[00:00:01]
>> YOU'RE WATCHING THE MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL.
DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM CAROLYN KING ARNOLD.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, CHAD WEST, JESSE MORENO, ZARIN D. GRACEY, JAIME RESENDEZ, OMAR NARVAEZ, ADAM BAZALDUA, PAULA BLACKMON, KATHY STEWART, JAYNIE SCHULTZ, CARA MENDELSOHN, GAY DONNELL WILLIS, PAUL RIDLEY, AND CITY MANAGER T.C.
BROADNAX, CITY SECRETARY BILLIERAE JOHNSON, AND INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY TAMMY PALOMINO.
>> WE HAVE A QUORUM. GOOD MORNING.
TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2023.
[Call to Order]
THE TIME IS 09:33 AM.I CALL THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER.
THIS MORNING OUR INDICATES SPEAKER IS THE ILLUSTRIOUS RABBI ANDREW PALEY, WHO WORKS WITH THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT.
SO RABBI PALEY, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO YOU FOR INVOCATION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE THIS MORNING.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, DEAR FRIENDS, WHO ONLY WANT A BLESSING GOD OF MANY NAMES.
WE INVOKE YOUR SPIRIT THIS MORNING, ASKING FOR YOUR STRENGTH, YOUR WISDOM, AND YOUR GUIDANCE ON OUR CITY LEADERS, THEIR STAFF AND ALL WHO WORK WITH THEM, WITH THE HOPE THAT THEY WILL THIS DAY CLARIFY THE PARADOX OF OUR TIME, AND TO SEE CLEARLY THE PATH OF WHOLENESS AND HOLINESS AND SINGULAR BEAUTY THAT IS GOD'S WORLD.
THE PARADOX OF OUR TIME IN HISTORY IS THAT WE SEEM TO HAVE TALLER BUILDINGS, BUT SHORTER TEMPERS, WIDER FREEWAYS, BUT NARROWER VIEWPOINTS.
WE BUY MORE, BUT ENJOY IT LESS.
WE HAVE BIGGER HOUSES BUT SMALLER FAMILIES.
MORE CONVENIENCES, BUT LESS TIME.
WE HAVE MORE DEGREES BUT LESS SENSE, MORE KNOWLEDGE BUT LESS JUDGMENT, MORE EXPERTS, BUT MORE PROBLEMS, MORE MEDICINE, BUT LESS WELLNESS.
WE'VE MULTIPLIED OUR POSSESSIONS, BUT WE HAVE REDUCED OUR VALUES.
WE TALK TOO MUCH, LOVE TOO SELDOM, AND HATE TOO OFTEN.
WE'VE LEARNED HOW TO MAKE A LIVING BUT NOT A LIFE.
WE'VE ADDED MORE YEARS TO LIFE, BUT NOT LIFE TO YEARS.
WE'VE BEEN TO THE MOON AND BACK, BUT HAVE TROUBLE CROSSING THE STREET TO MEET THE NEW NEIGHBOR.
WE'VE CONQUERED OUTER SPACE, BUT NOT INNER SPACE.
WE'VE CLEANED UP THE AIR BUT POLLUTED OUR SOULS.
WE'VE SPLIT THE ATOM, BUT NOT OUR PREJUDICE.
WE ARE LIVING IN A TIME OF TALL PEOPLE WHO ARE SHORT ON CHARACTER, STEEP PROFITS AND SHALLOW RELATIONSHIPS.
A TIME WHEN TECHNOLOGY CAN BRING GREETINGS IN A MOMENT, AND A TIME WHEN A MOMENT CAN EASILY BE DELETED.
SO WE COME HERE TODAY, GOD OF MANY NAMES, HOLY ONE OF BLESSING, TO ASK YOUR HELP AND YOUR GUIDANCE TO DESCEND ON OUR BRAVE CITY LEADERS.
TO HELP ALL OF US ALONG WITH THEM TO UNTANGLE THESE PARADOXES AND TO BE ABLE TO COME INTO YOUR PRESENCE AND SEE THE MAJESTY OF YOUR WORLD IN A SIMPLE, BEAUTIFUL, AND UTTERLY PERFECT PATH TOWARDS THE WHOLENESS WE SEEK.
WE ASK THIS IN YOUR HOLY NAME, AMEN.
>> THANK YOU. PLEASE RISE NOW FOR OUR PLEDGES OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG FIRST, AND THEN TO THE TEXAS FLAG.
MADAM SECRETARY, I THINK WE'RE ON TO
[Special Presentations]
A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MORNING BEFORE WE GO INTO OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS.SO FIRST, I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE OUR DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR A RECOMMENDATION.
THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, OF COURSE, FOR BEING HERE TODAY TO TAKE CARE OF CITY BUSINESS,
[00:05:02]
AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE WITH US IN THE AUDIENCE.OUR ANNOUNCEMENT TODAY CENTERS AROUND A VERY SENSITIVE TOPIC.
THAT TOPIC BEING MENTAL HEALTH.
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ACROSS THIS COUNTRY DAY-TO-DAY FACE A DECISION, OR THEY'RE IMPACTED BY DECISION THAT CHANGES THEIR LIFE ON THE SPIN OF A DIME.
IT COULD VERY WELL BE A LOSS OF A LOVED ONE, IT COULD BE DRUG-RELATED, IT COULD BE SUICIDE, IT COULD BE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
IT COULD BE THAT TODAY I WALKED TO MY BUSINESS AND REALIZED TODAY IS THE LAST DAY.
BECAUSE AFTER COVID MANY DOORS CLOSED ON BUSINESSES THAT ALSO IMPACTED THE BOTTOM LINE OF AN INCOME GOING TO A FAMILY.
AS WE CONTINUE TO NAVIGATE THROUGH THIS SEASON, IT HAS BECOME IMPORTANT FOR US TO REALIZE THAT AS WE LOSE, AS WE CONTINUE TO LOSE FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS DAY-TO-DAY, WE MUST HAVE RESOLUTION.
WE ARE MOVING TOWARD A PERIOD IN TIME WHERE WE MUST SIMPLY SAY, IT'S OKAY TO TALK ABOUT IT.
SOMETIMES WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S WRONG.
WE HAVE A HEADACHE, WE ARE DEPRESSED, WE DON'T WANT TO TALK, AND WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.
BUT IT IS ABOUT OUR MENTAL HEALTH AND OUR STATE OF BEING.
WE HAVE JOINED HANDS WITH AN INDIVIDUAL WHO'S MADE A COMMITMENT TO SHARE A STORY THAT HE'S FAMILIAR WITH.
AND HE'S MADE A DECISION TO DO IT IN A FORM WHERE WE CAN COME TOGETHER AND TALK ABOUT IT, SEE IT, RELATE TO IT.
BUT UNDERSTAND NOW IS THE TIME WE CAN NO LONGER TURN A DEAF EAR OR CLOSE OUR EYES TO A SITUATION THAT AFFECTS US ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS.
SO AS WE BRING UP MR. GREG ELLIS MAYER, HE'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE NEXT STEPS HE'S GOING TO TAKE.
BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH HE'S MOVING TOWARD THE RECOGNITION OF MAY, WHICH WE UNDERSCORE MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS, THERE'S STILL A LONG WAY TO GET TO MAY.
I THINK AS WE SIT AROUND THE HORSE SHOE, AND MANY OF US AROUND HERE, I WOULD BE WILLING TO BET, AND THOSE OF YOU IN THE AUDIENCE, YOU HAVE ONE PERSON IN YOUR FAMILY THAT YOU KNOW FOR SURE HAS SOME MENTAL ILLNESS ISSUES.
WE CHOOSE OFTEN WE MAY HAVE MORE THAN ONE, BUT WHAT DO WE SAY? SOMETIMES WE SIMPLY SAY, THAT'S MY CRAZY UNCLE.
WE JUST LET HIM DO WHAT HE DO.
WE MUST IN ORDER FOR US TO GROW TOGETHER, THIS COMMUNITY, THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND THIS NATION, I THINK IT'S NOW TIME TO SAY IT'S OKAY TO TALK ABOUT IT.
SPEAK TO SOMEONE AND LET THEM KNOW.
I'M HAVING A HARD TIME, AND IT JUST MIGHT BE THAT YOU MAY BE THE PERSON THAT CAN HELP LEAD ME TO RESOURCES TO HELP.
I KNOW YOU'RE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION NOW.
YOU'RE NOT ON THE FIELD, BUT YOU DO KNOW FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE ON BEING ON THE FIELD WITH THE DALLAS COWBOYS, YOU HAD A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHO BECAUSE OF THE GAME ITSELF HAVE SUFFERED FROM SOME OF THESE CHALLENGES.
WE WELCOME YOU TODAY, AND YOU CAN TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR PROGRAM AND HOW YOU NEED US TO HELP YOU TO GET TO THAT MARK AND REACH YOUR GOAL.
>> THANK YOU, MS. CAROLYN ARNOLD.
THANK YOU A BUNCH. THANK EVERYBODY FOR ALL YOU DO FOR THE CITY.
WHICH IS WHY I'M HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT AN IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT'S GOING ON.
NOT JUST IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, BUT NATIONWIDE.
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, WORLDWIDE.
AS PRO TEM CAROLYN ARNOLD JUST SAID, IT HAS ESCALATED EVEN MORE BECAUSE OF COVID.
WHAT I DO, I WRITE STORIES, I CREATE STORIES, I DO PLAYS, I DO MOVIES.
SOME OF YOU FAMILIAR WITH, I CAUGHT A HIGH MOVIE THAT WE DID ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO.
THAT'S WHAT I CONTRIBUTE TO IT.
MENTAL HEALTH IS DESTROYING FAMILIES EVERY SINGLE DAY, EVERY SINGLE MOMENT.
A NEW PERSON IS DISCOVERING A NEW FAMILY IS BEING DESTROYED BECAUSE OF MENTAL WELLNESS ISSUES, IF YOU WOULD.
ONE OF THESE SOLUTIONS, NOT THE ONLY SOLUTION OF COURSE, IT TAKES A WHOLE COMMUNITY TO SOLVE AND HELP THIS PROBLEM IF YOU ASKED ME, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, WHAT I CAN DO IS TO HELP EDUCATE AND ENLIGHTEN PEOPLE ABOUT MENTAL WELLNESS ISSUES.
I DO THAT THROUGH STORYTELLING.
THE MOVIE IS ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH.
IT SHOWS A FAMILY THAT WE WILL CALL THE PERFECT AMERICAN FAMILY, AND THEIR LIFE IS TURNED UPSIDE DOWN BECAUSE OF MENTAL HEALTH CHALLENGES.
[00:10:02]
BUT THE KEY WORD IS UNTREATED MENTAL HEALTH CHALLENGES.WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GET THE NECESSARY HELP THAT THEY NEED THAT WOULD HELP THEM WITH ANY TYPE OF MENTAL ISSUES THAT THEY MAY BE DEALING WITH.
SOMETIME IT'S TABOO, BUT PEOPLE NEED TO TAKE THE TIME TO GET THE NECESSARY HELP.
WE'RE HAVING A SCREENING ON SEPTEMBER THE 12TH.
THAT'S THURSDAY. EVERYBODY I THINK HAS THE PAPER.
I WANT TO INVITE EVERYBODY OUT TO COME TO THE SCREENER.
IT'S NO CHARGED. LEAVING, COVERING THE POPCORN.
THE GOAL IS DURING MENTAL HEALTH MONTH, WHICH IS MAY.
I WOULD LOVE TO SHOW IT IN EACH OF YOUR DISTRICTS, THIS PARTICULAR MOVIE.
THAT'S WHAT THE GOAL IS HERE TO, AGAIN, BRING MORE AWARENESS TO MENTAL HEALTH, IF YOU WOULD. THAT'S IT.
I JUST WANT TO INVITE YOU GUYS TO COME OUT AND ENJOY A MOVIE.
HOPEFULLY YOU ENJOY IT, BUT LEARN SOMETHING AND SEE VALUE IN IT TO BRING IT BACK TO YOUR RESPECTABLE DISTRICTS DURING THE MONTH OF MAY, WHICH HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS MENTAL HEALTH MONTH.
>> THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH, MR. ALLISON.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR GIVING YOUR UNDIVIDED ATTENTION, AND MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR GIVING US SUPPORT THIS MORNING FOR THIS ANNOUNCEMENT.
>> OF COURSE. MR. ELLIS, I WANT TO SAY PERSONALLY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO THIS COMMUNITY.
YOUR TAR HEEL, ARCHIE, AND WHEN YOU GOT HERE FROM NORTH CAROLINA, YOU MADE A BIG IMPACT ON THE FIELD.
FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE BIG FOOTBALL FANS, WE REMEMBER ALL THE GREAT DEFENSIVE IN PLAY, BUT I ACTUALLY REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'VE DONE SINCE YOU HUNG UP YOUR CLEATS AND WHAT YOU'VE BEEN DOING IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND YOUR CONSISTENCY AND YOUR COMMITMENT TO DALLAS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE THROUGHOUT YOUR LONG AND ILLUSTRIOUS CAREER.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. AT THIS TIME, I RECOGNIZE THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO KNOW ATKINS FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT.
>> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. IT'S GREAT TO BE HERE THIS MORNING.
WE LOOK AROUND THE CITY FOR MANY YEARS.
WE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND HOW DO PEOPLE CONTRIBUTE TO PUBLIC SAFETY? TODAY, I'M PROUD TO SAY THAT WE DO HAVE TWO INDIVIDUAL WHO STILL WORK FOR THE STATE OF DALLAS WITH DPD WHO SERVE OVER 53 YEARS.
WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WE GOT FIVE OF THEM WHO RETIRED, WHO ALSO WORKED FOR DPD, WHO IS DO SERVICE FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
IF THEY DO THAT, WE THINK ABOUT THESE MEN AND WOMEN HAD DEDICATED AT LEAST 50 YEARS TO THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT.
SOME WHO SERVED FOR FREE IN THE DALLAS RESERVE DIVISION.
THE DALLAS POLICE REPORT RESERVE THE CURRENT MAKEUP OF APPROXIMATELY 110 RESERVE OFFICER WHO ARE VOLUNTEER WHO SERVED AS SWORN LICENSED PEACE OFFICER FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THEY HAVE THE SAME AUTHORITY AS CERTAIN ALONG WITH THEIR FULL-TIME PAY COUNTERPART IN OUR DEPARTMENT.
IN ADDITION TO ROUTINE ASSIGNMENT, THEY ARE ABLE TO ASSESS DOING SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT.
REMEMBER THE BOLTON JOHN INCIDENT? WE HAVE THE RAZA, WE HAVE THE EXPERIENCED POLICE OFFICER AND WE HEAR YESTERDAY WE TALKED ABOUT BUILDING PERMIT.
WE SAID, IF YOU HAD TO HIRE SOMEONE, WHO WOULD YOU HIRE? THEY SAID MORE ENGINEERS.
WE SAID, WHY WOULD YOU HIRE MORE ENGINEERS? HE SAID, WE DO HAVE A PROBLEM BECAUSE INDEED IT'S LACK OF EXPERIENCE.
THIS WHAT WE HAVE WITH THE POLICE, BUT SOMETIMES WE NEED EXPERIENCE TO MAKE SURE WE DO HAVE THE RIGHT SAFETY NET AROUND THE CITY.
BUT THE POINT IS THAT THESE OFFICERS WHO ARE RECOGNIZED THIS MORNING STILL WORK FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS EVERY DAY.
THEY WILL PUT THEIR LIFE ON THE LINE FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS EVERY DAY.
SOMEONE SERVED 40 HOURS A MONTH, SOME MAY SERVE 10 OR 15 HOURS PER MONTH WITHOUT PAY.
THEY STILL PAY FOR A UNIFORM, THEIR BOOTS, THEIR GAS, THE MISCELLANEOUS STUFF THAT THEY DO NOT AS TAXPAYERS TO PAY THEM MONEY.
AS I LOOK AT THESE FIVE OR SIX OFFICERS, THAT EVEN LOOKING AT THE MAN HOURS, THEY PROBABLY SAY A POLICE REPORT A PROBLEM CLOSER TO MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR, A MILLION A YEAR SAVING BECAUSE THEY DO A VOLUNTARY.
THESE OFFICERS HERE TODAY ON THE FRONT ROW, THERE ARE TWO ON THE STILL WHO WORK FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND FIVE ARE IN RESERVE.
BUT WHAT I WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT, AND WE THINK ABOUT OUR BUDGET, WE THINK ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE CITY, WHY WOULD THESE OFFICER STAY FOR 50 YEARS FOR FREE AND DO SERVICE? WHAT GIVEN THEM THE CARIES, WHAT GIVEN THEM THE STANDARDS TO BE HERE FOR 50 YEARS WITHOUT PAY?
[00:15:05]
THAT TELL THEM SOMETHING, TELL THE CITY, THEY ARE PROUD OF THE CITY, ARE PROUD OF WHAT THEY DO, AND THEY WANT HELP TO MAKE SURE WE GOT TO SAVE THE CITY IN AMERICA.AS VSB TURNED HIM THIS MORNING, THEY SAY, WILL THEY HAVE TO DO IT ALL OVER AGAIN? YES, THEY WILL. BUT DO 50 YEARS, THAT'S A LONG TIME, THAT'S A LIFETIME.
THAT'S WHY THEY SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED.
THEY SHOULD'VE BEEN RECOGNIZED MANY, MANY YEARS AGO.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE HAVE NOT RECOGNIZED THESE OFFICER WHO HAVE SERVED THAT 50 YEARS, SOME THE 54 YEARS.
WE ARE IN A CITY, THAT SAY PUBLIC SAFETY IS NUMBER 1.
WE SAY WE WANT TO HAVE THE SAFEST CITY IN AMERICA.
I REMEMBER THAT WE WERE TRYING TO GET OFF THE THIRD WORST CITY IN HOMICIDES AND CRIME [INAUDIBLE] THAT BLACK.
BUT THESE OFFICER HAD BEEN HERE LET'S SAY 1953 TILL 1981, BUT 1953, THEY'VE BEEN HERE AND USE IT AS IMAGINE 1953, THEY DIDN'T HAD TO SERVE THE CITY AND PEOPLE SAY, WHO ARE THESE OFFICER? THEY NEVER HAD ASKED FOR ANY KIND OF RECOGNITION, THEY HAD NEVER CAME TO THIS COUNCIL AS ONE DIME.
THEY HAD NEVER ASKED FOR ANYTHING, ALL DAY THEY ASKED TO DO IS CAN WE SERVE OUR CITY? I THINK THIS A TIME THEY SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED AND THAT'S WHY WE TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE THEM TODAY, MAYOR.
I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THE FOREIGN SWORN OFFICER, CAPTAIN WILLIAM MCCLAIN.
WILL YOU STAND, PLEASE? HE'D BEEN FOR 54 YEARS.
>> HE'S STILL WORKING, HE'S STILL ON THE PAYROLL.
>> I CAN JUST START WALKING DOWN.
AS SOON AS YOU ARE RECOGNIZED JUST GO AHEAD AND HAVE YOU COME STAND SO EVERYONE CAN SEE YOU BECAUSE WE'RE SO HONORED TO HAVE YOU HERE THIS MORNING.
IT'S ONE AT A TIME, JUST COME ON DOWN AND STAND RIGHT HERE INFRONT AND THEN WE'LL TAKE A PHOTOGRAPH WITH ALL OF YOU.
>> WE ALSO HAVE SENIOR CORPORATE FERNANDO MASIMBA.
I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THE FEDERAL RESERVE VOLUNTEER OFFICER.
THESE INDIVIDUAL CAME BACK, HAVE RETURNED TO SERVE FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
THEY HAVE A NICKNAME, DETECTOR RON PAID THIS.
>> RAISE YOUR HAND RON [INAUDIBLE]. SENIOR CORPORATE STEPHEN LEDBELLA, 53 YEARS.
LUCIANA AMAZON, 53 YEARS [APPLAUSE]
DETECTOR JERRY ROMAN, 50-YEAR [APPLAUSE]
>> COMMUNICATION IN MIND, USED TO BE NEIGHBORS, SENIOR CORPORATE [INAUDIBLE] BUSBY HAD BEEN WITH 50 YEARS SWAT TEAM.
>> I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE MARYLAND AND COLLEAGUES, JUST GIVE THEM A ROUND OF APPLAUSE BECAUSE THEY'VE WORKED OVER 50 YEARS, THAT'S A LONG TIME.
>> EVERYONE, COM E ON DOWN FRONT.
GENTLEMEN, WILL YOU GUYS GO AHEAD AND COME ON DOWN RIGHT NOW AND STAND IN FRONT HERE? THANK YOU [BACKGROUND]
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO RECOGNIZE IT BEFORE WE WENT ON TO OUR OPEN MICROPHONE,
[00:20:06]
SO YOU STOLE MY THUNDER.>> WHILE EVERYONE IS MAKING THEIR WAY BACK TO THEIR SEATS AND BEFORE WE START OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS, SINCE WE HAVE A LITTLE TIME, I WAS GETTING SITUATED AND SAYING A FEW HELLOS.
I DID WANT TO SAY FIRST, SINCE IT IS IN THE NEWS, CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THE SMU MUSTANGS, ESPECIALLY OUR IN-HOUSE FAVORITE SMU MUSTANGS NEIL ATKINS ON SMU'S ASCENSION TO THE ACC, WHERE THERE'LL BE PLAYING THE CAROLINA.
TAR HEEL IS ON A REGULAR BASIS IN FOOTBALL, BASKETBALL, ALL OF SPORTS SO CONGRATULATIONS TO NEIL AND ALL YOUR FELLOW MUSTANGS ON THAT. THAT'S A BIG DEAL.
WE ALSO HAVE A VERY DISTINGUISHED GUEST HERE TODAY, CONGRESSWOMAN JOHNSON, EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, WHO SERVED THE CITY [APPLAUSE]
>> IN NORTH TEXAS, SO ADMIRABLY IN THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS FOR SEVERAL DECADES, AND ALSO IN AUSTIN AS A STATE LEGISLATOR.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE CONGRESSWOMAN JOHNSON.
WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU, MADAM SECRETARY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GOOD MORNING.
[Open Microphone Speakers]
THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW HEAR ITS FIRST FIVE REGISTER SPEAKERS.I'LL RECITE THE SPEAKER GUIDELINES.
SPEAKERS MUST OBSERVE THE SAME RULES OF PROPRIETY, DECORUM, AND GOOD CONDUCT APPLICABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
ANY SPEAKER MAKING PERSONAL AND PERTINENT, PROFANE OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS, OR WHO BECOMES BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL, WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ROOM FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE IN PERSON, ANY THE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS YOU WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE SESSION.
INDIVIDUALS BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
YOU'RE NOTICED THE TIMER ON THE MONITOR ON THE PODIUM IN FRONT OF YOU.
WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP, PLEASE STOP FOR THOSE IN-PERSON SPEAKERS.
FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, I WILL ANNOUNCE WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.
ALSO SPEAKERS, PLEASE BE MINDFUL THAT DURING YOUR COMMENTS YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REFER TO A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER BY NAME.
ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON ONLY.
YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, MICHAEL SIMMONS SAID IT'S CANCELED.
>> GOOD MORNING, HONORABLE COUNSELORS, HONORABLE MAYOR, JOHNSON, CITY MANAGER, COUNSELOR GRACEY, RB FOSTER, DISTRICT 3.
I WANTED TO JUST RECAP SOME SPENDING CONCERNS FOR FISCAL YEAR '24.
FIRST OF ALL, IT'S STREET LIGHTING.
FISCAL YEAR '23, THE CITY TOOK OVER THE MAINTENANCE OF FREEWAY STREET LIGHTING FROM ENCORE.
I UNDERSTAND WE BUDGETED AT ABOUT THREE MILLION DOLLARS.
>> WE'LL PAUSE YOUR TIME DON'T WORRY WE GET THE REMOTE SPEAKERS MUTED, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
>> STREET LIGHTING FOR FISCAL YEAR '23, WE TOOK OVER MAINTENANCE OF FREEWAY STREET LIGHTING FROM ENCORE.
I UNDERSTAND WE BUDGETED ABOUT THREE MILLION DOLLARS FOR FREEWAY LIGHTING REPAIRS, BUT IT'S JUST NOT ENOUGH.
COUNCIL NEEDS TO ADD ABOUT ANOTHER MILLION DOLLARS TO THE LED CONVERSION TO CONVERT ALL THE STREET LIGHTS TO LED.
FREEWAYS LIKE LUKE 12, I39, 45 STILL NEED TO BE CONVERTED TO LED.
UNDERPASS LIGHTING. WE BUDGETED MONEY FOR FREEWAY UNDERPASS LIGHTING REPAIRS.
HOWEVER, MORE NEEDS TO BE DONE.
75 CENTRAL IS A GOOD EXAMPLE, STILL HAS MANY DARK UNDERPASSES THAT NEEDS TO BE UPGRADED TO LED BUT WOULD REQUIRE EXPENSIVE LANE CLOSURES.
COUNCIL REALLY NEEDS TO ADD MONEY FOR THAT.
THE CITY HAS ABOUT SIX OR SEVEN DIGITAL INFORMATION SIGNS AROUND THE CITY THAT HAVE NEVER WORKED.
WE FINALLY NEED TO BUILD INFRASTRUCTURE TO GET THESE SIGNS OPERATING FOR CITYWIDE EMERGENCIES.
COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO ADD MONEY FOR THAT.
WE HAVE A LOT OF MAJOR FREEWAYS IN THE CITY WHERE YOU DRIVE FROM A LIGHT INTO DARK TO A LIGHTED AREA ON THE FREEWAY I20 IS ONE GOOD EXAMPLE.
I'D LIKE TO SEE THE COUNCIL PASS A RESOLUTION TO DIRECT CITY STAFF TO WORK WITH TEXTS DOT TO INSTALL CONTINUOUS FREEWAY STREET LIGHTING, ALL MAJOR FREEWAYS IN THE CITY.
[00:25:01]
ENTRANCE SIGNAGE.THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS NO SIGNS THAT SAY WELCOME TO THE CITY OF DALLAS WITH TREES AND FLOWERS AND STUFF LIKE YOU'D SEE IN GRAND PRAIRIE OR MCKINNEY.
COUNCIL REALLY NEEDS TO HELP BUDGET FOR THIS.
THE I30 BRIDGE OVER LAKE RAY HUBBARD.
>> TECH STATUS CURRENTLY BUILDING NEW SERVICE ROADS AND WIDENING I30 OVER LAKE RAY HUBBARD, WHICH ITSELF ISN'T EMPOWERMENT OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.
I'M CONCERNED A CITY STAFF IS NOT DIRECTED TEXTS DOT TO TAKE PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT OUR DRINKING WATER.
BY ADDING FENCING, PROHIBITED SIGNAGE, AND MAYBE STREET LIGHTING TO THOSE BRIDGES.
ALL MAJOR FREEWAYS OVER OUR WATER SOURCES REALLY SHOULD BE LIGHTED AND PROTECTED, THE GEORGE BUSH'S, FOR EXAMPLE.
WE REALLY NEED LIGHTING AND CAMERAS, NOT ONLY FOR MOTORISTS SAFETY, BUT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THE STUPIDITY OF UNFAVORABLE ACTORS WHO'D LIKE TO DO SOMETHING UNTHINKABLE TO OUR WATER OUT THERE IN DARK BRIDGES, COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO GIVE STAFF DIRECTION ABOUT THAT.
>> WE NEED TO PROTECT MORE OF OUR RAIL CORRIDORS.
MAYBE CONSIDER EXTENDING THE RED LINE FROM WESTMORELAND ONTO MOUNTAIN VIEW COLLEGE AND THEN MAYOR JOHNSON WE COULD ALSO EXTEND IT OVER TO HENSLEY FIELD FOR THAT PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
THE BLUE LINE COULD BE EXTENDED TO CEDAR VALLEY COLLEGE, HOWEVER, OUR DARK BOARD MEMBERS DON'T SEEM TO BE PROTECTING THESE RAIL RIGHT AWAY.
FINALLY, THE HIGH-FIVE AS DECORATIVE LIGHTS STUFF, LIGHT IT, STARS WHICH LIGHT UP AT NIGHT.
THEY ADD BEAUTY THERE KIND OF AN ART PIECE.
MOST OF THEM ARE OUT AND THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAD TO DIRECT CITY STAFF TO GET THOSE FIXED.
CAN I HAVE MY COMMENTS ADDED FOR THE RECORD.
>> YES, WE WILL DEFINITELY TAKE THEM. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. I SEE YOU'VE STARTED MY TIME VERY QUICKLY.
I'M A PROUD COMMUNITY MEMBER OF QUEEN CITY IN SOUTH DALLAS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SAY WE MUST DO BETTER.
ONE YOUR VOTE, TO LIMIT US TO SPEAK ONLY ONCE A MONTH.
I'M SORRY, WE CANNOT SAY YOUR NAME.
JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF YOU TRULY CARE.
JUSTICE FOR SHANERRA JONES, THE MURDER AND QUEEN CITY DISTRICT 7 SOUTH DALLAS.
A GRAND CITY, MURDERED IN COLD BLOOD, ONE SHOT THROUGH THE NECK.
LONG LIVE LANDY, THAT'S YOLANDA ANDERSON AND ECSTASY WHILE IT WAS HOT, YOU SAID IT'S NOT, WHILE WE WERE PROTESTING AND IT WAS HOT, YOU DIDN'T SHUT THEM DOWN.
I HEAR THAT THEY'RE NOT REALLY MAFIA, EVEN THOUGH THEY PULL THE MACHETE OUT ON ME, TRYING TO SCARE ME.
EVEN THOUGH HE DIDN'T SHUT THEM DOWN.
YOU DIDN'T EVEN GET BOTH CULPRITS.
DALLAS ISD, LET'S DO A BETTER JOB.
YOU MUST STEP IN LIKE THE BIGGER PIECE DOES USA AND PARTNER WITH OTHER COUNTRIES, BUT PLEASE PARTNER WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS AND DALLAS ISD TOGETHER.
YOU ARE BETTER. TRIPLE D. THANK GOD, IT IS BACK IN THE CREATOR'S HANDS.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE CITY WASN'T SMART ENOUGH TO LOOK UP AT THE STAR AND PUT THE STAR IN.
WASHINGTON, THANK YOU FOR THE WIN OF THE GHOST LOGO, PLEASE LEAVE THIS LOGO ALONE.
THIS CREATIVITY THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS DID NOT HAVE.
TRUST ME, THE CULTURE WILL COME FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU KEEP COMING FOR ITS CREATOR, OUR CREATOR. THANK YOU.
I KNOW THEY ALWAYS CALL THE POLICE ON ME TOO NOT EVERYONE.
SOME OF YOU ARE VERY NICE PEOPLE, AND HOPEFULLY THE NORTH CAN WORK WITH THE SOUTH.
I HEAR THAT DART IS USING THE RIDESHARE PARKING LOT TO GET PAID AND THEY'RE GETTING THEIR PERMITS FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS.
YOU GUYS ARE ALLOWING SLUMLORDS TO OPERATE IN THE CITY STREETS, TERRORIZING RESIDENTS, SHOUT OUT TO ROSEMARY AND METAL NAME, NO AC.
BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU TRULY CARE.
SAFETY AWARDS FOR WHAT, LIKE 40 YEARS FOR WHAT IN DART AND YOU'RE NOT EVEN IN THE TOP 10 INNOVATIVE TRANSPORTATION CITIES.
VOTE FOR WATERMARK SOUTH DALLAS. IT'S BEEN SO LONG.
I GOT TO JUST SAY ALL THESE THINGS SINCE I HAVE ANOTHER 30 DAYS TO WAIT, 29.
THANK YOU, ADAM BAZALDUA, AKA BAZ, FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING IN DISTRICT 7.
WE HAVE MORE TO GO AS YOU ALREADY KNOW, PLEASE EVERYONE HERE HELP QUEEN CITY TO BECOME [OVERLAPPING]
>> I HEAR IT'S HISTORICAL OVERLAY SO THAT WE CAN START TO BUILD IN.
[00:30:02]
HAVE THE MALCOLM X FESTIVAL IN DEEP ELLUM.>> AS SOURCES WITH THEM AND DO NOT FEAR.
SILVERIO MARTINEZ IS NOT PRESENT.
WILLIE COLEMAN. WILLIE COLEMAN IS NOT PRESENT.
PAMELA GRAYSON IS NOT PRESENT.
DOUGLAS DEAL SENIOR IS NOT PRESENT.
EMMANUEL GIBSON IS NOT PRESENT.
THIS CONCLUDES YOUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS FOR THIS MEETING, MR. MAYOR.
>> LET'S GET ON WITH OUR AGENDA. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF WORK TO DO.
>> THANK YOU. YOUR FIRST ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM 1,
[1. 23-2196 Approval of Minutes of the August 16, 2023 City Council Meeting]
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 16, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.>> I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. ARE THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THERE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM.
>> AGENDA ITEM 2 IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
[2. 23-2197 Consideration of appointments to boards and commissions and the evaluation and duties of board and commission members (List of nominees is available in the City Secretary's Office)]
THIS MORNING YOU HAVE SEVERAL INDIVIDUAL AND FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS.I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO NOTE THAT THE TERMS FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS DO NOT BEGIN UNTIL OCTOBER 1ST, 2023.
YOUR NOMINEES FOR INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENT.
TO THE ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION.
JONATHAN SAXER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
MR. SAXER MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
TO THE ARTS AND CULTURE ADVISORY COMMISSION, JESSE HORNBUCKLE IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD.
MR. HORNBUCKLE MEETS THE VISUAL ARTS SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
TO THE CITIZEN HOMELESSNESS COMMISSION, GELIA SEALHORN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
MS. SEALHORN MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPECIAL QUALIFICATION AND JAMES HAWK IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD.
MR. HAWK MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
TO THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, CHRISTIAN SHERNOCK IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
MELISSA KINGSTON IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
DEBORAH CARPENTER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ.
TABITHA WHEELER REAGAN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA AND JOANNA HAMPTON IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO.
TO THE COMMISSION ON DISABILITIES.
NANCY AMMERMAN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ.
MS. EMERSON AMMERMAN MEETS THE COMMITTED TO COMMUNITY OF DISABLED PERSONS SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
GAY RAVI IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
MS. RAVI MEETS THE COMMITTED TO COMMUNITY OF DISABLED PERSONS SPECIAL QUALIFICATION ALSO.
TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, NATHANIEL WALKER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND ROSEANNE MILLS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
TO THE COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD, BRANDON FRIEDMAN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
TO THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION, NICHOLAS RODRIGUEZ IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ.
MR. RODRIGUEZ POSSESSES A JURIS DOCTORATE SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
TO THE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION BOARD, ANTHONY PAGE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
TO THE JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMISSION, JOE KERIONE IS BEING NOMINATED BY A COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ.
AND CARL GINSBURG IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
TO THE MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR COMMUNITY CENTER BOARD, JOHN DIMICHELE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ.
AND ANN WILLIAMS IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD.
TO THE MUNICIPAL LIBRARY BOARD, STAN ATEN IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD AND AMY SHAFFNER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
TO THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD, SCOTT GOLDSTEIN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART AND RUDY KARIMI AS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
TO THE SENIOR AFFAIRS COMMISSION, KAREN ROBERTS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
MS. ROBERTS MEETS THE 55 PLUS YEARS OF AGE SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
TO THE SOUTH DALLAS PARE PARK OPPORTUNITY FUND BOARD,
[00:35:03]
THEMONE LEVINE IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD.MR. LEVINE MEETS THE KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE IN BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
TO THE VETERAN AFFAIRS COMMISSION, JUAN PRECIADO IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO.
MR. PRECIADO MEETS TO SERVE IN US MILITARY SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
AND CHARLES AYERS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
MR. AYERS ALSO MEETS THE SERVED IN US MILITARY SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.
TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION, MALACHER HAWTHORN IS BEING NOMINATED BY MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS.
LEROY TAMFU IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON AND TONY OKON IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ.
YOUR NOMINEES FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
NICHOLAS BROOKS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
AND ANDREW BENNY IS BEING NOMINATED ALSO BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
TO THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, PAM GERBER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ.
TO THE CYPRUS WATERS MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT DISTRICT BOARD, BRETT JOHANSSON IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ.
TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 16 BOARD, DAVIS GARDEN.
AUGUSTINE TORRES IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
AND NICHOLAS CARMONA IS ALSO BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 17 BOARD TOD, KYLE WAKE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 18 BOARD, MAPLE MOCKINGBIRD, JARED BURNETT IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO, AND TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 19 BOARD CYPRUS WATERS.
MOROCY, LANCE FLOWERS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ.
THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES, MR. MAYOR.
>> IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE?
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.
>> ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM SECRETARY, FOR THAT.
>> MR. MAYOR, YOU'RE BRIEFING CONTINUOUS.
[D. 23-2201 Park(ing) Day and Status of the Off-Street Parking & Loading Code Amendment]
HOWEVER, AT THIS TIME COUNCIL MEMBER WEST WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED.>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION, SIR.
>> OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY ACTUALLY.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'LL JUST MAKE THE REQUEST THAT ITEM D, THE PARK(ING) DAY BRIEFING, MOVE UP TO THE FRONT BECAUSE IT IS A TIMELINESS ISSUE ON US VOTING ON THIS NEXT WEEK TO RECOGNIZE PARK(ING) FOR SEPTEMBER 15TH.
>> IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO TAKING THAT? I MEAN, I CAN DO IT, BUT I'D RATHER DO WHAT WE ALL WANT TO DO HERE SO WE CAN JUST TAKE THAT ONE OUT OF ORDER, DEAL WITH IT QUICKLY, AND THEN GO BACK TO THE PRINTED ORDER OF THE AGENDA, WHICH I'M FINE WITH IT.
COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THAT?
>> I DO. I ACTUALLY HAVE QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PARKING BRIEFING AND I THINK IT'S A VERY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE FOR OUR CITY.
I KNOW IT'S ONE THAT YOU'RE ADVOCATING FOR.
IT'S NOT ONE THAT I WOULD SUPPORT FOR A UNIVERSAL SOLUTION FOR OUR CITY.
AND I'VE PREPARED SEVERAL PAGES OF QUESTIONS FOR IT AND I WOULD ACTUALLY ADVOCATE FOR THIS ITEM, MAYBE JUST TO RECOGNIZE PARK(ING) DAY, BUT TO HAVE THE FULL BRIEFING, PERHAPS EVEN ANOTHER DAY SINCE WE HAVE SUCH A FULL AGENDA. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY ON THIS? HOW MANY STREAMS, OBJECTION TO THE SIDES FROM COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN, ON TAKING IT OUT OF ORDER? THEN I'M OKAY WITH TAKING IT OUT OF ORDER.
WHAT NUMBER IS THAT OR WHAT LETTER IS IT? D. WE'LL TAKE D FIRST AND THEN WE'LL TAKE EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE NORMAL COURSE.
UNLESS THERE'S ANY MORE CHANGES THAT WE`LL TALK ABOUT LATER.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
PARK(ING) IS ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS THAT IMPACTS DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.
IT AFFECTS THE WAY THE CITY IS BUILT, PERMITTED IN THE APPEARANCE OF NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMERCIAL AREAS.
STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS ON WORKING TOWARD A DRAFT ORDINANCE.
TODAY, PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN WILL PROVIDE A BRIEFING ON THE STATUS OF THAT WORK AND RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM YOU AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS TRANSFORMATIVE CODE AMENDMENT.
AND WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO OUR DIRECTOR RYAN.
>> THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU HONORABLE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, JULIA RYAN, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN.
YOU CAN GO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
SO TODAY WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING A QUICK BRIEFING ABOUT WHERE WE ARE WITH BOTH THE PARK(ING) DAY AND ALSO THE CODE AMENDMENT THAT WAS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY.
AND THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH JUST A FEW THINGS REGARDING THAT AND
[00:40:04]
THEN RECEIVE ANY FEEDBACK THAT YOU ALL HAVE FOR US. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.SO AGAIN, THE PRESENTATION PURPOSE TO GO OVER BRIEFLY, THE PARK(ING) DAY FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO THAT WAS REQUESTED.
AND THEN ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT ABOUT TODAY'S BRIEFING IS WE'RE NOT BRINGING A PROPOSAL.
THIS IS NOT A PROPOSAL FOR ANY ORDINANCE OR RECOMMENDATION THAT IS SPECIFICALLY FOR INFORMATIVE PURPOSES ON THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS RELATED TO PARKING.
NEXT SLIDE. THIS SLIDE GOES OVER THE FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US ON AUGUST 3RD REGARDING RECOGNIZING PARK(ING) DAY AND ALSO TO BEGIN PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS TO REDUCE PARKING IN THE CITY AND PROVIDE BRIEFINGS ON THE STATUS OF THE PARKING CODE AMENDMENT.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW ABOUT PARK(ING) DAY.
IT IS AN ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL EVENT BY WHERE PARKING SPACES ARE TURNED OVER TO PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS, COMPANIES, ADVOCATES TO CREATE PARKWAY.
IT'S BASICALLY SO THERE'S A LOT OF IMAGINATION AND CREATIVITY THAT GO INTO THIS.
AND SO WHOEVER IS OCCUPYING THAT PARKING SPACE FOR THE DAY HAS CREATIVE CONTROL ON REALLY WHAT HAPPENS THERE.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF FUN THINGS THAT HAPPENED DURING THAT.
THERE'S GAMES, THERE'S PLACES TO RELAX.
REALLY JUST DEPENDING ON WHO'S ORGANIZING THAT.
THIS IS AGAIN, A WORLDWIDE INTERNATIONAL EVENT.
AND SO AS THIS MOVES FORWARD EVERY YEAR, THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF THESE THAT HAPPEN ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND WORLD. NEXT SLIDE.
IN DALLAS, THERE ARE ABOUT 30 SPACES THAT DDI AND THE CITY OF DALLAS PARTNER WITH ON MAIN STREET.
THE CITY OF DALLAS, THE PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN DEPARTMENT PARTICIPATES EVERY YEAR.
WE'LL BE BRINGING OUR FORWARD DALLAS EVENT TO PARKING DAY.
THERE'S A WEBSITE AVAILABLE THAT YOU CAN CLICK TO.
WE'LL BE UNVEILING OR VAN THAT HAS BEEN WRAPPED WITH FORWARD DALLAS AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO HAVE A LOT OF EVENTS AND INFORMATION ABOUT THE UPCOMING FORWARD DALLAS PLAN AS WELL.
WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DREYER.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
I WILL CONTINUE THE PRESENTATION WITH JUST A BRIEF SUMMARY OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE CURRENT PARKING CODE AMENDMENT.
I'M TRYING TO KEEP IT BRIEF, BUT ALSO I WAS TRYING TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF COMPREHENSIVE VIEW.
ON THE BACKGROUND, WE BASICALLY STARTED TALKING AND THINKING THAT WE NEED A PARKING REFORM IN 2019 IN AUGUST DUE TO COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND THEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUTHORIZATION FOR CODE AMENDMENT THAT WE HAVE OPEN AND WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER WITH STAFF AND TOGETHER WITH SO I CAN SEE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
BETWEEN MARCH OF 2020 AND AUGUST 2026, WE WORKED WITH ZOAC AND IT TOOK A LITTLE BIT OF TIME BECAUSE WE BASICALLY DIDN'T KNOW, WE ACKNOWLEDGED THE IMPORTANCE AND THE COMPLEXITY OF THE TOPICS THAT WE WANTED TO TOGETHER WITH ZOAC TO BASICALLY EXPLORING COME WITH THE PROPOSAL TOGETHER.
WE PAUSE IT FOR A LITTLE BIT AND HERE WE ARE IN AUGUST OF 2023.
THIS YEAR WE BROUGHT IT BACK, WE DID TWO PUBLIC LISTENING SESSIONS AND A LITTLE BRIEFING TO ZOAC.
WE WERE REQUESTED TO COME TO YOU WITH A BRIEFING ON WHAT IS THE STATUS AND THAT'S IT, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO RESUME AND START WORKING BACKWARDS ZOAC AND CBC.
THE AUTHORIZATION FROM OCTOBER 2019 WAS WIDE BUT ALSO I STARTED TO LOOK INTO SPECIFIC USES.
AFTER WORKING WITH ZOAC A LITTLE BIT, WE BASICALLY LANDED ON THE IDEA THAT IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLEX AND IT HAS TO BE MORE OF A REFORM OF THE WAY WE APPROACH PARKING IN THE CITY.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. JUST A LITTLE BIT OF AN OVERVIEW.
THE WAY THE CURRENT PARKING REGULATIONS WORK IS BASICALLY WHEN A BUSINESS OR A RESIDENCE IS ESTABLISHED ON A PROPERTY, THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES PROVIDING PARKING AND LOADING SPACES THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ON-SITE AND NOT ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY.
THE REQUIREMENT IS USUALLY A RATIO, IT MAY BE A RATIO OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING OR FOR WHATEVER OTHER THINGS THAT WERE IMPORTANT FOR THE US.
THERE ARE SOME VERY LIMITED REDUCTIONS AVAILABLE VIA DIFFERENT AVENUES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN EXAMPLE, THERE ARE A LOT OF RATIOS THAT ARE INTERESTING
[00:45:02]
AND WE FOUND THEM AS GOOD SPARKS FOR CONVERSATION.FOR INSTANCE, THE ONE THAT WAS INTERESTING TO ME WAS THAT FOR A COMMERCIAL STABLE, WHICH IS BASICALLY A FACILITY FOR COURSES, THE PARKING REQUIREMENT IS ONE SPACE FOR EACH TWO STALLS.
THEN FOR SEWAGE TREATMENT PLAN, THERE'S ONE SPACE OF PARKING FOR EACH MILLION GALLONS OF WATER CAPACITY.
DURING OUR JOURNEY AND EXPLORATION AND RESEARCH TOGETHER WITH ZOAC OF YEARS AGO, WE DISCOVERED THAT THERE ARE SOME ISSUES WITH THE WAY THE CURRENT CODE WORKS.
I WANT TO MAKE A NOTE THAT THE CURRENT CODE IS IN PLACE SINCE THE '60S.
WE LOOKED AT IT IN '80S, WE LOOKED AT IT IN 2012, SO WE HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH APPLYING AND SEEING THE OUTCOMES OF THE CURRENT CODE.
THEREFORE, WE ALL AGREE THAT IS OUTDATED, DYSFUNCTIONAL, AND IT PROVIDES INFLEXIBLE REQUIREMENTS THAT CREATE BARRIERS TO EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT, MORE SPECIFICALLY.
THEY ARE A ONE-SIZE FITS ALL REQUIREMENT BECAUSE IT'S A RATIO THAT APPLIES EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY AND IS BLIND TO LOCATION AND TRAFFIC AND OTHER CONSIDERATION.
THERE ARE CUMBERSOME PROCESS FOR APPLICANTS AND FOR STAFF.
THEY CAN BE A BARRIER FOR REDEVELOPMENT OR THE USE OF AN EXISTING BUILDING IN THE CITY.
THAT CAN BE AN OLD BUILDING THAT WE WANT TO PRESERVE.
THEY HAVE A DISPROPORTIONATELY BURDEN ON SMALL BUSINESSES AND ENTREPRENEURS, AND THAT THEY HAVE A BIG RACIAL EQUITY IMPACT.
THEY DO IMPEDE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ONE NEIGHBORHOOD WALKABILITY GOALS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
I WAS GOING TO BRING UP ONLY TWO VERY RECENT AND VERY IMPORTANT POLICIES THAT THE CITY VOTED ON IN THE RECENT YEARS.
THE FIRST ONE IS THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN THAT WAS VOTED AND APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN 2020 THAT HAS SOME GOALS THAT ARE RELATED TO PARKING, AND ONE OF THEM SAYS, "ADOPT A REVISED PARKING ORDINANCE STRATEGY THAT SUPPORTS NEW MODE SPLIT GOALS AND LAND-USE STRATEGY THAT MINIMIZES AVAILABLE PARKING IN TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTS." THEN IT GOES ON TO EXPLAIN WHAT THAT MAY MEAN.
TO REVISE PARKING STANDARDS, MAYBE DISCUSS ABOUT MAXIMUM PARKING STANDARDS.
TO THINK ABOUT PARKING MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS RATHER THAN PARKING STANDARDS AND REDEVELOPMENT, AND ALSO ENCOURAGES DESIGN GUIDANCE FOR THOSE PARKING MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS TO RETROFIT SURFACE LOTS WITH GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE BEST PRACTICES.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THEN CECAP GOES ON TO SAY THAT WE NEED TO SUPPORT AND RECOMMEND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN.
THEN IT DOES KNOW THAT SOME POTENTIAL OUTCOME METRICS WOULD BE, AND I WOULD INTERPRET THAT THAT IS A DESIRED OUTCOME METRIC WOULD BE A DECREASE IN NUMBER OF NEW PARKING SPACES IN THE CITY AND AN INCREASE IN TRANSIT RIDERSHIP.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE NEXT BIG, VERY SIGNIFICANT PLAN THAT WE RECENTLY VOTED ON IS CONNECT DALLAS, THE STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN THAT WE VOTED ON IN 2021.
THAT HAS FEW VERY IMPORTANT GOALS.
FIRST OF ALL, IT GOES ON TO EXPLAIN THAT PARKING MINIMUMS ARE AN OFTEN OVERLOOKED AREA OF POLICY THAT HAS TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON MOBILITY CHOICES AND THE USE OF MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
IT EXPLAINS WHY IT IS HURTFUL AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THEM.
IT DOES USE AND EXPLAIN WHAT ELIMINATING ELIMINATING PARKING MINIMUMS MAY MEAN.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. FURTHER ON, CONNECT DALLAS GOES ON TO RECOMMEND REFORM THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS TO SUPPORT MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION.
IT RECOMMENDS A RIGHT SIZE PARKING REGULATION APPROACH, SHIFT TO GOAL OF TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FROM REDUCING DELAYS INTO REDUCING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED, AND INTRODUCE AN ACTIVE MODE ANALYSIS AND MULTI-MODAL MITIGATION INTO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCESS.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. IT ALSO GOES ON TO HAVE ANOTHER GOAL AND SAY "EMPHASIZE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT TO MAXIMIZE SYSTEM EFFICIENCY, " AND IT GOES ON TO EXPLAIN WHAT A TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT IS.
THEREFORE, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
OUR PARKING REFORM PILLARS THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH ZOAC THAT WE'RE WORKING OFF RIGHT NOW ARE: RIGHT SIZING OF THE PARKING REGULATION TO INCREASE PREDICTABILITY AND FLEXIBILITY IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THROUGH ADEQUATE REQUIREMENTS, IMPROVED PARKING DESIGN AND ACCESSIBILITY, CREATE A TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND THEN MANAGED PARKING AREAS OR PARKING BENEFIT DISTRICTS,
[00:50:03]
THERE WILL BE A SEPARATE ACTION THAT THEY'RE ALSO INTRODUCED BY THE UPCOMING CURRENT MANAGEMENT POLICY.NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. FOR THE DESIGN STANDARDS THEY'RE INTENDED TO IMPROVE THE URBAN DESIGN AND MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF PARKING LOTS, AND THEN WE'RE LOOKING TO INCLUDE SMALL URBAN FORM AND ENVIRONMENTAL SENSIBILITY STANDARDS INTO DEVELOPMENTS SUCH AS PLACING PARKING BEHIND THE BUILDING OR PARTIALLY, PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS, ENSURE THE LOCATION OF PARKING DOES NOT BLOCK OF BUILDINGS ACCESSIBILITY, AND SOME ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLY DESIGN.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. FOR THE MANAGEMENT PORTION.
WE ARE LOOKING INTO WATER TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM LOOK LIKE WHICH IS A REVIEW BASICALLY, AND WE ARE LOOKING INTO UPDATING EXISTING TOOLS THAT WE USE TO CLARIFY AND FORMALIZE THE TRANSPORTATION REVIEW PROCESS.
I WANT TO SPECIFY THAT WE ALREADY LOOK AT NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE REVIEW WITH THIS LENS, WE JUST NOT HAVE IT FORMALIZED YET.
THEN FOR THE OTHER PORTION OF MANAGEMENT, HOW TO BASICALLY MANAGEMENT SPILL OR HOW IT WORKS WITHIN A CONTEXT, WE ARE LOOKING INTO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT MANAGED AREA, PARKING AREAS, PARKING BENEFIT DISTRICTS, BASICALLY MEANING USING PARKING METERS AND OTHER TOOLS TO MANAGE ON STREET PARKING WITHIN A SPECIFIC REGION WITH THE GOAL TO MANAGE THE OVERSPENT IN CASE IT APPEARS.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. DURING OUR TWO VIRTUAL SESSIONS IN AUGUST WITH ZOAC, WE HEARD SUPPORT AND CONCERNS ABOUT, THE SUPPORT WAS YES, WE DO NEED TO THINK ABOUT A MORE MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.
WE DO HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS FOR THE CITY, WE DO HAVE HOUSING NEEDS IN THE CITY, AND THEN WE HEARD THE VOICE CONCERNS ABOUT ADDED TRAFFIC, CONGESTION, LESS FREE AND ABUNDANT PARKING THAT MAY BE A POTENTIAL OUTCOME IF WE ARE GOING IN A CERTAIN WAY WITH THE REFORM, AND THE STATE OF THE CITY THAT IS NOT WALKABLE OR TRANSIT ORIENTED ANYWAY, AND OBVIOUSLY OVER SPILL OF PARKING INTO RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. FROM A STAFF POINT OF VIEW, WE WANTED TO LEAVE YOU WITH FEW THINGS THAT WE THINK THAT OUR FORECASTED OUTCOME OF WHAT A PARKING REFORM CAN LEAD TO.
WE ANTICIPATE WHATEVER THE PROPOSAL WOULD BE, THERE WE'LL HAVE INCREMENTAL CHANGES ON NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, MEANING THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PROBABLY WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST THE WAY IT IS.
EXISTING PARTIES SUPPLY WILL REMAIN AND POSSIBLY WE'LL TRANSITION TO SOME MODES OF SHARED PARKING.
DEVELOPERS WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE PARKING BASED ON THE MARKET DEMAND, AND WE HAVE DEMONSTRATED EXAMPLES OF THAT, AND WE ARE ALSO RELYING AND ARE VERY HAPPY THAT WE HAVE AN UPCOMING CURB MANAGEMENT POLICY.
I WILL SAY THAT THIS CODE AMENDMENT IS NOT A START OF ANY PROPOSAL, IS BASICALLY A NATURAL CONTINUATION BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE THE SEEDS IN PLACE, WE ALREADY HAVE SOME AREAS THAT WE TESTED, A MORE COMPREHENSIVE REFORM. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
>> TIMELINE. IF YOU WANT TO GIVE US ANY FEEDBACK TODAY, THEN WE WILL GO TO ZOAC.
THEN WE PLAN TO GO TO THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION IN LATE FALL AND COME BACK TO YOU FOR AN ACTUAL VOTE WITH A PROPOSAL THAT WAS VETTED BY ZOAC, AND CPC PROBABLY IN WINTER OR SPRING.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
WE'RE HERE FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, CITY MANAGER, AND IF YOU WANTED TO TRY ME AND YOU WANT TO GO ON TO QUESTIONS.
WE'RE PREPARED COUNCIL FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE MR. CHAD WEST.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I APPRECIATE THE BRIEFING FROM STAFF AND YOU GUYS PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.
I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO SIGNED ONTO THE MEMO.
BAZALDUA AND WILLIS RESEND DOES AND SCHULTZ TO GET THIS PARKING REFORM MOVING AGAIN AND JUST BACK IN THE SPOTLIGHT.
I APPRECIATE THE MAYOR FOR PUTTING THIS ON THE AGENDA AND THE CITY MANAGER AND ALSO CITY ATTORNEY FOR DRAFTING THE MEMO.
I THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT WHAT YOU POINTED OUT THAT WE'RE NOT HERE TODAY TO DICTATE TO YOU EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT IN THE PARKING CODE.
WE KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE DISCUSSIONS AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL AND THAT'S COMING TO US AND WE HAVE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS GOING ON.
WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE TOTAL BRAIN DAMAGE ON THIS TODAY, WHICH WE KNOW WILL BE COMING BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN FOR YEARS IN THE MAKING.
BUT THAT BEING SAID, THIS HAS BEEN FOR YEARS IN THE MAKING.
BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES IN THE CITY, AND I HOPE THAT CPC AND STAFF SEES THE IMPORTANCE OF EXPEDITING
[00:55:01]
THEIR REVIEW SINCE IT'S BEEN SITTING THERE SINCE AUGUST 2019.WITH THAT BEING SAID, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
IN DALLAS, DO WE HAVE A PARKING SUPPLY PROBLEM OR DO WE HAVE A PARKING MANAGEMENT PROBLEM? WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?
>> I WOULD SAY THAT. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
THAT'S PROBABLY THE BIG ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM. THE BIG QUESTION.
WE HAVE BEEN OPERATING, AS I SAID IN MY PRESENTATION ON THIS CODE SINCE 1965.
WE'VE BEEN BASICALLY HAVING THIS RATIO SINCE THEN.
I WOULD SAY ALL THE DEVELOPMENT COMING SINCE 1965 OR 67 HAS SUPPLY ACCORDING TO THE RATIOS.
I WOULD INVITE YOU TO LOOK THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND JUST EYEBALL AND SEE WHERE THE SUPPLY IS OR IS NOT.
I THINK THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY IS BASICALLY WITH THE MANAGEMENT OF PARKING.
BECAUSE IN OUR FOUR YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN TALKING TO A LOT OF STAKEHOLDERS.
THE PROVIDE WAY MORE ABOVE WHAT IS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE MARKET IS.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE PROVIDED PARKING, THE SUPPLY IS NOT MANAGED.
MEANING IF IT OVER SPILLS, THERE ARE NO TOOLS TO DEAL WITH THAT.
THERE ARE NO TOOLS WE'LL DEAL WITH THE DESIGN.
THERE'S NO CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WHEN THE PARKING IS BEING PLACED.
WHY? BECAUSE EVERYTHING STARTS WITH WHERE WOULD I PLACE MY PARKING, SOMETHING THAT IS EXPENSIVE AND BIG.
I WOULD SAY WITHOUT A DOUBT, ALL THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY WITH PARKING HAVE TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TOOLS TO ADEQUATELY MANAGE AND TO CONSIDER ANY TYPE OF SHARING THE SUPPLY THAT ALREADY EXISTS.
>> I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING YOU SAID, WE'RE USING A PARKING CODE THAT WAS BASED OFF OF OUR CITY IN 1965.
WE'RE ANALYZING ALL OF OUR NEW DEVELOPMENTS BASED ON A 1965 ERA PARKING CODE.
HOW HAS OUR CITY CHANGED SINCE 1965?
>> I THINK THE BIGGEST CHANGE IS THAT WE'RE STARTING TO FILL IN.
WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH AS UNDEVELOPED LAND AS WE USED TO PROBABLY IN THE '60S, AND I THINK REDEVELOPMENT REQUIRES A DIFFERENT TYPE OF CODE.
INFILL DEVELOPMENT IS NOT THE SAME AS NEW DEVELOPMENT.
REDEVELOPMENT IS NEVER THE SAME.
IT'S ONE THING TO HAVE A BLOCK AND TO HAVE ONE ACRE OF GREENFIELD, AND THESE ARE YOUR STREETS OR ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE NEW STREETS? AND ANOTHER THING TO KNOW, THIS IS EXISTING RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A BUILDING HERE, A BUILDING HERE, A TRAFFIC PATTERN.
OUR CODE IS NOT AND WAS NOT THOUGHT LIKE THAT BECAUSE IN THE '60S WE HAD A LOT OF NEW LAND WAITING TO BE DEVELOPED.
WE'RE RAPIDLY APPROACHING WHAT EVERY MAJOR CITY DOES, AND I LOVE THE FACT THAT CITIES DO HAVE A LIFE.
THEY HAVE LIFE CYCLES. OF COURSE THEY GROW.
WE NEED TO HAVE A CODE TO ENABLE THE GROWTH BASED ON THE NEEDS OF TODAY'S CITY.
>> WE ALSO HAVE A HOUSING SHORTAGE THAT I SUSPECT WE DID NOT HAVE BACK IN 1965, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT FOR SURE.
HOW DOES THE PARKING CODE IMPACT OUR ABILITY TO DEVELOP WORKFORCE HOUSING AND HOUSING IN GENERAL IN THE CITY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
I WILL REFRESH TO SAY THAT WE DID HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE CONVERSATION ABOUT IMPACT OF PARKING ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHEN WE DID THE UPDATE ON THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING BONUS A YEAR AGO OR TWO YEARS AGO, AND I WILL ALSO REFRESH THAT.
WE DID INCLUDE A SIGNIFICANT PARKING REDUCTION AS A BONUS.
WE DID SEE THE FRUITS OF THAT LABOR.
ALL THE NEW DEVELOPMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT IS BEING PROVIDED IS WAY ABOVE THE MINIMUM OF ABOVE THE BONUS.
I WILL REPEAT WHAT I SAID BACK THEN.
THE PROBLEM WITH PARKING IS THAT IT'S VERY BIG.
PROBABLY TWO OR THREE PARKING SPOTS EQUAL IT'S NOT EVEN LIKE PROBABLY TWO PARKING SPOTS WITH EQUAL THE SIZE OF A SMALL STUDIO APARTMENT.
IT'S BIG SPACE WISE, AND THEN THE SECOND IS VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE.
WHAT DEVELOPERS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING TOLD US IS THAT IT IS A RELIEF FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO START WITH PARKING AND THEY START WITH HOUSING.
THEY LOOK AT THE SITE AND THEY SAY, THIS SITE, WE WANT TO DEVELOP THIS NUMBER OF UNITS BECAUSE THIS IS THE NEED AND THIS IS WHAT WE SIGNED UP FOR AND THESE ARE THE UNITS AND NOW THIS IS THE PARKING THAT I CAN PROVIDE.
IT ALWAYS COMES A LITTLE BIT ABOVE ONE PER UNIT.
[01:00:03]
IT'S WAY MORE THAN THE MINIMUM RATIO THEY STILL PROVIDED.BUT THE CONVERSATION DOESN'T START WITH, WHERE WOULD I PUT MY PARKING? I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ROOM FOR THE PARKING, THEREFORE, I NEED TO CUT FEW UNITS.
I THINK THAT'S THE BIGGEST RELIEF.
WE ALLOW THE HOUSING MARKET TO PROVIDE UNITS FIRST.
>> OUR BASE PARKING CODE REQUIRES ONE CAR PER BEDROOM IS A ONE PARKING SPACE FOR VETERANS; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S THE BASE CODE. THAT DEPARTMENTS.
>> IF YOU HAVE A SINGLE PARENT IN ONE ROOM AND YOU HAVE A TWO-YEAR-OLD IN THE OTHER ROOM, THE DEVELOPERS STILL GOT TO PROVIDE TWO PARKING SPACES FOR THAT APARTMENT. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> YES. THAT'S WHAT I MEANT BY ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL.
THAT IS NOT SENSITIVE TO THE NUANCES LIKE THAT.
>> NOW, I KNOW THAT THERE IS NOT A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL MODEL OF THE PARKING CODE THAT'S GOING TO WORK FOR THE WHOLE CITY.
I'VE GOT CHALLENGES IN MY DISTRICT WHERE PARKING REDUCTIONS ARE USED TO PRESERVE HISTORIC BUILDINGS, AND THAT'S EVIDENT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.
I KNOW THERE ARE COUNCIL MEMBERS HERE WHO HAD CHALLENGES IN THEIR DISTRICT WITH PEOPLE PARKING ON THE STREETS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE, BUT DO YOU SEE OPPORTUNITIES IN THE CITY TO ELIMINATE PARKING MINIMUMS?
>> I WOULD SAY THAT WE ALREADY STARTED DOING THAT.
DOWNTOWN, NEVER HAD TWO BIG PARKING REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS AGAIN THE PHILOSOPHY OF CODES FROM THE '60S SO WE ALIGNED TO THAT.
BUT WE STILL HAVE ENOUGH, A LOT OF SUPPLIES AND ALSO THAT'S AN INDICATOR OF HOW MUCH CO-DEPENDENT THE CITY IS.
BUT THERE ARE ALSO OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY WHERE WE DIPPED OUR TOES, LIKE DEEP VELLUM HAS VERY REDUCED PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
FARMERS MARKET HAS EXACTLY THE SAME REQUIREMENTS AS DOWNTOWN.
BISHOP ARTS ALSO HAS VERY REDUCED REQUIREMENTS.
VICTORY PLACE HAS A VERY INTERESTING PD, AND I WOULD SAY LIKE ENCOURAGES AND IT'S NOT TO REDUCE IT'S A DIFFERENT TYPE OF MODEL.
I WOULD SAY THAT WE'RE ALREADY TESTING AND WE'RE DOING IT, IT'S JUST THAT RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TO TAKE ALL THE LESSONS LEARNED AND SEE WHAT WILL WORK FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.
WE ALREADY HAVE THE PLACE AND CONTEXT SENSITIVITY VIA THOSE PDS.
>> ON THE WAY INTO CITY HALL TODAY, I DROVE BY 8-10 SURFACE PARKING LOTS, MOST OF WHICH WERE VACANT.
HOW DO WE GET FOLKS TO ACTIVATE THESE PARKING LOTS? I MEAN, ONE, IT'S LOSS REVENUE TO THE CITY FROM LOW COMMERCIAL USE AND TWO ITS LOSS OPPORTUNITY FOR HOUSING.
IS THERE SOMETHING WE CAN DO LIKE FROM A TAX STANDPOINT OR AN INCENTIVE STANDPOINT TO GET THESE PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING WITH THEIR PROPERTY BESIDES PROVIDE A SURFACE PARKING LOT?
>> I WILL THINK ABOUT THE FISCAL INCENTIVES.
>> THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO TALK MORE INTERNALLY.
I'M ALWAYS LOOKING AT WHAT CAN WE DO WITH THE CODE.
I WANTED TO SIGNAL AND THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I WANTED TO SIGNAL SOMETHING THAT I REALIZED RECENTLY AFTER SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH SOME DEVELOPERS.
IT IS HARD TO ACTIVATE AND TO PLACE BUILDINGS.
THERE ARE MARKET VALUE AND DESIGNED AS THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO WHEN THAT BUILDING IS SURROUNDED BY PARKING LOTS.
BECAUSE WHOEVER IS PAYING PREMIUM OR WHOMEVER WANTS A DECENT TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT AROUND THEM WILL NOT BUY OR OCCUPY A UNIT THAT OVERLOOKS BARGAIN LOT WITH NO TREES, OR OVERLOOKS A PARKING LOT, OR OVERLOOK SOMETHING THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY NICE.
I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS A BIG ALARM SIGNAL THAT I HAVE FOR OUR DOWNTOWN, FOR EXAMPLE, BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO SAY THE MARKET WILL PROVIDE IT AND WE'LL MAKE IT WORK.
IT'S HARD TO SPUR DEVELOPMENT WHERE THE SITUATION IS, WHAT IT IS.
I THINK THE SAME SITUATION IS ALSO IN THE CEDARS IN SOUTH DALLAS.
YOU NEED TO CREATE THE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE MARKET TO START SPARKING AND IF YOU KEEP ON LIKE OVERBURDENING WITH REGULATIONS, AND OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING DOES NOT NECESSARILY DESIRABLE URBAN FORM IS GOING TO BE VERY HARD TO OBTAIN SOMETHING THAT'S MARKET WORTHY.
[01:05:02]
I'LL JUST MAKE THIS REQUEST INSTEAD OF ASKING FOR STAFF COMMENT ON THIS FOR PARKING DAY, IF WE COULD HAVE, LOOKING AT NGSS OVER THERE, IF WE COULD HAVE KNOW ABOUT SCHEDULE OF EVENTS.
IF YOU COULD GET THAT TO US THROUGH A DDI OR WHOEVER'S DOING THAT.
I'D LIKE TO GO TO SOME OF THOSE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL WOMAN, MENDELSOHN.
>> WELL. THANK YOU. I THINK I MIGHT HAVE TO HOST A PARKING DAY UP IN DISTRICT 12, IT MIGHT LOOK A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
IT WILL PROBABLY BE PEOPLE UPSET BECAUSE THEY'RE UPSET ABOUT ALL THE ON STREET PARKING BECAUSE THERE'S NOT SUFFICIENT PARKING AT THE APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
I HAVE A NUMBER OF THINGS I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT OUR BASE JUST ON THE EXCHANGE THAT YOU'VE HAD WITH COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
BUT THE FIRST THING I WANT TO SAY IS THAT WE STARTED WITH AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SAYING THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE AND YOU CONTRIBUTED SAYING IT HAS A TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON THE CITY.
I COMPLETELY AGREE, WHICH IS WHY I OBJECT TO THIS BEING AN ABBREVIATED LET'S THROW IT IN THERE BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO GET PARKING DAY COVERED WHEN IT'S ACTUALLY SOMETHING WE NEED TO BE VERY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT.
THE FIRST QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU IS, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THAT DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY HAVE DIFFERENT NEEDS?
>> YES, THE HEREIN LIES THE PROBLEM AND THAT'S WHY WE CALL IT A RIGHT SIZE APPROACH, AND THAT'S WHY WE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT A RATIO IS BLIND TO LOCATION, YES.
>> WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THAT IN A SECOND.
BUT IT'S INTERESTING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER WEST WAS TALKING ABOUT HAVING SEEN SO MANY SURFACE PARKING LOTS COMING INTO CITY HALL.
BECAUSE THERE'S ACTUALLY, I THINK ZERO PARKING LOTS IN DISTRICT 12 THAT ARE LITERALLY JUST THE SPOT THAT YOU JUST PAID APART. THERE'S NONE.
WE HAVE VERY DIFFERENT ISSUES, VERY DIFFERENT LIFE AND I COMPLETELY AGREE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN FOR CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, CEDARS, DEEP VELLUM, FISH PARKS, LIKE ALL THOSE AREAS UPTOWN.
IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT CITY THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IN FACT, WHEN YOU BRING UP 1965 FOR WHEN THIS WAS INITIATED, MOST OF MY DISTRICT WAS NOT EVEN THE CITY OF DALLAS, IT WAS A TOWNSHIP FOR VANNA.
TODAY, I MIGHT BE THE ONLY PERSON WHO'S REPRESENTING A DISTRICT THAT IS FULLY BUILT OUT.
LIKE THERE'S LITERALLY NOTHING LEFT TO BUILD.
WE HAVE VERY DIFFERENT ISSUES AND WE HAVE ARE VERY LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT DO HAVE THE ONE-BEDROOM, BECAUSE THEY ARE UNDER THIS CURRENT CODE.
BUT UNLIKE THE EXAMPLE OF A TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT WITH A SINGLE MOM, IT'S MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE A COUPLE IN A ONE-BEDROOM WITH TWO CARS, SOMETIMES EVEN MORE, WITH ONLY ONE SPOT THAT'S BEEN DESIGNATED TO THEM, WHICH LEADS TO LOTS OF ON STREET PARKING.
SOMETIMES THERE'S THREE AND FOUR ADULTS IN A ONE-BEDROOM APARTMENT, BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS IS, HOW PEOPLE ARE SURVIVING AND DALLAS TODAY.
WE ARE WAY UNDER PARKED AND MOST OF IT.
IF ANYBODY DOUBTS ME AND YOU WANT TO GO CHECK OUT SOME STREETS, I'M HAPPY TO JUST NAME A FEW.
YOU CAN GO TAKE A LOOK AND THIS IS A REGULAR ISSUE ON NEXT DOOR, BUT FEEL FREE TO GO SEE PARTRIDGE, TIMBER GLENN, BOTH EAST AND WEST OF THE TOLL WAY.
HAVERWOOD, GRAMMA SEA, OAKS OR LLOYD CIRCLE.
IF YOU CAN CHECK ON NEXT DOOR, YOU CAN SEE THE ONGOING CONVERSATION ABOUT THE PROBLEMS WITH BEING OVER PARKED IN THIS AREA.
I'M SORRY, WITHOUT HAVING TOO MUCH ON STREET PARKING.
LET ME ASK YOU SOME MORE QUESTIONS, GUYS HERE.
I'M ALREADY RUNNING OUT OF TIME.
YOU HAD MADE A STATEMENT ABOUT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL REQUIREMENTS, BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE, SHOULDN'T WE ALSO NOT HAVE ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL BY WIPING IT ALL AWAY.
LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE SOME REQUIREMENTS.
WHAT I WOULD CHALLENGE YOU AND I KNOW I'VE TALKED TO SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT THIS IS MAYBE SEPARATING THE CITY INTO URBAN AND SUBURBAN.
FOR EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO JOKE THAT I'M SOUTH PLANO REPRESENTING SOUTH PLANO AND DISTRICT 12, IS NOT TRUE.
IN FACT, IT HAS A HIGHER DENSITY THAN MANY OF THE OTHER DISTRICTS.
BUT IT DOES HAVE A DIFFERENT NEED.
IN FACT, IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST COMPLAINTS THAT I HEAR FROM RESIDENTS IS ABOUT THE ON STREET PARKING.
THERE'S A CRIME ELEMENT TO THAT.
IS DPD AVAILABLE TO ANSWER A QUESTION ABOUT PARKING? AND IF YOU WANT TO GRAB DFR AS WELL, THAT'D BE GREAT.
[01:10:20]
>> ARE WE WORKING ON THAT AS I WANT IT COMING FROM? THANK YOU. CARA.
>> LET ME THROW OUT A QUICK QUESTION THEN.
YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT REMOVING THE PARKING MINIMUMS AS A WAY TO IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND WALKABILITY.
BUT DON'T YOU AGREE THAT HAVING CARS LINING A STREET ACTUALLY DOES THE OPPOSITE? IT MAKES IT LESS SAFE AND THERE'S A TERRIBLE ENVIRONMENT FOR WALKABILITY WHEN THAT'S THE SITUATION.
>> SURE, I WOULD CORRECT THAT.
I DON'T REMEMBER HOW YOU PHRASE IT.
I DON'T WANT TO BUTCHER IT, SO I APOLOGIZE.
NOW, WE WANT IT TO MOVE THE CONVERSATION TO SAY, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL, THE DESIGN OF IT MATTERS A LOT.
A PARKING LOT, FOR INSTANCE, IS THE EASIEST.
THE LOWEST-HANGING IT'S A BIG SEA OF CONCRETE THAT OBVIOUSLY INCREASE THE HEAT ISLAND FACTOR.
IT'S A LOT ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AND THE MICRO-CLIMATE AROUND AREAS THAT ARE COVERED IN SURFACE PARKING LOT IS DIFFERENT.
THE ARGUMENT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE TO INCREASE OR TO COME UP WITH SOME DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLEVIATE THAT A LITTLE BIT.
THERE ARE A FEW NUANCES THERE, SO IT'S NOT A SIMPLE ANSWER.
I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. PLEASE DO.
EVERY PARKING SPOT COMES WITH A CURB CUT.
A CURB CUT IS A CONFLICT POINT WITH THE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY, WHICH IS THE SIDEWALK.
AGAIN, HITS BACK INTO THE DESIGN.
WE HAVE TO BE VERY THOUGHTFUL.
WHEN WE FOCUSED ON THE SUPPLY, WE CAN TO NOT CARE ABOUT BECAUSE EVERYTHING MUST FOLLOW SO IT'S FUNCTIONAL SO THAT'S WHERE THE CONVERSATION REGARDING WALKABILITY AND DESIGN COMES IN.
WE NEED TO BE VERY THOUGHTFUL WITH THAT SUPPLY.
HOW IS IT PLACED TO SUPPORT WALKABILITY? THEN ALSO THERE'S THE CONCEPT AND I DON'T WANT TO GET IN THERE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY MY STRONG POINT.
THERE'S A COMPETITION FOR THE CURB.
THE CURB MAY HAVE BETTER USES OBVIOUSLY WITH BIKE LANES AND TRANSIT AND ALL OF THAT SO I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE.
BUT KEEP IN MIND, THAT'S WHY I KEEP ON SAYING FOR US, FOR ME FOR INSTANCE, THE CURB CUT IS A VERY IMPORTANT LITTLE DETAIL THAT SPIRALS DOWN INTO HURTING.
>> IF I COULD ADD ON THE WALKABILITY RELATED TO ON STREET PARKING WE KNOW THAT AS A PERSON WALKING DOWN THE STREET AND I THINK MOST PEOPLE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED WALKING DOWN MATERIALS OR WALKING DOWN NEIGHBORHOODS STREETS WANT THE MOST DISTANCE FROM TRAVELING VEHICLES, ESPECIALLY TRAVELING VEHICLES THAT ARE GOING TOO FAST.
THE PARKED CARS ACTUALLY DO A COUPLE OF THINGS.
THEY ARE TRAFFIC CALMING SO PEOPLE WILL NATURALLY SLOW DOWN.
THEY ALSO PROVIDE SPACE BETWEEN THE TRAVELING AND THE PEDESTRIAN.
WE WANT AS MUCH SPACE BETWEEN THE TRAVEL LANE AND THE PEDESTRIAN AS WE CAN GET THAT ABSOLUTELY IMPROVED SAFETY.
IF YOU'VE GOT A CAR THAT IS RUNNING OFF THE ROAD OR ANY OTHER CONFLICT THAT'S HAPPENING IN THAT ROADWAY BED THAT THE PEDESTRIAN ON THE SIDEWALK IS NOT GOING TO BE PART OF THAT CONFLICT BECAUSE THERE IS THE PHYSICAL BARRIER OF THOSE PARKED CARS.
>> ARE WE STILL WAITING FOR SOMEONE FROM DPD AND GFR THAT WE LOOK AT ANYONE? THERE'S CHIEF ARTISTS I SEE, BUT I WAS GOING TO ADD THE TIME TO ANOTHER ROUND FOR YOU AND GO TO MS. BLACKWELL IF YOU WANTED, BUT WE CAN DO THIS NOW IF YOU WANT.
>> CHIEF ARTIS, DALLAS FIRE RESCUE, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION ONE MORE TIME?
>> YES. CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT ANY CHALLENGES THAT FIRETRUCKS OR AMBULANCES
[01:15:04]
MIGHT HAVE WHEN THEY GO DOWN A STREET THAT HAS ON STREET PARKING ON EITHER SIDE, ESPECIALLY IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA?>> YES, IT CAN BE TOUGH SOMETIMES.
JUST GET INTO BIG TRUCKS DOWN THE ROAD.
IF THERE'S PARKING THAT'S NOT WIDE ENOUGH FOR THE TRUCKS TO GET THROUGH SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO IMPROVISE AND MAYBE PARK AT THE CORNER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO GET TO THE PATIENTS OR WHATEVER IT IS WE'RE RESPONDING TO.
>> ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA OVER BY FIRE STATION 10?
>> THE DENTON COUNTY PART OF THE CITY.
>> I'VE HEARD ABOUT IT. YES, MA'AM.
>> YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE CHALLENGES THAT THE FIRE TRUCKS AND AMBULANCES AND HAD IN THE AREAS WITH APARTMENTS?
>> WE HAVE QUITE A FEW AND ALL OF OUR DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY, DEPENDING ON HOW OLD THE APARTMENTS ARE, SOME BUILT AT DIFFERENT TIMES AND SO THE TRUCKS OF HAVING GOTTEN CONSIDERABLY LARGER FROM WHERE THEY USED TO BE AND SO WE HAVE THOSE ISSUES AND WE JUST HAVE TO WORK WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT AS WELL AS OUR FOREIGN INSPECTORS TO TRY TO ADDRESS THEM.
>> WELL, I'VE DONE RIDE ALONGSIDE FIRE, BUT I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO COME HAVE A TOUR.
I'M WONDERING IF POLICE MIGHT BE AVAILABLE.
>> THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU FIND THAT THERE'S A CRIME ISSUE WITH ON STREET PARKING?
>> BUT FIND IT IT'S A CRIME ISSUE? NOT NECESSARILY.
>> IN THE SIX TENS, WHICH IS THE DENTON COUNTY AREA.
WE HAVE A LOT OF ON STREET PARKING.
DO YOU FIND THAT TO BE A CHALLENGE FOR POLICING IN THAT AREA?
>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S NECESSARILY A CHALLENGE FOR POLICING, ALTHOUGH OBVIOUSLY LESS CONGESTED PARKING OBVIOUSLY WOULD MAKE IT EASIER.
I THINK IT DEFINITELY IS A PROBLEM FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND I'VE HEARD THAT FROM THEM AS WELL.
>> ARE YOU AWARE OF CRIME THAT'S HAPPENING WHERE PEOPLE ARE BETWEEN THE CARS WAITING TO ASSAULT PEOPLE?
>> I'VE HEARD THAT ON OCCASION.
>> I CAN SEE THAT MY TIME IS UP.
I'LL WAIT FOR THE NEXT ROUND. THANK YOU.
>> IT LOOKS LIKE PAUL RIDLEY IS AHEAD OF PAULA BLACKMON NOW, BUT I DIDN'T SEE THAT BEFORE.
THAT MY SYSTEM IS JUST FLIP-FLOPPING.
THEN MR. RIDLEY, I SAID I WAS GOING TO GO TO YOU, BUT I THINK I NEED TO GO TO YOU FIRST, MR. RIDLEY.
DO YOU CARE? MR. RIDLEY IRREGULARS FOR FIVE-MINUTES THEN AND THEN MS. BLACKMON FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WITH REGARD TO THE PARKING ISSUE, I THINK IS SOMEWHAT PREMATURE REPORT IN THAT WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE ANALYSIS OF ZODIAC AND CBC'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO US AND SO I WON'T ENGAGE IN DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THE PRESENTATION OR DETAILED QUESTIONS, BUT I AM STRUCK BY A COUPLE OF GENERAL ISSUES THAT I'D LIKE TO VOICE.
ONE OF THEM IS THAT I AGREE THAT THIS IS NOT A SITUATION WHERE ONE SIZE FITS ALL.
IT IS A VERY DIVERSE CITY IN THE SENSE OF TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT, DENSITY, AMOUNT OF PARKING, AND THE USAGES OF THE LAND THAT RESULTS IN DIFFERENT PARKING DEMANDS AND IT'S NOT THE CITY THAT IT WAS 1965 WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE MASS TRANSIT LIKE WE DO TODAY.
BUT MY POINT IS THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE A VERY PARTICULARIZED, THOUGHTFUL STUDY OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY, URBAN VERSUS SUB-URBAN OR WHATEVER THAT DIVIDE IS, SO THAT IT CAN PROVIDE APPROPRIATE SOLUTIONS FOR ALL AREAS AND TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT.
SECOND OBSERVATION, IS THAT I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF A PROGRAM THAT RESULTS IN IMMEDIATE IMPLEMENTATION OVERNIGHT.
THIS IS SUCH A FAR-REACHING POLICY CHANGE AND I HAVE READ MANY ASTUTE OBSERVERS OF PARKING PROGRAM CHANGES WHO ALL ADVISE THAT IT SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED GRADUALLY OVER TIME, PERHAPS ON A PILOT BASIS AND SOME AREAS THAT ARE MOST IN CONTROVERSY AS TO WHAT
[01:20:08]
THE POLICY SHOULD BE SO THAT WE CAN LEARN FROM THAT EXPERIENCE AND NOT RESULT IN PARKING CHAOS ALL OVER THE CITY BECAUSE WE GOT IT WRONG.THIRD OBSERVATION, IS THAT THE IDEA OF PARKING BENEFIT DISTRICTS, I THINK, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED VERY CAREFULLY.
THIS WOULD RESULT IN A SHIFT OF THE BURDEN OF PARKING ENFORCEMENT AND REGULATION FROM CITY STAFF TO NEIGHBORHOODS.
NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE VARYING DEGREES OF ORGANIZATION AND REPRESENTATION, AND MOST ARE NOT PREPARED TO TAKE ON THAT DAY-TO-DAY AT TIMES RESPONSIBILITY FROM THE CITY STAFF AND DO IT ON A CONSISTENT APPROPRIATE BASIS AND SO I AM VERY SKEPTICAL OF ANY EFFORT TO TRY TO TRANSFER THAT BURDEN AND RESPONSIBILITY ONTO NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, MAYOR.
>> MS. BLACKMON, WHEN YOU'RE READY YOU'VE GOT FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. CAN WE LOOK AT SLIDE 7 AND THE TIMELINE? I GUESS THIS IS A CITY MOVING AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT.
I MEAN, SEEMS LIKE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME.
WHAT HAPPENS? IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS AN ONGOING CONVERSATION.
IT'S GOT TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS.
THIS IS STILL IN THE VERY BEGINNINGS OF DEVELOPING SOMETHING; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS WE'RE STARTING TO WRITE A PROPOSAL.
I FELT LIKE THOSE TWO, THREE YEARS THAT WE WORKED ON IT WAS BASICALLY THE RESEARCH, THOUGHTFULNESS ANALYSIS.
I THINK WE ARE EQUIPPED WITH ENOUGH DATA AND BEST PRACTICES.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER A PROPOSAL TO COME TO ZOAC AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
>. THERE'S BEEN 25 MEETINGS AT ZOAC?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. THAT WAS THE THOUGHTFULNESS SOURCE-MAKING.
>> MY QUESTION IS TAMMY, WHAT HAPPENS IF IT JUST STAYS IN ZOAC? CAN COUNSEL BRING IT FORWARD? CAN CPC PULL IT OUT? IN OTHER WORDS, ANOTHER 25 MEETINGS AND YOU'LL GET A WHOLE NEW COUNCIL.
I MEAN, SO I THINK WE'D EITHER NEED TO FISH OR CUT BAIT.
>> MY MICROPHONE. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CAN TAKE THE ISSUE FROM ZOAC.
IT WOULD BE TAKING IT FROM THE COMMITTEE.
BUT THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, UNDER STATE LAW AND OUR ORDINANCE, REQUIRES THAT CPC PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION AND THERE'S NO TIMELINE.
>> IT NEEDS TO COME THROUGH CPC, BUT IT CPC CAN ACT, CAN TAKE IT INTO THEIR BODY.
>> THAT WAS IT. I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS AND I UNDERSTAND EVERYBODY'S SITUATION BECAUSE I HAVE ADJACENCY TO RESIDENTIAL IN MIND, BUT IT IS STILL AN URBAN FEEL WITH A SUBURBAN-TYPE DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK IT JUST NEEDS A CAREFUL LOOK.
BUT THERE'S A POINT WHERE THE CAREFUL LOOK HAS HAD AND WE NEED TO START MOVING AND START TAKING THIS DEEPER INTO THE IMPLEMENTATION IF WE'RE GOING TO OR NOT.
THAT'S JUST THE REALITY OF IT.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE CPC TO NOT DO ANOTHER 25 MEETINGS BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE 25 YOU'VE DONE YOUR RESEARCH AND IT NEEDS TO MOVE.
THAT'S JUST MY FEELINGS. THANK YOU.
>> KATHY STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST A QUICK COMMENT.
I LIVE AND REPRESENT DISTRICT 10.
DISTRICT 10 IS REALLY I WOULD SAY A SUBURBAN DISTRICT WITH URBAN CORRIDORS.
WE DO HAVE A LITTLE PIECE OF THE URBAN.
I'VE WORKED FOR SEVERAL YEARS IN UPTOWN, OBVIOUSLY A VERY URBAN, DENSE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE VERY WELL.
I WAKE UP IN ONE AND WE'D GO TO WORK IN THE OTHER, AND THEY DO HAVE VERY DIFFERENT NEEDS.
I'M JUST REALLY ENCOURAGING YOU.
I KNOW WE'VE ALL SAID ONE SIZE DOESN'T FIT ALL, BUT PLEASE LOOK AT YOUR DISTRICTS THAT ARE MORE SUBURBAN, AND TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT.
THEIR NEEDS ARE DIFFERENT FROM OUR MORE DENSE NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU.
>> JESSE MORENO, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> I LOOK FORWARD TO PARKING DAY AND I'LL BE SURE TO COORDINATE THE EVENTS THAT THE DDI AND
[01:25:04]
DEEP ELLUM FOUNDATION ARE UNDERTAKING TO GET THOSE OUT TO OUR COLLEAGUES.I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF PARKING REFORM, ENSURING [NOISE]
>> THAT WE'RE MEETING THE NEEDS OF TODAY.
BUT I DO THINK IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BE SUCCESSFUL, WE NEED TO IMPLEMENT OUR CURRENT MANAGEMENT PLAN AND MOVE FORWARD WITH A PARKING AUTHORITY THAT WILL HAVE OVERSIGHT TO KEEP THAT BURDEN ON THE CITY RATHER THAN ON RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORS TO DO THAT ENFORCEMENT.
AS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, I'VE ALWAYS LOOKED AT REHABBING AND RESTORING HISTORIC PRESERVED STOREFRONTS.
I KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN A HUGE BARRIER TO GET REDEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY IN OUR INNER CITY AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THOUGH THAT THIS IS WORKING.
YOU SEE IT IN VICTORY PARK, YOU SEE IT IN DEEP ELLUM, YOU SEE IT IN THE THEATERS NOW AROUND ARCADE.
THE ONLY REASON THOSE ARE BEING SUCCESSFUL IS BECAUSE ONE, IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT MORE SUCCESSFUL.
BUT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE HAVING THAT ADDITIONAL TRANSIT, WE'RE HAVING THAT ADDITIONAL WALKABILITY.
I JUST WANTED TO THANK ANDREA AND JULIA FOR YOUR WORDS AND YOU'RE VERY ACCURATE ON THE PARKING ALONG THE STREET.
IT REALLY DOES PRESENT A BARRIER BETWEEN THOSE CARS THAT ARE ON THE ROAD AND THOSE FOLKS ON THE SIDEWALKS TO MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE BEING SAFE FROM SPEEDING CARS OR SOMEONE DRIVING.
IT ACTUALLY REDUCES THE SPEED OF VEHICLES AS WELL.
YES, SO I LOOK FORWARD TO MAKING SURE THAT WE DO TAILOR THESE TWO SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT OVERALL, I LOOK FORWARD TO THE REPORT COMING BACK. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> MR. RESENDEZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST BRIEFLY WANTED TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS REVIEW.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE IN TERMS OF THIS NOT BEING A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL APPROACH.
ANDREA, YOU MENTIONED THAT PARKING IS EXPENSIVE, RIGHT?
>> I GUESS FOR THE PUBLIC JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT PIECE.
HOW MUCH DOES SURFACE PARKING SPACE COST A BUILDER?
>> IT DEPENDS. IT MAY BE PROBABLY AROUND 5,000 PER SPOT.
THAT'S AGAIN, THE CHEAPEST. IT'S ONE SPOT.
>> THAT'S ONE SPOT. WHAT'S THE RANGE THOUGH? BETWEEN 5,000 AND WHAT?
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW EXPENSIVE YOU CAN GET PROBABLY IF YOU GO CRAZY WITH ALL SORTS OF BIOSWALES OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
BUT AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SURFACE, THE REAL MONEY COMES IN WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GARAGES.
>> YOU'RE READING MY MIND BECAUSE I MEAN, WHAT ABOUT GARAGE SPACES? HOW MUCH DOES EACH GARAGE SPACE COST?
>> AN ABOVE-GROUND ONE IS BETWEEN 20,000-40,000 PER SPOT.
>> THERE ARE SOME TRICKS TO IT.
IT HAS TO BE LIKE A CONCRETE STRUCTURE.
SO THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT PLAYS INTO IT. ALL THE RENTS.
AND I WILL MAKE ANOTHER POINT TO SAY THERE WAS A MOVEMENT TO TRY TO RETROFIT OLD GARAGES INTO OFFICE OR APARTMENTS.
IT IS HARD BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FIT.
THEY HAVE A SMALLER PLATE, THEIR SMALLER HEIGHT.
YOU CAN'T, AND TWO OTHER POINTS BOTH OF THEM AGAIN, CONCRETE IS NOT ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY.
>> RIGHT. THEN LASTLY, WHO BEARS THE BURDEN OF THIS, THE PARKING COST?
>> IT DEPENDS. IT CAN TRICKLE DOWN TO THE USER VIA INDUCED INFLATED COSTS.
AGAIN, IF IT'S FREE, THEREFORE IS GOING TO TRICKLE DOWN TO THE USER.
SO HE'S GOING TO TRANSFER INTO YOUR UNIT IS GOING TO BE MORE EXPENSIVE.
STUDIES SHOW THAT A RENTAL UNIT THAT COMES WITH PARKING USUALLY HAS BETWEEN $2- $400 MORE PER RENT PER MONTH BECAUSE THAT COST HAS TO BE ABSORBED.
BUT IT MAY HAPPEN THAT SOME OF IT MAY BE CHARGED FOR.
THEN THERE'S THE DIRECT BASICALLY, COST OF IT, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH CHARGE FOR PARKING.
BUT EVERYTHING AGAIN, THE INCREASE OF PRICE OF THE MEAL AT THE RESTAURANT, EVERYTHING LIKE IT HAS TO MAKE SENSE.
THAT COST DOESN'T GO SOMEWHERE.
THE DEVELOPER IS NOT GOING TO LIKE, "OKAY, OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF [LAUGHTER]
[01:30:01]
I'M GOING TO GIFT YOU THIS PARKING SPOT." SOMEBODY IS GOING TO COST.>> COMMERCIAL TENANTS AND RESIDENTS?
>> GOT IT. AWESOME. I REALLY APPRECIATE THOSE RESPONSES.
I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR EXPLORING THIS.
THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS, MR. MAYOR.
>> CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND I APPRECIATE THAT THIS IS ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
MR. WEST MENTIONED EARLIER THAT WE WEREN'T GOING TO HASH THIS ALL OUT BECAUSE IT WAS ABOUT PARKING DAY AND NOW HERE WE ARE AN HOURISH LATER HASHING IT ALL OUT.
ACTUALLY I WASN'T ON THE MEMO TO GET THIS, BUT UP HERE BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS APPROPRIATE WE BYPASS COMMITTEES, I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST GOING TO BE FOR PARKING DAY, WHICH YAY, LET'S DO THAT.
I'D REALLY LIKE FOR US TO GET THIS INTO A COMMITTEE.
I DON'T CARE WHICH COMMITTEE IS TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING, WHEREVER THIS IS HUGE AND OBVIOUSLY STAFF NEED SOME DIRECTION.
WE HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPINIONS AND I THINK THAT'S WHY THE COMMITTEE CPC HAS HAD 25 DIFFERENT MEETINGS ON THIS BECAUSE THERE IS NOT A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL.
I'M HEARING ABOUT SUBURBAN DISTRICTS VERSUS URBAN DISTRICTS.
WE'RE SUBURBAN URBAN INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
I PROBABLY HAVE THE MOST UNIQUE DISTRICT STRETCHING FROM FAR NORTH ALL THE WAY TO SOUTH OF 30, EAST OF I35.
I'VE GOT EVERYTHING EVERYBODY ELSE HAS, PLUS A WHOLE LOT MORE.
SO PARKING IS DEFINITELY AN ISSUE.
IF WE GO INTO THE DESIGN DISTRICT, WHETHER YOU'RE IN WEST DALLAS VERSUS MIDWAY HOLLOW, BACHMAN LAKE, CYPRUS WATERS WHERE WE PROBABLY HAVE AN OVERABUNDANCE OF PARKING.
BUT THAT'S WHAT WE GOT TO FIGURE OUT, IS WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.
I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION, I JUST HOPE THAT WE CAN SAY YAY FOR PARKING DAY AND THEN LET'S CONTINUE THE WORK ON THIS AT A MORE APPROPRIATE TIME AND WITH THE APPROPRIATE ENTITIES THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO GET THIS DONE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST ALL SAYING WHAT WE THINK AND FEEL VERSUS HAVING DATA IN FRONT OF US AND THINGS THAT WE CAN ACCESS.
SOME FOLKS, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE ALL THE RIGHT DEPARTMENTS HERE IN ORDER TO ASK CERTAIN QUESTIONS THAT ARE BEING ASKED. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I THINK CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, STATED EVERYTHING THAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY, I THINK THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HASH THIS OUT TODAY.
NUMBER 1, I BELIEVE THAT EVERY DISTRICT IS DIFFERENT.
MY DISTRICT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE PROBABLY A WHOLE LOT OF PARKING AND WE'VE GOT A WHOLE LOT OF LAND, WHOLE LOT OF SPACE.
WE WISH I WAS CONGESTED WITH RETAIL, SO WE CAN CHARGE FOR PARKING.
IT'S VARIOUS SECTIONS IN MY DISTRICT THAT WE CHARGE FOR PARKING RIGHT NOW, IN THE FUTURE WE PROBABLY WILL.
BUT THE POINT IS, I THINK THAT QUESTION TO YOU, WHEN ZOAC LOOKING AT THIS, ARE YOU LOOKING AT AS A CITY WIDE? I KNOW THAT ONCE THEY'RE ONE GLOVE DON'T FIT ALL ONE NET ONE SIZE FIT.
BUT HOW YOU REALLY LOOKING AT IT, ESPECIALLY IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF TOWN WHICH YOU DO NOT HAVE, WHICH YOU DO HAVE VULNERABILITIES AND MORE LAND, YOU DON'T HAVE A PARKING ISSUE, BUT YOU HAVE PARKING ISSUES IN RESIDENTS MORE THAN A RESIDENT BUT NOT MORE IN TO THE RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL?
>> YES. WE ARE LOOKING AT IT COMPREHENSIVELY.
I WILL ALSO POINT THE FACT THAT THIS IS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE DEVELOPMENT CODE IS APPLICABLE BY ZONING DISTRICTS, BY LAND USES, AND IS APPLICABLE TO THE ENTIRE CITY UNLESS IT HAS SOME PDES OR OTHER VARIANCES THAT ADDRESSED THIS, EVERYTHING THAT IS NOT UNDER A PDE WOULD SAY WOULD HAVE AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT, WILL FEEL AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT.
THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT CODE IS NOT A POLICY OR A PLAN, IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO BE THE STANDARDS FOR BUILDING MOVING FORWARD BASED ON ZONING DISTRICTS, LAND USES, AND ALL OF THAT, WITH THE CAVEATS THAT COME INTO IT.
>> DO WE HAVE A TIMELINE WHEN WE THINK THAT ZOAC AND CPC WOULD PROBABLY FINISHED THIS PROJECT.
>> WE WERE TRYING IN MY TIMELINE SLIDE TO GUESS TO BE VERY AMBITIOUS, BUT OBVIOUSLY IT WAS DISCUSSED, LIKE ZOAC USUALLY MAKES A RECOMMENDATION.
WE'RE COMING BACK, WE'RE WRITING THE PROPOSAL, WE'RE COMING BACK TO ZOAC IN FALL IN FEW WEEKS AND THEN ZOAC IS GOING TO TAKE WHATEVER TIME THEY NEED, CPC, WHATEVER TIME THEY NEED.
>> I NOTICED MIGHT BE THE PLACE AND TIME.
MR. CITY MANAGER, I KNOW WE PROBABLY CANNOT INSTRUCT ZOAC TO MOVE AS FAST,
[01:35:06]
BUT WHAT CAN WE DO AND TRY TO MOVE THIS ISLAND DOWN THE ROAD BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN AN ACUTE FOOT OVER TWO OR THREE YEARS.I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT A PROCESS AND PROCEDURES SO WE CAN GET IT TO A COUNCIL.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMAN. I THINK THAT QUESTION WAS ASKED EARLIER AND I THINK WE DEFER TO THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE CAN PLACE ON ZOAC.
I KNOW OUR TEAM WILL DO OUR BEST TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'VE GOT ALL THE INFORMATION THEY NEED, THE ANALYSIS AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WOULD GO IN AND HELP THEM MAKE A DECISION.
BUT AGAIN, I THINK IT'S UP TO THE CHAIR AND OR THE BODY ITSELF, BUT I'LL DEFER TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO TELL ME WHAT WE CAN DO OR REQUIRE?
>> YES. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND THAT THE PROCESS IS UP TO THE CHAIR, SO THE CHAIR CAN MAKE THEIR DECISION.
I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT WHO CAN MAKE DECISIONS SO WE KNOW HOW WE CAN GET IT BACK TO US SO SOMEONE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION, SOMEBODY ON YOUR STAFF, MR. CITY MANAGER.
>> I THINK BERT IS CONFERRING, I THINK SIMILAR TO THE STR ISSUE WHICH I BELIEVE WE PUT BEFORE THEM, WITH SOME UNDERSTANDING OF COUNCIL'S DESIRE TO HAVE THIS MOVE ALONG AT A MORE RAPID PACE.
I THINK THEY MET OUR REQUIREMENTS ON THAT AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT GUIDANCE MIGHT BE NECESSARY.
BUT AGAIN, I'LL DEFER TO THE LEGAL PART OF WHAT WE CAN DO.
>> SO LEGAL CAN YOU LET US KNOW, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE HEAR NOW.
WE'VE TRIED TO MOVE THIS FORWARD IN SEALED INTO IN A CABOOSE.
>> I THINK MY STAFF IS LOOKING UP THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RULES OF PROCEDURE ON HOW THAT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED AND WE'LL GET YOU AN ANSWER IN JUST A MINUTE.
>> BURT VINTERBERG, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
THE CPC RULES OF PROCEDURE, DIRECT ZOAC ACTUALLY VIEW ALL CODE AMENDMENTS.
HOWEVER, THE BODY ITSELF COULD SUSPEND THE RULES AND BRINGING THE ITEM STRAIGHT TO CPC.
THEY COULD CONSIDER IT AT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RATHER THAN AT ZOAC.
>> THE CHAIR COULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT SAID HE COULD SPEND A [INAUDIBLE].
>> ANY MEMBER CAN [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE HAVE PUT ON THE AGENDA, AND THEN IT WOULD REQUIRE A VOTE OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION.
I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE A TWO-THIRDS VOTE, BUT I WOULDN'T NEED TO DOUBLE-CHECK THAT.
>> IS A TWO-THIRDS VOTE, OR A SIMPLE MAJORITY?
>> I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE A TWO-THIRDS VOTE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE CHANGING THEIR ESTABLISHED RULES OF PROCEDURE.
>> SUSPENSION REQUIRES TWO-THIRDS.
>> CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ. ANY RECORDS FOR FIVE MINUTES.
WHAT I WAS WONDERING DR. YUDREA IS IN DOING SO IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS BECAUSE YOU ARE DEEPLY IMMERSED AND WHERE THEY ARE IN THIS PROCESS.
IS THAT AN EXPEDITIOUS MOVE, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE NOW GOTTEN VERY ENGAGED WITH THIS, BUT IN TERMS OF THE ZOAC COMPLETING ITS WORK AND THEN GO INTO CPC, WHAT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND PROFESSIONALLY IN TERMS OF BOTH THE PROCESS AS WELL AS THE TIMELINE?
>> WE WILL DO OUR BEST, AND THAT'S WHY IT TAKES US A LITTLE BIT TO COME WITH A PROPOSAL.
THAT THE PROPOSAL IS VERY CLEAR, AND VERY SIMPLE, AND VERY THOUGHTFUL THAT IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A LOT OF TINGLING AND UNTANGLING.
THAT IS OUR COMMITMENT, AND THAT'S WHY AGAIN, WE'RE TAKING A LITTLE BIT TRYING TO PUT IN FRONT OF SOMETHING THAT IS VERY CLEAR.
BUT AGAIN, WE WILL DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO ADDRESS, COME PREPARED, HAVE DATA, BUT IN THE END OF THE DAY IS GOING TO BE THEIR DECISION.
>> OF COURSE, I'M NOT ASKING THAT.
WHAT I'M ASKING IS THERE'S INTEREST ON THE PART OF A COUNCIL TO ASK THAT IT MOVED DIRECTLY TO CPC.
I'M ASKING WHETHER OR NOT IS ZOAC NEAR FINISHED THEIR WORK AND JUST LET THEM FINISH IT OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK WOULD BE AN EXPEDITIOUS MOVE? A WORTHWHILE MOVE, I SHOULD HAVE SAID.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY, ZOAC HAS A VERY GOOD COMPOSITION RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE SOME ARCHITECTS, WE HAVE VERY GOOD BALANCED VIEW AND VERY THOUGHTFUL ONES.
[01:40:01]
I WOULD MAKE A LITTLE POINT AND I'M OUT OF LINE, BUT I THINK THE CONVERSATION TODAY MAY SEND A STRONG MESSAGE THAT COUNCIL DOES SEE THIS AS A PRIORITY, SO I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE.>> THANK YOU. CAN I JUST ASK ONE QUESTION TO CLARIFY WHILE I HAVE TIME? THAT IS FOR PARTS OF TOWN THAT ARE FULLY BUILT OUT THAT THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT.
HOW WILL THIS POTENTIALLY IMPACT THEM? HARD. AS I WAS SAYING, AND WE MADE A STATEMENT IN ONE OF THE SLIDES, BARKING IS NOT GOING TO GO AWAY.
WE NEED TO FACTOR IN ALSO BEHAVIOR AND OBVIOUSLY THE EXISTING BUILT ENVIRONMENT.
I WOULD SAY THAT THE BARS THAT ARE FULLY BUILT OUT, THEY'RE BUILT OUT WITH A SUPPLY.
THEY'RE BUILT OUT WITH THE EXPECTATION OF THE USER TO FIND PARKING THERE.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS HARD TO BE UNDONE, AND THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO DRIVE THE MARKET.
>> IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU'VE GOT AN AREA OF TOWN THAT IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE, THEN THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY MANDATED CHANGE ON THEIR PARKING; IS THAT CORRECT?
THE CODE I WAS GOING TO MAKE A DISTINCTION THAT THE ZONING CODE IS RATHER A CODE THAT PUTS LIMITATIONS RATHER THAN TO ENABLE.
WE WOULD PREFER TO DEAL WITH SOME OF THE PROBLEMS, BUT THEN LET THE CITY DEVELOP AND REACT IN ITS WAY.
THE PURPOSE OF THE CODE IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO PROHIBIT PARKING.
>> LET ME ASK IT A DIFFERENT WAY.
WHERE I'M TRYING TO GO WITH THIS IS FOR ALL OF US, AND I HAVE SOME OF THE SAME PROBLEMS AS CHAIR MENDELSOHN IN TERMS OF THEIR APARTMENTS AND IT WASN'T BECAUSE OF PARKING MINIMUMS, THAT WERE THERE, THE DEMOGRAPHIC HAS CHANGED IN TERMS OF THE VEHICULAR DEMAND OF THESE PARKING SPOTS.
TO YOUR POINT ABOUT THE COST, THE APARTMENT DEVELOPERS IN THE '70S OR THEY BUILT PER THE CODE, AND THEY PUT IN THE MINIMUM NUMBER THAT WERE REQUIRED BECAUSE IT'S EXPENSIVE, AND SO NOW THERE'S MORE VEHICLES AND SO THE PEOPLE ARE PARKING ON STREET PARKING WAY LONGER THAN 24 HOURS, ETC.
BUT THIS REGULATION ISN'T GOING TO IMPACT THAT PROBLEM.
IS THAT CORRECT? UNLESS SOMEONE READ DEVELOPS?
>> EXACTLY NO, BECAUSE THAT'S BEING BUILT OUT.
I WOULD ALSO IN OUR RESEARCH AND IN OUR DATA GATHERING, WHICH IS VERY LIMITED BECAUSE DEVELOPERS DON'T USUALLY LIKE TO SHARE THAT TYPE OF DATA AND WHY DID WE SEE AT CPC AND PERMITTING, DEVELOPMENTS ARE OVER-PARKED. WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
>> BUT I CAN TELL YOU. I UNDERSTAND THAT IN GENERAL AS A CITY AND THAT'S WHERE THE PUSHBACK IS GOING TO COME FROM.
SOME OF THE MORE SUBURBAN-STYLE OLDER APARTMENTS.
TRUST ME, THEY ARE DEFINITELY NOT OVER-PARKED.
NOW, THAT SAID, IS THIS GOING TO HAVE ANY MAXIMUM? IF THERE WAS A NEW APARTMENT DEVELOPER OR WHATEVER AND THEY WANTED TO PUT IN FIVE SPOTS PER BEDROOM BECAUSE THEY WANT TO LEASE TO A GROUP THAT WILL HAVE FIVE CARS FOR BEDROOM, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
THIS WON'T HAVE MAXIMUMS, IT'S MINIMUMS, CORRECT?
>> ABSOLUTELY. AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL OR NOT, I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT A PROPOSAL, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN MAXIMUMS, MINIMUMS, AND PROHIBITING PARKING.
>> EXACTLY. THAT'S WHERE I THINK TO THE CHALLENGE THAT SHARE MENDELSOHN FACES I FACE AND PROBABLY CHAIR STUART.
SOME OF THE OTHER FOLKS WHO HAVE SOME SUBURBAN OR '70S AND '80S BUILT APARTMENTS, WE MIGHT FIGURE OUT A DIFFERENT WAY TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THIS ON-STREET PARKING CHALLENGE AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY'RE DEALING WITH THE MINIMUMS THAT WEREN'T TALKING ABOUT IT IN THE DENSER PARTS OF TOWN THAT ARE IN FLUX.
I THINK WE HAVE IN OUR STABILITY AREAS THAT ARE NOT CHANGING, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THEM AT DIFFERENT WAY AND WE ALL DO FACE THAT EXACT SAME PROBLEM, AND SO I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO WORK TOGETHER ON A PROCESS TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE ON STREET PARKING ISSUES.
>> I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE WHO HASN'T SPOKEN YET.
WHO'S THAT REMOTELY? MR. MORENO, IS THAT YOU?
>> I'M GOING TO TAKE YOU AFTER CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR ROUND 2 THEN, WE'RE ABOUT TO GET TO ROUND 2, UNLESS YOU HAD SOMETHING ELSE LIKE A MOTION OF SOME SORT.
CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES AND THEN CHAIRMAN MORENO YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. YOU'VE TALKED QUITE A BIT ABOUT THE COST OF THE DEVELOPERS FOR PARKING, BUT WHAT IS THE COST OF THE DALLAS TAXPAYER TO PAVE A ROAD THAT THEN BECOMES ON STREET PARKING?
>> I'M SORRY, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO RESEARCH THAT.
[01:45:01]
I DON'T KNOW THE COST OF BUILDING ROADS.>> IS PUBLIC WORKS AVAILABLE? WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO GIVE A LAY MILE COSTS FOR BOTH ASPHALT AND CONCRETE?
>> GOOD MORNING. ALI HATEFI, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
THE COST PER LAY MILE FOR CONCRETE STRICTLY DEPENDS ON THE FUNCTIONALITY OF IT.
THE MAJOR ONE IS $3.5-7 MILLION PER LAY MINE.
BUT WE HAVE LOWER NUMBERS ALSO, DEPENDS ON THE CLASSIFICATION.
>> IT APPEARS TO ME WE'RE ACTUALLY JUST DEFERRING THIS COST FROM THE DEVELOPERS TO THE TAXPAYERS WHO ARE THEN GOING TO HAVE TO BOTH PAY THAT AND MAINTAIN THAT ROAD.
MY QUESTION IS, WILL YOU REQUIRE NO ON STREET PARKING OR PARKING METERS NEXT TO APARTMENTS WITH THIS NEW CODE?
>> IF I COULD CLARIFY, THE CODE AMENDMENT THAT WAS AUTHORIZED WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR OFF STREET PARKING, NOT ON THE STREET.
>> RIGHT. BUT BY NOT HAVING OFF STREET PARKING, YOU ARE CREATING ON STREET PARKING.
>> YEAH. I THINK THAT PLAYS INTO THE CONVERSATION WE HAD EARLIER WITH COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE] OVER THE FACT THAT WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL AND THOUGHTFUL TO UNDERSTAND THAT PARKING WILL STILL BE PROVIDED.
>> WITH NO PARKING MINIMUM, WILL YOU THEN REQUIRE ADJACENCY? THE ON STREET PARKING THAT IS NEXT TO THOSE APARTMENT COMPLEXES, THAT THEY WILL EITHER HAVE NO PARKING AVAILABLE SIGNS, NO PARKING ALLOWED, OR PARKING METERS.
>> ONE OF OUR PILLARS, AS I SAID, WAS RELYING ON THE CURB MANAGEMENT POLICY THAT PROPOSES.
>> IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE EXACTLY SAYING WHAT I'M SAYING.
WHICH IS, YOU KNOW THAT BY NOT HAVING A PARKING MINIMUM, THAT THEY WILL USE THE CURB FOR PARKING, AND YOU ARE OFFSETTING THE COST FROM THE DEVELOPERS TO PROVIDE PARKING TO THE TAXPAYER TO PROVIDE THE CURB, WHICH IS ACTUALLY AN ENTIRE LANE THAT COULD BE USED FOR TRAFFIC, COULDN'T [INAUDIBLE]
>> I WOULD MAKE AGAIN THE SAME POINT THAT WE MADE DURING THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING BONUS.
THE NUMBER OF SPOTS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF ON A CURB, THEY ARE LIMITED AND THEY ARE WAY LESS THAN WHAT USUALLY YOU NEED IN A GARAGE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A GARAGE OR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT HAS HUNDREDS OF PARKING SPACES AND THEY CANNOT PHYSICALLY BE FIT ON THE STREET RIGHT AWAY.
THEN THE SECOND POINT I WANTED TO MAKE IS THAT THE CITY DOES CONTROL THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND WE CAN COME UP WITH TOOLS TO CONTROL OVER SPILL IF WE NOTICED THAT THAT WILL HAPPEN.
>> OKAY. I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU FORESHADOWING FOR ALL OF YOU, THERE ARE LINES 30 PLUS CARS PARKED IN FRONT OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES ALL UP AND DOWN THE STREET BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH OFF STREET PARKING.
IN TALKING ABOUT CHAIRMAN SCHULTZ'S QUESTION, WILL THERE BE ANY AVAILABILITY FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO HAVE ANY RETROACTIVE PARKING ADJUSTMENTS?
>> I WILL HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THEY FULLY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
>> I DON'T KNOW. I'LL THINK ABOUT IT.
>> WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU TRUST THE DEVELOPER, DECIDE HOW MUCH PARKING THERE SHOULD BE AND THERE ISN'T ENOUGH, THEN WHAT?
>> AS I SAID, THERE ARE FEW PILLARS AND WE WILL RELY HEAVILY THE SAME WE DO RIGHT NOW ON THIS TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT TO DISCUSS AND MOVE AT PERMITTING THE CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW ARE YOU GOING TO MANAGE ACCESS.
WE DO IT WITH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ANYWAY.
FOR INSTANCE, I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, WHEN WE HAVE A MEGA DEVELOPMENT WE REQUIRE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND WE TALK TO THEM ABOUT THE TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS.
OBVIOUSLY, IT IS A TRUST RELATIONSHIP.
BUT THE SECOND THE PROBLEMS ARISE, YOU NEED TO HAVE THE TOOLS IN PLACE.
>> MY TIME WAS NOT PAUSED. THANK YOU.
I'M SORRY. I'M TRYING TO TELL YOU THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT IN MY DISTRICT.
THEY ASSURED US THERE'D BE NO CHILDREN, THERE WOULD BE NO IMPACT TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AS IT TURNS OUT, MORE THAN HALF THE COMPLEX IS FULL OF CHILDREN, AND SO EVEN WHEN A DEVELOPER SUSPECTS, MAYBE THEY WON'T NEED A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PARKING OR THEY WON'T HAVE AN IMPACT FOR THE SCHOOLS,
[01:50:02]
I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARILY HOW IT PLAYS OUT, AND SO I HOPE YOU'LL CONSIDER WHAT THE TOOLS ARE TO REQUIRE THEM TO THEN CREATE PARKING, WHETHER THAT MEANS GIVING UP ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE THAT THEY JUST DIDN'T DEVELOP OR TAKING THEIR SURFACE LOT AND MAKING THAT STRUCTURE PARKING.BECAUSE THERE HAS TO BE SOME ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE PROJECTION THEY HAVE FOR PARKING.
YOU HAVE ON SLIDE 15 THAT YOUR GOAL IS TO REDUCE VEHICLE MILES INSTEAD OF REDUCING TRAFFIC DELAYS.
I THINK THAT IS COMPLETELY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT IT SHOULD BE.
REDUCING MILES IS ALREADY HAPPENING BECAUSE OF WORK FOR HOME AND CHANGES BECAUSE OF COVID, BUT YOU LITERALLY COULD NOT CHANGE THE NUMBER OF MILES I DRIVE.
I AM REQUIRED TO LIVE IN DISTRICT 12 AND I'M REQUIRED TO BE AT CITY HALL.
BY THE WAY, TRANSPORTATION DESERT, IT WOULD TAKE TWO HOURS FOR ME TO GET HERE ON DART.
IN FACT, THE DART TRIP WANTS ME TO ACTUALLY DRIVE SOMEWHERE FIRST.
THIS IS NOT WHAT THE GOAL SHOULD BE.
IT SHOULD BE TO HELP PEOPLE GET WHERE THEY NEED TO GO EXPEDITIOUSLY.
THE LAST THING I'M GOING TO SAY IS THAT WE LIVE IN A REGION AND NOT AN ISOLATED TOWN.
WE HAVE LOTS OF PEOPLE COMING IN THAT ARE NOT PART OF ANY TRANSIT AGENCY AND THEY NEED PARKING.
INSTEAD OF JUST TALKING TO DEVELOPERS, I HOPE YOU'LL GO BACK AND TALK TO EMPLOYERS WHO HAVE TO PROVIDE PARKING, INCLUDING AT CITY HALL WHERE YOU AS EMPLOYEES PAY FOR PARKING AND TALK TO RESIDENTS WHO ARE COMING IN BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO CHOOSE TO GO SOMEWHERE ELSE WHEN IT COSTS SO MUCH TO PARK DOWN HERE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SMALL COMMENT, IF POSSIBLE.
>> MAKE IT AS SMALL AS YOU CAN.
>> THANK YOU. SLIDE 15 IS A COPY PASTE FROM A VOTED CITY POLICY BY THIS BODY.
IT'S NOT A GOAL OF OUR PARKING REFORM, IS YOUR GOAL THAT YOU ESTABLISHED FOR THE CITY AND WE'RE TRYING TO IMPLEMENT.
THE REDUCTION IN VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IS NOT WHAT WE PROPOSE.
THIS IS WHAT THE CITY ALREADY VOTED ON.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE I DON'T HAVE A QUEUE ANYMORE. IT'S GONE.
IT WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO OH, YES.
ALL RIGHT. CHAIRMAN MORENO, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I KNOW YOU'RE OUT HERE HEARING UP TO 15 DIFFERENT OPINIONS AND PROPOSALS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF RECOMMENDATIONS.
I DON'T WANT TO ADD UNKNOWN TO OUR DEVELOPERS WHO ARE ALREADY EXPERIENCING CONCERN WITH OUR PERMITTING PROCESS AND HOW THAT CAN POTENTIALLY ADD TWO MORE TIME AND UNCERTAINTY.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PASS THAT ALONG AS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT POTENTIALLY HAVING 15 DIFFERENT PARKING CODE AMENDMENTS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
FINDING SOME CONSISTENCY, BUT ALSO RESPECTING THE WISHES OF OUR COLLEAGUES, IT'S CRITICAL.
I JUST WANT TO SHOUT OUT TO OUR PARKS FOR DOWNTOWNS FOR CONVERTING PARKING LOTS INTO PARKS.
WHETHER IT'S DOWNTOWN OR ALL THE WAY UP NORTH, SOUTH.
THOSE ARE THINGS WE'RE DOING CURRENTLY.
I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT A DECREASE IN PARKING WILL RESULT IN AN INCREASE OF A TRANSIT USE AND AN INCREASE IN RIDESHARE AND OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO GET AROUND OUR CITY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> I'VE GOT MY QUEUE BACKUP AND I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION FOR ITEM D. I THINK THE SAME AGE AND I'VE TALKED
[A. 23-2198 DFW International Airport Board FY 2024 Budget]
AND I THINK THAT THE WORK PLAN NOW IS TO TAKE UP ITEM A, WHICH IS DFW ISSUE BEFORE WE TAKE A LUNCH BREAK AND THEN WE WILL COME BACK FOR THE REMAINING ITEMS AFTER LUNCH.MR. CITY MANAGER, YOU CAN CONTINUE ON WITH YOUR BRIEFINGS, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.
CHRIS POINSATTE, CFO FOR THE DFW AIRPORT, IS HERE TO BREED THE CITY COUNCIL ON THEIR FY2324 BUDGET.
I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO CHRIS NOW. CHRIS, GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND I KNOW I'LL BE BRIEF HERE.
SINCE YOU HAVE A BUSY SCHEDULE.
CAN WE GO TO THE FIRST SLIDE THERE, LILLIAN, PLEASE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
THIS IS AN OVERVIEW OF OUR FY24 BUDGET.
IT REFLECTS RECORD GROWTH FOR THE AIRPORT, RECORD PASSENGERS,
[01:55:01]
RECORD NON-AIRLINE REVENUES, AND RECORD NON-NET REVENUES FOR THE DFW CAPITAL ACCOUNT.YOU CAN SEE OUR PASSENGERS ARE PROJECTED AT 81.6 MILLION.
WE HAVE RECORD REVENUES FROM NON-AIRLINE SOURCES OF 520 MILLION.
OUR EXPENDITURE BUDGET IS $1.2 BILLION, WHICH IS A 6.7 PERCENT INCREASE.
THIS YEAR, WE USED THE REMAINING 100 MILLION DOLLARS OF FEDERAL RELIEF PROCEEDS THAT WE HAD LAST YEAR TO REDUCE AIRLINE TERMINAL RENTS.
WHAT THE AIRLINES ARE PAYING THIS YEAR, EXCLUDING THAT AMOUNT WILL BE 613 MILLION, WHICH IS ABOUT A 6.8 PERCENT INCREASE, AND THE COST ON A PER EMPLOYMENT BASIS WOULD BE ABOUT A 1.9 PERCENT INCREASE.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS A COMPARISON OF PASSENGERS.
YOU CAN SEE WE ARE AT 81.6 MILLION.
THAT'S UP ABOUT 11.4 PERCENT FROM PRE-PANDEMIC AND 2019.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS YOU DFW COST CENTER REVENUES, WHICH ARE THE NON-AIRLINE REVENUE SOURCES.
WE HAVE FULLY RECOVERED FROM COVID AND ARE GROWING STRONG.
YOU CAN SEE PRE-COVID IN 19, WE'RE AT 399, AND WE'RE PROJECTING $520 MILLION THIS YEAR.
WE SHARE OUR NET REVENUES FROM NON-AIRLINE SOURCES WITH THE AIRLINES.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE TOTAL IS GOING DOWN OF THE NET REVENUES, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE OF OUR NEW USE AGREEMENT BUSINESS ARRANGEMENT.
BUT IF YOU FOCUS ON THE DARK BLUE COMPONENT, THAT'S WHAT WE GET TO KEEP AND WE'RE SLIGHTLY UP FROM FY23.
THEN DOWN BELOW IS WHAT WE SHARE WITH THE AIRLINES AND WE ARE NOW SHARING TO REDUCE TERMINAL RENTS, WHICH IS IN THE ORANGE VERSUS THE AIRLINES ARE LANDING FEES, WHICH IS IN THE LIGHT BLUE THAT WAS PART OF OUR NEW USE AGREEMENT.
THIS IS A SUMMARY OF OUR EXPENDITURE BUDGET OR OPERATING COSTS ARE UP 7.8 PERCENT DUE TO PRIMARILY INCREASED PASSENGERS, FIXED CONTRACT INCREASES INFLATION, AND CONTINUED INVESTMENTS IN TECHNOLOGY.
OUR DEBT SERVICE BUDGET IS UP 5.5 PERCENT, PRIMARILY DUE TO FUNDING OF OUR NEW CAPITAL PROGRAM.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS MIGHT BE INTERESTED THAT IN OUR NEW USE AGREEMENT, WE HAVE RECEIVED APPROVAL OF TERMINAL F, ALSO RECEIVED APPROVAL TO TEAR DOWN AND RECONSTRUCT TERMINAL C.
IT'LL END UP IN A TOTAL OF 24 NEW CONTACT GATES AND SEVEN NEW WALKOUT HARD STANDS.
THAT'LL BE PART OF TERMINAL F. WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE YOU CAN SEE THE TRENDING OF BOTH DEBT SERVICE AND OPERATING EXPENSES.
THEN IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WILL SHOW YOU THE WALK FORWARD OF OUR OPERATING EXPENSE BUDGET.
WE ARE GOING $623 MILLION TO 672 MILLION.
WE HAVE 10.8 MILLION OF BUDGET REDUCTIONS.
WE HAVE $19 MILLION OF FIXED COST INCREASES, WHICH IS PRIMARILY DUE TO ELECTRICITY, IT'S BEEN EIGHT YEARS SINCE WE'VE RABID THAT CONTRACT.
JANITORIAL SKYPE LINK AND MAPS CONTRACTS, EMPLOYEE-RELATED INCREASES.
WE HAVE A 4 PERCENT MERIT POOL FOR EMPLOYEES, DPS INCREASES, AND WE ALSO ARE REDUCING OUR VACANCY RATE ASSUMPTION FROM 13-10 PERCENT, WHICH MEANS WE'RE BUDGETING FOR MORE POSITIONS.
WE HAVE AN EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS CONTINGENCY WHICH WILL USE PRIMARILY FOR WINTER WEATHER THIS YEAR, AND THAT IS BEING RESTORED.
WE HAVE NUMEROUS INVESTMENTS IN DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY, INCLUDING NETWORK UPGRADES, CAMPUS-WIDE WIRELESS CYBER SECURITY.
CUSTOMER-RELATED INCREASES RELATE TO BUSING AND WHEELCHAIR ASSISTANCE PRIMARILY, AND THE OTHER INCREASES OR SIGNAGE, ASSET ASSESSMENTS, AND LEGAL COSTS.
THEY'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
THIS SHOWS YOU AIRLINE COST AND COST PER ENPLANEMENTS TRENDING OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.
YOU CAN SEE THAT COSTS ARE UP 6.85 AND 1.95, EXCLUDING THE FEDERAL RELIEF PROCEEDS WHICH ARE IN ORANGE.
THEN FINALLY, THE NEXT SLIDE IS THE BUDGET WE'RE REQUESTING THAT YOU APPROVE.
THAT INCLUDES A $10 MILLION CONTINGENCY THAT IS CONTROLLED BY OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
[02:00:02]
IT'S NOT IN THE RATE RATE BASE, BUT WE'VE BEEN REQUESTING CITY COUNCILS APPROVAL OF THAT FOR THE PAST 12 OR 13 YEARS NOW, AND THAT'S VERY HELPFUL IF REVENUES EXCEED NON-AIRLINE REVENUES EXCEED OUR BUDGET, THE BOARD CAN APPROVE SOME STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS.THEN FINALLY ON THE LAST SLIDE IS SLIDE WE SHOW YOU EVERY YEAR IT'S OUR TAX SHARING.
THE REVENUE SPLIT BETWEEN THE HOST CITIES AND THE OWNER CITIES, AND THE BOTTOM LINE FOR 22 WAS THAT DALLAS RECEIVED $13.1 MILLION, WHICH WAS ALMOST A 35 PERCENT INCREASE.
THAT WAS PRIMARILY DUE TO THE RENTAL CAR FACILITY AND THE FACT THAT RATES WENT UP SO MUCH DURING COVID.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, CHRIS. I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
REMEMBERS ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. POINSATTE? CHAIRMAN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
WE'RE ON ITEM A FOR THE PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU. WELL, I THINK YOU HAVE AN ENVIABLE BUDGET.
EVERYONE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THIS AND YOUR BALANCE SHEET LOOKS GREAT.
THE 13 MILLION, 13.1 MILLION THAT DALLAS IS RECEIVED FROM THE AIRPORT, IS THAT INCLUSIVE OF SALES TAX OR NO?
>> THAT'S ALL TYPES OF TAXES, CORRECT FROM THE HOST CITIES.
>> CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND FIRST, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING AND STAYING IN CONTACT AND CONSTANT COMMUNICATION WHEN IT COMES TO DFW AIRPORT, IT IS OUR NUMBER 1 ECONOMIC ENGINE FOR DALLAS-FORT WORTH, BUT ALSO FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
OUR PARTNERSHIP HAS BEEN INCREDIBLE OVER THE YEARS.
ONE THING BEFORE I ASK IS GOING INTO SOME OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT IS IF YOU DON'T MIND GETTING TO ME, A BREAKDOWN OF MWBE FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT, CONSTRUCTION AND CONCESSIONS CURRENTLY, AS WELL AS ANYTHING THAT COMES FOR THE FUTURE, ESPECIALLY WITH THESE TERMINALS THAT ARE GETTING READY TO BE EXPANDED AND BUILT.
IT'S GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE STAY UP TO THAT SO IF YOU DON'T MIND JUST GETTING THAT TO ME.
>> WHEN YOU GET A CHANCE. I ALSO WANT TO THANK YOU BECAUSE I MENTIONED CONCESSIONS IS THE PARTNERSHIP YOU DID WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR THE DALLAS BRIDGE.
THAT IS A HUGE ADVANTAGE FOR THE BRIDGE, FOR THEM TO GAIN EXTRA DOLLARS, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL HELP OUR UNHOUSED RESIDENTS HERE IN OUR CITY IN ORDER TO GET MORE SERVICES.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PARTNERSHIP.
IT WAS INCREDIBLE AND I KNOW THAT PEOPLE ARE UTILIZING IT AND THEY SPEND A LITTLE MONEY AND THEY GET TO LEAVE FEELING GOOD THAT THEY DID SOMETHING FOR THEIR FELLOW SISTERS AND BROTHERS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT COLLEAGUES AT THE $800 MILLION IN FEDERAL MONEY THAT DFW AIRPORT RECEIVED FROM THE INFRASTRUCTURE ACT THAT PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN SIGNED WILL TAKE ABOUT 10 PERCENT OFF OF THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE EXPANSION AND THAT IS A BIG, BIG DEAL.
I MEAN, I WISH WE COULD GET MORE OF THOSE DOLLARS AS WE'RE WORKING ON THEM FOR SOME OF OUR PROJECTS BECAUSE TAKING 10 PERCENT AND AS WE LIKE TO SAY, USING OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY FOR THAT IS ALWAYS INCREDIBLE ON ANYTHING.
SO CONGRATULATIONS TO THAT JOB, WELL DONE AND CONTINUE THAT.
THE OTHER HIGHLIGHT I WANTED TO MAKE COLLEAGUES, IS AS YOU ALL KNOW A YEAR AGO WE HAD TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AND DFW AIRPORT IS DOING $18 AN HOUR THIS YEAR FOR THEIR STARTING EMPLOYEES THAT ARE AT THE STARTING JOBS.
THE REST OF THE JOBS ARE OBVIOUSLY HIGHER AND YOU HEARD 4 PERCENT INCREASES ACROSS THE BOARD FOR OTHER EMPLOYEE SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I KNOW THAT THE EMPLOYEES ARE LOVING IT AND IT'S ALWAYS NICE TO WHERE TO GO TO WORK AND KNOW THAT YOU WORK IN HONEST HOUR OF WORK AND YOU GET AN HONEST AMOUNT OF PAY IN ORDER TO SUPPORT YOUR FAMILY AND WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DEAL WITH YOUR DOLLARS, WHY YOU'RE COMING TO WORK AND I KNOW THAT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED.
THE NEXT THING IS WITH ALL OF THIS IS I LIKE TO SAY IS THAT DFW AIRPORT, MR. MAYOR, CONTINUES TO BE THE TOP AIRPORT, NOT JUST IN THIS AREA, BUT ACROSS THE NATION AND WE'RE A TOP AIRPORT IN THE WORLD AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE VERY PROUD OF.
THAT WE OWN 7/11 OF THAT AND YOU ALL ARE DOING A FANTASTIC JOB AND ALSO WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO ALL OF OUR APPOINTEES ON THE DFW AIRPORT BOARD BECAUSE EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM DOES AN INCREDIBLE JOB AS GREAT QUESTIONS REALLY TAKES TO HEART WHAT THEIR JOB IS IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT DFW AIRPORT IS NOT JUST A SUCCESSFUL AIRPORT, BUT THE MOST SUCCESSFUL AIRPORT HERE IN THE NATION AND I LOVE THAT THEY'RE
[02:05:05]
BECOMING THE TOP AIRPORT IN THE WORLD AND WE WON'T STOP UNTIL WE GET THAT NUMBER 1 SPOT IN THE WORLD MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.>> MS. WILLS YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
WELL, IT'S REALLY EXCITING TO SEE THIS GROWTH.
THIS HELPS DRIVE THE ECONOMIC ENGINE FOR THE WHOLE REGION.
BUT IN DALLAS, I KNOW WE'RE REALLY EXCITED SINCE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BEAUTIFUL NEW CONVENTION CENTER AND A FEW YEARS.
I'M EXCITED TO HEAR ABOUT THE REDO OF TERMINAL C THAT DESPERATELY NEEDS THAT, BUT THEN ALSO ABOUT TERMINAL F. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO WORK IN TANDEM REAL WELL.
I NOTICED YOU'VE GOT THE 6.7 PERCENT INCREASE IN THE BUDGET.
BUT YOU ALSO MENTIONED BUDGET REDUCTIONS OF $10.8 MILLION.
I MAY HAVE MISSED WHERE YOU ALL FOUND THOSE REDUCTIONS EVEN IN THE FACE BUDGET INCREASES.
>> WERE THEIR BUDGET REDUCTIONS SO IN SOME CASES WHERE WE HAVE ONETIME PROJECTS THAT WE APPROVE IN ONE YEAR, WE REDUCE THOSE OUT OF THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, SO SOME OF THAT WAS FOR SOME ONETIME ASSESSMENTS.
WE ALSO DID SOME INSOURCING THOUGH WE'VE BEEN USING CONTRACT EMPLOYEES IN ITS AND THAT DROVE SOME OF THAT SAVINGS ALSO.
IT WAS MORE RELATED TO THE ONE TIME?
>> DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON ITEM A.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST I'M JUST GOING TO CHIME IN REAL FAST BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO LUNCH.
BUT I DID WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT PART OF YOUR GROWTH AND AS YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH CELEBRATING BUSINESSES THAT ADD TO THE REVENUE AT THE AIRPORT, I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN ONE OF MY CONSTITUENTS WITH DISTRICT 4 CONNECTIONS WHO PARTNER WITH DIRT AND A WHISKEY TO OPEN UP THE NEW RESTAURANT AT THE AIRPORT.
SO I WAS EXTREMELY EXCITED ABOUT THE END AT THE AIRPORT.
IT'S A FANTASTIC LOCATION AND I KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO HELP BOOST THAT REVENUE FOR YEARS TO COME.
I DIDN'T WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT, PARTICULARLY FOR DON MITCHELL AND LEWICKI AND HIS PARTNERS SO I DID WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNEW THAT. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM A? I DON'T SEE ANYONE, SO CHRIS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE AND IT IS TRUE IT IS A GREAT AIRPORT AND IT DOES STAND UP VERY WELL INTERNATIONALLY.
I JUST GOT BACK FROM A VISIT IN THE AIRPORTS IN LONDON, HEATHROW, AND MUNICH AND I'M PROUD TO SAY BETTER THAN BOTH OF THOSE FOR SURE.
>> MR. CITY MANAGER, I'M THROWING IT BACK TO YOU BEFORE YOU THROW IT BACK TO ME.
>> ARE WE GOING TO DO CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU INDICATED AND THEN GO TO LUNCHTIME? I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.
>> WE'RE READY. YES, WE'LL COME BACK AND IF THE COUNCIL SO DESIRES WILL DO BUDGET FIRST AND THEN WE'LL DO RANSOMWARE AFTER THE BUDGET.
>> SOUNDS GOOD TO ME. I NEED TO READ THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE AS YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH.
IT IS NOW 11:40 AM ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2023, THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 551 POINT.
>> NO, YOU'LL READ THAT WHEN WE GET DOWN WITH BUDGET AFTER THAT.
>> WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING NOW.
>> NO WERE NOT. WE'RE GOING TO DO.
>> MY RECOMMENDATION OR THOUGHTS WOULD BE WE WOULD COME BACK AND WE'LL DO THE BUDGET AMENDMENT ITEM IN THE ORDER THAT IT SHOULD BE AND THEN WE'LL FOLLOW THAT WITH THE BRIEFING ON RANSOMWARE AND THEN THAT IS AFTER THE BUDGET YOU WILL READ THE STATUTORY.
>> OKAY, SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO EXIST UNTIL, WE'RE GOING TO GO TO LUNCH, COME BACK BUDGET THEN EXEC.
>> OKAY. THEN GUYS WILL JUST SAY THEN WE WILL RECONVENE AT 01:00.
WE DON'T HAVE A SESSION RIGHT NOW IT IS JUST PURE LUNCH, SO SEE YOU GUYS AT 01:00.
>> OKAY. THE TIME IS 01:21 P.M. AND WE ARE BACK IN REGULAR SESSION AND AS COUNCIL MEMBERS START TO MAKE THEIR WAY TO THEIR SEATS, I WANT TO GIVE THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE SOME TIME TO LET US KNOW WHERE WE ARE IN THIS PROCESS AND EXPLAIN WHAT'S ABOUT TO HAPPEN NEXT.
I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MR. BROADNAX, SO YOU CAN CONTINUE WITH OUR BRIEFINGS FOR TODAY AND OTHER ITEMS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND GOOD AFTERNOON.
[B. 23-2199 FY 2023-24 & FY 2024-25 Budget Discussion and Amendments *For budget purposes, the City Council will be sitting as a Committee of the Whole.]
THANK YOU FOR THE COUNCIL'S CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.TODAY WE WILL CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2023/24, AND THE 2024/25 BIANNUAL BUDGET.
WE PRESENTED TO YOU THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED BIENNIAL BUDGET ON AUGUST 8TH.
AS OF FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 1ST, WE HAVE RECEIVED 64 AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGET.
[02:10:01]
AS IN OUR OFFICE, AS WELL AS 63 FROM CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.STAFF HAS REVIEWED EACH AMENDMENT AND HAVE NOTED THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE NOT BALANCED WITH A SPECIFIC SOURCE OF FUNDS IDENTIFY TO COVER THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE DESIRED USE OF THOSE FUNDS.
TODAY, EACH AMENDMENT WILL BE PRESENTED TO YOU AND STRAW VOTES WILL BE CAST.
EACH OF YOU HAVE RECEIVED A COLORED CARD, RED AND GREEN.
IF YOU ARE IN FAVOR AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO READ, I GUESS, IF YOU ARE AGAINST, AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE A MAJORITY SUPPORT WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE BUDGET ORDINANCE, WHICH WILL BE PRESENTED TO YOU FOR APPROVAL ON FIRST READING, AFTER A VERY SHORT RECESS, IF NECESSARY.
STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS TODAY.
MAYOR, I WILL TURN THE PROCESS OVER TO YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER.
IN THIS AGE OF FRAGILITY, WE'VE GOTTEN RID OF THE RED CARDS BECAUSE IF IT'S TOO HURTFUL, JUST ONLY HAVE THE GREEN CARDS NOW.
BUT THE ONLY PROCESSING I HAVE TO ADD BEFORE WE JUMP RIGHT INTO THIS IS, AS FAR AS AMENDMENTS GO, I DON'T CARE WHAT ORDER WE TAKE THEM UP IN OTHER THAN I'M GOING TO TAKE PEOPLE WHO HAVE AMENDMENTS, I WILL SAY YOUR TOP RIGHTS HAVE WHATEVER ONE YOU WANT TO GO FIRST WITH FOR WHATEVER REASON.
THEN WE'LL GO TO ANOTHER MEMBER FOR THEIR FIRST ONE AND WE'LL JUST KEEP GOING AROUND UNTIL EVERYONE'S EXHAUSTED.
BUT WE WON'T HAVE SOMEONE DO 30 AMENDMENTS WHILE SOMEONE WHO HAS ONE HAS TO WAIT ALL DAY TO DO THEIR ONE.
EVERYONE'S GOING TO DO, THE ONE THAT'S THEIR HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR WHATEVER REASON IT'S THEIR HIGHEST PRIORITIES.
I SEE, CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, I SEE YOU REMOTELY.
YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
PLEASE IF YOU HEARD WHAT I JUST SAID, BUT PLEASE ONLY LAY OUT YOUR TOP OR YOUR FIRST AMENDMENT THAT YOU WANT TO LAY OUT. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO APPROVE AMENDMENT 28A, WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO THE COUNCIL TODAY.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, SO DISCUSSION CHAIRMAN, BAZALDUA.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I'LL KEEP IT BRIEF.
I BELIEVE THAT THIS WAS A GOOD MIDDLE GROUND IN A SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE.
IT INCLUDES A LOT OF THE USE OF FUNDS THAT WAS DESIRED FROM WHAT WAS TURNED IN BY THE COUNCIL LAST FRIDAY.
THIS ALSO BRINGS A TAX RATE REDUCTION OF $0.35, WHICH GETS IT TO A TOTAL OF $0.01.
A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT IN HERE FOR THE USE OF FUNDS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT, THAT WERE ITEMS I WAS HOPING TO GET ACCOMPLISHED IN THIS BUDGET IS $750,000, WHICH IS FUNDING FOR LAWN EQUIPMENT TRANSITION PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSION FOR A FEW YEARS NOW ON IMPLEMENTING.
THIS IS TO GIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE PROGRAM TO THEN START ISSUING SUBSIDIES FOR THE TRANSITION OF GAS-POWERED LAWN EQUIPMENT TO ELECTRIC.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S $1 MILLION INCLUDED IN THIS AMENDMENT FOR THE OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS.
FOR US TO HAVE A MORE IN-DEPTH CONVERSATION ON SOME ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY BE EXPLORING, INCLUDING TRANSITIONAL HOUSING WITH LOW PERRIER OUTSIDE OF IN ADDITION TO THE EFFORTS THAT THE OPPOSITE HOMELESS SOLUTIONS ARE ALREADY DOING FOR OUR HOMELESS OUTREACH.
THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER USE OF FUNDS INCLUDED ON THIS AMENDMENT THAT WERE INSPIRED BY OTHER MEMBERS, AS I MENTIONED, PUTTING THINGS IN AND I'LL LET THEM EXPAND ON.
WITH THAT, I HOPE THAT WE CAN GET THIS APPROVED AND DROP THE TAX RATE AND START WORKING ON THIS BUDGET. THANK YOU, MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I SEE CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR FIVE-MINUTES, YOU RECOGNIZE.
>> I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CHANGE THE USE OF FUNDS TO ALL TAX REDUCTION.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE FIVE-MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT. YOU HAVE DISCUSSION.
>> APPRECIATE THE ROBUST SOURCE OF FUNDS LISTED BY CHAIR BAZALDUA, AND APPRECIATE THAT HE WANTS TO ACCOMPLISH OTHER THINGS.
[02:15:02]
BUT I THINK THAT WE KNOW THAT WE MUST REDUCE OUR TAX RATE BY MORE THAN $0.01.HERE'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.
THIS WOULD BE MORE THAN $0.02.
I HOPE EVERYONE WILL SUPPORT OUR RESIDENTS BY SUPPORTING A TAX REDUCTION. THANK YOU.
HOLD ON ONE SECOND. STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER WHILE I NEED SOMEONE TO LOOK AT MY Q AND GET IT BACK UP ONLINE OR OFFLINE AGAIN.
>> I'D LIKE TO JUST GET CLARIFICATION ON THE STRAW VOTE PROCESS AND AMENDING EACH AMENDMENT THAT EACH MEMBER HAS AN ABILITY TO PUT FORTH.
I HAVE NOTE IN 40 YEARS OF DOING BUDGETING AMENDMENTS BE AMENDED WITHOUT IT BEING AN AMENDMENT THEMSELVES.
>> IF SOMEONE CAN PLEASE LOOK AT MY MACHINE, THAT'LL BE HELPFUL.
OF COURSE NOW THAT MY MACHINE IS COMPLETELY GONE, I'M COMPLETELY HELPLESS BECAUSE I SEE NOTHING.
WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING? [LAUGHTER]
>> NOT IN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW? WE GOT A POINT OF ORDER BEING RULED ON, WE GOT AN AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE WAITING TO SEE IF IT'S IN ORDER.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THE ONLY MOTIONS THAT ARE IN ORDER IN A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE IS TO ADOPT OR TO AMEND. IT'S AN ORDER.
>> DID YOU HEAR THE RULING, MR. BAZALDUA?
>> YES. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THE MIC WENT OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE AMENDMENT, SO I DID NOT HEAR WHAT IT WAS.
YOU NEED TO HEAR THE EXPLANATION AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID? NO, THE MOTION?
>> THE MOTION WAS TO AMEND YOUR MOTION TO CHANGE THE USE OF FUNDS TO ALL TAX DEDUCTION.
>> DID YOU HEAR THAT? IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO DISCUSS THE, WE'RE ON THE AMENDMENT NOW BY MS. MENDELSOHN TO AMENDMENT NUMBER 28A? IF THERE'S NO ONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THE AMENDMENT TO NUMBER 28A, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT.
NOW, LET'S ASSUME MS. PALOMINO, THE VOTING IS FOR THE AMENDMENT IS STILL BY THE STRAW PROCESS?
>> ALL RIGHT THEN. WITH A SHOW OF CARDS, RAISE YOUR CARD.
>> WITH ONLY THREE VOTING IN FAVOR, THAT AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> WE'RE NOW BACK ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 28A BY MR. BAZALDUA.
MR. RIDLEY, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON NUMBER 28A.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
WITH REGARD TO THE SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, ELIMINATING ADDITIONAL DEMOLITION FUNDING, COULD WE HEAR FROM SOMEONE FROM CODE COMPLIANCE ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACT OF THAT WOULD BE?
>> CHRIS CHRISTIAN, DIRECTOR CODE COMPLIANCE. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
COUNCIL MEMBER, REALLY, THE IMPACT FOR US WOULD BE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT.
BLIGHTED PROPERTIES WOULD HAVE TO REMAIN IN THE COMMUNITY LONGER, OFTEN SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURES THAT ARE DILAPIDATED REQUIRE REPEATED OPENING CLOSURES, SECURE CLOSURES, MOWING, MAINTENANCE THAT OUR DEPARTMENT WOULD BE TAKING ON.
ADDITIONALLY, HOMELESS USUALLY CAMP IN THESE RESIDENTS AND START FIRES.
THAT THEN OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT HAVE TO RESPOND TO SAVE LIVES AND POTENTIALLY COULD BE INJURED.
ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS WITH REGARD TO THE USE OF FUNDS FOR OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS FOR SOLICITATION OF SANCTIONED ENCAMPMENT PARTNERSHIP.
I GUESS THIS IS FOR COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA IF HE IS WILLING TO RESPOND.
WHEN YOU DESCRIBE THIS ITEM, YOU DID NOT MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT SANCTIONED ENCAMPMENTS, BUT RATHER ALTERNATIVES FOR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING.
IS THAT A CHANGE OF INTENT FOR THIS USE OF FUNDS?
[02:20:05]
WHAT DO YOU INTEND FOR THIS TO GO TO?>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.
THE LEGISLATION THAT PREVENTS US TO ALLOW FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BE USED IT SPECIFICALLY USES THE TERM SANCTIONED ENCAMPMENT BECAUSE THE STATE PROVIDES IN THAT STATUTE AN AVENUE FOR MUNICIPALITIES TO GO INTO HAVING WHAT THEY CONSIDER TO BE SANCTIONED ENCAMPMENTS, BUT IT HAS TO HAVE SOME SPECS THAT ARE NOT TEMPORARY, ET CETERA.
I WAS USING THE VERBIAGE TO BE IN LINE WITH THE STATE STATUTE AND WHAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO.
BUT I'M LOOKING FOR IT TO BE A LOW BARRIER TRANSITIONAL SOLUTION SIMILAR TO MODELS LIKE WE'VE SEEN, SUCH AS PALATE HOMES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
BUT THAT'S WHAT IS YET TO BE DISCOVERED FROM PAST AS A BODY.
I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT CONVERSATION AND EFFORT STARTED.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION IS ABOUT THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER USE OF FUNDS FOR A MOBILE UNIT REFURBISHMENT.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW FROM STAFF WHAT THAT ENTAILS, WHAT THE MOBILE UNIT DOES AND WHAT THE NEED FOR REFURBISHMENT IS, AND WHY THAT WASN'T IN THE CITY MANAGER'S ORIGINAL BUDGET?
>> JOYCE WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR OF THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER.
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCILMAN RIDLEY, THE MOBILE UNIT IS FOR DAY LABOR PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE SET UP TO WORK WITH DAY LABORS WHO ARE WITHIN THE NORTHERN SECTOR OF THE DISTRICT AND THAT MOBILE UNIT WILL GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO STAND UP THAT INTO THREE DISTRICTS.
LOOKING AT THOSE SPECIFICALLY THAT HAVE HIGHER POPULATION OF DAY LABOR WORKERS GIVING THEM AN OPPORTUNITY NOT ONLY TO HAVE SAFE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH EMPLOYERS CAN COME AND OFFER THEM JOB OPPORTUNITIES, BUT ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE WORKFORCE TRAINING, AND ALSO WORKFORCE COMPLIANCE AND THE ABILITY FOR THAT MOBILE UNIT TO BE ABLE TO TRAVEL BETWEEN THOSE THREE DISTRICTS, PRIMARILY DISTRICT 2 DISTRICT 11 AND DISTRICT 13.
AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT 28A AS TO SOURCE OF FUNDS TO DELETE THE REFERENCE TO CODE COMPLIANCE DEMOLITION FUNDING.
>> I'M SORRY. CAN YOU RESTATE THE MOTION AND THEN WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S A SECOND.
>> YES. THE MOTION IS TO AMEND 28A, TO DELETE THE REFERENCE TO CODE COMPLIANCE, ELIMINATING ADDITIONAL DEMOLITION FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF 250,000.
>> OKAY. YOU CAN'T DISCUSS IT YET.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR WHATEVER HE JUST SAID?
>> NOW, WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ON IT.
MR. RIDLEY, YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON YOUR OWN AMENDMENT FIRST? YOU WANT TO THAT'S WHAT ELSE HAVE YOU GOT IT FIRST?
>> OKAY. YOU HAVE FIVE-MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT.
BUT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE SOURCES AND USES, SINCE THAT'S REALLY.
>> SURE. WELL, THIS WILL BE REDUCING THE SOURCE BY 250,000 FOR THE REASONS THAT DIRECTOR CHRIS CHRISTIAN IDENTIFIED THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR THAT FUNDING TO TAKE DOWN ABANDONED, DERELICT, SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS IN THE CITY, WHICH CONSTITUTE BLIGHT AND WHICH CAN ATTRACT CRIME, CRIMINAL ELEMENTS.
PEOPLE OCCUPYING A VACANT AND OPEN BUILDING, ET CETERA.
IT BECOMES A PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD AND SO I THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD USE OF FUNDS.
IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET.
I THINK THAT WE SHOULD MAINTAIN THAT IN THE BUDGET.
THIS WOULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF USE OF FUNDS IN A SIMILAR AMOUNT WHICH COULD BE TAKEN FROM THE TAX RATE, WHICH CAN BE MADE UP WITH SOME OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT I INTEND TO OFFER LATER.
>> NOW I NEED I GUESS TO CLARIFY SOMETHING FROM A PARLIAMENTARY STANDPOINT.
DID THAT NEED TO BE PART OF THEIR ORIGINAL MOTION? IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, I'LL LET MR. RIDLEY WITHDRAW HIS ORIGINAL AMENDMENT.
THERE IS A MOTION AND TO RESTATE IT BECAUSE HE'S CLARIFIED THAT THE USE WILL BE THE
[02:25:02]
$250,000 IN REDUCTION OF THE SOURCE IS GOING TO BE APPLIED TO THE TAX RELIEF. IS THAT RIGHT?>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS CORRECT.
IF YOU'D HAVE NO OBJECTION AND HE'S WITHDRAWING THAT ORIGINAL MOTION AND YOU CAN RESTATE YOUR NEW ONE AND THEN WE'LL CONTINUE.
>> THE NEW MOTION IS TO RESTORE THE CODE COMPLIANCE DEMOLITION FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF 250,000 TO THE BUDGET, WITHDRAWING IT FROM THE SOURCE OF FUNDS AND WITHDRAW FROM THE USE OF FUNDS, A SIMILAR AMOUNT FROM THE TAX RATE REDUCTION.
>> THAT'S THE MOTION AND YOU STILL SECONDING THE MOTION.
>> IT'S STILL BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND AND EVERYONE ELSE'S, I THINK HE'S SAYING BASICALLY THAT DECREASE THE TAX RATE NUMBER IS GOING TO BE REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF THE CODE COMPLIANCE LINE.
THAT'S IT. CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ OR WERE YOU DONE MR. RIDLEY SPEAKING ON YOUR? CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ HAS FIVE-MINUTES ON THIS SPECIFIC RIDLEY AMENDMENT.
>> YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO CALL STAFF BACK UP TO THE MICROPHONE ABOUT THIS.
MR. CHRISTIAN, WHEN MR. COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY WAS ASKING WERE YOU SPEAKING OF THE WHOLE DEMOLITION BUDGET OR 250,000 OF THAT BUDGET?
WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FUNDING IN OUR BUDGET NOW FOR DEMOLITIONS.
THE CITY MANAGER AND BODY WAS ABLE TO GRANT US SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDS THIS YEAR.
I THINK WE HAVE ABOUT 750,000, SO THE 250,000 WOULD BE AN ADDITION TO THAT.
>> GOT IT. WHEN YOU MENTIONED BEFORE THE BLIGHTED HOMES AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY JUST THE 250,000, CAN YOU SHARE HOW MANY BLIGHTED HOMES OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT YOU WOULD BE USING THAT MONEY FOR WOULDN'T HAPPEN IF YOU DON'T GET THIS EXTRA 250,000?
>> NO, MA'AM. WE WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO PERFORM DEMOLITIONS ON DILAPIDATED PROPERTIES TO THE TUNE OF THE AMOUNT THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY IN OUR BUDGET THAT WE WOULD STILL HAVE NEXT YEAR STARTING OCTOBER 1.
>> CAN YOU JUST HELP US BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE HEARING A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT WAS ANSWERED FOR MR. RIDLEY AND WHERE I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY IT FOR EVERYBODY BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT IT WASN'T GOING TO BE THAT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY WHO WANTS IMPACT THE WORK THAT CODE COMPLIANCE IS DOING.
COULD YOU JUST SHARE HOW THIS WOULD PLAY OUT IF YOU DID NOT GET THE ADDITIONAL 250? SORRY.
>> IF I DID NOT GET THIS 250,000 IN ADDITION TO MY DEMO BUDGET, I WOULD STILL HAVE ENOUGH IN MY DEMO BUDGET TO PERFORM THE NECESSARY DEMOLITIONS THIS COMING FISCAL YEAR.
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, MR. MAYOR.
>> CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MR. RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT.
>> I'M SORRY, I ACTUALLY WAS WANTING TO SPEAK ON THE UNDERLYING.
>> MR. ATKINS SAYS HE WAS IN THE QUEUE, IT FELL OUT, SO IT'S A GOOD THING ANYWAY.
MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON DEMOLITION.
IT STRUCK ME, THE ANSWER YOU JUST GAVE.
I KNOW LAST WEEK WE DEMOLISHED A PIECE OF PROPERTY AT 144 FIREBIRD, AND TO MY UNDERSTANDING, WE DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO DO THE DOMINATION AT FIRST, THEN WE HAD TO UNCOVER SOME MORE MONEY AND NOW, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THIS $250,000 HERE, THAT WE REALLY DO NEED THE MONEY OR WE DON'T NEED THE MONEY. WHAT ARE YOU SAYING?
>> WE DON'T NEED THE ADDITIONAL 250,000 HERE, WE HAVE THE FUNDING CURRENTLY TO COVER OUR DEMOLITIONS FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO COVER ALL THAT DEMOLITION.
HOW MANY DEMOLITION HOMES DO WE NEED TO DEMOLISH NOW?
>> HOW MANY REMAIN THAT WE NEED TO DO?
>> FOUR. THEN WHAT IS THE COST FOR THE FOUR?
>> THEY AVERAGE 25,000 A PIECE.
>> I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE ON MR. RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT.
MR. RIDLEY, YOU WANT TO SPEAK FOR A SECOND TIME?
>> MR. CHRISTIAN, COULD YOU COME BACK? I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
[02:30:01]
THE SHEET THAT YOU PROVIDED ME EARLIER TODAY SHOWS THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR '23 BUDGET HAVING $226,153 FOR DEMOLITIONS, CORRECT?>> YET YOU SAY THAT YOU HAVE, IN THE NEW BUDGET, 750,000 PLUS THE INCREASE OF 250,000, SO WHERE DID THAT 750 COME FROM?
>> IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, COUNCIL MEMBER, WE WERE ABLE TO REALLOCATE SOME FUNDING FROM SALARY SAVINGS IN OUR DEPARTMENT TO GIVE US THE FUNDING THAT WE NEEDED FOR THE DEMOLITIONS THAT WE NEEDED TO PERFORM.
AS OUR BUDGET STARTED THIS FISCAL YEAR AT THE 200 NUMBER THAT YOU SEE THERE, WE WERE ABLE TO REALLOCATE FUNDING AT THE BUDGET OFFICES' APPROVAL FOR SALARY SAVINGS THAT BROUGHT US UP TO THE 750,000 THAT WE NEEDED TO PERFORM THE ADDITIONAL DEMOLITIONS THIS YEAR.
HOW DOES THAT CARRY FORWARD TO THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR WITHOUT THIS COUNCIL APPROVING THAT?
>> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL FUNDING IN THE NEW FISCAL YEAR FOR DEMOLITIONS.
>> WELL, THAT'S WHAT THE 250,000 WAS, I THOUGHT.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET ACTUALLY INCREASES YOUR BUDGET BY 750,000, AND THIS AMENDMENT IS JUST ONE-THIRD OF THAT?
>> LET ME HAVE BUDGET TO TRY TO CLARIFY.
>> YES. IN MY DISCUSSIONS BRIEFLY WITH MR. CHRISTIAN, I BELIEVE THERE'S $200,000 THAT IS STILL AVAILABLE, OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE OF I THINK A MASTER CONTRACT ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED THAT I BELIEVE COULD BE AND WOULD BE ROLLED OVER.
AS IT RELATES TO THEIR ONGOING SUSTAINED BUDGET, I THINK THERE MAY BE SOME CONFUSION ON THAT, AND I THINK TO YOUR POINT, IF THIS YEAR THE FUNDING WAS FROM SALARY SAVINGS, THEN I THINK THAT MONEY WOULDN'T BE THERE, BUT I WANT TO GET THE BUDGET OFFICE TO REALLY CONFIRM THAT FOR ONE, AND TWO, I THINK IF YOUR AMENDMENT, I GUESS, WHICH I THINK I UNDERSTAND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY HARM OR FOUL.
JANETTE OR JACK, CAN Y'ALL CLARIFY? THE ENHANCEMENT IS ONE THING, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BASE BUDGET WAS.
>> THE BASE BUDGET FOR OUR NEXT FISCAL YEAR, FISCAL YEAR 24, IS $226,000 PLUS THE ENHANCEMENT OF 250 FOR A TOTAL NEXT YEAR OF 476.
>> MR. CHRISTIAN, IN LIGHT OF THAT LEVEL OF FUNDING, DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU DO NEED THE EXTRA 250,000 OR CAN YOU MANAGE ON THE SAME AS THE '23 BUDGET OF 226,000 FOR NEXT YEAR?
>> DIDN'T HE JUST SAY WE WOULD HAVE 476?
BUT THE ORIGINAL BUDGET AMENDMENT WAS TO DO AWAY WITH THE 250,000 ENHANCED SPENDING.
THE QUESTION TO YOU IS, CAN YOU DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO WITH ONLY 226,000 NEXT YEAR?
>> THEN I'LL WITHDRAW THE AMENDMENT.
>> WE'RE BACK NOW ON AMENDMENT 28A BY MR. BAZALDUA.
CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, NO, YOU'RE OUT.
>> IT'S LIKE AN AUCTION. MS. WILLIS. NOW, YOU'RE OUT.
>> IT'S PULLING US OUT. I WAS STILL IN.
>> FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 28A.
>> THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO ASK THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IF THEY NEED FUNDING FOR THE 80 FLOCK CAMERAS AND THE GUN DETECTION SYSTEM.
>> COUNCILMEMBER, WE CAN NEVER SHORT OF FLOCK CAMERAS, WE CAN USE EVERY CENT WE HAVE TO GET MORE FLOCK CAMERAS IN OUR CITY.
IT'S BEEN AN UNBELIEVABLE TOOL FOR OUR MEN AND WOMEN TO DETER VIOLENT CRIME, AND SO IT ABSOLUTELY WOULD BE WELL-RECEIVED.
>> WHAT ABOUT THE GUN DETECTION?
>> GUN DETECTION, THE JURY IS STILL OUT ON GUN DETECTION, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.
OBVIOUSLY, IN SOME CITIES, IT'S BEEN SUCCESSFUL, IN OTHER CITIES, THERE'S BEEN SOME ISSUES WITH IT.
OBVIOUSLY, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, IT CAN BE A DRAIN ON RESOURCES WITH REGARDS TO RANDOM GUNFIRE.
GENERALLY, WE NEED TO RESPOND AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN WHEN THERE'S A VICTIM TO THE GUNFIRE.
BUT CERTAINLY, IT'S SOMETHING THAT I KNOW, PARTICULARLY WITH THE RANDOM GUNFIRE ISSUE THAT WE'VE HAD IN THE CITY,
[02:35:03]
IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT AND PILOT IT OUT.BUT CERTAINLY, IT'S SOMETHING THAT I KNOW WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING FOR A WHILE HERE.
BUT HONESTLY, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THE JURY IS STILL OUT ON THE EFFICIENCY OF GUNSHOT DETECTION.
>> ARE YOU PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT IF THIS AMENDMENT PASSES BECAUSE IT HAS GUN DETECTION SYSTEM IN HERE?
>> NO, I RECOGNIZE THAT GUN DETECTION.
IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION THE COUNCIL WANTS TO GO, THEN CERTAINLY, IT'S SOMETHING THAT OUR MEN AND WOMEN WILL TAKE A LOOK AT AND WORK THROUGH THE ISSUES THAT IT HAS.
OBVIOUSLY, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WILL BE ROLLED OUT CITYWIDE, NECESSARILY, BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE TO SEE THE EFFICIENCIES OF IT, WE'LL HAVE TO SEE THE POSSIBLE DRAIN OF RESOURCES THAT COMES FROM OUT OF IT, SO WE'LL HAVE TO TEST IT OUT, IT'S THE BEST THAT I COULD TELL YOU.
>> IT'S $450,000 THAT'S ALLOCATED TO THAT COMBINATION, WOULD YOU PREFER IT WAS ALL JUST FLOCK?
>> BASED ON WHAT I'VE GATHERED FROM MY COLLEAGUES AROUND THE COUNTRY AND OTHER PLACES, I WOULD PREFER IT BE FLOCK.
FLOCK HAS ACTUALLY SHOWN US ITS TREMENDOUS VALUE, WHEREAS THE GUN DETECTION SYSTEM RIGHT NOW HAS NOT SHOWN ME THE VALUE YET AS FLOCK HAS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. MY NEXT QUESTION IS ABOUT PUBLIC WORKS.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. ALI HATEFI, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
>> THANK YOU. THIS AMENDMENT HAS A MILLION DOLLARS COMING OUT OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS, BUT 2.5 MILLION ADDED FOR STREET MAINTENANCE AND RESURFACING.
I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD TELL US HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT YOUR BUDGET.
>> WELL, COUNCIL MEMBER, IN ORDER TO GET YOU THE LANE MILES BASED ON THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WE RECEIVE OR WILL BE USED, WE HAVE TO RUN THEM ON.
THAT'S A PERFECT WAY TO ACTUALLY DO IT.
BUT AS A RULE OF THUMB, FOR ONE MILLION DOLLAR DEPENDS ON WHAT TYPE OF TREATMENT BECAUSE THE CAUSE IS DIFFERENT.
PROBABLY GOING TO REDUCE SOMETHING AROUND MAYBE FOUR LANE MILES OUT OF OUR WARD, AND 2.5 COULD BE SOMETHING AROUND EIGHT OR NINE LANE MILES ADDED TO THE WORK IF WE RECEIVE MORE MONEY.
>> THANK YOU. MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS.
>> YES. CHRISTINE CROSSLEY, OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS DIRECTOR.
>> THANK YOU. THIS IS TO ADD A MILLION DOLLARS FOR A SANCTIONED ENCAMPMENT PARTNERSHIP.
HAVE YOU CONSIDERED DOING THIS ALREADY?
>> WE HAVE SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS IN THE WORK ON-GOING AROUND THE TRANSITIONAL HOUSING MENTIONED BY THE COUNCIL MEMBER AND MULTIPLE OPTIONS FOR WHAT THAT COULD LOOK LIKE, WHICH WILL OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO COME TO COUNCIL ON THE HHS COMMITTEE FOR APPROVAL.
>> HOW MANY HOMELESS FACILITIES ARE THERE THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DALLAS THAT SERVE DALLAS COUNTY?
>> I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT.
I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL HEALTH SERVICES THROUGH NORTH TEXAS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AUTHORITY THAT THE COUNTY FUNDS, BUT I DON'T HAVE A FIRM COUNT ON THEM.
>> ARE THOSE FOR HOMELESS SERVICES OR ARE THOSE FOR INPATIENT MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION RECOVERY?
>> I BELIEVE THAT IN-PATIENT MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION RECOVERY WOULD INCLUDE THOSE WHO ARE UNSHELTERED.
I DO NOT KNOW IF THEY'RE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE UNSHELTERED.
AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO ASK.
>> I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE FEW OR NONE.
MY QUESTION IS, DO YOU THINK IT'S RIGHT FOR CITY OF DALLAS RESIDENTS TO PAY THROUGH THEIR TAXES FOR ALL SERVICES FOR OUR REGION FOR, I'LL JUST SAY THE DALLAS COUNTY AREA, SO A BETTER WAY TO SAY THAT THROUGH THEIR TAXES.
OR DO YOU THINK THAT THIS IS REALLY MORE OF A LARGER PICTURE?
>> I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS A POLICY QUESTIONS.
THAT IS FOR THE COUNCIL TO DETERMINE.
>> I KNOW WHAT THE POP REPORT HAS SAID AND WHAT THE MAYOR HAS DIRECTED, AND BEYOND THAT, I CAN'T SAY ANYTHING.
>> HOW MANY FACILITIES DO WE CURRENTLY OWN THAT ARE UNOCCUPIED BY THE HOMELESS?
>> WELL, WE OWN TWO THAT ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
[02:40:02]
A THIRD IS WITH THE COMMUNITY FOR DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW.I WOULDN'T SAY THAT THAT IS IN ANY STAGE THAT IS READY TO BE OPENED.
>> WELL, WE HAVE FOUR FACILITIES THAT WE OWN.
ONE OF WHICH IS FAMILY GATEWAY IN THE NORTH THAT'S CURRENTLY OPERATING.
THEN WE HAVE ONE THAT IS AT 4150 INDEPENDENCE DRIVE THAT'S ABOUT TO BE READY IN THE SAME FOR 1950 FORT WORTH AVENUE.
THOSE ARE BOTH WAITING FOR CONSTRUCTION AND NEXT STEPS.
THEN THERE IS ONE IN DISTRICT 3 THAT IS CURRENTLY WITH THE CITY.
THERE'S A FIFTH ONE, ST. JUDE PARK CENTRAL, THAT WE CONTRIBUTED FUNDING TO FORGET FINANCING, BUT WE DO NOT OWN IT.
>> DISTRICT 10 IS A VANTAGE POINT THAT'S NOT OHS, SO I THINK HOUSING IS HELPING WITH THAT, BUT YOU'RE CORRECT THAT'S CITY BUT NOT LHS.
>> BUT IT WAS INTENDED FOR PEOPLE EXITING HOMELESS; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THERE'S A LOT OF EMPTY BUILDINGS, IS MY POINT THAT SERVE THE HOMELESS THAT WE HAVEN'T FULLY UTILIZED AT THIS POINT.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY TO THE COUNCIL AND FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS, I THINK WE HAVE TO STOP LOOKING TO JUST OUR TAXPAYERS TO FUND HOMELESSNESS.
WE NEED TO LOOK AS A COUNTY SOLUTION.
WHILE I AM ACTUALLY IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT THAT I THINK TERM BASIL DOULA IS ADVOCATING FOR AND LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL SOLUTIONS, WHICH THIS WOULD BE A SOLUTION WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE.
I DON'T THINK THE FUNDING SHOULD COME THROUGH THE CITY OF DALLAS.
I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A COUNTY-WIDE ISSUE, SO I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT PARTICULAR ITEM.
MY NEXT QUESTION IS, WELL, I GUESS IT'S JUST A COMMENT ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY.
THIS LAWN EQUIPMENT TRANSITION PROGRAM, I DON'T BELIEVE, AGAIN, IT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TAXPAYERS TO SUBSIDIZE PEOPLE'S LAWN EQUIPMENT.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO SWITCH TO A DIFFERENT TYPE OF POWER, GOD BLESS, GO DO IT.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THE REST OF THE TAXPAYERS NEED TO SUBSIDIZE YOU ON THAT.
FOR THE DALLAS BEAUTIFUL PROGRAM, CAN I ASK? I DIDN'T REALIZE THIS WAS A CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUE.
CAN YOU COME TO ANSWER A QUESTION FOR ME? HOW IS THIS PROGRAM BEING FUNDED TODAY?
>> IT'S CURRENTLY NOT FUNDED, MA'AM.
IT'S 55,000 IN THE BUDGET CURRENTLY FOR THIS PROGRAM.
>> ARE YOU AWARE OF MODELS WHERE I KEEP ANY CITY BEAUTIFUL MODEL IS DONE ON A VOLUNTEER BASIS OR THROUGH A NON-PROFIT?
>> COMPLETELY VOLUNTEER OR SUBSIDIZED WITH VOLUNTEERS.
>> WHY ARE THREE EMPLOYEES NEEDED FOR THIS POSITION, FOR THIS INITIATIVE?
>> THESE WOULD ACT AS PROJECT COORDINATORS AND LIAISONS FOR THE MINI NEIGHBORHOOD CHAMPIONS AND RELATIONSHIPS WE HAVE WITH SOME OF OUR CONSTITUENCY TO PUT TOGETHER THESE BIG CLEAN-UPS PARK CLEAN-UPS, CREEK CLEAN-UPS, AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE THIS YEAR AND BEFORE AND OUR CURRENT BUDGET THROUGH SUBSIDIES AND REALLOCATIONS.
BUT THIS FUNDING WOULD PROVIDE A PERMANENT SOLUTION TO THOSE TYPE OF ACTIVITIES FOR OUR CITY.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT.
THEN CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THERE'S ADDITIONAL FUNDING IN THERE FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE LEGAL WORK.
>> I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE SIGNIFICANT WORK, AND SO WE WOULD WELCOME THE SUPPORT.
WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING THAT LITIGATION IN-HOUSE, SO THE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
>> THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CHANGE IT FROM THE USE OF FUNDS FROM THREE POSITIONS FOR KEEP DALLAS BEAUTIFUL TO ONE.
I'M ASSUMING THAT WOULD THEN BE A 1/3 OF THE 400,000, AND THE SOURCE OF THOSE FUNDS TO HAVE A REDUCTION IN THE DOLLAR COMING OUT OF PUBLIC WORKS.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
NOW WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT ON THE FLOOR TO ITEM 28 BY MS. MENDELSOHN.
MS. MILLS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK ON YOUR AMENDMENT?
>> I THINK IT'S FINE IF WE HAVE ONE PERSON WHO'S COORDINATING THAT, BUT I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE HOW MUCH ACTIVITY WILL TAKE FOR.
>> FOR THREE FULL TIME EMPLOYEES, PLUS THE ONGOING EXPENSE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE VACATION, ALL OF THAT.
WE JUST KEEP ADDING MORE AND MORE STAFF.
JACK, ARE YOU ABLE TO TELL US WHAT IS THE NUMBER OF FULL-TIME EQUIVALENCIES WE HAVE RIGHT NOW?
[02:45:07]
THEN IF YOU COULD ALSO TELL US, IS THAT THE MOST THE CITY'S EVER HAD?>> THE GRAND TOTAL FOR FULL-TIME EQUIVALENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 24 IS PROPOSED AT 15,035, AND I AM NOT SURE IF THAT'S THE MOST OF THE CITY HAS EVER HAD.
I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE WE DID SIGNIFICANT REDUCTIONS BACK IN ONE OF THE PREVIOUS RECESSIONS.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER OF THAT.
>> WELL, AS FAR AS I CAN SEE, I BELIEVE IT IS THE MOST WE'VE EVER HAD AND WE JUST CAN'T KEEP ADDING TO STAFF OVER AND OVER.
THAT'S NOT THE SOLUTION FOR EVERY PROBLEM WE HAVE.
THERE'S QUITE A FEW ENVIRONMENTAL NON-PROFITS THAT I THINK WE'D LOVE TO PARTNER WITH US ON THIS PROGRAM.
WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT VOLUNTEER GROUPS, THEY ALSO HAVE PEOPLE WHO COORDINATE EVENTS, AND I'VE BEEN ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.
WE DID IT FOR FREE, AND WE DID IT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT OUR PASSION WAS.
I THINK ONE PERSON AT THE CITY WHO'S THE POINT PERSON WHO CAN HELP MARSHAL THE RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE, MAKE SENSE, BUT TO ADD THREE NEW POSITIONS IS, I THINK OVERKILL.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT IT. THANK YOU.
>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. EVERYONE IS STILL IN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW.
WE'RE JUST NOT TALKING ABOUT MS. MENDELSOHN'S AMENDMENT THAT WOULD REDUCE THE BEAUTIFUL PART OF THIS FROM 3 TO 1.
THAT'S ALL THE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT FOR NOW.
MS. WILLIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THAT
>> YEAH, WE'RE JUST ON THE ONE ABOUT THE KEEP DALLAS BEAUTIFUL.
THEN WE'LL HAVE TO VOTE THAT UP OR DOWN AND THEN GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL.
>> SURE. WELL, IN VISITING WITH OUR GREETINGS ARE GARRETT BOONE ABOUT THIS PROGRAM, WHO KNOWS A THING OR TWO ABOUT VOLUNTEERS AND ENVIRONMENTAL NON-PROFITS.
AS SOMEONE WHO PUTS ON HIP BOOTS AND GETS IN THE TRINITY RIVER AND PICKS OUT MICROSCOPIC PIECES OF STYROFOAM WITH HIS OWN HANDS TO HELP MAKE OUR RIVERS BEAUTIFUL, I'D REALLY LIKE TO HEAR HIM ON THIS.
I TOO HAVE BEEN IN A POSITION WHERE I WORKED WITH PARK AND REC STAFF TO HELP GALVANIZE VOLUNTEERS AND HAVE THEM DO CLEAN-UPS, AND I KNOW IT DIDN'T TAKE EVEN JUST THREE PARK STAFF MEMBERS THAT IT TOOK MORE.
I THINK ON THIS ONE, THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT IS PRETTY PHENOMENAL BECAUSE I THINK THE PROJECTIONS ON THE NUMBER OF VOLUNTEERS, I THINK IT'S GOING UPWARD, SOME COMMUNITIES HAVE 20,000.
THAT TAKES MORE THAN ONE PERSON TO COORDINATE.
THE OTHER THING IS, I KNOW THAT WE'VE ADDED TO OUR BUDGET.
I THINK IN THE LAST YEAR WE WERE ADDING THE LITTER TEAM, THE LITTER RESPONSE TEAM IN FOUR QUADRANTS OF OUR CITY.
WE ARE HAVING TO PICK UP $1.4 MILLION OF CLEANING THAT TXDOT FORCED UPON US BY NOT CLEANING UP AS THEY SHOULD AND KEEPING THEIR AREAS TIDY.
I SEE THE ROLE OF GETTING OUR VOLUNTEERS, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS, ACTIVE IN THE PRIDE IN THE COMMUNITY AS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE REALLY VALUABLE TO US ON A NUMBER OF LEVELS.
I REALLY WANT TO HEAR OUR GREETINGS ARE ON THIS, AND SO I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF TAKING THAT NUMBER OF POSITIONS DOWN.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE KEEP DALLAS BEAUTIFUL RELATED AMENDMENT BY MR. MENDELSOHN.
JUST TRYING TO GIVE EVERYBODY REAL FOCUS BUT IS GETTING WEIRD.
DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING ON THIS? YOU WERE IN THE QUEUE.
>> THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M SORRY.
I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN WILLIS.
TRYING TO KEEP DALLAS BEAUTIFUL AND I'M JUST LOOKING AT, IN MY DISTRICT, DISTRICT A IN HOW MANY VOLUNTEERS AND HAVING A COORDINATION THAT WE DO HAVE TO TRY TO GET RESIDENT AND TRY AND GET PEOPLE TO PICK UP THE TRASH JUST ALONE THE INTERSTATE AND RIGHT NOW THE INTERSTATE TEXTS WILL BE CLEANING IT UP AND THEY DON'T CLEAN IT UP AND I HAVE TROUBLES JUST TRYING TO GET WITH COLD AND TRYING TO GET WITH PEOPLE TO SAY, I NEED HELP TO COORDINATE THOSE PEOPLE TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE SAFE AND MAKE SURE THEY GOT LUNCH AND MAKE SURE THEY GET TRANSPORTATION AND MAKE SURE THEY GET THE RIGHT TYPE OF EQUIPMENT AND EVERYTHING, AND MAKE SURE THEY STAY ON THE HIGHWAY.
SOMETIMES WE GET TO MAKE SURE YOU HAD THE NPO'S AFTER TO MAKE SURE IT'S SAFER THERE AGIN.
I HAVEN'T DONE WE HAVEN'T IN THE PAST.
[02:50:04]
COULD WE HAVE COLE?>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION COUNCIL MEMBER.
CURRENTLY THAT TEAM HAS THREE STAFF MEMBERS.
>> IS THAT WE HAVE THREE STAFF SEPARATELY?
>> OKAY. THOSE THREE STAFF MEN CONTROL THE WHOLE CITY, RIGHT?
>> THEY CONTROL THE WHOLE CITY, ALL THE COMMUNITY TRASH OFF PROGRAMS, ALL THE WEEKEND LITTER CLEANUPS THAT WE DO.
THEY'RE IN CHARGE OF ALL OF THAT PROGRAMMING.
>> IS THEY BROKE DOWN BY DISTRICT OR BY EAST, WEST, SOUTH, AND NORTH, OR HOW THEY BROKEN DOWN?
>> NO. THOSE THREE TEAM MEMBERS CURRENTLY SERVE EVERY COUNCIL DISTRICT, THE ENTIRE CITY?
>> CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ. I BELIEVE YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THIS AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT FROM AUGUST 21ST TO AUGUST 23RD, THERE HAS BEEN 47,572 CODE SERVICE REQUESTS REGARDING LITTER ALONE.
IT'S TIME THAT WE, AS A CITY, TACKLE THIS.
THANK GOODNESS FOR OUR GREENSOR WHO REALLY BROUGHT THIS TO OUR ATTENTION.
IT WENT THROUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE.
I BELIEVE IT WENT THROUGH WE BUT I KNOW IT'S ABSOLUTELY PART OF OUR RACIAL EQUITY PLAN PRIORITIES ON THIS.
THE OTHER PIECE, IN ADDITION TO THE VALUE OF THE KEEP DALLAS BEAUTIFUL ACTUAL CLEANING EFFORT IS THE VOLUNTEER ENGAGEMENT, WHICH WE KNOW WE'VE ALL ADDED THE E AND ENGAGEMENT TO OUR CITY, AND SO IF WE LOOK AT OUR VOLUNTEER NUMBERS FOR THE CITY, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR RESIDENTS TO PHYSICALLY BE A PART OF THIS CITY.
WE WENT FROM 1,444 VOLUNTEERS IN FISCAL YEAR '22 UP TO 2,774 IN FISCAL '23 AND THAT'S ALL WITH ONE PERSON DRIVING THIS.
YOU CAN IMAGINE THE AMOUNT OF VOLUNTEER HOURS, IF YOU TRANSLATE THAT INTO ABOUT 9,000 VOLUNTEER HOURS AND YOU DO OUR BASIC RATE ABOUT IT, IT'LL ACTUALLY INCREASE OUR FINANCIAL VALUE.
AGAIN, YOU CAN IMAGINE IT COULD BE HOUSTON, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH HAD 8,000 VOLUNTEERS FOR ABOUT 35,000 HOURS BACK IN 2016, THEIR WEBSITE, IT'S THE EQUIVALENT OF $1.2 MILLION.
THIS WILL MORE THAN ADEQUATELY PAID FOR ITSELF JUST IN KEEP DALLAS BEAUTIFUL, AS WELL AS THE OVERALL ENGAGEMENT.
IT OVERSEAS TO CHAIR MENDELSOHN'S POINT, ABOUT 11 OTHER VOLUNTEER GROUPS THAT WORK TOGETHER ON THIS AND SO THAT NEEDS THAT CENTRALIZED COORDINATION.
AS PART OF OUR OVERALL GREENING AGENDA FOR THE CITY, THIS IS TOTALLY IN LINE.
IT'LL BE SELF-SUPPORTING, IT MEETS OUR CITY'S AGENDA, GIVES PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE, AND IT'S A MINISCULE INVESTMENT GIVEN WHAT THE RETURN WILL BE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR,.
>> DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY MR. MENDELSOHN.
>> THANK YOU. STARTING OFF, SO SHE GUIDED ME TO THAT POINT.
I CANNOT SUPPORT THAT AMENDMENT.
I WANT TO SUPPORT WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED HERE, MAINLY BECAUSE I HAVE A NEED FOR COORDINATION AND IT IS ONE OF THE AREAS THAT REALLY NEEDS SUPPORT.
THE LAST TIME WE HAD SUPPORT IN CLEANING UP A PART OF THE DISTRICT, I MUST THROW HER NAME OUT HERE, WAS SARAH STANDARD, BUT WHEN SHE COORDINATED ALL OF THESE VOLUNTEERS, I DON'T KNOW WHERE SHE FOUND THEM FROM TO HELP CLEAN UP JUST THE TRINITY AND SO I'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET ON HER CALENDAR IN ADDITION TO EVERYTHING ELSE SHE'S DOING BECAUSE THAT WAS A FANTASTIC EFFORT.
SHE CAN'T DO THAT AND THEN DO WHAT WE ASKED AND TO DO.
THE COORDINATION OF THE VOLUNTEERS FOR ME WITH KEEP DALLAS BEAUTIFUL IN PARTICULAR, HELPED BEAUTIFY OAK CLIFF.
I KNOW I NEED IT AND WE NEED IT.
MY COMMUNITY KEEPS TALKING ABOUT THE CHALLENGES WE TRYING TO PREPARE AN INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S INVITING AND NO, SO THAT BUSINESSES WILL WANT TO COME.
WHEN I SPEAK ON THE COMMUNITY AND THE CONCERNS FROM THE LANCASTER AREA, LANCASTER ROAD, LEAD BETTER.
GLENDALE, MARSEILLAISE, CATALYTIC HEIGHTS, FRUIT DALE, 67, 35 WE PROBABLY NEED COORDINATED EFFORT FOR MAJOR CLEANUPS, I PROMISE YOU, EVERY WEEKEND.
THE OTHER PIECE THAT GOES WITH THIS IS AN EDUCATION PIECE BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO START TRAINING FOLKS AND I HAVE ONE GROUP IN PARTICULAR WITH TOM FORESIGHT AND PARKS WHERE THEY ACTUALLY THE COMMUNITY COMES OUT.
[02:55:02]
BUT YOU HAVE TO EDUCATE BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THEM TO TURN AROUND AND THINK IT'S OKAY THAT YOU CAN THROW IT RIGHT BACK OUT WHEN WE GET THROUGH, CLEAN IT UP.IT IS A TWO-PRONG EFFORT HERE IN TERMS OF TRYING TO EDUCATE AND WE CAN'T RAISE FOLKS UP, BUT WE CAN BEGIN TO GIVE THE SIGNAL THAT THIS IS WHERE WE WANT TO GO.
IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND QUALITY HOUSING, YOU MUST BE OUR PARTNER IN THE CLEANUP.
I MUST SUPPORT WHAT'S ON THE AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED AND I DID WANT TO SPEAK UP FOR THAT BECAUSE I DO KNOW THAT I GET THAT CONSTANT CONTINUOUS PRODDING.
I WILL SUPPORT WHAT IS PRESENTED TO US IN TERMS OF THOSE THREE POSITIONS FOR KEEP DALLAS BEAUTIFUL. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE ON MS.MENDELSOHN'S MOTIONS.
SO LET'S SEE THE CARDS, EVERYONE. LET'S SEE THE CARDS.
>> WITH ONLY TWO CARDS VOTING IN FAVOR, THE LIMIT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> OKAY. WE'RE BACK ON. AMENDMENT 28A, HAS NOT BEEN AMENDED AT ALL THIS POINT.
JAMIE GRACE, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 28A.
>> KINDLY CHIEF COME BACK UP HERE, CHIEF POLICE.
THEN I JUST REALLY WANTED TO SPEAK BRIEFLY TO THE GUNFIRE DETECTION.
AGAIN, THIS MAY OR MAY NOT BE A VERY DISTRICT SPECIFIC THING BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT, THE AREAS THAT I'M LOOKING AT IN PARTICULAR, BIG CEDARS, IS 282 ACRES WORTH OF WOODED AREA AND BIKING AND ALL OF THAT, THERE'S GUNFIRE BACK THERE.
IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO MAKE DALLAS ONE OF THE CITY FOR THE BEST PARKS, YOU CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
>> BUT THIS IS AN AREA WHERE I FEEL LIKE THE GUNFIRE DETECTION MAY BE OF SOME VALUE AND THOSE WOODED AREAS OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
I HAVE ABOUT THREE OR FOUR LOCATIONS IN MY DISTRICT.
MAYBE THERE ARE MORE AND IF NOT, THEN I'M FLEXIBLE IN TERMS OF DOING THIS.
ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I WANTED TO ASK YOU IS HOW MUCH DO THESE GUNFIRE DETECTION COSTS JUST INDIVIDUALLY?
I CAN GET BACK TO YOU WITH THAT.
>> BUT WITH A GUNFIRE DETECTION SYSTEM FOR A WOODED AREA OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
I'M NOT NECESSARILY TALKING ABOUT IN ROUND THE WAY, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT IT IN THE WOODED AREAS.
WOULD THAT BE OF SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE SOME BENEFIT OR SOME HELP IN YOUR OPINION? WHEN YOU SAY NO, I'M FINE. I'LL TAKE IT EITHER WAY.
>> THE REALITY OF IT IS WE JUST DON'T SIMPLY, WE HAVEN'T TRIED THAT OUT HERE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
WHAT I'LL SAY IS THE KNOWN COMMODITY THAT HAS BEEN USEFUL AND HELPFUL FOR US HAS BEEN THE FLOCK CAMERA.
NOW HAVING SAID THAT, WE HAVEN'T TESTED OUT GUN DETECTION TECHNOLOGY IN AN URBAN SPACE.
IF WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, WOULD IT BE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE IT IN A WOODED AREA OR AN AREA THAT'S OUTSIDE, I WOULD SAY THAT IF THE SYSTEM WORKS AS IS ADVERTISED, THAT IT COULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR THOSE SPECIFIC AREAS.
BUT AS FOR A CITYWIDE IN THE URBAN AREAS OF THE CITY, WE WOULD MUCH PREFER MORE FLOCK.
>> I UNDERSTOOD IT AGAIN. I'M SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY FOR THOSE WOODED AREAS WHERE WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF CALLS AND THESE PARTICULAR AREAS IN MY DISTRICT OR AREAS WHERE THE RESPONSE TIME IS NOT AS FAST BECAUSE OF WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED AROUND THAT MOUNTAIN CREEK AREA AND SO FORTH AND I'M GOING TO BE EXCEEDED.
THIS WAS JUST SOMETHING I THOUGHT COULD HELP.
IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHERE IT'S COMING FROM, THEN WE CAN TAKE ACTION TO DETER THEM FROM COMMITTING IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
THAT WAS MY THOUGHT AND SCIENCE BEHIND IT.
>> NOW IN SECLUDED AREAS AGAIN, IF THE SYSTEM WORKS AS IS ADVERTISED, THAT COULD BE BENEFICIAL.
>> JEREMY WEST, ARE YOU READY? FIVE MINUTES BACK ON THE ORIGINAL ITEM 28A.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. JUST A CLARIFICATION QUESTION.
IF I CAN GET PUBLIC WORKS TO COME UP HERE TO ADDRESS THE 5050 SIDEWALK QUESTION FOR ME.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR, AT THE ARTISTIC DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
>> THANKS FOR COMING UP. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT ON THIS AMENDMENT WHICH WOULD WIPE OUT ONE OF MINE IF IT'S APPROVED FOR THE 5050 SIDEWALK, THE FUNDING FOR THAT WAS INTENDED TO COME OUT OF THE SIDEWALK BUDGET,
[03:00:02]
NOT THE STREETS BUDGET.IT'S SIDEWALK TO SIDEWALK WITH KEEPING IT IN THE SAME CATEGORY IS THAT YOU'RE UNDERSTANDING?
>> THE AMENDMENT FIRST TIME I READ IT, I THOUGHT IT'S COMING FROM THE STREET NOT FROM THE SIDEWALK, BUT IF IT DOESN'T TURN, THEN I CAN UNDERSTAND.
>> I MEAN WE HAVE AN ENDLESS POT OF NEEDS AND STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND ALLEYS, AND JUST KEEPING THEM IN THEIR OWN BUCKET SO WE CAN TRACK THEM ACCORDINGLY.
I THINK IS IMPORTANT, IN MY OPINION. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. NEXT TO MR. RIDLEY, YOU'VE SPOKEN ONCE ON THE ORIGINAL. I'M SORRY.
IT LOOKS LIKE MS. WILLIS, ARE YOU READY? YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS 288.
>> WE'RE BACK ON THE ORIGINAL BY BAZALDUA WILL DO IT NOW.
>> THE OG. I JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY SUPPORT ON THE HOMELESS SOLUTIONS OPTION.
I KNOW THAT WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE A FORMAL BRIEFING ON THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE REPORT, BUT WE KNOW THAT TALKING ABOUT THIS MIDDLE GROUND AROUND SOMETHING MORE TRANSITIONAL IS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS NEEDS TO THINK ABOUT PHILOSOPHICALLY, AND SO TAKING THIS STEP TOWARD THAT I THINK IS AN IMPORTANT MOVE ON OUR PART.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION ON THE SIDEWALK FUNDS COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THE PUBLIC WORKS LINE ITEM ABOUT STREET MAINTENANCE AND RESURFACING WHILE MR. [INAUDIBLE] STOOD UP HERE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND TOLD US WE COULD MANAGE ANOTHER $5 MILLION ON THAT BUDGET.
I'M HAPPY TO SEE PROGRESS IN THIS DIRECTION WITH REGARD TO ADDING AT LEAST $2.5 MILLION TO STREETS.
THIS IS A NUMBER THAT WAS HELD FLAT AND THIS BUDGET, I KNOW I KEEP BRINGING UP THE CITIZEN SATISFACTION SURVEY.
EIGHTEEN PERCENT OF OUR CITIZENS HAVE A GOOD OR EXCELLENT OPINION ABOUT OUR INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE.
AS COACH SANDERS WILL SAY HERE IS THE RECEIPT FOR HOW OUR PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT OUR STREET MAINTENANCE.
I'M VERY PLEASED TO SEE THE $2.5 MILLION HERE TODAY.
I'D LOVE TO SEE US CONTINUE TO CHIP AWAY AT THAT.
I KNOW THAT IT'S A DAUNTING NUMBER.
WE HAVE THERE OUR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT INDEX THAT JUST STRUGGLES EVEN IN 10 YEARS TO GET US UP TO A DECENT LEVEL.
I ALWAYS SAY, HOW DO YOU TAKE A VITAMIN OR HOW DO YOU EAT AN ELEPHANT? ONE BITE AT A TIME.
EVEN THOUGH IT SEEMS DAUNTING, WE HAVE TO CHIP AWAY AT THIS YEAR AFTER YEAR IN ADDITION TO WHAT THE BOND MAY YIELD.
I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF LISTENING TO THE CHIEF ON THE FLOCK CAMERAS.
IF WE'RE HEARING THAT, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE RIGHT AWAY, I THINK WE NEED TO BE AGILE IN HOW WE LOOK AT THAT LINE ITEM AND IF WE WANT TO ADD MORE THAN 80 FLOCK CAMERAS I THINK WE NEED TO LISTEN TO OUR DPD ON THAT, BUT I ALSO HEAR YOU COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY AND I TOO HAVE RANDOM GUNFIRE GOING ON.
EVEN THOUGH OTHER CITIES MAY NOT HAVE A READ ON HOW THIS WORKS FOR THEM.
I WOULD AT LEAST LIKE TO SEE US PILOT THIS IF WE'VE GOT ENOUGH OF AN INDICATOR THAT IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD TRY TO SEE IF IT DOES WORK HERE OR IF THERE'S SOME WAY THAT WE CAN MAKE IT WORK HERE BECAUSE I HEAR ABOUT IT FROM EVERY SINGLE DISTRICT.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT AFFECTS US ALL.
I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS IN THE SPIRIT OF THE DIRECTION THAT IT IS GOING AS A FIRST STEP. THANK YOU.
>> WE'RE ON THREE-MINUTE ROUNDS NOW ON 28 DAY, SO I'M GOING TO GO TO CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. JACK, CAN YOU CONFIRM BETWEEN THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE AND THE RATE PROPOSED BY THE CITY MANAGER, IS IT 5 1/2 CENTS REDUCTION THAT WE WOULD NEED TO GET TO?
IN A MEMO THAT WE SENT LAST WEEK, WE CORRECTED THAT 5.336 CENTS FOR $104.2 MILLION.
>> THIS AMENDMENT REDUCES THE TAX RATE ONE CENT WHICH I DEFINITELY APPLAUD CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA FOR.
I'M PUTTING THAT FORWARD, I WAS REALLY HAPPY TO SEE THAT.
HOWEVER, IT ACTUALLY RAISES TAXES.
YOU CAN'T SAY IT ANY OTHER WAY BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE AFFIRMING THE INCREASE THAT WAS PROPOSED BY THE CITY MANAGER.
I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT IT AND I ALSO THINK IT'S WAY PREMATURE TO ALLOCATE A MILLION DOLLARS TO A HOMELESS PROGRAM WE'VE NEVER HAD A BRIEFING ON.
[03:05:01]
WE HAVEN'T EVEN BRIEF THE HOPE REPORT, AND POTENTIALLY THERE'S FUNDING THAT'S OUTSIDE THE CITY THAT COULD FUND SOMETHING LIKE THIS.I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AMENDMENT, ALTHOUGH I DO THINK THERE WERE SOME CREATIVE IDEAS AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S INPUT ON WAYS THEY'D LIKE TO SEE THE CITY IMPROVE AND I'M A LITTLE BIT SURPRISED THAT THEY WEREN'T INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL BUDGET. THANK YOU.
>> MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON ITEM 28.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'D LIKE CLARIFICATION ON THE PUBLIC WORKS, STREET IMPROVEMENTS, SOURCE OF FUNDS.
COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA IF YOU COULD RESPOND, I ONLY HAVE THE PRINTED BUDGET, AMENDMENT 28A IN FRONT OF ME WHICH SAYS REDUCE ALLOCATION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND THEN PUT THE SAME AMOUNT INTO FUNDING FOR THE 50/50 SIDEWALK CITY FUNDING.
AFTER HEARING MR. HATEFI TALK ABOUT IT, I'M CONFUSED.
WHERE DOES THAT ONE MILLION DOLLARS IN YOUR INTENTION COME FROM? IS IT TO REDUCE THE STREET MAINTENANCE BUDGET BY ONE MILLION OR FROM SOME SIDEWALK FUND?
>> I ACTUALLY LIKE PUBLIC WORKS TO WAY IN BECAUSE THIS WAS A SOURCE THAT WAS TAKEN FROM WHAT COULD BE SHAVED.
I DON'T KNOW THE RIGHT TERMINOLOGY, BUT THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS GIVEN TO US FROM EACH DEPARTMENT IN THE EVENT THERE WAS A NO NEW REVENUE.
THERE SHOULD BE SIDEWALK TO SIDEWALK, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WHO PROVIDED INFORMATION TO WEIGH IN.
>> COULD WE HAVE HIM COME BACK TO THE PODIUM?
>> SINCE THIS WAS MY ORIGINAL AND THEN I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER.
>> I'M JUST KIDDING GO. GO AHEAD.
>> WELL, WE'RE CONSIDERING MR. BAZALDUA'S AMENDMENT.
IF THE STAFF HAS SOME INPUT ON THIS, I GUESS I'D LIKE TO GET IT FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH. PARDON THE EXPRESSION.
>> STAFF CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT, BUT WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO MAINTAIN ORDER TODAY.
>> THE QUESTION TO YOU MR. HATEFI, IS WHERE IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS MILLION-DOLLAR SOURCE OF FUNDS WOULD COME FROM IN YOUR DEPARTMENT?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND IT, I THOUGHT THIS ONE MILLION DOLLAR WILL BE PART OF THIS SIDEWALK COST THAT IS GOING TOWARD THE COST YOU PROGRAM.
I THINK THIS IS WHY THE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST ALSO CLARIFIED ON THE MOTION FROM THE AMENDMENT.
>> IT WOULD NOT COME FROM THE STREET IMPROVEMENT BUDGET?
>> IF IT COMES FROM THE STREET IMPROVEMENT BUDGET, IT DEPENDS.
WE HAVE DIFFERENT SOURCE OF FUNDING.
I MAY NEED TO RESEARCH THAT TO GET BACK WITH YOU.
>> WELL, WHAT IS THE SOURCE IF IT WERE TO COME OUT OF SIDEWALK FUNDING?
>> WHAT SOURCE OF FUNDING WE HAVE FOR SIDEWALK?
>> WE HAVE CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION AND ALSO WE HAVE GENERAL FUND FOR SIDEWALK IF THIS IS THE QUESTION.
>> WELL, AND IF THAT EXISTING FUNDING IS FOR THOSE CITY'S PORTION OF THE 50/50 SHARE, WHY DO WE NEED TO PUT IN ADDITIONAL MILLION DOLLARS INTO THAT?
>> NO. WE DON'T ACTUALLY BUDGET THE FIXED COST SHARE PROGRAM OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND MONEY.
USUALLY, HISTORICALLY, IT HAS BEEN FUNDED THROUGH THE BOND PROGRAM, AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THIS AMENDMENT WANTS TO TAKE A MILLION DOLLAR FROM WHATEVER WE HAVE FOR THE SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN TO GO TOWARD THEIR COST-SHARE PROGRAM TILL 24 BOND PROGRAM BECOMES THE REALITY AND THEN WE CAN ACTUALLY GET THAT MONEY FOR THEIR CULTURE PROGRAM.
FILL IN THE GAP BETWEEN NOW AND THEN.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU DO HAVE A BUDGET ALLOCATION CURRENTLY IN THE 24 BUDGET FOR THE CITY SHARE OF THE SIDEWALK SHARE?
>> NO. WE DO HAVE BUDGET FOR SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN.
WE DO NOT HAVE ANY BUDGET FOR COST-SHARE PROGRAMS.
>> WHAT DOES THAT MONEY IN THE MASTER PLAN FUND GO FOR?
>> WELL, THE MONEY BASED ON THIS AMENDMENT, I'M ASSUMING THAT A MILLION DOLLAR OUT OF THAT $5.3 MILLION THAT WE HAVE FOR THE SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN, IT GETS REDUCED TO GO TOWARD THE COST-SHARE PROGRAM.
BASICALLY, THIS IS THE SHARE FOR THE CITY TO PAY FOR THE COST SHARE PROGRAM.
ALSO KEEP IN MIND THAT AS A PART OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET, WE HAVE TWO MILLION DOLLAR.
THE EQUITY FUND FOR COST-SHARE PROGRAM WHICH
[03:10:04]
USUALLY GOES TO THE CITIZEN PORTION OF IT, THE RESIDENT'S PORTION OF IT.WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THIS AMENDMENT WOULD TAKE MONEY FROM THE SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN FUNDING AND PUT IT INTO THE COST SHARE FOR THE CITY'S PORTION.
WHAT CAN THAT MASTER PLAN FUNDING BE USED FOR NOW? CAN IT NOT BE USED FOR THE CITY'S PORTION OF THE COST SHARE?
>> NO. TYPICALLY WE DON'T USE THE FONT FOR THE SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN AS PART OF THE COST-SHARE.
WE USUALLY USE IT TO BASICALLY ADDRESS ALL THE IDENTIFIED PROJECT AS A PART OF THE SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN TO TACKLE ALL OF THOSE PROJECTS BASICALLY.
>> THOSE PROJECTS ARE WHERE THE CITY FUNDS 100 PERCENT OF THE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT?
>> MS. BLACKMON, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. THERE'S A LINE ITEM THAT SAYS ELIMINATE AND IT HAS THE AM, THE NUMBER SIGN POSITIONS.
>> THERE ARE 147 POSITIONS THAT MET THE CRITERIA OF BEING VACANT FOR 12-PLUS MONTHS.
THAT WAS BASED ON INFORMATION AS OF AUGUST THE 1ST.
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT SOME OF THOSE MAY HAVE BEEN FILLED SINCE THEN, BUT IT'S APPROXIMATELY 147.
>> IT'S 147. THANK YOU ON THAT ONE.
ON THE ONE RIGHT ABOVE IT ABOUT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
I THINK I'VE BEEN ON THIS BODY WHEN WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION A FEW YEARS AGO.
CAN YOU TELL ME HOW MANY OFFICERS DID WE HIRE THIS LAST YEAR? BOTH THE NET AND THE GROSS.
>> WELL, I'LL GO WITH THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS COUNCIL MEMBER.
LAST YEAR, WE WERE ABLE TO HIRE 200, THIS YEAR 175.
>> THEN WITH THE ATTRITION, WHAT WAS OUR NET RESULT? DO YOU KNOW? [BACKGROUND]
>> WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION OF HIGHER THOUSAND, MORE, HIGHER, 25,000, WHATEVER PICK A NUMBER.
THE QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THAT NUMBER? WHAT IS THE NUMBER THAT YOU CAN HANDLE IN GRADING QUALITY TRAINING, GETTING THEM THEIR EQUIPMENT, AND GETTING THEM ON THE STREET? WHAT IS THAT REALISTIC NUMBER IN YOUR MIND?
>> IN MY MIND, A REALISTIC NUMBER IS 250.
>> WHAT WE'VE DONE AND I THINK ANYBODY, IF YOU CAME TO US AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, I GOT 50 MORE TO COME ON, GIVING US A TOTAL OF 300, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ON THIS BODY WOULD TELL YOU NO.
I THINK WE WOULD FIND A WAY TO DO IT.
BRINGING THIS DOWN TO 250 IS A REALISTIC TARGET FOR YOU IN YOUR DEPARTMENT.
>> ABSOLUTELY, COUNCIL MEMBER. AGAIN, 290 IS VERY LOFTY GOAL, RECRUIT WORKING EXTREMELY HARD.
IF WE CAN STAFF UP TO 250, I'LL SAY WITH THE CAVEAT, AND I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS TO CITY MANAGER ALREADY, THAT IF WE ARE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO HIRE MORE RECRUIT CLASSES IN ADDITION TO 250, THAT WE WILL DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO ENSURE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO THAT.
>> LET'S SEE. CHAIRMAN SCHULTZ, HAVE YOU SPOKEN YET ON 28-DAY THE ORIGINAL? I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE.
>> NO, JUST THE [INAUDIBLE], SIR.
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, CHIEF, I HATE TO DO THIS.
I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO COME BACK UP BECAUSE I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS BEFORE ANYTHING GETS MISREPRESENTED PUBLICLY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I DO WANT TO REINFORCE THE STATEMENT THAT YOU MADE ABOUT HOW HARD EVERYONE IS WORKING.
IN FACT, IF YOU COULD SHARE WITH US AND WITH THE PUBLIC PART OF THE CHALLENGES OF GETTING THAT NUMBER IN THE SENSE OF I KNOW I'VE HEARD YOU TALK BEFORE ABOUT HOW IT'S A NATIONAL CHALLENGE AND THAT DALLAS IS EXCEEDING A LOT OF OTHER CITIES.
IF YOU COULD JUST TAKE A MINUTE AND TALK ABOUT THAT, I THINK IT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED.
>> I KNOW. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE COMMUNITY, AGAIN, AS YOU ARE ALL AT COMMUNITY MEETINGS THAT I AM AT, THERE'S NOT A COMMITTEE MEETING THAT WE GO TO THAT OUR COMMUNITY DOES NOT WANT MORE OFFICERS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.
THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. WE ARE WORKING EXTREMELY HARD WITH REGARDS TO HAVE A RECRUITING UNIT.
WHAT WE'RE FACING HERE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS IS
[03:15:01]
NOT IMMUNE TO ANY OTHER MAJOR CITY IN THE COUNTRY.THERE IS A NATIONAL STAFFING CRISIS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.
THERE ARE BILLS OUT OF WASHINGTON, DC, BEING WORKED ON TO DEAL WITH THAT ISSUE.
IN PRESIDENT BIDEN'S EXECUTIVE ORDER, RECRUITING AND RETENTION IS AN IMPORTANT POINT THAT HE ALSO MAKES AN EXECUTIVE ORDER.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT ALL OF OUR AGENCIES ARE DEALING WITH.
I THINK WHAT WAS EXTREMELY HELPFUL EARLIER IN THE YEAR, OBVIOUSLY, THE RETENTION BONUS THAT WAS GIVEN.
AGAIN, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE 70 INDIVIDUALS THAT OFFSETS IF WE DON'T GET IF YOU LOOK AT IT TO ME, I DON'T LOOK AT IT.
SIMPLY RETENTION OF WE DISCUSSED MANY TIMES, I CAN HAVE 150 PEOPLE STARTING A POLICE ACADEMY, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO REALIZE THEIR EFFICIENCIES FOR 18 MONTHS, APPROXIMATELY 18 MONTHS AFTER THAT.
I KNOW THAT GETS A LOT OF ATTENTION.
BUT TO ME, I LOOK AT IT OVERALL STAFFING.
THE MANNER IN WHICH WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO GROW THIS DEPARTMENT IS RECRUITING.
IT'S KEEPING OUR OFFICERS THAT ARE HERE AND KEEPING THEM HAPPY, KEEPING THEM MORALE HIGH.
IT'S RECRUITING LATERALS AND ENSURING THAT PEOPLE STAY HERE AS LONG AS THEY CAN AND DON'T RETIRE THE DATE OF RETIREMENT ELIGIBLE.
THOSE LISTENING THAT WE'RE WORKING ON THAT COUNCIL HAS BEEN EXTREMELY SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE MEASURES.
BUT AS I MENTIONED AGAIN, IF WE ARE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HIRE 250 OFFICERS, WE ALSO CANNOT FORGET THE FACT THAT IF WE RETAIN 70 THAT WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE RETIRED BECAUSE WE HAVE SEEN RETIREMENTS DROP, THEN THAT'S A NET GAIN FROM WHAT WE HAVE IN OVERALL, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OVERALL STAFFING OR DEPARTMENT.
IT'S NOT JUST RECRUITING. IT'S NOT JUST RETENTION.
IT'S THE OVERALL COLLECTIVE NUMBER OF OFFICERS WE HAVE.
I THINK THAT ALSO ONCE WE GET THE NEW ACADEMY, THAT WILL HELP AS WELL.
>> THE NEW ACADEMY WILL DEFINITELY BE A HUMONGOUS SHOT IN THE ARM TO OUR CITY AND OUR DEPARTMENT.
>> GREAT. I ALSO WANT TO JUST REINFORCE TO YOU, I KNOW YOU KNOW IT AND YOU'VE ACTUALLY SAID IT.
BUT AGAIN, BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH MISINFORMATION ABOUT THE COUNCIL'S SUPPORT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
I JUST WANT TO REINFORCE THE FACT THAT I DON'T KNOW OF A TIME, AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT ANY PUBLIC SAFETY HAS COME TO THE COUNCIL AND SAID WE NEED THIS, AND COUNSEL HAS DENIED THAT REQUEST.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR AS WELL.
>> VERY CLEAR. SINCE THE DAY I'VE GOTTEN HERE, WE'VE GOTTEN TREMENDOUS SUPPORT FROM THE COUNCIL, FROM THE MAYOR, THE CITY MANAGER.
AGAIN, YOU HOLD US ACCOUNTABLE, WANT TO MAKE SURE WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH OUR DOLLARS AND CENTS, WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTANDABLE.
THERE'S NOT BEEN A MAJOR ISSUE THAT I'VE REQUESTED THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET FOR OUR MEN AND WOMEN, WHO ULTIMATELY NEED THE HELP TO MAXIMIZE THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE.
>> THAT'S TERRIFIC, AND I HOPE THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO GO INTO SOME CREATIVE THINGS, WHETHER IT'S WITH HOUSING AND OTHER INTERESTING WAYS THAT WE CAN ADDRESS BECAUSE OF OUR SUPPORT AND REAL APPRECIATION FOR ALL OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY EMPLOYEES.
REALLY ANY CREATIVE SOLUTIONS THAT WE HAVE THAT CAN HELP SUPPORT THEM AND ALL OF OUR CITY EMPLOYEES, OF COURSE, WE'RE HERE.
KEEP THE IDEAS COME IN AND [OVERLAPPING]
>> DEFINITELY KEEP THE IDEAS COMING.
>> THANK YOU, CHIEF. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES TO CLOSE, I HOPE ON YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED, MR. MAYOR.
>> ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST MR. BAZALDUA'S MOTION, ITEM 28 A AMENDMENT 20 A. XENON, SHOW THE CARDS, BOOKS, SHOW THE CARDS. YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO.
>> WITH 13 CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT.
IT'S MOVED FORWARD, MR. MAYOR.
>> WONDERFUL. WHO HAS AN AMENDMENT? WHO'S GOTTEN AMENDMENT THEY WANT TO PUT FORWARD.
WE'RE TAKING EVERYONE'S BEST ONE OR THEIR FAVORITE CHAIRWOMAN OF GOING IN AND OUT. ARE YOU IN OR YEAH.
I SAW YOU'RE IN THERE FOR A SECOND, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT YOUR RECOGNIZED FOR EMOTION IF YOU HAVE ONE ON AN AMENDMENT.
>> I DO. THANK YOU. WELL, WITH CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA'S MOTION PASSING.
MY NUMBER ONE AMENDMENT IS NO LONGER NECESSARY.
I HAD A SERIES OF TAX RATE REDUCTION AMENDMENTS.
>> I WANT YOU TO LAY OUT ONE AMENDMENT. TAKE ONE.
>> THAT ALL ALIGN WITH THE SUGGESTIONS I MADE IN THE BUDGET MEMO TO YOU, MAYOR.
TOGETHER, THEY WOULD ALL TOTAL ABOUT $62 MILLION.
>> WE STILL NEED A MOTION, THOUGH, BEFORE WE CAN HAVE ANY MORE.
>> THE MOTION IS TO REMOVE HALF OF THE FTES AND HALF OF THE BUDGET SALARY THAT'S BEEN OPEN FOR 6-12 MONTHS AS PROVIDED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND MEMO DATED 82323.
THE SELECTION OF THE FTES TO REMOVE WOULD BE LEFT TO THE CITY MANAGER'S DISCRETION.
>> I'LL MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON THIS, IS THIS AMENDMENT NUMBER THAT ALREADY HAS A NUMBER THAT'S JUST BEEN MODIFIED SO YOU CAN HELP?
>> IS NUMBER 33 IN ITS ENTIRETY OR A MODIFIED VERSION OF 33.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECONDED. CHAIRWOMAN, MIDDLE.
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT.
[03:20:01]
>> THANK YOU. I'LL GO BACK TO SAYING IT'S ONE OF A SERIES OF AMENDMENTS THAT I'M MAKING TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE, ALL BASED ON THE MEMO THAT I WROTE TO THE MAYOR, THAT TOGETHER TOTAL 62 MILLION.
I GUESS THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, FOR THE FIRST 6.8 MILLION THAT CAME ON YOUR AMENDMENT.
THIS IS DEALING WITH WHAT I CALL GHOST FTES.
I DON'T THINK THAT JACK LOVES THAT NAME. I'M SORRY.
BUT WE HEARD RIGHT THERE AS CODE COMPLIANCE TALKED ABOUT HOW THEY WERE DOING DEMOLITION OF HOUSES, THAT THEY WERE USING FUNDING FROM POSITIONS THAT THEY DIDN'T FILL TO USE IT FOR ANOTHER PURPOSE.
WHAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IS A BUDGET THAT ACTUALLY REFLECTS THE NEEDS OF A DEPARTMENT AND ISN'T RELYING ON THESE GHOST FTES.
THE AMENDMENT THAT JUST PASSED WAS FOR POSITIONS THAT HAD BEEN OPEN FOR A YEAR OR LONGER.
MY SUPPOSITION IS THAT IT'S REASONABLE AFTER NINE MONTHS TO REALIZE THIS IS NOT A PRIORITY FOR THE DEPARTMENT, OR IF THERE'S SOME OTHER PROBLEM, FOR INSTANCE, WE MAY BE WAY OFF ON PAY RATE AND IT NEEDS TO GO BACK AND BE RECONSIDERED BEFORE IT'S REAUTHORIZED.
GIVEN CITY HALL AND AS FAST OR NOT, THINGS MOVE HERE.
I THINK SIX MONTHS TO HIRE SOMEONE IS PROBABLY REASONABLE THESE DAYS.
THAT'S WHY I'VE SPLIT THE NUMBER BETWEEN SIX AND 12 MONTHS BECAUSE, REALLY I WAS LOOKING AT AFTER NINE MONTHS, IT BECOMES UNREASONABLE IN MY VIEW.
WITH THAT, THIS WOULD SAVE US QUITE A BIT OF MONEY, $5.7 MILLION.
I HOPE YOU WILL SUPPORT THIS FURTHER TAX REDUCTION. THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT NUMBER 33? CORRECT. AMENDMENT NUMBER 33, BY MR. WEST. CHAIRMAN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 33.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUE FOR SEEKING TO TRY TO SAVE US TAX REVENUE OR TAX DOLLARS FOR RESIDENTS.
I KNOW IT'S A PRIORITY FOR MY RESIDENTS AS IT IS FOR YOURS AND A LOT OF THE CITY.
I DID SIGN ONTO AMENDMENT 32 BECAUSE I BELIEVED ON THE LENGTH OF TIME IT WAS DOABLE TO I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND FROM STAFF ON THE SIX-MONTH GAP FOR WHEN THE POSITION IS OPEN, WHY DOES IT TAKE SO LONG TO FILL A POSITION? CAN YOU JUST COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT BECAUSE I'M INCLINED TO SUPPORT IT.
BUT I WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE REALITY OF IT WHEN IT COMES TO THE HIRING AND IS THIS MONEY USED FOR SOMETHING ELSE? IS IT USED FOR TEMP WORK? IT'S A LOT OF MONEY AND I'M WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHY THESE ARE OPEN SO LONG. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST JACK IRELAND, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER.
YES, THE AMENDMENT AS PRESENTED, TAKES HALF OF THE AMOUNT THAT WE PROVIDED TO COUNCIL AS AVAILABLE, RELATED TO POSITIONS THAT HAD BEEN VACANT FOR 6-12 MONTHS.
WE RAN THOSE NUMBERS ON AUGUST THE 1ST, IT'S 223 TOTAL POSITIONS.
TAKING HALF OF IT WOULD BE 111 OR 12 POSITIONS.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF REASONS THAT IT TAKES AN AMOUNT OF TIME TO FILL THE POSITIONS.
A LOT OF TIMES IS MR. MENDELSOHN MENTIONED, WE DO HAVE ISSUES WITH THE COMPENSATION AND WE DO HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT FOR DIFFERENT POSITIONS TO DETERMINE IF WE NEED TO MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS.
THE WAY THE FUNDS ARE USED, THEY ARE ALLOCATED FOR SALARIES.
BUT WHEN WE ARE UNABLE TO FILL THE POSITIONS, A DEPARTMENT WILL OFTEN USE THE FUNDS FOR OVERTIME FOR EXISTING STAFF TO GET THE WORK DONE OR FOR TEMPORARY HELP, OR CONTRACT SERVICES TO GET THE WORK DONE.
AS FAR AS REASONS, FAR DELAYS IN RECRUITING.
IT'S JUST THAT RIGHT NOW, MOST OF IT IS SALARY DRIVEN.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN PURCHASING, I KNOW WE'RE HAVING A VERY DIFFICULT TIME FILLING POSITIONS RELATED TO SALARIES AND SO WE'VE POSTED AND WE'VE MADE EFFORTS TO DO THAT.
WE'RE NOW WORKING WITH HR ON A COMPENSATION REVIEW TO DETERMINE IF THOSE POSITIONS NEED TO BE GRADED AND THE SALARY CHANGE.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF REASONS I KNOW ON THIS LIST, THERE'S SEVERAL 911 CALL TAKERS THAT ARE ON THIS LIST.
THERE'S BEEN A COMPARISON OF THE COMPENSATION WITH OTHER CITIES TRYING TO DETERMINE IF WE'RE JUST UNDERPAID.
RIGHT NOW SALARY IS THE BIGGEST DRIVER.
>> THIS SHOULDN'T COME AS A SURPRISE BECAUSE I'VE TOLD THIS TO YOU BEFORE, BUT I JUST DON'T LIKE HOW WE'RE ACCOUNTING FOR THIS.
[03:25:02]
IF THE GHOST FTE COMMENT IS SEEMS PRETTY ACCURATE TO ME BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT A BUDGET FOR HIRING PEOPLE AND THEN IT'S LEFT UP TO THE DEPARTMENTS TO SAY, OH, WE CAN'T HIRE ANYONE, WE'RE GOING TO APPLY IT TO OVERTIME.WE'RE GOING TO APPLY IT TO PART-TIME HELP.
IT JUST DOESN'T RESONATE WITH ME AS A RESPONSIBLE WAY TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS MONEY.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOLUTION IS.
I JUST THINK WE NEED TO TIGHTEN IT UP IN THE BUDGET AND THEN MY SECOND ISSUE IS WE'VE BEEN HEARING SINCE 2019 WHEN I GOT HERE THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT OUR SALARY IN OUR COMPENSATION AND THAT WAS OUR PROBLEM AND I'M HEARING IT AGAIN.
IT'S FOUR YEARS LATER. WHEN DO WE FIX THAT?
>> WE HAVE CONTINUED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS FOR COMPENSATION.
WE IMPLEMENTED A COMPENSATION STUDY AND MADE ADJUSTMENTS, BUT IT'S A CONSTANTLY MOVING NUMBER.
IT'S AN INCREDIBLY COMPETITIVE MARKET OUT THERE FOR SOME OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO RECRUIT AND WE'RE JUST HAVING TO TRY TO KEEP UP WITH THAT.
RIGHT NOW WHEN WE CAN'T FILL THE POSITIONS, WE STILL NEED TO GET THE WORK DONE AND SO DEPARTMENTS WILL USE THIS MONEY FOR OVERTIME OR OTHER WAYS TO DELIVER THE SERVICE.
HAD A CONVERSATION WITH BUILDING SERVICES THIS MORNING ABOUT THEIR VACANCIES WHEN THEY HAVE VACANT HVAC POSITIONS THAT WILL USE OVERTIME FOR EXISTING POSITIONS OR THEY'LL HIRE CONTRACTORS.
IF WE DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING AVAILABLE TO DO THAT, THEN THERE COULD BE A SERVICE IMPACT.
>> CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, THERE'S A QUESTION, I GUESS OUR CITY MANAGER IN TERMS OF OVERALL, MANAGEMENT OF ANY OPERATION WITH 15,000 EMPLOYEES.
WHAT I'M WONDERING IS, HOW IS OUR SITUATION DIFFERENT FROM ANY MAJOR EMPLOYER IN THIS SETTING AND IS GOVERNMENT THAT MUCH DIFFERENT OTHER THAN ART TRANSPARENCY, THAN PRIVATE COMPANIES IN TRYING TO FILL ESPECIALLY WHAT ARE WE BELOW? LIKE THREE SOMETHING PERCENT UNEMPLOYMENT HERE IN DALLAS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN.
I WOULD SAY THIS IS A TYPICAL STRUGGLE, AT LEAST AS I MEET AND TALK WITH MY COLLEAGUES, WHICH ARE THE LARGE CITIES, CITY MANAGERS.
THE ABILITY TO FILL POSITIONS AS WELL AS RETAINED POSITIONS, PARTICULARLY POST PANDEMIC HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY MORE DIFFICULT, I THINK, BECAUSE INDIVIDUAL STANDARDS AND OUR WILLINGNESS TO DO CERTAIN JOBS AND ARE THE FLEXIBILITY ASSOCIATED WITH THEM AS WELL AS THE PE, GIVEN EVEN SOME OF THEIR LOWER LEVEL POSITIONS AND ORGANIZATIONS ARE DEMANDING MORE RESOURCES AND PAY NOW TO COME TO WORK.
I THINK WE'VE SEEN THAT UP AND DOWN OUR ORGANIZATION.
SECONDLY, WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO REPLACE AND FIND EMPLOYEES, PARTICULARLY AT NON ENTRY-LEVEL POSITIONS, PARTICULARLY IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
IT IS QUITE DIFFICULT, PARTICULARLY IF THEY'RE COMING FROM ANOTHER ENTITY WHERE THEY EXPECT TO AT LEAST MAKE THE SAME IF NOT MORE AND OR IF THEY ARE EVEN ENTRY-LEVEL IN SOME CASES TRYING TO START, I THINK THEIR EXPECTATIONS ARE GREATER AND SO IT'S BEEN A CHALLENGE AND I THINK JACK HIT IT.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ARE CONTINUALLY BEHIND ALL THE TIME BECAUSE PEOPLE AND THE MARKET WILL DICTATE SOMEONE'S WILLINGNESS TO TAKE CERTAIN TYPE OF WORK.
AGAIN, A CITY THIS LARGE WITH AS MANY NEEDS, WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE IN COMPETITION WITH SMALLER CITIES.
ONE, BECAUSE I THINK THEY PAY MORE IN SOME CASES THAN WE DO.
BUT I THINK THE WORK IS MORE CHALLENGING HERE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT MORE TO DO AND AGAIN, UNMET NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY, THE EXPECTATION IS HIGHER.
THESE PARTICULAR POSITIONS, AND AGAIN, I WILL SAY WE SPOKE VERY LIMITED ON THE 12 MONTHS PLUS POSITIONS WITH THE BELIEF AND UNDERSTANDING THAT AT LEAST THERE ARE SOME POSITIONS WITHIN THERE THAT IF WE ELIMINATE THOSE, I THINK I WON'T SAY IT WILL BE FINE.
BUT THE 6-12 MONTHS MAY OVERLAP WITH SOME OF THOSE SAME CLASSIFICATIONS AND WE WILL DO AS A MANAGER'S THE VERY BEST AND MAKE SURE WE'RE FEELING THE MOST CRITICAL POSITIONS OF THOSE 12.
IF WE NEED TO RECLASSIFY TO ENSURE THAT WE GET THE WORK DONE, THAT'S THE ISSUE.
WE DON'T HAVE THE OPTION TO SAY I JUST CAN'T FEEL THE POSITION SO THE WORK DOESN'T GET DONE.
AS JACK SAID, WE USE TEMPORARY LABOR OR HIRE CONTRACTORS TO DO THE WORK IF WE CAN'T FIND BODY'S WILLING TO DO IT ON A PERMANENT BASIS.
AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS NOT UNCOMMON.
AGAIN, I THINK WE'VE EVOLVED, WE'RE ACTUALLY SHOWING WHAT THE FTE COUNTIES AS WELL AS WHAT THE POSITIONS ARE AND THAT'S BEEN AN EVOLUTION FOR US TO REALLY SHARE THAT PEOPLE ARE MORE THAN JUST FRACTIONAL NUMBERS, ARE ACTUALLY BODIES AND POSITIONS.
WE DO A GOOD JOB TRYING TO SHOW WHAT'S VACANT AND WHAT IS FIELD.
AGAIN, TO MS. MENDELSOHN'S POINT TO JACK SENTIMENT ON THE NOTION OF GHOSTS POSITIONS.
[03:30:05]
I WOULDN'T CLASSIFY THEM AS THAT.I THINK AS I'VE TALKED WHETHER IT'S POLICE VACANCIES OR NOT, WHEN THERE ARE ISSUES WITH OVERTIME OR OTHER ISSUES, THEY ALWAYS LOOK FIRST WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN NOT GO OUTSIDE AND IMPACT FOR POLICE LACK EXAMPLE, ANY OTHER DEPARTMENT.
IF THEY GO OVER THEIR BUDGET, THEY START THEIR FIRST THEY'VE GOT TO HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY, IN MY OPINION, TO BE ABLE TO MOVE AND DO DIFFERENT THINGS, MEANING ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE HAVING DICTATE UNLESS WE'RE IN A BUDGET CRUNCH WHERE WE TELL OUR DIRECTORS, DO NOT FEEL YOUR POSITIONS, THEY DO NOT HOLD THEM VACANT ON PURPOSE.
IN MOST CASES, IF NOT ALL, THEY MAY HOLD THEM VACANT SHOULD IN FACT, THERE'LL BE AN ISSUE THAT THEY KNOW THEY'VE GOT TO WORK THROUGH OR IF JACK AND GENETIC HAVE USED THEIR WIZARDRY ON THE, I GUESS THE ATTRITION THAT THEY TAKE OUT, THEY MAY NOT BE FUNDED FOR THE FULL YEAR ANYWAY, JUST BECAUSE OF OUR KNOWN ATTRITION RATES.
THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT GO INTO IT.
BUT FOR 15,000 EMPLOYEES AND 42 DEPARTMENTS, I BELIEVE THEY FUNCTION AS THEY SHOULD WHEN IT COMES TO WORKING THROUGH OUR PROCESSES AND CIVIL SERVICE AND HR, CATCH THE BRUNT OF IT AS IF THEY ARE THE ISSUE AND TALENT.
THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES INTO HIRING PEOPLE AND TRUTHFULLY WILL SPEND A MONTH TRYING TO HIRE SOMEONE OR TWO.
GET TO THE END, OFFER THEM WITH POSITION.
THEN THEY WALK AWAY BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE THE SALARY AT THE END OF IT AND THAT IS A CHALLENGE THROUGH ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS, AND THAT'S JUST WHAT THE MARKET IS.
RATHER THAN GOING ON TO THE THIRD OR FOURTH PERSON WHO MAY WANT TO BE HIRED, WE'LL CHOOSE IN MOST CASES TO GO BACK OUT, RE ADVERTISE AND TRY TO FIND THE BEST PERSON FOR THE ROLE.
>> I THINK THAT WHAT THAT SPEAKS TO ITS FIRST OF ALL, I SEE OUR CITY ATTORNEY NODDING HER HEAD AND IF THE ATTORNEYS LEVEL AND THEY'RE SUFFERING WITH IT, WE CAN IMAGINE SOME OF THE CHALLENGES AND SOME OF THE DEPARTMENTS THAT PAY LESS THAN PEOPLE WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
I THINK THAT THE HR, THE COMP STUDIES THAT WE'RE DOING ON COMPENSATION ARE MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN THE DEPARTMENTS THAT WE HAVE DONE THOSE.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. HASN'T HAD AN IMPACT, MR. IRELAND.
>> YES, MAM. IT HAS HAD AN IMPACT AND ONE THING TO KNOW ABOUT THE COMP STUDY, IT'S NOT A ONE AND DONE.
WE'RE TRYING TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH MARKET AND WE'RE HAVING TO CONSTANTLY LOOK AT THAT AND RE-EVALUATE WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE MARKET AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS ACCORDINGLY.
MR. TOLBERT, DID YOU WANT TO, SHE SAID I DID GET AN OUTLET, SO THAT'S FINE.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO START TO LOOK AT IS HOW DO WE GET MORE PEOPLE TO EVEN CONSIDER A LOCAL GOVERNMENT AS AN EMPLOYMENT THROUGH THE WORKFORCE EDUCATION AND EQUITY COMMITTEE, WE'RE GOING TO START HELPING PEOPLE WAKE UP TO THE IDEA THAT WORKING FOR CITY GOVERNMENT IS A GREAT CAREER.
WHAT CAN WE DO IN TERMS OF RECRUITMENT AS A CITY? I APPRECIATE THAT.
I WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE ALSO THAT THERE'S NOT A FALSE LOGIC APPLIED IN THE EXAMPLE OF CODE, FOR EXAMPLE, BECAUSE THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE, I GUESS FOR YOU, MR. BROADEN ACTS ARE ACTUALLY FOR JACK.
EITHER ONE IS DOES EVERY REQUEST FOR THE BUDGET WHEN YOU'RE PUTTING YOUR BUDGET TOGETHER WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS, DOES EVERY REQUEST GET ADDED TO THE BUDGET?
>> WHAT I'M WONDERING IS, SO FOR THE EXAMPLE OF BEING ABLE TO USE IF YOU CAN'T HIRE INTERNALLY, THEN YOU CONTRACT IT OUT AND SOMETIMES YOU'RE ABLE TO USE THAT FOR DEMOLITIONS FOR THINGS THAT THEY WANT TO GET DONE AS WELL.
I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE INTERNAL FLEXIBILITY WITHIN DEPARTMENTS SO IS THAT OKAY IF THERE WASN'T SOMETHING THEY REALLY WANTED TO ACCOMPLISH AS A DEPARTMENT COULDN'T FIND FTES FOR SOME THINGS, CAN YOU USE SOME OF THAT MONEY FOR OTHER THINGS THAT YOU'VE BEEN WANTING TO GET DONE BUT DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR, BUT NOW YOU MAY HAVE THE MONEY FOR BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET THAT POSITION FILLED.
>> OUR BUDGET EXECUTION PRACTICES ARE IF YOU HAVE SAVINGS AND SALARIES, YOU CAN USE THAT WITHIN YOUR DEPARTMENT TO GET THAT WORK DONE.
WHETHER THAT'S OVERTIME, TEMPS DE LABOR CONTRACTS.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO USE IT OUTSIDE OF A TYPE OF PERSONNEL TYPE OF ARRANGEMENT, THEN THEY SUBMIT A REQUEST TO THAT WE'VE REVIEWED THOSE FOR A REALLOCATION, BUT IF IT'S WITHIN THE SALARY DOLLARS, GET THE WORK DONE.
>> THEY HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE THOSE MOVES.
>> THANK YOU. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF ARC CONTINUING SUPPORT SO I THANK YOU.
>> ITEM 33 YOU'RE RIGHT. THAT'S FIVE-MINUTES.
WE'RE ON ITEM 33, AMENDMENT 33 FOR THE PUBLIC.
>> YES. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR AND CHAIRMAN SCHULTZ, I THINK YOU GOT MY QUESTIONS ANSWERED.
BUT JACK, BACK TO IF AN AMOUNT IS UNSPENT, YOU CAN GET IT REALLOCATED FOR ANOTHER PURPOSE.
[03:35:01]
THERE'S A PROCESS THAT THEY GO THROUGH.BUT ARE THERE TIMES WHEN THAT MONEY IS JUST NOT SPENT, DOES IT EVER JUST SIT THERE?
>> YES, MA'AM. WE REPORT MONTHLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH THE BUDGET ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT SHOWING VARIANCES TO BUDGET AND SO WE MONITOR THAT ON A MONTHLY BASIS.
WE DEAL WITH THAT WHEN WE HAVE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE SPENDING MORE THAN THEIR BUDGET AND WE COME TO COUNCIL TO MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS.
FREQUENTLY WHEN ONE DEPARTMENT IS GOING OVER BUDGET, WE WILL FREQUENTLY TAKE FROM DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE UNDER BUDGET SO THAT WE CAN STAY BALANCED OVERALL.
BUT YES, IT'S MONITORED MONTHLY.
>> IF WE WERE TO CUT SOME OF THESE FROM THE BUDGET THEN ON A GOING-FORWARD BASIS, IF A DEPARTMENT NEEDED AN ALLOCATION AND THEY COULD COME TO YOU AND YOU COULD POTENTIALLY FIND MONEY FROM ANOTHER DEPARTMENT.
>> IT'S POSSIBLE TO MOVE MONEY BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS.
WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING THAT TO COUNCIL IN AN ADJUSTMENT.
>> GOT YOU. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES WITH ON FOUR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER 33? SEEING NONE, LET'S SEE THE CARDS.
>> WITH ONLY FIVE CARDS RATES IN FAVOR THE MOTION FAILS MR. MAYOR.
>> ALL RIGHT. WHO ELSE HAS AN AMENDMENT, YOUR FAVORITE AMENDMENT, MR. RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR A MOTION?
>> THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, REFERRING TO AMENDMENT 18.
THIS IS TO REDUCE THE COMMUNICATIONS OUTREACH AND MARKETING BUDGET TO THE 22-23 FORECAST FIGURE.
ADDING BACK-IN REQUIRED CONTRACTUAL SALARY BENEFIT IN PENSION INCREASES.
>> AS PART OF THAT MOTION IS DECREASING THE TAX RATE.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED DISCUSSION.
>> YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT NUMBER 18, EVERYONE.
>> I THINK THAT THIS AMENDMENT BRINGS BACK INTO THE BUDGET, THE EXISTING LEVEL OF EXPENDITURE BASED UPON THE FORECAST FOR THE 23 EXPENDITURES FOR THIS DEPARTMENT AFTER ALLOWING FOR THE INCREASE IN MERIT COMPRESSION PAY BENEFITS CHARGED BACK TO FLEET TO RISK MANAGEMENT IN ITS AND PROVIDES US SOME ADDITIONAL TAX RATE RELIEF FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS.
>> THE MIC DROP IS BACK. MR. RIDLEY, THAT WAS IT?
>> THAT'S GREAT. MAYOR PRO TEM.
YOU RECOGNIZE FROM FIVE-MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 18 BY MR. RIDLEY.
>> IT'S A QUESTION FOR THE CITY MANAGER.
THE COMMUNICATION OUTREACH AND MARKETING.
WHAT IS THE BUDGET UPDATE DEPARTMENT? GUEST CHECK.
>> IT'S APPROXIMATELY FOUR MILLION CATHERINE THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
CATHERINE, CHOIR DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS, OUTREACH AND MARKETING.
THAT'S FOUR MILLION APPROXIMATELY, INCLUDING AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT AND GENERAL FUND.
>> THIS OUTREACH AND MARKETING COMBINED?
>> YES, SIR. COMMUNICATIONS, OUTREACH, AND MARKETING.
>> HOW MANY FTES ISN'T IN THE DEPARTMENT?
>> THIRTY FTES IN THE DEPARTMENT.
>> IF YOU LOSE $811 MILLION, HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT YOUR $811,000 [LAUGHTER]
>> [INAUDIBLE] HOW WOULD IT TAKE YOUR DEPARTMENT?
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. FIRST, THAT WOULD RESULT IN A REDUCTION IN OUR CURRENT STAFF HEADCOUNT BECAUSE WE HAD FOR THE BIENNIUM, CONTEMPLATED OUR AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT, MULTIMEDIA SENIOR OUTREACH SPECIALIST BEING RETAINED AS GENERAL FUND EMPLOYEES AFTER THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT DOLLARS RUN OUT.
ADDITIONALLY, CURRENTLY, WE DO NOT HAVE AN ASSISTANT DIRECTOR.
IF WE ELIMINATE THAT POSITION, WE DO NOT HAVE ROUND THE CLOCK EXECUTIVE AVAILABILITY IN TIMES OF 24/7 EMERGENCY ACTIVATION.
THIS WOULD ALSO POTENTIALLY PUT AT RISK OUR SUPPORT FOR ADOPTED STRATEGIC GOALS INCLUDING EQUITABLE LANGUAGE ACCESS, WHICH IS NECESSARY IN SUPPORT OF RACIAL EQUITY PLAN GOALS
[03:40:02]
AND OUR STAFF SUPPORTS OPERATIONS CITYWIDE, WE RECEIVE THOUSANDS OF REQUESTS A YEAR IN ADDITION TO HUNDREDS OF MEDIA REQUESTS A YEAR SO IT WOULD RESULT IN A EITHER INCREASED TURN-AROUND TIME OR REDUCTION IN OUR ABILITY TO PROVIDE THE CURRENT LEVEL OF SERVICE.>> ARE YOU SAYING THAT IT WOULD DECREASE OUR OUTREACH TO OUR RESIDENT TAXPAYER?
>> YES. THE SENIOR OUTREACH SPECIALIST POSITION IN PARTICULAR HAS BEEN HIRED IN MAY AND HAS BEEN ESSENTIAL TO OUR SUPPORT OF THE ENGAGEMENT VALUE OF SERVICE THROUGH PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY EVENTS, REACHING RESIDENTS TO BRIDGE THE DIGITAL DIVIDE, AND ALSO TO ENGAGE RESIDENTS WHO MAY NOT BE DIRECT FOLLOWERS OF THE CITY'S CHANNELS BUT DO HAVE TRUSTED RELATIONSHIPS WITH THEIR HOUSE OF WORSHIP, WITH THEIR NON-PROFIT SERVICE PROVIDER, WITH THEIR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION.
GIVEN THAT OUTREACHES OUR MIDDLE NAME, HAVING A SENIOR OUTREACH SPECIALIST SUPPORTING THOSE EVENTS TO SHARE INFORMATION ABOUT CITY PROGRAMS, INITIATIVES AND SERVICES IS ESSENTIAL TO THEIR ENGAGEMENT WITH PROGRAMS FOR WHICH THEY MAY BE ELIGIBLE, BUT WHICH THEY MIGHT OTHERWISE NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF OR HAVE TRUST TO ENGAGE WITH.
>> YOU SAID THAT IF YOU REDUCE THIS ABOUT $811,000, THAT YOU WILL LOSE PROBABLY FOR FTES IS CORRECT? THREE OR FOUR FTES?
>> WE WOULD LOSE OUR MULTIMEDIA SPECIALISTS WHO CURRENTLY SUPERVISE OUR COLLEGIATE PAID APPRENTICES SO EFFECTIVELY, THE FAIR PARK MULTIMEDIA CENTER APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM WOULD GO AWAY AND THAT WOULD ALSO THREATEN ATTAINMENT OF OUR WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT GOALS.
WE HAVE HIRED COLLEGIATE APPRENTICES INTO MULTIMEDIA SPECIALISTS AND VIDEO SPECIALISTS ROLES WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENT, BUT WITHOUT MULTIMEDIA SPECIALISTS TO SUPERVISE THOSE INTERNS.
THEN WE CAN HAVE THE INTERNS TRAINED ON AND USING THE EQUIPMENT AT THAT FAIR PART MULTIMEDIA CENTER, WHICH WAS PAID FOR NOT FROM GENERAL FUND BUT FROM PEG FUNDS.
>> SPEAKING ON THE FIRST PART, THE INVESTMENT THAT WE PUT AN A FOR AIRPORT IN A METER RULE AND HOW MUCH DO WE INVEST IN THAT PROJECT AND THEN PROGRAM.
>> THAT WASN'T $11 MILLION PROJECT FUNDED BY PUBLIC EDUCATION AND GOVERNMENTAL FEES PAID BY SUBSCRIBERS TO AT&T AND SPECTRUM CABLE CHANNELS.
THAT WAS NOT GENERAL FUND INVESTMENT.
>> BUT WE DO SUPPORT THAT, RIGHT? DO WE DO WORK THERE, RIGHT?
>> YES, SIR. THE 30 FTES AND CALM, AS WELL AS THE COMMUNICATIONS OUTREACH MARKETING PROFESSIONALS ACROSS CITY DEPARTMENTS HAVE UTILIZATION OF THAT FACILITY IN SUPPORT OF MARKETING AND ENGAGEMENT CITY-WIDE.
>> WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT, MARKETING AND OUTREACH IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS AND I'LL JUST COUNT THEM WERE ABOUT AND WE DECREASE THIS BY $811,000.
HOW WILL WE REDUCE OUR MARKET IN THAT OUTREACH TO OUR RESIDENT AND THAT CITIZEN? PLUS WE JUST INVEST INTO THE STUDIO FOR A PART.
WHAT IS YOUR OPINION THEN? ARE WE DOING A GREAT JOB WITH OUTREACH AND MARKETING? ARE WE KILLING OURSELVES OR SHOOTING OURSELVES IN THE ARM THAT WE NOT DOING A BETTER JOB BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO DO IT? BECAUSE NOW WE DID INVEST, WE'VE INVESTED IN THE MARKETING OUTREACH IN BILINGUALS, THE TRANSACTION.
WHAT IS THE CONSEQUENCE OF YOUR DEPARTMENT?
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
KALM IS ALWAYS MAKING THE MOST OF WHATEVER RESOURCES THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO GIVE US.
WE HAVE BEEN FORTUNATE TO HAVE CARES ACT AND AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT FUNDS TO SUPPLEMENT OUR GENERAL FUND STAFF.
AS YOU'LL RECALL, 0.03 PERCENT OF THE CITY'S RPA ALLOCATION WAS EARMARKED FOR THE MARKETING OF THOSE RPA SPECIFIC PROGRAMS. IN ADDITION TO THAT, COMING OUT OF THE PANDEMIC, WE ARE SEEING AN INCREASE IN IN-PERSON EVENTS, AN INCREASE IN ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES, AND AN INCREASE IN PROGRAMS. WE ARE MARKETING A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS, INCLUDING THE BOND ELECTION, INCLUDING THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER, MASTER PLAN AND PROCUREMENT OPPORTUNITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, WE ARE SUPPORTING VETERANS EVENTS, PRIDE EVENTS, WOMEN'S HISTORY MONTH EVENTS, HOLIDAY EVENTS THAT MAY NOT HAVE OCCURRED
[03:45:01]
DURING THE PANDEMIC IN-PERSON AND ARE NOW OCCURRING IN PERSON.WE ARE FULLY SUBSCRIBED WITH THE STAFF THAT WE HAVE.
WE'VE BEEN IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OUR CONVENTION AND EVENTS SERVICES VENDOR, VISIT DALLAS, WORKING ON A BRAND WHICH CAN BE USED FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, TALENT ATTRACTION, INCLUDING HUMAN RESOURCES AND CIVIL SERVICES, TALENT ATTRACTION CAMPAIGN, AND DESTINATION MARKETING.
COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS AND I ARE ON THE MARKETING COMMITTEE, VISIT DALLAS, WHICH HAS INVESTED MORE THAN A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS IN QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TO INFORM THAT BRAND, WHICH WILL BE BRIEFED TO THE VISIT DALLAS MARKETING COMMITTEE ON SEPTEMBER 20TH.
THE FULL STAFF WE CURRENTLY HAVE WILL BE ESSENTIAL INTO THE CREATION OF THE DALLAS CITY SPECIFIC ASSETS ALIGNED WITH THAT NEW BRAND.
>> LAST QUESTION. NUMBER 1, THAT IF YOU CAN THINK ABOUT THE FUNDING MECHANISMS GOING TO OFFER FUNDS, HOW MUCH IS OUTSIDE FUNDING, HAVE YOU RECEIVED IN THE LAST YEAR OR SO THAT WE WOULD NOT RECEIVE THIS FOLLOWING YEAR?
>> OUR MARKETING SUPPORT VENDOR UNDER CONTRACT IS FOR $500,000.
WE CAN INCREASE THAT EASILY BY 10 PERCENT FOR THE PROGRAMS SUPPORTED CITYWIDE.
>> DO YOU RECEIVE AN OFFER FOR MONEY AND YOUR DEPARTMENT?
>> YES, SIR. 0.03 PERCENT OF THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT.
>> IT'S SLIGHTLY MORE THAN A MILLION AND THAT IS PAYING BOTH FOR THESE PERSONNEL OUR SENIOR OUTREACH SPECIALIST AND OUR MULTIMEDIA SPECIALISTS CREATING THE VIDEO ASSETS THAT ARE SUPPORTING THE MARKETING OF THESE ENDEAVORS, AS WELL AS FOR OUR MARKETING SUPPORT VENDOR.
>> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, KIMBERLY BIZOR TOLBERT, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, I WANTED TO JUST TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COUNCIL THE UPPER TIM ATKINS.
AS YOU WERE GOING THROUGH THE VARIOUS QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE COMMUNICATION, OUTREACH, AND MARKETING DEPARTMENT, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT WE HAVE NEVER FULLY HAD THE STAFFING OR THE RESOURCES TO REALLY STAFF UP THE DEPARTMENT AND OPERATE AT THE LEVEL THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ASKED US TO DO.
FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS, WE'VE UTILIZED THE FUNDING.
KATHRYN TALKED ABOUT THE DOLLARS THAT WE RECEIVED THROUGH RPA, BUT WE'VE CONTINUED TO REVAMP THE DEPARTMENT AND FIND WAYS THAT WE COULD USE WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, THE FAIR PARK MULTIMEDIA CENTER, WHICH IS A WONDERFUL ASSET FOR THE CITY THAT WE'VE NEVER HAD BEFORE.
WE ACTUALLY OPENED THAT FACILITY WITH ONE STAFF PERSON.
NOW THAT WE'RE DOING MORE AND THERE'S MORE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR TIME AS IT RELATES TO THE TYPE OF PROGRAMMING THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING AS A CITY.
WE'VE CONTINUED TO OPERATE WITHIN THE SAME STAFFING LEVEL.
WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET TO THE LEVEL WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT OUTREACH AND YOU TALK ABOUT MARKETING THAT YOU WANT, IF WE DO NOT INVEST WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR AND I KNOW I'VE HAD SOME SIDEBAR CONVERSATIONS WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT IT'S ONE THING TO ASK US TO GO PUT TOGETHER THIS WONDERFUL MARKETING DEPARTMENT AND ASKS US TO DO THE WORK.
BUT IT'S ANOTHER THING NOT TO FUND IT.
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE WHERE WE ARE TODAY, WHICH IS TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO FILL THOSE GAPS WITHOUT THE STAFF RESOURCES, WITHOUT THE BUDGET, AND THEN TRYING TO ADDRESS ALL OF THE REQUESTS THAT WE GET YEAR OVER YEAR.
I THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY IF WE REALLY WANT TO DO IT RIGHT, TO ENSURE THAT WE INVEST WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT, AND WE'VE CONTINUED TO LOOK AT WAYS THAT WE CAN GET, WHETHER IT'S FREE PROMOTIONS, FREE ADVERTISING, WE'RE DOING THAT NOW, BUT WE'RE ALSO BEING TOLD TO BETTER UTILIZE OUR MINORITY MEDIA.
WELL, IT TAKES MONEY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE TO PUT IN PERSPECTIVE WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING WITH THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE AND THE IDEA THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO OPERATE AND PROVIDE SERVICES AT A HIGHER LEVEL WITHOUT THAT ADDITIONAL THOSE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES WILL BE PROBLEMATIC FOR US. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL WOMAN MENDELSOHN, THIS NEXT IN THE QUEUE.
>> THANK YOU. I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
AM I TO UNDERSTAND CURRENTLY THERE'S 30 PEOPLE IN THE DEPARTMENT?
>> YEAR OVER YEAR, THE PROPOSED INCREASES, 37.7 PERCENT; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT, AND THAT IS DUE TO THE GROWTH OF OUR TEAM.
>> CORRECT. THEN OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH YOU'VE GROWN?
>> I DON'T KNOW FOR FIVE YEARS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I'LL BE HAPPY TO ADVISE.
AS YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN WITH THE CITY THREE YEARS.
>> YES. THIS DEPARTMENT HAS GROWN 140 PERCENT IN FIVE YEARS AND IT'S JUST NOT SUSTAINABLE.
A 30 PERSON COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT FOR A CITY OUR SIZE, I THINK, IS MASSIVE.
TO CONTINUE GROWING, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO USE YOUR RESOURCES BETTER.
[03:50:04]
PERHAPS OUTSOURCING.SOME OF THE SERVICES THAT YOU PROVIDE MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA.
MAYBE YOU DON'T NEED ONE PERSON WHO DOES ONE THING ALL THE TIME AND MAYBE A FIRM MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP YOU.
BUT I THINK THIS BUDGET IS WAY TOO BIG FOR THIS DEPARTMENT.
THAT'S ALL. I AM IN SUPPORT OF COUNCIL BRADLEY'S MOTION.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT. I WOULD ADVISE THAT EVEN AT 30, FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES, WE'RE STILL HALF THE SIZE OF THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENTS OF OTHER LARGE CITIES WITHIN THE STATE OF TEXAS WHO WERE COMPETING AGAINST.
WE CAN AND HAVE USED CONTRACTORS TO GREAT EFFECT.
HOWEVER, CONTRACTORS ADD APPROXIMATELY TWO BUSINESS DAYS TO OUR TURNAROUND TIME FOR SERVICE REQUESTS BECAUSE OF THE REQUIREMENT OF PREPARING FOR THEIR ASSIGNMENT AND REVIEWING THEIR ASSIGNMENT UPON COMPLETION.
>> IF I COULD JUST ALSO ADD, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT COMMUNICATIONS, THAT'S ONE THING.
BUT THE WHOLE MARKETING PIECE IS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ASKED US TO INCLUDE IN 2019.
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE GROWTH, THAT GROWTH IS A DIRECT RESPONSE TO THE COUNCIL ASKING US TO REALLY BEEF UP THE DEPARTMENT TO ALSO BE THE MARKETING ARM FOR THE CITY.
WHEN YOU COMPARE US, EVEN, LET'S SAY THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, WE STILL ARE OPERATING WITH THE NUMBER OF STAFF THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED LESS THAN CITIES THAT ARE EVEN SMALLER THAN THE CITY OF DALLAS, NOT JUST THOSE THAT ARE LARGER THAN THE CITY.
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT BOTH THE COMMUNICATION AND THE MARKETING ASPECT OF WHAT WE'RE PROVIDING.
IF THAT ALL THE QUESTIONS, WE MOVE ON TO COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
>> I THINK THERE ARE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE NOT SPOKEN YET ON THIS ISSUE AND I'M ON ROUND 2.
>> COUNCILWOMAN WILLIS, YOU RECOGNIZE IT THIS TIME.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THIS MOTION NUMBER 18 TO HAVE THE USE OF FUNDS GO TO STREET MAINTENANCE.
>> I'VE TALKED ABOUT THE RECEIPT AND THAT IS THAT WE HAVE A CITIZEN'S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF 18 PERCENT WHEN IT COMES TO THE CONDITION OR HOW WE MAINTAIN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE,14 OF OUR DISTRICTS TOLD US THAT INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE WAS IN THEY'RE TWO ACTUALLY 12 SAID IT WAS THEIR NUMBER 1 ISSUE.
I AM SO APPRECIATIVE OF THIS COUNCIL FOR SUPPORTING THE $2.5 MILLION TOWARD THE $5 MILLION THAT MR. HOTEL, TOLD US THAT HIS DEPARTMENT CAN HANDLE WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL STREET MAINTENANCE THIS YEAR, BUT I STILL THINK WE NEED TO WORK TO GET TOWARD IT.
I APPRECIATE ALL THAT THE DEPARTMENT DOES, BUT I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A CORE COVENANT THAT WE ALL HAVE WITH OUR RESIDENTS AND I WANT TO SEE THAT SATISFACTION NUMBER MOVE AND I WANT TO SEE US ANSWER THEM WITH REGARD TO WHAT MOST OF THEIR NUMBER 1 ISSUE IS, SO I ASKED FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL ON YOUR LAST COMMENT, THANK YOU.
>> SPEAKING ON THE MEN, I'M SORRY, I JUST NEED TO ADD, THANK YOU.
>> I DO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A HUGE NEED THAT JUST AS WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH THE LAST AMENDMENT, I PERSONALLY WOULD SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT TO GO TO THE STREETS.
I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF GOING TO THE TAX RATE, I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY MINUSCULE TO THE TAX RATE, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD ENOUGH RETURN ON MAKING THAT BIG OF AN ADJUSTMENT.
BUT IF WE CAN CHIP AWAY AT OPPORTUNITY TO PUT MORE INVESTMENT INTO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I CAN GET BEHIND AND I DEFINITELY HEAR OFTEN FROM MY RESIDENTS TO BE MADE A PRIORITY, SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL WOMAN SCHULTZ MAKES AN ACUTE.
>> I'M NOT GOING TO FOLLOW MY SWORD FOR IT, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT EITHER ONE OF THESE AMENDMENTS FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
ONE IS THE FACT THAT WE EVEN KNOW THAT PEOPLE WANT MORE MONEY ON STREETS HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT WE ARE CAMS DEPARTMENT HELPED PROMOTE THE SURVEY, SO IT SHOWS THAT WE NEED THEM.
SECOND THING IS, IS THAT THIS IS OUR OUTREACH ARM TO OUR RESIDENTS AND FOR WHETHER WE MAY HAVE OUR OWN NEWSLETTERS ALL DAY LONG, BUT IF WE DON'T USE THE BIGGER MACHINE OF THE CITY, IT'S BASICALLY AN INVESTMENT IF THE $4 MILLION IS IT?
[03:55:01]
THAT'S ABOUT $3 A PERSON FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.IF I DID THE SAME MATH, I'M USING THE MOLE RATIOS I USED IN EDUCATION WORLD OF TEACHER STUDENT RATIO, IT'S 43,000 RESIDENTS FOR EVERY ONE EMPLOYEE OF THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT.
IF ANYTHING, I WOULD WANT TO BE INVESTING IN AS MANY OPPORTUNITIES AS POSSIBLE TO BE ABLE TO REACH OUT AND ENGAGE WITH OUR RESIDENTS.
WE MAY HAVE FRUSTRATIONS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OR ANY DEPARTMENT AND THE WAY IT'S BEING RUN, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT BEING PUNITIVE FINANCIALLY AS THE WAY TO MANAGE THAT CHALLENGE.
I THINK THAT THE MESSAGE IS MADE VERY CLEAR TO OUR CITY MANAGER THAT WE MAY HAVE ISSUES IN DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS THAT WE WANT HIM TO TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT, BUT CUTTING OFF OUR NOSE TO SPITE OUR FACE IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH OUR OWN RESIDENCE IS NOT THE WAY TO DO IT, SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING EITHER AMENDMENT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER, CHAD WEST ON THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS A HARD ONE, BUT I DON'T AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE, MS. SCHULTZ ON THIS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PENALIZING OR CUTTING A DEPARTMENT HERE, WE'RE SIMPLY HOLDING THEM TO WHAT THEY WERE THIS LAST YEAR AND THE WAY THIS AMENDMENT AS WRITTEN.
IT ALSO ADDS IN ALL OF THE SALARY, PENSION, EVERYTHING THAT THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE THERE SHOULD HAVE FOR THEIR SERVICE IN THE CITY, IT'S JUST NOT GROWING.
AT SOME POINT WITH THIS IS FOR MY FUTURE AMENDMENT, BUT WITH $14 BILLION AND NEEDS IN THE CITY PLUS CITIZENS AT ONCE TAX RELIEF PLUS OUR NEED FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING, WE'VE GOT TO START TIGHTENING OUR BELTS SOMEWHERE IN THE CITY AND THAT MEANS LOOKING HARD AT THESE DEPARTMENT.
THIS ONE IS NOT, WHAT I SEE IS A PENALIZING CUT, I'VE SEE THIS AS US BEING FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE AND SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'RE GOING TO JUST TAKE A BREAK.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO GROW THIS YEAR, WE'RE GOING TO PUT THE MONEY TOWARDS OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH CONTINUES TO CRUMBLE AROUND US, SO I'LL SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.
COUNCIL WOMAN, BLACK WHEN YOU'RE DONE.
I KNOW YOU'D MENTIONED THAT WE'RE READY TO GO BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER, NO, I BELIEVE IT READILY IN THE QUEUE NOW FOR THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I WILL OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE WE HAVE HEARD TREMENDOUS OUTPOURING OF REQUESTS FROM CONSTITUENTS TO CUT THE TAX RATE AND THIS IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY CONSIDERED AND WE WILL BE CONSIDERING LATER TODAY, IS NECESSARY TO BRING OUR TAX RATE DOWN AND TO PROVIDE NECESSARY TAX RELIEF TO OUR CONSTITUENTS.
CAN WE USE IT FOR STREETS? SURE. BUT 500 OR $800,000 IS NOT ENOUGH TO PAVE ONE LANE OF A STREET IN DALLAS, WHICH COSTS BETWEEN TWO-AND-A-HALF AND $5 MILLION.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S DROP IN THE BUCKET, WE'VE ALREADY PUT $2.5 MILLION IN THE PREVIOUS 28, A AMENDMENT INTO STREET MAINTENANCE.
THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS ALREADY ALLOCATED $150 MILLION IN THIS BUDGET FOR STREET MAINTENANCE.
ANOTHER 500,000 IS A SMALL FRACTION OF THAT AND ITS CONSEQUENCES WILL BE ALMOST INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE AMOUNT THAT WE HAVE ALREADY ALLOCATED FOR THIS PURPOSE, BUT IT CAN PROVIDE MEANINGFUL TAX RELIEF FOR CITIZENS.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER BRITTANY, I GET YOU DONE.
COUNCIL WELCOME, CARA MENDELSOHN.
>> I'M SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER NOVARTIS HASN'T SPOKEN AT ALL.
IS HE IN LINE NEXT? CORRECT AND THEN WE GO TO COUNCIL, WOMAN MENDELSOHN, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THIS ONE IS A TOUGH ONE BECAUSE I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT COMMUNICATIONS IS, I ALSO KNOW HOW IMPORTANT STREET MAINTENANCE IS.
AT EVERY TOWN HALL I WENT TO EVERY RESIDENT I SPOKE TO, KEPT SAYING STREETS.
FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER, WE DID A COMPLETELY NON OFFICIAL POLL, BUT JUST AS PEOPLE WERE CALLING IN AN OVERWHELMINGLY, IF GIVEN THE CHOICE BETWEEN STREETS AND BPD IN ORDER TO GET TAX CUTS.
I'D NEVER HEARD PEOPLE SAY DO SOMETHING WITH DPD THEN BECAUSE I WANT MY STREETS FIXED.
NOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT.
WE SHOWED IN THE LAST AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT THAT WE PASSED THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM IN ORDER TO GET
[04:00:02]
THEM EVEN MORE RESOURCES AND I THINK THAT'S A BIG WIN FOR US AND OUR RESIDENTS ARE GOING LIKE THAT.THE FIRST AMENDMENT, WE DID REDUCE THE TAX RATE MORE, SO DON'T FORGET THAT WE REDUCE THE TAX RATE FROM 0.65 TO 1, SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT NOW.
NOBODY CAN SAY WE HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING YET TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE.
AS MUCH AS I'D LIKE TO REDUCE THE TAX RATES SOME MORE.
0.0416 AND $811,000 IS NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY IMPACT EXTRA YET.
BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE WELL, ALL THESE SMALLER AMENDMENTS COULD ADD UP TO BIGGER DOLLARS WHICH WOULD MAKE AN IMPACT.
BUT MY RESIDENTS, N6, MY STAKEHOLDERS N6, THE PEOPLE WHO VISIT THE CITY, EVERYBODY IS SCREAMING, FIX YOUR STREETS.
$811,000, GOES A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AND FIXING STREETS TO 2.5 MILLION ADDS TO THAT, MAKING IT 3.3 MILLION IS EVEN MORE.
I'M CURRENTLY AND HAVE BEEN THE CHAIR OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND OUR INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDES STREETS AND IF WE CAN'T GET PEOPLE WHERE THEY NEED TO GET ON SMOOTH ROADS SO THAT THEIR CARS AREN'T FALLING APART, SO THE TRUCKS THAT ARE DELIVERING GOODS CAN'T GET WHERE THEY NEED TO GET SO THAT EMPLOYERS WANT TO STAY IN THE CITY, THEN WE'VE GOT TO DO WHAT IT TAKES IN ORDER FOR US TO FIX OUR CRUMBLING INFRASTRUCTURE.
FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER THE CURRENT BUDGET WE'RE IN, BUT WHEN WE'RE FINISHING UP, WE FUNDED FOR ZERO DEGRADATION, THAT'S GREAT BUT THIS COMING BUDGET, WE NEED MORE.
WHY IS THAT? BECAUSE EVERYTHING COSTS MORE AND TO MAINTAIN WHAT WE'RE DOING TO STAY AT ZERO DEGRADATION IS IMPORTANT.
OUR CITY MANAGER LEAD US WITH THE LAST BOND AND WITH THIS BUDGET OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS FOR US TO FINALLY GET TO ZERO DEGRADATION.
THAT WE'VE GOT TO DO MORE IN ORDER TO NOT JUST BE AT ZERO, BUT TO BE AN IMPROVEMENTS.
WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BOND OUR WAY OUT OF FIXING OUR STREETS.
WE HAVE 4 BILLION WITH A B IN DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ON OUR STREETS.
THIS ONE IS A TOUGH ONE BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON HERE WITH THIS, BUT I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT TO MOVE THESE DOLLARS OVER TO STREET MAINTENANCE AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT OVERALL ONCE AMENDED, IF THAT PASSES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL WOMAN MENDELSOHN, IS UP NEXT, UNTIL THE MAYOR IS BACK, SO COUNCIL WOMAN MENDELSOHN WILL BE UP NEXT.
THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PATIENTS, THANK YOU.
>> SURE. THANK YOU. I THINK IF WE ASK THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS, HOW MUCH DOES THE CITY SPEND ON STREET REPAIR? NOT A SINGLE ONE WOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE AN ANSWER., NOBODY KNOWS.
THE NUMBER IS SO BIG THAT IF IT'S A MILLION HERE, A MILLION LESS, IT WOULDN'T REALLY MEAN ANYTHING TO ANYONE, BUT IF YOU ASK THOSE SAME PEOPLE HOW MUCH THEY PAY IN PROPERTY TAX, I BET THEY COULD COME UP WITH THAT NUMBER.
I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, THAT'S WHERE THIS REDUCTION BELONGS, NOT IN STREETS.
NUMBER 2, THE ARGUMENT THAT IT'S A MINUSCULE AMOUNT OF MONEY TO PUT TOWARDS TAX RELIEF, BUT YET WOULD BE MEANINGFUL FROM STREETS IS RIDICULOUS.
IF IT'S A MINUSCULE AMOUNT THAN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, IT WOULDN'T MATTER EXCEPT THERE'S AN ACCUMULATION THAT WILL HAPPEN AS WE PASS AMENDMENTS TO REDUCE TAXES AND THOSE NUMBERS WILL ADD UP TOGETHER TO MEAN SOMETHING MEANINGFUL IF YOU DO WHAT THE PEOPLE ACTUALLY WANT.
ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS.
I WOULD SAY TO EVERYONE HERE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A WIN PUTTING MORE MONEY INTO STREETS.
WE HAVE ALREADY PUT A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY INTO STREETS, CAN YOU TELL THE DIFFERENCE? WE PROBABLY NEED TO BE TALKING ABOUT WHAT ARE WE DOING ABOUT STREET CUTS? HOW ARE WE VERIFYING THAT THEY WERE DONE PROPERLY? THAT WE DIDN'T REPAID ALL THE PARTS THAT PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN REPAVED.
WE PROBABLY NEED TO BE TALKING ABOUT INSPECTIONS, LOTS OF DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE CAN ENSURE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE LASTS LONGER AND WE'RE NOT REPEATING THINGS THAT WE JUST INVESTED IN.
ALL THAT TO SAY, I'M DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT OF A TAX REDUCTION AND I HOPE THAT THIS AMENDMENT WILL NOT PASS. THANK YOU.
>> MEMBERS JUST WANT TO GET CLARITY ON WHAT IS BEFORE US RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT THEN TO AMENDMENT NUMBER 18 BY MR. RIDDLELY THAT
[04:05:04]
WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE THE MONEY INSTEAD OF DECREASING THE TAX RATE, BUT INSTEAD DOING STREETS DURING EXTREME FOR HIM, IT'S OKAY.MAYOR PRO TEM, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING?
>> WELL, WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE ON [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOUR LIGHT WAS ON, IT'S ACTUALLY THE MAYOR PRO TEM.
GO AHEAD. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES MINUTES, I GUESS.
>> THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO BE REAL FAST BECAUSE THIS IS MY FIRST TIME SPEAKING.
I KNOW THAT I CANNOT SUPPORT THE CUTS AND THIS IS DIFFICULT TO MARKETING, MAINLY BECAUSE I'M ONE OF THE MAIN ONES WHO STANDS UP TO TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE NEED TO LET NUMBER 1, THE CITIZENS KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING AS A CITY.
TWO, I NEED MARKETING AND OUTREACH SO THAT MY CONSTITUENTS WILL KNOW WHEN SESSIONS SUCH AS THIS ARE TAKING PLACE SO THEY WILL KNOW THAT THEY NEED TO CONTACT OUR OFFICES SO THAT THEY CAN GET THEIR STREETS REPAIRED, SO THAT THEY CAN GET HOME REPAIR.
WE ARE DYING FOR LACK OF COMMUNICATION.
I KEEP TALKING ABOUT THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE SENIORS WHO DON'T WANT TO BE ON THE INTERNET.
THERE SOME WHO ARE THERE GRADUALLY, BUT WE NEED TO USE EVERY MODE POSSIBLE.
I HAVE A LARGE CONSTITUENCY ALSO THAT NEEDS THE TRANSLATION IN SPANISH.
WE'VE GOT TO REACH FOLKS WHERE THEY ARE AND BRING THEM IN.
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS, I'M ONE OF THOSE WHO REALLY NEEDS ALMOST TWO ADDITIONAL STAFF MEMBERS FOR MARKETING.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE NEED THE MARKETING TOOLS BECAUSE AS WE CONTINUE TO ASK FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PARTNERS FOR INVESTMENT PARTNERS FOR OUR PARKS, I'M ASKING STAFF, WHO YOU'RE COMMUNICATING WITH? I JUST ASKED ECO DEBBIE YESTERDAY, ARE YOU GOING NATIONAL OR YOU'RE JUST STATE? FOR AN ECONOMICALLY DEPRIVED AND SOCIALLY AND HISTORICALLY DEPRIVED COMMUNITIES, WE NEED TO HIT EVERY BASE WE CAN CITYWIDE, STATEWIDE, NATIONAL WIDE, BECAUSE WE HAVE AN UNUSUAL SET OF DEMOGRAPHICS AND WE NEED COMMUNICATION.
>> DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, ONLY THE INTERRUPTING FOR THIS ONE PURPOSE.
I KNOW THAT I HAD TO BE BROUGHT UP TO SPEED ON WORLD WAR.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD BE GERMANE RIGHT NOW WOULD BE US [OVERLAPPING]
>> TALKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU WOULD TAKE THIS REDUCTION AND APPLY IT TO TAX CUTTING OR PUBLIC OR STREETS AS OPPOSED TO WHEN IT BACK.
BUT OVERALL, THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT IS ABOUT TAKING IT OUT OF COMMUNICATIONS.
BUT THIS AMENDMENT TO THAT IS REALLY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU WOULD USE THAT FOR STREETS OR TAX REDUCTION.
>> I NEEDED JUST SAY, I'M GOING TO NEED TO BE REAL COMFORTABLE NOW SAY THAT.
CUTTING MARKETING RIGHT NOW THE AMENDMENT IS SPEAKING ON WHETHER OR NOT TO SEND IT TO STREETS.
>> VERSUS TAX RELIEF IS WHAT I UNDERSTAND.
THAT WOULD BE THE MOST GERMANE CONVERSATION YOU CAN HAVE ON THIS AMENDMENT, AND THEN WHEN WE GO BACK UP TO THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT, THAT WILL BE THE COMPENSATION ABOUT WHETHER I SHOULD COME OUT OF COMMUNICATIONS, PERIOD.
>> IT'S HARD BECAUSE I KNOW I NEED STREETS, BUT I NEED THE COMMUNICATION TO GET FOLKS TO TALK ABOUT THE STREETS.
I GUESS IF I HAD MY DRUTHERS, I WOULD SEND IT TO THE STREETS.
BUT THAT PUTS ME MORE IN THE STREET AND MY STAFF TO GET THE INFORMATION OUT, SO IT'S ROUGH.
BUT IF I HAVE TO SAY TODAY, YES, I WOULD HAVE TO SAY STREETS.
>> SOUNDS LIKE YOU LIKE THE AMENDMENT THEN.
PERFECT. BUT DID YOU WANT TO GET A MAYOR PRO TEM YOU'RE NEXT ON THE QUEUE, WERE YOU? JOEL, MICHELLE'S, WERE YOU IN? I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN, SO GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
ONE IS, SO IS IT THE 811,965 OR THE 535, 360?
>> THANK YOU, MS. SCHULTZ IT'S 811,965.
WE SENT THE AMOUNT THIS MORNING TO CORRECT THREE OF MR. RIDLELY'S THAT WE HAD A MISUNDERSTANDING ON IT.
>> I SHOULD TOSS OUT THIS ONE.
SHOULD I JUST TOSS OUT THIS WHOLE THING FROM 91?
>> YEAH PROBABLY. IF YOU PRINTED THE OTHER, YES.
>> THEN SO FROM THAT NUMBER IN TERMS OF STREETS VERSUS TAX RATE, COULD YOU GIVE THE IMPACT ON THE AVERAGE $324,000 OF THAT 0.0416, WHAT'S THAT SAVINGS TO OUR RESIDENTS?
>> THAT'S GOING TO TAKE ONE SECOND, BUT YOU'RE CORRECT.
[04:10:03]
IT'S 0.0416, JEANETTE.COUNCIL HAS ALREADY APPROVED A $0.01 REDUCTION.
>> IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT HOW MUCH THIS PARTICULAR REDUCTION WILL IMPACT AT $324,000.
OR CAN I GIVE YOU THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED AND WHAT THIS WILL DO?
>> YOU CAN TRY, SEE IF I CAN UNDERSTAND.
>> YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED A $0.01 REDUCTION.
ADDING THIS INCREMENTAL AMOUNT WILL REDUCE THE AMOUNT BY $1.11.
>> THEN I GUESS, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE MAIN MOTION, MR. MAYOR, YOU CAN CLARIFY IS WHAT EITHER WAY I WANTED MS. QUAY TO SHARE AGAIN, AND THIS MAY BE THE MAIN MOTION THE IMPACT OF THAT 811,965, SPECIFICALLY THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY IF BUDGET IS FOR 25.
>> THAT ACTUALLY WOULD BE MORE GERMANE TO THE ORIGINAL ONE.
>> THANK YOU. I'M FINISHED, THANK YOU.
>> YOU'LL HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER WAY.
>> CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA HAVE YOU GOTTEN IN YET? YOU NEED TO GET IN?
>> THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT THAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE FLOOR TO ADJUST THE SOURCE OF FUNDS AMOUNT FROM 811,965 TO 611,965, FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF KEEPING IN THE CRISIS COMMUNICATION AND THE EQUITABLE LANGUAGE ACCESS POSITIONS THAT THIS WOULD IMPACT AND CONTINUE TO DO THE SAME USE OF FUNDS THAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE FLOOR FOR STREET REPAIR.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, SO CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO OR YOU FEEL YOU'VE ALREADY SAID ENOUGH.
>> I THINK I'VE EXPLAINED THAT MR. MAYOR.
>> ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT TO ITEM 18.
>> ANY RESTATE TO THAT AMENDMENT?
>> YOU CAN RESTATE THE AMENDMENT, MR. BAZALDUA BUT I THINK OKAY. GO AHEAD.
>> I'LL DO IT WITH LESS COMMENTARY MAYOR.
THE SOURCE OF FUNDS TO CHANGE TO 611,965 INSTEAD OF THE 811,965.
JUST REDUCING WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING CONSIDERED BY $200,000 FOR THE SAME USE OF FUNDS THAT WOULD KEEP IN THE CRISIS COMMUNICATION AND THE EQUITABLE LANGUAGE ACCESS POSITIONS.
>> DOES THAT MAKES SENSE? I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS AMENDMENT? LET'S SEE THE CARDS, IF YOU'D LIKE.
OH, MR. RIDLELY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES THEN.
>> THANK YOU. QUESTION FOR JACK.
WHEN I ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THIS AMENDMENT, I ASKED FOR AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD KEEP COLUMNS AT THE SAME LEVEL THEY ACTUALLY ARE FORECASTED TO SPEND IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
I SAID THAT THAT NUMBER SHOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ANY REQUIRED CONTRACTUAL SALARY AND BENEFIT IN PENSION INCREASES, AND THUS, IT WOULD NOT RESULT IN THE ELIMINATION OF ANY EXISTING POSITIONS; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> SO IT WOULD ONLY ELIMINATE ANY EXPANSION OF THE DEPARTMENT BEYOND WHAT THEY ARE FUNDED FOR THIS YEAR AND ARE GOING TO SPEND THIS YEAR?
>> YES, SIR. I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT UNLESS WE MISS SOMETHING THAT.
>> SO IT WOULD NOT RESULT IN THE LOSS OF FOUR FTES?
>> AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS FISCAL YEAR WE HAD A NUMBER OF FTE VACANCIES WHICH WE FILLED DURING THE COURSE OF THIS YEAR, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THIS AMOUNT IS ACTUALLY FOR THE SUPPORT OF RACIAL EQUITY PLAN ADOPTED GOALS BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE TWO FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES DEDICATED TO LANGUAGE ACCESS CITYWIDE AND WE RELY ON A CONTRACT VENDOR TO PROVIDE TRANSLATION TO THE OTHER LANGUAGES REQUESTED.
WE'VE SEEN THE INCREASE FOR LANGUAGE ACCESS SERVICE REQUESTS INCREASED 20 TIMES OVER THE TWO FISCAL YEARS SINCE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF OUR LANGUAGE ACCESS CENTER OF EXCELLENCE.
[04:15:02]
ADDITIONALLY, THE CRISIS COMMUNICATIONS TRAINING REQUESTED WHICH IS $100,000 WOULD BE THREATENED BY THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE FACED NUMEROUS CRISES IN RECENT MEMORY AS YOU ALL KNOW, DOUBT, AND RECALL IN ONE OF WHICH IS ON OUR AGENDA LATER TODAY AND SO OUR CAPACITY FOR TRAINING ADDITIONAL SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND THE MEDIA IN RESPONSE TO CRISIS WOULD BE LIMITED.>> WELL, YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THAT YOU WOULD LOSE FOUR FTES THAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE, AND THAT WAS NOT THE INTENT OF THIS ORIGINAL AMENDMENT AND SO I'M WONDERING HOW WE GOT THERE.
>> FIRST OF ALL, LET ME RESPOND.
I THINK ONE, WE'RE GETTING VERY GRANULAR WITH THE POSITION.
IF YOU TURN TO PAGE 277 OF THE BUDGET IT'S VERY CLEAR IF YOUR BUDGET AMENDMENT WHICH I WOULD SAY ON ITS FACE YOU'RE PROPOSING ADJUSTMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 24 BUDGET TO THE CURRENT FORECASTED BUDGET, NOT THE ADOPTED BUDGET.
THAT DOES NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION KNOWN AND UNEXPECTED THINGS THAT ARE ONGOING RIGHT NOW WITH WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THE POSITIONS.
YOU SHOULD ALWAYS IN MY OPINION GO FROM THE ADOPTED BUDGET TO THE NEW BUDGET BECAUSE THAT'S HOW WE PRESENT THE BUDGET.
THAT WOULD JUST BE MY BUDGETARY COMMENTARY.
IF YOU GO TO THAT PAGE, WHAT YOU'LL BE DOING IN ESSENCE IN ITS PUREST SENSE IS THERE ARE $685,000 AND SIX POSITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH ADJUSTMENTS TO THIS BUDGET OVER THE ADOPTED BUDGET.
PERIOD. THE POSITIONS OF GROWTH THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT I BELIEVE ARE THERE WERE THREE POSITIONS FUNDED WITH ARPA FUNDS THAT IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE TO THIS DEPARTMENT.
THEREFORE IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE THOSE SERVICES FOR WHICH THEY WILL BE PROVIDING THE ASSISTANCE IN THE MULTIMEDIA AREA IN THE OTHER AREAS THAT CATHERINE SPOKE ABOUT.
IF YOU WANT TO KEEP FINDING THOSE POSITIONS TO DO THE WORK THAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING THAT I THINK HAS BEEN BENEFICIAL TO THIS COMMUNITY, THEN WE NEED TO FUND THOSE AND THAT'S $180,000.
THERE'S $25,000 ASSOCIATED WITH CUSTODIAL WORK AT THE MULTIMEDIA CENTER TO MAKE SURE AGAIN THAT WE CAN TAKE CARE OF THE ASSET THAT WE INVESTED $11 MILLION IN.
THERE'S THREE POSITIONS AND $281,000, ONE FOR AN ASSISTANT DIRECTOR THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO ADD FOR WHICH AGAIN IF I HEARD AND UNDERSTAND WHERE COUNSELS MANY CONCERNS AROUND OUR COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT IS, IS THAT THERE IS NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE OR AT LEAST ONE PERSON THAT IS SERVING AS THE SPOKESPERSON.
TO DEAL WITH CRISIS COMMUNICATION THE DIRECTOR IS THAT ONLY HIGH LEVEL EMPLOYEE AND SHE IS WORKING ON THE DAY-TO-DAY THINGS IN THE ORGANIZATION, JUST RESPONDING AND MANAGING MEDIA REQUESTS, TRYING TO ADD ANOTHER EXECUTIVE TO SUPPORT THAT FUNCTION AND ROLE EITHER WHERE THAT'S OUR FRONT PERSON BEING THE DIRECTOR AND/OR THAT AD SERVING IN THAT ROLE AS WELL AS A GRAPHICS DESIGN POSITION AND OTHER FOLKS THAT ARE GOING TO BE WORKING PARTICULARLY AROUND A LOT OF AGAIN OUR EQUITABLE OUTREACH AND COMMUNICATIONS.
THAT'S WHAT THAT'S FOR, THEN THERE'S $200,000 AS COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA MENTIONED.
ONE FOR FUNDING TO SUPPORT CRISIS AND MEDIA TRAINING.
I THINK CATHERINE SPOKE TO THAT AND THE OTHER TO ADD $100,000 TO OUR EQUITABLE LANGUAGE ACCESS TO AGAIN, STRENGTHEN OUR LANGUAGE ACCESS AVAILABILITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
AS I'VE SEEN SINCE WE'VE BEEN HERE, IT'S PRETTY MUCH NONEXISTENT BEFORE FIVE YEARS AGO THAT NOW WE ARE REQUIRING AND DOING MORE THINGS IN MULTIPLE LANGUAGES DEPENDING ON WHERE WE'RE FINDING THE WAY TO DO THE OUTREACH.
THAT'S $685,000 OF NEW THINGS THAT GO INTO THAT $811,000.
IN ESSENCE WHAT YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING IS IF YOU GO TO 811, SHE'S GOING TO HAVE TO REDUCE FROM HER ADOPTED BUDGET $235,000 MINUS ANY SALARY AND INFLATION AND OTHER THINGS THAT YOU SPOKE TO.
IT WILL BE A DIRECT REDUCTION AS IT RELATES TO THINGS THAT ARE NOT RELATED TO SALARIES AND OTHER GROWTH THAT YOU EXCUSE FOR.
IF I'M MISINTERPRETING WHAT THAT MEANS JACK, THEN PLEASE CLARIFY FOR ME.
>> YOU GOT IT EXACTLY AND THAT 235 IS BECAUSE THEY'RE UNDER BUDGET THIS YEAR, AND SO YOU'RE CUTTING 600 FROM NEW SERVICES.
BY USING THEIR FORECAST AS YOUR STARTING POINT, YOU'RE CUTTING 200 OF CURRENT YEAR BUDGETED THAT WASN'T EXPENDED AT THAT POINT.
>> THANK YOU JACK. YOU ALWAYS MAKE ME FEEL LIKE I HAVEN'T LOST MY BUDGET SO THANK YOU.
>> WELL, THIS DOES RAISE A BIGGER ISSUE, WHICH IS WE CANNOT AFFORD TO REPLACE ALL OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE FUNDED THROUGH ARPA OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS.
WE KNEW THAT WHEN WE GOT THE MONEY AND WE'RE IN THAT SITUATION NOW AS THAT MONEY BLEEDS OFF.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT PARTICULARLY.
I THINK IF YOU REVIEW THE MEMORANDUM THAT JACK SENT OUT THIS MORNING RELATED TO ARPA FUNDING AND WHAT WE FUNDED WITH ARPA AND WHAT IS CONTINUING AND ONGOING, THERE ARE PROBABLY FIVE ADD-ON ITEMS OUT OF 75-100 THAT WILL BE CONTINUED AND TWO OF THOSE WERE OVERTIME FUNDING FOR POLICE AND FIRE.
[04:20:02]
THE OTHERS ARE VERY MINIMAL AND THEY'VE GONE TO A ONE-TIME THING.THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING THAT WE'D LIKE TO CONTINUE, THAT'S WHY IT'S BEING CONSIDERED TODAY FOR YOU TO DO IT.
THERE ARE NOT MANY OF THOSE, EXCEPT IN AREAS THAT ARE CRITICAL THAT WE KNOW WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO AND/OR THEY STARTED AS PILOT PROGRAMS AND NOW WE'VE REALIZED THEY'VE BEEN IMPORTANT AND THEY'VE BEEN BENEFICIAL.
THAT IS NOT AN ACROSS-THE-BOARD THING THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING AND WE SAID THAT GOING IN AND WE DIDN'T PUSH A LOT OF ITEMS FROM ARPA INTO ONGOING FUNDING THE BEST WE COULD.
I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING WITH THIS AMENDMENT AND WHAT YOU'D BE GIVING UP SPECIFICALLY.
AGAIN AS I'D ALWAYS WOULD SAY IS COUNCIL IS PREROGATIVE, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN A REQUEST IS MADE TO DO ANYTHING IN COMMS AND WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO DO IT.
WE DON'T HAVE THE OPTION TO NOT DO IT AND/OR IT'S JUST GOING TO TAKE LONGER TO GET IT DONE.
THE DISSATISFACTION IF THERE IS ANY NOW WILL ONLY BE MAGNIFIED IF YOU MAKE THIS REDUCTION, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO CUTTING INTO THE EXISTING ADOPTED BUDGET BASED OFF THE FORECAST AND NOT EXPANDING WHAT I'M HEARING MORE OF FROM EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER IS MORE LANGUAGE ACCESS FOR EVERY DOCUMENT, EVERY PLANNING MEETING WE HAVE.
WE'RE DOING MUCH MORE THAN I THINK IT'S A GOOD PLACE TO BE AND IT SHOULD BECOME THE NORM, BUT IT COSTS MONEY TO DO IT.
I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A MORE EFFICIENT WAY TO GET IT DONE BY PROPOSING TO ADD THESE RESOURCES TO DO CERTAIN THINGS WITH STAFF MEMBERS IN THAT CAPACITY. THANK YOU.
>> NOW BEFORE YOU RESPOND OR SAY ANYTHING ELSE, I JUST WANT TO SAY THIS.
NOW I DIDN'T AT ALL WANT TO INTERRUPT THE [INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S BENEFICIAL CONVERSATION TO HAVE, BUT I WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT WE'RE STILL ON IF THIS WERE TO HAPPEN, THIS CUT WERE TO HAPPEN, WHETHER OR NOT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IT APPLIED TO TAX REDUCTION OR STREETS, NOT WHETHER OR NOT THE CUTS SHOULD HAPPEN.
THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN WE VOTE ON THIS AND THEN GO BACK UP TO THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT.
IT'S NICE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION TWICE WHEN WE SHOULD ONLY HAVE IT ONCE.
YOUR RESPONSE TO HIM IT WOULD NECESSARILY BE GERMANE.
>> I DO NOT OPPOSE THE REDUCTION IN THE SOURCE OF FUNDS TO THE AMENDED 611965.
I WOULD PROPOSE A FURTHER AMENDMENT THAT THE USE OF THOSE FUNDS.
>> THAT'S ONE-TO-MANY, WE CAN'T HAVE THAT MANY PENDING.
WE'VE ALREADY GOT TWO AMENDMENTS ON THE FLOOR.
>> WE HAVE TO RESOLVE THIS ONE FIRST.
ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA TO TAKE THE 811965 TO 611965 AND PUT THE 200,000, LEAVE IT BASICALLY.
I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE, SO I'LL SHOW THE CARDS IF YOU LIKED THAT IDEA.
>> WITH 11 VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD MR. MAYOR.
>> NOW WE ARE BACK ON THE WILLIS AMENDMENT, BUT IT'S BEEN MODIFIED WITH THAT CHANGE, THAT BIFURCATION.
MR. RIDLEY I WISH I WOULD RECOGNIZE THEM IN THE WILLIS AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR, I WOULD PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO THIS AMENDMENT TO SPLIT THE USE OF FUNDS 50/50 BETWEEN STREETS AND TAX REDUCTION.
>> GO AHEAD AND STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER MR. CHAIRMAN.
>> CAN WE AMEND OUR OWN MAIN MOTION?
>> I'LL LET THE PARLIAMENTARIAN SAY HOW TO CHARACTERIZE WHAT JUST HAPPENED, BUT OKAY.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION IS TO SPLIT 50/50 BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT USES OF FUNDS.
>> FROM THE PERSON THAT HAS THE ORIGINAL OUTLINE MOTION ON THE FLOOR?
>> YES, BECAUSE IT'S CHANGED SINCE THE ORIGINAL MOTION HAS BEEN MADE.
>> DID YOU HEAR THAT MR. BAZALDUA?
>> I HEARD THE RULING. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR.
>> YOU GOT IT. I'M LOOKING FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON YOUR OWN AMENDMENT.
I DON'T KNOW HOW? AS MANY MINUTES DID YOU NEED.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THE MR. RIDLEY'S 50/50? WELL, THAT'S NEW AND DIFFERENT.
FOR LACK OF A SECOND THAN THAT, THAT PROPOSED AMENDMENT FAILS.
WE ARE BACKUP TO THE WILLIS AMENDMENT.
AS IT HAS BEEN MODIFIED THOUGH BY THE 611965 CHANGE.
THAT DID HAPPEN. ARE WE BACK UP?
[04:25:05]
NO. I DON'T THINK WE ARE.WE'RE BACK UP. THAT'S RIGHT. I WASN'T HERE FOR ALL OF IT, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT NOW WE ARE BACK ON TO MS. WILLIS' AMENDMENT AND I STILL DON'T SEE ANYONE.
I GUESS WE SHOW CARDS NOW ON MS. WILLIS' AMENDMENT AS AMENDED WITH THE BAZALDUA AMENDMENT.
JUST TO CLARIFY WHERE WE ARE NOW.
THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT THAT MS. WILLIS MADE WHICH IS STILL NOT THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT THAT PAUL REALLY SUBMITTED, IS AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD ACTUALLY NOW TAKE THE 811965 AND SPLIT IT BETWEEN 6119654 STREETS AND THE 200 IS STAYING IN COMMUNICATIONS IS WHAT IS BEING DECIDED NOW.
SO LET'S SEE THE CARDS ON THAT.
>> WITH EIGHT CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MR. MAYOR.
>> OKAY. NOW, MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION IS BEEN AMENDED TO DO 61119652 STREETS AND 200 STAYS.
>> LET'S SEE THE CARDS ULTIMATELY NOW.
THIS IS THE MAIN MOTION NOW, IT'S BEEN FINALLY AMENDED.
>> WITH EIGHT VOTING IN FAVOR, THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MR. MAYOR.
>> OKAY. WE'VE ADOPTED AMENDMENT 18 AS IT WAS AMENDED.
WONDERFUL. WHO ELSE HAS AN AMENDMENT? YOUR FAVORITE ONE? MS. BLACKMON, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION.
>> ACTUALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW ALL MINE.
THEY'VE BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BAZALDUA AMENDMENTS, SO JUST TAKE THOSE OFF THE TABLE.
>> NOW, THAT'S LEADERSHIP PEOPLE. THAT'S LEADERSHIP.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT [INAUDIBLE]. THANK YOU.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT MS. BLACKMON. THAT'S LEADERSHIP.
>> WE WILL BE HAVING DRINKS LATER ON THE OUTSIDE.
>> EXACTLY. I'M BUYING ON THAT ONE.
THANK YOU. ANY OBJECTION? I DON'T HEAR ANY.
I GOT YOU. SERIOUSLY THAT'S WONDERFUL.
ANYONE ELSE? WE'LL ENTERTAIN MR. WEST?
>> YES, MAYOR. WELL, AND I DO WANT TO SAY WHAT I THINK IS GOOD NEWS.
THESE AMENDMENTS I'M WITHDRAWING.
TWO, FOUR, FIVE, SEVEN, EIGHT, 10 AND 11, AND I'LL TAKE UP AMENDMENT 3 AT THIS.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED TO SECOND.
MR. WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT NUMBER 3.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS MIGHT BE EASY BECAUSE I'M NOT ASKING FOR SUPPORT ON THIS.
A FEW YEARS AGO AN ESTABLISHED OPERATOR OF CARD ROOMS CAME TO THE CITY OF DALLAS AND PROPOSED TO OPEN A SIMILAR OPERATION IN DALLAS AS IT HAS EXISTED FOR YEARS IN AUSTIN AND OTHER TEXAS CITIES WITH NO ISSUES.
AT THAT TIME, OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE STUDIED THE ISSUE AND CONCLUDED THAT THE PROPOSED OPERATION AND BUSINESS MODEL WAS LEGAL UNDER EXISTING TEXAS LAW, AND ADVISED COUNCIL ACCORDINGLY.
COUNCIL EVEN APPROVED A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT THROUGH OUR PUBLIC ZONING PROCESS FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE.
THE OPERATOR ULTIMATELY ELECTED TO USE ANOTHER LOCATION IN THE CITY.
WELL, AFTER THAT APPROVAL, THE CITY STAFF AND CITY ATTORNEY REVERSED THEIR POSITION ON THESE USES AND DETERMINED THAT THEY WERE NOT ILLEGAL USE UNDER THE APPLICABLE TEXAS STATUTE.
THIS LED TO HEARINGS BEFORE OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WHICH RULED THAT THIS REVERSAL WAS DONE IN ERROR, MEANING THAT THE POKER ROOM SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE.
[04:30:03]
THIS HAS LED TO VERY EXPENSIVE LITIGATION.WHEN THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND CITY ATTORNEY SUED THE VOLUNTEER MEMBERS OF OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH THE TAXPAYERS OF DALLAS PAYING FOR OUTSIDE COUNCIL ON BOTH SIDES.
ON JANUARY 25TH OF THIS YEAR, COUNCIL VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO DIRECT CITY STAFF TO DRAFT A NEW LAND USE CATEGORY SO CARD ROOMS CONTINUE TO OPERATE LEGALLY WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF TEXAS STATE LAW WITH APPROPRIATE LAND USE RELATED SAFEGUARDS FOR THE COMMUNITY.
TO DATE, NO LAND USE CATEGORY HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO US AFTER NINE MONTHS, EIGHT MONTHS, AND SOME CHANGE WITH CITY STAFF.
THE FACT IS THAT PLAYING POKER AND UNDERGROUND GAMES HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR DECADES IN DALLAS AND EVERYWHERE ELSE.
INSTEAD OF ABOVEBOARD AND REGULATED OPERATIONS WHICH CREATE JOBS, PROVIDE REVENUE AND VALUE TO OUR CITY, UNDERGROUND GAMES ARE NOT REGULATED AND ARE FREQUENTLY ACCOMPANIED BY OTHER FORMS OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITY AND ADVERSE IMPACTS ON OUR COMMUNITY.
WE WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE AN ABOVEBOARD IN APPROPRIATELY REGULATED USE.
FOR EXAMPLE, JUST ONE OPERATOR EMPLOYS WELL OVER 200 EMPLOYEES IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, THE MAJORITY OF WHOM LIVE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS ITSELF.
THESE EMPLOYEES MAKE SEVERAL TIMES MORE THAN MINIMUM WAGE AND RECEIVE GOOD BENEFITS.
THESE OPERATIONS ALSO PAY LARGE SUMS OF SALES TAX REVENUE AND FEDERAL INCOME TAX.
I BRING THIS UP TODAY TO GIVE COUNCIL A COURTESY HEADS UP THAT I DO PLAN ON PROPOSING A RESOLUTION TO PRESENT SOON, WHICH DIRECTS CITY STAFF TO FINISH THEIR WORK QUICKLY ON A PATH TO LEGALIZATION WHILE WE WAIT FOR THE STATE TO BRING UP THIS ISSUE ON A STATEWIDE BASIS, AND ALSO DIRECTS A MORATORIUM ON NEW LOCATIONS PENDING THE ADOPTION OF THESE NEW LAND USE REGULATIONS AT THE STATE OF TEXAS.
I THINK THIS WILL END THE HEAVY EXPENDITURES OF TAXPAYER MONEY TO PAY TWO SETS OF ATTORNEY FEES AND FOR THE CITY TO SUE ITSELF.
I THINK IT WILL PROTECT GOOD JOBS AND A SUBSTANTIAL SALES TAX REVENUE.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, MAYOR, I WILL WITHDRAW THE MOTION.
>> CHAD, YOU'RE STILL KILLING ME TODAY.
BUT I WILL TAKE IT. NUMBER 3 IS WITHDRAWN AS WELL.
WHO ELSE HAS AN AMENDMENT THEY'D LIKE TO GO WITH? PAULA BLACKMON HAVE YOU PUT FORWARD AN AMENDMENT THAT YOU WANT? ALL OF THEM. WILLIS, HAVE YOU PERFORMED A MEMBER THAT YOU ACTUALLY WANT?
>> NO. I'D LIKE TO REMOVE AMENDMENT 31.
>> WHO HAS AMENDMENTS THEY ACTUALLY REALLY WANT? MR. GRACEY, DO YOU HAVE AMENDMENT YOU WANT BEFORE WE GET TO A SECOND ROUND FOR ANYONE?
>> NO, I THINK THE ONLY ONE I'M TRYING TO GET BACK TO MY NUMBERS HERE.
>> TAKE YOUR TIME. I MEAN, NOT TOO MUCH TIME. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?
>> THEN WE'LL GO TO SECOND ROUND FOR FOLKS WHO'VE GOTTEN ONE HEARD.
>> YOU CAN REMOVE NUMBER 62 AND 64.
I'M HAVING A SIDEBAR THERE. DID YOU MAKE A MOTION FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER?
>> YOU WANT TO WITHDRAW THOSE?
>> THANK YOU. YOU DON'T GET AS MUCH LOVE AS PAULA BLACKMON DID BECAUSE THAT'S NOT AS MANY.
>> I SHOULD GET LOVE BECAUSE I DIDN'T SUBMIT THEM ANYHOW [INAUDIBLE].
>> THAT'S THE LOVE THE CITY MANAGER GIVES YOU. I DON'T GIVE LOVE FOR THAT.
CITY MANAGER LOVES YOU WHEN YOU DON'T SUBMIT ANY.
ANYONE ELSE WHO HASN'T DONE ONE YET BEFORE I GO BACK TO CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR A SECOND ONE.
OKAY. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN YOU'RE UP.
>> OKAY. NO LOVE COMING THIS WAY.
LOTS OF AMENDMENTS THAT ARE NOT BEING WITHDRAWN.
>> I MOVED TO USE MULTIPLE SOURCES [LAUGHTER]
>> OF FUNDING, INCLUDING DATA ANALYTICS FOR $1,307,806, HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION FOR 2,744,479, HUMAN RESOURCES, 1,504,407.
MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR COMS, I BELIEVE THAT WOULD NOT BE AN ORDER ANYMORE; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> PARDON ME THAT, SHE'S ASKING.
>> YEAH. I BELIEVE SINCE I JUST WENT TO STREETS, I'M GOING TO REMOVE THAT ONE.
MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT, 325,380, MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR EQUITY AND INCLUSION, 578,629 AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS,
[04:35:02]
$1,389,860, AND ALL OF THAT USE OF FUNDS WOULD BE TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE.>> OKAY. JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, BEFORE WE ASKED FOR IT'S LIKE THE MOTION THEN IS AMENDMENT 34 WITHOUT THE 1,361,114.
BUT FOR THE SAME USE, AN OTHERWISE SAME SOURCES WITH JUST THE NUMBERS RECALCULATED. IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT?
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN?
>> YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 34 WITH THE MODIFIED WAY IT WAS READ INTO THE RECORD.
>> THIS IS AGAIN IN CONNECTION WITH A MEMO THAT I WROTE TO THE MAYOR ABOUT THE BUDGET, WHICH IS IT'S REDUCING THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE GROWN MORE THAN 50 PERCENT IN FIVE YEARS FROM FISCAL YEAR 23 AND IT'S REDUCING THEM 5 PERCENT.
IN THE CASE OF DATA ANALYTICS, THEY'RE PROPOSING, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE MOTION AS I SUBMITTED IT, THEY HAVE IN THERE THE YEAR OVER YEAR, DATA ANALYTICS IS ASKING FOR 20.9 PERCENT INCREASE YEAR OVER YEAR.
IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, IT'S GROWN 384 PERCENT.
HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION.
AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE IN THE DOCUMENT THAT IT'S A 57.4 PERCENT YEAR OVER YEAR INCREASE.
BUT IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, IT'S GROWN 131 PERCENT.
AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE IN WRITING IT'S A 13 PERCENT INCREASE YEAR OVER YEAR.
BUT IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS IT'S GROWN 56 PERCENT.
FOR OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT YEAR OVER YEAR, IT'S ASKING FOR 52.4 PERCENT INCREASE.
THIS IS A DEPARTMENT IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS HAS GROWN 218 PERCENT.
FOR OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION, YEAR OVER YEAR, IT'S ASKING FOR 11.8 PERCENT INCREASE, BUT IT'S GROWN 703 PERCENT IN FIVE YEARS.
THEN ALSO WE HAVE INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS, WHICH I THINK WE COULD ALL AGREE DOES A GREAT JOB.
IT'S PROPOSED YEAR OVER YEAR 17.4 PERCENT, BUT IT'S GROWN 4,928 PERCENT IN FIVE YEARS.
ALL THIS IS DOING IS SAYING, TAKE THE YEAR 23 AND IN THIS CASE, ACTUALLY REDUCE AT FIVE PERCENT.
THESE ARE DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE GROWN WAY TOO RAPIDLY.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE NOT DOING GOOD WORK, DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE NOT IMPORTANT TO US, BUT IT'S TOO FAST AND IT'S TOO MUCH.
THAT'S WHAT THE AMENDMENT IS, AND I HOPE THAT YOU'LL SUPPORT TAX REDUCTION FOR THE PEOPLE. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT 34 AS IT WAS READ, NOT AS IT'S WRITTEN, AS IT WAS READ.
THIS BILL IS BRINGING US FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> I'D LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION.
TO REMOVE THE REDUCTION OF HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION AND TO REMOVE THE REDUCTION OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES, OFFICE OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE COLUMNS ITEM HAS ALREADY BEEN REMOVED.
>> THAT'S THE MOTION? IT'S BEEN SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? MS. WILLIS, YOU REGULARS WERE FIVE-MINUTES IF YOU HAVE DISCUSSION, BUT JUST TO CLARIFY BEFORE YOU START DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST YOUR TIME.
STOP HER TIME AND STARTED OVER AGAIN AT FIVE BECAUSE IT'S [INAUDIBLE] MY CHAIR MY UNDERSTANDING THAT.
IT'S THE MENDELSOHN MOTION, BUT YOU'RE TAKING OUT NOW FROM THAT AND WHEN I SAY TAKE IT OUT.
I MEAN, NOT DOING THE REDUCTION FOR WHICH ONES?
>> HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION AND OFFICE OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS.
>> NOT THOSE TWO, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE THAT CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN PROPOSED.
GO AHEAD YOUR WRITINGS IS FOR FIVE MINUTES MS. WILLIS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WHAT CAUGHT MY EYE ON THIS AMENDMENT WAS ORIGINALLY, THE AMENDMENT WAS A REDUCTION OF ALMOST ANOTHER HALF SENATE IN A PROPERTY TAX.
I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A SPIRIT AS WE'VE MOVED THROUGH THIS PROCESS AT GETTING TO AT LEAST A 1.5 CENT REDUCTION.
IT'S GREAT THAT WE ARE AT ONE CENT AS OF TODAY, BUT I KNOW THAT THE SPIRIT WAS TO KEEP PUSHING AND GET TO THAT NUMBER.
NOW AS I SEE THE COMPONENTS THAT MAKE UP THIS HALF CENT, I'M STRUGGLING WITH A COUPLE OF AREAS.
I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE HOLDING FLAT ON THE EMPLOYMENT OR ON THE BUDGETS OF THESE DEPARTMENTS.
THIS IS JUST KEEPING US AT THAT 2023 LEVEL.
BUT ON HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION, I JUST THINK WITH THE HOUSING CRISIS THAT WE'RE IN, WITH THE SITUATION THAT WE'VE GOT AND TRYING TO MANAGE OUR HOMELESS POPULATION,
[04:40:02]
I'M NOT COMFORTABLE IN TOUCHING THAT AREA.I THINK WE NEED ALL THE HELP WE CAN GET THERE.
THEN I ALSO THINK OUR OFFICE OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS IS DOING A GREAT JOB.
THAT IS A GREAT COMPLIMENT TO WHAT OUR DPD OFFICERS DO.
I'M VERY HESITANT TO BRIDLE THAT.
BUT WHILE THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS, I'M CERTAINLY A BELIEVER IN, I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT SOME INFORMATION THAT'S GOING TO BE COMING TO US IN THE FORM OF AUDITS AND OTHERWISE AND JUST GOOD MANAGEMENT.
I THINK THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF GROWTH AND THAT THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH TEMPERING IT IN THE NAME OF A TAX RATE REDUCTION THIS YEAR.
I'M SUPPORTING THAT AMENDMENT.
>> CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ, FIVE MINUTES ON THE WILLIS AMENDMENT TO CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN'S NUMBER 34.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I GUESS IT SPEAKS TO BOTH THOUGH, BECAUSE THE WILLIS AMENDMENT LEAVES IN THESE OTHER ONES.
I HAVE TO ADDRESS THOSE, CORRECT?
>> YOU CAN SPEAK AS TO HOW THEY RELATE TO EACH OTHER, BUT ULTIMATELY, THE FINAL VOTE WILL BE ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU DO WHAT MS. MENDELSOHN ORIGINALLY READ.
THIS IS BASICALLY WHETHER OR NO YOU WANT TO CHANGE FROM WHAT MS. MENDELSOHN SAID TO WHAT MS. WILLIS WOULD CHANGE ABOUT THAT.
THAT'S GOING TO BE A VERY SIMILAR DISCUSSION TO THE TO THE MAIN MOTION BECAUSE IT'S TWO ITEMS DIFFERENT.
SPEAKING TO WHY YOU WOULD RATHER NOT DO THOSE TWO, OR WHETHER YOU'D RATHER DO THOSE TWO WOULD BE.
>> WELL, LET'S JUST RIP OFF THE BAND-AID.
LET'S START WITH THE NEW DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE BEING RECOMMENDED, THAT THEY BE LEFT IN ON THIS AMENDMENT.
THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION AND THEN ALLOW ME CLARIFY ALSO, PLEASE.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER REDUCTION THEN ON THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT OR IS THAT THE NEW NUMBER NOW IS LEAVING. SHE TOOK THAT ONE OUT?
>> THE ONLY NEW DEPARTMENT THAT'S IN HERE AND ALSO DATA ANALYTICS, THOSE ARE BOTH RELATIVELY NEW DEPARTMENTS.
IS THAT CORRECT, MR. CITY MANAGER? I DON'T KNOW HOW OLD THOSE DEPARTMENTS ARE.
>> YES. THE DATA ANALYTICS DEPARTMENT IS NEW, UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT WAS A PULL TOGETHER FROM STAFF FROM SEVERAL DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS SUCH AS IT AND THEIR GIS UNIT, AND OTHER DATA ANALYSTS TYPE POSITIONS THROUGHOUT THE ORGANIZATION.
IN A LARGE PART OF THAT 1.3 MILLION, IF I MUST CLARIFY, IS OUT OF THE CONTROL OF THE DEPARTMENT.
IT'S BASICALLY AND I'LL HAVE JACQUELINE SPEAK TO WHAT THE AMOUNT IS, IS PROBABLY SOME $800,000 AND DATA PROGRAMMING ASSOCIATED WITH A SACRED CODE, WHICH IS THE COST THAT IT HAS EXPANDED AND UTILIZES FOR THEIR SOFTWARE AND THE THINGS THAT THEY BUY AND PURCHASE FOR THEM.
BUT THEN THEY'RE FUNDED BY SACRED CODES OR WHATEVER FROM DEPARTMENTS.
ELIMINATING THIS AMOUNT, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR AND AGAIN, THE MECHANICS OF IT, OF THIS, IT MAY REDUCE THAT AMOUNT APPARENTLY IN THE DATA ANALYTICS BUDGET.
BUT THEN THAT $800,000 WOULD THEN BE SPREAD TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS AS WELL BASED ON THE FACT THAT THEY'LL UTILIZE THEM.
BUT IN REALITY, DATA ANALYTICS HAS TO USE THOSE THINGS TO EXIST.
I THINK WHERE I WOULD HOPE COUNSEL, IN THEIR CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM, THIS IS REMINISCENT TO A FEW YEARS AGO AND I'LL LET BRITA DEFINE AND DESCRIBE MANY OF THOSE THINGS IS WHERE THERE ARE ACROSS THE BOARD AND RANDOM, AND I USE THE WORD RANDOM IN A KIND WAY, CUTS THAT TAKE NO PARTICULAR SPECIFIC UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING DONE OR UTILIZE AND OR WHAT THE FUNDING IS SUPPORTING IN THIS TYPE OF AMENDMENT THAT IS NOT BEING SURGICAL.
BUT I THINK IN SOME CASES IS DOING THINGS THAT MIGHT ACTUALLY HARM AND UNFUND THINGS THAT YOU VERY MUCH ARE APPRECIATIVE OF, THAT ARE BECOMING CUSTOMARY AND STANDARD IN THE ORGANIZATION.
BUT I WANTED TO SPEAK TO THAT IN DATA ANALYTICS BECAUSE I THINK I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THAT NUMBER AND THERE'S A BIG NUMBER IN THERE, BUT THAT'S PUSHED CALLS FROM IT FOR ALL THE INVESTMENT WE'VE MADE AN IMPROVEMENT AI TECHNOLOGY, I THINK TO BE MORE EFFICIENT.
BRITA, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THE IMPACTS OF THAT FOR YOUR SPECIFICALY.
BRITA UNDER CHECK DATA ANALYTICS AND BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE.
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ.
IT HAS CERTAINLY BEEN A PRIVILEGE TO LEAD THE CITY TOWARDS BEING MORE DATA-DRIVEN IN THIS LAST THREE YEARS.
OCTOBER 1ST IS OUR THIRD BIRTHDAY AND AS THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OR THE CQI MANAGER MENTIONED.
WE PULLED POSITIONS FROM MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS TO CREATE THAT INITIAL DEPARTMENT.
[04:45:02]
IN AT LEAST 60 OR 75 PERCENT OF THOSE POSITIONS WERE EXISTING AND AREN'T TRULY GROWTH.TO GET TO 1.3, A HUGE PART OF THAT IS OUT OF OUR CONTROL.
IT'S INSIDE OF THOSE 3,000, THOSE SACRED CODES.
WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO REDUCE THOSE TO THOSE 23 LEVELS.
THAT'S THE VAST MAJORITY OF THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY.
TO GET TO A CUT OF 1.3, I'D BE ELIMINATING TWO TO THREE TEAMS THAT HAVE PEOPLE IN THEM.
THINGS LIKE OUR GIS TEAM, WHICH PROVIDES ALL OF OUR MAPS, PROVIDES ALL OF OUR PLACE-BASED DATA, ARE LOCATIONAL ACCURACY DATA THAT FUNDS ARE FILLS OUR CAD SYSTEM.
I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THIS IS HARD TO UNDERSTAND, BUT THE FIRST THING THAT HAPPENS WHEN A 911 CALL COMES IN IS THEY ACCESS OUR DATASETS THAT WE MAINTAIN TO GET THEM WHERE THEY NEED TO GO.
IT WOULD ALSO ELIMINATE POTENTIALLY OUR ADVANCED ANALYTICS TEAM, WHICH IS THE WORK THAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO DO.
WE'VE RECENTLY WORKED ON A PREDICTIVE MODEL FOR FIRE THAT'S GOING TO SHOW WHERE THE HIGHEST RISK BUILDINGS ARE IN TERMS OF WHERE IN A COMMERCIAL BUILDING OR THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A FIRE IN THE CITY.
WE'RE USING MACHINE LEARNING TO PREDICT THOSE THINGS.
THE FIRE CHIEFS ARE EXCITED BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE WAY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO SAVE LIVES.
THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO.
THIS IS NOT A REDUCTION TO SAY HOLD TO WHERE YOU ARE.
THIS IS A HUGE, SIGNIFICANT CUT THAT WOULD ELIMINATE 1/3 OF MY PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY ON THE TEAM.
I HOPE THAT THAT IS HELPFUL IN UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE THIS DEPARTMENT AND IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL, I'M HAPPY TO CLARIFY.
>> CHAIRWOMAN, I GOT TO JUMP IN HERE REALLY QUICKLY BECAUSE I'M GOING TO TRY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
I NEVER WANT TO CUT OFF OUR STAFF.
BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO BASICALLY SAY NOW IS, WHAT'S REALLY GERMANE TO THIS DISCUSSION IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT MS. MENDELSOHN HAS PROPOSED AND WHAT MS. WILLIS HAS PROPOSED, WHICH IS REALLY THE HOUSING NEIGHBORHOOD VISUALIZATION PART.
THE AUTHORS IMMIGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS PART BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS AND DEBATE THE MERITS OF ALL OF IT AS AN IDEA, WHEN WE GO BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? OTHERWISE, THIS IS HOW WE AVOID HAVING THE SAME DEBATE TWICE.
>> THAT'S FAIR. I WILL STOP NOW.
>> UNLESS YOUR QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES.
>> ANYTHING THAT GETS WRAPPED IN, I'M FINE WITH. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR.
>> ON THE AMENDMENT? YES. I SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT.
I HAD SOME QUESTIONS THAT SOME RESERVATIONS THAT I'M GOING TO RESERVE TILL WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DISCUSSION.
BUT I APPRECIATE CHAIRWOMAN WILLIS PULLING OUT THE HOUSING AND PUBLIC SAFETY PIECE THAT I WAS ORIGINALLY DID NOT SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE OF THAT, BECAUSE OF OUR DESPERATE NEED AND HOUSING RIGHT NOW.
I'LL SAVE THE REST OF MY COMMENTS FOR THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT.
>> OF COURSE. MS. BLACKMON, ANYTHING? YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. IT'S LOOKING LIKE THE NET IS 3.7; IS THAT CORRECT? AFTER WE TAKE OUT ALL THE THREE ITEMS?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S 3,716,222.
>> WHAT IS THAT IN SENSE? HOW MUCH WOULD WE ADD TO THE TAX RATE?
>> THAT'S A REDUCTION OF 0.19 CENTS.
>> WE'D BE AT ONE AND 1.1 CENTS.
>> ADDING THE ONES CENT THAT YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED, YOU WILL BE AT 0.7312.
>> WITH THESE REDUCTIONS I THINK WE HEARD FROM BRITA IN HUMAN RESOURCES, WHAT WOULD BE FOREGONE? IN POLICE OVERSIGHT, OFFICE EQUITY AND INCLUSION.
WHAT ARE WE NOT BUYING IF THAT ITEM PASSES?
>> THANK YOU. LET'S START WITH, HE SAID COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT.
>> THAT IS ONE OF THEM I THINK SO.
>> POINT OF ORDER, MR. MAYOR, ISN'T THIS TO REMAIN TO THE ORIGINAL UNDERLYING MOTION, NOT THE AMENDMENT.
>> HOME SAFETY SOLUTIONS. IT'S A SEPARATE ITEM.
I THOUGHT MAYBE IT WAS UNDER PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS THOUGH.
WE GOT IT. WE NEED TO RESOLVE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO.
>> I'LL WAIT TILL THAT. THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THE WILLIS AMENDMENT?
[04:50:03]
THEN WE NEED TO SEE THE CARDS ON THE WILLIS AMENDMENT FIRST.>> WITH ONLY FOUR CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT FAILS MR. MAYOR.
>> ALL THAT MEANS IS THAT WE'RE STILL NOW DEBATING THE ORIGINAL 34 AS IT WAS READ, WHICH IS ALL OF THOSE THINGS MINUS THE 1.361 MILLION FOR COMMUNICATIONS.
LET'S SEE WHERE WE WERE. NOW I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE.
NOW SEE CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ IN THE QUEUE.
CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ YOU'RE ACTUALLY FIVE MINUTES ON.
>> THEN YOU CAN TALK ABOUT ANY OF IT YOU WANT TO.
>> I'M BACK TO WHERE I WANTED TO BE. THANK YOU, SIR.
I THINK THAT WE ANSWERED THE QUESTION TO ME OF THE DATA ANALYTICS AND BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE.
IF WE WANT TO GO BACK TO A PAPER CITY, WE CAN KEEP DOING THAT, AND IF WE WANT TO CUT OUR WAY INTO HAVING PEOPLE GOING BACK TO THE STONE AGE AND NOT BE A DATA-DRIVEN CITY AND NOT MOVE FORWARD.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE TO INVEST IN DATA ANALYTICS AND BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE.
IF WE THINK THAT THAT'S EVER GOING TO BE FLAT, THEN WE REALLY ARE LIVING IN THE WRONG AGE.
THIS IS AN AGE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUOUSLY INVEST IN DATA AND DATA INTELLIGENCE.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO USE.
THAT TO ME IS ONE OF THOSE ONES LIKE ARE ANYTHING THAT HAS TO DO WITH PUBLIC SAFETY THAT WE ARE FOOLISH IF WE DO NOT INVEST IN.
TO ME THAT ONE I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE, DR. ANDREW CHECK FROM WHAT I ASKED, BUT I FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT WE WOULD BE, IT'S NOT RESPONSIBLE, IT'S JUST A FOOLISH ACT.
THE NEXT ONE, I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE OTHER NEW ONE WHICH IS THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION.
WHICH HAS BEEN LET'S SEE, WE ADOPTED THE RACIAL EQUITY PLAN LAST YEAR.
THEY'VE HAD LESS THAN A YEAR TO BE FULLY OPERATIONAL.
I FORGOT WHAT NUMBER CHAIR MENDELSOHN SUGGESTED THAT THEY HAD AS A GROWTH RATE.
BUT TO ME IT'S LIKE, HOW LONG HAS THIS OFFICE HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE?
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, DR. LINDSEY WILSON, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION.
THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION AND JUST A COUPLE OF CLARIFYING POINT.
THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2020 AFTER THE FOUR OFFICES COMBINED TO PULL OUR SYNERGY TOGETHER.
THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION IS INCLUSIVE OF THE EQUITY DIVISION, THE WELCOMING COMMUNITIES AND IMMIGRANT AFFAIRS DIVISION, HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION, AND FAIR HOUSING.
>> JUST FROM A NUMBERS PERSPECTIVE, IF YOU WERE TO TOTAL UP HOW MUCH OF THOSE THREE BUDGETS THE ENTIRE EFFORT HAS GROWN LIKE, INCLUDING WHAT THOSE BUDGETS WOULD HAVE BEEN.
DO YOU HAVE A MORE ACCURATE NUMBER OF WHAT THE INCREASE IS IN OUR INEQUITY.
>>I CAN GET THOSE NUMBERS FOR YOU.
I CAN TELL YOU WITHIN THE LAST YEAR WE'VE ONLY ADDED ONE FTE.
AS YOU MENTIONED, WE'VE SEEN THE EXPANSION OF THE WORK WITH A RACIAL EQUITY PLAN, WITH WELCOMING COMMUNITIES AND IMMIGRANT AFFAIRS WORK THAT'S HAPPENING WHERE WE'VE JUST BEEN RECERTIFIED AND HAS BEEN NAMED THE FIRST CITY IN TEXAS TO BRING WELCOMING INTERACTIVE.
WHILE THE WORK CONTINUES TO EXPAND OVER THE LAST COURSE OF THE YEAR, WE'VE ONLY HAD ONE NEW FTE.
>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THE RACIAL EQUITY PLAN SOMETHING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED?
>> IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAD ADOPTED ON AUGUST 23RD, 2022.
IT ALSO IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HEARD CONSISTENTLY THROUGHOUT THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AND THAT IS A DIRECT CORRELATION TO THE WAYS IN WHICH THIS OFFICE CONTINUES TO OPERATIONALIZE AND CHANGE SYSTEMS ACROSS ALL 42 OF OUR DEPARTMENTS.
>> THANK YOU. LET'S TALK ABOUT HR.
DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN TO US WHY THIS MONEY SHOULD NOT BE REMOVED FROM THE BUDGET.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M KIMBERLY BIZOR TOLBERT, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.
THE 1.5 MILLION IS INCLUSIVE OF THREE MAIN PIECES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT.
IN THE ENHANCEMENT FOR 24, WE'VE INCLUDED THE 1.2 MILLION OF THAT 1.5 SUPPORTS THE FULL WORKDAY IMPLEMENTATION.
WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE REMAINING MODULES WHICH INCLUDE THE RECRUITMENT, THE ONBOARDING, SO THAT WORKDAY IMPLEMENTATION IS EMBEDDED INTO THE UPCOMING BUDGET.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE COMPENSATION STUDY, THERE'S ABOUT $75,000 IN THE BUDGET THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR US TO CONTINUE OUR MARKET ANALYSIS, THE HEART TO FILL POSITIONS, WE WORK CLOSELY WITH THE DEPARTMENTS TO IDENTIFY THOSE POSITIONS AND SOLVE
[04:55:04]
THE CONSULTANT WORK WOULD BE INCORPORATED IN THAT 75,000.IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S ANOTHER 25,000 THAT WE'VE EARMARKED TO BUILD OUT THE MENTORING PROGRAM AND TO EXPAND OUR INTERNSHIP PROGRAM.
BOTH OF THOSE HAVE BEEN KEY DISCUSSION POINTS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THE WORKFORCE EDUCATION EQUITY COMMITTEE.
IF YOU TAKE ALL THREE OF THOSE TOGETHER, YOU GET ABOUT $1.5 MILLION.
>> OF THE MONEY THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED, ALL OF THE INVESTMENTS THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED, HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THE COUNCIL ITSELF HAD SAID THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE WANT DONE?
LET'S GO TO THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, TONYA MCCLARY, DIRECTOR FOR THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT.
>> THANK YOU. MS. MCCLARY, COULD YOU EXPLAIN, PLEASE? WHEN WAS YOUR OFFICE ESTABLISHED AND WHY?
>> THE OFFICE WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2019 TO REPLACE WHAT HAD BEEN A REVIEW BOARD THAT DIDN'T HAVE WHAT THE COMMUNITY FELT LIKE, A LOT OF TEETH AND A LOT OF AUTHORITY.
IT HAPPENED ON THE HEELS OF, I BELIEVE ALL OF YOU KNOW, THE CASE OF [INAUDIBLE], WHICH REALLY HAD AN OUTCRY FROM THE CITY ABOUT DO WE NEED TO BE TAKING A CLOSER LOOK AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THE VISION OF THIS OFFICE IS TO REALLY BRIDGE THE GAP BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND THE POLICE.
THIS IS A DEPARTMENT AND HOPEFULLY ONE DAY YOU WORK YOURSELF OUT OF A JOB, BECAUSE THAT MEANS THAT EVERYBODY IS REALLY HAPPY WITH THE SERVICES THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS DOING.
OUR VISION IS REALLY TO DO THAT, TO ALSO ENSURE THAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS ALSO KNOW THEIR RIGHTS AND OTHER THINGS, AND ALSO TO HELP THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BE THE BEST IN THE COUNTRY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SORRY. I THINK THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> MR. RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES, ITEM 34, EVERYONE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT.
IT APPROACHES THE ISSUE OF THE ALLOCATIONS FOR THESE DEPARTMENTS WITH A SLASH AND BURN MENTALITY.
IT'S NOT CONSIDERING THE NEED FOR PROGRAMS. IT WOULD REDUCE THEM TO A FUNDING LEVEL BELOW WHAT IT IS IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
I CAN'T SUPPORT THAT, PARTICULARLY WITH REGARD TO THE CUT TO THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT, THIS WOULD RESULT IN A 38 PERCENT CUT FROM THEIR CURRENT BUDGET, WHICH IS ONLY $812,000.
NEXT YEAR IT'S PROPOSED TO GO UP $50,000 TO $863,000.
IF YOU CUT 325,000 OUT OF THAT BUDGET, YOU'RE WIPING OUT THAT DEPARTMENT.
I CAN'T SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT HAS AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT.
>> MR. WEST, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 34.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I MENTIONED IN MY LAST COMMENTS THAT I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE DEPARTMENTS IN HERE.
I GUESS I JUST HAVE A PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION.
I MEAN, MY WHOLE PROBLEM WITH THIS BUDGET IS IF THE DEPARTMENT'S DOING A GOOD JOB, THEY NEED MORE MONEY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GROW AND DO MORE GOOD THINGS.
IF A DEPARTMENT IS DOING A CRAPPY JOB, THEY NEED MORE MONEY, SO THEY CAN GET MORE PEOPLE SO THEY CAN DO A BETTER JOB.
I MEAN, WHERE DOES IT END? WE KNOW IN 2025, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE MASSIVE CUTS.
BUT VIRTUALLY EVERY DEPARTMENT IS GROWING THIS YEAR.
WE'RE ADDING MORE PEOPLE TO OUR PENSION.
JUST SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PROBABLY HAVE LAYOFFS IN 2025. WHERE DOES IT END? EVERYBODY IS HANDED MORE MONEY, NON-STOP.
THAT'S MY CONCERN HERE BECAUSE CUSTOMERS ARE ALWAYS GOING TO TELL YOU THE CITY MANAGER, YES, WE WANT EVERYTHING YOU'RE HANDING US BECAUSE IT'S GREAT.
BUT THEN AT SOME POINT THERE COMES THE BILL IS DUE AND THE TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO HAVE ENOUGH.
>> I'VE TOLD THIS TO HIM AND HE ONLY HAS 30 MINUTES TO RESPOND TO THIS.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS, SO LET ME JUST CLARIFY ONE THING JUST REAL QUICK.
I THINK YOU MADE A STATEMENT ABOUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO MASSIVE LAYOFFS AND MAJOR CUTS IN 2025.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID. THAT'S FINE.
THERE'S NOWHERE IN THIS BUDGET WHICH ACTUALLY IS A TWO-YEAR BUDGET, ONE THAT'S BEING ADOPTED HOPEFULLY BEFORE THE END OF THIS MONTH AND THEN IN 24, 25 BUDGET, THERE ARE NO MASSIVE CUTS.
THERE ARE NO DEGRADATION OF EXISTING SERVICES BEING PROPOSED IN THE 2024, 2025 BUDGET, SO THE STATEMENT IS NOT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS CITY,
[05:00:06]
SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT FROM THE RECORD.LET ME THEN ALSO ADD JUST FOR A MATTER OF PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A COMMON STATEMENT AROUND THE BUDGET GROWTH OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
LET ME JUST MAKE SURE I PUT A REAL CLEAR LENS ON WHERE THAT GROWTH HAS BEEN, SO THAT NUMBER FROM THE DAY I ARRIVE, THE BUDGET IN THE GENERAL FUND WAS $1.2 BILLION.
IT'S 1.8 TODAY, $600,000,000 OVERALL GROWTH.
IN THAT TIMELINE, 90 PERCENT OF THAT GROWTH PERIOD IN DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR ARE IN THESE DEPARTMENTS.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS GONE UP 28 PERCENT AND USED 183 MILLION OF THAT $615 MILLION.
THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS GONE UP 39 PERCENT IN GROWTH, $159 MILLION OF THAT NUMBER.
THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT PAYMENT WENT FROM $34 MILLION TO $90 MILLION, WHICH IS $56 MILLION.
WHICH MEANS GOOD THINGS ARE HAPPENING IN THE CITY AND INCREMENT GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IS HAPPENING IN THOSE AREAS.
THE PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT HAS GONE UP 30 PERCENT, AN INCREASE OF $44 MILLION.
PARKS AND RECREATION HAS GONE UP 21 PERCENT, $25 MILLION.
COURTS AND DETENTION, 50 PERCENT GROWTH, $19 MILLION INCREASE FROM $19 MILLION TO $39 MILLION.
CODE COMPLIANCE, A PRIORITY OF THE CITY HAS GONE FROM $12 MILLION TO $45 MILLION.
REALLY IS A POINT OF EMPHASIS.
ONE, THEY'VE EVEN HAVE THE REDUCTION OF THE ANIMAL CARE DIVISION REMOVED FROM THEM HAD HAS GONE UP THAT MUCH BECAUSE COUNCILS MADE A PRIORITY TO CLEAN UP THE CITY AND GET BETTER ON COGEN PLANTS, THAT'S A 72 PERCENT INCREASE IN THEIR BUDGET.
LIBRARIES HAS GONE UP FROM 29 MILLION TO 43 MILLION, $13.5 MILLION, OR 31 PERCENT.
THE HOUSING AND HOMELESS AREA WHICH IS NEW.
WE SPENT EIGHT MILLION ON HOUSING WHEN I ARRIVED, WE ARE SPENDING 16.8 OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, AN INCREASE OF 51 PERCENT.
YES, IT'S GROWN, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HAD TO DO THAT'S EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS.
THEN FINALLY, THE INVESTMENT IN OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THE RIGHT THINGS, THAT OFFICE HAS GROWN TO SUPPORT ALL OF THE CITY, AND ALL THE EFFORTS AND WORK THAT WE'RE DOING HERE, THAT IS 90 PERCENT OF THAT INCREASE.
EVERYTHING ELSE MIGHT'VE GONE UP BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE OVERALL INCREASE, THIS NARRATIVE ABOUT WE'RE OUT OF CONTROL AND WE'RE GROWING.
THOSE AREAS OF GROWTH, THE DOLLAR WE'VE BEEN INVESTING ARE THE NUMBER 1, 2, 3, AND 4 PRIORITIES OF THIS COMMUNITY AND THIS COUNCIL, SO THE MONEY HAS BEEN INVESTED WHERE THE COUNCIL HAS ASKED FOR IT TO BE INVESTED, 90 PERCENT.
I JUST WANTED TO PUT OUT THE FACTS WHEN IT COMES TO THE DOLLARS THAT WE'RE SPENDING TO EXPECT THIS BUDGET TO BE BALANCED GOING FORWARD ON THE BACKS OF AND THAT'S A LARGE WORD OF THE OPERATING DEPARTMENTS THAT SUPPORT OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
I DON'T BELIEVE IF IN FACT, YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO INVEST IN THOSE DEPARTMENTS, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT BUT THE BUDGET IS SUSTAINABLE, IT WILL BE SUSTAINABLE.
EVERY NUMBER THAT WE'VE USED AS A METRIC TO DETERMINE THE HEALTH OF THE CITY'S FINANCES HAS IMPROVED SINCE THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE WE'VE BEEN BUDGETING THE WAY WE'VE BEEN BUDGETING.
I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT NOTION AND THAT NARRATIVE OUT THERE ABOUT WHERE WE'RE HEADED.
WE'RE HEADED FOR CONTINUED GROWTH, CONTINUED INVESTMENT IN THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE WANT.
WE UNDERSTAND HOW TO MANAGE THE FINANCES TO A POINT WHERE WE DON'T PUT THE COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY IN AN UPSIDE-DOWN SITUATION.
NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET IS BALANCED.
THE THIRD YEAR, WHEN IT BECOMES THE SECOND YEAR, WILL BE BALANCED.
WE'RE NOT ADDING POSITIONS FOR THE SAKE OF ADDING POSITIONS AND WE'RE GOING TO FIND A WAY TO AGAIN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN AT LEAST MAINTAIN THE LEVEL OF SERVICES WE HAVE AND IMPROVE SERVICES AS YOU MENTIONED, WHERE COUNSEL ASKED US TO DO IT, SO I JUST WANTED TO AT LEAST PUT OUT SOME FACTUAL INFORMATION ON NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, AS WELL AS WHERE THERE'S $600 MILLION HAS COME FROM THAT WE TALK ABOUT BECAUSE IT'S IN ALL THE AREAS I THINK THAT FOLK WANT US TO INVEST IN, NOT THINGS THAT I THINK WOULD SAY WE SHOULDN'T BE INVESTING IN BUT THESE ARE COUNSEL DIRECTIVES AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY'S IDEA OF WHAT THEY BELIEVE WE NEED TO DO MORE, SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE AND IT JUST I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND. THANK YOU.
>> THAT WAS REALLY SUCCINCT FOR YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER.
I APPRECIATE THE RESPONSE AND I GUESS WE'LL JUST CONTINUE TO WATCH IT THROUGH THE GPFM COMMITTEE.
[05:05:04]
WHEN I HEARD FROM THE CFO DURING THE INITIAL BUDGET MEETINGS THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE EXPERIENCING BUDGET CUTS IN 2025, THAT JUST MAKES ME REALLY CONCERN THAT WITH GIVEN ALL OF THE INCREASES IN ALL THE DEPARTMENTS PLUS THE $14 BILLION AND NEEDS PLUS THE PENSION, I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO BE TIGHTENING OUR BELTS AND I DON'T SEE WHERE THAT'S HAPPENING HERE, BUT I GUESS WE'LL CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT IT. THANK YOU.>> CHAIRWOMAN, MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON YOUR OWN AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU. SO LET'S START OFF JUST SAYING JUST BECAUSE YOU FUND SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN YOU ACTUALLY GET MORE SERVICES FOR IT.
TO COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ'S PLEA TO INVEST IN DEPARTMENTS.
I WOULD SAY WE ARE OVER-INVESTING IN SOME DEPARTMENTS AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS AN ACCUMULATION OF STAFF AND FUNDING.
TO THE CITY MANAGER'S COMMENT THAT THERE'S RANDOM CUTS, ACTUALLY, THERE'S NOT.
THIS IS ACTUALLY TAKING THE EMOTION OUT OF THE DECISION-MAKING AND SAYING, WE'RE GOING TO SET PARAMETERS, AND THE FUNNY THING IS AFTER THE MEMO, ALMOST NOBODY EVEN ASKED ME, WELL, WHAT DEPARTMENTS WOULD BE IMPACTED AND IT WAS ACTUALLY COUNCIL MEMBER WES, WHO ONLY ASKED ME LAST WEEK FOR THE FIRST TIME AND I SAID YOU'RE THE VERY FIRST ONE WHO'S EVEN ASKED BECAUSE THE POINT OF THE MEMO WASN'T TO SAY, I LIKE THIS DEPARTMENT, I DON'T LIKE THIS ONE, THEY'RE DOING A GOOD JOB, THEY'RE NOT.
IT WAS TO LOOK AT GROWTH IN A STRUCTURED, MEASURED, AND UNEMOTIONAL WAY.
NEXT ITEM, SPECIFIC FOR DATA ANALYTICS AND BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE, OF COURSE, THIS WAS ONCE THE OFFICE OF INNOVATION.
IT WASN'T JUST INITIALLY FORMED.
IN THE DIRECTOR'S OWN WORDS IN A RECENT ARTICLE, THIS IS THE BIGGEST DEPARTMENT IN THE NATION THAT DOES THIS WORK AND THE EXAMPLE OF THE CAD WORK.
CAD WORK HAS BEEN HAPPENING IN OUR CITY FOR A LONG TIME WAY BEFORE THIS DEPARTMENT OR EVEN THE OFFICE OF INNOVATION WERE CREATED.
SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS, IN FACT, SEVERAL OFFICES HAVE BEEN CREATED UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES, RECENTLY BEEN MOVED AROUND AND ACTUALLY, I'D LIKE TO REQUEST FOR ONE OF THE ANSWERS ON THE BUDGET IF I MAY, JACK.
IF YOU CAN PROVIDE TO US A LIST OF ALL THE DEPARTMENTS AND WHEN THOSE DEPARTMENTS WERE CREATED, BOTH IF THEY REPLACE SOMETHING ELSE OR IF THEY ARE NEW ITERATION THAT'S HAPPENED, A NEW IDEA.
THE HEARTBURN TODAY IS ACTUALLY WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON'T ACT BECAUSE A YEAR FROM NOW, I WILL SAY I TOLD YOU SO.
I WILL SAY IT BECAUSE WE MUST SLOW DOWN ON OUR EXPENSES.
NEXT YEAR WE'LL HAVE A CHOICE AND THE CHOICE OF THE UNBALANCED BUDGET HAS ALWAYS BEEN SOLVED IN THE SAME WAY IN THE CITY EXCEPT FOR WHEN WE HAD THE RECESSION AND THE WAY IT WAS RESOLVED WAS A TAX INCREASE.
WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO INCREASE THE PEOPLE'S TAXES IN DALLAS.
WE'RE ALREADY OVERTAXED, WE ALREADY HAVE THE HIGHEST TAX RATE OF THE SURROUNDING CITIES AND AS THE TITANIC EXAMPLE SHOWED US, PEOPLE WILL GO TO OTHER CHOICES.
THERE'S LOTS OF OTHER CHOICES BESIDES DALLAS AND WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE HERE.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IS THAT WE WILL HAVE A VERY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN CONTRIBUTION FOR OUR PENSION BOTH FOR POLICE, FIRE AND FOR ERF.
THIS ISN'T EVEN ACCOUNTED FOR.
>> THAT'S YOUR TIME FOR THIS ROUND.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK I HAVE ONE MORE MINUTE. CAN I JUST GO TOGETHER? IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION TO IT?
>> THEY'RE NOT EVEN IN THE QUEUE.
>> WE'LL WAIT AND SEE. IT WON'T TAKE LONG BECAUSE I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? THOSE ARE THE RULES, SO WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE.
SEEING NONE. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MINUTE.
>> THANK YOU. MANY TIMES AND IN FACT THE CITY MANAGER WAS SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY TO THE GENERAL FUND AS OPPOSED TO THE ALL FUND BUDGET AND THE TRUTH IS THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS DON'T JUST PAY FOR OUR GENERAL FUND.
THEY PAY FOR THE ENTIRE FUND, THEY PAY FOR OUR DEBT, THEY PAY FOR OUR CAPITAL AND WE ARE SEEING A GROWTH OF CIVILIAN AND I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE MY MY PAPERS WITH ME BUT THE GROWTH OF THE CIVILIAN STAFF AND BUDGET HAS EXCEEDED THE GROWTH OF OUR UNIFORM STAFF AND BUDGET, SO THE NARRATIVE WE ALWAYS GET IS BLAME OUR BUDGET WOES ON PUBLIC SAFETY IS COMPLETELY INACCURATE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DOCUMENTATION, JACK,
[05:10:03]
IF YOU COULD, ON THAT. THANK YOU.>> ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER 34 AS IT WAS READ, NOT AS IT'S WRITTEN.
SEEING NONE. LET'S SEE THE CARDS.
>> WITH ONLY THREE CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THIS AMENDMENT FAILS AND SMEAR.
>> NEXT AMENDMENT. WHO'S GOTTEN AMENDMENT THEY FEEL COMPELLED HIM TO BRING UP? I'M GOING TO GO TO YOU, MR. RIDLEY, WE ARE IN ROUND 2 OF AMENDMENT.
>> DO IT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION PLEASE WE CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A SECOND FORCE.
>> OF COURSE. I MOVE WITH REGARD TO AMENDMENT NUMBER 17, ADOPTION OF THE REDUCTION IN BUDGET FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER, WITH THE USE OF FUNDS BEING DECREASING THE TAX RATE.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND DISCUSSION. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, GO AHEAD.
WE'VE JUST HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE LEVEL OF FUNDING FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.
ALTHOUGH I DID NOT SUPPORT THE PREVIOUS MOTION BECAUSE OF THE LEVEL OF THE CUTS, I DO THINK THAT CUTS ARE APPROPRIATE TO REDUCE THE EXPANSION IN CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS.
AS WE SAW WITH THE PREVIOUS ONE, MY AMENDMENT NUMBER 18, THIS SAME APPROACH APPLIES TO ITEM 17, WHICH WOULD REDUCE THE BUDGET TO THE FORECAST 2023 LEVEL OF THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER WHILE ALLOWING FOR REQUIRED CONTRACTUAL SALARY, BENEFIT AND PENSION INCREASES AS CALCULATED BY THE BUDGET OFFICE.
THIS WOULD RESULT IN AN ALLOCATION TOWARD THE TAX RATE OF $473,996. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE WE SHOULD BE GONE FOR OR AGAINST? AMENDMENT NUMBER 17. JOEL MICHELLE'S RIGHT ANSWER.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST TO CLARIFY ON THIS, I'M LOOKING AT THE TOTAL BUDGET OF THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER SO TO SEE WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE.
>> THE TOTAL BUDGET PROPOSED FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER?
>> IS THE TOTAL FOR SMALL BUSINESSES CENTER.
>> JUST A QUICK QUESTION, JUST TO UNDERSTAND THAT FOR THE PUBLIC, WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER? MS. WILLIAMS AND MR. TOLBERT, DID THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER CAME OUT OF INITIATIVE OF THE ECODEB DEPARTMENT; IS THAT CORRECT? AND WHEN WAS IT ESTABLISHED?
>> CAN PROVIDE YOUR TOOLBAR, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.
THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION COMES FROM A SHELTER, IT WAS ACTUALLY A COMBINATION OF PULLING OUT THE BUSINESS DIVERSITY PIECE THAT'S SET IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT USED TO BE IN PROCUREMENT.
THEN WE ALSO PULLED OUT OF THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY CARE, SOME OF THE SERVICES THAT WERE RELATED TO WORKFORCE AND WE CREATED THEN THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THE FULL CYCLE OF OUR SMALL BUSINESSES.
THEY DO EVERYTHING FROM THE RE-ENTRY PROGRAM TO HAVE FRESH START PROGRAM TO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND ALL OF THE MINORITY WOMEN BUSINESS ENTERPRISE ACTIVITIES FOR THE CITY.
>> THANK YOU. THE WORKFORCE THAT'S PART OF WORKING I KNOW THROUGH THE WEEK COMMITTEE WERE WORKING HAND IN HAND WITH THE WORKFORCE INITIATIVE OF THE MAYOR; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. YES, MA'AM.
>> THEN THIS IS DESIGNED IN ORDER TO PRODUCE INCOME FOR THE CITY IS THROUGH GIVING JOBS AND HELPING BUSINESSES GROW TO PRODUCE SALES TAX AND OTHER THINGS; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WOULD THERE BE A BENEFIT TO THE CITY IN REDUCING THE TAXES BY 0.0243? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE CITY WOULD BE IN TERMS OF WHAT IT WILL ACCOMPLISH IN TERMS OF CREATING MORE JOBS, CREATING MORE INCOME.
AGAIN, WOULD WE BE CUTTING OFF OUR NOSE TO SPITE OUR FACE ON THIS? I GUESS THAT'S A QUESTION FOR JACK.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE HOPING TO BRING IN.
I KNOW WE HAVEN'T QUANTIFIED EVERYTHING, BUT WILL THE ULTIMATE SAVINGS OF THIS AMOUNT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT TOTAL IS.
WE GIVE BACK TO THE RESIDENTS.
THEN HOW MUCH IN TERMS OF THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING WELL, WILL WE LOSE IN THE PRODUCTIVITY AND THE JOBS AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CREATE THROUGH THIS? WILL WE LOSE MORE THAN WE GAINED BY THIS?
>> WELL, LET ME SAY IT THIS WAY.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I KNOW THAT WE HAVE FOCUSED ON IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE HAD GRANT FUNDING TO SUPPORT A RE-ENTRY PROGRAM, BUT THE CITY COUNCIL MADE A POLICY DECISION IN 2022 TO BEGAN A PRE-ENTRY PROGRAM.
SOME OF THIS ADDITIONAL FUNDING HELPS US NOW FUND THAT FOUR YEAR.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE ADDED SOMETHING CALLED THE
[05:15:03]
ACCELERATED PROGRAM AND THAT'S REALLY DEVELOPING MINORITY BUSINESSES TO PUSH THEM TO THE NEXT STEP IN THEIR BUSINESS CYCLE TO WHERE THEY CAN GROW BIOCAPACITY AND BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE JOBS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.BOTH OF THOSE PROGRAMS ARE INCLUDED IN OUR ENHANCEMENT FOR 24, WHICH WOULD MAKE UP THAT 473,000.
>> WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO AUTHENTICALLY MAKE THE CASE THAT ALL OF OUR PRE AND RE-ENTRY WORK HAS AN IMPACT ON PUBLIC SAFETY?
>> ABSOLUTELY, AND WE WILL BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE AND SHOW YOU THE DATA AND HOW WE'RE ABLE TO NOW WORK WITH ALL OF THE SYSTEMS THAT ARE OUT THERE AROUND CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND THOSE THAT COME BACK INTO OUR COMMUNITY.
WE HAVE THAT DATA BROKEN DOWN BY ZIP CODE THAT REALLY SHOWS HOW WE'RE NOW WORKING WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS TO NOT ONLY GET THEM BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY, BUT TO GET THEM PREPARED FOR JOBS EVEN WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS.
>> GREAT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT ANYBODY NEEDS TO ADD TO THIS?
>> JOYCE WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR OF THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER.
YES. THE PRE-RELEASE PROGRAM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE VERY PROUD OF BASED ON THE PRE-RELEASE PROGRAM IS TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THEM JOB READINESS SKILLS PRIOR TO THEM RELEASING BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY SO THAT THEY CAN THEN EITHER GO INTO EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS OR GO DIRECTLY TO WORK.
AS YOU'VE SAID, THAT IS NOT ONLY A BENEFIT TO REDUCING RECIDIVISM, BUT IT IS ALSO A BENEFIT TO WORKFORCE AND BEING ABLE TO BE TAXPAYERS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
>> THANK YOU. DID YOU SEND SOMETHING TO ME? BECAUSE I WAS ASKING THIS QUESTION ABOUT THE NUMBER OF ACTUAL JOBS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED THROUGH YOUR DEPARTMENT.
>> YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION AS WELL.
IN THE LAST 10 YEARS OR SO, ONE OF THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE'VE HAD WAS TO THE SOUTH DALLAS OPPORTUNITY FUND THAT FUNDS SMALL BUSINESSES AND THE SOUTHERN SECTOR OF DALLAS.
IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER HAS FUNDED FOUR INITIATIVES FOR BUSINESSES TO BE ABLE TO NOT ONLY DEVELOP THEIR BUSINESSES, GROW THEIR BUSINESSES, AND START THEIR BUSINESSES, AND BEING ABLE TO CREATE OVER 75 JOBS.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR.
>> MS. BLACKMON, NEW RECORDS FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. JOYCE AND BACK UP.
TELL ME WITH THIS $474,000 REDUCTION, WHAT WOULD WE NOT BE DOING THIS YEAR?
>> WE WOULD NOT DO THE FULL YEAR OF THE ACCELERATED PROGRAM.
AGAIN, THAT PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TO REALLY WORK WITH OUR SMALL BUSINESSES AND HELPING THEM DEVELOP TO ACTUALLY GROW THE CAPACITY OF THE FIRMS TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE THE WORK AND BE ABLE TO GET CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS WE STARTED LAST YEAR, AND THIS WILL BE TAKEN US TO THE FOUR-YEAR FUNDING.
WE WOULD ALSO NOT BE ABLE TO FUND THE PRE-ENTRY PROGRAM. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE.
WE HAVE STATE GRANT FUNDING FOR THE RE-ENTRY PROGRAM, BUT THIS IS ABOUT US GOING INTO THE SYSTEM, WORKING WITH INDIVIDUALS BEFORE THEY'RE ACTUALLY RELEASED.
WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FUND THAT PROGRAM.
>> YES. WE STARTED THE PRE-ENTRY IN THE LATTER PART OF 2022.
>> ARE WE HITTING THOSE METRICS?
>> YES. WE ACTUALLY HAVE AN UPDATE THAT WE WILL BE PROVIDING TO THE WORKFORCE EDUCATION EQUITY COMMITTEE COMING UP.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS TO REALLY GET THE DASHBOARD THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT, BRINGING BACK TO WHERE YOU COULD REALLY SEE HOW MANY INDIVIDUALS WE'RE SERVING.
ARE THEY GOING INTO JOBS? WHAT TYPE OF JOBS THEY ARE GETTING, HOW MUCH THEY'RE ACTUALLY MAKING IN THOSE JOBS AND SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THAT DATABASE PRETTY MUCH FOR THE LAST THREE OR FOUR MONTHS, BUT WE'LL BE READY TO PRESENT THAT DATA TO THE COMMITTEE.
>> JOYCE, TELL ME WHY YOU NEED 474.
THIS IS LIKE SHARK TANK. TELL ME WHY WE NEED TO INVEST THIS.
>> I'M SORRY. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOU'RE USING THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER.
I THINK YOUR QUESTION WAS TO TELL YOU WHY WE NEED 476,000.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT BASICALLY THE FORECAST INFORMATION THAT'S THEIR IMPACTS, WHAT OUR PROGRAM IS NOW.
THEN THE $250,000 THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT FOR THE FUTURE PROGRAM ADDS UP TO THE $473,000.
BASICALLY, THE REASON THAT WE NEED THIS IS TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE THE EFFORTS THAT WE'VE HAD TO BE ABLE TO REDUCE ONE, CONTINUE TO REDUCE THE CRIME RATE THAT WE SEE THAT COULD BE HAPPENING IF WE DID NOT HAVE THE PRE-RELEASE PROGRAM.
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE 198 INDIVIDUALS ENROLLED THROUGH OUR PRE-RELEASED PROGRAMS. THOSE RELEASE PROGRAMS WE'VE ALREADY BUILT PARTNERSHIPS AS PART OF THOSE, NOT ONLY WITH LOCAL EMPLOYERS BUT ALSO WITH DALLAS COLLEGE TO THEIR EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE THOSE EXIST.
THE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS FOR OUR MENTOR ACCELERATED PROGRAM.
[05:20:03]
WE'VE HAD SOME PROGRAMS IN WHICH WE ARE WORKING WITH THE NOT ONLY THE MINORITY CHAMBERS BUT ALSO CURRENT AND CURRENT CONTRACTORS THAT WE'VE HAD THAT HAVE BEEN TIER ONE CONTRACTOR SUBS THAT NOW ARE MOVING INTO PRIMES AND THE ABILITY TO WORK WITH OUR INTERNAL DEPARTMENTS TO ENCOURAGE OUR MWBES TO BE ABLE TO BUILD CAPACITY AS THEY MOVE FORWARD AND BEING ABLE TO HAVE CONTRACTS AND ALSO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF HISTORICAL UTILIZATION THAT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN GETTING THROUGH THE CITY BECAUSE THEY LACK THAT CAPACITY.THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE DOING BECAUSE BASED ON NOT ONLY THE COMMUNITIES CHARGED TO US, BUT THESE COUNCILS CHARGED TO US.
WE WOULDN'T EVER BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITHOUT THE $473,000.
>> DO YOU HAVE A SUCCESS RATE ON THAT PRE-RELEASE? DO YOU HAVE A SUCCESS RATE LIKE 50 PERCENT OR 100 PERCENT? I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAS BEEN, IT'S BEEN A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM.
I'M JUST LOOKING AT WHAT YOUR SUCCESSES ARE.
>> YEAH. WE HAVE 193 PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN ENROLLED IN THAT PROGRAM AND A PRE-RELEASE PROGRAM.
CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT 60 PERCENT WHAT WE WOULD SAY SUCCESS RATES, BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THEY'VE COME OUT, THEY HAVE NOT GONE OR RECOMMITTED A CRIME WHEN THE LAST 90 DAYS THEY'VE GONE INTO PROGRAMS, THEY ARE BEING MANAGED AND CASE MANAGER.
THEY ALSO COME INTO THE CITY AND APPLYING FOR OUR FRESH START PROGRAM.
>> MR. WEST, YOU'RE AGAINST FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND I APPRECIATE THE WORK TO SMALL BUSINESS CENTER DOES AND IT'S JUST A QUESTION IN GENERAL.
I KNOW THERE ARE OTHER PROGRAMS IN THE CITY, INCLUDING THE OAK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WHO PROVIDES JOBS PLACEMENT PROGRAMS, AND THEY ALSO WORK WITH EX-OFFENDERS.
WHY IS THE CITY IN THE BUSINESS IN GENERAL ARE DOING THIS? IT'S NOT A TRICK QUESTION.
