[00:00:03]
>> GOOD MORNING. WE HAVE A QUORUM.
TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 16,
[Call to Order]
2023 THE TIME IS 9:36 AM, AND I CALL THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER.TODAY'S INVOCATION SPEAKERS IS GOING TO BE GIVEN BY OUR CHAPLAIN RAYFORD BUTLER FROM THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE CHAPLAIN BUTLER FOR THE INVOCATION THEN WE'LL HAVE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
FATHER GOD, WE THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO SERVE YOU ONE MORE DAY.
THANK YOU OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR OUR MAYOR AND ALL THAT REPRESENT THIS WONDERFUL CITY.
WE GIVE YOU PRAISE AND GLORY IN JESUS NAME. AMEN.
>> WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE FOR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
HONOR THE TEXTS FLAG, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.
[Open Microphone Speakers]
TO OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS IF WE HAVE THEM THIS MORNING. I THINK WE DO.>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GOOD MORNING.
WE DO HAVE TO 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 THE DRESSING, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE REMOVED FOR THE ROOM, ALL SPEAKERS OR IN-PERSON.
INDIVIDUALS ARE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK, YOU'LL NOTICE THE TIME ON THE MONITOR AT THE PODIUM, WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP, PLEASE STOP.
ALSO SPEAKERS DURING YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REFER TO A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER BY NAME.
ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON ONLY.
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS M. JOYCE BROWN, AND I HAVE LIVED IN DALLAS, TEXAS SINCE 1976.
TODAY, I'M ADDRESSING YOU AS THE CHAIR OF THE DISTRICT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL FUNDING AND THE FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 BUDGET FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THE COMMITTEE REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS FOR HOTSPOTS, AND DISTRICT FOR PURCHASING GUNSHOT DETECTION EQUIPMENT TO IDENTIFY RANDOM GUNFIRE, AND CONTRACTING WITH SECURITY COMPANIES TO PATROL NEIGHBORHOODS.
WE BELIEVE IT IS TIME FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS AND DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT TO CONSIDER OTHER OPTIONS TO PROTECT DALLAS CITIZENS.
FROM FISCAL YEAR 2018 TO PRESENT, THERE HAS ONLY BEEN AN INCREASE OF 61 SWORN OFFICERS EVEN THOUGH EACH BUDGET PERIOD HAS RECOMMENDED HIRING AT LEAST 250 RECRUITS.
POLICE DEPARTMENTS NATIONWIDE ARE EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS HIRING NEW OFFICES, AND TELLING CITIZENS THE BUDGET INCLUDES FUNDING FOR 290 RECRUITS IS PROVIDING FALSE HOPE, AND DISCOURAGEMENT WHEN CONSTITUENTS DO NOT SEE AN IMPROVEMENT IN CRIME IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
DPD HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB AT DECREASING VIOLENT CRIMES, AND THE DATA SUPPORTS THE SUCCESS.
HOWEVER, THE QUALITY OF LIFE OR DISTRICT FOR RESIDENTS NEEDS MUCH IMPROVEMENT.
NO ONE SHOULD HAVE TO GET ON THE FLOOR WHEN THEY HEAR GUNSHOTS, BECAUSE THEY ARE UNSURE WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM.
SOMEONE SHOT A BULLET IN MY FRONT WINDOW AND IF I HAD BEEN SEATED ON MY SOFA, WILL NOT BE APPEARING BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING.
CONSISTENT POLICE PATROLLING AND SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS WILL CONSIDERABLY LESSEN CRIME AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE DISTRICT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE STRONGLY BELIEVES THAT DPT NEEDS TO LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS AND NEW TECHNOLOGY TO COVER THE SHORTAGE OF OFFICERS.
MOST OF THE FUNDING INCLUDED IN THE $57 MILLION DPD BUDGET IS TO HELP DPD OPERATE MORE EFFICIENTLY.
SIXTY NEW SQUAD CAR [INAUDIBLE] AND 80 FLOCK CAMERAS APPEAR TO BE THE ONLY LINE ITEMS THAT WILL IMPROVE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS SAFETY AND IS APPROXIMATELY 0.5 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL DPD BUDGET.
TODAY, THE DISTRICT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE ASKED THE CITY COUNCIL TO INCLUDE REQUESTS IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
WE ARE LIVING IN THE 21ST CENTURY AND WE NEED TO THINK LIKE WE ARE IN THE 21ST CENTURY, FINDING NEW IDEAS AND TECHNOLOGY TO DECREASE CRIME AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL CITIZENS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ROBERT CHECKER RALLY.
>> WELCOME BACK, CITY COUNCIL.
[00:05:01]
I'M GOING TO FLIP THE SCRIPT A LITTLE BIT.I WAS AT A SCHOOL BOARD MEETING IN JUNE, I SAW [INAUDIBLE] AND SHE TOLD ME SHE'S A RAILS MY NAME ROBERT CHECKER RALLY.
I GUESS YOU GOT YOUR WISH HAS TO DO WITH MARY WILLARD AND MADISON HIGH SCHOOL? BURNETT NET ON MARY WHEELER WERE CLOSE CLOSE CLOSE FRIENDS.
NOW THEY HATE EACH OTHER, I COULD NOT BELIEVE WHAT SHE WAS TELLING ME.
I SAID THIS, NOT ALL, I THOUGHT YOU TWO ARE TIGHT.
>> WHAT DO YOU MEAN MR. [INAUDIBLE] I THOUGHT YOU TWO ARE REAL CLOSE.
>> NOT ALL AND BURNETT KNOWS WANT SAVE MARY WILLARD JOB AT MADISON, YOU REMEMBERED MIKE MILES FIRED HER, WILLARD, AND SHE CAME BACK WITH A HINT OF HOSA.
WHAT HAPPENED AFTER? TEN MINUTES AFTER SO NOT ALL.
A LADY NAMED KIMONO HOWARD SPOKE IN FRONT OF THE SCHOOL BOARD.
SHE'S A STUDENT OF MEDICINE AND SHE SAID A RIVETING 3 MINUTES I WISH EVERYBODY WOULD LISTEN TO WHEN HE GET OUT OF HERE.
LISTEN TO THE VIDEO ABOUT MARRY WILLARD JUNE 2023.
KIMONO HOWARD MENTIONED THAT MULTIPLE TIMES MARY WILLARD WOULD SAY THIS TO HER.
YOU'LL BE LIKE YOUR MOTHER, YOU'D BE LYING ON YOUR BACK.
I'M GOING TO SAY IT ONE MORE TIME.
YOU'D BE LIKE YOUR MOTHER, YOU'D BE LYING ON YOUR BACK.
I HOPE YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.
IT MEANS YOU'RE HOE OR SLUT, WHATEVER YOU TAKE IT THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS.
NOW MARY WILLARD STILL AT MADISON.
PEOPLE ARE SCARED. MARY WILLARD BECAUSE IN [INAUDIBLE] IT BACK AND WHO KNOWS [INAUDIBLE] PUT IT BACK IN MADISON WHEN SHE GOT FIRED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD AND MIKE MILES.
HE KNOWS HE'D PROBABLY BEEN FIRED A SECOND TIME.
I'M ASKING YOU THE CONSTITUENTS WOULD LOVE IT, FORGET ABOUT THAT YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO WORK WITH DIST.
THINK ABOUT YOUR CITY AND EDUCATION OF THE KIDS, THINK ABOUT IT THAT WAY ONLY.
BECAUSE I'M TIRED OF HEARING STUFF, OH, WE CAN'T DO THIS.
DIST IS SCARED OF MARY WILLARD, THEY ARE, TRUST ME, I'VE BEEN AROUND MORE THAN I DO WITH THE HOMELESS.
MR. JOHNSON, EVERYBODY, I TALKED TO ONE OF THE STAFF MEMBERS AND MR. BAZALDUA, HE SAID, OH MY GOD, YOU GOT TO DO SOMETHING NOW, MARY WILLARD HAVE BEEN THERE TOO LONG AND SHE'S RULING THAT CITY AND NOW SHE'S TELLING THE WOMEN THEY'RE HOES.
LISTEN TO THE VIDEO IT'S RIGHT THERE.
YOU'LL BELIEVE ME, THEN MAYBE YOU MIGHT BELIEVE IN EVERYTHING ELSE I'VE BEEN SAYING ABOUT THIS CITY.
I GOT FIVE MORE SECONDS, PLEASE DO IT.
WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT KNOW HER, WE HAVE TEACHERS IN DIST.
>> PLEASE DO IT BECAUSE IF NOT THIS CITY IS GOING TO GO TO HELL. THANK YOU.
>> THIS CONCLUDES YOUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS FOR THIS MEETING, MR. MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR BUILDING AGENDA, PLEASE.
[1. 23-1758 Approval of Minutes of the June 19, 2023 Special Called City Council Meetings and the June 21, 2023 City Council Meeting]
>> THANK YOU. YOUR FIRST ITEM IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE JUNE 19, 2023 SPECIAL CALLED CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THE JUNE 21ST, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
>> I HEARD A MOTION IN A SECOND IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
>> AGENDA ITEM 2 WAS YOUR CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS
[2. 23-1759 Consideration of appointments to boards and commissions and the evaluation and duties of board and commission members (List of nominees is available in the City Secretary's Office)]
TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THIS MORNING.THEREFORE, MISDEMEANOR YOUR BRIEFINGS CONTINUE.
>> WONDERFUL, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO OUR CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU.
[A. 23-1839 FY 2023-24 Budget Workshop: Timeline and Discussion]
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WE HAVE FOUR BRIEFING ITEMS TODAY AND WE'LL START WITH THE VERY FIRST, WHICH SHOULD BE PRETTY QUICK.
WE'RE GOING TO SHARE WITH THE COUNSEL BASED ON OUR ONGOING ENGAGEMENT AND SUPPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 24 BUDGET.
YOUR FIRST BRIEFING THIS MORNING IS REVIEW THE TIMELINE FOR THE REMAINING STEPS WITHIN THE BUDGET PROCESS.
I'LL TURN THINGS OVER TO JANETTE WEEDON, THE DIRECTOR OF OUR BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES, TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE BRIEF PRESENTATION. JANETTE.
>> GOOD MORNING AND THANK YOU, MR. BROADNAX.
MY NAME IS JANETTE WEEDON, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
THIS MORNING, WE WILL BRIEFLY COVER THE REMAINING BUDGET TIMELINE.
OUR NEXT MAJOR MILESTONES IN THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND RECEIVE ANY FEEDBACK THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
THE BUDGET TIMELINE IS SHARED HERE ON SLIDES 2 AND 3.
I'LL START WITH SLIDE NUMBER 2.
TODAY IS AUGUST 16TH AND SO WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS THE TIMELINE.
HR AND THEIR TEAM WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS.
AND THEN OUR LAST BRIEFING ITEM FOR
[00:10:01]
THE BUDGET WORKSHOP IS AN OVERVIEW OF OUR FINANCIAL CAPACITY OF THE DEBT SERVICE FUND.CITY COUNCIL IS SET TO TAKE TWO ACTIONS NEXT WEEK.
THE FIRST ACTION IS AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON SEPTEMBER THE 20TH.
THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE.
CITY COUNCIL WILL ALSO AUTHORIZE A PROPOSAL TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A 0.7393 PER 100 VALUATION TAX RATE OR 73.93 CENT TAX RATE.
OR CITY COUNCIL MAY PROPOSE A LOWER RATE ANYTIME BETWEEN NOW AND SEPTEMBER THE 20TH.
THE ACTION NEXT WEEK ON THE 23RD SETS THE MAXIMUM RATE FOR CONSIDERATION.
AGAIN, CITY COUNCIL MAY PROPOSE A LOWER RATE AT ANYTIME DURING THE REMAINDER OF THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT MORE ON SLIDE NUMBER 4.
THE SECOND ACTION ON AUGUST 23RD IS TO HOLD A BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING.
THIS IS OUR THIRD AND FINAL BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING AND AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE TIMELINE, WE HELD A BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH THE 8TH, AS WELL AS MAY 24TH.
ON SLIDE NUMBER 3, WE ARE SHOWING THE REMAINING STEPS AND THE HIGHLIGHTED DATES RELATED TO THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.
RIGHT NOW YOU ARE MEETING WITH RESIDENTS AND RECEIVING FEEDBACK ON THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET IN YOUR TOWN HALL MEETINGS.
THE AMENDMENT PROCESS ALLOWS COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SUBMIT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGERS PROPOSED BUDGET.
WE HAVE A WORKSHOP SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST THE 30TH TO DISCUSS AMENDMENTS.
WE HAVE NOTED ON THE CALENDAR THAT THE MEETING MAY BE CANCELED.
LAST YEAR, THE FIFTH WEDNESDAY WORKSHOP WAS CANCELED AS WELL.
AS YOU CAN SEE BY THE CALENDAR, WE ARE PROVIDING DIRECTION FOR TWO SCENARIOS.
SCENARIO 1, IF YOU KEEP THE MEETING ON AUGUST THE 30TH, AND SCENARIO 2, IF THE MEETING IS CANCELED.
IF CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDS WITH THE MEETING ON AUGUST THE 30TH, AMENDMENTS ARE DUE TO THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER BY 10:00 AM ON FRIDAY, AUGUST THE 25TH.
WE WILL PACKAGE AND DISTRIBUTE THE AMENDMENTS RECEIVED BY 5:00 PM AND WE'LL SEND THOSE OUT TO YOU ALL.
IF THE AUGUST 30TH MEETING IS CANCELED, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT AMENDMENTS ON FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 1ST BY 10:00 AM.
AGAIN, WE WILL PACKAGE THE AMENDMENTS RECEIVED AND DISTRIBUTE THOSE BY 5:00 PM FOR THE BUDGET WORKSHOP ON SEPTEMBER THE 6TH.
STRAW VOTES ARE ANTICIPATED FOR BOTH MEETINGS.
THEN ON SEPTEMBER 6TH, CITY COUNCIL WILL ADOPT THE BUDGET ON FIRST READING.
THIS IS NOT YOUR FINAL OPPORTUNITY TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS.
CITY COUNCIL MAY PROPOSE AMENDMENTS ON THE SAME DAY AS BUDGET ADOPTION ON SEPTEMBER THE 20TH.
ON SEPTEMBER 9TH, WE WILL PUBLISH BOTH THE TAX RATE ORDINANCE AND THE BUDGET ORDINANCE IN THE NEWSPAPER.
THEN ON SEPTEMBER THE 20TH, WHICH IS OUR FINAL ACTION RELATED TO BUDGET DEVELOPMENT, YOU WILL HOLD A TAX RATE PUBLIC HEARING.
THIS IS THE FINAL OPPORTUNITY FOR RESIDENTS TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK.
THEN CITY COUNCIL WILL ADOPT THE TAX RATE AND APPROVE THE BUDGET ON FINAL READING.
ON SLIDE NUMBER 4, WE ARE PROVIDING A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL RELATED TO STATE REQUIREMENTS.
AGAIN, ON AUGUST 23RD, CITY COUNCIL WILL VOTE ON THE MAXIMUM PROPOSED TAX RATE.
AS MENTIONED, THIS IS THE MAXIMUM TAX RATE.
WE ARE REQUIRED TO PUBLISH NOTICE IN THE NEWSPAPER, HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN ADOPT THE TAX RATE.
ON SLIDE NUMBER 5, WE LAY OUT THE STEPS FOR THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.
AGAIN, COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT THEIR AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET.
THEY SHOULD BE BALANCED WITH A SPECIFIC SOURCE OF FUNDS AND USE OF FUNDS THAT WILL BE SUSTAINED OVER THE BIANNUAL.
STAFF WILL WORK WITH EACH COUNCIL MEMBER IF REQUESTED, AND WE WILL WORK WITH YOU ON ALTERNATIVE AMENDMENT OR A SOURCE OF FUNDS.
IT WILL PACKAGE COSPONSORED AMENDMENTS TOGETHER.
AMENDMENTS ARE PACKAGED AND NUMBERED BASED ON THE ORDER RECEIVED.
THE DEADLINE IS FRIDAY BY 10:00 AM, THEY'RE PACKAGED IN THE ORDER RECEIVED VIA E-MAIL.
THEN OF COURSE, AS MENTIONED, COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY OFFER AMENDMENTS UP TO AND INCLUDING THE DAY OF FINAL BUDGET ADOPTION.
THIS CONCLUDES THE PREPARED REMARKS.
WE ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
THIS IS A VERY SHORT BRIEFING.
>> WE HAVE A PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY.
>> IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ASK QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE BUDGET OR SPECIFICALLY JUST TO THE TIMELINE?
>> I THINK THE TIMELINE IS PROBABLY THE THING WE SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON FOR THIS BRIEFING.
[00:15:06]
I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY RIGHT.I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IT PRETTY NARROWLY TAILORED TO THE TIMELINE.
>> I'M GOING GO TO THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. QUICK QUESTION.
ON THE STATEMENT YOU MADE ABOUT PUBLICATION IN THE NEWSPAPER.
>> WE PUBLISH IN DALLAS MORNING NEWS, AL DÍA AND THEN THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL LIST OF NEWSPAPERS THAT WE PUBLISH IN.
I DON'T HAVE THEM RIGHT HERE AT MY FINGERTIPS, BUT I CAN SEND THAT TO YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO GET CLARITY, YOU SAID IN THE NEWSPAPERS, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE INCLUDED THOSE COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS IN TERMS OF PUBLICATION BECAUSE OFTENTIMES I HEAR THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE STILL NEED HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY, SO WE'RE IN THE LOOP.
THANK YOU. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH MY QUESTION.
ALSO, WOULD YOU SEND THAT LIST TO US SO THAT WE ARE COVERED IN OUR RESPONSES? THANK YOU.
>> MR. GRACEY, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> JUST A REAL SIMPLE QUESTIONS.
REGARDING THE SOURCES AND USES, IS THERE A TEMPLATE THAT YOU ALL COULD PROVIDE?
>> YES, THERE IS. WE TYPICALLY SEND A TEMPLATE OUT THE WEEK BEFORE WITH A COVER MEMO.
IT'S A SPREADSHEET AND PLUG AND PLAY.
IF YOU ENTER A USER, IT WILL SHOW YOU THE DEFICIT AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE TO IDENTIFY A SOURCE.
>> MR. WEST, RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'D ASKED A SERIES OF QUESTIONS IN THE LAST BUDGET BRIEFING.
WHEN CAN I EXPECT TO GET THOSE ANSWERS FROM THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS? JACK, I'M SORRY, YOU NEED TO TURN YOUR MIC ON.
WE'RE SENDING THE FIRST SET OF RESPONSES TODAY, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO SEND THEM EVERY FEW DAYS UNTIL WE GET THEM ALL ANSWERED.
BUT YOU SHOULD SEE YOUR FIRST SET OF RESPONSES THIS AFTERNOON.
THANK YOU, AND TO PIGGYBACK ON COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN'S QUESTION.
IF WE DO HAVE QUESTIONS LEADING UP TO WHEN THE AMENDMENTS ARE DUE, IS THIS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS TO THE DEPARTMENTS IS REALLY JUST THROUGH MEMO AT THIS POINT, OR IS THERE ANOTHER PUBLIC OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT IN PERSON?
>> WE WILL TAKE QUESTIONS TODAY IF IT FALLS WITHIN THE BRIEFING THAT WE HAVE ON DEBT, WE'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR THAT.
OR IF YOU HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU WANT TO JUST SEND TO US, WE WILL ANSWER THOSE AS WELL.
EITHER TEXT ME OR EMAIL ME OR ASK IN PUBLIC AND WE WILL RESPOND AS TO ALL THE QUESTIONS.
>> SO I GUESS WE'LL HAVE TO MAYBE ON THE THIRD BRIEFING WE'LL SEE IF THE QUESTIONS ARE GERMANE OR NOT.
IF NOT, I'LL JUST DO IT THROUGH MEMO. GREAT, THANKS.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT HAS ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEM A?
>> WRONG THING. USER ERROR, MY BAD. THERE'S ME.
>> GO AHEAD, MS. BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. LOOKING AT THE TIMELINE, IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE TWO OPPORTUNITIES, PLUS EVEN AT THE FINAL BRIEF, WE CAN BRING THEM ON THE 20TH.
IT'S ACTUALLY THREE TO DO AMENDMENTS, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. IF WE KEEP THE MEETING ON AUGUST THE 30TH, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT AMENDMENTS AND DISCUSSION ON THAT DATE.
YOU ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY ON SEPTEMBER THE 6TH, WHICH IS THE SAME DAY AS THE FIRST READING, AND THEN YOUR FINAL OPPORTUNITY ON SEPTEMBER THE 20TH.
I'M INCLINED TO NOT HAVE THE FIFTH WEDNESDAY IF THE BODY SEES THAT AND WORK THROUGH THE TWO DATES AND JUST PUMP IT OUT IN ONE DAY.
I THINK WE'VE HAD LONG BUDGET MEETINGS BEFORE, SO I KNOW THAT STAFF WOULD PROBABLY LIKE THAT TO HAVE AN EXTRA WEEK AND NOT HAVE TO ORGANIZE AND SUCH.
I'M INCLINED TO DO THAT AND MAYBE I COULD EVEN HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS WITH INDIVIDUALS THAT WEEK VERSUS PREPARING FOR A BUDGET WORKSHOP AND AMENDMENTS, BECAUSE IF WE HAVE TWO OPPORTUNITIES THAT'S THE TIME.
I'M OPEN TO WHAT THE BODY DECIDES, AND WE DID CANCEL IT LAST YEAR; IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
WE HAD PROBABLY WHAT 30 BUDGET AMENDMENTS ON THAT NEXT.
I THINK WE COMBINE SOME AND WORKED THROUGH A LOT.
[00:20:04]
WE'VE HAD MORE THAN 30 OF ONE TIME LONG ONE DAY, SO I THINK WE CAN MANAGE ON THE SEPTEMBER 6 DAY IF THE BODY CHOOSES TO CANCEL THE MEETING ON THE 30TH.>> MS. MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I'M PIGGYBACKING ON COUNCIL MEMBER WEST QUESTION ABOUT ASKING QUESTIONS IN A PUBLIC WAY.
CERTAINLY, WE'VE ALL CONTACTED YOU FOR OUR INDIVIDUAL INQUIRIES, BUT IF WE SEND IT TO YOU AS A MEMO, WILL IT BE POSTED THEN WITH THE ANSWERS SO THAT ANYBODY COULD VIEW IT ON THE FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY WEBSITE?
>> THEN ALSO JUST TO CLARIFY, IN YOUR TIMELINE FOR SUBMITTING AMENDMENTS, YOU ALSO ARE LEAVING OPEN THE OPTION FOR FOUR AMENDMENTS AT ALL THOSE MEETINGS, CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. WE LAY OUT A PROCESS TO RECEIVE AMENDMENTS ON THE FRIDAY BEFORE.
THAT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO PACKAGE THEM, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE BALANCED, BUT AS I MENTIONED, COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN PROPOSE AMENDMENTS ON THE FLOOR.
>> IF I CAN ADD TO THAT AS WELL.
HISTORICALLY, WE'VE TRIED TO DO THAT IN ADVANCE SO THAT EVERYONE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO VIEW THEM, SO IT'S PUBLIC.
IF THEY'RE MADE ON THE FLOOR, THERE'S NOT THAT OPPORTUNITY.
>> BUT WE CAN STILL, OF COURSE, WELCOME ON THE FLOOR AS WELL.
>> THOSE WOULD JUST BE AT THE END SINCE THESE ARE FIRST IN FIRST CONSIDERED; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> JUST MAKING SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THE RULES, THANK YOU.
>> MR. NARVAEZ IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I'M OKAY WITH THE TIMELINE, I DO AGREE, AND WILL ADD TO WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON SAID IF WE DON'T NEED TO DO THE FIFTH WEDNESDAY, I THINK I'D BE INCLINED NOT TO HAVE TO JUST COME INTO COME IN AND IF WE CAN ALL GET OUR WORK DONE, LET'S DO IT AND LET'S SAVE STAFF SOME TIME AND AS WELL AS OURSELVES, AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC FROM HAVING TO COME INTO AN EXTRA MEETING IF IT'S NOT NECESSARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> ANYONE ELSE HAVE THOUGHTS ON THE TIMELINE? I DON'T SEE ANYONE, SO THANK YOU.
[B. 23-1840 FY 2023-24 Budget Workshop: Employee Health Benefits Overview]
MR. CITY MANAGER, WE'RE ON TO ITEM WELL, B IF THAT'S THE NEXT ONE YOU GUYS WANT TO DO.>> THANK YOU MAYOR, AND AS STAFF WALKS TO THE SPEAKING AREA TODAY, OUR HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, WILL PROVIDE THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL WITH AN OVERVIEW ON EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS PROGRAMS, WHICH IS PART OF THE 23, 24 BUDGET WORKSHOP.
THE PRESENTATION REFLECTS OUR COMMITMENT TO OUR DEDICATED EMPLOYEES AND SHARING, THEIR HEALTH AND WELL-BEING AS THEY CONTINUE TO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY DILIGENTLY.
I BELIEVE YOU WILL FIND THE DETAILS BOTH INFORMATIVE AND IMPACTFUL.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION, AND I WILL TURN THE BRIEFING OVER TO DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, KIMBERLY BIZOR TOLBERT TO START THE PRESENTATION.
>> THANK YOU, MR. BROADNAX, FOR THE RECORD, KIMBERLY BIZOR TOLBERT, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, AND TO THE MAYOR, AND CITY COUNCIL.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THE 2023 EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS OVERVIEW.
IN THE EVER-CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF RISE IN HEALTH INSURANCE AND HEALTHCARE COST, WE REMAIN STEADFAST IN OUR COMMITMENT TO THE WELL-BEING OF OUR WORKFORCE.
OUR PRESENTATION TODAY OUTLINES A STRATEGIC APPROACH THAT ACKNOWLEDGES THE LINK BETWEEN THESE FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND THE WELFARE OF OUR EMPLOYEES.
WE CONTINUE TO EMPHASIZE EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN MATTERS OF HEALTH, AND REALIZE THAT IT NOT ONLY ENHANCES OUR ABILITY TO MANAGE HEALTH INSURANCE EXPENSES COMPETITIVELY, BUT ALSO UNDERSCORES OUR DEDICATION TO THE BETTERMENT OF OUR STAFF.
AS WE NAVIGATE THROUGH TODAY'S PRESENTATION, WE WILL DELVE INTO THE FUNDAMENTAL COMPONENTS, THAT UNDERPIN OUR APPROACH.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE PROACTIVE STRATEGIES THAT WE HAVE CONTINUED TO UTILIZE FOR OUR HEALTH BENEFITS PROGRAM.
WE WILL GET INTO THE COST DRIVERS, AND THE ONGOING COMMITMENT OF HOW WE TALK ABOUT CULTIVATING A CULTURE OF WELLNESS.
OUR EMPLOYEES AS YOU KNOW ARE INVALUABLE PARTNERS, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ALSO HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY IN HELPING US MANAGE HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS.
WE CONTINUE TO WORK ON PREVENTATIVE CARE, CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS CONDUCIVE TO OUR EMPLOYEES' GROWTH.
WE BELIEVE THAT THIS HORRIBLE RESULT IN MORE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT CONTROL OF HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS WHILE ALSO AGAIN KEEPING OUR EMPLOYEES PER ACTIVE AND ENGAGED.
AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO TURN THE PRESENTATION OVER TO NINA ARIAS, OUR DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES, AND NINA WILL INTRODUCE OUR GUESTS WHO ARE PRESENT HERE TODAY FROM HOLMES MURPHY, THEY ARE AT THIRD PARTY BENEFITS ADMINISTRATOR. NINA.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, NINA ARIAS, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES.
[00:25:02]
AND WITH US TODAY WE HAVE RYAN BEASLEY, SEAN TILDEN, AND DAVID GIBSON FROM HOLMES MURPHY, OUR CONSULTANT SUPPORTING THE CITIES, HEALTH AND WELFARE BENEFIT PROGRAMS. OUR BENEFIT PROGRAMS OFFERED TO THE CITY OF DALLAS EMPLOYEES AND RETIREES ARE ALIGNED TO FOUR STRATEGIC FOCUS AREAS, WHICH HAVE SERVED AS OUR GUIDING PRINCIPLES SINCE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL IN EARLY 2019.THESE PRINCIPLES WERE DEVELOPED AFTER CONDUCTING NUMEROUS EMPLOYEE AND MANAGEMENT TEAM FOCUS GROUPS IN 2018 AND HAVE REMAINED CURRENT BASED ON THE PROGRAM OUTCOMES AND FEEDBACK WE RECEIVE EVERY YEAR THROUGH OPEN ENROLLMENT.
LIKEWISE, THE CITY BENEFITS PROGRAMS ARE THOUGHTFULLY STRUCTURED AROUND FIVE WELLNESS PILLARS, SOCIAL, FINANCIAL, PHYSICAL, COMMUNITY, AND MENTAL WELL-BEING.
THESE PILLARS ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WELLNESS ENCOMPASSES FAR MORE THAN JUST PHYSICAL HEALTH.
AS WE DELVE INTO THE BENEFITS PLANS TODAY, ITS ACTIVITIES AND THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS, WE WILL CONSISTENTLY DRAW UPON OUR STRATEGIC FOCUS AND THE PILLARS OF WELL-BEING.
THIS SLIDE HIGHLIGHTS THE PROGRAMS AND THE OUTCOMES UNDER THE STRATEGIC FOCUS.
I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THE 6,794 INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE COMPLETED THE WELLNESS ACTIVITIES AS OF JUNE 2023, AND THE PARTICIPATION IN WELLNESS INCENTIVE BY OVER 250 PERCENT IN 2022.
WE CONTINUE TO WORK ON INITIATIVES THAT SUPPORT EMPLOYEES AND THEIR FAMILIES.
THIS SLIDE HIGHLIGHTS KEY INITIATIVES OF 2023, INCLUDING THE MIDWIFE SERVICES, HEADWAY MENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF HEALTH ADVOCATES TO SUPPORT RETIREES.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SLIDE 6 INCLUDES ADDITIONAL BENEFITS OFFERED TO EMPLOYEES AND BENEFITS THAT FOCUS ON ATTRACTING AND RETAINING STAFF.
IN PARTICULAR, THOSE THAT EMPHASIZES BALANCE AND FLEXIBILITY. NEXT SLIDE.
WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE ONGOING FOCUS ON EQUITY IN THE 2024 BENEFITS PLAN. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
IT'S LIKE IT TALKS ABOUT EQUITY AND BENEFITS AND OTHER TIER PREMIUM PRICING THAT PROVIDES EMPLOYEES UNDER 44,000 WITH COPAYS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE OR ADAPTED TO THEIR PARTICULAR INCOME BRACKET TO INCREASE EQUITY.
ALSO TARGETED PROGRAMS FOR CONDITIONS THAT AFFECT MINORITIES AND LOWER EARNING EMPLOYEES DISPROPORTIONATELY.
THESE HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED THROUGH OUR ONGOING FOCUS ON DATA.
ALSO ENHANCE PROGRAM ACCESS FOR CONDITIONS THAT AFFECT MINORITIES AND LOWER EARNING EMPLOYEES IS PROPORTIONALLY AND SUPPORT SUCH AS DEPENDENT CHILDCARE SUBSIDY, TELEHEALTH, THE CATAPULT VIRTUAL WELLNESS, ASSESSMENTS, AND OUR ACCESS REWARDS CONCIERGE.
THESE ARE OUR PROPOSED ACTIVE AND PRE-65 PLAN DESIGN DETAILS.
OUR ACTIVE AND PRE-65 PLAN DESIGNS ARE IDENTICAL AND THAT IS REQUIRED BY LAW.
THE IRS REQUIRED THE HIGH-DEDUCTIBLE PLAN TO HAVE A CHANGE AND IT INCREASED TO 3,200.
ACTUALLY WE USED TO HAVE A LOWER BRACKET THERE BUT WE HAD TO INCREASE IT.
OTHER THAN THAT, ALL OF OUR DEDUCTIBLES, PREVENTIVE CARE VISITS, CITY HALL CLINIC VISITS, ALL OF THAT THAT IS LISTED ON THE LEFT COLUMN IS IDENTICAL TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND WE HAVE NOT MADE ANY CHANGES DUE TO THE POSITIVE FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM EMPLOYEES.
THE NEXT SLIDE TALKS ABOUT OUR POST-65 RETIREE PLAN DESIGN.
CURRENTLY WE OFFER A HIGH PLAN AND A LOW PLAN FOR POST-65 AND THERE ARE NO CHANGES OTHER THAN THE CHANGES THAT ARE REQUIRED BY THE BY CMS,
[00:30:05]
WHICH ARE REQUIRED CHANGES FOR 2024.BASICALLY, THEY ARE LISTED THERE IN YOUR NOTES.
THE CENTER FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAL SERVICES REQUIRE SOME CHANGES TO OUR RX BENEFITS AND THAT IS THE ONLY CHANGE IN PLAN DESIGN FOR POST-65 RETIREES.
THE NEXT SLIDE ILLUSTRATES THE COST OF ACTIVE EMPLOYEES PREMIUMS COMPARED TO THE NATIONAL TREND OR ACTUALLY CAUSE COMPARED TO THE NATIONAL TREND.
THE MEDICAL AND PHARMACY COST PER ACTIVE EMPLOYEE.
THIS IS ONLY OUR ACTIVE EMPLOYEES AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN GREEN, IS THE NATIONAL TREND AND THE LINE REPRESENTS THE COST OF EMPLOYEES AT THE CITY OF DALLAS ACTIVE EMPLOYEES.
WE ARE BELOW AND WE HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN BELOW EXCEPT FOR 2020, WHICH WAS DIFFERENT YEAR DUE TO COVID.
HOWEVER, OUR TRAIN AGAIN HAS BEEN CONSISTENTLY UNDER NATIONAL AVERAGES.
WHEN WE MOVE TO SLIDE 12, WE SEE THAT RETIREE COST IS HIGHER AS YOU WILL IMAGINE OR WILL EXPECT FOR A POPULATION THAT HAS THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A POST PRE-65 RETIREE GROUP.
WHEN YOU GO TO SLIDE 13, IS THE COMBINED DATA BOTH ACTIVE AND RETIREES.
THE EFFECT OF THE RETIREES DATA RESULTS IN OVERALL TREND, WHICH IS HIGHER THAN NATIONAL.
WHEN WE MOVE TO SLIDE 14, WE HAVE THERE THE CURRENT AND FUTURE IMPACT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES.
THIS IS THE SAME SLIDE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL BY THE BUDGET TEAM AND THIS IS ACTUALLY PRESENTED THERE FOR CONTEXT.
THE NEXT SLIDE ILLUSTRATES THE HEALTH PREMIUM COST SHARE PHILOSOPHY ON THE RIGHT, YOU HAVE A DATA RELATED TO INDUSTRY SURVEYS AND BENCHMARKS.
WE ARE LOOKING AT DATA FROM MERCER NATIONAL SURVEY COST-SHARE FOR THE DIFFERENT PLANS, PPO PLANS, HSA PLANS, AND ALSO FOR PENDING COVERAGE.
ALSO, YOU HAVE DATA THERE FROM THE HUMPS MURPHY BOOK OF BUSINESS, WHICH INCLUDES PRIVATE AND PUBLIC ENTITIES COST-SHARE.
THEN FINALLY YOU SEE THE CITY OF DALLAS COST-SHARE.
ALSO ON THE LEFT, YOU SEE OVER THE YEARS SINCE 2015, THE COST-SHARE BETWEEN EMPLOYEES IN THE GRAY, ACTIVE EMPLOYEES AND CITY OF DALLAS IN THE BLUE.
THE NEXT SLIDE PROVIDES DATA THAT, THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR IS FOR ACTIVE EMPLOYEES, AND IT SHOWS WHAT HAS BEEN THE TREND FOR THE COST SHARE OF EMPLOYEES IN ORANGE OR RED.
THEN IN THE DARK LINE SHOWS THE COST OF THE CITY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE COST OF THE CITY CONTINUES TO RISE AND THE COST OF EMPLOYEE HAS REMAINED FLAT.
PRE-65 RETIREE HEALTHCARE COST SHARE, IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.
WE HAVE, AGAIN, THE COST IS THE SHADED AREA, AND THEN THE SPLIT IS THE CITY IS COST-SHARE AND IT HAS BEEN ACTUALLY STABLE NOW AFTER AN INCREASE IN 2020.
THE COST SHARE OF RETIREES CONTINUES TO GO UP AS THE COST OVERALL CONTINUES TO GO UP.
SOME RETIREES THAT WERE HIGHER AFTER 2010, PAID 100 PERCENT OF THE COST AND THAT IS PART OF THE REASON WHY THEIR COST IS HIGHER.
BUT ALSO, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON A STRATEGY TO CURVE THAT COST AND WITHIN WHICH WE WILL EXPLAIN IN DETAIL IN PREVIOUS YEARS AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT.
FOR ACTIVE AND PRE-65 RETIREES HEALTH CARE COSTS, WHEN WE SEE IT COMBINED, ACTIVE AND PRE-65, THEN YOU CAN SEE THAT THE COST OF THE CITY OF DALLAS CONTINUES TO INCREASE AND THE ACTIVE AND PRE-RETIREE COST IS FLAT, AND IT HAS BEEN FLAT OVER THE LAST, I'LL SAY, SEVEN YEARS.
[00:35:04]
WHAT ARE PROPOSED RATES FOR 2020? THAT'S SLIDE 19, SLIDE 20.YEAH. THANK YOU. THE NEXT ONE. THANK YOU.
WE ARE PROPOSING A FIVE PERCENT INCREASE IN THE RATES THAT EMPLOYEE'S PAY.
THIS SLIDE ACTUALLY SHOWS WHAT WILL BE THE COST, THE ENROLLMENT FOR EACH ONE OF THE TIERS FOR EACH ONE OF THE PLANS.
DO YOU HAVE THE PCP PLAN, THE PCP MIDDLE, AND THE PCP UNDER 66,000 AND THE ENROLLMENT IS ACTUALLY THE NEXT COLUMN.
IT TALKS ABOUT WHAT IS THE CURRENT AND THEN WHAT WILL BE IN 2024 AND THEN IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS.
ALL RATES SHOWN ARE MONTHLY RATES.
THE PROPOSED RATES FOR ACTIVE EMPLOYEES IN COPAY FOR LOW ON THE SLIDE 21.
THEN ON SLIDE 22, WE HAVE HSA WITH A FIVE PERCENT INCREASE.
TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT TO EMPLOYEES ON SLIDE 23 AND 24 PROVIDE A SCENARIO.
WE HAVE ON SLIDE 23, THE AVERAGE POLICE OFFICER HAS AN AVERAGE ANNUAL SALARY OF 74,224.
NOT INCLUDING STEP INCREASES IN THE BUDGET, WE INCLUDED A FIVE PERCENT INCREASE FOR POLICE OFFICERS.
IN THIS PARTICULAR SCENARIO THE FIVE PERCENT OF 74,000 WILL BE 3,711, SO THE NEW SALARY WILL BE 77,000.
IF THAT EMPLOYEE HAD AN EMPLOYEE ONLY PLAN, THE FIVE PERCENT INCREASE ON THE RATE WOULD BE $51 ANNUALLY.
YOU CAN SEE THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A DELTA BETWEEN THE FIVE PERCENT INCREASE IN THE SALARY AND THE FIVE PERCENT INCREASE OVER THE BENEFIT PREMIUM, WHICH IS MUCH LOWER.
IF THE EMPLOYEE HAS AN EMPLOYEE ON FAMILY, THAT FIVE PERCENT WILL AMOUNT TO $364 ANNUAL INCREASE.
AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE WHAT WILL BE THE DELTA.
BASICALLY, IF THE EMPLOYEE HAD A $3,711 SALARY INCREASE, AND THEN YOU REDUCE IT BY THE INCREASE IN THE PREMIUM THEN WHAT WILL BE THE NET IMPACT? THIS IS TO SIGNIFY OR TO DEMONSTRATE WHAT WOULD BE THE ACTUAL IMPACT FOR AN EMPLOYEE FOR AN AVERAGE POLICE OFFICER.
THE SAME EXERCISE IS REPEATED IN THE NEXT SLIDE, BUT THIS IS FOR AN AVERAGE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE.
THE SLIDE 25 AND 26 AND 27 INCLUDE INFORMATION ABOUT POST 65 RETIREE RATES AND PRE 65 RATES AS WELL.
MY PRESENTATION TODAY CONCLUDES WITH THE ONGOING FUND FINANCIAL CONTROLS ACTIVITIES.
THESE ARE ACTIVITIES WE PUT IN PLACE TO CURB THE COST, THE ONGOING COST AND NEVER ENDING INCREASES IN HEALTH CARE IN GENERAL.
WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED FISCAL YEAR AND PLAN YEAR END PERFORMANCE REVIEWS TO ENSURE THAT ALL OF OUR PLANS AND ALL OF OUR PROGRAMS ARE PROVIDING THE RESULTS THAT ARE EXPECTED.
ALSO, WE HAVE AN AUDIT OF MEDICAL AND PHARMACY CLAIMS AND WE DO RECONCILIATION OF ALL THE DISCOUNTS AND THE ENHANCED DISCOUNTS IN PARTICULAR FOR BAYLOR AND METHODIST.
WE HAVE BENEFIT VENDORS REVIEWS AND OPEN VALUATION THAT IS DONE EVERY YEAR AND ALSO AN ADVANCED PAYMENT REVIEW PROGRAM WHICH WAS IMPLEMENTED IN 2023.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE COST CONTROL STRATEGIES THAT WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED AND CONTINUE TO USE TO ENSURE THAT OUR EMPLOYEES AND THE CITY COSTS REMAINS UNDER CONTROL.
>> THANK YOU, NINA. FOR OUR NEXT STEPS WHICH ARE ON THIS SLIDE, WE DEFINITELY ARE HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THE BENEFITS PLANS AND WHAT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET IN THE CITY MANAGERS PROPOSED BUDGET AND HOPEFULLY WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET,
[00:40:02]
THE PLANS ARE THEN ADOPTED.WE WILL BEGIN OUR ACTUAL ENROLLMENT PERIOD FOR BOTH OUR ACTIVE AND OUR RETIREES BETWEEN SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER AND THEN THE PLAN YEAR IS A CALENDAR YEAR AND IT BEGAN ON JANUARY 1ST, 2024.
WITH THAT, WE WILL CONCLUDE OUR PRESENTATION AND OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.
>> ALL RIGHT, MEMBERS. ANY QUESTIONS?
>> FOR THE PUBLIC WORLD, ITEM B.
MS. MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED YOU'LL HAVE FIVE-MINUTES ON ITEM B.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WHAT IS THE ATTENDANCE INCENTIVE LEAVE?
>> THE ATTENDANCE INCENTIVE LEAVE IS AN INCENTIVE THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED AT THE CITY MANY YEARS AGO.
I THINK IT HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
BASICALLY IT PROVIDES EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE HAD AN EXCELLENT ATTENDANCE WITH ADDITIONAL TIME TO COMPENSATE OR I WILL SAY TO INCENTIVIZE THEIR PERFECT ATTENDANCE.
SO THEY HAVE TIME OFF GIVEN TO THEM AS A RESULT OF PERFECT ATTENDANCE.
IT'S MANAGED A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FOR POLICE AND FIRE, THAT IS FOR THE REST OF THE EMPLOYED POPULATION.
BUT BASICALLY, IN ESSENCE, THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
>> CAN YOU GIVE THE EXACT DETAILS OF THAT PLAN, LIKE HOW MUCH TIME DO THEY GET BASED ON WHAT CRITERIA?
>> IF WE HAVE ANYONE FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THEN MAY WANT TO SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT IT.
>> ARE YOU ASKING FOR BOTH CIVILIAN AND UNIFORM HOW THE PROGRAM OPERATES? IS THAT THE QUESTION?
>> YEAH, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU GET FOR DOING WHAT?
>> FOR EMPLOYEES TO BE ELIGIBLE, THEY HAD TO HAVE BEEN HERE FOR A YEAR.
THEN IF THEY HAVEN'T USED ANY SICK LEAVE OR ANY UNPAID LEAVE, THEY HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO EARN EIGHT HOURS EACH QUARTER.
IF THEY EARN EIGHT HOURS A QUARTER FOR FOUR CONSECUTIVE QUARTERS, THEN THEY CAN EARN 16 ADDITIONAL HOURS.
IT HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR SIX ADDITIONAL DAYS OFF.
>> YOU CAN GET 10 PAID DAYS IN A YEAR IF YOU DIDN'T CALL IN SICK?
>> SIX TOTAL. YOU GET EIGHT HOURS FOR EACH QUARTER PLUS AN ADDITIONAL TWO DAYS, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> SORRY, I MISHEARD THAT. THEN WHAT'S THE BUDGET IMPLICATION FOR THE ATTENDANCE INCENTIVE LEAVE?
>> UNLESS THERE IS A REQUIREMENT THAT THAT PERSON BE REPLACED THAT'S IN THE CASE OF FIRE IN WHICH THERE IS A I WILL SAY
FOR THE AVERAGE EMPLOYEE, FOR INSTANCE, IT WILL BE LOSS OF PRODUCTIVITY, BUT NOT AT AN ACTUAL HARM MONEY COST.
>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACTUALLY SAY THERE'S NO COST TO THE CITY WHEN WE GIVE PEOPLE TIME OFF, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACTUALLY SAY THAT.
>> THERE IS A LOSS OF PRODUCTIVITY.
NOW WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HARD COST, OR WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LOSS OF PRODUCTIVITY SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, BUT YES, THERE IS A COST.
>> IN ADDITION TO THE ATTENDANCE INCENTIVE LEAVE, HOW MANY OTHER DAYS OF PAID TIME OFF DO WE GIVE OUR EMPLOYEES?
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION.
PAID TIME OFF, A LOT OF THAT IS FACTORED IN BASED ON YOUR NUMBER OF YEARS WITH THE CITY SO THERE'S A SLIDING SCALE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF PAID HOLIDAYS THAT ARE APPROVED AS PART OF THE BUDGET, I THINK IT'S A TOTAL OF MAYBE 12.
>> TWELVE. I THINK WE WERE AT NINE OR 10 THREE YEARS AGO, AND THEN THERE WERE SOME ADDITIONAL HOLIDAYS ADDED GOING INTO THIS CURRENT BUDGET.
BUT THE ACTUAL TIME OFF IS REALLY GOING TO DEPEND ON HOW MUCH DO YOU EARN BASED ON YOUR NUMBER OF YEARS WITH THE CITY.
WE CAN ACTUALLY PROVIDE YOU WITH WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN OUR PERSONNEL RULES AND IT ACTUALLY GIVES YOU THE BREAKDOWN OF HOW MUCH IS EARNED, HOW MUCH YOU HAVE TO USE BEFORE YOU CAN CONTINUE TO EARN AND THEN WHAT YOUR BALANCE CAN ACTUALLY BE.
>> THERE'S THESE SIX DAYS THAT ARE POSSIBLE PLUS THE 12 OR 13 PAID HOLIDAYS.
I THOUGHT WE HAD MOVED TO 13 BUT 12 [OVERLAPPING]
>> PLUS VACATION TIME, PLUS PAID SICK LEAVE, PLUS WHAT ELSE? WE HAVE PAID MATERNITY LEAVE, WE HAVE OTHER MENTAL HEALTH LEAVES THAT ARE PAID.
ARE THERE OTHERS THAT YOU CAN IDENTIFY?
[00:45:05]
>> HOLD ON JUST A SECOND. ON SLIDE I THINK WE SHOW THE ADDITIONAL TYPES OF LEAVE THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.
>> SLIDE 6 OFF TO THE RIGHT, THOSE ARE THE ADDITIONAL LEAVES THAT I KNOW THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WE'VE NOW ADDED TO OUR BENEFITS PROGRAM.
THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY A PART OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM, BUT JUST OTHER LEAVE THAT FROM A PROGRAM STANDPOINT THAT'S BEEN ACTUALLY ADDED.
>> WELL, CERTAINLY THERE'S A HEALTH COMPONENT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SICK TIME OR FAMILY LEAVE, MENTAL HEALTH LEAVE, THESE CERTAINLY HAVE THAT INTERSECTION.
IF WE GO TO SLIDE 14, THE CITY CONTRIBUTION IS 115 MILLION ON THIS SLIDE IS WHAT IT SAYS.
BUT CAN YOU TELL US AND THIS MAY BE A BUDGET QUESTION, WHAT ITEMS GO INTO GETTING TO 115 MILLION? I WAS LOOKING AT HEALTH INSURANCE, IT'S 79 MILLION, THE ER 12.7 MILLION WELLNESS 8,000 AND THEN WELLNESS INCENTIVE FOR FIVE MILLION.
THAT WAS COMING UP WITH ABOUT 97 MILLION, BUT I'M MISSING ABOUT 19 MILLION SOMEWHERE.
AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD TELL ME WHERE ELSE IN THE BUDGET WE'RE ROLLING UP TO GET TO THAT 115 MILLION OF CITY CONTRIBUTION.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK RYAN BEASLEY TO TALK TO US IN MORE DETAIL ABOUT THAT QUESTION, HELP UP RESPOND.
WHILE YOU'RE WAITING FOR THAT, I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE WELLNESS INCENTIVE FOR THE FIVE MILLION AND AND HOW THAT WORKS AND WHAT'S COVERED?
>> ABSOLUTELY. EMPLOYEES THAT COMPLETE THE REQUIREMENTS AND DO AN ANNUAL CHECKUP AND LAB WORK TO IDENTIFY BASICALLY IT'S THE EARLY DETECTION AND PREVENTION, RECEIVE $500 AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
THAT IS A INCENTIVE THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED ABOUT MAYBE FOUR, FIVE YEARS AGO, AND THEY HAVE CONTINUED TO INCREASE IN PARTICIPATION.
WE STARTED WITH VERY LOW PARTICIPATION LAST YEAR, TWO-THIRDS OF EMPLOYEES WERE PARTICIPATING SO THAT IS BASICALLY WHAT THAT COST IS FOR.
>> THAT FIVE MILLION, IS THAT ALL PAYMENTS TO EMPLOYEES FOR PARTICIPATING? I THINK YOU HAD LISTED MAMMOGRAPHY, MAYBE EVEN ON SITE, ARE WE PAYING PROVIDERS TO COME AND DO THAT HERE AND THAT'S OUT OF THE FIVE MILLION OR THAT'S SEPARATE?
>> THEY'RE SEPARATE. IT'S JUST THE PAYMENTS?
>> OKAY. THEN ON SLIDE 15, YOU HAVE MERCER STUDY ABOUT THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION VERSUS THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION.
I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD PULL THAT UP ON THE SCREEN.
BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE NOT FOLLOWING THAT RECOMMENDATION AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT.
>> IF I COULD JUST JUMP IN FOR JUST A SECOND.
JUST FOR REFERENCE, WE'RE SHOWING YOU WHAT'S HAPPENING OUTSIDE IN MARKET COMPARED TO WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING TO REALLY CREATE THIS PHILOSOPHY GOING FORWARD ABOUT WHERE WE NEED TO BE.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW WHAT WAS SHOWN TO YOU AS HERE'S WHAT'S HAPPENING OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.
>> WELL, WHAT IT APPEARS TO ME THAT YOU'RE SHOWING, IF YOU COULD PUT SLIDE 15.
>> YES. WE ARE BEYOND COMPETITIVE.
WE ARE EXTREMELY RICH IN BENEFITS IN TERMS OF THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION, EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION, MEANING THE CITY TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING MORE THAN WHAT IS IN THE MARKETPLACE.
THEN WE HAVE LOTS OF OTHER LEAVES THAT ARE BEYOND THE MARKETPLACE.
THE MARKETPLACE DOESN'T DO THIS ATTENDANCE INCENTIVE LEAVE.
THAT IS WHAT IS CALLED BEING A GOOD EMPLOYEE, NOT USING YOUR SICK TIME WHEN YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO.
WE HAVE LOTS OF PAID HOLIDAYS AND WE HAVE A PRETTY GENEROUS VACATION TIME OFF, SICK TIME, MENTAL HEALTH TIME, PAID MATERNITY LEAVE.
WE HAVE A VERY, VERY GENEROUS BENEFIT PACKAGE.
I'LL JUST SAY ANYBODY WHO HAS NOT APPLIED FOR A JOB WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS THAT'S LOOKING YOU SHOULD BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT ALL OF THESE EXPENSES, DON'T EVEN ADD UP TO WHAT WE PAY FOR PENSION.
THIS IS A VERY, VERY RICH BENEFIT PLAN.
THAT'S REALLY MY POINT AND HOW DO YOU JUSTIFY THAT WE'RE ASKING TAXPAYERS TO PROVIDE MORE OF THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION THAN WHAT'S EVEN FOUND IN PRIVATE BUSINESS?
[00:50:08]
>> WE'VE PROVIDED A RECOMMENDATION AND THIS PROPOSED BUDGET FROM THE CITY MANAGER TO INCREASE NOT ONLY THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION, BUT AS WELL AS THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION AND I THINK IF YOU RECALL THE SLIDES THAT WE REALLY SHOW THAT THAT EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION HAS REMAINED FLAT.
BECAUSE OF THE INCREASE IN COSTS THAT WE'VE SEEN YEAR OVER YEAR, WE CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THAT WE'VE GOT TO BEGIN TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES NOW, BY CREATING A STRATEGY AROUND HOW WE DO IT, WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE PRESENTED IN THE PHILOSOPHY, THAT IT REALLY WON'T ALLOW US TO HAVE THOSE AUTOMATIC TRIGGERS WE'RE BUILDING IN.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO REDUCE THE BENEFIT.
WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS TO ACTUALLY GET OUR BENEFITS AT A LEVEL TO WHERE WE BELIEVE THAT WE ARE COMPETITIVE TO WHERE WE CAN NOT ONLY ATTRACT TOP TALENT, BUT WE CAN RETAIN TOP TALENT.
WE'RE PLEASED WITH WHERE WE ARE AS IT RELATES TO WHAT WE'RE PROVIDING BUT WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A PRICE TAG AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE GO FORWARD THAT THERE IS A COST SHARE THAT IS CONDUCIVE TO THE RISING COSTS THAT WILL ALLOW US TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THOSE BENEFITS TO OUR EMPLOYEES.
>> WELL, THANK YOU. I THINK YOU EXPRESSED IT PROPERLY, WHICH IS WE'VE HAD NO EMPLOYEE INCREASE BECAUSE WE'VE USED FUND BALANCES AND INSTEAD, THE CITY AND THE TAXPAYERS HAVE STEPPED UP AND TAKEN A LARGER AND LARGER SHARE.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT WE'RE APPROACHING LEAN TIMES AS IT'S BEING SAID THESE DAYS AND WE NEED TO RE-BALANCE TO MATCH THE MARKET.
WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A RICH BENEFIT PLAN AS A GOVERNMENT SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
THAT'LL BE MY LAST COMMENT ON THAT. THANK YOU.
>> MR. RIDLEY, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON ITEM B.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ON SLIDE 10, THAT'S ENTITLED THE POST 65 RETIREE PLAN DESIGN, I'M CURIOUS HOW MANY ENROLLEES DO WE HAVE IN THE POST 65 RETIREE PLAN WHEN MEDICARE WAS AVAILABLE FOR THAT CLASS OF PEOPLE?
>> YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
WE DO HAVE A POST 65 RETIREE WRAPAROUND PLAN WHICH IS 100 PERCENT FUNDED BY THE RETIREE.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE CITY DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THAT PLAN AT ALL.
IT IS ENTIRELY PAID BY THE RETIREE OR IS PAID BY THE RETIREES ENTIRELY AND WE DO HAVE A CENSUS IN THE DECK.
I'M LOOKING FOR THAT INFORMATION.
>> THIRTY FIVE. THANK YOU. THOSE ARE PRIEST, YES.
WE HAVE 1,900 PARTICIPATING CURRENTLY.
CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHY SOMEONE WOULD WANT TO PAY OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKET FOR THE FULL COST OF THAT COVERAGE WHEN THEY CAN GET MEDICARE COVERAGE AT GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZED RATES.
THESE ARE MEDICARE WRAPAROUNDS, IN OTHER WORDS, WHATEVER MEDICARE DOESN'T COVER, THESE PLANS WILL COVER.
>> OKAY. SO THIS IS A SUPPLEMENTAL PLAN?
>> OKAY. WITH REGARD TO THE WELLNESS INCENTIVE THAT SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT IDEA.
IN PRINCIPLE, WE SPEND $5 MILLION A YEAR ON IT.
DO YOU HAVE A COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS? HAVE WE REDUCED THE INCIDENCE OF DISEASE OR BENEFIT PAYMENTS FOR THE EMPLOYEES THAT PARTICIPATE IN THIS WELLNESS INCENTIVE PLAN THAT COMPENSATE FOR THE $5 MILLION COST?
>> WE DO FOLLOW REALLY CLOSELY THE DATA OF WHO PARTICIPATES AND WHAT ARE THE INCIDENCES, WHAT IS THE COST PER EMPLOYEE.
THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS IN WHICH WE HAVE SEEN REDUCTIONS.
THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY TYPICALLY YIELDS RESULTS OVER THE YEARS, SO IT IS NOT IMMEDIATE.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE SEEN, FOR INSTANCE, IN THE CIRCULATORY DISEASES, THE CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES, WE HAVE HAD A REDUCTION, AND WE BELIEVE ACTUALLY THERE'S A CORRELATION BETWEEN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE PARTICIPATING AND US BEING ABLE TO DETECT EARLY THOSE DISEASES.
WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THAT DATA OVER THE YEARS TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE FOR SURE HOW MUCH OF AN IMPACT IT IS HAVING.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE MORE PEOPLE GO TO THE DOCTOR, THERE'S ALSO CERTAIN COST ASSOCIATED TO THAT BECAUSE THEN THOSE THINGS THAT ARE
[00:55:01]
DISCOVERED MAYBE THAT THEY WILL HAVE NOTHING TO DISCOVER.HOWEVER, WHAT WE ARE ANTICIPATING IS THAT AS MORE EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO THE DOCTOR EARLIER IN OUR IDENTIFYING IF THEY HAVE DISEASES AND THEY'RE TAKING CARE OF THEMSELVES, THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO NOT ONLY REDUCE PREVALENCE IN GENERAL, BUT ALSO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF HIGH COST.
>> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY BASING THIS DECISION TO MAINTAIN THIS PROGRAM ON DATA AND STATISTICS RATHER THAN JUST HOPES THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO THE DOCTOR MORE OFTEN THAT THEY'RE REDUCING THE INCIDENCE OF CLAIMS. I THINK IT'S CONCEIVABLE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CLAIMING THIS WELLNESS INCENTIVE ARE ALREADY HEALTHY.
IT'S THE UNHEALTHY ONES WHO ARE LESS LIKELY TO BE BOTHERED BY GOING TO THE DOCTOR, CHANGING THEIR LIFESTYLE HABITS.
THAT MAY BE AN INDICATION THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING OUR MONEY'S WORTH OUT OF THE $5 MILLION INCENTIVE PAYMENTS.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT IS THE CASE, I'M JUST SAYING CONCEPTUALLY THAT MAY HAPPEN.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW BASED UPON THE STATISTICS THAT WE'RE NOT PREACHING TO THE CHOIR ESSENTIALLY, WE'RE ACTUALLY GETTING BENEFIT FOR THE INCENTIVE DOLLARS.
>> MAYBE FROM HOLMES MURPHY, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE HOW WE UTILIZE DATA AND WHAT EVIDENCE DO WE HAVE ON THE IMPACT AND BENEFIT OF THE WELLNESS INCENTIVE.
>> HELLO. SHAWN COLVIN WITH HOLMES MURPHY, AND I'LL ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THINGS JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES AS IT RELATES TO THE WELLNESS INCENTIVE.
THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS A VERY HIGH OVERALL PARTICIPATION IN THE WELLNESS PROGRAM.
SO I WOULD AGREE THAT WE KNOW, BASED ON YOUR CURRENT PARTICIPATION, YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES WHO ARE THE ONES WHO ARE CURRENTLY WELL, AND YES, THEY ARE PARTICIPATING.
BUT BASED ON OVERALL PARTICIPATION, WHAT WE ALSO KNOW IS THAT YOU ARE ALSO DRAWING OUT MEMBERS WHO DO NOT HAVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIANS.
THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOW BEING FORCED TO, AS THEY'RE PARTICIPATING IN THE WELLNESS PROGRAM, ARE NOW SEEKING CARE.
WHAT THE RESULTS OF THAT WELLNESS INCENTIVE LEADS TO FOR ALL OF US, IN ADDITION TO LORD CLAIMS, IS THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO FIND CANCER IN CIRCULATORY TYPED CONDITIONS WITHIN THE POPULATION.
THE GOAL OF THE WELLNESS INCENTIVE IS TO SEEK THOSE THINGS OUT AND IDENTIFY THEM AT AN EARLIER LEVEL SO THAT WHAT WE SEE IN YOUR COST FOR CIRCULATORY CONDITIONS OR FOR CANCERS, LUNG CANCER, BREAST CANCERS, WE WANT TO CATCH THOSE THINGS AT AN EARLIER STAGE BECAUSE THAT MEANS THAT THE CITY'S COST IS LOWER FOR THOSE INCIDENTS.
WE ARE TO NINA'S POINT, PROBABLY ABOUT FIVE YEARS INTO OUR WELLNESS ROLE, BUT WE ARE REALLY MORE SO ABOUT 36 MONTHS INTO THE TIME WHERE WE CAN SEE YEAR OVER YEAR DATA FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE PARTICIPATING IN THE WELLNESS PROGRAM YEAR OVER YEAR.
WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS THAT WHILE YOU WILL NEVER READ YOUR POPULATION OF CANCER OR SOME OF THE COST DRIVERS, WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS LOWER COST PER INCIDENT, AND THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE RESPONSE.
WE CAN'T TAKE AWAY BREAST CANCER, LUNG CANCER, HODGKIN'S DISEASE.
WE CANNOT REMOVE THOSE FROM THE POPULATION, BUT WE CAN FIND THOSE CONDITIONS EARLIER AND REDUCE YOUR SPEND.
THE GOAL IS EARLY PREVENTION IF WE CAN, AND WHERE WE CANNOT PREVENT, THE GOAL IS TO REDUCE YOUR IMPACT FOR THOSE CONDITIONS.
I WOULD SAY AS WE LOOK AT YOUR RESULTS YEAR OVER YEAR, WE CONTINUE TO SEE CERTAIN EXPENSES, BUT THOSE ARE AT A LOWER INCIDENCE RATE, AND THAT IS THE RESULT OF THE WORK OF A WELLNESS INCENTIVE.
>> THANK YOU. I TAKE IT THAT THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM BENEFITS THAT WE PROVIDE IS TOTALLY SELF-FUNDED.
THE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD JUST ADMINISTERS THE PROGRAM OR DO THEY ALSO PROVIDE SOME UNDERWRITING?
>> IT IS A COMPLETELY SELF-FUNDED PROGRAM, SO YOU USE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD SOLELY FOR ACCESS TO THEIR NETWORKS AND THEIR PROCESSING OF CLAIMS, THE CLAIMS THEMSELVES ARE FUNDED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS.
>> IF I MAY SAY, EXCEPT FOR THE POST 65, THAT IS A FULLY INSURED LOT.
>> RIGHT. STILL ON PAGE 14, THIS INDICATES THAT OUR FORECAST FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AS THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION OF 115 MILLION WILL ESCALATE TO 134 MILLION IN THE NEW BUDGET.
[01:00:07]
THAT'S DESPITE A FIVE PERCENT INCREASE IN EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS?>> WE'RE SEEING QUITE AN INCREASE OVERALL IN HEALTH CARE COSTS FOR OUR EMPLOYEES?
>> EXACTLY. IF I MAY JUST JUMP IN FOR JUST A SECOND.
LAST YEAR WHEN WE HAD OUR BENEFITS DISCUSSION, WE WERE ALREADY SHOWING LAST YEAR THAT THE FUND BALANCE WAS GOING TO BE DEPLETED.
WE MADE THE RECOMMENDATION AT THAT TIME TO CONTINUE WITH STABILIZING OUR EMPLOYEE RATES AT THAT MOMENT OR AT THAT TIME BECAUSE WE WERE COMING OUT OF THE PANDEMIC, WE UNDERSTOOD THE IMPACTS THAT HAD HAPPENED ACROSS THE BOARD TO OUR ENTIRE WORKFORCE.
SO WE DID NOT RECOMMEND THE INCREASE LAST YEAR, BUT WE KNEW THAT IT WOULD BE COMING SOON.
BUT THE FUND BALANCE LAST YEAR WAS ALREADY GOING IN THE NEGATIVE DIRECTION.
SO EVEN WITH THE FIVE PERCENT INCREASE THAT WE ARE PROPOSING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO SUPPORT GOING FORWARD, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY CATCH US UP IN THE OUTER YEARS, AND WE'LL COME BACK AND BE ABLE TO SHARE WITH YOU HOW AS WE CONTINUE TO LOOK AT INCREASES, AND AGAIN MAKING SURE THAT THE INCREASES ARE JUSTIFIABLE, LOOKING AT THE MARKET, WE CAN SHOW HOW THAT INCREASE WILL EVENTUALLY CATCH US UP AND ALLOW FOR US TO MAYBE REBUILD THAT FUND BALANCE.
BUT WE KNEW LAST YEAR THAT THAT FUND BALANCE WAS GOING TO BEGIN TO GO DOWN.
>> EACH YEAR, AS YOU'VE LOOKED AT THE STATISTICS AND PROPOSED RATES FOR THE NEW BUDGET, DOES SOMEONE LOOK AT WHAT IT WOULD COST TO PROCURE COMPARABLE HEALTH CARE IN THE PRIVATE INSURANCE MARKET IN ORDER TO COMPARE THAT WITH THE COST OF SELF INSURING?
>> I CAN ANSWER THAT. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE DO BENCHMARKING, NOT JUST FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
HELLO. MY NAME IS DAVID GIBSON WITH HOLMES MURPHY, AND WE LOOK AT THAT FOR THE CITY ANNUALLY AS PART OF THIS PROCESS.
WE LOOK AT NOT ONLY WHAT THE COST WOULD BE FOR PRIVATE EMPLOYERS, BUT WE CAN PAIR A LOT TO MUNICIPALITIES SINCE THE DEMOGRAPHICS ARE VERY SIMILAR.
WE'RE LOOKING LOCALLY, WE'VE ACTUALLY SURVEYED 130 MUNICIPAL PLANS HERE IN TEXAS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT CONTINUOUSLY TO SEE IF THERE'S GAPS FROM THE CITY'S PLAN IN COMPARISON TO A LOWER COSTS OR POSSIBLY EVEN BETTER PERFORMING PLAN.
BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, THE CITY'S PLAN IS COMPETITIVE, THE COSTS ARE LOWER THAN MOST, AND IF YOU LOOK AT JUST WHERE THE COST IS ON EMPLOYEE BASIS OVER TIME, IT'S GENERALLY LOWER THAN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES WHICH HAVE SIMILAR DEMOGRAPHICS AND ARE ALSO LOCAL.
IT'S DIFFICULT COMPARING TO NATIONAL SURVEYS.
IT'S MORE APPROPRIATE TO LOOK AT THAT, BUT THEN ALSO LOOK AT LOCAL COST AS WELL.
>> DO YOU EXPLORE THE AVAILABILITY OF INDUSTRY-WIDE RISK POOLS SUCH THAT SOME PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS PROVIDE INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR ALL MEMBERS OF THAT PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION REGARDLESS OF THEIR EMPLOYER, I THINK IT'S CALLED A MULTI-EMPLOYER PLAN, TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING OFFERED BY TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MIGHT INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE RISK POOL, THEREBY REDUCING RATES?
>> WE DO LOOK AT TML, TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE TYPE SOLUTIONS, AND WHAT WE HAVE FOUND HISTORICALLY IS THAT THE THERE'S NOT AS MUCH FLEXIBILITY IN THOSE PLANS BECAUSE A LOT OF SMALLER MUNICIPALITIES HAVE THAT PLAN, AND THAT'S MORE TRADITIONAL PLANS WITHOUT THE ABILITY TO DESIGN THEM TO FIT THE NEEDS OF YOUR WORKFORCE.
BUT THE ANSWER IS YES, WE DO LOOK AT THOSE EXTENSIVELY, NOT JUST TML, WHICH IS FOR MUNICIPAL EMPLOYERS, BUT OTHER POOLS AS WELL.
>> OKAY. VERY GOOD. ALSO ON SLIDE 23, THERE'S AN ARITHMETICAL ERROR THAT UNDERSTATES THE NEW RATE INCREASE FOR ACTIVE EMPLOYEES FOR EMPLOYEE AND FAMILY, FIVE PERCENT OF 7,296 WHEN YOU ADD $364 IS THE ANNUAL INCREASE, DOES NOT EQUAL THE NEW RATE OF 7,300.
I THINK THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. THANK YOU, MAYOR.
>> MS. WILLIS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
>>THANK YOU. ON SLIDE 8, WHERE WE GET INTO THE TIERS OF INCOME, HOW IS THAT DECIDED? IS THAT SOME TYPICAL STANDARD OR HAVE WE ANALYZED OUR OWN SALARY RANGES TO DETERMINE THOSE TIERS?
[01:05:01]
>> EXACTLY. I THINK IT WAS 2019 THAT WE STARTED LOOKING AT WAYS THAT WE COULD LESSEN THE IMPACT FOR OUR LOWER WAGE EMPLOYEES, AND WE DEVELOP THOSE TIERS.
THIS IS BASED ON OUR ACTUAL EMPLOYEE SALARY DATA WHERE WE REALLY LOOKED AT WHAT THAT MIDPOINT SALARY RANGE IS, AND THEN WHAT'S THAT LOWERED POINT? WHEN YOU'RE IN THE MIDDLE, YOU'RE PAYING LESS THAN SOMEONE THAT'S A HIGHER WAGE EARNER, AND THEN ON THE LOWER END, YOU'RE PAYING LOWER THAN SOMEONE THAT'S IN THE MIDDLE.
BUT THIS IS BASED ON OUR ACTUAL EMPLOYEE DATA WHEN WE BEGAN TO LOOK AT EQUITY AND BENEFITS OVERALL.
WE'VE CONTINUED THAT THROUGHOUT THESE LAST FEW YEARS.
>> WHEN I VISITED WITH FIRST RESPONDERS, A LOT OF THEM HAVE TALKED ABOUT HOW THIS HAS AN IMPACT ON THEM FOR THEIR FAMILY, HEALTH INSURANCE RATES, AND SO I WASN'T SURE.
THEY'RE EMPLOYEES LIKE OTHER EMPLOYEES ARE TOO, BUT I'VE SPECIFICALLY HEARD FROM THAT GROUP.
IT LOOKS THIS MIDDLE TIER REALLY DOESN'T CAPTURE THEM VERY WELL.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHEN WE WERE GOING TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN TO JUST CONSIDER HOW SOME OF THIS MARKET, I GUESS, THE PAY HAS CHANGED.
>> WE CAN DEFINITELY GET AT THAT AGAIN.
I THINK THE POINT WOULD BE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE A PART OF OUR ONGOING EVALUATION OF WHAT THAT MIDDLE TIER SHOULD BE.
WE CAN DEFINITELY CONTINUE TO DO THAT ANALYSIS AS WE GO FORWARD.
>> THEN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THE CITY IS ABSORBING AND HOW THAT IS INCREASING, AS I LOOK AT SLIDE 23, THAT OUTLINES WHAT THE INCREASE WILL BE TO GIVE EMPLOYEES AN IDEA OF WHAT THE IMPACT WILL BE ON THIS.
OBVIOUSLY, EMPLOYEE AND FAMILY THAT'S ABOUT $30 A MONTH, THAT LOOKS LIKE.
BUT WHAT IS THE AMOUNT THAT THE CITY IS ABSORBING? WE TALK ABOUT THIS INCREASE.
HERE'S THE PART THAT YOU EMPLOYEE WILL PAY.
WHAT IS THE PART THAT THE CITY IS ABSORBING? I'M GETTING AT HOW WE CAN MERCHANDISE THIS TO PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYEES AND TO OUR CURRENT EMPLOYEES.
BECAUSE I KNOW WE WERE LOOKING AT A RECRUITMENT CAMPAIGN AND TO THE POINTS MADE ABOUT OUR BENEFITS PACKAGE.
MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT, THAT'S TO HELP US OFFSET OUR PAY [LAUGHTER]
>> YES. IF I MAY ASK YOU TO REFER TO SLIDE 15 PLEASE.
>> YES. THANK YOU. THE COST SHARE OVERALL OF EMPLOYEE-EMPLOYER, AND WE HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN BY PLAN, THE OVERALL IS 17 PERCENT OF THE COST IS BEING BEARED BY THE EMPLOYEE AND 83 PERCENT IS BEARED BY THE CITY.
BUT THEN IT IS BROKEN DOWN BY EMPLOYEE ONLY COVERAGE AND DEPENDENT COVERAGE AND BY PLAN, PCP PLAN, CO-PAY AND HSE.
>> WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS, TO CONSUMMERIZE IT IS TO SAY IT'S GOING TO MEAN $365 MORE PER YEAR.
BUT TO THE CITY, WE ARE TAKING THIS MUCH PER YEAR OFF OF YOU SO THAT THERE'S AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S THIS INCREASE, BUT THAT THE CITY IS ALSO CONTRIBUTING THIS.
>> WE COULD SHOW THE TOTAL COST, AND THEN BASED ON THAT COST SHARE BREAKDOWN, WE CAN SHOW YOU THEN THAT WHAT THAT 83 PERCENT IS FOR THE CITY AND THEN WHAT THE ACTUAL DOLLAR AMOUNT IS FOR THE 17 PERCENT, WE CAN DEFINITELY SHOW THAT.
>> I THINK THAT'S THAT. IT'S NOT JUST ME, THIS IS THE KITCHEN TABLE.
>> THIS IS THE HOW MUCH IS IT? I'M GIVING $30 A MONTH, BUT THE CITY IS CONTRIBUTING X, Y, Z PER MONTH.
I'M VERY CURIOUS ABOUT THE IMPACT ON OUR ENERGY BILL FOR THE CRYOTHERAPY THAT YOU-ALL ARE TRYING OUT IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS TODAY BECAUSE IT'S FREEZING.
>> DO WE KNOW THAT? LET'S SEE. I CAN BARELY TURN THE PAGES BECAUSE MY FINGERS ARE FROZEN.
JUST IN GETTING INTO THE WELL-BEING PROGRAM, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT PROGRAM TO HAVE.
I UNDERSTAND WE DON'T HAVE LONGITUDINAL DATA AT THIS POINT BECAUSE IT'S FAIRLY NEW.
BUT ON THE MAMMOGRAPHY IS THIS LOOKS LIKE SUCH A LOW NUMBER.
DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHY THIS IS LOW? I GUESS WE HAVE UNITS ON SITE.
>> IT'S ON SITE. THAT'S IN ADDITION TO THE INDIVIDUALS THAT ACTUALLY TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO THE DOCTOR.
>> THIS IS A SPECIFIC TYPE OF PROCEDURE THAT IS NON-INVASIVE AND IS NEW. IT'S A PILOT.
IT IS NOT TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THE MAMMOGRAMS THAT ARE CONDUCTED.
BUT JUST THIS PARTICULAR PILOT.
>> THAT MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY THAT NUMBER IS LOW.
BUT ON CHILDCARE SUBSIDIES, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE UNIVERSE OF ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES IS FOR THAT?
[01:10:02]
BECAUSE THIS SEEMS A LITTLE BIT LOW TOO.BUT I'M NOT SURE REALLY WHAT THAT OVERALL NUMBER IS.
>> I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER WITH ME TODAY, BUT DEFINITELY CAN PROVIDE IT.
IT VARIES BECAUSE CHILDREN AGE, ETC.
I DO NOT HAVE THE SPECIFIC NUMBER, BUT I'LL BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT FOR YOU.
>> IT'S JUST HARD TO TELL HOW IT'S PERFORMING AND WHETHER WE SHOULD WORK HARDER AT THAT OR IF THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT.
>> WE'RE CONTINUING TO LOOK AT THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM.
I KNOW THAT EVEN LAST YEAR WE CAME BACK AND WE MADE SOME MODIFICATIONS.
WE BELIEVE THAT THERE WERE SOME ADDITIONAL WAYS THAT WE COULD GET MORE EMPLOYEES INCORPORATING INTO THE PROGRAM, THOSE THAT MAY NOT RESIDE DEFINITELY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
BUT AS LONG AS THE PROVIDER WAS WITHIN DALLAS COUNTY, SO WE CAN ACTUALLY COME BACK AND SHARE THE DATA ON WHAT WE'RE PREDICTING THAT WE WILL END THE YEAR.
I THINK WE HAD AN UPDATE AT THE WEEK COMMITTEE.
I WANT TO SAY IT WAS IN MARCH, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY COME BACK AND SHOW YOU WHAT WE'RE TRACKING TO END THE YEAR WITH THAT PROGRAM.
>> MS. SCHULTZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. ITEM B.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WANT TO START WITH BIG PICTURE ITEMS. I THINK THAT IN TERMS OF THESE BENEFITS, THIS IS COMING OFF OF THE DIRECT MANDATE THAT WE ARE GIVEN FOR OUR COMMITTEES OF MAKING DALLAS THE BEST PUBLIC SECTOR PLACE TO WORK IN THE STATE; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT, AND WE'VE BROUGHT A LOT OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
WE'VE BEEN SHARING THOSE THROUGH YOUR COMMITTEE OVER THE LAST YEAR. YES, MA'AM.
>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK MR. MAYOR FOR SETTING THAT TONE BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY THE MANDATE THAT YOU GAVE US.
THANK YOU FOR THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S PAYING OFF.
COULD YOU TALK FROM A BIG PICTURE PERSPECTIVE IN TERMS OF THE BENEFITS THAT WE OFFER, HOW WE COMPARE IN SOME SIMILAR POSITIONS TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN SALARIES.
>> AND WHAT WAS THE LAST PART IN SALARY?
>> YEAH. BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE MAKING UP IN BENEFITS FOR SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE CAN'T DO BECAUSE WE PAY LESS FOR THE EQUAL POSITION.
SO I KNOW THIS ISN'T THE HEALTH BENEFITS PER SE, BUT IT IMPACTS THE REASON THAT WE'RE INVESTING SO MUCH IN ALL THESE OTHER BENEFITS BECAUSE WE CAN'T MATCH WHAT SOMEONE MIGHT MAKE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN ENGINEERING OR SOME OF THE OTHER POSITIONS; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT BASED ON OUR COMPENSATION STUDY, WHICH IS TOTAL COMP, WHICH INCLUDES THE BENEFITS PIECE, WE COULD DEFINITELY TAKE OUR MOST RECENT DATA THAT SHOWS US WHERE WE ARE WITH OUR CASHIERS AND HOW MUCH OUR EMPLOYEES ARE ACTUALLY SPENDING VERSUS WHAT WE'RE PAYING.
AND THEN RUN THAT IN PARALLEL TO WHAT THE COMP STUDY SHOWED US.
BASED ON CERTAIN TYPES OF POSITIONS, THOSE THAT ARE HARD TO RECRUIT FOR, AND THOSE THAT WE CONTINUE TO SEE A LOT OF TURNOVER.
SO THAT'S AN ANALYSIS THAT I THINK WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO COME BACK AND BE ABLE TO DO A SIDE-BY-SIDE AND SHOW YOU THAT DATA.
I DON'T THINK I'M GOING TO DROP IT OUT OF MY HAIR TODAY.
>> NO 100 PERCENT. IN FACT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A VERY INTERESTING THING OVERALL OF WHERE WE DO STINK.
THERE'S SO MUCH MISINFORMATION OUT THERE IN A LOT OF WAYS I KNOW I HEARD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS LAST NIGHT AT MY TOWN HALL IN TERMS OF PUBLIC SAFETY SALARIES, THINGS LIKE THAT THEY VERY INTERESTING.
DO YOU HAVE ENROLLMENT BY DEPARTMENT FOR HEALTH BENEFITS?
>> WITH THIS, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY, WE DO KNOW IT.
WE CAN SHARE THAT WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD ALSO BE A VERY IMPORTANT FACTOR FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND IN TERMS OF THE CITY'S INVESTMENT, TO SEE WHERE, BECAUSE THERE MAY BE DEPARTMENTS, PARTICULARLY HIGHER-RISK PUBLIC SAFETY, OTHERS THAT HAVE A HIGHER ENROLLMENT, THEN MAYBE SOME OTHERS.
AND SO THAT ALSO HELPS US JUSTIFY WHY THE CITY IS INVESTING SO MUCH IN THIS AREA OF OUR BUDGET.
>> I WILL NOTE THAT OUR UTILIZATION IS UP.
I THINK IT'S UP ABOUT TWO PERCENT.
AND SO THAT MEANS THAT EITHER MORE EMPLOYEES ARE SEEING TRULY THE BENEFITS THAT WE'RE OFFERING ARE ATTRACTIVE.
AND IN PAST YEARS MAYBE THEY DID NOT SIGN UP BECAUSE THEY HAD OTHER OPTIONS, BUT NOW THEY'RE COMING INTO PARTICIPATING BECAUSE OF WHAT WE'RE OFFERING TO THEM NOW.
SO THAT UTILIZATION INCREASE, I DO BELIEVE WILL CONTINUE TO BE A TREND AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
>> THAT'S GREAT. SO AGAIN, WE ARE MEETING THE GOAL THAT WAS SET FOR US.
I HAVE A FEW DETAILED QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENTIAL COSTS BY JOB DESCRIPTION? LIKE DO CERTAIN POSITIONS COST US MORE IN TERMS OF BENEFITS BY JOB DESCRIPTION?
>> NOT THE JOB DESCRIPTION BUT BY SALARY TIER.
>> YEAH. GOOD. THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW.
