[Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on June 17, 2024.]
[00:00:03]
THE TIME IS 10:01.WE'LL CALL THIS MORNING'S TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING TO ORDER.
THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM MAY 20TH.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION'S MADE AND PROPERLY SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR? ALTHOUGH AND THEN WE HAVE THE SECOND ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM B IS APPROVAL OF THE MAY 20TH SPECIAL CALLED TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE MEETING.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTIONS MADE AND SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED. TODAY'S TRANSPORTATION MEETING.
WE HAVE SEVERAL BRIEFING MEMOS, BUT I WANTED I DON'T WANT TO RUSH THROUGH THESE, SO I WANT TO JUST TAKE THEM ITEM BY ITEM TO GIVE EACH OF MY COLLEAGUES AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE SOME COMMENTS.
SO AT THIS POINT MR. SPARKS, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO JUST COME UP TO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND SEE IF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS.
AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, CLIFFORD SPARKS, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, WHEN YOU SAY WHERE WE WERE AT.
YEAH. IN OTHER WORDS, IS VISION ZERO PART OF OUR LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES BOTH TO SUPPORT AND FUND AT BOTH THE STATE AND THE FEDERAL LEVELS? THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S ON THE MEMO AND IT'LL BE PUSHED UP TO FULL COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION.
YEAH, I DIDN'T SEE MAYBE I MISSED IT.
I THOUGHT I STUDIED IT, BUT I GUESS I'M I DON'T SEE WHERE VISION ZERO IS THERE.
AND THAT'S ALSO WHAT THIS TIME IS FOR AS WELL.
IF YOU DO SEE SOMETHING MISSING, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ADD.
I THINK DOCTOR CONCARLY HAS COMMENT.
DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
YES. ITEM NUMBER ONE IN THE MEMO IS PART OF THE VISION ZERO ACTION ITEMS, WHICH IS TO PERMIT GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN LOWERING THE PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS FROM 30 TO 25MPH.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING TO DO.
AND I AGREE IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF IT.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S OTHER ASPECTS OF VISION ZERO OR IF THIS OR IF USING THE MONIKER MATTERS, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S A FEDERAL TERM. AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ADDING THAT TERMINOLOGY IN ANY WAY, SHAPE AND THE OTHER ASPECTS OF THE VISION ZERO, BECAUSE IT'S MUCH MORE THAN JUST SPEED REDUCTION. CORRECT.
AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO BE REFLECTED IN THE ITEMS, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM.
WE CAN ADD THAT LANGUAGE IN AS WELL.
OKAY. AND I'LL GET WITH YOU ON THE WORDS.
AND THERE MAY BE A BETTER WAY TO SAY THAT MY COLLEAGUES MAY HAVE SOME INPUT ON THAT.
WELL, I HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS STARTING WITH WHERE DID THIS LIST COME FROM? SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MEMO AND WHO WROTE THE MEMO, IT LOOKS LIKE THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE CHAIR WROTE THAT OR WROTE IT.
SO WHO PROVIDED INPUT ON THESE ITEMS? WELL, BECAUSE IT WAS DATED BACK IN DECEMBER, THE ASSUMPTION WOULD BE THAT THE COMMITTEE PROVIDED THAT INPUT.
THE COMMITTEE NEVER HAD THIS AS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
WHERE DID THE ITEMS COME FROM? WELL, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE UP WITH THE CHAIR BECAUSE THAT'S HIS MEMO.
SO IT SEEMS TO ME THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS, OF WHICH I BELIEVE ALL FOUR OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE BEEN PART OF, WHERE THERE'S A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW ONE PERSON SHOULD NOT BE PUTTING FORWARD THE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM.
ARE YOU TELLING ME THAT ONE PERSON SUBMITTED ALL OF THIS ON BEHALF OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE? AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'D HAVE TO TAKE UP WITH THE LEGISLATOR CHAIR.
I'M SORRY. I AM THE LEGISLATIVE CHAIR.
I'M SORRY. WITH THE TRANSPORTATION CHAIR, I APOLOGIZE.
OKAY, SO IT HAS NOT BEEN ON ANY TRANSPORTATION AGENDA.
SO I HAVE A NUMBER OF ISSUES WITH SOME OF THESE ITEMS. FIRST, WE'LL START WITH ABILITY TO LEVERAGE STREET USAGE FEES ON ALL BUSINESSES, AS WELL AS RIDESHARE AND DOCKLESS VEHICLES.
[00:05:02]
ABSOLUTELY NOT.THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED AT THIS COMMITTEE.
I'VE SPOKEN AGAINST THIS ITEM.
POSSIBLY IT'S NOT EVEN LEGAL TO DO THIS.
I ABSOLUTELY WOULD LIKE THIS TAKEN OFF ON BEHALF OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WILL DISCUSS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE PROPER, I GUESS I'LL LOOK TO MY CITY ATTORNEYS TO FIGURE OUT IF THIS IS A PROPER PLACE TO TAKE VOTES. BUT I THINK THIS IS THE MEETING, IF THERE ARE ITEMS THAT WE WANT TO ADD TO THIS TO THIS LIST, THEN WE CAN ABSOLUTELY DO THAT.
TODAY I WANT TO REMOVE THAT ITEM FROM THIS LIST.
RIGHT. AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS TOO.
SO. SO I WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THIS ITEM FROM THE LIST.
THAT'S MY QUESTION IS DO WE TAKE A VOTE NOW TO DO THAT.
I'M TRYING TO SEE IF THE CHAIR IS ON NOW, BUT ARE IS CAN WE DO WE TAKE A VOTE? SO I'LL PUT ON MY LEGISLATIVE CHAIR HAT SAYING WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR AT THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE WAS A LIST THAT THE COMMITTEE DISCUSSED AND VOTED ON AND PRIORITIZED TO BE SENT TO THE LEGISLATIVE..
RIGHT. AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANYTHING YOU'RE SAYING.
THIS WHILE I GET AND YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THE REST OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
MR. CHAIRMAN, MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT WE HEAR FROM CHAIR MENDELSOHN OF ALL THE ONES THAT SHE'D LIKE US TO DISCUSS, WE MAYBE MAKE A MASTER LIST OF THE ONES WE WANT TO DISCUSS SO STAFF CAN BE PREPARED THEN TO RESPOND TO ALL OF US.
AND THEN BEFORE WE MAKE ANY DECISIONS ON ON INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. THANK YOU. THAT'S FAIR. ACTUALLY, THE ENTIRE IDEA WAS THAT TODAY WAS THE DAY WE PUT FORWARD THIS.
OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO DECIDE TODAY WHAT'S GOING TO GO FORWARD.
WHY? WHY WOULDN'T WE TAKE THEM ONE AT A TIME? LET'S CONTINUE, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT I SAID BEFORE.
SO WE'LL GIVE EACH PERSON THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO THROUGH, ADD OR REMOVE ITEMS. SO IF YOU CONTINUE TO GO THROUGH THOSE AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF STAFF ABOUT THAT ITEM.
DID YOU HAVE SOME INPUT IF GOOD MORNING.
I'VE JUST QUICKLY TALK TO STAFF, AND I APOLOGIZE.
I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION OTHER THAN WE DO HAVE SOME WRITE UPS THAT WE COULD PROVIDE TO THE COMMITTEE EXPLAINING EACH ONE OF THOSE ITEMS, AND WE'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO THAT.
SO THIS ITEM HAD A FULL MEMO BY ROBERT PEREZ.
ISN'T THAT CORRECT? TO MY UNDERSTANDING.
AND THERE WAS A ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, AND THAT IT WOULD BE TAXING RESIDENTS BASED ON THEIR EXPECTED USAGE OF THE ROAD. AN ADDITIONAL TAX BEYOND WHAT THEY'RE ALREADY TAXED, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO MAINTAIN THE ROAD.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
OTHER CITIES DO UTILIZE THAT TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE.
SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS KIND OF UNIQUE TO TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
BUT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
IT WOULD BE ADDITIONAL FEE FOR DEVELOPERS WHO ARE WHO ARE USING OUR ROADS.
AND IF YOU TAX THE BUSINESS AND YOU TAX THE RIDESHARE, WILL THEY NOT PASS IT ON TO THE RESIDENTS? I THINK THE INTENT OF THAT TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE IS TO CHARGE DEVELOPERS WHO ARE GOING TO PUT MORE IMPACT ON THE ROAD TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES SUCH AS TRAFFIC SIGNALS, SUCH AS STREET CONDITIONS, ALL OF THAT.
THEY HAVE A MUCH LOWER TAX RATE.
SO THE NEXT ITEM I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS IS ALLOWING A LOCAL OPTION FOR SALES TAX WITH VOTER APPROVAL FOR MAINTENANCE OF STREETS, SIDEWALKS, ALLEYS AND PUBLIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS.
I WOULD SAY I WOULD NOT LIKE THIS ITEM ON THIS AGENDA ITEM ON THIS LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.
DO YOU WANT TO TALK TO THAT ITEM?
[00:10:02]
SO OUR STAFF MEMBER.HE WANTS TO SHARE ABOUT USING SALES TAX FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE.
INCREASING SALES TAX TO PAY FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE, IN ADDITION TO OUR ALREADY HIGH PROPERTY TAX RATE.
DOES ANYBODY FROM STAFF HERE? SO WE'LL BE SURE TO GET WITH STAFF TO GET YOU THAT INFORMATION.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S EVEN ON HERE.
I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REMOVE THIS ITEM.
IS THERE SOMEONE ON STAFF WHO WANTS TO TALK ABOUT THIS ITEM? GOOD MORNING HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
THIS IS ALI HATEFI, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
COUNCIL MEMBER. THIS IS REGARDING THE YES.
CAN YOU TURN YOUR CAMERA ON? I BELIEVE IT'S ON.
THANK YOU. I BELIEVE THIS IS REGARDING ONE OF THE, I GUESS, THE GOVERNMENT CODE THAT LIMIT THE RFCSP OR REQUEST FOR COMPETITIVE SALE PROPOSAL.
AND WE'RE ASKING THAT $1.5 MILLION LIMIT TO BE REMOVED, THAT THE CITY CAN ACTUALLY USE THIS OPTION TO GET THE PROJECT, BECAUSE THIS WAY, WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE A BETTER QUALITY CONTRACTORS AND ALSO THE BIDS.
SO YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A SEALED BID PROCESS AVAILABLE FOR ANY SIZE JOB.
FOR SOMETHING EVEN MORE THAN $1.5 MILLION.
YES, MA'AM. AND HOW IS THAT YOU BELIEVE WILL IMPROVE THE PROCESS? WHAT WAYS WILL IT BE IMPROVED? WELL, THAT'S THE THING THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY USE THIS PROCESS BECAUSE MOST OF OUR PROJECTS ARE YOU KNOW, THE AMOUNT IS HIGHER THAN $1.5 MILLION ANYWAYS.
AND WITH THE LIMITATION THAT THE, YOU KNOW, THE CODE HAS, WE CANNOT ACTUALLY USE THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO STAY WITH THE $1.5 MILLION. AND DO YOU BELIEVE THIS IS GOING TO REDUCE COSTS FOR US? YOU BELIEVE THIS WILL SPEED UP PROCUREMENT? LIKE WHAT IS THE BENEFIT TO DOING THAT? WELL, THE BENEFIT IS THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTRACTORS THAT THEY HAVE EXPERIENCED WITH THE CITY. AND THE CITY DOESN'T BASICALLY AGREE WITH THE PERFORMANCE, OR THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE PERFORMANCE THEY HAD IN OTHER PROJECTS.
ALSO, WE CAN PROBABLY HAVE A BETTER NEGOTIATION.
YOU KNOW AUTHORITY WITH THE CONTRACTORS, WITH THE.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER ITEMS, BUT I WOULD LIKE THOSE TWO REMOVED, PLEASE.
OKAY. AND I JUST WANT TO REMIND THE COMMITTEE, LET ME JUST KIND OF REESTABLISH AND I APOLOGIZE FOR ALL THE CONFUSION UP FRONT, BUT THIS MEETING IS TO DISCUSS THESE ITEMS. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY TO ADD OR REMOVE ITEMS, IT'S TO DISCUSS THESE ITEMS. AND AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF THESE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE COME THROUGH THE COMMITTEE, BUT I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES.
MADAM CHAIR, YOU CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG IN TERMS OF TIMING TO ADD ADDITIONAL ITEMS. I KNOW YOU SAID A DEADLINE, BUT I THINK WE.
THE CHAIR ON HIS OWN SUBMITTED ALL OF THESE ITEMS WITHOUT INPUT FROM THE COMMITTEE.
ALL OF THESE MONTHS HAVE GONE BY WHERE THIS COULD HAVE COME TO COMMITTEE, BUT IT DID NOT.
AND THE CRITICISM THAT'S BEING LOBBED ABOUT CERTAIN PEOPLE HAVING ONE VOICE IS ACTUALLY THIS COMMITTEE, THIS THIS MEMO IS THE PROBLEM.
AND THAT IS THE EXERCISE THAT WE SHOULD BE TAKING TODAY.
[00:15:06]
AND I'M ASKING YOU, AS THE CHAIR OF THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, WILL THERE BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS COMMITTEE TO COME BACK AND HAVE THAT DISCUSSION? I'M SAYING TODAY IS NOT THAT DAY.THE INTENT IS TO HAVE A FULL COUNCIL BRIEFING IN AUGUST.
SO NO, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WILL BE A TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE UNLESS THEY'D LIKE TO BE A SPECIAL CALLED ONE TO DEAL WITH THIS ONE ISSUE, WHICH AGAIN SHOULD HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH IN OCTOBER, NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER.
FAIR ENOUGH. COULD I SAY SOMETHING? YES, SIR. I BELIEVE THAT, BUT THE CHAIRMAN SAID AND BELIEVE THAT WE AS A COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE, THAT AS A LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, WHICH I SERVED ON, THAT THERE WAS ONE COMMITTEE, A SUBCOMMITTEE DID NOT SET FORTH THEIR PRIORITIES, WHICH DID NOT GO TO THE COMMITTEE.
THE CHAIRMAN, YOU KNOW, DID SET THOSE PRIORITIES WITHOUT HAVING A COMMITTEE.
SO SO THEREFORE, THERE WAS NOT A SPECIFIC ORDER THAT WHATEVER WAS ON THIS LIST, YOU COULD ADD OR YOU TO SUBTRACT, IT WAS A DISCUSSION THAT YOU WOULD SEND THERE. SO IN MY MIND, I KNOW IT'S THE PROCESS AND RECEIVED WILL NOT FOLLOW CORRECTLY.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO CHANGE THE PROCESS.
CORRECT THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW IN THE MIDDLE OF SOMETHING.
SO I JUST SAID SIMPLY THAT WE WOULD DISCUSS THESE ITEMS HERE, AND AND IT'S NOT A VOTE UP AND DOWN.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO DISCUSS THE ITEMS. AND, AND SO MAKE SURE THE COMMITTEE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DO KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO BE ON HERE OR NOT, BUT I ALSO FEEL LIKE THAT WE SHOULD NOTATION WHATEVER WE FEEL LIKE TALKING TO OUR STATE LEGISLATOR, CHAIRMAN COUNCIL THERE, THEY SAID, HEY, THIS IS NOT SHOULD BE ON THERE BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO PASS.
YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO PUT STUFF DOWN THERE AS A LEGISLATOR RIGHT NOW.
AND WE GOT THIS PENSION GOING ON.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER WE PUT IN THERE IS NOT A FIGHT.
YOU KNOW A FUNDING MECHANISM, WHATEVER SALES TAX, WHATEVER.
I DON'T WANT TO CONFUSE THE LEGISLATOR.
IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WE'RE GOING TO FIGHT THIS AGAIN AT THE, WHOLE IN AUGUST, WHATEVER THEY SAY.
HEY, HERE IS THESE LEGISLATURE OFFICER.
AND SOMEONE IS GOOD SOMETHING IS BAD.
SO MISTER CHAIRMAN, YOU KNOW, THAT'S YOUR CALL.
AND AS A COMMITTEE, I'M JUST TRYING TO EXPLAIN THE PROCESS AND THE PROCEDURE THAT WE SHOULD GO BY, BUT ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT WE SHOULD NOT SEND ANYTHING TO THE LEGISLATURE TO CAUSE A HICCUP. THANK YOU.
SO THIS MAY JUST MUDDY THE WATERS A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT AND MAYBE I'VE SEEN THESE BRIEFINGS AND I JUST DON'T RECALL.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THE, THE STREET USAGE AND THE THE SALES TAX FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE ARE REALLY GETTING TO ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCES, RIGHT, FOR MAINTAINING OUR STREETS, WHICH I THINK WAS AN ISSUE THAT CAME UP TIME AND TIME AGAIN DURING OUR BOND DISCUSSIONS.
SO I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE STARTING TO GET CREATIVE AND LOOK FOR THOSE SOURCES.
BUT HAVE WE HAD A BRIEFING SO THAT WE REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR PARAMETERS ARE, WHAT OUR LIMITATIONS ARE, WHAT'S LEGAL, WHAT'S THE FEE? WHAT'S THE TAX? I MEAN, I JUST DON'T HAVE ANY CONTEXT, I THINK, FOR JUDGING WHETHER OR NOT THESE ARE THEIR TIME HAS COME OR THEY'RE THIS IS NOT THEIR TIME, THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE WELL RECEIVED AT THE STATE OR WHATEVER THAT JUST CONTEXT.
AND SO THAT POSTPONES GETTING THIS MOVED FORWARD.
BUT I, I JUST I DO SEE THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE WE DISCUSS.
SO I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S THERE.
BUT I THINK WE NEED SOME MORE UNDERSTANDING AND POTENTIALLY SOME STRATEGIZING AROUND THAT.
I HAVE A CONSIDERABLE QUESTION.
SO OUR NEXT MEETING IS AUGUST 19TH.
IS THAT BEFORE OR AFTER THE COUNCIL WILL BE DETERMINING WHAT'S OUR FINAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA? YES. AFTER.
WE CAME UP WITH A WE HAVE A RESERVE DATE IN AUGUST AND I BELIEVE IT'S AUGUST.
WE HAVE A RESERVE DATE FOR THE BRIEFING AS WELL.
THAT'S WHY I WANT TO GET THE MASTER LIST.
[00:20:05]
OR SHOULD NOT BE ON THAT AGENDA IN TIME TO GO TO THE COUNCIL MEETING.I AM NOT PREPARED TO SUPPORT EITHER ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU MADE, JUST LIKE SOMEBODY ELSE MAY NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE IDEA OF EXPANDING THE VISION ZERO STATEMENT UNTIL WE ALL HAVE A CHANCE TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF HOMEWORK, BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY WE'RE HEARING FROM EACH OTHER ABOUT THIS LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.
SO I'M NOT PREPARED AND I WON'T BE FORCED INTO MAKING A VOTE.
SO IF WE COULD JUST FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT THE COUNCIL MEETING IS AFTER THE 19TH OR IF WE'RE GOING TO NEED A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, AS YOU SUGGESTED, MADAM CHAIR TO DISCUSS JUST THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.
THE TRUTH IS, I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK WE NEED A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING.
AND ALL OF THIS IS JUST GOING TO GO TO THE FULL COUNCIL AND WE'RE JUST GOING TO FIGHT IT OUT THERE.
BECAUSE THE PROCESS WAS NOT FOLLOWED.
I MEAN, IT REALLY IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT, AND I'M NOT SURE WHY THIS HAPPENED.
BUT IT'S PUTTING US IN A VERY BAD SITUATION.
SO ALL THAT TO SAY, I HAVE OBJECTIONS TO THOSE ITEMS. I'M SURE WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT AT FULL COUNCIL.
MR. RESENDEZ. I DON'T HAVE ANY ANY QUESTIONS.
YOU KNOW, I, I HEAR WHAT EVERYONE IS SAYING, I, I HEAR EVERYONE'S CONCERNS.
YOU KNOW. WHATEVER QUESTIONS ANY OF US HAVE, I YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO SOME HOMEWORK OFFLINE AND GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF SOME OF THESE ITEMS. YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S MULTIPLE WAYS TO THAT WE CAN APPROACH THIS YOU KNOW, IF WE WANT TO SIT HERE AND TAKE A VOTE, I'D BE PREPARED TO DO THAT AS WELL. OTHERWISE, IF WE NEED MORE TIME, I'M FINE WITH THAT, TOO.
THANK YOU. MR. CHAIR. I'M HERE.
I'M HERE. WE HAD A MEETING ON FRIDAY AND CAME UP WITH THE DATES.
DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT WITH YOU? I DON'T HAVE MY PAPERS WITH ME.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU GOT CAUGHT UP IF YOU CAUGHT EVERYTHING BEFORE BUT WE'RE GOING THROUGH THESE ITEMS IN TERMS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ITEMS. SURE. THERE AND THERE'S A DISCUSSION THAT REALLY AT THIS POINT, THE COMMITTEE IS NOT PREPARED TO REALLY DISCUSS OR I THINK THERE ARE SOME WHO WANT TO REJECT SOME OF THESE ITEMS, BUT REALLY NOT PREPARED TO MOVE THESE FORWARD, I THINK, OR THE OTHER OPTION IS WE'LL JUST TAKE THEM TO COUNCIL AND HASH IT OUT.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO NOW IS DETERMINE IF THERE'S ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY BEFORE THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING TO DISCUSS THESE ITEMS SO THAT WE CAN. MR. CHAIR, THERE IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE TO NOT MOVE THESE FORWARD.
AND I WAS TOLD THAT I DID NOT FOLLOW PROPER PROCEDURE IN ORDER TO GET THINGS ACCOMPLISHED, WHICH ACTUALLY, IN RETROSPECT AND DISCOVERY THE COMMITTEE, WE HAD DONE EVERYTHING THE WAY WE WERE SUPPOSED TO.
AND THE MEMO THAT WAS SENT IN WAS NEVER TURNED IN BY THE CHAIR FOR THE LEGISLATIVE AD HOC COMMITTEE.
AND SO WE APPEARED TO HAVE NOT DONE OUR PROJECT CORRECTLY, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY INACCURATE.
I HAVE THE EMAILS TO PROVE IT.
AND WAS BASHED DURING THE LAST MEETING OF THE LEGISLATIVE AD HOC COMMITTEE.
AND I KNOW THAT THE CHAIR HAD SOME CHOICE WORDS TO SAY THIS MORNING AS WELL.
UNFORTUNATELY, I WAS LISTENING BUT NOT ABLE TO JUMP IN.
JUST LAST WEEK, THE CHAIR OF LEGISLATIVE AD HOC DECIDED TO MISS A MEETING FOR PERSONAL BUSINESS.
AND THOSE ARE THINGS THAT HAPPEN WHEN WE'RE ON COUNCIL.
AND I THINK IT'S UNFAIR THAT THE CHAIR HAS DECIDED TO DO THESE TYPES OF THINGS AND TRY TO MAKE THIS A PERSONAL ISSUE AND AND ALL ACTUALITY, I WAS THE ONLY PERSON WHO TURNED IN OR SUBMITTED ANYTHING FOR OUR COMMITTEE AS WELL AS I SUBMITTED THE ITEMS THAT STAFF HAD ASKED ME TO SUBMIT EVEN INCLUDING THE CHAIR OF THE LEGISLATIVE AD HOC COMMITTEE CHOSE NOT TO TURN ANYTHING INTO ME FOR THIS MEETING.
I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO HOLD THIS, BECAUSE THE CHAIR OF LEGISLATIVE AD HOC WAS NOT PREPARED.
[00:25:01]
ANYWAY, WHEN WE HAD OUR LAST MEETING TO MOVE EVERYTHING FORWARD TO COUNCIL.IN FACT, THE LEGISLATIVE AD HOC COMMITTEE HAS MULTIPLE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD AND WE WILL NOT BE COMPLETED BY THE 26TH, WHICH IS WAS THE AGGRESSIVE TIMELINE PUT FORWARD BY THE CHAIR AND MYSELF AND ANOTHER SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE AD HOC COMMITTEE HAD TOLD AND WARNED THE COMMITTEE THAT THIS THIS AGENDA WAS JUST TOO AGGRESSIVE TO MOVE FORWARD AT THAT LIGHTNING SPEED.
BUT IT WAS AT THE INSISTENCE, AND SO WE AGREED TO DO IT.
I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO HOLD THIS IF THIS COMMITTEE NEEDS MORE TIME.
BECAUSE PARKS AND TRAILS IS ALSO NEEDING MORE TIME AS WELL, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND.
AND THEN WE CAN HOLD AND SLOW DOWN EVERYTHING WITH LEGISLATIVE AD HOC, AND WE CAN COME BACK AFTER THE SUMMER AND REALLY FOCUS ON THIS, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WE ALL HAVE A LOT OF ITEMS ON OUR PLATE, AND I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE WANTING TO SLOW THIS DOWN BECAUSE YOU ALL NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME.
SO I WOULD ACCEPT THAT. DEFINITELY.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. WE'RE GOING TO TABLE THIS ITEM.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO TABLE THIS ITEM.
BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.
HERE. I DON'T LIKE THIS CHAOS.
I'M JUST GOING TO BE REAL HONEST.
HERE. SO WE'RE GOING TO TABLE THIS ITEM.
I'M GOING TO FIND OUT WHEN WE CAN COME BACK TO GET THE DATES FOR THE AGENDA.
ALL RIGHT. A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND PROPERLY SECONDED TO TABLE THIS ITEM.
ANY DISCUSSION? OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.
LET'S MOVE ON TO THE BUDGET REVIEWS.
NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ITEM D THE OFFICE OF BOND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT REVIEW AND NEXT STEPS.
OR ACTUALLY, I'LL START ONLINE AND SEE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER D? IT'S THE OFFICE BOND AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT BUDGET REVIEW.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. ALL RIGHT.
CHAIR RESENDEZ. NO QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE.
I IN LOOKING AT YOUR NUMBERS, EVERYTHING'S GOING UP.
I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHEN WE ON ON OUR SUPERVISION, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU GO IN AND OUT WITH PROCUREMENT SO THAT STAFFING WISE THAT I THINK IT'S THE 23 MILLION THAT YOU HAVE THAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT PART OF THAT IS ACTUAL OVER BECAUSE WE HAVE THE WE HAVE THE BOND ATTORNEYS, WE HAVE CONSTRUCTION.
SO CAN YOU HELP US AND FOR THE PUBLIC ALSO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS YOUR OFFICE DO VERSUS THE VARIOUS OTHERS? SO THE INTERNAL SERVICE OF THE TOTAL.
SO YOU'VE GOT 187 PEOPLE AT 23 MILLION.
I'M JENNY NISWANDER, I'M THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF BONDED CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.
SO THAT 23 MILLION THAT YOU ARE SEEING ON PAGE EIGHT, I BELIEVE YOU'RE REFERENCING.
THAT IS ALL FOR FOR STAFF TIME.
AND THEN ALSO PARKS HAS SOME FULL TIME EMPLOYEES THAT CHARGE TO THE BOND PROGRAM.
SO THAT'S ALL INCLUDED IN THAT 23 MILLION.
SO CAN I ASK A QUESTION FOR, I THINK FOR CLARIFICATION AND WHETHER IT'S NOT NECESSARILY YOUR DEPARTMENT, BUT AS WE GO THROUGH THE BUDGET FOR FOR IN AUGUST AND WE START GOING THROUGH THE BUDGET, IF WE COULD GET THOSE DENOTED FROM THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS SO THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT THERE'S NO DOUBLE NOT THAT ANYBODY'S DOING IT, BUT JUST TO MAKE SURE IN OUR MINDS WE'RE NOT DOUBLE DIPPING.
OKAY. THAT'D BE GREAT. AND I THINK IN THE PUBLIC AS WELL, SO THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT OF THE BONDS THAT THEY PASSED WHERE WE HAVE THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY, THAT GOES TO JUST MAKING SURE EVERYTHING'S DONE RIGHT.
PERFECT. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, MR. CHAIR. CHAIRMAN.
[00:30:01]
I'M NOT COMFORTABLE UNDERSTANDING HOW MUCH IS ACTUALLY COMING OUT OF BOND PROCEEDS AND HOW MUCH IS COMING OUT OF GENERAL FUND AND HOW MUCH IS INTERNAL SERVICE I GUESS LIKE.ARE WE FUNDING YOUR DEPARTMENT OR IS ALL OF IT INTERNAL SERVICE? IT'S ALL INTERNAL SERVICE.
YES WE DO. WE CHARGE OUR TIME BACK TO THE BOND.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, 100% OF ITS BOND.
THERE FOR BONDING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.
YES, MA'AM. SO YOUR INTENTION NEXT YEAR IS 23 MILLION.
WELL, FOR ALL THE EMPLOYEES THAT CHARGED THE BOND, I MEAN, YES.
SO EITHER AT A PROJECT LEVEL OR AN OVERALL BOND OFFICE LEVEL AT 23 MILLION SUPPORTS ALL OF THAT 187 EMPLOYEES? YES, MA'AM. GOOD MORNING.
I'M CANDY GREEN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR IN THE OFFICE OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.
THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DO HAVE ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCES THAT SUPPORT FOR THEIR NON BOND COMPONENTS OF THE CAPITAL PROJECTS. FOR EXAMPLE, THEY RECEIVE REVENUE FROM DALLAS WATER UTILITIES.
THERE IS A GENERAL FUND COMPONENT AS WELL.
SO BUT FOR BONDING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, WE ARE 100% SUPPORTIVE, OUR DEPARTMENT.
BUT PUBLIC WORKS AND PARKS DO HAVE OTHER REVENUE SOURCES.
SO YOU HAVE OUR CURRENT YEAR BUDGET.
NUMBERS FOR BOTH STAFFING, WHICH WAS 181 THIS YEAR.
ARE THOSE ALL FILLED? AS OF APRIL, WE ARE WE DO HAVE OVER 40 VACANCIES IN THE COMBINED THREE DEPARTMENTS.
SO YOU HAVE 181 APPROVED, BUT YOU HAVE 40 VACANCIES? YES, AS OF APRIL.
WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO TURN OUT ON YOUR BUDGET? ARE YOU GOING TO SPEND ALL YOUR DOLLARS? WE ARE FORECASTING ON SLIDE SEVEN AT 20 MILLION, 20.8 MILLION.
WE ARE WORKING AS HARD AS WE CAN TO FUND THOSE AND TO FILL THOSE VACANT POSITIONS.
BUT RIGHT NOW WE ARE FORECASTING TO COME IN UNDER BUDGET.
CAN YOU GIVE ANY PERIOD BACK THREE, FIVE, SEVEN YEARS? AND WE WOULD HAVE TO GET THAT INFORMATION.
WE'LL HAVE ANYONE HERE FROM THE BUDGET OFFICE.
HONORABLE CHAIR, CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR ME, PLEASE? WELL, MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE GROWTH OVER TIME OF THIS DEPARTMENT.
AND IF THERE'S ANY PERSPECTIVE YOU CAN GIVE ON STAFFING GOING BACK, BESIDES COMPARING IT TO THIS CURRENT YEAR OR DOLLAR GROWTH, AND SO LET ME GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT PERSPECTIVE.
SO I WOULD NEED CANDY TO HELP ME WITH THAT ONE.
WHEN WE ESTABLISHED WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHED THE BOND OFFICE PRIOR TO 2017, EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT WOULD CHARGE WERE CHARGED TO THE PROJECT, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THEY WOULD NOT CHARGE THE BOND PROGRAM.
THEY WOULD CHARGE GENERAL FUND.
SO IN ADDITION TO THE FUNDS AND THE BOND, THERE WOULD BE STAFFING USES OF, OF, OF THE GENERAL FUND.
SO WE NEVER HAD A TRUE ACCOUNTING OF, OF WHAT THE, WHAT THE PROJECT COST IS, WHETHER IT'S SOFT, YOU KNOW, SOFT SOFT COSTS, ADMINISTRATION COSTS THROUGH, YOU KNOW, REVIEW COSTS, INSPECTION COSTS.
ALL OF THOSE WERE, WERE KIND OF HIDDEN IN THE DEPARTMENT.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE'VE ESTABLISHED THAT BOND OFFICE TO HAVE TRUE ACCOUNTING OF EVERY SINGLE COST ASSOCIATED WITH A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR A PROGRAM FOR THAT MATTER.
SO WHEN WE STARTED IN 2017, WE, WE WE HAD FIVE CORE STAFF MEMBERS.
[00:35:03]
AND WHAT WE DID IS WE TOOK STAFF FROM DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS WHO WERE WORKING ON PRIOR BOND PROGRAMS, AND THOSE WERE DESIGNATED OR DEDICATED TO EXECUTING THE BOND OFFICE.SO RATHER THAN HAVING THE GENERAL FUND PAY FOR IT, IT WAS THE BOND PROJECT THAT PAID FOR IT.
SO AS A RESULT, I BELIEVE WE STARTED WITH ABOUT MAYBE ABOUT 150, 155 PEOPLE.
AND THEN WE PROGRESSED TO THE 163, AND NOW WE'RE ASKING FOR 169.
SO THOSE ARE THE CORE, YOU KNOW STAFF WHO WORKS ON SPECIFICALLY ON FINANCIAL PIECE, ON SPECIFIC PROJECT MANAGEMENT FOR THE ENTIRE PROGRAM.
SO I HOPE, I HOPE I ANSWERED THE QUESTION YOU DID.
AND THE GOOD THING THAT BY DOING THIS AND I APPRECIATE, IS THAT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S ACTUALLY MADE IT MORE TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHAT IS THE COST OF THE BOND, THE TRUE COST OF THE BOND. HOWEVER, IT ALSO MEANS THAT WE HAVE STAFF MEMBERS THAT ARE BEING PAID BY DEBT AND INTEREST.
AND WE ALSO ARE GETTING LESS PROJECTS DONE PER BOND DOLLAR.
MEANING INSTEAD OF ALL OF THE BOND DOLLAR DEBT GOING TOWARDS THE PROJECT.
WE'RE TAKING SOME OF THAT MONEY AWAY AND USING IT FOR ADMINISTRATION, WHERE I BELIEVE IN THE PAST, BEFORE 2017, THE GENERAL FUND SUPPORTED THE STAFF TO DO THE WORK, AND ALL OF THAT WENT TO THE PROJECT.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ABOUT THE FIRST PART.
ON THE SECOND PART, STAFFING IS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE PROJECT COST.
THIS IS AN OVERALL PROJECT COST THAT WAS PUT IN THE BOND PROGRAM, MEANING THAT IF YOU HAD, LET'S SAY IF YOU HAD ONE STREET PROJECT, THAT STREET PROJECT WILL HAVE ADMINISTRATION, WILL HAVE DESIGN, WE'LL HAVE INSPECTION WILL HAVE EVERYTHING.
SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE STAFFING TIME ALREADY IN THAT BOND PROGRAM.
SO IT'S ALREADY FULLY BAKED IN IT.
RIGHT. SO I MEAN THE PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEM WITH THAT, OF COURSE, IS THAT YOU'RE THEN PAYING DEBT OVER TIME FOR STAFF WORK THAT ISN'T REALLY OVER TIME, AS OPPOSED TO A STREET THAT'S GOING TO STAY AND WILL DEPRECIATE OVER TIME.
BUT. THAT WOULD GENERALLY MEAN YOU WOULD REDUCE YOUR GENERAL FUND, NOT CONTINUE TO INCREASE YOUR GENERAL FUND, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE DONE, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE IN THIS SITUATION.
I MEAN, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE GROWTH OF THE DEPARTMENT.
TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE GROWTH OF OUR DEBT.
AND. I APPRECIATE THE BRIEFING.
THANK YOU. I GUESS MAJED YOU CAN STAND UP.
YES, SIR. MY QUESTION IS THAT.
I KNOW WE CHANGED HOW WE CHARGE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT AND BOND.
TELL ME IN 2017, WHAT IS OUR DEBT AND WE ADD MORE EMPLOYEES.
BUT WE STILL GOT A WHOLE LOT OF 2017 BOND PROJECTS HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETED.
DO THAT BALANCE OUT, DO THAT INCREASE BECAUSE WE DIDN'T FINISH THE 2017 DEBT.
SO HOW DO YOU CARRY IT OVER? DO YOU MANAGE THAT 2017 DEBT WITH A SEPARATE CLEAN BALANCE SHEET SHEET TO GO TO THE 2024 DEBT OR WHAT? HOW DO THEY WORK? I WOULD LOVE FOR JACK OR SOMEONE FROM THE BOND OFFICE TO BE HERE.
SO OKAY, OKAY, SO DON'T ANSWER THE QUESTION THEN.
SO CAN WE GET SOMEBODY FROM JACK OFFICE? BECAUSE THAT'S MY QUESTION RIGHT THERE.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE GOT A WHOLE LOT OF 2017 DEBT THAT HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETED THAT IS OVERRUN, ESPECIALLY IN MY DISTRICT, LIKE ONE STREET ON CROSS ROAD.
I'VE BEEN COMPLAINING FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS THEY'RE GOING TO OVERRUN.
IS THAT ADMINISTRATION THAT HAD BEEN ADMINISTRATING THAT DEBT? WHO TAKEN CARE OF THAT DEBT? THAT'S A COST FOR 2017, BUT IT'S GOING INTO THE 2024.
YOU KNOW, 2024 ARE GOING TO SAY, OKAY, THIS DEBT IS GOING TO GO BACK TO 2017.
SO IF YOU IF YOU CAN'T ANSWER THIS, GET SOMEBODY FROM STAFF.
BECAUSE THAT'S MY CONCERN RIGHT NOW.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TWO BUDGET SIDE BY SIDE.
[00:40:02]
AND YOU ARE YOU GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO 20 1226.SO ARE YOU. WE HAD LESS EMPLOYEES.
BUT GOING FORWARD WE GOTTA WE GOTTA DELTA SOMEWHERE.
IT'S OVERRUN. I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION, SIR.
AND JEANETTE WEEDEN, OUR BUDGET DIRECTOR IS ON THE LINE.
BUT I WOULD TELL YOU THE DEBT WAS NOT JUST ABOUT THE 2017 BOND.
WE HAD DEBT FROM THE 2012 TO 2006, 2003, AND EVERY SINGLE YEAR WE PAY INTO THE DEBT SERVICE.
SO WE HAVE WHAT'S CALLED THE DEBT CAPACITY.
I'LL LET JEANETTE TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IT, BUT I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WHEN, WHEN STAFF SUGGESTED THE SPECIFIC SPENDING CAPACITY, I THINK THAT'S HOW THE BOND WAS SET UP FOR 2024.
FOR, FOR A LOT MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE PERSON AND BETTER INFORMATION.
JEANETTE. THANK YOU MAJED, CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME? YES. JEANETTE WEEDEN, OUR DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
SO, COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS, TO YOUR POINT IF YOU LOOK AT THE MARCH BUDGET ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT, WE REFLECT THE UNENCUMBERED BALANCES FOR THE 2017 2012 AND 2006 BOND PROGRAMS. SO WE TRACK EACH BOND PROGRAM SEPARATELY.
WHEN WE ISSUE DEBT, WE ISSUE DEBT SEPARATELY IN DIFFERENT FUNDS.
SO WE ARE TRACKING THAT ANY COST OVERRUNS ASSOCIATED WITH THE 2017 2017 BOND PROGRAM.
IF YOU RECALL, WE ISSUED CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS, BOTH THE 2017 AND PRIOR BOND PROGRAMS. SO AT THIS TIME, WE DO NOT ANTICIPATE COST OVERRUNS ASSOCIATED WITH PRIOR BOND PROGRAMS IMPACTING THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM. SO HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.
YES IT DID. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I'LL START ON THIS END WITH MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM CHAIR RESENDEZ.
SORRY TO HAVE TO USE THOSE STEPS.
WITH THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM.
ITEM ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEM F? DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
ALL RIGHT. WE'LL START WITH CHAIR MENDELSOHN.
IT'S A THOROUGH PRESENTATION, SO I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU ON THAT.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE PAVEMENT MARKINGS.
IT JUST SAYS UPDATE ON BUDGETING INITIATIVES.
AND YOU HAVE A BULLET THAT SAYS PAVEMENT AND CROSSWALK MARKINGS.
BUT COULD YOU SPEAK TO WHAT THAT IS? HELLO. GOOD MORNING.
GASKIN CALLING THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
AS FAR AS THE THE PROGRAM FOR THE REFRESHING, IF YOU WILL, OF PAVEMENT AND CROSSWALKS MARKINGS AND FOR THIS YEAR IN THE CURRENT BUDGET IS WE DO HAVE AND WE DO HAVE 1.2 MILLION IN THE BASE BUDGET, IN ADDITION TO ABOUT $2 MILLION FROM THE DART SALES TAX FOR A TOTAL OF $3.2 MILLION THAT WE'RE USING FOR THE PAVEMENT AND CROSSWALKS.
AND WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR THIS COMING YEAR? AT THIS POINT, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THE BASE BUDGET HAS 1.2 MILLION IN THE BASE BUDGET.
I'M SORRY. SO YOU'RE SAYING FOR FISCAL YEAR 25, YOUR PLAN IS 1.2 FROM GENERAL FUND AND 2 MILLION FROM THE DART? OR YOU'RE SAYING FOR THE CURRENT YEAR, FISCAL YEAR 24.
SO CURRENT FY 24 I HAVE 1.2 PLUS TWO.
THIS BRIEFING IS NOT ON FUTURE BUDGET.
[00:45:02]
THIS BRIEFING IS ONLY ABOUT THE BUDGET THAT WAS NOT PROPOSED BY THE TWO YEAR BUDGET.NO, NO, I THINK THAT'S THE POINT OF THIS DISCUSSION, IS TO TALK ABOUT THE UPCOMING BUDGET.
THIS IS, IN MY UNDERSTANDING, IS THIS WAS THE PLAN BUDGET ESTABLISHED LAST YEAR.
WHAT IS YOUR PLANNED BUDGET FOR PAVEMENT MARKINGS? CURRENTLY, WHAT IS IN THE PLANNED BUDGET IS 1.2 MILLION IN.
WHAT IS THE COST TO BE ABLE TO DO ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS IN A YEAR? AND I BELIEVE YOU HAVE IT ON A THREE YEAR SCHEDULE.
SO ESSENTIALLY A THIRD OF WHAT IT WOULD COST TO DO THE ENTIRE CITY.
CORRECT. SO CURRENTLY BASED ON THE PROJECTIONS BECAUSE OUR CURRENT CONTRACT IS EXPIRING.
SO WHEN WE RENEW THE NEW CONTRACT IN IT WILL BE IN 25.
SO A PORTION OF IT WILL BE IN 24.
SO WE'RE PROJECTING A 20% INCREASE IN COST ALSO.
SO THEREFORE WE'RE PROJECTING OUR NEED IF WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN THE SCHEDULE OF ABOUT ONE THIRD OF OUR LINEAR MILES, IF YOU WILL, OF PAVEMENT TO BE CLOSE TO ABOUT 4 MILLION.
OKAY, WELL, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GO ON RECORD SAYING THIS IS A BUDGET PRIORITY TO ME.
I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE NOT FUNDED IT AS ROBUSTLY AS WE SHOULD.
I. I THINK IT NEEDS TO STAY FROM A SUSTAINABLE SOURCE, MEANING THE GENERAL FUND.
WE SHOULDN'T EVEN BE THINKING ABOUT THIS.
AND WHEN I'VE SEEN REDUCTIONS IN THIS, MY CONCERN IS NOT JUST FOR VISION ZERO, BUT JUST THE BASIC COMMON SENSE OF HOW ARE PEOPLE GOING TO STAY IN THEIR LANE WHEN THE PAVEMENT MARKINGS HAVE WORN OFF OR SAFELY CROSS AT A CROSSWALK WHEN THAT'S WORN OFF? AND SO.
YOU KNOW, IN THE OVERALL SCHEME, EVEN 4 MILLION IS NOT ASTRONOMICAL IN OUR BUDGET.
SO I I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT THE NEXT ITEM THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP IS IF THERE'S BEEN CONSIDERATION OF CHANGING HOW WE DEAL WITH DOLLARS THAT ARE RECOVERED BY RISK MANAGEMENT FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS OR SIGNAGE THAT HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BY A VEHICLE, AND INSTEAD OF THAT GOING INTO A FUND WITH RISK MANAGEMENT, HAVING THAT RETURN TO TRANSPORTATION SO THAT YOU CAN REPLACE THOSE, BECAUSE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING HOW YOU'RE ABLE TO DO THAT WHEN WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY SIGNALS WILL BE HIT BY TRUCKS AND CARS, HOW MANY SIGNS WILL GO DOWN, I MEAN, I IT LOOKS LIKE FROM, FROM THE PRESENTATION THAT YOU'RE DOING IT BASED ON EXPERIENCE, LIKE, OKAY, WE GENERALLY THINK IT'LL BE THIS MUCH, BUT I THINK YOU HAD ONLY $200,000 IN THERE FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL REPLACEMENT.
AS FAR AS THE RECOVERY, IF YOU WILL, AFTER HANDLING A ALL THESE, WHAT WE CALL THEM, THE KNOCK DOWNS.
THEN WE'LL MAY HAVE TO COME BACK BECAUSE THAT CONVERSATION WILL HAVE TO INCLUDE OTHER DEPARTMENTS ON HOW WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT, WHETHER WE DO IT LIKE YOU PROPOSED.
IS THE REVENUE SOME SORT OF A REVENUE TO BE COMING BACK OR CONTINUE TO DO IT BASED ON THE PROJECTED, HISTORICAL PROJECTED COST.
SO THAT IS A CONVERSATION TO HAVE.
AND ARE YOU AWARE OF WHERE THE DOLLARS GO THAT RISK RISK MANAGEMENT HAS RECOVERED FOR? I LOVE THAT NAME A KNOCKDOWN.
WHERE DOES THAT MONEY GO NOW? I MAY HAVE TO DEFER TO JEANETTE IF SHE'S STILL ON.
JANETTE WEEDEN, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
SO ANY RECOVERY FROM LOSSES BOTH THROUGH TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPACTS AND OTHER IMPACTS ACROSS THE CITY, THAT FUNDING IS COLLECTED AND BOOKED INTO THE RISK MANAGEMENT FUND.
[00:50:01]
RISK MANAGEMENT COSTS.SO WORKER'S COMP LIABILITY INSURANCE.
IT'S PART OF THE OVERALL FUNDING FOR THAT PARTICULAR FOR THOSE GROUPS OF FUNDS.
SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT WOULD BE LOGICAL TO MOVE THAT TO BECOME AUTOMATIC ADDITION TO ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN SUBROGATED, TO GO DIRECTLY BACK TO TRANSPORTATION, TO BE ABLE TO FIX OR INSTALL A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL, SIGNAGE, WHATEVER IT IS. HAS THAT BEEN DISCUSSED? YES. AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT ALL COMES FROM THE SAME SORT OF POCKET OF FUNDING.
SO IT'S JUST A MATTER OF MOVING IT FROM, FROM FROM ONE BUCKET TO ANOTHER.
OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION.
ON SLIDE FIVE, COULD YOU TALK ABOUT THE REDUCTION IN GRANT AND TRUST FUNDS? SO THE GRANT FUNDS THAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE 8.3 IN FY 24, 23, 24 AND PLANNED 24-25 GOING DOWN TO ZERO.
THIS IS THE LAST FUNDS THAT WE HAVE FROM THE ARPA PROGRAM.
THANK YOU. SO, OKAY. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE WON'T HAVE OTHER GRANTS THAT COME IN.
THEY'RE JUST NOT BUDGETING BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T APPLIED THAT AT THIS POINT.
THIS IS THIS IS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE ARPA.
OKAY. LET'S LET'S CLARIFY THAT JUST FOR WHEN WE DO THE BUDGET SO NOBODY GETS CONFUSED.
YES, MA'AM. AND SAY AND COULD YOU SHARE THAT YOUR INSIGHT ON THE TRUST AND OTHER FUNDS PLEASE.
THIS INCLUDES ALSO THE OTHER FUNDS SUCH AS THE BIKE LANE FUNDS.
IT HAS ALSO THE SIGNAL EQUIPMENT.
AND THOSE TWO THIS FUNDS HERE INCLUDES THE STREETCAR.
SO WHAT, YOU'RE SORRY TO INTERRUPT.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? SO VICTORIA BENNETT THE BUDGET MANAGER FOR THE DEPARTMENT.
SO THOSE ARE SINGLE YEAR ALLOCATIONS TO THOSE FUNDS OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE MOST PART.
SO WALTON WALKER PROJECT OUR BIKE LANES.
SO WE SEND THOSE WE PUT THAT FUNDING OVER INTO A MULTI YEAR FUND.
SO THE LOOP 12 WAS A ONE TIME.
I'M TRYING TO I'M LOOKING AT THE TRUST AND OTHER FUNDS.
YES, MA'AM. SO THEY'RE SOME OF THOSE? NOT THE ENTIRE LIST, BUT SOME OF THOSE ARE ONE TIME ARE PASSTHROUGHS TO OUR MULTI YEAR FUNDS, WHICH ARE COUNTED IN THE GRANT AND TRUST.
I'M SORRY, IN THE TRUST AND OTHER FUNDS CATEGORY.
SO THERE THERE'S KIND OF A DOUBLE COUNTING IF YOU TOTAL THEM ALL UP TOGETHER.
SO BECAUSE, SO LIKE THE, THE TWO POINT THE 2 MILLION AND THE WALTON WALKER AND THE 2.5 MILLION OF A BIKE LANE FUNDS, SO TO $6 MILLION, $6.5 MILLION DELTA.
SO MAYBE DIG IN A LITTLE MORE FOR ME.
SO THERE ARE ITEMS IN HERE THAT ARE A ONE TIME ITEM THAT WERE IN MY 23, 24 BUDGET.
THE ONE TIME ITEM, FOR EXAMPLE, $2 MILLION WERE FOR THE LOOP 12 STREET LIGHTS.
SO THAT IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE.
NOW WE'RE DOWN TO 4.5 MILLION.
WE'RE DOWN LESS, LESS, 2 MILLION.
AND THEN YOU DO HAVE 4.75 MILLION IN THE DART SALES OPERATING FUNDS THAT BASICALLY CAME TO US FROM DART ON THE EXCESS SALES TAX THAT WE HAVE THEM IN THIS YEAR AVAILABLE FOR EXPENDITURES THAT WE ACCOUNTED FOR IN THIS YEAR.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR NEXT YEAR.
SO LET'S CLARIFY THAT FOR THE BUDGET AGAIN ALSO SO THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
[00:55:04]
IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT? WE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A REAL PROBLEM WITH PARKING OVERSIGHT BECAUSE WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE BANDWIDTH TO MANAGE ALL THE PLACES THAT NEED MANAGEMENT, RIGHT? NO PARKING ZONES, THINGS LIKE THAT, OPPORTUNITIES FOR REVENUE, I WILL SAY.AND SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE THE OPPORTUNITY WHETHER IT'S DOWN THE ROAD OR NOT, TO LOOK AT THIS FROM AN ENTERPRISE PERSPECTIVE? I DON'T MEAN THAT NECESSARILY FROM A LEGAL ENTERPRISE STRUCTURE, BUT JUST THAT WE CAN GET MORE.
IF WE INVEST MORE, WE CAN GET MORE FROM THIS.
SO FIRST WE NEED TO UPGRADE THE SYSTEM.
WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THAT MONEY IS WE'RE CONVERTING ALL OF THE OLD METERS INTO SMART METERS.
IF SOMEONE LEAVES AT 30 MINUTES, SOMEONE COMES IN AND STILL THE METER IS STILL AVAILABLE FOR THAT PERSON FOR ANOTHER 30 MINUTES WITH THE NEW PARKING METERS WITH THE SENSORS THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN, WHEN THE SENSORS SENSES THAT THE CAR IS GONE, IT RESETS ITSELF TO ZERO SO THAT WHEN WE HAVE SOMEONE COMING IN, IT STARTS AGAIN.
SO WE'RE ABLE TO KIND OF GENERATE ADDITIONAL FUNDING.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE UPGRADE TO THE METERS.
THE OTHER THE OTHER THING IS THAT WE AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE MAY HAVE TO KIND OF LOOK INTO, AND I THINK THIS HAS COME UP BEFORE IS TO LOOK, SINCE WE'RE LOOKING AT PROJECTS AS TOTAL COST PROJECTS CURRENTLY, I THINK, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, AND I'M GOING TO GO BACK AND AND GET THAT IN THE CITY ORDINANCE, IF THERE IS A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT THAT IS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, THEN THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM PAYING THE HOODING FEES AS WELL AS ALSO ADDITIONAL CLOSURES OF ROADWAY.
SO THEREFORE I SHOULD BE ABLE TO COLLECT SOME OF THE REVENUES FROM THE HOODING, BECAUSE CURRENTLY WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS I'M LOSING REVENUES BECAUSE OF PARTLY OF THE REMOVAL AND NOT BEING ABLE TO TAP IT A LOT.
BUT YOU SHOW YOUR METER FEES WELL, YOU DON'T HAVE YOUR 2425 REVENUE FORECAST ON HERE.
I ONLY SEE 2324 AND IT'S DOWN 500,000.
SO I LIKE LOOKING AT THAT REVENUE OPPORTUNITY.
BUT BUT THE THE CITATIONS ACTUALLY ARE TWICE THE REVENUE POTENTIAL.
AND SO I'M WONDERING BUT YET YOU HAVE A YOU'RE, WE'RE SPENDING TWICE, ALMOST TWICE OUR INCOME ON MANAGEMENT THAN WE'RE GETTING FROM CITATIONS.
ONE IS LOOKING AT THAT OPPORTUNITY.
SECOND, WILL THOSE METERS IF I RUN OVER ON THE METER IS IT GOING.
HOW DO I PAY FOR THE TIME IF I DON'T IF I RUN OUT OF THE METER.
SO THE PARKING ENFORCEMENT, THEY WILL HAVE THE THEY HAVE THE LICENSE PLATE READERS.
I RUN OUT THAT METER, I'M GOING TO GET A TICKET.
BUT CURRENTLY I KNOW THAT SOME OF OUR, SOME OF OUR PARKING ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS DO HAVE THE LICENSE PLATE READER, THEREFORE, WHICH IS BASICALLY YOU PUT IN THE LICENSE PLATE AND IF ON THE ON THE APP, THEY EXCEEDED THE TIMELINE, THEN THEY WILL GET A CITATION. WE'RE GOING TO SPEND $1 MILLION ON THESE METERS.
WE SHOULD DEFINITELY BE ABLE TO RECOVER OUR FUNDS THROUGH THINGS LIKE THIS.
SO I WOULD LIKE US TO LOOK AT THAT.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO REASON TO HAVE PARKING ENFORCEMENT IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO RECOVER THE FUNDS.
LET'S NOT INVEST IN IT SO THAT I REALLY LIKE MAYBE YOU CAN COME BACK IN A MEMO AND EXPLAIN THE MONEY SIDE OF THIS, BECAUSE WE ABSOLUTELY SHOULD BE FULLY RECOVERING OUR INVESTMENT IN PARKING MANAGEMENT THROUGH INCOME SOURCES, WHETHER IT'S METERS OR CITATIONS.
SO YES, MA'AM, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
[01:00:05]
I CONCUR, AND WE'LL COME BACK WITH EXPLANATION.SORRY I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBER IN FRONT OF ME AT THE MOMENT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE BRINGING IN IN EXCESS OF 9 MILLION IN REVENUE FROM THE TOTAL FUNDING SOURCE. TOTAL REVENUE SOURCES FOR PARKING.
AND SO, MR. CHAIR, WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE.
AND MAYBE WHAT WE CAN DO IN THE FALL SOMETIME IS GET A MORE CLEAR PICTURE AND MAYBE GET A BRIEFING JUST ON ALL OF OUR PARKING ENFORCEMENT ISSUES, BECAUSE I REMEMBER FROM PLANNING COMMISSION DAYS, IT'S A CONSTANT DISCUSSION ABOUT PARKING AS A HUGE PIECE OF ALL OF OUR LAND USE.
AND SO IF WE COULD HAVE THAT BRIEFING, THAT WOULD BE FANTASTIC.
THAT ALLOWS ME TO GATHER DATA BASED ON THE NEW METERS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? YES. THANK YOU.
WELL. THANK YOU. THIS IS VERY NEEDED.
I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
LET'S SEE. SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S NO REGISTRATION STICKER AT ALL? SO WE'RE WE'RE TRYING TO KIND OF TAG THE VIN NUMBER AND GO AFTER THE PERSON WHO OWNS THE VEHICLE BASED ON THE VIN NUMBER.
BUT SO ARE YOU ABLE TO TICKET AND ARE YOU ABLE TO TOW IT? THAT IS THE INTENT IS TO TO BE ABLE TO DO ALL THESE THINGS HERE.
BECAUSE CURRENTLY THAT IS A GAP IN THE ORDINANCE.
AND OBVIOUSLY IN SOME AREAS, AS YOU'RE AWARE, IN DISTRICT 12, DISTRICT 11, DISTRICT 13, AND LATELY DISTRICT FOUR AND DISTRICT SIX, ALSO WE'RE HAVING SOME OF THESE ISSUES.
SO THIS DEFINITELY WILL COVER A GAP THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
BUT SO WHEN I'M READING IT ON PAGE ONE OF THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE A SAYS THAT A PERSON COMMITS AN OFFENSE IF THE PERSON PARKS A MOTOR VEHICLE ON A STREET, HIGHWAY OR ALLEY THAT DISPLAYS A VEHICLE REGISTRATION THAT HAS BEEN EXPIRED FOR TWO MONTHS OR LONGER.
SO WHAT IF THERE'S NO STICKER, THOUGH? WHAT IF THERE'S NO REGISTRATION? WELL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK INTO IF THERE IS A REGISTRATION ON THE VEHICLE.
AND AGAIN, THE CITATION WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE TO THE VIN NUMBER ON THE VEHICLE.
HOWEVER, I WILL FOLLOW UP ON THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THIS IS A KIND OF GAP THAT WE NEED TO COVER, I'LL WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO BE MORE EXPLICIT IF THERE ISN'T ONE. AND THEN IN THE SAME VEIN, ON C, IT SAYS, EXCEPT FOR DIGITAL LICENSE PLATES GOVERNED BY SUBCHAPTER B1, CHAPTER 504, TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE IS AMENDED. A PERSON COMMITS AN OFFENSE IF THE PERSON PARKS A MOTOR VEHICLE ON A PUBLIC STREET, HIGHWAY, OR ALLEY THAT DOES NOT DISPLAY A REAR LICENSE PLATE, AND IT SAYS THIS SUBSECTION APPLIES TO A DAMAGED VEHICLE THAT PREVENTS THE DISPLAY OF A REAR LICENSE PLATE.
NUMBER ONE, I'M WORRIED THAT THE SECOND SENTENCE THAT SAYS THIS SUBSECTION APPLIES TO THAT.
IT ALSO MAKES IT CLEAR THAT IT APPLIES TO ALL VEHICLES.
SO I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A WORD MISSING THAT LIKE THIS SUBSECTION ALSO APPLIES.
MEANING THE FIRST SENTENCE YOU'RE CLEARLY SAYING.
BUT THEN I FEEL LIKE THE SECOND SENTENCE IS QUALIFYING IT TO MEAN ONLY DAMAGED, YOU KNOW? IF IT'S DAMAGED AND DOESN'T DISPLAY IT.
SO I FEEL LIKE THE WORD ALSO IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO BE IN THERE.
AND THEN LET ME SEE IF I HAD ANOTHER ONE.
YOU KNOW, THE I LOVE THAT IN THE MEMO, YOU YOU SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE OF PEOPLE RUNNING CAR REPAIR BUSINESSES. THAT'S REALLY BECOME AN ENTERPRISE OF SEEPING FLUIDS.
I MEAN, WE HAVE SUCH AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE THAT'S HAPPENING.
IN SOME OF THESE AREAS AND JUST A MASSIVE NUMBER OF VEHICLES THAT HAVE NO LICENSE PLATE WHATSOEVER.
AND I KNOW THAT I HAVE POSTED MULTIPLE VIDEOS JUST GOING DOWN STREETS WHERE IT IS LITERALLY CARS ARE PARKED INCHES WITHIN EACH OTHER SO THAT THEY CAN'T STEAL THEM BECAUSE IT'S ALL OWNED BY THE SAME FOLKS.
AND THERE'S NOT A SINGLE LICENSE PLATE IN IN SIGHT.
SO THERE'S A AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS SEEPING OUT OF THEM.
SO THIS IS CLEARLY TIGHTENING UP SOME THINGS THAT I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN ENCOUNTERING.
[01:05:06]
AND SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT AND APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT FORWARD.GREAT FEEDBACK. THANK YOU MA'AM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. CHAIR, I MEAN, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? IS THAT IF THE COMMITTEE WOULD WOULD LIKE FOR US TO BRING THIS TO THE FULL COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, I WOULD LOVE TO TO HAVE A KIND OF A MOTION FOR US TO HAVE A SECOND. MOTION MADE IN SECOND.
ALL RIGHTY. THAT IS MOVED FORWARD.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. I BELIEVE THIS MAY BE THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM IS ITEM H, IS UPCOMING AGENDA ITEM.
HALL, ARTS GARAGE, ELEVATORS, EMERGENCY REPAIRS AND MODERNIZATION.
ANY QUESTIONS? CHAIR MENDELSOHN.
YES. SO THE MEMO IS TALKING ABOUT THE NEED TO ADDRESS THIS ELEVATOR, BUT THERE'S NO COST ASSOCIATED.
THAT'S THERE'S IT'S NOT ON HERE.
GOOD MORNING, HONORABLE CHAIR.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE BRIAN THOMPSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF BUILDING SERVICES.
AND WHERE WILL THAT COME FROM? CURRENTLY THAT IS GOING TO COME FROM THE BUILDING SERVICES MAJOR MAINTENANCE CAPITAL FUNDING.
WOULD YOU KNOW HOW MUCH YOU HAVE LEFT IN THAT ACCOUNT? I DON'T, BUT WE CAN GET THAT FOR YOU.
WHAT'S THE LIFESPAN OF AN ELEVATOR? OR THIS KIND OF ELEVATOR, I SHOULD SAY.
I THINK THAT'S A TOUGH QUESTION TO ANSWER.
LIKE ANY FACILITY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM, WE ANTICIPATE 20 YEARS.
FOR LARGE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, BUT USE THE TYPE OF FACILITY THAT'S IN A WHOLE HOST OF SITUATIONS COULD REALLY PLAY INTO THE LIFESPAN. SO YOU JUST SAID 20 YEARS.
HAVE WE ACCRUED ANY DOLLARS TO DO THIS REPLACEMENT? CAN YOU CLARIFY AS FAR AS WHAT YOU MEAN BY CRUDE? SURE. SO I PUT A NEW ROOF ON MY HOUSE.
I KNOW THAT IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO LAST 20 YEARS, AND I START SAVING UP.
I PAID OFF MY ROOF, AND I START SAVING UP BECAUSE I KNOW I'M GOING TO REPLACE IT.
I BUY A CAR, I KNOW THE CAR IS GOING TO LAST ME TEN YEARS.
I START SAVING UP TO BE ABLE TO REPLACE IT.
HAVE WE DONE THAT? TO BE ABLE TO REPLACE SOMETHING THAT WE KNOW HAS A LIMITED LIFE? IN THIS SPECIFIC INSTANCE, I WOULD SAY NO.
WE HAVEN'T SET ASIDE SPECIFIC DOLLARS FOR THIS PARTICULAR SET OF ELEVATORS.
IN THE BIG CITYWIDE PICTURE BUILDING SERVICES HAS 504 PLUS BUILDINGS UNDER OUR MAINTENANCE PORTFOLIO THAT WE CONTINUALLY WORK THROUGH A CAPITAL PLANNING PROCESS.
AND I WOULD SAY WE DON'T NECESSARILY SET ASIDE A SPECIFIC DOLLAR PER BUILDING.
IT'S REALLY LOOKING AT THE CITYWIDE NEED AS A WHOLE.
AND OUR PLANNING PROCESS BASED ON THE APPROPRIATIONS WERE GIVEN ANNUALLY.
SO I GUESS THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT MY PROBLEM IS, IS THAT WE HAVE A PLANNING PROCESS AND WE'RE SAYING THIS IS AN EMERGENCY REPAIR, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY NOT AN EMERGENCY REPAIR WHEN IT'S 38 YEARS OLD.
AND I MEAN, YOU SAID 20 YEARS.
I MEAN, IT'S ALMOST TWICE AS OLD AS IT SHOULD BE.
THIS SHOULD BE LIKE A PLANNED REPAIR.
THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE EMERGENCY IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE IS THERE'S FOUR ELEVATORS.
THREE OF THOSE ARE CURRENTLY INOPERABLE.
THE ONE OPERATIONAL ELEVATOR CONTINUES TO CAUSE FREQUENT ENTRAPMENTS.
AND IN THE OPINION OF BUILDING SERVICES AND IN CONSULTATION WITH CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO REALLY MITIGATE ANY ADDITIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES.
I AGREE, IT ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE REPAIRED, REPLACED, WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE.
AND WE HAD TO KNOW THIS WAS COMING.
WE HAD TO KNOW THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.
AND I'M CERTAINLY NOT IN ANY WAY PICKING ON YOU OR EVEN THESE ELEVATORS.
IT'S JUST THE GENERAL PHILOSOPHY OF HOW WE TAKE CARE OF OUR CITY AND HOW WE TAKE CARE OF OUR ASSETS.
[01:10:01]
THAT I'M CALLING INTO QUESTION, AND THIS IS JUST A REALLY HORRIBLE EXAMPLE OF THAT, OF SOMETHING THAT WE KNOW IS VERY, VERY OLD.AND WE DIDN'T ACCRUE THOSE DOLLARS SO THAT WE COULD REPLACE IT WITHOUT CALLING IT AN EMERGENCY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS, MR. CHAIR? OMAR? YES.
I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. UM ON THIS ITEM.
THIS IS REALLY ABOUT WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
AND YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ONLY ONE ELEVATOR.
THAT IS AN EMERGENCY, IN MY OPINION.
IF WE'VE GOT TO GET THIS TAKEN CARE OF AND FIXED FOR THE MEYERSON, WE OWN THE BUILDING.
YES, THE ELEVATOR IS 38 YEARS OLD.
YES. THERE ARE PLANS TO GET IT DONE.
BUT AS FAR AS WHAT AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
BUILDING, THIS HAS TO BE DONE.
WE NEED TO GET IT TAKEN CARE OF.
THIS IS A POSITIVE FOR OUR CITY.
WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE DONE AS COUNCILS PAST, NOT THIS ONE.
COUNCILS PAST HAVE DONE A HORRIFIC JOB IN PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE.
AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE GOT TO START ON NOW.
BUT TO TAKE IT OUT ON AN ELEVATOR IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO JUST SIT BACK AND NOT SAY SOMETHING BECAUSE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT REPAIR THAT HAS TO GET TAKEN CARE OF.
IT'S EXPENSIVE. I HATE THAT IT'S EXPENSIVE.
I HATE THAT WE'VE KNOWN THAT THIS IS COMING UP, BUT HERE WE ARE.
LET'S FOCUS ON IT, GET IT REPAIRED, GET IT DONE, AND THEN WE CAN TAKE CERTAIN SUGGESTIONS AND PUT THEM IN A POSITIVE LIGHT SO THAT WE CAN START TO WORK ON THOSE THINGS. BECAUSE WE ARE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DEFERRED MAINTENANCE IN THE CITY ACROSS THE BOARD.
AND IT'S WE COULD DO THIS IN EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT AND NOT GET ANYWHERE.
SO MR. CHAIR, I SAY THAT WE GO FORWARD WITH THIS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THIS NEEDS ANY KIND OF A APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD TO FULL COUNCIL.
BUT IF SO, THEN I MOVE THAT WE MOVE IT FORWARD.
IF IT DOESN'T, THEN LET'S JUST MOVE ON.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
SO I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP THE 747,400, IS THAT FOR THE ONE ELEVATOR? IS THAT FOR ALL FOUR? NO, THAT'S FOR ALL FOUR.
OKAY. AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED TO THE OTHER THREE THAT WEREN'T WORKING? SO TWO ARE AN ELECTRICAL RELATED ISSUE.
AND SO THEY HAVE RELAY SYSTEMS. AND WHEN ONE RELAY SYSTEM FAILS IT FAILS THE OTHER ELEVATOR AS A SAFETY MEASURE.
THE THIRD INOPERABLE ELEVATOR.
SO THEY HAVE WHAT'S CALLED LIFTING JACKS.
AND THE LIFTING JACK ON THAT PARTICULAR UNIT HAS FAILED.
AND HOW LONG HAVE THOSE OTHER THREE NOT BEEN WORKING? WE STARTED RECEIVING CALLS IN DECEMBER AND ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS SENT OUR ELEVATOR REPAIR CONTRACTOR OUT AND REALLY PERFORMED BAND AID MEASURES.
WE DIDN'T REALIZE THEY WERE BAND AID MEASURES AT THE TIME, BUT WE WOULD MAKE A REPAIR.
AND THEN SHORTLY AFTER RECEIVE A CALL THAT ANOTHER ISSUE HAD TRANSPIRED.
SO IT WAS A A SNOWBALL EFFECT.
IT WASN'T ONE ISSUE THAT CAUSED US TO KEEP GOING BACK.
IT WAS A DIFFERENT ISSUE EACH TIME.
OKAY. AND THEN I DON'T EXPECT YOU'RE GOING TO KNOW THIS, BUT COULD YOU EMAIL ME AND TELL ME? I'M CURIOUS HOW MANY ELEVATORS WE HAVE IN THE CITY THAT ARE OURS TO MAINTAIN? I CAN GET YOU THAT.
I KNOW WE MAINTAIN A LIST OF ALL THE ELEVATORS THAT DSD MAINTAIN CITYWIDE, AND THEN THE MASTER AGREEMENT WILL GIVE US A THE LIST THAT WAS UNDER THE BID TABULATION.
SO I CAN GET THAT. OKAY. AND IF YOU CAN SPLIT THEM OUT THAT WAY, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE LAST ITEM AND THAT'S ITEM I.
MONTHLY UPDATE OF PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAM PERFORMANCE.
ANY COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? FOURTH TERM.
AND I DON'T KNOW. OH, THAT'S ALI IN PERSON NOW.
ALI ABOUT THIS TIME OF YEAR, I ALWAYS ASK YOU THE SAME QUESTION.
YOU PROBABLY KNOW WHERE I'M GOING TO GO WITH THIS.
SO YOU'VE GOT THE MONTHLY UPDATE AND IT'S GOT THE INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT AND IT'S GOT THE BOND.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE WHOLE THING, YOU'VE GOT LESS THAN 40% OF THE WORK DONE.
[01:15:07]
AND YOU'VE GOT FOUR MONTHS LEFT.ARE YOU GOING TO GET IT ALL DONE? GOOD MORNING, ALI HATEFI, THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, COUNCIL MEMBER.
WE HAD THE SAME SITUATION LAST YEAR, I BELIEVE.
RIGHT? YEP. USUALLY DURING THE SUMMER TIME, WE DO A LOT OF CHEAPER TREATMENT THAT IT RAMPS UP LANE MILES PRETTY QUICK, ACTUALLY.
SO I'M EXPECTING TO SEE A LOT MORE NUMBERS.
AS YOU ALL KNOW I BELIEVE WE'RE STILL GOING TO BE GOOD FOR ACHIEVING THE GOAL OF 792.
HOWEVER, OUR MATERIAL COST HAS GONE UP FOR THE STREET OPERATION TEAM, FOR OUR IN-HOUSE TEAM.
BASED ON THE NEW CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE, THEY HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT ONE AND SEE WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS FOR THAT COST TO BE ABSORBED WITHIN THE LANE MILES THAT THEY HAVE? WE MAY NEED TO ADJUST SOME, BUT FOR NOW, I'M STAYING WITH THE 792.
AND WE'LL UPDATE YOU IN THE NEXT MONTH FOR SURE.
AND SO, IS IT YOUR INTENTION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY SPEND ALL THE DOLLARS BY THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, OR THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ACTUALLY COMPLETED ALL THE LANE MILES OR NEITHER? WELL, COMPLETING LANE MILES WILL BE THE OPTION FOR THIS IS OUR GOAL ALWAYS, BECAUSE THE FUNDING PART OF IT IS ALWAYS LAGGING BECAUSE OF THE COLLECTING THE INVOICES, WHEN THE CONTRACTOR INVOICES AND ALL THESE THINGS.
SO I'M ASSUMING, YOU KNOW, BY END OF SEPTEMBER, PROBABLY NOT ALL THE MONEY GOING TO BE SPENT.
BUT MY GOAL IS TO FINISH ALL THE LANE MILES BY END OF SEPTEMBER.
OF COURSE. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
WITH THAT, I DO WANT TO CIRCLE BACK TO THIS ITEM.
WE HAVE DATES IDENTIFIED FOR THE PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES.
SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO MR. CHAIR, IF IT'S OKAY WITH YOU, IS TO BRING THIS BACK ON THE AUGUST 19TH COMMITTEE MEETING SO THAT WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSIONS.
AND I'M LOOKING AT BOTH THE CHAIR OF LEGISLATIVE AND THE CHAIR OF TRANSPORTATION, LOOKING AT YOU BOTH TO, TO TO UNDERSTAND, AT THIS POINT BETWEEN NOW AND AUGUST 19TH, AM I THE UNDERSTANDING, ARE WE TO UNDERSTAND THAT AS A COMMITTEE, IF THERE ARE ANY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA ITEMS AND PRIORITIES, WE SUPPOSED TO SUBMIT THOSE AND COME PREPARED TO DISCUSS THOSE AT THE AUGUST 19TH MEETING SO THAT.
SEPTEMBER 4TH. SEPTEMBER 4TH COUNCIL MEETING.
WE'LL BE PREPARED TO TO KIND OF HAVE A DISCUSSION OF THE COUNCIL BRIEFING.
EVERYBODY CLEAR? I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT TIMELINE.
AND JUST COLLEAGUES, MAKE SURE THAT THOSE FOR OUR COMMITTEE, THEY GET SENT INTO ME SO THAT I CAN COMPILE THEM ALL AND FORWARD THEM TO CLIFFORD TO WHO WILL BE ABLE TO PUT THEM ALL TOGETHER AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE IN THE RIGHT CATEGORY, BECAUSE SOME THINGS DO GET SENT IN THAT BELONG IN ANOTHER LEGISLATIVE AGENDA ITEM AREA, PRIORITY AREA.
AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH GETTING THAT TAKEN CARE OF, BUT YOU HAVE TO GET IT TO ME A WEEK BEFORE THAT MEETING, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO ALLOW STAFF ENOUGH TIME TO PUT EVERYTHING TOGETHER SO THAT IT ENDS UP ON THE AGENDA, BECAUSE IF YOU TURN IT IN THE DAY BEFORE THE AGENDA, THEN IT'S NOT GOING TO GET TO BE HEARD BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT WASN'T POSTED.
SO, COLLEAGUES, MAKE SURE THAT YOU KNOW THAT YOU HAVE TO THE WEEK BEFORE THE MEETING IN ORDER TO GIVE STAFF ENOUGH TIME TO PUT EVERYTHING TOGETHER AND TO POST AND GET EVERYTHING PREPARED.
BUT, MR. CHAIR, CAN I CAN I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION? GO FOR. SORRY. CAN I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THEN THAT BY FRIDAY, AUGUST 9TH.
THAT MEANS THAT'LL GIVE STAFF OR GIVES FULL WEEK TO COMPILE FOR THE AUGUST 19TH MEETING.
IS THAT WORK? AND BY END OF DAY FRIDAY.
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. THAT WORKS GREAT.
OKAY. ALL RIGHT, WELL, WITH THAT, WHAT WE DO NEED ONE MORE THING.
WE NEED TO TAKE A MOVE TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM.
ITEM C TO THE AUGUST 19TH TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE.
SECOND MOTION IS MADE PROPERLY.
SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. AT 11:20, WE'LL CALL THE TRANSPORTATION MEETING TO ADJOURN.
THANK.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.