I FEEL LIKE WE'RE IN THE BUSINESS OF BEING THE SOCIAL SERVICES AND WORKFORCE ENTITY FOR THE REGION AND IT JUST GROWS THE CITY BIGGER AND BIGGER.
I'M NOT PICKING ON THIS DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS JUST A GENERAL PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION WHY? WHY THIS PROGRAM, WHY IS IT NECESSARY THAT WE DO THIS INSTEAD OF RFP MISS OUT TO A NON-PROFIT TO CONDUCT THIS PROGRAM?
>> LET ME ANSWER IT TWO DIFFERENT WAYS.
I THINK THE FIRST THING IS THAT THE COUNCIL IN 2020 ASKED US TO BEGIN TO WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS TO DEVELOP A PRE-ENTRY PROGRAM.
THAT WAS A DIRECT REQUEST TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND IT WAS INCORPORATED INTO THE GENERAL FUND TO DO IT.
WHAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT WE'VE DONE EXACTLY THAT WE DID AN RFP.
WE WENT OUT TO THE STREET AND WE ACTUALLY IDENTIFIED, I THINK WE HAVE A TOTAL OF THREE DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS, NON-PROFITS THAT ARE ACTUALLY DELIVERING THE PRE-ENTRY PROGRAM.
THE RE-ENTRY PROGRAM WAS STARTED IN 2018 WHEN WE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER, BUT WE PULLED IT INTO THIS AREA.
WE'VE BEEN UTILIZING GRANT FUNDING THROUGH THE STATE TO ACTUALLY MANAGE THAT PROGRAM.
WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL ASKED US TO DO WAS TO CONTINUE TO FIND WAYS TO EXPAND THAT PROGRAM SO WE COULD GET MORE INDIVIDUALS IN AND BE ABLE TO THEN ACTUALLY HELP THEM IDENTIFY JOBS.
IT'S NOT BEING DONE SOLELY BY THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER, BUT WE'RE ACTUALLY PUTTING THOSE DOLLARS ON THE STREET, MAKING THOSE INVESTMENTS, AND THEN WORKING WITH OUR PARTNERS TO ACTUALLY DELIVER THE SERVICES.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH, I WOULD SAY, OVER THE LAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS NOW, TO REALLY PERFECT THE MODEL AND WE BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE THESE PARTNERSHIPS IN PLACE, WHETHER IT'S THE OAK CLIFF CHAMBER, WHETHER IT'S DALLAS COLLEGE, NOW THERE'S DONE A LOT OF THE TRAINING FOR US.
THE REGIONAL BLACK CONTRACTORS, AS WELL WORKING TOGETHER IN A COLLABORATION TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE APPROACHING THIS COMPREHENSIVELY.
THE PARTNERSHIPS THAT THEY ARE THE CITIES JUST BRINGING, I WOULD SAY WE'RE PUTTING OUR MONEY WHERE OUR MOUTH IS BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT DOING.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER WEST I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD AS A COUNSELOR, I'M SURE IT REMINDED US ALL IS THAT IT WAS ALSO AN INITIATIVE FROM THIS COUNCIL AND ALSO THE LUMIERE TASK FORCE ON UP-SKILLING WORKFORCE.
BEING ABLE TO PARTNER WITH THAT AND PARTNER WITH WORKFORCE DALLAS IS ONE OF THE INITIATIVES THAT THE CITY IS TAKING ON BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO PUT UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES, UNDESERVED RESIDENTS NOW THAT ARE UNDER SKILLED, UNEMPLOYED BACK TO WORK.
>> I AGREE WITH THE MISSION, I THINK IT'S FANTASTIC.
IT'S JUST DO WE GROW OR DO WE USE OUR FUNDING TO PUSH OUT MORE SO TO OUR NON-PROFIT PARTNERS.
IT'S THAT'S WHAT I STRUGGLE WITH SOME OF THESE DEPARTMENTS BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWER AND IT'S A GOOD ONE, AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU'LL ANSWER FOR FIVE MINUTES, AND FOR EVERYONE WHO'S LISTENING, AMENDMENT 17 THAT WE'RE DEBATING.
[05:25:01]
I JUST WILL SAY JOYCE HAS BEEN A GREAT RESOURCE TO A LOT OF SMALL BUSINESSES, NON-PROFITS IN DISTRICT 7, BUT ALSO THROUGHOUT SOUTHERN DALLAS.
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY NOT SOMETHING THAT I CAN SUPPORT WOULD ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO REPRESENT SOUTHERN DISTRICTS, TO LOOK AT HOW THIS WOULD IMPACT THE STRIDES WE'VE MADE TOWARDS ME AND EQUITABLE RESOURCES FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND MINORITY AND WOMEN BUSINESS PARTICIPATION.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.
>> MR. GRACEY, RECOGNITION FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 17.
>> THANK YOU. I ALWAYS DEBATE ON WHETHER OR NOT I'M GOING TO USE WORDS JUST BECAUSE WE HEAR A LONG TIME.
BUT THIS IS ONE THAT I DID WANT TO SPEAK ON OBVIOUSLY FOR ITS NEAR AND DEAR.
I USED TO RUN THE DEPARTMENT, BUT BEYOND THAT, I GO TO BETO PRISON ONCE A MONTH AND I SPENT SOME TIME WITH THOSE FELLOWS.
THE EXCITEMENT AND THE RELATIONSHIPS THAT YOU BUILD IN THE EXCITEMENT THAT THEY DISPLAY AS THEY'RE APPROACHING THEIR DAY.
THIS PRE-ENTRY IS THE ONE OF THOSE TOOLS THAT CONTINUES TO PUSH THEM AND MOTIVATE THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T RETURN AND THAT THEY STAY.
IF YOU DO THE PRE-ENTRY BEFORE THEY GET OUT, THE OPTIMISM, THE HOPE, THE ENCOURAGEMENT, HOW THEY COME BACK TO THEIR FAMILIES, ALL OF THAT STUFF MATTERS.
I'M SAYING ALL THAT TO SAY THAT I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I WILL BE SUPPORTING IN COUNCIL MEMBER WEST, YOU ASK THE WHY AND I GET IT. I AGREE.
THERE'S OTHER AGENCIES THAT SHOULD BE DOING THIS WORK, BUT IF WE DON'T DO IT, NOBODY IS GOING TO DO IT AND IT HAS TO BE DONE BECAUSE IT IMPACTS THE QUALITY OF LIFE, NOT JUST FOR ANY ONE PARTICULAR DISTRICT, BUT CITYWIDE.
WHEN THESE PEOPLE COME BACK WHEN PEOPLE GET CONTRACTS, THE DIFFERENCE THAT IT MAKES ON THEIR BUSINESS AND THEIR FAMILIES, AND ALSO I'VE SEEN THIS FIRSTHAND.
THIS IS NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT I'M WILLING TO SACRIFICE FOR THE SAKE OF SAVING THE TAX RATE OR WHATEVER.
I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK.
>> MS. WILLIS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS.
>> I'M AWARE OF THE WORK ON PRE-ENTRY AND RE-ENTRY, WHICH IT IS PUBLIC SAFETY, IT'S VERY MUCH PUBLIC SAFETY AND WE KNOW THIS FROM STUDYING THIS ISSUE.
I KNOW THAT IN JUNE, THE FOCUS DETERRENCE PROGRAM FINALLY GOT OFF THE GROUND AND WHAT ROLE DID THE SBC PLAY IN THAT PROGRAM?
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU ASKED BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS BEEN A PART OF THIS HAS BEEN THE WHOLE DAY LABOR INITIATIVE THAT WE'D STARTED BECAUSE FOCUS DETERRENCE, AS PART OF BEING ABLE TO WORK WITH US WITH THE MOBILE UNIT, WAS PART OF THAT CONCERN AND HOW WE WOULD HAVE BE ABLE TO APPROACH THAT AS PART OF THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER.
THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS OF COURSE THE RE-ENTRY PROGRAM AND WORKING WITH THE TEAM, THE FOCUS DETERRENCE PROGRAM, ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID WAS WORK WITH ONE OF OUR PARTNERS, OUR BCA, WHO HAS APARTMENT AND HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE JUST BEING TRAINED.
THAT AREA IN WHICH THAT HOUSING IS PLACED IS ONE OF THE TARGETED AREAS OF THE FOCUS DETERRENCE TEAM.
BEING ABLE TO DO AND COLLABORATE FROM THE SBC WITH OUR NON-PROFIT PARTNER FOR OUR BCA AND BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT HIGH CRIME AREA AND BEING ABLE TO PULL ALL THAT ALTOGETHER WITH DPD.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING SOMETHING UNIQUE THAT SBC DESK, BECAUSE I'VE HAD A CONCERN AND I'M VERY EXCITED TO BE ON THE WORKFORCE COMMITTEE SO THAT I CAN DIG INTO THIS FURTHER BECAUSE I HAVE SENSED DUPLICATION.
IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE DUPLICATING RIGHT NOW, UNLESS WE CAN REALLY IDENTIFY THAT THERE IS SOME GAP THAT'S NOT BEING SERVED IN THAT POPULATION THEN I WOULD RE-HOME IT.
I WOULD WORK TOWARD FINDING THAT IN A NEW HOME.
THEN IT'S ALSO POSSIBLE TO BE THE STARTING POINT OF SOME GREAT PROGRAM AND THEN STAND IT UP AND LET IT FLY WITH SOMEONE ELSE WHERE THEY CAN TAKE IT OVER AND THEN THEY GET TO WHERE IT CAN BE SELF-SUSTAINING AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE CITY, MEANING IT DOESN'T HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE TAXPAYERS ANYMORE.
BUT WE CAN STILL SEE SUCCESS, IT CAN STILL MAKE AN IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY.
BUT I THINK THAT WHERE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD STRUGGLE TO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT IS THE FACT THAT WE'VE DEDICATED ATTENTION TO THE FOCUS DETERRENCE PROGRAM, WHICH IS TAKING OUR VIOLENT CRIMINALS AND TURNING THEM AROUND, WHICH CAN HELP OUR OVERALL COMMUNITY BECOME MORE SAFE AND REDUCE VIOLENT CRIME,
[05:30:05]
WHICH HAS BEEN A PRIORITY AND AN AMAZING INITIATIVE WHERE WE'VE SHOWN MOVEMENT THAT IS GOTTEN THE ATTENTION OF THE NATION.THIS IS AN AREA WHERE IT'S UNIQUE TO HAVE A CITY DEPARTMENT WORKING IN LOCKSTEP WITH DPD ON MAKING THE COMMUNITY SAFER AND ALSO TURNING PEOPLE'S LIVES AROUND INTO MAKING THEM CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, GETTING THEM HOUSED AND ON TO BE HEALTHY, HAPPY, AND INDEPENDENT.
FOR THAT REASON, I WON'T SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT, BUT I WILL BE LOOKING AT THE DUPLICATION AND SEEING HOW IT'S GOING TO HAVE THIS DEPARTMENT IT IS FULFILLING SOME NEED THAT IS NOT BEING MET ANYWHERE ELSE. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
THIS IS ALWAYS THE TOUGHEST MONTH THAT WE HAVE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE BUDGET.
THERE IS A LOT OF PROGRAMS THAT ARE NEAR AND DEAR TO OUR HEARTS AND THEN THERE'S SOME THAT ARE NOT SO NEAR AND DEAR AND THEN THERE'S SOME THAT'S LIKE YOU JUST CUT IT, GET RID OF IT.
WE HAVE TO MAKE THE TOUGH CALLS WE'RE THE POLICYMAKER.
THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER, THE HARD PART ON THIS ONE IS THAT SMALL BUSINESSES, MR. MAYOR ARE THE BACKBONE OF OUR ECONOMY, AND ESPECIALLY IN AREAS THAT ARE MAINLY PEOPLE OF COLOR.
IF THE BIG BUSINESSES DON'T WANT TO COME INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND DON'T WANT TO BUILD THEIR GROCERY STORES IN SOME OF THESE AREAS AND DON'T WANT TO BRING THEIR MULTI-BILLION-DOLLAR CORPORATIONS INTO SOME OF THESE AREAS.
IF IT WEREN'T FOR SMALL BUSINESSES, SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD HAVE ZERO ACCESS TO ANYTHING.
I KNOW SOME OF THE BUSINESSES THAT THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER HAS HELPED AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S SO IMPORTANT.
I AGREE IF THERE'S DUPLICATION, LET'S LOOK AT THAT.
THANK YOU, CHAIR WILLIS, FOR SAYING THAT AND HELPING US OUT WITH THAT TO SEE THAT BECAUSE IT IS SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK AT FOR THE FUTURE.
THE RE-ENTRY AND PRE-ENTRY PROGRAMS ARE PERSONAL TO ME BECAUSE I HAVE A BROTHER WHO IS A CONVICTED FELON.
I'VE TOLD THIS STORY MORE THAN ONCE.
HE LIVES IN HOUSTON, MR. MAYOR.
IF THEY HAD A PROGRAM LIKE THIS, THAT COULD HAVE HELPED HIM WITH PRE-ENTRY, WITH A RE-ENTRY, MAYBE HE WOULDN'T HAVE GONE BACK AND FORTH TO PRISON SO MANY DIFFERENT TIMES.
SOMETHING FINALLY STUCK AND HE'S BEEN OUT FOR ABOUT SIX OR SEVEN MONTHS NOW AND I'VE SEEN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT LITTLE BROTHER THAN I'VE EVER SEEN BEFORE.
HE'S REPEATING THE THINGS THAT WE'VE ALL TOLD HIM BUT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE SAID THAT THIS TIME IT MATTERED TO HIM AND HE'S MAKING THOSE CHANGES.
CHIEF GARCIA, EVEN PARTICIPATES IN THIS PROGRAM, MR. MAYOR.
I'VE CALLED HIM MORE THAN ONCE WHEN HE'S ON HIS WAY DOWN THERE TO GO HELP OUT, TO GO MENTOR SOME OF THESE CONVICTED FOLKS SO THAT THEY WILL GET THAT HOPE SO THEY'LL SEE WHY IT MATTERS.
COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY, I KNOW GOES BECAUSE ONE TIME I CALLED HIM AND HE SAID CAN I CALL YOU BACK BECAUSE I'M ON MY WAY TO THE PRISON TO GO TALK TO SOME FOLKS AND HE'S DOING THAT ON HIS PERSONAL TIME NOW AS A COUNCIL MEMBER.
HE'S NOT GETTING PAID TO DO IT ANYMORE.
HE'S DOING IT ON HIS PERSONAL TIME.
IF WE'RE GOING TO HELP PUBLIC SAFETY OUT, AND WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT A PERSON WHO'S BEEN PUT INTO JAIL DOESN'T COMMIT A CRIME AGAIN WE'VE GOT TO PUT THAT IN THERE.
FOR THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY, WE'RE GETTING WAY MORE BENEFIT OFF OF IT THAN WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE CUT OR STOPPED, OR SLOWED DOWN THAT PROGRAM.
I ADORE MY COLLEAGUE, MR. RIDLEY.
THIS IS ONE THAT WE'RE GOING TO DISAGREE ON.
THIS WAS JUST TOO IMPORTANT, NOT JUST BECAUSE OF MY PERSONAL STORY BUT BECAUSE I REPRESENT A LOT OF PEOPLE IN DISTRICT 6 WHO HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS PROCESS AS FAR AS WHAT'S HAPPENED TO THEM.
THIS WORKS JUST LIKE OUR COMMUNITY COURTS WORK.
IF WE DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO HELP FOLKS THAT NEED THAT EXTRA BIT OF HELP FOR WHATEVER REASON IT IS, THEY MADE A MISTAKE, BUT WE SHOULDN'T BE PUNISHING THEM FOREVER WHEN IT'S
[05:35:01]
TIME FOR THEM TO GET OUT AFTER PAYING THEIR DEBT TO SOCIETY.I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT.
I JUST APPLAUD YOU ALL FOR EVERYTHING YOU ALL DO FOR THE TIGHT BUDGET YOU DO ALREADY HAVE AND LOOK FORWARD TO HELPING GET THIS.
IF THERE IS ANY DUPLICATION, LET'S LOOK AT IT.
LET'S SEE IF WE CAN DO THAT AND MAKE THINGS WORK EVEN BETTER. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, AMENDMENT NUMBER 17, FOLKS.
>> THANK YOU. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION AND THANK COUNCILMAN RIDLEY FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD.
I THINK THERE'S SOME BASIC QUESTIONS THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD ACTUALLY BRING UP AT A RETREAT.
LIKE, SHOULD THE CITY OF DALLAS BE INVOLVED IN THE BUSINESS OF SOCIAL SERVICES? I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD LEGITIMATELY TALK ABOUT.
PRISON RE-ENTRY IS VERY IMPORTANT, I DON'T THINK ANYONE WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT.
HOWEVER, IT'S ALSO A STATE FUNCTION.
THE NON-PROFIT COMMUNITY HAS COME BESIDE THAT, THE FAITH COMMUNITY CERTAINLY AS WELL.
THE ROLE OF CITY GOVERNMENT IN THIS EFFORT I'M NOT SURE WHERE WE BELONG.
I DON'T PERSONALLY THINK THAT WE DO BELONG THERE.
ONCE PEOPLE COME BACK TO OUR CITY, MOST CERTAINLY WE SHOULD WELCOME THEM AND HELP THEM BECOME SUCCESSFUL.
BUT THERE'S A ROLE FOR THE CITY AND WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY FULFILLING OUR OWN ROLE.
WE'RE NOT TAKING CARE OF OUR ROADS, WE'RE NOT EVEN MAINTAINING OUR OWN ASSETS PROPERLY.
THERE'S LOTS OF THINGS THAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT WE'RE NOT DOING THE JOB THAT OUR TAXPAYERS THINK WE SHOULD AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THEM.
IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO BE THE SOLUTION TO EVERY PROBLEM ON A CITY BUDGET AND IT DOESN'T FIT.
YOU HEARD MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS TALK WITH PASSION ABOUT A PROJECT THAT IS IMPORTANT TO THEM PERSONALLY, PROJECTS THEY LOVE, PROGRAMS, THEY LOVE, DEPARTMENTS THEY LOVE.
WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU IS, WE'VE GOT TO TAKE THAT OUT AND MAKE SOME VERY LOGICAL DECISIONS THAT ARE BASED ON FINANCES, THAT ARE BASED ON WHAT WE SEE AHEAD.
I FEAR THAT THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I PROPOSE THIS AS A FRAMEWORK.
I'VE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH FOUR WHERE I WENT THROUGH LINE ITEM BY LINE ITEM. YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU DON'T GET VERY FAR BECAUSE EVERY DOLLAR HAS A CONSTITUENCY AND EVERYONE'S GOING TO TELL THE EMOTIONAL STORY LIKE EVERY FUNDRAISING APPEAL YOU EVER GET ABOUT THE HORRIBLE THING THAT'LL BE CUT OR THE DEVASTATION THAT'LL HAPPEN.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 10 PERCENT OF A $4 MILLION BUDGET HERE.
AGAIN, THIS IS I DON'T KNOW, AT LEAST THE THIRD ITERATION OF THIS DEPARTMENT.
I THINK COUNCILMAN GRACEY, YOU CAME TO ME MAYBE ON VERSION 2 OR 3, I WAS ALREADY IN OFFICE.
THIS DEPARTMENT JUST KEEPS REINVENTING ITSELF.
I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LOGIC OF A CITY TRYING TO TEACH PEOPLE TO BE ENTREPRENEURS.
BUREAUCRATS TRYING TO TEACH PEOPLE TO BE ENTREPRENEURS.
THIS IS PROBABLY NOT WHERE THIS BELONGS.
THE OTHER LOGIC IS, ON THE ONE HAND, YOU ALL WANT TO SAY IT'S A MINISCULE AMOUNT, HOW IT WILL AFFECT THE TAX RATE.
BUT THEN IT'S CATASTROPHIC IF WE CUT IT.
THESE TWO STATEMENTS DO NOT ALIGN.
I'VE THOUGHT A LOT ABOUT HOW I WOULD COUNTER THE CLAIMS ABOUT OH, IT'S SO LITTLE, JUST KEEP IT IN THE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE HOW COULD THIS REALLY AFFECT ANYONE? BUT LET'S THINK ABOUT OUR GASOLINE.
WHEN YOU GO FILL UP YOUR CAR THE PRICE OF THAT GASOLINE MIGHT BE JUST A COUPLE OF CENTS MORE OR LESS, BUT YOU FEEL IT AND YOU NOTICE IT AND YOU KNOW HOW MUCH IT COSTS.
THAT'S THE SAME THING. ALL OF THESE TAXES, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE DOING AN AMENDMENT BY AMENDMENT, THIS ALL ACCUMULATION.
>> CAN WE PLEASE KEEP OUR DISCUSSION GERMANE TO THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING?
>> IT SEEMS RELATIVELY GERMANE TO ME.
SHE'S TALKING ABOUT THE NEED FOR A PROGRAM, WHETHER THAT'S BEING DUPLICATED ELSEWHERE OR NOT.
>> THAT WAS AT THE BEGINNING OF HER COMMENTARY, BUT I UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET LATITUDE.
>> I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT MUCH LATITUDE, TO BE HONEST, BUT YOUR POINT IS WELL-TAKEN AND NOT SUSTAINED.
>> THE USE OF FUNDS IS TAX DECREASE AND THAT IS WHY I'M MAKING THE COMMENTS THAT I'M ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF US TAKING A STANCE TO SAY WE NEED A BIGGER TAX DECREASE FOR OUR RESIDENTS BECAUSE THE BUDGET THAT WAS SENT TO US, THE PROPOSED BUDGET, IS A TAX INCREASE EVEN IF THE RATE IS LOWER, AND SOMETHING WOULD HAVE TO BE CUT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THEM INDIVIDUALLY, THIS IS WHERE WE ALWAYS END UP.
THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS ON THIS AND I HOPE YOU WILL SUPPORT COUNCILMAN RIDLEY.
[05:40:07]
>> BEFORE I GO BACK TO YOU, MR. RIDLEY FOR A SECOND ROUND AND GO TO CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA FOR THE FIRST TIME.
YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IS NOT EMOTIONAL.
IN FACT, I THINK THAT THIS IS EQUITABLE AND THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT EQUITY IS.
WE'VE HEARD QUITE A BIT OF, I WOULD SAY, NEGATIVE TONE TOWARDS ANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES WHO HAVE EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR PROGRAMS LIKE THIS, AND I THINK THAT THAT'S THE BEAUTY IN HAVING A GOVERNMENT THAT HAS SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS WITH SUCH UNIQUE NEEDS AND CONSTITUENCIES.
I ALSO THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE LIVED A LIFE WHERE YOU DON'T NEED THESE SOCIAL SERVICES AND TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BE AFFORDED THE OPPORTUNITY THAT THESE AREN'T LIFELINES FOR YOU OR YOUR FAMILY.
BUT WHEN THOSE EMOTIONS COME IN IS BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN THE RESULTS AND WE'VE SEEN HOW THIS CAN IMPACT THOSE WHO DO DEPEND ON THE SOCIAL SERVICES.
I WASN'T ELECTED TO PASS THE BUCK AND FIND OTHER BODIES THAT THIS SHOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR, I WAS ELECTED TO PRIORITIZE THE QUAL AND WHAT WE CAN DO WITHIN OUR POWER TO IMPROVE THAT QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT ELECTED US IN.
I THINK IT'S JUST IMPORTANT FOR US TO STAY FOCUSED ON IF WE AS REPRESENTATIVES WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THINGS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF US, RATHER THAN BASHING ANY INTENT OR MOTIVE AT WHAT HAS BEEN PUT IN FRONT OF US.
SOME OF US ARE GOING TO PRIORITIZE THE NEED FOR A TAX RATE INCREASE.
SOME OF US ARE GOING TO PRIORITIZE SOME OF THE SERVICES THAT WE'RE ABLE TO OFFER.
I BELIEVE THIS IS ABSOLUTELY ONE OF THOSE SERVICES THAT WE'VE HEARD TESTIMONY OF HOW MUCH POSITIVE IT IS GOING TO DO.
I ALSO THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE STAY GENUINE WITH OUR MESSAGING.
WE AREN'T JUST BEING EMOTIONAL ON THIS FRONT.
WITH OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED, YOU CAN'T HAVE SACRED COWS.
YOU CAN'T TALK OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF YOUR MOUTH AND WANT THE BIGGEST TAX CUT IN OUR CITY'S HISTORY, BUT NOT WILLING TO TOUCH A COUPLE OF DEPARTMENTS THAT YOUR EMOTIONS WOULD BE IMPACTED FROM.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO STAY FOCUSED ON THE TASK AT HAND AND US TO NOT BASH OTHERS' ATTEMPTS AT ADEQUATELY REPRESENTING THE CONSTITUENTS WHO ELECTED THEM TO DO THE JOB. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR
>> WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE? ADAM, WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO OVERLOOK ANYTHING, IF I GO BACK TO MR. RIDLEY.
MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS AMENDMENT WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE A REFERENDUM ON WHETHER WE SHOULD RETAIN THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER OR ANY OF ITS PROGRAMS. ISSUES HAVE BEEN RAISED HERE TODAY AND WHAT I THINK HAS BEEN A HEALTHY DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ROLE OF THIS SOCIAL SERVICE PROVIDER IN OUR COMMUNITY.
WE CAN DEBATE THAT UNTIL THE COWS COME HOME, BUT THIS AMENDMENT IS SIMPLY A CURTAILMENT OF THE INCREASE IN THE BUDGET FOR THIS DEPARTMENT.
IT IS NOT CURTAILING ANY OF THEIR EXISTING PROGRAMS, ANY OF THEIR EXISTING STAFF POSITIONS.
JACK, LET ME ASK YOU HOW YOU ARRIVED AT THE AMOUNT OF THIS AMENDMENT AT 473996 IN RESPONSE TO MY REQUEST TO REDUCE THE INCREASE IN THE BUDGET FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER AND KEEP IT AT THE EXISTING FORECAST USE OF FUNDS FOR THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
>> FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS CENTER, THEIR FORECAST IS TO BE ABOUT $250,000 UNDER BUDGET.
THAT PLAYED INTO THE AMOUNT THAT WAS AVAILABLE SINCE YOUR STARTING POINT WAS NOT THE ADOPTED BUDGET, BUT THE FORECAST.
>> I ASKED YOU TO ALLOW FOR THE REQUIRED CONTRACTUAL SALARY BENEFIT AND PENSION INCREASES IN THAT DEPARTMENT, CORRECT?
>> SECONDLY, I THINK IT'S MISSING THE POINT TO OPPOSE A BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT SEEKS TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE ON THE GROUNDS THAT, WELL, IT WILL ONLY RESULT IN A MINUSCULE REDUCTION IN THE TAX RATE.
[05:45:05]
BUT IF WE SAY THAT AND APPLY THAT LOGIC, THEN NONE OF THE AMENDMENTS FOR TAX RATES PASS THAT TEST.THEY HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED CUMULATIVELY BECAUSE WE'RE TAKING THEM DEPARTMENT BY DEPARTMENT.
I THINK IF YOU CONSIDER IT AS ONE PIECE OF AN OVERALL PLAN TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE, THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD KEEP IN MIND.
AS COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN HAS SO ELOQUENTLY STATED, WE ARE TRYING TO PROVIDE TAX RELIEF TO OUR CITIZENS WHO ARE FACED WITH A TAX INCREASE WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE IS IMPORTANT TO SHOW THEM THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING THEIR SENTIMENTS THAT THEY NEED RELIEF.
PARTICULARLY, OUR CONSTITUENTS ON FIXED INCOMES ARE SENIORS WHO ARE GETTING PRICED OUT OF THEIR HOMES AND ARE YELLING FOR TAX RELIEF.
THIS IS SIMPLY AN EFFORT TO SEE TO SOME OF THOSE WISHES. THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT 17 BY MR. RIDLEY? IT'S TIME TO SHOW THE CARDS, EVERYONE.
>> IT'S FOUR CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR.
THIS AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> WHO ELSE HAS AN AMENDMENT? DOES ANYONE WHO HASN'T GOTTEN ONE OUT THERE THAT THEY REALLY WANT TO GET OUT THERE BEFORE I GO? TO REPEAT OFFENDERS. MR. WEST, DO YOU GET TO REPEAT OFFEND WITH ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE US THE SPEECH AND THEN WITHDRAW OR YOU'LL REALLY PUSH WITH THIS ONE?
>> WE'LL SEE. DEPENDS ON THE ANSWERS.
>> WE'RE GOING TO COMMIT TO IT NOW.
>> DO IT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION, PLEASE, THOUGH.
IT DOESN'T GET A SECOND, YOU DON'T EVEN GET TO GIVE THE SPEECH.
DON'T GIVE ANYBODY ANY SUGGESTIONS, PLEASE.
THE MOTION IS GOING TO BE CHANGED FROM WHAT'S ON HERE, REDUCE THE BUDGET FOR REAL ESTATE DIVISION OF PUBLIC WORKS ACTUALLY TO KEEP THE BUDGET AS PROPOSED BY STAFF FOR '23, '24, AND THEN FOR '24, '25, INITIATE AN RFP PROCESS TO THIRD PARTY OUTSOURCE THIS FUNCTION FOR FUTURE YEARS.
THAT CREDIT WILL BE FOR THE RFP PROCESS IN '24, AND '25.
>> THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD UNDERSTAND BEFORE WE GET THE SECOND BEFORE.
SIX WAS THE SAME, HOW WAS IT DIFFERENT?
>> THE AMENDMENT AS POSTED BY STAFF HAS THE DEBIT AS 25 PERCENT FOR THIS FIRST YEAR WITH THE CREDIT GOING TO THE PENSION, AND THEN FOR '24, '25, HAVING THE ENTIRE BUDGET GOING TO AN RFP PROCESS TO THIRD-PARTY AD OUT.
THE CHANGE IS TO SIMPLY KEEP THE FUNDING INTACT IN THE DEPARTMENT FOR '23, '24, AND THEN CONTINUE THE RFP PROCESS AS PROPOSED FOR '24, '25.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THAT I COULD EXPLAIN IF I HAVE TO PROBABLY WON'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT. THAT'S THE MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED TO SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? I ASSUME THERE IS. FIVE-MINUTES, SIR.
>> IS THIS ELIGIBLE SINCE IT'S SPEAKING ABOUT FUTURE YEARS, FUTURE BUDGETS? FOR THE SOURCE OF FUNDS.
IN THE SOURCE OF FUNDS, IT SAYS THIRD PARTY TO OUTSOURCE THIS FUNCTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 24/25.
NEVER MIND, I PULL MY POINT OF ORDER. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> NO, I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION.
[LAUGHTER] WHAT IS THE FINANCIAL IMPACT FOR THIS YEAR'S BUDGET?
>> MAY I ANSWER? THE WAY I JUST ADJUSTED IT, THERE'S NO FINANCIAL IMPACT FOR 23/24.
IT'S TO GO WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDED BUDGETS, SO THE 381,786 WOULD STAY IN THE DEPARTMENT.
BUT FOR FUTURE YEARS, THE BUDGET THAT'S PROPOSED BY THE CITY MANAGER, WOULD THEN RFP OUT THAT WHATEVER THAT BUDGET WOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED WILL GO TO THIRD PARTIES.
>> CAN I ASK A POINT OF ORDER?
>> YOU CAN'T, AND THIS IS ALL FINE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, WE ARE TECHNICALLY IN THE DISCUSSION PORTION OF IT NOW.
>> THEN I CAN USE MY TIME IF YOU PREFER.
>> IT'S FINE, GO SET YOUR POINT. IT'S A POINT OF ORDER.
>> MY QUESTION IS, IF WE, AS A COUNCIL RIGHT NOW, ARE MANDATING THEM TO PUT SOMETHING OUT FOR RFP, DON'T WE NEED A COUNCIL DECISION AND THEN A BRIEFING ON THIS DEPARTMENT? WE'RE GOING TO OUTSOURCE A WHOLE DEPARTMENT? I THINK WE SHOULD AT LEAST HAVE A BRIEFING ABOUT IT,
[05:50:01]
EVEN UNDERSTAND HOW WE GOT TO THAT PLACE.I'M HAPPY I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.
>> I'M GOING TO LET THE CITY MANAGER SPEAK TO ABOUT.
BEFORE I DO THAT, I'M GOING TO SAY I DON'T KNOW IF THERE MIGHT BE A PRACTICAL REASON THAT I DEFINITELY WANT YOU TO ADDRESS, AND I KNOW YOU HAVE THINGS YOU WANT TO SAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A LEGAL PROHIBITION OR NOT.
I DO KNOW THAT YOU CAN'T LEGISLATE IN A BUDGET IN A STATE LEGISLATURE, IT'S PROHIBITED PRACTICE YOU CAN'T ACTUALLY MAKE GENERAL LAW THROUGH A BUDGET.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THAT SIMILAR PROHIBITION HERE, BUT I'LL LET THE CITY MANAGER AND THE LAWYERS WHO DRAW SALARIES TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS, DO THAT.
>> MR. MAYOR, I HAVE ANOTHER POINT OF ORDER.
>> NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE THEM ON TOP OF EACH OTHER RIGHT NOW.
>> I CAN'T KEEP MY GOD STRAIGHT.
ISN'T ABOUT THE POINT OF ORDER.
>> CAN WE RESOLVE THAT ONE FIRST.
>> MY POINT OF ORDER WOULD RESOLVE THAT POINT OF ORDER.
>> IT'S A SUPER POINT OF ORDER.
>> IT'S THE POINT THAT WE'RE NOT PROPOSED TO AMEND THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, IT WOULD ONLY AFFECT THE NEXT PROPOSED BUDGET AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN ORDER.
>> AM GOING TO LET THEM SPEAK TO THAT.
>> THE MANAGER IS NODDING HIS HEAD.
>> ME AND COUNCIL MEMBER WE FINALLY AGREE ON SOMETHING TODAY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT COUNCIL MEMBER.
I WOULD AGREE IT IS REALLY ABOUT THE PLANNED BUDGET, I THINK, BUT THE BIGGER ISSUE, I BELIEVE, IS THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY AND THE DETERMINATION OF WHAT DEPARTMENTS, WHAT FUNCTIONS, AND WHO PERFORM THOSE FUNCTIONS TYPICALLY ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY MANAGER.
WANTED TO DO THAT AT A BRIEFING, I THINK TO COUNCIL MEMBER, SHELTON, PROBABLY COUNCIL MEMBER REALLY IS POINT IS, NOT REALLY PROBABLY APPROPRIATE.
BUT I THINK THE DISCUSSION AROUND WHAT WE DO AND WHAT OUR REAL ESTATE OPPORTUNITY AND OUR FUNCTIONS DO.
I THINK IS MUCH MORE THAN WHAT I THINK WE COULD PUT ON THE STREET FOR IT BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE INTIMATE THAN THAT WHEN IT COMES TO THE RELATIONSHIP OF MANAGING OUR RESOURCES AS IT RELATES TO OUR ASSETS, AS WELL AS DISPOSING OF THEM.
THE PROCUREMENT OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT GO THROUGH, WHETHER IT'S CONDEMNATION AND ALL THOSE THINGS I THINK IS A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED.
I THINK THE DISCUSSION COULD BE HAD.
I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTHY FOR ROBERT AND HIS TEAM TO COME AND EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHAT THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THAT DIVISION ARE AND THEN ULTIMATELY HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH STAFF AND THE FULL COUNSEL ABOUT WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DO AND SEE IF IN FACT, WE CAN DO IT BETTER OR MORE EFFICIENT IF WE DID A THIRD PARTY.
>> I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.
I WOULD JUST SAY THAT AS A REMINDER, WE'RE AMENDING THE BUDGET ORDINANCE, IN HISTORICALLY AND IT'S JUST NUMBERS.
YOU CAN'T PUT DIRECTIVES IN THE BUDGET ORDINANCE TO DO SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE.
WE'RE WORKING ON 23/24 ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS.
>> I'M JUST GOING TO INTERPRET.
WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THE ONE AMENDMENT YOU ACTUALLY CARED THE PATH IS ACTUALLY NOT EVEN LEGAL.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING. DO YOU WANT TO WITHDRAW IT?
>> I WILL WITHDRAW IT AND BRING THIS ISSUE TO GPFM, ALTHOUGH I WILL SAY MAYOR, TO CLARIFY, A COUPLE OF MY OTHER AMENDMENTS WERE SUBSUMED IN 28A, SO IT WASN'T A COMPLETE LOSS TODAY.
>> WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT WINS AND LOSSES HERE.
IT'S MORE ABOUT LEGAL AND ILLEGAL AND HOW YOU FEEL AND HOW YOU FEEL.
>> THAT'S WHY WE ONLY HAVE GREEN CARDS NOW.
THE RED CARD WERE TOO HURTFUL, TALK ALL ABOUT FEELINGS NOW.
>> ANYONE ELSE GOTTEN AMENDMENTS AS WE GOT MR. WEST TO FINALLY STOP? [LAUGHTER]
>> JAYNIE SCHULTZ, DO YOU HAVE AN AMENDMENT THAT YOU WANT TO PUT OUT?
>> NO, SIR, MY AMENDMENT PASSED.
>> YOU GUYS ARE DOING THE WINS AND LOSSES THING.
I TOLD YOU ABOUT WHAT IT'S ABOUT.
I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE.
THERE YOU GO. CHAIRWOMAN SO YOU HAVE AN AMENDMENT?
>> I DO. THIS WOULD BE AMENDMENT NUMBER 35.
>> AM KEEPING WITH THE AMENDMENTS ALIGNING WITH THE MEMO THAT I SENT TO YOU, THE AMENDMENT IS USING SOURCE OF FUNDS REDUCING CODE COMPLIANCE, $3,828,037, REDUCING MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICER COMMUNITY CARE, 823,504, REDUCING MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, $1,029,095, REDUCING PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN, 3,329,242, AND ALL OF THAT TO DECREASE THE TAX RATE.
>> IS IT EXACTLY AS I'M 35 IS WRITTEN?
>> IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? IT'S BEEN SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION?
>> THANK YOU. IN THE DOCUMENT, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT SAYS CODE COMPLIANCE, REDUCING THAT.
[05:55:01]
CODE COMPLIANCE HAS ASKED FOR 9.3 PERCENT INCREASE YEAR OVER YEAR, 64 PERCENT GROWTH IN FIVE YEARS.FOR THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY CARE, THEY'RE ASKING FOR 8.9 PERCENT YEAR OVER YEAR, 56 PERCENT GROWTH IN FIVE YEARS.
THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, [NOISE]
>> 15.7 PERCENT YEAR OVER YEAR, 57 PERCENT GROWTH IN FIVE YEARS.
PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN 70 PERCENT GROWTH YEAR OVER YEAR.
OF COURSE, THEY DID TAKE ON THE SELF PRESERVATION AND 162 PERCENT GROWTH IN FIVE YEARS.
THIS AMENDMENT ACTUALLY REDUCES THOSE BUDGETS TO THE LESSER OF EITHER FISCAL 23 OR THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 24 BUDGETS.
IT'S EITHER NO CHANGE AT ALL FROM THE FORECAST FISCAL YEAR 23 OR THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 24, WHICHEVER ONE IS THE SMALLEST NUMBER.
WITH THAT, I THINK THIS IS ALREADY BEEN TALKED ABOUT IN SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS.
WE HAVE A LOT OF GROWTH HAPPENING.
IT WASN'T SPECIFIC TO DEPARTMENTS.
IT WAS A FRAMEWORK WITHOUT EMOTION, NOT SURGICAL, NOT MEANT TO BASH A CERTAIN DEPARTMENT.
IT WAS MEANT TO RESTRAIN GROWTH.
THIS IS NOT CUTTING ANY DEPARTMENT.
IT'S LITERALLY KEEPING THEM WHERE THEY ARE THIS FISCAL YEAR OR WHERE THE MANAGER PROPOSES FOR THE COMING YEAR, WHICHEVER IS THE LEAST. THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE WISHES TO SPEAK ON FOR, AGAINST THE AMENDMENT 35 AS WRITTEN IN YOUR PACKET? SEEING NONE, LET'S SEE, THE CARDS.
>> WITH ONLY TWO CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THIS AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> AMENDMENTS, ANYONE? YOU DON'T HAVE TO, MR. RIDLEY, IN THE FORM OF A MOTION, PLEASE.
>> ITEM AMENDMENT 23, I MOVE THAT WE ELIMINATE THE PARK AND RECREATION VACANT PARK MAINTENANCE WORKER 1 AND ONE VACANT PARK MAINTENANCE WORKER 2 FOR A SAVINGS OF $382,406 TO ELIMINATE THESE VACANT POSITIONS WITH THE USE OF FUNDS GOING TO REDUCTION IN THE TAX RATE.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, SO MEMBERS WERE TALKING AMENDMENT 23 AS IT WAS WRITTEN IN YOUR PACKET.
MR. RIDLEY, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES IF YOU NEED IT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS ITEM STRUCK ME WHEN I REVIEWED THE BUDGET AS ONE THAT WAS RELATIVELY EASY TO MAKE.
THESE ARE CURRENTLY VACANT POSITIONS.
WE HAVE ALREADY ENDORSED THE IDEA OF ELIMINATING VACANT POSITIONS THAT HAD BEEN OPEN FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME IN A PREVIOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT.
THIS ONE PARTICULARLY GOT MY ATTENTION BECAUSE OF THE HIGH DOLLAR AMOUNT OF 382,000 FOR TWO MAINTENANCE WORKER POSITIONS.
>> YOU GET ME EVERY TIME WITH THAT.
CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 23.
>> THANK YOU. I ALSO NOTICED THAT HIGH DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR TWO POSITIONS.
I WAS WONDERING IF SOMEBODY FROM PARKSERS HERE WHO COULD EXPLAIN.
I THINK WE'D HAVE SOME HIGHLY TRAINED PEOPLE THAT WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE.
BUT JACK, YOU CAN VERIFY THAT'S NOT A TYPO?
>> I WILL VERIFY THAT THIS REDUCTION SEEMS TO HAVE COME FROM THE REDUCTIONS THAT THE DEPARTMENTS TURNED EARLY IN THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, AND THEY SUBMITTED A REDUCTION SCENARIO OF $382,406 THAT WAS TO ELIMINATE THE TWO VACANT POSITIONS AS PART OF PARK MAINTENANCE AND I BELIEVE GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE.
>> THAT PART WAS NOT WRITTEN IN THERE.
>> I'M GOING TO SEE IF PARK DEPARTMENT WANTS TO HELP ADDRESS.
[06:00:04]
[BACKGROUND]>> JOHN LAWRENCE, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.
YES, THE TWO POSITIONS, THEY ARE OUR PARK MAINTENANCE WORKERS 1 AND MAINTENANCE WORKERS 2.
THEY'RE NOT ACTUALLY AT 382,406.
THE SALARIES ARE AT $106,000 TOTAL FOR THE TWO POSITIONS.
THE OTHER AMOUNTS ARE TIED TO OUR TWO VEHICLES THAT ARE 120,000 AND THEN 42,000 AND SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS, AND THEN ANOTHER 114,000 FOR REPAIRS AND SERVICES, WHICH MAKES UP THE 382,406.
>> SIR, I'M SORRY, YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PURCHASE TWO ADDITIONAL VEHICLES?
>> WE HAVE TWO VEHICLES THAT ARE ASSIGNED TO ONE SET OF TENNIS AND GOLF COURSE AND KEATON PARK GOLF COURSE, AND SO WE WOULD FOREGO THOSE PURCHASES.
>> YOU HAVE THOSE PURCHASES SLATED ALREADY AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU WOULD GIVE THEM UP, IS THAT?
>> THAT'S THROUGH BUILDING SERVICES ON OUR FLEET SERVICES AND SO I'M NOT SURE IF THEY HAVE PURCHASED THOSE VEHICLES AT THIS TIME.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. FOLLOW UP ON THOSE QUESTIONS.
THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT IDENTIFIED THIS AS SOMETHING IN THE LIST OF DEPARTMENT CUTS TO REDUCE THE OVERALL BUDGET, IT WAS ITEM 95.
THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT THE DEPARTMENT DECIDED THAT THEY COULD DO WITHOUT, AM I RIGHT ABOUT THAT?
>> IT WAS AN EFFICIENCY REDUCTION AND IT WILL IMPACT GOLF COURSE.
IT WILL IMPACT THE MAINTENANCE OVERALL BECAUSE ANYTIME YOU REDUCE THE STAFF LEVELS, FOR EXAMPLE, IT TAKES 20 HOURS FOR US TO MOW A GREEN PER WEEK, AND SO IF WE REDUCE THE STAFF MEMBER THAT'S 20 HOURS LESS THAN WE SPEND ON THE GREENS.
IT'S ALSO 14 HOURS LESS THAT WE'RE SPENDING ON MOWING ROUGHS OR FIVE HOURS HEDGING AROUND TEA BOXES.
THOSE REDUCTIONS WILL DEFINITELY AFFECT THE OVERALL QUALITY AND THE CONDITION OF THE GOLF COURSE, WHICH WILL OVERALL EFFECT REVENUES, DECREASE IN REVENUE.
>> BUT THESE ARE VACANT POSITIONS, SO APPARENTLY YOU'RE GETTING ALONG WITHOUT THEM NOW; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
>> THEY WERE VACANT, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEM FILLED OBVIOUSLY, SO THAT WE CAN MAINTAIN ABOVE 10 STAFF MEMBERS PER GOLF COURSE.
WHAT WE'VE FOUND IS THAT OUR COMPETITORS MAINTAIN ABOUT 12-15 MAINTENANCE WORKERS AT EACH GOLF COURSE TO DO THE SAME LEVEL OF WORK.
IF WE REDUCE THESE POSITIONS, WE'RE BELOW OUR COMPETITORS, AND IS IN THAT REGARDS AS FAR AS STAFFING LEVELS.
>> WHY DID THESE TWO MAINTENANCE WORKERS NEED SEPARATE VEHICLES?
>> THEY DO NOT NEED SEPARATE VEHICLES FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS.
THEREFORE, THE OTHER EMPLOYEES TO MOVE EQUIPMENT BACK-AND-FORTH BETWEEN GOLF COURSES OR TO MOVE SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS.
THEY'RE NOT ASSIGNED TO THIS SPECIFIC EMPLOYEES.
>> I PRESUMED THAT SINCE YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE VEHICLES NOW AND YOU'RE CUTTING GREENS, THAT YOU HAVE ADEQUATE VEHICLES IN YOUR INVENTORY TO MANAGE YOUR CURRENT WORKLOAD?
>> WE HAVE VEHICLES IN OUR CURRENT FLEET THAT MAINTAINS OUR WORKLOAD.
HOWEVER, THOSE VEHICLES DO AGE AND SO I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHICH VEHICLES WERE SLATED TO BE REPLACED, BUT I CAN GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT.
>> THESE AREN'T ADDING TO THE FLEET, THESE ARE REPLACEMENT FOR EXISTING VEHICLES.
>> YOU MENTIONED 114,000 AND THIS WAS FOR REPAIRS, REPAIRS TO WHAT EXACTLY?
>> THAT CAN BE REPAIRS ON THE GOLF COURSE FOR ACCESSORIES, WHETHER IT'S PARK BENCHES, LIGHTING, PAVILION THINGS, ANYTHING THAT'S ON THE GROUNDS OF THE GOLF COURSE ITSELF UP PAVILION OR WATER FOUNTAINS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
>> ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY COMPLAINTS BY PATRONS OF THE GOLF COURSE ABOUT THE WAY THE GREENS ARE MAINTAINED OR ABOUT THE GENERAL MAINTENANCE IN THE ABSENCE OF THESE TWO VACANT POSITIONS?
>> WE HAVEN'T HAD THE ABSENCE OF VACANT POSITIONS, NOT TIED SPECIFICALLY TO THESE TWO POSITIONS, BUT YES, WE DO HAVE COMPLAINTS ON THE CONDITIONS OF THE GOLF COURSES AND THE OVERALL MAINTENANCE AND WHETHER THAT IT'S SUFFICIENT OR NOT.
>> COUNCILMAN, LET ME FOLLOW UP.
JOHN JENKINS, DIRECTOR OF PARKS.
YOU MENTIONED ABOUT THE GOLF COURSES.
BOTTOM LINE IS, THIS SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED? BECAUSE LET ME TELL YOU ON THE GOLF OPERATIONS WE HAVE A TOTAL ON AVERAGE OF ABOUT TEN GOLF PROFESSIONALS.
[06:05:04]
I'M NOT GOLF PROFESSIONAL, BUT MAINTENANCE WORKERS WHO WORKED THERE.AS RELATES TO OTHER GOLF COURSES IN THE AREA AND OUTSIDE THIS AREA, THEY HAVE ABOUT 12 WORKERS.
I'M TRYING TO INCREASE BY WORKERS ON THE GOLF COURSE SO WE CAN IMPROVE THE QUALITY.
I REALLY CAN'T AFFORD A CUT ALL MY GOLF COURSES.
>> IF I MAY, THE REDUCTION SCENARIOS THAT YOU ALL RECEIVED WERE REQUESTED AS PART OF BUDGET DEVELOPMENT, SO I'M PRETTY SURE IT WASN'T ANYTHING THAT THE DEPARTMENT WAS SAYING.
WE ASKED FOR SCENARIOS AND THEN YOU ALL ASKED FOR COPIES OF THOSE SCENARIOS AND THAT'S WHAT YOU RECEIVED AND THAT'S WHAT'S REFLECTED HERE IN THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT.
BUT MR. JENKINS, YOU HAVE A VERY LARGE PROPORTION OF THE CITY'S OVERALL GENERAL FUND BUDGET.
YOU SELECT IT OR SOMEONE ON YOUR STAFF SELECTED THIS PARTICULAR ITEM AS INEFFICIENCY REDUCTION THAT YOU COULD LIVE WITH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. HOWEVER, AS YOU ALL KNOW, I'VE BEEN OUT, I'VE BEEN GETTING CAUGHT UP.
UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED.
BECAUSE I KNOW FOR A FACT, I'M ASKING YOU-ALL FOR MORE MAINTENANCE DOLLARS.
THIS GOES TOTALLY AGAINST WHAT I NEED WHEN IT COMES TO THE MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS.
QUITE FRANKLY, LIKE I SAID, I APPRECIATE MR. BROADNAX AND THE BUDGET TEAM.
THE FIRST TIME I'M WORKING WITH MR. BROADNAX, A TEAM THAT WE ARE GETTING PLUS THE REQUESTS FROM THE COUNSELOR AND BOARD.
WE ARE GETTING SOME ADDITIONAL MINDED ADDRESS, SOME DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, SOME NEEDED MAINTENANCE.
SO TOTALLY CONTRADICTS MY ABILITY TO BRING THESE GOLF COURSES AS WELL AS THESE 411 PARKS UP TO QUALITY STANDARDS.
THEY'RE GREAT STANDARDS NOW, BUT WE NEED TO KEEP IMPROVING.
>> ARE THESE SEASONAL WORKERS SINCE THEY WORK AT A GOLF COURSE?
>> NO. THE ONES THAT I BELIEVE IT'S ON THIS LIST AS FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES.
LET ME TELL YOU, WE'RE FINALLY GETTING TO A POINT WHERE WE HAVE NOW GOT OUR GOLF COURSES WHERE WE ARE GETTING TO 9-10 EMPLOYEES.
BEFORE THAT, WE WAS ONLY HAVING ABOUT 6-7.
IT WAS A CHALLENGE AND WE'RE FINALLY MAKING PROGRESS IN STRESS NOW.
I JUST GOT AN EMAIL A FEW MINUTES AGO ON HOW MUCH WE HAVE IMPROVED AT ONE PARTICULAR GOLF COURSE HAS BEEN IN THE NEWS, BECAUSE OF THE MAINTENANCE ISSUES.
I THINK REINSTATEMENT OF THE CONCERNS AROUND THE GOLF COURSE.
I THINK JEANETTE TRY TO ADDRESS I THINK WHAT JOHN WAS MOST CONCERNED ABOUT.
THERE IS AND ARE SCENARIOS AND HAVE BEEN BEFORE I EVEN ARRIVED HERE AS A PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS, WHICH IS ACTUALLY TYPICAL IN MOST MAJOR CITIES AND EVEN SMALL CITY BUDGET PROCESSES WHERE THAT THE BUDGET DEPARTMENT WILL REQUEST REDUCTION AND OR EFFICIENCY RELATED SCENARIOS AT WHATEVER RANGE.
WE BELIEVE THERE MAY BE A GAP OR NEED FOR FUNDING FOR, FOR ANY CITY MANAGER TO CONSIDER IF IN FACT HE BELIEVED WE HAD TO MAKE THOSE REDUCTIONS.
JOHN AND HIS TEAM AND PARKS, QUITE HONESTLY, TYPICALLY DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROCESS.
OBVIOUSLY HE HAS TO HAVE HIS BOARD'S PERMISSION BEFORE THEY SUBMIT ANY SUCH THINGS, SO THAT THERE IS NOT A MISCHARACTERIZATION OR MISINTERPRETATION THAT THEY ARE WANTING TO GIVE THESE ITEMS UP AS IF THEY WOULD NOT HURT.
AS YOU'VE SEEN IN THAT ENTIRE LIST, MANY OF THOSE ITEMS REFLECT CHANGES THAT WOULD ACTUALLY REDUCE AND ELIMINATE SERVICES.
WHICH ARE MANY THINGS THAT THIS COUNCIL, AS WELL AS MYSELF AND MY OWN CONSIDERATION, DID NOT CONSIDER IT BECAUSE WE DID NOT WANT TO DILUTE SERVICES.
JOHN JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE HE DEMONSTRATED, HE SHARED AND PARTICIPATED.
IN OUR PROCESS, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THEY WOULD RECOMMEND.
MATTER OF FACT, WHEN THEY MET WITH ME INDIVIDUALLY, THEY SAID TO ME, I'VE SUBMITTED THEM BUT I DO NOT RECOMMEND THEM BECAUSE HERE WOULD BE THE CHALLENGES AND THE PROBLEMS. I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT AND THAT LIST WAS PROVIDED AS REQUESTED.
I WILL SAY FOR THE FIRST TIME, I GUESS AS JENKINS, JEANETTE, TELL ME IN THE HISTORY OF THE CITY, THOSE PRE-DEVELOPMENT WORKSHEETS THAT DEPARTMENTS SUBMIT WERE SHARED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL, I GUESS AS AN AREA OF I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT WE TYPICALLY GO THROUGH THOSE IN THERE IN DRAFT FORM.
BUT I GUESS PEOPLE WANTED TO CHECK OUR WORK THIS TIME TO SEE IF THERE WERE ACTUALLY MORE THINGS THAT WE COULD ACTUALLY REDUCE AS A PART OF OUR EXERCISE.
[06:10:02]
BUT AGAIN, I WOULD POINT OUT THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF ALL HISTORY THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED.I THINK IT'S CREATED QUITE A BIT OF CONFUSION AROUND WHAT SOME DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENTS BELIEVE THAT FOLK BELIEVE THEY CAN DO WITHOUT BECAUSE THEY MAKE THEIR CASE TO ME SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHAT THOSE IMPACTS WOULD BE.
THEN I'VE MADE THE DECISION TO INCLUDE THEM OR NOT IN THE CITY MANAGERS RECOMMENDED BUDGET, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE HERE TODAY TO DISCUSS.
I WOULD APPRECIATE AND I APPRECIATE JOHN'S PASSION.
I JUST WANTED TO CORRECT IT THAT THEY DID NOT SUBMIT THAT AS IF THEY WANTED TO GIVE THAT UP, BUT HE INDICATED THAT THEY DID NOT SUPPORT THAT REDUCTION.
IT'S ONLY SHOWING UP IN COUNCIL'S HANDS BECAUSE IT WAS REQUESTED, SO THANK YOU.
>> PRO TEM RIGHT NOW FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>>THANK YOU. I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, AND SINCE THE GOLF COURSES WAS INTERJECTED INTO THIS CONVERSATION, I HAVE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE CEDAR CREST GOLF COURSE IN PARTICULAR.
WE WERE AT A POINT WHERE WE HAD BROWN'S INSTEAD OF GREENS.
OF COURSE, HIGHLIGHTED IN THE NEWS AND ACCUSED OF NOT TAKING CARE OF ONE OF OUR JEWELS IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.
I KNOW ALSO I WANT TO KNOW PERHAPS, SINCE YOU TOLD ME IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ON THERE, BUT I KNOW IF YOU'RE DEALING WITH GOLF COURSE, YOU'RE ALSO DEALING WITH THE PROSE CONTRACT.
THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS CONNECTED TO, I THINK SOME OF THESE MAINTENANCE WORKERS AND THE COST OF MAINTAINING THAT GOLF COURSE.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, I HOPE THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT US AND NOT SUPPORTING THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY NOW WITH CEDAR CREST AND I'M JUST GOING TO HAVE TO UNDERSCORE IT AS EQUITY, BECAUSE SO MANY OF THOSE GOLFERS COME, YOU'LL BE SURPRISED WHERE THEY COME FROM.
I KNOW IN COUNCILWOMAN WILLIS DISTRICT AND I MET A NUMBER OF GOLFERS WHO AT THAT TIME COUNCILWOMAN GATES WAS THERE.
I'M LIKE, WHY DID YOU ALL COME WAY OVER HERE TO SEE THE CEDAR CREST? THEY SAID, "MAM, THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST COURSES IN THE CITY OF DALLAS." WE GOT A LOT OF FIRE FUEL BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT THE BROWN, THEY WANTED GREENS.
I'M SIMPLY SAYING, WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY NOW, I THINK IN NOVEMBER WE'RE GOING TO BE WE HAVE BEEN CHOSEN ARE WE RECEIVED A REQUEST FOR THE GOLF CLASSIC WITH THE HBCU, HISTORICALLY BLACK UNIVERSITIES.
WE'LL HAVE A GOLF TOURNAMENT THERE.
WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET THE SUPPORT OF SOUTHWEST AIRLINES AS A KEY, AS A MAJOR UNDERWRITER OF THIS PARTICULAR EVENT.
WE HAVE OTHERS THAT WILL COME OUT, BUT THIS WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHOWCASE IN THE SOUTHERN DALLAS IN THE CORE OF IT, WHICH I LIKE TO CALL IT AN AFFLUENT NEIGHBORHOOD BUT THEY DO HAVE THEIR CHALLENGES.
BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHOWCASE.
WE WANT TO SEE A GOLF COURSE THAT ADDS VALUE TO THE COMMUNITY.
WE HAD A DIFFICULT TIME, ESPECIALLY YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WENT THROUGH AFTER THE FREEZE.
IT TOOK US PROBABLY ABOUT MAYBE ALMOST TWO-AND-A-HALF YEARS TO REBOUND FROM THAT FREEZE.
I KNOW IT PROBABLY THESE NUMBERS PROBABLY SCARED YOU, BUT I'M LEARNING A LITTLE BIT MORE NOW ABOUT THE GOLF PRO AND HIS OR HER EXPENSES AND JUST THE GENERAL MAINTENANCE AND I'M SURE WE'RE TAKING A HIT WITH THIS HEAT WAVE THAT WE'VE HAD AND IT'S COST US MORE EVEN TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE GREENS.
I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU COULD GIVE US A CHANCE TO SAVE THAT ECONOMIC ENGINE, BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE OUR ECONOMIC ENGINE AS WE PUSH FOR ECONOMIC EQUITY.
AS WE MOVE DOWN, CEDAR CREST, AND WE UNITE WITH DISTRICT 7 WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA IN THE FAIR PARK AREA WHERE WE WANT TO USE THE CEDAR CREST AS A CATALYST.
CATALYTIC HEIGHTS ON CROSS MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD ALL THE WAY UP TO FAIR PARK.
I SURE HOPE THAT WE CAN MAKE A BIG IMPACT.
I THINK WE WILL IF WE SUPPORT THAT COMMUNITY GOLF COURSE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR LISTENING AND I'M GOING TO WORK ON GETTING MY GREEN JACKET, [LAUGHTER]
>> YOU'D CASE THAT BY THE TIME YOU GET HOME.
>> MR. WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> JOHN, IF WE MET ABOUT THE LACK OF MAINTENANCE WORKERS MAYBE 10 TIMES OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS.
IT'S A REAL ISSUE WITH PARKS DEPARTMENT AND THE LACK OF MAINTENANCE STAFF.
IT'S PARTLY BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING HIM ENOUGH IN THAT, RIGHT?
[06:15:01]
>> THAT'S CORRECT. BUT WE HAVEN'T MADE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS NOW.
BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMY IS JUST HARD TO COMPETE, BUT WE ARE NOW COMPETITIVE.
>> CEDAR CREST IS A BEAUTIFUL COURSE, SO STEVENS PARK, WHICH IS IN MY DISTRICT, AND I PROBABLY HAD 80-90, MAYBE 100 COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE GREENS AND THE TEE BOXES THERE.
IS OUR GOLF COURSES REVENUE GENERATORS FOR THE CITY?
>> DOES A LACK OF MAINTENANCE OF GOLF COURSES LEAD TO DETERIORATION OF THOSE GOLF COURSES?
>> IF A GOLF COURSE IS GOT BROWN TEE BOXES AND BROWN GREENS, CAN WE EXPECT LESS TOURNAMENTS TO COME AND LESS TEE BOX TIMES TO BE RESERVED?
>> MAYOR, I THINK THIS IS A NO-BRAINER TO NOT SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE I SHALL PUT ON? MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. ON THIS ISLAND, PARK AND REC ELIMINATE ONE BIG IN PARK MAINTENANCE.
I THINK COUNSEL DEBORAH PULLING ON THEM AND CHAIRMAN, WHERE HE'S MADE A GOOD COMMENT.
NUMBER 1, CEDAR CREST I THINK IT'S ABOUT ONE OF THE BEST GOLF COURSE THE YEAR OF 1927 THE PGA CAME THERE.
WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT PGA WAS THERE.
SO ONE OF THE BEST GOLF COURSE.
BUT THE KEY IS THAT WHEN WE DO PLAY THOSE COURSES, I CANNOT GO BACK TO THE PANDEMIC.
WHAT SAVED THE PEOPLE, HUMANITY WAS PLAYING GOLF AND GETTING OUT THERE AT THE GOLF COURSE.
IF OUR GOLF COURSE WILL NOT DARE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD HAVE DONE.
IN DAY WAS OPEN DURING THE PANDEMIC.
EVERY TIME I SEE SOMEONE, I SAY WE THANK YOU FOR KEEPING THE GOLF COURSE OPENED UP.
DURING THE PANDEMIC, THEY COULD GET OUT THERE AND PEOPLE WALK.
THEY'RE NOT PLAYING GOLF ALL THE TIME AND IT IS WALKING, THE WALK AND THE DOWELS AND WALKING ACROSS THE FIELD, JUST ENJOYING LIFE.
IS THERAPY TO ME, BUT ALSO THAT IT TOOK A WHOLE LOT TO MAINTAIN A GOLF COURSE, IF YOU EVER BELIEVE IS TAKE A WHOLE LOT, THOSE PEOPLE WORKING RIGHT NOW ON 105 DEGREES, 110 DEGREES TO KEEP THOSE GREEN GREEN TO MAKE SURE THEY MOW AND MADE SURE THAT THE EQUIPMENT IS PICKING UP.
I KNOW JOHN SOMETIME WE PLAY ON FRIDAY AND WEEKEND WITH ADAM BAZALDUA.
THE MAINTENANCE, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY DO IT.
YOU JUST IMAGINE HOW HOT IT IS.
THEY'VE WORK IN AT 2:00 OR 3:00 O'CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON WE HAVE 105-106 DEGREE TO MAKE SURE THOSE GOLF COURSE MANICURE AND MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE PLAY.
TO ELIMINATE THEM AND I KNOW WE ALWAYS SHORT, THEY'RE REVENUE DRIVEN, BUT WHEN PEOPLE GO IN AND PLAY, THEY EXPECT THE GREEN TO BE GREEN, THEY EXPECT THE SAND TRAP TO BE CLEAR.
THEY MADE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IN THE BRUSH.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE NEED MORE MAINTENANCE IS REVENUE-GENERATING.
I BELIEVE, IS THAT PEOPLE PLAY AT OUR GOLF COURSE, BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY ARE ONE OF THE BEST GOLF COURSE IN THE CITY.
JOHN, I GUESS A CHRISTIAN ME, IF YOU LOOK AT ALL YOUR GOLF COURSES, HOW MANY ROUND OF GOLF DO WE HAVE?
>> I HAVE JOHN LAWRENCE HERE IF I CAN JUST RIGHT OFF THE BAT.
TURNAROUNDS IS UP TO 250,000 ROUNDS, WHICH IS HUGE.
>> MOST OF THE TIME THEY COME, THEY ARE LOOKING AT WHAT CONDITIONS THE GOLF COURSE IS IN, RIGHT?
>> FIRST I NEED TO LOOK AT AS THE GREENS AND THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE TO SPEND PRETTY MUCH.
JOHN, WHEN YOU SAY, I WOULD SAY PROBABLY 50-60 PERCENT A YEAR LABOR IS SPENT ON THE GREENS.
>> HOW MANY PARK MAINTENANCE WORKS DO WE HAVE FOR THE GOLF COURSES?
>> PER GOLF COURSE, AS I JUST MENTIONED TO OUR COUNCIL MEMBER, LATELY, WE'VE BEEN STRUGGLING, FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS, WE'VE BEEN AVERAGING AROUND SIX TO SEVEN, AND TRUST ME, SHOWED IN THE MAINTENANCE.
WE FINALLY HAVE GOTTEN BACK TO A NUMBER OF GETTING UP TO NINE AND 10 WORKERS PER GOLF COURSE.
NOW YOU'RE SEEING THE DIFFERENCE IN THE MAINTENANCE LEVEL.
>> WHAT IS THE ACRES OF A GOLF COURSE?
>> OUR TOTAL ACREAGE FOR OUR GOLF COURSES, ALL SIX THEM IS ABOUT 900 ACRES, GOT ABOUT 21,000 ACRES FOR THE PARK SYSTEM.
>> YOU JUST THINK ABOUT THAT TRYING TO MAINTAIN YOUR YARD AND THOSE ARE GREEN SPACE AND TRYING TO CUT THE RAILS, TRY TO KEEP SAND TROUT CLEAN, TRY TO MAKE SURE THE GREENS ARE DONE, AND YOU LOOK AT HOW MANY EMPLOYEES YOU GET TO MAINTAIN.
[06:20:04]
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN MAINTAIN WITH SIX OR SEVEN MAINTENANCE PEOPLE TO CUT THE LAWN ALMOST EVERY DAY.CLIPPERS, TRIM THE TREES, TO FREEZE, GOING ON, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD DO IT IS REVENUE-GENERATING FOR THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT TODAY IS NUMBER 1 THAT I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT PARKS.
PARKS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
WHEN PEOPLE COME GOING TO THE FOOTBALL GAME, GOING INTO THE BASEBALL GAME, AND THEY ARE HERE ON A WEEKEND DAY, THEY GENTLE BRANDY GOLF CLUBS.
BUT THE ONE THING THEY WANT US TO MAKE SURE IS, IS THE GOLF COURSE IS MANICURE.
THEY WOULD NOT GO TO THE GOLF COURSE IS GREEN, IS NOT CUT, AND THE FAIRWAY IS NOT CLEAN, THEY WILL WALK AWAY IN A MINUTE, AND FIRST THING THEY DO, THEY WILL TELL SOMEONE ELSE AND NO ONE ELSE WILL COME TO THE GOLF COURSE, THEN WE LOSE REVENUE.
THEREFORE, WE GOT TO HAVE MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE IS A KEY AND I ALWAYS SAY MAINTENANCE KEY.
YOU KNOW, JOHN AND I TELL YOU ABOUT AGAIN, I KNOW WE'VE BEEN REDUNDANT, BUT THINK ABOUT.
I'LL JUST READ A FORECAST FROM DAYS, WE'VE BEEN OVER 100 DEGREES.
THOSE WORKERS OUT THERE 103 IN A DAY? IT COULD BE WORSE, IT COULD BE 105.
BUT THEY WORK IN THOUGH, BUT WE NEED TO KEEP THE MAINTENANCE. THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST AMENDMENT 23? LET'S SEE THE CARDS VOTES.
AS WRITTEN AMENDMENT 23 BY MR. RIDLEY IS WRITTEN.
JUST SHOW YOUR CARD IF YOU LIKE IT. IF YOU DON'T.
>> WITH TWO CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR THE AMENDMENT BILL, MR. MAYOR.
>> WE'RE STILL LOOKING FOR AMENDMENTS.
>> THANK YOU. WELL, LET'S FLIP TO SOMETHING I THINK WE'RE ALL GOING TO AGREE ON. THIS WOULD BE.
>> NO EDITORIALIZED BEFORE YOU LAY IT OUT.
>> BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 1, I'M OFFERING THIS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY MANAGER.
I MOVE TO TRANSFER 840 DETENTION SERVICES, THE CITY DETENTION CENTER, CITY MARSHAL'S OFFICE, [INAUDIBLE] JAIL CONTRACT, SECURITY SERVICES, SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, SOBERING CENTER, MARSHALL'S PARKING ENFORCEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES DIVISION, AND TO ESTABLISH A NEW OFFICE CALLED THE CITY MARSHALL'S OFFICE.
THE REMAINING SERVICES WOULD MOVE INTO A NEW DEPARTMENT CALLED MUNICIPAL COURT SERVICES AND PARKING ADJUDICATION, AND THEY WILL BE FOCUSED ON EXCLUSIVELY COURT SERVICES.
>> IT IS EXACTLY AS WRITTEN, YES.
>> THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE FIVE-MINUTES.
>> I GUESS AS THE NEWLY APPOINTED PUBLIC SAFETY CHAIR, ALTHOUGH WE HAVE NOT YET HAD A MEETING, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THE POINT OF THIS IS TO BETTER SUPPORT THE STAFF AND THE RESIDENTS WITH THESE SERVICES AND DIVIDING WHAT ARE SWORN OFFICERS WITH CIVILIAN AND THE VARIOUS ROLES.
