[2. 24-2679 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 ONLY HAVE FOUR COUNCIL NOMINEES FOR APPOINTMENTS.

YOUR NOMINEE FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 15 BOARD, FORT WORTH AVENUE.

DEVIN MORRIS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND PHILLIP HYATT.

HE IS ALSO BEING NOMINATED TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 17 BOARD.

TOLD BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES, MR. MAYOR. I HEARD A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

IS THERE A SECOND? I HEARD A SECOND AS WELL.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM, MR. MAYOR. YOUR BRIEFINGS CONTINUE.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE NOW.

[A. 24-2680 Investment Reports for Dallas Police and Fire Pension System (DPFPS) and Employee Retirement Fund (ERF)]

SO, MADAM INTERIM CITY MANAGER, PLEASE TAKE IT AWAY.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

YOUR FIRST PRESENTATION TODAY IS A REPORT ON THE INVESTMENTS OF OUR TWO PENSION SYSTEMS. AS PART OF OUR REVIEW OF THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM.

AND THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT FUND.

CITY STAFF ENGAGED A CONSULTANT TO REVIEW THE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO AND THE PERFORMANCE OF EACH OF THE PENSION FUNDS.

STAFF WENT THROUGH A COMPETITIVE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS AND CONTRACTED WITH COMMERCE STREET INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT BEGINNING IN APRIL 2024 TO UNDERTAKE THIS REVIEW.

THE REPORT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR THIS MORNING WAS PROVIDED TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON PENSIONS ON AUGUST THE 22ND, AND IS NOW BEING SHARED WITH THE FULL CITY COUNCIL.

DORY WILEY, WHO SERVES AS THE PRESIDENT AND THE CEO OF COMMERCE STREET HOLDINGS, WILL PROVIDE THE REPORT AND BE AVAILABLE FOR YOUR QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. WILEY TO BEGIN TODAY'S PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU. I DID IT AGAIN.

I'M ZERO FOR THREE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

THANK YOU, CITY COUNCIL, FOR HAVING US HERE TODAY.

WE APPRECIATE THE HONOR AND PRIVILEGE TO WORK FOR YOU.

WE'VE BEEN WATCHING THIS FROM THE SIDE FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS, AND IT'S A IT'S AN HONOR TO BE HERE AND HELP IN ANY WAY WE CAN.

WE HAVE THIS PRESENTATION IN FRONT OF YOU.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE SEEN IT.

WE'LL GO THROUGH IT, BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS WE GO ALONG.

THE FIRST ONE, WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS SPEND MORE OF OUR TIME ON DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

WE DID LOOK AT BOTH PLANS.

AND IF YOU HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU, WE'LL GO OVER IT.

THEY'RE. THE TWO FUNDS ARE VERY DIFFERENT.

ERF, JUST A QUICK SUMMARY.

SO YOU KIND OF GET IT IN CASE YOU THE PRESENTATION GETS MUNDANE.

ERF PERFORMS ABOUT ON AVERAGE AND THEY'RE DOING THEY'RE NOT IN TROUBLE AND THEY'RE DOING A GOOD JOB.

SO THEY'RE NOT IN PROBLEM.

DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE AS YOU KNOW AS IS VERY DIFFERENT HAS A LOT OF ISSUES.

THEY'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THEM.

WE'LL GO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THOSE TODAY AS WE GO THROUGH.

AND IF YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AGAIN, LET ME KNOW.

ON THE FIRST PAGE OR PAGE TWO, A FEW POINTS WE CAN ALL AGREE ON THAT INCLUDES DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE OF THE CITY.

BENEFICIARIES, THE CITIZENS, ETC..

PENSION FUNDS UNDERFUNDED WITH 39% FUNDING RATIO NOW IN 2017.

THAT RATIO WAS 49%.

THE CITY OF DALLAS WILL HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY TO IMPROVE THE FUNDING STATUS OF THIS FUND.

THERE'S NO GETTING AROUND IT.

THE PUBLIC, THE CITY OFFICIALS, ALL STAKEHOLDERS WANT SOME ASSURANCE THAT IF YOU PUT SOME MONEY IN THIS FUND, IS IT BEING OPTIMALLY MANAGED TO THE BENEFIT OF OF THE PARTICIPANTS AND THE BENEFICIARIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS? THE GOAL AND THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THAT QUESTION IS BECAUSE WE HAVE VERY QUESTIONABLE MANAGEMENT OF THE FUND PRIOR TO THE 2017.

RIGHT. SO THE QUESTION IS A LEGITIMATE QUESTION.

IT'S FAIR FOR THE CITY TO ASK.

AND AND WE APPLAUD THE FACT THAT YOU ARE EXERCISING.

YOU KNOW, THAT, RIGHT? TO UNDERSTAND AND MAKE SURE AND GET SOME ASSURANCE THAT THE FUNDS ARE GOING TO BE OPTIMALLY MANAGED.

NOW, THE GOAL OF THIS REVIEW THAT WE'VE DONE JUST OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS IS AN EVALUATION OF THE APPROPRIATENESS, ADEQUACY, AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PENSION'S PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OVERALL IMPROVEMENTS OF THE PENSION.

[00:45:03]

THERE'S A LOT TO DO IN JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS, BUT WE'LL GIVE YOU SOME HIGHLIGHTS.

PERFORMANCE OVER TIME.

WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE OVER TIME, THEY SHOULD OUTPERFORM NET OF FEES AND COSTS, EXCEED APPROPRIATE BENCHMARKS WHERE APPLICABLE, AND HOPEFULLY AT LEAST THE AVERAGE OR MEDIAN OF YOUR PEERS YOU WANT TO PERFORM IN LINE WITH YOUR PEERS.

YOU CAN'T ALWAYS CONTROL WHERE THE MARKET'S GOING TO GO, BUT YOU CAN CONTROL HOW YOU PERFORM TO OTHERS.

AND SO YOU WILL SEE OUR ANALYSIS VERY HEAVILY RELIES ON COMPARISON.

COMPARISON TO PEERS.

I VIEW THIS AS KIND OF LIKE A FOOTBALL GAME.

IT'S NOT A PARTICIPATION AWARD OR A SEASON.

IT'S NOT A PARTICIPATION AWARD.

WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE RECORD IS AT THE END OF THE SEASON COMPARED TO EVERYONE ELSE IN THE CONFERENCE.

RIGHT. AND SO THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE LOOK AT IT NOW.

EVERYONE I THINK, CAN AGREE THE POLICEMEN AND FIREFIGHTERS ARE IN DIRE NEED OF A LIVABLE COLA.

THEY HAVEN'T HAD 1 IN 7 YEARS.

THAT'S A LITTLE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE'RE DOING.

BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING GREATLY INFLUENCES THAT ABILITY TO GET A COLA.

AND I THINK EVERYONE HAS THAT GOAL.

THE QUESTION IS, CAN WE GET THERE WITH THE RESTRICTIONS THAT YOU HAVE IN PLACE, AND YOU CAN ONLY PULL SO MANY LEVERS OVER HERE IN THE CITY.

YOU CAN ONLY SPEND SO MUCH.

YOU CAN ONLY SELL SO MANY ASSETS.

AND A BIG LEVER, A REALLY BIG LEVER IS THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS FUND AND THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FUND REALLY DEPENDS ON DEFINING RISK.

REDUCING THAT RISK OVER TIME AND MAKING MORE MONEY COMPARED TO YOUR PEERS ARE DOING AT LEAST AS AVERAGE OR ABOVE AVERAGE IF YOU CAN.

THIS LAST POINT I CAN'T EMPHASIZE ENOUGH.

I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A SPIRIT OF COOPERATION BETWEEN THE PENSION AND THE CITY.

THERE IS A RIFT, AS YOU KNOW ABOUT IT, AND I THINK THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION ON BOTH SIDES CAN RESULT WITH SOME IMPROVED PERFORMANCE.

THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT THAT'S A KEY COMPONENT OF WHAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.

AND THE INCREASED CONTRIBUTIONS WILL ALSO HELP AND GET TO THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE TO THE TEXAS PENSION REVIEW BOARD FUNDING GOAL TO BENEFIT THE PLAN PARTICIPANTS.

NOW, ON PAGE THREE WE'RE GOING TO NEED THESE INITIAL OBSERVATIONS.

WE'RE GOING TO NEED IMPROVED RISK ADJUSTED RETURNS TO LOWER THE CITY CONTRIBUTIONS AND INCREASE FUNDED STATUS.

THESE ARE HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT ON PERFORMANCE.

SO THAT'S THE HAMMER THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

IT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE.

NOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE MIGHT SIT AND SAY, WELL, YOU ONLY GET INCREASED NUMBERS IF YOU INCREASE RISK.

THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY.

SO YOU CAN ACTUALLY DECREASE RISK AND MAKE MORE MONEY.

AND THAT'S A WIN WIN.

NOW DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE HAS UNDERPERFORMED ITS PEERS BOTH NATIONALLY AND IN THE STATE OF TEXAS OVER THE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PERIOD.

NOW, GRANTED, WE ALL KNOW THIS, BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS IT.

THEY'VE INHERITED LEGACY ASSETS FROM PREVIOUS MANAGEMENT THAT WERE ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE INVESTMENTS AND IMPROPERLY MANAGED, AND THEY'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THOSE FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS.

THAT'S A LONG TIME TO BE DEALING WITH PROBLEM ASSETS, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DEALING WITH.

AND THEY'RE TO BE COMMENDED BECAUSE THEY WERE DEALT A BAD HAND.

YOU'RE SITTING WITH A GYM HAND OR A POKER HAND AND IT'S TERRIBLE.

AND YOU LOOK AT IT, THAT'S WHAT THEY GOT.

THEY GOT A BAD HAND AND THEY'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THAT FOR SEVEN YEARS.

BUT IT'S BEEN SEVEN YEARS.

IT'S BEEN SEVEN YEARS.

AND IT'S, IT'S I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE SOME DIFFERENCE AND WE SHOULD EXPECT SOME DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE MOVING FORWARD.

THE NEED TO TARGET REDUCING VOLATILITY RISK AND IMPROVING RISK ADJUSTED ASSET ALLOCATION.

DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE, AS WELL AS SOME SOME PRIVATE EQUITY MANAGER SELECTION THAT THEY'VE HAD TROUBLE WITH IN THE PAST.

WE'RE GOING TO SPEND SOME TIME ON THAT TODAY.

SO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THIS REDUCING RISK AND MAKING MORE MONEY AND THE NEED TO CREATE AN IMPROVED PRIVATE MARKET STRATEGY GOING FORWARD IS A VERY KEY ELEMENT OF THAT.

NOW ON PAGE FOUR, I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH IT.

BUT THOSE ARE THE EIGHT THINGS THAT YOU ASKED OF US.

I'M GOING TO FLIP OVER TO PAGE FIVE.

AND THESE ARE JUST SORT OF AS IS.

THIS IS WHAT A FORMER MAYOR TOLD ME, YOU GOT TO DEFINE REALITY, OKAY? IT'S YOUR FAULT.

MY FAULT? NOBODY'S FAULT.

DOESN'T MATTER. RIGHT? WHAT IS REALITY? WE ALL JOIN HANDS, AND WE MOVE FORWARD FROM HERE.

DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE OVER THE TEN YEAR PERIOD IS AT 2.1%.

THE LAST FIVE YEARS SINCE THE CURRENT MANAGEMENT HAS BEEN AT 4.1%.

AND AGAIN, WE HAVE THIS DRAG ON THESE LEGACY ASSETS.

BUT WE HAVE ANOTHER LINE HERE THAT EXCLUDES THE LEGACY ASSETS OR THE PRIVATE MARKETS, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN INVESTING IN PRIVATE MARKETS FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS.

AND THOSE ARE THE RETURNS KIND OF FOCUS ON 5 TO 10 YEAR.

[00:50:01]

THE REASON WHY I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE IN ANY ONE YEAR, YOU CAN OUTPERFORM OR UNDERPERFORM.

AND RISK DOESN'T NECESSARILY FACTOR INTO THE EQUATION.

BUT OVER TIME RISK AND REWARD WILL THE MARKET WILL EVEN ITSELF OUT.

IT'S VERY HARD TO OUTPERFORM YOUR PEERS OVER FIVE AND TEN YEAR PERIODS.

IF YOU'RE TAKING MORE RISK BECAUSE THE MARKET WILL GET YOU, IT'LL CATCH UP WITH YOU.

SO I FOCUS A LOT ON THOSE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PERIODS, AND WE PUT IN THERE AT THE REQUEST OF OF SOME CITY STAFF.

HUGH, WHAT DOES HOUSTON DO? AND HOUSTON POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS DOING PRETTY WELL THERE ACTUALLY IN THE TOP DECILE OF PERFORMERS IN THE COUNTRY.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE TEN YEAR RETURNS.

THAT'S A THAT'S A 6% DIFFERENCE.

OKAY. YOU CAN DO THE MATH.

6% ON $2 BILLION TIMES TEN YEARS IS 1,000,000,002.

SO THAT'S THE KIND OF HAMMER I'M TALKING ABOUT HERE.

OKAY, I'M NOT SAYING WE'RE GOING TO GO OUT AND GET 8% OVERNIGHT, BUT IF WE CAN GET HALF THAT.

OKAY, NOW WE'RE TALKING $600 MILLION.

OKAY. SO WE'RE TALKING BIG HAMMERS HERE.

THAT IS WORTH THE FOCUS OF THE CITY.

THE CITY COUNCIL AND EVERYBODY INVOLVED.

AND I APPLAUD YOU MOVING IT TO, YOU KNOW, ONE OF YOUR TOP AGENDA ITEMS? DOWN IN THE BOTTOM, WE HAVE AUSTIN POLICE AND SAN ANTONIO AS WELL.

THEY'RE MORE IN THE AVERAGE AREA ON PERFORMANCE, AND YOU CAN STILL SEE THAT IT IS BETTER THAN WHAT WE'VE HAD WITH DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

AGAIN, IT'S NOT TO POINT ANY FINGERS AT ANY OF THE CURRENT PEOPLE AT DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE FOR THOSE LEGACY ASSET ISSUES.

THEY HAVE BEEN DEALT A VERY TOUGH HAND, AND THEY ARE TO BE COMMENDED TO WORKING VERY HARD AND DILIGENTLY ON THAT.

THE QUESTION IS, HOW DO WE MOVE GOING FORWARD? AGAIN? WE'LL GET THERE IN A MINUTE.

ON PAGE SIX, WE ALSO LIKE TO COMPARE IT TO OTHER PENSION FUNDS NATIONWIDE.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, THIS IS DATA PROVIDED FROM THE CONSULTANT OF DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

THE TEN YEAR RETURNS ARE 2.3% AND FOCUS ON TOP QUARTILE.

THAT'S WHERE I LIKE TO BE.

I DON'T REALLY LIKE TO FOCUS ON BOTTOM.

I LIKE TO BE UP AT THE TOP.

THE TOP 25% OF FUNDS NATIONWIDE ARE AT 7.1%.

THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS AT 6.4% AND THE BOTTOM QUARTILE AT 6.1.

WE'RE HAVING A TOUGH TIME MEETING THAT NOT ONLY WITH THE LEGACY ASSETS, BUT WITHOUT COUNTING THE LEGACY ASSETS.

AND PART OF THE REASON WHY WE'RE NOT GETTING THERE WITHOUT THE LEGACY ASSETS IS BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN INVESTING IN PRIVATE MARKETS FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS.

THEY'RE TOTALLY RELYING ON STOCKS AND BONDS, WHICH I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE, CAN BE A LITTLE BIT OF A RISKY STRATEGY AND CAUSE YOU TO UNDERPERFORM OVER LONG PERIODS OF TIME. IF YOU LOOK DOWN HERE AT THE BOTTOM, WE ALSO HAVE TEXAS TOP QUARTILE, AVERAGE AND BOTTOM QUARTILE WITH THE SAME SIMILAR RESULTS.

YOU LOOK ON PAGE SEVEN, THERE'S A LITTLE COMPARISON FROM THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE TO POLICY INDEX AND POLICY BENCHMARKS.

THERE'S SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT IS EXACTLY THE POLICY BENCHMARK AND EVERYTHING, BUT IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER.

YOU KNOW, IT'S ABOUT COMPARING TO SOME OTHERS.

YOU KNOW, THEY EVERY EVERY FUND IS GOING TO HAVE POLICY BENCHMARKS AND THEY TRY TO OUTPERFORM THEIR POLICY BENCHMARKS.

BUT THAT'S A LONGER DISCUSSION.

AND WE DON'T NEED TO REALLY FOCUS ON AS MUCH TODAY ON PAGE EIGHT WE'VE BROKEN IT DOWN BY ASSET CLASS.

SO YOU HAVE A WHOLE PORTFOLIO.

AND IN THAT PORTFOLIO YOU'LL INVEST IN STOCKS AND BONDS AND PRIVATE EQUITY AND REAL ESTATE AND DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO THE PUBLIC EQUITY AS YOU CAN SEE THERE, TO BE COMMENDED OVER THE TEN YEAR PERIOD AT 8.5% OVER THEIR BENCHMARK.

AND I ALSO TELL YOU THEY FARE VERY WELL AGAINST THEIR FRIENDS.

THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE BEEN FOCUSING ON.

SO THEY'VE SOME THEY'VE SHOWN SOME ABILITY TO PICK GOOD MANAGERS IN THEIR PUBLIC EQUITY SIDE.

ON THE FIXED INCOME.

YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY'RE OUTPERFORMING THE INDEX AS WELL.

AND SO THEY'VE PICKED ADEQUATE AND FINE MANAGERS THERE.

IT LOOKS LIKE, AT LEAST FROM THE INDEX STANDPOINT, ON THE PRIVATE EQUITY, YOU SEE THE UNDERPERFORMANCE AND PRIVATE ASSETS, REAL ESTATE.

SEE THAT THREE POINT -3.7 VERSUS 13.5.

YOU KNOW THAT'S A KILLER.

IF YOU DO A LITTLE MATH ON A $2 BILLION FUND.

YOU KNOW, OR, OR FOR THE ALLOCATION THEY HAD.

THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S A KILLER.

IT'S IT'S JUST BIG, BIG MONEY.

PAGE NINE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THESE INVESTMENTS THAT THEY'VE HAD, THESE LEGACY HOLDINGS.

NOW, THE CURRENT VALUE OF THE PRIVATE EQUITY PORTFOLIO IS 216 MILLION.

AND THE ACCUMULATED LOSS OVER THAT TIME IS 10 MILLION.

THEY DON'T HAVE THE BROKEN DOWN NET IRR THERE.

[00:55:01]

BUT GRANT, MY COMRADE HERE IS PUT IT HERE IN BLUE AT THE BOTTOM.

PRIVATE EQUITY AND PRIVATE CREDIT COMBINED THE IRR OVER THE LIFE OF THOSE INVESTMENTS IS 0.4%.

THE PRIVATE ASSETS PORTFOLIO WAS 1.8%.

THE STAFF HAS WORKED VERY HARD TO GET THROUGH 1.4 BILLION OF THESE PROBLEMS, DOWN TO 498 MILLION NOW.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT BEING VERY DIFFICULT.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT IT BEING A NO BID MARKET, HAVING A HARD TIME SELLING ASSETS.

I'VE SEEN I'VE SEEN NO BID MARKETS.

THEY EXIST. I'M NOT SURE THEY EXIST FOR SEVEN YEARS, BUT THEY'VE WORKED OUT A LOT OF A LOT OF THEM.

SO THEY'RE TO BE COMMENDED FOR THAT.

IN ADDITION TO I WANT YOU TO REALIZE WHATEVER THEY HAVE LAST LEFT IS THE WORST OF THE WORST BECAUSE IT'S THE HARDEST TO GET RID OF.

OKAY. SO IT'S GOING TO TAKE THERE ARE SOME STRATEGIES YOU CAN TAKE.

IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE DOING SOME OF THEM THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT A LOT OF THEM.

BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME REAL ACTION.

AND I THINK THEY ARE DOING SOME ACTION.

WE JUST HAVE TO DO A DEEPER DIVE ON IT.

BUT TO GET RID OF THESE ASSETS NEEDS TO BE THESE LAST REMAINING ASSETS NEED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF.

AND AND IT MAY BE A BIG LOSS ON THEM.

YOU KNOW, THEY MAY NEED TO BE SOLD AT A PRETTY BIG LOSS.

WE'LL SEE. OR THERE'S THERE'S SOME DIFFERENT STRATEGIES.

