAY POLICEMEN TO WHI WHICH WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE TO HAVE CITY SERVICES TO BE ABLE FOR THE CITY TO HAVE MONEY, BUT THEN MAYBE TAKE THAT MONEY AND DEPLOY IT IN DIFFERENT WAYS TO HELP FOLKS THAT ARE DISADVANTAGED DON'T TAKE AWAY, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ANSWER.
I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE A CASE FOR IT.
I'M TRYING TO EX I'M TRYING TO REALLY EXPLAIN TO YOU THAT AS A REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONAL, THAT IS NOT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THAT PROPERTY FOR THE CITY, FOR A DEVELOPER WHO OWNS THAT PROPERTY OR FOR A FUTURE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY THAT WOULD DO IT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE, IF I HELP YOU EXPLAIN IT.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THE, UH, THE DISTINCTION BEING MEDICAL DISTRICT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING ELSE, BUT WE'VE, WE'VE TAKEN, THIS BOARD HAS TAKEN DOWN PROPERTY IN BLUFF.
BUGATTI, EL CAMINO OFFICE BUILDING ARE GONNA BE GONE.
MOCKINGBIRD AND RIGHT BY LOVE FIELD, LEON, BK, AND THE, THE, UH, UTES FAMILY HAS TAKEN DOWN, YOU KNOW, 25 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, WEST COMMERCE OVER WEST DALLAS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, ONCE AGAIN GOING TO RESIDENTIAL.
SO IT'S JUST, I, I JUST HAD TO ASK A QUESTION.
YOUR ANSWER WAS, WAS, WAS GREAT.
I MEAN, I, I RESPECT IT AND I DON'T, I DON'T, I I'M NOT ARGUING WITH YOU.
IN OUR EXPERIENCE, WE SEE RESIDENTIAL BEING SUCH A VALUE, SUCH A HIGH, YOU KNOW, HIGH USE.
I JUST, I JUST HAD TO ASK THE QUESTION AND, AND, AND AGAIN, NOT TO, IT IS A, IT IS A POINT THAT I, THAT YOU BROUGHT UP THAT'S ACTUALLY VERY IMPORTANT.
THE TORNADO, I BLEW UP OUR BUILDING IN MY HOUSE, AND YOU KNOW WHAT, OH YEAH.
IT BLEW UP THE LOOSE BUILDING.
IT BLEW UP THE BUILDING NEXT DOOR.
THAT'S WHY THAT PROPERTY'S THERE.
WE CHOSE TO STAY INVESTED IN THAT PROPERTY, IN THAT LOCATION.
WE TOOK THE MONEY THAT WE WERE ABLE TO GET, THANK GOD WE HAD, UH, A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF INSURANCE TO BE ABLE TO RE DEPLOY THAT BIG FOR A YEAR AND A HALF.
THE BUILDING WAS EMPTY WHILE WE HAD TO REDEVELOP IT.
THE LOOSE BUILDING WAS EMPTY WHILE THEY HAD TO REDEVELOP IT.
WE MADE A COMMITMENT TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS IS A GREAT PLACE WE'RE GOING TO, WE'RE COMMITTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE COMMITTED TO THE PROPERTY.
WE'RE GONNA IMPROVE THE PROPERTY.
WE'RE GONNA IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF OUR TENANTS, OUR EMPLOYEE BASE, OUR, OUR, OUR FACILITIES, AND WE WANT TO LIFT ALL THE VOTES HERE.
WE WANT THIS TO BE, UH, AN INVESTMENT THAT WE CAN BE PROUD OF FOR OUR FAMILIES AND FOR OUR, OUR PARTNERS.
WE'VE MADE A COMMITMENT HERE BASED ON THE TRUST OF WHAT THE RULES OF THE GAY ARE, CAN'T CHANGE THE RULES OF THE GAME.
EIGHT ACRES OUT OF THE 30 THAT PROMPTED YOU AND YOUR OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA TO CHANGE THE RULES OF THE DE RESTRICTION TO LET IN OTHER WE DIDN'T.
THE, THE, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WHEN WE CAME IN 25 YEARS AGO ARE AS THEY ARE TODAY.
UH, MR. ROTH, YES, YOU HAVE, UM, YOU'VE MENTIONED THAT PART OF THE REASON YOU VALUE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS IS BECAUSE IT ALLOWS FOR, UM, DEVELOPMENT AND, AND A PLAN.
UM, COUNCILMAN MAGUE, UM, SHARED WITH US, UM, HIS, UM, THOUGHTS AND A, A LETTER IN ADDITION TO BEING KIND ENOUGH TO, TO JUMP ON AND SHARE HIS, HIS THOUGHTS VERBALLY EARLIER.
