[00:02:14]
[00:06:34]
OLLIE, ARE WE, HANG ON JUST A SECOND.HEY, OLLIE, ARE WE READY? CAN THE MEETING COME TO ORDER? IT'S A LITTLE BIT PAST SEVEN.
[00:10:10]
OKAY.ARE WE READY NOW? IF THE MEETING WILL COME TO ORDER,
[2024 Capital Bond Streets & Transportation Subcommittee Meeting on August 15, 2023.]
THAT WOULD BE GREAT.UH, THE MEETING IS NOW BEING RECORDED.
I'M THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS WITH ME.
ON THE LEFT SIDE, I HAVE SHA MOHAMMAD, OUR, UH, PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR OVER ASSET MANAGEMENT.
UH, WE HAVE HAYDEN HAYTHAM, HASSAN, OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OVER ENGINEERING, BUT, AND ALSO WE HAVE DR.
WHITE AT THE END, UH, AS OUR INTERIM ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OVER, UH, ASSET RIGHT OF AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.
ON MY RIGHT SIDE, WE HAVE CATHERINE RUSH, OUR, UH, CHIEF PLANNER FROM TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.
I DON'T KNOW, UH, IF S DO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO JOIN US OR WE'RE GONNA OKAY.
YOU'RE GONNA JOIN US LATER ON WITH THAT.
WE'RE GONNA GO OVER, UH, THE PRESENTATION FOR TONIGHT.
HOWEVER, JUST YES, PLEASE, MA'AM.
I NEED TO DO SOME HOUSEKEEPING BEFORE WE DO THAT.
RIGHT? I WAS GOING ACTUALLY TO SAY THAT
UM, THERE ARE SEVERAL MEMBERS WHO HAVE NOT SIGNED IN, IN, UH, DURING THE LAST COUPLE OF MEETINGS, AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE ON THE RECORD THAT YOU GET SIGNED IN.
SO IF YOU WILL JUST, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ACTUAL PROCEDURE IS FOR DOING THAT, BUT I THINK THAT IF YOU'LL JUST PUT IT DOWN ON A PIECE OF PAPER AND EVERYBODY HAND IT THIS WAY, AND I'LL, AND I'LL GIVE IT TO THE STAFF AND WE CAN MAKE THOSE CORRECTIONS, I THINK, BECAUSE WE'RE BEING RECORDED ALL THE TIME.
BUT I KNOW THAT YOU, THAT MANY OF YOU DO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU, THAT YOUR ATTENDANCE IS SHOWN CORRECTLY.
AND THAT'S IMPORTANT, REALLY, ACTUALLY.
SO THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE, UM, HAVE, WHO ATTENDED EITHER IN, IN PERSON OR ONLINE, WE ONLINE USUALLY WE'RE ABLE TO PICK IT UP FAIRLY QUICKLY, BUT ESPECIALLY IN PERSON, IF YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED THE SIGN IN SHEET AND IT'S GOING AROUND RIGHT NOW, PLEASE DO THAT.
AND THEN IF YOU THINK THAT YOU'VE MISSED A MEETING, JUST PASS IT TO ME AND WE'LL DOUBLE CHECK IT.
THAT'S MY HOUSEKEEPING FOR THE, FOR THE DAY.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANYONE, UM, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY, JUST FOR THE RECORD, PROBABLY THEY NEED TO, UH, STATE THEIR NAMES AND THE DISTRICT.
UM, SELENA, DO WE HAVE ANYONE ATTENDING? VIRTUALLY? MARY.
MARY HAD PROBLEM WITH MUTING HERSELF LAST TIME.
I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS STILL THE CASE OR NOT.
UH, MARY, IF YOU CAN'T HEAR US, CAN YOU TALK FROM OKAY.
THEY'RE TRYING TO UNMUTE YOU, MA'AM.
UH, IF YOU CAN HEAR US, BUT, UH, FOR THE SAKE OF THE TIME, I'LL, I'LL TEXT HER JUST A SECOND.
AND THEN ALSO, I TALKED TO LAUREN EARLIER AND I KNOW SHE'S ON, SHE'S OUT OF TOWN.
SHE'S IN ATLANTA, SO, UM, LAUREN, IF YOU CAN HEAR US, SEND ME A MESSAGE.
SHE MIGHT HAVE ALREADY DONE THAT.
MARIE SAID SHE CHATTED IN AND THEN, THANK YOU.
AND THEN ON, UH, LAUREN, SHE SAID, IS THE LINK THE SAME LINK AS LAST TIME? ANYBODY KNOW? SO, DO YOU WANT US TO GO AHEAD AND START THE PRESENTATION WHILE WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES? YES.
SO CAN YOU UNMUTE L LAUREN? LAUREN, IF YOU CAN HEAR US, CAN YOU SAY SOMETHING? THIS IS MARIE AGAIN.
YOU GUYS JUST UNMUTED ME, BUT I CAN ONLY UNMUTE IF YOU UNMUTE ME LIKE IT'S LOCKED UNLESS YOU SEND ME AN UNMUTE REQUEST.
I THINK IF WE UNMUTE YOU ONCE, UH, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO MUTE, UNMUTE YOURSELF AFTERWARDS.
NO, I JUST TRIED THAT 'CAUSE I MUTED MYSELF AFTER THE FIRST TIME I SPOKE AND IT LOCKED AGAIN.
UH, SELENA, YOU KNOW HOW TO UNMUTE HER AGAIN? YEAH.
CAN YOU JUST MAYBE SEND IN A CHAT WHEN YOU WANNA SPEAK THAT SHE CAN UNMUTE YOU AGAIN? YEAH.
AND YOU GUYS CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE CHAT THOUGH.
'CAUSE I WAS CHATTING BEFORE AND
[00:15:01]
IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE ANYONE.WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND START, ALAN? SURE.
WE CAN, UH, GO AHEAD AND START.
UH, AGAIN, THIS PRESENTATION, MAJORITY OF 'EM, UM, YOU HAVE PROBABLY SEEN THEM.
UM, JUST TO REFRESH EVERYONE'S MIND, UH, IN OUR LAST MEETING, WE HAD A VOTE ON THE ALLOCATION PART FOR THE DISTRICT-WISE, UH, PROJECT.
AND IT WAS DECIDED TO GO WITH 25% DIVIDED EQUALLY TO ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBER, ALL THE COUNCIL DISTRICTS, AND ALSO 75% BASED ON THEIR NEEDS.
AND BASED ON THAT, UH, WE PUT SOME, UH, SLIDE TOGETHER TO SHOW YOU THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS BASED ON THE PERCENTAGE THAT YOUR DISTRICT GONNA RECEIVE AS A PART OF THIS, UH, SCENARIO.
HOWEVER, THE PERCENTAGE NOT GONNA CHANGE BECAUSE THIS IS THE, BASED ON THE 50% OF THE CITYWIDE AND 50% FOR THE DISTRICT, RIGHT? HOWEVER, AFTER THAT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE CITYWIDE.
UH, WE HAVE OUR TRANSPORTATION TEAM, OUR TEAM, THEY'RE GONNA GO OVER THE EXCEL FILE THAT, UM, WE HAVE.
AND WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT, UH, SOME PROBABLY MINOR CHANGE ON THE PERCENTAGE OF THE CITYWIDE PROJECT.
AND, UH, WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON IT AGAIN TO MAKE SURE THAT Y'ALL ARE, UH, IN, YOU KNOW, ON BOARD, UH, WITH THE FINAL NUMBERS.
UM, IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, SELENA.
SO, UM, UH, IN TODAY'S MEETING, WE'RE JUST GONNA LOOK AT THE OVERALL BUDGET ALLOCATION SCENARIOS FOR THE, UH, THREE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
$400 MILLION FOR A, UH, 400, UH, MILLION DOLLARS, $485 MILLION, AND $520 MILLION.
UH, WE ALSO GONNA LOOK AT, UM, THIS, THIS SPECIFICALLY SELECTED SCENARIO BASED ON THE PREVIOUS BO VOTING.
WE ALSO GONNA DO, UM, LOOK AT THE SPECIFICALLY COUNT, UH, SPECIFIC AMOUNTS PER COUNCIL DISTRICT BASED ON THAT SCENARIO, AS ALI MENTIONED.
AND THEN WE WILL, UM, AS ALI MENTIONED, LOOK AT ADDITIONAL SCENARIO THAT YOU, UM, THAT WE WANNA PROPOSE, UH, SPECIFICALLY, UM, UNDER THE IMPACT OF CHANGING PERCENTAGE FOR THE CITYWIDE.
UH, SO, UM, LET'S MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
SO THIS IS, UM, THIS IS THE THREE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS WITH, UM, AS PREVIOUSLY, UM, PROPOSED AND SHOWN, UH, IN OUR LAST MEETING.
UM, THIS HAS NOT CHANGED HERE.
SO, AND THIS IS THE SELECTED SCENARIO, UH, BASED ON, UM, THE SUBCOMMITTEE VOTING FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING, UM, JUST, UM, TO FOCUS ON THAT SCENARIO.
UM, IT'S CURRENTLY, UM, SPLIT 50 50, UH, 50% OF THE BUDGET GOES TO THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS TO INCLUDE, UH, SIDEWALKS AND BRIDGES, UM, ALONG WITH, UM, DIFFERENT CITYWIDE BY CATEGORIES.
THE OTHER 50% IS GONNA BE PER COUNCIL DISTRICT.
UH, AND THEN THAT IS SPLIT INTO, UM, TWO PARTS.
25% OF THE BUDGET, UH, PER CITY GOES TO THE EQUALLY DIVIDED, AND THE 75% GOES BASED ON THE NEEDS, UM, PERCENTAGES.
SO FOR THAT SPECIFIC SCENARIO HERE IS, UM, A BREAKDOWN FOR STREETS AND ALLEYS BASED ON THE DATA WE HAVE FOR PERCENTAGES.
AND HERE IS THE FIRST, UH, BUDGET SCENARIO WE'RE LOOKING AT, WHICH IS THE $400 MILLION.
UM, THE TOP, UH, LITTLE TABLE SHOWS, UM, YOU KNOW, OVERALL BREAKDOWN BASED ON DIFFERENT ASSETS.
AND THEN, UM, THE BOTTOM, UM, BIGGER TABLE SHOWS, UH, AMOUNTS PER CITY FOR ALLEYS AND STREETS, UH, FOR THAT 50% OF THE BUDGET THAT IS PER COUNCIL DISTRICT.
SO, UH, IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT, UM, TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU'LL SEE THE 485 MILLION SCENARIO.
AND THEN IF YOU GO TO THE SLIDE AFTER, YOU'LL SEE THE 520 MILLION, UH, SCENARIO PERCENTAGES HA UM, HAVE NOT CHANGED WHERE, UH, HOWEVER THE AMOUNTS ARE CHANGED BASED ON THE TOTAL BUDGET.
UM, THE ADDITIONAL SCENARIO, IF YOU GO TO THE SLIDE AFTER, IS WHAT YOU DON'T HAVE ON THE PRINTED SHEETS.
HOWEVER, THIS IS JUST LAST MINUTE ADDED
[00:20:01]
AFTER, UH, AN INTERNAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.WE ARE PROPOSING THIS SCENARIO, UM, FOR THE, DUE TO THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS THAT, UM, THAT WE THINK ARE BENEFICIAL FOR THE CITY, UM, TO TAKE CARE OF.
AND WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE FURTHER WITH YOU AND SEE WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT IT.
UM, FOR THAT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE CITYWIDE PORTION, YOU'LL SEE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES WITH THE DIFFERENT AMOUNTS FROM THE PREVIOUS SHEETS.
UH, SO WE KIND OF CHANGED THE LOCATION, UH, FOR THE CITYWIDE CATEGORIES BASED ON SPECIFIC PROJECT LISTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
UH, AND WE THINK IT'S BENEFICIAL FOR THE CITY TO ADDRESS.
SO THAT SHOWS, UM, A TOTAL, IF, IF YOU ADD ALL THESE, UM, CITYWIDE CATEGORIES, IT'S GONNA, UM, BASICALLY MAKE ABOUT 57% OF THE BUDGET, NOT 50% OF THE BUDGET, AND THE REST OF IT GOES TO THE PER, UH, PER DISTRICT, UM, AND SPLIT ON THE, BASED ON THE SAME PERCENTAGES PER, UH, PER EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT.
SO, UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL BREAKDOWN ON THE TOP, YOU SEE FOUR STREETS CITYWIDE IS $154 MILLION, AND FOR THE PER C IS ONE $24 MILLION.
SO IT'S NOT A 50 50 SPLIT, IT'S ALMOST 57, UH, PERCENT SPLIT, UH, COMPARED TO, UM, A 43% SPLIT.
SO, UM, THE REST OF IT IS, UM, BASICALLY SAME PERCENTAGES AND JUST SHOWS ALL THE AMOUNTS THAT YOU SHOULD GET IF WE GO WITH THIS SCENARIO.
SO IF WE LOOK AT THE BOTTOM WHERE WE SEE THE CITYWIDE CATEGORIES, WHAT WE DID IS FOR COMPLETE ST STREET, WE LOCATED ABOUT $36 MILLION BASED ON SPECIFIC PROJECTS.
THE PARTNERSHIP FUNDED HERE, WE KIND OF LOOKED AT THE IDEA OF ALLOCATING MORE MONEY FOR THE PROJECTS THAT HAVE FUNDS THAT IS, UH, ALREADY, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, DONE BY OTHER ENTITIES OTHER THAN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CALLED FUNDED CATEGORY.
AND WE THOUGHT, UM, THIS CAN BE A GOOD PROPOSAL TO BASICALLY FUND ALL THOSE PROJECTS THAT HAVE FUNDS ALREADY FROM OTHER ENTITIES IN PLACE.
AND THEN FOR THE PARTNERSHIP PERSPECTIVE, WE ALSO PUT IT $21 MILLION FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THOROUGH AFFAIRS.
AND FOR THE THOROUGHFARE EXPANSIONS, WE ALSO THOUGHT OF PROPOSING, UH, NOT ALLOCATING FUNDS TO SPECIFIC PROJECTS AT THIS POINT, UH, FOR, UM, EXPANDING THOROUGHFARE OR WIDENING SOME A STREET, UM, AS, UM, A PRIORITY AT FOR THIS FUND.
BUT WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THESE OPTIONS WITH YOU AND SEE WHAT YOU THINK.
UM, I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT THE SHEETS AND THEN WE LOOK AT THOSE PROJECTS AND THAT GIVES YOU BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
UH, CAN YOU GO TO THE, UM, SPREADSHEETS, LET ME, LET ME BEFORE WE START ON QUESTIONS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
I, I'M SORRY, BUT I DID PROMISE PEOPLE THAT THEY COULD SPEAK BEFORE THE MEETING, BUT THEN I SAW THAT THERE WERE SO MANY PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT, THAT WE WERE GONNA HAVE AN ISSUE.
RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ON A PROJECT.
SO THERE'S JUST TWO, TWO PROJECTS.
IS THAT IT? I'M SORRY, DAVID, CAN YOU, YEAH, YOU'RE ONE.
SO, AND THERE'S SOMEBODY ELSE.
LET US GET THROUGH THIS JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AND THEN WE'LL TAKE YOU, I'M SORRY, I SAW SO MANY PEOPLE OUT THERE, I THOUGHT I'D I'D HOLD ON THAT, UH, ON THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
FINISH UP WHAT YOU WERE SAYING.
UM, NO, I WAS JUST GONNA, UH, LOOK AT THIS TOGETHER.
UM, SO IF WE OPEN THE, UM, THE OPTION THAT SAYS
SO, UM, APOLOGIES FOR NOT SENDING THIS OUT IN ADVANCE.
UM, HOWEVER, THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO BASICALLY PREVIEW WITH YOU ALL, UM, WHAT IS THE SORT OF STAFF PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL
[00:25:01]
FOR THESE RECOMMENDED CITYWIDE PROJECTS.UM, AND THEN BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING, UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND FOR THE CHAIR'S CONSIDERATION THAT, UM, MEMBERS SUBMIT ANY PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LIST OR ANY PROJECTS THAT THEY HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT OR, UM, UH, CHANGES TO KIND OF THE OVERALL FUNDING SCHEME A COUPLE DAYS BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING SO THAT THOSE, WE COULD BASICALLY GO DOWN THE LIST AND CONSIDER THOSE AMENDMENTS.
DOES EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THESE ARE THE 50% THAT WERE CITYWIDE PROJECTS OR SYSTEM-WIDE PROJECTS THAT CONSISTED OF COMPLETE STREETS PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM? SOME OF 'EM HAD FEDERAL MONEY ON 'EM, SOME OF 'EM HAD STATE MONEY ON 'EM, SOME OF 'EM HAD COG MONEY ON 'EM.
UM, AND THEN ON THE SHEET THAT SHE'S SHOWING YOU RIGHT HERE IS A, UH, ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE IS KIND OF THE IDENTIFIER WHERE THEY ARE.
AND THEN IT TALKS ABOUT WHAT'S, WHAT'S GONNA BE, WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN AND THAT KIND OF THING AND, AND HOW MUCH MONEY THEY'RE WORTH.
UM, SUSAN WORKED WITH ME THE OTHER DAY AND MADE SOME GREAT SUGGESTIONS.
AND THIS PRETTY MUCH LOOKS LIKE THE FORMAT THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, SUSAN, THAT WE JUST WANTED TO SEE WHAT THESE PROJECTS WERE AND WHERE THEY WERE AND HOW MUCH THEY WERE WORTH AND THAT KIND OF THING.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT ANSWERS A LOT OF YOUR QUESTIONS THAT SOME OF YOUR, UM, AND I KNOW THAT THE AUDIENCE IS HERE TOO, THAT THE AUDIENCE WANTS TO KNOW 'CAUSE THEY DON'T SEE THEIR STREETS IN THE STREETS NEEDS LIST.
AND A LOT OF IT HAS BEEN TAKEN CARE OF, UM, ON THE SYSTEM WIDE, UM, PROCESS.
JUST WANTED A, A SMALL EX EXPLANATION OF THAT.
THERE IS ALSO A COLUMN IN HERE THAT SAYS NOTES FOR BOND CONSIDERATION TO BASICALLY HELP PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT FOR WHY.
UM, YOU'LL SEE THAT CERTAIN PROJECTS AS WE GO DOWN THE LIST, CERTAIN PROJECTS WERE SKIPPED IN FAVOR OF OTHER PROJECTS.
AND SO THAT IS INTENDED TO BASICALLY EXPLAIN NOT ONLY WHY A PROJECT SCORED HIGHLY, BUT ALSO WHY ANOTHER PROJECT MAY BE CONSIDERED, UM, A HIGHER PRIORITY THAN OTHERS.
AND THEN THERE ARE ALSO THREE COLUMNS FOR THE DIFFERENT FUNDING SCENARIOS FOR THE 400 MILLION, THE 485, AND THE 520 MILLION, TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF WHAT COULD BE FUNDED UNDER THOSE THREE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
AND SO THE STARTING POINT FOR THIS LIST, UH, WAS THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS FUNDED LIST.
SO THESE ARE THE PROJECTS THAT HAVE A FUNDING OF SOME AMOUNT FROM ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY.
UM, AND IF YOU COULD GO TO THAT, UM, THAT SHEET.
YEAH, THE TAB THAT SAYS PARTNERSHIP, UH, PROJECTS FUNDED.
SO WE'RE, THERE'S A COUPLE PROJECTS ON HERE.
PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THESE PROJECTS WE'RE RECOMMENDING FOR SOME AMOUNT OF MONEY.
UM, THERE'S SOME OF THEM SUCH AS DAVIS STREET, THAT THE TOTAL FUNDING AMOUNT IS, UH, WE WOULD NEED AROUND A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS.
SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO SPLIT PROJECTS LIKE THAT UP INTO PHASES OR SUB PHASES OR FUNDING JUST, UM, A SMALLER AMOUNT OF IT IN THE HOPES OF GETTING ADDITIONAL FEDERAL FUNDING TO TRY TO MAKE THAT FUNDING GO FURTHER.
THERE'S A COUPLE ON THERE THAT WE ARE NOT PROPOSING FOR FUNDING.
SO TWO OF THEM THAT YOU CAN SEE RIGHT HERE.
SO SAMUEL BOULEVARD LIGHTING, AS WELL AS THE PLEASANT GROVE WE THINK WE CAN FUND FROM OTHER SOURCES OR, UM, WE BELIEVE ALREADY HAVE BEEN FUNDED, UH, SAMUEL BOULEVARD BEING, UH, THE MAIN ONE THERE.
AND THEN DENTON PROJECT, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT HOLDING OFF AND FOCUSING ON THE OTHER, THERE'S ANOTHER DENTON DRIVE PROJECT.
SO BEFORE I MOVE ON TO, UM, I CAN TAKE QUESTIONS OR WE CAN HOLD OFF UNTIL THE END, UM, AT LEAST ON, ON THIS SHEET BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO SOME OF THE OTHERS.
JUST AGAIN, THIS IS A HIGH LEVEL.
OH, I HAVE SUSAN NEXT AND THEN MAURA.
