Jan 31, 2024 Special Called City Council

I DON'T SEE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MORNING.

YOU MAY BE SEATED.

ALL RIGHT.

SO, MADAM SECRETARY, LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS.

[Open Microphone Speakers]

I SEE A FULL GALLERY THIS MORNING, WHICH IS THE MOST EXCITING THING FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN PUBLIC SERVICE TO SEE.

WE LOVE TO SEE THE PUBLIC SHOW UP.

SO THIS IS GREAT.

OH, ACTUALLY, DO WE HAVE DO WE HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT I DIDN'T GET? I HAVE A MOTION, MAYOR.

A MOTION. OKAY.

I MOVE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL GO INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO CONSIDER THE ALLOCATION FOR EACH PROPOSITION OF THE BOND.

MOVED AND SECONDED.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. WE'RE IN COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

AND NOW, MADAM SECRETARY, SINCE I DON'T SEE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS, WE'LL MOVE ON TO, OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND GOOD MORNING.

THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW HEAR ALL ITS OPEN, ALL OF ITS REGISTERED OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS.

EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN TWO MINUTES.

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, IMPERTINENT, PROFANE OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS, OR WHO BECOMES BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL, WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ROOM. FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN PERSON FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, YOU WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE SESSION AGAIN.

INDIVIDUALS BE GIVEN TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK FOR THOSE IN PERSON.

SPEAKERS. THE TIME WILL BE ON THE MONITOR AT THE PODIUM.

WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP. PLEASE STOP 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 ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER BY NAME.

PLEASE ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON ONLY.

MADAM SECRETARY, BEFORE YOU START CALLING NAMES, I JUST WANTED TO ONE MORE LITTLE HOUSEKEEPING ITEM I WANTED TO POINT OUT SINCE WE ARE NOW IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

I WAS TOLD I SHOULD PROBABLY MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHAT THAT MEANS.

SO BECAUSE WE'RE ACTING AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE NOW, THAT MEANS WE ARE NOT TAKING ANY OFFICIAL ACTIONS TODAY.

IT MEANS THAT THE STAFF IS HERE AND THEY CAN, OFFER WE CAN OFFER RECOMMENDATIONS TO STAFF, BUT THEY'RE ONLY RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND IT ALSO MEANS THAT THERE ARE EMOTIONS THAT ARE ALLOWED TO BE MADE BY THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE IN THE FORM OF AMENDMENTS, IN THE FORM OF POINTS OF ORDER, APPEALS AND INQUIRIES.

BUT THEY WILL NOT BE ANY ACTUAL ROLL CALL VOTES TAKEN TODAY.

[00:05:03]

THERE WILL NOT BE ANY FORMAL BALLOT VOTES TAKEN TODAY.

WE HAVE A SYSTEM OF BEING ABLE TO IDENTIFY PEOPLE'S, SIGNALS OF SUPPORT FOR THINGS IN THE FORM OF HOLDING UP CARDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT NO FORMAL VOTING WILL TAKE PLACE TODAY.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, SINCE THERE'S SO MANY OF YOU HERE, AND YOU DON'T COME EVERY SINGLE DAY, OR EVERY SINGLE MEETING, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A UNIQUE, NOT COMMON, WAY TO MEET.

SO THIS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, SET UP IS NOT OUR NORMAL SETUP, AND WE ARE NOT TAKING FORMAL VOTES TODAY, SO.

BUT WE WILL MEMBERS BE FOLLOWING OUR NORMAL RULES IN TERMS OF THE FIVE, THREE, ONE, FIVE MINUTES, THREE MINUTES, ONE MINUTE, THREE ROUNDS OF DEBATE ON ANY POINT. SO JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT HOUSEKEEPING WAS ADDRESSED BEFORE YOU GO INTO OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, BOBBY ATAHI.

GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL BOBBY ABTAHI, DISTRICT 13.

YOU HAVE A HANDOUT IN FRONT OF YOU THAT.

I'M SORRY, WERE TWO MINUTES.

I KNOW SHE'S TRYING TO GET SOME EXTRA IN.

YEAH, I WANT THIS.

I WAS WANTING TO MAKE SURE THE CITY SECRETARY KNEW WE WERE GOING TWO MINUTES PER SPEAKER, BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY TODAY.

SO YOU HAVE A HANDOUT FROM THE DALLAS ZOO.

I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT YOU GUYS ARE SICK OF HEARING FROM ME, SO I BROUGHT SOME FRIENDS TODAY, SO I'M GOING TO LET THEM SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF AS WELL.

THE ZOO BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONTAINS FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS SUCH AS LOIS FINKELMAN, JENNIFER GATES, FORMER PARK BOARD MEMBERS SUCH AS JOAN WONG, C.W.

WHITAKER, AND RUDY RODRIGUEZ.

CURRENT PARK BOARD MEMBER HARRISON BLAIR SITS ON THE ZOO BOARD AS THE LIAISON.

WE HAVE BUSINESS LEADERS SUCH AS DON MOORE, SHAQUAN LEWIS, TAMELA THORNTON, NEIGHBORHOOD ADVOCATES SUCH AS XAVIER HENDERSON.

AND THE REASON I MENTIONED THAT IS BECAUSE ALL THESE PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE CITY HAVE GIVEN THEIR TIME, ENERGY AND EFFORT TO THE ZOO BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IN IT AND WE BELIEVE THIS PROJECT IS YOUR BEST SHOT AT MAKING TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE.

MAYOR, I'VE HEARD YOU OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS MENTION HOW DALLAS NEEDS TO BE A CITY THAT IS WELCOMING TO YOUNG FAMILIES AND NOT LOSING OUR YOUNG FAMILIES.

TODAY, A FAMILY OF FOUR CAN GO TO THE DALLAS ZOO AND SPEND ALL DAY THERE FOR $40.

YOU CAN'T EVEN GO TO A MOVIE TO HAVE A FAMILY OF FOUR SPEND AN ENTIRE DAY IN THE ZOO.

IT'S OUR ONLY, IT'S A HUB FOR EDUCATION.

IT'S OUR ONLY THING FOR FAMILIES IN SOUTHERN DALLAS TO DO THAT'S ACCESSIBLE, AFFORDABLE, AND OPEN YEAR ROUND.

IT'S IMPORTANT FOR MANY OF US.

AND I'LL LET THE OTHERS SPEAK TO KNOW THAT THIS IS A PROJECT THAT YOU WILL BE PROUD OF.

YOU'VE GOT THAT PACKET, YOU'VE GOT BRIEFING MATERIALS DATING BACK TO 2019 FROM THE MASTER PLAN.

WE'VE ALL BEEN PART OF BOND PROJECTS BEFORE, AND I CAN SAY SOMETIMES THERE ARE PROJECTS YOU'RE PROUD OF, AND SOMETIMES THERE ARE PROJECTS YOU KIND OF REGRET.

I'M HERE TO TELL YOU THAT THIS IS A PROJECT YOU WILL BE PROUD OF.

WE'RE READY TO GO.

WE HAVE PRIVATE DOLLARS READY TO GO.

WE'VE STUDIED THIS, SO WE'RE HERE TO ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

YOU'LL HEAR FROM OTHER SPEAKERS WHO ARE GOING TO MENTION ALL THE OTHER REASONS THAT YOU SHOULD SUPPORT THIS, BUT WE WOULD GRACIOUSLY ASK YOU TO MAKE THE TOUGH DECISIONS YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE. BUT REMEMBER THAT THE ZOO HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 1888.

IT'S A CITY ASSET. IT'S YOUR DALLAS ZOO, AND IT'S A WORLD CLASS ZOO.

IT'S ONE OF THE TOP IN THE NATION.

LOIS FINKELMAN.

IN 2009, THE CITY WAS BUSY BUILDING A $25 MILLION BOND FUNDED GIANTS OF THE SAVANNA EXHIBIT AT THE ZOO. AT THE SAME TIME, THE CITY BUDGET WAS IN FREEFALL.

CITY MANAGER AT THAT POINT WANTED TO CUT $300,000 FROM THE PARK DEPARTMENT AND THE ZOO BUDGET.

SO THE DALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY AND THE CITY CAME TOGETHER TO FORM A PARTNERSHIP.

15 YEARS LATER, OUR MEDIOCRE ZOO IS A SUPER SUCCESS.

THE SAVANNA EXHIBIT WAS TRANSFORMATIVE.

WE DOUBLED OUR BUDGET.

WE DOUBLED OUR ATTENDANCE.

AND ACCORDING TO A PERRYMAN 2018 STUDY, WE TRIPLED OUR ECONOMIC IMPACT.

THE $30 MILLION CURRENT BOND REQUEST WOULD CREATE ANOTHER TRANSFORMATIVE PROJECT.

WE WILL REPURPOSE OUR MONORAIL.

CREATE A, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO'VE BEEN IN NEW YORK HIGH LINE KIND OF WALKWAY WITH A NEW EXHIBIT, NEW SPECIES, AND A COMBINED CHEETAH RHINO EXHIBIT.

NO ONE ELSE IN THE COUNTRY IS CURRENTLY DOING THAT.

IT ALSO OPENS UP 15 ACRES OF CURRENTLY UNUSED UNACCESSIBLE PARKLAND.

AND THE MOST IMPORTANT THING OF ALL, IT ADDS ZERO COST TO THE CITY BUDGET.

IT'S TIME TO REINVEST IN YOUR CITY ZOO.

[00:10:02]

I KEEP LOOKING AT THE TIME, SO THAT THE THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES THAT BOBBY REFERRED TO HAVE A SUPERIOR PRODUCT TO GO TO.

WE ARE THE OLDEST AND LARGEST CITY OWNED ASSET SOUTH OF INTERSTATE 30.

IN ORDER TO REMAIN SUPERIOR AND TO REMAIN THE WORLDWIDE ATTRACTION THAT WE HAVE BECOME, THE CITY NEEDS TO HELP US REINVEST IN THIS PROJECT SO WE CAN FULFILL OUR MASTER PLAN, WHICH IS $100 MILLION.

THANK YOU. FULL FUNDING FOR PARKS, BY THE WAY.

THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL.

JOAN WALL.

I COME TO YOU TODAY TO SUPPORT FULL FUNDING FOR PARKS, WHICH IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF OUR CITY, WHICH MAKES A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BEING A GOOD CITY AND A GREAT CITY, WHICH IS EVIDENCED BY THE INCREDIBLE WORK THE BOND CITIZENS TASK FORCE PERFORM.

I SPECIFICALLY ASK YOU TO SUPPORT FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE DALLAS ZOO.

AS BOARD CHAIR, WE WORK TIRELESSLY ON THE MASTER PLAN TO LAY A FIRM FOUNDATION TO MOVE FORWARD.

THE ZOO MASTER PLAN WAS ADOPTED BY THE PARK BOARD AND THE CITY COUNCIL IN 2019.

AFTER MANY, MANY COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND VALUED INPUT AND TODAY SETS THE FRAMEWORK FOR OUR NEXT TRANSFORMATIONAL PROJECTS.

YOU'VE SEEN THE PLANS, YOU'VE BEEN BRIEFED ON OUR VISION, BUT I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU THE COMMITMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY.

HOW WE IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORS.

AND EDUCATION AND OPPORTUNITY ARE KEY COMPONENTS OF THIS PLAN.

WE PARTNER WITH MANY DISD SCHOOLS AND ENJOY SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIPS WITH BRYAN ADAMS, ROOSEVELT, AND ARE CURRENTLY CONNECTING WITH SOUTH OAK CLIFF HIGH SCHOOL.

IN ADDITION, WE HAVE INTERNS AND STUDENTS FROM PAUL QUINN AND P-TECH EARLY CHILD, PARDON ME, EARLY COLLEGE HIGH SCHOOL.

YOUR DALLAS ZOO WELCOMES OVER 100,000 STUDENTS TO BE INTRODUCED TO ANIMALS, CONSERVATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES.

ONE OF THESE STUDENTS THAT I'D LIKE TO TELL YOU ABOUT IS DANAY JACKSON.

DANAY GREW UP IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

SHE WAS ON THAT SCHOOL FIELD TRIP.

SHE, AT 14, DECIDED THE ZOO WAS GOING TO BE HER CAREER PATH, AND SHE IS NOW A LARGE MAMMAL SENIOR ZOOLOGIST AT YOUR DALLAS ZOO WITH YOUR INVESTMENT IS HOPE THAT A NEW GROUP OF STUDENTS LIKE DANAY WILL BE ENCOURAGED TO FOLLOW THEIR SAME GOAL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO PARTNER WITH US.

THANK YOU, JENNIFER SCRIPPS.

SHIFTING GEARS A BIT.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR JOHNSON AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS JENNIFER SCRIPPS, AND I'M THE PRESIDENT AND CEO OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS, INC.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR DEDICATION AND SHAPING THE MOST IMPACTFUL BOND PROPOSITION VOTERS CAN CONSIDER LATER THIS YEAR.

DOWNTOWN DALLAS IS A GROWTH ENGINE FOR OUR CITY.

IN FACT, JUST LAST WEEK, THE GPFM COMMITTEE WAS BRIEFED ON THE IMPACT OF DIFFERENT PARTS OF OUR CITY AND WISE DECISIONS TO CONTINUE TO DRIVE TAX BASE GROWTH AND THE OUTSIZED IMPORTANCE OF DOWNTOWN AND OUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS WAS CLEAR.

FOR US TO CONTINUE OUR EVOLUTION FROM A BUSINESS DISTRICT INTO A SEVEN DAY A WEEK VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE COUNTRY'S LARGEST ARTS DISTRICT, MORE THAN 20 ACRES OF NEW PARK SPACES, AND SOON A NEW REDEVELOPED KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER.

WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO INVEST IN THE VITAL INFRASTRUCTURE OF DOWNTOWN, AND CURRENTLY, ONLY 5% OF THE TOTAL RECOMMENDED STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOCATION PACKAGE IS GOING TO THE CBD.

THIS WILL NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO CONTINUE TO ADVANCE THE GOALS OF THE THREE 60 PLAN FOR DOWNTOWN DALLAS THAT WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY IN 2017.

MAJOR PRIVATE INVESTMENT WILL HINGE ON MUCH NEEDED TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS AS OUTLINED IN DDI'S PRIORITY LIST, INCLUDING THE FIELD STREET DISTRICT.

OF NOTE, YOUR COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE VOTED TO APPROVE THE INCLUSION OF THIS CRITICAL COMPLETE PROJECT IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION.

WE ALSO BELIEVE GRIFFIN STREET SHOULD BE REALIGNED.

BOTH STREETS NEED NEW, IMPROVED UNDERGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE.

THIS WILL CONNECT US TO VICTORY PARK AND THE NEW GOLDMAN SACHS CAMPUS.

WE KNOW THE LIST OF NEEDS ACROSS OUR CITY IS LONG AND THERE ARE MANY WORTHY PROJECTS, BUT BY MAINTAINING THE CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN DOWNTOWN, WE WILL CONTINUE TO SPUR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF OUR CITY AND BE A GROWTH ENGINE.

GOOD MORNING COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU. LISA NEW.

[00:15:02]

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU TODAY.

MY NAME IS LISA NEW.

I'M A OAK CLIFF RESIDENT, DISTRICT ONE.

I'M THE NEW CEO OF DALLAS ZOO, AND I'M THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR THE GLOBAL ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS AND AQUARIUMS. YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD THIS MORNING FROM SEVERAL OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, THE HISTORY OF THE ZOO AND OUR STRONG PARTNERSHIP FAR BETTER THAN I.

MY JOB TODAY IS TO TELL YOU WHAT INSPIRED ME TO MOVE FROM TENNESSEE TO DALLAS TO JOIN THIS TEAM.

MY PASSIONATE BELIEF THAT ZOOS ARE FOR ABSOLUTELY EVERYONE, AND HOW EXCITED I AM TO LEAD THIS NEXT PHASE OF THIS TREASURED DALLAS INSTITUTION. I'M NEW TO DALLAS, NEW TO THE JOB EIGHT DAYS TODAY, BUT I'M NOT NEW TO DALLAS ZOO.

I HAVE BEEN THE ACCREDITATION INSPECTOR FOR THIS ORGANIZATION WHEN YOU PRIVATIZED AND I HAVE BROUGHT NOT ONE, BUT TWO BOARDS AND TWO CITY MAYORS TO SEE WHAT TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE CAN HAPPEN, WHEN A CITY INVESTS IN AN ORGANIZATION AND IS USED FOR PRIVATE DOLLARS TO LEVERAGE THAT SUPPORT. I'VE ALWAYS ADMIRED DALLAS ZOO.

I'VE WATCHED AS DALLAS ZOO HAS RISEN TO BE ONE OF THE MOST RESPECTED ZOOS IN THE COUNTRY.

THIS TEAM, THEIR COMMITMENT TO EDUCATION, CONSERVATION, AND THE RECOGNITION AND DESIRE TO BE AN ACCESSIBLE AND INCLUSIVE PLACE TO VISIT, BUT ALSO TO WORK, A PLACE WHERE EVERYONE BELONGS.

I WAS ALSO SO INSPIRED TO KNOW THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS WAS CONSIDERING, ONCE AGAIN, TO INVEST IN THE ZOO AND A BOARD, READY AND EXCITED TO USE THAT TO LEVERAGE A 2 TO 1 MATCH IN PRIVATE FUNDS.

I JUMPED AT THE FIRST CHANCE TO BE PART OF THIS NEXT TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE FOR OUR ZOO, AND I BELIEVE IT WILL ENHANCE AND ENRICH THE COMMUNITY THAT I NOW CALL HOME, BUT ALSO, IN FACT, WILL BE A DESTINATION FOR THE REGION.

AND NOW I'D LIKE TO ASK ALL OF OUR ZOO SUPPORTERS TO STAND.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. I'M THRILLED TO BE A PART OF THIS DALLAS ZOO LEGACY, AND ALL OF US HERE ARE READY TO STAND UP, ROLL UP OUR SLEEVES AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THE REMAINING GROUP OF SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN GROUPS.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST TWO ROWS IN THE CENTER SECTION.

HUA LU, SELWA MOHARRAM, ROBERT KENT, ROY ATWOOD, GARRETT BOONE, APRIL ALLEN, MARIA VALENZUELA, DESI TANNER, JULIE FEINMAN, BRIAN TONY, EBONY BROCK, TAMATHA CURIEL, RUDY RODRIGUEZ, PHILIP KINGSTON, AND MARCY HELFAND.

HUA LU MAY COME TO THE PODIUM.

YOU MAY BEGIN. THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS HUA LU.

I'M HERE ACTUALLY ON BEHALF OF SUNRISE MOVEMENT DALLAS.

AND I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT GREEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO 2023, IN DALLAS, WHICH WAS LAST YEAR, WAS THE HOTTEST SUMMER ON RECORD.

AND DURING THE HEAT WAVE, 300 LIVES IN OUR CITY WERE UNFORTUNATELY LOST.

THE LARGEST DEATH TOLL SINCE RECORDS BEGAN IN 1989 AND IS PREDICTED THAT 2024, THE HEAT IN THE SUMMER WILL BE EVEN WORSE BECAUSE EL NINO WILL BE TAKING FULL EFFECT THEN.

NOW THIS BUTTRESSES INTO THE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CRISIS THAT'S CURRENTLY HAPPENING IN DALLAS.

AS OF 2022, THERE'S A 92.8% RENT LIKE OCCUPANCY RATE WITH A HIGHER RATE FOR RENTAL UNITS.

AND SO AVAILABLE HOUSING FOR LIKE ORDINARY PEOPLE IS REALLY HARD.

LIKE THE SUPPLY IS REALLY SQUEEZED, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THE INFLATION RATE IS OUTPACED THE WAGE GROWTH RATE AND CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS HAS INCREASED FROM 2019 TO 2022 BY 93%.

ON TOP OF THAT, THERE'S BEEN A DECREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING IN THE BOND EXPLICITLY ALLOCATED FOR HOUSING FROM, I BELIEVE, 100 MILLION DOWN TO 25 MILLION, WHICH IS 2.5% OF THE BOND.

THIS IS NOT A GOOD LOOK, I THINK.

SO I'M HERE TO BASICALLY SAY, I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT THIS HOUSING THING BECAUSE LIKE BOTH

[00:20:03]

YOUTH HOMELESSNESS AND VETERAN HOMELESSNESS, RATES HAVE GONE UP BY DOUBLE DIGITS, SINCE LAST YEAR.

THAT'S YOUR TIME? YEAH.

JUST TAKE HOUSING SERIOUSLY.

THANK YOU. SALWA MOHARRAM.

SALWA MOHARRAM IS NOT PRESENT.

ROBERT KENT.

I'VE LOST MY VOICE, SO BEAR WITH ME.

MY NAME IS ROBERT KENT AND I'M THE TEXAS STATE DIRECTOR FOR TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND AND A TRUSTEE WITH THE DALLAS PARKS COALITION.

I'M HERE TODAY TO ADVOCATE IN FAVOR OF THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE'S RECOMMENDATION OF $350 MILLION FOR PARKS, TRAILS AND GREEN SPACES IN THE NEXT CITY BOND PROGRAM.

THE DALLAS PARKS COALITION IS A DIVERSE ORGANIZATION MADE UP OF OVER 30 NONPROFITS, VOLUNTEER GROUPS, FRIENDS OF ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTING TENS OF THOUSANDS OF MEMBERS, AND PARK USERS, MANY OF WHOM ARE HERE TODAY.

IF YOU ARE A SUPPORTER OF PARKS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND YOU'RE HERE TODAY, PLEASE STAND.

WE'RE ALL UNITED BY ONE THING THE NEED TO PROVIDE THE PARK SYSTEM THE RESOURCES IT NEEDS, ESPECIALLY IN THE UPCOMING BOND.

WE FULLY SUPPORT THE CTPF RECOMMENDATION OF $350 MILLION ALLOCATED TO PARKS, TRAILS AND GREEN SPACES.

YOU'VE HEARD FROM MANY OF OUR MEMBERS IN THE PAST, AND YOU WILL HEAR FROM MANY MORE TODAY.

I DON'T NEED TO REITERATE THEIR MESSAGE.

I DO WANT TO TELL YOU TODAY THAT DALLAS VOTERS SUPPORT PARKS.

A RECENT POLL COMMISSIONED BY TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND AND THE NATURE CONSERVANCY FOUND THAT 64% OF DALLAS VOTERS WOULD SUPPORT $398 MILLION FOR PARKS IN THE NEXT BOND. AND EARLIER TODAY, WE DELIVERED A PETITION TO EACH OF YOU THAT WAS SIGNED BY 1261 DALLAS RESIDENTS IN SUPPORT OF $350 MILLION FOR PARKS.

THE DALLAS PARKS COALITION TO THANK CITY COUNCIL, CITY STAFF AND THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE FOR YOUR HOURS OF WORK ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE.

INVESTING $350 MILLION IN PARKS WILL HELP DALLAS BECOME A HEALTHIER, MORE EQUITABLE, MORE SUSTAINABLE AND MORE ECONOMICALLY AND VIBRANT CITY READY FOR THE CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF THE 21ST CENTURY.

ROY ATWOOD. GOOD MORNING.

MY NAME IS REVEREND ROY ATWOOD.

I'M THE ASSOCIATE MINISTER OF COMMUNITY AT FIRST UMC DALLAS, AND I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 14.

I CAME TODAY TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF BOND ALLOCATION AMENDMENT ONE, WHICH PROVIDES $150 MILLION FOR HOUSING AND $20 MILLION FOR HOMELESSNESS, AND TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF REFORMS TO THE ZONING CODE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SMALLER HOUSING UNITS IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

HOUSING IS A HUMAN RIGHT.

EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN OF THIS CITY DESERVES THE STABILITY OF HAVING A ROOF OVER THEIR HEAD AND A SAFE PLACE TO SLEEP AT NIGHT.

UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO THE HIGH COST OF HOUSING IN DALLAS, TOO MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORS ARE HOMELESS OR AT RISK OF HOMELESSNESS.

I'D LIKE YOU TO THINK THIS MORNING ABOUT THOSE WHO ARE MOST HARMED BY THE DANGERS OF HOMELESSNESS, OUR CITY'S CHILDREN.

WHILE I WAS IN SEMINARY, I WORKED DIRECTLY WITH SOME OF THESE CHILDREN AT THE FAMILY GATEWAY SHELTER.

I STILL REMEMBER ASKING THE KIDS WHAT I THOUGHT WAS AN INNOCENT QUESTION, AS WE NEAR THE END OF THE SUMMER VACATION.

WHAT SCHOOL DO YOU GO TO? MUCH TO MY SURPRISE, NONE OF THE 20 OR SO KIDS KNEW THE ANSWER BECAUSE OF COURSE THEY DIDN'T KNOW THEY WERE LIVING IN A TEMPORARY SHELTER AND THEY HAD NO IDEA WHERE THEY'D BE LIVING NEXT WEEK, LET ALONE WHAT SCHOOL THEY'D BE ATTENDING.

IT BROKE MY HEART HOW NORMAL IT WAS FOR THEM NOT TO KNOW IF ANY OF THE FRIENDS THEY'D MADE THE PREVIOUS SCHOOL YEAR WOULD BE THERE WHEN THEY RETURNED TO SCHOOL IN THE FALL.

I WANT YOU TO PICTURE THESE CHILDREN IN YOUR IMAGINATION.

THEY ARE THE ONES WHO WILL MOST BENEFIT FROM OUR CITY LEGALIZING FUNDING AND BUILDING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SEE YOURSELF AT A RIBBON CUTTING CEREMONY FOR A NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL GIVE STABILITY TO HUNDREDS OF YOUR NEIGHBORS BECAUSE OF THE ACTIONS THAT YOU TAKE OVER THE COMING WEEKS.

PICTURE THE SMILE OF A KID WHO KNOWS THEY FINALLY HAVE A PLACE TO CALL HOME.

YOU CAN MAKE THAT SMILE HAPPEN.

GARRETT BOONE. GOOD MORNING.

MY NAME IS GARRETT BOONE.

I AM CHAIR OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PARKS AND ALSO THE MAYOR'S APPOINTED GREEN CZAR.

AND A RECENT ARTICLE ABOUT PARKS.

THIS QUOTE STOOD OUT TO ME.

CITIES THAT BELIEVE IN THEIR FUTURE INVEST HEAVILY IN PARKS.

BECAUSE I FIRMLY BELIEVE IN THE TRUTH OF THIS STATEMENT.

I WILL STILL KINDLY ASK, AND NOT UNEXPECTEDLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THE $350 MILLION INVESTMENT IN OUR CITY'S PARKS AND TRAILS.

THERE ARE COUNTLESS REASONS TO MAKE THIS INVESTMENT, BUT TWO REASONS I WANT TO NOTE NOW, BECAUSE DALLAS PHILANTHROPISTS UNDERSTAND HOW CRITICAL PARKS, TRAILS, AND GREEN SPACE IS FOR OUR CITY'S FUTURE, THEY HAVE RESPONDED OVERWHELMINGLY WITH $350 MILLION IN FUNDING IN THE PAST TEN YEARS.

[00:25:02]

I IMPLORE THAT YOU FURTHER THIS CRITICAL PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP BY HONORING THE PROMISE TO MATCH THEIR QUALIFIED MATCHING GIFTS AS PART OF THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM. THESE MATCHING GRANTS ALLOW NONPROFITS TO LEVERAGE FEDERAL FUNDS TO CREATE SIGNATURE PARK PROJECTS THAT BENEFIT OUR ENTIRE CITY.

THE PARKS $350 MILLION NEED LIST WAS DRIVEN BY THE SOLEMN RESPONSIBILITY TO ENHANCE, REPLACE, RENOVATE BUILDINGS, EQUIPMENT AND PARKLAND THAT MAKE UP THE DALLAS PARK SYSTEM.

THAT IS WHAT THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS NEED AND DESERVE.

UNFORTUNATELY, STUDIES SHOW THAT OUR PARK SYSTEM HAS BEEN CHRONICALLY UNDERFUNDED FOR YEARS, MEANING THAT PARKS HAS BEEN FORCED TO EXTEND THE USE OF WORN OUT FACILITIES PAST THEIR USEFUL LIVES, RESULTING IN A VICIOUS CYCLE OF INCREASINGLY EXPENSIVE MAINTENANCE.

BOND DOLLARS WILL HELP US ADDRESS THOSE NEEDS AND MOVE BEYOND THE CYCLE OF BAND-AID FIXES TO A MORE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE.

THIS $350 MILLION INVESTMENT REPRESENTS A DOWN PAYMENT ON DALLAS FUTURE, AND IS ESSENTIAL TO ENHANCING THE CITY'S EXISTING SAFE HAVEN FOR OUR KIDS AND FAMILIES. THANK YOU.

APRIL ALLEN. THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS APRIL ALLEN, PRESIDENT AND CEO AT SOUTHERN GATEWAY PARK.

DALLAS NEXT DECK PARK OVER I 35 E IN OAK CLIFF, ADJACENT TO OUR FRIENDS AT THE DALLAS ZOO.

WE SUPPORT THE ARTS COMMUNITY AND ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS HOUSING COALITION AND SUPPORT THEIR EFFORTS.

BUT TODAY, I'M SPEAKING AS CO-FOUNDER AND TRUSTEE OF THE DALLAS PARKS COALITION AT THE DALLAS PARKS COALITION.

WE'RE FOCUSED ON MAKING DALLAS GREENER AND GREATER.

WE KNOW THAT PARKS MEAN MORE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, IMPROVED HEALTH OUTCOMES FOR NEARBY RESIDENTS, AND REDUCTION IN URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECTS.

THAT'S WHY WE SUPPORT FULLY FUNDING THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION OF $350 MILLION FOR PARKS IN THIS BOND ELECTION.

I THINK ALL OF US RECOGNIZE THAT LIVING NEAR PARKS IS A GOOD THING.

IT GIVES OUR KIDS A PLACE TO PLAY SPORTS AND RUN AROUND.

REC CENTERS, PROVIDE GREAT PROGRAMING CLASSES, AFFORDABLE AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS AND SUMMER CAMPS, AND MANY OF OUR PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS LIKE THE DALLAS ZOO, THE ARBORETUM, KLYDE WARREN, AND SOUTHERN GATEWAY PROVIDE GREAT ENTERTAINMENT, CULTURAL OPPORTUNITIES, AND EXCITING NEW PROGRAMS ON A DAILY BASIS.

WE ALL KNOW THAT ON A HOT SUMMER AFTERNOON IN DALLAS, BEING IN A SHADY PARK IS SO MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE THAN HOT ASPHALT.

BY PROVIDING PARKS THIS LEVEL OF FUNDING, YOU WOULD BE EXPANDING AND IMPROVING EXISTING PARKS AND ADDING NEW ONES, MAKING PARKS AND THEIR PROGRAMING MORE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL DALLAS RESIDENTS AND THEREBY MULTIPLYING THESE BENEFITS CITYWIDE.

THESE BENEFITS ARE ALSO MULTIPLIED WHEN YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT MANY OF THESE PROJECTS ARE PROJECTS IN WHICH THE CITY'S INVESTMENT WOULD BE LEVERAGED TO DRAW DOWN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FUNDS IN THE SOUTHERN GATEWAYS CASE, THAT'S $15 MILLION THAT WOULD BE LEVERAGED BY OVER $50 MILLION IN PUBLIC FUNDS FOR THE PHASE TWO BRIDGE.

SO FOR ALL THESE REASONS, I HOPE YOU'LL KEEP THESE BENEFITS IN MIND.

AND I JUST WANT TO SAY SOMETIMES WE HAVE ISSUES WITH THE CLOCK, BUT WE ARE ALWAYS MONITORING THE TIME.

MARIA VALENZUELA.

SO EVEN IF YOU CAN'T SEE IT, WE ARE TRACKING IT.

SO THANK YOU GUYS.

MY NAME IS MARIA VALENZUELA AND I LIVE ON DORRINGTON DRIVE IN DISTRICT SEVEN.

THE FAR EAST DALLAS COMMUNITY HAS BEEN ON A 28 YEAR QUEST TO GET THE WHITE ROCK HILLS RECREATION CENTER BUILT AT 2131-2165 HIGHLAND ROAD.

FOR DECADES, THE CITIZENS ALONG THE LOWER FERGUSON ROAD CORRIDOR HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED BY THIS CITY.

UNTIL THE FORMATION OF THE FERGUSON ROAD INITIATIVE IN 1998, WE HAVE NO NEIGHBORHOOD CHAMPION OR ADVOCATE TO SHINE LIGHT IN THIS NEGLECT.

A RECREATION CENTER WAS FIRST IDENTIFIED IN 1995 AS NEEDED AMENITY, HOWEVER, YEAR AFTER YEAR, BOND ELECTION AFTER BOND ELECTION, DESPITE A DOCUMENTED GAP IN RECREATION CENTER SERVICES, OUR COMMUNITY HAS BEEN BYPASSED.

WHY? WITH A MINORITY COMMUNITY OF 68%, WE ARE ASKING YOU TO FUND A RECREATION CENTER THAT WILL SERVE DISTRICTS TWO, SEVEN AND NINE.

THIS CENTER HAS THE SUPPORT OF OUR COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES.

MY DAUGHTER SPOKE AT A PUBLIC MEETING IN 2010 BEGGING FOR A RECREATION CENTER IN HER COMMUNITY.

SHE IS NOW 30 YEARS OLD AND NO LONGER LIVES IN THE AREA.

BUT MY HOPE IS THAT THIS CENTER WILL BE BUILT SO THAT ONE DAY MY GRANDCHILDREN AND I CAN ENJOY IT TOGETHER.

[00:30:01]

PLEASE PLACE THE WHITE ROCK HILLS RECREATION CENTER ON THE BOND BECAUSE IT'S OUR TURN.

DESI TANNER. MY NAME IS DESI TANNER.

I'M FROM THE, I'M REPRESENTING THE WHITE ROCK EAST NEIGHBORHOOD AND DISTRICT TWO.

PLEASE PLACE THE WHITE ROCK HILLS RECREATION CENTER ON A 24 BOND PROGRAM.

MY COMMUNITY HAS BEEN PATIENTLY WAITING MORE THAN 25 YEARS.

THE RECREATION CENTER WILL SERVE A OVERALL POPULATION OF 70,000 PEOPLE WITHIN A THREE MILE AREA.

WITHIN 1.5 MILE RADIUS, THE CITY WILL SERVE 19 DIVERSE, NEIGHBORHOODS 16 APARTMENTS WHERE MANY OF THE MOST DISENFRANCHISED FAMILIES ACTUALLY LIVE.

CHILDREN FROM THESE APARTMENTS ATTEND THREE SCHOOLS IN OUR AREA WHICH AVERAGED 95% POVERTY RATE.

THE CENTER IS THE FINAL PHASE OF OUR COMMUNITY DRIVEN PLAN THAT WILL PROVIDE INTERGENERATIONAL SPORTS, WELLNESS, TECHNOLOGY, CULTURE, ARTS PROGRAM THAT MEET A WELL DOCUMENTED COMMUNITY NEEDS.

LOOK, WE HAVE THE LAND, WE HAVE A FEASIBILITY STUDY.

WE HAVE WORKED TO BUILD A PARK.

WE HAVE NEW STREETS, SIDEWALKS, BIKE PATHS THAT WILL CONNECT THE CENTER TO THE TRINITY FOREST SPINE TRAIL.

ALL WE NEED NOW IS A 17 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT OUR RECREATION CENTER.

IT IS TIME FOR THE CITY TO FULFILL THEIR PROMISE TO OUR COMMUNITY AND GET THE PROJECT ON THE BOND, AND LET IT BE BUILT.

PLEASE SUPPORT THE WHITE ROCK EAST, WHITE ROCK HILLS RECREATION CENTER ON THE BOND.

PLEASE. BECAUSE IT'S OUR TURN.

I'M JULIE FEINMAN, A RESIDENT OF FOREST HILLS, AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT NINE.

JULIE FEINMAN.

I'M ALSO THE FOUNDER OF THE CONSOLATION OF LIVING MEMORIALS, THOUGH I'M NOT HERE TODAY TO REPRESENT THE CEMETERY CONSOLATION PROJECT, I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THE WHITE ROCK HILLS RECREATION CENTER, WHICH IS A TALE OF TWO CITIES.

TO THE WEST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS, ARE NEIGHBORHOODS WITH NO POVERTY, AND FAMILIES ARE HIGHLY EDUCATED.

TO THE EAST OF THE TRACKS ARE MIXED INCOME COMMUNITIES COMPRISED OF STABLE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND TRANSIENT MULTIFAMILY POPULATIONS LIVING IN POVERTY.

THIS IS A COMMUNITY OF GREAT NEEDS.

A BAYLOR STUDY RATES ZIP CODE 75228 AS A 4.8 ON THE COMMUNITY NEEDS INDEX.

THE HIGHER THE SCORE, THE GREATER THE NEED.

THIS AREA QUALIFIES AS MEDICAL, FOOD, CHILD CARE, AND INFRASTRUCTURE DESERT.

THE WHITE ROCK HILLS RECREATION CENTER WILL SERVE AS A SAFE HAVEN FOR CHILDREN, A PLACE FOR OUR SENIORS TO ENGAGE IN FELLOWSHIP AND WILL SPUR ECONOMIC GROWTH.

THE WHITE ROCK HILLS RECREATION CENTER WILL BE A PLACE TO CREATE DIVERSE NEW FRIENDS AND RELATIONSHIPS THAT DON'T YET EXIST, BECAUSE WE CAN'T BRING BOTH SIDES OF THE TRACK TOGETHER, AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CAPTURE THE SPIRIT.

IT WILL BE A PLACE IN WHICH OUR COMMUNITY CAN THRIVE TOGETHER, HEALTHIER IN BODY, MIND AND SPIRIT.

THE TIME IS NOW.

OUR COMMUNITY IS TIRED OF WAITING.

IT'S OUR TURN.

THANK YOU. BRIAN TONEY.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

ON BEHALF OF THE DALLAS HOUSING COALITION.

FIRST, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, YOUR LEADERSHIP AND LISTENING TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS CONCERNS, AS HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS HAS BROUGHT UP CONSISTENTLY AT EVERY PUBLIC MEETING THE CITY HAS HELD THROUGHOUT THIS IMPORTANT PROCESS BECAUSE HOW WE SPEND OUR DOLLARS REFLECTS OUR PRIORITIES.

SECOND, TO FURTHER EXPLAIN OUR $200 MILLION ASK, ADDING TOGETHER CPALS 33,600 UNIT RENTAL SHORTAGE FOR FAMILIES OF FOUR EARNING LESS THAN $44,000 A YEAR, AND BC WORKSHOPS 16,000 AFFORDABLE SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEFICIT AT A CONSERVATIVE PRODUCTION COST OF $200,000 A

[00:35:01]

UNIT, OUR HOUSING GAP WILL TAKE CLOSER TO $10 BILLION TO CLOSE.

WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR IS A CITY TO MAKE ITS LARGEST SINGLE INVESTMENT IN HOUSING AND COMMITMENT LESS THAN 2% OF THAT TOTAL NEED, SO DEVELOPERS CAN LEVERAGE IT WITH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC FUNDING.

IF WE CHOOSE NOT TO SIGNIFICANTLY INVEST IN HOUSING, WE ARE ONLY DIGGING OURSELVES INTO A DEEPER HOLE AND PUTTING OUR RESIDENTS IN MORE DIRE STRAITS.

THIRD, WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS REGARDING ACCOUNTABILITY AND EFFICIENT OUTPUT BECAUSE WE SHARE THOSE CONCERNS AS WELL.

NOBODY WANTS TO SEE HOUSING DOLLARS PUT TO BETTER USE THAN THE PEOPLE IN THIS AUDIENCE AND OUR MEMBERS WHO CANNOT BE HERE TODAY.

AS A COALITION, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SHOW UP FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS RELATED ISSUES AND HELP HOLD THE CITY ACCOUNTABLE.

PLEASE VISIT OUR FAQ WEB PAGE FOR MORE INFO.

OUR STRENGTH AS A COALITION IS OUR NUMBERS AND OUR DIVERSITY.

WE REFLECT DALLAS FROM SOMOS TEJAS TO THE BLACK CHAMBER, THE AFL-CIO TO HUNT REALTY, JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES TO FRIENDSHIP WEST JUSTICE MINISTRY, JUBILEE PARK TO THE GROVE.

WE'RE ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT ONE OF THE $150 MILLION PROPOSALS AND 20 MILLION FOR HOMELESSNESS.

TODAY MAY WELL BE YOUR MOST IMPORTANT UNOFFICIAL VOTE THAT YOU TAKE ON COUNCIL WITH GENERATIONAL CONSEQUENCES, WE INVITE YOU TO JOIN US.

YOUR TIME, RISE TO THE OCCASION AND SEND A STRONG MESSAGE THAT DALLAS IS BIG ENOUGH FOR EVERYONE.

THANK YOU, EBONY BROCK.

HELLO, I AM DISTRICT PRESIDENT, EBONY BROCK, THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH DIRECTOR FOR THE CONSOLATION OF LIVING MEMORIALS, FOR WHICH I AM HERE.

THE PROGRAM ENTAILS REVITALIZATION OF EIGHT HISTORIC CEMETERIES IN UNDERSERVED DALLAS COMMUNITIES, ALL RATED 4 OR 5 ON THE COMMUNITY NEEDS INDEX.

IT'S A BEAUTIFUL, SELF-SUSTAINING NATIVE WILDLIFE HABITATS.

OUR MISSION IS TO REVIVE THE SACRED GROUNDS OF THESE HISTORIC CEMETERIES, RESTORE THEIR NATURAL AND CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS TO OFFER AN AUTHENTIC SENSE OF PLACE, HERITAGE AND BELONGING TO THEIR SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES WHILE PRESERVING AND HONORING THEIR HISTORIC SITES AND ENVIRONMENT.

OUR WORK WILL PROVIDE A RANGE OF SCIENCE, CULTURE AND ART INSPIRED EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCES FOR ALL AGES AND BUILD OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE COMMUNITY TO CONNECT WITH NATURE AND TO EACH OTHER, CREATING NATIVE BIODIVERSITY HUBS TO ENHANCE THE ECOLOGY, PROVIDE CLIMATE RESILIENCY AND NATURAL BEAUTY WHILE SUPPORTING THE OVERALL GREAT NEED OF THESE OVERLOOKED COMMUNITIES.

WHILE WE HAVE ACTIVATED A STRONG VOLUNTEER WORKFORCE FOR HANDS ON LABOR SUCH AS REMOVAL OF INVASIVE PLANTS, HABITAT BUILDING AND ESTABLISHING TRAILS AND SIGNAGE, THERE IS MUCH TO BE DONE TO COORDINATE THESE FOUNDATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND DEVELOP EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS TO ACHIEVE A ROBUST OUTREACH TO THE PUBLIC.

WHAT SENSE IS THERE IN CREATING THESE GEMS IN OUR CITY HAVE NO ONE KNOWS? SIMPLY PUT, THIS PROJECT CANNOT BE SUSTAINABLE OR AS A EXCLUSIVELY VOLUNTEER, SELF FUNDED ORGANIZATION.

AS COMMUNITY OUTREACH DIRECTOR, I WANT TO BUILD EDUCATIONAL, SUPPORTIVE EXPERIENCES FOR EVERYONE THAT TOUCHES THE UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES.

THERE ARE SO MANY DIVERSE THREADS OF PEOPLE AND PURPOSE IN THIS TAPESTRY WE ARE WEAVING THAT WILL TOUCH THE HEART AND VERY SOUL OF DALLAS.

THERE IS SO MUCH THAT CAN BE SEEN WITH THE EYE, BUT IS SENSED BY THE PEOPLE OF THESE COMMUNITIES.

IGNORING THEIR GREAT NEEDS IS AN INEQUITY THAT UNDERMINES OUR SOCIETY.

WITH YOUR HELP AND SUPPORT, WE CAN TRANSFORM THIS MEANINGFUL PROJECT INTO A LONG TERM BENEFIT FOR THE CITY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

HI, MY NAME IS TAMATHA CURIO.

TAMATHA CURIO.

I'M FROM DISTRICT FIVE, PLEASANT GROVE.

JESUS SAID THE POOR WILL ALWAYS BE WITH YOU, BUT AS A LITTLE [INAUDIBLE] KID WHO LIVED IN SQUALOR ON THE EDGE OF BALCH SPRINGS AND PLEASANT GROVE, I'VE HAD TO CONTINUOUSLY REMIND MYSELF THAT THE RICH WILL ALSO ALWAYS BE WITH US, THE RICH AND POWERFUL.

I'VE BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH IN MY ADULT LIFE TO KNOW SOME WEALTHY AND OR POWERFUL FOLKS WHO ARE KIND, COMPASSIONATE, GENEROUS, AND HAVE A TRUE DESIRE TO COLLABORATE AND PROBLEM SOLVE. I BELIEVE YOU ARE HAPPY TO SEE US HERE, AS WE BRING THE DREAMS THAT YOU HAVE ENCOURAGED US TO DEVELOP COLLECTIVELY, AS IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

AND NOW WE'RE ASKING YOU TO FUND THOSE DREAMS BY PROVIDING THE FULL RECOMMENDED AMOUNT AND ECO DEV MONIES TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

OUR. WE HAVE AN ICDP THAT WILL PROVIDE TRAINING TO FOLKS IN OUR COMMUNITY, WILL PROVIDE A GREEN SPACE.

IT WOULD PROVIDE A CULTURAL SPACE THAT ACTUALLY IS OPEN AFTER 5:00.

IT WOULD PROVIDE TECHNICAL TRAINING.

IT WOULD DO MANY THINGS FOR A COMMUNITY THAT HAS BEEN LONG IGNORED IN ALL OF THOSE AREAS.

I'VE SPENT SOME TIME AS A PERFORMANCE ARTIST AND HAVE ENGAGED IN ANCESTRAL RESEARCH THROUGH RITUAL IN FRONT OF THE SANTOS RODRIGUEZ RECREATION CENTER, ACROSS THE STREET FROM

[00:40:07]

HARRY HINES IN FRONT OF THE, YOU KNOW, IN THE SHADOWS OF THE LUXURY CONDO TOWERS.

AND SO SOMETIMES WHEN YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPERS AND HOUSING, I DON'T KNOW IF I ACTUALLY BELIEVE WHAT YOU SAY IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE ARTS MONEY THAT WENT FOR, INTO THE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, FOR ARTISTS, THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

$14 MILLION WAS GIVEN AND THAT DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THE FOLKS WHO ARE HERE AND FROM THE HOUSING COMMUNITIES TO CONSIDER, AS A MOM OF A SPECIAL NEEDS ADULT, WHAT IS BEING DONE FOR THAT PARTICULAR POPULATION OF COMMUNITY THAT MAY BE NOT HOMELESS.

NOW THAT'S YOUR TIME. COULD BE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HOMELESS IN THE FUTURE.

RUDY RODRIGUEZ.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR JOHNSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

I'M RUDY RODRIGUEZ, A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 13 AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DALLAS ZOO.

I'M HERE TO ASK FOR FULL FUNDING FOR OUR PARKS AND FOR THE DALLAS ZOO'S FULL $30 MILLION BOND REQUEST.

I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS SINCE 2007.

FOR A FEW YEARS BEFORE THAT, I WAS A PARK BOARD LIAISON TO THE ZOO.

MY TWO CHILDREN WERE BASICALLY RAISED AT THE ZOO.

AND THEY ACT LIKE IT.

TOGETHER, WE EXPERIENCED THE ZOO'S TRANSFORMATION FROM GOOD TO GREAT THAT MY FELLOW DIRECTOR, LOIS FINKELMAN DESCRIBED EARLIER.

I'LL JUST NOTE A FEW THINGS AS YOU MAKE YOUR CONSIDERATIONS.

THE ZOO IS ONE OF THE MOST AFFORDABLE PLACES IN TOWN FOR FAMILIES TO LEARN AND ENJOY NATURE TOGETHER.

ALMOST 50% OF GUESTS ATTENDED FOR $10 OR LESS LAST YEAR.

THE ZOO IS ONE OF THE LARGEST EMPLOYERS IN OAK CLIFF.

THIS PROJECT WILL ADD ADDITIONAL JOBS AND HAVE POSITIVE ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESSES AND RESTAURANTS AS WELL.

THE ZOO'S PROJECT WILL ADD 15 ACRES OF GREEN SPACE, MUCH NEEDED GREEN SPACE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE ZOO IS AN EDUCATION HUB WITH A PRESCHOOL 100,000 PLUS FIELD TRIP ATTENDEES PER YEAR.

PARTNERSHIPS WITH AREA SCHOOLS AND MORE.

THE PROJECT, THIS PROJECT WILL HELP THE ZOO REACH EVEN MORE CHILDREN AND FAMILIES.

THE BOND ALLOCATION WE ARE REQUESTING IS AN INVESTMENT IN A VIBRANT FUTURE FOR THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS.

WE ON THE DALLAS BOARD OF THE DALLAS ZOO BOARD WILL CONTINUE TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE FUNDING ENTRUSTED TO US, AS WE ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.

WE THANK YOU FOR HELPING US TO FULFILL OUR MISSION AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

PHILIP KINGSTON IS NOT PRESENT.

PHILIP KINGSTON.

MARCY HELFAND.

GOOD MORNING, I'M MARCY HELFAND.

I SERVE ON THE BOARD OF THE DALLAS HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.

HOWEVER, MY REMARKS TODAY ARE COMING JUST FROM ME AND ARE NOT THE REMARKS OF THE BOARD.

THIS PAST YEAR ALONE, THE DHFC HAD DEVELOPERS WHO WANTED TO BUILD AFFORDABLE UNITS BUT HAD TO PUT THEIR PROJECTS ON HOLD BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T MAKE THEM WORK WITHOUT ADDITIONAL SUPPORT. DEVELOPERS WHO WANT TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE UNITS HAVE THE SAME COST OF DEVELOPMENT, BUT HAVE A GAP IN INCOME, BECAUSE THEY CAN'T CHARGE MARKET RENT TO FILL THE GAP, THEY CAN USE TAX EXEMPT BONDS TO LOWER THE COST OF THEIR FINANCING.

THEY CAN OFFER THEIR INVESTORS TAX CREDITS, AND THEY CAN GET A TAX EXEMPTION FOR THE REAL ESTATE TAXES.

IN THE PAST, THOSE THREE MECHANISMS FULLY FUNDED THE GAP FOR THE DEVELOPER.

HOWEVER, THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION HAS GONE UP TREMENDOUSLY, AND THE FEDERAL FUNDS INTEREST RATE HAS GONE FROM 0.25% TO 5.5% JUST IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS.

BECAUSE OF THAT, THOSE THREE TRADITIONAL MECHANISMS NO LONGER WORK, AND THE OTHER DOLLARS AVAILABLE FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN ONLY FUND A SMALL PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENTS WHICH HAVE COME BEFORE THE DHFC.

I HOPE THIS ANSWERS THE CONCERN I HEARD AT THE LAST BRIEFING ABOUT NOT HAVING PROJECTS THAT ALREADY HAD A NEED FOR THESE BOND DOLLARS, IN ADDITION TO THE NEED FOR UNITS AFFORDABLE TO THOSE EARNING 60% OF AMI, WHICH FOR AN INDIVIDUAL IS $44,000.

THERE'S ALSO A HUGE NEED FOR WHAT WE REFER TO AS MISSING MIDDLE WORKERS.

THAT WOULD BE THOSE EARNING BETWEEN 80% AND 120% OF AMI, WHICH EQUATES TO 59,000 TO 88,000 FOR AN INDIVIDUAL.

THE DEVELOPERS WHO WANT TO PROVIDE SOME OF THOSE UNITS ALONGSIDE MARKET UNITS IN A DEVELOPMENT CAN'T USE TAX EXEMPT BONDS OR TAX CREDITS.

SO ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE LESS OF A GAP TO FILL, THEY HAVE FEWER LEVERS TO USE IF THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE THE FUNDS TO PROVIDE TO THEM.

THAT MISSING MIDDLE INCLUDES OUR POLICE, OUR FIREFIGHTERS, OUR TEACHERS, AND OUR NURSES.

[00:45:05]

PLEASE APPROVE THE $150 MILLION IN BONDS TO PROVIDE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE DESPERATELY NEED.

THANK YOU. I'LL NOW CALL THE NEXT GROUP OF SPEAKERS.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST TWO ROWS OF THE CENTER SECTION.

AARON FENNELL, CHRIS DENNY, DEREK AVERY, BILLY LANE, ADAM LAMONT, ED ZARA, MATTHEW HENDERLONG, COLUMN CLARK GREG ESTELLE, JONATHAN DELAHUNTY, MARK ISHMAEL, ISHMAEL, NATHANIEL BARRETT, BRIAN LLEWELLYN, PATRICK KENNEDY AND JASON DIAMOND.

AARON FENNELL YOU MAY COME TO THE PODIUM.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR JOHNSON AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS AARON FENNELL.

I'M A DALLAS RESIDENT. I'VE BEEN IN THE DFW REGION FOR ABOUT 22 YEARS.

I'M HERE AS A MEMBER OF THE DALLAS HOUSING COALITION.

I'VE SEEN MUCH OF GROWTH AND ADVANCEMENT IN THE REGION, BUT ONE THING THAT HAS BECOME A GROWING CONCERN FOR ME IS HOUSING.

ACCORDING TO AXIOS DALLAS, A DATA AND INVESTIGATION FIRM FROM DALLAS, THE COST OF LIVING IN DALLAS HAS INCREASED YEAR OVER YEAR, FOR THE PAST 22 YEARS, DALLAS WAS RANKED THE 53RD MOST EXPENSIVE STATE OR, I'M SORRY, EXPENSIVE CITY OF OVER 400 CITIES ANALYZED IN 2019, YOU COULD BUILD A HOME FOR ABOUT $100 A SQUARE FOOT.

FIVE YEARS LATER, $200 PER SQUARE FOOT IS NOW THE STANDARD.

IF DALLAS WANTS TO BE A MAJOR INTERNATIONAL CITY, WE MUST TACKLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO I'M AN ADVOCATE FOR THE $150 MILLION TOWARDS HOUSING AND THEN $20 MILLION TOWARDS HOMELESSNESS.

I WAS HELPING AND WE HAVE AN AGING POPULATION AS WELL.

SENIOR LIVING IS A HUGE THING.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE DEVELOPMENT FOR SENIOR LIVING AND HOUSING.

I WAS HELPING A 60 YEAR OLD GENTLEMAN WITH, YOU KNOW, FIND A NEW PLACE.

HE WAS LIVING WITH HIS BROTHER AND SISTER, AND HE HAD BEEN LIVING WITH THEM, AND HE WAS TIRED OF LIVING WITH THEM.

AND HE INFORMED ME THAT HE WANTED HIS OWN PLACE.

I ASKED HIM A FEW QUESTIONS.

I SAID, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH ARE YOU HOPING TO SPEND FOR A NEW PLACE? HE INFORMED ME THAT HE WAS HOPING TO SPEND ABOUT $400 NOT HAVING THE REALITY THAT THAT'S JUST NOT POSSIBLE TODAY.

SO I WOULD LIKE LIKE I SAID, I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF DALLAS HOUSING COALITION, AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY MORE DONE FOR OUR SENIORS.

GOOD MORNING, I'M CHRIS DENNY.

CHRIS DANNY.

I LIVE IN DISTRICT 14.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE TURTLE CREEK PARK AND THE PARKS COALITION.

WE'RE A PROUD MEMBER OF THE PARKS COALITION.

WE WANT TO ASK FOR THE FULL FUNDING OF $350 MILLION FOR PARKS IN THE 2024 BOND ELECTION.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO INGEST AND INJECT FUNDING INTO ALL THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE, SPECIFICALLY AT TURTLE CREEK PARK, WE WANT TO ACTIVATE FIVE ACRES OF THE PARK, THAT WAS CEDED TO US IN 2013, 2014.

THAT IS YET TO BE ACTIVATED.

WE'RE ASKING FOR $1.5 MILLION TO MATCH AGAINST A 4.5 MILLION, PRIVATE FUNDRAISING PROJECT.

SO, WE JUST APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION.

IT IS A WONDERFUL THING TO BE ABLE TO COME AS A CITIZEN OF DALLAS, TO EXPRESS OURSELVES AND TO MAKE KNOWN WHAT WE WANT TO HAVE HAPPEN.

BUT WE WOULD REALLY ADVOCATE FOR THE PARK SECTION OF, THE BOND BECAUSE IT'S JUST SO IMPORTANT TO KEEP THOSE PARKS ACTIVE AND ALIVE AND, BRINGING MORE, ECONOMIC GROWTH TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE.

DEREK AVERY. GOOD MORNING, GOOD MORNING, CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING US HERE.

MY NAME IS DEREK AVERY, AND I'M HERE TO ENCOURAGE THE CITY TO INCREASE THE FUNDING FOR IN THE BOND, THE 2024 BOND FOR HOUSING. I GREW UP HOUSING INSECURE.

I LIVED AT MOTEL SIX MY SENIOR YEAR IN HIGH SCHOOL, AND Y'ALL SEE A POLISHED VERSION OF ME TODAY.

I'M A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER.

I FOCUS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

MY SLOGAN IS REVITALIZATION WITHOUT GENTRIFICATION.

AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON AS A GROUP AND AS A CITY.

AND I THINK THAT TYPE OF INVESTMENT CAN SEND A MESSAGE TO THIS ENTIRE COUNTRY THAT WE ARE FOCUSED ON SOLVING THE HOUSING CRISIS.

I LOOK AT DALLAS AND YOU THINK ABOUT A STABILIZED NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE DATA SAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE OVER 50% HOME OWNERSHIP IN A NEIGHBORHOOD FOR IT TO BE STABILIZED.

DALLAS HAS 44% HOME OWNERSHIP.

WE CAN'T GET TO A STABILIZED CITY IF WE DON'T HAVE OVER 50% HOME OWNERSHIP.

AND I THINK THAT AN INVESTMENT IN THIS PARTICULAR BOND WOULD HELP US GET THERE.

[00:50:03]

THIS IS NOT TO TAKE AWAY FROM ANY OTHER DEPARTMENT.

THIS IS NOT TO TAKE AWAY FROM PARKS.

BUT WE NEED PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE.

WE NEED LIVING WAGES.

WE NEED A LOT OF THINGS.

BUT HOUSING IS A BASIC HUMAN RIGHT, AND HOUSING IS THE BASIS OF MOST PEOPLE'S WEALTH.

AND IF AND IF WE DON'T INVEST IN THAT, WE WILL BE BACK HERE EVERY THREE YEARS, EVERY FOUR YEARS TO DO THE SAME THING.

SO I THINK THAT IF WE INVEST IN OUR MOST VULNERABLE AND WE INVEST IN EVEN PEOPLE WHO ARE STRUGGLING TO BECOME HOMEOWNERS, THEN WE CAN GET TO WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

THE LAST THING I WANT TO CLOSE WITH IS IT'S A BIT OF A LEFT TURN, BUT I WANT YOU ALL TO THINK ABOUT SANDBRANCH TEXAS.

SANDBRANCH DOES NOT HAVE RUNNING WATER.

DALLAS WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY IS 400FT AWAY FROM SANDBRANCH, TEXAS, AND THAT COULD BE PART OF THIS BOND AS WELL.

SO THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH.

BILLY LANE. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

MY NAME IS BILLY LANE.

I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR INNER CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, AND ICDC IS ALSO A MEMBER OF THE DALLAS HOUSING COALITION.

AND I STAND IN SUPPORT OF THE $150 MILLION [INAUDIBLE] FOR HOUSING AND $20 MILLION FOR HOMELESSNESS YESTERDAY DURING A RIBBON CUTTING EVENT AT ICDC.

IT WAS A SPECIAL EVENT, PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN ICDC KROGER AND BONTON FARMS, KNOWN AS GROCERY CONNECT.

AND DURING THAT RIBBON CUTTING EVENT, I MET A LADY AND HER SON, A YOUNG SON.

THEY CAME OVER, WALKED DOWN THE STREET, AND I ASKED HER.

I SAID, WHERE DO YOU LIVE? AND SHE POINTED TO A SECTION OF HOMES RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM ICDC.

I FELT PROUD, BUT I ASKED HER, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT WHERE YOU LIVE? SHE SAID, MY MOTHER BOUGHT IT.

WE LIKE IT.

I SAID, YOU WANT TO STAY HERE? SHE SAYS, YES, WE LOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THAT MADE ME FEEL EVEN MORE PROUD.

OUR CONVERSATION GOT INTERRUPTED, BUT WHAT I WANTED TO SAY TO HER WAS THAT ICDC BUILT THOSE HOMES, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHAT I WANT TO TELL HER.

ICDC BUILT THOSE HOMES WITH HELP FROM CITY BOND DOLLARS.

NOW, I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU.

THE CITY IS NOT THE EASIEST PEOPLE TO WORK WITH.

BUT IT'S WORTH IT BECAUSE THAT LITTLE BOY, HIS MOTHER AND HIS GRANDMOTHER HAVE A HOME THAT IS MULTI-GENERATIONAL IMPACT, MULTI-GENERATIONAL STABILITY.

SO WE ASK THAT YOU APPROVE THE $150 MILLION FOR HOUSING AND THE $20 MILLION FOR HOMELESSNESS.

ADAM, IS THERE AN ECHO? NO WE CAN HEAR YOU.

ADAM LAMONT. HELLO.

OKAY. 942 ANDERSON PARKWAY.

I THINK JUST WHAT I'M ASKING FOR.

AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, THOSE WHO ARE LOOKING FOR MORE MONEY FOR BOTH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND FOR THE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING REFORM IS JUST THAT THIS COUNCIL TAKE THIS HOUSING CRISIS SERIOUSLY.

THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE FOR PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS IS HOW EXPENSIVE HOUSING IS.

THAT'S ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL CITY SURVEY.

AND I GUARANTEE IF WE JUST WALK DOWN THE STREET ANYWHERE IN THE CITY, THE HIGH PRICE OF HOUSING IS WHAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TELL YOU IS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE RIGHT NOW.

CITY'S OWN MBA, RIGHT, SAYS THAT THE AVERAGE SALES PRICE FOR A HOUSE RIGHT IN THE LAST SIX YEARS IS UP 196%.

TO QUOTE A WISE MAN. RIGHT.

THE RENT IS TOO DAMN HIGH.

I DON'T HAVE TIME TO CONVINCE YOU ON ALL THE MERITS OF THESE POLICIES.

I'M JUST GOING TO LIST OUT PLACES THAT ARE UNDERTAKING ONE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY.

RIGHT HERE ARE CITIES THAT HAVE DONE LARGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BONDS FROM LAST IN RECENT YEARS.

SEATTLE 970 MILLION RIGHT OVER SEVEN YEARS FOR THEM.

AUSTIN 350 MILLION.

SAN ANTONIO 150 MILLION.

SAN FRANCISCO 300 MILLION, PENDING VOTER APPROVAL IN MARCH.

COLUMBUS, OHIO 200 MILLION.

PALM BEACH COUNTY 200 MILLION.

PUTTING MONEY TOWARDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN A BOND IS NOT SOME NEWER, UNPROVEN POLICY, RIGHT? IT'S A PROVEN AND RATIONAL APPROACH TO A HOUSING CRISIS LIKE WE'VE NEVER SEEN MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING REFORMS, RIGHT? MINIMUM LOT SIZE REFORM.

AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY TRIPLEXES.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PORTLAND, OREGON, STATE OF WASHINGTON, STATE OF MONTANA, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, STATE OF MAINE, MINNEAPOLIS, AND OF COURSE, HOUSTON.

OKAY. AS WELL AS MANY INTERNATIONAL CITIES.

THESE AREN'T RIGHT PLOTS.

THIS IS, THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO TODAY TO SOLVE THE HOUSING CRISIS.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, RIGHT? WE'RE IN A HOUSING CRISIS.

PLEASE ACT LIKE IT.

[00:55:01]

ED SARAH. ED'S NOT PRESENT.

MATTHEW HINTERLAND.

HERE. HERE.

I'M HERE. I'M SORRY.

IS THAT OKAY? ED ZARA.

OKAY MR. ZARA, WILL YOU PLEASE DISPLAY YOUR CAMERA? CAN YOU SAY YES? YES. WE CAN SEE YOU AND HEAR YOU.

YOU MAY CONTINUE.

THANK YOU. ED ZARA, 1003 VALENCIA DALLAS, DISTRICT 14.

BUY RIGHT IS THE DEAL BREAKER.

BUYING A HOME IS BUYING A NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS BUYING A HOUSE.

EVERYONE PICKS THE ZONING THAT FITS YOUR LIFESTYLE AND DEPENDS ON THE BOND WITH THE CITY, THAT THE QUALITY OF LIFE WILL BE PROTECTED.

IF THE NEW MINIMUM LOT SIZES AND DUPLEX TRIPLEX, FOURPLEX, MULTIFAMILY BUY RIGHT PROPOSAL AND ANY NEIGHBORHOOD MOVES FORWARD, SINGLE FAMILY ZONING IS GONE FOR GOOD.

WHAT THIS PROPOSAL ACTUALLY DOES IS TAKE OUR RESIDENTS RIGHT TO A HEARING ON THE MATTER AWAY AND PROPOSES TO MAKE THESE DEVELOPABLE BY RIGHT MEANING ANY TIME, ANY PLACE, BY ANYONE WITHOUT A PUBLIC PROCESS TO ENSURE THAT THESE STRUCTURES RESPECT STABLE NEIGHBORHOODS WITH A PROCESS THAT ALLOWS FOR PUBLIC INPUT TO ENSURE THAT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ARE NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECTED, THE CITY CANNOT CHERRY PICK LOTS AND INJECT A NEW BY RIGHT ZONING WITHOUT CHANGING ALL OF THE EXISTING ZONING THAT IS RECORDED BY DEED AND CREATED BY ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION PLATS.

A FORWARD DALLAS PASSES WITH THIS HIDDEN AGENDA OF CHANGING THE DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW ADUS AND MULTIFAMILY BY RIGHT IN ANY NEIGHBORHOOD, SINGLE FAMILY ZONING IS GONE FOR GOOD.

EVERYONE I KNOW IN THIS FIGHT AGREES THAT HOUSING SOLUTIONS NEED TO BE DEVELOPED, BUT LOSING SINGLE FAMILY ZONING BECAUSE OF THE BUY RIGHT FEVER GOING AROUND IN CITY HALL IS NOT RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MATTHEW HENDERLONG.

BUT. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, CITY COUNCIL, FOR HAVING ME.

MY NAME IS MATT HENDERLONG.

I LIVE IN DISTRICT 13.

I'M A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPER IN DISTRICT 13 AND IN DISTRICT SIX.

I AM HERE WITH SUPPORT OF THE REMOVAL OF MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS AND THE RIGHTS TO HAVE FOUR UNITS PER LOT IN YOUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

THESE ARE NO COST OPTIONS THAT WILL INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN DALLAS.

I CURRENTLY BUILD SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN MIDWAY HOLLOW THAT ONLY OR THAT 90% OF RESIDENTS IN DALLAS CANNOT AFFORD.

DALLAS NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

DALLAS CURRENT DEFINITION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS LARGE APARTMENT BLOCKS WITH OCCASIONAL TOWNHOME OR DUPLEX PROJECTS, AND THOSE ARE STILL NOT AFFORDABLE BY 80% OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN DALLAS.

WE NEED TO REMOVE ZONING REQUIREMENTS AND PROMOTE DENSITY AND ALTERNATIVE HOUSING TYPES IN THE CITY.

THE NATIONAL AVERAGE HOME COST USED TO BE UNDER $300,000.

NOW IT IS WELL OVER $400,000 IN JUST THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

WE NEED NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILT IN THIS COUNTRY THAT CAN BE SOLD FOR UNDER $300 THAT 80% OF THE POPULATION OF DALLAS CAN AFFORD. DALLAS HAS THEIR OWN PROBLEMS OF GETTING NEW HOUSING UNITS BUILT IN THE CITY FOR YEARS, AND THEY'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF REDUCING BACKLOGS AND PERMITTING.

BUT WE'RE DEFINITELY IN THE NEED TO REDUCE REGULATION AND INCREASE PROPERTY OWNERS RIGHTS IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE DENSITY OF THE CITY AND TO ALLOW FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

CALUM CLARK IS NOT PRESENT.

GREG ESTELLE.

GREG ESTELLE IS NOT PRESENT.

JONATHAN DILLAHUNTY.

JONATHAN DELAHUNTY.

YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.

OH, SORRY. ALL RIGHT, MAY I BEGIN? GO AHEAD. OKAY.

JONATHAN DILLAHUNTY, LOCKWOOD, DISTRICT NINE.

I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF MINIMUM LOT SIZE REFORM AND INCREASING THE HOUSING ALLOTMENT IN THE BOND.

THE COST OF HOUSING IS REACHING A CRISIS POINT IN THE CITY.

THIS PROPOSAL WILL WORK TO STABILIZE THE HOUSING MARKET.

SHELTER CANNOT BE MADE INTO A FINITE RESOURCE THAT IS INFINITELY APPRECIATING IN VALUE.

OUR CURRENT TRAJECTORY WILL LEAD TO DISASTER.

MY WIFE AND I MOVED INTO OUR HOUSE IN 2019.

IT IS A SMALL TWO BED, TWO BATH THAT WE VIEWED AS A STARTER HOME.

UNFORTUNATELY, DESPITE ME SIGNIFICANTLY ADVANCING IN MY CAREER AS A DATA ANALYST AT ONE OF THE BIGGEST BANKS IN THE COUNTRY, OUR INCOME CANNOT KEEP UP WITH RISING HOUSING COSTS.

[01:00:10]

NOT ONLY ARE WE PRICED OUT OF GETTING A HOME WITH ANOTHER BEDROOM TO ACCOMMODATE OUR GROWING FAMILY, WE WOULD BE PRICED OUT FROM OTHER TWO TWOS IN OUR CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE APPRECIATION OF OUR HOUSE MEANS NOTHING WHEN THE ONLY OPTION IT ALLOWS IS TO SELL IT IN ORDER TO UPSIZE IN THE SUBURBS.

I'VE LIVED IN EAST DALLAS MY ENTIRE LIFE, AND THE THOUGHT THAT I AM NOW BEING PRICED OUT OF MY HOME DUE TO INSUFFICIENT HOUSING POLICY IN OUR CITY IS DEEPLY PAINFUL TO ME.

MINIMUM LOT SIZE REFORM WILL ALLOW MORE HOUSING TO BE BUILT IN OUR CITY, AS WELL AS A GREATER VARIETY OF HOUSING.

THE MAIN CRITIQUE I'VE HEARD OF THIS PROPOSAL IS THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT MORE PEOPLE MOVING INTO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD AND ADDING TRAFFIC, ETC.

I WOULD SAY IF YOUR GOAL IS TO LIVE NEAR AS FEW PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, LIVING IN THE NINTH LARGEST CITY IN THE US MIGHT NOT BE THE PLACE TO DO THAT.

IT IS FINANCIALLY UNSUSTAINABLE TO BUILD HOUSING POLICY AROUND PEOPLE WHO WANT A SUBURBAN LIFESTYLE WITH AN URBAN PRICE TAG.

WE NEED ADDED DENSITY TO INCREASE OUR TAX BASE, MAKE OUR CITIES MORE WALKABLE, FAMILY AND SENIOR FRIENDLY, AND INCREASE ACCESS TO HOUSING FOR PEOPLE OF ALL INCOME BANDS.

THIS IS NOT A RADICAL PROPOSAL.

THIS IS THE EXPERTS CONSENSUS OPINION NATIONWIDE AND WHERE IT HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN OTHER CITIES, IT HAS PRODUCED THE DESIRED EFFECT.

CULLUM CLARK IS NOW ONLINE, MR. CLARK. WE CAN SEE YOU.

MR. CLARK, WOULD YOU NEED TO GO ON, OFF MUTE? UNMUTE YOURSELF. OKAY.

NOW, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, YES, WE CAN GO AHEAD.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THANKS FOR GIVING ME A CHANCE TO SPEAK.

MY NAME IS COLIN CLARK. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 13.

I'M AN ECONOMIST, AND I LEAD THE ECONOMIC POLICY WORK OF THE GEORGE W BUSH INSTITUTE.

AND ALSO I'M AN ADJUNCT PROFESSOR AT SMU.

AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SPEAK BRIEFLY ON THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, IDEA REALLY COMING AT IT FROM AN ECONOMISTS POINT OF VIEW, WHAT DOES THE DATA SHOW? AND I HAVE PULLED TOGETHER SOME, SOME NUMBERS ON THIS.

IT'S NOT A TOPIC THAT HAS BEEN HEAVILY STUDIED BY ECONOMISTS AND OTHER EXPERTS, BUT THERE ARE SOME STUDIES.

LET ME TELL YOU QUICKLY ABOUT THREE AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR DALLAS.

FIRST OF ALL, THERE IS ONE NATIONAL STUDY LED BY JOSEPH GYOURKO, A PROMINENT HOUSING EXPERT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, AND COLLEAGUES, THEY LOOKED AT NEIGHBORHOODS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY, COMPARING NEIGHBORHOODS IN CITIES WITH RELATIVELY LOW MINIMUM LOT SIZES, I.E. RELATIVELY PERMISSIVE, ENVIRONMENTS FOR BUILDING VERSUS CITIES WITH RELATIVELY RESTRICTIVE HIGH MINIMUM LOT SIZES AND CAME UP WITH SORT OF PAIRS THAT WERE VERY SIMILAR TO EACH OTHER.

AND WHAT THEY FOUND IS THAT THE CITIES WITH LOWER MINIMUM LOT SIZES HAD ABOUT 11% MORE UNITS PER ACRE.

THE HOMES WERE SLIGHTLY SMALLER.

THEY WERE ALSO HOUSING PRICES WERE LOWER BY ABOUT 10%.

SECOND PIECE OF EVIDENCE IS HOUSTON, ONE OF THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT CITIES IN LARGER CITIES IN AMERICA TO ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT A REDUCTION IN MINIMUM LOT SIZE.

THEY DID THAT FIRST IN 1998, IN CORE URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS NEAR DOWNTOWN AND THEN ULTIMATELY IN THE WHOLE CITY IN 2013.

IT'S BEEN STUDIED BY SEVERAL PEOPLE.

ONE STUDY LED BY UT AUSTIN RESEARCHERS LOOKED AT TWO EFFECTS.

ONE IS THAT IN THREE ZONED COMMERCIAL LAND, FORMERLY INDUSTRIAL AND RETAIL AND THINGS LIKE THAT, SOMETHING ON THE ORDER OF 22,000 MORE UNITS WERE BUILT IN THOSE PLACES THAN WOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT UNDER THE OLD RULES, ACCORDING TO THEIR STUDY.

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'VE ALSO WRITTEN SOMETHING ABOUT THIS.

AND IF YOU ALL WANT TO SAY THANK YOU.

MARK ISHMAEL.

HI, I'M MARK ISHMAEL.

I LIVE AT 2401 BENNETT AVENUE, APARTMENT 3231, IN DISTRICT 14.

AND I'M HERE AS A MEMBER OF DALLAS NEIGHBORS FOR HOUSING AND IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE DALLAS HOUSING COALITION.

I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL FOR THEIR WORK SO FAR ON THE BOND.

I KNOW IT'S A COMPLICATED ISSUE WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS, AND I WANT TO ASK THEM TO PLEASE SUPPORT THE 150 MILLION PROPOSED FOR HOUSING AND 20 MILLION FOR HOMELESSNESS.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED ZONING REFORMS, REDUCING MINIMUM LOT SIZES AND ALLOWING FOR MULTIPLE UNITS PER LOT IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

THESE WILL INCREASE AFFORDABILITY FOR RESIDENTS.

WE KNOW THERE'S A HOUSING CRISIS.

RENT IS INCREASING, HOME SALE PRICES ARE UP IN RECENT YEARS AT UNSUSTAINABLE RATES, AND SO PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SUPPLY WHEREVER WE CAN IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THAT.

IT'S ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL WEALTH BUILDING, WITH THE MOST COMMON ZONING IN DALLAS BEING OUR 7.5, WHICH IS 7500 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZES.

[01:05:02]

IF WE, TOOK HOUSTON'S APPROACH OF HAVING A 1500 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZE, THAT'S FIVE HOMES ON EXISTING LOTS THAT COULD EXIST.

AND THAT'S THE WAY THAT YOU BEGIN GETTING PEOPLE ACCESS TO, GETTING THEIR OWN HOUSING AND EVEN PURCHASING A HOME, FOR A CROWD THAT AT THE UNDER THE CURRENT STATUS QUO, IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE RENTING IN PERPETUITY BECAUSE NO ONE CAN SAVE UP ENOUGH FOR DOWN PAYMENTS AND TO AFFORD THE MORTGAGES AT CURRENT INTEREST RATES.

AND THEN ALSO, IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE'LL INCREASE THE TAX BASE FOR THE CITY.

THE CITY HAS A LOT OF LONG TERM DEBT OBLIGATIONS.

A LOT OF THINGS IS TRYING TO FUND, INCLUDING PENSIONS AND FUTURE INFRASTRUCTURE WORK.

IF WE CAN GET MORE BUSINESSES, MORE RESIDENTS IN DALLAS INCREASE THE DENSITY OF THE CITY, WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE HOW MUCH TAX REVENUE WE'RE COLLECTING.

WE'LL BE ABLE TO BETTER ADDRESS TRANSPORTATION TO BASICALLY FUND EVERYTHING ELSE WE WANTED.

THAT'S YOUR TIME, ETC..

NATHANIEL BARRETT IS NOT PRESENT.

BRIAN LEWELLEN.

GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING.

I APOLOGIZE, MR.. MR. LEWELLEN. I BELIEVE YOUR TURN ON MY CAMERA.

YES, PLEASE. WORKING.

I APOLOGIZE. THERE SEEMS TO BE A WEBEX ISSUE AND I'M NOT ABLE TO USE IT.

OKAY, WELL, I'M SORRY, MR. LEWIS. WE'LL COME BACK, BUT WE CAN MOVE ON IF YOU'RE HAVING CAMERA ISSUES.

EXACTLY. OKAY.

PATRICK KENNEDY IS NOT PRESENT.

JASON DIAMOND.

JASON DIAMOND IS NOT PRESENT.

I'LL NOW CALL THE NEXT GROUP OF OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST TWO ROWS OF THE CENTER SECTION.

MICHAEL MEADOWS, CATHERINE MCGOVERN, SAMANTHA BRADLEY, DAVID MARQUIS, BRANDON HALL, ABRAHAM MORENO, DAVID GUYER, JOHN BODIFORD, SARAH STEAMS, TRACY WEBSTER, JERRY BAKER, RACHEL MCGOWAN, VICTORIA CLOUGH, SABINA CARR HAS CANCELED, AND SHELLEY WHITE . MICHAEL MEADOWS, YOU MAY COME TO THE PODIUM.

MY NAME IS MICHAEL MEADOWS.

I LIVE IN DISTRICT 13.

I AM A CONSULTANT TO PUBLIC CHARITIES, PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS AND PHILANTHROPIC FAMILIES, AND CURRENTLY UNDER MY CONSULTING PRACTICE, I AM SERVING AS THE INTERIM CEO OF DALLAS COUNTY HERITAGE SOCIETY, WHICH IS MANAGING OLD CITY PARK AND IN.

ALTHOUGH I AM NOT HERE IN THE GREEN SHIRT, I WANT TO SAY I FIRST OF ALL FULLY SUPPORT AND WE ALL FULLY SUPPORT THE PARK DEPARTMENT'S FULL REQUEST FOR 350 MILLION, IN WHICH UNTIL RECENTLY, OLD CITY PARK WAS NOT INCLUDED.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE IS NOW 2 MILLION IN THERE.

AND SO I'LL START WITH THE HEADLINE.

WE ARE GRATEFUL TO BE INCLUDED AT ALL, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS NEARLY ENOUGH.

TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY, I WAS ORIGINALLY HIRED BY DALLAS COUNTY HERITAGE SOCIETY TO COME IN AS A CONSULTANT, AND I BROUGHT IN FORMER PARK DIRECTORS, PAUL DYER AND WILLIS WINTERS, TO HELP DO AN ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMEND OPERATIONAL CHANGES.

AS WE WENT THROUGH THAT, WE DISCOVERED THAT THERE WAS A LONG HISTORY OF UNDERINVESTMENT IN OLD CITY PARK BY THE CITY OF DALLAS.

I THINK THE LAST TIME THAT THERE HAD BEEN A BOND DOLLARS WAS $250,000 THAT WERE REPLACED ONE ROOF.

THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT THERE WHEN WE WENT THROUGH, THERE WAS ABOUT $10 MILLION IN DEFERRED MAINTENANCE THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.

I THINK ARCHITECTUS IS DOING SOME WORK FOR YOU RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S GOING TO PROBABLY TELL YOU IT'S CLOSER TO 20 MILLION.

HERE'S WHAT I WANT TO SAY IN THE SHORT TIME I'VE GOT LEFT.

ON MAY 27TH, THE CITY OF DALLAS WILL TAKE FULL CONTROL OF OLD CITY PARK.

YOU ALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MANAGING IT.

IF YOU DON'T INVEST SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE PARK, I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT PRIVATE PHILANTHROPISTS WILL NOT EITHER.

AND THAT WILL LEAVE YOU WITH DALLAS'S OLDEST PARK IN A VERY DETERIORATED POSITION.

IT IS A JEWEL.

IT IS DALLAS'S OLDEST PARK.

IT IS WHERE THE DALLAS ZOO STARTED.

I ENCOURAGE YOU TO PLEASE DO AS MUCH AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN FOR OLD CITY PARK.

THANK YOU. CATHERINE MCGOVERN.

THANK YOU. I HAVE A HANDOUT.

WHO SHOULD I GIVE IT TO? THANK YOU.

[01:10:01]

MY NAME IS CATHERINE MCGOVERN AND I AM ASKING FOR MORE MONEY FOR PRESTON ROYAL LIBRARY.

I'M IN DISTRICT 13.

I WE ARE CURRENTLY BEING OFFERED IN THE ALLOCATION AND A RENOVATION OF 8.3 MILLION BY ADDING .007% OF THE CURRENT BOND PROPOSAL OF 1.25, WE COULD EXPAND IT.

AND I USE THE TERM WE BECAUSE THIS IS TAXPAYERS MONEY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

THIS IS SERVICE TO THE TAXPAYERS.

NOW, THE HANDOUT THAT I GAVE YOU SHOWS YOU WHERE PRESTON ROYAL LIBRARY IS.

IT IS THE ONLY LIBRARY IN THAT AREA SOUTH OF 635, NORTH OF NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, WEST OF 75 AND EAST OF SAY MARSH.

NOW WE ARE IF IF WE BY ME, I MEAN ME, THE PEOPLE THAT GO TO CRICHTON ROYAL LIBRARY, THE FRIENDS, THE COMMUNITY HAD OUR SAY.

EVERY LIBRARY WOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE STANDARD OF 18,000FT².

OUR LIBRARY IS CURRENTLY ONLY 10,738FT².

AND I KNOW THAT BECAUSE IN 2002 WE HIRED A CONTRACTOR, AN EXPERT, TO COME IN AND GO THROUGH THAT BUILDING, UNDER IT, OVER IT, THROUGH IT.

AND THAT WAS WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY.

NOW, WHAT WE FOUND IS STRUCTURALLY SOUND.

THERE'S A LOT OF WASTED SPACE BECAUSE IT WAS BUILT ALMOST 60 YEARS AGO.

IT CAN BE THE WALLS CAN BE EXPANDED.

THIS CAN BE DONE.

SERVE THE PEOPLE OF THIS AREA WITH THE LIBRARY THAT WE NEED.

YOUR TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

MY NAME IS SAMANTHA BRADLEY, AND I'M THE COOL SCHOOLS PROGRAM DIRECTOR FOR THE TEXAS TREES FOUNDATION.

SAMANTHA BRADLEY.

HELLO AND GOOD MORNING.

I COME HERE ON BEHALF OF NOT JUST MY AMAZING TEAM AT TEXAS TREES, BUT ALSO ON BEHALF OF THE DALLAS PARKS COALITION AND PERSONALLY AS AN AVID CYCLIST, PARK LOVER, AND THE MOM OF AN 11 YEAR OLD SKATER GIRL WHO LOVES SIXTH FLOOR EVERY SKATE PARK IN DFW.

SO THIS IS JUST A REMINDER THAT THE COOL SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK INITIATIVE CONVERTING 25 DALLAS ISD CAMPUSES TO PARKS AFTER SCHOOL HOURS ON THE WEEKENDS, IS THE NUMBER ONE FACTOR THAT INCREASED THE PARK SCORE IN DALLAS, PROVIDING A PARK SPACE WITHIN A TEN MINUTE WALK FOR OVER 115,000 RESIDENTS.

THE COOL SCHOOLS PARK INITIATIVE IS INCLUDED IN THE $5 MILLION PARTNERSHIP LINE ITEM WITH OTHER DALLAS ISD AND DALLAS COLLEGE FUNDING.

THIS, WITH THE $1 MILLION MARY MCDERMOTT FOUNDATION MATCH, WILL FUND 20 MORE COOL SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS TO BE OPEN IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS.

THESE PARKS AND ALL PARKS IN DALLAS ARE THE BEST WAY TO CONNECT PEOPLE TO NATURE IN AN URBAN CENTER LIKE DALLAS.

BY INVESTING IN PARKS, YOU ARE INVESTING IN THE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING OF OUR CITIZENS.

COOL SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS PLAY A KEY ROLE IN INCREASING THE TREE CANOPY COVERAGE AND BIODIVERSITY OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IN TURN INCREASES THE TREE CANOPY OF THE CITY, WHICH IS THE KEY GOAL OF Y'ALL'S OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS.

WE DON'T JUST ADD PLASTIC PLAYGROUNDS TO THE CAMPUS, BUT TRANSFORM THESE CAMPUSES INTO PARK LIKE SPACES RICH WITH NATURE BASED PLAY AND LEARNING, EXPANSIVE TREE CANOPY COVER, BIODIVERSITY, TREE LINED WALKING PATHS, ARBORETUMS FOR CHILDREN TO EXPLORE, POLLINATOR GARDENS, RAIN GARDENS AND MORE THAT ADD NATURE TO THESE SPACES.

SO AGAIN, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT IN PARKS.

THANK YOU, DAVID MARQUIS.

GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS DAVID MARQUIS, 3110 WEST COAST BOULEVARD AND BEAUTIFUL OAK CLIFF, TEXAS, DISTRICT THREE.

I COME TO YOU THIS MORNING TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF PARKS.

I MOVED TO DALLAS IN 1976.

THAT'S 48 YEARS AGO, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN CIVIC LIFE, HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH EVERY MAYOR, EVERY MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL, COUNTLESS MEMBERS, STAFF, AND FROM ALL OF THESE PEOPLE, I HAVE LEARNED SO MUCH.

SO I COME TODAY TO SPEAK NOT ON BEHALF OF PARKS, BUT ALSO TO TELL YOU WHY AND HOW I THINK PARKS ARE SUCH A CRITICAL INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE OF DALLAS.

AS SOME OF YOU KNOW, IN 1999 I WORKED TO FOUND THE OAK CLIFF NATURE PRESERVE.

BY SAVING 120 ACRES OF TREES, WE'RE ABLE TO ACCESS $1.25 MILLION OF HUD SECTION 108 MONEY, BECAUSE WE WILL DEMONSTRATE TO THE FEDS

[01:15:04]

THAT BY DOING THAT, WE COULD SHOW THAT ANY NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDING OR ADJACENT TO A GREEN SPACE INCREASED IN VALUE, SO INCREASED THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

250 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADJACENT TO THE NATURE CENTER, ALSO ABLE TO FUND A NEW LIBRARY THEY HAVE AN ILLINOIS LIBRARY CAME FROM THAT AND THEN A NEW SCHOOL. SO BY DOING ONE NATURE PRESERVE, ONE GREEN SPACE, WE'RE ABLE TO ACCESS ALL THAT MONEY FROM FED TO THE STATE AND PRIVATE MONEY.

AND NOW WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, BY FUNDING OUR PARKS TO THE FULLEST AMOUNT TO DEAL WITH STREETS, BECAUSE WE INCREASE TAX BASE, TO INCREASE THE ABILITY TO USE STORMWATER, BECAUSE STORMWATER FALLS ON THE OPEN SPACE AND OPEN SPACE ABSORBS THE RAINWATER.

WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY THROUGH INVESTING IN PARKS TO DO ALL THESE THINGS, SUCH AS CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, OUR STREETS, LOWERING OUR OUR DEBT RATIO.

SO I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TODAY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN PARKS, BECAUSE PARKS ARE THE KEY THAT UNLOCKS OTHER MONEY THAT WE CAN USE FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR YOUR SERVICE.

IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE FOR HALF A CENTURY TO BE HERE AND TO WORK WITH ALL OF YOU.

BRANDAN HALL. GOOD MORNING COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS BRANDON HALL.

I'M A DALLAS RESIDENT OF DISTRICT ONE, AND I'M HERE TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF REDUCING THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR CITY.

REDUCING MINIMUM LOT SIZE HAS A GROWING TRACK RECORD OF LOWERING THE COST OF PURCHASING A HOME, AS WELL AS RENTING.

HOUSTON'S ALREADY BEEN GIVEN AS A GOOD EXAMPLE REGIONALLY IN 1998 AND 2013.

AND BY DOING THIS, HOUSTON HAS MAINTAINED DIVERSE AND VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS SURROUNDING ITS CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICTS.

I AKIN RENTING IN DALLAS TO A LOT LIKE STEPPING INTO A LARGE PUBLIC POOL INTO THE SHALLOW END.

YOU'RE NOT. YOUR HEAD'S NOT FULLY SUBMERGED, BUT YOUR FEET ARE TOUCHING THE GROUND.

YOU CAN CONTINUE TO MOVE, HAVE FUN AND IT'S DIVERSE ENVIRONMENT.

AND TO CONTINUE THAT ANALOGY, WHEN YOU CONSIDER PURCHASING A HOME IN DALLAS, IT'S NOT IN THE SHALLOW END.

IT'S IN THE DEEP END, THE DALLAS DEEP END.

PURCHASING A HOME IN DALLAS IS UP TO 50% MORE EXPENSIVE THAN RENTING IN THE CITY.

AND ANOTHER REGIONAL EXAMPLE, AUSTIN.

IT'S OVER 130% MORE EXPENSIVE TO PURCHASE A HOME IN THE CITY VERSUS RENT.

WE BELIEVE THAT REDUCING MINIMUM LOT SIZE WILL GIVE DALLAS THE FLEXIBILITY TO ADD MORE MIDDLE HOUSING, BUT WITHOUT IT, THE COST OF PURCHASING A HOME.

PURCHASING A HOME IN THE DALLAS DEEP END WILL TRANSFORM INTO THE AUSTIN TRENCH.

GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS ABRAHAM MORENO, AND I'M HERE TO DEMAND OF ALL OF YOU TO RIGHTFULLY GIVE WHAT'S MINE AND THAT OF MY PEERS.

ABRAHAM MORENO.

I'M A 16 YEAR OLD HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE IN SCHOOL, BUT I'M SICK AND TIRED OF WALKING INTO MY SCHOOL EVERY DAY AND SEEING MY CLASSMATES SKIP SCHOOL AND BE EXHAUSTED 24 SEVEN BECAUSE THEY HAD TO PICK UP EXTRA SHIFTS AT THEIR JOBS TO KEEP A ROOF OVER THEIR FAMILY'S HEAD.

THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE, AS NO TEEN SHOULD BE WORKING TWO JOBS TO KEEP A ROOF OVER THEIR HEAD.

AND THEY SHOULD DEFINITELY NOT BE SPEAKING AT A COUNCIL MEETING TODAY.

WE SHOULD BE ENJOYING THE CITY'S RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, GREEN AND CULTURAL SPACES.

YET WE CAN'T, AS EVERY MINUTE WE WASTE COULD MEAN END UP SLEEPING ON THE STREET TONIGHT.

THIS IS AN EFFECT OF THE CITY'S POOR DECISION MAKING AND NEGLECT TOWARDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT HAS GONE ON FOR WAY TOO LONG.

IT IS TIME WE RECTIFY THIS MISTAKE MADE BY THE CITY IN THE PAST AND INVEST $200 MILLION IN BOND MONEY NOT JUST FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT FOR OUR FUTURE.

I'M NOT ASKING YOU FOR THIS JUST FOR MYSELF, BUT FOR THE SAKE OF EVERY TEEN AND KID THAT IS STRUGGLING TO KEEP A ROOF OVER THEIR HEADS.

IT'S TIME TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE.

DAVID GUYER IS NOT PRESENT.

JOHN BODIFORD.

GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME BE HERE.

JOHN BODIFORD, DISTRICT TWO.

I WOULD WANT TO URGE THE COUNCIL TO LISTEN TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY BOND TASK FORCE, AS THAT WAS A GREAT PROCESS WHICH INVOLVED A LOT OF DIVERSE INPUT FROM SEVERAL CITIZENS, INCLUDING MYSELF, AND TRULY IS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

IT WAS A LONG PROCESS, OVER A YEAR LONG PROCESS WITH MANY APPOINTEES FROM FROM YOU GUYS THAT, A LOT OF

[01:20:01]

INPUT AND THE $350 MILLION WASN'T THE ORIGINAL ONE, IT WAS 400.

BUT I THINK THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THROUGH AN ENGAGING PROCESS, WE REACHED A 350 MILLION MARK.

THAT'S, ACCEPTABLE TO EVERYONE.

AND I URGE THE COUNCIL TO PLEASE FOLLOW THIS TASK FORCE.

IT SEEMS THAT THERE'S A LOT OF ADVERSARIAL ISSUES HERE, PARTICULARLY WITH SOME ORGANIZED LOBBYING GROUPS URGING ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

I'M A PART OF A NO GROUP REPRESENTING NO GROUP.

BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THE VALUE OF PARKS IN THIS TOWN.

THE ORIGINAL DNA OF THIS CITY WAS BUILT ON THE KESSLER PLAN, WHICH CONNECTED ALL OUR PARKS THROUGH BOULEVARDS.

TURNED A DUSTY LITTLE TWO TRAIN STATION TOWN INTO A MODERN CITY.

I'D URGE THAT WE FOLLOW THE ETHOS OF THAT AND PROTECT OUR PARKS, FUND OUR PARKS, AND CREATE MORE DEVELOPMENT IN ONE.

ONLY NEEDS TO LOOK AT THE KATY TRAIL TO SEE WHAT THAT'S DONE FOR THE CITY.

AND THAT'S A PARK, A TRAIL, THAT'S A PARK.

THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES ALONG.

MANY OF THE TRAILS FOR DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING MULTI-FAMILY, PLEASE FOLLOW THE CITY BOMB TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU.

SARAH. STEANS.

MY NAME IS SARAH MICHELLE STEANS.

I'M A NEW RESIDENT OF DISTRICT TEN, A MEMBER OF THE PARKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COMMITTEE OF THE JUNIOR LEAGUE OF DALLAS, A PROUD NORTH TEXAS MASTER NATURALIST.

AND AS IS PERTINENT HERE TODAY, I'M A BOARD MEMBER OF THE DALLAS COUNTY HERITAGE SOCIETY, WITH WHICH I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH FOR APPROXIMATELY FIVE YEARS.

DURING MY TIME AS A BOARD MEMBER, I'VE BEEN SURPRISED TO LEARN THAT THE CITY, ALTHOUGH CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED TO MAINTAIN AND REPAIR THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS AT THE PARK, IT'S ACTUALLY INVESTED VERY FEW PUBLIC DOLLARS INTO THE BUILDINGS, MUCH LESS THE PARK AS A WHOLE.

I'M SPEAKING TODAY TO ADVOCATE FOR THE CITY TO INVEST IN OLD CITY PARK, USING THE INFLUX OF BOND DOLLARS FOR PARKS.

OLD CITY PARK, AS YOU'VE HEARD, NEEDS AT LEAST 2 MILLION MINIMUM TO SIMPLY SURVIVE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PARK DEPARTMENT HAS REQUESTED AT LEAST 350 MILLION FROM THE CITY, AND HAS PROMISED TO GIVE OLD CITY PARK AT LEAST 2 MILLION OF THAT AMOUNT.

SO I'M HERE TO URGE THE CITY TO APPROVE THE PARK DEPARTMENT'S REQUEST.

SUPPORTING OLD CITY PARK IS IMPORTANT FOR SEVERAL REASONS, BUT I'D LIKE TO BRIEFLY HIGHLIGHT AT LEAST TWO.

THE OBVIOUS ONE IS THAT FROM A HISTORIC STANDPOINT, OLD CITY PARK IS DALLAS FIRST AND OLDEST PARK.

IT SHOULD BE THE CROWN JEWEL, AND IT STILL CAN BE.

ANOTHER REASON THAT'S PROBABLY LESS OBVIOUS, BUT MORE IMPORTANT, IS THAT OLD CITY PARK PROVIDES A SPACE AND PROGRAMING FOR SHARED COMMUNITY EXPERIENCES OVER GENERATIONS, AND THERE SIMPLY AREN'T MANY OTHER PLACES IN DALLAS THAT HAVE THAT SAME GENERATIONAL IMPACT, PARTICULARLY AT SUCH A LOW COST.

AND THAT ALONE MAKES OLD CITY PARK WORTH SUPPORTING.

TRACY WEBSTER.

MY NAME IS TRACY WEBSTER FROM DISTRICT 13.

I HAVE LIVED HERE FOR OVER 18 YEARS AS TREASURER OF THE PARK FOREST LIBRARY, FRIENDS, AND A REPRESENTATIVE FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT THE COUNCIL RECONSIDER FUNDING THE REPLACEMENT FOR THE PARK FOREST LIBRARY BUILDING.

OUR EXISTING LIBRARY WAS BUILT IN 1970 AND IS IN DESPERATE NEED OF REPLACEMENT.

THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY CAME TO THIS DECISION BACK IN 2000, WHEN THE LIBRARY MASTER PLAN WAS DEVELOPED.

I UNDERSTAND WE ARE ONE OF THE MORE BUSIER LIBRARIES IN THE CITY SYSTEM.

IT IS CONCERNING THAT THE COUNCIL DECIDED TO REMOVE THE REPLACEMENT PART CHORUS LIBRARY BUILDING FROM THE BOND.

I GO TO THE PARK FOREST LIBRARY OFTEN AND HAVE FOUND BASIC FUNCTIONS SUCH AS NORMAL TEMPERATURE ARE NOT BEING MET AND ARE INADEQUATE.

ONE COULD EASILY ARGUE THAT OUR LIBRARY IS THE MOST OUTDATED IN THE SYSTEM.

OUR LIBRARY SERVES A LARGE COMMUNITY WITH A DIVERSE POPULATION, INCLUDING NUMEROUS APARTMENT BUILDINGS, SENIOR CITIZENS, AND SEVERAL SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.

I BELIEVE THAT EVEN MORE DALLAS CITIZENS WOULD GO TO THE PARK FOREST LIBRARY IF IT WAS REPLACED, AND PROVIDED MORE OPTIONS FOR MEETING SPACES AND SUPPORT SPACES IN OUR COMMUNITY. LIBRARIES ARE IMPORTANT COMMUNITY HUBS THAT PROVIDE LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES, RESOURCES, PROGRAMING AND INFORMATION TO CITY PATRONS AND VIEW OF THE FACT THAT MOST OF OUR SCHOOLS IN THE AREA DO NOT HAVE LIBRARIANS.

[01:25:03]

IT IS A SHAME WE ARE TAKING FUNDING AWAY FROM OUR CITY LIBRARIES.

THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT IN OUR CITY LIBRARIES IS IMMEASURABLE.

THE TIME TO MAKE THE DECISION IS NOW AND WE CANNOT POSTPONE FOR MORE DECADES.

PLEASE FUND THE PARK FOREST LIBRARY REPLACEMENT AND FOLLOW THE CITY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY FUNDING AND THE BOND ALLOCATION. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

GOOD MORNING. CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? WE CAN BARELY HEAR YOU, BUT WE CAN.

IS THAT BETTER? WE CAN HEAR YOU. YEAH.

GO AHEAD. OKAY.

THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.

I'M COMING.

I, I WANTED TO SAY I STRONGLY SUPPORT FUNDING OF THE PARKS AT $350 MILLION, INCLUDING THE ORBITER AND WHITE ROCK CREEK TRAIL.

I AM A RISD SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE, BUT REPRESENTING AS A PARENT AND COMMUNITY MEMBER IN D10.

MY FAMILY HAS LIVED IN THIS AREA FOR OVER 40 YEARS, AND GROWING UP HERE, WE HAD NO ACCESS TO PARKS WITHIN SAFE WALKING DISTANCE.

ORBITER PARK SITS DEAD END OF OUR STREET AND IT'S BEEN A PLACE FOR DRUGS AND SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.

BY DAY, THE PARK IS A SEMI POPULAR SPOT FOR TENNIS PLAYERS AS THAT IS THE ONLY OPTION AT OUR PARK.

BY NIGHT, THE PARK OFFERS A SECLUDED AREA FOR DRUGS, DRUG DEALS AND SEXUAL MISCONDUCT AND HOMELESSNESS.

IT'S TIME WE DO MORE.

IT IS TIME THE CITY DOES MORE.

DEVELOPMENT AND IS OFTEN OVERLOOKED IN THIS AREA OF D10.

UNLIKE SOME OF THE OTHER AREAS, IT'S TIME THAT THINGS ARE A LITTLE MORE EQUITABLE IN THE D10 AREA.

WE ARE A GROWING COMMUNITY.

THIS YEAR ALONE, WE WILL CONCLUDE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF APPROXIMATELY 50 NEW HOMES WITH MORE IN THE PIPELINE.

WE DO NOT HAVE A PARK WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE FOR NEW AND GROWING FAMILIES TO ENJOY WITH THEIR FAMILIES AND KIDS.

OUR KIDS NEED SOMEWHERE TO PLAY.

OUR PARENTS NEED SOMEWHERE TO SPEND TIME WITH OTHER NEIGHBORS.

OUR FAMILIES ONLY OPTION FOR KIDS TO PLAY OR TAKE DOGS IS THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARK.

SCHOOL PARKS ARE RELATIVELY OFF LIMITS DURING SCHOOL HOURS, WHICH IS A HUGE DISSERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY THAT HOLDS OVER APPROXIMATELY 800 HOMES AT CURRENT.

I WRITE AGAIN IN SUPPORT AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORBITER PARK IN WHITE ROCK PARKS.

VICTORIA CLOW OR VICTORIA CLOUGH.

HI, I AM VICTORIA CLOUGH, AND I'M SORRY, MISS CLOUGH.

YOUR VIDEO NEEDS TO BE DISPLAYED.

OKAY, WE CAN SEE YOU.

YOU MAY CONTINUE. OKAY.

GOOD. WONDERFUL.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS VICTORIA CLOUGH.

I'M PRESIDENT OF PRESERVATION DALLAS AND A BOARD MEMBER AT THE DALLAS COUNTY HERITAGE SOCIETY.

I WANTED TO THANK THE PARKS DEPARTMENT FOR INCLUDING OLD CITY PARK IN THEIR BUDGET REQUEST.

IN THE 1980S, I WAS A STUDENT ON A FIELD TRIP AT OLD CITY PARK WHO WAS IMPACTED BY THE TACTILE EXPERIENCE OF HISTORY AND BUILDINGS COMING TOGETHER.

I NOW WORK IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND ARCHEOLOGY FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

I HOPE THAT YOU WILL THOUGHTFULLY CONSIDER THE FUTURE OF THE CITY'S OLDEST PARK.

THE REHABILITATION OF THE BUILDINGS AND THE THOUSANDS OF VOLUNTEER HOURS IN DOLLARS INVESTED IN THIS IMPORTANT HISTORIC PARK.

THE PARK NEEDS MORE THAN $2 MILLION.

IT IS CURRENTLY ALLOCATED IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BUDGET.

THE PRESERVATION COMMUNITY IS HERE, AND WE WILL WORK HAND IN HAND TO HELP THE CITY SUPPORT THIS WONDERFUL ASSET.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND CONSIDERATION.

SABINA CARR HAS CANCELED.

SHELLY WHITE.

HELLO, I'M SHELLEY WHITE, I'M THE DIRECTOR OF TRINITY RIVER AUDUBON CENTER.

I'M HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR THE $350 MILLION FOR PARKS.

I AM A PRODUCT OF THOSE PARKS.

OLD CITY PARK WENT THERE AS A STUDENT, DISD, ALL THROUGH MY 12TH YEAR.

ARBORETUM, OF COURSE.

THE DALLAS ZOO.

SAMUEL FARMS TOOK MANY TRIPS THERE.

I WAS ALSO THE DIRECTOR AT TRINITY STRAND TRAIL, HELPING BUILD A TRAIL FOR EIGHT YEARS.

SO YOU ARE SEEING A PRODUCT OF SOME OF THOSE PARKS, AND HOPEFULLY YOU SEE THAT AS A GOOD THING.

BUT I'M ALSO HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR TRINITY RIVER AUDUBON CENTER.

WE ARE DOING SOME COOL WORK, GREAT PROGRAMING.

WE WENT TO FREE ENTRY JANUARY 1ST LAST YEAR.

OUR NUMBERS HAVE INCREASED 210% SINCE DOING THAT.

[01:30:02]

WE WILL BE FREE THROUGH JUNE OF THIS YEAR, AND I'M LOOKING MORE FOR MORE FUNDING TO, OPEN UP THAT FREE ENTRY THROUGH THE END OF 2024. WE WENT FROM 12 EMPLOYEES TO FOUR DURING COVID.

WE JUST STARTED BUILDING BACK A YEAR AND A HALF AGO.

BUT WE'VE GOT SOME GREAT PROGRAMING ON THE WAY.

WE'VE GOT AN ECO MOM PROGRAM TO HELP THE KIDS GET EXCITED.

WE'VE GOT A CLIMATE WATCH SERIES FOR THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN CONSERVATION, WHICH WE ARE TRYING TO GET EVERYBODY TO DO.

WE'VE GOT A FOREST BATHING PROGRAM AND YOU CAN JUST THINK ABOUT THAT ONE FOR A MINUTE.

WE'VE GOT FIVE MILES OF TRAIL.

WE'RE 120 ACRES JUST A FEW MILES FROM HERE IN SOUTH DALLAS.

WE'RE FREE FOR ALL.

AND, SPEAKING OF FREE, WE'VE HELPED ALMOST 3000 STUDENTS AND ADULTS THIS PAST SCHOOL YEAR WITH FREE PROGRAMING, AS WELL AS TRANSPORTATION VOUCHERS THAT HAVE HELPED 460 STUDENTS AND ADULTS.

SO PLEASE KEEP US IN MIND WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BOND.

I'LL NOW CALL THE NEXT GROUP OF SPEAKERS FOR THOSE IN PERSON SPEAKERS.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, WILL YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST TWO ROWS OF THE CENTER SECTION? LILY WEISS, KIM NOLTE, LAURA SPECKLES, JOE DINGMAN, SAMUEL MORTIMER, HEXCEL COLORADO, DOLORES PHILLIPS, IMAN MAGID, MEGAN LONG, MARFIL DODD, MORGAN BRADBURY, LUKE METZGER, JERRY SCHWARTZ, JUDGE CLARK, AND DEBORAH MARTINEZ.

LILY WEISS YOU MAY COME TO THE PODIUM.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

I'M LILLY WEISS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DALLAS ARTS DISTRICT.

DISTRICT 14.

THE ARTS DISTRICT IS UNLIKE ANY OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTING TOP TIER BUSINESSES, RESTAURANTS, PERFORMING AND VISUAL ARTS INSTITUTIONS.

FAITH COMMUNITIES SUCH AS THE NEWLY DESIGNATED NATIONAL SHRINE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE AND HUNDREDS OF DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS.

16 ARTS DISTRICT ORGANIZATIONS GENERATED $341 MILLION IN ECONOMIC IMPACT AND $62 MILLION IN TOTAL TAX REVENUE LAST YEAR.

UNFORTUNATELY, TODAY'S ARTS DISTRICT'S INFRASTRUCTURE, PARTICULARLY OUR SIDEWALKS, DOES NOT MEET DALLAS'S REPUTATION FOR EXCELLENCE.

WE WANT FAMILIES TO VISIT KLYDE WARREN PARK, HAVE LUNCH AT A FOOD TRUCK, AND WALK SAFELY TO THE DALLAS MUSEUM OF ART OR ANNETTE STRAUSS SQUARE FOR THE AFTERNOON.

BUT THE SIDEWALK ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF PEARL, FROM KLYDE WARREN PARK TO THE HEART OF THE ARTS DISTRICT IS IMPASSABLE FOR STROLLERS AND WHEELCHAIRS ALIKE.

THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THE MEYERSON IS CRUMBLING SO BADLY IT'S CREATED A WAVE, AND THE SIDEWALK ALONG HARWOOD OUTSIDE OF THE DMA IS A HAZARD.

WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST $1.5 MILLION IN CITYWIDE INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS TO REPAIR OUR MOST CRITICAL SIDEWALKS THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT.

IF BOND FUNDS ARE NOT AVAILABLE, PLEASE CONSIDER OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDS, SUCH AS FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS OR OTHER PROGRAMS, TO SUPPORT THIS CRITICAL PEDESTRIAN SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE.

ON BEHALF OF THE CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF OUR CONTINUED REQUEST OF 6% OF THE PROPOSED BOND FUNDS TO RESTORE AND MAINTAIN DALLAS'S CULTURAL FACILITIES, THE SAME NATIONAL STUDY SHOWS THE ARTS IN DALLAS YIELDING $854 MILLION IN ECONOMIC IMPACT AND $169 MILLION BACK IN TAX REVENUE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE ARTS.

THANK YOU, KIM [INAUDIBLE] . GOOD MORNING.

I'M KIM [INAUDIBLE]. I'M THE CEO OF THE DALLAS SYMPHONY, AND I LIVE IN THE ARTS DISTRICT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND TAKING THE TIME TO GET THIS BOND PROGRAM RIGHT.

AS YOU KNOW, IN THE ARTS COMMUNITY, WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT THAT 6% OF THE PROPOSED BOND FUNDS SHOULD BE DESIGNATED FOR THE ARTS.

MANY OF OUR BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES ARE IN DISREPAIR, INCLUDING THE MORT MEYERSON SYMPHONY CENTER, WHICH HAS A ROOF IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT.

THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF AS PART OF THE CONTRACT WITH THE CITY IN 2022.

OUR SPECIFIC REQUEST IS ONLY FOR THE ROOF OF THIS INCREDIBLE, ACOUSTICAL HALL THAT IS RANKED IN THE TOP TEN IN THE WORLD, AND THE ROOF THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS DIRECTLY OVER THE ACTUAL STAGE OF THE MEYERSON.

[01:35:06]

AS THE MANAGER OF THIS FACILITY, WE HAVE HANDLED THE MAJORITY OF THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND WILL DO SO ON AN ONGOING BASIS.

OUR I.M. PEI CONCERT HALL, WHICH HE IS ONE OF THE RENOWNED ARCHITECTS IN THE WORLD, PASSED AWAY JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

IT WAS AN ICONIC SYMBOL OF THE SUCCESS OF THE ARTS AND THE CULTURAL SECTOR IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THE CITY INVESTED IN OUR CONCERT HALL AND MANY OTHER CULTURAL FACILITIES, AND THAT HAS RESULTED IN THIS CITY BEING WELL KNOWN AS AN ARTS CITY, ATTRACTING BUSINESSES AND NEW MOVERS TO THE CITY, GENERATING ECONOMIC IMPACT, AS LILLY JUST TALKED ABOUT.

AND WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO INVEST IN THESE INCREDIBLE ASSETS AND NOT LET THEM GO INTO DISREPAIR SUCH THAT THEY CANNOT BE USED OR THEY BECOME AN EMBARRASSMENT TO THE CITY.

SO WE HOPE YOU WILL CONSIDER ALL OF THIS, AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL YOU DO FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THANK YOU, LAURA SPECKLES.

YES, HERE I AM.

OKAY, YOU MAY CONTINUE. YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU AND SEE YOU.

YOU MAKE VERY GOOD.

GOOD DAY TO ALL OF YOU.

VERY MUCH FOR ALL THAT YOU'VE DONE.

AND IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO SPEND THE TIME YOU HAVE SPENT ON MAKING THIS HAPPEN.

I LIVE ON CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD, BUT I SPEND MOST OF MY DANCING TIME AT THE SOUTH DALLAS CULTURAL CENTER.

I AM THE DIRECTOR OF THE [INAUDIBLE] DANCING COMPANY, AND EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE SOME BEAUTIFUL THINGS HAPPENING IN THE CENTER, THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE BAND-AID [INAUDIBLE] WILL NOT WORK FOR ANYMORE.

ONE THING THAT HAPPENED IS THAT THE DURING THE PANDEMIC, THE SINKS WERE CHANGED, THE FAUCETS WERE CHANGED SO THAT THEY HAD A WHEREVER YOU PUT YOUR HAND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS SENSITIVE, BUT THERE WERE THE WRONG FAUCETS.

SO WHEN A PATRON GOES INTO THE RESTROOM, THE WATER SPLASHES AGAINST THE SINK ONTO THE PERSON, AND THEN THE, PAPER TOWELS ARE FAR AWAY.

SO THAT IS DRIP, DRIP ON THE COUNTER.

SO THE NEXT PERSON WHO GOES IN SEES SPLASH AND DRIP.

ANYWAY, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP SO FAR, BUT THAT BECAME A PROBLEM AND IT WON'T BE HELPED.

I AM IN SOLIDARITY WITH ALL THE ARTS ORGANIZATIONS THAT NEED 6% OF THE BOND MONIES IN THIS PACKAGE.

THEY CAN'T WAIT BECAUSE IF THEY DO, THINGS WILL GET EVEN WORSE.

ANOTHER THING ABOUT THE CENTER IS WHEN THE DANCERS IN THE THEATER TRY TO MAKE [INAUDIBLE].

THAT'S YOUR TIME.

BECAUSE THEY'RE HUGE.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, JOE DINGMAN.

GOOD MORNING. I AM JOE DINGMAN.

MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, THANKS FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE.

AND THANKS FOR TAKING YOUR MORNING TO LISTEN TO PEOPLE WHO BY NOW ARE MOSTLY, I THINK, RECURRING.

SO I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF AND NOT DUPLICATE ANYTHING.

I'M THE TREASURER AND CO-FOUNDER OF A COMMUNITY BASED NONPROFIT CALLED THE CATHOLIC HOUSING INITIATIVE.

WE HAVE ABOUT 1,500 RENTAL UNITS, AFFORDABLE RENTAL UNITS.

ABOUT HALF OF THOSE WERE BOUGHT LONG AGO, AT A TIME WHEN THE HOUSING SUPPLY WAS IN SURPLUS VERSUS DEMAND.

YOU MIGHT CALL IT TODAY, NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHERE WE WERE JUST ABLE TO PAY MARKET PRICE, FOR EXAMPLE, TO THE RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION.

THOSE DAYS ARE GONE.

OUR THE OTHER HALF OF OUR PORTFOLIO HAS BEEN ASSEMBLED PIECE BY PIECE BY PIECE, AND IT'S BASICALLY ALWAYS USING SOME KIND OF PUBLIC SUBSIDY. NOTABLY INCLUDING OUR THREE SAINT JUDE CENTERS, EACH OF WHICH THE CITY WAS A BIG CONTRIBUTOR FOR.

AND WE THANK YOU FOR THAT.

THAT SUPPORTS MY CORE POINT, WHICH IS THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DOES NOT COME NATURALLY.

IT NEEDS TO BE INDUCED.

THE CITY FUNDING IS VITAL TO THAT PROCESS.

IT JUST CAN'T WORK WITHOUT IT.

SO, THEREFORE WE ARE HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE DALLAS HOUSING COALITION'S RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH

[01:40:07]

ARE FOR MORE THAN THE CITY MANAGER STARTING POINT AND THE JANUARY 19TH MEMO OR THE EITHER AMENDMENT 1 OR 5.

BUT THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH.

THINK OF THAT AS AN INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY.

AND THAT PRETTY MUCH IS MY REMARKS.

AS FOR THE BOND, GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE'RE IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSALS THAT ARE BEING BATTED ABOUT AS TO INCREASING THE DENSITY OF HOUSING.

WE THINK THAT'S ANOTHER KEY TO IMPROVING THE AFFORDABILITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU, SAMUEL MORTIMER.

GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, MR. MAYOR. GOOD MORNING.

MY NAME IS SAMUEL MORTIMER.

I'M A DOWNTOWN RESIDENT AND CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE FRIENDS OF THE SANTA FE TRAIL.

THE SANTA FE TRAIL IS A CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THREAD GOES THROUGH EAST DALLAS.

I'M HERE TODAY TO ASK THE CITY OF DALLAS TO INVEST HEAVILY IN PARKS AND TRAILS.

AS MENTIONED BY OTHERS, THESE TYPES OF INVESTMENTS ARE AN IDEAL VEHICLE FOR STIMULATING ECONOMIC GROWTH WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY BUILDING HEALTHIER AND STRONGER COMMUNITIES.

FUNCTIONING AS LINEAR PARKS.

OUR TRAILS OCCUPY AN INTERESTING PLACE AND THAT THEY'RE NO LONGER, SIMPLY NEIGHBORHOOD RESPITES, BUT, ATTRACT PEOPLE FROM FROM EVERY DISTRICT, TO VISIT THEM AS THEY SERVE AS DEVELOPMENT CONTOURS, DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS, AND TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE INTO THE CORE OF THE CITY.

I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE FULL PARKS ALLOCATION RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE AND IN PARTICULAR, FUNDS EARMARKED FOR THE SANTA FE TRAIL.

AND AS AN ASIDE, AS AN ARCHITECT AND URBANIST, SOMEONE WHO IS A YOUNG PERSON IN THE CITY, I HAVE BY-RIGHT FEVER.

I'M VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF REDUCING MINIMUM LOT SIZES AND ADUS BY RIGHT.

YOU WOULDN'T BELIEVE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT CALL ME EVERY DAY AND ASK, HOW DO I DO AN ADU? HOW DO I DO ONE? JUST IF I WANT TO DO IT, THE PROBLEM NEEDS TO BE SOLVED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AND ADDRESSED.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

HEXCEL COLORADO.

MY NAME IS HEXCEL COLORADO DISTRICT 14 DALLAS.

I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF $200 MILLION FOR HOUSING IN THE CAPITAL BOND.

I'M ALSO HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF MINIMUM LOT SIZES REFORM AND DENSITY BY RIGHT.

SURVIVORSHIP BIAS.

WHERE WE SIT TODAY USED TO BE HOMES RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES.

IF YOU WERE TO DRIVE ON RURAL ROGERS STEMMONS THORNTON 345.

THE NEXT TIME YOU'RE ON THOSE FREEWAYS, IMAGINE SNAPPING YOUR FINGERS AND BEING TRANSPORTED ONLY 70 YEARS AGO.

YOU WOULD NOT BE ROLLING OVER EMPTY FIELDS.

YOU WOULD BE PLUMP, BARRELING THROUGH HUNDREDS OF HOMES FOR THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE.

THE HOUSING CRISIS WE FACE TODAY, THE REDLINING OF THE PAST.

THE DESTRUCTION OF COMMUNITIES OF COLOR ARE ALL CONNECTED.

THEY ARE NOT COINCIDENCE AND THEY ARE NOT ACCIDENTS.

THE SLATE OF HOUSING REFORMS IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY.

THIS IS HOW WE BEND THE LONG MORAL ARC OF THIS CITY.

THIS IS HOW WE BEND IT TOWARDS JUSTICE.

THESE HOMES.

THIS IS NOT A CREATION OF NEW.

THIS IS A RESTORATION OF WHAT WAS TAKEN AWAY.

I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE HUD PROJECT.

DOLORES PHILLIPS.

YOU DO HAVE MY ADDRESS.

MAYOR ROLLINS, I'M SPEAKING TO YOU IN HUMBLENESS, HUMILITY AND THE DECEPTIVE PRACTICES THAT YOU DO.

AND JUST AS YOU DECEIVE THE VOTERS WITH, I'M NOW A DEMOCRAT.

I MEAN, A REPUBLICAN, WHEN YOU KNEW THAT PROBABLY WHEN YOU WAS LIKE 18.

I WANT TO SAY THIS ON BEHALF OF THE HUD PROJECT THAT'S WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT TODAY.

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU IMPLEMENT A COMMITTEE FOR POOR PEOPLE WHO RECEIVES THE GRANTS AND THE FUNDING FROM THE HUD MONIES, BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES WHEN YOU HAVE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS, THEY PREY

[01:45:02]

ON THE BACKS OF THE POOR PEOPLE BEYOND RACE.

IN THE FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL ACT, IT STATES THAT BEYOND YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION, BEYOND YOUR GENDER, YOUR RACE, YOU ARE TO BE PROTECTED.

AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS THAT I USED TO SAY PROBABLY I'M 56 NOW.

SO WHEN I WAS LIKE 40, I USED TO SAY IT WOULD NEVER BE ANYTHING MORE HUMILIATING THAN BEING TARGETED FOR YOUR RACE.

I UNINTENTIONALLY LIED TO BE TARGETED BECAUSE OF YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION, BECAUSE YOU WERE BORN A WOMAN OR A MAN, BY FAR SURPASSES INHUMANLY BEING TARGETED FOR YOUR RACE.

I WANT TO SHARE SOMETHING WITH YOU BECAUSE I SPOKE OF INJUSTICES.

WE WERE IN A NONPROFIT HOME 2006, AND I STARTED SPEAKING OF THESE INJUSTICES, AND IT WAS DERAILED BY THE LINKS, CONNECTIONS AND NETWORKS OF DALLAS.

IN THE DALLAS OBSERVER, PHILIP KINGSTON 2017 ORDERED CITY ATTORNEY LARRY CASTILLO TO HAVE AN INVESTIGATION INTO WHAT HAPPENED TO ROBERT GRODEN.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. I'M ASKING FOR AN INVESTIGATION AS TO WHY YOU CONTINUED THE METHODICAL OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, AND IT'S ALREADY AT THE US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOW. THE CDS THAT WERE STOLEN FROM THE CDS THAT WERE STOLEN, THE CDS THAT WERE STOLEN FROM HONORABLE YOUR NEXT SPEAKER, AIMAN MAJID.

AIMAN MAJID IS NOT PRESENT.

MEGAN LONG.

WILL YOU PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR AUDIO IS ON? I'M SORRY, MISS LONG. WE CAN.

WE STILL CANNOT HEAR YOU.

HELLO? HELLO. YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW.

YOU MAY CONTINUE.

WONDERFUL. THANK YOU.

HELLO. MY NAME IS MEGAN LONG AND I ADVOCATE TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE SUFFERING COURSES FOR AN IMMEDIATE BAN ON THE CRUEL AND OUTDATED HORSE CARRIAGE INDUSTRY IN OUR BEAUTIFUL, ETHICAL, MODERN CITY THAT WE LOVE, DALLAS.

THE HORSES ABUSED BY THE UNNECESSARY HORSE CARRIAGE INDUSTRY, ENDURE INTENSE PAIN UNDER GRUELING SLAVE LABOR CONDITIONS, AND MANY HAVE ALREADY DIED BECAUSE OF THE DANGEROUS AND CRUEL HORSE CARRIAGE INDUSTRY.

TIGHTLY BOUND AROUND THEIR FACES AND BODIES, THESE HORSES ARE DENIED NATURAL BEHAVIORS LIKE REST, ROAMING FOOD AND WATER BREAKS, BATHROOM BREAKS, AND SOCIALIZATION WITH OTHER HORSES AS THEY WORK EXCESSIVE HOURS IN EXTREME WEATHER CONDITIONS, THE HORSES ARE FORCED TO WEAR BLINDERS ON EITHER SIDE OF THEIR EYES, RESTRICTING THEIR VISUAL INPUT ON THE DANGEROUSLY BUSY CITY STREETS.

THE STREETS ARE ALREADY SO HARD, BUT THE HORSES FEEL EVEN WORSE, LABORING WITH A CRUEL WHIP HANGING OVER THEM.

THESE HORSE CARRIAGES ARE CRIMINAL ANIMAL ABUSE AND NEED TO BE BANNED NOW.

WE HAVE AN ABUNDANCE OF MODERN, MORE EFFICIENT AND ETHICAL MODES OF TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING CARS, BUSSES, BICYCLES, TRUCKS, MOTORCYCLES, MOPEDS AND EVEN ELECTRIC CARRIAGES.

WITH PLENTIFUL MODERN TECHNOLOGY, THERE IS NO NEED FOR HORSES TO SUFFER LIKE THESE HORSES CRIMINALLY ABUSED FOR UNNECESSARY HORSE CARRIAGE RIDES SUFFER. MANY CITIES HAVE ALREADY PLACED THE SENSIBLE BAN ON THE CRUEL AND OUTDATED HORSE CARRIAGE INDUSTRY, INCLUDING CHICAGO, SALT LAKE CITY, BILOXI, CAMDEN, KEY WEST, PALM BEACH, PANAMA CITY BEACH, ISTANBUL, RENO, LAS VEGAS, MONTREAL, OXFORD, LONDON, BARCELONA, SANTA FE AND OTHERS THROUGHOUT THE GLOBE.

WE SHOULD JOIN THE MODERN MOVEMENT TO BAN CRUEL AND OUTDATED HORSE CARRIAGES AND EXCLUSIVELY ALLOW FOR ETHICALLY MODERN TRANSPORTATION.

AS A MOTHER TO A FIVE YEAR OLD BOY, ELLIOT, I WANT.

THAT'S YOUR TIME THANK YOU. [INAUDIBLE].

HELLO. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS [INAUDIBLE].

I'M A CANDIDATE IN THE PAKISTAN GENERAL ELECTIONS, HAPPENING NEXT WEEK ON FEBRUARY 8TH, 2024.

I WAS ACTUALLY HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THAT SEEMS LIKE A FAIRY TALE NOW, AS TWO HOURS AGO, ANOTHER CANDIDATE WAS SHOT DEAD IN THE ELECTIONS FOR SUPPORTING THE FORMER PRIME MINISTER IMRAN KHAN.

AND YESTERDAY, THE FORMER PRIME MINISTER WAS SENTENCED TO TEN YEARS IN JAIL FOR A SHAM CASE AND A KANGAROO COURT THAT HAS NO REGARD FOR LAW OR JUSTICE. BECAUSE HE MADE A STATEMENT SAYING THAT THE UNITED STATES HAD INDIRECT ENROLLMENT IN HIS REMOVAL FROM OFFICE.

SO I URGE THE CITY OF DALLAS, TO MAKE A STATEMENT, JUST LIKE HOW THE UNITED NATIONS HAS TODAY AND THE INTERNATIONAL, HUMAN RIGHTS FOUNDATION HAS TODAY,

[01:50:03]

REGARDING THE RELEASE OF HIS, BEING IN JAIL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MORGAN BRADBURY.

MORGAN BRADBURY IS NOT PRESENT.

LUKE METZGER.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS LUKE METZGER.

I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT TEXAS.

WE'RE A NONPROFIT ADVOCATE FOR CLEAN AIR AND WATER PARKS AND WILDLIFE AND A LIVABLE CLIMATE WITH OVER 3,000 MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS IN DALLAS.

I'M HERE TO TALK ON TWO MATTERS MINIMUM LOT SIZE REFORM AND FUNDING FOR PARKS IN THE BOND PACKAGE.

FIRST, I SUPPORT REDUCING MINIMUM LOT SIZES IN THE CITY.

DFW IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING REGIONS IN THE COUNTRY, BUT MOST OF THAT GROWTH IS HAPPENING OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS.

AND THAT SPRAWL MEANS HIGHER GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, ENERGY USAGE, MORE FLOODING AND WATER POLLUTION, AND WORSE AIR QUALITY.

COMPACT DEVELOPMENT, ON THE OTHER HAND, OFFERS FAR GREATER ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS THAN SPRAWL.

REDUCING MINIMUM LOT SIZES CAN CREATE MORE WALKABLE, BIKEABLE AND TRANSIT ACCESSIBLE OPTIONS FOR FOR DALLAS RESIDENTS.

AND BY PAIRING SUCH AN ACTION WITH INVESTMENTS IN GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE SUCH AS RAIN GARDENS AND CISTERNS, WE CAN BUILD A MORE SUSTAINABLE DALLAS.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF INCLUDING $350 MILLION FOR PARKS, TRAILS AND GREEN SPACES AS PART OF THE BOND.

YOU KNOW, FROM TAKING OUR KIDS TO THE PLAYGROUND, WALKING THE DOG ON A TRAIL, OR MEETING FRIENDS FOR A PICK UP GAME OF BASKETBALL.

YOU KNOW, PARKS JUST MAKE OUR LIVES SO MUCH BETTER.

AND IN ADDITION TO THE PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS, PARKS ALSO PROVIDE CRITICAL GREEN SPACE THAT REDUCES THE URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECT, MITIGATES FLOODING, AND PROVIDES HABITAT FOR WILDLIFE.

BUT ACCORDING TO THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND, DALLAS RANKS A PIDDLING 43RD IN THE NATION FOR PARKS AND RECREATION AND SCORES BELOW AVERAGE FOR AMENITIES LIKE DOG PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS, AND PERMANENT RESTROOMS. DALLAS FUTURE IS GREENER AND GREATER WITH MORE ACCESSIBLE PARKS.

THANK YOU, JERRY SCHWARTZ.

MY NAME IS JERRY SCHWARTZ, AND I'M A 72 YEAR OLD OWNER OF FANTASY CARRIAGES.

DURING THE CHRISTMAS SEASON.

FOR THE LAST 12 YEARS, I'VE PARTICIPATED IN CARRIAGE RIDES THROUGH HIGHLAND PARK.

THIS ACCOUNTS FOR ABOUT 90% OF MY CARRIAGE INCOME.

I HAVE TWO TEAMS OF HORSES EACH WORKING EVERY OTHER NIGHT.

I DO APPROXIMATELY FIVE 50 MINUTE RIDES PER NIGHT.

PRIOR TO THE SEASON, MY TEAMS WERE VET CHECKED AND AND SPECIAL RUBBER SHOES ARE APPLIED WHICH PREVENT SLIPPING AND DEFACING THE STREETS.

DURING THE RIDES WE LOVE ENGAGING WITH THE FAMILIES AND SEEING THE JOY IT BRINGS TO THE KIDS FACES.

IT IS A TRADITION FOR MANY, AND SOME FAMILIES HAVE CARRIED THIS TRADITION FOR 17 YEARS.

AT THE END OF EACH RIDE, A TRAINED GROUND CREW OFFERS WATER TO HER HORSES AND CLEANS HER, CLEANS THEIR DIAPERS, INSPECTS THE CARRIAGES AS WELL AS THE HORSES FOR ANY SAFETY ISSUES.

ONCE THE SEASON CONCLUDES, THE SHOES ARE REMOVED AND THEY GET TWO MONTHS REST.

I DO 4 TO 7 WEDDINGS THE REMAINDER OF THE YEAR, WHICH INCLUDES ABOUT 1 TO 2 HOURS WORK FOR THE HORSES.

I ALSO DO 2 OR 3 QUINCEANERA'S WHICH IS A SPANISH TRADITION WHEN THE GIRLS TURNING 15, AND IS ALSO A TRADITION FOR THE YOUNG LADY TO ARRIVE AT THE CHURCH IN A HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGE. FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE YEAR THEY'RE JUST HORSES.

WE WE FEED HIGH QUALITY GRAIN AS WELL AS HAY, PLUS SIX ACRES TO GRAZE ON.

I HAVE VARIOUS BARNS FOR THEM TO GO IN AND OUT, AND THEY'RE NOT NOT OUT IN THE WEATHER.

FOR THESE REASONS I HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT DALLAS CARRIAGES SHOULD BE SAVED.

YES. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

THANK YOU, JUDGE GLOCK.

MY NAME IS JUDGE GLOCK.

I'M THE DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH AT THE MANHATTAN INSTITUTE.

I'VE WRITTEN EXTENSIVELY ON HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS, AND THROUGH NO FAULT OF MY OWN, I HAPPEN TO LIVE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS.

I'M HERE TO TESTIFY IN FAVOR OF MINIMUM LOT SIZE REFORM.

I USED TO TELL MY STUDENTS THAT THEY HAD EVER FALLEN ASLEEP IN CLASS, AND I TAUGHT ECONOMICS, AND THEY HAD TO BE WOKEN UP BY A QUESTION.

THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE QUESTION WAS, MERELY ANSWER SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

AND MOST LIKELY THEY WOULD BE CORRECT.

THAT IS THE SITUATION HERE AS WITH MANY OTHER ISSUES, THERE IS ONLY TWO SIGNIFICANT WAYS TO REDUCE HOUSING PRICES IN DALLAS.

ONE IS TO REDUCE THE DEMAND.

YOU CAN GO THE ROUTE OF CITIES LIKE DETROIT OR CLEVELAND THAT MAKE THE PLACE SO INHOSPITABLE THAT FEWER PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE THERE.

A BETTER ROUTE, OF COURSE, IS TO INCREASE SUPPLY.

THAT IS THE ONLY EFFECTIVE ROUTE TO REDUCE HOUSING PRICES AND A MINIMUM LOT SIZES IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO DO SO.

[01:55:01]

WE KNOW DALLAS IS FACING A CRISIS OF HOUSING AFFORDABILITY.

JUST TEN YEARS AGO, THE MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD, WOULD TAKE ABOUT THREE YEARS OF THEIR INCOME TO BUY A MEDIAN PRICED HOUSE IN DALLAS.

TODAY, THAT IS UP TO FIVE.

THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN LOWER PRICED CITIES SUCH AS ATLANTA AND NASHVILLE AND OKLAHOMA CITY.

THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REFORM WILL ALLOW AND EXPAND THE NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY HOME OPTIONS, WHILE MINIMALLY IMPACTING NEIGHBORHOODS.

WE SAW WHEN HOUSTON REDUCED MINIMUM LOT SIZES, ONLY ONE HALF OF 1% OF SINGLE FAMILY PARCELS WERE REZONED INTO TOWN.

EXCUSE ME? WERE PRODUCED INTO TOWNHOMES.

MOST AREAS THAT TENDED TO BE THE ABOVE AVERAGE INCOME, AREAS THAT SAW NEW, MORE MODERATELY PRICED HOMES WITH MORE OPTIONS FOR BUYERS.

THIS WILL ALSO REDUCE DISPLACEMENT.

WE'VE SEEN CITIES THAT REFUSE TO REDUCE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OR ALLOW MORE BUILDING, SEE MORE DISPLACEMENT OF MINORITIES IN THOSE CITIES THAT HAVE REFORM.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU, DEBORAH MARTINEZ.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS DEBORAH MARTINEZ.

I'M AN EMPLOYEE WITH DALLAS ISD AND THE HOMELESS EDUCATION PROGRAM.

I AM HERE TO ASK FOR YOUR EACH OF YOU TO USE YOUR POSITION AND LEADERSHIP TO COME TOGETHER TO HELP OUR DALLAS ISD STUDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM.

I HAVE TWO STUDENTS THAT I, ARE HERE WITH ME TODAY THAT I AM CURRENTLY WORKING WITH, THAT I HELP.

I'M A SPECIALIST AND I WORK DIRECTLY WITH THE STUDENTS.

OUR HOMELESS UNACCOMPANIED STUDENTS IN PARTICULAR ARE THE STUDENTS THAT ARE WITHOUT PARENTS.

THEY HAVE NO HOME TO GO TO.

THEY HAVE NO SHELTER.

I HAVE PERSONALLY WORKED WITH THESE STUDENTS AND SEVERAL OTHERS AND UNFORTUNATELY THERE WAS NO PLACE FOR THEM TO GO IN DALLAS.

OUR NEIGHBOR.

THOUGH ARLINGTON PROVIDED SHELTER FOR BOTH OF THESE STUDENTS.

IT WAS VERY IT'S VERY SAD TO ME THAT OUR OWN CITY OF DALLAS CANNOT SUPPORT OUR STUDENTS THAT LIVE HERE IN DALLAS.

I KNOW IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF ANY PARTICULAR REASON, BUT IT'S A VERY LARGE, BROAD REASON.

THERE'S A LOT OF FUNDING INVOLVED, MONEY INVOLVED.

BUT I WORK WITH THESE STUDENTS EVERY DAY.

I HAVE TO SEE THEM.

I HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THEY GO THROUGH IN ORDER FOR THEM TO SURVIVE.

AND THAT'S THE MODE THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE RATHER THAN FOCUSING ON THEIR STUDIES.

SO I AM ASKING FOR EACH OF YOU TO PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT IS GOING ON IN OUR CITY IN DALLAS, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR STUDENTS WHO ARE OUR FUTURE. I DO KNOW THAT WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE IF WE ALL COME TOGETHER.

I'LL NOW CALL THE LAST GROUP OF SPEAKERS FOR THOSE IN PERSON SPEAKERS.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST TWO ROWS OF THE CENTER SECTION.

MICHAEL OR MICHAEL WILKINS.

JOSHUA PERRY AND MIKE SHAW.

CHRISTIAN SAMPSON, YOU MAY COME TO THE PODIUM.

GREETINGS, MAYOR JOHNSON AND FORMER MAYOR AND FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS CHRISTIAN SAMPSON, AND I AM HERE BASICALLY TO ASK Y'ALL TO, YOU KNOW, DO THE GRANT FOR THE HOMELESS PEOPLE AND STUFF, BECAUSE FOR ONE, I HAVE BEEN IN THAT SITUATION BEFORE.

SO LAST YEAR, AROUND OCTOBER 5TH, I WAS HOMELESS AND I HAD NOWHERE TO GO.

AND I TRIED MULTIPLE SHELTERS AND THEY ALL HAD THE SAME ANSWER, PRETTY MUCH, WHICH WAS, YOU KNOW, NO SPACE OR, YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TO BE HERE LIKE SUPER EARLY TO, YOU KNOW, GET A SPOT. AND BASICALLY I WENT SIX MONTHS BEING HOMELESS AND IT WAS DAYS THAT I SLEPT AT THE CAMP WISDOM STATION OUTSIDE. IT'S DAYS THAT I WHEN IT WAS SNOWING OUTSIDE, I WAS ACTUALLY IN AN ABANDONED HOUSE.

[02:00:06]

NO ELECTRICITY OR NOTHING.

I HAD TO GET COVERS AND STUFF TO STAY WARM.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I FEEL LIKE Y'ALL SHOULD.

I'M JUST GOING TO PITCH THIS IDEA.

I HOPE THAT I PRAY THAT Y'ALL FIND A SPOT OR BUILD A SPOT FOR THE KIDS WHO HAVE NO PARENTS AND STUFF LIKE THAT TO TAKE CARE OF THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO.

AND I FEEL LIKE THAT'S A BIG PART OF HOW SOME OF THESE YOUNG PEOPLE ARE, YOU KNOW, DOING CRIMES AND STUFF BECAUSE THE STRUGGLE THAT THEY'RE GOING THROUGH, THEY THINK THEY HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO DO BUT THAT IN ORDER TO SURVIVE, WHEN THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THE WAY.

AND I JUST HOPE Y'ALL, YOU KNOW, TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

VANESSA GAGNEY. I GUESS VANESSA GAGNY IS NOT PRESENT.

SALEM FIRTH.

HELLO. MAYOR JOHNSON AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE MY RESEARCH ON THE ISSUE OF MINIMUM LOT SIZE REGULATIONS IN DALLAS.

I STUDY LAND USE REGULATION AND HOUSING MARKETS AS CO-DIRECTOR OF THE URBANITY PROJECT MERCATUS CENTER AT GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY.

I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY LAST DECEMBER 6TH TO PROVIDE EXTENSIVE WRITTEN TESTIMONY TO THE COUNCIL, WHICH I'M HAPPY TO RESEND TO ANYONE WHO'S INTERESTED.

ANALYZING. I'M SORRY, MR. FIRTH, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING.

I WAS UNABLE TO MAKE THE VIDEO WORK, MA'AM, WITH WEBEX IN THE BROWSER.

WELL, I'M SORRY, MR. FIRTH. YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL UNLESS YOUR VIDEO IS DISPLAYED.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, I'LL HAVE TO SPEAK TO YOU A DIFFERENT TIME.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

TIA X APOLLAS.

HI, MR. MAYOR. CRUCIFIED RIGHT HERE.

LAID BEHIND A STONE.

WE LIFT HIM HIGH.

BUT NOW WE ALL ALONE.

LIKE A ROSE TRAMPLED ON THE GROUND.

BUT HE TOOK THE FALL.

AND NOW YOU LOOK FOR ME TO SEW ALL DOWN.

LET ME START WITH GENESIS, EXODUS, LEVITICUS, NUMBERS, DEUTERONOMY, JOSHUA, JUDGES, RUTH, FIRST AND SECOND SAMUEL, FIRST AND SECOND KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND CHRONICLES, EZRA. NEHEMIAH.

PROVERBS. PSALMS. PROVERBS. ESTHER.

JOB. SONG. PROVERBS.

ECCLESIASTES. I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ONE GREATER THAN SOLOMON HAVE COME.

JESUS HAVE COME FROM THE HOLY GHOST, THAT THE CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST WE RAISED OVER THERE.

BUT WE AIN'T GOING TO CHANGE OUR CLOTHES.

WHY? TIMOTHY THREE AND THEY KEEP ARRESTING ME.

SO I SAID, PASTORS AND MAYOR, WE CAME TO YOU BEFORE, TWO MINUTES AT THE MIC BEFORE CORONA HITS AND SPREADS THE PLAGUE.

IT'S SPIRITUAL CALL. WE'RE NOT ASKING ANY ILLUMINATI OR CATHOLIC TO DISMISS [INAUDIBLE] I HAVE SERVED 66 BOOKS SINCE I WAS A CHILD AT THE CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST.

IF I'M GOING TO SAY PEACE, I'M GOING TO SAY IT TO A BETTER WIG.

SOMEBODY THAT REPRESENTS SOMEBODY THAT HAS SOME RESPECT FOR A EUNUCH IN THE HOUSE OF GOD.

NOW, I AIN'T GOING TO BE NO BOY NO MORE.

I'M GOING TO STAY TRANSGENDER, AS HE SAYS, TRANSFORMED BY THE RENEWING OF OUR MIND THAT YOU BECOME A KINGDOM OF PRIESTS AND A KINGDOM THAT DWELLS WITHIN HEAVEN, THAT GOD SAID WAS WITHIN YOU. I'M ADDRESSING YOU AS POWERFUL PROPHET NOW THAT TO THE NATIONS.

I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO GET THAT SATELLITE UNDER CONTROL AT THE ORDER OF BISHOPS JUICE CHAIR, THAT I'M GOING TO TAKE THE CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST TO Y'ALL AS CATHOLICS AND EVERYBODY ELSE TO LET YOU KNOW WE HAVE A COVERING THERE.

BUT YES, THE SON [INAUDIBLE] THIRD GENERATION AND DAUGHTER OF A PREACHER.

DISMISS HERE.

I'LL COME BACK AND SEE YOU. THANK YOU, LISA ALVARADO.

OKAY. THAT'S ME.

MY NAME IS LISA ALVARADO, AND I'M THE DIRECTOR OF HIS GRACE PLACE.

IT'S FOR PEOPLE IN AND OUT OF JAIL OR ANYONE THAT NEEDS HELP GETTING ON THEIR FEET.

AND IN THE PROCESS OF FINDING A PLACE, MY HUSBAND WAS ASSAULTED ON THE DART TRAIN.

AND BECAUSE OF HIS ASSAULT ON THE DART TRAIN, WE WERE LEFT HOMELESS.

AND WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO FIND A PLACE, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE SAID TODAY IS KIND OF REFLECTED ON KIND OF WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE ON THE TRAIN DID NOT HAVE, ANYTHING ELSE TO DO, WITH THEIR TIME.

SO, SO THEY, YOU KNOW, ASSAULTED HIM AND IT WAS MORE THAN ONE ASSAULT, WHICH, CAUSED HIM TO BE IN AND OUT OF THE HOSPITAL.

AND SO THAT CAUSED OUR SITUATION RIGHT NOW.

AND SO WE ARE, LOOKING FOR A HELP IN ANY WAY TO BE ABLE TO GO AHEAD AND START THE NONPROFIT BACK, BUT OR JUST

[02:05:09]

A HOME IN GENERAL.

SO WE CAN WE CAN RECOVER FROM HIS CAR OR FROM HIS, BEING IN THE HOSPITAL AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO, THANK YOU, FOR YOUR TIME AND, AND JUST FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION WITH THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MICHAEL WILKINS.

MICHAEL. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR JOHNSON.

COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MICHAEL WILKINS.

I'M FROM PLANO, TEXAS, BUT I'M AN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER WHO WORKS IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS.

I ALSO SERVE ON DALLAS ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE ON C-CAP IMPLEMENTATION, AND I'M AN ADJUNCT PROFESSOR AT SMU SCHOOL FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.

SUFFICE TO SAY, I SPEND MOST OF MY WAKING HOURS IN DALLAS.

CONSEQUENTLY, MANY OF THOSE HOURS I'M A BIKE COMMUTER, A MOUNTAIN BIKER, AND AN ADVOCATE FOR DALLAS PARKS.

I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE DALLAS PARKS COALITION AND ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT THE FULL FUNDING.

$350 MILLION FOR THE 24 BOND ELECTION FOR DALLAS PARKS.

IN 2016, I COLLABORATED WITH THE DALLAS PARKS DEPARTMENT AND MULTIPLE OTHER CONSULTANTS TO DETERMINE THE FULL VALUE OF THE DALLAS PARK SYSTEM. IN THAT STUDY, WE DETERMINED THAT ALL PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN DALLAS PARKS HAS A 7 TO 1 RETURN ON INVESTMENT.

THAT'S ENORMOUS.

WITH THAT IN MIND, THE QUALITY OF LIFE BENEFITS THE HUMAN HEALTH BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH INVESTMENT IN PARKS.

I URGE YOU TO PLEASE CONSIDER MAXIMIZING THE FUNDING IN THE BOND PROGRAM IN LIGHT OF THAT RETURN ON INVESTMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

SHANNON STAFFORD IS NOT PRESENT.

SHANNON STAFFORD.

DON MOORE.

DON MOORE IS NOT PRESENT.

LAKENDRA HOUSTON.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? HELLO? OKAY.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M [INAUDIBLE] HOUSTON, A 20 YEAR COMBAT VETERAN AND A HOMELESS VETERAN REINTEGRATION SPECIALIST AT UNI.

I REPRESENT OPERATION TINY HOME AS A BLACK WOMAN DEVELOPER WHO IS HELPING TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AND THESE WOMEN ARE ASSISTING OR HELPING ME.

TODAY, I STAND BEFORE YOU TO SHED LIGHT ON A PRESSURING ISSUE THAT DESERVES OUR DESERVES OUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION, HOMELESSNESS.

NOT ONLY WITHIN OUR COMMUNITIES BUT WITHIN OUR VETERAN POPULATION.

THESE BRAVE INDIVIDUALS WHO SELFLESSLY SERVED OUR NATION OFTEN FIND THEMSELVES FACING THE HARSH REALITY OF HOMELESSNESS, HOMELESSNESS, RETURNING TO CIVILIAN LIFE.

AND IN 2021, I WAS ONE OF THOSE VETERANS.

THE IMPACT OF HOMELESSNESS ON VETERANS EXTENDS FAR BEYOND THE ABSENCE OF A STABLE HOME.

IT DESTROYS OUR MENTAL AND PHYSICAL WELL-BEING AND MAKES TRANSITION TO CIVILIAN LIFE EVEN MORE CHALLENGING.

MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN ARMS, WHO ONCE WORE THE UNIFORM WITH PRIDE, NOW STRUGGLE WITH HARSH CONDITIONS OF LIFE ON THE STREETS.

OUR CLIENTS HAVE BEEN ROBBED OF, ASSAULTED AND EVEN MURDERED.

IT'S OUR MORAL OBLIGATION AS A COMMUNITY TO ENSURE THOSE IMPACTED DON'T ENDURE THE SAME.

THE SHAME OF LIVING WITHOUT A PLACE TO CALL HOME.

BY ADDRESSING THE ROOT SOURCES AND OFFERING SUPPORT FOR INCREASING AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO $100 MILLION TO $200 MILLION, WE NEED TO RESTORE PRIDE IN OUR CITY AND OUR GREAT CITY E NSURE NO ONE MUST SUFFER FIGHTING FOR THOSE WHO FOUGHT FOR US.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ANGIE SANDERS.

HI, MY NAME IS ANGIE SANDERS, SPRUCE VALLEY LANE, DISTRICT THREE.

THE CUCKOO BIRD DIFFERS FROM OTHER BIRDS IN TWO MAJOR ASPECTS ITS UNIQUE CALL AND ITS NESTING HABITS.

SOON, OUR FEATHERED FRIENDS WILL BEGIN LOOKING FOR SECURE LOCATIONS SAFE FROM STRONG WINDS AND PREDATORS LIKE CATS AND SNAKES.

THEY WILL BEGIN TO GATHER LITTLE TWIGS AND STICKS, BLADES OF GRASS, BITS OF LEAVES, PIECES OF THREAD, AND HOPEFULLY SOME DRYER LINT.

THEY WEAVE THESE HUNDREDS OF ITEMS TOGETHER TO BUILD A SAFE, SECURE HOME IN WHICH TO LIVE AND RAISE THEIR FAMILIES.

MEANWHILE, THE CUCKOO DOES NONE OF THIS.

IT SITS TO THE SIDE AND WATCHES THE OTHER BIRD WORK.

IF THERE'S VIDEO, YOU CAN SEE IT FOR YOURSELF.

AFTER THE OTHER BIRD HAS LAID ITS EGGS, THE CUCKOO ZOOMS IN TO LAY ITS EGGS IN THE HOST BIRD'S NEST.

AND WHEN THE HATCHLINGS ARRIVE, WHEN THE EGGS BREAK, THE CUCKOO HATCHLING PECKS THE OTHER BIRDS AND PUSHES THEM OUT OF

[02:10:09]

THEIR NEST TO THEIR DEATHS.

THERE'S PLENTY OF VACANT LOTS IN DALLAS, TEXAS, NOT IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

FIND THOSE.

IMPOSING MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY AREAS IS NOT ONLY HARMFUL, IT'S PREDATORY.

IT'S CUCKOO.

PLEASE STOP.

THANK YOU [LAUGHTER]. THANK YOU, JASON WOODBURY.

MAYOR JOHNSON AND COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

I'M COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT YOU'VE LISTENED TO 70 PEOPLE PRIOR TO ME, SO I'LL BE QUICK AND HOPEFULLY, CAPTURE YOUR ATTENTION.

MY WIFE AND I LIVED IN DALLAS FOR THE PAST 26 YEARS.

MY WIFE AND I BOUGHT OUR FIRST HOME HERE, AND WE'VE RAISED THREE CHILDREN HERE.

I'M A PROUD MEMBER AND LIVE IN DISTRICT TEN.

I LOVE OUR COMMUNITY, BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE SERIOUS LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND MY CONCERN DRAWS FROM THREE PERSPECTIVES.

AS A FELLOW HUMAN BEING, I FEEL THE MORAL IMPERATIVE TO PROVIDE THIS BASIC NEED.

I CANNOT, NOR SHOULD ANY OF US, BE COMFORTABLE WITH MY OWN SITUATION WHILE NEGLECTING THE NEEDS OF DALLAS'S MOST VULNERABLE.

SECOND, AS A HOMEOWNER, I WANT TO DISPEL THE MISPERCEPTION THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS BAD FOR MY HOUSE'S VALUE.

WITHIN A ONE MILE RADIUS OF MY HOME, THERE ARE SEVEN APARTMENT COMPLEXES AS WELL AS DUPLEXES.

YET DESPITE THE PROXIMITY TO A HIGH VOLUME OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS, WE'VE SEEN OUR HOMES VALUE MORE THAN DOUBLE IN THE PAST TEN YEARS.

MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE BELIEF THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS BAD FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMEOWNERS.

THREE AS A BUSINESS LEADER, I'M THE CEO OF A GLOBAL FIRM THAT'S HEADQUARTERED HERE IN DALLAS.

OUR COMPANY IS DEPENDENT UPON HIRING WORKERS, MANY OF WHOM ARE RIGHT OUT OF COLLEGE AND CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE IN OUR CITY.

IN THE PAST YEAR ALONE, OUR CHURCH, WILSHIRE BAPTIST CHURCH, HAS HELPED 26 PEOPLE WITH RENTAL ASSISTANCE.

JUST THIS WEEK, OUR MINISTER OF MISSIONS HELPED A SINGLE MOTHER OF TWO AVOID EVICTION THROUGH TEMPORARY RENT ASSISTANCE.

I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE PRIORITIZE HOMELESS AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE ALLOCATIONS OF THE UPCOMING BOND.

GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.

JAKE SNYDER.

MY NAME IS JAKE SNYDER, A FOURTH GENERATION CARRIAGE DRIVER AND OWNER OF 25 HORSES IN DALLAS.

HAVING DEDICATED MY LIFE TO THIS BUSINESS, I OFTEN REFLECT ON ITS VALUE AND IMPACT.

TO ME, IT'S CLEAR THAT AND THAT COMMON SENSE AND STRONG MORAL COMPASS ARE VITAL IN UNDERSTANDING THE TRUE NATURE OF CARRIAGE RIDES.

AS YOU WALK THROUGH DALLAS, YOU MIGHT SEE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF CITY LIFE STRUGGLES TO THE BUSTLING NIGHTLIFE OR, IN MY EXPERIENCE, IN THE CITY [INAUDIBLE] . HIGHLIGHTING DIFFERENT CHALLENGES WE FACE IN THE ENVIRONMENT.

HOWEVER, WHEN DISCUSSIONS TURNED TO BANNING CARRIAGE RIDES, I BELIEVE THERE ARE MORE PRESSING ISSUES FOR CITY COUNCIL TO ADDRESS.

CARRIAGE RIDES IN DALLAS OFFER MORE THAN JUST ECONOMIC BENEFITS AS WE'VE DISCUSSED IN MEETINGS.

THEY PROVIDE A UNIQUE FAMILY EXPERIENCE, BRINGING JOY OF THOUSANDS OF CUSTOMERS.

THEY SERVE AS A LIVING HISTORY LESSON TO OUR PAST.

ONE EXAMPLE IS CESAR 2,000 POUND HORSE WHO PURPOSELY LOWERS HIS HEAD SO A FOUR YEAR OLD LITTLE GIRL CAN HUG HIM.

THIS GENTLE INTERACTION BETWEEN A MAJESTIC ANIMAL AND A CHILD IS ONE OF THE COUNTLESS SPECIAL MOMENTS THESE RIDES OFFER.

OUR 12 PERSON WAGON RIDES ARE A HIGHLIGHT FOR MANY [INAUDIBLE] PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER DALLAS COME TO DALLAS AND OFTEN SHARE THAT THE CARRIAGE RIDE IS THEIR HIGHLIGHT OF THEIR TRIP.

FAMILIES CREATE MEMORABLE EXPERIENCES, SOMETHING [INAUDIBLE].

PERHAPS A FAMILY REUNION THAT STANDS OUT IN YOUR MIND.

THIS IS WHAT WE AIM TO PROVIDE FOR THE PEOPLE [INAUDIBLE].

MAKING THIS DECISION I ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONSULT YOUR OWN OFFICE AND CONSIDER THE JOY AND VALUE THESE CARRIAGE RIDES BRING TO OUR COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.

FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TODAY.

CHRISTINA FASCHING.

I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THE CARRIAGE COMPANIES OF DALLAS, AND I'M OPPOSED TO THE BAN THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY.

FOR MANY PEOPLE IN THE CARRIAGE.

FOR MANY PEOPLE, THE CARRIAGE IS BEING IN DALLAS BRINGS CALM TRADITION AND A LIVELIHOOD TO ALL THOSE WHO PARTAKE.

[02:15:06]

I BELIEVE THAT IS AN ONGOING DISPUTE IS MORE HARMFUL TO OUR SOCIETY THAN PARTAKING IN THE EVENT.

I, A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INFORMATION HAS COMPILED AGAINST THE OWNERS, OPERATORS OF THESE BEAUTIFUL HORSES AND CARRIAGE COMPANIES, AND THEY ARE OLD AND OUTDATED.

THESE THOSE WHO EXPRESS CONCERN FOR TREATMENTS OF THE HORSES, BOTH IN THEIR WORK ENVIRONMENTS AND HOME, I ASSURE YOU THEY ARE WELL FED, HAPPY AND HEALTHY.

I HAVE DEDICATED NEARLY 30 YEARS OF MY LIFE TO THE EQUINE WORLD THROUGH SHOWING, TRAINING, BOARDING, GIVING LESSONS, EDUCATION AND CARE FOR OUR EQUINE COMPANIONS. I HAVE LEARNED HOW TO READ AND UNDERSTAND THESE HORSES AND IN THEIR WORK ENVIRONMENTS, AND LEARN THEIR BODY LANGUAGE EXPRESSIONS AND THEIR LOVE FOR THEIR WORK.

OFTEN, HORSES TEND TO CREATE THEIR OWN LIVELIHOODS IN THEIR WORK BECAUSE OF THEIR INTELLIGENCE.

MANY HORSES WHO LOVE THEIR WORK, WHO ARE FORCED IN RETIREMENT, USUALLY DIE SHORTLY THEREAFTER DUE TO DEPRESSION.

THESE CARRIAGE HORSES BRING JOY TO NOT ONLY US AS PARTAKERS, BUT ALSO OUR EQUINE COMPANIONS.

OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY IS SAFETY WHEN IT COMES TO OUR COMPANIONS AND THE ATTEMPT TO ABOLISH [INAUDIBLE].

IN YOUR ATTEMPT TO ABOLISH THIS PROVEN, SAFE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO THOSE WHO ENJOY OUR CITY, WE HAVE OTHERS THAT ARE NOT SO SAFE.

UBER AND LYFT ARE AMONG THOSE THAT CONTRIBUTE TO NEARLY 3% OF DALLAS FATALITY ACCIDENTS.

CARRIAGES. WE HAVE NONE IN THE LAST TEN YEARS.

THESE CARRIAGES ALSO CONTRIBUTE TO THE MANY PARTS OF OUR ECONOMY AS WELL.

JUST NEARLY $19 MILLION.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. OH THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

MICHELLE FOWLER IS NOT PRESENT.

ELIZABETH MARKOWITZ.

GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR GIVING US THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS FOR TEXANS FOR REASONABLE SOLUTIONS, AND I'M HERE TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE BOND AND ALSO REDUCING OUR MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS IN DALLAS TO 1,500 SQUARE FEET.

YOU SHOULD HAVE A VISUAL HANDOUT THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU.

AND I WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW REDUCING MINIMUM LOT SIZE CAN EXPAND HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE IN DALLAS, ESPECIALLY MIDDLE CLASS AND WORKING CLASS FAMILIES.

SLIDE ONE WILL SHOW YOU HOW WHEN HOUSTON REDUCED ITS MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO 1,400FT² IN THE LATE 1990S, HOMEOWNERSHIP HAS STAYED AFFORDABLE COMPARED TO OTHER LARGE CITIES FOR MEDIAN INCOME HOUSEHOLDS, AND THAT'S DESPITE RAPID JOB GROWTH IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON.

SLIDE TWO WILL SHOW YOU THAT HOUSTON HAS HOME OWNERSHIP HAS REMAINED MORE AFFORDABLE THAN OTHER LARGE CITIES LIKE CHICAGO, LOS ANGELES AND NEW YORK CITY.

AND I WOULD NOTE THAT THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS RECENTLY REPORTED THAT HOUSING IS NOW MORE EXPENSIVE IN DALLAS THAN IT IS IN CHICAGO, AND IT IS NEARING NEW YORK CITY LEVELS OF UNAFFORDABILITY. SLIDE THREE WILL SHOW YOU THAT WHEN HOUSTON REDUCED THEIR MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS TO 1,400FT², WE SAW A RAPID CONSTRUCTION OF TOWNHOUSES AND HOMES ON MODERATE LOT SIZES THAT HELPED RETAIN AND GROW HOUSTON'S BLACK AND LATINO POPULATIONS, THANKS TO MORE HOUSING OPTIONS FOR FAMILIES.

THE LAST SLIDE SHOWS YOU AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT A TOWNHOUSE COULD LOOK LIKE.

THAT'S A TOWNHOUSE LISTED JUST YESTERDAY ON ZILLOW IN HOUSTON.

THREE BED, THREE BATH LISTED FOR $184,000.

I USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE SO YOU CAN VISUALIZE WHAT TOWNHOUSES COULD LOOK LIKE.

CURRENTLY, I'M RAISING MY TWO YEAR OLD SON IN AN APARTMENT.

I WOULD LOVE A TOWNHOME LIKE THAT.

PLEASE SUPPORT MINIMUM LOT SIZE REFORM.

THIS IS A COMMON SENSE SOLUTION TO OPEN UP MORE HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES.

THANK YOU. COOKIE PADEN IS NOT PRESENT.

UNFORTUNATELY, I'VE JUST LOST MY VIDEO CONNECTION I APOLOGIZE.

OKAY. I MAY COME BACK TO YOU IF IF WE HAVE TIME.

JONATHAN. JONATHAN MOORE.

HELLO, MY NAME IS JONATHAN MOORE AND I LIVE IN COLLIN COUNTY.

I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT HORSE CARRIAGES IN DALLAS.

THE FIRST THING I WANT TO EXPRESS IS THAT DRIVING AROUND HORSE CARRIAGES CAN BE STRESSFUL.

OH WELL. ANYWAYS.

AND IT ALSO CAN BE STRESSFUL FOR THE HORSES IN THAT THE CITY IS BUSTLING, FULL OF PEOPLE.

THERE'S LOTS OF SOUNDS, THERE'S LOTS OF COMMOTION, AND THIS IS NOT REALLY A GREAT ENVIRONMENT FOR A HORSE TO BE IN.

I BELIEVE A HORSE SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIVE THEIR ENTIRE LIVES ON A PASTURE, AND MANY HORSES DO GET TO LIVE THEIR ENTIRE LIVES ON PASTURE AND NOT HAVE

[02:20:04]

TO PERIODICALLY HAVE THAT BE INTERRUPTED, PERIODICALLY HAVE TO GO TO BUSY, CROWDED STREETS AND BE STRESSED OUT BY ALL THE COMMOTION THERE.

I THINK HORSES ARE A DOCILE ANIMALS, AND SO THIS IS NOT A VERY FUN ENVIRONMENT TO BE IN.

AND SO MANY HORSES GET TO LIVE FREE OF THIS, AND I THINK THESE HORSES DESERVE THE SAME, AND THEY DON'T DESERVE TO BE IN AN INDUSTRY THAT TAKES ADVANTAGE OF THEIR DOCILITY AND TAKES ADVANTAGE OF THEIR OBEDIENCE JUST TO MAKE SOME MONEY.

AND I THINK MANY CITIES AROUND THE WORLD HAVE BANNED HORSE CARRIAGES, FOR INSTANCE, TO NAME A FEW PARIS, TORONTO, BEIJING, SANTA FE AND LAS VEGAS. AND I BELIEVE DALLAS SHOULD JOIN THIS LIST OF CITIES THAT ARE MODERNIZING THEIR TOURISM, MODERNIZING THE ENTERTAINMENT, AND MODERNIZING THEIR TRANSPORTATION. TO NO LONGER HAVE A TRADITION OF TAKING ADVANTAGE OF HORSES DOCILITY AND OBEDIENCE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

COOKIE PEDEN.

MISS PEDEN, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YOUR, YOUR AUDIO NEEDS TO BE ON.

COOKIE BEEKMAN, 7111 DEBBIE DRIVE, DALLAS 75252.

THE CITY OF DALLAS IS LOSING POPULATION.

IT'S NOT GAINING.

IT'S NOT GROWING.

GIVEN THAT FACT, I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE LOOKING AT CHOPPING UP LOTS THAT ARE STANDARD SIZE AND THINKING OF PUTTING MULTIPLE FACILITIES, MULTIPLE DWELLINGS ON NORMAL SIZED LOTS.

RESIDENTS IN SOUTH DALLAS, EAST DALLAS, WEST DALLAS AND NORTH DALLAS WANT THEIR SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS PROTECTED.

THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT INVESTMENT A FAMILY MAKES IS A HOME WITH THE EXPECTATION THAT THEIR CHILDREN WILL HAVE A SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD.

PLACING A TOWNHOUSE OR A MULTI STORY QUADRAPLEX NEXT DOOR TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME MAKES NO SENSE.

CO-MINGLING DISPARATE TYPES OF HOUSING AND RESIDENCES IN A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.

JUST IGNORES THE EXPECTATIONS THAT RESIDENTS HAVE WHEN THEY BUY A HOME.

PLEASE DO NOT SUPPORT MEASURES PROPOSED BY RIGHT.

THAT TAKES AWAY THE RIGHT OF A SINGLE FAMILY MEMBER OR A RESIDENT OF DALLAS TO PROTEST THINGS THAT MIGHT BE GOING IN RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THEIR HOME.

BY RIGHT, TAKES AWAY THEIR RIGHT TO SPEAK UP AND OPPOSE THOSE TYPES OF FACILITIES.

WE ASK YOU TO PLEASE CONSIDER THAT WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING NOW, LOOKING AT INFILL AND REPURPOSING LOTS IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.

CATHERINE BACH IS NOT PRESENT.

CATHERINE BACH.

JOHN JACK.

THANK YOU MAYOR.

QUESTION RAISED BY A MEMBER OF COUNCIL REGARDING A SPECIFIC REGARDING THE SPECIFIC SERVICES OR HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES PROVIDED TO THE CITY.

MAYOR IT'S A COMPREHENSIVE ANSWER.

BEYOND OUR FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS, OUR CARRIAGES PLAY A VITAL ROLE IN THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.

OUR ENGAGEMENT TAKES PLACE IN VARIOUS FORMS, INCLUDING COLLABORATIONS WITH DALLAS SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY OUTREACH, CHURCHES, ORGANIZED FUNDRAISERS, CITY EVENTS, AND PARADES.

MANY CHILDREN, POSSIBLY DUE TO THEIR YOUNG AGE OR LACK OF EXPOSURE, HARBOR A FEAR OF HORSES.

OUR HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES OFFER THESE CHILDREN A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO OVERCOME THIS FEAR BY FACILITATING UP CLOSE INTERACTIONS WITH HORSES.

THIS NOT ONLY INTRODUCES THEM TO OUR PROFESSION, BUT ALSO ALLOWS UNDERPRIVILEGED CHILDREN, THOSE BATTLING DEPRESSION, SUFFER FROM ABUSE TO FORGE THERAPEUTIC CONNECTIONS WITH OUR ANIMALS, FOSTERING SELF-EXPRESSION IN WAYS NOT ALWAYS AVAILABLE.

HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES HAVE A UNIFYING EFFECT, BRINGING JOY TO MANY PEOPLE AND FAMILIES THROUGHOUT DALLAS.

THE ROLE OF OUR HORSES EXTENDS TO SUPPORTING OUR VETERANS, AIDING IN COPING AND PTSD, AND EASING THE TRANSITION BACK INTO CIVILIAN LIFE.

HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES THUS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF OUR CITY'S COMMUNITY FABRIC.

MANY YOUNG ADULTS INTERN WITH US, GAINING VALUABLE EXPERIENCES THAT AIDS THEM IN DIVERSE CAREER PATHS.

MOREOVER, WE EMPLOY AND SUPPORT THE HOMELESS BY PROVIDING MEALS, CLOTHING, BLANKETS, AND YES, EVEN TRANSPORTATION TO SHELTERS.

[02:25:07]

BANNING HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES IN DALLAS WOULD NOT ONLY BE A DISSERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY, BUT POSSIBLY A REGULATORY CONCERN.

OUR FOCUS SHOULD INSTEAD BE ON PRESSING ISSUES LIKE HOUSING HOMELESS FOR VETERANS, BOND ELECTIONS, REELECTIONS.

LET'S WORK TOGETHER TO ENHANCE THE POSITIVE IMPACTS OF HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES IN OUR COMMUNITY.

HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES, WHEN OPERATED RESPONSIBLY BY PROFESSIONALS, DOES NOT EQUATE TO EXPLOITATION IT, BUT RATHER A HARMONIOUS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMANS AND HORSES.

MY NAME IS BRIAN HIGH WITH NORTH STAR CARRIAGE ON DECEMBER 5TH, 2023, BOTH JOHN JACKS OF 3J CARRIAGES AND I FOUND OURSELVES THE CENTER OF ATTENTION FROM THIS COUNCIL AND VARIOUS NEWS OUTLETS.

BRIAN HIGH.

I'M GRATEFUL FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO STAND BEFORE YOU TODAY AND CLARIFY SOME MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGE INDUSTRY IN DALLAS.

THE QUESTION IS RAISED ON DECEMBER 5TH WERE VALID, YET I WAS TAKEN BACK WHEN THE CONVERSATION TURNED TO ALLEGATIONS OF INHUMANE PRACTICES AND ROGUE CARRIAGE OPERATORS.

INSTEAD OF FEELING OFFENDED, I FELT THE NEED TO EDUCATE.

FOR NEARLY THREE DECADES, THIS INDUSTRY HAS OPERATED SMOOTHLY WITHOUT INCIDENT IN DALLAS .

WE PROVIDED VALUABLE SERVICES TO RESIDENTS, NORTH TEXANS AND TOURISTS WITH MINIMAL FUSS AND RESOURCES.

I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT OUR COMPREHENSIVE ORDINANCE IS THE REASON FOR THIS SUSTAINED SUCCESS.

CONTRARY TO WHAT CERTAIN GROUPS FROM CHICAGO MIGHT HAVE YOU BELIEVE, I ASSURE YOU THAT OUR HORSES RECEIVE THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF CARE, REGULAR VETERINARY INSPECTIONS, AND BENEFIT FROM TOP NOTCH TRAINING, FARRIER WORK, AND DIET MANAGEMENT.

NORTH STAR CARRIAGE, ALONG WITH OTHER OPERATORS HERE, ARE DEDICATED TO CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT.

BUILDING ON OUR THREE DECADES OF EXPERIENCE.

IN RESPONSE TO THE CONCERNS RAISED IN THE DECEMBER 5TH MEETING ABOUT HAVING THE MOST EXPERIENCED PERSONNEL, I SAY TO YOU, MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THOSE PERPETUATING A FALSE NARRATIVE, LOOK NO FURTHER.

YOU HAVE SOME OF THE MOST SKILLED AND SEASONED HORSEMEN AND HORSEWOMEN RIGHT HERE BEFORE YOU.

WE ARE OPEN DISCUSSION.

WE ARE EAGER TO EDUCATE WHERE NECESSARY.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD, I'M INVITING ANYONE BEFORE ME A TOUR OF MY RANCH, A TOUR OF OUR WAREHOUSE, OR MY TIME TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO CONTINUING THIS CONVERSATION AND DEMONSTRATING HOW DALLAS LEADS IN THIS INDUSTRY, POTENTIALLY SERVING AS A MODEL FOR OTHER CITIES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JOSHUA PERRY.

DO NOT BAN HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES.

I'M JOSHUA PERRY AND I'VE WORKED FOR NORTH STAR CARRIAGE SINCE I WAS 16.

WITHOUT NORTH STAR CARRIAGE MY LIFE WOULD LOOK VERY DIFFERENT.

BEFORE I EVEN PICKED UP A PAIR OF DRIVING LINES.

I WORKED AS A BARN HAND FOR TWO YEARS, TAKING CARE OF THE COMPANY'S HORSES SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.

BY CARRYING OUT THIS JOB, I LEARNED HOW TO PROPERLY CARE FOR A HORSE LONG BEFORE I EVER STARTED TO DRIVE ONE.

WHEN I WAS 18, I STARTED MY TRAINING TO BECOME A CARRIAGE DRIVER FOR THE COMPANY.

I RECEIVED NUMEROUS HOURS OF TRAINING FROM ONLY OUR BEST DRIVERS.

QUICKLY DURING MY TRAINING, I REALIZED IF YOU WANT TO BE A GOOD HORSEMAN, THEN THE LEARNING NEVER STOPS, BUT FOR THE DRIVERS AND HORSES.

FAST FORWARD FIVE YEARS LATER AND I COULD DRIVE ANY HORSE MY BOSS HANDS ME AND EVEN COMPETE PROFESSIONALLY WITH SOME OF THE BEST DRIVERS IN THE NATION.

THANKS TO MY EMPLOYMENT AT NORTH STAR CARRIAGE, I'VE BEEN ABLE TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT MYSELF INDEPENDENTLY SINCE I WAS 18.

I WILL BE GRADUATING FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS DEBT FREE, AND I'VE DEVELOPED A UNIQUE SKILL THAT I'VE GROWN VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT.

NORTH STAR CARRIAGE HAS GIVEN ME MUCH MORE THAN EMPLOYMENT, AND THE KNOWLEDGE I'VE LEARNED BRANCHES OUT FAR BEYOND DRIVING HORSES.

MY EXPERIENCE WORKING FOR THE COMPANY HAS GIVEN ME ALL THE TOOLS TO SUCCEED IN LIFE AS A YOUNG MAN.

TOOLS SUCH AS RESPONSIBILITY, ACCOUNTABILITY, CONFIDENCE, DISCIPLINE, RESILIENCE, INTEGRITY, FLEXIBILITY, ORGANIZATION AND LEADERSHIP.

THIS COMPANY'S EMPLOYEES AND HORSES HAVE TRULY BECOME A HUGE PART OF MY LIFE.

THEY'RE LIKE A SECOND FAMILY TO ME, AND I WAS VERY THANKFUL TO HAVE BRIAN HIGH DRIVING [INAUDIBLE] ROOSTER TO SEND ME AND MY WIFE OFF ON OUR WEDDING NIGHT.

BACK AT THE BARN, THERE ARE 3, 16 YEAR OLD BARN HANDS.

IF THIS BAN GOES THROUGH THE OPPORTUNITIES I'VE HAD WITH THIS COMPANY CEASE TO EXIST FOR THEM.

PLEASE DO NOT BE THE ONE'S TO TAKE THAT AWAY.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MIKE SHAW.

GOOD MORNING. I TOO STAND BEFORE YOU ASKING YOU NOT TO BAN HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES.

[02:30:04]

A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MYSELF.

FOR THE LAST 35 YEARS, I'VE BEEN A PARAMEDIC.

I STARTED WORKING FOR NORTH STAR CARRIAGES ABOUT 12 YEARS AGO AS A PART TIME DRIVER.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT DREW ME TO THIS PARTICULAR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT WAS HOW THEY CARED FOR THEIR HORSES.

I TOO OWN HORSES MYSELF.

THE DRAFT WORLD WAS NEW TO ME.

AND I'VE LEARNED A LOT THROUGH MR. HIGH AND HOW HE CONDUCTS HIS BUSINESS.

I'M PROUD TO STAND NEXT TO HIM, WITH HIM AND FOR HIM AND SUPPORT OF HOW HE TREATS HIS HORSES.

VERY HUMANE.

THEY GET THE BEST VET CARE IN NORTH TEXAS.

THEY'RE NOT OVERWORKED BY WHAT SOME OTHER PEOPLE WANT TO SAY.

WE TREAT THEM LIKE THEY'RE OUR OWN.

WE'RE GIVEN THE POWER BY THE OWNER OF THE COMPANY TO TO PULL A HORSE OFF THE ROAD IF IT BECOMES INJURED, IF SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THAT HORSE, WE HAVE THE POWER TO DO THAT.

IT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH REHAB, IT'S GOING TO GET TREATED, AND IT'S GOING TO GET TAKEN CARE OF.

THOSE ARE JUST THE FACTS OF LIFE.

AS A PARAMEDIC, I HOLD THAT DEAR TO MY HEART.

TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE.

IT EXTENDS INTO MY ANIMAL FAMILY AS WELL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS CONCLUDES YOUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS FOR THIS MEETING.

WONDERFUL. ALL RIGHT.

JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE WE'RE STILL ON THIS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE STRUCTURE.

AND I'M NOW GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO TAKE US INTO OUR BRIEFINGS FOR TODAY.

[A. 24-171 2024 Bond Program Update]

WHILE THEY GET SITUATED.

MAYOR, I WANTED TO JUST KIND OF SHARE WITH COUNCIL, THIS BRIEFING.

AND JENNIFER, CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? OH. I'M SORRY. IN THIS BRIEFING, OUR INTERIM DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, JENNIFER NICEWANDER, WILL BE UPDATING YOU ON THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM. IT'S A VERY SHORT DECK PRESENTATION, AS WELL AS, INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE MAY 2024 ELECTION.

THIS PRESENTATION WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE BOND PROPOSITION, ALLOCATIONS, AMENDMENTS, TIMELINE, AND NEXT STEPS.

AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE BRIEFING, STAFF IS OBVIOUSLY REQUESTING, THAT COUNCIL CONSIDERATION FOR STRAW POLLING TO INDICATE THE CITY COUNCIL'S GUIDANCE ON FUNDING LEVELS BY PROPOSITIONS, WHICH IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE DEFINITELY NEED TO MAKE SURE WE GET DONE TODAY AS IT RELATES TO US PROCEEDING ON THE TIMELINE, THAT WE HAVE LAID OUT. AND I THINK THAT THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS INDICATED THAT THEY SUPPORT IT AS IT RELATES TO A MAY ELECTION.

SO RIGHT NOW, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO JENNIFER, AND THEN WE CAN GET INTO THE NEXT STEPS OF THIS PROCESS.

THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.

SO I'M JENNIFER NICEWANDER.

I'M THE INTERIM DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF BOND AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.

AND TODAY, NEXT SLIDE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A REAL SHORT PRESENTATION.

WE'LL GO OVER THE BACKGROUND ON ALLOCATIONS.

WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE COUNCIL FEEDBACK AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE BOND TIMELINE AND NEXT STEPS.

ON JANUARY 19TH, THROUGH A STRAW POLL, COUNCIL PROVIDED DIRECTION TO STAFF ON A $1.25 BILLION BOND CAPACITY AND TO WORK TOWARDS A MAY 4TH ELECTION. SINCE THE 19TH, COUNCIL HAS BEEN PROVIDED A AMENDMENT FORM.

AND TO DATE, WE'VE RECEIVED SIX AMENDMENTS.

THANK YOU. NEXT SLIDE.

SO THE FIRST SET OF NUMBERS THAT YOU'RE SEEING ON THIS SLIDE ARE THE IS AN AVERAGE OF THE SIX AMENDMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED.

THE LAST COLUMN IS THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THOSE AMENDMENTS.

YOU'LL NOTE THAT STAFF ZEROED OUT THE IT AND THE STEMMONS DUE TO THE ALLOCATIONS NEEDED FOR THOSE PROPOSITIONS.

PROPOSITIONS BEING SMALL, CONSIDERED SMALL FOR A BOND PROPOSITION.

THE CONCERN ABOUT THAT IS IF THESE WENT TO THE VOTERS AND FAILED, WE WOULD BE UNABLE TO ISSUE ANY CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION DOLLARS AGAINST THOSE PROJECTS THAT WERE WITHIN THOSE PROPOSITIONS FOR THREE YEARS.

I ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT WE WILL BE WHEN WE'RE TALKING, AT THE AMENDMENT LEVEL, WE'LL BE GETTING AWAY FROM THE WORD DISCRETIONARY AND WE'LL BE SAYING, TALKING ABOUT COUNCIL

[02:35:04]

DISTRICT SPECIFIC FUNDING, WHICH MORE ACCURATELY DESCRIBES WHAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT.

NEXT SLIDE. SO WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE WE DID ON THE 19TH.

AND TODAY WE WILL REQUEST THAT COUNCIL PROVIDE DIRECTION THROUGH STRAW VOTES ON THE PROPOSITION ALLOCATION LEVELS.

ON THE 7TH, WE'LL COME BACK AND BRIEF COUNCIL AND DISCUSS THE PROPOSITIONS AND THE FINAL PROJECT LISTING.

ON THE 14TH, CITY COUNCIL CALL FOR A MAY ELECTION.

NEXT SLIDE. SO IN FEBRUARY WE WILL COMPLETE THE PROJECT LISTING FOR PROPOSITION.

IN MARCH, STAFF WILL FINALIZE THE FACTS AND INFORMATIONAL INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS THAT INCLUDE THE PROJECT LISTING.

IN APRIL WE'LL HAVE OUR TOWN HALL INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS.

EARLY VOTING IS APRIL 22ND THROUGH THE 30TH AND MAY 4TH IS ELECTION DAY.

AMENDMENT. SO WE DID RECEIVE SIX AMENDMENTS.

AND WE WILL AT THIS POINT WE'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS OR GO STRAIGHT INTO THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.

SO THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BEFORE WE GO INTO, AGAIN, THIS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE STRUCTURE, I MENTIONED IT BEFORE, BUT IT'S WORTH MENTIONING AGAIN.

THESE ARE STRAW, STRAW VOTES.

AND WE'LL INDICATE OUR SUPPORT WITH WHAT GREEN CARD DO WE HAVE? SO THE GREEN CARDS ARE COMING, AND THAT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO DEMONSTRATE SUPPORT FOR THINGS.

I'M TRYING TO THINK IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE TO LET YOU KNOW ABOUT.

OH, YEAH. THE 531 IS STILL IN PLACE THAT WE NORMALLY USE.

AND SO WAITING ON THOSE GREEN CARDS, HERE THEY COME.

ALL RIGHT, I'M GOING TO WAIT FOR EVERYONE TO GET THEIR CARD IN THEIR HAND AND, RECOGNIZE HERE SHORTLY.

CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA TO LAY OUT AMENDMENT ONE.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING, HAVING DISCUSSED WITH THE PARLIAMENTARIAN IN TERMS OF PROCEDURE, IS AMENDMENTS ARE BEING LAID OUT IN THE FORMAT THAT WE HAVE SEEN THEM, WHICH IS A TOTAL ALLOCATION OF $1.25 BILLION, BROKEN OUT BY PROPOSITION. THEY'RE LAID OUT IN THEIR ENTIRETY, AND THEN THE DISCUSSION WILL BE ON ALL OF THEM IN THEIR ENTIRETY, AND WE'LL HAVE OUR 531 DISCUSSION, AMENDMENT BY AMENDMENT.

SO WITH THAT EVERYONE HAVE ONE OF THESE.

CHAIRMAN MORENO, YOU HAVE YOURS YET? OKAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GOT ALL THE WAY AROUND AT THE END.

ALL RIGHT. NO NO NO, NOT WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT DOING ANY WE'RE NOT.

THAT WAS NOT A VOTE.

THAT WAS A THAT WAS I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GOT.

I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE HAD GOTTEN ALL THE WAY AROUND IN THE END.

OKAY. CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU ARE, RECOGNIZED NOW TO LAY OUT AMENDMENT ONE.

THANK YOU MAYOR.

I MOVE TO, I MOVE AMENDMENT ONE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

STREETS ALLOCATION, $500 MILLION.

PARKS ALLOCATION $300 MILLION.

PUBLIC SAFETY $89 MILLION.

HOUSING $100 MILLION.

CULTURAL ARTS $75 MILLION.

FLOOD $57.1 MILLION.

LIBRARIES $36 MILLION.

CITY HALL $27.9 MILLION.

ECO DEV $45 MILLION.

AND HOMELESSNESS AT $20 MILLION.

DO WE NEED A SECOND TO HAVE THAT FURTHER DISCUSSED? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

MR. BAZALDUA YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU MAYOR.

SO I FIRST WANT TO SAY A BIG THANK YOU, TO THE WORK THAT WE'VE HAD WITH ALL OF OUR VOLUNTEERS IN THE TASK FORCE, ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS WE'VE HEARD AND ADVOCATES HERE AND, OF COURSE, STAFF, FOR Y'ALL'S WORK THROUGH, THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.

WE HAVE HEARD A LOT OF FEEDBACK.

WE HEARD SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND IN THE SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE AND WORKING WITH COLLEAGUES THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS AND HEARING ON RECORD AND, HEARING SUBMISSIONS THAT WERE PUT IN.

IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT NO ONE'S GOING TO WALK AWAY 100% HAPPY.

THAT'S JUST NOT THE WAY THAT AN EXERCISE LIKE THIS WOULD WORK.

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, TO MAKE SURE THAT COMPROMISES HAVE BEEN FELT ACROSS THE BOARD AND ACROSS THE BOARD IS NOT JUST WITHIN THE ALLOCATION BUCKETS, BUT ALSO IN INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRIORITIES.

A BLANK CHECK IS WHAT WE ALL WISH WE HAD.

I KNOW THAT I HAVE PROJECTS THAT I'VE COMPROMISED TO GET TO THESE NUMBERS.

[02:40:01]

I KNOW THAT I'VE HAD PRIORITIES THAT WEREN'T SPECIFIC, PROJECTS THAT I'VE COMPROMISED ON IN ORDER TO GET TO THESE NUMBERS, AND I CAN SAY THAT CONFIDENTLY, WITH AT LEAST THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE ALSO SHOWN A WILLINGNESS TO GO BACK ON SOME THINGS THAT THEY, IN A PERFECT WORLD, WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN MUCH HIGHER.

THE REALITY IS, IS THAT WE HAVE TO BALANCE THIS INTO THE CAPACITY THAT WE'VE SET, WHICH IS $1.25 BILLION, WHICH STILL GIVES US A HUGE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS THAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM.

WE'VE HEARD, GREAT DEAL, FROM STAFF.

AND IT'S FUNNY, WE DON'T HEAR THEM NECESSARILY ON THE MICS, OPEN MIC SPEAKING FOR BOND ISSUES.

AND I ACTUALLY HAD SOMEBODY TEXT ME EARLIER AND ASK, WHERE ARE ALL THE SPEAKERS FOR STREETS IF Y'ALL ARE PRIORITIZING THAT? AND I'LL JUST SAY FOR THE RECORD, THOSE, SPEAKERS FOR STREETS, REACH OUT TO OUR OFFICES EVERY SINGLE DAY.

AND SO HEARING FROM STAFF ON MAKING SURE THAT GETTING A $500 MILLION NUMBER HITS OUR ZERO DEGRADATION GOALS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED CITYWIDE FOR ALL OF THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE'VE HEARD GREAT ADVOCACY FROM THE REALM OF PARKS AND HOUSING.

BOTH ARE NOT ONLY HUGE ASSETS, BUT THEY ALSO HAVE HUGE NEEDS, FOR WHAT THEY SERVE OUR RESIDENTS.

I BELIEVE THAT COMPROMISES WERE MADE, TO GET TO THESE NUMBERS THAT SHOULD BE, A CLEAR MESSAGE THAT WE'VE HEARD WHERE PRIORITIES ARE FROM THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS, CULTURAL ARTS.

THANK YOU ALL FOR ALWAYS BEING HERE.

BUT ALSO THANK YALL FOR BEING VERY REASONABLE THROUGH THIS EXERCISE.

WITH ADDRESSING $75 MILLION IN THIS BOND THAT IS ONLY ADDRESSING HALF OF THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE THAT WE'VE SEEN, LAID OUT THROUGH THROUGH DATA.

AND THAT'S JUST GETTING YOU TO HOLD THAT'S NOT SHINY NEW AND WISH LIST.

AND THE ARTS COMMUNITY IS A VITAL, RESOURCE AND ASSET TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS. AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU ALL HAVE ALSO BEEN HEARD.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S BEEN SOME PRIORITIES HEARD FROM OTHER COLLEAGUES THROUGHOUT FLOODS, LIBRARY FACILITIES IN SPECIFIC DISTRICTS.

UPGRADES TO CITY HALL THAT WE ORIGINALLY SAW IN THE ECO DEV.

WE'VE SEEN HUGE PROJECTS IN, COLLEAGUES OF OURS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP LIKE UNT DALLAS IN DISTRICT EIGHT OR, PLEASANT GROVE'S, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY OR THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT UP IN DISTRICT 11.

AND, WE'RE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THOSE BIG PRIORITIES THAT WE'VE HEARD SO MUCH ABOUT UP TO THIS POINT BY GETTING THE 45 MILLION IN ECO DEV AND HOMELESSNESS. I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL, IF IT HIT Y'ALL AS HARD AS IT DID ME, BUT TO TO HEAR A YOUTH, RESIDENT OF OURS SPEAK. IN FACT, HE'S THE YOUNGER BROTHER OF A STUDENT OF MINE FROM WILMER-HUTCHINS HIGH SCHOOL.

AND WHEN I PULLED HIM TO THE SIDE, I REALIZED THAT HIS ENTIRE FAMILY IS EXPERIENCING THIS HOUSING ISSUE.

AND WE'VE GOT TO GET MORE SERIOUS ON THIS.

WE HAVE, OPPORTUNITIES ON THE HORIZON TO INCREASE BEDS AT OUR BIGGEST PARTNER, WITH THE BRIDGE, WHICH SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED IN THESE HOUSING DOLLARS, IN ADDITION TO BRINGING IN UNCONVENTIONAL AND ADDITIONAL TOOLS TO OUR CONTINUUM OF CARE WHO HAVE ALREADY SHOWN SUCH A SUCCESS IN HOUSING 3,000 PEOPLE OVER THE PAST 18 TO 24 MONTHS.

I, I TRULY BELIEVE THAT WHAT'S PRESENTED IN FRONT OF YOU IS A DOCUMENT THAT DESCRIBES THE SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE AND PRIORITY THAT WE'VE HEARD NOT ONLY FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AROUND THIS BODY, BUT THE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE TAKEN THE TIME TO SPEAK TO US IN THIS.

AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL TO GET THIS THROUGH.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHO'S NEXT? I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE.

CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

WE ARE ON FOR THE PUBLIC.

WE ARE ON ITEM A OF TODAY'S BRIEFINGS.

AND THIS IS AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE BY CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA.

CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

WITH REGARD TO A COMPARISON OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND THE PROPOSITION ALLOCATIONS IN, MISS NICEWANDER'S JANUARY 20TH EMAIL.

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

I NOTE THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN THE LIBRARY NUMBER, FOR EXAMPLE, OF, $36 MILLION COMPARED TO THE $28 MILLION THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED.

AND I'VE HEARD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT NEW LIBRARIES.

AND I'D JUST LIKE TO GET A BETTER IDEA, IF YOU HAVE THE PERSPECTIVE TO TELL ME WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS BETWEEN THOSE TWO NUMBERS.

[02:45:05]

SURE. SO FOR THE $28 MILLION THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS AND MONTHS, THAT INCLUDES $17 MILLION FOR THE NORTH OAK CLIFF LIBRARY.

JUST OVER OR JUST UNDER $9 MILLION FOR THE PRESTON ROYAL LIBRARY.

ADDITIONAL $2.3 FOR ADA UPGRADES AT NINE VARIOUS LOCATIONS.

AND THEN THE $36 MILLION, I BELIEVE, WOULD GO TOWARDS THE PRESTON FOREST LIBRARY IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

SO THE $9 MILLION THAT YOU MENTIONED, THAT'S FOR PRESTON FOREST PARK.

FOREST PARK.

PARK FOREST. I APOLOGIZE.

OKAY, SO THE $36 WOULD INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL LIBRARY LOCATION BEYOND WHAT YOU HAVE JUST LISTED.

I'M SORRY. COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? YES. THE $36 MILLION WOULD ADD FOR A PARK FOREST REPLACEMENT LIBRARY THAT ISN'T PROVIDED FOR IN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FROM JANUARY 20TH.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY.

AND THAT WOULD CLOSE OUT THE, THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE LIBRARY AS WELL.

OKAY. AS I UNDERSTAND THE PARK FOREST LIBRARY IS CALLED FOR IN THE LIBRARY MASTER PLAN.

OKAY. WAS THAT A VERBAL RESPONSE? YES, SIR. IT IS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. AND SO THAT WOULD PROVIDE $8 MILLION FOR THE PARK FOREST LIBRARIES PROJECT.

IS THAT CORRECT? JUST DOING SIMPLE ARITHMETIC.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN $28 AND $36.

YES. OKAY.

NOW, CAN YOU EXPLAIN, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION? WE HAVE IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION $12.9 MILLION.

AND THIS PROPOSAL HAS IT AT $45 MILLION.

DO YOU HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS? SO I BELIEVE THE $45 MILLION AND I DON'T KNOW IF ROBIN WOULD WANT TO COME IN AND TALK ABOUT THAT, CONFIRM IT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT WAS TO PUT $15 MILLION TOWARDS THREE SPECIFIC AREAS.

WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC AREAS IN THE ORIGINAL STAFF ALLOCATION OF $13 MILLION.

SO, BUT I THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT BEHIND THE $45 WAS TO, HAVE THAT BROKEN OUT INTO THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT AND.

OH, SORRY. THERE'S ROBIN.

GOOD AFTERNOON, ROBIN BENTLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

I DO NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE INTENT WAS OF THE AMENDMENT, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSITION GENERALLY IS NOT ALLOCATED TO SPECIFIC PROJECTS.

IT DOES GENERALLY HAVE GUIDANCE FROM THE COUNCIL.

AND SO WE WOULD BE WORKING THROUGH HOW TO SPEND THOSE FUNDS THROUGH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE BY MODIFYING OUR POLICY WHEN IT CAME TO THAT POINT.

BUT NO, I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC ANSWER ON THE THE MOTION.

OKAY. MR. BAZALDUA, COULD YOU ENLIGHTEN US? YES. I BELIEVE HE WANTS TO.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, I JUST I JUST, AS ROBIN MENTIONED, I BELIEVE THAT, THEY'RE GOING TO THE NEXT STEP IN THIS EXERCISE IS GOING TO BE HEAVILY, GIVEN DIRECTION AS A BODY TO STAFF ON WHAT WOULD BE INCLUSIVE OF THE SPECIFIC ALLOCATIONS THAT WE GET TO.

AND SO, WITH, WITH WHERE MY INTENT WAS, IT WAS TO COVER UNT DALLAS, PLEASANT GROVE'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT. AND I NOTICED THAT THE STEMMONS AND IT LINE ITEMS ARE ZEROED OUT.

CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN TO ME WHY THAT WAS DONE? I CAN SPEAK TO TO WHITE STAFF.

WHITE STAFF ZEROED IT OUT.

OUR REASONING FOR THAT WAS BECAUSE THOSE INDIVIDUAL PROPOSITION LEVELS ARE WOULD BE EXTREMELY LOW IN COMPARISON TO THE OTHERS, AND THERE WOULD BE A RISK, IF IT WAS VOTED DOWN, THAT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ISSUE ANY NON VOTER APPROVED DEBT.

SO CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION DOLLARS FOR ANY PROJECTS WITHIN THAT PROPOSITION CATEGORY FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS.

SO SO THAT WAS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION MOVING FORWARD.

OKAY. I UNDERSTAND THAT'S THE CASE WITH THE IT ALLOCATION.

WITH REGARD TO THE STEMMONS ALLOCATION, IS IT AN ISSUE OF WHETHER THE PROPOSED EXPENDITURES QUALIFY FOR BOND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS? NO.

THE PROJECT THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT SPECIFICALLY FOR STEMMONS WAS A MECHANICAL OVER UPGRADE AT THE STEMMONS FACILITY.

IT WAS FOUND TO BE INSUFFICIENT, SO IT'D HAVE TO BE REPLACED.

OKAY. AND I TAKE IT THE LIFE SPAN OF THAT IMPROVEMENT WOULD BE 20 YEARS, SO IT WOULD QUALIFY FOR THIS KIND OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.

YES. OKAY.

AND FINALLY.

[02:50:05]

I'M AN ADVOCATE FOR SOME DISCRETIONARY SPENDING BY THE COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR EACH DISTRICT, AND I KNOW THAT THIS ONE DOESN'T HAVE A LINE ITEM FOR THAT. I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND BETTER WHETHER WE, IF THERE'S ANY BARRIER TO HAVING A LINE ITEM FOR DISCRETIONARY DISTRICTS EXPENDITURES OR WHETHER THEY NEED TO BE ROLLED INTO THE VARIOUS OTHER CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURE BASED UPON THE FIAT OF INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS.

SO THE DISCRETIONARY THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PAST, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IDENTIFIED BY PROPOSITION.

SO AT SOME POINT AND BUT AT SOME POINT BEING END OF DAY TOMORROW, IF THERE WAS DISCRETIONARY MONEY THAT WAS IDENTIFIED, WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THAT IN ONE OF THE PROPOSITIONS THAT WAS APPROVED.

SO WE COULDN'T HAVE A STANDALONE.

AND IT GOING FURTHER WITH THAT.

WE WOULD PREFER TO HAVE THOSE THOSE DOLLARS IDENTIFIED BY A PROJECT.

BUT IF THAT'S NOT THE CASE, THEN WE COULD HAVE A COUNCIL DISTRICT SPECIFIC FUNDING LINE WITHIN THE PROJECT LISTING THAT COULD BE IDENTIFIED LATER. SO MECHANICALLY OR PROCEDURALLY, HOW WOULD THAT WORK? WOULD THE COUNCIL DECIDE TODAY HOW MUCH IT WANTED IN DISTRICT DISCRETIONARY FUNDS? AND THEN WE WOULD LATER DETERMINE ON A DISTRICT BY DISTRICT BASIS WHAT CATEGORIES IN THE BOND WE WANTED TO ONE OR MORE CATEGORIES IN THE BOND WE WANTED THAT DISCRETIONARY MONEY TO BE USED FOR.

SO FOR TODAY, I THINK THE CLEANEST WAY TO APPROACH THAT WOULD BE TO IDENTIFY, THE DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS THAT WOULD BE GIVEN TO THE INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THEN ROLL THAT UP INTO THE THE APPROPRIATE PROPOSITION.

SO WE WOULD DO THAT PART OF THE ANALYSIS LATER IN TERM TODAY WE DECIDE HOW MUCH PER COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT LATER WE DECIDE HOW EACH COUNCIL MEMBER WANT IT OR WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU HOW WE WANTED TO SPEND THAT MONEY IN WHICH CATEGORIES.

RIGHT? SO IF YOU WANTED IT ALL FOR PARKS, THEN IT WOULD JUST INCREASE THAT OVERALL ALLOCATION.

OKAY. SO THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT DOESN'T HAVE AN ALLOCATION SPECIFICALLY FOR DISCRETIONARY.

SO IF WE WANT DISCRETIONARY, WOULD THAT THEN COME OUT OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROPOSITIONS THAT EACH COUNCIL MEMBER OPTS FOR.

AND SO FOR EXAMPLE, PARKS WOULD REMAIN AT THE THE PROPOSITION SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS WOULD REMAIN AT $300 MILLION. BUT IF, LET'S SAY ONE COUNCIL MEMBER WANTED TO USE ALL OF THEIR $5 MILLION ALLOCATION FOR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS FOR PARKS, IT WOULD COME OUT OF THAT $300 MILLION.

SO THERE'D STILL BE $300 MILLION FOR PARKS, BUT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER COULD DIRECT TO SPECIFIC PROJECTS IN PARKS WHERE THEY WANTED THAT $5 MILLION TO GO.

YEAH. AND THAT'S YOUR LAST QUESTION FOR THIS ROUND.

BUT YOU HAVE TWO MORE.

YEAH, I THAT'S HOW I SEE IT MOVING FORWARD.

AND I THINK THAT YES, THAT WOULD BE THE CLEANEST WAY AND, AND AND WE'LL GET INTO THOSE DETAILS AS WE GET INTO PROJECT LISTINGS.

BUT TODAY IS REALLY THE OVERALL PROPOSITION AMOUNTS THAT WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING TO ACHIEVE.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY. FOR STAFF, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, BECAUSE I'M NEW AT THIS, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING.

SO EACH OF THESE CATEGORIES, EACH OF THESE PROPOSITION CATEGORIES, WILL EACH OF THOSE BE SEPARATELY ON THE BALLOT.

SO YOU WILL VOTE FOR EACH SEPARATE ITEM THAT WE HOW WE HAVE THEM LISTED IN OUR AMENDMENTS? YES, MA'AM. EACH ONE OF THOSE WOULD BE A STANDALONE PROPOSITION.

SO YOU'LL VOTE FOR HOUSING AND FOR PARKS AND FOR STREETS AND.

OKAY. CORRECT. OKAY.

AS ALL OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW, I AM A PASSIONATE SUPPORTER OF PARKS, SO I JUST WANT TO, TALK ABOUT THE COMPROMISES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE AND HAVE BEEN WORKED ON.

ON MONDAY OF THIS WEEK, JUST A COUPLE DAYS AGO, THE PARK BOARD MET FOR MANY HOURS, TO WORK ON WHAT THIS BODY ASKED THEM TO DO, WHICH WAS TO COME BACK WITH WHERE CUTS WOULD BE IF WE WERE AT $325, $300, AND $275.

AND SO I SAT IN THAT MEETING BACK ROW.

NO, NO INPUT, NO NOTHING.

I WAS LITERALLY A FLY ON THE WALL.

BUT I WANTED TO WATCH THAT PROCESS.

I WANTED TO SEE HOW THAT WENT.

AND I WAS IMPRESSED.

[02:55:02]

I THINK OF PARK BOARD MEMBERS, THEY PUT IN A LOT OF TIME AND THEY ARE VOLUNTEERS.

AND THEY SPENT I WAS THERE FOR THREE HOURS AND LEFT AROUND FIVE.

I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY FINISHED, SO BUT I KNOW THEY SPENT MORE THAN THREE HOURS ON MONDAY, PLOWING THROUGH THESE PROJECTS, LOOKING AT HOW DO YOU GET TO EACH OF THESE THRESHOLDS.

AND IT WASN'T EASY.

AND THEIR CONVERSATION THOUGH WAS GOOD.

I MEAN, THESE THESE PEOPLE ROLL UP THEIR SLEEVES AND THEY GO ROUND AND AROUND, BUT THEY DO IT WELL.

THEY DO IT WITH WITH RESPECT.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU, TO THAT BODY FOR THE WORK THAT THEY PUT IN.

IT WAS IT WAS MUCH APPRECIATED FROM MY STANDPOINT.

SO IF ANY OF YOU WERE TO ASK ME ABOUT PARKS AND I GET THAT PANICKED DEER IN THE HEADLIGHTS LOOK, I'M THINKING ABOUT ALL OF THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THESE NUMBERS AND HOW DIFFICULT IT HAS BEEN TO GET TO, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS $300.

SO I APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR PATIENCE, AND I APPRECIATE YOU ALL KEEPING KEEPING THAT IN MIND.

AND, AND I WILL SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT AS IT, AS IT IS AT THE MOMENT.

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN WEST.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUES FOR WORKING ON THIS AMENDMENT.

I WILL SUPPORT IT.

I AM DISAPPOINTED THAT WE HAVE SUCH A LOW NUMBER ON HOUSING.

BUT IN THE SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE, I'M WILLING TO WORK HERE TOWARDS TOWARDS, I'M WILLING TO VOTE ON THIS.

MY HESITATION IS IS SORT OF ALLEVIATED A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE SOME OF THE OTHER CATEGORIES I FORESEE US BEING ABLE TO USE TOWARDS HOUSING.

SUCH AS THE, THE LIBRARY PROPOSITIONS.

I KNOW, AT LEAST FOR DISTRICT ONE, IF THIS GETS FUNDED.

MY PLAN IS TO ADVOCATE FOR, ACTUALLY A MIXED USE PROJECT THERE WITH, WITH HOUSING ON TOP OF THE THE NEW LIBRARY.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, LEVERAGING THE LIBRARY FUNDS CAN HELP BRING US CLOSER TO THE $150 OR $200 THAT WE ORIGINALLY ADVOCATED FOR.

AND I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK FOR MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILWOMAN WILLIS, BUT I THINK THERE MAY BE AN IDEA FOR HER LIBRARY AS WELL.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DOLLARS AND ALSO HOMELESSNESS CATEGORY WHEN YOU INCLUDE WHEN YOU ADD ALL THOSE UP, WE DO GET CLOSER TO THE $150 OR EVEN MORE TOWARDS HOUSING.

I JUST REALLY HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THIS FOR STAFF AND, AND THAT'S ON THE STREETS PROPOSITION.

WHERE DOES I KNOW WE HAVE A PRIORITY IN THE CITY FOR VISION ZERO? WE VOTED ON IT UNANIMOUSLY.

HOW DOES OUR STREETS PROPOSITION MOVE US CLOSER TO OUR VISION ZERO GOALS, IF AT ALL? SO, AT THE 532 LEVEL OF FUNDING FOR FOR STREETS, VISION ZERO WAS FUNDED AT $9.4 MILLION.

AND IF WE WERE TO REDUCE THAT PROPORTIONATELY TO $500, THAT WOULD BRING US TO ABOUT $8.8 MILLION IN VISION ZERO PROJECTS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I WOULD HOPE WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

I MEAN, THAT'S PRETTY, IT'S PRETTY MINIMAL CONSIDERING THE SIZE OF THIS BOND, BUT I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF PRIORITIES, THAT WE'RE TRYING TO TRYING TO MEET AND COMPROMISE ON HERE.

THANK YOU. MR. RESENDEZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND MY COLLEAGUE JUST ASKED.

THE FIRST QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT WAS VISION ZERO.

AND SO I WANTED TO KNOW HOW AN ALLOCATION OF $500 MILLION, HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT THAT GOAL.

AND, YOU KNOW, I SHARE HIS CONCERN AS WELL.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S THAT LOW, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, IF WE'RE HAVING $500 MILLION, MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT IF YOU'RE, PUTTING FUNDS INTO STREETS IN GENERAL, THAT THE GOAL IS FOR THOSE STREETS TO INCLUDE THE VISION ZERO INITIATIVE.

SO HOW DO WE GET TO SUCH A LOW NUMBER? WELL, AND AS STREETS ARE BEING RECONSTRUCTED, THERE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, ELEMENTS OF THAT PROJECT TOO, THAT WOULD GO TOWARDS THE VISION ZERO THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THAT $8.8 MILLION. AND, AND I THINK FOR OVERALL, THE STREETS PROPOSITION THAT THE REAL FOCUS WAS ON, WAS ON THE STREETS RECONSTRUCTION RESURFACING PORTION OF IT.

SO SO THAT BEING SAID, WE COULD WE CAN CERTAINLY AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROJECT LISTING AFTER WE GET THE FINAL NUMBER, TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT.

I THINK WE ALSO WERE TAKING SOME DIRECTION FROM THE COMMUNITY BOND TASK FORCE AND THEIR PRIORITIES AS WELL.

AND IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, A MATTER OF BALANCING THE THE PRIORITIES WITH THE DOLLARS, WITH WITH THE NEEDS.

SO, YEAH, I THINK IT'D BE IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE VARIOUS PROJECTS MORE CLOSELY AND SEE WHAT ELEMENTS OF VISION ZERO ARE INCLUDED IN THAT.

AND I THINK THAT THAT COULD HELP ALLEVIATE THE CONCERN OF US JUST SAYING 8.

WHATEVER MILLION, BECAUSE IT IS A PRIORITY FOR ME.

I KNOW IT'S A PRIORITY FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THIS COUNCIL.

IT'S THE TOP ISSUE THAT I HEAR ABOUT IN DISTRICT FIVE.

[03:00:03]

AND SO TO ME, THIS IS A IT REALLY IS IT'S A LIFE OR DEATH TYPE OF THING, YOU KNOW, IT REALLY IS.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO BE CAUTIOUS AND AWARE OF HOW, HOW IT WOULD COME ACROSS TO THE PUBLIC IF WE'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE WE'RE ONLY ALLOCATING $8 MILLION TO THIS WHEN WE'RE WHEN WE'RE APPROVING $500 MILLION.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.

I KNOW YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING. SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF.

NO, I WAS JUST SAYING THAT ONCE WE GET THE THE FINAL PROPOSITION AMOUNT, THEN WE CAN.

I'LL WORK. I'LL WORK WITH TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC WORKS AND SEE, SEE WHAT WE CAN DO, AND WE'LL CIRCLE BACK FOR SURE.

[INAUDIBLE] THANK YOU SO MUCH. MISS BENTLEY, I WAS HOPING YOU CAN COME BACK UP HERE SO WE CAN ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON ON THE ECO DEV.

GOOD. YES, SIR.

AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON.

SO I WAS HOPING YOU COULD JUST SHARE WITH THE COUNCIL, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROJECT IN SOUTHEAST DALLAS.

THE INTEGRATED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.

IF YOU CAN TELL FOLKS, WHERE WE ARE, WHERE WE HOW FAR WE'VE COME AND HOW ECO DEV FUNDS COULD HELP WITH THAT PROJECT.

SURE. SO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, WE HAVE SEVERAL PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE BOND ELIGIBLE IN YOUR DISTRICT.

BUT THIS PARTICULAR ONE, IT'S A CITY OWNED PROPERTY ON SAINT AUGUSTINE ROAD JUST NORTH OF GRADY SPRUCE HIGH SCHOOL.

AND 2017 BOND FUNDS HAVE HELPED US GET THROUGH ALL OF THE DUE DILIGENCE WORK.

THE SURVEYING AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN IN THE CITY'S PORTFOLIO FOR 20 PLUS YEARS OFF THE TAX ROLL.

SO WE'RE WORKING VERY HARD TO GET IT BACK INTO PRODUCTIVE USE.

WE'VE DONE AN RFP.

WE'VE CHOSEN A DEVELOPMENT PARTNER.

WE HAVE OTHER PARTNERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN LOCATING AT THE SAME PLACE.

SO THE IDEA IS THAT IT WOULD BE A MIXTURE OF RESIDENTIAL GREEN SPACE, HOPEFULLY A MEDICAL USE.

AND THEN SOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS WOULD HAVE THEIR CONCEPT THERE AS WELL.

SO WORKING OUR WAY THROUGH DESIGN AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE COMING BACK TO YOU IN THE NEXT YEAR OR SO WITH A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, FINANCIAL STRUCTURE AND POSSIBLY PROBABLY SOME INCENTIVES FROM THE CITY, WHICH COULD INCLUDE BOND FUNDING.

OKAY. SO THIS PROJECT COULD HELP ADDRESS, LIKE YOU MENTIONED, HOUSING ISSUES, ECO ISSUES, GREEN SPACE ISSUES.

AND THE ONE THING YOU DIDN'T MENTION IS THAT IT COULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ARTS AS WELL.

OKAY. EXACTLY RIGHT.

THAT'S PART OF THE SOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS PIECE OF THE PROJECT.

THEY'RE LOOKING TO BUILD A FACILITY THERE THAT WOULD INCLUDE A FEW DIFFERENT USES, ONE OF WHICH WOULD BE ARTS FOCUSED.

AWESOME. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THOSE ARE ALL. WELL, YOU KNOW, I COULD SIT HERE AND CONTINUE ARGUING THAT CERTAIN BUCKETS SHOULD SHOULD HAVE MORE AND OTHERS SHOULD HAVE HAVE LESS.

BUT WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS HERE WITH THIS MOTION, I THINK, I THINK THAT WE'RE IN A REALLY GOOD PLACE TO TO ADDRESS A LOT OF NEEDS AND MAKE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT THROUGHOUT OUR CITY.

SO THIS IS A AN AMENDMENT THAT I COULD SUPPORT.

THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. QUESTION.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT STREET.

AND THANK YOU, COLLEAGUE, FOR BRINGING UP VISION ZERO, IN STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION THAT I KNOW THE LAST BOND WE DID, 2017.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? 2017. RIGHT.

2017. AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT 2024 AND SOME PROJECTS WE HAVE NOT COMPLETED.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND AND WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE PROJECTS THAT IS NOT COMPLETED.

AND WOULD THIS BOND HELP THOSE PROJECTS TO BE COMPLETED IF WE DO NOT HAVE THE FUNDING? SO THE PROJECTS THAT WERE COMPLETED ARE THE 2017 BOND.

THOSE SHORTFALLS ARE BEING FUNDED THROUGH THE CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION FUNDS AND NOT THROUGH THIS BOND.

RIGHT. OKAY.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HOUSING IN THE BOND PACKAGE, IS THE FIRST SCENARIO THAT YOU DEFINITELY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DOLLARS TO SUPPORT HOUSING UNITS.

YES. I WOULD SAY THAT'S A FAIR STATEMENT.

SO TO DO THAT. SO IS THAT A 3 TO 1 RATIO.

SO EVERY EVERY DOLLAR YOU PUT IN HOUSING YOU PROBABLY NEED THREE AND ECO.

IS THAT A FAIR SCENARIO.

I'D ASK ROBIN OR CYNTHIA TO RESPOND TO THAT.

MAYOR PRO TEM, WOULD YOU MIND REPEATING THE QUESTION? I WAS SAYING THAT WHEN YOU DO HOUSING, IS IT FAIR THAT WHEN YOU INVEST IN HOUSING, YOU ALSO GOT TO INVEST IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, IS THAT YOU PUT A DOLLAR IN HOUSING? YOU ALSO MAYBE HAVE PUT MAYBE $3 INVESTS IN ECO IN ORDER TO GET A PROJECT.

WELL, I WOULD SAY HOUSING IS A TYPE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

AND SO ANY TIME WE'RE AWARDING FUNDS TO ANOTHER PARTY TO GROW OUR TAX BASE OR CREATE JOBS OR CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, OR ADDRESS A FOOD DESERT OR ANY OF THE PUBLIC POLICY GUIDELINES THAT COUNCIL HAS GIVEN US.

[03:05:01]

ALL OF THOSE WOULD BE A TYPE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

COULD YOU TELL US, FOR THE PEOPLE WHO'VE BEEN AROUND, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE IN THIS IN THE BOND PACKAGE, THIS BOND PACKAGE, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING DOLLARS IN HOUSING VERSUS THE ECO, THERE HAVE THE RULES BEEN CHANGED OR ARE THE SAME RULES? RIGHT. SO I'LL ASK THE CITY ATTORNEYS TO WEIGH IN HERE.

BUT ESSENTIALLY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING HAVE ALWAYS BEEN IN THE SAME PROPOSITION.

AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL BEING AWARDED UNDER THE SAME LEGAL AUTHORITY.

AND THAT'S CHAPTER 380 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

AND SO IF WE'RE AWARDING FUNDS TO OUTSIDE PARTIES TO DO DEVELOPMENT TO MEET ANY OF THOSE PUBLIC PURPOSE GOALS, THOSE ALL, EVEN IF THEY'RE FOR A HOUSING PURPOSE, ARE UNDER THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSITION, JUST LIKE ALWAYS, JUST LIKE WE'VE ALWAYS DONE IT.

THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT AND CYNTHIA CAN JUMP IN HERE, HAS SOME OTHER GOALS THAT DON'T FIT UNDER CHAPTER 380.

AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CYNTHIA.

YES. CYNTHIA ELLICKSON, INTERIM DIRECTOR FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION.

THE HOUSING BOND THAT'S NOW HERE IS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS TIED TO DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, AND WE'VE NEVER HAD THAT SEPARATED BEFORE.

WE'VE ALWAYS WORKED OUT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT'S BOND, AS ROBIN MENTIONED, TO DO BOTH ACTIVITIES CONSTRUCTION, DEVELOPMENT OF UNITS AS WELL AS INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THIS IS JUST SEPARATING OUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE PIECE FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY.

OKAY. IN THIS, AMENDMENT.

IF WE LOOK AT STREETS OR TRANSPORTATION OR PARK AND WE HAVE A A FIXED AMOUNT, YOU KNOW, 500 MILLION OR $300 MILLION, THERE.

IS ANY WAY WE CAN RAISE THAT ALLOCATION? DO WE HAVE TO AMEND TO RAISE THAT? WHAT'S THE PROCESS AND PROCEDURE IN THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT? I'M SORRY TO RAISE THE..

THE CEILING, YOU KNOW, WE HAD THREE.

IS THERE AN EXEMPTION? YOU GOT 3 TO 500 MILLION YOU WANT TO RAISE TO 520 OR 525.

WHAT IS THE PROCESS? IN THIS AMENDMENT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE ASKING WHAT THE PROCESS TODAY WOULD BE IF YOU WANTED TO CHANGE THE ALLOCATIONS.

OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO LET THE PARLIAMENTARIAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

BUT I THINK THAT'S JUST PURELY PROCESS.

IS WHAT YOU'RE THINKING PROCESS.

YES OKAY. PROCESS.

THANK YOU MAYOR.

SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE, THIS AMENDMENT ONE THAT'S ON THE FLOOR AND THAT THE MATH HAS TO BALANCE OUT.

SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO ADD TO ONE, YOU HAVE TO TAKE FROM ANOTHER, OKAY.

THANK YOU. MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

AND I DO WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR PARTICIPATING IN THIS CONVERSATION, STARTING FROM THE BOND TASK FORCE AND ALL THE SUBCOMMITTEES, TO HEAR IT'S NOT BEEN EASY, AND I DO APPLAUD YOU GUYS FOR I DIDN'T THINK YOU WOULD MAKE IT.

SO I WANT TO APPLAUD YOU.

SO I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.

STREETS WAS MY BIG THING SINCE D9 IS PRETTY MUCH IN THE LOWER, THE LOWER GROUPING OF STREETS.

SO THE 500 MILLION GETS US JUST TO THE PAR RIGHT, GETS US JUST TO EVEN.

SO, FOR THE ZERO DEGRADATION.

I THINK IT GETS US JUST SHORT OF THAT, TO BE HONEST.

SO ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A PLAN TO GET US TO THAT, TO PAR? AND AND THAT'S YOU CAN JUST SHAKE YES.

OKAY. BUT THEN YOU TALK ABOUT VISION ZERO AND YES, EVERYBODY HERE HAS SPEEDING ROADS WHEN YOU'RE REPURPOSING OR, OR LOOKING AT A STREET, YOU'RE GOING TO IMPLEMENT ALL THOSE STRATEGIES AND TACTICS TO GET US TO THAT SPOT.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHILE WE DON'T HAVE VISION ZERO SPECIFIC, YOU WILL BE RECONSTRUCTING IT TO THOSE STANDARDS.

YES. THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY. SO FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT OKAY.

FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

OKAY. ON THE HOUSING 100 MILLION.

CYNTHIA. AGAIN, I'M GOING TO HARP ON MAKING SURE WE HAVE ALL OUR.

WHAT IS YOUR PLAN WHEN YOU GET THIS $100 MILLION? SO OUR PLAN IS TO LOOK AT OUR TARGET AREAS BECAUSE WE HAVE SELECTED SOME TARGET AREAS, AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE COUNCIL DISTRICTS, TO SEE HOW WE COULD PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY IN ALL DISTRICTS.

WE DON'T HAVE A POLICY AT THIS TIME THAT DESIGNATES ANY PARTICULAR AMOUNT OF MONEY TO DESIGNATE IT TO TARGET AREAS.

SO THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER POLICY DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE COMING UP AND IN OUR HHS COMMITTEE, AS WELL AS WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS.

[03:10:04]

BUT THAT'S OUR PLAN.

WE ALSO PLAN TO PUT IT IN THE NOFA.

THAT'S THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD NORMALLY PUT OUR FUNDING, BECAUSE I WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE THE RULES MAPPED OUT BEFORE WE START ALLOCATING THIS.

SO EVERYBODY'S CLEAR.

THIS IS A LOT OF MONEY.

YES. AND I FEEL LIKE I'M GIVING KEYS TO A CORVETTE TO A NEW DRIVER.

AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT GUARDRAILS.

AND BECAUSE THIS IS A, THIS HAS BEEN AN AREA THAT HAS BEEN NOTORIOUS FOR MISUSE.

JUST BEING HONEST. AND I HEAR YOU.

YES, MA'AM. AND SO EVERYBODY, I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW, WE NEED TO HAVE IT VERY TRANSPARENT.

AND LIKE I SAID, THE RULES OF THE GAME ESTABLISH BEFORE WE START DIVVYING THIS OUT, BECAUSE 100 MILLION CAN GO.

WHILE IT'S NOT A LOT, IT IS A LOT FOR YOUR FIRST TIME OUT OF THE CHUTE.

UNDERSTOOD? UNDERSTOOD.

AND WE CERTAINLY WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE OUR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT POLICY.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ARTS AND CULTURE. HAPPY THAT WE GOT IT TO 75.

I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF NEED THERE.

ON THE HOMELESSNESS, I THINK THERE'S BEEN CONVERSATION.

I THINK MY COLLEAGUE DID TALK ABOUT THE BRIDGE.

I MEAN, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE HAVE PEOPLE AROUND THE BRIDGE IS BECAUSE WE CAN'T KEEP THEM AT NIGHT, AND WE'VE GOT TO.

SO I GUESS CHRISTINE IS THERE.

WHAT WOULD THE PLAN BE IF MONEY FOR HOMELESSNESS WAS ALLOCATED? WOULD IT GO TO THE BRIDGE? THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.

CHRISTINE CROSLEY, OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS DIRECTOR.

THE WAY THAT IT IS ALLOCATED, RIGHT.

AND THEN THE REST 5 MILLION WAS FOR GAP FINANCING FOR NEW PROJECTS IN THE SYSTEM.

SO IF YOU, ALL OF THE PREVIOUS PROPOSALS HAD AN ADDITIONAL 4.36 MILLION, ADDED TO THAT 1.8, SO LIKE 6 OR 7 MILLION FOR THE BRIDGE IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DO ADDITIONAL, NEW BUILD WITHIN THEIR EXISTING FOOTPRINT, THAT WOULD ADD 100 BEDS.

SO IT WAS THERE AND THEN IT WAS TAKEN OUT WHEN THE RECOMMENDATION WAS SLIMMED DOWN.

SO IT'S NOT BUILT, IT'S NOT EXPANDING IT.

IT'S ACTUALLY RECONFIGURING WHAT'S IN ITS BOUNDARIES TO GET A BETTER USE, TO ALLOW THAT FLEXIBILITY.

I MEAN, TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO STAY IN WHEN THEY COME IN IN THE DAY TO NOT HAVE TO LEAVE FOR THE NIGHT.

CORRECT. OKAY. AND THEN I SUSPECT YOU WILL BE WORKING WITH OTHER FOLKS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PERIMETER IS SECURE SO WE CAN HAVE THOSE BOUNDARIES SO PEOPLE AREN'T LOITERING OUTSIDE, CORRECT? YES. OKAY.

AND CAN I THANK YOU FOR SAYING THAT.

WAS IT I MEAN THAT'S THAT'S BASICALLY ALL MY CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS.

HAPPY THAT WE HAVE A DREDGE IN THE PARKS ALLOCATION AND HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THAT VERY LONG.

SO ANYWAY, I DO WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS.

I KNOW IT'S BEEN TOUGH AND I WANT TO APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUES FOR BEING FLEXIBLE AND STILL COMMUNICATING AND TALKING.

AND BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE ALL OF US TO GET US GET ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

AND THEN THEN THE WORK BEGINS AND HELPING TO GET THE VOTERS TO BELIEVE IN THIS AS WELL.

SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS.

AND THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN MORENO. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU MAYOR. AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR ALL THEIR LONG HOURS, OUR BOND TASK FORCE FOR THE WORK THAT THEY'VE BEEN PUTTING IN AND THE COUNTLESS RESIDENTS THAT HAVE COME UP HERE TIME AND AND TIME AGAIN EXPRESSING THEIR PRIORITIES.

THANK YOU FOR FOR YOUR COMMITMENT AND WILLINGNESS, WITH STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION, I THINK IT'S PRETTY, APPARENT THAT WE'RE ALL TRYING TO INCREASE THAT, THAT PROPOSITION ALLOTMENT.

BUT AS MENTIONED EARLIER, I DO STILL HAVE CONCERNS ON THE MINIMAL AMOUNT THAT IS BEING ADDRESSED TO VISION ZERO.

I AND, YOU KNOW, WE STILL HAVE RESURFACING IN HERE, ON SOME STREETS.

AND SO I, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING UP TO THE AMOUNT THAT WE ARE ON TRANSPORTATION.

I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SEE MORE TOWARDS VISION ZERO.

I KNOW WE HAVE SOME COMPLETE STREET COMPONENTS IN HERE THAT THAT WILL HELP ADDRESS SOME OF THAT.

BUT WE'RE A LONG WAY FROM WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

AND I KNOW TODAY WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THE SPECIFIC, PRIORITIES BY STREET, BY STREET, BUT I DO WANT TO, JUST MAKE IT KNOWN THAT THAT IS AN AREA THAT I WANT TO SEE AN INCREASE, ESPECIALLY IN OUR DENSE POPULATION AREAS WHERE WE HAVE, HIGH VOLUME OF PEDESTRIANS WALKING TO AND FROM.

PARKS AND RECREATION.

THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR FROM, FROM OUR RESIDENTS.

AND WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY IN OUR PARK SYSTEM FROM WHERE WE WERE, JUST TEN YEARS AGO.

AND SO WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO INVEST IN OUR GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE IN PARKS AND TRAIL.

[03:15:01]

I DO HAVE A A QUESTION, AND I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S GOING TO BE OUR FROM THE PARK DEPARTMENT OR DWU.

AND WHEN IT COMES TO, THE DREDGING OF WHITE ROCK LAKE, WHY IS IT IN THE BUCKET OF PARKS AND RECREATION AND NOT DWU? AND MAYBE YOU CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW BACHMAN, WAS DONE.

SO I WOULD DEFER TO DWU TO, TO RESPOND TO THAT QUESTION.

I'D HATE TO SAY THE WRONG THING.

DWU COMING . AND JUST SO WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, TO STAY ON TRACK.

THIS IS SO CHAIRMAN MORENO UNDERSTANDS BETTER THE TREATMENT OF BACHMAN LAKE AND ITS DREDGING VERSUS, WHITE ROCK FOR PURPOSES OF WHERE, WHAT PROPOSITION AND WHERE IT MIGHT BELONG IN A BOND PACKAGE.

SO WE ARE STAYING ON TOPIC, BUT WE NEED DALLAS WATER UTILITIES TO GIVE US THAT HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE.

SO THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

MATT PINK, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DALLAS WATER UTILITIES THE BACHMAN DREDGING WAS DONE AS A STUDY TO DETERMINE WHAT TO DO WITH THE LAKE.

THERE WERE SOME IDEAS ABOUT REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE LAKE.

ALSO, WE HAVE OUR BACHMAN WATER TREATMENT PLANT, WHICH RECEIVES, CHLORINE DELIVERIES THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR WATER TREATMENT.

SO THERE WERE ASPECTS OF PROTECTING THE PLANT AND ALSO FOR THE OVERALL DAM PROJECT, INCLUDING THAT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW.

SO THERE WAS AN OVERALL, FOCUS ON BACHMAN THAT WAS DIFFERENT THAN WHITE ROCK.

WHITE ROCK IS BEING PURSUED FOR ESTHETIC AND, AQUATIC BENEFITS FOR THE DREDGING PURPOSES.

AND IT'S A YOU KNOW, UNDER THE PARKS PROPOSITION CURRENTLY.

SO DWU WILL ASSIST WITH TECHNICAL ASPECTS, TO HELP ADVANCE THE PROJECT BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE WITH BACHMAN.

AND THEN WE ALSO THERE WAS ALSO SOME FUNDING AGREEMENTS WITH PARKS WITH REGARD TO, TO THE BACHMAN AS WELL PARTICIPATION.

IS THE WATER ITSELF AT WHITE ROCK LAKE CONSIDERED PARK A PARK PARCEL OR A PARK PROPERTY? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

I DON'T KNOW, SARAH CAN HELP WITH THAT.

I DIDN'T EVEN HEAR THE QUESTION.

I'M SORRY. WHAT WAS IT? THE QUESTION IS, IF WHITE ROCK LAKE, THE BODY OF WATER ITSELF, IF IT'S PARK, PROPERTY, IF IT'S OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON. SARAH STANDIFER, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF DALLAS WATER UTILITIES.

THE LAKE PROPER IS STILL CONSIDERED DWU PROPERTY.

WE DO PAY ANNUALLY TO THE PARK DEPARTMENT FOR SOME SHORELINE MAINTENANCE AND SOME ESTHETIC PIECES THAT THEY DESIRE TO DO THAT SINCE IT'S SERVING AS A RECREATIONAL LAKE AT THIS POINT.

THAT IS WHERE WE ARE HEADED. AND THAT'S KIND OF THE PIECE OF WHITE ROCK DREDGE THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN BLACKMON RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

I'LL MOVE ON TO TO HOUSING.

OBVIOUSLY WE ARE, WE ARE IN NEED OF MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

MY QUESTION IS GOING TO ARE GOING TO BE, LEGAL QUESTIONS, AND IT'S GOING TO PERTAIN BACK TO AN EARLIER, COMMENT THAT I HAD.

WAS THE USE OF PUBLIC GOODS OR FOR A PUBLIC GOOD FOR PARKS, EXCUSE ME, FOR HOUSING.

AND SO I WANT TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE OUR PARAMETERS ON WHAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THOSE DOLLARS, WHEN IT COMES TO HOUSING, WOULD IT BE WOULD WE BE ABLE TO USE IT FOR HOUSING ASSISTANCE, FOR HOME REPAIR, FOR MIXED USE PROJECTS? WHAT ARE OUR GUIDELINES? SO WE'LL HAVE OUR ATTORNEYS COME AND HELP WITH THAT QUESTION.

LISA MATA IS WITH THE DALLAS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND I APOLOGIZE.

CAN YOU PLEASE REPEAT THE LAST PART OF YOUR QUESTION? SURE. I'M TRYING TO GET THE GUIDELINES, THE PARAMETERS OF HOW WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ALLOCATE WHICH PROJECTS WOULD BE IDENTIFIED UNDER HOUSING, WOULD WE BE ABLE TO AWARD IT TO MIXED USE PROJECTS TO, BUYER ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS? WHAT ARE THE PARAMETERS? SO THE CURRENT HOUSING, PROPOSITION, I WOULD TREAT IT AS A HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE PROPOSITION.

THOSE DOLLARS WOULD BE DEDICATED TO IMPROVEMENTS TO INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO STREETS, SIDEWALKS THAT WOULD SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSITION, THOSE DOLLARS WOULD BE USED FOR BOTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT WOULD BE AWARDED UNDER A LOAN OR A GRANT VIA CHAPTER 380 CONDITIONAL GRANT AGREEMENT, OR I BELIEVE CHAPTER 373 ALSO PROVIDES SOME AUTHORITY FOR REDUCING NEIGHBORHOOD BLIGHT AND OTHER COMMUNITY

[03:20:04]

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS. OKAY. THANK YOU.

MAYBE EBS NEXT ON, I NOTICED THAT THEY WITHDREW THE, STEMMONS MUNICIPAL CENTER TO ZERO.

Y'ALL DID MENTION EARLIER, WHY Y'ALL DID THAT, BUT DO WE HAVE A PLAN ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO FUND THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT? GOOD AFTERNOON, JOHN JOHNSON, BUILDING SERVICES, THE $5 MILLION THAT WAS LISTED IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSITION FOR CITY FACILITIES AT STEMMONS WAS TO COVER MECHANICAL, HVAC, PLUMBING AND SOME BUILDING CONTROLS.

AT THIS TIME, THOSE UPGRADES ARE NOT FUNDED IN ANY OTHER PROPOSITIONS.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. FROM STAFF ON THAT, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE CURRENT, AMENDMENT THAT'S BEFORE US.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

WE'LL START WITH, HOUSING FIRST.

AND I JUST HAVE A VERY SIMPLE QUESTION.

I'M NOT SURE, KIND OF FOLLOWING UP WITH, CHAIRMAN MARINO'S QUESTION.

EVERY TIME, IT SEEMS LIKE WHEN WE REFERENCE HOUSING DOLLARS, THE TERM AFFORDABLE IS AUTOMATICALLY ATTACHED TO IT.

SO, FOR CLARITY, IF ONE JUST IS SIMPLY AS PUT, CAN THOSE HOUSING DOLLARS BE USED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE? THAT'S QUESTION A.

YES SIR. ALL RIGHT, QUESTION B.

WHEN YOU PUT THOSE FUNDS IN THAT BOND PROPOSITION, ARE THEY NOW RESTRICTED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS ONLY.

SO LET ME SAY THAT OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS.

LET ME ASK IT A DIFFERENT WAY.

THE OTHER WAY IS, YOU SAID THOSE THOSE FUNDS COULD BE USED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DOLLARS TO HELP TO, TO INCENTIVIZE BUILDERS TO COME IN.

AND ONCE THEY'RE USED FOR THAT, COULD A NEW HOME BUILDER COME IN AND BUILD IN, IN THAT COMMUNITY USING THOSE DOLLARS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE? YEAH. WELL SO YES.

SO THESE DOLLARS ARE SPECIFIC TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.

SO WHEN A DEVELOPER WANTS TO DO AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OR A MIXED INCOME DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, AS LONG AS THERE IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN IT, WE CAN LOOK AT FUNDING THEM OUT OF THIS INFRASTRUCTURE POOL OF FUNDS AND THEN THEY CAN COME IN AND BUILD.

WE'VE DONE THIS IN THE PAST.

WE'VE HAD DEVELOPMENT DEALS THAT HAVE HAD A PERCENTAGE OF THE THE MIX IS AFFORDABLE AND THE OTHER IS SINGLE FAMILY UNITS.

WE'VE DONE TOWNHOMES.

WE'VE DONE MULTIFAMILY WITH..

BUT NOT MARKET RATE WHERE NOT DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M ASKING AND WHERE I'M TRYING TO GET.

WE'VE, WE HAVE FOR, YOU KNOW, I'LL USE THIS DISTRICT, BUT REALLY IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, THERE IS A DESIRE IN SOME OF THOSE AREAS TO ACTUALLY HAVE NEW MARKET RATE HOMES BEING BUILT BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T IN PROBABLY SINCE, OH EIGHT, I BELIEVE.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY CAN THESE FUNDS.

SO FOR ME TO GET ON BOARD, I NEED TO UNDERSTAND IF THESE FUNDS COULD BE USED TO INCENTIVIZE NEW HOME BUILDERS TO COME IN AND BUILD NEW HOMES IN A PARTICULAR AREA.

AND LISA MARES WITH THE DALLAS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO THE TYPICAL PROJECTS THAT WE, AWARD LOANS OR GRANTS TO IS, TYPICALLY A MIXED INCOME PROJECT.

SO SOME OF THE HOMES WOULD BE MARKET RATE, BUT A PORTION WOULD BE..

WHAT'S THE BREAKDOWN? WELL, THE TRADITIONAL BREAKDOWN IS USUALLY A THIRD, AT LEAST A THIRD OF THOSE UNITS, AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS WITHIN THE ENTIRE PROJECT ARE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

NOW, THE ARMY THAT WE USE IS IT CAN BE AS HIGH AS 120%.

AMI AND THOSE ARE STILL, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE CLOSER TO OUR WORKFORCE HOUSING.

SO THE AMOUNT OF THE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN A MARKET RATE AND AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT IS NOT NECESSARILY AS HIGH. SO THEREFORE THAT'S MORE ATTRACTIVE TO DEVELOPERS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT A NICE MIX OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE RESIDING IN THAT PROJECT.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT RESPONSE.

I'M STILL NOT CLEAR. I GUESS I ANYWAY, I'M NOT GOING TO USE MY OWN TIME.

SO SOME OF THE HOMES ARE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.

SO IF YOU BUILT A NEW COMMUNITY, IT WOULD JUST YOU'RE SAYING IT BASICALLY BE A MIX OF.

EXACTLY. AND IF, A COMPONENT OF THE PROJECT TO MAKE IT ATTRACTIVE TO A DEVELOPER IS AT MARKET RATE.

[03:25:08]

AND BUT FOR THAT AWARD, THE DEVELOPER WOULD NOT CONSTRUCT OR ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT TO CONSTRUCT THE PROJECT.

THEN IT IS ADDING TO THE STOCK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS WITHIN THE CITY.

AND THAT'S THE ULTIMATE GOAL.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SWITCHING TO PARKS.

THANK YOU ALL. AND BY THE WAY, I DIDN'T SAY THAT AGAIN.

I DO NOT ENVY Y'ALL.

ESPECIALLY YOU JENNIFER.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE, GRACE, AND ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT YOU'VE, BEEN SUBJECTED TO, DEALING WITH ALL OF US.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND TO ALL OF OUR CULTURAL AFFAIRS, OUR PARKS FOLKS, AND THE TASK FORCE, THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR WORK THERE, AS FAR AS MY QUESTION IN PARKS, IS JOHN IN HERE? AND YOU ALREADY KNOW.

WELL, YOU JUST TAKE US QUICKLY THROUGH THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS JUST SO I CAN GET A BETTER CLARIFICATION AND MORE SPECIFICALLY IN EACH ONE OF THOSE SCENARIOS.

IN SOME CASES, YOU ADDED MONEY, IN OTHER CASES YOU SUBTRACTED MONEY FROM THERE.

AND I NEED TO SAY THIS ON THE RECORD, AND I'M GOING TO SAY THIS AND I'LL GET BACK TO TASK.

BUT ON RECORD IN THAT SCENARIO, AND THIS IS WHERE I'M STRUGGLING, I HAVE IN DISTRICT THREE THE TOTAL OF ABOUT $11 MILLION IN PARKS.

IT'S 11 MILLION. TWO OF THOSE PROJECTS, I BELIEVE, ARE CITYWIDE, AND THE REST OF THEM WERE DISTRICT SPECIFIC.

AND ONE IN PARTICULAR IS GLENDALE.

AND I GUESS I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE MATH IN TERMS OF IF IT GOES TO 2.75 OR 300.

AND BY THE WAY, I'M IN SUPPORT OF PARKS, BUT IF IT GOES TO 2.75, I'M JUST STRUGGLING WITH HOW, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE SEVERAL PARKS LISTED, BUT AGAIN, WITH THIS GLENDALE, THAT'S 9 MILLION THERE, WHICH IS LESS THAN 3%.

HOW IS THAT CUT BY 50%? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE MATH.

AND JUST WALK ME THROUGH ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS QUICKLY, IF YOU CAN.

AND SO, I DO A SUMMARY ON EACH ONE OF THEM, BECAUSE I THINK YOU ONLY HAVE ABOUT FIVE MINUTES.

YEAH. DON'T TALK LONG EITHER. YEAH.

AND I'M SORRY. I'M JOHN JENKINS, DIRECTOR OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

SO REAL QUICK, THREE, CAN YOU GET CLOSE TO THE MIC? OKAY. YEAH.

THE $350 MILLION SCENARIO IS PRETTY MUCH DOESN'T TOUCH ANYTHING THAT, THE BOARD, THE COUNCIL, WHEN I HAD MY INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS WITH YOU ALL AS WELL AND FEEDBACK.

IT DOESN'T TOUCH ANYTHING.

EVERYTHING'S HOLD THE OTHER END WHEN YOU START ON THE OTHER END, PLEASE.

BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH TIME.

THE 275. YEAH.

YEAH, I THINK WE WILL LOSE, BUT AND I'M GONNA SWITCH TO THE THREE HUNCHES SCENARIO.

NOTHING BELOW.

I MEAN, ONCE YOU GET BELOW 300, THEN YOU START GETTING INTO, WELL, I JUST GO STRAIGHT 300 DOES NOT TOUCH GLENDALE, DOES NOT TOUCH ANY OTHER TRANSFORMATIONAL PROJECTS, DOES NOT, IT DOESN'T HAVE A LARGE REDUCTION FOR SOME OF OUR PARTNERS.

BUT ONCE YOU GET PAST 275 MILLION AND YOU HAD A TOTAL OF 3000 ENTRIES AND I GOT IT DOWN TO 400, I GOT TO START TOUCHING SOME OF THE LARGER PROJECTS, OR I WON'T GET TO $275 MILLION.

IT'S NOT POSSIBLE UNLESS I START TO ELIMINATE ALL THE PLAYGROUNDS, ELIMINATE ALL THE TRAILS.

SO WE'RE STARTING TO TOUCH ALL THE BASIC STUFF.

SO WHEN WE GET INTO THE TRANSFORMATIONAL PROJECTS, YES, I HAVE TO.

YES. SO I LOOKED AT WHAT WAS THOSE BIG PROJECTS BECAUSE THE TRANSFORMATIONAL BUDGET ALONE I THINK WAS $70 MILLION.

BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO WIPE OUT EVERY TRANSFORMATIONAL PROJECT.

AND THAT'S WHY THE NUMBER WAS ABOUT 4 MILLION FOR THOSE BUCKETS THAT ARE ANYWHERE FROM, AS YOU MENTIONED, 9 MILLION FOR GLENDALE.

THEN THERE'S 20 MILLION FOR SOME OF THOSE OTHER LARGER PROJECTS.

AND SO, YES, THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO THE 4 MILLION AND STARTED REDUCING THE PARTNERS BY ANOTHER, LIKE ALMOST $15 MILLION.

AND I GET YOUR QUESTION ON AS FAR AS THE PROPORTION, AS YOU MENTIONED, DISTRICT THREE, IT WAS, YOU KNOW, ABOUT $19 MILLION BECAUSE WE DO HAVE THE TRAIL RUNNING THROUGH THERE WITH ANOTHER $7 MILLION.

AND THEN IF YOU WERE TO STRIP OUT, YOU KNOW, THE TRAIL, THEN YES, YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU'RE AT $12 MILLION.

AND AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO GO ON THE RECORD AGAIN.

WE'RE GOING TO GET THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND EVERYBODY WILL LAND.

AND I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT, EACH ONE OF THESE PROPOSITIONS WILL GET WHAT THEY NEED.

BUT I NEED TO GO ON RECORD IN SAYING, WHEN WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND YOU PUT ONE OF THOSE

[03:30:01]

MAIN PROJECTS AGAIN.

AND I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS.

WE'VE BEEN ASKING I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THAT.

I'M JUST GOING TO GET INTO THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A $9 MILLION PROJECT.

AND THE ASK WAS ANYWHERE BETWEEN 260 TO $350 MILLION.

AND AS A $9 MILLION PROJECT THAT NOW GETS THREATENED TO BE CUT IF WE DON'T GET IT TO 275.

AND I THINK THAT'S JUST NOT EQUITABLE.

AND IN MY MIND IT FEELS A BIT PUNITIVE.

SO I'M GOING ON RECORD AS SAYING I KNOW.

BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT THIS IS HOW THIS BUILDING WORKS SOMETIMES, AND THAT'S ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE.

AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY NOT EQUITABLE.

EVERYBODY POINTS FINGERS AND THAT'S FINE, BUT THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE.

AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY NOT EQUITABLE.

AND FOR ME TO BE SITTING UP HERE THIS MORNING TRYING TO GO AROUND LOBBYING, USING POLITICAL CAPITAL FOR $4 MILLION FOR A PARK IN SOUTHERN DALLAS THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR SINCE 1980 IS ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE.

SO I'M CONFIDENT WE'RE GOING TO GET WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

BUT THIS PROCESS RIGHT HERE IN THAT PART IS UNACCEPTABLE.

WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO FIGHT FOR $4 MILLION FOR, LYNDALE PARK.

THANK YOU. AND IF I MAY, MAYOR, I HAVE TO.

YOU KNOW, I WOULD NEVER BE PUNITIVE TOWARDS ANY OF YOU ALL, ANY COMMUNITY.

THAT'S NOT WHO I AM.

OKAY. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

EXCUSE ME. SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO AS I'M TRYING TO GET THIS PROCESS UNDER MY BELT AND ASK QUESTIONS.

COUNCIL MEMBERS, ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT US TO BE MINDFUL OF, AND IS THAT WE MUST BE CONSCIOUS AND COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE OBLIGATED OURSELVES THROUGH A VOTE AND THROUGH SPEECH THAT WE'RE GOING TO SUPPORT, PROTECT THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUITY.

AND SO AS WE VOTE AROUND THE HORSESHOE ON THESE ALLOCATIONS OR INTERESTS OF IT, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE BONDED TO THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUITY.

AND SO THE QUESTION FOR ME BECOMES MAYBE TO THE CITY MANAGER, HOW DO WE GET LANGUAGE AROUND THESE PROPOSITIONS SO THAT THE EQUITY PRINCIPLE IS SUPPORTED, WHETHER WE ARE HERE AS A COUNCIL, WHETHER THE MAYOR IS HERE AS A MAYOR, THAT IT TRANSITIONS FOREVER AS LONG AS IT'S BOND MONEY COVERS, SO THAT WE ARE NOT PERCEIVED AS JUST GOING THROUGH THE MOTION DOING POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING.

SO WHAT CAN WE DO? HOW CAN I HOW CAN WE DIRECT YOU OR GET YOUR STAFF TO HELP US? SO I MAY NEED SOME HELP FROM, THE WONDERFUL CITY ATTORNEY, SITTING TWO SEATS NEXT TO ME ON THE TYPE OF LANGUAGE THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR, ANY WORDING ASSOCIATED WITH ANY OF THE PROPOSITIONS THAT DOESN'T PUT US AT SOME KIND OF RISK OF OR PROPOSITION LANGUAGE BEING REJECTED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, WHOEVER WE PASS IT THROUGH.

HOWEVER, BEYOND THE LEGAL SIDE OF THAT, I THINK AS MISS BENTLEY, AND CYNTHIA ERICKSON STATED, THE POLICIES THAT GUIDE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE FUNDS AND WHERE WE EXPEND THOSE FUNDS ONCE APPROVED, WHETHER ARTICULATED AS A PART OF THE PROPOSITION OR NOT, IS DICTATED BY THIS COUNCIL AND YOUR POLICY PROGRAMS AND YOUR PUBLIC PURPOSE AND INTENTION AROUND THEM.

AND AS WE'VE GOT PROGRAMS AND POLICIES THAT ARE INTENDED TO BENEFIT CERTAIN UNDERSERVED AREAS, THEN I THINK WE CAN HAVE THE CONVERSATION AT ONE OF OUR COMMITTEE MEETINGS ABOUT HOW DO WE MODIFY THOSE POLICIES TO AFFECT THE RESULTS WITH THE RESOURCES THAT WE WANT.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE MY ANSWER ON THE STAFF AND OPERATIONAL SIDE OF IT AND HOW IT GETS DONE.

THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF WHAT CAN BE PUT IN A BOND PROPOSITION.

I'LL DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.

THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER. COULD I HAVE LISA MARES AND JULIE PARTAIN COME UP AND TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN THE PROPOSITION? IN. GOOD AFTERNOON, LISA MARES WITH THE DALLAS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

AFTERNOON, JULIE PARTAIN BRACEWELL, BOND COUNSEL.

SO THE LANGUAGE OF THE PROPOSITION IS DRIVEN BY STATE LAW, PRACTICE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

AND JUST WHAT IS CLEAR TO THE VOTERS, IF THE QUESTION IS, COULD WE PUT SOMETHING IN THE PROPOSITION REGARDING EQUITY? YOU CAN PUT WHATEVER YOU WANT IN THE PROPOSITION, AS LONG AS IT IS CLEAR AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS OKAY WITH THE WAY IT IS WORDED.

NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE WITH RESPECT TO, EQUITY OR HOW THAT WOULD BE DEFINED.

[03:35:04]

I FEAR THAT IT WOULD BE MORE CONFUSING THAN IT WOULD BE CLEAR, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAD TO DEFINE THE WORD AND YOUR PROPOSITION WENT FROM 20 WORDS TO 80 WORDS.

BUT IF THERE IS SOMETHING, IF IT IS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL TO DO THE, DO THE PROPOSITION LANGUAGE DIFFERENTLY, WE CAN VET THAT THROUGH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

MOST CITIES, HANDLE THESE SORTS OF THINGS AT THE POLICY LEVEL, WHERE THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS, REMEMBER YOUR YOUR VOTED AUTHORITY IS ONLY AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS FOR A PURPOSE.

YOU NEVER HAVE TO ISSUE THEM.

IT COMES BACK BEFORE YOU.

EVERY TIME WE ISSUE DEBT, WE HAVE A BOND ORDINANCE THAT ISSUES THE DEBT.

SO HAVING IT VOTED DOESN'T GET IT ISSUED AND IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T GET IT SPENT.

THE EXPENDITURE OF THOSE BOND PROCEEDS ARE BASED UPON YOUR POLICIES AND THE CONTRACTS THAT YOU ENTER INTO.

SO MOST OF MY CITIES WILL HANDLE THOSE TYPES OF ISSUES AT THE POLICY LEVEL.

THE THE PROJECTS THEY CHOOSE TO DO, WHO THEY CHOOSE TO DO, THEM, WHERE THEY CHOOSE TO DO THEM, AND HOW MUCH, THEREFORE, ARE USUALLY WHAT DICTATES THOSE TYPES OF ITEMS. SO THIS IS WHAT I'M ASKING.

THIS PRIMARILY BECAUSE I WAS ON THE COUNCIL WHEN THERE WAS A CONVERSATION AROUND A BOND PROPOSAL OF 2012, I BELIEVE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR SOUTHERN SECTOR, AND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT USING SOME OF THAT MONEY.

AND THE COUNCIL MEMBER AT THAT TIME, IT WAS, COUNCILWOMAN SANDY GRAYSON.

SHE SAID, STOP.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

AND HERE I'M LIKE, WHAT? SO I HAD TO START LOOKING BECAUSE NOW I REALIZED THAT IT'S ON PAPER.

BUT YOU HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO ARE TRYING TO GO AFTER MONEY THAT'S NOT FOR THAT AREA.

SO I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE IN THIS CASE, NOW, I NEED YOU TO ADDRESS EQUITY FOR THOSE TARGETED AREAS THAT HOUSING HAS DEVELOPED.

HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE CONSCIOUS AS WE LOOK AT THESE ALLOCATIONS, HOW DO WE SPECIFY IT UNDER THESE TOPICS.

SO UNDER THESE CATEGORIES.

SO WE STILL GET FUNDS GOING TO THOSE EQUITY AREAS IF THAT MAKES SENSE I KNOW WE HAVE TO DO BOND AND BUDGET.

WE HAVE TO DO THE TWO BS.

BUT RIGHT NOW THIS ON BOND RIGHT.

AND THIS IS LISA WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT OUR CURRENT HOUSING POLICY DOES IDENTIFY CERTAIN PRIORITY AREAS FOR EQUITY PURPOSES AND THE, INCENTIVE POLICY, WHICH IS A DOCUMENT THAT IS REVIEWED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE.

WE WILL BE ADDING THOSE HOUSING PROGRAMS UNDER THE INCENTIVE POLICY, SO THAT WE CAN SPEND THE MONEY.

SO THOSE TYPES OF CONCERNS CAN BE ADDRESSED AND THE INCENTIVE POLICY, WITHOUT HAVING TO ADD THE TERM EQUITY INTO A PROPOSITION, WHICH, YOU KNOW, AS WE'VE LEARNED HERE, CAN MEAN DIFFERENT THINGS TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

AND SO THAT WOULD AVOID SOME CONFUSION FOR THE VOTERS.

ALL RIGHT. NOW FOR THE VOTERS, I WANT THEM TO VOTE FOR THIS PRODUCT.

WHAT WE DO KNOW, WITH A STATE THAT IS FROWNING ON THE WORD EQUITY AND DIVERSITY IN THE CITY, WE HAVE A CHALLENGE TRYING TO GET THIS BOND APPROVED, THE LANGUAGE BY WHAT WE HAVE IN AUSTIN. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WHAT THE VOTERS UNDERSTAND IS ADVOCACY FOR THEIR COMMUNITIES BASED ON THE NEEDS, BASED ON THE DATA.

AND WE'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE DATA DRIVEN.

AND WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE IS FOR US TO DO THE MOONWALK ON THOSE PROMISES THAT WE MADE A COMMITMENT, I SHOULD SAY, TO THOSE UNDERSERVED AREAS, BECAUSE THEY'RE BOTH, BASED ON DATA.

SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE THE DATA, THEN IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE FOR US TO PUT ANY MONEY IN OUR TECHNOLOGICAL NETWORK.

IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FOR US TO PUT ANY MONEY IN THE STREETS, FOR EXAMPLE, BECAUSE WE NEED INFRASTRUCTURE TO GO WITH THE HOUSING.

AND IT'S ALL ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT EVERY COMPONENT IS TIED TO THE TARGET AREAS THAT DEMONSTRATE THE MOST NEED, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. AND SO I'M FEARFUL OF THE FACT THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO THE MOONWALK ON THESE COMMUNITIES WHO HAVE WHO ARE LOOKING TO US.

AND I SIMPLY WANT THEM TO VOTE AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE VOTING ON.

AND WE WANT TO BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM THE STATE, BECAUSE WHEN THEY WHEN WE GO TO THE POLLS TO VOTE ON STATE LANGUAGE, WE ARE DISCOMBOBULATED.

WE WANT TO MAKE THIS VERY SPECIFIC AND UNDERSTAND ON THIS PROPOSITION, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR THE HOUSING PROJECT HERE.

IF WE CAN DO THAT.

WE'RE WORKING FOR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR STREET.

AND THEY FEEL GOOD ABOUT WHERE THEY ARE IN TERMS OF COMING TO THE POLLS.

SO, CITY MANAGER, I'M THE LAST PERSON I WANT TO TALK TO IS THE EQUITY GURU.

IF SHE COULD COME UP FOR US FOR JUST A MINUTE, I DO HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION ON THE EQUITY PIECE.

WE NEED THE EQUITY GURU.

[03:40:03]

GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M SORRY.

CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR ME? YES. IN TERMS OF OUR POLICIES AND OUR ATTEMPT TO MAKE SURE AND ENSURE AND DOCUMENT THE THE APPLICATION OF THE EQUITY PRINCIPLE SO IT IS NOT ARBITRARILY AND CAPRICIOUSLY UTILIZED BY FUTURE COUNCIL MEMBERS.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE, AND I'M SURE OTHERS DO TOO, THAT WE HAVE LANGUAGE THAT SPEAKS TO THE REALITY OF WHAT THE DATA SAYS.

SO HOW DO WE GET THAT DONE IN YOUR EXPERTISE AND LOOKING THROUGH YOUR LENSES OF EQUITY? SO HOW DO WE SPEAK TO THE THE LANGUAGE..

ON THE AS WE PREPARE FOR THE BOND? YES. AS WE PREPARE FOR THE BOND.

AND SO WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS AN INITIAL, TAKE AS IT REGARDS TO THE EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT TOOL, BUT THAT'S REALLY QUALITATIVE DATA.

IT'S NOT THE QUANTITATIVE PIECES.

AND SO UTILIZING A FRAMEWORK THAT ACTUALLY LOOKS AT IF THE PROJECTS WILL IN FACT ADDRESS DISPARITIES THAT WE KNOW EXIST THROUGH SOME OF OUR TRUSTED DATA SOURCES LIKE THE EQUITY INDICATORS REPORT, WILL THE PROJECT ADD SOME FORM OF INCLUSION FOR OUR RESIDENTS AS WELL AS LOOKING AT THE ASSETS? SO WILL IT SPUR SOME ECONOMIC GROWTH, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EQUITY PRIORITY AREAS, WHICH WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE RACIAL EQUITY PLAN AND OR OUR HISTORICALLY DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES.

ALL RIGHT. SO FOR EXAMPLE, AND I'M QUICKLY I GUESS I'LL COME BACK, MAYOR, ON THE NEXT ROUND BECAUSE I HAVE A AREA OF 10TH STREET WHERE THE CONSULTANTS HAVE SAID WE NEED ALLOCATIONS IN STREETS, ARTS, PARKS, FLOODING.

WE NEED ALL OF THAT.

AND SO THE QUESTION BECOMES, HOW DO I PUT THAT IN THE BOND, THE RIGHT LANGUAGE, SO THAT IT DOES SPEAK TO EQUITY.

BUT HOW DO WE GET IT DONE.

AND I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WITH ONE OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO HOW DO WE DO THAT.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE MAYOR I'M OUT OF TIME.

SO THAT'S THAT'S YOUR TIME FOR THIS ROUND.

YOU HAVE OTHER ROUNDS.

SO AND I APPRECIATE WE'LL LET THEM ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

YEAH. AND SO YOU CAN JUST KIND OF LET THAT MARINATE AND I'LL PICK IT UP AFTER, AFTER WE YOU LET IT MARINATE WHEN IT GETS LET IT MARINATE.

AND THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU EQUITY GURU. THANK YOU MAYOR.

THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

AND I'M GOING TO SKIP OVER YOU MAYOR PRO TEM AND GO TO CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ FOR FIVE MINUTES.

AND THEN CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. COLLEAGUES, I DID SIGN ON TO THE ORIGINAL VERSION OF THIS AMENDMENT.

NOT THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THIS AMENDMENT THAT JUST CAME, THAT WERE ANNOUNCED WHEN IT WAS MADE.

SO JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE ARE CLEAR ON THAT, THERE'S, SOMETHING THAT'S MISSING, IS WE NEED 17, $1 MILLION IN PUBLIC SAFETY FOR A VERY IMPORTANT PROJECT THAT DISTRICT SIX RESIDENTS HAVE LOBBIED AS THEIR HIGHEST PRIORITY, WHICH IS THE REPLACEMENT OF FIRE STATION 16.

AND I WANTED TO SEE IF CHIEF ARTIS WAS HERE.

OR MR. FORTUNE, SOMEBODY THAT CAN COME AND SPEAK ON FIRE STATION 16.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALWAYS HARD WHEN YOU DON'T MAKE A LINE, BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT UNDER IT.

FIRE STATION 16 IS ON CHALK HILL ROAD.

IT'S FAR, FAR WEST DALLAS AND LEDBETTER.

THE FACILITY IS SO OLD THAT WE CAN'T EVEN ALLOW FEMALE FIREFIGHTERS TO WORK THERE, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE SEPARATE FACILITIES OR FACILITIES, AND WE HAVE SUPER MAJOR ACCOMMODATIONS HAVE TO BE MADE.

WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT EQUIPMENT THERE, IN ORDER TO TAKE CARE OF EMERGENCY SITUATIONS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE AN AMBULANCE OR AN AMBULANCE BAY.

AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE, YOU KNOW, WORKED HARD TO MAKE SURE AREAS GET AMBULANCE IF THEY HAVE THE BAY.

AND THERE'S A LOT OF JUST TECHNOLOGY THAT IS SO UNDER, IT'S JUST NOT FAIR FOR THIS COMMUNITY.

AND THIS FIRE STATION IS SO OLD, AND I KNOW STAFF HAS TO PICK.

AND, YOU KNOW, ONE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE PRIORITY THAN THE OTHER.

BUT, WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS, COLLEAGUES, IT WAS SAID THAT IF IF CONSTITUENTS, STOOD UP AND DEMANDED OR WANTED A PROJECT AND THEY REALLY SHOWED UP FOR IT, AND THE COUNCIL MEMBER SUPPORTS IT, THAT THAT WOULD REALLY HELP TO GET THE VOTES.

BUT I DON'T WANT TO REPLACE THE OTHER FIRE STATION AND HAVE TO PICK BECAUSE THAT COMMUNITY ALSO NEEDS THEIR FIRE STATION REPLACED.

AND AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE ANTIQUATED FACILITIES, CAN YOU EXPLAIN, FIRE STATION 16 AND THEN IT'S MAJORLY NEEDED ISSUES.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M DEREK, AND I'M THE ASSISTANT CHIEF OF COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY, AND I HAVE WITH ME, SECTION CHIEF DEBORAH EDENS.

STATION 16 IS ONE OF OUR OLDER STATIONS.

IT IS A SMALL STATION.

WE REALLY DON'T HAVE ROOM TO EXPAND IT.

SO THERE ARE OTHER EQUIPMENTS OR OTHER, APPARATUS OR SERVICES THAT WE WOULD POTENTIALLY OFFER IN THAT AREA, ESPECIALLY WITH, WITH SOME OF THE GROWTH THAT WE CAN'T DO WITH THE CURRENT WITH THE CURRENT FACILITY.

SO WHEN WE WERE PRIORITIZING THE STATIONS THAT WE WANTED REPLACED, IT WAS IN OUR TOP 6 OR 7.

[03:45:07]

SO IT'S IT'S DEFINITELY ONE OF THE ONES THAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR IN THE FUTURE OF, OF UPGRADING AND HAVING IT.

AND YOU ARE CORRECT WHERE IT IS SMALL ENOUGH, WHERE THERE AREN'T SEPARATE FACILITIES FOR FEMALE FIREFIGHTERS.

IT'S A VERY SMALL STATION.

THERE'S NOT ENOUGH BAY SPACE TO, TO REALLY EXPAND, TO OFFER ANYTHING ELSE.

VERY GOOD, THANK YOU. AND, IT'S ALSO VERY EMBARRASSING WHEN YOU WALK IN THERE AND SEE THE, THE DISARRAY IN THAT, FACILITY AND NO FAULT TO YOU ALL, IT'S JUST A VERY OLD AND ANTIQUATED FACILITY.

AND SO I JUST WANTED TO HEAR IF YOU ALL HAD WOULD SUPPORT, 16 BEING ADDED IF AN AMENDMENT WAS MADE TO GET THE FUNDING FOR IT? YES, SIR. WE WOULD SUPPORT THAT.

OF COURSE, WE HAVE PRIORITIES.

SO WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY WANT ANY OTHER STATIONS THAT HAVE MADE THE CUT TO BE CUT IN ORDER TO DO THAT.

BUT STATION 16 IS ONE OF THOSE THAT THAT WE WOULD SUPPORT, IF THAT'S THE WAY THE COUNCIL LEAD.

SO, BY BY HAVING THE COMMUNITY THAT, IS ADVOCATING FOR IT BECAUSE I WENT TO ALL OF MY DISTRICTS, TOWN HALLS AND THEY ALSO CAME TO THE BIG PUBLIC MEETING THAT WAS THERE, THE EMAILS, THE PHONE CALLS AND ALL OF THAT.

YOU KNOW, I GET THAT THERE'S A LIST AND PRIORITIES, BUT THIS PROCESS WAS, SAID THAT IF YOU HAVE THAT SUPPORT AND THAT'S WHY SO MANY OF THESE PEOPLE ARE OUT HERE IS BECAUSE AND I'M NOT TALKING TO THIS TO YOU JUST IN GENERAL FOR THIS COLLEAGUES, IS THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S LIKE PEOPLE ARE GETTING THEIR PRIORITIES.

AND THEN WE SIT THERE AND SAY, OH, WELL, NOW FOR THIS ONE.

WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE PRIORITY LIST.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S FAIR BECAUSE WE TOLD OUR COMMUNITY, WE TOLD OUR GENERAL PUBLIC, IF YOU COME OUT AND YOU SHOW BIG SUPPORT, WE'RE GOING TO ADD POINTS AND DO THAT. AND IF YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER SUPPORTS IT AS WELL, THAT'S EVEN MORE POINTS.

SO, YOU KNOW, I GET IT MIGHT BE DOWN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN THE LIST THAN MAYBE A SECOND OR THIRD.

BUT, I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE FIRST LOMBARDI IS DEFINITELY IMPORTANT, FOR TWO AND 13, BECAUSE OF THE AREA THAT IT'S IN, WE SHARE IT.

AND THEN, DEFINITELY THIS ONE BECAUSE IT'S JUST IT'S IN TOTAL DISARRAY.

AND, THIS IS THE ONE PROJECT THAT THIS, THIS AREA WAS DALLAS WAS LIKE ALL IN SUPPORT OF HAVING THAT REPLACED BECAUSE HAVING SEEN THE OTHER FIRE STATION GET REPLACED.

NOW WE SEE HOW DESPERATE, WE ARE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY ACCESS WHEN IT COMES TO AMBULANCE AND FIRE SAFETY AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AND THAT'S FAR, FAR WEST DALLAS AND TO GET AN AMBULANCE THAT HAS TO COME FROM SEVERAL MILES AWAY SOUTH OF THERE.

AND WE HAVE A LOT OF SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN, ADULTS, A LOT OF SENIORS IN THE AREA.

AND, TO SAY LIKE, OH, Y'ALL CAN WAIT ANOTHER, SEVEN, TEN, 12 YEARS, MAYBE 20.

I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT OR FAIR.

AND SO I'M GOING TO ADVOCATE FOR IT.

SO AT THIS TIME, MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THIS AMENDMENT, TO TAKE, PUBLIC SAFETY AND MAKE IT $106 MILLION, MAKE HOUSING $90 MILLION AND MAKE HOMELESSNESS, $15 MILLION. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO RESTATE IT SIMPLY, NO ADVOCACY YET.

JUST RESTATE IT SO WE CAN SEE IF THERE'S A SECOND FOR IT.

SURE. I MOVE TO REDUCE, I'M SORRY TO INCREASE PUBLIC SAFETY FROM, OH, I DON'T KNOW WHERE I CAN'T SEE IT TO $106 MILLION.

I'M SORRY. SO SAY IT AGAIN.

JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GET A SECOND.

WE'LL SEE IF WE GET I THINK IT'S 89 OKAY.

SO FROM PUBLIC SAFETY UP FROM 89 TO 106.

NO NO NO NO 89 TO YES 106, YES 106.

AND THEN REDUCE HOMELESSNESS FROM 20 MILLION TO 15 MILLION.

OKAY. AND MAKE AND BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF THE OTHER AND THEN REDUCE HOUSING FROM 90, I'M SORRY FROM 100 MILLION TO 88 MILLION.

IS THAT THE FULL MOTION? THAT'S THE FULL MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? MAYOR, I HAVE A POINT OF INFORMATION BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE SECOND, I'M GOING TO GIVE THE SECOND.

OKAY. TO SET YOUR POINT OF INFORMATION.

THE POINT OF INFORMATION.

I NEED THE CLARITY. I THOUGHT WE WERE INSTRUCTED THAT ANY PROPOSALS WE HAD HAD TO END IN FIVE, OR IT WAS CERTAIN NUMBER WE HAD TO END IN.

NO, THIS IS AN ORDER.

THIS I MEAN, THIS IS IT HAS TO EQUAL 1.25..

IF I, IF I COULD JUST ADD TO THAT, WE WERE GIVEN GIVEN DIRECTION BY BOND COUNSEL, THAT EVERYTHING HAS TO BE IN A DENOMINATION OF I THINK 5000.

[03:50:03]

AND THIS FALLS INTO THAT.

SO WE COULDN'T HAVE ANY LIKE $250 AMENDMENTS.

SO GOT IT. ALL RIGHT.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I SECOND IT OKAY.

NO. SO YOU'RE SECONDING IT.

YES I'M TRYING TO. ALL RIGHT. SO IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

WE ARE NOW ON A NEW 531 CLOCK ON AN AMENDMENT BY CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ.

THAT DOES WHAT HE JUST SAID.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT DOES.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS CLEAR.

THAT'S WHAT IT DOES.

SO, CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON THIS AMENDMENT.

COLLEAGUES, I'M MAKING THIS, AMENDMENT, BECAUSE IT'S IT'S VERY DIFFICULT.

AND I WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL I WASN'T PART OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE THAT WAS PROPOSED THAT WAS ANNOUNCED.

AND, I JUST IT'S SOMETHING THAT IT'S OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY FOR, WEST DALLAS.

AND IT'S WHAT WE'RE FIGHTING FOR.

THEY HAVE GIVEN UP ON OTHER PROJECTS IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS ONE HAPPENS.

AND SO IT WOULD BE I'VE GOT TO TRY AND FIGHT FOR THEM.

AND, THAT'S WHY I'M ADDING THIS AMENDMENT IN.

IF THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO DO IT, I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO CONVERSE ON IT.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

SO, THAT WAS GIVEN AT THIS TIME.

SO, I'M ASKING FOR THE AMENDMENT.

NOT EVEN SURE IF I'LL STILL SUPPORT THIS OVERALL, BUT BECAUSE I SAW ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT JUST CAME THROUGH THAT I THINK REALLY WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.

BUT I WANT TO DEFINITELY TRY TO MASSAGE THIS IN CASE THIS, MAKES THE CUT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OKAY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE PROCEDURALLY BEFORE WE MOVE ON.

I HAVE THE QUEUE STILL FOR, AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE WITH CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN AND THEN GOING TO THE MAYOR PRO TEM IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE WHO HADN'T SPOKEN ALREADY ON, AMENDMENT ONE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK.

BUT WE'RE NOW ON AN AMENDMENT BY CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, AND WE ARE ONLY NOW TALKING, HAVING PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SPEAK ON THAT AMENDMENT. SO IF YOU WERE IN THE QUEUE OR TRYING TO GET IN THE QUEUE ON AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE BY CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, THEN I NEED YOU TO DROP OUT OF THE QUEUE.

AND I'VE ALREADY MADE A NOTE OF WHERE YOU WERE IN IT, SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT.

SO I'M GOING TO GO TO CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA NOW FOR FIVE MINUTES ON CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ AMENDMENT TO HIS AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS MOTION, THIS AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION.

I THINK THAT AN EXERCISE WAS LAID OUT FOR US TO, ADVOCATE SPECIFICALLY FOR PROJECTS THAT WASN'T, EXCLUSIVE TO OTHERS PRIORITIES AS WELL.

IN FACT, I BELIEVE THAT, MY COLLEAGUE WHO JUST OFFERED THIS AMENDMENT ALSO HAD AN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED WHEN THEY WERE DUE ON FRIDAY THAT WAS NOT INCLUSIVE OF WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW.

SO, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO START, ESSENTIALLY NICKEL AND DIMING ON THE FLOOR, IN THE MIDDLE OF WHERE I BELIEVE PROGRESS HAS GONE WHEN WE WANT TO TO START THE CONVERSATION NOW, AND HEARING FROM STAFF THAT SOMETHING IS SEVENTH DOWN THE LIST AND WE WANT TO JUST MOVE IT UP IN FRONT OF THE OTHERS.

I THINK THAT WE'RE IT'S A REALLY SLIPPERY SLOPE THAT'S GOING TO END IN A LOT OF CONTROVERSY AND DIVISIVENESS.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE, US AS A BODY REALLY, PRIORITIZE THAT WHAT WE LOOK TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE END RESULT IS NOT SOLELY DRIVEN BY WHAT YOU WANT.

AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN, I THINK, THE HARDEST ABOUT THIS EXERCISE.

IN FACT, I COULD PROBABLY LOOK THROUGH EVERY SINGLE, PROPOSED, PROPOSITION.

AND I COULD POINT OUT WHERE THERE'S BEEN, SACRIFICE OR COMPROMISE FROM EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES.

AND I THINK THAT THAT'S WHERE THIS IS GOING TO HAVE TO END.

SO IT'S NOT AS IF, JUST AS I MENTIONED IN THE FIRST TIME, THAT I WISH WE HAD A BLANK CHECK.

IT'S NOT AS IF I DON'T WANT TO SEE EVERYONE GET WHAT THEY WANT IN THEIR DISTRICT.

THAT'S JUST NOT THE CARDS IN FRONT OF US.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO NOT CONVOLUTE A PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN LAID OUT AT THE LAST MINUTE AND IN THE 11TH HOUR THAT WILL ESSENTIALLY, NEGATE A LOT OF THE WORK THAT HAS LED US TO WHERE WE ARE AT THIS POINT.

AND THAT'S WHAT I THINK A VERY LARGE AMENDMENT LIKE THIS.

NOW, PHILOSOPHICALLY, I WILL ALSO SAY, BEYOND THE SPEAKING TO THE PROCESS, I HAVE A HUGE PROBLEM WITH TAKING ANY MONEY AWAY FROM OUR HOMELESS POPULATION.

IT'S A PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE NOT INVESTED IN ENOUGH.

IT'S A PROBLEM THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF INVESTING IN ENOUGH IN OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET.

IT'S A PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE A PLAN AND INVESTMENT AND A STAFF THAT HAS ALREADY PROVEN, RESULTS IN THE PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED. AND THE MORE WE CAN INVEST IN THAT REALM, THE MORE SUCCESSFUL WE CAN BE OVERALL.

[03:55:07]

IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT'S THE SAME FOR HOUSING.

WE'VE GOT A HUGE ISSUE IN HOUSING, AND WE'VE SEEN ADVOCATES THAT CAME UP HERE WANTING 200 MILLION.

I ACTUALLY STARTED WITH 400 MILLION.

SACRIFICES HAVE CONTINUED TO BE MADE THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS TO FIND WHERE WE CAN STILL PRIORITIZE ALL OF THE NEEDS OF THE CITY, AND IT MAY NOT BE ACCOMPLISHING EVERY ONE OF THOSE WISH LISTS.

BUT I TRULY BELIEVE THAT WE CAN SPRINKLE ENOUGH AROUND, IF YOU WILL, SO THAT EVERY ONE OF THOSE NEEDS AND PRIORITIES IN OUR CITY HAVE BEEN MET TO SOME DEGREE.

AND FOR THAT REASON, MR. MAYOR, I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT.

BEFORE I GO TO YOU, CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.

ARE YOU WANTING TO SPEAK ON THE AMENDMENT BY MISTER NARVAEZ? DO YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THAT AMENDMENT? THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. QUESTION FOR STAFF.

AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WE HAVE A BIFURCATED PROCESS HERE.

TODAY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC BUCKETS THAT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AS BOND PROPOSITIONS.

IN FEBRUARY, WE WILL TAKE UP SPECIFIC PROJECTS WITHIN THOSE BUCKETS TO DETERMINE THE RELATIVE PRIORITIES AND WHAT WE ACTUALLY WANT IN EACH PROPOSITION.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT.

TODAY IS REALLY TO GET THE DOLLAR AMOUNT PER PROPOSITION TO GET TO GET THOSE ALLOCATIONS.

SO WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY IN THOSE FEBRUARY DISCUSSIONS TO TALK ABOUT THE RELATIVE MERITS OR IMPORTANCE OF, SPECIFIC PROJECTS SO THAT WE CAN THEN STUFF THE BUCKET WITH THE PROJECTS THAT WE COLLECTIVELY THINK ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT FOR THAT PROPOSITION, WHETHER IT BE PUBLIC SAFETY IN THIS INSTANCE OR HOUSING OR CULTURAL ARTS.

CORRECT? YES.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND I THINK FOR THE MOST PART, THE LIST THAT WE'VE, WE'RE ABOUT 90% THERE, I WOULD THINK.

SO WE CERTAINLY HAVE A REALLY GOOD STARTING POINT WHEN WE START THOSE DISCUSSIONS STARTING TOMORROW, I'M SURE.

BUT TODAY IS TO GET THE ALLOCATION FOR PROPOSITION, AND THEN THE FINAL SPECIFIC PROJECT LISTING WILL FOLLOW.

GREAT. THANK YOU. MISS BLACKMON, ARE YOU WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE NARVAEZ? YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THAT.

I NEED SOME CLARIFICATION HERE.

AND MAYBE I PRINTED OFF THE WRONG BOND PROPOSAL ALLOCATIONS.

MR. NARVAEZ, YOU SAID THAT YOU HAVE AMENDMENT ONE AND AMENDMENT FIVE, BUT IT WAS IN ONE OF THOSE AMENDMENTS YOUR THIS PROPOSED.

WHICH ONE IS IT? BECAUSE THEY'RE BOTH SHOWING 89..

AND NO I'M SORRY. IT'S THERE'S AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS JUST PUT THAT WAS JUST HANDED OUT..

THIS ONE. THIS ONE I KNOW HAS EVERYTHING THAT PEOPLE ARE NEGOTIATING BEHIND THE SCENES RIGHT NOW IN IT.

SO OKAY, SO I JUST BUT IT'S STILL ONLY AT 90.

SO I'M JUST RIGHT.

AND THAT'S BECAUSE OTHER THINGS HAVE BEEN MENTIONED.

I CAN'T TALK ABOUT THAT ONE RIGHT NOW.

SO BUT OKAY NOW I UNDERSTAND.

AND MY NEXT QUESTION IS IS 17 MILLION GOING TO GET US TO A FIRE STATION OR IS IT GOING TO BE LIKE WHAT IS THE NORMAL? WELL, NOT THE NORMAL. WHAT IS THE COST OF A FIRE STATION? I ASSUME IT ALREADY HAS ALL ITS EQUIPMENT BECAUSE IT'S A REPLACE, RIGHT? SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, TRICK IT OUT, SO TO SPEAK.

BUT YEAH, AS A PROGRAMING COST, WE USE 17 MILLION FOR THE, FOR THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE.

SO IF THERE WAS LAND AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE IN IT WOULD BE ON TOP OF THAT THE 17 MILLION FOR THE STRUCTURE.

SO 17 IS THE REPLACEMENT COST FOR IT OKAY.

THANK YOU. THAT WAS IT.

I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE ON THE AMENDMENT BY MISTER NARVAEZ.

SO I NEED TO SEE CARDS NOW IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF MISTER NARVAEZ AMENDMENT, PLEASE SHOW A GREEN CARD IF YOU ARE IN FAVOR OF MISTER NARVAEZ AMENDMENT TO MISTER BAZALDUA AMENDMENT. AND MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE COUNT THE CARDS FOR US.

I ONLY SEE TWO CARDS DISPLAYED.

THEREFORE THE AMENDMENT FAILS.

OKAY, THAT AMENDMENT FAILS.

AND WE'RE NOW BACK TO AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE BY CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA.

AND I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN NOW FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE BY CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA.

THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO QUESTIONS, IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

MY FIRST QUESTION IS GOING TO BE ABOUT, OUR FMPC THAT SAYS WE WILL NOT INCLUDE PROJECTS THAT ARE ASPHALT.

AND WE HAVE A CRITERIA THAT SAYS EVERY PROJECT MUST LAST 20 YEARS.

ASPHALT DOESN'T LAST 20 YEARS.

SO HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY HAVING ASPHALT ROADS IN THIS PROPOSITION? SO I THINK YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT THE RESURFACING THAT WE HAVE FOR WITH ASPHALT STREETS.

SO THE REASON WE HAVE IT WITHIN THE BOND, AND I THINK WE'VE HAD IT IN EVERY BOND SINCE 2003.

THE REASON WE HAVE IT IN THERE IS BECAUSE IT DOES EXTEND THE LIFE OF THE ROAD.

AND I THINK WE'VE MENTIONED A COUNCIL EVEN IF WE WERE TO, TO CONSTRUCT A, A BRAND NEW STREET THAT WAS ASPHALT, THOSE STREETS WOULD STILL NEED MAINTENANCE OVER A 20 YEAR PERIOD.

[04:00:04]

AND THAT'S WHAT THAT'S THE SAME TYPE OF MAINTENANCE THAT WE WOULD HAVE WITH THOSE RESURFACING STREETS.

SO THAT..

IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS IN THE FM THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA ASPHALT SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED.

I MEAN, DO WE HAVE A CITY ATTORNEY? DO WE HAVE A LEGAL OBLIGATION TO FOLLOW OUR FMPC, OR IS THAT JUST A POLICY DISCUSSION? I'M NOT SURE SHE HEARD THE QUESTION. SHE WAS IN A LITTLE CONFERENCE HERE.

SO WOULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION TO THE CITY ATTORNEY? AND WE'RE GOING TO AND IT SAYS ASPHALT ROADS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN A BOND.

AND SO MY QUESTION IS IF WE'RE LEGALLY HELD TO THAT, IF THAT'S A POLICY DECISION THAT THE BODY CAN MAKE.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT? I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM JACK IRELAND ABOUT THAT.

YOU CAN HEAR FROM ME OR TC.

THANK YOU. SO AS IT'S A POLICY AT ANY POINT IN TIME, IF THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING TODAY OR IT BECOMES AN ISSUE, THEN COUNCIL CAN COME BACK AND CHANGE THE FMPC IF THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT STREET CONDITIONS THAT OBVIOUSLY BASED ON COST, ASPHALT AND HOW WE TREAT THOSE STREETS, ACTUALLY MAKE OUR DOLLARS GO FURTHER SO THAT CAN BE CHANGED.

IS IT YOUR INTENTION TO BRING THAT TO GPFM FOR DISCUSSION OF CHANGING OUR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA? THAT'S BEEN WELL ESTABLISHED TO NOT INCLUDE ASPHALT ROADS IN A BOND WITH A 20 YEAR THRESHOLD.

SO, COUNCILWOMAN, I THINK THAT QUESTION SIMILARLY HAS COME UP BEFORE NOT RESPECT TO THE FMPC, BUT HOW IN FACT, WE TREAT STREETS AND THE LENGTH OF CERTAIN STREETS, AND BASED ON THE MAINTENANCE OF THEM, THE LIFE CAN BE EXTENDED AT CERTAIN POINTS.

AND SO I THINK WE'VE ANSWERED THAT QUESTION AS IT RELATES TO OUR INTENTION TO BRING SOMETHING TO FMPC, DISCUSSIONS AT THE COMMITTEE.

WE CAN DO THAT.

BUT TODAY, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S GERMANE TO, I THINK, WHETHER THAT AMENDMENT AND OR THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE LEVEL OF THE PROPOSITION IN SOME RESPECT.

WELL, I THINK IT'S COMPLETELY GERMANE WHEN YOU HAVE A POLICY THAT EXCLUDES SOMETHING AND THEN YOU ARE INCLUDING IT.

SO I WOULD DISAGREE ON THAT.

I'M GOING TO MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS.

FIRST OFF, I DON'T THINK THE ELECTION SHOULD BE IN MAY.

AND SECOND, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE ADDED THE EXTRA MONEY.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S THE WILL OF THE BODY TO DO THAT.

SO I'M DISCUSSING THESE ITEMS UNDER THAT CONTEXT.

I'M GOING TO START AT THE BOTTOM WITH IT.

IS IT LEGALLY NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE A PROPOSITION FOR ONLY $5 MILLION, OR IT'S JUST NOT THE PRACTICE YOU WISH TO PURSUE? THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S JUST NOT A PRACTICE THAT WE WISH TO PURSUE.

IT'S JUST A VERY SMALL AMOUNT.

SO BILL ZELENSKY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE STILL IN HERE.

I BELIEVE YOU'VE REPORTED TO US THAT $20 MILLION IS NEEDED TO BUILD OUT THE NEW SERVER FACILITY.

THIS YEAR. YEP.

GOOD AFTERNOON, BILL ZELENSKY, CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER I'M SORRY, MA'AM, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT QUESTION FOR ME? OKAY. STOP MY TIME.

THE QUESTION IS, HOW MUCH IS NEEDED TO BUILD OUT THE NEW SERVER FACILITY.

SO JUST A FEW THINGS AS IT RELATES TO THE $5 MILLION THAT WAS TARGETED HERE, THAT IS, INTENDED TO FUND IMPROVEMENTS AND ENHANCEMENTS TO A NEW DATA CENTER THAT THE CITY WILL TAKE POSSESSION OF IN LATE 2024.

IT WOULD FUND THINGS SUCH AS UPGRADES TO GENERATORS, THE UNINTERRUPTED POWER SUPPLY, FIRE ALARM MONITORING SYSTEM.

IT THE CURRENT ESTIMATE THAT WE SUBMITTED ORIGINALLY FOR THE BOND PROGRAM IS $13 MILLION.

BECAUSE WE DO NOT TAKE POSSESSION UNTIL OCTOBER OF 2024, WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GO IN AND GET A FULL ASSESSMENT.

SO OUR CURRENT OPERATING NUMBER THAT WE SUBMITTED FOR THE PROGRAM IS $13 MILLION.

AND WHAT IS OUR TECHNICAL DEFICIT THAT YOU ALWAYS TALK ABOUT? SO, YES, THE TERM THAT I USE IS TECHNICAL DEBT.

AND THAT REALLY IS REFERRING TO WITHIN YOUR TECHNICAL OPERATIONS, THE TECHNOLOGY THAT YOU EMPLOY, WHERE YOU HAVE AGING SYSTEMS, INFRASTRUCTURE, WHERE THERE IS RISK ASSOCIATED WITH MAINTAINING THINGS THAT ARE AT OR NEAR THE END OF LIFE, THAT IS TECHNICAL DEBT.

AND, AND THERE REALLY ARE TWO SEPARATE PIECES THAT I LOOK AT.

BUT, WE HAVE ASSESSED, UTILIZING SOME TECHNICAL EXPERTS TO COME IN AND ASSIST US, THAT OUR CURRENT DEFICIT IS AT ABOUT $168 MILLION TO REMEDIATE THAT TECHNICAL DEBT.

THE OF THAT, THERE'S ALREADY $113 MILLION THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN EARMARKED, ALLOCATED AND IS IN PROCESS FOR USE, LEAVING A DEFICIT OF ABOUT 55

[04:05:01]

MILLION UNFUNDED.

AND AS WE CONTINUE TO REFINE AND LOOK AT HOW WE REMEDIATE THAT DEBT, WE WILL CONTINUE TO PLACE ITEMS WITHIN THE BUDGET IN ORDER FOR US TO CLOSE THAT GAP.

AND MUCH OF THAT DEBT CANNOT BE USED FOR BOND BECAUSE IT'S SOFTWARE.

IT'S THINGS LIKE THAT. CORRECT.

THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE USEFUL LIFE OF HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE, THAT IT WOULD NOT BE A CANDIDATE FOR THE BOND PROGRAM.

CORRECT. BUT THE NEW SERVER FACILITY, 13 MILLION THAT YOU'RE ESTIMATING, YOU DO NEED THAT MONEY.

AND IF WE ARE FURTHER INVESTING OUR GENERAL FUND DOLLARS TO TRY TO ADDRESS THE SOFTWARE TYPE OF ISSUES, DON'T YOU NEED CAPITAL MONEY TO MAKE THAT SERVER FACILITY HAPPEN? SO AGAIN, THE CURRENT ESTIMATE THAT WE'RE OPERATING UNDER IS THAT THE DELTA, FROM WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE FUNDED FOR THAT FACILITY AND WHAT WE NEED IS APPROXIMATELY $13 MILLION.

THE MY PHONE.

SORRY, MY PHONE'S RINGING THE WITHIN THAT DELTA.

WE DO NEED TO HAVE THAT FULL ASSESSMENT TO REALLY UNDERSTAND IF IT IS IN EXCESS OF THAT AMOUNT.

THE OTHER ITEM THAT WAS PRESENTED EARLIER BY DIRECTOR NISWANDER IS THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, AS THIS WOULD BE A STANDALONE ITEM, THE RISK THAT WE HAVE IS IF IT FAILS, THEN WE WOULD NOT ONLY NOT HAVE THAT MONEY TOWARDS THAT, BUT WE WOULD ALSO NOT BE ABLE TO UTILIZE OTHER FUNDS FOR THAT AS WELL.

AND SO THAT IS A THAT IS A RISK AS IT RELATES TO IN THE INCLUSION OF THIS IN THIS BOND PROGRAM.

THANK YOU FOR SAYING THAT.

THE BIGGER RISK WE HAVE IS TO NOT INVEST IN IT.

AND EVERY OTHER THING THAT WE DO DOES NOT MATTER IF IT FAILS.

AND IF YOU GUYS HAVEN'T LEARNED THAT YET, IF YOU DO NOT INCLUDE MONEY FOR IT WHEN IT GOES DOWN, IT IS YOUR FAULT BECAUSE YOU KNOW YOU HAVE HEARD IT OVER AND OVER.

WE'VE ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED IT.

IT'S UNBELIEVABLE TO ME THAT WE'RE NOT PUTTING MONEY INTO THIS.

SO I HOPE THAT WHEN THERE'S OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WILL BE INCLUDED, I'M GOING TO CONTINUE ON WITH OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE NOT VERY POPULAR TO TALK ABOUT.

SO FLOOD MONEY.

JACK IRELAND.

MY QUESTION FOR YOU, JACK.

I'M GOING TO PAUSE. YEAH, WE JUST DID JUST STOP FOR A MINUTE.

AND WHILE WE GET THE NECESSARY STAFF TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS, BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF IT'S A LITTLE BIT WHACK-A-MOLE RIGHT NOW.

LET'S SEE. WE GOT A QUESTION FROM JACK IRELAND.

WE JUST HAD BILL.

ALL RIGHT, JACK.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M SORRY.

YOU'LL HAVE TO REPEAT THE QUESTION.

THERE'S VERY SIGNIFICANT FLOODING ISSUES THROUGHOUT DALLAS.

I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT.

BUT THE QUESTION IS, DOES IT HAVE TO BE PUT IN THE BOND? COULDN'T THIS MONEY ACTUALLY BE, ALLOCATED AND DEBT ISSUED UNDER DWU WITH REVENUE BONDS? OKAY, I APOLOGIZE, I DIDN'T HEAR THE FIRST PART OF THE QUESTION EVEN JUST NOW.

THE QUESTION IS ABOUT THE FLOODING PROPOSITION, THE FLOODING PROPOSITION.

AND WHAT'S THE QUESTION REGARDING THAT? OKAY, CAN YOU STOP MY TIME IF I'M REPEATING THIS AGAIN, I'M GOING TO ASK.

YEAH, BUT I DIDN'T. LET'S PAUSE OUR TIME AND LET'S, LET'S KIND OF EVERYBODY, TAKE A BREATH HERE.

BREATHE AND FOCUS.

EVERYBODY GET FOCUSED.

SO I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO FRAME THE CONVERSATION HERE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION HERE.

THIS IS ABOUT THE PROPOSITION THAT DEALS WITH FLOOD CONTROL.

HER QUESTION IS ABOUT TO TAKE YOU IN THE DIRECTION OF, IS THIS NOT SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DEALT WITH THROUGH DWU AND NOT THROUGH THIS FLOOD CONTROL PROPOSITION? SO THAT'S REALLY WHERE YOU KIND OF CAME IN OKAY.

NO. GO AHEAD.

START OUR TIME. LET'S GO.

SO IF THAT'S THE QUESTION.

NO, NO YOU YOU GET YOU GET TO ASK IT.

BUT GO AHEAD I WANT TO I JUST WANT TO KIND OF SETTLE EVERYBODY DOWN.

BUT YOU CAN ASK YOUR OWN QUESTION.

I JUST WANT TO GET YOU UP TO SPEED.

I DON'T WANT ANYBODY FEELING LIKE THEY GOT A BLINDSIDED HERE OR SOMETHING.

OKAY, WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME TEAM TODAY, RIGHT? LET'S GO. SO THE QUESTION IS, DOES THIS HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE BOND TO BE FUNDED, OR COULD IT BE FUNDED THROUGH REVENUE AND REVENUE BONDS THROUGH DWU. SO THANK YOU.

AND I DO APOLOGIZE THAT I DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION.

SO YES, MA'AM.

THE STORMWATER, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COULD BE FUNDED FROM A DIFFERENT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS.

PRIOR TO JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, STORMWATER WAS NOT PART OF DALLAS WATER UTILITY.

IT HAS BEEN MOVED INTO THE DALLAS WATER UTILITY.

WE HAVE BEEN MOVING IN A DIRECTION OF ISSUING CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION THAT ARE BACKED BY THE STORMWATER REVENUES TO PAY FOR THE DEBT.

THAT IS A WAY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP.

AND I BELIEVE MISS STANDIFER HAS EXPLAINED A TEN YEAR CAPITAL PLAN OF HOW SHE'S TRYING TO MOVE TOWARDS ISSUING DEBT THAT IS BACKED BY THE REVENUES OF THE STORMWATER FUND, AS OPPOSED TO A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROGRAM.

BUT AT THIS TIME, THERE STILL NEEDS THAT EXCEED THE STORMWATER'S ABILITY TO DO THAT, TO PAY ALL THE DEBT.

[04:10:04]

AND SO WE'RE CONTINUING TO USE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS BACKED BY PROPERTY TAX, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME ALSO USING REVENUE BONDS BACKED OR CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION BACKED BY THE FEES FROM STORMWATER.

SO BOTH PATHS ARE BEING USED AT THIS TIME.

AND I DO HOPE I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.

I WAS TRYING TO WELL, I GUESS THE POINT IS THAT IT'S NOT NECESSARY FOR THAT TO ACTUALLY BE IN THE BOND.

IT COULD BE FINANCED IN A DIFFERENT WAY.

IT IS. IT DEPENDS ON THE LEVEL OF NEEDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO ADDRESS.

IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ADDRESS ALL OF THE NEEDS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED FOR STORMWATER THROUGH THE TEN YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM THAT WE'RE BACKING BY STORMWATER FEES, AND WE WANT AND THE BODY WANTS TO ADDRESS THOSE, THEN GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IS A WAY TO DO THAT.

THAT'S Y'ALL'S DECISION.

OKAY, SO STAFF HAS CONTINUED AND THIS IS REALLY FOR YOU, JENNY, TO RECOMMEND FOR FLOODING $50 MILLION.

AND WE'RE NOW TALKING ABOUT A PROPOSITION AN AMENDMENT WITH 57 MILLION.

WHAT WOULD THAT OTHER 7 MILLION GO TO.

SO FOR THAT I WOULD, I DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION ON THAT.

I DIDN'T GET ANY.

OKAY, I DON'T KNOW.

IT'S OKAY. I GUESS THE POINT IS, Y'ALL ARE MAKING DECISIONS AND YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT IT'S FOR.

OKAY. SO THE NEXT THE NEXT ITEM I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT, SPECIFICALLY IS ABOUT THE INPUT WE HAVE HEARD FROM PEOPLE.

AND IT'S INTERESTING THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE SHAKING THEIR HEAD WITH WHAT I'M SAYING ABOUT IT, BUT NOT A SINGLE PERSON HAS COME DOWN HERE TO TALK ABOUT IT, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S THE RIGHT THING. THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE ABOUT STREETS.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE COME AND TALK ABOUT STREETS SOME.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED PROBABLY MORE THAN 500 MILLION IN THERE.

AND SO NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IT THROUGH VISION ZERO.

THERE'S THINGS THAT WE KNOW BECAUSE WE DO IT EVERY SINGLE DAY OR IT'S THE UNDERLYING.

IT'S FABULOUS AT THE ARTS COMMUNITIES DOWN HERE.

THEY SHOULD BE DOWN HERE.

BUT FIRST OF ALL, NOT ALL OF THEM EVEN LIVE IN DALLAS.

AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE ARTS.

BUT WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A PERCENTAGE OF A BOND INSTEAD OF THE ACTUAL NEEDS? AGAIN, FOR CULTURAL ARTS, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED 49,000, AH 49 MILLION, 55 MILLION.

AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AMENDMENT WITH 75 MILLION.

DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS GOING TO GO TO? RIGHT. SO ALL THAT TO SAY, I HOPE THAT THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STREETS, WHERE IS THE DISCUSSION ABOUT BUYING ASPHALT ZIPPER TRUCKS? STOP MY TIME.

SO FOR THE STREETS, WE DON'T HAVE ANY EQUIPMENT COSTS AT ALL IN THE BOND PROGRAM.

SO IT'S ALL TO GO INTO REPAIRS ON THE STREETS OR SIDEWALKS.

WOULD SOMEONE FROM PUBLIC WORKS LIKE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT TRUCK DOES? OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ALWAYS TRYING TO TIE THESE CONVERSATIONS TODAY TO A TOP LINE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR A PROPOSITION. IT'S ONE THING TO MAKE YOUR POINTS, WHICH I'M FINE WITH, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT DOES NEED TO RESULT IN SOME FORM OF DIRECTION TO STAFF ABOUT A TOP LINE NUMBER FOR A PROPOSITION, NOT THE UNDERLYING PROJECTS THAT LEAD UP TO THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S, AS CHAIRMAN RIDLEY HAS POINTED OUT NUMEROUS TIMES, NOT ACTUALLY THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

SO WITH THAT, TRY TO GET IT TO WHERE YOU'RE GOING IN TERMS IF YOU'RE GOING TO PROPOSE A DIFFERENT ALLOCATION OF PROPOSITIONS, IT NEEDS TO TAKE THE FORM OF AN AMENDMENT HERE PRETTY SOON AND GET THROWN OUT THERE.

BUT WE'RE NOT JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THESE AND HAVE A SORT OF A SUB CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT LED TO THE TOP LINE NUMBER, AND THEN WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACTUALLY PROPOSE TO DO ANYTHING TO THE TOP LINE NUMBER.

THAT'S WHAT STAFF IS LOOKING FOR FROM US TODAY.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S ACTUALLY FOR EVERYBODY TO HEAR.

SO KEEP GOING. SO I'M GOING TO SAY, I DO THINK WE NEED A HIGHER TOP LINE NUMBER FOR STREETS, AND WE NEED IT TO BE ABLE TO BUY EQUIPMENT LIKE THESE ZIPPER TRUCKS THAT WILL DO ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT I GUESS STAFF ISN'T GOING TO SAY.

BUT ALSO, HAVE YOU MET OUR TRAFFIC SIGNALS? WE DO A TERRIBLE JOB OF MAINTAINING EVERYTHING IN.

YOU ARE OUT OF TIME, BY THE WAY.

BUT WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO FINISH MY SENTENCE.

GO AHEAD. AND ALMOST EVERY SINGLE PROPOSITION ON HERE IS ABOUT THE POOR MAINTENANCE THAT WE'VE DONE, INCLUDING PARKS AND REPLACING PLAYGROUNDS.

ALL OF THESE ITEMS. YOU HAVE MORE ROUNDS. THAT'S ONE OF GET TO MISS WILLIS.

YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES AND WE ARE STILL FOR EVERYONE ON AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE.

ALL RIGHT. BY CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, I THINK THAT OUR COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS HAVE BEEN THANKED, BUT I WANT TO DO THAT AGAIN.

[04:15:05]

ALL OF THOSE THAT PUT TIME IN ON THESE SUBCOMMITTEES AND AT THE OVERALL TASK FORCE LEVEL, WE THANK YOU FOR THIS PROCESS.

IT HELPED US GET TO THAT 90% THAT YOU SAID WE WERE AT, AS FAR AS OUR LISTS OF PROJECTS TO CULL THROUGH THAT.

SO THAT WAS MEANINGFUL. AND I ALSO WANT TO THANK OUR RESIDENTS WHO CAME OUT AND CONTRIBUTED TO THIS PROCESS, WHO EMAILED US, WHO ARE STILL EMAILING US EVEN AS WE SIT HERE. SO, SO THANK YOU.

I KNOW THAT THERE WAS AN INVESTMENT OF TIME IN THE DETAIL AND THE FIELD VISITS, ETC.

SO THAT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED.

AND THIS IS PART OF THE PROCESS, THIS DEBATE.

BUT WE NEEDED THAT FOUNDATION.

I AM GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AMENDMENT, BUT I WANT TO THINK ABOUT BOND 2024 AND BONDS 2029.

SO THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE WILL SHED FROM THIS YEAR TO 5 OR 6 YEARS FROM NOW.

TO THE POINT ABOUT DWU REVENUE BONDS, WE SHOULD BE AT A CRITICAL MASS TO WHERE WE'RE NOT SEEING THIS LINE ITEM ON HERE.

MY BOND REPRESENTATIVE HAD STORMWATER EXPERIENCE.

THIS REFLECTS SOME BIG PROJECTS THAT ARE HIGH DOLLAR.

IT DOESN'T GET WHAT I NEED.

AND SOME NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE REALLY SUFFERING.

EVERY TIME IT RAINS, I SIT AND WORRY IN MY OWN LIVING ROOM ABOUT THOSE NEIGHBORS.

AND YOU KNOW NOT TO.

AND I'M NOT EVEN EXPERIENCING WHAT THEY ARE WITH REGARD TO FLOODING ON THEIR PROPERTY.

SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO USE THOSE REVENUE BONDS TO GET AT THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL PROJECTS.

BUT IN FIVE YEARS, I HOPE WE'RE GETTING AT THIS ISSUE IN A DIFFERENT WAY.

STREETS. YES, IT SHOULD DEFINITELY BE HIGHER.

THE NEEDS ARE TREMENDOUS.

AND I'M HOPING WE CAN COME UP WITH ANOTHER FUNDING MECHANISM TO HELP US CLOSE THAT GAP.

THAT IS SO MUCH GREATER THAN $500 MILLION.

THIS IS ALMOST A DROP IN THE OCEAN.

BUT WITH REGARD TO THE REST OF THE NUMBERS, I KNOW I'VE MADE CONCESSIONS ON PARKS TO HELP GET SOME OF OUR OTHER TRANSFORMATIVE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT JUST ABOUT PARKS, THEY'RE ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN OTHER WAYS.

SO I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.

OUR PUBLIC SAFETY NUMBER, I THIS IS WHERE I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF PAUSE AND HEARING CHAIR NARVAEZ TALK ABOUT THE FIRE STATION, BUT IT'S ALSO MADE ME OPEN UP, YOU KNOW WHAT THAT LIST OF NEEDS WERE PULLING THAT LIST OF THE TOP TEN LISTS FROM TFR.

AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ADVOCATING FOR THAT ONE, I ALSO SEE UPGRADING EMERGENCY ELECTRICAL PANELS AND GENERATORS.

AND SO I WOULD SAY THAT WHILE I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS, I THINK OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS, I'D LIKE TO SEE US KEEP WORKING ON SOME OF THESE OUTLIERS, THIS KIND OF REMAINING 10% THAT WE HAVE CULTURAL ARTS.

I JUST HOPE THIS IS THE YEAR THAT EVERYONE CAN REALLY CHEER AND NOT FEEL LIKE YOU WERE LEFT ON THE CUTTING ROOM FLOOR.

I HOPE YOU FEEL AND SEE THE SUPPORT THAT THIS COUNCIL AND OUR COMMUNITY ARE GIVING AND HAVING A PRETTY DECENT NUMBER FOR YOU ALL.

I KNOW IT'S NOT EVERYTHING, BUT IT'S PRETTY RESPECTABLE.

ON LIBRARIES, GOING BACK TO WHAT CHAIR WEST AND I WOULD REALLY LOVE TO SEE AS CATALYST PROJECTS TO WRAP UP A MASTER PLAN THAT WAS DONE IN 2025 YEARS LATER.

WRAP IT UP. AND AS OUR MUNICIPAL LIBRARY BOARD AND DIRECTOR OF LIBRARIES IS EMBARKING ON A NEW STRATEGIC PLAN AROUND LIBRARIES TO HAVE PROJECTS, TWO PROJECTS THAT CAN CHANGE THE MODEL OF HOW WE BUILD LIBRARIES IN DALLAS, TEXAS.

MIXED USE ADDING HOUSING.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PARK FOREST, THAT'S SAD PIECE OF LAND THAT'S BEEN SITTING THERE VACANT FOR 18 YEARS.

THAT WAS APARTMENTS.

THERE WAS A FIRE.

IT WAS DEVASTATING.

THEY COULDN'T BE REPAIRED.

THE CITY BOUGHT THAT LAND.

IT'S BEEN SITTING THERE. I'D LIKE TO HAVE NOT ONLY A LIBRARY THERE, BUT HOUSING TO GO THERE AS WELL.

BRING THAT BACK.

AND WITH REGARD TO HOMELESSNESS.

I GUESS THIS IS WHAT GIVES ME A LITTLE BIT OF PAUSE ON TAKING FROM THAT NUMBER.

SOME COLLEAGUES AND I WENT AND EXPLORED SOME OPTIONS IN ANOTHER CITY, THAT ARE GOING TO NEED SOME HELP TO EXECUTE HERE, BUT THERE WERE SOME SUCCESSFUL MODELS THAT WE SAW, AND THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A PLACE TO DRAW FROM TO MAKE SOME OF THOSE THINGS HAPPEN.

AND THEN FINALLY, I AGREE ON IT.

I THOUGHT THAT NUMBER HAD BEEN ROLLED INTO THE CITY HALL FIGURE AND, HEARING THESE NUMBERS, BEING REMINDED OF THE NUMBERS THAT MR. ZELENSKY SHARED WITH US.

I'M TROUBLED BY THIS, AND I THINK I'VE HEARD THAT THERE'S CONCERN ABOUT HAVING A SMALL ITEM ON THE BOND, THAT THE VOTERS MIGHT NOT SUPPORT IT.

IF IT'S ONE YOU CAN JUST EASILY CROSS OFF IF IT'S $5 MILLION OR 10 OR $13 MILLION.

BUT THIS IS 911, THIS IS 311.

THIS IS HOW WE INTERACT WITH OUR TAXPAYERS AND SERVE THEM, AT TIMES OF CRITICAL NEED AND OTHER TIMES WHEN THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO COMMUNICATE WITH US.

SO WE'LL FEEL IT IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG.

AND I THINK GIVEN SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE HAPPENED NOT ONLY AT THE CITY FROM AN IT PERSPECTIVE, BUT WITH THE COUNTY AND WITH OTHERS AROUND THE COUNTRY, I THINK OUR PUBLIC WILL COME OUT AND SUPPORT THIS AS A STAND ALONE ALLOCATION.

SO I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR BRINGING THAT BACK.

[04:20:02]

THANK YOU. I KNOW.

CHAIR RECOGNIZES MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THREE MINUTES.

THREE MINUTES? CAN I GET JOHN JENKINS BACK, PLEASE? PARK DEPARTMENT, JOHN JENKINS, DIRECTOR.

MR. JENKINS ON THE CRUNCHY.

I KNOW YOU HAD 275, 300, 325 AND 350.

I WANT TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT THE 325.

YES. WHAT IS MISSING BETWEEN 300 AND 325.

ALL RIGHT. FROM THE PARK DEPARTMENT? YEAH. PRIMARILY WHAT'S MISSING IS, WITH THE 327, YOU GET TO ADD BACK ANOTHER $7.5 MILLION FOR AQUATICS, TO ADDRESS ABOUT THREE SWIMMING POOLS.

ALSO, THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING WOULD, DEFINITELY RESTORE BACK THE PARTNERS THAT WILL RESTORE THE ZOO BACK TO THE $30 MILLION.

IT WOULD RESTORE, IT WOULD ALLOW THE ATHLETIC FIELDS, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE THINGS I MENTIONED IN THE LAST MEETING WITH YOU, ALL THAT YOU ALL ASKED WHAT WOULD BE A PRIMARY THING TO RESTORE BACK WAS THE $3 MILLION FOR, ATHLETIC FIELD AND, PLEASANT GROVE, ADDITIONAL MONEY FOR ATHLETIC FIELDS, FOR TAYLOR FIELDS, WHEATLAND PARK, THE ATHLETIC COMPLEX AS WELL AS GATEWAY PARK.

AND THEN IT WILL ALSO ALLOW US TO, DO THE ADD ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO SANTOS RODRIGUEZ RECREATION CENTER, ALSO OLD CITY PARK, AS YOU ALL HEARD FROM THE SPEAKER TODAY, IT WOULD ALLOW US TO TAKE CARE OF THE MAJOR NEEDS OUT THERE. IT WOULDN'T TAKE CARE OF EVERYTHING AND ALSO WOULD ALLOW US, WELL, THAT'S ALREADY IN THERE.

THE VICKERY MEADOW SPRAYGROUNDS.

AND IT WOULD, THE 327, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IT JUST A, THE ONLY THING THAT'S MISSING IN THE 327 NUMBER BECAUSE IT ADDRESSES EVERYBODY'S CONCERN.

BUT IF YOU GET TO THE 327, BECAUSE AS COUNCIL MEMBER GAY DONNELL WILLIS MENTIONED, BECAUSE SHE HAD A ALMOST AN $18 MILLION REC CENTER, SHE AGREED TO HAVE A MAJOR RENOVATION AND ALSO WANTED A SPRAYGROUND AND THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA, WHO ALSO HAD ABOUT $10 MILLION FOR A PROPERTY.

AND WE WAS ABLE TO BECAUSE WE DO, WE CAN WE CAN FUND THAT PROPERTY ANOTHER WAY, THROUGH OUR PARK DEDICATION FEE.

AND WE ALSO COULD GET THE MASTER PLAN DONE FOR $1 MILLION, WHICH THEREFORE WOULD ALLOW US TO SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING.

SO THAT GOT US ADDITIONAL FUNDS BACK.

AND THEN WHAT? COUNCIL MEMBER CHAD WEST, WE AGREED ON THE $5 MILLION, PRO SHOP AT STEVENS GOLF COURSE THAT WE COULD FINANCE THAT THROUGH REVENUE BONDS.

AND SO THAT'S HIGH IF YOU GET TO THE 327 NUMBER, IT RESTORES EVERYTHING BACK THAT.

AND THAT'S WHY THAT'S WHY I'M GETTING THAT.

YOU KNOW, I KNOW CHAIRMAN STEWART KNOW 300 MILLION, BUT I'M NOT AT 300 MILLION.

YOU KNOW, I GOT FIVE REC CENTER IN DISTRICT EIGHT, AND I PROBABLY GOT MORE PARKS THAN ANYONE.

AND I DO KNOW WHEN WE NEED PARKS, BUT YOU ALSO NEED MORE MONEY.

AND I KNOW THAT I WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FINISH MY, SINGING HILL REC CENTER IF I HADN'T HAD NO DISCRETIONARY MONEY TO REALLOCATION, I WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FINISH MY TRAILS IF I HAD DISCRETIONARY MONEY OR REALLOCATE THOSE MONEYS, BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH MONEY THERE.

SO IN ORDER TO GET THOSE NUMBERS TO THE PARK, WHERE THE NUMBER WOULD, I THINK WE NEED TO BE THERE.

AND SINCE PARK IS ONE OF OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY VERSUS PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRANSPORTATION, WE GOT TO HAVE SOME KIND OF TOOL, SOME KIND OF RESERVE TO GET THAT NUMBER UP.

SO I'M LOOKING AT TRYING TO GET CLOSE TO 325 IF I CAN, IN PART SO I KNOW THAT THIS OTHER EXERCISE IS A GREAT EXERCISE THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH.

BUT I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THE FIRST, THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE DISCRETIONARY FUND REALLOCATION FUND TO GET ME TO THE NUMBERS THAT MY RESIDENT AND

[04:25:02]

MY CITIZENS REALLY NEED.

AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EQUITY.

AND WE ALSO LOOKING AT THE BALLOT, THAT PERTAINING TO THAT, I CAN LOOK AT THE PROPOSITION THAT I KNOW IN THAT PROPOSITION THAT I KNOW MY DISTRICT IS REPRESENTED IN THAT PROPOSITION.

AND THAT'S WHY I'M LOOKING AT DISCRETIONARY FUND, ANOTHER WORD REALLOCATED WHATEVER TO GET THAT NUMBER TO PART BECAUSE PART DURING THE PANDEMIC.

THAT'S WHAT SAVED THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THAT'S SAVED OUR MIND.

IT WENT FOR THOSE PARKS THAT I WAS GOING CRAZY.

WE CAN PLAY GOLF, WE CAN GO TO THE PARK.

WE NEED THOSE PARKS.

AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT PARKS FOR ALL THESE MANY YEARS.

AND THAT'S WHY THAT I SAID, WITH OUR DISCRETIONARY MONEY, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH AT.

BEFORE I GO TO CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA FOR A SECOND ROUND FOR THREE MINUTES ON, HIS OWN AMENDMENT, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT FROM A PROCEDURAL STANDPOINT AGAIN, I'VE TALKED TO THE PARLIAMENTARIAN ABOUT THIS, THE APPROPRIATE TIME AT THIS POINT, IF YOU HAVE ALTERNATIVE ALLOCATIONS FOR THESE TOP LINE NUMBERS, IS NOW, I'M GOING TO HOLD OUT CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ AS A MODEL FOR WHAT HOW THIS NEEDS TO ACTUALLY GO TO AVOID THE ISSUE OF RE-DEBATING THE SAME 12 PROPOSITIONS EACH MULTIPLE TIMES, THEY CAN BE RESOLVED BY IF YOU HAVE THINGS YOU WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE, SUBMIT THEM AS AMENDMENTS NOW SO THEY CAN BE RESOLVED.

AND THEN ULTIMATELY THE VOTE OR NOT REALLY A VOTE, THE SHOW OF SUPPORT OR LACK OF SUPPORT FOR AMENDMENT ONE WILL FINALLY RESOLVE ALL OF THE ISSUES IF IT'S DONE IN THIS MANNER.

SO I'M GIVING EVERYBODY A LITTLE NOTICE THAT THIS IS THE WAY IT SHOULD GO.

IF YOU'VE GOT A TOP LINE NUMBER CHANGE LIKE CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ PROPOSED, GET IT, READY TO CIRCULATE AND SO WE CAN RESOLVE THEM.

AND NOW I'M GOING TO GO TO CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA FOR THREE MINUTES ON HIS AMENDMENT.

WELL, I WANTED TO ADDRESS THE IT CONCERN, AND I WANT TO SAY THAT, I THINK THAT WE HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

WE HAVE DISCUSSED, THE NEED AND IN GREAT DETAIL, AND I BELIEVE THAT WE'VE SEEN, VERY CONSISTENT SUPPORT ACROSS THIS COUNCIL.

I THINK THAT WITH, WHEN I WAS TOLD SPECIFICALLY ABOUT, THE FEAR OR THE, PROCESS IN WHICH, IF IT WERE TO FAIL, AS YOU'VE MENTIONED ALREADY, CAN YOU JUST KIND OF GO BACK TO ONE OF THE SMALL PROPOSITIONS AND WHY YOU ALL FEAR FOR THEM TO FAIL FROM THE VOTERS? SO, YEAH, I THINK THE CONCERN IS THAT IT WOULD BE SEEN AS A SMALL AMOUNT.

IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE FAR DOWN ON THE BALLOT.

SO IF IT IF IT DID FAIL, THEN WE WOULD BE RESTRICTED FROM UTILIZING ANY NON VOTER ISSUED DEBT ON THOSE PROJECTS WITHIN THAT PROPOSITION FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD. SO THAT THAT'S THE REAL CONCERN.

WELL, I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT AND THAT IF THERE IS AT ALL, A CHANCE THAT WOULD PREVENT US FROM ACTUALLY ADDRESSING THIS MAJOR ISSUE, AS MISS MENDELSOHN MENTIONED, BECAUSE IT IS MAJOR.

I THINK THAT IT WOULD NOT BE VERY PRUDENT OF US AS, THIS, THIS GOVERNING BODY, IN FACT, WITH A NUMBER OF $13 MILLION WITH A $4.6 BILLION BUDGET, I BELIEVE WE COULD PROBABLY COME UP WITH A CONSENSUS TO GIVE DIRECTION TO OUR CITY MANAGER, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE GENERAL FUND HAS PRIORITIZED ANOTHER BENEFIT TO THAT, INSTEAD OF SAYING THAT THIS BOND IS THE ANSWER FOR SUCH A SMALL $13 MILLION, UNTIL WE START TO SELL PAPER, AND WE WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE IF WE PRIORITIZE THIS NEXT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET IN MAKING SURE THAT $13 MILLION IS GOING TO GIVE THEM THE TOOLS NEEDED IN THIS NEXT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET, I BELIEVE THAT TO BE A MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE WAY TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP.

AND I'M COMMITTED, AND I'VE HEARD FROM OTHER COLLEAGUES, AND I'D LOVE FOR EVERYONE ELSE TO WEIGH IN.

WHENEVER YOU SPEAK TO TO DISCUSS IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT.

BUT I THINK THAT THE CITY MANAGER JUST HEARD ME LOUD AND CLEAR, SO I DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO GO THERE.

I, IN ADDITION TO THAT, WOULD LIKE TO ASK ABOUT SOME NUMBERS FROM FLOOD BECAUSE IT WAS IT WAS ALLUDED TO THAT WE ARE UTILIZING BOND FUNDS FOR FLOOD WHEN WE COULD USE OTHERS. I THINK THAT WE'VE HEARD THAT THE NEED IS MUCH GREATER THAN WHAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO, IN FACT, IT WAS IT WAS KIND OF POSED AS IF THERE'S JUST AN ARBITRARY ADDITION TO THIS PROPOSITION THAT I BELIEVE COULDN'T BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH, BECAUSE JUST LIKE OTHER PROPOSITIONS, WE'VE BEEN GIVEN DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.

SO IF, SARAH STANDIFORD DIRECTOR, COULD YOU, COME AND SPEAK TO THE NEED AND THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT YOU HAVE PRESENTED US? BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE HAD EVEN A $75 MILLION ALLOCATION AND WHAT THAT WOULD INCLUDE.

YES, SIR. SARAH STANDIFER, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF DALLAS WATER UTILITIES.

AND THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE PRESENTATIONS TO YOU ALL AND THE COMMITTEE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AN APPROXIMATE $2.6 BILLION NEEDS INVENTORY.

[04:30:04]

AND WE'VE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT A TEN YEAR STRATEGY, AS MR. IRELAND MENTIONED, THAT WE WOULD PARTICIPATE IN THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM WITH THE GOAL OF EASING OUT OF GEO BONDS, MOVING INTO REVENUE BONDS.

AND WE'RE KIND OF INTERSECTING THE RAMP UP.

SO WE ARE ISSUING CO DEBT RIGHT NOW FOR THAT.

AS WE WENT THROUGH THE SCENARIOS WITH BOTH THE SUBCOMMITTEE, THE TASK FORCE AND SOME OF THE PRESENTATIONS TO YOU ALL, THEY WERE STAGED AT 50, 75 MILLION IN THE 200 MILLION, AND THEY COVER ABOUT 80% OF YOUR STORM DRAINAGE AND FLOOD MANAGEMENT.

SO YOUR PROJECTS LIKE MILL CREEK, JOE'S CREEK, THINGS OF THOSE CHANNEL TYPE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THAT CATEGORY, 20% OF THOSE NEEDS, INVENTORIES ARE IN EROSION CONTROL BOTH ON PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROPERTY.

AND SO THEY'RE KIND OF STACKED OUT THE SPIRIT OF THAT 50 MILLION OR 55, WHEREVER WE END UP, IS TO GO WITH THAT SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE LOOK AT CITYWIDE AND THEN NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECTS AS A AS A COLLECTIVE PACKAGE TO MOVE US FORWARD.

THANK YOU. WOULD IT BE SAFE TO SAY THAT I'M NOT THE ONLY COUNCIL MEMBER WHO HAS TALKED TO YOU ABOUT A DIRE NEED OF RESIDENTS WHO ARE LOSING THE PROPERTY BECAUSE OF BUTTING UP TO CREEKS THAT WE NOT HAVE NOT HAD THE ABILITY TO ADDRESS, AND THAT THAT'S A CRITICAL ISSUE.

EVERYBODY'S DISTRICT HAS NEEDS IN EACH ONE OF THEM ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.

BUT YES, SIR, THERE'S 82 MILLION IN THE EROSION CONTROL CATEGORY IS THE ONES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN PARTICULAR.

THANK YOU, DIRECTOR SANDERS.

I JUST THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT THIS AND JUST MENTION THAT THIS IS, AGAIN, WHY WE ARE NOT GOING TO SEE A, AN ENTIRE BOND PACKAGE THAT'S GOING TO BE INCLUSIVE OF EVERYONE GETTING WHAT THEY WANT.

BUT IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO ADDRESS THE NEED THAT WE KNOW EXISTS, WHEN NONE OF THESE PROPOSITIONS ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO HIT THE LEVEL OF NEED THAT THEY OF THE RESPECTIVE PROPOSITIONS, THEN WE'RE REALLY DOING A DISSERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS.

WE'RE ASKING THEM TO COME TO THE VOTERS.

WE'RE ASKING FOR THEM TO SUPPORT WHAT WE HAVE WEIGHED OUT COLLECTIVELY AND COMPREHENSIVELY OF THE NEEDS OF OUR CITY, AND HOW WE CAN START TO CHIP AWAY AT THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED.

AND THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE THIS AMENDMENT DOES.

AND I WANT TO JUST TO POINT OUT TO A COUPLE OF THOSE THAT WERE THAT WERE ADDRESSED THAT I STILL BELIEVE THAT WE ARE GOING TO ADDRESS THEM AS A NEED IN OUR CITY.

SO MAKE SURE I GET EVERYBODY'S ROUNDS CORRECT.

I'M GOING TO GO TO OUR DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR A THREE MINUTE ROUND ON, AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE.

MAYOR. YOU SAID.

YOU SAID MAYOR PRO TEM.

I MEANT THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

I MEANT THE LADY IN GREEN.

NO. WELL, WHAT I'M GOING TO ASK IF YOU THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE, I'M GOING TO PUT IT ON HOLD AND TAKE MY NAME OUT OF THE QUEUE.

ARE YOU REALLY GETTING OUT OR ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE US A FREE SPEECH WHERE YOU SAY YOU'RE OUT, BUT IT'S STILL A SPEECH? WELL, IF I'M NOT ON A TIMER, I'M REALLY READY FOR LUNCH.

BUT, SO ARE YOU.

ARE YOU GOING ON THE RECORD RIGHT NOW? ARE YOU NOT? ARE YOU OUT? YOU'RE OUT, I'M OUT.

OKAY. YOU'RE OUT THEN. OKAY.

BE OUT. OKAY.

MAYOR PRO TEM, DID YOU WANT TO GET BACK IN? I STILL SEE YOU.

THIS WOULD BE A ONE MINUTE.

WELL, I WANT TO. YOU WANT TO BURN UP YOUR ONE MINUTE RIGHT NOW ON THIS? IS SOMEONE ELSE GOING TO SPEAK? THEN I NEED A BECAUSE IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE, THEN WE'RE ABOUT TO SHOW CARDS ON THIS AMENDMENT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO SHOW CARDS. SO I'M ABOUT TO SPEAK.

OKAY. I THINK MISS MENDELSOHN, PAUL RIDLEY.

OKAY, THEN HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU WOULD BE AT THREE MINUTES.

SO THE COUNCIL'S HAD A, PIECE OF PAPER THAT'S BEEN PASSED AROUND, AND IT'S A MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM WITH A NUMBER OF CO-SPONSORS, ONE OF WHICH IS DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM ARNOLD, COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO AND GRACEY.

AND, GIVEN WHERE WE'RE AT IN THIS DISCUSSION, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO OFFER IT AS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

SO IF YOU'RE OFFERING THAT, YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN WHAT THAT DOES, AND THEN YOU NEED TO SEE IF THERE'S A SECOND FOR THAT.

BUT BEFORE SO BEFORE THERE'S A SECOND WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

I THINK WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS.

SO SURE. AND AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING DOLLAR ALLOCATIONS FROM WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED IN AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE BY CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA. SO COULD YOU WALK THROUGH WHAT THAT IS? YES. WITHOUT REFERRING TO A PIECE OF PAPER THAT SOME MAY HAVE SEEN, MAY HAVE NOT SEEN, I ACTUALLY HAVE NOT EVEN SEEN THAT PIECE OF PAPER.

BUT I DON'T CARE. I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT DOES.

SURE. SO THE PIECE OF PAPER THAT MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS HAS PUT TOGETHER OFFERS THESE PROPOSITIONS STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION AT 500 MILLION.

PARKS AND RECREATION AT 310-500 MILLION.

[04:35:02]

PUBLIC SAFETY AT 90 MILLION.

HOUSING AT 61 MILLION.

CULTURAL ARTS FACILITIES AT 75,200,000.

FLOOD PROTECTION AND DRAINAGE 52,000,100.

LIBRARIES, 43,000,500.

THERE'S NO DOLLARS IN THERE FOR CITY HALL.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 29,000,200.

HOMELESSNESS, 8.5 MILLION.

NO DOLLARS IN THERE FOR THE MUNICIPAL CENTER AND 5 MILLION IN THERE FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

THERE'S AN UNALLOCATED 75 MILLION, WHICH I'M ASSUMING HIS INTENT WAS FOR THERE TO BE DISCRETION AMONGST COUNCIL MEMBERS TO PICK PROJECTS THAT THEY ARE AWARE OF AND FEEL ARE MOST ESSENTIAL FOR THE CITY.

AND THE TOTAL FUNDS ALLOCATED UNDER HIS AMENDMENT IS 1.25 MILLION.

IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

WE ARE NOW ON AN AMENDMENT BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN THAT DOES THAT, THAT DOES THAT.

AND NOW THE DISCUSSION WILL START OVER FIVE MINUTES, THREE MINUTES, ONE MINUTE PER ROUND ON THAT SPECIFICALLY.

OKAY. SO CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I BELIEVE EVERYBODY WILL NOW HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

SO IF SO I'M GOING TO GIVE COMMENTS BUT REALLY I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER TO MAYOR PRO TEM SINCE THIS TRULY IS HIS AMENDMENT.

NO, IT'S YOURS. BUT NOW EVERYBODY HAS FIVE MINUTES AND WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT.

WE GOT IT. OKAY, WELL, IT WAS BECAUSE HE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME BEFORE, SO I UNDERSTAND.

SO PLEASE I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WHY I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.

ALTHOUGH I WAS NOT PART OF THE GROUP THAT CAME UP WITH IT, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF IT BECAUSE NUMBER ONE, IT FUNDS STREETS AT $500 MILLION.

I THINK THAT IS THE BARE MINIMUM WE NEED TO HAVE.

IT FUNDS PARKS AT $310.5 MILLION.

AGAIN ESSENTIAL MOST OF THESE PARKS PROPOSITIONS I MEAN A COUPLE OF THINGS HAVE BEEN MENTIONED THAT ARE NEW AND EXCITING.

BUT THE TRUTH IS MOST OF THIS IS MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE ON OUR PARKS.

WE HAVE TO GET THIS TAKEN CARE OF.

PUBLIC SAFETY $90 MILLION, OBVIOUSLY.

I THINK WE GET CLOSER TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY, ENVISIONED BY OUR COMMUNITY, BY OUR BOND TASK FORCE, BY SAYING HOUSING AT $61 MILLION.

AGAIN, WE HAVE MORE THAN A DOZEN WAYS TO FUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY.

AND TAKING OUT DEBT TO DO IT IS JUST A BAD FISCAL POLICY, IN MY OPINION.

CULTURAL ARTS FACILITIES.

I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE HOW IMPORTANT THEY ARE.

I THINK WE WANT TO SUPPORT CULTURAL ARTS.

THIS GIVES IT AN EVEN BIGGER BUMP.

I WOULD ACTUALLY LOVE TO TAKE $5 MILLION OF THAT AND PUT IT TO IT, BUT I'LL LEAVE THAT ALONE.

I'M GOING TO MOVE DOWN FOR LIBRARIES.

THIS IS A BIGGER NUMBER FOR LIBRARIES THAN WE'VE SEEN BUT THESE ARE THE PLACES THAT OUR PEOPLE GATHER, GET INFORMATION, CONNECT TO INTERNET.

WE HAVE TO MAKE THESE ACCESSIBLE.

DO YOU KNOW THAT WE DO NOT HAVE OUR LIBRARIES ADA ACCESSIBLE? 33 YEARS ON FOR ADA AND OUR OWN PEOPLE WHO WE WHO PAY THE TAXES CAN'T EVEN GET INTO OUR OWN LIBRARIES COMFORTABLY.

I JUST THINK THAT IS SUCH A SHAME.

SO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, IT GIVES A CORPUS OF MONEY, HOMELESSNESS.

I HAVE TO TELL YOU, I'M NOT SURE WHERE WE'RE COMING AT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $20 MILLION FOR HOMELESSNESS.

I SAT ON PROPOSITION J IN 2017.

FOR THAT $20 MILLION, WE BARELY JUST SPENT IT.

AFTER SEVEN YEARS.

DO WE WANT TO GO THROUGH THE THREE EMPTY FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE, ONE OF WHICH WE HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER SAYING SELL IT, IT'S BOND MONEY.

IT WOULD RETURN TO BOND MONEY TO HOPEFULLY FINISH OUT THESE OTHER PROPERTIES.

WE HAVE DOLLARS FOR HOMELESSNESS.

WE HAVE GREATLY INCREASED OUR COMMITMENT TO HOMELESSNESS, BOTH THROUGH GENERAL FUND AS WELL AS, OTHER DOLLARS.

SO ALL THAT IN THERE.

THE MOST ATTRACTIVE THING, I HOPE YOU SEE, IS THIS DISCRETIONARY MONEY.

BECAUSE EVERY DAY, DAY IN, DAY OUT, YOU HEAR THE VERY SPECIFIC NEEDS OF YOUR COMMUNITY.

I LOVE THAT WHEN WE COME IN, IN THIS ROOM IS FILLED, USUALLY.

ALL THAT TO SAY, IT'S A LOT EASIER TO GET DOWN HERE IF YOU DON'T LIVE IN DISTRICT 12 BECAUSE IT'S 20 MILES AWAY AND THEY FEEL VERY DISCONNECTED. THEY FEEL VERY DISRESPECTED.

THERE ARE THREE PARKS IN ALL OF DENTON COUNTY SERVING 29,000 PEOPLE.

THE THREE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS THAT SERVE THAT AREA, THEY ALL HAVE 90% OR MORE FREE AND REDUCED LUNCH.

OF THOSE THREE PARKS, ONE OF THEM IS TIMBERLAND, WHICH HAS A REC CENTER.

ONE IS BARRY BARKER PARK, WHICH THE PLAYGROUND WAS SET ON FIRE BECAUSE IT IS, BY THE WAY, THE ORIGINAL AND THE THIRD PARK, WHICH IS THE ONLY PARK THAT'S ON THE WEST SIDE OF GEORGE

[04:40:01]

BUSH SERVING ALL THOSE PEOPLE.

THERE'S ONE PARK AND IT'S 100% UNDEVELOPED.

THERE'S NOT EVEN A SIGN.

THERE'S NOT PARKING, THERE'S NOT A WAY IN.

AND IF THEY DID GO IN LOTS OF HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS, INCLUDING ARYAN NATION, YOU'VE HEARD RUBELS TALKING ABOUT THEIR INCREDIBLE CHALLENGES.

WELL, PROBABLY THAT'S WHERE MY MONEY IS GOING TO GO.

AND WHEN WE LOOK AT THINGS LIKE STREETS, I'M SAYING WE NEED MORE FOR STREETS.

PLEASE KNOW MY DISTRICT HAS THE SECOND BEST STREETS.

I'M NOT LOOKING FOR THE STREETS IN DISTRICT 12 TO GET ADDITIONAL MONEY.

I NEED YOUR STREETS TO HAVE MORE MONEY.

BECAUSE YOUR STREETS ARE TERRIBLE.

COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY YOURS ARE THE WORST STREETS, AND YOU'RE NOT GETTING ENOUGH MONEY.

AND I DON'T KNOW, I KNOW I'VE CALLED MORENO SAYING, HEY, I'M DRIVING ON FIELD, I THINK I BROKE A TIRE.

LIKE, ALL ACROSS THE CITY.

WE HAVE TO STOP THINKING ABOUT OUR DISTRICT.

AND HOW DOES THE CITY MOVE FORWARD STRONG TOGETHER.

AND THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT I THINK ARE MOST IMPORTANT.

AND SO THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, FOR BRINGING THIS MOTION FOR ME TO SAY GOODBYE.

OKAY. CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES AGAIN, EVERYONE, WE ARE ON CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN'S MOTION, TO AMEND AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE.

I THINK THAT IT IS HONESTLY A VERY BAD MESSAGE TO SEND THE PUBLIC.

I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS.

WE ARE SCRAPING TO FIND A MILLION HERE OR $5 MILLION THERE, OR MEET HALF OF A DEFERRED MAINTENANCE NEEDS OR, BARELY, YOU KNOW, HAVE TO HAVE TO CHANGE, THE ASK FROM CERTAIN PRIVATE PARTNERS THAT WE HAVE THAT HAVE BEEN HUGE ECONOMIC DRIVERS.

WE'VE HAD TO MAKE REALLY TOUGH DECISIONS.

AND I AND THIS AMENDMENT TO ME TELLS THE PUBLIC I'M NOT CONCERNED WITH EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE LEARNED ON THE NEEDS OF OUR CITY, BUT I AM MORE CONCERNED WITH HAVING THE AUTONOMY WITH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

WELL I'M TELLING YOU NOW THAT I, OF COURSE, AGAIN WOULD LOVE A BLANK CHECK, AND I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THE AUTONOMY WITH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE DO, BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE THE NEED.

BUT THAT WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM NEED THAT'S ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED, THAT WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM THE NEED THAT WE ALREADY ARE NOT ABLE TO MEET WITH ANY OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF US.

I DESPISE WHEN POLITICIANS ACT IN A SELF-SERVING WAY, AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD BE SAYING TO THE PUBLIC AS A POLITICIAN.

I WANT YOU TO GIVE ME A BLANK CHECK.

I WANT YOU TO LET ME DECIDE.

I WANT TO FORGET ALL OF THE TIMES YOU SHOWED UP TO OUR COMMUNITY TOWN HALLS.

I WANT TO FORGET ALL OF THE HOURS THAT WE'VE SPENT HEARING OPEN MIC SPEAKERS AT CITY HALL.

I WANT TO COMPLETELY NEGATE THE DATA POINTS THAT HAVE SHOWN US WHERE WE SHOULD BE PRIORITIZING OUR DOLLARS.

ALL OF THOSE MESSAGES IS WHAT WE'RE TELLING THE PUBLIC BY SAYING, LET'S JUST CUT A BUNCH OF THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING TOWARDS ALL THE WAY UP TO THIS POINT, AND LET ME BE THE SOLE DECIDER.

LET ME BE THE MAYOR OF DISTRICT SEVEN.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS EXERCISE WAS DESIGNED TO BE.

THIS EXERCISE WAS DESIGNED TO BE A COLLECTIVE FRONT, AND TO FIND WHERE THE NEEDS OF OUR CITY CAN BE BEST MET.

I CAN'T EMPHASIZE ENOUGH WHEN YOU SEE AN AMENDMENT LIKE THIS THAT'S CAME UP AND IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH A $75 MILLION DISCRETIONARY ALLOCATION, WE'RE JUST GOING TO SAY WE DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT CITY HALL ANYMORE.

LIKE IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT WE DON'T HAVE HVAC HERE, RIGHT? THAT IS ADEQUATE.

IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT DURING THE FREEZE AND ALL OF OUR STAFF ARE TRYING TO BE HERE AND ANSWER THE NEEDS OF OUR PUBLIC, WHO ARE ALSO DEALING WITH THE REMNANTS OF, A HARD FREEZE AND ELECTRICAL OUTAGES ACROSS THE CITY THAT THAT MY STAFF NEEDS TO WORK FROM HOME BECAUSE THEY ARE FREEZING INSIDE OF THE OFFICE AND THERE'S NO HEAT.

LET'S IGNORE THAT.

LET'S IGNORE THE FACT THAT THIS IS NOW GOING TO BE THE THIRD BOND THAT A PROPOSAL TO ENHANCE THE PEOPLE'S BUILDING OF OUR CITY WILL CONTINUE TO BE NEGLECTED. THIS IS NOT THE ANSWER, IN FACT, EXACTLY AS WE'VE BEEN MENTIONING.

IN WHAT? THROUGH CONVERSATION WITH STAFF AND DIRECTOR NICEWANDER HAS TOLD US, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE ALLOCATIONS ARE GETTING AS CLOSE TO MEETING NEED AS POSSIBLE AND THEN DO THE EXACT EXERCISE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED, EXCEPT BACKWARDS, MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO ALLOW FOR ONE OF THESE ALLOCATIONS, ONE OF THESE PROPOSITIONS, TO BE COMPLETELY COMPROMISED.

THERE IS NO GUARANTEE IF WE'RE LEAVING IT UP TO THE DISCRETION OF 15 DIFFERENT MEMBERS IN THE 11TH HOUR TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS MOST IMPORTANT TO THEM, NOT WHAT WE'VE BEEN

[04:45:06]

HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC, NOT WHAT WE'VE BEEN COLLABORATING WITH ALL STAKEHOLDERS ON FIGURING OUT WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE BEST, NOT MAKING SURE THAT EVERYONE SEES THAT THE COMPROMISES THAT THEIR RESPECTIVE ORGANIZATIONS THAT THEY'RE ADVOCATING FOR IS ALIGNED WITH WHAT EVERYONE ELSE HAS SEEN THAT THEIR ADVOCACY IS ALSO BEING CUT FROM.

THERE'S NO EQUITY AT ALL WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AN EQUAL ALLOTMENT ACROSS 14 DISTRICTS AND THE MAYOR, THAT'S NOT EQUITABLE.

THAT'S ACTUALLY THE OPPOSITE.

THAT'S WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EQUALITY VERSUS EQUITY.

THERE'S NOTHING EQUITABLE ABOUT IT.

AND LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND SAY THIS WAS ATTEMPTED IN 2017 AND IT WAS ATTEMPTED IN A VERY PISS POOR MANAGED WAY.

IN FACT, WE CURRENTLY HAVE OVER $18 MILLION OF TAXPAYERS DOLLARS THAT Y'ALL APPROVED IN 2017.

THE TAXPAYERS APPROVED EXACTLY WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED RIGHT NOW.

AND WE HAVE $18 MILLION THAT ARE SITTING AROUND.

THAT'S $18 MILLION THAT COULD BE GOING TO THE ZOO ALREADY.

THAT'S $18 MILLION THAT COULD HAVE ADDRESSED THE ARTS NEEDS, INSTEAD OF US HAVING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET Y'ALL TO 6%, THAT'S $18 MILLION THAT WE COULD HAVE GIVEN MORE FOR HOMELESS HOUSING.

ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THERE'S $18 MILLION SITTING ON THE SHELF THAT WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING WITH.

THIS ISN'T THE ANSWER COLLEAGUES, LET'S STAY ON TASK, PLEASE.

THANK YOU MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN'S AMENDMENT TO MR. BAZALDUA AMENDMENT.

I TOTALLY CONCUR WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA, BUT I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FIRST, LET'S JUST START WITH THE ELIMINATION OF SUPPORT FOR DALLAS CITY HALL.

I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DON'T INVEST IN CITY HALL NOW.

HELLO, JOHN JOHNSON BUILDING SERVICES, COULD YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROPOSED 28279 OF AMENDMENT ONE THAT NOW WOULD BE DECIMATED IN THIS? YES, MA'AM. THAT INCLUDES FOUR PROJECTS TOTAL FOR DALLAS CITY HALL, THE FIRST BEING $4.9 MILLION FOR ELECTRICAL UPGRADES, WHICH IS USED TO REPLACE THE FEDERAL PACIFIC PANELS THAT HAVE BEEN OUTLAWED TO INCREASE CAPACITY IN THE BUILDING, TO ALLOW US TO SUPPORT OTHER GOALS FOR THE CITY AND COUNCIL DIRECTIVES, SUCH AS ELECTRIFICATION OF THE FLEET SO THAT WE CAN INSTALL EV CHARGERS.

$6.5 MILLION FOR GENERATORS WHICH SUPPORT THE FACILITY AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.

OF THE FIVE THAT WE HAVE, ONE IS NONFUNCTIONAL AND THE AGE OF THE REST IS AROUND 49 YEARS OLD.

EIGHT POINT MILLION DOLLARS, $8 MILLION FOR THE FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM UPGRADES.

AND THAT'S TO REPLACE AND UPGRADE THE SYSTEM THAT IS ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDING'S CONSTRUCTION.

AND THEN THE REMAINING PIECE IS $8.5 MILLION FOR AIR CONDITIONING RETROFITS TO BRING THE FACILITY AND ITS EQUIPMENT INTO COMPLIANCE BEFORE A 2030 MANDATE.

SO WE'RE BEHIND ON ALL COMPLIANCE IN SOME AREAS, AND THEN OUR OWN PLANS FOR C-CAP AND OTHER THINGS AND OTHERS.

THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND.

SO IN DOING THE SAME THING TO THE HOUSING, PROPOSITION, TAKING $38 MILLION AWAY FROM THE HOUSING PROPOSITION SO THAT IT CAN GO INTO DISCRETIONARY FUNDS, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GONE OVER THIS AGAIN AND AGAIN AND UNDERSTANDING HOW THE HOUSING FUNDS WILL BE USED ACROSS THE CITY.

SO FOR ANYONE WHO'S TRYING TO SUPPORT EQUITY, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THEY COULD NOT HOW THEY'D WANT TO TAKE AWAY, FUNDS FROM HOUSING OF ALL PLACES, ESPECIALLY HOUSING THAT'S GOING TO BUILD INFRASTRUCTURE WHERE IT'S NEEDED IN EQUITY AREAS AND THEN OTHER PLACES WHERE IT'S GOING TO BUILD AFFORDABILITY, HELP PEOPLE STAY IN THEIR HOMES. AND WE'VE HEARD AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN FROM THE PUBLIC HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS.

I ALSO DON'T UNDERSTAND.

I'D LIKE TO, UNDERSTAND.

SORRY, CYNTHIA. I DIDN'T MEAN TO.

I DIDN'T CALL YOU UP. I WAS JUST MAKING A STATEMENT ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

IF WE TAKE AWAY $35 MILLION AWAY FROM THE PROPOSED.

IS THAT THE RIGHT? DO I HAVE THE RIGHT NUMBER? YES. SO THAT THAT ELIMINATES WHAT PLEASANT GROVE, UNT INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT, IS THAT CORRECT? SORRY. SO I AM ACTUALLY ASKING THAT.

SO THE 20 AND MAYBE I'M ASKING, CHAIR ATKINS.

SORRY, MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS WHAT WOULD BE OF THE $35 MILLION THAT'S GOING TO BE CUT FROM ECO DEV? WHICH PROJECT IS GOING TO LOSE? BECAUSE ALL THREE OF THEM NEED ALL THAT, ALL THE MONEY THAT'S IN THE AMENDMENT ONE.

I GOT $75 MILLION.

[04:50:01]

I'M GOING TO PUT BACK TO REALLOCATE.

WELL, IT'S. BUT HERE'S MY QUESTION.

MY QUESTION IS THIS.

WE WERE TOLD THAT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS WERE GOING TO BE USED FOR UNT PLEASANT GROVE IN THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT, EACH OF $15 MILLION.

SO HOW ARE THE DISCRETIONARY FUNDS FROM OTHER DISTRICTS GOING TO BE USED TOWARD HELPING SOMEBODY IN A PARTICULAR DISTRICT? I MEAN, I'M VERY HAPPY SINCE CERTAINLY THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT IS A CITYWIDE PROJECT, BUT I DOUBT MY COLLEAGUES ARE GOING TO BE GIVING ME THEIR DISCRETIONARY MONEY.

WHEN I GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT MY ALLOCATION, I WILL TELL YOU.

OKAY.

NO. IT'S OKAY. AND THEN THE OTHERS ARE JUST LITTLE TWEAKS, I THINK, TO GET TO THAT TWO, $2 MILLION HERE, $3 MILLION THERE.

AND I THINK IT'S JUST CONVOLUTING, ADDING THE ADDITIONAL $10,500,000 TO THE PARKS.

AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND MAYBE ON YOUR TIME OR SOMEONE ELSE WHO SUPPORTS THIS AMENDMENT UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT $10,500,000 IS ACTUALLY GOING TO GO TO.

AND THEN THE CUT TO THE HOMELESSNESS, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHY, CUTTING IT DOWN TO CUTTING IT BY, $8 MILLION, HOW THAT'S GOING TO SERVE THE PUBLIC GOOD.

BECAUSE MY PROPOSITION ON ALL OF THIS HAS BEEN THAT BOND MONEY.

IF WE'RE GOING TO BORROW MONEY FROM TO IN ORDER TO MOVE THIS CITY FORWARD, THESE ITEMS IN THESE, IN THESE BOND RECOMMENDATIONS OUGHT TO BE MOVING OUR CITY FORWARD.

AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE JUSTIFICATION, PARTICULARLY FOR THE DISCRETIONARY FUND, ON HOW EVERYBODY'S DISCRETIONARY FUND IS ACTUALLY GOING TO MOVE THIS CITY FORWARD AND BE WORTH BORROWING THE MONEY FOR.

SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

[INAUDIBLE] MAYOR PRO TEM, I'M GOING TO GO TO CHAIRMAN RIDLEY FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MISS MENDELSOHN'S AMENDMENT TO MR. BAZALDUA'S AMENDMENT.

SO, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IF THE COUNCIL'S WILL IS TO CREATE DISCRETIONARY FUNDS, THERE ARE TWO BASIC WAYS TO ARRANGE THAT.

ONE IS TO HAVE A LINE ITEM OF UNALLOCATED FUNDING THAT WOULD THEN BE SUBJECT TO SUBSEQUENT DESIGNATION BY INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS AS TO HOW THEY WANTED TO USE THEIR DISTRICT'S ALLOCATION, FOR WHICH BUCKETS.

THE OTHER APPROACH IS TO, NOT HAVE AN UNALLOCATED LINE ITEM AND HAVE FIXED NUMBERS FOR EACH OF THE OTHER BOND PROPOSITIONS, BUT AT A LATER TIME TO HAVE INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS DESIGNATE WITHIN THOSE ESTABLISHED LINE ITEM PROPOSITIONS WHERE THEY WANTED TO ALLOCATE THEIR PARTICULAR X MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, ALL OF THAT $75 MILLION WOULD NEED TO BE IDENTIFIED IN ONE OF THOSE PROPOSITIONS.

SO WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO DO THAT.

ONE IS THROUGH AN AMENDMENT LIKE THIS, ONE THAT HAS AN UNALLOCATED LINE ITEM.

THE OTHER WAY IS TO NOT HAVE AN UNALLOCATED LINE ITEM, BUT HAVE IT, DESIGNATED THAT EACH COUNCIL MEMBER CAN IDENTIFY OUT OF THE $5 MILLION CONJECTURED, WHICH OF THE ESTABLISHED BUCKET AMOUNTS THEY WANT THAT, DISCRETION.

SO EXAMPLE STREETS.

BOTH OF THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE $500 MILLION FOR STREETS.

IF WE GO WITH THE SECOND APPROACH THAT THAT'S A FIXED AMOUNT.

THEN EACH INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER, LET'S SAY FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT TO PUT THEIR $5 MILLION ADDITIONAL INTO STREETS.

THEY'RE REALLY DESIGNATING THAT THEY WANT COLLECTIVELY $25 MILLION TO BE SUBJECT TO THEIR DISCRETION.

IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THE $500 MILLION.

SO NO.

SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IF THREE PEOPLE WANTED THEIR THEIR MONEY INTO STREETS, THEY WOULD TELL US THAT THAT PROPOSITION WOULD THEN INCREASE BY THAT AMOUNT, AND THEN WE WOULD WORK WITH COUNCIL AND MAKE SURE THAT THE TOP PRIORITY FOR YOUR.

OKAY, THAT THAT'S THE APPROACH TAKEN BY THIS AMENDMENT.

THE ORIGINAL PROPOSITION, MR. BAZALDUA'S AMENDMENT, IF SO AMENDED, COULD ESTABLISH THAT WE EACH GET THE SAME 5 MILLION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS THAT WOULDN'T CHANGE THE ALLOCATION IN THESE DIFFERENT PROPOSITIONS.

IT WOULD JUST MEAN THAT WE HAD THE ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, DESIGNATE WHICH OF THAT $500 MILLION FOR STREETS.

THEY WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY, THE DISCRETION TO SAY, I WANT THIS TO GO IN THIS STREET OR THAT STREET.

[04:55:07]

SO I THINK THAT'S A BIT MORE COMPLICATED APPROACH TO, TO THAT.

BECAUSE THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO GO AND LOOK AT THE LIST, IDENTIFY WHAT PROPOSITION YOU WANTED THOSE FUNDS FROM OR THE DISCRETIONARY, YOU KNOW, ITEM IN.

AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO EITHER REMOVE PROJECTS FROM THAT, THAT PROPOSITION TO GET TO AN UNALLOCATED LINE ITEM.

WELL, WE HAVE TO IF THE COUNCIL WANTS DISCRETIONARY FUNDING, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT EXERCISE OF THEM DESIGNATING WHAT THEY WANT, THEIR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS TO WHICH BUCKET THEY WANT THEIR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS TO BE IN.

I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST DECISION TO MAKE.

YES. IF YOU WANT DISCRETIONARY FUNDING, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED TO IDENTIFY.

AND THEN WE WOULD GO FROM THERE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT PROPOSITION IT NEEDS TO GO INTO.

AND THE CITY MANAGER ALSO HAS THAT.

YEAH. PLEASE. SO THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN.

AND I THANK YOU, JENNY.

I THINK YOU DESCRIBED BOTH PROCESSES, AND I THINK THE LATTER PROBABLY WAS A LOT MORE DIFFICULT.

AND SO I'LL JUST SAY THIS AS A BROADER STATEMENT ABOUT THE WHOLE $1.25 BILLION AT THIS POINT IN THE CONVERSATION AT 2:22, EVERY DOLLAR AMOUNT WITHIN THE ENTIRE BOND PROGRAM IS BASICALLY DISCRETIONARY FOR COUNCIL TO DETERMINE WHAT PROJECTS WILL ULTIMATELY GO IN THEM AND WHAT THE PROPOSITION LEVELS WILL BE.

SO WHEN IT COMES TO TRYING TO SEGREGATE OUT DISCRETIONARY FUNDS, WHICH BASICALLY MEANS IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN THE PROPOSITION LEVELS THAT YOU SET.

THAT YOU WANTED SOME CONTROL OVER AS YOU SET THOSE, WHETHER THAT'S $5, $10 OR $15 MILLION, THOSE NUMBERS TODAY, AT LEAST MY IMPRESSION.

AND THE EASIER WAY TO DO IT WOULD BE FROM THE TOP LEVEL PROPOSITION AMOUNTS SET THOSE THAT THEN WOULD BE LESS THAN WHETHER IT'S $150 MILLION OR $75 MILLION IN TOTAL.

SO THAT, AS WE HAD INDICATED IN A MEMORANDUM YESTERDAY, WHATEVER THAT AMOUNT IS THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO ALLOCATE TODAY, AT LEAST GIVE US THE PROPOSITION LEVELS AND COMFORT ON STREETS, PARKS, HOUSING, ECO DEV, WHATEVER THAT IS, MINUS WHATEVER AMOUNT YOU DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS TODAY AND ALLOCATE.

AND THEN BY TOMORROW OR THE END OF THIS WEEK COME BACK.

IF THERE'S DISCRETIONARY MONIES BY DISTRICT THAT YOU WANT, WHETHER IT'S $5, $10 OR $15 MILLION, COME BACK AND SHARE WITH JENNIFER AND ROBERT OF MY $10 MILLION.

I WANT FIVE TO GO IN PARKS.

I WANT THREE TO GO IN HOUSING.

I WANT X, Y, AND Z.

WE'D COME BACK NEXT WEEK WHEN WE HAVE FULL UNDERSTANDINGS OF THE AMOUNTS AND TELL YOU WHEN YOU LEFT THIS TO WEDNESDAY, YOUR PROPOSITION LEVELS WERE AT THIS LEVEL.

YOU HAD $75 MILLION UNALLOCATED.

YOU'VE TOLD US NOW WHERE YOU WANT TO PUT THAT INDIVIDUALLY.

SO WE'RE GOING TO SHARE WITH YOU INDIVIDUALLY WHAT EVERYBODY SAID AND THEN WE'LL ADD THEM TO.

AND THERE'LL BE AN AMENDMENT TO BASICALLY THE PROPOSITION LEVELS.

AND THEN THE PROPOSITION LEVELS WILL THEN BE SET BECAUSE EVERYTHING WILL BE ALLOCATED BASED ON YOUR COMMUNICATION.

THAT IS WHAT WE HAD PROPOSED OR THOUGHT WOULD BE THE EASE EVER TODAY, I WOULD ARGUE AND SAY TO YOU, IT'S MORE DIFFICULT TO SET THOSE AMOUNTS NOW WITHOUT ANY UNALLOCATED AMOUNTS AND COME BACK AND SAY, BUT WITHIN STREETS, BUT WITHIN PARKS, I WANT TO MAKE CERTAIN AMOUNTS OF THAT DISCRETIONARY.

YOU'VE GOT THAT OPPORTUNITY NOW WHEN YOU SET THE PROPOSITION LEVEL TO DETERMINE THAT OR JUST KEEP IT ASIDE JUST IN CASE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T MAKE THE CUT, THAT'S WHAT YOU WANTED TO ADD BACK YOURSELF.

I THINK THAT'S THE VIRTUE AND THE I THINK THOUGHT AROUND DISCRETIONARY.

SO AGAIN, I THINK THE OTHER AREA JUST IS LIKE I SAID, IT'S ALL DISCRETIONARY NOW.

SO IF YOU DON'T IF YOU WANT TO DIG INTO ANY PROPOSITION AND PICK A PROJECT HERE OR THERE, YOU'VE GOT THE RIGHT TO DO THAT TODAY, TOMORROW OR BEFORE WE ACTUALLY GO TO AN ACTUAL VOTE.

SO I'M SAYING, AGAIN, I THINK WE'RE MAKING IT TOO HARD TODAY TO UNDERSTAND THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, Y'ALL HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL OF EVERY PROPOSITION AND EVERY DOLLAR.

BUT IF YOU DON'T LIKE ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE IN THERE, BUT YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT'S IN THE PROPOSITION RIGHT NOW AT CERTAIN LEVELS, THEN VOTE TO AMEND AND SET THOSE LEVELS TODAY AND SAY, BUT I STILL THINK SOMETHING'S MISSING THAT IS ABOVE THAT LINE, THAT IF I HAD DISCRETIONARY, I'D GO AND ADD IT BACK MYSELF AND NOT HAVE TO TAKE AWAY. AND I THINK THAT IS, AGAIN, I THINK THE MOST APPROPRIATE AND EASY WAY TO GET THROUGH TODAY.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO HAVE SOME LEVELS OF PROPOSITIONS TODAY, PERIOD IS WHAT WE WOULD HOPE IF WE WANT TO ADVANCE AND GET TO A MAY ELECTION, BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE TWO MORE SHOTS TO DO IT, THE 7TH AND THE 14TH AND THE 14TH IS FINAL.

[05:00:03]

WELL, MR. CITY MANAGER, YOUR PREFERRED APPROACH WOULD NOT RESULT IN SETTING THE ALLOCATIONS FOR THE DIFFERENT PROPOSITIONS TODAY, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS THE IMPERATIVE TO SET AND FIX THOSE NUMBERS TODAY.

THEY WOULDN'T BE CHANGED AFTER TODAY, BUT YOUR PREFERRED METHOD WOULD CHANGE THEM WITH CONSIDERATION OF OUR INDIVIDUAL DISCRETIONARY AMOUNTS. SO CAN YOU RESOLVE THAT CONFLICT FOR ME? JUST TO ANSWER THE QUESTION FROM WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR PERSPECTIVE, THERE IS A $75 MILLION OF UNALLOCATED.

AND SO IF THIS MOTION PASSES, EACH COUNCIL MEMBER WILL TELL THE CITY MANAGER WHERE THEY WANT THEIR $5 MILLION.

AND THEN AT THE NEXT MEETING, WE WILL WE'LL BE ADDRESSING THAT.

THAT IS WHAT I UNDERSTAND THE MOTION TO BE ON THE FLOOR.

WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL.

BUT THAT MEANS THAT THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS WON'T BE FIXED UNTIL NEXT WEEK.

AND I THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS AN IMPERATIVE TO DO THAT TODAY.

SO THE IMPERATIVE TO BE VERY FRANK AND HONEST, YOU KNOW, I'M A PEACEABLE PERSON.

IT'S TO ACTUALLY MAKE SOME KIND OF DECISION.

AND SO WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN DECEMBER.

WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THE MIDDLE OF JANUARY.

AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT TODAY.

AND ALL WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS A LOT OF MYSTERY AROUND, WELL, WHAT ARE THE PROPOSITION LEVELS GOING TO BE DIRECTLY FROM THE TASK FORCE, THE CITY MANAGER'S THOUGHTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, OR THE AVERAGE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AND SO THERE IS NO GUIDANCE ON WHAT IS IN OR OUT, OTHER THAN YOU'VE HEARD FROM MY TEAM ON WHAT WE BELIEVE THE LEVELS ARE THAT WE WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH.

AND IT'S REALLY BEEN IN THE COUNCIL'S COURT.

SO IF WE WALKED AWAY TODAY WITHOUT ANY GUIDANCE ON ANY OF THAT, WE'RE STILL FLOATING AROUND WITH, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT TOP LEVEL IS ON ANY PROPOSITION.

SO THE CLOSER WE GET TO AT LEAST ESTABLISHING A INTERIM LEVEL OF WHERE WE'RE COMFORTABLE AT THE LARGEST, AND IF THERE'S ONLY $75 MILLION HELD OUT, I'M $1.1 BILLION MOVED FORWARD THAN WHERE I'VE BEEN SINCE DECEMBER.

AND SO I'M SAYING TO YOU, THE ALLOCATION OF $50, $75 OR $100 THAT'S NOT THERE TODAY.

THAT'S PROGRESS.

AND WE JUST WANT TO MAKE PROGRESS SO THAT FOLK CAN THEN WORK WITH YOU ON THE FINER POINTS OF WHAT YOU WANT, IN OR NOT.

AND WE DON'T HAVE TO BE THERE TODAY.

IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE WERE, BUT WE'VE GOT NEXT WEEK.

THEN I WOULD SAY FOR SURE NEXT WEEK WE GOT TO BE AT FULL FIXED SO THAT TAMMY PALOMINO AND HER TEAM CAN GO AND PREPARE THE LANGUAGE FOR ORDINANCE CODIFICATION FOR THE 14TH, TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING, TO KNOW HOW TO DESCRIBE THEM IN VAGUENESS, EVEN SO THAT WE CAN STILL WORK ON THE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS EVEN PAST THAT.

SO AGAIN, IF WE CAN GET AWAY WITH $1.25 TOTALLY ALLOCATED TODAY, GREAT STAFF WOULD SLEEP BETTER THIS WEEKEND.

IF WE CAN'T, WE'VE GOT WORK TO DO WITH YOU INDIVIDUALLY TO FIND A WAY TO GET YOU TO PUT IT IN A PROPOSITION.

SO AT LEAST ON THE 7TH OR ON FRIDAY, THE WORLD WILL KNOW WHAT THE PROPOSITIONS ARE NOW PROPOSED TO BE, BECAUSE YOU'VE ALLOCATED IT NOW FULLY BASED ON EVEN SOME INDIVIDUALITY IN YOUR DISTRICT. AND THEN WHEN WE GO OUT IN PUBLIC, WE'LL BE ABLE TO TALK TO PEOPLE NOW ABOUT THE PROPOSITION LEVELS AND AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL, BECAUSE WE'LL WORK THROUGH THAT BEFORE WE EVEN GO AND VISIT WITH OUR COMMUNITY TO TELL THEM WHAT CAME OUT THE OTHER END.

SO TWO STEPS OR YOU CAN DO ONE STEP.

IT IS 2:29.

NO ONE IS EATING. SO I WOULD PREFER WE DO THE TWO STEP SO THAT WE CAN AT LEAST MAKE PROGRESS.

AND THEN WE CAN GO SPEND TIME AFTER LUNCH TALKING ABOUT WHAT YOU MIGHT DO WITH DISCRETIONARY IF THIS AMENDMENT IS APPROVED.

I HOPE THAT CLEARS IT UP A LITTLE.

IS YOUR FLOOR AGAIN? ARE YOU DONE? OKAY, THEN WE'LL GO TO I BELIEVE I'M GOING TO GO TO.

EVERYONE'S AVAILABLE.

DID YOU WANT TO STILL HOLD? OKAY, THEN I'M GOING TO GO TO THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR FIVE MINUTES ON.

THANK YOU, MISS MENDELSSOHN'S AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU, I DO, I THINK SECOND AND APPROVE AND SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT AS STATED, BASICALLY ALL OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING ANYWAY IS BASED OFF OF DISCRETIONARY.

WE HAVE PUSHED FOR PROJECTS BASED ON WHAT OUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE ASKED US TO DO, AND WE'RE PUSHING THOSE.

I THINK THE $5 MILLION FOR ME WOULD ENABLE ME TO GIVE A LITTLE EXTRA IMPETUS TO THE EQUITY PRINCIPLE.

AND SO I COULD TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, I MEAN, IT'S NOT THE PERFECT WORLD, BUT IF I COULD PUT PROJECT UMPH, UMPH, I'M MAKING A NEW WORD UP BECAUSE [INAUDIBLE] HUNGRY UMPH BEHIND MY PARK PROJECT, MY HOUSING 10TH STREET AND MY MY, CULTURAL ARTS FACILITIES.

I'M READY TO DO THAT.

AND IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GO IN TERMS OF CERTAINTY THAT WE KNOW WE HAVE AT LEAST A BILLION ALREADY ALLOCATED.

SO COUNCIL MEMBERS, I KNOW IT'S KIND OF FOR THOSE WHO'VE ONLY BEEN THIS THEIR FIRST BOND, IT'S KIND OF AN EERIE FEELING.

[05:05:08]

BUT TRUST ME ON THIS IN TERMS OF THE FACT, IF YOU ARE ADVOCATING FOR YOUR COMMUNITY, THEN IT SHOULD BE SIMPLE.

I KNOW MY FOLKS ARE ASKING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.

WE CAN'T GET ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

WE CAN'T GET ANYTHING WITHOUT INFRASTRUCTURE, HOUSING.

WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT IT, THAT WE HAVE PROGRAMS FOR HOUSING.

WE ARE NOT SITTING HERE AS A CITY OF DALLAS, NOT DOING ANYTHING FOR HOUSING.

AND I TAKE A LITTLE OFFENSE TO THAT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE PROGRAMS. DO WE NEED TO FINE TUNE IT A LITTLE BETTER TO DELIVER? ABSOLUTELY. BUT PLEASE DON'T TELL US THAT WE'RE DOING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ON HOUSING.

AND THIS IS ME TALKING, BUT I KNOW THAT IN MY DISTRICT WE CAN'T BUILD ANY HOUSES WITHOUT INFRASTRUCTURE.

BUT MOST OF MY FOLKS ARE ASKING FOR HOME REPAIR, AND SO WE NEED TO TIGHTEN THAT PROGRAM UP.

AND I NEED TO GET WITH THE ATTORNEYS ON THAT.

BUT COUNCIL MEMBERS, I THINK FOR US TO GET I HAVE A NEW PARK.

AND I SAY I BUT I WILL TELL YOU, JUST TO GO BACK IN HISTORY, WHEN WE BOUGHT OUT CADILLAC HEIGHTS ALMOST 20 SOMETHING YEARS AGO, THOSE FOLKS HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR ALMOST TWO DECADES FOR US TO SPEAK TO THEIR NEEDS.

AND IT'S A CITYWIDE ISSUE BECAUSE IT WAS FLOODING IN THAT AREA AND THEY HAD NO CHOICE.

AND SO WE OWE THAT TO THAT COMMUNITY.

AND SO I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK IN TERMS OF JUST WHAT WE NEED IN FOR IS EQUITY THROUGH THE CITY.

WHAT HAPPENS IN CADILLAC HEIGHTS, CEDAR CREST EFFECTS SEVEN.

IT'S GOING TO EFFECT THREE.

IT'S GOING TO EFFECT EIGHT BECAUSE OF WHAT WE'RE ROLLING OUT.

SO EVERYTHING WE DO IS GOING TO EFFECT ANOTHER DISTRICT.

SO TODAY I'M GOING TO ASK NOT BECAUSE I WAS ON THIS LIST.

THE CONVERSATION WITH WITH WITH THE MAYOR, THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM TO COME TO THE TABLE.

BUT I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW THIS IS THE BEST PRODUCT, PROPOSITION THAT I CAN SUPPORT.

WITH THE $5 MILLION, YOU GET TO GIVE A LITTLE MORE OOMPH TO A PROJECT YOU KNOW, YOUR COMMUNITY HAS ASKED FOR.

AND SO WITH THAT, WITH ONE MINUTE AND SOME SECONDS LEFT, I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT AND JUST ASK FOR FOR MORE FOLKS TO COME TO THE TABLE WITH FOUR.

WE CAN DO MORE FOR THIS BOND PACKAGE.

THOUGHT I'D THROW THAT IN MAYOR ON THE 4TH.

I KNOW YOU LIKE THAT. THAT'S PRETTY WELL DONE [INAUDIBLE].

OKAY, I'M GOING TO GO TO CHAIRMAN GRACEY FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION AND I CAN APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BAZ WAS SAYING ABOUT JUST THE DISCRETIONARY.

AND IF YOU IF YOU IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PLAN FOR IT AND HOW RISKY IT COULD BE, I CAN APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT I THINK AS THE CITY MANAGER, STATED, I THINK THE IDEA IS THAT WE CAN THEN ALLOCATE THESE, THIS ADDITIONAL MONEY TO SPECIFIC PROJECTS. I MEAN, NOT PROJECTS, BUT PROPOSITIONS TO ENSURE THAT THOSE THE MONEY ONE STAYS WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE.

BUT TWO, IT ACTUALLY THERE ARE PROJECTS TIED TO IT AS WELL.

SO FOR THAT REASON I CAN SUPPORT THIS.

AND I WAS GOING THROUGH THIS JUST KIND OF DOING A COMPARISON BETWEEN AMENDMENT ONE AND THIS AMENDMENT.

AND IF YOU GO THROUGH THERE, YOU HAVE AN INCREASE IN, IN STREETS AS YOU GET YOUR $500, PARK AND RECREATION IS AN INCREASE IN AN ADDITIONAL $10 MILLION THERE.

PUBLIC SAFETY IS AROUND ABOUT THE SAME.

THERE'S A SMALL DECREASE IN IN HOUSING AND SO FORTH.

BUT EACH ONE OF THESE, WE'RE NOT FAR OFF.

AND IT FEELS LIKE WE CAN, GET THERE UNDER THIS MOTION.

AND I THINK WE CAN GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN ALL BE SATISFIED.

FOR THAT REASON, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.

CHAIRMAN MORENO, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

WE'RE ON THE MENDELSOHN AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU MAYOR. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT.

I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR WORKING WITH ME ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE.

FOR ME, IT WAS CRITICAL THAT WE GET PARKS A LITTLE BUMP.

THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN HEARING FROM THE CONSTITUENTS.

WANT TO ALSO JUST POINT OUT THAT CITY HALL AND THE STEMMONS MUNICIPAL CENTER, BUT BOTH IN DISTRICT TWO, REALLY LEAVING ABOUT $35 MILLION ON THE TABLE.

THAT COULD GO DIRECTLY TO DISTRICT TWO.

WHAT I FIND, THOUGH, IS THAT WE CAN SPREAD THAT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITY AND MAKE AND LEVERAGE THOSE DOLLARS TO, BE IT MORE EQUITABLE THAT SERVES MORE PEOPLE AND MORE DISTRICTS.

AND SO, THAT'S MY THOUGHT BEHIND THOSE TWO FACILITIES AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PUTTING DOLLARS WHERE, WHERE OUR CONSTITUENTS ARE USING IT, ENSURE THEY COME BY CITY HALL.

BUT I THINK CITY HALL NEEDS A WHOLE, EVALUATION OF ITSELF.

THERE'S ANOTHER $65 MILLION IN NEEDS, FOR OUR BASEMENT IN THE, IN THE GARAGE.

[05:10:05]

AND SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WE ARE DOING THAT IN A WELL THOUGHT OUT MANNER AND THAT WE'RE NOT JUST PUTTING BAND-AIDS IF WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH THIS BUILDING.

AND I THINK THAT THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

I THINK THAT TRANSPORTATION IS WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE.

PARKS GETS THAT MUCH NEEDED BUMP THAT THAT WE'VE ALL BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

AND THEN PUBLIC SAFETY GETS ANOTHER LITTLE BUMP IN HERE.

AND SO FOR ME, GETTING STREETS, PARKS AND PUBLIC SAFETY ARE CRITICAL, AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

AND WITH THAT, I HOPE THAT WE CAN GARNER SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

YOU KNOW, WE TALK ABOUT DISCRETIONARY MONEY.

THANK YOU COLLEAGUES.

WE ALSO TALK ABOUT REALLOCATION.

THERE IS THE SAME DEFINITION BUT A DIFFERENT WAY.

WE ARE TRYING TO DO A BUDGET.

WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, I LOOK AT OUR SURVEY AND A SURVEY SAID, NUMBER ONE, STREETS, PUBLIC SAFETY AND PARKS AND RECS IN SURVEYS.

AND WHAT WE'RE DOING IS TODAY IS, NUMBER ONE, THERE IS $75 MILLION UNALLOCATED.

IT'S NOT DISCRETIONARY, IT'S UNALLOCATED.

AND TO LOOK AT THE QUESTION THAT, CHAIRMAN SCHULTZ ASKED ME, YOU SAID, HEY, WHY ARE YOU LOOKING AT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 29, WHICH WE LOOK AT 45, BUT IT COULD BE 45, BECAUSE NUMBER ONE, YOU CAN PUT MONEY BACK IN THERE IN THAT LINE AND THAT PROPOSITION THAT, YOU KNOW, IN THAT LINE ITEM, THAT PROPOSITION IS GOING TO DISTRICT LEVEL, YOU KNOW THAT.

AND SO OUR RESIDENTS, WHEN YOU DO ALL THESE BUNDLED PACKAGE, THE FIRST THING THEY SAID WHEN THEY GO AND LOOK AT PROPOSITION, THEY WANT TO KNOW, OR WE WANT TO TELL THEM THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET FIXED, BECAUSE NUMBER ONE, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, WELL, IN 2017, MY STREET GOING TO GET FIXED.

AND YOU CAN POINT THERE, I ALLOCATE THIS MONEY SPECIFICALLY FOR YOUR STREETS.

SAME THING THAT WE TALK ABOUT POINTS.

WE'RE SAYING THAT WE WILL START AT $400 MILLION FOR PARK.

WE WENT DOWN TO $350 AND I'M COMING BACK WITH $325 BECAUSE I THINK PARK IS A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THIS CITY.

DALLAS TRAILS.

I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY KIND OF DISCRETIONARY MONEY OR REALLOCATION MONEY TO YOUR PROJECTS TO FINISH YOUR PROJECT, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO FINISH YOUR PROJECT? I FOUND THAT OUT AT THE SENIOR HILL REC CENTER.

I FOUND THAT OUT WHEN I DID THE TRAILS.

I FOUND THAT OUT WHEN I DID RED BIRD MALL.

IF I HADN'T HAD NO KIND OF REALLOCATION, THOSE PROJECT WOULD STILL BE SITTING ON THE SHELF.

SO THAT'S WHY COLLEAGUES THAT I FEEL LIKE WE CAN COME BACK AND LOOK AT THIS AND AND TO LOOK AT IT.

BUT BUT THE POINT IS THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHOLE LOT OF WORK.

AND POINT IS, I THINK WE ARE POLICY MAKERS AND WE ARE LOOKING AT STAFF AND SAY, STAFF, YOU TELL US WHAT TO DO.

THE CITIZEN WE WORK FOR, THE CITIZEN OF DALLAS, THEY ARE OUR BOSS.

THEY TELL US WHAT TO DO.

WE HEAR THE LOUD AND CLEAR PARTS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.

WE FOUND OUT DURING THE COVID.

WE FOUND THAT OUT DURING THE PANDEMIC.

WE FOUND THAT OUT.

BUT WE ALSO WE CAN INCREASE THE VALUE OF PARK.

WE CAN INCREASE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

WE KNOW WE GOT HOUSING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, WORK TOGETHER.

IT DO WORK TOGETHER BECAUSE EVERY DOLLAR YOU SPEND, THE HOUSING, YOU GOT TO HAVE SOME DOLLARS IN ECO TO GET THAT DONE.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE TASK FORCE.

THE TASK FORCE GAVE US A NUMBER.

STAFF GAVE US A NUMBER.

NOW, THE CITIZEN WAS IN THEIR CONVERSATION.

BUT ALSO WE ARE THE POLICY MAKER.

NOW IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY.

NOW WE GOT TO WORK 9 TO 5 OR 24/7.

THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO WORK TO MAKE SURE THESE NUMBERS GET DONE, TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE.

SO I WORK 24/7 BECAUSE I'M DEDICATED TO MAKE SURE THIS WORK.

I'M NOT RELYING ON STAFF BECAUSE IF I RELY ON STAFF, WE JUST GOT THE INFORMATION WE ASKED STAFF TO DO ON FRIDAY.

WE GOT IT AT 5:00 YESTERDAY.

THAT'S PARK DEPARTMENT.

GIVE ME A CRUNCH OF 25 TO 275 TO 325.

I JUST RECEIVED IT YESTERDAY I JUST NOW HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT IT TODAY.

NOW OUR STREETS ONLY THING WE GOT FROM STREET IS $532 MILLION, WHICH THEY TOLD US WASN'T GOING TO BE IN THERE.

WE DIDN'T GET IT DOWN TO $500.

WE STILL GOT TO LOOK AT IT.

SO COLLEAGUES, YOU KNOW, ROLL UP YOUR SLEEVE, DO SOME WORK BECAUSE WE OWE IT.

WE GOT TO DO THE WORK FOR OUR RESIDENTS.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

WE'RE NOT HERE FOR 9 TO 5.

WE'RE HERE TO WORK. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO WORK, YOU SHOULD NOT GET ELECTED.

WE'RE HERE TO WORK, BUT ALSO WE TALK ABOUT [INAUDIBLE].

BUT THE POINT IS THAT LIBRARY WE GOT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN PUT MONEY BACK IN LIBRARY, WE CAN DO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IF WE WORK TOGETHER.

NOW IT MIGHT BE 7 TO 8 OR 8 TO 7, WHATEVER.

[05:15:01]

BUT THAT'S NOT A MAJORITY. I WANT THEM TO MAKE SURE WE GOT ALL 15 ON THE SAME PAGE.

NOT JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY, BUT WE JUST GOT A JUST A PLAIN MAJORITY TO GET HERE THAT MEANS WE'RE NOT DOING A GREAT SERVICE FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.

LET'S DO THE BEST WE CAN DO WITH THIS OBLIGATION, WITH THIS OPPORTUNITY.

BUT TO DO THE OPPORTUNITY, IT TAKES HARD WORK.

YOU DON'T WIN THE GAME OVERNIGHT.

IT TAKES A WHOLE SEASON TO PREPARE FOR THE SUPER BOWL.

YOU DON'T GET THAT OVERNIGHT.

YOU GOT TO WORK.

YOU DON'T WANT TO WORK YOU SHOULD NOT BE HERE.

YOU KNOW YOU. LIKE I SAID, I LISTEN TO STAFF, BUT STAFF, I DO NOT CONTROL STAFF.

THAT'S A CITY MANAGER JOB.

WE ARE THE POLICY MAKERS.

LET'S MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION AND ROLL UP OUR SLEEVES AND MAKE SURE WE GET THE BEST WHAT WE CAN GET WITH OUR MONEY.

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON MISS MENDELSOHN'S AMENDMENT TO YOUR AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT, I THINK THAT WHAT WE HAVE HERE, WE'RE KIND OF TALKING SEMANTICS AND IN CIRCLES. I DON'T KNOW HOW PRODUCTIVE OF, AN EXERCISE IT IS, TO TELL YOU WITHIN A DAY WHERE WE'RE GOING TO PUT A ARBITRARY FIXED AMOUNT OF, OF DOLLARS, AND HOW THAT NONE OF US HAVE GOTTEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH OUT HOW A $5 MILLION SHIFT HERE OR A $5 MILLION SHIFT HERE, ETC., IMPACTS OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE DID SEE WORKED ON WITH THE TASK FORCE THAT WE DID SEE PRESENTED WITH DATA FROM, THE FROM STAFF.

I MEAN, IT REALLY, REALLY CONVOLUTES THE PROCESS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE HAD OUR SLEEVES ROLLED UP BECAUSE I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS, IN RESPONSE TO A COMMENT THAT WAS JUST MADE.

IN FACT, I BELIEVE THAT THE DOCUMENT THAT I PUT FORWARD ACTUALLY IS VERY INCLUSIVE OF A LOT OF COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE HAD THEIR SLEEVES ROLLED UP, WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF, WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE ADVOCATES, WHO HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS IN FIGURING OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO FIND, AS MUCH AS WE CAN. NOW, IF WE'RE SAYING THAT WE THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE A DISCRETIONARY, IN, IN PARKS, FOR INSTANCE.

YOU'RE GOING TO ADD TO THAT, AND THEN IT'S GOING TO TAKE AWAY FROM SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE'VE ALREADY SEEN PRESENTED.

AND I THINK THAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE CLEAR ON THAT.

$75 MILLION IN THIS EXERCISE IS A LOT OF MONEY.

IT'S A LOT OF MONEY.

SO THAT $75 MILLION COULD EASILY BE SPREAD THROUGHOUT OTHER PROPOSITIONS.

AND THEN WE LOOK AT THESE PROPOSITIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, FROM WHERE WE SAW WITH THE TASK FORCE, FROM WHAT WE'VE SEEN WITH STAFF STREETS $500 TO 0 DEGRADATION, I THINK THAT THAT'S PRETTY SELF-EXPLANATORY.

RIGHT. AND WE HAVE PARKS AT $300.

WELL, IF THERE'S A DESIRE FOR US TO HAVE A CERTAIN AUTONOMY OVER A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OR DOLLAR AMOUNT, WE'RE GOING TO DO THE SAME THING BY GIVING US DISCRETION THAT WAY.

SO EITHER WAY, THIS THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT'S ON THE FLOOR DOES NOTHING TO HONOR THE WORK OF THE TASK FORCE OR STAFF.

AND HOW WE HAVE DECIDED TO WEIGH OUT THE AVERAGES.

IN FACT, IT TAKES AWAY FROM BOTH OF THEM BOTH.

AND I THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT NEEDS TO BE VERY CLEAR HERE.

IT MAY SOUND GREAT ON PAPER, BUT THAT $5 MILLION THAT THAT COULD POTENTIALLY AFFECT ONE OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAD ADVOCATES AND VOLUNTEERS ON A ON A COMMISSION THAT GOT US TO THIS POINT, IT COULD BE TAKING ALL OF THAT AWAY.

THAT ALREADY MADE IT THROUGH SEVERAL ROUNDS.

BUT IN THE END, WHAT IS THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE? THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE OUR INDIVIDUAL FINGER ON THIS AND THAT THIS IS ABOUT WHAT WE AS INDIVIDUALS WANT.

OR IS THIS ABOUT BEING ONE MEMBER OF A GOVERNING BODY THAT'S SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT THE ENTIRE CITY OF DALLAS? MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT'S WHAT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON.

THAT'S YOUR TIME, MR. CHAIRMAN. SO.

OH, THERE YOU GO.

UP. YOU'RE OUT AGAIN.

GET BACK IN, GET IN, GET IN THERE.

I DON'T SEE YOU, BUT YOU'RE YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MISS MENDELSOHN AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS HAS BEEN A GREAT DEBATE.

FROM THE BEGINNING TO NOW.

REALLY GIVING ME A LOT OF THINGS TO THINK ABOUT AS FAR AS THESE DOLLARS, AND IT'S HARD.

I'M JUST GOING TO TELL THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY.

THE UGLY. WE HAVE $24 BILLION, $24 BILLION WITH A B AND DEFERRED MAINTENANCE IN THIS CITY.

AND WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE IT ALL OUT WITH $1.250 BILLION.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHY EVERYTHING'S GETTING, GETS A LITTLE HEATED OR, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE OUR THINGS THAT WE REALLY ADVOCATE FOR AND WE, LIKE,

[05:20:03]

I WAS, AS I SAID EARLIER, ONE OF THE SPONSORS OF THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT.

THEN IT CHANGED ON ME.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I MADE SURE Y'ALL KNEW THAT I WAS NO LONGER SUPPORTING THAT ONE.

AND I'M NOT A SPONSOR OF THIS ONE.

BUT I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS ONE.

AND THE REASON THAT I'M SUPPORTING IT IS BECAUSE FROM THINGS I'VE HEARD OVERALL IN OUR DISCUSSIONS, IT GETS US TO THE CLOSEST FOR NOW.

I MEAN, ANYTHING CAN STILL BE AMENDED.

THIS IS A STRAW VOTE THAT GETS US THE STARTING PLACE THAT THEN AMENDMENTS CAN STILL COME.

THIS IS MY SECOND BOND.

AND IN 2017, I REMEMBER RIGHT BEFORE WE WERE, GOING TO APPROVE $1 BILLION, $25 MILLION CAME THROUGH AT THE LAST SECOND.

I MEAN, IT WAS I MEAN, WE WERE GETTING READY TO VOTE AND AN AMENDMENT CAME THROUGH AND WE ADDED IT IN.

ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.

BUT I THINK THIS IS A GOOD STARTING PLACE AND THINGS CAN STILL BE MASSAGED.

THAT WAS STATED EARLIER.

YEAH. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WORKING AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET WHERE THEY THINK THEY CAN GET.

AND I DO BELIEVE, THAT THIS DOES TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHAT THE TASK FORCE WAS, HAD SHOWN US.

NO, IT'S NOT EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAID, BUT IT GETS US CLOSER TO, WHAT ALL THOSE, VOLUNTEERS DID IN ORDER TO GET US TO A, STARTING POINT AS WELL AS I THINK IT HONORS A LOT OF THE CITY MANAGER'S, PROPOSALS, AND IT KIND OF MORPHS THEM INTO ONE.

NOT PERFECT.

I'M NOT SAYING IT'S PERFECT, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S A GOOD STARTING POINT.

SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSIONS, CONTINUE WORKING WITH EACH OTHER AND SEE IF THERE'S A PLACE THAT WE CAN MOVE FROM HERE TO THERE.

I DO LIKE THE OPTION OF US BEING ABLE TO SAY, I WANT $5 MILLION, AND I KNOW IT'S GOING HERE NO MATTER WHAT.

THAT'S THAT'S MY ONE LITTLE FINGER THAT I GET TO HAVE IN THIS, TO SAY THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS GETS TAKEN CARE OF.

I DO LIKE I MEAN, I THINK YOU SEE THE OVERARCHING THINGS $500 MILLION MINIMUM FOR STREETS, $310 IS A LITTLE BIT UP FROM THE $300 MILLION MINIMUM FROM PARKS, WHICH I THINK IS A GREAT THING BECAUSE OUR.

THAT'S THE ONE THING THAT OUR RESIDENTS ALWAYS SEE AND KNOW ABOUT.

AND LET ME TELL YOU, IT'S WHERE I GET THE MOST COMPLAINTS AFTER STREETS IS ON PARKS BECAUSE OF EQUIPMENT, MAINTENANCE AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AND, REC CENTERS, THINGS LIKE THAT ARE SO IMPORTANT THERE.

CULTURAL CENTERS AS. WELL.

SO OUR PARKS, IT'S WHERE WE GATHER.

IT'S WHERE WE DO THINGS. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE PUT A GOOD INVESTMENT IN THERE.

AND FROM 17 WHEN WE HAD DISCRETIONARY, I PUT $10 OF MY $12 MILLION DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS INTO PARKS.

AND IT, WAS SOMETHING THAT MAKES SURE THAT WEST DALLAS GOT, AQUATICS BECAUSE WE WERE LEFT OUT OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN.

THE OTHER THINGS IN HERE, ARTS AND CULTURE, MAN, I LOVE YOU GUYS.

EVERYBODY'S KIND OF STICKING TO THAT.

6%, $75 MILLION.

LET'S KEEP DOING IT.

THE CITY HALL, I THINK, CAN BE MASSAGED.

WE PROBABLY NEED SOME, SAFETY EQUIPMENT THERE IN CITY HALL, BUT WE CAN STILL WORK ON THAT.

THIS ISN'T OFFICIAL.

LIKE THIS, IS IT? THIS IS ALL WE'RE SPENDING THERE.

WE CAN WORK ON THAT.

AND I THINK THAT, THERE'S A FEW OTHERS THAT WE CAN WORK ON.

SO, BECAUSE OF THIS, AND I FEEL IT'S THE MOST THAT HAS A LITTLE BIT OF EVERYBODY IN IT AND THINGS THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

I WANT TO SUPPORT THIS AND HOPEFULLY IT PASSES.

AND THEN WE HAVE A PLACE TO MASSAGE FROM THERE.

AND, AND HOPEFULLY BY THE 14TH WE HAVE A, AN EASY, VOTE TO SEND TO THE VOTERS FOR A MAY ELECTION.

AND, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE GOT TO GET I THOUGHT WE WERE GETTING THERE AND, THIS ONE, I THINK, MAYOR PRO TEM AND THE FOLKS YOU WORK WITH, HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD A GOOD, YOU KNOW, PLACE TO START.

AND I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUE CARA MENDELSOHN FOR COUNCIL MEMBER CARA MENDELSOHN FOR, TAKING THE BATON AND MAKING THE AMENDMENT IN ORDER TO GET IT ON THE FLOOR SO WE COULD DISCUSS IT AND TALK ABOUT IT.

SO WITH THAT, MR. MAYOR, I'M GOING TO STAND FOR THIS ONE, AND I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR IT, AND HOPEFULLY YOU ALL WILL TOO.

AND THEN WE HAVE A STARTING POINT AND A PLACE TO GO SO THAT WE CAN GET SOMETHING TO THE VOTERS BECAUSE THEY DESPERATELY, DESPERATELY NEED AND WANT THIS BOND ELECTION, IN ORDER FOR US TO ADVANCE OUR CITY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, IT'S TIME TO SHOW CARDS.

IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT, PLEASE SHOW A GREEN CARD.

MIC] WITH NINE CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR.

THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, SO, LOOK, WE'RE ABOUT TO TAKE A LUNCH BREAK AND COME BACK AND DEAL WITH THE NEXT ITEM.

BUT AGAIN, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER HERE. BUT I THINK THE SUMMARY SO FAR OF THE GUIDANCE THAT YOU'VE GOTTEN FROM THE COMBINED MEETINGS ABOUT THIS IS A

[05:25:08]

$1.25 BILLION PROGRAM, A MAY 4TH, 2024 ELECTION.

AND THE ALLOCATIONS AS DESCRIBED IN THE AMENDMENT THAT MISS MENDELSOHN READ AS GUIDANCE F OR YOU. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I HEARD TO HAPPEN OVER THESE TWO.

SO MY IMPRESSION THEN JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, IS WHAT I SEE ON THE SCREEN HERE THAT HAS ZERO FOR I'M NOT SURE THOSE NUMBERS ARE RIGHT BECAUSE IT HAS $1 MILLION FOR SOMETHING THAT'S NOT RIGHT.

I DON'T THINK YOU CAN TRUST THAT SCREEN.

IT'S WHAT WAS READ INTO THE RECORD BY MISS MENDELSOHN.

YEAH, YEAH, YOU HAVE TO GO BY WHAT SHE SAID.

LET ME, LET ME, LET ME. YEAH, IT SHOULD BE UNDER THAT NUMBER ONE.

THAT'S THOSE ARE THE NUMBERS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.

RIGHT. AND SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY JUST FOR THE RECORD THAT'S FINE. THAT CITY HALL HAS ZERO IN THE PROPOSITION.

IS THAT WHAT I'M READING? [INAUDIBLE] I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WAS THE GUIDANCE.

AND IT'S AGAIN, GUIDANCE.

AND YOU, AS YOU POINTED OUT, THERE'S MORE TIME NOW TO WORK WITH THAT.

BUT THAT'S THE GUIDANCE.

IT'S 2:53.

WE'LL GO TO RECESS FOR LUNCH.

WE'LL COME BACK WITH ITEM B, STANDARD RECESS.

OH, WE'LL COME BACK AT 3:30.

ALL RIGHT. IT'S 4:00 AND WE ARE NOW BACK AT OUR SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, ACTING AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

AND WE ARE ON A BRIEFING ITEM B, SO I'M READY FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE OVER.

[B. Discussion of Expanding Housing Development Options with Potential Regulations for Two-Four-Unit Housing and Minimum Residential Lot Size]

THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND AS STAFF MAKES THEIR WAY TO THE PODIUM, THE FOLLOWING BRIEFING IS IN RESPONSE TO A FIVE SIGNATURE CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM FROM NOVEMBER 2023 THAT REQUESTED THAT AN ITEM BE PLACED ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION.

PER THAT MEMORANDUM, THE PURPOSE OF THIS BRIEFING IS TO DISCUSS WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE FOR AMENDING THE CONSTRUCTION CODES AND THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS.

PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN STAFF WERE CHARGED WITH THE FOLLOWING THE FOLLOWING THROUGH ON THAT REQUEST IN THE MEMO TO HAVE THIS ITEM FOR DISCUSSION AND PLACED ON A BRIEFING AGENDA, AS WELL AS PROVIDE INFORMATION AND POTENTIAL PROCESSES AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF AMENDING THE CITY CODES SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDE TO PURSUE THOSE OPTIONS. THERE IS NO STAFF PROPOSAL RELATED TO THIS ISSUE AND DISCUSSION, NOR HAS THERE BEEN CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THE ZONING OR DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE CURRENT ITEM AT HAND INCLUDES A PRESENTATION BY STAFF TO PROVIDE SOME BASELINE INFORMATION TO CONSIDER, AS DIRECTED BY THE FIVE SIGNATURE MEMORANDUM, AND FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO DISCUSS THE ISSUE AND PROVIDE DIRECTION, FEEDBACK AND OR MAKE REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO STAFF.

AND AT THIS TIME, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO ANDREA GILLIS AND DR.

ANDREA UDREA WITHIN THE PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK FOR THE DISCUSSION.

THOSE WERE WONDERFULLY HELPFUL REMARKS.

THANK YOU. BUT BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO STAFF, I JUST WANT TO, RECOGNIZE FIRST CHAIRMAN WEST TO SAY, WHATEVER HE NEEDS TO SAY ABOUT THIS.

BUT BEFORE HE DOES, I WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE, FOR THE PUBLIC AND EVERYBODY, TO KNOW THAT THIS IS WHAT I WAS TOLD AND MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WERE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A CONVERSATION STILL AT THIS POINT, IN TERMS OF WHERE WE ARE AND THE HISTORY OF THIS TOPIC, A CONVERSATION, THERE'S NOT THIS IS NOT A STAFF DIDN'T TELL US TO DO THIS.

AND WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, TELLING STAFF TO DO SOMETHING.

WE ARE HAVING A CONVERSATION.

AND I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MR. WEST TO MAYBE PUT EVEN MORE, MORE COLOR TO THAT.

BUT AND TO SAY WHAT HE THINKS OUGHT TO HAPPEN HERE.

BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY, IS TO HAVE A CONVERSATION.

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND MR. BROADNAX. AND, YEAH, I THINK THAT SOMETIMES IN THE MEDIA AND IN THE ESPECIALLY SOCIAL MEDIA, THINGS GET A LITTLE BIT HYPED UP.

AND THIS WAS FILED BY SEVERAL COLLEAGUES AND MYSELF AS SIMPLY A OPENING, A DISCUSSION ABOUT POLICIES THAT ARE HAPPENING IN OTHER CITIES AND WHAT ARE THE BEST PRACTICES

[05:30:08]

WITH THE INTENT FOR THIS TO REALLY BE HANDLED BY THOSE WHO WE HAVE APPOINTED AS OUR PROFESSIONALS TO DEAL WITH THIS, OUR PLANNING COMMISSION AND MEMBERS. AND I WOULD JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TODAY MAYOR, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS APPROPRIATE THAT WE JUST PUNT THIS ITEM DOWN TO THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND LET THEM TAKE THE FIRST STAB AT IT BEFORE WE, AS COUNCIL TRY TO, YOU KNOW, CURE CANCER WITH THIS POLICY.

OKAY, HOLD ON A SECOND.

I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS, BUT I'M GOING TO LET YOU TRY TO WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY TO MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT'S THAT MAKES SENSE FROM A PROCEDURAL STANDPOINT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT.

I HATE TO EVEN REPEAT THE PHRASE, I KNOW WHAT PUNTING MEANS OUTSIDE OF THE FOOTBALL CONTEXT, I I'LL CLARIFY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

IT'S A LONG MORNING.

MAYOR. SO THE REQUEST WOULD BE, OR MOTION, IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE, TO SEND THE BRIEFING AND ANY RELATED ACTIONS THAT MIGHT COME FROM THAT TO THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR DISPOSAL.

IS THAT AN APPROPRIATE MOTION TO MAKE AT THIS TIME? NO, NOT AT THIS TIME.

THERE'S NO MOTIONS THAT SHOULD BE ON THE FLOOR.

OKAY, OKAY.

OKAY. CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ, DID YOU HAVE A SOMETHING YOU NEEDED TO SAY? [INAUDIBLE] YEAH.

I JUST IF IT'S TRUE THAT WE ARE GOING TO GET THE BRIEFING, THEN I DON'T NEED TO SPEAK.

OKAY. CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU NEEDED TO SAY BEFORE WE.

I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE BRIEFING IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, BUT YEAH, I WOULD, ASK FOR A POINT OF, INFORMATION.

OKAY. STATED, PLEASE.

FOR, I GUESS, ESSENTIALLY A VOTE OF CONFIDENCE, WOULD WE NOT BE ABLE TO GO INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AND, VOTE YAY OR NAY ON THE MOTION THAT WAS JUST MADE TO REMAND? NO, YOU WOULD NOT, BECAUSE IT'S SIMPLY A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BODY.

AND IT WOULDN'T IT WOULDN'T HAVE ANY FORCE OR EFFECT UNLESS YOU GUYS COULD ACTUALLY VOTE ON IT.

AND I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE RULES OF PROCEDURE REQUIRE ONE OF FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO COMES THROUGH THAT THAT THE FULL BRIEFING BE DONE.

YEAH. IT ALSO REQUIRES WITHIN 30 DAYS.

SO IS EVERYONE HEARING, BECAUSE I'M HEARING THIS ALL IN REAL TIME TO LIKE YOU GUYS ARE YOU HEARING THE THE PROCEDURAL SITUATION WE'RE IN THE THE BRIEFING HAS TO CONTINUE PER RULE BECAUSE IT WAS DONE PURSUANT TO A FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO.

CHAIRMAN WEST MADE A MOTION THAT THE PARLIAMENTARIAN JUST RULED WAS OUT OF ORDER TO REMAND IT TO CPC TO DEAL WITH IT DIRECTLY THERE FIRST.

SO WE NOW, PER RULE, MUST HEAR THIS BRIEFING, AND THEN YOU CAN DO WITH IT WHAT YOU, YOU YOU WILL THAT'S PERMITTED.

BUT THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW.

OKAY. CITY MANAGERS BACK TO YOU AGAIN.

I THINK YOUR STAFF IS READY.

BUT GO AHEAD, MISS GILLIS.

YOU CAN BEGIN THE PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU. ANDREA GILLIS, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN.

I THINK CITY MANAGER BROADNAX AND THE MAYOR, STATED VERY WELL, WHAT I WANTED TO STATE WAS THAT THIS IS A CONVERSATION, THAT THERE IS NO PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE. STAFF DOES NOT HAVE ANY PROPOSALS AT THIS TIME.

AND I THINK THE ONLY OTHER PIECE THAT I WANTED TO FRAME THIS UP, BEFORE I PASS IT TO DR.

UDREA, IS THAT THIS ALSO IS A COMPLETELY SEPARATE CONVERSATION FROM FORWARD DALLAS.

THIS IS A, YOU KNOW, STEMMING FROM THE FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO, THAT WAS PRESENTED BACK IN NOVEMBER.

SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONFUSION, PARTICULARLY IN THE MEDIA, ABOUT WHAT THIS IS AND WHAT IT ISN'T.

IT IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM FORWARD DALLAS.

SO WITH THAT, I WILL PASS THE PRESENTATION TO DR.

UDREA TO WALK US THROUGH SOME OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE MEMO FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ANDREA UDREA ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN.

I'M GOING TO GET A LITTLE BIT TECHNICAL.

WE HAVE A PRESENTATION READY.

IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE.

WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH A PURPOSE OF THE PRESENTATION, SOME OF THE CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS, SOME TRENDS THAT WE SEE, VR ZONING CASES, SOME POSSIBLE PATHS FORWARD AND PROCESS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS AND TIMELINE.

ALL OF THIS IS BASED ON THE THE MEMO.

SO NEXT SLIDE.

AS WE SAID, THE PRESENTATION PURPOSE STEMS FROM A REQUEST THAT WAS SIGNED BY FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS IN NOVEMBER 8TH,

[05:35:06]

2023 THAT WAS REQUESTED A DISCUSSION ABOUT POTENTIAL OPTIONS TO EXPAND THE ZONING MENU FOR A WIDER VARIETY OF HOUSING OPTIONS.

THIS IS NOT A PROPOSAL.

NEXT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

I THINK WE'RE NEXT SLIDE AGAIN.

ONE MORE.

HERE IT IS. THIS IS AN EXCERPT FROM THE MEMO, AND I'M GOING TO READ IT.

IS IT A BRIEFING TO EXPLAIN THE PROCESS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF AMENDING CHAPTER 51 AND 51A, WHICH ARE BASICALLY OUR ZONING, TO DEFINE NEW USES CALLED TRIPLEX AND FOURPLEX.

SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT, LARGE TYPE OF PLACES REDUCING MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT AND AMENDING SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX DISTRICTS TO ALLOW TRIPLEX AND FOURPLEX USES.

ALSO, THE SECOND PART OF THE MEMO WAS TO AMEND CHAPTER 53 AND 57 OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE TO MODIFY THE SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS OF THE BUILDING CODE AND DALLAS ONE AND TWO FAMILY DWELLING UNIT CODE TO MAKE DALLAS ONE AND TWO FAMILY DWELLING CODE APPLY TO THREE AND FOUR UNIT STRUCTURE.

THIS IS GOING TO BE THE PORTION THAT'S GOING TO BE PRESENTED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

BUT I MUST I MUST MAKE A MENTION IN HERE.

THIS IS NOT THE ZONING.

THIS IS BUILDING CODE.

SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONVERSATION IS COMPLETELY SEPARATED FROM THE ZONING.

AND THIS DOESN'T CIRCUMVENT WHERE THESE TYPE OF UNITS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

SO THIS IS WHERE I'M GOING TO GET A LITTLE BIT TECHNICAL.

AND THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO DO THAT.

GOING THROUGH THE CODE THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, THE ZONING CODE, RIGHT, WE HAVE 18 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

THERE ARE ALL DEFINED BASED ON THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES.

AGRICULTURAL. WE HAVE SIX TYPES OF SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE LOT.

WE HAVE A DUPLEX DISTRICT, THREE TYPES OF TOWNHOME DISTRICTS.

WE HAVE ONE THAT'S CALLED CLUSTER HOUSING.

WE HAVE FOUR TYPES OF MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS.

AND THEN MANUFACTURED HOME SINGLE FAMILY IS ALLOWED IN ALL OF THESE DISTRICTS.

SINGLE FAMILY IS ALLOWED IN OTHER DISTRICTS AS WELL.

AGAIN SUMMARY AND HIGH POINTS R-7.5 IS THE MOST USED ZONING DISTRICT IN THE CITY.

D(A) HAS SOME REGULATIONS THAT KIND OF LIKE MAKE IT NOT NECESSARILY WORKABLE.

THE LOT SIZE IS TOO BIG.

THE FRONT YARD IS BIGGER THAN THE DISTRICT.

SO IT'S REALLY HARD TO HAVE THAT ZONING DISTRICT TO BE ANY TYPE OF INFILL DEVELOPMENT.

TH-1 AND TH-2 HAVE DENSITY CAPS THAT ARE VERY LOW.

FOR INSTANCE, THERE ARE LIKE 6 OR 9 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

AS A COMPARISON, I WILL MENTION THAT R-7.5, IF YOU WERE TO DO IT PER ACRE, ALLOWS 8.7 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

SO IT TURNS OUT THAT R-7.5 IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT DENSER THAN THE TH ONE AND TWO.

CH ONE ALSO REQUIRES A MINIMUM LOT SIZE THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT HARD TO USE, AND THEN MF ONE AND TWO, WHICH ALSO ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY AND THE GENTLE DENSITY.

THEY HAVE DENSITY CAPS PER UNITS AND LOT SIZES.

SO IT'S ALWAYS A COMBINATION OF DENSITY PLUS LOT SIZE THAT KIND OF LIKE MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT HARD TO DEVELOP DIFFERENT TYPE OF HOUSING.

ALSO TO MENTION THAT GENTLE DENSITY, THE ONE THAT'S IN THE MEMO, HAS NO SPECIFIC ZONING DISTRICT RIGHT NOW THAT WILL FALL UNDER AN MF 2 OR 1.

WHAT DOES THE CODE CONTAIN RIGHT NOW? IT'S NOT A WELCOMING CODE TO DIFFERENT TYPE OF HOUSING.

JUST A LITTLE RECAP.

CONTAINS BARRIERS TO OTHER TYPES OF HOUSING OTHER THAN SINGLE UNIT DETACHED AND DOESN'T HAVE SENSITIVITY TO CONTEXT.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN? IT MEANS THAT IT DOES NOT CARE HOW A HOUSE LOOKS LIKE.

AND I'M NOT TALKING JUST ABOUT ARCHITECTURE.

I'M TALKING ABOUT MASSING.

SO WHAT I'M SAYING, WHAT IS MISSING SCALE DESIGN, PREDICTABILITY FOR ANY TYPE OF HOUSING, WHAT IS CONTEXT SENSITIVITY AND GENTLE DENSITY? I WILL TRANSLATE THIS.

ANY OR DIFFERENT TYPE OF HOUSING CAN LOOK AND FUNCTION THE SAME.

THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO TO TO SAY.

I'M JUST GOING TO RECAP A LITTLE BIT.

THIS IS JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A VERY HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF HOW THE CITY OF DALLAS IS ZONED RIGHT NOW.

YOU SEE A LOT OF YELLOW AND A LOT OF, GREEN ISH.

THAT GREEN IS ACTUALLY PD ZONED AND THE YELLOW IS SINGLE FAMILY ZONING.

FOR FORWARD DALLAS WE DIVIDED THE CITY IN SEVEN AREAS, AND WE DID, AGAIN, AN OVERALL TYPE OF, PERCENTAGE OF THE ZONING THAT'S ON THE GROUND.

[05:40:08]

THIS IS NOT HOW THE LAND IS USED.

IT'S JUST A ZONING.

AND JUST TO GIVE YOU HIGH POINTERS, FOR INSTANCE, THE AMOUNT OF LAND THAT IS ZONED MULTIFAMILY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS IS LESS THAN 5%.

THE AMOUNT OF LAND THAT'S ZONED DUPLEX AND TH, WHICH ALLOWS DUPLEX USES IS 2% AND 20% IS PD.

SINGLE FAMILY CAN VARY.

A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION.

HOW ARE OTHER CITIES? WHY ARE OTHER CITIES EXPLORING THIS OPTIONS? SIMPLY TO ALLOW AND CREATE MORE HOUSING OPTIONS AT DIFFERENT PRICE POINTS.

AND FOR DIVERSE HOUSEHOLDS, INCLUDING MULTIGENERATIONAL HOUSEHOLDS, SINGLE PARENTS, THOSE WHO WANT TO AGE IN PLACE, AND STUDENTS.

OBVIOUSLY, TO ALLOW GREATER ACCESS TO NEIGHBORHOOD LIVING.

GENTLE DENSITY ALSO WAS A COMMON HOUSING TYPE IN THE CITIES BEFORE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES IN THE 80S.

I WOULD ALSO MAKE A COMMENT TO SAY THAT THEY WERE ALSO, VIA ZONING, CAREFULLY MADE NONCONFORMING.

ALSO, THERE ARE REQUESTS THAT ARE GROWING FOR HOUSING TYPES, BUT CITIES DO NOT HAVE THE PROPER ZONING TOOLS AND REGULATIONS TO FACILITATE GOOD DESIGN, WHICH DALLAS FALLS INTO THIS TOO.

I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH A SERIES OF EXAMPLES I UPDATED.

I ADDED TWO, TWO MORE I THINK SINCE OUR BRIEFING FOR THE HOUSING COMMISSION, COMMITTEE.

THIS IS JUST TO ILLUSTRATE MASSING AND HOW WHAT TYPE OF HOW THESE TYPE OF HOUSING LOOK LIKE.

SO IF YOU LOOK TO THE LEFT OF YOUR SLIDE, YOU SEE A SINGLE FAMILY OR A SINGLE UNIT DETACHED TO THE LEFT VERSUS, TO THE RIGHT, I'M SORRY, VERSUS THE EXISTING DUPLEX THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OLDER TO THE RIGHT.

THEN PICTURE TO THE RIGHT OF THE SLIDE, YOU WILL SEE A FOURPLEX AND THE SINGLE FAMILY SIDE BY SIDE.

THE SINGLE UNIT DETACHED IS THE ONE THAT'S FRONT LOADED.

THE FOURPLEX IS THE ONE THAT'S REAR LOADED.

IT HAS ONLY ONE DRIVEWAY BETTER, MORE PER MORE PERVIOUS FRONT YARD.

PLEASE DO NOT LOOK AT THESE HOUSES.

JUST AT ARCHITECTURE.

PLEASE LOOK AT THE MASSING AS WELL.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A FRONTAGE THAT'S, CONTAINED WITH A COMBINATION OF FOURPLEXES AND DUPLEXES.

I KNOW EXAMPLES ARE FROM PD 193, BUT I WILL MAKE A COMMENT THAT PD 193, SOME AREAS DO HAVE ZONING FOR THIS TYPE OF USES.

AND THEY'VE BEEN EXISTING IN PLACE FOR A LONG TIME.

OTHER EXAMPLES JUST BEHIND LEMON AVENUE, YOU WOULD SEE THERE ARE SOME BLOCKS IN THERE WHERE IT'S A GOOD COMBINATION BETWEEN CONSERVATION DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS ONLY SINGLE FAMILY AND THEN SOME TYPES OF MULTIFAMILY ZONING, AND YOU WOULD SEE HOW THEY BLEND WELL TOGETHER.

FOR INSTANCE, TO THE RIGHT OF THE SIDE, THESE TWO HOMES ARE BASICALLY, AT THE SAME CORNER FROM ONE ANOTHER.

THE MULTIFAMILY TO THE RIGHT IS BASICALLY, OH, CAN YOU DO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? HERE IT IS.

SO TO THE RIGHT OF THIS OF THE SCREEN YOU WILL SEE A PICTURE OF A MULTIFAMILY WHICH ARE BASICALLY INDIVIDUALLY ATTACHED UNITS.

I WILL MAKE A COMMENT THAT SOME OF THEM ARE PLATTED INDIVIDUALLY, SO THEY CAN TECHNICALLY BE CONSIDERED A SINGLE FAMILY.

THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE ON THE END OF THE BLOCK WITH INDIVIDUAL UNITS ATTACHED.

THAT BLOCK IS A COMBINATION OF PLATTED AND MORE UNITS ON A LOT, BUT THEY NEEDED TO SWITCH TO AN MF-3 IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE, A SMALLER TYPE OF LOT AND THE SMALLER TYPE OF UNIT.

ALL ATTACHED.

YOU'LL SEE THESE HOUSES AGAIN.

SAME AREA.

THEY'RE ACROSS THE STREET FROM ONE ANOTHER.

THE ONE TO THE LEFT IS A CORNER LOT.

THAT IS A COMBINATION OF INDIVIDUAL UNITS THAT ARE ATTACHED OR STACKED, WHICH IS A MULTIFAMILY ZONING.

BUT ALSO YOU CAN SEE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT EXISTS IN A MULTIFAMILY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS ONE.

I THINK BY MISTAKE I DOUBLED IT.

SO IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT PLEASE.

THANK YOU. THIS IS A NEW EXAMPLE THAT I ADDED SINCE THE HOUSING COMMITTEE BRIEFING.

IT'S A COMBINATION.

THE ZONING ON THE GROUND IS DUPLEX IS, THE COMBINATION IS SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX.

YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE ALL REAR LOADED.

THE SCALE IS VERY SMALL.

IT'S ONLY ONE STORY.

THEY HAVE BIG FRONT YARDS.

THEY HAVE LARGE, STREET TREES.

SAME AN EXAMPLE WITH DUPLEXES.

BUT THERE ARE REAR LOADED AND ACROSS FROM THE DUPLEX YOU SEE IT'S SINGLE UNIT DETACHED ALSO FRONT LOADED.

[05:45:07]

SO BUT AGAIN VERY DEEP FRONT YARD SMALL SCALE.

THEY WORK WELL WITH ONE ANOTHER.

I'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT MORE RESEARCH BECAUSE ONE OF THE, COMMENTS THAT I GOT, WE GOT FROM THE HOUSING COMMITTEE COMMISSION COMMITTEE WAS TO FIND EXAMPLES SOUTH OF 30.

I ALSO FOUND A LOT OF EXAMPLES IN FAR NORTH IN DISTRICT 12 AND 11.

A LOT OF EXAMPLES IN DISTRICT 3, 4 OR 5.

WE ALL KNOW DISTRICT SIX SEVEN.

THEY ALREADY HAVE A LOT.

I HAVE A LIST OF NEIGHBORHOODS IF YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH THEM, BUT, I'LL LEAVE IT FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.

NEXT ONE, PLEASE.

SO WHAT ARE THE TRENDS THAT WE SEE? WITH OUR ZONING CASES? WE SEE A LOT OF REQUESTS, FOR PDS, FOR SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS.

THESE ARE SINGLE UNIT OR SINGLE FAMILY.

USUALLY THEY ARE DETACHED, BUT SMALLER LOTS.

JUST IN AN ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS THE MARKET NEED FOR A LITTLE BIT OF, ON A LOT TYPE OF HOUSE BUT A LITTLE BIT DENSER.

WE SEE A LOT OF ZONING CASES OR REQUESTS FOR GENTLE INFILL.

BUT ZONING UP, WE SEE AN APPEAL FOR DUPLEX AND MULTIPLE UNITS ATTACHED, BUT USUALLY SMALL, SMALL DENSITY LIKE THREE, FOUR UNITS.

WE ALSO SEE SOME ZONING CASES FOR NON CONFORMING HOMES THAT ARE NOT PROPERLY ZONED.

THEY ARE IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS AND THEY NEED TO PROBABLY IMPROVE THEIR HOMES.

SO THEY'RE TRAPPED BY ZONING.

JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF AN A SENSE IN NUMBERS, THE ZONING CASES IN THE PAST TWO YEARS, APPROXIMATELY 30% HAVE A HOUSING COMPONENT. AND OUT OF THOSE 30% OF CASES, 50 UP TO 50% ARE USUALLY REQUESTS FOR GENTLE DENSITY OR SINGLE FAMILY. AND I ALSO HAVE NUMBERS IF NEED BE.

NOW BASED ON THE MEMO, BECAUSE THE MEMO WAS, REQUIRING US TO LOOK AT POSSIBLE PATH FORWARD, I DIVIDED THE CONVERSATION INTO THREE TOPICS, AS IN REGARDS TO A PATH FORWARD.

ONE IS THE LAND USE.

WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? WHICH IS WHAT TYPE OF HOUSING.

THE OTHER ONE IS WHERE? MEANING ZONING DISTRICTS AND THE OTHER ONE WAS LOT SIZES.

SO REGARDING THE WHAT THE LAND USE, WE WERE THINKING OF SCENARIOS OR TOPIC OF CONVERSATION.

ONE WOULD BE TO ALLOW DUPLEX AND ADUS ON ANY LOT BECAUSE THEY FUNCTION A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

AND FOR INSTANCE, ADUS ARE SOMEWHAT ALLOWED RIGHT NOW.

ANYWAY, THE SECOND ONE WOULD BE PER THE MEMO, CREATE AND ALLOW TRIPLEX AND FOURPLEX BASED ON CERTAIN CRITERIA.

AND THE CRITERIA I WANT TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR MEANS DESIGN MEANING WHERE AND HOW.

SO I'M VERY CAREFUL I WILL NOT AND I NEVER USE THE WORD BY RIGHT IN THE PRESENTATION.

I WANT THIS TO BE VERY CLEAR.

SO NOW THE DESIGN, THE CONTEXT SENSITIVITY MEANS THAT THE EXAMPLE OF THINGS THAT WE CAN LOOK AT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN CRAFT REGULATIONS TO BE RESPECTFUL.

THE SCALE, THEY NEED TO LOOK LIKE A HOUSE, THE SAME STANDARDS AS A BASE DISTRICT, WHATEVER THAT BASE DISTRICT IS, OR THE SAME STANDARDS OR ANY HOUSE ON, ON THE BLOCK OR ON THE STREET.

HOW IS THE THE AXIS DEALING WITH IS IT FRONT LOADED? REAR LOADED? HOW IS THE GARAGE DOOR? IF IT'S FRONT LOADED, WE CAN PUT MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGES ON ADUS FOR INSTANCE, MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ON THE LOT.

AND OBVIOUSLY WE WILL KEEP THE REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSCAPING.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE A NOTE TO SAY THAT EVEN RIGHT NOW, PER CODE, THE CODE REQUIRES AT LEAST ONE TREE PER LOT.

IF THE LOT IS SMALLER, OBVIOUSLY THE THE REQUIREMENT GOES WITH THE LOT, BUT ALSO FOR BIGGER LOTS DEPENDS ON THE SIZE OF THE LOT YOU CAN GO UP TO ARE REQUIRED THREE TREES.

AS TO WHERE THIS IS THE CONVERSATION ABOUT ZONING DISTRICTS.

WE WERE THINKING OF TWO POSSIBLE DISCUSSION POINTS OR DISCUSSION LINES.

ONE IS CREATING A FLOATING, BASICALLY A NEW BASE ZONING DISTRICT FOR SMALL MULTIPLEX.

IT CAN BE ATTACHED STACK DETACHED, SMALL SCALE HOMES, AND THEY MAY BE ALLOWABLE BY REZONING CASE BY CASE.

[05:50:02]

WE HAVE TAKEN THIS APPROACH WITH MU FOR INSTANCE.

AND THEN ANOTHER ONE WOULD BE AND I THINK THAT IS NEEDED ANYWAY TO UPDATE AND, CORRECT OR MAKE THE EXISTING ZONING DISTRICTS WORK A LITTLE BIT BETTER, LIKE THE DUPLEX AND THE TH AND THE MF ONE AND THE CH, AND RETHINK THE ACCESS TO A LOT AS WELL.

MEANING ARE THEY FRONT LOADED? HOW DO YOU ACCESS YOUR GARAGE? WHAT YOU WILL SEE IN HERE, NONE OF THESE SCENARIOS SAY ANYWHERE.

NOW REGARDING THE LOT SIZE, WHICH WAS THE SECOND PART OF THE MEMO, WE DISCUSSED, WE THINK WE THOUGHT ABOUT IT REALLY, REALLY DEEPLY.

WE THINK THAT THIS IS A LONGER TERM TYPE OF, CONVERSATION BECAUSE IT REQUIRES A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS.

I STARTED MY PRESENTATION AND I SAID ALL OUR EXISTING ZONING DISTRICTS ARE BASED ON LOT SIZE.

SO WHEN WE TOUCH THE LOT SIZE, IT IS MEANS THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CODE COMPREHENSIVELY.

SO THIS CAN BE, AGAIN, IF WE WANT TO OPEN UP A CONVERSATION ABOUT LOT SIZES, IT PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE ITS OWN SEPARATE CONVERSATION.

AND WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THAT IT WILL ATTACH EVERY PART OF THE CODE.

THE NEXT TWO SLIDES ARE JUST IMAGES, FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE STUDIED THIS, MORE ACADEMICALLY AND OBVIOUSLY PRACTICALLY, WE CAN COME UP OBVIOUSLY WITH OUR OWN, ILLUSTRATIONS.

WE JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN AND, HOW MASSING COMPATIBILITY LOOKS LIKE AND CAN LOOK LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, IN THIS ONE, DEPENDING ON THE COLOR IS EXISTING AND, HOMES AND THE ONES THAT ARE COMING, OR PROPOSED OR NEW.

THIS ONE EXPLAINS A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

LIKE IF YOU DIAL DOWN TO THE LOT THE LOT SCALE.

HOW WHAT DO WE MEAN BY CONTEXT SENSITIVE.

IT MEANS IT'S GOING TO LOOK THE SAME AS A HOUSE.

SO RIGHT NOW IF YOU HAVE TWO ATTACHED THEY CAN LOOK THE SAME AS A SINGLE ONE.

IF YOU HAVE FOUR ATTACHED AND STACKED, THEY CAN LOOK THE SAME AS AS A SINGLE UNIT.

JUST AN ATTEMPT TO SHOW A LITTLE BIT AND GET THE BASELINE OF THE CONVERSATION.

POTENTIAL EFFECTS, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT, THE MEMO REQUIRED US TO BRING TO CONVERSATION.

THIS IS OBVIOUSLY REALLY OPENED UP FOR A REALLY A TOPIC OF A VERY WIDE, WIDE CONVERSATION.

BUT WHAT WE'VE SEEN AND WE'RE RESEARCHING, THOROUGHLY AND WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO SO.

THE CHANGES ARE INCREMENTAL.

THE HOUSING MARKET REACTS VERY SLOW TO ZONING REFORM, BECAUSE THERE ARE STILL OTHER REGULATIONS ON THE GROUND AND OTHER, GUIDELINES, BUT DOES UNDERSTAND THE SIGNAL OF ELIMINATING A BARRIER TO HOUSING PRODUCTION.

FOR INSTANCE, SOME ACADEMIC RESEARCHERS SHOW THAT ZONING REFORMS, SIMILAR ONES THAT WERE RECENT, WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE OLD ONES, SHOWED AN INCREASE IN SUPPLY BY 3-5% OVER A SPAN OF THREE YEARS.

IT FOR SOME IT MAY BE MUCH, FOR SOME IS NOT ENOUGH, BUT IT'S STILL A HOUSING INCREASE.

THIS IS COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO THE TOPIC, BUT I WANTED TO MENTION THAT DATA SHOWS THAT THE PARKING REFORM DELIVERS MORE HOUSING UNITS, BUT IN LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENTS. ALSO, THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN WILL REMAIN AND GUIDE THE NEW DEVELOPMENT BY THE EXISTING OTHER RULES THAT ARE IN PLACE. AREAS IN TRANSITION CAN BE VERY WELL STABILIZED BY OFFERING MORE LOCAL HOUSING OPTIONS.

THERE IS NO SINGLE SOLUTIONS.

THERE ARE SO MANY WAYS WE CAN ADDRESS, HOUSING OPTIONS THAT ARE GENTLE DENSITY.

WE CAN TALK A LOT.

MORE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE A KEY IN ALL OF THE ZONING REFORMS. WE DIDN'T SEE ANY THAT DIDN'T HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS AND MASSING COMPATIBILITY AS WELL.

I HAVE MORE DATA AND I CAN COME BACK IF QUESTIONS.

JUST A TIMELINE IS GOING TO BE UP TO YOU.

WE HAVE THE SLIDING HERE.

BUT I THINK OUR STRONG MESSAGE IS TO ADOPT FORWARD DALLAS FIRST AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK AND STRATEGIZE A LITTLE BIT MORE.

ALSO KEEP IN MIND THAT WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT CODE REFORM, THAT IT'S ALSO GOING AT A STEADY PACE.

SO THERE ARE A LOT OF INITIATIVES THAT WE HAVE AT THE SAME TIME.

BUT I WOULD STRESS THAT WE NEED TO FINISH FOR DALLAS FIRST.

THAT IS ALL I HAD.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEARING WITH ME THROUGH A LONG PRESENTATION.

[05:55:05]

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO PRESENT ANYTHING FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE RELATED TO THIS TOPIC BEFORE I GO TO THE MEMBERS? YES. SECOND PART OF A PRESENTATION I FORGOT IS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO ADDRESS THE BUILDING CODES.

THERE ARE A FEW SLIDES THAT THEY HAVE.

THEN WE'LL GO WITH THEM, AND THEN WE'LL OPEN IT UP.

CAN CAN YOU PLEASE PUT THE PRESENTATION BACK AND AFTER THE LAST SLIDE WITH THE TIMELINE IF YOU MOVE DOWN, YOU'LL FIND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SLIDES.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

DONALD DIXON, DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL, CITY OF DALLAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

AND THIS IS ALEX BARKHAM.

HE'S MY MANAGER FOR MY RESIDENTIAL PROGRAM.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

I WENT BACK TO THE VERY BEGINNING.

ANYWAY, I CAN GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS.

THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT CHANGING THE DEFINITIONS OF THE WITHIN THE CODE ITSELF ABOUT SINGLE FAMILY, MULTIFAMILY AND SO FORTH.

BUT THE WAY THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DO THIS WITH THE THROUGH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THERE AREN'T ANY CHANGES NECESSARY TO THE RESIDENTIAL CODE OR THE BUILDING CODE.

MULTIPLE UNITS, WHETHER THE SINGLE FAMILIES, WHETHER THEY ARE ATTACHED OR DETACHED OR ADDRESSED IN THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE.

SO THAT WOULD GOVERN ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURES THEMSELVES.

WELL, THERE IT IS. YEAH, IT COULD BE CONSIDERED A TOWNHOUSE UNIT.

AS FAR AS OUR CODE CONSTRUCTION CODES, AS I SAID, YOU HAVE MULTIPLE STRUCTURES.

FOR EXAMPLE, I'VE BEEN IN HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW YORK CITY, AND THEY HAVE WHAT THEY CALL ROW HOUSES, THE SINGLE FAMILIES DIVIDED BY PARTY WALLS.

THAT'S ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE HORIZONTAL VERTICAL SEPARATIONS.

AS FAR AS THE BUILDING CODE IS INVOLVED, WE DON'T WE DON'T WORRY ABOUT HOW MANY UNITS PER ACRE AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

WE GO WITH WHATEVER THE ZONING TEAM HAS APPROVED AND THE COUNCIL.

ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, I'M READY TO TAKE QUESTIONS ON ALL OF IT AT THIS POINT.

SO AND I THINK WE HAVE TECHNICAL ISSUES.

SURPRISE, SURPRISE.

SO WE MAY HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH RECOGNIZING FOLKS.

SO WE MAY HAVE TO GO TO THE OLD SHOW OF HANDS SYSTEM.

SO MR. WEST, I'M GOING TO LET YOU START IT OFF ON, WE'RE FOR THE PUBLIC.

WE'RE ON ITEM B OF OUR BRIEFINGS TODAY AND YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, MR. WEST. THANK YOU MAYOR.

I DON'T THINK I'M GOING TO TAKE THE FULL FIVE.

JUST ANOTHER COMMENT.

HOUSING. THIS WAS INTENDED TO HAVE HOUSING OPTIONS ON THE TABLE FOR US TO CONSIDER AS A COUNCIL.

AGAIN, WHEN FILED, AT LEAST MY INTENT WAS TO NEVER PROPOSE SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO BE UP FOR A VOTE WITHOUT THIS GOING THROUGH THE PROPER PROCESSES.

SO TO THE EXTENT THAT'S BEEN REPORTED THAT THAT WAS ON THE TABLE IS INCORRECT.

WITH HOME OWNERSHIP AS REPORTED BY [INAUDIBLE] AT LEAST GOING UP FROM $300,000 LAST YEAR, UP TO $405,000 THIS YEAR FOR YOUR AVERAGE HOME PRICE, HOME OWNERSHIP IS BECOMING LESS AND LESS ATTAINABLE.

WE'VE SEEN THE CHILD POVERTY ACTION LAB DATA THAT SHOWS THAT OUR RENTAL NEED IS VERY GREAT IN THE CITY.

SO IN MY MIND, ANY OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE ON THE TABLE TO CONSIDER, WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING.

[INAUDIBLE] CLARK SPOKE A LITTLE BIT EARLIER TODAY.

HE'S ALSO PROVIDED A BRIEFING OR JUST LIKE A PAPER ON MINIMUM LOT SIZES, CITIES THAT HAVE CONSIDERED ADJUSTMENTS TO THEIR MINIMUM LOT SIZES, REDUCING THEM AND ALLOWING FOR DIFFERENT SIZES OF LOTS, HAVE SEEN 11% MORE UNITS PER ACRE FOR SALE, HOMES

[06:00:08]

THAT ARE GENERALLY 4% SMALLER, AND AVERAGE HOME PRICES ALMOST 10% LOWER.

AND THAT'S BASED ON NATIONAL STUDIES.

AND THEN AS FAR AS THE GENTLE DENSITY PIECE OF SINGLE FAMILY VERSUS DUPLEX VERSUS TRIPLEX AND FOURPLEX, I GET THAT.

AND THAT IS SOMETHING MY NEIGHBORS STRUGGLE WITH AND A LOT OF MY NEIGHBORHOODS.

I JUST CAN SAY THAT I SPEAK FROM, SOME EXPERIENCE IN IN MY HISTORIC DISTRICT.

WINNETKA HEIGHTS IS FULL OF GENTLE DENSITY, AND IT'S JUST LIKE HIGHLAND PARK IN THAT.

AND, I'VE GOT A NEIGHBORHOOD PRESIDENT THERE WHO LIVES NEXT TO A FOURPLEX WHO'S WILLING TO COME TALK AND EXPLAIN THAT IT'S IT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD TO LIVE NEXT TO A FOURPLEX. SO I'M NOT SAYING IT'S RIGHT FOR EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD, I BELIEVE STAFF, WHEN THEY TELL US THIS ISN'T A ONE SIZE FITS ALL SCENARIO THAT'S GOING TO WORK.

BUT I JUST THINK WE SHOULD OPEN OUR, OUR MINDS AND OUR, OUR HEARTS TO CONSIDER THIS.

AND, WE SHOULD LET OUR, APPOINTED FOLKS AT CPC, TALK THROUGH THIS.

SO THAT'S JUST MY FEELINGS.

I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

I'VE LISTENED TO THE ENTIRE THREE HOUR HOUSING COMMITTEE, SO I KIND OF I HEARD A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS ANSWERED THERE, AND I DON'T NEED TO REHASH THEM TODAY.

THANK YOU MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN SCHULTZ.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I RAN FOR OFFICE WAS TO BE ABLE TO USE THE INCREDIBLE INTELLECT OF OUR STAFF TO BE ABLE TO HELP US SEE THE CITY AND MOVE THE CITY FORWARD. ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I SIGNED THIS MEMORANDUM WAS TO ACTUALLY DO WHAT I HOPE TO DO AS A LEADER, WHICH IS LEARN ABOUT WAYS THAT WE CAN MAKE CITY THE CITY OF DALLAS BETTER.

THIS IS NOT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM A PROPOSAL.

AND THERE IS I KNOW THERE'S A WHOLE CAMPAIGN TO MAKE THIS INTO SOMETHING THAT IT'S NOT.

WHICH IS TO SAY THAT IF WE WANT TO LEARN ABOUT SOMETHING AND POSSIBILITIES FOR OUR CITY, WE ARE DEAD SET AND DETERMINED TO DESTROY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

AND I'M SORRY THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE MISREPRESENTING LEARNING.

WE SEE THAT HAPPENING ALL OVER THE COUNTRY IN LOTS OF OTHER FORMS, AND THIS IS ONE OF THEM.

SO I'M GOING TO MOVE FORWARD IN TERMS OF MY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS.

AND AS CHAIR WEST, WHO REALLY BRAVELY MOVED THIS FORWARD FOR US AND GIVING AND GAVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN ABOUT THIS BY HAVING OFFERING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIGN THIS MEMO, WHAT HE HAS RECOMMENDED IN TERMS OF IT MOVING FORWARD TO THE IDEA OF IT BEING EXPLORED THROUGH THE VEHICLES THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE TO EXPLORE, WHICH IS [INAUDIBLE] AND CPC.

SO HERE'S A FEW QUESTIONS, THOUGH, THAT I WOULD LIKE [INAUDIBLE] AND CPC TO CONSIDER NOT TO BE ANSWERED.

NOW, PLEASE.

ONE IS. I'D LIKE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND THE NEED OF THE NUMBERS OF LOTS BY ZONING DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE.

THERE'S MORE AND MORE INFORMATION AS CHAIR WEST IDENTIFIED, AND RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE IN UNDERSTANDING OUR NEED AND IN THE VARIETY OF ZONING DISTRICTS.

SECOND, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND ONE OF THE IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, ONE OF THE WORST THINGS THAT'S HAPPENED IN OUR CITY IS IN MORE AFFLUENT NEIGHBORHOODS.

WE HAVE A, A MENACE OF TEARDOWNS, AND THEY'RE TAKING PERFECTLY GOOD, BEAUTIFULLY, APPROPRIATELY SIZED LOTS.

AND NOW THEY ARE MAKING MCMANSIONS OUT OF THEM AND DESTROYING THE CHARACTER OF LONG STANDING NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND SO I'D LIKE TO GET SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS, MAYBE FROM THE BUILDING SERVICES OF PERMIT APPLICATIONS OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS OR SO, OR I DON'T KNOW, THE WHATEVER THE METRICS ARE THAT [INAUDIBLE] IS GOING TO LOOK AT THAT SAME TIMELINE FOR THE NUMBER OF TEARDOWNS OF HOUSES, SO THAT WHAT WE HAVE IS NO PROBLEM HAVING SOMEBODY TEARING DOWN AN APPROPRIATELY SIZED HOUSE FOR A SEVEN 10,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME.

BUT WE WOULDN'T WANT THE EQUIVALENT IN DUPLEXES.

SO I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THE NUMBER OF TEARDOWNS.

I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THE NUMBER OF, POSSIBLE UNITS THAT WE COULD GET IN THIS.

I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND HOW SUCCESSFUL HOUSTON HAS BEEN IN ALLOWING NEIGHBORHOODS TO OPT OUT OF THIS OPTION, WHETHER IT'S BY THE BLOCK OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SIMILAR.

SO I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THAT.

LIKE, HOW COULD THAT WORK? HOW COULD THE WHOLE OPT OUT OPTION WORK SO THAT THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT REALLY DON'T WANT ANY CHANGE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESERVE THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS AS THEY WANT THEM TO STAY NOW? AND IN THAT OPT OUT OPTION, WOULD IT ALSO PRECLUDE SIZE, THOSE MCMANSIONS ALSO.

RIGHT. BECAUSE WE HAVE [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S BEGINNING TO HAPPEN EVERYWHERE.

[06:05:02]

AND THEN THE FINAL NUMBER IS THERE'S A COUPLE OF CONCERNS THAT I'VE HEARD DIRECTLY, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE GOING TO BE TORN DOWN SO THAT CORPORATE ENTITIES CAN BUY THESE HOUSES, PUT UP DUPLEXES OR MORE, AND THEN TURN THEM INTO RENTAL UNITS, WHICH AGAIN HURTS THAT SINGLE NEIGHBORHOOD FAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY, NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.

SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF WE HAVE I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S THROUGH RESEARCH THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE THROUGH DCAD OR WHAT, BUT HOW WE CAN FIND OUT THAT CORPORATE OWNED AND IS THAT REALLY TRENDING THE WAY WE THINK IT IS OR IS IT SMALLER? I DON'T KNOW. SO, THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE ANSWERED.

AND THE OTHER THING IS, FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE CURIOUS ABOUT LEARNING MORE ABOUT THIS BEFORE AUTOMATICALLY SHUTTING IT DOWN IS IF THERE'S THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE LEARNING SESSIONS AROUND IT FOR US, WHETHER IT'S AS [INAUDIBLE] LEARNS THINGS TO GET THAT DATA SO THAT WE CAN READ IT AND KEEP UP WITH IT, OR EVEN IN LUNCH AND LEARN SESSIONS OR WHATEVER.

I'D BE VERY, VERY PLEASED TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE.

SO I REALLY WANT TO THANK YOU.

I KNOW YOU'RE TAKING IT FROM ALL SIDES, AS MANY OF US ARE.

BUT I HOPE THAT MY DISTRICT MEMBERS WHO ARE LISTENING UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE NO INTEREST AT ALL IN IN PASSING ANYTHING AT ALL ON THIS.

WE ARE JUST NOW BEGINNING TO LEARN, AND I HOPE THAT THEY WILL RESPECT THAT INTEREST OF MINE.

MISS BLACKMON, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AND YES, I TOO SIGNED THE MEMO TO HAVE A CONVERSATION.

I'M A TRANSPLANT.

I WAS NOT BORN AND RAISED HERE.

AND THE FUNNY THING IS, I LIVED ON PRESCOTT WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE IN AN A PLEX, AND IT WAS ONE OF THE OLDER STYLE, AND IT WAS GREAT KNEW MY NEIGHBORS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU DO. AND MOVED DOWN THE STREET WITH MY NOW HUSBAND AND ANOTHER DUPLEX AGAIN, FELT, IT FELT RIGHT BECAUSE IT WAS ABOUT CONTEXT SENSITIVE, SENSITIVE DESIGN.

IT WAS ALL ALIGNED.

IT WAS NOT OVERPOWERING.

THEN I NOTICED ONE OF YOUR SLIDES IS SANDRA LANE, DISTRICT NINE.

AND YEAH, WE'VE BEEN LIVING WITH THAT TOO.

AND TO MISS SCHULTZ, THESE DO OVERPOWER.

SO MY QUESTION IS YOU HOW WOULD YOU.

AND THEN WE CAN GO HOW DO YOU BALANCE THIS.

THIS BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT THIS DUPLEX.

YOU'VE GOT THIS BIG HOUSE, WHICH IS PROBABLY WHAT, LITTLE 4,500FT² MAYBE.

BUT THEN YOU'VE GOT THE SMALL, WHICH IS WHAT, 1,800? BUT YOU COULD PUT TWO TOGETHER AND WITH WITH DESIGN AND MAKE THEM LOOK VERY SIMILAR.

RIGHT. I MEAN, IT DOESN'T INTRUDE.

SO WALK ME THROUGH HOW THAT CAN HAPPEN IN YOUR SCENARIO AS YOU SAID BY RIGHT.

NO, NOT BY RIGHT.

SO EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE MORE THAT I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THIS, THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO COME IN AND START CHANGING ALL OF THIS TOMORROW.

SO I THINK WHAT THE KEY IS, THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND HAVING THOSE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT ABOUT THE MASSING AND THE SCALE SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE WE JUST EVEN IN OUR CURRENT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, OUR R7 FIVES, OUR R FIVES, THERE ARE NONE OF THOSE DISTRICTS.

IT IS. AND WHAT WE SEE, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST IT WAS PEOPLE DID NOT MAX OUT THE BUILDING ENVELOPE WHEN YOU BUILT IT, OR SOMETIMES YOU DID, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT WAS WELL WITHIN, A SMALLER ENVELOPE THAN WHAT WAS ALLOWED.

WHAT WE SEE TODAY IS EVEN IN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS, YOU ARE IT IS MORE COMMON TO MAX OUT THAT BUILDING ENVELOPE.

SO WHERE WE HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DUPLEXES OR TRIPLEXES, YOU'RE ALMOST GETTING A BIGGER DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THAT SINGLE FAMILY ZONING BECAUSE THERE ARE ALSO NO DESIGN STANDARDS THERE.

OR WE HAVEN'T UPDATED SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS TO REFLECT MORE OF WHAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE, EVEN IN JUST A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN SOME AREAS.

SO I THINK THE KEY IS TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION ABOUT REALLY WHAT WE WHAT THE PRIORITIES ARE TO HELP MANAGE SOME OF WHAT PEOPLE FEEL ARE INCOMPATIBLE.

AND A LOT OF IT JUST HAS TO DO I MEAN, REALLY OFTENTIMES IT'S FOR COMPONENTS.

IT'S WHAT TYPE OF ROOF, WHAT'S THE HEIGHT, WHAT ARE THE SETBACKS, AND WHERE IS YOUR GARAGE AND HOW MUCH ARE YOU PAVING YOUR FRONT YARD? AND SO MUCH OF THAT, I MEAN, THAT CAN ALL BE ADDRESSED, WHICH CURRENTLY JUST DOESN'T.

WE HAVEN'T UPDATED ANY OF OUR CODES TO INCORPORATE THAT.

WELL, AND SANDRA DID HAVE DUPLEXES AND SO AND THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME THAT ARE ON LIKE, THERE IS SOME JUST ADJACENT THERE.

AND THEN THERE'S SOME ON WINTON. SO IN D9 THERE ARE VERY THERE IS A, A, A POD IF YOU WILL.

[06:10:08]

BUT THERE ARE NO TOWNHOMES.

RIGHT. SO TELL ME, WALK ME THROUGH HOW A TOWNHOME WOULD BE CONSIDERED VERSUS A DUPLEX BECAUSE THOSE ARE NOT THE SAME EITHER.

CORRECT. WELL, ONE OF THE SO AND ANDREA CAN GO INTO THIS IN MORE DETAIL, BUT I THINK WHAT OF ONE OF THE WHAT CAME OUT OF THE MEMO IS WHAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER IS WHETHER OR NOT WE ACTUALLY CREATE A ZONING DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY FOR BUILDING TYPES.

SO A LOT OF JURISDICTIONS WILL CREATE THE STANDARDS FOR A SPECIFIC BUILDING TYPE.

SO IF YOU WANT TO BUILD A TOWNHOUSE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

OR IF YOU WANT TO BUILD A DUPLEX, RIGHT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO REQUEST A MULTIFAMILY ZONE OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT YOU'RE GETTING MORE THAN WHAT YOU REALLY WANT.

IT'S VERY UNDERSTANDABLE AND PREDICTABLE THAT I'M GOING TO PULL DOWN THE TRIPLEX DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE.

SO I THINK WE HAVE TO RELOOK THOSE, ALL OF THE STANDARDS IN THERE.

AND WE DO CURRENTLY HAVE SOMETHING CALLED TOWNHOUSE.

WE HAVE TOWNHOUSE ZONES, BUT WE HAVE ONE, TWO AND THREE.

AND WHAT ARE WE REALLY THINKING ABOUT? WHAT DO WE ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE COMING OUT OF TOWNHOUSES.

AND IT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY.

OKAY, SO IT ISN'T GOING TO BE A COOKIE CUTTER.

WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AND IT IS GOING TO BE THOUGHT OUT AND LIKE YOU SAID, PREDICTABLE.

BUT THEN WHEN YOU GO TO ADUS, THOSE ARE PROBABLY THE LESS RESTRICTIVE, RIGHT, WHEN IT COMES TO THE CONTEXT DESIGN.

AND SO THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I'M.

AND SO I REALLY I KNOW WE HAVE THAT ON RECORD MAYBE LOOSENING THE RESTRICTIONS.

I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO GO FULL OUT WILD WILD WEST ON THOSE.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION BECAUSE IT IS A CONTEXT DESIGN THAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S GREAT TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

WELL, AND WHAT AGAIN, THROUGH DISCUSSION, WHAT WE CAN DO IS IF WE WERE TO ACTUALLY ALLOW THEM, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT IN OUR, IN OUR DISTRICTS, WHATEVER OUR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, THAT I THINK THAT YOU ALSO NEED TO AGAIN, INCORPORATE DESIGN STANDARDS WITH THOSE BECAUSE WHAT IS THE SCARY PART OF THEM.

RIGHT. IT IS, AGAIN, WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE GOOD HEIGHT LIMITS ON THEM.

ARE WE LIMITING STORIES? YOU CAN LIMIT THE NUMBER OF STORIES.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT THAT ALLOWS 35FT, BUT I THINK THAT THERE ARE LESS PARAMETERS NOW BECAUSE IT WAS OPT IN.

SO I THINK ALONG WITH THAT, YOU CAN ALSO EXPLORE WHAT ARE THE CONCERNS ABOUT THOSE ADUS AND HOW CAN WE REGULATE THOSE CONCERNS.

SO ON YOUR SLIDE 20, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOUR ZONING CASES HAVE ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE WHY IS THE GENTLE DENSITY ACTUALLY TAKING UP? I MEAN, HAVE YOU ALL THOUGHT LIKE, IS THAT JUST WHAT THE MARKET'S GOING FOR? IS THAT EXPLAIN.

BECAUSE I WANT TO GO WITH THAT.

LIKE WHY IS THAT.

YEAH, I THINK I'M USING THE ZONING CASES THAT WE HAVE AS A GOOD HINT OF.

WHAT OBVIOUSLY THE MARKET WANTS.

WHAT? BUT ALSO WHAT WE DON'T HAVE IN THE CODE.

SO I'M LOOKING AT BOTH.

WHERE'S THE CODE BROKEN? WHY DON'T YOU DO IT BY RIGHT? THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION TO EVERYBODY.

ONE IS OBVIOUS.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S COMMERCIAL AND YOU CANNOT DO ANYTHING WHATEVER RESIDENTIAL.

BUT IF IT'S ALREADY RESIDENTIAL THERE, WHY CAN'T YOU DO IT BY RIGHT? WELL, SOMETIMES IT'S AN INCREASE IN DENSITY, BUT, THE MARKET ALSO HAS A BIG APPETITE FOR A DIVERSITY OF PLATTED TYPE OF SINGLE FAMILY, MORE DIVERSE TYPE.

SO TOWNHOUSE ATTACHED.

IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY PRODUCT THAT HAS ZERO LOT LINE.

RIGHT. SO, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING.

WE'RE SEEING, FOR INSTANCE, REQUESTS FOR DUPLEXES.

BUT BECAUSE THE DUPLEX DISTRICT DOESN'T WORK, SOMETIMES WE END UP WITH A MULTI-FAMILY.

IT SOUNDS SCARY, BUT IN REALITY THEY JUST WANT TO BUILD TWO UNITS.

AND THAT'S YOU GOT TO THE DUPLEX IS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PUT IT IN THAT BUCKET.

EXACTLY. THERE IS NO EXISTING.

EXACTLY. THERE IS NO BUCKET IN THE CODE RIGHT NOW FOR THE TYPE OF GENTLE INFILL THAT THE CITY WHILE IS REDEVELOPING, WHAT IS INCREASING THE MARKET ONES.

IT'S AGAIN, IT'S ONE THING TO HAVE LIKE, OH, I HAVE TEN ACRES, I CAN DO WHATEVER I WANT THAT'S DIFFERENT.

BUT WHEN YOU LIKE, TRY TO LIKE THIS IS A CORNER LOT.

I WANT TO PUT SOMETHING THIS IS A LOT THAT'S DOUBLE FRONTED.

I CAN PUT TWO UNITS.

WELL TOUGH LUCK. YOUR ZONING IS R5, OR IF YOUR ZONING IS DUPLEX IS NOT GOING TO WORK ANYWAY.

SO THAT'S WHERE I'M SAYING THE CODE IS A LITTLE BIT BROKEN AND WE NEED TO LOOK INTO IT ANYWAY.

AND IT ALSO MEANS THAT OUR, PROPERTY VALUES, MOSTLY OUR REAL ESTATE, THE LAND IS ACTUALLY INCREASING IN VALUE, WHICH IS A GOOD THING BECAUSE THAT'S YOUR INVESTMENT AND YOU WANT TO MAINTAIN THAT.

I WAS IN DALLAS WHEN IT WAS NOT THAT CASE.

AND SO IT IS GOOD THAT YOUR, YOUR LAND IS APPRECIATING THAT MEANS PEOPLE ARE WANTING TO COME TO YOUR CITY.

[06:15:08]

AND SO THE BEST THING THAT WE CAN DO AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, I THINK, IS FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAYS TO USE THE LAND THAT WE HAVE AND PRESERVING AREAS AS WELL. I MEAN, WE DON'T WANT TO IT'S NOT A ONE SIZE FITS ALL, BUT WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING.

I MEAN, I'M LOOKING FOR A TOWNHOME AND IT'S THEY'RE DONE.

THEY'RE THEY'RE VERY LIMITED AND DON'T NEED THE YARD.

DON'T NEED THE BIG HOUSE, WANTING SOMETHING SMALL AND IT'S NOT AN OPTION ANYMORE.

AND SO AND MY KIDS DON'T WANT IT EITHER AND WE WANT THEM TO COME BACK, BUT BECAUSE, I MEAN, PRICES ARE SO CRAZY, IT'S NOT I MEAN, I THINK IT'S WHAT I THINK I'VE HEARD.

IT'S GONE UP 175% IN TEN YEARS.

I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU GET A RETURN LIKE THAT EVER, YOU KNOW.

BUT IT'S GOOD.

BUT THE QUESTION IS, IS HOW DO WE GROW FOR THE NEXT GENERATION? AND I THINK THAT'S A VALID QUESTION THAT WE SHOULD BE ASKING OUR CONSTITUENTS, OUR RESIDENTS AND PEOPLE SITTING AROUND THIS BODY.

SO I DO APPRECIATE YOU DOING THIS.

I KNOW IT'S NOT BEEN EASY, BUT THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF A LONG, LONG CONVERSATION.

THANK YOU. I'M SORRY I WAS GETTING HIT UP BY THE COOKIE ONSLAUGHT HERE.

WHERE ARE WE? WHAT ARE WE DOING? BUYING COOKIES. OKAY.

YES, MISS WILLIS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES WHILE I BUY MORE COOKIES.

OKAY. GOOD DEAL.

THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING THIS DISCUSSION.

THAT IS NOT ABOUT A PROPOSAL THAT DOES NOT YET EXIST.

I THINK WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE FACT THAT WE'VE GOT OR AT LEAST I KNOW I'VE GOT IN DISTRICT 13, SOME AGING HOUSING STOCK THAT AT SOME POINT IS GOING TO NEED TO BE REPLACED.

SOME OF IT IS ALREADY, YOU KNOW, DUPLEXES, THAT SORT OF THING.

SO THIS IS A QUESTION REALLY, ON MY MIND.

WE ALSO HAVE TO REALIZE THAT WE'VE GOT SENIORS TO THINK ABOUT.

OUR FASTEST GROWING DEMOGRAPHIC IS PEOPLE 60 PLUS, AND NOT EVERYBODY WANTS TO STAY IN THEIR BIG HOUSE WITH A BIG YARD TO MAINTAIN.

THEY NEED SOME OF THE OPTIONS MR. DIXON, THAT YOU MENTIONED, I MEAN, ROWHOUSES, TOWNHOMES, GARDEN HOMES, OTHER OPTIONS THAT ARE EASIER FOR THEM TO GET AROUND IN AND WHERE THEY JUST DON'T HAVE THE MAINTENANCE THAT THEY DON'T THEY DON'T NECESSARILY WANT ANYMORE.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO EXPLORE THIS.

AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING.

AND SO THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT I'D LOVE TO HAVE ANSWERED THAT ARE NOT TO BE ANSWERED HERE TODAY.

BUT WHEN I THINK OF SOME AGING DUPLEX STOCK, AND WHEN THIS DISCUSSION STARTED AND I THOUGHT, WHERE COULD THIS APPLY IN MY DISTRICT, I THOUGHT THAT I COULD SEE THOSE GOING TO, TO FOURPLEXES, YOU KNOW, GOING UP A STORY AND, YOU KNOW, IT WOULDN'T REALLY DISRUPT THE APPEARANCE OF A BLOCK.

HOWEVER, WE'VE ALSO GOT A LOT OF FOLKS WHO ARE CONTENDING WITH OUR DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT KEPT UP WITH ALL OF OUR PAVING OF THE CITY AND EVERYONE NORTH OF US PAVING THEIR CITIES.

AND SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACT OF JUST GOING UP AND ADDING MORE PEOPLE WOULD BE ON OUR EXISTING STRUCTURE, NOT ONLY FOR WHAT WHAT WE HAVE NOW, BUT AS WE GO TO NEW BUILT ENVIRONMENTS WHERE WE'VE GOT AREAS TO DEVELOP.

WHAT'S THE IMPLICATION THERE? WHAT DO WE NEED TO CHANGE TO BE SURE THAT'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH GREATER DENSITY? AND THEN YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING, MR. DREA ABOUT, THE TREES.

AND SO I THOUGHT THERE'S A REAL TREE IMPLICATION HERE, AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT CECAP AND THAT WE LIVE ON THIS HEAT ISLAND, YOU KNOW, ABOUT HAVING A REQUIREMENT OF ONE PER LOT AND DEPENDING ON LOT SIZE, UP TO THREE PER LOT.

SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE IMPLICATION OF MINIMIZING A LOT SIZE WOULD BE.

I DON'T FAVOR A BLANKET APPROACH TO THAT, BUT I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT TAKING THIS STEP IN ANY MEASURE MIGHT MEAN WITH REGARD TO THE IMPORTANCE OF TREES IN OUR CITY.

AND SO I THINK, CHAIR WEST HAD BROUGHT UP, ZODIAC, THE ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND THEY ARE THE ONES WHO ARE JUST LASER FOCUSED ON THESE ISSUES.

AND I THINK GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLORE THIS AND ALSO ALLOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT, THE PUBLIC INPUT, THE PUBLIC EDUCATION, FRANKLY, I THINK IT'S GOT TO START WITH JUST LEARNING ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE, CHAIR SCHULTZ'S POINT, THERE'S BEEN SOME MISINFORMATION, I THINK TO CHARACTERIZE THIS AS TRYING TO DESTROY SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS IS JUST IRRESPONSIBLE.

AND SO I WISH EVERYONE WOULD STOP THAT.

SO BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO EXPLORE IT.

WE ARE A BIG CITY AND WE'VE GOT AN AGING POPULATION AND WE'VE GOT SOME AGING STOCK, AND WE ALSO HAVE OPPORTUNITY FOR GREAT GROWTH.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT, CHAIR WEST, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE THAT, BUT I WOULD DEFINITELY BE SUPPORTIVE OF HAVING ZOAC EXPLORE THAT AND THEN COME BACK TO US AFTER THEY'VE DONE A DEEP DIVE ON SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I'VE ASKED AND THAT SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ASKED, AND THAT THEY WILL PROBABLY UNCOVER AND THAT THE PUBLIC WILL AIR AS WELL. SO THANK YOU FOR EDUCATING US A LITTLE MORE AT THIS STEP.

[06:20:03]

AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT A LITTLE WAYS TO GO.

I'M STILL IN THE COOKIE WORLD HERE.

OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY. MISS MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES BECAUSE NO ONE'S SHOWING UP ON THE CUE RIGHT NOW.

OH, NO. ACTUALLY, CHAIRMAN.

OKAY, SURE. ALL RIGHT.

JUST THAT KIND OF DAY. FIVE MINUTES AND THEN, CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ FOR FIVE MINUTES.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO GO TO SLIDE EIGHT.

AND ANDREA, IF YOU COULD READ THE SECOND BULLET FOR US, IT SAYS WHAT IS MISSING IN THE CODE? YES, IT SAYS SCALE DESIGN PREDICTABILITY FOR ANY TYPE OF HOUSING.

SO MY QUESTION IS IF PREDICTABILITY IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE SEEKING, HOW DOES A SINGLE FAMILY HOMEOWNER HAVE PREDICTABILITY WHEN THE LOT NEXT TO THEM COULD BECOME A FOUR PLEX.

I WOULD, SO WHEN I ADDED THAT, I MEANT MORE TO COUNCILWOMAN SCHULTZ'S POINT, THE MISSING OR MISMATCH IN SCALE BETWEEN AN EXISTING, UNIT OR AN EXISTING HOUSING BUILDING AND THE NEW HOUSING BUILDING, BECAUSE THE TRENDS HAVE CHANGED.

SO YOU MAY END UP IN SITUATIONS AND I DON'T WANT TO GIVE NAMES, BUT WE HAD A RECENT OR TWO YEARS AGO AUTHORIZED HEARING THAT IS HAPPENING.

SO AREAS THAT ARE RAPIDLY MOVING, DEVELOPING, THAT MAY CAUSE A LITTLE BIT OF DISPLACEMENT IS BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU MAY END UP WITH A HOUSING STOCK THAT WAS BUILT UNDER DIFFERENT TIMES, THAT IS A LITTLE BIT, SMALLER.

IT HAS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF FOOTPRINT.

BUT NOW YOU WOULD HAVE SITUATIONS WHERE NEXT DOOR TO YOU IS THE SAME TYPE IS A SINGLE UNIT, IT'S JUST THAT IT MAXIMIZING.

SO THEREFORE YOU END UP WITH ALL OF THIS INAPPROPRIATE OUT OF SCALE, MASSING ON THE SAME STREET.

AND WE'VE SEEN THIS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

THAT WAS MY COMMENT REGARDING PREDICTABILITY.

BEFORE I WAS ON THE COUNCIL, I WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN WHAT THREE WORDS OR PHRASES MEAN.

FOR INSTANCE, FROM YOU I'VE LEARNED THE WORD PLACE TYPE.

NEVER HEARD THAT BEFORE.

AT THIS POINT, AFTER SO MANY FOUR DALLAS MEETINGS, I THINK I GET WHAT A PLACE TYPE IS.

I WOULD I WOULD PROPOSE TO YOU THAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT A PLACE TYPE IS.

WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT CONTEXT SENSITIVE DESIGN AND GENERAL DENSITY, I THINK I NOW UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THOSE ARE NOT THE THINGS I'M OBJECTING TO.

WHAT I'M GOING TO TELL YOU I'M OBJECTING TO IS I DON'T CARE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, IF IT MATCHES THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT'S NOT THE POINT.

SO IT MIGHT BE CONTEXT SENSITIVE TO LOOK THAT WAY.

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

THE DIFFERENCE IS I WANT A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBOR AND THE NEIGHBORS WANT SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORS.

THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE MULTIFAMILY NEXT TO THEM.

AND MY CONCERN IN LISTENING TO THE VERY LONG HOUSING PRESENTATION IS THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO REDEFINE THE WORD SINGLE FAMILY TO INCLUDE DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, AND QUAD.

AND I WOULD NOT WANT THAT.

THAT YOUR PLACE TYPE THAT ONCE SEEMED TO ME TO BE EXCLUSIVE TO SINGLE FAMILY NOW HAS A BROADER WORDING, AND COULD INCLUDE OTHER THINGS.

AND I'M LOOKING FOR A PLACE TYPE THAT IS EXCLUSIVE.

NO, NO OTHER OPTION BUT SINGLE FAMILY.

AND I'M JUST SAYING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT ADDED INTO THE FORWARD DALLAS PLAN.

SINGLE FAMILY ONLY.

AND I WOULD AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY THIS IS NOT FORWARD DALLAS NOR IS IT PLACE TYPES.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF THESE THINGS THAT TOUCH EACH OTHER.

AND I MEAN, I THINK YOU MAY HAVE SAID THE FORWARD DALLAS WORD MULTIPLE TIMES IN OUR PRESENTATION AND THAT..

I SAID IT WAS NOT FORWARD DALLAS..

WELL, IN THE HOUSING PRESENTATION, IT DID GET BROUGHT UP AND THEN THAT IT'S NOT ZONING, BUT OF COURSE IT INFORMS ZONING, RIGHT? THAT'S THE WORD THAT Y'ALL USED.

IT INFORMS THE ZONING.

IT DOES, AND IF I MAY, IF I COULD CLARIFY, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN FORWARD DALLAS THAT SAYS YOU MUST OR THIS AREA IN EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY IN THIS AREA WILL ACCOMMODATE A FOUR PLEX.

IT DOESN'T SAY THAT.

OKAY, BUT I WANT TO TURN THAT AROUND.

YOU WILL NOT ALLOW ANYTHING BUT SINGLE FAMILY IN ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY.

NOW YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT NEW AREAS WHERE DEVELOPING.

I'M VERY OPEN TO THOSE CONVERSATIONS, BUT BECAUSE OF THIS EXACT WORD PREDICTABILITY, PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT A HOME DESERVE TO HAVE THAT PREDICTABILITY, THAT

[06:25:07]

THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD WILL STAY INTACT AND NOT TURN INTO SOMETHING THAT WAS ONCE SINGLE FAMILY, WHICH IS NOW SINGLE FAMILY, WITH MULTIFAMILY MIXED IN CONTEXT SENSITIVELY.

PEOPLE DON'T WANT THAT.

I DON'T WANT THAT.

I DON'T WANT THAT. FOR DALLAS, OUR SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS ARE A STABILITY.

THEY'RE A STABILIZING FACTOR THROUGHOUT OUR CITY, AND WE NEED TO PRESERVE THEM.

IT DOESN'T MEAN IT SHOULD BE EXCLUSIVE.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP, THE AREA I'M IN HAS THE MOST MULTIFAMILY, SO IT'S NOT IN ANY WAY SAYING EVERYBODY'S NOT IMPORTANT, BUT SO ARE THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMEOWNERS.

SO I REJECT THAT IDEA.

AND WHILE THIS MAY HAVE BEEN A CONVERSATION, NOW THAT WE'RE HAVING IT, MY RESPONSE IS NO THANK YOU, NO THANK YOU.

I'M NOT INTERESTED IN INCORPORATING DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, QUADS IN ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.

I'M NOT INTERESTED IN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, BY RIGHT, YOU CAN CHANGE THE WORDING OF THAT.

WE ALREADY HAVE A PROCESS.

IF THE PROCESS ISN'T WORKING WELL, LET'S CHANGE IT.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

THE PROBLEM IS IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE TO BUILD AN ADU AND NOT HAVE AN EXTREMELY HIGH RENT.

SO UNLESS YOU ACTUALLY HAVE A FAMILY MEMBER WHO YOU'RE TRYING TO GET ON YOUR PROPERTY, IT PROBABLY ISN'T GOING TO PENCIL OUT.

SO ALL THAT TO SAY, THANK YOU FOR THE CONVERSATION, NOT INTERESTED.

WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE THAT GO TO CPC.

CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

AND I'M GOING TO GO INTO, I KNOW THIS ISN'T FORWARD DALLAS, BUT I ALSO DID LISTEN TO THE ENTIRE, CONVERSATION THAT WAS IN THE SPECIAL CALLED MEETING FOR HOUSING AND FORWARD DALLAS WAS REFERENCED TO LEFT AND RIGHT, BY STAFF.

SO I'M JUST I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE WHAT WE'RE WHAT YOU'RE PROBABLY HEARING.

BECAUSE IN THERE, YOU ALL SAID THAT PART OF THE PROCESS WOULD BE LET US GET FORWARD DALLAS DONE, AND THEN WE COULD HAVE CONVERSATIONS AND WORK WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT WHERE WE'RE AT.

WE'RE AT A CONVERSATION ABOUT SOMETHING THAT COULD OR COULD NOT AFFECT FORWARD DALLAS.

IS THAT MAYBE A BETTER WAY TO PUT IT? SO I GUESS WHAT THE QUESTION WILL BE AND HOW THIS CONVERSATION RELATES TO FORWARD DALLAS IS IF THE BODY IF THIS BODY, IF THE CITY, IF WE GET TO CITY COUNCIL WITH FORWARD DALLAS AND THE PLACE TYPES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED IN IT, IF YOU IF THE MAJORITY OF THE BODY WANTS ABSOLUTELY NO MIXING OF LAND USES.

I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT WE I MEAN, THAT'S THAT WILL.

AND THEN YOU COULD DIRECT US TO DRAMATICALLY CHANGE BECAUSE WHAT FORWARD DALLAS DOES SAY RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM.

WE ALL HAVE TO FIGURE THIS OUT AS A CITY.

WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO RESOLVE OUR HOUSING ISSUES AND NOT JUST OUR HOUSING ISSUES.

WE ALSO HEAR ABOUT FAILING RETAIL, FAILING, FAILING SMALL BUSINESS.

WE WANT WALKABILITY.

WELL, IF WE WANT ALL OF THOSE THINGS, WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE PEOPLE LIVE TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS THOSE THINGS AND TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THOSE THINGS. SO. SO ARE WE SAYING WE DON'T KNOW WHERE PEOPLE LIVE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS? NO. WE'RE SAYING WE HEAR A LOT OF PEOPLE IN VERY LOW, DENSE, LOW, LOW, LOW DENSITY AREAS THAT WANT THOSE THINGS.

THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO GO TO A GROCERY STORE.

THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO WALK TO X RETAIL.

THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO WALK TO X SERVICE.

IF WE DON'T HAVE A LAND USE PATTERN THAT ACCOMMODATES THAT, THAT IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.

SO WE EITHER TELL THEM, I'M SORRY, I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT THAT'S NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.

OR WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT MAYBE HOW WE COULD MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION AND WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN.

SO WITH FORWARD DALLAS, WE DO SAY WE RECOGNIZE THEM FORWARD.

IT IS RECOGNIZED IN FORWARD DALLAS.

THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS THAT ARE PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THEY WILL STAY PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, BUT ON EDGE AREAS, ON CORRIDORS IN OUR HALF MILE FROM TRAIN STATIONS, WE'VE GOT AREAS THAT ARE HALF MILE FROM TRAIN STATION THAT ARE COMPLETELY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

CAN WE ACCOMMODATE SOME DUPLEXES THERE? A LITTLE BIT MORE DENSITY IF WE'RE SAYING IF YOU'RE SINGLE, I MEAN, SO THAT'S GOING TO BE THE QUESTION, WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO AS A CITY IF WE'RE GOING TO SAY FROM HOUSING, IF YOU ARE AN ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, ANYWHERE ACROSS THE CITY, ANY ADDITIONAL HOUSING UNITS ARE HANDS OFF

[06:30:03]

ANYWHERE. I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT THAT'S GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT KIND OF DISCUSSION.

I THINK WHAT YOU SAID IS VERY FAIR, AND I LIKE A LOT OF THE THINGS YOU JUST MENTIONED, BECAUSE I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH THEM.

BUT I DON'T AGREE WITH, DOING AN ORDINANCE, A CODE CHANGE THAT, SCARES SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

I LIVE IN MULTIFAMILY, SO I LIKE LIVING IN MULTIFAMILY.

I ENJOY IT, BUT I'M NOT EVERYBODY ELSE.

RIGHT. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT A GREAT EXAMPLE THAT I WOULD GIVE IS THAT, IN WEST DALLAS, IN ORDER TO STAVE OFF GENTRIFICATION AND TO MAKE SURE WE CONTINUED WITH AFFORDABLE UNITS AND MIXED HOUSING IS THE COMMUNITY SAID.

AND THEY HAD SELF DETERMINATION.

AND WE ALL TALK ABOUT SELF DETERMINATION UNTIL IT'S LIKE, OH, IT DOESN'T IT DOESN'T DOESN'T FAVOR ME OR DOESN'T HELP ME.

WHAT MY GOALS ARE.

AND THEY TOLD ME AND THEY SAID WE DO NOT WANT ANY MULTIFAMILY NORTH OF SINGLETON, SOUTH OF CANADA DRIVE.

THAT'S EASY FOR ME BECAUSE NOW ANYTHING SOUTH OF SINGLETON, THEY'RE LIKE, YEAH, WE DON'T MIND IT THERE BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT OUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WAY OF LIFE.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT'S THE PERFECT EXAMPLE, BUT IT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID A CORRIDOR, THE CORRIDOR WORKS.

BUT THEY SAID HANDS OFF ON THIS SIDE.

GO FOR IT ON THAT SIDE. AND THE DEVELOPERS HEARD IT LOUD AND CLEAR.

AND SO I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS, I APPRECIATE US TRYING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION.

I REALLY, REALLY DO.

AND I KNOW IT WASN'T Y'ALL.

Y'ALL DIDN'T BRING IT UP. AND I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUES WHO SIGNED ON FOR IT AND EVERYTHING.

I WISH IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE A DIFFERENT WAY, BECAUSE NOW IT'S LIKE MY MY RESIDENTS ARE UP IN ARMS. THEY DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT BECAUSE THEY DON'T TRUST WHAT COULD HAPPEN.

AND I THINK IF WE'D DONE IT A DIFFERENT WAY BY HAVING CONVERSATIONS AND TALKING TO PEOPLE FIRST, WHICH ISN'T Y'ALL.

I'M JUST SAYING, THEN, MAYBE THIS WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY.

YOU KNOW, SIX, EIGHT MONTHS, A YEAR FROM NOW.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, MR. CITY MANAGER, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I DON'T WANT OUR STAFF SPENDING ANY TIME ON THIS, DEALING WITH THIS RIGHT NOW.

I WANT THEM TO FINISH FORWARD DALLAS AND, AND LET'S MOVE ON, AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT THOSE OTHER THINGS ONCE WE GET FORWARD DALLAS DONE, BECAUSE THEN STAFF WILL HAVE A GUIDING EXAMPLE.

WE WILL HAVE A GUIDING EXAMPLE.

AND IT'S KIND OF LIKE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE RIGHT NOW.

BUT AS OF NOW, I'M JUST DON'T WANT TO WASTE ANY MORE OF YOUR TIME BECAUSE Y'ALL HAVE A LOT OF OTHER BIGGER FISH THAT WE NEED TO FRY, WHICH IS FORWARD DALLAS AND MAKING SURE THAT THAT GETS TAKEN CARE OF.

SO AND I ALSO DON'T WANT TO WASTE THE TIME OF OUR VOLUNTEERS ON CPC ZOAC AND ALL OF THAT, BECAUSE THEY ARE SO OVERWHELMED RIGHT NOW, AND WE CAN'T EVEN DO ZONING CHANGES WITHOUT IT TAKING NINE, TEN, 11 MONTHS.

AND THAT'S JUST LIKE THE STANDARD PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

SO. AND THAT'S NOT FAIR TO YOU ALL.

AND IT'S NOT FAIR TO OUR VOLUNTEERS THAT GIVE UP SO MUCH OF THEIR TIME AT CPC.

I MEAN, 14 AND 15 HOUR MEETINGS EVERY OTHER THURSDAY.

I KNOW IT'S GOT TO BE BRUTAL ON YOU GUYS.

IT'S DEFINITELY BRUTAL ON THEM, AND IT'S BRUTAL ON OUR DEVELOPERS AND EVERYBODY WHO'S TRYING TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN IN THE CITY.

AND SO LET'S FIX THAT PROBLEM FIRST AND THEN WE CAN START LOOKING AT THIS.

THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER.

I MEAN MR. MAYOR. SORRY.

THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER, FOR HEARING ME.

MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.

THANKFUL FOR EVERYBODY.

CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

IT STRIKES ME THAT FROM THIS PRESENTATION THAT SO FAR THIS HAS BEEN MOSTLY AN ACADEMIC EXERCISE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE IMPACT ON THE REAL CITY.

AND BY THAT, I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES, CONSEQUENCES FOR THE STABILITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE OPEN THE DOOR TO HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IN OUR EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS? WELL, WE'VE ALREADY SEEN A HUGE INFLUX OF INVESTORS, SPECULATORS, CORPORATE ENTITIES BUYING UP CITY OF DALLAS HOMES IN ORDER TO RENT THEM OUT AND HOLD THEM UNTIL THEY RISE IN VALUE, AND THEN THEY FLIP THEM.

AND THAT'S HAVING A SERIOUS IMPACT ALREADY.

IF WE ALLOW HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THEN THOSE SPECULATORS ARE GOING TO COME IN, TEAR DOWN EXISTING HOMES, INCLUDING SMALLER, OLDER, AFFORDABLE HOMES, AND BUILD MUCH LARGER DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES AND QUADPLEXES BECAUSE THEY CAN MAKE A LOT MORE MONEY DOING THAT.

WE ALREADY HAVE A HOUSING MARKET THAT IS BEING SKEWED BY THIS OUTSIDE INVESTMENT.

THIS IS JUST GOING TO OPEN THE FLOODGATES.

DO YOU NOT HAVE SOME CONCERN FOR THE IMPACT THAT THIS WOULD HAVE ON DESTABILIZING EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS?

[06:35:05]

OF COURSE, WHICH IS WHY WE DON'T HAVE A PROPOSAL.

THERE IS NO PROPOSAL TO REZONE EVERY SINGLE LOT TO SOMETHING ELSE.

THERE JUST ISN'T.

SO, I MEAN, I DO HAVE CONCERN ABOUT THAT AND THAT'S WHY I HONESTLY SAY IT IS NOT A ONE SIZE FITS ALL.

WE NEED TO HAVE MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

I THINK IT IS A WE LOOK AT IT CERTAIN THINGS INCREMENTALLY.

IT IS GOING TO BE MORE APPROPRIATE IN CERTAIN AREAS THAN IT'S NOT.

I THINK WE NEED TO.

I MEAN, JUST YESTERDAY AND FOR MONTHS, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HOW WE LAYER ON A BUNCH OF DATA, ESPECIALLY TO, TO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT SOME OF THE AREAS THAT MAY BE MOST VULNERABLE TO THIS VERSUS OTHERS, THAT GIVEN MARKET FORCES, THERE'S GOING TO BE NO IMPACT WHATEVER THAT THIS IS.

SO ABSOLUTELY, WE ARE ABSOLUTELY, VERY, VERY SENSITIVE TO THIS, SENSITIVE TO THIS AND VERY CONSCIOUS OF IT.

AND AND I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ONE SIDE OF PEOPLE THAT SAY THEY DON'T WANT THIS.

WE HAVE HEARD A LOT OF PEOPLE BEING OUT IN THE COMMUNITY AND AS PART OF OUR DISCUSSION THAT DO WANT US TO DO SOMETHING, SO WE'RE NOT TRYING TO IGNORE ANYONE. SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT OUR BALANCE IS AND HOW DO WE DO THIS, TAKING INTO ALL OF THESE THINGS AND ALL OF THIS INPUT INTO AS MUCH OF A COUNT AS WE CAN, WE KNOW WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING.

I MEAN, WE'RE A MAJOR DYNAMIC CITY.

HOW DO WE COME UP AND MANAGE THIS TOGETHER? WELL, I THINK THE BASIC IDEA OF HIGHER DENSITY IS APPROPRIATE FOR US TO CONSIDER.

IF IT ISN'T AN ACROSS THE BOARD ABANDONMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, IT HAS ITS PLACE IN MULTI-USE DISTRICTS AND AREAS THAT ARE GREENFIELDS THAT HAVEN'T EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS.

THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT PERHAPS WE CONSIDER AT SOME POINT.

BUT THIS IDEA OF CONVERTING OUR SINGLE FAMILY ZONING TO MULTIFAMILY ZONING, TO ME, IS A NONSTARTER.

AND I HAVE TO REJECT THAT.

CREATING THIS, MULTIFAMILY ZONING OR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS DOES NOT BRING MOST PEOPLE CLOSER TO RETAIL, TO GROCERY STORES.

I CAN'T WALK TO A GROCERY STORE IN MY SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.

I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY ELSE THAT'S CLOSE ENOUGH TO RETAIL TO DO THAT.

INTERJECTING MULTIFAMILY INTO THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS IS NOT GOING TO ACHIEVE THE AIM OF BRINGING THEM CLOSER.

MULTIFAMILY DOES THAT MIXED USE PROJECTS DO THAT? CURRENTLY, IF A DEVELOPER WANTS TO BUILD HOMES ON SMALLER AREAS THAN 5000FT², THEY CAN APPLY FOR A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT, CAN THEY NOT? THEY CAN, BUT IS LIMITED.

BUT IT DOES ALLOW FOR SMALLER THAN 5000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS? BY 20% IF I'M NOT WRONG.

SO IT'S NOT LIKE THE ONLY, DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE SMALLER THAN THAT IS DUPLEX, WHICH IS 3000 PER UNIT, BUT TOGETHER IT'S 6000 OR WE HAVE TH THAT ALLOWS 2000.

THE PROBLEM IS..

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THOSE RIGHT NOW, I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT..

ONLY BY 20%.

I WILL SAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE IT.

WE JUST HAD TO DO A PD FOR RESIDENTIAL LOTS THAT WERE THEY WERE INDUSTRIALLY ZONED, WE HAD TO CREATE A PD FOR TO HONOR THE RESIDENTIAL USE ON THAT LOT, BUT THEY WERE BUILT AT 2500FT².

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AVAILABLE FROM A BASE ZONING DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS SOMEBODY TO DEVELOP ON A SMALL LOT.

WELL, YOU QUALIFY THAT ANSWER BY SAYING BASE ZONING.

AND YOU MENTIONED PDS, WHICH IS WHERE I WAS GOING NEXT.

YOU CAN ALSO CREATE A NEIGHBORHOOD PED, AND WE'VE DONE THAT BEFORE TO ALLOW SMALLER THAN 5000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.

ISN'T THAT RIGHT? YES.

SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CHALLENGES WITH PDS, WHICH BECOMES SEPARATE LITTLE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT NOW IT'S SO HARD TO PROCESS THOSE.

WHAT, THE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY BEING OR THAT NEEDS FURTHER CLARITY.

THERE IS ONE THING TO CREATE CERTAIN ZONES.

THERE'S ONE THING TO APPLY THE CERTAIN ZONES.

SO PART OF WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IS WE NEED TO UPDATE OUR CODE TO MAKE CERTAIN ZONES AVAILABLE FOR PREDICTABILITY PURPOSES.

HAVING A SMALL LOT, ZONING CLASSIFICATION THAT YES, IF AN AREA IS APPROPRIATE FOR IT, YOU REZONE TO IT.

A DEVELOPER COULD COME IN AND SAY AND MAKE THEIR CASE AND REZONE TO IT, AS OPPOSED TO I THINK THE ASSUMPTION IS THE CITY IS GOING TO GO OUT AND REZONE ALL THESE AREAS.

[06:40:07]

THAT'S ALSO NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EITHER.

IT'S MAKING CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS AVAILABLE SO THAT IN AREAS WHERE IT MAY BE APPROPRIATE, YOU CAN APPROPRIATELY DEVELOP.

OKAY, THAT WAS NOT CLEAR FROM THE PRESENTATION TO ME.

I MIGHT SUPPORT THAT PROPOSITION TO CREATE AN R3 DISTRICT OR WHATEVER.

THAT'S MASTER PLANNED.

AND THAT HAS COMMON AREAS, GREEN SPACE TO COMPENSATE FOR THE SMALLER LOTS.

THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME, BUT CONVERTING OR ALLOWING BY CODE AMENDMENT DUPLEXES AND FOURPLEXES TO BE BUILT IN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY ZONES IS BY RIGHT ELIMINATES THE CHECK ON HAVING IT REVIEWED FOR ZONING APPROVAL BY STAFF, BY THE CPC, AND BY THIS BODY.

AND THAT'S WHAT I REJECT THAT WE MAKE IN ACROSS THE BOARD, CODE CHANGE THAT CONVERTS OUR SINGLE FAMILY INTO MULTIFAMILY.

AND I JUST DISAGREE WITH THE PROPOSITION THAT BUILDING A QUADPLEX CREATES FOUR MORE SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ON ONE LOT.

THAT IS JUST A CONTRADICTION IN TERMS. SO LIKE MY COLLEAGUES THAT HAVE SPOKEN ON THIS ISSUE, I ALSO THINK THAT THERE ARE MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THINGS FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO BE FOCUSED ON . REDUCING THE TIME IT TAKES TO PROCESS REZONINGS AND AUTHORIZED HEARING PROCESSING.

THOSE SHOULD BE OUR PRIORITIES NOW.

SO I JUST DON'T WANT TO BURDEN OUR VOLUNTEERS ANY FURTHER ON THAT SCORE OR THE CITY STAFF.

THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.

MAYOR PRO TEM. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN RIDLEY.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DUPLEX, TRIPLEX AND FOURPLEX? WHAT SIZE ARE LOT ARE WE REFERRING TO? WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANYTHING.

THERE IS NO PROPOSAL. THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS TO DO IT AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO EXPLORE.

WHAT IS THE CONVERSATION THEN? OFTEN THE STANDARD IN MANY CITIES IT DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT OF THE CITY.

HONESTLY, THERE ARE SOME CITIES THAT CAN GO DOWN AS LOW AS 8000FT² FOR A FOURPLEX.

THERE ARE SOME THAT GO UP TO 16,000FT².

IT DEPENDS ON, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK AT IF WE WANTED TO INCORPORATE A MINIMUM LOT SIZE.

SOME CITIES DON'T EVEN GO BY LOT SIZE, THEY GO BY FRONTAGE.

HOW MUCH FRONTAGE THAT YOU HAVE ON YOUR LOT.

AND IF YOU CAN OR THEY BUILT, THEY HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND IF YOU CAN FIT IT ON THAT THEN YOU COULD BUILD THE FOURPLEX.

CAN I GET SOME OF MY TIME BACK, MISS SECRETARY? WHAT HAPPENED? SHE KEPT ON RUNNING MY TIME.

SO SHE'S TRYING TO HELP YOU? I HOPE NOT.

NOT HELP ALL OF US.

WELL, EVERYBODY ELSE DIDN'T GET HELP.

I UNDERSTAND. OKAY, WE'LL FIX IT.

OKAY. SO.

THIS CONVERSATION HAVE NOT BEEN BROUGHT ABOUT, WHAT SIZE OF LOTS.

SO IT'S A CONVERSATION.

SO THEREFORE WE HAD A CONVERSATION, THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN TALKED IN THE, IN THE COUNCIL, BUT WE HAVE NOT TALKED TO THE RESIDENT.

WE HAVE NOT HAD A CONVERSATION WITH A PERSON WHO HAS A R7 FIVE OR R5 TEN HOUSE AND SAY, WHAT TYPE DO YOU WANT IT TO HAVE A FOUR PLEX TRIPLEX? IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? NO, BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN ASKED TO DO THAT.

WE HAVEN'T OR AND OR EVEN SEPARATELY APART FROM THAT, WE HAVEN'T BROUGHT FORWARD YET A DISCUSSION ABOUT EVEN IF WE JUST WANTED TO CREATE A FOUR PLEX ZONE, WE HAVEN'T STARTED THAT YET.

AND TO START A CONVERSATION, ARE WE REFERRING TO THIS IS A ZONING QUESTION THAT NEEDS TO BE ZONING FIRST.

SO AND WHAT IS THE PROCESS WHEN YOU WANT TO CHANGE ZONING, WHAT IS OUR PROCESS? SO IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE ZONING YOU HAVE TO MAKE AN APPLICATION AND THEN GO THROUGH THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION PROCESS AND THEN ULTIMATELY APPROVAL WITH CITY COUNCIL.

SO THIS CONVERSATION RIGHT HERE WOULD BE A PROCESS THAT GOES THROUGH ZONING.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? WELL, THIS THAT THE QUESTION THAT YOU HAD IT WOULD ACTUALLY SAY WOULD BE A CODE AMENDMENT.

IT WOULDN'T BE A ZONING CHANGE, IT WOULD BE A CODE AMENDMENT, A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE CODE THAT WOULD START AT THE ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WHERE WE'D HAVE THAT WHOLE CONVERSATION ABOUT, DO WE CREATE A ZONING CATEGORY JUST FOR A FOUR PLEX, FOR EXAMPLE? SO WOULD THAT BE THE ZONING CHANGE? NO, IT WOULD NOT CHANGE THE ZONING.

IT WOULD CHANGE THE TEXT OF THE CODE.

BUT THEN SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE ONCE WE CREATED A FOUR PLEX DISTRICT, THEN SOMEBODY COULD COME AND SAY, ANDREA, I AM SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION FOR A

[06:45:01]

ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.

NOW I WANT TO GO TO CPC AND THEN CITY COUNCIL.

SO IS A IS A CONVERSATION ABOUT A DUPLEX OR TRI PLEX OR FOUR PLEX ON A CERTAIN SIZE OF LOT, OR WE JUST COME AND SAY, WE DON'T KNOW.

WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY.

SO AND THIS DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH FORWARD DALLAS? NO, NOT DIRECTLY.

AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOUSING IN GENERAL IN FORWARD DALLAS, BUT NOT ABOUT CHANGING ZONING.

BUT INDIRECTLY DO RIGHT? CORRECT. OKAY. SO IT DO HAS TO DO WITH FORWARD DALLAS INDIRECTLY.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE ON RECORD IT DO HAVE SOME DO WITH FORWARD DALLAS.

AND SO I HAVE SAID ALL ALONG THAT WE NEED TO GET FORWARD DALLAS TAKING CARE OF FIRST.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON FORWARD DALLAS FOR 20 YEARS AND IT STILL AIN'T COMPLETED AND WE GOT SO MANY.

HOW MANY PDS DO WE HAVE OUT THERE? 1200. 1200 PDS.

SO WE NEED TO GET TAKEN CARE OF THOSE PDS.

SO THAT'S MY OTHER STATEMENT ALSO.

THEN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BUILDING, ON PROBABLY A R5 OR R7 5, R 10 AND, AND WE, I HEAR WE MENTIONED THAT SUPPOSE THE PRICE OF HOUSING GOING UP FROM $300 MILLION TO $400 MILLION, AND IF YOU WANT TO BUILD A DUPLEX OR A TRIPLEX OR A FOUR PLEX ON THAT SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY OF 5000 SQUARE FOOT, THEN THE VALUE WILL BE MORE ON THAT OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY, IF YOU BUILD A FOUR PLEX VERSUS A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.

IT DEPENDS. IT COULD BE.

RIGHT. RIGHT. SO THEREFORE THEN WE'RE LOOKING AT MINIMUM SIZE I GUESS WE LOOK AT WHAT IS BEING THE MINIMUM SIZE OF A DUPLEX, OR WHAT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM SIZE OF A TRIPLEX OR A FOURPLEX.

WOULD THEY BE PUTTING IN, IN PERSPECTIVE THAT IF YOU HAVE A 5000 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY, WILL YOU PUT IN THERE, SAYING YOU CANNOT BUILD A DUPLEX NO MORE THAN 2000 SQUARE FOOT? BECAUSE YOU WON'T HAVE NO YARD.

YOU MIGHT HAVE TEN FEET WORTH OF YARD.

SO WOULD THAT BE IN CONSIDERATION IN THE CONVERSATION? THAT COULD BE PART OF THE CONVERSATION, YES.

YEAH. BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE LIKE I SAID, YOU START BUILDING WITH NO YARD.

SO YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AND YOU ALSO LOOK AT A RESIDENT SO WHEN IN THE CONVERSATION, AND YOU TURN BY TALKING ABOUT TURNING DOWN HOUSES IN A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD, WHAT ABOUT PARKING? BECAUSE IF YOU HAD A REAR END PARKING DRIVEWAY OR THE FRONT RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE PARKING ENOUGH PARKING IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE VERSUS THE DRIVEWAY. HOW DO WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION? THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE CONVERSATION.

RIGHT. SO SO HAVE THAT BEEN PART OF THE CONVERSATION? SO WHAT WAS THE CONVERSATION, ABOUT THE REAR IN THE GARAGE OF THE FRONT AND PARKING.

WELL. SO I THINK WHAT DOCTOR ADREA WAS SHOWING WAS SOME EXAMPLES OF HOW DIFFERENT CONTEXTS COULD FIT IN.

BUT IT DEPENDS. IT DEPENDS GREATLY ON THE LOT AND WHERE YOU'RE DEVELOPING ON THE LOT OR THE BLOCK.

RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE A CORNER LOT? DO YOU HAVE AN ALLEY? ARE YOU MID BLOCK? ALL OF THOSE THINGS FACTOR IN WELL AND THEN ALSO ONE SIDE DON'T FIT ALL YOU KNOW DIFFERENT RESIDENTS.

SO THEREFORE IF YOU HAD A CONVERSATION THAT WE NEED TO PROBABLY HAVE A CONVERSATION IN CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS OR CERTAIN PART OF THE CITY, IT WOULD NOT BE ALL OVER.

CORRECT. AND AND THAT STILL BE A CONVERSATION.

YOU GOT TO GO OUT TO THE RESIDENTS TO TALK ABOUT, OH, DO YOU WANT THAT IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO BY RIGHT, THEY SHOULD BE HAVE A OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, DO I OPPOSE THIS OR DO NOT OPPOSE IT? BECAUSE BY ZONING YOU GOT TO PUT A REQUIREMENT, A NOTICE OUT THERE IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE ZONING.

IN THIS CASE, WE GOT TO FILL OUT, DO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANT TO CHANGE THE ZONING.

CORRECT. SO NOTICE WOULD HAVE TO GO OUT, AND ULTIMATELY IT'S YOUR DECISION.

SO ULTIMATELY THOSE ISSUES COME TO YOU RIGHT.

AND SO RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT OUR DECISION TODAY BECAUSE WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO THEREFORE IT'S GREAT CONVERSATION.

BUT YOU KNOW WE GOT SO MUCH DONE TO DO IN OUR CPC VOLUNTEER.

YOU GOT A WHOLE LOT OF WORK. WE BACK BACKLOGGED AND PYRAMIDS WE'RE TRYING TO GET DONE.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT CONVERSATION, BUT I THINK RIGHT NOW WE NEED TO GET FORWARD DALLAS TAKEN CARE OF FIRST.

WE NEED TO GET THAT TAKEN CARE OF FIRST.

AND WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE RESIDENT AND GET SOME MORE INPUT.

I DON'T THINK WE'RE READY.

IT'S A GREAT CONVERSATION.

LISTEN TO THE CONVERSATION, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S READY TO PUT IN PLAN.

CHAIRMAN MORENO, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. IT'S BEEN SAID THAT I REFUSE TO PLACE THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA, AND I JUST WANT TO GET ONE THING OUT THERE.

I ACTUALLY ENCOURAGED THIS TO BE PLACED ON OUR AGENDA AND A DIFFERENT ROUTE WAS PURSUED.

AT OUR PRIOR, BRIEFING, WE ASKED A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS FROM STAFF.

AND SO I AM, HERE TO SEE IF THOSE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED AND ADDRESSED FROM OUR PREVIOUS BRIEFING.

[06:50:09]

WE TRIED TO ADDRESS SOME OF THEM.

SOME WILL NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE RESEARCH.

I WENT THROUGH THE PRESENT THROUGH THE COMMENTS AND THAT MEETING THIS PAST WEEK.

SO SINCE THEN, WE NOTICED AGAIN, IT WAS A BIT OF A CONFUSION BETWEEN FORWARD DALLAS AND THIS ONE, AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE ARE SEPARATE ISSUES.

THAT'S WHY WE PULLED THAT.

AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO BE VERY CLEAR RIGHT NOW.

WE WERE VERY CAREFUL THAT THERE WAS NO PROPOSAL, NO BY RIGHT, NO DISCUSSION ON THAT.

ALSO, I ADDED A LITTLE BIT MORE EXAMPLES THAT I DID, A LITTLE BIT MORE RESEARCH.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, AND THEN WE REFINED THE MESSAGE TO ENSURE THAT IT IS JUST A CONVERSATION.

WE'RE JUST WANT TO SEE WHAT ARE THE HOUSING OPTIONS, HOW TO ADDRESS HOUSING NEEDS, AND ALL OF THIS.

BUT, I DO REMEMBER I THINK YOU HAD A QUESTION REGARDING THE POPULATION IN CBD, BUT I THINK YOU ANSWERED THAT QUESTION AS WELL.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I'M JUST TRYING TO SAY THAT I MIGHT BE IN A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT PLACE.

IF WE HAD SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MOVE ME A LITTLE BIT ON THAT.

ON PAGE THREE, ON THE FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO, HELP ME UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE MAYBE I'M CONFUSED.

MAYBE SOME RESIDENTS ARE CONFUSED, BUT IT READS AMEND A SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO ALLOW A TRIPLEX AND FOURPLEX USE BY RIGHT.

AND SO WHAT I'M HEARING TODAY IS THAT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S BEING PROPOSED OR CONSIDERED.

AND SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE LANGUAGE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED ON THE MEMO VERSUS WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED TODAY.

I WOULD SAY AGAIN, THERE WAS THE LANGUAGE IN THE MEMO.

IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WE THOUGHT IT HAS A STRAIGHTFORWARD ANSWER.

SO THEREFORE WE ADDRESSED IT INTO OPTIONS AND HOW TO GENTLY REFER TO IT.

NOT BACK THEN.

AND TODAY I WAS EVEN MORE CLEAR.

BUT IF YOU GO BACK TO OUR PRESENTATION BACK THEN WE DID NOT SAY SIGNATURE MEMOS? THE MEMO SAID BY RIGHT NOT STAFF.

SO STAFF IS MAKING THE OPINION TO NOT GO BY RIGHT.

WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANYTHING.

I MEAN, WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING A ZONING SOLUTION RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE SO I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, A PART OF NOT ANSWERING THE OR PENDING QUESTIONS.

WE'RE TRYING TO IF WE GOT DIRECTIVE TODAY FROM THE COUNCIL FROM, FROM THIS BODY THAT SAID TO US, ANDREA AND ANDREA, GO BACK AND COME TO COME FORWARD WITH A BUY RIGHT PROPOSAL, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD DO.

BUT WE CERTAINLY FROM THE HOUSING COMMITTEE MEETING, WE DIDN'T GET THAT IMPRESSION.

AND THAT IS NOT WE DON'T THINK COMING OUT OF THE GATE WITH SOMETHING NEW THAT STILL NEEDS A LOT MORE EDUCATION, THAT STAFF, THAT'S NOT OUR RECOMMENDED APPROACH EITHER.

AT THIS POINT. I THINK THERE'S STILL MORE STUDY THAT NEEDS TO BE HAPPENING.

SO WE WOULD LOVE TO GET A PLAN DONE FIRST AND THEN MOVE INTO ZONING.

AND WHATEVER COMBINATION THAT IS STAFF IS, WE DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU. AND I'VE TOUCHED A LOT ON ON WHERE MY POSITION IS CURRENTLY.

I'LL JUST REITERATE THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROTECTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE HAVE TODAY AND THAT WE DON'T SEE THESE TEAR DOWNS POTENTIALLY HAPPENING.

I WANT TO, I AGAIN AGREE, AND I THINK WE'RE HEARING FROM YOU ALL THAT IT'S NOT A ONE SIZE FITS ALL, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

WHAT I AM OPEN TO IS MASTER PLANS ROWHOMES ALONG CORRIDORS.

EVEN POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT CORNER LOTS AND BEYOND.

CAN I, I DIDN'T REALLY SEE ANY NEXT STEPS ON HERE.

AND SO WHAT WOULD IT BE? I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A RECOMMENDATION ON THE FLOOR BY ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES.

BUT DO YOU GUYS HAVE A GUIDANCE ON HOW TO PROCEED? IF I HAD MY DRUTHERS, AND I CAN'T BELIEVE I JUST SAID THAT, THAT I THINK, AGAIN, GETTING FORWARD DALLAS IN PLACE, BECAUSE I WILL SAY THAT STAFF IS WE'RE ALL HANDS ON DECK ON THAT RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK.

WE CAN PUT TOGETHER A SERIES OF CONSIDERATIONS.

IT'S ALMOST LIKE IF YOU DO THIS, WE DO THIS.

IF YOU DO THIS, YOU DO THIS, AND WE CAN START TALKING THROUGH.

BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE TALKING A LOT OF CONCEPTUAL THINGS.

[06:55:01]

EVEN ON THE ADU SITUATION, IT'S A MATTER OF IT'S NOT JUST ALLOWING ADUS, BUT I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THE DESIGN PARAMETERS WOULD BE FOR ADUS.

AND MAYBE IF PEOPLE SAW THAT IN BLACK AND WHITE, YOU MIGHT BE A LITTLE LESS CONCERNED ABOUT IT.

MAYBE NOT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO START EVENTUALLY COMING WITH SOME CONCRETE OPTIONS OF WHAT ZONING CATEGORY, WHAT WOULD A FOUR PLEX ZONING DISTRICT LOOK LIKE? AND THEN WE AND I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OF CREATING THE CODE AND THEN APPLYING IT AND HOW IT GETS.

THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS TO APPLY THINGS.

SO ALL OF THAT I THINK WE NEED TO FLESH OUT, THAT I THINK WE COULD START BRINGING SOME OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS BACK SO THAT YOU COULD ACTUALLY START SEEING SOME THINGS IN BLACK AND WHITE. OKAY. TO THAT, I THINK THERE'S OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE, SHIFTS FROM ON COUNCIL AND IN WHICH DIRECTION WE MOVE FORWARD IN.

WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET UNDERSTOOD IS IF WE WERE TO SEND THIS TO TO ZOAC AND CPC WITHOUT REAL GUIDANCE, WITHOUT REAL, THIS IS WHAT COUNCIL IS, WOULD SUPPORT AND WOULDN'T.

I MEAN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT WASTING INDIVIDUAL'S TIME.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT'S GOING TO COST, FROM STAFF TIME TO GET IT IMPLEMENTED WHEN YOU'RE KIND OF ALREADY HAVE A FEELING OF WHERE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LIE.

WHAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IS I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THE TOOLS TO THEN WE CAN FIGURE OUT EVENTUALLY HOW TO APPLY THEM.

BUT RIGHT NOW WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE TOOLS.

SO WE'VE GOT DUPLEXES BEING BUILT THAT EVERYONE IS KIND OF APPALLED BY THE DESIGN OF DUPLEX.

I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO AMEND THAT ZONING DISTRICT SO THAT IF SOMEBODY IS GOING TO DEVELOP A DUPLEX, THEY HAVE BETTER GUIDANCE AND NEIGHBORS FEEL BETTER ABOUT THOSE DUPLEXES. I WOULD LOVE TO CREATE A TRIPLEX AND A FOUR PLEX ZONE.

SO IF THERE ARE AREAS WHERE IT'S APPROPRIATE THAT SOMEBODY WANTS TO ASK FOR THAT, WE HAVE GOOD DESIGN.

SO THEY DON'T ACTUALLY THEN ASK HAVE TO ASK FOR MULTIFAMILY TO BACK THEMSELVES INTO A FOUR PLEX, AND THEN YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET.

I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO CREATE THE TOOLS, EVEN A SMALL LOT ZONING DISTRICT THAT COULD BE APPLIED, AND THEN WE'LL FIGURE OUT HOW TO APPLY THEM.

SO WE CHANGE THE CODE FIRST.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE REZONE ANYTHING.

THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I'LL CLOSE WITH, YOU KNOW, WE MUST PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS WHILE STILL GROWING OUR HOUSING STOCK.

NOW, I GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE MOMENT JUST TO WISH, MY DAUGHTER AVA, A HAPPY BIRTHDAY.

I MISSED HER BIRTHDAY AT SCHOOL EARLIER TODAY.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY HAPPY BIRTHDAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU MAYOR.

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU ALL FOR Y'ALL'S WORK AND HOLD ON, HOLD ON, YOU'RE NOT IN THE QUEUE YET.

I DIDN'T SEE A QUEUE. AND THAT'S WHY YOU JUST GAVE ME EYE CONTACT AND SHOOK YOUR HEAD, SO I.

I'M A CHAIRMAN.

HAVE, YOU SPOKE YET? HEY, YOU SPOKE BACK.

OKAY. DEPUTY MAYOR ARNOLD.

WE BUYING TOO MANY COOKIES, TOO MANY COOKIES.

[INAUDIBLE] THANK YOU.

SIR. THANK YOU ALL ALSO FOR FOR YOUR THIS PRESENTATION.

I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHILE THE PUBLIC IS LISTENING, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS IS ABOUT A CONVERSATION.

WE'RE NOT TO TAKE ANY ACTION TODAY.

THERE IS NO POLICIES BEING ESTABLISHED.

SECOND OF ALL, WE HAVE TERRORIZED AND UPSET A NUMBER OF PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT WE ARE HERE THROUGH THIS OVERREACH OF WHAT'S PERCEIVED AS OVERREACH BY DISCUSSING A BY RIGHT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH THEY, BY RIGHT, PURCHASED A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND THEY DON'T WANT TO THEY DON'T WANT TO BE VICTIMIZED BY WHAT APPEARS TO BE, YOU KNOW, THIS BAMBOOZLE BAIT AND SWITCH.

AND AS THE NINTH LARGEST CITY IN THE UNITED STATES, WE OUGHT TO BE A CITY OF OUR WORD, SO THAT FOR ME, THE THE ANSWER IS NO FOR ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS, YOU'RE NOT ONLY CREATING ISSUES FOR THE CITY.

WHAT ABOUT THE COUNTY THAT CREATES A WHOLE NOTHER BALL OF WAX THAT THEY HAVE TO WORK OUT OF? SO I WOULD SIMPLY SAY THANK YOU ALL FOR THE CONVERSATION.

BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO DO WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FORWARD DALLAS, LET'S TALK ABOUT DALLAS NOW, WE HAVE TO BALANCE.

WE'RE STRUGGLING TO GET OUR SERVICES DELIVERED TO THESE NEIGHBORHOODS.

WE'RE ASKING FOR STABILITY AND STRUCTURE TO GET FIRST RESPONDERS DOWN THE STREETS TO GET OUR BASIC SERVICE SANITATION PICKED UP.

[07:00:02]

WE'RE STRUGGLING FOR JUST THE BASICS OF WHICH WE'RE SITTING HERE NOW TALKING ABOUT PUTTING A BOND PROPOSAL TOGETHER OF $1 BILLION, AND WE SURE DON'T WANT A BALL OF CONFUSION. GIVE US WHAT WE DESERVE AS TAXPAYERS NOW, WHICH IS A CITY IN WHICH IF WE'RE PAYING PROPERTY TAXES OR SALES TAXES, WE WANT SERVICES AND WE WANT THEM NOW DELIVERED MORE EFFICIENTLY, EFFICIENTLY.

AND IT'S GOOD TO TALK ABOUT THE FUTURE.

BUT WHAT NORMALLY HAPPENS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THESE PROJECTS, AND NO DISRESPECT TO THE FACT OF THAT IDEA, LOFTY IDEA, BUT WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE PROJECTS LIKE THIS, YOU BUY CHEAP, YOU BUILD CHEAP, AND WHERE DO YOU GO? THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

WHERE DO YOU GO? THE UNDERSERVED NEIGHBORHOODS.

WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WERE POORLY PLANNED IN MY DISTRICT RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO ALLEY WHERE YOU CAN COME THROUGH THE BACK.

ALL THE PARKING IS ON THE FRONT.

WE HAVE SENIORS CRYING.

THEY'RE SCARED BECAUSE JOE IS BRINGING HIS WORK TRUCK HOME AND PARKING IN HER FRONT YARD BECAUSE HE HAS 3 OR 4 OTHER CARS IN HIS DRIVEWAY. AND SO ALL WE WANT IS TO CORRECT THE WRONGS THAT WE'VE DONE WITH THAT OTHER GREAT PLANNING BACK IN THE 60S AND 70S.

NOW, I'M FORTUNATE THAT I HAD A DEVELOPER, AND I BELIEVE I WAS TOLD THAT HE HAS A WOMEN ON HIS TEAM.

SO WE HAVE BACKYARD ENTRY.

WE HAVE GARAGES WHERE YOU CAN PARK THERE.

WE DON'T WANT PARKING ON THE STREET FOR 400 AND 365 DAYS OUT OF THE YEAR, AND I'M GOING TO ADD ANOTHER 100 DAYS BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BRING IN ALL OF THESE EXTRA VEHICLES THAT STAY.

SO FOR US COUNCIL MEMBERS, I WOULD SAY COME TO SOME OF THE DISTRICTS WHERE WE ALREADY ARE IN PAIN.

THIS IS NOT THE BEST SOLUTION FOR ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS.

BUT WHATEVER WE DO AS A CITY, LET'S NOT BAIT AND SWITCH.

LET'S NOT PUT THESE SCIENCE FAIR PROJECTS OUT HERE IN THESE COMMUNITIES WITHOUT BEING HONEST ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WHAT WE PROMISED AND WHAT WE'RE STANDING ON WITH OUR ZONING.

AND SO I WOULD SAY, AS THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE SAID TODAY, WE HAVE WORK TO DO.

WE NEED TO BE WORKING NOW ON THIS BOND PROJECT, BOND PROPOSALS.

WE'RE SPENDING MORE TIME ON THIS CONVERSATION, AND IT'S GOOD TO DO THAT EXERCISE.

BUT RIGHT NOW, I WOULD MUCH RATHER FOR US TO TALK ABOUT A PLAN THAT I'M GOING TO NAME TODAY DALLAS NOW, DALLAS TODAY.

SO THANK YOU ALL COLLEAGUES FOR SIGNING THAT.

IT'S GREAT, I LOVE WHEN WE HAVE THIS BRAIN EXERCISE AND WE HAVE CREATIVITY, BUT THE REALITY IS THE PEOPLE WANT US TO DELIVER AND THEY WANT TO DELIVER NOW AND NOT TOMORROW.

AND LET'S NOT DO THIS, HOODWINK, BAIT AND SWITCH, GOTCHA APPROACH TO SERVING OUR CONSTITUENTS.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN BAZALDUA FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

AND AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL FOR Y'ALL'S PRESENTATION AND Y'ALL'S WORK.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO EXTEND SOME APOLOGY TO THE WAY THAT I THINK THAT THIS IS THROWN YOU ALL THROUGH THE WRINGER A BIT.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, THIS WAS BROUGHT FORTH, OF COURSE, AS THE FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO, AND THIS WAS DIRECTED TO STAFF.

THIS WAS NOT YOU ALL TRYING TO SHOVE ANYTHING DOWN ANYONE'S THROAT OR PULLING ANY BAIT AND SWITCH.

THIS WAS Y'ALL DOING YOUR JOB.

SO, IT'S UNFORTUNATE SOMETIMES THAT WHO WE HAVE AT THE PODIUM, GETS RIDICULED AND CRITICIZED FOR DOING YOUR JOB.

BUT I DO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR IT.

AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT I'M SORRY THAT THIS CONVERSATION HAS BEEN A LACK OF BEING PRODUCTIVE.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S A REALLY SAD DAY IN OUR CITY WHEN POLICY MAKERS WITH DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AND VIEWS CAN'T HAVE COMPLEX POLICY DISCUSSIONS.

IT'S REALLY A SAD DAY IN OUR CITY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE WERE ELECTED TO DO.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT, THERE'S A ONE SIZE FITS ALL SOLUTION.

BUT I ALSO DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE CONVERSATION SHOULD BE APPROACHED AS A DICHOTOMY, BECAUSE THERE WERE MANY THINGS THAT WERE LISTED ON THAT, MEMO. THERE'S A COUPLE THAT, OF COURSE, GET HIGHLIGHTED AND EMPHASIZED MORE THAN OTHERS.

BUT JUST THE SIMPLE CONVERSATION OF IF WE NEED TO REVISIT MINIMUM LOT SIZE COVERAGE.

RIGHT. AND THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MULTIFAMILY DWELLING TYPES, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DWELLING TYPES.

AND BUT WE CAN'T EVEN HAVE A PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION TO ACTUALLY SEE.

AND IF YOU LOOK BACK ON THE MEMO, IT CLEARLY STATES THAT WE WANT TO GET BRIEFED ON THESE OPTIONS AND THE IMPACT THAT THEY HAVE ON THE CITY. WHICH MEANS THIS WAS MEANT TO BE A ROBUST DISCUSSION.

[07:05:05]

THIS WAS MEANT TO BOUNCE OFF WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE A REALLY AMAZING FORM OF GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS 14 ONE, BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE UNIQUE CONSTITUENCIES THAT WE SERVE.

BUT TO APPROACH THIS CONVERSATION IN A ZERO SUM, IS NOT REALLY OPEN TO THE SPIRIT OF HOW DIVERSE OUR CITY IS WITH THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS THAT ARE MADE UP.

IT'S GREAT TO ADVOCATE FOR YOUR CONSTITUENCY, BECAUSE WE WOULD HOPEFULLY KNOW THEM BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE THAT WE SIT HERE WITH, BUT WHEN WE FRAME A CONVERSATION BASED ON JUST WHAT WE BELIEVE OUR DISTRICT SEES, INSTEAD OF ALLOWING THAT TO BE A PART OF THE CONVERSATION THAT MAYBE WE SEE THAT BY RIGHT, ISN'T THE ANSWER NECESSARILY CITYWIDE.

BY RIGHT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S EXPLORED WITH ONE ZONING TYPE.

WE DON'T HAVE TO EXPLORE EVERY OPTION THAT'S ON THE MEMOS.

MAYBE WE REALIZE QUICKLY THAT THERE'S AN APPETITE TO LOOK AT NEW DEVELOPMENT, AS I'VE HEARD A COUPLE OF TIMES FOR JUST ZERO LOT LINES.

THE REALITY IS, IS THAT WE'RE NEVER GOING TO COME TO A NEW POTENTIAL.

WE'RE NEVER GOING TO EXPLORE HOW WE CAN CHALLENGE THE STATUS QUO.

IF WE BALL UP OUR FISTS AND STOMP ON THE GROUND AND SAY, THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WANT.

THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE ELECTED TO DO.

THAT'S LAZY.

SO I AGREE, WE DO HAVE WE HAVE A LOT OF IMPORTANT THINGS TO GO ON.

AND I THINK THAT OUR CITY ALWAYS HAS IMPORTANT ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.

IN FACT, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO PRIORITIZE, ONE VERSUS THE OTHER.

AND WE SHOULD, AS I'VE SAID IN THE PAST, BE ABLE TO WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME.

I THINK THAT THIS IS, TO ME, BEEN A MORE BENEFICIAL EXERCISE TO AIR THE FACT THAT WE CAN'T EVEN HAVE COMPLEX POLICY DISCUSSIONS AS POLICY MAKERS.

SO I GUESS MAYBE SOME PEOPLE SHOULD USE THE PLATFORM OF BEING A RUBBER STAMP WHEN THEY RUN FOR OFFICE.

BUT I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHY I'M HERE.

I WANT TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS.

I WANT TO BOUNCE OFF OF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES.

I WANT TO SEE IF WE CAN FIND A MIDDLE GROUND THAT CAN HELP MOVE OUR CITY FORWARD.

AND IT'S REALLY SAD IN OUR CITY, IT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE THAT WE HAVE FOUND A PLACE IN TIME WHERE OUR GOVERNING BODY CAN'T EVEN DEBATE POLICY ISSUES.

THAT'S ALL I REALLY WANTED TO SAY, BECAUSE EVERYTHING THAT I'VE HEARD TODAY DOESN'T SURPRISE ME.

I WILL JUST THANK THE BODY FOR MAKING THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A TRANSPARENT CONVERSATION, INSTEAD OF AN AMBUSH IN THE THEATRICS THAT WE SAW IN DECEMBER.

BECAUSE THIS IS AT LEAST A START IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FOR US TO HAVE PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE STILL NOT THERE.

THANK YOU MAYOR. JAYNIE SCHULTZ.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO PUT A CAP ON THIS.

AT SOME POINT, I WILL ABSOLUTELY WANT TO UNDERSTAND, YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON WHY ZONING CASES TAKE SO LONG.

I DON'T THINK IT'S FOR STAFF OR LACK OF STAFF'S EFFORTS.

I THINK THAT THERE'S SOME STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT WE HAVE, INCLUDING PROBLEMS WITH OUR OWN CODE AND WHY THINGS TAKE SO LONG, BUT THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER DISCUSSION THAT WE SHOULD HAVE AT A WHOLE OTHER TIME.

I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE TIMELINE THAT YOU'RE PRESENTING ON SLIDE 27 IS WHAT, THE MESSAGE YOU WOULD LIKE US TO SEND BACK TO YOU.

AND IF SO, I KNOW THERE'S NO VOTE OR EVEN GREEN, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS GOING ON FOR THIS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO FIRMLY ENDORSE YOUR TIMELINE AND LET'S GET THROUGH FORWARD DALLAS AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THEN DEAL WITH THE CODE AMENDMENTS AFTER THAT.

SO THAT'S WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND, MR. MAYOR. AND IF WE'RE SENDING ANY MESSAGE BACK TO STAFF, THAT'S DIFFERENT.

I THINK NOW IS THE TIME TO SPEAK.

NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE.

MR. CITY MANAGER.

NEXT ITEM.

SO. THANK YOU.

YOU CAN LEAVE, I GUESS.

BECAUSE I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE AN EVENT TO GET TO AS WELL.

I'LL BE TRAILING RIGHT WITH YOU, I KNOW.

SO WE'RE GOING TO BE BRIEF.

WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM.

THAT ITEM HAD BEEN MOVED SEVERAL TIMES.

NEXT BRIEFING AGENDA IS EQUALLY AS CROWDED.

AND SO STAFF IS GOING TO COME UP, THEY'RE GOING TO GO STRAIGHT TO THE HIGHLIGHTS AND GET TO THE MEAT OF THE SITUATION FOR THE DISCUSSION, TO GET SOME GUIDANCE ON A PREFERRED

[C. 24-175 HUD 5-Year Consolidated Pan for FY 2024-25 through FY 2028-29]

METHOD OF MOVING FORWARD.

AND THEN WE'LL HOPEFULLY BE OUT OF HERE, AS SOON AS WE HAVE A BRIEF DISCUSSION OR AS LONG AS THE COUNCIL WANTS TO DISCUSS IT.

[07:10:06]

SO WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO JEANETTE WEEDEN TO GO THROUGH AND TRY TO DIRECT US TO THE THE PART OF THE PRESENTATION THAT'S MOST RELEVANT.

THANK YOU JEANETTE. GOOD AFTERNOON.

AND THANK YOU, MR. BROADNAX.

AS HE MENTIONED, MY NAME IS JEANETTE WEEDEN, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

I'M JOINED BY SHANE WILLIAMS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR AND BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES, AND WE ARE HERE TO WALK YOU THROUGH, OR TO DISCUSS THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED APPROACH TO DEVELOPING THE FIVE YEAR PLAN.

SO IF WE CAN JUST GO QUICKLY TO SLIDE NUMBER FIVE.

JUST WANT TO REMIND YOU ALL OF THE FUNDING THAT WE RECEIVED FOR FISCAL YEAR 24, WHICH IS $31 MILLION.

THE ONE THING THAT I WANT TO STRESS ON THIS PARTICULAR SLIDE, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DETERMINES THE ALLOCATION FOR EACH GRANT PROGRAM.

SO NOT THE CITY.

SO JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR TO EVERYONE.

AND THEN I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MISS WILLIAMS TO HIT THE HIGHLIGHTS OF SLIDES 15 THROUGH 35.

HI I'M SHARON WILLIAMS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF GRANTS DIVISION, BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

AS JEANETTE HAS SHARED, LET'S GO STRAIGHT TO SLIDE 15.

SO TODAY'S DISCUSSION IS ABOUT THE APPROACH FOR DEVELOPING OUR NEW FIVE YEAR PLAN.

AND YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT THE PLAN, THE APPROACH IS TO PRIMARILY USE SOME OF THE EXISTING SYSTEMS AND EXISTING STRATEGIES AND POLICIES THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE.

WE HAVE THE THE TASK FORCE, THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON POVERTY, THE DALLAS HOUSING POLICY.

SOME OF THOSE THINGS CECAP, THOSE SYSTEMS AND WORK THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ACCOMPLISHED.

AND THE GOAL IS TO COMBINE ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS INTO ONE DOCUMENT THAT RESPONDS TO HUD'S PRESCRIBED REQUIREMENTS.

AND THEN JUST SLIDE 16 JUST GIVES YOU A VISUAL OF HOW ALL OF THAT, FEEDS INTO THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN.

IN GENERAL, BECAUSE OF THE HUD REGULATIONS AND THE PRESCRIBED TEMPLATE THAT IS USED TO DEVELOP THE FIVE YEAR PLAN, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES ANY DIFFERENT FOR OUR APPROACH GOING FORWARD.

HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO SLIDE 20.

THAT IS OUR CDBG GRANT.

IT IS THE MOST FLEXIBLE OF OUR GRANT.

AND ON SLIDE 20, THE CHANGE THAT WE'RE APPROACH THAT'S DIFFERENT THIS YEAR.

I'D LIKE TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO IS, THE RECOMMENDATION OF TRANSFERRING THE COMMUNITY COURTS FROM THE CDBG GRANT TO THE GENERAL FUND IN FISCAL YEAR 2024-25.

AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS IT GIVES US, THE COURTS, AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND SERVICES IN COMMUNITIES OTHERWISE LIMITED BY THE GRANT FUNDS.

AND THEN THE GRANT RULES DO LIMIT THE ACCESS TO OTHERWISE LOW AND MODERATE RESIDENTS IN THOSE COMMUNITIES.

THE NEXT THREE GRANTS EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS, SLIDE 32.

THE NEXT THREE GRANTS ARE VERY SPECIFIC, AND YOU CAN SEE ON SLIDE 32 THE HOME GRANT, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE HOUSING POLICY FOR OUR EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT.

HUD RULES REQUIRE THAT WE HAVE A CONSULTATION WITH OUR COMMUNITY CONTINUUM OF CARE, AND THAT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION, IS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OFFICE OF HOME SOLUTIONS AMENDED FOUR TRACK STRATEGY.

THEN OUR LAST OF THE FOUR GRANTS WOULD BE OUR HOPWA GRANT.

AND THE RECOMMENDATION THERE IS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE POLICIES FOR THE RYAN WHITE, PLANNING COUNCIL FOR THE DALLAS AREA.

AND THEN THAT COMPREHENSIVE HIV NEEDS ASSESSMENT THAT THAT COUNCIL DEVELOPS.

AND NOW BACK, WE'RE GETS TO THE NEXT STEPS AND THE SCHEDULE.

SLIDE 33.

SO SLIDE NUMBER 33 REFLECTS THE CALENDAR.

AGAIN TODAY WE ARE DISCUSSING THE APPROACH.

SO WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING A BUDGET TODAY.

WE WILL WE WILL BE BACK BEFORE YOU ON MAY THE 1ST WITH A RECOMMENDED BUDGET.

AND WITH FINAL APPROVAL IN JUNE.

WE DO HAVE IN THE APPENDIX THE PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE SURVEY.

WE WILL CONTINUE GATHERING SURVEY DATA, FEEDBACK THROUGH THE END OF FEBRUARY.

SO THIS CONCLUDES OUR PREPARED REMARKS, AND WE ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

COUNCILMAN RIDLEY.

REFERRING TO THE PAGE 20 OF THE SLIDE DECK, THE, TRANSFERRING COMMUNITY COURTS FROM CDBG TO THE GENERAL FUND. I'M RELUCTANT TO PUT ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON OUR GENERAL FUND, IN PLACE OF FEDERALLY SOURCED FUNDS.

SO, CAN YOU EXPLAIN HOW THIS WON'T BE AN ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON THE GENERAL FUND? WILL WE BE TAKING OTHER EXPENDITURES OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND IN LIEU IN PLACE OF FEDERAL DOLLARS?

[07:15:06]

NO. AND SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO MOVE THE COMMUNITY COURTS, FROM CDBG GRANT INTO THE GENERAL FUND.

WHEN THE CITY MANAGER PREPARES AND PRESENTS THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 25 ON AUGUST THE 13TH, THIS WILL BE PART OF THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION.

SO IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN, OTHER, PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS THAT ARE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET.

SO THIS WILL SHOW UP IN AUGUST AS PART OF THE 25 GENERAL FUND BUDGET.

CORRECT. SO ARE WE GIVING BACK FEDERAL DOLLARS HERE? NO, WE ARE NOT. SO IF YOU GO TO SLIDE NUMBER, THE RECOMMENDATION SLIDE.

YES, THANK YOU 32.

SO WITHIN THE PUBLIC SERVICES CATEGORY, THE LAST TWO BULLETS WHERE IT SAYS TRANSFER CURRENT EXPENSES FOR COMMUNITY COURTS FROM CDBG TO THE GENERAL FUND.

THE NEXT ITEM IS TO INCREASE FUNDING FOR CHILDCARE AND OUT OF SCHOOL TIME SERVICES.

SO PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION, AS WE MENTIONED, WE'VE HAD SIX OUTREACH MEETINGS AND THE VIRTUAL MEETING THAT WE HELD, THERE WAS A VERY ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT CHILDCARE, AFFORDABLE CHILDCARE, THE AVAILABILITY OF CHILDCARE.

AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE SURVEY RESULTS IN THE FOLLOWING SLIDES IN THE APPENDIX.

AND SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO INCREASE CHILDCARE AND AFTER SCHOOL CARE PROGRAMS AND WITHIN THE GRANT.

SO HOW MUCH MONEY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THAT'S BEING USED NOW FROM THE CDBG GRANTS TO FUND COMMUNITY COURTS.

SO THE FISCAL YEAR 24 BUDGET WAS $736,000.

ALL RIGHT. SO THIS PROPOSAL WOULD TRANSFER THAT FIGURE, THAT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT COMMUNITY COURTS EXPENSE TO THE GENERAL FUND IN THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.

AND IT WOULD ALSO FREE UP THAT 736,000, IN CDBG GRANT FUNDS TO BE SPENT ON CHILDCARE AND OUT OF SCHOOL TIME SERVICES.

IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT.

SO WHO DECIDED THAT THAT WOULD BE THE RECIPIENT OF THE 700,000? SO THIS IS THE CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE HAVING ABOUT THE RECOMMENDED APPROACH.

AND SO, IT'S THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPROACH.

AND SO WE ARE HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK TODAY BECAUSE THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON THE APPROACH.

WELL, I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT HOW THAT MONEY WOULD BE SPENT.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF MONEY, $700,000.

SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW, OUT OF ALL THE NEEDS THAT THE CITY HAS, THAT QUALIFY FOR THE FEDERAL GRANT, WHY WAS CHILDCARE AND OUT OF SCHOOL TIME SERVICES CHOSEN? SO I CAN START THE RESPONSE.

SO WE CURRENTLY PROVIDE CHILDCARE AND OUT OF SCHOOL TIME SERVICES WITHIN THE GRANT.

AND SO BASED ON THE OVERWHELMING RESPONSE FROM THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE RECEIVED, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO EXPAND THAT PROGRAM.

SO IT'S AN EXISTING PROGRAM THAT FALLS UNDER THE GRANT.

IT MEETS THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE GRANT AND WE'RE EXPANDING IT.

SO WHAT IS THE CURRENT FUNDING UNDER THE GRANT FOR CHILDCARE AND OUT OF SCHOOL TIME SERVICES? SO THE FISCAL YEAR 24 BUDGET FOR, EARLY CHILDHOOD AND OUT OF SCHOOL CONTRACTS WITH 650,000, THERE'S ANOTHER ALLOCATION FOR PARK AND RECREATION OUT OF SCHOOL, WHERE THEY PROVIDE AFTER SCHOOL CARE AT, DISD FACILITIES AND RECREATION CENTERS.

AND THAT'S 738,000.

AND IF STAFF CAN BRING UP THE MEMO THAT WE SENT TO COUNCIL BACK IN OCTOBER, IT PROVIDES A SUMMARY OF THE CDBG FUNDING CATEGORY THAT WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, REALLOCATING.

SO THIS WOULD INCREASE THE ALLOCATION TO THAT PROGRAM BY ABOUT 50%.

IT'S WELL, THE PROGRAM THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TARGETING IS THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY CARE PROGRAM, WHICH IS CURRENTLY FUNDED AT 650,000.

SO IT INCREASES IT OVER 100%.

OKAY. AND SO HOW IS THAT MONEY DEPLOYED? ARE GRANTS GIVEN TO INDIVIDUALS OR TO DAYCARE FACILITIES? HOW IS THAT ADMINISTERED? SO I'M GOING TO PHONE A FRIEND.

BUT I DO KNOW THAT THE FUNDING IS ACTUALLY, GIVEN TO THE, DAYCARE PROVIDERS, BUT IT'S ON BEHALF OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT USE THAT SERVICE.

BUT I'LL LET THE EXPERT, COME UP AND ANSWER THIS QUESTION.

[07:20:03]

JESSICA GALICIA.

HELLO. JESSICA GALICIA, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY CARE.

I'M SO HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, SIR.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE CDBG FUNDED CHILD CARE SERVICES PROGRAM THROUGH THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY CARE, THE MAJORITY OF THOSE FUNDS GO TO CHILD CARE SUBSIDIES FOR ELIGIBLE FAMILIES. THE CITY OF DALLAS MANAGES THE ELIGIBILITY REVIEW PROCESS AND THE INTAKE PROCESS, AND WE ENTER CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS WITH CHILD CARE PROVIDERS SELECTED BY THOSE FAMILIES, HOWEVER, THEY MUST MEET ALL THE STATE LICENSING REGULATIONS AND AGREEMENTS AS WELL.

AND OF COURSE, BE WILLING TO BE A VENDOR OF THE CITY.

THE CHILD CARE PROVIDER WILL THEN ENTER THE CONTRACT AND WILL ALSO HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE PARENT FOR THE PROGRAM, AND WE PAY THE SUBSIDY DIRECTLY TO THE PROVIDER ON BEHALF OF THE PARENT. THE SUBSIDY AMOUNTS RANGE BETWEEN 75 AND 150 A WEEK, AND THAT WAS ESTABLISHED BASED ON A MARKET ANALYSIS, TO IDENTIFY THE AVERAGE CHILD CARE COST FOR THE PROVIDERS THAT WE HAVE WORKED WITH HISTORICALLY OVER THESE YEARS, THE MARKET RATE, AND TO ESTABLISH THAT WE WOULD COVER 75% OF THAT MARKET RATE, AND THE PARENT IS STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR 25% OF THAT RATE.

AND SO THE YOUNGER KIDS, THE 0 TO 17 MONTHS, BECAUSE THE MARKET TENDS TO CHARGE A HIGHER RATE FOR BABIES AND INFANTS DUE TO A VARIETY OF REASONS, ADDITIONAL CARE, HIGHER RATIOS, ETC., THERE'S A LITTLE BIT HIGHER.

THE LOWER RATES ARE FOR THE AFTER SCHOOL OUT OF SCHOOL TIME, WHICH OF COURSE IS A LOWER NUMBER OF HOURS AND DIFFERENT RATIOS AND SUCH.

SO IT EFFECTIVELY IT WORKS WHERE WE'RE PAYING A SUBSIDY THAT IS SUPPOSED TO EQUATE TO APPROXIMATELY 75% OF THE CHILD CARE COSTS FOR THAT FAMILY ON A WEEKLY RATE, AND WE PAY IT DIRECTLY TO THE PROVIDER.

AND ARE THOSE SUBSIDIES INCOME QUALIFIED? YES. SO ALL THE FAMILIES THAT ARE PARTICIPATING HAVE TO BE ELIGIBLE BASED ON THE CDBG REQUIREMENTS.

IN THIS CASE, IT ALLOWS FOR FAMILIES UP TO 80% AMI TO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE THAT BENEFIT.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUE FOR ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS, BECAUSE THAT MEANS I DON'T HAVE TO.

BUT I DO HAVE SORT OF A CONCEPT QUESTION.

AND, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR BRIEFING ME YESTERDAY ON THIS, BUT TO TO THE WAY THAT COUNCILMAN RIDLEY EXPLAINED THIS, WE ARE ESSENTIALLY ASKING FOR OVER 700,000 MORE DOLLARS TO GO TO CHILD CARE.

I'M NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO THAT.

BUT INSTEAD OF, WHY WOULDN'T WE JUST ADD THAT TO THE GENERAL FUND AND LEAVE COMMUNITY COURTS AND CDBG, BUT INSTEAD WE'RE SWAPPING THEM OUT? AND WHAT THAT SAYS TO ME IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IN THE BUDGET, WE CAN'T WE CAN'T CUT THE COORDINATORS OF THE COMMUNITY COURTS.

THEY ARE ESSENTIAL.

THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL.

BUT IN A TOUGH TIME, WE MIGHT SAY, WELL, MAYBE WE DON'T NEED TO DOUBLE CHILD CARE.

MAYBE IT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO A LOWER NUMBER.

BUT ONCE IT'S WRAPPED UP IN A FIVE YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN, YOU'D HAVE TO DO A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THAT.

SO I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A STRATEGY HERE TO PROTECT THIS MONEY INSTEAD OF BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE TRANSPARENT AND JUST LEAVING THE COMMUNITY COURTS IN THE FIVE YEAR PLAN AND PUTTING THE CHILD CARE IN THE GENERAL FUND, IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THE BODY.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THAT.

LET ME SAY THIS AS IT RELATES TO, I THINK, THE QUESTION ABOUT ANY STRATEGY.

THE UNDERLYING PREMISE AS THIS WAS RAISED SEVERAL YEARS AGO WAS THIS.

THESE CDBG FUNDS ARE SPECIFIC AND ARE IN SOME CASES, ACTUALLY THEY'RE PUBLIC SERVICE DOLLARS.

AND FOR US TO DEPLOY AND HELP, WHETHER IT'S NONPROFITS AND IN THIS CASE, IT'S NONPROFITS AND FAMILIES THAT NEED CHILD CARE TO HELP REDUCE THOSE COSTS, TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY TO GO TO WORK AND HAVE THEIR KIDS BE, HELD ACCOUNTABLE WITH SOMEONE THAT IS IN A CARING ENVIRONMENT. IT STOOD TO REASON TO ME THAT IF COMMUNITY COURTS, HOWEVER LONG IT'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE, PROBABLY 15 TO 20 YEARS, IS A STAPLE AND A PART OF A FUNCTION THAT WE DO EVERY YEAR NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER SERVICE THAT, IN MY OPINION, THE FEDERAL DOLLARS, WHERE WE DON'T GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO CHILD CARE SUBSIDIES AT ANY GREAT EXTENT, SHOULD BE USED FOR THOSE TYPE OF SERVICES, ONE TO BUILD CAPACITY IN OUR COMMUNITY AND TO ASSIST PEOPLE IN NEED.

AND IF COMMUNITY COURTS, WHICH WE CARE ABOUT AND IS IMPORTANT, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO DEFLECTING PEOPLE OUT OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, IS A PART OF OUR VALUES AND WHAT WE WANT TO DO THEN .03 PERCENT OF THE OVERALL PROGRAM SHOULD BE FUNDED, AND I BELIEVE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BELIEVES WE CAN HELP

[07:25:02]

MORE PEOPLE IN COMMUNITY COURTS IF IN FACT, THE FUNDING IS MOVED TO THE GENERAL FUND.

SO IT'S NOT ANY TYPE OF NONTRANSPARENT MOVEMENT.

IT IS A DEDICATED AND PURPOSEFUL INTENT TO PUT THE MONEY AND USE THE MONEY FOR INTENDED PURPOSES, AND NOT FOR CITY DIRECT SERVICES THAT WE SHOULD BE FUNDING, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN IN A PROGRAM FOR 20 YEARS.

SO IT'S NOT A PILOT, IT'S A PROGRAM THAT WE DO NO DIFFERENT THAN MUNICIPAL COURTS.

AND SO FOR ME, THAT'S A GENERAL FUND EXPENSE.

AND YOU'RE RIGHT, CHILD CARE AND OTHER THINGS ARE NOT.

AND IF I'VE GOT FUNDING DEDICATED FOR THAT PURPOSE, I SHOULD PROBABLY BE USING IT FOR THAT.

SO THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT.

SO THAT IS WHY WE'RE DOING IT.

AND IT'S NOT TRYING TO MOVE ANYBODY'S CHEESE.

IT'S THE IN MY OPINION AND PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATION.

IT IS WHERE WE NEED TO SPEND THOSE DOLLARS AND WHAT WE NEED TO BE DOING.

PERIOD. WELL, IT WAS PRESENTED I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ON THE SLIDE, BUT YOU'VE SPECIFICALLY USED THE WORD, THE STRATEGY THAT YOU'RE TAKING TO ADDRESS THE FIVE YEAR PLAN, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS AN INTERESTING WORD.

THE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR CHILD CARE AND OUT OF SCHOOL WOULD BE WELL OVER 2 MILLION.

SO WE ALREADY DO 650,000 PLUS OUT OF SCHOOL, 738,000.

I THINK IT'S A PERFECTLY LEGITIMATE THING FOR US TO TALK ABOUT AND EVEN FUND ADDITIONAL CHILD CARE.

I MEAN, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THAT, BUT I FEEL VERY UNCOMFORTABLE ADDING IT IN HERE AND TAKING OUT THE COMMUNITY COURT.

AND, YOU KNOW, IF WE NEED TO I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMUNITY COURT COORDINATORS CAN ONLY DO CLASS C, MISDEMEANORS, AND THEY HAVE TO PLEAD AND ALL THOSE THINGS.

BUT WE'RE ALSO FUNDING A LOT OF COMMUNITY COURT THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND, CORRECT? THE MAJORITY OF IT. CORRECT.

SO WE HAVE TWO, COURTS, COMMUNITY COURTS AND THE GENERAL FUND.

SO WE HAVE VICKERY MEADOW AND DOWNTOWN NIGHT COURT.

I THINK WE ALSO HAVE NORTHEAST.

OH, THERE'S THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT COURTS.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. YES.

OKAY. WHAT YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE'RE NOT MAKING A DECISION TODAY.

I JUST WANT TO BRING THAT UP BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE THE SHIFTING OF THE FUNDS.

I MEAN, I THINK IF WE BELIEVE IN CHILD CARE, THEN STICK IT IN THE GENERAL FUND AND LET'S FUND IT EVERY YEAR AND HAVE THAT DEBATE.

BUT I THINK I THINK THE SWAP I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH.

SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE THAT INPUT.

MY NEXT QUESTION IS ABOUT YOUR CDBG HOUSING RECOMMENDATION.

AND MY QUESTION IS CAN YOU BREAK DOWN FOR US HOW MUCH OF THAT IS HOMEBUYER ASSISTANCE? HOW MUCH OF IT'S HOME IMPROVEMENT, HOW MUCH IS, YOU KNOW, HOUSING ACQUISITION? WELL, I GUESS THAT IS HOUSING ACQUISITION.

AND IF THERE'S DOLLAR LIMITS FOR THOSE THEN I HAVE IT.

YEAH. I HAD IT.

SO FOR FISCAL YEAR 24, THERE IS $400,000 FOR DALLAS HOMEBUYER ASSISTANCE.

THERE IS 4.2 MILLION FOR THE HOME IMPROVEMENT AND PRESERVATION.

AND THEN THERE IS $1.6 MILLION FOR OR, I'M SORRY, $2.6 MILLION FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN CDBG.

OKAY, SO THAT'S THE HOUSING ACQUISITION PART.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION IS THE FORGIVABLE LOAN FOR THE WITH THE FIVE YEAR LIEN, THAT LIMIT IS 24,000.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING OR IS THAT MANDATED BY CDBG BY THE RECOMMENDATION? THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION.

IT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION.

AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION IS ABOUT THE PUBLIC FACILITIES MONEY.

SO YOU CURRENTLY HAVE $1.6 MILLION, WHICH IS I THINK YOU TOLD ME IT'S GOING TO THE FIVE MILE DRAINAGE PROGRAM.

IS THAT RIGHT? SO AGAIN, COULDN'T THAT MONEY BE USED FOR, PUBLIC FACILITIES LIKE FOR ADA COMPLIANCE AND IMPROVING SOME OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ON THE BOND TODAY, INCLUDING HELLO, CITY HALL.

AND INSTEAD FIVE MILE DRAINAGE, THE REMAINDER OF THAT PROJECT, COULDN'T THAT GO INTO DWU.

SO IT IS AN ELIGIBLE USE.

AND SO IT'S VERY HARD TO HEAR YOU.

I'M SORRY. NO, IT IS AN ELIGIBLE USE.

THE CHALLENGE BECOMES THE TIMING.

RIGHT. SO THE FIVE MILE PROJECT WE HAVE, THAT PROJECT IS READY TO MOVE FORWARD.

WE'RE EXPECTING A RESOLUTION COMING FORWARD FOR PROJECTS TO GET UNDERWAY.

TYPICALLY INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECTS, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.

THEY TAKE LONGER TIME.

AND THEN WE HAVE THE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT, THAT CDBG 1.5 TEST WHERE WE'RE HOLDING FUNDS FOR A WHILE.

SO SO YOU'VE ALREADY APPLIED TO EXTEND THE FUNDS, RIGHT, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HIT THE CORRECT FISCAL YEAR.

[07:30:02]

IS THAT RIGHT? I'M SORRY, YOU'VE ALREADY APPLIED FOR THE EXCEPTION OF NOT SPENDING IT WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME FRAME WHERE YOU CAN HOLD IT LONGER.

I THINK WE APPROVE THAT.

WE HAVE DONE THOSE THAT THAT DO COMPLY, THAT DO THE CITY'S POLICY.

YES, WE HAVE. AND IT WAS A SMALL AMOUNT, MAYBE LESS THAN $1 MILLION.

WELL, I WOULD REALLY LIKE THE CITY TO THINK ABOUT IF THERE'S A WAY YOU USE, USE YOUR BRAINS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MOVE SOME OF THAT FIVE MILE MONEY OVER TO THE DWU, AND THEN LET'S GET OUR ADA COMPLIANCE TAKEN CARE OF, ESPECIALLY AT OUR LIBRARIES. AND THEN WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO HERE AT CITY HALL.

THE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU ABOUT ON SLIDE 29 FOR THE ESG DOLLARS IT SAYS, WHICH, I MEAN, I KNOW THIS IS VERY RESTRICTIVE FOR HOMELESSNESS, BUT IT SAYS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO EXPEND IT CONSISTENT WITH OHS STRATEGY PLAN.

AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD BE A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC ON EXACTLY WHAT YOU WOULD BE SPENDING THAT MONEY IN.

SO THE STRATEGY, THE RECOMMENDATION, WE WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO DEVELOP, THE RECOMMENDATION, HUD TELLS US 60% CAN'T BE FOR.

SO WE WORK TO MAKE SURE THE COMPLIANCE.

BUT MAYBE WE COULD ASK, CHRISTINE TO SHARE A SPECIFICALLY HOW THEY APPROACH.

BUT WE TAKE THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS.

WE WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENTS TO BUILD THOSE.

OKAY. WELL, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 90,000 FOR ADMIN.

I'M ASSUMING THAT'LL PAY FOR STAFF AND OHS AND THEN 1.1 MILLION IN GRANTS.

BUT I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT I KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

I'M NOT SURE HOW ANYONE CAN KNOW WHAT IT MEANS TO JUST SAY CONSISTENT WITH OHS STRATEGY PLAN.

AND I THINK IT MENTIONS THE FOUR STRATEGIES FROM LONG AGO.

I'M NOT SURE WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING THAT FOR STRATEGY THESE DAYS, BUT THE TIME IS UP.

YOU WANT TO FINISH? THANK YOU. I WOULD JUST LIKE THAT ANSWER.

THANK YOU. AND IT WAS MY LAST QUESTION.

I DON'T HAVE ANOTHER ROUND.

AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD BECAUSE I JUST THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.

WE DO HAVE $1 MILLION.

THERE'S $2 MILLION CURRENTLY IN CDBG, 1 MILLION IS FOR ADA COMPLIANCE INSIDE OF CITY FACILITIES, AND $1 MILLION IS FOR SOME BARRIER FREE RAMPS.

AND THAT THOSE FUNDS WERE ALLOCATED NOT LAST YEAR BUT THE YEAR BEFORE.

AND THEY'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH ALL OF THE DESIGN AND THE TIME THAT IT TAKES.

THOSE ARE AT LEAST 2 OR 3 YEARS.

SO WE DO HAVE $2 MILLION, ONE INSIDE CITY FACILITIES AND ONE FOR BARRIER FREE THAT ARE BARRIER FREE RAMPS WITH THOSE THINGS.

SO WE HAVE THAT NOW.

AND IF I MAY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DETAIL, IS THAT CHRISTINE CROSSLEY, OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS DIRECTOR.

SO I CAN GET THESE SPECIFIC, ORGANIZATIONS AND THE AMOUNT THAT HAS BEEN CONTRACTED OVER A THREE YEAR SPAN FOR YOU.

I DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT ESG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES ADMINISTRATION IS LIMITED TO 7.5% PER CONTRACT. SO THAT'S LOOKING AT.

ALL OF THEM PUT TOGETHER IS THAT $90 MILLION AMOUNT.

BUT I WILL CERTAINLY GET YOU THE THREE YEAR COMPARISON OF EVERY SINGLE CONTRACT.

IS THAT WHAT YOU. DOES THAT HELPFUL? I THINK I MIGHT HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, BUT MY TIME IS OUT SO I WILL DO THAT.

GO AHEAD AND FINISH. GO AHEAD TO FINISH.

PLEASE GO AHEAD AND FINISH.

WELL, I THINK SO.

YOU'RE JUST SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO RENEW THE CONTRACTS YOU ALREADY HAVE.

NO. SO IT GOES OUT FOR AWARD EVERY SINGLE YEAR UNLESS WE'RE IN A RENEWAL YEAR.

AND ACTUALLY I BRIEF THE ESG FUNDING TO SEEK FEEDBACK ON THINGS LIKE MATCH DOLLARS AND DIFFERENT QUESTIONS TO THE CONTINUUM OF CARE AND PROVIDERS EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

BUT I'M JUST TELLING YOU THAT THE 7.5% CAP IS THAT THAT'S JUST FROM ESG.

SO WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE TO YOU IS THAT GIVEN THE RULES FOR PUBLIC INPUT ON CDBG, THAT INPUT SHOULDN'T JUST BE FROM THE COC, THE PROVIDERS WHO WOULD THEN, OF COURSE, BE THE RECIPIENTS OF THE GRANTS.

YOU SHOULD VERY FULLY EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.

AND MAYBE THERE'S PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS ON HOW THEY'D LIKE THAT HOMELESS DOLLARS TO BE SPENT.

AND WE'RE NOT ASKING THAT QUESTION.

WE JUST SAY CONSISTENT WITH OHS STRATEGY PLAN.

AND SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE MORE FULLY DEVELOPED WHEN YOU'RE SEEKING INPUT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN.

YO, YO, ARE YOU SPEAKING? I WANT TO HIS BIG NIGHT.

IS THAT OKAY? I'LL LET YOU SPEAK.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU MAYOR, I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU, CHRISTINE.

COUNCIL. YOU DON'T, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU ALL, AND THAT I AM SUPPORTIVE.

I WANTED TO TO TELL CITY MANAGER THAT, I AM SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT YOU ALL HAVE LAID OUT.

I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT.

I WOULD ACTUALLY, I WOULD ACTUALLY PUSH BACK ON A LITTLE, A LITTLE BIT ON THE, THE SUGGESTION OR THE NOTION THAT THIS SHOULD BE IN GENERAL FUND.

[07:35:03]

I THINK WE'VE SEEN, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE COLLEAGUES THAT WANT TO SLASH A LOT FROM OUR BUDGET, THAT ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS COMES UP IS LIKE DENTAL, FOR SENIORS, FOR INSTANCE.

I THINK THAT THOSE SOCIAL SERVICES ARE IMPERATIVE, BUT I THINK THAT WE'VE SEEN, A PRECEDENT TO WHERE IT'S GOING TO TO ALWAYS BE ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK WHEN WE HAVE TO MAKE HARD DECISIONS. AND WHAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO DO IS UTILIZE FUNDING THAT IS SPECIFIC FOR THAT AND NOT PUT IT INTO OUR GENERAL FUND AND SUBJECT IT TO, BEING FIRST CUT, IF YOU WILL.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, I THINK THAT THE THE WAY THAT YOU'VE PROPOSED THIS, ALLOWS FOR US TO EVEN HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY WITH, WITHIN COMMUNITY COURTS.

SO IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT, THE BENEFIT ON THE END OF KEEPING THE CHILD CARE BUCKET IN CDBG FROM GOING OVER TO GENERAL FUND I AND US HAVING THE ABILITY TO TO CONSIDER EXPANDING SOME SERVICES THAT OUR COMMUNITY COURTS OFFERS.

THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE BOUND BY FEDERAL REGULATION WITHIN CDBG, AND IT WOULD GIVE US A LOT MORE AUTONOMY THAT I AM FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF, BECAUSE BOTH OF THE PROGRAMS THAT THIS IS, BRIEFINGS ARE ABOUT, I THINK ARE CRITICAL TO OUR CITY.

AND SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE CITY MANAGER'S HEARD MY $0.02.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN RIDLEY.