AND, UM, I DON'T WANNA MISCHARACTERIZE WHAT, WHAT HIS, UM, WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT.
UM, THAT, THAT HE PUT FORWARD AS POTENTIALLY A PATH FORWARD.
UM, I THINK, AND THE VERY FIRST ONE IS ASKING THE DEVELOPER TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CREATION OF AN AREA PLAN THAT INCLUDES THE PROPOSED LOCATION AND SURROUNDING AREA.
WOULD YOU BE SUPPORTIVE OF SUCH A, A STEP? UH, I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS.
WHAT IS AN AREA PLAN THAT'S, UH, AN AREA PLAN FOR, UH, DEVELOPING THE, THE AREA AROUND THE
[02:30:01]
PROPERTY? I'M NOT TRYING TO, I'M NOT SAY, I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THE, IS IT AN AREA PLAN TO REDEVELOP THE PROPERTY, THE PROPERTY IN THAT AREA TO SOMETHING ELSE? BE EXACT.SO THIS, AND, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT, I'M NOT BEING COMPETITIVE.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND SAYING, YEAH.
ASKING THE DEVELOPER TO, TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CREATION OF AN AREA PLAN THAT INCLUDES THE PROPOSED LOCATION AND IT'S SURROUNDING AREA.
UM, I CAN TELL YOU THAT, UM, I KNOW THE CITY HAS PROBABLY 40 OF THOSE, UM, AROUND THE, UM, AND I WOULD SUSPECT MORE, UM, AROUND THE CITY.
THEY ARE FOCUSED ON A PARTICULAR AREA.
UM, I'M PROBABLY CLOSEST TO, AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT IN THIS, UH, ON THIS COMMISSION, UM, THE, UH, GARLAND ROAD VISION.
UM, SO IT'S A, A PLAN FOR THE ENTIRETY OF GARLAND ROAD FROM GRAND ALL THE WAY DOWN TO
SO THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT PRESUMABLY, UM, AND THE TERMINOLOGY I'VE HEARD FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS, UM, AND A MUNICIPAL LEVEL, AND THEY TALK ABOUT AN AREA PLAN, THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO IT'S MULTIFAMILY OVER HERE, IT'S RETAIL OVER HERE.
IT'S A, IT'S A PICTURE OF WHAT THE NEIGHBOR, OF WHAT COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE.
SO MY, MY QUESTION IS, UM, COUNCILMAN MAGOO HAS, UM, HAS INCLUDED THAT SUGGESTIONS THAT HAVE COME FORWARD IS, IS HOW WE WORDED IT.
UM, AND SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, WOULD YOU BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT? I LISTEN
YOU, YOU MAY NOT SEE THE, THE ACTUAL FOLKS WALKING AROUND IN THE STREETS.
THERE'S A LOT OF HOMES THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE LIVING IN APARTMENTS THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF, OF, OF FAMILIES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE'S A LOT OF STAKEHOLDERS, A LOT OF BUSINESS AND LOT OF POISON.
IF WE WOULD DO IT NOW, IF IT WOULD, WE SUPPORT, UH, TRYING TO, UH, UH, TO PARTICIPATE TO MAKE THAT AREA, UH, MORE PROSPER, MORE STABLE, MORE SAFE, MORE MORE USER FRIENDLY, MORE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, FRIENDLY FOR, FOR, FOR COMMERCIAL PEOPLE IN, IN RESIDENTIAL PEOPLE.
WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, DIRECTOR RUSSELL, THAT YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR A COMMENT? YES.
IT'S KIND OF AN EXTENSION OF QUESTION.
IS THE, UH, IS IT THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF HOUSING PROJECT THAT MAKES YOU UNCOMFORTABLE? WOULD IT BE ANY TYPE OF, UH, PROPOSAL OF HOUSING FAIR MARKET OR NOT? YEAH, IT IS NOT, THIS IS NOT A REFERENDUM ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR ON HOUSING.
AND, AND IT, IT'S, WE'RE NOT HERE, BUT WE'RE NOT HERE, UH, AS AN REFERENDUM ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE'RE HERE ABOUT TAKING A PROPERTY, BUT THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY IS NO, IT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR HOUSING.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? DISCUSSION ITEMS? OKAY.
SOMETIMES WE'RE NOT USED TO BEING.
AND, UH, AARON, IF YOU WANT TO CALL ROLL, UM, INDICATE YOUR APPROVAL FOR DIRECTOR TA'S MOTION WITH AN AYE AND, UM, DISAPPROVAL WITH A MAY.
AARON, YOU WANNA TAKE A STEP THEN? HE DIDN'T.