SO THE QUESTION I HAVE, THIS IS CANDACE URBAN DISTRICT 13, IS CAN SHARE WITH US WHAT ADDITIONAL PARTNERSHIP FUNDS WE'RE RECEIVING BECAUSE YOU'RE ASKING US TO TAKE MONEY AWAY FROM THE DISTRICTS AND GIVE IT TO THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE PROJECTS, THEY TEND TO FAVOR CERTAIN DISTRICTS OVER OTHERS.
AND SO TRYING TO AGREE TO THAT, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE BENEFIT IN THE INCREMENTAL FUNDS, AND THEN ALSO YOU'RE ASKING TO CHANGE IT TO 53% OR 57% IN THE 400 MILLION OPTION, BUT IT LOOKED LIKE IN THE 520 MILLION OPTION YOU WERE ASKING TO INCREASE IT TO 60%, WHICH YOU HAVE EVEN MORE MONEY.
SO IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME WHY THEN WOULD YOU EVEN NEED MORE VERSUS GOING BACK DOWN TO 50.
SO FOR, TO ANSWER THE FIRST QUESTION ABOUT, UM, WHAT THE FUNDING SOURCES
[00:30:01]
THAT WE'RE GETTING THAT INFORMATION IS PROVIDED IN THAT SORT OF, UM, INFORMATION FOR BOND CONSIDERATION, UM, UH, COLUMN TO BASICALLY ADD THAT ADDITIONAL SORT OF INSIGHT.UM, WOULD YOU MIND, UH, ZOOMING IN ON THE SPREADSHEET A LITTLE BIT? UH, LET'S LOOK AT, I THINK THE SHORE CREST PROJECT KIND OF, UM, IF YOU CAN ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT, IT'S SORT OF RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE THERE.
SO THAT PROJECT IS, YOU'LL SEE IN, UH, THE SORT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION COLUMN, IT HAS, UH, TWO AND A HALF MILLION AWARDED FROM THE COUNTY.
THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS IS GOING TO BE CONTRIBUTING 25 MILLION.
I THINK WE NEED 2.5 MILLION, UM, IN ORDER TO MATCH THE COUNTY'S FUNDS OR ELSE WE LOSE THE COUNTY FUNDS.
SO ANYTIME YOU SEE M M C I P PROJECTS, THAT MONEY REQUIRES AT LEAST A 50% MATCH.
SO BASICALLY THAT FUNDING AMOUNT.
UM, AND THEN TO ANSWER YOUR OTHER QUESTION ABOUT WHY, UM, THE FUNDING, UH, PERCENT ACTUALLY INCREASED AS THE DOLLAR AMOUNT INCREASED, A LOT OF THIS GOES BACK INTO, TO THESE DIFFERING PERCENTAGES.
LIKE WHY 53 VERSUS 50, IT GOES DOWN, IT'S BASICALLY ABOUT WHAT PROJECTS ARE BEING FUNDED.
SO ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE FUNDING JUMPS IN THE HIGHER END SCENARIO IS BECAUSE UNDER THAT SCENARIO, WE COULD CONSIDER FUNDING ADDITIONAL DEBT CAPS, WHICH HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A PRIORITY FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR UPCOMING, UM, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS ON I 30 AND THEN I 30, I 3 45.
AND SO PROJECTS LIKE THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED AS WE GET MORE MONEY, BUT THOSE, IT'S A, YOU KNOW, IT'S $20 MILLION KIND OF THING AT A TIME, AS YOU'LL SEE WITH A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS EXPLAIN THE DEBT CAP.
UM, SOME PEOPLE CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE.
SO, UM, THIS IS ACTUALLY, UH, SO THE DECK HAVE THINK CLYDE WARREN PARK, BUT REALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE FUNDING FOR IS THE SUPER STRUCTURE, UH, FOR, AS THESE HIGHWAYS ARE RECONSTRUCTED, UH, THE BASICALLY SUPPORT STRUCTURE FOR IT, A DECK TO BE ADDED ON TOP BECAUSE JUST BEING ABLE TO RETROFIT A HIGHWAY DOWN THE ROAD WOULD BE MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE IF WE DON'T DO IT AT THE TIME OF THE PROJECT.
SO RE REITERATE, IT'S NOT FOR PARK, IT'S FOR THE SUPERSTRUCTURE.
SO JUST, UH, IF I MAY, UH, CLARIFY THIS ITEM.
UM, SO, AND ONCE WE PUT THE DECK ON TOP OF THE FREEWAY, THE PURPOSE ABOVE IT CAN BE WHATEVER THAT BASICALLY COULD BE DESIRED.
SO IN THAT CASE IS IF A CAP IS PUT IN, IT COULD BE DESIGNED FOR, UH, TO HANDLE, UH, A CA A A PARK OR IN SOME INSTANCES SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING IN THE CANYON, IS, UH, WE'RE CONSIDERING PUTTING IN A POTENTIAL STRUCTURE, UH, OVER THAT.
SO THESE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE'RE, UM, CURRENTLY DESIGNING.
THE, UH, UH, AND DETERMINING THE LOADS, UH, THAT WILL REQUIRE, WILL BE, UH, IMPOSED ON THE STRUCTURE.
THUS WE HAVE TO PUT IN, AS CATHERINE MENTIONED, IS WE HAVE TO PUT IN THE FOUNDATION NOW AS PART OF THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THESE PROJECTS.
UM, NEXT I HAVE, UM, SUSAN, I'M STILL TRYING TO DIGEST WHAT YOU'VE JUST GIVEN TO US, AND WE KNOW THAT I'M THE SLOWEST ONE HERE.
I THINK
I DON'T SEE THAT IN THE CITYWIDE SECTION BELOW.
SO I, I WONDER WHAT, WHERE DOES THAT SHOW UP AND HOW DID THAT GET ACCOUNTED FOR AND DID THAT CHANGE THE 50 50? OKAY.
UM, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
THE, THE MULTI-DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE, IT WAS A DIFFERENT CATEGORY, UH, IN PREVIOUSLY, AND IT, I THINK IT, IT HAD SOMETHING AROUND LIKE FIVE, $7 MILLION.
IT WAS, THE AMOUNT WAS NOT THAT MUCH, BUT EXCUSE ME, WE ABSORBED THAT PART OF IT INTO THE DISTRICTWIDE PROJECT WE INCLUDED AS A PART OF THAT.
SO IT IS NOT A PART OF THE CITYWIDE ANYMORE BECAUSE, UH, WE THOUGHT ABOUT IT, WE SAID, OKAY, IF THAT CATEGORY BY ITSELF IS A CITYWIDE AND GETS ASSIGNED SOME SORT OF ALLOCATION OF MONEY, AND ALSO THAT SAME DISTRICT ALSO GET AN ADDITIONAL MONEY FOR THE DISTRICTWIDE.
SO IT WASN'T A FAIR, UH, ALLOCATION.
SO WE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT.
[00:35:02]
SO I, UH, MORRIS SCHREYER FLEMING DISTRICT 12.SO, UM, I WANNA GET SOME CONFIRMATION.
IT APPEARS BASED ON WHAT YOU HAD SAID, THAT SOME OF THESE PROJECTS WE WOULD LOSE FUNDING, THE CITY WOULD LOSE FUNDING.
SO IT WOULD, IT, HOW MANY OF THESE WOULD LOSE FUNDING? SO IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THEY ARE SOME SORT OF SUPER PROJECTS, IF THAT'S THE CASE, COULD YOU CONFIRM THAT THESE ARE SUPER PROJECTS THAT ARE VERY SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE OF LOST FUNDING? IF THEY'RE NOT, UM, I CAN CONFIRM THAT FUNDING, UM, I CAN CONFIRM THAT THE FUNDING, IF, IF WE DID NOT MEET OUR LOCAL MATCH REQUIREMENT, THAT FUNDING WOULD BE LOST.
SO FEDERAL FUNDS CANNOT BE REAPPROPRIATED TO ANOTHER PROJECT.
HOWEVER, ON THE M C I P, WHICH IS THE MAJOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, UH, PROGRAM FROM THE, FROM DALLAS COUNTY, THERE COULD BE SOME FLEXIBILITY.
UH, BUT WE HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH THE, UH, UM, WITH THE COUNTY AND HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT FOR ANY FLEXIBILITY.
SO GENERALLY SPEAKING IS THESE ARE, UH, FUNDS, UM, THAT ARE SET FOR A SPECIFIC PROJECTS AND SPECIFIC, UM, UH, UH, SCOPE.
SO WHAT MAKES THESE PROJECTS, YOU KNOW, SPECIAL CASE, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IF YOU HAVE TO ASK THE COUNTY FOR SPECIAL PERMISSION, THE PROBABILITY OF GETTING THAT MAYBE NOT VERY HIGH.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE, UH, M C I P, UH, EVERY FIVE YEARS USUALLY COUNT.
CAN YOU TELL 'EM WHAT M C I P MEANS? OKAY, I JUST, I'LL RESTATE IT.
THE MAJOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, UH, FROM THE DALLAS COUNTY.
SO THEY DO THAT PROGRAM EVERY FIVE YEARS.
SO, UM, BACK IN OCTOBER OF 2019, WE APPLIED FOR, UH, THE PROGRAM WHEN THEY RAN IT, AND WE HAD, UM, UH, I THINK CLOSE TO LIKE 43 PROJECTS THAT WE SUBMITTED AND 41 WERE SELECTED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AND, UH, THOSE WERE THE PROJECTS THAT WERE SELECTED AT THE TIME.
SO SOME, WE HAD THE 2017 BOND ON THEM AND OTHERS DID NOT HAVE ANY BONDING.
AND WE NOTED IN THE APPLICATION THAT THOSE WILL BE, UH, FUNDED, THE LOCAL MATCH WILL BE FUNDED FROM FUTURE BONDS, BUT WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ONES THAT YOU WANNA TAKE MONEY FROM, THE 50% AND THESE PROJECTS, UH, IT'S NOT QUITE CLEAR WHAT MAKES THESE SO UNIQUE, AT LEAST NOT TO ME.
SO WHY WERE THEY SELECTED AND SUBMITTED? WHAT'S THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THEM AND WHY ARE THEY, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S 50% DISTRICT CITYWIDE AND THE OTHER 50% IS BETWEEN DISTRICTS, WHATEVER QUARTER WOULD BE DECIDED, WHY IS IT SPECIAL TO TAKE MORE THAN THE 50% THAT WE HAD ALREADY AGREED ON? WHEN WE SEE PROJECTS SPECIAL, UH, ON, ON THESE HERE, I MEAN, I'LL LET CATHERINE KIND OF ELABORATE, BUT I THINK THESE ARE THE, WE PUT IN THE REQUIRED LOCAL MATCH FOR THE PROJECT, AND THESE ARE THE TOTAL, UH, THAT CAME OUT FOR THE, UH, REQUIRED MATCH.
BUT, UM, AND THEN, WAIT, YEAH, I MEAN, SO SOME OF THESE PROJECTS WERE COUNCIL MEMBER PRIORITIES AT THE TIME, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING HERE IS, AND I THINK IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION CORRECTLY, IS WHY THE, UM, TOTAL IS HIGHER THAN THE 50%.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, I MEAN, YEAH.
SO WHAT I'M SAYING HERE IS IF I HAVE A PROJECT LIKE SHORT CREST IS THE COUNTY GAVE US TWO AND A HALF MILLION, I HAVE TO COME UP WITH A TWO AND A HALF MILLION, SO IT'S A 50 50.
SO, UM, I CAN'T SHORTCHANGE THE PROJECT.
SO WHEN YOU PUT IN THE REQUIRED FUNDING, THEN THE TOTAL, UM, FOR THESE PROJECTS MAY END UP AND IT DID END UP GOING OVER THE 50, IS THAT CORRECT? SO, SO THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
HOWEVER, I MEAN, I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO KIND OF FOLLOW UP IF THERE IS, IF I'M MISUNDERSTANDING OR, WELL, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE WE SPENT SO MUCH TIME ON THE WHOLE ALLOCATION LAST TIME AND NOW TO INTRODUCE A NEW VARIABLE AT THIS LATE TIME SEEMS, I MEAN, CERTAINLY YOU KNEW THE PROJECTS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS.
ANOTHER THING TO CONSIDER, UM, COULD YOU GO TO THE COMPLETE STREET SHEET? SO WE STILL HAVEN'T DONE A FULL ANALYSIS OF WHAT I'M ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT, BUT, SO IF YOU LOOK AT PEAK STREET IS THE VERY TOP, THIS PROJECT, UM, WOULD FUND THE NUMBER, NUMBER ONE SCORING, NUMBER FOUR, SCORING FIVE, SIX, UH, 13, AND 1520, ET CETERA, RESURFACING PROJECTS IN D TWO AS WELL AS AT LEAST TWO OF THE TOP, UH, SIGNAL
[00:40:01]
UPGRADE PROJECTS, UM, CITYWIDE.UM, SO MOST OF THE COMPLETE STREET PROJECTS, BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH LIMITED FUNDING, ARE INTENDED TO ADVANCE MULTIPLE CITY PRIORITIES.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF MOST OF THE STREET IS IN A FAILED CONDITION, IF SEVERAL SIGNALS, FOR EXAMPLE, ALONG THE STREET, NEED TO BE UPGRADED, IF IT IS A PRIORITY IN A PLAN, UM, THINGS LIKE THAT ARE WHAT KIND OF GET THESE COMPLETE STREET PROJECTS TO THE TOP.
SO WE HAVEN'T DONE THE FULL ANALYSIS OF THEN WHAT, UM, THAT COULD MEAN FOR, FOR, UM, THE DISTRICT ALLOCATIONS.
BUT THAT IS SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND AND SOMETHING THAT I THINK WITH PUBLIC WORKS WE'VE BEEN GRAPPLING WITH.
UM, NEXT I HAVE JENNIFER AND THEN PATTY, JENNIFER GRANTHAM, DISTRICT SEVEN.
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO SEND US THE SPREADSHEET OUT SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHICH PROJECT SO WE CAN VIEW OUR PRIORITIES AND THE BUDGET? UM, SPECIFICALLY I WAS WONDERING WHICH TAB THE M L K PARTNER PROJECT IS ON.
IT'S THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECT'S PERSPECTIVE AND WHAT'S THE PERSPECTIVES PART? SO WITH THAT PROJECT, WE APPLIED FOR A SAFE STREETS FOR ALL FEDERAL GRANT.
UM, THE ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT WHAT PROJECTS HAVE BEEN WERE SELECTED HAS NOT BEEN MADE YET.
SO WE DON'T, THE FUNDING FOR THAT ISN'T ACTUALLY COMMITTED, WHICH IS WHY IT'S UNDER THE, UH, PERSPECTIVE CATEGORY.
HOWEVER, AS YOU WILL SEE, IT'S ONE OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE RECOMMEND FUNDING FOR.
AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION IS, AND THIS IS SORT OF TO MA'S POINT ON GOING OVER THE 50% IS, AND THIS IS WHY I WANNA SEE THE BREAKDOWN OF THE TOTAL COST OF SOME OF THESE PROJECTS, AND DO WE NEED ALL THESE PROJECTS, LIKE FOR INSTANCE, THE DEBT CAPS ON 30 AND 3 45 ON PROJECTS THAT ARE SO ENORMOUS AND STILL BEING GREATLY DISCUSSED.
I FEEL LIKE BOND MONEY WILL BE BETTER SPENT ON PROJECTS THAT AFFECT QUALITY OF LIFE AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR RESIDENTS IN THE NEAR FUTURE IN THAT FIVE TO SEVEN YEARS, VERSUS PROJECTS THAT WE'RE EARMARKING MONEY AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR LATER.
AND SO BY, IF WE'RE MOVING THOSE BRING US CLOSER TO THE 50% SO WE HAVE MORE MONEY FOR OUR DISTRICT NEEDS, THAT WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION I WOULD MAKE.
CAN I COMMENT JUST A LITTLE BIT, IF I MAY, ON THE DEBT CAPS? SO IF YOU LOOK AT HOW MUCH MONEY WE PUT IN, WE PUT IN A VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THE DEBT CAP.
JUST THAT, THAT'S WHAT I WANNA LOOK AT.
SO I MEAN, YEAH, I MEAN, SO, UH, UH, SO, UM, SO IT'S A SMALL AMOUNT COMPARED TO WHAT IS REQUIRED.
HOWEVER, THIS IS VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH WHAT HAS BEEN PUT IN, IN PREVIOUS BOND ON, UM, LIKE THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY AND SO ON.
IT, WE DO NOT, AND DID NOT PUT IN THE, THE FULL, UH, EXPECTED AMOUNT OF, OF, FOR THE LOCAL MATCH ON THESE DECK CAPS.
AND THE OTHER THING IS ALL WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS, UM, PUT IN JUST ENOUGH, UH, SEED MONEY IN THESE, UM, PROJECTS TO ALLOW US TO, UH, TRY TO GET PARTNERSHIPS AND OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS.
UM, BECAUSE THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ON ANY OF THESE PROJECTS AS THESE FREEWAYS ARE BEING RECONSTRUCTED, IS TO OVERSIZE THE FOUNDATION THAT WILL SUPPORT THE CAP.
I MEAN, THIS IS, LIKE I SAID, THIS IS VERY SMALL TOKEN JUST TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE FOUNDATION SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND RETROFIT AND BE IN A SITUATION THAT WE ARE IN, UH, CLYDE WARREN PARK WHERE, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, WE RUN INTO MAJOR CHALLENGES AS FAR AS THE MAINTENANCE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS THE ORDER THAT THESE PROJECTS ARE SELECTED, ARE THEY FOLLOWING THE SAME CRITERIA SCORE OF THE TECHNICAL SCORE THAT INCLUDES THE PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX AND THE OVERLAYS THAT INCLUDE THE EQUITY SCORING? AND ARE THOSE SELECTED IN THAT ORDER AS WELL? YES, THE CRITERIA FOR THESE PROJECTS DOES CONSIDER, UM, PAVEMENT CONDITION, UM, AS WELL AS THE EQUITY OVERLAYS.
IT'S A, THAT'S THE FULL SCORING, UH, WHEN YOU SEE TOTAL SCORE, IT'S, IT'S ALL THE CRITERIA.
SO, UH, WHAT WE PRESENTED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS FOR THE SCORING CRITERIA, THAT'S EVERYTHING IN HERE.
AND, UM, UH, NEXT I HAVE TWO MORE SPEAKERS, PATTY AND PORTIA, AND THEN AFTER THAT AND, AND DARREN.
AND AFTER THAT, I'M GONNA TAKE A LITTLE BREAK AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE THE SPEAKERS IN THE AUDIENCE SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO STAY UNTIL NINE O'CLOCK.
UM, BUT THEY ONLY GET THREE MINUTES, SO DON'T, DON'T THINK WE'RE GIVING 'EM SO MUCH TIME, BUT WE APPRECIATE THEM SITTING HERE.
IT'S VERY IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, WHEN PEOPLE COME TO SPEAK TO US THAT
[00:45:01]
WE ACKNOWLEDGE THEM AND LISTEN TO WHAT THEY HAD TO SAY.SO I HAVE PATTY, FIRST, PATTY, SIMON, DISTRICT TWO.
I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS, UH, ADDITIONAL FUNDING AND, AND THE PERCENTAGE.
AND I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND MOORE'S QUESTION AND I THINK I UNDERSTAND YOUR ANSWER, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE TWO ARE CONNECTING HERE.
UM, SO CAN WE LOOK AT THIS AS IF YOU USE IT OR LOSE IT? AND IF WE DON'T MATCH IT, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY INTEREST ON MONEY WE HAVE IN THE BANK, THAT WE'RE GETTING EXTRA MONEY BY FUNDING THIS AND WE'RE GONNA LOSE THAT MONEY AND INSTEAD OF 4 MILLION, MAYBE WE END UP WITH 450 MILLION BECAUSE WE HAVE MATCH AND WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE THINGS DOWN THE ROAD OUT OF OUR MONEY.
IS THAT CORRECT? NO, FOR THESE PROJECTS WHERE THERE'S A MATCH, THAT'S JUST WHERE WE HAVE MATCHES.
UM, YEAH, SO IT'S, IT'S, WE EITHER PROVIDE THE, IF WE, WE EITHER PROVIDE THE FUNDING MATCH AND GET THE FUNDING, OR WE DON'T PROVIDE THE FUNDING MATCH AND WE DON'T GET THE FUNDING, AND WE WOULD HAVE TO, UH, FUND THAT REMAINING AMOUNT, UM, OURSELVES IF AND WHEN THAT PROJECT IS, UM, SELECTED.
I JUST WANNA ADD THE, JUST TO CLARIFY BY THAT, YOU'RE, YOU'RE CONTRIBUTING MORE THAN REQUIRED IN SOME OF THESE CASES THOUGH, CORRECT? OR ARE YOU JUST DOING THE MINIMUM TO GET THE MATCH? UM, WELL, THERE'S SOME PROJECTS WHERE THERE'S, UH, IT COSTS MORE THAN THE, THAN THE MINIMUM MATCH.
