[00:00:01]
GOOD EVENING.UH, IT IS 6:30 PM WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT
[Charter Review Commission on March 26, 2024.]
HERE FOR THE DALLAS CITY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.UH, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY CALL TO ORDER.
UH, WE'LL BEGIN TONIGHT'S MEETING WITH PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC INTERESTED IN SPEAKING TO THE BODY, OR WELCOME TO SIGN UP ONLINE FOR FUTURE MEETING.
UH, WE HAVE A LOT OF REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS TONIGHT, AS YOU CAN TELL.
SO EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE TO SPEAK.
STAFF THIS TIME WILL CALL YOUR NAME AND THE ORDER YOU'RE SIGNED UP.
AND DUE TO THE VOLUME OF SPEAKERS AND THE AMOUNT OF BUSINESS WE HAVE FOR TONIGHT, I'M GONNA ASK STAFF TO BE STRICT IN ENFORCING THE TIME LIMIT.
WE RECEIVED MANY EMAILS AND HEARD FROM MANY OF YOU, UH, ABOUT THE ITEMS WE HAVE TONIGHT, AND WE'VE REVIEWED THOSE.
I KNOW I'VE REVIEWED THOSE, AND THEY'VE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.
UH, WE SINCERELY APPRECIATE YOUR ENGAGEMENT IN THIS PROCESS, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO PROVIDE FURTHER COMMENTS BEYOND YOUR WOMEN ALLOTMENT TONIGHT, YOU CAN SEND THEM TO THE FOLLOWING, UH, CHARTER REVIEW@DALLAS.GOV.
WITH THAT, I'LL HAND IT OVER TO JAKE ANDERSON, WHO WILL CALL OUR SPEAKERS.
UM, WHAT I'M GONNA DO IS CALL PEOPLE FIVE AT A TIME SO YOU KNOW THE ORDER THAT YOU'RE GOING IN.
UM, AND I WILL SET A TIMER THAT YOU'LL HEAR GO OFF FOR, UH, ONE MINUTE ONCE YOU START SPEAKING.
UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER'S GONNA BE AMY MEADOWS, THEN SCOTT GOLDSTEIN, THEN BRIT WILLIAMS, THEN RUSS COLEMAN, THEN TIFFANY DAVIDS.
SO, MS. MEADOWS, YOU CAN COME, COME ON DOWN.
SO, MR. GOLDSTEIN, GOOD EVENING CHAIR COMMISSIONERS.
UH, MY NAME'S SCOTT GOLDSTEIN.
I'M PROUD TO SERVE AS THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD MEMBER FOR DISTRICT 10 REPRESENTING LAKE HIGHLANDS AND COUNCIL MEMBER KATHY STEWART.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR UNANIMOUS VOTE EARLIER THIS MONTH AGAINST AMENDMENTS TO UNDO DALLAS PARKS INDEPENDENCE.
MUCH HAS BEEN SAID AND WRITTEN IN RECENT WEEKS ABOUT HOW AMENDMENT 1 0 3 WOULD SHATTER THE SECRET SAUCE THAT HAS MADE OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT A SUCCESS.
WE URGE YOU TO CAREFULLY CONSIDER THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS AMENDMENT AND THE OVERWHELMING OPPOSITION AND FORMER PARKS DIRECTORS, CURRENT AND FORMER PARK BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, CONSTITUENTS FROM ALL OVER THE CITY.
AS I SAID EARLIER THIS MONTH, THE AMENDMENTS TO REFORM PARKS, GOVERNMENTS ARE SOLUTIONS IN SEARCH OF PROBLEMS THAT DO NOT EXIST SEPARATELY, I WANTED TO URGE YOU TO SUPPORT AMENDMENT TWO FOR RANK CHOICE VOTING.
RANK CHOICE VOTING ENSURES THE SAME TYPE OF ELECTION OUTCOMES AS OUR CURRENT SYSTEM OF RUNOFFS, UM, WHERE CANDIDATES MUST BUILD A MAJORITY EXCEPT THAT WE DO IT IN ONE GO SAVING TIME AND MONEY.
AND DALLAS SHOULD BE PUT IN POSITION TO IMPLEMENT.
THAT'S YOUR TIME, GOLD WHEN STATE LEGISLATURE PASSES IT.
ALL RIGHT, NEXT WE HAVE BRI WILLIAMS. BRIT WILLIAMS, NOT HERE.
THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO RUSS COLEMAN.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS TIFFANY DIVIS AND I AM THE, THE PRESIDENT AND CEO OF TURTLE CREEK CONSERVANCY.
WE TAKE CARE OF ARLINGTON, PAUL, ARLINGTON HALL AND TURTLE CREEK PARK.
UM, I'M HERE TODAY TO, UH, GIVE MY OPINION THAT I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT, UH, 1 0 3 AMENDMENT SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED AND THAT THE PARK BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE STRUCTURE THAT THEY HAVE CURRENTLY IN PLACE AND THAT HAVE THEY'VE HAD FOR A HUNDRED YEARS WORKS EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENCY EFFICIENTLY.
AND WE WOULD BE, BE A TRAVESTY TO LOSE THE BEST PRACTICES THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE.
AND ALSO, I REALLY DON'T FEEL LIKE THAT THEY NEED ANY OTHER, UM, OVERSIGHT AND THAT THEY ALREADY DO, UH, THROUGH THEIR OWN SYSTEM REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND AGAIN, AS A NONPROFIT, WE RELY HEAVILY ON THIS DAY-TO-DAY, UH, RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAVE BUILT WITH THE PARK AND REC, UH, MEMBERS AND THE BOARD DI OF DIRECTORS.
AND IT WOULD REALLY BE MAKE OUR JOB MORE DIFFICULT IF WE HAD TO IN, YOU KNOW, HAVE ANOTHER LINE OF, OF, UH, SOMEONE ELSE TO GO THROUGH.
AND THESE RELATIONSHIPS ARE BUILT IN THE COMMUNITY AND PARTNERS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE, AGAIN, ARE VERY STRONG.
UH, I'M TOLD THAT MS. AMY MEADOWS IS HERE NOW.
[00:05:08]
GOOD EVENING.I'M AMY MEADOWS, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE DOWNTOWN DALLAS PARKS CONSERVANCY.
WE'RE A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION AND A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.
THROUGH THIS PARTNERSHIP, FOUR NEW PUBLIC PARKS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED DOWNTOWN PACIFIC PLAZA, WESTIN SQUARE, CARPENTER PARK, AND HARWOOD PARK.
THIS WAS FUNDED BY 4.4 MILLION IN 2006, BOND DOLLARS 35 MILLION FROM THE 2017 BOND AND 52 MILLION IN PRIVATE FUNDS.
THE PROCESS TO FORM THIS PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP BEGAN IN 2014 AND CULMINATED IN MORE THAN 14 ACRES OF ADDITIONAL PARKLAND HELPING TRANSFORM DOWNTOWN TO A VIBRANT CITY CENTER WITH A GROWING RESIDENTIAL POPULATION.
THE DALLAS PARK AND RECREATION BOARD PLAYED A PIVOTAL ROLE IN COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE PARK DEPARTMENT AND THE CONSERVANCY, REVIEWING PARK DESIGNS AND PARTICIPATING IN THE PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS THAT THE CONSERVANCY LED.
THIS ENSURED THAT THE NEW PARKS WERE RESPONSIVE.
MS. MEADOWS, THAT IS YOUR TIME.
NEXT I WILL CALL THE NEXT FIVE SPEAKERS IN ORDER.
THEY WILL BE CHRIS DENNING, PAUL FILL, RUDY KAMI, TIMOTHY DICKEY, AND DAVID MARQUI.
I'M THE DIRECTOR OF ADVANCEMENT FOR TURTLE CREEK CONSERVANCY.
I JUST WANNA REITERATE WHAT MY, UH, FRIEND AND COLLEAGUE TIFFANY SAID ABOUT, UH, THE WAY THAT WE WORK WITH THE PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.
WOULD, UH, ANY CHANGE TO THAT PROCESS WOULD MAKE IT REALLY DIFFICULT FOR US TO GET THINGS DONE IN OUR PARK.
UH, WE'VE WORKED REALLY HARD TO BUILD A REALLY STRONG RELATIONSHIP WITH PARK AND RECREATION WITH RUDY CREAMY AND, UH, WITH PAUL RIDLEY IN OUR DISTRICT.
AND WE ARE, UH, JUST REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE FUTURE AND WE CANNOT EVEN IMAGINE A CHANGE TO THE GOVERNANCE AND THE PROCESSES IN THE PARK AND REC DEPARTMENT.
UH, IT WORKS VERY WELL AND, UH, YOU KNOW, CREATING MORE BOTTLENECKS IN THE CITY GOVERNMENT IS NOT REALLY WHAT WE NEED AND WE THINK THAT'S WHAT 1 0 3 WOULD DO.
ALRIGHT, NEXT WE HAVE PAUL LAR.
UH, WE ARE LIVING IN DEEPLY POLARIZED TIMES AND AMENDMENT TWO TO PASS RANK CHOICE.
VOTING IN DALLAS, IF IT'S ADOPTED AT THE STATE LEVEL, I THINK IS, IT'S ONE OF THE BEST THINGS WE CAN DO TO ADDRESS POLARIZATION BY RUTHLESSLY PURSUING A POLICY THAT ENJOYS OVERWHELMING SUPPORT BY BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT.
AND I UNDERSTAND IT'S A, A BIG ISSUE, UM, TO DO THAT, BUT WE CAN TACKLE IT IN OUR OWN SMALL WAY BY, YOU KNOW, SHOWING THE REST OF THE COUNTRY THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY A CITY THAT CAN PUT FORWARD THE POLICIES THAT ARE JUST COMMON SENSE AND AGREED UPON BY BOTH SIDES.
NEXT, UH, WE HAVE RUDY CREAMY.
GOOD EVENING CHARTER COMMISSIONERS.
I'M THE PROUDEST COUNCIL DISTRICT 14 RESIDENT YOU'LL EVER MEET.
THE MEDIA HAS BEEN TERRIBLY UNFRIENDLY TOWARDS AMENDMENT 1 0 3, AND SO WILL I.
THE AUTHOR IS STILL UPSET ABOUT A DECISION MADE OVER FOUR YEARS AGO ABOUT RIVER SEAN PARK, THAT HE CONTINUES TO BLAME THE PARK BOARD AND THE PARK DIRECTOR FOR.
I WASN'T ON THE PARK BOARD BACK THEN, BUT AS A RESIDENT, I STOOD PROUDLY WITH THE AUTHOR AND THE REST OF THE OPPOSITION IN THAT FIGHT BACK IN 2019.
IN FACT, I HELPED CALL SHENANIGANS ON THAT FIGHT, AND IN PARTICULAR, THE SHENANIGANS BY MY OWN COUNCIL MEMBER AT THE TIME.
REGARDLESS OF THAT FIGHT, I DON'T NEED TO REMIND YOU THAT POLICIES MADE AROUND SINGULAR EVENTS OR SINGULAR INDIVIDUALS IS NOT POLICY AT ALL.
IT'S RETRIBUTION AND DOESN'T BELONG ANYWHERE IN OUR GOVERNMENT.
SO I URGE YOU VOTE DOWN AMENDMENT 1 0 3 AND LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH ACTUAL POLICY.
I'M THE DISTRICT SIX PARK BOARD REPRESENTATIVE.
AND I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD ONE THING.
THE, THE DISCUSSION AROUND AMENDMENT 1 0 3 HAS BEEN LARGELY ABOUT THE ABILITY TO, TO HIRE AND FIRE THE DIRECTOR.
BUT ANOTHER IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THAT IS THE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND THE SETTING OF THE METRICS FOR THE NEXT YEAR.
AND THIS IS A CRITICAL ELEMENT THAT THE PARK BOARD TAKES ON.
WE JUST DID IT TWO WEEKS AGO WITH DIRECTOR JENKINS AND I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT HIS REVIEW AND THE DIRECTIONS WE SET FOR THE NEXT YEAR, IT WAS A VERY VIGOROUS, ROBUST REVIEW OF HIS PERFORMANCE AND REALLY WELL RESEARCHED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE METRICS THAT WE EXPECT HIM TO ACHIEVE IN THE NEXT YEAR.
[00:10:01]
FACT, I'VE GOT 15 METRICS THAT I CAME UP WITH AND I THINK THEY'RE ALL REALLY GOOD.SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO GO AWAY FROM THIS, UH, 'CAUSE I'M NOT SURE THE COUNCIL MAY BE ABLE TO DO A BETTER JOB, BUT WE REALLY DON'T KNOW.
AND SO WHY TAKE A CHANCE WITH A SYSTEM THAT'S WORKING VERY WELL.
UM, NEXT WE HAVE DAVID MARCUS.
AND THANK YOU FOR SERVICE TO OUR CITY.
I'M OPPOSED TO AMENDMENT 1 0 3.
I'M OPPOSED BECAUSE OF LESSONS I LEARNED MANY YEARS AGO AS A YOUNG SCHOOL TEACHER.
I TOOK STUDENTS WHO WERE DOING WELL IN CLASS AND I'D SAY TO THEM, GO, YOU KNOW HOW TO LEARN.
YOU KNOW HOW TO SUCCEED, GO SUCCEED SO I COULD HAVE MORE TIME TO WORK WITH THE OTHER STUDENTS THAT NEEDED MY HELP.
IN THE CITY OF DALLAS TODAY, THOSE STUDENTS WHO ARE ALREADY SUCCEEDING ARE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.
SO LET'S TAKE OUR TIME AND WORK WITH THOSE STUDENTS WHO NEED OUR HELP AND LET THOSE WHO ARE SUCCEEDING GO ON, LET THEM MOVE FORWARD.
IN DALLAS, TEXAS, WE DO NOT RESTRICT SUCCESS.
THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IS SUCCEEDING.
LET'S LET THEM MOVE ON SO WE CAN TAKE THE TIME TO WORK WITH OTHERS WHO NEED OUR HELP MORE AND NEED OUR ATTENTION IN ORDER FOR OTHER DEPARTMENTS TO SUCCEED OPPOSED TO 1 0 3.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR CITY.
OUR NEXT FIVE SPEAKERS WILL BE TED ELLIS, SUSAN ALVO, PRISCILLA RICE, ROBERT KENT, AND RICK CLARK CLARKSON.
MR. ELLIS THANK YOU COMMISSION.
I LIVE IN DISTRICT NINE AND I'M THE PAST PRESIDENT OF THE WHITE ROCK LAKE FOUNDATION FOR 10 YEARS AND HAVE BEEN ON THAT BOARD FOR 28.
UM, WE HAVE WORKED HAND IN HAND WITH PARK DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR JENKINS AND OTHER STAFF MEMBERS FOR ALL OF THESE YEARS AND FEEL LIKE IT'S A VERY BENEFICIAL RELATIONSHIP.
UH, WE DON'T SEE CHANGING, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WHOLE PROCESS NOW TO BE BENEFICIAL AT ALL.
WE URGE YOU GUYS TO VOTE AGAINST 1 0 3 AND I REITERATE AS A NONPROFIT, WE HAVE VERY EASY ACCESS TO ALL OF THESE STAFF MEMBERS AND CREATING LAYERS AND ADDITIONAL BLOCKS DON'T HELP US ANY.
SO WE WOULD URGE YOU FROM THE WHITE ROCK LAKE FOUNDATION TO PLEASE VOTE AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT 1 0 3.
AND I DO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR TIME BEING A COMMISSIONER.
I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF WORK AND EFFORT AND IT'S MUCH APPRECIATED.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING US COMMISSIONERS.
WE APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO.
UM, I THINK WHAT I'M GONNA CONCENTRATE ON IS I AM OPPOSED TO 1 0 3 AND ONE 13.
AND THE REASONS FOR THAT IS BECAUSE THINGS HAVE BEEN WORKING SO WELL.
SO RATHER THAN SAY WHAT WE DON'T WANNA DO, WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN WORKING WELL.
UM, I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF TONIGHT, BUT I HAVE BEEN ON THE WHITE ROCK LAKE FOUNDATION BOARD FOR 28 YEARS AND I'M CURRENTLY THE CHAIR OF THE WHITE ROCK LAKE TASK FORCE.
WE WORK HAND IN HAND WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT CONSTANTLY.
THEY'RE EASY TO WORK WITH, THEY GET THINGS DONE, THEY MAKE CHANGES WHEN APPROPRIATE.
WE DON'T NEED TO, UH, DON'T MESS WITH SUCCESS, I THINK IS THE, THE GOING SAYING FOR TONIGHT RATHER THAN IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT.
WHO, MS. RICE ARE YOU HERE? ALRIGHT, I DON'T SEE MS. RICE, SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO MR. KENT.
I AM BACK AFTER BEING HERE A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.
MY COMMENTS ARE LARGELY THE SAME AS I GAVE, UM, A FEW WEEKS BACK.
UH, THE SYSTEM THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS RIGHT NOW FOR ITS PARK DEPARTMENT IS WORKING, UH, WORKING VERY WELL.
TRUST REPUBLIC LAND HAS A 30 YEAR HISTORY WORKING WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS.
UM, WE RIGHT NOW ARE WORKING ON 400 ACRES OF PARKS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, SPECIFICALLY AROUND A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF WORK.
AND, UM, WE ARE ABLE TO DO THAT WORK BECAUSE THE SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT WORKS RIGHT NOW.
AND ANY CHANGES TO THAT SYSTEM, UM, WOULD BE OF CONCERN, UM, BECAUSE AS EVERYONE ELSE HAS SAID, IT'S A SUCCESSFUL SYSTEM THAT'S WORKING VERY WELL.
WE DON'T SEE A NEED TO MAKE ANY CHANGES AT THIS POINT.
UM, MR. CLARKSON, GOOD EVENING.
I CAME ON MARCH 4TH TO GIVE YOU A PERSPECTIVE FROM OUTSIDE THE
[00:15:01]
DALLAS MARKET ON THE STRUCTURE OF THE GOVERNANCE OF PARKS AND RECREATION.I TOLD MY GREAT FRIENDS BACK IN JACKSONVILLE ON CITY COUNCIL, THIS IS THE MODEL YOU NEED TONIGHT.
I BRING YOU A PERSPECTIVE AS A FIVE-YEAR RESIDENT IN DISTRICT NINE, PAULA BLACKMAN'S DISTRICT.
SHORTLY AFTER MOVING HERE, I GOT TOGETHER WITH PAULA FOR COFFEE TO INTRODUCE MYSELF AND ASK HOW CAN I GET INVOLVED IN HELPING DALLAS PARK AND REC? SHE SAYS, YOU NEED TO MEET.
MARIA HAS MANY MY APPOINTEE ON THE BOARD.
SHE COVERS MORE GROUND THAT I COULD POSSIBLY COVER AND SHE REALLY KNOWS WHAT SHE'S DOING.
SO POST PANDEMIC, I GET TO MEET MARIA.
WE HAVE TENNIS AS A COMMON BACKGROUND.
SHE TELLS ME ABOUT EVERYTHING SHE'S BEEN INVOLVED WITH.
RESURFACING OF THE COURTS, THE TENNIS CENTERS, PICKLEBALL, THE LINES, THE NETS.
SHE'S BEEN DOWN TO CEDAR CREST FOR A COUPLE OF OUR EVENTS DOWN THERE WITH THE I A GOLFER FOUNDATION.
SHE DIDN'T HAVE TO MAKE MR. CLARKSON THAT AT YOUR TIME.
THE SUMMARY IS THE REPRESENTATIVES ON THE COURT.
I'M, I'M SORRY THAT'S YOUR ARE APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL.
OUR NEXT FIVE SPEAKERS, UM, IN ORDER WILL BE CALVERT COLLINS, BRATTON MORRIS, SCHREYER FLEMING, DANNY OBERST, GAIL LYNCH, AND BRIAN LOU ALLEN.
BRETT, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITY.
THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT AND THANKLESS JOB THAT YOU HAVE.
I'VE BEEN ON THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD REPRESENTING DISTRICT 13 FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS AND SERVING AS PRESIDENT.
AND IT'S WHY I'M OPPOSED TO AMENDMENTS 1 0 3 AND ONE 13.
THE GRASS IS GREENER IN PARKS.
WE ARE A TEAM AND WE SUPPORT OUR DIRECTOR.
WE, WE SURE WE RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE AT TIMES, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE POLITICS.
WE'RE ALIGNED ON THE GOALS OF PARKS, TRAILS, RECREATION, AND AMENITIES.
AND WE ARE HIGHLY EFFICIENT IN PASSING POLICY AND BUILDING PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.
UNLIKE THE COUNCIL, THE DIRECTOR'S NOSES, WE HAVE HIS BACK.
HE GETS A VERY ROBUST PERFORMANCE REVIEW, AS YOU HEARD.
BUT WE SPEND HOURS WITHOUT THE TOXICITY AND THE DIVISIVENESS THAT OFTEN EXISTS AT COUNCIL.
THE BOARD AND STAFF SPEND HOURS MAKING SURE THAT MWBE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET OR EXCEEDED AND WE ENSURE OUR TAX DOLLARS ARE NOT AWARDED TO SHADY OR UNSCRUPULOUS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED CONSULTANTS OR VENDORS.
THE CITY FOUNDERS GOT THIS RIGHT.
THEY DIDN'T TRUST THE COUNCIL NOT TO SELL PARK LAND WHEN TIMES GET TOUGH AND THE PARK BOARD PROVIDES ANOTHER LAYER OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT TO THE PUBLIC.
AND ACCOUNTABILITY, PLEASE DON'T UNDO DECADES OF SUCCESS AND MOMENTUM.
ALRIGHT, NEXT WE HAVE, NEXT WE HAVE MS. UH, SCHREYER FLEMING ONLINE.
I DO NOT SUPPORT AMENDMENT 1 0 3 AND ONE 13.
CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO FOCUS ON FIXING THE PROBLEMS THAT EXIST IN THE CITY AND NOT CREATING ONES THAT DON'T.
ONE ONLY HAS TO LOOK AT THE CURRENT PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT REPORTING STRUCTURE TO REALIZE THAT IS THE KEY TO ITS SUCCESS.
THE PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT IS THE ONLY DEPARTMENT THAT DOES NOT REPORT DIRECTLY TO THE CITY MANAGER.
FORTUNATELY, THE PARK PARK FORD WORKS BECAUSE THERE IS ACCOUNTABILITY FROM THE CITY COUNCIL PERSON APPOINTING THE PARK BOARD MEMBER THE PARK, THE PRESENT PARK BOARD HAS BEEN CRITICIZED AS BEING INEQUITABLE.
HOW CAN THE CRITICISM BE ACCURATE WHEN EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT IS REPRESENTED ON THE PARK BOARD AND IS APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL PERSON? IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME DISTRICTS WANT MORE MONEY FOR THEMSELVES AT THE DISSERVICE TO THE REST OF THE CITY.
NOW THAT'S NOT IN, THAT'S NOT EQUITABLE.
THE RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINT THE PARKS DIRECTOR RATHER THAN THE PARK BOARD AND HAVE CONFIRMATION AUTHORITY OVER ALL CITY EXECUTIVES OF EACH DEPARTMENT IS MISGUIDED.
THE CITY COUNCIL'S PERFORMANCE WITH PERMITTING NINE 11 RESPONSE TIMES OR STREET CONDITION.
UM, NEXT WE HAVE DANNY OBERST.
I'M DANNY OBERST, A HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT 14, AND I'M HERE TO OPPOSE AMENDMENT 1 0 3, WHICH ADDRESSES THE PARK DEPARTMENT AND HOW IT IS GOVERNED.
OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, I'VE WORKED DIRECTLY WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT AND THE PARK BOARD ON SEVERAL ISSUES RELATED TO EXILE PARK NEAR MY BRYAN PLACE COMMUNITY.
I HAVE BEEN IMPRESSED WITH THE RESPONSIVENESS TO MY CONCERNS AND THAT OF THE FRIENDS OF EXILE PARK ORGANIZATION.
I AM A PART OF THE CURRENT GOVERNING STRUCTURE OF THE PARK DEPARTMENT.
[00:20:01]
ME AND MY NEIGHBORS.PLEASE JOIN ME IN OPPOSING AMENDMENT 1 0 3.
I AM NOT SPEAKING ABOUT THE PARKS.
I WAS COMING FOR AMENDMENT TWO.
I HOPE THAT'S OKAY TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT NOW.
UM, SO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TO YOU TONIGHT.
I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE I BELIEVE A SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT OF RANK CHOICE VOTING IS THAT IT GIVES GREATER CHOICES TO VOTERS WHEN MORE THAN TWO CANDIDATES ARE RUNNING FOR A SINGLE POSITION.
AND BY BEING ABLE TO RANK A FIRST, SECOND AND SUBSEQUENT CHOICES, I FEEL THAT VOTERS HAVE A GREATER OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THEIR WILL HEARD.
IT ALSO HELPS THEM MORE OR LESS ABOUT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE THINKING AND VOTING FOR AND PICKING A CANDIDATE THAT ALIGNS WITH THEIR VALUES AND NEEDS FOR THE COMMUNITY.
I FEEL LIKE WE GET CANDIDATES WITH A BROADER BASE OF SUPPORT AND CLOSER REPRESENTATION WITH OUR, UH, MAJORITY OF VOTERS.
IT'S ESPECIALLY TRUE BECAUSE IN RUNOFF ELECTIONS TYPICALLY WE SEE A LOWER, LOWER TURNOUT.
AND FINALLY, FOR THE CITY, I THINK DOING AWAY WITH OR REDUCING THE NUMBER OF RUNOFF ELECTIONS WILL SAVE US SOME MONEY.
UH, RANKED CHOICE VOTING FOR TEXAS ESTIMATED THAT AN ADDITIONAL $7 MILLION WAS SPENT IN 2022 FOR THE RUNOFFS AT THE STATE LEVEL.
SO THAT GIVES YOU KIND OF AN IDEA OF HOW MUCH MORE IT CAN COST FOR A SIGNIFICANT RUNOFF.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR GIVING ME YOUR TIME TONIGHT.
I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT YOU ALL DO.
GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR CITY.
MY NAME'S BRIAN LEWELLEN AND I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT TWO AND THE CEO OF FAIR PARK.
FIRST ANOTHER NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.
LIKE MANY OF MY PREVIOUS SPEAKERS WHO WORK IN CLOSE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.
MY ROLE ALLOWS ME TO WORK VERY CLOSELY, NOT ONLY WITH THE PARK AND RECREATION STAFF, BUT ALSO WITH THE PARK BOARD, ALSO WITH THE CITY COUNCIL, ALSO WITH THE CITY MANAGER.
AND IT'S RARE THAT I WOULD STEP OUT AND SPEAK FOR BUREAUCRACY, BUT THE REALITY IS WE HAVE A STATUS QUO THAT IS WORKING EXCEEDINGLY WELL.
EVERYONE PLAYS THEIR ROLE IN THE PROCESS AND IT HAS SERVED THE CITY EXTREMELY WELL FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.
I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T GET A CHANCE TO SPEAK HERE AND SAY HOW WELL THE CITY'S DOING.
THIS IS ONE WHERE AREA WHERE WE ARE SUCCEEDING, AND I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO CHANGE WHAT IS WORKING.
OUR NEXT FIVE SPEAKERS, UM, WILL BE ARUN AGARWAL, WAYNE SMITH, MARY, UH, MARIE, E EARLY CHUCK WALKER, AND THEN JOHN FER.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF DALLAS PARK AND RECREATION.
I WAS ON OTHER SIDE AND HOW I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT IT CAN BE.
WELL, I'LL QUOTE ONE OF THE TALLEST, UH, UH, LEADER CIVIC LEADERS OF THE DALLAS ROBERT DECKARD.
HE SAID DOWNTOWN RENAISSANCE WITH DOWNTOWN PARKS WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED IF DALLAS, IF PARKS AND RECREATION STRUCTURE WAS ANY DIFFERENT, PLEASE DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING.
AND NOT ONLY HIM, IF ALL EX MAYORS, IF ALL EX PARK BOARD PRESIDENTS, IF ALL, MOST CIVIC LEADERS, ALL EX DIRECTORS, EVERY FRIEND GROUP, EVERY MEDIA RIGHT OR LEFT PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT POLITICAL PHILOSOPHIES, IF THE ONE THING THEY'RE AGREEING, WHICH I'VE SEEN IS THAT DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING IN THE PARKS.
WE HAD NATIONAL PARKS RECREATION CONFERENCE.
THEY WERE ASKING US, OUR STAFF TO GIVE EXAMPLES AND TEACH THEM HOW DALLAS PARKS OPERATE.
I WILL SAY, THEY SAY, PLEASE DON'T FIX WHAT IS NOT BROKEN.
BUT I AM SAYING MORE IMPORTANT, DON'T BREAK.
WHAT IS WORKING? WELL? THANK YOU.
I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS DEALING WITH PARKS AND RECREATION FOR OVER 25 YEARS NOW.
AND I DON'T KNOW OF ANOTHER CITY DEPARTMENT THAT'S MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE PARKS AND RECREATION.
I'VE HEARD SOME GRUMBLINGS ABOUT WE NEED MORE PUBLIC INPUT TO HIRE THIS PARK DIRECTOR.
WELL, I WANNA TELL YOU, WE'VE GOT A SYSTEM CALLED ELECTIONS RIGHT NOW, AND THOSE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR WHO GETS ELECTED, THEY APPOINT A PARK BOARD THAT WAS GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO HIRE THE DIRECTOR.
AND THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL
[00:25:01]
FOR DECADES AND DECADES AND DECADES.TO ME, THIS PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS A SOLUTION THAT IS LOOKING FOR A PROBLEM.
AND I CAN'T FIND ANYONE TO TELL ME WHAT THE PROBLEM IS.
SO I SEE NO REASON AT ALL THAT WE SHOULD BE CHANGING THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW.
UM, OUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE MS. EARLY.
HELLO, MY NAME IS MARIE EARLY AND I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRIENDS OF XL PARK IN DISTRICT 14.
I AM IN HERE TO SUPPORT OUR PARK BOARD REPRESENTATIVE RUDY CREAMY, WHO WAS, UH, APPOINTED BY OUR COUNCILMAN PAUL RIDLEY, UH, WORKING WITH THE PARK BOARD AND, UH, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN AMAZING FOR US.
I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT IS WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM THAT IT, THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE NOW.
AND SO I OPPOSE AMENDMENT 1 0 3 AND I HOPE YOU JOIN ME AS WELL IN OPPOSING THIS AMENDMENT.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. WALKER.
AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ABOUT MY EXPERIENCES WITH THE CURRENT DALLAS PARK SYSTEM.
I WANNA TELL YOU THAT SINCE MY ARRIVAL BACK IN 2003, I'VE BEEN THOROUGHLY IMPRESSED WITH THE OVERALL QUALITY AS WELL AS THE FORWARD THINKING OF DALLAS' PARKS AND OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT.
UH, FROM ITS 300 PLUS COMMUNITY PARTNERS TO THE WAY IT LEVERAGES OVER 75 MILLION IN ANNUAL ANNUAL PARTNERSHIP FUNDING.
IT'S ALWAYS BEEN CLEAR TO ME THAT OURS IS A PARKS SYSTEM THAT TRULY LISTENS TO ITS CITIZENS AND ENGAGES WITH US THROUGH A VARIETY OF CHANNELS, INCLUDING STAFF, OUR PARK BOARD CHAMPIONS, AND ULTIMATELY OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I USE THE WORD CHAMPION VERY INTENTIONALLY BECAUSE FOR ME AND MY EXPERIENCE AS A YOUTH DEVELOPMENT LEADER AND PARTNER OF THE CITY FOR 20 PLUS YEARS, IT'S BEEN THE ACCESSIBILITY TO COUNCIL APPOINTED INTERMEDIATE ADVOCATES WHO SERVE OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES THAT HAS MADE THE DIFFERENCE IN MY TEAM'S ABILITIES ACROSS MULTIPLE ORGANIZATIONS THROUGH THE YEARS TO FORM PARTNERSHIPS AND TAKE ACTION RELATIVELY QUICKLY.
THE TRANSFORMATIVE WORK WE'RE COLLECTIVELY ACCOMPLISHING IN AND AROUND CEDAR CREST IN SOUTHERN DALLAS IS A CURRENT EX EXHIBIT A OF THIS.
UH, JOHN BOER, DISTRICT TWO BUSINESS AND DISTRICT NINE.
I'VE, UH, BEEN ON THE EY ROCK LAKE FOUNDATION FOR FIVE YEARS AND BEFORE THAT PRESIDENT OF PRINCESS SANTA FE TRAIL.
AND, UH, I'VE HAD NOTHING BUT AMAZING RESPONSE WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND, UH, HAVING RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL, I KNOW THAT THAT CAMPAIGN ERA IS, IS VERY INTENSE.
AND NOW WE'RE GONNA DISTRACT A COUNCIL MEMBER BY TRYING TO DECIDE ON ANOTHER VERY IMPORTANT POSITION OF THE CITY PARKS DEPARTMENT.
NO, SO THIS, I'M AGAINST 1 0 3.
UH, I DON'T WANT TO ADD ANY MORE BURDEN TO WHAT IT IS FOR A CITY COUNCILMAN.
THEY HAVE ENOUGH TO DO ON THEIR OWN AND THE SYSTEM WORKS AS WELL AS IT CAN RIGHT NOW.
IT'S THE BEST SYSTEM IN DALLAS RIGHT NOW IN OUR GOVERNMENT.
AND, UH, DON'T, DON'T MESS WITH IT.
UM, I'LL CALL OUR NEXT FIVE SPEAKERS COMMISSIONERS.
IF YOU LOOK, IF YOU'RE FOLLOWING THE LIST, UH, NUMBERS 27 AND 28 ARE DUPLICATES.
THEY ALREADY SPOKE, SO I'LL, I'LL BE SKIPPING THEM.
UM, UH, OUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE, UH, MS. YOLANDA WILLIAMS, THEN BETTY CULBERTH, BO SLAUGHTER, AND THEN CHRIS CARTER.
UH, I'M JUST HERE TO PROVIDE SOME FACTS.
UM, I THINK WHAT THIS IS ABOUT IS CLEARLY RETALIATION BACK IN 2022.
UH, A COUNCIL MEMBER APPOINTED, I MEAN, A COUNCIL MEMBER GOT INVOLVED WITH A CONTRACT FOR THE PARK DEPARTMENT BECAUSE HIS CAMPAIGN TREASURE DID NOT GET THE BID.
YOU CAN SEE, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY 'CAUSE I JUST GOOGLED TO SEE THE STATUS OF IT.
THE CITY JUST AWARDED THIS CONTRACT A $9.3 MILLION WHILE THEY WAS IN A LAWSUIT.
AND NOW IT'S IRONIC THAT THE PERSON WHO IS SITS FOR THE, UH, COMMISSIONER THAT SITS ON THE CHARTER COMMISSIONER IS THE ONE THAT APPOINTED.
SO THIS IS CLEARLY RETALIATION AGAINST MR. JENKINS.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HE DIDN'T DO.
AND I WANT TO CO-SIGN WITH WHAT THE OTHER
[00:30:01]
MAN SAID ABOUT RIVER SHUN.I SERVED ON THE PARK BOARD THEN.
SO WE HAVE TWO CASES OF RETALIATION.
THIS IS CLEARLY ABOUT RETALIATION BECAUSE THEY FELT THE COUNCIL MEMBER FOR DISTRICT SIX, AND YOU CAN GOOGLE IT FELT LIKE HIS CAMPAIGN TREASURE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN A CONTRACT FROM THE PARK DEPARTMENT.
MR. JENKINS IS NOT OVER PROCUREMENT.
SO THAT'S WHAT THIS IS CLEARLY ABOUT.
THANK YOU MS. WILLIAMS. THAT'S YOUR TIME.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER, UH, IS JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
MS. CULBERTH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I AM OPPOSED TO AGENDA ITEM 1 0 3 PRIMARILY BECAUSE THIS COMMISSION ADDRESSED THE PARK BOARD MOVEMENT AT YOUR LAST MEETING.
AND THERE IS NOTHING CURRENTLY IN THE CITY CHARTER THAT ADDRESSES DEPARTMENT HEADS.
SO IN ORDER FOR THIS RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE ANY WEIGHT, THE WHOLE CHARTER WOULD HAVE TO BE AMENDED AND A SECTION ADDED TO INCLUDE DEPARTMENT HEADS.
CLEARLY THIS IS NOT, SHOULD NOT EVEN BE ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE YOU ALREADY ADDRESSED THE DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT AT YOUR LAST MEETING.
THERE ARE ONLY TWO POSITIONS CURRENTLY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, CHARTER CITY SECRETARY AND CITY MANAGER.
EVEN THE, THE, UH, CITY IS NOT EVEN RECOGNIZABLE UNDER A CHARTER IN THE CITY CHARTER.
SO THIS REALLY IS A, IS A NON-ISSUE.
'CAUSE IT'S NOT EVEN A RECOGNIZABLE THING THAT YOU COULD DO IN TERMS OF DEPARTMENT HEADS.
YOU WOULD IN, IN ESSENCE, BE DISMANTLING A DEPARTMENT.
THE DEPARTMENT IS RECOGNIZED, NOT THE DIRECTORS OF EACH DEPARTMENT.
SO WHAT YOU GONNA DO? I MEAN, THE CHART FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS TO BE APPOINTED BY
THANK, THANK YOU MS. BERTH, THAT YOUR TIME.
UM, OUR NEXT SPEAKER, UH, IS BOSE SLAUGHTER.
FIRST OF ALL, HAPPY NEW YEAR AND, AND THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO AND GLAD WE'RE HERE.
I SEE SOME FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT I'M SO PROUD OF WHAT YOU DID.
MR. BEANO, YOU APPOINTED SIR JESSE MORENO, SIR, ON THE PARK BOARD.
ONE OF THE GREATEST THINGS THAT HAPPENED, SIR, SIR, I NEED TO STOP YOU.
YOU CANNOT CALL OUT INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION LIKE THAT.
OKAY? THERE WAS A APPOINTEE ON THE PARK BOARD.
I REPRESENTED JESSE RAY, BUT JESSE MORENO WAS APPOINTED A GREAT THING.
PULLED MY HEARTSTRINGS WHAT HE DID FOR THE SANTOS FAMILY.
AND WE'LL NEVER FORGET THAT DALLAS WILL NEVER FORGET THAT ALL THE APPOINTEES IS AN EXTENSION OF THE COUNCIL PEOPLE.
AND WE'VE DONE A DAMN GOOD JOB.
SO ALL OF A SUDDEN THIS HAS COME UP.
WHEN THE TRAILER CREEK CONSERVANCY, WHEN WE HAD THAT PROBLEM WITH THE STATUE, AND MOST OF THE COMMUNITY WANTED TO PARK THE STATE IN THE NAME OF ROBERT E. LEE.
BUT THE TRAILER CREEK CONSERVATIVE CAME TO US AND WE LOBBIED FOR THEM.
AND THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED THE TRAILER CREEK.
HOW SOON WE FORGET, HOW SOON WE FORGET.
AND WHAT I'M MOST SO PROUD OF, WE'VE BEEN HAVING A GAME AT FAIR PARK, PRAIRIEVIEW AND GRAMBLING GAME.
AND THEY CAME TO US AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EQUITY.
JOHN JENKINS WENT AND LOBBIED FOR THIS.
AND NOW AL WASH AND PRAIRIEVIEW AND GRAMBLING TEAMS ARE GETTING MORE MONEY.
SO THINK LOOK IN THE MIRROR LIKE I DO EVERY DAY.
MR. SLAUGHTER, THAT'S YOUR TIME.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. CARTER.
I LIVE IN DISTRICT 10, WHICH IS LAKE HIGHLANDS.
I HAVE BEEN A DALLAS COUNTY POLL WORKER FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS.
MOST RECENTLY AT ELIA BRANCH LIBRARY.
THE CONFUSION THAT RANKED CHOICE VOTING WOULD CAUSE FAR SUPERSEDES ANY VAGUE, FUZZY BENEFITS THAT RANK CHOICE VOTING MIGHT PROVIDE DIVERSE CANDIDATES, ALTERNATE TO THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM, INCREASED CIVILITY.
RANK CHOICE VOTING WILL COMPLICATE THE BALLOT.
A CONVOLUTED BALLOT WILL SLOW THE VOTING PROCESS.
IT WILL BE SUSCEPTIBLE TO MISTAKES, WHICH WILL CAUSE LONG LINES AND WAIT TIMES.
THIS WILL GENERATE A COMPLICATED ELECTION RESULT, WHICH WILL DECREASE VOTER CONFIDENCE IN THE VALIDITY OF THOSE RESULTS, WHICH MR. VAUGHT, IN THE CURRENT POISONOUS POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT WE ARE IN.
THAT IS THE WORST POSSIBLE OUTCOME THAT WE COULD HAVE.
[00:35:01]
CHOICE, VOTING.UM, THE NE THE NEXT FIVE SPEAKERS WILL BE MS. TAMMY BROWN RODRIGUEZ, DEBORAH GOODMAN, REGINA AND BURGIA, EUGENE, RALPH AND MELISSA KATZ.
MS. RODRIGUEZ, I HAVE A PROPERTY IN DISTRICT NINE AS WELL AS A PROPERTY IN DISTRICT 14.
AND I AM AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO, THE RANK CHOICE VOTING.
I WANNA BRING OUR ATTENTION TO WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN MAINE, ALASKA, AND CALIFORNIA DUE TO THE SPECIFIC TYPE OF VOTING IN MAINE SECOND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 2018, DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY, WE HAD 126,000 VOTERS WERE CAST ONLY 117,000 VOTES COUNTED, WHICH MEANS NEARLY 9,000 PEOPLE HAD THEIR VOICES SILENCED BY BALLOT EXHAUSTION AND SAN FRANCISCO.
AFTER 20 ROUNDS OF TABULATION, 53% OF THE BALLOTS HAD BEEN EXHAUSTED, WHICH MEANS DISCARDED AND NOT COUNTED.
THAT MEANT ONLY 8,200 BALLOTS WERE CONTRIBUTED TOWARDS THE FINAL RESULTS.
MORE BALLOTS WERE THROWN OUT THAN WERE COUNTED, THEREFORE, LET'S NOT ADOPT THIS DISASTROUS POLICY IN DALLAS COUNTY.
HELLO, MY NAME IS, UH, DEBORAH GOODMAN, AND I LIVE IN DALLAS COUNTY.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REITERATE WHAT SHE SAID REGARDING RANK VOICE, UH, VOTING.
IT DESTROYS CONFIDENCE IN VOTERS.
UH, IT ALSO, UH, MAKES, UH, PEOPLE FEEL THAT THERE, THE VOTE DON'T COUNT.
IT TAB IT, IT, IT, UH, CREATES A TIME WHERE THERE'S A DELAY IN THE COUNTING OF THE VOTES.
AND IT ALSO OPENS US UP FOR COMPUTER FRAUD, WHICH IS A BIG ISSUE THAT WE'RE ALREADY ADDRESSING TODAY.
IT DOES NOT BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER.
IT POLARIZES PEOPLE BECAUSE WE WILL NOT FEEL THAT WE CAN GO DOWN THERE AND VOTE.
AND THAT THAT ONE VOTE IS GONNA COUNT.
THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL SOMEONE DECIDES BECAUSE THEY'VE DECIDED THAT, UH, WHO THE CANDIDATE'S GONNA BE.
SO THIS IS NOT GONNA BRING, UM, UH, PEOPLE TOGETHER.
IT'S GONNA DESTROY US IN OUR VOTING SYSTEM.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS REGINA BERTIA.
I'M, I'M REGINA
AND I AGREE WITH THOSE LADIES ALSO.
WE SHOULDN'T HAVE A RANK, UH, CHOICE VOTING FOR MANY REASONS.
IT WOULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE TRANSITIONING INTO IT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO BE TRAINED ON HOW TO DO IT.
EQUIPMENT WOULD HAVE TO BE, UH, MODIFIED.
AND THAT WOULD INVOLVE MORE STAFF, MORE TIME AND TIME IS MONEY, AND THE MONEY COMES FROM THE VOTERS.
IT WOULD, UM, IT'S A PROBLEM WITH THE ONE VOTE, ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE, AND ALSO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE FOR IT.
MOST OF THEM CAN'T EVEN EXPLAIN HOW, HOW IT WORKS.
UH, THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION ABOUT IT, AND IT WOULD ONLY ADD TO, UH, LOWERING THE PEOPLE COMING TO VOTE BECAUSE AS IT IS, PEOPLE, UM, FIND THINGS CONFUSING, LIKE COMING TO VOTE.
SO WE NEED TO MAKE IT EASIER, NOT HARDER.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE TIME CLOCK IS
AND PLEASE DO NOT, UH, UH, HAVE THE RANK, UH, CHOICE VOTING.
UM, EUGENE, RALPH, UH, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
UH, I'M EUGENE RALPH, CITIZEN OF DALLAS DISTRICT EIGHT.
I SPEAK AGAINST AMENDMENT TWO.
I BELIEVE THE PURPOSE OF ELECTIONS IS BASICALLY TO DEFINE, UH, WHERE THE CITIZENS ACTUALLY WANT, UH, THE DIRECTION OF THE GOVERNMENT TO GO.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN RELY ON THAT SORT OF SIGNAL FROM AN OUTCOME, FROM A PROCESS THAT IS KNOWN TO BE PRETTY MUCH CONFUSING AND DISCOURAGING TO VOTERS IN JURISDICTIONS WHERE WE ACTUALLY HAVE IT ACTIVE.
AND IF OUR CURRENT CANDIDATES HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ACTUALLY GARNERING THE MAJORITY OF, UH, CITIZENS' VOTES IN THE FIRST BALLOT.
IF OUR ISSUE IS POLARIZATION, THEN I WOULD SIMPLY SUGGEST THAT THEY ACTUALLY START RUNNING TOWARDS THE MAJORITY OF THE DISTRICT FOR INCUMBENTS.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE ACTUALLY GET BUSY ORDERING THE CITY'S BUSINESS TOWARDS THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY LIVE HERE AND NOT GOING ON WITH THIS CRAZY PROCESS.
[00:40:01]
THING.THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MELISSA KATZ.
I'M A DALLAS SITE FOR 58 YEARS, AND THIS IS MY FIRST MEETING.
UM, I'M WANNA TALK ABOUT, AND I'M OPPOSED TO AMENDMENT TO RANK CHOICE VO VOTING.
UM, AS AMERICANS, ONE OF OUR BIGGEST PRIVILEGES IS THE RIGHT TO VOTE AND RANK CHOICE VOTING TAKES AWAY THAT OPPORTUNITY.
IT'S A THREAT TO OUR CURRENT ELECTION SYSTEM.
AND CURRENTLY WE HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH ELECTION INTEGRITY.
AND SO AMERICANS FEEL LIKE THEIR VOTE DOESN'T COUNT.
AND WE'VE HAD A LOT OF VOTER SUPPRESSION BECAUSE OF THAT.
AND IN STATES WHERE THEY HAVE HAD IT, FOR EXAMPLE, IN NEW YORK, THE N NAACP, THEY SAID THAT AFFECTED AND THAT SUPPRESSED VOTER SUPPRESSION ALSO.
UM, THEY A CLU IN NEW YORK AS WELL, THEY TESTIFIED AND SAID THAT TYPE OF VOTING LED TO VOTER SUPPRESSION.
THE OTHER THING ABOUT THIS, NOT ONLY IS IT CONFUSING, YOU CANNOT AUDIT IT.
I THINK IT'S IMP PER VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO FEEL THAT OUR VOTES COUNT.
OUR, OUR LAST THREE SPEAKERS OF THE NIGHT WILL BE JEFF KITNER, CYNTHIA GRUB, AND MIKE HOOK.
THANK YOU, MR. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.
I'M THE PARK BOARD MEMBER FOR DISTRICT 11.
I'VE SERVED IN THAT CAPACITY FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO AMENDMENTS 1 0 3 AND ONE 13.
THANK YOU FOR PREVIOUSLY VOTING DOWN AMENDMENTS 70 AND 85.
AS YOU'VE HEARD FROM MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES AND OTHER RESIDENTS, THESE AMENDMENTS WOULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE OPTIMAL GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE OF THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD BY MOVING THE HIGH PERFORMING DEPARTMENT UNDER MORE CITY HALL BUREAUCRACY, UNDER THE ALREADY OVERBURDENED CITY COUNCIL.
UM, YOU'VE ALL, YOU'VE, YOU'VE SEEN I THINK, LOTS OF WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE ON THIS AS WELL.
UH, DON'T NEED TO REITERATE ALL THE POINTS HAVE BEEN MADE, BUT I KNOW THAT MANY D 11 FRIENDS GROUPS HAVE REACHED OUT TO YOU ALL AS WELL.
FRIENDS OF NORTH HAVEN TRAIL, FRIENDS OF HILLCREST VILLAGE GREEN, THE DALLAS TRAILS COALITION, LOTS OF OTHERS IN OPPOSITION.
I'M ALSO HERE TO SUPPORT AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO.
VOTER TURNOUT IS EXTREMELY LOW IN DALLAS FOR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS, EVEN LOWER AT RUNOFF RACES.
UH, WE ARE OVERWHELMED WITH ELECTION DATES.
IF WE MOVE, I SUPPORTED MOVING ELECTIONS FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER IN FAVOR, ANYTHING THAT WILL INCREASE ELECTION TURNOUT AND IT WILL SAVE THE CITY MONEY.
I'M HERE REGARDING THE CHANGING OF THE WORDING.
TO BE INCLUSIVE USING RESIDENT OR PEOPLE IN PLACE OF CITIZEN.
LET'S HAVE A LITTLE DICTIONARY TALK.
A PERSON OWING LOYALTY TO AND ENTITLED BY BIRTH OR NATURALIZATION TO THE PROTECTION OF A STATE OR, OR A NATION.
A PERSON IS A CITIZEN, ONE WHO ENJOYS THE FREEDOM AND PRIVILEGES OF A CITY AS A CITIZEN OF A RESIDENT.
A FREEMAN OF A CITY AS DISTINGUISHED AS A FROM A FOREIGNER.
A CITIZEN IS A PERSON, A CITIZEN IS A RESIDENT.
I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REASONING WHY WE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE THAT WHEN THOSE TWO ISSUES, THOSE TWO WORDS ARE ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE WORD CITIZEN.
SO I THINK IT'S NONSENSICAL TO WASTE YOUR TIME AND CERTAINLY THE VOTER'S TIME IF YOU DECIDE TO PASS THIS.
AND FINALLY, WE HAVE MIKE HOOK, FOLKS RANKED CHOICE.
VOTING MIGHT SOUND APPEALING FOR WHATEVER STRANGE REASONS, BUT FOR DALLAS AND ALL OF AMERICA, IT'S A DEEPLY FLAWED SYSTEM.
IT ADDS UNNECESSARY AND DANGEROUS COMPLEXITY TO OUR ELECTORAL PROCESS, POTENTIALLY CONFUSING VOTERS AND BURDENING OUR ALREADY STRAINED ELECTION INFRASTRUCTURE.
MOREOVER, IT DILUTES ACCOUNTABILITY BY
[00:45:01]
ALLOWING CANDIDATES WITH FEWER, FEWER FIRST CHOICE VOTES TO WIN FOLKS, IT UNDERMINES THE PRINCIPLES OF MAJORITY RULE.LET'S PRIORITIZE CLARITY AND FAIRNESS IN OUR ELECTIONS.
SAY NO TO RANK CHOICE VOTING IN DALLAS COUNTY.
ALRIGHT, MR. CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES THE LIST OF, UH, 37 SPEAKERS FOR TONIGHT.
UH, NOW OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES, UH, FROM OUR MARCH 4TH, 2024 MEETING.
IS THERE A SECOND DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE INTO THE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
UH, AS WE MOVE INTO THE VOTING PORTION OF THIS AGENDA, WE'LL GIVE THE SUBMITTERS OF EACH AMENDMENT THREE MINUTES.
THAT'S THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON THEIR SUBMISSION.
FOLLOWING THAT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE EACH ITEM.
I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT A MOTION IS REQUIRED TO BE PUT ON THE FLOOR BEFORE DISCUSSION BEGINS.
DISCUSSION MUST THEN BE LIMITED TO THAT WHICH IS GERMANE TO THE MOTION.
KEEP IN MIND THE AGENDA ITEM STATES THE TOPIC THAT IS UP FOR DEBATE AND THE ACTION.
THE SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS ARE OPTIONS FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER RELATED TO THE AGENDA ITEM.
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT MOTIONS ARE DETAILED AS TO WHAT OPTION YOU'RE WANTING TO INCLUDE FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION.
YOUR MOTION MAY INCLUDE AN OPTION THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS PROPOSED AS A PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT, OR AN OPTION THAT WAS NOT SUBMITTED, BUT STILL GERMANE TO THE AGENDA ITEM.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT PROCESS? IT'S WHAT WE FOLLOWED EVERY TIME, BUT MAINLY WANT EVERYONE IN THE PUBLIC TO, TO HEAR THAT AGAIN.
SO WITH THAT, WE'RE GONNA TAKE THE AGENDA OUT OF ORDER A BIT WITH REGARDS TO ONE ITEM, UH, WE'RE GONNA CALL AGENDA ITEM.
I FIRST, UH, AGENDA ITEM I IS TO AMEND THE WAYS IN WHICH THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT IS OVERSEEN.
ITEM I INCLUDES TWO PROPOSALS FOR THE WAY IN WHICH, UH, PARKS AND REC IS, IS OVERSEEN.
AMENDMENT 1 0 3 SUGGESTS THAT THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR BE HIRED BY CITY COUNCIL RATHER THAN THE PARK BOARD.
UM, THIS WAS SUGGESTED BY COMMISSIONERS MADANO AND MILLS, UH, COMMISSIONERS ISH HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AND WE'LL START.
UH, MR. SPEAKER, UH, THANK YOU.
AND I, I FIRST WANNA SAY I APPRECIATE ALL THE PASSION IN THIS AUDIENCE.
UM, I TOO LOVE PARKS, BUT WHEN I WAS ASKED LAST YEAR, PARDON ME, TO BE ON THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TO REVIEW THE CITY'S CHARTER, I TOOK IT VERY SERIOUSLY.
I'VE READ THE CHARTER NUMEROUS TIMES.
IT'S A DOCUMENT OVER A HUNDRED PAGES, AND IT'S REVIEWED EVERY 10 YEARS.
IN DOING SO, I VIEWED IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR OVER 55 YEARS, AS WELL AS A TAXPAYER.
IN MY OPINION, NOW MORE THAN EVER, I BELIEVE IS IMPORTANT TO ENSURE TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE MAYOR, THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER, AND ALL DIRECTORS OF THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.
THE PARK BOARD VOLUNTEERS DEDICATE A LOT OF TIME, ENERGY, AND ATTENTION TO MAKING SURE DALLAS HAS A GREAT PARK SYSTEM.
BUT THE PUR PURPOSE OF MY CO-SPONSORSHIP OF AMENDMENT 1 0 3 WITH COMMISSIONER MADANO WAS AND IS TO HAVE AN OPEN DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ACCOUNTABILITY, THE EFFICIENCY, AND THE TRANSPARENCY OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.
WHEN A DEPARTMENT HAS A BUDGET OVER $114 MILLION AND IS POTENTIALLY RECEIVING ANOTHER 345 MILLION IN BOND PROCEEDS, I THINK IT'S PRUDENT THAT THE CURRENT STRUCTURE BE DISCUSSED AND REVIEWED, ESPECIALLY SINCE THIS STRUCTURE HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR MORE THAN A CENTURY.
SO I SEE THE NEED TO REVIEW IT WITH AN EYE ON OUR CITY'S NEEDS.
NOW, NOT THOSE OF A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, OF THE 42 OF THE 42 DEPARTMENTS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, ONLY TWO DO NOT REPORT TO THE CITY MANAGER, THE, THE CIVIL SERVICE DIRECTOR AND THE PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR IN ANY LARGE COMPANY OR FORTUNE 500 COMPANY.
DALLAS IS VALUED AT OVER $150 BILLION.
SO WE NEED TO THINK IN THESE TERMS. I'VE REVIEWED HOW SOME OTHER TEXAS CITIES INCLUDE THEIR PARK DEPARTMENT AND THEIR ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
[00:50:01]
IN HOUSTON, AUSTIN, SAN ANTONIO, EL PASO, FORT WORTH, ARLINGTON, CORPUS CHRISTI, PLANO, AND LUBBOCK, THE DIRECTOR OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, IS HIRED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR THE CITY COUNCIL AND NOT BY ITS OWN BOARD, WITHOUT ANY OTHER CITY OVERSIGHT.THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
AND A COMMENT WAS MADE A FEW MINUTES AGO ABOUT RETALIATION.
I'M HERE TO TRY TO MAKE THIS CITY BETTER.
I SEE PEOPLE IN THIS AUDIENCE THAT I KNOW WHO WORK VERY HARD IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
BUT I THINK THIS IS WORTHY OF A DISCUSSION.
SO I'LL, I'LL TURN IT BACK TO YOU, MR. CHAIR.
UH, THANK YOU, UH, MR. MADANO.
UH, LET'S START OFF REAL QUICK.
FIRST JOB PARKS DEPARTMENT HIRED ME.
I WAS WORKING AS A PART-TIME, UH, ASSISTANT AT ZARAGOZA RECREATION CENTER.
ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE THAT'S WHY I GOT ELECTED TO THE SCHOOL BOARD BECAUSE PEOPLE SAW ME THERE AND WORKING WITH KIDS, UH, UM, AND DOING STUFF IN THE COMMUNITY.
I, I I, I GIVE THE, THE, MY THANKS TO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY HELPED ME GET ELECTED.
I WAS WORKING WITH KIDS, UM, FINISHED COLLEGE.
I LIKED IT SO MUCH THAT I WANTED TO BE A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.
SO I MANAGED XAL PARK AND SAMUEL GRAND.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU KNEW THAT, BUT I DID.
SO I DID THAT FOR A LONG TIME.
SO ONE OF THE, I ALMOST DIDN'T EVEN RUN FOR COUNCIL BECAUSE I LOVED PARKS SO MUCH AND I LOVED MY JOB AND I SAW MYSELF ELEVATING IN THAT, IN THIS DEPARTMENT.
UH, I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE BIGGEST MAKE I WOULD'VE MADE
JUST GONNA GO THROUGH, JUST GIMME A CHANCE TO BRAG A LITTLE BIT.
AS A, AS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, WHAT I DID IS IN PARKS BUCKNER PARK, CROCKETT DOG PARK, SAMUEL GRAND AQUATIC CENTER, BACHMAN AQUATIC CENTER, KB POLKS, GRAY GROUND GROW, OUR WILDERS PLAYGROUND, THE NEW GATE PARK THAT'S ABOUT TO OPEN.
GUESS WHO HAD THE VISION YEARS AGO? ME, $4 MILLION SKATE PARK IS GONNA BE DONE.
OUR FIRST ONE I LOVE PARKS, BUT THERE'S ONE THING THAT I ALWAYS THOUGHT WAS, WAS KIND OF, KIND OF WEIRD AND I WAS AN EMPLOYEE, BUT BACK THEN IT DIDN'T BOTHER ME 'CAUSE NOTHING HAD HAPPENED.
BUT WHEN I BECAME A COUNCIL MEMBER AND, UH, MY COUN, MY PARK BOARD MEMBER, WHO'S A CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBER, JESSE MORENO, WAS APPROACHED BY SOME DEVELOPERS TO, UH, PRIVATIZE THE PARK THAT I GREW UP IN, THE PARK THAT I LOVE.
WE TOLD THEM, NO, THEY WENT AWAY.
COUPLE YEARS LATER, MAYBE FOR A MONTH OR SO DOWN THE ROAD, FORMER PARK BOARD PRESIDENT, FORMER PARK BOARD PRESIDENT BROUGHT SOME DEVELOPERS TO THE CURRENT PARK BOARD.
SO, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A FORMER PARK BOARD PRESIDENT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WERE CONSULTING FOR THEM OR WHATEVER, BROUGHT THE PERSON TO THE, THE PARK BOARD.
UM, THEY DIDN'T GO TO TO, TO MR. MORENO 'CAUSE HE KNEW THAT WAS A NO-NO.
SO THEY STARTED WORKING ON A PLAN WITHOUT MYSELF KNOWING AND MY CURRENT PARK BOARD MEMBER NOT KNOWING.
BY THE TIME I FOUND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON, IT WAS HALF BAKED PLAN.
WE DID NOT KNOW THIS WAS GONNA BE RAM ROTTED DOWN MY DISTRICT, DOWN OUR THROATS.
IF Y'ALL KNOW ME, I'M NOT GONNA BACK DOWN.
I'M A FIGHTER, BUT IT'S ALSO, I'M GONNA DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE CITY AND WHAT'S RIGHT FOR MY COMMUNITY.
SO BY THE TIME IT GOT, IT WENT THROUGH PARK BOARD 12 TO THREE, TIM DICKEY, JESSE MORENO, BECKY RADER, THE ONLY ONES THAT VOTED AGAINST IT, SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE ARE STILL ON THAT PARK BOARD.
SO I PROMISED MYSELF IF I EVER HAD A CHANCE TO TRY TO CORRECT THIS, I WOULD.
NOT TO RETALIATE, NOT RETALIATION, IS TO PROTECT OTHER PARKS OR, OR OTHER THINGS FROM HAPPENING.
SO, SO, UM, WHEN IT CAME TO ME, THE PLAN WAS THEY WOULD TAKE OVER THE PARK.
REMEMBER THAT PARK THEY WERE GONNA TAKE OVER WAS ABOUT $20 MILLION WORTH OF LAND.
IT'S ABOUT FOUR TO SIX ACRES OF PARK THAT THEY WERE GONNA TAKE OVER.
AND YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THEY WERE GONNA PAY, LEASE AND GIVE TO THE PARKS
[00:55:01]
DEPARTMENT.THAT'S WHAT WE WERE GONNA GET A YEAR FROM THIS SPORTS VENUE ENTERTAINMENT THAT WAS GONNA TAKE OVER.
AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE CONCERTS, BALLPARK, A A MINOR LEAGUE BASEBALL.
UM, I SAW THAT IT MIGHT GET RAM ROTTED.
SO I HAD TO DO THE BEST THAT I COULD AND MAKE IT THE BEST, UM, UH, DEAL.
THE BEST I COULD GET WAS 125 A YEAR, 120 5K.
THAT'S WHAT WE WERE GONNA GET.
UM, THE DAY OF THE VOTE, THIS IS WHAT REALLY CHAPPED MAHY, THE DAY OF THE VOTE.
SEVERAL PARK BOARD MEMBERS WERE SITTING WITH THE DEVELOPERS WHILE WE WERE DISCUSSING IT.
THEY WERE IN THE AUDIENCE WITH THE DEVELOPERS LAUGHING AWAY THINKING THEY'RE GONNA WIN THAT NIGHT.
TWO WEEKS LATER, THE COUNCIL MEMBER THAT ADJACENT TO MY DISTRICT DECIDED TO HAVE FOR A REVOTE.
HE REVOTE HE SWITCHED HIS VOTE.
THAT WAS PROBABLY THE WORST FEELING.
NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT COUNCIL MEMBER IS A ONE TERM COUNCIL MEMBER.
'CAUSE ALL HIS CONSTITUENTS VOTED HIM OUT OF OFFICE, MESSING WITH PARKS.
UM, SO, UH, THE ONLY THING THAT SAVED RIVERSTONE, THE ONLY THING THAT SAVED RIVERSTONE, I KNOW IT'S BAD FOR US, BUT IT WAS COVID.
NOBODY WANTED IT TO, TO, TO GIVE MONEY OR RAISE MONEY.
AND, UM, THEY DIDN'T COME UP WITH THE MONEY AND TIME THE DATE THAT, THAT, UH, THEY NEEDED TO.
SO WE WERE ABLE TO AVOID THAT CONTRACT.
I WAS ABLE TO AVOID THAT CONTRACT ON MY BIRTHDAY
SO THAT WAS PROBABLY THE BEST, BEST, BEST BIRTHDAY PRESENT I EVER HAD.
BUT THAT'S WHY I'M DOING THIS BECAUSE THERE WERE BACKDOOR DEALS BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEMBER KNEW.
AND IT WAS, AND YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANNA SAY, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT WAS.
HOW, HOW COME WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT? UH, BUT TO SAY THAT I DON'T LIKE PARKS OR, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE HEARD THAT IN THE PAPER OR I'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAY IT IS, IT IS FUNNY.
SO THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN TO A WHITE ROCK LAKE.
SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN TO A CRAWFORD PARK OR A KEITH PARK OR ANY OTHER PARK.
AND THAT'S WHY I'M DOING THAT TODAY.
I JUST SAID I WANTED TO GET A CHANCE AND BE ABLE TO DO THAT TO SHOW THAT HEY, I I WAS GONNA BE ABLE TO STOP THAT.
'CAUSE THAT'S PROBABLY THE WORST FEELING YOU CAN DO IS WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR HANDS TIED.
UH, WHEN I WENT TO THE DIRECTOR TO TRY TO STOP HIM FROM, UM, UM, UH, LISTENING TO THE PARK BOARD MEMBERS AND I, I DON'T BLAME JOHN JENKINS, HE WAS MY BOSS.
I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL KNOW THAT, BUT HE WAS MY BOSS FOR A LITTLE BIT.
UH, AND THEN I BECAME ONE OF HIS 30 BOSSES.
SO I UNDERSTAND WHY HE HAD TO LISTEN TO THEM AND AT LEAST, UH, UM, UM, 'CAUSE THEY HIRED HIM.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE I FOUND OUT THAT THAT WAS, THAT WAS KIND OF AN ISSUE THERE WHEN HE DIDN'T WANNA LISTEN TO THE ELECTED BODY, BUT LISTEN TO SOMEONE THAT IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE TO THE VOTERS.
SO I DIDN'T FAULT HIM FOR THAT.
SO, BUT I JUST KNEW THAT THAT WAS AN ISSUE BECAUSE HE COULDN'T, HE COULDN'T, HE COULD NOT LISTEN TO ME.
'CAUSE HE HAD TO LISTEN TO ONE OF SEVERAL OF HIS BOSSES THAT HAD, THAT HAD WANTED TO DO THIS, THIS PLAN.
AND SO THAT'S THE REASON I'M DOING THIS TODAY.
SO I HOPE YOU GUYS CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M COMING FROM AND SEE THAT AND SEE IF SOMEONE'S ATTACKING YOUR COMMUNITY.
UH, BUT, UM, LUCKILY WE DO HAVE RIVERSTONE HERE AND WE HAVE A GREAT PARTNERSHIP WITH DALLAS SD AND WE'RE REDOING THE BALL FIELD NOW.
BUT, UH, THIS CAN HAPPEN TO ANYBODY'S NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT'S WHY I'M DOING IT.
THE OTHER SUGGESTION WAS THAT PARKS, UH, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT HAVE ITS BUDGET APPROVED DIRECTLY BY CITY COUNCIL RATHER THAN ITS CURRENT PROCESS, WHICH GOES THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER, UH, SCOTT GOLDSTEIN.
UH, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON, UH, THAT SUGGESTION.
AND THEN I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR, UH, TO MOTIONS AND DISCUSSION ON, UM, THESE AGENDA ITEMS. GOOD EVENING AGAIN.
WHEN PARK BOARD, UH, MEMBER TIM DICKEY AND I FIRST SUBMITTED THIS AMENDMENT SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, OUR INTENTION WAS TO STRENGTHEN PARK'S INDEPENDENCE BY PUTTING THE BUDGET PROCESS DIRECTLY THROUGH THE PARK BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAD NO IDEA AT THAT TIME HOW MUCH ENERGY, UH, WE'D BE SPENDING OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS DEFENDING AGAINST WHAT WE SEE AS, UH, UNNECESSARY BAD AMENDMENTS TO UNDO PARKS AMENDMENT.
THE ARGUMENT THAT, UH, MANY OF THE PARKS SUPPORTERS HERE TONIGHT AND MANY OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS A COUPLE WEEKS AGO HAS MADE IS THAT THE CURRENT SYSTEM WORKS AND WE SHOULD LEAVE IT ALONE.
SO WE THINK IT'D BE DISINGENUOUS OF US TO CONTINUE TO PUSH THIS AMENDMENT.
AND WE ASK THAT THIS ONE BE EXCLUDED FROM CONSIDERATION AND WE KEEP THE, THE STATUS QUO FOR THE PARKS GOVERNANCE IN DALLAS.
DOES IT TAKE A, A MOTION TO EXCLUDE, TO
[01:00:01]
EXCLUDE THAT OR IT DOES, YES.I'LL MOVE TO EXCLUDE AMENDMENT 1 21 SECOND.
THERE'S BEEN A SECOND ON THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE AMENDMENT 1 21.
ANY DISCUSSION? I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THAT POINT, MS. HUNT.
UH, I WOULD LIKE, I, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE VOTE ON THAT MATTER AFTER WE HAVE A VOTE ON 1 0 3, WHICH WOULD FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE HOW THE PARKS DIRECTOR IS SELECTED.
UM, I I THINK THAT, UM, IT, IT JUST MAKES, IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO ME TO HAVE THAT VOTE AFTER WE DECIDE HOW THE PARK STRUCTURE'S GONNA BE.
IF, IF THERE, IF YOU WOULD BE, I'LL DRAW IN MOTION.
IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION? YEAH, I, I MAKE A MOTION TO INCLUDE 1 0 3.
THERE'S A MOTION TO INCLUDE 1 0 3.
IS THERE SECOND? I SECOND DISCUSSION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO, OH, MS. HUNT.
UM, I WANNA THANK EVERYONE, UH, CURRENT PARK BOARD MEMBERS WHO SPOKE TONIGHT, PAST PARK BOARD MEMBERS, PAST PRESIDENTS, UM, FOR YOUR ADVOCACY OF OUR PARKS, AND OF COURSE ALL OF THE FOLKS IN OUR PARKS ORGANIZATIONS WHO'VE TAKEN THEIR TIME OUT, UM, TO, TO WORK ON THIS ISSUE TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.
UM, I I'M OPPOSED TO THIS MOTION, UM, FOR ALL OF THE REASONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED.
SO I, I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT THAT, BUT I WANNA SHARE A VERY QUICK STORY.
I WAS RECENTLY APPOINTED TO THE DFW AIRPORT BOARD.
I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ONE OF THE FORMER BOARD MEMBERS OUT TO LUNCH TO PICK HIS BRAIN.
UM, I ASKED HIM IF HE THOUGHT THAT THE DFW AIRPORT WAS WELL RUN, AND HE, THIS IS SOMEONE WHO'S A PILOT WHO'S HIGHLY ACTIVE IN AVIATION, WHO SPENDS A LOT OF TIME AT OTHER AIRPORTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
I, I SAID COMPARATIVELY, WHAT DO YOU THINK? AND HE SAID, I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY WELL RUN.
UH, AND I SAID, WHAT DO YOU ATTRIBUTE THAT TO? AND HE SAID, ANGELA, THERE ARE OTHER AIRPORTS, MAJOR AIRPORTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AND HE NAMED A COUPLE OF THEM, UM, LAX AND UM, UM, JFK.
AND HE SAID THEY ARE POORLY RUN BECAUSE OF THEIR STRUCTURE, BECAUSE THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN THE POLITICS OF THE AIRPORTS.
AND IT MAKES THEM HAVE TO RESPOND TO THE POLITICS RATHER THAN BE EFFICIENTLY RUN.
AND HE SAID, DFW AIRPORT, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS MEMBERS ON THE BOARD SELECTED BY THE TWO OWNER CITIES, DFW, UH, DALLAS AND FORT WORTH.
AND THEY CREATE THIS LITTLE BIT OF CUSHION.
THEY DECIDE WHO THE CEO, UH, OF THE AIRPORT IS, AND THEY CREATE THIS LITTLE BIT OF CUSHION THAT ALLOWS A DISTINCTION AND SOME ROOM BETWEEN THE POLITICS AND THE EVERYDAY OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE AIRPORT.
AND HE SAID, THAT'S ALL THE DIFFERENCE.
AND IMMEDIATELY I THOUGHT OF OUR PARK BOARD.
UH, I, AND, AND SO I, AGAIN, I AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE TONIGHT.
WE HAVE AN EXCEPTIONAL PARKS DEPARTMENT, EXCEPTIONAL PARKS.
THIS IS NOT A CHANGE WE SHOULD MAKE.
IT WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT.
ANY ANYONE ELSE? MR. LAMA? THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
AND THANK YOU MR. MADANO FOR TELLING US YOUR STORY AND THE, AND THE HISTORY THERE.
UM, JUST LAST WEEK AT A FUNERAL SERVICE, I HEARD MY, MY GOOD FRIEND EULOGIZE BY SOME OF THE ADVICE THAT HE WOULD GIVE.
AND HIS DAUGHTER SAID THAT SOME OF THE BEST ADVICE WAS DON'T MAKE LONG-TERM DECISIONS BASED ON SHORT-TERM EVENTS.
I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY, ALL THE HISTORY, I'VE HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT, ABOUT THE TENSION BETWEEN PARKS AND THE COUNCIL, OR PARKS AND THE MANAGER.
BUT I DO KNOW THIS, IT'S HARD TO WORK EFFECTIVELY WITH THAT KIND OF TENSION AND ANGER AND ACCUSATIONS.
SO I HOPE THAT WHATEVER HAPPENS HERE, THAT THESE TWO GROUPS WILL FIGURE OUT HOW, THAT WE ARE BETTER TOGETHER, WORKING TOGETHER ON THE PROBLEMS AND NOT, OR WORKING ON, ON THE PROBLEMS AND THE POLICIES, AND NOT JUST TRYING TO TAKE EACH OTHER DOWN.
I'LL BE VOTING, UM, WITH MS. HUNT.
I, SO I SORT OF, I SHARED MY REMARKS LAST WEEK ABOUT HOW OR WHEN WE MET LAST ABOUT HOW, WHERE I STAND ON PARKS AND I'LL CON MY VOTE WILL REFLECT WHERE I STOOD THE LAST TIME.
[01:05:01]
YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALL BEEN PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO BE A PART OF THIS PROCESS, UH, AND IT'S AN HONOR, UH, AND CERTAINLY A RESPONSIBILITY.IT ALSO GIVES US A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE OCCASIONALLY, UH, TO BE ABLE TO SHARE REMARKS WHILE TIED TO THIS VOTE THAT I JUST THINK I'D LIKE TO SHARE AT THE MOMENT.
UM, AND THAT IS, YOU KNOW, TO COMMISSIONER MILLS AND TO COMMISSIONER MADANO WHO HAVE TAKEN A TIME TO DO A TON OF WORK, UH, TO WRAP THEIR MINDS AROUND THE ISSUE, PUT THE ISSUE ON THE TABLE FOR US TO DISCUSS AND DEBATE.
THAT IS WHAT WE WERE SENT HERE TO DO.
UM, BUT REALLY FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE CROWD AND ANYBODY THAT'S WATCHING AND THE PRESS WHO'S WRITTEN, WE ALSO, AS A CITY, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I, I HOPE WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE THE CITY GREAT, IS HOW WE TREAT THE PEOPLE THAT WE SEND TO THE DAIS AND, AND ASSUMING THE BEST OF INTENTIONS WHEN WE CAN.
SO, I JUST FROM A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE, I WANNA THANK COMMISSIONER MILLS AND COMMISSIONER MADANO FOR BRINGING THE ISSUE TO THE TABLE.
I WON'T BE VOTING WITH YOU, UH, BUT I KNOW YOU AND I KNOW THE PUBLIC SERVANTS YOU'VE BEEN, I DON'T QUESTION YOUR INTEGRITY.
I, I DOUBT ANYBODY AT THIS TABLE QUESTIONS YOUR INTEGRITY AND WHY YOU BROUGHT THIS FORWARD.
UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THIS POINT AND FOR THE SERVICE THAT INEVITABLY YOU'LL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE.
PEOPLE IN THE CROWD MAY NOT AGREE WITH YOU, BUT MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT MOST PEOPLE ALSO DON'T QUESTION THE INTEGRITY OR THE SPIRIT OF WHY YOU BROUGHT THIS FORWARD.
ANYONE ELSE? UH, MR. CHAIR, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER MILLS AND MADANO, UH, SPECIFICALLY TO COMMISSIONER MADANO.
UH, I JUST WANNA TAKE A MOMENT TO, UH, VET OUT YOUR POSITION JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE.
SO IN, IN WHAT WAYS OF HAVING THE DIRECTOR APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL PREVENT, UH, WHAT HAPPENED AT RIVER SHAW PARK? WELL, WHEN I ASKED HIM IF HE WOULD STOP THE PROCESS, HE SAID HE COULDN'T BECAUSE HE WAS LISTENING TO HIS BOSSES, AND THEY DO HIRE HIM.
THERE'S, THEY'RE 15, THEY, THEY HIRE HIM NOW.
WE APPOINT THEM, BUT THEY HIRE HIM.
SO HE HAD TO AT LEAST LISTEN TO, YOU KNOW, THEIR PROPOSAL.
BUT MY, MY THINKING IS IF IT WAS A COUNCIL, AND I'VE BEEN THERE BEFORE, AND, AND ALSO I THINK IT'S FUNNY THAT SOME PEOPLE SAY NO, HOW HARD WE WORK OR HOW MUCH WORK WE DO.
I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM GETTING ANYTHING DONE,
IT'S, IT'S JUST, THAT'S HOW MUCH TIME YOU WANNA PUT INTO IT.
UM, BUT, UH, I WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO STOP IT AT COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, AT MY LEVEL, YOU KNOW, WITH HIM, UM, BEING, ME BEING HIS BOSS, JUST LIKE CITY MANAGER.
YOU KNOW, I'VE WORKED WITH CITY MANAGER, I'VE WORKED WITH CITY SECRETARY.
IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN IN YOUR DISTRICT, IT USUALLY DOESN'T.
AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S MY THINKING AS WELL.
I MEAN, I WAS, I MEAN, THE PARK DIRECTOR HAD TO LISTEN TO HIS BOSS.
I THINK THAT'S TOO MANY, BUT, OKAY.
COMMISSIONER MADANO, MR. CHAIR.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO, UH, ECHO WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER SLEE SAID THAT I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER MADANO AND MILLS BRINGING FORWARD THIS FOR US TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION.
I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER MADANO YOUR HONESTY IN SHARING WITH US.
AND I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT YOUR INTEGRITY IS IN DOUBT TO NO ONE WHO KNOWS YOU.
AND, UH, I'VE WORKED WITH PARKS FOR YEARS, AND I DO THINK IT'S A VERY WELL RUN ORGANIZATION THE WAY IT IS.
I'VE WORKED WITH, UH, THE LAST THREE DIRECTORS PRETTY CLOSELY, AND AT TIMES IN MY JOB, I WISHED I HAD A BOARD
SO, I, I WILL NOT BE VOTING WITH YOU, BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU'VE DONE MR. DE LA FUENTE.
I WANT TO REITERATE, UH, WHAT COMMISSIONER SOLIS AND LOWERY JUST SAID, UM, VICE CHAIR MADANO.
I THINK NO ONE LOVES THE CITY AS MUCH AS YOU DO.
HONESTLY, I'VE FELT THAT WAY FOR YEARS, UH, WITH YOUR COMMITMENT AND WHAT YOU HAVE DONE FOR US, UH, COMMISSION, UH, MEMBER MILLS, IT'S BEEN GREAT GETTING TO KNOW YOU OVER THIS PROCESS.
AND I THINK YOUR INTENTIONS ON THIS AMENDMENT WERE, UH, WERE, WERE IMPEACHABLE.
I THINK BOTH OF YOU WERE TRYING TO, UM, CREATE PERHAPS A BETTER SYSTEM THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW.
UM, I THINK WE HAVE HEARD SO MUCH FROM THE PUBLIC OVER THE, UH, PAST FEW WEEKS, UH, THROUGH EMAILS AND PUBLIC SPEAKERS THAT, UH, I'M NOT SURE IF THE PUBLIC IS, IS WITH THIS CHANGE.
AND I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WEIGHS HEAVILY ON ME.
BUT I DO WANT TO THANK YOU BOTH FOR BRINGING THIS UP.
AND HOPEFULLY SOME OF THE EXAMPLES LIKE RIVER SEAN PARK OF WHERE THE CITY HAS PERHAPS FAILED OUR COMMUNITY VIA PARKS CAN BE, UH, FIXED, UH, IN THE FUTURE.
[01:10:01]
EXCUSE ME.I'M A DISABLED VET AND I HAVE HEARING PROBLEMS THEN EVERYBODY WAS TALKING.
WE GOOD AND LOUD UNTIL WE GOT TO THIS.
AND, UH, THIS IS A TOUCHY SITUATION, BUT I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING.
YOU KNOW, I KEEP ON HEARING, IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT.
IT'S BEEN PERFECT FOR, UH, A HUNDRED YEARS.
BUT, UH, I'M IN SUPPORT OF COMMISSIONER MADANO BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WHEN YOU JUST LEAVE THINGS AS IS FOR A HUNDRED YEARS, YOU SAYING YOU DON'T WANT TO CHANGE.
AND, UH, IT'S NOT THAT HE'S PUTTING IN THE FIGHTER CURRENT DIRECTOR.
HE'S SAYING IT'S WHO HIRES THE DIRECTOR WHO OVERSEES THE MONEY.
I, I THINK WHEN WE BECOME AFRAID OF CHANGE, THEN IT'S LIKE WE ARE AFRAID OF DEMOCRACY.
IF, IF THERE WAS NO CHANGE, I'D STILL BE IN SLAVERY BECAUSE THEY SAID IT AIN'T BROKE.
SO I THINK THAT, UH, WHAT MR. MADANO AND MR. MILLS IS ASKING FOR IS FERAL.
HE'S NOT ASKING TO FIRE ANYONE.
SEEING NO OTHER, UH, HANDS RAISED FOR COMMENTS, THEN WE WILL HAVE A VOTE.
THE MOTION PENDING, THAT'S BEEN SECONDED.
IT IS, UH, MOTION TO INCLUDE 1 0 3 AND I VOTE WOULD INCLUDE, UH, AMENDMENT 1 0 3.
UH, NO VOTE WOULD OBVIOUSLY EXCLUDE IT.
SO, UM, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO INCLUDE AGENDA ITEM OR AMENDMENT 1 0 3, RATHER SAY AYE.
MR. CAMPBELL, DID YOU HAVE A MOTION? UH,
CHAIR TO, UH, MY MOTION IS TO EXCLUDE AMENDMENT 1 21.
ALL IN FAVOR? THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE, UH, 1 21.
SO NOW WE'LL MOVE BACK TO, UH, THAT WAS AGENDA ITEM.
WE WILL MOVE BACK TO THE, UH, NORMAL FLOW OF THE AGENDA AS IT WAS BEFORE.
THAT'S, UH, SO WE GO INTO AGENDA ITEM A.
THAT'S TO ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY BOND, COMMISSION AMENDMENT 40.
UH, THIS IS SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KARA MENDELSON, AND WE WOULD ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY BOND COMMISSION IN CHAPTER 21.
SECTION 13, UH, IS COUNCIL MEMBER.
UH, I, I BELIEVE COUNCIL MEMBER MOLSON DID NOT JOIN US TONIGHT, BUT SHE HAS ASKED, SHE SAID, UH, COMMISSIONER MCGEE, UM, HAS THE INFORMATION.
SO YOU, ARE YOU GONNA LAY IT OUT? YEP.
SO, UM, THIS IS, THIS WAS PROPOSED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSON, AND SHE HAS SUBMITTED A LOT OF INFORMATION IN WRITING AND THOSE THAT SAW THE LANGUAGE THAT CAME FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON FRIDAY.
UM, ESSENTIALLY JUST SAYING WITH SUCH AN IMPORTANT PROCESS THAT THE COMMUNITY BOND COMMISSION IT, WE ALREADY HAVE A, A COMMUNITY BOND TASK FOR A GROUP THAT'S, THAT THE COUNCIL APPOINTS.
AND SHE'S JUST SUGGESTING THAT THIS BE, UM, FORMALIZED IN THE FORM OF A COMMISSION SO THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE APPOINTED GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS AS ANY ANYTHING ELSE.
AND SO, UM, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR PART ON THAT, I, I WOULD, I I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S A PRETTY GOOD IDEA, SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT.
IS, UH, IS THERE A MOTION I WOULD MOVE TO INCLUDE AMENDMENT 42ND? THAT THERE'S, THERE'S A MOTION TO INCLUDE, UM, THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
IF, IF YOU'RE IN THE GALLERY, CAN YOU PLEASE SAVE ANY CONVERSATION FOR OUTSIDE? EXCUSE ME.
IF, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE IN THE GALLERY, EXCUSE ME, CAN YOU PLEASE SAVE ANY CONVERSATION FOR OUTSIDE? THANK YOU.
[01:15:01]
ALL IN FAVOR OR SAY AYE.OKAY, SO FIVE NAYS, FIVE NAYS.
RAISE YOUR HANDS AGAIN PLEASE.
DO YOU WANT TO REPEAT IT? YEAH, COULD WE HAVE A, COULD SOMEONE REPEAT THE MOTION? PLEASE? REPEAT THE MOTION.
UH, MS. CLAP MOVED TO INCLUDE THIS ITEM FOR, UH, FINAL CONSIDERATION.
WE DID, UM, THIS MOTION WOULD, UM, ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY BOND COMMISSION WITHIN THE CITY CHARTER.
JUST, JUST SO WE CAN BE CLEAR.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO INCLUDE AYE.
UM, THIS WOULD ADD A REQUIRED PENSION CONTRIBUTION TO THE CHARTER AMENDMENT 41.
ITEM B WAS SUBMIT ALSO SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSSOHN, AND SUGGESTS THAT THE FULL COST OF THE ACTUARILY DETERMINED PENSION CONTRIBUTION BE INCLUDED IN THE CITY MANAGER'S ANNUAL ANNUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE EVERY YEAR, OR IF IT IS NOT INCLUDED, REQUIRE A DISCLAIMER THAT THE FULL COST IS NOT INCORPORATED INTO THE BUDGET ESTIMATE.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSON, SHE'S NOT HERE AS I UNDERSTAND IT, UH, AS SOMEONE GONNA LAY THIS OUT FOR YOU, MR. MAGOO? YEP.
AND I'LL ALSO REFER TO THE LANGUAGE, UM, THAT WOULD BE ADDED FROM THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT.
UM, AND THE NEW LANGUAGE SAYS AS IT RELATES TO THE ANNUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE, THE ED THE NEW LANGUAGE WOULD SAY THE ESTIMATE MUST INCLUDE THE FULL COST OF THE ACTUARILY DETERMINED PENSION CONTRIBUTION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR.
OR IF IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE FULL COST, THE ESTIMATE MUST CONTAIN A DISCLAIMER THAT'S STATING THAT THE ESTIMATE DOES NOT INCLUDE THE FULL COST OF THE ACTUARILY DETERMINED PENSION CONTRIBUTION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT, UM, THIS IS, AS, AS CONSTABLE MENDELSON AND FORMER CHAIR OF THE BUDGET JUST RECOGNIZES THE, TRYING TO BE CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT AND STATE SPECIFICALLY IN THE BUDGET PROCESS THAT THERE EITHER IS, DOES INCLUDE THE ACTUARILY DETERMINED PENSION CONTRIBUTION OR STATE THAT IT DOESN'T.
UM, AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE EXPLANATION THAT I HAVE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
SO WE, WE, UH, I'M SORRY, MR. MILLS MADE A SECOND.
UH, SO IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION MS. HUNT? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
UH, AND, AND WITH DUE RESPECT TO MY COLLEAGUE, UH, AND OF COURSE TO, TO COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN, UM, I, I APPRECIATE THE DESIRE FOR TRANSPARENCY.
I THINK THIS CAN BE ADDRESSED OUTSIDE THE CHARTER, SO I WILL NOT BE VOTING IN FAVOR.
UH, MEMBERS, THE CITY MANAGER IS HERE.
IS THERE ANY, THIS IS KIND OF A BIG DEAL.
ANYBODY LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER ON THIS BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT? YES.
WOULD, WOULD YOU, UH, PLEASE COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND POSITION AND, HI, GOOD EVENING.
I'M DEPUTY CITY MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND I'M, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR IF THERE WAS A QUESTION.
SO WE, WE HAVE, UH, AGENDA ITEM B, IT'S AMENDMENT 41.
UH, IT'S TO, UM, SUGGEST THAT THE FULL COST OF THE ACTUARILY DETERMINED PENSION CONTRIBUTION BE INCLUDED IN THE CITY MANAGER'S ANNUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE EVERY YEAR, ESSENTIALLY.
UH, I'M SURE YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH IT, BUT CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, UH, YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS? SO, SO I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE SENTIMENT.
I KNOW THAT THE CITY IS DEALING WITH A LOT OF PENSION ISSUES AND THEY HAVE HISTORICALLY DEALT WITH A LOT OF PENSION CONCERNS.
AND WE'RE, WE'RE IN THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW OF COMING UP WITH THE STATE MANDATED REQUIREMENTS FOR A
[01:20:01]
PLAN TO SOLVE THE PENSION NEEDS FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS.UM, I WOULD TELL YOU THAT GENERICALLY, UM, I WOULD ADVISE THAT IT'S NEVER A GOOD IDEA TO LEGISLATE THROUGH THE CHARTER FINANCIAL PLANNING.
UM, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD, UM, WHILE I WOULD NEVER FORESEE A, A PLAN IN THE FUTURE WHERE THE COUNCIL WOULD NOT FUND THE PENSION AS IT NEEDS TO BE FUNDED, I WOULD SAY THAT HAVING THAT RESTRICTION IN BINDING THE COUNCIL TO A CERTAIN CHOICES WOULD BE LIMITING FOR THE FLEXIBILITY AND NEEDS OF THE TIME FOR THAT PARTICULAR COUNCIL.
SO THAT WOULD BE MY GENERAL RESPONSE.
I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE SENTIMENT AND I CAN'T IMAGINE A SITUATION, I'M NOT AWARE OF A SITUATION WHERE THE COUNCIL HAS NOT MET THE FUNDING OBLIGATIONS FOR OUR PENSION.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS WOULD BE FOR THAT, UM, IF THIS REQUIREMENT WERE PUT INTO THE BUDGET, UM, FOR THE CHARTER FOR THIS NEXT YEAR AND, AND WHAT THAT FINANCIAL IMPLICATION WOULD BE.
BUT, UM, SIR, I, THAT'S THE INPUT THAT I COULD GIVE YOU AND FEEDBACK THAT I COULD GIVE YOU AT THIS TIME.
UH, MR. STEIN, I, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.
THE LANGUAGE SAYS, FOR ALL CONTRIBUTION FOR ALL PENSION PLANS, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE POLICE PENSION PLAN? IT DOES.
I, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION AND THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT FUND.
SO THERE, THERE ARE TWO PENSIONS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SO WE HAVE, UH, PENDING THE MOTION, UH, TO INCLUDE THIS, UH, AMENDMENT.
UH, THERE'S NO MORTAR DISCUSSION.
AND, UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
CAN YOU RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE AN AYE.
ALL OPPOSED, NAY, NAY NAYS HAVE IT.
MOTION DOES NOT CARRY AGENDA ITEM C.
THIS WOULD ADD A PROVISION TRIGGERING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF RANK CHOICE VOTING IN MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS ONCE THE STATE LAW IS AMENDED TO ALLOW FOR RANK CHOICE VOTING.
UH, I BELIEVE THIS IS COMMISSIONER DE LA PUENTES.
UH, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES, SIR.
UH, CAN WE PULL UP THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION I MADE? THANK YOU, MR. ANDERSON.
UH, I'VE SPOKEN ON THIS BEFORE, BUT I WANTED TO GIVE A BRIEF, UH, OVERVIEW AGAIN WITH SOME NEW DATA.
UM, AGAIN, PLURALITY VERSUS MAJORITY ELECTIONS ARE THE BIG DISCUSSION HERE.
WE ALREADY HAVE MAJORITY ELECTIONS HERE IN CITY OF DALLAS, AS MANDATED BY TEXAS STATE LAW.
PLURALITY ELECTIONS ARE WHAT YOU'RE USED TO FOR A LOT OF OTHER ELECTIONS, LIKE THE PARTISAN GENERAL ELECTIONS FOR SENATOR OR GOVERNOR, WHOEVER GETS THE MOST VOTES WINS JUST OVER AFTER ONE ROUND.
MAJORITY ELECTIONS, CITIZENS VOTE FOR ONE CANDIDATE, BUT THE CANDIDATE MUST GET A MAJORITY OF THE VOTE TO WIN.
THIS IS WHAT WE'RE USED TO FOR NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS LIKE CITY COUNCIL AND PARTISAN PRIMARIES AS WELL.
UM, MAJORITY ELECTIONS ARE CLEARLY SUPERIOR, UH, BECAUSE THEY REWARD CANDIDATES WHO CAN, UH, UH, GET THE SUPPORT OF A MAJORITY OF THEIR ELECTORATE.
UH, BUT THE IMPLEMENTING OF MAJORITY ELECTIONS IS A QUESTION THAT I THINK IS GOING THROUGH A LOT OF THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW.
RUNOFFS VERSUS RING CHOICE, VOTING RUNOFFS ARE INHERENTLY FAIR, BUT THEY'RE BURDENSOME AND COSTLY CITIZENS HAVE TO VOTE TWICE TO ELECT A SINGULAR OFFICE HOLDER IN DALLAS.
THAT MEANS YOU HAVE TO VOTE TWICE IN A FIVE WEEK TIME PERIOD.
TAXPAYERS PAY TO CONDUCT THE SAME ELECTION TWICE.
IN DALLAS, A CITYWIDE ELECTION COST AROUND A MILLION DOLLARS AS THE CITY'S SECRETARY HAS ALREADY INFORMED US.
RANK CHOICE VOTING IS ESSENTIALLY AN INSTANT RUNOFF.
UH, CITIZENS GO TO THEIR POLLING LOCATION JUST ONCE TO ELECT A CANDIDATE BY A MAJORITY SAVES TIME, SAVES MONEY.
THIS IS DATA THAT I GOT FROM THE DALLAS COUNTY ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT THAT LOOKS AT 2019 DALLAS VOTERS.
AGAIN, THIS IS ONLY PEOPLE THAT VOTED IN A MAYORAL ELECTION, UH, IN 2019.
OF THE PEOPLE WHO CHOSE TO VOTE, ONLY 57% OF THEM SHOWED UP IN BOTH MAY AND JUNE.
43% OF THEM ONLY SHOWED UP IN MAY OR JUNE, WHICH SHOWS HOW RUNOFFS ARE EXTREMELY BURDENSOME ON OUR EVEN MOST HARDCORE VOTERS.
AND THIS IS EXASPERATED EVEN WORSE IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.
I PULLED RUNOFF DATA FROM THE PAST, UH, SIX ELECTION CYCLES.
AND WHAT I FOUND IS THAT IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, AKA DISTRICTS ONE THROUGH EIGHT, COMPARED TO DISTRICTS NINE THROUGH 14, AGAIN, IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, THESE DISTRICTS ARE MAJORITY NON-WHITE.
UH, DISTRICTS NINE THROUGH 14 ARE MAJORITY WHITE.
WHEN A RUNOFF IS TRIGGERED, A VOTER IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR IS SIX TIMES LESS LIKELY TO SHOW UP TO VOTE IN A RUNOFF THAN A VOTER IN THAN NORTHERN SECTOR.
SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A CLEAR EXAMPLE OF HOW OUR RUNOFF SYSTEM OVERLY BURDENS WORKING CLASS
[01:25:01]
BLACK LATINO VOTERS, MORE SO THAN OUR WHITE VOTERS, UH, THAT ARE IN THE NORTH, THAT TEND TO BE A LITTLE BIT WEALTHIER, A LITTLE BIT MORE EDUCATED, HAVE MORE TIME ON THEIR HANDS.I THINK, UH, BLAMING THIS ON APATHY IS LAZIER THAN THE PEOPLE THAT DON'T VOTE.
THIS IS NOT AN APATHY PROBLEM.
THIS IS A STRUCTURAL PROBLEM OF PUTTING TOO MUCH OF A BURDEN ON OUR CITIZENS.
UH, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT BEFORE I CLOSE, UM, WE DON'T NEED TO GO TO THIS SLIDE.
THIS IS JUST TO FOLKS HAVE QUESTIONS.
UM, WE'VE RECEIVED TONS AND TONS OF POSITIVE FEEDBACK ABOUT THIS, UH, VIA EMAILS VIA PUBLIC SPEAKERS BEFORE IN THE PAST AND WIN OR LOSE.
I THINK IT'S THE COOLEST THING EVER THAT MARK CUBAN OF ALL PEOPLE REACHED OUT TO ME INSTEAD, HE SUPPORTS THIS AMENDMENT.
HOW OFTEN DOES THAT MAN TAKE TIME TO COMMENT ON A CITY OF DALLAS ISSUE? SO I THINK THIS IS THE OFFICIAL CHARTER AMENDMENT OF MASS FANS FOR LIFE, BUT THAT'S JUST MY POSITION.
NO, UM, MEMBERS, DO WE HAVE A, A MOTION? SECOND? IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? MR. CHAIRMAN? I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT THE COMMISSIONER HAS DONE ON THIS ISSUE, AND I APPRECIATE THE ANALYSIS THAT HE HAS LAID BEFORE US.
I HAVE BEEN TALKING TO VOTERS AND NEIGHBORS ABOUT THIS ISSUE FOR THE LAST MONTH OR TWO, AND WHAT I KEEP GETTING IS A FEELING OF CONFUSION, OF FEELING OF THE OUTCOME, NOT NECESSARILY BEING WHAT THEY CAN TRUST.
THAT WHEN YOU GET TO THE IDEA OF TABULATING NUMBERS BASED ON DROP OFFS AND BASED ON WHOSE VOTE DOESN'T HAVE THOSE, THOSE CANDIDATES ON IT, I, I'VE GOTTEN A CLEAR SENSE OF A REAL FEAR OF A LACK OF TRUST OF ELECTIONS USING THIS METHOD.
I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFICULTY OF GETTING VOTERS OUT FOR A RUNOFF ELECTION.
MY FIRST ELECTION, I HAD 49.9% OF THE VOTE HAD TO GO TO A RUNOFF AND ONLY ONE WITH 51.2% OF THE VOTE.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFICULTY OF GETTING VOTERS OUT FOR THAT SECOND ELECTION AND RUNOFF, BUT I FEEL LIKE PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT MY GENERATION TRYING TO EDUCATE THE VOTERS ON THE ONE THROUGH FIVE OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, AND HAVING THEM FEEL CONFIDENT THAT THEIR WILL IS GOING TO BE DONE, UM, LEADS ME NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT.
MR. MCGILL? I, UH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
SO THIS IS, AGAIN, ONE OF THE, THE ITEMS THAT WHEN I SAW IT THE FIRST TIME, I SAY, OH, THAT'S INTERESTING.
I STARTED LOOKING AT IT AND SEEING OTHER PLACES THAT HAVE DONE IT.
AND IT, IT REALLY ONLY TOOK, TOOK ME EXAMINING MY OWN EXPERIENCE AND MY OWN ELECTION IN THIS CITY.
AND I, QUITE HONESTLY, AS I DUG IN DEEPER, CAME TO THE POINT OF LIKE, I'M NOT ONLY SUPPORTIVE OF RUNOFF ELECTIONS.
LIKE I'M THANKFUL THAT WE'VE HAD RUNOFF ELECTIONS.
IT'S, IT IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR ISSUES TO BE NARROWED AND CLARIFIED.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT, I, I CAN'T STAND IT AS A CANDIDATE HAVING TO RAISE ADDITIONAL FUNDS AND GO THROUGH THE OTHER PROCESS THERE.
BUT, UM, MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE GOING THROUGH IT, THE, MY FIRST ELECTION WHERE I WON IN A RUNOFF BY 35 VOTES, UM, IT WAS INCREDIBLY CLOSE.
WE ENDED UP HAVING MORE PEOPLE SHOW UP IN THE RUNOFF THAN WE DID THE ORIGINAL ELECTION, BECAUSE THE ISSUES CLARIFIED AT THAT TIME.
IT WAS SPECIFICALLY AROUND THE, THE TRINITY TOLL ROAD.
AND, UM, THE IMPLICATIONS THAT THAT HAD FOR AWARENESS AND ENGAGEMENT AND ISSUES FACING THE CITY WAS MASSIVE.
AND I, LOOK, I DO, I MEAN, IT DOES SAVE SOME MONEY.
UM, BUT I DO NOT THINK IT IS WORTH THE LACK OF ENGAGEMENT THAT OCCURS WHEN YOU HAVE A RUNOFF AND WHEN YOU HAVE THE CANDIDATES THAT ARE CLARIFIED AND THE ISSUES THAT ARE MORE CLARIFIED, AND YOU CAN DIG INTO WHO THE PEOPLE REALLY ARE AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT ELECTION.
AND, UM, I, I, AS A, AS A RESIDENT, AS A VOTER, I WANT TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY.
UM, IT'S, IT, IT CAN BE DIFFERENT.
PEOPLE CAN EVEN CHANGE IN THE COURSE OF THAT MONTH WHERE THEY ARE ON THINGS AS THEY LEARN AND TALK TO THEIR CONSTITUENTS MORE, ESPECIALLY AT THE CITY COUNCIL ELECTION LEVEL WHERE, UM, NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT RUN DON'T HAVE EVERY ISSUE ALREADY FIGURED OUT.
AND THEY KNOCK ON DOORS AND THEY GET EDUCATED ON DIFFERENT THINGS AND THEY DEVELOP THEIR OPINIONS.
AND THAT, THAT MONTH OF ANALYSIS AND MORE CANDIDATE FORUMS AND MORE TALKING
[01:30:01]
AND DEBATES AND ISSUES THAT COME UP IS, IS INCREDIBLY POWERFUL.AND, UM, I I JUST ABSOLUTELY IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, I DO NOT THINK IT IS A WISE DECISION TO GO TO RANKED VOTING.
AND, UM, I, I HAVE, I TOOK THE EFFORT TO REACH OUT TO SOME OF OUR STATE ELECTED OFFICIALS AND JUST ASK FOR THE TEMPERATURE.
AND ALL THE RESPONSES I GOT BACK WAS THAT THERE'S NOT A TEMPERATURE TO CHANGE THIS AT THE STATE LEVEL EITHER.
AND SO, UM, FOR THOSE REASONS, I AM NOT SUPPORTING THE RANK CHOICE VOTING AND WOULD PREFER STATUS QUO IN THIS CASE.
WAS THAT ME? OKAY, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
A COUPLE THINGS, UH, FROM THE SPEAKERS WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT ON THIS ISSUE AGAINST IT, AND, UH, FROM SOME OF MY COCOMS, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE DON'T BASE PUBLIC POLICY OFF OF FEAR.
WHENEVER THAT HAPPENS, BAD POLICY GETS MADE.
UH, CHANGE ISN'T ALWAYS BAD IN THIS REGARD.
I THINK CHANGE WOULD BE EXCELLENT FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SECOND, UM, FOR MY COMMISSIONER WHO JUST SPOKE, I THINK WHAT YOU JUST ARTICULATED WAS OUR POINT IN FAVOR OF IT, BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS, IN YOUR EXACT EXPERIENCE, A SITUATION WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE DIDN'T COME OUT TO THE FIRST ELECTION.
NOW, IS THAT TRUE DEMOCRACY WHEN PEOPLE JUST SAY, SCREW IT.
I DON'T WANNA COME TO THE FIRST ELECTION BECAUSE I KNOW IT DOESN'T MATTER.
THAT'S NOT WHAT A DEMOCRACY IS SUPPOSED TO BE.
PEOPLE AREN'T JUST SUPPOSED TO SIT BY HYPOTHETICALLY UNTIL THEY GET THEIR OWN CHOICES NARROWED DOWN BY OTHER PEOPLE.
THIRD, I'M HERE REPRESENTING D SEVEN IN SOUTH DALLAS.
AND AS MR. DELA FUENTE PUT VERY ELOQUENTLY, THIS WILL MOST LIKELY IMPACT PEOPLE OF COLOR SOUTH OF I 35 THAT VOTE IN DISTRICTS ONE THROUGH EIGHT.
UM, AS HE, AS HE PUT THOSE VOTERS ARE SIX TIMES LESS LIKELY TO SHOW UP IN THE SECOND RUNOFF ELECTION.
SO THAT MEANS WE'RE TAKING AN ELECTION BASE OF UNDER, SOMETIMES UNDER 6,000 PEOPLE, SIX TO 10,000 PEOPLE, MAYBE UP TO 15 DEPENDING ON THE PRECINCT, AND NARROWING IT DOWN BY ANOTHER 80% ALMOST IN THE RUNOFFS.
AGAIN, TO ME, THAT'S NOT DEMOCRACY.
IT'S, WE WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ELECTING OUR OFFICIALS BASED OFF AN EXTREMELY NARROW MARGIN OF PEOPLE.
UH, AND LASTLY, WHAT I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT HERE, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I EXPERIENCE ALL THE TIME.
MANY OF YOU KNOW THAT I'M IN, I'M IN EVICTION COURT ALMOST EVERY SINGLE DAY, AND A LOT OF TIME IN EVICTION COURTS, THESE JUDGES WILL RESET CASES MULTIPLE TIMES.
NOW, I REPRESENT LOW INCOME FOLKS.
I REPRESENT ALMOST EX ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY PEOPLE OF COLOR IN MY PRACTICE IN SOUTH DALLAS, ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY.
AND IN THAT EXPERIENCE, THESE ARE WORKING CLASS PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING FORCED TO TAKE TIME OFF OF CHILDCARE, BEING FORCED TO TAKE TIME OUTTA SCHOOL, BEING FORCED TO TAKE TIME OFF OF WORK TO COME TO THESE MULTIPLE COURT RESETS.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THESE RUNOFFS ARE TOO.
IF YOU WANNA PARTICIPATE IN DEMOCRACY HERE AND, AND, AND HAVE MULTIPLE SETTINGS FOR ELECTIONS, YOU HAVE TO TAKE TIME OUT OF YOUR LIFE TO GO AND VOTE.
UH, AND FOR THAT SIMPLE REASON, I THINK IT MAKES IT MORE EFFICIENT TO HAVE FOLKS TO HAVE JUST ONE SINGULAR ELECTION DATE, UH, AND AVOID THE, THE EXTRA COST OF HAVING MULTIPLE ELECTIONS AFTERWARDS.
I WANNA THANK COMMISSIONER DE LA FUENTE FOR YOUR INCREDIBLE WORK AND RESEARCH ON THIS.
UM, YOU'VE JUST DONE A FANTASTIC JOB, AND I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
UM, I ALSO WANT TO JUST TAKE A SECOND TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES WITH WHOM I DISAGREE ON THIS POINT.
IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I, I ENJOY SO MUCH SERVING ON THIS COMMISSION BECAUSE, UM, AT TIMES WHEN I DISAGREE, ESPECIALLY WHEN I DISAGREE WITH, I HEAR THOUGHTFUL POINTS OF VIEW, AND I LEARN SOMETHING AND GAIN A, A BETTER PERSPECTIVE ON THE MATTER WE'RE DISCUSSING.
SO I'M, I'M APPRECIATIVE OF THAT.
UH, I, I THINK SOME OF THE FOLKS WE HEARD FROM WHO ARE CONCERNED, UH, WHO SPOKE THIS EVENING AND FROM WHOM WE'VE HEARD, UH, VIA EMAIL, I I JUST GET A SENSE THAT THERE'S A, A, A MISUNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAVE PARTISAN ELECTIONS AND THAT WE HAVE PRIMARIES IN THE CITY.
WE DON'T, FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR ANYONE WHO'S NOT AWARE OF THAT, WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE PARTISAN OFFICIALS.
THERE ARE NO DEMOCRATS, NO REPUBLICANS, NO INDEPENDENTS WHO SERVE.
WE DON'T HAVE A PRIMARY FOR ANY OF THE PARTIES.
IT IS A GENERAL ELECTION, AND THEN WE HAVE A RUNOFF.
UM, I, I DO BELIEVE THIS COULD BE MORE EFFICIENT, BUT, UM, TO STUART'S POINT, THE FACT THAT WE WOULD HAVE MORE PEOPLE, UH, INVOLVED IN THE DECISION OF WHO'S REPRESENTING THEM BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE NUMBER OF VOTERS WHO COME OUT THE FIRST TIME AND THE LOSS, UH, ON, ON THE RUNOFF, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
I THINK WE'LL HAVE MORE REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY.
[01:35:02]
MR. SIZ.RESPECTFULLY, JUST 'CAUSE THIS'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE RAISED MY HAND, AND COMMISSIONER LAMAER HAD IT UP FOR ABOUT FOUR TIMES.
I'LL LET HER GO FIRST, IF YOU DON'T MIND, MR. CHAIR.
I TRY TO TRY TO BE A GENTLEMAN.
YOUR MIC, YOUR MIC, MS. BALLESTER, YOU WANT MIC? I I SHOULD KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT, UH, FOR ME TO COME TO A CONCLUSION ON.
AND THEN ALSO FOR COUNCILMAN GRACIE.
UM, WE REALLY DO RESPECT THE WORK AND THE RESEARCH AND THE HARD WORK THAT YOU PUT INTO THIS.
AND I, I, I NOW THINK I COULD PROBABLY EXPLAIN IT TO SOMEONE STARTING IN OCTOBER.
UM, I, I WANNA ADD ONE THOUGHT TO THIS THAT, UH, THAT I DID TALK TO COUNCILMAN GRACIE ABOUT, THAT IF, IF THIS DOES FAIL TONIGHT, THAT WE AT LEAST ADD INTO OUR REPORT TO THE COUNCIL.
UM, AND MR. CHAIR, THIS WILL COME TO YOU.
I GUESS YOU'LL BE DOING THAT REPORT THAT YOU WOULD, UH, PERHAPS URGE THE COUNCIL TO LOOK AT IT AND PUT IT ON A TEXAS STATE LEGISLATURE, UH, DEBATE OR, YOU KNOW, A BILL LIST, SOMETHING THAT THEY COULD CONSIDER DOING.
'CAUSE AS YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, WE CANNOT IMPLEMENT RANK CHOICE VOTING.
BUT, UH, I, I, I'D LIKE TO KEEP THE CONVERSATION ALIVE.
AND I, IT DOES SEEM LIKE IT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT AND NOT JUST SAY NO.
UH, IF I CAN, I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF COMMISSIONER ENTENTE.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER, HELP ME ONE MORE TIME.
JUST IN THE MOST BASIC EXPLANATION.
UNDERSTAND, WERE I UNDER THE RANK CHOICE VOTING HYPOTHETICAL TO WALK INTO THE DALLAS MAYORAL 2019 RACE AND GO VOTE? UH, WHAT WOULD THAT HAVE LOOKED LIKE VERSUS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE IN 2019? YEAH, SO I PUT TOGETHER ON YOUR SLIDES, YOU HAVE AN ACTUAL BALLOT, UH, ON, UH, SLIDE SIX.
AND, UH, MR. ANDERSON, IF YOU WANNA PULL IT UP FOR THE SCREEN, UH, THIS IS WHAT ESSENTIALLY ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN 2019.
AND IN DALLAS, WE HAVE NOT ELECTED A MAYOR ON THE FIRST BALLOT, UH, IN AN OPEN MAYORAL ELECTION SINCE RON KIRK IN 1995.
SO WE'VE GONE FOUR MAYORS IN A ROW SINCE THEN THAT WE'VE ALWAYS HAD A RUNOFF.
SO THE ENTIRE CITY IS BURDENED WITH A RUNOFF IN 2019, UH, NINE PEOPLE, UH, INCLUDING ONE OF OUR ESTEEMED COLLEAGUES, UH, FILED FOR MAYOR, UH, I THINK ANYONE THAT HAS ANY SENSE OF HOW ELECTIONS WORK HERE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS KNEW THAT THAT ELECTION WAS GOING TO A RUNOFF.
UH, SO WE ALL WENT AND VOTED ON MAY 4TH, 2019.
YOU SELECTED YOUR FAVORITE CANDIDATE.
THE TWO WHO GOT THE MOST VOTES WOULD APPEAR ON A RUNOFF BALLOT JUNE 8TH, 2019.
AND WE ALL WENT AND VOTED AGAIN, UH, AMONGST THE TOP TWO VOTE GETTERS.
UH, IF YOU WANT TO GO TO NEXT SLIDE.
THIS IS WHAT THE BALLOT WOULD'VE LOOKED LIKE IN ON MAY 4TH, 2019.
IF WE HAD A RANK CHOICE VOTING SYSTEM IN DALLAS, VOTERS WOULD'VE GONE TO THE POLLS AND WOULD'VE HAD THE OPTION TO VOTE FOR UP TO FIVE OF THE NINE CANDIDATES IN PREFERENTIAL ORDER.
UH, AND THE COMPUTER WOULD HAVE, UH, COUNTED ALL THE FIRST CHOICE BALLOTS.
UH, WHAT WOULD'VE HAPPENED THEN IS THAT ALICE, ALLISON KENNEDY, UH, WAS THE LOWEST VOTE GETTER HER, SHE WOULD'VE BEEN ELIMINATED.
AND THE PEOPLE THAT, UH, HER VOTER SELECTED AS THEIR SECOND CHOICE WOULD'VE GOTTEN THOSE VOTES.
UH, THEN ALBERT BLACK WOULD'VE BEEN ELIMINATED.
AND THE PEOPLE THAT, UH, SELECTED HIM AS THEIR FIRST CHOICE, UH, THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT WOULD LOOK AT WHO THEY SELECTED AS THEIR, AS, UH, THEIR SECOND CHOICE.
AND THOSE VOTES WOULD'VE BEEN REDISTRIBUTED.
DO DO ME A FAVOR, REALLY QUICKLY, I JUST WANT TO, JUST TO CUT TO THE CHASE ON THIS.
IF I WOULD'VE WALKED IN ON MAY OF 2019, I DON'T CARE WHAT THE COMPUTER DOES.
IF I WOULD'VE WALKED IN, I WOULD'VE BEEN PRESENTED WITH A BALLOT THAT GAVE ME FIRST CHOICE TO FIT CHOICE.
AND I WOULD'VE GONE AND I WOULD'VE SELECTED WHO I WANTED AS MY FIRST CHOICE, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WHO I WANTED AS MY FIFTH CHOICE, WHICH WOULD'VE LEFT THEN, LET'S SAY 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, IF FOUR PEOPLE THAT I DID NOT VOTE FOR AT ALL.
THAT IS ALMOST EXACTLY HOW, UH, WE DID IT FOR MY STUDENT COUNCIL YEP.
AND WE, WE FIGURED OUT HOW TO DO IT.
IT'S FAIRLY SIMPLE AS A 12-YEAR-OLD.
WHO, WHO WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN YOUR FIRST CHOICE IN THE HYPOTHETICAL FOR RANK CHOICE VOTING IN 2019?
I, I, I, I THINK THERE WAS A, UH, YOUNG, HANDSOME MAN RUNNING, UH, I THINK HIS NAME WAS SOMETHING LIKE MIGUEL SOLI.
[01:40:01]
TO CLARIFY REALLY QUICKLY.SO THE, THE THING THAT I FEEL LIKE IS, HAS BEEN THE MOST COMPELLING TO ME ABOUT THE THIS SYSTEM IS THE NOTION THAT I COULD TELL YOU WHO I WANTED MY SECOND CHOICE TO BE.
IF I'D HAVE BEEN FORCED INTO, NOW THIS IS JUST THE HYPOTHETICAL PERSON WOULD'VE BEEN FORCED TO THEN HAVE TO GO INTO A RUNOFF AND HAVE TO SELECT BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE WHO HAD, I HAD NO INTENTION OF WANTING TO SUPPORT FROM THE VERY START, THEN MY SECOND CHOICE NEVER COUNTED THAT FIRST TIME.
'CAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE WHO MY SECOND CHOICE WOULD'VE BEEN.
TO SOME EXTENT, AND THIS IS PERHAPS A BIT CUTE, BUT IT'S A LITTLE ANTI-DEMOCRATIC TO FORCE SOMEBODY INTO A SCENARIO WHERE YOU'RE NOW ONLY HAVING TO VOTE FOR ONE OF TWO CANDIDATES WHO YOU HAVE NO INTEREST IN, IN, IN WHATSOEVER.
AND HYPOTHETICALLY, ONE MIGHT ASSUME GOING BACK IN TIME, THAT ONE OF THE REASONS WHY YOU SEE SUCH A LARGE DROP OFF IS BECAUSE YOU HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T LIKE CHOICE ONE OR CHOICE TWO IN THE RUNOFF.
SO THEY JUST DECIDED TO STAY HOME.
UH, I AM GONNA BE SUPPORTING A CONCEPT LIKE THIS EVEN IF YOU WEREN'T SUPPORTIVE OF THE, THE CONCEPT, UH, BECAUSE YOU STILL HAD GENERAL QUESTIONS AND MAYBE YOU COULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT OR MAYBE NOT.
THE CHARGE OF THIS COMMISSION IS TO SEND A SET OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL.
I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT ALL THE HARD WORK THAT WE PUT IN WILL BE RESPECTED BY THE COUNCIL, AND THEY WOULD JUST TAKE EVERYTHING WE DID AND DO EXACTLY WHAT WE'D LIKE THEM TO DO.
IF YOU FOLLOW 10 YEARS AGO, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY HOW IT WORKS.
I'D URGE YOU IF YOU ARE JUST ON THE FENCE, SEND THIS TO THE COUNCIL AND LET THE COUNCIL DEBATE THE CONCEPT.
'CAUSE I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF THEIR DEBATE.
IF FOR ANY OTHER REASON, IT GIVES THE CITIZEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND AND HAVE THEIR CHOICE RESPECTED IN A WAY THAT THE CURRENT SYSTEM DOESN'T.
UH, I GOT A QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSIONER.
IT'S, IT'S A LOT OF TIMES Y'ALL STATE THAT, UH, IT SAVES MONEY.
I DIDN'T KNOW ELECTIONS IS ABOUT SAVING MONEY.
I THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT GETTING THE BEST CANDIDATE.
DEMOCRACY IS NOT BUILT ON SAVING MONEY IN ELECTIONS.
WE LOST, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BALLOT BOXES, HOW MANY POLLING PLACES IN THE NAME OF SELLING, UH, SAVING MONEY.
AND IT WAS NOTHING BUT VOTER SUPPRESSION.
NOW, WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO RUNOFFS, I THINK WE GETTING THE BEST TWO CANDIDATES YOU GETTING.
UH, LIKE YOU SAY, MY NUMBER ONE MAY NOT BE YOUR NUMBER ONE.
I THINK COMMISSIONER, UH, SOLI, SO MENTIONED, WE GOT TWO PEOPLE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.
SO IT'S NOT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHO'S THE BEST MAN FOR THE JOB.
IT'S THE WHO'S THE BEST MAN FOR MY SITUATION.
SO WHEN IT COME DOWN TO GETTING PEOPLE TO THE POLLS, UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S THE CHARTER, UH, ANY OTHER LEGAL SYSTEM THAT WE GOT.
I THINK IT'S THE PEOPLE'S CHOICE WHETHER THEY WANT TO VOTE OR DON'T WANT TO VOTE.
WHEN PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA RAN FOR PRESIDENT, THEY RUN OUTTA BALLOTS AND CAUCAS AND EVERYTHING BECAUSE HE GAVE PEOPLE HOPE.
IT'S NOT MY FAULT THAT THE CANDIDATES CANNOT GET VOTERS TO THE POLL, BUT RANK CHOICE VOTING WILL CONFUSE PEOPLE.
UH, IT'S NOT ABOUT SAVING MONEY.
AND YOU CAN GET THE TWO WORST PEOPLE BECAUSE YOU MIGHT HAVE YOUR NUMBER ONE, AND IT'S 14 OF US UP HERE, 15 WITH THE CHAIRMAN.
IF WE ALL GOT DIFFERENT NUMBER ONES AND NUMBER TWOS AND NUMBER THREES, WE MIGHT NOT GET THE BEST PERSON FOR THE JOB OR WHO THE PEOPLE WANT.
SO I THINK WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO RANK CHARGE VOING OF VOTING, IT SOUNDS GOOD.
I MEAN, IT LOOKS GOOD ON PAPER.
I HATE TO BE IN OPPOSITION, BUT IT CONFUSES THE, THE VOTER.
AND I THINK THEY EXPRESSED THAT.
AND WE JUST SAID THAT SOMEBODY JUST MADE A STATEMENT SAY, UH, CHANGE IS GOOD.
WE DIDN'T CHANGE THE PARK BOARD.
I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION POSED.
[01:45:01]
WAS MAKING A STATEMENT.UM, UH, I WILL SAY I WILL BE SUPPORTING, UH, THIS AMENDMENT IF, IF FOR NO OTHER REASON.
I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION, UM, BY THE COUNCIL.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, THERE'S A FEAR OF CONFUSION THAT MAY HAPPEN IF THIS CHANGE WAS TO BE IMPLEMENTED.
BUT I WILL SUGGEST TO YOU THAT I BELIEVE THAT THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS ARE SMART.
I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO ADOPT TO.
AND I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THIS IS THE FUTURE.
THE DATA THAT I'VE SEEN IS SUPPORTS THAT EITHER BY DESIGN OR, UH, YOU KNOW, ACQUIESCENCE, THAT THIS HAS IMPACTED THE SOUTHERN SECTOR GOING OUT TO VOTE TWO TIMES WITHIN FIVE WEEKS.
AND I THINK THERE'S A REASON WHY.
I MEAN, THIS TYPE OF SYSTEM IS PRIMARILY IN THE, IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.
SO IF, IF WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHOOSE OUR FIRST CHOICE AND SECOND CHOICE AT ONE TIME, I THINK WE'LL COME UP WITH THE SAME OUTCOME.
IF WE HAVE TO GO BACK FIVE WEEKS FROM, FROM THE, UH, FROM WHENEVER THE, UH, INITIAL ELECTION WAS INTO THE RUNOFF, UM, I MEAN, I THINK IT'LL BE THE SAME.
I MEAN, I, I GET COMMISSIONER STING'S POINT, AND I THINK IT'S LEGITIMATE AND INVALID THAT, I MEAN, WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THINGS BASED ON COST AND COST SAVINGS.
UM, BUT I THINK THERE'S A REAL RISK.
WELL, THERE, THERE HAS BEEN A REAL RISK THAT'S BEEN, HAS MANIFESTED WHERE PEOPLE IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR HAS BEEN, UH, DISENFRANCHISED BASED ON THE DATA THAT I'VE REVIEWED.
AND SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I THINK IT DESERVES ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL.
I KNOW THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WILL BE IMMEDIATELY IMPLEMENTED BECAUSE THERE'S STATE LAW PRE PROHIBITION AGAINST IT.
BUT I THINK WE SHOULD CARRY ON THE CONVERSATION.
AND FOR THOSE REASONS, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT.
AND, AND I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT, UM, ANY ACTION, UM, TO INCLUDE THIS TONIGHT WOULD BE INCLUDING THIS WITH A TRIGGER CLAUSE IN THE CHARTER.
UM, AS IT'S BEEN REFERENCED, IT IS NOT LEGAL CURRENTLY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS TO IMPLEMENT RANK CHOICE VOTING.
SO, UM, IF THIS WERE TO BE PUT IN THE CHARTER, IT WOULD BE PUT IN WITH A TRIGGER CLAUSE.
THAT WOULD ONLY TAKE EFFECT SHOULD THE STATE LEGALIZE RANK CHOICE VOTING IN THE FUTURE.
UM, SO THAT IS, THAT IS WHAT'S BEING VOTED ON.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION BEFORE YOU HAVE A VOTE? UH, WE HAVE PENDING A MOTION TO INCLUDE, UH, AMENDMENT TWO.
UH, MS. BERNARDINO, HOW DID YOU VOTE? I'M SORRY.
SO THEN I COUNT SEVEN TO SEVEN.
IT'S A, UH, TIE VOTE, SEVEN TO SEVEN.
AND UNDER THE RULES, THAT MEANS IT FAILS TO CARRY, SO IT DOES NOT PASS.
UH, IT RELATES TO RAISING THE SALARY FROM MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAVE RECEIVED FOUR PROPOSALS ON THE TOPIC.
SO EACH SUBMITTER WILL HAVE, UH, THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON THEIR PROPOSAL.
WE'LL START WITH MR. KINGSTON AND THEN, UH, AND MR. UH, MINISTER ALEXANDER.
I THINK IT'S JUST MR. KINGSTON.
I DON'T SEE MINISTER ALEXANDER HERE.
AND THEN AFTER THAT WE'LL MOVE ON.
UH, I HAVE COMMISSIONER JI DON'T BELIEVE HE'S HERE.
AND CAMPBELL, UH, MR. KINGSTON.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME YET AGAIN.
UM, I HAVE WRITTEN YOU ALL EXTENSIVELY ABOUT MY PROPOSAL, SO I'M GOING TO ENDEAVOR NOT TO, UH, EXPEND A LOT OF BALLOON JUICE, UH, IN TRYING TO WIN YOUR VOTE.
YOU GUYS HAVE MADE UP YOUR MINDS.
I THINK IF I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT MAKE THINGS MORE CLEAR, I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT.
UH, ONE QUESTION I'VE BEEN ASKED MANY TIMES IS WHERE I CAME UP WITH 125, AND THE ANSWER IS, IT'S AN EDUCATED GUESS.
AND SO YOUR OPINION AND MY EDUCATION IS PROBABLY WHAT'S GOING TO CONVINCE YOU ON THAT.
BUT IT IS A NUMBER THAT IS DESIGNED TO GET GOOD CANDIDATES.
WHEN WE RAISED IT TO 60 IN 2014, THE POOL OF CANDIDATES IMPROVED SUBSTANTIALLY.
AND I THINK EVEN PEOPLE WHO WERE ELECTED BEFORE 2014 WOULD ADMIT THAT, UH, WE HAD NO WORKING PARENTS EXCEPT FOR SCOTT GRIGGS ON COUNCIL WHEN WE
[01:50:01]
RAISED THE SALARY.AND THEN WE ULTIMATELY GOT MANY MORE WORKING PARENTS.
AND I THINK THIS, A CITY THAT IS GOVERNED EXCLUSIVELY BY PEOPLE WHO ARE WEALTHY, RETIRED, OR IN OTHER WAYS, ABLE TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES IN A DIFFERENT WAY, IS PROBABLY NOT REFLECTING THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE VERY WELL.
UH, AND I I CAN CITE MANY INSTANCES OF THAT FROM THE SEVENTIES, EIGHTIES, AND NINETIES.
SO, UM, PLEASE ALSO, I'M HERE TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE PARK.
NO, I'M NOT, NO, NOT GONNA TALK ABOUT PARKS AT ALL.
THIS DOES NOT AFFECT PARKS IN ANY WAY.
I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR HAVING THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL THE SAME PAY.
WELL, THAT'S UP TO YOU, COUNSEL.
I INADVERTENTLY LEFT THE MAYOR OFF MY INITIAL PROPOSAL.
MY REAL PROPOSAL IS TO PAY THE MAYOR $200,000 A YEAR IN 2014 WHEN I SUGGESTED A SIMILAR RAISE, UH, UH, A PREVIOUS DALLAS MAYOR ASKED ME WHY THAT NUMBER.
AND I BELIEVE I MAY HAVE SAID SO THAT WE MIGHT GET SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T LOOK LIKE YOU.
MR. CHAIR, IF I CAN HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. KING.
MR. SISE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
COULD YOU JUST HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE TYING TO THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX VERSUS ANY OTHER MEASURE YOU COULD HAVE USED? THANK YOU.
CPI IS THE ACTUAL INFLATION RATE THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL FACE ONCE THEY TAKE OFFICE.
UM, TYING IT TO, UM, OTHER MEASURES COULD BE, COULD REFLECT INFLATION IN A WAY THAT IS, IS SUBJECT TO BEING WARPED.
AND THE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES I GAVE YOU IN THE WRITTEN MATERIALS REFLECT, UH, COUNTER ARGUMENT TO THE IDEA OF TYING IT TO AREA MEDIAN INCOME.
WAGES ARE, IN THE LAST 200 YEARS IN THE UNITED STATES, WAGES HAVE BEEN SUPPRESSED BY EMPLOYERS WHO HAVE MARKET POWER IN THE LABOR MARKET.
UM, WAGES ARE NOT GOING TO REFLECT THE VALUE OF WORK, AND I THINK EVERYBODY AGREES WITH THAT.
PEOPLE DON'T MAKE ENOUGH MONEY FOR THE WORK THAT THEY DO.
UH, IF YOU ARTIFICIALLY SUPPRESS COUNCIL WAGES THE SAME WAY THAT EMPLOYERS ARE ARTIFICIALLY SUPPRESSING THE WAGES OF WORKERS, I DON'T THINK THAT SERVES YOUR GOAL OF GETTING THE BEST PEOPLE FOR THE JOB.
BUT JUST TO BE EVEN MORE CLEAR AND PERHAPS, EXCUSE MY IGNORANCE, BUT JUST ELEMENTARY, GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF WHY CONS LIKE THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX ITSELF WOULD BE BETTER.
UM, CPI HAS BEEN SHOWN THROUGH BACKWARD LOOKING ECONOMIC RESEARCH FOR YEARS.
SO NOT PEOPLE PREDICTING THE FUTURE.
PEOPLE LOOKING BACKWARDS TO SAY THAT WHEN YOU TIE A MEASURE, WHAT THEY CALL IT, A BASKET OF GOODS, WHEN YOU MEASURE THEIR CHANGES IN PRICE OVER TIME, ONCE YOU GET TO ABOUT 10 OR 15 OF THOSE, AND THE CPI BASKET ACTUALLY CONTAINS HUNDREDS, UM, BECAUSE WE HAVE GOOD DATA NOW, UM, YOU GET A VERY ACCURATE REFLECTION OF THE ACTUAL ECONOMIC PRESSURE ON PEOPLE'S BUYING POWER.
UH, MR. KINGSTON, WHAT IS YOUR PROFESSION, IF YOU DON'T MIND ME ASKING? MY PROFESSION IS LAWYER, MR. STEIN.
UH, THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT YOU KNOW IN THE PAST, ARE THEY BEEN ATTORNEYS OR JUST REGULAR LABOR PEOPLE? UM, MANY OF THEM HAVE BEEN ATTORNEYS.
I WAS PRECEDED BY MS. HUNT, WHO IS AN ATTORNEY.
I SERVED WITH MR. MCGOO, WHO IS IN AN ATTORNEY.
UM, MANY OF US ON COUNSEL HAVE HELD LAW DEGREES, AND THAT'S VERY HELPFUL FOR UNDERSTANDING LEGAL ISSUES.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY HELPFUL FOR UNDERSTANDING PEOPLE'S, UH, KITCHEN TABLE ISSUES.
OH, THE REASON I ASKED THE QUESTION, BECAUSE WHEN YOU, UH, RAISE THE BAR OR THE, YOU KNOW, TO A HUNDRED AND THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS DON'T, DON'T GIVE, UH, YOU KNOW, BLUE COLLAR WORKERS A BETTER CHANCE AT WORKING ON A JOB LIKE CITY COUNCIL WHERE THEY COULD STILL PROVIDE AND HAVE A GOOD INCOME IN THEIR HOMES BECAUSE IT'S $60,000 A A YEAR, UH, TRYING TO SEND KIDS TO COLLEGE AND, YOU KNOW, CAR NOTE, HOUSE NOTE HOUSE AVERAGE HOUSE NOTE IS PROBABLY $2,000 OR CLOSE TO IT IN DALLAS.
SO WHEN THEY GIVE OPEN THE, BROADEN THE FIELD FOR PEOPLE THAT REALLY WANT TO LOOK OFF INTO CITY GOVERNMENT WHEN THEY GIVE THEM A BETTER, SAY EQUAL OPPORTUNITY.
[01:55:02]
UH, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT, MR. STEEN.AND I THINK THAT IF WE HAD, FOR INSTANCE, UH, UH, A, A LABOR POSITION, SOMEBODY WHO WORKED IN CONSTRUCTION OR IN MANUFACTURING AND WANTED TO BE A NEIGHBORHOOD LEADER FOR HIS OR HER NEIGHBORS, THAT'S SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA TO ME.
AND IF WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN ECONOMICALLY WITH THIS VERY SMALL EXPENDITURE COMPARED TO THE CITY BUDGET, I THINK WE WOULD BE WELL ADVISED TO DO SO.
BECAUSE I, I DO NOTICE THIS NOW WILL SPEAK FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTOR AS I SEEN IN THE PAST THAT WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS, UH, MAKING SO LESS MONEY, THEY SEEMS TO BE ENTICED.
SO I SAY WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION.
SO THAT'S WHY I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT.
I'M NOT TRYING TO ACCUSE THEM OF ANYTHING, BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU MAKE A GOOD INCOME, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU ARE LESS LIKELY TO BE CORRUPT OR ENTICED.
I THINK IT'S AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE.
I WOULD CAUTION THAT THERE'S A VERY FAMOUS EPISODE OF CORRUPTION HERE AT CITY HALL THAT INVOLVED A WHITE COUNCIL MEMBER WHO DID NOT HAVE THAT SAME ECONOMIC PRESSURE.
UH, BUT AS A PERSON WHO'S RECENTLY HAD TO TESTIFY IN A FEDERAL CRIMINAL TRIAL RELATED TO A COLLEAGUE, THEN I, I GUESS I DO AGREE WITH YOU IN SOME WAYS.
UM, DO YOU KNOW THE CURRENT SALARY FOR OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? IT'S 1 92 LAST YEAR, OR DID THEY RAISE IT AGAIN? I I'M CURIOUS.
I MEAN, I DON'T, THE, UH, OH, I THINK MR. CAMPBELL KNOWS IT.
OUR LOWEST PAID COUNTY COMMISSIONER IS, IS MS. GARCIA.
IT'S 1 76 AND 300 AND SOMETHING, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND ARE THERE OTHER COMPARISON, SORT OF ELECTED POSITIONS THAT YOU HAVE CONSIDERED OR LOOKED AT? SURE.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT FEDERAL ELECTED OFFICIALS, THEY ALL MAKE, UM, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF ONE 90 TO 200, UH, THE PRESIDENT MAKES, IS IT FOUR 50 NOW? 4 75, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, I WOULD ALSO LOOK AT IT THE OTHER WAY.
UH, COMMISSIONER MAGOO, UH, THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE MAKES $7,200 PER YEAR.
UM, AND I WOULD TAKE THE QUALITY OF REPRESENTATION WE'RE GETTING THERE AS INSTRUCTIVE ON THE ISSUE.
I'LL LEAVE THAT PART OF THE COMMENT ON, OH, SORRY, CHAIRMAN BAUGH
I'M, I GUESS LAST QUESTION IS, YOU, YOU, YOU DID A DECENT JOB OF EXPLAINING WHERE 1 25 CAME FROM, BUT I'M, I WANT TO, I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS ANALYSIS FOR A WHILE TOO.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT NUMBER IS.
UM, I BELIEVE IT'S MORE THAN WHAT IT IS AND I 1 25 IS GOOD AS ANYTHING ELSE.
BUT, UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER GUIDANCE OF YOUR RESEARCH ON THIS TOPIC SINCE YOU'VE SPENT AS MUCH AS ANYBODY? I, I KNOW ON IT THAT, I MEAN, ARE YOU STILL SATISFIED THAT THAT'S THE RIGHT NUMBER OR IS THERE I I, I AM NOT TIED TO THAT NUMBER.
UH, MR. MCGEE, I HAVE SEEN WHAT COUNSEL DOES WHEN IT IS GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO DEBATE A, UH, A SALARY INCREASE.
AND FRANKLY, I HAD TO HAVE MEDICATION AFTER THAT DEBATE.
UM, BUT THE, UH, SO WHAT I WANT TO DO IS SEND THEM A STRONG RECOMMENDATION FROM YOUR BODY, WHICH I DO BELIEVE THEY WILL LISTEN TO, TO SAY, TO RAISE IT, HOW MUCH IS ULTIMATELY UP TO THEM AND WHAT THEY THINK THEY CAN GET THE VOTERS TO APPROVE.
YEAH, THAT WAS MY NEXT POINT IS THAT'S, THAT'S THE REAL QUESTION, IS WHAT, WHAT DO WE BELIEVE THE CONSTITUENCY WILL SUPPORT? WELL, I'M AWARE OF A, A POTENTIAL AMENDMENT THAT I THINK MR. CAMPBELL MAY BE MAKING THAT WOULD TIE IT TO THAT NUMBER THAT YOU MENTIONED BEFORE, WHICH IS THE PAY OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, BUT AT A LOWER LEVEL.
AND THAT MIGHT BE A WAY TO EXPLAIN TO VOTERS WHY THIS ISN'T TOO MUCH MONEY.
UH, MR. CHAIR, I DID HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION.
I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT HAVING TO ASK IT EARLIER.
UH, MR. KINGSTON, I, I WANNA UNDERSTAND ALSO JUST IN THE VOTER, WOULD I PERHAPS WANNA UNDERSTAND THIS, SO TYING IT TO THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX OR WERE WE TO TIE IT TO THE, UH, THOUGH I REALIZE THIS'S NOT YOUR AMENDMENT, THE METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA OF THE MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME, BUT GIVEN YOUR EXPERIENCE ON COUNCIL AND WHEN YOU SET BUDGETS, UH, TWO QUESTIONS.
ONE OF 'EM IS EXTREMELY ELEMENTARY AND THE OTHER ONE IS JUST A, A BUREAUCRATIC PROCESS.
UH, THE ELEMENTARY ONE IS YOU CAN BE MAKING $125,000 A YEAR, ONE YEAR, THEN THERE IS A PROCESS YOU COULD BE MAKING THE NEXT YEAR LESS THAN $125,000 OR PERHAPS MORE
[02:00:01]
THAN 105, $25,000 A YEAR.IS THAT CORRECT? IN IT'S THEORETICALLY CORRECT AND PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE IMPOSSIBLE PRACTICALITY OF IT? WE HAVE NOT HAD NEGATIVE INFLATION IN MANY, MANY, MANY YEARS, AND NEVER MORE THAN A QUARTER OR TWO AT A TIME.
THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS, UH, THE, THE PROCESS IN WHICH IT, IT ULTIMATELY ENDS UP IMPACTING THE COUNCIL MEMBER IN THIS CASE, PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, GOING UP.
THE CITY HAS A SET OF BUDGET, AND THE CITY MANAGER ULTIMATELY IS THE ONE THAT DRIVES THE BUDGET AND RUNS THE ANALYSIS.
YOU KNOW, WHOEVER WITHIN THE CITY RUNS THE ANALYSIS.
AND THEN IT COMES TO THE COUNCIL.
AND THE COUNCIL HAS TO ESSENTIALLY RATIFY ITS INCREASE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
IS THAT YOU, HOW YOU THINK IT WOULD WORK? THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
AND YOU COULD FACE A SITUATION LIKE 2009 WHERE THE COUNCIL, UH, MIGHT BE VERY WISE IF THEY WERE BEING PAID $125,000 A YEAR TO ALL VOTE, TO BACK THAT DOWN FOR A YEAR TO SHARE THE PAIN WITH VOTERS WHEN THEY NEED TO CUT THE BUDGET BECAUSE OF AUSTERITY PROBLEMS. AND THAT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL.
THE COUNCIL CAN YEAR BY YEAR CONTROL THAT EXPENDITURE.
THERE WON'T BE SOMEBODY WHO HAS THE ABILITY TO SUE THE COUNCIL FOR NOT PAYING ITSELF THE FULL AMOUNT.
BUT THEORETICALLY, AND THIS IS PRACTICALLY HOW IT HAPPENS AT THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT, IS WHEN THERE IS A RAISE, THEY GO AND THEY TAKE A VOTE ON IT.
AND IF THEY DON'T WANT TO GIVE THEMSELVES THE RAISE AND THEY DON'T GIVE THEMSELVES THE RAISE, UH, OR WHEN THEY DO, THEY GIVE THEMSELVES THE RAISE.
IT'S JUST, IN THIS CASE, THERE IS INEVITABLY A CAP, WHICH AGAIN, IN YOUR, IN YOUR SPECIFIC EXAMPLE, WAS THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, WHICH IS NEVER GONNA BE, I WOULD THINK, RADICALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE 125,000 A YEAR NUMBER IS.
AND THAT'S THE, THE CHARTER IS VERY EXPLICIT ABOUT WANTING THIS TO BE THE DECISION OF THE VOTERS, WHICH IS WHY I'M HERE AND NOT BOTHERING COUNSEL ABOUT THIS.
IF I WERE, IF OUR, IF I THOUGHT THE COMMISSIONERS WERE UNDERPAID, I WOULD TELL THEM TO VOTE THEMSELVES A RAISE, WHICH THEY CAN DO WITHOUT GOING TO THE VOTERS.
SO WE ALSO HAVE, UM, COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL HAS AN AMENDMENT AND, AND ALSO, UH, COMMISSIONER YOUNG DOES, AND HE'S NOT HERE AS YOU KNOW, BUT HE DOES HAVE MATERIALS HE LEFT ON THE DESK IN FRONT OF YOU, IF YOU WANNA LOOK AT IT.
MR. CAMPBELL, IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE CHAIR, I WOULD ASK IF, UH, THE HONORABLE PHILIP KING KINGSTON CAN RETURN TO THE, UH, TABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
UH, SO I'M GOING TO BE MAKING AN AMENDMENT TO MY AMENDMENT, SO A MOTION TO AMEND MY AMENDMENT.
AND THAT MOTION WILL INCLUDE CHANGING THE LANGUAGE.
AND THIS IS, I'VE SPOKEN TO A FEW OF YOU ABOUT THIS, SO IT'S GONNA BE MAYBE COMPLICATED, BUT I THINK IN PRACTICE IT, IT'S GOOD TO GET THIS PASSED, CHANGING THE LANGUAGE OF MY CURRENT AMENDMENT TO TIE THE CITY COUNCIL SALARIES TO OUR LOWEST PAID, UH, DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSIONER, WHICH AS I'VE MENTIONED EARLIER TODAY IS, IS MS. GARCIA AT 1 76 AND TIE THAT TO TWO THIRDS.
SO NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT, BUT SEVEN OR BUT 66.7% OF THE LOWEST PAID DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSIONER RIGHT NOW THAT WOULD GET US AT $117,000, UH, IN SALARY.
AND SO, UH, MY MOTION IS GOING TO BE TO CHANGE MY AMENDMENT AS DRAFTED TO BE TIED TO TWO THIRDS OF OUR LOWEST PAID DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSIONER.
SECOND, UH, MR. STEIN, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? UH, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER GET A RAISE? WELL, IF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, UH, VOTED THEMSELVES TO HAVE A RAISE, THEN THAT WOULD ALSO IMPACT THE CITY.
IF MY AMENDMENT PASSES AND WERE ADOPTED BY THE VOTERS, AND THIS WAS LAW, THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAPPEN.
SO IT OUGHT, EVERY TIME THE COMMISSIONERS GET A RAISE, IT AUTOMATICALLY BUMP THE CITY COUNCIL UP.
IT WOULD, UH, BUT JUST AS SOME OF OUR COMMISSIONERS CURRENTLY DO, I'VE MENTIONED MS. GARCIA A FEW TIMES.
UH, SHE HAS ELECTED TO NOT TAKE HER OWN RAISE, EVEN THOUGH SHE'S VOTED IN FAVOR OF IT.
SHE'S JUST SAID SHE'S DECIDED SHE HAS, SHE DOESN'T WANNA TAKE THE OWN HER OWN RACE.
HOW MANY RAISED HAS SHE DONE? TEAR IT DOWN? I THINK FOUR.
I DON'T, I CAN'T SPEAK THAT EXACTLY, BUT IT'S BEEN A COUPLE.
SO WE, UH, OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS NOT HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE LEGALITY OF HAVING ANOTHER BODY, UM, YOU KNOW, EFFECTIVELY DICTATING, UH, THE SALARIES OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, UM, THAT THEY'VE ADVISED THAT IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO DO, UM, IT'D BE, IT'D BE GOOD TO HOLD THAT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING SO THAT, UM, THAT CAN BE EVALUATED.
[02:05:01]
UH, WHAT JAKE SAID, YOU KNOW, THIS IDEA WOULD ESSENTIALLY GIVE THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CONTROL OVER THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SALARY.SO WHEN THEY GIVE THEMSELVES A RAISE OVER AT THE COUNTY, THAT WOULD BE THEM GIVING THE COUNCIL A RAISE OVER HERE.
AND THE TWO BODIES ARE UNRELATED.
SO WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO THE LEGALITY OF THAT.
MAY I ASK WHERE THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE ILLEGAL OR UNLAWFUL? I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? WHERE COULD THAT POSSIBLY BE, UH, LEGAL OR UNLAWFUL? WELL, WE DON'T KNOW.
WE WOULD HAVE, SINCE THIS IS AN IDEA WE HAVEN'T CONTEMPLATED, WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT.
UH, MR. YEAH, I, I WAS, I WAS WITH YOU
UM, I THINK WE NEED TO PICK A NUMBER AND GO WITH THAT.
AND IF YOU WANT TO USE THAT AS A, AS HOW WE DETERMINE THE NUMBER, YOU KNOW, LIKE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANNA DO, THEN LET'S HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
BUT TO TURN THIS OVER TO, I, I, FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY WAY THAT THIS WOULD EVER PASS.
AND CERTAINLY THE, THE VOTERS, I CAN'T IMAGINE.
I, I JUST THINK THE, THERE'S SO MANY PROBLEMS WITH IT.
SO I'M, I I LOVE WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THE IDEA OF, OF FINDING AN INDEX OR A MEASURE THAT GOES WITH IT.
BUT, UH, PLEASE FIND
'CAUSE I THAT, THAT'LL, THAT'S A DEAL KILLER FOR ME.
MR. MASTER JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
I, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THIS HAS BEEN DONE, UH, AND DONE IN CALIFORNIA.
UH, AND THEY MOST COMMONLY USE NUMBER IS BY THE, WHAT WE WOULD CALL A DISTRICT STATE JUDGE, THAT WHATEVER THEY ARE PAID, THAT'S WHAT THE COUNCIL IS PAID.
AND IT, IT, I THINK YOU'LL FIND THAT IN THE RESEARCH THAT, UH, THAT IT HAS BEEN DONE IN, IN, UH, IN A NUMBER OF PLACES.
UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION IS AMENDED.
WHAT DO WE, WHAT DO WE, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESTATE, UH, YOUR MOTION THAT YOU AMENDED OR YOUR AMENDMENT RATHER? SURE.
UH, I'M JUST, JUST RESTATE MY MOTION TO AMEND MY MOTION.
TOO MANY INTERCHANGEABLE WORDS HERE.
SO IT WOULD BE TO TIE IT TO THE LOWEST PA TO TWO THIRDS OF THE LOWEST PAID COUNCIL.
DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S SALARY.
I JUST WANNA ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
SO WHEN I LOOK AT ITEM D, THERE ARE FOUR BULLETS THERE.
I JUST, UH, COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL WANT TO FIRST GET CLEAR ON WHICH OF THESE BULLETS IS YOUR PROPOSAL? WELL, THE, THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL THAT YOU NOW ARE MAKING AN AMENDMENT TO.
SO ON THE AGENDA IT WOULD BE AMENDMENT NUMBER 97, I'M NOT SURE.
SO MAYOR'S SALARY RAISED 140,000 A YEAR, AND COUNCIL MEMBER SALARY RAISED 125,000 A YEAR.
INDEX TO CONSUMER PRICE INDEX IS WHAT AMENDMENT 97 CURRENTLY STATES, UH, WITH ITEM D.
WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING NOW IS TO ESSENTIALLY SUBSTITUTE THAT LANGUAGE AND TIE, WHAT I THINK I UNDERSTAND WOULD BE THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S SALARY AND NOT THE MAYOR, BUT PERHAPS IT IS THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S SALARY.
SO IF YOU COULD CLARIFY THAT FOR ME, AND THEN IT'S TO ESSENTIALLY TIE IT TO WHAT YOU, UH, TO TIE IT TO THE LOWEST PAID COUNTY COMMISSIONER THAT'S, SO THIS MAYOR'S MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER, OR JUST COUNCIL MEMBERS? MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE.
MOTION DOES NOT CARRY, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I KNOW THIS IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE, BUT MAYBE MR. SOLIS WILL APPRECIATE THIS.
UH, IF WE WOULD CONSIDER TYING THE CITY COUNCIL SALARY TO THE, UH, SALARIES OF SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS.
WE ALL DESERVE TO SUFFER, DON'T WE? NOT JUST THE SCHOOL BOARD.
MR. MIGUEL, ARE YOU GONNA MAKE ANOTHER MOTION? NO, I JUST, I THINK IT'S STILL, BUT PLEASE.
[02:10:01]
HOPING YOU'D MAKE ANOTHER MOTION.UM, I WOULD MOVE TO INCLUDE WHAT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE AMENDMENT 97.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT SAYS, MAYOR SALLY RAISED TO ONE 40 YEAR COUNCIL MEMBERS RAISED TO 1 25 A YEAR INDEX TO CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.
THERE'S BEEN A SECOND ON THE MOTION DISCUSSION, MR. CAMPBELL.
SO OBVIOUSLY I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS ONE.
UH, BUT AGAIN, MY GOAL ON THIS IS JUST TO GET SOMETHING PASSED.
UH, NOW I'M SORRY, MR. CAMPBELL.
JUST ONE, ONE QUESTION FOR, UM, MR. MCGEE.
CAN WE CLARIFY IF THAT'S ON THE SWEARING IN, UH, BEGINS ON THE SWEARING IN 2025 AS IT WAS WRITTEN IN THE, UH, MEMO FROM THE CITY ATTORNEYS.
SO, UM, THE REASON I THREW THAT KIND OF THOUGHT EXPERIMENT OUT THERE AS A MOTION IS THAT I, I DO THINK IT NEEDS TO BE TIED TO SOMETHING.
AND MY GOAL IS, IS TO GET THIS DONE AS PASSABLE AS POSSIBLE.
IT PASSED BY A LITTLE, OVER A POINT AND A HALF IN 2014.
AND SO WHAT I, I HOPE THAT WE CAN ENCOURAGE CITY COUNCIL ONCE IT GOES FROM THIS BODY, WHICH I HOPE IT DOES TO CITY COUNCIL, UH, TO BE CREATIVE IN THE WAY THEY, THEY ADOPT THIS, WHICH I, I, AGAIN, I HOPE THEY DO AND I THINK THEY WILL.
BUT I THINK THE LANGUAGE OF HOW IT ENDS UP BEING ON THE BALLOT IS VERY IMPORTANT.
UM, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT TO, THOUGH.
I WOULD LIKE IT TO PASS BY 1.6 LIKE IT DID IN 2014.
HOPEFULLY YOU'D BE A, A WIDER MARGIN THAN A A PERCENT AND A HALF.
AND SO, AGAIN, MY GOAL HERE WAS JUST TO TRY TO GET ANYTHING PASSED IF POSSIBLE, THAT WAY WE CAN GET IT TO CITY COUNCIL AND DO SOME NEGOTIATIONS AT THAT LEVEL.
AND, AND AGAIN, TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER COMES OUT OF THIS BODY AND WHATEVER COMES OUT OF CITY COUNCIL IS PASSABLE AND WILL SUCCEED IN NOVEMBER.
MS. HUNT? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
UM, HAVING SERVED ON THE COUNCIL AS A WORKING PARENT, AND AT THAT TIME, I THINK WE MADE 37,500.
UM, SOME OF THE HEARTBURN I HAVE OVER THIS PROPOSAL AND SOME OF THE OTHERS ORIGINALLY WAS SOMETHING I LIKED.
AND, AND NOW I'VE, I'VE COME TO HAVE RESERVATIONS.
AND THE REASON I HAVE RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE INDEXING IS BECAUSE SALARIES FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR COULD INCREASE IN A SAME YEAR WHEN THE EMPLOYEES HERE AT CITY HALL DON'T GET ANY RAISES.
AND THAT, AND THAT'S TROUBLING TO ME, AND I DON'T FEEL LIKE THAT SENDS THE RIGHT MESSAGE TO THE FOLKS WHO WORK HERE THAT WE'RE ALL IN THIS BOAT.
UM, AND I, I RECOGNIZE THAT WE ONLY GET ONCE EVERY 10 YEARS TO ADDRESS THIS.
AND SO I, I, I UNDERSTAND THE PRACTICAL REASON FOR IT, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S MY HEARTBURN.
I I AM CONCERNED THAT IT DOESN'T SEND THE RIGHT MESSAGE, UM, TO THE FOLKS WHO DO ALL THE WORK, UH, UP HERE IN THIS BUILDING.
I, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, HAVING A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHY WE WOULD TIE IT TO THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, I THINK MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
UM, THE REASON WHY THIS ONE IS A LITTLE MORE COMPELLING TO ME THAN THE, THE ONE WHERE JUST 120 5K ACROSS ALL POSITIONS IS JUST, I MEAN, THE, IF DONE WELL, UH, THE MAYOR'S ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES, UH, I THINK CAN EXCEED WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT FROM A SINGLE COUNCIL MEMBER.
AGAIN, IF DONE WELL, THERE ARE TIMES WHERE IT'S NOT DONE WELL, AND YOU'D WANNA GIVE SOMEBODY A DECREASE IN SALARY, BUT DIFFERENTIATING, I THINK, MAKES A LITTLE MORE SENSE TO ME.
UH, TO COMMISSIONER HUNT'S POINT, I ACTUALLY HAD BEEN THINKING ABOUT THE POINT THAT YOU MADE, UM, BUT THEN ALSO THOUGHT ABOUT IF I KNEW AS A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT I WAS POSSIBLY UP FOR A SALARY INCREASE BASED ON WHAT THE CPI SAYS.
IT GETS BACK TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I WAS ASKING, UH, THE HONORABLE PHILIP KINGSTON, COULD YOU DEFER, UH, THROUGH A SIMPLE, UH, DECLINE OF THAT EARMARK WITHIN THE BUDGET? BECAUSE THAT COULD BE ONE WAY TO APPROACH IT.
THE OTHER ONE IS, IT'S A CONSISTENT REMINDER TO COMMISSIONERS, TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT
[02:15:01]
YOU'RE ABOUT TO GET A RAISE.AND WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THAT YOU THOUGHT ABOUT GIVING A RAISE TO YOUR CITY STAFF? BECAUSE AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS, POSSIBLY, OF GETTING A SLIGHT RAISE WITH YOUR CP WITH THE, THE TIDE OF THE CPI, YOU'RE GONNA BE, I THINK YOU'LL BE THINKING ABOUT THAT QUITE A BIT, AND YOU MAY BE HEARING ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
SO, TO, SO I, I'M OF THE OPINION THAT IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY A GREAT BEHAVIORAL THEORY NUDGE TO GET COUNCIL MEMBERS TO BE CONSIDERING THE SALARY OF LINE WORKERS AT, UM, CITY HALL AND ACROSS THE CITY, UH, FAIRLY CONSISTENTLY.
WITH THAT, UH, I THINK I'LL BE SUPPORTING, UH, THIS AMENDMENT.
AND IF IT DOESN'T PASS, I WOULD ASK US TO CONSIDER, UH, AMENDMENT SEVEN, WHICH ALSO IS TIED TO THE CPI.
UH, I WILL BE SUPPORTING AMENDMENT 97.
UH, I THINK THE COUNCIL IS DUE FOR A RAISE TO HELP PEOPLE RUN FOR COUNCIL THAT DON'T COME FROM WEALTHY BACKGROUNDS.
I THINK THE RAISE TO 60,000 WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL AT GETTING DIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE TO RUN AND HOLD OFFICE ON COUNCIL.
I THINK A FURTHER RAISE CAN ONLY, UH, SERVE TO CONTINUE THAT PROGRESS.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER LISA LEMASTER HAS WORKED ON THIS ISSUE A LOT OVER THE DECADES, AND WE OWE HER A LOT.
UNFORTUNATELY, COMMISSIONER YOUNG, UH, ISN'T ABLE TO BE WITH US TONIGHT, BUT THE PRESENTATION HE GAVE IN THE, THE FALL WAS A VERY EYE-OPENING, UH, EXPERIENCE IN TERMS OF THE NEED TO CONTINUE LOOKING AT RAISING SALARIES, I'LL BE VOTING TO INCLUDE PRETTY MUCH ANY AMENDMENT IN D UNTIL WE HIT AN ANSWER.
UM, AND I REALLY HOPE WE DO PASS SOMETHING, EVEN IF IT'S NOT 97.
UH, I WILL BE SUPPORTING, UH, AMENDMENT 97 IF YOU DO THE QUICK MATH, WHICH I JUST DID.
AND YOU ASSUME A 3% INCREASE THE 140,000 GOES TO 164,000 IN FIVE YEARS, JUST MATHEMATICALLY.
UM, THE OTHER POINT IS, COULD WE, COULD THIS BE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST, 2025? OR DOES IT NEED TO BE TIED TO ELECTION YEAR? UH, UH, I'M SORRY.
SO THE FIRST TIME THAT IT'S IMPLEMENTED, YES.
UM, IT'S WRITTEN, SO IT WOULD BE, UM, IT, IT WOULD COME INTO PLAY ONCE SOMEBODY WAS ELECTED TO THE OFFICE.
SO THE NEXT ELECTION WOULD BE IN MAY OF 2025.
UM, WITH THE IDEA OF, OF THEM WE'RE STARTING TO RECEIVE THE SALARY ONCE THEY'RE ELECTED TO THE OFFICE, WHEN EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT THEIR SALARY WOULD BE, MS. LEMASTER, I TOO, AM GONNA SUPPORT THIS MEASURE.
I WANTED TO BE SURE WE COME OUT WITH SOMETHING, UH, ON SALARIES.
I ALSO PLEDGE TO CAMPAIGN FOR IT, AND I HOPE ALL OF US WILL, IF THIS INDEED GETS TO THE BALLOT, BECAUSE IT'S HARD FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO GO OUT THERE AND SAY, HEY, GIMME A RAISE.
UH, FINALLY, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY IF THE LANGUAGE IN THE BALLOT, IF THE BALLOT LANGUAGE COULD HAVE THE OPTION IN THERE ABOUT THEY WOULD GET THE RAISE BASED ON CPI, BUT IF THEY, UNLESS THEY DECIDED NOT TO, I MEAN, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO, I MEAN, THE BAD NEWS ABOUT THAT IS IT LEAVES THE SALARY DECISION UP TO THE COUNCIL AS OPPOSED TO AUTOMATICALLY TIED TO SOMETHING.
SO YOU GET A VOTE LIKE THEY HAD IN AUSTIN, AUSTIN VOTES, YOU KNOW, 50% PAY RAISE, AND THAT'S NOT GOOD.
BUT I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT OUR BALLOT LANGUAGE OPTIONS MIGHT BE.
WELL, I, I HAVE AT LEAST A PARTIAL ANSWER, COMMISSIONER.
UM, WHEN IT COMES TO THE SALARIES FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS BEING SPELLED OUT IN THE CHARTER, THE CITY WOULD HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO EVERY YEAR PAY THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT SALARY.
THE COUNCIL WOULDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY UNLESS WE SPECIFICALLY WROTE IT IN WHICH WE COULD TO SAY, THIS IS THEIR SALARIES.
UNLESS THE CITY COUNCIL PUT IT TO A VOTE AND THEY VOTED FOR SOMETHING LESS, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE COULD WRITE INTO THE CHARTER.
IT'S JUST, IT JUST HASN'T BEEN ONE OF THE PROPOSALS.
JUST TO CONFIRM WITH THE CITY ATTORNEYS, IS THAT WHY THE 2014 BALLOT MEASURE INCLUDED THE SECTION ABOUT MAYORAL PAY? BECAUSE MAYOR RAWLINGS PROACTIVELY DECLINED THE PAY INCREASE? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? SO, IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE 2014, UH, COUNCIL PAY INCREASE, IT WAS CLEAR THAT IT WOULD NOT IMPACT THE CURRENT MAYOR, AND THAT WAS WRITTEN INTO IT.
I'M ASSUMING THAT'S BECAUSE MAYOR RAWLINGS WAS PROACTIVE ABOUT MAKING SURE HE DID NOT RECEIVE A PAY INCREASE AND WITHOUT THAT PROACTIVITY FROM A SITTING MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL, THEREFORE, THAT TRIGGERS WHAT YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT.
[02:20:01]
I DON'T THINK THAT WAS REALLY RELATED TO WHAT I, I JUST ANSWERED FOR COMMISSIONER LEMASTER, BUT, UM, BACK IN 2014, I DON I DON'T THINK THAT'S GERMANE.LET'S, I DON'T THINK THAT'S GERMANE TO WHAT, WHAT WAS PRESENTED.
SO WE, IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION BEFORE WE HAVE A VOTE ON THE MOTION TO INCLUDE? CAN I JUST CLARIFY, UH, A RESPONSE I GAVE TO MR. MILLS? UM, I, I USED THE TERM ELECTED IN MAY, 2025.
UM, IT REALLY WOULDN'T TAKE EFFECT UNTIL THEY WERE INAUGURATED IN 2025, UM, WHEN THEY ACTUALLY TAKE OFFICE.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION BEFORE WE HAVE A VOTE ON THE MOTION TO INCLUDE? ALRIGHT, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO INCLUDE, AYE AYE.
SO, NA UH, SO THE MOTION CARRIES.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER MOTIONS? I ASSUME NOT, BUT ANY OTHER MOTIONS RELATIVE TO THIS AGENDA ITEM? ALRIGHT, SO NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS E UM, IS SUBMITTED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER MAGO AND WOULD CREATE AN OPTION FOR THE EXPANSION OF BENEFITS THAT ARE ALLOWED BY STATE LAW TO MEMBERS AND CITY COUNCIL.
UH, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'LL, I'LL DO MY BEST ON THIS ONE TOO.
I, AS YOU IF, IF, IF EVERYBODY COULD LOOK OR HAS LOOKED AT THIS, THE LANGUAGE PROPOSED BY THE CITY ATTORNEYS, IT QUITE SIMPLY IS CHANGING THE WORD FROM COMPENSATION TO SALARY.
UM, THAT HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY LEGAL COUNSEL AS RESTRICTIVE IN THE PAST AS IT RELATES TO ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS BEING ABLE TO, UM, PARTICIPATE IN ANY SORT OF THE PENSION, EVEN THOSE THAT WERE ALREADY VESTED AS EMPLOYEES PRIOR TO COMING TO WORK AT CITY COUNCIL.
AND SO THIS JUST AS BEST I CAN EXPLAIN IT, IT JUST SIMPLY, UM, IS A CLARIFICATION OF, OF THE PREVIOUSLY USED WORD SALARY.
I MEAN, PREVIOUSLY USED WORD COMPENSATION TO MAKE IT SALARY, AND SO THE LANGUAGE ADDED, THE MAYOR AND EACH MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ALSO RECEIVE BENEFITS FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AS PERMITTED BY STATE AND FEDERAL LAW AND ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL THROUGH RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE.
THAT'S THE MAIN ADDED LANGUAGE HERE.
AND, UM, I, I BELIEVE IT ADDRESSES A NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT THE PENSION COUNCIL USED TO HAVE FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT HAD ALREADY VESTED IN THE CITY PENSION THAT WERE NOW ON COUNCIL.
THERE WERE SEVERAL OF US THAT HAVE BEEN IN THAT SITUATION, AND AT LEAST LETS YOU GET TIME SERVED.
UM, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S MORE ACCURATE THAN OTHERWISE, UM, FOR THOSE THAT ARE IN THAT, IN THAT POSITION.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD, WOULD CLARIFY.
I'M THE CHAIR RIGHT NOW,
UH, JUST TO BE CLEAR, SO HAVE WE MADE A, HAS A MOTION BEEN MADE? I MAY HAVE MISSED IT.
I, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO INCLUDE AND I'LL SECOND I GOT A QUESTION.
IT'S, AND NOT NECESSARILY, IT'S REALLY, IT'S NOT A QUESTION, IT'S A BASIC STATEMENT.
WE HA WE HAVE TO STOP DEPROFESSIONALIZING WHAT IS, UH, A PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO DO VERY IMPORTANT WORK.
AND THE NOTION THAT WE WOULD NOT RESPECT IT THE SAME WAY THAT WE WOULD RESPECT, UH, IN, IN, IN CASES THAT I, I THINK, UH, ARE GREAT EXAMPLES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN REFERRED.
AND YOU REFERRED TO EARLIER, MR. CHAIR, YOUR SERVICE AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T TAKE AN ELEVATED POSITION AND MAKE DECISIONS FOR THE ENTIRE CITY, BUT NOT ALLOW THAT THING TO QUALIFY THE SAME WAY THAT IT QUALIFIED WHEN YOU WERE A CITY STAFF MEMBER.
UH, DOESN'T, IT'S NEVER SAT WELL WITH ME.
AND I THINK THAT IT, WE'D BE RIGHT TO, TO CONSIDER THIS.
I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE SHOULD TRY TO PROFESSIONALIZE THE CITY COUNCIL, UM, AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
MR. FUENTE, I THINK OPTICS AND PERCEPTION MATTER, UH, WITH THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING.
UM, I WAS OBVIOUSLY A YES ON D I'LL BE VOTING NO ON E MY WORRY IS THAT AS WE LOOK TO SELL WHAT WE ARE PASSING TO VOTERS INTO COUNCIL, WE ARE GONNA HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE ARE GONNA TALK ABOUT HOW WE WANT TO RAISE COUNCIL SALARIES AND HOW WE WANT TO GIVE COUNCIL PENSION.
AND IT'S BASICALLY GONNA BE A BUNCH OF THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO SELL TO VOTERS THAT
[02:25:01]
PUTS MORE MONEY IN COUNCIL MEMBERS' POCKETS.AND WE'RE NOT REALLY DOING A LOT FOR RESIDENTS, UH, IN A LOT OF THE CHANGES THAT WE'RE DOING.
SO I DO WORRY ABOUT THE PERCEPTION OF SOME OF THE WORK THAT WE'RE GONNA BE PUTTING TOGETHER IN THIS PACKAGE.
IF SO MANY OF THE AMENDMENTS ARE RELATED TOWARDS COUNSEL COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS, I THINK THE SALARY PIECE WAS MUCH MORE IMPORTANT.
UH, I'M NOT REALLY SOLD ON THIS PIECE, SO I'LL BE VOTING.
MR. STEIN, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
WILL THIS, IT'S KIND OF HAVING AN OVERTONE, ARE THEY STILL PLAN COMMISSION? ARE THEY BECOMING EMPLOYEES? IS YOUR QUESTION DIRECTED TO MR. MCGILL? UM, I I THINK YOU'RE REFERENCING IT.
THERE'S A WHOLE NOTHER AMENDMENT THAT TALKS ABOUT SOME SORT OF PAY FOR PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
IT'S NOT THE PLANNING COMMISSION? NO, SIR.
UH, AND WE DO HAVE A MOTION PENDING THAT WAS, UH, A MOTION TO INCLUDE, RIGHT? IT'S BEEN SECONDED.
UH, THIS WOULD ALLOW THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION TO RECEIVE 25,000 PER YEAR FOR THE SERVICE ON THE COMMISSION.
IT WAS SUBMITTED BY MR. KINGSTON.
UH, MR. KINGSTON, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES ON THIS.
UM, I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO TALK WITH YOU ALL ABOUT THIS.
I GAVE YOU A VERY SHORT EXPLANATION OF IT IN MY EMAILS TO YOU.
UH, SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW THAT I'M MARRIED TO A CITY PLAN COMMISSIONER, AND SO I HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND I DON'T CARE.
AND I WILL CERTAINLY SPEND THAT $25,000 ON GOOD STUFF.
UM, THE, UH, THE, THE POINT HERE THOUGH IS REALLY THAT THE, UH, AMOUNT OF WORK THAT IS REQUIRED OF A PLAN COMMISSIONER CAN EXCEED A HUNDRED HOURS A MONTH SOMETIMES.
UM, MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND YOU CAN TALK TO 'EM ABOUT THIS, THIS IS NOT A SECRET, HAVE HAD STRUGGLES FINDING PEOPLE FROM THEIR DISTRICTS WHO ARE CAPABLE OF SERVING NOT INTELLECTUALLY CAPABLE, FINANCIALLY CAPABLE AND TIME RESOURCE CAPABLE.
UH, AND SO WHAT YOU'VE WOUND UP WITH IS A CITY PLAN COMMISSION THAT, AS OF TODAY IS MORE THAN A QUARTER REPRESENTED BY PEOPLE FROM DISTRICT 14.
UM, BUT I, I FIND IT INCREDIBLY HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THERE AREN'T BRILLIANT PEOPLE IN EACH DISTRICT OF THIS CITY WHO COULD SERVE ABLY ON THE PLAN COMMISSION.
BUT FOR INSTANCE, ONE OF THE PLAN COMMISSIONERS WHO REPRESENTS DISTRICT THREE, IS FORCED TO TAKE PERSONAL TIME OFF.
HE'S A CITY EMPLOYEE AND THIS CITY IS BURNING HIS VACATION SO THAT HE CAN BE A PLAN COMMISSIONER.
THAT'S AN INCREDIBLE SACRIFICE.
AND IT'S, IT'S, HE'S NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO IS FORCED TO TAKE PTO IN ORDER TO SERVE ON THE PLAN COMMISSION.
IT'S NOT JUST THE CITY OF DALLAS THAT HAS CREATED THIS PROBLEM, BUT THIS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN IN THE CITY, IS FINDING PEOPLE ON THE PLAN COMMISSION WHO CAN AFFORD TO DO THE GREAT JOB THAT THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT THEM TO DO.
AND THIS IS A VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY TO HOPEFULLY, UH, CORRECT THAT.
UH, IS THERE A MOTION, MR. CHAIR? CAN I ASK, UH, MR. KINGSTON JUST A QUESTION OR TWO? UM, SO YOU, SO A CITY EMPLOYEE CAN SERVE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION? UH, I, I ASSUME SO BECAUSE ONE IS OKAY,
IT'S, UH, I THINK WHEN YOU PAY SOMEBODY COMPENSATION, YOU CAN HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE.
UH, AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT AND IT'S A LOT OF TIME.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR MOTION MR. STEIN? WELL, BACK TO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION ABOUT THIS.
ARE THEY GOING TO BE EMPLOYEES? ARE THEY GOING TO BE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS? THEY'LL BE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, MR. STEIN, BUT THEY'LL BE PARTIALLY COMPENSATED FOR THEIR TIME AT A VERY LOW RATE.
I MIGHT, I MIGHT ADD, IF THEY ARE SPENDING AS MANY HOURS AS THE, AS YOU CAN PROVE THAT THEY ARE BY WATCHING THE MEETINGS, YOU CAN, YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH TIME THEY SPEND JUST IN THE MEETING,
[02:30:01]
NOT INCLUDING ANY PREPARATION TIME THAT THEY'RE DOING.SO THE MONEY THAT THEY WILL RECEIVE WILL COME ON A W2, JUST LIKE COUNCIL MEMBERS SALARY COMES ON A W2, BUT I DON'T THINK ANY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER COULD BE ACCUSED OF BEING A CITY EMPLOYEE AND NOT A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO WILL THEY BE FILING INCOME TAX ON THIS MONEY? INDEED.
SO WOULD THEY BE ELIGIBLE FOR, SINCE THEY'RE MAKING SO LOW, WILL THEY MAKE THEM ELIGIBLE FOR THE DRAW UNEMPLOYMENT? UH, NO, SIR.
THEY ALL HAVE OTHER SOURCES OF INCOME.
NEIL EMMONS MIGHT NOT, I'M NOT SURE HE'S QUITE OPEN.
I'M JUST WONDERING, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY, UH, WHEN THEY LOSE THEY POSITION OF, OF WHEN THE COUNCILMAN ELECTION AND HE BRING IN A NEW ONE, DOES THAT MAKE THEM UNEMPLOYED? THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO SEE.
COULD THEY FILE WITH TWC FOR UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS? RIGHT.
BECAUSE THEIR JOB HAS ENDED AND THEY WAS MAKING 25,000.
UH, BUT THAT'S REALLY A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY AND IT'S, I I, I WILL ADMIT TO YOU, IT'S SOMETHING I HAD NOT THOUGHT OF OF RIGHT.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE 25,000.
I JUST WANNA KNOW WHAT, YOU KNOW, RAMIFICATION COULD COME DOWN THE ROAD, YOU KNOW, IF I'M A PLAN COMMISSION AND I, YOU KNOW, MY TERM IS UP, I MIGHT WANT TO DRAW UNEMPLOYMENT OR ANYTHING, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? ALRIGHT, MR. MADANO, I, I WOULDN'T, I MEAN, I'M NOT, I'M NOT GONNA SAY I'M TOTALLY AGAINST IT, BUT I DON'T SEE WHY YOU WOULD PAY ONE COMMISSION, NOT PARKS OR OTHERS.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S, I'M JUST TRYING TO BE FAIR THERE.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU WOULD PAY OTHER COMMISSIONS THAT I THINK THEY SPEND MY, NOT, PROBABLY NOT AS MUCH TIME AS CPC, BUT IT'S STILL A LOT OF TIME EVERY, EVERYBODY'S COMMISSIONED AND THEY'RE ALL VOLUNTEERS.
SO IF YOU'RE GONNA PAY ONE SET OF VOLUNTEERS, THEN YOU SHOULD PAY.
UM, EVERYONE MAY, MAY I RESPOND BRIEFLY, MR. MADANO? YES.
UM, I WAS TRYING TO BRING UP THE ONE THAT NEEDS IT THE WORST FIRST, UH, WITH THE IDEA THAT IT'S PROBABLY SELLABLE TO THE VOTERS.
AND IF I AM LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE BACK WITH YOU 10 YEARS FROM NOW, I'LL PROBABLY BE BRINGING FORWARD SOME MORE COMMISSIONS.
UH, AND THANK YOU, MR. KINGSTON.
UH, FOR ALL OF THE POINTS THAT YOU'VE BROUGHT BEFORE US, I, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS.
AND IN PART, BECAUSE OF WHAT OUR VICE CHAIR POINTED OUT, UM, OTHER COMMISSIONERS ON OTHER BOARDS DO PUT A GREAT DEAL OF TIME IN IT.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO START PARSING THAT OUT AND FIGURING OUT WHO SHOULD GET PAID AND WHO NOT.
UM, I, I'M ALSO TAKING COMMISSIONER DEL FUENTES POINT EARLIER TO HEART ABOUT HOW THIS LOOKS WHEN WE PRESENT THIS TO VOTERS AND MR. CHAIR, WHEN WE CONSIDER THIS, UM, THE BODY OF ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS TOGETHER.
AND, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I WILL HAVE AN EYE TO IS THINKING ABOUT HOW VOTERS WILL VIEW THAT ENTIRE SET.
UM, IF WE'VE PUT TOO MANY BEFORE THEM, IF IT, SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I'LL BE THINKING OF.
UM, ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE HERE IS THIS IS, UM, CURRENTLY A VOLUNTEER POSITION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
RIGHT NOW IT'S MY ASSESSMENT, HAVING BEEN A COUNCIL MEMBER AND ALSO, UH, IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR THAT OUR PLAN COMMISSION GENERALLY, UM, NOT ALWAYS, BUT IS, IS IN LARGE PART INDEPENDENT OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
THEY'RE OFTEN IN ALIGNMENT, BUT NOT ALWAYS.
UH, AND I, I APPRECIATE THAT AND I APPRECIATE THEIR, UM, INDEPENDENCE.
I WORRY THOUGH, IF A COUNCIL MEMBER HAS THE ABILITY TO ESSENTIALLY FIRE SOMEONE, TAKE AWAY THEIR SALARY, TAKE AWAY $25,000, UM, I WORRY THAT THAT WOULD PUT AN UNDUE INFLUENCE ON THE COMMISSIONERS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE NOW TO BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THEIR COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO I, I WILL WITH RESPECT, NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS.
I WAS, UM, WHEN I FIRST SAW IT AND WENT THROUGH THE ANALYSIS, I WAS TOTALLY AGAINST IT.
AND THEN AS I'VE, I MEAN, YOU CAN'T LOOK AT WHAT OUR COMMISSIONERS SACRIFICE AND GIVE AND WATCH THESE MEETINGS THAT GO TILL AS LATE AS COUNCIL MEETINGS AND SOMETIMES LONGER AND NOT RECOGNIZE THERE'S
[02:35:01]
A NEED FOR SOME ADDITIONAL RECOGNITION.AND MAYBE IT'S IN COMPENSATION, UM, BUT AS JUST PROCESSING THIS OUT LOUD, YOU KNOW, WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE HERE AND NOT THE OTHERS? AND, YOU KNOW, THE POINT COMMISSIONER HUNT BRINGS UP WITH, NOW, NOW YOU'RE TAKING RESOURCES FROM SOMEONE WHEN YOU CHANGE A POSITION OR SOMETHING.
IT, IT, THE COMPLEXITIES THAT IT ADDS.
I GUESS I'M JUST NOT READY TO JUMP ON BOARD YET, SO I WON'T, WON'T BE SUPPORTING THAT.
DO WE, UM, I JUST, JUST WANTED TO PUT ON THE RECORD THAT, I MEAN, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING, UH, THIS AMENDMENT, UH, NOT FOR THE REASON.
I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S DESERVING, ACTUALLY.
I THINK 25,000 IS WAY LOW FOR THE EFFORTS THAT THE CPC ACTUALLY PUTS IN.
I MEAN, THEY PUT IN A LOT OF WORK FOR WHAT THEY DO.
IT IS VERY IMPORTANT, UH, TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
UH, BUT FOR ALL OF THE REASONS THAT HAVE BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WHERE DO WE STOP? I MEAN, THERE ARE OTHER COMMISSIONS WHERE COMMISSIONERS PUT IN A LOT OF TIME AND WORK SO THAT WE HAVE TO BE, I THINK WE WOULD ONLY BE EQUITABLE IF THEY WERE COMPENSATED AS WELL.
AND NOT KNOWING WHAT THE CITY BUDGET IS AND WHAT THE IMPACT OF THE CITY BUDGET WILL BE IF WE GAVE THEM THE AMOUNT, THE COMMENSURATE OF WHAT THEIR EFFORTS ARE.
UM, I CANNOT SUPPORT, UH, THIS AMENDMENT, BUT, BUT POINTS WELL TAKEN AND I THINK THEY DESERVE SOMETHING, BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS, UH, THE WAY TO GO.
UH, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION TO EXCLUDE.
ANY DISCUSSION? THERE'S A MOTION TO EXCLUDE THIS AMENDMENT.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE, SAY AYE.
COMMISSIONERS, JUST KIND OF FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ON WHERE WE ARE, WHERE WE NEED TO BE, WE'RE ABOUT TO BE ON AGENDA ITEM G, AND THAT'S NOT EVEN HALFWAY THROUGH OUR AGENDA FOR THE NIGHT.
I'D PROPOSE THAT WE PUSH FORWARD UNTIL ABOUT NINE 30 AND THEN, UH, TALK ABOUT HAVING AN ADDITIONAL MEETING ADDED TO WHERE WE CAN HOPEFULLY KNOCK OUT THE REMAINING ITEMS. IS THAT, I'M GETTING A LOT OF NODS, SO.
WELL, LET'S, LET'S, LET'S GO IN THAT DIRECTION.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE AGENDA ITEM G.
NOW, UH, THAT WOULD GIVE CITY COUNCIL THE ABILITY TO CONFIRM THE HIRING OF DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS MADE BY THE CITY MANAGER.
THIS AMENDMENT SUBMITTED BY MINISTER DO ALEXANDER DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER.
UM, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MOVE TO EXCLUDE SECOND.
AGENDA, ITEM H UH, RELATES TO THE HIRING OF THE CHIEFS OF POLICE AND FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENTS.
UH, ONE PROPOSAL SUGGESTS THAT THE CITY MANAGERS APPOINTMENTS BE CONFIRMED BY CITY COUNCIL.
WHILE THE OTHER PROPOSAL, UH, SUGGESTS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAVE THE POWER TO APPOINT AND REMOVE EACH POSITION, THESE AMENDMENTS WERE SUBMITTED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER MCGOO AND MINISTER DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER.
UH, WE'LL START WITH YOU, SIR.
THIS ONE CAME OUT OF ANOTHER ORIGINAL AMENDMENT.
UM, AND YEAH, DON'T FEEL HUGELY STRONG, STRONG ABOUT THIS ON EITHER SIDE.
AS, AS YOU THINK ABOUT IT, YOU WANT THE, IN OUR CURRENT CITY MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT, YOU WANT THE CITY MANAGER TO HAVE AUTHORITY TO HIRE AND FIRE.
THE RECOGNITION HERE WAS THAT THESE POSITIONS, OUR FIRE CHIEF AND OUR POLICE CHIEF ARE MORE DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO OUR, OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR COUNCIL IN VERY SIGNIFICANT WAYS.
AND RECOGNIZING THAT THERE COULD BE THE OPPORTUNITY.
YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY THE CITY MANAGER IN THE PAST FEW HAVE CREATED SOME DEGREE OF A COMMUNITY, UM, VETTING.
THERE'S AT LEAST SOME MEETINGS AND SOME INTRODUCTION.
UM, BUT THERE HASN'T BEEN DIRECT, UM, YOU KNOW, INPUT FROM COUNCIL.
AND I THINK THIS WOULD AT LEAST ALLOW THERE TO BE A, NOT ALLOW, THERE WOULD REQUIRE THERE TO BE SOME COMMUNICATION WITH COUNSEL AS TO WHO THE RIGHT PEOPLE ARE FOR THESE INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT POSITIONS.
AND SO IT'S NOT TAKING THE AUTHORITY AWAY AS IT RELATES TO
[02:40:01]
THE APPOINTMENT, BUT IT DOES GIVE A CHECK ON THAT, UM, THOSE APPOINTMENTS TO MAKE SURE THERE'S SOME MEANINGFUL DIALOGUE SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE ARE ISSUES, THEY'RE UP BEFORE.UM, WE HAVE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE HAD.
SO, UM, I, I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AMENDMENT AS IT RELATES TO 1 0 8.
AND WE, WE ALSO HAVE THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE HERE.
IF Y'ALL, IF YOU COME UP, I MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
AGAIN, MY NAME'S JOHN FORTUNE.
AND, UM, SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE ASKING ME FOR SOME INPUT FROM A PERSPECTIVE FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, I CAN PROVIDE THAT.
UM, I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS SELECTION OF POLICE CHIEFS FOR AND FIRE CHIEFS FOR ALMOST 20, 20 PLUS YEARS.
AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT, UM, THIS COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, EXCUSE ME, UH, COMMITTEE MEMBER MEU, UM, HAD REFERENCED IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT UP FRONT.
AND SO THAT'S ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE WILL BE SOMETHING THAT'S A PRIORITY FOR CITY MANAGEMENT TO GET, NOT JUST THE COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO THE COUNCIL AND OTHER STAKEHOLDER INPUT ON THE SELECTION OF THE NEXT CHIEF.
AND WE'VE TRIED TO STRUCTURE PROCESSES IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.
UM, AS REGARDING THE, THE ACTUAL DECISION TO APPOINT THE CHIEF BY THE CITY COUNCIL, I CAN TELL YOU THAT FUNDAMENTALLY, AND I THINK THE CITY MANAGER'S PROVIDED YOU A RESPONSE IN HIS POSITION ABOUT THIS, IT FUNDAMENTALLY TAKES AWAY THE, THE ABILITY FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO MAINTAIN CONTROL AND OVERSIGHT FOR THE, THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE POLICE AND FIRE CHIEF TO THE CITY MANAGER UNDER THE CITY MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT THAT'S KIND OF PREDICATED ON THE FACT AND HAVING PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE WORKING WITH THE CHIEFS AND SUPPORTING THEM, THAT, UM, HAVING THEM, THEIR REACTION TO A POLITICAL, UM, INTEREST BY A PARTICULAR COUNCIL MEMBER COULD PUT THEM IN A POTENTIAL CONFLICT FOR HOW THEY ALLOCATE THEIR RESOURCES AND ADDRESS THE, THE NEEDS FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.
AND SO, I I, I BELIEVE MAINTAINING THE, THE SEPARATION OF THE POLICE CHIEF AND THE FIRE CHIEF OUT OF THE POLITICAL APPOINTMENT PROCESS WOULD CERTAINLY BENEFIT THE CITY FROM A CITY MANAGER'S PERSPECTIVE.
AND SO, AGAIN, I'M JUST PROVIDING YOU MY INPUT BASED ON YOUR REQUEST.
I, I JUST WANNA USE THIS, UM, OPPORTUNITY TO THANK YOU MR. FORTUNE FOR NOT ONLY YOUR SERVICE, BUT, UM, JUST THE PROFESSIONAL WAY THAT YOU HANDLE ALL SORTS OF SITUATIONS AND INCREDIBLY, UM, RESPECTFUL OF YOUR WORK AND YOUR TIME.
AND, UM, I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH THE SECOND PART OF THAT STATEMENT.
AND, AND THAT WOULD BE REFERENCED INTO AMENDMENT 12.
AND SO, JUST AS A CLARIFICATION POINT, THE, THE ONLY SENTENCE, THE PORTION OF THE SENTENCE THAT WOULD BE ADDED IS AT LEAST UNDER THE AMENDMENT THAT I'M SUPPORTING, SAYS THE CHIEF OF POLICE SHALL BE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER.
AND THE ONLY PART THAT'S DIFFERENT IS SUBJECT TO CONFIRMATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO IT'S JUST A CONFIRMATION PROCESS THAT I'M SUGGESTING BE, UM, BE ADDED.
THAT'S, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I WOULD MOVE THAT WE IN INCLUDE THAT PORTION SPECIFICALLY REFERENCED WHO? SECOND.
I THOUGHT I HAD, UH, OH, I'M SORRY.
I WANTED TO MAKE A MOTION, BUT I THINK YOU ACKNOWLEDGED HIM FIRST.
I WAS GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO EXCLUDE WHAT? BUT I THINK HE'S ALREADY MADE A MOTION.
HE'S MADE A MOTION TO INCLUDE WELL, I'M, I WAS GONNA MAKE ONE TO EXCLUDE, SO BE BECAUSE HE MADE HIS MOTION FIRST.
UH, THIS IS HIS IS ON THE TABLE? YES, SIR.
AND THERE'S A SECOND BY MR. MR. CAMPBELL.
UH, IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, UH, AND ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
YOUR HAND RAISES YOU RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE AN AYE.
MR. STEIN, DID YOU STILL WANNA MAKE A MOTION? YOU'RE GOOD? I CAN MAKE A MOTION FOR NUMBER 12.
THAT WAS ONE THAT WAS, THAT WAS 1 0 8, RIGHT? MCG YOU 1 0 8.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO EXCLUDE AMENDMENT 12.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
[02:45:01]
AYE.WE HAVE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE WHO'VE STAYED LATE WITH US HERE.
I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO AGENDA ITEMS THAT I BELIEVE THEY'RE HERE ON.
UH, ONE OF YOU HERE ON AGENDA ITEM J.
UH, WE'LL, WE'LL CALL THAT ONE.
UH, AGENDA ITEM J WAS SUBMITTED BY MINISTER DOMI DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER AND WOULD REQUIRED THAT THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT AND THE COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD REPORT DIRECTLY TO CITY COUNCIL RATHER THAN THE CITY MANAGER.
UH, THIS WAS HELD FROM OUR LAST MEETING ON MARCH 4TH.
UH, MINISTER ALEXANDER'S NOT HERE, UH, BUT SIR, IF YOU WANTED TO SPEAK, YOU CAN COME UP.
UH, I THINK YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ON IT.
RIGHT? MR. CHAIRMAN, HOW MUCH TIME DO I HAVE? THREE MINUTES.
UH, CHAIRMAN VAUGHT COMMISSION MEMBERS, UH, MY NAME IS BRANDON FRIEDMAN AND I'M HERE TO COMMENT ON AMENDMENT 1 0 1, WHICH WOULD HAVE THE CITY'S DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT REPORT DIRECTLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL INSTEAD OF TO THE CITY MANAGER.
TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BACKGROUND, UH, LIVED IN DALLAS FOR A TOTAL OF 12 YEARS, CURRENTLY REPRESENT DISTRICT 14 ON THE COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD.
UH, I STARTED MY CAREER IN PUBLIC SERVICE 24 YEARS AGO AS AN ARMY OFFICER IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.
AFTER THAT, UH, I STUDIED, UH, IN GRAD SCHOOL HERE, UH, AND WAS MENTORED BY SEVERAL, THE DISTINGUISHED CITY MANAGERS TO INCLUDE FORMER DALLAS CITY MANAGER TED BENAVIDES.
I LATER MOVED TO WASHINGTON AND SERVED AS A WHITE HOUSE APPOINTEE, UH, FIRST AT THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, THEN AS THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS AT HUD.
SO, WHILE I WORK IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR NOW, UH, I'M NOT NEW TO PUBLIC SERVICE.
I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME.
AND GOOD GOVERNANCE IS A PASSION OF MINE, AND THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TONIGHT.
AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, UH, THERE'S BEEN A GOOD BIT OF CHAOS SURROUNDING THE CITY'S POLICE OVERSIGHT OFFICE SINCE LAST SUMMER.
UH, THAT'S WHY THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT HAS COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION.
I WON'T REHASH THE DETAILS, BUT SUFFICE IT TO SAY THE ENTIRE EPISODE HAS REAFFIRMED FOR ME AN IDEA THAT I'VE LONG HELD, WHICH IS THAT THERE IS AN INHERENT CONFLICT PRESENT WHEN THE CITY MANAGER CAN HIRE, SUPERVISE, AND FIRE THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR DAY-TO-DAY.
POLICE OVERSIGHT OVERSIGHT OFFICES SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT, MUCH LIKE AN INSPECTOR GENERAL.
FURTHER, THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT IS NOT ONE THAT PROVIDES CITY SERVICES LIKE SANITATION, STREET REPAIR, OR PERMITTING.
THIS IS AN OFFICE THAT OVERSEES A CITY SERVICE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT, THEREFORE SHOULD FALL DIRECTLY UNDER THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO I'M HERE TO ENCOURAGE THAT.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CITY CHARTER SHIFT SUPERVISION OF THE OFFICE DIRECTLY TO THE COUNCIL, SPECIFICALLY BY MAKING THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT A CITY COUNCIL HIRE NOT A CITY MANAGER HIRE, JUST AS THE POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD IS APPOINTED BY AND WORKS DIRECTLY FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO SHOULD THE CITY'S POLICE MONITOR THIS WOULD MAKE OVERSIGHT SEAMLESS AND REMOVE THE MAJORITY OF CONFLICTS THAT MAY ARISE BETWEEN THE BOARD, THE OFFICE, AND THE CITY.
THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, MEMBERS OF MR. FREEMAN AND I WERE IN A ROCK AT THE SAME TIME, AND I'VE KNOWN HIM FOR A LONG, LONG TIME, OVER 20 YEARS, AND, UH, THINK VERY HIGHLY OF WHAT HE HAS TO SAY.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, TALKING WITH US MR. CAMPBELL.
UM, FIRST OFF, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY IN THE MILITARY, BUT ALSO IN YOUR OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AND YOUR DEDICATION TO THE CI CITIZENS OF DALLAS.
UH, THROUGH YOUR SERVICE ON THE OVERSIGHT BOARD, CAN YOU KIND OF DESCRIBE TO US A SHORT SUMMARY OF WHAT'S HAPPENED? YOU MENTIONED SOME CHAOS AT, AT THE OVERSIGHT BOARD AND IN THE OFFICE IN THE LAST SIX TO 10 MONTHS.
CAN YOU GIVE US A SHORT SYNOPSIS OF WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE REF, UH, REFERRING TO MR. CAMPBELL? I WILL DO MY BEST TO MAKE IT SHORT.
UM, THERE WAS A LOT THAT HAPPENED.
UM, AS YOU MAY RECALL, THERE WAS, UH, AN INCIDENT, UH, WITH DALLAS POLICE OFFICERS REGARDING A MAN NAMED DONELLE LANE, WHO'S AN AFGHANISTAN VETERAN.
UM, AND HE WAS FORCED TO SOIL HIMSELF.
UM, IN DEEP EL ONE EVENING HE RAISED A COMPLAINT ABOUT THE POLICE, UM, AND IT BECAME A VIRAL NEWS STORY IN THE, IN THE WAKE OF THAT, IN THE DIRECTOR OF POLICE OVERSIGHT FOR THE CITY, UH, WAS REMOVED.
UH, THE CHIEF INVESTIGATOR WAS ALSO REMOVED.
THE POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD WAS NEVER TOLD.
WOULD YOU JUST, UH, SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO YOUR MIC? IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO HEAR YOU UP HERE.
[02:50:02]
THE, THE DIRECTOR OF POLICE OVERSIGHT AND THE, UH, CHIEF INVESTIGATOR WERE BOTH REMOVED FROM THEIR POSITIONS.THE BOARD WAS NEVER TOLD WHY THIS HAPPENED.
UM, AND, UM, A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS OCCURRED THAT, THAT WERE NOT GREAT, UM, POSITIONS WEREN'T FILLED.
UM, WE'VE HAD AN INTERIM DIRECTOR, UM, THAT HAS CREATED A, A SITUATION WHERE WE'VE NOT SEEN AS MANY CASES THAT WE'VE HAD TO INVESTIGATE.
UM, AND THEN SEVERAL WEEKS AGO, UH, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, UM, HAD AN OPINION THAT WOULD'VE REMOVED THE INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT ABILITY OF THE BOARD, UM, WHICH GOT A LOT OF, UM, UH, BOARD MEMBERS UP IN ARMS OVER IT.
UM, SO THERE'S BEEN A LOT GOING ON.
UM, AND, UM, I I, I'M HERE SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, I KNOW SPEAK FOR THE BOARD, UM, BUT THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONFLICT BETWEEN THE BOARD AND THE CITY OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.
AND MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THAT A LOT OF THAT WOULD BE ALLEVIATED, UM, IF THIS OVER, IF THIS, UM, OVERSIGHT POSITION WERE UNDER THE, THE JURISDICTION OF THE, THE CITY COUNCIL AND NOT THE CITY MANAGER.
THERE IS, I DO BELIEVE A CONFLICT THERE.
MR. MILLS, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE QUESTION.
DO YOU THINK THIS IS BECAUSE OF WHO THIS CITY MANAGER IS AND SINCE WE'RE GETTING A NEW CITY MANAGER? OR DO YOU THINK REGARDLESS OF WHO THE INDIVIDUAL IS, I MEAN, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT FOR ME? YEAH, I, I, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT'S JUST BECAUSE IT'S THIS CITY MANAGER.
UM, I, I THINK THAT BECAUSE THIS IS, UM, THIS IS NOT A POSITION THAT PROVIDES CITY SERVICES, LIKE I MENTIONED, SANITATION, PERMITTING, WHATEVER.
THIS IS A POSITION THAT HAS OVERSIGHT OF A CITY SERVICE PUBLIC SAFETY.
THEREFORE, I THINK THAT THIS IS A MATTER MORE FOR THE COUNCIL TO ENSURE THAT THE PERSON LEADING, THAT SOMEONE THE COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE WITH, AND THAT IT IS NOT, UM, UH, GIVEN JUST TO THE CITY MANAGER TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
GOT A QUESTION IF YOU COULD EVER GET TO ME AGAIN, MR. STEVEN.
UH, I TALKED TO SOME MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I NEVER MET YOU BEFORE, AND I TALKED TO, UH, POLICE OFFICERS, UH, AND I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT MOVING THE OVERSIGHT OF THE, THE BOARD UNDER THE CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO GET YOU WHAT YOU WANT.
'CAUSE I HAVE BEEN, IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED TO, EXPLAINED TO ME THAT THE PROBLEM IS INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND THAT IT'S LIKE THEY RUNNING INTERFERENCE WITH THE BOARD.
UH, I, I CAN'T SPEAK IN GENERAL ABOUT WHETHER INTERNAL AFFAIRS IS RUNNING INTERFERENCE, BUT I WILL SAY THAT THE PROCESS THAT I SAW FIRSTHAND WITH THE DILL LANE CASE, UH, IT SEEMED THAT INTERNAL AFFAIRS WAS TAKING AN AWFULLY LONG TIME TO GET THAT DONE.
WHEN IT, WHEN ANYBODY WHO WATCHED THAT VIDEO AND SAW WHAT HAPPENED COULD SEE THAT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE TAKEN, UH, YOU KNOW, 10 MONTHS TO RESOLVE.
SO YOU THINK THAT BEING UNDER THE CITY COUNCIL INSTEAD OF THE CITY MANAGER, IS IT GONNA GET YOU TO TEACH OR GET YOU TO I OPEN UP DOORS THAT YOU'VE BEEN SLAMMED IN YOUR FACE? THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY.
I, I THINK TAKING THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT OUT FROM UNDER THE CITY MANAGER AND GIVING THAT POSITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD PUT US IN A BETTER POSITION THAN HAVING HE OR SHE UNDER THE CITY MANAGER.
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER FRIEDMAN.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT.
UM, I DO THINK THAT WE HAVE A STRUCTURAL PROBLEM HERE.
I DON'T THINK IT IS, UM, JUST ONE OF THIS CITY MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATION.
I THINK IT'S A STRUCTURAL ISSUE.
WE'VE BEEN TALKING A LOT ABOUT CHECKS AND BALANCES.
ONE OF THE THINGS I'M MOST PROUD OF IS OUR DISCUSSIONS ON HOW WE CAN ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, AND CHECKS AND BALANCES.
AND A NUMBER OF OUR AMENDMENTS RELATE TO THAT, BUT A WHOLE BUNCH OF 'EM ARE INSIDE BASEBALL.
UM, THIS IS ONE THAT COULD ACTUALLY IMPACT OUR CITIZENS IN A VERY POSITIVE WAY BY CREATING SOME CHECKS AND BALANCES.
UM, I, I AGREE WITH YOUR POINT THAT IT, IT DOESN'T,
[02:55:01]
YOU DON'T REALLY GET CHECKS AND BALANCES WHEN THE SAME PERSON WHO IS, UH, APPOINTING THE POLICE CHIEF IS ALSO OVER THE COMMUNITY POLICE, UM, UH, COMMISSION.SO, UM, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
MR. MIGUEL, YOU, UM, COULD MR. FORTUNE? YES, SIR.
SORT OF A BROAD QUESTION, BUT COULD YOU JUST PLEASE SHARE THE POSITION FROM CITY MANAGEMENT AS IT RELATES TO THIS ITEM? YES, THANK YOU.
AND I, I AGREE WITH THE COMMISSIONER AND THE COUNCIL POLICE OVERSIGHT IS, IS A VERY IMPORTANT AND NECESSARY FUNCTION FOR, UM, THE CREDIBILITY FOR OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.
UM, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT, UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO CONSIDER TO BE ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF WHAT WE DO IN OUR COMMUNITY FROM POLICING THE ORDINANCE AS IT SPEAKS RIGHT NOW, CREATED THE POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD BY APPOINTMENT BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS MAKE THEIR ACTUAL APPOINTMENTS TO THE, THE COMMITTEE, THE POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD, UM, THE BOARD FUNCTIONS AS AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PER THEIR CHARTER TO PROVIDE ANNUAL REPORTS AND REPORTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEES.
UM, THEY'RE, UM, ALSO AN ADVISORY TO THE, THE POLICE CHIEF.
AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT, UM, I KNOW, UH, VERY INTIMATELY ABOUT THE MR. LANE INVESTIGATION THAT WAS REFERRED TO.
AND I WOULD SAY THIS IS AN INSTANCE IN WHERE THE OVERSIGHT WORKED.
UM, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, UM, HAS THE CHIEF HIMSELF HAS, HAS SENT COMMUNICATION INDICATING THAT, UM, THEY MISSED AN IMPORTANT STEP IN THE EARLY PART OF THAT INVESTIGATION.
AND IT WAS BECAUSE IT WENT TO THE OVERSIGHT THAT THAT INVESTIGATION CONTINUED OR WAS INITIATED.
AND SO I WOULD SAY, UM, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, HAVING HAD A LITTLE BIT OF, OF INVOLVEMENT IN HOW THE STRUCTURE WAS CREATED, UM, THE IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS PARTICULAR PROCESS IS THE FACT THAT THE, UM, THE CHARTER, EXCUSE ME, THE ORDINANCE THAT CREATED POLICE OVERSIGHT CREATED A POLICE MONITOR POSITION.
THAT POLICE MONITOR HAS FULL ACCESS TO THE INTAKE PART OF A POLICE COMPLAINT ON FROM AN EXTERNAL COMPLAINANT.
UM, THEY HAVE ACCESS TO OBSERVE AND WATCH THE, UM, INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION.
UM, SHOULD THERE BE A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE POLICE MONITOR AND THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION ON WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN? THAT'S WHEN THE PARTICULAR MATTER CAN BE ELEVATED TO THE BOARD.
UM, AND THERE COULD BE AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION CONCLUDED.
I WON'T SPEAK INTO WHAT HAPPENED OR DIDN'T HAPPEN IN TERMS OF HOW THE BOARD MIGHT HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATED TO.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT I HAVE SPOKEN, AND I'M AWARE THAT THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER, KIMBERLY TOLBERT, HAS COMMUNICATED TO ME AND OTHERS THAT, UM, RESOLVING AND COMING TO SOME CONCLUSIONS ABOUT HOW WE OPERATE BETTER AND BE MORE SUPPORTIVE FOR THE BOARD IS GOING TO BE A VERY HIGH PRIORITY FOR HER, UM, IN HER TERM AS THE CITY MANAGER.
AND SO, HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS.
I JUST, THAT'S AGAIN, MY PERSPECTIVE FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S.
UM, POINT OF VIEW FOLLOW UP QUESTION WOULD JUST BE, UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE, I'VE, SINCE WE HAD THIS LAST DISCUSSION, I'VE KIND OF THOUGHT ABOUT IT ON BOTH SIDES.
AND, YOU KNOW, ALSO BEING INTIMATELY INVOLVED IN THE CREATION OF THIS OR ORDINANCE AND HOW IT WAS INTENDED TO BEGIN WITH, KIND OF SAY, DOES IT, DOES IT HELP, DOES IT NOT? AND THE THING THAT COMES TO MIND IS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
SO A LOT OF THE, THE SORT OF BUY-IN THAT TOOK PLACE THAT GOT US TO THE PLACE WHERE WE CREATED THIS BOARD TO BEGIN WITH, I'M AFRAID OF THAT ERODING.
AND SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, AS YOU THINK THROUGH THIS, ARE THERE CONSEQUENCES INTENDED OR UNINTENDED THAT POTENTIALLY COULD ACTUALLY MAKE THE, THE BOARD LESS EFFECTIVE EITHER AS IT RELATES TO PARTICIPATION OR THOSE KIND OF ISSUES? WELL, I, I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S, UNDER THE CURRENT STRUCTURE, AND Y'ALL HAD SOME VOTES ON THIS THIS EVENING, THE, THE SINGLE PERSON IN THIS ORGANIZATION WHO CAN DIRECT THE POLICE CHIEF TO MAKE CHANGES TO PROCEDURES, PROCESS AND, AND OUTCOMES FOR PARTICULAR INVESTIGATIONS IS A CITY MANAGER.
AND SO I BELIEVE THAT HAVING THE POLICE MONITOR ALSO REPORT TO THE CITY MANAGER.
IT ALLOWS A MANAGER TO, TO BE THE SINGLE PERSON WHO IS RESPONSIVE AND ENSURING AND ACCOUNTABLE, IF YOU WILL, FOR THE, THE, THE, THE ACTIVITIES OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT I KNOW THAT THERE WAS, UM,
[03:00:01]
UM, A LOT OF DISCUSSION AROUND THAT DURING THE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORDINANCE.I KNOW YOU MENTIONED YOUR INVOLVEMENT.
AND SO I WOULD, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT WOULD BE THE KEY THING THAT I WOULD POINT OUT TO YOU AT THIS TIME.
AND IF, AND IF IT REPORTED DIRECTLY TO COUNSEL, I MEAN, DOES THE COUNCIL THEN START LOOKING AT OVERSIGHT OF THAT MONITOR AND START ANALYZING, I MEAN, SPECIFIC COMPLAINTS? I MEAN, DO WE COME ALMOST QUASI-JUDICIAL IN THAT PART? OR I, I GUESS I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THAT YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEYS.
I, I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO THEM IN THAT, THAT REGARD.
UH, ACTUALLY, I THINK WE DO HAVE SOME INPUT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON, ON SOMETHING REGARDING THIS, DON'T WE? YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT, UM, EARLIER TODAY AND I, UM, DISTRIBUTED YOUR PACKET, UM, AT YOUR SEAT TONIGHT.
UM, WE TOOK ANOTHER LOOK AT THIS AGENDA ITEM AND WE REMOVED ANY REFERENCE OF THE BOARD BECAUSE THE, THE ASK ON THIS ITEM IS THAT WE REQUIRE THE, UM, OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT AND THE COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD TO REPORT DIRECTLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND THE BOARD ALREADY REPORTS DIRECTLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
EACH MEMBER IS APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
UM, AND THAT'S WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS IN CHAPTER 37 OF THE CITY CODE.
UH, MR. FRANKLIN, UH, MR. CHAIR, I, I THANK YOU.
I I DO HAVE A QUESTION, UH, REGARDING THE ORDINANCE.
YOU, YOU, YOU SPOKE ABOUT THE POSITION OF THE MONITOR, AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THE, THE DUTY OF THE, OF THE MONITOR AND WHAT THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO.
SO, SIR, ARE YOU REPRESENTING THAT IF INTERNAL AFFAIRS DECIDES NOT TO INVESTIGATE A PARTICULAR COMPLAINT, THE MONITOR WOULD BE FULLY IN INFORMED OF THAT AND KNOW THE REASONS WHY THAT THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DID NOT GO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN INVESTIGATION OF A COMPLAINT THAT THE, THAT IT'S BEEN RECEIVED? YEAH, SO, SO THE, THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS THAT THE POLICE MONITOR AND THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS INVEST, UH, DEPARTMENT DIVISION, UM, THEY PROVIDE JOINT INTAKE FOR EXTERNAL COMPLAINTS.
SO PEOPLE CAN COME TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, UH, RESIDENTS CAN COME TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND MAKE A COMPLAINT AGAINST THE POLICE OFFICER, AND THEY CAN GO DIRECTLY TO THE MONITOR IF THEY CHOOSE, UM, OR THE POLICE OFFICE OF POLICE OVERSIGHT.
THOSE HAVE TO BE DISCUSSED JOINTLY TO DETERMINE WHAT THE OUTCOME IS GONNA BE FOR OR NOT THE OUTCOME, THE NEXT STEPS FOR THOSE, THOSE PARTICULAR CASES.
SOMETIMES THROUGH THAT INTAKE PROCESS, IT'S DETERMINED THAT SOMEBODY'S COMPLAINING ABOUT A POLICE OFFICER THAT'S ACTUALLY A MEMBER OF THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
SO IT WOULDN'T FALL WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY TO ACTUALLY INVE OR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ACTUALLY INVESTIGATE THAT.
SO THE PROCESS STARTS THERE, IT GOES INTO THAT PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIVE STATUS.
UM, THEN THERE'S A DECISION MADE ABOUT, UM, SHOULD IT GO TO, UM, INTERNAL AFFAIRS FOR INVESTIGATION OR SHOULD IT POSSIBLY GO TO PUBLIC INTEGRITY? MAYBE THERE'S A CRIMINAL ACTION OR CRIMINAL NEXUS INVOLVED IN THAT PARTICULAR, UM, COMPLAINT.
AND SO IT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED AS A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, EXTERNAL COMPLAINTS RIGHT NOW.
SO IF IT MAKES IT, IN THIS PARTICULAR EXAMPLE, ASSUME IT GOES TO, UM, THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION FOR INVESTIGATION, THE MONITOR AND THEIR STAFF THEN ARE ABLE TO MONITOR THE INVESTIGATION AS IT PROCEEDS WITH THE IDEA BEING THAT, UM, IF THEY DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT IS INVESTIGATING THAT WITH THE VERACITY THAT IT NEEDS TO BE, YOU KNOW, LOOKED AT, OR IF THEY'RE ACTUALLY TAKING A SERIOUS LOOK INTO THE QUESTIONS AND ALLEGATIONS, THAT IS THE INTENT OF HAVING THE MONITOR THERE TO BE ABLE TO THEN GO BACK TO THE POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD AND SAY, HEY, WAIT A SECOND.
WHATEVER THEIR OUTCOME IS, I DON'T AGREE WITH IT, AND HERE'S THE REASONS WHY I DON'T AGREE WITH IT.
THAT WOULD BE THE PROCESS FOR WHICH AN INTERNAL AFFAIRS, AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION COULD BE REQUESTED BY THE BOARD.
THE SECOND THING IS, UM, THE POLICE MONITORS THERE TO BE NOTIFIED FOR CRITICAL INCIDENTS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTINGS, INSTANCES IN WHERE THERE MAY HAVE BEEN AN IN-CUSTODY DEATH.
AND THE IN THE INTENT IS TO BE ABLE TO, AT THAT MOMENT HAVE THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT STEPS AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING AT THAT MOMENT FOR THE FUTURE INVESTIGATION INTO THAT PARTICULAR INCIDENT.
IT'S, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE READING OF THE ORDINANCE THAT THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS HAS THE POWER TO DECIDE WHETHER TO INVESTIGATE OR NOT INVESTIGATE.
SO MY, MY QUESTION IS REALLY POINTED TO THE TRANSPARENCY THERE OF WHEN INTERNAL AFFAIRS DECIDE THEY WILL NOT INVESTIGATE SOMETHING.
[03:05:01]
NOW, IS THERE A MECHANISM FOR TRANSPARENCY THERE? IS THERE ANY REPORTING OR ANY DUTY, UH, IN THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT THAT WILL LET THE COMMUNITY KNOW, LET THE, THE MONITOR KNOW WHY A PARTICULAR COMPLAINT WAS NOT INVESTIGATED? SO YES, SIR.EACH MONTH THAT, THAT IS REPORTED TO THE COMMUNITY AS, UH, POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD, THERE IS A REPORT, IT TALKS ABOUT ALL THE CASES THAT COME, ALL THE COMPLAINTS THAT COME IN TO NOT ONLY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, BUT ALSO THE MONITOR.
THOSE NUMBERS ARE COMPILED INTO A SINGLE REPORT.
UM, IT GOES INTO, UH, SEVERAL CATEGORIES OF, OF THE TYPE OF COMPLAINTS THAT COME IN, AS WELL AS THE DISPOSITION AND NEXT STEPS FOR THOSE COMPLAINTS.
SO THAT IS PART OF DIS THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS DISCLOSED, UM, ON A MONTHLY BASIS.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY MORE DISCUSSION OR A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION.
I HAVE A MOTION TO AMEND THE CURRENT AMENDMENT.
UH, AND FIRST OFF, I WANNA SAY THIS THANK YOU CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR CLARIFYING A WHOLE BUNCH AND FOR SUPPLYING THIS, UH, GREAT MEMO THAT YOU DID.
UM, MY MOTION TO AMEND WILL BE ON PAGE 19 OF THE BIG PACKET THAT WE ALL HAVE ON PAGE 19 TO INCLUDE ONLY THE FIRST SENTENCE OF SECTION ONE, SCRATCH THE REST OF SECTION ONE, AND THEN ALL OF SECTION TWO, AND THEN TO EXCLUDE THE REST OF SECTION, THE REST OF IT, WHICH WOULD BE ALL OF SECTION THREE SECOND.
SO THE MOTION IS, AGAIN, IT'S ON PAGE 19 OF THE PACKET WE HAVE IS DUE, INCLUDE ONLY THE FIRST SENTENCE OF SECTION ONE AND THEN ALL OF SECTION TWO AND THEN, UH, TOTALLY EXCLUDE SECTION THREE.
WOULD IT BE ACCEPTABLE FOR THE COMMISSIONER TO READ THAT SO THAT THE PEOPLE LISTENING AT HOME KNOW WHAT WILL VOTE? WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
SO SECTION ONE IS, UH, TITLED SELECTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY OVERSIGHT.
THE FIRST SENTENCE READS, UH, THERE IS HEREBY CREATED THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT, THE HEAD OF WHICH SHALL BE THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT, WHO SHALL BE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, AND WHO SHALL BE A PERSON PROFESSIONALLY COMP, UH, COMPETENT BY EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING TO MANAGE SUCH OFFICE.
SECTION TWO READS IS ENTITLED EMPLOYEES AND READS, THE COUNCIL SHALL, SHALL PROVIDE THE DIRECTOR WITH SUCH EMPLOYEES AS IT SEEMS NECESSARY, AND THOSE EMPLOYEES SHALL RECEIVE SUCH COMPENSATION AS MAY BE FIXED BY, BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
ANY SUCH, UH, EMPLOYEE MAY BE DISCHARGED AT ANY TIME BY THE DIRECTOR.
ALL POWERS AND DUTIES IMPOSED BY THE DIRECTOR MAY BE EXERCISED AND PERFORMED BY ANY EMPLOYEE UNDER, UNDER THE DIRECTOR'S DIRECTION.
IS THERE A SECOND ON THIS MOTION? UH, THERE'S A SECOND DISCUSSION.
AND, AND, AND MR. CAMPBELL, TO BE CLEAR, YOUR MOTION IS TO INCLUDE THIS AMENDMENT WITH YOUR AMENDMENT, RIGHT? YES.
AND THAT'S JUST, I'VE GOT A SECOND ON IT.
ALL MOTION CARRIES AS AMENDED.
OKAY, UH, LET'S MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM V, MR. CHAIR, SORRY, I, I WANNA MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AGENDA ITEM C, WHICH CONTAINED AMENDMENT TWO, IN OTHER WORDS, THE RCV VOTE.
AND WERE YOU I WAS, I WAS ON THE SIDE NOT TO INCLUDE IT.
SO YOU WERE ON THE SIDE THAT PREVAILED? CORRECT.
SO I RECOGNIZE YOU FOR THAT MOTION THEN SAY AGAIN? IS THERE A SECOND? MR. CAMPBELL'S A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, UH, UNFORTUNATELY THIS, UH, MOTION CANNOT HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON IT BY ROBERT RULES OF ORDERS.
SO JUST, JUST A STRAIGHT VOTE.
SO, UH, THE, THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS WHAT YOU CANNOT HAVE DISCUSSION ON.
OKAY? ALL IN FAVOR OF, UH, COMMISSIONER MASTER'S MOTION, SAY AYE.
NINE, NINE TO FIVE THE MOTION.
CARRIE? ALRIGHT, SO THE MOTION CARRIES.
[03:10:01]
OKAY, SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM V.SO NOW YOU RECONSIDER IT SO WE CAN OH, OKAY.
SO NOW WE HAVE A, SO WE, SO WE HAD THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE PASS.
SO NOW THERE HAS TO BE A MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE IT, RIGHT? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO INCLUDE AGENDA ITEM C, AMENDMENT TWO.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 OPPOSED? OKAY.
NOW WE CAN GO TO AGENDA ITEM V, RIGHT? YES.
UH, SUBMITTED BY MR. ALBERT ALBERT MATA AND WOULD PROHIBIT CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES FROM SOLICITING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS MORE THAN SIX MONTHS IN ADVANCE OF ELECTION DAY.
MR. MATI, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
HEY, THANK YOU AND SORRY THAT, UH, I'M KEEPING YOU HERE A LITTLE LONGER.
I'M GONNA BE DISCUSSING PROPOSED AMENDMENT NUMBER 53, AGENDA ITEM V.
UH, YOU'VE ARE AWARE OF THE LANGUAGE, SO I'M NOT GOING TO REALLY TALK ABOUT THE LANGUAGE.
UM, I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT WHY WE NEED THIS.
SO WE'VE DISCUSSED THROUGH THIS COMMISSION THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
HOW TWO YEARS IS TOO SHORT FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAKES IT TOO SHORT IS THE FACT THAT WE HAVE, UH, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE OFTEN SPENDING A LOT OF TIME, UH, CAMPAIGNING INSTEAD OF JUST GOVERNING.
UH, SO THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD EFFECTIVELY, UH, CREATE A, A CAMPAIGN SEASON TO ABOUT 25% OF A TERM.
SO IT'S APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS OUT OF THE TWO YEAR TERMS WHERE CANDIDATES AND OFFICERS WILL BE ABLE TO ACCEPT CONTRIBUTIONS.
UM, I THINK IT LEVELS THE PLAYING FIELD.
UM, INCUMBENTS ALREADY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IN INBUILT ADVANTAGE.
UH, BUT I THINK SETTING THIS FUNDRAISING MORATORIUM, UH, DOES LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD FOR SOME CHALLENGERS.
UM, AND IT ALSO LIMITS THE INFLUENCE OF MONEY.
UM, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SAYING MONEY AND SPECIAL INTEREST IS EQUIVALENT TO CORRUPTION, BUT I THINK THE GOVERNMENT HAS A, A, A IT SHOULD PURSUE, UH, AND TRY TO ELIMINATE THE PERCEPTIONS OF CORRUPTION OR THE PERCEPTIONS THAT POLICIES ARE TIED TO PRIVATE COMMERCIAL INTEREST.
UM, OF COURSE, I THINK CREATING A CAMPAIGN SEASON, I THINK CHALLENGES MAY START FILING EARLIER.
I THINK IT WILL LEAD TO MORE COMPETITIVE RACES, UM, AND REDUCES THE ACCUMULATION OF A WAR CHEST FOR, FOR INCUMBENTS.
UH, SO THEY DON'T NECESSARILY GET A HEAD START.
AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE MANY PROPOSALS THAT HAVE COME TO YOU THAT CAN HELP LEAD TO A MORE REPRESENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL.
UH, EITHER THERE'S QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER THIS BELONGS IN CHARTER OR CODE.
I'VE GIVEN A FEW REASONS HERE WHY I BELIEVE IT BELONGS IN THE CHARTER INSTEAD OF OF CODE.
SO I, I WOULDN'T JUST WRITE IT OFF AS SOMETHING WE SHOULD LET CITY COUNCIL ADJUDICATE AND PUT IT ON IN WITHIN CODE.
UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT OTHER CITIES AND TEXAS HAVE ON, ON THE CHARTER, SO I WANNA TALK ABOUT THOSE THREE REASONS AND GIVE YOU SOME DATA.
UH, MY PROPOSAL SAYS ABOUT SIX MONTHS BEFORE ELECTION DAY IS WHEN I WOULD WANT, UH, CANDIDATES TO START RECEIVING CONTRIBUTIONS WE SEE HERE ABOUT THE MIDDLE OF THE CHART, AN UPTICK AROUND MARCH, UH, AROUND APRIL AND MAY AND THE YEAR BEFORE AN ELECTION.
SO THIS EFFECTIVELY TELLS ME THAT CITY COUNCIL INCUMBENTS ARE EFFECTIVELY STARTING THEIR CAMPAIGN SEASONS ABOUT A YEAR BEFORE, UH, ELECTIONS.
UM, THAT IS, UH, NOT BENEFICIAL TO, TO THE PUBLIC IN MY OPINION, LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD.
UM, I'LL JUST TELL YOU TO LOOK AT THE BLUE CHART IN TERMS OF THE MONEY RAISED BETWEEN THE END OF A PREVIOUS ELECTION UNTIL ABOUT 180 DAYS, UH, WHICH IS THAT MORATORIUM DATE.
UM, INCUMBENTS RAISED IN THIS LAST CYCLE, 530,000, HALF A MILLION DOLLARS WHERE OPEN SEATS HAD 5,000 AND 4,000 CHALLENGERS.
DO I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.
UM, IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO EXCLUDE SECOND DISCUSSION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE, SAY AYE.
THANK YOU FOR COMING UP AND TALKING TO US AND TAKING TIME TO PRESENT THIS.
UH, WE'RE GONNA TAKE UP AGENDA ITEM K, WHICH I UNDERSTAND THE AUTHORS OF, WHICH HAVE HAD A CHANGE OF
[03:15:01]
HEART END.SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE THAT UP AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO FIGURING OUT OUR CALENDAR.
I MOVE TO EXCLUDE KI SECOND DISCUSSION.
UH, MOTION TO EXCLUDE CARRIE'S.
ALRIGHT, SO LET'S TALK THEN ON THE CALENDAR.
UM, WELL, I GUESS FIRST, CAN I, LET'S TALK ABOUT OUR, OUR ADDITIONAL CALENDAR, THEN I'LL ASK FOR MOTION TO TABLE THE REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS. UM, SO WE'RE COMING TO THE END OF OUR SCHEDULED MEETINGS NEXT WEEK'S MEETING.
TUESDAY, APRIL 2ND IS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED TO BE OUR LAST MEETING.
HOWEVER, I BELIEVE, UH, WE NEED TO ADD A MEETING, UH, TO ENSURE WE GET THROUGH THIS.
THE, THE REMAINING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT ARE THE ONLY REMAINING ITEMS WE HAVE, AND I THINK WE CAN GET THROUGH THOSE IN ONE MEETING.
UM, THE STAFF HAS TOLD US WE HAVE APRIL 11TH AND APRIL 18TH AVAILABLE.
ANY INPUT ON WHICH OF THOSE DATES WORK BEST FOR Y'ALL? MR. I, I WOULD URGE APRIL 11TH BECAUSE I HAVE A BABY ON THE WAY, UH, FOR LATE APRIL.
SO, UH, THE EARLIER THE BETTER.
I'M GONNA BE OUTTA TOWN ON THE 18TH, SO THE 11TH WOULD BE BETTER.
AND, AND THE, THE SOONER WE CAN GET DONE, UH, TO GET THIS TO, UH, CITY COUNCIL, THE BETTER.
SO, I MEAN, THAT SOUNDS GOOD TO ME.
IF EVERYONE'S ON BOARD WITH IT.
SO THE, THE DATES WERE APRIL 11TH AND APRIL 18TH.
AND SO FAR, APRIL 11TH SEEMED TO WORK BEST FOR EVERYONE.
I WILL, I'LL BE OUT OF TOWN ON THE 11TH, BUT I FULLY DEFER TO THE BABY PROCESS, SO, YEAH.
ALRIGHT, WELL, CAN WE GET A, A MOTION TO ADD APRIL 11TH, UH, AS A COMMITTEE MEETING? I MOVE TO ADD APRIL 11TH IS THE NEXT MEETING.
ALL IN FAVOR OR ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
SO, UM, MS. HUNT? I'M SORRY MR. CHAIR.
I, DID YOU SAY WE HAVE A MEETING NEXT WEEK? I JUST DIDN'T HAVE THAT ONE ON MY CALENDAR.
SO APRIL 2ND AND THEN APRIL 11TH.
AND HOPEFULLY APRIL 11TH WILL BE OUR, OUR WRAP UP CONCLUSION MEETING WHERE WE'RE JUST REAFFIRMING WHAT WE GOT IT.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, CAN I GET A MOTION TO TABLE THE REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING? SO MOVED.
UH, THE MEETING OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION'S CONCLUDED AT 9:48 PM THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE LATE WITH US.
GIVE YOU MUCH OF AN OPTION JUST.