THE MOTION WAS TO APPROVE THE M MOU SUBJECT TO AN INDEMNIFICATION BY CITY COUNCIL AND, UH, RESEARCH FROM, UH, OUR CORPORATE COUNCIL THAT THIS WILL NOT HARM US.
UH, WE WILL NOT TAKE ON TOO MUCH.
ONE FINAL CLARIFICATION IS A PART OF THE, UM, LEGAL COUNSEL ASPECT, IS IT ALSO KIND OF A, UH, ESTIMATE THE CHARGES OCCURRED AS WELL? YES.
I MEAN, WE WOULD IMPORTANT AS, I'M NOT SURE THIS KYLE OR MR. PLUMBER SAID YEAH, WE WOULD, WE WOULD HAVE TO GET A SCOPE AND A BUDGET, UH, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY MR. WARD BEFORE WE GO FORWARD.
I'LL READ YOUR NAME AND DO YOU SPEAK, CAN SAY YAY OR NAME DIRECTOR SCOTT HOUSEL.
[02:35:02]
YES.VICE PRESIDENT KEN MONTGOMERY? YES.
MOTION PASSES WITH EIGHT, FOUR AND THREE AGAINST, SO WE'LL GO GET OUR PRESIDENT.
SOMEBODY GET PRESIDENT PAUL MCCALL.
AND, UM, JUST HAVING PRESIDED OVER THIS, UH, THIS ITEM, UH, LAST TIME AND THEN THIS TIME, UM, I, IT'S, IT'S NOTICEABLE HOW ENGAGED THE, UH, THE BOARD HAS BEEN.
I, I THINK IT'S, IT'S HARD TO, UH, COME TO THESE CONCLUSIONS TO MAKE DECISIONS.
UM, IT TAKES EVERYBODY PULLING, UM, ONE DIRECTION, UM, TO DO THEIR BEST AND, UM, FIGURE OUT A GOOD SOLUTION.
SO, UM, DIRECTOR HOLMES, IN PARTICULAR IN YOUR DISTRICT? UM, DIRECTOR TOLEDO.
AND, UM, WHO ELSE IS WITH YEAH, THE, THE SATURDAY DIRECTOR.
SO, UM, THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR, UH, FOR JUMPING IN AND, UM, WORKING ON IT.
I DIDN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE THIS TIME.
ALTERNATIVE, SIMILAR TO WHAT MR. YEAH.
SEVEN BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVE EXIT STRUCTURES FOR TFC LEASE AGREEMENTS, HANS.
OKAY, NOW ONTO THE, THE BORING, MUNDANE AND STUFF, I GUESS.
UH, SO WE'VE HAD A FEW DEVELOPERS, AND I'LL ASK JIM PLUMBER AS WELL TO KIND OF OPINE ON WHAT WE'RE SEEING AND WHAT HE'S SEEN IN THE, AND I GUESS WHAT WE WOULD CALL THE PFC MARKET IN QUOTATION MARKS.
UM, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL DEVELOPERS COME TO US EXPLAINING, AND YOU, YOU MIGHT HAVE HEARD, UH, MR. HANSEN DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT TALKING ABOUT THIS ITEM WHERE DEVELOPERS HAVE NEEDED TO HAVE THE OPTION TO, UH, EXIT THE LEASE, UH, WITH AN EARLY TERMINATION OPTION SO THAT THEY CAN EXERCISE AND REFINANCE AND REDEVELOP THE PROPERTY, WHATEVER THEY NEED TO DO, AND BRING THE PROPERTY BACK TO THE PROPERTY TAX ROLES, MAKE IT A MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENT OR RENEGOTIATE A, A, A STRUCTURE WITH THE PFC AT THAT TIME.
UM, BUT THEY JUST NEED TO HAVE THAT CERTAINTY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
UM, WE ARE, WE'VE, WE'VE KIND OF CALCULATED BASED ON WHAT OTHER, UH, PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATIONS HAVE DONE AND, AND TAKEN A, A, A FEE OF 7% OF FAIR MARKET VALUE POTENTIALLY, UM, AS A, AS AN EXIT FEE.
UM, BUT WE JUST WANTED TO BRING THIS TO THE BOARD TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT THAT THIS IS A, IS AN OPTION THAT, THAT, THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT DOES KIND OF ALLOW US THE OP OPPORTUNITY TO, ONE, HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE THE DEVELOPERS DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THE PROJECT IN, IN, IN CONJUNCTION WITH US TO BE ABLE TO, UH, POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVE THIS BE THE FULL 75 YEARS, BUT ALSO, UH, MAKING SURE THAT WHAT'S BEST FOR THE PROPERTY AND THAT OUR EQUITY PARTNERS IN THESE TRANSACTIONS ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THE TRANS WITH THE DEAL.