SO, UM, LIKE DATE, A LOT OF THESE ACTUALLY, THE, THE COST IS MUCH MORE THAN IT THAN JUST THE MATCH.
SO WE ARE FUNDING MORE BECAUSE OF THAT.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I JUST, UH, I JUST WANNA ADD SOMETHING HERE FOR EVERYONE TO THINK ABOUT TOO, IS WHEN WE, UH, ARE PROVIDING THIS SCENARIO OR ADDITIONAL SCENARIO, UM, WE'RE ADDING, I KNOW IT'S, IT'S ADDED ABOUT 7% OVER WHAT WE SPOKE ABOUT BEFORE.
HOWEVER, IF WE LOOK AT, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT'S NOT ONLY COMING FROM THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS FUNDED, UH, UH, THAT ADDITION DID NOT COME ONLY FROM THAT, IT'S BASICALLY BASED ON SEVERAL, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT ALL THOSE PROJECTS, A PROJECT BY PROJECT, WHEN WE WANTED TO FINALIZE THOSE RECOMMENDED LISTS, AND THAT'S HOW WE SAW THAT IT ADDED UP TO WHERE ALMOST THIS AMOUNT THAT KIND OF PUSHED, UM, THE, UH, CITYWIDE PROJECT A LITTLE MORE THAN THE PERCENTAGE WE FIRST PUT IN PLACE BASED ON, ON THE PERSON NEEDS.
BUT WHAT I WANNA SAY IS, IF EVEN IF WE DECIDE TO GIVE FULL FUNDING TO THE, UM, PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS FUNDED AND STILL STAY WITH THE 50% OVERALL FOR THE CITYWIDE, WE HAVE THAT OPTION TOO.
BUT WE WILL HAVE TO TAKE, UM, MONEY FROM OTHER CATEGORIES LIKE LOWER THE FUND, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR COMPLETE STREETS OR PROSPECTIVE OR, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HAVING NO FUNDS UNDER THIS FUND TO GO THROUGH THE TOUR OF YOUR EXPANSIONS UNLESS THERE IS SPECIFIC SORT OF YOUR EXPANSION PROJECT THAT'S STANDING OUTWARD, ONE OF THE CON UH, YOU KNOW, DISTRICTS THAT WANNA BRING UP AND SAY, NO, WE WANT THIS.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, EXPLAIN IT'S OPTIONS HERE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DISCUSS.
PORSCHE AND THEN DARREN PORTIA GREER, DISTRICT SIX, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, DISTRICT THREE.
UH, I, THIS IS FOR POINT OF INFORMATION ABOUT, I GUESS WITHIN THE LAST 10 YEARS, 35 SOUTH HAS HAD A FACELIFT, A MAKEOVER, AND THERE IS AN AREA BECKLEY.
NOW I WAS UNDER THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S GONNA BECOME A PARK, SO IT WILL PROBABLY BE SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE TO GET COMPLETED, IS BECKLEY, IT'S SIMILAR TO CLYDE WARREN PARK WHERE NOTHING IS ON, I MEAN, WHEN YOU GO UNDERNEATH THIS, SO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT SOUTHERN GATEWAY? YEAH, SOUTHERN GATEWAY.
SO THERE IS THE FIRST PHASE THAT THE DECK IS ALREADY IN PLACE.
AND THERE IS THE SECOND PHASE.
AND THE SECOND PHASE, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO, UM, UH, UM, WE APPLIED FOR FEDERAL FUNDS AND WE'VE GOT, UH, ALSO, UM, REGIONAL, UH, NORTH CENTRAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
AND I BELIEVE THERE IS SOME, UH, UM, THERE IS SOME HERE BECAUSE THE LOCAL, I MEAN, I THINK THE LOCAL, I MEAN, THERE IS LOCAL MATCH THAT'S COMING
[00:50:01]
TO IT, UH, FOR PHASE TWO.SO THAT'S SOUTHERN GATE GATEWAY, THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY THANK OR PHASE TWO, BECAUSE PHASE ONE INCLUDED, UH, 2017 BOND AND, UM, YEAH, IN ADDITION TO ALL THE FUNDS THAT CAME TODAY.
SO, UH, WHILE WE'RE HERE ON THE, UH, COMPLETE STREETS TAB, UM, LOOKING AT THESE SCENARIOS THAT HAVE THE NUMBERS ATTACHED TO THEM, ARE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT IN THE SCENARIO YOU'RE ASKING FOR, WE ONLY GET THESE FOUR PROJECTS? UM, NO, THERE ARE MORE THAN FOUR PROJECTS IF YOU SCROLL, BUT IN THE DESCRIPTION NEXT TO IT, WE, UM, TRY TO EXPLAIN WHY THAT PROJECT HASN'T BEEN FUNDED.
UM, AND IT'S MOSTLY BECAUSE BELOW THAT WE THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE CRITICAL PROJECTS.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, UM, WHAT YOU DON'T SEE ON HERE IS SAN JACINTO, SAN JACINTO, I THINK, UH, ALL THE, THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR, EXCEPT FOR LIKE ONE BLOCK IS FAILED PAVEMENT CONDITION.
SO WITH A LOT OF THESE COMPLETE STREET PROJECTS, THE OTHER QUESTION TO ASK IS THIS, THAT STREET'S PROBABLY ONLY GONNA GET TOUCHED ONCE IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS AT BEST.
DO WE WANT THAT OPPORTUNITY TO GO BY AND JUST HAVE NEW PAVEMENT CONDITION, OR DO WE WANT A COMPLETE STREET? DO WE WANT LIKE A, DO WE THINK THAT THAT STREET IS WORTHY OF BEING SORT OF A, UM, A SIGNATURE PROJECT OR A, UM, MORE CONNECTED FACILITY, MORE MORE MULTIMODAL FACILITY FOR THE CITY? OKAY.
UM, SO, UH, MY NEXT QUESTION IS MORE, IS MORE OF A COMMENT WITH A QUESTION, BUT, UM, ON THESE ONES THAT HAVE THE MATCHING FUNDS THAT YOU SAY, IF WE DON'T USE IT NOW IN THIS BOND, WE WILL LOSE IT.
UM, PRESUMABLY THESE BONDS ONLY COME AROUND EVERY SEVERAL YEARS, SO IF SOMETHING GETS KNOCKED OFF AND DOESN'T MAKE THE LIST, IT'S GONNA COME BACK AROUND 5, 6, 7 YEARS FROM NOW, AGAIN, ON THE NEXT BOND CYCLE.
AND, UH, WHAT IS THE LIKELIHOOD THAT MATCHING FUNDS COULD REOCCUR ON THAT PROJECT, UM, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW UNDER A DIFFERENT PROGRAM? SO, UM, FOR EXAMPLE, THE NORTH CENTRAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, UM, UH, FUNDED PROJECTS, THEY HAVE SOMETHING CALLED THE MILESTONE POLICY.
IF WE DO NOT DELIVER THE PROJECTS AS PROMISED, THAT FUNDING IS BASICALLY TAKEN AWAY.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE WILL BE ON THE NASTY LIST AND ADVERTISED.
SO, UM, PROJECTS BASICALLY ON THE, UH, LIKE I SAID, UH, THE, UH, UH, FUNDED REGIONALLY, UH, WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE MILESTONE, AND MOST LIKELY WE'LL LOSE THOSE FUNDS.
AND THE, UH, THE M C I P, UH, THROUGH DALLAS COUNTY IS TAKING THE VERY SIMILAR APPROACH, UM, UH, BASICALLY IS THAT IF WE DO NOT FUND THOSE PROJECTS, UH, THEY'RE TAKING THE FUNDS AWAY AND PUT 'EM, PUTTING THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SO IN ESSENCE, WHAT WAS POTENTIALLY TRUE, SAY 10, 15 YEARS AGO IS NO LONGER TRUE NOW.
SO IT'S EITHER WE HAVE THE MONEY AND DELIVER THE PROJECTS, OR WE PRETTY MUCH WE'RE DONE.
OKAY, PATTY, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA TAKE THIS A LITTLE SORRY, ONLY BECAUSE IT'S HERE AND, AND I SEE THAT, SO WE'RE TALKING, I SEE COMPLETE STREETS ON PEAK.
ARE, IS THERE A CONSIDERATION BEING TAKEN INTO THE FACT THAT 30 IS BEING PROPOSED PURPORTEDLY RECONSTRUCTED, AND THAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE ASKING FOR PEAK AND HASKELL TO BE UNCOUPLED AND BI-DIRECTIONAL? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? SO, I SEE COMPLETE STREETS ON PEAK, AND IT'S FROM HASKELL TO SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW.
IT'S GOING SOUTH, UH, HEADING TOWARDS FAIR PARK.
I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT STREET IT WAS, BUT IT'S GOING IN THAT DIRECTION, WHICH GOES THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
NOBODY'S TALKED TO US ABOUT THIS, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN BEGGING FOR HASKELL AND PEAK STREET TO BE UNCOUPLED AND BIDIRECTIONAL.
AND WE HAVE ALREADY TALKED TO, UH, TDOT ABOUT THAT LIKE TWO, THREE YEARS AGO.
IT WAS DURING COVID WHEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THEIR WHOLE RECONSTRUCTION.
SO I MEAN, ARE YOU GUYS TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ALL OF THESE OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING AT THIS AND SO THAT WE AREN'T THROWING MONEY AT SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA GET TORN UP BY ANOTHER ENTITY? UM, THE QUICK AND SHORT ANSWER IS YES.
UM, SO WITH SOME OF THESE PROJECTS YOU'LL SEE, UM, FOR EXAMPLE, WHY WE SKIPPED OVER A PROJECT LIKE ON THE COMPLETE STREETS LIST.
UM, VE THERE'S A PROJECT ON VE SOUTH OF 30 THAT IS NOT, YOU HAVE TO KIND OF SCROLL A LITTLE BIT, BUT IT'S REALLY CRITICAL TO HAPPEN AT, BECAUSE OF THE I 30 PROJECT, IT'S GOING TO SPLIT, UM, ST.
AND SO BASICALLY IF WE DON'T CONVERT A PORTION OF EVE TO TWO WAY, IT'LL REALLY LIMIT ACCESS FROM SOUTH DALLAS INTO DOWNTOWN.
[00:55:01]
BASICALLY ONLY BE ABLE TO GO SOUTH ON HERVE INTO SOUTH DALLAS AND NOT REALLY NOT BE ABLE TO GET NORTH UNLESS YOU GO KIND OF A LITTLE BIT OVER TO GET NORTH INTO DOWNTOWN.UM, AND THEN WITH PEAK IN HASKELL, SO, SO, UH, WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING A TWO-WAY CONVERSION STUDY FOR, UH, PEAK AND HASKELL.
UM, SO I THINK THE, THE ASSUMPTION IS TOO THAT THIS PROJECT, IT'S A FAIR AMOUNT OF MONEY, SO, UM, IT WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PROBABLY, UH, FUND AS COMPREHENSIVE OF IMPROVEMENTS ON A STREET, BUT IT COULD BE, UM, IT, IT COULD WAIT FOR THAT STUDY TO BE COMPLETED AND THEN IF AGAIN, IT COULD TURN INTO A PARTNERSHIP PROJECT IF MORE FUNDING IS NEEDED.
AND I SEE BIKE LANES, HAVE YOU TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE COMPLETE STREET BIKE LANES ON COLUMBIA ARE COMPLETE CATASTROPHE AND A FAILURE? UH, WE ARE AWARE OF THAT PROJECT AND WE ARE WORKING, UH, WITH PUBLIC WORKS, UH, ALL IN A TEAM EFFORT TO TRY TO MAKE THE SECOND HALF OF THAT PROJECT, UM, A SUCCESS AND THEN SEE HOW WE CAN GO BACK AND IMPROVE THE FIRST PART OF THAT PROJECT.
SO THIS ISN'T GONNA BE THE SAME KIND OF BIKE LANES? NO.
WHEN, WHEN ARE WE GONNA GET THE SPREADSHEET? ARE YOU SENDING THAT OUT, LIKE AS WE SPEAK OR IS THIS GONNA BE AFTER THE MEETING? NOT AS WE'RE SPEAKING RIGHT NOW, BUT WE'RE GONNA SEND IT PROBABLY AFTER THIS MEETING.
IS THERE ANY REASON WE CAN'T GET IT NOW? I MEAN, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE'RE GONNA BE ASKED TO MAKE DECISIONS AND IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE COULD SEE THE EMAIL.
WE, WE CAN SEND YOU WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS NOT FINAL, FINAL, UH, MAY HAVE, WE MAY NEED TO, UH, FINE TUNE IT A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE CAN EMAIL YOU ALL RIGHT NOW IF YOU WANT.
AND DID YOU SEND THE NEW STREETS AND ALLEY SPREADSHEETS? I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THEY DIDN'T GET CAUGHT UP AGAIN, LIKE LAST TIME.
IT'S PART OF THIS, UH, THE LIST THAT WE WERE GONNA LOOK AT, UM, AS NEEDED.
HOWEVER, UM, THOSE LISTS ARE JUST, UM, DIDN'T HAVE ANY, YOU KNOW, CHANGE LIKE THIS ONE, THE CITYWIDE.
UM, SO, UM, I CAN SHARE THOSE WITH, WITH THIS.
WE WERE WAITING ON SENDING EVERYTHING TOGETHER TO YOU, BUT WE CAN SEND THEM SEPARATELY TOO.
UM, UM, HOWEVER, ALSO THERE IS THE BOND BOOK THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER, THAT WE ALSO, UM, CALL IT A BOND BOOK, BUT IT'S THE RESIDENTS REQUEST BOOK FOR, UH, PROJECTS TO BE ON THE BOND THAT WE WERE TRACKING, AND THEN SOME OF THEM COMING FROM COUNCIL MEMBER OFFICES AS WELL.
AND THEN SOME OF THEM COULD BE, UM, ONE OF SOME OF YOUR PRIORITIES AND ALREADY ON THOSE LISTS AND ALREADY ON THE NEEDS INVENTORY.
BUT WE JUST THOUGHT THAT WE'RE GONNA PROVIDE THOSE FOR EVERYBODY TO LOOK AT AND MAKE SURE WE TOLD YOU WHAT, UM, WHAT WE HAVE RECEIVED REQUESTS FROM RESIDENTS OR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ADD, UM, TO THEM, TO THE BOND OR TRACK FOR THE BOND FUNDING.
I JUST THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO GET DATA SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, UM, BECAUSE YOU'RE BRINGING A LOT OF CHANGES ON US NOW, BUT WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE DATA THAT WE WERE PROMISED LAST WEEK TO HAVE BEFORE THIS MEETING.
SO IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING TO GET A BIG CHANGE LIKE THIS AND NOT HAVE THE DATA WE WERE PROMISED FROM THE LAST MEETING.
LET, LEMME ELABORATE SOMETHING, UH, ON THE CHANGE, UH, THESE ARE ALL RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CITY, RIGHT? I, I THINK WHAT CATHERINE TRIED TO DO IS TO COLLECT ALL THE MEANINGFUL PROJECT TO THE CITY, TO THE REGION, TO THE DISTRICT, RIGHT? AND GIVE YOU AN OPTION.
YOU CAN HAVE 90% CITYWIDE, 10% DISTRICT, YOU CAN HAVE 90% DISTRICTWIDE, 10% CITYWIDE, RIGHT? UH, WE CAN, WE CAN PLAY WITH THE NUMBERS, RIGHT? WE CAN COLLECT ALL THE PARTNERSHIP, PUT IT THERE, AND REDUCE SOME OTHER CATEGORIES TO STAY WITH THE 50 PERSON.
AGAIN, THESE ARE RECOMMENDATION.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE SAYING NO, 57 IS THE DEAL.
YOU GUYS HAVE TO STAY WITH IT, AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
IT'S JUST, IT'S HARD FOR US TO ASSESS YOUR RECOMMENDATION WITHOUT THE DATA THAT THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
BUT I GUESS THE PERCENTAGE FOR THE DISTRICT WISE, UH, THE ONE THAT WE EXERCISED, YOU KNOW, THE LAST MEETING, THAT'S NOT GONNA CHANGE BECAUSE THAT IS STILL GONNA SAME, STAY THE SAME AS 25%, 75% BASED ON THE NEEDS, RIGHT? WHETHER IT'S 50% OF THE MONEY OR IT'S 80% OF THE MONEY, THE PERCENTAGE FOR YOUR DISTRICT WILL STAY THE SAME.
THEN DOLLAR AMOUNT WILL CHANGE, OF COURSE, BECAUSE OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT.
BUT AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO SEND YOU THIS, UH, RIGHT NOW, UM, WE'RE GONNA EMAIL YOU ALL, AND YOU CAN LOOK AT IT FOR THE CITYWIDE THAT WOULD BASICALLY STAY WITH THIS EXCEL FILE BECAUSE IT HAS, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, HAS MORE INFORMATION, UH, RATHER THAN THE PREVIOUS, UM,
[01:00:01]
EXCEL FILE.BUT AGAIN, KEEP IN MIND THAT PEOPLE ARE STILL UPDATING THE NEEDS INVENTORY.
SO AS THINGS GOES ON, YOU KNOW, THINGS ARE GETTING UPDATED AND EVEN AS WE ARE SPEAKING, ARE GETTING UPDATED EVERY NIGHT, THE NEEDS IS GETTING UP, UPDATED AND GETTING A SCORE AND ALL THESE THINGS REGARDLESS, TO SOME POINT THE NEED'S GONNA CHANGE AND, UM, TO SOME EXTENT WE HAVE TO STAY, OKAY, THIS IS AS OF THIS TIME AND STAY WITH IT AND THEN DON'T CHANGE IT AGAIN, BUT WE'LL SEND YOU THIS INFORMATION RIGHT NOW.
UM, I JUST WANNA ADD SOMETHING TO THAT.
THESE SHEETS WERE PROVIDED ALREADY, SO WE HAVE ALREADY GIVEN, UH, THE STREETS, UM, YOU KNOW, SHEETS AND THEIR SCORING.
HOWEVER, UM, AS ALI WAS MENTIONING, WE ARE SENDING UPDATES AS DATA IS BEING ADDED, AS THINGS ARE BEING UPDATED BECAUSE EVERY NIGHT AUTOMATICALLY OUR SYSTEM GETS UPDATED AND WE HAVE, AND THAT MIGHT HAVE CHANGES ON THE SCORING AND ON THE PROJECTS AS THINGS ARE BEING ADDED.
SO WE, WE HAVE TO KEEP SENDING YOU UPDATED LIST AS WE GO.
UM, AGAIN, BUT THIS INFORMATION HAS BEEN ALREADY PROVIDED BEFORE AS WELL.
OKAY, I'M GOING TO STOP IT RIGHT HERE.
THEY HAVE THREE AND A HALF MINUTES EACH.
WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS, I THINK.
RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE A SPEAKER.
OKAY, WE HAVE A THREE SPEAKER, FOUR SPEAKERS.
UM, DAVID, DO YOU WANNA COME UP AND SPEAK FIRST? YOU WERE HERE IN THE BEGINNING.
UM, I HAVE A STOPWATCH ON MY PHONE, SO WHEN I TELL YOU TO, I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE 32ND WARNING.
IS THAT OKAY? AND DOES EVERYBODY HAVE ONE OF THESE? SHOULD, SHOULD THEY GO TO THE PODIUM OR SHOULD THEY STAY THERE IN THE BACK? WELL, OR ASKING QUESTIONS.
IS THE PODIUM MICD? IS THAT MIKE ON? NO, NO, NO.
I, YEAH, IT DOESN'T HELLO? RIGHT.
ACTUALLY WE CAN SEE 'EM BETTER THERE.
OKAY, SO DOES EVERYBODY HAVE ONE OF THESE? THEY PASSED 'EM OUT EARLIER.
DOES EVERYBODY HAVE ONE? WE'LL GET BACK TO THIS DISCUSSION, I PROMISE, AS SOON AS THE SPEAKERS HAVE SPOKEN.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT ENDEAVOR.
I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE TEXAS TREES FOUNDATION REGARDING THE PROJECT IN THE SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL DISTRICT, SPECIFICALLY THE RECONSTRUCTION OF INWOOD AND HARRY HINES.
UM, AND THIS PROJECT IS ACTUALLY PART OF A BROADER SET OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY UNDERWAY ON HARRY HINES.
UM, I'M SURE THAT YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR, BUT HARRY HINES IS KIND OF THE POSTER CHILD FOR AUTOCENTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE.
THIS INTERCHANGE ACTUALLY SEES ABOUT 82,000 CARS A DAY PASSING THROUGH IT.
UM, THAT TROPIC VOLUME, OF COURSE, BRINGS CHALLENGES.
UM, IT IS PART OF THE CITY'S HIGH INJURY NETWORK.
UM, IT ALSO HAS A HIGHER CRASH RATE THAN THE STATE AVERAGE, AS WELL AS NUMEROUS SEGMENTS THAT HAVE THE MAJORITY, IF NOT IN SOME CASES, ALL OF THE FOLKS TRAVELING ABOVE OR WELL ABOVE THE POST SPEED LIMIT.
UM, THIS IS ALL OCCURRING IN A VERY IMPORTANT REGIONAL DESTINATION AND ECONOMIC ENGINE FOR THE CITY.
THE MEDICAL DISTRICT SEES ABOUT 3 MILLION CLINICAL VISITS EVERY YEAR, ABOUT 37,000 EMPLOYEES FROM EVERY COUNCIL DISTRICT, UH, AS WELL AS THROUGHOUT THE REGION WORK IN THIS PLACE.
UM, AND SO THIS PROJECT REALLY IS REALLY ABOUT MAKING THE INFRASTRUCTURE MATCH THAT CONTEXT AND ADDRESSING SOME OF THOSE VERY PRESSING, UM, SAFETY ISSUES.
UH, IT'S ADVANCING VISION ZERO BY INCREASING SAFETY AND REDUCING CONFLICTS, UM, ADVANCES COMPLETE STREETS BY FOCUSED ON FOCUSING ON INTERMODAL CONNECTIVITY THROUGH THAT INTERCHANGE WHERE THERE IS NOW PRESENTLY NONE.
UM, IT ALSO ADVANCES THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN BY PROVIDING ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS FROM NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION OPPORTUNITIES, AND THEN THE FUTURE PHASES WILL INCREASE, UM, GREEN SPACE AND TREE CANOPY, AS WELL AS LOOK AT NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS FOR VERY COMPLEX URBAN PROBLEMS. SO THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING PROJECT THAT THE TREES FOUNDATION HAS BEEN WORKING HAND IN HAND WITH THE CITY, UH, AS WELL AS OUR PARTNERS AT THE COUNTY AND COG AND THE MEDICAL DISTRICT.
UM, WE HAD A VERY BROAD, UM, ENDEAVOR, UM, WITH ABOUT 2000 POINTS OF CONTACT, UH, TO DEVELOP A COMMUNITY.
WE HAD A COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PLAN TO DEVELOP THE VISION FOR THE PROJECT, UM, WHICH WAS, UH, SEED FUNDED DURING THE LAST BOND PROGRAM WITH CITY FUNDS THAT THEN LEVERAGED COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT FUNDING MONEY AS WELL AS M C I P MONEY, AS WELL AS $8 MILLION IN COUNTING AND PRIVATE FUNDS, UM, TO EXECUTE.
WE ARE PRESENTLY, UH, COMPLETING THE 30% DESIGN PHASE FOR THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR, WHICH INCLUDES THE INTERCHANGE, WHICH IS PART OF THE REQUEST TODAY.
UM, AND THE FIRST PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION, WHICH WILL BE SOUTH OF THE INTERCHANGE DOWN TO, UH, MARKET CENTER, WILL GO INTO CONSTRUCTION IN 2025.
SO THIS, THIS REQUEST IS REALLY ABOUT CONTINUING THAT MOMENTUM AND
[01:05:01]
CONTINUING THAT EFFORT, UM, FURTHER LEVERAGING THE DOLLARS THAT HAVE BEEN SPENT ON THE PROJECT SO FAR, PROTECTING THAT INVESTMENT, UM, AS WELL AS BRINGING ADDITIONAL DOLLARS TO THE TABLE.UM, THE REQUEST WOULD PROVIDE DESIGN AS WELL AS CONSTRUCTED AND SEED DOLLARS FOR ALL OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AT INWOOD OF HARRY HINES.
THE TRAINS FOUNDATION WOULD THEN COMMIT TO BRING ADDITIONAL PRIVATE DOLLARS THAT WOULD HELP TO FUND, UM, THE DESIGN FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND OPEN SPACE AMENITIES, AS WELL AS, UM, CONTINUE TO WORK TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE AMENITIES, AS WELL AS, UM, ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THAT, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE AND CONSTRUCTION.
UM, AND SO WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE BEEN IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY AND WE'RE, UH, LOOKING FORWARD TO CONTINUING THAT VERY EXCITING AND TRANSFORMATIONAL PARTNERSHIP, AND IT'S EXCEPTIONALLY IMPORTANT PART OF OUR CITY.
OH BOY, THAT WAS REALLY CLOSE.
AND YOU HAVE, AND WE HAVE THIS, AND YOU CAN LOOK AT IT AT, AT YOUR LEISURE.
I, I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT, BUT IT, I'M SURE IT TALKS ABOUT THE, WHERE THE STREET IS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH IN FRONT OF THE MEDICAL DISTRICT, UM, THAT SPANS SEVERAL DIFFERENT COUNCIL MEMBERS, UM, DISTRICTS.
GOOD EVENING, UH, MADAM CHAIRMAN AND ALSO THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
AND I DO APPLAUD YOU, JUST AS THE GENTLEMAN SAID, AND THE GOOD HARD WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING ON BEHALF OF ALL THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS HEARTFELT WORK.
I LIVE AT 2323 WEST COLORADO BOULEVARD, WHICH IS IN OAK CLIFF.
AND I'M REALLY HERE TO PROVIDE A PETITION REQUESTING REPAVING AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE TWENTY TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY THREE HUNDRED BLOCKS OF WEST COLORADO.
THESE BLOCKS ARE LOCATED IN STEVENS PARK VILLAGE.
STEVENS PARK VILLAGE IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT ONE.
WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY 140 HOMES.
95% OF THE HOMES WERE BUILT IN 1940 AND 41 AND 26 OF THE, UH, HOMES ARE LOCATED IN THESE TWO BLOCKS THAT I'VE MENTIONED.
THE PETITION THAT I'M PROVIDING YOU AS 25 PEOPLE IN EACH OF THE, THAT OWN THE HOMES HAVE ALREADY SIGNED THIS PETITION.
AND YOU SAID, WELL, WHY ARE YOU HERE? WELL, THE REASONS ARE THE STREET SURFACE IS VERY OVERGROWN, VERY, UM, VERY POOR CONDITIONS, INCLUDING PORTIONS WITH ALLIGATOR AND CRACKS WITH VEGETATION GROWING THROUGH 'EM.
THE SECOND ONE IS THAT WE HAD HEAVY EQUIPMENT TRUCKS USING THESE BLOCKS DURING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION AND AN ADJACENT TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT.
AND THIS TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED AT 2200 2300 BLOCKS OF ROOK ROAD AND FORT WORTH AVENUE, AND IT CAUSED A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DAMAGE TO AN EROSION OF THE STREET SURFACE, AND IT SHORTENED THE LIFE OF OUR STREET.
THE THIRD REASON THAT I'M ASKING THAT YOU CONSIDER OUR PETITION IS THAT THESE BLOCKS HAVE EXPERIENCED A HEAVIER THAN NORMAL TRAFFIC THAN MOST SIMILAR RESIDENTIAL STREETS, WHICH HAS CAUSED DAMAGE IN A HIGHER FREQUENCY OF WEAR AND TEAR.
AND THE FIRST REASON FOR THAT IS THAT THE INCREASED TRAFFIC IS CONNECTED WITH STEVENS PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, INCLUDING REGULAR BUS TRAFFIC AS WELL AS SECONDLY, HIGH USE BY CARS, TRUCKS, AND COMMERCIAL VEHICLE VEHICLES, EXCUSE ME, THAT REGULARLY CUT THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO AVOID TRAFFIC AND TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS ON FORT WORTH AVENUE, WHICH IS THE MAJOR PARALLEL THOROUGHFARE.
I HAVE THE ACTUAL PETITIONS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER THAT EVERYONE HAS SIGNED ON THE STREET EXCEPT FOR ONE INDIVIDUAL, WHICH IS OVERSEAS AT THIS POINT.
AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
CAN YOU, UM, GIVE THOSE TO OUR IT PERSON? OH, OKAY.
OH, CAN YOU HAVE SOMEONE TALK WITH HER ABOUT WHERE THEY ARE ON THE NEED? WHAT, WHERE HER REQUEST IS ON THE NEEDS LIST? OKAY.
JUST ASK A STAFF PERSON TO CHAT WITH HER A LITTLE BIT.
THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN, MRS. NEWTON.
UM, OKAY, WHO ELSE IS HERE? OKAY.
GOOD NE GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.
I HAVE RUSS AMAN WITH ME AS WELL.
AND WE ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE JEFFERSON BOULEVARD PROJECT IN DISTRICT ONE, BUT IT'S A CITYWIDE PROJECT, AND THIS PROJECT IS REALLY AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECREATE JEFFERSON INTO A COMPLETE STREET AND GREEN STREET THAT WORKS WITH A LOT OF THE CITY'S EXISTING, UM, INITIATIVES AND GOALS.
THIS INCLUDES VISION ZERO COMPLETE STREETS.
THIS IS AN INTEGRAL PIECE OF THE DALLAS BIKE PLAN.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH, UM, CITY STAFF, UM, FROM PUBLIC WORKS, TRANSPORTATION, UM, URBAN
[01:10:01]
PLANNING TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT WORKS WELL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS.WE HAVE A TASK FORCE COMPRISED OF MULTIPLE NEIGHBORHOODS, D I S D, LOCAL BUSINESSES.
AND SO WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE WORK, UM, THAT'S TAKING PLACE.
I'M GONNA LET RUSS TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES ON JEFFERSON AND WHAT WE'RE REALLY HOPING THAT WILL BE, UH, REMEDIED THROUGH THE BOND FUNDING.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS, UH, FIRST AND FOREMOST, OUR FOCUS IS ON SAFETY AND TRAFFIC CALMING STRATEGIES.
SO, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS EARLY ON IN OUR TASK FORCE EFFORTS, WE REACHED OUT TO CITY STAFF AND, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE VISION ZERO PROGRAM, WHICH IS LOOKING AT HOW CAN WE TAKE OUR FATALITIES AND INJURIES DOWN TO ZERO FOR PEDESTRIAN CYCLISTS AND SO FORTH.
UH, WE LEARNED THROUGH SOME, UH, COMMUNICATION WITH CITY STAFF THAT AN ANALYSIS HAD BEEN DONE IN PUTTING TOGETHER A HIGH INJURY NETWORK.
WHAT STREETS ARE UNSAFE, THERE ARE HIGHER, UH, LIKELIHOOD OF HAVING ACCIDENTS THERE.
AND IT TURNS OUT JEFFERSON IS ON THAT LIST, UH, FROM EDGEFIELD GOING EAST.
SO AGAIN, THAT, THAT'S REALLY OUR MAJOR OVERARCHING, UH, GOAL IS HOW CAN WE MAKE THE, THE, THE, THE STREET, UH, SAFER.
UH, ALSO ORIGINALLY, YOU KNOW, UH, CURRENTLY IT'S, IT'S SET UP AT SIX LANES.
WE, WE FOUND A WAY TO, UH, IMPROVE SAFETY BY GOING TO FOUR LANES, SO TWO LANES EACH DIRECTION, WHAT'S SOMETIMES CALLED, UM, A, UH, A LANE REDUCTION, ROAD REDUCTION EFFORT.
AND WE THINK THAT'S HAD AN EFFECT.
WE THINK IT'S NOT, IT'S, IT'S REALLY NOT ENOUGH.
WE ALSO WORK WITH CITY STAFF ON SOME, UM, DATA COLLECTION, AND WE FOUND THAT THE, THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT OF 30 MILES AN HOUR, PEOPLE ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDING THAT.
AND A, UH, ABOUT HALF OF THE DRIVERS, 45, 50% ARE, ARE GOING ABOVE THAT SPEED.
WHAT WE'RE MOST CONCERNED ABOUT ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE, UH, MUCH FASTER.
THEY'RE 45 MILES AN HOUR OR FASTER.
AND SO, UH, WE'D LIKE TO SEE EFFORTS PUT IN PLACE TO HELP REDUCE THOSE, UH, SIGNIFICANTLY.
UM, IN TERMS OF BEAUTIFICATION, SIDEWALKS ARE IN FAIR TO POOR CONDITION AND NON-EXISTENT IN SOME CASES.
AND, UM, AS, AS WILLIAM MENTIONED, A DALLAS BIKE PLAN, I DO VERY RARELY SEE PEOPLE ON BIKES.
WE THINK ADDING A BICYCLING ELEMENT, WE'LL ACTUALLY MAKE FOR A BETTER, FROM A, UH, QUALITY OF LIFE IMPROVEMENT AS WELL.
UH, WE'VE HAD, UH, AT LEAST SINCE I'VE LIVED IN, UH, THE AREA, A COUPLE FATALITIES OF, UH, UH, ONE, UH, LAWN CARE WORKER WAS UNFORTUNATELY KILLED BACK IN JULY OF 2021.
UH, SOMEBODY THAT WAS SPEEDING, LOST CONTROL OF THEIR VEHICLE.
AND, UH, THE GUY'S JUST OUT TRYING TO MAKE MONEY FOR HIS FAMILY AND WAS UNFORTUNATE.
IF YOU CAN WRAP IT UP, YOU'VE REACHED YOUR THREE MINUTES.
THAT, THAT, THAT'S PRETTY MU THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, AND WE HAVE, AND WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER, AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE, THESE ARE S SYSTEM-WIDE PROJECTS.
ONE OF THE OL OLDER STREETS IN TOWN.
I CAN REMEMBER WHEN I WAS A LITTLE GIRL.
IT'S JEFFERSON AVENUE, SO THAT'S ALWAYS KIND OF INTERESTING TO REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS BEFORE AND, AND HOW GRAND IT CAN BE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, NOT THAT IT'S NOT RIGHT NOW, BUT UM, CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY NEEDS MAYBE A LITTLE BIT OF ATTENTION.
BUT THESE ARE PROJECTS, UM, UT SOUTHWESTERN'S AS WELL.
IF ANYBODY'S TRAVELED ON, ON, UH, ANY OF THE STREETS OVER IN THE UT SOUTHWESTERN AREA, IT'S PRETTY, IT IS, IT CAN BE VERY, UH, CHALLENGING.
THAT'S JUST NOT TO SAY THE LEAST.
UH, AND WE HAVE ONE FINAL SPEAKER IF THEY WOULD COME BEFORE US NOW.
GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
I JUST WANNA THANK YOU AS EVERYONE ELSE HAS FOR THE TREMENDOUS WORK AND THE TIME THAT YOU'RE SPENDING ON THIS.
I ALSO WANNA GIVE KUDOS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
THEY HAVE CONSISTENTLY WORKED WITH US IN THE ARTS DISTRICT, AND I FORGOT TO TELL YOU MY NAME.
I'M LILY WEISS AND I'M REPRESENTING THE DALLAS ARTS DISTRICT.
UH, THERE IS A TREMENDOUS NEED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORT IN THE ARTS DISTRICT, MUCH OF WHICH STATES BACK TO THE ORIGINAL SUZAKI PLAN.
FORTUNATELY, THE COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUR NEW CONNECT MASTER PLAN IN 2021.
WE ARE WORKING TOWARD PRIORITY OBJECTIVES IN THAT PLAN.
ONE OF THESE GOALS IS TO REINVIGORATE FLORIST STREET AS THE CULTURAL CORE OF THE DISTRICT AND TO CREATE, MOST IMPORTANTLY, TO CREATE A SAFE, A D A ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION.
I KNOW FOR A FACT IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR ANYONE WHO HAS ANY KIND OF DISABILITY, WHETHER THEY'RE ON A SCOOTER IN A WHEELCHAIR, TO REALLY TRAVERSE SOME OF FLORA STREET FROM CLYDE WARREN PARK AND INTO THE DISTRICT.
[01:15:01]
A SUBSTANTIALLY LARGER REQUEST, BUT HAVE AMENDED OUR ASK TO PRIORITIZE AND FOCUS ON THIS GOAL, ACKNOWLEDGING THERE ARE A LOT OF NEEDS ACROSS THE CITY.WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST OUR ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS OVER 30 MILLION, JUST TO REVIEW THAT, BUT WE RESPECTFULLY CORRECT REQUEST NOW EIGHT AND A HALF MILLION IN CITYWIDE STREETS FUNDING FOR THE ARTS DISTRICT.
THIS INCLUDES ONE POINT 0.5 MILLION FOR OUR HIGHEST PRIORITY SIDEWALKS.
AND I JUST WANNA TELL YOU THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH ALL OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS AND WE, THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, ESPECIALLY THE SIDEWALKS, IS ON DOWNTOWN DALLAS INC'S HIGH PRIORITY LIST.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE DOING AND FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TO YOU TONIGHT.
THANK YOU LILY AND THE ARTS DISTRICT, UM, ON THAT PARTICULAR, UH, SIDEWALK, ACTUALLY, I WENT DOWN AND LOOKED AT IT.
I LOOKED AT ALMOST ALL OF THESE PROJECTS.
UM, THAT PARTICULAR SIDEWALK THAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT, YOU COULD NOT GET A WHEELCHAIR DOWN THERE BECAUSE PART OF THE PROBLEM IS HALF THE SIDEWALK IS TAKEN UP BY TREES AND, AND THESE COBBLESTONES THAT ARE ALWAYS IN DIS REPAIR AND THE OTHER PART ISN'T WIDE ENOUGH TO GET A SIDEWALK.
I'M GETTING A, UM, WHEELCHAIR THROUGH.
SO IF YOU'RE DOWNTOWN, YOU REALLY HAVE GOT AN ISSUE THERE.
SO THANK YOU FOR PRIORITIZING YOUR NEEDS TOWARDS SAFETY.
I WANNA THANK ALL OF YOU HAVE, HAVE DONE THAT AS WELL.
I THINK THAT'S ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS TONIGHT.
JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE GOT TO YOU EARLY IN THE EVENING.
IT WAS JUST A REQUEST TO, UM, ON THE LIST THAT YOU'RE GONNA SEND US TO, TO NOTE WHICH PROJECTS ARE ALREADY FUNDED.
SO WE WOULD BE LOSING MATCHING FUNDS AND WHICH PROJECTS ARE NOT FUNDED.
UM, YES, ALL PROJECTS, UM, AND IN THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS FUNDED CATEGORY HAVE SOME AMOUNT OF FUNDING.
UM, ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COLLEAGUES, TO WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW? UM, I KIND OF WANNA REITERATE JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT GUS SAID.
UM, WHETHER THE YOU LIKE THE PROJECT OR DON'T LIKE THE PROJECT, UM, ANY PROJECT THAT IF IT DOES HAVE PARTNERSHIP MONEY ON IT, THOSE MAY DO GO AWAY.
I THINK SUSAN CAN VOUCH FOR THAT TOO.
WE WERE TALKING LAST NIGHT ABOUT A PROJECT THAT, THAT THAT LOST SOME MONEY AND IT HAD TO GET BACK INTO THE QUEUE AND IT WAS QUITE A BIT OF, OF EXTRA MONEY THAT HAD TO BE SPENT BECAUSE IT COULDN'T GET BACK INTO THE QUEUE.
SO, AND THIS IS A MAJOR HIGHWAY, SO IT GOES THROUGH DALLAS.
SO THERE ARE, THERE ARE, UH, PROGRAMS, FEDERAL MONEY AND SO ON AND SO FORTH THAT REALLY DO GET RID.
THEY GET, THEY JUST GET RID OF THEIR MONEY.
THEY JUST GIVE IT TO THE NEXT PERSON DOWN AND USUALLY IT'S NOT THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SO JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO PRIORITIZE, UH, WHICH OF THESE PROJECTS.
AS SOON AS WE GET THEM, UM, I'M HEARING FROM, FROM EVERYBODY THAT WE WANT TO HAVE THAT LINK SENT TO US.
I, UH, I THINK THE FORMAT THAT IT IS IN RIGHT NOW, IF WE CAN SEE IT IN, IN, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN SEE IT BLOWN UP, IT PROBABLY IS A PRETTY GOOD FORMAT.
SUSAN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THAT FORMAT? 'CAUSE WE DISCUSSED LAST NIGHT, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE TWO SEVEN 2017 BOND PROGRAM AND WHAT THEIR FORMAT LOOKED LIKE AND IT WAS VERY, VERY EASY TO FOLLOW.
SO DO YOU SEE ANY DI DISTINCTION HERE? WELL, I THINK, UH, THIS IS SUSAN FROM DISTRICT 10 AND I THINK BE COLLINS TO THE WRITER, HELPFUL TO US, BENEFICIAL TO SEE IF IN THE DIFFERENT FUNDING SCENARIOS WHAT THE ALLOCATIONS MAY BE AND WHICH PROJECTS MIGHT GET INCLUDED.
WHAT'S STILL CONFUSING TO EVERYONE, AND I'M HEARING CONVERSATION JUST NOW, IS THAT WE HAVE TO DIGEST THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES ACROSS THE BOTTOM.
EACH ONE OF THOSE TABS IS A DIFFERENT CATEGORY.
SO LIKE THE PARTNERSHIP FUNDED PROJECTS IS A DIFFERENT LIST.
AND THEN YOU HAVE TO FLIP OVER AND LOOK AT THE OTHER TAB WITH THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS THAT ARE PERSPECTIVE, AND THEN COMPARE THAT TO YET ANOTHER TAB, WHICH IS COMPLETE STREETS.
I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY REALLY GRASPS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, BECAUSE TO ME, THE QUESTION BECOMES IF IS THERE, IS THERE GONNA BE SOME LEVELING BETWEEN THESE CATEGORIES? AT SOME POINT SOMEONE'S GONNA SAY, MY PERSPECTIVE PARTNERSHIP PROJECT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SOMEONE ELSE'S COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT.
AND, AND THIS IS VERY HARD FOR US TO DIGEST THIS WITHOUT A HAVING THE DATA FULLY IN FRONT OF US.
I MEAN, I, I KEEP WANTING TO PAGE
UM, ANYWAY, SO YES, I THINK, I THINK THOSE COLUMNS OVER THERE HELPING US SEE
[01:20:01]
HOW STAFF HAS PRIORITIZED THE FUNDING IN THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.IT'S STILL PRETTY CONFUSING TO PEOPLE.
I, WE NEED TO
UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE HAD TO GET THROUGH THE LAST MEETING TO GET ONTO THIS MEETING
THESE ARE GONNA BE DIFFICULT DECISIONS BECAUSE THERE ARE MULTIPLE DISTRICTS INVOLVED.
AND ONCE YOU PULL OUT ONE OF THOSE, ONE OF THOSE AND PUT IT INTO STREETS, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE MULTIPLE COUNCIL MEMBERS, UM, SAYING THAT'S NOT EXACTLY WHAT I, WHAT WE INTENDED.
SO BEFORE YOU DO THAT, OKAY, BEFORE YOU DECIDE YOU'RE GONNA TRADE THIS FOR THAT, BE SURE YOU TALK TO YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER BECAUSE THEY MAY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON A PROJECT PROJECT FOR YEARS AND YEARS, AND EVEN THEIR PREDECESSOR, PREDECESSOR MIGHT HAVE BEEN WORKING ON IT.
NOW IT'S EASY IF IT'S IN YOUR DISTRICT, RIGHT? AND YOU WANNA SWITCH IT OUT, YOU KNOW, OR IF IT'S IN YOUR DISTRICT OR ONE OTHER DISTRICT AND YOU GUYS DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE, THAT'S EASY.
BUT WHEN IT'S IN MULTIPLE DISTRICT, LOTS OF DISTRICTS, REMEMBER THERE IS ALWAYS A, AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION TO EVERY ACTION.
NOW, IF YOU HAVE ANOTHER ISSUE, WHICH I KNOW CANDACE IS KIND OF TALKING ABOUT, WHICH IS SHE WANTS TO PUT MORE MONEY INTO STREETS, THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE A LIST OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT YOU DON'T WANNA DO IN ORDER TO PUT MORE MONEY INTO STREETS.
NO, I THINK MY, MY CONCERN AT THIS POINT IS IT IS A UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OR MAYBE IT'S JUST A CONSEQUENCE OF SHIFTING MORE MONEY INTO CITYWIDE.
IT IS TAKING FROM SOME DISTRICTS AND GIVING TO OTHERS.
AND WHEN WE AGREED TO WHAT WE AGREED TO LAST WEEK, I WAS LOOKING AT A LIST OF PROJECTS THAT I THOUGHT WERE GONNA MAKE THE CUT.
AND NOW SOME OF THOSE ARE DROPPING OFF AND IT'S FRUSTRATING BECAUSE OUR DISTRICT ISN'T PICKING UP ANYTHING IN THIS NEW ALLOCATION.
SO WE'RE JUST NET LOSING AND IT'S, UM, IT FEELS LIKE A BAIT AND SWITCH WHEN, IF IT'S, IN FACT YOU'VE HAD THIS DATA FOR YEARS THAT THESE PROJECTS HAVE BEEN IN THE WORKS AND THE FUNDING HAD BEEN APPLIED FOR WHY JUST NOW ARE WE HEARING ABOUT THESE SPLITS AND CUTS? UM, AND THIS ADJUSTMENT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE.
SO THAT'S THE FRUSTRATION IS THAT WE'VE APPROVED SOMETHING LAST WEEK WITH A BASE UNDERSTANDING AND THAT IS NOW DIFFERENT.
SO LET ME, I GUESS CLARIFY SOMETHING HERE.
ALL THESE LISTS THAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE, THESE ARE NOT THE NEW PROJECT THAT WE JUST RECEIVED, RIGHT? THESE PROJECTS WERE ON THE NEEDS INVENTORY ANYWAYS.
I MEAN, THE EXCEL FILE THAT WE PRO PEER RECEIVED PROVIDED TO YOU HAD ALL THESE PROJECTS, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF ALLOCATION OF THE MONEY FROM 50% TO 57%.
RIGHT? SO I GUESS AGAIN, IF Y'ALL AGREE WITH THE 50%, IF THAT'S A DESIRE FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS, RIGHT? IF THERE IS A VOTE THAT Y'ALL SAY, OKAY, WE DON'T WANNA GO ABOVE 50%.
WHAT I RECOMMEND HERE, HERE IS THAT, AND THIS IS JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION, THAT I THINK WE SHOULD MAYBE KEEP MORE OF THE FUNDED PARTNERSHIP PROJECT AND THEN REDUCE SOME OTHER CITYWIDE PROJECT THAT AT LEAST WE DON'T LOSE THE FUNDED PROJECT.
I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT THING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANNA LOSE ANY OTHER CONTRIBUTION TO THE CITY.
IF SOME OTHER AGENCY WANTS TO PAY US, WHY NOT? RIGHT? WHY WE SHOULD ACTUALLY AVOID, AND MAYBE WE CAN, I'M NOT SAYING THAT I, I'M SAYING THERE ARE A COUPLE THINGS.
ONE, I'M WILLING TO GO BACK AND REVISIT ALL OF THIS, BUT IT IS JUST, JUST KNOW IT'S FRUSTRATING.
UM, AND THEN TWO, WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS IF YOU HAD COME TO ME AND SAID, LOOK, INSTEAD OF 4 85 WE THINK WE'RE ONLY GONNA GET 400, SO WE NEED TO SHIFT UP TO 57% FOR CITYWIDE TO GET IT DONE.
THAT I WOULD'VE SAID, OKAY, THAT MAKES SOME SENSE.
THEY'RE NOT GETTING AS MUCH AS THEY THOUGHT TO DO THESE PROJECTS.
BUT NOW UNDER THE FIVE 20, YOU'RE EVEN GOING UP HIGHER TO 60%.
THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
'CAUSE THEN I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD BE GOING DOWN TO 45% FOR CITY PROJECTS BECAUSE THE POOL'S NOW BIGGER.
SO IT'S NOT MAKING A LOT OF SENSE TO ME WHY YOU'RE TAKING AWAY FROM THE DISTRICT DISCRETION, I'LL CALL IT IN THE DISTRICT ALLOCATION, UM, FOR CITYWIDE WHEN THE BUCKET GOT BIGGER.
IF IT GOT SMALLER, THEN I AGREE I CAN UNDER, I CAN WRAP MY HEAD AROUND THAT.
BUT AGAIN, THESE AREN'T NEW PROJECTS.
SO THE VARIABLE THAT I WOULD'VE SAID I CAN UNDERSTAND IS THE AMOUNT THAT GET ALLOCATED TO STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION.
BUT YOU'RE ACTUALLY SAYING, NO, THAT DOESN'T EVEN MATTER IN ANY SCENARIO, WE'RE GONNA TAKE MORE FOR CITYWIDE.
THAT'S WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH.
[01:25:01]
I GUESS AGAIN, IF THIS COMMITTEE TELLS US TONIGHT 50%, THAT'S IT, RIGHT? THEN WE'RE GONNA GO BACK AND LOOK AT ALL THE PROJECTS, SEE WHAT IS THE 50%, THE MOST MEANINGFUL, UH, 50% WILL BE AND PRESENTED THAT WAY.RIGHT? AND IF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THEY SAY THEY VOTE ON 55%, THEY WILL STAY WITH 55%.
THIS IS JUST A, ANOTHER TOOL FOR Y'ALL TO, UM, MAKE A VOTE AND SAYING, UM, IS 50, IF IT'S MORE THAN 50% OKAY.
WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS OR NOT? I KNOW SOME DISTRICTS WILL IMPACT MAYBE IN A POSITIVE WAY.
MAYBE SOME DISTRICTS MAY NOT GET BENEFIT OUT OF IT.
I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITYWIDE PROJECT, THERE WAS A REASON THAT THEY CALL IT CITYWIDE, RIGHT? THERE WAS A REASON BECAUSE THAT PROJECT ACTUALLY SERVED THE CITY, SERVE THE REGION, SERVE THE DISTRICT MORE THAN JUST THE LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IT, THAT'S A STREET THAT YOU DRIVE ON WHEN YOU GO TO WORK.
THAT'S A STREET THAT IS USUALLY CONGESTED.
THAT'S A STREET THAT, YOU KNOW, SERVES A LOT OF OTHER PURPOSES.
A LOT OF, UM, EMERGENCY VEHICLES, EMERGENCY CALLS, TAKING THOSE STREETS TO GET TO POINT A AND B.
RIGHT? SO THAT'S WHY THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS ARE, AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, UM, THE DISTRICTWIDE PROJECT IS IMPORTANT FOR, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOUR CONCERN.
WE ALL UNDERSTAND THE CITYWIDE PROJECT, ON THE OTHER HAND ALSO ARE IMPORTANT DUE TO THE, UM, I GUESS THE PURPOSE THAT THEY HAVE.
YEAH, GRADY MCGANN, DISTRICT FIVE.
UM, I THINK ONE OF THE POINTS OF CONFUSION HERE, AT LEAST FOR ME, IS THE UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT CITYWIDE MEANS IS IT ALSO SEEMS LIKE THAT'S BEEN SLIGHTLY REDEFINED SINCE THE LAST MEETING.
'CAUSE YOU SAID YOU TOOK SOME OF THOSE STREETS OUT OF CONSIDERATION OF CITYWIDE AND PUT THEM INTO THE CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY.
RIGHT? SO THAT WHOLE CONCEPT HAS SHIFTED A BIT SINCE THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
I'M LOOKING AT SEVERAL DIFFERENT POSSIBLE BUDGET ALLOCATION SCENARIO CONCEPTS FROM DIFFERENT MEETINGS.
I WASN'T HERE ON JULY THE 17TH, UM, WHICH WHAT YOU JUST SENT REFERENCES, UM, WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEVEN 17 RIGHT.
VERSUS WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT TODAY.
BUT IN OUR PREVIOUS MEETING, THERE WERE ALSO POSSIBLE BUDGET ALLOCATION SCENARIOS PRESENTED FOR 400, 4 85 AND 520.
AND THOSE NUMBERS THAT ARE THE SAME, YOU KNOW, COMPLETE STREETS, PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS, THOROUGHFARE EXPANSIONS ARE DIFFERENT NUMBERS THAN THE ONES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE AND, AND THE SCENARIOS PRESENTED TODAY, WHICH HARKEN BACK TO THE, A MEETING BEFORE THAT.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF WE'RE CHANGING, IF WE'RE ASKING FOR A RECOMMENDED REVISED AMOUNT, AND IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN YOU REMOVE SIDEWALKS AND BRIDGES, THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE GETTING 50 50, RIGHT? LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND THEN SIT, YOU KNOW, DISTRICT PROJECTS VERSUS CITYWIDE PROJECTS.
YOU GET IN THE $400 MILLION OR OF SCENARIO THAT'S LIKE 139 MILLION.
THEN WHEN YOU ADD SIDEWALKS AND BRIDGES INTO CITYWIDE, THEN YOU GET TO YOUR 53 47.
BUT I'M, BUT AGAIN, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT JUST IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING, THE POSSIBLE BUDGET ALLOCATION SCENARIOS.
THOSE NUMBERS THAT ARE LISTED HERE UNDER CITYWIDE FOR COMPLETE STREETS PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS AND ALL OF THAT ARE DIFFERENT THAN THE ONES THAT WERE PRESENTED TO IN ON SEVEN 17.
SO WHY DID, DID YOU GO BACK TO THOSE JULY NUMBERS AS OPPOSED TO THE ONES THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT IN THE POSSIBLE BUDGET SCENARIOS IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING? I'M NOT SURE IF I ACTUALLY FOLLOWED THE ENTIRE QUESTION, BUT I THINK THE QUESTION, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, PLEASE.
UH, I THINK THE QUESTION WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS SCENARIO THAT WE PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY, WHICH HAD THE MULTI-DISTRICT PORTION OF THE MULTI-DISTRICT, WHICH WAS A PART OF CITYWIDE AND IT WAS 50 50, 50 PERSON CITYWIDE, 50 PERSON, UH, DISTRICT-WISE, UM, PROJECT.
NOW IT'S SHIFTING BECAUSE WE CHANGED THE MULTI-DISTRICT BACK TO THE DISTRICT-WISE AND THE CITYWIDE IT STAYS WITH THE CYBER AND BRIDGES.
SO, SO YOU CHANGED, I MEAN, AGAIN, ON PAGE THREE OF THE MEETING, SIX, OUR LAST MEETING, WE HAVE BUDGET ALLOCATION SCENARIOS.
SORRY, CAN YOU PUT THIS MEETING SIX ON THE SCREEN IF WE HAVE, DO WE HAVE IT CHAD? UM, UH, YEAH, NO, I'M JUST TRYING TO, BECAUSE LIKE THE, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER NUMBERS, NUMBERS ON TOP OF MY HEAD DIFFERENT.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY WE'RE GOING BACK TO PRESENT, YOU KNOW, IN, IN JULY.
AND I'M WONDERING IF IT'S BECAUSE YOU, SINCE YOU CHANGED THE WHAT IS CONSIDERED A COMPLETE STREETS, WHICH LOOKS LIKE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, A $30 MILLION DIFFERENCE, THAT THAT MONEY GOT REALLOCATED INTO THE OTHER CATEGORIES TO GET BACK TO THE TOTAL OVERALL SPEND OF WHAT'S CONSIDERED NOW CITYWIDE PROJECTS.
[01:30:01]
OF THOSE COMPLETE STREET PROJECTS OR CITYWIDE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, STREETS, THOSE GOT ASSIGNED TO CITY COUNCIL DISTRICTS.MAYBE LET'S GO TO THE EXCEL FILE THAT HAS A FIRST TAB.
UH, YEAH, THE SECOND EXCEL FILE.
I MEAN, I CAN SHOW YOU RIGHT HERE.
YOU CAN SEE I'M LOOKING AT, YEAH, BECAUSE I I, I'M, I'M JUST LOOKING SEE THIS NUMBER, THESE NUMBERS HERE.
THESE ARE FROM THE, LOOKING AT HERE, THIS IS FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING, BUT LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS THAT ARE HERE, THESE ARE DIFFERENT NUMBERS.
SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE I GO BACK.
FIRST TWO CLARIFY SLIDE, I THINK COMPARE, HE'S COMPARING THE SPREADSHEET THAT, UH, STAFF CATHERINE HAD TODAY WITH WHAT WE PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
AND IN THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS PRESENTATION TODAY MADE FOR THE CITYWIDE PORCH.
THE APPROPRIATION PER CATEGORY FOR CITYWIDE IS HE REFER IS WE HAVE NOT TAKING ONE, WE'RE NOT TAKING PROJECTS FROM CITYWIDE AND PUTTING THEM BACK INTO THE DISTRICT.
SO CITYWIDE IS STILL, STREETS NUMBER IS 30, SO THE COMPLETE STREETS IS 69 MILLION HERE.
BUT THERE IS OTHER DIFFERENCES HERE.
IF YOU SEE PARTNERSHIP FUNDED AND PARTNERSHIP, AND I SEE THAT, SO LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THERE'RE ONLY 7 MILLION ALMOST EACH.
SO THIS WITHIN THE TOTAL AMOUNT, WITHIN THE TOTAL AMOUNT.
MS. SELENA, CAN YOU GO TO THE FUNDING SCENARIO TAB? I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT REFERRING TO, RIGHT? THE TOTAL AMOUNT ONLY UP 7% WHEN YOU COMPARE IT TO THIS AMOUNT.
BUT WHAT, SO WHY IS THERE A $30 MILLION DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMPLETE STREETS INTO THOROUGH FAIR ATTENTION? THAT'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
CAN YOU ZOOM IN TO THE SCENARIO ONE ON THE SPREADSHEET? WHAT I WANNA CLARIFY IN GENERAL, THAT, UM, WE ALWAYS PRESENTED, UH, BASED ON NEEDS.
SO WHATEVER WE PRESENTED IN THE PAST FOR ALLOCATION PERCENTAGES, EVEN FOR THE CITYWIDE, WAS BASED, BASED ON THE PERSON NEED IN THE, UH, DATA THE SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE.
HOWEVER, ON THIS LATEST ONE THAT KEVIN WAS PROVIDED TODAY ON THIS SPREADSHEET, THE DIFFERENCE IS ALLOCATION IS SUGGESTED BASED ON MEANINGFUL PROJECTS THAT, UH, FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, ASIDE FROM THE PERSON NEED OR THE ORIGINAL, YOU KNOW, DATA CONCEPT THAT WE USED FOR SUBJECTIVITY.
SO EVERYTHING WE HAVE PROVIDED PREVIOUSLY WAS BASED ON PERSON NEED.
WHEN WE COMPARE THE PERSON NEED FOR PARTNERSHIP PROJECT, FOR EXAMPLE, TO THE PERSON NEEDS FOR COMPLETE SPEED OR TO THE PERSON NEEDS FOR
THAT WAS THE PERSONAGE BASED ON THAT WE SHOWED LOCATION.
HOWEVER, WHEN, UH, WHEN, UH, UH, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOOKED AT PROJECT BY PROJECT AND LOOKED AT THOSE PROJECTS, AND, UH, SO THE PROJECTS THAT IS RECOMMENDED TO BE SELECTED AS PROJECTS BY AS A LIST, THIS, THE ALLOCATION HAS SHIFTED IN A WAY THAT, OKAY, WE THINK WE SHOULD GIVE MORE MONEY FOR THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECT FUNDED BECAUSE THEY HAVE FUNDS.
WE THINK WE SHOULD GIVE, UH, LESS MONEY TO THE TOTAL FOR EXPANSION.
ALTHOUGH THEY ARE THE PERSON NEED FOR TOTAL FOR EXPANSION IN OUR SYSTEM IS A LOT, BUT WE DON'T SEE IT AS A PRIORITY.
I'M NOT SAYING WE, I MEAN US, BUT I'M SAYING, UH, AS A PROPOSED SCENARIO OR WHAT THIS SCENARIO IS SAYING MM-HMM.
SO THAT, SO THAT, THAT ALL THAT CONCEPT AND ALL THAT METHODOLOGY WAS PRESENT IN JULY 17TH, WHICH IS WHAT THESE NUMBERS ARE HEARKENING BACK TO.
RIGHT? BECAUSE IT SAYS, THIS IS MOUNTS PRESENTED ON SEVEN 17.
SO THERE WAS A, SO IT'S THIS SHIFTING DOCUMENT.
THIS IS JULY 17TH, AND THIS IS WHAT WE ALREADY PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY.
LET'S, LET'S, SORRY, LET'S TAKE THE THING FROM CATHERINE ALSO.
UH, SHE WANTS TO ELABORATE ON THIS ONE PARTICULARLY.
SO JUST IN THE FIRST, UM, TAB OF THE SPREADSHEET THAT YOU'LL BE SENT OUT SHOWS THE THREE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
UM, AND SO YOU'LL, AND IT COMPARES IT TO WHAT WAS PRESENTED ON JULY 17TH, A K A, THE NEEDS BASED BREAKUP.
SO ON JULY 17TH, IT WAS PURELY BASED ON OF THE PERCENT THAT THAT CATEGORY MADE UP OF THE NEEDS INVENTORY, HOW MUCH SHOULD THEN BE FUNDED BASED OFF OF THAT PERCENT AND HOW MUCH IS ALLOCATED TO CITYWIDE PROJECTS.
HOWEVER, UM, CERTAIN PROJECTS LIKE THOROUGH BEAR EXPANSIONS, UM,
[01:35:01]
EITHER, AS YOU'LL SEE IN THE SPREADSHEET, WE THINK WE CAN FUND THROUGH OTHER FUNDING SOURCES OR JUST AREN'T, HAVEN'T BEEN IDENTIFIED AS HIGH PRIORITIES OR AREN'T CONSIDERED HIGH PRIORITIES FROM A CITY POLICY STANDPOINT.UM, VERSUS, YOU KNOW, WE MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THE CURRENT SCENARIO IS TRYING TO FUND, UM, ALMOST ALL OF THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS THAT HAVE FUND FUNDED, UM, THE PREVIOUS, YOU KNOW, THE ORIGINAL SCENARIO THAT DIDN'T TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.
SO THOSE ARE KIND OF SOME OF THE DIFFERENCES.
YOU CAN ALSO USE THIS TAB IF YOU WANNA CHANGE THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE ALLOCATED TO THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES TO SEE HOW THAT, THAT THEN CHANGES THE PERCENTAGE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANNA PLAY AROUND WITH HOW DO YOU GET DOWN TO A 50%, LIKE WHAT PROJECTS WOULD HAVE TO BE CUT IN THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS TO GET DOWN TO 50%.
UM, THIS SHEET CAN AL ALSO HELP YOU WITH THAT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
DID THAT, YOUR QUESTION DID ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
NO, THAT ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
GRADY, IS YOUR QUESTION ANSWERED? I, I, I UNDERSTAND WHY PRIORITIES SHIFT AND CHANGE AND YOU KNOW MM-HMM.
BUT THE NUMBERS FROM JULY 17TH ARE THE SAME AS THE ONES TODAY, RIGHT? LIKE THERE'S LIKE THIS IN THE MIDDLE, THEY'RE DIFFERENT.
BUT NO, THE NUM THE, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE ONE THAT IS FROM JULY 17TH MM-HMM.
NO, IT'S WHAT IS A PROPOSED COLUMN WHICH SAYS AMOUNT PRESENTED AS A SUBCOMMITTEE ON JULY 17TH.
THOSE NUMBERS ARE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS PRESENTED ON THE 17TH.
NO, THOSE NUMBERS ARE THE SAME NUMBERS YOU HAVE FROM, FROM THIS, UH, FIRST PAGE HERE FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING AS WELL.
THOSE ARE THE SAME NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER.
THE, THE DIFFERENCE IS ONLY IN THE LAST COLUMN THAT SAYS RECOMMENDED REVISED AMOUNT, THAT'S THE ONLY NEW ONE FOR TODAY.
BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THOSE NUMBERS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE COLUMN IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
THE FIRST NUMBER IN COMPLETE STREETS IS 69 MILLION 814 6 0 6.
THE SECOND NUMBER IS 6,000,009 80.
AND THE $400 MILLION SIGN, RIGHT, YOU'RE RIGHT.
THAT ONE MATCHES THE, THE, THE STREET RECONSTRUCTION THOROUGHFARE IS 41,888,000, NOT 55.
I MEAN, AM I JUST TOTALLY MISSING SOMETHING?
IT, IT, IT, THERE'S BEEN, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S BEEN SIGNIFICANT SHIFTING, SHIFTING SINCE THE PREVIOUS MEETING, BUT IN JULY THE NUMBERS WERE THE SAME AS I'M SEEING THERE, AS YOU'RE SAYING.
UH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
BUT ISN'T THAT A, THE IMPACT OF THE, THE RECOMMENDATION? NO, THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE SHIFT FROM THE MEETING, THE, THE NUMBERS ON THE SEVEN 17 TO THESE REVISED AMOUNTS.
BUT FOR EXAMPLE, SWITCHING COMPLETE STREETS FROM 34,000,008 50 UP TO 36.
WHAT WE SAW LAST WEEK WAS 69,814,000.
OR EVEN LOOKING AT THIS WEEK'S PAGE THREE, JUST LOOK AT PAGE THREE FROM TODAY'S PRESENTATION.
THE NUMBERS MATCH WHAT WE SAW LAST WEEK THAT DON'T MATCH WHAT WAS IS SHOWN HERE FOR SEVEN 17.
SO LIKE TODAY WE, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, JULY 17 SLIDES.
I DON'T SEE THOSE NUMBERS ON THOSE SLIDES THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
I KNOW I'M LOOKING AT AUGUST, I'M LOOKING AT THE LAST MEETING WE JUST HAD, OR THE ONE THAT'S EARLIER IN THIS PRESENTATION TODAY.
ALSO, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, THE SLIDES FROM JULY 17TH TOO.
I AM, WELL, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WHY THE NUMBERS FROM THE 17TH CHANGED ON THE, ON THE NINTH AND THEN ARE NOW BACK TO THE 17TH NUMBERS AND THEN ASKING TO BE REVISED.
WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING? THAT'S WHAT I'M AND WHY
LET US GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT ONE BECAUSE THERE MIGHT BE A REASON BEYOND IT.
UM, I HAVE, UH, I HAVE PATTY AND THEN TARA, PATTY SIMON, DISTRICT TWO.
SO ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DECIDE WHAT PERCENTAGE WE WANT TONIGHT? BECAUSE FRANKLY I CAN'T MAKE A DECISION WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO EVALUATE THIS.
UM, MY RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT, UH, TO JUST KEEP THE CONVERSATION ORGANIZED
[01:40:01]
WAS TO SUBMIT A, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, UM, TO THE DIFFERENT FUNDING SCENARIOS.UM, I THINK TO THE CHAIR OR, OR TO, NOT TO ME.
WE TRIED THAT ONE TIME AND THEN I END UP FORWARDING THEM AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE TELLING SOMEBODY A SECRET AND IT GOES ON DOWN AND GETS ALL MESSED UP.
NO, PLEASE PRESENT THEM TO, TO ALLIE AND GUS AND CATHERINE AND DEREK AND SHAHAN AND
SO WE VOTE NEXT TIME, NOT TONIGHT, YOU'RE GONNA SEND US ALL OF THIS STUFF SO WE CAN EVALUATE IT ON A COMPUTER SCREEN.
SO I HAVE ALREADY SENT, UH, ALL OF THIS, UM, SO I SENT A LINK, UM, ON THE EMAIL NOW, AND THAT LINK HAS ALL THESE FILES THAT WE LOOKED AT, UM, AND ALSO THE UPDATED, UH, LISTS FOR ALLEYS, UM, AND, AND FOR, UM, STREETS THAT ARE PER DISTRICT.
THERE IS ALSO, UH, THE BOND BOOK THAT I MENTIONED FOR THE RESIDENT DISTRICT WITH TRACKING.
SO I HAVE ALL OF THAT ON THE LINK THAT I SENT IN THE EMAIL.
UM, I THINK, UM, ABOUT 15 MINUTES AGO, AND SHAHA, WE ONLY GOT ONE, I ONLY GOT ONE OF THE FILES.
SO I'M WORRIED THAT THE STREETS AND ALLEYS, WE NEED TO DO WHAT WE JENNIFER DID FOR US LAST TIME.
YEAH, BECAUSE ONLY THIS FILE CAME THROUGH TONIGHT.
DID YOU HAVE, UM, IS THAT THROUGH THE LINK? DID YOU PRESS ON THE LINK YES.
TO GET THIS FILE? NO, ON THE LINK THERE IS, UH, ABOUT SIX OTHER SIX FILES TOTAL.
NO, NOT THE TAPS FILES ON THE LINK, BUT THAT DOES NOT HAVE THE NEW STREETS AND ALLEYS IN IT.
THAT'S THE FILE I'M HOPING TO GET.
SO DID YOU RECEIVE A LINK? YEP.
WHEN YOU OPENED THE LINK, HOW MANY FILES DO YOU SEE? JUST ONE.
UM, WELL WE LOOK AT THAT ONE, BUT LET ME JUST ASK, HOLD ON.
ALI, CAN I, CAN I SAY SOMETHING? UH, GRADY, I WANT TO GO BACK TO YOUR COMMENT.
I WANT TO ADDRESS THAT COMMENT.
I, LOOKING AT THE PRESENTATION, I'M, I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
THOSE NUMBERS ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE JULY 17TH AND THEY DO MATCH WHAT OR WHAT IS ON THE SCREEN.
HOWEVER, THE NUMBERS FROM LAST WEEK, THE REASON WHY THOSE NUMBERS CHANGED IS BECAUSE WE DISCUSSED THIS INTERNALLY.
UH, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS AND WE WERE SAYING, WELL, THE, UH, ALLOCATION THAT WE SAW BASED ON NEEDS OR THE PERCENTAGE BASED ON NEEDS FOR THOSE CITYWIDE PROJECTS IS SPECIFICALLY FOR FAIR FARE EXPANSION.
WE SAW THAT WAS TOO HIGH A PERCENTAGE, AND IT WAS CLOSE TO 50% OR O OVER 50%.
AND INTERNALLY WE DISCUSSED THAT AMONGST, AMONG EACH OTHER.
WE WERE SAYING, WELL, THAT'S TOO MUCH.
UH, THOROUGHFARE EXPANSION WILL CO WILL PERHAPS, UH, FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT, WE'LL PROBABLY NEED, YOU KNOW, A RIGHT AWAY AND IT'S GONNA TAKE FOREVER TO ACQUIRE RIGHT AWAY.
AND IT WAS, AND I THINK FROM THE PREVIOUS BOND, WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT MANY, UM, UH, THE AIRFARE EXP EXPANSIONS.
SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE DECREASED THAT THE ALLOCATION TO 10% AND REDISTRIBUTED THO THAT ALLOCATION, THAT THAT PERCENTAGE TO LIKE, UH, COMPLETE STREETS AND TO, UH, THE, TO, UH, RECONSTRUCTION THE AIRFARE.
SO WE BUMPED UP COMPLETE STREETS TO 50% REDUCED THEIR, UH, THOROUGHFARE EXPANSION TO 10%, AND WE ADD I THINK, THE EXTRA 20% TO, UH, RECON, UH, THOROUGHFARE.
SO THAT'S WHY THOSE NUMBERS ARE DIFFERENT THAT YOU SEE.
SO, BUT IT DID NOT GO OVER THE 50%.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE 50% HERE WITH THE NEW METHODOLOGY TO CREATE BETTER NUMBERS THAN THE PREVIOUS ONES, RIGHT? RIGHT.
SO THE, WHY ARE WE LOOKING AT THE PREVIOUS NUMBERS THEN? NOW? STILL THEN IT IT, RIGHT? 'CAUSE YOU'RE SAYING 'CAUSE YOU CHANGED THEM LIKE YOU WANTED TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT TO THOROUGHFARES, THE THOROUGHFARE NUMBERS WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE.
SO DID YOU MEAN THAT THE, THE REVISED NUMBERS ACTUALLY ARE THE ONES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT ALMOST $70 MILLION, WHICH IS ABOUT HALF INTO COMPLETE STREETS AND LIKE THOSE ARE THE CORRECT NUMBERS.
AND SO WE'D BE LOOKING AT A REVISION BASED OFF OF THOSE NUMBERS TO SOMETHING ELSE? OR ARE WE ACTUALLY STILL CONSIDERING THIS RIGHT HERE? IF I MAY, I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION THAT LET'S VOTE ON THE PERCENTAGE FOR THE CITYWIDE.
IF Y'ALL WANT TO HAVE A 50%, WE STAY WITH 50%.
IF YOU THINK 55 7, WHATEVER WE ARE PRESENTING, THAT'S OKAY.
WE ARE GONNA STAY WITH THAT ONE.
WE'RE GONNA REVISE THE FUNDING AND NUMBERS AND PROJECTS AND SEND IT TO YOU.
I THINK WE CAN AT LEAST VOTE ON
[01:45:01]
THIS ONE RATHER THAN WAIT FOR NEXT WEEK TO, OR NEXT WEEK, WHATEVER THE TIME IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA COME UP WITH ANOTHER PERCENTAGE AND SAY, IS 50 OKAY? OR 57 IS OKAY OR NOT? I, I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN DO THAT.I THINK I, I JUST, I DON'T HAVE, I CAN'T LOOK AT THIS INFORMATION AND SAY I'M GONNA CUT THIS, THAT OR THE OTHER.
AND I MEAN, MAYBE I WOULD SAY 50 SEVEN'S FINE BECAUSE LOOK AT THESE THINGS AND HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE ACTUALLY GETTING OUT OF IT AND SIT THERE AND GO, WELL, WHY DID I VOTE FOR 50%? WE LOST ALL OF THIS STUFF.
I MEAN, I THINK, I CAN'T ANALYZE THIS LOOKING AT A SCREEN THAT'S THE SIZE OF A POSTAGE STAMP AND I CAN'T SIT HERE AND TAB ON ANY OF IT.
I MEAN, I REALLY WANNA LOOK AT THIS DATA BEFORE I SAY I WANNA KILL SOMETHING.
RIGHT? SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS FEEL, BUT I, I DON'T FEEL I CAN MAKE A DECISION ON A PERCENTAGE TONIGHT.
AND I ALSO THINK WE NEED TO LOOK, BECAUSE THIS TALK ABOUT PARTNERSHIP FUNDS THAT WE'RE GONNA MISS OUT ON THE FUNDED PARTNERSHIPS DO NOT CHANGE IN ANY OF THE THREE SCENARIOS, BUT YET COMPLETED STREETS SKYROCKETS UNDER THESE SCENARIOS.
SO THERE IS A MIS IN MY OPINION, A MISUNDERSTANDING OR MISREPRESENTATION AND THAT WE NEED TO GO TO 60% UNDER A $520 MILLION SCENARIO IN ORDER TO GET ALL THE PARTNERSHIP FUNDS.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DATA, IT'S NOT TRUE.
IT'S NOT WHAT THEIR OWN DATA'S SHOWING US.
SO I THINK PEOPLE DO NEED TO LOOK AT THE DATA, UNDERSTAND WHAT'S COMING IN AND OUT AND WHERE THE MONEY'S GOING BEFORE WE'RE ASKED TO VOTE.
UM, THE $57 MILLION FOR BRIDGES, I DON'T CARE WHERE IT IS.
WE ARE NOT GONNA HAVE A BRIDGE COLLAPSE ON OUR, ON OUR WATCH.
I'M JUST SAYING NO MATTER WHERE THE, NO MATTER WHERE YOU PUT IT, YOU PUT IT IN STREETS, YOU PUT IT IN, YOU KNOW, CITYWIDE.
UM, WE'RE JUST, THAT'S A SAFETY ISSUE THAT CANNOT BE, UM, IGNORED.
I'M GONNA TRY TO DO THIS WITHOUT PROFANITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE YOU, YOU COME TO US WITH NEW INFORMATION AT THE LAST MINUTE, JUST SPRING ON US.
WE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE WASTED 45 MINUTES DISCUSSING SOMETHING THAT WE WEREN'T PREPARED TO DISCUSS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE INFORMATION AHEAD OF TIME.
THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING THING SINCE WE STARTED.
UM, I'M NOT EVEN WILLING, WE HAVE ONE MEETING LEFT.
I'M NOT EVEN WILLING TO CONSIDER CHANGING THAT 50% WITH ONE MEETING LEFT WHEN YOU SPRING THIS INFORMATION ON US AT THE LAST MINUTE, IT'S UNREASONABLE.
AND I THINK IT, IT WOULD VOID EVERYTHING WE DID AT THE LAST MEETING AND IT WOULD BE UNETHICAL FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD HAVING AND HOLD TO THAT VOTE WHEN WE CHANGED THE ENTIRE PREMISE OF IT, YOU KNOW, TO, TO MS. IRVIN'S POINT.
SO I DON'T, I THINK THIS HAS JUST BEEN A, YOU KNOW, A WASTED CONVERSATION BECAUSE IT ALL CAME AT THE LAST MINUTE.
IF WE HAD KNOWN THIS FOUR MEETING MEETINGS AGO, IT WOULD'VE BEEN A REALLY GOOD CONVERSATION TO HAVE.
I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, BUT THE OTHER THING WE HAVE TO BE AWARE OF IS THIS PROBLEM OF MOVING GOALPOSTS.
YOU KNOW, WE, IT TOOK US FIVE MEETINGS IN TO GET THE DATA TO BEGIN WITH.
THEN WE GOT ANOTHER SET OF DATA AT THE LAST MEETING.
WE WERE TOLD WE WOULD GET THAT BOND BOOK.
WE WERE TOLD WE'D HAVE IT THE NEXT DAY, DIDN'T GET IT.
UM, AND SOMEONE MADE THE COMMENT THAT THE EQUITY GROUP WAS RECONSIDERING THEIR NUMBERS AND WAS GONNA RESTORE EVERYTHING.
SO WE KEEP MOVING THE GOALPOSTS EVERY TIME WE COME INTO THIS ROOM, WE'RE MOVING THE GOALPOSTS.
YOU CANNOT RUN A PROJECT THAT WAY.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS WHEN THE GOALPOSTS CONTINUOUSLY MOVE.
AND I JUST WANNA MAKE ONE CLARIFICATION.
WHEN WE SAY 50%, IT'S ACTUALLY 53% BECAUSE OF BRIDGES AND SIDEWALKS.
SO WE'VE ALWAYS SAID 53% WAS GOING TO CITYWIDE BECAUSE OF BRIDGES AND ALLEYS ADDED 3% TO THAT NUMBER.
SO I JUST DON'T WANT US TO GO AND TAKE AWAY AND CHANGE WHAT WE HAD LAST WEEK IN THE OTHER DIRECTION EITHER.
SO 53, IT WAS 50% FOR STREETS AND ALLEYS, AND THEN BRIDGES AND SIDEWALKS GOT US TO 53 AT THE LAST MEETING.
JUST SO THOSE WERE THE NUMBERS.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT GOING BACK TO WHAT WE HAD, IT'S GOING TO 53 JUST SO WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
BUT IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT EVEN WITH THE NET 47, 53 SPLIT, NOW SOME PROJECTS THAT WERE CONSIDERED CITYWIDE AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING ARE NOW DIVIDED UP INTO CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT.
NO, THAT, THAT HASN'T HAPPENED.
THERE HASN'T BEEN, I THOUGHT THAT WAS SAID EARLIER.
NO, THERE WERE NO PROJECTS MOVED BETWEEN CITYWIDE AND PER COUNCIL DISTRICT.
THERE WERE NO PROJECTS CHANGED, UH, CATEGORY.
[01:50:01]
WAS NOT A CITYWIDE ANYWAY, WOULD WE PUT IT AT CITYWIDE? YEAH, NO, YEAH.I, I THOUGHT I, YEAH, I THOUGHT SOME THINGS GOT PUSHED INTO DISTRICT PROJECT.
MULTI-DISTRICT WAS NOT AS CITYWIDE.
IT WAS JUST, UM, A PERCENTAGE AND, UH, FROM PREVIOUS ME, NOT EVEN FROM PREVIOUS MEETING.
FROM PREVIOUS MEETING, UH, WE HAD SPLIT THE PERCENTAGE.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE THAT HAPPENED IS ORIGINALLY WHEN WE FIRST SPOKE ABOUT IT, WE HAD A MULTI-CITY ON ITS OWN.
AND WHAT WE SPLIT THE TOTAL BUDGET 50% ON WAS 15, NOT 14.
HOWEVER, WHEN WE LOOKED AT IT, AGAIN, WE CONSULTED WITH THE BOND OFFICE AS WELL.
AND WHAT HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE IS THAT FOR MULTI DISTRICTS, THEY WERE KIND OF SPLIT PER PROJECT ON THE COUNCIL DISTRICTS.
SO THEY SAID WE DID NOT NEED TO DIVIDE BY 15, WE WOULD NEED BY TO DIVIDE AGAIN BY 14, WHICH ALSO BUMPED THE PERCENTAGE PER DISTRICT A LITTLE BIT UP COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS, UM, TO THE MEETING BEFORE THAT.
SO NOTHING HAVE MOVED FROM CITYWIDE.
THE 50% OF THE CITYWIDE INTO THE PER DISTRICT.
PER DISTRICT IS STILL THE SAME.
SO JUST A REAL QUICK QUESTION IF I MAY.
CAN YOU CLARIFY? I'M CONFUSED.
LET ME LET, LEMME JUST, SO MULTIDISTRICT IS NOT SHOWN HERE.
WHERE IS IT? SO, SO THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
WE HAVE NOT, UH, FROM THE, EVEN FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING, MULTI-DISTRICT WAS NOT THERE.
EVEN FOR THIS IS THIS ONE THE FIRST SHEET ON, ON THE SLIDES.
YOU GUYS HAVE NOT, THIS ONE HAS EVERYTHING FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING AND WHAT WE HAD SHOWN IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING, MULTI-DISTRICT WAS ALREADY OFF WHEN WE DID THE VOTING AND WHEN IT WAS OFF, WE DID NOT CHANGE, WE DID NOT MOVE IT TO THE CITYWIDE.
AND IT WAS NOT IN THE CITYWIDE ALL.
WHAT HAPPENED IS PERCENTAGE, IF YOU REMEMBER FROM A MEETING BEFORE WAS THREE POINT, UM, WAS 3.3 AND THEN IT WA UH, IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING IT BECAME PERCENTAGE BECAME 3.75 OR SOMETHING, WHICH BASICALLY A DIVIDE BY 14 INSTEAD OF 15.
OKAY, LET ME MAKE A SUGGESTION SO WE CAN KIND OF MOVE THIS ALONG 'CAUSE WE'RE REALLY, REALLY IN THE WEEDS.
UM, WHAT I'M HEARING ON A LITTLE BIT HIGHER LEVEL IS THAT PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR DISTRICTS AND THEY WANT MORE DISTRICT MONEY.
SO WHAT IF WE TOOK THE 4 85 OKAY.
AS A SCENARIO WE DID LAST WEEK OR LAST LAST WEEK, IT SEEMS LIKE A MONTH AGO LAST WEEK.
AND IF BY CHANCE WE GET THE FIVE 20 AND WE, THAT WE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIVE 20 AND 4 85 GOES TO THE DISTRICTS OR A SPLIT LIKE IT WAS IN 4 85.
OKAY, SO WE'RE NOT GIVING MORE MONEY IF WE GET THE EXTRA MONEY.
IT COULD BE 400 MILLION, IT COULD BE 4 85, IT COULD BE 500 MILLION.
BUT IF WE DO GET MORE THAN 4 85, WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON, THAT WE JUST BRING THOSE BACK AND WE SPLIT IT EITHER THE WAY JENNIFER HAD HAD US LAST WEEK OR WE, OR WE SPLIT IT BETWEEN THE DISTRICTS.
THE REASON THAT I'M SAYING THAT IS BECAUSE I THINK THAT THESE CITYWIDE PROJECTS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT PROJECTS AND THEY'RE TRYING TO TELL YOU THAT THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON THEM FOR YEARS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
AND WE'RE GETTING REALLY DOWN IN THE WEEDS AND THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND IT.
BUT I THINK THERE IS SOME METHODOLOGY THAT NEEDS TO BE HAD ON THEIR PART.
THEY NEED TO FLESH IT OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT AT A HIGHER LEVEL, WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING REALLY, BESIDES BEING THE OVERSIGHT.
'CAUSE I THINK IT WAS A GOOD CONVERSATION.
GRADY, I THINK YOU GUYS WERE DOING A GREAT JOB IN CANDACE.
BESIDES THE OVERSIGHT PART IS WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THIS POLICY DECISION.
AND WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS PERHAPS WE CAN MAKE THE POLICY DECISION AND ALSO GET THE DATA THAT WE, THAT WE ARE REQUIRING AS WELL.
LET'S TAKE A, UH, FIVE MINUTE BREAK, OKAY? RESTROOM BREAK AND, UM, TALK ABOUT IT WITH YOUR COLLEAGUES.
AGAIN, IF YOU, IF WE, IF WE'RE LUCKY ENOUGH TO GET THE $520 MILLION THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 4 85 AND FIVE 20, WHICH IS 45, 40 5 MILLION, GO BACK TO THE DISTRICTS, EITHER BACK TO THE DISTRICTS OR BACK TO THE SPLIT.
ORIGINALLY THAT MEANS NEITHER IS SPLIT 14 WAYS OR IT GOES BACK TO WHAT THE ORIGINAL POLICY WAS IN THE 4 85.
I'M NOT GONNA MAKE THAT DECISION.
[01:55:01]
TODAY OR SPLIT IT EVEN, RIGHT? OR FOR THE INCREMENTAL 35 MILLION.SO, OKAY, SO, UM, START FIVE AND
UM, KYLIE, I WANNA READ INTO THE RECORD, UM, CERTAIN PEOPLE THAT WERE EITHER ONLINE OR CAME IN LATE LAST TIME SO THAT, SO THAT WE CAN COUNT THEM AS PRESENT.
AND THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IS FOR ME TO READ THEIR NAMES INTO THE RECORD.
JOHN KILLIAN WAS VIRTUAL GRADY, UM, BEGAN.
IT WAS IN PERSON AND, UH, MAURA SCHREIBER, FLEMING WAS IN PERSON.
SO IF THE, UH, SECRETARY CAN PUT THOSE INTO THE MINUTES, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
I'D ALREADY TALKED TO HER, SO I THINK THAT'S FINE.
OKAY, SO OH, YES MA'AM, I DID.
FOR THIS ONE OR FOR THE ONE BEFORE? FOR THE MEETING BEFORE, YEAH, YOU WERE HERE LAST WEEK, JUST OH, RIGHT.
UM, FOR THE MEETING LAST WEEK, UM, SHARON HOWARD WAS HERE AND SO I'M TALKING, I'M TALKING TO THE, UM, THE IT PERSON OVER HERE AND THE SECRETARY.
SO MAKE SURE THAT SHE GETS INTO THE MINUTES THAT SHE WAS HERE ON AUGUST THE 10TH CHAIR.
WE ALSO HAVE TO CHECK TO SEE IF, UH, ANY VIRTUAL QUESTION IS THERE THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY ANSWER.
UM, WE CHECKED AND THERE IS NONE.
THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS VIRTUALLY YET.
I DO HAVE ONE THAT, HANG ON JUST A SECOND.
UM, SO BACK TO BACK TO WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSING BEFORE WE TOOK A SHORT BREAK.
DOES ANYONE HAVE A, UM, UH, A PROPOSAL PERHAPS? I HEAR THERE MAY BE A PROPOSAL.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ONE? DARREN, DARREN HAS A PROPOSAL, SO BLESS HIM IN THE FORM OF A MOTION.
IF YOU'VE GOT EIGHT PEOPLE THAT WILL SIGN ON TO YOU, YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.
ALL YOU GOTTA DO IS GET TO EIGHT.
UM, NOW I, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE JUST STICK TO WHAT WE VOTED ON LAST WEEK, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE FUNDING LEVEL IS FOR THE FULL BOND, UH, THAT WE STICK TO.
I GUESS IT'S THIS MODEL HERE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW.
DOES EVERYONE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROPOSAL WOULD BE? SO IF WE WENT UP TO FIVE 20, IT WOULD BE DIVIDED 50 INTO CITYWIDE PROJECTS, ALTHOUGH WE KNOW IT'S A LITTLE BIT 53, IT WOULD STILL BE 50 BECAUSE THIS IS HOW YOU'RE ALL ALABAMA STREETS AND ALLEY'S MONEY.
UM, CAN YOU FLIP THE SCREEN BACK TO WHAT IT WAS JUST A SECOND AGO,
[02:00:01]
PLEASE? SOMEONE? OKAY.AND THEN 50% TO THE DISTRICT PROJECTS, 25% TO THE, UM, EQUITY, UM, NO EQUALLY DIVIDED, I'M SORRY, I CAN'T, CAN'T READ THAT.
EQUALLY DIVIDED BY, UH, COUNCIL DISTRICT AND 75%, UH, MULTIPLIED BY THE, BY THE NEEDS.
OKAY, SO IT WAS BASICALLY OPTION A THAT IS YOUR PROPOSAL? CORRECT.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY, THEN WE'LL TAKE A VOTE.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, JUST RAISE YOUR HAND.
OKAY, COLLEAGUES, UH,
NO, I, I, I GET THAT, BUT I THINK, I THOUGHT THAT THE TASK FORCE ACTUALLY WANTED TO SAY, WELL, I SAY WE SAY WE GO WITH FIVE 20 THEN, I MEAN, YOU KNOW.
WELL, I, I WOULD SAY WE GO FOR 600 AND THEN LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
WELL IF THAT'S, ARE YOU SERIOUS ABOUT THAT? I MEAN, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T, UM, I, UM, I, I HAD HEARD THROUGH A LITTLE BIRD THAT THERE'S, UH, JUST SOME DISCUSSION OF THE AMOUNT OF THE BOND INCREASING OVERALL.
IS THAT TRUE? THEY ARE STILL ACTUALLY, UM, WORKING ON THAT ONE TO SEE.
I THINK THERE'S A BRIEFING TOMORROW, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
UH, YOU, YOU ARE WELCOME TO LISTEN TO THAT.
UH, THEY'RE GOING TO TOUCH BASE ON THAT ONE.
I HEARD MAYBE UP TO 1.2 INSTEAD OF 1.1 OR 1.2, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UHHUH? YEAH, I DON'T REMEMBER.
SO THAT WOULD OBVIOUSLY AFFECT THE AMOUNT THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO GET.
SO THE REALLY AND TRULY, ARE YOU REALLY SAYING SERIOUSLY THAT 600 IS A, IS A FACTOR BECAUSE I'M, I'M, I'M JUST SAYING IF YOU PUT TOO MUCH MONEY INTO ONE PORTION OF THE BONDS AND THEY'LL JUST, THEY'LL TELL 'EM WHAT THEY'LL GIVE YOU.
I, I WOULD LIKE FOR TRANSPORTATION TO CHIME IN ALSO, BUT YOU KNOW, THAT WE PUT MORE PROJECT ON THE CITYWIDE, IT BECOMES 70 57, EVERYONE GOT MAD, RIGHT? SO 60 $600 MILLION WOULD BE A BETTER DEAL BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE MONEY TO ALLOCATE TO ANYTHING ELSE.
I MEAN, FOR US AS A INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE, UH, MORE MONEY.
I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S A GIVEN.
I DON'T THINK IF ANYONE SAYS NO, WE DON'T, WE WANT LESS MONEY.
BUT THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION.
IT'S RELATIVELY EASY IN OUR, IN OUR SCENARIO TO JUST HAVE A BRIGHT LINE, YOU KNOW, 405, UH, 45, 5, 2600.
SO IF YOU PUT IN 600, THAT'S FINE.
OR WHATEVER NUMBER THEY CHOOSE.
AND FROM THAT 600, IT'S STILL THE SAME PERCENTAGES AND EVERYTHING.
AND LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING.
WHAT THESE NUMBERS, THESE ARE NOT JUST ARBITRARY NUMBERS, THESE ARE, THE 485 WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED BY BOND PROGRAM.
AND THAT'S WHY WE TOOK THE 485, RIGHT? AND THEN, UM, THE ASK WAS FOR 520, THEY PUT IT OUT THERE FOR FIVE 20 AND THEN SOME COUNCIL VOTED AGAINST, YOU KNOW, SOME PROPOSITION, THEY WANTED MORE MONEY TO OTHER PROPOSITION AND THEY SAID, SO MAYBE POSSIBLY 400.
THAT'S WHY WE CAME UP WITH THESE NUMBERS.
400, 485 AND FIVE 20 THAT YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EXACT BOND AMOUNT WILL BE UNTIL THE TAX ROLL ARE VERIFIED.
AND THOSE AREN'T VERIFIED UNTIL THE END OF SEPTEMBER.
SO THAT'S THE SAME WITH THE BUDGET.
CAN WE PROPOSE THAT WHATEVER THE BOND AMOUNT, 50% GO TO STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION? UM, THAT'D BE ONE WAY TO LOOK AT IT.
WELL, YEAH, WELL, BECAUSE THE BOND'S NOT GONNA GO DOWN, IT WOULD ONLY GO UP.
RIGHT? SO WAS IT 50%? NO, WE'RE ACTUALLY, WAS IT FROM THE ORIGINAL? FROM THE ORIGINAL? IT WAS 48.5% FROM THE ORIGINAL.
WELL THAT'S AN INTERESTING WAY TO LOOK AT IT.
AND I THINK SHE KNOW ITS 48.5 'CAUSE DOLLARS.
THAT WAS VERY EASY TO FIGURE OUT.
I JUST ASK AND I THINK THERE ARE SOME DEPARTMENT THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE ASKING LIKE FOR $400 MILLION WORTH OF THE, UM, BOND.
SO WE MAY WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT.
YEAH, THE THE RUMOR I'M HEARING IS THAT, UM, HOUSING AND PARKS ARE BOTH GOING IN AT LIKE DOUBLE AND TRIPLE WHAT THE BOND OFFICE HAVE TOLD THEM.
AND THOSE ARE DISTRICT SEVEN PRIORITIES MORE THAN STREETS.
WE'RE NUMBER THREE, WHEREAS HOUSING AND PARKS.
[02:05:01]
REPRESENTING MY DISTRICT HOLISTICALLY, I WOULD BE CLOSER TO VOTING FOR THE 400 MILLION FOR STREETS OF THOSE THREE OPTIONS BECAUSE I KNOW MY DISTRICT WOULD WANNA PUT MORE MONEY INTO RECREATION PARK.OH, THE SURVEY, UM, ONE OF THE SURVEY THAT THE CITY DID, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE WAS ONE OF THE HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR THEIR RESIDENTS, UH, ALONG WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE.
YEAH, YOU HAVE
UH, WE CAN ASK THE BUDGET OFFICE TO PROVIDE THAT TO Y'ALL.
I, I SENSED PANIC IN GUS'S FACE WHEN WE VOTED AND I KNOW HE'S THE ONE THAT HAS TO PULL MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR.
ARE YOU PANICKED BY THIS VOTE? GUS
YOU DON'T WANNA PUT ME ON THE SPOT HERE, RIGHT? UM, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, MY POSITION ALWAYS, I FOLLOW THE GUIDANCE OF MY COUNCIL AND MY CITY MANAGER.
SO I HAVE NO FURTHER COMMENTS ON THIS.
I THINK THERE ARE ENOUGH VOTES TO GO TO FIVE 20 AND MAYBE EVEN HIGHER THAN THAT, ABSENT JENNIFER.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE THAT DOES NOT WANNA GO HIGHER THAN 4 85 LISTED THIS PROCESS OF ELIMINATION, JENNIFER? I DO.
UH, IS THERE ANYBODY THAT DOESN'T WANT GO HIGHER THAN FIVE 20? IS THERE ANYONE THAT WANTS TO GO HIGHER THAN FIVE 20? THAT'S NOT A DOUBLE NEGATIVE.
I DO
OKAY, SO WE DON'T HAVE THE VOTES FOR 600 MILLION, BUT WE DO HAVE THE VOTES FOR FIVE 20.
WELL I ASKED WHO WANTED TO GO OVER FIVE 20 AND THERE WERE ONLY SIX.
AND WE HAVE A VIRTUAL ONE ALSO.
IS THERE? NO, I DON'T, UH, YEAH.
YEAH, JOHN, LEMME SEE IF I CAN'T GET, LAUREN SAYS IT WORKS FOR ME.
SO WHAT, WHICH ONE WORKS FOR YOU? LAUREN
SHE DOESN'T WANNA GO OVER FIVE 20.
SHE DOESN'T WANNA GO OVER FIVE 20.
SO AT THAT POINT, I'M GONNA DO IT ONE MORE TIME.
WHO WANTS TO GO OVER FIVE 20? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
SIX IS A TIE OF THE MEMBER OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE VOTING.
PIA, DID YOU VOTE? WHAT DID YOU VOTE? CAN I, UM, THIS, THERE, THERE'S ONE ONLINE.
CAN I MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS? YEAH, GO AHEAD.
I KNOW WE'RE IN THE VOTING, BUT I SHOULD HAVE COMMENT IN EARLIER.
BUT UM, YOU KNOW, OUR JOB IS TO REALLY TO LOOK AT THE STREETS AND WHAT THE STREETS NEED AND, AND I, I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND JENNIFER'S POINT.
I FEEL KIND OF THE SAME WAY, UM, IN SOME WAYS, BUT THAT'S A DECISION THAT GETS MADE BY THE TASK FORCE ITSELF, NOT THE SUB.
THEY WILL THEN DECIDE WHERE TO MOVE THE MONEY AROUND.
SO IF WE GO IN WITH A HIGHER NUMBER, THEY'LL, THEY'LL TAKE IT OUT.
IF THEY WANT IT TO GO INTO HOUSING, THEY'LL TAKE IT OUT AND, AND MOVE IT INTO HOUSING, YOU KNOW.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET TO NO, GIVEN HIS COMMENTS.
WELL, I, I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS ALL OF THIS IS WE'RE ARGUING OVER, WE CAN ONLY DO 5% OF THE NEEDS INVENTORY, YOU KNOW, AND YOU KNOW, IF THIS, IF THIS IF GOING UP A LITTLE HIGHER CAN GET US TO 6%, I THINK THAT'S A BOOST.
AND REALISTICALLY IN A ALMOST TWO PERFECT WORLD, IF THEY COME UP WITH A $1.2 BILLION BOND, I DON'T THINK 600 MILLION IS UNREASONABLE FOR US TO ASK IN LIGHT OF WHAT THE, THE PRIORITIES
[02:10:01]
ARE ACROSS THE CITY.I REALLY LIKE KANSAS' OPTIONAL.
WHATEVER NUMBER WE ASK FOR, WE SUPPLEMENT THAT WITH, BUT WHATEVER IT IS, WE SHOULD GET 50%.
THAT'S AN INTERESTING THOUGHT.
UM, BECAUSE THEN WE'RE NOT SUBJECT TO SOMEBODY PUTTING IN A CRAZY ASS AND PERSONALIZING THIS IN.
IT'S WHATEVER THE PHOTO NUMBER IS, WE WANT HALF OF IT, WHICH WAS BASICALLY WHAT WE HAD BEFORE.
WELL THAT'S WHAT I'M GONNA SAY.
SINCE, OKAY, SO THIS WAS A TIE.
UM, SO I CAN ACCEPT ANOTHER PROPOSAL.
I WOULD LIKE LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE ASK FOR 50% OF THE TOTAL BOND AMOUNT, WHATEVER AMOUNT THAT BE, GO TO STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND ON? DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT, 50% OF THE TOTAL BONDS GOING FOR UH, OUR STREETS AND UM, TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE.
NOW IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF? WELL, I DON'T KNOW 'CAUSE WE JUST VOTED ON IT.
UM, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE, DON'T WE AT THE NEXT MEETING OR THE FINAL MEETING HAVE TO SEND A LIST OF ASSOCIATED PROJECTS WITH WELL THAT'S TRUE.
SO THEREFORE THERE HAS TO BE A NUMBER THAT WE'RE PLANNING THIS.
BUT THEY ALSO JUST SAID THAT THERE'RE GONNA BE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO RAISE THE BOND AMOUNT TOMORROW.
SO IF WE HAVE, IF WE HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION TO TODAY, WE CAN REVISIT THAT CONCEPT AND KNOW THAT IT'S 1.2.
RIGHT? SO WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DECIDE WHAT THAT NUMBER IS TODAY, BUT WE CAN, BUT I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE IF PLANNING PURPOSE PURPOSES.
YEAH, I THINK YOU START WITH YOUR FIVE 20 AND YOU JUST START CUTTING THEM OFF IF THE NUMBER IS LESS THAN THAT.
YEAH, I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
UM, SO, SO THE PROJECT I'M GONNA TAKE ON FOR NEXT TIME IS TO COME UP WITH THE LIST THAT UNDER THE FIVE 20 SCENARIO, IF I HAVE 11 MILLION UNDER THIS ONE UNDER, I'M GONNA MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE A LIST THERE THAT REPRESENTS THAT 11 MILLION AND THAT'S THE LIST FOR MY HISTORY.
AND IF WE ALL DO THAT, THEN WE HAVE A FULL LIST OF WHAT THE ASK IS AND IF, AND IT'LL BE PRIORITIZED SO THAT YOU JUST TAKE OFF THE BOTTOM.
I HAVE A, YEAH, I HAVE ASKED FOR YOUR PRIORITIZED LIST, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR A MONTH NOW.
IT REALLY DOES HELP IF YOU HAVE IT.
I CAN'T SAY HOW THE COUNCIL IS GOING TO USE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW NECESSARILY THAT WE HAVE TO.
WHAT I WAS GONNA DO WAS JUST PRESENT THE LIST, THE PRIORITIZED LIST AND THE UH, TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER AND ALLOW THEM TO GO AHEAD AND, AND MAKE THAT DECISION.
IT'S THEIR DECISION IN THE END ANYWAY.
NO, THEY'RE NOT GONNA GET THAT MUCH INTO THE WEEDS.
OH, NOT ON STREET BY STREET BASIS.
WELL, THEY MIGHT DO IT ON SAYING RIGHT, BUT THEY'RE NOT GONNA LOOK AT STUPID QUESTION.
CAN, CAN I JUST VOICE A CONCERN AND SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT FOR NEXT MEETING? YEAH.
AND THEN I WANT THE STAFF TO TELL US THE DIRECTION THAT THE NEXT MEETING IS GONNA GO.
'CAUSE WE ONLY HAD THIS NEXT MEETING AS A MATTER OF FACT.
DID YOU GET A TEXT FROM JENNIFER TAKE
THAT'S NOT OUR MEETING, IT'S JUST FOR THE CHAIRS AND THE TASK FORCE.
SO WE'RE JUST VERIFYING THAT RIGHT NOW.
I'M SORRY I WOULD'VE LOVED TO KEPT MEETING WITH YOU GUYS FOR A LONG TIME, BUT
[02:15:01]
OKAY, SO WE GO BACK TO THE 50% CITYWIDE.WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE 50% CITYWIDE.
SO, UM, DO WE WANNA VISIT THAT NOW, DO WE WANNA SEND A PROPOSAL IN AN EMAIL BASED ON REDUCING IT TO 50%? SO, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, IT'S 53%.
AND SO NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS IT RE STREET RECONSTRUCTION? IS IT, WHAT ARE THE BUCKETS WITHIN CITYWIDE? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? YEAH.
WITHIN CITYWIDE THE BUCKETS WE HAVE, DO WE GIVE ALL THE FUNDED PROJECTS? FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT JUST PROPOSED TODAY, GIVING FUNDED PROJECTS FULL AMOUNT AND SAY, UM, THE REST OF IT GETS SPLIT FOR DIFFERENT OTHER CATEGORIES.
DO WE, UM, DO WE DO LISTS THAN THE FUNDED? WE DON'T FUND EVERYTHING.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT REALLY WANT, UH, THINK WE WOULD WANNA DECIDE AS WELL.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT FOLKS SAID THEY NEEDED SOME TIME TO LOOK AT THE FILES, BUT I DO THINK BASED ON THE CONVERSATION EARLIER, THERE'S GOING TO BE A PREFERENCE.
CORRECT ME IF I MISINTERPRETED TO DO THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS FIRST SO THAT WE GET ALL THE MATCHING FUNDS FROM OTHER PLACES OUTSIDE THE BOND.
BUT I THINK FOLKS WANNA HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE FILE AND COME BACK AND ANSWER THAT.
DO WE THOUGH NEED TO PROVIDE A, A REVISED VERSION THAT HAS THE 50% REDUCED, 50% SPLIT? YES.
AND THE FOCUS IS AT THE 520 MILLION FUNDING LEVEL? OR WOULD YOU LIKE IT AT THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS? FOUR FIVE AND 5 20 45.
UH, THE ONE THING I ALSO WANTED TO, UM, RELATE, RALLY, UM, UH, REQUESTS FROM ALL THE, UH, SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS IS TO THE, THE LINK THAT I SENT WITH THOSE FILES IN IT.
LET'S GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE.
UM, I HAVE DRAWN SOME LINES FOR THE BUDGET, UM, BASED ON THE MINIMUM BUDGET.
JUST TO CLARIFY, BASED ON THE 400, I DID NOT DRAW THE LINES BASED ON HIGHER BUDGETS.
UM, HIGHER BUDGETS MEANS GETTING MORE, MORE, UM, MORE PROJECTS DONE.
BUT I JUST DRAW THE LINE BASED ON THE MINIMUM FOR ALLEYS, FOR LOCAL STREETS, AND, YOU KNOW, PER DISTRICT.
AND ALL OF THOSE TABS YOU WILL SEE.
UM, HOWEVER, OUR REQUEST IS BASICALLY, UM, THAT WE GET A RESPONSE BACK FROM EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU WITH USING THOSE LISTS ON YOUR PRIORITIES.
SO USE THOSE LISTS TO TELL US, OKAY, MY, THE TOP LIST, FOR EXAMPLE, DOES NOT HAVE A PRIORITY PROJECT FOR US.
SO THIS IS THE PROJECT THAT WE WANNA ADD TO THE TOP LIST.
AND THIS IS THE PROJECT WE CAN TAKE OFF, BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE TO SWAP PROJECTS ON THE TOP LIST IF WE WANNA ADD SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ON THE TOP LIST RIGHT NOW.
SO WE HAVE TO DECIDE ON THOSE THINGS.
SO USE THOSE LISTS TO MODIFY ON AND SEND BACK YOUR VERSIONS THAT WE CAN LOOK AT AND, AND ACTUALLY CONSIDER FOR YOUR LAST MEETING AS A FINALIST.
I'D LIKE TO ADD SOMETHING TO THAT.
AGAIN, IF YOU'RE GONNA GO CROSS DISTRICT, CALL YOUR NEIGHBOR, CALL YOUR NEIGHBOR ON THIS COMMITTEE AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU DON'T HAVE SOME FIGHT HERE AT THE HORSESHOE ABOUT THE, THE ONE THAT YOU WANNA TAKE OFF AND REPLACE WITH YOUR OWN RIGHT.
CALL YOUR NEIGHBOR AND SEE IF YOU CAN'T MAKE SOME DECISION ON THAT.
IF YOU'RE GONNA, NOW THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE DISTRICT SPECIFIC, RIGHT? AND THERE'S SOME, PERHAPS YOU CAN'T EVEN FIND, UH, I THINK IN SUSAN'S DISTRICT, SHE DOESN'T HAVE VERY MANY AT ALL.
SO PERHAPS SHE JUST GIVES YOU A WISHLIST AND PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF CAN HELP HER, YOU KNOW, TRADE OUT SOME THAT'S IN OUR, IN YOUR DISTRICT OR MAKE SOME SUGGESTIONS.
'CAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS SOME SUGGESTIONS THAT YOU CAN MAKE.
YOU KNOW, STAFF'S GOT, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE GOT A PRETTY GOOD HANDLE ON WHAT'S, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE CITYWIDE OR YES, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS JUST NOW.
ALLY ALSO HAS CROSSOVERS AND THEN STREETS, LOCAL ONES, UM, UH, HAS THAT TOO.
THE ONE THAT HAS CRO CROSSOVERS, SOME OF THEM ARE ON MULT, ON ON DIFFERENT DISTRICTS ON THE TOP AS WELL, BECAUSE THEY HAVE A HIGH SCORING.
SO ON DIFFERENT DISTRICTS, THEY'RE COMING ON THE TOP OF THE LIST ANYWAY.
SO FOR THOSE, UH, THE BUDGET KIND OF SPLIT BETWEEN THE TWO DIS DISTRICTS, UM, THAT'S HOW IT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.
SO, UM, FOR ALLEYS, FOR STREETS, FOR THE LOCAL ONES, LEMME ASK A, JUST A TECHNICAL
[02:20:01]
QUESTION.YEAH, WE JUST STEPPED ON THE BUDGET.
THE LINE WAS JUST BASED ON THE BUDGET PURELY.
WHICH ONE ENDED UP ABOVE AND BELOW THE LINE.
WHICH ONE ENDED UP, UH, BELOW THE LINE WAS STOPPED THERE, BUT, UM, BECAUSE WE HAD TWO DECIMAL POINTS ANYWAY, AND STILL WITH THE TWO DECIMAL POINTS, SOME PROJECTS TIED.
SO, UM, WE JUST WENT SCROLLED DOWN, UM, AND WE STOPPED AT THE LINE OF THE, OF THE BUDGET.
HOWEVER, UM, AS I SAID, I THINK WE WOULD WANT FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS TO GO BACK AND LOOK AND SEE WHICH ONE OF THESE, UM, YOU KNOW, TIDE PROJECTS, FOR EXAMPLE, IS A PRIORITY THAT WE WANNA KEEP ON THE TOP.
I ALSO WANNA CLARIFY ONE EXAMPLE ON THOSE LISTS.
FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE LINES, SOME OF THE LINES I DREW DID NOT CUT EXACTLY TO THE BUDGET, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE STOPPED THERE, IF WE JUMP TO THE NEXT PROJECT, IT'S GONNA BE MUCH MORE THAN THE BUDGET, FOR EXAMPLE.
SO IN THAT CASE, WE WILL SURE HAVE E WE EITHER HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF, UH, OF MONEY LEFT THAT YOU CAN PICK LOWER DOWN, MAYBE TWO, THREE PROJECTS DOWN.
THERE WAS A PROJECT THAT FITS THAT AMOUNT ALMOST OR SOMETHING.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.
JUST SEE HOW YOU WOULD FIT IN THE PROJECTS IN YOUR BUDGET.
JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU PUT THAT LIST, I'M SORRY, BUT WHEN YOU PUT THAT LIST TOGETHER, IS IT GONNA HAVE THE SIDEWALKS, ALLEYS, AND STREETS ALL IN ONE LIST? OR DO WE NEED TO GO TO THREE DIFFERENT TABS AND PUT THE PRIORITIES FOR ALL THREE AND MAKE SURE THAT ALL THREE OF THOSE ADD UP TO THE NUMBER THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR?
THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS BASICALLY TO HAVE IT IN AN, IN AN EXCEL SHEET USING THE DATA WE HAVE, BECAUSE WE HAVE PROJECT NUMBERS, WE HAVE SEGMENT NUMBERS THAT IS, IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO FIND THOSE PROJECTS OUT OUT.
WE HAVE RECEIVED SOME OF DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, LISTS FOR PRIORITIES.
HOWEVER, THEY WERE IN AN EMAIL, SOME OF THEM DIDN'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, AN ACCURATE ADDRESS.
SOME OF THEM HAVE PROJECT NUMBER, SO WE WOULD PREFER TO USE THOSE LISTS THEMSELVES, COPY, PASTE, AND, AND ADD TO THEM AS NEEDED.
AND THEN, UM, IN A SPREADSHEET AND AN EXCEL SHEET, GIVE US A DROP DEAD DATE ON WHEN YOU WANT THOSE.
UH, FOR THE PER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
WHAT ABOUT, WELL, WE'RE GONNA, IF WE GET IT, IF WE'VE GOT IT NOW, WE'VE GOT THE DATA NOW.
IS IT FAIR TO SAY BY END OF, UH, THIS WEEK? OKAY, IS THAT FAIR? WELL, HOW ABOUT BY SUNDAY? DOES THAT WORK, PATTY? SUNDAY, BY SUNDAY? SURE.
THAT'S WHAT, YEAH, WE ALREADY SENT THAT LIST.
HEY, SUSAN, SUSAN, SUSAN, SUSAN.
OKAY, I'M GONNA GET RUDIMENTARY HERE.
THE LIST THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THAT THE EMAIL THAT YOU JUST SENT THAT HAS ALL THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS ON IT WITH MULTIPLE TABS, AND ON THAT LIST YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S A CUT LINE FOR WHERE THE MONEY RUNS OUT? NOT ON THE CITYWIDE ONES.
UM, ON THE CITYWIDE ONES, WHAT I HAVE PROVIDED IS BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE PRESENTED HERE, THIS PROPOSED SCENARIO THAT CAME IN TODAY, UM, IS THE SEPARATE, UM, SHEET THAT YOU HAVE HERE.
THAT SHEET THAT IS PART OF THE LINK TOO.
BUT THAT'S FOR THIS, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR CITYWIDE, BUT FOR THE OTHER SHEET THAT SAYS STREETS, THAT HAS ALL THE STREETS, BASED ON THE ORIGINAL SCENARIO WE HAD, OKAY, I UNDERSTAND STREETS MM-HMM.
[02:25:01]
OF US ARE GONNA HAVE TO GO BACK TO OUR COUNCIL MEMBER AND THEY'RE GONNA SAY, WELL, BESIDES STREETS AND ALLEYS, WHAT PROJECTS ARE WE GETTING FUNDED IN MY DISTRICT? RIGHT.I THINK THAT'S, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, UH, REVISITING THE LOCATION WITHIN THE CITYWIDE TO MEET THE 50% AND WE HAVE TO SEND IT BACK AGAIN.
THAT BEFORE WE CAN DRAW THE LINE, YOU KNOW? WELL, YOU JUST SENT US NO, NO, JUST SORRY.
FOR THE CITYWIDE, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND, CITYWIDE, WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS 57%, RIGHT? THE, THE LIST OF THE PROJECT, WE'RE GONNA REVISE THE SAME FORMATS, UH, SPREADSHEET WITH THE 50%.
SO THE, THE ONE YOU JUST SENT US THIS EVENING, YOU'RE GONNA REVISE THAT YET AGAIN? YES.
ONLY FOR CITYWIDE THE LIST OF EVERYTHING ELSE YOU SHOULD HAVE IT ALLEYS, UM, THE DISTRICT WISE PROJECTS, EVERYTHING IS GOOD.
SO ON THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS, I MEAN, BASED ON WHAT I JUST SAW, I DIDN'T, YOU HAVE NUMBERS OUT TO THE SIDE AS TO WHAT NUMBERS, WHAT DOLLARS ARE ACTUALLY GONNA BE APPLIED AT A CERTAIN LEVEL, AND YOU'RE GONNA REVISE THAT.
BUT JUST AT THIS FIRST PASS, I DIDN'T SEE ANY PROJECTS IN DISTRICT 10 FOR JUST A COUPLE OF CATEGORIES THAT I WAS ABLE TO GO THROUGH.
SO IN THE CASE THAT WE ALL GET THROUGH THIS AND HALF THE BOND MONEY GOES TO CITYWIDE, AND YOU GET NO PROJECTS, YOU HAVE TO GO BACK AND TELL YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER THAT YOU HAVE NO MONEY COMING IN FOR CITYWIDE PROJECTS BECAUSE THERE'S VERY LITTLE MONEY AND IT, AND THE BIGGER PROJECTS ARE TAKING IT OFF.
UH, YEAH, THEY'RE GONNA WANNA KNOW WHICH ONES WE REALLY, REALLY, REALLY HAVE TO DO BECAUSE THEY ARE PARTNERSHIP FUNDED.
I MEAN, THAT KIND OF REALLY RAISES THEM TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL PRIORITY.
AND THEN, THEN BEYOND THAT, I THINK THEY'RE GONNA DUKE IT OUT AROUND THE HORSESHOE
SO LINDA, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA PRESENT IN TERMS OF A LIST? WELL, THE STAFF HAS GOTTA GIVE ME YOUR LIST AND I'M JUST GONNA PRESENT IT.
I, YOU KNOW, I, THAT'S WHAT, SO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DO THAT? IF WE RIGHT.
IT'S REALLY UP TO THEM BECAUSE I'VE GIVEN YOU MY PRIORITIES.
I, I DON'T KNOW, I, I HAVEN'T CHECKED TO SEE IF YOU, THOSE HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THIS LIST YET, BUT YOU GOT THAT IN AN EMAIL.
SO YES, IT'S IN, IT'S ON THE LIST.
UM, THE SPREADSHEET SHOWS YOU BASED OFF OF SCORING CRITERIA AND THEN WHAT'S RECOMMENDED, UM, JUST AGAIN, BASED OFF OF THE SCORING CRITERIA THAT WE PRESENTED AT MULTIPLE MEETINGS AND TRY TO GET FEEDBACK ON, AND THEN AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS IN TERMS OF COMPLETE STREETS PROJECTS, BASED OFF ON THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING RIGHT NOW, WE CAN FUND ABOUT THREE PROJECTS.
SO YOU SHOULDN'T EXPECT A PROJECT IN EVERY DISTRICT.
BASED OFF OF THE CURRENT RUNNING AMOUNT.
BASED ON THE TRANSPORTATION PORTION OF IT.
AND, AND LIKE VI JUST TAKE VISION ZERO, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET STREETLIGHTS IN THE NEWER PART OF TOWN BECAUSE THOSE HAVE OBVIOUSLY ALREADY BEEN DONE, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE LAST 20 YEARS OR SO.
SO, I MEAN, TO YOUR POINT, I THINK SUSAN, IT'S DIFFERENT IN EVERY SINGLE SCENARIO.
AND THAT'S HOW COME WE HAVE SUCH AN ISSUE.
AND REMEMBER WHEN I ADDED UP ALL THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES AND STREETS, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WERE BACK TO THE BACK, YOU KNOW, LAST WEEK, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 12 OR 15 DIFFERENT CATEGORIES, AND THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT SO DIFFICULT.
UH, WE'RE REALLY, REALLY, YOU KNOW, DOWN TO THE GRANULAR LE LEVEL HERE.
WELL, I KNOW, AND, AND JUST, I, I DON'T THINK THE TASK FORCE REALLY, THEY, THEY WANT A NUMBER FROM US.
THEY WANT BROAD CATEGORIES FROM US.
THEY MAY HAVE A PET PROJECT OR TWO, BUT TO THINK THAT THEY'RE GONNA DO THE GRANULAR LEVEL FOR EVERY SINGLE BOND PROPOSITION, IT WOULD BE JUST TOO OVERWHELMING.
BUT IN THE END, THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAS TO GO BACK TO THEIR DISTRICT AND TELL THE VOTERS WHAT THEY'RE GONNA GET OUT OF THE BOND SO THAT THE VOTERS WILL VOTE YES.
ON THE COUNCIL LEVEL, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE TASK FORCE.
WELL, MY COUNCIL MEMBER'S ASKING ME ARE WE ABOVE THE LINE? ARE, IS ANY, ARE ANY OF OUR PROJECTS ABOVE THE LINE? AND I HAVE TO TELL HER NO, WE'RE SECOND FROM THE BOTTOM IN TERMS OF NEEDS ON STREETS.
SO WE'RE GONNA GET A FEW STREETS, BUT NOT MANY.
WE'RE GONNA GET A FEW MORE ALLEYS THAN THAT BECAUSE OUR NEEDS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER AND WE HAVE NOTHING OUT OF THE CITYWIDE PROJECTS, NEW SIGNALS.
A COUPLE SIGNALS IN ONE SIDEWALK, THE SIGNAL FIVE, 700,000 EACH, THREE 500 EACH.
[02:30:01]
IS SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT BECAUSE THEBUT ANYWAY, IT IS JUST SOMETHING, IT'S JUST A CONCERN I HAVE THAT, YOU KNOW, ANYWAY, BACK
AND THE WORK, WE, THE WORK WE DID ON STREETS AND ALLEYS I THOUGHT WAS GREAT.
AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH SENDING MY MONEY TO OTHER PARTS OF THE DISTRICT FOR THAT.
BUT YOU HAVE A, YOU HAVE A OUT OF 585 MILLION, I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, CAN YOU WORK WITH STAFF FOR THE NEXT DAY OR TWO TO DISCUSS WHICH OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT YOU WANT MOVED ABOVE THE LINE AND SEE IF THEY'VE GOT ANY IDEAS? OKAY.
WHAT SHE WANTS IS, AND WHAT SHE'S BEEN TRYING TO TELL YOU, AND MAURA TOO, IS THAT HER DISTRICT HAS GOT SO MANY APARTMENTS IN IT THAT THEIR STREETS ARE NOT AS BAD.
THEIR LOCAL STREETS, WHAT THEY NEED ARE, ARE DIFFERENT.
THEIR, THEIR, THEIR NEEDS ARE DIFFERENT THAN EVERYBODY ELSE'S DISTRICT.
AND UNLESS YOU'VE BEEN OVER THERE TO SEE THAT, YOU KIND OF, IT ALMOST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
BUT WHEN YOU'VE GOT LIKE 50% OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN YOUR DISTRICT IN AN APARTMENT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT REALLY MAKES A DIFFERENCE IF YOU HAVE COMPLETE STREETS AND SIDEWALKS AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
SO, UM, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND SO, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS THE STAFF HAS AN IDEA, SO JUST WORK WITH THE STAFF ON THAT.
BECAUSE IT JUST REALLY HAPPENS IN ONLY TWO DISTRICTS, REALLY, QUITE FRANKLY.
IT'S NOT JUST, I'M JUST SAYING YOU'VE GOT THESE SPECIFIC IN INTERESTING.
UM, YEAH, YOU NEED CHALLENGES.
SO I RECOMMEND THAT YOU HAVE THAT LIST THAT WE HAVE PROVIDED.
FIND THE, THE STREET THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR ON THE LIST, WHATEVER IT'S RANKING, PROBABLY RANKING IN THE BOTTOM MAYBE.
OR, OR I THINK C CATHERINE UH, MENTIONED THAT IT IS ON THE NEEDS INVENTORY, WHATEVER WE HAVE RECEIVED, UM, AS A PRIORITY LIST.
KATHY KNOWS WHAT IT'S WAS ADDED.
SO WHATEVER WE HAVE RECEIVED AS A, AS, UM, A PRIORITY LIST, IT HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE NEEDS INVENTORY AND IT IS, SHOULD BE AVAILABLE ON THE LIST THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED.
HOWEVER, IT MIGHT NOT BE ON THE TOP OF THE LIST, UH, PER SCORING.
SO WHAT WE WANT IS, AGAIN, USE THOSE LISTS TO SAY, I MEAN, MY PROJECT THAT I WANT TO BE ABOVE THE LINE SCORED THIS, THIS, THIS MUCH AND THIS IS WHERE IT IS, BUT I WANTED TO PUSH IT TO THE TOP OF THE LINE AND THEN THAT'S WHAT WE WANNA, WHAT WE WANNA SEE.
AND THEN LET 'EM, THEN LET 'EM LOOK AT IT AND YEAH.
AND, AND MAKE SOME DECISIONS ON IT.
AND ALSO WHAT IF YOU THINK SOMETHING SHOULD BE ADDED, WHAT SHOULD BE CUT, RIGHT.
IF YOU CAN DO THAT, IT'S MORE HELPFUL IF YOU CAN MAKE A CUT.
ANYTHING ELSE? ARE WE CLEAR ON OUR MARCHING ORDERS? OKAY.
DENNIS DAPH MORE COMMENTS BEFORE WE LEAVE? NO COMMENTS FOR ME PERSONALLY.
I REALLY APPRECIATE Y'ALL HARD WORK ON THIS ONE.
IT'S BEEN A JOURNEY WITH Y'ALL.
I THINK PORSCHE HAS ONE QUESTION.
PORSCHE, I HAVE ON THE 22ND, OUR MEETINGS IS FROM SIX TO SEVEN 30.
AND THEN I'VE GOTTA LEAVE AND GO TO THE TASK FORCE AT SEVEN 30.
THAT THE MEETING ON THE 22ND STARTS AT THE, ON THE SIXTH, I MEAN, STARTS AT SIX.
THAT'S HOW, OKAY, ONE MORE TIME.
I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA TELL YOU WHAT THIS IS ON THE 22ND.
OUR MEETING STARTS AT SIX AND ENDS AT SEVEN 30.
OKAY, WELL, WELL, I'VE GOTTA LEAVE AT, I'VE GOT, I'VE GOTTA LEAVE AT SEVEN 30 'CAUSE I'VE GOTTA PRESENT OUR, OUR FINDINGS TO THE TASK FORCE.
THERE IS NO MEETING ON THE 29TH.
THAT'S FOR THE CHAIRS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES AND THE TASK FORCE.
SO THE NEXT MEETING IS OUR LAST MEETING.
I, I, I ALSO PROPOSE THAT IF OUR MEETING IS TWICE AS LONG AS NORMAL, THAT UH, WE GET SOME DESSERT NEXT TIME,
THE, THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED.