[00:00:02]
>> WELL, OKAY. THAT'S A NEW VIDEO INTRO WITH
[Call to Order]
A MUCH CALMER VOICE THAT I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE WAS FINISHED.WELL, GOOD MORNING. WE HAVE A QUORUM.
TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, MAY THE 10TH, 2023 TIMES 09:16 A.M AND THAT CALLS ME TO DALLAS CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER.
THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE CHAPLAIN, PHYLLIS WILLIAMS, I BELIEVE.
YES. WHO'S GOING TO GIVE US OUR INVOCATION TODAY.
SHE IS WITH THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. LET'S ALL BOW OUR HEADS FOR A WORD OF PRAYER.
FATHER, WE THANK YOU FOR THIS DAY.
AS WE PREPARE FOR TODAY'S MEETING, WE PRAY FOR YOUR PROTECTION AND STRENGTH AND ALSO YOUR GUIDANCE.
LORD OUR PRAYERS GO OUT TO OUR MAYOR, OUR CITY COUNCIL, AND OUR CITY LEADERS THAT YOU PROTECT THEM DAILY IN THEIR FAMILIES.
AS THEY TAKE ON THE TASK OF EACH WEEK'S AGENDA, WE KNOW THAT THE SERVICE THEY GAVE OUR CITY PROVES THAT WE ARE IN GREAT HANDS.
LORD WE PRAY FOR ALL OF OUR CITIZENS AND WE KNOW THAT THE WORD THERE'S UNITY, THERE IS STRENGTH.
LORD WE ASKED THESE PRAYERS AND YOUR NAME, FOREVER GIVING YOU THANKS. AMEN.
>> EVERYONE, PLEASE RISE FOR OUR PLEDGES OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU MAY BE SEATED.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MORNING.
FIRST, I WANT TO TAKE TIME TO ACKNOWLEDGE TWO VERY SERIOUS ACTS OF SENSELESS VIOLENCE THAT HAVE RECENTLY OCCURRED IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND HAVE CAPTURED THE NATION'S ATTENTION.
THE FIRST BEING THE MASS SHOOTING THAT OCCURRED JUST THIS WEEKEND IN ALLEN, TEXAS AND THE OTHER BEING A DEADLY CAR CRASH, THAT HIT A GROUP OF NEWLY ARRIVED MIGRANTS IN BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS.
I WANT TO ASK THAT EVERYONE WOULD PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT OF SILENCE RIGHT NOW FOR ALL OF THE VICTIMS OF ALL OF THESE TRAGEDIES AND OF COURSE, THEIR FAMILIES AND THEIR LOVED ONES.
IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND JOINING ME IN A MOMENT OF SILENCE.
MY NEXT ANNOUNCEMENT IS THAT EARLIER THIS MORNING, I MET WITH A GROUP OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION.
I'M SURE EVERYONE HERE HAS HEARD OF MAKE A WISH.
THEY ARE WITH THE MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF NORTH TEXAS TO BE SPECIFIC AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEREBY UNDERSTANDS THAT EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE SEEN THE MARKETING ON TELEVISION FOR YEARS, NATIONALLY, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A LOCAL GROUP OF MAKE-A-WISH THAT IS AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS DONE TREMENDOUS WORK IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
THE ORGANIZATION IS ACTUALLY HOSTING ITS ANNUAL FUNDRAISING EVENT THIS SATURDAY RIGHT HERE AT OUR OMNI HOTEL.
IT'S GOING TO HELP THEM RAISE MONEY THAT THEY DEFINITELY ARE IN NEED OF TO FULFILL THE WISHES OF 800 CRITICALLY ILL CHILDREN IN OUR COMMUNITY.
I LEARNED THIS MORNING, IF YOU'RE LIKE ME, YOU MAY REMEMBER WHEN WE MAKE-A-WISH WAS FOR TERMINALLY ILL CHILDREN ONLY, IT'S NOW EXPANDED TO CHILDREN WHO ARE CRITICALLY ILL AS WELL.
IN HONOR OF THIS OCCASION, I HAVE PROCLAIMED MAY 13TH, 2023 AS WISH NIGHT IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
THAT NIGHT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MANY OF THE BUILDINGS AND OUR DOWNTOWN AREA, INCLUDING THE OMNI HOTEL, WHERE THE EVENT IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE, BUT ALSO THE BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING, KPMG BUILDING AND SEVERAL OTHERS HAVE AGREED TO LIGHT UP THEIR BUILDINGS IN BLUE IN RECOGNITION OF ALL OF THESE CHILDREN, ALL OF THEM WHO ARE EXTREMELY DESERVING OF OUR ATTENTION, DESERVING OF OUR ADVOCACY AND DESERVING OF OUR SUPPORT.
ON BEHALF OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY OF DALLAS, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE STAFF AND THE VOLUNTEERS, ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS AND ALL THE SUPPORTERS MOST IMPORTANTLY, OF THE MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION, YOU INSPIRE US WITH YOUR LEADERSHIP AND WITH YOUR COMMITMENT TO FULFILLING THE LIFE-CHANGING WISHES FOR THESE CHILDREN WHO NEED IT THE MOST.
I SEE THAT WE HAVE SEVERAL REPRESENTATIVES THAT MAKE A WISH IN OUR GALLERY TODAY, WHO JOINED US FOR TODAY'S COUNCIL MEETINGS.
IF YOU WOULD NOT MIND, IF YOU ARE WITH THE MAKE-A-WISH ORGANIZATION,
[00:05:02]
MAKE-A-WISH NORTH TEXAS, PLEASE STAND FOR A MOMENT SO THAT WE CAN RECOGNIZE YOU AND GIVE YOU A ROUND OF APPLAUSE FOR YOUR WORK.THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANKS FOR BEING HERE FOR OUR MEETING.
THAT'S IT FOR ANNOUNCEMENTS THROUGH THIS MORNING.
I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO OUR CITY SECRETARY,
[OPEN MICROPHONE]
MADAM SECRETARY, LET'S HAVE OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS NOW.>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GOOD MORNING.
>> THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW HEAR ITS FIRST FIVE REGISTER SPEAKERS, OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS.
I'LL RECITE THE SPEAKER GUIDELINES.
SPEAKERS MUST OBSERVE THE SAME RULES OF PROPRIETY, DECORUM AND GOOD CONDUCT APPLICABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
ANY SPEAKER MAKING PERSONAL AND PERTINENT, PROFANE OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS, OR WHO BECOMES BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ROOM FOR THOSE IN-PERSON SPEAKERS.
FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, YOU'LL BE REMOVED FROM THE SESSION.
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN PERSON, YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
YOU'LL NOTICE THE TIME ON THE MONITOR ON THE PODIUM.
WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP, PLEASE STOP ANY VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, I WILL ANNOUNCE WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.
ALSO SPEAKERS DURING YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS, PLEASE REMEMBER THAT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REFER TO A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER BY NAME.
ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON ONLY.
YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, JOE DILLARD, III.
I'M REPRESENTING FRIENDSHIP WEST BAPTIST CHURCH WHERE DR. FREDERICK D HAYNES, III IS THE PASTOR.
WE'RE COMING TODAY TO TALK ABOUT WHAT AMOUNTS TO A HARDSHIP AND AN ISSUE OF HIGHEST AND BEST USE, AS WELL AS THE LEADERSHIP SENSITIVITY ISSUE AS IT RELATES TO STONE LAKE CAPITAL PARTNERS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THE 18 ACRES IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST OF THE 60 ACRES THAT FRIENDSHIP WEST OWNS.
LATE 2021 STONE LATE CAPITAL PARTNERS CAME TO US AND MADE US AWARE OF WHAT AMOUNTS TO A 200,000 SQUARE FOOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER THAT THEY WERE PROPOSING DEVELOPING IN THE AREA AROUND THE CHURCH.
KEEP IN MIND THAT IN THIS AREA, THERE IS CARTA HIGH SCHOOL.
THERE'S APARTMENTS LESS THAN A FOOTBALL FIELD AWAY.
THERE'S HOUSING THAT'S BETWEEN THE HIGH SCHOOL AND THE APARTMENTS.
WHAT IT AMOUNTS TO IS THEY TOLD US THEY WERE HAVING SOME ISSUES DRAIN IN WATER.
THEY PROPOSED TO DRAIN THEIR WATER FROM THE DISTRIBUTION CENTER THROUGHOUT SITE BY WAY OF AN EASEMENT.
OBVIOUSLY WITH OUR FUTURE PLANS TO DEVELOP HOUSING IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, WE DIDN'T SEE THAT AS A BENEFIT.
CONSEQUENTLY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE, WE HAVE TO IMAGINE SOMEONE WHO LIVES DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THAT DEVELOPMENT, IGNORING THE FACT THAT IT'S LEGAL AS A DEVELOPMENT ITEM.
BUT IT'S NOT RIGHT. IT'S TOTALLY NOT RIGHT.
WHEN WE LOOK AT THE MORE PRESSING ISSUE BEING HOUSING, THERE IS A HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THAT PROPERTY.
RESIDENTS IN THIS AREA HAVE TO TRAVEL 30 MINUTES TO THE NORTH, EAST OR WEST FOR QUALITY ENTERTAINMENT, QUALITY DINING AND TO HAVE A DISTRIBUTION CENTER GIVEN ALL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND AESTHETIC HAZARDS THAT COME WITH A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THAT IS NOT RIGHT.
I ASKED TODAY, IS THAT THE CITY, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THIS BEING A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS LEGAL BY NATURE OF THE ZONING PROCESS, WE ASKED THAT WE HAVE THE COURAGE AS A LEADERSHIP BODY AND AS A COUNCIL TO SAY NO WITH A PROVEN THIS DEVELOPMENT.
BECAUSE AT A HARDSHIP THAT IT POSES NOT ONLY TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE AT THE SCHOOL, IT CREATES A BOTTLENECK OF TRAFFIC AND THERE ARE STUDIES ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY THAT SAYS DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS CREATE SUSTAIN HEALTH ISSUES FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL STANDPOINT.
THIS DOESN'T EVEN COUNT THE AESTHETIC ISSUES OF NOT ONLY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ISSUES WITH HOUSING IN THE AREA. THANK YOU.
[00:10:09]
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS CORPORAL JAMES, I'M A RETIRED DALLAS POLICE OFFICER WITH OVER 34 YEARS OF SERVICE NOT ONLY TO THE CITY OF DALLAS BUT ALSO TO THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS.
I TOOK AN OATH WITH THIS CITY TO REPRESENT THE CITY FAIRLY.
ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE ALWAYS DONE IS I'VE SPOKEN ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS AND THAT'S WHAT I'M DOING RIGHT NOW.
I'VE LIVED WITHIN THE DALLAS, TEXAS COMMUNITY FOR ALMOST 28 YEARS.
I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF DALLAS FOR ALMOST 44 YEARS.
THE COMMUNITY IS ONE THAT HAS, AS YOU HEARD BEFORE, ABOUT 3,500-5,000 RESIDENTS THERE, NOT INCLUDING FIVE DIFFERENT APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
THERE ARE THREE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, ONE MIDDLE SCHOOL, ONE HIGH SCHOOL.
THERE ARE SIX OR MORE DAYCARE CENTERS IN THE SAME GENERAL AREA.
IF YOU GO ABOUT 8-12 BLOCKS, THERE ARE EIGHT DIFFERENT CHURCHES.
WITHIN TWO BLOCKS OF THE SAME LOCATION OF THIS PROJECT IS TWO MAJOR CHURCHES AND ANOTHER ONE IS BEING BUILT WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR OR SO.
I AND THE COMMUNITY ARE OPPOSED OF BRINGING ANOTHER WAREHOUSE AND TO OUR IMMEDIATE COMMUNITY BECAUSE THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL AREA, NOT A INDUSTRIAL AREA.
IT WOULD AFFECT THE RESIDENTS WHO COME IN AND OUT ON A DAILY BASIS, IT'S A HIGH-RISK FOR THE CHILDREN WHO ALSO PLAY IN THAT AREA BECAUSE THERE ALSO IS TWO PLAYGROUNDS IN THE SAME GENERAL AREA WHERE THIS CONSTRUCTION IS GOING TO BE AT, THIS WAREHOUSE.
IT IS ALSO A HAZARD RISK FOR THE TRUCKS 18TH WHO ALWAYS WILL BE COMING IN AND OUT.
THEY'RE NOT ONLY GOING TO BE A DANGER TO THE RESIDENTS THAT STAY THERE BUT THINK ABOUT ALSO THE EFFECT IT'S GOING TO HAVE ON THE ROADS' CONDITION.
AS WE SEE LOOK AT IT RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE A HARD TIME TRYING TO GET EVEN MINOR REPAIRS TO ROAD CONDITION, AND THIS SOMETIMES IT TAKES 6-8 WEEKS TO GET [INAUDIBLE] EVEN DOWN THERE BY THE NEW GOVERNMENT PLAY WHERE THERE IS A MAJOR BUMPED AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
AS WE LOOK AT THIS, I ENCOURAGE EACH OF YOU TO TAKE SOME TIME OUT TO ACTUALLY DRIVE DOWN AND SEE WHAT THE COMMUNITY LIKE.
WE WANT DEVELOPMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY, NO IF AND BUT ABOUT IT, BUT WE WANT RESIDENTIAL.
WE WANT TO KEEP THIS AS A FAMILY RESIDENT AND I ASK EACH OF YOU TO THINK ABOUT IT.
WOULD YOU HAVE A WAREHOUSE PUT IN YOUR BACKYARD OR DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF YOUR SCHOOL THAT'S GOING TO RISK THE SAFETY OF YOUR CHILDREN? IF YOU THINK ABOUT THAT AND REALIZE THE NEGATIVE EFFECT IT WOULD HAVE TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND ESPECIALLY THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND HISPANIC COMMUNITY, WE ASK YOU ALL TO PLEASE TAKE TIME OUT AND COME VISIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD FIRST.
LOOK AND SEE WHERE WE'RE AT THIS POINT.
SEE HOW MUCH WE HAVE GROWN AS A COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPED OVER THIS PERIOD OF ABOUT 10-15, 20 YEARS.
I ENCOURAGE YOU, THE COMMUNITY ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE NEGATIVE ON THIS PROJECT AND ALLOW OUR COMMUNITY TO GROW IN A DIFFERENT MANNER. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. DEBORAH PEEK-HAYNES.
>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR JOHNSON.
TO ALL OF YOU, I AM ASKING YOU TO USE FROM YOUR TOOLBOX AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY TO STOP THE DEVELOPMENT.
ACTUALLY, ADJACENT TO FRIENDSHIP-WEST BAPTIST CHURCH, THERE'S AN 18-ACRE DEVELOPMENT AND THERE WOULD BE A 200,000-SQUARE-FOOT WAREHOUSE BETWEEN THE CHURCH AND ALSO THE COUNTY BUILDING AND ACROSS THE STREET FROM CARTER HIGH SCHOOL.
IT'S ALREADY BEEN SAID THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
IT'S VERY, VERY DANGEROUS TO EVEN THINK ABOUT 18-WHEELERS COMING DOWN AT WHEATLAND ROAD IN FRONT OF THE HIGH SCHOOL.
I'M ASKING YOU TO USE WHATEVER TOOLS YOU HAVE TO BLOCK SOMETHING THAT WE KNOW BY RIGHT THEY CAN DO.
BUT AS MY HUSBAND ALWAYS SAYS, JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS LEGAL DOES NOT MAKE IT JUST.
IT IS NOT JUST FOR THIS WAREHOUSE TO COME IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN THEY CAN GO ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE FREEWAY OR TO THE INLAND PORT.
PLEASE USE YOUR TOOLKIT TO BLOCK THIS DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. DAVID MALCOLM MCGRUDER.
>> GOOD MORNING TO THE MAYOR AND TO THE COUNCIL.
I HAD TO RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEVELOPMENT JUST WEST OF THE CAMPUS AT FRIENDSHIP-WEST AT 2020 WEST WHEATLAND ROAD IN DALLAS, TEXAS.
[00:15:02]
AGAIN, AS CORPORAL ALLEN, FIRST LADY HAYNES, DR. DILLON, HAS ALREADY SAID I CO-SIGN ALL THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN LIFTED UP FOR YOU.I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING.
WE ALSO SAY NO TO THIS DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE WE SAY NO TO ANOTHER WAREHOUSE IN SOUTH DALLAS.
WE SAY NO TO THE INABILITY OF DEVELOPERS TO BE CREATIVE WHILE LOOKING TO PRODUCE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR BECAUSE WE SAY NO TO ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM, AND THE NEGATIVE POSSIBLE HEALTH EFFECTS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ON THE NEIGHBORS, THE FAMILY, THE CHILDREN OF THIS COMMUNITY.
WE SAY NO TO THIS DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE WE SAY NO TO AIR POLLUTION, AND TO NOISE POLLUTION, AND TO IMPLICIT REDLINING, AND TO HEALTH HAZARDS, AND TO SAFETY HAZARDS.
WE SAY NO TO ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENTAL APARTHEID.
WE SAY NO BECAUSE OUR CHILDREN WALK TO SCHOOL IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO CARTER HIGH SCHOOL, OR TO HULCY MIDDLE SCHOOL, OR TO BIRDIE ALEXANDER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
WE BELIEVE THAT THOSE CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES DESERVE TRUE, LEGITIMATE, REAL ECONOMIC INVESTMENT.
WE SAY NO BECAUSE WE ARE CHRISTIANS AND WE ABIDE BY THAT GREAT CIVIC GOLDEN RULE, "DO UNTO THE SOUTH SIDE AS YOU WILL DO TO THE NORTH SIDE." WE SAY NO BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A REAL VISION FOR THAT PROPERTY.
WE BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A REAL VISION FOR THAT COMMUNITY AND FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
FORTUNATELY FOR US, PERHAPS UNFORTUNATE FOR OTHER PEOPLE, THIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT A PART OF THAT VISION.
WITH THAT, I YIELD THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME.
>> MAYOR JOHNSON, COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND FRIENDS.
I'M HERE TODAY JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD.
JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN BUILD IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S IN THE RIGHT PLACE AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO LIVE SAFELY AND JUSTLY IN OUR COMMUNITY.
YOU'VE HEARD ALL OF FRIENDSHIP-WEST, NOW I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT ME AS A RESIDENT WHO LIVES WITHIN A MILE OF THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
I'M GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT ME AS SOMEONE WHO LIVES BY HERSELF AND HAS HAD TO CALL 911 AND HAVE AN AMBULANCE COME AND GET ME BECAUSE I COULDN'T GET UP AND DO FOR MYSELF.
I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT ME AS A RESIDENT WHO HAS TO USE THE ONLY HOSPITAL THAT SERVES THE WHOLE SOUTHERN SECTOR, DUNCANVILLE, DESOTO, LANCASTER, AND WILMER HUTCHINS.
I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT ME AS A RESIDENT WHO LIVES A MILE AWAY FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS TO FIGHT THE TRUCKS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE AND THAT'S UNSAFE.
I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT ME AND MY FAMILY WHO HAS TO DEAL WITH THE INJUSTICES OF WAREHOUSING NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL.
TWO YEARS AGO I WAS DIAGNOSED WITH RA.
IF YOU KNOW WHAT RA IS, IT'S AN AUTO-IMMUNE DISORDER.
I HAVE HAD TO HAVE BOTH OF MY KNEES REPLACED.
AS SUCH, THERE WAS A MORNING I WOKE UP.
I DIDN'T KNOW I COULDN'T EAT BEEF ANYMORE AND I WOKE UP AND I COULDN'T MOVE.
I COULDN'T PUT MY CLOTHES ON AND I COULDN'T HAVE ANYBODY COME AND GET ME.
I HAD TO CALL 911 AND HAVE THEM COME AND GET ME AND I SPENT FOUR DAYS IN THE HOSPITAL.
WHEN WE HAD THAT SNOW ARMAGEDDON.
AND AFTER THAT SNOW ARMAGEDDON WAS OVER WITH, THERE WAS TRUCKS ALL OVER THE PLACE.
AND WHAT WOULD TAKE ME FIVE MINUTES TO GET TO MY HOUSE, TOOK ME 25 MINUTES TO GET THERE.
IT'S NOT FAIR, IT'S NOT SAFE, AND IT'S NOT JUST.
WE, THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT HAS TO TRANSCEND THROUGH THIS ENVIRONMENT, WE SIGNED A PETITION ONLINE AND IN-PERSON.
THIS REPRESENTS OVER 2,000 SIGNATURES.
I SAID IT, 2000 SIGNATURES THAT SAID, THIS IS NOT SAFE.
THIS IS NOT JUST AND AS A COMMUNITY THAT HAS TO USE THE ONLY RETAIL DIVISION AREA IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR,
[00:20:06]
THIS IS THE ONLY HOSPITAL AND THE ONLY RETAIL.THEY HAVE TO FIGHT TO GET TO WHERE WE SHOP, WHERE WE PLAY, AND WHERE WE GO TO SCHOOL.
I WANT TO PRESENT TO CITY COUNCIL THIS.
>> AND YOU CAN HAND IT TO THE OFFICER. TO MY RIGHT.
>> THIS IS FOR WHAT PURPOSE? [BACKGROUND]
>> TO REQUEST THE NEXT TWO SPEAKERS ON OPEN MIC TO ALLOW THEM TO GO TO SUSPEND THE RULES.
>> IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE.
SO WE'LL TAKE THE NEXT TWO SPEAKERS, MADAM SECRETARY.
>> YOUR NEXT SPEAKER, CHRIS HINDBALL.
>> GOOD MORNING. I'M CHRIS HINDBALL WITH THE AT&T PERFORMING ARTS CENTER.
I AM HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM.
I SAW IN A MEMO FROM MR. PERES THAT ONLY A SMALL NUMBER OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE SUBMITTED ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SCENARIOS.
AND I KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE A BRIEFING NEXT WEEK.
SO I'M MAKING THE CASE TODAY THAT 2024 MUST BE A SIGNIFICANT YEAR FOR CULTURAL FACILITIES.
IN 2017, THE NEEDS INVENTORY FOR CULTURAL FACILITIES WAS $89.7 MILLION.
BUT WE WERE TOLD THAT THAT'S NOT A YEAR FOR CULTURAL FACILITIES.
IT WAS THE STREETS HERE, BUT NOT LIBRARIES, NOT THE ARTS.
SO FOR THE $89 MILLION NEED, WE GOT THIS, A $14 MILLION BAND-AID, BIG HOLE, SMALL BAND-AID.
FAST FORWARD SEVEN YEARS TO 2024, THE CULTURAL NEEDS INVENTORY WILL HAVE GROWN TO $120 MILLION.
AND WHAT IS PROPOSED, ANOTHER BAND-AID.
THE HOLE HAS GOTTEN $31 MILLION BIGGER TO 120 MILLION, AND WE'RE IN FOR ANOTHER $15 MILLION BAND-AID.
THAT'S ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT IT THOUGH, IS 60 IS 6% OF THE BOND.
AND THERE IS STRONG HISTORY FOR THIS.
I SENT YOU ALL A SPREADSHEET OF THE CITY BOND PROGRAMS GOING BACK TO 1995.
I GOT THESE FROM MR. IRELAND'S OFFICE.
IN THE PROGRAMS THAT WERE NOT BIG CULTURAL YEARS, WE GOT ABOUT ONE TO 2% OF THE BOND TOTAL.
OR IN SOME CASES, WE WEREN'T IN THERE AT ALL.
BUT IN YEARS OF SIGNIFICANCE, A MUCH HIGHER PERCENTAGE.
IN 2003, CULTURAL FACILITIES WERE 5%, WHICH AMOUNTED TO 29 MILLION OF THAT BOND PROGRAM.
IN 2006, WHEN WE HAD THE LARGEST BOND PROGRAM EVER IN THE CITY'S HISTORY, 1.3 BILLION, THAT WAS AN IMPORTANT YEAR FOR THE ARTS, 4% OF THAT WAS 60 MILLION.
AND THAT WAS USED TO HELP BUILD MOODY PERFORMANCE HALL THAT YEAR.
BUT THERE WERE NO CULTURAL FACILITIES INCLUDED IN 2012 AND ONLY 1% IN 2017.
THAT MEANS BY 2024, NEXT YEAR, IT WILL HAVE BEEN 18 YEARS, 18 YEARS SINCE A BOND PROGRAM INCLUDED CULTURAL FACILITIES IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY.
AND KEEP IN MIND WHAT THE OFFICE OF ARTS AND CULTURE IS PRESENTING, THERE IS NOTHING NEW HERE.
WE ARE JUST TAKING CARE OF WHAT WE'VE GOT.
AT LEAST 15 BELOVED WORKHORSE VENUES FROM NEIGHBORHOOD CULTURAL CENTERS TO THE BIG INSTITUTIONS LIKE THE WINSPEAR OPERA HOUSE AND THE DALLAS MUSEUM OF ART.
WE HAVE ALL HEARD THE SAYING AND SOME OF US MAY HAVE SAID IT OURSELVES.
DALLAS IS REALLY GOOD AT BUILDING THINGS, BUT IT'S NOT GOOD AT TAKING CARE OF THEM.
WE HAVE TO BREAK THIS PATTERN.
WE CAN DO IT WITH THIS BOND PROGRAM FOR BAND-AIDS.
JUST PLEASE SUBMIT A FUNDING SCENARIO THAT GETS US TO 6% WITH CULTURAL FACILITIES.
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE.
CONGRATULATIONS ON THOSE OF YOU WHO WERE RE-ELECTED.
>> AND MY THANKS TO THE BOND OFFICE, YOU HAVE A THANKLESS JOB. THANK YOU.
PAMELA ANDERSON IS NOT PRESENT.
THIS CONCLUDES YOUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS FOR THIS MEETING. MR. MAYOR.
>> WONDERFUL. LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR VOTING AGENDA.
[MINUTES]
>> THANK YOU. YOUR FIRST VOTING ITEM.
ITEM 1 IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
I'M ASKING THAT NO ACTION BE TAKEN ON THIS ITEM AS I WAS NOT ABLE TO GET THE MINUTES TO THE COUNCIL FOR REVIEW, THOSE MINUTES WILL BE PLACED ON YOUR NEXT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.
SO WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR CONSENT AGENDA.
[00:25:01]
BUT BEFORE WE TAKE THAT UP, YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL, PHILIP HYATT HALL.PHILIP HYATT. HE'S COMING FORWARD.
WHO WILL BE SPEAKING TO YOU ON CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 25.
THAT ITEM IS STILL ON YOUR CONSENT AGENDA.
BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. YOU MAY BEGIN.
>> EXCELLENT. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
FIRST CONGRATULATION ON YOUR RE-ELECTION FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT WERE UP, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MCGOUGH AND THOMAS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR EIGHT YEARS OF SERVICE.
THIS COUNCIL HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY SUPPORTIVE OF PARKS AND TRAILS.
AND WE HAVE ANOTHER ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO CONTINUE TO EXPAND THAT WORK IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
IT'S AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARK DEPARTMENTS AND DORBA, THE DALLAS OFF-ROAD BICYCLE ASSOCIATION.
THEY ARE AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS BEEN ACTIVE FOR OVER 30 YEARS AND THEY HAVE HAD PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS, STATE PARK SYSTEMS, THE COUNTY, AND PROVIDE A SERVICE THAT MAKES THE CITY OF DALLAS MORE ATTRACTIVE.
IT PROVIDES SOMETHING THAT THE PUBLIC FUNDING HAS NOT YET GONE INTO, WHICH IS SOFT SURFACE TRAILS.
THIS AGREEMENT BEFORE YOU TODAY.
IT UPDATES THE AGREEMENT FOR ALL THE PROPERTIES THAT YOU HAVE UNDER MANAGEMENT CURRENTLY, AND IT ALSO INCLUDES THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IN NEW FACILITIES GOING FORWARD.
THE FIRST ONE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE AS CREEK SIDE PARK, THAT'S GOING TO BE THE 50 ACRES THAT FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT WERE ABLE TO ATTEND THE FIELD TRIP THAT WE TOOK LAST NOVEMBER TO LOOK AT THE TRINITY FOR A SPINE TRAIL.
THIS IS THE 50 ACRES THAT ENCOMPASSES THAT AREA.
AND ORBIT IS GOING TO BE BUILDING THE FIRST NEW FACILITY IN DALLAS IN 15 YEARS THERE.
THE ONLY OTHER TYPE OF PROJECT LIKE THIS IN THE REGION IS ONE THAT FRISCO IS DOING AS PART OF THEIR PGA CAMPUS.
AND SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DALLAS IS DOING TO STAY COMPETITIVE, TO BRING NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES AND MAKE THIS THE CENTER OF OUR PARK SYSTEM.
THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS THAT I PERSONALLY I'M A DORBA MEMBER.
ONE THING THAT I STARTED OUT THAT ACTUALLY GOT ME INTO BIKING WAS WRITING ON DORBA FACILITIES.
RELIC CREEK PRESERVE FIRST AND NOW I LIVE VERY CLOSE TO OAK CLIFF NATURE PRESERVE IN BOULDER PARK.
AND SO THIS IS A REALLY EXCITING THING THAT DOESN'T GET A LOT OF ATTENTION.
AND SO I'M REALLY GLAD THAT THIS IS BEFORE YOU ON CONSENT AGENDA TODAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. THERE ARE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS ON YOUR CONSENT AGENDA.
I WOULD LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT ON CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 25, IT HAS BEEN CORRECTED TO AS KATIE JACKSON PARK WAS OMITTED FROM THE ITEM DESCRIPTION.
NOW WE'LL MOVE TO YOUR CONSENT AGENDA.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
YOUR CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEMS TWO THROUGH 34.I'M SORRY. THERE WERE SOME CHANGES, LAST-MINUTE CHANGES.
AGENDA ITEM 13 HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO, AND AGENDA ITEM 29 WAS DELETED.
THEREFORE, YOUR CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEMS TWO THROUGH 12, 14 THROUGH 28 AND 30 THROUGH 34.
>> ALL RIGHTS. MOVEMENT SAY IN A DISCUSSION, MR. WESTON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE CONSENT.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. JUST A COUPLE OF SHOUT OUTS.
AGENDA 5 IS AN EXTENSION OF THE CONSULTING CONTRACT FOR TDA CONSULTING TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH OUR HOUSING RESOURCE CATALOG AND WORKING WITH STAFF ON THE DALLAS HOUSING POLICY 2033.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH TDA SINCE 2019.
THEY'VE HELPED US THROUGH THE EQUITY AUDIT AND THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE STAYING ON FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HOUSING POLICY, WHICH WAS SOMETHING I THINK MOST OF US HERE ASKED FOR IT AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING HELP, AND I WANT TO COMMEND HOUSING STAFF AND THE CITY MANAGER FOR GETTING THAT DONE.
SECOND IS ITEM 19, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM NARVAEZ AND I HAD THE WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY TO READ THE RESOLUTION PROVIDED BY MAYOR JOHNSON DESIGNATING THE WEST DALLAS GATEWAY PECAN TREE AS A HISTORIC TREE.
THIS IS A TREE THAT'S 175-200 YEARS OLD AND HAS SURVIVED EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED, INCLUDING THE CREATION OF THE LEVEES ALONG THE TRINITY RIVER, IMPORTANT CELEBRATION THAT OCCURRED DURING EARTH DAY.
LASTLY, I WANT TO RECOGNIZE ITEM 25, WHICH IS THE TENURE TERM OF MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE DALLAS OFF-ROAD BICYCLE ASSOCIATION DOBA, FOR PROVIDING OFF ROAD BIKE TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS IN MAINTAINING SURFACE TRAILS FOR OFF-ROAD CYCLISTS.
THEY'D BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH MY OFFICE AND I THINK IT WAS SEVERAL OF YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT MAKING SURE WE HAVE ADEQUATE FACILITIES FOR OFF-ROAD BIKE FANATICS, AND I'M GLAD THAT THEY'RE DOING ALL THIS ON THEIR OWN DIME, JUST ENHANCING OUR PARKS.
I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR PROVIDING THESE AMENITIES TO OUR OUTDOOR ENTHUSIASTS. THANK YOU.
[00:30:05]
>> I'LL COME BACK TO YOU MS. BLACKMON.
MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON CONSENT.
>> THANK YOU. JUST QUICKLY JUST SOME OBSERVATIONS ON ITEM 23 AND 24.
JUST TO SHOUT OUT IS COUNCIL MEMBER WAS STATED ON THE MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT PROGRAMS THAT THE CITY MANAGER IS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE, WHICH IS SUCH A POSITIVE.
WE NEED TO SEE MORE OF THAT, AS WELL AS 24 WHERE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE MORE INVESTMENT IN OUR YOUTH.
WE'VE BEEN ASKED, I KNOW I HAVE QUITE EXTENSIVELY, WHAT ARE WE DOING FOR THE YOUTH AND I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE PUT THAT ON THE RECORD AND ESPECIALLY IF THE PUBLIC IS LISTENING, SO THEY REALIZE WE DON'T HAVE A DEAF EAR TO THAT, WHETHER IT RELATES TO THE YOUTH OR TO MENTAL HEALTH, AND THEN ALSO ITEMS 6 AND 7, I'M EXTREMELY EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE SOME INVESTMENT IN THE CEDAR CREST AREA NEAR CEDAR CREST GOLF COURSE.
WE CAN BEGIN TO STABILIZE THOSE VACANT LOTS, AND WE SEE WE HAVE A DEVELOPER WHO OBVIOUSLY THE SIGN ALL THE TIME, BUT THEY NEED THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
COUNCIL MEMBERS AND PUBLIC IT'S SUCH A POSITIVE VIBE THAT WE'RE GETTING HERE AS WE MOVE TO THE HBCU, THIS COMING TO CEDAR CREST THIS FALL, AND IT'S GOLF TOURNAMENT.
I DON'T KNOW IF GOLF TOURNAMENTS THE RIGHT TERM, BUT THE PRO GOLF IS COMING UP HBCUS AND IT IS GOING TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE INVESTMENT AND GET THAT ECONOMIC ENGINE GOING.
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES IS OUR SIGNATURE SPONSOR, ONE OF THEM, BUT THE SOUTHWEST IS THE MAJOR, AND SO THIS IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR FOR THAT COMMUNITY AND JUST TO BE ABLE TO HAVE DEVELOPMENT, CLEANING UP SOME OF THOSE EMPTY LOTS.
I'M EXTREMELY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
THANK YOU STAFF FOR PUTTING IN THAT INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE WILL BE GETTING SOME MONEY FROM THE GENERAL FUND, BUT I AM EXTREMELY EXCITED ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S COMING INTO THE CEDAR CREST AREA, AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A PLUS.
I DID WANT TO MAKE SURE I'VE PUT THAT ON THE RECORD TO DATE FOR THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, WE ARE MOVING ON UP AT CEDAR CREST AND THAT COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRWOMAN BLACKMON, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON THE CONSENT.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO PUT NOTICE ON NUMBER 3, THE ACCEPTANCE OF FUNDS FROM THE STATEWIDE OPIOID SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
YESTERDAY, WE DID HAVE OUR PRESS CONFERENCE ON FENTANYL AWARENESS AND I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR ATTENDING AND LISTENING.
WHAT WE'VE DONE IS A STRIKE FORCES CREATES SOME WORK RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE FOLKS THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH TO BRING NARCAN VARS FIRST RESPONDERS, TRAINING EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS, RESPONSE TEAM NEEDS SUCH AS CARS OR EVEN JUST GENERAL THINGS AS WELL AS A PR CAMPAIGN.
WE'LL BE FINALIZING SOME ITEMS AND BRING IT TO COUNCIL OR SEND IT THROUGH A MEMO IF IT DOESN'T MEET THE THRESHOLD.
BUT WE'RE ALSO WORKING THIS IN A REGIONAL VIEW, SO IT'S NOT DONE IN ISOLATION.
LEVERAGING OUR RESOURCES THAT THE COUNTY WILL GET SO THAT WAY WE CAN BRING A BROADER OPERATION TO OUR COMMUNITY.
I THINK YOU CAN HELP ME SUPPORT THIS ITEM.
>> GERALD ATKINS REGISTERS FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON CONSENT.
>> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. I WANT TO BRING THE HIGHLIGHT TO ITEM NUMBER 16 IS BEEN LONG BEEN WAITING.
WE THINK ABOUT 2017 BOND PACKAGE THAT WE PASSED SIX YEARS AGO, AND NOW WE JUST NOW GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON IT, AND THIS IS COMPLETELY OF QUEENSLAND ROAD, IT'S ROUGHLY ABOUT $15 MILLION ROAD TO BE COMPLETED.
IT LOOKED LIKE YOU WANT TO TAKE A DECADE TO COMPLETE.
HOPEFULLY IN THE FUTURE THAT WE WILL HAVE THIS DONE VERY SHORTLY.
THEN WE'LL ALSO BRING THE INFRASTRUCTURE AROUND UNIVERSITY DALLAS AT UNT DALLAS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE DO HAVE A PROFIT INFRASTRUCTURE AROUND TO GET AROUND TO THE EGRESS AND REGRESS FRONT OF THE UNT CAMPUS. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT NUMBER 3 AS WELL.
I DO WANT TO THANK CHAIRWOMAN BLACKMON FOR HER LEADERSHIP.
OUR STRIKE FORCE HAS PUT TOGETHER A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT TO REALLY RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT THE OPIOID CRISIS.
BUT I WANTED TO JUST HIGHLIGHT THAT THESE SETTLEMENT DOLLARS THAT ARE COMING IN ARE HUGE ASSISTANCE AND US COMBATING THIS CRISIS.
HOWEVER, WE DID HAVE A CALL TO ACTION YESTERDAY AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE IT'S PUT ON RECORD AND ENCOURAGE ALL COLLEAGUES OR ANYONE WHO'S WATCHING TO REACH OUT TO YOUR LEGISLATORS IN ADDITION TO TALKING TO YOUR CHILDREN.
RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A PENDING BILL THAT WE'VE BEEN LOBBYING FOR FOR THE FENTANYL TEST STRIPS THAT
[00:35:03]
COULD BE THE THE LIFESAVING TOOL IN MANY CASES.WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO TO PREVENT OTHER THAN CONTINUE TO RAISE AWARENESS AND WE'VE HEARD SOME REAL LIFE STORIES ON WHAT FAMILIES BELIEVE COULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT HAD THESE BEEN AVAILABLE TO THEM.
THIS ITEM IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOME OF THAT FUNDING THAT WE COULD BE SPENDING TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S ACCESS TO THESE TESTING STRIPS ACROSS OUR CITY TO HELP COMBAT THIS CRISIS THAT IS TOUCHING ALL CORNERS OF SOCIETY.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, I WANTED TO JUST HIGHLIGHT IN ITEM 12, WE'VE GOT SEVERAL PROPERTIES BEING SOLD.
IN DISTRICT 7, THIS IS HUGE FOR GROWTH, NOT ONLY FOR HOME OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES, BUT WITH THE VACANT LOTS THAT WE'VE HAD SITTING ON OUR LAND BANK AND MAKING SURE THAT WE REVITALIZE THEM, DEVELOP ON THEM.
IT SPEAKS DIRECTLY TO THE MAYOR'S PRIORITIES WITH PUBLIC SAFETY AND OR IMPROVEMENT OF BLIGHT REMEDIATION.
ON ITEM 15, WE HAVE DOLPHIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS THAT THE DOLPHIN HEIGHTS AND OWEN WOULD COMMUNITIES HAVE BEEN LONG WAITING.
THIS IS A GOOD ITEM TO SEE HAPPEN BECAUSE THAT MEANS MORE DIRT IS GOING TO BE TURNED FOR THIS PROJECT TO FINALLY END.
THEN I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT ITEM 23, WE'VE GOT SOME GOOD INVESTMENTS WITH CONTRACTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON MENTAL HEALTH, SENIORS AND OUR YOUTH AND I AM ALWAYS THRILLED WHEN WE AS A COUNCIL PRIORITIZE OUR SENIORS, YOUTH, AND MENTAL HEALTH FOR THE COMMUNITY.
WITH THAT I WILL YIELD MY TIME. THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE CONSENT AGENDA TODAY? WE HAD A LOT OF INTEREST IN THAT AT SCHOOL. I DON'T SEE ANYONE.
ANYBODY REMOTE TODAY? I GUESS EVERYBODY'S HERE.
WELL, SEEING AND HEARING NONE.
ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT. CONSENT AGENDA IS ADOPTED. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE.
[13. Authorize a five-year lease agreement, with two five-year renewal options, with New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, for approximately 528 square feet of City-owned land located at 500 North Malcolm X Boulevard to be used as a cellular transmission and receiving facility for the period March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2028 - Estimated Revenue: General Fund $460,356.00]
>> AGENDA ITEM 13, AUTHORIZE A FIVE-YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT WITH TWO FIVE-YEAR RENEWAL OPTIONS WITH NEW SINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC FOR APPROXIMATELY 528 SQUARE FEET OF CITY-OWNED LAND, LOCATED AT 500 NORTH MALCOLM X BOULEVARD TO BE USED AS A CELLULAR TRANSMISSION AND RECEIVING FACILITY FOR THE PERIOD MARCH 1ST, 2023 THROUGH FEBRUARY 29, 2028.
THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO.
>> YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION, MR. MORENO.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO OUR NEXT COUNCIL AGENDA.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
>> YOU HAVE FIVE-MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION TO DEFER.
>> AS WE BEGIN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT OUR UPCOMING BOND ALONG WITH PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE PLAN AHEAD, THAT WE LOOK AT CREATIVE CONCEPTS WHEN IT COMES TO OUR PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES.
AS OUR CORE BECOMES MORE DENSE, WE NEED TO LOOK AT NEW MODELS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES.
AS WE DO THAT, THERE'S CREATIVE IDEAS THAT I'VE STARTED DISCUSSIONS WITH DEVELOPERS AND WITH OUR PUBLIC SAFETY TEAM.
THE TIME PERIOD TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, I BELIEVE WILL HANDICAP US FROM POSSIBLE PARTNERSHIPS WITH OUR PRIVATE SECTOR.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO BE ABLE TO THINK THIS LONG TERM SO THAT IT DOESN'T HOLD US BACK FROM FUTURE PARTNERSHIPS. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR.
>> IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO DEFER ABOVE.
CARA MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON MR. MORENO'S MOTION TO DEFER TO THE NEXT MEETING.
>> I JUST WANT TO COMPLIMENT COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO ON PURSUING THIS LINE OF SUPPORT FOR OUR FIRE STATIONS AND FACILITIES AS WE GROW. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DEFER? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM.
>> WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
YOUR FIRST ITEM, AGENDA ITEM 35 IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
THIS MORNING THERE ARE NO BOARD APPOINTMENTS.
AGENDA ITEM 36 IS A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTED
[36. A resolution reappointing Mark S. Swann, as City Auditor for a two-year term, effective May 1, 2023 - Not to exceed $511,596.00 - Financing: General Fund]
MARK S1 AS CITY AUDITOR FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM EFFECTIVE MAY 1ST 2023, NOT TO EXCEED $511,596.>> IS THERE A MOTION? IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S MOVING AND SAY, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING HEARING NONE.
ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM.
[37. An ordinance amending Ordinance No. 32308, previously approved on September 28, 2022, authorizing certain transfers and appropriation adjustments for FY 2022-23 for the maintenance and operation of various departments, activities, and amending the capital budget; and authorize the City Manager to implement those adjustments - Not to exceed $4,651,236,410 - Financing: General Fund ($1,727,562,642), Enterprise Funds, Internal Service, and Other Funds ($1,639,630,557), Capital Funds ($1,121,157,386), and Grants, Trust, and Other Funds ($162,885,825) (This item was deferred on April 26, 2023)]
>> AGENDA ITEM 37 IS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 32308,
[00:40:05]
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 28TH 2022, AUTHORIZING CERTAIN TRANSFERS AND APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022, '23 FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, ACTIVITIES, AND AMENDING THE CAPITAL BUDGET, AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT THOSE ADJUSTMENTS NOT TO EXCEED $4,651,236,410.I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT AGENDA ITEM 37 HAS BEEN CORRECTED ON PAGE 12 OF THIS ITEM, A TYPO HAS BEEN CORRECTED, REMOVING THE ASTERISK FROM THE CEDARS TIFF DISTRICT FUND.
>> IS THERE A MOTION? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
WELCOME, MR. THOMAS. GOOD TO SEE YOU.
[38. Authorize the (1) City Manager to accept conveyance of the Premises in an amount not to exceed $6,000,000.00 in the name of the City utilizing financing to be secured by Cypress Creek Forest Lane, LP (Tax Credit Partnership) including Low Income Housing Tax credits provided by Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) commercial debt, and soft debt approved by the City and secured by the Tax Credit Partnership; and (2) negotiation and execution of a lease for a term of at least five years and not longer than 39 years and development agreement with Cypress Creek Forest Lane, LP (Tenant/Tax Credit Partnership) allowing construction and operation of the project called Cypress Creek at Forest Lane Apartments located at 11520 North Central Expressway, Dallas, Texas 75243 - Estimated Revenue: $2,153,042.00 (15 years of estimated fees and lease payments)]
>> YOUR NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 38 AUTHORIZE ONE, THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT CONVEYANCE OF THE PREMISES IN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED SIX MILLION DOLLARS IN THE NAME OF THE CITY UTILIZING FINANCING TO BE SECURED BY CYPRUS CREEK FOREST LANE LP TAX CREDIT PARTNERSHIP, INCLUDING LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS PROVIDED BY TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, TDHCA, COMMERCIAL DEBT, AND SOFT DEBT APPROVED BY THE CITY AND SECURED BY THE TAX CREDIT PARTNERSHIP.
TWO, NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION OF A LEASE FOR A TERM OF AT LEAST FIVE YEARS, IF NOT LONGER THAN 39 YEARS AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH CYPRUS CREEK FOREST LANE, LP, TENANT TAX CREDIT PARTNERSHIP, ALLOWING CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE PROJECT CALLED CYPRUS CREEK AT FOREST LANE APARTMENTS LOCATED AT 11520 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, DALLAS, TEXAS 75243.
YOU DO HAVE 10 INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, WILLIAM ROTH.
>> YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO PUSH IT.
GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO PRESENT FOR TODAY.
I RESIDE AT 6921 METAL ROAD IN DALLAS, TEXAS.
OUR OFFICES ARE LOCATED IN 11551 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY IN DALLAS, TEXAS.
MY PARTNERS AND I ARE THE OWNERS OF A 75,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPOSED PROJECT.
WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS PROJECT.
IT IS A DIRECT VIOLATION OF A DEED RESTRICTION THAT PREVENTS APARTMENTS FROM BEING DEVELOPED AT THIS SITE.
OUR LEGAL RESEARCH CONFIRMS THAT THE CITY'S INVOLVEMENT IN THIS TRANSACTION IS NOT BEING USED PROPERLY AND IT IS IMPROPER TO PERMIT A PRIVATE DEVELOPER TO AVOID THESE BINDING DEED RESTRICTIONS.
SUCH ACTIONS BY THE CITY IN OUR RESEARCH AND IN REALLY THOUGHTFUL POSITION IS IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A PROPRIETARY ACT AND A VIOLATION OF THE PUBLIC PURPOSE.
SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY TO THE CITY WOULD NOT APPLY.
ALL POTENTIAL CAUSES OF ACTION ARISING FROM THE VIOLATION OF THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO ABOUT 150,000 SQUARE FEET OF PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THIS VIOLATION.
IF THE CITY ALLOWS AND FACILITATES THE DEVELOPMENT OF APARTMENTS ON THIS SIDE, WE WILL CONSIDER THIS AN IMPROPER TAKING OF OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PRIVATE DEVELOPER.
WE WILL SUE THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER FOR VIOLATION OF THESE RIGHTS.
WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, BUT WE WILL DO IT.
THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNERS BOUGHT AND DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTIES
[00:45:03]
IN GOOD FAITH AND IN RELIANCE ON DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH ENCOURAGE AND PROMOTED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IN THIS COMMUNITY.TAKING AWAY THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS DISRUPTS THE TRUST AND CONFIDENCE OF THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE INTEGRITY AND LONGEVITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THEY LIVE IN.
THERE ARE NO APARTMENTS ON THE EAST SIDE OF CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY FROM MOCKINGBIRD TO LBJ, THAT WHOLE CORRIDOR IS OFFICE, RETAIL, SERVICE, INSTITUTIONAL UNITS.
THERE IS NOT ONE APARTMENT COMPLEX OR UNIT ON THE SERVICE ROAD.
THERE'S OVERWHELMING NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT, SURPRISING TO US THAT THE VOICES OF LITERALLY THOUSANDS OF RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ARE NOT PARAMOUNT TO THE CITY'S DECISION PROCESS.
WE HOPE THAT THE WISHES OF THE RESIDENTS AND THE PROTECTION OF [OVERLAPPING]
THANK YOU. [OVERLAPPING] THAT'S YOUR TIME.
>> I UNDERSTAND. I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT.
>> ZACHARY KROTCHTINGLE, SYCAMORE STRATEGIES, DISTRICT 12.
YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR A LOT OF MOTIONS ABOUT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BUT THE FOCUS OF PLACING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN DALLAS NEEDS TO BE INFORMED BY DATA.
THERE'S NO STATISTICAL REASON THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SHOULD NOT MOVE FORWARD.
TDHCA HAS GUIDELINES FOR CRIME RATES, SCHOOL RATINGS, POVERTY RATES, AND OTHER UNDESIRABLE SITE FEATURES.
THE SITE FOR CYPRESS CREEK AT FOREST LANE DOES NOT HAVE ANY OF THE ISSUES THAT WOULD DISQUALIFY IT FROM FUNDING.
FURTHER, OUR SITE PROMOTES THE GOALS OF THE RECENTLY PASSED RACIAL EQUITY PLAN.
THERE ARE OVER 21,000 LIGHT-TECH UNITS IN DALLAS.
COUNCILMAN ATKINS, YOUR DISTRICT HAS 4,100 OF THOSE UNITS.
COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA, YOUR DISTRICT HAS 3,900 IN YOUR DISTRICT.
COUNCILMAN THOMAS, THERE ARE 2,300 IN YOUR DISTRICT.
MAYOR PROTEM ARNOLD, THERE ARE 2,300 IN YOUR DISTRICT.
THOSE DISTRICTS HOUSE 58 PERCENT OF THE CITY'S ENTIRE LIGHT-TECH UNITS.
CYPRESS CREEK AT FOREST LANE WILL BE LOCATED IN DISTRICT 10.
THERE ARE 168 LIGHT-TECH UNITS IN DISTRICT 10, LESS THAN 1 PERCENT OF THE CITY'S TOTAL.
WHEN YOU ADD THE 103 AFFORDABLE UNITS FROM CYPRESS CREEK AT FOREST LANE, DISTRICT 10 WOULD STILL HAVE THE LEAST LIGHT-TECH UNITS OF ANY CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT IN THE CITY.
HISTORICALLY, LIGHT-TECH HAS NOT BEEN SPREAD AROUND THE CITY OF DALLAS IN AN EQUITABLE MANNER.
SINCE 2010, THERE HAVE BEEN OVER 4,000 LIGHT-TECH UNITS FOR FAMILIES PLACED IN CENSUS TRACTS WITH OVER 90 PERCENT MINORITY CONCENTRATION.
THE CONCENTRATION AT CYPRESS CREEK AND FOREST LANE IS UNPRECEDENTED.
THERE ARE ONLY 287 UNITS IN 15 YEARS PLACED IN A LESS RACIALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS THAN CYPRESS CREEK AT FOREST LANE.
THE PROPOSED SITE IS ONE OF THE BEST SITES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN DALLAS.
IT IS WALKING DISTANCE TO DART.
IT IS IN A HIGH OPPORTUNITY, LOW POVERTY CENSUS TRACT.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT IS NOT NEXT TO SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
AS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER, WE TRY TO AVOID DEVELOPMENT SITES TO BACKUP THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
THE CLOSEST SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES TO THIS SITE ARE OVER 1,000 FEET AWAY.
THE BACKLASH WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN FIERCE.
BUT THIS IS THE SAME BACKLASH THAT HAS LEFT NORTH DALLAS WITHOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THE REST OF THE CITY WITH CONCENTRATIONS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AS A CITY AND AS A COMMUNITY, WE NEED TO DO BETTER. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS ANNE LOTT AND I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT LOCATED AT 3301 ELM STREET IN DALLAS, TEXAS.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT AND THE THOUSANDS OF LOW-INCOME FAMILIES THAT WE SERVE TO EXPRESS SUPPORT FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS' PARTNERSHIP WITH SYCAMORE STRATEGIES TO DEVELOP
[00:50:02]
APPROXIMATELY 189 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT 11520 NORTH-CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.ICP WORKS TO EXPAND HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES IN HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREAS FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES, PARTICULARLY FAMILIES WITH VOUCHERS WHO DESIRE TO LIVE IN HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREAS.
WE WORK WITH THEM TO FIND THIS HOUSING AND WE WORK TO ADDRESS THE BARRIERS THAT DENY THEM ACCESS TO THIS HOUSING.
ICP SUPPORTS THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT PROVIDES THEM WITH ACCESS TO RETAIL, WHICH PROVIDES THEM ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT, AND IT ALSO PROVIDES THEM ACCESS TO GOOD QUALITY SCHOOLS.
OVER THE LAST 30 OR SO YEARS, DEVELOPERS HAVE RECEIVED OVER $95 MILLION TO DEVELOP AND BUILD OVER 20,000 LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS.
97 PERCENT OF THE 20,000 OR SO LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS ARE BUILT IN AREAS THAT ARE MORE THAN 50 PERCENT BLACK.74 PERCENT ARE BUILT IN HIGH POVERTY AREAS AND 16 PERCENT OF THE UNITS AT THE CITY OF DALLAS APPROVES HAVE BEEN IN EXTREME POVERTY AREAS.
THE LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAMS PROVIDES CITIES TO AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHER FAIR HOUSING.
THE PATTERNS OF SEGREGATION THAT WE SEE ACROSS THE CITY SUGGEST THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS NOT MET ITS OBLIGATION.
HOWEVER, APPROVAL OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT WILL HELP THE CITY MEET ITS OBLIGATION UNDER THE FAIR HOUSING ACT TO PROMOTE INTEGRATION AND STOP SEGREGATION.
I APPRECIATE YOU HEARING THIS PROPOSAL THIS MORNING.
I KNOW THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION IS STRONG, IT ALWAYS IS, AND I KNOW THAT THE NIMBY VOICES ARE LOUD, THEY ALWAYS ARE.
THAT'S WHY WE SEE THE PATTERNS OF SEGREGATION THAT WE SEE TODAY.
BUT I URGE YOU NOT TO BE SWAYED BY THESE HATEFUL RHETORIC ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO WILL LIVE IN THE HOUSING.
I URGE YOU NOT TO BE PERSUADED BY THE PATRONIZING VOICES THAT SAY IT'S NOT THE RIGHT LOCATION.
IT'S NEVER GOING TO BE THE RIGHT LOCATION AS LONG AS IT'S IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT DALLAS NEEDS MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT THAT WILL PLACE THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING [OVERLAPPING]
>> THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME THIS MORNING.
>> THANK YOU. GARRETT SHERMAN.
GARRETT SHERMAN IS NOT PRESENT.
>> YES, MY NAME IS BRITNEY JONES AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CLIENT ADVISORY BOARD AND FOR ALL DALLAS VOUCHER HOLDERS.
THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THAT'S GOING ON IS THAT VOUCHER HOLDERS HAVE A STIGMA AND A NEGATIVE NARRATIVE THAT NOBODY WANTS TO ADDRESS.