UM, JIM, DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO THAT? NO, I THINK, I THINK A A COUPLE OF, UM, IMPORTANT POINTS FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE.
UM, THIS IS COMING ABOUT BECAUSE THE HOUSTON HOUSING AUTHORITY AND THE, THE CITY OF BOSTON HOUSING AUTHORITY HAVE GRANTED THIS.
AND SOME DEVELOPERS ARE STARTING TO ASK FOR IT.
SO WE ARE GOING TO SEE THIS REQUEST IN, IN MANY FUTURE DEALS.
UM, THE ADVANTAGE TO YOU IS THAT
[02:40:01]
IT, IT HAS A POTENTIAL TO TAKE THIS PROPERTY FROM AN EXEMPT STATUS TO A PAY TAX PAYING PROPERTY, UM, AT A TIME OF, OF ABOUT 40 YEARS, WHICH IS THE NORMAL FEDERAL PERIOD FOR AFFORDABILITY.UM, IT HAS THE DISADVANTAGE OF ELIMINATING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, POTENTIALLY HAVING TENANTS BE FORCED TO RELOCATE AT THAT.
UM, AND THE, IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN, WE WOULD EXPECT THEM TO PAY A FEE OF 7%.
7% IS CALCULATED AS THE NET PRESENT VALUE OF THE PERVERSION INTEREST AT THE END OF THE 75 YEAR TERM.
THAT 7% NUMBER, UM, WILL BE A VERY SIGNIFICANT COMPENSATION TO YOU AND COULD BE USED TO ASSIST IN REPLACEMENT AFFORDABLE HOUSE.
UM, SO WHILE THIS WOULD BE AN ADVANTAGE TO DEVELOPERS, WE HAVE TRIED TO DESIGN IT IN A FORMAT, UM, WHERE AT LEAST YOU WALK AWAY WITH A NET PRESENT VALUE OF YOUR INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY AND GIVE YOU A SUBSTANTIAL SUM OF MONEY TO ENABLE YOU TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING THROUGH THE USE OF THAT MONEY.
SO WITH THAT, THIS WAS MOSTLY JUST TO PRESENT THIS AS, AS SOMETHING THAT YOU MAY BE SEEING AS A REQUEST IN MOU AND PARTNERSHIP TERMS AND LEASE TERMS GOING FORWARD AND WANTED TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYBODY TO OPINE OR SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, I'LL, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN TOLD WHY WE HAVE TO HAVE 75 YEAR LEASES, BUT THAT PROVIDES US WITH 75 YEARS OF, OF AFFORDABILITY.
BUT THEN IF WE SHORTEN THE LEASE UP, THEN WE RUN THE SAME TYPE OF RISK THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE WHERE THERE COULD BE A POTENTIAL FOR DISPLACEMENT.
BUT I THINK IN THE LONG RUN, UH, USEFUL LIFE, LIFE OF A PROP PROPERTY AT, AT 40 YEARS, YOU KNOW, WE CAN REEVALUATE THE PROPERTY AT THAT TIME AND, AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK DEVELOPERS WOULD BE COMING BACK TO US TO REFINANCE OR RESTRUCTURE OUR PARTNERSHIP OR LEASE AT THAT TIME ANYWAY.
SO, UH, I JUST WANTED TO PRESENT THIS TO THE BOARD AND HAVE ANY SORT OF DISCUSSION THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE, OR IF WE WANNA PUN THIS TO A, A FINANCE COMMITTEE TO ALSO DISCUSS BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN HERE FOR TWO HOURS AND 45 MINUTES.
I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERY, EVERYBODY KNEW THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WILL, WILL MOST LIKELY BE A REQUEST OF DEVELOPERS AT A LATER DAY.
SO I'M, SO HELP ME, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS OF KYLE AND THEN JIM, I HAVE SOME PROBABLY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS OF, OF YOU.
UM, SO I, I GUESS I'M UNCLEAR IF, IF THE IDEA IS TO PROVIDE 75 YEARS OF AFFORDABILITY AND TO BE A GOOD COMMUNITY MEMBER FOR A SIGNIFICANT PERIOD OF TIME, WHICH WOULD BE 75 YEARS OR 99, UM, WHY THEN WOULD A, WHY THEN WOULD A DEVELOPER WANT TO CUT THAT TO I SEE 20 TO 40 YEARS, LET'S JUST SAY 40, UM, AND GO MARKET.
THAT DOESN'T SEEM VERY COMMUNITY ORIENTED.
