Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:03]

ALL RIGHT. IT IS 1:32 P.M.

[Council Government Performance & Financial Management Committee on June 24, 2024]

AND WE ARE GOING TO CALL THIS.

I'M GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING OF THE GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE TO ORDER.

I SEE WE'VE GOT MR. RESENDEZ ON THERE.

CAN YOU HEAR US? YEP. THERE IT IS.

ALL RIGHT. AND I'VE GOT VICE CHAIR BLACKMON WITH ME.

SO I THINK THE OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE ON THEIR WAY.

WE WILL START WITH.

OF THE MINUTES FOR MAY 21ST, 2024.

I GOT A MOTION.

I GOT A SECOND.

SECOND. THAT'S A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT WE WILL.

WELL, I THINK THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WANTED TO BE HERE FOR ITEM A, BUT WE'LL GO AHEAD AND JUST GET STARTED.

NOW, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROCEED, MR. GIBSON? I WOULD, MR. CHAIR, IF THAT'S YOUR PREFERENCE.

SO I'M HERE TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE MEMORANDUM THAT WAS PROVIDED THIS PAST FRIDAY.

I KNOW AT PREVIOUS COMMITTEE MEETINGS THERE WAS AN OPEN DISCUSSION ABOUT PROPERTIES THAT WERE GOING TO BE DIVESTED OF.

AND THE LIST OF THE TEN PROPERTIES ARE HERE IN THE MEMORANDUM FOR OUR REVIEW.

REAL ESTATE HAS RECEIVED SOME OF THE DRAFT APPRAISALS.

THERE'S STILL SOME BACK AND FORTH THERE.

SO THEY'RE NOT FORMAL.

THEY'RE NOT COMPLETE JUST YET.

SO THEY'RE STILL UNDER REVIEW.

AND THEN THERE'S SOME THAT ARE STILL OBVIOUSLY IN PROGRESS THAT ARE LISTED HERE IN THE MEMORANDUM.

THERE'S ALSO A BRIEF UPDATE ON 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL, WHICH IS ONE OF THE TEN PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DIVEST OF.

AND AS DESCRIBED HERE IN THE MEMORANDUM, THERE WERE SOME.

THANK YOU. SIR. CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME BETTER NOW? OKAY, PERFECT.

ANYWAY, MAKE A LONG STORY SHORT.

THERE WERE SOME ISSUES THAT WE HAD AT 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL.

WE BELIEVE THAT THE DAILY INSPECTIONS THAT BUILDING SERVICES IS DOING, THAT'S NOT BUILDING.

BUILDING SECURITY IS DOING IS ADDRESSING THAT.

THERE HAD BEEN ONE ISSUE WHERE POLICE AND SEVERAL OTHER DEPARTMENTS MADE ENTRY OF THE BUILDING AND FOUND SOME PEOPLE THERE INSIDE THE BUILDING WHERE THEY WERE ASKED TO, TO LEAVE.

AND THEN WE HAD TO REBOARD THE BUILDING UP.

BUT IT'S IT'S UNDER SUPERVISION NOW.

IT'S BEEN THERE'S A SECURITY CAMERA THAT'S ACTUALLY THERE, FOCUSED AND BEING MONITORED AT THAT LOCATION AS WE SPEAK.

SO WE FEEL LIKE THE BUILDING IS IN A FAIRLY SECURE STATE AT THE MOMENT.

AND I'M HERE FOR ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

I'M GONNA ASK MY COLLEAGUES IF THEY HAVE ANY.

I'VE GOT SOME I CAN KICK IT OFF WITH.

FIRST OF ALL, WHAT IS THE 606 GOOD LATIMER PROPERTY? WHERE IS THAT? AND WHAT IS IT? ASHLEY, CAN I GET SOME SUPPORT ON THIS ONE? GOOD AFTERNOON MISS ASHLEY EUBANKS WITH REAL ESTATE.

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBER.

606. GOOD. LATIMER IS NOT TOO FAR AWAY FROM US, ACROSS FROM THE FARMERS MARKET.

IT'S JUST A VACANT PARCEL OF LAND.

WE'VE HELD IT FOR QUITE A WHILE.

IT'S BEEN USED FOR SANITATION PURPOSES.

MULTIPLE PURPOSES.

I KNOW PARKS HAD A INTEREST IN IT AT ONE TIME, SO RIGHT NOW, IT'S JUST CURRENTLY VACANT.

IF YOU RECALL, LET ME GO BACK.

WE DID HAVE A LEASE ON IT WITH A VETERANS GROUP TO HAVE FOOD THAT WAS TO BE PRODUCED IN RAISED GARDENS.

THAT LEASE HAS SINCE GONE AWAY.

SO NOW IT'S JUST CURRENTLY VACANT.

HOW MANY ACRES IS IT? I WANT TO SAY IT'S APPROXIMATELY TWO ACRES.

OKAY, I THINK WE I FEEL LIKE WE'VE SEEN A FOLLOW UP MEMO FROM MAYBE WHEN DOCTOR PEREZ WAS HERE HAVING THE ACREAGE AND AND, LIKE, WHICH DEPARTMENT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR IT? ON THIS MEMO THAT YOU SEND US EVERY MONTH.

IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL IF, AS YOU'RE BREAKING IT DOWN WITH THE APPRAISAL STATUS, ALSO INCLUDE THE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE.

AND IF IT HAS A BUILDING ON IT, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN ADDITION TO THAT, WHETHER IT'S VACANT OR OCCUPIED.

AND THEN FINALLY, WHAT DEPARTMENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IT? MY COLLEAGUES MAY HAVE OTHER THINGS TO ADD TO THAT, BUT THIS WILL HELP US, I THINK BETTER TRACK IT AS A COMMITTEE.

ON THAT ONE. OKAY, LET'S WE'LL COME BACK TO THE SAINT PAUL ONE BECAUSE I BELIEVE MR. MORENO HAD SOME QUESTIONS ON THAT.

CENTRAL SERVICE CENTER.

IS THAT THE PROPERTY IN DEEP ELLUM?

[00:05:04]

CORRECT. OKAY.

AND THAT APPRAISALS IN PROGRESS DALLAS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT.

WE KNOW WHAT THAT IS. IT'S IN PROGRESS.

DFW HUTCHINS PROPERTY THAT'S VACANT LAND, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

AND DWU IS OBVIOUSLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT.

DO WE KNOW WHEN THE LAST TIME SOMEONE WENT OUT THERE TO LOOK AT THE PROPERTY JUST TO MAKE SURE IT'S BEING MAINTAINED? THERE'S NOT AN ENCAMPMENT OUT THERE OF SOME TYPE.

DOES ANYONE HAVE AN IDEA? I DON'T HAVE INFORMATION ON THAT, BUT DEFINITELY CAN GET WITH DALLAS WATER UTILITIES SINCE THAT FALLS UNDER THEIR UMBRELLA.

ALL RIGHT. THAT'S A QUESTION. IF YOU COULD LET THEM KNOW WE HAVE THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

I THINK WE'RE ALL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A HEIGHTENED ALERT AFTER WHAT WE SAW HAPPEN AT 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL MUNICIPAL COURTS BUILDING, FIFTH FLOOR ONLY. IS THAT A IS THAT VACANT RIGHT NOW? FIFTH FLOOR. YES, SIR.

IT'S CURRENTLY VACANT.

DO WE KNOW WHEN SOMEONE'S PUT EYES ON THE FIFTH FLOOR? I KNOW I'VE SEEN IT IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS.

AND IT'S JUST HOUSING OLD FURNITURE.

SO IT IS. IT'S CURRENTLY VACANT, BUT THE BUILDING IS CURRENTLY IN USE.

IT'S JUST THAT FIFTH FLOOR AND FIFTH FLOOR IS SECURE.

THERE'S NOT. YES, SIR.

GOING UP IN THERE, CORRECT? YES, SIR. OKAY.

THE OTHERS I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH.

PARK FOREST LIBRARY IS A VACANT PARCEL, RIGHT? OR IS THAT ONE ACTUALLY IN OPERATION? I GET THE LIBRARIES CONFUSED.

THIS ONE IS ACTUALLY AN OPERATION.

THIS ONE IS AN OPERATION. OKAY.

SORRY. PARK FORCE PEOPLE.

I THINK I'M GOOD.

I'VE MR. MORENO.

WE SKIPPED 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL.

JUST BECAUSE I WAS HOPING YOU'D BE HERE.

SO, DO YOU GUYS WANT TO EXPLAIN WHAT'S BEEN DONE AT THAT PROPERTY? NOW? SPEAKING OF 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL TO SECURE IT.

AND WHAT THE PLAN IS TO, TO NOW DO WITH THE PROPERTY NOW THAT WE DO HAVE A DRAFT APPRAISAL IN.

UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU, SIR.

DONZELL GIBSON, INTERIM ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.

711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL.

THERE'S BEEN SOME REMEDIATION ACTIVITY RELATIVE TO GRAFFITI.

THERE WERE SOME VAGRANTS THAT WERE THERE AS WELL.

THE PROPERTY'S BEEN BOARDED UP AGAIN, AND THERE'S DAILY INSPECTIONS BEING PROVIDED BY BUILDING SECURITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BUILDING IS NOT BEING BREACHED.

AGAIN, THERE'S BEEN A ACTUAL MOBILE SECURITY CAMERA TRAILER THAT WAS PLACED ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY THAT HAS FULL EYES ON THE BUILDING THAT'S BEING MONITORED AS WELL.

THERE'S A CRIMINAL TRESPASS SIGN THAT'S UP, LETTING ANYONE KNOW THAT SHOULD THEY BREACH THE BUILDING OR VANDALIZE OR DO ANY OTHER HARM TO THE BUILDING, THAT THEY COULD BE PROSECUTED? HOW DO WE GET TO THE POINT? AND I DON'T WANT TO, LIKE, GO INTO THE LITANY OF WHO'S AT FAULT HERE.

I DON'T THINK IT'S HELPFUL.

IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE TO SECURE IT IN THE FUTURE, BUT HOW DO WE, AS A COUNCIL, LEAVE HERE WITH A LEVEL OF COMFORT THAT THIS IS NOT HAPPENING AT OTHER CITY FACILITIES? YOU KNOW, THAT'S A TOUGH ONE.

AND WE JUST HAVE TO BE TRANSPARENT AND HONEST.

IN THE PAST, I THINK THERE'S BEEN A CHALLENGE RELATIVE TO THIS AREA.

AND I THINK 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL KIND OF BECAME A KIND OF A RED FLAG FOR STAFF TO DOUBLE BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT OUR INTERNAL PROCEDURES RELATIVE TO DEALING WITH BUILDINGS SUCH AS THIS OWNERSHIP MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S DAILY CARE AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.

I THINK THOSE ARE SOME GAPS THAT WE ACTUALLY NEED TO CLOSE.

I THINK YOU'RE VERY SOON THAT YOU WILL SEE THAT STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING ON SOME PLANS THAT WILL BE SHOWN BY THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER THAT I THINK WILL PROVIDE SOME HIGH LEVEL OF COMFORT TO COUNCIL, THAT THESE PROPERTIES ARE BEING MANAGED AND MONITORED, MONITORED PROPERLY, AND THEN WHEN WE'RE READY TO DIVEST OF THEM, THAT WE DO SO QUICKLY PUT THEM BACK ON THE TAX ROLLS.

THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MY COLLEAGUES IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS MR. MORENO. THANK YOU.

CHAIR. AND I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR ADDRESSING AND SECURING 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL.

WITH THAT, I'LL JUST ADD THAT.

YES, WE WANT THAT.

BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THAT'S COSTING THE CITY DOLLARS EVERY SINGLE DAY TO KEEP IT SECURE AND TO KEEP IT UP TO CODE.

AND SO JUST REITERATING THAT THIS IS A TOP PRIORITY, I THINK, OF MINE AND THE MAJORITY OF THIS COUNCIL TO GET THIS OFFLOADED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

EARLIER TODAY AT THE HOUSING AND HOMELESS COMMITTEE, WE VOTED TO SELL THIS PROPERTY.

OBVIOUSLY WE STILL NEED THE DOCUMENTATION, STILL NEED THE APPRAISAL, STILL NEED THE EXPERTISE FROM.

THE TEAM THAT'S PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, BUT MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE NOT LOSING ANY ADDITIONAL DOLLARS DUE TO SECURITY OR TO KEEPING THE BUILDING

[00:10:08]

FROM BEING REENTERED AGAIN.

THAT'S ON 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL.

AND I'M SORRY FOR FOR BEING LATE.

CAN YOU JUST TELL ME WHAT DRAFT RECEIVED AND IN PROGRESS MADE? WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO? I'LL LET ASK THAT QUESTION.

DRAFT RECEIVED MEANS WE DO HAVE THE APPRAISAL.

IT'S CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW.

WE'RE GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH THE APPRAISER FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE.

IT HASN'T BEEN DEEMED COMPLETED AS OF YET.

AND DO WE HAVE A SCHEDULE? IS THAT GOING TO BE PRESENTED WHEN WE GET BACK FROM RECESS OR.

I BELIEVE THAT IS THE PLAN TO BRIEF COUNCIL IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

YEAH. THANK YOU.

CHAIR. THANK YOU.

CHAIR BLACKMON. THANKS.

SO I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON SOME OF THESE BIGGER PROJECTS, LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHERE THERE'S THE CENTRAL SERVICE CENTER AND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT, AND IT SAYS IN PROGRESS. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LOT OF IN PROGRESS THERE.

AND SO HOW DO WE GET I MEAN, IS IT JUST THAT IT'S STILL ON THE PAGE AND IT'S TALKED ABOUT, OR ARE WE MOVING DOWN A LINE? IN PROGRESS IN REFERENCE TO WHAT YOU SEE TODAY MEANS WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE APPRAISAL YET DUE TO THE COMPLEXITY OF THE PROPERTY, THE APPRAISAL IS STILL WORKING ON THE APPRAISAL. OKAY, SO AFTER YOU RECEIVE THE APPRAISAL, THEN THAT'S WHERE THE DISCUSSION WILL HAPPEN IF WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD OR NOT.

CORRECT. OKAY.

AND THEN HOW DO YOU SELL ONE FLOOR OF A QUARTZ BUILDING? WELL, THE.

THE PURPOSE FOR THAT BEING ON THE LIST WAS LOOKING AT FOR ITS REDEVELOPMENT AT FIRST, AND THEN WHEN WE HAD RECEIVED FURTHER FEEDBACK WHAT WE THEN TRIED TO DO WAS GO BACK OUT AND GET AN APPRAISAL.

AND WHAT WE'LL DO IS REALLY ASSESS WHAT PROBABLY THE VALUE IS FOR LEASING THE FIFTH FLOOR MORE SO THAN SELLING.

AND IS THIS THE FIRST ITERATION? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LOTS OF PROPERTIES.

AND I THINK I'VE EVEN TALKED TO A FEW ABOUT YOU IN MINE DISTRICT.

IS THERE GOING TO BE ANOTHER ROUND OF OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT FUTURE SALES OF PROPERTIES? I'LL TAKE THAT ONE. I THINK THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS, IS YES.

I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING ONGOING.

IT'S NOT A GOOD THING TO KEEP THESE OFF THE TAX ROLLS.

SO IF THERE'S A REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY, IF WE NEED TO DIVEST OF THE PROPERTY IN AN EFFORT FOR US TO NOT HAVE ONGOING O&M MANAGING THE PROPERTY WE ALL KNOW ANYTHING THAT'S VACANT FOR A WHILE AT SOME POINT WILL GET ALL THE MONEY.

WELL, NOT JUST COST YOUR MONEY, BUT ALL FORMS OF PROBLEMS. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT TO DO.

SO I THINK THERE'LL BE A RECYCLING OF ALL THESE PROPERTIES THAT WE HAVE MORE SO THAN JUST WHAT WE'VE DONE, MAYBE IN THE PAST ANNUALLY, JUST A HARD LOOK.

OR WHEN THE DEPARTMENT DECIDED THAT NO LONGER WANTED TO, TO TAKE CARE OF A BUILDING OR THEY LOST A LESSEE OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE, BUT MORE OF A ROUTINE PROCESS PROGRESS.

LOOK THAT WE TAKE AT ALL THE PROPERTIES, BRING IT TO COUNCIL AND GET FEEDBACK FROM YOU GUYS ON WHAT YOU WANT US TO DO WITH THE ASSETS.

SO DO WE HAVE A MAP? THAT SHOWS EVERY, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE AN INTERESTING EXERCISE TO LOOK AT ALL GOVERNMENT OWNED BUILDINGS AND WORKING WITH THEM AND SAYING, HEY, WE NOTICED THAT THIS ONE IT'S BEEN ON, THIS IS WHAT CODE IS.

WE'VE GOT THIS MANY. LET'S WORK TOWARDS GETTING THIS OFF.

OFF YOUR OFF ITS WORK TO GET IT OFF.

HELP THE WHOLE ECOSYSTEM IN GETTING IT ON THE TAX ROLLS.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? ABSOLUTELY IT DOES. I'LL LET ASHLEY SPEAK TO HOW WE RECORD THESE, HOW WE KEEP UP WITH THEM.

THAT'S MORE IN HER WHEELHOUSE.

BUT WHAT I WILL TELL YOU, WE FOR SURE WANT TO MOVE AWAY FROM WHAT I WOULD CALL THE OLD PATTERN OF HOW WE DID BUSINESS WITH THESE PROPERTIES.

AND I THINK THE MEDIA, I THINK WE'RE HEARING IT FROM COUNCIL, AND OBVIOUSLY WE'RE HEARING IT FROM OUR CITY MANAGER TO DO THE SAME.

AND SO HOPEFULLY YOU'LL SEE AS YOU COME BACK FROM BREAK, YOU'LL SEE SOME NEW REVELATIONS, SOME REIMAGINING THAT WE'RE DOING IN THIS SPACE THAT I THINK, AS I MENTIONED TO THE CHAIRMAN WEST EARLIER, WILL GIVE COUNCIL SOME LEVEL OF COMFORT THAT STAFF HAS THESE PROPERTIES IN HAND, THE ONES THAT MAKE THE MOST SENSE TO KEEP IT BECAUSE THERE'S SOME FUTURE MUNICIPAL CITY OF DALLAS USE OR SOME PARTNERSHIP, AND WE HAVE A REASON TO HOLD IT THAT WE'RE ABLE TO ARTICULATE THAT TO YOU.

IF THERE'S SOME REASON THAT WE BELIEVE IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY SHOULD DIVEST OF, SO WE CAN GET RID OF THE O&M AND ALL THE OTHER CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE BROUGHT UP, SUCH AS EXAMPLE AT 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL WILL BRIEF YOU ON IT, AND WE WILL WORK TO DIVEST OF THE PROPERTY IN THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY POSSIBLE AND GET THOSE PROPERTIES BACK ON THE TAX ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, WE DO HAVE A MAPPING TOOL.

[00:15:01]

IT IS ALSO AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.

IT MAPS EVERY SINGLE CITY OWNED PROPERTY.

IT IS COLOR CODED BY DEPARTMENT.

AND SO YES, WE DO THAT, WE DO HAVE THAT AVAILABLE OKAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE? CHAIR MENDELSOHN.

THANK YOU. WHERE COULD ONE FIND THAT MAP? SURE. IT'S ON OUR CITY PUBLIC WORKS WEBPAGE, BUT I CAN ALSO..

GO TO THE PUBLIC WORKS WEBPAGE UNDER A LOT OF DIFFERENT MENUS.

IT'S UNDER THE REAL ESTATE DIVISION.

SO IF YOU CLICK ON REAL ESTATE, IS IT GOING TO BECOME APPARENT? IT SHOULD BE, IT SHOULD BE.

I WILL DEFINITELY MAKE SURE IT IS, IF IT ISN'T, BUT IT SHOULD BE OKAY.

SO THERE ARE SOME THINGS SAID ABOUT THE REAL ESTATE, AND THIS IS ACTUALLY BEEN SAID A NUMBER OF TIMES ABOUT HOW A LOT OF DEPARTMENTS HAVE BEEN HOLDING REAL ESTATE, AND NOW THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GO BACK AND REALLY THINK THROUGH WHAT DO THEY NEED AND WHAT DO THEY NOT NEED.

I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU, I WOULD LOVE TO FLIP THAT AND SAY, YOU WILL GET RID OF EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY UNLESS YOU CAN DEFEND WHY YOU KEEP IT.

BUT THE ASSUMPTION NEEDS TO BE WE HAVE NO BUSINESS HOLDING ALL OF THIS LAND.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS DISCUSSION IN HOUSING, AS I THINK THAT CHAIR WEST BROUGHT UP.

BUT WE HAVE BEEN WHOLLY INCAPABLE OF DEVELOPING PROPERTIES.

AND THAT'S WHY CHAIR MORENO HAS A LIST OF PROPERTIES WE'RE TRACKING JUST FOR HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS.

WELL, I GUESS THESE ARE ALL RELATED TO HOMELESSNESS OVER YEARS THAT HAVE BEEN SITTING VACANT AS WE SIT HERE AND MASH OUR TEETH ABOUT HOW MANY HOMELESS WE HAVE.

AND SO.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE DOING THIS.

WE NEED TO TURN IT OVER TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR, WHICH HAS DONE A BEAUTIFUL JOB IN DEVELOPING LOTS OF THINGS HERE IN DALLAS.

AND MAYBE WE CAN THROW IN THE BENEFIT OF HELPING THEM THROUGH DEVELOPMENT WITH PERMITS AND SUCH.

BUT, WE HAVE A NEED FOR FUNDS.

WE HAVE LOTS OF USES FOR FUNDS.

I THINK WE CAN DEBATE WHAT THOSE USES ARE, BUT THERE'S JUST NO REASON THAT WE'RE HOLDING ON TO THIS PROPERTY.

AND WHAT I REALLY LOVE TO SEE IS SOME SORT OF ANALYSIS THAT SAYS, WHAT IS IT COSTING US? BECAUSE YOU'RE CERTAINLY DOING MAINTENANCE ON THIS PROPERTY.

YOU'RE CERTAINLY SECURING THE PROPERTY.

THERE IS A COST TO HOLDING THIS.

AND SO WHETHER IT'S AN INTERNAL SPACE WHERE YOU'RE DEALING WITH PEST CONTROL, WHETHER IT'S AN OUTSIDE SPACE AND YOU'RE MOWING IT, I MEAN, THERE ARE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH HOLDING IT.

SO PLEASE SHARE WITH US WHAT THAT IS.

AND I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO LOOKING AT THE MAP.

RECEIVED. WE HAVE SOMEBODY ONLINE FOR QUESTIONS.

I THINK WE'RE GOOD.

CHAIR MORENO.

THANK YOU.

CHAIR WEST. DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THESE PROPERTIES ARE WORTH? BECAUSE, I MEAN, WHEN I GO TO DCAD, THEY'RE ALL LISTED AS ZEROS.

SO DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA JUST TO RIGHT OFF THE BALLPARK OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE THESE APPRAISALS EVEN COME IN? SURE. SO IF YOU GO FURTHER INTO DCAD AND YOU THEN SEARCH THE ICON OF PULLING UP A MAP IF YOU LOOK AT THE FAR LEFT HAND CORNER, ONCE THE MAP COMES UP, THERE SHOULD BE A VALUE THAT HAS AN IMPROVEMENT IN A LAND VALUE AS WELL.

OKAY. I'LL TAKE A DEEPER LOOK AT THAT.

I JUST WANT TO ALSO REITERATE THAT SITTING ON THESE FACILITIES OR JUST LAND IS COSTING US, WHETHER IT BE MOWING THE LAWN, WHETHER IT BE SECURING THE BUILDING.

SO IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE A COST ASSOCIATED TO HOLDING THE PROPERTY.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT HAPPENED AT 711 SOUTH SAINT PAUL DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

AND SO I'M MORE INTERESTED IN WHAT PROCEDURES AND PROTOCOLS WE'RE DOING TO EVALUATE OUR CITY FACILITIES.

ARE WE HAVING STAFF GOING OUT WEEKLY? MONTHLY? EVERY COUPLE OF MONTHS TO CHECK IN ON THE CONDITION OF THESE BUILDINGS? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO PUT IN PLACE? SO THAT WOULD HAPPEN? DOESN'T HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO.

WHAT I WOULD TELL YOU IS THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE COUNCIL AND STAFF ARE COMPLETELY ALIGNED WITH YOUR STATEMENTS.

THERE'S SOME GRASSROOTS WORK THAT'S BEING DONE BY STAFF NOW THAT, LIKE I SAID, WE'D LIKE TO BRING BACK TO YOU HERE WHEN YOU GET BACK FROM BREAK.

THAT I THINK WILL ANSWER A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU BROUGHT FORTH.

I DON'T WANT TO GET AHEAD OF THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER IN SOME OF THE REALIGNMENTS AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT SHE'S WORKING ON, BUT I THINK THERE'LL BE A HIGH LEVEL OF COMFORT WHEN YOU GUYS ARE ABLE TO SEE THAT THERE'S A SERIES OF GUIDELINES, THERE'S A SERIES OF NEW RULES AND DIRECTIVES TO STAFF ABOUT WHO OWNS WHAT, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT.

TODAY, I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU THAT THERE'S A BUNCH OF GAPS THERE, THAT IT WOULD BE HARD IN SOME INSTANCES TO POINT OUT WHO'S REALLY RESPONSIBLE, RIGHT?

[00:20:05]

RIGHT. NO, I AGREE WITH THAT.

YOU KNOW, JUST AGAIN, 711 SAINT PAUL IS A PROPERTY THAT.

USED TO BE UNDER THE PORTFOLIO OF.

I'M HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS, BUT IT REALLY WASN'T EVER ASSIGNED TO THEM.

IT WAS ALWAYS KIND OF BEEN UNDER REAL ESTATE.

I JUST SEE THE POINTING OF THE FINGERS OF, YOU KNOW, IT'S IN THIS DEPARTMENT OR IT'S IN THAT DEPARTMENT.

AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE WORKING ON TRYING TO CONSOLIDATE THAT.

BUT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE IT LIVE UNDER ONE DEPARTMENT.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'M IN AGREEMENT.

WE NEED TO SELL AS MANY OF THESE PROPERTIES AS POSSIBLE THAT AREN'T BEING UTILIZED AND THAT DON'T HAVE A THAT WE DON'T HAVE A NEED FOR IN THE FUTURE.

AND SO I KNOW THAT THAT'S IN THE WORKS.

AND SO I LOOK FORWARD TO AN UPDATE.

AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU AND THE TEAM FOR HELPING SECURE THE BUILDING.

AND HOPE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY NEW ISSUES ARISE FROM THERE.

THANK YOU. CHAIR, I THINK THE LAST THING I'D LIKE TO DO MR. WEST, IS JUST KIND OF GIVE A HIGH LEVEL VIEW OF WHAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO SEE IN MY SHORT TIME HERE IN THIS ROLE.

IS THAT MANAGEMENT OF PROPERTIES, RIGHT? NOT JUST GOING OUT AND DOING THE INSPECTION, BUT THE MAINTENANCE AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS ASSOCIATED WITH.

YOU MENTIONED MOWING THE GRASS IS SOMETHING THAT'S THAT'S FRAGMENTED HERE, AND MOST OF OUR STANDALONE DEPARTMENTAL AGENCIES ARE REALLY PREPPED TO TAKE CARE OF BUILDINGS IN THAT FASHION.

WE JUST WE'RE NOT ORGANIZED THAT WAY AND HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN IN THE PAST.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LOOK FORWARD TO BRINGING BACK TO COUNCIL IS A SERIES OF RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT HOW WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO MANAGE OUR PROPERTY, NOT JUST HAVE IT ON THE BOOKS, NOT JUST HAVE A LIST, BUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO PHYSICALLY MANAGE THOSE PROPERTIES AND WHO'S RESPONSIBLE AND WHEN IT'S TIME TO LET GO OF THEM, DIVEST OF THEM FOR WHATEVER REASON? OR TO MISS MENDELSSOHN'S POINT, IF THERE'S A REALLY VALID REASON ON WHY WE SHOULD HOLD ON TO IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO WITH A SENSE OF TRANSPARENCY TO COUNCIL.

THIS IS WHY WE'RE HOLDING ON TO IT.

THERE'S SOME FUTURE PLAN FIRE STATION, LIBRARY, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT BE, AND THOSE THINGS MAY CHANGE.

AND SO WE NEED TO DO THOSE REGULAR INTERVALS WHERE WE COME BACK WITH STAFF AND WE HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT ALL OUR PROPERTIES, WHETHER IT'S A SLIVER OR A MAJOR PROPERTY LIKE THE CENTRAL SERVICE CENTER.

THANK YOU.

AND.

OH, OKAY. HERE IT IS.

I'M SORRY. SO I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.

AND MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE MUNICIPAL COURTS IN THE FIFTH FLOOR.

SO YOU'RE TELLING ME YOU'RE APPRAISING ONE FLOOR OF A BUILDING? NO, WE'RE APPRAISING THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.

AND FROM THAT APPRAISAL, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET A VALUE OF THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR LEASE.

WELL, YOU ALREADY KNOW WHAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE FLOOR IS, CORRECT? CORRECT. BUT IN REGARDS TO THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY, WE DO NOT.

MEANING YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO SET A LEASE PRICE.

NO, WE DO KNOW HOW TO SET A LEASE PRICE.

I MEAN, I COULD USE DCAD IF I NEEDED TO, TO SET THE VALUE, BUT THAT WAS ONE OF THE PROPERTIES FROM THE ONE OF THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT WE WERE ASKED TO PURSUE FOR AN APPRAISAL. AND THEN IS IT POSSIBLE TO SHARE ALL OF THE PROPERTIES THAT WE MIGHT BE RENTING? MEANING THE CITY OF DALLAS IS LEASING FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR OR FROM.

YES, WE CAN HAVE THAT LIST SHARED.

SO I'M GOING TO WRITE THAT DOWN.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THAT AS A MEMO TO US.

I CAN DO THAT. OKAY, SO, LIKE THE ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY, WHAT WE'RE RENTING THERE, YOU KNOW, IT'S THIS DEPARTMENT, THIS MANY SQUARE FEET, THIS MUCH COST. BECAUSE I WONDER IF WE COULDN'T MOVE SOME PEOPLE INTO OUR OWN BUILDING, AND REDUCE THAT RENTAL EXPENSE, AND I WOULD EVEN SAY THAT FOR CITY HALL THAT AS THERE SEEMS TO BE A CONVERSATION ABOUT MOVING PEOPLE OUT OF CITY HALL, WHETHER THAT'S TO STEMMONS OR SOMEWHERE ELSE, I WOULD SAY WE OWN THIS BUILDING.

MAYBE WE SHOULD TRY TO PACK MORE PEOPLE IN, BECAUSE WHEN I WALK THROUGH THE HALLS, IT'S PRETTY EMPTY, AND MAYBE PEOPLE AREN'T HERE EVERY DAY, AND WE NEED TO DEVELOP A DIFFERENT KIND OF SYSTEM OF SPACE.

AND MAYBE THAT WOULD FREE UP EVEN MORE PROPERTIES.

BUT I THINK IT'S ODD TO HAVE AN APPRAISAL FOR ONE FLOOR, I THINK.

THANK YOU. AND JUST TO WRAP UP HERE YOU KNOW, I'VE KIND OF BEEN MAKING NOTES OF ON EVERYTHING WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.

AND I THINK ONE THING THAT WILL BE VERY USEFUL FOR US IS SO WE CAN START SEEING PROGRESS BECAUSE THIS ISN'T YOUR FAULT, BUT WE WE ASKED FOR THIS EARLY LAST FALL. WE'RE COMING UP ON A YEAR AND WE ARE SEEING SOME APPRAISALS, BUT WE'RE NOT REALLY SEEING ANY MOVEMENT WITH THESE PROPERTIES.

AND SO FOR US TO SEE THE BREAKDOWN, LIKE I HAD MENTIONED, THE PROPERTY ITSELF, THE APPRAISAL STATUS, THE ACREAGE, SQUARE FOOT IN ANOTHER

[00:25:07]

COLUMN CHAIR MORENO'S POINT, THE COST TO MAINTAIN EITHER MONTHLY OR YEARLY WHATEVER MAKES SENSE FOR YOU AND THEN THE DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBLE.

AND IF COLLEAGUES WANT TO ADD MORE, WE CAN JUST KEEP ADDING EVERY MONTH AS WE GO ON FROM THERE.

IF [INAUDIBLE] COULD ALSO INCLUDE SECURITY.

YEAH. COST OF OPERATION, UTILITIES, MOWING, SECURITY.

YEAH. THAT'S GOOD.

OKAY. CHAIR, JUST ONE OTHER THING.

ON THE MUNICIPAL COURTS BUILDING, FIFTH FLOOR.

IS THAT GOING TO INCLUDE THE PARKING LEASE THAT FOR THAT? I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS ARE OUT THERE, BUT DON'T WE HAVE A LONG TERM LEASE ON SOME OF THOSE PARKING SPOTS? YOU ARE CORRECT. THERE IS ONE OUT NEAR THE PROPERTY.

HOW MANY SPOTS IS THAT? DO WE KNOW? I DO NOT HAVE THE INFORMATION, BUT I CAN GET IT FOR YOU.

THANK YOU. OKAY WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON.

I DO WANT TO TAKE UP ITEM G REAL QUICK.

JUST GOING TO HAVE A COLLEAGUE THAT'S GOT TO GO AND IS HERE FOR THAT ITEM ALONE.

SO IF WE COULD GET CITY CONTROLLER'S OFFICE TO TAKE ON ITEM G, WE'LL KNOCK THAT OUT REAL QUICK.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M JENNY KURTZMAN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF TREASURY AND THE CITY COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE.

I'M JOINED BY FELICIA HERNANDEZ, OUR DEBT ADMINISTRATOR, AND STEVE JONES WITH HILLTOP SECURITIES.

THANK YOU. AND I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION.

I JUST WANT TO TURN IT OVER TO MY COLLEAGUE FOR QUESTIONS.

YEAH. JUST REAL QUICK QUESTION.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. REGARDING THE SELECTION OF OF THIS, AND CAN YOU JUST QUICKLY JUST WALK ME THROUGH THE PROCESS SO I KNOW I WENT THROUGH THERE, WE NARROWED IT DOWN TO 36 UNDERWRITERS AND TYPICALLY WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF HAVING, YOU KNOW, THAT SENIOR AND THEN TWO CO-SENIORS OR CO-MANAGERS AND THAT TYPICALLY WOULD BE A A LARGER FIRM, A REGIONAL FIRM AND THEN AN NWBA OF SOME SORT OF A BREAKUP.

CAN YOU TELL ME THE BREAKOUT OF THE BREAKUP OF THESE THREE FIRMS, THE BREAKDOWN? I'LL LET FELICIA HANDLE THAT PERSON.

ADMINISTRATOR. OH, SORRY ABOUT THAT.

FELICIA NUNEZ, THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.

WE DO, OF COURSE, AS YOU MENTIONED, FOLLOW AN RFP STRUCTURE.

SO THE 36 FIRMS YOU MENTIONED WERE ACTUALLY PART OF OUR UNDERWRITING POOL THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.

FROM THAT, WE ISSUE MANY RFPS TO THE POOL.

OF COURSE, PART OF THAT RFP INCLUDES SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE UPCOMING BOND TRANSACTION THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO THE NEEDS OF THAT TRANSACTION.

IN DOING SO, WE RELEASED THE RFP IN FEBRUARY, FEBRUARY 27TH OF THIS YEAR.

WE ALLOW A PERIOD FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS, AND WE ORIGINALLY HAD A CLOSED DATE OF MARCH 22ND, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO EXTEND THAT CLOSED DATE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TIME BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY COMPLEX, OBVIOUSLY TRANSACTION, YOU KNOW, VERY IMPACTFUL TO THE CITY.

AND THEN WE DID END UP CLOSING THE RFP ON MARCH 27TH.

FROM THERE, WE RECEIVED 28 RESPONSES, AND WE WERE ABLE TO FORM OUR SELECTION COMMITTEE COMPRISED OF THE CITY COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, THE TREASURY DIVISION, OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS AND CO-FINANCIAL ADVISORS, HILLTOP SECURITIES, MISTER HINOJOSA, AND THE CONVENTION CENTER STAFF.

FROM THERE WE DID A SELECTION FOR INTERVIEWS FOR THE AS I MENTIONED, THE SENIOR PYRAMID OF THE STRUCTURE, WHICH WOULD BE THE SENIOR BOOKRUNNER.

AND IN THIS INSTANCE WE CHOSE TO SELECT TWO CO-SENIOR MANAGERS.

WERE YOU WANTING THE ACTUAL FIRMS AND ADDITIONAL DETAILS.

YEAH. NO I APPRECIATE THAT. THAT'S THAT'S GOOD.

NO. NOW, NOW NOW THAT YOU'RE AT THE SELECTION.

SO JUST GIVE ME THE BREAKDOWN OF THE SELECTION OF THE FIRMS IN TERMS OF YOU SAID YOU YOU DID INTERVIEWS AND ENDED UP SELECTING TWO CO-MANAGER.

CORRECT. AND THE INTERVIEWS WERE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SENIOR STRUCTURE OF THE SYNDICATE, WHICH IN TOTAL IS TEN FIRMS. SO THE SENIOR BOOKRUNNERS SELECTED WAS JP MORGAN CHASE BANK.

AND THEN THE CO SENIORS WERE RAMIREZ AND CO.

THEY'RE SERVING AS THE CO SENIOR.

THE LEFT SIDE BUT THEY'RE ALSO OUR FIRM.

AND THEN ALSO MESIROW WHICH IS A REGIONAL FIRM OKAY, IS A REGIONAL FIRM.

YES. OKAY. AND NORMALLY SO THAT BREAKDOWN I THOUGHT AND AGAIN I THIS IS ME AND MY WEARING MY HAT FROM YESTERDAY.

[00:30:02]

BUT I THOUGHT THEY WOULD ONLY BE LIKE A BREAKDOWN.

NORMALLY IT'D BE LIKE A NON-MINORITY FIRM AND TWO MINORITY FIRMS AS THE THE CO.

CAN YOU TELL ME THE BREAKDOWN OF.

AND I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO.

I KNOW RAMIREZ I BELIEVE IS HISPANIC ON CHASE IS CORRECT.

NON. AND RAMIREZ I THINK IS EMPLOYEE OWNED IS THAT I'M NOT SURE IF RAMIREZ ARE THEY ARE THEY OR ARE THEY AN MWB.

CORRECT. CORRECT.

WELL TO CONTINUE THE SELECTION, ACTUALLY TO COMPLETE THE REST OF THE SYNDICATE, WE DO HAVE SEVEN ADDITIONAL FIRMS. AND OF THOSE.

I'M SORRY, I'LL HAVE TO REFERENCE THE MEMO FOR THE MOVIES, BUT THAT DOES INCLUDE ONE VETERAN FIRM, BANCROFT CAPITAL, WHICH THAT'S NOT AN ENTITY THAT'S VETERAN ONLY LOOP AND SIEBERT, WHICH ARE ADDITIONAL FIRMS. SO I MAY GIVE IT JUST TO OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR TO GIVE YOU KIND OF MORE OF THE TECHNICAL DETAIL OF THE SELECTION.

BUT PART OF OUR UNDERWRITING POOL GUIDELINES ALSO DICTATES THAT CERTAIN ENTITIES, IF THEY OR ANY FIRM, IN FACT, WHETHER THEY'RE MWB OR NOT, IF THEY DON'T REACH A CERTAIN CAPITAL THRESHOLD, THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO SERVE IN A SENIOR CAPACITY.

BUT IN WHOLE, WE SELECTED THIS SYNDICATE BASED ON THEIR CAPACITY TO MEET THE NEEDS THAT WE THINK WILL BEST SERVE THIS TRANSACTION AND GET US OVER THE FINISH LINE.

SO THAT INCLUDES, YOU KNOW, HAVING A STRONG NATIONAL SUPPORT AND MWD.

OBVIOUSLY THAT ALSO IS VERY EXPERIENCED WITH THIS CONVENTION CENTER TRANSACTIONS AND THEN ALSO A REGIONAL FIRM THAT IS VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CONVENTION CENTER AND CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS. OKAY. AND WE'VE USED THESE FIRMS BEFORE, ALL OF THEM.

ALL OF THEM.

I'M NOT SURE I CAN GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT.

I BELIEVE WE HAVE MOST OF THEM FOR SURE.

WE'VE USED SOME OF THEM SEVERAL TIMES ON CITY TRANSACTIONS OVER THE YEARS, WHETHER THEY WERE IN THE CURRENT POOL OR PREVIOUS POOLS THAT THE CITY HAD.

BUT I CAN DEFINITELY FOLLOW UP WITH THAT INFORMATION.

OKAY. AND THEN LAST QUESTION.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I APPRECIATE THIS.

AND THEN THE OVERALL WHAT'S THE OVERALL MWBE PARTICIPATION, I GUESS I KNOW THIS IS WEIRD KIND OF HOW YOU CALCULATE THAT, BUT WITH THE MAKE UP OF ALL OF THE FIRMS, ARE WE MEETING OUR MWBE GOAL? WELL, WE CURRENTLY CAN'T DEFINITIVELY SAY THAT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T PROVIDED THE DESIGNATION, BUT IT'S STRUCTURED IN A WAY THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY SURPASS THAT GOAL.

AND ACTUALLY PART OF OUR I BELIEVE OUR BID POLICY DOESN'T INCLUDE VETERAN FIRMS, BUT TREASURY, WE ALWAYS MAKE THAT A POLICY TO INCLUDE VETERAN FIRMS, WHICH I THINK IS GREAT. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT, I'M GONNA STOP THERE.

MR. CHAIR, I MAY HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS.

I'LL TALK TO YOU OFFLINE ABOUT.

ALL RIGHT. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU.

DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS ON ITEM G? I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE DO.

AND GOOD NEWS FOR THE CITY COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE.

I CLEARED IT H, ITEMS H AND I.

NO QUESTIONS. YOU GUYS ARE DONE UNLESS YOU JUST WANT TO HANG OUT FOR THE REST OF THE AFTERNOON WITH US.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO OUR BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION OF STATE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR THE 89TH LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

THIS IS BRIEFING ITEM B.

HEY, KERRY, CAN, BEFORE YOU START, CAN YOU CONFIRM TO THAT WE DID SUPPLY YOU WITH A MEMO, RIGHT? IT JUST WASN'T ATTACHED TO THE MATERIALS YOUR AND CLIFFORD YOU DID GET.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY.

CAN WE ASK STAFF TO PRINT THAT AND BRING THAT TO EVERYBODY? OUR EMAIL IS FINE. YEAH, EMAIL IS GOOD.

THE THE DECEMBER JANUARY MEMO.

YES, WE SAW THE EMAIL.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS.

I'M CLIFFORD SPARKS, YOUR LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, AND TODAY, I'LL BE GOING OVER THE CONSIDERATION OF THE 2025 LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

TODAY WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THESE THREE BULLET POINTS.

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS JUST DETERMINING THE PRIORITIES FOR THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

[00:35:01]

SO JUST SOME THINGS THAT SHOULD BE A PART OF YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY IS THAT THE PRIMARY RUNOFF ELECTIONS THAT HAPPEN AS FAR AS THE SPEAKER'S RACE BACK IN MAY, WILL PLAY A HUGE FACTOR INTO HOW THE WAY EVERYONE'S LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM ACROSS THE STATE WILL EVENTUALLY FALL ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE WAS EMBATTLED THIS PAST SESSION OR THIS PAST ELECTION SEASON, AND HE WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT BACK.

THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT HE WILL BE THE SPEAKER.

IT JUST MEANS THAT HE WON HIS SEAT BACK.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE AN INTERESTING TOSS UP TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT HE RETAINS THE GAVEL FOR THIS UPCOMING SESSION.

NOW, THAT COULD HAVE WIDE RANGING IMPACTS, BECAUSE THE SENATE AND THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE WAS BOTH VERY AGAINST HIM IN THIS PAST ELECTION CYCLE, WHICH WILL LARGELY IMPACT THE LEGISLATION THAT HE WILL BE ABLE TO PASS AND LARGELY IMPACT THE LEGISLATION THAT WILL COME OUT OF THE HOUSE.

THE POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT IS STILL WHAT WE'VE SEEN OVER THE PAST DECADE, WHICH IS ANTI-CITY TYPE ATMOSPHERE, WHICH MEANS THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE STILL OUR BACKS ARE STILL AGAINST THE WALL.

SO WE SHOULD ASSUME THAT A LOT OF OUR PRIORITIES WON'T GET DONE.

THE ONES THAT WILL GET DONE WILL HAVE TO BE VERY IN LINE WITH WHAT THE REPUBLICAN PLATFORM IS HERE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

IF NOT, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT AS THE PLATFORM HAS CONTINUED TO MOVE IN A DIRECTION THAT IS, AGAIN, VERY ANTI-CITY.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND HERE, LIKE THE SLIDE SAYS PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED LEGISLATIVE ITEMS BACK ON DECEMBER 12TH OF 2023.

WE HAVE THESE LIST OF ITEMS. IF THE CHAIR WOULD LIKE, WE CAN GO THROUGH THEM ONE AT A TIME OR WE CAN TAKE THEM ALL UP AT ONCE.

I THINK THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.

AND GREAT SUMMARY.

I KIND OF LEARNED, LIKE, I THOUGHT WE HAD A GOOD METHOD IN HOUSING WHEN WE DID THIS EARLIER.

WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS JUST RUN THROUGH THEM QUICKLY.

FIRST, JUST READING THEM OFF.

AND IF COLLEAGUES WANT TO OR ACTUALLY KNOW, I'LL JUST ASK MY COLLEAGUES.

IF YOU WANT TO PULL ANY OF THESE OFF FOR DISCUSSION, WE'LL PULL THEM OFF.

AND THE ONES THAT STAY ON THERE, WE JUST VOTE AS A SLATE AND THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH INDIVIDUALLY THE REMAINING ITEMS. SO OUT OF JUST TO MAKE THIS AS EXPEDITIOUS AS POSSIBLE, DOES ANYONE WANT TO PULL UP THE FIRST ONE, PURSUE REVENUE STREAMS THAT COULD SUPPORT FUTURE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PENSION OBLIGATIONS? SO RAISE YOUR HAND. STAYS ON.

ENSURE PRIVACY AND SECURITY OF RESIDENT AND COMMERCIAL DATA? NO. STAYS ON.

JUST. JUST RAISE YOUR HAND AND I'LL LOOK AROUND.

REQUIRE MANDATORY DISCLOSURE OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE PRICES.

RAISE YOUR HAND. NADA.

ESTABLISH A DATABASE OF HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS.

NO CONCERNS THERE.

PRESERVE LOCAL AUTHORITY TO COLLECT FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES.

NOPE. EXPAND OPTIONS FOR PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICES.

ANY CONCERNS THERE? NO. AND THEN GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 2274 REGARDING PROHIBITION FROM SERVICE CONTRACTS WITH INSTITUTIONS THAT HAVE POLICIES THAT MAY RESTRICT GUN OR AMMUNITION SALES AND FOSSIL FUELS INVESTMENTS.

WE'RE GOING TO PULL THAT ONE.

CLARIFY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT PROCESS TO INCLUDE PRICE CONSIDERATION OF PURCHASING GOODS.

THAT STAYS ON. SUPPORT.

FLEXIBILITY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTION DATES.

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE PULLING THAT ONE.

AND THE.

DID YOU PULL THAT? NO.

EXPAND OPPORTUNITIES TO GROW THE TAX BASE AND GENERATE REVENUE FOR CITY PRIORITIES AND OBLIGATIONS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, AUTHORIZATION, LICENSING AND REGULATION OF CASINO GAMING, SPORTS WAGERING AND CARDROOMS IN THE STATE.

ALL RIGHT. IT DOES NOT SURPRISE ME.

AND AND THEN IF WE WANT TO ADD SOME AFTER THAT, WE'LL WE'LL DO THAT.

YOU HAVE QUESTIONS BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE SLATE.

YEAH. THAT'S FINE. OKAY.

TO ADD, AND WE'LL DO THAT AT THE END.

OKAY. SO LET'S THE ONES THAT ARE REMAINING THAT WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON, I DON'T NEED TO READ THEM AGAIN HOPEFULLY.

BUT IT'S IT'S ALL OF THEM EXCEPT FOR AMENDING GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 227 SUPPORT FLEXIBILITY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTION DATES.

IN THE LAST ONE THE TAX BASE CASINO GAMBLING 2274.

THANK YOU. SO WE'RE VOTING NOW AS A GROUP TO RECOMMEND THAT THE OTHERS THAT I DID NOT JUST READ OFF WILL BE ADDED TO THE GPS AND LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.

ALL THOSE KIND OF GET A MOTION.

NOW THERE'S A MOTION A SECOND SOMEWHERE IN THERE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE.

OKAY, GREAT. NOW WE'LL GO TO THE FIRST ONE THAT WAS PULLED AND THAT WAS PULLED BY CHAIR MENDELSOHN, AND THAT'S THE AMEND GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 2274.

THANK YOU. THIS IS A BILL THAT WAS PASSED, I BELIEVE, TWO SESSIONS AGO.

AND IT IS STANDING LAW.

[00:40:01]

AND WHAT WE WOULD BE ASKING IS FOR.

THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION TO ACTUALLY OVERTURN THEIR OWN BILL THAT THEY'RE VERY PROUD OF.

SO THIS IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.

AND ALL WE WILL DO IS DRAW OUT ADDITIONAL IRE.

SO IT SEEMS SORT OF POINTLESS AND AGAINST IT WOULD JUST HARM THE REST OF OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA TO HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON THERE.

SO I JUST DON'T SEE THE POINT, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE SO MANY PRIORITIES FROM SO MANY COMMITTEES.

THANK YOU. AND I THINK CHAIR MORENO HAD A GREAT REQUEST WHEN YOU DID THIS FOR HOUSING IS TO TELL US WHO PROPOSED THIS, WHERE THIS CAME FROM.

IT'S CAME FROM STAFF, A COUNCIL MEMBER OR SOMEONE.

HOW DID THIS GET ON OUR RECOMMENDATIONS? ALL RIGHT, AND I HAVE TO DEFER TO MISS ROGERS.

HI. GOOD AFTERNOON, CARRIE ROGERS, GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS DIRECTOR.

THIS WAS PROPOSED LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION PROGRAM BY STAFF.

SO IT WAS IN OUR PROGRAM FOR 2023 AND THEN PROPOSED AGAIN FOR THIS SESSION.

OKAY. AND IF I CAN ADD TO THAT, JACK HARLAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, ALONG WITH JENNY KURZMAN, OUR CITY TREASURER.

AND SO WE DID ASK THIS TO BE INCLUDED.

I UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT THE POSITION OF THE COMMITTEE THAT THIS MAY NOT BE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO CARRY FORWARD AS A RESULT OF IT BEING SOMETHING THAT WAS RECENTLY APPROVED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

OUR CONCERN WAS IT DOES IMPACT OUR ABILITY AS WE'RE DOING DIFFERENT TYPES OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS.

WE'VE HAD SOME FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WHO HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO CERTIFY TO THE STATE THAT THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS ON THIS.

AND SO IT LIMITS OUR ABILITY.

WE'VE HAD SOME DELAYS ON OUR MASTER LEASE PROGRAM AS WE HAD TO CONTINUE TO, TO WORK THROUGH.

WE THOUGHT THAT THE PARTICULAR BANK WAS GOING TO BE ELIGIBLE.

AND THEN AS WE CONTINUED TO WORK THROUGH, THEY COULDN'T CERTIFY.

AND SO THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH IT FROM THE ABILITY TO WORK WITH THE DIFFERENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.

I'LL ASK JENNY IF SHE WANTS TO ADD ANYTHING OR WE'RE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.

OKAY, SO THIS WAS PASSED IN 21.

YES, MA'AM. AND HOW MUCH OF A PROBLEM HAS IT BEEN TO, SIR LIKE, IS IT A IS IT SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH THAT WE HAVE DATA TO SAY YOU'VE REALLY CREATED A PROBLEM HERE? YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.

YES, IT HAS CREATED A PROBLEM BECAUSE THE LARGER FIRMS BANK OF AMERICA, WELLS FARGO, JP MORGAN CHASE THEY'RE ALL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE.

RIGHT NOW, WHAT ALSO MADE IT A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED WAS THEIR REPORTING OF THEIR COMMITMENT TO NET ZERO BY 2030.

SO THAT ALSO ADDED A LITTLE BIT OF COMPLICATION BECAUSE THE STATE CAME BACK AND SAID, WELL, HOW ARE YOU COMING OUT AND SAYING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE NET ZERO AND DON'T HAVE A CONFLICT WITH THIS LAWS? SO AS WE GO ALONG, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE REALLY IN COMMUNICATION WITH THESE BANKS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING HAS COME THROUGH.

THAT HAS MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO DO BUSINESS WITH US.

AND ONE OF THE PENALTIES IF YOU CONTINUE TO DO BUSINESS.

WELL, WE CANNOT ACTUALLY MOVE FORWARD.

IT SAYS YOU MAY, YOU SHALL NOT.

YES, IT IS NOT.

IT MAY NOT. WITH THE PENALTY.

THERE WAS A BOND SALE THAT WE DID EARLIER IN THE YEAR THAT WELLS FARGO WAS THE WINNER OF THAT, AND BEFORE WE EVEN SAID, OKAY, YOU ARE THE WINNER, WE HAD CALL THE BOND COUNCIL TO SAY, PLEASE LET US KNOW IF THERE IS ANYTHING OUT THERE BEFORE WE AWARD THAT BOND SALE.

SO WE HAVE TO BE VERY UPFRONT AND ON TOP OF IT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T GET INTO A SITUATION THAT WE ACTUALLY DO A BUSINESS WITH ONE OF THESE INSTITUTIONS.

SO DOES IT HURT A SMALLER INSTITUTION? IT COULD HURT AH, IN TERMS OF BANKING, I WOULD SAY MAYBE NOT SO MUCH BECAUSE THERE IS A THRESHOLD.

SO IF YOU ARE NOT SPENDING OVER $100,000 IN BANKING FEES, YOU ARE ABLE TO DO BUSINESS WITH ONE OF THOSE BANKS.

IF YOU'RE A SMALL CITY, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT THE CASE FOR US.

IT COULD BE SOME OTHER DIFFICULTIES IN TERMS OF FINANCING FOR BONDS AND ISSUE LIKE THAT.

YOU KNOW, AS JACK MENTIONED, THE MASTER LEASE WAS A VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO GET IT THROUGH THE FINISH LINE BECAUSE THE THE BANK THAT PROVIDED THE BEST BID WAS NOT ABLE TO CERTIFY. AND CLIFFORD, IS THE STATE LEGISLATURE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THIS LIKE JUST TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IMPLICATIONS? I KNOW ONE FIRM HAS BEEN KIND OF BLACKLISTED, IF YOU WILL.

SO MY QUESTION IS, IS ARE THEY GOING TO BE ASKING? I MEAN, THERE'S A THERE'S A WAY THAT YOU CAN PUT SOMETHING ON YOUR AGENDA BUT NOT EXPEND YOUR POLITICAL CAPITAL, BUT JUST GIVE THEM INFORMATION OF WHAT IS HAPPENING IN REAL TIME,

[00:45:05]

BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN TWO YEARS AND YOU CAN CAPTURE SOME DATA.

SO IS THAT AN OPPORTUNITY THERE TO JUST SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE WANTED TO SHOW YOU WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE AND HOW IT'S AFFECTING, NOT NECESSARILY PUSHING IT TO WHERE, YOU KNOW, YOU DIE ON THE HILL, BUT IT ALLOWS FOR SOME UNDERSTANDING, AND WHILE IT COULD BE A KEYSTONE PART OF AN AGENDA, I STILL THINK NOT. BUT THAT ISN'T A REASON NOT TO GIVE THEM GOOD DATA.

THAT IS CORRECT.

WHEN YOU MAKE STATEMENTS FOR THEM TO TAKE NOTICE OF, THEY DO TAKE NOTICE OF THAT.

NOW, WHETHER OR NOT THEY RESPOND OR HOW THEY RESPOND, THAT'S A WHOLE NOTHER THING.

BUT IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY ARE YOU PLANNING TO PUT A BILL THROUGH? BECAUSE HAVING IT ON YOUR AGENDA AND FILING A BILL ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, CORRECT? SO IF THE COUNCIL MOVES FORWARD WITH THIS ITEM AND VOTES FOR IT TO BE ON THE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM AND SAYS, YOU KNOW, IN THE WORDING SAYS, YOU KNOW, WE WILL LOOK FOR LEGISLATION FOR THIS, THEN OF COURSE I WILL TAKE IT AND SHOP IT AROUND, SO TO SPEAK.

YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE TAKERS.

YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE SOMEONE THAT'S WILLING TO CARRY THE WATER ON THAT.

IF WE HAVE A TAKER, THEN WE'RE HOPING THAT THEY TOOK IT TO PUSH IT FORWARD.

IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY TAKERS, THEN I WILL DEFINITELY MAKE SURE I REPORT BACK WHY WE DON'T HAVE ANY TAKERS SO THAT WE KNOW.

WELL, I THINK IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO, WHILE YOU'RE SHOPPING IT AROUND TO EXPLAIN WHAT WHAT IS HAPPENING.

I MEAN THAT THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE HERE IS HELP EDUCATE WHAT IS HAPPENING IN AUSTIN AND HOW IT AFFECTS US BACK HERE IN DALLAS OR LUBBOCK OR IN HOUSTON.

AND I THINK TO JUST ASSUME THAT, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LISTEN WHEN YOU'RE HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS, BECAUSE YOU MAY BE ON THE OTHER PART OF THE AISLE, I THINK IS A BAD ASSUMPTION.

I'VE BEEN DOWN IN AUSTIN, I'VE WORKED IN AUSTIN.

IT'S A LONG GAME, AND SO YOU'VE GOT TO KEEP SHOWING INFORMATION AFTER EVERY YEAR AFTER YEAR.

AND SO I'M INCLINED TO KEEP IT THERE JUST BECAUSE I THINK IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING.

BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW IF IT'S A HILL I'M GOING TO DIE ON.

YES. AND THERE ARE OTHER CITIES THAT ARE ALSO GOING THROUGH THE SIMILAR EXPERIENCE AS WE ARE.

SO WE WON'T BE THE ONLY ONE SAYING THIS.

NOW, WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS IT ON OUR LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM IS A WHOLE NOTHER THING.

BUT BUT YES.

AND IF I COULD ADD WELL, WELL, IT'S BEEN A CHALLENGE AND WE HAVE STARTED PROCESSES AND HAD TO BACK UP AND START AGAIN ON SOME DIFFERENT THINGS.

IT'S NOT PREVENTED US FROM BEING ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY TRANSACTION WE NEEDED.

WE JUST HAVE TO BE VERY MINDFUL OF IT.

WE'VE HAD TO TAKE MORE TIME AGAIN.

WE STARTED HAD TO BACK UP AND START AGAIN ON SOME THINGS, BUT WE ARE ABLE TO DO ALL THE TRANSACTIONS THAT WE NEED.

THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES.

I'LL JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, IN THIS ONE, I'VE KIND OF DON'T FEEL LIKE I HAVE A DOG IN THE FIGHT, BUT WHEN I, WHEN I AM IN THAT SITUATION, I'M GOING TO ALWAYS DEFER TO STAFF, AND I THINK YOUR REASONING IS PRETTY SOUND.

TIME IS MONEY, AND WE HAVE A LOT OF EXPENSES COMING UP IN THE CITY.

SO I SUPPORT STAFF'S POSITION ON THIS ONE.

NO SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ON IF WE ADD THIS TO THE AGENDA OR NOT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT, 4 TO 1.

WE'RE ADDING THAT TO THE AGENDA.

THE NEXT ITEM IS THAT WAS PULLED BY CHAIR MENDELSOHN WAS SUPPORT FLEXIBILITY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTION DATES.

MISS ROGERS, COULD COULD YOU TELL US ABOUT THIS ONE AND WHAT IT WHAT IT MEANS? THANK YOU. CHAIR. THIS ONE WAS SUBMITTED BY YOU DURING THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION PROCESS, BACK AT THE END OF DECEMBER.

SO, AS YOU KNOW, THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS HAS BEEN MANAGING THE CHARTER REVIEW PROCESS, AND THIS WAS ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT THEY HAD SUBMITTED.

AND THEN WE RECEIVED A REQUEST TO CONSIDER IT AS PART OF YOUR COMMITTEE'S PROGRAM.

WE DO HAVE WITH US OUR GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS MANAGER, JAKE ANDERSON, WHO IS MANAGING THE CHARTER REVIEW PROCESS, TO ANSWER ANY HARD QUESTIONS.

THANKS AND I'LL JUST MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS I'VE.

THIS ONE PERTAINS TO ALLOWING US TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO THE STATE AGAIN.

IF WE CHOOSE AS A COUNCIL, TO SET OUR ELECTION DATE FOR NOVEMBER VERSUS MAY.

RIGHT. OR THE STATE LAW CURRENTLY PROHIBITS A CITY FROM HOLDING THEIR MOVING THEIR ELECTION FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER UNLESS THEY TOOK THAT ACTION BEFORE 2016.

SO WE DID NOT TAKE THAT ACTION.

SO WE CANNOT THE CITY COUNCIL BY ORDINANCE OR WHAT HAVE YOU COULD NOT MOVE THEIR ELECTION FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER UNLESS THERE WAS A STATUTORY CHANGE.

SO MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE THIS WOULD BE A PLACEHOLDER THAT IF THE LEGISLATURE DID TAKE ACTION, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL COULD THEN MOVE THEIR ELECTION FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER.

IS THERE ANYTHING PREVENTING THIS ITEM FROM DIRECTING OUR CONSULTANTS TO ASK THE STATE TO REOPEN THAT PROHIBITION AND ALLOW US TO OR GIVE US ANOTHER WINDOW IN WHICH WE WANT TO MOVE OUR DATES? I THINK THAT'S SUBJECT TO THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL, IF THAT WAS THE LEGISLATIVE DIRECTION THAT WAS RECEIVED.

[00:50:06]

I DON'T KNOW IF CLIFFORD, IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING.

YEAH. SO IF THE COUNCIL CHOOSES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING, THE CONSULTANTS WILL BE PUSHING THIS DOWN IN AUSTIN TO GET TO BASICALLY GET IT ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

AND AGAIN, JUST LIKE PREVIOUSLY, WHATEVER FEEDBACK WE GET ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO DO IT OR NOT, WE'LL DEFINITELY BRING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL TO KIND OF HELP STRATEGIZE A LITTLE BETTER. A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP, DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE COME UP IN THE CHARTER REVIEW CHARTER AMENDMENT PROCESS HAVE BEEN THE DISLIKE OF TRIGGER CLAUSES. SO IF WE PUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN OUR IN OUR CHARTER THAT WE WERE GOING TO MOVE TO A NOVEMBER ODD YEAR ELECTION IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONTINGENT ON A TRIGGER CLAUSE OF THE STATE MAKING THIS LARGE LEGAL CHANGE.

SO IF WE IF WE SO, SO BY PROVIDING YOU WITH THE FLEXIBILITY, YOU COULD WE COULD BE A LITTLE MORE PROACTIVE ON THE STATE SIDE OF THIS.

RIGHT. YES.

IF THAT'S THE IF THAT'S THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN AND THAT'S THE WAY THE CONVERSATION GOES, THEN YES.

YES, IF IT WAS INCLUDED, IF THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE CHARTER THAT WENT TO THE VOTERS, AND THE VOTERS THEN APPROVED IT IN NOVEMBER, THAT WOULD BE THE TRIGGER THEN SUBJECT TO WHATEVER HAPPENS IN AUSTIN.

SO YOU COULD THE THE VOTERS COULD APPROVE A PROPOSITION IN NOVEMBER THAT SAYS, HEY, WE WANT TO MOVE ELECTIONS FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER, BUT THAT COULDN'T OCCUR UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE AUTHORIZED IT.

AND, JAKE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CLEAN ME UP.

HI, JAKE ANDERSON, OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS.

YES, THAT'S BASICALLY IT.

THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A TRIGGER CLAUSE.

SO IT WOULD READ SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF SUBJECT TO, YOU KNOW, LEGISLATIVE APPROVAL.

OKAY. SO THIS THIS REALLY WOULD ACCOMPANY THAT INSTEAD OF REPLACING IT.

CORRECT. THAT IS THAT IS CORRECT.

YES. MOVING AN ELECTION DATE WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE IN THE CHARTER.

BUT IT ALSO HAS TO BE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A WINDOW OPENED UP IN THE FIRST PLACE AT THE LEGISLATURE.

SO THERE'S KIND OF A TWO PART PROCESS AND YOU CAN TAKE THEM KIND OF IN EITHER ORDER.

BUT IF YOU TAKE THE CHARTER AMENDMENT FIRST, YOU HAVE TO DO IT WITH A TRIGGER CLAUSE.

I DON'T THINK SO.

THE WAY I'M UNDERSTANDING IT, YOU'RE SAYING YOU MUST HAVE THE TRIGGER CLAUSE TO GO ADVOCATE FOR THE CHANGE.

NO. OKAY. SO YOU CAN STILL GO ADVOCATE FOR THE CHANGE AND THEN COME IN TWO YEARS AND CHANGE IT.

ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. BECAUSE IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU WERE SAYING YOU NEEDED TO HAVE THE TRIGGER IN ORDER TO GO TO AUSTIN, I APOLOGIZE.

NO, YOU CAN TAKE YOU CAN REALLY TAKE THIS IN EITHER ORDER IN THAT YOU COULD IMPLEMENT IT, YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATURE COULD OPEN IT UP AND THEN.

YES. YES, EXACTLY. AND SO I'VE BEEN SAYING, I MEAN, I WANT I'D RATHER GET IT ON THE BOOKS IN AUSTIN AND COME BACK IN TWO YEARS BECAUSE I THINK THE CONFUSION AND ANYTIME YOU SAY TRIGGER, IT SETS OFF A CERTAIN VOTER.

AND I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THAT THAT'S THIS IS UNNECESSARY FOR NOVEMBER.

AND THAT'S JUST MY THING, BUT I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT IN AUSTIN, AND THEN WHEN IT COMES HERE, PUT IT ON.

AND THEN THERE YOU GO.

THANK YOU CHAIRMAN.

CLIFFORD, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE LIKELIHOOD IS IF THIS WAS ON OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, THAT THE FIRST THING ANY STATE ELECTED OFFICIAL WOULD SAY IS, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? YOU ALREADY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THIS ALL THE WAY UP UNTIL 2016.

YES, THAT'S A VERY STRONG POSSIBILITY BECAUSE THE A LOT OF THE LEADERSHIP THAT WAS THERE BACK IN 2016 AND EVEN PREVIOUS OR PRIOR, THEY ARE STILL THERE. AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS A POSSIBILITY THAT THEY LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE LONG MEMORIES IN AUSTIN.

SO THEY COULD ALWAYS LOOK AND SAY, WELL, WE GAVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY.

WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHY DIDN'T YOU TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY THEN? BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE LEGISLATURE IS ONE OF THOSE PLACES WHERE ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN AS WELL.

SO AT THE SAME TIME, THEY COULD COME BACK AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, IT'S BEEN LONG ENOUGH.

YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN PUSHING FOR THIS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, SO MAYBE NOW'S THE TIME TO REOPEN IT BACK UP.

AND WHAT DO YOU THINK THE GENERAL MINDSET IS ON WANTING TO HELP OUT DALLAS WITH SOMETHING THEY WANT? LIKE I SAID, THEY'RE STILL VERY ANTI-CITY AND DALLAS IS STILL A CITY AND THEREFORE, YOU KNOW, ANY.

BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A VERY GOOD SESSION LAST SESSION AND IT WAS ANTI-CITY SESSION.

SO. HEADS OR TAILS.

ALL RIGHT. NOT SEEING ANY OTHER COMMENTS.

WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS ITEM.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

OH, THIS IS TO KEEP THIS ONE ON AS A LEGISLATIVE PRIORITY.

SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? GOT TWO. OPPOSED.

CHAIR RESENDEZ. WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO KNOW WHAT YOU WHERE YOU STAND ON THIS.

I'M SUPPORTIVE OF KEEPING IT ON THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.

THANK YOU. WE ARE GOING TO ADD THAT ONE TO THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE LAST ONE THAT'S INCLUDED ON THIS LIST.

[00:55:07]

AND THEN WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADD MORE IF YOU GUYS WANT.

AND THIS IS TO EXPAND OPPORTUNITIES TO GROW THE TAX BASE, ESSENTIALLY SUPPORT THE AUTHORIZATION, LICENSING AND REGULATION OF CASINO GAMING, SPORTS WAGERING AND CARDROOMS IN THE STATE.

WHERE'D THIS COME FROM? CARRIE. THIS WAS SUBMITTED ACTUALLY, BY A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, INCLUDING YOURSELF BACK IN THE FALL.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, AND I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND I GUESS LOBBY FOR THIS ONE.

I FEEL LIKE THIS IS THIS IS A FOREGONE CONCLUSION AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, IF NOT THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION, IF WE DON'T PREPARE FOR IT IN DALLAS, WE HAVE CITIES LIKE ARLINGTON AND IRVING THAT WILL HAPPILY TAKE THE MANTLE AND AND ALLOW FOR IT IN THEIR CITIES.

SO WHATEVER COMES FROM IT, WHETHER IT'S YOU KNOW, REVENUE, CRIME, WHAT HAVE YOU LIKE, I WOULD RATHER BE IN CONTROL OF IT AND BENEFIT FROM THE GOOD, GOOD STUFF THE MONEY AND REGULATE AND BE IN CONTROL OF THE BAD STUFF.

LIKE IF WE BELIEVE CRIME IS GOING TO COME FROM IT.

SO FOR ME, WE SHOULD GET AHEAD OF IT AND NOT SIT BACK AND WAIT AND LET OUR SISTER CITIES JUMP OUT IN FRONT OF IT, AND I THINK ONE WAY TO GET AHEAD OF IT IS FOR US TO, TO BE DOWN THERE SHOWING OUR SUPPORT FOR LEGALIZATION, REGULATION AND TAXING.

THAT'S WHERE I STAND ON IT. YEAH.

AND, YOU KNOW SO I AGREE WITH YOU THAT WE SHOULD BE PREPARING FOR CASINO GAMBLING AND SPORTS WAGERING.

ABSOLUTELY. I THINK ONE DAY THOSE WILL HAPPEN.

AND I DO THINK DALLAS SHOULD BE READY, AND I CAN SUPPORT THAT.

I TOTALLY DISAGREE ABOUT THE CARD ROOMS, AND DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS ITEM, BUT OVERALL, I DON'T KNOW THAT PREPARING NEEDS TO BE PART OF A LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'VE ALREADY HAD THE SPEAKER.

I'M SORRY. THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR SAY THAT THIS ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN.

SO AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I WOULD LIKE US TO JUST BE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND STRATEGIC IN DEVELOPING THIS.

IF WE JUST WANT TO LITERALLY SHOW ALL OUR CARDS, WE CAN DO THAT.

BUT I THINK EVERYBODY ALREADY KNOWS THAT WE'RE PREPARING FOR THE DAY THAT IT WILL HAPPEN.

I DON'T THINK THAT IT WILL BE ANYTIME VERY SOON.

ANYBODY ELSE? I DO THINK THAT SINCE I'VE BEEN AROUND THE PINK DOME A LOT.

IT TAKES A COUPLE OF SESSIONS TO GET ANYTHING THROUGH.

AND WHILE YES, WE'VE HAD SOME FOLKS SAY THIS ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN, I THINK YOU SHOULD ALWAYS BE PREPARED FOR ANYTHING TO HAPPEN.

AND AGAIN, THIS ISN'T ONE TO LIKE, GO IN AND SAY, WE'RE ALL IN, WE'RE ALL IN.

BUT I THINK GIVEN WHERE WE ARE WITH WHAT HAS BEEN SAID, OTHER OTHER CITIES IN THIS REGION WILL TAKE IT.

IF WE DON'T. AND WE HAVE A BIG BILL COMING UP AND THIS IS A WAY TO DO IT.

AND I THINK IT'S ALL OF THEM.

AND IT IS.

THE CARD ROOM THING HAS GOT TO GET FINALIZED SOMEHOW, SOME WAY.

SO I'M, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT BECAUSE I DO THINK IT'S TIME TO TO ACTUALLY START BEING FOR SOMETHING INSTEAD OF AGAINST SOMETHING IN THIS CITY. BECAUSE I THINK IT DEFENSE GETS REALLY OLD PRETTY FAST.

SO THAT'S MY COMMENTS.

I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS AS WELL.

I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO BE PREPARED FOR.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S COMING.

I HOPE IT'S THIS TIME.

DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL, BUT JUST COMING BACK FROM VEGAS WITH MY COUNCIL MEMBER.

I WANT TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO.

WELL, I CAN'T BELIEVE IT, BUT YES, WE WILL.

I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? CHAIRMAN, MAY I ALSO ADD, JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, STAFF REMINDED ME THAT SUPPORTING SOME FORM OF GAMBLING AS A MEANS OF FUNDING FOR THE PENSION IS ON THE DRAFT QUALITY OF LIFE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM, I THINK FOR TOMORROW.

YES. THAT'S HELPFUL TOO.

SO WE'LL HAVE MORE INPUT FOR FOR THIS FOR THIS TOPIC.

I MEAN THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR GENERATING REVENUE.

IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR NEW JOBS AND A NEW NEW TOURISM.

AND SO IT'S IT'S IT'S IT'S AN EXCITING OPPORTUNITY.

AND IF WE DON'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT, WHO KNOWS WHERE IT WILL GO.

SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF KEEPING THIS ON THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, SAY I.

AND THAT'S AN EYE FOR HIM.

ANY. OPPOSED.

4 TO 1.

IT STAYS ON THE AGENDA.

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON.

DOES ANYONE WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? I KNOW WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE.

OKAY. GO AHEAD.

SO IF WE I KNOW THAT IN OUR AD HOC PENSION BRIEFING, THERE'S A CONVERSATION ABOUT INCREASING

[01:00:05]

OUR CAP.

THAT WOULD BE THE LOCAL NOT GOING TO AUSTIN AND LOOKING AT IT THERE.

IS THAT CORRECT? IT'S BASICALLY TO INCREASE OUR CAPACITY TO TAX MORE.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO DO IT AT THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IT.

HERE. FROM OUR TEXT.

OTHERS. SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE CAP THAT THAT WAS PROBABLY REFERRING TO WOULD BE THE STATE CAPTIVE SB TWO, THE 3.5% CAP THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY UNDER. SO THAT THAT WAS THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

YEAH. AND SO IT'S THE VOTER.

CORRECT. THE VOTER. IT'S NOT LOOKING TO INCREASE OUR SALES TAX OR ANYTHING IN AUSTIN.

BUT ANYWAY, I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

AND I GUESS BECAUSE IT SAYS PENSION OBLIGATIONS, WE COULD PUT THAT UNDER EVERYTHING.

RIGHT. THIS HELPS THE PENSION.

SO THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT SALES TAX, AS YOU KNOW, WITH DART AND CORRECT TAKING BACK SOME AMOUNT OF THE 1% THAT GOES TO DART.

AND TAMMY, I APOLOGIZE, BUT I WOULD HAVE TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO WHAT WOULD BE NEEDED REGARDING SALES TAX.

IN REGARDS TO PROPERTY TAX, THERE IS A STATE LAW THAT CAPS THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO GENERATE EACH YEAR.

AND SO TO INCREASE THAT WITHOUT A VOTER REFERENDUM WE ARE ABLE TO GO ABOVE THAT 3.5% CAP IN REVENUE WITH A VOTE OF OF THE RESIDENTS.

OKAY. BUT IF WE WANTED TO INCREASE THE CAP SO THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO HAVE THOSE LOCAL VOTES, IT WOULD TAKE A CHANGE IN STATE LAW TO INCREASE THE CAP.

AND THEN AND THEN I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT DART, IF ANY.

YEAH. SO I GUESS THAT WOULD BE UNDER PENSION OBLIGATIONS IF WE ARE NEEDED TO DO ANYTHING.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING TO REDUCE THE PENNY.

YOU DON'T NEED TO DO IT AT AUSTIN TO SOME DEGREE.

SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING TO CALL ON OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

THANK YOU. JACK.

HI. TAMMY PALOMINO.

SO CURRENTLY UNDER THE STATE STATUTE, DART HAS 1%.

AND THEY CAN, THROUGH THEIR BOARD, REDUCE BY ONE QUARTER OF 1% INCREMENTS.

AND IF THEY DID DO THAT, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE VOTERS AND TRY TO WE'D HAVE TO CAPTURE THAT, RECLAIM IT.

AND WHAT IF IT IS LIKE A DIME? THEY THEY CAN'T DO IT.

IT'S ONLY 25%, RIGHT.

IT'S IT'S IN ONE QUARTER INCREMENTS.

OKAY. SO IF THEY DID ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT THAT'S A IT'S NOT EXISTED.

AND HOW IT IS. LET'S GO BACK TO THE IT WOULD HAVE TO IT WOULD REQUIRE A STATE LAW CHANGE.

OKAY. AND THEN MY NEXT THING IS TAXPAYER ADVOCACY WORK.

I'M SURE THAT'S GOING TO BE COMING AT US.

IS THERE DO WE NEED TO EVEN PUT THAT ANYWHERE, OR IS THAT JUST AN ASSUMPTION THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO, THAT WE'RE GOING TO SAY WE NEED ALL THE HELP WE CAN GET.

SO TYPICALLY WE HAVE A BROAD BASED STATEMENT THAT SAYS PROTECT.

I'M SORRY LOCAL CONTROL.

THANK YOU. AND SO THEREFORE THAT WOULD FALL UNDER THAT UMBRELLA STATEMENT THAT WE HAVE AND WE ALWAYS HAVE THAT STATEMENT ON EVERY LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM.

SO BUT AGAIN, TO MAKE A STATEMENT, WE CAN PUT THAT OUT THERE THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO PROTECT.

I KNOW WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATION OVER THE INTERIM ABOUT THAT.

BUT SO PUTTING SOMETHING ON YOUR AGENDA BECAUSE YOU SAID IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THAT'S THE MAIN THING THAT YOU'RE GOING FOR, BECAUSE I MEAN, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT ANYWAY. AND THEN THE FINAL THING ON THE DEATH STAR BILL, I'M SURE IT'S GOING TO NEED SOME CLEANUP.

DOES THAT GO HERE? IS THAT GOING TO BE SOMETHING WHERE BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S BEEN CONVERSATIONS THAT WE WERE CAUGHT UP IN SOME STUFF THAT REALLY PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE US.

WHERE DOES THAT FALL? SO AND WHEN YOU SAY, WHERE DOES IT FALL AS FAR AS WHICH COMMITTEE OR JUST WHAT? AND IS IT GOING TO BE ON OUR AGENDA? IS IT STILL UNDER THE LOCAL CONTROL? THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE.

THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE UNDER LOCAL CONTROL.

BUT YOU COULD PUT IT UNDER I MEAN, YOU CAN PUT IT UNDER GPFM, YOU CAN PUT IT UNDER ECO.

IT JUST I'M JUST WONDERING, HAS THERE ANY BEEN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THAT ONE.

OH, THERE I WAS GOING TO SAY THERE WAS AN ITEM IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND I FORGET THE LANGUAGE.

BUT IT WAS SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF ENSURING EFFICIENT, PROPER PROCESSES OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

AND THAT WAS A REFLECTION OF DOING SOME CLEANUP ON SENATE BILL 99, HOUSE BILL 14, JUST SOME UNINTENDED IT'S AN OMNIBUS THING.

YEAH. OKAY. YEAH.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE IT SOMEWHERE, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME SOME UNSEEN REPERCUSSIONS OF WHAT HAPPENED.

MS. MENDELSOHN. THANK YOU.

SO I'D JUST LIKE TO ADDRESS YOUR COMMENT, ACTUALLY, ABOUT THE DEATH STAR BILL THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WILL BE A DEATH STAR BILL 2.0 COMING.

[01:05:03]

SO IN ADDITION TO PERHAPS PROVIDING INPUT TO THINGS THAT MIGHT NEED ADJUSTMENTS TO WHAT'S ALREADY PASSED YOU KNOW, I DO THINK UNDER LOCAL CONTROL WILL BE WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THIS AGAIN.

I HAVE A QUESTION, ACTUALLY TAMMY, IF YOU'RE AVAILABLE ABOUT DART.

IN THAT PENNY. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE QUARTER PENNY.

THAT'S ONLY IF THE DART BOARD EXECUTES A CHANGE, AS OPPOSED TO IF WE DIRECTLY WENT TO THE LEDGE AND ASKED FOR FOR AN OVERALL CHANGE TO THE STRUCTURE, YOU'RE CORRECT.

AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE IF WE WERE SEEKING MORE OF A TRANSIT AUTHORITY SO THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE CITIES TO PARTICIPATE, EVEN AT MAYBE A LOWER RATE.

I HAVEN'T LOOKED INTO THAT ONE, BUT I GUESS WE COULD DO THAT FOR YOU FOR SURE.

WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK TO COUNCILMEMBER BLACKMON'S POINT, YOU KNOW, WE MAY WANT TO ACTUALLY SPECIFY THAT WE ARE SEEKING CHANGES TO THAT DART CONTRIBUTION SO THAT NO MATTER WHAT COMES I MEAN, I'M SURE MOST OF YOU ARE AWARE THAT PLANO HAS ON THEIR AGENDA FOR MONDAY NIGHT TO PASS A RESOLUTION ASKING FOR THE QUARTER CENT OR MORE REDUCTION.

AND I'M NOT SURE THAT ANYBODY KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT PATH FORWARD LOOKS LIKE.

BUT I THINK WE SHOULD KEEP ALL OF OUR OPTIONS OPEN.

SO I'M VERY OPEN TO HAVING THAT IN THIS COMMITTEE SINCE IT CERTAINLY WOULD BE A HUGE BOON.

QUARTER CENT IS OVER $100 MILLION A YEAR IF WE WERE TO RECAPTURE THAT.

SO IF THERE WAS LANGUAGE THAT SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE, I'D CERTAINLY SECOND IT.

SO AND I MEAN, THERE'S THERE'S ANOTHER OPTION, TWO, OF CAPPING THEIR AMOUNT.

THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION THAT YOU CAN CAP WHAT DART RECEIVES AND THEN DO A CPI AND THEN COLLECT ANYTHING.

THERE'S I WAS GOING TO SAY TAKING A PENNY OR TAKING A QUARTER OF A PENNY IS NOT AN ONLY OPTION.

THERE ARE MANY OPTIONS.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, I DON'T WANT TO PIGEONHOLE OF ONLY SAYING TAKING.

IT SHOULD BE USING SALES TAX CREATE.

AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT SHOULD BE, BUT IT'S A BUCKET THAT AND I THINK IT'S JUST FOR PENSION OBLIGATIONS WHICH COULD BE REDUCTION OR CAPTURING EXCESS.

SO SAY I THINK WHAT IS IT SUPPOSED TO GROW IN FIVE YEARS.

JUST OUR PORTION WILL I THINK GO TO 200 MILLION.

SO BASICALLY WHAT IT WOULD BE IS YOU GET YOUR WHOLE FOR THAT AMOUNT, YOU'LL STILL GET YOUR 400 MILLION FROM DALLAS, BUT THAT 200 INCREMENT CAN COME BACK TO US. THAT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME CREATIVE JUICES.

AND AS I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS AND SO IT KEEPS DART WHOLE AND THEY WILL KEEP THEIR PART OF THEIR CPI, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER IT IS.

BUT IT ACTUALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS THEY DON'T NECESSARILY GET MONEY.

AND IN ORDER TO CREATE PROJECTS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY BENEFIT THE SYSTEM, BUT ALSO TO LOOKING AT CITIES TO JOIN IN, WHICH IS GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT IT WILL BE A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION TOO.

SO I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO SAY GO AFTER THE QUARTER.

I THINK IT IS USING THAT SLOT OF MONEY IN CREATIVE WAYS THAT COMES BACK TO THE CITY AND NOT NECESSARILY TO DART.

WE CAN DO A BROADER DEFINITELY PURSUE LEGISLATION THAT INCREASES.

YES IN CITIES. CAN I SUGGEST SEEK RESTRUCTURING OF DART SALES TAX CONTRIBUTION AND JUST LEAVE THAT BROAD OF A STATEMENT? I THINK IT MIGHT. AND I AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT HAS BEEN FLOATED OUT AS YOU KNOW, PUTTING SOME LIMITS ON THE GROWTH.

WE'VE HAD YEARS WHERE WE'VE HAD MORE THAN 11% GROWTH AND OUR SALES TAX, AND THEY ARE FOR DOING NOTHING, RECEIVING THAT EXTRA MONEY.

THAT WOULD BE VERY IMPACTFUL FOR OUR CITY AND WOULD THEORETICALLY BE BECAUSE OF ACTIONS THAT WE TOOK TO DEVELOP THAT.

SO YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY AN ELEMENT.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO THINK FORWARDLY ABOUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN IF A CITY LEAVES? WHAT IF THE CITY JOINS, AND HOW DOES THAT RESTRUCTURE EVERYBODY'S CONTRIBUTION? WHAT IF MANY CITIES JOIN? AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK ALL OF THE, ALL THE DIFFERENT PERMUTATIONS OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN SHOULD BUT ALSO IF WE WANT TO THEN SAY IF THERE'S A REDUCTION OR ONGOING RETURN OF SALES TAX TO US IF THAT'S DEDICATED TO A SPECIFIC TOPIC LIKE PENSION OR STREETS OR SOMETHING.

[01:10:01]

SO. YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT LEAVES IT OPEN ENOUGH FOR US TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

I THINK THIS IS AN EVOLVING STORY, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT A COUPLE OTHER CITIES ARE GOING TO PUT THAT AS A RESOLUTION AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

I GUESS JUST, AND I APOLOGIZE.

I RAN TO THE RESTROOM REAL QUICK BECAUSE I THINK I HEARD EVERYTHING THOUGH THE.

SO IS THIS A LEGISLATIVE ITEM OR IS IT MORE OF AN ITEM? WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A COMMITTEE.

YES. TO ADD THE LEGISLATIVE ITEM.

SEEK RESTRUCTURING OF DART SALES TAX CONTRIBUTION.

OKAY. AND THE INTENT IS TO LEAVE IT BROAD ENOUGH THAT IT CAN THE WHATEVER COMES OF IT IS WE'RE NOT SETTING IN STONE TODAY.

WE'RE SAYING IT COULD BE FLEXIBLE.

AND THE USE OF THE RECAPTURED PROCEEDS IS FLEXIBLE.

ALL RIGHT.

I'LL ASK ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON THIS ONE? ALL RIGHT. SO THE THAT IS IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH GUIDANCE TO ADD? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON IT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? EVERYONE'S IN FAVOR OF THAT ONE.

OKAY. I HAVE ONE TO ADD TO THIS IS IN LINE WITH THE ELECTION ITEMS FROM THE CHARTER.

AND THIS IS. AND I'M NOT SURE HOW TO WORD IT KERRY AND CLIFFORD, BUT RANKED CHOICE VOTING AND HAVING THAT LISTED AS A LEGISLATIVE PRIORITY, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORTED ADDING TO THE CHARTER.

BUT THERE WERE A LOT OF COLLEAGUES THAT DID SPEAK UP AND SAY THAT THEY WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF ADVOCATING FOR IT AT THE LEGISLATURE.

SO I'M PUTTING THAT UP THERE.

I'D LIKE TO GIVE FEEDBACK THAT THAT IS NOT SOMETHING I WOULD SUPPORT.

THANK YOU. VERY CLEAR AND SHORT.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER FEEDBACK? ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ON THIS ONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? GOT THREE IN FAVOR, TWO OPPOSED.

IT STAYS ON THE OR GOES ON THE AGENDA.

THAT'S EVERYONE WHO'S TOLD ME THEY HAD A NEW ONE.

IS THERE ANYBODY WHO HASN'T SPOKEN UP YET? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU ARE FINISHED.

JUST TO AS A ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM HERE WE HAVE A HARD STOP TIME OF 330 BECAUSE OF HALF OF MY COMMITTEE, OR MAYBE 3/5 OF THEM ARE ON THE SPORTS COMMITTEE, SO WE WILL KEEP IT EFFICIENT.

THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. I WAS MISS BLACKMON.

OH. I'M HEARING WE MAY NOT.

AT LEAST ONE COUNCIL MEMBER HAS NO QUESTIONS ON THESE BUDGETS.

I DON'T EITHER ON THESE DEPARTMENTS.

MR. RESENDEZ OR MORENO.

OKAY, WELL, LET'S JUST PAUSE FOR A MINUTE BEFORE I PUT YOU THROUGH THE THE MOTIONS OF DOING PRESENTATIONS.

LET'S SEE IF MISS BLACKMON HAS ANY QUESTIONS.

YEAH. WHILE WE'RE ON PAUSE, LET'S JUMP DOWN TO.

WELL, FIRST OF ALL, DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT E OR F? OKAY. WELL THEN LET'S JUST DO D.

GO AHEAD AND DO YOUR QUESTIONS ON D IF YOU WOULD.

AND THIS GOES FOR EVERYBODY.

THANK YOU. THIS IS FOR BUDGET ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT ON PAGE SIX.

UNDER GENERAL FUND.

MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE UNIFORM PENSION EXPENSES.

SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT A VARIANCE OF ABOUT $2 MILLION.

OTHERS. NO, SORRY.

I WAS LOOKING BACK BY JACK.

AND I'M LIKE, WHERE'D SHE GO?

[01:15:01]

HI, JEANETTE. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT A VARIANCE OF ABOUT $2 MILLION.

SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE PROJECTED STAFFING ASSUMPTION WAS INCORRECT? KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WHEN WE MADE THE ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING POLICE HIRING OF 250 OFFICERS, THE CALCULATED PENSION AMOUNT WAS BASED ON THAT.

AND SO WITH THE FORECAST LESS THAN 250 OFFICERS, WE ARE FORECASTING UNDER BUDGET BECAUSE OUR PROJECTED STAFFING ISN'T WHERE WE HAD EXPECTED IT TO BE.

THAT IS CORRECT. AND SO WOULDN'T THAT ALSO CARRY OVER TO THE PENSION ITSELF? AND THEIR UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS.

THAT IS CORRECT.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT INTERNALLY TREATING PENSION LIKE A SACRED CODE.

AND SO WHATEVER WE BUDGET WOULD BE THE AMOUNT THAT WE WOULD SEND OVER TO THE PENSION FUND.

THE NEXT ITEM I HAVE.

THE. OKAY. AND SO FOR THE 159 MILLION WE USED FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT FOR ARPA FROM VFR.

ARE THERE ADDITIONAL ELIGIBLE EXPENSES? IF THE COUNCIL DECIDED THEY WANTED TO GO THAT ROUTE? SO WHEN WE BRIEF COUNCIL, WE FORECAST WE WE MENTIONED IN THE BRIEFING THAT I BELIEVE IN FISCAL YEAR 23, WE COULD GO THEY WE REALIZED 189 MILLION OF ELIGIBLE EXPENSES.

SO THERE IS CAPACITY TO INCREASE THAT AMOUNT BASED ON FISCAL YEAR 23 ACTUALS.

ALSO, WE ARE COMMITTED TO COMING BACK TO COUNCIL AS PART OF THE END OF YEAR BUDGET APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE.

AND SO WE HAD MENTIONED THAT WE WOULD BRING BACK WHERE WE ARE FROM A SPENDING PERSPECTIVE.

AND SO WE'LL SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH YOU AS PART OF THE END OF YEAR ORDINANCE.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S ANOTHER 30 MILLION THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED IN THIS REIMBURSEMENT? THAT IS CORRECT.

OKAY. AND THEN THERE'S A MEMO THAT WAS SENT BY THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS QUESTIONING THE ARPA FUNDING ON BROADBAND AND RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ALSO BE MOVED OVER.

IS THAT BEING CONSIDERED FOR YOUR BUDGET AMENDMENT? THAT WILL BE PART OF THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAVE AS PART OF THE END OF YEAR BUDGET APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE? YES. WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHERE WE ARE FROM A SPENDING PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE, AS YOU KNOW THE GRANT ENDS SEPTEMBER.

WE HAVE TO HAVE FUNDS ENCUMBERED BY SEPTEMBER 30TH OF 2024.

SO ANY PROJECTS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ENCUMBERED, THEY WILL BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION FOR REALLOCATION AS WELL AS THE BROADBAND ITEM.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN ON PAGE TEN CONVENTION EVENT SERVICES, THE FORECAST FOR THIS FUND SHOWS THAT THE TOTAL REVENUE.

WOULD BE $12 MILLION LESS THAN EXPENSES, AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN THAT.

YES. SO CONVENTION AND EVENT SERVICES REALIZED SIGNIFICANT REVENUE IN THE PRIOR YEAR.

AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE DOING ON THE EXPENSE SIDE IS TRANSFERRING THAT EXCESS CAPACITY TO THEIR CONSTRUCTION FUND.

SO IT'S FUND BALANCE BEING TRANSFERRED OVER TO CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION.

OKAY. AND THAT'S OKAY.

SO WHEN YOU STARTED THE YEAR, YOU HAD A PRETTY HIGH FUND BALANCE 69 MILLION, ALMOST 70 MILLION.

SO WHAT ARE YOU EXPECTING THAT TO BE FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR.

SO THE YEAR END FORECAST RIGHT NOW IS 57.9 MILLION.

OUR FMPC REQUIREMENT INDICATES THAT THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN 30 DAYS.

AND SO THEY'RE MAINTAINING THE 30 DAYS.

OKAY. AND THEN SAME THING FOR THE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT FUND.

THE REVENUE PROJECTION IS ABOUT $7 MILLION LESS THAN EXPENSES.

HOW IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT THE RATES FOR OUR EMPLOYEES FOR THE COMING YEAR? SO WE ARE HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS NOW ABOUT COMMITMENT TO EMPLOYEES REGARDING THE RATES.

AND SO, AS YOU KNOW THE EXPENSE SIDE OF THE HOUSE TYPICALLY IS, IS ASSUMED THE EXPENSES ARE ASSUMED ON THE CITY SIDE.

AND SO THIS FORECAST THAT YOU SEE THE CITY WILL BE MAKING AN ADJUSTMENT TO COVER THE BALANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T END THE YEAR NEGATIVE.

WE DON'T GO BACK AND ASK EMPLOYEES TO COVER ANY FORECAST OVERAGES IN TERMS OF 2025 RATES AS WE GO INTO OPEN ENROLLMENT.

LAST YEAR WE TALKED ABOUT AN AVERAGE OF 5% INCREASE FOR PLANS ACROSS THE THREE PLANS.

[01:20:10]

WE ARE MAKING SOME RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON USAGE THAT MAY CHANGE THAT SLIGHTLY, BUT IT'S STILL NOT GOING TO BE MORE THAN 15% ACROSS ALL THREE PLANS. SO WE ARE HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS AS WELL.

OKAY. AND WE'RE SELF-FUNDED.

YES. BUT WE USE AN OUTSIDE ADMINISTRATOR.

CORRECT. RIGHT. SO OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T GO BACK TO RECOUP PREMIUM, BUT CERTAINLY YOU'RE THEREFORE EXPECTING TO HAVE A PRETTY SIZABLE INCREASE FOR EMPLOYEES.

IS THAT TRUE? NO.

SO AS I MENTIONED, WE ARE COMMITTED TO, I THINK LAST YEAR AS PART OF OPEN ENROLLMENT WE TALKED ABOUT A 5% INCREASE BECAUSE PRIOR TO 2024, THE CITY COVERED ANY COST INCREASES ASSOCIATED WITH PLAN DESIGN.

AND SO WE THE CITY WAS ASSUMING SORT OF ANY INCREASES.

IN 2024, WE COMMUNICATED AS PART OF OPEN ENROLLMENT THAT EMPLOYEES WOULD EXPERIENCE ABOUT A 5% INCREASE.

NOW WE ARE MAKING SOME CHANGES TO THAT RECOMMENDATION, BUT OVERALL, BECAUSE IT'S 5% PER PLAN, YOU WON'T SEE AN INCREASE MORE THAN 15% ACROSS ALL THREE PLANS.

OKAY. THE THE NEXT ITEM I ACTUALLY HAD WRITTEN ABOUT WAS THE 365 MEASURES.

BUT THEN I KEPT READING THE AGENDA AND I SAW, OH, ACTUALLY, YOU HAVE A WHOLE ITEM ON THAT, SO I'M GOING TO SAVE THOSE.

THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR THE BUDGET ACCOUNTABILITY.

THANK YOU. I'VE JUST GOT ONE QUESTION I SEE ON THE BUDGET INITIATIVE TRACKER.

YOU'VE GOT THE SHORT TERM RENTAL REGISTRATION PROGRAM THAT WE'VE ONBOARDED A SEVERAL NEW STAFF MEMBERS TO, I GUESS, PREPARE FOR THE INEVITABLE ENFORCEMENT.

WHERE CAN I SEE WHAT THAT COST? AND ON BOARD THOSE NEW STAFF MEMBERS? IS THAT IN THE ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT OR CAN YOU SUPPLEMENT THAT LATER? I CAN SUPPLEMENT THAT LATER.

IT'S ACTUALLY A MAJOR BUDGET INITIATIVE ITEM, SO IT IS IN THE BUDGET DOCUMENT.

UNDER CODE COMPLIANCE.

OKAY. AND I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR IT.

NOW, THIS IS JUST KIND OF A LAST MINUTE REQUEST I CAME UP WITH.

SO LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIND IT REALLY QUICKLY.

MAYBE NOT SO QUICK.

DON'T. IT'S OKAY.

YOU CAN SUPPLEMENT LATER.

AND I THINK I'M THE ONLY ONE HOLDING YOU GUYS UP HERE STILL.

SO THIS ITEM WE'RE FINISHED WITH, I FOUND IT.

YOU FINISHED WITH. OKAY.

AND WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RELEASE EVERYBODY ON ITEM C.

IT'S 1.4 MILLION.

FOR THE INSPECTION TEAM, 1.4 MILLION FOR THE INSPECTION TEAM..

IN THE FIRST YEAR AND THEN THE SECOND, THE FULL YEAR FUNDING.

SO IT'S ABOUT TWO, A LITTLE OVER 2 MILLION.

SO WE'VE SPENT THAT MONEY TO ONBOARD ALL OF THESE INDIVIDUALS WHO CAN'T EVEN REALLY DO ENFORCEMENT YET BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN ENJOINED FROM THE STATE FROM DOING SO, BECAUSE WE CAME DOWN WITH A VERY HARSH ORDINANCE.

JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT, WORKING THERE, SUPPORTING OTHER TEAMS. YEAH, I'M SORRY, THAT WAS MORE OF A STATEMENT THOUGH.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM E TECHNOLOGY ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT.

YOU DID HAVE QUESTIONS ON THIS.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD.

BUT YEAH, IT'S GOOD, IT'S GOOD, I LIKE IT.

I'VE GOT QUESTIONS ON THE.

IT'S.

GO AHEAD. OH. THANK YOU.

HI, RYAN. FOR THE CODE COMPLIANCE ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.

IS THAT THE SAME SYSTEM BEING USED TO TRACK VESTS AND UNIFORMS AS DPD AND DFR? GOOD AFTERNOON, DOCTOR BRIAN GARDNER, INTERIM CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER.

NO, THIS IS A DIFFERENT SYSTEM.

DOING A VERY SIMILAR TASK.

YES, MA'AM. HOW COME?

[01:25:01]

WE ARE LOOKING AT THAT AS TO WHY THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ONES.

THE THE PD IS GOING THROUGH A CHANGE IN THEIR SYSTEM.

THEY USE ONE CALLED IWM.

SO I ASKED THAT QUESTION ACTUALLY.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT.

WELL YOU KNOW WHEN I SEE THESE MAPS OF THE THOUSANDS I GUESS IT'S REALLY HUNDREDS I DON'T KNOW MAYBE IT IS MORE THAN A THOUSAND SOFTWARE SYSTEMS THAT WE HAVE. IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING WE ALREADY TRACK.

AND I JUST WAS LIKE, WOW, WHY WOULD WE GET A WHOLE DIFFERENT? I JUST HADN'T SEEN THAT NAME BEFORE.

OKAY. WELL, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN TRY TO? MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T DO A PROCUREMENT FOR A SYSTEM THAT WE ALREADY HAVE.

THAT'S TRACKING THE SAME THING.

YOU KNOW, I'M SAYING LIKE OBVIOUSLY THIS HAD TO GO THROUGH SOMEBODY'S PROCUREMENT AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE SOUGHT THAT OUT OR SOMEBODY IN PROCUREMENT WOULD BE LIKE, OH, HEY, WAIT, WE ALREADY HAVE THAT SYSTEM.

LET'S JUST GET YOU A LICENSE ALSO.

OR, I MEAN, HOW DO WE STOP FROM HAVING FIVE DIFFERENT SOFTWARES THAT DO THE SAME THINGS, LIKE OUR FIVE DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO PAYMENT PROCESSING OR FIVE DIFFERENT WAYS TO TRACK LOTS OF THE SAME EXACT SOFTWARE THAT THEN YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN AND DEAL WITH SECURITY AND, YOU KNOW.

YES, MA'AM. SO THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

THE WAY THE CITY IS OPERATED AND IT'S TYPICALLY OPERATED IN IT ORGANIZATION, YOU KNOW, THAT HAS IT IS USED AN IT GOVERNANCE PROGRAM TO MANAGE AND MONITOR THAT. AND WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING THROUGH HOW TO MODIFY THAT SO THAT WE IDENTIFY THOSE AREAS, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE THE WHOLE IT CADRE AND YOU'RE TALKING THAT'S THE MAP THAT BILL DID LOOKING AT THAT MAP AND STARTING TO CONSOLIDATE AND WITH SUPPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, DONZELL, THAT'S KIND OF THE DIRECTION WE'RE HEADING, IS TO REDUCE THOSE NUMBERS AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN.

OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE MULTIPLE SYSTEMS AND MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS, SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT THAT ROADMAP INTO REDUCING THAT AND CONSOLIDATING THAT.

BUT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE YES, WE'VE CAUGHT IT KIND OF ON THE BACKSIDE.

AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND MAKING SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, CODE COMPLIANCE CAN OR CAN'T USE IT.

AND IF IF NOT, WHY.

AND MAYBE THERE ARE SOME SMALL REQUIREMENTS THEY HAVE THAT PD DOESN'T, WHICH I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE, BUT THAT WE COULD PUSH THEM INTO USING EITHER IWM OR HAVING POLICE USE THIS SYSTEM.

YEAH. I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S VERY OFTEN SOME CUSTOMIZABLE FIELDS, YOU KNOW, FOR THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS KIND OF MAYBE DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO HAVE JUST TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE SAME.

PURPOSE? YES, MA'AM.

AND LIKE I SAID, WE'RE REVAMPING THE IT GOVERNANCE PROCESS TO CATCH IT IN THE FRONT END AND ASK THE QUESTIONS BEFORE IT GETS TO THAT POINT.

OKAY. SO FOR THE WIC PROJECT CAN YOU GIVE US AN UPDATE IN ABOUT SIX MONTHS TO SHOW HOW MANY CLIENTS ACTUALLY USE THESE RESOURCES? SO THIS IS A SOFTWARE THAT WAS DESIGNED AND BUILT TO PROVIDE THE CLIENTS A RESOURCE CENTER FOR EDUCATION AND SERVICES TO IMPROVE THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.

AND WHAT I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS IF IF IT WORKED, IF THEY TOOK ADVANTAGE OF IT, HOW MANY PEOPLE LOGGED IN? HOW MANY PEOPLE? YOU KNOW, IF IT'S AN ONLINE CLASS, HOW MANY PEOPLE COMPLETED THE CLASS? YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? YES, MA'AM. SO TO KIND OF GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT AROUND THIS ITSELF IS THE OCC IS CONTRACTING WITH A THIRD PARTY TO BUILD THIS WEBSITE, SO I WOULD I WILL GET WITH JESSICA AND THE OCC TO COME UP WITH THE WHAT YOUR ASK IS, AS FAR AS THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE USING IT IT WILL HAVE VERY MINIMAL INPUT INTO THE ACTUAL BUILD OF THIS WEBSITE.

AND HAVING THAT INFORMATION, WHAT ARE WE SPENDING FOR THIS? APOLOGIZE. I DO NOT HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU, BUT I CAN GET THAT TO YOU.

OKAY. AND THEN.

ON THE OUTAGES SECTION, THERE SEEMED TO BE QUITE A FEW, I MEAN, EVERYTHING THERE WERE A LOT OF OUTAGES ASSOCIATED WITH WORKDAY.

IS EVERYTHING OKAY WITH THAT SYSTEM? FROM A HIGH LEVEL, YES.

WORKDAY TENDS TO HAVE OVER THE COURSE SINCE WE'VE IMPLEMENTED, THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL NOTABLE OUTAGES THAT WE'VE HAD OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST FOUR YEARS. THEY SEEM VERY SIGNIFICANT WHEN WE HAVE THEM.

AND IT IS DOWN FOR A VERY BRIEF TIME, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF REDUNDANCY WITHIN THE WORKDAY PLATFORM ITSELF.

GIVEN IT'S A SAAS BASED SOLUTION.

BUT IT'S BY FAR THE MOST.

HAS THE MOST OUTAGES.

CAN I ASK WHICH PAGE YOU'RE REFERENCING? SO, YOU KNOW I DIDN'T WRITE IT.

I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE.

IT'S BEFORE PAGE 42.

[01:30:02]

I CAN TELL YOU THAT.

HERE WE GO. I THINK IT'S PAGE 26.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK DOWN THE COLUMN OF THE HOURS OUT WORKDAY 210, AND THAT'S JUST THIS MONTH.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER SYSTEM THAT SEEMS TO BE MORE THAN, WELL, HERE'S I TAKE THAT BACK AND HERE'S ANOTHER ONE FOR WORKDAY 244.

AND THEN HERE'S ANOTHER ONE FOR WORKDAY 174 HOURS.

AND THOSE ARE THE TOP THREE BY FAR WITH I THINK THE NEXT CLOSEST IS 49 HOURS FOR A NETWORK ISSUE.

SO LET ME GIVE IT A LITTLE CONTEXT AROUND THE ACTUAL HOURS WITHIN THAT'S BEING REPORTED HERE.

WHAT THESE ARE IS MULTIPLE INSTANCES WHERE A USER OR A DEPARTMENT IS HAVING AN ISSUE THAT'S RELATED TO THAT DESCRIPTION.

SO WORKDAY ITSELF, THE PLATFORM MAY NOT BE DOWN, BUT THERE IS SOME CONTEXT WITHIN WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IN THE WORKDAY PLATFORM THAT'S BEING REPORTED TO US THAT WE HAVE TO GO IN AND MAKE A CONFIGURATION CHANGE OR AN UPDATE TO A FIELD THAT IS CAUSING THE ISSUE THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO THEIR TASKS. SO THE 244 HOURS IS THE TIME IT TOOK US TO TROUBLESHOOT, GET THROUGH THE ISSUE, AND THEN REPORT BACK THAT IT WAS COMPLETELY RESOLVED.

DOES THAT HELP? IT DOES.

WE JUST SPENT SO MUCH MONEY ON THAT ON WORKDAY.

I MEAN. IT'S IT'S PRETTY REMARKABLE THAT I'M LIKE, WOW, HOW COULD IT BE OUT SO MUCH? SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WAS SOME SORT OF BIGGER PROBLEM OR NOT IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS TABLE.

AND WE WILL LOOK AT HOW THIS IS REPORTED.

SO IT'S A LITTLE CLEAR FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND YOU KNOW WHAT THESE HOURS ACTUALLY MEAN AS FAR AS THE DOWNTIME FOR THE PLATFORM ITSELF, WHICH WE DON'T CONTROL TO THE CONFIGURATION COMPONENTS THAT WE DO.

OKAY. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS ON PAGE 42, AND THIS IS ABOUT YOUR HIRING, AND YOU HAVE A COMMENT IN THERE THAT YOU HAVE 16 POSITIONS THAT ARE WAITING TO BE POSTED.

AND ALL I COULD THINK OF TO ASK YOU IS, WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO IT'S IS GOING THROUGH A SLIGHT REORGANIZATION IN THE STRUCTURE IN MAKING POSITIONS MORE ADVERTISING FOR THE PUBLIC TO OR FOR USERS TO COME IN AND WORK FOR THE CITY IN THOSE POSITIONS.

WE HAVE SOME VERY ANTIQUATED POSITIONS IN IT THAT WE'VE JUST NOT BEEN ABLE TO FILL BECAUSE OF SALARY, BECAUSE THE POSITION REALLY DOESN'T FIT IN THE INDUSTRY ANYMORE.

AND SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS IS POSSIBLE.

HOPEFULLY THIS WEEK I'M MEETING WITH HR TO GO THROUGH THAT, THAT SLIGHT REORGANIZATION.

SO THOSE 16 POSITIONS ARE PART OF THAT TO UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OR EVEN ELIMINATE TO PAY FOR THAT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT.

WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR LAST ITEM OF THE DAY, WHICH IS ITEM F, THE DALLAS 365 PERFORMANCE MEASURES AS OF MAY 31ST, 2024.

AND COLLEAGUES ACCOMPANYING THIS ITEM IS A MEMO FROM MR. IRELAND ASKING FOR OUR FEEDBACK ON THE 365 MEASURES BY A DATE OF JULY 5TH.

SO ANY RECOMMENDED CHANGES YOU HAVE.

THEY WANT YOUR FEEDBACK BY THAT FRIDAY.

THESE MEASURES ARE WERE CREATED BACK IN 2018 TO INFORM US, THE CITY RESIDENTS ABOUT THE PROGRESS OF SPECIFIC CITY PROGRAMS. THESE ARE REALLY METRICS THAT ARE FOLLOWED BY THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVALUATE THEM ON.

SO PRETTY IMPORTANT.

AND I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS.

I'LL KICK OFF WITH YOU AND THEN I'VE GOT A FEW AS WELL.

WELL, CHAIR, HOW MANY YEARS HAVE WE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THESE PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND POSSIBLY CHANGING THEM?

[01:35:02]

MAY I ASK YOU THAT QUESTION? SINCE WE'VE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL? I THINK THAT WE HAVE DONE SMALL WORK.

WE'VE DONE BIG WORK.

THERE'S NOT A SINGLE YEAR I HAVEN'T PROPOSED THEM.

AND I'M JUST GOING TO PUSH BACK ON THIS REQUEST BECAUSE I'M NOT WILLING TO DO THIS AGAIN AND NOT HAVE THEM CHANGE.

AND IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

SO I NEED TO UNDERSTAND IF IT'S WORTH MY TIME.

AND AND WHAT EXACTLY THIS PROCESS IS.

SO WE GIVE STAFF FEEDBACK AND THEN WHAT DOES THAT MEAN.

WHAT HAPPENS FROM THERE? IT'S A FAIR COMMENT AND REQUEST I THINK.

SO THE CHALLENGES IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE MEASURES HAVE BEEN PROPOSED.

AND HAS IT BEEN THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN COUNCIL SUPPORT OR THAT THERE WASN'T A MECHANISM TO GET THEM INCORPORATED INTO? INTO THE DOCUMENT ITSELF.

THE FIRST YEAR, I BELIEVE WE WERE TOLD TO WORK ON IT, BUT THEN WE WERE NOT TOLD IT NEEDED TO HAPPEN WITH THE BUDGET.

SO WE WERE CONTINUING TO WORK ON IT PAST THE BUDGET AND THEN TOLD IT WAS TOO LATE THE NEXT YEAR.

STAFF FLAT OUT DID NOT WANT TO CHANGE THEM, AND SINCE THEN IT'S BEEN A VARIETY OF SOME OF THE ONES THAT WANTED TO BE CHANGED EITHER COUNCIL DIDN'T NECESSARILY WANT TO MAKE ANY CHANGES THAT STAFF DIDN'T AGREE WITH.

AND JUST AS YOUR COMMENT EARLIER, WHICH IS FAIR ENOUGH TO SAY, I'M INCLINED TO JUST.

YOU KNOW, LISTEN TO THE PROFESSIONALS THAT SOMETIMES WE JUST DO THAT RIGHT.

AND I THINK THERE'S A REASON WE DO IT.

AND I'M NOT CRITICIZING THAT.

HOWEVER, I ALSO DON'T WANT TO SPEND MY TIME WORKING ON SOMETHING FOR A SIXTH YEAR IF THE STAFF'S GOING TO COME BACK AND SAY, YEAH, WE'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO CHANGE THAT.

I'M GOING TO TURN THAT OVER.

YOU'RE IN THE HOT SEAT.

HOW WOULD YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION IF WE PROPOSE SOMETHING? ONE IF WE GET YOU OUR PROPOSALS BY JULY 5TH.

WHAT HAPPENS THEN? STAFF HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND.

SORT OF LIKE AN AUDIT, I WOULD ASSUME.

RIGHT? CORRECT.

SO TO YOUR POINT, WE DO ASK FOR FEEDBACK RELATED TO PERFORMANCE MEASURES.

AND THEN BASED ON THE MEASURES OR SUGGESTIONS THAT WE RECEIVE, WE SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH THE DEPARTMENTS WITH THE EXECUTIVE TEAM.

AND THEN THERE'S A FINAL RECOMMENDATION THAT IS MADE.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT THIS YEAR, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN PRESENTING THE BUDGETS TO COMMITTEE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF FEEDBACK RELATED TO DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE MEASURES.

AND SO DEPARTMENTS ARE ACTIVELY REACHING OUT TO OUR PERFORMANCE MEASURE TEAM TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES.

SO I THINK THERE IS A SPIRIT TO POSSIBLY BE OPEN TO YOUR WHATEVER FEEDBACK THAT YOU MAY PROVIDE.

WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS SITUATION.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. WHAT HAPPENS IN THE SITUATION WHERE LET'S SAY WE HAVE A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL THAT SUPPORT SOME NEW METRIC THAT WE'RE GOING TO MEASURE AND THEN PICK A DEPARTMENT. DEPARTMENT X SAYS WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT.

AND THEY LIST OUT THE REASONS WHY.

CITY ATTORNEY SAYS IT'S OKAY EITHER WAY.

SO IT'S KIND OF LEFT UP WHAT HAPPENS.

WE AS A COUNCIL WOULD JUST HOW WOULD WE SORT OF FORCE THE ISSUE IF WE WANTED TO DO THAT? I THINK IF THERE'S A STRONG SENTIMENT AND A MAJORITY RECOMMENDATION TO IMPLEMENT A CERTAIN PERFORMANCE METRIC, I THINK IT WOULD BE WE WOULD CONSIDER IT AND I THINK THE EXECUTIVE TEAM WOULD HAVE A STRONG CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. I THINK PART OF THE CHALLENGE IN PRIOR YEARS, THERE'S THERE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SORT OF THE MAJORITY.

IT MAY HAVE BEEN YOU KNOW, 1 OR 2 INDIVIDUALS OR LESS THAN A MAJORITY OFFERING A RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY. WELL, STAFF, COME UP WITH YOUR OWN RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHICH OF THESE PERFORMANCE MEASURES SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT.

I SAW WE'RE ADDING SOME BASED ON OUR EQUITY INDICATORS, BUT WHAT ABOUT REMOVAL? AND SOME OF THESE ARE NO LONGER APPLICABLE.

SO THAT IS HAPPENING.

YOU'LL NOTICE THAT I BELIEVE THERE'S A MEASURE FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WHERE THEY MADE A CHANGE TO PERCENT OF MATTERS CLOSED AS OPPOSED TO A COUNT.

SO YOU'LL SEE THAT AS A NEW MEASURE.

SO WE ARE MAKING THOSE CHANGES.

AND AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE BEEN PRESENTING TO COMMITTEE LOTS OF GREAT FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL.

AND THEY HAVE BEEN REACHING OUT TO OUR OFFICE TO MAKE CHANGES TO MEASURES.

OKAY. IF THIS IS A KIND OF A CHART, SORT OF LIKE THE CHARTER PROCESS, IF WE KNOW SOMETHING THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN TRACKING, LIKE LET'S SAY REAL ESTATE.

UTILIZATION OF REAL ESTATE IN SOME MEANINGFUL WAY, RIGHT?

[01:40:03]

IF WE IF WE KNOW WHAT THAT IS, BUT WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO WORD IT, WOULD WE BRING THAT TO YOU AND THEN YOU WOULD WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENTS TO PUT THAT INTO THE PROPER WORDING? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

AND WELL, WE WOULD WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE DATA TO ACTUALLY TRACK IT AND MEASURE IT.

I THINK THAT'S BEEN A CHALLENGE AS WELL, ASKING US TO CREATE A MEASURE WHEN WE DON'T HAVE PROVEN DATA SET TO REPORT ON.

AND I THINK IN A PERFECT WORLD, WE ALL AGREE.

YOU KNOW, COUNCIL SUGGESTS SOMETHING.

STAFF AGREES, AND WE ALL WORK TOGETHER.

I'M JUST KIND OF PLANNING FOR THE WORST, WORST SCENARIO HERE.

WELL, PLAN FOR THE BEST SCENARIO.

AND SO YOU ALL HAVE UNTIL THE FIFTH TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND SO IT IS OUR COMMITMENT TO GO BACK, SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH THE DEPARTMENTS AND THEN ALSO PROVIDE FEEDBACK TO YOU ALL AS TO WHY OR, YOU KNOW, A RESPONSE.

GREAT. WE'LL GIVE YOU A RESPONSE.

GO AHEAD. IS IT YOUR INTENTION TO KEEP ONLY THE 36? SO WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT ACTUALLY MEASURING EITHER MORE OR LESS WE DID REACH OUT AND SURVEY A FEW CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY. AND SO THERE'S VARYING DEGREES OF WHAT THEY MEASURE.

SOME ENTITIES MEASURE AS TEN MEASURES CITYWIDE AND THEN SOME MEASURE UP TO 70.

SO I THINK WE WERE FOCUSED ON SORT OF THE 365, 35.

BUT IF THERE'S A DESIRE FOR US TO MEASURE MORE OR LESS, WE'RE CERTAINLY OPEN TO THAT FEEDBACK AS WELL.

WELL, IT SEEMS VERY ARBITRARY, LIKE IT'S MEANT TO BE, LIKE, CUTE THAT IT'S 365 AND THERE'S I GUESS THERE'S 35 OF THEM THIS TIME.

SO 36.

I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S A TERRIBLE WAY TO COME UP WITH THE NUMBER.

AND INSTEAD WE SHOULD REPORT OUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY MEANINGFUL.

AND SO LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION, BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN SORT OF THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE.

ARE THESE MEASURES MEANT FOR THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ACCOUNTABILITY, OR ARE THEY MEANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND ACCOUNTABILITY WITHIN THE CITY? WELL, I THINK WE SAY IN THE MEMO THAT WE EXIST TO PROVIDE SERVICES UPON WHICH RESIDENTS RELY.

AND SO THE GOAL IS REALLY TO PROVIDE A WAY TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK TO RESIDENTS HOW WE DELIVER SERVICE.

SO I WILL PULL OUT OLD MEMOS THEN, WHICH ARE GEARED TOWARDS ITEMS THAT I THINK THE PUBLIC WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT, NOT THE THINGS THAT THE DEPARTMENT CARES ABOUT AND NOT THE THINGS THAT MAYBE EVEN THE COUNCIL CARES ABOUT.

BECAUSE FRANKLY, WE GET ACCOUNTABILITY INFORMATION THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC MIGHT NOT, BUT WE HAVE A WAY TO SHARE THAT WITH THEM THROUGH THIS BUDGET ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT EVERY MONTH.

THEY CAN SEE, LIKE, ARE WE ON TRACK OR ARE WE NOT? AND, YOU KNOW, LIKE, I LOVE THE WE'RE GOING TO FILL A POTHOLE IN THREE DAYS.

I THINK OUR PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW THAT.

AND HOW ARE WE DOING ON THAT MEASURE? WELL, OKAY, WE HAD TORRENTIAL RAIN.

WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE.

OR YOU KNOW, IT'S SUMMER AND WE'RE FILLING THEM ALL IN A DAY.

AND I THINK WE DELIGHT PEOPLE WHEN WE DO THAT.

SO I THINK THIS COULD BE A VERY IMPORTANT TOOL AND EMPLOYEE, I'M SORRY, IN RESIDENT SATISFACTION.

AND IT'S CLEAR FROM OUR SURVEY THAT WE SHOULD TRY TO IMPROVE ON THAT AREA.

THANK YOU. AND I WILL CLARIFY.

SO THE PACKET THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU INCLUDES ALL DEPARTMENT MEASURES.

SO IT DOES INCLUDE MEASURES THAT THE DEPARTMENTS ARE WANTING TO TRACK INTERNALLY MAYBE FOR ACCREDITATION OR INTERNAL PERFORMANCE.

AND SO YOU HAVE ALL OF THE BUDGET BOOK MEASURES, BUT THE 365 MEASURES ARE HIGHLIGHTED.

SO THANK YOU JANET. SOMETIMES AS I HAVE PROPOSED ITEMS THERE'S A COMMENT FROM COUNCIL THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE ASKING STAFF TO DO ALL THIS EXTRA WORK.

AND, YOU KNOW, SOME PEOPLE JUST WANT TO READ TOO MUCH OR WHATEVER, BUT THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT YOU'RE TRACKING NO MATTER WHAT THAT YOU'VE INCLUDED.

CORRECT? CORRECT.

SO IN YOUR IN THE MEMO AND THE ATTACHMENT THAT INCLUDES ALL OF THE BUDGET BOOK MEASURES THAT WE'RE ALREADY TRACKING.

SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S THERE IT'S NOT HIGHLIGHTED.

AND YOU WANT TO MAKE IT A THREE OR MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE IT A 365 MEASURE, YOU CAN CERTAINLY DO.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF PUBLISHING IT MONTHLY AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING YOUR QUARTERLY.

QUARTERLY. WELL, WE PUBLISHED DALLAS 365 MONTHLY.

AND ALL THE OTHER MEASURES WE PUBLISHED QUARTERLY.

RIGHT. WHICH I WILL SAY THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I FEEL LIKE YOU NOT YOU PERSONALLY, ALTHOUGH I DO THINK IT WAS YOU PERSONALLY.

ACCOMMODATED MY REQUEST FOR THAT INFORMATION BY DOING THAT.

AND SO I AM VERY APPRECIATIVE, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT MOST PEOPLE WANT TO READ THROUGH ALL OF THOSE.

I MEAN, IT'S LIKE, WHAT, 275? 274? YEAH, THAT'S A LOT.

SO ANYHOW, THANK YOU.

[01:45:02]

THANK YOU. AND JUST A FINAL REMINDER, FEEDBACK IS DUE BY FRIDAY, JULY 5TH.

RIGHT? RIGHT. OKAY, COLLEAGUES WITH THAT BEING SAID, IT IS 3:17 P.M.

AND THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.