I JUST WANT YOU TO REALIZE THERE'S STILL SOME PROBLEM ASSETS THAT THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH.

THE GOOD NEWS IS NOT AS BIG AS IT USED TO BE.

AND THEY HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO WHERE THEY CAN DO SOME THINGS GOING FORWARD.

AND SHOULD THE CITY COME UP WITH SOME MORE MONEY, WHICH I'M HOPING YOU'LL DO.

THERE NEEDS TO BE A GOOD PLAN ON HOW TO PUT THAT FORTH GOING FORWARD.

NOW ON PAGE TEN.

PAGE TEN IS A GRAPH THAT CAME DIRECTLY FROM DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

AND I THINK IT'S IT'S WORTH LOOKING AT JUST IF THEY DID NOTHING, ROLLING OFF THESE OLD TEN YEAR RETURNS THAT THEY HAVE WILL IMPROVE THE RETURNS GOING FORWARD, EVEN IF THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT GOING FORWARD.

SO THERE'S GREAT MOMENTUM IN THEIR PAST WORK AND IN IMPROVING RETURNS, BUT IT CAN BE EVEN GREATER IF WE CAN WORK ON THE REST OF THE PORTFOLIO AND HOW HOW IT'S BEING MANAGED, I THINK.

ON PAGE 11, THERE'S BEEN A BIG STRATEGY TO DECLINE THE INVESTMENTS IN PRIVATE MARKETS.

WE'VE GOTTEN TWO DIFFERENT ANSWERS OUT OF THEM FOR THAT.

ONE IS THEY SAID WE COULDN'T INVEST IN PRIVATE MARKETS ANYMORE.

I ASSUMED THAT WAS FOR LIQUIDITY NEEDS.

BUT THEN I GOT ANOTHER ANSWER FROM ONE OF THEM THAT SAID, NO, THAT WASN'T THE REASON WHY WE DIDN'T DO IT.

SO I'M STILL NOT SURE WHERE WE ARE ON THAT.

I THINK THERE'S SOME DISCREPANCY INCLUDING FROM SOME OF THE REPORTS ON HOW THEY ACTUALLY FEEL ABOUT PRIVATE MARKETS.

BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU, PRIVATE MARKETS AREN'T THE PROBLEM.

IT'S PICKING BAD MANAGERS AND BAD INVESTMENTS.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

SO I LIKEN THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF BANKS AS CLIENTS.

A BANK MAY BE IN THE LENDING BUSINESS.

IF THEY MAKE A BAD LOAN, IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY STOP MAKING LOANS.

YOU GOT TO MAKE BETTER LAWS AND YOU GOT TO LEARN TO COLLECT ON THE BAD LOANS.

SAME WAY WITH INVESTMENTS.

IF YOU MAKE A BAD INVESTMENT, IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU STOP INVESTING.

IT MEANS YOU DO A BETTER JOB OR YOU FIND THE EXPERTISE TO DO A BETTER JOB.

SO ON PAGE 12 WE'RE GOING TO TALK ASSET ALLOCATION.

AND I KNOW YOU WANTED TO DO A LITTLE DEEPER DIVE INTO THIS.

SO BEAR WITH US.

NATIONAL TOP QUARTILE PENSIONS, 39%.

SOMEONE IN THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS WROTE AN ARTICLE THE OTHER DAY AND TALKED TO SOME OTHER EXPERTS THAT I DON'T KNOW, BUT THEY CAME UP WITH A NUMBER OF PRIVATE MARKETS.

ALLOCATION OF A TYPICAL PENSION FUND WAS 40%.

AND LOOK THERE IT IS, 39% NATIONAL TOP QUARTILE PENSIONS.

I DON'T KNOW THEM, BUT I'M LIKE, WELL, THAT PERSON KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IT'S PRETTY COMMON KNOWLEDGE OUT THERE FOR ANYONE TO PULL THIS STUFF UP.

AND WHAT WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? PRIVATE MARKETS. THAT MEANS THESE OTHER ALTS.

THAT'S ALTERNATIVE ASSETS, WHICH COULD BE ANYTHING FROM HEDGE FUNDS TO COMMODITIES TO REAL ESTATE OR ETC.

AND THEN PRIVATE EQUITY.

OR IT COULD BE PRIVATE CREDIT, BUT IT MEANS STUFF THAT'S NOT READILY TRADABLE ON A STOCK EXCHANGE OR IN A BOND MARKET.

OKAY. IT'S BASICALLY OTHER.

AND WHAT THAT DOES IS YOU GENERALLY YOU GIVE UP SOME LIQUIDITY.

YOU CAN'T BUY AND SELL IT EVERY DAY, OR AT LEAST NOT AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN A STOCK OR BOND, BUT YOU GENERALLY HAVE LESS VOLATILITY AND HIGHER RETURNS.

NOW VOLATILITY IS DEBATABLE.

WE'LL GET INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU MARK TO MARKET IT, ETC.

BUT I REALLY DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A WHOLE LOT OF THAT TODAY BECAUSE IN GENERAL I'M I'M CORRECT AND YOU DON'T NEED A DISSERTATION.

NOW IF WE LOOK OVER AT DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE ON THE RIGHT, WE'RE AT 26% AND THE TARGET IS 5%.

NOW THEY'VE TOLD US THEY WANT TO INCREASE THAT, AND THEY'VE HIRED ALL BORN ANOTHER CONSULTANT TO HELP THEM INCREASE THEIR PRIVATE MARKET STUFF.

[01:00:01]

OKAY. SO FOR ONE MESSAGING THAT WE'RE GETTING FROM THEM IS THAT THEY WANT TO INCREASE THEIR PRIVATE MARKETS.

THEY'VE BEEN OUT FOR SEVEN YEARS NOW.

THAT CREATES A PROBLEM.

THE PROBLEM IS YOU'VE BEEN OUT FOR SEVEN YEARS.

SO IF THE MAYOR COMES TO ME AND SAYS, HEY, I'M A BILLIONAIRE AND I WANT YOU TO BUILD ME A NICE PRIVATE EQUITY PORTFOLIO OF ABOUT 300 MILLION, I'LL SAY, GREAT. CHECK BACK WITH ME IN SEVEN YEARS BECAUSE I HAVE TO SLOWLY INVEST IN THESE OVER TIME.

THEY HAVE FIVE YEAR DRAWDOWNS.

THEY HAVE WHAT'S CALLED J-CURVE, WHERE THEY LOSE MONEY IN THE BEGINNING AND THEN MAKE IT ALL UP IN THE END.

AND YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW HOW YOUR PORTFOLIO IS GOING TO DO FOR SEVEN YEARS.

WELL, COINCIDENTALLY, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN INVESTING FOR SEVEN YEARS.

SO IF THEY START FROM SCRATCH AND JUST INVEST IN GENERAL PRIVATE EQUITY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A WHOLE NEW CITY COUNCIL WONDERING HOW THEY'RE DOING IN SEVEN YEARS.

AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF TIME.

SO THERE ARE SOME STRATEGIES THAT NEED TO BE TALKED ABOUT AND IMPLEMENTED WITH THEM ON HOW TO GET THAT PERFORMANCE NOW, HOW TO GET IT NOW. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT'S A LITTLE BIT CLOUDY.

BUT THERE WAS SOME INITIAL DISCUSSIONS.

I THINK THERE WERE SOME RECENT RECEPTIVITY TO SOME IDEAS AND NOT SOME OTHERS, BUT I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH THEY REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT IT.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY HAVEN'T.

WE JUST HAVEN'T BEEN PRIVY TO IT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE RETURNS OVER HERE, OBVIOUSLY 8.6% ON THE TOP QUARTILE PENSIONS AND 2% OVER HERE ON DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE. IT'S NOT JUST A FUNCTION OF ASSET ALLOCATION FOR DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

IT'S THOSE BAD PERFORMING ASSETS.

BUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SHOW YOU IS HOW MUCH OF AN IMPACT ASSET ALLOCATION HAS.

I DON'T HAVE TO BE THE BEST MANAGER PICKER.

I JUST HAVE TO BE THE GOOD RISK MANAGER AND KNOW HOW TO ALLOCATE.

AND THAT'S THE KEY.

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO SHOW YOU THAT HERE IN A MINUTE ON PAGE 13.

IT'S JUST A LITTLE MORE EMPHASIS ON WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS THE TOP QUARTILE PENSIONS ON THE LEFT AT 39%.

THE BOTTOM QUARTILE PENSIONS, GUESS WHAT? THEY'RE AT 29%.

NOW THE FOCUS HAS BEEN ON PRIVATE MARKETS, RIGHT.

FORGET THAT FOR A MINUTE.

LET'S TALK ABOUT RISK.

THE RISK IS IN PUBLIC EQUITY AND FIXED INCOME.

THAT'S WHERE THE VOLATILITY IS RIGHT.

HOW MANY OF YOU SEEN NVIDIA GO UP AND DOWN.

HOW MANY HAVE YOU SEEN THE STOCK MARKET GO UP AND DOWN AND LOSE 37% IN 2008, OR 18.1% IN THE S&P IN 2022? AND YOU LOOK AT YOUR 401 K AND GO, RIGHT.

THAT'S VOLATILITY.

THAT'S RISK. AND WE TRY TO MINIMIZE THAT WITH PRIVATE MARKETS ALLOCATION.

SO IT'S NOT THE PROMOTION OF RETURN THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IN PRIVATE MARKETS.

IT'S THE PROMOTION OF LESS RISK WITH LOWER ALLOCATIONS TO PUBLIC EQUITY.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOP INVESTORS IN THE COUNTRY, WHICH ARE GENERALLY CONSIDERED YALE AND PRINCETON AND WHATNOT, THEIR ALLOCATIONS TO PUBLIC EQUITY MAY BE AS LOW AS 15 TO 20%.

THEY'RE TRYING TO REDUCE VOLATILITY.

SO ON PAGE 14 I WANTED TO ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT THEY HAD IN THEIR ADDENDUM TO OUR FINAL REPORT THAT YOU GOT. AND I'M PERPLEXED BY IT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT.

THEY WROTE IN THE REPORT IT SAYS DPFP STAFF SUBMITTED AN APPENDIX TO COMMERCE STREET'S ORIGINAL REPORT, TITLED DPFP RESPONSE TO FINAL COMMERCE STREET REPORT. IN IT, UNDER THE SECTION UNSUPPORTED, MISLEADING OR DISPUTED INVESTMENT CLAIMS, THEY WROTE, QUOTE, ADDING PRIVATE EQUITY DOES NOT DECREASE RISK OF THE PORTFOLIO.

THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT THAT IS WIDELY ACCEPTED AMONGST INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS.

FURTHER, INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS CONCUR THAT PRIVATE EQUITY IS ONE OF THE RISKIEST ASSET THAT CLASSES.

WHILE PRIVATE EQUITY HAS BEEN ONE OF THE TOP PERFORMING ASSET CLASSES, LOOKING BACKWARD INSTITUTIONAL CONSULTANTS BROADLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE ENVIRONMENT THEY MAY VERY WELL BE DIFFERENT MOVING FORWARD.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S ADDRESS THESE TWO ISSUES.

THE BOTTOM ONE IS YEAH, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE PRIVATE EQUITY IS GOING FORWARD.

AND IT'S ON A 20 YEAR DECLINE IN THE 90S.

YOU COULD EXPECT PRETTY EASILY 28 TO 40% IRR ON PRIVATE EQUITY.

IF YOU'RE IN BIG BULGE BRACKET PRIVATE EQUITY.

CARLISLE. YOU KNOW, BLACKSTONE, ANY OF THESE OTHERS THEN, YOU KNOW, THOSE RETURNS HAVE DROPPED DOWN TO THE LOW TEENS, BUT THEY'RE STILL PRETTY NICE.

STILL PRETTY NICE.

BUT YEAH, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ANYTHING IS GOING TO RETURN GOING FORWARD, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU DON'T INVEST IN IT.

NOW LET'S ADDRESS THIS OTHER ISSUE.

IF THEY REALLY BELIEVE THAT PRIVATE EQUITY DOES NOT DECREASE RISK IN THE PORTFOLIO, WHY DID THEY HIRE ALL BORN AND WHY DID THEY TELL US THEY WERE GOING TO INCREASE THEIR PRIVATE EQUITY ALLOCATION? THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

SO YOU EITHER BELIEVE IN PRIVATE MARKETS OR YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN PRIVATE MARKETS.

[01:05:01]

WE HOPE TO IRON THAT OUT WITH THEM.

I CAN ASSURE YOU, THERE ARE A LOT OF REALLY SMART PEOPLE ON THEIR BOARD THAT MANAGE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND SOME OF THEM ARE IN PRIVATE MARKETS AND MANAGE PRIVATE MARKETS.

I FIND IT REALLY HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THEY ALL BELIEVE THIS.

AND WE WON'T SPEND A WHOLE DISSERTATION ON IT BECAUSE YOU YOU GOT OTHER THINGS TO DO.

BUT I WANT TO SHOW YOU THE NEXT PAGE AND YOU CAN GET THIS PAGE FROM ANY BIG BULGE BRACKET FIRM, GOLDMAN SACHS, JP MORGAN, CITIBANK.

IT DOESN'T MATTER. COMMERCE STREET, ANYWHERE THESE EXIST.

AND WE SHOW THEM TO OUR CLIENTS ALL THE TIME.

WHAT IS THIS CHART? IT SHOWS HOW PRIVATE EQUITY CAN REDUCE RISK.

IT'S WHY PEOPLE USE PRIVATE EQUITY OR PRIVATE MARKETS I'M USING AN INTERCHANGEABLY HERE TO TO REDUCE RISK IN THE PORTFOLIO AND I.E.

MAKE MORE MONEY OVER THE LONG TERM.

SO OVER ON THE BOTTOM IS THE VOLATILITY.

VOLATILITY MEANS MY PRICE GOING UP.

MY PRICE GOING DOWN OKAY.

THAT'S RISK.

THE RISK OF LOSS.

THE RISK OF GAINS OKAY.

THE MORE VOLATILE IT IS THE MORE RISKY IT IS.

IT'S THE WAY IT WORKS.

ON THE LEFT SIDE IS THE ANNUAL RETURNS.

OKAY. SO THE HIGHER RETURN AND HIGHER RISK, THE MORE PROBLEM I HAVE.

I'M LOOKING FOR HIGHER RETURN ASSETS WITH LOW VOLATILITY OKAY.

AND THEN I LIKE THEM TO NOT CORRELATE WITH OTHER ASSETS.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO EVERYONE.

IT'S KIND OF A BASIC FINANCE DEAL.

BUT IF STOCKS HAVE ONE RETURN PROFILE IN VOLATILITY AND BONDS HAVE ANOTHER AND PRIVATE EQUITY HAS ANOTHER AND PRIVATE CREDIT HAS ANOTHER AND REAL ESTATE HAS ANOTHER. AND BY DIVERSIFYING, I WILL REDUCE RISK IN THE WHOLE PORTFOLIO.

AND THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE HERE ON THE FAR RIGHT.

YOU HAVE A TRADITIONAL 60 OVER 40 PORTFOLIO, AND IF YOU ADD 5% PRIVATE EQUITY, LOOK HOW MUCH RISK IT TAKES OUT OF THE EQUATION.

AND MY RETURN GOES UP, NOT DOWN.

AND IF I ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE 10%, MY RETURN GOES UP TO 6.5%.

MY RISK GOES DOWN.

AND IF I ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE, IT GOES UP AND REDUCES DOWN.

WHAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH THIS? IT ASSUMES THAT I KNOW HOW TO PICK A PRIVATE EQUITY MANAGER.

I THE RISKIEST THING IS TO DO DIRECT INVESTING, WHICH IS WHAT THIS FUND DID PRIOR TO 2016.

IT'S LESS RISKY TO BUY FUNDS, AND IT'S EVEN LESS RISKIER TO BUY A FUND OF FUNDS.

I DON'T HAVE TO BE GOOD.

AND IF I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M DOING, JUST BUY A FUND OF FUNDS AND GET AN AVERAGE RETURN.

THE KEY THING IS REDUCING RISK AND GETTING THAT PORTFOLIO SAFER SO YOU MAKE MORE MONEY.

SO IF YOU LOOK ON PAGE 16, WE HAVE A COMMON THING THAT WE USE IN FINANCE CALLED A SHARPE RATIO.

WHAT IS A SHARPE RATIO.

THINK ABOUT THE RISK FREE RATE WHICH WOULD BE A TREASURY AND THE RETURN ON AN ASSET.

LET'S SAY IT'S PRIVATE EQUITY AND MAYBE IT'S 15% OR IT'S A STOCK AND IT'S 12%.

DOESN'T MATTER. YOU TAKE THE RETURN OF THE ASSET MINUS THE RISK FREE RATE AND DIVIDE IT BY THE VOLATILITY OF THAT ASSET, OKAY, WHICH THEY ALL HAVE DIFFERENT VOLATILITY NUMBERS.

WHEN WE DO THAT WE HAVE WHAT'S CALLED A SHARPE RATIO.

THE HIGHER THE NUMBER THE BETTER THE ASSET CLASS FOR INVESTING OKAY.

SO IF YOU LOOK ON HERE IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS.

NOW THIS IS FROM HAMILTON LANE.

THIS IS WHO ERF USES.

AND THEY'VE HAD A VERY GOOD SUCCESS INVESTING WITH HAMILTON LANE.

BUT AGAIN, ANY INVESTMENT BANK, INCLUDING COMMERCE STREET, HAS THESE KIND OF NUMBERS.

WE JUST WANT TO USE AN INDEPENDENT FIRM AND IT WILL SHOW PRIVATE EQUITY WITH THE HIGHEST SHARPE RATIOS.

SO THIS ATTACK ON THE REPORT FOR THE CITY I'M NOT SURE THEY REALLY MEANT IT.

I THINK IT'S JUST SOMETHING TO THROW ROCKS AT YOU GUYS.

AND I THINK WE CAN WORK IT OUT WITH THEM.

BUT I DIDN'T WANT YOU TO BE CONFUSED BY THE MESSAGE, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO NEED PRIVATE MARKETS GOING FORWARD BECAUSE THEY HAVE TOO MUCH EXPOSURE TO STOCKS AND BONDS, AND THEY HAVE. AND THE MARKET'S VERY RICH RIGHT NOW.

AND WE'RE GOING INTO A VERY VOLATILE TIME.

AND WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER DROP IN IN IN VALUE 2,030%, JUST LIKE WE DID IN ZERO EIGHT.

EVEN IF WE DON'T, THE S&P 500 HAS A LONG TRACK RECORD OF NOT MAKING MONEY.

IT HAS A LONG TRACK RECORD OF MAKING MONEY, AND IT TENDS TO DO IT IN SPURTS.

IT MAY RUN UP FOR 10 OR 20 YEARS.

AND GUESS WHAT? IT MAY STAY FLAT FOR TEN YEARS LIKE IT DID FROM 1999, FOR THE EARLY 2000 OR THROUGH THE 70S.

AND IF YOU HAVE ALL YOUR MONEY IN THERE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME REALLY UPSET DALLAS POLICE AND FIREMEN WHO AREN'T GOING TO GET WHAT THEY NEED ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR

[01:10:07]

FUND. SO ON PAGE 17, AGAIN, PRIVATE EQUITY OR PRIVATE ASSETS IS NOT THE PROBLEM.

IT'S BEEN THE LEGACY MANAGERS THAT THESE GOD BLESS THEM, FOLKS HAVE BEEN STRUGGLING WITH FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS.

PAGE 18. HERE'S THE EXAMPLE ON HOW HOW WE'RE TRYING TO SHOW YOU YOU.

NOW, THIS ISN'T ROCKET SCIENTIST.

IF WE TAKE THE TOP QUARTILE FOR PENSION FUNDS IN THE COUNTRY AND WHAT THEIR ASSET ALLOCATION IS, AND YOU CAN SEE PRIVATE EQUITY, ALTS AND COMMODITIES, THAT ALL ADDS UP TO, YOU KNOW, ABOUT 40% OR SO, RIGHT? AND WE USE THIS ALLOCATION AND WE DON'T USE TOP RETURNS.

WE JUST USE AVERAGE RETURNS.

WE CAN USE AN INDEX FOR STOCKS.

WE CAN USE INDEXES FOR BONDS.

WE CAN USE A FUND OF FUNDS WITH VERY LOW RISK FOR PRIVATE EQUITY.

BECAUSE MAYBE I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PICK MANAGERS OR PRIVATE CREDIT FUND OF FUNDS OR WHATNOT.