I ALSO HAD SENT IN A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, SO I'M SORRY IF YOU SENT THEM AND SO IF I ASK THEM AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE.
I THINK THE NUMBER WAS 6,794 EMPLOYEES ENROLLED IN THE WELLNESS.
[01:15:02]
ARE THOSE UNIQUE OR ARE THOSE ANY DUPLICATED PARTICIPANTS?>> IS THAT THE CORRECT NUMBER?
>> SO ALMOST HALF OF OUR EMPLOYEES ARE ENROLLED, CORRECT?
>> AND THAT IS ACTUALLY THE HIGHEST THAT WE HAVE SEEN I KNOW SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE THAT'S BEEN ONE OF THE HIGHEST NUMBERS FOR THE ENROLLMENT INTO THE PROGRAM.
>> THAT IS ENROLLMENT UP TO NOW.
SO WE'RE EXPECTING THAT TO THE END OF THE YEAR, WE'LL HAVE MANY MORE.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK BEGINNING ON SLIDE 34 IN THE APPENDIX.
CAN WE GET A COMPARISON OF THE ACTIVE ENROLLMENT STATISTICS TO OUR EMPLOYEE BASE? FOR EXAMPLE, IF I READ THIS RIGHT, 36.1 PERCENT OF OUR OVER 66,000 IN SALARY EMPLOYEES ARE ENROLLED.
IN OTHER WORDS, ARE THE PEOPLE AT DIFFERENT SALARY TIERS? DO WE HAVE DIFFERENT ENROLLMENT? AND DO WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT COMPARED TO THE PERCENTAGE OF OUR EMPLOYEES THAT ARE IN THAT SALARY TIER? ARE YOU WITH ME?
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION AND DEFINITELY WE CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION.
BUT THAT IS AN ANALYSIS THAT WE CAN PROVIDE FOR YOU.
>> YEAH. OTHER THAN NECESSARILY THE EXACT PERCENTAGE, WHAT I'D REALLY LIKE IS YOUR EXPERT OPINION ON ARE THE LOWER SALARY EMPLOYEES ENROLLING AT THE SAME RATE AS THE HIGHER AND IF NOT OR SO WHAT IS THAT TEACHING US? THAT'S REALLY WHAT I WANT TO KNOW MORE THAN THE EXACT NUMBER.
>> WE CAN SPEAK TO THAT A BIT BASED ON THE WAY YOUR ENROLLMENT WORKS TODAY.
WE KNOW THAT YOUR OVERALL HEADCOUNT AND YOUR POPULATION IS VERY SIMILARLY MATCHED TO ENROLLMENT.
AND THAT'S BECAUSE YOU HAVE SUCH A HIGH OVERALL PARTICIPATION.
SO IF YOU WERE AN EMPLOYER WHO ONLY HAD 30 PERCENT OR 40 PERCENT OF ENROLLMENT BASED ON THE TOTAL POPULATION, THEN THAT'S WHEN YOU SEE, ARE YOU BEING SELECTED AGAINST, OR ARE YOUR BENEFITS MAYBE NOT AS COMPETITIVE OR NOT AS AFFORDABLE FOR A CERTAIN GROUP? BUT BECAUSE YOU HAVE ENROLLMENT THAT MATCHES VERY, VERY CLEARLY TO YOUR ACTUAL POPULATION, THEN WE'VE LOOKED AT THAT, RYAN, DAVID, AND I HAVE LOOKED AT THAT RECENTLY.
AND WE WERE SEEING THAT IT IS DISTRIBUTED EVENLY BETWEEN TIERS.
AND THAT TYPICALLY YOU ALL MEANS THAT YOUR BENEFITS ARE PRICED AFFORDABLY AND THEY ARE COMPETITIVE LIKE YOUR TAKE RATE SAYS THAT THE BENEFITS LOOK TO YOUR MEMBERS LIKE THIS IS THE PLAN WE NEED TO BE IN.
AND I HAVE MULTIPLE PLAN OPTIONS THAT MEET THE NEEDS OF MY FAMILY.
SO YOU'RE GIVING THEM CHOICE AND FROM AN AFFORDABILITY STANDPOINT, I THINK AS WE THINK ABOUT BUZZWORDS LIKE SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH CARE, WHICH LOOK AT HOW MUCH PEOPLE EARN AND ALL THOSE OTHER THINGS, YOUR SALARY TIERS PLAY PERFECTLY INTO YOUR EMPLOYEE DEMOGRAPHICS.
>> SO I THINK THEN WHAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO THAT POINT.
AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS LOOKING TO HEAR, IS IF WE COULD GET JUST A LITTLE FACT SHEETS SO THAT WE CAN SHARE WITH THE PUBLIC.
WE'VE GOT X PERCENT ENROLLMENT.
THIS IS WORKING. IT'S HELPING US GET THE EMPLOYEES THAT WE WANT.
OUR WELLNESS IS GROWING, WHATEVER THE KEY POINTS ARE THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS ABOUT THIS INVESTMENT THAT THEY'RE MAKING IN THEIR CITY EMPLOYEES.
MY LAST QUESTION IS ON SLIDE 71.2.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE RETROSPECTIVE, BUT THE WAY THAT THEY'RE LAID OUT IS EXCELLENT.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT AND MAYBE I'M MISSING IT, IF WE COULD GET OUR PROGRESS MOVING FORWARD OF THAT FULL PACKAGE, WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE?
>> YES, WE'VE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THAT AND HOLMES MURPHY WILL BE PROVIDING THAT BACK TO THE CITY, AND THEN WE CAN SHARE THAT WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.
>> GREAT. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION I'M SORRY.
I KNOW I PROMISED MY LAST, AND I REMEMBER THAT, IS ON THE RETIREES REGARDLESS OF AGE, ALTHOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A BREAKDOWN I KNOW THAT THEY DON'T BOTH PAY ONLY THE OVER 65, CORRECT?
>> OVER 65, AND IT'S 100 PERCENT.
>> IS THERE A SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE UNDER-65 RETIREES AND HOW MUCH THAT COSTS THE CITY.
>> YES. I WILL ADD TO THAT UNDER 65 THAT HIGHER AFTER 2010, THEY ALSO PAY 100 PERCENT.
>> OH, OKAY. SO WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR THEM TO AGE OUT.
>> DID YOU WANT TO GO DIRECTLY TO THAT PAGE?
>> NO, I'LL LOOK IT UP MYSELF BUT THE ANSWER IS THERE AT SLIDE 25.
[01:20:01]
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.>> MR. MORENO, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM B.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO START OFF BY SAYING, TAKING CARE OF OUR WORKFORCE IS CRITICAL BOTH FOR THEIR WELLNESS AND FOR OUR OVERALL RETENTION.
I WILL CONTINUE URGING US TO INVEST WHERE WE CAN BUDGET WHEN IT COMES TO HEALTH CARE AND TO CONTINUE TO IMPROVE OUR BENEFITS.
ON PAGE 6, I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CHILDCARE SUBSIDY.
ARE WE SEEING THE RESULTS THAT WE WERE HOPING FOR IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA? WHAT CAN WE DO TO CONTINUE PROMOTING AND ENSURING THAT OUR WORKFORCE IS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THAT AREA?
IT TOOK A FEW YEARS FOR US TO EDUCATE AND INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE.
WE'VE LEARNED QUITE A BIT IN THE TIME THAT WE HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTING THIS BENEFIT.
WHAT I CAN TELL YOU WE HAVE ANECDOTAL TESTIMONIES FROM EMPLOYEES THAT YOU SAID THAT THEY ABSOLUTELY APPRECIATE IT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS IS IMPACTING LOW-INCOME FAMILIES.
THIS IS ACTUALLY NOT AVAILABLE TO EVERY EMPLOYEE, BUT ONLY THOSE THAT QUALIFY VIA INCOME.
CAN WE IMPROVE IT? ABSOLUTELY. I THINK IT'S ABOUT EDUCATION.
IN PARTICULAR, EVERY NEW EMPLOYEE THAT QUALIFIES, WE SPEAK WITH THEM, WE'LL EXPLAIN THE PROGRAM.
TYPICALLY IT TAKES THEM A YEAR TO FEEL COMFORTABLE AND THEN THEY DO IT.
>> I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT AS A PARENT AS WELL.
I WANT TO CONTINUE URGING THAT WE CONTINUE EXPLORING THE POSSIBILITIES OF HAVING SOMETHING IN-HOUSE.
I KNOW THAT COUNTY IS STARTING TO EXPLORE THAT AS WELL.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO, IF I COULD JUST JUMP IN FOR JUST A SECOND.
I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF NUMBERS SO YOU CAN SEE THE PROGRESS THAT WE'RE MAKING.
NOT THAT IT'S AS GREAT AS WE WOULD LIKE.
BUT IN 21/22, WHICH IS WHEN THE PROGRAM STARTED AND THE COUNCIL APPROVED THAT WE HAD ABOUT 98 ENROLLED IN THE CHILDCARE SUBSIDY.
I BELIEVE WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR WAYS TO EXPAND.
IT'S REALLY ABOUT EDUCATING EMPLOYEES ABOUT THE BENEFIT, AND THEN GETTING THEM TO EITHER SWITCH FROM WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY DOING TO BE ABLE TO COME INTO THE PROGRAM AND PARTICIPATE.
SOMETIMES THAT MIGHT MEAN SWITCHING CHILDCARE PROVIDER.
AGAIN, IT'S OPTIONAL AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING MANDATORY, BUT WE WILL CONTINUE WITH THE OUTREACH AND EDUCATION THAT NINA HAD SPOKEN ABOUT.
>> THANK YOU. ON PAGE 15, WE'RE SEEING THAT OVERALL, DALLAS HAS A LOWER THAN NATIONAL AVERAGE.
I'M WONDERING BECAUSE I'M HEARING THE SAME THING WHEN IT COMES TO OUR PUBLIC SERVICE PROFESSIONALS, THAT THAT'S SOMETIMES THE REASON THEY'RE LEAVING.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HOW WE COMPARE JUST IN THE PUBLIC SAFETY SIDE ALONE COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES.
>> WE CAN COME BACK AND HAVE THAT ANALYSIS DONE.
>> ON PAGE 23, ON THE AVERAGE WE WERE SEEING EMPLOYEES RECEIVING A THREE PERCENT INCREASE.
BUT YET A FIVE PERCENT INCREASE IN THE OVERALL PREMIUM INCREASES.
DO WE HAVE ANY MATH ON HOW THAT PANS OUT IF AN EMPLOYEE DOES NOT RECEIVE THAT THREE PERCENT INCREASE?
>> ON SLIDE 24, SO FOR THAT THREE PERCENT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE EMPLOYEE ONLY WITH THAT $45 ANNUAL INCREASE, THAT THREE PERCENT INCREASE WILL BECOME ABOUT 2.9 IF THEY WERE IN THE EMPLOYEE ONLY PLAN.
IF THEY'RE IN THE EMPLOYEE FAMILY PLAN, THAT THREE PERCENT WOULD ACTUALLY BE AROUND 2.4.
THAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT AGAINST THE MERIT INCREASE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE FIVE PERCENT INCREASE IN THE ACTUAL PREMIUM.
DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
>> PAGE 32 IS JUST HIGHLIGHTING SOME OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE, BUT I'M CURIOUS TO WHAT THE ACCESS TO HEALTHY FOODS FOUNDATION CAFE IS.
>> YES. WE HAVE THE FOUNDATIONS CAFE, IT WAS AN INITIATIVE THAT WAS DONE IN 2022.
WE ARE SUPPLEMENTED IT NOW AND IT HAS TRANSFERRED TO FOODA, WHICH IS A PROVIDER THAT COORDINATES THE DELIVERY OF FOOD ON SITE.
WE WORK WITH FOODA TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS HEALTHY OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE OR TO ENJOY HERE ONSITE.
THE NAME HAS CHANGED SLIGHTLY, BUT IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME.
IT'S FOOD ON-SITE THAT PROVIDE HEALTHY CHOICES.
[01:25:02]
>> PERFECT. THEN LASTLY IS HOW LONG IS OUR CURRENT CONTRACT WITH BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD, AND HOW OFTEN DO WE REEVALUATE THAT?
>> I WILL LET DAVID SPEAK TO THAT INDEED.
>> THE CURRENT AGREEMENT IS THREE YEARS WITH TWO ONE-YEAR OPTIONS IN YOUR SECOND YEAR.
AT THE END OF THE THREE YEARS, YOU CAN RENEGOTIATE TO EITHER STAY WITH THEM AND PROVE THE TERMS OF THE OPTION YEARS.
THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE HELP THE CITY WITH, TO JUST EVALUATE THAT ANNUALLY.
>> THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WILL BE ACTUALLY DOING.
BUT WE'VE ALREADY STARTED WORKING ON A TIMELINE FOR WHEN WE WOULD BEGIN TO LOOK AT GOING BACK OUT TO THE MARKET.
IN 2018, WE DID EXACTLY THAT, WHICH IS HOW WE ENDED UP WITH BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD.
OUR GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CONSTANTLY CHECKING OUR PROVIDER AGAINST THE MARKET.
IF THERE ARE CHANGES THAT WE BELIEVE ARE MORE ADVANTAGEOUS FOR THE CITY, THEN WE WILL BE RECOMMENDING WHATEVER TRANSITIONS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN SO WE'RE CONTINUING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SAVINGS THAT WE CAN PASS ON TO OUR EMPLOYEES.
I JUST WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE HERE WHILE WE'RE THERE.
THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP GETTING TO A FUND BALANCE.
IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE THAT WE MADE IN GOING INTO BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD, TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE DISCOUNTS, AND THE REDUCED RATE THAT ACTUALLY BUILT UP THAT FUND THAT WE HAD NOT HAD BEFORE.
WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO MAKE THOSE TYPES OF DECISIONS.
BECAUSE WHEN WE DO THAT, IT ALLOWS FOR US TO CONTINUE TO OFFSET THOSE COSTS BETWEEN THE CITY AND OUR EMPLOYEES.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO THANK, AGAIN, OUR TEAM FOR PUTTING THESE PACKAGES TOGETHER AND EVEN THESE INCENTIVES, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER PROGRAM THAT WE DO.
UNFORTUNATELY, SOMETIMES WE LACK IN THAT COMMUNICATION AND LETTING OUR WORKFORCE KNOW ABOUT THOSE OPPORTUNITIES.
I WILL STRIVE THAT WE CONTINUE TO JUST PROMOTE THAT AND MAKING SURE THAT FOLKS ARE WELL AWARE OF ALL THE GREAT THINGS THAT WE ARE OFFERING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> MR. GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I'VE BEEN SITTING HERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO FRAME THIS QUESTION ON SLIDE 12.
EVERYTHING WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT REALLY TALKS ABOUT OUR COST COMPARED TO THE NATIONAL AVERAGE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT WHAT I WAS TRYING TO FIND IS, WHAT ARE THE TOTAL BENEFITS THAT WE'RE ALL GETTING? WE TALKED ABOUT THE LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION IN EACH ONE OF THEM, BUT WHAT ARE THOSE TOTAL BENEFITS THAT WE'RE GETTING FOR OUR MONEY COMPARED TO WHAT THE NATIONAL AVERAGE OF BENEFITS ARE? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M ASKING?
>> I BELIEVE SO AND THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
THE WAY IN WHICH WE CAN COMPARE THAT IS WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OVERALL TREND, HOW MUCH IS AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, THE COST OF HEALTH INSURANCE INCREASES YEAR OVER YEAR, AND HOW WE COMPARE TO THE AVERAGE, BUT ALSO WHAT IS OUR INCIDENCE AND OUR COST PER INCIDENCE? IN OTHER WORDS, HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ARE GETTING DIABETES FOR INSTANCE? AND HOW MUCH IS DIABETES COSTING PER EMPLOYEE? WE COMPARE THAT TO A BENCHMARK.
THAT IS HOW WE KNOW IF WE'RE DOING WELL OR WE ARE NOT DOING WELL.
OUR INTENT IS TO REDUCE THE PREVALENCE AND ALSO TO REDUCE THE COST PER EMPLOYEE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
>> RIGHT. MINE IS WAY MORE SIMPLE THAN THAT.
I GUESS WHEN I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS IF WE DECIDE THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR BENEFITS AND WE'RE GOING THROUGH THAT LIST OF MENU OF ITEMS. WE'RE GOING TO SELECT THIS, THIS, THIS, AND THIS, AND AS A RESULT IS GOING TO COST US THIS ON AVERAGE COMPARED TO THE NATIONAL AVERAGE OF THE COST OF WHAT WE'RE PAYING AND THE THINGS THAT WE'RE SELECTING.
ARE WE GETTING MORE OR LESS BENEFITS ON A NATIONAL LEVEL?
>> SO I THINK THERE'S SOME FACTORS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER.
FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN OUR BENEFITS PROGRAM WHICH IS WHAT WE GET THROUGH THE PROVIDERS.
BUT THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE ARE SOME OTHER BENEFITS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY HEALTHCARE.
SO WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT A PRICE TAG IF YOU WILL.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
SO WHAT IS THAT COST TO THEN DO ALL OF THE OTHER I WOULD SAY AUXILIARY BENEFITS ALONG WITH WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE BENEFITS PROGRAM? THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND A NATIONAL EQUIVALENT TO WHERE THEY'RE DOING SIMILAR THINGS TO BE ABLE TO REALLY GIVE YOU AN APPLES-TO-APPLES COMPARISON.
>> BECAUSE IF NOT, WE WILL BE LEAVING SOME FACTORS OUT I THINK.
>> RIGHT. JUST ALONG WITH THE FACT SHEET WHERE IT'S COSTING US AND WE HAVE GREAT BENEFITS,
[01:30:06]
BUT ARE THERE BENEFITS THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR THAT WE DON'T NEED? OR I DON'T KNOW.I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO.
>> WELL, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT WE'VE MADE SOME VERY INTENTIONAL DECISIONS OVER THE YEARS.
IF THERE WERE THINGS THAT WE FELT THAT WERE NOT AS IMPORTANT OR EMPLOYEES WE'RE JUST NOT UTILIZING THEM EVEN IN OUR BENEFIT PLAN DESIGNS THEN WE REMOVE THEM BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE GO BY.
WE LOOK AT USAGE, WE LOOK AT BY ASKING OUR EMPLOYEES WHAT'S IMPORTANT.
THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE'VE CHANGED THROUGHOUT THE YEARS TO MAKE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT WHAT WE'RE OFFERING IS WHAT OUR EMPLOYEES ACTUALLY NEED.
THEN IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S NOT BEING UTILIZED THEN WE REMOVE IT.
THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS THAT WE GO THROUGH YEAR OVER YEAR.
AGAIN, THAT KEEPS US COMPETITIVE AND IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR US TO BE PROACTIVE IN HOW WE THEN PRESENT AND DESIGN OUR PLANS.
ONE OF THE BENEFITS THAT WE ADDED ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT PAID FOR BY THE CITY, BUT OUR EMPLOYEES ASK FOR PED INSURANCE.
I SAID IT OUT LOUD BUT THAT HAPPENED AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO A LOT OF OUR EMPLOYEES.
WE HEARD FROM THEM AND THIS IS A TWO-YEAR PERIOD OF WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO GET PED INSURANCE THEY GET IT AT AMAZON.
SO AS WE GO THROUGH THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR EMPLOYEES, IT'S BACK TO THE ENGAGEMENT AND I TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE VERY BEGINNING.
IT'S NOT ABOUT US JUST SAYING, HERE YOU GO, IT'S ABOUT TELLING ME WHAT YOU NEED.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING WHAT MATTERS MOST TO YOU.
A LOT OF THE PREVENTATIVE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST YEAR, WE INCREASED OPPORTUNITIES FOR EMPLOYEES THAT MIGHT BE PREDIABETIC.
HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO: YOUR NUTRITIONAL PROGRAMS. YOU CAN MEET WITH THE WELLNESS COUNCIL, YOU CAN MEET WITH A COUNSELOR TO HELP YOU DEVELOP A MEAL PLAN.
THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING NOW THAT WE'VE NEVER DONE BEFORE.
TO GET TO THAT COMPARISON, WE WOULD REALLY HAVE TO FIND A MODEL THAT HAS SOME SIMILARITIES BECAUSE IF NOT, WE'D BE COMPARING SOME THINGS THAT ARE PROBABLY NOT BEEN OFFERED, BUT WE DO BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE THEY MANAGE OUR EMPLOYEES. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> MS. BLACKMON YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. ON THE LINE OF THE CHILDCARE AND IT'S GREAT THAT WE'VE SEEN THAT INCREASE.
BUT BECAUSE SOME OF OUR DEPARTMENTS ARE 24/7, ARE WE LOOKING TO CREATE A 24/7? I'M JUST ASKING THAT BECAUSE 911, 311, THEY'RE HEARING A DPD, DFR.
IF WE WANT TO RETAIN GOOD ESPECIALLY FEMALES IN ACTUALLY PARENT YOUNG FAMILIES AND WE WANT TO RETAIN THEM.
I'M JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE.
>> WE'VE LOOKED AT SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS I WOULD SAY NOT IN THIS LAST YEAR.
WE REALLY WANTED TO SEE HOW WELL THE CHILDCARE SUBSIDY WOULD BE RECEIVED.
BUT WE DEFINITELY CAN GO BACK AND LOOK.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT JUST IN SOME OF THE PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS AND THE COST FACTORS GOING INTO THE BUDGET YEARS THAT WE KNOW ARE ALREADY CHALLENGING FOR THE CITY, WE HAVEN'T BROUGHT THAT BACK TO THE TABLE.
BUT DEFINITELY, WE'VE LOOKED AT IT BEFORE.
WE LOOKED AT EVERYTHING FROM HAVING MAYBE A THIRD PARTY THAT WOULD JUST COME IN AND ACTUALLY OPERATE IN THE CITY JUST PROVIDES THE SPACE.
THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH.
IT'S NOT THAT WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT, BUT IN THIS LAST YEAR, WE DID NOT BRING IT BACK AS A RECOMMENDATION.
>> IF I MAY ANSWER FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF EMPLOYEES THAT MAY NEED 24-HOUR CARE, THE SUBSIDY IS DESIGNED IN A WAY IN WHICH ANY CHILDCARE THAT THEY HAVE CAN BE SUPPORTED BY THE SUBSIDY.
SO IF THEY FIND CHILDCARE THAT IS 24/7, THE SUBSIDY WILL.
>> BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT THE HOSPITAL AROUND THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT, THERE ARE SO FEW THAT THEY DO THAT.
I THINK IT WOULD BE A VERY GOOD BENEFIT.
BUT YEAH, WE PROBABLY NEED TO LET FOLKS KNOW THAT YES, YOU CAN USE IT FOR 24.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE JUST IN A TYPICAL SETTING 77.
THANK YOU THAT WAS IT MR. MAYOR.
>> MS. MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY ON BEHALF OF SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES, IT IS UNCOMFORTABLY COLD IN THESE CHAMBERS AND SO FOR OUR EMPLOYEE HEALTH IN HERE IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE COULD ADJUST THAT, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE ALL GOING TO GET SICK.
I'M STILL WAITING ON MY QUESTION THAT WE WERE GOING TO GET SOMEBODY TO RESPOND TO WHICH WAS ABOUT WHERE THE FUNDING WAS IN THE BUDGET.
I HAD IDENTIFIED 97 MILLION OF 115, WERE WE ABLE TO GET SOMEBODY TO SPEAK TO THAT?
[01:35:03]
>> YEAH I HAVE IN FRONT OF ME. WHAT WAS YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION AGAIN?
>> SO MY QUESTION IS WHAT MONEY GOES ON SLIDE 14, YOU'RE SHOWING 115 MILLION FOR THE COST FOR THE CITY CONTRIBUTION FOR HEALTH.
I'VE IDENTIFIED OBJECT CODES 1304, 1306, 1309, AND 1120 WHICH I ALREADY WENT THROUGH THOSE NUMBERS, BUT THEY TOTAL UP TO 97 MILLION.
I'M WONDERING WHERE THAT OTHER 18 MILLION IS.
>> CAN YOU REFRESH ME ON WHAT EACH OF THESE SECTIONS WERE THAT YOU WERE JUST WRITING THEM OFF.
>> SURE. 1304 IS HEALTH INSURANCE, IT'S LISTED AS 79 MILLION.
YOU'RE USING MY TIME THOUGH. 1306 IS ER FOR RETIREES, I BELIEVE, 1309 IS WELLNESS AND 1120 IS WELLNESS INCENTIVE.
>> TO THAT WEIGHT AND DIRECTOR BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 23, THE ADOPTED BUDGET FOR CITY CONTRIBUTIONS WAS 108.9 MILLION.
THE FORECAST SHOWS 115 MILLION AND SO PART OF WHAT WE PLAN TO DO ON THE FISCAL YEAR 23 END-OF-YEAR ORDINANCE IS INCREASED THAT AMOUNT.
WE'VE ALREADY GIVEN INSTRUCTIONS TO DEPARTMENTS LATE LAST WEEK, GIVEN THEM THE UPDATED FORECAST AMOUNT THAT THEY NEED TO SHOW FOR CITY CONTRIBUTIONS AND WE WILL PRESENT THAT TO CITY COUNCIL IN THE END-OF-YEAR ORDINANCE.
>> ARE YOU SAYING THE CITY CONTRIBUTION THAT'S IN OUR BUDGET BOOK IS NOT CORRECT?
>> NO. WHAT I'M SAYING, THE CITY CONTRIBUTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 23 ADOPTED THE FORECAST IS GOING TO BE INCREASED.
THERE'S THE ADOPTED BUDGET THAT WE ASSUMED THIS TIME LAST YEAR AND THEN AS WE REALIZE CLAIMS, MORE PARTICIPATION, THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION NEEDS TO INCREASE IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FUND ENDS AT A POSITIVE LEVEL.
>>YOUR LINE ITEM 1304 FOR HEALTH INSURANCE WHAT DO YOU HAVE FOR THE 24 BUDGET?
>> FOR 24 I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE TOTAL NUMBER ACROSS ALL FUNDS FOR THE THREE OR TWO EXPENSE OBJECTS, IT'S 134.9 MILLION.
IF YOU GO ONLINE TO THE FORM A'S AND YOU TOTAL THE EXPENSE OBJECTS FOR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING IS, WHAT ARE THE EXPENSE OBJECTS THAT YOU'RE TOTALING UP TOGETHER?
>> IT'S THE HEALTH BENEFIT LINE AND THEN IT'S LIFE INSURANCE.
IF YOU TOTAL THOSE TWO NUMBERS TOGETHER YOU SHOULD GET TO THE 134.9 FOR FISCAL YEAR 24.
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS ASKING.
MY SECOND QUESTION IS AND ACTUALLY COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS, COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO AND COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY ALL HIT ON THIS TOPIC, WHICH IS REALLY COMMUNICATING WITH OUR EMPLOYEES, INVESTMENT WE'RE MAKING AND BENEFITS WHICH IS SO SIGNIFICANT AND ARE WE DOING AN EMPLOYEE BENEFIT STATEMENT FOR EACH EMPLOYEE?
>> WE ARE NOT CURRENTLY DOING EMPLOYEE STATEMENT.
HOWEVER, AS PART OF THE WORK, THE IMPLEMENTATION, THAT IS GOING TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT IMPLEMENTATION.
RIGHT NOW OUR BENEFITS DATA AND OUR SALARY DATA RESIDES IN DIFFERENT PROGRAMS OR IN DIFFERENT DATABASES SO MERGING IT IS DIFFICULT.
WE DON'T WANT TO PUT SOMETHING OUT THERE THAT WE CANNOT STAND BEHIND.
WE DON'T HAVE IT NOW BUT WE ARE WORKING IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WORKDAY BENEFITS.
ONCE WE DO THAT, THERE IS A FEATURE THAT WILL ALLOW EMPLOYEES IN REAL DATA OR DAY-TO-DAY TO BE ABLE TO SEE HOW THEIR ENTIRE PAYCHECK COMES TO LIFE, NOT ONLY BENEFITS BUT ALSO LEAVE IN THEIR SALARY OF COURSE.
>> YOU TOLD ME THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DO AN EMPLOYEE BENEFITS STATEMENT TODAY.
>> IT'S NOT INCLUDED ON THE ACTUAL PAYCHECK WHERE THE EMPLOYEES CAN ACTUALLY SEE IT.
>> BUT I'M NOT SAYING ABOUT A PAYCHECK. I'M TALKING ABOUT PRODUCING A DOCUMENT THAT SAYS, YOU PAY THIS MUCH FOR YOUR EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION ON HEALTH CARE AND THE CITY'S PAYING THIS MUCH.
YOU'RE PAYING THIS MUCH FOR LIFE INSURANCE AND THE CITY'S PAYING THIS.
>> YOU HAVE THIS PRODUCED FOR A CHUNK HERE WE'RE SUBMITTING THIS.
>> ALL THOSE BLUE BOXES ON SLIDE NUMBER 31, ALL WRAPPED UP AND SAY, CONGRATULATIONS, JUST SO YOU KNOW, YOU MAY BE ABLE TO FIND ANOTHER JOB FOR A COUPLE OF THOUSAND DOLLARS MORE BUT DO YOU REALIZE WHAT THE CITY IS PROVIDING AND ALL THOSE LEAVES, ALL OF THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THERE.
THESE ARE ALL INVESTMENTS IN OUR EMPLOYEES AND I DON'T THINK THEY REALIZE HOW MUCH GOES INTO IT AND WE'RE NOT THE PRIVATE BUSINESS MODEL, WE'RE A GOVERNMENT.
[01:40:02]
WE ACTUALLY ARE ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO LONG TIME STAY HERE, LONGER THAN WE'RE HERE.YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE THE STABILITY, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO COME AND GO.
IT'S A DIFFERENT HEART FOR SERVICE.
THEN YOU MIGHT FIND WITH SOMEBODY WHO'S SUPER TYPE A AND JUST LOOKING FOR THE HIGHEST PAYCHECK.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LONGTIME WANT TO INVEST IN THE FUTURE OF DALLAS BUT WE ARE MAKING AN EXTREMELY SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT AND I DON'T THINK THEY'RE SEEING IT.
THIS DOESN'T TAKE AN INTEGRATION OF SOFTWARE TO PRODUCE AN EMPLOYEE BENEFIT STATEMENT.
>> I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A MANUAL VERSUS AN AUTOMATIC PROCESS BECAUSE THERE IS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS OUT IN THE MARKET CALLED THAT HIDDEN PAYCHECK.
WHEN YOU PULL UP YOUR ACTUAL CHECK STUB, YOU CAN SEE THE ACTUAL DETAIL OF WHAT YOU'RE GETTING ON TOP OF YOUR SALARY.
WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING IS JUST A SIMPLE SIDE-BY-SIDE THAT SHOWS THE NUMBERS.
THAT'S SOMETHING DEFINITELY WE CAN DO MANUALLY AND PROVIDE THAT TO OUR EMPLOYEES, BUT TO PULL IT OUT OF THE SYSTEM TO WHERE IT AUTOMATICALLY CALCULATES AND IT'S INCLUDED ON A PAPER CHECK IS WHAT NINA WAS DESCRIBING.
BUT IT'S NOT PROBLEMATIC FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SHARE THAT.
AS PART OF OUR OPEN ENROLLMENT WHEN WE'RE GOING THROUGH AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BENEFITS, WE ALSO TALK ABOUT THE NUMBERS WITH OUR EMPLOYEES AS THEY'RE SITTING DOWN AND MAKING DECISIONS AROUND CHOICE AND WHAT BENEFIT OPTIONS THAT THEY WANT FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES.
BUT TO HAVE A DOCUMENT LIKE THAT IS NOT A PROBLEM TO ME.
I SEE IT AS A FACT SHEET THAT JUST TALKS ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING VERSUS WHAT YOU DO AS IT RELATES TO BENEFITS.
>> MY LAST THING, IT'S NOT MY LAST ONE, WOULD CONSULTANTS, WOULD YOU SAY THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS A RICH BENEFIT PLAN?
IT IS COMPETITIVE COMPARED TO ESPECIALLY OTHER MUNICIPAL EMPLOYERS IN TEXAS AND WITH OUR VERY LARGE MUNICIPAL SURVEY THAT WE DO.
THERE ARE SOME SUBURBS THAT HAVE MUCH RICHER BENEFITS AND PAY MORE, AS YOU KNOW AND I WOULD SAY IT'S VERY COMPETITIVE.
Y'ALL MADE A LOT OF STRIDES OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS AS HAVING THIS PART OF RECRUITING AND RETAINING YOUR TALENT.
BENEFITS ARE VERY IMPORTANT ALONG WITH PAY NOWADAYS.
SOME SURVEYS SUGGESTS IT'S EQUALLY AS IMPORTANT AS THE PAY.
>> WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT THE GPFM COMMITTEE WHEN IT'S CONSTITUTED, GO BACK AND LOOK AT OUR COMPLETE BENEFITS PACKAGE COMPARED TO OUR SURROUNDING SUBURBS WHO ARE OUR COMPETITION, OUR LABOR MARKET, AS WELL AS LARGE CITIES.
I SEE I'M OUT OF TIME. THANK YOU.
>> YOU HAVE ANOTHER ROUND OF A MINUTE AND WE'LL GO TO MR. NIRVANA'S FOR FIVE-MINUTES. ITEM B.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ONE THANK YOU FOR THE BRIEFING.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ASKED FOR WHICH WAS, HOW DO WE BECOME THE BEST EMPLOYER, NOT JUST OF THE MUNICIPALITIES AROUND US BUT DEFINITELY IN NORTH TEXAS? WE NEED THE TALENT.
OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS WE'VE BEEN LOSING TALENT TO FOR ALL REASONS.
THE PANDEMIC DIDN'T JUST AFFECT DALLAS IT AFFECTED EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYER AND FOLKS ARE JUST SEEING THE WORKPLACE MUCH DIFFERENTLY THAN THEY DID BACK IN MY DAY WHEN I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IT AND DO THINGS AND SO I SEE THE PLIGHT THAT WE HAVE AND WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE OKAY WITH THINKING DIFFERENTLY THAN, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A JOB, YOU'VE GOT TO WORK 40 HOURS, YOU'VE GOT TO BE CHANGE YOUR DESK.
IT'S LIKE PEOPLE JUST THINK DIFFERENTLY.
ESPECIALLY WITH THE TECHNOLOGY AND THE ABILITY TO WORK FROM HOME OR WORK FROM DIFFERENT LOCATIONS AND WE'RE JUST SEEING THIS WILD CHANGE.
REAL QUICK QUESTION, HOW MANY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE DOES THE FIRM HAVE THAT IS DOING THIS ON A PROFESSIONAL BASIS THAT GAVE US THIS INFORMATION?
>> AS A FIRM, NINE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.
AS A FIRM, HOWEVER, IF IT'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR 90 YEARS, THE FOLKS THAT YOU HAD THAT SERVE THE CITY OF DALLAS TEAM, DAVID, RYAN AND I ALL HAVE APPROXIMATELY 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS.
I WANT TO TALK SUPER BRIEFLY IF I CAN, IF IT'S OKAY ABOUT THE BENCHMARKING.
WHEN WE LOOK AT NATIONAL SURVEY DATA, WE ARE ALSO TAKING SOME OF THOSE NATIONAL SURVEYS LIKE A MERCER SURVEY, WHICH WILL SHOW US NATIONAL COST SHARES WHICH YOU SHOW TO HAVE A GREATER COST SHARE COMPARED TO THE MERCER SURVEY.
I WOULD SAY KEEP IN MIND THEY'RE LOOKING AT NATIONAL EMPLOYERS THAT ARE DOUBLE THE SIZE OF THIS ENTITY.
WHEN WE LOOK AT EMPLOYERS FOR PUBLIC ENTITY STANDPOINT, YOU'RE MORE IN LINE THERE IN TERMS OF WHAT.
YOUR COMPETITION IS GREATER IN A PUBLIC ENTITY MARKET.
CAN YOU SURVIVE AT THE MERCER SURVEY SUBSIDY PERCENTAGES? PROBABLY NOT.
[01:45:06]
I THINK HE WOULD LOSE TALENT TO YOUR SURROUNDING ENTITIES IF THAT'S IN PLACE.BUT AGAIN, JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YOUR TEAM THAT SERVICES YOUR HR DEPARTMENT, WE HAVE ABOUT 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE SITTING AT THIS TABLE.
IT'S WHAT WE LIVE AND BREATHE EVERY DAY AND EVERY PERSON ON THIS PANEL FOR HOLMES MURPHY, WE PRIMARILY SERVE PUBLIC ENTITY CLIENTS ONLY.
SO WHEN WE LOOK AT YOUR DATA, WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT ACROSS YOUR COMPETITORS AS IT RELATES TO PUBLIC ENTITIES.
>> I'LL ADD TO THAT I HAD THE PLEASURE OF WORKING WITH HIS TEAM IN MY PRIOR EMPLOYMENT WITH THE TOTALLY AUTHORITY.
THIS IS HISTORY AND A LOT OF GREAT PEOPLE HERE THAT REALLY UNDERSTAND OUR MARKET.
THEY DO A LOT OF WORK WITHIN THE REGION WITH A LOT OF OTHER MUNICIPALITIES SO WE'RE VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE HOLMES MURPHY BE A PART OF WHAT WE DO AS OUR BENEFITS ADMINISTRATOR.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT.
THE REASON I WAS ASKING THAT IS YOU ALL ARE PROFESSIONALS AND I'M NOT SO I TEND TO TRY TO TRUST PROFESSIONALS, THIS IS WHAT YOU DO.
I LOVE THAT WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT WE LIVE, BREATHE, AND THINK, THIS IS YOUR LIFE. I'M A COUNCIL MEMBER.
I LIVE, BREATHE, AND THINK FILLING POTHOLES, PICKING UP TRASH, TAKING CARE OF ANIMALS, TAKING CARE OF SENIOR CITIZENS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER HOW TO THINK A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY AND REMEMBER SOME PEOPLE ARE REALLY GOOD AT WHAT THEY DO AND WE'RE REALLY GOOD AT WHAT WE DO.
THE ONE QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT WAS THIS ATTENDANTS BONUS.
I'VE WORKED FOR AN EMPLOYER IN THE PAST THAT HAD ONE.
AS SOMEBODY WHO'S COMPETITIVE AND WANTS THOSE TYPES OF EITHER BONUSES OR DOLLARS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S EVERYBODY, THIS IS JUST MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.
I KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE WILL COME TO WORK SICK REGARDLESS BECAUSE THEY'RE LIKE, I WANT TO GET THAT BONUS.
HOW DO WE WORK ON THAT IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT SOMEBODY WHO IS SICK, ESPECIALLY THOSE OF US HERE ARE LUCKY ENOUGH TO HAVE SURVIVED A GLOBAL PANDEMIC.
>> HOW DO WE DO THAT AND NOT SPREAD COVID, THE FLU, AND ANY OTHER TYPES OF COMMUNICABLE INFECTIONS AND DISEASES IN THE WORKPLACE?
>> ABSOLUTELY. WELL, FIRST WE COUNT ON EMPLOYEES EXERCISING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.
HOWEVER, IN PARTICULAR BEFORE THE PANDEMIC, WE HAD IN PLACE A VERY STRUCTURED PROTOCOL TO IDENTIFY ANYONE THAT MAY BE SICK.
ACTUALLY, THERE WAS A SYMPTOM CHECKER AND PEOPLE WERE DOING THAT ON A DAILY BASIS.
HOWEVER, NOW THAT THE PANDEMIC IS OVER, SUPERVISORS IF THEY SEE SOMEONE WHO'S SICK THAT IS THERE FOR THE WRONG REASONS, THEY WILL SEND THEM HOME.
I WILL SAY THAT THE INCENTIVE IS IN PARTICULAR SO THAT PEOPLE IN OTHER WORDS, IF SOMEONE HAS A PLAN DOCTOR'S VISIT, THAT WOULD NOT AFFECT THEIR INCENTIVE.
IT IS ABOUT THAT SURPRISE ABSENCE THAT IN PARTICULAR FOR AREAS WHERE YOU NEED EVERYONE TO BE THERE TO COVER CERTAIN SHIFTS THAT HE SAW DISRUPTIVE.
WITH THAT SAID, I WILL SAY THAT ALL INCENTIVES SOMETIMES HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
PART OF IT IS THAT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, BUT ALSO THE SUPERVISORS MONITORING THAT EMPLOYEES ARE WELL WHEN THEY COME TO WORK.
>> THANK YOU. IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND I KNOW FOR THE CORPORATIONS AND NON-PROFITS I WORKED FOR IN THE PAST THAT HAD THIS TYPE OF BONUS, PERFECT ATTENDANCE, WHAT PERCENTAGE DO YOU SEE ACTUAL EMPLOYEES ACTUALLY ACHIEVING THIS? FOR MY PREVIOUS EMPLOYERS, IT WAS A VERY SMALL.
IT WAS JUST A HANDFUL THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE THAT.
DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY KIND OF DATA ON THAT?
>> WE DO HAVE THE DATA THAT IS ACTUALLY RAN THROUGH PAYROLL.
I WILL SAY IN PARTICULAR FOR POLICE AND FIRE, THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THAT GET IT.
I CAN PROVIDE YOU THE EXACT NUMBERS.
I DON'T HAVE THEM HERE WITH ME.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. IF YOU DON'T MIND JUST GETTING THAT TO US BECAUSE I THINK IF PEOPLE SEE THAT WHAT'S PROBABLY A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE, THAT THEY MAY THINK A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY ON THAT.
I'M BRINGING THIS UP JUST IF WE CAN LOOK INTO IT.
I'M NOT SEEING LET'S DO IT IN THIS FISCAL BUDGET.
BUT THE CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH HAS BECOME A BIG DEAL AROUND HERE.
I'VE BEEN GETTING ALL KINDS OF MESSAGES AND I KNOW YOU ALL HAD NEVER HEARD IT ABOUT GOING TO A FOUR-DAY WORK-WEEK IN SOME AREAS.
IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU ALL CAN TAKE A LOOK IT AND EXPLORE IT.
IS THAT EVEN SOMETHING? BECAUSE I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THEY DID IT OR WHAT THEY DID, JUST SEEING IF WE CAN FIND OUT AND GET INFORMATION ON THAT.
I'M NOT ASKING FOR THIS BUDGET,
[01:50:01]
JUST ASKING IF WE CAN TAKE A LOOK INTO THEM.>> ABSOLUTELY. WE SENT THAT TO THE CITY MANAGER ALREADY FOR CONSIDERATION.
>> YEAH. I FIGURED, I JUST WANT TO PUT IT ON THE RECORD. THANK YOU.
THEN, I THINK THAT'S IT FOR ME.
AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION.
OUR EMPLOYEES ARE OUR NUMBER 1 ASSET AND WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM.
WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
IN THE PAST, GOVERNMENTS WERE THE LEADERS ON ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF BENEFITS WE HAVE TODAY.
THEN THE PRIVATE WORKPLACE BECAME THE LEADER.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S TIME NOW FOR GOVERNMENTS TO BECOME THAT LEADER AGAIN IN ORDER FOR US TO GET THOSE TALENTS AND BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ACHIEVE THE BEST.
IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO GIVE SOME DIFFERENT TYPES OF PACKAGES IN ORDER TO RETAIN AND KEEP FOLKS AND MAKE SURE THOSE THINGS HAPPEN.
I LIKE TO ALWAYS SAY THAT WE HAVE THE BEST STAFF HERE IN DALLAS OUT OF A LOT OF THE OTHER MAJOR CITIES.
CAN WE IMPROVE ON THINGS? ABSOLUTELY. WE'VE IMPROVED OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE ON BENEFITS AND THINGS THAT WE DIDN'T EVEN THINK ABOUT HAVING.
SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE HUGE LIKE PARENTAL LEAVE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING NEW CHILDREN INTO THEIR FAMILIES.
THAT WAS A HUGE, HUGE VICTORY FOR US.
THERE'S OTHERS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO THINK ON.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> MR. ATKINS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON ITEM B.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GREAT PRESENTATION. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTION.
HAVE Y'ALL DID A SURVEY BASED ON EMPLOYEES WHO WANT TO WORK FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS VERSUS THE OTHER CITY PERTAINING TO WHAT TYPE OF BENEFIT WE OFFER COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES? WHY WOULD THEY DECIDE TO WORK FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS BECAUSE OF THE BENEFITS?
>> WE'VE NOT DONE THAT GLOBALLY.
I THINK THE COUNCIL MEMBER MAY I RESPOND FOR THE QUESTION.
WHAT WE TYPICALLY TRY TO DO IS TO ENSURE THAT ON OUR BACK-END OF THE PROCESS, THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHY EMPLOYEES CHOOSE TO LEAVE AND OFTENTIMES THEY WILL CITE VARIOUS REASONS.
BUT THAT'S ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE CAN COLLECT DATA AROUND OUR BENEFITS.
BUT THEN JUST AS WE ARE WORKING ON THEIR WHOLE RECRUITMENT PROCESS, I KNOW WE PRESENTED A DRAFT RECRUITMENT MARKETING CAMPAIGN EARLIER IN THE YEAR.
WE WERE WAITING TO MOVE THAT FORWARD AT A LATER DATE, BUT THOSE WOULD BE THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT I THINK WE COULD DO, WHETHER IT'S BENCHMARKING SURVEY, HAVING SOME FOCUS GROUPS TO REALLY TALK ABOUT, HERE'S WHAT THE CITY OF DALLAS OFFERS, TELL US WHAT YOU'VE SEEN OUT THERE.
WE KNOW SOME OF IT JUST WITH SOME OF THE DATA THAT WE PULL FROM OTHER ENTITIES AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT WAYS TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN TALENT.
BUT GLOBALLY, THAT'S NOT A SURVEY THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY CONDUCTED OURSELVES.
>> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY KIND OF DATAS THAT IF AN EMPLOYEE IS SOMEONE WHO IS SEARCHING FOR THE JOB IN CITY OF DALLAS AND I WOULD LOVE TO WORK FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS BECAUSE OF THE BENEFIT.
>> IF I MAY ADD, WHEN WE PRESENTED AT THE WEEK MIDI EARLY IN FEBRUARY AND THEN IN MAY, WE DID PRESENT SOME GLOBAL DATA JUST SHOWING WHAT EMPLOYEES IN GENERAL SAY THEY WANT FROM EMPLOYERS.
NOT PARTICULAR TO THE CITY, BUT IN GENERAL.
WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT TO EMPLOYEES.
THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF DATA AVAILABLE FOR MERCER AND OTHERS TO PUBLISH THAT TYPE OF DATA.
I KNOW THAT SEAN MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO IN DETAIL TO THAT.
>> I WOULD SAY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO ANNUALLY AS A GROUP IS TAKE A LOOK AT NATIONAL SURVEY DATA FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES AND LOOK TO SEE WHAT BENEFITS ARE IMPORTANT TO EMPLOYEES.
THAT DATA IS TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM EMPLOYEE BASE POPULATIONS TO SHOW IS SIMPLE THINGS LIKE IT'S PTO IMPORTANT, DENTAL INSURANCE.
THAT'S REALLY HOW THE CITY AT IT, PET INSURANCE.
BECAUSE WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE SURVEY DATA FROM THE PRIOR YEAR, WE SAW THAT THE PET INSURANCE MARKET HAD 26 PERCENT GAIN IN TERMS OF IT BEING IMPORTANT TO MEMBERS.
SO EVERY SINGLE YEAR WE LOOK AT WHAT THOSE BENEFITS ARE THAT ARE RANKED BY EMPLOYEE POPULATIONS.
THEN WE LOOK TO SEE WHERE THERE ARE GAPS OR WHERE THERE ARE BENEFITS WHERE MAYBE YOUR EMPLOYEES DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THEM.
WHAT I CAN SAY IS IF WE TOOK THE TOP 10 BENEFITS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO EMPLOYEES BASED ON THEIR RESPONSES TO SURVEYS, THEY ARE ALL AVAILABLE HERE AT THE CITY OF DALLAS.
YOUR EMPLOYEES ARE NOT LOOKING FOR DENTAL BENEFITS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE OR PET INSURANCE IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU DIDN'T OFFER.
WE PUT THAT IN PLACE, BUT WE'RE CONSTANTLY SURVEYING THE MARKET
[01:55:02]
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO YOUR MEMBERS AND THEN TRYING TO FIND A WAY FOR THE CITY TO MAKE THOSE THINGS AVAILABLE TO YOUR EMPLOYEES AND THEIR DEPENDENTS.>> WHILE ALSO CONTROLLING COSTS, WHICH IS ALWAYS A FACTOR YOU CAN ADD AT ALL.
BUT HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SUSTAINABLE GOING FORWARD?
>> WE ASK OUR EMPLOYEES AS WELL, WE HAVE AN INTERNAL BENEFITS SURVEY AND WE ASK THEM TO RANK YOUR BENEFITS, WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TO YOU, AND THEN RANK THEM.
THAT DATA IS VITAL BECAUSE AGAIN, WE DON'T WANT TO PROVIDE THINGS OR REMOVE THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO EMPLOYEES.
>> OKAY. ARE WE PART OF THAT SELF-INSURED? IS THAT A BUCKET, A MONITOR? IF SO, HOW MUCH IS IN THE BUCKET OF MONEY FOR SELF-INSURED? HOW MUCH IS THAT?
>> IF YOU GO TO THE SLIDE THAT ACTUALLY HAS THE WHOLE FINANCIAL.
>> PLEASE, LET ME GIVE YOU THAT SLIDE NUMBER.
ACTUALLY SHOWS THE TOTAL AMOUNT.
THAT'S OUR STATEMENT OF ALL THE REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AROUND OUR ENTIRE BENEFITS PROGRAM IS ON SLIDE 14.
>> ON A SELF-INSURED THAT WE SELF-INSURED, HOW MUCH MONEY DO WE SPEND OUT OF THAT PORTION OF THE SELF-INSURED? WHAT IS THAT NUMBER?
>> IN TERMS OF THE TOTAL COST PART OF IT?
>> YEAH, I WOULD SAY THE HEALTH INSURANCE, IF YOU THINK OF VISION AND DENTAL ARE PAID BY THE EMPLOYEE, HEALTH INSURANCE IS GOING TO BE 95 PERCENT OF THE COST.
LARGELY YOU'VE GOT DISABILITY, LIFE INSURANCE, AND OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT ALSO BUT MEDICAL CLAIMS RUNS A LOT OF IT.
>> SO OUT OF THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES THEY ARE 14?
>> OUT OF THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES THAT YOU SEE ON SLIDE 14, THAT WOULD BE THE PERCENTAGE THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE SELF-INSURED.
>> HI, MEMBERS. I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE ON ITEM B WHO HAS A QUESTION AND THANKS TO THE WORK PLAN, I THINK THAT I'VE DISCUSSED WITH THE CITY MANAGERS.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE NEXT PRESENTATION.
WE WILL HOLD THE Q&A FOR THAT UNTIL AFTER LUNCH AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE LAST PRESENTATION IN Q&A AFTER LUNCH.
MR. CITY MANAGER, YOU WANT TO SET UP IMC?
>> SURE, AND THANK YOU OUR HR TEAM AND HOLMES MURPHY FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
THIS NEXT BRIEFING I WILL GO THROUGH AS THE MAYOR INDICATED AND DO Q&A AFTER THAT, PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW.
YOUR NEXT BRIEFING PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW OF OUR CURRENT GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT AND THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY FOR ISSUING ADDITIONAL DEBT.
STAFF WILL EXPLAIN THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE MADE TO DETERMINE OUR FINANCIAL CAPACITY AND THE AMOUNT OF THAT THAT CAN BE ISSUED FOR THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM AS PROPOSED SHORTLY THIS FALL, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO JACK IRELAND, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, TO BEGIN THE PRESENTATION. JACK.
AS MENTIONED, THIS PRESENTATION IS INTENDED TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE CONSIDERATIONS AS WE MADE IS WE ANALYZED OUR FINANCIAL CAPACITY TO DETERMINE WHAT DEBT WE ARE ABLE TO ISSUE.
WE'VE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED HAVING CAPACITY FOR $1 BILLION BOND PROGRAM IN 24.
THROUGH THE BRIEFING, WE WILL EXPLAIN HOW WE'VE INCREASED THAT CAPACITY TO $1.1 BILLION.
I'M GOING TO TURN IT TO JANETTE WEEDON TO WALK US THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.
>> THANK YOU, JACK. GOOD MORNING AGAIN, JANETTE WEEDON, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
MOVING ON TO SLIDE NUMBER 2, THERE ARE SEVERAL FACTORS THAT WE CONSIDER WHEN DETERMINING THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY TO ISSUE ADDITIONAL DEBT.
WE REVIEW PROPERTY TAX VALUES, FUTURE GROWTH, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT ON A FUTURE SLIDE.
WE ALSO LOOK AT THE DEBT SERVICE PORTION OF THE TAX RATE.
OUR CURRENT OUTSTANDING DEBT, ANY VOTER-AUTHORIZED BUT AN ISSUE DEBT, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE REMAINDER OF THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM.
WE ALSO LOOK AT OUR PLAN DEBT, WHAT WE HAVE PRESENTED IN THE ANNUAL BUDGET DOCUMENT.
THEN OF COURSE, OTHER DEBT CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT.
ON SLIDE NUMBER 3, GO BONDS AS WELL AS CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, MASTER LEASE AND EQUIPMENT NODES ARE ALL REPAID BY THE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.
RECENT PROPERTY TAX BASE VALUE GROWTH, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED HAS BEEN VERY STRONG.
OUR GROWTH PROJECTIONS, HOWEVER, FOR FINANCIAL CAPACITY, WE DON'T JUST LOOK AT THE RECENT YEAR-OVER-YEAR CHANGE, WE LOOK AT THE LONG-TERM TREND RATHER THAN RECENT GROWTH.
[02:00:03]
IF YOU LOOK AT OUR LONG-TERM TREND SINCE FISCAL YEAR 85, THAT AVERAGE GROWTH IS 4.29 PERCENT, AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE INCLUDED IN OUR ASSUMPTIONS.MOVING ON TO SLIDE NUMBER 4, WE JUST SHOW A GRAPH OF THAT HISTORICAL AVERAGE GROWTH COMPARED TO OUR ACTUAL VALUES, AGAIN IN FISCAL YEAR 24 VALUES 198.3 BILLION.
MOVING ON TO SLIDE NUMBER 5, THE PROPERTY TAX RATE IS SPLIT BETWEEN THE GENERAL FUND AND THE DEBT SERVICE FUND.
DEBT SERVICE CAN ONLY BE USED TO PAY DEBT.
YOU CAN ONLY TAX UP TO THE AMOUNT TO COVER THE DEBT PAYMENT FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR.
SIMILAR TO THE GENERAL FUND TAX RATE, THE DEBT SERVICE RATE HAS BEEN REDUCED BY 2.84 CENTS SINCE FISCAL YEAR 16.
MV CAPACITY ANALYSIS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ASSUMES NO CHANGE IN THE TAX RATE.
THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE WILL REMAIN AT 20.40 CENTS.
SLIDE NUMBER 6 PROVIDES A HISTORICAL SPLIT BETWEEN THE GENERAL FUND AND THE DEBT SERVICE FUND DATING BACK TO FISCAL YEAR 99.
THEN SLIDE NUMBER 7, YOU RECOGNIZE FROM THE BRIEFING LAST WEEK, THIS SHOWS THE 40-YEAR HISTORY OF TAX RATE CHANGES.
ON SLIDE NUMBER 8, ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE LOOK AT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CAPACITY, WE LOOK AT OUR CURRENT OUTSTANDING DEBT.
OUR CURRENT OUTSTANDING DEBT AS OF SEPTEMBER 30TH OF 2023, IT'S 2.2 BILLION.
THAT'S PRINCIPLE ONLY IF YOU ADD IN THE INTERESTS OF 1.1 BILLION, THAT GIVES YOU A TOTAL OUTSTANDING AMOUNT OF 3.2 BILLION.
OUR FISCAL YEAR 24 DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE IS 342.9 MILLION.
THEN THE LAST BULLET, WE DO HAVE AN FNPC THAT ADVISORS THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR OUR OUTSTANDING DEBT FOR ANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR REFUNDING.
ASSIGNED NUMBER 9, WE'RE SHOWING THAT THE VOTERS AUTHORIZED 1.05 BILLION GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROGRAM FOR 2017.
WE DO HAVE 134.8 MILLION REMAINING TO BE ISSUED FOR THIS PROGRAM.
OUR PLAN IS TO ISSUE THOSE BONDS THIS COMING FALL.
ON SLIDE NUMBER 10, WE ARE SHOWING PLAN DEBT IN A CITY MANAGERS RECOMMENDED BUDGET.
WE DID WANT TO POINT OUT A CORRECTION THAT WE MADE TO THE PLAN DEBT AMOUNT IN THE POST DOCUMENT WAS 579 MILLION AND THE CORRECTED AMOUNT IS 595.2.
THERE'S NO CHANGE TO THE ANALYSIS, JUST THE CORRECTION TO REFLECT WHAT'S IN THE CITY MANAGERS RECOMMENDED BUDGET.
IN FISCAL YEAR 24 UNDER THE PLAN DEBT WE ARE SHOWING 136 MILLION IN EQUIPMENT NOTES, AS WELL AS MASTERLESS.
THIS INCLUDES THE FISCAL YEAR 23 ASSUMPTIONS AND FISCAL YEAR 24 ASSUMPTIONS COMBINED.
OUR MASTER LEASE AND EQUIPMENT PROGRAM, IT INCLUDES REPLACEMENT OF OUR GENERAL FLEET, OUR EMT UNITS FOR FIRE APPARATUS UNITS.
WE ALSO INCLUDE EQUIPMENT PURCHASES FOR IT.
THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE IN THAT NUMBER FOR THE PLAN DEBT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO LOOK AT AS PART OF OUR ANALYSIS, LOOK AT INFLATIONARY COST IMPACTS TO OUR CURRENT BOND PROGRAM, AS WELL AS OTHER LEGACY BOMB PROGRAMS AND IN DOING SO, WE REALIZED THE NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 213.5 MILLION.
THE MAJORITY OF THE PROJECTS ARE STREET PROJECTS.
THOSE ARE THE PROJECTS EXPERIENCING THE BIGGEST IMPACT RELATED TO INFLATION AND SO OUR ASSUMPTIONS ASSUME THAT WE WOULD ISSUE 215 MILLION IN CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION STARTING IN FISCAL YEAR 25 TO ADDRESS THAT NEED.
ANOTHER DEBT CONSIDERATION THAT WE LOOKED AT ON SLIDE NUMBER 12 IS OUR UNFUNDED LIABILITY IN BOTH THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND AS WELL AS THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT FUND.
THE COMBINED LIABILITY IS $4 BILLION.
I DO WANT TO SAY THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE CITY CONTINUES TO MAKE OUR REQUIRE CONTRIBUTIONS TO BOTH FUNDS.
WE DO KNOW THAT THE STATE REQUIRES THAT THE PRINCETON REVIEW BOARD PROVIDE A FINAL REPORT IN DECEMBER OF 2024 IN ADVANCE OF THE 2025 LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING AS PART DEBT ANALYSIS THAT WE WOULD
[02:05:02]
ISSUE 400 MILLION IN PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS TO GO TOWARDS THIS PARTICULAR NEED.OTHER CONSIDERATIONS FINALLY, OUR 2024 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROGRAM, BASED ON OUR UPDATED TAXABLE VALUES, NO CHANGE TO THE TAX RATE, WE REALIZED THAT WE HAVE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY OF 1.1 BILLION.
THIS IS AN ADDITION TO THE 215 MILLION FOR CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, AS WELL AS THE 400 MILLION FOR PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS AND SO OUR GO BOND PROGRAM IF RECOMMENDED AND APPROVED, WE CAN START THOSE PROJECTS RIGHT AWAY WITH OUR COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES JUST-IN-TIME FINANCING, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT TO ISSUE THOSE BONDS.
MOVING ON TO SLIDE NUMBER 14, THIS IS JUST A REMINDER OF THE EQUATION THAT WE WALK THROUGH WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT DEBT.
WE LOOK AT OUR TAX BASE VALUE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DO ON OUR GENERAL FUND SIDE, THE TAX RATE, AND THAT CALCULATES OUT TO OUR REVENUE.
FIRST THING WE WANT TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT WE COVER OUR CURRENT OUTSTANDING DEBT.
ANYTHING THAT WE PLAN TO ISSUE AS PART OF THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET, AND THEN THAT EQUALS OUR FUTURE CAPACITY.
THEN ON SLIDE NUMBER 15, WE ARE SHOWING A GRAPH THAT SHOWS OUR CURRENT OBLIGATIONS, WHAT WE HAVE PLANNED RELATED TO EQUIPMENT AND IT 215 MILLION FOR COST OVERRUNS ASSOCIATED WITH A 2017 BOND PROGRAM AND LEGACY PROGRAMS, 400 MILLION RESERVE FOR POSSIBLE PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS, AND THEN A 2024 BOND PROGRAM AT 1.1 BILLION.
TODAY'S DISCUSSION, WE ARE HERE TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL.
WE DO REALIZE THAT DISCUSSIONS REGARDING A BOND PROGRAM ARE ONGOING, WE REALIZED THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE MEETING, THE BOND COMMITTEES ARE MEETING AND HAVING THOSE DISCUSSIONS, SO WE WE DON'T EXPECT A DECISION TODAY.
I GUESS THAT'S THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE THAT WE'RE HERE TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK.
HAPPY TO RECEIVE THAT, I GUESS AFTER LUNCH.
>> VERY WELL DONE AND QUICKLY. I APPRECIATE THAT.
SOME MEMBERS WE'RE GOING TO RECESS UNTIL 01:00 P.M. AND COME BACK WITH THE Q&A FOR THIS PRESENTATION AND THEN THE LAST ONE.
HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEBT CAPACITY UNTIL AFTER LUNCH.
WITH THAT, WE STAND IN RECESS IT'S 11:43 WILL BE BACK AT 01:00 P.M.
[C. 23-2057 FY 2023-24 Budget Workshop: General Obligation Debt Overview and Financial Capacity 23-2057]
>> IT'S 1:23, WE'RE BACK AND IT'S REGULAR SESSION.
WE ARE READY WHENEVER THE BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOLKS ARE READY TO TAKE QUESTIONS AND OUR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, JACK IRELAND IS HERE TOO NOW.
MEMBERS, IF YOU GUYS ARE READY TO START FILLING IN THE QUEUE, I DON'T SEE ANYBODY YET, BUT I KNOW THAT'S JUST THE TEMPORARY SITUATION HERE, SO I'M JUST WAITING TO SEE WHO WANTS TO GO FIRST.
WE'RE DOING THE Q&A ON ITEM C ON TODAY'S AGENDA FOR THE PUBLIC.
>> WHO WAS THAT? HEY, MR. BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES? FIVE-MINUTES ON ITEM C.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU-ALL FOR THE PRESENTATION.
ONE QUESTION I HAVE, ESPECIALLY WITH SEEING THAT IT'S NOW COMING IN HIGHER EVALUATION OF DEBT CAPACITY, IS WHY IS IT SUCH A NEED FOR US TO BE PUTTING THIS ON AN ELECTION FOR MAY INSTEAD OF IN NOVEMBER WHEN WE CAN ALREADY ANTICIPATE A PRETTY ROBUST CHARTER REVIEW, INSTEAD OF PAYING TWO DIFFERENT ELECTIONS IN A YEAR THAT WE OTHERWISE WOULD NOT HAVE ANY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
JACK IRELAND, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER.
THE DECISION TO MOVE FORWARD IS CLEARLY THE COUNCIL'S DECISION OF WHEN IT WOULD BE.
HOWEVER, I WILL SAY THAT THE WORK ON OUR DIFFERENT INFRASTRUCTURE, WHETHER IT'S STREETS AND ALLEYS AND THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS, WILL BE NEEDING ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE.
WE HAVE HEARD FROM THIS BODY AS WELL AS FROM RESIDENTS, THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SPENDING,
[02:10:02]
ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT IN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND THIS IS A MEANS OF ACCOMPLISHING THAT.THE BOND PROGRAM PROVIDES US WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET RESIDENT APPROVAL AND THEN THE MONEY AVAILABLE TO DO THE PROJECTS.
PRIMARY REASON, I BELIEVE AND DR. PEREZ CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE OUR PRIMARY REASON IS GOING TO BE SO WE CAN CONTINUE OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WITHOUT ANY INTERRUPTION.
>> HONORABLE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL, ROBERT PEREZ, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.
AS MR. IRELAND, HAS STATED, THAT PRIMARY REASON IS TO KEEP OUR CAPITAL PROGRAM PROJECTS RUNNING AND I THINK IN PREVIOUS BRIEFINGS WE'VE SHARED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PARTICULARLY FOR 2024, THE NOVEMBER ELECTION WOULD BE MORE EXPENSIVE AS THIS THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND THERE'S ADDITIONAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT COMPARED TO MAY ELECTION.
THOSE ARE SOME PRIMARY DRIVERS AS TO WHY WE ARE CALLING FOR A MAY '24 ELECTION VERSUS NOVEMBER.
>> ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS WITH WHAT IS ALLOCATED IN OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO GAP JUST FIVE TO SIX MONTHS OF NEED? THEN ALSO YOU MENTIONED THE COST OF A MORE EXTENSIVE ELECTION WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CHARTER REVIEW ON THE ELECTION.
CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THAT COST ANALYSIS IS IN IF WE WERE TO HAVE IT IN MAY VERSUS WITH TWO DIFFERENT ELECTIONS VERSUS HOW MUCH IT IS TO ADD THAT TO AN ELECTION WERE ALREADY EXPECTING TO CONDUCT?
>> BEFORE YOU GO ANY FURTHER AND I'M TALKING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT IT JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT GETTING TOO FAR OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF TALKING ABOUT THE DEBT CAPACITY AND THE FINANCIAL ASPECT OF THE BOND ISSUANCE AND THINGS AS OPPOSED TO THE ELECTION COSTS AND THE PROS AND CONS OF THAT.
I'M AGNOSTIC ABOUT THE ISSUE I GUESS I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE STAY GERMANE TO THE TOPIC OF THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSAL.
>> MAYOR I THINK THAT THERE'S SOMETHING TO BE SAID ABOUT A LATER DATE OF AN ELECTION IN HAVING STAFF RE-EVALUATE OUR CAPACITY EVEN FOR THAT LATER DATE AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING IF THERE WOULD BE IMPLICATION AND IF THAT'S BEEN EVALUATED.
YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN TO IT.
LIKE I SAID IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS THAT ARE RELATED TO THE PROS AND CONS FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT OF DELAYING OR PUSHING FORWARD THE BOND ISSUANCE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE DEBT ISSUANCE ITSELF.
BUT THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH AN ELECTION AND HOW MUCH TO ELECTIONS CAUSE VERSUS ONE, THE MORE EXPENSIVE ONE.
I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF A BUDGET PRESENTATION THAT TOUGH FROM LIKE A CITY SECRETARY CONVERSATION TO ME, BUT I'LL DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THAT ONE.
>> MAYOR, I JUST WOULD EXPECT FOR THAT TO BE SOME OF THE ANSWER THAT I GET WHEN ASKING WHAT HAS GONE INTO EVALUATING WHY WE'RE GOING WITH A MAY ELECTION ON THIS BOND VERSUS NOVEMBER.
>> I'M CURIOUS TO HEAR SOME OF THESE ANSWERS TO REALLY NOT TRY TO STOP THE CONVERSATION I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE HAVING THE CONFIDENCE THAT WERE PERMITTED TO HAVE ON THIS POSTED TOPICS.
GO AHEAD, ROBERT IF YOU WANT TO KEEP GOING.
>> COUNCILMAN, ASIDE FROM THE ELECTION COSTS, WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED WITH THIS BODY, THEY'RE ALL WE'RE SEEING OUR PRICE ESCALATIONS IN CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR, WHETHER IT BE MATERIALS OR LABOR.
WE HAVE DISCUSSED THAT EVEN A SIX MONTH DELAY, WE COULD POTENTIALLY SEE PRICE ESCALATIONS OVER THOSE SIX MONTHS.
OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, WE HAVE REJECTED BIDS BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE ONE CONTRACTOR BIDDING ON IT, AND THE PRICES ARE COMING ANYWHERE 50 TO 60 PERCENT HIGHER ON OUR ESTIMATED COSTS.
I CAN TELL YOU OF ANOTHER PROJECT, THE UPTOWN MECHANICAL TO A CONVERSION PROJECT THAT PROJECT WAS IT WAS SCOPED A NUMBER OF YEARS BACK.
BUT WE WE HAD ESTIMATED ABOUT $20,000,000 COSTS AND THAT PROJECT IS NOW SOMEWHERE AROUND 38 MILLION.
EVEN JUST A SIX-MONTH DELAY, SIR WE CAN SEE SOME ADDITIONAL COST IN THE PROJECTS.
[02:15:04]
>> ARE YOU FINISHED, MR. BAZALDUA? IS THAT IT?
>> I'M WORRIED ABOUT MY REMOTE FOLKS I OVERLOOK YOU GUYS SOMETIMES SORRY.
MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. JACK, WHAT DOES OUR CURRENT DEBT CAPACITY?
>> OUR CURRENT OUTSTANDING DEBT AND I'LL ANSWER A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS HERE.
OUR CURRENT OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT, WHICH INCLUDES PAST GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, EQUIPMENT NOTES, MASTER LEASE DEBT IS $2.2 BILLION AS OF THIS SEPTEMBER.
IS THAT YOUR DIRECT QUESTION OR YOU WANT ME TO GO FURTHER?
MY QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE CITY'S CURRENT DEBT CAPACITY IN CONSIDERATION OF OUR TAX RATES, OUR TAX BASE, WHAT CAN WE AFFORD TO BORROW?
>> GIVEN THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE'VE LAID OUT TODAY, WE CAN AFFORD TO BORROW $1.1 BILLION FOR THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROGRAM.
>> THAT'S ON TOP OF THE EXISTING DEBT OF 2.2 BILLION IN PRINCIPLE, PLUS A BILLION IN INTEREST TO SERVICE THAT DEBT?
>> YES, AND IT IS ON TOP OF SETTING ASIDE $215 MILLION FOR CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION TO FINISH UP THE 2017 PROJECTS AND THE LEGACY PROJECTS FROM PRIOR BOND PROGRAM AND IT'S IN ADDITION TO SETTING ASIDE $400 MILLION, AS MS. WEEDON MENTIONED, THAT WE HAVE SET ASIDE FOR FUTURE POTENTIAL OF PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS.
OF COURSE, THAT'S DOWN THE ROAD. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
BUT WITH ALL THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE'VE LAID OUT THROUGH THE BRIEFING, $1.1 BILLION.
>> NOW, THOSE ASSUMPTIONS CAN CHANGE OVER THE COURSE OF SEVERAL YEARS, PARTICULARLY THE ANTICIPATED INCREASE IN OUR TAXING CAPABILITY FOR PROPERTY TAXES BASED UPON ASSESSED VALUES OVER WHICH WE HAVE NO CONTROL.
AS YOU'VE ALREADY OBSERVED OR AS ROBERT HAS OBSERVED, IT CAN ALSO BE AFFECTED BY THE COST OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE BOND ISSUE; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES, SIR. THAT'S EXACTLY CORRECT.
WE TRIED TO BE AS TRANSPARENT AS WE COULD ON THE DIFFERENT VARIABLES THAT WE'VE INCLUDED THAT AFFECT OUR CAPACITY.
>> YES. THAT WAS VERY WELL DONE.
MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT OBLIGATES THIS COUNCIL IN THIS 2024 BOND ISSUE TO EXHAUST OUR BORROWING CAPABILITY TO THE TUNE OF NOW $1.1 BILLION.
THAT HAS JUST THIS WEEK INCREASED BY $100 MILLION.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT COMPELS US TO INCUR THAT ADDITIONAL 100 MILLION IN DEBT, OR COULD WE STICK WITH THE ORIGINAL BILLION DOLLARS?
>> THERE'S NOTHING THAT REQUIRES THAT.
I WAS TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE TOP LIMIT, IF YOU WILL.
>> YOU COULD DO A SMALLER BOND PROGRAM THAN EVEN ONE BILLION IF YOU CHOOSE TO.
>> GIVEN THE POTENTIAL VARIABILITY OF SOME OF THE FACTORS THAT GO INTO CALCULATION OF THE DEBT'S CAPACITY OVER THE ENSUING FIVE YEARS OF THE NEW BOND PROGRAM, WOULDN'T IT BE PRUDENT TO NOT EXHAUST THE ULTIMATE LIMIT OF OUR CURRENT CALCULATION OF BONDING CAPACITY AND GIVE US SOME FLEXIBILITY IN CASE PROPERTY TAX VALUES DROP-OFF, EXPENSES GO UP HIGHER THAN EXPECTED?
>> YES, SIR THAT IS FOR SURE SOMETHING WE CAN CONSIDER OR THIS BODY CAN CONSIDER.
ONE THING THAT WE'VE EXPERIENCED IN THE PAST, IN PRIOR BOND PROGRAMS. THIS GOES BACK TO BEFORE MY TIME, BUT THE 1985 BOND PROGRAM, AS AN EXAMPLE, WAS STRETCHED OUT MUCH LONGER BECAUSE VALUES DECLINED.
>> YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY RECOMMENDING TO THIS BODY THAT WE INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF OUR BOND FOR 2024 TO $1.1 BILLION.
YOU'RE JUST SAYING THAT'S OUR POTENTIAL BORROWING CAPACITY?
>> YES, SIR. THAT'S THE CAPACITY.
>> NOW, YOU INDICATE ON SLIDE 9 THAT THERE IS 134.8 MILLION OF 2017 BONDS THAT HAVE NOT YET BEEN ISSUED, AND YOU'RE ANTICIPATING THAT THOSE WILL BE ISSUED BY THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR, AM I RIGHT?
>> YES, SIR. I DO WANT TO CLARIFY ON THAT.
WE HAVE APPROPRIATED THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, THE ENTIRE 2017 BOND PROGRAM.
IN FISCAL YEAR 23, THE CURRENT YEAR, WE APPROPRIATED THROUGH COUNCIL ACTION, THE LAST OF THOSE BONDS, WE USE COMMERCIAL PAPER TO GET THOSE PROJECTS STARTED.
[02:20:03]
WE RETIRE THE COMMERCIAL PAPER SO THE PROJECTS ARE ALREADY UNDERWAY USING COMMERCIAL PAPER.RETIRE THAT LAST TRANCHE OF 135 MILLION BEFORE THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR, AS YOU JUST MENTIONED.
>> WELL, YOU USE THE TERM RETIRE, BUT WE'RE INCURRING THE DEBT.
WE'RE NOT RETIRING THAT DEBT, RIGHT?
>> CORRECT. WE'RE REFUNDING THE COMMERCIAL PAPER WITH LONG-TERM DEBT, TAKING IT OUT FOR ADDITIONAL 19 YEARS.
>> WHAT IS OUR CURRENT INDEBTEDNESS UNDER THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM? I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE ISSUED THE BONDS, I.E, INCURRED THE DEBT UP TO THE LAST 135 MILLION.
BUT HOW MUCH IS CURRENTLY OUTSTANDING ON THAT DEBT?
>> THAT'S AN ANSWER I DON'T HAVE WITH ME, BUT I CAN PROVIDE THAT.
THE FIRST OF THE BONDS WE ISSUED IN WHAT YEAR? IN 2018 AND SO WE HAVE STARTED MAKING SOME PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS ON WHAT WE ISSUED IN 2018, WHAT WE ISSUED IN 2019, ETC.
WE CAN GET YOU THAT NUMBER OF THOSE BONDS WE'VE ALREADY ISSUED, HOW MUCH IS STILL OUTSTANDING.
>> THE WAY THAT WORKS IS IN TERMS OF RETIRING THAT BONDED INDEBTEDNESS IS THAT FROM THE DATE OF ISSUE OF EACH TRANCHE, THAT DEBT IS PAID BACK OVER A COURSE OF 30 YEARS WITH INTEREST RATE.
>> TWENTY YEARS, AND SO WE WILL STILL BE PAYING ON 2017 BONDED NATEDNESS 20 YEARS FROM NOW?
>> THE SAME WILL BE TRUE OF THE 2024 BOND ISSUE?
>> YES, AND BY DOING IT IN FIVE INCREMENTS OF $220 MILLION, EACH INCREMENT THEN GOES FOR 20 YEARS.
>> IN 2017, PRESUMABLY YOU WENT THROUGH THE SAME EXERCISE THAT YOU'VE GONE THROUGH IN THIS BOND IN DETERMINING WHAT OUR BONDING CAPACITY WAS IN 2017 DOLLARS?
>> WE HAVE ONLY PAID BACK A FRACTION OF THAT INDEBTEDNESS SIX YEARS LATER?
>> HOW HAS OUR BONDING AUTHORITY GONE UP A BILLION ONE SINCE 2017, GIVEN THAT THE MONEY THAT WE BORROWED IN 2017, MOST OF IT HASN'T BEEN PAID BACK YET?
>> I WILL REFER TO SLIDE 15 AND I HOPE SOMEONE CAN PULL THAT SLIDE UP.
WE STRUCTURE OUR DEBT WITH LEVEL PRINCIPAL SO THAT WE'RE PAYING OFF MORE UPFRONT AND IT THEN DECREASES OVER THE COURSE OF THE 20 YEARS, AND SO YOU'LL SEE ON SLIDE 15, OUR EXISTING DEBT THAT IS IN THE REDDISH COLOR.
YOU WILL SEE THAT EACH YEAR THAT STEPS DOWN, EACH YEAR AS WE MAKE OUR DEBT PAYMENTS IT STEPS DOWN AND WE'RE ABLE TO LAYER ON ADDITIONAL DEBT ON TOP OF THAT, AND SO ON THE FAR RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE GRAPH, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LINE AT THE TOP, WHICH IS THE REVENUE, AND THOSE BARS AT THE BOTTOM IS THE CAPACITY THAT WILL BE OUT THERE IN THE FUTURE BEYOND THE 24 BOND PROGRAM, SO AS OUR DEBT IS PAID OFF, WE CAN LAYER ON ADDITIONAL DEBT.
>> THAT'S REPRESENTED IN THE PURPLE BARS AT THE TOP OF THE GRAPH AS THE FUTURE BOND PROGRAM CAPACITY?
>> WHAT ARE THE ASSUMPTIONS IN THE REVENUE LINE AT THE TOP, THE BLACK LINE?
>> WE HAVE ASSUMED A, I BELIEVE, 35-39 YEAR AVERAGE ON GROWTH OF 4.29 PERCENT.
WE'VE ASSUMED A 20.4 CENTS ON THE TAX RATE.
>> BEING CONSTANT FOR THE NEXT 20 OR 30 YEARS?
>> WE CARRIED THE REVENUE OUT FAR PAST THE POINT OF ISSUING ALL THE DEBT THAT WE'VE LAID OUT, IT WILL CONTINUE TO GROW BEYOND THAT POINT.
BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS, WE JUST CARRIED IT OUT PAST THE POINT OF WHEN THE DEBT STARTS LAYERING ON.
YOU CAN REALLY ASSUME ON SLIDE 15 THAT THAT REVENUE LINE CONTINUES TO GO UP RATHER THAN FLATTEN OFF.
IT ONLY FLATTENS OFF BECAUSE THERE'S NO POINT IN CONTINUING IT PAST THE POINT OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ISSUE THIS THROUGH THIS ASSUMPTIONS.
>> WHAT DO YOU ATTRIBUTE THE BLIP BETWEEN 2029 AND 2033 IN THAT REVENUE LINES?
>> INCLUDED WITHIN THE REVENUE IS THE PROPERTY TAX THAT COMES TO THE DEBT SERVICE FUND, THE 20.40 CENTS.
ALSO BECAUSE WE DO HAVE OUTSTANDING PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS THAT WERE ISSUED IN 2005, WE REQUIRE DALLAS WATER UTILITY AVIATION CONVENTION CENTER,
[02:25:01]
THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS TO PAY THEIR SHARE OF THOSE PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS.THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT YOU SEE COMING IN.
OUT THERE IN 2035 OR SO, IS WHEN THOSE BONDS ARE PAID OFF AND I HAVE TO QUIT CHARGING WATER AND AVIATION AND CONVENTION CENTER ONCE THOSE PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS ARE PAID OFF.
THAT'S THE SLIGHT DROP YOU SEE THERE.
>> THIS DEBT CAPACITY GRAPH ON SLIDE 15 IS INDEPENDENT OF BINDING CAPACITY OF DALLAS WATER UTILITIES, OR OTHER ENTERPRISE FUNDS, CORRECT?
>> YES, SIR. THIS IS WHAT IS BACKED BY THE PROPERTY TAX OF THE CITY.
>> RATHER THAN REVENUE FROM FEES FOR SERVICES RENDERED?
>> WITH REGARD TO THE PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS, JANETTE, ON SLIDE 12 YOU MENTIONED $400 MILLION IN PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS.
I WASN'T REAL CLEAR ON WHAT THOSE BONDS ARE.
ARE THOSE ALREADY ISSUED BONDS IN THE PAST OR THOSE PROPOSED FUTURE BONDS?
>> THOSE ARE PROPOSED FUTURE BONDS.
WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION WITH THIS BODY ABOUT OUR UNFUNDED LIABILITY RELATED TO THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND AS WELL AS THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT FUND.
WHAT WE'RE SHOWING ON SLIDE NUMBER 12 IS THAT THE CURRENT UNFUNDED LIABILITY IS $4 BILLION.
WE DO REALIZE THAT THE STATE REQUIRES THAT THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD PROVIDE A FINAL REPORT TO THE CITY IN ADVANCE OF THE 2025 LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
WE DO ANTICIPATE THAT THERE WILL BE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS IN THAT REPORT.
WHAT WE'RE OFFERING AS OTHER DEBT CONSIDERATION IS THE OPTION FOR CITY COUNCIL TO SET ASIDE SOME OF THAT CAPACITY TO GO TOWARDS THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY.
>> IF I CAN ADD TO JANETTE EXPLANATION THERE, IT IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT.
IT IS JUST SETTING ASIDE THAT CAPACITY BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO USE ALL THE CAPACITY.
I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT $400 MILLION WILL FIX THE PROBLEM.
BUT I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE A COMBINATION OF PERHAPS SOME INFUSION OF CASH AS WELL AS INCREASED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE CITY, POSSIBLY FROM THE EMPLOYEE.
I DON'T KNOW. BUT I WILL GO AHEAD AND SAY IF I MAY, THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD HAS SELECTED AN INDEPENDENT ACTUARY THAT HAS STARTED THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND.
IN OCTOBER, NOVEMBER TIMEFRAME THIS YEAR THIS FALL, THEY WILL BE BRINGING FORTH THEIR FIRST DRAFT OF THE REPORT.
THEY WILL UPDATE THAT AFTER THE FIRST OF THE CALENDAR YEAR.
BETWEEN NOVEMBER AND JANUARY, WE WILL START TO HAVE A MUCH BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE GOING TO BE ON THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SIDE.
AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE BEGINNING THE PROCESS OF WORKING WITH THE NON-UNIFORM EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT FUND.
WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR ACTUARY, THEY HAVE THEIR ACTUARY.
WE WILL COME TO THIS BODY WITH RECOMMENDATIONS HOPEFULLY BEFORE THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR SO THAT YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION THIS WINTER.
>> MR. RILEY, THAT'S IT FOR THIS ROUND, BUT HOLD THAT NEXT QUESTION FOR THE NEXT ROUND, YOU'VE GOT SOME GOOD QUESTIONS THERE.
YOU JUST RAN OUT OF TIME HERE FOR THIS ROUND.
MS. MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. YOU'RE GOING TO NEED THE SAME SLIDES THAT MY COLLEAGUE HERE PULLED UP.
FIRST I WANTED TO JUST SAY, SHOUT OUT TO COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA ASKING ABOUT DELAYING THE PENSION ELECTION, AND MY QUESTION FOR MR. PEREZ IS ABOUT THE SUPPOSITION THAT WE WOULD RUN OUT OF PROJECTS BECAUSE WE'VE RUN OUT OF MONEY.
MY QUESTION IS, WOULDN'T YOU HAVE ENOUGH WORK TO DO WITH THE 90 MILLION FROM DART?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER, YES. WE WOULD HAVE SOME MORE WORK TO DO WITH THE DART FUNDS.
HOWEVER, A LOT OF THE DART FUNDS DON'T COVER THE TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE IN THE BOND AND INCLUDE STREET RECONSTRUCTION, TO INCLUDE RESURFACING, TO INCLUDE PARTS, TO INCLUDE ALL THE OTHER PROPOSITIONS THAT ARE NOT COVERED BY THE DART FUNDS.
>> OKAY. THEN ON PAGE 515, WE'VE GOT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET.
MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE BONDS FROM NOVEMBER 2012 THAT ELECTION AND NOVEMBER 2006 ELECTION, AND THERE SEEMS TO BE QUITE A BIT OF MONEY THAT STILL ELIGIBLE FOR PROJECTS.
THAT WOULD OF COURSE COVER THE VERY THINGS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 41 MILLION AVAILABLE FROM 2012 AND 59 MILLION AVAILABLE FROM 2006.
LOTS OF DIFFERENT NEW PARKS HAS OVER 4 MILLION IN THEIR FLOODING 28 MILLION, LOTS AND LOTS OF NUMBERS IN HERE, SO WOULDN'T YOU BE ABLE TO ISSUE DEBT FOR THESE INSTEAD AND GO AHEAD AND GET THAT WORK GOING?
[02:30:02]
>> COUNCIL MEMBER THAT SPEAKS TO THE, WHAT IS IT? 215 MILLION AND COS THAT ARE NEEDED TO KEEP THOSE PROJECTS GOING.
IT DOES REFERENCE SOME OF THE LEGACY PROJECTS.
I'LL GIVE YOU A PERFECT EXAMPLE.
ONE OF THEM IS THE WEST DALLAS GATEWAY PROJECT FROM THE 2012 BOND PROGRAM THAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY BUDGETED I BELIEVE SOMEWHERE AROUND $30 MILLION, WHICH IS NOW ABOUT $60 MILLION.
A LOT OF THOSE OLDER BONDS THAT ARE BEING REFERENCED ARE FOR LEGACY PROJECTS THAT NEED SOME OF THIS ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO KEEP GOING.
>> I'LL TELL YOU I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF CO SINCE NOBODY ACTUALLY VOTED TO ISSUE THAT DEBT.
I'M GOING TO JUST PUT THAT ASIDE AS A SEPARATE TOPIC.
BUT IF YOU COMBINE THAT 215 WITH THE 90 MILLION FROM DART, YOU HAVE A VERY LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT YOU CAN BE DOING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT ON. WOULD YOU AGREE?
>> I WOULD AGREE THAT THERE'S A VERY LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY, BUT ALSO AGREE THAT THERE'S VERY FEW PROJECTS THAT THERE ARE SOME EXPENSIVE PROJECTS THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.
AS MENTIONED THE $60 MILLION FOR THE WEST DALLAS GATEWAY WILL BE PART OF THAT.
WE'RE LOOKING AT A NUMBER OF LARGE PROJECTS AT THAT.
WHILE THERE ARE HIGH-END NUMBER THERE, THERE AREN'T A WHOLE LOT OF PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE PAID FOR WITH THAT.
WE HAVE A LIST OF PROJECTS THAT WE CAN SHARE WITH YOU.
BUT THERE'S A LOT OF LARGE TICKET ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE FUNDED OUT OF THE LEGACY BOND PROJECTS AS WELL AS THE 250 MILLION.
>> SINCE WE HAVEN'T HAD A COMMITTEE MEETING IN TRANSPORTATION FOR SOME TIME, CAN YOU TELL US WHERE YOU ARE ON YOUR YEAR-TO-DATE SPEND FOR BOTH BOND AND GENERAL FUND FOR THOSE ITEMS?
>> I HAVE TO GET THE NUMBERS ON THE GENERAL FUND.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT AS PART OF THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM, THE QUARTERLY REPORT THAT WE SHARED LAST WEEK SHOWED US AT 96 PERCENT AWARD OR COMMITMENT OR THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM.
WE'RE CHUGGING ALONG PRETTY WELL MA'AM.
>> HOW ABOUT FOR THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH ABOUT HALF? [OVERLAPPING]
>> AGAIN, I'LL HAVE TO GET THAT FOR YOU.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU ON THE BOND SIDE WHERE WE'RE MOVING ALONG WELL.
>> IN THE FOUR YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE, WE'VE NEVER HAD A YEAR THAT WE DIDN'T ROLL OVER MILLIONS OF DOLLARS BECAUSE IT WASN'T ABLE TO BE COMPLETED.
ARE YOU EXPECTING THAT YOU WILL HAVE COMPLETED YOUR BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR?
>> SO YES, I BELIEVE WE'RE ON TRACK TO DO THAT MA'AM.
AND AGAIN, I'LL GET YOU SPECIFICS, BUT WE ARE MOVING FORWARD AGGRESSIVELY.
>> I WILL JUST SHARE GENERAL FEEDBACK FROM APPOINTEES THAT I HAVE ON THE BOND COMMITTEE THAT THEY FEEL VERY RUSHED AND THEY HAVE ASKED QUESTIONS OF STAFF THAT THEY HAVE NOT YET GOTTEN ANSWERS TO.
SLOWING THIS DOWN A LITTLE BIT WILL ALLOW US TO ACTUALLY HAVE SOME ACCURATE NUMBERS FOR OUR PENSION.
AND WHILE I MOST CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU HAVE RESERVED 400 MILLION.
IS THAT 400 MILLION FOR POLICE FIRE PENSION WHERE WE HAVE 3 BILLION OF UNFUNDED LIABILITIES OR IS THAT FOR THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT FUND WHERE WE HAVE 1.2 BILLION UNFUNDED LIABILITIES?
>> WE DID NOT DESIGNATE EITHER WAY, BUT AS YOU MENTIONED, ONE HAS A MUCH LARGER UNFUNDED LIABILITY, WHICH IS WHERE THE GREATER NEED IS.
>> IT ALSO HAS A LEGISLATIVE DEADLINES.
>> IF WE WERE TO FUND THE ENTIRE FIX FOR THE PENSION THROUGH PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS, WHAT DOLLAR AMOUNT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT FOR EACH ONE?
>> I THINK I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, BUT CORRECT ME IF I DIDN'T.
IF WE ISSUED $3 BILLION IN PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS OUR ANNUAL DEBT COST IS $218 MILLION.
THAT WOULD BE EQUAL TO ABOUT 11.18 CENTS ON THE TAX RATE, WHICH WE, FOR OUR ENTIRE DEBT SERVICE FUND, OUR TAX RATE IS ONLY 20.4 CENTS.
THERE IS NOT AN EXPECTATION THAT WE WOULD SOLVE A 30-YEAR PROBLEM BY ISSUING $3 BILLION RIGHT NOW THOUGH.
>> PLUS YOU DIDN'T INCLUDE THE [OVERLAPPING]
>> I DID NOT. A THIRD OF WHAT I JUST SAID APPLIES TO THE OTHER.
>> I GUESS THE POINT IS REALLY THAT WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE NEED, MAYBE MORE, MAYBE LESS.
>> WE WOULDN'T ISSUE THE FULL AMOUNT NOW TO FIX A 30-YEAR PROBLEM.
>> IS SOMETHING WE WOULD DO OVER TIME.
A BIG IF, IF IT'S A RECOMMENDATION TO DO PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS, WE WOULD PROBABLY DO IT IN TRANCHES AND SO MUCH EVERY FOUR OR FIVE YEARS OR SO.
I DON'T KNOW THAT ANSWER RIGHT NOW.
BUT I DEFINITELY WOULD NOT ASSUME THAT WE NEED TO BORROW $4 BILLION TODAY.
>> I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S SUGGESTING THAT, BUT I DO THINK THAT WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE NEED.
I MEAN, EVEN THE ACTUARIES DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE NEED.
>> WORKING ON THAT. YES, MA'AM.
[02:35:01]
>> IF WE GO BACK TO SLIDE 15 REAL QUICK, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THAT LINE AS IT INTERSECTS WITH THE BAR CHART AT 2024 AND 2026 WHERE IT'S OVERLAPPING WITH THE PURPLE.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. I THINK IT'S JUST THE SIZING OF THE CHART.
THE REVENUE ACTUALLY EXCEEDS THE PROJECTED EXPENSE.
SO IF I PULL UP THE ACTUAL NUMBERS.
IN FISCAL YEAR 2025, I'M SHOWING REVENUE OF 468.4 MILLION, SORRY, AND PROJECTED EXPENSES OF 442 MILLION.
SO IT'S JUST THE SIZING ISSUE.
THERE'S MORE REVENUE THAN EXPENSE.
>> I WAS LIKE WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE? THEN CAN YOU TALK ABOUT ON PAGE 8? ACTUALLY, I THINK YOU ANSWERED THAT QUESTION. I'M SORRY.
I'M GOING TO END MY QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW.
>> MS. WILLIS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK WE'LL PICK UP, YOU WERE TOUCHING ON THE FACT THAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT $4 BILLION IN UNFUNDED LIABILITY, THAT WE'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO DO ALL THAT UPFRONT.
WE WOULD STRUCTURE THIS IN A WAY THAT WOULD WORK.
IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE EXPECT TO BE ONE OF THE FINDINGS IN THIS ACTUARIAL REPORT IS A RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO THAT OR ARE WE PRETTY MUCH WATCHING MARKET FORCES OR DO WE HAVE ANY INDICATOR OF HOW WE WOULD TRANCHE THAT OUT?
>> AT THIS POINT COUNCIL MEMBER, I DO NOT.
BUT WE WILL BE BACK TO YOU WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
I FEEL CERTAIN THAT THE ACTUARY IS GOING TO SAY THE CITY NEEDS TO CONTRIBUTE MORE.
NOW, IT MAY BE UP TO THE CITY TO DETERMINE HOW WE DO THAT.
WHETHER WE CHOOSE TO DO THAT WITH JUST INCREASING OUR ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION, BECAUSE IF WE ISSUE AT A BAD PLACE IN THE MARKET TO BE BORROWING SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS LIKE THAT FOR THE PENSION OBLIGATION FOR A 30-YEAR DEBT, WE WILL PROBABLY GET SIX PERCENT OR MORE INTEREST ON THAT.
A FEW YEARS AGO, WE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY GOTTEN MUCH LESS THAN THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE FAVORABLE.
I'M NOT SURE IF I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION WHAT THAT RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO BE.
BUT THERE'S LOTS OF WAYS TO ADDRESS PROBLEMS LIKE THAT.
EITHER INCREASE THE CITY'S ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION, A CASH INFUSION FROM PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS, MAYBE THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTE MORE.
THEY'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT, AT LEAST ON THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SIDE, THE BENEFITS.
I THINK THERE MIGHT BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE BENEFITS ON THE NON-UNIFORM SIDE TO REDUCE THE EXPENSES AND THE LIABILITY.
THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT LEVERS YOU HAVE ON THAT.
BUT THEY ALL BOIL DOWN TO EITHER MORE MONEY COMING IN OR LESS MONEY GOING OUT.
ONE OF THE THINGS WE REALLY WANT TO TIGHTEN UP ON AS OUR HIRING PLAN FOR UNIFORM EMPLOYEES.
WHEN WE HIRE MORE OFFICERS, IT ADDS MONEY TO THE PENSION FUND THROUGH CONTRIBUTIONS.
WHEN WE INCREASE PAY THROUGH MEET AND CONFER, THAT ACTUALLY ENDS UP WITH MORE MONEY GOING INTO THE PENSION FUND, SO THERE'S A LOT OF VARIABLES THERE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
>> WHEN WE LOOK AT ON SLIDE 15 TO 29 MILLION, THE CONTRIBUTION WE MAKE EVERY YEAR.
THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE THAT WE HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE.
>> NO. THE CHART ON SLIDE NUMBER 15 IS THE PROJECTED DEBT ASSOCIATED WITH ISSUING 400 MILLION.
AGAIN, WE REALIZE THERE'S AN UNFUNDED LIABILITY, AND SO WE ARE SHARING WITH YOU THE AVAILABLE CAPACITY TO DO SEVERAL THINGS.
YOU CAN ADDRESS YOUR COST OVERRUNS FOR LEGACY PROGRAMS AND THE 2017'S BOND PROGRAM, UP TO 215 MILLION.
YOU CAN RESERVE CAPACITY FOR PENSION, UNFUNDED LIABILITY UP TO 400 MILLION, OR YOU CAN INVEST IN A 2024 BOND PROGRAM FOR 1.1 BILLION.
THIS IS JUST A BUFFET OF ITEMS FOR YOU TO CHOOSE FROM.
THE PURPLE REPRESENTS THE PROJECTED DEBT SERVICE ASSOCIATED WITH ISSUING 400 MILLION AND PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS.
>> OUR CURRENT CONTRIBUTION FOR FISCAL YEAR '24 TO POLICE AND FIRE THROUGH THE PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS THAT WE MAKE IS $186 MILLION.
WE CONTRIBUTE A TOTAL OF $120 MILLION FOR THE NON-UNIFORM.
THAT'S A COMBINATION OF THE BI-WEEKLY AS WELL AS
[02:40:02]
THE DEBT ON THE PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS THAT WE ISSUED IN 2005, SO 20 MILLION WE PUT INTO THE NON-UNIFORM 186 THIS YEAR IS OUR BUDGET FOR UNIFORM.>> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DEBT CAPACITY, THE WAY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, IT'S ABOUT THIS IS HOW MUCH WE COULD TAKE ON WITHOUT RAISING TAXES.
>> YES MA'AM OUR ASSUMPTION IS 20.4 CENTS.
>> THAT'S THE OBJECTIVE IS WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO THAT SWEET SPOT WITHOUT RAISING TAXES.
BUT IF WE WERE LOOKING DOWN THE ROAD, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE NEEDED TO INCREASE THAT CAPACITY TO FULFILL THIS OBLIGATION.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER.
>> IT COULD BE A CONSIDERATION, THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL.
AS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK, WE'VE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THREE YEARS OF THE UNUSED INCREMENT, AND SO THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE FOR THE GENERAL FUND GOING FORWARD.
I BELIEVE WE WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO LOWER OUR TAX RATE ON THE GENERAL FUND SIDE BEGINNING NEXT YEAR.
NOW, THAT'S A REQUIREMENT ON THE GENERAL FUND SITE, YOU COULD SHIFT SOME OF THAT TO THE DEBT SERVICE SIDE SO THAT YOU'RE NOT INCREASING THE TOTAL TAX RATE, BUT MOVE IT FROM THE GENERAL FUND SIDE TO THE DEBT SERVICE SIDE KEEPS YOU UNDER THE SENATE BILL 2 CAP ON GENERAL FUND.
BUT IT'S ONLY POSSIBLE IF YOU HAVE DEBT TO SUPPORT THAT ON THE DEBT SERVICE SIDE, YOU CAN'T JUST HAVE A DEBT TO SAVE MONEY.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE DEPTH TO GO ALONG WITH IT.
>> ANOTHER QUESTION ON THIS REPORT.
I THINK IT'LL MAYBE GIVE US SOME COMFORT NO MATTER WHAT THE FINDINGS ARE ON THE PRELIMINARY REPORT AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
BUT THIS IS THE FINAL REPORT IS REQUIRED IN DECEMBER 2024.
IS THAT IN DECEMBER 2024 OR IS IT BY DECEMBER 20.
>> IT'S ACTUALLY DECEMBER 1ST, 2024.
IT'S DUE FROM THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE.
WE WILL HAVE DONE ALL OF OUR WORK WELL BEFORE DECEMBER 1ST OF 2024.
>> BECAUSE I'M SURE WE'D LIKE TO HAVE AN INDICATOR.
I KNOW FOR ALL OF US, I MEAN, INCLUDING OUR POLICE AND FIRE EMPLOYEES.
>> WE WANT TO GO TO THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD IN AGREEMENT WITH THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND.
WE WANT TO WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH THEM AND BE A PARTNER WITH THEM BEFORE WE GO TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE, AT LEAST THAT WOULD BE MY INTENT AND I THINK IT WOULD BE THE INTENT OF THE BODY AS WELL.
>> I THINK THAT'S IT. THANK YOU.
>> MR. MORENO, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM C.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ISSUING DEBT, IS IT CORRECT THAT WE SELL A VARIETY OF BONDS OVER A SERIES OF YEARS? IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE HAVE NOT YET STARTED CONSTRUCTION ON A PROJECT OR DESIGN ON A PROJECT, WE'RE NOT SELLING THOSE BONDS AND OCCURRING INTERESTS UNTIL THAT PROJECT HAS BEEN COMMENCED.
IS THAT CORRECT OR? FOR EXAMPLE, RIGHT NOW I KNOW OUR GOAL IS TO TRY TO OBLIGATE ALL THOSE 2017 BOND PROJECTS BY THE START OF THE NEXT BOND SERIES.
MY QUESTION IS, IF THERE IS A PROJECT THAT WE'RE EITHER AWAITING CONSTRUCTION OR AWAITING MATCH DOLLARS, ARE WE STARTING TO INCUR INTERESTS ON THOSE PROJECTS OR DOES THAT NOT START UNTIL WE SELL THE BONDS FOR THAT PROJECT?
>> IT'S A COMBINATION OF A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH.
FOR THE 2017'S BOND PROGRAM, WE LAID OUT A FIVE-YEAR PLAN FOR ISSUING OUR BONDS.
AS WE MOVED ALONG, WE REALIZED THAT MAYBE SOME PROJECTS WERE STALLED.
WE HAD COVID, SO THERE WAS NOT A FAVORABLE MARKET TO ISSUE DEBT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO, WE WORK WITH DEPARTMENTS AND THEY PREPARE QUARTERLY FORECAST.
WE TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR ISSUANCE IS ALIGN WITH THEIR PROJECTED SPIN.
THERE ARE OCCASIONS WHERE WE WOULD ISSUE BONDS AND THE PROJECT HASN'T STARTED.
THAT HAPPENS JUST BECAUSE IT'S A FORECAST, BUT SOMETHING HAPPENS.
YES, TO YOUR QUESTION, IT DOES HAPPEN.
THAT'S NOT HOW WE LIKE TO PLAN IT, BUT IT DOES HAPPEN.
>> TO LIMIT THAT, WE USE A COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM WHICH ALLOWS US TO, WHEN YOU AWARD THE PROJECT AT CITY COUNCIL AND THEY START HAVING INVOICES WEIRD ISSUE COMMERCIAL PAPER, WHICH IS A SHORT-TERM FINANCING TOOL.
BUT THEN ONCE WE HAVE COMMERCIAL PAPER OUTSTANDING, WE WILL TAKE THAT OUT WITH LONG-TERM DEBT.
WE TRY TO TIME THAT, IT DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK OUT LIKE THAT.
WE DO, AS JANETTE SAID, WE ARE PAYING ON SOME PROJECTS THAT WE HAVEN'T STARTED YET PERHAPS.
>> AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS 2024 BOND PROGRAM IN UNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAVE LIMITATIONS
[02:45:03]
WITHIN CONSTRUCTION CAPABILITIES AND AS WELL AS STAFF TIME, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE NEED IS GREAT AND RESIDENTS WINNING THOSE PROJECTS TO HAPPEN SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.WHAT IS OUR CAPACITY TO DO MORE PROJECTS IN A QUICKER WAY.
LET'S SAY WE'RE WAITING SIX MONTHS BEFORE WE ISSUE THE BONDS.
ARE WE ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE PROJECTS IN A SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME?
>> COUNCILMAN, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID START OFF DOING VERY WELL AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM WAS THAT WE HAD WE A LIST THROUGH AN RFQ OF AVAILABLE ENGINEERS.
AS THE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE DESIGN CAME ON BOARD, WE HAD A LIST THAT WE COULD AUTOMATICALLY JUST USE OFF WITH THE COUNCIL APPROVED LIST OF RFQ ENGINEERS.
TOWARDS THE MIDDLE OF THE BOND PROGRAM THAT LISTS EXPIRED.
WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS WE'RE TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER A LIST SO THAT WAY WE CAN SAVE TIME ON COUNCIL AWARD.
AS SOON AS WE HAVE THE ELECTION CALLED, WE'LL START WORKING ON THAT LIST AGAIN, SO THAT WAY WE CAN STREAMLINE THE DESIGN OF REWARD OR THE AWARD OR DESIGN PROJECTS.
THAT'S ONE WAY THAT WE'RE DEFINITELY LOOKING TO EXPEDITE OR SPEED UP THE DELIVERY OF THEM.
THEN AGAIN TO ANY MASTER AGREEMENTS THAT WE CAN DO FOR OUR RESURFACING PROJECTS ARE LONG-TERM CONTRACTS FOR RESURFACING.
WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ARE IN PLACE AS WELL SO THAT WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO JUST EXECUTE PROJECTS AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE BOND.
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE STRATEGIES, SIR.
>> THANK YOU. AS WE TRY TO MEET OUR CURRENT OBLIGATIONS AND PROMISE TO OUR FIRST RESPONDERS WITH OUR PENSION, THE INVESTMENT THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY HAVE IN PLACE TODAY, DOES THAT GET US THROUGH DECEMBER 2024? IS THE PENSION OKAY UNTIL DECEMBER OF 2024.
>> THROUGH DECEMBER OF 2024, WE WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE THE STATE REQUIRED CONTRIBUTION LEVELS AND THAT IS NOT IMPROVING THE FUND.
THE ACTUAL UNFUNDED LIABILITY MIGHT ACTUALLY GROW A LITTLE BIT MORE BEFORE WE GET THERE, WHAT WE ARE MEETING, WHAT IS REQUIRED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE KNOWING WHEN THAT WAS PASSED IN 2017, I BELIEVE THERE WAS AN UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WOULD BE BACK AND THAT'S WHY THE STATE LEGISLATURE WANTS TO LOOK IN '25.
BUT WE WANT TO BE TOGETHER, PARTNER WITH THE PENSION FUND, COME UP WITH THE PLAN BEFORE WE GET TO THAT POINT.
BUT YES, SIR WE'RE MAKING ARE REQUIRED CONTRIBUTIONS.
>> MR. ATKINS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON ITEM C.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ON THE BOND WHAT IS OUR CAPACITY WITH COMMERCIAL PAPER AS OF TODAY?
>> WE HAVE A $350 MILLION COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM.
>> IT'S SAID THAT IT'LL BE ALLOCATED TO ANY TIME SOON TO BE ISSUED IN THE PROJECT.
>> WE DON'T HAVE ANY COMMERCIAL PAPER OUTSTANDING, SO WE HAVE CAPACITY FOR 350 MILLION.
COMMERCIAL PAPER CAN ONLY BE USED FOR GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT.
WE DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING CURRENTLY PLANNED FOR COMMERCIAL PAPER, BUT WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DO SO.
>> WE GOT A CAPACITY OF 350 MILLION.
>> CORRECT. IF WE NEED TO USE THAT.
WE HAVE CAPACITY UP TO OUR UNAUTHORIZED BOND AUTHORITY.
THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM AUTHORIZED A BILLION AND 50 MILLION, WE HAVE 134.8 MILLION REMAINING SO WE CAN ISSUE UP TO THE CAPACITY OF OUR OUTSTANDING BONDS OR OUR UNAUTHORIZED BOND CAPACITY.
>> THE 2017 BOND PACKAGE WITH 134 MILLION, WE COULD USE ALL THAT IN COMMERCIAL PAPER IF WE CHOOSE TO DO, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THEN WE WOULD CHOOSE TO TAKE THAT OUT WITH LONG-TERM DEBT AS OPPOSED TO KEEPING IT IN COMMERCIAL PAPER.
WE START WITH COMMERCIAL PAPER, THEN TAKE IT OUT WITH THE 20-YEAR DEBT.
>> WHAT DOES THAT ITERATE ON COMMERCIAL PAPER?
>> IT VARIES. I WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON THAT.
>> DUE DATE RATE IS BASED ON WRITING OF THE CITY, NEVADA.
>> THE DATE RATE IS TIED TO I BELIEVE THE I-BAR.
I'M HOPING THAT ONE OF MY FRIENDS THAT ARE LISTENING FROM
[02:50:01]
THE CITY CONTROLLER'S OFFICE WILL PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION BEFORE THE END OF THIS MEETING.HOPEFULLY, WE'LL HAVE A RESPONSE TO YOU.
>> WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT ACTUARY, WHICH ACTUARY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? ONE WHO WORK FOR THE PENSION AND OR WHO WORK FOR THE CITY?
>> WHEN YOU SPEAK UP ON ACTUARY, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE PENSION ACTUARY OR ONE WHO WORK FOR THE CITY.
YOU DID NOT DESCRIBE WHO WAS ACTUARY. WHO THEY'RE WORKING FOR?
>> THE INDEPENDENT ACTUARY THAT'S GOING TO WORK ON THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND WAS SELECTED BY THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD.
I BELIEVE THEY SELECTED THEM THE LAST WEEK OF JULY.
>> DO WE KNOW THE NAME OF THE ACTUARY COMPANY?
>> I DO. IT WAS NOT ONE THAT I WAS FAMILIAR WITH, THAT'S KAI WAN.
THEY DO WORK WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN, THEY DO NOT HAVE A DALLAS OFFICE.
THEIR PRIMARY OFFICES IN VIRGINIA, THEY HAVE OFFICES IN PHILADELPHIA, CHICAGO, NEW YORK, PORTLAND, SAN DIEGO, BUT NOTHING IN DALLAS.
BUT THEY DO WORK ON ONE OF THE PENSION FUNDS IN AUSTIN, I KNOW THAT.
THEY WERE SELECTED THROUGH A COMPETITIVE PROCESS BY THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD.
>> DO YOU KNOW WHO WORK ON THE PENSION?
>> I DO NOT. WE HAVE ALSO ENGAGED DELOITTE AS AN ACTUARY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
LAST WEEK ON YOUR AGENDA, YOU INCREASE THE FUNDING FOR THAT CONTRACT AND WE WILL BE USING DELOITTE WITH US ON THE CITY TEAM, WORKING ON BOTH PENSION FUNDS AND DOING OUR OWN ANALYSIS APART FROM THE INDEPENDENT ACTUARY.
>> THE CAPACITY OF THIS BOND IS 1.1 BILLION.
>> HOW WAS THAT FIGURING OUT? HOW DO YOU CALCULATE THE 1.1 BILLION? WHAT WAS THE BASE ON THE CALCULATION?
>> THAT'S BASED AGAIN, ON ALL OF THE VARIOUS ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE HAVE UTILIZED WITH THE TAX RATE, THE GROWTH AND THE TAX BASE, OUR OUTSTANDING DEBT.
THE ASSUMPTIONS RELATED TO THE $215 MILLION FOR THE OVERRUNS, THE $400 MILLION RESERVED FOR PENSION.
THAT LEAVES US WITH $1.1 BILLION OF CAPACITY.
THAT BEING THE MAXIMUM THAT WE HAVE CAPACITY FOR, GIVEN OUR ASSUMPTIONS.
CHANGE THE ASSUMPTIONS, THE OUTPUT CHANGES TOO.
>> IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT ROUGHLY ABOUT $3-$4 BILLION OF THE CAPACITY IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, JACK?
>> NO, SIR. I APOLOGIZE IF I MISSTATED.
WE'RE LOOKING AT $220 MILLION A YEAR FOR FIVE YEARS, WHICH WOULD BE ONE BILLION, $100 MILLION FOR A 2024 BOND PROGRAM.
IF YOU UTILIZE ALL THE CAPACITY WE HAVE AVAILABLE GIVEN OUR CURRENT ASSUMPTIONS.
>> TOMORROW MAY BE DIFFERENT, CORRECT?
>> YES, SIR. IT DEPENDS ON THE ASSUMPTIONS.
>> HOW DID WE COME TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE $400 MILLION?
>> THERE WAS NOT A CALCULATION TO DETERMINE THAT.
IT WAS REALLY LOOKING AT WHAT OUR TOTAL CAPACITY WAS AND THEN SAYING, OKAY, WE WILL SET ASIDE.
WE WANT MORE THAN A BILLION DOLLARS FOR THE BOND PROGRAM.
I'VE HEARD THAT TYPE OF FEEDBACK.
WE SET ASIDE 1.1 AND THEN THE 400 MILLION WAS THE AMOUNT THAT WAS LEFT THAT WE COULD AFFORD.
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO RESERVE ANYTHING FOR A FUTURE POTENTIAL PENSION OBLIGATION BOND, THEN YOU HAVE 1.1 BILLION AND YOU'VE GOT 400 MILLION.
YOU COULD SAY THE ENTIRE THING IS THE CAPACITY FOR THE 24 BOND PROGRAM IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SET ASIDE ANYTHING FOR PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS.
AND IF YOU REALLY WANT TO MAX OUT ALL OF OUR DEBT AND LEAVE YOURSELF WITH NO FLEXIBILITY.
>> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DEBT PAYING BACK OF THE BOND, WE'RE LOOKING AT 1.1100 BILLION AND YOU LOOK AT THE TAX RATE IN TRYING TO CALCULATE THE TAX RATE OF 20 YEAR PERIOD, WE HOPE EVERYTHING STAY FLAT TO THE POINT TO RECRUIT TO PAY THAT BACK.
IS THAT A TRUE CALCULATION, HOW YOU DO THAT?
>> YES, SIR. WE'VE ASSUMED THAT WE WOULD KEEP THE TAX RATE THE SAME AS PROPOSED IN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET OR THE FY24 BUDGET, WHICH IS 20.40 FOR THE DEBT SERVICE SIDE OF THE TAX RATE.
THAT'S COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THE GENERAL FUND SIDE OF THE TAX RATE, BUT 20.40 ON THE DEBT SERVICE SIDE AND WE LEFT THAT FLAT.
[02:55:03]
I DIDN'T MAKE AN ASSUMPTION.YOU WANTED TO INCREASE IT OR DECREASE IT? I JUST ASSUMED THAT ASSUMPTION WOULD BE FLAT.
>> IT TOLD US WHAT THAT MEAN, AN AMOUNT.
>> WELL, THAT GENERATES ALMOST $400 MILLION IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE TO PAY THE DEBT.
>> ABOUT 400 MILLION TO PAY OUTSTANDING DEBT.
AGAIN, ALL OF THE OUTSTANDING DEBT THAT WE'VE ISSUED FOR THE LAST 19 YEARS GOING FORWARD, AS WELL AS OUR ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE'VE LAID OUT HERE.
>> WE TALKED ABOUT THE 2017 BOND PACKING.
DO WE HAVE ANY BOND THAT HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETED IN 2007? HAVE THEY ALL BEEN TAKEN CARE OF?
>> WE HAVE ISSUED EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE VOTERS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF $134.8 MILLION, WHICH WE PLAN TO ISSUE THIS YEAR, WE ARE STILL PAYING ON THE DEBT THAT'S PREVIOUSLY BEEN ISSUED, AND YES, THERE ARE STILL PROCEEDS THAT ROBERT AND HIS TEAM ARE USING TO FINISH UP PROJECTS.
>> I GUESS MY QUESTION WAS 2012 YEAR IS VERY IN OUTSTANDING BOND DEBT IN 2012?
>> I WILL HAVE TO FOLLOW UP WITH THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE OUTSTANDING.
>> WE ISSUE BONDS NEARLY EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
ANYTHING THAT WAS ISSUED LESS THAN 20 YEARS AGO, WE STILL HAVE OUTSTANDING DEBT ON IT.
I CAN GET YOU A SCHEDULE THAT SHOWS WHAT WE ISSUED IN 2003 AND HOW MUCH IS OUTSTANDING IN 2004.
>> I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE PROJECT 2017 WE STILL GOT A WHOLE LOT OF PROJECTS WE HAVE NOT COMPLETE AND WE SAID IT HAD SOLD THE BONDS; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THERE'S 134.8 MILLION REMAINING, SIR.
>> IN 2012, WE SOLD SOME BONE.
WE STILL GOT SOME PROJECT HAD NOT BEEN COMPLETE. THAT'S AN AMOUNT.
WE GOING BACK TO 2007, YOU GOT SOME OLD BONDS OUT THERE.
I WAS ONLY TRYING TO CALCULATE HOW MUCH WE ACTUALLY HAVE AFTER.
WE STILL GOT TO PAY DEBT ON THOSE BOND BECAUSE IT OBLIGATES THE BOND, BUT THE WORK HAD NOT BEEN COMPLETE AND WE STILL CARRY IT OVER.
AT THAT TIME, THE PRICE WAS CHEAPER, BUT NOW THE PRICE WENT UP.
THERE COULD BE INCREASE TO TRY TO GET THEIR PROJECT COMPLETE.
>> THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS THAT I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
ONE IS WE ISSUED THE BONDS, EACH YEAR WE DO THAT.
WE PAID THAT DOWN OVER 20 YEARS.
YES, WE'RE STILL PAYING DEBT ON THE BONDS THAT WERE ISSUED.
THEN THE OTHER SIDE IS THE BONDS WERE SET ASIDE IN OUR BANK ACCOUNT AND USED TO PAY FOR THE PROJECTS.
WHAT PROJECTS ARE REMAINING IS DIFFERENT THAN THE OUTSTANDING BONDS THAT WE'RE PAYING ON.
DEBT SERVICE VERSUS THE CAPITAL PROJECTS.
>> WOULD THERE BE ANY REASON WHY SOME OF THOSE DEBT SERVICE LIKE 2017, 2012, OR 2007, WE DIDN'T USE COMMERCIAL PAPER TO GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY? WE WOULD NOT HAVE TO PIN HIGH RATE OF CONTRACT BECAUSE NOW THEY DON'T COST MORE TO DO THE JOB, IS WHY WE DID NOT DO IT THAT?
>> SIR, WE DID, AND STARTING IN 2011, STARTED THE COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM.
WE WOULD USE COMMERCIAL PAPER TO GET PROJECTS STARTED BUT THEN WE WOULD GO AHEAD AND ISSUE THE BONDS.
THEN WE HAD FREED UP CAPACITY AND COMMERCIAL PAPER TO DO OTHER PROJECTS.
WE DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY TO USE COMMERCIAL PAPER FOR EVERYTHING.
IT'S ONLY 350 MILLION A REVOLVING LINE OF CREDIT, IF YOU WILL, TO AWARD THOSE PROJECTS UNTIL WE ISSUE THE LONG-TERM DEBT.
>> WHEN WE DO THAT WITH COMMERCIAL PAPER JUST FOR SAMPLING, IF I HAD A 2017 PROJECT, MAYBE 10 MILLION, WAY BACK IN 2017.
NOW, IS NOT 20 MILLION RIGHT NOW, MAYBE A 25 MILLION BECAUSE OF PRICE WENT UP.
WOULD THAT BE A REASON TO USE COMMERCIAL PAPER TO PAY THEIR 20 BEFORE THE PRICE GOING UP? HOW DID THAT WORK?
[03:00:01]
>> NOW WE HAVE ALREADY ISSUED WHATEVER BONDS THERE WERE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT PROJECT FROM 2017.
>> AT THIS POINT, WE'VE ISSUED EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN APPROVED BY VOTERS EXCEPT FOR 135.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO HASN'T ASKED A QUESTION HERE THAT WANTS TO GET ONE FOR THIS FIRST ROUND? I'M ABOUT TO MOVE TO A SECOND ROUND.
MS. WILLIS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. THIS IS JUST REAL QUICK.
I DID WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THE TIMING OF THE ELECTION AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I DO TEND TO AGREE WITH THE CAPACITY OF WORK THAT WE STILL HAVE TO DO THAT STAFF WOULD BE OCCUPIED DURING THAT TIME.
I HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT THE MONEY COMING FROM DART AS THIS OVERLAY ON WHAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING AND EXPECTED TO DO.
I HAVE HEARD ABOUT BOND SUBCOMMITTEES AND COMMITTEE AND THE LAG AND GETTING SOME DATA TO KEEP THE PROCESS MOVING.
YOU PAIR THAT WITH THE FACT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE GETTING THIS REPORT.
JACKIE, SEEM TO KNOW THE DATE ON WHEN THE FINAL REPORT IS DUE, BUT WHEN IS THE REPORT THAT DRAFT IN JANUARY DO? BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IF WE'RE GOING TO BE EXPECTED LATER THAT MONTH TO MAKE OUR DECISION OR ON CALLING FOR THIS ELECTION IN MAY IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WE'D WANT ALL THE INFORMATION WE COULD GET AND WAS SOMETHING JUST LOOMING TO MAKE THE MOST INFORMED DECISION THAT WE CAN.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I'M WORKING FOR A DOCUMENT FROM THE TEXAS PENSION REVIEW BOARD.
THIS IS SOMETHING THEY PUT TOGETHER AS THEY WERE SELECTING THE INDEPENDENT ACTUARY.
THEY FINALIZED THEIR SELECTION BY JULY 31ST OF '23.
THEY ARE REQUIRING A DRAFT REPORT BY NOVEMBER 9TH OF '23.
THEY'RE REQUIRING AN UPDATE AND A FINAL REPORT ON FEBRUARY THE 8TH, '24.
THEN THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND, AND THE CITY AFTER FEBRUARY 8TH WILL HAVE THAT FINAL REPORT TO WORK FROM.
NOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW FIRM THEY ARE WITH THOSE DATES, BUT IT WAS IN THE BRIEFING THAT I'VE REVIEWED FROM THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD.
>> JANUARY WAS DISCUSSED WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS EARLIER, WAS THAT ACTUALLY FEBRUARY?
>> THEIR REPORT SAYS JANUARY/FEBRUARY.
>> WE'LL BE PRESUMABLY CALLING FOR AN ELECTION BEFORE WE ARE THIS CLOSE TO GETTING THAT INFORMATION.
>> I THINK THE DEADLINE FOR CALLING THE ELECTION IS FEBRUARY THE 16TH, BUT WE WILL HAVE PRELIMINARY INFORMATION BEFORE THAT.
>> I JUST THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND NOT RUSHING THIS AS WE'VE GOT THE IMPENDING BOND ELECTION BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE THIS POLICE AND FIRE OBLIGATION BOND AND UNDERSTANDING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WE DO RIGHT NOW.
WITH REGARD TO THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT INCREASED FUNDING WILL BE REQUIRED FROM THE CITY.
BUT RIGHT NOW WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
IF WE CAN GET A LITTLE CLOSER TO UNDERSTANDING MORE OF THAT, I THINK THAT MAKES US MORE RESPONSIBLE IN MAKING THIS DECISION.
>. I KNOW I'VE ALREADY SAID, BUT I WANT TO SAY AGAIN, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS.
I'M NOT SURE THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION.
>> MR. NARVAEZ, WHERE DID HE GO?
>> SURE. ALWAYS TOLD THEM WE CAN PUT AHEAD OF YOU.
MS. BLACKMON, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. WHAT I'M SEEING IN THIS PRESENTATION IS THAT YOU ARE MAKING CONCESSIONS FOR THAT NEED THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE REGARDING PENSIONS.
>> IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE MAKING A DECISION WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION.
BUT YOU DID SAY WE COULD GO UP TO 1.1.
SAY THAT WE KEPT IT AT ONE BILLION.
DOES THAT EXTRA CAPACITY HELP US IN ANY WAY? WE COULD USE IT TO AS WELL.
>> IF YOU WANTED TO LIMIT THE 24 BOND PROGRAM TO ONE BILLION, THEN YES, THAT CAPACITY THAT YOU'RE NOT USING, THEN YOU HAVE FLEXIBILITY.
IF WE WERE TO DECIDE TO DO PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS, THEN YOU CAN INCREASE THE SIZE.
OR IF YOU WANTED TO DO A $800 MILLION BOND PROGRAM, YOU HAVE MORE CAPACITY, YOU CAN SHIFT OVER.
>> WE AS THE BODY CAN MAKE THAT IN WITH STAFF, MAKE THAT DETERMINATION OF, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE MAY NOT NEED TO GO TO THE LIMIT, HAVE SOME RESTRAINT AND WEIGHT AND THEN YOU COULD
[03:05:03]
ALWAYS ISSUE ANOTHER ELECTION IF YOU NEED IT TO.>> ABSOLUTELY. IF WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACCELERATE A BOND PROGRAM AND DO IT QUICKER THAN WE HAD PLANNED, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.
BUT MR. RIDLEY MADE THE GREAT POINT OF THE ONE-POINT ONE IS THE TOP LIMIT.
WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT BOND NEXT, ABOUT THE ELECTION CYCLE.
IT WAS UNCLEAR BECAUSE PEOPLE KEPT CHIMING IN.
>> DO WE TALK ABOUT THAT'S ABOUT IT IN ITEM D OR DID WE TALK ABOUT IT NOW?
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONTENT IS GOING TO ULTIMATELY BE OF THE BOND UPDATE.
MY THOUGHT WAS THAT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT AN UPDATE ON THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE.
>> WE COULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE TIMING THEN AS WELL.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL SAY.
BUT I THINK THIS NEXT PRESENTATION IS MORE ABOUT DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF PRIORITIES FOR THE BOND.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FINANCIAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DOING ELECTIONS AT DIFFERENT TIMES AND STUFF COMES IN.
IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE IT'S A DIFFERENT TOPIC THAT'S MORE OF A CITY SECRETARY INFORMED CONVERSATION ABOUT, "THIS IS WHAT IT COST US TO PARTICIPATE IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION IN A PRESIDENTIAL YEAR WITH THE COUNTY.
THIS IS WHAT IT COST TO GO BY OURSELVES IN MAY OF AN EVEN NUMBER OF YEAR WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN GOING IN MAY IN AN ODD NUMBER YEAR." WE WOULD NORMALLY BE ON THE BALLOT WITH SOME OTHER PEOPLE.
>> RELATED TO WHEN WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS RELATED TO OUR PENSION OBLIGATIONS.
I WOULD SAY THAT PUTTING IT OFF SO THAT WAY WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION AND THERE'S MORE DISCUSSION IS PROBABLY A BETTER APPROACH THAN TO JUST GO IN MAY AND HOPE.
BECAUSE I REALLY THINK BETWEEN MAY AND NOVEMBER WHEN THAT DRAFT REPORT IN DECEMBER, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME PRETTY HEAVY DISCUSSIONS HAPPENING AND I THINK YOU WILL HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE THIS IS GOING.
TO RESERVE THAT TIMING FOR A NOVEMBER BOND IN CASE WE NEED TO DO IT THEN AS WELL, IS I THINK A BETTER APPROACH.
I'M SORRY, BUT LOOKING AT YOUR NUMBERS, ROBERT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PROJECTS.
I'D HEARD THAT, AND THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME I'D EVER HEARD THAT, IT WAS, "WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT OF PROJECTS." I TEND TO DISAGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT.
BUT I'M JUST LOOKING AT UNUSED FUNDS, GENERAL FUNDS, I JUST FEEL THAT WITH 2017, YOU MAY HAVE A LAG, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU'LL BE TWIDDLING YOUR THUMBS.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON, I APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS, MA'AM.
BUT AS MENTIONED, THE BOND IS MORE THAN JUST STREETS.
IT'S OUR FACILITIES, IT'S OUR PARKS, IT'S OUR CULTURAL ARTS.
FOR STREETS, MAYBE I CAN DEFINITELY SEE THAT POINT.
HOWEVER, KEEP IN MIND THAT SOME OF THE THINGS WE'RE CONSIDERING ARE; THE POLICE ACADEMY, UNT DALLAS.
SO AS FAR AS IF YOU WANT TO JUST FOCUS JUST ON PUBLIC WORKS, I CAN SEE SOME OF THAT ARGUMENT.
>> IN FACT WE ALSO HAVE A CONVENTION CENTER THAT'S GOING TO BE REDONE.
I THINK LOVE FIELD WILL HAVE STUFF.
I THINK STORM WATER, I THINK DWU, THOSE ARE ALL ENTERPRISE THAT ARE GOING TO STILL HAVE STUFF.
I THANK YOU FOR LOOKING AT THAT.
>> I MEAN, ARTS AND CULTURE, IT'S A SLITHER.
BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS, AND I GUESS BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A NEW STATEMENT THAT WE HAVEN'T HEARD BEFORE, IT JUST BRINGS LIKE A, "WHAT?" THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THE TIMING BECAUSE THEN YOU WOULD WANT.
BUT BY ALL MEANS, I THINK YOU DO HAVE ENOUGH WORK THAT COULD KEEP PEOPLE GOING IN WITH ENOUGH CHANNELS TO GET FUNDING THAT A SIX-MONTH DELAY IS NOT GOING TO IMPEDE THE WORK OF THE CITY.
JUST MY THOUGHTS ON THAT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
YOU GUYS WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE ABOUT THAT.
BUT BEFORE YOU DO, I DO WANT TO SAY, I COULD BE WRONG ABOUT THIS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE A BRIEFING ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA WOULD BE MORE THE ELECTION PIECE OF THIS AND THE VARIOUS COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DOING ELECTIONS AT DIFFERENT TIMES.
I DON'T KNOW. I'M JUST SAYING IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF POINTS BEING MADE ABOUT THE COST OF DOING THESE ELECTIONS AND THAT.
JUST BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT IT TODAY IT DOESN'T MEAN WE NEVER TALK ABOUT IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO AT A LATER DATE OR NOT.
[03:10:03]
I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE THAT MAYBE WE TALK ABOUT THAT AT ANOTHER TIME.I DON'T KNOW. MR. BROADNAX, WHAT WERE YOU GOING TO SAY?
I THINK THE COST OF THE ELECTION, MAYBE CAME UP ONE TIME, AT LEAST FROM MY RECOLLECTION.
I THINK THE BIGGER DISCUSSION THAT I GUESS I'M HEARING IS THIS CONCERN ABOUT THE PENSION SYSTEM.
AND TO JACK'S POINT, WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD EVEN CHOOSE TO USE PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS TO RESOLVE THAT ISSUE, NOTWITHSTANDING THIS BELIEF AND UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TO SOLVE A THREE BILLION DOLLAR PROBLEM IN FIVE YEARS OR 10 YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO LAY OUT A PLAN THAT MIGHT TAKE 30 YEARS TO HAVE IT FULLY FUNDED AT WHATEVER STATE REQUIREMENTS WE HAVE.
I THINK THE CONVERSATION AROUND THE VOTE AND TIMING OBVIOUSLY IS A POLITICAL QUESTION IN SOME RESPECT.
I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY A FINANCIAL QUESTION.
I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A STRETCH TO SAY THAT WE SHOULDN'T ISSUE BONDS ASSOCIATED WITH CAPITAL, WHETHER IT'S STREETS, PARKS, CULTURAL FACILITIES, OR NOT IN MAY VERSUS NOVEMBER BECAUSE OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A MILLION-DOLLAR ELECTION COST OR THAT WE'VE GOT SOME PLAN PENDING FOR PENSIONS.
AGAIN, NOTHING I'VE HEARD PROBABLY IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS HAS MADE ME FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD BE WAITING TO FIND ANY LEVEL OF CONCRETE AND OR ASPHALT IN THIS ENTIRE CITY BECAUSE EVERY MEETING I ATTEND, WHETHER IN PUBLIC OR EVEN HERE, IT'S A RUSH TO COMPLETE AN ALLEY, TO COMPLETE A STREET, TO DO WHATEVER IT IS.
SO TO HEAR THAT IT'S OKAY TO WAIT SIX MONTHS WHEN IT COMES TO WANTING TO DO ANY OF THAT, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY NEW TO MY STAFF AND I THINK THEY WERE LOOKING AT ME LIKE, "TC, ARE YOU GOING TO SAY SOMETHING?" BECAUSE THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THEY NORMALLY HEAR.
BUT WE'LL NEVER RUN OUT OF WORK BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO DO.
AGAIN, TO ROBERT'S POINT ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON, WE'LL ALWAYS HAVE A POTHOLE TO FILL, WE'LL ALWAYS BE ABLE TO DO THOSE KINDS OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.
BUT EVEN THE LAST TWO WEEKS ALL L HAVE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC IS, "WHEN IS MY STREET GOING TO BE STARTED AND IT'S BEEN ON A BOND PROGRAM OR NEEDS LIST FOR 20 YEARS? SO SIX MONTHS IS NOT REALLY THAT BIG OF AN ISSUE.
WHAT I DON'T WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE BELIEVE OR WALK AWAY FROM THIS CONVERSATION IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT THE WHOLE CITY ON HOLD BECAUSE WE MAY HAVE A PENSION ISSUE TO DEAL WITH.
WE'VE BEEN DOING THAT FOR FIVE YEARS.
ACTUALLY, IT WAS IN THE WORST SITUATION WHEN I GOT HERE SIX YEARS AGO.
SO NOTHING HAS CHANGED OTHER THAN THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS THAT WE HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE ANNUALLY AND THE FACT THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING HARD AS JACK SAID TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE, TO HAVE MORE PEOPLE MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS IN THE PLAN.
AND SO AGAIN, IT'S NOT LOST ON US.
I THINK THE REALITY IS WE'VE GOT A HARDWORKING GROUP OF RESIDENTS.
WHILE THEY'RE WORKING HARD, WHILE I THINK WE MAY WANT TO TRY TO USE THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE MAY NOT BE A FLOW OF INFORMATION HAPPENING AS QUICKLY AS THEY MIGHT LIKE IT, I THINK THE TOUGHER DECISION IS GOING TO BE HOW THEY SQUEEZE ALL OF THOSE NEEDS INTO A BILLION-DOLLAR BOND PROPOSITION AND FIGHT OVER WHICH PROPOSITION GETS THE MOST.
I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST CONCERNING PART TO THAT GROUP, NOT WHETHER OR NOT WE GIVE THEM AN ESTIMATE ON WHAT A PROJECT IS OR NOT.
SO MORE TIME WILL BE GREAT, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, LET'S NOT CONFLATE THE PENSION ISSUE AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVEN'T EVEN MADE A DECISION, OR EVEN IF IT'S PRACTICAL OR REASONABLE TO ISSUE PENSION BONDS, TO TRY TO NOT MOVE FORWARD AT SOME POINT WITH THE THINGS THAT WE KNOW WE NEED TO HAVE DONE, LIKE THE HUNDRED-YEAR-OLD FIRE STATIONS THAT I TEND TO HEAR A LOT ABOUT, ARE NOT GOING TO GET FIXED IF WE DON'T ISSUE BONDS TO DO THEM.
AGAIN, I THINK WE'RE MIXING APPLES AND ORANGES.
LET'S JUST SAY WE WANT TO GO IN NOVEMBER AND OR MAY.
THERE'S NO SCIENCE TO IT OTHER THAN THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT GOING FOR THE LAST YEAR-AND-A-HALF TO GIVE AT LEAST THE COUNCIL THAT IS SEATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY RECOMMEND PROJECTS AND NOT HAVE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS COME IN AFTER DECISIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE ON DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS AND THEN THEY ARE INHERITED AND SITTING FOR FIVE YEARS AND NOT HAVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY THEY REPRESENT.
THAT'S WHY WE SHIFTED THE DATE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
AGAIN, I'LL JUST SAY THAT I DON'T NEED TO GO BACK AND FORTH.
I'M SURE THERE WILL BE PEOPLE WHO TAKE EXCEPTION TO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE SAID. I'M JUST SAYING.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS.
NOBODY HAS EVEN SAID THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION, $400 MILLION IS NOT GOING TO SAVE THE PENSION.
WE TALKED ABOUT 25 YEARS' WORTH OF EFFORT TO DO THAT.
AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE SPINNING OUR WHEELS.
IF YOU WANT TO DO IT IN NOVEMBER, JUST SAY,
[03:15:02]
"WE WANT TO DO IT IN NOVEMBER," AND WE'LL BE OKAY WITH THAT.BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE EXCUSES TO DO IT IN NOVEMBER.
AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT STAFF IS NOT FIGHTING TO GO IN MAY.
WE WILL RELY ON Y'ALL'S DECISION AND WISDOM FOR WHEN WE TAKE IT.
SO THAT'S NOT EVEN AN ARGUMENT OR A DEBATE.
THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OFF MY CHEST. I FEEL BETTER.
>> THAT'S GOOD. NOW WHETHER IT TURNS INTO A BACK-AND-FORTH WILL TOTALLY DEPEND ON YOU BECAUSE WE CANNOT STOP COUNSEL MEMBERS, OBVIOUSLY, FROM SAYING WHATEVER THEY WANT WITH THEIR TIME.
IF YOU CAN RESTRAIN YOURSELF, THEN YOU'LL BE FINE.
I'M GOING TO GO TO MR. NARVAEZ FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU COLLEAGUES FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE BOUNCED AROUND JUST NOW.
ON THE BONDS, HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE ONCE A BOND ELECTION IS PASSED BEFORE WE CAN ACTUALLY ISSUE BONDS TO START WORK?
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
ONCE THE BOND ELECTION IS PASSED BY THE VOTERS, THEY CAN BEGIN PROJECTS RIGHT AWAY, AND THAT TIES INTO THE COMMERCIAL PAPER DISCUSSION.
WE USE COMMERCIAL PAPER FOR JUST-IN-TIME FINANCING.
AS SOON AS THE BOND ELECTION IS APPROVED, THEY CAN START WORKING.
>> RIGHT. BUT HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE US TO THEN SELL BONDS BECAUSE COMMERCIAL PAPER IS NOT THE BONDS BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE TO SELL THEM.
MY EXPERIENCE FROM THE 2017 BOND WAS THAT IT WAS ABOUT A YEAR BEFORE WE DID OUR FIRST SALE OF BONDS BECAUSE IT TAKES TIME TO GET THINGS GOING WITH THE SALE.
>> I BELIEVE THAT PROBABLY WAS NOT A REQUIREMENT OR A TIMING ISSUE.
IT WAS WE START WITH THE COMMERCIAL PAPER.
ONCE WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL PAPER OUTSTANDING BECAUSE WE HAVE CAPACITY UP TO $350 MILLION, THEN WE WOULD TAKE THAT OUT WITH LONG-TERM DEBT.
IT WASN'T THAT IT TOOK A YEAR TO ACCOMPLISH IT. THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
>> YEAH. THEN THE NEXT THING IS [NOISE]
>> ON THE PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED FOR THE BOND, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO DESIGN THEM, WE HAVE TO HIRE, WE HAVE TO PASS.
WE HAVE TO DO A LOT OF THINGS IN ORDER TO GET THOSE PROJECTS GOING.
I KNOW THAT WE HAVE SOME READY.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHETHER THE VOTERS VOTE TO PASS THOSE PROJECTS OR NOT.
EVERYTHING THAT'S PROPOSED RIGHT NOW WITH THE BOND TASKFORCE.
I KNOW WE'RE NOT DONE, BUT HOW MUCH IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO GET THOSE THINGS ALL UP TO SPEED AND PREPARED? BECAUSE I KNOW EVEN WITH THE 2017, WE PUT THEM IN DIFFERENT CATEGORIES AS FAR AS WHAT YEARS WE WERE GOING TO DO CERTAIN PROJECTS.
DO WE START DESIGNING EVERYTHING RIGHT AT ONCE OR DO WE WAIT UNTIL WE KNOW WE'RE ABOUT TO GET READY FOR THAT PROJECT?
>> COUNCILMAN, AS SOON AS THERE'S A CALL FOR ELECTION, WE START PUTTING TOGETHER OUR RFQS FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES.
SO THAT BY THE TIME THAT THE ELECTION COMES AROUND, WE ALREADY HAVE A LIST OF ENGINEERING OR DESIGN FIRMS THAT CAN START WORKING ON THOSE PROJECTS.
NOT ALL PROJECTS REQUIRE DESIGN.
SUCH AS OUR RESURFACING PROJECTS, OUR STREET RESURFACING PROJECTS.
IF AN ELECTION HAS PASSED AND WE HAVE THE COMMERCIAL PAPER AVAILABLE, WE CAN START THE NEXT WEEK.
THAT'S WHAT WE DID IN 2017 BOND, WHICH IS WHY THE RESURFACING THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE 2017 BOND, MOST OF THOSE PROJECTS ARE ALREADY COMPLETE.
THE PROJECTS THAT AREN'T COMPLETE, THERE WAS EITHER SOME OVERLAP WITH THE DW PROJECT OR SOME OTHER PARTNER THAT WE CAN WORK WITH.
JUST DEPENDENT UPON THE PROJECTS, THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT WE CAN START ON DAY 1, BUT A BULK OF THEM DO REQUIRE DESIGN.
>> VERY GOOD. THEN I DO KNOW ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT FOLKS MAY NOT REALIZE OR KNOW IS THAT WE HAVE BEEN PATCHING UP OUR LEVEES AND WE HAVE TO REPLACE PORTIONS OF OUR LEVEES OURSELVES.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE CANNOT ALLOW OR HAVE BREACH.
THAT'S WHY WITHIN THE LEVEES SYSTEM, WE JUST CANNOT AFFORD TO BE WAITING ANY LONGER.
BECAUSE IF THE LEVEES BREACH, WE'VE ALREADY SEEN WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A LEVEE BREACHES IN THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, MR. MAYOR.
THAT WAS A DEVASTATING OCCURRENCE AND THE LEVEES BREACHING IN DALLAS, THAT'S DOWNTOWN DESIGN DISTRICT, WEST DALLAS.
THEN LET'S KEEP GOING SOUTH AND KEEP GOING AND GOING.
THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT'S IN THERE THAT WE'VE GOT TO FIX AND THAT'S A PROJECT THAT WE DEFINITELY NEED TO WORK ON.
OBVIOUSLY, IT MEANS A LOT TO ME BECAUSE IT'S ALL IN DISTRICT 6.
BUT THAT'S A LOT OF FOLKS AND I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE DOWNTOWN BEING FLOODED OUT BECAUSE WE DECIDED THAT WE WANTED TO WAIT SIX MORE MONTHS [NOISE]
>> TO START WORKING ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THAT'S A PRIORITY THAT WE'VE GOT TO WORK ON.
THERE'S OTHER ISSUES THAT AREN'T JUST STREETS AND ROADS AND SIDEWALKS.
OBVIOUSLY, EVERY EVERY TOWN HALL I GO TO AS WELL,
[03:20:03]
JUST AS MR. BROADNAX SAID, EVERYWHERE I GO, I WANT MY SIDEWALKS FIXED, I WANT MY STREETS FIXED.IT'S THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER.
I'M NOT IN THE BOAT OF WAITING ANY LONGER SINCE EVERYBODY IS STARTING TO MAKE THEIR COMMENTS ON THAT, SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT I KNOW HOW LONG THIS WILL TAKE AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO GO ON.
THE OTHER REASON IS, IS THAT I FEEL THAT WITH THE BOND ELECTION, THERE'S FUNDS THAT WE WILL SHOW THAT, WE'VE GOT THIS MUCH MONEY IN ORDER TO START A PROJECT.
THE INFRASTRUCTURE ACT, NOT EVERYTHING HAS BEEN RELEASED YET. AM I CORRECT ON THAT? AS FAR AS GRANTS AND MONIES THROUGH THE PRESIDENT BIDEN INFRASTRUCTURE ACT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT, SIR. WE STILL HAVE, I BELIEVE, ANOTHER TWO OR THREE CYCLES THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY LEVERAGE WITH THOSE DOLLARS.
>> FOR ME IT'S LIKE I JUST SEE SO MUCH OPPORTUNITY TO LEVERAGE IN ORDER TO GET FUNDS FROM OTHER ENTITIES THAT CAN HELP US EITHER TAKE CARE OF THAT PROJECT OR IN ORDER TO TAKE CARE OF OTHER PROJECTS BY HAVING THOSE FUNDS.
BECAUSE I DO KNOW THAT WHEN WE APPLY, WHEN WE SHOW THAT WE HAVE DOLLARS FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LOOKS VERY HIGHLY ON THAT.
IF IT'S ONE SHOVEL-READY TOO, WE'VE GOT SOME MONEY BEHIND IT AND THEY WANT TO FUND THAT BECAUSE THEY ALSO WANT TO SEE THEIR DOLLARS THAT THEY ARE GIVING OUT TO US.
THE CITY OF DALLAS, WE'RE IN A PRETTY GREAT SPACE RIGHT NOW AS FAR AS WHAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO ACHIEVE AT THE BEGINNING STAGES OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ACT, DOLLARS THAT WE RECEIVED MR. MAYOR FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
I WOULD HATE TO MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET MORE DOLLARS OVER AN ELECTION.
MR. BROADEN ACTS, IF I CAN ASK HER, MR. IRELAND, WHOEVER WANTS TO ANSWER IT.
FOR THIS BUDGET CYCLE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEXT YEAR IN MAY, WE'RE IN A CURRENT BUDGET CYCLE.
DID WE ALREADY BUDGET FOR THE MAY ELECTION?
>> YES, SIR. WE INCLUDED IN THE FISCAL YEAR 24 PROPOSED BUDGET FUNDING FOR THE MAY ELECTION.
>> IF WE DO A NOVEMBER ELECTION WHICH COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN WITH CHARTER REVIEW, WOULD THAT BE AN ELECTION WE'RE PAYING FOR IT IN A DIFFERENT BUDGET?
>> SIR WE INCLUDED FUNDING IN THE BUDGET FOR ABOUT A MAY ELECTION AND A CHARTER REVIEW ELECTION.
>> NO MORE ELECTION QUESTIONS.
>> EVERYBODY ELSE DID IT. I WAS LIKE I GOT TO TAKE MY STAB AT IT AND I APOLOGIZE.
COLLEAGUES, DEFINITELY LET'S GET THE WORK DONE WITH THE TASK FORCES.
LET'S SEE WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING TO US, WHAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE TELLING US.
BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T EVEN TAKEN IT TO OUR RESIDENTS YET, BUT WE HAVE BEEN TELLING OUR RESIDENTS MAY 2024, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON A BOND.
I'D LIKE TO KEEP THAT PROMISE THAT WE'VE BEEN TELLING THEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> MS. SCHULTZ, TO RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, TO PUT THIS ITEM TO BED, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR US TO OFFICIALLY SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION THAT'LL INCLUDE THE POLITICAL, THE FINANCIAL, ALL THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
I GUESS IT'S AN AGENDA ITEM FOR YOU THAT I'M ASKING IF WE COULD JUST.
>> I'M WILLING TO DO IT, BUT AS THEY DO WORK WITH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AND PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR GETTING ALL THAT INFORMATION TO FIND OUT WHERE THEY COULD COME WITH IT BECAUSE IT'S HER.
>> I DO THINK THAT IF AT TWO TO CHURN OR VIA AS-IS POINT, I THINK THAT THE SOONER WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION, EVEN THOUGH WE STILL HAVE ITEMS THAT MAY CAME OR COME OUT OF THE BOND, IT'S THE WHEN DISCUSSION DOESN'T, ISN'T IT? WE NEED TO DO THAT SOONER THAN LATER.
>> RIGHT. YEAH. NO. GO AHEAD, I'M SORRY.
>> NO, SIR. THAT'S ALL I WAS GOING TO SAY IS IF WE COULD GET THAT ON AN AGENDA, I THINK THAT WOULD BE FANTASTIC.
>> I'M HAPPY TO PUT IT ON IF YOU WANT IT.
ANYONE ELSE WHO HAS NOT SPOKEN ONCE OR TWICE BEFORE I GO.
>> MR. RESEN- AND THEN MS. WILLIS FOR THREE MINUTES.
YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, MR. RESENDEZ?
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, STAFF FOR THE PRESENTATION.
JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT OBVIOUSLY, IT'S GOOD TO KNOW WHAT OUR CAPACITY IS.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS A PLAN FOR 1.1 BILLION, A PLAN THAT WE CAN PUT FORWARD TO THE VOTERS.
IF THEY TELL US NO, THEN THEY TELL US NO.
IN TERMS OF THE TIMING, I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE TIME TO DISCUSS THAT, BUT FOR THE REASONS STATED BY DR. PEREZ, MR. BROADNAX AND MR. NARVAEZ IS I'D BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE MAY TIMELINE AT THIS POINT.
[03:25:03]
OBVIOUSLY, AS LONG AS PEOPLE'S CONCERNS AND ALL THAT GET ADDRESSED, THOSE THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.>> MS. MENDELSOHN. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE SCATTERED AND TALK ABOUT.
THERE HAS BEEN CONCERN ABOUT ACTIVE PROJECTS.
AS I LOOK AT THESE THREE BONDS, ALTHOUGH YOU'VE GIVEN A GLOBAL NUMBER, VERY SPECIFICALLY, THERE'S OVER 121 MILLION FOR STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION IN ADDITION TO THE 90 MILLION FOR DARK.
THEN FOR FLOOD PROTECTION, WE HAVE MORE THAN 25 MILLION FROM THE 2006 THAT WAS NEVER ISSUED.
THOSE PROJECTS NOW COMPLETED MORE THAN 20 MILLION OUT OF THE 2012 BOND.
ALTOGETHER, OVER 73 MILLION CAN BE DONE RIGHT NOW, ALREADY APPROVED FOR FLOOD PROTECTION AND HASN'T.
MY FIRST QUESTION FOR YOU IS THE SCOPE OF THE REPORT THAT WE'RE EXPECTING FROM THE OUTSIDE ACTUARY HIRED BY THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD.
WHY DON'T YOU JUST TELL US WHAT THAT SCOPE IS?
>> I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS ON WHAT THAT SCOPE IS GOING TO BE.
I HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE ACTUARY TO SET UP A TIME TO MEET WITH THEM AND REVIEW THAT, BUT AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW THE SCOPE.
>> ARE YOU EXPECTING IT'S GOING TO GIVE HERE DALLAS, HERE'S HOW YOU SHOULD SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM?
>> NO, I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO UPDATE US ON WHAT THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY IS AND WHAT THE REQUIRED CONTRIBUTION WOULD BE, BUT NOT RECOMMEND HOW WE SOLVE THAT PROBLEM.
I BELIEVE IS GOING TO BE UP TO US.
>> WHO HAS TO DO THAT WORK TO COME UP WITH WHAT OUR SOLUTION IS?
>> I BELIEVE IT'LL BE THE STAFF MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
>> WHEN WILL YOU BE STARTING ON THAT PROCESS?
>> I'VE REACHED OUT TO THE ACTUARY TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION TO REALLY UNDERSTAND IF THEY ARE GOING TO STICK TO THE TIMELINE THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TODAY AND TO UNDERSTAND IF I GET ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BEFORE THAT, BUT WE'RE ON IT NOW.
>> HOW MANY PENSION BONDS DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE THAT ARE ISSUED?
>> WE ISSUED PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS IN 2005 FOR THE NON-UNIFORM FUND, SORRY FOR THE NON-UNIFORM IS 399.3, WE HAVE $95 MILLION OUTSTANDING.
>> THAT'S GOING TO EXPIRE IN 2025, CORRECT?
>> YOU HAVE A PENSION OBLIGATION BOND THAT WILL EXPIRE IN 2025 THOUGH.
>> MOST OF THE POB IS WORTH 30 YEARS.
SOME OF THEM MAY HAVE HAD A SHORTER TIMEFRAME.
>> YES. HAVE YOU HEARD ANY NUMBERS FROM THE POLICE FIRE PENSION FUND ABOUT APPROXIMATELY HOW MUCH WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT IN TO MAKE SURE THEIR PENSION AMORTIZES IN 30 YEARS?
>> YOU'VE NOT HEARD ANY NUMBER THAT'S LIKE $1 BILLION?
>> WELL, I'VE HEARD A NUMBER THAT'S ABOUT $1 BILLION.
WHILE I TRULY APPRECIATE THAT YOU'VE RESERVED THE 400 MILLION CAPACITY, THAT WOULD THEN BE FOR BOTH AS A POTENTIAL I'M SUPER CONCERNED THAT'S NOT NEARLY ENOUGH IF THAT WAS THE EXCLUSIVE WAY WE WENT.
I DON'T THINK IT WILL END UP BEING THE EXCLUSIVE WAY, BUT WE'RE NOT PREPARED TO MAKE DECISIONS IF WE CARE ABOUT OUR PUBLIC SAFETY.
I'LL REMIND EVERYONE HOW MANY OFFICERS WE LOST LAST TIME BECAUSE THIS CITY DID NOT DO WHAT IT NEEDED TO IN A TIMELY BASIS.
IT DIDN'T GIVE CONFIDENCE TO OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, AND WE HAVE TO DO THAT THIS TIME.
WE CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE OFFICERS LIKE WE DID LAST TIME.
TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS BOND IN MAY WHEN WE DON'T HAVE A PLAN IS COMPLETELY IRRESPONSIBLE IN MY OPINION.
I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A STRAW POLL ABOUT DELAYING THAT BOND.
I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO COME UP WITH A NEW SCHEDULE FOR THAT BOND FOR A NOVEMBER ELECTION.
MS. ROSS, YOU MENTIONED THE POLICE ACADEMY.
WE GOT 20 MILLION FROM THE STATE.
IF WE GOT THE 50 MILLION IN THE BOND, ARE WE READY FOR CONSTRUCTION ON THAT?
>> COUNCIL WILL HAVE TO SPEAK TO, I GUESS MAYBE JOHN FORTUNE ABOUT WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT.
>> JOHN FORTUNE, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.
SO THOSE BOND FUNDS, IF THEY ARE SOLD NEXT YEAR, WOULD ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH CONSTRUCTION.
[03:30:01]
WE WON'T BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT THOSE BOND FUNDS AND THE CULMINATION OF ANY OTHER PRIVATE DONATIONS THAT WE WOULD RECEIVE.>> I DON'T THINK YOUR MICROPHONE IS CLEAR.
WHAT'S THE TOTAL COST OF THIS PROJECT?
>> IT'S APPROXIMATELY 130 MILLION.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER FUNDING BESIDES THE STATE FUNDS?
>> WE HAVE THE STATE FUNDS, YES.
>> IS 20 YES, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COMMITTEE WOULD HAVE FOR THE ACADEMY THROUGH THIS PROCESS THE DIFFERENCE WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE UP WITH PRIVATE DONATIONS.
>> YOU WOULDN'T ISSUE THAT WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THAT COMMITTED, WOULD YOU?
>>THAT'S CORRECT. WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE FUNDS THE COMMITMENTS TO THE ISSUE THAT NOW THE QUESTION IS, WHAT YEAR OF THE NEXT BOND PROGRAM WOULD THOSE FUNDS BE ISSUED? SO YOU'RE PRESUMING WE HAVE AN ISSUE IN THE FIRST YEAR IF WE'RE NOT READY FOR CONSTRUCTION, THEY WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE STAGED INTO THE SECOND OR THIRD YEAR OF THAT BOND PROGRAM.
>> MY POINT IS WE HAVE 70 MILLION PLUS TO RAISE AND A SIX-MONTH DELAY IN ELECTION ISN'T GOING TO DELAY EVEN ONE DAY THE BUILDING OF A POLICE ACADEMY. THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO ASK QUESTION ON IMC? I DON'T SEE ANYONE.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM D. THANK YOU GUYS FOR THAT.
I HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR THAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO GET A BRIEFING ON THE ELECTION COSTS AND THINGS, MORE DISCUSSION ON THE PROS AND CONS OF THAT.
BUT I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TRYING TO STAY FOCUS TODAY ON THE NUMBERS.
[D. 23-2079 2024 Bond Update]
MR. CITY MANAGER, ITEM D.>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I THINK AS STAFF BEGINS TO TRANSITION FOR THE NEXT PRESENTATION, THE NEXT BRIEFING WILL BE FROM JENNIFER NICE WANDER, THE INTERIM DIRECTOR OF BOND AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.
SHE WILL PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM.
THIS 2024 BOND PROGRAM BRIEFING WILL INCLUDE UPDATES ON THE FUNDING CAPACITY, THE USE OF TECHNICAL SCORES, EQUITY, AND OTHER VARIABLES TO PRIORITIZE PROJECTS AND FUNDING LEVELS, WORK BEING COMPLETED BY THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE AND PROPOSITION SUBCOMMITTEES, THE PUBLIC INPUT AND SURVEYS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED THUS FAR, AND THE OVERALL BOND SCHEDULE LEADING TO A SOON TO BE DETERMINED BOND ELECTION TIMELINE.
I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO JENNIFER FOR HER PRESENTATION.
>> THANK YOU. I'M JENNY NICE WONDER, I'M THE INTERIM DIRECTOR OF OFFICE OF BONDING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND GOOD AFTERNOON.
TODAY WE ARE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING THE 2024 BOND DEVELOPMENT STATUS, THE UPDATE OF THE 2024 BOND CAPACITY, OUR NEEDS INVENTORY UPDATES, EQUITY, OUR COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE UPDATE AND THEIR SCHEDULE, THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK, PREVIOUS BOND BREAK DOWN AND THEN ANY QUESTIONS.
NEXT SLIDE. THE 2024 BOND DEVELOPMENT.
TO DATE, WE HAVE COMPLETED 16 SUMMER TOWN HALLS, OVER 25 COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE MEETINGS, SUBCOMMITTEES ARE DEVELOPING SCENARIOS FOR THE ALLOCATIONS BY CATEGORY AND PROPOSITION, AS WELL AS PROJECT PRIORITIZATION, AND THE NEEDS INVENTORY HAS BEEN UPDATED WITH THE PROJECTED CONSTRUCTION COSTS THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 27.
WE USE A MIDYEAR OR THE BOND CYCLE FOR A PROJECT ESTIMATION PURPOSES.
>> AS YOU HEARD IN THE PREVIOUS BRIEFING, WE NOW HAVE A BOND CAPACITY OF 1.1 BILLION.
THAT LAST COLUMN ON THIS SLIDE REFLECTS THE PROPOSED BOND SCENARIO BASED ON THAT CAPACITY.
ALSO, AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED TODAY, WE'VE GOT 250 MILLION IN CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATIONS THAT WILL BE USED TO COVER THE 2017 LEGACY PROJECTS OVERRUNS.
NEXT SLIDE. NEEDS INVENTORY HAS BEEN UPDATED WITH OUR MOST RECENT CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES AND NOW COMES IN AT OVER $16 BILLION.
MAJOR CHANGES TO THE NEEDS INVENTORY INCLUDES THE ADDITION OF THE UNIMPROVED STREETS AND ALLEYS CATEGORIES.
UNIMPROVED STREETS ARE ASPHALT STREETS WITH THE BAR DITCHES THAT WILL BE RECONSTRUCTED AS CONCRETE STREETS WITH UPDATED WATER, SEWER, STORM, CURB AND GUTTERS, AND SIDEWALKS.
UNIMPROVED ALLEYS ARE ALLEYS THAT HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN PAVED BEFORE.
THESE PROJECTS WERE PREVIOUSLY PART OF A PETITION PROGRAM.
THAT PROGRAM WAS DISSOLVED A FEW YEARS AGO AND THESE CATEGORIES WERE PLACED ON THE NEEDS INVENTORY FOR CONSIDERATION.
THESE TWO CATEGORIES ALONE ACCOUNT FOR 2.2 BILLION THAT WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY REPORTED. NEXT SLIDE.
LOOKING AT THE OVERALL BOND IN TERMS OF INVESTMENT IN EQUITY AREAS, WE ARE TARGETING 30 PERCENT OF OUR BOND DOLLARS INTO THESE AREAS.
OUR GOAL IS BASED ON SOME FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE RECEIVED DURING
[03:35:01]
A RECENT COMMUNITY BOND TASKFORCE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS, SPECIFICALLY IN OUR STREETS COMMITTEE.WE'RE EVALUATING EQUITY FUNDING SCENARIOS, NOT JUST BY A PROJECT POINTS, BUT BY THE OVERALL BOND FUNDING LEVELS.
THE BOND OFFICE IS WORKING WITH OUR EQUITY AND INCLUSION OFFICE AND WHO IS LEADING THE EFFORT TO IDENTIFY PROJECTS FOR THESE EQUITY INVESTMENTS.
THE BOND OFFICE WILL ALSO WORK WITH OUR TASKFORCE AND SUBCOMMITTEE TO ADJUST PROGRAMS BASED ON EQUITY INVESTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE PROPOSED BOND PROGRAM WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE SUBCOMMITTEES ON AUGUST 29TH. NEXT SLIDE.
THIS SLIDE IS A REVIEW OF OUR EQUITY SCORING AND OUR OVERLAY CATEGORIES.
THE GRID LAYOUT YOU SEE IS BASED ON THE SPATIAL ANALYSIS DONE BY OUR DATA AND BUSINESS ANALYTICS GROUP FOR THE OVERALL OVERLAYS AND THE EQUITY SCORING.
NEXT SLIDE. THEN MAP SHOWN ON THE LEFT IS THE EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT SCORES AT THE CENSUS TRACK LEVEL.
THAT'S THE MAP THAT WAS USED AS THE BASE DATA LAYER FOR OUR ONE MILE BY ONE MILE GRID SPATIAL ANALYSIS AND YOU CAN SEE THAT PIXELATED MAP ON THE OTHER SIDE.
OUR COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE MEETINGS RESUMED LAST NIGHT.
ADDITIONAL MEETINGS ARE BEING PLANNED AS THE DRAFT BOND PROGRAM IS BEING DEVELOPED.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS HOW YOU CAN FIND LINKS TO THE VIDEOS OF OUR COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND OUR PRESENTATIONS.
WE'RE ALSO UPDATING OUR MEETING INFORMATION IN THE CITY CALENDAR AS ROOMS BECOME AVAILABLE. NEXT SLIDE.
MOVING FORWARD, THE SUBCOMMITTEES ARE SCHEDULED TO PROVIDE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE ON THE 29TH.
IN SEPTEMBER, THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE AND THE CHAIRS WILL NEED TO FINALIZE A DRAFT BOND PROPOSAL THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE.
FALL TOWN HALLS WILL BEGIN LATE SEPTEMBER AND GO THROUGH MID-OCTOBER.
THE TASKFORCE AND CHAIRS WILL REVIEW THE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY TO REFINE OUR DRAFT BOND PROGRAM. NEXT SLIDE.
IN NOVEMBER, THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE, THE CHAIRS, AND OUR CITY MANAGER WILL FINALIZE THE BOND PROGRAM.
DECEMBER 6TH, WE PLAN ON BRIEFING COUNCIL.
PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE BOND PROGRAM WILL BE IN JANUARY WITH A CALL FOR ELECTION IN JANUARY 2024.
NEXT SLIDE. AS PART OF OUR SUMMER TOWN HALLS, THE BOND OFFICE HAD A POLL THAT RESIDENTS COULD TAKE TO IDENTIFY PRIORITIES OF THE BOND PROGRAM.
THIS WAS AN UNSCIENTIFIC POLL, BUT WE DID HAVE OVER 800 RESPONSES THAT WE COULD USE TO IDENTIFY OVERALL BOND THEMES OR PRIORITIES, AND THAT WAS THE HANDOUT THAT WE JUST GAVE TO EVERYBODY.
NEXT SLIDE. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE TOP SIX PRIORITIES.
WE'VE PROVIDED YOU THE DETAIL OUTPUT A FEW MINUTES AGO AND PLAN ON HAVING THIS ON OUR WEBSITE BY THE END OF THE WEEK.
THE TOP SIX PROPOSITIONS, ACCORDING TO THOSE 800 RESPONSES WERE STREETS, PARKS AND RECREATION, HOMELESS SOLUTIONS, PUBLIC SAFETY, TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING.
NEXT SLIDE. WE HAVE A SIMILAR POLL FOR THE COMMUNITY REGARDING ALLEGATIONS ASKING WHERE YOU WOULD SPEND $1,000 OF THE BOND.
AMOUNTS RANGED $25-$50, 25 WOULD EQUATE TO ABOUT 25 MILLION, 100 WOULD BE 100 MILLION.
THE POLL WAS PUT TOGETHER IN THE BOND OFFICE USING OUR AVAILABLE RESOURCES, SO IT'S A LITTLE CLUNKY, BUT WE THINK IT WILL PROVIDE GOOD FEEDBACK IF WE GET ENOUGH PEOPLE TO FILL OUT THE POLL.
AGAIN, THIS ISN'T A SCIENTIFIC APPROACH, BUT WE ARE TRYING TO GATHER AS MUCH INFORMATION AND FEEDBACK AS POSSIBLE. NEXT SLIDE.
THE NEXT TWO SLIDES SHOW THE BREAKDOWN OF THE PAST BOND PROGRAMS BY COUNCIL DISTRICT AND BOND PROPOSITION AND THIS SLIDE IS IN RESPONSE TO A QUESTION FROM A PREVIOUS BRIEFING.
LAST WEEK YOU WERE SENT THIS DATA, AND ALSO SHOWS THE BREAKDOWN BY PROPOSITIONS. NEXT SLIDE.
THIS SLIDE IS JUST A CONTINUATION AND SHOWS ALL THE VARIOUS CITYWIDE AND MULTIPLE DISTRICT PROJECTS.
NEXT SLIDE. WITH THAT, WE'LL TAKE QUESTIONS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILMAN GRACEY.
>> THANK YOU. JENNIFER, I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AND I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A PARTICULAR SLIDE TO REFERENCE. YES, I DO ACTUALLY.
[03:40:03]
THERE WAS A LIST OF ALL OF THE PROPOSITIONS.IT MAY HAVE BEEN ON THE PREVIOUS BRIEFING, ACTUALLY.
BUT I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING TO IS UNDER PROPOSITION, I BELIEVE IT WAS J, CAN YOU JUST TALK TO ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THAT IN 2017, THAT THOSE BOND PROCEEDS, IN TERMS OF HOW THEY'VE BEEN USED TO DATE, AND MORE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PROPERTY 2949, HAMPTON? HAVE ANY BOND PROCEEDS BEEN USED TOWARDS THAT PROPERTY? IF SO, HOW?
>> I HAVE TO GET YOU SOME DETAILS ON THAT ONE.
I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION WITH ME.
>> I THINK CHRISTINE WITH OUR OFFICIAL SHEET, MAYBE ABLE TO HELP. SORRY.
QUESTION COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE CROSSLEY, DIRECTOR OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS, AND BOND FUNDS WERE SPENT TO ACQUIRE 2929 SOUTHAMPTON.
>> BUT AT THIS POINT, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE HAS HAPPENED WITH BOND PROCEEDS OTHER THAN TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY.
>> NOW, UNDER THE PROPOSITION J, CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS WHICH ONE, BUT JUST EXPLAIN HOW THOSE FUNDS ARE, WHAT ARE ELIGIBLE PROJECTS FOR THOSE FUNDS UNDER PROPOSITION J FOR 2017.
>> THAT PROPOSITION WAS SPECIFIC TO, YOU COULD EITHER BUY, RENOVATE, OR RECONSTRUCT EXISTING FACILITIES SPECIFICALLY FOR HOUSING HOMELESS.
>> BUT WEREN'T THERE'S SOME OTHER OPTIONS, I GUESS?
>> THE PROPOSITION IT DID HAVE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE ON HOW THOSE FUNDS COULD BE USED IN JUST BASED ON.
IT ALLOWED US TO PLAN, DESIGN, REPAIR, REPLACE, AND PROVE, EXPAND, OR EQUIP FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY.
INCLUDING PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND TRANSITIONAL IN NATURE.
THAT WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWS FOR THIS FUND.
>> CHRISTINE, WHAT TYPE OF COMMUNICATION HAS HAPPENED THUS FAR IS IN TERMS OF PLANS FOR THAT PROPERTY AND JUST TALK ABOUT KNOW THERE WERE SOME UPROAR AND NOW WE'RE BACK AND WE'RE TRYING TO RESET THIS.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES, TRYING TO JUST KIND OF RESET AND SAY THAT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY GO BACK IN THERE MAYBE EVEN BEEN SOME CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
WE HAVE AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT WHO HAS RE-ENGAGED FRESH COMMUNITY WORKGROUP, BRINGING IN ALL SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS FROM A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT AREAS, ENGAGING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE LIBRARY, PARENTS, AND LEAD COMMUNITY MEMBERS IN THAT AREA AND THEY'VE HAD THEIR FIRST MEETING JUST TO DISCUSS.
>> EXCUSE ME. IS THIS GERMAIN? I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE BOND EITHER LACK IS EMICA, YOU.
THE CONVERSATION NEEDS TO BE AROUND THE 2024 BOND UPDATE AND THIS NOT WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST.
>> ARE THERE ANY ARE THERE ANY FUNDS CURRENTLY IN THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM THAT ARE PLANNED SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT PROPERTY THAT YOU KNOW OF? THAT'S TO ANYONE ON THE PANEL.
>> NO. THERE ARE THREE DESIGNATED FUNDING POTS.
ONE IS FOR SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT ARE REPAIRS AT THE BRIDGE SHELTER.
THE OTHER IS FOR A GENERAL WEATHERIZATION AND RENOVATION OF THE STRUCTURAL ASPECTS OF THE BRIDGE.
THE REMAINING 28 MILLION OR FOUR GAP FINANCING FOR PROJECTS ACROSS OUR ECOSYSTEM.
IT COULD BE USED FOR ANYTHING, BUT THERE'S NOTHING SPECIFIC THAT IT IS DESIGNATED FOR.
>> IF I COULD JUST ADD BECAUSE WE HAVE MULTIPLE PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE PIPELINE WHERE WE HAVE FUNDING THAT WE'VE USED FOR ACQUISITION.
BUT AS WE MOVE INTO THE NEXT PHASES WE WOULD NEED ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO COMPLETE THOSE PROJECTS.
DEPENDING ON THE NEED, THE AMOUNTS, WE'RE LOOKING AT PARTNERSHIPS, WE'RE LOOKING AT LEVERAGING OTHER SUPPORTIVE FUNDING AS WELL FROM THE COUNTY.
TECHNICALLY, WE COULD END UP DOING A LOT WITH THAT ADDITIONAL BUCKET WITH THOSE PROJECTS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN THE PIPELINE.
[03:45:05]
THAT COULD BE A PARTICULAR PROJECT, BUT AGAIN, IT WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CYCLE OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE RESET AND ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO COME UP WITH AN ELIGIBLE PROJECT.>> THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, I APOLOGIZE.
IT TOOK ME A WHILE TO GET TO WHERE I WAS GOING, BUT THAT WAS REALLY JUST TO COMMUNICATE THAT THEY'RE STILL TIME, SO THANK YOU.
>> I'M HAPPY TO HURDLE MR. RIDLEY, IF YOU'D LIKE TO CALL HIM NEXT. THANK YOU.
>> I BELIEVE POWELL COUNCIL WILLIS IS NEXT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ON SLIDE 4, IT INDICATES THAT COST OVERRUNS FOR THE 2017 AND LEGACY BOND PROJECTS WILL BE COMPLETED USING 200 PLUS.
WE KNOW THE NUMBER IS 215 MILLION OF CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.
I'M CURIOUS, THIS IS TO COMPLETE PROJECTS THAT THE VOTERS AUTHORIZED IN THE 2017 BOND ELECTION, CORRECT? AND PERHAPS EARLIER BOND ELECTIONS?
>> THAT WAS ORIGINALLY A SERIES LIST OF PROJECTS THAT WERE GOING TO BE FUNDED BY BONDS, BUT WE'VE RUN OUT OF BONDING AUTHORITY TO COVER THOSE COST OVERRUNS.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY BACK THOSE 200 MILLION IN CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, WHICH ARE SHORT-TERM COMMERCIAL PAPER OBLIGATIONS? THEY'RE NOT LONG-TERM FUNDED BY BONDS.
WE AREN'T INCLUDING THOSE IN THE 2024 BOND PROPOSAL BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A NEW LIST OF PROJECTS FOR THAT MONEY.
WHAT'S THE LONG-TERM FINANCING PLAN FOR THOSE COST OVERRUNS FROM 2017?
>> I BELIEVE THAT CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION FUNDS HAVE A 10-YEAR PAYBACK AND THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION.
>> SO THAT'LL BE PAID BACK OVER 10 YEARS MATURITY?
>> YES, SIR. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AND WE CAN CONFIRM THAT.
>> THAT MEANS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO ALLOCATE EACH OF THE NEXT 10 YEARS, $21 MILLION TO RETIRE THOSE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION PLUS I PRESUME THE INTEREST ON THAT DEBT?
>> DO WE KNOW IF THAT'S BEEN FACTORED INTO OUR PROPOSED AND PLANNED BUDGETS?
>> YES, SIR. THAT WAS PART OF THE DECK CAPACITY THAT WAS DISCUSSED IN OUR PREVIOUS BRIEFING.
>> QUESTION ABOUT THE PROGRESS UPDATE AND SCHEDULED GRAPHICS ON PAGES 10 AND 11.
AFTER THE COMMITTEES PRESENT THEIR PROPOSED PROGRAM ON AUGUST 29TH, THEN THE TASK FORCE AND THE CHAIRS MEET TO FINALIZE IN SEPTEMBER THE BOND PROGRAM BEFORE TAKING IT TO THE COMMUNITY AS PART OF THE FALL TOWN HALLS.
WE'VE ALREADY HAD BOND TOWN HALLS TO SOLICIT INPUT ON CITIZENS' PRIORITIES FOR BONDS FUNDING.
ON THESE FALL TOWN HALLS, THE AGENDA IS GOING TO BE THE SAME THING OR IS IT JUST TO REACT TO WHAT THE TASK FORCE HAS COME UP WITH?
>> THE FALL TOWN HALLS WILL BE SPECIFIC TO THE LIST THAT THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE HAS PUT TOGETHER.
WE WILL HAVE THE PROJECTS THAT THEY ARE RECOMMENDING AND WE WILL TAKE THAT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO GET SOME FEEDBACK.
>> SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOUR OFFICE WILL BE HOLDING THE TOWN HALLS THAT'S NOT INCUMBENT UPON EACH OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO DO THAT?
>> WE'LL BE WORKING WITH YOUR OFFICES TO IDENTIFY WHERE THOSE TOWN HALLS NEED TO HAPPEN.
WE'RE PLANNING ON HAVING TWO HERE AT CITY HALL AND THEN WANTING TO EACH OF THE COUNCIL DISTRICTS.
>> AND THEN IN OCTOBER, THE TASK FORCE AND CHAIRS WILL REVIEW THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK OBTAINED FROM THE TOWN HALLS, PROVIDE ANY REFINEMENTS, AND THEN PRESENT THAT TO THE CITY MANAGER IN NOVEMBER TO FINALIZE THE BOND PROGRAM.
AT THAT POINT, THE CITY MANAGER COULD PROVIDE HIS OWN CHANGES TO THE BOND PROGRAM.
>> THEY WILL BE WORKING TOGETHER.
WE'RE GOING TO START THOSE MEETINGS WHEN WE GET THE OVERALL BOND FROM THE COMMUNITY UPON TASK FORCE, AND WE'LL BE WORKING WITH THE CITY MANAGER BACK-AND-FORTH MOVING FORWARD LATE OCTOBER TIMEFRAME.
BUT THERE'LL BE WORKING TOGETHER TO PROVIDE ONE BOND PROGRAM TO COUNCIL.
>> THEN THAT HAPPENS IN DECEMBER ON THE SIX.
>> THAT'LL BE IT, A BRIEFING SESSION. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
[03:50:01]
>> THANK YOU. WELL, I JUST WANT TO FLIP TO SLIDE 4.
I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR UPPING THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT'S PROPOSED FOR STREETS.
WHEN I LOOK AT PARKS AND REC IT LOOKS ENTIRELY TOO LOW TO SAY 165 MILLION.
I HOPE THAT THAT WILL SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGE.
I'M WONDERING ABOUT FOR FLOOD PROTECTION, STORM DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL.
EROSION CONTROL IS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY HAS BEEN ENGAGED IN AND HAS BEEN FUNDING, BUT IT'S NOT ACTUALLY REQUIRED OF THE CITY.
AND I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S BEEN ANY KIND OF THOUGHTS AROUND WHAT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO IS ADJACENT TO A CREEK OR SOMETHING AS OPPOSED TO ALL OF THE TAXPAYERS OF DALLAS PAYING FOR THEIR PROPERTY?
>> I'M GOING TO DEFER TO THE TEAM.
HERE, WE GET INTO A LOT OF LEGAL DISCUSSIONS ON THAT.
I THINK THERE'S A HISTORY IN THE CITY WITH TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT AS FAR AS WHAT THE CITY'S ROLES SHOULD BE.
I'M GOING TO DEFER TO SARAH OR ANYONE ON OUR TEAM WHO MIGHT HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND WHY WE APPROACH IT THAT WAY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, SARAH, STANDARD FOR INTERIM DIRECTOR DALLAS WATER UTILITIES.
SINCE THE 1985 ORDINANCE THAT THE COUNCIL PASSED AUTHORIZING US TO WORK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITH A PERMANENT EASEMENT IN PLACE, EACH BOND PROGRAM WE COME FORWARD.
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU'VE ASKED AND SOME PRAYER BRIEFINGS THAT WE'VE BRIEFED GEL, THAT'S ALWAYS ONE OF OUR QUESTIONS.
DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE THE PROGRAM? IF SO, DO YOU WANT COST SHARE? IF NOT, THEN WE CAN ADJUST OUR STATEMENTS AND THE FIELD.
THE COMMITTEE THAT'S WORKING WITH US HAS HAD THAT CONVERSATION AS WELL.
IT'S ONE EVERYBODY STRUGGLES WITH.
THERE IS A HEALTHY CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMITTEE ABOUT DO WE DO THIS? DO WE CONTINUE TO RECOMMEND IT RIGHT NOW? THE COMMITTEE SEEMS POISED TO CONTINUE TO RECOMMEND PRIVATE EROSION WITH A PERMANENT LEGAL EASEMENT IN PLACE.
BUT THAT IS ALWAYS UP TO YOU ALL AS WE GO FORWARD WITH THE CONVERSATION TO TELL US, STOP DOING THAT PROGRAM, LET'S ONLY INVEST IN THE REST OF IT.
>> HOW MUCH OF IT IS PROPOSED FOR THE EROSION CONTROL.
>> THE COMMITTEE RIGHT NOW IS PROPOSING UNDER THEIR CRITERIA 80 PERCENT FOR EVERYTHING ELSE AND 20 PERCENT OF WHATEVER THE PROPOSITION AMOUNT ENDS UP BEING TO BE EROSION.
THEY'RE WORKING THROUGH THEIR NUMBERS RIGHT NOW TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TASK FORCE, BUT THEY'VE GOT AN 80 SPLIT WITH 20 EROSION.
>> I JUST WANTED TO JUST GO ON THE RECORD AS SAYING I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF SOME MATCHING PROGRAM, BUT I DO NOT THINK IT IS SOLELY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY IN THIS ISSUE.
UNLIKE A NUMBER OF OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES THAT CAN HAPPEN, IF YOU HAVE EROSION CONTROL ISSUES, YOU KNEW YOU HAD A CREEK BACK THERE.
I'VE GOT A LOT OF CREEKS IN MY DISTRICT THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO BEG FOR HELP WITH THIS, BUT THERE SHOULD BE SOME PARTICIPATION BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE DOLLARS ARE PRECIOUS AND I THINK THEY'RE GETTING MORE AND MORE PRECIOUS AS WE GO.
I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT FIRE TRAINING.
CAN YOU SPEAK JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THAT IF THIS IS FOR THE TRAINING TOWER AND BURNING HOUSE, OR IF THIS IS FOR THE ACADEMY ITSELF AND THAT REDO.
>> THIS IS FOR THE TRAINING FACILITY ON DOLPHIN ROAD.
I KNOW WE ARE WORKING ON A COUPLE OF PROJECTS RIGHT NOW AND WE'RE LOOKING AT AN OVERALL MASTER PLAN OF THAT AREA, SO THAT WOULD BE TO FURTHER THE MASTER PLAN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
>> ALL OF THOSE ITEMS ARE AT DOLPHIN ROAD, BUT THEY'D HAD A PROBLEM WITH THEIR BURN HOUSE AND WITH THEIR FIRE STRUCTURE.
>> I KNOW THEY HAD AN EMERGENT OR I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS NECESSARILY EMERGENCY, BUT THERE WAS A PROJECT THAT HAS HAPPENED THIS FALL AND THEN THAT IS BEING WORKED ON NOW.
>> HI CHIEF, CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, FOR THE FIRE TRAINING FACILITY.
DOMINIQUE ARTIS DALLAS FIRE CHIEF.
THIS 25 MILLION IS NOT ONLY BUILD UP AREAS IN THE ACADEMY THAT'S BEEN LACKING.
WE'RE TRYING TO NOT ONLY PUT THINGS TOGETHER THAT WE FEEL A COMPARABLE WITH WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW.
WE'RE WORKING WITH THE BOND GROUP ON FIXING OUR BURN HOUSE, LIKE YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THEY'VE GOT THE STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT.
[03:55:01]
WE'RE EXPECTING TO GET THAT FIXED.I THINK IN THE NEXT TWO, THREE MONTHS.
THIS IS TO LOOK AT OUR STRUCTURES THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY OCCUPYING NOW.
CLASSROOMS MAKE THEM LARGER BECAUSE WE WANT TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE.
ALSO LOOK AT SOME OF THE PROPS WE HAVE.
THAT'S MORE CONDUCIVE TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN GENERAL FIRE NOW.
>> YES OR NO FOR THE TOWER AND THEN YOU HAVE AN OBSTACLE COURSE THING, IS THAT INCLUDED AS WELL? OR ARE YOU REALLY TIMEOUT WHERE YOU'RE HOLDING THE CLASSES? I KNOW I'VE SEEN YOU HAVE TO TURN CLASSROOMS INTO STORAGE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE'RE LOOKING AT REALLY EXPANDING THE CLASSROOM AREAS BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO HAVE LARGER CLASSES, WELL, WHAT WE'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR US.
THEN LOOKING AT ALSO SOME OF THE, LIKE OUR BURN HOUSE, WE KNOW THAT IT NEEDS TO BE UPGRADED, AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT HOW DO WE UPGRADE THAT WITH NEW TECHNOLOGIES THAT MAKE IT A LOT MORE SIMPLER AND EASIER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO BURN, DO MORE OF THAT, LACKED THE GLUTEN USING GAS INSTEAD OF THE GRASS AND HAY THAT WE USE AND PALLETS THAT WE USE RIGHT NOW.
>> IF YOU WERE ALLOCATED 5.5 MILLION, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO DO ALL THE THINGS YOU NEED TO?
>> I'M WORKING ON A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ITEMS, NOT ONLY WITH US, BUT ALSO WITH PARTNERING WITH DALLAS COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGES AS WELL AS DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT TO LOOK AT WAYS THAT WE CAN PARTNER TOGETHER.
I WANT TO LOOK AT CREATING A LINKAGE BETWEEN OUR SCHOOLS AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENABLE NOT ONLY MEMBERS LIKE MYSELF, THAT IT'S A DIALYSATE THAT GREW UP IN THIS AREA TO SEE THAT THIS IS A GREAT JOB AND ENABLE THEM TO ALSO SEE THIS AS A CAREER THAT THEY SHOULD WANT TO BE A FIREFIGHTER HERE NEAR OUR GREAT CITY.
>> WHERE ARE YOU HAVING YOUR RECRUITS PRACTICE FOR A BURN HOUSE SINCE YOURS IS NOT OPERABLE?
>> RIGHT NOW, OUR BURN HOUSE IS OPERABLE.
IT'S SUM OF THE OTHER STAIRS IN OUR TOWER THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS WITH OUR PARTNERS ALSO THAT THEY TRAIN IN THAT AREA.
WE GO TO THEIR AREA. IT JUST DEPENDS.
>> MY NEXT QUESTION IS ABOUT HOUSING.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY IN GENERAL, I THINK THAT WHEN WE SURVEYED PEOPLE AND THEY WEIGHED IN ON THESE PROPOSITIONS, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUE ITSELF BEING IMPORTANT TO THEM.
WHEN THEY SAY HOMELESSNESS IS IMPORTANT TO ME, I WANT TO PUT THIS IN THE BOND.
IT ISN'T NECESSARILY BECAUSE THEY WANT MORE HOMELESS FACILITIES.
IT'S THEY WANT MORE ACTION TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS.
I THINK IF YOU ACTUALLY ASK THEM, DO YOU WANT OUR HOMELESS FACILITIES IN DALLAS? THEY'D PROBABLY SAY NO.
I HOPE THAT AS WE'VE SEEN IN SOME ARTICLES, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE HOMELESS FACILITIES AROUND OUR NORTH TEXAS REGION.
HOPEFULLY DALLAS COUNTY WILL HELP SUPPORT FUNDING HOMELESS FACILITIES IN OUR NEIGHBORING CITIES AND NOT PUT ALL OF THEM IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
WITH HOUSING, I FEEL LIKE IT'S THE SAME ISSUE THAT EVERYONE RECOGNIZES HOUSING IS CRITICAL AND CERTAINLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT IF YOU SAID, DO YOU WANT TO GO IN DEBT TO BUILD THIS HOUSING, THAT THE ANSWER WOULD STILL BE YES.
I'D LIKE TO ASK THE VDD IF HE COULD TELL US SOME OF THE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE CAN FUND HOUSING BESIDES USING A BOND OR ANYBODY THE CITY MANAGER TO HAVE ANSWERED THAT.
>> WAS THE VETO AWARE THAT HE MIGHT NEED TO BE HERE TO SUPPORT THIS? COUNCIL, WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN GET SOMEONE FROM HOUSING TO COME DOWN.
>> I'LL SKIP THAT ONE FOR NOW.
MY NEXT ITEM ON THIS IS CULTURAL ARTS WHICH I AM A STRONG ARTS SUPPORTER, I THINK IT'S CRITICAL FOR OUR CITY.
HOWEVER, WE SURE HAVE GONE FROM 15 MILLION TO A $55 MILLION RECOMMENDATION, THAT'S A VERY LARGE JUMP.
THE THING IS THAT THE CULTURAL ARTS ARE ABLE TO ACCESS PHILANTHROPY DOLLARS THAT WE CANNOT AS A CITY ACCESS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT OUR AVERAGE TAXPAYER NEEDS TO BE PAYING FOR SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT FRANKLY, THEY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO GET AS A FLAT-OUT DONATION.
WHEN I HEAR THAT WE'RE GOING TO PAY THIS FOR 10, 20, OR 30 YEARS OF DEBT, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
THE THING THAT WE REALLY HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT HERE IS HOW EXPENSIVE DEBT IS AND WHAT IT MEANS TO OUR FUTURE TO PUT SO MUCH DEBT ON US.
COUNCILMAN RIDLEY SAID, BUT DO WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY ISSUE ALL OF THIS? DO WE HAVE TO HAVE AS MUCH AS OUR FULL CAPACITY?
[04:00:01]
IT'S VERY EASY TO SAY ALL THE THINGS WE WANT, BUT WE WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR THEM.I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT LOVE YOU, CULTURAL ARTS, I GOT TO SAY WE GOT TO GO BACK TO THAT ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION IN MY OPINION.
MY NEXT QUESTION IS ABOUT, FOR HOMELESSNESS, IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THAT SEVEN MILLION OF THAT WAS FOR THE BRIDGE AND THE REST OF IT WAS FOR NEW IDEAS?
>> YOUR TIME IS EXPIRING. THE END OF THE ROUND.
>> I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR THE ANSWER THEN FOR MY QUESTION ABOUT HOUSING.
>> DO YOU WANT TO REPEAT IT SO HE'D KNOW? HE JUST WALKED IN.
THE QUESTION WAS ABOUT HOUSING AND OTHER WAYS THAT WE COULD FUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING BESIDES A BOND.
>> ABSOLUTELY. DAVID NOGUERA, DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION.
WELL, THE FIRST ONE I'LL POINT TO IS ONE OF YOUR FAVORITE TOOLS, THE DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITY COOPERATION.
WE FREQUENTLY USE THAT WHEN WE'RE TAKING ON MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.
THEN THERE'S THE DALLAS HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, WE'LL USE THAT WHEN WE'RE PARTNERING WITH TAX CREDIT DEVELOPERS.
THERE'S STATE FUNDING THAT COMES THROUGH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR TAX CREDIT FINANCING THAT WE UTILIZE, SO THOSE ARE OUR MAIN ONES.
THEN ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, WE RECEIVE FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS THROUGH HUD, OUR HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM GRANT, OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT.
I GUESS THE LAST ONE THAT I'LL MENTION IS THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS PROGRAM WHICH HAS A FEE-IN-LIEU COMPONENT.
WHAT YOU'LL SEE THOUGH WITH EACH OF THESE TOOLS IS THAT THEY ALL HAVE VERY LIMITED ELIGIBLE USES ON WHAT WE CAN DO.
WITH EACH ONE OF THEM, THEY CAN TARGET CERTAIN INCOMES OR THEY CAN TARGET A CERTAIN TYPE OF HOUSING.
SO IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING MORE FLEXIBLE, THEN WHAT ONE OF THOSE TOOLS ALLOW THEN IT'S EITHER GOING TO BE GENERAL FUNDS OR BOND FUNDS.
>> BUT THERE'S MORE ITEMS FOR HIM.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILOR SCHULTZ.
THIS IS VERY HELPFUL, ALL OF THIS IS.
FIRST OF ALL, I THINK BACK TO YOUR SLIDE 4, WHAT WILL BE VERY HELPFUL IS IF WE CAN HAVE REGULAR ALIGNMENT WITH THE WAY THE COMMITTEES ARE STRUCTURED ON THESE BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE I'M TRYING TO PLAY CATCH UP OF WHERE THIS ALL FITS IN.
THEN ON THE SAME THING, AS IT GOES THROUGH COMMITTEE, I KNOW YOU'RE DOING ALTERNATIVE FUNDING OPTIONS AND LOTS OF DEEP DIVES INTO EACH ONE, TO CHAIR MENDELSOHN'S POINT, SO I THINK BY THE TIME IT COMES TO US, WHEN WE GET ALL OF THAT BACKGROUND WORK, I THINK IT'D BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL TO LOOK AT EACH OF THOSE AREAS TO SAY, WHERE ARE THERE ALTERNATIVE FUNDING THINGS SO THAT WE CAN MAKE A DECISION.
IT COULD BE ARGUED EQUALLY, HOW MUCH DEBT DO WE WANT TO GO IN FOR STREET REPAIR, THAT KIND OF THING.
EVERY ITEM WE NEED TO DETERMINE AND ARE THERE OTHER WAYS TO FUND THESE THINGS? I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE EQUITY PIECE.
I KNOW THAT WE USED THOSE FIVE DIFFERENT CRIME AND TODS AND MVA AND ALL OF THOSE, DID WE ALSO INCLUDE OTHER EQUITY FACTORS SUCH AS TREE CANOPY AND PARKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN THE EQUITY ANALYSIS? OR WAS IT ONLY FINANCIALLY BASED AS WELL AS SERVICE REQUESTS?
>> ON THE 311 REQUEST PORTION?
>> I'M SORRY, I'M LOOKING AT YOUR SLIDE 7 ON YOUR SCORING.
DR. WILSON, WHEN YOU WERE DOING, I CAN'T REMEMBER, I SHOULD KNOW THIS, DO WE INCLUDE THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IN OUR EQUITY INCLUDING PARK DESERTS LIKE WE HAVE FOOD DESERTS, THINGS LIKE THAT? IS THAT IN THESE EQUITY SCORES?
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
DR. LINDSEY WILSON, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION.
AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT PIECE OF IT, THAT IS NOT INCLUDED.
BUT I THINK TO THE LARGER POINT THAT SPEAKS TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THINKING ABOUT
[04:05:02]
EQUITY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROCESS FOR THOSE VERY REASONS THAT YOU'VE HIGHLIGHTED, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT WHEN WE'RE THINKING ABOUT HOW WE'RE EMBEDDING EQUITY INTO THIS ENTIRE PROCESS THAT GOES BEYOND A POINT SYSTEM OR REALLY JUST A CHECK OF A BOX.IT'S SOME OF THOSE LARGER QUESTIONS AROUND WHERE ARE WE SEEING THE GREATEST NEEDS FOR THE VARIOUS PROJECTS.
>> I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING THEN IN THIS IS, SINCE WE HAVE AREAS THAT GO FROM ARTS AND CULTURE TO PARKS TO STREETS AND PUBLIC SAFETY WITHIN THE VARIOUS COMMITTEES THAT WE'VE SAT, THERE ARE DIFFERENT EQUITY FACTORS THAT MATTER.
WHAT I'M WONDERING IS, IS THERE GOING TO BE THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE IT COMES TO US FOR THE FINAL DECISION FOR THE ALLOCATIONS TO CONSIDER THE EQUITY ISSUES THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THAT PARTICULAR FUNDING AREA?
>> ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THAT THAT'S KEY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT WE'VE EMBEDDED EQUITY INTO THIS PROCESS.
>> AND THE PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF EQUITY THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THAT PARTICULAR BUCKET, IF YOU WILL, OF PROPOSITION, THANK YOU. DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING?
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I WAS CLEAR BECAUSE SOMETIMES I'M NOT [OVERLAPPING]
>> SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS.
>> THANK YOU. THEN MY LAST POINT ON THE CREEKS PIECE, I THINK AGAIN TO CHAIR MENDELSOHN'S, IS I THINK THAT AS WE EVALUATE, AND THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR MS. STANDIFER.
I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S A QUESTION OR JUST A COMMENT ON MY POINT BECAUSE I ALSO HAVE A TREMENDOUS NUMBER OF REQUESTS REGARDING EROSION IN CREEKS BECAUSE THE WHOLE WHITE ROCK CREEK SYSTEM GOES THROUGH NORTH DALLAS.
MY QUESTION IS, DO WE HAVE A LONG-TERM STRATEGY FOR OUR CREEKS SUCH THAT WE KNOW WHICH ONES THE CITY OUGHT TO BE INVESTING IN VERSUS THE ONES THAT ARE SIMPLY AESTHETIC AMENITIES FOR PRIVATE HOMEOWNERS?
>> SARAH STANDIFER, DALLAS WATER UTILITIES.
COUNCIL MEMBER, ABOUT 700 MILES OF CREEK RESIDE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, 161 MILES ARE PUBLIC-OWNED.
SO THAT LEAVES A LARGE NUMBER OF THE CREEKS WITH PRIVATE OWNERSHIP TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE CREEK.
WE HAVE FLOOD STUDIES AND WE HAVE VELOCITY STUDIES THAT WE DO LOOK AT AND CONSIDER, BUT AS FAR AS WORKING ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BUY THOSE CREEKS, THAT IS NOT PART OF THE CURRENT PLAN, BUT WHEN WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT NECESSITATES IT, WE WOULD.
SO A LARGER CONVERSATION THAT WE'VE HAD AND THEN YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO END UP HAVING IT EARLIER.
THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS IF YOU WANT EROSION CONTROL IN THE CREEKS, YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE THE NATURAL VALUE.
YOU'LL GET RID OF THE TREES, YOU'RE GOING TO BEGIN TO SEE CONCRETE BOXES AND THINGS.
THE NEW DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA REQUIRE THAT YOU BUILD 75 FOOT OFF FROM A CREEK.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO BUILD ON A CREEK, YOU MUST REPLACE THAT CREEK WITH SOMETHING TO PROTECT THE PROPERTY SO REALLY, WE'RE LOOKING AT THOSE OLDER PROPERTIES THAT WERE BUILT WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE THESE RULES IN PLACE.
BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO THINK ABOUT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WHEN YOU ASK FOR THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> WELL, I'M NOT ASKING FOR THOSE, DON'T GET ME WRONG.
WHAT I'M ASKING IS WE MAY DECIDE THAT WE WANT THE AESTHETIC FOR WHAT IT IS, AND WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, PARTICULARLY AS I WOULD ARGUE, WE NEED TO ACTUALLY INCREASE OUR TREE CANOPY PERCENTAGE, NOT LOOK FOR ANY OPPORTUNITY TO REMOVE TREES.
SO WHAT I'M ASKING THOUGH IS, HAVE WE DONE A STRATEGIC ANALYSIS OF THE, LET'S SAY, NON-CITY-OWNED CREEKS, IF THAT'S THE WAY WE'RE DIVIDING IT, OR EVEN OF THE NON-CITY-OWNED CREEKS TO SAY, THESE ARE CREEKS THAT STILL HAVE A TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON THE OVERALL CITY.
FOR EXAMPLE, I KNOW WE GET, I'LL JUST USE WHITE ROCK CREEK BECAUSE THAT'S THE MAIN ONE. IS THAT CITY-OWNED?
>> WHITE ROCK IS A COMBINATION OF ALL OF THEM.
YOU HAVE FIVE MAJOR TRIBUTARIES THAT RUN THROUGH DALLAS AND ALL OF THEM ARE A HYBRID.
SO WHEN WE LOOK AT TOTAL FLOWS AND VOLUMES AND WHAT TO PUT INTO THOSE CREEKS, WE'RE LOOKING AT THOSE THINGS, BUT THERE IS NOT A PARTICULAR STRATEGY THAT SAYS, IN THIS STRETCH, WE WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR.
>> IF THERE ARE FLOOD PROPERTIES, WE PURCHASE THEM WHEN AVAILABLE.
>> WELL, I'M NOT TRYING TO GET TO THE SOLUTION YET, BUT WHAT I GUESS I'M ASKING IS, IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO FUND THE DISCUSSION THAT IT WOULD TAKE? BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT JUST BUYING AND WALLING IS THE ANSWER TO EVERY SINGLE CREEK EROSION ISSUE.
ALL I'M ASKING IS, FOR THIS PIECE OF IT, ARE WE PLANNING AT ALL TO DO ANY PLANNING AROUND THOSE, I GUESS EVERY CREEK SINCE THEY'RE ALL HYBRIDS?
[04:10:01]
>> THERE WILL BE A SMALL PORTION IN THE COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT THAT WE'VE GOT UNDERWAY, THE LARGER PIECE IS THE UNDERSIZED PIPES, THAT'S WHERE THE REAL STRATEGY HAS BEEN.
UNDERSIZED PIPES AND FLOODING PROPERTIES BECAUSE EROSION IN MANY CASES IS AESTHETIC UNTIL IT BECOMES A STRUCTURAL DEFICIENCY, SO WE'VE PLACED A LOT OF THE EMPHASIS ON FLOODING STRUCTURES AND TRYING TO ADDRESS THOSE.
BUT THERE'LL BE A SMALL PIECE THAT'LL TALK ABOUT CREEKS AND BEST PRACTICES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. SARAH, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WILL NECESSARILY [INAUDIBLE], BUT AS YOU KNOW, I'M IN TOUCH WITH YOUR OFFICE QUITE A BIT ABOUT EROSION ISSUES AND THAT THING.
YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT THE 1985 RESOLUTION, BUT THEN I GUESS THAT'S TO HELP US FIND A WAY AROUND THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION THAT PROHIBITS THE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR PRIVATE PURPOSES, WAS THAT INTENDED TO?
>> THE RESOLUTION THAT WE ASKED THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME WAS THIS VERY CONVERSATION WE'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW, DO YOU WANT TO GET INTO THE BUSINESS OF PAYING FOR EROSION ON PRIVATE PROPERTY? IF SO, THEN IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN EASEMENT THAT IS THE OWNERSHIP MECHANISM.
THE OWNERSHIP IS PROVIDED AT NO COST TO THE CITIES, SO IT'S NOT LIKE THE OTHER EASEMENTS WHERE WE GO BY THE EASEMENT IN ORDER FOR US TO PUT EROSION ON YOUR PROPERTY, YOU MUST GIVE US THAT EASEMENT AND IT IS A PERPETUITY.
LIKE I MENTIONED, EVERY BOND PROGRAM WE ASKED YOU, DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THIS PROGRAM? IF SO, WE COULD DO OPTIONS.
>> I THINK IN THIS PROCESS, SINCE WE DO HAVE A BIG NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, AND I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS IT BECAUSE THERE ARE THOSE WHO ARE HAVING THEIR HOMES FLOODED, AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING THE CITY SHOULD BE DOING ON THAT 161 MILES PUBLIC OWNED CREEK, WELL, THEN WE SHOULD DO IT.
I WOULD ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
I THINK YOU-ALL MAY HAVE BEEN ASKED TO EVALUATE THE PROJECTS ON THIS LIST TO UNDERSTAND IF THEY ARE PRIVATE OR PUBLIC, BECAUSE I JUST WONDER ABOUT THE ONES THAT ARE ON THIS THAT REALLY WOULD BE CONSIDERED PRIVATE, THAT SHOULDN'T BE ON THIS LIST SO THAT WE CAN GET TO AN ACCURATE NUMBER.
>> THE PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE IS DETERMINED BASED ON THE DEED AND PLAT, SO WHEN WE PULL THE DEED AND PLATS, IT DETERMINES THE OWNERSHIP THAT IS THEN PLACED ON THE NEEDS INVENTORY WITH A NOTATION OF PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.
THEN WHAT THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS DONE PREVIOUSLY IS TO WORK WITH US TO EXECUTE AN INSTRUMENT, SO THERE'S A FIELD SURVEY AND A BOUNDARY SURVEY THAT'S DONE AND THEN THE EASEMENT IS EXECUTED.
IN ABSENCE OF AN EASEMENT, THERE IS NO PROJECT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
>> WE'RE FEELING CONFIDENT THAT THESE LIST OF PROJECTS WOULD QUALIFY TO BE CONSIDERED IN A PUBLIC REALM.
>> IF THE PROPERTY OWNER WERE TO CONVEY THE EASEMENT TO THE CITY FOR THE DRAINAGE AND PURPOSE OF EROSION PROTECTION OF THE CREEK, THEN YES.
BUT IF THEY DO NOT, THEN NO, THEY WOULD NOT.
>> I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER CATEGORY WHERE THE MINIMUM PROJECT LENGTH MUST BE ONE-BLOCK, SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT LIKE IF THERE'S ONE PROPERTY OWNER THAT WOULDN'T QUALIFY NECESSARILY.
>> THE ONE-BLOCK IS A STRATEGY THAT SOME CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE USED AND THAT THEY DON'T SEEK AND DO EROSION ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITH AN EASEMENT IN PLACE AT THAT POINT UNLESS IT INCLUDES MORE THAN ONE PROPERTY.
HISTORICALLY, BOND PROGRAMS AND EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS HAVE BEEN AN ITERATIVE PROCESS, AND SO SOME DISTRICTS THAT HAS BEEN ONE PROPERTY, AND THEN THE NEXT BOND PROGRAM AND OTHER PROPERTY IS FUNDED IS REALLY DEPENDENT ON THE FUNDING AND THE NEED WITHIN THE CREEK AND THE COUNCIL DISTRICTS.
>> I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT OUR RESOLUTION SAID THAT IT HAD TO BE A BLOCK SO THAT WE'RE NOT JUST FOCUSED ON.
>> IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT WAS ONE OF THE CRITERIA ON A BLOCK, AND SO WE DO HAVE PROJECTS THAT HAVE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES, OTHER PROJECTS AND THE NEEDS INVENTORY.
BECAUSE REMEMBER WHEN WE GO OUT AND ASSESS THESE, WE OFTEN TELL A RESIDENT IN ABSENCE OF US DOING SOMETHING, YOU COULD SIT HERE FOR 20 OR 30 YEARS, YOUR BEST LINE OF DEFENSE IS TO HIRE YOUR OWN SUPPORT AND DO THIS PROJECT.
HOWEVER, MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS HAVE WAITED 20 AND 25 YEARS AND SO THEY'RE DOWN TO ONE OR TWO IN A ROW.
THE OTHER SCENARIO THAT YOU SEE IS THERE ARE CERTAIN RESIDENTS THAT CANNOT AFFORD THE TYPES OF EXPENSES INVOLVED IN EROSION, SO EACH DISTRICT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
>> THANK YOU. I'M ON THE PHILANTHROPY ARGUMENT THAT WAS MADE AND SPONSORSHIP ARGUMENT, I AGREE.
I THINK THAT NOT ONLY OCCURS WITH OUR CULTURAL FACILITIES,
[04:15:03]
BUT ALSO WITH PARKS.ANYWHERE THAT WE CAN FIND A PHILANTHROPIC OPPORTUNITY OR SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITY CITYWIDE, I THINK WE NEED TO BE LOOKING VERY HARD AT THAT.
I KNOW PARK AND REC IS REVIEWING THE SPONSORSHIP.
A PROPOSAL THAT'S BEEN MADE, BUT THAT MAY NOT PLAY OUT FOR A YEAR WHERE WE WOULD REALIZE IT IN OUR BUDGET, WHICH COULD THEN AFFECT THE BOND DOLLARS THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO PUT TOWARDS SOME PROJECTS THAT I DEFINITELY WANT TO SEE US THINK BIG AROUND THAT.
HOWEVER, THAT SAID, I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME DOLLARS THAT YOU CAN LEVERAGE WITH PRIVATE DONORS.
IF WE'VE GOT CITY FACILITIES, OUR CULTURAL FACILITIES, AND WE'RE ABLE TO SAY THE CITY IS PUTTING IN XYZ DOLLARS IN THEIR FACILITY, BUT WE NEED YOU TO HELP US MAKE THAT UP.
WHEN WE PUT THAT SKIN IN THE GAME, IT DOES GO FARTHER.
SOMEWHERE IN HERE BETWEEN THE VERY LOW $15 MILLION AND THE DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED, OR AT 55 MILLION, THERE'S GOING TO BE A SWEET SPOT, BUT I THINK WE'VE JUST GOT TO FIND THAT AND THINK ABOUT HOW WE KNOW THAT THOSE FACILITIES OR THAT THESE CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN PUSHING THEIR PRIVATE DONORS DURING COVID AND THAT THING.
I DON'T ENVY YOU-ALL TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT BEFORE IT COMES TO US, BUT I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING WHAT YOU LAND ON.
I'M CONCERNED AROUND OUR PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES AND THESE AMOUNTS, IT JUST FEELS LOW.
THIS 5.5 MILLION ON OUR POLICE FACILITIES ON JUST GETTING THESE UP TO SPEED, AGAIN, I GO BACK TO 2017 SITTING ON THAT COMMITTEE AND THAT LIST WAS LONG, AND THEN LAST YEAR WE DID THE AMENDMENT FOR OUR FIRE STATIONS, AND THAT WAS JUST TO GET THE MOST EGREGIOUS THINGS FIXED, AND THERE WERE STILL SUCH A LONG LIST.
I'M JUST REALLY CONCERNED BY THESE NUMBERS, MR. FORTUNE, I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THIS TO KNOW WHAT THAT NEED IS AND WHY WE'RE LANDING AT SOMETHING SO LOW.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S NEEDS IN ALL OF OUR CITY FACILITIES.
IN THIS AREA IN PARTICULAR, I WOULD HAVE TO REFER TO THE BOND OFFICE, I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS IN FRONT OF ME AS TO WHAT MAKES UP THAT 5.5, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THE BOND OFFICE DOES, IT'S NICE WONDER.
>> SURE. FOR THE POLICE, $5.5 MILLION, I BELIEVE THAT TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THREE DIFFERENT PROJECTS AND I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT WHERE THAT LANDED AND I CAN CERTAINLY GET THAT TO YOU.
>> THAT'S JUST THREE PROJECTS.
>> HOW MANY PROJECTS ARE THERE ON THAT LIST?
>> IT WAS A LOT MORE THAN THREE?
>> YEAH. AS WE LOOK AT THIS, I WOULD RAISE MY HAND TO FIGHT FOR MORE DOLLARS GOING INTO THAT BUCKET, AND WITH FIRE AS WELL JUST KNOWING WE SAW THAT LIST LAST YEAR AROUND THIS TIME AND IT WAS LONG, SO I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A HARD LOOK TAKEN AT THAT BECAUSE I CAN PROMISE WHEN IT GETS HERE IT'S GOING TO HAVE A HARD LOOK TAKEN.
THEN GOING BACK TO HOUSING, SOME OF THE QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED, I THINK ON WHAT THESE GO AHEAD, MR. NOGUERA.
I APPRECIATE YOU OUTLINING HFCS, PFCS AND THE GRANTS AND THAT SORT OF THING, AND THAT YOU'RE SAYING WE NEED THESE HOUSING BOND DOLLARS TO HELP US FUND OR INCENTIVIZE JV OR SOMETHING WITH TO GET SOME PROJECTS DONE THAT MAYBE DON'T FIT INTO THESE OTHER EXISTING CRITERIA.
CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME THAT ARE ON THAT BUBBLE, BECAUSE I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS? I KNOW WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS OUR HOUSING SHORTAGE, BUT THERE'S ALSO A PRIVATE SECTOR OUT THERE THAT CAN INVEST IN THESE THINGS, SO TELL ME A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHERE YOU SEE WHERE THESE DOLLARS WOULD HELP.
>> GREAT. DAVID NOGUERA, DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION.
IF YOU LOOK AT OUR OVERALL HOUSING STOCK, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ROUGHLY 570,000 UNITS, 61 PERCENT OF OUR UNITS ARE MULTIFAMILY, ONLY 39 PERCENT ARE SINGLE-FAMILY.
THE COUNCIL HAS ASKED US TO LOOK AT MORE HOME-OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES, BUT THE REALITY OF IT IS THAT THE LAND AROUND THE CITY IS EXPENSIVE, AND WHEN YOU FIND LAND, IT NEEDS TO BE CULTIVATED WITH INFRASTRUCTURE AND REZONING AND ALL THESE OTHER FACTORS BEFORE YOU CAN USE IT.
SO WHAT THE BOND DOLLARS ALLOW US TO DO IS TO GO IN AND TAKE DOWN LARGE SCALE LOTS, AND HOME-OWNERSHIP IS ONE OF THE OUTCOMES THAT CAN COME FROM US ACQUIRING LAND.
[04:20:04]
WE RECENTLY ACQUIRED SOME LAND IN DISTRICT 5 WHERE IT'S ABOUT 18 ACRES, THAT'S PRIME FOR SALE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.BUT THAT LAND HAS TO BE ACTIVATED.
IT NEEDS TO BE ACTIVATED IN A WAY THAT BRINGS A MIX OF INCOME SO THAT WE'RE NOT FURTHER CONCENTRATING POVERTY.
THOSE OTHER TOOLS DON'T ALLOW US TO DO THAT.
>> WERE THERE ARPA FUNDS FOR HELPING US GET AT SOME OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE TO GET THAT TO DEVELOPMENT, TO PUT WHAT IS NEEDED IN THE GROUND TO HELP MAKE THE REST OF THAT HOUSING HAPPEN?
>> YES, SO ARPA HAS BEEN GREAT AND WE'VE USED IT FOR ACQUISITION OF LAND, WE'VE USED IT FOR PRESERVATION OF EXISTING HOUSING UNITS, BUT THOSE ARE ONETIME FUNDS, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SHORTAGE OF HOUSING UNITS THAT NEED TO BE DEVELOPED, WE'VE GOT TO CONTINUE TO LOOK IN THE FUTURE.
>> THERE WERE SOME THAT WERE GETTING PAID TO INFRASTRUCTURE.
>> EXCUSE ME, COUNCILWOMAN. HE NEEDS TO FINISH UP HIS RESPONSE AND YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.
>> IT WAS ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE.
>> WHAT WE'VE LEARNED FROM AN ELIGIBILITY STANDPOINT, AND I'LL ASK CYNTHIA TO THE COMMENT IF I DON'T HAVE THIS TOTALLY CORRECT, IS THAT THE ARPA FUNDS CAN BE USED TO PAY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE WHEN IT'S TIED TO AN ADDRESS, NOT JUST INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> WELL, IT DOES, BUT I REALLY THOUGHT THAT THERE WERE SOME FUNDS.
>> COUNCILWOMAN, YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.
AT THIS TIME, YOU MAY HAVE ANOTHER ROUND.
>> SURE, LET'S LOOK INTO WHAT THOSE ARE.
>> THANK YOU. I BELIEVE I HAVE THREE MINUTES, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THANK YOU. FOR TRANSPORTATION, MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS, IS A COMMITTEE EVALUATING PROJECTS BASED ON OPPORTUNITIES TO LEVERAGE OTHER FUNDS? THE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS THAT THEY EVALUATING, YES, THEY ARE LOOKING AT THE ONES THAT WHERE THERE'LL BE LEVERAGING OTHER FUNDS FROM OTHER SOURCES.
I FORGOT THE NAME OF THE ACTUAL CATEGORY, BUT YES, THAT'S BEING LOOKED AT.
THEN TO COUNSEL OUR NERVOUS EYES AS POINT.
THERE'S A LOT OF NEW FUNDING THAT IS POTENTIAL FOR US TO RECEIVE.
IS THAT SOMEHOW PLAYING INTO IT OR IT'S JUST TOO UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME? COUNCIL MEMBER, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE TOO UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME, BUT I WILL POINT OUT THAT A LOT OF THE FEDERAL DOLLARS THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR LARGE PROJECTS, BRIDGES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE THAT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY TIE TO A RECONSTRUCTION OF A LOCAL STREET.
YES, WE CAN LOOK TO THE LEVERAGE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS THROUGH GRANTS OR FEDERAL OPPORTUNITIES.
BUT THOSE USUALLY BIG-TICKET ITEMS. YES, WE ARE LOOKING AT THAT.
THEN FOR LIBRARIES, HAS THERE BEEN ANALYSIS DONE ABOUT THE ACTUAL NEED FOR ADDITIONAL LIBRARIES OR NOT? OR MAYBE WE HAVE TOO MANY LIBRARIES.
HAS THERE BEEN ANY LOOK AT THAT?
>> I KNOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE WORKING ON YOUR MASTER PLAN AND I ASSUME THAT THAT WOULD BE TAKEN TO ACCOUNT THAT TIME, THE PROJECTS THAT THEY'VE LISTED HERE TO TO FINISH OUT THE CURRENT MASTER PLAN THAT THEY HAVE.
>> ARE ANY OF THOSE NEW OR THOSE RENOVATIONS?
>> I BELIEVE THERE'S ONE NEW AND TWO RENOVATIONS, BUT I MIGHT HAVE THAT BACKWARDS, THOUGH.
>> THEN FOR IT, IF THOSE DOLLARS THAT YOU'VE GOT IN THERE, I THINK IT WAS 24 MILLION.
I'M NOT SURE. WILL THAT COMPLETE THE BUILD-OUT OF THE OFFSITE SERVER LOCATION, INCLUDING EQUIPMENT PURCHASE?
>> THAT I'M NOT SURE. OFTEN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT.
I KNOW THEY HAVE ON THEIR NEEDS INVENTORY OR REQUESTS FOR AN OVERALL CAMPUS.
IT WOULDN'T COVER THAT. I THINK TO BUILD OUT THE BUILDING ACROSS FROM JACK EVANS WAS 30 MILLION. WE'RE STILL.
>> IF YOU COULD SEND A MEMO LETTING US KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT WOULD COST FOR THE BUILD-OUT OF THAT OFFSITE SERVER LOCATION AND THAT INCLUDES EQUIPMENT THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT GETS FUNDED.
I THINK WE'VE ALL SEEN THE REPERCUSSIONS OF NOT HAVING OUR ITB, WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE.
[04:25:04]
THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT EQUITY.IT'S ALWAYS HARD WHEN WE DO THAT AROUND THIS COURSE YOU BUT I'M GOING TO GO THERE.
WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT 10 POINTS, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT ONE THROUGH FIVE, AND THEN ARBITRARILY THAT NUMBER WAS GOING TO BE DOUBLED.
I ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY SCIENTIFIC LOOK AT HOW WAS THAT DETERMINED. THE ANSWER WAS NO.
I ASKED IF WE RAN THROUGH PROJECTS TO SEE WHAT USING THAT TOOL WOULD MEAN.
WHAT I'M SEEING NOW IS THAT THIS EQUITY TOOL MEANS VERY BAD THINGS FOR AT LEAST MY DISTRICT.
WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT YOU'RE USING A MAP WHERE SOMETIMES THE LOCATION THAT NEEDS INVESTMENT IS LITERALLY ACROSS THE STRAIN.
IT DOESN'T GET ANY EQUITY POINTS, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY SERVING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THE EQUITY AREA.
THE NEEDED INVESTMENT, ESPECIALLY IN A VERY SMALL DISTRICT.
I THINK I'M THE SECOND SMALLEST, IS NOT GOING IN THE RIGHT LOCATIONS, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE WE'RE FULLY DEVELOPED.
I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT.
>> ABSOLUTELY. DR. LINDSEY WILSON, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION, TO ANSWER SOME OF YOUR FIRST QUESTIONS. I'M NOT QUITE SURE.
I THINK BONNS WILL NEED TO SPEAK TO THAT BECAUSE THE SCIENTIFIC AND ALL OF THAT, I THINK THOSE RESPONSES CAME FROM BONN.
TO BE VERY CLEAR THE EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT TOOL WAS CREATED TO USE AS A FOUNDATION FOR DEPARTMENTS TO LAYER ON OTHER KEY FACTORS TO MAKE DECISIONS AROUND GREATEST NEED.
WHEN IT'S USED IN ISOLATION AND DOUBLING THE POINTS, AGAIN, I THINK BONNS CAN SPEAK MORE SPECIFIC TO THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS A BONN'S DECISION AS IT REGARDS TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE MAP AND ISOLATION, IT IS SHOWING WHERE WE'RE SEEING THE GREATEST NEEDS AS IT REGARDS TO THE DISPARITIES THAT WE SEE HERE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS ACROSS A NUMBER OF FACTORS.
WHETHER WE'RE SPEAKING INFRASTRUCTURE OR WE'RE SPEAKING DISPARITY.
HE'S AROUND EDUCATION, PUBLIC HEALTH, AND SO FORTH.
NOW, TO MAKE IT THE MOST EFFECTIVE, JUST BUILDING OFF OF WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ SAID, IT'S KEY TO FACTOR AND OTHER COMPONENTS THAT ARE CRITICAL TO WHATEVER ASSESSMENT THAT WE'RE MAKING.
IF WE'RE LOOKING AT STREETS, THE TECHNICAL CRITERIA IS JUST AS IT IS IMPORTANT TO LAYER ON TOP OF THAT SO THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY WHERE THOSE GREATEST NEEDS ARE.
BUT IN ISOLATION, THE TOOL BY ITSELF DOES IDENTIFY WHERE WE'RE SEEING THE LARGEST DISPARITIES AS IT REGARDS TO A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. WE CAN TALK ANYTHING FROM EDUCATION TO NEIGHBORHOODS AND INFRASTRUCTURE, TO JUSTICE AND GOVERNMENT, AND DATA CONTINUES TO DEMONSTRATE THAT.
THEN THE IMPORTANT PIECE THEN IS TO SAY, IF WE'RE GOING TO LOOK SPECIFICALLY AT STREETS, WHAT OTHER CRITERIA DO WE NEED TO ASSESS ON TOP OF THE EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT TOOL AND I'LL PASS IT TO EITHER JENNIFER OR DR. PEREZ.
>> TO ADD ON THAT COUNCIL MEMBER, IF I CAN REFER YOU TO SLIDE 8 IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP THAT'S THERE, THE ONE THAT LOOKS LIKE MINECRAFT, THE ONE ON THE RIGHT.
TO YOUR POINT, AS FAR AS ENSURING THAT WE DON'T LEAVE OUT AN AREA RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.
IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE LAST BRIEFING AS TO WHERE FOLKS, OR TO WHERE THIS BODY HAD DISCUSSED THE IDEA OF NOT WANTING TO PENALIZE A NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT HAD A HIGH EQUITY NEED.
BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF MILLION-DOLLAR HOMES THAT WERE BUILT NEXT TO THEM.
THIS GRID THAT WE'RE USING IN THE ONE-BY-ONE MI GRID ACTUALLY HELPS TO ADDRESS THAT.
IF YOU LOOK PARTICULARLY IN YOUR DISTRICT, I THINK IT'S THE DARKER SHADES ARE WHERE THERE'S GOING TO BE A HIGHER EQUITY NEED BECAUSE WE'RE USING THE ONE-BY-ONE MI GRID, WE WILL BE ABLE TO PICK UP THAT AREA RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.
>> NOTICE THAT THE DARKER EQUITY IS RIGHT NEXT TO ONE THAT HAS NO SHADING, AND THE ONLY PUBLIC FACILITY IS ACTUALLY IN THE WHITE SIDE, BUT IT'S SERVING EVERYBODY IN COLLIN COUNTY.
>> I'LL ALSO MA'AM, KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS IS JUST TO SCORE THE PROJECTS.
>> I KNOW BUT ALL THE PEOPLE THAT NEED THE HELP AND THE SCORING AREN'T GOING TO RECEIVE IT BECAUSE THE ACTUAL LOCATION OF THE LIBRARY IN THIS CASE HAPPENS TO BE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.
BUT HAD IT BEEN ON THIS SIDE, BUT IT'S THE ONLY FACILITY SERVING 65 PERCENT OF MY DISTRICT.
THE RULE ISN'T FUNCTIONING IN A WAY TO SERVE THE ACTUAL NEED IS WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU.
>> I WILL ALSO SAY TO MA'AM THAT TO COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ'S QUESTION EARLIER,
[04:30:06]
WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THOSE ITEMS WHERE THERE IS A DESERT, IF YOU WILL, HAVE NO LIBRARIES OR SOMETHING, PARTICULAR TO WHAT EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT COURT AREA NEEDS ARE WITHIN THOSE COUNCIL DISTRICTS? YES, WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THAT PREVIOUS TO THIS LAST MONTH OR SO.WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT THOSE SCORES, LAYING ON THE TECHNICAL DATA.
BUT THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE A DEEPER DIVE.
GOING BACK TO THAT 30 PERCENT GOAL TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING THE PARTICULAR NEEDS OF EACH DISTRICT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
>> I'D INVITE YOU TO HAVE A MEETING WITH ME SO I CAN EXPLAIN THESE THINGS TO YOU AND THEN I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU FOR ANYBODY'S MISCONCEPTION THAT DISTRICT 12 IS A MAJORITY-MINORITY DISTRICT. THANK YOU.
>> I THINK THE COUNCIL RIDLEY, DO YOUR SECOND ROUND. THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. DR. WILSON, WITH REGARD TO THE DESCRIPTION ON SLIDE 6, THAT STAFF IS EVALUATING EQUITY FUNDING SCENARIOS NOT JUST BY PROJECT POINTS, BUT OVERALL BOND FUNDING LEVELS.
I'D LIKE TO DIG INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT.
YOU HAVE SPOKEN TO THE EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT TOOL, WHICH I UNDERSTAND YOUR OFFICE HAS DEVELOPED THIS POINT SYSTEM TO EVALUATE PROJECTS ON AN EQUITY SCALE.
THAT'S OBVIOUSLY PRIMARILY AN OBJECTIVE PROCESS OF EVALUATING THINGS LIKE INCOME LEVELS, DEMOGRAPHICS, ET CETERA.
THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL BASIS UPON WHICH I UNDERSTOOD PROJECTS WOULD BE EVALUATED ON THIS POINT SYSTEM.
WHY ARE WE OVERLAYING THAT WITH ADDITIONAL.
>> DAISY IS CURRENTLY UNAVAILABLE.
PLEASE LEAVE A MESSAGE AFTER THE TONE.
WHEN YOU HAVE FINISHED, PLEASE HUNG UP.
>> THANK YOU. WHY ARE WE ADDING TO THAT WHAT APPEARS TO BE A SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS OF OVERALL BOND FUNDING LEVELS, WHO DETERMINED THAT THAT ADDITIONAL SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS WAS NECESSARY AND WHY?
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I WILL BEGIN AND I SEE JENNIFER HAS HER HAND ON THE MIC, SO I WILL PASS IT OVER TO JENNIFER FOLLOWING I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.
THE EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT TOOL WAS NOT CREATED IN THE FORM OF A POINT SYSTEM BY THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION.
THAT WAS A DECISION THAT BONDS AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MADE AND ULTIMATELY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE UNIQUE NEEDS THAT THAT TOOL REALLY SHOULD HAVE LAYER FACTORS ON IT RIGHT AROUND WHERE THERE MAY BE SOME REC CENTERS OR SOME OTHER KEY FACTORS.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE EQUATE POINTS PARTICULARLY WHEN WE DO MORE OF WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER A EQUALITY APPROACH WHERE WE GIVE EVERY ONE POINTS, IT STARTS TO MINIMIZE WHERE WE'RE SEEING SOME OF THE GREATEST NEED.
I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT PIECE OF IT.
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'RE ALL ATTEMPTING TO EMBED EQUITY AND BONDS.
WE'RE TRYING TO CHECK THE VALIDITY OF THAT.
BUT IT WAS NOT ORIGINALLY CREATED IN THE FORM OF A POINT SYSTEM TO ALLOCATE POINTS.
I DON'T KNOW IF JENNIFER OR DR. PEREZ WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT.
>> YES. THANK YOU. SHE'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
THE OFFICE OF BONDING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, WE DID WANT TO EMBED EQUITY WITHIN THE SELECTION PROCESS AND WE FOUND THAT THIS WAS A WAY TO DO THAT.
WE WANTED TO ACCOUNT FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF POINTS.
WE DID MULTIPLY THAT SCORE BY TWO TO GET TO 10 POINTS BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL CAME TOGETHER AND FELT LIKE THAT WAS AT LEAST SOMETHING THAT WAS ACCOUNTABLE AND THAT WE COULD POINT TO SAYING THAT WE ARE DOING THAT, BRING EQUITY INTO THE SCORING PROCESS.
ON TOP OF THAT, WE HAVE ASKED ALL THE DEPARTMENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROGRAMS THAT THEY WILL BE SELECTING IN OUR WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY TO BOND TASKFORCE IS THAT THOSE ARE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE RACIAL EQUITY PLAN AS WELL.
THAT'S THE BASIS FOR ALL THAT.
WHEN IT COMES TO THE FUNDING LEVELS, THAT WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN OUR COMMUNITY BOND TASKFORCE BY ONE OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS.
THEY HAD POINTED OUT THAT WE HAVE THIS POINT SYSTEM AND THAT'S GREAT AND IT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT, BUT YOU'RE NOT PUTTING YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS, SO WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN TERMS OF FUNDING WHEN IT COMES TO EQUITY?
[04:35:01]
THAT'S WHAT DROVE THIS WHOLE PROCESS AND TALKING ABOUT GETTING TO 30 PERCENT.THAT'S THE THOUGHT BEHIND HOW WE GOT HERE.
>> WELL, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
IF THE POINT SYSTEM WAS DESIGNED TO FAVOR PROJECTS BASED UPON AN EQUITY SCORE, THAN THOSE PROJECTS WOULD HAVE A LEG UP ON OTHER LOWER EQUITY SCORING PROJECTS AND THEREFORE WOULD TEND TO GET MORE FUNDING, WHY ARE WE OVERLAYING ON TOP OF THAT POINT SYSTEM AND ANALYSIS OF OVERALL BOND FUNDING LEVELS.
ARE WE SAYING THAT THE POINT SYSTEM ISN'T WORKING?
>> NO. I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE.
AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT, AND AS YOU GET INTO THE WIDTHS OF IT, THOSE POINTS SYSTEM IT HELPS TO IDENTIFY PROJECTS WITHIN A PROPOSITION, WITHIN A CATEGORY, WITHIN A COUNCIL DISTRICT.
THEN THOSE PROJECTS WITHIN EACH OTHER, BECAUSE EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT FOR THAT CATEGORY WOULD HAVE A CERTAIN DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT THEY WERE LOOKING TO SPEND, AS IT CAME TO SELECTING THE PROJECTS, IT WAS GETTING NARROWED DOWN PRETTY FINE TUNED.
THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT FUNDING LEVELS VERSUS POINTS.
BECAUSE THE POINTS AGAIN, IT WOULD IDENTIFY THE PROJECTS, BUT YOU'D HAVE TO DRILL DOWN TO GET TO THAT LEVEL OF THE PROJECT SELECTION.
>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY DRILLING DOWN TO? THE POINT SYSTEM IS TO EVALUATE SPECIFIC PROJECTS, CORRECT?
>> WHAT ELSE IS THERE NECESSARY TO DO HERE? HOW ARE YOU GOING TO EVALUATE OVERALL BOND FUNDING LEVELS? WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA FOR THAT IF IT'S NOT THE POINT SYSTEM?
>> COUNCILMAN, THAT THE WAY THAT THIS EVOLVED IS WE DID EXACTLY AS JENNIFER MENTIONED.
THE PROJECTS WERE SCORED, WE CAME IN AND I SAY WE, PUBLIC WORKS, TRANSPORTATION CAME IN AT THE STREET SUBCOMMITTEE, AND BASED UPON THE POINT SCORING, WE LOOKED AT A DISTRICT LEVEL AND WE NOTICED SOME OF THOSE DISTRICTS OR ONE OF THE MEMBERS NOTICE THAT ONE OF THE DISTRICTS OR NUMBER OF THE DISTRICTS WHERE THERE'S TYPICALLY A HIGH EQUITY NEED WERE SCORING OR GETTING LESSER DOLLAR AMOUNTS.
THAT'S WHAT REALLY SPURRED THIS DISCUSSION.
AS WE MOVE FORWARD, YES, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE PROJECT SCORES, WHICH WILL BE THE BASIS FOR IT.
BUT THEN WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK TO THIS 30 PERCENT GOAL IS TO ENSURE THAT AT LEAST THAT 30 PERCENT GOES INTO AREAS OF HIGH EQUITY NEED.
BUT AS WE TOLD THE TASK FORCE, WE ALSO HAVE TO BE REALISTIC, WE KNOW THAT IF WE GO STRAIGHT OFF OF EQUITY THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE DISTRICTS THAT MIGHT GET TWO OR THREE TIMES THAN ANOTHER DISTRICT.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE TAKING THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AS WELL.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, YES THE PROJECT SCORE, YES EQUITY NEED.
BUT WE ALSO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INVESTMENTS THAT WE MAKE GO INTO THOSE EQUITY, THOSE HIGH EQUITY NEED AREAS.
BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE NEED TO BRING SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO GET SUPPORT FROM THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
WE'RE LOOKING AT ALL OF THAT AND THAT'S WHAT WILL ULTIMATELY BRING YOU WORKING WITH OUR TASK FORCE AND OUR OTHER STAKEHOLDERS.
>> WELL, I'M STILL NOT REALLY FATHOMING WHY YOU'RE GOING BEYOND THE POINT SYSTEM, BUT I WON'T BELABOR THAT TODAY.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT OFFLINE THOUGH.
I THINK A PIECE OF WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE WHEN LOOKING AT THE POINT SYSTEM THAT WAS ESTABLISHED AN ISOLATION IS IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY IN IT BY ITSELF ACCOUNT FOR THE NUANCES OF WHAT IS HAPPENING EVEN WITHIN WHERE WE SEE SOME OF THE SHADED AREAS.
REALLY, WHEN WE'RE THINKING ABOUT HOW WE REALLY NEED TO BE THINKING ABOUT EQUITY AT EACH LAYER OF THIS, IT SPEAKS AGAIN TO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STREET CONDITIONS, HOW ARE WE LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS OF THE STREETS AND EQUATING THAT ON TOP OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN LIEU OF DOING SOMETHING AND ISOLATION.
VERY SIMILAR, I THINK, TO COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN'S RECOMMENDATION, OUR POINT AROUND THE RECREATION CENTER.
IF WE JUST LOOK AT THE POINT SYSTEM, PARTICULARLY LOOKING AT THE ONE-BY-ONE GRID, WHAT IT DOES IS IT SHIFTS WHERE WE'RE SEEING SOME OF
[04:40:02]
THE GREATEST NEED WITHOUT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE UNIQUE ASPECTS OF EACH OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES CONSIDERATIONS.>> THAT DIDN'T HELP ME. WE'LL HAVE TO CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION OFFLINE.
ON SLIDE 4, JENNIFER, CAN YOU DESCRIBE FOR ME THE PROCESS THAT YOU WENT THROUGH TO DEVELOP THE LAST COLUMN UNDER PROPOSED AND HOW IT WAS CHANGED FROM THE PREVIOUS PROPOSED.
WAS IT STRICTLY ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS WHEN YOU WENT TO AN INCREASED BOND CAPACITY TO A BILLION ONE OR WAS THERE SOME FURTHER SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIVE MERITS OF THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES FOR THE BOND PROPOSITIONS.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE PROPOSED FOR STREETS PREVIOUSLY IT WAS 400 MILLION, NOW IT'S 10 PERCENT MORE AT 440.
WAS THAT STRICTLY A MATHEMATICAL ADDITION GIVEN THAT YOU ARE INCREASING THE TOTAL BOND CAPACITY BY 10 PERCENT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT FOR THAT ENTIRE COLUMN, I INCREASE EVERYTHING.
>> WELL, EXCEPT THAT SOME OF THOSE FIGURES.
>> COUNCIL RIDLEY, YOUR TIME IS UP.
YOU WANT TO TAKE YOUR ONE MINUTE NOW?
>> THANK YOU. SOME OF THEM DECLINED, LIKE HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
LET'S SEE. THOSE IN PARTICULAR.
IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT IT WAS 10 PERCENT ACROSS THE BOARD IS WHAT I'M SEEING.
WAS THERE SOME OTHER ADJUSTMENT FACTOR THAT WAS ADDED?
>> BASED ON THE LAST TIME THIS SLIDE WAS SHOWN, IT WAS THIS 10 PERCENT ON TOP OF THAT, SO BEFORE WE ARE SHOWING HOUSING AT 80 MILLION AND NOW IT'S AT 88.
I'LL GO BACK AND DOUBLE-CHECK THAT.
>> WELL, I WILL TOO. I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I JUST WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ON THE SUBJECT OF EQUITY, AND I DON'T KNOW IF DR. WILSON WANTS TO COME BACK BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE I HAVE A QUESTION.
I KNOW SHE'S PROBABLY THINKING, GREAT.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE VERY MUCH.
I HAVE TO SAY I'VE STRUGGLED WITH THE ACCURATE EQUITY SCORING FOR DISTRICT 10.
I FOUND PROJECTS, FOR EXAMPLE, TWO CREEKS PROJECTS, ONE WAS FOR A HOME AND THE SIX PERCENT TO $700,000 VALUE AND IT HAD AN EQUITY SCORE OF AN EIGHT.
THEN A MUCH LOWER VALUED HOME HAD AN EQUITY SCORE OF A TWO.
I KNEW THAT WASN'T RIGHT AND SARAH WAS VERY HELPFUL IN HELPING ME FIGURE THAT OUT.
SIMILARLY, I HAVE SOME PROJECTS I'D LIKE TO HAVE HAPPEN IN ORBITER PARK AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND THERE.
WE'RE NOT GIVEN A HIGH EQUITY SCORE AT ALL, AND I KNOW THAT THEY ARE, SO I FOUND THE CENSUS TRACT AND PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION FOR PARK AND REC.
I SUPPORT HAVING AN EQUITY FACTOR, ABSOLUTELY.
I DON'T SEE THE RHYME OR REASON AND I DON'T MEAN TO BE DISRESPECTFUL, BUT I FOUND STUFF THAT JUST DIDN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME AND I WOULD HOPE THAT WE REFINE THIS SOMEHOW.
WE FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT MORE ACCURATE.
YOU MAY NEED TO RUN IT THROUGH YOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO REALLY KNOW THEIR DISTRICTS.
I CAN LOOK AT A NUMBER AND I'VE DRIVEN THAT STREET AND MILLION TIMES, I'VE KNOCKED ON DOORS ON THAT STREET.
WHATEVER IT IS, WE CAN PROBABLY HELP A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE SOMETIMES A HOME MAYBE ON THE VERY EASTERN EDGE.
IT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN WAS SAYING ON THE VERY EASTERN EDGE OF SOMETHING, SO IT SHOWS UP IN A CENSUS TRACK THAT IT JUST NOT INDICATIVE OF WHAT REALLY IS GOING ON IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
I APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS, I'M SURE THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK WENT INTO MAKING THAT HAPPEN, BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO REFINE OUR PROCESS A BIT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT.
I JUST WANT TO REITERATE TOO BECAUSE THE EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT TOOL, IT USED CENSUS DATA, USE THE DATA FROM THE CDC, BUT IT WAS REALLY ESTABLISHED TO IDENTIFY BASED OFF OF WE STARTED WITH ZIP CODES AT THIS LARGER LEVEL TO SEE WHERE SOME OF THE GREATEST NEED AROUND THE ENTIRE CITY AND SO NOT WHERE JUST GENERAL NEED, BUT WHERE DO WE SEE SOME OF THAT GREATEST NEED WHEN IT COMES TO THE FIVE FACTORS THAT WE LOOKED AT.
NOW AS IT REGARDS TO THE SHIFT THAT IT TOOK IN POINT SYSTEM, WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH BONDS TO FIND A MORE, MAYBE EFFECTIVE WAY TO USE THE TOOL.
AGAIN, THE TOOL PREVIOUSLY HAS BEEN USED IN COLLABORATION WITH OTHER KEY FACTORS.
WHEN LIBRARY USED IT, THEY LOOKED AT SOME OTHER IMPORTANT FACTORS THAT THEY KNEW THAT THEY WERE
[04:45:02]
TRYING TO CLOSE DISPARITIES ON TO LAYER IT ON TOP OF THAT, WHICH WOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION SOME OF THE UNIQUE THINGS THAT WE SEE WITHIN COMMUNITIES, SO MAYBE ON THAT STREET THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, MAYBE WE HAVE LOWER EDUCATIONAL RATE AND SO THEN THAT WOULD SHOW UP THERE.THE TOOL IS JUST THE FOUNDATIONAL PIECE TO LAYER ON TOP OF OTHER KEY FACTORS.
THAT IS WHY NOW WE ARE TEAMING UP TO THINK ABOUT THIS VERY DIFFERENTLY AND WORK WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEES TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT DISPARITIES AND HOW WE NEED TO EMBED EQUITY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROCESS.
NOT A POINT SYSTEM BECAUSE WE KNOW EQUITY DOESN'T EQUATE TO A BOX OR A POINT SYSTEM.
WE TALKED ABOUT EROSION IN THE BOND PACKAGE AND I'M TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT IS THERE MONEY AND HOW DO YOU SET ASIDE FOR THE GOOD EXAMPLE IN DISTRICT 3 MY YOUNG COLLEAGUE, ZARIN, CROSSMAN, COUNT WILSON, THE OLD WALMART WAS THERE AND WALMART WAS VACATED.
BUT WHEN THEY BUILD WALMART, THEY PUT OUT A CONCRETE AND THERE'S A CREEK THAT FLOWED DOWN ALL THE WAY DOWN UNDERNEATH COUNT WILSON THROUGH THE RESIDENT AND CAUSE EROSION OUR WAY THROUGH FROM COUNT WILSON ALWAYS TO PULL ALMOST ALL WAY TO DISTRICT 4.
IS THERE A MECHANISM OR MAGNITUDE EVEN THOUGH IT TAKE THE RESIDENT PARTLY BACKYARD.
I KNOW AT ONE TIME THAT WE DID PUT SOME BOND MONEY TO PAY TO RE TO RISK RESTRUCTURE BACKYARD, WHATEVER.
COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHERE WE ARE, ARE WE STILL DOING THAT? I NOTICED IT'S BEEN OVER 10 YEARS AGO BECAUSE IT WAS SOMEWHERE UPSTREAM.
>> IS THERE A STANDARD FOR DALLAS WATER UTILITIES? COUNCIL MEMBER, I THINK IN THE PARTICULAR INSTANCE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I'D NEED TO GO BACK AND PULL AND SEE WHERE WE WERE AS PART OF EACH BOND PROGRAM.
WE'VE MET WITH COMMUNITIES, WE MEET WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS AND WE TALK ABOUT WHAT IS YOUR NEED, HOW DOES IT PERCENTAGE OUT THAT SOME OF WHAT THE COMMITTEE IS LOOKING AT.
OF WHAT'S IN YOUR DISTRICT, YOU'VE GOT X PERCENT OF EROSION.
SOME DISTRICTS DON'T HAVE ANY, OTHER DISTRICTS ARE ALL EROSION, NO NEED FOR PIPE UPGRADE.
IN THE INSTANCE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THOSE ARE FUNDED THROUGH THE BOND PROGRAM AND THEY'RE COMPLETED AS EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS.
CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS AS THEY GO THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO ENSURE THAT NO WATER LEAVES THEIR SITE, NO INCREASED VELOCITIES WHEN THAT DOES HAPPEN.
THERE ARE COMPLAINTS THEN WE WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS AT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND CODE COMPLIANCE TO DO SOME ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.
PROPERTIES FROM 10 AND 15 YEARS AGO ARE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION AND WE'VE GOTTEN BETTER AT ALL OF THAT.
I'M COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY'S DISTRICT IS ONE LAST NIGHT THAT THE CONVERSATION WAS THE VAST MAJORITY OF HIS NEEDS ARE EROSION IN HIS DISTRICT.
HOW DOES THAT WORK COMPARED TO A DIFFERENT DISTRICT THAT REALLY THE VAST MAJORITY IS UNDERSIZED PIPES? WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT, BUT THAT'S HOW WE FUND THEM, IS THROUGH THOSE EROSION CONTROL.
>> WOULD THAT BE A PROPOSITION IN THE BOND PACKAGE?
>> IT IS INCLUDED IN THE FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM DRAINAGE PROPOSITION AND THAT'S HISTORICALLY THREE CATEGORIES IN THERE.
WE'RE HAPPY TO COME MEET WITH YOU GUYS AND TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT EACH OF THE TYPES OF PROJECTS IN THE PROPOSITION AND HOW THAT LOOKS.
>> THANK YOU. WITH THAT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO PICK UP ON THE EQUITY PIECE.
I THINK WE STILL NEED TO FINE TUNE THAT, I HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORIC I'M THINKING NORTH PARK, WAS MY CONCERN AS ROBERT MENTIONED EARLIER, WHEN YOU HAVE A MILLION-DOLLAR HOMES GOING INTO THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOW IT IS NOT GETTING THE EQUITY SCORE THAT IT NEEDS TO SO WE NEED TO KEEP WORKING ON THAT.
AS FAR AS THE MEETINGS WITH SUBCOMMITTEES, I BELIEVE IT WAS 24 OR 25 MEETINGS THAT HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED OR SCHEDULED.
CAN YOU TELL ME SOMEONE MAYBE FROM THE PARK DEPARTMENT, HOW MANY PARKS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED AND HOW MANY HAVE ACTUALLY TAKEN PLACE?
>> I KNOW THE PARKS SUBCOMMITTEE HAVE CANCELED THREE MEETINGS.
I BELIEVE THEY'VE HAD ONE OR TWO.
I'VE REACHED OUT TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR ACTUALLY EARLIER TODAY TO TALK ABOUT RESCHEDULING THE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN CANCELED.
>> THEN THERE'S A DATE IN LATER AUGUST OF WHEN THE COMMITTEE WILL RECEIVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
[04:50:01]
ARE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS SOLELY FROM STAFF OR IS THAT A COMBINATION OF SUBCOMMITTEE AND NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT?>> THE RECOMMENDATIONS BEING MADE ON THE 29TH WILL COME FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEES.
>> BUT WAS THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE INPUT OR WAS THAT STAFF INPUT?
>> STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEES THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS AND THEY'VE CERTAINLY BEEN RELYING ON THE DATA THAT THEY'VE BEEN PROVIDED, BUT THE SUBCOMMITTEES WILL BE THE ONES MAKING THE ULTIMATE DECISION.
>> I JUST ASKED THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE THE SAME DATE WHEN THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL BE PRESENTING THEIR FINAL PRESENTATION OR THEIR FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND THAT DATE IS THE SAME TIME THAT THEY'LL BE RECEIVING, I GUESS THEIR PACKAGES. IT DOESN'T LINE UP.
>> I'M SORRY. COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION?
>> SURE. ON THE PRESENTATION AND I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW.
BUT THERE IS A DATE OF WHEN THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL RECEIVE THE FINAL RECOMMENDATION AND THAT'S THE SAME DATE THAT THEIR, I GUESS FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE SUBMITTED ARE.
>> THE SUBCOMMITTEES ARE WORKING RIGHT NOW TO DEVELOP THOSE LISTS AND THE GOAL IS THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEES WILL PRESENT THAT LIST TO THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE ON THE 29TH OF THIS MONTH.
THEN THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE AND THE CHAIRS OF SUBCOMMITTEES WILL GET TOGETHER.
I THINK ANOTHER TWO-AND-A-HALF WEEKS AFTER THAT, WE HAVE SOME MEETINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING SCHEDULED SO THAT THE TASK FORCE AND THE CHAIRS CAN DISCUSS THE THE PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED AND GO BACK-AND-FORTH AND AT THAT POINT, WE'LL HAVE A DRAFT PROGRAM.
WE WILL HAVE SOME TIME FOR DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE TIME THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEES SUBMIT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEN WE HAVE THE TOWN HALLS.
>> I WANT TO GO BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN AND THEIR SURVEY THAT THE COMMUNITY GAVE OUT AROUND HOMELESSNESS.
REALLY DRILLING DOWN THAT IT'S NOT SOLELY ABOUT ADDITIONAL FUNDING, BUT IT'S ABOUT PARTNERING WITH THE COUNTY, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATE.
IT'S DURING THAT WE'RE IMPLEMENTING NEW PROJECTS MOVING FORWARD AND I SAID, AGAIN, IT CAN'T BE SOLELY ABOUT THE FUNDING COMPONENT.
AS FAR AS THE PROPOSITIONS, WHERE WOULD A POTENTIAL PENSION FUNDING, WHERE WOULD THAT BE ON THERE?
>> THE PENSION FUNDING WILL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM.
I BELIEVE WE WILL WORK WITH JACK TO IDENTIFY WHEN AND IF THAT WOULD HAPPEN.
>> THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> ANYONE ELSE? [INAUDIBLE] SPEAKERS?
>> IT IS NOW 4:08, WE CALL THIS BRIEFING TO BE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.