A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW A VOUCHER HOLDER, NEVER MET ONE OR HAS TAKEN THE TIME TO SEE HOW WE LIVE.
SO I JUST WANT TO INTRODUCE MYSELF AS A VOUCHER HOLDER.
I HAVE A DEGREE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND A MINOR IN PSYCHOLOGY.
DUE TO THE INHUMANE LIVING CONDITION, I HAD TO SUE MY APARTMENT BY MYSELF ANYONE AND ALSO STARTED A UNIT WITH A TENANT.
HOWEVER, WHEN I GO TO AN APARTMENT COMPLEX AND SHOW THEM THE VOUCHER, ALL MY ACCOLADES GO OUT THE WINDOW.
I JUST WANT A BETTER PLACE TO STAY LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.
WE GET A VOUCHER, BUT WHERE WE HAVE TO STAY IS IN POVERTY.
HOW CAN YOU MAKE A BETTER LIFE FOR YOURSELF IF THIS IS THE ONLY OPTION THAT YOU HAVE? WITH CYPRESS CREEK BEING OFF OF 75 FOREST LANE, THERE ARE SCHOOLS, THERE'S HOSPITALS, THERE'S CHURCHES, YOU HAVE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.
THERE'S DIVERSITY, TRADITION THERE.
YOU HAVE A BETTER WAY OF LIFE AND NOBODY WANTS TO GIVE US THAT, BUT THEY SAY THEY ARE HELPING US BY GIVING US VOUCHERS THAT ONLY PUTS US IN SITUATIONS THAT CAUSES OUR DOWNFALL.
WE JUST WANT OPTIONS LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
WE JUST WANT THE OPTION TO LIVE IN A BETTER COMMUNITY, TO HAVE A BETTER LIFE. THANK YOU.
[00:55:20]
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS ROB STEWART.
I LIVE AT 509 SHADY VALLEY DRIVE IN DALLAS, TEXAS 75238 IN DISTRICT 10.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE CYPRESS STREET PROJECT FOR SEVERAL REASONS.
IN ADDITION TO BEING IN A BAD LOCATION, IT'S ALMOST TWO MILES TO THE CLOSEST GROCERY STORE.
IT'S TWO DARK BUSES TO GET THERE AND THREE TO GET BACK.
THINK OF A YOUNG MOTHER WALKING WITH TWO GALLONS OF MILK, WITH TWO SMALL CHILDREN IN TOWN TO GET BACK-AND-FORTH.
IT'S MORE THAN A MILE TO THE CLOSEST PLAYGROUNDS.
THAT WOULD BE HAMILTON PARK WHERE YOU'D CROSS SIX LANE FORCE PLANE OR MOSS PARK, WHICH WITH SIX LANE ROYAL LANE IN GREENVILLE AVENUE.
FOR RESIDENCE OF THIS PROJECT TO GET TO THE GROCERY STORE OR TO THE SCHOOLS AT HAMILTON PARK, IT'S STOLTZ ROAD.
THEY'LL HAVE TO CROSS THE INTERSECTION OF THE COTTONWOOD CREEK TRAIL, FOREST LANE AT THE DART STATION IN THE CONVENIENCE STORE WHICH SHARON GREEKS HAS WRITTEN ABOUT.
THERE'S HIGH CRIME, THERE'S PROSTITUTION, THERE'S A LOT OF DRUGS.
NO ONE ON THE STAFF TALK TO THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT BEFORE LAST WEEK ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
IT HAS BEEN A CRIME AREA AND A PROBLEM AREA FOR A LONG TIME.
YOUNG CHILDREN WILL WALK BY THEIR TWICE A DAY ON THEIR WAY TO AND FROM SCHOOL.
IN ADDITION TO THE PROJECT ISSUES, I AGREE THAT THERE ARE LEGAL CONCERNS WITH THIS PROJECT.
IN LAW SCHOOL THEY TEACH REAL PROPERTY IS A BUNDLE OF STICKS WHEN THERE IS ONE TAKEN AWAY FOR THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, IT'S OVER HERE.
WHEN YOU PURCHASE IT, YOU ONLY PURCHASE THIS THE DEED RESTRICTIONS OVER HERE.
IT'S BEEN CONDEMNED BY INVERSE CONDEMNATION.
I DO AGREE THAT IN THE INVERSE CONDEMNATION, THERE'S NOT JUST THE COMPENSATION TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT THERE'S A QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT THE EXCEPTION IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE APPLIES, BECAUSE IN THIS CASE THE PROPERTY WAS TAKEN BY COM DONATION.
LAST, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE RESOLUTION ITSELF.
AN INDEMNITY IS ONLY AS GOOD AS A PERSON THAT GIVES IT.
IN THIS CASE, THE INDEMNITY IS COMING FROM A SINGLE-PURPOSE ENTITY WITHOUT ANY ASSETS OTHER THAN THE PROJECT ITSELF, UNTIL THE PROJECT GETS BILL THAT'S NOTHING.
A LAWSUIT IS GOING TO COME LONG BEFORE THE PROJECT IS BUILD.
THE FULL FAITH IN CREDIT OF THE CITY OF DALLAS IS ON THE LINE FOR THAT LAWSUIT.
IF YOU DO PROCEED, I RECOMMEND THAT YOU AMEND THE RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE THAT THE PRINCIPLES OF THE DEVELOPER, MR. AND MRS. CROTCH ANGLE, PERSONALLY INDEMNIFY THE CITY FOR ANY CLAIMS THAT ARE MADE.
THEY STAND TO MAKE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY FROM THIS PROJECT AND THEY SHOULD BEAR THE RISKS AND NOT THE TAXPAYERS.
I WOULD ASK YOU ALSO TO MODIFY THE RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE A TENURE PROVISION ON MANAGEMENT.
GOOD PROJECTS ONLY HAPPEN IF THERE'S GOOD PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.
AMEND THE RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE THAT IT WILL BE MANAGED BY AN EXPERIENCED PROPERTY MANAGER WITH A GOOD REPUTATION.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE.
>> HI, MY NAME IS WOOD REVISIT AHMED, 8319 FLOYD LAKE DRIVE.
I LIVE BY THE DART STATION, FOREST LANE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I GUESS THERE'S A LOT OF TALK ABOUT D-10 HERE TODAY.
I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO DISTINGUISH THE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS PROPERTY.
IT'S HAMILTON PARK IN NORTHWOOD ESTATES.
HAMILTON PARK I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL KNOW A HISTORICALLY BLACK COMMUNITY.
IT'S RISD AND THE CITY OF DALLAS WORKED OUT A DEAL WHERE THEY CREATED A SEGREGATED SCHOOL IN THE 1950S.
IN 1970S WITH THE INTEGRATION AND ALL THAT, NORTHWOOD ESTATES WAS PAIRED WITH THIS TOOL HERE TO STOLTZ ROAD WAS PAIRED WITH HAMILTON PARK.
[01:00:06]
AT THAT TIME IN 1970S, THERE WAS WHITE FLIGHT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.WE'RE VERY MUCH DISTINGUISHED FROM THE IDEA OF A D-10.
I GUESS THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TODAY IS TO TALK ABOUT THE POLICY OF PUTTING LOW-INCOME, GREAT HOUSING, THE BIG ISSUES, WALKER VOUCHERS, AND THEN THE ICP DID A GREAT JOB OF DOING TAKING ALL THAT TO COURT.
BUT YOU'RE PUTTING IT IN AN AREA THAT IS HISTORICALLY BLACK.
WE ASK THAT TO BE CONSIDERED TWO YEARS AGO WHEN THE LIGHT TECH ISSUE CAME UP, MYSELF, I REACHED OUT TO THE ICP TO DISCUSS THAT.
I REACHED OUT TO THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT, DISCUSS THAT, BUT NO ONE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IT.
THE PEOPLE WHO WORK ON THIS ISSUE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TWO YEARS AGO, THERE ARE THE FOLKS WHO LAST I GUESS OCTOBER AROUND HALLOWEEN, ORGANIZE VOTING RIGHTS BLOCK WALK WITH A GROUP OF YOUNG BLACK LAWYERS FROM COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL.
THEY FLEW DOWN HERE FROM NEW YORK TO DO VOTER OUTREACH.
OUR TWO AREAS HERE, WE D-10 BUT WE ALSO ARE VERY MUCH GERRYMANDER.
DALLAS COUNTY TOOK US FROM THEIR DISTRICT 1 TO DISTRICT 2 DEMOCRATIC.
THE STATE OF TEXAS MOVED US FROM HD 114 WITH JOHN TURNER IN TOWN AND MARINA RAMOS DISTRICT TO THE BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE TOGETHER.
THIS IS WHERE THIS PROJECT IS GOING INTO.
I ALSO LIKE POINTED OUT THIS ASSIST IN RISD, BUT RISD DOES NOT TREAT OUR AREA VERY WELL.
WE ADVOCATE FOR BLACK AND BROWN KIDS.
FEEDBACK WE GET IS YOU'RE DESTROYING THE DISTRICT. THANK YOU.
LORENA YVONNE IT'S NOT PRESENT.
RACHEL MCGOWAN. RACHEL MCGOWAN, YOU MAY BEGIN SPEAKING.
>> YES, WE CAN SEE YOU AND HEAR YOU. YOU MAY CONTINUE.
>> PIGGYBACKING OFF OF WHAT WE'VE SAID AND THANK YOU ALL FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO US TODAY.
THIS IS A HISTORICALLY BLACK DISTRICTS AND I AM IN OPPOSITION OF THE PROJECTS.
WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS PROJECT FOR OVER TWO YEARS NOW.
I'VE HEARD IT A REOCCURRING THEME HERE THAT HOW THIS IS TO PICK OUR HOUSING SITES.
ARE YOU CONCERNED WITH SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE SURROUNDING THESE DEVELOPMENT? IT SOUNDS LIKE THE GENTLEMAN THAT SPOKE EARLIER, THE POLICE OFFICERS SPOKE EARLIER COULD BENEFIT FROM MORE RESIDENTIAL AND AS OPPOSED TO WAREHOUSING DEVELOPMENT SITES.
THE SOUTH SIDE OF DALLAS AS WELL, INFRASTRUCTURE, MORE HOSPITALS, MORE BUSINESSES.
HOW ARE YOU GUYS TRULY WORKING DEALS TO BUILD INFRASTRUCTURE AROUND SUPPORTING RESIDENTIAL? THAT IS A HUGE CONCERN.
I DO HOPE THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS DOES A BETTER JOB IN CREATING MORE OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR OF DALLAS.
IT WERE LONG OVERDUE FOR THAT.
BUT I HAVE LIVED IN THIS AREA FOR OVER FOUR YEARS WHERE THIS SITE IS BEING BUILT.
WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANY GOOD, DECENT INFRASTRUCTURE BUILT UP AROUND THIS AREA.
AS STATED EARLIER, THIS IS A SECTION OF D-10 THAT HAS BEEN HISTORICALLY BLACK AND BROWN AND SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE HAS LACKED IN OUR COMMUNITY.
AS FAR AS THESE KIDDOS THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO WALK TO SCHOOL FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT, IT IS NOT A SAFE WALK.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE PASSING A RACE TRACK DEVELOPMENT OR GAS STATION.
THAT IS, WE HAVE DRUG DEALS AND PROSTITUTION GOING ON IN BROAD DAYLIGHT.
IF I WERE A VOUCHER HOLDING CITIZENS, IT IS NOT AN AREA OR IT IS NOT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT I WOULD CHOOSE TO LIVE IN.
I WILL ALSO LIKE TO SEE THE CITY WORK CLOSELY WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE COMMUNITY.
COME SPEAK AND COME HANG OUT WITH THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU'RE PUTTING YOUR DEVELOPMENTS IN.
COMES BACK TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF WHICH YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO MAKE THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
MAKE A SAFE PLAN FOR THE KIDS, BUT THIS ONE IS NOT IT, IT IS NOT THE RIGHT LOCATION.
[01:05:01]
I AM SUPPORTIVE OF PUBLIC HOUSING AND ASSISTANT COMMUNITY, BUT WE CAN ALSO WORK WITH DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE ALREADY HERE.WE HAVE A LOT OF APARTMENT COMMUNITIES THAT ARE ALREADY HERE, AND MAYBE WE SHOULD DO A BETTER JOB BY WORKING WITH OWNERSHIP IN THOSE COMMUNITIES AND MAKING MORE AFFORDABLE OPTIONS IN THOSE COMMUNITIES FOR OUR RESIDENTS.
OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT IS ONE OF THEM, IS THE FIFTH MOST DIVERSE DISTRICT IN THE COUNTRY.
WE DO HAVE BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT ARE LIVING IN OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT AREAS.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE BETTER PLANNING DONE AND BETTER COLLABORATION DONE.
DEFINITELY SAFETY IS NUMBER ONE FOR OUR KIDS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. PHILIP KINGSTON.
PHILIP KINGSTON, YOU MAY BEGIN. THERE WE GO.
WE CAN SEE YOU AND WE CAN HEAR YOU.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME VERY WELL THAT'S THE ISSUE?
>> HELLO. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR LETTING IT COME BEFORE YOU.
THOSE OF YOU WHO'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS ROAD AHEAD, IT'S BEEN A LONG ROAD.
I'M JUST HERE TO PROVIDE SOME TECHNICAL SUPPORTS THAT WERE AROUND FOR QUESTIONS WHEN YOU ALL BEGIN TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE.
BUT I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT CAME UP IN PREVIOUS STATEMENTS.
MR. ROSS AND MR. STUART REFERRED TO LEGAL PRINCIPLES THAT FRANKLY DON'T APPLY HERE IN ANY WAY.
I DON'T EXPECT THAT A COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE HORSESHOE TO WEIGH LEGAL ARGUMENTS.
TO AVOID THAT, WHAT I DID IS I PUT ALL OF OUR LEGAL RESEARCH INTO MEMORANDUM FORM THAT YOUR STAFF HAD.
I WISH THEY'D PUT THAT INTO YOUR PACKET FOR YOU, BUT YOU CAN CERTAINLY ASK THEM FOR IT.
YOU WILL SEE THAT THESE RESTRICTION THAT MR. ROB MENTIONED OR BOYD, IT'S AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY, NOT DISSIMILAR TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT I DISCOVERED EXISTED IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT REPORTED TO PREVENT THE SALE OF PROPERTY TO CERTAIN PEOPLE AND YOU KNOW WHO I MEAN.
JUST TO MAKE THE REPRESENTATION, THIS IS CONTROLLED BY AN INTERESTING CASE FROM A LONG TIME AGO WHEN THE CITY OF HOUSTON WAS TRYING TO PROTECT ITSELF FROM FIRE BY BUILDING FIRE STATION.
NEIGHBORS HAD THESE RESTRICTIONS AGAINST THE BUILDING OF FIRE STATIONS.
JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE POWER OF PEOPLE NOT WANTING ANYTHING IN THEIR BACKYARD.
THIS IS REALLY ANALOGOUS TO DALLAS TODAY, OUR LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS TANTAMOUNT TO A FIRE.
IT'S BECOME DANGEROUS FOR OUR CITY AND THIS PROJECT CAN PUT OVER 100 FAMILIES IN QUALITY, SAFE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA WHERE THEY'RE LIKELY TO THRIVE.
I THINK THAT'S THE PROMISE OF OUR PROJECT, AND THAT'S WHY YOU SEE YOUR STAFF HAVE SUCH A STRONG DESIRE TO COMPLETE IT.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TODAY AND WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES YOUR SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM, MR. MAYOR.
>> WONDERFUL. CHAIRMAN MCGOUGH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION..
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
>> YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES, MR. MCGOUGH.
>> AS OF MONDAY EVENING, I RECEIVED THE EMAIL THAT SAYS FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEYS NOTICE THAT STAFF HAS GONE AHEAD AND INCLUDED THE RESOLUTION FOR WENDY SAYS AGENDA, DESPITE NO SIGN OFF FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND ALSO STAFFS FAILING TO MODEL THE RESOLUTION PER SAMPLES PROVIDED.
I SHARE THAT BECAUSE IT GOES TO THE REPETITIVE THEME OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED WITH THIS PROJECT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
WHAT YOU HEAR, I HOPE FROM SOME OF THE COMMUNITY THAT'S HERE TODAY, SOME THAT SPOKE AT THE PFC, SOME THAT HAVE SPOKE MANY TIMES IN THE PAST, IS THAT THIS IS NOT WHAT PEOPLE LIKE TO CONVENIENTLY SAY IS JUST SIMPLY A NIMBY ISSUE.
THIS IS A COMMUNITY THAT, AS WE WORKED ON PREVIOUS PROJECTS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE THIS COUNCIL, SPECIFICALLY OUR CITY OF REFUGE PROJECT AND OTHERS, WHERE WE HAD HUNDREDS OF UNITS OF TINY HOMES AND INNOVATIVE HOUSINGS AND OTHER THINGS.
THIS COMMUNITY WAS ENGAGED FROM THE BEGINNING.
THEY SAT, THEY LISTENED, THEY HAD INPUT INTO IT.
THEY SUGGESTED THINGS THAT NEEDED TO BE CHANGED AND IMPROVED AND THOSE THINGS WERE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
SOME ON THIS COUNCIL SAID, I NEED TO SEE THE ENTIRE LEASE TERMS. I NEED TO SEE EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THIS AGREEMENT AND UNTIL I DO, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.
WE STARTED WORKING ON THOSE THINGS.
THAT'S WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN IN THIS PROJECT.
IN FACT, THAT'S WHAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED FROM THE BEGINNING.
[01:10:01]
WE SHOULD HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY.I'VE HEARD PEOPLE SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT THAT SAY THIS IS JUST SIMPLY NIMBLY AND NOBODY EVER WANTS AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THEIR PROJECT AND ARE ALWAYS GOING TO FIGHT AGAINST IT.
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT'S JUST SIMPLY NOT TRUE.
YOU HAVE TO GIVE PEOPLE THE DIGNITY OF BEING ABLE TO VOICE WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE SAT DOWN LAST WEEK AND A GROUP OF STAKEHOLDERS THAT LIVE IN THE AREA CAME UP WITH SUGGESTIONS FROM SHUTTLE SERVICES FOR ACCESS TO RESIDENTS.
YOU HEARD THE ISSUES OF GETTING TO THE GROCERY STORE.
THERE IS I WOULD BEG FOR YOU ALL TO COME WITH ME AND STAND WITH ME AT THIS LOCATION AND SAY, IF IT WAS YOUR KIDS, I WOULDN'T LET MY WIFE WALK FROM THIS LOCATION TO STOLTZ ROAD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
YET IT'S BEING VOICED AS THIS IS CLOSE TO EDUCATION.
WHEN I, MYSELF WAS LIVING ON THE STREET TEMPORARILY, I COULDN'T STAY AT THE DARK STATION BECAUSE IT WAS NOT SAFE FOR ME PHYSICALLY.
I'M TELLING YOU, YOU CAN STAND THERE TODAY AND WATCH DRUG TRANSACTIONS HAPPEN ONE AFTER THE OTHER AT THIS INTERSECTION AT THE DARK STATION.
IT'S NOT A SAFE PLACE FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.
THE ARGUMENTS THAT YOU'RE HEARING, I LIKED THE ARGUMENTS.
WHEN I'M HEARING THAT, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT TOO, BUT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING ON THE GROUND HERE.
THE STORY, WHY IS THIS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW? WHY IS IT HAPPENING SO FAST? WHY ARE WE GETTING A ITERATION OF A DRAFT OF A DOCUMENT LAST NIGHT THAT IS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS SUBMITTED AND POSTED FOR THIS COUNCIL TO REVIEW? NOT ONE SINGLE QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED FROM ANY COUNCIL MEMBER ON THIS HORSESHOE RELATING TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS IN A PUBLIC FORMAT.
IT HADN'T COME THROUGH COMMITTEE.
THIS NEEDS TO COME THROUGH A HOUSING COMMITTEE.
IT SHOULD BE WORKED ON TO MAKE THE PROJECT BETTER.
I'VE HAD NUMEROUS CONVERSATIONS AS IT RELATES TO THE LEGALITY OF THIS.
THE DOCUMENT THAT CAME THROUGH BEFORE WAS FRAUGHT WITH LEGAL ISSUES.
THERE WAS NO PERFORMANCE PRIOR, THE INDEMNITY IS SEVERELY LACKING.
WE ABSOLUTELY KNOW WITHOUT A DOUBT, NOT JUST THAT WE WILL BE SUED.
WE KNOW WHO'S GOING TO SUE US.
WE KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO SUE US FOR.
I CAN TELL YOU BASED ON WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM THIS, IT'S NOT JUST GOING TO BE THE CITY GETTING SUED, WE'RE GOING TO BE SUED INDIVIDUALLY FOR THOSE OF THOSE SUPPORT THIS.
WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING DEPOSITIONS IN THIS PROCESS.
THE COMMUNICATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH EVERYBODY IS GOING TO COME OUT.
THIS IS PART OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON'T GO THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS TO GET A PROJECT DONE.
THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DENIED BY THE COUNTY, IT HAS BEEN DENIED EARLIER BY THE CITY AS NOT LEGAL.
IT HAS BEEN DENIED BY THE PFC AS SAYING THAT WE WOULDN'T DO IT WITHOUT INDEMNIFICATION BECAUSE THEY ALSO KNEW WHAT WAS GOING TO COME.
THIS IS NOT HOW WE DO THINGS AT THE CITY.
FROM DAY 1 ALL I WANT AND ALL I ASK FOR FROM THE VERY BEGINNING IS ENOUGH DIGNITY TO SIT DOWN WITH THE COMMUNITY AND SAY ALL THESE OTHER THINGS, IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PARK, JUST GIVE US A SAFE ROUTE TO SCHOOL WITH CAMERAS AND LIGHTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT CAN MAKE THIS BETTER.
INSTEAD, IT'S CONSTANTLY SAID, EVERYBODY JUST HATES AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SO WE CAN'T HAVE A REAL VALID DISCUSSION BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO FIGHT AGAINST IT.
IF YOU LOOK BACK IN TIME, THE ARTICLE THAT WAS WRITTEN FOR THE SAME PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY WAS YES, IN MY BACKYARD.
YOU NEED TO TAKE CARE OF YOUR BACKYARD, YOU NEED TO ENGAGE PEOPLE IN IT.
BUT YOU CAN'T JUST SHOVE THESE PROJECTS THROUGH AND IF YOU STILL THINK THAT YOU SHOULD, THEN AT LEAST DO IT TO PUT THE CITY IN THE BEST POSITION LEGALLY.
WE ARE ABSOLUTELY NOT DOING THAT.
WE'RE PUTTING OURSELVES IN THE WORST POSITION WE POSSIBLY COULD LEGALLY, AND IT WILL IMPACT, YOU VOTE ON THIS OR YOU VOTE NOT, THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO BE TIED UP FOR A LONG TIME.
IT'S NOT GOING TO HELP THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUE.
>> CHAIRMAN BEZEL DEWEY YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DENY ON ITEM 38.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING A DENIAL FOR A LOT OF THE REASONS THAT WERE JUST MENTIONED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCGOUGH, I FEEL THAT A DENIAL IS INAPPROPRIATE.
I THINK THAT IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE WORKED OUT, IF THERE IS ANY POLICY DISCUSSIONS BASED ON THE NEED FOR MORE UNDERSTANDING OF ANY DOCUMENTS, DENIAL WOULD NOT GIVE US THAT OPPORTUNITY, IT WOULD JUST BE KILLING A PROJECT.
IF THAT'S THE GOAL, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE MORE GENEROUS WITH THE INTENT OF WHAT WE'RE DOING ON THIS PROJECT AND I DON'T BELIEVE THIS TO BE THE ANSWER.
IF WE NEED TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT SOME OF THE DEAL POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO US OR THE PROCESS IN WHICH IT WAS PRESENTED TO US, I THINK THAT HAVING ROBUST DISCUSSION IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO AS A BODY, BUT A STRAIGHT DENIAL DOESN'T GIVE US THE OPTION TO WORK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT CAN BE BEST FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.
WITH THAT SAID, I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE
[01:15:03]
SOME LEGAL QUESTIONS THAT HAVE NOT ONLY COME UP IN DISCUSSION AMONGST THE BODY, BUT ALSO THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT FORTH BY SOME OF THE SPEAKERS.I THINK THAT IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BEST FOR US AS A BODY TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO OUR CITY ATTORNEYS.
I'M GOING TO REQUEST AN EXECUTIVE SESSION RIGHT NOW. MR. MAYOR.
>> JUST GIVE ME ONE MOMENT, SO I'M SURE I CAN HANDLE THAT CORRECTLY.
ALL RIGHT. WE'LL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION NOW.
[Closed Session]
IT'S 10.31.WE HAVE ANOTHER ITEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ON ANYWAY, SO I'LL JUST GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THE POSTED ITEM AND ON THE ISSUE THAT'S BEFORE US NOW.
SO IT IS 10.32 AM ON MAY 10TH, 2023.
THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 551.076 AND 551.089 AT THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING MATTERS DESCRIBED AT TODAY'S AGENDA.
DELIBERATION REGARDING SECURITY DEVICES OR SECURITY AUDITS INCLUDING ONE, SECURITY ASSESSMENTS OR DEPLOYMENTS RELATING TO INFORMATION RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY.
TWO, NETWORK SECURITY INFORMATION.
THREE, THE DEPLOYMENT OR SPECIFIC OCCASIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SECURITY PERSONNEL, CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE OR SECURITY DEVICES, OR FOUR, A SECURITY AUDIT REGARDING A RECENT RANSOMWARE ATTACK, SECURITY INCIDENT RELATING TO THE CITY'S INFORMATION RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY, AND UNDER SECTION 551.071 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 38.
WE'RE NOW AT RECESS FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND WE'LL PLAN TO BE BACK AT ONE.
>> I SEE THE COUNCIL MEETING HAS COMPLETED IT'S CLOSED SESSION OF SECTIONS 551.071, 551.076, AND 551.089 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND AT 1:19 PM ON MAY 10TH, 2023, WE'VE RETURNED TO OPEN SESSION.
MADAM SECRETARY, WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO CHAIRMAN MCGOUGH'S MOTION TO DENY ON ITEM 38 AND COMMENCE THE DISCUSSION WHERE WE LEFT OFF.
I BELIEVE CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA HAD THE FLOOR AND HE HAD THREE MINUTES AND 48 SECONDS LEFT.
SO WE WILL JUST PICK UP THERE, MR. CHAIRMAN.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO I'LL JUST WRAP UP THE STATEMENTS IN A SECOND, BUT I DO WANT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ANSWERED, IF DAVID MCGUIRE IS AROUND.
DAVID, WHAT IS THIS PARCEL ZONE FOR RIGHT NOW?
>> DAVID MCGUIRE, DIRECTOR HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION.
IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED MU3 MULTIFAMILY.
>> SO THIS IS A PROPOSAL THAT'S BEING DONE BY WRIGHT?
>> WOULD YOU SAY IT'S SAFE TO SAY WE HAVE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEED IN OUR CITY?
>> AS FAR AS THE DEED RESTRICTIONS HAVE GONE AND BEEN DISCUSSED, YOU HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION AND ADDRESSED THOSE CONCERNS. IS THAT ACCURATE?
>> YES. I'VE BEEN PART OF ONE OF THE PARTIES THAT HAS BEEN PART OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
>> AND IF WHAT WE ARE PASSING TODAY, IS THAT THE LEASE AGREEMENT ITSELF?
>> NO. WHAT THIS IS, IS THE TERMS THAT COUNCIL IS INCLUDING, AUTHORIZING STAFF TO GO BACK AND TO INCLUDE IN A LEASE AGREEMENT.
IT SETS THE PARAMETERS FOR DALLAS LEASING AGREEMENT NEGOTIATIONS.
>> SO IT SETS THE NECESSARY PARTIES ON THEIR WAY FOR THE ABILITY TO ACTUALLY NEGOTIATE THE CORRECT LEASE AGREEMENT TERMS?
>> IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN WE STILL HAVE THE ABILITY FOR COUNCIL MEMBER MCGOUGH TO ADDRESS A LOT OF THE POINTS THAT HE'S MENTIONED THAT I COMMENTED ON EARLIER TO SAY THAT IT WASN'T A GENUOUS INTENT TO DENY THIS IF SOME OF THOSE ISSUES CAN BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE LEASE AGREEMENT.
>> SO I THINK THAT IT'S DEFINITELY KNOWN THAT
[01:20:01]
WE HAVE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEED IN OUR CITY, I THINK THAT THERE WERE SOME NUMBERS THAT WERE READ BY ONE OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS ABOUT WHERE THERE'S ALREADY A CONCENTRATION AND PROLIFERATION.PART OF OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS TO BE MET IS TO HELP PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPPORTUNITY IN ALL PARTS OF OUR CITY.
I KNOW THAT THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT THERE BEING UNDER TWO MILES TO THE GROCERY STORE AND THAT NOT BEING SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED.
I JUST WANT TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT I SERVE IN A DISTRICT THAT'S MAJORITY OF FOOD DESERTS AND WE APPROVE A LOT OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES IN PLACES THAT ARE FURTHER THAN THIS AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE EFFORTS TO HELP THIS.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENT INCOME LEVELS THAT THIS WOULD BE IMPACTING BASED ON THE AGREEMENT.
>> SO THIS PROJECT WILL SERVE 189 UNITS WITH TENANTS RANGING FROM LESS THAN 30% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME TO MARKET RATE.
>> AND CAN YOU GIVE INCOME LEVELS WITH THOSE PERCENTAGES?
>> SO I HAVE PROPOSED RENTS IN FRONT OF ME.
I DON'T HAVE WHAT 30% AMI INCOME IS IN FRONT OF ME.
>> I BELIEVE IT'S [OVERLAPPING] 24,000.
>> DARWIN WADE, INTERIM ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF HOUSING.
TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE INCOME LEVELS.
SO FOR THE FAMILIES, THE INCOMES RANGES ARE 54,000 - 77,000 FOR THOSE ABOVE 60, AND FOR THOSE THAT ARE EARNING BELOW 30% OF THE AMI, IT'S GOING TO BE 20,450 - 29,200.
>> THANK YOU. SO THIS IS A WIDE SPECTRUM OF MIXED INCOME POPULATION THAT WOULD BE SERVED BY THIS. IS THAT ACCURATE?
>> THAT IS ACCURATE. THIS IS A TRUE EXAMPLE OF A MIXED INCOME PRODUCT.
YOU HAVE FAMILIES ACROSS THE SPECTRUM AS RELATES TO AMIS.
>> CAN YOU REMIND THE BODY OF THE SCORING IN FAIR HOUSING WHEN WE ORIGINALLY SENT A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT WITH THE LIHTC AT THE STATE?
>> YES. SO IN 2021, THIS PROJECT CAME TO COUNCIL AS A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT.
IT ALSO RECEIVED RECOMMENDATION FROM OUR OFFICER FOR HOUSING DIVISION, WHICH THEY DO GO THROUGH A SCORING PROCESS AND THIS PROJECT RECEIVED THE NEEDED SCORES TO PROCEED THROUGH THAT RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, IT ACTUALLY RECEIVED THE HIGHEST SCORE OF ANY OF THE PROJECTS THAT WENT THROUGH THE CRITERIA IN THAT YEAR.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE AND EMPHASIZE THAT, THAT THESE ARE GO THROUGH FAIR HOUSING.
IN FACT, THERE HAS BEEN LIHTC PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED THAT I WAS VERY SUPPORTIVE OF IN MY DISTRICT, ALSO IN COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO'S THAT ENDED UP NOT GETTING SCORED TO GO IN.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF DUE DILIGENCE ALREADY THAT'S BEEN PUT IN IN MAKING SURE THAT THIS IS A OPTIMAL PLACE TO PUT IN THIS MIXED INCOME PRODUCT. THAT'S ACCURATE TO SAY?
>> FOR THESE REASONS, I THINK THAT WE STILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW FOR SOME OF THE CONCERNS TO BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE PROCESS IN THE LEASE AGREEMENT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN MENTIONED BY THE COUNCIL MEMBER TO DENY THIS IS THINGS THAT WARRANT DENYING A PROJECT THAT HAS SHOWN TO BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN ASSET IN OUR HOUSING NEEDS.
I HOPE THAT THE BODY WILL CONSIDER NOT SUPPORTING THE DENIAL SO THAT WE CAN GET TO THE DEBATE OF MOVING THIS PROJECT FORWARD FOR OUR CITY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> MR. WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DENY.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M GOING TO SEPARATE MY QUESTIONS IN THE FINANCING PORTION OF THIS AND THEN THE PROJECT ITSELF.
SO CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN LIKE IN LAYMAN'S TERMS, HOW THIS DEAL IS STRUCTURED BECAUSE THIS IS NOT TYPICAL FOR WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN OTHER DEALS.
>> CORRECT. SO TYPICALLY, DEALS LIKE THIS WOULD COME THROUGH ONE OF OUR CORPORATIONS, THE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION OR THE PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION.
BOTH OF THOSE CORPORATIONS OFFER TAX EXEMPTIONS THAT TAX CREDIT PROJECTS WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF.
IN THIS CASE, YOU HAVE A LEASE AGREEMENT THAT'S COMING DIRECTLY TO THE CITY.
[01:25:04]
THE LEASE AGREEMENT IS STRUCTURED VERY SIMILAR TO HOW WE STRUCTURE A PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION LEASE, WHERE THE TAXES ARE EXEMPT, THE DEVELOPER PAYS A FEE, IN THIS CASE, THAT FEE WOULD COME TO THE CITY, NOT TO ONE OF THE CORPORATIONS, AND THOSE FEES THAT ARE COLLECTED WOULD THEN BE USED FOR OTHER HOUSING PURPOSES THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD DEEM APPROPRIATE.>> THIS IS LAND THAT IS BEING PURCHASED BY THE DEVELOPER AND THEN CONVEYED TO THE CITY, CORRECT?
>> SO WE'RE OUT NO MONEY FROM OUR END TO ACQUIRE THE LAND, CORRECT?
>> WE'RE ALSO GETTING REVENUE OFF THE DEVELOPER FOR PUTTING HOUSING ON THE PROPERTY, CORRECT?
>> IN ADDITION TO GETTING MIXED INCOME HOUSING ON THIS PROPERTY.
>> WHAT TYPE OF REVENUE ARE WE LOOKING AT FOR THE CITY ON A YEARLY BASIS?
>> DARWIN WADE, I'M ASSISTANT DIRECTOR.
YES. THE REVENUES THAT WE ARE PROJECTING THAT WE ESTIMATED TO BE RECEIVED, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN AMOUNT OF $2.1 MILLION OVER 15 YEAR PERIOD.
>> YES. THAT INCLUDES THE $100,000 CONSTRUCTION FEE, AND 20% OF THE CASHFLOWS FROM THAT WILL BE GENERATED FROM THIS PROPERTY.
>> DOES THIS PROJECT GO THROUGH UNDERWRITING?
>> THIS PROJECT HAS GONE THROUGH UNDERWRITING THROUGH THE STATE LEVEL OF THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AS A NON-PROFIT TAX CREDIT.
THE STATE HAS ALREADY LOOKED AT THE DEVELOPERS CAPACITY, THEIR FINANCIALS, THEIR DEBT COVERAGE RATIO, TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS.
ADJACENT PROPERTIES THAT MAY BE IN THE AREA.
IT HAS GONE THROUGH A RIGOROUS UNDERWRITING AT THE STATE LEVEL.
>> WHAT KINDS OF THINGS JUST ON A GENERAL LEVEL THAT LOOKED AT DURING THE UNDERWRITING PROCESS?
>> WHAT THINGS ON A GENERAL LEVEL?
>> WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO PASSING UNDERWRITING?
>> WE DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS THE CAPACITY TO CARRY OUT THE WORK, THAT THE FINANCIALS ARE IN PLACE.
THAT THEY CAN GET THE FINANCING, THEY CAN GET THE TAX CREDIT, EQUITY, AND ALL THAT STUFF THAT'S BROUGHT FORTH IN THE CAPITALS STACK.
WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THAT IS DONE AND THAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED AT THE STATE LEVEL.
SHOULD THE DEVELOPER COME TO THE CITY FOR SOFT DEBT FINANCING, THERE WILL BE A THIRD-PARTY UNDERWRITING ON TOP OF WHAT WAS DONE AT THE STATE LEVEL AS WELL.
>> IF THE DEVELOPER, IN SOME WAY FAILS IN THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO US UNDER THE LEASE THAT'S DRAWN UP, GENERALLY WHAT'S THE RECOURSE THAT WE COULD BE LOOKING AT?
>> THERE IS RECOURSE THAT'S IN THE RESOLUTION.
THERE'S A USE RESTRICTION THAT LIMITS THE USE OF THE PREMISES TO WHAT WE HAVE AGREED TO, SUCH AS CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATION OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS.
OTHER PROVISIONS INCLUDE THE CITIES RIGHT OF TERMINATION AND RIGHT OF A REENTRY, IN FAVOR OF THE CITY ENFORCING THE USE RESTRICTIONS.
THERE ARE SOME RECOURSES IN THIS RESOLUTION TODAY.
>> GREAT. I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO MY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT ITSELF.
>> CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA HAD MENTIONED TO THE SCORING UNDER FAIR HOUSING FOR THIS PROJECT IN THE PAST, AND I'M VERY FAMILIAR, I FEEL LIKE WE GO THROUGH THIS SAME DISCUSSION ON THIS PROPERTY LIKE ONCE A YEAR, I'M HOPING THIS IS A FINAL ONE.
IS THIS LOCATION A GOOD LOCATION FOR MIXED-INCOME HOUSING FOR OUR CITY?
>> I WOULD SAY YES, FOR A FEW REASONS.
NUMBER 1, BECAUSE OF THE POVERTY RATE IN THE CENSUS TRACK WHERE IT'S LOCATED.
THIS CENSUS TRACK IS AT ABOUT 14%, WHEREAS TYPICALLY, WE'RE LOOKING CITYWIDE FOR ANYTHING UNDER 20%.
THIS IS CLEARLY WITHIN THAT THRESHOLD.
NUMBER 2, THIS LOCATION IS NEAR OTHER AMENITIES THAT ARE IN THE AREA.
IT'S WALKING DISTANCE TO TRANSIT, SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF POINTS THAT THIS PROJECT RECEIVED AT THE STATE LEVEL, JUST BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION THAT OTHER PROJECTS WOULDN'T HAVE EVEN BEEN ELIGIBLE FOR.
>> THANK YOU. THEN THE APPLICANT HAD LAID OUT SOME DATA POINTS ABOUT THE LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS UNITS IN VARIOUS PARTS OF THE CITY.
IF THE APPLICANT WAS CORRECT, IT SEEMS A LOT OF THEM ARE CONSOLIDATED IN THE SOUTH IN FOUR DISTRICTS.
>> THOSE NUMBERS COME FROM TDHCA'S HISTORIC INVENTORY DATABASE.
[01:30:02]
THEY APPEAR TO BE ACCURATE.I WOULD HAVE TO VERIFY THEM MYSELF BEFORE I CAN GIVE YOU DEFINITIVE RESULTS.
>> ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE NUMBER OF LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT UNITS IN DISTRICT 10? THE NUMBER THAT WAS GIVEN WAS 168 OUT OF THE THOUSANDS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER IN MY HEAD.
>> IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT WE'RE NOT CONSOLIDATING LOW-INCOME IN DISTRICT 10 BASED ON THOSE NUMBERS.
>> GREAT. WE AS A CITY GET THREATENED WITH LITIGATION QUITE A BIT. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> IS THAT OUR POLICY AS A CITY TO JUST BACK AWAY FROM THINGS IF WE GET THREATENED WITH LITIGATION? I WOULD SAY NO BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD HAPPEN ALL THE TIME.
>> IT'S NOT THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT'S POLICY TO BACK AWAY FROM LITIGATION AT ALL.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A POINT THAT WE, AS A CITY, HAVE A DUTY TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE NEED TO MAKE IT EASIER, NOT HARDER AS A CITY FOR PEOPLE TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY.
THIS IS EXACTLY THE SITUATION WHERE WE'RE MAKING IT HARDER.
IF WE'RE MAKING IT HARDER, PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO BUILD HERE.
IF I'M A DEVELOPER WATCHING THIS MEETING RIGHT NOW AND WATCHING WHAT WE'RE PUTTING THIS DEVELOPER THROUGH, I'M NOT GOING TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY.
WE GOT TO THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT PEOPLE IN CALIFORNIA, PEOPLE IN NEW YORK ARE TRYING TO MOVE HERE, AND WE NEED TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR ALL THESE INDIVIDUALS.
WE DON'T WANT TO SCARE OFF THE BUILDERS FROM DOING THAT IN OUR CITY.
IF WE KEEP BEATING THEM UP, TIME AFTER TIME AFTER TIME FOR TRYING TO GIVE US WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, THEY'RE GOING TO STOP DOING IT.
I DON'T SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DENY, AND I HOPE WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION COMING. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRMAN MCGOUGH RECOGNIZE FOR THREE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION DENY.
>> THANK YOU. IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIGHT TECH PROJECTS AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING?
>> YES. LIGHT TECH IS A TECHNICAL TERM, AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS A MUCH BROADER TERM.
>> ARE MOST LIGHT TECH PROJECTS, NEW BUILD DEVELOP PROJECTS, AND INVOLVE PURCHASING LAND, THAT THING?
>> IT DEPENDS. LIGHT TECH CAN BE NEW DEVELOPMENT OR IT CAN BE REHABILITATION OF EXISTING.
>> DOES DISTRICT 10 HAVE AFFORDABLE UNITS IN THE DISTRICT OUTSIDE ABOVE LOW-INCOME TAX CREDIT PROJECTS?
>> YES. DISTRICT 10 HAS NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
>> DOES IT HAVE MORE THAN ANY OTHER DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF DALLAS?
>> I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER IN FRONT OF ME.
>> BASED ON YOUR MEMO AND YOUR DATA IT DOES.
I JUST WANT TO SEPARATE THAT POINT.
I HEAR WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING.
SPECIFIC LIGHT TECH PROJECTS ARE LESS FREQUENT AT NORTH BECAUSE PROPERTY IS A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT FEED INTO THAT.
THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE IS NOT A LARGE QUANTITY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY.
I'LL JUST PUT IT THAT WAY, AND FOR A LOT OF REASONS I HOPE I'M WRONG.
I HOPE SURE THAT THE LITIGATION IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HARMS THE CITY.
I HOPE THAT IF A PROJECT DOES GO INTO THIS LOCATION, IT IS ONE THAT IS GOOD FOR THE RESIDENTS, FOR PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE AND THERE ARE WAYS TO BE SAFE TO GET TO SCHOOL AND GROCERY STORES AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
I KNOW THE COMMUNITY VERY WELL.
THERE'S A TON OF WORK TO BE DONE BEFORE I COULD SAY THOSE THINGS WITH ANY CONFIDENCE LIKE YOU'VE JUST SAID THERE TODAY.
IT'S UNFORTUNATE, IT'S DISAPPOINTING TO ME THAT THE WAY THIS HAS COME TO FRUITION TO THE DEVELOPERS, THAT ONE I'M POTENTIALLY COME TO DALLAS.
WHAT I HOPE YOU HERE IS PLEASE JUST SIT DOWN WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THE COUNCIL AND LET'S MAKE THESE PROJECTS BETTER AND SAFER AND WORK TOGETHER.
IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO DO THAT, IT'S GOING TO BE HARDER AND THE PROJECT IS NOT GOING TO BE AS GOOD.
I HOPE EVERYBODY HEARS THAT, ALL THE DEVELOPERS.
ANYBODY WANTS TO COME TO A PROJECT IN DALLAS? PLEASE, I'VE LISTENED TO THE PEOPLE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, AND FOR A WHILE I WAS WRITING DOWN QUOTES AS THE HOUSING POLICY AND CREATING A WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PIECE OF IT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO IN THESE PROJECTS.
[01:35:01]
WHEN IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, YOU'RE LIKE, OKAY, NO BIG DEAL ON THIS ONE.IT'S JUST FRUSTRATING, IT'S DISAPPOINTING.
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE LEGAL ISSUES.
I STILL WITH MY ANALYSIS, BELIEVED THAT WE HAVE LEGAL ISSUES.
I THINK THAT THIS WILL EQUATE TO AN INVERSE CONDEMNATION.
I THINK I STILL DON'T KNOW WHY, MAYBE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO OUT FOR PUBLIC BID.
WE CERTAINLY HAVE PROPOSED THAT IN DIFFERENT DEALS IN THE PAST, BUT AREN'T DOING THAT HERE.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE ALL THE RULES HAVE CHANGED ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
WE'RE DOING SOMETHING WE'VE NEVER DONE BEFORE AND A STRUCTURE WE'VE NEVER DONE BEFORE, AND I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO BE TESTED AND I BELIEVE THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO SUFFER FOR IT. THANK YOU, MAYOR.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION DENY ON ITEM 38.
>> THANK YOU. THIS MORNING I HEARD AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR, IS IT MR. ZACHARY, OR WAS A CHAIRMAN WHO PRESENTED SOME DATA? ZACHARY. I DID APPRECIATE THAT DATA AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A COPY OF THAT INFORMATION THAT WE CAN WORK WITH AND VERIFY THROUGH HOUSING IN TERMS OF WHERE OUR HOUSING IS LOCATED IN TERMS OF NEED.
BUT I WILL JUST SAY QUICKLY, I WOULD LIKE MAYOR IF THERE'S NO PROBLEM LEGALLY FOR MS. ANNE LOTT TO SPEAK JUST TO ADD TO SOME COMMENTS AROUND WELL, WHAT WOULD SHE REPRESENTS HER AGENCY AND WHERE WE ARE IN TERMS OF WHAT THE DATA THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED HERE TODAY, EVEN BY STAFF.
BUT AS SHE COMES UP TO THE MIC, IS THERE A LEGAL PROBLEM WITH HER COMING?
>> I BELIEVE AND I'LL CHECK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY.
BUT I BELIEVE UNDER OUR RULES, YOU CAN TAKE YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU, THAT'S IT. AS YOU MOVE FORWARD [OVERLAPPING]
>> THANK YOU. ADD UP IF THERE'S A QUESTION.
[OVERLAPPING] I'LL ASK THE QUESTION, I'LL ASK HER THE QUESTION.
BUT AS YOU MOVE FORWARD, I GUESS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS, DO YOU BASICALLY HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING THAT ANYTIME HISTORICALLY WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH CIVIL RIGHTS, YOU WILL PROBABLY HAVE SOME TYPE OF LEGAL CHALLENGE, ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO MINORITY COMMUNITIES?
>> ABSOLUTELY. IN THIS CASE, I DON'T FEAR THAT BECAUSE I'M HERE.
I'M HERE BECAUSE OF LITIGATION.
[LAUGHTER] I'M HERE BECAUSE OF THE STRUGGLE OF INTEGRATING THIS COUNTRY.
I'M VERY HAPPY FOR THOSE WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES AND FOUGHT SO THAT WE COULD BE INTEGRATED SO THAT I COULD BE A PART OF THIS HORSESHOE TODAY.
COULD YOU EXPOUND A LITTLE BIT MORE ON YOUR OBSERVATION OF INTEGRATION AND SEGREGATION AND HOW WE MOVE FORWARD BASED ON THE RESPONSE? THANK YOU. I'M SHUTTING UP NOW. THANK YOU.
>> IN MY COMMENTS EARLIER I MENTIONED THAT 97% OF THE LHITC HOUSING IS BUILT IN WELL, AFRICAN-AMERICAN NEIGHBORHOODS.
IT IS BECAUSE OF THE OPPOSITION OF NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE MORE FLUENT AND WEALTHIER ARE WHITER COMMUNITIES SO IT HAS BEEN SATURATED OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.
THIS INFORMATION IS SUPPORTED BY THE TDHCA INVENTORY SO IT HAS BEEN A PROBLEM.
EVERY TIME A DEVELOPER IN THIS CITY COMES BEFORE THE HORSESHOE AND TRIES TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING OUTSIDE OF AREAS OF HIGH POVERTY, THEY ARE BASICALLY STOPPED AND PROHIBITED FROM DOING SO.
THIS IS THE FIRST PROJECT I HAVE SEEN IN A NUMBER OF YEARS TO GET THIS FAR.
I DO COMMEND YOU THAT YOU ARE TAKING THE PROJECT SERIOUSLY, BUT HERETOFORE HAS BEEN VERY LITTLE CONSIDERATION OF LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS OUTSIDE OF AREAS OF POVERTY AND THEY'RE TYPICALLY LOCATED NEXT TO ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS, NEXT TO JUNK YARDS.
ONE OF THE SPEAKERS SPOKE THAT WAS A PARTICIPANT ON OUR PROGRAM.
THEY SAID THEY DON'T HAVE VERY MANY CHOICES AND THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT WILL OFFER THEM WITH A SORELY NEED COUNCIL MEMBER, AND THAT IS CHOICE.
EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE A CHOICE AND THERE'S NOT VERY MANY CHOICES AVAILABLE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. THOSE ARE MY REMARKS.
>> THANK YOU. IF I COULD JUST ASK MR. ZACHARY, I JUST HAVE ONE MINUTE MAYOR.
>> POINT OF INFORMATION. MR. MAYOR. [OVERLAPPING]
>> PLEASE STATE YOUR POINT OF INFORMATION.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. COULD WE GET AN INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES BECAUSE IN THE PAST, WE'VE HAD THE CITY ATTORNEY TELL US THAT IF WE BROUGHT SOMEBODY TO SPEAK AND WE ASKED
[01:40:06]
A QUESTION THAT OUR TIME DOES STOP AND THEN TODAY IT'S BEING SAID THAT IT KEEPS ROLLING? I'M JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED, I JUST WANT CLARITY.IT'S BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING] WE'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH ON THIS RULE.
>> IT'S PROBABLY MY FAULT BECAUSE I DIDN'T EVEN LOOK.
I HAVE THE RULES RIGHT HERE AND I DIDN'T BOTHER TO LOOK I DID IT FOR MEMORY.
THE CITY SECRETARY STOPPED IT, I HAD SAID STARTED AND IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN MY FAULT.
I'LL LET THE CITY ATTORNEY ANSWER THE QUESTION AND THEN WE'LL DO WHATEVER SHE SAYS.
>> MY POINT WAS THAT THE RULE DOES NOT ALLOW YOU TO YIELD YOUR TIME TO SOMEONE ELSE, BUT YOU COULD ASK QUESTIONS AND THAT TIME DOES NOT COUNT AGAINST YOU WHEN SOMEBODY IN THE AUDIENCE IS ANSWERING THE QUESTION.
>> YES, STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. THE TIME CONTINUED TICKING WHILE FOLKS WERE ANSWERING [OVERLAPPING] QUESTIONS AND SO THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED. THANK YOU.
>> IT CAN BE BECAUSE I DEFINITELY MESSED THAT UP AS THIS DEPENDS ON THAT.
MS. ARNOLD WANTS TO BRING MS. LOT BACK UP AND ASKED HER SOME MORE QUESTIONS OR NOT, IT SHOULDN'T HAVE TO USE THE TIME.
>> WELL, TO BE REALLY HONEST WITH YOU, I REALLY WOULD LIKE.
>> IF YOU WERE HONEST WITH ME. [LAUGHTER]
>> BUT I REALLY WOULD LIKE BECAUSE I WAS LISTENING. BUT MS. LOT, COULD YOU COME DOWN ALONG? NO, DON'T LEAVE BECAUSE I WANT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TIME THAT I DO HAVE.
WHEN WE WERE WITH MS. LOT, DID YOU HAVE ANY MORE RESPONSES TO THAT QUESTION ABOUT THE INTEGRATION AND CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES IN LITIGATION THAT COMES WITH THESE PROJECTS?
>> I FEEL THAT IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE RUDE TO REMIND THE CITY OF DALLAS ABOUT THE HISTORY CONCERNING THE ISSUE.
I BELIEVE EVERYONE AROUND THE HORSESHOE UNDERSTANDS THOSE ISSUES.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO OFFER AN OPPORTUNITY OR JUST URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS VERY WORTHWHILE PROJECT.
I BELIEVE IT'S IN A GOOD AREA.
I BELIEVE IT WILL PROVIDE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SO MANY LOW-INCOME FAMILIES THAT ARE SEARCHING FOR HOUSING.
>> THANK YOU. MR. ZACHARY, ON YOUR DATA THAT YOU PRESENTED, WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT THAT YOU BOUGHT THAT INFORMATION TO US TODAY ABOUT THE LOCATIONS?
>> IT'S REALLY HARD TO DEVELOP AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN HIGH-OPPORTUNITY AREAS.
THE YEAR THAT WE PUT IN THE APPLICATION FOR CYPRESS CREEK AT FOREST LANE, THERE WERE THREE NEGATIVE STATE REP LETTERS AGAINST PROJECTS THAT WERE BROUGHT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE STATE.
TWO OF THEM WERE AGAINST MY PROJECTS IN HIGH-OPPORTUNITY, MAJORITY-WHITE AREAS.
I HAVE TRIED AND I WILL CONTINUE TO TRY TO BRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THOSE AREAS AND IT IS A FIGHT THAT'S WORTH FIGHTING.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE SYSTEM HAS JUST BEEN FIGHTING AGAINST, ALLOWING THESE PROJECTS TO MOVE FORWARD, AND THAT DATA JUST SHOWS THAT WE NEED TO DO BETTER, BUT WE CAN DO BETTER.
I'VE LIVED IN MANY DIFFERENT PARTS OF DALLAS AND I'VE SEEN THE GOOD AND THE BAD, AND I THINK THAT EVERYBODY NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE COMMUNITIES AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS TO BE SPREAD OUT THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR EFFORTS TO AT LEAST TRY TO INTEGRATE THOSE AREAS AND INVEST IN THE HIGH OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU, MS. LOT FOR YOUR CONTINUOUS SUPPORT OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT TRIED TO KEEP US FROM BEING SATURATED.
BASICALLY, THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY IN TERMS OF MY ADVOCACY AND I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT TODAY. THANK YOU.
>> MR. RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DENY ITEM 38.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. NOGUERAR, COULD YOU COME BACK TO THE MIC? THE ISSUE OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT HAS BEEN QUESTIONED AND I WONDERED IF YOU COULD ENLIGHTEN US WITH THE AMOUNT OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THIS PROJECT.
>> THE RECORDS THAT I HAVE THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST THREE COMMUNITY MEETINGS.
THE DEVELOPER MAY BE AWARE OF OTHERS, BUT I'M AWARE OF AT LEAST THREE THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE AHEAD OF TODAY'S CONSIDERATION.
>> WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THOSE MEETINGS? WHERE WERE THEY HELD? HOW ARE PEOPLE NOTIFIED OF THEM?
>> THE MEETINGS WERE HELD IN PERSON, THEY WERE HELD VIRTUAL.
WHEN THE PROJECT STARTED IN 2021, WE WERE STILL LARGELY OPERATING IN A REMOTE ENVIRONMENT, SO THEY WERE HELD, I BELIEVE IT WAS VIA WEBEX.
THE DEVELOPER PRESENTED THE TERMS OF THE PROJECT,
[01:45:03]
THE COMMUNITY WAS ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS AND VOICED THEIR CONCERNS WITH THE PROJECT.IT WAS TYPICAL OF ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT THAT WE PRESENT WHERE WE WOULD HOLD OUTREACH MEETINGS AND GATHER INPUT.
>> THANK YOU. GIVEN THE IMPERATIVE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, PARTICULARLY AT THE INCOME LEVELS THAT WILL BE SERVED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THE FACT THAT IT'S LOCATED IN A HIGHER OPPORTUNITY AREA, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE CURRENT MOTION.
>> CHAIRMAN, I HEAR YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE ON YOUR MOTION TO DENY ON ITEM 38.
>> THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO ASK IF MR. NARVAEZ WOULD COME DOWN FOR QUESTION.
YOU'VE JUST HEARD SOME OF THE COMMENTS AS IT RELATES TO THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THIS AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT?
>> I WOULD. I GUESS I SPOKE EARLIER.
>> HELLO. I SPOKE EARLIER TODAY ABOUT THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE AREA.
I GUESS HERE THAT IT'S NOT LOW-INCOME.
I THINK THAT IS SKEWED FIRSTLY, BY THE EXISTENCE OF THE PRESBYTERIAN RETIREMENT VILLAGE ON THE CENSUS TRACT.
IT'S A HUGE RETIREMENT VILLAGE.
I MET MR. LEE, MR. MIRANDA ALLEN, THIS BLACK MEN AT A FEW WEEKS AGO.
WITHOUT THAT DEVELOPMENT, IT WOULD BE A MINORITY CENSUS TRACT.
IN FACT, THE TWO VOTING LOCATIONS IN HAMILTON PARK AND IN NORTHWEST ESTATES ARE BLACK CHURCHES SO WHEN WE WENT TO GO VOTE ON SATURDAY, WE WENT TO THE BLACK CHURCHES SO MISSING, I THINK THERE'S SOME INCONGRUITY BETWEEN WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED ABOUT D10 AS A WHOLE IN THESE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT.
>> WHEN YOU HEAR THE DISCUSSION EARLIER AS IT RELATES TO THE HISTORY OF THE CITY PUTTING LIGHT TECH PROJECTS AND OTHER PROJECTS INTO HISTORICALLY MINORITY AREAS.
DO YOU THINK THAT THIS PROJECT, BASED ON YOUR EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE, IS DOING THE SAME THING AGAIN? OR DO YOU THINK IT'S THIS NEW, GREAT CREATIVE OPTION WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GET MORE DIVERSITY?
>> I THINK WE'RE DOING THE SAME THING.
I THINK WE'RE PICKING A AREA OF NORTH DALLAS THAT IS MINORITY AND CHOOSING THAT TO PUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING [INAUDIBLE] HOUSING AND EVEN LATER THIS AFTERNOON, HOMELESS HOUSING, THERE'S A ZONING ISSUE COMING UP TO PUT 100 HOUSING UNITS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR PERMANENT HOUSING SOLUTION.
THAT'S NOT IN YOUR LIGHT TECH STATISTICS, BUT THAT IS WHAT'S GOING ON. IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
I CREATED A MAP, MAYBE A MONTH AGO, I SENT TO SOME OF YOU GUYS TO SHOW SOME OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS IN THE AREA AND IT PRETTY MUCH SURROUNDS HAMILTON PARK.
YOU START AT THE CORNER OF LBJ IN THE CENTRAL.
YOU COME DOWN, I THINK QUIET ROAD THAT SIDE.
YOU'VE GOT THIS PROJECT HERE AT FORESTS IN CENTRAL.
YOU GO EAST ON FOREST AND STOLTZ, I'M ACTUALLY WORKING WITH THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW TO TRY TO GET AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN MY LITERAL BACKYARD NEXT TO THE DART TRAIN STATION.
YOU GO FURTHER EAST AND FOREST LANE TOWARDS GREENVILLE.
WE HAVE A SECTION EIGHT SENIOR HOUSING RIGHT NOW AND YOU GO NORTH, YOU'RE AT 12,000 GREENVILLE WHERE THIS BODY HAS TALKED ABOUT DOING MORE HOMELESS HOUSING AND THEN YOU GO BACK TOWARDS A 75 AND 635 WEST ALONG 635.
THAT'S WHERE THE ZONING PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS HOUSING THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED TODAY IS SO THERE IS A LOT OF STUFF COMING INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS THE CONCERN OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
THAT'S ALL BEING PUT INTO THIS AREA OF NORTH DALLAS, ASSUMING IT MIGHT BE NORTH DALLAS, IT MIGHT BE D10.
BUT I GUESS I SPOKE EARLIER ABOUT HOW THIS AREA IS JERRY MANDER IN WHAT IS GOING ON
[01:50:02]
HERE AND I GUESS THAT WASN'T ADDRESSED BY THE ICP.THAT'S WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO TALK TO THE ICP ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO AND WE HAVE ISSUES WITH OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT, I GUESS IN 2013, 2014, THE FEDERAL COURT ORDERS ENDED AND THEY CHOOSE WHERE TO INVEST IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND THEY'RE NOT CHOOSING TO INVEST IN THE ZIP CODE 75243, AS WELL AS ALSO A COUPLE OF SCHOOLS IN A DISTRICT AT SPRING VALLEY IN KUWAIT, WHICH ARE ALMOST 100% HISPANIC AND THEN WHEN I OR REPRESENTATIVE RAMOS MENTIONED THIS TO ADMINISTRATORS, THAT THEY TELL US, HEY, MAN, YOU'RE BEING DESTRUCTIVE TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SO THAT'S THE SITUATION GOING ON IN THE AREA.
>> HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FROM THE BEGINNING ON THIS PROJECT?
>> I HAVE BEEN AND WE TRIED TO REACH OUT.
I WROTE AN EMAIL TO THE MAYOR, TO THE CITY MANAGER, TO THE DIRECTOR OF HOUSING, SAY WE NEED TO MEET AND CAN IT JUST BE HOUSING DEPARTMENT? THIS IS A BIGGER ISSUE THAN HOUSING.
WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN.
WE GOT TO TALK ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY.
WE HAD A HUGE DARK PROBLEM, NO ONE FROM MY NEIGHBORHOOD GOES TO THAT DARK BECAUSE IT'S SAFER FOR US TO GO TO THE DARK STATION AT 6:35.
THESE ARE ISSUES WE WOULD LOVE TO TALK TO THE CITY ABOUT AND FIND OUT WHAT WILL WORK AND I JUST ADD OBVIOUSLY HOMELESSNESS TO THE TWO, BUT NOTHING'S EVER BEEN SAID UP.
WHEN THIS PROJECT CAME BACK IN FEBRUARY, I ASKED THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT, THEY SET THE MEETING WITH PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN SO THAT WE CAN ALL SIT DOWN AND TALK AND THAT WASN'T ABLE TO BE DONE.
THE SAME ISSUE CAME UP LAST THURSDAY WHEN WE DISCUSSED WHAT COULD BE DONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO THAT THIS PROJECT WOULDN'T HURT IT TOO MUCH.
OR LIKE WHAT COULD BE DONE IN NEIGHBORHOODS SO THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE A CONCENTRATION OF POVERTY.
IN THE ANSWER FROM HOUSING WAS THAT'S OUT OF THEIR CONTROL.
THEY'RE A PRODUCTION DEPARTMENT THEY'RE ALL ABOUT PUTTING HOUSING AND IT'S NOT SO MUCH ABOUT THE OTHER NEEDS OF THE RESIDUES.
>> WHEN THIS WAS AROUND TWO YEARS AGO, WERE THERE TWO VIRTUAL MEETINGS THAT ALL WAS THERE?
THERE WAS ONE FIRST SET UP BY THE NORTHWOOD ESTATE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THAT WAS DURING THE SNOWMAGEDDON IT WAS REALLY HARD FOR PEOPLE TO JOIN IN.
IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE POWER WAS GOING OUT SO NOT MANY PEOPLE COULD JOIN IN.
THERE WAS A SECOND MEETING WITH HAMILTON PARK AND THAT WAS THE NIGHT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND ON THAT CALL WAS ALSO THE PRESIDENT, FOUNDER OF BARNER CARRINGTON, WHO IS THE REAL DEVELOPER HERE, BARNER CARRINGTON AND WE'RE ON A CALL WITH THE FOLKS I MENTIONED EARLIER WHO WERE DOING A LOT OF THE VOTER OUTREACH IN THE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS AND HIS ATTITUDE WAS VERY DISRESPECTFUL.
HE ASKS US LIKE WILL YOU GUYS TAKE $10,000.
>> POINT OF ORDER MAYOR, COULD WE JUST ASCERTAIN WHAT THE RESPONSE IS? WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? WHAT IS THE RESPONSE IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE WORKING TOGETHER.
>> I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE THE SPECIFIC POINT OF ORDER THAT'S IN THERE BUT I'M GOING TO TRY TO INTERPRET ONE FOR EVERYBODY.
I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE DISCOVERED THE LOOPHOLE IN THE RULES AND I COMMEND YOU ALL FOR THAT HAPPENING ON BOTH SIDES.
IF WE CAN TRY THAT AND MAYBE AVOID ASKING ANY QUESTIONS THAT WOULD BE DUPLICATIVE AND IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND TRYING TO KEEP YOUR ANSWERS AS FOCUSED AS YOU CAN ON THE QUESTION AND BE AS SUCCINCT AS YOU CAN, WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE, OF COURSE, BUT AT THIS POINT, THIS IS THE ONLY TIME A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC CAN BE UNTIMED UNDER OUR RULES AND YOU GUYS HAVE FOUND IT AND SO I COMMEND YOU FOR THAT.
BUT IN THE INTEREST OF GETTING THE MEETING DONE, ABOUT FIVE O'CLOCK OR SIX O'CLOCK OR SO, WOULD YOU MIND HELPING US OUT, MR. CHAIRMAN? PLEASE.
[01:55:01]
>> YES. THANK YOU. WE'RE ALSO INVOLVED IN THE ONLY IN-PERSON MEETING THAT TOOK PLACE JUST IN WEEK OF MARCH 15?
>> YES. I HELPED ORGANIZE THAT WITH DAVID.
>> HAVE THERE BEEN ANY OTHER PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THIS?
>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. ESPECIALLY NOT WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS.
I GUESS THIS SPRING IT'S ALL BEEN NOT THE PFC AND THEN THERE WAS A SUDDEN CHANGE, MAYBE A FEW WEEKS AGO.
I DID ASK FOR A MEETING ABOUT THAT AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS NEW DEAL WAS WHAT THE TAX IS AND WHAT COULD BE DONE FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND HAD A QUICK MEETING OR IMPROMPTU MEETING LAST THURSDAY.
>> THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN AND PARTICIPATING AND ENGAGING IN THIS AND AGAIN, REITERATE MY DISAPPOINTMENT WITH WHERE WE ARE. THANK YOU.
>> I JUST WANT TO SAY TO YOU ALSO THANK YOU FOR COMING.
YOU JUST HAPPEN TO BE THE LAST PERSON THAT WAS PART OF THE STRANGE QUIRK IN OUR RULES.
I DON'T MAKE ANYONE MAKE YOU FEEL SINGLED OUT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE TODAY.
CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DENY ITEM 38 FOR THE PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU. WE'VE SEEN SEVERAL ITERATIONS OF THIS DEAL.
I'M WONDERING IF YOU CAN TELL US WHY ARE WE NOT BEING PRESENTED THE DEAL AS A PSD?
>> [OVERLAPPING] IS YOUR MICROPHONE ON?
>> YES. STAFF WORKED THROUGH DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND BASED ON THE PFC BOARD AND STAFF'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THIS WAS THE THE BEST PATH FORWARD.
HERE'S WHERE WE GET INTO THE LEGAL EASE AND I'M GOING TO TRY NOT TO KNOW.
THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO.
THIS WAS IN THE BEST INTERESTS.
>> DID THE PFC BOARD WANTS TO DO THIS PROJECT?
>> BUT THEY SAID ONLY IF CERTAIN SITUATIONS WERE IN PLACE?
>> I BELIEVE THEY WANTED THE CITY TO INDEMNIFY THE BOARD AND THE CITY AS A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY CANNOT INDEMNIFY THE BOARD.
>> DID THEY DISCUSS HAVING ANYBODY ELSE INDEMNIFY THEM?
>> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION.
>> THE ONLY OTHER ENTITY THAT COULD INDEMNIFY THEM WAS THE DEVELOPER AND THAT WAS PUT ON THE TABLE, BUT IT WASN'T SUFFICIENT TO THE PFC BOARD.
>> BECAUSE THAT DEVELOPERS INDEMNIFICATION WAS LIMITED OR FOR WHAT PURPOSE?
>> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY EXPRESSED THAT ON THE RECORD, DID THEY? THE PFC THE ANSWER TO HER QUESTION?
>> THE PSC BOARD WAS CONCERNED THAT THERE WOULD BE A LEGAL CHALLENGE AND THEY COULD POTENTIALLY LOSE THEM, WIPE OUT ALL OF THE RESERVES THAT HAVE ACCUMULATED FOR THE PFC.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF THEY EXPRESSED THAT ON THE RECORD.
>> DID YOU HEAR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AT THE MEETING?
>> I'M NOT SURE WHICH WAY TO GO WITH THIS.
STAFF PRESENTED THE PROJECT, THE BOARD HAD AN EXTENSIVE CONVERSATION AROUND THEIR SUPPORT OR NON-SUPPORT FOR IT AND WHAT THEY ADOPTED WAS A APPROVAL THAT WAS CONDITIONAL.
>> I WATCHED THE MEETING, IT SEEMED TO BE THAT THERE WAS NOT COMFORT WITH MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE OF THE LEGAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE COVENANTS ON THE LAND IS THAT FAIR?
>> YOU SAID YOU WATCHED THE MEETING? OKAY.
>> DO YOU THINK THAT'S A FAIR TAKEAWAY?
>> DID YOU ALL WATCH THE MEETING AS WELL? YES.
>> WAS THAT YOUR SAME TAKEAWAY?
HOLD ON A SECOND IF I SETTLE DOWN.
I'M GOING TO JUMP IN HERE BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE TO RESET AND REMEMBER THAT STAFF IS HERE
[02:00:02]
TO AS A RESOURCE TO ANSWER FACTUAL QUESTIONS AND IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S WITHIN THEIR KNOWLEDGE IS NOT COMPETENT OR THE LIKE THAT, THEN THEY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO TELL US.BUT IF WE REQUIRE A FORM OF SPECULATION OR IF IT IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT WITHIN THEIR KNOWLEDGE, THEN HE'S ANSWERED THE QUESTION AND IF YOU SAW THE SAME MEETING THAT HE SAW, THEN I'M NOT SURE WHY HIS JUDGE WOULD BE ANY BETTER SUBSTITUTE FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF WHAT WAS SAID IN THE MEETING FOR YOURS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S BENEFICIAL TO US..
IT'S JUST HE SAW IT, YOU SAW IT.
YOU COULD TELL US WHAT YOU THOUGHT.
YOU CAN USE YOUR TIME TO TELL US WHAT YOU THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT YOU SAW, BUT CONTINUING TO ASK HIM OVER AND OVER AGAIN, IS THAT WHAT HE THINKS HE SAW? I DON T THINK HE'S GOING TO GET US ANYWHERE.
I'M GOING TO ASK IF YOU CAN MOVE ON ON THAT.
THE POINT OF WHY I'M ASKING IT IS BECAUSE IT SEEMED TO CENTER AROUND THAT TOPIC, AND SO WHILE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS, WE'VE HEARD INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY SAYING THIS WOULD BE GOOD BUT THEN WE'VE HEARD PEOPLE WHO ARE BLACK AND BROWN SAYING THIS IS NOT GOOD.
WE'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAYING THIS IS GREAT BECAUSE IT'S WALKABLE TO SO MANY THINGS, BUT THEN WE'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAYING IT'S VERY FAR FROM SHOPPING.
WE'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAY THAT DISTRICT 10 HAS THE MOST LOW-INCOME HOUSING UNITS, WHICH IS FROM A MEMO YOU CREATED, BUT THEN WE'VE HEARD NUMBER SAYING YOU HAVE DISTRICT 10 WITH THE LEAST NUMBER OF SPECIFIC LOW-INCOME TAX CREDIT UNITS.
WE'VE HEARD THAT THIS IS A BETTER NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS A HIGH OPPORTUNITY ZONE, BUT THEN WE'VE ALSO HEARD ABOUT A HIGH CRIME RATE, WHICH ANYBODY WHO'S BEEN OVER THERE KNOWS THAT IT'S TRUE AND YOU CAN GO TO THAT RACE TRACK AND SEE PROSTITUTION AND DRUG DEALS HAPPENING.
I THINK IT'S PART OF CHIEF GARCIA'S CRIME UNITS.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE ALL HAPPENING AT THE SAME PLACE.
BUT THE THING THAT GOES BACK TO ME, SOMETIMES PEOPLE WILL MAKE A PRO CON LIST.
IT DOESN'T MEAN EVERYTHING ON THAT LIST IS WEIGHTED THE SAME, AND THE ITEM THAT SEEMS TO BE WEARING VERY HEAVY FOR ME IS THERE'S A COVENANT ON THE LAND, AND WE'RE NOT RECOGNIZING THAT THAT'S PROBLEMATIC, AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THE TWO OWNERS THAT ARE TELLING US THEY'RE GOING TO SUE US NEXT DOOR ARE WELL-RESPECTED ATTORNEYS.
I BELIEVE THEM WHEN THEY SAY THAT THIS IS PROBLEMATIC AND THEY WILL SUE US AND THEY'VE WON A LOT OF CASES, AND SO WE'VE SEEN THIS MULTIPLE TIMES.
WE VOTED ON THIS FOR THOSE OF US WHO'VE BEEN HERE AWHILE, I VOTED YES WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY HERE.
THIS TIME BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE COVENANT THEN, THAT'S A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION, AND SO ALL THE OTHER PARTS I'M GOING TO PUT ASIDE, DO I THINK IT'S GOOD FOR JOBS IF YOU'RE IN THE MEDICAL FIELD? YEAH MEDICAL CITY IS RIGHT THERE ALONG WITH OTHER SERVICES THAT ARE CO-LOCATED, AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE GREAT FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO WORK.
BUT THAT'S NOT AN ACCEPTABLE USE GIVEN THIS LAND.
I THINK WHAT'S HAPPENED THAT I HAVE HEARD CHAIR MCGOUGH EXPRESS IS, THIS THING JUST KEEPS COMING BACK AND IT'S CLEAR THAT YOU'RE TRYING EVERY ANGLE TO TRY TO MAKE A DEAL WORK AND I THINK IT'S FOR A GOOD REASON.
I THINK IT'S FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I THINK PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT INTENTION TO TRY TO GET THAT TO HAPPEN, BUT WE CAN'T FORGET THAT THERE'S A COVENANT ON THE LAND AND WE'RE OBLIGATED TO ABIDE BY THOSE INSTANCES.
I'M JUST SURPRISED THAT WE JUST KEEP COMING BACK TO SOMETHING ONCE WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THAT.
THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO SAY ABOUT IT. THANK YOU.
>> DEP MAYOR, PROTEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DENY ON ITEM 38.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOU MAY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, YOU MAY NOT.
I WAS ABLE TO GOOGLE IT REAL QUICK, BUT CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE AVERAGE HOME PRICE IS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S CLOSEST, WHICH IS JUST TO THE EAST OF THIS LOCATION?
>> NO, I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
>> WELL, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO SHARE IT WITH EVERYBODY IF I'M ALLOWED TO EMAIL IT TO EVERYONE POST DISCUSSION AND VOTE.
THE AVERAGE HOME PRICE IS $1.4 MILLION OF THE HOMES ADJACENT TO THIS AREA, WHICH ISN'T EXACTLY ADJACENT.
[02:05:03]
THAT WAS JUST A QUICK GOOGLE SEARCH.WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE SCREENSHOT THAT I TOOK, IT'S 1.3 MILLION, 1.34 MILLION, 1.5 MILLION, 1.32 MILLION, 1.34 MILLION 355,000 IS AN EMPTY LOT, 1.3 MILLION, 1.39 MILLION, THESE ARE EMPTY LOTS AS WELL.
THERE'S AN $899,000 LOTS, A $1.78 MILLION HOME, AND A $1.952 MILLION HOME.
WHAT DOES HIGH OPPORTUNITY MEAN?
>> HIGH OPPORTUNITY TYPICALLY REFERS TO A NUMBER OF FACTORS FROM CRIME RATES, TO THE QUALITY OF THE SCHOOLS, TO ACCESS, TO RETAIL CENTERS AND TRANSIT HUBS.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF FACTORS THAT GO INTO THE CALCULATION, AND THE POVERTY RATE OF THE AREA.
>> IT WAS ASKED EARLIER ABOUT THE SCORING, AND WHY DOES THIS AREA CONTINUE TO SCORE HIGH?
>> BECAUSE OF ITS PROXIMITY TO ALL OF THOSE FACTORS RELATIVE TO OTHER SITES.
THE 9% TAX CREDIT PROGRAM IS A COMPETITIVE PROGRAM, SO WHEN THIS PROJECT SUBMITTED ITS APPLICATION TO THE STATE, IT WAS COMPETING AGAINST OTHER SIMILAR PROJECTS ACROSS THE STATE, BECAUSE OF ALL OF THOSE FACTORS, IT SCORED HIGHER THAN THE OTHER PROJECTS.
IT'S A UNIQUE SITE FOR THAT REASON.
>> VERY GOOD. I'LL AGREE IT IS A UNIQUE SITE.
I USED TO LIVE IN DISTRICT 10, I LIVED THERE FOR A DOZEN YEARS.
MY EX-PARTNER WORKED AT MEDICAL CITY.
HOME DEPOT IS WHERE I USED TO SHOP, I ACTUALLY HAD A PART-TIME JOB AT THAT HOME DEPOT FOR AWHILE, SO I KNOW THIS AREA VERY WELL AS FAR AS JUST PERSONALLY AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT IT'S HARD TO EXPERIMENT AND GO INTO A NEW AREA WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE HOUSING.
WE DID IT IN DISTRICT 6, AND THANKFULLY, THIS BODY VOTED UNANIMOUSLY FOR IT AND WE WERE ABLE TO PUT IN 90 UNITS OF WORKFORCE HOUSING THAT IT'S AT A MUCH, MUCH HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABILITY THAN THIS.
THE BREAKDOWN OF THIS FOR THE INCOME DISTRIBUTION IS 25% OF THE HOMES ARE AT 30%, 22% OF THE HOMES ARE AT 70% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME, SO 30% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOMES, 25% OF THE UNITS, 47 OF THE UNITS WILL BE 30%, 22% OF THE UNITS, SO 42, WILL BE AT 70% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME, 7%, 14 OF THE UNITS, WILL BE AT 80% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME.
THIS IS A BIGGER NUMBER THAN WE TYPICALLY DO.
46% OF THE UNITS WILL BE AT MARKET RATE.
ALMOST HALF THE UNITS ARE GOING TO BE AT MARKET RATES.
IT'S 189 TOTAL UNITS AND 86 OF THEM ARE GOING TO BE AT MARKET RATE.
THIS ISN'T LIKE WHAT WE DID TWO YEARS AGO, THIS ISN'T LIKE A LIGHT TECH PROJECT, THIS ISN'T WHAT WE TYPICALLY SEE.
IT SADDENS ME TO SEE THAT WE'RE ALL TRYING TO FOCUS ON A FEW UNITS AND THAT FOLKS ARE HERE TALKING ABOUT WHERE THEY WANT TO PLACE LOWER-INCOME PEOPLE.
IT'S A PRIVILEGE THAT PEOPLE WITH PRIVILEGE FINANCIALLY HAVE WHERE THEY ALWAYS TEND TO WANT TO BE ABLE TO SAY WHERE A PERSON WHO HAS LOWER PRIVILEGE IS GOING TO LIVE, WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO EAT, WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET TO SPEND THEIR MONEY ON, WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO WEAR, WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO GO TO SCHOOL, AND THAT'S UNCONSCIONABLE.
THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP IN THIS SITUATION BECAUSE OF CENTURIES OF RACISM.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS FINALLY SAID IT'S GOING TO BREAK AND IT'S GOING TO END.
WE KEEP FIGHTING OVER THIS ONE LITTLE AREA.
WE DID IT IN DISTRICT 6, WE'VE DONE IT MULTIPLE TIMES IN DISTRICT 6 AND EVERY TIME WE DO IT, WE END UP WITH SUCCESS.
IT WAS ASKED EARLIER THAT WE DISCUSS THIS MORE AND, SO I'M GOING TO HAVE TO SAY I'M AGAINST THE DENIAL BECAUSE IF WE REALLY DO WANT TO FOCUS MORE ON THE DISCUSSION AND TALK MORE, THEN WE HAVE TO VOTE NO IN ORDER TO ALLOW A DIFFERENT MOTION SO THAT YOU ALL CAN CONTINUE TO WORK.
IF WE VOTE NO, WHAT HAPPENS? IS THIS OVER? IS IT DONE AS FAR AS RIGHT NOW?
[02:10:02]
>> CITY ATTORNEY, CAN YOU TELL ME, IF WE VOTE NO, IS IT ALLOWED FOR MORE DISCUSSION? I MEAN, WE'RE SAYING NO AT THIS POINT.
>> IF YOU VOTE NO AND THAT PASSES, THE FLOOR WOULD BE OPEN FOR ANOTHER MOTION.
>> NO, I MEANT, IF WE VOTE NO AND IT PASSES, THE STAFF CONTINUE TO WORK ON THIS PROJECT?
>> I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL'S GUIDANCE WOULD BE NO.
>> EXACTLY. THAT'S WHY IT WAS ASKED EARLIER FOR US TO HAVE MORE CONVERSATION, MORE OF A LOT OF THINGS AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY WHO'S COME UP TO SPEAK.
IF WE REALLY WANT TO HAVE MORE DISCUSSION AND WE WANT TO ASK MORE QUESTIONS AND HAVE MORE RESPONSES, THEN THE ONLY RIGHT THING TO DO IS TO VOTE AGAINST THIS MOTION.
THAT'S WHAT I WILL BE DOING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> AND I'LL SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST, CHAIR MCGOUGH, YOU'RE OUT OF ROUND.
DO YOU NEED TO RECOGNIZED FOR SOMETHING ELSE.
>> YES. I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT I WILL WITHDRAW MY MOTION TO DENY AND ASK THAT WE MOVE THIS BACK TO THE HOUSING COMMITTEE.
>> FIRST THINGS FIRST, YOU WANT TO WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION.
IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE, THE MOTION IS WITHDRAWN.
YOU HAVE A MOTION YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE NOW?
>> LET'S MOVE THIS BACK TO HOUSING COMMITTEE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT ARE OUTSTANDING.
>> IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
NOW THE MOTION IS TO REFER THIS ITEM BACK TO COMMITTEE.
WE'RE NOW ON A MOTION TO REFER BACK TO COMMITTEE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU'D LIKE TO START THE DISCUSSION ON THAT? NO? CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO REFER BACK TO COMMITTEE.
>> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
MOVE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CLOSING AND ACQUISITION WHILE REMINDING THE LEASE AGREEMENT TO HOUSING ON MAY 22, AND RETURN FOR AUTHORIZATION OF THE LEASE TO THE COUNCIL TO BE CONSIDERED ON JUNE 14TH.
>> I JUST LOST MY PARLIAMENTARIAN AT THE WORST POSSIBLE TIME BECAUSE I WANT TO CONFIRM WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS AN APPROPRIATE MOTION AT THIS POINT, AND I'M JUST WONDERING FOR THE RECORD TO ESTABLISH THAT IS ACTUALLY PERMISSIBLE AS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
MADAM PARLIAMENTARIAN, CITY ATTORNEY, SO YOU HEARD THE ORIGINAL MOTION WAS CHAIR BAZALDUA'S MOTION TO REFER TO COMMITTEE WHICH WAS SECONDED BY CHAIRMAN THOMAS AND THEN WE HAD A MOTION MADE BY CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA THAT HE JUST READ THAT'S SOMEWHAT LENGTHY.
BUT HE'S DESCRIBED IT AS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
I WANT YOU CONFIRM THAT AS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S OUT OF ORDER FOR SOME REASON.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DID THIS RIGHT SINCE PEOPLE ARE HERE AND THEY'VE BEEN HERE ALL DAY AND PEOPLE CARE ABOUT THIS. WE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. TO BE A LITTLE BIT TECHNICAL, THE MAIN MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS AN INCIDENTAL MAIN MOTION TO COMMIT OR REFER THE ITEM.
I BELIEVE YOUR SUBSTITUTE WHICH IS TO APPROVE A PORTION OF IT HAS THE EFFECT OF KILLING THE REFERRAL, AND SO THAT WOULD BE OUT OF ORDER.
>> THE MOTION IS OUT OF ORDER AT THIS TIME.
WE CAN DISPOSE OFF THE MOTION IF WE GO THROUGH THE NORMAL DEBATE AND IT'S VOTED DOWN OR UP.
WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS. BUT AT THIS TIME I'M STILL GOING TO RECOGNIZE MAYOR PRO TEM FOR [OVERLAPPING]
>> DO YOU STILL HAVE [OVERLAPPING]
>> YEAH. I THOUGHT YOU RECOGNIZE ME AND I USED SOME OF MY TIME FOR A MOTION.
>> WE'LL CONTINUE ON YOUR TIME AND START HIS TIME AT FIVE MINUTES.
>> BY THE WAY, AS WELL AS WE'RE CLEAR ON WHERE WE ARE, WE'RE STILL NOW ON THE MOTION TO REFER TO COMMITTEE.
>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO JUST REMIND EVERYONE THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF TOOLS AND TACTICS USED THAT HAVE BEEN DELAYS AND DELAYS MEAN ATTEMPTS TO KILL.
IF WE REALLY ARE GOING TO GET THIS DONE, THERE'S NOTHING BINDING US IN GETTING ANY OF WHAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP AS ISSUES IRONED OUT WITHOUT MAKING US VULNERABLE TO THE SELLER BACKING OUT.
QUITE FRANKLY, THE VERY FIRST TIME WE TOOK ACTION IN THIS COUNCIL WAS MORE THAN TWO YEARS AGO.
IF WE CONTINUE TO KICK THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ENOUGH TIME, THAT'S BEYOND DISINGENUOUS.
WE HAVE HAD MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO GET WITH COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
WE HAVE HAD MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO ASK QUESTIONS THROUGH VARIOUS ROUTES OF TRYING TO GET THIS THROUGH.
THE PFC, CPC, COUNCIL, HOUSING COMMITTEE, WE'VE HAD MEMOS.
THIS HAS LITERALLY BEEN SEVERAL YEARS IN THE MAKING.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHETHER IT WAS APPROPRIATE OR NOT THAT THERE IS A MOTION THAT I WOULD LIKE TO BE MAKING.
[02:15:01]
IT'S GOING TO BE AS AN ALTERNATE MOTION TO WHAT IS ON THE FLOOR AND I HOPE THAT MY COLLEAGUES WILL CONSIDER GIVING OUR CITY MANAGER THE ABILITY TO AT LEAST LOCK IN THIS OPPORTUNITY WITHOUT US CONTINUING THE DELAY TACTICS WITH THE INTENT TO KILL THE PROJECT.WHAT IS OUR INTENT IN THIS CITY? TO LOOK AT A PROJECT THAT IS BEFORE US, THAT IS ADDRESSING ONE OF THE BIGGEST NEEDS BEFORE US, THAT IS HELPING PROVIDE HOUSING STOCK TO OUR CITY WHILE ALSO ADDRESSING THE GLARING DISPARITY OF HOUSING OPTIONS IN OUR CITY.
ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE BEING ADDRESSED BY THIS AND I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE CONTINUING TO BEAT OUR HEAD AGAINST THE WALL WHEN THE ONLY OPPOSITION THAT WE HEAR ARE FROM PEOPLE WITH MILLION-DOLLAR HOMES WHO DON'T WANT PEOPLE MAKING 30% OF AMI LIVING NEXT TO THEM.
LET'S JUST CALL A SPADE WHAT IT IS.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM IN OUR CITY IF WE AREN'T GOING TO MIX INCOMES IN NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGHOUT OUR CITY.
I REPRESENT A DISTRICT THAT DOES HAVE A LOT OF FOOD DESERTS.
IT ALSO HAS, AS WAS CITED, A HIGH CONCENTRATION OF AFFORDABLE AND LOW-INCOME HOUSING.
IT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER BY MS. MENDELSOHN THAT WE HAVE THE MOST IN DISTRICT 10.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE ON THE RECORD THAT IT IS CLEAR.
IT'S NOT THE MOST LIGHT TECH, IT'S THE MOST AFFORDABLE.
AFFORDABILITY GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO 120 AMI.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE THAT MAKE SIX FIGURES IN SOME CASES THAT HAVE BEEN SET ASIDES OF AFFORDABILITY.
LOW-INCOME WAS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING THE MOST IN ALL OF THE DISTRICTS OF THE SOUTH WHICH IS WHY WE SEE A DISPARITY.
YOU KNOW ANOTHER DISPARITY IN OUR CITY? NINETY PERCENT OF THE CORPORATE JOB MARKET IS NORTH OF 30.
WHY DO WE KEEP PUTTING THE LOWER-INCOME POPULATION DOWN BELOW 30? THIS IS ALL BY DESIGN AND WE ARE IN POSITIONS TO CHANGE THAT DESIGN BECAUSE THAT DESIGN STARTED A LONG TIME AGO.
CHAIRMAN THOMAS WORKED REALLY HARD ON OUR RACIAL EQUITY PLAN, HAS WORKED REALLY HARD ON APPLYING THAT TO OUR HOUSING PLAN.
FOR US TO DENY OR KILL A PROJECT LIKE THIS, IT IS NOT BELIEVING IN WHAT WE FOUGHT FOR ALREADY.
IT'S NOT BELIEVING IN WHAT WE STAND FOR AS A CITY.
WE HAVE PROJECTS BEFORE US WHERE WE OFTEN TALK OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF OUR MOUTHS.
ARE WE GOING TO TELL THE CITY AND THE RESIDENTS THAT WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND EQUITY IN THIS CITY, OR ARE WE GOING TO TELL THEM THAT IT'S ALL TALK? THAT'S THE DECISION BEFORE US RIGHT NOW.
REMANDING THIS IS A DELAY TACTIC, REMANDING THIS WILL HAVE THE SELLER END UP WALKING AWAY AND WE KNOW IT.
THIS PARCEL IS ZONED FOR MULTI-FAMILY.
AT A TIME WHEN OFFICE SPACE IS ABOUT 40% VACANT IN OUR CITY, WHAT ELSE IS GOING TO GO THERE? WE'RE GOING TO KEEP RESISTING DENSITY, WE'RE GOING TO KEEP RESISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES, AND THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO HURT ARE THOSE THAT NEED IT MOST IN OUR CITY. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR.
>> MR. WEST, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO REFER BACK TO COMMITTEE.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I AGREE WITH PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID THERE.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MORE REVIEW.
I THINK HERE AT THE 11TH HOUR, IT'S CLEAR THIS IS A DELAY TACTIC AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO LEARN ANYTHING NEW SENDING IT BACK THERE AT THE HOUSING COMMITTEE.
HOWEVER, I GUESS I WOULD EITHER ASK THE APPLICANT OR DAVID, YOUR TEAM, WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF SENDING IT BACK TO HOUSING AND WHEN DOES IT HAVE TO BE BACK OR THE DEAL IS GOING TO GO AWAY? YEAH, I THINK IT'S A BETTER QUESTION FOR THE DEVELOPER.
>> BECAUSE IF IT CAN GO TO HOUSING AND COME BACK TO US, GREAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE, I THINK PROBABLY NOTHING, BUT WHAT'S THE TIMELINE WE'RE LOOKING AT TO MAKE SURE THIS DOESN'T FALL APART?
>> ULTIMATELY, TIME KILLS DEALS IN GENERAL.
>> I'VE BEEN HOLDING ONTO THIS DEAL FOR DEAR LIFE FOR OVER A YEAR WHILE TRYING TO GET THIS STRUCTURE TOGETHER.
IF WE CAN SEND THE LEASE BACK AND ACTUALLY HAVE LEASE LANGUAGE TO COME BACK ON JUNE 14TH, I THINK THAT'LL WORK.
BUT OBVIOUSLY ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN THAT MONTH-AND-A-HALF.
>> THANK YOU. YOU MIGHT WANT TO JUST STAY CLOSE IN CASE THERE ARE MORE QUESTIONS.
JUNE 14TH IS THE DATE THAT WAS SAID.
[02:20:02]
IF THIS WAS REMANDED BACK TO HOUSING, WHAT'S THE NEXT HOUSING MEETING?>> MAY 22ND IS WHAT I'M HEARING.
IS THERE ENOUGH TIME TO NOTICE THAT AND PREPARE TO MEET OUR OBLIGATIONS FOR OPEN RECORDS REQUIREMENTS?
>> AS FAR AS NOTICING THERE IS ENOUGH TIME.
>> I TEND TO PROBABLY NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION, BUT IF I CAN HEAR A GOOD REASON FOR SENDING IT BACK TO HOUSING, I COULD BE PERSUADED, I GUESS ON THIS ONE AS LONG AS WE HAVE A DATE THAT CERTAIN THAT IT COMES BACK TO COUNCIL FOR A VOTE BEFORE JUNE 14TH. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRMAN MCGOUGH YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. THE MAIN REASON TO ANSWER MY COLLEAGUES QUESTION IS WE DIDN'T EVEN GET CLOSE TO A FRAMEWORK OF THE ACTUAL DEAL UNTIL LAST NIGHT AT 07:00 PM.
I HEAR SOME OF THE TERMINOLOGY AND TO MY OTHER COLLEAGUE, LIKE WE WERE HAVING DISCUSSIONS THIS MORNING WHERE YOU SAID, YES, IT'D BE APPROPRIATE TO GO BACK TO HOUSING AND HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS.
I'M NOT GETTING BACK-AND-FORTH, I'M JUST SAYING IT'S NOT JUST A DELAY TACTIC, IT'S TRYING TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD BOTH LEGALLY AND PROCESS WISE, TO TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.
I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT EVEN SURE IF THE DEVELOPER GOT THE AGREEMENT BEFORE WE DID LAST NIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY DID OR DIDN'T.
BUT THIS IS NOT HOW YOU DO THIS WHEN YOU'RE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS.
I'VE NEVER SEEN THE CITY GO THROUGH SOMETHING LIKE THIS WHERE THEY POST SOMETHING.
WHAT WAS POSTED BEFORE LAST NIGHT WAS THAT WE WERE RELYING ON THE SELLER'S DEBT IN ORDER TO TAKE POSSESSION OF THE LAND AND THAT SO MANY OF THE DIFFERENT ASPECTS WERE JUST TOTALLY MISSING OF IT.
WE'VE GOT SOME OF IT, WE TALKED SOME ABOUT INDEMNITY AND WHAT'S THERE, BUT WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT INDEMNITY FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBERS INDIVIDUALLY.
THERE'S OTHER PIECES OF THIS THAT NEED TO BE WORKED OUT.
YOU CAN'T PUT FORWARD A RESOLUTION AND THEN SAY, OH IT'S ALL GOING TO BE WORKED OUT IN THE LEASE TERMS LATER WHEN YOU'VE GOT SPECIFIC THINGS THERE THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED.
NOW IS WHEN AS A CITY ON THIS DEAL OR ANY OTHER DEAL, WE SHOULD GO INTO IT WITH HERE ARE WHAT WE NEED OUT OF THIS.
HERE'S THE RESOLUTION OF WHAT IT IS, AND THEN LET'S START NEGOTIATING THE TERMS WHILE WE'RE IN A POINT OF LEVERAGE, WHILE WE KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
THAT'S HOW WE SHOULD BE DOING THESE THINGS.
IN FACT, A LOT OF THESE SUGGESTIONS ON WHAT WE NEED THAT HOPEFULLY, THIS COUNCIL, I'LL BE GONE, BUT WILL INCLUDE IN THOSE LEASE TERMS OR WHATEVER ELSE LATER ON AND ENFORCE IT WILL BE THESE THINGS THAT MAKE THE PROJECT BETTER.
BUT AT NOW, IT'S NOT JUST DELAY.
IT IS TRYING TO MAKE THIS BETTER BEFORE WE DIG OURSELVES OUR OWN GRAVES ON THIS.
>> THANK YOU. MAYOR PROTEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION REFERRED TO COMMITTEE.
>> THANK YOU. MY POSITION IS THAT WE SHOULD NOT AND NO DISRESPECT CHAIRMAN THOMAS, BUT YOU ARE ENDING YOUR EIGHT YEARS HERE AT THE HORSESHOE AS CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE.
AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE TIMELINES, I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH US PLANNING TO DISCUSS SOMETHING OR PUT IT IN FRONT OF A COMMITTEE WHERE INDIVIDUALS MAY VERY WELL HAVE AN OPTION OF NOT SHOWING UP FOR COMMITTEE.
THEN THE NEXT STEP IS, AS COUNCIL MEMBER CASEY THOMAS LEAVES, THE MAYOR, THAT'S HIS PREROGATIVE TO NAME A NEW HOUSING COMMITTEE WITH THE NEW CHAIR.
WE'RE DEALING WITH A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY THAT'S NOT GOOD TODAY AS WE SPEAK ABOUT THE LIVES OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE WAITING FOR US TO GIVE ANOTHER SIGNAL OF SUPPORT THAT WE ARE WILLING TO INVEST IN THOSE WHO NEED US THE MOST.
IF INDEED THIS LANE IS CLASSIFIED FOR MULTIFAMILY, MULTIFAMILY IS WHAT YOU'RE OFFERING, I DO COMMEND YOU AND THANK YOU BECAUSE OFTENTIMES WE HAVE WHITE DEVELOPERS WHO ARE NOT WILLING TO DO WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A REPEAT OF HISTORY AND I THINK MANY OF YOU SHOULD GO BACK.
AS I WAS LISTENING, I'M GOING THROUGH AND I'M FLASHING THROUGH THE LITTLE ROCK NINE AND ROSA PARK AND ALL THOSE FOLKS WHO HAD TO GO THROUGH WHAT THEY HAD TO GO THROUGH TO STAND UP.
BUT I LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE IT WAS PREDOMINANTLY WHITE.
THEN AS AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND HISPANICS MOVED IN, WHITE FLIGHT TOOK PLACE, WE WERE LIKE, HEY, WE FINE BECAUSE WE'VE GOT GOOD LAND, GREAT ARCHITECTURE IS A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE.
IF THOSE FOLKS WANT TO MOVE AND TAKE THE FLIGHT, LET THEM TAKE IT, BUT AT LEAST INVEST IN THOSE WHO NEED US THE MOST.
THESE INDIVIDUALS ALSO LOOK TO US FOR TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THEIR PROPERTY TAXES.
[02:25:03]
THESE PEOPLE ARE PAYING SOME TYPE OF TAXES.THEY WANT TO BE CLASSIFIED AS HUMAN BEINGS WHO ARE RESPECTED IN THE CITY AND I HEAR THAT DAY IN AND DAY OUT.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE LOSING SO MUCH TRACTION.
I THINK THE REPORTER ASKED ME THE OTHER DAY ABOUT LOW VOTER TURNOUT.
LOW VOTER TURNOUT CAN ALSO BE ATTRIBUTED, IN MY OPINION TO THE FACT THAT THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO NEED US THE MOST DON'T SEE THINGS COMING TO FRUITION THAT SUPPORTS THEM.
IF THEY SEE IT, THEY BELIEVE IT, AND THEN THEY WILL HAVE FAITH IN US.
WE'VE GOT TO RESTORE THE FAITH OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO LIVE IN A CITY THAT I KNOW I'M PROUD OF BEING IN.
BUT AS WE TALK ABOUT THE GREAT FINANCIAL REVOLUTION TAKING PLACE HERE IN THE CITY AND PEOPLE MOVING TO DALLAS, AND THEN YOU TURN THE PAGE AND WAVE DOWN IN THE BOTTOM HERE, YOU'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT THE THINGS THAT USED TO HAPPEN AND SOMEBODY ASKED, WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER, WE'RE STILL IN WHAT I CALL A RACE FOR THE CURE.
DEVILS, THEY DON'T DIE, THEY MULTIPLY.
BUT WE HAVE TO KEEP FIGHTING FOR THOSE OF US WHO KNOW WHAT'S RIGHT.
TODAY I THANK YOU ALL FOR SHOWING UP MISS.
[INAUDIBLE], THE DEVELOPER'S NAME I KEEP GETTING MIXED UP WITH.
BUT LET'S NOT FALL FOR THE ROPER DOPE HERE.
MOST OF YOU ON HERE HAVE BEEN REELECTED.
YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT BEING REELECTED FOR A WHILE, DON'T EVEN BE SCARED.
JUST STAND UP TODAY FOR WHAT'S RIGHT.
MCGOUGH AND THOMAS, YOU ALL ARE LEAVING SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ANYONE COMING AFTER YOU.
MAYOR DIDN'T HAVE AN APPALLINGLY ONE RIGHT OUT.
[LAUGHTER] WE ALL HERE, LET'S DO WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO FOR THOSE WHO NEED US THE MOST. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO REFER BACK TO COMMITTEE.
I WANT TO JUST TOUCH ON ONE OF THE POINTS THAT WAS MADE AND MY COLLEAGUE MENTIONED THAT IT WASN'T A DELAY TACTIC OR A KILL TACTIC.
I WOULD BE MUCH QUICKER TO BELIEVE THAT, AGAIN, WITH ITS GENUINE INTENT IF YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION WASN'T TO JUST DENY IT OUTRIGHT.
I THINK THAT SHOWED US WHERE THE INTENT WAS.
BY BRINGING THIS BACK TO COMMITTEE, THIS GIVES THE ABILITY FOR IT TO GET KICKED DOWN THE ROAD EVEN FURTHER AND WE KNOW THAT THERE IS AN IMPATIENCE.
I AM SAYING THAT I THINK THAT THERE'S A MIDDLE GROUND HERE.
IF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT WE CAN WORK OUT SOME DEALS.
IF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT TIME IS NEEDED TO LOOK AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT IS STRUCK THROUGH AND GIVEN TO US LAST MINUTE IS PUT ON THE AGENDA IN A CLEANER FORM WITH MORE ABILITY TO HAVE THAT IRONED OUT, BUT STILL GIVES US THE ABILITY TO GO INTO THE PURCHASING COMPONENT OF THIS DEAL, THEN I BELIEVE IT TO BE EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE HEARD SO FAR, THIS BODY IN THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS.
I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE SHOVED DOWN AS IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE A SAY IN THE FINAL PRODUCT.
BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT PERFECT TO BE THE ENEMY OF GOOD AND US TO SEE A GOOD PROJECT FOR OUR CITY GO AWAY.
WHAT I WAS OFFERING THAT WASN'T ACCEPTED IS SOMETHING THAT I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES WILL SUPPORT.
CAN I GET CONFIRMATION THAT WE HAVE, I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION MR. MAYOR.
>> I'VE JUST SAID IT WASN'T IN ORDER AT THAT TIME.
IT'S NOT THAT THE MOTION WAS INAPPROPRIATE [OVERLAPPING].
>> JUST I HAD A SUSPICION IT WAS HOSTILE TO THE MAIN MOTION.
>> THAT'S WHY I'M JUST REITERATING AND I WANT TO SHOW SOME INTENT OF WHAT COULD BE DONE ALTERNATIVELY.
MR. CITY MANAGER, CAN YOU PLEASE COMMENT TO WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO AUTHORIZE YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CLOSING AND ACQUISITION AND MOVE BACK.
THEN I WANT TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE STRICKEN LANGUAGE.
>> I WILL DEFER TO TAMMY ON WHETHER OR NOT I HAVE THAT ABILITY SINCE SHE GRANTS ME ALL OF MY ABILITIES.
I'M ASKING CONNIE TANKERS LEAD TO COME UP AND RESPOND TO THE QUESTION THAT CHAIR BEZEL DO ASKED.
>> CONNIE TANKER FLEET WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. IT CAN BE DONE.
IF THE DEVELOPERS WILLING TO GO AHEAD AND CONVEYED THE PROPERTY AND ALLOW US TO NEGOTIATE THE LEASE BASED ON THESE TERMS, THEN IT'S ACCEPTABLE.
>> COLLEAGUES, IF OUR COGNIZANCE IS REALLY THAT THE TIME RESTRAINT ISSUE IS ABOUT THE SELLER AND NOT THE DEVELOPER.
THE DEVELOPER IS WILLING TO DO THAT.
I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD NOT SEND THIS BACK WITH A CLEAR DIRECTION.
FIRST OF ALL, THIS MOTION DOES NOT INCLUDE DATES CERTAIN,
[02:30:01]
WHICH LEAVES TOO MUCH AMBIGUITY, AND I WANT US TO HAVE A SPECIFIC DATE TO EXPECT THIS BACK BEFORE US WITH LANGUAGE THAT CAN BE IRONED OUT FROM NOW UNTIL THEN.WITH THAT, THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS GIVEN TO US LAST NIGHT, THAT HAS SEEMS TO BE AN ISSUE BY MR. MCGOUGH, CAN YOU PLEASE CITY MANAGER, GIVE ME A SUMMARY AND BREAK DOWN WHAT IT WAS THAT YOU'VE GIVEN TO US AND THE DIFFERENCES ON THE DOCUMENT?
I THINK THE COUNCIL IS RIGHTFULLY CONCERNED OR SHOULD BE AROUND THE LATENESS OF THE ITEM AND THE DOCUMENT COMING OUT BECAUSE THAT IS NOT TYPICAL, HOWEVER, THAT IS OFTEN DONE.
ONE OF THE REASONS THE ITEM WAS SENT OUT LAST NIGHT WAS TO AVOID MUCH OF THIS CONVERSATION TODAY, ODDLY.
BUT WITH TO GET IT IN FRONT OF YOU AT LEAST OVERNIGHT SO THAT YOU COULD REVIEW IT, SO IT WAS NOT DONE ON THE FLOOR.
AS IT RELATES TO THIS SPECIFICS WITHIN THE DOCUMENT THAT I WOULD BE CONCERNED OR QUESTION.
MOVING IT BACK TO A COMMITTEE BEYOND WHAT CAN BE DISCUSSED TODAY, EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN AMENDED IN THE AGREEMENT TO MY UNDERSTANDING AND READING IS TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY AND TO CLARIFY SPECIFIC ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES AND OBLIGATIONS THAT WE ARE PLACING ON THE DEVELOPER AND NOT THE CITY BEYOND THE INDEMNIFICATION ISSUES AND CLARIFICATION LANGUAGE, EVERYTHING IN IT IS TO THAT.
AS WE GO THROUGH THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, MUCH OF THE STRIKETHROUGH IS, WORD SALAD, JUST TO IMPROVE UPON LANGUAGE TO BE CLEAR.
BUT WE'RE MAKING CLEAR, AT LEAST ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE DOCUMENT, THAT THE CONVEYANCE AND THE TRANSACTION COSTS WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER OR OUR PARTNER WHO SUBSEQUENTLY ALSO JUST IDENTIFYING THAT THE LEASE WILL INCLUDE THE DEVELOPMENT, USE, AND OPERATIONS CONSISTENT WITH AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT, JUST TO BE SURE THERE IS NO AMBIGUITY, ALSO THAT THE TENANT WILL BE RESPONSIBLE TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THE PREMISE BASED UPON OUR SATISFACTION.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WHERE WE TALK THROUGH THIS ISSUE OF THE LEASE CHANGING, WE STRUCK OUT LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWED FOR THE TERM OF THE LEASE OF WHICH WAS VAGUE, TO BE ARRANGED BETWEEN FIVE YEARS AND 39 TO REALLY JUST END WITH 39 YEARS AS THE TERM OF THE LEASE AND THE RIGHT FOR AN EXTENSION OF THAT LEASE OF SIX YEARS, I BELIEVE, TO FULFILL OUR OBLIGATIONS WHEN IT COMES TO US SHOWING TITLE TO THE PROPERTY AND THE ULTIMATE REASON FOR US ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT.
SUBSEQUENTLY, IN ADDITION, WE'RE JUST BEING VERY CLEAR ABOUT, AGAIN, THE TERMS OF THE LEASE AND THE DEFAULT PROVISIONS IN IT.
THE SALIENT POINTS, AS PEOPLE OFTEN DESCRIBE, WHICH ARE NOT THE LEASE, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE BENEFIT OF UNDERSTANDING SOME OF THE BIG POINTS IN THE LEASE.
WE JUST CLEANED UP LEASE LANGUAGE, AND NOT USING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, BUT USING LEASE.
WE'RE TALKING AGAIN ABOUT WHEN THE LEASE WILL COMMENCE AS IT RELATES TO THE 90% OCCUPATION OF WHEN THAT CLOCK WILL TICK.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITHIN 60 DAYS OF APPROVAL WHEN WE WOULD RECEIVE THE ONETIME STRUCTURING FEE.
WE JUST PUT A TIME AND A DATE ON THAT TO ENSURE THAT WE GOT THAT AMOUNT.
IN ADDITION, AGAIN, THE INDEMNIFICATION LANGUAGE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
THE OTHER THINGS I'LL JUST SAY TO COUNCIL MEMBER MCGOUGH'S POINT, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION AROUND TRYING TO MAKE THE PROJECT BETTER, SO WE ACTUALLY INCLUDED LANGUAGE WHEN YOU START IN SECTION 3 AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS AROUND SEPTATE AND SOME OF THE COMMITMENTS THAT THE CITY WAS GOING TO MAKE NOW THAT WE ARE AN ACTIVE PARTNER TO TRY TO FIND WAYS TO IMPROVE UPON THE PROJECT AND HIS SHOW WE'RE WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY.
THOSE WERE ADDED AGAIN, IN CONVERSATIONS AND THROUGH CONVERSATION.
THEN I JUST CLEAN UP LANGUAGE AROUND WORKER'S COMPENSATION, AND THEN AGAIN, ON THE DEVELOPER SIDE, WHAT THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES ARE AND THE THINGS THAT THEY'VE GOT TO PRODUCE AS IT RELATES TO ENSURING THERE ARE NO INCIDENTS AND OR THAT THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE THINGS.
AGAIN, IN MOST PART, IT'S REALLY AND WE'RE ADDRESSING THE BONDING ISSUES.
IT'S REALLY CLEANING UP LANGUAGE THAT AGAIN, STRENGTHENS THE CITY'S POSITION AS A PARTNER.
CLEARLY ALIGNING RESPONSIBILITIES WHERE THEY SHOULD BE, WHERE THERE MAY HAVE BEEN VAGUENESS IN IT, AND SO THAT IS WHAT THIS STRIKETHROUGH IS AND IT IS DOING AND IT LOOKS BUSY.
BUT THAT'S BECAUSE WE WANTED TO BE SPECIFIC, BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN HERE THAT IS NON-INTERFERING TO THE BENEFIT AND STRENGTHENING OF THE AGREEMENT AND REMOVING THE VAGUENESS AND CLARITY AROUND IT.
THAT IS WHAT WE BROUGHT FOR YOU TODAY THAT DID NOT GET DONE AND PUT INTO THE AGREEMENT IN THE TIME OF THE POSTING.
UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION TODAY.
ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, IF THIS AGREEMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THIS CURRENT FORM, WE MAY NOT BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION, SO WE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD TO AMEND THE AGREEMENT.
[02:35:03]
BUT AGAIN, EVERYTHING IN IT CONSISTENT WITH COUNCIL MEMBER MCGOUGH'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE CITY ATTORNEY NOT SIGNING OFF ON IT.THOSE THINGS SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE AGREEMENT.
THEY'VE BEEN DISCUSSED, I BELIEVE, WITH THE DEVELOPER AND WERE SHARED WITH THEM AS WELL.
AS HE STOOD HERE TODAY, HE DID NOT SEEM TO BELIEVE THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DEAL AND MOVE THIS TRANSACTION FORWARD BASED ON THE AMENDED THINGS THAT WE PUT BEFORE YOU TODAY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER.
WE KNOW THE DIFFERENCE IN THE LANGUAGE.
WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO PUT THAT BACK THROUGH IF THERE IS A NEED FOR IT.
BUT WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS JUST REMAND IT BACK WITHOUT ANY CLEAR DIRECTION ON WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
CAN I HEAR FROM THE DEVELOPER, PLEASE ON WHETHER OR NOT HE WOULD ACCEPT WHAT I HAVE PROPOSED AS AN ALTERNATIVE, IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN GET?
>> THAT NOT APPROPRIATE, WE CAN DO THAT IF YOU GET TO THE POINT MAKING A MOTION.
>> CAN I ASK THE DEVELOPER WHAT IMPLICATIONS [OVERLAPPING].
>> GO AHEAD, I KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
>> WHAT IS THE TIME RESTRAINT ON THIS DEAL?
>> TIME RESTRAINTS ARE WITH THE SELLER AS WELL AS WITH TD HCA AND PLACED IN SERVICE STATES.
OBVIOUSLY, WITH THE PANDEMIC AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THERE HAD BEEN A LOT OF EXTENSIONS FOR TD HCA.
WE'RE COMING UP ON A FEW DEADLINES WITH TD HCA THAT WE NEED TO GET ON THE JUNE AGENDA JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN CLEAR UP THAT PAPERWORK.
>> IN DELAYING THIS ALTOGETHER WOULD BE A HINDRANCE AND WHERE THAT.
>> TIME RESTRAINT. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> SHERMAN ACT, WHICH REGULATES FIVE-MINUTES ON EMOTION TO REFER BACK TO COMMITTEE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WAS GOING TO BE QUIET, BUT, DEAL WITH PROCESSING PROCEDURE.
HOW WE PROCESSING PROCEDURE, AND I'LL KNOW WHY WE SPEND AN HOUR-AND-A-HALF ON A BRIEFING ON A BOAT AGENDA? I THINK THAT TIME IS VERY PRECIOUS AROUND HERE WHEN WE BRING SOME TO THIS HORSESHOE TO VOTE ON, AND WE'RE NOT PREPARED TO VOTE ON.
I'M DEFINITELY CONFUSED BY SITTING HERE FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF GOING THROUGH A BRIEFING.
WE SHOULD HAVE DONE, WHAT WE COULD ADD DONE.
MY QUESTION IS NUMBER 1, WE DO SEND IT BACK TO A COMMITTEE, WHAT IS A COMMITTEE GOING TO DO AND WHAT IS DESTRUCTION, THE INSTRUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE? WHAT ARE THE AGENDA GOING TO BE ON THE COMMITTEE? PUT THEM ON TWO REVIEW, TO DISCUSS
>> LET ME TRY TO TAKE A STAB AT THAT.
THE BROADEST ANSWER WOULD BE, I'M NOT QUITE SURE.
BUT WHAT I WOULD THINK THAT WE WOULD SEND BACK, I GUESS WOULD BE THE RESOLUTION.
BUT PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS ITEM HAD BEEN BRIEFED, NOT IN ITS CURRENT FORM AND STRUCTURE AT A FEBRUARY, I BELIEVE, A HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE MEETING BUT IT WAS BRIEFED BY MEMORANDUM.
WHICH WAS THE REQUEST AND THE DISCUSSION WITH THE CHAIR, AND THERE WAS NOT GOING TO BE ANY ACTION OR AFFIRMATIVE RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE FORWARD OR NOT, SO WE BRIEFED IT BY MEMORANDUM.
WHEN THE DEAL STRUCTURE MOVED ON AND WENT TO THE PFCN AND AS THE V INDICATED.
WHAT THEY SENT BACK TO THE CITY IN THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY PLACED ON IT, IT WAS NOT AMENABLE TO US AND WE WERE NOT GOING TO MOVE FORWARD AND APPROVE IT.
WE HUDDLED BACK UP BETWEEN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND STAFF TO DISCUSS WHAT OTHER OPTIONS WE HAD TO ACTUALLY MOVE THE AGREEMENT FORWARD.
AT THAT POINT, WE RESULTED IN THINKING THAT WE WOULD DO IT IN THE CURRENT STRUCTURE THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU TODAY MINUS ALL THE STRIKE THROUGHS BUT THAT WAS THE STRUCTURE.
AT THE TIME WE WERE STILL WORKING THROUGH THAT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND TRYING TO GET THE LANGUAGE STRAIGHT AND THE AGREEMENT OF HOW THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE.
WE HAD PLACED IT ON THE AGENDA OF THE LAST HOUSING COMMITTEE MEETING AND THE ITEM WASN'T READY YET.
THERE WAS AN UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE DIRECTOR AND CHAIR THAT IF THE ITEM WASN'T READY, HE DID NOT WANT TO KEEP IT ON AND HAVE IT POSTED TO BE HEARD AT THE NEXT MEETING.
WE GOT IT DONE LATER IN THAT DAY, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, WE DID NOT COME BACK AND PUT THE ITEM BACK ON THE AGENDA IN A TIMELY MANNER THE FOLLOWING DAY TO GET IT POSTED FOR THE MOST RECENT MEETING.
THE DISCUSSION THEN BECAME, OKAY SINCE WE BRIEFED IT BY MEMORANDUM AND A BRIEFING MEMORANDUM PRIOR TO THAT TO THE COMMITTEE WITHOUT A PRESENTATION.
THEN INSTEAD OF THAT, WE WOULD THEN SEND THE NEW STRUCTURE, EXPLAINING THE INTENT OF IT TO THE FULL COUNCIL IN A FULL BRIEFING TO THE COUNCIL, WHICH WE DID ON A FRIDAY MEMO.
TO GIVE THE FULL COUNCIL THE BENEFIT OF WHAT THE SAME INFORMATION THAT THE COMMITTEE WOULD HAVE.
[02:40:01]
THERE WAS TWO WEEKS IN BETWEEN AND WE ASKED AND REQUESTED THAT IF ANYONE HAD ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT THE ITEM TO PLEASE CONTACT THE V AND OR MERGER TO DISCUSS THOSE TYPES OF CONCERNS AND ISSUES.>> STATE YOUR POINT OF INFORMATION.
>> WE STILL TALKING ABOUT THE ITEM THAT WE GOT LAST NIGHT.
HOW WAS THAT BRIEFED OR MENTIONED TO ANYBODY?
>> THAT'S NOT REAL POINT OF INFORMATION, THAT'S INTERJECTING IN THE DEBATE THIS TIME.
>> THAT WAS MY NEXT STATEMENT BEFORE THE POINT OF ORDER WAS.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT OCCURRED IN THE MEMORANDUM WAS THAT WHEN WE FINALLY POSTED THE ITEM OF THIS LAST FRIDAY, IT WAS NOT THE ITEM THAT INCLUDED THE LANGUAGE THAT WE ULTIMATELY AGREED WITH WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN UPDATED.
THEREFORE, WE CORRECTED THAT INFORMATION IN THAT ITEM AND THAT'S WHAT WE SHARED LAST NIGHT WITH THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY.
THE ONLY ISSUE WAS THAT IF WE WOULD HAVE POSTED THE ITEM TODAY THAT YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE YOU TODAY.
ON FRIDAY, I WAS GIVEN THE CHRONOLOGY OF HE ASKED ABOUT THE PROCESS AND WHETHER WE WENT TO COMMITTEE OR NOT, AND THE REASONS WHY AS WE'RE REFERRING TO IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
I WOULD JUST SAY IT HAD BEEN A CHALLENGE AND A STRUGGLE TO GET THE ITEM IN SOME CASES REVIEWED AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL.
BUT WE FOUND A WAY TO DO THAT BY MEMORANDUM SINCE THE AGENDAS WERE SO PACKED.
THEREFORE, AGAIN, WE DEFAULTED TO BRIEFING BY MEMO TO THE FULL COUNCIL EXCEPT FOR THIS ITEM THAT OCCURRED LAST NIGHT, WHICH SEEMS TO BE THE STICKING POINT, AND I RESPECT THE COUNCIL'S HESITANCY, IF YOU HAVE ANY ON THAT.
BUT I TRIED TO GO THROUGH WHAT WAS SAILING IN THE AGREEMENT.
THAT IS NOT, AGAIN, TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE CITY, BUT TO THE GOOD OF THE CITY.
THAT'S WHAT WOULD GO BACK TO COMMITTEE.
I THINK WE'D BE HAVING THE SAME CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE HAVING TODAY ABOUT THE LANGUAGE IN THE AGREEMENT.
AT LEAST MY POSITION IS WE'RE HAVING THE CONVERSATION TODAY, PUSHING IT OFF FOR TWO MORE WEEKS.
WE'LL HAVE THE SAME CONVERSATION AT A COMMITTEE AND BRING IT BACK AND HAVE THE SAME CONVERSATION WE'RE HAVING TODAY.
BECAUSE PEOPLE'S POSITIONS AND POINTS WON'T CHANGE AS IT RELATES TO THE MERITS AND OR WHERE, WE'RE PLACING THE PROJECT AND THE ISSUE IS NOT THE AGREEMENT.
IT'S THE UNITS. IT'S THE USE, IT'S THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE SERVING PROCESS FILE YOU CAN CALL ALL DAY, BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT WE'RE DOING.
THAT IS PUTTING HOUSING ON THE GROUND.
WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR IT UP THE WAY WE ALWAYS WILL TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT ON WHAT THAT LANGUAGE IS.
AGAIN, A DELAY IS SIMPLY A DELAY AND IS SIMPLY A MONTH LONGER THAT SOMEONE WILL GO WITHOUT HOUSING AND WE WON'T START CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE THE MERIT OF THE DEAL IS THE DEAL.
THE DEAL POINTS WILL NOT CHANGE.
YOU CAN'T ASK A DEVELOPER AND EVEN US SITTING IN THIS SEAT.
THE CITY HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO BUILD SIDEWALKS AND BUILD OTHER AMENITIES.
THE PROPERTY OWNER DOES NOT HAVE THAT RESPONSIBILITY.
YOU CAN'T CHANGE THROUGH THE UNITS, THE GEOGRAPHICAL NATURE AND AMENITIES ON THE GROUND THAT THE CITY HAS NOT PROVIDED OR SOME OTHER ENTITY.
AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I'M DIGRESSING BECAUSE I'M SIMILAR TO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE, IS THAT YOU ASKED US TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE COULD MAKE IT BETTER.
I THINK WE MET LAST WEEK TO TRY TO DO THAT AND I THINK SOME THINGS ARE IN THE AGREEMENT THAT WILL HELP US DO THAT, BUT THE CITY PROPER HAS A RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE OTHER THINGS THAT I THINK THE COMMUNITY IS ASKING FOR AND YOU CAN'T HEAP THAT ON A DEVELOPER.
NOT EVEN WHEN THE CITY IS A PARTNER, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE MEANS OR THE MANNER TO DO IT.
BUT AGAIN, IF IT GOES BACK TO COMMITTEE, YOU'LL SEE THE SAME RESOLUTION IN TWO WEEKS AND I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT IS GOING TO CHANGE OTHER THAN THE DATES ON THE CALENDAR.
BECAUSE WE'LL BE BACK HERE ON THE 14TH IF THAT'S WHAT THE WISH OF THE COUNCIL OR WHENEVER, AND WE'LL HAVE THE SAME CONVERSATION AGAIN.
AGAIN, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN TWO YEARS IN THE MAKING.
JUST SITTING IN MY ADVANTAGE POINT AS THE CITY MANAGER, ALL THE FIGHTING AND THE ARGUMENT OVER WHETHER YOU PLACED IT OR NOT AND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP.
QUITE HONESTLY, THE PROPERTY IS ZONED MULTI FAMILY.
ODDLY ENOUGH THAT THERE'S DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY TO PREVENT THAT, DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
BUT AGAIN, A LOT OF THINGS DON'T MAKE SENSE.
THIS COUNCIL HAS THE ABILITY THROUGH THIS AGREEMENT TO BUILD SOME UNITS FOR WHICH YOU SAY IS ONE OF THE TOP PRIORITIES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THAT YOU HARP ON US TO FIND WAYS TO DO IT EVERY DAY.
WE FOUND THAT OPPORTUNITY, WE FOUND THE VEHICLE.
WE'VE GOT THE AGREEMENT IN FRONT OF YOU.
I WOULD RECOMMEND WE APPROVED THE AGREEMENT AND MOVE ON TO FIND AND DO MORE PROJECTS SIMILAR AND FIND A WAY TO PUT THOSE IN OTHER HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREAS. THANK YOU.
>> IF WE SENT BACK TO COMMITTEE AND I HEAR YOU'LL RESPOND TO YOUR STATEMENT.
WHAT WOULD BE THE GUIDELINE OF THE COMMITTEE? THE QUESTION THAT WE ASKED TODAY.
I DON'T KNOW WE GOT ALL THE ANSWERS TODAY, BUT WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS THERE IS NO OTHER ANSWER THAT WE GOING TO GET GOING BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
[02:45:04]
THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE CITY MANAGER.I DON'T KNOW BY STUFF, SO ON THEY'RE TRYING TO GET STUFF THAT WHAT YOU'RE HEARING TODAY IS READ A BRIEFING.
WE ARE BRIEFING TODAY BASIS WHAT'S GOING ON.
IT'S UP TO US TO SAY YOU GOT SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO HEAR WHAT IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT.
WHEN WE GO BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO BE OPEN AND HONEST.
WHAT ARE GOING TO HEAR DIFFERENT? OR ARE THERE MORE TESTIMONY, LEGAL ISSUE GO BACK AND END UP THE SESSION.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE THAT.
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO HEAR? IF WERE ARE GOING TO BE ON A COMMITTEE.
YOU GOT TO WRITE A BRIEF IT UP.
YOU GOT TO GIVE IT TO THE COMMITTEE.
WHAT ARE GOING TO BE CHARGED ON? WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO BRIEF?
>> ESSENTIALLY THE SAME INFORMATION.
WE'LL PACKAGE IT AND MAKE IT LOOK A LITTLE PRETTIER SO YOU DON'T HAVE RED LINES, BUT IT'S THE SAME INFORMATION.
>> I GUESS SOMETIMES YOU GOT TO COOL OFF A LITTLE BIT.
I GUESS I'VE BEEN HEATED THE DAY.
I GUESS WE HAVE 30 DAYS COOL OFF.
TO GAIN YOUR THOUGHTS OR WHATEVER.
THE DEVELOPER, CAN I ASK THE DEVELOPER A QUESTION? HE CONTINUES ON MY TIME.
>> NO. APPARENTLY YOU GUYS HAVE FOUND A LOOPHOLE.
IF WE GO BACK TO THE COMMITTEE ON BACK HERE ON JUNE, WHAT IS THE NEXT HOUSING COMMITTEE? WHAT IS THAT DATE? MAY WHAT?
>> MAY 22. THE VOTING WOULD BE JUNE 14TH, RIGHT?
>> CORRECT? FINANCIALLY, I'M PUTTING A DEAL TOGETHER BRIEFING.
IS THAT GOING TO COST IN A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP OR YOU MIGHT LOSE A DEAL, YOU CANNOT FINANCE THE DEAL.
WHAT? BECAUSE OF THAT 30 DAYS WINDOW?
>> ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN 30 DAYS.
>> I HATE TO SAY IT, BUT I CAN'T MAKE ANY GUARANTEES.
THE SOONER THAT I CAN GET ON AND GET MOVING, THE BETTER.
OBVIOUSLY, THE LANGUAGE THAT'S PUT IN THE MEMO IS A DEAL THAT WE'RE WILLING TO ACCEPT AND WORK WITH.
YEAH. WHATEVER PROCEDURE THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN AS QUICK MANNER AS POSSIBLE IS WHAT WE NEED.
WE NEED AN APPROVED LEASE AGREEMENT.
>> YOU DID RECEIVE THE RENT LAND MEMO.
>> YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT INFORMATION IN THAT MEMO?
>> NO PROBLEM. WITH THAT MERIT, I BELIEVE YOU ARE ABOUT A FRESH SHOT, 30 DAYS, WHATEVER.
BUT THE KEY IS THAT IS A DATE CERTAIN AND CITY MANAGER.
I KNOW WE COULD PULL THIS OFF THE AGENDA. WHAT WAS THE DEADLINE? WE COULD HAVE ACTUALLY PULLED THIS OUT BEFORE WE HADN'T HAD THAT DISCUSSION.
WHAT WAS THE TIMELINE TO PULL THIS OFF THE AGENDA DATE?
>> I'LL DEFER. I'M ASSUMING IT WOULD HAVE BEEN EVEN THIS MORNING.
>> ARE YOU REFERRING TO A DEFERRING THE ITEM WHEN THE COUNCIL CAN'T EVEN CONSIDER THE ITEM?
>> JUST TO PULL IT. WE HEARD ALL THE CONCERN AND WE DID A RED LINE LAST NIGHT.
COULD WE PULL THIS LAST NIGHT OR COULD WE PULL IT ON FRIDAY? WHAT WAS THE TIMELINE THAT WE COULD HAVE PULL IT AND SAVE OUT THIS DISCUSSION TILL ANOTHER DAY, I'M JUST TRYING TO.
>> YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE FIRM BECAUSE PULLING THE ITEM, THE ITEM IS ALREADY AN INDIVIDUAL ITEM.
YOU ONLY PULL CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, BUT IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DEFERRING THE ITEM, SO IT'S NOT CONSIDERED AT THIS COUNCIL MEETING.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO?
>> THEN THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN FRIDAY.
>> IF WE DID DEFER AS A COUNCIL MEETING ON FRIDAY, THEN TODAY IS NOT A DEFER.
WE HAVE SEND IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
THAT'S WHAT WHAT THE DIFFERENCE. IS THAT CORRECT? MR. SECRETARY IS DIFFERENT.
>> CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION?
>> I SAID THAT TODAY, WE'RE SENDING BACK TO COMMITTEE THAT IF WE COULD DEFER IT ON FRIDAY, THAT YOU SHOULD THEN SEND IT BACK TO ANOTHER DAY TO VOTE ON. THAT'S CORRECT.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ON CLARIFY ON THE PROCESS.
I MEAN, WE'RE NOT HERE TO DEBATE.
>> READY TO GO. JEREMY, GO FOR THREE MINUTES OF DISCUSSION ON YOUR MOTION TO REFER TO COMMITTEE.
WHEN I GOT THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS POSTED, WHAT WAS ON THE AGENDA,
[02:50:01]
I LOOKED AT IT, I SAW A NUMBER OF PROBLEMS. I WENT TO THE CITY ATTORNEYS AND SAID, HERE ARE THE PROBLEMS, HERE ARE THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.THEY SAID, US TOO, WE HAVE THE SAME QUESTIONS.
WE'VE GIVEN THE COMMENTS, WE HAVEN'T GOT ANY RESPONSES, WE'RE SITTING HERE AND WE STARTED THE DISCUSSION TO MAKE THIS BETTER.
WE WORKED THROUGH IT FOR AN HOUR, SO WE FOLLOWED UP ON IT AND THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO GET SOME COMMENTS BACK AND IT WAS A FULL DAY, I GUESS THEY HAD A MEETING THE NEXT DAY WITH STAFF, AND THEN WE GET THIS LAST NIGHT AND IT'S MUCH, MUCH BETTER THAN IT WAS TO YOUR POINT OF IT'S MORE ADVANTAGE TO THE CITY.
I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF WE TAKE THE TIME TO PROCESS THIS, LOOK AT ALL THE OTHER NUANCES, THE POINTS THAT HAVE COME OUT IN DISCUSSION TODAY AND SIT DOWN THERE AT THE COMMITTEE, ASKED THE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT AND GET THIS AGREEMENT IN A MUCH BETTER PLACE THAN IT IS RIGHT NOW.
WHEN THAT COMES FORWARD AND THE TIMELINES THAT YOU ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT, THEN IT COMES FORWARD AND IT IS WHAT IT IS.
BUT THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO THIS PLACE.
THAT'S WHAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED BEFORE IT WAS EVER POSTED AND THAT'S WHERE WE SHOULD BE NOW ALREADY.
BUT THIS IS NOT SIMPLY JUST DELAY.
THIS IS GET IT IN A BETTER CONDITION THAN IT WAS JUST LIKE WE'VE ALREADY DONE TO GET IT TO WHERE WE WERE LAST NIGHT.
>> ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON OR AGAINST CHAIRMAN MCGOUGH'S MOTION TO REFER TO COMMITTEE? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> NAY. CAN WE HAVE A RECORD VOTE? I'M SORRY [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE RECORD BUT IT'S BEEN REQUESTED.
MADAM SECRETARY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND INITIATE THE ELECTRONIC VOTING.
>> MAYOR, COULD YOU PLEASE TELL US AGAIN WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON? [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE ARE VOTING ON A MOTION TO REFER TO COMMITTEE.
A YES VOTE INDICATES THAT SUPPORT FOR SENDING IT BACK AND NO VOTE IS NOT TO SEND TO COMMITTEE AND THE FLOOR WILL BE OPENED AGAIN FOR A NEW MOTION.
>> PLEASE START VOTING. TWELVE HAVE VOTED, 14 HAVE VOTED.
VOTE IN FAVOR COUNCILMEMBERS MCGOUGH, MENDELSOHN, THOMAS, VOTING AGAINST COUNCILMEMBERS BAZALDUA, MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD, COUNCILMEMBERS WEST MAYER JOHNSON, COUNCILMEMBER WILLIS, MORENO, DEPUTY MAYOR, PRO TEM NARVAEZ, COUNCILMEMBERS RIDLEY, BLACKMON, AND ATKINS.
COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ IS ABSENT, VOTE TAKEN WITH THREE VOTING IN FAVOR, 11 OPPOSE.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM SECRETARY.
CHAIR RECOGNIZES, CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA FOR MOTION.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CLOSING AND ACQUISITION WHILE REMINDING THE LEASE AGREEMENT TO HOUSING ON 522 IN RETURN FOR AUTHORIZATION OF THE LEASE TO COUNCIL TO BE CONSIDERED ON JUNE 14TH.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIRMAN?
>> WARRANTS SOME FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. FOR THE SPIRIT OF COLLABORATION, I'M TRYING TO AT LEAST BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME RESERVE FROM A COUPLE OF MEMBERS WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS JUST PROVIDED.
I KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN SAID THAT IT WOULD APPEAR TO BE REDUNDANT.
HOWEVER, THIS MOTION DOES CONTAIN DATES CERTAIN SO THAT WE KNOW WHEN IT WILL BE BACK BEFORE US.
IT ALSO ALLOWS THE CITY MANAGER TO GO AHEAD WITH THE DEAL THAT WILL TAKE AWAY THE FACTOR OF THE SELLER HAVING ANY REASON TO BACK OUT.
THIS TO ME, LOOKS TO BE THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS FROM WHAT WE'VE HEARD THAT CONCERN OF COUNCILMEMBER FROM DISTRICT 10 SPECIFICALLY, BUT ALSO WEIGHING IN WHAT IS CLEARLY OBVIOUS WHERE THE WILL OF THIS BODY IS, WHICH IS TO PUSH THIS DEAL THROUGH IN THE END.
IF THAT GIVES THE ASSURANCE AND THE COMFORT OF THIS DEAL, I THINK THAT WE CAN GO THAT ROUTE AND I HOPE THAT I CAN HAVE MY COLLEAGUE SUPPORT TO DO THAT.
>> ANYONE ELSE WISH TO GOING ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? MEMBERS, YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION.
>> RECORD OF VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED.
RECORD OF VOTES GRANTED OUT OF THE RULES. MADAM SECRETARY.
>> PLEASE START VOTING. TWELVE HAVE VOTED, 13 HAVE VOTED, 14 HAVE VOTED.
VOTING IN FAVOR, COUNCILMEMBERS BAZALDUA, MAYOR PRO TEM, ARNOLD, COUNCILMEMBERS WEST, MAYOR JOHNSON, COUNCILMEMBER WILLIS, COUNCILMEMBER.
RESENDEZ, COUNCILMEMBER MORENO, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM NARVAEZ, COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY, BLACKMON, AND ATKINS.
VOTING AGAINST COUNCILMEMBERS MCGOUGH, MENDELSOHN, AND THOMAS.
COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ ABSENT WITH VOTE TAKEN WITH 11 VOTING IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSE, ONE ABSENT WITH VOTE TAKEN.
>> WONDERFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM.
[02:55:01]
HOPEFULLY THAT'S ZONING.>> WELL, NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING AGENDA.
MR. MAYOR, AT THIS TIME, MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM Z1.
[Z1. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a CR Community Retail District and a resolution accepting deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant on property zoned a TH-3(A) Townhouse District with H/118 Zion Hill Missionary Baptist Church Historic Overlay and an R-5(A) Single Family District, on the northwest and northeast corners of Morrell Avenue and Fernwood Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to amended deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant Z212-206(MP)]
>> MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR MOTION.
I WOULD LIKE FOR MS. ANDRE TO GIVE US THE DATE.
I'M SORRY. WHAT DATE DID WE HAVE?
>> JUNE 14TH. I'M SORRY, COUNCILMEMBERS.
>> THE MOTION TO DEFER TO JUNE 14TH?
>> NO, SIR. WE JUST NEEDED ADDITIONAL TIME SO WE CAN HAVE THOSE COMMUNITY MEETINGS THAT I THINK ARE VERY VITAL TO THIS PROJECT. COUNCILMEMBERS, THANK YOU.
>> ANY ONE ELSE WISH TO GO ON OR AGAINST THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM.
>> MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM Z3.
[Z3. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for an MF-1(A) Multifamily District on property zoned an R-7.5(A) Single Family District, at the southwest corner of North Jim Miller Road and Elam Road Recommendation of Staff: Approval Recommendation of CPC: Denial without prejudice Z212-280(JM)]
>> MR. CHAIR, WE RECOGNIZE FOR A MOTION?
>> I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL AUGUST THE 9TH, 2023.
>> MEMBERS YOU HEARD THE MOTION HAS BEEN SECONDED.
ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM.
[Z7. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an MU-3 Mixed Use District on property zoned an MC-4 Multiple Commercial District, on the north side of Vantage Point, west of Greenville Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Approval Recommendation of CPC: Approval Z212-185(OA/JM) Note: This item was deferred by the City Council before opening the public hearings on August 10, 2022, and September 14, 2022, and was held under advisement on December 14, 2022 and February 22, 2023, and is scheduled for consideration on May 10, 2023.]
>> MR. MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM Z7.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR MOTION.
>> I AM MOVING TO DEFER THE ZONING MATTER UNTIL MAY 24, 2023. IS THERE A SECOND?
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIRMAN? DISCUSSION ANYONE? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM.
>> WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.
YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEMS Z1 AND Z2.
ITEM Z1 WAS PREVIOUSLY DEFERRED.
[Z2. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a Specific Use Permit for a motor vehicle fueling station on property zoned Subdistrict 6A within Planned Development District No. 830, the Davis Street Special Purpose District, at the northeast corner of North Hampton Road and West Jefferson Boulevard Recommendation of Staff: Approval for a ten-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional ten-year periods, subject to a site/landscape plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval for a ten-year period with eligibility for automatic renewal for additional ten-year periods, subject to a site/landscape plan and conditions Z212-350(RM)]
THEREFORE, YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEM Z2.I'LL READ THAT ITEM INTO THE RECORD.
ITEM Z2 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION ON PROPERTY AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH HAMPTON ROAD IN WEST JEFFERSON BOULEVARD.
THERE AREN'T ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM, ITEM Z2? NO SPEAKER, MR. MAYOR?
>> MEMBERS WHO ARE LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT DOCKET.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ZONING CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED. NEXT ITEM.
>> THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT ITEM IS ITEM Z4.
[Z4. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment to and an expansion of Planned Development District No. 597 on property zoned an NC Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict and an MF-2(A) Multifamily Subdistrict with deed restrictions [Z078-207] within Planned Development District No. 595, the South Dallas/Fair Park Special Purpose District, on the south corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and Holmes Street Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to a revised conceptual plan, a development plan, and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to a revised conceptual plan, a development plan, and conditions Z212-306(MP)]
ITEM Z4 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXPANSION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 597 ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH CORNER OF PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND HOME STREET.>> MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 106 LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE AREA REQUESTS.
WE RECEIVED 14 REPLIES IN SUPPORT AND TWO IN OPPOSITION.
>> YOU DO HAVE ONE REGISTER SPEAKER FOR THIS ITEM, DAVID MARTIN.
MR. MARTIN, YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. YOU MAY BEGIN.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
DAVID MARTIN, 2728 NORTH HOLLYWOOD STREET IN DALLAS, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
JUST HERE TO SAY WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE CBC RECOMMENDATION AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM, ITEM Z4? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR?
>> MR. BEZEL, DO WE HAVE MOTION.
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIRMAN?
>> ANY DISCUSSION ANYONE? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[Z5. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an MF-2(A) Multifamily District on property zoned an IR Industrial/Research District on the northwest line of Empire Central Drive, northeast of Harry Hines Boulevard Recommendation of Staff: Approval Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant Z223-115(RM)]
>> AGENDA ITEM Z5 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AND MF-2A MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF EMPIRE CENTRAL DRIVE, NORTHEAST OF HARRY HINE BOULEVARD.
>> MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 12 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE AREA REQUEST.
WE RECEIVED THREE REPLIES IN SUPPORT AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.
>> THERE AREN'T ANY REGISTER SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM, ITEM Z5? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR.
>> MR. MORENO, YOU HAVE A MOTION?
>> I DO, MR. MAYOR. I MOVE TO APPROVE THAT ZONING CHANGES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, MR. MORENO?
>> IS THERE DISCUSSION ANYONE? MEMBERS? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM.
[Z6. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for a Specific Use Permit for a drive-through restaurant on property zoned a GR General Retail Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 193, the Oak Lawn Special Purpose District, at the west corner of Lemmon Avenue and Herschel Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Approval for a five-year period, subject to a site plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Denial without prejudice Z223-131(AU)]
>> AGENDA ITEM Z6 IS A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT ON PROPERTY AT THE WEST CORNER OF LEMON AVENUE AND HERSCHEL AVENUE.
>> MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 18 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE AREA REQUEST.
WE RECEIVED THREE REPLIES IN SUPPORT AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
>> YOU DO HAVE SIX INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
[03:00:03]
INDIVIDUALS BE GIVEN TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK.YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, MAC COPENHAGER.
>> IS THAT BETTER? MAC COPENHAGER 14800, LANDMARK BOULEVARD, DALLAS, TEXAS 752-54.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
ONLY HAVE TWO MINUTES HERE, SO WON'T BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH EVERYTHING I HAD PREPARED, BUT I THINK YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR, WE PROVIDED A PRE-READ OF OUR CASE.
WE ALSO HAVE HARD COPIES WHICH WE CAN PASS OUT AS WELL, BUT I THINK YOU ALL KNOW WE WERE UNFORTUNATELY DENIED AT PLANNING AND THERE WERE THREE MAIN ISSUES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP THAT WE DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE TO RESPOND TO IN THAT MEETING, SO I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT HERE.
THE FIRST COMMENT WAS AROUND WALKABILITY ON LEMON AVENUE AS IT RELATES TO PD193, WHICH IS THE ZONING OVERLAY IN THIS DISTRICT.
I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT LEMON AVENUE IS NOT DESIGNATED AS A SPECIAL RETAIL STREET UNDER PD193.
THERE ARE SEVERAL THAT ARE OAKLAND, CEDAR SPRINGS, MAPLE, MCKINNEY AVENUE ARE BUT LEMON IS NOT AND I THINK THAT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT THE INTENT OF PD193 WAS NOT TO MAKE LEMON WALKABLE.
THERE'S 45,000-50,000 CARS A DAY.
WE BELIEVE THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE FOR THIS SITE.
THE SECOND ONE HERE BEING MINDFUL OF TIME WAS AROUND A COMMENT ABOUT MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AND NEEDING MORE OF IT.
I THINK WE RECENTLY APPROVED A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT SITE AT THE OLD HEB PARCEL.
JUST FOR A COMPARISON SAKE, THAT'S 130,000 SQUARE FEET OF A PARCEL.
OUR PARCEL IS 19,000 SQUARE FEET, VASTLY DIFFERENT IN SIZE AND SCALE, CANNOT SUPPORT A MULTI OR MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT.
AGAIN, THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE WE HAVE A MICRO FOOTPRINT.
THE THIRD WAS AROUND TRAFFIC IMPACT.
I WOULD REFER YOU GUYS TO STAFFS RECOMMENDATION.
WE DID A FULL TRAFFIC REVIEW AT THE TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT.
THEY DON'T BELIEVE THERE'LL BE ANY ADVERSE IMPACT AS A RESULT OF OUR DEVELOPMENT.
WE SHARED A PLAN, THAT WAS PART OF A DIR, WHICH IS A REQUIRED SUBMISSION WITH THE CITY AND NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WERE BEING PRESUMPTIVE AS FAR AS WHAT IMPACT WE MIGHT HAVE.
WE HAVE SEVERAL OPEN AND OPERATING UNITS WITHIN THE CITY AND HAVE NEVER HEARD OF ONE CONCERN RELATED TO TRAFFIC OR IMPACT.
>> HE HAS HIS BUDDIES FOR SALAD AND GO AS WELL, IT WAS JUST TAG TEAM AND THE SAME THING.
WE HAD A FEW SPEAKERS. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY SHOWED UP.
>> I HAVE THE LIST. [LAUGHTER]
>> THANK YOU. MAYOR JOHNSON, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO EACH OF YOU FOR YOUR OUTSTANDING SERVICE TO OUR CITY AND CONGRATULATIONS TO EACH OF YOU WHO STOOD FOR RE-ELECTION THIS PAST SATURDAY.
MY NAME IS LELAND BURKE AND I JUST REALIZED I HAVE TWO MINUTES, I GUESS, NOT THREE.
>> THAT'S TRUE. BUT IF YOU JUST GO AHEAD AND START AND IT RUNS OVER A LITTLE BIT MAYBE WE WILL LET YOU KEEP GOING.
>> I LIVE AT 5311 PARK LANE IN DALLAS.
WELL, I HAVE NO FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THIS PROPERTY.
AS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNER IN PD193, I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS SUP APPLICATION.
THIS LOCATION, FORMERLY A TITLE LOAN OFFICE, HAS BEEN VACANT AND BOARDED UP FOR YEARS AND HAS BECOME A NUISANCE ON LEMON AVENUE AND THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
IT IS A SITE KNOWN FOR VAGRANCY, DRUG USE, AND ARRESTS.
IN MY OPINION, REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS PARCEL IS A MUST FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE AREA.
I WITNESSED FIRSTHAND THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH CONDUCTED BY SALAD AND GO AND THE COMMUNITIES ENGAGEMENT AND OVERWHELMINGLY POSITIVE RESPONSE.
SALAD AND GO PARTICIPATED IN A NUMBER OF COMMUNITY EVENTS NOT ONLY TO SHARE MORE BROADLY THEIR CONCEPT BUT TO ACTUALLY ACCEPT AND ACT ON NEIGHBORHOOD FEEDBACK.
THEY MET WITH THE PERRY HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND PRESENTED MULTIPLE TIMES TO THE OAKLAND COMMITTEE, WHO IN TURN PROVIDED WRITTEN SUPPORT TO SELL IT AND GO FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT IN THE SUP REQUEST.
SALAD AND GO NOT ONLY COMPLIED WITH ALL PD193 REQUIREMENTS REGARDING SETBACKS, SIDEWALKS, AND LANDSCAPING.
[03:05:01]
BUT VOLUNTARILY AGREED TO ADD A MASONRY SCREENING WALL ON THE ALLEY SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THEREBY CREATING TWO SCREENING WALLS BETWEEN PERRY HEIGHTS AND THE SUBJECT PARCEL.IN FACT, THE PERRY HEIGHTS RESIDENT THAT LIVES IMMEDIATELY BEHIND THE LOCATION.
>> JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ALLEY.
>> GO AHEAD, FOR LIKE 15 MORE SECONDS.
>> THANK YOU. STRONGLY SUPPORTS THIS SUP REQUEST.
IF NOT ON LEMON AVENUE THAN WHERE? LEMON IS A SIX LANE DIVIDED ARTERY.
UNLIKE OAKLAND, CEDAR SPRINGS, MAPLE AND MCKINNEY, LEMON WAS PURPOSEFULLY AND INTENTIONALLY NOT DESIGNATED AS A SPECIAL RETAIL STREET UNDER PD13.
THEREFORE HISTORICALLY APPROPRIATE FOR DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANTS.
>> I'M SORRY, I GOT TO GO ON YOU NOW.
>> I JUST WANT TO ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL TO ACCEPT DR. ANDREW [OVERLAPPING]
>> THIS IS MY CLOSING COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU. I REALLY MEAN IT THOUGH, MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. PETER CAVANAUGH.
>> PETER CAVANAUGH IS NOT PRESENT.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME? THANK YOU.
I'M THE MANAGING PARTNER OF THE ENTITY THAT OWNS THE PROPERTY AT 4401 LEMON AVENUE.
I LIVE AT 5431 HEADLAND, DALLAS, TEXAS.
THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN VACANT FOR OVER THREE YEARS.
WE'VE HAD A DIFFICULT TIME FINDING ANYBODY TO BE WILLING TO RETROFIT EXISTING BUILDING.
ALL THE COPPER HAS BEEN STRIPPED OUT.
WE FENCED IT UP BECAUSE THE HOMELESS WERE BEHIND IT.
IT WOULD COST A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY TO RETROFIT THAT BUILDING.
IN FACT, IT'S CHEAPER TO TEAR IT DOWN AND BUILD A NEW BUILDING.
I THINK SALAD AND GO IS A PERFECT TENANT FOR THIS PROPERTY.
THEY HAVE NO INDOOR SEATING, THEY DON'T STAY OPEN LATE, THEY DON'T SELL ALCOHOL, AND THEY OFFER INEXPENSIVE AND HEALTHY FOOD.
I ENCOURAGE YOU TO APPROVE THIS SUP. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ROBERT WILLIAMS. [BACKGROUND] ROBERT WILLIAMS IS NOT PRESENT.
ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YOU'D BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
YOU'LL BE GIVEN TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON CITY COUNCIL.
I'M AT 3100 MACKINNON STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS AND I AM THE CITY HALL LIAISON FOR THE OAKLAND COMMITTEE.
LELAND, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
WE DID CONDITIONALLY SUPPORT THE SUP FOR THIS DRIVE-THROUGH FOR SALAD AND GO.
THEY DID COME AND PRESENT TO US, ANSWERED EVERY QUESTION THAT WE ASKED.
SAME COMMENTS AS WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, TRAFFIC AND ANY BACKUP ALONG LEMON AVENUE.
LANDSCAPING WAS ANOTHER TOPIC.
THOSE WERE THE BIG ONES THAT WERE DISCUSSED AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF ANYONE HAS ANY.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM, ITEMS E6.
NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR.
>> I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THIS ZONING, MR. RIDLEY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE FOLLOW THE CPC RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, MR. RIDLEY?
>> THANK YOU. IT WOULD BE EASY TO GIVE INTO EXPEDIENCY AND OVERRULE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE PLANNING AND ZONING EXPERTS ON THIS TO ALLOW THIS DEVELOPMENT.
BUT I RESIST THAT TEMPTATION BECAUSE WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE LONGER-TERM FUTURE OF LEMON AVENUE AND THE EFFECT THAT THIS WILL HAVE ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE DID RECEIVE SEVEN OBJECTIONS TO THIS REZONING FROM RESIDENTS OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD, PERRY HEIGHTS, INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT TO THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
THEIR OBJECTIONS WERE BASED UPON NOISE,
[03:10:03]
SMELL, THE DUMPSTER ACTIVITY AND QUEUING ON LEMON.WE HAVE ENOUGH PROBLEMS WITH TOO MANY CURB CUTS ALREADY ON LEMON AVENUE FOR EVERY LITTLE PARCEL, THIS WOULD JUST ADD TO THAT CONGESTION, PARTICULARLY WHERE THE PROPOSED PLAN WOULD ALLOW OR WOULD REST UPON THE MANAGER OF THE PROPERTY GOING OUT AND CONING OFF THE END DRIVEWAY WHEN THE DRIVE-THROUGH BACKED UP TO THE STREET.
THAT IS NOT A VIABLE SOLUTION FIRST, BECAUSE CARS WOULD BE TEMPTED TO REMAIN STATIONARY ON LEMON, ANTICIPATING A PROMPT REMOVAL OF THE CONES, AND I ALSO THINK IT'S IMPRACTICAL TO EXPECT A MANAGER AT THEIR BUSIEST TIME TO LEAVE THE FACILITY, TO GO OUT AND PUT CONES OUT, PARTICULARLY IN INCLEMENT WEATHER.
THAT'S JUST NOT A VIABLE, SUSTAINABLE SOLUTION TO BLOCKING TRAFFIC IN THE RIGHT LANE OF LEMON AVENUE, AND IT ALSO DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE OAKLAND PLAN.
THE OAKLAND PLAN PRESCRIBES LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS WHICH ARE NOT MET BY THIS.
I'VE STUDIED THE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR LANDSCAPING.
I'VE REVIEWED IT WITH THE CITY ARBORIST.
HE AGREES WITH ME THAT IT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE PD-193 REQUIREMENTS, AND IT'S DOUBTFUL THAT GIVEN THE SIZE AND CONFIGURATION OF THIS CORNER LIFE THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO SO.
FOR THOSE REASONS, I ASKED FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
>> CHAIRWOMAN BLACKMON, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE-MINUTE.
>> THANK YOU. ANDREA, HE'S TALKING ABOUT CURB CUTS.
ARE THERE IS THERE GOING TO HAVE TO BE AN ADDITIONAL CURB CUT WITH THIS OR IS IT ALREADY THERE? > NO. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
THERE IS ALREADY A CURB CUT THAT IS VERY WIDE.
WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT TO ACTUALLY NARROW.
THEY WERE PROPOSING TO ADD ADDITIONAL, BUT NO, THERE IS NOT AN ADDITIONAL, THE ADDITIONAL CURVE CUT WOULD BE ON HERSCHEL AVENUE.
HERSCHEL AVENUE IS A DEAD END STREET.
>> THERE'S NOT AN ADDITIONAL CURB CUT ON LEMON THAT IS NEEDED?
>> NO. THE EXISTING ONE THAT'S THERE IS GOING TO BE NARROWED, WHICH IS A HUGE SUCCESS WE HAD WITH THE DESIGN.
>> THEN I HEARD THAT THE OAKLAND COMMITTEE HAD CONCERNS.
I THINK THE GENTLEMAN TALKED ABOUT THOSE.
BUT QUESTIONS WERE THOSE CONCERNS MET BY THE TIME IT WENT TO CPC OR BY THE TIME IT HIT AT US, THE LANDSCAPING, THE SMELLS, ETC.
>> YES. WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT TO CHANGE THE SITE PLAN TO ENSURE THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS WITH PD-193 AND THEY WILL, THEY DID ADD AS THEY WERE SAYING, WALL IN THE BACK TO MITIGATE THE NOISE.
THEY MOVED THE SPEAKERS A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO LEMON.
WE ALSO WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE A WALK-UP WINDOW AND THEY HAVE THAT WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED.
BASICALLY, THEIR FLOW OF CARS WILL NOT OVERLAP WITH THE WAY THE PEDESTRIANS WOULD GO TO THE SIDE SO TO THE BUILDING.
WE WORKED WITH THEM TO MAKE IT THE BEST DESIGN POSSIBLE.
>> WHAT IS THERE? IS IT A VACANT BUILDING NOW?
>> IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR THREE YEARS.
>> AS SOON AS PROBABLY A HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT OCCASIONALLY.
>> THE PROPERTY IS FENCED OFF RIGHT NOW.
THEIR PROPOSAL IS TO TAKE DOWN THE EXISTING BUILDING, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT OVER 2,000 SQUARE FOOT, AND BUILD THIS LITTLE 800 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR THE DRIVE-THROUGH.
>> THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT CONES.
CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT STATEMENT?
>> YES. THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE AND THIS WAS, AGAIN, A BIG POINT OF DISCUSSION WE HAD WITH OUR ENGINEER TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE TRAFFIC, IF THEY HAVE ANY ISSUES, IS ACTUALLY THEY'RE GOING TO USE HERSCHEL AVENUE MORE THAN LEMON.
THEY DO SHOW [NOISE] ON THEIR SIDE PLAN THAT THEY CAN PUT CONES ON THE ENTRY ON THE DRIVER ON LEMON AVENUE IN CASE THEY OBSERVED THAT THEY OVERFLOW INTO LEMON AVENUE.
BUT AGAIN, WE WORKED WITH THEM VERY CLOSELY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE TWO CURB CUTS ON HERSCHEL IN CASE THEY NEED TO DIRECT ALL THE TRAFFIC ON HERSCHEL INSTEAD OF LEMON.
>> THE CURB CUTS ON HERSCHEL AFFECT TRAFFIC ON HERSCHEL.
THIS SERVES ONLY THIS ONE AND THE PROPERTY ACROSS THAT IT'S ALSO A DRIVE-THROUGH.
>> THERE WAS SOME REFERENCE TO THE OAKLAND PLAN.
I WANT TO CALL IT CONFORMING, BUT IS IT NOW APPROPRIATE FOR THE OAKLAND PLAN?
>> PD-193 HAS A VISION IMBEDDED INTO IT.
I WOULD SAY NOT NECESSARILY, BUT IT'S AN SUP FOR A SHORT-TERM USE.
[03:15:01]
THAT'S HOW WE'D LOOKED AT IT.THE OAKLAND, THE PG-193 VISION GOALS ARE MORE MIXED TO USE THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THEN, SINCE THIS USES ALLOWED WITH AN SUP, WILL USUALLY ALLOW SUPS.
>> IS LEMON AVENUE ON TAP TO BE MOVED OVER TO MORE OF A MIXED USE CORRIDOR.
>> WHEN I DID MY RESEARCH FOR THIS CASE, I COUNTED I THINK FIVE RESTAURANTS WITH A DRIVE-THROUGH AND THREE OR FOUR BANKS WITH A DRIVE-THROUGH.
I WISH, BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S PRETTY MUCH A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE THAT CONNECTS THE HALLWAY WITH UPTOWN AND DOWNTOWN.
>> MR. MORENO, YOU HAVE JUST FOR FIVE MINUTES.
ANDREW, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THE CONCERNS WERE FROM CPC?
>> SURE. THERE WERE QUESTIONS REGARDING THOSE CONES AND IF THE TRAFFIC WILL OVERFLOW ON LEMON AVENUE, FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, WE DIDN'T HAVE CONCERNS WITH THAT.
I THINK THERE WERE MORE TRAFFIC CONCERNS.
I DON'T REMEMBER MUCH DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. I APOLOGIZE.
IT WAS A LONG SPEECH AND EMOTION THEY TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE OPPOSITION FROM THE HOA BEHIND.
OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T RECALL THAT ONE.
>> JUST TO VERIFY, THIS DOES COMPLY WITH THE PD-193 LANDSCAPING PLAN.
>> THIS IS NOT A LANDSCAPE PLAN, THIS IS A SITE PLAN.
WHEN THEY GO AT PERMITTING, THEY WILL NEED TO SUBMIT A LANDSCAPE PLAN.
WHAT WE DO WITH SUP IS WE MAKE SURE THAT THE WAY WE DESIGN THE SITE PLAN LEAVES ENOUGH ROOM SO THEY CAN COMPLY. THAT'S WHAT WE DID.
THAT'S WHY WE HAD FEW ROUNDS OF REVIEW WITH THIS APPLICANT.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON PAGE 10 OF THE REPORT, THEY PUSHED IN THEIR DRIVEWAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WILL COMPLY WITH THE BUFFERS ALONG THE STREETS.
THEY SHOW PARKWAYS AND THEY ARE WIDE ENOUGH FOR ARTICLE 10 FOR PD-193 REQUIREMENTS TO SHOW WIDER SIDEWALKS.
WE ENSURED THAT THE WAY IT IS DESIGNED IT WILL ALLOW THEM TO COMPLY, OTHERWISE IT WOULDN'T HAVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
>> CHAIRWOMAN WILLIS YOU HAVE JUST FIVE MINUTES.
MAYBE YOU CAN HELP WITH OR I HEARD COMMENTS ABOUT NOISE AND SMELL, BUT I WOULD THINK OF ALL THE THINGS THAT WOULD HAVE PROBABLY THE LEAST NOISE AND SMELL, WHAT WOULD BE A SALAD AND GO, IS THAT I KNOW WE'VE GOT ONE IN MY DISTRICT AND THE RESIDENTS ABSOLUTELY LOVE IT.
WITH THESE CONSIDERATIONS, HOW WAS THAT DISCUSSION?
>> SURE. THE SMELL IT IS TRUE.
IT'S A SALAD PREP PLACE, SO I WOULDN'T ASSUME SMELL, BUT FOR NOISE PURPOSES, PD-193, AS OPPOSED TO OTHER PDS HAS A VERY CONSISTENT CHAPTER REGARDING OUTDOOR SPEAKERS SO THEY WILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY THOSE, AS WELL AS ANY DEVELOPMENT IN PD-193 SO WE CONSIDER THOSE SUFFICIENT.
AS I WAS SAYING, WE DID APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THEY ADDED A WALL IN THE BACK, AND THEIR SPEAKERS ARE MOVED A LITTLE BIT AWAY FROM THE BACK.
THEY ARE BORDERING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THE BACK.
>> HAVING WORKED IN THAT AREA FOR NINE YEARS AND FREQUENTED LEMON AVENUE, I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF THAT THAT EXISTS THERE THAT IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S OUT OF ORDER AND TALKING ABOUT LANDSCAPING AND I KNOW PD-193 AS WELL, BUT IT SEEMS SO DURING PERMITTING, YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND ABIDE BY ARTICLE 10.
>> BY PD-193 LANDSCAPING, WHICH IS DIFFERENT AND MORE ADJUSTED TO OPT DOWN.
FOR INSTANCE, PD-193 REQUIRES SIDEWALKS AND REQUIRES PARKWAYS WHICH IS THE BUFFER AREA BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE STREET, WHICH NORMALLY IN ARTICLE 10, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO.
>> THIS WILL BE OVER ABOVE THAT AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPLIED WITH?
>> YES. OTHERWISE, THEY CAN GET THEIR PERMIT.
>> CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I'M A BIG FAN OF SALADS TO GO AND DRIVE THROUGH IT ALL THE TIME.
DISTRICT 11, I MOSTLY GO TO THAT ONE.
THERE'S ONE IN DISTRICT 12, CLOSE ON THE CALL AND THEN BORDER.
THE THING ABOUT THIS DRIVE-THROUGH IS THE FASTEST TURNAROUND OF ANY DRIVE-THROUGH I'VE EVER BEEN THROUGH AND THERE IS NO SMELL.
IT'S CLEAN, THE LANDSCAPE IS LOVELY, THE PEOPLE ARE SUPER NICE.
BY THE TIME YOU GET EVEN YOUR CUSTOM ORDER DONE AND YOU GET TO THAT WINDOW, IT'S A PAYMENT TRANSACTION AND YOU'RE OUT, SO I LOVE IT FOR THERE.
I'M HOPING WE'LL BE BRINGING BACK TO CITY HALL SO I'D LOVE TO HAVE AN OPTION THAT DOESN'T HAVE FRIES. THANK YOU.
[03:20:03]
>> ANYONE ELSE WHO SHOULD SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION ON THE ZONING ITEM 6, I BELIEVE IT IS.
IS THAT RIGHT? I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE, SO DO WE NEED TO HAVE A RECORD VOTE OR NO FOR THIS BECAUSE OF THE THRESHOLD?
>> NO, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A RECORD VOTE FOR THIS ITEM.
>> OKAY. THEN WE WON'T UNLESS ONE WANTS IT.
>> THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY MR. RIDLEY AS A MOTION TO DENY.
EVERYONE KNOWS WITH THE VOTING ON, SO ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NAY. IT SOUNDED LIKE THAT WAS VERY CLOSE AND DECIDED WE NEED TO HAVE A RECORD VOTE.
I'M GOING TO ASK THAT WE HAVE ONE, PLEASE.
>> POINT OF CLARIFICATION, MR. MAYOR.
>> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT I'LL LET IT THROUGH [OVERLAPPING].
>> IF IT'S A MOTION TO DENY, IT'S A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
IF IT'S A MOTION TO APPROVE, IT'S 3/4 VOTE.
>> I SHOULD HAVE SPECIFIED THAT.
A MOTION TO APPROVE WOULD BE 3/4.
WE'RE HAVING A RECORD VOTE ON THE MOTION TO DENY.
>> PLEASE START VOTING. TEN HAVE VOTED.
[NOISE] VOTING IN FAVOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS RESENDEZ, MORENO, DEPUTY MAYOR PROTEM NARVAEZ RIDLEY, AND COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY VOTING AGAINST COUNCIL MEMBERS MENDELSOHN, MAYOR PROTEM ARNOLD, MAYOR JOHNSON, COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS, AND BLACKMON.
ANSWERING VOTE TAKEN. COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA, MCGOUGH, THOMAS, SCHULTZ, AND ATKINS.
>> OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER MCGOUGH, HOW DO YOU VOTE? COUNCIL MEMBER [OVERLAPPING]
WITH FIVE VOTING IN FAVOR, SIX OPPOSED.
IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION? THERE CAN BE A MOTION TO DEFER OR HOLD IT.
>> A MOTION TO DEFER TO THE NEXT VOTING [OVERLAPPING] AGENDA.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
>> JUST TO ALLOW FOR A QUORUM.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO DEFER TO THE [OVERLAPPING]
>> NEXT MEETING AGENDA, [OVERLAPPING], AND IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
TWO VOTING AGAINST ON THE MOTION.
[Z8. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a Specific Use Permit for an alcoholic beverage establishment limited to a bar, lounge, or tavern use on property zoned Tract A within Planned Development District No. 269, the Deep Ellum/Near East Side District, on the north side of Main Street at the terminus of Pryor Street, between North Good Latimer Expressway and North Crowdus Street Recommendation of Staff: Approval for a two-year period, subject to a site plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval for a two-year period, subject to a site plan and conditions Z212-334(JM) Note: This item was deferred by the City Council before opening the public hearing on April 12, 2023, and is scheduled for consideration on May 10, 2023.]
YOUR NEXT ITEM, ITEM Z8 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A BAR LOUNGE OR TAVERN USE ON PROPERTY OR THE NORTH SIDE OF MAIN STREET AT THE TERMINUS OF PRIOR STREET BETWEEN NORTH GOOD LATIMER EXPRESSWAY AND NORTH CROWDED STREET.>> MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 18 LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE AREA OF REQUESTS.
WE RECEIVED FOUR LETTERS IN SUPPORT AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
>> THERE ARE NO REGISTER SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ITEM Z8.
>> IS THERE A MOTION, MR. MORENO?
>> YES, MR. MAYOR. I MOVE TO DENY THE REQUEST, ZONING CHANGE WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
>> THE APPLICANT WITHDREW THEIR APPLICATION.
>> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE WHO SHOULD SPEAK ON OR AGAINST THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSE? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM.
>> MR. MAYOR, THERE ARE NO FURTHER ITEMS FOR THIS AGENDA.
>> WONDERFUL. THE TIME IS 3:26 PM AND WE HAVE ALL THE MICROPHONES HAS GOTTEN HANDLED THIS MORNING.
>> THEN THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.