ALL I HAVE TO DO IS BE AVERAGE.

BUT IF I GET MY ALLOCATION RIGHT, NOTICE YOU WIND UP WITH 7.7%.

THAT'S A TOP QUARTILE RETURN WITHOUT GETTING TOP QUARTILE RETURNS IN THE INDIVIDUAL ASSET CLASSES.

THAT'S THE TRICK.

NOW THIS IS LOOKING BACKWARDS, RIGHT? WHAT'S THE ASSET ALLOCATION GOING FORWARD? I CAN TELL YOU THIS.

IT'S EASIER TO GET THE ASSET ALLOCATION RIGHT THAN IT IS TO FORECAST RETURNS ON THE ASSET CLASSES.

SO I DON'T HAVE TO BE 100% CORRECT.

I JUST NEED TO BE NEAR IT.

PAGE 19.

THE PRIVATE MARKET TARGET ALLOCATION WAS SET IN 2018, SO ENOUGH TIME HAS PASSED FOR REEVALUATION.

THEY'VE TOLD US THEY'VE DONE THAT BUT THEY'VE NOT STARTED TO IMPLEMENT IT.

WE'VE NOT SEEN THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.

WE DON'T SEE IT. WE HAVEN'T SEEN A PLAN FOR NEW MONIES.

AND WE'RE NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW THEY'RE GOING TO DO THIS OR WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO SEE IS TRYING TO START A NEW PRIVATE EQUITY PORTFOLIO FROM SCRATCH AND NOT KNOW WHAT WE HAVE FOR SEVEN YEARS.

DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE OBVIOUSLY NEED TO INCREASE ITS ADJUSTED RETURNS TO REDUCE THEIR CITY LIMITS.

I HOPE I'VE MADE THAT CLEAR.

THE PRIVATE ASSETS AS AN ASSET CLASS THAT HISTORICALLY HAS THE HIGHEST EXPECTED RISK ADJUSTED RETURN.

I'M NOT CHASING RETURNS HERE.

I'M CHASING. I'M CHASING.

REDUCING RISK.

THAT'S HOW YOU MAKE MORE MONEY.

NEW PRIVATE EQUITY INVESTMENTS CAN CREATE OTHER ISSUES, AS WE TALKED ABOUT, THAT MUST BE DEALT WITH.

AND THAT'S WHERE THAT'S WHERE THE RUBBER HITS THE ROAD ON THIS GOING FORWARD.

AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF WORK AND A LOT OF COMMUNICATION NEEDS TO HAPPEN WITH THE CITY IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT MORE MONEY IN THERE.

BUT NEW INVESTMENTS CAN BE MADE INTO PRIVATE ASSETS CAUSING WITHOUT CAUSING THESE J-CURVE LIQUIDITY ISSUES.

AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THEM, BUT NOT IN DETAIL LIKE WE WOULD LIKE TO GOING FORWARD, IF THAT'S A POSSIBILITY OR WHOEVER YOU HIRE, IF YOU SO CHOOSE TO DO SO.

WHICH KIND OF BRINGS US TO PAGE 20.

THERE ARE MANY PARTIES OBVIOUSLY AFFECTED BY THESE PENSIONS.

THE CITY NEEDS TO INCREASE HIS KNOWLEDGE ON THESE ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN.

I HOPE TODAY IS PROVIDING USEFUL IS IS USEFUL TO YOU.

BUT THIS WE CAN KEEP IT SIMPLE AND FOCUS ON ASSET ALLOCATION, RISK POLICY AND LIQUIDITY PROCEDURES, REPORTING, BENCHMARKING, ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

AND WE THINK YOU NEED TO HIRE AN EXPERT TO DO THIS ON AN ONGOING BASIS.

YOU CAN'T JUST LOOK UP ONCE EVERY SEVEN YEARS.

SO I'VE BEEN WATCHING THIS FOR 20 YEARS.

THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY WE'RE INVOLVED.

IF YOU DON'T WANT IT TO BE US, THAT'S GREAT.

GO HIRE AN EXPERT.

WE WILL DONATE OUR TIME AND HELP YOU FIND THAT EXPERT.

IF YOU DON'T THINK IT'S US, WE WILL DONATE OUR TIME TO WHOEVER YOU HIRE AND HELP THEM WITH THESE ISSUES TO MOVE FORWARD.

THIS HAS TO BE HAS TO BE FIXED.

IT'S JUST TOO MUCH MONEY FOR ANY ONE PERSON TO NOT FOCUS ON FOR THE CITY.

SO AGAIN ON 21.

THIS WILL HELP THE CITY UNDERSTANDING OF FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF OTHER TOP PERFORMING PEERS.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEER WORK TO BE DONE.

WHAT IS HOUSTON DOING? ET CETERA. ET CETERA.

HOUSTON'S TAKING LESS RISK, AND THEY'RE MAKING 8% OVER TEN YEARS.

THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE.

THE QUESTION IS HOW CAN WE UNDERSTAND THAT AND IMPLEMENT SOME THINGS.

THERE'S NO PATENTS IN INVESTING.

SO WE CAN COPY WHAT SOME PEOPLE ARE DOING AND TAKE THE BEST OF THE BEST.

[01:15:03]

WE THE WORK WITH THE CITY CONSTITUENTS TO IMPROVE THE CITY'S UNDERSTANDING.

AND I WOULD SAY COMMUNICATION, THE RELATIONSHIPS, THE RELATIONSHIP NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED.

DOESN'T MATTER WHOSE FAULT IT IS.

I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A COMMITMENT FROM WHOEVER YOU HIRE TO HELP IMPROVE THAT RELATIONSHIP IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE AND BE VERY SENSITIVE TO IT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE NUMBER ONE INHIBITOR TO THE SUCCESS OF DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

IT'S NOT A CONTRIBUTION.

IT'S ABOUT WORKING WITH THE CITY AND THE HAND IN HAND MATTER, BECAUSE THAT 200 MILLION THAT YOU PUT IN THERE, THAT 100 MILLION YOU PUT IN THERE, THAT $1 OR 1 BILLION, IT WON'T MATTER. IT DISAPPEAR IF IT'S NOT DEALT WITH IN A COOPERATIVE SPIRIT.

WHOEVER YOU HIRE NEEDS TO CONDUCT ONGOING ANALYSIS TO HELP THE CITY BE BETTER INFORMED AND AS NEEDED.

ONGOING REPORTS AND CLARIFICATIONS, AND AS NEEDED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION TO ACHIEVE BEST PRACTICES.

I CAN TELL YOU, AFTER BEING INVOLVED WITH THIS JUST FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS, A LITTLE DIGGING HERE AND THERE.

THERE ARE SOME THERE WERE SOME RED FLAG ISSUES THAT DEVELOPED PRIOR TO 2016.

PRIOR TO 2008 THAT HAD A CONSULTANT BEEN WORKING FOR, YOU COULD HAVE IDENTIFIED VERY READILY, VERY EASILY, AND PREVENTED THIS REALLY TRAGIC THING.

NOW, THE GOOD NEWS IS YOU'RE ALL HERE.

YOU ALL CARE. IT'S A NEW REGIME AND EVERYBODY CAN WORK TOGETHER AND MOVE IT FORWARD.

BUT I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE BRIGHTER DAYS AHEAD FOR DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

WE'LL GO OVER URF, WHICH AGAIN IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

A LOT DIFFERENT. IT'S IT'S ON PAGE ONE.

I'M JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS REAL QUICK.

THEY HAVE A FUNDING RATIO OF 73%.

MOST PENSION FUNDS ARE UNDERFUNDED.

SO THAT'S NOTHING. NOTHING REALLY NEW, BUT IT'S A LOT MORE FUNDING.

AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE LIQUIDITY AND RISK ISSUES.

AND OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE ABLE TO PAY COLA AND THINGS LIKE THAT BECAUSE THEY HAVE A BETTER PERFORMING FUND.

SO IT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SITUATION THAN DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

THEY PERFORMED ABOVE AND BELOW BASICALLY AVERAGE COMPARED TO MOST OF THEIR PEERS, BUT IF THEY IMPROVED SOME RISK ADJUSTED RETURNS, I THINK THERE'S SOME WAYS FOR THEM TO DECREASE RISK AND IMPROVE RETURNS AS WELL.

AND GIVEN THAT THEIR SIZE IS ABOUT 3.5 BILLION, IF WE CAN GET, SAY, 1 OR 2% MORE OUT OF THEM OVER TEN YEARS WITH LESS RISK, THAT'S 350 TO $700 MILLION, THAT COULD MEAN A LOT TO YOU.

IT CAN MEAN A LOT TO THE CITIZENS AND CERTAINLY A LOT TO THEIR TO THE BENEFICIARIES AND PARTICIPANTS OF THE FUND.

I CAN TELL YOU THIS.

THEY ARE THEY HAVE A GREAT SPIRIT OF COOPERATION.

THEIR BOARD, THEIR STAFF HAVE BEEN VERY EASY TO WORK WITH.

WE'VE MADE LIGHT YEARS OF PROGRESS JUST IN TWO, TWO MONTHS.

AND IT'S JUST THAT SPIRIT OF COOPERATION IS VERY IMPORTANT.

WE GOT OFF ON THE WRONG FOOT WITH DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

BUT I WILL TELL YOU, IT DID IMPROVE OVER TIME.

IT JUST STILL HAS SOME WAY TO GO.

AND I DO THINK IT CAN IMPROVE.

I REALLY DO.

PAGE TWO HERE ON ERF.

JUST COMPARING THEM TO TO HOUSTON MAPS HERE.

A LITTLE UNDER 3%.

TWO 9290 BASIS POINTS OVER TEN YEARS.

THAT'S REAL MONEY.

THAT'S REAL MONEY. AND IF WE CAN DO IT WITH LESS RISK, THAT'S GREAT.

MAYBE IT'S NOT LESS RISK.

WE DON'T WANT TO TAKE A BUNCH OF RISKS TO MAKE MORE MONEY.

WE'RE OUT TO TAKE LESS RISK TO MAKE MORE MONEY.

AND YOU CAN SEE THEIR PERFORMANCE IS MIXED WITH THE ONES DOWN BELOW.

THE TOP QUARTILE NATIONALLY IS 6.8.

SO THEY'RE UNDER THAT.

THEY'RE RIGHT AT THE AVERAGE JUST BELOW 6.2.

ON THE THREE YEAR, THEY'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO TOP QUARTILE.

THERE ARE SOME REASONS FOR THAT.

NOT KNOWING HOW THEIR ASSET ALLOCATION IS AND KNOWING HOW THE STOCK MARKETS BEHAVED AND HOW PRIVATE MARKETS HAS BEHAVED, IT'S AFFECTED THEIR RETURNS.

BUT AS YOU CAN TELL, THEY OUTPERFORM ONE BIT.

THEY'RE UNDER WHEN THEY START TO HIT THE FIVE YEAR.

AND THEN IN THE TEN YEAR THEY WIND UP YOU KNOW ABOUT AVERAGE.

WHY IS THAT? BECAUSE IT'S TAKING MORE RISKS THAN WHAT THEIR PEERS ARE.

AND I'LL SHOW YOU WE'LL SHOW YOU IN JUST A SECOND WHAT WE ALSO DECIDED TO DO.

THEY WANTED US TO TO BETTER DEFINE A PEER GROUP THAT WAS MORE THEIR SIZE AND MORE OF THEIR FUNDING RATIOS.

AND SO GRANT PULLED THAT TOGETHER.

AND ON PAGE FIVE, THIS IS KIND OF THE RESULT OF THAT.

AND IF YOU ADD THE REAL ESTATE 16 PRIVATE EQUITY, 1026 HEDGE FUNDS, THAT'S 29%.

SO THAT'S 30%.

AND REMEMBER WE TALKED ABOUT PRIVATE MARKETS BEING ABOUT 40% FOR TOP QUARTILE.

[01:20:05]

SO THEY'RE A LOT CLOSER THAN SAY DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

SO THEY'RE TAKING LESS RISK.

AND THAT'S WHY THEIR PERFORMANCE IS BETTER.

IT'S REALLY SIMPLE.

IT'S NOT QUARTILE.

WHY. BECAUSE IT'S NOT QUITE AS HIGH.

AND THEY'RE TAKING MORE RISK WITH 42% PUBLIC EQUITY, WHICH IS WHERE ALL THE VOLATILITY IS VERSUS 34%.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEXT PAGE, THE NATIONAL TOP QUARTILE PENSIONS PRIVATE MARKETS AT 39%, AS WE DISCUSSED, DALLAS AT 30%. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE PERFORMANCE DOWN THERE ON THE BOTTOM.

THE NEXT PAGE IS THE SAME SLIDE WE DISCUSSED EARLIER UNDER DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

SO NO NEED TO REHASH OTHER THAN IT JUST SHOWS YOU HOW A LITTLE MORE ALLOCATION WITH AVERAGE RETURNS WOULD GET THEM WHERE WE NEED TO.

ON PAGE EIGHT IS A LIST OF THEIR PRIVATE EQUITY INVESTMENTS.

IT SHOWS UP AT 13.2% IRR, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT BELOW AVERAGE.

BUT HAVING SAID THAT, LOOK WHAT THAT DOES FOR THE FUND 13.2% IS A NICE RETURN.

IT'S LESS VOLATILE.

AND LET ME SHOW YOU ANOTHER LITTLE THING THAT MAKES SOME SENSE.

THE HAMILTON SECONDARY FUNDS.

WHAT IS A SECONDARY? A SECONDARY FUND IS LET'S SAY MR. WEST HERE IS RUNNING A SECONDARY FUND.

AND WHAT HE DOES, INSTEAD OF GOING OUT AND BUYING COMPANIES, HE GOES OUT TO OTHER PENSIONS AND OTHER LIMITED PARTNERS OF FUNDS AND BUYS THEIR INTEREST.

AND IT'S ALREADY SEASONED AND IT DOESN'T HAVE A J-CURVE AND IT'S ALREADY MAKING MONEY.

IT'S ALREADY GOT CASH FLOW.

SO NOW WE DON'T HAVE TO WHAT, WAIT SEVEN YEARS.

SO A SECONDARY FUND IS A WAY TO GET THERE FASTER.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY HOW URF GOT INTO THE BUSINESS, WHICH IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE COULD TAKE AS A LESSON TO MOVE FORWARD.

IT'S A LESS RISKY WAY TO GET IN, AND IT ALSO SO IT WON'T GIVE YOU THE ABOVE MARKET RETURNS, BUT IT'LL KIND OF GIVE YOU AN AVERAGE AND IT GIVES YOU AN IMMEDIATE RETURN. AND WE NEED THAT IMMEDIATE RETURN AND DIVERSIFICATION FOR DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE SEVEN YEARS TO WAIT.

SO WE WIND UP WITH REALLY BASICALLY THE SAME CONCLUSIONS HERE.

JUST THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO KIND OF KEEP UP THEIR PULSE ON THIS MOVING FORWARD.

AND, AND HAVE A KIND OF A WATCHDOG, IF YOU WILL ON YOUR BEHALF TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE NO RED FLAGS THAT POP UP LIKE WE HAD PRIOR TO 2016.

I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT.

I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS ACTUALLY VERY, VERY INFORMATIVE.

AND I'M SURE WE HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU, BUT I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE TIME THAT YOU'VE PUT INTO HELPING US HERE.

I GUESS START THAT PROCESS OF BECOMING MORE ON THIS SIDE OF THE HOUSE, IF YOU WILL MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE AND AWARE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS IN THESE FUNDS.

I DON'T THINK VERY MANY PEOPLE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE RAN FOR THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL TO BECOME AN EXPERT ON THIS.

AND I KNOW, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, THAT THAT WE DO OR THAT FUTURE COUNCILS DO.

BUT I DO THINK THAT 1500, MARILLA PROBABLY OUGHT TO HAVE MORE INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE AROUND THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS IN OUR PUBLIC SECTOR PENSIONS THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND THAT THIS IS A GOOD CONVERSATION STARTER ABOUT THAT.

SO I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR INTRODUCING THAT INTO OUR INTO OUR DIALOG.

AND WITH THAT WE'RE ON BRIEFING ITEM A, EVERYONE IN THE PUBLIC AND I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN MY QUEUE.

WHICH CAN'T BE RIGHT.

CANNOT BE CORRECT.

SO I SEE NOW ONE PERSON IS POPULATED AND NOW IT'S STARTING TO FILL IN.

NOW CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON BRIEFING ITEM A.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

SO STARTING WITH PAGE 16 OF THE DALLAS FIRE AND POLICE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, YOU TALK ABOUT THAT, IT'S ACKNOWLEDGED THAT PRIVATE EQUITY IS HISTORICALLY THE HIGHEST SHARPE RATIO AND IS EXPECTED TO CONTINUE IN THAT FASHION.

AND SO I'M HAVING A TOUGH TIME UNDERSTANDING WHY THE DECISION MAKERS AT THE FIRE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT CONCEPT OR ARE NOT ACCEPTING IT.

[01:25:05]

DO YOU HAVE ANY INSIGHT ON THAT? IN THE HEART OF HEARTS.

I THINK THEY DO UNDERSTAND IT.

I THINK THE, YOU KNOW, THE COMMENTS THAT THEY MADE INTO THEIR ADDENDUM WERE REALLY KIND OF MORE OF JUST THROWING ROCKS AND DIDN'T WANT ANY MORE OVERSIGHT.

ONCE I THINK YOU KIND OF GET TO THE DECISION, IF YOU SO DESIRE TO GET, YOU KNOW, SOME MORE OVERSIGHT OR INFLUENCE OR A BETTER RELATIONSHIP, WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT, I THINK IT'LL BE EASIER FOR THEM TO MOVE ON AND SAY, OKAY, BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY HIRED.

IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO NOT BELIEVE THIS, RIGHT? WHEN YOU'VE ALREADY HIRED A CONSULTANT AND THEN TOLD US YOU WANTED TO INCREASE PRIVATE MARKETS, YOU CAN'T COME BACK AND SAY IT'S TOO RISKY AND EVERYONE IN THE INSTITUTION, THE WORLD SAYS IT.

IT'S JUST NOT IT'S NOT A STATEMENT OF FACT.

YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM ON THAT IS REALLY JUST SORT OF NITPICKING BY SAYING, WELL, IT DEPENDS.

AND WHAT DOES IT DEPEND ON? WELL, IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU PICK PRIVATE EQUITY DEPENDS ON HOW GOOD YOU ARE AT INVESTING DEPENDS ON WHAT MANAGERS YOU KNOW.

SO WE'RE ALL TALKING IN GENERALITIES.

AND THEY WERE TRYING TO JUST SAY, WELL THERE'S SOME EXCEPTIONS.

AND OF COURSE THERE IS. THERE'S ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS.

WELL I'M CONCERNED ABOUT TWO THINGS.

ONE, IS THERE PUSHBACK ON THAT ISSUE WHICH IS ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE RETURNS ON THE PENSION FUND? AND SECOND, YOU ALSO MENTIONED THAT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN PICKING PRIVATE EQUITY MANAGERS.

AND THAT CONCERNS ME.

DID THEY PRESENT ANY RESPONSE TO YOUR CRITIQUE OF THE SUCCESS OF THEIR PRIVATE EQUITY MANAGERS? SO HERE'S WHAT WE KNOW THAT ALL THE INVESTMENTS THAT THEY HAVE IN PRIVATE MARKETS WERE FROM THE PREVIOUS REGIME, SO THEY HAVEN'T PICKED ANYTHING IN SEVEN YEARS. DO THEY HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF DOING SO? I WOULD THINK SO.

BUT IT'S BEEN SEVEN YEARS.

THEY'RE PROBABLY OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE MARKET.

THEY'RE GOING TO NEED HELP FROM A GOOD CONSULTANT.

ALL BORN IS A GOOD CONSULTANT.

THEY HAVE A BOARD THAT HAS A LOT OF EXPERTISE.

TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THEY INVOLVED IN HELPING? IS THERE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE BOARD, LIKE AN ALTERNATIVE ASSETS COMMITTEE, TO GET MORE INVOLVED AND REVIEW ALL THESE MANAGERS TO HELP SET POLICY THAT'S BEEN NON-EXISTENT FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS.

SO THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, AND THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW.

AND WHAT KIND OF AGAIN, WHAT KIND OF STRATEGY ARE YOU GOING TO DO? I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY PENSION FUNDS I'VE TALKED TO WHO WOKE UP AND LOOKED AT A GRAPH THAT SAY, LIKE ON PAGE 15 AND SAID, THAT'S FOR US.

AND THEN THEY START A PRIVATE EQUITY PORTFOLIO AND THEY WONDER WHY THEY HAVE LOSSES IN IT FOR THE FIRST 3 TO 5 YEARS, BECAUSE IT TAKES SEVEN YEARS TO FIGURE IT OUT.

IF YOU'RE DOING TRADITIONAL DRAWDOWN PRIVATE EQUITY.

SO YOU HAVE TO DO SOME CREATIVE THINGS IN ORDER TO GET THAT IMMEDIATE RETURN BEFORE YOU CAN TRY TO BUILD THAT TOP QUARTILE PERFORMING PRIVATE EQUITY PORTFOLIO.

AND AS YOU DESCRIBE ON PAGE 19, THOSE INCLUDE INTERVAL FUNDS, SECONDARIES AND PRIVATE CREDIT.

YES. ARE THEY INVESTED IN ANY OF THOSE NOW? I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. ARE THEY INVESTED IN ANY OF THE SECONDARIES? NO THEY'RE NOT.

NOT RIGHT. THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANY OF THAT.

AND WE BROUGHT THAT UP AND THEY SEEMED RECEPTIVE TO IT.

THEY SEEMED RECEPTIVE TO PRIVATE CREDIT AS WELL, BECAUSE PRIVATE CREDIT DOESN'T HAVE A LONG DRAWDOWN AND HAS SOME IMMEDIATE RETURN.

THERE'S SOME OTHER IDEAS AS WELL THAT I'M NOT SURE THEY QUITE TOOK TO YET, BUT I THINK THEY WOULD.

AND THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF SMART PEOPLE THERE.

THEY JUST SORT OF BEEN, I DON'T KNOW, OUT OF PRACTICE FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS OR SO.

WHO HAVE YOU BEEN TALKING TO WITH REGARD TO THESE ISSUES AT THE PENSION FUND? IS IT THE ADMINISTRATORS OR THE BOARD MEMBERS? SO MOSTLY STAFF.

MOST OF THE MEETINGS HAVE BEEN WITH STAFF.

I'VE HAD SOME WITH THE THE CHAIRMAN WHO I'VE KNOWN A LONG TIME.

ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER OR SO.

OTHER ONES WERE AFRAID TO MEET WITH US FOR WHATEVER REASON.

SO YOU HAVE RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY HIRE A CONSULTANT TO BECOME BETTER EDUCATED ABOUT THE PENSION FUND AND ITS INVESTMENTS. IS THAT CORRECT? WHAT? WHAT? YES.

YOU SAID YOU WANT THE CITY TO HIRE A CONSULTANT FOR THE.

FOR THEM TO BECOME BETTER KNOWLEDGEABLE ON THE PENSION FUNDS? YES. AND AND I ALSO THINK IN THE MEANTIME IF THAT THAT CONSULTANT CAN WORK WITH THE BOARD AND STAFF BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE THE MAYOR APPOINTS A LOT OF THESE, RIGHT? AND SO I, FOR EXAMPLE, VISITED WITH ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HAS BEEN INVOLVED, I THINK, FOR 15 YEARS ON ONE OF THE FUNDS.

I'VE KNOWN HIM FOR 30 YEARS.

I'VE KNOWN A LOT OF THESE BOARD MEMBERS, AND HE SAID, NOT ONCE HAS ANYONE FROM THE CITY EVER VISITED WITH HIM ABOUT THE FUND OVER 15 YEARS.

[01:30:09]

WELL, THAT'S NOT AN EXCUSE FOR POOR PERFORMANCE OR POOR SELECTION OF MANAGERS.

SO THAT LEADS TO MY NEXT QUESTION, THOUGH.

HOW CAN WE, AS THE CITY COUNCIL, INFLUENCE THE INVESTMENT DECISIONS OF THE BOARD TO INCREASE THEIR RETURNS? IT'S A RELATIONSHIP BECAUSE THAT BOARD HAS THE FIDUCIARY DUTY.

IT STANDS ALONE. THOSE FUNDS STAND ALONE, AND YOU CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH.

RIGHT. SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A RELATIONSHIP.

SO NOT ONLY WITH THE STAFF BUT WITH THE BOARD.

OKAY. AND SO YOUR, YOUR, YOUR BIG HAMMERS ARE WHAT I CAN GIVE MONEY AND I CAN APPOINT PEOPLE.

RIGHT. BUT THE LAST ONE IS, IS A RELATIONSHIP.

AND THAT'S WHAT I'M REALLY ADVOCATING HERE.

AND BECAUSE A RELATIONSHIP WITH AN EXPERT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY CAN GO A LONG WAY TO HELP.

BRIDGING NOT ONLY COMMUNICATION, BUT IDEAS.

RIGHT? BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN.

YOU'RE AT A PENSION FUND.

AND MR. ATKINS KNOWS THIS BECAUSE HE'S BEEN ON THE BOARD.

IS YOU.

ALL YOUR INFORMATION COMES FROM STAFF AND IT COMES FROM THOSE CONSULTANTS.

RIGHT. AND SO THAT'S THE MESSAGE.

AND FOR MOST OF THE TIME THAT'S THAT'S ALL GOOD.

RIGHT. BUT IF THE IF THE FUND IS TAKING A BUNCH OF INORDINATE RISK OR GOD FORBID, DOING SOME THINGS IT SHOULDN'T BE DOING, YOU MAY NOT KNOW AND IT HAPPENS AND IT'S NOT UNCOMMON.

WELL, THIS IS AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT WORKING FOR THE CITY THAT'S NOT BEHOLDEN TO THE BOARD OR TO THE STAFF AND CAN HAVE ITS OWN OPINION ON WHAT IS A RED FLAG AND WHAT ISN'T.

I WAS SURPRISED THAT SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS I VISITED WITH, THEY WERE SURPRISED BY THE PERFORMANCE OF THESE FUNDS.

THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE DOING BETTER AGAINST SOME OF THEIR PEERS THAN THEY REALIZED.

WHY? WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE THE STAFF AND THE CONSULTANT DEFINES A PEER GROUP, AND I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD OF A PENSION FUND THAT'S NOW $200 BILLION.

AND AND THAT WAS THE FIRST THING I HAD TO FIX WAS WHAT WAS THE PEER GROUP AND HOW ARE WE MEASURING OURSELVES? IF YOU LOWER THE BAR, YOU LOOK PRETTY GOOD.

WELL, I'M OPEN TO THE IDEA OF THE CITY EMPLOYING A CONSULTANT, AND I THINK THIS IS CLEARLY AN ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO REMAIN FRONT OF MIND FOR ALL OF US.

AND PERHAPS A CONSULTANT WHO MAKES REGULAR REPORTS TO THE APPROPRIATE COMMITTEE WOULD BE A GOOD THING.

BUT I ALSO HAVE TO SAY THAT IT OUGHT TO BE THE BOARD OF THE PENSION FUND THAT'S HIRING THIS CONSULTANT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES CHARGED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THAT FUND, NOT US.

AND THEY WOULD BE IN A POSITION TO DIRECTLY INFLUENCE THE INVESTMENT DECISIONS, WHEREAS ANYONE THAT WE HIRE IS JUST GOING TO BE AN ADVISOR. AND WHY SHOULD THE CITY INCUR THAT EXPENSE WHEN IT'S THE PENSION FUND THAT'S OBLIGATED TO ACHIEVE THE BEST RESULTS THAT THEY CAN? MAYBE WE HAVE TO DO IT ANYWAY, BUT I'M JUST VERY UNHAPPY WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR INVESTMENT ADVISORS AND THEIR BOARD TO TOLERATE THESE KINDS OF RETURNS AND THIS KIND OF ALLOCATION, WHICH IS SHOOTING THEMSELVES IN THE FOOT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

CHAIRWOMAN ARNOLD, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

ON ITEM A, I'M SORRY.

THANK YOU. I THOUGHT I'D REMOVE MY NAME, BUT BECAUSE I'M STILL GATHERING, YOU DON'T.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO. I MEAN, I'M NOT, YOU KNOW, I'LL GO.

AND NOW I THINK I THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR INSIGHTFUL PRESENTATION.

AND SO I CAN HEAR, NUMBER ONE AND AGREE THAT PERHAPS WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT POSITION THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT IN TERMS OF HAVING SOMEONE DAY TO DAY ACCOUNTABLE FOR COMMUNICATING. THAT'S VERY KEY.

NUMBER TWO, I THINK THE RANK AND FILE OF POLICE AND FIRE THE FOLKS WHO BOOTS DAY TO DAY ON THE GROUND, THEY'RE LOOKING FOR SOMEONE TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS FOR THEIR FUTURE.

YOU KNOW, AND I'VE TALKED TO A NUMBER OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS.

THEY'RE NOT CAUGHT UP IN KEEPING UP WITH THE DAY TO DAY.

THEY ARE TRUSTING THAT SOMEONE HAS THEIR BEST INTEREST.

NUMBER THREE, IN TERMS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF A POSITION THAT'S STEADY AND FIRM, THAT DEALS WITH THAT BOARD, IS THAT AS COUNCIL MEMBERS COME IN AND OUT, ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE WHEN WE ARE RUNNING FOR OFFICE IS THAT WE HAVE THIS FINANCIAL INVESTMENT BACKGROUND.

AND SO WHEN YOU BEGIN TO TRY TO PUT IT, WHEN I CAME, THEY WERE PUTTING A PLACE, A NOMINATING OR PLACING COUNCIL MEMBERS ON, ON THE BOARD.

AND THAT THAT'S BECAUSE YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE THE BACKGROUND TO ENTER INTO THAT ARENA TO MAKE DECISIONS.

[01:35:06]

AND I KNOW THAT MR. ATKINS HAS HAS HAD THAT POSITION.

I KNOW THAT WAS ONE JUST COMING IN.

I WOULDN'T HAVE THAT EXPERTISE.

BUT I DO HAVE UNDERSTANDING OF PENSION COMING FROM AN EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MY MONEY IS BEING TAKEN CARE OF.

AND AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN I RETIRE, I WANT TO GET MY MONEY.

AND THAT'S WHAT THESE WORKERS WANT.

THESE EMPLOYEES WANT THEIR MONEY WHEN THEY RETIRE.

AND SO IT IS DISHEARTENING.

I'VE BEEN AT THE TABLE WHEN WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE DISMAL OUTLOOK BACK IN 2016 AND 17, WHEN MAYOR ROLLINS TOLD US THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK, HE TOLD US THEN. SO I WOULD SAY, JUST FOR ME RIGHT NOW, THIS IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW.

I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO TELL US IF YOU HAD TO MEET WITH THE A COMMUNITY, A NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP BECAUSE THIS IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAXPAYERS MONEY, AM I RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHERE THE THAT'S WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD.

YEAH. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO EXPLAIN TO THEM IN LAYMAN TERMS, WHY ARE THEY WHY ARE WE IN THIS POSITION.

WHAT IS IT GOING? HOW IS IT GOING TO IMPACT THEIR BOTTOM LINE.

AND AS WE TALK ABOUT BUDGETS MOVING FORWARD, WHO'S GOING TO CARRY THAT LOAD TO HELP LIFT THIS FINANCIAL BURDEN OFF OF THE CITY, OFF OF THE FIREMEN AND FIRE AND POLICE AND FIRE AND THEIR FAMILIES? AND HOW DO WE COME OUT WITH A BETTER OUTLOOK? HOW DO YOU PUT THAT IN LAYMAN TERMS? HOW DID WE GET HERE AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR THE TAXPAYERS? HOW DID WE GET HERE? IN LAYMAN TERMS, IT'S NOT ANY ONE THING, RIGHT.

IT'S IT'S SORT OF A SLIPPERY SLOPE.

BUT IT STARTED WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE, OBVIOUSLY.

IT STARTED WITH THE STAFF.

PREVIOUS STAFF AND LEADERSHIP.

PARTICULARLY PARTICULAR NAME WHO WAS REALLY, REALLY GOOD AT TELLING STORIES.

YOU KNOW THE STORIES.

IN 2004, WHILE I WAS ON THE BOARD OF A PENSION FUND.

EXCUSE ME, ARE THEY DID THEY TELL STORIES OR DID THEY TELL LIES? BOTH. THEY BOTH YOU KNOW, THIS THIS DIRECT INVESTING AND REAL ESTATE IN NAPA AND HAWAII AND ALL THAT STUFF AND BOONDOGGLES OR EVERYONE THAT YOU JUST KIND OF GET SUCKED UP IN IT.

I'VE SEEN IT IN OTHER PENSION FUNDS AND IT IT WORKS WELL UNTIL IT DOESN'T.

WHEN YOU HIT A BAD MARKET RIGHT NOW, IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T LOSE MONEY IN OTHER INVESTMENTS.

YOU CAN, BUT YOU WANT TO LOSE LESS.

YOU WANT TO LOSE LESS.

THAT'S REALLY THE NAME OF PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT.

WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN A PREVIOUS MEETING.

YOU KNOW, IF THE MARKET GOES DOWN, SAY 20% LIKE IT DID IN 2022.

I WANT TO LOSE LESS.

WHY? BECAUSE IT TAKES MORE EFFORT TO MAKE IT UP.

IF I LOSE 20%, I GOT TO DO 25% TO BREAK EVEN.

IF I LOSE 50, I GOT TO DO 200%.

IF I LOSE 70, I GOT TO DO 3X3 TIMES MY MONEY 300%.

SO IT'S A PROBLEM THAT GETS WORSE WHEN THE MARKET GOES LIKE THIS.

AND ALL THE ASSET CLASSES.

A REDUCED VOLATILITY.

B WHEN I PUT MY PORTFOLIO TOGETHER, AS LONG AS I LOSE LESS THAN EVERYONE ELSE AND I HAVE UPSIDE BECAUSE THE MATH DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY, I'LL OUTPERFORM.

IT'S THAT SIMPLE.

SO NOW AS FAR AS PREVIOUS MANAGEMENT AND HOW TO GET HERE, THAT'S WHY I THINK YOU NEED TO HIRE A CONSULTANT.

YOU NEED EYES AND EARS.

YOU KNOW, I'M TOLD THAT A CONSULTANT FIRED DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE AND QUIT PRIOR TO 2008.

AND THAT THAT CONSULTANT IS THE ONE THAT'S WITH URF NOW.

THAT'S A RED FLAG.

YOU DON'T FIRE YOUR PENSIONS.

THEY'RE TOO HARD TO GET AS A CLIENT IF THEY'RE A CONSULTANT OUT THERE.

RIGHT? THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE BUSINESS, MAKITA, MERCER AND WHATNOT.

WILSHIRE WAS A FIRM, AND THAT'S WHAT ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS TOLD ME ON THE ERF.

WELL, THAT'S SORT OF LIKE KPMG FIRING YOU FOR AN AUDIT.

WHY WOULD THEY FIRE YOU AS A CLIENT? BECAUSE SOMETHING DOESN'T SMELL RIGHT.

AND THEY'RE OUT. WELL, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG WHERE A CONSULTANT WOULD HAVE WENT, WAIT A MINUTE.

I'VE BEEN TAKING LONG LUNCHES AND WORKING TWO HOUR DAYS, BUT THAT'S A RED FLAG.

AND WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THAT RIGHT NOW BEFORE THE MARKET CRASHES.

AND NO ONE NO ONE SAW THE RED FLAG.

BUT THERE WERE OTHER RED FLAGS.

WE COULD SEE THEM. YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS ON THE BOARD AT TEACHER RETIREMENT SYSTEM, KNOWING THE STAFF, KNOWING WHAT THEY WERE DOING, I VISITED WITH SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS AT THAT TIME SAYING, HEY, YOU'RE HEADING DOWN THE WRONG ROAD.

THIS IS GOING TO BLOW UP.

WHY? BECAUSE TRS HAD DONE THE SAME THING IN THE 80S.

THAT'S CORRECT. THEY DID DIRECT REAL ESTATE AND THEY LOST THEIR SHIRT.

AND THEN THEY BROUGHT IN A CIO FROM DALLAS, AND THE CIO HIRED A BANK REAL ESTATE WORKOUT GUY TO COME IN AND GET RID OF ALL THE ASSETS.

GOOD MOVE ANYWAY.

AND THEY DID THAT OVER ABOUT A THREE AND A HALF YEAR PERIOD.

[01:40:03]

THEY GOT RID OF ALL THEIR PROBLEM ASSETS.

WELL, IT WAS THE SAME STORY, SAME SONG, DIFFERENT VERSE WITH DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE.

ALL RIGHT. SO WHEN I COME BACK WITH THE NEIGHBORS THAT I MET WITH LAST NIGHT AND OTHERS, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT VERY SIMPLE.

BECAUSE WHEN YOU START, SOME OF US HAVE SEEN TRADING PLACES.

THAT'S ABOUT WHAT THEY UNDERSTAND YOU.

WE NEED TO BREAK IT DOWN. WHAT IS IT GOING TO MEAN FOR YOU AS A TAXPAYER, AS WE MOVE FORWARD TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THIS STATE, THIS CITY IS SAFE, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO HAVE THE FAMILY MEMBERS, THOSE FIRST RESPONDERS, AND WE'VE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF THEM, AND THEY GOT TO HELP TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES AS WELL.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS, IN LAYMAN TERMS, AS WE CRAFT BUDGETS, THAT'S GOING TO END UP MEANING MEETING MORE OF THAT MONEY.

OUR TAXPAYERS DOLLARS ARE GOING TO GO TO POLICE AND FIRE.

SO THE WORD YOU'RE LOOKING FOR MESSAGING AND I THINK YOU COME.

YEAH. SO BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN YOU SAY WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY, THEN THAT'S GOING TO HELP ME TO BETTER UNDERSTAND, TO MAKE DECISIONS.

BUT I'M GOING TO TO DEFER NOW AND MOVE ON AND COME BACK AND JUST THINK ABOUT IT, BECAUSE THAT'S MY THAT'S WHO HAS HIRED ME.

THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS IN MY DISTRICT HAVE HIRED ME AND OTHER CITIZENS THROUGHOUT ALL OF OUR DISTRICTS, EXPECTS EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US TO TAKE CARE OF THE TAXPAYERS DOLLARS.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M LISTENING FOR RIGHT NOW, IS HOW AM I GOING TO EXPLAIN, AS THEIR TAX DOLLARS INCREASE IN TERMS OF DONATIONS, IF YOU WILL, TO THE POT, BUT FOR THE RETURN THEY'RE GOING TO GET? WHAT IS IT GOING TO MEAN FOR THEM ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS? WHAT HAPPENED? SO THANK YOU SO MUCH.

JUST THINK ABOUT IT. AND WHEN I COME BACK, I HAVE THREE MINUTES AND ONE MINUTE, SO I MAY CATCH YOU AT THE ONE MINUTE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

SO HERE WOULD BE.

AND I'M A BETTER NUMBERS GUY THAN I AM COMMUNICATOR.

BUT HERE WOULD BE MY ATTEMPT.

LAME ATTEMPT AT A MESSAGING A WE HAVE MISMANAGEMENT OF THE FUND PRIOR TO 2016 2016.

B THEY'VE BEEN WORKING FEVERISHLY TO DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS.

SEE, THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE TO WRITE A CHECK, PUT IT IN.

D WE AS A CITY COUNCIL ARE GOING TO HIRE A CONSULTANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T GET IN THIS AGAIN AND THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD, BECAUSE THE GOAL IS WE'VE GOT TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FUND SO WE DON'T HAVE TO RAISE TAXES, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO SELL AS MANY ASSETS SO WE CAN MEET OUR BUDGET SO WE CAN PAY OUR POLICEMEN.

SO WE CAN GIVE A COLA SO WE CAN PLAY OUR FIREMAN AND WE CAN GIVE A COLA TO THEM.

WE CAN HAVE A SAFER CITY AND WE CAN KEEP ATTRACTING THE TOP TALENT, THE TOP COMPANIES, TO THE BEST CITY AND THE BEST STATE IN THE UNION.

ALL RIGHT, I THINK I CAN WAIT WITH THAT.

WORK WITH THAT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I KNOW THIS IS A VERY TOUCHY SUBJECT.

IT'S VERY SERIOUS, VERY TOUCHY.

AND I'M AT THE END OF THE DAY, AS I'VE SHARED WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS, COMING FROM THE BACKGROUND AND WORKING, AS YOU TALKED ABOUT TRES WHEN THEY WENT THROUGH AND MADE THAT DECISION, YOU KNOW, I WAS UPSET.

AND I TELL THEM, I UNDERSTAND WHEN I GET READY TO PULL MY MONEY DOWN, I WANT IT, OKAY? AND THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO.

EXACTLY. I THINK AS WHAT YOU SUGGESTED, AND I WILL LISTEN FOR THE REST OF THE COMMENTS AND THE ENGAGEMENT.

BUT YOU I THINK THANK YOU.

AT LEAST I CAN TAKE PART OF THAT BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM A.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

GREAT PRESENTATION.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT YOU SAID TWO THINGS.

BAD MANAGEMENT, BAD INVESTMENT, AND WE HAVE BAD MANAGEMENT AND BAD INVESTMENT.

WHAT WAS THE TIPPING POINT THAT YOU KNEW THAT WE KNEW WAS BAD MANAGEMENT AND BAD INVESTMENT, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE GUARDRAILS IN PLACE.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? HELP ME WITH THAT. I COULDN'T HEAR IT.

WHAT WAS THE TIPPING POINT WHEN WE REALIZED IT WAS BAD? IT WAS BAD INVESTMENT. WHEN DID I REALIZE THAT? WHEN DID. WHEN DID WE REALIZE THAT? LIKE WHEN COULD PEOPLE.

WE REALIZED IT BEFORE WE STARTED.

WHEN WAS THAT? OH, WELL, I MEAN, I THINK I'VE MET PRIOR MANAGEMENT, PROBABLY IN 2007.

OKAY. OKAY.

SO, SO THEREFORE, IF YOU GO BACK TO 2007 BEFORE THEN AND YOU GO BACK FROM 2017 TO TODAY THERE WAS BAD INVESTMENT.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? IS THAT WHAT YOU COME UP WITH? YEAH. I THINK WHEN WAS THE LAST YEAR THAT THEY MADE AN INVESTMENT? WAS IT 2016? YEAH. YEAH.

SO FROM 2007 TO 2016 THAT PRIOR MANAGEMENT WAS STILL HERE AND THEY WENT THROUGH ZERO EIGHT.

AND YOU KNOW ALL THE TROUBLES BETTER THAN I DO.

WELL, YOU LOOK AT THE PAPERWORK, YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS AND YOU LOOK AT THE INVESTMENT.

AND WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THAT, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE BOARD MEMBERS ON THE BOARD THAT ALL THE INVESTMENT IS PUBLIC

[01:45:02]

INFORMATION. IS THAT CORRECT? AND THAT'S WHAT YOU DID WAS LOOK AT PUBLIC INFORMATION.

YOU DID NOT GO BEYOND WHAT WAS NOT PUBLIC.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

SO, SO SO THEREFORE WE AS A CITY THAT WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS THAT WHERE THAT THIRD PARTY CONSULTANT, WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION THAN THE PUBLIC WOULD HAVE.

YOU SHOULD HAVE, YEAH.

IF YOU'RE COLLABORATING, YES.

YOU'D HAVE MORE INFORMATION.

YOU SHOULD HAVE OR WE WOULD HAVE.

WHICH ONE? BETTER HALF.

I MEAN, I CAN'T GUARANTEE HOW THEY'LL REACT.

WELL, I'M LOOKING AT THE GOVERNMENT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY.

BUT I HAVE NO REASON TO THINK THAT WE WON'T HAVE ACCESS TO MORE INFORMATION.

BUT EVEN IF WE DON'T, EVEN WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION PUBLIC WISE, TO COME TO THE CONCLUSIONS THAT WE NEED. BUT I HAVE NO REASON TO THINK THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO OTHER INFORMATION WITH THE FUNDS.

THEY'VE BEEN THEY'VE BEEN VERY COLLABORATIVE, ONE ONE MORE SO THAN THE OTHER, BUT THEY'VE BEEN COLLABORATIVE.

OKAY. SO DID YOU ASK FOR ANY INFORMATION THAT YOU COULD NOT GET ACCESS TO OR THE FUND? DO THEY HAVE INFORMATION THAT WE COULD NOT GET ACCESS TO? THAT IS CORRECT. I THINK THERE'S SOME YES, THERE IS SOME.

WE'D LIKE TO GET MORE DATA FROM WILTSHIRE AND MAKITA WHO ARE THEIR CONSULTANTS? WHICH IS MORE THAN WHAT THE PUBLIC WOULD GET, OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE THAT GOES TO THE PLAN.

BUT THEY'VE BEEN GENEROUS IN SHARING WHAT WE'VE ASKED FOR.

BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE DONE AS A TOP DOWN ANALYSIS WITH IT'S IT MAY SEEM LIKE A LOT OF DETAIL, BUT THERE WOULD BE A LOT MORE DETAIL BEHIND IT.

YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING TO LOOK AT THE BOARD OF FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY.

AND WE AS POLICYMAKERS, OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND WHAT THE BOARD CAN ALLOW TO TELL US IN EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, THE THINGS DO NOT GO ON THAT THE THE PUBLIC WOULD NOT KNOW.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO SEND THAT.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT AN EXPERT CONSULTANT THEY WERE TRYING TO READ THE INVESTMENT THAT WE AS POLICYMAKERS OR WE AS A STAFF DO NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO LOOK AT INVESTMENT.

SO WHAT'S THE QUESTION? LET'S ASK THEM TO REPEAT IT. WILL YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN? AND NOW, O ALL OF YOU, AN APOLOGY.

BECAUSE I WEAR HEARING AIDS.

AND ONE OF THEM WENT OUT.

AND SO IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT.

IT'S MINE, BUT I APOLOGIZE.

OKAY, REPEAT THE QUESTION ONE MORE TIME.

OKAY. CAN I GET MY TIME BACK? BUT THE POINT IS THAT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT WHEN YOU HIRE A CONSULTANT, AN EXPERT CONSULTANT FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, WHERE THEY HAVE AN AVENUE TO GET MORE DATA, MORE INFORMATION, THEN YES, THEY WOULD.

YES. I THINK THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION.

I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD HAVE BECAUSE THEY IS NOT ON THE BOARD AND THEY'RE NOT IN THAT POSITION OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF ANOTHER DEPARTMENT.

SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CONSULTANTS THAT WORK FOR THE PLANS OR THE CONSULTANT FOR THE CITY? FOR THE CITY. OH, NO, WE WOULDN'T HAVE MORE.

THAT'S CORRECT. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE.

AREN'T YOU TRYING TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO.

IF YOU HIRE A CONSULTANT THAT THE SAME INFORMATION WOULD BE PUBLIC INFORMATION.

AND SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING THAT AS A CITY DALLAS, IF WE HIRE EXPERTS, IT'D BE THE SAME INFORMATION WOULD BE OUT THERE IN THE PUBLIC EYE ANYWAY.

SO WE'LL BE TRYING TO HIRE SOMEONE TO EDUCATE US WHAT THIS MEANS.

BAD INVESTMENT OR BAD MANAGEMENT TO LET THAT GO.

BUT WE DO NOT CONTROL THE BOARD.

WELL, AND YOU BRING UP A REALLY GOOD POINT THAT I WANT TO KIND OF BRING OUT.

THERE ARE GOING TO BE INSTANCES WHERE THEY DON'T WANT US TO KNOW EVERYTHING BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S GOING TO IF IT'S GOING TO GO PUBLIC.

SO WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHAT WE ASK.

AND IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR INFORMATION, WE'RE NOT GOING IN TO MANAGE THE FUNDS.

THAT'S NOT OUR JOB.

THAT WOULDN'T BE YOUR JOB.

THAT'S THE BOARD'S JOB.

THAT'S THE STAFF'S JOB.

AND SO YOU CAN SAY, WELL, IS IT OUR JOB TO SECOND GUESS WHAT WE'RE DOING? WELL. NOT NECESSARILY.

THINK OF IT MORE AS A KIND OF A WATCHDOG, RIGHT? WE CAN TELL ENOUGH FROM MOSTLY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION.

AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED THAT'S PRIVATE TO THE FUND, THEN WE HAVE TO MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL.

HEY, DO WE REALLY WANT TO KNOW THIS AND HAVE IT PUT AT RISK FOR BEING PUBLIC? AND THEY HAVE TO MAKE THE SAME CALL AS WELL.

AND THEY MAY VERY WELL TURN US DOWN.

AND THAT'S OKAY.

BUT YOU BRING UP A REALLY GOOD POINT BECAUSE YOU KNOW, ANY TIME, YOU KNOW IF YOU SAY, HEY, THEY'RE HAVING THIS ISSUE OR THAT ISSUE OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, NEXT THING YOU KNOW, IT COULD CREATE A LOT OF STRAIN ON THE STAFF WITH 5 MILLION PHONE CALLS OUT THERE IN THE MARKETPLACE TRYING TO FIX THIS ISSUE

[01:50:05]

WHEN THEY MAY ALREADY HAVE A PLAN TO FIX IT.

WELL, I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS MORE A CHECK AND BALANCE GOVERNANCE, AND THAT'S WHAT WE LOOK AT, THAT IF YOU WANT TO SAY IF THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THE RISK OR INVEST SOMETHING.

WHAT IS THE GOVERNMENT THAT IS A BAD INVESTMENT, A BAD MANAGEMENT THAT WE ARE THE CITY OF DALLAS.

OH, BEFORE YOU INVEST THAT MONEY, TAP THE BRAKES AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT.

IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY. OKAY.

I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO LEGAL, BUT THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE ALREADY GOT GOVERNMENT THAT WE GO BY.

YOU GOT TO CHANGE THE GOVERNANCE AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BRIEFING YOU DID, I UNDERSTAND THE BAD MANAGEMENT, THE BAD INVESTMENT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT OVER 20 YEARS, IT'S KIND OF MORE THE CITY RESPONSIBILITY THAT WE HAVE A FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO THE TAXPAYERS TO MAKE SURE THEY INVEST IS PROPERLY INVESTED.

BUT WE ALSO HAVE FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TAXPAYER BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO PAY THE BILL.

WE HAVE THE PERS, THE PENSION DO NOT HAVE THE PURSE.

WE HAVE THE MONEY. WE GOT TO PAY THE BILL.

WE HAVE FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TAXPAYERS BECAUSE THEY GOING TO GIVE THE MONEY TO THE COUNCIL, TO THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THE INVESTMENT IS DONE CORRECTLY.

WE 100% AGREE.

I MEAN, THE FUNDS ARE GOING TO SAY, WELL, WE'RE INDEPENDENT, WE MAKE THESE DECISIONS AND WE HAVE FIDUCIARY DUTY AND THIS IS OUR CHARTER, ETC.

THAT DOESN'T MATTER WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH THE PUBLIC.

PUBLIC. ALL THEY SEE IS YOU.

YOU'RE THE CITY.

YOU'RE YOU'RE WRITING THE CHECKS.

IS THAT MONEY BEING FISCALLY SOUNDLY MANAGED.

AND YOU'RE GOING TO YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT.

SO THAT'S WHY I THINK HIRING AN EXPERT HELP YOU KEEP TABS ON THIS ON A REGULAR BASIS BECAUSE IT IS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

IS IS A IS A GOOD IDEA? WELL, YOU KNOW, I DO UNDERSTAND.

WHEN I DID SIT ON THE BOARD, IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE CITY, AS IN MY FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY, I CAN TALK TO MY COUNCIL MEMBER.

YEAH. YOU KNOW, I HAD TO TALK TO AN ATTORNEY TO TALK TO SOMEONE.

EXACTLY. SO THEREFORE, I COULD NOT COMMUNICATE.

I COULDN'T EVEN TALK.

I HAD TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY TO COMMUNICATE.

SO IS THAT SOMETHING DIFFERENT IF THAT'S GOVERNMENT GOT TO BE CHANGED.

SO. SO THEREFORE I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE LAY THIS OUT.

IT'S IT'S NOT THAT EASY TO HAVE THAT COMMUNICATION WITH THE BOARD OF THE PENSION IS THAT I AGREE WITH THAT.

AND YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THESE OPEN MEETINGS LAWS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND I'VE BEEN I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THAT.

AND I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT IT IS.

AND YOU CAN LIMIT WHAT YOU CAN DO AS A BOARD MEMBER.

I WILL TELL YOU THIS. YOU'RE NOT BLAZING NEW GROUND HERE.

THERE ARE OTHER CITIES WITH OTHER PENSION PLANS, AND THEY FUNDS AND THEY HIRE CONSULTANTS AS WELL.

NEW YORK IS IS ONE EXAMPLE.

THEY HAVE MULTIPLE BIG PENSION PLANS, AND THEY HIRE EXPERTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY TO HELP THEM KIND OF MONITOR AND UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THOSE PENSIONS.

YOU KNOW, MY MAIN CONCERN IS, NUMBER ONE, IS FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO THE RETIREES THAT WHO WORK FOR THE EMPLOYEES IN THE POLICE AND FIRE WHEN THEY LEAVE.

THEY DON'T WORK 30 YEARS.

THEY SHOULD HAVE A RETURN ON THEIR MONEY.

THEIR MONEY SHOULD BE INVESTED WISELY.

WE AS A COUNCIL, WE AS A TAXPAYER, TO MAKE SURE THE MONEY IS THERE FOR THE RETIREMENT.

AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO COME OUT OF THIS, BECAUSE I WOULD HATE FOR ANYBODY TO WORK FOR THE CITY OF DENVER FOR 30 OR 40 YEARS.

AND WHEN THEY GET TO RETIREMENT, THEY DON'T HAVE RETIREMENT.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO RESOLVE.

WE OWE THEM THAT, YOU KNOW, AND I CAN'T IMAGINE ANYBODY THAT DOESN'T FEEL THAT WAY.

EVEN IF THERE'S SOME DISAGREEMENT ON HOW TO MANAGE THE FUNDS, I CAN'T IMAGINE ANYONE ON THE PLANET NOT FEELING THAT THAT THE THE POLICE AND FIREMEN DESERVE A GOOD RETIREMENT, PUTTING HER LIFE ON THE LINE FOR US.

WELL, YOU KNOW, IN CLOSING, I MIGHT HAVE ANOTHER ROUND THAT WE GOT TO LOOK AT GOVERNANCE.

IF WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING, THAT'S GOVERNANCE.

I MEAN, YOU CANNOT WE CAN SIT HERE AND TALK ALL DAY, BUT IF YOU DON'T CHANGE THE GOVERNANCE TO MANAGE THAT, WHATEVER, WE BE IN THE SAME SITUATION WITH BAD MANAGEMENT, BAD INVESTMENT. THANK YOU, MISS WILLIS.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM A.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO THAT POINT ABOUT GOVERNANCE.

BUT YOU KNOW, BLESS YOU ALL BECAUSE I LOVE THAT YOU ALL ARE SO PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS SUBJECT BECAUSE IT'S DRY AS TOAST TO GET INTO THESE NUMBERS SOMETIMES, BUT IT'S VERY REVEALING.

AND I THINK THAT TELLS US WHY WE NEED SOMEONE WHO IS FAR MORE INTO UNDERSTANDING THIS AND EXPLAINING TO US WHAT THIS MEANS. YOU KNOW, GOOD ANALOGY IN THERE ABOUT PICKING YOUR COMPETITORS.

[01:55:03]

WHEN YOU PICK WHO YOUR COMPETITORS ARE, YOU CAN MAKE YOURSELF LOOK REALLY GOOD IF YOU WANT TO.

AND THAT REALLY DRIVES THE NEED FOR WHY YOU'RE SITTING HERE TODAY.

AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT A MAJORITY OF US ON THE PENSION AD HOC COMMITTEE SAW, BECAUSE WE KNEW ONE DAY WE'D BE SITTING HERE WITH ALL OF OUR COLLEAGUES, AND THAT WE'VE HAD THE LUXURY OF MONTHS OF DIGGING INTO THIS AND EXAMINING DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THESE FUNDS.

BUT THIS WOULD HIT YOU ALL AT THE END, AND IT'S COMPLEX, AND THERE'S SOME GOOD AND SOME BAD.

THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE PERFORMANCE, BUT WE'VE BEEN SITTING AROUND HERE FOR THE PAST FEW MONTHS TALKING ABOUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO HANDLE THIS UNFUNDED LIABILITY, THIS MASSIVE UNFUNDED LIABILITY.

THAT WAS REALLY NOT OUR FAULT.

WE TALK ABOUT REVENUE STREAMS. WE TALK ABOUT WE'LL SELL THIS OFF HERE FOR 5 MILLION AND THIS OFF HERE FOR 10 MILLION.

OR WHAT CAN WE TAKE AWAY FROM DART AND THREATEN TO HOBBLE OUR PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEM? BUT THERE HASN'T BEEN APPROPRIATE FOCUS ON THE FUND'S PERFORMANCE, AND I HOPE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS SITTING WITH YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE TODAY, THAT YOU HAVE REFERENCED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

SO THERE IS THAT POTENTIAL THERE.

SO AS WE NIBBLE AROUND THE EDGES OF THE COOKIE, THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT THIS FUND, BOTH FUNDS COULD DO TO HELP MINIMIZE THAT IMPACT ON THE TAXPAYER.

THERE'S AN ASSUMPTION THAT THE STAFF AND THE BOARD OF THE FUNDS POLICE AND FIRE PARTICULARLY HAVE BEEN WATCHING THIS.

BUT LET'S FACE IT, WE ARE THE BANK OF DALLAS.

AND SO WHEN YOU KNOW, YOU'VE ALWAYS GOT MAMA'S CHECKBOOK TO COME BACK TO, YOU MAY NOT YOU MAY NOT FORCE YOURSELF TO PERFORM AS MUCH AS WE WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IN A MOMENT WHEN MR. IRELAND PRESENTS THE ACTUARIAL DEFINED CONTRIBUTION YOU KNOW, THERE ARE YEARS WHERE THAT'S $500 MILLION.

THAT'S A LOT OF JACK.

AND IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A MESSAGE BACK TO THE TAXPAYERS, MY COLLEAGUE FROM DISTRICT FOUR AND ALL OF US HAVING A FUND THAT PERFORMS IN EVERY YEAR THAT IT OUTPERFORMS THAT TARGET, THAT AMOUNT THAT THE CITY AND THE TAXPAYERS HAVE TO PAY GOES DOWN.

SO THAT IS THE MESSAGE TO TAXPAYERS.

AND TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM DISTRICT 14, I, I'M, I'M PLEASED YOU AGREE WITH THE NEED FOR EVALUATION, BUT I WOULD CAUTION AGAINST THAT BEING HIRED BY THE BOARD.

THE BOARD DID HIRE POLICE AND FIRE DID HIRE PER THE GUIDANCE OF THE POLICE AND PENSION REVIEW BOARD, THEIR OWN ACTUARY.

THEY CAME UP WITH THREE POINTS.

THEY'RE VERY CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH WHAT THE FUND WANTS, BY THE WAY, ACTUARIAL DEFINED CONTRIBUTION, WITH THE TOP PRIORITY BEING FUND IT NOW, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW A COLA COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT WHICH TAKES AWAY FROM FUNDING THE FUND.

IT'S, YOU KNOW, NEEDED.

WE UNDERSTAND WHY THE LEGISLATURE DID THAT.

AND THEN THE THIRD POINT WAS REDUCING THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP OVER TIME.

I GET ALL OF THAT.

IT'S FUNNY THAT THE FIRM THAT THE FUND HIRED DIDN'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND GOVERNANCE, WHICH OUR STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED.

OUR OWN COMMITTEE SAID WE NEED MORE GOVERNANCE HERE, THAT IN ONE OF YOUR REPORTS TO US SAID THERE ARE SOME NORMS HERE THAT AREN'T EVEN PRESENT AROUND GOVERNANCE. BUT IF YOU HIRE SOMEONE TO REPORT TO YOU, HOW DO THEY TELL YOU YOU NEED SOME GUARDRAILS FROM YOURSELF? AND SO THAT'S WHY I WOULD SAY WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT HAVING OUR OWN OBJECTIVE PERSPECTIVE AROUND THIS FUND AND ITS PERFORMANCE. IT'S BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND IT COULD MAKE SO MUCH MORE TO HELP TAKE THIS BURDEN OFF THE BACK OF THE TAXPAYERS.

BUT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT I HAD WANTED TO BRING UP ON THE LIST OF QUESTIONS THAT MR. IRELAND, WE HAD GIVEN HIM 65 QUESTIONS, AND ONE OF THEM WAS ABOUT THE RATE OF RETURN.

THERE'S A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE ERF RATE OF RETURN, WHICH IS 7.25, AND THE POLICE AND FIRE FUND, WHICH IS 6.5.

AND AT THE LAST MEETING THAT YOU PRESENTED AT, I ASKED, WHY COULDN'T THEY RAISE THEIR RATE? I MEAN, IF THEY MAKE SOME CHANGES AND THE RESPONSE GIVEN BY THE FUND WAS BASICALLY, WELL, WE COULD RAISE IT, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO PERFORM ON IT.

WHAT WOULD YOU COUNTER WITH THAT? BECAUSE YOU'VE PRESENTED SOME IDEAS TODAY THAT SEEM LIKE THEY COULD HELP GET US THERE.

CAN THEY DO THE SEVEN AND A QUARTER? THEY COULD, BUT THEY NEED SOME TIME.

I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO TAKE AT LEAST A YEAR.

OPTIMISTICALLY, TO DEAL WITH THOSE PROBLEM ASSETS.

THAT'S A DRAG ON THE PORTFOLIO.

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A DEFINED PLAN STRATEGY REALLY DOESN'T TAKE THAT LONG.

ON THE STOCK AND BOND SIDE.

ON THE PRIVATE, PRIVATE SIDE, THAT CAN TAKE, LIKE I WAS SAYING, YOU KNOW, 4 OR 5 YEARS SOMETIMES.

BUT I DO THINK THERE'S SOME WAYS TO JUMPSTART IT.

KIND OF LIKE URF DID WITH SECONDARY FUNDS AND OTHER THINGS WHERE YOU CAN GET TO AVERAGE IN A HURRY.

SO I'D SAY YOU COULD GET IF EVERYONE WAS IN AGREEMENT OVER THERE.

[02:00:04]

THEY COULD GET A LOT OF THIS TAKEN CARE OF WITHIN A YEAR, AND THEN A SEVEN AND A QUARTER IS NOT UNREALISTIC, YOU KNOW, AFTER THAT.

NOW, DO I THINK THAT WILL HAPPEN? I THINK THIS SPIRIT OF COOPERATION AND AGREEMENT AND ETC., YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHAT THEIR BELIEF SYSTEM IS IN PRIVATE MARKETS.

AFTER THE MIXED MESSAGE WE GOT IN THEIR THEIR REPORT RIGHT NOW.

I HAVE A FEELING THAT'S NOT INDICATIVE OF WHAT THEY BELIEVE OR WHAT THE BOARD MEANS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, ALL THAT NEEDS TO BE IRONED OUT.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, TO MY COLLEAGUES, THAT DIFFERENCE OF CHANGING THAT RATE, AND EVEN IF IT TAKES A YEAR OR TWO TO PERFORM ON IT, THAT IS $450 MILLION ACROSS 30 YEARS. THAT'S $15 MILLION A YEAR IF YOU AMORTIZE IT.

AND HERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SELLING A LITTLE OF THIS AND SELLING A LITTLE OF THAT.

WOULDN'T IT BE NICE TO HAVE THAT PAD OF $15 MILLION A YEAR FROM CHANGING THIS RATE AND PERFORMING AGAINST IT.

I'LL COME BACK TO THIS BLACKMON YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM A, THANK YOU.

AND YEAH, EVERYTHING SHE SAID.

YES. SO BUT I DO HAVE SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

OKAY. SO LET ME GET THIS RIGHT.

WHAT IS THE RATE OF RETURN ON EACH? BECAUSE WE HAVE IT IN A ONE YEAR, FIVE YEAR OR ONE YEAR, THREE YEAR, FIVE YEAR TENURE.

WHAT IS THE RATE OF RETURN ON EACH.

AND I GUESS IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION, IS IT THE 2.3 THAT THEY SAY AND THEN THE WHATEVER ONE, IS THAT WHAT THEY MADE? I DON'T KNOW, THEY MADE 2.3% FOR TEN YEARS.

OKAY. SO THAT IS 2.3%.

THAT IS LESS THAN A MONEY MARKET OR.

WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO BE I THINK MY MONEY MARKET MAKES 5%.

YES. IT'S 2.3.

CORRECT. SO THEY'RE MAKING LESS OF WHAT IF YOU JUST PUT IT IN A SAVINGS ACCOUNT.

WHAT, WHAT. OH, YEAH.

CORRECT. OKAY.

AND THEN. BUT BUT URF IS DOING A LITTLE BETTER.

YES. LIKE THREE TIMES.

YEAH. ABOUT AN AVERAGE.

SO WHAT YOU'VE SAID IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT WHEN YOUR PERFORMANCE GOES UP BECAUSE WE'RE ALL MANAGING RISK.

SO THAT MEANS PERFORMANCE HOWEVER THAT'S MEASURED RIGHT.

IT COULD BE LOWER RISK HIGHER WHATEVER IT IS.

THAT MEANS MORE MONEY TO THE FUND, LESS MONEY THAT WE HAVE TO PAY OUT.

WHICH MEANS I COULD PROBABLY KEEP A LIBRARY OPEN.

CORRECT. OKAY.

SO YOU TALK ABOUT THE URF, THEY THEY HAVE POBS.

IS THAT CORRECT? DID YOU LOOK AT THOSE? YEAH. WHAT DOES POB MEAN? OH. PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS.

YES. WHAT ABOUT THEM? WHEN DO THOSE COME OFF AND WILL THAT.

HOW WILL THAT AFFECT THE FUND.

MAYBE WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN YOU COME UP JACK LATER.

BUT I GUESS YOU'RE HERE. WELL I'LL ANSWER IF I MAY.

THIS JACK IRELAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER.

THE CITY ISSUED $500 MILLION OF PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS FOR THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT FUND.

I BELIEVE IN 2005 AND IT WAS 30 YEARS.

SO IN 2035 THOSE WILL ALL ROLL OFF.

AND SO RIGHT NOW WE GET A CREDIT IN OUR CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR WHAT WE'RE PAYING IN DEBT SERVICE FOR THOSE BONDS.

SO WHEN THOSE BONDS ARE PAID OFF THEN OUR CASH CONTRIBUTION WILL GO UP BY THAT AMOUNT.

OKAY. SO YOU'LL SEE IT'LL BE AN UPTICK.

IT'LL IT'LL BE IT'LL BE MORE IT'LL BE A LARGER ANNUAL CASH CONTRIBUTION.

OKAY. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE PAYING OUR CONTRIBUTION FROM THE DEBT SERVICE FUND FOR POBS AND FROM THE GENERAL FUND FOR CASH CONTRIBUTIONS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

YEAH. SO I'M LOOKING AT THIS.

AND IN 2017, IT WAS 49%.

YES. TODAY WE'RE LOOKING AT IT AT 39% FUNDED.

SO IN SEVEN YEARS IT DROPPED TEN PERCENTAGE POINTS.

DID YOU ALL LOOK AT THE REASON? I MEAN, THE REASON WHY IS IT ACCUMULATION OF WHAT YOU JUST TOLD US? YEAH. NOW, PART OF THAT IS LOSSES ON ALL THOSE LEGACY ASSETS.

AND THAT'S REALLY NOT YOU CAN'T PUT ALL THAT ON THE CURRENT MANAGEMENT OKAY.

YOU KNOW NOW THEY DO TRACK THE PRIVATE MARKETS.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT.

BUT WITH PRIVATE MARKETS THOSE LEGACY ASSETS I MEAN THAT'S BEEN HAND TO HAND COMBAT AND, AND BIG LOSSES IN THOSE.

AND I AND I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT IT IN THE COMMITTEE THAT.

YEAH IT'S BEEN SEVEN YEARS.

SO WHEN DO YOU OWN THEM.

RIGHT. WHEN DO THEY BECOME PART OF THE PORTFOLIO OR WHEN DO YOU JUST SAY WE'RE DONE.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON.

IT'S BEEN SEVEN YEARS.

SO IT'S IT'S YOU KNOW LUCKILY THEY'VE GOT IT DOWN TO A LITTLE MORE MANAGEABLE NUMBER.

AGAIN THE WORST OF THE WORST IS IN THE PORTFOLIO STILL.

BUT I THINK THIS FUND HAS SOME REALLY BRIGHT DAYS AHEAD OF IT, IF IT CAN, A DEAL WITH THE LAST BIT OF THESE ASSETS AND AN EFFECTIVE MANAGER IN AN EFFECTIVE MANNER, AND B HAVE A GOOD PLAN GOING FORWARD TO REDUCE RISK AND INCREASE RETURN, INCLUDING WHAT YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THEM.

[02:05:09]

SO, DORY, DID YOU FIND EVIDENCE OF SUCH A PLAN? NO. SO IT'S BEEN SEVEN YEARS NOW.

HAVING SAID THAT, I MEAN, DID THEY EVEN.

THEY TOLD US THEY HIRED AUBURN AND THEY TOLD US THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IDEAS AND ALL THIS TO BE IMPLEMENTED SOMETIME IN 25.

SO MAYBE THEY'RE WORKING ON IT THIS FALL, AND THEY'LL HAVE IT ALL PLANNED AND THEY'LL HIT THE GROUND RUNNING IN 2025.

OKAY. BUT YOU DIDN'T.

BUT WE HAVE NOT SEEN IT.

OKAY. AND THEN SO THE FUND ADVISOR, I SEE THAT MORE AS HELPING US UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON AT, AT THE PENSION FUND AND TO AND TO EXPLAIN IT IN LAYMAN TERMS AND AS YOU SAID, IDENTIFY RED FLAGS.

IS THAT HOW YOU SEE IT AS WELL? IT'S NOT NECESSARILY WORKING FOR THE PENSION FUND, BUT IS OUR GO BETWEEN.

IT WOULD BE WORKING FOR YOU AND I THINK IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE.

YOU HAVE APPOINTMENTS ON THOSE BOARDS AND LIKE MR. ATKINS POINTED OUT BECAUSE OF OPEN MEETINGS AND THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER, YOU CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH ON THE BOARD.

YOU CAN HAVE SOME REALLY GOOD INFLUENCE.

YOU KNOW HOW BOARDS ARE. THERE'S THEY'RE ALL DIFFERENT CULTURES.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, SOMETIMES YOU CAN HAVE MORE INFLUENCE ON THE OUTSIDE THAN YOU CAN ON THE INSIDE.

WELL, AND YOU TALK ABOUT BOARDS AND YOU MENTIONED THE WORD PARTNERSHIP AND YOU'VE BEEN SERVING ON ONE.

CAN YOU GIVE US AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT A PARTNERSHIP WOULD LOOK LIKE? AND IS IT WHAT WE SEE TODAY? WELL, ONE, YOU KNOW, IF THE MAYOR APPOINTS SOMEONE ON THE BOARD OF A PENSION FUND AND SOMEONE'S WORKING FOR THE MAYOR, AND HE WANTS TO MEET WITH THE BOARD MEMBER.

THEY OUGHT TO MEET WITH HIM.

SO THAT WOULD BE A START.

AND THEN I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT ON BOTH SIDES, BUT PARTICULARLY WHOEVER YOU HIRE TO REALIZE THAT YOU GOT TO COME IN AND HAVE A RELATIONSHIP AND WORK WITH THESE PEOPLE, IT CANNOT BE COMBATIVE.

IT CANNOT BE TEARING DOWN.

IT CANNOT BE CRITICIZING.

IT CANNOT BE POINTING FINGERS.

IT'S TO BUILD UP AND WORK TOGETHER AND ACHIEVE THE SAME GOALS.

NOW, IF SOMEONE DOESN'T WANT TO WORK WITH THE CITY, NO MATTER WHAT, YOU KNOW, THEN THAT'S A PROBLEM.

AND THEN YOU CAN TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTIONS.

AND THAT'S A DIFFERENT THING ALTOGETHER.

BUT I DON'T I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY BOTH OF THESE BOARDS AND, AND BOTH SETS OF STAFFS CANNOT WORK WITH THE CITY.

AND WHEN YOU HAVE THAT, I WOULD ASSUME THAT EVERYTHING, ALL BOATS RISE, YOU GET BETTER RETURNS, YOU GET BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND IT'S THE PEOPLE GET THEIR COLAS AND THE FUND IS ABLE TO MEET ITS DEMANDS.

THAT'S CORRECT. I MEAN, IT'S IT'S NOT THE HARD PART WILL BE THE PEOPLE THING.

IT WILL NOT BE THE SCIENCE OF INVESTING, AT LEAST IN MY MIND.

SO I THINK I'VE ASKED YOU THIS BEFORE, BUT WHAT WOULD BE YOUR HEADLINE? WHAT WOULD I'VE DONE? NO. WHAT WOULD BE YOUR HEADLINE IN THIS REPORT? WHAT WOULD YOU WANT YOUR HEADLINE TO BE? WHAT WOULD BE YOUR HEADLINE? HEADLINES FOR WHAT? YOUR REPORT FOR MY FOR MY REPORT.

YES. LET, LET LET'S IMPROVE THE PENSION FUNDS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE THE POLICE, THE FIRE, THE EMPLOYEES, THE TAXPAYERS, THE STAKEHOLDERS AND THE CITY.

WE ARE AGAIN, IT'S WE'RE IN THE BEST CITY IN THE WORLD.

WE SHOULD NOT BE HAVING PENSION FUNDS.

WHAT IF WE WERE CHICAGO? CHICAGO WAS SMALLER TODAY THAN IT WAS IN 1920.

WE GOT PEOPLE MOVING HERE RIGHT AND LEFT AND WE'RE MESSING IT UP.

WE'RE BLESSED.

WE'RE LUCKY. WE'RE SUCCESSFUL A LITTLE BIT IN SPITE OF OURSELVES.

WE NEED TO FIX THESE PENSION PLANS.

WE NEED TO FIX THEM NOW.

WHAT IF EVERYBODY DECIDED TO MOVE? YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT WE'RE BLESSED.

WE NEED TO HAVE PENSION FUNDS THAT HAVE THE BEST POLICE, THE BEST FIREMEN, THE BEST PAY.

SO WE'RE SAFE. AND IT'S EASY FOR FOR THE MAYOR AND THE REST OF YOU TO GO OUT AND RECRUIT BUSINESSES AND IMPROVE JOBS AND REDUCE HOMELESSNESS AND SUICIDE AND ALL THOSE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.

SO YOU TRULY THINK WE CAN FIX THIS? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN GRACIE.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND THANK YOU FOR THIS PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU FOR THE EDUCATION PIECE ON THIS.

AND I THINK ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SPOKEN TO THIS, BOTH THE GOVERNANCE PIECE AND HOW DO YOU COMMUNICATE THIS TO THE TAXPAYERS WHO ARE ULTIMATELY BEING IMPACTED, IN ADDITION TO OUR POLICE AND FIRE FOLKS.

MY QUESTION IS REALLY CENTERED AROUND THE INVESTMENT MANAGER.

FORGIVE ME IF I MISSED THIS.

HOW MANY INVESTMENT MANAGERS DOES THIS FUND HAVE? I DON'T KNOW.

[02:10:01]

YOU KNOW NUMEROUS.

THEY HAVE A LOT OF MANAGERS.

SO THEY'LL HIRE YOU KNOW, THERE'S THERE'S NOT THAT MANY.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S PROBABLY LESS THAN 20 THAT THEY HAVE IN PRIVATE EQUITY NOW BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T INVESTED IN SEVEN YEARS AND THEY'VE BEEN RUNNING THAT DOWN OR IN PRIVATE MARKETS.

YOU KNOW, GIVE OR TAKE SOME.

BUT ON THE PUBLIC SIDE, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL HAVE VARIOUS DIFFERENT MANAGERS DOING DIFFERENT SECTORS, DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, SMALL CAP, LARGE CAP OR WHATEVER THEY'RE DOING.

HOW ARE THEY? I'M NOT SURE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THEY HAVE NUMEROUS MANAGERS.

AND DID YOU FIND ANYTHING IN THIS STUDY THAT SHOWS HOW THEIR HOW THEIR PERFORMANCE, HOW ARE THEIR PERFORMANCES? HOW ARE THEY REVIEWED THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR PUBLIC MANAGERS THAT INVEST IN PUBLIC STOCKS ARE ACTUALLY THEY'VE SHOWN SKILL IN PICKING GOOD ONES AND THEY'VE OUTPERFORMED THE AVERAGE AND A LOT OF THEIR PEERS.

SO THEY'VE DONE PRETTY WELL.

THOUGH. THE PROBLEM WITH DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE HAS BEEN THE DRAG OF THE LEGACY PROBLEM ASSETS AND PRIVATE MARKETS.

AND THEN THE PROBLEM OUTSIDE OF THAT X PRIVATE MARKETS IS THE ALLOCATION.

THEY DON'T HAVE ANY EXPOSURE TO PRIVATE MARKETS OR OTHER DIVERSIFYING ASSET CLASSES.

AND THAT COULD BECOME AN EVEN BIGGER PROBLEM GOING FORWARD.

OKAY. OKAY.

I CAN SUPPORT BRINGING IN A CONSULTANT OF SOME SORT.

AND WHERE I WAS ASKING, I WAS KIND OF WANDERING AROUND AND I'LL BRING AND ASK.

MR. CITY MANAGER, CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OR JACK OR OUR INVESTMENT COMMITTEE OR AS IT STANDS TODAY, THE CITY'S INVESTMENT COMMITTEE? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION ON COUNCIL MEMBER GRACIE.

I KNOW THAT JACK WILL JUMP IN AND TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CURRENT PROCESS THAT WE USE FOR HOW WE DO OUR INTERNAL INVESTMENTS.

NOW, JUST THE JUST WHAT THAT INVESTMENT COMMITTEE'S RESPONSIBILITY IS TODAY.

GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JACK.

GO AHEAD. YEAH.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER JACK IRELAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND I'M JOINED HERE WITH JENNY KURZMAN, THE CITY'S TREASURER.

AND WE DO HAVE A CITY INVESTMENT COMMITTEE THAT'S MADE UP OF MYSELF, THE CITY COMPTROLLER, THE BUDGET DIRECTOR, THE DALLAS WATER UTILITIES DIRECTOR, AND MISS KURZMAN AS TREASURER.

AND WE MEET QUARTERLY WITH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR.

AND OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR HAS THE ROLE OF MR. PUBLIC FUNDS IS OUR CONTRACTED ADVISOR, AND WE WORK WITH THEM ON THE CITY'S INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY'S PORTFOLIO, OF THE DIFFERENT OPERATING AND CAPITAL FUNDS AND OUR INVESTMENTS.

OKAY. AND, COLLEAGUES, THE REASON I'M BRINGING THIS UP, AND I WANTED THE PUBLIC TO HEAR THIS STRUCTURE IS BECAUSE FOR THE CITY'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO, WE HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT IS IN PLACE. AND AS WE TALK ABOUT POTENTIALLY BRINGING IN A CONSULTANT, I AM RECOMMENDING THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE CONSULTANT REPORT TO THIS INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, WHICH I DO BELIEVE REPORTS TO THE GFM COMMITTEE ON A REGULAR BASIS.

SO I THINK THERE MAY BE A STRUCTURE IN PLACE WHERE THIS CAN BE.

AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS NOT NECESSARILY HOW THEY'RE INVESTING, BUT THE THE STATEMENT YOU KEEP BRINGING UP WAS HOW WE'RE THE PROMOTING LESS RISK.

AND I THINK HAVING THAT CONSULTING REPORT TO THIS GROUP PARTICULARLY BECAUSE AND I'LL ASK THIS QUESTION JUST TO FOR I GUESS ENTERTAINMENT.

BUT WHO IS RESPONSIBLE AFTER EVERYTHING IS HAPPENING NOW IN OUR BUDGETS AND WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS BUDGET PROCESS ON THAT INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR NOW MAKING THE NECESSARY ADJUSTMENTS TO FIX THIS PENSION PROBLEM.

SO I'M GOING TO PAUSE FOR ONE SECOND ON ANSWERING, BECAUSE I WANT TO ADD TO MY LAST ANSWER TO ALSO SAY YOU'RE CORRECT THAT OUR INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, WE DO SEND A QUARTERLY REPORT TO GP, FM.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE OUR INVESTMENT POLICY APPROVED BY GP FM AND BY COUNCIL ANNUALLY.

I NEEDED TO COMPLETE MY LAST ANSWER.

OKAY. SO NOW REGARDING THIS SO REGARDING THE THE STABILITY, THE SOUNDNESS, THE LONG TERM. DALLAS.

POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM THE CITY OF DALLAS IS GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FUNDING THE PLAN.