IT'S REALLY BEEN TWO DIFFERENT THINGS PUT TOGETHER AND TIME FOR THEM TO SEPARATE SO THAT THEY CAN EACH FOCUS ON THEIR OWN AREA. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE WILL SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 AS WRITTEN? SEEING NONE. LET'S SEE THE CARDS.
>> I'M GOING TO SAY WITH 14 CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT PASSES, MR. MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. MORE AMENDMENTS.
YOU HAVE ANOTHER ONE? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR A MOTION.
>> THIS IS FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 36, AND THE MOTION WILL BE EXACTLY AS IT'S WRITTEN.
>> IT'S MOVED TO SECOND. DISCUSSION, FIVE-MINUTES.
>> I'M NOT SURE I NEED FIVE MINUTES TO DISCUSS THIS.
I GUESS WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT REDUCTION OF TAXES, AND THAT'S THE POINT OF THIS.
WHAT THIS DOES IS NOT MASSIVE CUTS, THIS IS NOT CATASTROPHIC FOR ANYBODY, THIS IS REDUCING THESE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE LISTED ON BUDGET NUMBER 36 TO THE BUDGETED AMOUNTS FOR FISCAL YEAR '23.
IT'S ESSENTIALLY FREEZING THOSE DEPARTMENTS.
[06:25:03]
NO CUTTING, THEY'RE JUST STAYING WHERE THEY ARE AT.HOPEFULLY, ANY INCREASES IN SALARY, THEY'RE GOING TO CREATE SOME EFFICIENCY TO MAKE THAT ALL HAPPEN.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU.
OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON, FOR, OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER 36? I DON'T SEE ANYONE, SO LET'S SEE THE CARDS, FOLKS.
>> WITH ONLY TWO CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THIS AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
WHO'S GOT ANOTHER ONE? MR. RIDLEY.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION WITH REGARD TO AMENDMENT 24, COURT IN DETENTION SERVICES TO REDUCE ONE SENIOR COURT SPECIALIST TO POSITION WHICH IS CURRENTLY VACANT, AND USE THAT AS A WAY OF REDUCING THE TAX RATE.
THIS IS IN THE AMOUNT OF $64,093. THAT'S MY MOTION.
>> ALL RIGHT. IT'S THE AMENDMENT NUMBER 24 AS WRITTEN.
IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
ANY DISCUSSION? YES, FIVE MINUTES.
>> THIS ITEM WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE CITY MANAGER'S LIST OF EFFICIENCY REDUCTION SUBMITTED BY THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS WITH THE NOTE IN ITEM 23 ON THAT LIST THAT THE DUTIES OF THIS POSITION CAN BE ABSORBED BY OTHER EMPLOYEES.
>> ANYONE ELSE WHO WILL SPEAK BE ON, FOR, AGAINST THE AMENDMENT NUMBER 24? SHOW CARDS, PLEASE.
>> WITH ONLY SIX CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU CAN ASK FOR A MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. I'LL BE LAYING OUT AMENDMENT NUMBER 38, AND IT IS AS WRITTEN.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN SECONDED.
FIVE MINUTES FOR DISCUSSION, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU. AS OUTLINED IN THE MEMO I SENT TO THE MAYOR ABOUT OUR BUDGET AND TAX RATE, THESE ITEMS ARE ALL ITEMS THAT COULD BE REMOVED BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY THE DOMAIN OF THE COUNTY, THE STATE, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, OR A TRANSIT AGENCY.
THE FIRST ONE I'D REALLY LIKE TO TALK ABOUT IS A STREETCAR, BECAUSE I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER WEST WOULD BE SO DISAPPOINTED IF I DIDN'T BRING THIS UP ONCE AGAIN THIS YEAR.
HOWEVER, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS ASK IF STAFF COULD READ FOR US THE RESOLUTION ABOUT D2.
I DID ASK US IN ADVANCE. THANK YOU.
I TRIED TO GIVE YOU A HEADS-UP.
GHASSAN KHANKARLI, DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO THE FEBRUARY 9TH, 2022 D2 RESOLUTION AND SECTION 3 OF THAT RESOLUTION STATES.
THIS IS UNDER THE HEADING OF THE RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SECTION 3 SAYS THAT IF AT THE 30 PERCENT DESIGN MILESTONE OF THE REVISED D2 ALIGNMENT, OR BY THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR 2024, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER, THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINES THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE D2 PROJECT WILL BE DEFERRED.
THERE WILL BE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY AND DART REGARDING THEIR FUTURE POTENTIAL INCREASED CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DALLAS STREETCAR PROGRAM, OTHER DART TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS, AND OTHER TRANSIT SERVICES IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY RESULT, IN FUTURE, INTO LOCAL AGREEMENTS.
>> WITH THAT RESOLUTION, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT, FIRST OFF, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE DIDN'T ALREADY HAVE A VOTE ABOUT D2 AND IT WAS REMOVED FROM THE DART PROGRAM.
THAT'S NUMBER 1. BUT NUMBER 2, WITH THAT, WE SHOULD EXPECT A HIGHER LEVEL OF CONTRIBUTION, WELL, ANY CONTRIBUTION FROM DART ABOUT THE STREETCAR.
AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY APPLIED FOR THIS GRANTS, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE PERFECT TIME, HAD WE BEEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT D2, FOR US TO SAY WE MAYBE WOULD HAVE AGREED, MAYBE WE WOULDN'T, BUT MAYBE WE WOULD HAVE AGREED WITH THEM ABOUT D2,
[06:30:01]
BUT WE WOULD HAVE ALSO HAD AN OPPORTUNITY HANDBACK FOR THAT STREETCAR AND THAT FUNDING, WHICH WE ARE, WHAT ARE WE UP TO? WELL, I PUT IN 1.3 MILLION, BUT I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO BE UP TO 1.7 MILLION THIS YEAR; IS THAT CORRECT?>> I THINK, IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECT, IT'S 1.56 FOR THE UPCOMING '23/'24, AND 1.7 IN THE PLANNED '24/'25.
>> OKAY. SO IT'S A VERY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY.
IN THE PAST, WE'VE OFFSET THIS WITH TIFF FUNDING, THAT THE TIFF IS COMPLETELY EXTENDED.
I KNOW THAT, TO HIS CREDIT, COUNCIL MEMBER WEST HAS TRIED TO CREATE OTHER WAYS TO FUND THIS, AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT.
I KNOW IT'S TOUGH. AT ONE POINT WE INSTRUCTED YOU TO PLEASE GO GET SPONSORSHIPS, ANY OTHER WAY TO DEVELOP REVENUE.
IT WAS NOT A SUCCESSFUL VENTURE, BUT THIS IS AN ITEM THAT DOES NOT BELONG IN OUR BUDGET.
WE GAVE DART, THIS YEAR $432 MILLION.
WHAT WAS YOUR LAST AMENDMENT? LESS THAN $50,000.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $432 MILLION FOR TRANSIT SERVICES, AND I DON'T KNOW, I SIGNED UP FOR ALL OF THEIR ALERTS THAT STREETCAR IS FREQUENTLY NOT RUNNING.
AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE ALLOCATED FUNDING FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURES, BUT THIS IS NOT OUR DOMAIN, AND I OBJECT FREQUENTLY THAT WE EVEN HAVE THIS IN OUR BUDGET.
THAT'S WHY THAT ITEM IS THERE.
THE REST OF THEM, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT AMOUNT, BUT ALSO COMMUNITY CARE, THE SENIOR RIDE PROGRAM, AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE THE DOMAIN OF OUR TRANSIT AGENCY.
FUNDING FOR SENIOR DENTAL, THIS IS A DALLAS COUNTY ITEM, IN MY OPINION.
AND THE LAST ONE IS INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS.
WE'RE PAYING THROUGH METROCARE FOR ITEMS THAT, AGAIN, SHOULD BE CHARGED BACK TO THE COUNTY FOR PRESCRIPTIONS, FOR OTHER KINDS OF SERVICES THAT ARE NOT THE DOMAIN OF THE CITY.
THAT'S WHAT THIS AMENDMENT IS ABOUT, AND I THINK I'LL REST THERE.
THOUGH, OBVIOUSLY, THE USE OF THE FUNDS IS TAX REDUCTION.
>> ANYONE ELSE WISHES TO SPEAK ON, FOR, AGAINST AMENDMENT 38? I'M SEEING NONE. LET'S SEE THE CARDS.
>> WITH FOUR CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> ANY MORE AMENDMENTS? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. ACTUALLY, MR. RIDLEY.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION WITH REGARD TO AMENDMENT 22, WHICH IS TO REDUCE THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVERTISING FOR BAHAMAS BEACH WATER AND DALLAS AQUATICS IN THE AMOUNT OF $275,153, WITH THE USE OF THOSE FUNDS BEING REDUCING THE TAX RATE.
>> HOLD ON ONE SECOND. BEFORE YOU'VE FINISHED YOUR MOTION, DO YOU HAVE OTHERS THAT YOU INTEND TO LAY OUT THAT YOU'D LIKE TO, IF YOU WANT TO, LAY OUT TOGETHER?
>> BEFORE WE SECOND, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH AN UP OR DOWN VOTE ON THEM ALL, AND TO CONFINE YOUR DEFENSE OF ALL OF THEM TO FIVE MINUTES? [LAUGHTER] I'M BASICALLY ASKING IF WE'RE GOING TO INVOKE THE LEE CLEMENT RULE ON YOU AND ON CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, AND NOT DEPRIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT, BUT TO SAY YOU PUT THEM ALL ON THE FLOOR, AND YOU HAVE A TOTAL OF 531 TO DEFEND ALL OF YOUR AMENDMENTS IF YOU'D LIKE.
IN THE NAME OF EFFICIENCY, I WANT TO CONTINUE TO GIVE EVERYBODY AN OPPORTUNITY TO FIGHT FOR WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN, WHICH I THINK IT'S A GREAT DISCUSSION, BUT FOR EFFICIENCY PURPOSES, MAYBE THERE'LL BE SOME SUPPORT FOR THIS SAYING LAY THEM ALL OUT AND DEFEND THEM ALL IN FIVE-MINUTES, IF YOU CAN.
>> WELL, I WOULD COUPLE THIS ONE WITH 26 AND 27 BECAUSE THEY ARE SIMILAR AND SIMPLE.
I WILL BE WITHDRAWING NUMBER 25, BY THE WAY.
>> DOES THAT LEAVE YOU WITH ANYTHING LEFT?
>> YES. WELL THEY AFFECT DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, AND I THINK I'D LIKE TO HAVE THOSE SEPARATE FROM THIS SERIES.
>> OKAY. THEN IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, MAKE A MOTION, FOR THE BODY TO CONSIDER SECONDING, THAT WOULD GROUP AS MANY AS YOU FEEL ARE APPROPRIATE TO BE GROUPED, AND I WOULD ASK THEN YOU CONFINE YOUR COMMENTS TO THE 531 FOR ALL THEM.
>> CONTINUING THE MOTION, IN ADDITION TO ADOPTING AMENDMENT 23, ALSO AMENDMENTS 26 AND 27,
[06:35:02]
WHICH RESPECTIVELY WOULD REDUCE THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL BUDGET BY ELIMINATING THE ALLOCATION FOR THE BOARD AND COMMISSION LUNCHEON IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000.USE OF FUNDS DECREASING TAX RATE, AND ALSO IN ITEM 27, THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL BUDGET FOR MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES TO REDUCE IT TO THE 2023 ALLOCATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $177,520 USED THE TAX RATE REDUCTION.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MR. RIDLEY, FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PART OF YOUR MOTION.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ITEM 22 RELATES TO A $275,000 EXPENDITURE FOR ADVERTISING FOR BAHAMAS BEACH WATER IN DALLAS AQUATICS.
I FIND THAT TO BE AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT FOR ADVERTISING CITY FACILITIES.
I ALSO NOTE THAT THIS WAS IDENTIFIED AS AN EFFICIENCY CUT IS ITEM 94 IN THE CITY MANAGER'S LIST OF EFFICIENCY CUTS.
I THINK THAT'S FAR IN EXCESS OF WHAT WE SHOULD BE SPENDING TO ADVERTISE THESE KINDS OF FACILITIES.
ITEM 26 IS TO ELIMINATE AN ALLOCATION FOR THE BOARD AND COMMISSION LUNCHEON OF 50,000.
I THINK THAT IS AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT TO SPEND FOR A TWO-HOUR LUNCH AND FOR OUR BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I FULLY SUPPORT RECOGNIZING THEIR EFFORTS AND THE TIME EXPENDITURE, BUT I THINK THAT CAN BE DONE BEST ON AN INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT BASIS WITHOUT SPENDING $50,000 FOR LUNCH.
ITEM 27 WOULD BE TO REDUCE AN EXPENDITURE OF 177,000 FOR UNSPECIFIED MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL SERVICES BY REDUCING IT TO THE CURRENT YEAR'S ALLOCATION FOR THAT PURPOSE.
>> WONDERFUL. ANYONE ELSE? SHE'S BEEN GONE FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENTS 22 FOR THE PUBLIC TO AMENDMENTS 22, 26, AND 27 ARE ALL LAID OUT TOGETHER.
MR. GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ANY OF THE THREE.
>> EARLY ON ANY OF THESE, BUT ESPECIALLY FOR THE BAHAMAS BEACH, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THAT AMENDMENT FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.
THERE I THINK THAT'S THE ONE WATER PARK THAT WE HAVE OVER IN THAT AREA AND THAT'S SOME THINGS THAT WE WANT TO DRIVE TRAFFIC OVER THERE, SO I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THAT PARTICULAR AMENDMENT.
>> JOE, AND SHELTERING HAS FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE PARK STAFF IF MY NUMBERS ARE RIGHT, I THINK THAT IS THE ENTIRE ADVERTISING BUDGET FOR BAHAMAS BEACH?
>> MA'AM, THIS IS THE ENTIRE BUDGET FOR ADVERTISING AT BAHAMA BEACH AND ALL OF OUR AQUATIC FACILITIES WHICH INCLUDES OUR NINE COMMUNITY POOLS, OUR NINE AQUATIC FACILITIES AND THE INDOOR POOL, IT'S BACHMAN RECREATION CENTER.
>> YOU'RE AT ABOUT AN EIGHT FOR THE TOTAL REVENUE IS ABOUT 3.8 MILLION FROM ALL THESE CENTERS.
YOU'RE AT ABOUT AN 8 PERCENT MARKET SPEND?
>> I'D LIKE TO ASK MY COLLEAGUES, SOME OF WHOM HAVE BEEN IN THE ADVERTISING BUSINESS, WHAT'S INAPPROPRIATE? MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S GENERALLY BETWEEN 10 AND 15 PERCENT OF MARKET SPEND FOR ANY RETAIL EXPERIENCE, SO WE'RE ACTUALLY BELOW BUDGET.
IT COULD BE ARGUED ON THAT, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM ANY PROFESSIONALS WHO UNDERSTAND MARKETING AND ADVERTISING ON THIS.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THAT ON STAFF OR NOT.
IS MY MATH RIGHT? ON 3.8275 IS ABOUT 8 PERCENT, THAT WE'RE SPENDING ON MARKETING? THEN LET ME ASK YOU THIS WELL, WE'RE SEEING IF THERE IS ANYBODY BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW.
MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT OF THIS REDUCTION IF IT'S THE ENTIRE BUDGET? HOW ARE PEOPLE GOING TO FIND OUT THAT THEY SHOULD GO TO THESE AQUATIC CENTERS OTHER THAN BY WORD OF MOUTH.
>> THAT WOULD BE CORRECT IF YOU REDUCE THE MARKETING BUDGET OVERALL THAN THEY DO NOT HAVE THAT MEANS TO KNOW ABOUT OUR SERVICES, WHETHER IT'S THE SWIMMING LESSONS OR ADULT SWIM AND OTHER PROGRAMS THAT WE OFFER.
GETTING THIS OUT THERE AND WHETHER IT'S THROUGH BILLBOARDS, PRINT MEDIA, RADIO, TV, ALL THE VARIOUS MEDIA PLATFORMS THAT WE USE.
[06:40:01]
PEOPLE WILL NOT HEAR ABOUT IT.>> ONCE AGAIN, I JUST CANNOT SUPPORT US MOVING BACK TO THE STONE AGE. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE WHO SHOULD BE ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MEMOS THAT ARE OUT THERE.
HERE'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS GUYS.
SEPARATE SHOW CARDS FOR THE SEPARATE UNDERLYING AMENDMENTS ON LIMIT 22.
LET'S SEE THE CARDS IF YOU'RE FOR AMENDMENT 22.
>> WITH ONLY TWO CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, AMENDMENT 22 FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> ITEM 26, IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF 26, LET'S SEE THE CARDS.
I CAN'T EVER TELL WHERE IT'S COMING FROM. YES, MA'AM.
>> I DO NEED TO MAKE A COUPLE OF CORRECTIONS TO 26 AND 27.
WHEN YOU ALL APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO REUSE THE MILEAGE, THE 168,000, PART OF THAT WAS REALLOCATED TO BOARD AND COMMISSION MANSIONS WHICH IS PART OF NUMBER 26, AND THEN ABOUT 83,000 WAS ALLOCATED TO NUMBER 27, SO YOU'VE ALREADY DISPOSED OF A PORTION OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IN 26 AND 27.
>> ARE YOU SAYING THIS IS NOT NEEDED ANYMORE.
>> WELL, I'M SAYING YOU'VE USED THE SOURCE OF FUNDS ALREADY.
EXCEPT FOR NUMBER 27, THE DIFFERENCE IS?
>> WE WANT TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE AMENDMENT SINCE THERE'S A SPIRIT THERE.
IF THERE IS AN AMOUNT TO BE REDUCED, I THINK THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SHOWING A GREEN CARD SAYING THEY WANT TO REDUCE IT BY WHATEVER THE AMOUNT IS FOR BOARD AND COMMISSION LUNCHEONS AND WHATEVER THE AMOUNT IS FOR MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL SERVICES.
>> MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL SERVICES IS ABOUT 88,000 AND THEN THE COMMISSION BOARDS AND LUNCHEONS.
>> IS IT 20,000? JESSICA RENO, CHIEF OF STAFF.
BOARDS AND COMMISSION LUNCHEON IS ACTUALLY $30,000.
>> IT'S A TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO THOSE.
IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT JUST HAPPENED HERE IS WE GOT STAFF INFORMATION THAT LETS US KNOW THAT THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS ARE INCORRECT BASED ON WHAT'S HAPPENED ALREADY TODAY.
MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION DOESN'T CHANGE, BUT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS NOT 50,000.
IT'S FOR 26, IT'S NOW ACTUALLY 30,000, AND IT'S NOT 177,524 ITEM 27, IT'S ACTUALLY.
>> THAT'S THE PRACTICAL EFFECT.
>> MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK WITH THESE NEW DETAILS.
>> I'D LIKE TO SPEAK NOW THAT WE HAVE NEW DETAILS TO VOTE.
>> WE HAVEN'T REALLY TECHNICALLY VOTED YET.
MINISTER BASSIL, DO YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES.
AGAIN, THIS IS ITEM 26, WHICH IS PART OF THE THREE THAT HAVE BEEN LAID OUT BY MR. RIDLEY.
>> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR, ON 26 SPECIFICALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT TO CUT IT IN HALF, BUT NOT ELIMINATE IT ALTOGETHER.
I THINK I CAN EASILY SPEAK FOR THE REST OF US WHEN I CAN EXPAND ON THE AMOUNT OF VOLUNTEER TIME THAT IS PUT INTO OUR APPOINTEES TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. IT'S ABSOLUTELY.
I GOT TO GET A SECOND FIRST BEFORE YOU DEFEND THAT.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THE MOTION, IT'S BEEN SECONDED SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES NOW ON YOUR AMENDMENT ON 26.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, SO IF IT'S GOING OFF 30 WOULD BE IN HALF TO 15.
THE REST CAN GO TO TAX RATE AS ORIGINALLY PUT IN THIS AMENDMENT.
HOWEVER, ELIMINATING IT ALTOGETHER, I CAN'T SUPPORT, I UNDERSTAND THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS SEEMS HIGH, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT EACH OF US HAVE DOZENS OF APPOINTEES FOR OUR DISTRICT THAT SPEND COUNTLESS AMOUNT OF HOURS.
THAT ALL THANKLESS WORK TO HELP ADVISE US AND GIVE ADEQUATE REPRESENTATION TO OUR RESIDENTS.
IT WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE SAW IT DONE.
CAN WE DO THINGS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY? OF COURSE ALWAYS, BUT TO TAKE SOMETHING AWAY THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED JUST ONE YEAR, I THINK IS A REALLY BAD PRACTICE.
IT SPEAKS TO HOW MUCH WE ARE WILLING TO SHOW OUR APPRECIATION TO THE VOLUNTEER APPOINTEES ACROSS OUR CITY.
>> CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
THIS IS ON MR. BAZALDUA'S AMENDMENT.
[06:45:01]
>> HE'S ONLY MOVING TO AMENDMENT 26 TO CUT THE AMOUNT IN HALF?
>> YES. TO MRS. GAVINO, CAN YOU TELL US LAST YEAR WAS THE FIRST YEAR; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WE HAD OVER 400 ATTENDEES FOR THE BOARDS AND COMMISSION LUNCHEON.
>> I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S FROM EVERY DISTRICT, BUT PREDOMINANTLY, YEAH, WE GOT GOOD ATTENDANCE.
>> THEN IF WE TOOK IT DOWN TO 15,000, IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD DO AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT WAY IN TERMS OF MAYBE NOT SERVING A MEAL OR WHATEVER.
>> IT WOULD BE VERY PARED DOWN.
>> I KNOW I WAS THERE AND I KNOW IT WAS QUITE CHALLENGING WITH OUR LOCATION.
THERE WAS, I THINK A CHEERLEADER CONVENTION GOING ON AT THE SAME TIME AS OUR DEFINED SO THERE ARE ALREADY TWEAKS BEING DONE.
BUT DO YOU KNOW IF THERE WAS FEEDBACK? I KNOW WHAT MY PEOPLE SAID, BUT I DON'T WANT JUST TAKE MY OWN DISTRICT'S PERSPECTIVE TO MAKE A DECISION FOR THE WHOLE CITY.
>> TRANSPORTATION WAS A BIG FACTOR IN THE FEEDBACK.
WE DID HAVE TO TRANSPORT PEOPLE FROM CITY HALL TO THE CONVENTION CENTER, AND WE DID HAVE TO MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THOSE WHO REQUESTED IT.
WE HAD CHARTER BUSES FOR PEOPLE WHO COULDN'T WALK OVER OR GO UNDER THE TUNNEL, SO THAT WAS AN ADDITIONAL COST FOR US TO MAKE THOSE ACCOMMODATIONS THAT WAS REQUESTED.
IS IT PLANNED FOR THIS YEAR YET?
>> WE HAVE NOT PLANNED IT FOR THIS YEAR YET BECAUSE KNOWING THAT WE HAD REQUESTED AN ENHANCEMENT AND THE COST OF LAST YEAR, WE WANT TO SEE WHAT WE WERE GOING TO GET THIS YEAR TO SEE HOW DO WE PLAN MOVING FORWARD FOR THIS EVENT.
>> MR. RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MR. BASSIL DO AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. QUESTION FOR YOU GENESIS AT A $15,000 REMAINING BUDGET AS THIS AMENDMENT PROPOSES, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO HOST ANY MEANINGFUL EVENT ON THE SCOPE OF LAST YEAR'S EVENT?
>> NOT ON THE SCOPE OF LAST YEAR'S EVENT, BUT I THINK WE CAN MAKE A MEANINGFUL EVENT.
IT JUST WOULDN'T HAVE THE SAME POMP AND CIRCUMSTANCE AS LAST YEAR'S.
>> WE'D BE RELEGATED TO BOX LUNCHES.
>> LET ME AND THANK YOU GENESIS FOR ALWAYS KEEPING A POSITIVE ATTITUDE ABOUT SUCH A THING.
I WOULD SAY THIS, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING THAT REFLECTS OUR APPRECIATION FOR 500 BOARD MEMBERS, TO DO IT ON THE CHEAP, I'D RATHER WE JUST NOT DO IT AND DON'T DO IT IF THAT'S THE CITY'S HISTORY OF NOT WANTING TO RECOGNIZE PEOPLE THAT SPEND, IN SOME CASES, SIX TO SEVEN HOURS DEBATING AND DOING THE WORK THAT YOU ASK THEM TO DO.
I THINK GENESIS GAVE THE FEEDBACK ON, I THINK TRANSPORTATION ISSUES AND LOGISTICS.
I THINK WHAT I HEARD AS A SENTIMENT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATED WAS THEY REALLY APPRECIATED THE CITY ACTUALLY RECOGNIZING THEM FOR THEIR SERVICE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'VE NEVER DONE.
THEY APPRECIATE IT MEETING AND UNDERSTANDING FROM OTHER COLLEAGUES WHAT THEIR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS DO AND ACTUALLY SEEING PEOPLE THAT HAVE VOLUNTEERED THEIR TIME THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THEIR OWN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
I WOULD SAY IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT AT A LEVEL THAT IS COMMENSURATE WITH THE NINTH LARGEST CITY AND THE WORKLOAD AND EFFORT THAT THESE PEOPLE PUT IN IT, THEN I WOULDN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE AN EMBARRASSMENT AND I WOULDN'T WANT AT LEAST AS IT'S BEING REPRESENTED FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO FIND A WAY TO INVITE WHETHER COUNCIL AND THE BOARDS THERE.
I WOULDN'T WANT TO PRODUCE AN EVENT THAT IS NOT UP TO THE STANDARDS THAT I BELIEVE THEIR WORK AND EFFORT DESERVES.
I WOULD JUST SAY TAKE THE WHOLE AMOUNT AND WE JUST DON'T DO IT AND WE JUST SEND THEM A THANK YOU OR SOMETHING, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT US TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT COMMENSURATE WITH AT LEAST I BELIEVE YOU ALL APPRECIATION FOR THEM.
>> WELL, I AGREE WITH MOST OF YOUR COMMENTS MR. CITY MANAGER.
I DON'T AGREE THAT WE SHOULDN'T RECOGNIZE OUR BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTEES.
I ALREADY HOST A DISTRICT EVENT FOR ALL OF MY APPOINTEES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS TO RECOGNIZE THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS.
I THINK THAT IS AN EFFECTIVE WAY.
IT'S MORE PERSONAL WAY TO RECOGNIZE THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO OUR CITY GOVERNMENT.
I JUST DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE SPENDING $50,000 OF OUR TAXPAYERS MONEY FOR A ONETIME LUNCHEON.
BUT IT IS NOT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD RECOGNIZE THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF OUR VOLUNTEERS, BUT JUST THAT THAT IS AN EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE THAT CAN BE DONE MORE PERSONALLY AND ON A TIGHTER BUDGET BY DOING IT ON AN INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT BASIS.
>> LET ME JUST CLARIFY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY THAT YOU COULD NOT DO THAT AND IT'S DONE BY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS AT AND FOR THEIR OWN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WE WILL NOT RECOMMEND AND I WILL NOT HOST AN EVENT THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE OF A STATURE FROM ME.
THE COUNCIL CAN DO IT AND SO IF YOU WANT TO REMOVE THE DOLLARS AND USE THEM FOR SOMETHING ELSE, THAT'S FINE AND DO WHAT YOU DO INDIVIDUALLY.
[06:50:02]
BUT I WON'T BE RECOMMENDING THAT WE HOST OR HAVE MY STAFF PUT ENERGY INTO AN EVENT THAT I DO NOT BELIEVE IS COMMENSURATE WITH WHAT I WOULD RESPECT AND OR EXPECT TO DO FOR SOMEONE WHO HAS VOLUNTEERED THEIR TIME ON THE CITY'S BOARD.AGAIN, COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN CONTINUE TO DO IT, WE JUST WON'T HOST ONE AS AT LEAST SUPPORTED BY THE CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING, YOU'RE SAYING IF THE CITY COUNCIL THAT I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THIS, IT'S THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS TOO LOW AND WE'RE TOO LOW ON TIME.
I WANT THE AMOUNT OF TIME AND DEBATE TO BE REFLECTIVE OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS THAT WERE SPENT AT THIS POINT IS TOO MUCH DEBATE FOR TOO LITTLE MONEY, I THINK FOR ME.
I'M GOING TO FOLLOW MY OWN ADVICE AND BUY MYSELF A DRINK ON THAT ONE.
>> WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON? THIS IS JUST THE BAZALDUA AMENDMENT TO REDUCE IT FROM 30-15.
MS. BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTE.
>> THANK YOU. I GUESS MY JUNIOR LEAGUE DAYS ARE COMING BACK TO ME HERE AND THERE'S PLENTY OF PARTNERS WHO WOULD LOVE TO GIVE BACK TO THEIR CITY AND THIS IS A PERFECT OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK OUT THAT PARTNERSHIP.
I CAN THINK OF FIVE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I MEAN, MS. WILLIS AND I SERVED ON MANY OF THOSE COMMITTEES ASKING PEOPLE AND THEY DEFINITELY WOULD OPEN UP.
I THINK MR. MAYOR, YOU'RE SET ON ONE OF MY COMMITTEES.
I JUST THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HERE THAT YOU CAN STILL DO IT NICE AND HAVE PARTNERS COME IN AND DONATE THE SPACE, THE FOOD, WHATEVER IT IS.
START AT 15,000 IN ASK FOR DONATIONS OR START AT 10 AND GO FROM THERE.
BUT I WOULD SAY IF YOU NEED HELP, I'M SURE THERE'S PEOPLE AROUND THIS BODY THAT CAN GET PEOPLE TO SHOW UP. THANK YOU.
YOU'RE RECOGNIZED, I BELIEVE FOR WHAT, THREE MINUTES.
>> I'M SORRY, I HAVEN'T SPOKEN YET.
>> YOU HAVEN'T SPOKEN AT ALL ON THIS ONE, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED, I'M SORRY, I'M LOOKING AT THE WRONG NUMBER.
YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU. I AGREE WITH MR. RIDLEY IN THAT, I ALSO HOST THIS EVENT IN MY DISTRICT.
I HAD A TABLE FULL OF DISTRICT, 12 PEOPLE, HALF WHO SAID THEY WERE SO GLAD TO BE INVITED AND IT WAS MEANINGFUL TO THEM.
OF COURSE, ALL THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T SHOW UP BECAUSE IT WAS WAY TOO FAR OR THEY COULDN'T COME DURING THE DAY.
I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT THE PEOPLE WHO CAME FOR THE EVENING EVENT THAT WE HELD IN THE DISTRICT, I THINK FELT THE WARMTH OF APPRECIATION FROM PEOPLE WHO KNEW THE CONTRIBUTION THAT THEY WERE GIVING.
THE SECOND THING IS JUST THE CONVERSATION HERE HAS TAKEN MY BREATH AWAY THAT A CHARTER BUS WOULD TAKE SOMEBODY FROM CITY HALL TO THE CONVENTION CENTER.
THAT'S SHOCKING BECAUSE WITH ALL MY DISABILITY, I CAN WALK THAT.
HERE WE TALK ABOUT BEING A WALKABLE CITY EVERY SINGLE DAY THAT I'M SITTING AROUND THIS HORSESHOE.
WHAT IT REALLY GOES TO IS NOT ABOUT ADDRESSING WHAT COULD BE ADA NEEDS, WHAT IT GOES TO IS ABOUT THE EFFICIENCY OF CITY HALL.
WE HAVE, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY VEHICLES THAT ARE CITY OF DALLAS SITTING IN OUR PARKING GARAGE THAT ANY NUMBER OF STAFF MEMBERS COULD HAVE RUN SOMEBODY OVER.
BUT WE HIRED A CHARTER BUS FOR LIKE HALF A MILE.
THIS IS EXACTLY ABOUT THE WAY WE SOLVE PROBLEMS HERE IN THE LEAST EFFICIENT WAY.
I JUST WANTED TO CALL OUT HOW SHOCKED I AM TO HEAR THAT. THANK YOU.
>> BEFORE WE GO TO YOU, MAYOR BRUTANE, MS. WILLIS, YOU ARE IN THE QUEUE FIRST FOR FIVE MINUTES I BELIEVE.
>> I KNOW, BUT THIS IS YOUR FIRST ROUND, SO [OVERLAPPING]
>> I GOT YOU. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK WE COULD DO A NICE EVENT AND I THINK WHAT'S REALLY THE MOST MEANINGFUL THING HERE, WELL, RIGHT ALONG WITH ACKNOWLEDGING THE SERVICE AND THE TIME THAT OUR BOARD MEMBERS THAT WE CAREFULLY WORK TO A POINT GIVE IS THE CROSS-POLLINATION BETWEEN OUR WHOLE CITY.
I THINK THAT IS INVALUABLE AND I WOULD NOT WANT TO SEE THIS GO AWAY.
YES, I DO THINGS FOR MY BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS BUT I JUST THINK THE VALUE OF THAT IS JUST SO INCREDIBLE.
I WOULD NEVER WANT TO SEE THAT. THANKS.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> ON MR. BAZALDUA AMENDMENT TO GO FROM 30-15.
>> I GUESS THE 15 IS BETTER THAN ZERO.
BUT I DO WANT TO COMMENT THAT TRANSPORTATION WISE, I KNOW THAT I GOT NUMEROUS CALL FOR ADA AND THE PROBLEM THERE, THEY CANNOT GET THERE AND THEY CALL TO GET A VAN TO GET SOMEONE TO TAKE THEM TO THE PLACE THEY CANNOT GET THERE.
[06:55:01]
I WILL TRY TO MAKE SURE WE DO THAT.WE GOT TO MAKE SURE WE DO HAVE TRANSPORTATION FOR ADA.
I GOT NUMEROUS CARD AND I BELIEVE THE LADY CAME AND SPOKE TO THE CITY COUNCIL MORE THAN ONE TIME, AND SAY, NO ONE WOULD PICK HER UP TO TAKE OVER.
SHE IS THE COMMISSION A DISABILITY THERE.
WITH THAT IF IT'S 13,000, WE VOTE ON CHAIRMAN VALID DOING THAT.
I THINK IS WE ALLOW FOR PHILANTHROPIES OR NON-PROFIT.
THAT IS A GOOD DEAL, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO DO IT THANK FIRST-CLASS, BUT WE GOT TO FIND A WAY THAT WE DO OFFICE.
THOSE VOLUNTEER THEY SHOW, IT'S NOT A RESPECT.
WHAT THEY RESPECT IF YOU'RE GOING TO VOLUNTEER, YOU SHOW SOME RESPECT TO THEM.
IT'D BESIDES EATING PEANUT BUTTER CRACKERS.
BUT I DO UNDERSTAND WOULD YOU SAND HERE? WE TRIED TO DO THE BUDGET.
I'D SAY MONEY, BUT THOSE ARE VOLUNTEERS AND SOME OF THE VOLUNTEER WHO SPENT THE LAST DIME CATCH THE BUS TO COME DOWN HERE.
SEVERAL VOLUNTEER COME DOWN HERE.
YOU GOT TO PAY $5, $6 TO PORT, BUT VOLUNTARY STILL GET EATEN LUNCH TO VOLUNTEER TO COME DOWN HERE ANYTIME.
I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A COURTESY, HOW WE TREAT OURSELVES AND HOW WE TREAT OUR VOLUNTEERS, AND HOW WE TREAT OUR COMMISSION THAT VOLUNTEER.
I DO KNOW THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT VOLUNTEERS IN THE LUNCH IN HERE THAT, THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH, WHATEVER, SOME PEOPLE MAY BE OF THE MIDDLE CLASS, LOWER MIDDLE CLASS, BUT THERE IS A DIVISOR HERE THAT SOME OF THE TV, YOU JUST CAN'T GET VOLUNTARY.
THEY DON'T HAVE TIME, THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO DO THAT.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER WE DO THAT WE TAKE IN CONSIDERATION OF PEOPLE WHO SERVE WE JUST SAW LAW ENFORCEMENT, 50 YEARS OF SERVICE, AND THEY VOLUNTEERS AND WHAT THEY DO.
THEY'VE BEEN DOING FOR 50 YEARS AND NO ONE HAS SAID ANYTHING TO THEM, GIVE ME TO COME TO THE LAUNCH INTO DO WHATEVER.
BUT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE SAYING.
PEOPLE ARE WATCHING US RIGHT NOW AND I WANT TO HANDLE VOLUNTEERS IS FEELING RIGHT NOW AND THAT WE'RE SAYING, HEY WE REALLY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU. THANK YOU.
>> IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE, I WANT TO TURN TO CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, DO IT FOR THREE MINUTES.
CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT? CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I WILL JUST SAY THAT I WAS ACTUALLY CONSIDERING WITHDRAWING BECAUSE I AGREE THAT WE DON'T NEED TO DO AT HALF-PAST NIGHT.
PERSONALLY, WITH MY EXPERIENCE IN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY, THINK THAT WE CAN MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN.
WE'VE GOT GREAT RELATIONSHIPS WITH DIFFERENT VENUES, WE'VE GOT GREAT RELATIONSHIPS FOR SPONSORSHIPS AND DONATIONS.
WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS TO ELIMINATE IT ALTOGETHER AND THIS NOT BE MADE A PRIORITY, BUT HAVING SOMETHING TO WORK FROM, AND STILL PRIORITIZING THIS AS AN EFFORT TO SHOW APPRECIATION.
I THINK IT SPEAKS TO EQUITY THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO ALREADY DO IT.
THEY HAPPEN TO LIVE IN MORE AFFLUENT PARTS OF THE CITY.
I THINK THAT IT'D BE GREAT FOR ALL OF THE APPOINTEES ACROSS OUR CITY TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO BE APPRECIATED IN THE SAME WAY BECAUSE MY WIFE AND I CAN'T AFFORD THAT IS SOMETHING, BUT WE COULD DO FOR OUR APPOINTEES.
I DON'T THINK I'M ALONE IN THAT BOAT ON OUR COUNCIL.
IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EQUITY, UNITY IS ESSENTIALLY AS BEING ONE DALLAS.
I THINK THAT THE GESTURE ALONE FROM CITY STAFF, TAKING THIS ROLE, THIS TASK ON, AND PROVIDING THIS OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR RESIDENTS WAS ABSOLUTELY BENEFICIAL AND APPRECIATED IN BRIDGING SOME OF THOSE GAPS.
THAT WAS SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT I GOT FROM MY APPOINTEES.
THEY REALLY ENJOYED BEING IN A DIFFERENT SETTING WITH MEMBERS OF THEIR BODIES AND ALSO GETTING TO SEE PEOPLE ACROSS DISTRICT LINES THAT WORK IN OTHER SPACES, ON OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
ALTOGETHER, I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING NEGATIVE FROM THE EVENT ITSELF.
DO I THINK THAT WE CAN LOOK AT OTHER WAYS TO FIX IT? OF COURSE, ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAXIMIZE $15,000? I THINK WITH OUR POLITICAL CAPITAL, WE CAN LEVERAGE OUR PARTNERS AND MAKE THIS A VERY SUCCESSFUL EVENT THAT SERVES THE SAME PURPOSE.
I'M ASKING EVERYONE TO PLEASE SUPPORT THIS AND THEN WE CAN GIVE THE REMAINING 15,000 TO THE TAX RATE, JUST AS PROPOSED BY MR. RIDLEY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
HERE'S WHERE WE ARE. WE'RE GOING TO SHOW CARDS ON MR. BASIL DO AN AMENDMENT ON 26,
[07:00:03]
AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT ITSELF ONCE IT'S BEEN AMENDED OR NOT.ON THE 26TH, YOU AGREE WITH THE BASIL DO AMENDMENT TO CUT IT FROM 30-15.
>> BUT ONLY WITH FOUR CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR THE AMENDMENT FAILS MR. MAYOR.
>> WE'RE NOW BACK ON THE ORIGINAL 26 AS MR. RIDLEY LAID IT OUT.
I SHOULD SAY THIS AS HE LAID IT OUT, BUT WITH THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS CORRECTED TO REFLECT THE REALITY WHICH IS THAT BASELINE PRIOR ACTION, THERE WAS ONLY $30,026 TO BE REDUCED.
SHOW CARDS IF YOU SUPPORT IT. IT'S OBVIOUSLY.
>> VOTING ON 26 NOW WITH THE 30,000 BECAUSE YOUR AMENDMENT FAILED. SORRY.
>> WE'RE DISCUSSING THE MAIN MOTION.
WE WE CLOSE THE DEBATE ON THAT BEFORE AND HE LAID OUT ALL THREE TOGETHER.
WE CLOSE THE DEBATE ON IT, AND THAT WAS IT.
>> NO WHEN I WAS RECOGNIZED MR. MAYOR TO SPEAK ON THIS MAIN MOTION, I MADE A MOTION TO AMEND.
I NEVER GOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THE MAIN MOTION.
I MADE ANNOUNCEMENT FOR YOU TO GET IT.
WE WERE ACTUALLY IN THE PROCESS OF VOTING AT THE TIME.
>> WELL, I'M TECHNICALLY CORRECTED.
IT'S LIKE IF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WAS STATED IN HIS MOTION WAS STATED INCORRECTLY BECAUSE HE ACTUALLY HAD OUTDATED INFORMATION.
I'M GOING TO PROCEED WITH THE VOTE. GO AHEAD.
YOU SEE CARDS THAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE OR SOMETHING.
>> WITH FIVE CARDS VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> NOW WE ARE ON LET'S SEE, 27 WAS THE MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL SERVICES, AND THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT IS ALSO TECHNICALLY CORRECTED, WE'VE ALREADY HAD THE DEBATE IN THE DISCUSSION ON IT.
IT'S JUST THAT THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS WE'RE NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT PREVIOUS ACTION.
>> IF I MAY MR. MAYOR. SORRY ABOUT THIS.
I'M GOING TO TECHNICALLY CORRECT IT AGAIN.
>> NINETY FOUR THOUSAND FIVE TWENTY
I'M NOT TRYING TO PULL A FASTENERS ON ANYBODY, BUT WE LITERALLY HAD HAD ALL THREE LAID OUT. DISCUSSION WAS CLOSED.
WE WERE GOING TO THE VOTING ON ALL THREE IN THE ORDER, AND THE ONLY THING THAT HAPPENED WAS STAFF WAS KIND ENOUGH TO LET US KNOW THAT THE ORIGINAL DOLLAR AMOUNTS THAT MR. RIDLEY THOUGHT HE WAS REDUCING WERE NOT ACCURATE ANYMORE.
THAT'S JUST A CORRECTED DOLLAR AMOUNT.
WE DIDN'T CHANGE IT AT 94,520 IS THE AMOUNT YOU'D BE REDUCING IN ORDER TO PUT IT TOWARDS TAX REDUCTION.
THAT'S THE DEAL. ANYBODY GOT ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY.
>> I'M NOT DEBATING. I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
>> WHAT ARE MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL SERVICES SO WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO CUT.
>> I JUST WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO REMOVE.
>> THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN WHEN HE LAID OUT 20 TO 26 TO 27.
>> I'M NOT ALLOWED TO KNOW WHAT THE DETAILS OF WHAT WERE.
>> THE CLARIFICATION WAS NEEDED THEN.
THAT'S ANOTHER STAFF PRESENTATION ON THIS.
I'M NOT TRYING TO BE UGLY ABOUT IT.
I'M JUST SAYING AT THE POINT THAT THE VOTING [INAUDIBLE] CAN YOU EXPLAIN ME WHAT IT IS THAT'S THE UNDERLYING ISSUE WE'RE VOTING ON IS GOING TO REOPEN.
WE NEED TO SHOW THE CARDS ON 27.
>> WITH SIX CARDS VOTING IN FAVOR AMENDMENT 27 FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> ANYMORE AMENDMENTS FROM ANYONE, HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
I SAID THAT WE NEED TO STAND AT EASE FOR LIKE TWO MINUTES, NOT A RECESSED RISK OF STANDARDS ALONE.
[07:05:45]
>> IS THAT IN A MORE AMENDMENT, REALLY? WHO?
>> THANK YOU. MY FIRST AMENDMENT IS AMENDMENT NUMBER 40, AND IT IS PRESENTED JUST AS IT IS IN ON YOUR PAPERS.
IT IS PRESENTED AS UNBALANCED.
I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.
AS WE HAVE SEEN, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH RPA DOLLARS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY PUT IN AS ONE TIME THAT BECOME FULL TIME IT DOES GET WORKED OUT IN TIME. YES, IS THERE A SECOND?
>> DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? SHE GOT A SECOND.
I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT FOR A NUMBER OF THESE ITEMS WE HAVE A LOT OF VEHICLE SITTING IN OUR PARKING GARAGE FROM DEPARTMENTS.
>> WHAT IS YOUR POINT OF ORDER?
>> THE AMENDMENT IS UNBALANCED.
IS THAT ALLOWED BY RULE FOR AMENDING A BUDGET?
>> I THINK THIS IS REALLY A BUDGET QUESTION, BUT THE RULES ARE IF YOU HAVE A SOURCE OF FUNDS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE USE OF FUNDS.
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT. IF I MAY, I THINK THE POINT OF SAYING THAT IT'S UNBALANCED, THE CITY MANAGER PRESENTED A BALANCED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR '24 AND '25.
THESE AMENDMENTS USE ONE-TIME SOURCE FOR AN ONGOING PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION.
IT MAKES THE TOTAL BUDGET OUT OF BALANCE.
WE WOULD ASK THAT AMENDMENTS IDENTIFY ONGOING SOURCES WITH ONGOING USES.
>> IF I MAY, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO RAISE TAXES IN THE FUTURE IF NECESSARY.
THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BALANCE IT.
>> EXCUSE ME, AM STILL MAKING MINE.
JACK, I BELIEVE THAT THE QUESTION IS, IS UNBALANCED SO WHEN WE DO MAKE AMENDMENT WE GOT TO HAVE A SOURCE AND THEY USE; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES SIR. A REQUEST IS THAT YOU PROVIDE A SOURCE OF FUNDS THAT IS EQUAL TO THE USE OF FUNDS.
THE POINT OF REFERENCE TO THE AMENDMENT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IS FOR FISCAL YEAR '25 BECAUSE FISCAL YEAR '25 WILL HAVE $11 MILLION OUT OF BALANCE BASED ON THIS.
IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DEALT WITH NEXT YEAR BUT IT'S STRUCTURALLY IMBALANCED FOR '25.
TO CLARIFY, THERE'S ACTUALLY NO RULE WHETHER IT'S FMPC, OR OTHERWISE THAT SAYS WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DO SO.
>> AS I SAID IN MANAGING SO YOU HIT YOUR HANDLE ON THE MIC.
>> I THINK TAMMY LOOKED AT ME AND JACK IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT BECAUSE WE ADOPT ONE YEAR OF THE BUDGET.
I THINK AGAIN, HIS NOTE WAS TO INDICATE AND DEMONSTRATE THAT IF THE ENTIRETY OF OUR DISCUSSIONS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN ABOUT THE STRUCTURAL IMBALANCE AND FINDING WAYS TO ENSURE THAT OUR BUDGET HAS SOME INTEGRITY TO IT, WE JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT ELIMINATING AND DOING A TAX REDUCTION WOULD ONE-TIME FUNDING SOURCES.
RECURRING REVENUE, WHICH COMES IN THE FORM OF A TAX REVENUE REDUCTION, MEANS THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO FIND $11 MILLION IN DIRECT REDUCTIONS NEXT YEAR THAT ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EXISTING TAX BASE GROWTH.
I THINK THAT WAS THE POINT OF THE CONVERSATION, AND IN SOME CASES, THE POINT OF A LOT OF THESE DISCUSSIONS TODAY AROUND THE FISCAL INTEGRITY OF OUR BUDGET.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT JACK WAS HIGHLIGHTING, BUT TECHNICALLY, IT IS BALANCED IN THE CURRENT YEAR, BUT IT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE AND REFLECTIVE AS IT RELATES TO
[07:10:01]
REVENUE TO SUPPORT THE ONGOING CUT FOR NEXT YEAR.I THINK THAT'S JUST ALL WE WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT.
COUNCIL CAN DISCUSS THAT, BUT TECHNICALLY, SHE'S CORRECT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CITY MANAGER.
I'LL NOTE THAT THE GOAL IS ACTUALLY FOR THERE TO BE EFFICIENCY CHANGES SO THAT IT WILL ACTUALLY BE IMBALANCED BY THE TIME WE GET TO NEXT YEAR.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH IT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME.
IF ANYONE HAS A QUESTION, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT.
BUT ALL OF THESE ARE AGAIN IN LINE WITH THE MEMO PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO THE MAYOR.
NO ONE IN THE CUES. LET'S SEE WHO CALLS IN.
VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT AMENDMENT IS AMENDMENT NUMBER 4.
>> I THOUGHT MR. RIDLEY, HAD ONE.
>> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, A COMBINATION OF AMENDMENT NUMBERS 13, 14, 15, AND 16, WHICH WOULD REDUCE THE INCREASE IN BUDGET FROM '22, '23 THE CURRENT BUDGET YEAR TO MAINTAIN SERVICE AT THE EXISTING LEVEL PROVIDING FOR INCREASES FOR CONTRACTUAL SALARY, BENEFIT, AND PENSION INCREASES, IN THE OFFICE OF DATA ANALYTICS, ITEM 13, HUMAN RESOURCES, AND ITEM 14, PUBLIC WORKS WOULD BE A REDUCTION IN THE BUDGET FOR THE REAL ESTATE DIVISION TO THE FORECAST '23 LEVEL WITH THE SAME PROVISOS OF INCREASES FOR CONTRACTUAL SALARY BENEFIT IN PENSION INCREASES.
IN ITEM 16, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO REDUCE THE BUDGET OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL DIVISION TO THE '22, '23 LEVEL.
THE USE OF FUNDS AND ALL OF THESE AMENDMENTS WOULD BE TAX RATE REDUCTIONS.
>> MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REMOVE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ITEM FOR 37,850, AND CONTINUE WITH THE OTHER ITEMS.
>> IT'S YOUR MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE IS URGENTLY NEEDED AT CITY HALL AND I AM IN FULL SUPPORT OF THE WORK THEY'RE DOING.
THAT'S NOT A PLACE I'M WILLING TO CUT.
I THINK YOU GUYS CAN SEE I'M WILLING TO CUT MANY THINGS.
ALL THAT TO SAY, ALL THE OTHER CUTS I AGREE WITH AND SUPPORT AND HOPE THAT WE CAN PASS THIS TAX REDUCTION.
>> ANYONE ELSE? SHOW OF CARDS.
>> WELL, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE AMENDMENT, IF I MAY.
>> I ASKED YOU. THANK YOU, GO AHEAD.
>> THE AMENDMENT BY COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN IS TO ELIMINATE THE CUT OF $37,000 IN THE CITY INSPECTOR GENERAL DIVISION.
THIS IS A DIVISION WHICH I BELIEVE TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY OVERSTAFFED AND IT DOES AN IMPORTANT JOB, NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
BUT I THINK IN THIS ERA OF BUDGET CONSERVATISM THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT EFFICIENCY SAVINGS.
THE NUMBER OF CASES BROUGHT TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE BUDGET OF 1,677,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR '24, '25.
THIS IS A SMALL REDUCTION, BUT IT'S AN IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE THAT IT RECOGNIZES THE EXISTING FUNDING LEVEL PLUS REQUIRED CONTRACTUAL SALARY BENEFIT IN PENSION INCREASES.
>> I THINK THAT COUNCIL MEMBER WEST, IS HE?
[07:15:01]
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IS THIS ON THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT?
>> NO I UNDERSTAND. WELL, THIS IS ON CURRENT AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CARA MENDELSOHN BEAT ME TO THE PUNCH ON THIS BECAUSE I CAN FOLLOW THOSE OTHER AMENDMENTS, BUT I DON T THINK THIS IS THE TIME TO LOOK AT REDUCING THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE.
THIS IS A NEW OFFICE, WE'VE JUST STOOD IT UP.
WHEN IT COMES TO ETHICS, I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHERE WE MAKE CUTS.
WE HEARD INSPECTOR GENERAL BEVERS SIT HERE, I DON'T KNOW, A YEAR AGO TO TALK TO US ABOUT HIS STAFF AND THE NEEDS.
HE RAN THROUGH A LITANY OF WHAT HE WAS WORKING ON ACROSS CATEGORIES THAT I DON'T REALLY EVEN CARE TO REPEAT AND SO UNTIL HE GETS OVER THAT KILIMANJARO OF INITIAL REPORTS OF VIOLATIONS, WHETHER THEY ARE FOUND TO BE VEXATION OR HAVE NO GROUNDS, OR NOT LIVE WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS, OR IF THERE IS SOME MERIT THERE THAT SENDS THEM ONTO OUR ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION AND THEN ONTO COUNCIL, THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO CUT BACK ON THAT.
WE STILL HAVE SOME THINGS TO EXAMINE.
I HOPE SOMEDAY IT IS APPROPRIATE TO START KNOCKING BACK THAT STAFF BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE ITEMS ON HIS MENU TO HAVE TO CONSIDER.
>> MAY I ADD? BECAUSE THIS DIVISION REPORTS TO ME.
I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON WHAT, COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS SAID ABOUT STANDING UP THE DIVISION.
PHASE 1 WAS BRINGING OVER ALL OF THE FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE STANDING UP THE DIVISION ON THE INVESTIGATIVE SIDE.
BUT THERE'S ANOTHER SIDE TO THIS DIVISION AND THAT IS THE CHIEF INTEGRITY OFFICER AND THEY'VE ALREADY BEGUN THEIR PHASE 2.
I THINK EDUCATION, TRAINING, COMMUNICATION, AND BUILDING A CULTURE OF ETHICS IS VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THIS STRUCTURE.
JUST $37,890 IS REALLY MOSTLY BENEFIT INCREASES IN OUR DEPARTMENT.
I'M GOING TO HAVE TO FIND THE MONEY SOMEWHERE ELSE.
>> WITH SIX CARS RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT FAILS. MR. MAYOR.
>> THE NEXT ONE IS THE LAST ONE. WILL REALLY HAVE 13.
>> WE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION. DO YOU MAKE MOTION?
>> YES. THE MOTION IS SIMILAR FOR EACH ONE OF THE FOUR ITEMS, BRINGING THE PROPOSED INCREASED BUDGETS BACK TO THE EXISTING 22, 23 LEVEL PLUS REQUIRED CONTRACTUAL SALARY BENEFIT IN PENSION INCREASES.
THE PURPOSE IS SIMPLY TO MAKE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO THE TAXPAYERS AND TO BREAK THE CYCLE OF AUTOMATIC INCREASES IN EVERY DEPARTMENT EACH YEAR.
THIS IS UNSUSTAINABLE AND WE NEED TO SHOW SOME RESOLVE TO CURTAIL THE INCREASES YEAR-TO-YEAR WHILE MAINTAINING THE EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICES IN THESE DEPARTMENTS.
THAT'S WHY I'VE MADE THIS MOTION.
>> POINT OF ORDER OR POINT OF PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY.
>> WILL WE BE VOTING ON EACH ONE OF THOSE AMENDMENTS SEPARATELY?
>> CHAIR WEST, I SEE YOUR LIGHT IS ON.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WE'RE VOTING ON EACH ITEM SEPARATELY, BUT THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT ALL OF THEM, RIGHT?
>> OKAY. I HAVE QUESTION FOR THE REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 15.
>> ALI HATEFI, THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS. YES SIR.
>> HI, ALI. SO I'VE BEEN LOOKING TODAY AT THE 2024 CAPITAL BOND PROGRAM, MARCH 1, 2023 BRIEFING BY THE BOND AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.
[07:20:04]
SLIDE 4 ON THAT BRIEFING LAYS OUT OUR NEEDS INVENTORY, INCLUDING THE $14 BILLION IN NEEDS TOWARDS 4 BILLION IN STREETS, 900 MILLION IN PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES, 149 IN CULTURAL FACILITIES, INCLUDING CITY HALL, WHICH WE'VE HEARD COULD FALL IN ON THE PARKING LOT IF WE DON'T FIX IT UP.IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE HAVE 4.4 BILLION WE NEED FOR THE PENSION.
WE ALSO HAVE THE ADDED PRIORITIES OF OUR TAX RELIEF FOR OUR RESIDENTS, WHICH THE MAYOR I KNOW SUPPORTS AND MOST OF US UP HERE.
THEN OUR NEED FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING SO THIS MASSIVE NEED IN OUR CITY, WE'VE GOT TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE ASSETS THAT WE DO HAVE, INCLUDING OUR REAL ESTATE.
I GUESS WITH THIS IN MIND, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT.
ONE, HOW MANY ACRES TOTAL DO WE MANAGE AS A CITY AND DO WE OWN?
>> I BELIEVE THE TOTAL ACRES OF ALL THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE IS AROUND 50,000 ACRES, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, 50K.
>> ROUGHLY WITHIN OUR CITY LIMITS?
>> OKAY. HOW MANY OF THESE 50, AND I KNOW SOME ARE PARKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT HOW MANY OF THESE 50,000 ACRES ARE LISTED FOR SALE OR ON THE BOOKS TO BE ACTIVATED IN THE MARKET IN SOME WAY?
>> I THINK CURRENTLY WE HAVE SOMETHING AROUND 15 ACRES.
FIFTEEN POINT SOMETHING, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
>> TWELVE BY SALES, BASICALLY IN SALE.
>> OKAY, THAT WOULD LEAVE US WITH LIKE 49,900 AND SOMETHING ACRES THAT WE HAVE, MINUS PARKS.
WHAT'S OUR STRATEGY AS A CITY FOR LIKE OUR REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO?
>> THAT'S A VERY BROAD QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER.
BUT I GUESS THE WAY THAT WE MANAGE THE PARCELS OR PROPERTIES THAT WE HAVE OR THE SALE OF THEIR PARCELS IS, ONE OVER THE ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE THAT WE HAVE, I THINK IT'S 6 TIMES 17 OR SO AND ALSO THE CITY CODE.
AT THE END OF EACH YEAR, WE'LL EXAMINE AND ALL THE DEPARTMENTS, WE ASK THEM TO PROVIDE US WITH THE LIST OF THE PROPERTIES THAT THEY HAVE, THAT IS A CURRENTLY USE OR FUTURE USE.
AS A RESULT, THE REMAINING WILL BE THE PROPERTIES THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO USE OR IS NO LONGER NEEDED.
THEN WE RUN THOSE PROPERTIES BY OTHER COMPANIES, OTHER AGENCIES, AGENCIES SUCH AS UTILITY COMPANIES, FOR EXAMPLE, OR OTHER DEPARTMENTS AT THE CITY TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY PUBLIC USE FOR THEM.
IF NOT, THEN THOSE BECOME IDENTIFIED THAT GOES ON THAT MAPPING TOOL OR THE LAND AND BUILDING MANAGEMENT SERVICES THAT IS ACCESSIBLE TO PUBLIC.
IT GOES THERE AS IDENTIFIED PROPERTIES FOR SALE OR FOR ANY USE FOR FUTURE.
ANOTHER THING IS THAT THROUGH THE DEVELOPERS OR CITIZENS WHEN THEY REQUEST FOR SOME PROPERTIES TO PURCHASE, FOR EXAMPLE, WE ALSO RUN THOSE PROPERTIES THROUGH MANY OTHER DEPARTMENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE IS ANY NEED FOR THE CITY OR FOR THE PUBLIC FIRST, WE EXCLUDE THEM.
IF NOT, THEN THAT WILL CALL FOR THE SALE.
THE SALE OF THE PROPERTIES OF COURSE HAS SOME REQUIREMENTS PER STATE LAW.
FOR EXAMPLE, IT HAS TO BE ADVERTISED FOR THREE WEEKS IF I'M NOT MISTAKING, ON NEWSPAPERS OR CITY WEBSITE OR THE AUCTIONEER FIRMS. IT TAKES SOMETHING AROUND 3-4 WEEKS FOR PROPERTIES TO BE ABLE TO BE ADVERTISED FOR THE SALES.
CURRENTLY WE ARE ALSO USING SOME TECHNOLOGY TO STREAMLINE MORE OF THE, I GUESS THE PARCELS OR THINGS THAT WE HAVE THROUGH THE REAL ESTATE OFFICE.
THESE ARE SOME EXAMPLES THAT I CAN THINK OF RIGHT NOW.
BUT IF THERE'S ANY SPECIFIC QUESTION, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.
>> I WON'T DEEP DIVE ON THIS BECAUSE YOUR ANSWER IS VERY THOROUGH.
BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IN A NUTSHELL IS, STAFF REACHES OUT, SAYS, HEY, DEPARTMENTS, WHAT ASSETS DO YOU HAVE? TELL US ABOUT IT.
IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO NEED SOMETHING, LET US KNOW.
BUT IS THERE SOMEBODY WHO IS DRIVING THAT AND SAYING, WE ARE UNDER UTILIZING THIS PARCEL HERE AND WE NEED TO ACTIVATE IT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF OUR CITY.
WHO IS THAT PERSON OR DEPARTMENT?
>> AS I UNDERSTAND, AGAIN, EACH DEPARTMENT,
[07:25:01]
THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE TO IDENTIFY THE PARCELS OR PROPERTIES THAT THEY HAVE, THAT THEY DON'T NEED IT ANYMORE.ONCE WE RECEIVE THAT, THAT'S OUR BASIS FOR THOSE PROPERTIES TO BE ADVERTISED FOR SALES OR OTHER PURPOSES BASICALLY.
DEPARTMENTS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO BASICALLY SCRUB THEIR INVENTORIES AND SAY, THESE ARE NEEDED THESE ARE NOT NEEDED AND THEN WE GET THAT INFORMATION FROM THEM.
>> IS THERE ONE PERSON IN THE CITY WHO IS THE REAL ESTATES OR WHO I COULD GO TO AND SAY, WHAT'S OUR STRATEGY?
>> WELL, REAL ESTATE IS PART OF PUBLIC WORKS, IS PART OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT I'M LEADING ALSO.
OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR IS ALSO ONLINE.
ASHLEY EUBANKS ACTUALLY HAVE HER TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS ONE.
BUT AGAIN, WE'RE RELYING ON DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE US THE LIST OF PROPERTIES THAT THEY DON'T NEED.
>> I THINK THE CITY MANAGEMENT WOULD WANT TO HELP YOU OUT.
>> THANKS. I'M DONE WITH MY QUESTIONS. I APPRECIATE THAT.
>> ARE YOU READY FOR A NEW AMENDMENT?
>> I WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH YOU'RE GOING TO LOVE GPFM.
>> YES, MISS. CHAIRMAN SCHULTZ.
>> THIS QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH THIS ONE, BUT IT CAN APPLY TO ALL THE FUTURE ONES THAT AREN'T SPECIFIC CALL-OUTS FOR REDUCTION IN PARTICULAR POSITIONS.
MY QUESTION IS, FOR ALL OF THESE THAT ARE GENERAL REDUCTIONS, IF IT'S NOT CALLING OUT FOR AN FTE, JUST A GENERAL REDUCTION.
THE QUESTION IS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE THAT IS MAJORITY OF EVERY DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET IS PERSONNEL, AND SO IF WE'RE ASKING FOR THINGS STAY FLAT YEAR-OVER-YEAR, THEN DOES THAT ELIMINATE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR COST OF LIVING, BENEFIT INCREASES, PENSION INCREASES.
HOW WILL WE MANAGE THAT UNLESS WE SPECIFICALLY CALL OUT A REDUCTION IN FTES?
>> IN THESE INSTANCES WHERE THERE'S A REDUCTION THAT'S NOT SPECIFIED, WE WOULD WORK WITH THOSE INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTS TO IDENTIFY WHAT THE REDUCTION IS GOING TO BE.
BUT CERTAIN COSTS HAVE TO BE ADDED TO THE BUDGET.
THE BENEFITS COST, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN A THAT HAS TO HAPPEN.
THE DEPARTMENT AND A HAVE TO IDENTIFY SOME OTHER WAY TO MAKE THE REDUCTION.
WE WOULD WORK WITH, IN THIS CASE, THESE FOUR DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS TO IDENTIFY THE REDUCTIONS.
>> THEY WON'T GET OFFICE SUPPLIES OR SOMETHING? [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY'RE ALL PEOPLE, THEY'RE ALL PEOPLE.
>> IT MAY REQUIRE REDUCTION OF POSITIONS.
>> THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IN THIS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS THAT WHAT IS BEING ASKED FOR AND THIS IS ESSENTIALLY PERSONNEL CUTS.
>> AS YOU POINTED OUT, MOST OF THE DEPARTMENTS BUDGETS ARE PERSONAL COST, SO YES, THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE TO TURN MOST ON TIME.
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL, MR. MAYOR.
>> CHAIRMAN, WILLIS, I MEAN WILLY?
>> WORKING. I'LL HAVE TO RESORT TO THE MECHANICAL METHOD.
JACK, I SPECIFICALLY ASKED YOU WHEN I POSE THESE AMENDMENTS TO EXCLUDE THE INCREASES IN SALARY, COST OF LIVING, BENEFITS, AND PENSION INCREASES, AND THAT'S INCORPORATED IN THESE MOTIONS, IS IT NOT?
>> YES, SIR. THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE MOTIONS.
>> OKAY, SO ALL OF THESE DO IS THEY DON'T CUT ANY FTES THAT ARE IN EXISTENCE NOW.
THEY SIMPLY ELIMINATE THE INCREASE THAT WAS PROPOSED IN THEIR BUDGETS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF REQUIRED INCREASES FOR SALARY, BENEFITS, AND PENSION.
>> I BELIEVE TWO OF THESE ARE STARTING AT THE CURRENT YEAR FORECAST, AND SO IF YOU'RE STARTING AT THE CURRENT YEAR FORECAST, YOU HAVE TO CUT SOMETHING THAT'S IN THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET TO ACCOMPLISH THIS NUMBER.
>> WELL, BUT NOT IN THERE EXISTING OPERATIONS.
IF WE'RE BASING THE BASE ON THESE ON THE ACTUAL EXPENDITURES FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR THEN WHAT THEIR BUDGET IS IS AT THAT POINT IRRELEVANT IF THEY HAVEN'T SPENT ALL OF THEIR BUDGET.
>> EXCEPT FOR PERHAPS THE SAVINGS, THE FORECAST IS UNDER BUDGET AS A RESULT OF VACANCIES EARLIER IN THE YEAR,
[07:30:04]
PERHAPS THEY CAN FILL THOSE POSITIONS NOW, AND SO THOSE POSITIONS AND EMPLOYEES WOULD HAVE TO BE CUT.THE FOCUS ISN'T NECESSARILY WHAT'S HAPPENING TODAY, BUT IT'S WHAT'S HAPPENED OVER THE 12 MONTHS OF THE FISCAL YEAR.
>> DO YOU KNOW OF ANY INSTANCES, OR YOU SPECULATING ABOUT THAT?
>> IT'S THE FORECAST. I CAN'T TELL YOU SPECIFICALLY WHAT IT IS THAT DROVE THAT FORECAST.
>>WHAT THEY'RE EXPECTED TO SPEND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH.
>> THESE AMENDMENTS, I THINK THE TWO THAT ARE BASED ON A FORECAST NUMBER, SIMPLY MAINTAIN THAT SAME BUDGET NUMBER FOR THE NEW FISCAL YEAR.
THEY DON'T CUT THE EXISTING EXPENDITURE LEVEL, AND THEY ACTUALLY INCREASE IT BECAUSE OF NATURAL INCREASE OF SALARY BENEFITS AND PENSION COSTS; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> IF THE FORECAST AS A RESULT OF VACANCIES, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS YEAR, AND THEY HAVEN'T FILLED THE POSITIONS IN ORDER TO GET TO THE FORECAST NUMBER NEXT YEAR AND REPEAT THAT NEXT YEAR, THOSE POSITIONS HAVE TO BE VACANT FOR PART OF THE YEAR NEXT YEAR AS WELL.
>> BUT YOU DON'T KNOW OF ANY INSTANCES OF ANY OF THESE DEPARTMENTS WHERE THAT'S THE CASE.
>> WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT EACH ONE INDIVIDUALLY TO SEE WHAT CAUSED THE CURRENT YEAR SAVINGS.
>> SURE. CAUSE 13. PROGRESSING.
>> WITH SEVEN CARDS VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT FAILS. MR. MAYOR.
>> WITH EIGHT CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR.
THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MR. MAYOR.
>> WITH SIX CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT FAILS.
I'M SORRY. IT'S MORE CARDS. GIVE ME A SECOND.
LET ME COUNT. WOULD YOU PLEASE RAISE YOUR CARDS AGAIN? WITH EIGHT CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FOR IT. MR. MAYOR.
16. WHAT DO YOU GET? 16? RAISE CARDS 16.
>> I HAVE ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO PROPOSE, PLEASE. LET ME.
>> I THOUGHT WE JUST DID THAT.
>> AMENDMENT 16 WITH NO CARDS BEING RAISED.
>> TWO, SHANNON AND PAUL DID IT.
>> WITH TWO CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR.
WE KNOCKED OUT 13, 14, 15, 16; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> OKAY. WONDERFUL. THANK YOU. GREAT JOB, GUYS.
CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE TO OR YOU CAN'T LAY THEM OUT TOGETHER? THEY'RE NOT RELATED? OKAY.
>> MR. MAYOR, MAY I TAKE A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE OR ASK IF WE CAN TAKE A SMALL BREAK SO THAT STAFF AT THE FRONT CAN POSSIBLY STRETCH THEIR LEGS AND MAYBE TAKE CARE OF OTHER BUSINESS?
>> GUYS, WE'RE GOING TO RECESS UNTIL 07:00 PM.
THANK YOU, MEMBERS, FOR YOUR PATIENCE THERE.
IT'S 7:03 AND WE'RE BACK IN REGULAR SESSION.
AND I BELIEVE CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN HAD THE FLOOR FOR AN AMENDMENT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS AMENDMENT 41.
THE MOTION IS TO INCREASE THE SALES TAX PROJECTION BY TWO MILLION AND DECREASE THE TAX RATE EQUALLY.
>> SO MOVED AND SECONDED. DISCUSSION, CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN?
>> YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE MINUTES.
[07:35:02]
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE GREATLY REDUCED OUR SALES TAX PROJECTIONS IN THE FUTURE THIS YEAR FROM WHAT WE HAVE RECEIVED THIS FISCAL YEAR ALREADY.
WHILE I DO AGREE, AND THE ECONOMIST HAS FORECASTED THAT WE'LL HAVE A SLOWING IN THE INCREASE OF SALES TAX, THIS IS A DRAMATIC SHIFT.
SO I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY CONSERVATIVE TO SAY TWO MILLION ADDITIONAL DOLLARS OVER THE FULL COURSE OF THE YEAR.
YOU SHOULD NOTE, OF COURSE, THAT FROM OUR PROJECTION LAST YEAR TO OUR FORECASTED TOTAL, WE WILL HAVE EXCEEDED THAT BY 25 MILLION IN THE YEAR.
SO THIS IS ESSENTIALLY ONE MONTH OF THAT.
SO THE EXTRA DOLLARS WOULD THEN GO TO TAX REDUCTION, AND THAT IS THE MOTION.
>> YOU GET FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 41.
>> THANK YOU. HELP ME UNDERSTAND, JACK AND JANETTE, WHY WE WOULD DO THIS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON, FOR ASKING.
THE PROPOSAL IS TO INCREASE OUR SALES TAX FORECAST FOR NEXT YEAR BY TWO MILLION DOLLARS.
WE DID NOT INCLUDE THAT IN THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND THE WORK THAT WE DID WITH OUR ECONOMIST.
IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, WE DID HAVE 14 AND 15 PERCENT GROWTH, AND THAT IS UNPRECEDENTED GROWTH.
THERE'S ONLY BEEN ONE OTHER YEAR THAT WE'VE RECORDED WHERE WE'VE HAD OVER 10 PERCENT YEAR-OVER-YEAR GROWTH IN SALES TAX.
WE HAVE HAD VERY UNPRECEDENTED SALES TAX GROWTH THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
IN WORKING WITH THE ECONOMIST, HE BELIEVES THAT WE WILL RETURN TO MORE OF A NORMAL GROWTH PATTERN, WHICH IS ABOUT 4.2 PERCENT.
THAT IS OUR 30-YEAR AVERAGE ON YEAR OVER YEAR GROWTH.
WE HAVE INCLUDED THAT AS OUR FORECAST GOING FORWARD OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, 4.4 PERCENT GROWTH IN FISCAL YEAR '24, 5.5 PERCENT GROWTH IN FISCAL YEAR '25.
I WILL MAKE A COUPLE OF POINTS, THREE, IF I CAN, ABOUT THAT.
EARLIER THIS YEAR ON MAY 10TH, WE INCREASED THE CURRENT YEAR SALES TAX BUDGET BECAUSE WE WERE SEEING EVERY MONTH WHERE WE WERE DOING MUCH BETTER THAN BUDGET.
WE INCREASED THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET FROM 417 TO 432.
THREE OF THE LAST FOUR MONTHS, OUR SALES TAX HAS BEEN LESS THAN IT WAS THE SAME MONTH LAST YEAR.
SO NOT 4 PERCENT GROWTH, BUT LESS THAN IT WAS LAST YEAR ON THOSE THREE MONTHS.
WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO LOWER OUR FORECASTS FOR THE CURRENT YEAR BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO ACHIEVE THE $432 MILLION SALES TAX THAT WE INCREASED OUR BUDGET TO ON THE MAY 10TH.
IT NOW LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE ABOUT 427 FOR THE YEAR.
WE'RE GOING TO FALL ABOUT FIVE MILLION DOLLAR SHORT IN THE CURRENT YEAR.
I SPOKE OF THE UNPRECEDENTED NATURE OF THIS AND THAT WE DID ONE YEAR IN 2000 HAD OVER 10 PERCENT GROWTH.
THAT WAS FOLLOWED BY THREE YEARS OF YEAR-OVER-YEAR DECLINE.
WE LOST REVENUE IN THOSE YEARS.
WE DIDN'T HAVE GROWTH, WE HAD DECLINE.
WHILE WE'VE HAD 14 PERCENT AND 15 PERCENT GROWTH THE LAST TWO YEARS, IT CAN TURN VERY QUICKLY.
IN WORKING WITH THE ECONOMIST, WE'VE COME UP WITH THAT AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE PRESENTED FOR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, THE 4.4 PERCENT.
I UNDERSTAND, ADDING TWO MORE MILLION DOLLARS, AND I DO HOPE THAT OUR SALES TAX COMES IN HIGHER THAN WE'D FORECASTED.
BUT IF IT DOESN'T, WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS BACK IN PRIOR YEARS WHEN SALES TAX STARTED TURNING, WE DID FURLOUGHS.
WE STARTED MAKING REDUCTIONS BECAUSE WE HAD TO STAY WITHIN BUDGET.
WE'VE DONE OUR BEST AND OUR PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATION, WORKING WITH THE ECONOMIST TO FORECAST AND PROJECTING, INCLUDING THE MANAGER'S BUDGET, WHAT WE HAVE, AND THAT'S WHAT WE BROUGHT FORWARD.
NOW IT'S FOR THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE IF THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OR IF IT NEEDS TO CHANGE.
>> HOW LONG HAVE WE BEEN WORKING WITH THIS ECONOMIST?
>> WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THIS ECONOMIST FOR FOUR YEARS AND IT'S BEEN A TOUGH FOUR YEARS.
NOBODY EXPECTED A PANDEMIC ONCE IN A CENTURY, TOP OF SITUATION SO HE HAS MISSED HIS PROJECTIONS.
ABSOLUTELY. BUT I THINK EVERYBODY HAS MISSED THEIR PROJECTIONS.
NOBODY ANTICIPATED THAT WE WOULD HAVE THE DOWNTURN THAT WE
[07:40:02]
DID BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC AND NOBODY ANTICIPATED THAT WE WOULD HAVE UNPRECEDENTED GROWTH AS WE CAME OUT OF THE PANDEMIC WITH PENT-UP DEMAND, THE INFLATION DROVE THE NUMBERS UP, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO CONTINUE.>> SO I ASSUME THIS ECONOMIST DOES COME WITH CREDENTIALS AND UNDERSTANDING HOW THE ECONOMY WORKS? I HAVE AN ECONOMICS DEGREE, BUT I'M NOT AN ECONOMIST BY ANY MEANS.
BUT WHAT I DO UNDERSTAND IS THAT WE WOULD BE COMING AFTER YOU IF YOUR PROJECTIONS WERE REALLY OFF.
IF YOU KEPT THIS PRECEDENTED HIGH AMOUNT AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT CRASHES, WE WOULD BE LOOKING TO YOU AND SAY, WHAT DID YOU DO? I UNDERSTAND THIS IS TWO MILLION, BUT TO ME, I WOULD RATHER HAVE THE FROSTING THAT YOU GET EXTRA THAN VERSUS HAVING TO CUT INTO THE CAKE WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE IT.
I HAVE TALKED TO PEOPLE, AND PROJECTIONS FROM THE STATE ARE SHOWING DIFFERENTLY.
BUT WHEN YOU TALK TO YOUR FINANCIAL PLANNER, EVERYBODY IS SAYING GET READY BECAUSE THERE IS GOING TO BE A SWING.
THAT'S WHEN WE DID THE FURLOUGHS BECAUSE ALL OF A SUDDEN IT TANKED AND IT CAME OUT OF NOWHERE.
SO I'M NOT INCLINED TO SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE I DO THINK IT'S ENRON FAILING.
WE'RE GOING TO INFLATE STUFF BECAUSE WE THINK IT'S GOING TO BE THAT WAY.
I WOULD RATHER GO WITH A PROFESSIONAL WHO WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH AND TALKING TO THE PROFESSIONALS WHO WE ARE PAYING TO SAY THIS IS WHAT WE THINK BECAUSE WE ALWAYS DO IN MID-YEAR ADJUSTMENT AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
I APPRECIATE THE THOUGHT IN LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT WAY AND INCREASING IT, BUT I'M JUST NOT INCLINED TO GO AGAINST WHAT WE HAVE ASKED OUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF TO PUT FORTH.
>> IF I GO BACK TO CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN AND HER AMENDMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO HASN'T SAID ANYTHING ON THIS ONE WHO WANTS TO? OKAY. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK THAT YOU'VE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE FORECAST HAS BEEN WRONG A LOT, NOT JUST A LITTLE BIT THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
I AGREE, NOBODY COULD HAVE SEEN COVID COMING AND WE DIDN'T KNOW EVEN HOW TO REACT TO THAT.
HOWEVER, TO GO FROM 15 PERCENT INCREASE TO FOUR WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC EVENT HAPPENING IS VERY DRAMATIC.
I CONSIDERED A MUCH HIGHER NUMBER THAN TWO MILLION, BUT THIS IS THE MOST CONSERVATIVE THING I COULD THINK OF TO DO.
IF WE START THINKING THAT WE WOULD HAVE A FURLOUGH SITUATION, THE TRUTH IS WE WOULD NEVER ADOPT THIS BUDGET.
WE WOULD NEVER INCREASE THIS BUDGET WELL OVER $100 MILLION.
SO I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ACTUALLY THINKS THAT THE WORST IS COMING.
THE THING IS THAT ONCE WE SET THE TAX RATE, WE CAN'T GIVE IT BACK.
ALL WE'RE GOING TO DO IS HAVE THIS INCREASE OF SALES TAX.
YOU'RE RIGHT, WE'LL MAKE A BUDGET AMENDMENT, AND IT'S JUST EVERYBODY'S PET PROJECT WILL GET FUNDED.
THAT'S THE WAY THE STILL WORKS AND THAT'S THE WAY IT'S WORKED EVERY YEAR THAT WE'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL AND YOU GUYS ALL KNOW IT.
SO THE PRUDENT THING TO DO IS TO TRY TO HAVE A MORE ACCURATE NUMBER AND NOT OVERTAX PEOPLE FOR THINGS THAT WE DON'T ACTUALLY NEED TO SPEND IT ON.
THAT'S WHY IT'S INCREASING JUST TWO MILLION IF THE PROJECTION NOW IS 427 INSTEAD OF 432.
THAT STILL MEANS WE'RE GOING TO GET 20 MILLION EXTRA IN REVENUE THAT WE NEVER EVEN BUDGETED FOR, 20 MILLION.
THIS IS A LOT OF MONEY THAT WE'RE PROBABLY STILL GOING TO HAVE IN EXCESS.
SO I HOPE YOU WILL SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE WISHES TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT NUMBER 41 AS WRITTEN IN YOUR PACKET.
>> YES. CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 41.
>> I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I DO BELIEVE THIS TO BE FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE, AND I THINK IT WAS ARTICULATED VERY WELL BY COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON.
I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.
I THINK THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE CUTS, IT SHOULD BE MUCH MORE THOUGHTFUL AND INTENTIONAL WITH ITS FUNDING SOURCE.
THIS SEEMS TO BE IRRESPONSIBLE. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE ELSE WOULD WISHES TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER 41 AS WRITTEN IN YOUR PACKETS? SEEING NONE, LET'S SEE THE CARDS FOR ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS.
>> IF IT'S SIX CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT FAILS. MR. MAYOR.
>> NEXT AMENDMENT, IF THERE ARE ANY.
CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR MOTION.
[07:45:11]
I NEED YOUR MICROPHONE ON.>> SORRY. THIS IS AMENDMENT NUMBER 44.
IT'S ACTUALLY TO SPEND $5 MILLION TO DO AN EFFICIENCY STUDY.
NOW, I WAS ONLY GOING TO PUT THIS FORWARD IF WE CAN CONFIRM THAT WE HAVE $5 MILLION IN TAX REDUCTION.
>> SECOND, THE WAY THIS WORKS IS I'M TRYING MOTION, SECOND, THEN DISCUSSION SO IS THAT THE MOTION?
>> THE MOTION IS TO SPEND $5 MILLION ON EFFICIENCY AUDIT IF WE HAVE REDUCED OUR TAXES ALREADY BY FIVE MILLION.
>> THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE. NO ONE'S CALCULATE THAT IN ADVANCE HERE BECAUSE NOW'S THE TIME TO MAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND NOT TO GO AHEAD.
>> IT'S YOUR AMENDMENTS THUS FAR TODAY, INCLUDING 28A YOU'VE REDUCED 7,056,000.
>> THEN YES, THAT'S MY MOTION.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED DISCUSSION, CHAIRMAN, MENDELSOHN YOU HAVE READINESS FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. THE POINT OF THIS MOTION IS REALLY TO SET US UP FOR FUTURE SUCCESS.
I THINK THAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM SO MANY DIFFERENT COUNCIL MEMBERS, EITHER TO BRING FORWARD THEIR OWN AMENDMENT FOR ITEMS THAT I BELIEVE COULD HAVE REDUCTIONS OR HAVE WEIGHED IN WITH OTHER ITEMS. WHAT WE NEED IS LONG TERM TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN BECOME A MORE EFFICIENT ORGANIZATION.
EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT COULD BENEFIT FROM HAVING OUTSIDE PROFESSIONALS WHO SPECIALIZE IN THIS WORK.
LOOK AT THE CRAZY FLOWCHARTS THAT WE SEE ALL THROUGH OUR ORGANIZATION ON HOW A PROCESS WORKS AND MAP THEM OUT, AND SIMPLIFY THEM.
THERE'S SO MANY WAYS THAT WE CAN CUT OUR BUDGET WITHOUT REDUCING SERVICES.
I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU ONE VERY SIMPLE EXAMPLE.
I HAD A RESIDENT CALL ME AND THEY WERE VERY FRUSTRATED ABOUT GETTING A GARAGE SALE PERMIT.
YOU HAVE TO COME IN PERSON OR YOU HAVE TO EMAIL SEVEN DAYS IN ADVANCE.
YOU PAY $10 BUT ALL WE REALLY HAD TO DO WAS HAVE A WEBSITE WITH A LOOKUP FUNCTION.
IT WOULD SEE IF YOU'D HAD A GARAGE SALE ALREADY TWICE THIS YEAR AND IF IT DIDN'T, IT WOULD SEND YOU THE PERMIT AND YOU PAY THE $10 PROBABLY IN THE OTHER ORDER.
THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE 24/7 ON-DEMAND.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE A STAFF MEMBER WHO IS THEN LOOKING AT A BOOK TO SEE IF IT WAS ON THE ADDRESS LIST.
THIS IS EXACTLY HOW WE ACTUALLY ARE PROVIDING A BETTER SERVICE WITH LESS COST.
THIS IS THE WORK THAT AN EFFICIENCY AUDIT WOULD PROVIDE AND I DID CHECK WITH A COUPLE OF FIRMS THAT DO THIS TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE COSTS WOULD BE.
I THINK OUR LARGEST DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING DPD AND GFR, WOULD BE THE GREAT PLACES TO START.
I'M OPEN TO WHERE THEY ARE, AND PERHAPS THAT WOULD BE A TASK FOR GPFM.
BUT I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, I CAN'T IMAGINE ANY ORGANIZATION I'VE EVER BEEN PART OF NEEDS THIS MORE DESPERATELY.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHES BE ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER 44 AS WRITTEN IN YOUR PACKETS?
>> YES, CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER NUMBER 44.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WOULD SAY THAT EFFICIENCY STUDIES, OF COURSE, ARE GREAT.
I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT I KNOW WE'VE HAD MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF EFFICIENCY STUDIES, INCLUDING A KPMG STUDY FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT WE HAVE YET TO IMPLEMENT.
THE FACT THAT THIS IS COMING FROM A SOURCE THAT IS SPEAKING AT EVERY CHANCE POSSIBLE AT HOW MUCH WE NEED TO SAVE MONEY.
A $5 MILLION INVESTMENT IN THIS AT THIS TIME, TO ME IS ABSOLUTELY CONTRADICTING TO THE OVERALL MESSAGE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SEND, WHICH IS WASTEFUL SPENDING.
JUST YET AGAIN, ANOTHER EFFICIENCY STUDY, ANOTHER CONSULTANT GROUP THAT WOULD BE HIRED FOR MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR CONTRACT AND YET WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EFFICIENCY IN SPENDING TAX DOLLARS.
THIS IS IRRESPONSIBLE I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS AT THIS TIME AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A BETTER WAY THROUGH POLICY WITH US AS
[07:50:02]
A BODY TO WORK THROUGH COMMITTEE AND FIGURE OUT OTHER METHODS THAN AN ARBITRARY NUMBER THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP WITH REAL NODE JUSTIFICATION. THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR.>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON FOUR AGAINST ITEM AMENDMENT NUMBER 44? I DON'T SEE ANYONE, SO WE'LL SHOW THE CARDS.
SHOW YOUR CARDS IF YOU SUPPORT THE MOTION.
>> WITH FOUR CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT PASS MR. MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY MORE AMENDMENTS, MEMBERS? THIS IS IT. MR. GRACEY?
>> NOTED. YOU DON'T HAVE TO DRAW THEM GO.
THEY WERE NEVER MOVED, BUT IT'S GOOD TO KNOW WHO THEY ARE THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING ELSE.
YES. YOU HAVE THREE MORE? ARE YOU GOING TO LAY THEM OUT TOGETHER OR SEPARATELY? LET'S HEAR THE MOTION.
>> AMENDMENTS 19, 20, AND 21, 19 I MOVED TO ELIMINATE THE NEW OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RESTORE THE POSITIONS FUNDING BACK TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING, P&V.
TO DO SO I WOULD REDUCE THE ALLOCATION BY $43,062 WITH THE REDUCTION USED AS A TAX RATE REDUCTION, 20 IS TO REDUCE THE BUDGET TO THE 2022, '23 FORECASTS TO THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION, PLUS ALLOWANCES FOR REQUIRED CONTRACTUAL SALARY BENEFIT IN PENSION INCREASES IN THE AMOUNT OF $474,288 USE OF FUNDS, DECREASING THE TAX RATE AND 21, TO REDUCE THE BUDGET OF THE OFFICE OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS TO THE CURRENT 22, 23 LEVEL PLUS THE REQUIRED CONTRACTUAL SALARY BENEFIT IN PENSION INCREASES.
USING THOSE FUNDS FOR REDUCTION OF THE TAX RATE.
JACK, CAN YOU GIVE ME THE CURRENT FIGURE FOR THAT?
>> CAN WE JUST SAY IN THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNTS OR IN THE AMOUNTS THAT WOULD BE NECESSITATED IF YOU MADE THOSE CUTS SO WE DON'T HAVE TO.
>> THAT'S THE MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND?
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND. BEFORE WE GO TO ANY DISCUSSION AS ONE AND CLARIFY WHAT I WAS TRYING TO BE PERMISSIVE LAST TIME THAT THEY MAY HAVE CREATED CONFUSION.
IF YOU HAVE A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ONE OF THESE, THEY'RE LAID OUT NOW, THEY'VE BEEN SECONDED NOW, SO CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA AND ANYONE ELSE, AS LONG AS YOU KNOW, NOW'S THE TIME I WANT YOU TO DO THE AMENDMENTS IF YOU HAVE THEM, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO JUST BRING THEM ALL UP IN SEQUENTIAL ORDER FOR A VOTE ONCE WE END.
THE 531 WON'T APPLY TO ALL THREE, SO YOU ONLY HAVE FIVE MINUTES FOR ANY OF THE THREE.
WITH THAT, MR. RIDLEY, DO YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? I ASSUME YOU DO.
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON ALL THREE AMENDMENTS TO ANY OF THE THREE ARE WELCOME AT THIS POINT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WITH REGARD TO 19, THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE MADE UP OF, I BELIEVE IT'S FIVE FTES WHO ARE CURRENTLY IN THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS, ECODEV IN PARTICULAR.
THIS JUST SEEMS TO BE CREATING ANOTHER LEVEL OF BUREAUCRACY, AND WE NEED SIMILAR OPERATIONS TO BE IN THE SAME DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS COORDINATION OF EFFORTS.
I DON'T SEE A NEED TO SPLIT OFF A SEPARATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FROM THE EXISTING DEPARTMENT.
TWENTY IS TO ONCE AGAIN LIVE WITHIN THE CURRENT '22, '23 BUDGET AND STILL PRESERVING INCREASES TO SALARY BENEFIT AND PENSION INCREASES FOR EXISTING EMPLOYEES.
AND THE SAME WITH THE OFFICE OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS DOING A GREAT JOB, JUST LIVING WITHIN THEIR EXISTING BUDGET PLUS THE REQUIRED INCREASES.
CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON ANY OF THE THREE.
>> THANK YOU. THIS IS ON EACH ONE OF THE THREE.
COULD THE STAFF FROM THOSE, PLEASE EXPLAIN THE IMPACT OF THIS AMENDMENT PASSING.
[07:55:02]
>> I'M SORRY, I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW FROM THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS NEW, WHICH I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF IT IS TO CREATE AN EFFICIENCY HERE.
IS THAT CORRECT, MR. CITY MANAGER?
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. THE QUESTION IS THE IMPACT OF ALL THREE THAT HE'S PROPOSING?
>> YES, BECAUSE I HAVE TO ASK ABOUT ALL RIGHT NOW?
>> BUT I CAN'T ASK LATER. IT'S NOW OR NEVER.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I DO MY HOMEWORK.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU ARE CORRECT, THIS IS REALLY TO CREATE EFFICIENCIES, PARTICULARLY AROUND INTERNAL COORDINATION AND EXTERNAL ACTIVITIES OUT IN THE COMMUNITY WITH THE RESPECT FOR ADVANCING THE EQUITABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS, I THINK THAT THE COUNCIL HAS SET OUT.
THE UNIT WILL WORK PRIMARILY TO ADVANCE REAL ESTATE PROJECTS, PARTICULARLY IN HISTORICALLY DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND PRIORITY AREAS DEFINED IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICY AND RACIAL EQUITY PLAN, AS WELL AS OTHER CITY PLANS.
IT WILL BE A COORDINATED UNIT THAT WE'LL BE DOING THE WORK THAT I BELIEVE THEY ARE GAPS AND THAT WE'RE NOT DOING NOW.
THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE UNIT.
IT IS COMING FROM, AS YOU SEE EVEN IN THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FROM EXISTING DEPARTMENTS.
I WOULD JUST CALL I WON'T SAY THROW A FLAG ON THE FACT THAT I THINK THE INTENT OR THE ACTUAL IN RESULT OF THE AMENDMENT, IS TO REDUCE IT BY $43,000.
THE NOTION THAT OPERATIONALLY A BUDGET AMENDMENT IS GOING TO ADVISE AND TELL ME WHERE MY STAFF NEEDS TO WORK, WHO THEY WORK FOR, AND HOW THEY PERFORM THEIR FUNCTIONS, I THINK IS BEYOND THE BUDGET AMENDMENT PROCESS.
ACTUALLY IT'S DOWN INTO THE SPECIFIC WEEDS OF THE OPERATION OF WHAT WE DO HERE AT THE CITY.
THAT'S TELLING ME WHAT OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND OR ACTIVITIES WE SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT BE DOING WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT AND WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED.
NO DIFFERENT THAN CREATING THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION OR MOVING IT BACK INTO PLANNING URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK THERE MAY BE DIFFERENCES IN IDEOLOGY ON WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THE DEPARTMENTS, BUT THOSE ISSUES AND THINGS AROUND HOW I ORGANIZE REALLY RELATE TO MY FUNCTION AS THE CITY MANAGER.
SO I APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENT, BUT THEY WORK IN THE EFFORT AND THE OUTCOME AND THE POLICY INTENT IS REALLY TO REALLY MOVE FORWARD THE CITY MANAGER, AS WELL AS THE COUNCILS AND TENSIONS AROUND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICY, FOR WHICH AGAIN, WAS NEW AND DIFFERENT AND IS FOCUSED IN AREAS AGAIN, THAT WE HISTORICALLY DON'T PUT A FRONT FOOT FORWARD AND GO OUT AND DO ACTIVITIES IN.
AGAIN, I THINK THE AMENDMENT IN ITS ESSENCE IS ABOUT $43,000.
BUT TOO, I GUESS THROUGH THE AMENDMENT, SAY MOVE THE POSITIONS BACK TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR MOVE THEM BACK TO PUT THE WORK AND THE BODY OF WORK WILL STILL BE DONE.
I GET THE INTENTION, BUT IT'S REALLY ABOUT FINDING A WAY TO ELEVATE THE ROLES OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND CREATE A SPACE, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO WORKING DIRECTLY FOR ME TO BE TARGETED AND SPECIFIC ABOUT IMPLEMENTING THE EQUITABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY.
THAT WAS THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF MOVING THEM CLOSER TO WHERE I BELIEVE THE ATTENTION WILL BE PAID FOR AND WORKING IN SPECIFIC AND DISCRETE AREAS TO DO THINGS WE'VE NEVER DONE IN THE CITY BEFORE WHERE THERE ARE GAPS AROUND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PARTICULARLY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
AGAIN, I'M SPEAKING TO THAT, I THINK I SOUND LIKE I CARE ABOUT IT BECAUSE I DO BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD NEED.
>> CAN I ASK ANOTHER QUESTION? IF THIS OFFICE IS SUCCESSFUL, WILL IT RESULT IN GENERATING ADDITIONAL PROPERTY OR SALES TAX INCOME FOR THE CITY?
>> IT WILL AND IT WILL BE WORKING INTENTIONALLY AROUND SPACES AND PLACES THAT NO ONE IS ACTUALLY GRAVITATING TO, BUT TO CREATE ENERGY, TO CREATE EXCITEMENT AND TO DO THE HEAVY LIFTING THAT SOME OF OUR DEPARTMENTS DON'T HAVE THE TIME OR CAPACITY TO DO.
THESE INDIVIDUALS IN THIS UNIT WILL SPEND THE TIME WITH THOSE NASCENT DEVELOPERS WITH BRINGING TOGETHER COLLECTIVE MINDS AROUND TRYING TO REVITALIZE AREAS THAT HAVE HISTORICALLY NOT BEEN A PLACE WHERE ANYBODY HAS LOOKED TO GO AND ADVANCED PROJECTS AND TO GERMINATE PROJECTS THAT I THINK MANY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE TALKED ABOUT.
BUT THERE'S NOBODY DOING THE WORK AND THE HEAVY LIFTING AROUND, WHETHER IT'S CREATING A WAREHOUSE DISTRICT AND TURNING THAT INTO SOMETHING ELSE.
THERE'S NO ONE THAT WAKES UP EVERY DAY THAT WILL JUST FOCUS ON THOSE AREAS AND THOSE PROJECTS.
THAT'S WHAT THIS UNIT IS INTENDED TO DO AND I BELIEVE IT WILL BE SUCCESSFUL AND IT WILL HELP REDEVELOP AND DO PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTIES THAT HAVE SAT DORMANT FOR YEARS BECAUSE THERE'S NOBODY WORKING WITHIN THOSE ZONES TO DO THAT WORK.
>> THAT'S GREAT. HOPEFULLY, IT WILL ADDRESS SOME OF THE REAL ESTATE QUESTIONS AS WELL.
I'D LIKE TO ASK THE OFFICE OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS.
THANK YOU, MR. ODEN, FOR YOUR WORK.
COULD YOU SHARE WITH US THE IMPACT OF THIS THIS PROPOSED DECREASE TO YOUR BUDGET? YES, MA'AM. KEVIN ODEN, DIRECTOR OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS.
[08:00:02]
WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS BY THE NUMBERS, IN REALITY, WE HAVE ABOUT $2.8 MILLION IN OUR BUDGET THAT WE CAN TOUCH.THIS AMENDMENT WOULD KNOCK OUT ABOUT HALF OF THAT DISCRETIONARY MONEY.
WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS ABILITY TO DO ADDITIONAL OUTDOOR PUBLIC LIGHTING ENHANCEMENTS, WHICH ACROSS THE CITY THIS YEAR WHERE WE HAVE UPGRADED LIGHTING FROM THE OLD HALOGEN OR EVEN BROKEN BULBS TO LED, WE'VE SEEN A 17 PERCENT DECREASE IN NIGHTTIME CRIME AND ALL THOSE AREAS.
WE WOULD ALSO REMOVE CERTAIN ACCESS TO BEHAVIORAL AND MENTAL HEALTHCARE.
THE BIGGEST TOOL RIGHT NOW IN THE CITY FOR BEHAVIORAL AND MENTAL HEALTH OR HISTORICALLY, HAS BEEN JAILS OR HOSPITALS.
OUR SERVICES GET THE ABILITY TO GET PEOPLE INTO THAT ROOT CAUSE TREATMENT, METRO KARYOTYPE CLINICS, OR OTHER COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS THAT CAN SERVE FOLKS LONG TERM.
ON TOP OF THAT, WE TALKED EARLIER TODAY ABOUT BLIGHT, VACANT LOTS AND OTHER REMEDIATION.
THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THIS COUNCIL HAS SAID IS VERY IMPORTANT TO IT.
IT'S BEEN HIGHLIGHTED IN THE CITY MANAGER'S REAL CHANGE INITIATIVE AS WELL AS THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON SAFE COMMUNITY.
THAT WOULD HAMSTRING OUR ABILITY TO DO THAT.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS COMBINED MAKE OUR CITY LESS SAFE IF WE'RE UNABLE TO DO IT.
AS THE CHIEF TALKS ABOUT ALL THE TIME, THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS WE CAN DO BY MOVING AROUND RESOURCES AND OFFICERS TO LOWER CRIME, BUT ULTIMATELY THAT'S AN ADVIL.
THE WORK WE DO IS THE MORE LONG-TERM AND SUSTAINABLE CHANGES TO PLACES WHERE WE CAN RAISE QUALITY OF LIFE WHILE ALSO LOWERING CRIMINAL OFFENSE INCIDENTS, AND THE NUMBERS OF THE AREAS WE'VE WORKED IN THE CITY HAVE SHOWN THAT.
IN OUR HIGHEST RISK AREAS OF THE CITY, THESE ARE 30-YEAR AREAS OF HISTORIC UNDER INVESTMENT AND DOING THE SAME THING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY WISE.
WE'VE LOWERED CRIME BY 15 PERCENT THIS YEAR, JUST BY BEING PRESENT AND WORKING PROPERTIES AND ENGAGING LANDLORDS AND PROPERTY OWNERS IN A PRESSURIZED WAY RIGHT, SO THAT WE'RE CHANGING THE ENVIRONMENTS AROUND SOME OF THESE HIGH-CRIME AREAS.
HOPE THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION. HAPPY TO GO ANY FURTHER IF YOU NEED TO, BUT WE'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME TONIGHT.
>> IT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY AS MUCH AS.
>> GAME CHANGER. WE'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED EQUITY AND INCLUSION AND UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING OUR CITY FORWARD.
WHAT I'M SEEING FROM THIS AND FROM SO MANY OF THESE IS THERE'S REALLY TWO DIFFERENT WORLDVIEWS IN THIS BUDGET.
THERE'S THE WORLDVIEW THAT SAYS, WE CAN GROW THE PIE, WE CAN BRING IN MORE MONEY, IT BOTH IN PROPERTY TAX AND SALES TAX BY INVESTING IN OUR RESIDENTS AND THEIR FUTURES.
OR WE CAN CUT THINGS DOWN SO THAT EVERYBODY'S IN A DOG-EAT-DOG WORLD AND WHERE PUBLIC SAFETY DRIVES EVERYTHING THAT WE DO AND IT'S ONLY ESSENTIAL SERVICES.
I REALLY THINK THAT IT'S A DECISION FOR OUR COUNCIL DOWN THE ROAD, ULTIMATELY, OF WHAT LEADERS WE FEEL LIKE WE WERE ELECTED TO BE.
WHETHER WE'RE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO BRING THE CITY FORWARD OR TURN IT BACK TO WHAT CITIES USED TO BE WHERE THEY WERE ONLY THE VERY BASIC OF SERVICE.
IN FACT, INTERESTINGLY, HISTORICALLY, EVEN POLICE FORCES STARTED OFF THE REASON THAT POLICE OFFICERS EVEN GOT INTO THE TRAFFIC BUSINESSES WHEN CARS CAME ABOUT AND THEY WERE THE ONLY PEOPLE WITH ENOUGH AUTHORITY TO STOP PEOPLE WHO COULD AFFORD TO BUY CARS.
THAT GREW INTO OBVIOUSLY THE VERY IMPORTANT SERVICE THAT IT IS TODAY.
I BELIEVE THAT DALLAS HAS HUGE POTENTIAL AND THAT THE MORE WE INVEST IN THINGS LIKE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS THAT ARE HOLISTIC, EQUITY AND INCLUSION SO THAT EVERYBODY HAS A CHANCE TO EARN MONEY, AND RAISE A FAMILY, AND BUY A HOME.
THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO MAKE DALLAS THE CITY THAT MAKE US PROUD, NOT CUTTING OUR WAY INTO THE FUTURE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> MR. GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES.
>> SURE. I JUST WANTED TO SAY AS FAR AS THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS ONE BECAUSE I WAS EXCITED ABOUT THIS.
ONE, WE'VE BEEN TALKING A LOT ABOUT THE BUDGET AND WHERE IT WAS AND WHERE IT'S BEING, WHAT YOU'RE EXPERIENCING IS IN THE EVOLUTION OF SERVICES IS WHAT I THINK.
THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE OF A MUCH NEEDED SERVICE, PARTICULARLY IN SOUTHERN DALLAS WHEN YOU HAVE PROPERTIES THAT AREN'T MARKETED AND THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY AND THERE'S A LOT OF ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE IDEAS, BUT DON'T KNOW HOW TO ACTIVATE THOSE IDEAS.
AN OFFICE LIKE THIS WILL HELP US DEVELOP MORE AND MARKET MORE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN SOUTHERN DALLAS.
[08:05:04]
FOR THAT REASON, I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS ONE OR REALLY ANY OF THEM, BUT [INAUDIBLE].>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST 19,20 OR 21?
>> CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ANY OF THE THREE.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO COUNCILMAN SCHULTZ FOR GETTING SOME CLARITY TO A LOT OF THIS.
THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IS EXTREMELY CRITICAL FOR THE GROWTH OF SOUTH DALLAS AND SOUTHERN DALLAS JUST AS A COUNCILMAN GRACEY JUST MENTIONED.
FOR THAT $43,000 WHEN I TALKED ABOUT A MINUSCULE CUT, I THINK THAT WHAT I WAS REALLY REFERRING TO IS THE FACT THAT WE NEED TO BE WEIGHING OUT WHAT THAT RETURN ON INVESTMENT IS.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S A BIG ENOUGH IMPACT TO THE RESIDENTS TO USE THIS SMALL OF AN AMOUNT IN A CUT VERSUS THE IMPACT THAT THIS ACTUALLY WILL MATERIALIZE IF WE INVEST IN THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
IN ADDITION TO THAT OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION, A CUT LIKE THIS WOULD BE ALSO VERY CONTRADICTORY TO THE DIRECTION THAT WE HAVE HAD STAFF WORKING TOWARDS AND THE PRIORITIES THAT WE'VE SET AS A COUNCIL AND A CITY.
IT SPEAKS TO A LOT OF WHAT IS ALREADY REFLECTING IN THE BUDGET THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING AT THE END OF THIS MONTH.
IN FACT, I THINK IT WOULD PUT US BACKWARDS AND I WOULD SAY THE SAME THING FOR THE OFFICE OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS.
THERE HAVE BEEN INCREDIBLE RESULTS OUT OF THIS OFFICE.
IT'S BEEN RIGHT IN LINE WITH THE DIRECTION THAT WE AS A COUNCIL HAVE SET SEVERAL YEARS AGO ABOUT RE-IMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY AND THINKING OUTSIDE OF THE BOX, LOOKING AT EFFICIENCIES AND THOSE EFFICIENCIES NOT ONLY HAVE HAD AN IMPACT IN PUBLIC SAFETY ACROSS OUR CITY, IT'S ALSO HAD AN IMPACT POSITIVELY TO THE RESOURCES THAT ARE BEING USED IN DPD AND TAKING OFF THE BURDEN SOLELY ON OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND HELPING BRIDGE SOME OF THE GAPS THAT HAVE EXISTED IN THE COMMUNITY WITH SOME OF THE ENFORCEMENT METHODS.
I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE COLLEAGUES TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE OFFICE OF INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER TWO.
I WILL NOT SUPPORT ANY OF THESE THREE.
I THINK THAT WE ARE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION WITH THESE INVESTMENTS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON 19,20 OR 21.
>> THANK YOU. I BELIEVE I SUPPORT THE STATEMENT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA JUST MADE.
I'M PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT ANY WHAT I CALL A TEXT, BUT JUST THE ROLLING BACK THE HANDS OF TIME WITH EQUITY INCLUSION.
WE'RE IN SUCH A STATE NOW WHERE IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT YOUR LIFE EXPERIENCE IS ON A DAY TO DAY.
BUT IF WE BEGIN TO TURN BACK THE HANDS OF TIME, WE'RE GOING TO ROLL OURSELVES ALL THE WAY BACK AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT LEGS ON JIM CROW AND HE'S GOING TO BE RIGHT BACK IN HERE IN DALLAS, TEXAS.
WE CANNOT AFFORD TO WRAP OUR ARMS AROUND THOSE TYPES OF CUTS THAT HOLD BACK THE MOMENTUM THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO GAIN.
I CAN TELL YOU WHEN YOU SEE FOLKS IN SOME OF THESE MAJOR CITIES WHERE THEY'RE JUST SHOOTING PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE AND THEIR COLOR, IT'S REAL.
THAT SAME MENTALITY APPROACHES US WHEN YOU FOLKS ARE TRYING TO START A BUSINESS, THEY ARE TRYING TO MOVE INTO NEW NEIGHBORHOODS.
THIS IS REAL, AND UNLESS YOU'VE LIVED IT, YOU SEE IT ON TELEVISION.
I SEE IT ON TELEVISION, BUT I KNOW PEOPLE WHO'VE LIVED IT AND I LIVE IT.
I THINK WE'VE MADE GREAT STRIDES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RACIAL EQUITY AND INCLUSION.
WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND REVISIT THE VOTE THAT WE MADE, I THINK AT LEAST 13 OF US MADE IT TO COMMIT TO RACIAL EQUITY AND INCLUSION ACROSS THE BOARD.
WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON, BUT I THINK OUR VOTE WAS A COMMITMENT TO MOVE FORWARD AND TO NOT GO BACK TO THE SYSTEMIC PRACTICES THAT CRIPPLES, I KNOW COMMUNITIES LIKE I HAVE AND IT CRIPPLES US SO MUCH, AND THEN WE'D BE GETTING THIS BOND SEASON THAT WE'RE IN NOW AND BUDGET, THEN IT'S HARD FOR US TO GET THE EQUITY THAT WE REALLY NEED.
EQUITY IS DIFFERENT FROM EQUALITY.
I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK ON THAT.
WE CAN NOT PUT LEGS ON JIM CROW.
LET HIM STAY, AT LEAST CRIPPLED.
[08:10:01]
HE BECOMES VERY STRONG.DALLAS HAS A REAL DEEP HISTORY ON THIS VERY TOPIC.
IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE ACCOMMODATION, THAT WOULD GIVE YOU A LITTLE LOOK INTO DALLAS.
I'LL GIVE YOU ONE TO READ ON A GYM SHOES AND COMMISSIONER PRICE WILL BE AT LEAST HAPPY THAT YOU HAVE PICKED IT UP, BUT IT'S REAL.
I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THIS CITY MANAGER AND HIS STAFF HAD TRIED TO CREATE REAL-TIME SOLUTIONS FOR REAL-TIME REACTIONS AND BEHAVIORS.
THEN I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT LIKE THAT AND I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT ANY OF THIS BECAUSE I NEED THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT NEED TO BE CLEAN.
MR. OWEN KNOWS, I PROBABLY GAVE HIM A HARD TIME BECAUSE MY CONSTITUENTS GIVE ME A HARD TIME, AND SAME THING WITH MR. FORTUNE.
I KNOW HE PROBABLY HATES TO SEE ME WHEN I CALL, BUT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS [LAUGHTER]
>> WHEN THE FOLKS SAYING WE WANT THE LIGHTS, WE WANT THE SAFETY, WE WANT THE EQUITY, WE WANT THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CREATION AND INCLUSION WITH SMALL BUSINESSES, JUST NEW IDEAS, JUST CREATIVITY SO THAT WE CAN BE A PART OF THIS GREAT CITY AND HELP THIS CITY BE WHAT WE SAY IT IS IN THE NINTH LARGEST CITY THAT WE ARE PROUD.
WE ARE VERY POWERFUL IN THIS SPACE WHERE WE ARE.
I'M VERY PROUD TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE IN THE NINTH LARGEST CITY.
WE'RE SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT PERHAPS MAKING DECISIONS THAT WILL EITHER HURT OR HELP.
I WANT TO BE A PART OF THE SOLUTION THAT HELPS ESTABLISH THIS CITY.
WE'RE ALWAYS PROUD TO SAY, I'M DALLAS, TEXAS AND I'M DALLAS PROUD.
>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT.
THAT'S ORIGINAL FROM DISTRICT 4. BUT I'M VERY SERIOUS.
THANK YOU MAYOR, AND THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR INDULGING MY REMARKS THIS EVENING.
>> CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES ON AMENDMENTS 19, 20 AND 21.
>> THANK YOU. I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENTS.
IT SEEMS THAT AT THIS LATE HOUR, THERE'S A LOT OF BIG STATEMENTS BEING MADE.
I'M GOING TO ADD MY TWO CENTS INTO IT.
WHEN I CAME ON THIS COUNCIL, A $3.5 BILLION BUDGET.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE A $4.5 BILLION BUDGET WITH A $4.63 BILLION BUDGET PROPOSED TO US.
THESE AMENDMENTS ARE JUST SAYING PLEASE STAY WHERE YOU ARE AT YOUR RECORD HIGH BUDGET EVER OF 4.5 BILLION, JUST THESE SMALL AMOUNTS.
WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBER SAY THINGS THAT I DO FEEL LIKE I NEED TO ANSWER, WHICH IS THERE'S SOME NICE DREAMS ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT DALLAS TO BE.
WELL, I WANT DALLAS TO BE WONDERFUL THINGS ALSO, BUT I ALSO WANT PEOPLE TO STAY HERE.
I WANT THEM TO THRIVE HERE. YOU KNOW WHAT? OUR CITY HAS HAD THE LEAST POPULATION GROWTH OF ANY OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
THINK ABOUT THAT. PEOPLE ARE INTENTIONALLY NOT CHOOSING TO COME HERE.
THERE'S A REASON AND YOU SHOULD THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT MIGHT BE.
I DO THINK THERE'S DIFFERENT WORLDVIEWS ON THIS COUNCIL.
SOME PEOPLE WANT TO CONTINUE TO TAX AND GROW A VERY SLOW AND INEFFICIENT GOVERNMENT.
OTHER PEOPLE WOULD LIKE A VERY EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT THAT LETS PEOPLE KEEP THEIR OWN MONEY.
THEY CAN SOLVE A LOT OF THEIR OWN PROBLEMS IF THEY HAVE THOSE RESOURCES, BUT WE KEEP TAKING THEM.
I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THESE MOTIONS, AND I HOPE THAT WHEN WE HAVE OUR NEXT LONG BUDGET SESSION THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO CONTINUE CUTTING. THANK YOU.
>> SNOWS WON'T WORK. WE NEED TO PUSH FOR HER.
>> IS IT THE MAYOR PRO TEM OR THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM?
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.
>> THE MAYOR PRO TEM WANTS TO SPEAK.
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON 19,20,21.
>> I'M SITTING HERE TO JUST LISTEN ON THE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT AND WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE OFFICE OF EQUITY INCLUSION IN THE PUBLIC SAVINGS SOLUTION THAT FOR MANY YEARS WE ARE TRYING TO BUILD EQUITY AND TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM THE TALE OF TWO CITIES.
WE SIT AROUND HERE NOW DEBATING 43,000, 474, PROBABLY $ 0.5 MILLION AND LIFE IS MORE THAN $0.5 MILLION WE'RE TALKING ABOUT QUARTERS OF LIFE.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT HOW DO WE RARISH LIGHT IN CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD.
[08:15:04]
LIGHTS DOWN STREETS THAT WE NEVER HAD BEFORE AND THANK DEMERIT FOR PUTTING LIGHTS DOWN SINCE THE STOOL, ALMOST A HALF A MILE AND A HALF A MILLION DOLLAR JUST FOR LIGHT, BUT ALSO EQUITY.WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF EQUITY? I THINK CHAIRMAN TOM HAS ALWAYS SAID IF YOU'RE 7'2'' AND YOU'RE 5'4'' THEY'LL PULL A BOX, YOU STAND UP TRYING THEN YOU GOT TO EQUITY AND YOU'LL SEE OVER THE FENCE.
TO DO THIS IN THIS LATE HOUR, TRYING TO SAY ARE WE TRYING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE WITH HIS BUDGET? ARE WE TAKING AWAY DOLLARS THAT IS NOT GOING TO ADD VALUE TO THE CITY OF DALLAS? ARE WE TAKING AWAY DOLLARS THAT'S NOT GOING TO ADD VALUE TO THE PROPERTY TAX OR THE SALE TAX? ARE WE TAKING AWAY DOLLARS THAT PEOPLE ON THE STREET WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE A BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE? I LOOK AT THESE ITEMS HERE, THESE AMENDMENT AND WHY WOULD WE PUT OFFERS OF EQUITY INCLUSION IF WE DID NOT BELIEVE IN IT? WHY WE MADE A BUDGET, WHY WE CREATE THE OFFICE, WE DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT OFFICE.
I PREFER THAT HEY, JUST TAKE IT AWAY, THEN THAT WAY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE IT.
ARE WE GOING TO INVEST IN IT? I THINK RIGHT NOW WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS INVEST IN QUALITY LIVE IN EQUITY, ESPECIALLY IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF DALLAS.
HERE, NOT TO BE DISRESPECTED IN THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT IN DISTRICT 8 WE OUTGREW TO SIT IT OUT 2-1 IN 2018 2-1 POPULATION.
WE OUTGREW THE WHOLE CITY JUST IN MY DISTRICT, 2-1 POPULATION SO WE ARE GROWING.
PEOPLE ARE MOVING TO MY DISTRICT.
I HAVE GIVEN ANOTHER 5,000 PEOPLE THIS PASS.
WE ARE GROWING IN DISTRICT 8 BECAUSE WE GOT LAND AND PEOPLE HAVE HAD OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE PRIVATE VALUE GOING UP.
I LOOKED BACK THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO DURING THE PANDEMIC, WE HAD HOUSES SELLING FOR 175 AND NOW THEY'RE $450, $600,000.
I GOT PEOPLE RIGHT NOW BUILDING A HOUSE IN DISTRICT 8 IN THAT END OF THE CITY FOR ONE DIME TO BUILD SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES.
WE ARE GROWING, BUT I THINK WE NEED THESE TOOLS HERE.
BUT WE GOT TO USE THEM THE RIGHT WAY.
I THINK THESE ITEMS HERE, WE DO NEED THESE ITEMS OFFERED EQUITY INCLUSION.
I THINK THAT IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT FOR THE LAST TWO OR THREE YEARS, THAT'S WHAT WE'D BEEN VOTING ON.
WE ALL RAN A HARSH SO WE MAY VOTE ON EQUITY, INCLUSION.
WE ALL SAY HEY, WE GOT ONE CITY.
IT'S NOT NORTH AND THE SOUTH ANYMORE, WE ALWAYS SAID NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST, WE ARE ONE CITY.
LET US BE ONE DALLAS AND HOPEFULLY THAT MAYBE ONE DAY THE SOUTHERN PART OF DALLAS WILL BE CARRYING THE BURDEN OR THE PROFIT VALUE, THE SALE TAX BECAUSE THEY GOT TO GO SOUTH.
YOU CAN'T GO TOO MUCH TO THE NORTH, OR YOU HAVE A POPULATION OVERGRWOTH IN DENSITY.
BUT WE ARE GOING TO GROW BUT THE WAY WE GROW IS GROW TOGETHER AS ONE AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE THIS EQUITY INCLUSION AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO GO.
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO MOVE TO DALLAS.
THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE IN TO DALLAS.
I KNOW THEY MOVE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY MOVE IN FOR ONE REASON BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT'S THE BEST PLACE TO BE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
>> CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE-MINUTES, 19,20, AND 21.
THIS HAS BEEN A LONG DAY AND IT'S WHEN WE DO THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER IS ALWAYS LONG MEETINGS FOR US AND A LOT OF DEBATE AND A LOT OF GREAT DISCUSSION.
SOME THINGS DO GET PERSONAL AND THEY SHOULDN'T, AND I'M GUILTY OF IT IN THE PAST AND THIS BUDGET CYCLE I'M NOT LETTING ANY OF THAT HAPPEN.
IT'S PRETTY COOL TO SIT HERE ON THE OTHER SIDE WATCHING MY COLLEAGUES DEBATE SOME OF THESE ITEMS AND THEY SHOW OUR VALUES AS INDIVIDUALS, AS OUR DISTRICTS.
THERE'S 14 DISTRICTS, ONE AT-LARGE.
IT'S NOT EASY ALL THE TIME BECAUSE SOMETIMES OUR OWN PERSONAL BELIEFS DON'T MATCH OUR DISTRICT AND YOU GOT TO VOTE A CERTAIN WAY BECAUSE YOUR DISTRICT HAS TOLD YOU TO VOTE A CERTAIN WAY.
MR. MAYOR, I'M GOING TO TELL YOU THAT MY DISTRICT DISTRICT 6 OVERWHELMINGLY SHOWED UP, SUPPORTED, WE EVEN HAD TO HAVE EXTRA MEETINGS BECAUSE OF RESIDENTS IN
[08:20:01]
WEST DALLAS SCREAMING THAT THE RACIAL EQUITY PLAN WASN'T DONE YET.WE TOOK A PAUSE AND WE ADDED THOSE EXTRA MEETINGS.
>> BECAUSE THE PEOPLE ASKED AND WHAT I SAID WAS WE EVEN HOSTED THOSE MEETINGS IN SPANISH AND GOT THOSE THINGS PRINTED IN RECORD TIME.
WHY? BECAUSE THE PEOPLE DEMANDED IT AND THAT'S OUR JOB.
WE'RE NOT THE BOSS OF OUR RESIDENTS.
EVERYDAY, WHEN I GO TO DIFFERENT MEETINGS AND WHEN I SEE MY CONSTITUENTS, THEY GIGGLE SOMETIMES ESPECIALLY, NEW ONES AND I'M LIKE, HEY BOSS, WHAT'S GOING ON? WHAT'S MY MARCHING ORDERS TODAY? BECAUSE THAT'S HOW I TAKE THIS JOB.
TO SOME OF THESE CUTS, MR. MAYOR, YOU MADE IT YOUR MANTRA ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY.
THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS WAS CREATED BECAUSE OF A COMMITTEE THAT YOU FORMED OF RESIDENTS FROM ACROSS THE CITY THAT CAME AND TOLD US AND GAVE US A PLAN AND WE FUNDED IT.
I CAN TELL YOU, MR. MAYOR, THAT SOME OF THOSE LIGHTS WERE PUT UP BEFORE THAT EVEN EXISTED BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING I SAW BECAUSE MY RESIDENTS WERE DEMANDING IT, BECAUSE SOME OF OUR POLICIES ARE ANTIQUATED FOR SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
THOSE NEW LIGHTS MEANT EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD TO REDUCE CRIME IN PARTS OF WEST DALLAS, BATMAN LAKE, ARCADIA PARK, EVEN IN MIDWAY HOLLOW, MY MOST AFFLUENT NEIGHBORHOOD.
JUST HEARING THOSE STATS, 15 AND 17 PERCENT REDUCTION.
THAT'S PART OF WHAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE FOLKS CAMPAIGNED ON, WAS THAT WE ARE THE ONLY MAJOR CITY TO HAVE A CRIME REDUCTION.
THESE DOLLARS ARE WELL-SPENT AND WELL WORTH IT AND A POLICE OFFICER CANNOT DO WHAT THESE THINGS DO.
WE'RE HELPING OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WHEN IT COMES TO RACIAL EQUITY, WE OVERWHELMINGLY VOTED FOR THIS.
I'M NOT ABOUT TO STOP ON THIS.
THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR YOUR ELOQUENT WORDS ON WHAT IT'S LIKE AND WHAT WE CAN'T LET COME BACK TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
WE HAVE NOT LIVED VERY LONG WITH ANY TYPE OF EQUITY.
WE SENT OUR CITY MANAGER MARCHING ORDERS WHEN IT CAME TO RACIAL EQUITY AND ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS IMPLEMENT IT.
WE TALK ABOUT RAISING THE TAX VALUES SO THAT WE CAN HELP.
IF WE DON'T GROW SOUTH AND GROW WEST, AND GROW NORTH EAST AND EAST, AND NORTH AND THE AREAS THAT NEED IT THE MOST, WE WILL NOT INCREASE THE VALUES OF PROPERTIES THAT ARE UNDERVALUED BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING TO THEM YET.
THAT'S GOING TO HELP US IN THE FUTURE TO REDUCE TAX RATES SO THAT THE BURDEN ISN'T ONLY ON THE MOST AFFLUENT IN THE CITY. I GET IT.
I REPRESENT SOME OF THESE FOLKS.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT EQUITY, LET'S DO EQUITY.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE WITH SOMETHING I'VE REPEATED MANY TIMES.
MR. MAYOR, THAT VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS ONCE SAID, IT TAKES A WHOLE LOT OF WORK TO BUILD SOMETHING AND VERY LITTLE TO TEAR IT DOWN.
I CAME HERE TO BUILD SOMETHING, I HOPE YOU DID TOO. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES FROM ALL FOUR AGAINST AMENDMENTS 19,20, AND 21? I DON'T SEE ANY. WE'LL TAKE CARDS IN SEQUENTIAL ORDER, AMENDMENT NUMBER 19.
IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF IT, HOLD UP YOUR CARD.
>> WITH FOUR CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> NUMBER 20, IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF IT, HOLD UP YOUR CARD.
>> WITH FOUR CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
>> NUMBER 21, IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF IT, HOLD UP YOUR CARD.
>> WITH THREE CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR.
ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS, MEMBERS? THIS IS LITERALLY LAST CALL FOR ALCOHOL, AND I DON'T MEAN THAT [LAUGHTER]
>> AS A SO MINIMAL MESSAGE OR WHATEVER YOU CALL THAT.
I DON'T SEE ANY MORE AMENDMENTS SO MR. CITY MANAGER, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY AT THIS POINT, I THINK THE COUNCIL HAS HEARD WHAT IT NEEDS TO HEAR FROM
[08:25:08]
YOUR WONDERFUL STAFF AND I'M GOING TO TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU GUYS TO LAND THE PLANE ON THIS AGENDA ITEM BEFORE YOU TURN IT OVER TO WHEREVER YOU TURN IT TO NEXT.>> I THINK WE'RE DONE WITH THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.
I THINK THE OTHER WAY IS INDICATING WE NEED TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER 3.
NOW IF WE'RE READY TO DO THE CALCULATION OR YOU ALREADY, JACK.
I THINK THERE'S THREE SPEAKERS.
NO OTHER SPEAKERS WILL DO THE MATH.
>> WE'LL NOW MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 3.
[3. 23-2157 First reading and passage of the appropriation ordinance appropriating funds for the proposed FY 2023-24 City of Dallas Operating, Capital, and Grant & Trust Budgets (1) for the maintenance and operation of various departments; (2) authorizing the City Manager to make certain adjustments; (3) appropriating funds for public improvements to be financed from bond funds and other revenues of the city of Dallas for fiscal year 2023-24; (4) providing for publication; and (5) providing an effective date - Not to exceed $4,903,184,488 - Financing: General Fund ($1,844,634,000), General Obligation Debt ($420,687,511), Enterprise Funds ($1,401,626,306), Grants, Trusts, and Other Funds ($166,677,152), Capital Funds ($794,619,446), Internal Service and Other Funds ($268,266,846), and Employee Retirement Fund ($6,673,227) 3.]
I'LL READ THIS ITEM INTO THE RECORD, AND YOU DO HAVE SPEAKERS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.AGENDA ITEM 3 IS FIRST READING AND PASSAGE OF THE APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE, APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE PROPOSED FY2023, 24 CITY OF DALLAS OPERATING CAPITAL AND GRANT AND TRUSTS BUDGETS, ONE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, TWO AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO MAKE CERTAIN ADJUSTMENTS.
THREE, APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FINANCED FROM BOND FUNDS AND OTHER REVENUES OF THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023, '24 FOR PROVIDING.
FOUR PUBLICATION, AND FIVE, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE NOT TO EXCEED $4,903,184,488.
YOU DO HAVE THREE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
FIRST SPEAKER IS KATHERINE LEAL UNMUTHH.
EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
>> IT'S KATHERINE LEAL UNMUTHH.
I AM HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF INCREASING FUNDING FOR THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY TO EXPAND LIBRARY HOURS TO SUNDAYS AND LATER WEEKDAY HOURS.
I OFTEN TAKE MY TWO-YEAR-OLD SON TO THE LAKEWOOD LIBRARY BRANCH TO CHECK OUT BOOKS IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
HE LOVES TO PLAY AREA AND WHEN WE DRIVE PAST THE BUILDING, HE EXCITEDLY SHOUTS, LIBRARY.
I WAS THRILLED WHEN SATURDAY MORNING STORY HOUR WAS ADDED AT LAKEWOOD HOSTED BY THE BRANCHES WONDERFUL LIBRARIAN KITTY.
BECAUSE I WORKED FULL-TIME LIKE MOST PARENTS IT WAS THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER BEEN ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN STORY HOUR WITH HIM.
ON ONE SUNDAY AFTERNOON, WE DROVE NORTH TO THE AMAZING NEW $62,000,000 FRISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY, A TESTAMENT TO THAT CITIES DEDICATION TO INVESTING IN LIBRARIES.
IN DALLAS, ONLY ONE LIBRARY BRANCH IN THE ENTIRE CITY OF 1.3 MILLION PEOPLE IS OPEN ON SUNDAY AFTERNOONS, VICKERY PARK.
MOST PARENTS IN DALLAS WORK, AND THEREFORE, MANY ARE LIMITED TO TAKING OUR CHILDREN TO LIBRARIES ONE DAY A WEEK, SATURDAY.
MANY MORE ONLY HAVE SUNDAY OFF WORK.
LARGE CITIES BEGAN ADDING BACK SUNDAY HOURS ONCE THE COUNTRY WAS PASSED THE HEIGHT OF THE PANDEMIC, SUNDAY HOURS HAVE BEEN RESTORED IN CITIES INCLUDING INDIANAPOLIS, CHICAGO, AUSTIN, SEATTLE, SAN DIEGO, DENVER, BALTIMORE, SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA IN COBB COUNTY NEAR ATLANTA.
CITY LIBRARY SYSTEMS OPEN SUNDAYS INCLUDE LOS ANGELES, SAN FRANCISCO, BOSTON, AND WASHINGTON DC, KANSAS CITY, AND ST. LOUIS.
WE ARE ALSO FALLING BEHIND OUR NEIGHBORS IN NORTH TEXAS WITH NUMEROUS CITY LIBRARIES OPEN ON SUNDAY AFTERNOONS, OFTEN BETWEEN 01:00 AND 05:00 PM.
CITIES WITH SUNDAYS HOURS INCLUDE DENTIN, IRVING, PLANO FRISCO, ALAN KERATIN, MCKINNEY, FARMERS BRANCH, GRAPEVINE FLOWER MOUND, THE COLONY, GARLAND AND LITTLE M. MOST OF THOSE LIBRARIES ARE ALSO OPEN MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY UNTIL 8:00 OR 09:00 PM.
LIBRARY SERVICES ARE FREE AND EXPENSIVE ACTIVITIES SUCH AS THE PEROT MUSEUM IN DALLAS ARBORETUM.
AS A FORMER EDUCATION REPORTER FOR THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, I'M FAMILIAR WITH EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY WHAT WILL IMPROVE CHILDREN'S ACADEMIC OUTCOMES.
ONLY ABOUT 36 PERCENT OF DALLAS RESIDENCE, EACH IS 25 OR OLDER, HAVE A BACHELOR'S DEGREE.
NEARLY 18 PERCENT OF DALLAS RESIDENTS LIVE IN POVERTY, MANY OF THEM CHILDREN.
MY MOTHER OFTEN SHARES THAT SHE TOOK A CITY BUS OUT OF THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN SAN ANTONIO NEIGHBORHOOD THAT SHE GREW UP IN TO STUDY AT A PUBLIC LIBRARY, A RESOURCE SHE DESCRIBES AS PIVOTAL TO HER EARNING A COLLEGE DEGREE AT A TIME WHEN VERY FEW MEXICAN-AMERICANS WERE DOING SO IN TEXAS.
PLEASE INVEST IN LIBRARIES AND CONSIDER IT AN INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE OF DALLAS AND OUR CHILDREN.
[08:30:06]
>> HOW THE LINDA NEWLAND HERE FOR DISTRICT 7, SPEAKING ON MY FAVORITE SUBJECT, FLUORIDATION.
IT WAS STARTED BY THE COUNCIL BACK IN 1960S.
A VOTE, Y'ALL, ALL CAN VOTE IT OUT AND SAVE LOTS OF MONEY.
I UNDERSTAND JAVA ROD AT 500,000 FOR FLUORIDATION.
BUT WHAT IF AN ACCIDENT HAPPENS? Y'ALL NEED TO SPEND MORE MONEY BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT THAT FLOOR CALL IT FLUORIDE, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY FLORISIC ACID A BYPRODUCT OF THE FLORA, THE FERTILIZER OR ALUMINUM INDUSTRY.
YOU LOOK AT FLORISIC ACID IN THE DICTIONARY, AND IT CLASSIFIES IT A POISON.
BASICALLY, Y'ALL ARE USING OUR TAGS, DOLLARS, TO POISON AS CITIZENS AND MAKE US SICK.
SOME FOLKS EVEN HAVE FLUORIDE ALLERGY.
IT ALSO CAUSES DENTAL FLUOROSIS.
IT CAUSES MUSCLE JOINT, BONE PAIN AND ARTHRITIS AND SKIN PROBLEMS, AND Y'ALL INSIST ON SPENDING OUR MONEY TO POISON US HIGH.
Y'ALL STOP IT, SAVE THAT MONEY, AND USE IT FOR SOMETHING MORE APPROPRIATE LIKE KEEPING THE LIBRARIES OPEN.
US CITIZENS ARE REALLY DEMANDING AND REQUESTING Y'ALL TO STOP IT.
Y'ALL SAID, I HEARD SOMEONE SAY THEY LIKE TO DO WHAT THEIR CITIZENS WANT.
NOT EVERYBODY CAN COME DOWN HERE TO SPEAK.
IT SAYS SENIORS THAT GOT TO DO THE JOB FOR THEM.
YOU GOT TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT, PLEASE. I BEG YOU.
IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, PLEASE TURN ON YOUR VIDEO.
LET ME CHECK ON HER. WHAT'S GOING ON WITH OUR SYSTEM? WE ARE HAVING TECHNICAL ISSUES WITH OUR SPEAKER, SO MR. MAYOR, THERE ARE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
>> WONDERFUL. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION NOW, IS THE CHAIRPERSON, GOVERN PERFORMANCE BY TWO MANAGEMENT PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION? WE NEED A LITTLE TIME.
WILL THIS WORK ON TRYING TO FIND THAT LAST SPEAKER, AND WHILE THEY'RE DOING THAT, I DON'T WANT ANYBODY GO, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE A RECESSED, I DON'T WANT YOU GUYS TO BE CORRALLED, SO LET'S SUSTAIN IT EASE FOR FOR TWO MINUTES.
[08:35:20]
ALL MEMBERS, WE'RE GOING TO NEED A LITTLE LONGER THAN TWO MINUTES, SO LET'S JUST TAKE A BRIEF RECESS AND WE WILL RECONVENE AT 08:10, THAT IS FIVE-AND-A-HALF MINUTES FROM NOW, 8:10.TIMES 08:13 P. M. WE'RE BACK IN REGULAR SESSION HERE AND WE'RE GOING TO GO TO OUR SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, WE HAD THREE SPEAKERS AND ANN DREES IS OUR THIRD ONE, SO LET'S GO.
>> THAT IS CORRECT, MR. MAYOR.
MS. DREES, DO YOU MIND TURNING ON YOUR VIDEO?
>> THANK YOU. WE CAN HEAR YOU AND SEE YOU, YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS ANN DREES AND I AM A 25-YEAR MEMBER OF THE PRESTON ROYAL LIBRARY FRIENDS, BUT A FRIEND OF LIBRARIES IN GENERAL, AND I WANT TO SAY WHY WE NEED OUR LIBRARY'S OPEN MORE OFTEN.
ALL GREAT CITIES HAVE A GREAT PUBLIC LIBRARY AND THEY ARE OPEN, NOT LOCKED DOORS.
IN DALLAS, THE CENTRAL LIBRARY DOWNTOWN IS CLOSED ON SUNDAYS AND ON MONDAYS ACCORDING TO THE WEBSITE, AND I LOOKED UP, FOR INSTANCE, IN LOS ANGELES, THE CENTRAL LIBRARY IS OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.
IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, IT'S OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, AND I FEEL THAT OUR LIBRARY DOWNTOWN, I'VE BEEN PERSONALLY DOING RESEARCH DOWN THERE AT ONE TIME, IF FOR SCHOLARS AND THOSE DOING RESEARCH AND THE FACT THAT THERE IS ONLY ACCORDING TO THE WEBSITE, ONE BRANCH LIBRARY OPEN ON SUNDAY.
I REALLY THINK THAT IS AN ABOMINATION, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE OUR LIBRARIES OPEN SIX DAYS A WEEK FOR THE BRANCHES AND SEVEN DOWNTOWN FOR SURE, AND THAT IS MY TEXT.
I THINK THE LIBRARIES SHOULD BE OPEN MORE, AND I THINK THE CITY SHOULD BUDGET FOR THAT.
>> THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, THERE ARE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
>> I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE THE CHAIRPERSON OF GOVERNOR PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FOR A MOTION.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS FOR ITEM NUMBER 3, I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS AMENDED WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE PASSED TODAY WITH THE BUDGET NOT TO EXCEED $4,898,376,958.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIRMAN?
>> JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS, MAYOR.
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR THEIR VERY HARD WORK GETTING US THIS FAR.
OF COURSE, THIS IS NOT THE END YET, BUT THIS IS A BIG STEP TOWARDS IT, ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES FOR THEIR HARD WORK TODAY, EVERYBODY ON CITY STAFF FOR STICKING WITH US.
A LOT OF OUR COUNCIL ASSISTANTS ARE HERE TOO, AND THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR DOING ALL OF THAT, AND THIS IS AN ADDITIONAL ROUGHLY $5 MILLION MORE THAN WAS PROPOSED FOR TAX SAVINGS FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS, SO THAT'S A WIN IN ADDITION TO SOME OF THE GREAT ITEMS WE GOT IN HERE AND THE BUDGET ITSELF. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD JUST HAVE JACK GIVE A QUICK LITTLE LESSON FOR US ON WHY THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT IS SO HIGH BECAUSE SOME OF THE ITEMS ARE DOUBLE COUNTED, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ACCURATELY REFLECTED IN THE MEDIA AND THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT ACTUALLY THAT LARGE OF A BUDGET.
>> YES, MA'AM. THROUGH YOUR AMENDMENTS THAT YOU CONSIDER TODAY, FOR EXAMPLE, THE $2.5 MILLION FOR STREETS I BELIEVE, IT IS BOTH IN THE OPERATING BUDGET AS A TRANSFER AND IT WILL SHOW UP IN THE CAPITAL BUDGET AS APPROPRIATIONS, SO SOME ITEMS GET DOUBLE COUNTED AS WE TRANSFER THEM BETWEEN DIFFERENT FUNDS.
YOUR ACTION TODAY REDUCE THE TAX RATE BY AN ADDITIONAL 0.36 FOR A TOTAL TAX RATE REDUCTION FROM THE CURRENT YEAR OF 1.01.
[08:40:08]
WE WILL SEND OUT A SUMMARY ON FRIDAY THAT SUMMARIZES THE SIXTH AMENDMENTS THAT WERE PASSED TODAY AND GIVE YOU THE DETAILS RELATED TO THE GENERAL FUND, THE CAPITAL FUNDS, AND SO FORTH, SO YOU CAN SEE THAT DETAIL.>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE BUT SHE'S BEEN GONE FOR AGAINST CHAIRMAN WEST'S MOTION? SEEING NONE. DO WE NEED A RECORD VOTE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IT'S JUST A VOICE VOTE IS OKAY.
>> NO, NOT AT THIS. NO, CAN I PUT THIS ITEM?
>> WELL, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE, ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT, MOTION PREVAILS, MR. CITY MANAGER?
[C. 23-2200 After Action Review Report (AAR) of May 3rd Ransomware Incident.]
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IN THE INTEREST OF TIME TONIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE POSTPONE THE BRIEFING NUMBER C ON THE RANSOMWARE UPDATE UNTIL OUR NEXT BRIEFING DAY, AS WELL AS THE EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
>> MEMBERS THERE'S NOTHING MOTION, BUT THERE IS ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? ARE WE ALL OKAY WITH THAT? I'M ASSUMING I THINK THAT'S FINE.
AS WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE BUDGET FOLKS, YOU ALL THANK YOU SO MUCH, [APPLAUSE]
>> IT'S A LONG NIGHT FOR EVERYBODY, BUT YOU'VE GOT THAT TO BE IN THOSE SEATS AND CAN'T MOVE FOR A LONG TIME, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WITH THAT MEMBERS, IT IS 08:19 P.M. NO, YOU GUYS KEPT ON GOING UP, I'LL BUY PAULA DRINK THOUGH, SHE DID HER PART.
IT'S 8:19 AND THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS COUNCIL IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.