AND I THINK, JIM, ARE YOU GONNA SAY SOMETHING? YEAH, THE ONE THING THAT IS CLEAR IS THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO MAKE A FINANCIAL DECISION, UM, AND IF IT IS IN THEIR BEST INTEREST, THEY WOULD EXERCISE.
UM, IT IS CLEARLY NOT A COMMUNITY ORIENTED DECISION.
UM, SO HERE ARE SOME OF THE, THE STRUCTURING QUESTIONS.
IS THERE A WAY, SO FIRST OF ALL, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS NOW? UM, AND IF, UM, OTHER THAN JUST LOSING THE TAX EXEMPTION, UM, AND WHAT WOULD BE, AND DEFAULTING, UM, WHAT OPTIONS DO WE HAVE ON CURRENT, UM, LEASES THAT WOULD ALLOW SOME SORT OF A BUYOUT? AND THEN SECONDLY, UM, IS THERE A WAY TO, TO PHASE IT AND STRUCTURE IT SO THAT YOU MINIMIZE THE DISPLACEMENT PROBLEM YOU WOULD INEVITABLY HAVE? IN OTHER WORDS, YOU KNOW, YOU GO FROM, I'M JUST GONNA MAKE SOMETHING UP.
YOU GO FROM OVER A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, DECREASE YOUR AFFORDABILITY AND YOUR TAX EXEMPTION PROPORTIONATELY, UM, BY 10%.
[02:45:01]
FIVE, YOU GO TO 40%, UM, AFFORDABLE YEAR, 30%, YEAR MINUS TWO, YOU GO TO 20 YEAR MINUS 10, AND THEN YEAR ZERO, UM, YOU, YOU'RE ALL MARKET AND YOU HAVE A PROPORTIONAL, UM, TAX EXEMPTION ON THAT.SO ARE, ARE THERE WAYS THAT YOU COULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO MITIGATE THAT RISK? WELL, FIRST, RIGHT NOW THERE ARE NO OPTIONS IN PLACE.
UM, WE HAD ALWAYS ANTICIPATED THAT DEVELOPERS MAY COME BACK TO YOU AND ATTEMPT TO RENEGOTIATE, AND THEN OF COURSE WE WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO MAKE A COMMUNITY-BASED DECISION IN THAT NEGOTIATION, UH, AND DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE WISH TO CONTINUE THE AFFORDABILITY OR NOT.
UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT YOU COULD, I MEAN, PRACTICALLY, UH, STRUCTURE A DEAL TO PHASE IT, I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO THE DEVELOPERS, UM, BECAUSE THEY ARE LOOKING FOR MORE CERTAINTY, UM, AND PROBABLY A PRETTY CLEAN CUT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
UM, BUT I THINK WE COULD EXPLORE THAT WITH THEM.
WE CERTAINLY LEGALLY CAN DO IT.
WE CERTAINLY STRUCTURALLY CAN DO A PHASE APPROACH.
WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES.
UM, THE FIRST THING THAT JUMPED OUT AT ME WAS THE REVERSIONARY INTEREST.
YOU KNOW, SOUNDS A LITTLE LOW TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, BUT TO HOLD ONTO THAT ASSET FOR THAT LONG FOR US TO WALK AWAY, 7%.
SO I GUESS I COULD, QUESTIONS FOR JIM, IS THAT, IS THERE, DOES THE LANGUAGE ON THAT, YOU KNOW, REQUIRE AN UP-TO-DATE CURRENT APPRAISAL? A HUNDRED PERCENT, YOU KNOW, NO DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, A CAP RATE THAT REFLECTS THE, THE FULL EARNING POTENTIAL OF THE PROPERTY, ALL, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THOSE FACTORS? WELL, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT A LOT MORE.
WE, WE WOULD DO A FULL APPRAISAL.
THE 7% IS ONLY DESIGNED TO REPLACE THE REVERSIONARY INTEREST.
YOUR ANNUAL RENT IS BEING REPLACED BY THE FACT THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS WOULD COLLECT TAXES AT, WOULD, AS WOULD THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE COUNTY.
SO WE DID NOT CALCULATE THAT INTO THE FORMULA.
WHAT WE DID WAS WE TOOK $1 AND DISCOUNTED IT FOR 35 YEARS AT 8%.
WE USED 8% BECAUSE THAT'S OUR COMMON PREFERRED RETURN RATE.
AND THAT RESULTS IN A NET PRESENT VALUE OF 7 CENTS.
YOUR EXPERIENCE, HAVE YOU HAD ANY NEGOTIATING ISSUES ON WHAT DOES THAT APPRAISE VALUE LOOK LIKE? THAT, YOU KNOW, AS A GENERAL RULE, WE HAVE, WE HAVE SIMPLY PUT IN AN APPRAISAL PROCEDURE THAT IS PROBABLY A BASEBALL APPRAISAL PROCEDURE.
THE DEVELOPER SUGGESTS AN APPRAISER.
IF WE, UM, APPROVE THAT APPRAISER, THEN A THIRD PARTY APPRAISAL IS DONE.
IF WE DON'T APPROVE THAT APPRAISER, WE SUGGEST ONE.
IF THE PARTIES DON'T AGREE, THE TWO APPRAISERS SUGGESTS A THIRD APPRAISER, IT'LL BE A THIRD PARTY M A I APPRAISAL OF THE VALUE OF THE PROJECT AS A TAXABLE PROJECT.
UH, MR. CLOVER, YOU'VE MENTIONED YOU USED A 8% PREFERRED RETURN FOR THAT CALCULATION.
HAVE WE NOT BEEN SEEING HIGHER PRE RATES THAN SOME OF THE DEALS WE'VE SEEN RECENTLY? WE HAVE BEEN SEEING SOME HIGHER PRE RATES.
UM, WE'VE ALSO BEEN SEEING EIGHT.
AND SO, UM, AND, AND, AND PART OF THIS FORMULA WAS DEVELOPED, UM, TRUTHFULLY A YEAR AGO WHEN EVERYTHING WAS EIGHT.
UM, BUT IT'S THE SAME FORMULA THAT IS BEING USED BY THE OTHER PFCS AND IS CONSIDERED THE MARKET.
SO ON A DEAL BY DEAL BASIS, WILL WE ADJUST FOR THE PREFERRED RATE? WE CERTAINLY COULD.
NOW I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IF YOU GO TO A HIGHER DISCOUNT, YOU END UP WITH A LOWER PERCENTAGE AS A FOLLOW UP TO THAT.
WHILE THAT MAY BE TRUE, I MEAN, I THINK DEAL BY DEAL
[02:50:01]
GETS KIND OF TOUGH, BUT IS THERE MAYBE AN AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF WHERE WE KIND OF SET THAT, THAT DISCOUNT RIGHT AT BEGINNING JUST GIVE KIND OF MARKET? SO THAT'S TO, TO NOT ADDRESS IT WOULD BE, UH, WOULD BE, UH, IMPROVE? UM, I THINK EVERYBODY'S GONNA WANT A DEFINED PERCENTAGE SO THAT THEY KNOW WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE.UM, AND ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE, THE, I TRACK THAT THE OPTION ITSELF OR US AS A BOARD REVISITING WHAT US AS A BOARD? I MEAN, I THINK WE COULD CERTAINLY REVI REVISIT IT YES.
UH, AS A, AS A, AS A BOARD AND WE, IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO DO THAT.
BUT I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE THE OPTION TO WHERE IT'S LIKE WE SET, I DON'T THINK.
I THINK THAT THAT'S A FINANCE COMMITTEE THING, YOU KNOW? YEAH.
EVERY YEAR YOU SET THE DISCOUNT RATE.
DO WE HAVE A, IS A MOTION APPROPRIATE TO, UH, DEFER THIS TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR, UH, FOR THE REVIEW, OR IS WE HAVE A, THERE'S, THERE'S, WE HAVE A PROJECT COMING UP THAT'S GOING TO, UH, USE THESE TERMS. CAN SOMETHING DIFFERENCE? YEAH, THIS IS, I MEAN, THIS IS, UH, THIS WAS JUST A BRIEFING IN DISCUSSION.
THERE'S NOT ACTUALLY ANY ACTION REQUIRED.
WHAT I'LL SAY IS THAT WHEN WE, WHEN WE HAVE OUR NEXT BATCH OF MOU AND PROJECTS, WE'LL CERTAINLY BE BRINGING THIS, WE'LL, WE'LL HAVE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THIS OPTION TERMINATE PRE EARLY TERMINATION OPTION LOOKS LIKE, AND THEN WE CAN, WE CAN GO FROM THERE AND KIND OF TALK ABOUT IT AND THEN BRING IT TO THE BOARD AND DISCUSS, BECAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T SEE IT GOING AWAY.
UH, JIM WORKS ON PFCS ALL THROUGHOUT THE STATE, AND HE DOESN'T SEE IT GOING AWAY.
SO, UM, AND THEN TO BE HON, TO BE HONEST, I THINK AT THAT, AT THAT, LIKE I SAID, AT THE 40 YEAR, UH, TIMEFRAME, YOU KNOW, WE'LL, WE'LL, THE, THE PROJECT'S GONNA NEED TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL RENOVATION ANYWAY.
SO, UM, WE'LL BE LOOKING IT NO MATTER WHAT.
SO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WILL CERTAINLY BE SEEING THIS, AND I'M SURE WILL SET UP A TIME FOR US ALL TO GET TOGETHER AND, AND MEET AND DISCUSS, AND WE PRESENT OUR FINDINGS TO THIS BOARD WHEN WE CONSIDER THE NEXT PROJECTS.
NOW, ANY, ARE THERE FURTHER COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? HEARING NONE, WE LOOK, WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE YES, SIR.
I WAS JUST GONNA, UH, REQUEST THAT AT OUR NEXT MEETING.
UM, WE HAVE, UM, AN UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF ALL OF THE PROJECTS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE THIS BOARD WHERE THEY ARE.
AND SECONDLY, UH, WOULD LIKE TO GET, UH, STAFF TO, UM, PROVIDE, PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF THE D AND O INSURANCE AVAILABLE TO THIS COMMITTEE, BECAUSE THAT IS REQUIRED.
UH, KYLE, I'LL BE THE LAST, THE LAST FULL DECISION LOG WE RECEIVED WITHIN THE END OF JANUARY.
SO WE'LL GET YOU ANOTHER ONE SOON, PROBABLY LIKE RIGHT AFTER THIS MEETING.
WE'LL, WE'LL SUBMIT THAT, BUT THEN WE CAN GO OVER THAT AS WELL.
SO, AND, UH, ANOTHER ITEM I JUST WANTED TO MENTION IS THAT, UH, I THINK IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA IF THE BOARD, UH, PERHAPS, UH, NOT IN A FORMAL MEETING, BUT AT LEAST IN A, A DEBRIEF OR A, UM, WHAT'S THE WORD WE USE, KYLE, A RETREAT TYPE OF SITUATION WHERE WE COULD DISCUSS SOME OF THESE ITEMS AND, UH, THAT OCCURRED IN THE PAST AND NOT, NOT AS A, UH, UH, CERTAINLY NOT AS A MAKE A DECISION, BUT JUST TO DISCUSS AMONG US, UM, HAVE WE DONE SO FAR, AND WHERE, WHERE WE COULD GO FROM HERE AND PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, BRING UP SOME OTHER ITEMS, UH, TO BRING UP TO A, UH, FULL BOARD AND A PUBLIC, UH, VOTE AND DISCUSSION FOR A FUTURE MEETINGS.
UH, WE JUST HAVEN'T REALLY HAD THAT AND, UH, I GUESS A YEAR OR SO.
SO I THINK THAT'D BE GOOD FOR US AS AN ORGANIZATION TO, UH, TO MEET AND, UH, DISCUSS THESE THINGS.
IS THAT GENERALLY AGREEABLE, UH, A TIME AND DATE TO BE DISCUSSED? YEAH, WE CAN, WE CAN WORK ON THAT ONLINE AND FIGURE OUT HOW YOU DO THIS WITH TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS.
ZACH, WE CAN CIRCLE YES, SET THAT UP AND, AND, AND, AND THE TIMING.
LIKE, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU WANT TO SPEND ON A RETREAT, THAT SORT OF THING.
IS THIS SOMETHING YOU WANNA DO ON A WEEKEND? IS THIS SOMETHING YOU WANNA DO IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY THAT SORT OF, WE'RE GONNA DO A ROPES COURSE TRUST TO BE MADE FOR THE PUBLIC? YES.
I JUST WANTED TO, UH, MENTION THAT,
[02:55:01]
UM, I RAN ACROSS THIS DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION ANNUAL REPORT.I DON'T BELIEVE THAT, UH, THAT WAS PRESENTED, UNLESS I NOT CORRECT AN ANNUAL REPORT LAST YEAR.
WAS THERE A NEW ANNUAL REPORT? OH, THE ONE, THE 2022 BOARDING COMMISSION REQUIRED ONE THAT WAS NEVER SENT TO THE BOARD.
I DIDN'T SEE, HASN'T SENT YOU.
I THINK THAT'S JUST REQUIRED BY THE CITY BOARD.
FOR FURTHER, UM, FURTHER INPUT AND SUGGESTION DOWN THE ROAD, SINCE WE ARE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD BE INVOLVED, IF YOU WILL, IN, UH, PREPARING THIS REPORT.
AND WE SHOULD ALSO BE INVOLVED IN REVIEWING THIS REPORT.
AND WE, AS WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY PERFORMANCE, UH, AND ASSESSING EXACTLY SOME OF OUR OBJECTIVES AND WHAT WE DO.
SO, UH, I JUST FELT THAT THIS WAS, OF COURSE, UH, VERY HART LITTLE ACTION GEAR, NO MENTION IN HERE ABOUT, UH, THE FACT THAT WE ESTABLISHED SUBCOMMITTEES, UH, TO ADDRESS DIFFERENT, UH, TOPICS SUCH AS THE, UH, FINANCE, WE HAVE A GOVERNANCE AND SOME OTHERS.
BUT ANYWAY, FOR THIS PARTICULAR YEAR NOW, 2023, UH, HOWEVER THIS IS TO BE DONE, THE PROCESS, I THINK IT SHOULD COME BEFORE US, AND IF WE HAVE THINGS TO SUBMIT OR THINGS TO, UH, REVIEW, THAT SHOULD BE PUT BEFORE US ON THE BOARD.
THAT'S MY, UH, SUGGESTION ON THIS PARTICULAR MATTER.
CAN WE ALL GET A COPY OF THAT EMAIL TO US IMMEDIATELY, KYLE? IS THAT, IS THAT AVAILABLE? YEAH, IT'S, IT'S AVAILABLE ONLINE.
IT'S, IT'S REALLY, IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S A REQUIREMENT FROM THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE THAT WE PROVIDE A UPDATE ON THE, THE PROJECTS THAT WERE APPROVED ESSENTIALLY BY THE, THE BOARD.
UM, WE HAD, WE HAD, WE HAD RECEIVED NOTIFICATION THAT WE NEEDED TO SUBMIT THIS, UH, TOWARDS THE TAIL END OF LAST YEAR.
AND, UM, WE APOLOGIZE THAT IT WA THAT IT, THAT IT WASN'T SENT TO THE GREATER BOARD AT, AT LARGE.
UH, THIS ANNUAL REPORT IS NOT NEARLY AS EXHAUSTIVE AS WHAT WILL HAPPEN WHEN WE RECEIVE OUR AUDITED FINANCIALS AND, UH, ACTUAL, UH, PERFORMANCE AND UNDERSTANDING OF ALL OF OUR PROJECTS AND THE, THE STATUS OF THEIR, THEIR, THEIR COMPLETION.
AND, UH, THIS IS FOR THE USE OF, ESSENTIALLY, OF THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE FROM WHAT I RECOLLECT FROM THIS, THIS REPORT.
SO YOU'LL RECEIVE A MUCH MORE EXHAUST, UH, EXHAUSTIVE ANNUAL REPORT WHEN WE ACTUALLY TAKE A LOOK AT DEEP DIVE INTO THE AUDITED FINANCIALS OF THIS, OF THIS BODY AND FORM TO OUR PROJECTS AS WE, UM, FORM, I WOULD, I WOULD HAVE TO CUT.
WE'RE, WE'RE STAFFING UP GREATER THIS YEAR AS WELL.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS PROBABLY AT NEAR THE BOTTOM OF OUR LIST, THINGS TODAY,
OBVIOUSLY, WE'LL BE MORE IN DEPTH AND MORE INVOLVED WITH Y'ALL, UM, AS WE GO FORWARD AND AS WE KIND OF CONTINUE TO HAVE OUR BEST PRACTICE SINCE WE FIND IT.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE APPRECIATE IT.
WE'RE A GROW NEW AND GROWING ORGANIZATION, AND SO WE APPRECIATE AND UNDERSTAND THE, THE GROWING PAINS THAT COME AT ALL LEVELS.
ONE THING I ALSO WANTED TO DO IS TO, UM, ALBERT, IF, IF YOU COULD JUST STAND A SECOND, THIS ALBERT GONZALEZ, ALBERT, UM, WAS HIRED TO SERVE IT AS THE NEW, UM, PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION MANAGER.
UM, AARON HAS ACTUALLY BEEN FILLING IN BECAUSE THIS WAS A VACANT POSITION FOR THE LAST YEAR PLUS.
SO AS ALBERT GETS UP TO SPEED AND TRANSITIONS FROM HIS OLD POSITION TO THE NEW ONE, HE'LL BE TAKEN ON THE, UH, MANY OF THE DUTIES THAT AARON IS, ARE YOUR SMALL
UH, AND AS A DIRECTOR, PAUL, UH, SUGGESTED IF, IF WE COULD JUST AS A STARTER OF, OF THE COMMUNICATION, IF WE COULD JUST, UH, HAVE A COPY OF THAT REPORT CIRCULATE IN, THAT'LL HELP KICK US OFF ON THE, UH, BEFORE A POSSIBLE RETREAT AND TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION ON THAT SUBJECT.
WE HAVE ANY OTHER, UH, ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION, SEEING, AND HEARING? NONE.
ALL IN FAVOR BY SAYING AYE, THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED.