[2. 24-1715 Consideration of appointments to boards and commissions and the evaluation and duties of board and commission members (List of nominees is available in the City Secretary's Office) ]

THIS MORNING. YOU HAVE INDIVIDUAL AND FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS.

YOUR INDIVIDUAL YOUR NOMINEES FOR INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENT TO THE CITIZEN HOMELESSNESS COMMISSION.

SORAYA SANTOS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ.

MS. SANTOS MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD.

ADJUNCT MEMBERS CALVIN ROBINSON IS BEING NOMINATED BY MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS.

MR. ROBINSON MEETS THE FIVE PLUS YEAR'S EXPERIENCE AS A VOLUNTEER EMPLOYEE IN AN ADMINISTRATION OR PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS OF A BUSINESS, GOVERNMENTAL OR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION. SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE COMMISSION ON DISABILITIES, STEVEN HAUSCHKA IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS.

MISS HAUSCHKA. MR. HAUSCHKA MEETS THE COMMITTED TO COMMUNITY OF DISABLED PERSONS SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.

ALSO TO THE COMMISSION ON DISABILITIES, YOU HAVE DYLAN RAFFERTY AND KERRY PARKS, BOTH ARE NON-VOTING MEMBERS AND ARE BEING PRESENTED BY CITY MANAGER INTERIM CITY MANAGER TOLBER TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.

MICHAEL STARCZEWSKI IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO TO THE JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMISSION.

JUAN OLIVO IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO TO THE PERMIT AND LICENSE APPEAL BOARD.

STEPHANIE KYLE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION.

DAVID BERNARDINO IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO.

YOUR NOMINEES FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE ARTS AND CULTURE ADVISORY COMMISSION.

ADJUNCT MEMBERS JEROME LAREZ IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ MR. LAREZ MEETS THE VISUAL ARTS SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE SIX BOARD FARMERS MARKET.

LAUREN CARTER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE NINE BOARD.

VICKERY MEADOW, KEVIN GRIFFITH IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 12 BOARD.

DEEP ELLUM CARL ANDERSON IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 14 BOARD SKILLMAN CORRIDOR.

ASHA WARREN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STUART TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 15 BOARD, FORT WORTH AVENUE.

CAL WICK IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE SEVEN BOARD.

TODD KRYSTAL GONZALES IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES, MR. MAYOR. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.

I HEARD A MOTION IN A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.

EVERYONE'S APPROVED. NEXT ITEM.

AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3. 24-2320 Casting of lots to identify the recommended vendor resulting from tie bids between Living Earth and The Organic Recycler on Group 1 Line 4 in response to bid BY24-00024715 for a three-year master agreement for the purchase of a variety of mulching materials]

CASTING OF LOTS.

YOUR CASTING OF LOTS.

TO IDENTIFY THE RECOMMENDED VENDOR RESULTING FROM TIE BIDS BETWEEN LIVING EARTH AND THE ORGANIC RECYCLER ON GROUP ONE, LINE FOUR, IN RESPONSE TO BID BY24-00024715 FOR A THREE-YEAR MASTER AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A VARIETY OF MULCHING MATERIALS.

PER RULES. MR. MAYOR, YOU ARE BEING ASKED AT THIS TIME TO BREAK THAT TIE.

MY STAFF IS RIGHT BEHIND YOU.

YOU HAVE TWO ENVELOPES.

SEALED ENVELOPES.

WILL YOU PLEASE SELECT ONE AND ANNOUNCE THE WINNING BID? WINNING VENDOR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IT'S LIKE A IT'S LIKE A GAME SHOW.

IT'S LIKE THE MOST FUN WE HAVE AROUND HERE IS THE CASTING OF LOTS.

ALL RIGHT, THE ORGANIC RECYCLER, GROUP ONE, LINE FOUR.

THANK YOU.

THAT ITEM WILL BE BROUGHT TO YOU FOR COUNCIL FOR APPROVEMENT AT A LATER DATE.

THERE IS NO FURTHER ACTION FOR THIS ITEM, MR. MAYOR. YOUR BRIEFINGS CONTINUE.

[A. 24-1716 Update on the charter review process and voter-submitted charter amendment petitions, Dallas Freedom Act and Dallas HERO; and discussion of the Mayor and City Councilmember Salaries Amendment in the 2024 Charter Review Commission’s Final Report and newly-submitted councilmember-proposed charter amendments (Part 1 of 3)]

WONDERFUL. WE'LL, NOW, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO OUR INTERIM CITY MANAGER, KIM TOLBERT.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

AND GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I'D LIKE TO WELCOME YOU BACK FROM YOUR SUMMER RECESS TODAY.

WE WILL BEGIN BY RETURNING TO THE CITY CHARTER AT THE JUNE 26TH MEETING.

[01:10:04]

THE CITY COUNCIL HELD THIS ITEM UNTIL AUGUST THE 14TH.

YOU DIRECTED STAFF TO RETURN ON AUGUST THE 7TH TODAY, WITH A SUMMARY OF WHERE THINGS STAND AND WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO STRAW VOTE ON ANY NEW AMENDMENTS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED THROUGHOUT THE MONTH OF JULY.

THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS STAFF WILL PROVIDE TODAY'S BRIEFING OF THE 15 PROPOSITIONS INCLUDED IN COUNCIL'S CURRENT RECOMMENDATION AND A BRIEF NOTE ABOUT THE FOUR-VOTER LED BALLOT INITIATIVES FOLLOWING THE BRIEFING.

CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO STRAW VOTE ON TWO PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENTS.

THOSE INCLUDE PROPOSITION TWO CITY COUNCIL SALARIES, AND THE NEW AMENDMENT SUBMITTED IN JULY, LISTED IN APPENDIX D OF STAFF'S PRESENTATION TODAY.

IF YOU WISH TO CONSIDER ANY NEW AMENDMENTS OUTSIDE OF THOSE TWO, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO DO SO AT THE FLOOR AMENDMENT PROCESS DURING THE WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 14TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING WHEN THE ORDINANCE CALLING THE ELECTION WILL BE CONSIDERED.

I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO DIRECTOR KERRY ROGERS OF THE GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT FOR TODAY'S PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER TOLBERT.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR JOHNSON AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

WE ARE GOING TO BE BRIEFING YOU TODAY ON AN OVERVIEW OF THE CHARTER REVIEW PROCESS AND WHERE WE STAND TODAY.

I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO JAKE ANDERSON, OUR MANAGER OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, WHO'S BEEN MANAGING THIS PROCESS.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL MEMBERS.

HONORABLE MAYOR. IT'S GOOD TO BE BACK.

AS DIRECTOR ROGERS MENTIONED, I AM JAKE ANDERSON.

I'M THE MANAGER IN THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS.

TODAY I'M BRIEFLY GOING TO JUST WALK US THROUGH THE PROCESS THUS FAR, INCLUDING THE FOUR MEETINGS IN WHICH COUNCIL DELIBERATED ON POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS IN MAY AND JUNE.

THEN I'M GOING TO PROVIDE A VERY SHORT SUMMARY OF THE FOUR VOTER PETITIONS FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN VALIDATED BY THE CITY SECRETARY AND WILL GO TO VOTERS IN NOVEMBER. FOLLOWING THE BRIEFING, WE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE TYPICAL, TYPICAL QUESTION AND ANSWER FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS TO STAFF.

AND ONCE THAT CONCLUDES, I BELIEVE WE'LL TRANSITION TO STRAW VOTING WHERE YOU WILL, WHICH WILL FUNCTION IN THE SAME WAY AS IT HAS IN PRIOR MEETINGS.

YOU'LL BE ABLE TO STRAW VOTE ON THE ITEM THAT'S LISTED IN APPENDIX D TO THIS PRESENTATION, AS WELL AS PROPOSITION NUMBER TWO RELATED TO COUNCIL MEMBER SALARIES, WHICH I WILL COVER SHORTLY.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND NEXT SLIDE.

SO LET'S QUICKLY START BY REVIEWING THE PROCESS UP TO THIS POINT.

AS YOU KNOW, THE 15 PERSON CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION MET 15 TIMES OVER THE COURSE OF EIGHT MONTHS, DURING WHICH THEY REVIEWED 125 SUGGESTIONS SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CHARTER. ULTIMATELY, THEY RECOMMENDED 30 TOTAL CHANGES OF WHICH 13 RECOMMENDATIONS WERE TECHNICAL IN NATURE, MEANING THAT THEY WERE CLEAN UP LANGUAGE THAT DID NOT NECESSARILY AFFECT THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATION OF CITY.

OF THE CITY.

17 RECOMMENDATIONS WERE SUBSTANTIVE IN NATURE.

THEY DO HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE DAY TO DAY.

SO ON MAY 1ST, CHAIRMAN ALLEN VAUGHT OF THE CITY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, AS WELL AS DIRECTOR ROGERS AND MYSELF, BRIEFED CITY COUNCIL ON THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

CHAIR VAUGHT PRESENTED THOSE 30 RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL TO THIS BODY, AND AT THAT MEETING, STAFF OUTLINED THE UPCOMING PROCESS FOR COUNCIL, WHICH INCLUDED AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SUBMIT AMENDMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION THAT THE COMMISSION DID NOT INCLUDE WITHIN THEIR FINAL REPORT.

OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT THREE BRIEFINGS, COUNCIL DELIBERATED THOSE OVER THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE COMMISSION, AS WELL AS THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS ON JUNE 26TH.

A DRAFT ORDINANCE APPEARED ON YOUR VOTING AGENDA AND WAS HELD UNTIL AUGUST 14TH AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES, WE'LL LOOK AT EACH OF THE DATES IN WHICH YOU REVIEWED THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND, AND THEN WE'LL LOOK AT THE 15 PROPOSITIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.

NEXT SLIDE. ON MAY 15TH THIS BODY BEGAN THE STRAW VOTING PROCESS.

THE COMMISSION OR EXCUSE ME, THE COUNCIL ENTERED INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WHICH ALLOWED FOR INFORMAL NON-BINDING VOTES TO BE CAST ON EACH ITEM THAT YOU CONSIDERED.

THE RESULTS OF THOSE WERE USED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO DETERMINE WHAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU SAW ORIGINALLY ON JUNE 26TH AND WILL CONSIDER ON AUGUST 14TH. DURING THE MEETING ON THE 15TH, THE BODY PROGRESSED THROUGH ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION'S FINAL REPORT THAT WERE CLASSIFIED EITHER AS TECHNICAL OR OPERATIONAL IN NATURE.

IN THE COURSE OF STRAW VOTING, THIS BODY ADVANCED ALL THE TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, BUT OF THE OPERATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS, ONE WAS ADVANCED VIA STRAW VOTE, WHILE SIX FAILED TO ADVANCE.

NEXT SLIDE. ON JUNE 5TH, THE PROCESS CONTINUED.

THE BODY TOOK UP THE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE CONTAINED WITHIN THE FINAL REPORT, BEFORE THEN MOVING ON TO SOME OF THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

OF THE SEVEN POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE COMMISSION.

THIS BODY ADVANCED FIVE AND FAILED TO ADVANCE ONE, THE SEVENTH AND FINAL RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE COMMISSION, WHICH IS PROPOSITION TWO.

[01:15:08]

WE'LL GET TO THAT IN A SECOND.

ON COUNCIL PAY WAS NOT STRONG.

STRAW VOTED ON IN THAT MEETING.

AT THAT POINT, CONSIDERATION OF THE 30 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUDED AS ALL HAD BEEN STRAW VOTED ON WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COUNCIL SALARY.

THE BODY THEN BEGAN TO CONSIDER THE COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED AMENDMENTS.

IN TOTAL, 12 PROPOSALS OF THE 17 THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE CONSIDERED ON JUNE 5TH, AND COUNCIL ULTIMATELY ADVANCED TEN OF THOSE 12.

THE REMAINING WERE CONSIDERED ON JUNE 18TH.

NEXT SLIDE. SO JUNE 18TH WAS THE FINAL DAY FOR YOUR STRAW VOTING WHERE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERED THE REMAINING SUGGESTIONS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

NO NEW RECOMMENDATIONS, HOWEVER, WERE ADVANCED.

TWO FAILED IN STRAW VOTING AND THREE OTHERS WERE WITHDRAWN BY THEIR SUBMITTERS BEFORE A VOTE.

DISCUSSION OF CITY COUNCIL'S SALARY, WHICH WAS SCHEDULED TO BE HELD THAT DAY, WAS DEFERRED UNTIL JUNE 26TH.

IT WAS THE ONLY OUTSTANDING ITEM THAT REMAINED THAT HAD NOT RECEIVED A STRAW VOTE AT THAT POINT.

NEXT SLIDE. ON JUNE 26TH, FOLLOWING A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE COUNCIL MEMBER SALARIES, THE DISCUSSION WAS TABLED AND TO BE BROUGHT BACK HERE IN AUGUST. ADDITIONALLY, COUNCIL ASKED THAT TODAY YOU RECEIVE THIS BRIEFING AND WE HAVE ANOTHER STRAW VOTING OPPORTUNITY IN CASE ANY NEW ITEMS MIGHT ARISE OVER THE JULY RECESS.

AND THERE WERE ANY NEW OPPORTUNITIES TO GIVE INPUT INTO THE CITY CHARTER PROCESS.

SO, IN TOTAL, ONE NEW SUBMISSION WAS MADE WHICH CAN BE FOUND IN APPENDIX D TO THIS PRESENTATION.

NEXT SLIDE.

LET'S TURN NOW AND LOOK AT THE 15 PROPOSITIONS THAT ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE ON WHICH YOU WILL VOTE NEXT WEEK.

NOTE THAT WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SLIDES IS THE LANGUAGE OF THE PROPOSITION THAT WOULD APPEAR ON THE BALLOT, AND NOT THE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD APPEAR IN THE CHARTER.

SO IT'S JUST A SUMMARY OF WHAT WOULD APPEAR IN THE CHARTER.

FOR FULL DETAILS ON EACH PROPOSITION LANGUAGE.

SEE APPENDIX A OF THIS PRESENTATION, WHICH CONTAINS THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.

PROPOSITION ONE.

PROPOSITION ONE WOULD ADD A PREAMBLE TO THE CITY CHARTER THAT, AMONG OTHER THINGS, HIGHLIGHTS.

THIS WOULD HIGHLIGHT THE CITY'S DIVERSITY AND RESILIENCY AND CHAMPION EQUITY.

A PREAMBLE IS ALMOST LIKE THE CITY'S VISION STATEMENT THIS LANGUAGE IS NOT NOT BINDING, BUT ASPIRATIONAL, AND WAS A COUNCIL MEMBER SUBMITTED AMENDMENT THAT PASSED STRAW VOTING.

PROPOSITION TWO WOULD INCREASE THE SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, WITH A YEARLY ADJUSTMENT BUILT IN THAT WOULD TIE COMPENSATION TO THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.

THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBERS RECEIVE $125,000 PER YEAR, WHILE THE MAYOR RECEIVE $140,000 PER YEAR.

AFTER THIS BRIEFING AND QUESTIONS CONCLUDE, YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO STRAW VOTE ON THIS PROPOSITION AND DECIDE WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO INCLUDE IN THE ORDINANCE.

AGAIN, I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THE NUMBERS YOU SEE CURRENTLY WERE THOSE RECOMMENDED BY THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, AND THIS BODY HAS NOT WEIGHED IN YET AND WILL HAVE THE CHANCE TO DO SO TODAY.

NEXT SLIDE. PROPOSITION THREE WOULD EXTEND THE TERM LENGTHS FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM TWO YEARS TO FOUR YEARS, BEGINNING IN JUNE 2027.

THIS WOULD MEAN THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR WOULD NOW BE ON THE SAME CYCLE FOR ELECTIONS.

IN ORDER TO DO SO, IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT, OR IT MIGHT REQUIRE THAT SOME PEOPLE WHO SERVE AS MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS CHANGE, BE ABLE TO SERVE MORE THAN EIGHT YEARS ON THE COUNCIL.

THE LANGUAGE TO DO SO IS LAID OUT ON PAGE SIX OF THE ORDINANCE.

SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT APPENDIX A, IT'S PAGE SIX.

BUT IN OTHER WORDS, THE SWITCH TO FOUR YEARS WOULD MAKE IT SO THAT SOME CURRENT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, SHOULD THEY CONTINUE TO SERVE THROUGH THIS.

THIS CHANGE IN 2027 WOULD NECESSARILY HAVE TO SERVE EITHER MORE OR LESS TIME THAN THE CURRENT EIGHT YEAR LIMIT IN ORDER TO SYNC UP AND MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S ON THE SAME FOUR YEAR CYCLE.

THIS WAS ALSO A COUNCIL MEMBER.

PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION.

PROPOSITION FOUR WOULD ADD THE PHRASE AND EMPLOYEES TO CHAPTER 3A, SECTION TWO AND CHAPTER NINE, SECTION TWO, WHICH REQUIRES THE COUNCIL TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO THE CITY SECRETARY AND CITY AUDITOR AND WAS INITIALLY RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMISSION.

PROPOSITION NUMBER FIVE.

NEXT SLIDE IS A RECOMMENDATION BY THE COMMISSION THAT WOULD INCREASE THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SERVING ON THE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION.

IT WOULD ADD LANGUAGE THAT, AMONG OTHER THINGS, PRECLUDES FAMILY OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

ANYONE WHO SERVED AS STAFF FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS, REGISTERED LOBBYISTS OR PEOPLE WHO HAVE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS WITH THE CITY FROM BEING PART OF THE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION.

THE RECOMMENDATION WAS ORIGINALLY PART OF THE 2014 CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL, AND THIS YEAR'S COMMISSION TOOK THE SUGGESTION BACK UP AND DID ADVANCE IT TO YOUR BODY.

PROPOSITION NUMBER SIX WOULD ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENTS THAT MEMBERS OF THE CHARTER CREATED BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS BE REGISTERED TO VOTE QUALIFIED VOTERS OR QUALIFIED TAXPAYING CITIZENS.

THIS WAS ALSO INITIALLY RECOMMENDED BY COMMISSION WITH A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE, WITH A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT LANGUAGE, AND WAS AMENDED BY CITY COUNCIL AND WOULD ALIGN THESE FOUR BOARDS WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WITHIN THE CITY CODE.

PROPOSITION NUMBER SEVEN AND NUMBER EIGHT ARE BOTH RELATED, AND BOTH CAME FROM THE COMMISSION.

[01:20:04]

THEY WOULD EASE THE REQUIREMENT FOR REFERENDUM PETITIONS WITH PROPOSITION SEVEN EXTENDING THE DEADLINE TO COLLECT SIGNATURES FROM 60 DAYS TO 120 DAYS, AND PROPOSITION EIGHT REDUCING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNATURES NEEDED IN THE REQUIRED TIME FRAME FROM 10% TO 5% OF QUALIFIED VOTERS.

PROPOSITION NUMBER NINE.

NEXT SLIDE. WOULD ALLOW FOR BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS TO BE REPLACED BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THEIR TERMS. PROPOSITION TEN WOULD ALLOW A MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO BE CALLED TO ORDER BY THE HIGHEST RANKING OFFICER PRESENT ONCE A QUORUM IS PRESENT.

NEXT SLIDE. PROPOSITION 11 WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE MAYOR ASSIGN STANDING COUNCIL COMMITTEES WITHIN 60 DAYS OF INAUGURATION.

IF THAT DID NOT HAPPEN, IT WOULD ALLOW FOR FORMER ASSIGNMENTS TO STAND UNTIL NEW COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS WERE MADE WITH NEWLY ELECTED COUNCIL MEMBERS SERVING IN THE PLACE OF THEIR PREDECESSORS.

PROPOSITION 12 WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS, REASSIGNMENTS AND REMOVALS FROM ANY STANDING COMMITTEES.

NEXT SLIDE.

THEN PROPOSITIONS 13 AND 14 BOTH RELATE TO THE MUNICIPAL COURTS.

13 WOULD AMEND THE CHARTER TO CLARIFY THAT TERMS OF JUDGES ALIGN WITH THOSE OF CITY COUNCIL.

THIS WOULD NOT CHANGE THE LENGTH OF JUDGES TERMS UNLESS PROPOSITION THREE EXTENDING THE LENGTH OF COUNCIL TERMS, ALSO PASSED.

PROPOSITION 14 WOULD AMEND THE APPOINTMENT PROCEDURE AND THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGES.

AND THEN PROPOSITION 15.

OUR FINAL PROPOSITION IS THE TECHNICAL CHANGES.

THESE ARE JUST THE CHANGES THAT THE CHARTER OR THE CHANGES RECOMMENDED TO THE CHARTER THAT WOULD NOT HAVE A DAY-TO-DAY IMPACT ON THE CITY.

THE CHANGES IN THIS PROPOSITION DO A COUPLE OF THINGS.

SOME OF THEM HARMONIZE CHARTER LANGUAGE WITH CURRENT PRACTICES.

OTHERS UPDATE LANGUAGE TO REFLECT CHANGES IN STATE LAW, AND OTHERS ARE SIMPLY JUST CLEAN UP LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE PRECISE OR MORE CLEAR.

WHAT'S GOING ON IN THAT SECTION? NEXT SLIDE.

SO I JUST WANT TO BRIEFLY TURN OUR ATTENTION TO THE VOTER PETITIONS FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS.

THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE RECEIVED FOUR VOTER PETITIONS FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS FOR VERIFICATION.

THOSE ARE ALL ATTACHED TO THIS PRESENTATION IN APPENDIX C.

ALL FOUR WERE CERTIFIED AS VALID USING THE STATISTICAL SAMPLING METHOD ALLOWED UNDER THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE.

THREE PETITIONS CAME FROM A GROUP KNOWN AS DALLAS HERO PROJECT, WHILE ONE WAS FROM THE DALLAS FREEDOM ACT.

NEXT SLIDE. AS WE MOVE FORWARD, THIS COUNCIL IS NOW TASKED WITH DETERMINING WHAT CHARTER AMENDMENTS WILL BE SENT TO VOTERS IN NOVEMBER.

YOUR FINAL SCHEDULED MEETING TO CALL THE NOVEMBER 2024 ELECTION IS NEXT WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 14TH.

THIS IS DUE TO THE LEGAL DEADLINE FOR CALLING THE ELECTION BEING AUGUST 19TH.

NEXT SLIDE. SO TO SUMMARIZE, WE'RE CONCLUDING THIS BRIEFING TO GIVE YOU THE CONTEXT ON WHERE THE PROCESS CURRENTLY STANDS.

THERE WILL BE A CHANCE TO ASK STAFF QUESTIONS ON THE BRIEFING ITEM.

AND ONCE THAT CONCLUDES, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO STRAW VOTE ON THE TWO ITEMS MENTIONED.

THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBER SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL THAT YOU CAN SEE IN APPENDIX D AND PROPOSITION TWO.

IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE, WHICH RELATES TO THE SALARY OF MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON AUGUST 14TH, YOU'LL HAVE AN ACTION ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA.

AND ON THAT DAY, LIKE ANY OTHER ITEM, YOU'LL HAVE THE CHANCE TO MAKE FLOOR AMENDMENTS TO THE ITEM.

SO WITH THAT, I'M CONCLUDE OUR PRESENTATION AND TURN IT BACK TO THE CITY MANAGER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JAKE.

AND THANK YOU, KERRY.

FOR THE COUNCIL, WE WOULD LIKE TO JUST REMIND YOU THAT STAFF IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THE OPERATIONAL CONCERNS REGARDING THE COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE VOTER LED BALLOT INITIATIVES.

I DO BELIEVE THAT OUR CHIEF OF POLICE IS HERE, AS WELL AS OUR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, TO DISCUSS ANY FINANCIAL OR OPERATIONAL IMPACTS.

AND WITH THAT, MAYOR JOHNSON, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION.

AND WITH IT NOW BEING 10:39 A.M.

[CLOSED SESSION]

ON AUGUST 7TH, THE CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING MEETING WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 551.071 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING MATTERS DESCRIBED ON TODAY'S AGENDA.

SEEKING THE ADVICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING ONE CITY OF DALLAS VERSUS EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT FUND OF THE CITY OF DALLAS TO THE CITY'S MANAGEMENT CONTRACT WITH FAIR PARK. FIRST AND THREE BRIEFING ITEM A WITH THAT IT'S 10:39 A.M.

AND WE ARE IN CLOSED SESSION.

WE WILL RETURN WHEN WE RETURN.

OKAY. THE CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING MEETING HAS COMPLETED ITS CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 551 .071 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

AND AT 1:25 P.M.

ON AUGUST 7TH, 2024, WE'VE RETURNED TO OPEN SESSION.

ALL RIGHT, AT THIS TIME, I'M ENTERTAINING A MOTION TO GO INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

[01:25:05]

IS THERE A MOTION? IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

OKAY. WE ARE NOW ACTING AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE VOTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE 2024 CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION'S FINAL REPORT REGARDING CITY COUNCIL SALARIES AND THE COUNCIL MEMBER PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED ARE NOT FINAL ACTIONS, BUT RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WILL BE FINALLY VOTED ON AT A LATER DATE.

MOTIONS ALLOWED IN A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ARE AMENDMENTS, INCLUDING REMOVING OR STRIKING SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS.

POINTS OF ORDER, APPEALS AND INQUIRIES.

ROLL CALL VOTES AND BALLOT VOTES ARE NOT ALLOWED.

WE WILL USE GREEN CARDS TO SIGNAL SUPPORT OF AN AMENDMENT, ALTHOUGH A FORMAL VOTE WILL NOT BE TAKEN.

THE CITY SECRETARY WILL RECORD THE NAMES OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS SHOWING THEIR GREEN CARDS IN FAVOR OF A MOTION.

WE WILL FOLLOW OUR USUAL 531 FORMAT FOR DEBATE.

WE WILL START WITH THE POLICY AMENDMENT REGARDING CITY COUNCIL SALARIES THAT CITY COUNCIL BEGAN DISCUSSING ON JUNE THE 5TH, THEN MOVE TO THE NEWLY SUBMITTED COUNCIL MEMBER PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT.

AND SO, WITH THAT MAYOR, POINT OF INFORMATION.

YES. GO AHEAD AND SAY YOUR POINT OF INFORMATION.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS OR QUESTIONS OR CLARIFICATION ON THE BRIEFING THAT DOESN'T PERTAIN TO ITEMS WE'RE GOING TO BE VOTING ON TODAY, WHEN WOULD IT BE PROPER TO ASK THOSE? I'M FINE WITH DOING IT BEFORE THE STRAW VOTING, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO. IF THAT'S IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE TO EVERYONE SHOULD BE QUICK.

OKAY. MINE THEN GO AHEAD.

YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MR. WESTON. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. AND THIS IS FIVE MINUTES.

THIS IS FOR JAKE.

JUST TO. WE SPOKE ABOUT THIS ON PROPOSITION THREE ON THE PROPOSED COUNCIL MEMBER TERMS. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE AFTER YOU SPOKE, I HAD A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS TEXT ME AND THE CHART THAT WAS CREATED FROM WHAT I READ AND UNDERSTOOD, AND THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN IS THAT IF THIS BALLOT PROVISION EXTENDING TERMS TO FOUR YEARS WAS TO PASS AT LEAST EVERYONE WHO'S HERE THAT THIS WOULD IMPACT IT WOULD BE AN 8- OR 10-YEAR TERM.

THERE WOULD BE NO TERMS THAT WOULD BE ACTUALLY SHORTENED.

CAN YOU CLARIFY? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN THERE WOULD BE NO TERMS SHORTENED FOR ANY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY INTENTION IN THE BRIEFING WAS TO SIMPLY SAY THAT IN ORDER TO ALIGN EVERYTHING, YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO ONE OR THE OTHER, AND IN THIS CASE, WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE ORDINANCE WOULD EXTEND TERMS OR EXTEND THE LENGTH OF TIME SOMEBODY COULD SERVE TO TEN YEARS.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND JUST FOR MY COLLEAGUES, I'VE GOT A FEW COPIES OF THAT CHART THAT WE SAW A WHILE BACK.

IF ANYBODY WANTS IT, JUST TEXT ME OR WHATEVER.

COME OVER HERE AND GRAB ONE.

BUT THAT'S IT. MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE SCHULTZ RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

ON PROPOSITION 15.

COULD I KNOW A LOT OF THEM WERE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS AND WE HAVE THEM BACK IN HERE, BUT I, I WANT TO JUST CLARIFY ANY THAT AFFECT COUNCIL.

BECAUSE THERE WAS A COUPLE QUESTION ABOUT PENSION OPPORTUNITIES OR CAR ALLOWANCE OR SOMETHING THAT MAY HAVE BEEN IN THERE, AND I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT CLARIFIED. CAN YOU REPEAT THAT QUESTION? SO I WAS AND I MAY BE MISINFORMED, BUT ON PROPOSITION 15 I WAS TOLD THAT THERE MAY BE ITEMS THAT HAVE TO DO WITH A CAR ALLOWANCE OR PENSION OR THINGS THAT WE MAY WANT TO STRIKE.

LAURA MORRISON CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO PART OF THAT TECHNICAL AMENDMENT IS CHANGING THE WORD COMPENSATION TO SALARY WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT YOUR ANNUAL SALARY IN CHAPTER THREE.

THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION AT THE CITY.

WHAT IS YOUR TOTAL COMPENSATION? WE WANT THE CHARTER TO REFLECT THAT.

THAT NUMBER IS YOUR ANNUAL SALARY, NOT YOUR TOTAL COMPENSATION, BECAUSE YOU ARE ELIGIBLE, WHETHER IT'S AUTHORIZED BY LOCAL ORDINANCE OR STATE LAW OR MAYBE EVEN FEDERAL LAW TO RECEIVE CERTAIN BENEFITS.

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S A TECHNICAL AMENDMENT, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW WE'VE BEEN TREATING IT.

AND DOES THAT INCLUDE ELIGIBILITY FOR THE PENSION? THE PENSION IS A LARGER DISCUSSION.

I BELIEVE THAT THIS CHANGE WOULDN'T NOW MAKE YOU ELIGIBLE FOR A PENSION.

WOULD? YES IT WOULD.

YES. MAKE IT ELIGIBLE.

NO. WOULD OR WOULD NOT.

I'M SORRY. WOULD NOT AUTOMATICALLY MAKE YOU ELIGIBLE FOR A PENSION.

THERE ARE SOME OTHER HOOPS THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

[01:30:04]

I DON'T KNOW IF MISS PALOMINO WANTS TO KNOW.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I SUPPORT.

I WANTED TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT THIS PROPOSITION DOES NOT INCLUDE THAT.

IT WOULD NOT INCLUDE THE PENSION AS OF NOW.

THANK YOU. YEAH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO HAD GENERAL SORT OF MISS MENDELSOHN YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES? THANK YOU. AND CONTINUING THE QUESTIONING THAT COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ WAS ASKING, WHERE EXACTLY IS IT WRITTEN ABOUT INCREASING FROM THE ONLY BENEFIT, WE RECEIVE BEING THE ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE IN HEALTH CARE? IS THERE AN INTENTION TO EXPAND THOSE BENEFITS IN ANY OF THESE PROPOSITIONS? YES. SO, IT WOULD BE SECTION FOUR AND CHAPTER THREE OF THE CHARTER.

SO WHICH PROPOSITION WOULD THAT BE UNDER.

IT'S TECHNICAL.

SO, NUMBER 15.

OKAY. WELL OKAY.

SO PLEASE GO CONTINUE. I'M SORRY.

CHAPTER 15 NO.

PROPOSITION 15.

IT'S IN CHAPTER THREE.

SECTION FOUR COMPENSATION OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

SUBSECTION D IS TO ADD A SENTENCE.

THE MAYOR AND EACH MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ALSO RECEIVE BENEFITS FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS, AS PERMITTED BY THE STATE AND FEDERAL LAW, AND ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL THROUGH RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE.

OKAY. WELL, I'M GOING TO SAY I DON'T THINK THAT'S A TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.

I THINK THAT'S VERY SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S HAPPENING TODAY.

WE ARE WE'VE BEEN DEEMED NOT EMPLOYEES.

WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL WHEN THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT SHOULD THERE BE SOME ACCOMMODATION ABOUT PENSION BENEFITS ACCRUED BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO PREVIOUSLY WERE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY AND WHAT WE WERE TOLD BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS WE ARE NOT EMPLOYEES, RIGHT? WE'RE A DIFFERENT CLASS.

WE'RE ELECTED OFFICIALS.

WE ARE HERE TO SERVE, NOT TO BE EMPLOYED BY.

AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE ENTITLED TO EMPLOYEE BENEFITS.

AND SO I REALLY FIND IT OBJECTIONABLE THAT THAT'S UNDER A TECHNICAL AMENDMENT THAT REALLY RESIDENTS AREN'T GOING TO READ CAREFULLY.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT WAS EVER THEIR INTENTION TO PROVIDE TO PEOPLE WHO SHOULD BE DOING THIS JOB AS SERVICE, NOT AS EMPLOYMENT.

WELL, JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS WOULDN'T BE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS.

THESE WOULD BE BENEFITS THAT ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE COLLECTED BY ELECTED OFFICIALS.

AND CAN YOU ENUMERATE THOSE BENEFITS? ACTUALLY, I'VE ASKED AYA TO COME UP AND ENUMERATE THOSE UNDER STATE LAW.

I HAVE POWERS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

CAN YOU MOVE THAT CLOSER? LIKE MUCH CLOSER? SURE. SO CURRENTLY, THE ONLY THING THAT'S IN THE PERSONNEL RULES FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS IS HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS.

THIS WOULD ALLOW YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER OTHER OPTIONS AS ALLOWED BY STATE LAW.

AND WHAT ARE THOSE THINGS THAT ARE ALLOWABLE BY STATE LAW? WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT AND GET BACK TO YOU.

OKAY. WELL, PLEASE PROVIDE A MEMO IN ADVANCE OF OUR MEETING NEXT WEDNESDAY.

AND IF YOU COULD ALSO PROVIDE TO ME THE EXACT LANGUAGE TO BE ABLE TO STRIKE THAT ITEM.

THANK YOU. JUST THAT.

JUST THAT SPECIFIC PORTION.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? I SEE YOUR HANDS TRYING TO SEE IF THE QUEUE IS GOING TO UPDATE WITH YOU BUT GO AHEAD.

IS THAT DID IT FINALLY NARVAEZ YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES? THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND SO GOING OFF OF WHAT WE JUST HEARD ON STATE LAW THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE STATE OF TEXAS, THE LEGISLATURE SAID IS ALLOWABLE. IS THAT WHAT IS THAT CORRECT? WAS I ACCURATE AND HEARING YOU FOR WHAT WE JUST HEARD FROM MY COLLEAGUE BEFORE ABOUT PERSONNEL BENEFITS THAT ARE ELIGIBLE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS.

IS THIS WHAT STATE THE STATE LEGISLATURE APPROVED FOR US TO DO? IS THAT WHERE THAT'S LOCATED? FOR THE FOR. YES.

FOR BENEFITS. SORRY FOR THE HEALTH INSURANCE.

IT WAS THAT AMENDMENT I BELIEVE WAS MADE TO THE PERSONNEL RULES AFTER OBAMACARE BUT WAS PASSED.

I BELIEVE THAT'S THE CHANGE.

THAT'S WHEN WE MADE THE CHANGE.

BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT FOR OTHER ITEMS THAT YOU'VE BEEN TOLD TO LOOK UP AND PROVIDE A MEMO AND, AND ALL OF THAT.

I'M ASKING ABOUT THAT PORTION THAT IS THAT STATE LAW.

IS THAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE THAT APPROVED FOR MUNICIPALITIES OR DIFFERENT BODIES TO BE ABLE TO HAVE? I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK TO SEE WHAT ADDITIONAL BENEFITS THE COUNCIL WOULD WANT TO ADD AND THEN LOOK, LOOK AT THAT.

I THINK THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M ASKING ABOUT.

SO I BELIEVE THAT STATE LAW SAID THAT WE WERE REQUIRED AFTER OBAMACARE, THAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE HEALTH BENEFITS.

[01:35:04]

SO WE MADE THAT CHANGE TO THE PERSONNEL RULES.

AND WE'LL CLARIFY THAT IF I'M INCORRECT.

OTHER BENEFITS THAT COULD INCLUDE SALARY MIGHT ACTUALLY NOT BE REQUIRED BY STATE, BUT WOULD BE YOU KNOW MAYBE A STIPEND FOR MILEAGE. WE TALKED ABOUT IT LAST YEAR.

THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED SALARY BECAUSE YOU WOULD GET MONEY AND YOU'D HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE IRS IS REQUIRES US TO YOU TO PAY TAXES ON THAT.

AND SO THERE COULD BE OTHER BENEFITS.

SO I DON'T I DON'T THINK IT'S COMPLETELY ACCURATE TO SAY ONLY STATE LAW.

OKAY. BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR BECAUSE THE I'M NOT ASKING ABOUT THE ENUMERATION OF BENEFITS, THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M ASKING ABOUT.

THE ACTUAL WHAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT? BECAUSE IT'S TECHNICAL.

SO, WHAT IS ALLOWING FOR THAT TO BE? A TECHNICAL LIKE WHAT? WHAT DOES. THERE'S SOME BODIES AND SOME ELECTED BODIES SAID MUNICIPALITIES OR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE IF THEY CHOOSE OR, YOU KNOW, YOU WANT TO BE PART OF THIS, YOU MAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO, BUT YOU MAY.

SO THAT'S WHY I WAS TRYING TO GET AT IS WHAT WOULD ALLOW THAT TECHNICAL CHANGE.

THERE'S NO SPECIFIC STATE LAW OTHER THAN THE HEALTH CARE BENEFITS.

AND LAURA, CAN YOU ANSWER WHY WE'RE CONSIDERING IT TECHNICAL AS OPPOSED TO OPERATIONAL OR POLICY? YES. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THAT THAT'S THAT SECTION IN THE CHARTER TALKS ABOUT YOUR SALARY, EVEN THOUGH IT CURRENTLY SAYS COMPENSATION.

WE WANT TO CHANGE IT TO SALARY AND MAKE IT CLEAR TO ANYONE READING THAT SECTION THAT YOU DO GET A SALARY PLUS ANY BENEFITS THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO RECEIVE THAT THE COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE THAT THE STATE LAW ALLOWS OR FEDERAL LAW ALLOWS.

GOTCHA. OKAY. VERY GOOD.

AND THEN THE NEXT THING IF YOU, IF YOU DON'T MIND, IS TO PROVIDE SINCE YOU'RE ALREADY DOING THE ENUMERATION OR YOU KNOW IS TO PROVIDE OF THE TOP 20 CITIES WHICH ALLOW OF THE ENUMERATION, WHICH ALLOW SO THAT WE CAN JUST SEE THE TOP 20 CITIES, SINCE WE'RE THE NINTH LARGEST CITY IN THE NATION.

LET'S JUST SEE. DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO ADHERE TO IT.

JUST, I JUST WANT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, SINCE WE'RE ALREADY GOING TO GET AN ENUMERATION AND YOU'RE GOING TO BE DOING THIS HOMEWORK.

THEN I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, GO DOWN THE LIST AND THEN I'D ALSO LIKE TO KNOW WHAT HEALTH CARE OR WHAT BENEFITS ARE ALLOWED TO DALLAS COUNTY, COLLIN COUNTY, DENTON COUNTY AS WELL AS ELECTED OFFICIALS AS WELL AS STATE LEGISLATURE, STATE REPS, STATE SENATORS, ALL THE WAY UP TO GOVERNOR, TO THE GOVERNOR.

AND THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS AND SAY THAT WE'RE DIFFERENT.

AND WE SHOULDN'T BECAUSE OF SERVICE, EVEN THOUGH ALL THESE OTHER FOLKS ARE DOING SERVICE AS WELL.

I'D LIKE TO KNOW ALL THE WAY FROM CONGRESSIONAL ELECTED OFFICIALS, YOU KNOW, US SENATE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

JUST WHAT DO THEY GET? WHAT DO THEY GET? AND NOT SEEING THAT WE HAVE TO DO THAT, MR. MAYOR, I'M JUST I'D LIKE TO SEE.

SO IT'S A TRUE COMPARE CONTRAST.

SINCE YOU'RE ALSO BEEN REQUESTED TO PROVIDE LANGUAGE TO STRIKE THAT I JUST WANT TO SEE IT SO THAT I CAN HAVE A REALLY GREAT PICTURE ON WHETHER I'D WANT TO SUPPORT STRIKING THAT.

OR MAYBE I DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT STRIKING THAT IN ORDER THAT IT'S FAIR AND IT'S APPLES TO APPLES.

INSTEAD OF SAYING THAT, OH, THE CITY OF DALLAS, BECAUSE ONE PERSON THINKS THAT, OH, IT'S THIS IS HOW SERVICE SHOULD BE.

BUT I ALSO DO KNOW FOR AN EXAMPLE THAT WE HAVE A STATE, I MEAN, A COUNTY COMMISSIONER HERE THAT ALWAYS GIVES AWAY THEIR SALARY BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO GET PAID MORE.

AND THAT'S FINE FOR THEM TO DO THAT.

BUT AND ANYBODY COULD DO THAT ON THIS BODY AS WELL.

IS THAT ACCURATE? IF WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE OUR SALARY, WE COULD DONATE IT BACK OR WE COULD DONATE IT TO CHARITY.

OR YOU COULD YOU KNOW, DO THAT WITH, YOU KNOW, OUR HEALTH CARE BENEFITS.

YOU COULD SAY, I JUST DON'T WANT THEM AND JUST NOT TAKE THEM.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT FORCES YOU TO GET THESE IF YOU DON'T WANT THEM.

RIGHT. I GUESS THAT'S AN HR QUESTION.

YOU DON'T NEED TO ANSWER THAT.

BUT I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, IT IS POSSIBLE.

YOU KNOW, AND IF SOMEBODY HAS THE MEANS TO BE ABLE TO DO ALL OF THAT, GO FOR IT, AND SO BE IT.

BUT THAT'S A WAY TO STOP PEOPLE THAT MAYBE DON'T HAVE THE MEANS FROM RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL, BECAUSE THEY WOULD WANT TO DO THIS AS A FULL-TIME JOB SO THAT THEY COULD DO IT REALLY WELL AND, YOU KNOW, THE WAY THEY FEEL IT SHOULD BE DONE.

AND SO THAT'S WHY I JUST AM ASKING THESE QUESTIONS, MR. MAYOR, BECAUSE IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT OR FAIR TO, YOU KNOW, TRY TO PUT IT ON ONE SIDE WITHOUT THE REST OF US HEARING WHAT COULD POSSIBLY BE EVEN MORE INFORMATION THAT WE MAY NEED SO WE CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION? VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

SO THIS PROVISION OF THE TECHNICAL AMENDMENT IN SECTION FOUR OF COMPENSATION OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL DOESN'T ESTABLISH ANY BENEFITS, DOESN'T AWARD ANY BENEFITS TO THE COUNCIL.

IT JUST RECOGNIZES THAT WE ARE ELIGIBLE FOR ANY THAT WE MAY LATER ADOPT AS A COUNCIL.

[01:40:05]

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.

IT DOESN'T CREATE ANY BENEFITS.

IT JUST SAYS THAT IF YOU CHOOSE TO ADD BENEFITS, THAT'S ALLOWED UNDER STATE LAW OR OTHER ORDINANCES, YOU MAY DO THAT.

OKAY. SO COULDN'T WE DEFER THE DISCUSSION ABOUT SUBSTANTIVE BENEFITS TO A LATER ISSUE WITHOUT FOLDING THEM INTO THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT, BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY NOT RELEVANT TO THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT? CORRECT. THIS AMENDMENT DOESN'T ADDRESS ANY SPECIFIC BENEFITS.

SO IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION LATER, YOU CAN DO THAT.

THANK YOU, MISS SCHULTZ, RECOGNIZE FOR THREE MINUTES.

YES. TO FURTHER CLARIFY, CHAIR RIDLEY'S GREAT WAY OF PUTTING THIS AND ANY ADDITIONAL ANY BENEFITS THAT WE DECIDE WE WOULD HAVE TO BE VOTED UPON ANYWAY.

CORRECT. IT'S NOT AN INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION, IS THAT CORRECT? IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT IT IS.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CHANGE THAT WAS MADE TO HEALTH INSURANCE WAS IN THE PERSONNEL RULES.

SO IT WAS THAT WHICH IS THROUGH AN ORDINANCE.

SO THAT HAD TO BE APPROVED AS AN ORDINANCE.

BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SPECIFIC BENEFITS TO SEE HOW IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IMPLEMENTED, OR I GUESS APPROVED, BUT COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE IT. CORRECT. THAT'S MY QUESTION.

SO OKAY. AND THERE'S ALWAYS THE BUDGETING PORTION OF IT AS WELL.

YOU HAVE TO APPROVE THE BUDGET SIDE OF IT.

RIGHT OKAY. SO, IT'S NOT NEARLY AS DRAMATIC AS IT IS.

IT INITIALLY APPEARED TO BE I THINK THE REASON WHY AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, ANY OF MY FOLKS THAT THIS WAS PROPOSED BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE COURT HAS INTERPRETED COMPENSATION AND THE WAY THAT WE WRITE IN OUR CHARTER, IS THAT WHAT IS ON PAPER 60,000 IS THAT'S IT.

AND SO WE WERE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT THERE WERE OTHER OPTIONS AND IT WASN'T SO SPECIFIC TO JUST THE NUMBER ON THE PAGE.

PERFECT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR THREE MINUTES.

SO, THERE IS A TIME WHEN THERE IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT GIVING A CAR ALLOWANCE AS A STIPEND.

AND THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT WOULD THAT ACTUALLY BE COMPENSATION? AND OUR CHARTER SAYS THE VOTERS GET TO DETERMINE OUR COMPENSATION.

THIS WOULD THEN ALLOW AN UNLIMITED CAR STIPEND TO HAPPEN.

IF THIS BODY VOTED FOR IT WITHOUT ANY APPROVAL BY THE RESIDENTS.

IS THAT CORRECT? NO.

THE IRS HAS VERY SPECIFIC RULES AROUND STIPENDS FOR CAR ALLOWANCES.

SO IT WOULDN'T JUST BE ANY LARGE SALARY.

AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT TO FOLLOW UP WITH WHAT I ANSWERED THE QUESTION.

SO THE ISSUE WITH THE WAY THAT WE USE THE WORD COMPENSATION IN THE CHARTER AFFECTS THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, WHICH REQUIRES US TO GIVE BENEFITS TO COUNCIL.

SO WE'RE DOING THAT THROUGH CHAPTER 34.

SO THERE'S ALREADY A BIT OF A CONFLICT.

AND SO CHANGING IT FROM COMPENSATION TO SALARY IS A TECHNICAL DEFINITIONAL CHANGE THAT IT'S A LITTLE BIT CLEARER THAT YOU DO RECEIVE, YOU KNOW, HEALTH CARE BENEFITS.

SO I CAN IMAGINE THIS COUNCIL VOTING ITSELF SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE VOTERS.

AND SO I WOULD BE MORE INTERESTED IN CHANGING THAT FROM TO INSTEAD OF A LARGER WORD LIKE COMPENSATION, WHICH IS SO INDEFINITE AND ALL ENCOMPASSING TO SALARY PLUS HEALTH CARE BENEFITS THAT ARE EQUIVALENT TO CITY EMPLOYEES.

SO I'M JUST LETTING YOU GUYS KNOW YOU CAN VOTE FOR IT OR NOT SUPPORT IT OR NOT.

BUT I THINK YOU'RE OPENING UP A DOOR TO ALLOW COUNCIL TO VOTE ITSELF A LOT OF BENEFITS UNCHECKED BY THE VOTERS.

AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS INTENDED IN THE CHARTER.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

AND MAYBE SOME PEOPLE HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT WE STILL HAVE AN ACTUAL PIECE OF THE CHARTER THAT IS VERY SPECIFIC TO OUR COMPENSATION.

IS THAT CORRECT? YOU HAVE A CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? SO FAR, OUR COMPENSATION.

WE MAKE $60,000 A YEAR.

THAT'S WHAT WE GET COMPENSATED.

AND IF COUNCIL MEMBER DIDN'T WANT TO KEEP IT, THEY COULD GIVE IT BACK.

THEY COULD DO WHATEVER THEY WANT WITH THOSE DOLLARS.

BUT DOES THAT CHAPTER STILL EXIST IN OUR CHARTER? YES. SO THIS TECHNICAL AMENDMENT, DOES IT TAKE THAT AWAY? NO. IT JUST CHANGES THE TERM COMPENSATION TO SALARY IN ORDER TO MATCH WHAT THE IRS AND ALL THE.

IT'S JUST A TECHNICAL CHANGE.

SO, TO SIT HERE AND SAY THAT YOU KNOW, SOME PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO USE THAT AS A, OH, THE COUNCIL CAN VOTE FOR WHATEVER THEY WANT AND GIVE THEMSELVES UNLIMITED BENEFITS AND GIVE THEMSELVES UNLIMITED COMPENSATION WITHOUT GOING TO THE VOTERS.

THAT'S NOT ACCURATE BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE A CHART, A PIECE OF THE CHARTER THAT SAYS WHAT WE GET, WE HAVE TO SEND TO THE VOTERS.

AS FAR AS SALARY.

[01:45:02]

YES. CORRECT. SO SO COLLEAGUES AND AGAIN, I, YOU KNOW, I THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS IS I UNFORTUNATELY THINK, MR. MAYOR, THAT THIS IS JUST YOU KNOW, A WAY TO TRY TO MAKE SOMETHING INTO SOMETHING THAT IT'S NOT BECAUSE THIS IS A TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.

WE STILL HAVE THE OTHER ONE WHERE WE HAVE TO DISCUSS AND TAKE IT TO THE VOTERS, WHICH WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT LATER ON.

BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS DOES.

THIS IS NOT GIVE A CARTE BLANCHE, BLANK CHECK TO ANYONE IN ORDER TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO.

AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE SET OUT THERE.

NONE OF THIS BENEFITS ME AT ALL.

I ROLL OFF THE COUNCIL BEFORE ANY OF THIS COMES TO EFFECT.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WHAT IS FAIR IS FAIR AND THAT WE AREN'T USING BIG GENERALITIES IN ORDER TO SCARE VOTERS OR TO SCARE FOLKS ON THINGS THAT ISN'T EVEN SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY FIXED IN THE CHARTER.

THAT WHAT THE SALARY THAT WE GET, THE COMPENSATION, WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT RIGHT NOW, JUST FOR FOLKS OUT THERE THAT NO MATTER WHAT IN DALLAS, THE CITY OF DALLAS, UNLIKE OTHER MUNICIPAL BODIES IN THIS AREA, IN THE STATE, WE DON'T VOTE ON OURSELVES.

WE VOTE TO SAY, HEY, THIS IS WHAT I THINK.

THIS IS WHAT WE THINK WE LIKE.

THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE. THIS IS WHAT WE THINK.

VOTERS. HERE YOU GO.

YES OR NO? THAT'S IT. THAT'S HOW IT WORKS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND HAS SINCE THEY WENT FROM $0 OR $50 A BOARD MEETING TO 30, I THINK IT WAS 37.5. AND THEN THE 60 THAT WE'RE AT.

THAT'S HOW IT'S HOW IT WORKS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.

AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S PROPOSING TO ELIMINATE THAT SO THAT WE CAN DO WHATEVER WE WANT, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT SOMETHING I WOULD VOTE FOR ANYWAY.

SO ANYWAY, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MY COLLEAGUES, BEFORE THEY TRY TO START RIPPING ME UP IN THE PRESS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY LIKE TO DO IS THAT THEY KNOW THAT NONE OF THIS BENEFITS ME.

I WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY A SINGLE BIT OF THIS AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT'S FAIR FOR THIS BODY, AS WE GO INTO THE FUTURE, IS FAIR FOR THIS BODY AND THAT.

AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE VOTERS ARE GOING TO MAKE A DECISION, YES OR NO.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE GOING INTO THESE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS AND SPENDING THIS MUCH TIME ON SOMETHING THAT THE VOTERS ARE GOING TO GET TO VOTE ON, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT DEMOCRACY IS.

AND WHAT A LOT OF TIMES SOME FOLKS SAY IS LET THE VOTERS VOTE, LET THE VOTERS VOTE.

THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING, MR. MAYOR. LET THE VOTERS VOTE.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRWOMAN.

MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU. AND UNDERSTANDING PROPOSITION 15, IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THE PERSONNEL RULES ARE NOT, ARE DETERMINED JUST BY THIS BODY? THE VOTERS DON'T HAVE A SAY ON THOSE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

AND COULD THIS BODY DECIDE IN THE PERSONNEL RULES WE'D LIKE TO ADD IN LIFE INSURANCE? YES. AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T CONTRADICT ANY OTHER STATE OR FEDERAL LAW.

YES. AND COULD THIS BODY DECIDE WE'D LIKE TO ADD IN DENTAL INSURANCE? I THINK IT'S ALREADY COVERED.

OKAY. I'M SORRY, I DON'T PARTICIPATE IN ANY OF THE BENEFITS AND COULD WE ADD IN A STIPEND FOR VEHICLES? THAT WOULD BE THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, NOT THROUGH THE PERSONNEL.

BUT IF WE ALLOCATED THE DOLLARS, WHICH WE ALONE VOTE ON.

AND WE ALSO PUT THAT IN THE PERSONNEL RULES, WOULD THAT BE ALLOWED? IT WOULD BE THROUGH THE BUDGET, NOT THE LIKELY THE PERSONNEL RULES.

BUT YES, YOU COULD BECAUSE SALARY THAT'S PART.

IRS DEFINES THAT AS A SALARY.

SO AGAIN, THIS GOES BACK TO THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A DEFINITION THAT THE VOTERS THEMSELVES CAN DETERMINE WHAT THE COMPLETE COMPENSATION WOULD BE FOR OUR SERVICE TO THEM. THANK YOU.

SCHULTZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT I DO BELIEVE THAT WHETHER IT'S BY LAW OR CERTAINLY OUR POLICY, THAT WE CAN'T GIVE OURSELVES SOMETHING THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THE REST OF THE EMPLOYEES. SO IF THERE WERE GOING TO BE NEW BENEFITS ALLOWED THAT THE OTHER EMPLOYEES DON'T HAVE, WE CAN'T DO THAT.

SO IF WE'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR LIFE WITH SOME INSURANCE THAT'S NOT OFFERED CURRENTLY BY THE CITY, IT WOULD BE CITYWIDE THAT WE WOULD BE DOING IT FOR.

IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS AND I MEAN WHAT COUNCIL'S WILL IS AT THAT POINT, I'M NOT SURE IF I HAVE AN ANSWER FOR EVERY SITUATION.

I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT IT INDIVIDUALLY TO SEE THAT MAKES SENSE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR NOT REALLY ON FOR AGAINST JUST GENERALLY ON THE COUNCIL PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT WE'VE SORT OF GOTTEN OUT BEFORE US BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BRIEF BREAK TO RECOGNIZE A DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVANT WHO'S LEAVING THE CITY, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK. NOT WE'RE NOT RECESSING OR ANYTHING.

I WAS GIVING YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT KIND OF THE ORDER OF BUSINESS HERE, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VOTERS SUBMITTED ISSUES THAT ARE POSTED TODAY, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE MOTIONS THAT ANYONE WANTS TO MAKE TO ACTUALLY STRAW VOTE THOSE THINGS.

[01:50:04]

SO, WE'RE GOING TO JUST KEEP THE GENERAL DISCUSSIONS FIRST, AND THEN THE STRAW VOTES WILL BE THE LAST THING WE DO.

SO, ANYONE ELSE WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE GENERAL.

I'M IN THE QUEUE. COUNCIL PROPOSAL ONE.

SO THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SO FAR BEFORE WE TAKE A BRIEF BREAK FOR RECOGNITION.

I THINK I'M IN THE QUEUE.

I THINK MY TECHNOLOGY IS WORKING.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES IF YOU WANT TO GO NOW.

MAY BE A BENEFIT THAT WE MIGHT NEED TO WORK ON SO QUICKLY, MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO ALL THE WEEDS OF THIS, SINCE WE'VE ESTABLISHED THE FACT THAT IT IS CLEAR, AND WE WILL GO MORE IN DETAIL INTO THE SALARIES.

BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE TODAY THAT I AT LEAST COMMENT ON THE NEED TO KEEP COMMUNICATING ON A HIGH LEVEL WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS ABOUT THIS PROCESS, BECAUSE YOU WANT THEM TO USE MAKE SURE THEY HAVE GOOD INFORMATION SO THAT WE'RE JUST NOT THEY'RE NOT ACTING JUST ON EMOTION, BECAUSE SOME OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING THROUGH IN THE CITY, WHETHER, YOU KNOW, THIS SUMMER WITH THE DECISION ON HOW WE MADE TO PICK UP TRASH AND BULK TRASH, WHATEVER, FOLKS WILL GET IN THAT MODE, LIKE THEY DON'T DESERVE A RAISE.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO EXPLAIN THIS AS MUCH AS WE CAN.

I OFTENTIMES HEAR FROM PEOPLE WHO SAID, LOOK, LORD BLESS Y'ALL'S HEARTS.

WE WISH YOU WE COULD PAY YOU MORE FOR WHAT YOU GO THROUGH BECAUSE WE GO THROUGH A LOT.

AND THEN WHEN THEY HEAR SOME OF THESE SPEAKERS ON WEDNESDAY, THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE A DEAL WITH US TO PAY US ALL $1 MILLION.

AND YOU HAD SOME OF THAT THIS MORNING.

SO WE KNOW THAT WE GO THROUGH A LOT.

BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M ON THE RECORD, I DON'T THINK, AND WE AGREE AND DISAGREE ON A LOT OF THINGS, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK WE HAVE FOLKS ON HERE WHO ARE SO OUT OF THE LOOP THAT WE'RE TRYING TO BECOME MILLIONAIRES AND BUILD UP THESE BIG BANK ACCOUNTS.

I THINK WHEN WE CONTINUE TO COMMUNICATE ON WHAT OUR STANDARDS AND VALUES ARE IN TERMS OF SERVICE, PEOPLE WILL MAKE A DECISION IF THEY WANT TO SERVE AND COME INTO THIS REALM OR NOT, BECAUSE IT IS ABOUT SERVICE FOR ME.

I KNOW THAT IT IS, BUT IT HAS TO BE COMMUNICATED.

AND SOME OF THIS WHAT WE ARE EVEN BEING REQUIRED TO DO MORE OF.

IT MAY TAKE A FEW MODIFICATIONS.

I'VE HAD I HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT IN 20 I THINK 2017 ABOUT WITH THE ATTORNEYS BECAUSE IN THAT INSTANCE, I TRAVELED NO LESS THAN FIVE EVENTS ON THAT ONE DAY. I HAD TO HIT IT, QUIT IT, AND KEEP IT MOVING.

AND SO I THOUGHT I WOULD BE ABLE TO HIRE SOMEONE FOR THAT DAY TO DRIVE ME.

BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO GET IN BETWEEN SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS AND YOU'RE TRYING TO KEEP YOUR HEAD TOGETHER AND YOU'RE TRYING TO FOCUS, YOU NEED TO BE FOCUSED.

AND WHAT DID THE ATTORNEYS TELL ME, MISS TAMMY PALOMINO, ABOUT THAT REQUEST? DO YOU REMEMBER THAT? I'M SORRY, I WAS REMEMBER THAT I TRIED TO BE COMPENSATED FOR THE SUPPORT THAT I RECEIVED WITH THE DRIVER? WHAT WAS I TOLD YOU REMEMBER THAT YEAR? I DO REMEMBER THAT.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

I DO REMEMBER THAT AND THAT THE COUNCIL HAD TO APPROVE THAT BY CREATING A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND, AND A RESOLUTION.

AND I THOUGHT I WAS SERVING A PUBLIC PURPOSE, GOING TO ALL THOSE COMMUNITY MEETINGS THAT DAY, FIVE OF THEM.

AND SO I DIDN'T GIVE A BIG STINK, SUCK IT UP, PAY FOR IT, AND KEEP IT MOVING.

BUT THOSE MIGHT BE SITUATIONS WHERE IN THE FUTURE WE MIGHT BEGIN TO LOOK AT THAT.

BECAUSE WHEN I GO AND SPEAK WITH THE COMMUNITY, I WANT TO BE CLEAR.

IF I HAVE A SPEECH, I WANT TO BE CLEAR IF THEY'RE ASKING ME TO DO THE HULA HOOP WITH THE KIDS, I WANT TO BE CLEAR IF THEY'RE ASKING ME TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROCESS.

SO, COUNCIL MEMBERS, PLEASE NOTE TODAY THAT I HAVE ENOUGH FAITH IN YOU THAT YOU WILL DO THE RIGHT THING AND WE WILL NOT ATTEMPT TO ROB THE BANK.

BUT I KNOW THIS IS A PROCESS THAT PROBABLY EVERY JURISDICTION GOES THROUGH.

I WAS LOOKING AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

YOU KNOW, THE 27TH AMENDMENT ALLOWS THE LEGISLATURE TO VOTE ON THEIR OWN SALARY THAT CANNOT TAKE EFFECT DURING THEIR COURSE OF SERVICE.

BUT THE NEXT TERM, I BELIEVE, AND I BELIEVE IT HAS TO GET SOME APPROVAL AS WELL.

SO THIS IS NOT FOREIGN.

AND THOSE REPRESENTATIVES, I'M SURE THEY ALL WANT TO MAKE MORE THAN WHAT THEY'RE MAKING NOW, BUT THEY KNOW THEY HAD BETTER NOT DO THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE USING WHAT TAXPAYERS DOLLARS.

SO THANK YOU FOR ALL THAT YOU ALL DO.

AND EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT ALWAYS TOGETHER ON EVERYTHING, I DO VALUE YOUR INPUT.

I VALUE YOUR LEADERSHIP, I VALUE YOUR ADVICE.

AND I REALLY ADMIRE THE FACT.

AND THANK YOU, MISS TAMMY PALOMINO, AND YOUR LEADERSHIP AND YOUR TEAM FOR CONTINUING TO WORK WITH US TO KEEP US IN LINE, BECAUSE YOU REALLY DO.

AND IT'S ALL ABOUT COUNCIL MEMBER.

WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT YOU ALL.

COUNCIL MEMBER WE'RE TRYING TO HELP YOU ALL.

AND I DO HEAR THAT ON A REGULAR BASIS.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THAT.

AND I THINK AS WE GO INTO THIS PARTICULAR ELECTION, WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH ADVICE THAT WE CAN TRUST AND KNOW THAT IT'S IN GOOD IN THE BEST INTEREST FOR OUR CITY AND

[01:55:10]

ESPECIALLY FOR US AS WE CONTINUE TO REPRESENT THOSE WHO HAVE SENT US HERE.

AND I THANK THEM FOR SENDING ME HERE TO WORK WITH ALL OF YOU TODAY.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

I THINK NOW IS A GOOD TIME MADAM CITY MANAGER TO BREAK FOR OUR ANNOUNCEMENT.

[Special Presentations]

NOT OUR ANNOUNCEMENT FOR OUR RECOGNITION.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO ASK ALI HATAFI TO COME, PLEASE.

AND I'D LIKE TO INVITE HIS WONDERFUL FAMILY TO COME AND JOIN HIM DOWN FRONT.

IT'S NOTHING LIKE HAVING YOUR FAMILY BY YOUR SIDE.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE, TO STOP AND PAUSE AND GIVE A SPECIAL TRIBUTE TO ALI.

WE ARE DEEPLY SADDENED, IF I CAN JUST SAY THAT THAT YOU WILL NO LONGER BE WITH THE CITY EFFECTIVE AUGUST THE 12TH.

BUT I WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT THE GREAT THINGS THAT THAT HE HAS DONE FOR OUR CITY DURING HIS YEARS OF SERVICE.

ALI JOINED THE CITY OF DALLAS IN 2013 AS AN ENGINEER, AND QUICKLY CLIMBED THE LADDER TO SENIOR ENGINEER, SENIOR PROGRAM MANAGER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, CITY ENGINEER AND TO HIS CURRENT ROLE AS THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

HE HAS GIVEN US 11 YEARS OF HIS LIFE, AND TODAY WE ARE HERE TO HONOR YOU AND TO BID YOU WITH A FAREWELL.

ALI HAS A BREADTH OF MANAGERIAL AND OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE AND HIS COMMITMENT TO SERVICE FIRST, NOW ADDED TO THE IMMEDIATE VALUE TO NOT ONLY OUR TEAM, TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND TO THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS.

HIS LEADERSHIP WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WAS A CONSTANT DISPLAY THROUGHOUT HIS ENTIRE TENURE.

HE WAS HUMBLE.

HIS DEMEANOR AND HIS DESIRE TO PUSH HIS TEAM TO ACHIEVE GREATNESS WILL ALWAYS HAVE AN IMPRESSION ON THE WORK THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH DURING HIS TENURE.

UNDER ALI, THE TEAM IMPLEMENTED FREE BROADBAND WI-FI NETWORKS IN SEVERAL OF OUR UNSERVED NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE CITY.

HE OVERSAW THE SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN, THE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THE BRIDGE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.

HE FACILITATED THE RED CLOUD SMART NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE, WHICH RECEIVED THE GLOBAL 2023 SMART 50 AWARD FROM SMART CITIES CONNECT.

HE REVISED THE CITY'S ORDINANCE AND CODE TO BETTER ADDRESS CONSTRUCTION CONCERNS IN THE CITY, AND TO GENERATE A MORE COMPETITIVE REVENUE FOR USING OUR CITY'S PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. HE STARTED A NEW STUDY WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON TO DEVELOP SPECIFICATIONS FOR FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE, SUPPLEMENTING TRADITIONAL CONSTRUCTION METHODS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE CITY TO REDUCE THE CONSTRUCTION TIME AND COST.

HE ALSO CREATED A DESIGN MANUAL FOR THE 5G NETWORK ROLLOUT THROUGH COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS WITH MULTIPLE CITY DEPARTMENTS, AND UPDATED THE CITY'S CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS.

DETAILS. ALI, YOU'RE GOING TO BE MISSED AND WE WISH YOU THE VERY BEST IN THIS NEW CHAPTER OF YOUR LIFE.

PLEASE JOIN ME, CITY COUNCIL AND FRIENDS, IN SAYING A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO ALI HATEFI FOR HIS DEDICATION TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.

ALI, I WILL GIVE YOU THE OPTION OF GOING FIRST OR LAST.

IF FOLKS WILL HAVE SOMETHING THEY WANT TO SAY AROUND THE HORSE.

YOU CAN EITHER WAIT UNTIL THEY ALL FINISH OR YOU CAN GO RIGHT NOW.

WHICH WOULD YOU RATHER DO? I'LL GO LAST.

ALL RIGHT SIR? WELL, CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, I'LL LET YOU GO FIRST.

BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY I DO DEEPLY APPRECIATE YOUR SERVE.

I WANT TO ECHO WHAT OUR INTERIM CITY MANAGER HAS JUST SAID.

AND IT'S WONDERFUL THAT YOU HAVE YOUR FAMILY HERE TODAY.

TO THE TO THE LITTLE KIDS HERE.

I WANT YOU TO KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOUR DAD HAS GONE INTO THE NOBLEST PROFESSION.

I THINK THAT THERE IS, WHICH IS PUBLIC SERVICE AND I HOPE YOU ALWAYS REMEMBER YOU KNOW, WHAT YOUR DAD HAS DONE FOR THIS CITY AND THAT HE'S A BIG DEAL AND THAT HE'S SOMEONE THAT SHOULD BE EMULATED AND SOMEONE WHO SHOULD BE LOOKED UP TO AND RESPECTED.

THAT'S REAL IMPORTANT, I THINK.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH ALI FOR YOUR SERVICE AND THANK YOU ALL FAMILY, FOR SHARING HIM WITH US FOR THE TIME THAT WE'VE HAD HIM.

AND I WISH YOU GODSPEED AND WHAT COMES NEXT.

NOW WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO SOME OF YOUR ADORING FANS HERE AROUND THE HORSESHOE BEFORE WE LET YOU CLOSE IT OUT.

CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ NO TIME LIMIT, BUT, YOU KNOW, BE MINDFUL OF THE FACT THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO GO IN WITH HIS FAMILY AND CATCH A PLANE AND GO CELEBRATE.

THE YOUNG GENTLEMEN ARE THERE.

[02:00:03]

SO, THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO STAY STILL FOR SO LONG.

SO BUT ALI, JUST THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE SINCE I GOT HERE TO CITY HALL.

YOU KNOW, A LITTLE OVER SEVEN YEARS AGO.

WHAT YOU'VE JUST DONE HAS BEEN INCREDIBLE.

WE ALL HEARD THE LIST, AND I DON'T THINK THAT EVERYBODY REALLY REALIZES THE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE ACCOMPLISHED AND DONE FOR OUR CITY TO TAKE US TO LEVELS THAT WE PROBABLY NEVER EVEN DREAMED THAT WE COULD GET TO.

IT ALWAYS HASN'T BEEN EASY, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT YOU'VE ALWAYS BEEN PROFESSIONAL.

YOU'VE ALWAYS BEEN KIND.

YOU. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU EVER RAISE YOUR VOICE OR GET ANGRY.

THE BOYS MIGHT SAY SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT, BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT HERE.

SO BUT WHAT I'LL TELL YOU IS THEN WHEN I BECAME CHAIR TRANSPORTATION, THANKS TO THE MAYOR OUR RELATIONSHIP, OUR WORKING RELATIONSHIP JUST REALLY BLOSSOMED AND GREW.

AND WHAT I LEARNED FROM YOU IN THAT IN THE SHORT THREE ISH YEARS HAS BEEN JUST INCREDIBLE FOR ME.

WHEN I GO TO OTHER THINGS AND I'M EXPLAINING THINGS IN PUBLIC.

IT'S BECAUSE OF YOU AND, YOU KNOW, AND THE TEAM THAT YOU HELPED BUILD AND THE THINGS THAT YOU'VE DONE.

AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THAT, NOT JUST FOR ME, BUT FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT WE SERVE HERE IN OUR GREAT CITY.

AND I WOULD JUST WISH YOU THE BEST OF EVERYTHING.

YOU DESERVE IT ALL. AND TO THE TO YOUR WIFE AND YOUR BOYS.

THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR DAD WITH US, EVEN THOUGH YOU PROBABLY DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A CHOICE IN THE MATTER.

BUT THANK YOU, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THERE'S A SACRIFICE THERE, AND YOUR DAD'S ABOUT TO BE BACK WITH YOU ALL A LITTLE BIT MORE.

DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING NEXT.

I'LL LEAVE. BUT WHATEVER IT IS I WISH YOU THE BEST OF EVERYTHING.

AND JUST KEEP DOING A GREAT JOB WITH THOSE.

THOSE YOUNG GUYS. BECAUSE THE WAY YOU SPEAK ABOUT THEM, I KNOW THAT THEY ARE YOUR LIFE AND BETWEEN YOUR WIFE AND YOUR CHILDREN.

SO THANK YOU AGAIN, ALI.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS WILLIS, THANK YOU.

SO, THIS IS FOR THE BOYS.

YOUR DAD HAS HAD A REALLY TOUGH JOB, BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT HE IS SO NICE.

HE IS RESPECTED BY SO MANY PEOPLE.

HE'S REALLY GOOD AT WORKING WITH PEOPLE AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE AREN'T BEING NICE TO HIM, BUT HE YOU'D NEVER KNOW IT BECAUSE HE JUST HANDLES IT SO WELL.

BECAUSE WE'VE STOOD IN SOME ALLEYS TOGETHER AND DEALT WITH SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT NICE TO US.

BUT I JUST WANTED YOU ALL TO KNOW HOW MUCH PEOPLE THINK OF HIM AND HOW MUCH HE'S ADMIRED HERE AT DALLAS CITY HALL.

AND I'M VERY SORRY TO MISS YOU.

WE'RE GOING TO MISS YOU. BUT I GUESS WHAT IS A BIT OF A BALM IS THAT WE KNOW THAT HE WILL HAVE MORE TIME WITH YOU, WITH THE FAMILY, AND HOW MUCH THAT MEANS TO YOU.

AND SO BEST WISHES TO YOU, MR. WEST. THANK YOU.

ALI, YOU WON OVER SOME OF THE MOST DIFFICULT, OPINIONATED PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT.

AND YOU KNOW WHO? I LOVE THEM ALL. BUT WHEN THEY CAN DISAGREE WITH YOU VEHEMENTLY ON PUBLIC WORKS ISSUES ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH, MOST RECENTLY, THE DIGITAL KIOSK, I'M TALKING ABOUT DAVID SPENCE. NOW AND FOR YOU TO FOR THEM TO LEAVE AND BE LIKE, GOSH, I REALLY LIKE THAT GUY.

I JUST DON'T AGREE WITH HIM.

YOU KNOW INSTEAD OF THEM JUST YELLING AT ME ABOUT CITY STAFF LIKE THEY DO MOST OF THE TIME IT JUST SHOWS WHAT A CONSUMMATE PROFESSIONAL YOU ARE TO BE ABLE TO DO YOUR JOB. AND EVERYONE RESPECTS YOU, EVEN IF THEY DISAGREE WITH YOU.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU.

AND WE'RE GOING TO MISS YOU.

MR. MORENO.

THANK YOU, MAYOR ALI.

THANK YOU FOR ALL THE HARD WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.

I, TO THIS DAY, STILL SOMETIMES GET CONFUSED IF SOMETHING IS UNDER TRANSPORTATION OR PUBLIC WORKS.

BUT THAT DIDN'T MATTER WHEN I CALLED YOU TO ASK YOU ABOUT A PROJECT STATUS OR HOW WE GET SOMETHING DONE, EVEN IF IT WASN'T UNDER YOUR PURVIEW, YOUR SCOPE, YOU ALWAYS FIGURED A WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.

WHETHER IT'S FROM MAKING SURE THAT WE INSTALLED AND UPDATED SIDEWALKS IN FRONT OF SENIORS WHO HAD A HANDICAP, ISSUES MAKING SURE THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO BE MOBILE IN THEIR COMMUNITY OR COMING OUT WITH ME ON THE WEEKENDS LATE, LATE AT NIGHT TO DEEP ELLUM TO LOOK AT WORK AND PROJECTS FIRSTHAND TO SEE ENSURING THAT SAFETY MEASURES WERE IN PLACE.

AND WITH THAT BEING SAID, I KNOW THAT YOUR YOUNG FAMILY IS EAGER TO HAVE YOU BACK, AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO BE CLOSER TO YOUR HOME WITH YOUR NEW CAREER.

AND I WISH YOU THE VERY BEST.

AND JUST GOOD LUCK.

THANK YOU, MISS ARNOLD.

THANK YOU MAYOR.

CAUGHT ME OFF GUARD THERE, MAYOR.

SO I REALLY I THINK I'VE PRETTY MUCH SHARED WITH YOU MR. ALI HOW I FEEL, YOU KNOW FIRST OF ALL, IT'S LIKE, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IN OUR DISTRICT? BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR EVERYTHING.

I THINK WE PRETTY MUCH ARE GOING TO HEAR THE SAME THING IN TERMS OF THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, BUT I TOO WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET ON THE RECORD AS WE TALK ABOUT PUBLIC SERVICE,

[02:05:06]

AND WE CAN'T PAY YOU ENOUGH FOR WHAT YOU YOUR WORK.

BUT FOR ALL OF US, I THINK WE PROBABLY HAVE THAT ONE PERSON IN OUR DISTRICT WHO IS A LITTLE BIT CUCKOO OVER COCO POPS, AND THE PERSON THAT WOULD WRITE YOU AT TEN, 11:00 AT NIGHT TO SAY, YOU ALL STILL HAVEN'T FIXED MY STREET, AND NO MATTER WHAT YOU ALL DID FOR US, SHE WAS NEVER HAPPY.

AND SO AT LEAST YOU'LL MOVE AWAY FROM THAT PERSON.

BUT JUST KNOW THEY DON'T DIE, THEY MULTIPLY.

OKAY, SO NO MATTER WHERE YOU GO, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THOSE COCO POPS.

SOMETIMES. BUT THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

AND I CAN JUST RE SUPPORT UNDERSCORE WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS SAYING.

YOU'VE BEEN A FANTASTIC PERSON TO WORK WITH AND I HOPE YOU HAVE NOTHING BUT GREAT SUCCESS.

BUT MOST OF ALL, I SEE YOUR SONS BACK THERE.

THEY'RE SO HAPPY THEY'RE GETTING YOU CLAPPING, THEY'RE SMILING, AND YOUR GREATEST CHEERLEADERS.

BUT MAYOR, I THINK THAT'S ABOUT ALL I HAVE TO SAY BECAUSE I'M REALLY TRAUMATIZED LOSING HIM TODAY.

OKAY, WE'LL WORK WITH YOU.

WE'LL WORK WITH YOU ON THAT, MR. GRACEY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

OLLIE, WHEN I THINK ABOUT YOU, I THINK ABOUT THAT.

THAT OLYMPIC SHOOTER OUT OF TURKEY.

JUST SO COOL. JUST HANG IN THE POCKET.

I'M COMPETING AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL.

BAM! JUST DO IT.

THAT IS YOU.

THAT HAS BEEN YOU.

YOU'RE NOT MOVED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

YOU JUST EXECUTE AND AGAIN, WHEN YOU HAVE THAT TYPE OF ETHIC ABOUT YOU, WHETHER PEOPLE AGREE WITH YOU OR NOT, YOU CAN'T HELP BUT TO APPRECIATE WHO YOU ARE AS A PERSON AND WHO YOU ARE REPRESENTING THE CITY OF DALLAS.

SO THANK YOU FOR WHO YOU ARE AS A PERSON.

THANK YOU FOR WHO YOU ARE AS YOU REPRESENTED THE CITY OF DALLAS.

AND BEST OF LUCK TO YOU FELLAS.

YOUR DAD'S A GREAT PERSON.

DON'T EVER FORGET THAT, STEWART.

OKAY, MY ONE QUICK STORY IS I HADN'T BEEN HERE LONG, AND I GOT LOST, AND YOU WERE THERE, AND YOU JUST ASSURED ME IT'LL MAKE SENSE TO YOU EVENTUALLY.

JUST HANG IN THERE AND STILL COULD GET LOST, I THINK.

BUT YES, IT'S BEGINNING TO MAKE SENSE.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR KINDNESS AND YOUR PATIENCE AND FOR JUST YOUR PROFESSIONALISM.

I THINK EVERYBODY'S MENTIONED THAT YOU ARE VERY, VERY TALENTED.

YOU'RE VERY GOOD AT WHAT YOU DO, AND YOU'VE BEEN WILLING TO DO THAT FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR 11 YEARS.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.

AND I KNOW THE RESIDENTS APPRECIATE IT AS WELL.

SO THANK YOU.

MRS. BLACKMON, THANK YOU.

AND ALI, THANK YOU.

I MEAN, GOSH, Y'ALL'S DISTRICTS ARE JUST CRUEL.

THEY LOVE ISLAND NINE.

NO, NO BUT NO, YOU'VE YOU DO STAND UP THERE AND YOU'VE TAKEN A LOT OF SLINGS AND ARROWS, AND IT'S VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

I THINK THE PUBLIC DOESN'T REALIZE THAT YOU COME TO DO GOOD AND YOU SHOW UP EVERY DAY, AND THAT IS YOUR NORTH STAR.

AND THEY GET FRUSTRATED BECAUSE WE DO THE BEST WE CAN.

AND YOU ARE ALWAYS KIND AND UNDERSTANDING AND WILLING TO GET PEOPLE TO MEET YOU WHERE YOU NEEDED TO BE AND HELP US TO.

SO BEST LUCK AND YOUR FAMILY IS A BEAUTIFUL AND SPEND TIME WITH THEM AND LOVE THEM, BECAUSE IT'S NOT ALWAYS GUARANTEED THAT THEY'RE HERE TOMORROW.

MR. BAZALDUA.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. ALI, I JUST WE'LL TRY NOT TO BELABOR OR REITERATE ALL OF THE THINGS, BUT I WILL JUST SAY I AGREE WITH ALMOST EVERYTHING THAT I'VE HEARD TODAY ABOUT YOU AND YOUR PERFORMANCE IS IT'S STELLAR.

IT WAS ALWAYS GREAT WORKING WITH YOU, WITH ANYTHING PUBLIC WORKS.

YOU CAME, YOU DELIVERED FOR THE COMMUNITY.

ALWAYS. BUT I THINK YOUR SPIRIT IS REALLY WHAT I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT.

AND YOUR SMILE AND THE POSITIVE ENERGY THAT YOU GIVE OFF.

TO ME SETS AN EXPECTATION IN THE ROOM, AND I'VE SEEN THAT COME AS AN ASSET IN MANY CASES AS IT WAS MENTIONED SPECIFICALLY MOST RECENTLY WITH THE DIGITAL KIOSKS AND THE LONG HOURS THAT YOU PUT IN OUTSIDE OF YOU KNOW, JUST IN THE HALLS OF HERE.

BUT HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY AND, AND JUST DISPLAYING A LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING, BUT A PROFESSIONALISM IN A WAY TO PUSH BACK ON A LOT OF, I THINK, MISINFORMATION.

AND SO I JUST I WAS VERY PLEASED WATCHING YOU FACILITATE THAT.

AND THAT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT YOUR NORMAL, I THINK, DUTIES ARE.

BUT THAT WAS JUST, THAT WAS ALWAYS EVEN WHEN I GOT IN, IN A ROOM WITH YOU IN A MEETING ABOUT SOMETHING IN THE DISTRICT.

JUST UPDATES ON OUR PROJECTS.

YOU ALWAYS SET A TONE OF OF BEING HAPPY AND POSITIVE ENERGY, AND I HOPE THAT YOU NEVER LOSE THAT.

AND I CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A SMILE RIGHT BEHIND YOU THAT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S NOT GOING TOO FAR.

[02:10:01]

SO THANK YOU FOR FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR CITY.

PLEASE DON'T BE A STRANGER. LET US KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN DO IN YOUR NEXT CHAPTER.

MISS MENDELSOHN, THANK YOU.

WELL, ONE OF THE PROJECTS NOT MENTIONED IS THE SILVER LINE.

AND I WILL SAY YOU HAVE ALWAYS ANSWERED THE PHONE.

AND WITH SIX GRADE CROSSINGS PLUS THE TWO GRADE SEPARATED, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP.

AND YOU HAVE BEEN THERE.

I THINK I'M LUCKY YOU LIVE IN FRISCO SO THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO DRIVE BY THEM ON THE WAY HOME AND SAY, OKAY, YEAH, THAT'S A PROBLEM OR OR OR NOT.

BUT YOU HAVE DEALT WITH A LOT OF ISSUES OVER THESE FIVE YEARS WITH THAT AND COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

SOME NOT VERY HAPPY AND SOME THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO HELP MAKE SOME CHANGES.

SO ANYHOW, I THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I ESPECIALLY THANK YOU FOR THE TIMES.

IT'S A SATURDAY AND WE WENT AND STOOD ON RAILROAD TRACKS TOGETHER.

AND SOMETIMES WE'RE TOLD THINGS THAT TURNED OUT TO NOT BE TRUE, BUT YOU YOU HAVE BEEN THERE FOR THAT AND I APPRECIATE IT.

AND I THINK THAT HAS BEEN MY NUMBER ONE REASON TO CALL YOU VERY, VERY FREQUENTLY.

AND SO I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE ADDED THAT TO THE LIST, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S BEEN A HUGE HEADACHE.

SO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR EXTRA TIME WITH THAT.

I FEEL LIKE WE'VE BEEN A LOT OF MEETINGS, SO I WISH YOU BEST OF LUCK IN FRISCO.

MAYBE I'LL SEE YOU AROUND UP NORTH.

MISS SCHULTZ.

MR. MAYOR, FIRST I WANT TO TALK TO YOUR SONS, IF I CAN, FOR A MINUTE.

SO YOU GUYS WEREN'T BORN WHEN YOUR DAD STARTED WORKING HERE, IS THAT RIGHT? RIGHT. SO HE TOOK THIS JOB, AND THEN YOU GUYS CAME ALONG.

SO I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU A COUPLE THINGS ABOUT HIM THAT YOU CAN TAKE WITH YOU AS YOU GET OLDER.

OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, HE IS ALWAYS FILLED WITH NEW IDEAS AND NEW WAYS OF LOOKING AT PROBLEMS. SECOND, HE IS INCREDIBLY PATIENT.

IS HE PATIENT WITH YOU GUYS? NO. SO JUST REMEMBER THAT.

SAY WHEN HE STARTS TO GET IMPATIENT, SAY, DAD, THINK OF ME AS A CONSTITUENT, RIGHT? AND THEN HE'S ALWAYS, ALWAYS KIND.

SO I'M SURE AS YOU GUYS GROW UP, YOU'LL GET TO.

YOU'LL THINK ABOUT ALL THE WAYS THAT YOU WANT TO BE LIKE HIM.

SO, THANK YOU FOR SHARING HIM WITH US FOR ALL THESE YEARS.

THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO JUST SAY TO YOU VERY QUICKLY IS I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND KINDNESS, ALWAYS TO ME AND TO EVERYBODY THAT YOU'VE ENCOUNTERED. I THINK YOU WERE THE BEST OF HUMANS, TRULY.

WHAT WE'RE MEANT TO BE.

AND THEN THE LAST THING I'LL JUST LEAVE YOU WITH IS YOUR WIFE IS DOING AN INCREDIBLE JOB VIDEOING THIS.

SO THANK YOU FOR SHARING ALL THESE, ALL OF THIS, SHARING HIM ALL THESE YEARS.

BUT WHENEVER YOU START TO FEEL DOWN OR SAD ABOUT WHATEVER'S NEXT, JUST WATCH THAT VIDEO AND YOU'RE GOING TO KNOW HOW ALL OF US TRULY FEEL FOR YOU.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR YEARS.

TO OUR RESIDENTS.

APPRECIATE MAYOR PRO TEM.

THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU.

ALI. YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE 52 MASKS TODAY.

AND EVEN THOUGH I HAVE 52 SQUARE MILES, I THINK, YOU KNOW, EVERY INCH OF MY DISTRICT AND ONE THING I KNOW, WHEN I ALWAYS GET IN TROUBLE, I CALL YOU.

AND LOOK, YOU'RE SO PATIENT.

AND THE RESIDENTS SAY, HEY, I WISH YOU WAS MY COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT ON A SERIOUS NOTE YOU HAVE BEEN VERY, VERY PATIENT IN DISTRICT EIGHT.

MANY OPPORTUNITY, MANY PROJECTS.

WE DON'T GET DONE, MANY COMMUNITY MEETINGS THAT WHEN YOU SHOW UP, EVERYONE LISTEN TO YOU, THEY BELIEVE IN YOU.

AND ONE THING YOU SAY, HEY, IF I CAN DO IT, I CAN DO IT.

IF I CANNOT DO IT, I CAN'T GET IT DONE.

BUT I WILL TRY SOME KIND OF WAY TO GET IT DONE, YOU KNOW? AND THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE MISSING SOMETIME AROUND THE HORSESHOE, AROUND THE COUNCIL AND EMPLOYEES THAT YOU GO OUT OF YOUR WAY AND YOU SINCERE WHAT YOU DO AND PEOPLE REALLY BELIEVE YOU.

BUT I NEED SOME OF YOUR PATIENCE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO IT BUT GIVE ME.

WE'LL ME SOME PATIENCE WHEN YOU LEAVE.

AND WITH THAT, THANK YOU.

AND YOUR KIDS AND YOUR WIFE AGAIN.

MAKE SURE YOU GET EVERYTHING ON VIDEO.

BUT THE POINT IS THAT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

OKAY, NOW I'M REALLY ACTUALLY CONFUSED BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD FROM THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM AND FROM CAROLYN KING ARNOLD.

SO WHY IS THAT LIGHT ON? THAT CAN'T BE RIGHT.

IT CAN'T BE RIGHT.

BUT YOU'VE ALREADY. YOU'VE ALREADY SPOKEN THOUGH, SO.

OKAY, THERE WE GO. I'M LIKE, ALL RIGHT, THERE WE GO.

MR. RESENDEZ.

THANK YOU. AND, ALI, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT YOU'RE AN AMAZING PUBLIC SERVANT, BUT YOU'RE AN EVEN MORE AMAZING HUMAN BEING.

AND YOU ARE THE TYPE OF PERSON THAT MAKES THIS JOB EASIER AND MAKES IT EASIER TO WAKE UP AND COME TO CITY HALL TO DO THE WORK OF THE RESIDENTS OF OUR CITY.

[02:15:06]

SO IT'S BEEN AN HONOR TO SERVE WITH YOU.

AND ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE IN SOUTHEAST DALLAS DISTRICT FIVE, I WANT TO JUST THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND WISH YOU WELL MOVING FORWARD.

THANK YOU. AND I BELIEVE THE FLOOR IS NOW YOURS, SIR.

THANK YOU. WELL, I'M REALLY HUMBLED.

I DIDN'T EXPECT THAT, TO BE HONEST.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL FOR GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY.

THE REASON I'M HERE TODAY WHATEVER COULD HAVE DONE IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE OPPORTUNITY I HAD AN AMAZING TEAM.

ALSO, I NEED TO THANK THEM FOR WHAT THEY DID FOR ME AND ALL THE SUPPORT.

AND ALSO, LASTLY, I NEED TO THANK MY FAMILY, MY WIFE, MY KIDS THAT THEY PUT UP WITH ME FOR ALL THE LONG HOURS I SPENT AT WORK AND MISSING THEIR GAMES OR ACTIVITIES AND ALL THESE THINGS.

BUT I NEED TO THANK THEM FOR THAT.

AND ALSO THANK YOU ALL FOR ALLOWING ME TO SERVE YOUR COMMUNITY.

AND THANK YOU, MS. TOLBERT, FOR BELIEVING IN ME, FOR ALLOWING ME FOR TO LEAD THE DEPARTMENT.

I THINK THAT WAS AN AMAZING JOURNEY.

I LEARNED A LOT.

I GREW PROFESSIONALLY, I ADDED SOME MORE GRAY HAIR TO MY FACIAL FOR SURE, BUT IT WAS WORTH IT AND I TAKE THE MEMORY WITH ME FONDLY EVERYWHERE I GO.

SO I'M STILL IN THE DFW AREA.

I STILL CONTINUE TO SERVE COMMUNITIES, SO THAT'S WHAT KEEPS ME GOING.

SO THANK YOU ALL. I APPRECIATE YOU ALL.

I LOVE IT.

THAT'S SO FUNNY.

ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE BACK TO, WE'RE BACK IN IN OUR COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE DISCUSSION ON THE GENERAL DISCUSSION ON

THE COUNCIL PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, AND I'LL RECOGNIZE I WELL, ACTUALLY, NO, I CAN'T RECOGNIZE YOU ON THIS PART YET. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE WERE FINISHED.

AND I THINK WE ARE ON THAT.

AND WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO ANYONE WHO HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VOTER.

SUBMITTED ONE. SO I WILL RECOGNIZE YOU ON THAT.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON THE VOTER SUBMITTED ONES.

I'M WONDERING IF CHIEF GARCIA IS AVAILABLE.

WE'RE LOOKING INTO THAT.

NOT SURE HE WAS HERE.

HE IS HERE.

HE'S RIGHT BEHIND YOU.

THANK YOU. CHIEF.

WE HAD FOUR VOTERS SUBMITTED PROPOSITIONS, AND ONE OF THEM IS ABOUT DECRIMINALIZING MARIJUANA.

I'M WONDERING IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN TO US HOW THIS PROPOSITION COULD IMPACT PUBLIC SAFETY.

COUNCIL MEMBER, THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.

I MEAN, ONE PART OF THIS IS REALLY TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY WITH REGARDS TO HOW WE DEAL WITH OUR MISDEMEANOR B, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY LESS THAN TWO OUNCES. YOU KNOW, WE NEVER REALLY WE NEVER DECRIMINALIZE MARIJUANA OR MISDEMEANOR B, I MEAN, IN FACT, IT WAS A BUSINESS DECISION FOR PERSONAL USE AND AT THAT TIME, TWO OUNCES WAS DEEMED FOR PERSONAL USE.

AND IT ALIGNED WITH MISDEMEANOR B REALLY TO MAKE OFFICERS AVAILABLE FOR HIGHER PRIORITY TYPE CALLS FOR PERSONAL USE.

AGAIN, IT WAS A BUSINESS DECISION.

NONETHELESS, TO ALLOW OFFICERS MORE TIME TO CONCENTRATE ON HIGHER PRIORITY CRIMES WITH MISDEMEANOR B.

NOW, HAVING SAID THAT WE DIDN'T DECRIMINALIZE IT.

NOT ONLY IF IT'S LESS THAN TWO OUNCES.

OBVIOUSLY, WE STILL GO THROUGH OUR REGULAR PROCESS WITH THE CONFISCATION REPORTS, ETC..

BUT PER OUR POLICY, WE CAN TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTION IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE POSSESSION ARE INDICATIVE OF MARIJUANA DISTRIBUTION, SUCH AS MULTIPLE SMALL

[02:20:06]

INDIVIDUAL BAGGIES PACKED FOR RESALE, PRESENCE OF DIGITAL SCALES.

PACKS OF EMPTY BAGGIES.

OFFICERS OBSERVED HAND TO HAND DRUG TRANSACTIONS.

THE OFFENDER WAS INVOLVED IN A DRUG RELATED CALL IN NARCOTICS DIVISION INVESTIGATION.

THE OFFENDER POSSESSES MARIJUANA IN CONJUNCTION WITH A WEAPON.

THE OFFENDER HAS A COMPANION CHARGE FOR A CRIME AGAINST A PERSON OFFENSE, AND THE OFFICER CAN DOCUMENT, AND THE LAST ONE THE OFFICER CAN DOCUMENT AND ARTICULABLE REASON FOR CUSTODIAL ARREST AND OBTAINS APPROVAL FROM A SUPERVISOR NOW, ONE OF THE DYNAMICS, AND I WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY FOR A LITTLE SHOW AND TELL.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT TWO OUNCES IS.

AND I KNOW I SHOWED THIS AT THE TIME WHEN WE DID THIS A FEW YEARS BACK, IS THIS IS TWO OUNCES.

AND I'LL EXPLAIN WHY IT'S PACKAGED THIS WAY, BUT THIS IS TWO OUNCES OF MARIJUANA.

THIS IS FOUR OUNCES OF MARIJUANA.

AND I'LL GET INTO PACKAGING.

THIS WAY YOU CAN IMAGINE IT WITHOUT THE INDIVIDUAL PACKAGING TO SEE THAT THIS ISN'T EXACTLY PERSONAL USE.

ONE-TIME PERSONAL USE.

IN MY OPINION, FOUR OUNCES IS NOT A SMALL AMOUNT OR FOR PERSONAL USE.

AND IN FACT, PER MY NARCOTICS UNIT, THE TYPICAL ILLEGAL PURCHASE FOR PERSONAL USE FROM A DRUG DEALER IN THE CITY OF DALLAS IS ABOUT $20, WHICH IS ABOUT 2 TO 3 DIME BAGS EACH, AND THAT'S ABOUT 2 TO 3G.

FOUR OUNCES IS APPROXIMATELY 113G, WHICH EQUATES TO 113 DIME BAGS, MEANING AT 2 TO 3 DIME BAGS PER SALE, 113G, WHICH IS FOUR OUNCES, CAN ATTRIBUTE TO 38 DIFFERENT DRUG TRANSACTIONS, WHICH AGAIN IS OUR FEAR.

I DESCRIBE THIS TO ILLUSTRATE THAT FOUR OUNCES, IN MY OPINION, IS NOT FOR PERSONAL USE AND SHOULD DEFINITELY BE LOOKED AT.

IT'S DEFINITELY IT. IT IS DEFINITELY WORTH OUR TIME AND IT'S FRAUGHT WITH ILLEGAL SALES IMPLICATIONS.

THE NEXT POINT THAT I BRING UP WHEN I HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS, WHERE CAN YOU PURCHASE MARIJUANA, MUCH LESS FOUR OUNCES LEGALLY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS? YOU CAN'T.

THIS WOULD INCREASE DEMAND.

AND WHO PROSPERS? DRUG DEALERS, DRUG HOUSES PROSPER DRUG HOUSES AND DEALERS THAT ARE ALREADY TARNISHING THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR MOST AT RISK NEIGHBORHOODS.

NOW, YEAR TO DATE, OUR NARCOTICS UNIT HAS SERVED OVER 141 SEARCH WARRANTS IN THE CITY, 88 OF THEM, OVER 62% INVOLVED SOME AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA.

WE JUST RECENTLY DID A SEARCH WARRANT IN ONE OF OUR VULNERABLE NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND THE REALITY OF IT IS WHEN YOU HAVE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE BUYING MARIJUANA, WE DON'T HAVE GENERALLY MARIJUANA, ONLY DRUG DEALERS.

AND THIS WAS THE THIS WAS THE SEIZURE AT A SEARCH WARRANT WE DID AT AN IMPACTED APARTMENT COMPLEX.

AND I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THIS WAS WHAT WAS TAKEN.

IT'S THESE TYPE OF INDIVIDUALS IN OUR CITY THAT WILL PROSPER.

NOW, I ASKED MY HOMICIDE UNIT TO DO A BREAKDOWN OF OUR MURDERS THAT WE KNOW OR HAVE A KNOWN DRUG NEXUS SINCE 2023.

IN 2023, WE HAD 28 MURDERS THAT ARE HOMICIDE DETECTIVES.

KNEW WE HAD A DRUG NEXUS.

OF THOSE, TWO INVOLVED PCP, SOME AMOUNT OF PCP, THREE INVOLVED SOME AMOUNT OF METHAMPHETAMINE, FIVE HAD SOME AMOUNT OF COCAINE AND 17 INVOLVED SOME AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA.

NEARLY 61% OF DRUG RELATED MURDERS IN 2023 THAT WE KNOW OF INVOLVE SOME AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA.

IN 2024, AS OF JUNE, AS OF JUNE, WE HAD 17 DRUG ASSOCIATED MURDERS THAT WERE KNOWN.

ONE INVOLVED COCAINE, TWO INVOLVED FENTANYL, TWO INVOLVED PERCOCET.

12 INVOLVED MARIJUANA.

SO FAR THIS YEAR, NEARLY 71% OF OUR DRUG RELATED MURDERS HAVE INVOLVED SOME AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA COMBINED AS OF JUNE, OF OUR DRUG RELATED MURDERS THAT WE KNOW OF, NEARLY 66% HAVE A MARIJUANA, HAVE HAD SOME MARIJUANA NEXUS.

NOW, I WANT TO READ SOME EXAMPLES OF THE TYPE OF INDIVIDUALS AND THE TYPE OF VICTIMOLOGY AND THAT OUR HOMICIDE DETECTIVES DEAL WITH.

IN FEBRUARY OF 17 YEAR OLD COMPLAINANT DROVE TO AN ADDRESS WITH HIS BROTHER TO SELL MARIJUANA.

WHEN THEY PULLED UP, THREE SUSPECTS WERE STANDING IN THE STREET.

THEY TOLD THE COMPLAINANT TO GIVE THEM.

THEY USED AN EXPLETIVE TO GIVE THEM WHAT HE HAD.

WHEN HE TRIED TO DRIVE AWAY, THEY FIRED AROUND, STRIKING THE COMPLAINANT.

THE COMPLAINANT LOST CONSCIOUSNESS AS HIS VEHICLE SPED DOWN.

HE STRUCK A TELEPHONE POLE AND A PARKED CAR AND AN OCCUPIED VEHICLE.

[02:25:05]

THERE WAS ONE OUNCE OF MARIJUANA RECOVERED FROM THE COMPLAINANTS BACKPACK.

THAT WAS A CAPITAL MURDER.

IN APRIL, INDIVIDUAL RESPONDED.

OFFICERS RESPONDED TO POLK STREET.

UPON ARRIVAL, OFFICERS MET WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE WHO TREATED THE COMPLAINANT IN THE PARKING LOT.

THE COMPLAINANT HAD A GUNSHOT WOUND TO HIS NECK, AND DALLAS FIRE RESCUE TRANSPORTED HIM TO METHODIST CENTRAL HOSPITAL, WHERE HE DIED FROM HIS INJURY.

HOMICIDE DETECTIVES HAVE INTERVIEWED THE WITNESSES, AND THE WITNESSES TOLD DETECTIVES THAT THE COMPLAINANT HAD CALLED THE SUSPECT AND WENT TO THE TO THE POKEMART TO MAKE A DRUG DEAL. AT THE SCENE WAS RECOVERED SEVERAL BAGS OF MARIJUANA AND THE DRIVER'S SIDE FLOORBOARD AND AN UNDETERMINED LARGE AMOUNT OF $120 BILLS IN HIS WALLET. AND THERE WERE SOCIAL MEDIA THAT INDICATED THAT THE SUSPECT WAS TRYING TO BUY AN OUNCE OF MARIJUANA FROM THE COMPLAINANT.

IN MAY, CENTRAL OFFICERS RESPONDED TO YOUNG STREET REGARDING A SHOOTING.

UPON THEIR ARRIVAL, THEY FOUND THE COMPLAINANT SHOT.

THE COMPLAINANT WAS TRANSPORTED TO BAYLOR HOSPITAL WHERE HE DIED A FEW HOURS LATER.

THE ASSAULT WAS INITIALLY ASSIGNED TO THE CALLOUT, BUT HOMICIDE HAD TAKEN OVER THE INVESTIGATION.

HOMICIDE INVESTIGATORS RESPONDED AND INTERVIEWED INDIVIDUALS WHO ADVISED THAT THE COMPLAINANT MET WITH THE SUSPECT AT A NEARBY 7-ELEVEN AND AGREED TO SELL THEM TWO OUNCES OF MARIJUANA. THE WITNESSES STATED THAT THEY AGREED TO MEET AT THE LOCATION OFFENSE WHEN THE SUSPECT ARRIVED, AND THEN THEY SHOT THE COMPLAINANT.

THIS IS STILL AN ACTIVE INVESTIGATION.

MY LAST EXAMPLE IN JUNE, AN 18-YEAR-OLD COMPLAINANT WAS PARKED IN THE PARKING LOT OF A MINI MART WHEN TWO SUSPECTS IN AN SUV PULLED UP AND SHOT HIM MULTIPLE TIMES.

THE COMPLAINANT WAS SELLING MARIJUANA AT THE LOCATION.

LESS THAN AN OUNCE OF MARIJUANA WAS RECOVERED FROM HIS VEHICLE.

VIDEO FROM ACROSS THE STREET SHOWED THE SHOWED THE INDIVIDUALS WHO DID THE SHOOTING BUT DIDN'T CAPTURE THE SHOOTING.

AND THOSE ARE SOME, SOME EXAMPLES.

I READ THESE EXAMPLES TO YOU AND PROVIDE THE PREVIOUS STATISTICS TO PAINT A PICTURE.

THAT THE CONVERSATION PERTAINED TO MARIJUANA IS NOT VICTIMLESS.

FURTHERMORE, AS I DEPICTED, FOUR OUNCES IS NOT A SMALL AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA, AND NOT ONLY WILL IT LEAD TO INCREASED TRAFFIC AND DRUG HOUSES IN OUR MOST VULNERABLE NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT IN MY 32 YEARS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, IN MY OPINION, COULD LEAD TO INCREASED ILLEGAL SALES AND DETERIORATION OF QUALITY OF LIFE IN CERTAIN AREAS OF OUR CITY, AS RANDOM MOBILE DEALERS WOULD LOOK TO PROFIT FROM THE INCREASED THRESHOLD REGARDLESS OF THE RISK AND THE DANGERS THAT THEY FACE AS IT PERTAINS TO THE ARGUMENT OF DISCRIMINATORY ENFORCEMENT PRACTICES AND AS IT PERTAINS TO ARRESTS MADE BY MY DEPARTMENT FOR MARIJUANA BE OFFENSES ALONE AT OUR PEAK SINCE 2015.

IN 2017, WE MADE 538 ARRESTS FOR TWO OUNCES OR LESS OF MARIJUANA.

AS OF EARLY JUNE THIS YEAR TO DATE, WE HAVE ONLY MADE 15.

OF THOSE 15, SEVEN WERE ARRESTED IN POSSESSION OR WITH ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM, FOUR WERE IN POSSESSION OF MULTIPLE SMALL BAGGIES.

UNDER A SCALE, TWO WERE OBSERVED MAKING A TRANSACTION AND TWO IN CONNECTION WITH A GANG OPERATION.

WE HAVE AND CONTINUE TO MOVE THE NEEDLE IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION AS IT PERTAINS TO MISDEMEANOR BE CASES LESS THAN TWO OUNCES, WHICH IS MORE IN LINE WITH PERSONAL USE. HOWEVER, OF NOTE, AS THIS TALK OF DISPARITY AND OF DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES INVOLVING MARIJUANA POSSESSION CONTINUES, IT ALSO SHOULD BE NOTED THAT OF THE 66% OF DRUG RELATED MURDERS WITH A MARIJUANA NEXUS, THE RACIAL BREAKDOWN, THERE WERE 29 MURDERED INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN A CRIME AND A MURDER WITH A MARIJUANA NEXUS.

27 OF THE 29 OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS WERE BLACK OR LATINO VICTIMS. THE DISPARITY IN VICTIMIZATION IS UNACCEPTABLE, WHICH IS WHY DRUG RELATED CRIME, AND ITS REDUCTION IS CRITICAL TO OUR MISSION.

MY LAST POINT IS THAT OF OUR OATH, THE OATH THAT EVERY POLICE OFFICER TAKES IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, WHICH READS IN PART TO THE BEST OF THE OFFICER'S ABILITY PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE STATE OF TEXAS.

FIRST, I'LL SAY THAT DISCRETION IN ENFORCEMENT IS CRITICAL IN OUR BELOVED PROFESSION.

HOWEVER, IN READING THE PROPOSED CHARTER CHANGE AND ITS THROUGHOUT, BUT PARTICULARLY IN SECTION 22, SUBSECTION C IN PART READS THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT SHALL NOT MAKE ANY ARREST OR ISSUE CITATION FOR ANY CLASS A OR B MISDEMEANOR MARIJUANA POSSESSION EXCEPT IN LIMITED CASES DESCRIBED IN THIS POLICY.

NOT ONLY IS THE QUOTE OF LIMITED CASES NOT CONGRUENT WITH OUR MISSION, IT DOES NOT OFFER THE OPPORTUNITY FOR DISCRETION.

DISCRETION, SIMPLY PUT, IS THE FREEDOM TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO.

SHALL NOT DOES NOT EQUATE TO DISCRETION.

AND FINALLY, IT'S UNCLEAR WHETHER OR NOT TCORE OR THE STATE WOULD TAKE ACTION FOR OUR OFFICERS VIOLATING THEIR OATH.

[02:30:02]

BUT I'M JUST SIMPLY PUTTING IT SIMPLY AND I'M NOT GOING TO PRETEND TO KNOW ALL THE INS AND OUTS OF HOME RULE AND THESE TYPES OF ISSUES.

BUT THE OATH DOESN'T SPECIFY WHAT HOME RULE IS, BUT IT DOES SPECIFY THE SWEARING TO DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE STATE OF TEXAS, WHICH THIS PROPOSED CHARTER DOES NOT.

IN CLOSING, COUNCIL MEMBERS AS YOUR CHIEF, IT'S MY DUTY TO ALWAYS GIVE YOU IT STRAIGHT.

OTHER CITIES MAY BE DIFFERENT.

THERE'S NO QUESTION OTHER CITIES MAY NOT BE ABLE TO LINE UP THE FEARS THAT WE HAVE WITH REGARDS TO VIOLENT CRIME AND HOW MARIJUANA, WHEN IT COMES TO DRUG RELATED VIOLENT CRIME HAS BEEN AN ISSUE FOR US.

IN MY OPINION. THIS IS NOT GOOD SAFETY, SAFETY, PUBLIC POLICY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS AND OUR DEPARTMENT.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS WILL MAKE OUR CITY SAFER.

IN MY OPINION 2 TO 4OZ OF MARIJUANA IS DEFINITELY WORTH OUR TIME TO INVESTIGATE.

I DO FEEL AGAIN OTHER CITIES MAY BE DIFFERENT.

BUT IN OURS, I DO BELIEVE THIS WILL HAVE NEGATIVE SAFETY, PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACTS.

WELL THANK YOU. I THINK YOU'VE MADE THE CASE THAT THIS IS CLEARLY NOT HARMLESS.

IS MARIJUANA LEGAL? NO, IT IS NOT. NO.

OKAY. SO I APPRECIATE THAT YOU SPECIFICALLY SPOKE ABOUT THE OATH THAT OUR OFFICERS TAKE TO UPHOLD STATE LAW AND THE US CONSTITUTION.

HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT THEIR ABILITY TO I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TCORE, AND I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY IS THEY COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE THEIR BADGE TAKEN AWAY.

CORRECT. COUNCIL MEMBER.

I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD THAT THE STATE WOULD COME DOWN ON THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT.

BUT WHAT I'LL SAY ON AN ISSUE THAT I BELIEVE IN, TALKING TO MY RANK AND FILE AND TALKING TO MY NARCOTICS UNIT AND BEING AT EVERY COMSTAT MEETING, I CAN TELL YOU THAT THIS ISSUE IS IMPORTANT TO US.

AS I'VE SEEN SOME ARGUMENTS MADE IN COURT ON OTHER ISSUES WHERE ALLOWING OFFICERS FREE TIME TO DO OTHER MORE, MORE PRIORITY THINGS, WE FEEL THIS IS ONE OF OUR PRIORITIES.

AND AGAIN, THE OATH MEANS SOMETHING OR IT DOESN'T.

AND SO OBVIOUSLY THE REASON I BELIEVE THIS HAS BEEN SUCH A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE IS BECAUSE IT IS CONTRARY TO STATE LAW WHICH OUR OATH SAYS THAT WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO SUPPORT AND DEFEND.

YES. SO EVERY FRIDAY, WE GET A CRIME REPORT.

THERE ARE MANY YEARS.

I DID NOT LIKE LOOKING AT IT.

NOW IT'S ONE OF MY FAVORITE THINGS ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON TO SEE.

HOW ARE WE DOING? BECAUSE Y'ALL ARE, PARDON THE PUN.

YOU'RE KILLING IT, RIGHT? YOU ARE DOING SUCH A GREAT JOB AT REDUCING VIOLENT CRIME IN OUR CITY.

AND I'M VERY FEARFUL THAT SHOULD THIS PASS, THAT IT WILL HAVE SOME KIND OF NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THAT.

HOW WOULD YOU SAY.

BECAUSE I'M ABOUT TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT THE HERO ITEMS. HOW WOULD YOU SAY YOU'RE DOING WITH VIOLENT CRIME? AND HOW'S THE DEPARTMENT DOING IN MEETING THESE CHALLENGES? WELL, I'LL SAY AGAIN, AS WE'VE SPOKEN AT PUBLIC SAFETY, I'M CONSTANTLY IMPRESSED WITH THE WORK THAT OUR MEN AND WOMEN ARE DOING LISTENING TO THEIR COMMUNITIES AND RESPONDING, YOU KNOW, AS TO DATE, AS WE SIT HERE TODAY VIOLENT CRIME IN THE CITY IS DOWN ALMOST 13.5%.

PROPERTY CRIME IN THE CITY IS DOWN OVER 11.5%.

OUR AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS, NON-FAMILY VIOLENCE ARE DOWN ALMOST 18%.

MURDER IS DOWN.

OVER 21%.

ROBBERY. TOTAL ROBBERY IS DOWN ALMOST 5%, WHICH AGAIN, THAT EQUATES TO.

WE HAVE 845 LESS VICTIMS TODAY AT THIS TIME THAN WE HAD LAST YEAR AT THIS TIME, WHICH AGAIN WAS OUR THIRD YEAR OF VIOLENT CRIME REDUCTION.

IMPRESSED IS NOT A STRONG ENOUGH WORD FOR THE MEN AND WOMEN IN THE SACRIFICES THEY MAKE.

AND I THINK WE OWE IT ALL TO THEM.

OKAY, SO THE LAST REPORT I LOOKED AT, WE HAD 3070 OFFICERS.

WE HAVE AN OLDER FORCE.

WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, SO WE HAVE AN ATTRITION ISSUE WHERE PEOPLE ARE LEAVING BECAUSE THEY'RE DONE.

THEY'RE RETIRING.

WHAT DO YOU THINK IS NEEDED IN TERMS OF AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A MULTI-PART QUESTION.

HOW MANY OFFICERS DO WE NEED? THIS HERO INITIATIVE IS SAYING 4000.

SO, I'M CURIOUS TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE A NUMBER IN MIND AND HOW YOU THINK HAVING MORE OFFICERS MIGHT ADDRESS OR NOT ADDRESS OUR CRIME? YEAH. WELL, YOU KNOW, I'LL TAKE THE ONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS WHICH I'M ASKED OFTEN.

I MEAN, I, YOU KNOW, AT OUR, AT OUR HIGHEST POINT, I MEAN, IN RECENT HISTORY, WE'RE ABOUT 3600 OFFICERS.

I'D LIKE TO GET BACK TO THAT.

I THINK THAT SHOULD BE OUR GOAL.

AND AND THEN AND THEN REASSESS WHERE WE'RE AT AS A CITY.

YOU KNOW OBVIOUSLY HAVING MORE OFFICERS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THE CRIME PLAN AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT THEY FACE.

AND WE TALK ABOUT PATROL A LOT, BUT THE IMPACTS ON OUR INVESTIGATIONS IS ENORMOUS AS WELL.

[02:35:06]

AND WE'RE NOWHERE NEAR I MEAN, AS WE READ THESE NUMBERS, I KNOW THAT THAT WE'RE NOT CLOSE TO WHERE WE WANT TO BE.

AND THIS ISN'T THE TIME TO LET OUR FOOT OFF THE GAS.

AND I KNOW THAT THAT THERE'S MEMBERS IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT FEEL WE'RE NOT DOING ENOUGH.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL.

AND SO, OBVIOUSLY, THESE REDUCTIONS AGAIN, IN OUR STAFFING NECESSARILY.

WELL, IT CERTAINLY HAS NOT GONE HIGHER SINCE WE STARTED OUR CRIME PLAN.

YET WE'RE SEEING THE RESULTS OF THESE MEN AND WOMEN.

I CAN'T IMAGINE WHERE WE WOULD BE WITH INCREASED STAFFING.

I THINK EACH ONE OF YOU WOULD APPRECIATE MORE PRESENCE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

OFFICERS JUST SIMPLY PATROLLING STREETS, BEING ABLE TO GET OUT OF THEIR CARS.

AND DOING THINGS THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THEY MAY JUST NOT BE ABLE TO DO BECAUSE OF THE DEMANDS THAT, THAT THAT ARE PLACED ON THEM.

SO CERTAINLY, I THINK GROWING THE DEPARTMENT IS IMPORTANT.

THE COMMITMENT FROM THE CITY, FROM THE COUNCIL, FROM THE MAYOR, FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE SINCE THE TIME I HAVE BEEN HERE, HAS BEEN HERE, BEEN THERE.

WE'RE DOING OUR BEST TO GET TO OUR 250 A YEAR.

HIRING. WE'RE HOPEFUL WE CAN GET THERE THIS YEAR.

BUT AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT MANY TIMES IN THE PAST, THE SUPPORT FOR THE DEPARTMENT HERE IS INCREDIBLE FROM OUR COMMUNITY, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT AGAIN, I THINK WE HAVE THE PIECES IN PLACE, AND WE'RE TRYING TO HEAD IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO ENSURE THAT WE MAINTAIN THE STAFFING THAT WE HAVE, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME INCREASING IT WITH OUR HIRING.

SO I'M SORRY I DIDN'T ASK YOU THIS IN ADVANCE, AND I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT.

YOU OF COURSE, CAN DECLINE, BUT YOU'VE MADE SOME VERY STRONG STATEMENTS ABOUT THE MARIJUANA SIDE OF THINGS.

RIGHT. LIKE THAT WAS A VERY COMPELLING REPORT.

YOU GAVE US TO THAT ANSWER.

SO ARE YOU WILLING TO GO AS FAR AS SAYING YOU DO NOT RECOMMEND THE RESIDENTS SUPPORT THAT PROPOSITION? WELL, BASED AGAIN, ANY COUNCIL MEMBER, I WON'T MINCE WORDS AND I.

POINT OF ORDER, MR. MAYOR.

STATED, BUT I THINK I KNOW IT, I JUST I TO PUT THE CHIEF.

YEAH, YEAH YEAH, YEAH, I THINK THAT'S UNETHICAL FOR THE CHIEF TO.

I'LL GET IT. I'LL FIND OUT.

Y'ALL LET Y'ALL FIGURE THAT. THANK YOU. WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO SIDEBAR THAT ONE REAL QUICK BECAUSE I THINK IT'S VERY VALID.

OKAY. SO HERE'S I THINK THE ANSWER THAT I, THAT I'VE GOTTEN FROM OUR PRELIMINARY AND I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.

THE CHIEF HAS THE DISCRETION TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION HE WANTS OR DECLINED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION HE WANTS.

BUT AS FAR AS OUR LEGAL LIMITATIONS, WE'RE NOT AT THIS POINT PROSCRIBED FROM ENGAGING IN THAT CONVERSATION BECAUSE IT'S NOT YET AN INITIATIVE.

IT'S WE'RE STILL ON THE LEGISLATING PHASE OF THIS WHERE WE ARE DEBATING WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO SEND THIS FORWARD.

SO, IT'S A PERMISSIBLE QUESTION TO ASK.

HE DOESN'T HAVE TO ANSWER ANYTHING.

HE DOESN'T WANT TO EVER UNLESS THE CITY MANAGER COMPELS HIM TO ANSWER.

HE DOESN'T HAVE TO.

SO THAT'S YOUR ANSWER.

SO IT'S UP TO YOU, CHIEF.

I HAVE TO I HAVE TO BE CREDIBLE TO MY RANK AND FILE.

I HAVE TO BE CREDIBLE TO THIS COMMUNITY.

THE EXAMPLES OF WHAT I READ TO YOU.

AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THIS MAY BE RIGHT.

AND THIS MAY WORK FOR OTHER CITIES THAT DON'T HAVE THE IMPACTS THAT WE HAVE.

BUT IN THE DIRECTION WE'RE GOING.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS IS GOOD FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU. I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

AND JUST A REMINDER. I'M SORRY. I'M JUST NOT HOLDING COUNTING EXTRA TIME.

JUST REMINDER. THIS IS ANY OF THE VOTER BROUGHT FORWARD AMENDMENTS IS WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.

SO ANY OF THEM ARE FAIR GAME FOR YOU TO TALK ABOUT.

YOU CAN GO BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THEM AS YOU LIKE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

SO, CHIEF, I HOW LONG AGO DID YOU MAKE THE GENERAL ORDER SWITCH FOR EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING? BUT FOR TWO OUNCES VERSUS FOUR.

I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT MONTH.

COUNCIL MEMBER. IT'S EARLY IN 2021.

OKAY. AND IN 2021, WAS MARIJUANA STILL ILLEGAL IN TEXAS? YES. SO, WAS TWO OUNCES ILLEGAL? JUST AS MUCH AS FOUR OUNCES? YES. BUT IT WAS STILL A RECOMMENDATION OF YOURS TO CHANGE THE GENERAL ORDERS AND HELP TO SHIFT RESOURCES.

AND IT MADE SENSE IN THE CASE OF TWO OUNCES.

BUT YOU'RE SAYING VERY DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT WITH FOUR OUNCES.

I BELIEVE IT'S VERY DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT.

I'M NOT ASKING YOUR OPINION ON THE DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF WEED.

I'M ASKING ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE IN LEGALITY BECAUSE I THINK YOUR STATEMENT WAS IT'S EITHER AN OATH OR YOU EITHER TAKE THE OATH SERIOUS OR NOT.

[02:40:01]

SO IF TWO OUNCES IS AS ILLEGAL AS FOUR OUNCES, I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE YOUR OPINIONS OF THE DIFFERENT AMOUNTS, BUT WHY WOULD THERE BE A DIFFERENCE IN THAT APPROACH? WELL, WELL, BECAUSE ON ONE WITH THE LESS THAN TWO OUNCES, WE STILL HAD A MYRIAD OF TIMES WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY MAKE AN ARREST.

NUMBER TWO, THAT WAS A BUSINESS DECISION FOR WHAT WE DEEMED PERSONAL USE AT THE TIME, WHERE WE WANTED OUR OFFICERS CONCENTRATING ON VIOLENT CRIME. NOW, WHEN YOU START GOING INTO FOUR OUNCES OR LESS, WE BELIEVE THAT DOES LEAD TO VIOLENT CRIME AS THE EXAMPLES THAT I READ.

AND SO WHEN IT'S SOMETHING THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO US, AND AT THAT TIME, AS YOU KNOW, THAT CONVERSATION WASN'T JUST ONE WAY.

THERE WAS COLLABORATION BETWEEN COUNCIL AND THE DEPARTMENT AT THAT TIME.

BUT WHEN THIS DOES DEAL WITH VIOLENT CRIME, AND WHEN I HEAR FROM RANK AND FILE AND HEAR FROM AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS ON A DAILY, ON A DAILY OR WEEKLY BASIS, THAT IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO NOT BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR US THAT WE FEEL CAN HELP OUR COMMUNITY AND KEEP PEOPLE ALIVE.

TO NOT BE ABLE TO ENFORCE THAT, I BELIEVE, WOULD VIOLATE THE OATH.

I APPRECIATE THAT, SO THAT IT BRINGS UP A GOOD QUESTION I HAVE, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHY WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO THE VOTERS WOULD PROHIBIT YOU FROM CHARGING OR PROSECUTING ANY OF THE CASES THAT YOU MENTIONED TO US TODAY.

WELL, IF YOU READ THE SUBSTANCE OF MARIJUANA IS STILL FEDERALLY ILLEGAL, IN FACT, IT'S ALSO ILLEGAL IN OUR STATE.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE YOUR PROBABLE CAUSE IS BEING TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU, FROM THAT SUBSTANCE BEING PRESENT.

AND IN ALL OF THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU GAVE THAT ATTRIBUTE, OTHER CRIMES TO THE POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA, YOU'RE YOU'RE CONFLATING CAUSATION TO CORRELATION. AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A VERY ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF THE PRESENCE OF MARIJUANA BEING THERE WHEN THESE CRIME EXAMPLES THAT YOU'VE GIVEN, IN FACT, THE CORRELATION VERSUS CAUSATION WAS ACTUALLY WORDS THAT YOU USED THREE YEARS AGO.

AND I WANT TO ALSO REMIND YOU THAT THREE YEARS AGO IS WHEN YOU PUT IN PLACE THE TWO OUNCE GENERAL ORDER CHANGE, AND SINCE THEN WE'VE HAD A CONSISTENT THREE YEARS OF A DECREASE IN VIOLENT CRIME.

SO THE PICTURES THAT ARE PAINTED WITH THESE GRIM STORIES AND A CONFLATION OF CAUSATION TO CORRELATION TO ME, IS MISLEADING IN WHAT THE TRUE DIFFERENCE OF 2OZ TO 4OZ IS.

THE REALITY IS, IS WHAT YOU SHOWED US IN ALL INDIVIDUAL BAGGIES THAT COULD HAVE ONLY BEEN ONE OUNCE, AND THAT STILL WOULD HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENT CHARGE, BECAUSE THERE'S AN INTENT TO SELL TO ATTACH TO THAT.

AND THAT'S ALREADY BEEN SPECIFIED NOT ONLY WITHIN YOUR GENERAL ORDERS, BUT ALSO IN THE PROPOSED BALLOT LANGUAGE.

SO PROBABLE CAUSE IS NOT BEING TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU.

NOTHING IS BEING DONE TO INTENT TO SELL.

ONE OF THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU GAVE US WAS ACTUALLY THE PRESENCE OF MARIJUANA THAT WAS LESS THAN TWO OUNCES, BUT YOU STILL WERE ABLE TO ENFORCE ALL OF THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY THAT YOU MENTIONED.

AND SO I HAVE NOT YET SEEN THE CASE OF ANYTHING THAT YOU'VE BROUGHT UP THAT THIS THE PASSAGE OF THIS FROM THE VOTERS WOULD PROHIBIT YOU FROM BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE TO DO THE GREAT JOB THAT THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT IS DOING, BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN A DECREASE, AS IT WAS MENTIONED, FOR THREE SOLID YEARS. THOSE THREE SOLID YEARS WERE ALSO THE THREE YEARS THAT WE'VE HAD THE LEAST AMOUNT OF CITATIONS OR ARRESTS FOR PERSONAL POSSESSION, BUT THOSE THAT WEREN'T CITED WEREN'T ATTACHED TO OTHER CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, JUST AS YOU INTENDED FOR IT TO BE. SO I BELIEVE IGNORING THE ACTUAL BENEFIT OF SHIFTING AND RESOURCES FROM THOSE CASES THAT WE DIDN'T, BECAUSE DATA SHOWS WE HAVEN'T IN MANY CASES UNLESS THEY ARE ATTACHED TO OTHERS.

BUT NOTHING HAS SHOWN THAT YOU WILL BE PROHIBITED FROM STILL ENFORCING THOSE OTHER LAWS, WHETHER IT'S FOUR OUNCES, TWO OUNCES, ONE OUNCES OR NOT.

COUNCIL MEMBER IF YOU READ THE ONLY TIMES WHERE THERE CAN BE AN ARREST ACCORDING TO THIS IS IF PARTS OF FELONY NARCOTICS INVESTIGATION THAT HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED AS HIGH PRIORITY, WHICH IT WOULD BE AND HAS REVEALED AS PART OF AN INVESTIGATION OF A VIOLENT FELONY.

AS I READ THIS AND THEN THERE'S OTHER ISSUES WHERE DALLAS POLICE HAVE NOT CONSIDERED THE ODOR OF MARIJUANA TO CONSTITUTE PROBABLE CAUSE FOR ANY SEARCH OR SEIZURE, EXCEPT IN LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE POLICE INVESTIGATION.

THAT'S CONTRARY TO CASE LAW.

BUT WHAT I WILL TELL YOU, THAT IS, AS A POLICE OFFICER AND AGAIN, FOR AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN A COP FOR AND LISTENING TO MY RANK AND FILE, THAT I THAT WHEN YOU'RE, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CONFLATING ISSUES OR WHAT HAVE YOU, I LOOK AT WHAT'S THERE AND I MAKE A HYPOTHESIS BASED ON EXPERIENCE AND BASED ON WHAT I SEE OUT IN THE STREET, TO TELL YOU THAT MY OPINION WOULD BE THAT THIS WOULD INCREASE, THIS WOULD

[02:45:03]

THIS WOULD INCREASE THIS CAN INCREASE VIOLENT CRIME.

I DO APPRECIATE YOUR OPINION.

I'M NOT ASKING FOR IT RIGHT NOW THOUGH.

AND YOUR YOUR OPINIONS TO ME ARE JUST THAT THEY'RE OPINIONS.

YOU GAVE OPINIONS BEFORE WHEN WE HEARD THE DIRECTION WE WERE GOING WITH TWO OUNCES.

IN YOUR GENERAL ORDERS WE ACTUALLY HEARD STORIES AND OPINIONS OF YOURS FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE THAT YOU, IN YOUR LONG 25 YEARS AS A POLICE OFFICER, HAVE BEEN AROUND MORE HOMICIDE SCENES THAT INVOLVED ALCOHOL OR OTHER SUBSTANCES THAN MARIJUANA IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AND THAT WAS ACTUALLY THE EXAMPLE YOU USED TO SPEAK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE IN CAUSATION AND CORRELATION.

SO I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US IF WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THE COMMUNITY, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THE RESIDENTS AS MUCH TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION IN NOVEMBER.

IT SHOULDN'T JUST BE BASED ON YOUR OPINION.

THAT SEEMS TO HAVE CHANGED IN THREE YEARS.

IT'S CHANGED WITH THE AMOUNT COUNCIL MEMBER.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. SO I'M GOING TO GO KIND OF MACRO FOR A BIT.

THESE FOUR PROPOSITIONS THAT WERE SUBMITTED, CAN THIS COUNCIL SAY WE'RE NOT PUTTING THEM ON THE BALLOT? NO. THE CITY COUNCIL HAS A MINISTERIAL DUTY TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT FOR THE VOTERS.

OKAY. SO WE HAVE IT'S OUR DUTY TO SAY THANK YOU AND MOVE IT ON TO THE VOTE.

AND IF WE DON'T PUT IT ON THE BALLOT, WHAT HAPPENS OR WHAT COULD HAPPEN? I WOULD EXPECT A LAWSUIT FROM THE PETITIONER.

I'M JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC KNOWS THAT IT IS THAT WE HAD THAT THESE MUST NOW GO TO THE VOTERS, THAT THEY HAVE MET THE THRESHOLD.

OUR CITY SECRETARY HAS CERTIFIED IT, AND VOTING AGAINST IT ACTUALLY PUTS US AT HARM'S WAY OF BEING SUED.

OKAY. THAT'S I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT ON THE FLOOR NOW FOR THE, I GUESS, DALLAS FREEDOM ACT.

OKAY. YOUR PROPS WENT AWAY, BUT YOU THERE IS A BIG DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE TWO AND THE FOUR OUNCES.

AND SO MY QUESTION.

AND YOU, YOU WERE RATTLING OFF A LOT OF STATS.

I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IS WHAT IS USUALLY THAT THRESHOLD OF.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THIS OR CAN HAVE OR, BUT WHEN IT'S RECREATIONAL SOMEBODY JUST HAS A SMALL AMOUNT VERSUS WHEN THERE'S CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

LIKE IS IT REALLY AT THE ONE OUNCE, HALF OUNCE? BECAUSE I MEAN, WHEN I ASKED MY KIDS ABOUT FOUR OUNCES, THEIR DRINK ALMOST WENT ALL OVER THE THEY SPAT IT AT ME BECAUSE THEY SAID, THAT'S A LOT OF WEED, MOM.

AND WHEN YOU SHOWED IT, THAT'S A LOT OF WEED.

AND I DIDN'T. THAT WAS A WHOLE NOTHER CONVERSATION.

BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS ON WHEN IS IT JUST A KID WHO HAS A BLUNT RIGHT, VERSUS SOMEBODY WHO'S GOT REAL INTENTIONS TO DOING HARM? AND IS THAT WHAT WHAT AMOUNT IS THAT? YOU KNOW WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER? I MEAN, TO YOUR POINT, OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HAVING A JOINT YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DID THE, YOU KNOW, THE B CHARGE AS AN EXAMPLE THE LOWER OF THE LOWER THE AMOUNT.

YOU KNOW, THE MORE THAT YOU CAN, YOU CAN MAKE A CASE THAT THAT COULD BE FOR SOMEONE'S PERSONAL USE.

AGAIN. AND I MADE THESE COMMENTS THEN REGARDLESS OF WHERE THIS WENT.

BUT THERE WAS STILL CONCERN.

REGARDING THAT, REGARDLESS THE DIRECTION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WENT THAT THAT WAS A THAT WAS A THAT COULD HAVE BEEN ALSO FOR SALES.

HOWEVER, WHAT I'LL SAY IS THE MORE MARIJUANA, THE MORE OF ANY SUBSTANCE YOU HAVE, THEN IT STARTS BECOMING MORE OF AN ISSUE AND MORE OF A POSSIBLE ISSUE WITH REGARDS, PARTICULARLY WITH THE ILLEGAL SALES.

AND SO NO, I DON'T HAVE A MAGIC NUMBER FOR YOU WITH REGARD TO THE OUNCES.

I'LL JUST TELL YOU, THE MORE OF THE AMOUNT THAT YOU ALLOW TO EITHER BE LEGAL OR NOT HAVE CONSEQUENCES FOR CAN LEAD TO MORE SOCIETAL ISSUES WITH REGARDS TO CRIME.

SO ON YOUR TWO CAN YOU GO OVER I MEAN, DO YOU HAVE THOSE STATS PRETTY I MEAN READILY THEY'RE AVAILABLE BECAUSE IT WAS YOU WERE GOING PRETTY FAST AND I KIND OF STOPPED. WHAT'S YOUR WHAT'S THE FOR WHAT QUESTION? IT WAS LIKE YOU WERE BASICALLY SAYING OF THE 23 ARRESTS, YOU KNOW, I GUESS IT WAS 19 OF THEM ARE OR MURDERS.

WHAT WAS MARIJUANA? BUT DID YOU HAVE THE AMOUNT THAT WAS THAT WAS TIED TO THAT? LIKE WAS IT A SMALL AMOUNT OR WAS IT MORE THAN TWO OUNCES OF THE OF THE EXAMPLES THAT I, THAT I READ WAS, WAS SMALLER AMOUNTS.

THEY WERE SMALL AMOUNTS, YES.

SO SMALLER AMOUNTS BEING ONE OUNCE, TWO OUNCE, 1.5OZ.

THEY'RE DEFINITELY LESS THAN FOUR OUNCES.

OKAY, SO USUALLY SOMEBODY WHO DOES HAVE FOUR OUNCES, THERE IS AN INTENT THERE.

I'M JUST SAYING USUALLY NOT THAT THAT IS BUT THAT IT'S USUALLY NOT.

THAT'S NOT A RECREATIONAL USE.

[02:50:02]

IT'S NOT IN IT'S NOT INDICATIVE OF PERSONAL USE IN.

OKAY. AND THEN OKAY.

ON THE HEROES, I THINK WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO PUT 4000 OFFICERS.

CAN Y'ALL HANDLE TRAINING 4000 AND GETTING THEM ON THE STREET IN A TIME FRAME? SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE STARTED HAVING THE DISCUSSIONS WITH REGARDS TO 250 OFFICERS, WHAT HAVE YOU RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, 250 OFFICERS IS ABOUT BETWEEN 250 TO 300 OFFICERS IS REALLY WHAT WE CAN ABSORB INTO THE AS A QUALITY CONTROL POOL, RIGHT.

BECAUSE YOU WANT TO I MEAN 18 MONTHS OF TRAINING AND MAKING SURE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GETTING INTO WHAT THE LAWS ARE.

I MEAN, YOU DON'T WANT TO JUST PUT SOMEBODY OUT THERE WITH A GUN AND SAY, GOOD LUCK.

NO, NO, WE CAN'T. WE COULDN'T ABSORB 900 OFFICERS IN ONE YEAR.

I ACADEMY SPACE TRAINERS, RECRUITERS.

WELL, CARS TOO, RIGHT? YOU GOT TO HAVE THE EQUIPMENT, CARS, SUPERVISION.

THAT THAT THAT IS A THAT'S A HEAVY LOAD NOW OVER TIME.

THAT'S A DIFFERENT QUESTION.

BUT OBVIOUSLY IN ONE YEAR, 900 WOULD BE A LOT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR US TO ABSORB IN A YEAR.

OKAY. THAT'S IT, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, MISS WILLIS.

BRINGING US FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. SO WE'RE COVERING ALL OF THE FOUR IN THIS.

OKAY. WELL YOU KNOW, WHAT'S UNFORTUNATE IS THAT EVEN THOUGH THIS IS ALLOWABLE TO GO ABOUT GETTING SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT THIS WAY, WE HAD A PROCESS.

AND THAT'S WHERE THESE DIFFERENT IDEAS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORTH BY COUNCIL MEMBERS, RESIDENTS, ETC., HAVE BEEN EXPLORED AND REFINED AND HONED.

AND NOW WE'RE KIND OF IN THE LIGHTNING ROUND AROUND THAT WHERE WE'RE EXPLORING THESE IDEAS.

YET WE REALLY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO SEE THESE ON A BALLOT.

SO I GUESS THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY LEST THE RECORD SHOW, YOU KNOW, WE VOTED FOR THIS, WHAT COULD SOME HESITATION BE AROUND THEM? AND I THINK THERE THERE ARE MANY.

AND THANK YOU, CHIEF, FOR BRINGING THE SHOW AND TELL TO GIVE US SOME PERSPECTIVE ON THE TWO OUNCE VERSUS FOUR OUNCE MEASURE, AS WELL AS DETAILING THE THE CRIME ASSOCIATED WITH WHAT MAY SEEM HARMLESS.

I THINK THERE WAS A DECISION MADE A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AROUND TWO OUNCES, AND THAT WAS A PROGRESSIVE DECISION THAT WAS RESPONSIVE.

YOU'RE LISTENING TO THE RANK AND FILE.

WE'RE LISTENING TO OUR RESIDENTS.

HOWEVER, MOVING TO FOUR OUNCES JUST FEELS LIKE YOU'RE CROSSING INTO THE SELLING ZONE AND CREATING A CLASS OF DRUG DEALING.

I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THIS IS TIED INTO WEAPONS, OTHER DRUGS, OTHER ACTIVITY.

I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT YOU DETAILED FOR US.

AND SO I'M I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

AND I DON'T LOVE THAT THAT IS GETTING RAMRODDED ONTO THE BALLOT.

BUT ON SOME OF THESE OTHERS WITH REGARD TO AND THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON FOR TOUCHING ON SOME OF THE ISSUES AROUND HOW IF YOU WERE TO RAMP UP THIS FAST, WHERE DO YOU GET THE FLEET, WHERE DO YOU GET THE TRAINERS? WHERE DO YOU GET ALL OF THIS? YOU KNOW, THAT ONE JUST REALLY FLIES ALL OVER ME BECAUSE YOU DON'T ORDER DALLAS POLICE OFFICERS OFF OF AMAZON.

RETIRED ASSISTANT POLICE CHIEF DAVID ELLISTON STOOD RIGHT HERE, AND HE SAID THEY ARE NOT ORDINARY PEOPLE.

AND LOOK AT OUR CRIME STATISTICS.

WE ARE A LEADER IN THIS COUNTRY.

AND I'D HATE FOR TO SEE US GO BACK ON THAT.

YOU KNOW, IT ALSO DIMINISHES THE CREATIVE INITIATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN WORKED ON OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS THAT ARE WORKING IN TERMS OF RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT.

THE GEARS ARE STARTING TO LOCK.

WE'RE SEEING IT. I THINK THAT GOING ABOUT IT THIS WAY REALLY DEVALUES OUR POLICE OFFICERS.

I MEAN, WHEN I LOOK AT WE TALK ABOUT IN PUBLIC SAFETY MEETINGS, THE BATTERY OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS AND PHYSICAL TESTS THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO JUST EVEN BE ABLE TO WALK INTO OUR POLICE ACADEMY.

I MEAN, YOU DON'T JUST GO PICK THAT UP OFF THE STREET TEN MONTHS, THEY GET TASED.

THEY GET PEPPER SPRAYED.

THEY HAVE TO LEARN THE INTRICACIES OF LAW.

THEY HAVE TO LEARN HOW TO WORK WITH PEOPLE.

THEY SOME DON'T MAKE IT.

I MEAN, WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO DROP OUT BECAUSE IT IS THAT RIGOROUS AND THAT TOUGH.

AND THEN YOU GO INTO 18 MONTHS IN THE FIELD YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, IN TALKING WITH THE ASSOCIATIONS HOW MUCH THEY WERE EVEN INVOLVED IN THIS, WE'VE GOT TO MEET AND CONFER SITUATION THAT THAT SEEMS TO BE WORKING.

WE HAVE A CONTRACT. I MEAN, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE WORKING AND MOVING THE RIGHT DIRECTION IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.

YOU KNOW, I'M REALLY CONCERNED BY THE REMARKS I HEARD AT THE LECTERN ABOUT EQUATING THE BEST POLICE OFFICERS TO MONEY, TO MONEY.

I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD GET TO THIS VOLUME WITHOUT RELAXING STANDARDS.

AND I'VE HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANYONE AROUND HERE WHO WOULD SAY THEY WANT TO RELAX THE STANDARDS OF ENTRY INTO THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT.

I SURE DON'T HEAR THAT FROM ANYONE.

AND SO THIS IS JUST REALLY CONCERNING TO ME.

AND, YOU KNOW, AND THIS DOESN'T EVEN BRING UP FIRE.

I MEAN, WHERE ARE THEY IN ALL OF THIS? SO I JUST IT'S FRUSTRATING.

[02:55:01]

BUT I HOPE THAT OUR RESIDENTS AND IT'S INCUMBENT ON US, ON OUR OWN TIME TO BE ABLE TO SHARE WITH THEM WHAT YOU'VE SHARED TODAY.

AND THEN ALSO JUST THAT, WHILE IT MAY LOOK GOOD ON PAPER, IT MAY NOT MANIFEST ITSELF IN THE BEST POLICE FORCE IN THE COUNTRY.

ON THE STREETS, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE PRIORITIES OF EXCESS REVENUE, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT ONE.

IT'S IT ASSUMES THAT THE PRIORITIES THAT WOULD BE PUT INTO THIS SURVEY ARE EVERYONE'S PRIORITIES.

AND SO, I GUESS THIS IS SOMETHING THAT VOTERS CAN DETERMINE AT THE BALLOT BOX.

BUT TO JUST SELF-DETERMINE THOSE AND DOESN'T SEEM VERY RESPONSIVE TO THE RESIDENTS IN THE CITY AS A WHOLE.

I THINK ON THE COMMUNITY SURVEY IN THE CITY MANAGER.

AGAIN, A GROUP IS PREDETERMINING THE CITY'S PRIORITIES WHEN IT COMES TO A CITY MANAGER.

THERE'S SO MUCH MORE THAN A SURVEY, WOULD YOU SAY? I THINK WE ALL WOULD.

I MEAN, WHAT KIND OF CULTURE DO YOU CREATE AT CITY HALL FOR 15,000 EMPLOYEES, WHERE THEY WANT TO SHOW UP TO WORK EVERY DAY FOR OUR RESIDENTS WITH A GOOD ATTITUDE, HOW DO YOU RETAIN YOUR KEY LEADERSHIP? THAT'S SOMETHING A CITY MANAGER DOES THAT DOES NOT SHOW UP ON A SURVEY.

YOU KNOW, HOW ARE YOU WORKING IN CRISIS RESPONSE? HOW DO YOU PROACTIVELY COMMUNICATE WITH A CITY COUNCIL? HOW DO YOU DESIGN A BUDGET? THE LIST IS ENDLESS, AND IT JUST DOESN'T SHOW UP ON A SURVEY.

AND SO I HAVE MY CONCERNS AROUND THAT ONE AS WELL.

I'LL COME BACK. MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

I'D LIKE TO ADD A FOOTNOTE TO WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS JUST MENTIONED.

AND THAT IS WE ARE CURRENTLY IN THE SEARCH FOR A NEW CITY MANAGER.

I WONDER HOW MANY CANDIDATES WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THIS JOB IF THEY KNEW THAT THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE A GUN TO THEIR HEAD, BASED UPON AN ANONYMOUS CITY SURVEY, THAT THEY MIGHT BE TERMINATED AT THE DROP OF A HAT.

I JUST RAISED THAT FOR A RHETORICAL QUESTION.

BUT, CHIEF, I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU A QUESTION OR TWO ABOUT THE MEET AND CONFER.

THE MEET AND CONFER. THE CURRENT ONE CURRENTLY HAS A PROVISION THAT THE CITY WILL INCREASE BASE SALARIES FOR OFFICERS.

ACCORDING TO A SURVEY OF OTHER CITIES IN THE NORTH TEXAS AREA, IS THAT CORRECT? COUNCIL MEMBER I'M NOT GOING TO PRETEND TO KNOW ALL THE INS AND OUTS OF IT, BUT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

YES. AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE RAISE THAT WILL RESULT FROM THAT PROVISION FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR FOR OUR OFFICERS WILL BE A 7.2% RAISE TO KEEP THEM COMPARABLE WITH THOSE OTHER JURISDICTIONS.

THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, SIR.

AND IS THAT ALSO ONE OF YOUR PERSONAL OBJECTIVES TO OFFER SALARIES FOR OUR OFFICERS THAT ARE COMPARABLE TO OTHER JURISDICTIONS SO THAT WE AREN'T HAMPERING OUR EFFORTS TO HIRE TO MEET OUR NEEDS? ABSOLUTELY COUNCIL MEMBER.

OKAY. MR. IRELAND, I'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

UNLESS THE CITY MANAGER WOULD PREFER TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS ABOUT BUDGET PRIORITIES.

MR. IRELAND CAN COME OUT, AND I CAN DEFINITELY JUMP IN AND SUPPORT HIM AS WELL.

YES. VERY GOOD. HE WAS JUST WAITING FOR YOU TO CALL HIS NAME, I THOUGHT SO.

SO, MR. IRELAND, THERE ARE MANY DEMANDS UPON CITY REVENUES FOR MAINTAINING CITY INFRASTRUCTURE, FOR MAINTAINING OUR STREETS AND ROADS, FOR MAINTAINING OUR HUNDREDS OF CITY BUILDINGS, FOR PAYING OUR EMPLOYEES A COMPETITIVE SALARY FOR STAFFING OUR LIBRARIES AND KEEPING THEM OPEN THE HOURS THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS DEMAND FOR PROVIDING AT LEAST A MINIMUM LEVEL OF SOCIAL SERVICES FOR OUR RESIDENTS WHO ARE LESS WELL OFF THAN OTHERS FOR KEEPING OUR PARKS OPEN AND WELL MAINTAINED.

I COULD GO ON AND ON WITH THE LIST, BUT WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THE COSTS OF PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES IS SOMEWHAT DETERMINED BY THE POPULATION THAT WE MUST SERVE IN THE CITY.

YES, SIR. I WOULD AGREE THAT POPULATION IS A FACTOR AS WELL AS INFLATION AND OTHER THINGS, BUT POPULATION DOES DRIVE A LOT OF OUR COST.

AND I KNOW YOUR DEPARTMENT HAS DONE VARIOUS PROJECTIONS OF POPULATION ANTICIPATED IN COMING YEARS.

AND IS THE GENERAL TREND UPWARD IN TERMS OF EXPECTED POPULATION GROWTH? MY OFFICE HAS NOT DIRECTLY DONE THAT, BUT YES, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PROJECTION IS TO GROW, TO CONTINUE TO GROW.

ALL RIGHT. AND YOU MUST PREPARE YOUR BUDGET FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR BASED UPON THOSE KINDS OF ACTUARIAL PROJECTIONS.

[03:00:09]

SO WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT THIS THIRD DALLAS HERO PROPOSITION WOULD PLACE A STRAITJACKET ON YOUR ABILITY TO CRAFT A BUDGET? IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CITY MANAGER? OF COURSE, THAT MEETS THE CITY'S GROWING NEEDS IN ALL AREAS, NOT JUST IN POLICING.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT ANYTHING THAT'S WRITTEN IN THE WAY THIS IS IS RESTRICTIVE.

FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE ALREADY A RESTRICTION OR A LIMIT ON OUR REVENUE GROWTH FROM PROPERTY TAX FOR REAPPRAISAL.

THAT'S ALREADY A LIMIT THAT WE HAVE.

THIS PROPOSAL, I BELIEVE, WOULD FURTHER RESTRICT HOW WE CAN USE OUR REVENUE.

IT TAKES AWAY THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE MANAGER AND LOOKING AT THE NEEDS OF THE CITY.

IT TAKES AWAY THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE COUNCIL TO LOOK AT THE PRIORITIES IT DICTATES TO YOU HOW YOU SPEND AND ALLOCATE THE RESOURCES.

SO ANY INCREASE IN REVENUE AS DEFINED IN THIS REFERENDUM THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, RESULTS FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS THAT ARE TAXED ON THE INCREASED VALUE WOULD ALL HAVE TO BE DEVOTED TO THESE PUBLIC SAFETY INITIATIVES.

THEY COULD NOT BE USED FOR IMPROVING ROADS, FOR EXAMPLE, TO SERVE THE NEW CONSTRUCTION OR TO SERVE THE GROWING NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY OUTSIDE OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

THIS WOULDN'T BE AVAILABLE, WOULD THEY? MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE REFERENDUM IS THAT IT DOES REQUIRE THE YEAR OVER YEAR GROWTH IN REVENUE TO BE USED.

I BELIEVE IT WAS 50% FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.

SO, IT DOES AN ALL DEDICATE IT TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

BUT IT LIMITS OUR ABILITIES.

WELL, ACTUALLY THAT'S NOT QUITE TRUE.

50% OF THE EXCESS AMOUNTS WOULD GO TO FUND THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM, AND THE OTHER REMAINDER WOULD BE APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATED TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY OBJECTIVES DESCRIBED, SUCH AS INCREASING THE STAFFING TO 4000 AND INCREASING THE SALARIES.

SO 100% OF THAT INCREASE WOULD GO FOR PUBLIC SAFETY INITIATIVES, WOULD IT NOT? IF THAT IS THE READ THAT I'M EVEN MORE CONCERNED.

YES. AND I'M INCLUDING, OF COURSE, THE PENSION FOR POLICE OFFICERS AS PART OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY WORLDVIEW.

SO IT WOULD BE 100% NOW.

THE DEFINITION OF REVENUE IS EXTREMELY INCLUSIVE.

THAT'S IN SUB POINT E, AND IT INCLUDES SUCH THINGS AS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS.

NOW, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS ARE A 100% PASS THROUGH FOR THE CITY.

ISN'T THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.

THAT'S CORRECT. THE CITY COLLECTS THE MONEY, BUT THEN PAYS IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS FOR THEM TO SPEND THAT MONEY.

SO, THERE'S NO NET GAIN.

THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE YOUR TIME TO FINISH THAT THOUGHT.

BUT YOU HAVE TWO MORE ROUNDS.

OF COURSE, JUST KNOW THAT YOU'RE AT THE END OF YOUR TIME.

SO IF THERE'S NO NET GAIN TO THE CITY IN THAT, BUT THAT TOTAL AMOUNT OF TAX REVENUE IS COUNTED AS REVENUE, ANY INCREASE OF WHICH WOULD HAVE TO BE DEVOTED TO PUBLIC SAFETY, WE'RE ACTUALLY REDUCING THE CITY'S REVENUE BY THAT AMOUNT, AREN'T WE? THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.

AND THE WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE REFERENDUM, THE LIST OF THE DIFFERENT REVENUES.

SOME OF THOSE WOULD BE RESTRICTED FOR COVENANTS FOR DEBT AT THE CONVENTION CENTER ARE FOR THE WATER UTILITY AND DIFFERENT THINGS.

AND SO, THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS IN THE REFERENDUM.

YES, SIR. THANK YOU.

WE'LL COME BACK IF YOU NEED MORE TIME.

MISS STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I WANT TO GET BACK TO WHETHER THE DIFFERENCE OF TWO OUNCES OR 4OZ MAKES A DIFFERENCE OF MARIJUANA.

SORRY, TWO OUNCES OR FOUR OUNCES OF WHAT KATHY? I HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC INTERSECTION AND NEIGHBORHOOD IN D10 THAT SUFFERS FROM DIME BAG SALES.

IT SUFFERS FROM DRUG SALES TREMENDOUSLY.

FOREST AND AUDELIA, I HAVE WORKED THAT AREA SINCE PROBABLY 2015.

I'VE WATCHED IT COUNTLESS TIMES, JUST THE CASUAL NATURE OF THE SALES GOING ON.

FROM A STRIP CENTER TO A GAS STATION TO A DART BUS STOP TO A SHOPPING CENTER, IT JUST TRAVELS ALL AROUND THERE.

[03:05:01]

AND IT'S VERY WELL-KNOWN AND VERY WELL DOCUMENTED.

BUT IF WE WERE TO INCREASE THIS AMOUNT UP TO FOUR OUNCES, I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THAT THE AMOUNT OF THE DRUG SALES WOULD INCREASE DRAMATICALLY BECAUSE OF JUST A DIFFERENT ACCESS AND POTENTIALLY REPERCUSSIONS.

AND I, I, I KNOW SALES IS ILLEGAL WHETHER IT'S 2OZ OR 4OZ.

BUT IF YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH THE FOUR OUNCES AND SELL WHAT YOU, YOU KNOW, HELD UP IN A BAG, I MEAN, THAT WILL JUST INCREASE THE CRIME THAT'S HAPPENING BECAUSE THIS GOES TO THE I'M SORRY, I'M KIND OF ALL OVER THE PLACE ON THIS, BUT IT GOES TO THE CORRELATION CAUSATION ISSUE AS WELL.

CRIME IS NOT GOOD AT THAT INTERSECTION.

THERE ARE IN THE PAST THERE HAVE BEEN SOME TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE MURDERS.

THERE WAS A NINTH GRADER WHO WAS KILLED AT THAT INTERSECTION NOT LONG AFTER I BECAME A PID DIRECTOR, AND IT WAS RELATED TO DRUG SALES.

SO IF WHETHER WE CALL IT CORRELATION OR CAUSATION, I DO BELIEVE AND DO AGREE THAT THE MORE OF THOSE DIME BAGS THAT GET SOLD AT FORREST AND AUDELIA, THE GREATER CRIME WILL HAPPEN THERE.

IT'S I MEAN, I'VE WATCHED I'VE LOOKED AT CRIME STATS, I'VE STUDIED CRIME STATS FOR THAT CORRIDOR FOR SO LONG AND IT'S THERE'S SO THEY'RE RELATED.

IT'S DRUG. THERE'S ALMOST ALWAYS A DRUG ELEMENT IN THERE.

SO I JUST I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT POINT THAT I DO BELIEVE THAT MORE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY CHALLENGING FOR THE AREAS, THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE SUFFERING AND I MEAN, SUFFERING FROM THESE SALES AND THE CRIME THAT IS WRAPPED UP AND RELATED TO THE TO THE DRUG SALES.

SO THANK YOU, MISS ARNOLD.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. SIR.

MAYOR, I'M GOING TO BE QUICK AS WELL.

I THINK WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING TODAY ABOUT CAUSATION OR CORRELATION, IT COMES DOWN TO EDUCATION.

WE'VE GOT TO DO A BETTER WE MUST DO A BETTER JOB AROUND EDUCATING OUR PUBLIC, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES THEY GET CAUGHT UP IN THE EMOTION. THAT'S RIGHT.

LIKE RIGHT, FOR EXAMPLE, RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, SOME FOLKS USE THE SOCIAL MEDIA FACEBOOK TO GET THEIR EDUCATION ON HOW CITY GOVERNMENT WORKS.

AND SO I'LL SPEAK, I THINK, MAYOR, YOU SAID WE COULD PRETTY MUCH SPEAK ON ALL ANY OF THOSE PROPOSALS JUST TO GO AROUND QUICKLY.

YEAH. THE VOTER SUBMITTED ONE.

YES. EDUCATION GOES AROUND UNDERSTANDING, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT A CITY CHARTER IS, THE FUNCTION OF A CITY CHARTER.

SO BECAUSE RIGHT NOW I'VE NEVER SEEN AND PROBABLY I'VE ONLY PAID ATTENTION REALLY CLOSE TO ONE TERM OF CHARTER REFORM.

BUT NOW EVERYONE IS COMING UP WITH ALL THESE WILD IDEAS AS TO WHAT THEY CAN PUT IN A CHARTER.

A CHARTER HAS A PARTICULAR FUNCTION AND THAT IS PART OF THE EDUCATION.

EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE A CITY MANAGER UNTIL THEY GET THE JOB.

CITY MANAGER HAS A DESIGNATED FUNCTION IN THE CHARTER.

WE CAN'T HAVE 15 CITY MANAGERS.

WE CAN'T HAVE 12 MANAGERS PER COUNCIL DISTRICT.

IT'S ONLY ONE.

AND IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF BEING ABLE TO EVALUATE A CITY MANAGER BASED ON POPULAR FEELING IS DANGEROUS.

I HAVE SEEN A CITY MANAGER REPUTATION DECIMATED ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

THESE ARE FOLKS ON THE OUTSIDE.

THEY DON'T EVEN WORK HERE ON A DAY TO DAY.

I'M LIKE, WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THAT CITY MANAGER? THIS IS WHEN I FIRST CAME IN 2015.

IT WAS JUST WILD.

SO NOW IF I WAS A QUALIFIED, BONA FIDE CERTIFIED PROFESSIONAL CITY MANAGER WITH CREDENTIALS, I WOULDN'T COME TO DALLAS, TEXAS.

BASED ON WHAT I'M LOOKING AT, THE HEADLINES, I'M NOT GOING TO UPROOT MY FAMILY TO COME HERE TO BE SUBJECTED TO THIS.

IF I'M LOOKING AT AS A AS A CHIEF OF POLICE AND TRUST ME, I'M NOT TRYING TO WIN BROWNIE POINTS.

BUT I'VE WATCHED ENOUGH OF MARTIN TO KNOW WE DON'T WANT JEROME, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET IF YOU TRY TO PUSH THROUGH A THOUSAND OFFICERS, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE TRAINING, QUALIFIED QUALITY TRAINING.

THIS IS WHAT WE'RE PUSHING FOR A NEW TRAINING CENTER AT UNT.

I WENT TO THE TRAINING CENTER AT REDBIRD.

MY HEART ACHED DURING THAT TOUR.

SO, I SUPPORTED THAT TRAINING FACILITY BECAUSE TIMES ARE CHANGING.

THE FOLKS ON THE OTHER SIDE WHO WAKE UP EVERY MORNING TO MAKE OUR LIVES MISERABLE, THEY'RE ALL INTO AI, II, AND WHAT I'M GOING TO DO TODAY TO

[03:10:07]

TRAUMATIZE THE CITY OF DALLAS.

WE'VE GOT TO BE READY.

WE'VE GOT TO TRAIN THE YOUNG FOLKS WHO ARE COMING THROUGH LAW ENFORCEMENT.

I USED TO YOU ALL KNOW I USED TO TEACH AT TOWNVIEW LAW ENFORCEMENT MAGNET.

WE NEED TO EDUCATE THOSE STUDENTS.

THEY SHOULD HAVE ALREADY STARTED GETTING TRAINING ON TECHNOLOGY.

TECHNOLOGY AND HOW IT AFFECTS AND ALLOWS IMPROVES THE CRIMINAL'S OPPORTUNITY TO TRAUMATIZE US.

WE'VE GOT I DON'T WANT ANY BOOTLEG POLICE OFFICERS.

SO WE'VE GOT TO HAVE THE CARS.

WE'VE GOT TO HAVE THE DRONES.

WE'VE GOT TO HAVE THE EQUIPMENT IT COSTS.

SO, WE DON'T NEED JEROME IN DALLAS.

THEN WE GET TO THIS TOPIC OF MARIJUANA YEARS AGO AND MR. MORENO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE OF MY FAVORITE COUNCIL MEMBERS.

YOU KNOW, IT USED TO BE YOU DON'T DIDN'T KNOW WHAT A DIME BAG WAS.

THEY CALLED YOU SQUARE. YOU'LL LEARN THAT WORD WHEN WE TALK LATER ON.

BUT YOU WERE A SQUARE.

SERIOUSLY, THOUGH, I'M SITTING HERE BECAUSE I'M ONE OF THOSE SQUARES.

I WAS TRYING TO READ ON WHAT TWO OUNCES OF MARIJUANA MAY COST.

SO BETWEEN ABOUT TWO 1 TO 4OZ, YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND PROBABLY ABOUT 3 TO $400 ON 1 TO 4OZ OF WEED.

DOES THAT SOUND ABOUT RIGHT, CHIEF? DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THAT? I'M THAT.

I CAN'T GOT THAT OFF THE INTERNET JUST A WHILE AGO.

DOES THAT SOUND ABOUT RIGHT? PEOPLE WILLING TO KILL EACH OTHER? THAT DOES SOUND ABOUT RIGHT. BUT I HAVE MY NARCOTICS EXPERT HERE.

OKAY, THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT, COME ON.

ALL RIGHT. FOR A GOOD STUFF.

THERE IS GOOD STUFF.

AND THERE IS. YEAH, I WAS READING THAT.

SO, WHILE THE COUNT WHILE HE'S COMING UP, I STARTED READING THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY SUBSTITUTE.

IS IT TIME, YOU KNOW, DO WE COOK WITH THAT AT THANKSGIVING.

SOMETIMES IT CAN BE USED IN PLACE OF MARIJUANA.

DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? TIME. SO, TWO THINGS.

YES. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE COST.

AND THEN WE TALK ABOUT THE SUBSTITUTES FOR MARIJUANA THE LOOK ALIKES.

SO TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION, THE AVERAGE COST OF MARIJUANA HAS GONE UP OVER THE YEARS.

MOST PEOPLE THESE DAYS ARE SMOKING WHAT IS KNOWN AS KUSH.

SO, AN OUNCE IS GOING TO GO FOR ANYWHERE FROM 100 TO $150, DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU'RE BUYING IT, WHO YOU'RE GETTING IT FROM.

RIGHT. AND THE QUALITY RIGHT.

I SAW IT VARIED BY STATES.

I WAS LOOKING AT THAT AS WELL.

SO I SAW THAT SOME STATES PRICES ARE HIGHER.

THAT'S AMAZING TO ME.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE DEALING WITH DIFFERENT SOIL OR WHAT, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT CHANGES PER STATE.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS WHEN YOU GET TO 404OZ AND UP, THE PRICE GOES UP.

AND SO FOLKS ARE WILLING TO KILL YOU AT A FASTER RATE, BECAUSE IF THEY LOOK AT THAT BAG AND THIS IS WHAT I GET OFF TELEVISION, IF THEY LOOK AT IT AND IT LOOKS OFF, YOU HAVE A PROBLEM. SOME OF THEM HAVE THE ABILITY TO SMELL WHEN THEY OPEN THE BAG, AM I RIGHT? YOU HAVE TO WRAP IT UP. OKAY I'M GOING TO WRAP IT UP.

YOU HAVE TWO MORE ROUNDS IF YOU NEED THEM.

THE BY SMELL.

THEY KNOW THAT IF IT DOESN'T SMELL RIGHT, IT'S A POSSIBILITY YOU COULD LOSE YOUR LIFE.

DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? YES, MA'AM.

ALL RIGHT, SO I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS IT.

THAT WAS THE LAST THAT WAS IT FOR THIS.

FOR THIS ROUND? YES. THANK YOU SO VERY.

YOU GOT IT OUT.

AND NOW YOU HAVE TO SAVE THE REST FOR ANOTHER ROUND.

I APPRECIATE IF YOU WANT IT, MR. WEST. YOU READY FOR FIVE MINUTES? I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO FOLLOW THAT.

THAT WAS. IT WAS AMAZING.

YEAH. SO.

OKAY FIRST OF ALL, I FULLY SUPPORT THE PETITION PROCESS.

THE VOTER-INITIATED PETITION PROCESS.

GENERALLY, I THINK IT'S DEMOCRACY IN ACTION 101, AND I WANT TO SEE IT CONTINUE.

I THINK THE GOALS BEHIND THESE FOUR BALLOT INITIATIVES ARE NOBLE.

THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, BETTER ACCOUNTABILITY IN GOVERNMENT, MORE RESOURCES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, LESS DRAIN ON OUR PUBLIC SAFETY RESOURCES.

BUT THE REALITY IS, SOMETIMES THEY MAY SOUND GOOD ON PAPER, AND THEN IN REALITY IT'S NOT FEASIBLE OR IT HARMS OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.

SO I'M GOING TO START WITH MY QUESTIONS WITH THE CITY MANAGER OR POSSIBLY WITH MR. IRELAND. IF YOU WANT TO JUST COMMENT GENERALLY, AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE BUDGET AND MOST OF MY QUESTIONS WERE ASKED BY MR. RIDLEY ON THESE.

SO THANK YOU. BUT THE JUST GENERALLY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN FOR THE CITY FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE IN TERMS OF HOW RESOURCES WOULD HAVE TO BE SHIFTED IF THESE HERO INITIATIVES WERE PASSED.

AND I'M GOING TO ASK A SIMILAR QUESTION TO THE CHIEF, BECAUSE I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER, THE CHIEF, HAVE BEEN WORKING HAND IN HAND ON INCREASING MORALE, WHICH WE'RE SEEING RETENTION OF OFFICERS AND RECRUITMENT, WHICH WE'RE SEEING.

SO WHAT'S HAPPENING IS WORKING.

AND OUR VIOLENT CRIME REDUCTION, THANKS TO THE CHIEF AND HIS TEAM IS WORKING.

SO HOW COULD THIS IMPACT OUR SUCCESS.

AND SO THAT'S A QUESTION FOR BOTH.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

COUNCIL MEMBER WEST FOR THE QUESTION.

AND I'LL TALK ABOUT IT FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE.

AND I'LL LET THE CHIEF DEFINITELY TALK ABOUT IT FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE.

AS THE LEADER OF THE DEPARTMENT, WE KNOW THAT THE ADDITION OF 900 OFFICERS FROM A BUDGETARY IMPACT IS ABOUT 175 MILLION, AND THAT'S

[03:15:08]

FULLY LOADED. THAT INCLUDES ALL OF THE NECESSARY, I WOULD SAY, SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT, PENSION, BENEFITS THAT WOULD BE NEEDED FOR THOSE NEW POSITIONS. BUT LET ME JUST PAUSE AND SAY THAT IN OUR UPCOMING BUDGET THAT YOU WILL RECEIVE ON FRIDAY WE HAVE FUNDED FOR OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS AN ADDITIONAL OF AN ADDITION OF 500 OFFICERS, 250 OFFICERS AND 25 AND ANOTHER 250 OFFICERS AND 26.

IF YOU JUST LOOK AT ONE YEAR, THAT'S ABOUT $30.5 MILLION JUST TO BE ABLE TO ADD THOSE ADDITIONAL OFFICERS IN THE UPCOMING YEAR ONE AND THEN YEAR TWO, ANOTHER 30 ROUGHLY, IT'LL GO UP JUST BECAUSE OF NATURAL INFLATION.

SO OVERALL YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT DRASTIC, VERY EXTREME CUTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND THAT'S NOT JUST FROM A DAY TO DAY, BUT THAT'S A DRASTIC CUT IN EVERY SINGLE SERVICE THAT WE PROVIDE AT THE CITY IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO ASSUME THAT ADDITIONAL NUMBER WITHOUT GIVING US AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING NOW TO BUILD UP TO THAT NUMBER IN THE FUTURE.

AND I'LL SAY THIS ON RECORD, ANY POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT IS WORKING THROUGH RIGHT NOW, STAFFING CHALLENGES, WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MORE.

AND THAT ALSO INCLUDES US IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.

WE ARE COMMITTED TO THE RECRUITMENT GOALS THAT WE HAVE SET.

I KNOW THAT THE CHIEF AND HIS TEAM ARE WORKING AGGRESSIVELY TO ENSURE THAT WE MEET THOSE GOALS.

HOWEVER, WE ALSO HAVE OTHER PARTS OF OUR CITY THAT WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SERVICES.

AND WHILE WE'RE USING THE STRATEGIES AND THE TOOLS AND THE INCENTIVES AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING, WE DO BELIEVE THAT WE'RE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

AND AS YOU'VE ALREADY STATED, THAT THERE IS PROGRESS BEING MADE AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO STAY FOCUSED ON THAT PROGRESS.

SO, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION.

AND I'LL LET THE CHIEF TALK ABOUT IT FROM AN OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT AS IT RELATES TO THE DEPARTMENT.

WELL, THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER. YOU KNOW, FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE IN THE DEPARTMENT, OBVIOUSLY, LISTEN, AND I'LL SAY THIS, I CAN'T TURN A BLIND EYE FOR THE TREMENDOUS SUPPORT THAT WE GET FROM OUR COMMUNITY AND THE SUPPORT THAT WE GET FROM COUNCIL IS AMAZING TO HEAR THAT, THAT THE CITY AND COUNCIL ARE SUPPORTIVE OF GROWING THIS POLICE DEPARTMENT. THAT IS NOT AN ARGUMENT THAT I'VE EVER HAD TO MAKE TO ANY OF YOU.

HAVING SAID THAT, AGAIN, WHEN IT COMES TO HIRING 900 OFFICERS AND ONE FELL SWOOP, THAT DOES COME WITH SEVERAL ADMINISTRATIVE CHALLENGES FOR US IN ONE YEAR.

YOU KNOW, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT RECRUITING, RECRUITING IS ONE PART OF THIS.

BUT JUST AS IMPORTANT, IF NOT JUST NOT EVEN MORE IMPORTANT IS RETENTION.

BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE COST, BUT IF WE WERE TO KEEP, IF WE WERE TO GET OUR HIRING GOALS OF 250 OFFICERS A YEAR, WHICH AGAIN, THIS WILL BE, HOPEFULLY WE GET THERE THIS YEAR WITH THE ATTRITION THAT WE HAVE, WHICH IS ROUGHLY AROUND 190 OFFICERS THAT LEAVE OR RETIRE EVERY YEAR, WE WOULDN'T GET TO 4000 OFFICERS FOR 15 YEARS, EVEN AT THE CURRENT AT THE CURRENT RATE THAT WE'RE AT.

AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT, TO ME, THE 250 THAT WE TALK ABOUT IS SOMETHING FEASIBLE RIGHT NOW WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT 200.

IF WE GET TO 300, THAT'D BE GREAT.

BUT MORE THAN THAT BECOMES ISSUES WITH THE STAFFING THAT WE HAVE THAT WE'D BE ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL WITH REGARDS TO TRAINING AND REGARDS TO BEING FTOS AND THE SUPERVISION. SO, WE REALLY DO NEED TO CONCENTRATE ALMOST A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THAT RETENTION PIECE.

WE HAVE TO BRING THAT 190 NUMBER DOWN.

BECAUSE AGAIN WE TALK ABOUT HOW HAVING RECRUITS IN THE ACADEMY, IF I HAD 250 RECRUITS IN THE ACADEMY, IT SOUNDS GREAT AT FIRST.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO RECOGNIZE THEIR EFFICIENCY FOR A YEAR AND A HALF, OVER A YEAR AND A HALF.

AND SO, AGAIN, 50 POLICE OFFICERS IN THE ACADEMY, WHICH I LOVE.

AND I LOVE EVERY GRADUATION THAT I GO TO HARD TO COMPARE TO 50 TENURED SENIOR OFFICERS THAT WALK OUT THAT DOOR BECAUSE IT TAKES TIME TO TRAIN.

IT TAKES TIME TO GAIN THE EXPERIENCE AND THE INSIGHT THAT IS SO DESPERATELY NEEDED IN SUCH A LARGE CITY AND SO DYNAMIC AS DALLAS IS WITH THE CRIME ISSUES THAT WE HAVE.

AND SO OBVIOUSLY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE THINGS AND YOU LOOK AT THE MONEY THAT'S BEEN PUT ASIDE, THEN YOU ALSO LOOK AS WE HAVE TO GROW A DEPARTMENT, BUT WE NEED NEW EQUIPMENT.

WE NEED MORE VEHICLES.

WE NEED CERTAIN THINGS THAT THAT I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER OF HOW THAT WOULD WORK OUT IF IF YOU KNOW, THIS TYPE, OF THIS TYPE OF FUNDING WAS PUT ASIDE.

AND SO FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE, THERE IS NO QUESTION WE NEED TO GROW.

AND NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT.

I'VE NEVER HAD AN ARGUMENT WITH ANY OF YOU OR OUR COMMUNITY THAT WE DEFINITELY NEED TO GROW.

BUT WE NEED TO GROW SLOWLY.

WE DIDN'T GET INTO THIS MESS OVERNIGHT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET OUT OF IT OVERNIGHT.

AND CERTAINLY AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO CLOSE WITH WHAT I SAID BEFORE THAT.

I TELL YOU, THERE'S A LOT OF POLICE CHIEFS THAT WOULD LOVE TO BE SITTING IN MY SEAT THAT HAS A COMMUNITY THAT WANTS THEM TO GROW, BUT TO ALSO HAVE A COUNCIL THAT SUPPORTS GROWTH AS WELL. AND SO AGAIN THE DECISIONS WITH REGARDS TO THIS OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT LIE WITH ME.

[03:20:03]

BUT THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT I LOOK AT FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

FOR BOTH OF YOU, FOR THAT IS THE SLOW GROWTH AND RETENTION PLAN THAT YOU JUST LAID OUT.

IS THAT ENCOMPASSED IN OUR BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR AND FUTURE YEARS? YES, IT IS. WE HAVE BEEN VERY INTENTIONAL.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER WEST, WE'VE BEEN VERY INTENTIONAL ABOUT WORKING TO SEE HOW WE CAN DO A LOT MORE AND USING DIFFERENT TOOLS IN VARIOUS TOOLS THAT YOU'LL DEFINITELY SEE IN THE BUDGET AND REALLY WORKING WITH OUR ASSOCIATIONS TO COME UP WITH BEST PRACTICES AND THINGS THAT WE CAN DEFINITELY EMPLOY AND BE ABLE TO THEN LOOK AT OUR PROGRESS.

SO WHEN YOU RECEIVE YOUR BUDGET ON THIS WEEK, YOU WILL DEFINITELY SEE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING AROUND RETENTION.

AND WE WILL CONTINUE FOCUSED EFFORTS AROUND RECRUITMENT AS WELL.

SO YOU'LL SEE BOTH RETENTION OPPORTUNITIES AND THE BUDGET AS WELL AS RECRUITMENT.

SO YOU INTERIM CITY MANAGER TOLBERT, YOU MENTIONED THE COST OF THIS BALLOT PROPOSITION WOULD BE ABOUT 175 MILLION, ON TOP OF WHAT WE'RE ALREADY PUTTING INTO PUBLIC SAFETY INCREASES.

THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. YES, SIR.

THAT'S IN ADDITION TO.

CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME AN IDEA OF WHERE THOSE CUTS.

I MEAN, I KNOW I'M NOT ASKING FOR SPECIFICS, BUT WHAT ARE SOME OF THE BUDGETS FOR OTHER DEPARTMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY REALM, AS I UNDERSTAND EVERY YEAR, YOU KNOW, WE DO PUT THE MAJORITY OF THE BUDGET INTO PUBLIC SAFETY.

IT'S A PRIORITY. THE CITY, MY CONSTITUENTS TELL ME THAT OTHERS DO AS WELL, AND WE DO THAT, AND THAT'S REFLECTED IN OUR BUDGET.

BUT WHAT ARE SOME OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS ASSUMING BECAUSE YOU CAN'T TOUCH ENTERPRISE FUNDS.

SO IT WOULD PROBABLY BE GENERAL FUND.

EXACTLY. SO THE WAY OF COURSE, WE GO ABOUT THE PROCESS IS LOOKING AT WHERE THERE WOULD BE OPPORTUNITIES.

AND WHAT I WOULD TELL YOU, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE EVERY SINGLE CITY DEPARTMENT.

WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND WAYS TO, TO PULL RESOURCES AWAY FROM THOSE DEPARTMENTS IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO ALLOCATE IT TOWARDS THIS ADDITIONAL HIRING GOAL. AND SO I CAN'T THINK OF A DEPARTMENT, WHETHER IT'S LIBRARIES, PARK AND REC, ALL OF OUR ACTIVITIES AROUND CODE COMPLIANCE, ANIMAL SERVICES? EVERY SINGLE CITY DEPARTMENT WOULD BE IMPACTED.

THERE WOULD BE NO SACRED COWS, BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THE DEPARTMENTS IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO BRING THAT TYPE OF FUNDING TO THE TABLE.

SO IT WOULD BE A DIRECT IMPACT ON EVERY SINGLE CITY DEPARTMENT, GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT.

YOU ANTICIPATED MY NEXT QUESTION, WHICH WERE WHAT ARE THE GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS, THE LARGER ONES? PARKS AND REC LIBRARIES ANIMAL SERVICES.

ARE STREETS IN THAT DEPARTMENT? STREETS WOULD DEFINITELY BE IN THAT DEPARTMENT.

AND NOW THAT WE'VE COMBINED THE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE IN THERE AS WELL.

OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER LARGE DEPARTMENTS THAT I MISSED? I'M NOT A TRICK QUESTION.

I'M GOING OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

MY LARGEST IS DALLAS WATER UTILITIES OUTSIDE OF THOSE.

BUT THAT'S AN ENTERPRISE FUND RIGHT.

SO, IT WOULD MAINLY BE THOSE DEPARTMENTS, WE JUST.

IT WOULD BE THE DEPARTMENTS WHERE WE'RE DIRECTLY PROVIDING SERVICES DAY TO DAY SERVICES FOR THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS.

THANK YOU. THAT ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY FEES.

YES. MR. GRACEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AGAIN, JUST QUICKLY WANT TO JUST THANK THE DALLAS HEROES FOR SUBMITTING THIS AND FREEDOM ACT FOR SUBMITTING THESE PETITIONS.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT STOOD OUT ON THIS, AND I JUST HAVE TO SAY IT.

I'M JUST HAVE TO SAY IT WITH THE ONE ON THE SURVEY.

THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT A SURVEY FOR THE CITY MANAGER, WHICH I THINK MIGHT NOT BE A BAD IDEA.

I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S SOME RESTRICTIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I GOT THAT, BUT THEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEDICATING ALL OF THE REVENUE TO PUBLIC SAFETY WITHOUT ANY SURVEY OF PERFORMANCE OR THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO THAT WAS JUST A GLARING DIFFERENCE IN THE IN THE TWO.

ON ONE HAND, FOR THE CITY MANAGER, WE WANT TO HOLD THE CITY MANAGER ACCOUNTABLE AND DO ALL OF THAT AS I THINK WE SHOULD IN SOME FORM OR FASHION, WHICH I THINK WE ARE DOING.

BUT THEN WHEN IT COMES TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND WE WANT TO DEDICATE ALL OF THE REVENUE AS A FINANCIAL PERSON WITHOUT ANY THINGS THAT I STRUGGLE WITH THAT A LITTLE BIT JUST BECAUSE THERE ISN'T.

I MEAN, WE WENT THROUGH THE TIME TO COME UP WITH THAT SURVEY FOR THAT, BUT NOT ONE FOR THE REVENUE.

SO FOR THAT, I'M A LITTLE BIT I JUST I JUST STRUGGLE WITH THAT.

AND I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT SOME THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE AND I GUESS.

YEAH I JUST YEAH.

SO ANYWAY THAT'S JUST A COMMENT THERE.

SO THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THIS EXPLANATION AND GOING THROUGH ALL OF THAT.

FROM THERE, I JUST WISH THERE WAS SOME WAY WE COULD, COULD FIGURE OUT SOME WAY OF A SURVEY OF SIMILAR SURVEY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO, TO, YOU KNOW, JUSTIFY IF THAT WERE I'M TALKING IN A CIRCLE RIGHT NOW, BUT I KNOW WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY.

I CAN'T GET IT OUT RIGHT NOW. SO, I'M JUST GOING TO PAUSE.

I'M GONNA PAUSE.

OKAY. CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO, FIRST THING I WANT TO SAY IS THESE THE PETITION INITIATED THINGS ARE THEY'RE ALLOWED BY STATE LAW,

[03:25:09]

NOT THE CITY OF DALLAS.

WE DID OUR PART. THEY'RE HERE, AND WE HAVE TO STICK THEM ON THE BALLOT, WHETHER WE LIKE THEM OR WE DON'T.

THAT'S THE UNFORTUNATE PART.

WE CAN'T MASSAGE THEM.

WE CAN'T CHANGE THEM. WE CAN'T FIX THEM.

AND THEY'RE VERY FLAWED.

THEY'RE VERY, VERY FLAWED.

SO THE FIRST THING I WANT TO GET TO IS ASK CITY MANAGER TOLBERT DO PRICES OF GOODS AND THINGS THAT WE UTILIZE AT THE CITY GO UP EVERY YEAR? YES.

NORMAL. NORMAL INFLATIONARY COSTS HAPPEN EVERY SINGLE YEAR, WHETHER IT'S THE COST OF THE COST OF FUEL OR SUPPLIES.

BUT THAT'S A NATURAL DRIVER OF A LOT OF OUR BUDGET CHANGES THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT YEAR OVER YEAR.

SO IT NEVER IT NEVER STAYS FLAT.

IT INCREASES.

SO THINGS LIKE CONCRETE STRIPING, PAINT, SQUAD CARS, NEW, YOU KNOW, NEW UNIFORMS. I DON'T KNOW THE THINGS THAT WE PAY FOR, LIKE, EVERY SINGLE THING PAYS FOR THE PAPER, ELECTRICITY, FLAGS.

YEAH. PICKING UP TRASH.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE THINGS GOES UP.

CORRECT? EVERY YEAR.

THAT IS CORRECT, YES.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. AND ONE OF THESE CHARTER REVIEW AMENDMENTS IS TO TAKE ONE HALF OF ALL NEW REVENUE AND IT GOES TO DPD.

SO, IT SAYS ALL NEW REVENUE.

SO THAT MEANS ALL NEW REVENUE.

RIGHT? SO ALL NEW REVENUE COMES FROM SALES TAX AS WELL AS PROPERTY TAX.

SO THAT REVENUE GOES UP EVERY YEAR.

VERY RARE THAT IT WOULD GO DOWN AND ONE HALF HAS TO GO.

SO GOODBYE TAX RATE DECREASES BECAUSE WE CAN'T CUT IT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THIS AMENDMENT SAYS.

GOOD. AND IT HALF OF IT GOES TO THE PENSION AND ALL THAT I GET IT.

DID YOU, ARE YOU ABLE TO WHAT YOU PREDICT FOR THIS BUDGET AND THE TWO YEARS.

BECAUSE WE ALWAYS WRITE A TWO-YEAR BUDGET, EVEN THOUGH WE ONLY ADOPT ONE, THAT YOU HAVE ENOUGH FUNDING FOR THE NEXT YEAR OF THE PENSION? YES. POLICE AND FIRE PENSION.

I'M SORRY. YES, WE ARE, OF COURSE, WITH THAT BRIEFING IS COMING UP NEXT.

BUT WE ARE PRESENTING A PLAN AND OUR BUDGET THAT YOU WILL RECEIVE ON FRIDAY IS A TWO-YEAR BALANCED BUDGET.

AND HOW LONG DO WE HAVE TO FUND FULLY FUND THE POLICE AND FIRE BUDGET, I MEAN PENSION I'M SORRY, WE HAVE A 30-YEAR COMMITMENT AND IT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED BY THE STATE TO HAVE THE FUND. RIGHT? EXACTLY. AT A 70% IN 30 YEARS.

YES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

MADAM CITY MANAGER AND I WAS HERE IN 2017 WHEN THAT WAS THAT ACTUALLY THAT LAW WAS DONE RIGHT BEFORE I GOT ELECTED AND GOT HERE.

SO I THAT WAS A BIG DEAL.

AND WE'RE THANKFUL THAT WE HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THIS TIME TO GET THINGS WORKED OUT.

AND THE CITY MANAGER HAS JUST SAID THAT WHEN EVERYBODY SEES THE BUDGET ON FRIDAY, THAT SHE HAS BALANCED IT WITH THE FIRST YEAR OF THE PENSION, OF COURSE YOU CAN'T.

WE DON'T WRITE FIVE YEAR BUDGETS, BUT WE HAVE A PLAN AND WE'VE HAD A PLAN AND WE'VE SEEN THE PLAN.

WE'VE BEEN PRODUCED THE PLAN.

AND BEYOND THAT, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO GO BEYOND THAT.

I MEAN, I MEAN, WE HAD A GLOBAL PANDEMIC JUST A FEW YEARS AGO THAT I DON'T THINK ANY ANALYST, ANY OF THE SMARTEST FINANCIAL PEOPLE FORESAW THAT.

I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IT.

AND THEN WE HAD CRAZY INFLATION AFTERWARDS, WHICH NO FINANCIAL PERSON SAW THAT EITHER.

SO IF YOU TAKE HALF OF THAT BUDGET OF THE REVENUE AND THE OTHER HALF AND PUT IT INTO PUBLIC SAFETY INITIATIVES, WHICH MEANS THERE'S NO MONEY LEFT TO INCREASE FOR THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THE CHLORINE THAT GOES INTO THE SWIMMING POOL TO PAY FOR THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER, EVERYTHING GOES UP IN PRICE. I'M 50 YEARS OLD AND SINCE I WAS BORN, EVERYTHING GOES UP IN PRICE.

I'M AN AVID LEGO COLLECTOR, STAR WARS LEGO COLLECTOR, AND EVERY YEAR MY LEGO STAR WARS GET MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE.

I DON'T LIKE IT, BUT I STILL COLLECT IT AND I PAY FOR IT.

ALL RIGHT, SO AND THAT'S THE SAME THING WITH THE STUFF THAT WE DO HERE.

WE DON'T LIKE HAVING TO INCREASE THE TAX BASE AND ALL OF THAT STUFF, BUT IT'S PART OF WHAT WE DO HERE AS A CITY TO HAVE A GOOD SOCIETY, TO GET THINGS BETTER.

AND LET ME TELL YOU, BECAUSE WE WERE ABLE TO DO THAT IN AN INTERIM.

CHIEF TOLBERT, MR. MAYOR, MY COLLEAGUES, WHEN OTHER CITIES WERE COMING AFTER THE GREATEST CHIEF IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WE WERE ABLE TO FIX IT AND FIND THE BUDGET IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT HE GOT TAKEN CARE OF.

WE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT FOR OTHER PEOPLE IF WE NEED TO DO IT.

JUST EARLIER, WE HEARD ABOUT ONE OF THE BEST, BEST CITY EMPLOYEES, STAFFERS THAT WE HAVE LEAVING US WITH THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT.

YOU WOULD NOT WOULD YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE CARE OF THAT PERSON WITH ZERO ABILITY TO INCREASE THE BUDGET? IT WOULD BE A TOTAL CHALLENGE FOR US GOING FORWARD.

YOU'RE VERY POLITE, SO THANK YOU.

SO THOSE ARE SOME THINGS THAT I JUST WANT TO SHOW.

AND THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE IN THE LAST SURVEY, MR. MAYOR, FOR THIS CITY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN LIKE HISTORY WAS NOT PUBLIC SAFETY.

[03:30:05]

WHY? BECAUSE THAT CHIEF OF POLICE RIGHT THERE.

CHIEF GARCIA, SINCE YOU GOT HERE, SINCE HE GOT HERE, HAS DONE A PHENOMENAL, AMAZING JOB IN LEADERSHIP.

AND THE RANK AND FILE, THIS COUNCIL, THE RESIDENTS OF THIS CITY AND THE ENTIRE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT BELIEVE IN HIS LEADERSHIP. I WOULD HAVE WE HAVE.

CHIEF GARCIA, HAVE WE EVER DENIED YOU WHAT YOU'VE ASKED FOR RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT? NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO COUNCIL MEMBER, AS I AS I SAID BEFORE, BEEN INCREDIBLY SUPPORTIVE SINCE THE DAY I GOT HERE AND THAT AND THAT ALL COMES FROM TRUST, AND IT COMES FROM BELIEF.

YOUR PLAN IS WORKING.

IT'S NOT WHERE I KNOW, IT'S NOT WHERE YOU WANT IT TO BE, BECAUSE I'VE NOT MET ONE DALLAS POLICE OFFICER WHO'S EVER SAID IT'S OKAY TO HAVE SOME CRIME.

Y'ALL ALL SAY YOU WANT ZERO CRIME IN OUR CITY.

AND OF COURSE, THAT'S PROBABLY AN IMPOSSIBLE TASK.

BUT YOU TALKED ABOUT YOUR OATH AND YOUR DUTY AND ALL OF THAT, AND THAT'S WHAT THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT IS ALL ABOUT.

AND TO REDUCE THE CRITERIA TO HAVE A DALLAS POLICE OFFICER, WE ARE THE FINEST POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THIS NATION.

MR. MAYOR, MADAM CITY MANAGER, COLLEAGUES, BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING TO THAT ACADEMY, AND WE FINALLY GOT ENOUGH DOLLARS TO BUILD A NEW ONE.

NOW WILL THAT WHEN THE NEW ACADEMY IS FINALLY BUILT, IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME, BUT WHEN IT'S FINALLY BUILT, WILL THAT ALLOW YOU TO INCREASE THAT CAPACITY BEYOND 250 WHEN IT WHEN IT'S FINALLY BUILT? VERY HOPEFUL. YEAH.

VERY HOPEFUL. AND I'M THERE WITH YOU I DON'T WANT TO NOT HAVE THE OFFICERS YOU NEED BECAUSE I SEE THEM IN MY DISTRICT, MR. MAYOR. I SEE THEM AROUND THE CITY.

ALL THEY WANT IS TO DO THEIR JOB.

THEY WANT TO HAVE THE VEHICLES THEY NEED BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THEM IN JEROME'S VEHICLE.

YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO BRING IT TO A, YOU'RE GONNA LAND THE PLANE.

I WILL, BECAUSE I'M GOING TO USE MY THREE MINUTES TOO.

BUT THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO CHIEF GARCIA AND WHAT YOU'RE DOING CITY MANAGER AND MY COLLEAGUES.

I'VE GOT A LOT MORE TO SAY ABOUT THESE CHARTER AMENDMENTS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. UNFORTUNATELY FOR YOU, YOU HAVE MORE ROUNDS TO SAY THEM.

MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

YOU KNOW, I'M LOOKING AT THE CHARTER, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO GET MY HANDS AROUND THIS PROPOSAL OF THE THIRD CHARTER AMENDMENT IN THE HERO PETITION.

PROVIDE ASSIST CITY REVENUE.

MISS CITY MANAGER, WE DO A TWO-YEAR BUDGET, RIGHT? AND WE FORECAST A TWO-YEAR BUDGET ONCE WE BALANCE THE BUDGET ON OCTOBER THE 1ST.

WE ARE OVER BUDGET ON OCTOBER THE 2ND.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? WITH COST THAT AUTOMATICALLY GO UP, THAT WOULD BE A FAIR STATEMENT.

SO, IT COSTS AUTOMATICALLY GO UP AND YOU DON'T FORECAST WITH A SHORTFALL THIS YEAR.

IT LOOKED LIKE WE'D BE A SHORTFALL IN THE SECOND YEAR.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? IF THE MEASURE PASSES, THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.

SO WHAT IS OUR SHORTFALL DISTRICT IN THE BUDGET AND YOUR CITY MANAGER RIGHT NOW, IF WE LOOK AT BEFORE YOU BRING THE BUDGET, THE BUDGET THAT YOU WILL RECEIVE FOR 2024-25, WHICH WILL ALSO GO INTO THE SECOND YEAR OF THE BIENNIAL, WILL BE A BALANCED BUDGET.

BEING A BALANCED BUDGET. YES, SIR.

SO IT'LL BE A BALANCED BUDGET.

SO COLLEAGUES, MY CONCERN IS WE DO BALANCE THE BUDGET ON OCTOBER THE 1ST, BUT THE NEXT DAY YOU COULD BE OVER $100 MILLION OVER BUDGET THE NEXT DAY.

AND THAT TO HAPPEN.

WHAT DO YOU DO ON A BUDGET? BECAUSE BY STATE LAW, YOU JUST GOT TO BALANCE A BUDGET.

AND SO MANY TIMES AND MANY THINGS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE PUT INTO PLACE.

AND I KEEP SAYING OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS, WE'RE NOT ADDED ROUGHLY ABOUT 110, $120 MILLION IN THIS BUDGET OVER THE LAST 3 OR 5 YEARS.

THOSE EXTRA ITEMS THAT WE ADD TO IT.

AND SO, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ASSET REVENUE GOING THERE, THAT MEANS THOSE 110, $120 MILLION THAT WE'D ADD INTO THE BUDGET, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR IT.

SO THOSE ASSET DEPARTMENTS EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE CUT, BECAUSE THAT'S THE ISSUE.

AND I KEEP SAYING THAT WHEN WE HAD THE ARPA FUND, THAT ONE TIME FUNDING, WE MADE A BIG MISTAKE HOW WE DID IT, AND I BELIEVE WE DID THAT.

WE DIDN'T LOOK AT THE FUTURE.

AND RIGHT NOW TO DO THIS WITH ASSET REVENUE, SALES TAX AND PROPERTY TAX, YOU GOT TO BE VERY, VERY CAREFUL.

WE MIGHT BE IN A SITUATION YOU DON'T WANT TO BE IN VERSUS OTHER CITIES IN AMERICA.

[03:35:04]

SO I'M JUST SAID THAT WHEN THEY PUT THIS IN THE.

TO THE VOTERS THAT YOU GOT TO BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASK FOR.

YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THE RESIDENT IN THE CITIZEN OUT THERE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS MEAN.

ASSET REVENUE.

YOU KNOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT.

YOU GOT YOUR HOUSE, YOUR HOME, AND YOU GO GET AN EXTRA JOB.

AND EVERY EXTRA PENNY YOU GET, YOU'RE GOING TO PUT IT ON SOMETHING ELSE.

AND YOU CAN MAINTAIN YOUR THE STRUCTURE OF YOUR HOUSE AND YOUR AND YOUR HOUSE IS GOING TO FALL DOWN BECAUSE YOU'RE TAKING AN ASSET DOWN A SWIMMING POOL OR DOING WHATEVER, BECAUSE THE ASSET REVENUE.

SO, WE HAD TO BE A STEWARD AND REALLY GOT TO LOOK AT THIS, BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE DO HAVE EXCESS SALES TAX, PROPERTY TAX IS GOING UP, BUT ALSO WHAT WE GOT TO MAINTAIN IS GOING UP ALSO.

AND SO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE WHAT YOU GET GAINED AND ASSET REVENUE AND PAY FOR THINGS THAT YOU KNOW IS GOING UP.

THE COST OF LIVING GOING UP, COST OF SERVICE GOING, EVERYTHING IS GOING UP CONSTANTLY.

AND SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE MERIT OF THIS RIGHT HERE.

AND I'M STILL LOOKING AT IT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT YOU'RE THINKING THAT IN DROP THAT WE LOOK AT THE PENSION THAT WE LOOK AT GOING FORWARD.

WE GOT $3.5 BILLION OUT THERE, AND WE USE ALL THAT ASSET REVENUE TO TAKE CARE OF THE $3.5 BILLION.

BUT WE ALSO GOT TO TAKE CARE OF MEETING THE CONFIRMED.

WE GOT TO MAKE SURE WE GOT ENOUGH MONEY TO TAKE CARE OF THERE.

AND YOU'RE SAYING I CAN USE THAT.

I CANNOT USE THAT.

AND WE'RE GOING OVER AND OVER TRYING TO FIGURE SOMETHING OUT THAT SAID, THE MAN WITH THE BUDGET.

AND I GUESS ONCE THIS GO TO THE VOTERS, THIS WAS STARTING YOUR SECOND YEAR OF BUDGET, RIGHT? IF THIS WOULD PASS.

IF THIS WOULD PASS.

LET ME REFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.

I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE TIME FRAME FOR WHEN WE WOULD HAVE TO IMPLEMENT THAT PARTICULAR AMENDMENT.

IT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE UPON PASSAGE AND THEN CANVASING OF THE VOTE.

SO WHAT DATE IT WOULD BE? ROUGHLY NOT PROBABLY BEFORE NOVEMBER 11TH.

I CAN'T REMEMBER THE LOOKING AT THE CITY SECRETARIATS OR MY FOLKS.

THE REQUIREMENTS, WE CAN'T CANVAS NOT EARLIER THAN ONE DAY, THREE AND EIGHT.

SO, THREE DAYS BETWEEN 3 AND 8 DAYS AFTER THE ELECTION.

AND THE ELECTION IS NOVEMBER 5TH.

SO, AT THE AROUND NOVEMBER 13TH.

AND I THINK THAT ONCE YOU DO THAT, THEN YOU GOT TO RECALCULATE HOW REFIGURE YOUR BUDGET AGAIN, BECAUSE YOU BE IN THE MIDDLE OF ANOTHER TERM BUDGET.

SO, I'M JUST OPENING TO LISTEN TO EVERYONE, BUT I JUST WANT TO THROW THAT OUT.

THAT COSTS GO UP EVEN THOUGH YOU GET EXTRA MONEY, BUT YOU STILL GOT TO PAY THE BILLS BEHIND YOU BECAUSE IT WILL INCREASE IN INCREASE IN PRICES.

THANK YOU. I THINK EVERYONE WHO'S LEFT IN THE QUEUE IS ALREADY GONE.

SO, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. CHIEF, YOU KNOW, YOUR FIRST ANSWER TO MY QUESTION ABOUT THE MARIJUANA WAS SO STRONG, AND I DID TAKE NOTES, BUT NOT ENOUGH.

COULD YOU WRITE A MEMO TO OUR FULL COUNCIL ENCAPSULATING THE DATA YOU SHARED AND YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU.

AND IF YOU WOULD INCLUDE A PHOTO OF THE FOUR-OUNCE BAG AS WELL AS YOUR POSTER, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

SO, THE NEXT ITEM I HAVE IS IN LOOKING AT STATES LIKE COLORADO, DOES DECRIMINALIZING OR LEGALIZING END THE BLACK MARKET? DOES THAT STOP DRUG SALES FROM GANGS? I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH COLORADO, IT DOESN'T END IT.

FROM SALES, I MEAN, I'LL SPEAK FROM COMING FROM CALIFORNIA.

CERTAINLY, THERE'S STILL THERE'S STILL A LIMIT.

THERE'S STILL A MARKET FOR IT, BUT IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T END IT.

OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN TALK ABOUT HOW MUCH PEOPLE SUPPORT YOU.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU HAVE ENORMOUS SUPPORT FROM BOTH THE CITY AND THE CITY COUNCIL.

AND WHAT WE HEARD YOU SAY TODAY IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR YOUR STAFFING LEVEL IS 3600.

AND THIS HERO PROPOSITION IS SAYING 4000.

ANY WAY WE LOOK AT IT, WE'RE JUST UNDER 3100.

SO YOU'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT ADDING 500 OFFICERS, 500 UNIFORMS, GUNS, TASERS, VIDEO VEHICLES, ALL OF THAT PENSION AS WELL AS SALARY.

[03:40:03]

RIGHT. SO THIS TO GET TO YOUR GOAL AND I DON'T KNOW ANY COUNCIL MEMBER THAT DOESN'T HAVE RESIDENTS SAYING WE NEED MORE POLICE BECAUSE I THINK ALL OF US DO, STILL MEANS WE WOULD FUNDAMENTALLY HAVE TO CHANGE OUR BUDGET FROM THE WAY IT IS TODAY.

WE'RE NOT BUDGETING FOR 3600.

ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER I'M SORRY.

INTERIM. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE HOW WE AS YOU KNOW AND AS THE CITY COUNCIL KNOWS THAT WE LOOK AT BUDGET ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AND THEN BASED ON FUNDING, BASED ON THE CHALLENGES AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS AND WHAT WE PUT FORTH TO THE CITY COUNCIL IS TO TAKE CARE OF THAT UPCOMING YEAR.

AND AS YOU KNOW, IT STARTED IN 2017.

WE PROVIDE YOU WITH A SECOND YEAR.

SO THAT'S A PART OF THE ANNUAL BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WHERE WE LOOK AT ALL OF OUR OPERATIONS, WE LOOK AT OUR NEEDS, WE LOOK AT OUR FUNDING, AND THEN WE COME BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A PROPOSED BUDGET.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE DO YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR.

AND WE WOULD NOT NOT DO THAT.

AND YOU MENTIONED THE ADDITIONAL OFFICERS.

WE WOULD BE WORKING EVERY YEAR TO GET TO THAT 3600 STRENGTH THAT THE CHIEF HAS TALKED ABOUT.

AND THAT WOULD BE BUILT INTO ALL OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAVE AS WE'RE DEVELOPING THE BUDGET.

SO, OUR CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, WE HAVE A BUDGET TO HIRE 250.

YOU'RE SAYING 190? APPROXIMATELY. ARE LEAVING.

IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO SAY? NO, ABSOLUTELY. COUNCIL MEMBER ONE OF THE DYNAMICS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT STAFFING, I CAN SAY 3600 OR WHATEVER.

AND WE'RE RIGHT NOW HOVERING JUST BELOW 3100.

AGAIN, RIGHT NOW WITH OUR ATTRITION AT 190 AND AT OUR GOAL AT 250, THAT'S ONLY A NET GAIN OF 60 A YEAR.

SO THAT IS WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR THAT ATTRITION NUMBER TO COME DOWN.

AND SO YES, TO YOUR POINT, OKAY.

SO I WILL SAY THAT LAST YEAR WHEN I WAS APPOINTED CHAIR OF PUBLIC SAFETY, ALONG WITH THE APPOINTMENT CAME PRIORITIES FROM THE MAYOR.

AND THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY WAS RECRUITING AND RETENTION.

WE MOVE THAT TO THE TOP OF THE AGENDA EVERY MONTH.

I THINK THE COMMITTEES WORKED REALLY HARD ON THIS.

I THINK YOUR STAFF HAS DONE A FANTASTIC JOB AT CHANGING WHAT YOU HAD BEEN DOING.

I THINK IT'S BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE.

50 PEOPLE IN THE CLASS, 400.

I THINK THERE'S CLOSE TO 50 IN CLASS 401.

THIS HASN'T HAPPENED SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL, I MEAN EVEN BEFORE PANDEMIC TIMES.

SO I'M VERY HAPPY FOR THAT.

YOU ASKED FOR A RETENTION BONUS PROGRAM 40,000 AN OFFICER.

I KNOW IT'S WORKING.

ON FRIDAY, I HAD AN OFFICER TELL ME HE WAS GOING TO LEAVE.

HE STAYED FOR IT.

AND IT'S ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT HE HAD TOLD ME HE'D LEAVE.

I BET HIM HE WOULDN'T. AND WHEN IT CAME OUT, HE SAID, YOU WERE RIGHT.

SO I'M JUST SAYING, IF WE'RE REALLY GOING TO SAY WE CARE ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY, WE'RE ALREADY GOING TO FLIP OUR BUDGET.

AND MAYBE THAT HERO AMENDMENT ACTUALLY HOLDS US ACCOUNTABLE.

I'M NOT SURE WE'LL EVER GET TO 39.

I'M SORRY, 4000, AND I'M NOT SURE WE EVEN SHOULD, BUT IT MIGHT COMPEL US TO DO WHAT WE MUST DO, WHICH IS GET TO 3600.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, LET'S LET'S SEE HERE.

IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE MR. RIDLEY, FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

MR. IRELAND, COULD YOU COME BACK TO THE MIC? SO, MR. IRELAND, CAN YOU TELL US THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, HOW MUCH OF THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET GOES TO PUBLIC SAFETY? FOR DPD? SO THAT'S GOING TO TAKE ME ONE MINUTE TO LOOK IT UP.

BUT IF YOU WANT IF YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, I'LL TRY TO DO BOTH.

WELL, MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET DOES THAT REPRESENT? SO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET IS FOR THE CURRENT YEAR IS $657 MILLION.

ABOUT 35% OF THE TOTAL FOR THE GENERAL FUND.

CHIEF GARCIA, WE HAVE HEARD IN THE PAST TWO YEARS AT LEAST, THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS IS THE ONLY CITY AMONGST THE TOP TEN IN THE COUNTRY THAT HAS REDUCED THE MURDER RATE BY REDUCE THE MURDER RATE PERIOD OVER THE LAST TWO.

PERHAPS IT'S THREE YEARS NOW.

CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT WE'VE REDUCED MURDER NOW THREE OF THE LAST FOUR YEARS? WE'VE REDUCED VIOLENT CRIME EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

[03:45:03]

AND THAT'S UNPRECEDENTED AMONGST THE TOP TEN CITIES IN THE COUNTRY, IS IT NOT? I, I BELIEVE WE'RE OUTLIERS, SIR.

SO, THIS IS NOT A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE SEEING RAMPANT INCREASES IN THE CRIME RATE, PARTICULARLY THE VIOLENT CRIME RATE.

YOUR VIOLENT CRIME PLAN HAS BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE IN RACKING UP YEAR AFTER YEAR REDUCTIONS IN VIOLENT CRIME. ISN'T THAT TRUE? IT IS COUNCIL MEMBER. BUT I JUST WANT TO JUST PUT IT INTO CONTEXT A LITTLE BIT IN THAT, YOU KNOW, THE TREMENDOUS WORK THE MEN AND WOMEN HAVE BEEN DOING SINCE THE PEAK OF VIOLENT CRIME IN 2020 TO REDUCING IT NOW.

OUR GOAL IS TO GET TO BELOW THE PRE-PANDEMIC VIOLENT CRIME.

THAT'S EVERY POLICE CHIEF'S GOAL IN THE COUNTRY IS TO GET TO PRE-PANDEMIC RATES OF VIOLENT CRIME, WHICH WE ARE VERY WELL ON OUR WAY.

WE'RE THERE IN A LOT OF CATEGORIES.

WE'RE AND WE'RE STRIVING TO GET THERE.

THAT'S BEEN THE GOAL SINCE WE STARTED.

BUT AGAIN, I'LL SAY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NEVER LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL.

THERE'S ANOTHER TUNNEL.

AND ONE LIFE IS TOO MANY.

AND I WILL SAY WE'RE NOWHERE CLOSE TO BEING WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

ALTHOUGH CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY TO YOUR POINT, I THINK WE'D MUCH RATHER BE SITTING HERE WITH THE TREND LINE GOING DOWN THE WAY IT HAS BEEN THAN THE WAY IT WAS PRIOR TO 2021.

BACK TO YOU, MR. IRELAND.

I STARTED TALKING IN MY FIRST TIME PERIOD ABOUT THE REVENUE PROVISIONS THAT SWEEP IN ALL TYPES OF REVENUE.

AND TO ILLUSTRATE THE DRACONIAN NATURE OF THIS PROPOSED REFERENDUM AMENDMENT.

THIS WOULD RESULT IN A FREEZING OF THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, BECAUSE ANY INCREASE IN TAX REVENUE, OR ANY OF THE FEES OR OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE LISTED HERE, WOULD AUTOMATICALLY HAVE TO GO TO EITHER THE PENSION OR TO HIRING MORE POLICE OFFICERS, AND SO THAT GENERAL FUND BUDGET TOTAL AMOUNT WOULD BE FROZEN, WOULDN'T IT? FOR EVERYTHING BUT DPD.

YES, SIR. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE CASE.

AND THEREFORE, AS COSTS GO UP, THEN THE SERVICE LEVELS WOULD GO DOWN.

EXACTLY. BUT IT'S EVEN WORSE THAN THAT.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS.

THEY'RE ALSO SWEPT IN SO THAT ANY INCREASED FEES THAT THEY CHARGE WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE REVENUE.

THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO TO DPD.

AND EVERY YEAR IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE ASKED BY YOUR DEPARTMENT TO INCREASE THE FEES FOR WATER, SANITATION, ETC. ISN'T THAT CORRECT? THERE ARE INCREASES AND ON THAT ONE I WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WHEN IT CAME TO THAT, IF THOSE FUNDS COULD BE DIVERTED TO A GENERAL FUND USE AS OPPOSED TO THE USERS THAT PAY FOR THOSE SERVICES? WELL, THERE ARE TWO POSSIBILITIES HERE.

ONE IS THAT THAT INCREASED REVENUE THAT THEY WANT TO CHARGE TO DEFRAY HIGHER COSTS WOULDN'T BENEFIT THEM, BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE POURED INTO THE DPD BUDGET. OR THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE NON-ENTERPRISE IN THE GENERAL FUND WOULD HAVE TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE.

AND SO IT'S NOT JUST THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO INCREASE THEIR ALLOCATION EVERY YEAR.

IT WOULD DROP WHEN THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS ARE ALLOWED TO INCREASE THEIR FEES, ISN'T THERE? LAST QUESTION FOR THIS ROUND.

I'M SORRY. YES, SIR.

THANK YOU. YOU STILL HAVE GOT ONE MORE.

OKAY, I THINK.

YEAH. I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE WHO'S NEXT.

CAROLYN KING ARNOLD.

THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. JUST QUICKLY ON THIS WHOLE PROCESS, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING MY STATEMENT EARLIER ABOUT EDUCATION.

AND SO I HAVE A QUESTION OF CITY MANAGER ON THE CAMPAIGN.

IF I CALL THE ELECTION.

HOW DO WE WHAT IS THE COST? I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT QUESTION.

THE QUESTION SHOULD BE AS WE PREPARE FOR THIS VOTE, WILL WE HAVE PARTNERS TO HELP THAT WE WILL PARTNER WITH AS A CITY TO GET THIS INFORMATION OUT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC SO THEY BETTER UNDERSTAND AND ESPECIALLY THE WHAT I CALL MAKE IT MAKE SENSE CAMPAIGN THAT WE MUST ADOPT IN THIS CITY TO GET THE MESSAGE OUT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET OUT, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE CHALLENGES.

A REALITY CHALLENGE IN TERMS OF WHAT THESE HEROES ARE TRYING TO GET ON THE BALLOT AS IT RELATES TO THE CONFLICT BETWEEN CITY

[03:50:01]

POLICY AND STATE LAW.

AND WE CAN'T HAVE OUR PUBLIC THERE ALREADY ASKING US FOR CLARITY ON THE BALLOT.

SO WHEN WE ASK WHEN WE ALLOW THIS MISLEADING LANGUAGE AND ACTIONS TO GET ON THE BALLOT, HOW DO WE COUNTERACT THAT? WELL, IT'S EDUCATION.

IT'S EDUCATION, BUT IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

HOW WILL WE GET OUR MESSAGE OUT? DO WE USE CITY FUNDS, OR DO WE HAVE TO HAVE THE PARTNERSHIP TO HELP US WITH A CAMPAIGN, OR IS IT LEGAL TO DO THAT? I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO ANSWER IT, I THINK, FROM ONE PERSPECTIVE.

BUT THEN I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO WEIGH IN.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT WE HAVE IS TO PUT OUT THE FACTS, AND IT WILL NOT BE BASED ON HOW WE SUPPORT OR NOT SUPPORT ANY OF THE PROPOSITIONS.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE THE ROLE THAT WE WOULD PLAY AS A CITY.

WE WOULD DO THAT THROUGH OUR NORMAL COMMUNICATIONS OUTREACH EFFORTS.

BUT ANYTHING BEYOND THAT, WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A PARTNERSHIP BROUGHT TO THE TABLE, I WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO GIVE GUIDANCE AROUND THAT.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE CITY HAS PARTICIPATED FROM FUNDING A CAMPAIGN, IF YOU WILL, AS IT RELATES TO ANY FORMER CHARTER ELECTIONS.

BUT I'D HAVE TO DEFINITELY ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO STEP IN ON THAT QUESTION.

I SEE THE BIRD IS HERE.

YET? LAURA MORRISON.

CITY. CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

THE CITY CAN DEFINITELY DO WHAT IT WANTS TO DO TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON THE FACTS OF THE MEASURES, THE FACTS OF THE PROPOSITIONS. BUT AS LONG AS EVERYONE'S CAREFUL NOT TO ADVOCATE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ON PASSAGE OR FAIL OF THE PROPOSITIONS.

I'M LOSING, MAY I RECLAIM MY TIME? YOUR TIME IS YOUR TIME. COUNTING DOWN DURING THE I WASN'T, I WAS.

YES. MALFUNCTION.

TECHNOLOGY. MALFUNCTION.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO TO BE CLEAR, LET ME JUST STATE THIS PUBLICLY.

I AM COMMITTED TO EDUCATING OUR COMMUNITY AROUND THIS CHARTER.

WHAT A CHARTER DOES, WHAT THE FUNCTION OF IT IS.

AND AS THESE AND DEMOCRACY IS ALL ONE IS ONE OF THOSE ELEMENTS THAT I DO SUPPORT.

BUT MISLEADING, IN MY OPINION, IS UNFAIR TO OUR CONSTITUENTS.

SO MY MY POSITION IS I'M GOING TO TRY TO GET THROUGH EVERY AVENUE I CAN TO EDUCATE THE PEOPLE THAT I REPRESENT AND THOSE WHO COME TO ME.

SO WHAT CAN I DO AS A COUNCIL MEMBER? WHAT HELP CAN I GET AND WHAT CAN I DO LEGALLY? AS I GET OUT TO MESSAGE AGAINST THOSE MISLEADING MEASURES THAT THAT WILL HAVE TO GO ON THE BALLOT? THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS WORKING ON A MEMORANDUM THAT WILL BETTER EXPLAIN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL BE DURING THIS TIME, BETWEEN CALLING THE ELECTION AND HOLDING THE ELECTION AND WHAT MAY BE DONE AND WHAT WILL BE PROHIBITED.

ALL RIGHT. AND SO I DO KNOW THIS.

I BELIEVE THIS WHOLEHEARTEDLY THAT A LOT OF MONEY WAS PUT INTO THOSE, TO THE SIGNATURES THAT WERE GATHERED TO PUT THIS, WHAT I CALL PROPAGANDA OUT.

THAT'S MY POSITION.

AND SO WE MAY NOT HAVE THOSE TYPES OF DEEP POCKETS, BUT I HAVE BEEN ASKED TO SERVE AND BE HONEST AND BE TRANSPARENT.

AND SO I HAVE TO REPRESENT.

AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING.

AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, I WOULD ASK THAT THAT YOU JUST GIVE ME A LITTLE TIME AND UNDERSTANDING THIS IS VERY SERIOUS TO ME.

AND AS WE CLOSE, CHIEF GARCIA, LET ME MAKE A CORRECTION.

IT'S NOT IT'S NOT JEROME, IT'S OTIS.

SO YOU ALL NEED TO LOOK THAT UP.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, MR. WEST, YOUR ACCESS FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

I THINK WE, AS A BODY SHOULD BE VERY CAREFUL NOT TO SEND MIXED MESSAGES TO THE PUBLIC TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT.

ESPECIALLY ON THESE HERO INITIATIVES.

WHEN I HEAR A COLLEAGUE SAY THAT SUPPORTING THIS WOULD MIGHT GIVE US A BOOST TO REACH HIRING GOALS, I MEAN, I THINK THAT SENDS A MESSAGE THAT THIS MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE, AND I JUST DON'T THINK IT IS.

THIS IS A VERY WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE CHIEF, WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE CITY MANAGER FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE BALLOT INITIATIVE.

ALL ALL OF THESE HERO INITIATIVES ARE AND IT COULD SERIOUSLY IMPACT OUR OTHER DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING PARKS, LIBRARIES, STREET REPAIRS, ALL THESE THINGS THAT ARE ALSO PRIORITIES TO OUR CONSTITUENTS BEYOND JUST PUBLIC SAFETY, WHICH WE KNOW IS AT THE VERY TOP OF THE LIST.

SO BEING VERY CAREFUL ABOUT THE MESSAGES WE SEND AND THE THINGS THAT WE SAY TO THE PUBLIC, I THINK SHOULD BE PARAMOUNT FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

SECONDLY, TO ALL OF THE VOTERS THAT CAME OUT OR THE RESIDENTS THAT SIGNED THESE PETITIONS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR ENGAGEMENT.

THIS IS LIKE I SAID EARLIER, DEMOCRACY 101.

I MEAN, THIS IS I LOVE THE FACT THAT SO MANY PEOPLE ARE ENGAGED AND PASSIONATE ABOUT ALL OF THESE ISSUES.

[03:55:03]

I HOPE ALL OF YOU WHO DID THIS WILL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THESE ITEMS. WE'LL DIG IN DEEP ENOUGH BEFORE YOU GO VOTE TO UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE VOTING ON AND THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF IT, BOTH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE.

AND I'M HOPING THE MEDIA WILL ALSO TELL THE FULL STORY HERE.

SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU.

MISS NARVAEZ.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

CHIEF GARCIA IS PART OF YOUR JOB AS CHIEF OF POLICE.

DETERMINING STAFFING STRATEGY, BUDGETS, ALL OF THAT.

YES, SIR. YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

AND FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, I'M SORRY FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, CORRECT? YES, SIR. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

INTERIM, MADAM.

CITY MANAGER, THE SAME QUESTION.

IS THAT PART OF YOUR JOB FOR THE ENTIRE CITY OF DALLAS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PARKS AND REC? YES, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I, MY COLLEAGUES, I SEE THIS THIS HERO THING, 1000 COPS AND ALL THIS STUFF.

WE'RE ALL WORKING TOWARDS IT.

AND WE'RE WORKING THROUGH YOUR LEADERSHIP TO GARCIA BECAUSE YOU TOLD US WHAT YOU NEED.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT YOU CAN HANDLE, AND YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT CAN HANDLE.

AND IF WE COULD DO MORE, WE WOULD, AND YOU WOULD AS WELL.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN HOW THAT ALL WORKS? THE THE ENTIRE RECRUITMENT PROCESS FROM, YOU KNOW, GETTING THAT THE STARTING THE RECRUITMENT WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO, WHERE YOU'RE DOING AND THEN HOW LONG IT TAKES TO TRAIN THAT RECRUIT FROM THE DAY, THEY START TILL THEY'RE ACTUALLY ON THEIR OWN ON THE STREETS OF DALLAS.

WELL, OBVIOUSLY IT STARTS, YOU KNOW, WITH OUR RECRUITERS.

I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WITH OUR ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN IT STARTS WITH RECRUITERS GOING OUT TO THE POOL OF APPLICANTS THAT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN A CAREER IN LAW ENFORCEMENT.

THEN IT'S TO SELL THE DEPARTMENT TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS.

AS I'VE MADE MENTION MANY TIMES AT PUBLIC SAFETY, STAFFING ISSUES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IS NOT JUST A DALLAS ISSUE IS IT IS A NATIONAL ISSUE.

AND SO WE HAVE TO SHOW WHAT WE HAVE IN DALLAS THAT OTHER PLACES DON'T.

WE HAVE TO SHOW INCENTIVES.

AND I'VE SAID OFTENTIMES IS THAT RECRUITING INCENTIVES MAY NOT HELP RETENTION, BUT RETENTION INCENTIVES DO HELP RECRUITING.

AND SO AFTER WE SELL THAT THEN WE HAVE THE RECRUIT, THE RECRUITS GO THROUGH THERE, GO THROUGH A PROCESS, GO THROUGH THEIR TESTING, GO THROUGH THEIR BACKGROUNDS.

AND, YOU KNOW, IN TWO, THREE, FOUR MONTHS IF THEY GET SELECTED, THEY START THE ACADEMY WHICH IS A LONG ACADEMY.

IT'S ALMOST TEN MONTHS.

AND THEN AFTER THAT, THEY GO THROUGH A FIELD TRAINING PROGRAM, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS.

AND SO AGAIN, I MEAN, IT'S ALMOST A YEAR AND A HALF AGAIN BEFORE WE CAN HIRE THEM WHEN WE TALK ABOUT STAFFING, I ALWAYS SAY TO THE POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT RECRUITING.

AND I ALWAYS HAVE TO SAY THAT BECAUSE IT'S THE RETENTION PIECE IS JUST AS, IF NOT MORE IMPORTANT.

SO, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, IF THIS DEPARTMENT, IF INDIVIDUALS ARE STAYING IN THIS DEPARTMENT ONE YEAR LONGER THAN THEY NORMALLY WOULD THAT OFFSETS THAT, THAT OFFSETS THAT.

250. YOU KNOW, FOR THAT YEAR AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THOSE INCENTIVES.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE MANAGER'S OFFICE, ALWAYS WORKING WITH CHAIR MENDELSOHN AND PUBLIC SAFETY SINCE THE DAY SHE STARTED WITH THE CHAIR WITH REGARDS TO HOW WE INCREASE THAT. AND WE HAVE SEEN, WE HAVE SEEN.

I MEAN, I'M NOT GOING TO CALL IT A TREND, BUT IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, WE HAVE SEEN, WE HAVE SEEN ATTRITION NUMBERS LOWER WHILE WE'RE SEEING ACADEMY NUMBERS RISE.

BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW IT'S STILL THE NET GAINS ARE MINIMAL.

SO TO SPEAK, AS WE'RE GETTING TO OUR ULTIMATE GOAL.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN SO THAT'S WHY I ALWAYS SAY WE GOT TO KEEP OUR EYE ON RETENTION, JUST AS, IF NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE RECRUITING ASPECT OF IT.

ABSOLUTELY. AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU.

AND BEING IN BUSINESS BEFORE I WAS IN NONPROFIT, YOU DIDN'T COME INTO CITY HALL.

IT'S LIKE THE BIGGEST THING ON MY STAFFING WAS WHEN I HAD 350 EMPLOYEES THAT I MANAGED, YOU KNOW, AND I HAD ALL MY, YOU KNOW, MY MANAGERS BELOW ME.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AS A REGIONAL MANAGER AND IT'S LIKE, THEN YOU HAVE YOUR OTHER ONES.

SO LIKE YOUR RANK AND FILE, RIGHT? YOU HAVE ALL YOUR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THEIR MANAGERS.

RIGHT? BUT THEY'RE GIVEN DIFFERENT TYPE TITLES.

AND SO, YOU NEED A SERGEANT FOR EVERY SO MANY STREET OFFICERS.

RIGHT. AND THEN YOU NEED, YOU KNOW, YOUR MAJORS AND YOUR I MEAN, ALL THE WAY UP.

THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT LEVELS IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS ABLE TO FIGHT CRIME, STAY SAFE AND COME HOME EVERY DAY THAT, YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT ULTIMATE GOALS, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE EVERY TOOL THAT YOU HAVE.

SO YES, RETENTION BECAUSE WE GET I THINK WE'RE KIND OF GETTING THERE WITH THE SLOWING DOWN THE RETIREES.

BUT THAT ONLY LASTS SO LONG.

RIGHT? BECAUSE AGE IS A THING.

AND POLICING IS NOT A YOUNG PERSON'S GAME.

IF YOU'RE OUT THERE HAVING TO RUN AND JUMP ON PEOPLE AND, YOU KNOW, NOT EVERYBODY'S LIKE YOU, RIGHT?

[04:00:02]

SO IT'S LIKE, IT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.

AND SO I WANT TO ASK YOU A REALLY QUICK QUESTION, BUT YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB AND WE'RE GOING TO GET THERE.

BUT WE GOT TO TRUST IN YOU AND NOT LET SOME OUTSIDE ENTITY TRY TO DO YOUR JOB FOR YOU.

UNIVERSITY PARK, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I KIND OF THE PERSON CAME TO SPEAK LEADING THE CHARGE, AND THEY'RE FROM UNIVERSITY PARK.

AND DO THEY GIVE US TAX DOLLARS, POLICE OFFICERS OR ANY KIND OF ANYTHING TO OUR CITY FROM THEIR SALES TAX OR THEIR PROPERTY TAX OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? WE THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ANSWERING THAT QUESTION CORRECTLY BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT.

SO, I'M JUST WONDERING IF SOMEBODY CAN TELL ME BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO KNOW.

SO MY ANSWER WAS CORRECT.

MR. IRELAND JUST AGREED.

SO NO, THERE ARE NO TAX DOLLARS THAT COME TO THE CITY DIRECTLY FROM THAT CITY.

FROM THE CITY. OKAY. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.

THANK YOU. WEIRD THAT SOMEBODY FROM UNIVERSITY PARKS WANTS TO LEAD THIS CHARGE.

NEXT THING I WANT TO ASK IS ALL OF THESE THINGS, THESE HERO ONES, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE HUGE, UNCONSTITUTIONAL PORTIONS TO THESE JUST FROM WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE COURTS IN OTHER CITIES.

AND I WILL FINISH UP WITH MY ONE MINUTE WHEN IT'S MY TURN.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT IN THE HEROES.

I THINK IT WOULD SET US BACK TO THE DARK AGES.

SO, THE REVENUE.

SO, IF THIS SOMETHING PASSED, IT GOES INTO EFFECT IN NOVEMBER.

SO, THE ASSET REVENUE, WHEN DO THOSE REVENUE HAVE TO BE SPENT AND WHAT STOPPED THEM FROM YOU NOT TO SPENDING THOSE REVENUE.

SOME WILL ANSWER IT IN TWO PARTS.

SO, I THINK I HEARD FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY EARLIER THAT IF THE PROPOSITION PASSES, IT WOULD GO INTO EFFECT AFTER THE CANVASING ELECTION.

CAN THE CANVASING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD DO.

BUT WE TYPICALLY DO NOT GET OUR REPORTS OR OUR UPDATES ON ANY OF OUR REVENUES UNTIL THE SUMMER.

AND SO, I'M NOT SURE WHETHER OR NOT FROM A TIMING PERSPECTIVE, DOES THAT GIVE US TIME TO WHERE WE GO INTO THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE? I WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT WOULD BE THE CASE, BECAUSE WE WOULD ALREADY BE IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUDGET THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED.

WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE JUST TWO MONTHS INTO THAT NEW FISCAL YEAR.

SO, I'M NOT CERTAIN WHETHER OR NOT IF WE THEN WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR, GET OUR NEW NUMBERS THAT WE TYPICALLY GET IN JULY, AND THEN BEGIN TO DEVELOP THE BUDGET AROUND THAT NUMBER.

BUT I'M NOT REALLY SURE HOW THAT WOULD WORK.

AND SO, TAMMY, DO YOU WE'D HAVE TO GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT.

YEAH. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, WE'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THE FOLLOW UP QUESTION ABOUT EXACTLY WHEN IT WOULD TAKE EFFECT AND HOW LONG WOULD THIS CHANGE TAKE EFFECT? IF SO, WHAT IS THE PROCESS TO STOP THE CHANGE? IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER CHARTER AMENDMENT, WE CAN'T DO ANOTHER CHARTER AMENDMENT EARLIER THAN TWO YEARS.

SO IT WOULD BE 2020 7TH NOVEMBER BEFORE ANY CHANGE WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE PLACE.

SO ANY AMENDMENT TO THE CHARTER.

SO WITH THIS WE'RE LOOKING AT A TWO-YEAR GRACE PERIOD.

WE DON'T KNOW I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO LEGAL BUT THAT'S SOMETHING EXECUTIVE SESSION.

BUT I'M WANTING TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THAT TIME FRAME.

YOU KNOW WHAT. YOU KNOW THAT TIME FRAME.

IF YOU DO PASS, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? HOW DO AFFECT OUR BUDGET? YOU KNOW, ASSET REVENUE.

THAT'S SOMETHING WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE ARE WE ARE.

WE GOT A PENSION WE'RE TRYING TO RESOLVE.

I GUESS ON THE OTHER SENSE THAT IT PUT US IN A PREDICAMENT.

IT'S A CAMPAIGN THAT WE CANNOT USE ANY CAMPAIGN RESOURCES TO DO IT.

BUT AS AN INDIVIDUAL, AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, AS TENNELL ATKINS WHATEVER.

I CAN USE MY OWN SOURCE TO LOBBY AGAINST THAT.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I KNOW THE GUIDELINES, WHAT I CAN DO AND WHAT I CANNOT DO IF I CHOOSE TO DO THAT.

AND RIGHT NOW I DO NOT KNOW.

SO, I DO NEED SOME DIRECTION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY BECAUSE THAT IS GOING TO AFFECT, YOU KNOW WHAT I BELIEVE, WHAT I DON'T BELIEVE AS AN INDIVIDUAL AND AS A TAXPAYER, WHERE MY MONEY SHOULD GO, WHERE MY MONEY SHOULD NOT GO.

I SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT NOT IN MY POSITION AS A COUNCIL, BUT MY POSITION AS A TAXPAYER, AS A RESIDENT, AS A CITIZEN, WHAT IS MY RIGHT? AND SO I WANT TO BE IN GOOD, CONFIDENT THAT OUR ATTORNEY WILL TELL US OR TELL ME PERSONALLY WHAT IS MY RIGHT AND WHAT I CAN DO AND WHAT I CANNOT DO, BECAUSE I FEEL THAT THIS IS SOMETHING GOING TO CRIPPLE US RIGHT NOW.

[04:05:03]

I AM 100% PUBLIC SAFETY.

I SUPPORT THEM 100% ON THE PENSION.

WE'RE GOING TO RESOLVE THE PENSION HERE.

BUT RIGHT NOW THIS IS GOING TO CRIPPLE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE.

YOU KNOW, OUR PARKS, OUR RECS, OUR LIBRARIES, YOU KNOW EMPLOYEES.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO GO BACK TO THE POINT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT BACK IN THE FURLOUGH DAYS AND PARKS AND REC CENTER CLOSED DOWN, LIBRARY CLOSED DOWN, AND AN OFFICER IS LEAVING.

YOU KNOW WE CAN'T PAY THE PENSION, CAN'T DO ANYTHING.

IT'S A IT'S A IT'S A FORMAT THAT WE GOT TO RIGHT MESSAGE THE RIGHT WORD.

GO OUT THERE AND TELL WHAT IS THIS IS ALL ABOUT.

AND SO I JUST NEED SOME GUIDANCE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

COUNCIL MEMBER. WE'LL BE PROVIDING THAT INFORMATION TO ALL OF COUNCIL.

WE'LL BE PROVIDING IT TO CITY EMPLOYEES AS WELL, WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT DO WHEN IT COMES TO A MEASURE.

MR. BLACKMON YOU RECOGNIZE FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. SO I BELIEVE WE HAD JUST A I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING THROUGH A CITY MANAGER SEARCH AT THIS MOMENT, SO I'LL WAIT TILL.

OH, SORRY.

KIM, DID YOU SAY THE WORD SEARCH? I DID SO M NECK.

BUT. AND YOUR PROFESSIONAL THAT'S BEEN IN THE INDUSTRY.

TELL ME WHAT THESE MEASURES WOULD MEAN AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS SEARCH, IF THEY ARE TO PASS, BECAUSE WE'VE ESSENTIALLY TOLD YOU HOW TO DO YOUR JOB.

AND THAT GOES SAME WITH THE POLICE CHIEF IN SOME ASPECTS.

WE'VE ESSENTIALLY SAID, THIS IS HOW WE WANT YOU TO DO YOUR JOB.

AND I WOULD THINK IT WOULD HARM ATTRACTING TALENT TO THIS CITY.

AND I MEAN, YOU CAN OPINE ON THAT, OR YOU CAN JUST SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT.

NEXT QUESTION.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT.

JUST FROM MY OWN PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE, AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ANY POTENTIAL CANDIDATE FOR THE CITY MANAGER POSITION, BUT I THINK IT'S DETRIMENTAL.

AND IT WOULD BE A I THINK IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF WOULD THINK VERY SERIOUSLY ABOUT BEFORE THEY WOULD WANT TO DEDICATE THEIR PROFESSIONAL TIME TO THE CITY MANAGER POSITION.

BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT, I GUESS, AMENDMENT TWO ABOUT A SURVEY, A SURVEY IS DIFFERENT FROM A POLL, AND YOU COULD REALLY ACTIVATE A PR CAMPAIGN.

AND IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT IF YOU DON'T REACH THAT THRESHOLD, YOU WILL BE TERMINATED.

AND SO I WOULD THINK IF I WAS LOOKING FOR A JOB, I WOULDN'T COME HERE.

AND SO I WOULD THINK THE TALENT POOL WOULD SHRINK.

AND THAT'S JUST MY THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS.

BECAUSE WE WANT TO HIRE THE BEST.

WE WANT TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE.

AND I THINK THAT'S THE DIRECTION OF ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES.

ON MY NEXT QUESTION, IT DOES SAY THAT ON, I THINK THREE, IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT A CERTAIN AMOUNT WILL GO TO FIRE AND PENSION SYSTEM.

HAVE WE EVALUATED WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE? I MEAN, IF IT DOES GO THERE, IF IT WHAT'S THE IMPACT ON IT.

WELL, I MEAN, WE KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT ON OUR BUDGET WILL BE, BUT IF IT GOES DIRECTLY TO THE PENSION AS IT'S INDICATED, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO OUR PAYMENT STRUCTURE? AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD ANY EVALUATION ON THAT.

WE HAVE NOT HAD THAT DETAILED EVALUATION AT THIS TIME, BUT IT WOULD BE DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD WANT TO COME BACK AND BE ABLE TO SHARE MORE IN DEPTH WITH THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT WHAT THOSE FINANCIAL.

BECAUSE IT'S ALL BACK TO THEN WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO THEN PROJECT.

IF THIS HAPPENS, THEN YEAR ONE, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO OUR BUDGET? AND THEN YEAR AFTER YEAR WHEN WE KNOW THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY ADDITIONAL REVENUES, THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF TO TAKE CARE OF OUR ONGOING NEEDS.

THANK YOU. THAT'S IT FOR NOW, MR. MAYOR. MISS WILLIS, RECOGNIZE FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AND I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.

GIVEN SOME OF THE DISCUSSION AROUND THIS AND CONCERN RAISED BY OUR CHIEF OF POLICE AND OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND SOME REALLY EXCELLENT POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE.

IS IT POSSIBLE IF THESE THE GROUPS THAT SUBMITTED THESE, COULD THEY WITHDRAW THEM IF THEY SO DESIRE? LET ME I'D HAVE TO CHECK.

OKAY. I MEAN, I THINK MAYBE THERE ARE SOME POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS DISCUSSION THAT MIGHT GIVE PAUSE TO THE DETRIMENT IT COULD ACTUALLY DO TO OUR BUDGET, TO OUR CITY THAT THEY MIGHT WANT TO WEIGH AND CONSIDER.

LET ME MOVE NOW TO THE THE AMENDMENT ON CITIZEN ENFORCEMENT.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS A WAY TO TIE UP TAXPAYER DOLLARS IN THE COURT SYSTEM VERSUS DOING THE WORK OF THE PROCESS OF CITIZEN OR RESIDENT IMPROVEMENT PUBLIC INPUT, WORKING WITH NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS, COUNCIL MEMBERS, STAFF, ETC.

KIND OF THE WAY WE USUALLY DO THINGS TO TO HAVE TO IDENTIFY AN ISSUE AND THEN WORK THROUGH IT AND ARRIVE AT THE BEST SOLUTION.

[04:10:04]

SO THAT'S CONCERNING.

BUT ANOTHER THING THAT CONCERNS ME IS KIND OF AN ISSUE THAT'S BEEN INTERWOVEN IN THIS, THAT I THINK THIS IS BROUGHT UP TO TRY TO GET TO, AND THAT IS ARRESTING OUR WAY OUT OF HOMELESSNESS. AND I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

WHAT'S THAT THING? THE BILL OF RIGHTS, YOU KNOW, ARE THERE CONSIDERATIONS AROUND THAT AND HOW THAT COULD BUTT UP AGAINST SOMETHING LIKE THIS? I MEAN, I'M, I JUST I WANT OUR, OUR RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND AS THEY GO TO THE POLLS ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS, THAT IT MAY SOUND LIKE A QUICK FIX AND JUST TO, YOU KNOW, ARREST OUR WAY OUT OF SITUATIONS, BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WOULD HAVE IMPLICATION HERE THAT I THINK THEY SHOULD KNOW.

I MEAN, THE MEASURE IS NOT SPECIFIC TO WHAT THE 4000 POLICE OFFICERS ARE SUPPOSED TO DO.

SO SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN INTERTWINED WITH THIS.

I MEAN, I REALLY DON'T HAVE A COMMENT ON WHETHER IT REQUIRES US TO ARREST OUR WAY OUT.

I DON'T THINK IT DOES.

WELL, I MEAN, IT'S ENFORCING.

IT'S SAYING WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THE CITY ENFORCE THEIR OWN.

YEAH. THE CITIZEN ENFORCEMENT ONE.

OH, OKAY. WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE.

WELL, I HESITATE TO ANSWER ON THE RECORD BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO PROVIDE AN ARGUMENT FOR A RESIDENT.

OKAY, I GET IT.

SO I GUESS THAT'S JUST SOMETHING I WOULD SAY I WOULD WANT RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT WHILE IT MAY SEEM LIKE THIS IS A WAY TO JUST CLEAN UP OUR STREETS IN ONE FELL SWOOP, THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER FACTORS THAT MIGHT SUPERSEDE JUST BEING ABLE TO GO IN AND DO THAT.

SO THIS ISN'T THE QUICK FIX THAT IT MAY APPEAR TO BE ON PAPER.

RIGHT? I WOULD AND ANSWERING FOR THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER, I THINK IT'S A HUGE RESOURCE ISSUE, HUGE RESOURCE ISSUE THAT THIS PETITION DOESN'T EVEN CONSIDER.

AND AGAIN, I'LL JUST SAY WE'VE GOT A SYSTEM FOR THIS.

I MEAN, WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, 14 DISTRICTS, COUNCIL MEMBERS, STAFF, LOTS OF STRONG NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS DIFFERENT GROUPS, ACTIVIST GROUPS OUT THERE THAT THERE ARE SOME CHANNELS BY WHICH, IF YOU'VE GOT A CONCERN YOU COULD USE THAT DOESN'T GO, YOU KNOW, STRAIGHT TO THE COURT SYSTEM AND TYING UP TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND BURNING THOSE RESOURCES.

SO THAT'S JUST THE POINT I WANTED TO MAKE ON THAT ONE.

THANK YOU.

OKAY, I GUESS WE'RE NOW ON TO ROUND THREE.

MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MINUTE.

MADAM CITY MANAGER, YOU HAVE BRIEFED US ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION ABOUT THE SHORTFALL IN THE FIRE AND POLICE PENSION, AND YOU, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, HAVE DEVISED A SOLUTION TO MEETING THE OBLIGATIONS TO FULLY FUND THAT PENSION.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I ASSUME THAT YOU HAVE WORKED INTO THE 2025 BUDGET, INCREASED ALLOCATION TO THE PENSION FUND TO ADDRESS THAT SHORTFALL IN THE PENSION FUND, ISN'T THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT IN YEAR 25 AND IN YEAR 26.

SO THERE ARE TWO BASIC ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS REFERENDUM.

ONE IS IS IT NECESSARY? I THINK THE CONCLUSION HAS TO BE THAT IT IS NOT NECESSARY, BASED UPON THE CITY MANAGER'S ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IN MR. IRELAND'S QUESTION.

I'M SORRY. AND THE CHIEF'S QUESTION ANSWERS ABOUT THE FUNDING FOR DPD.

THAT'S YOUR TIME.

I'M SORRY. YOU SHOULD HAVE. THANK YOU.

BEEN WARNED, I GUESS. BUT, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE THE RULES.

MISS ARNOLD, THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

I HAVE ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU.

TO SAY I'M SORRY, I GOTTA.

I'M SORRY. I GOT A HOLD. I SEE MR. RESENDEZ. HE GETS TO JUMP.

ACTUALLY. FIVE MINUTES, I BELIEVE.

I THINK YOU GOT FIVE MINUTES, SIR.

THANK YOU, SIR, THANK YOU.

I WON'T TAKE UP ALL FIVE. I DON'T THINK I SHARE THE SAME CONCERNS THAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN EXPRESSING ABOUT THE DALLAS HERO.

INITIATED CHARTER AMENDMENT PETITIONS.

I'M WONDERING IF, FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S PERSPECTIVE, ARE THERE ANY LEGAL ISSUES WITH THOSE THREE AMENDMENT PETITIONS THAT THAT YOU ALL CAN SHARE WITH THE PUBLIC? NO.

OH. ALL RIGHT.

WELL, BUMMER.

BECAUSE I HAVE SOME AND I CAN THINK OF MANY LEGAL ISSUES, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE, I'M SURE.

ALL RIGHT. SO. NO, I'M NOT I'M NOT THE CITY ATTORNEY.

I'M AN ATTORNEY. BUT I'LL LET YOU ALL TALK ABOUT THAT.

BUT AS IT RELATES TO THE DALLAS FREEDOM ACT AMENDMENT PETITION, I DO HAVE A FEW COMMENTS AS WELL.

I THINK WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT CONFLATING SALES OF MARIJUANA AND POSSESSION FOR PERSONAL USE FOR EXAMPLE,

[04:15:03]

WITH WITH THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU GAVE CHIEF ABOUT THE VARIOUS YOU KNOW, VIOLENT CRIME AND ALL THAT.

ARE THERE WAS THERE A NEXUS BETWEEN ANY OF THOSE AND AND ALCOHOL? FROM WHAT THE FROM WHAT I GOT FROM MY HOMICIDE INVESTIGATORS THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN, BUT THAT IS NOT THAT WASN'T THE PREVALENT ISSUE BECAUSE I THINK I MEAN, AREN'T THERE SOME STUDIES THAT THAT HAVE SHOWN THAT MARIJUANA USE ITSELF IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT DRIVER OF VIOLENT CRIME? I'M NOT FAMILIAR NECESSARILY WITH THOSE STUDIES.

I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE CRIMINOLOGIST.

I WILL SAY WHAT MY WHAT MY OPINION OR WHAT I BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD LEAD TO MORE SALES, WHICH THERE IS VIOLENCE WITH THAT. OKAY.

AND THE PROPS THAT YOU HAVE, THOSE, THOSE TWO DIFFERENT BAGS, CAN WE SHOW THEM AGAIN REALLY QUICKLY? SURE. BECAUSE AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO BE CAREFUL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POSSESSION OF FOR PERSONAL USE VERSUS SALES.

AND DO YOU MIND HOLDING THEM UP, CHIEF? THEY'VE BEEN IN THE BOX TOO LONG.

THE ONE ON THE BAG ON YOUR RIGHT HAND.

THAT ONE IS THE TWO-OUNCE BAG, RIGHT? YES, SIR. AND THEN THE ONE ON THE RIGHT, ON YOUR LEFT HAND IS THE FOUR OUNCE.

YES. IF A DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT OFFICER FOUND SOME A RESIDENT WITH A TWO-OUNCE BAG, THEY CAN STILL BE CHARGED WITH A FELONY, RIGHT? NOT NECESSARILY.

WHY NOT? BECAUSE OUR.

I'LL LET MY NARCOTICS EXPERT TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT, BUT A NARCOTICS OFFICER NEEDS TO DEEM THAT WHEN IT WHEN IT'S WHEN IT'S PARTICULARLY LIKE THAT.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M LIEUTENANT DAN FOGLE WITH THE NARCOTICS DIVISION.

CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION FOR ME, PLEASE, SIR? IF A DALLAS RESIDENT WAS FOUND WITH A TWO-OUNCE BAG THAT YOU ALL JUST SHOWED COULDN'T THEY BE CHARGED WITH A FELONY FOR DELIVERY? YES, SIR. OKAY.

SO, AGAIN, WE JUST NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SALES OR POSSESSION.

AND ANOTHER THING THAT I NOTICED, IS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON WHY THE TWO OUNCE BAG THE MARIJUANA IS SEPARATED IN BAGGIES VERSUS THE FOUR OUNCE WHERE THE MARIJUANA IS SEPARATED, LIKE IN LOOSELY TIED SANDWICH BAGS? BUT ALL THE, BOTH BAGS ARE INDIVIDUALLY SEPARATED.

THE FOUR OUNCES AND THE TWO OUNCES.

THERE'S JUST MORE IN THE IN THE BIGGER ONE, BUT THE TWO OUNCE HAS THE GREEN BAGGIES AND THE FOUR OUNCE HAS SANDWICH BAGS.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROJECTING ACCURATE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE COULD SEE THE FOUR-OUNCE BAG AND IT LOOKS LIKE A POUND OF MARIJUANA VERSUS THE TWO-OUNCE BAG THAT LOOKS LIKE ONE OUNCE OF MARIJUANA.

THE FOUR-OUNCE BAG HAS A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT BAGS IN THERE.

WE JUST USE WHAT PACKAGING WAS AVAILABLE, BUT THE WEIGHT OF EACH INDIVIDUAL BAG WITHIN THAT FOUR-OUNCE BAG IS APPROXIMATELY THE SAME.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT, I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND THEN CHIEF GARCIA, BACK TO THAT, THE NEXUS QUESTION ABOUT THE MARIJUANA, AND I KNOW I ASKED I ASKED ABOUT ALCOHOL.

WAS THERE A NEXUS BETWEEN ANY OF THOSE CRIMES AND POVERTY? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT MURDER, THE MURDER, ANY OF THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU GAVE? I. WE DON'T.

OUR HOMICIDE DETECTIVES DON'T REALLY MEASURE POVERTY ON VICTIMS. WHAT ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES? NONE THAT WERE IN THEIR SUMMARIES OR HOUSING INSECURITY.

LACK OF QUALITY EDUCATION.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T.

WE'RE JUST NOT USING MARIJUANA AS A SCAPEGOAT AND BLAMING MARIJUANA FOR THE VIOLENT CRIME THAT WE SEE.

WELL, I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER AND I APPRECIATE YOUR QUESTIONS.

I THINK TO THE POINT AND, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT A STANDING OFFICE CHIEF, AND I'VE BEEN TO COMMUNITY MEETINGS AT EVERY COUNCIL DISTRICT, AND THERE'S PROBABLY NOT A COUNCIL DISTRICT WHERE I'VE NOT HEARD FROM COMMUNITIES THAT ARE IMPACTED OF VIOLENT CRIME THAT HAVE SPOKEN REALLY PARTICULARLY TO WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART'S POSITION WAS WITH REGARDS TO STREET LEVEL TYPE SALES AND THE ARGUMENTS OF CONFLATING AND IN WHATEVER WE TALK ABOUT.

BUT I MEAN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS THIS POLICY WILL NOT HELP THAT SITUATION GET BETTER.

I MEAN, WE COULD TALK ABOUT THE CORRELATIONS, BUT CERTAINLY HAVING A HIGHER THRESHOLD WILL NOT MAKE THOSE SITUATIONS BETTER.

YEAH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING ACCURATE INFORMATION THOUGH.

ABSOLUTELY. I JUST WANTED TO DEPICT THE REASON THAT WE EXPLAINED THIS IN THE MANNER WE DID IS PARTICULARLY AS COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART PUT IT AND IT

[04:20:03]

REALLY IT RESONATED WITH ME BECAUSE, AGAIN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I DON'T WANT TO SAY ARGUE.

WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION BACK AND FORTH, BUT IT CERTAINLY WILL NOT MAKE THAT STREET LEVEL TYPE QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES THAT YOUR BUSINESS OWNERS CALL US ON, THAT YOUR COMMUNITY CALLS US ON THAT.

COMMUNITY MEMBERS CALL US ON GET BETTER.

OKAY. WELL, I APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONSES.

I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK YOU AND THE DEPARTMENT OFFICERS DO.

THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AT THE TIME.

AT THIS TIME, I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE, BUT THAT DOESN'T.

THE QUEUE IS NOT INFALLIBLE.

OKAY, HERE WE GO. YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE, MR. NARVAEZ. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THE ONE ABOUT THE 1000 OFFICERS, WHICH, I MEAN, I DON'T EVEN THINK IT COULD EVEN POSSIBLY BE IMPLEMENTED ANYWAY, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN IS 1000 OFFICERS IS $175 MILLION.

THAT'S IN, YOU KNOW, IN CURRENT TIME.

THAT'S 8.5 CENTS ADDED TO THE TAX RATE, MR. MAYOR, WHICH IS AN ADDITIONAL A LITTLE BIT OVER 10% OF THE TAX RATE THAT THE CITY MANAGER IS ABOUT TO PRESENT TO US TOMORROW.

JUST FYI, BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE ON THIS COUNCIL WHO ARE HUGE ABOUT TAX RATE DECREASES AND THAT'S OKAY.

BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT LIKE THIS AND GET EVERYTHING ELSE.

CHIEF GARCIA, YOU ASK OR TALK TO US A LOT ABOUT WEED AND SEED.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO YOU OR WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WEED AND SEED IS AND NOT WEED LIKE THE OTHER WEED.

BUT NOW WEED AND SEED IS OUR MANTRA.

AND AGAIN, WE CAN SEE IT GOES BACK TO A FEDERAL PROGRAM IN THE LATE 80S, EARLY 90S WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE WEED THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, AND THEN WE SEED THOSE SAME NEIGHBORHOODS WITH POSITIVITY AND WITH PROGRAMS TO HELP THEM GET OUT OF A LIFE OF VIOLENT CRIME OR GET OUT OF A LIFE OF CRIME.

SO, IT'S A, IT'S A CARROT AND A STICK PERSPECTIVE THAT WE'RE WEEDING.

YOU KNOW, THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT TO ALLOW FLOWERS TO GROW.

YOU AND I AGREE WITH YOU 100% ON THAT.

I LOVE THAT YOU BRING THAT UP AND EVERYTHING.

AND TAKING $125 MILLION OUT OF OUR BUDGET ELIMINATES WEED AND SEED, WHICH INCREASES YOUR VIOLENT CRIME, EVEN THOUGH YOU WOULD HAVE MORE OFFICERS, BECAUSE ALL THOSE OTHER RESOURCES WE HAVE GET ALL CUT AND DEPLETED.

AND THEN THEN WHERE ARE YOU AT? SO JUST AND IT'S NOT ON YOU JUST ON THIS AMENDMENT THAT'S BEEN IS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. TIME.

THANK YOU. MISS ARNOLD, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU, SIR. AND ONCE AGAIN, I WILL UNDERSCORE MY POSITION.

AND SOMETIMES IT'S GOOD TO BE QUIET.

AND TODAY IS NOT MY DAY.

WE MUST EDUCATE ON THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT.

I MEAN A PROPOSITION AROUND THIS CHARTER, THE WHOLE CONCEPT.

ONCE AGAIN, WE HAVE FAST MONEY, DEEP POCKETS THAT HAVE PUT THIS NONSENSE BEFORE US.

BUT ONCE AGAIN, IT IS ABOUT DIPLOMACY.

DEMOCRACY. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I THINK WHEN WE I JUST HEARD THE COMMENT ABOUT OUTSIDERS COMING IN TO DALLAS, THEY SHOULD THANK OUR ATTORNEYS BECAUSE OUR ATTORNEYS RECOGNIZE THE CONSTITUTION AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH, BECAUSE IF IT WAS LEFT UP TO ME, NO ONE FROM THE OUTSIDE OF THIS CITY LIMITS WOULD BE ABLE TO COME HERE, SPEAK TO US, AND TELL US HOW TO RUN THE BUSINESS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO GET TO OUR CONSTITUENTS.

WE HAVE SOME REALISTIC CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING HERE TODAY, CHIEF.

AND ALL OF THE POLICE OFFICERS WHO ARE LISTENING, RETIRED AND ACTIVE.

IF I COULD WRITE A CHECK TODAY TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM, I WOULD.

I'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THE PENSION ISSUE SINCE 2015 AND MY HEART GOES OUT.

BUT WE MUST NOT LET OUR CONSTITUENCY FALL FOR THE ROPE A DOPE FOR THOSE FOLKS WHO ARE OUTSIDE PERPETRATING THIS TALE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

WE'VE GOT WORK TO DO, SO STAY WOKE.

I THINK YOU'RE OUT OF TIME. BUT I WOULDN'T KNOW BECAUSE YOU BROKE THE TIMER.

IT'S GONE. IT'S COMPLETELY GONE.

MISS MENDELSOHN, I THINK YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, IT'S INTERESTING.

ALL FOUR OF THESE PROPOSITIONS WERE BROUGHT FORWARD BY PEOPLE NOT FROM DALLAS WITH DEEP POCKETS THAT HAVE THEIR OWN INTERESTS.

ALL FOUR. AND PREVIOUSLY, WE STRAW PULLED AN ITEM THAT SAID WE WOULD LOWER THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES AND EXTEND THE LENGTH OF TIME.

I VOTED FOR BOTH OF THOSE BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY SOMETHING.

I WILL BE CHANGING THAT VOTE.

I WILL BRING THIS BACK UP NEXT WEEK, BECAUSE WE'RE SEEING HOW IT COULD PUT US IN A DIFFICULT POSITION, AND MAYBE WE NEED TO HAVE THAT THRESHOLD THERE.

SO I WILL SAY THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE YOU LEARN AS YOU GO AND YOU'RE LIKE, YOU KNOW, I NEED TO RECONSIDER THAT POSITION.

BUT I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT WE'RE HEARING HERE ARE FROM RESIDENTS WHO SIGNED UNBELIEVABLY HUGE PETITIONS DEMANDING THEIR GOVERNMENT WORK BETTER, THAT WE HIRE MORE POLICE OFFICERS AND THAT THEY WANT A HIGH FUNCTIONING CITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THAT WHICH THEY CAN'T GET FROM JUST THEIR

[04:25:03]

ONE PERSON, WHICH IS WHY 1401 IS NOT NECESSARILY THE RIGHT WAY FOR US TO GOVERN.

THANK YOU. GOODBYE. IS YOUR TIME ALL RIGHT, MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

I WILL JUST SAY I HADN'T TOUCHED ON THE HERO MEASURES AT ALL, BUT I THINK THEY ARE ALL I THINK THAT THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME UNCONSTITUTIONALITY TO THEM.

I THINK THAT THERE ARE LEGAL CONCERNS TO OUR ABILITY TO FUNCTION EFFICIENTLY AS A CITY.

I THINK JUST TO THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE JUST MADE BY MY COLLEAGUE, THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF SIGNATURES, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS NEAR THE AMOUNT OF CONTEXT THAT WAS NEEDED FOR THOSE WHO SIGNED TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS THE LONG TERM IMPLICATIONS.

IT ALSO WAS CIRCULATED, QUITE FRANKLY, FROM SOMEONE WHO ALSO IS NOT VERY WELL VERSED IN CITY GOVERNMENT.

I KNOW THAT NO ONE AT THE CITY WAS CONSULTED, AND I THINK THAT ANYTHING THIS TO THIS DEGREE, VOTERS NEED TO RELY HEAVILY ON SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS.

AND I WOULD SAY VERY DEFINITIVELY THAT THOSE CIRCULATING AND STARTING THESE ARE NOT THAT.

AND SO I ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC TO ASK YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TO MAKE SOME CALLS AND TO FIND OUT WHAT IT IS THAT'S BEING ASKED FOR YOU TO VOTE ON.

I WILL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW ON RECORD, I THINK YOU SHOULD VOTE NO.

AND THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS THAT WE'VE WENT THROUGH TODAY ON WHAT THAT'S GOING TO DO TO OUR ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO EFFECTIVELY GOVERN GOING FORWARD.

AND SO I HOPE THE PUBLIC WILL DO THEIR HOMEWORK AND, AND REALIZE THAT THERE'S A LOT MORE THAN WHAT I GUESS A PARAGRAPH ABOVE SOME, SOME SIGNATURE LINES COULD HAVE EXPLAINED IN ADDITION TO THAT I THINK THAT JUST AS WE'VE LOOKED AT SOME OTHER PROPOSITIONS, I MEAN SOME AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE COME UP THROUGH OUR CHARTER AMENDMENT PROCESS, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT IT'S SMART GOVERNING AT ALL TO BIND US IN OUR CHARTER.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THE CHARTER DOCUMENT IS MEANT TO BE.

AND FOR US TO PUT OUR CITY IN COMPROMISED SITUATIONS IN THE FUTURE, NOT KNOWING WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH THE MARKET AND THE ECONOMY IS, IS IS VERY IRRESPONSIBLE OF US AS ELECTED OFFICIALS.

AND I THINK THE BIGGEST JOB WE HAVE AS LOCAL OFFICIALS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS IS EFFECTIVELY UTILIZING THE TAX DOLLARS THAT OUR TAXPAYERS PAY TO PROVIDE EFFICIENT SERVICES.

IF WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT, WE CAN CONTINUE TO SUSTAIN THAT WITH A BALANCED BUDGET MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE OF THIS ACTION, I HOPE THE VOTERS WILL VOTE NO AND ALLOW FOR US TO CONTINUE TO DO OUR WORK HERE AT CITY HALL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

SO, LAURA, I GUESS, COULD YOU CLARIFY, ARE THERE TWO SEPARATE WAYS TO GET SOMETHING THROUGH A CHARTER? BECAUSE I THINK THE ONE THAT HE WROTE AND THE FREEDOM DALLAS ONE DID, THAT'S A STATE STATUTE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THEY DID THAT ACCORDING TO STATE LAW.

THE PETITION PROCESS.

OKAY. SO TO BE CLEAR, THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO DO IT.

AND THE ONE THAT WE HAVE ON PROPOSITION SEVEN AND EIGHT ARE ORDINANCES BY THE CITY.

YES. AND THE ONES THAT CAME THROUGH US ON THE FOR PUBLIC ARE BASICALLY A STATE STATUTE.

SO, I BELIEVE WE NEED TO CHANGE THE STATE STATUTE, NOT NECESSARILY JUST OUR CHARTER.

SO, THIS WOULDN'T.

SO RIGHT, THIS WAS NOT PART THEY DIDN'T USE THIS THIS THEY DIDN'T USE WHAT THE TRINITY RIVER USED IN 2007, 2008 TO GET SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT. THEY USED A STATE STATUTE.

SO, IN OTHER WORDS, MAYBE THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD PUT ON OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IS TO CHANGE THAT STATE STATUTE.

THANK YOU. I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE WHO HAS ROUNDS LEFT WHO IS STILL IN THE QUEUE FOR SOME REASON, THE CAROLYN KING ARNOLD, WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ACTUALLY THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM OR THE ACTUAL CAROLYN KING ARNOLD'S.

I DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T FIXED THAT YET, BUT IT'S STILL ON, SO I'M GOING TO IGNORE IT AND MOVE ON TO WHAT I'M TOLD BY MY FRIEND.

THE PARLIAMENTARIAN IS THE NEXT STEP IN THIS PROCESS TO DEAL WITH.

AGENDA. ITEM A TODAY IS TO PROCEED TO THE STRAW, VOTING ON THE ONLY TWO AMENDMENTS THAT ARE POSTED AND PERMISSIBLE FOR US TO ACT ON.

SO WE NEED MOTIONS ON EACH PUT BEFORE THE BODY.

AND THEN THERE'S A STRAW VOTE ON THESE.

NOT A VOTE VOTE.

SO I THINK THE FIRST ONE I WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON IS THE ONE THAT APPEARS FIRST IN THE POSTING JUST TO DO IT IN ORDER, WHICH.

[04:30:02]

YEAH, SORRY, MR. MAYOR, I'M SORRY. CAN I JUST MAKE ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION? OF COURSE, OF COURSE. SINCE YOU'VE BEEN HERE ALL DAY AND WE'RE AND WE'RE APPRECIATIVE OF THAT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY, CHIEF.

THANK YOU. JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ QUESTION.

I THINK THERE'S JUST A MISUNDERSTANDING WITH REGARDS TO HOW HOWEVER WE UNDERSTOOD IT, BUT WITH THAT BAG AS AN EXAMPLE OF LESS THAN FOUR OUNCES, EVEN IF IT'S IN INDIVIDUAL BAGGIES AND A PATROL OFFICER STOPS THAT INDIVIDUAL, EVEN THOUGH TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE MAY LEAD THEM TO BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS POSSESSION FOR SALES, THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ARREST THAT INDIVIDUAL FOR SALES.

THEY WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO ARREST THAT INDIVIDUAL FOR THE MISDEMEANOR.

A NOT FOR THE FELONY.

THEY'D HAVE TO PROVE, THEY'D HAVE TO PROVE DELIVERY.

AND THEY CAN'T PROVE DELIVERY UNLESS IT'S A HAND TO HAND TRANSACTION.

BUT THEY CAN THEY CAN ARREST THEM AND SEND IT TO THE TECHNICALLY YOU HAVE ANOTHER ROUND SO YOU CAN TALK FOR THREE MINUTES.

YEAH. I WAS GOING TO SAY GIVE HIM THREE MINUTES.

THEY CAN BE ARRESTED AND REFERRED TO THE DA'S OFFICE AND LET THE DA FIGURE THAT OUT.

AND THEN THEY'LL HIRE A DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND LET THE COURTS DEAL WITH IT.

BUT I GUESS MY POINT IS, IS UNDER THIS, IF THAT'S ALL UNDER THIS PROPOSITION, IF THAT'S ALL THE INDIVIDUAL HAD WITH THIS PROPOSITION OR WITH THIS FREEDOM ACT IS TELLING US THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTION.

OH, MAYBE THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT ON THAT ONE, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S PREVENTING POLICE FROM ADDRESSING DRUG SALES OR INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE.

BUT MAYBE WE CAN CLARIFY THAT OFFLINE.

YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. SO AGAIN THAT ROUNDS OUT THE DISCUSSION ON THE GENERAL DISCUSSION.

AND SO MR. BAZALDUA, DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION ON THE SALARIES AMENDMENT? IN JUST A MINUTE, I WILL.

YEAH. FOR WHAT PURPOSE THEN? I WAS ON THE QUEUE.

OH, I TALKED ABOUT THAT WHILE YOU WERE GONE.

I GUESS I WAS LIKE, I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS FAKE.

I THOUGHT IT WAS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE MISTAKES.

OKAY, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU. CHIEF, I JUST WANT TO ASK, I KNOW WE HAVE A COUPLE CAMERAS HERE.

I KNOW THAT THE PUBLIC MAY BE TUNING IN, AND THERE'S A LOT OF BUZZ AROUND THESE PROPOSITIONS THAT WERE COMMUNITY LED, SOME OF WHICH I THINK HAD WELL INTENTIONED BUT HAD SOME ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

IF WE ARE UNABLE TO SUSTAIN OUR SUPPORT AND FUNDING THAT WE ALREADY GIVE YOU ALL.

CAN YOU SAY WHAT YOU HAVE? LET THE CITY MANAGER AND TOLD US REPEATEDLY THAT YOU'RE IDEAL STAFFING LEVEL IS WHAT NUMBER IS THAT? I WOULD SAY I'D LIKE TO GET BACK TO 3630.

WE'RE AT 3600 AT OUR HIGHEST.

I THINK WHEN YOU GE TO THAT AND THEN REASSESS AT THAT POINT AGAIN, POPULATION, CRIME, ETC., THINGS SHIFT.

BUT WE CERTAINLY NEED TO GET BACK TO THAT.

SO GOING MORE THAN DOUBLE OF THAT, WHICH WOULD GET US TO THE 4000 WHICH IS BEING ASKED, WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE MONEY AWAY THAT YOU COULD BE DISTRIBUTING WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT FOR MORE EFFICIENT TRAINING OR MATERIALS AND INSTRUMENTS.

BUT IF WE ARE BOUNDING OURSELVES OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS TO 175 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS JUST TO GET STAFFING, WOULD THAT OVERALL HINDER YOUR ABILITY TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEPARTMENT? COUNCIL MEMBER AGAIN, AND JUST TO IN THE ANSWER THAT I'LL GIVE.

I'M NOT NAIVE THAT IF WE'RE PUTTING ASIDE THAT MUCH MONEY THAT CERTAINLY WE NEED VEHICLES, WE NEED EQUIPMENT, WE NEED HELICOPTERS, WE NEED TRAINING.

THERE IS A MYRIAD OF THINGS THAT WE ALSO NEED.

AND I, I'M NOT GOING TO PRETEND TO KNOW ALL THE INS AND OUTS OF THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS, BUT CERTAINLY THAT HAS BEEN SOMETHING IN THE BACK OF MY MIND OF THINKING, IF WE'RE DOING THIS, HOW CAN WE THEN PROVIDE FOR THE OTHER INSTRUMENTAL THINGS THAT OUR OFFICERS NEED, PARTICULARLY AS WE TALK ABOUT RETENTION INCENTIVES? AND WE'RE PARTICULARLY AS WE TALK ABOUT BENEFITS AND EQUIPMENT, THAT IS ALL IMPORTANT AS WELL.

AND SO IF THAT WOULD IMPACT THAT NEGATIVELY, THEN THAT CERTAINLY IS A CONCERN.

WELL, THANK YOU CHIEF.

I'M CONFIDENT THAT IF YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF THE IMPLICATIONS, NEITHER ARE THE DISTRIBUTORS OF THE PETITION.

SO THANK YOU, CHIEF. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO NOW WE NEED A MOTION ON SALARIES.

I DON'T KNOW WHO WANTS TO MAKE THAT.

THANK YOU CHIEF. THANK YOU EVERYONE, ACTUALLY, FOR BEING HERE TODAY.

AND THANK YOU GUYS. SO FOR TO STAY PUT, I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE, BUT SOMEONE NEEDS MR. BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. IN CHAPTER THREE, CITY COUNCIL SECTION FOUR COMPENSATION OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

I MOVE TO STRIKE THE SALARY OF 125,000 AND INSERT 90,000 FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STRIKE THE SALARY OF 145,000 AND INSERT 110,000 FOR THE MAYOR, WITH SALARIES SUBJECT TO A YEARLY ADJUSTMENT EQUAL TO

[04:35:10]

THE YEAR OVER YEAR PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN THE LOCAL CONSUMER PRICE INDEX EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST, 2025.

IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND.

AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE NORMAL 531 DISCUSSION, ALTHOUGH WE WON'T HAVE A FORMAL VOTE.

SO, MR. BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION? THANK YOU MAYOR.

SO THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT I WANTED THERE TO BE MORE OF A CONSENSUS ON, AND IT DIDN'T SEEM THAT WE WERE GETTING THERE BEFORE AFTER WORKING WITH MY COLLEAGUE COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART.

AND SEVERAL OTHERS TO JUST GET SOME FEEDBACK BEYOND WHAT WE HEARD WHEN WE WERE ON THE COUNCIL.

I MEAN ON THE DAIS WAS THE URBAN APPLYING THE URBAN CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.

WE WERE GETTING TO A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN 80,000.

THEN WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT IT IS THAT WE WERE BRINGING UP WAS EQUITABLE.

AND THE REASON THAT I SAY EQUITABLE IS THAT WE OFTEN TALK ABOUT EQUITY, AND WE REALIZE THAT THERE ARE DISPARITIES THAT EXIST IN OUR CITY.

AND IF THE INTENT OF ADJUSTING THE SALARY IS TO MAKE THIS A LIVABLE WAGE OPPORTUNITY, THAT OPENS THE OPPORTUNITY TO THOSE WHO ARE NOT INDEPENDENTLY WEALTHY, FOR INSTANCE, THEN IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IS ADEQUATE TO AFFORD TO LIVE, NO MATTER WHAT DISTRICT IT IS THAT YOU ARE REPRESENTING, FOR US TO FIND SOMETHING TO AGREE ON THAT WOULD STILL PROHIBIT CERTAIN PARTS OF OUR CITY FROM HAVING ADEQUATE TALENT APPLY BECAUSE OF THE FINANCIAL RESTRAINTS.

I THINK THAT THAT IS IN ITSELF A LITTLE BIT EQUITABLE, MORE EQUITABLE THAN THINKING AN AVERAGE IS GOING TO BE THE SAME FOR OUR MOST AFFLUENT COMMUNITIES OF OUR CITY VERSUS THOSE THAT ARE OF LOWER SOCIOECONOMIC MAKEUP.

AND WITH THAT, I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT ALSO TO LOOK AT WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US.

AND IF YOU SEE IN MY MOTION WHAT WAS STRUCK AND WHAT IT WAS REPLACED WITH WE WE HAVE MORE THAN CUT IN HALF WHAT WAS RECOMMENDED TO US BY THE VOLUNTEER BOARD THAT CAME HERE.

THAT'S MORE THAN 50% LESS OF WHAT THEY WERE RECOMMENDING.

I WANT TO REEMPHASIZE THAT THAT VOLUNTEER BOARD WAS COMPRISED OF SEVERAL FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DEMAND IS OF THE JOB.

IT ALSO WAS, AGAIN, A VOLUNTEER BOARD THAT DEVOTED A LOT OF THEIR OWN TIME TO COME UP WITH WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE.

WE DON'T TAKE THAT WORK THAT THEY PUT INTO IT LIGHTLY, BUT WE ALSO HEARD FROM RESIDENTS AFTER THAT PART OF THE PROCESS AND AFTER THEY ARTICULATED WHAT THEY BELIEVED WE SHOULD BE MAKING, WE HEARD SOME FEEDBACK, AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT WAS PRETTY RESOUNDING OF A CONSENSUS THAT 125 WAS A LITTLE BIT TOO HIGH.

IN FACT, BECAUSE OF WHAT WE MAKE NOW, THAT WAS MORE THAN DOUBLING OUR SALARIES.

WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO, BECAUSE I KNOW EVERYONE AROUND THIS DAIS, AND EVEN IF I DO OR DON'T AGREE WITH YOU ON ON POLICY ISSUES, WE'RE ALL HERE BECAUSE WE HAVE PASSION AND LOVE FOR THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE WERE ELECTED TO SERVE.

AND THAT'S NEVER GOING TO BE A QUESTION IN MY MIND, REGARDLESS OF IF THAT MEANS THAT YOU DON'T FEEL THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE FOR YOUR FAMILY IN AN ADEQUATE WAY WITH A SALARY THAT IS MATCHED TO HOUSING THAT WE SUBSIDIZE.

WE HAVE TO LOOK AND WE HAVE TO PRACTICE WHAT WE PREACH.

THIS IS MORE ABOUT, AGAIN, EQUITABLE OPPORTUNITY.

THE FACT THAT THIS HAS CHANGED SO LITTLE IN SO LONG SPEAKS VOLUMES TO THIS BEING BY DESIGN.

THE INTENT WAS NOT FOR THIS HORSESHOE RIGHT HERE TO LOOK AS DIVERSE AS IT IS.

THE INTENT WHEN OUR CHARTER WAS WRITTEN WAS NOT TO LOOK AROUND AT 15 DIFFERENT SEATS, AND IT LOOKED LIKE A SAMPLE OF OUR CITY. THAT'S WHAT IT DOES NOW.

IT LOOKS THAT WAY BECAUSE WE HAVE A DIVERSITY OF RACE, OF GENDER, OF AGE.

THIS IS A TRUE DEPICTION OF THE BEAUTIFUL DIVERSITY THAT MAKES UP THE CITY OF DALLAS.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS DIVERSITY COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED IF WE WERE STILL UNDER THE SAME MINDSET THAT IT WAS MEANT TO BE, FROM SOMEONE WHO COULD AFFORD THIS AS A HOBBY. I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, WITH THE PHONE CALLS THAT I GET AT EVERY HOUR, NO MATTER WHAT DAY OF THE WEEK, NO MATTER IF IT'S A HOLIDAY OR WHAT THE CASE

[04:40:02]

IS, THIS IS NOT A HOBBY.

THIS IS NOT A PART TIME JOB.

I PUT MY 110% INTO THIS, JUST AS I KNOW ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES DO, AND I WOULD LIKE FOR IT TO BE A JOB THAT I CAN HELP TO GROOM THE NEXT LEADERS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS AND IN DISTRICT SEVEN, TO ALSO BE ABLE TO DO THE SAME.

AND THAT'S NOT CURRENTLY HOW IT'S DESIGNED.

SO, I ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO SUPPORT AND THANK YOU ALL TO WHO CONTRIBUTED TO HELP BUILDING A CONSENSUS ON WHAT WE COULD LIVE WITH.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST THE MOTION RELATED TO SALARIES, AS IT WAS READ INTO THE RECORD BY MR. BAZALDUA, CHAIRMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE SALARIES PROPOSED AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION.

WE DID LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS AND HAVE MULTIPLE DISCUSSIONS.

I DO THINK IT'S WISE TO TIE IT TO THE CPI AND THAT DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS AN URBAN CPI.

SO THAT DOES TAKE TOOK US A LITTLE OVER THE 80,000 NUMBER THAT WE DISCUSSED BEFORE.

AND I THINK WE THERE IS A RECOGNITION THAT COST OF LIVING IN DALLAS PROPER IS, IS PERHAPS HIGHER THAN SOME OF OUR SURROUNDING SUBURBAN AREAS.

SO I THINK THERE WAS A ALSO, THIS IS A REALIZATION THAT THE COMMISSION WAS VERY GENEROUS WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATION AND TOOK IT UP MORE THAN TWICE AS MUCH.

AND SO THIS IS NOT THAT WE'RE NOT GOING UP 60.

WE'RE NOT GIVING OURSELVES, AS EVERYONE LOVES TO SAY, WE'RE GIVING OURSELVES A RAISE, BUT WE'RE NOT TAKING IT TO 125,000.

WE HAVE A MORE MODEST INCREASE THAT I THINK CAN BE TIED TO COST OF LIVING.

AND I THINK THAT THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION.

AND I THINK IT'S A NUMBER THAT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

SO THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE SALARIES AMENDMENT.

AND THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ORIGINALLY I WAS NOT GOING TO SUPPORT ANY TYPE OF CHANGE BECAUSE FOR FULL DISCLOSURE, ONCE AGAIN, I WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY THIS CHANGE.

BECAUSE I KNOW SOME FOLKS LIKE TO CALL THE PRESS AND SAY THAT I'M DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN I REALLY AM.

SO FULL DISCLOSURE ON THE RECORD, I WILL NOT GET A PENNY OF ANY KIND OF INCREASE IF THE VOTERS OF DALLAS DECIDE THAT THEY WANT TO DO THAT.

BUT I DO SUPPORT WHAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU DO, BECAUSE I HAVE DONE IT FOR THE LAST SEVEN AND A HALF YEARS.

IT'LL BE 8 IN 10 MONTHS WHEN I LEAVE HERE AND THE 60,000 A YEAR I'M SINGLE.

I LIVE BY MYSELF.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE IT'S TOUGH.

I DON'T KNOW HOW SOME OF Y'ALL DO IT WITH ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR AND FIVE CHILDREN.

AND WHAT MR. BAZALDUA JUST SAID IS ABSOLUTELY LEGIT AND RIGHT.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US PUTS IN COUNTLESS HOURS, COUNTLESS TIME, AND WE ANSWER THAT PHONE.

I JUST THE OTHER DAY, I'M WE'RE ON VACATION AND I'M ANSWERING THE PHONE AT 2:30 IN THE MORNING BECAUSE A CONSTITUENT CALLED AND I KNOW IF THEY'RE CALLING ME AT 2:30 A.M., YOU BETTER BE THERE TO ANSWER THE CALL, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT CALLING YOU JUST TO CHIT CHAT, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SOMETHING'S GOING ON IN THEIR HOME, THEIR COMMUNITY THAT THEY THINK THAT I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT.

AND, AND I KNOW A LOT OF OUR STAFF DO THE SAME THING.

AND SOMETIMES WE GOT TO CALL EACH OTHER OR TEXT EACH OTHER AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND THIS ISN'T A THIS IS NOT A CAREER FOR I THINK, ANYBODY ON THIS COUNCIL.

THIS IS JUST SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN DO THE JOB, AND IT'S JUST WHAT THINGS COST NOW AND 90.

I CAN, I CAN AGREE TO I'M NOT GOING TO SIT THERE AND GO 2000 LESS OR 90 IS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE IT'S KIND OF BEEN TRADITIONAL EVERY TEN YEARS IT WENT FROM 37 5 TO 60.

WE'RE KIND OF RIGHT THERE. 90.

MAYOR GETS A LITTLE BIT MORE BECAUSE THE MAYOR'S GOT TO DO YOU KNOW, CITYWIDE AND INTERNATIONAL TRIPS AND WHO KNOWS WHAT.

AND I'M GOOD WITH ALL THAT.

I THINK THIS IS I THINK THIS IS FAIR.

AND SO THANK YOU FOR THE CONSENSUS BUILDERS THAT GOT TOGETHER AND MADE SURE THAT THIS WORKED OUT.

AND LET'S SEND IT TO THE VOTERS AND LET THE VOTERS DECIDE.

AND THEY'RE EITHER GOING TO SAY YAY OR THEY'RE GOING TO SAY NAY.

BUT ONE MORE TIME, MR. MAYOR, FOR FULL DISCLOSURE, I AM NOT AFFECTED BY THIS IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM AND WILL NOT HAVE RECEIVED ONE INCREASE IN THE EIGHT YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE, AND THAT'S OKAY.

BUT IT IS TIME FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO GET THE NEXT BUMP UP.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, MR. CHAIRMAN. RIDLEY, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON THE SALARIES.

QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.

CAN WE VOTE TO INCREASE OUR OWN SALARIES DURING THIS TERM AS OPPOSED TO FOR THE NEXT TERM? YEAH. THERE'S NO PROHIBITION ON HAVING THE EFFECTIVE DATE BE DURING THE CURRENT TERM.

[04:45:01]

SO, CONTRARY TO MR. NARVAEZ PROTESTATIONS, HE WILL BENEFIT FROM THE INCREASE IF THIS IS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.

I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS INCREASE.

LET ME CLARIFY THAT THE MOTION WAS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST, 2025.

THAT IS WHAT I UNDERSTOOD THE MOTION TO BE.

YOU HAD OKAY, LOOK, YOU ACTUALLY HAD OKAY, OKAY, HERE'S THE REALITY.

YOU ACTUALLY HAD EXACTLY TWO MINUTES AND 30S LEFT ON YOUR TIME FROM THE FIRST ROUND.

WE'LL CALL IT A SECOND ROUND, BUT, I MEAN, IT'S ROUGHLY THREE MINUTES.

GO ROUND TWO. I NEED TO CLEAR THE AIR.

I DID NOT HEAR THE. I'M NOT GIVING HIM MORE TIME, BUT I'M TAKING HIM A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER BECAUSE HE SHUT HIMSELF DOWN TWO MINUTES 30S EARLY, WHICH I WAS SURPRISED BY.

THAT'S WHY I REMEMBER HOW MUCH TIME IT WAS.

I APOLOGIZE, LEAVE IT.

MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU REALLY QUICKLY, I APOLOGIZE.

I DID NOT HEAR THAT IT WOULD BEGIN JANUARY 1ST, 2025.

AND NOW I'VE BEEN TOLD SO IT WILL AFFECT ME.

BUT THAT IS NOT WHY I'M VOTING FOR IT.

BECAUSE I REALLY DID THINK THAT IT WAS STARTING IN THE NEW COUNCIL.

SO ANYWAY, I'M NOT GOING TO CHANGE MY MIND ON IT BECAUSE I DO KNOW WHAT EVERYBODY DOES.

BUT I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO YOU ALL BECAUSE I DID NOT HEAR THE AMENDMENT PROPERLY, AND I DIDN'T WANT TO BE A LIAR.

AND THEN THEN THEN ALL Y'ALL TURNED ME INTO THE PRESS AND SOMETHING GOES ON BECAUSE I LIED.

SO THANK YOU ALL FOR CORRECTING ME.

AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THAT OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT THE RECORD, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. OH, BOY, Y'ALL ARE SO FUNNY.

MISS WILLIS. YOU'RE ASKED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT COMPENSATION, IT'S USUALLY TOUCHY.

AND, I MEAN, I'VE NOW I'VE WORKED ACROSS SEVERAL SECTORS.

I MEAN, PRIVATE, NONPROFIT, GOVERNMENT.

BUT WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO, I MEAN, IT'S BUSINESS AND OPERATIONS.

AND IN OUR CASE, IT'S NOT JUST BUSINESS AND OPERATIONS ON A BALANCE SHEET, BUT IT'S WHO CAN OCCUPY THESE SEATS TO REPRESENT THE RESIDENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

AND, YOU KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN POINTS MADE ABOUT HOW THIS IS 24 OVER SEVEN.

AND BECAUSE OF THAT, YOU NEED A SOLID FOUNDATION.

AND THAT COMES IN MANY FORMS. IT COMES IN HAVING SOLID CITY STAFF AND LEADERSHIP AND PEOPLE THAT WE CAN RELY ON TO WORK FOR OUR RESIDENTS.

IT COMES DOWN TO OUR OWN STAFF IN OUR OFFICES BECAUSE THEY ARE THE FRONT LINE WORKING WITH OUR RESIDENTS, BUT IT ALSO HAS TO DO WITH COMPENSATION.

AND YOU KNOW, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SERVICE, WHAT IS SERVICE IN THIS SERVICE ROLE? AND I THINK THE DISTINCTION IS THAT NONE OF US ARE GOING TO BE COMPENSATED WHAT WE COULD GET IN THE MARKETPLACE.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A GAP.

EVEN IF THIS PASSES WITH THE VOTERS, THERE'S GOING TO BE A GAP BETWEEN THIS NUMBER AND WHAT WE COULD GO OUT AND GET IN THE MARKETPLACE, NOT ONLY WHEN YOU WALK IN THE DOOR, BUT WITH THE WEALTH OF INFORMATION YOU LEARN ACROSS SO MANY DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.

SO THAT IS WHERE THE SERVICE COMES IN.

AND SO YOU'VE GOT TO BE SURE THAT YOU'RE NOT SKATING INTO SERVICE TURNING PUNITIVE.

WE I WAS HOPING WE'D GET TO TALK ABOUT THE PENSION TODAY AND HEAR MORE ABOUT COLA.

WE'VE ALL BEEN GETTING EMAILS AROUND THAT FROM OUR RETIREES, OUR POLICE AND FIRE RETIREES AND HOW THEIR BUYING POWER IS DIMINISHED BY 30%. AND SO OUR $60,000 IS REALLY MORE LIKE $42,000.

SO IF ANYONE'S WORRIED THAT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, ROLLING TO THE BANK IT'S NOT THE CASE.

AND SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, AS WE LOOK AHEAD TO WHAT THAT 60,000 FROM TEN YEARS AGO WOULD BE TODAY.

I THINK YOU ALSO NEED TO LOOK BACKWARD AT THE DIMINISHED POWER, BECAUSE THAT'S A CASE THAT'S BEING MADE TO US BY OUR RETIREES.

AND SO YOU REALLY CAN'T BASE THIS ON YOUR OWN HOUSEHOLD.

I KNOW THERE'S A TENDENCY TO DO THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT A GOOD WAY TO THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE OF HOW WE WANT TO HAVE REPRESENTATION HERE.

AND SO WE KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE IN LINE WITH THE MARKETPLACE.

WE DON'T NEED TO NECESSARILY JUST BASE THIS NUMBER ON WHAT WAS DONE TEN YEARS AGO.

BUT ON THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, I PURPOSELY APPOINTED SOMEONE WHO IS A CEO OF A STATEWIDE BUSINESS BECAUSE I WANTED THAT BUSINESS MENTALITY. I VALUE THE OPINIONS OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WERE HERE.

OBVIOUSLY, THEY HAVE A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE, BUT I REALLY WANTED TO BE SURE WE HAD SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT LIKE A CEO, AND HIS COMMENT TO ME WAS ALWAYS, YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR.

I THINK HE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY PUT A HIGHER NUMBER IN HERE.

AND I WAS LIKE, NO, NO, NO.

YOU KNOW, THE VOTERS, WE STILL IS A SERVICE POSITION.

WE STILL HAVE TO BE MINDFUL OF WHAT THIS NUMBER IS.

BUT LOOKING AT IT FROM A CEO'S POSITION, HE WAS DEFINITELY ABOUT INCREASING THIS NUMBER.

AND SO I APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENT AND COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ AND I HAVE BEEN ON SOME LATE-NIGHT TEXTS TOGETHER DEALING WITH SOME SITUATIONS, PHONE CALLS.

THAT'S GREAT. I'VE HAD PEOPLE SHOW UP ON MY DOORSTEP WITH THEIR PLUMBING PROBLEMS. SO, YOU KNOW, IT TRULY IS 24 OVER SEVEN.

AND I LOVE IT.

AND I THINK WE'RE ALL SO HONORED TO SERVE HERE.

BUT I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING BY THOSE OF US WHO ARE COMMITTED.

JUST DEEP INTO OUR HEART, SOUL AND MIND, TO THIS ROLE AND TO ALL THOSE WHO WILL COME AFTER US AND TO OPEN THOSE DOORS A LITTLE WIDER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE THE REPRESENTATION

[04:50:05]

THAT OUR RESIDENTS DESERVE AS A WHOLE.

THANK YOU.

FOR MENDELSOHN YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON SALARIES.

THANK YOU. MY FIRST QUESTION IS FOR JAKE.

THERE HAD BEEN A REQUEST AROUND THE HORSESHOE FOR YOU TO DO SOME RESEARCH INTO COMPARABLE SALARIES OF OTHER CITIES.

CAN YOU SHARE WHAT YOU FOUND? SURE. AND I DO WANT TO JUST POINT OUT THAT A LOT OF THESE NUMBERS CAME FROM HR, AND THEY DID A LOT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING.

AND SO, I APPRECIATE THEM FOR THAT.

YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED ON, I BELIEVE, JUNE 17TH AN EMAIL FROM ME WITH THAT DATA COMPILED.

IT INCLUDED INFORMATION ABOUT CITIES IN TEXAS AS WELL AS CITIES ACROSS THE NATION.

IN TEXAS, THE HIGHEST COUNCIL SALARIES WERE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.

COUNCIL SALARIES WERE ABOUT $116,688.

WITH THE MAYOR'S SALARY AT ABOUT 134,000.

THE NEXT HIGHEST WAS THE CITY OF HOUSTON AT ABOUT 62,000 AS OF THE TIME OF SENDING THAT EMAIL.

I WILL NOTE THAT SAN ANTONIO WAS ABOUT 45,000 FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND 61 FOR THE MAYOR.

HOWEVER, THEIR CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDED A RAISE.

AND SO, THEY GOING TO THE VOTERS.

AT LEAST LAST I SAW WAS ABOUT 80,000 FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND 95 FOR THE MAYOR.

IF YOU LOOK NATIONALLY AT SOME OF OUR PEER CITIES.

IF YOU LOOK AT PHOENIX, PHOENIX IS ABOUT 66,000 AND 88000 RESPECTIVELY.

I WILL ALSO NOTE THAT THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THEIR SALARIES FOR THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AS THOSE HAVE NOT BEEN RAISED IN SEVERAL YEARS.

OTHER COMPARABLE CITIES, SUCH AS SAN JOSE HAVE 136,000 FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND 215 FOR THE MAYOR.

AND CHARLOTTE HAS 34,000 FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND 41,000 FOR THE MAYOR.

SO THOSE ARE THAT'S JUST A COUPLE HIGHLIGHTS OFF OF THAT SHEET.

THERE'S THERE'S SEVERAL MORE.

LIKE I SAID, THE TOP TEN CITIES IN TEXAS ARE LOOKED AT AS WELL AS SEVERAL OTHER NATIONAL CITIES.

YOU ACTUALLY LIKE YOU TO GO AHEAD AND LIST OUT ALL THE ONES IN TEXAS.

GREAT. I CAN DO THAT.

SO, IN ARLINGTON THE CITY COUNCIL IS PAID $200 PER MONTH AND $250 FOR THE MAYOR PER MONTH IN AUSTIN. LIKE I SAID, 116,000 134,000 PER YEAR.

IN CORPUS CHRISTI PER YEAR, COUNCIL MEMBERS GET 6000 AND MAYOR 9000.

AND DALLAS, AS YOU KNOW, IS 60 AND 80.

IN EL PASO, IT'S 52,500 AND 78,750 FOR THE MAYOR.

AND EL PASO'S IS ACTUALLY TIED TO THE ARMY.

IT'S ONE POINT.

I BELIEVE IT'S 1.50.

EXCUSE ME. IT IS. THE COUNCIL MEMBERS RECEIVE THE ARMY FOR THE EL PASO AREA, WHEREAS THE MAYOR RECEIVES 1.5 TIMES THAT OF THE COUNCIL. FORT WORTH RECEIVES $25,000 PER YEAR FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND 29,000 FOR THE MAYOR.

HOUSTON 62,000.

REALLY 63000 IF YOU ROUND AND 236,000 FOR THE MAYOR.

I WILL NOTE THAT THAT'S THE ONLY CITY THAT'S A STRONG MAYOR IN DALLAS, I MEAN, EXCUSE ME, IN TEXAS.

LUBBOCK RECEIVES $300 PER COUNCIL MEMBER PER YEAR AND 900 FOR THE MAYOR.

THAT WAS LAST UPDATED IN THE YEAR 1925.

PLANO RECEIVES $1,000 PER MONTH AND $2,000 FOR THE MAYOR PER MONTH, RICHARDSON $100 PER MEETING FOR BOTH THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AND THEN SAN ANTONIO, WHICH I MENTIONED IS CURRENTLY AT 45,000 AND CHANGE WITH ALMOST 62,000 FOR THE MAYOR.

AND I BELIEVE THE LAST THAT I SAW WHAT IS GOING TO THE VOTERS IS 80,000 FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND 95 FOR THE MAYOR.

SO, WHEN I LOOKED OVER THE LIST THAT YOU SENT US, WHAT BECAME CLEAR TO ME IS WE'RE ACTUALLY RIGHT WHERE WE BELONG.

AND WHAT I THINK YOU'RE SEEING IN SOME OF THOSE CITIES IS THAT THIS IS NOT A JOB WHERE YOU'RE AN EMPLOYEE.

WE'RE NOT COMPARABLE TO THE EMPLOYEES.

WE DON'T CLOCK IN, WE DON'T CLOCK OUT.

YOU COULD ACTUALLY NOT WORK EXCEPT FOR SHOWING UP AT THIS MEETING.

YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO BE PREPARED AT THE MEETING.

YOU COULD JUST SHOW UP.

NOW, IF YOU DO, YOU PROBABLY WON'T GET REELECTED, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE NOT DOING THE WORK.

BUT THE REALITY IS WE HAVE COMPLETE AUTONOMY.

WE ARE NOT EMPLOYEES, WE'RE SERVING.

AND I ACTUALLY WAS SURPRISED THAT THIS JOB WOULD PAY 60,000, IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH.

I'VE SERVED ON LOTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

MY COLLEAGUE HERE WENT THROUGH AND SAID SHE'S WORKED ON PRIVATE, NONPROFIT AND GOVERNMENT.

I WOULD ECHO THE SAME, BUT I WOULD ALSO ADD IN THAT SERVICE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, BECAUSE HONESTLY, SOME OF THOSE JOBS HAVE BEEN HARDER THAN MY OTHER JOBS AND HAVE BEEN MORE TIME CONSUMING AND CHALLENGING.

AND THEY DIDN'T PAY A PENNY.

BUT I DID THEM OUT OF SERVICE, AND I DID THEM BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO DO WITH MY LIFE AND HAVE MADE ADJUSTMENTS IN MY LIFE.

[04:55:09]

OBVIOUSLY, I STARTED IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

I'M GOING TO TELL YOU I GOT PAID THE MOST, AND THEN I MOVED TO THE NONPROFIT AND I GOT PAID LESS, AND THEN I MOVED TO GOVERNMENT.

AND THIS IS THE LEAST I'VE BEEN PAID.

BUT I DID THAT AS MY OWN CHOICE.

SO, I THINK SERVICE AND SERVING ON THIS COUNCIL IS AN HONOR, BUT IT IS ALSO A CHOICE.

AND JUST AS OUR CITY EMPLOYEES MAY PUT THEIR HEART AND SOUL AND SWEAT AND TEARS INTO THE JOB, WE CERTAINLY PAY THEM DIFFERENT AMOUNTS.

IT'S NOT BASED ON THEIR EFFORT.

IT'S NOT BASED ON THEIR RACE.

IT'S NOT BASED ON IF THEY COME FROM POVERTY.

WE'RE GOING TO PAY OUR ENGINEERS AND OUR ATTORNEYS MORE THAN WE'RE GOING TO PAY OUR FILE CLERKS.

THAT'S JUST A FACT.

AND SO THE VALUE OF THIS JOB, I THINK, IS EXACTLY WHERE IT SHOULD BE WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR OTHER CITIES.

I'LL NOTE THAT FOR THE DIVERSITY ARGUMENT.

WELL, IF YOU THINK THIS IS DIVERSE, YOU ACCOMPLISHED IT ON THE $60,000.

SO THE NEED TO INCREASE IT IS ACTUALLY NOT THERE.

I WILL ALSO JUST LAUGH THAT YOU'VE PUT A CPI INDEX IN THERE, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT EVEN DOING THAT FOR OUR RETIREES IN THE PENSION.

SO THAT VERY ARGUMENT IS EXACTLY WHY WE SHOULD BE DOING THAT.

AND I'M SORRY, THAT'S FOR POLICE FIRE PENSION.

SO I WILL JOIN MY COLLEAGUE MR. RIDLEY HERE. AND I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS ITEM.

AND I THINK IT'S FLYING IN THE FACE OF OUR FISCAL REALITY TO SUGGEST WHETHER IT'S 125 OR 90,000 AS A SALARY FOR THIS POSITION, IT'S NOT RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

CHAIR MORENO, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE SALARIES AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU MAYOR.

MY QUESTION IS MORE ON THE DATE OF IMPLEMENTATION.

MOST OF THE AMENDMENTS GO INTO EFFECT AFTER WE RATIFY THE ELECTION, WITH MAYBE THE EXCEPTION OF TERM LIMITS.

HOW WAS THE DATE OF IMPLEMENTATION FOR POTENTIAL SALARY INCREASE? HOW DID THAT COME ABOUT ON THAT SPECIFIC DATE? SO, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, THE MOTION FOR MR. BAZALDUA HAS JANUARY 1ST, 2025.

OKAY. IF YOU'RE LOOKING IF YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT WHAT THE COMMISSION INITIALLY RECOMMENDED, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN UPON THE DATE OF INAUGURATION FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL WITH THE IDEA OF NOT HAVING THIS CURRENT COUNCIL VOTE ON THEIR, THEIR OWN SALARY, BUT RATHER BE ELECTED INTO THAT POSITION WITH A SALARY KNOWN.

OKAY. AND THAT WAS ALSO WHAT WAS WHAT HAPPENED IN 2014 WHEN THE SALARY WAS RAISED.

THANK YOU. SCHULTZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

SALARIES. THANK YOU.

SIR. I REALLY BELIEVE THAT SERVING THE CITY SHOULD BE A PRIVILEGE, BUT NOT ONLY FOR THE PRIVILEGED.

WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ATTRACT PEOPLE FROM EVERY WALK OF LIFE INTO THIS JOB.

IT SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE SACRIFICE THEIR LIVES TO DO.

AND SO, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO, AS I SAID, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO ATTRACT ANYONE.

AND I KNOW FOR A FACT, JUST IN TALKING WITH PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO RUN, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE PEOPLE WHO SAY, I CAN'T AFFORD TO RUN FOR OFFICE.

SO I BELIEVE, AND I SUPPORT THIS MOTION DOESN'T MATTER TO ME WHEN IT STARTS.

IF THAT'S PART OF THE AMENDMENT THAT WOULD MAKE OR BREAK IT, I'M HAPPY TO GO TO THE NEXT ELECTION.

BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS SHOULD BE A JOB ONLY FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD TO DO THIS JOB.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE SALARIES AMENDMENT BEFORE WE STRAW VOTE IT? I DON'T SEE ANY.

SO AT THIS POINT, IF YOU SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT AS IT WAS READ, AND MIND YOU, THE DATE CHANGED FROM WHAT WAS IN PRINT TO JANUARY 1ST, 2025.

SIGNIFY BY SHOWING YOUR CARD.

CARDS. YEAH.

OKAY. THIS IS SALARIES ONLY.

CARDS RAISED IN FAVOR, COUNCIL MEMBER STUART, WILLIS, ARNOLD, NARVAEZ, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BAZALDUA, MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS, COUNCIL MEMBERS RESENDEZ, BLACKMON, SCHULTZ, GRACEY AND MORENO.

WITH MAJORITY OF THE CITY CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR, THIS AMENDMENT WILL MOVE FORWARD, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, SO NOW IN ORDER, WE HAVE THE NEWLY SUBMITTED COUNCIL MEMBER PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT.

SINGULAR, I BELIEVE.

RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION THAT ANYONE'S GOING TO MAKE ON THAT? YEAH. MISS WILLIS, GO AHEAD.

THANK YOU. I MOVE TO AMEND CHAPTER 16, CIVIL SERVICE AND PERSONNEL, SECTION 12.1 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE, BY DELETING SUBSECTION B REGARDING

[05:00:03]

THE PAYMENT BY CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES OF ONE HALF OF THE COST ATTRIBUTED TO HAVING AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE CONDUCT THE APPEALS OF DISCHARGE OR REDUCTION IN GRADE. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION, MISS WILLIS? YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON THE ALJ AMENDMENT.

YES. I'D LIKE TO ASK CITY AUDITOR MARK SWANN TO COME DOWN.

BUT AS WE KNOW, THE CHARTER REVIEW IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT PRACTICES CARRIED FORWARD EVERY TEN YEARS.

AND THE CITY AUDITOR COMPLETED AN AUDIT THAT WE RECEIVED IN JULY.

AND THAT IS THE REALLY THE BACKUP FOR WANTING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

CAN YOU JUST REALLY TOP LINE WHY, WHAT THIS IS ABOUT? OKAY. MARK SWANN, CITY AUDITOR THIS IS RELATED TO AN AUDIT THAT HASN'T BEEN ISSUED YET.

OH, I'M SORRY. BECAUSE THE DRAFT FOR THE PERSONNEL COMPLAINT PROCESS, WHICH HOPEFULLY YOU'LL BE GETTING THIS MONTH.

BUT ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WAS INCLUDED WAS THIS PROPOSAL TO HAVE MORE EQUITY IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE FEES.

BUT THEN IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE CHARTER DEADLINE HAD ALREADY PASSED.

AND SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO WAIT FOR TEN YEARS TO HAVE SOMETHING AS AN IMPLEMENTATION DATE.

AND THEN WHEN YOU HAD THE REVISION TO ENTERTAIN ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS, I BELIEVE THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA TO AT LEAST GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER IT. AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE NOW.

IT'S AN IDEA TO PROVIDE SOME EQUITY IN FOR MAYBE EMPLOYEES WHO MIGHT NOT HAVE THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO BE ABLE TO DO ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE BECAUSE IT GIVES THEM ANOTHER OPTION.

RIGHT. SO THIS WILL JUST REMOVE THAT PAYING HALF OF THE COST.

AND AT SOME POINT, THE CIVIL SERVICE DIRECTOR WILL BRING THIS TO GPFM WITH A SOLUTION, WHETHER IT'S A SLIDING SCALE OR SOME SORT OF OPTION THAT WOULD BE MORE IN LINE WITH MAYBE SALARY BASED VERSUS JUST A FLAT FEE.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION AND I HOPE YOU'LL SUPPORT THIS.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT? I DON'T SEE ANY. SO IT'S TIME TO SHOW CARDS.

IF YOU SUPPORT IT, I'LL SEE A CARD.

CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR.

COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART, WILLIS, NARVAEZ, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BAZALDUA, COUNCIL MEMBERS RESENDEZ, BLACKMON, SCHULZ, GRACEY.

COUNCIL MEMBER ARNOLD AND MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS, WITH MAJORITY CARDS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR.

THIS AMENDMENT WILL MOVE FORWARD AS WELL.

MR. MAYOR WONDERFUL.

OKAY. TO FROM WHAT I CAN SEE, WE'VE FULLY ADDRESSED BRIEFING ITEM A, AND I'M GOING TO THROW IT BACK TO OUR INTERIM CITY MANAGER.

[B. 24-1717 Dallas Police and Fire Pension System (DPFPS) and Employee Retirement Fund (ERF): Funding Soundness Restoration Plan Update and Consideration of Recommendations]

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH, MAYOR.

AND SO I WANTED TO SHARE THAT WE HAD PREPARED TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON OUR PENSION PRESENTATION THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU.

THIS IS THE SAME PRESENTATION THAT YOU'VE SEEN PREVIOUSLY.

AND SO WHAT WE'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND, IF YOU WANT US TO SPEND TIME GOING THROUGH IT, OR WE HAVE AN AD HOC COMMITTEE ON PENSION SCHEDULED WITH OUR CHAIR OF THAT COMMITTEE ON AUGUST THE 22ND.

WE HAD PLANNED TO GO BACK TO THE COMMITTEE ANYWAY, AND WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT.

AND MR. IRELAND IS PREPARED TO MEET WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS INDIVIDUALLY IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.

FOR TODAY.

POINT OF ORDER, MR. MAYOR.

IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOUR POINT OF ORDER TO THE FULL BODY, IT CAN'T GO BACK TO THE COMMITTEE UNLESS WE SEND IT BACK.

SO, I'M KIND OF CONFUSED ON THAT PRACTICE.

YOU ARE CORRECT.

IT HAS TO BE COMMITTED OR REFERRED BACK TO COMMITTEE.