AND SO THE AMOUNT THAT WE FUND THAT PLAN BY IS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THEIR RATE OF RETURN.

THE MORE MONEY THAT THEY EARN THROUGH INVESTMENTS, THE LESS THAT WE HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE AS THROUGH OUR CONTRIBUTIONS.

AND SO THIS IS A VERY CRITICAL POINT FOR US TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE INVESTMENT RETURNS.

BUT WHO DOES IT ULTIMATELY COME DOWN TO, WHETHER THE INVESTMENTS ARE GOOD OR WHETHER THE INVESTMENTS ARE BAD? IT COMES DOWN TO THE CITY OF DALLAS TO MAKE THE CONTRIBUTIONS TO FUND THE SYSTEM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FULLY FUNDED IN 30 YEARS AND MEET OUR OBLIGATIONS. THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.

[02:15:02]

AND MY POINT IS, I THINK THE STRUCTURE IS IN PLACE AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT, YOU KNOW, THE RECOMMENDATION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT SUPPORTING, HAVING THIS CONSULTANT, WHOMEVER IT MAY BE, REPORT TO THIS INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, I THINK, GIVES US AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT OF KNOWING, ANTICIPATING THE RISK AND ANTICIPATING AT LEAST GOING FORWARD IN YEAR ONE, IF SOMETHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN, SOMETHING DOESN'T LOOK RIGHT.

AT LEAST THOSE SAME FOLKS THE, THE CFO, THE INVESTMENT ADVISER, THE TREASURY MANAGER.

ALL OF THESE FOLKS ARE THERE AND CAN BE ANTICIPATING THESE THINGS.

SO I GUESS I'M RECOMMENDING A CONSULTANT, BUT I'M ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT THEY REPORT UP TO THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE.

AND I THINK THAT MAY GIVE US A LITTLE BIT OF THE REPORTING STRUCTURE, THE GOVERNANCE THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO ENSURE, BECAUSE AT THE VERY LEAST, I DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO KNOW.

I WANT TO KNOW, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO KNOW MONTH AFTER MONTH HOW THIS PORTFOLIO IS PERFORMING.

BUT IF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISIONS ULTIMATELY TO FIX IT, I THINK THEY SHOULD KNOW.

AND I THINK THAT SHOULD BE COMMUNICATED ON A REGULAR BASIS.

AND I THINK THIS INVESTMENT COMMITTEE STRUCTURE GIVES US THAT ABILITY TO DO SO.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT EXPLANATION.

CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

AGAIN, FOR THE PUBLIC. WE ARE ON ITEM A FROM OUR BRIEFING AGENDA FOR TODAY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF SERVING ON THE PENSION COMMITTEE, AND HAVE CERTAINLY LEARNED A LOT IN THE LAST YEAR OR SO.

AND I REALLY JUST WANT TO ADD MY SUPPORT TO THE IDEA OF HIRING THE CONSULTANT.

I THINK WE YOUR MESSAGE.

I'VE HEARD YOUR PRESENTATION BEFORE, AND IT'S VERY CONSISTENT.

YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD HAVE US YOU WOULD YOU WOULD HAVE THE FUND MAKING DIFFERENT INVESTMENTS IN THE PRIVATE MARKET, USING THE SECONDARY FUNDS TO GET INTO THAT MARKET.

YOU WOULD REDEFINE THEIR PEER GROUP.

I MEAN, THESE THESE THESE ARE THESE ARE CONCEPTS THAT I THINK MAKE SENSE.

THEY'RE PRACTICAL.

AND WE ALL WANT TO SEE THOSE TYPES OF THINGS HAPPEN.

I THINK WE HAVE IDENTIFIED, THOUGH, THAT THE CONSULTANT IS LIMITED IN WHAT THEY CAN ACCOMPLISH.

AND THEY WOULD BE THE GO BETWEEN THEY WOULD BE SHARING INFORMATION WITH US, BUT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE GIVING SPECIFIC ADVICE.

OR IF THEY DO, THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE BOARD AND THE THE GROUPS THAT MAKE THOSE INVESTMENT DECISIONS.

SO IT DOES COME DOWN TO THE RELATIONSHIP, AND I THINK I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT.

I DO THINK IT IS BROKEN.

I THINK THERE, AS YOU'VE POINTED OUT, I AGREE THERE ARE MANY, MANY REASONS FOR THAT.

BUT I AM A BIG BELIEVER THAT RELATIONSHIPS CAN BE REPAIRED.

AND I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT WITH THE RIGHT PEOPLE AND MAYBE A RESET, AND MAYBE WE COULD STOP POINTING FINGERS SO MUCH BECAUSE THAT NEVER GETS YOU TO A BETTER PLACE.

IT JUST TENDS TO MAKE YOU SPEND.

SO I, I JUST I THINK MY POINT IS LET'S LET'S HIRE THE CONSULTANT.

LET'S WORK ON THE RELATIONSHIP.

AND LET'S, LET'S TRY TO INFLUENCE THE INVESTMENTS BECAUSE IT'S CRITICAL.

IT'S CRITICAL THAT OUR RETURNS IMPROVE.

AND THEY CAN.

AND I DON'T THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S THAT DIFFICULT OR THAT COMPLICATED.

AND IT'S CRITICAL FOR TWO REASONS.

WE HAVE A HUGE STAKE.

WE HAVE THE LIVES OF OUR RETIREES, OUR DALLAS, POLICE AND FIRE ARE COUNTING, COUNTING ON THE PEOPLE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE AND YOU AND ALL OF US, THE PENSION FUND, EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THIS RELATIONSHIP, THEY ARE COUNTING ON US TO FIGURE THIS OUT.

AND WE'VE GOT TO DO THAT.

THE OTHER STAKE WE HAVE IS FINANCIAL.

AND SO THAT'S THE OBLIGATION TO OUR TAXPAYERS.

AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT $202 MILLION IN THIS YEAR.

AND AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT, THAT NUMBER JUST GOES UP.

SO WE'VE GOT A BIG REASON.

WE'VE GOT OUR STAKE IS HUGE AND I THINK WE'VE GOT A PATH FORWARD.

SO I JUST ENCOURAGE US TO KEEP MOVING DOWN THAT PATH.

THANK YOU. I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU GOT AHEAD OF SCHULTZ, BUT I'M GOING TO GO TO MISS SCHULTZ FOR FIVE MINUTES.

ALL RIGHT, MISS, SHE GOT AHEAD BECAUSE I DROPPED OFF AND WENT BACK IN.

SO YOU'RE IN NOW, RIGHT, SIR.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND THEN A COMMENT.

WHAT HAPPENS FROM A CITY'S PERSPECTIVE IF THEY DO NOT IMPROVE THEIR PERFORMANCE? OH. BIGGER CHECKS, BUT I THINK IT'S A BIGGER PROBLEM THAT IF THEY DON'T I MEAN, THE MARKET CONTROLS PERFORMANCE, RIGHT? YOU CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH.

SO THERE'S, THERE'S A STAFF OR FUND MANAGEMENT EFFECT AND THEN THERE'S MARKET EFFECT.

SO IF YOU HIT A 2008 OR 2000, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE A BIGGER HOLE AND MAYBE WE CAN LESSEN THE EFFECT OF IT.

[02:20:06]

BUT IT'S STILL GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, A LOSS AND TOUGH.

THE POINT BEING IS YOU'LL HAVE TO COME UP WITH MORE MONEY.

I THINK THE GOAL IS IF WE CAN GET THE RELATIONSHIP BETTER AND GET EVERYONE PULLING IN THE SAME DIRECTION, WHICH I'M NOT SAYING THESE FUNDS DON'T WANT TO IMPROVE, THEY DO.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW WHAT LEVERS TO PUSH AND HOW TO DO IT.

AND AND THEY'RE ALL GOOD PEOPLE, BUT EVERYONE'S GOT TO BE ON THE SAME PAGE, AND EVERYONE'S GOT TO REALIZE THE GOAL IS TO BE A TOP PERFORMER WITH LESS RISK.

WE CAN'T JUST SAY WE'RE AVERAGE.

YOU DON'T HIRE A FOOTBALL COACH AND GO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO KEEP SCORE AND WE'RE GOING TO BE AVERAGE AND EVERYBODY GETS A PARTICIPATION AWARD.

I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S NICE FEELING, BUT IT DOESN'T WORK.

AND IT'S NOT GOING TO GET THE POLICEMEN AND THE FIREMEN PAID FOR THEIR RETIREMENT.

THEY'VE GOT TO DO BETTER.

YOU CAN ONLY COME UP WITH SO MUCH MONEY HERE.

THEY HAVE TO DO BETTER.

SO IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO BE FACED WITH SOME REALLY BIG ISSUES ON HOW DO WE COME UP WITH REALLY BIG NUMBERS? HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO TELL YOU OTHER THAN YOU KNOW BETTER THAN I DO.

THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PLACES TO GO TO GET IT IF I CAN ADD TO IT AS WELL.

WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION TO IMPLEMENT AN ACTUARIALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTION RATE AS OPPOSED TO A FIXED RATE WE WILL BE DOING THE ACTUARIAL ANALYSIS EACH YEAR, AND WE WILL BE MAKING ADJUSTMENTS IN OUR CONTRIBUTION EACH YEAR.

SO IF THEY HAVE A HISTORY OF UNDERPERFORMING, IT WILL CAUSE US TO HAVE TO PUT IN MORE.

IF THEY HAVE A HISTORY OF OVERPERFORMING, OUR CONTRIBUTIONS WILL GO DOWN.

SO THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF THE ADC IS BECAUSE IT'S CONSTANTLY ADJUSTING TO MAKE SURE THAT ONCE WE IMPLEMENT THE THE, THE STRUCTURE THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN PLACE IS AND WE'RE FULLY FUNDED IN 30 YEARS, THAT WE'RE CONSTANTLY MAKING THOSE ADJUSTMENTS TO STAY FULLY FUNDED IN 30 YEARS.

GOOD YEARS, BAD YEARS.

WE MAKE ADJUSTMENTS.

SO THE STRUCTURE OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE THERE'S NO INCENTIVE ON THEIR PART TO PERFORM BETTER.

AND WE DON'T HAVE THE LEVERAGE BECAUSE WE CARE SO MUCH ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE RECEIVING THE FUNDS TO HOLD BACK ANYTHING, BECAUSE WE WOULD NOT DO THAT TO OUR OWN OFFICERS AND PEOPLE.

SO WE'RE THE ONES OVER THE BARREL ON THIS FOR SURE, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER WAY TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION OTHER THAN THE TWO THINGS THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING.

IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING AND I THINK YOU HAVE LIMITED THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM.

THAT'S WHY I THINK YOU NEED A KIND OF A RELATIONSHIP CONSULTANT TO SEE IF YOU CAN HELP OUT.

IT'S MORE THAN JUST REPORTING, CORRECT THIS RELATIONSHIP, BUT ALSO IT'S THIS WATCHDOG.

AND SO AS WE CAN COME BACK AND GO, HEY MAYBE YOU NEED SOME HELP IN PICKING BOARD MEMBERS OR OUR INFLUENCE ON BECAUSE THE BOARD MEMBERS PICKED STAFF, RIGHT? SO YOU DO HAVE SOME LEVERS.

BUT TO MY UNDERSTANDING, THOUGH, THE THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THOSE LEVERS HAS NEVER BEEN UTILIZED REALLY AT ALL.

AND THERE'S NO COMMUNICATION WHATSOEVER.

AND THIS COULD BE THAT POINT OF COMMUNICATION WITH THOSE LEVERS TO GIVE THE INFLUENCE THAT YOU NEED.

YOU DON'T NEED A LOT, YOU JUST NEED A FEW.

AND THEY NEED TO KNOW THAT IT CAN HAPPEN.

SO I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF INITIAL FEAR, PARTICULARLY ON THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE, THAT WE WERE COMING IN TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET RID OF STAFF AND THIS THAT WE KNOW WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK WITH THEM RIGHT NOW.

IF AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF STAFF DOESN'T WORK WITH YOU AND THE BOARD DOESN'T WORK WITH YOU, THEN YOU'VE GOT A PROBLEM AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PICK NEW BOARD MEMBERS WHO WILL GET NEW STAFF. I DON'T THINK THAT I HAVE NO REASON TO THINK THAT'S NECESSARY.

THEY GOT A VERY COMPETENT BOARD BORED AND THEY'VE GOT A VERY COMPETENT STAFF.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WILLINGNESS, OF COOPERATION.

SO I SEE TWO THINGS FROM THIS.

I SEE CLEARLY HIRING OUR OWN ADVISOR TO REPRESENT US IN UNDERSTANDING AND INFLUENCING THESE PORTFOLIOS.

I ALSO WHAT I'M HEARING IS, AND WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE NEEDED RELATIONSHIPS WITH ALL THE GROUPS THAT WERE INVOLVED WITH.

ONE OF THE ACHILLES HEELS THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING REPEATEDLY AS A CITY IS OUR LACK OF PERSONAL INVESTMENTS.

IN THE PLACE WHERE WE HAVE FINANCIAL INVESTMENTS, WE'VE RELIED ON TRANSACTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS WHEN WE NEED TO SPEND MORE TIME ON PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, AND I KNOW THIS FROM A VERY PERSONAL WAY, IS MUCH MORE RELIANT ON PEOPLE THAN WE THINK.

[02:25:04]

LIKE DART, LIKE THE RTC, LIKE DFW AIRPORT.

WE'RE IN PARTNERSHIPS WITH THESE FOLKS, AND WE MUST SPEND TIME WITH THE BOARD MEMBERS, AS WAS SUGGESTED BY COMMERCE STREET.

I UNDERSTAND THE LEGAL RESTRICTIONS OF THE CONVERSATIONS, BUT THAT DOES NOT PRECLUDE US FROM REDUCING THE ANIMOSITY WE FEEL MUTUALLY.

THIS, ALONG WITH AN ADVOCATE TO WATCH OVER OUR INTERESTS, WILL HELP.

OUR APPOINTMENTS, AS YOU SAID, IS CRUCIAL.

AND I THINK THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS GOOD GOVERNANCE IS TO ACTUALLY CREATE OUR OWN PLAN FOR HOW WE'RE GOING TO BUILD THE RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE RESTRICTIONS THAT OF COURSE WE HAVE, BUT WE'VE GOT TO ACT ON THAT AS WELL.

AND CONTINUING TO BE ANGRY AT EACH OTHER IS NOT GOING TO GET US ANYWHERE, BECAUSE FRANKLY, WE'RE THE ONES WHO ARE IN THE BAD PLACE.

SO WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO HAVE THEM WANT TO BE COOPERATIVE WITH US AND WANT TO WORK WITH THE PERSON THAT WE'RE GOING TO HIRE.

I HOPE WE WILL TO REPRESENT US WHO UNDERSTANDS THIS AS WELL AS COMMERCE STREET DOES AND IS READY TO BE OUR ADVOCATE IN THIS ARENA. WHO CAN SPEAK THE LANGUAGE, WHO CAN, AND DO THAT IMPORTANT WORK OF MAKING SURE THAT ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGHT FOR RIGHT NOW GET WHAT THEY DESERVE WHEN THEY RETIRE.

SO CERTAINLY FROM MY PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE, ANYTHING THAT I CAN DO AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, I THINK MY COLLEAGUES FEEL THE SAME WAY THAT WE CAN DO SO.

WE'RE TURNING, I THINK, TO YOU A LITTLE BIT, COMMERCE STREET AND A LITTLE BIT TO YOU, MADAM CITY MANAGER, AND HELPING US FIGURE OUT WHAT'S OUR ROLE AS COUNCIL IN BUILDING THOSE RELATIONSHIPS THE WAY WE ARE WITH DART AND THE AIRPORT BOARD AND THE OTHERS.

AND THAT INCLUDES, YOU KNOW, OUR OWN BOARD MEMBERS WITHIN, AGAIN, THE LIMITATIONS THAT WE HAVE.

SO I WANT TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS.

IT'S HARD WORK AND YOU HAVE TO SAY HARD THINGS.

SO SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.

I APPRECIATE IT. THAT'S ALL, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO HADN'T ASKED A QUESTION OR MADE A COMMENT YET BEFORE I GO TO ROUND TWOS? I DON'T SEE ANYONE.

SO, MISS WILLIS, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU.

I MEANT THREE MINUTES. I'M SORRY.

SO, MR. WILEY, YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT OTHER FUNDS DO WHEN THEY HAVE PROBLEM ASSETS, AND THAT IS HIRE A WORKOUT MANAGER.

AND YOU SAID THAT THEY'RE DOWN TO ABOUT $480 MILLION NOW IN THESE DRAG ASSETS.

IS THERE A WORKOUT MANAGER THAT'S BEEN HIRED? AND WAS THERE A WORKOUT MANAGER HIRED FOR THOSE OTHER ASSETS? HAS THERE BEEN A WORKOUT MANAGER HIRED FOR THESE ASSETS? TO MY UNDERSTANDING IS STAFF IS DOING THAT INTERNALLY AND THEY'VE BEEN DOING THAT INTERNALLY TO THE EXTENT THEY'VE USED OUTSIDE.

I'VE BEEN WE'VE NOT BEEN MADE PRIVY TO THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY HAVEN'T DONE IT.

WE'RE JUST NOT AWARE OF IT.

I CAN TELL YOU, IT DOES TAKE A WHOLE DIFFERENT LEVEL OF EXPERTISE TO DO WORKOUT THAN IT DOES TO INVEST.

IT'S KIND OF LIKE I BROUGHT UP THE BANK EXAMPLE EARLIER.

YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE LENDERS THAT MAKE LOANS.

WHEN THEY GET INTO PROBLEMS, THEY GO TO BAD ASSETS.

AND THERE'S A PROBLEM ASSET MANAGER THAT WORKS THEM OUT.

AND THEN IF IT'S TOO BIG A JOB FOR THEM, THEY THEY GET AN OUTSIDE HELP.

SO IS IT A LITTLE NAIVE TO THINK YOU CAN TAKE ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT? IS IT A LITTLE NAIVE TO THINK YOU CAN TAKE ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT YOURSELF? I KNOW I WOULDN'T, YOU KNOW, KNOWING WHAT YOU CAN DO AND WHAT YOU CAN'T DO IS PART OF THE TRICK, RIGHT? WELL, I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE THE CURRENT CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER WAS ACTUALLY AN EMPLOYEE BACK IN 2012.

SO HERE'S SOMEONE WHO'S I THINK SWUM IN ONE POND.

AND THIS IS PART OF TRYING TO DIVEST OF THESE ASSETS THAT ARE DRAGGING THIS DOWN.

I MEAN, MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR APPOINTING ME TO THIS COMMITTEE.

I HAVE I DON'T WANT TO.

I DON'T WANT TO MAKE ASSUMPTIONS THAT THEY HAVEN'T USED ANY OUTSIDE HELP AND AND WHATNOT.

WE'RE JUST NOT AWARE OF THEM.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE REAL CAREFUL ABOUT GOING DOWN.

BUT BUT YOU'RE LET'S JUST SAY IN THE HYPOTHETICAL, IF YOU'RE WORKING ON PROBLEM ASSETS, YOU GET PROBLEM ASSET MANAGERS.

IT'S KIND OF LIKE A TRES.

YOU GET A A WORKOUT GUY FROM A BANK THAT KNOWS HOW TO WORK OUT DIRECT REAL ESTATE.

ET CETERA. YOU DO THE SAME THING ON PRIVATE EQUITY AND PRIVATE REAL ESTATE.

BUT IT USUALLY INVOLVES OUTSIDE HELP.

SO I'M JUST AIRING THAT CONCERN BECAUSE OF THE THE BODY OF WHAT YOU'VE PRESENTED TODAY SUGGESTS SOME QUESTIONS AROUND HOW THIS FUND IS PERFORMING AND WHAT THE IMPACT IS IF IT PERFORMS BETTER.

I MEAN, IT HAS MASSIVE IMPACT.

I MEAN, EARLY ON WE STARTED WITH PUBLIC NUMBERS, AND THE BASEMENT IS WHERE THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND IS.

THIS LITTLE BITTY LINE AT THE BOTTOM, AND YOU'VE GOT ALL THE CITIES IN TEXAS WHO ARE AHEAD OF US TEACHER FUNDS, FIRE FUNDS, ETC.

[02:30:06]

AND SO THAT'S WHAT'S CONCERNING TO ME.

AND I THINK IT'S REAL SWEET THAT WE TALK ABOUT THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION.

I WISH I COULD WAVE A MAGIC WAND, BUT MEMBERS WHO AREN'T ON THE COMMITTEE WE GOT A LETTER IN FEBRUARY FROM THE BOARD CHAIR OF THE FUND SAYING THAT APPOINTING A CONSULTANT MAY WELL LEAD TO MORE FRICTION IN AN ALREADY DIFFICULT PROCESS.

SO FROM THE GET GO, BEFORE YOU WERE EVEN HIRED, IT WAS WE DON'T REALLY NEED AN OUTSIDE VIEWPOINT OF THIS.

AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT COOPERATION, I JUST WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THE REALITY HERE.

NOW, AT THE APRIL 11TH BOARD MEETING, I WAS REALLY HEARTENED TO HEAR THE POLICE REPRESENTATIVE SAY, I THINK WE'RE WAY CLOSER TOGETHER THAN WE ARE FAR APART.

WHEN WE STARTED REVEALING THE FUNDING SOUNDNESS RESTORATION PLAN.

AND SO A SPIRIT OF COOPERATION EXISTED, AND NOW THEY'RE SUING THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND THE TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO FUND THAT.

SO THAT THREATENS OUR VERY ABILITY TO PROVIDE CITY SERVICES TO OUR TAXPAYERS.

AND THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM WHO CAN HELP US.

WE TALK ABOUT WE'VE GOT THESE IDEAS AND WE'VE GOT THE EXPERTISE.

HOW DO WE MAKE IT HAPPEN? AND I'M GOING TO POINT TO THE GALLERY.

SIRS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

IT MEANS THE WORLD TO US AND WE NEED YOU.

WE NEED YOU, YOUR ASSOCIATIONS, YOUR MEMBERSHIP TO TALK TO YOUR BOARD AND TO TALK TO THE STAFF BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE LEVERAGE.

AND THIS IS ABOUT YOUR FUTURE, THE THINGS YOU WANT, WE WANT TO DO FOR YOU.

BUT THAT FUND HAS GOT TO HAVE AN OAR IN THE WATER RIGHT BESIDE US.

AND SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU LET US KNOW YOUR YOU'RE EMAILING US A LOT, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME OF THAT ENERGY DIRECTED BACK TO THE VERY PEOPLE WHO CAN HELP ACCOMPLISH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT TODAY.

THAT'S WHAT CAN MAKE THIS DIFFERENCE.

WE'RE KIND OF HELPLESS HERE, SO I HOPE WE CAN GET THAT COMMITMENT.

COMMITMENT FROM YOU.

IT WOULD MEAN SO MUCH.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION TODAY.

I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT WAS JUST SAID IN THE LAST THREE MINUTES, AND I WANT TO ALSO THANK MY COLLEAGUES WHO HAVE REALLY DONE THE LION'S SHARE.

THERE'S A FEW OF YOU UP HERE WHO'VE DONE THE LION'S SHARE OF THE DIGGING IN ON THIS.

AND SO THANK YOU FOR MAKING IT EASIER FOR THE REST OF US WHO HAVEN'T BEEN AS INVOLVED.

YOU KNOW, THE THING THAT'S RESONATED WITH ME THE MOST TODAY HAS BEEN THE FACT THAT IT, YOU KNOW, IF THE FUND CONTINUES TO PERFORM AS POORLY AS IT HAS BEEN PERFORMING, IT'S ULTIMATELY GOING TO BE US THAT HAS TO CLEAN IT UP AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, JUST LIKE WE'RE PAYING FOR LAWYERS TO REPRESENT US NOW AGAINST THE SUIT THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT BY THE VERY BOARD THAT GOT US INTO THIS MESS.

AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS FOR US FROM A FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE, WHICH IS THE COMMITTEE I CHAIR.

WHAT THAT TRANSLATES TO IS WE HAVE LESS MONEY TO PAY FOR OUR CURRENTLY ACTIVE POLICE AND FIRE.

WE HAVE LESS MONEY TO PAY FOR PARKS.

WE HAVE LESS MONEY TO PAY FOR LIBRARIES, WHICH HE'S BEEN CHIMING IN MANY TIMES TODAY ALREADY ON THAT.

AND WE HAVE LESS MONEY FOR ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE SO IMPORTANT TO OUR TO OUR, OUR CONSTITUENTS.

AND SO WE GOT TO FIX IT.

I DON'T THINK ME SITTING DOWN AND TRYING TO BUILD A RELATIONSHIP WITH ANY PARTICULAR BOARD MEMBER IS GOING TO HELP.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT I WOULD TELL THEM OTHER THAN DO BETTER.

GET IT, YOU KNOW, STOP BEING THE WORST PERFORMING FUND OF OF ALL RELATIVE CITIES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO DALLAS.

THAT'S WHAT I'D PROBABLY TELL THEM.

SO WHAT I WOULD EXPECT THEM TO DO IS PERFORM BETTER.

AND I THINK FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AS A COUNCIL, THE SUGGESTION THAT THAT WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH IS THIS OUTSIDE CONSULTANT THAT'S GOING TO ADVISE THEM, ADVISE US AND PUBLICLY REPORT TO US ON THE PERFORMANCE MOVING FORWARD.

SO WHATEVER THAT PROCEDURE IS, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S COME UP TO THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, IF YOU KNOW WHAT THE PROCEDURE FORWARD IS ON THAT I'D SUPPORT THAT. YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY AS WE CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS.

THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN ARNOLD, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU TO THE MAYOR.

OF COURSE. AND THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I THINK THAT THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT CONVERSATION.

AS I STATED, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GET CAUGHT UP INTO THE PROCEDURES AND WHO AND ANIMOSITY.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S THE TAXPAYERS THAT WE HAVE TO BE IN CONSIDERATION OF AS WELL AS THE EMPLOYEES.

AND I THINK THE CAREFULLY THINKING IN TERMS OF PUTTING A PUBLIC FACE HERE WHERE THE INFORMATION COMES OUT PUBLICLY, THE BOOTS TO THE GROUND, THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOB, THEY'RE DEPENDING ON US AND THIS BOARD TO DO MAKE THE RIGHT INVESTMENTS.

CITY MANAGER I'M GOING TO MAYOR, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

I'M GOING TO THROW THIS TO THE CITY MANAGER JUST TO WEIGH IN ON THIS.

SHE CRAFTS BUDGETS.

[02:35:01]

NOW. SHE HAS TO ALSO LOOK AT HISTORICALLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED.

BUT FOR THE TAXPAYERS, WHEN YOU'RE CRAFTING THAT BUDGET, COULD YOU JUST KIND OF WEIGH IN ON THIS CONVERSATION AROUND THIS CONSULTANT, YOU KNOW, JUST LONG TERM IN YOUR OPINION? THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

AND AND THANK YOU TO COUNCIL MEMBERS IN GENERAL FOR ALL THE COMMENTS REGARDING JUST HOW WE MOVE FORWARD IN THE FUTURE OF THE CITY AS IT RELATES TO THE ONGOING INVESTMENT THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE IN BOTH OF THE PENSION FUNDS.

SO I THINK THAT THERE IS AN AWARENESS AND CLEARLY VERY RECEPTIVE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THAT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US AS A CITY TO BECOME MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THE PLANS IN GENERAL.

AND I THINK WE CAN TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO FROM THE INPUT THAT WE'VE HAD FROM FROM MR. WILEY AND HIS TEAM TO REALLY BE BETTER INFORMED, WHETHER THAT'S THROUGH POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.

WE'VE HEARD COMMENTS AROUND, YOU KNOW, THE WORKING RELATIONSHIP AND HOW WE CAN DO A BETTER JOB.

AND EVEN WITH THE HIRING OF A THIRD PARTY, I THINK IT'S STILL GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT TYPE OF INFLUENCE THAT THAT THEIR PARTY IS ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE. THEY CAN COME TO US THROUGH THE COMMITTEE STRUCTURE THAT I KNOW, COUNCIL MEMBER GRACIE SUGGESTED.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S REALLY GOING TO BOIL DOWN TO HOW DOES THAT INFORMATION THEN, HOW IS IT GOING TO BE RECEIVED BY THE BOARD AND THE MEMBERS AND THE EXECUTIVE TEAM? AND SO THAT PROCESS, I THINK, HAS TO START WITH A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE EXPECTATION OF WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO HAVE FOR THAT THIRD PARTY AND MAKING SURE THAT WHATEVER WE CRAFT, WHATEVER WE PUT OUT THERE TO GET THAT ENGAGEMENT UNDERWAY, THAT IT'S VERY CLEAR WHAT TYPE OF INFLUENCE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE. BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT'S GOING TO BOIL DOWN TO IS MAKING SURE THAT THE WORK THAT THEY DO, HOWEVER, THEY WORK WITH OUR WITH OUR STAFF AND WHAT THEY COME BACK TO US WITH RECOMMENDATIONS, HOW IS THAT GOING TO THEN BE RECEIVED AND HOW IS THAT GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED? ACROSS BOTH OF THE FUNDS IN GENERAL.

AND SO I THINK IT'S I THINK WE'RE, I THINK WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I THINK HAVING THAT ADDITIONAL SUPPORT AND THAT EXPERTISE THAT WE CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE ON OUR STAFF IS AN OPPORTUNITY.

VERY SUPPORTIVE OF IT.

AND I DO BELIEVE THAT WE JUST NEED TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT HOW THAT WORK IN RELATIONSHIP IS GOING TO HOW IT'S GOING TO FLOW AND THE OVERALL ACCOUNTABILITY THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE AS IT RELATES TO THE GO FORWARD APPROACH FOR BOTH OF THE FUNDS IN GENERAL.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN.

ALL RIGHT. AND THE OTHER I WANT TO MAKE IT ON SOMETHING ELSE.

WE JUST VOTED ON AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.

BUT IF WE DON'T WE CAN'T.

THIS COMMITTEE, THIS CORPORATION CAN'T BE SUCCESSFUL IN RECRUITING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IF WE HAVE A CITY WITH AN UNSTABLE FUND.

AND SO WE ARE ALREADY IN A, IN A POSITION NOW WHERE A CRITICAL POSITION WHERE WE MUST ADDRESS THIS IT REALLY TODAY AS WE MOVE FORWARD. BECAUSE FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW, WE HAVE THIS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION DESIGNED TO BRING MORE BUSINESSES TO THIS CITY.

AND THEY'RE NOT COMING IF THEY DON'T HAVE AN IDEA OF WHERE WE'RE GOING IN TERMS OF THE INVESTMENT IN THE STRUCTURE OUR WAY QUICKLY ON ON HISTORY, I DON'T WANT TO WAKE UP TO AN ENRON HEADLINE THAT WAS DEVASTATING FOR FAMILIES, FOR CORPORATIONS, FOR CITIES.

AND SO WHEN WHAT WE WILL LOOK LIKE IF WE DON'T GET THIS STRAIGHTENED OUT NOW, WE'RE GOING TO WAKE UP AND THE TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO WAKE UP TO HEADLINES.

FEWER POLICE OFFICERS INCREASE IN RETIREMENT.

YOU'RE GOING TO SEE LONG, LONGER RESPONSE TIMES, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND MORE DIFFICULTY IN RECRUITMENT.

YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT WE ARE RUNNING SHORT ON REPLACING EQUIPMENT.

WE'RE GOING TO SEE HIGHER CRIME STATS.

DALLAS WILL NOT BE A SAFE CITY.

AND SO FOR THE TAXPAYERS, WE CAN TALK ALL DAY LONG.

THAT'S WHY I ASKED YOU EARLY ON.

HOW ARE YOU? WHAT MESSAGE DO WE GIVE THE TAXPAYERS? COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE GOING TO COME AND GO.

WE NEED TO STABILIZE THIS CITY MANAGER A POSITION OF COMMUNICATION SO THAT PUBLICLY, IF YOU HAVE ALL THIS PUSHBACK WHEN YOU PUT A PUBLIC RECORD OUT THE CITY, THE TAXPAYERS KNOW THE BOOTS TO THE GROUND, KNOW EVERY DAY THEY'RE OUT THERE DOING THE BEST THEY CAN SO THEY CAN BRING HOME THE BACON AT SOME POINT TO THEIR FAMILIES.

AND SO FOR US TO BE TRANSPARENT AND CLEAR AND TO REALLY BUILD THE TRUST, WE KEEP HEARING THAT ABOUT THE LACK OF TRUST IN THE CITY.

FOLKS DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT SHORTAGE AND POLICE OFFICERS AND FIREMEN.

THEY WANT A SAFE CITY.

THEY WANT COMMUNICATION.

THEY WANT TRANSPARENCY.

WE HEARD THIS YESTERDAY.

YOU GOT TO LAND. THE PLANE IS AT THE END OF MY.

IS THAT THE END? YOU HAVE ANOTHER MINUTE, THOUGH.

THANK YOU. WELL, I APPRECIATE THAT.

SO WE'LL COME BACK. WE'LL COME BACK.

BUT I WANT TO LEAVE IT ON THE TRUST FACTOR.

THANK YOU. YEAH.

[02:40:01]

MISS BLACKMON RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AND I KIND OF WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT MISS WILLIS WAS IN.

PARTNERSHIPS COME IN VARIOUS FORMS, RIGHT? THEY DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE WARM, TOUCHY FEELY, BUT THEY CAN UNDERSTAND A BUSINESS DIRECTION AND UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE GOING.

AND SO MY QUESTION TO THAT WOULD BE TO THE CITY MANAGER OR EVEN TO MR. IRELAND IS ARE THE FUNDS HERE THIS MORNING.

ARE THEY HERE LISTENING TO WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US.

SO IF I COULD JUST SPEAK TO THAT QUESTION.

SO WE ACTUALLY HAD THIS EXACT SAME PRESENTATION PRESENTED ON AUGUST THE 22ND TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, AND BOTH OF THE FUNDS WERE REPRESENTED BY THEIR EXECUTIVE TEAM MEMBERS, AND THEY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVEN SPEAK AS PART OF THIS PRESENTATION.

SO THEY HAVE BEEN AT THE TABLE AND THEY HAVE HEARD THIS INFORMATION JUST AS THE COUNCIL RECEIVED THIS MORNING.

BUT THEY'RE NOT HERE FOR A FULL COUNCIL.

I DON'T BELIEVE I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'RE IN THE AUDIENCE UNLESS I'M UNLESS THEY'RE ONLINE.

I BELIEVE THERE'S SEVEN OF US THAT AREN'T ON THIS COMMITTEE.

SO I'M JUST I'M JUST SAYING PARTNERSHIPS COME IN VARIOUS FORMS AND IT COULD BE A BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP, UNDERSTANDING WHAT OUR DIRECTION IS, HOW WE'RE GOING, HOW WE'RE GOING TO GET THERE. AND I THINK PARTICIPATING AT ANY LEVEL, WHETHER IT'S AT A COMMITTEE OR AT FULL COUNCIL, IS VERY IMPORTANT.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU LEGISLATE THAT.

THAT IS A HARD THING.

YOU'VE GOT TO COME WITH THE THE THINKING THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THIS BETTER, WE'RE GOING TO GO RIGHT.

AND SO I'M OPEN TO ANY CONVERSATIONS ON HOW TO MAKE A PARTNERSHIP BETTER THAT THAT WE CAN RAISE AT LEAST, WHAT, TWO PERCENTAGE POINTS MAYBE. AND THAT HELPS EVERYBODY.

AND I THINK IF WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT THAT MAY BE WHERE WE GO AND WE HAVE OUR PARTNERS WITH US, OUR STAKEHOLDERS SAYING WE WANT THIS FUND.

AND WHEN WE INTERVIEW THESE BOARD MEMBERS, THEY ACTUALLY SAY WE WANT TO INCREASE OUR OUTCOMES.

THEN I THINK MAYBE WE CAN ALL AGREE ON SOMETHING.

AND IF STAFF CAN'T BE THERE, WHETHER IT'S OUR STAFF OR THEIR STAFF, THEN CHANGES ARE MADE.

BUT I THINK WE ALL NEED TO AGREE ON SOME NORTH STARS, SOME GUIDING PRINCIPLES, SOME UNDERSTANDING IN ORDER TO CREATE THAT PARTNERSHIP.

AND AGAIN, IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE THAT WE ARE WARM AND TOUCHY AND GOING OUT FOR DRINKS, BUT THAT WE'RE ALL MOVING IN THE SAME DIRECTION TRYING TO GET TO THE SAME GOAL.

OTHERWISE, WE JUST CREATE A TIDAL WAVE AND A WHIRLPOOL AND WE SINK AND NOBODY WANTS US SINKING.

THAT I AGREE WITH ALL OF THAT.

THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION.

THE OLIVE BRANCH IS GOING TO BE IMPORTANT.

I HAVE AN IDEA FOR YOU.

PLEASE SHARE.

I'VE BEEN ASKED BY THE BOARD OF DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE TO PRESENT TO THEM.

THAT WOULD BE AN OPEN MEETING, RIGHT? IN THE PAST, WHEN WE ATTENDED THOSE, THERE WAS NO ONE THERE.

YOU KNOW, VERY FEW PEOPLE.

CORRECT. EVERYONE SHOW UP.

DO YOU KNOW WHEN THAT MEETING IS GOING TO HAPPEN? WE HAVE NOT SAID IT YET.

WE'RE TRYING TO COORDINATE, BUT WHEN THAT'S SET UP, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT MR. IRELAND KNOWS, AND HE'LL GET THAT TO YOU.

AND I HAVE THIS THOUGHT THAT IF EVERYONE SHOWED UP AT THEIR PLACE, THAT'S A BIG OLIVE BRANCH.

AND IT TELLS THEM THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND EVERYONE IN THE STAKEHOLDERS CARE, AND IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO TO NOT RECIPROCATE IN THAT KIND OF ENVIRONMENT OR TO SPEAK ABOUT US.

BUT I WILL SAY THAT WE WANT THIS TO WORK.

I DON'T THINK NOBODY I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HERE WAS SAYING NO, BUT IT IS A IT'S LIKE A MARRIAGE YOU GIVE AND TAKE.

IT'S NOT ALWAYS GOING TO BE.

I MEAN, SOME DAYS YOU GIVE 60, SOME DAYS YOU DON'T.

I MEAN, AND AND I UNDERSTAND THAT MARKETS ARE MARKETS AND YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO HIT IT.

RIGHT. 100%.

BUT BUT YOU'VE GOT TO STRIVE FOR THAT EVERY DAY.

YOU BRING YOUR A GAME.

AND SOMETIMES I THINK SOME OF THE PLAYERS ARE NOT.

AND THAT'S HARD TO DEAL WITH ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY SUE YOU.

SO AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THE LAWSUIT.

WELL, I'LL TELL YOU THIS.

YOU'VE ALL BEEN VERY PASSIONATE AND WE ALL KNOW IT'S ABOUT THE POLICEMEN AND THE FIREMEN AND THE TAXPAYERS, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.

YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHY WE'RE HERE.

WE ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT FIXING THAT RELATIONSHIP AND HELPING THE CITY BECAUSE WE GOT A BIG MONEY PROBLEM.

BUT IT'S NOT JUST A MONEY PROBLEM.

IT CAUSES ALL THESE OTHER PROBLEMS. AND IT'S CENTRAL TO THE CORE OF THIS WHOLE CITY.

AND WE WANT WE WANT TO HELP.

WE WANT TO HELP. WE'VE BEEN WATCHING IT FOR A LONG TIME.

YOU'VE BEEN WATCHING IT FOR A LONG TIME.

WE WANT TO HELP. WE THINK WE CAN.

WE THINK WE CAN.

BECAUSE I THINK THAT BOTH BOARDS AND BOTH STAFFS HAVE TO WANT THE SAME THING.

[02:45:02]

IT WOULD BE INCREDIBLY IMPOSSIBLE TO NOT WANT THE SAME THING.

SO WE JUST HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO BRIDGE THE GAP.

AND I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO DO THAT AND WE'RE VERY UPBEAT ABOUT IT.

I APPRECIATE YOUR OPTIMISM.

THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. PUBLIC SAFETY IS PROBABLY OUR NUMBER ONE FOCUS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.

SAFE TO SAY THAT PEOPLE WOULD NOT COME TO THE CITY OF DALLAS IF WE'RE NOT SAFE.

AND ALSO, I HEAR, BUILD RELATIONSHIP.

HOW DO WE BUILD RELATIONSHIP IF WE DON'T HAVE TRUST? AND I HEAR IN OUR COMMITTEE MEETING YESTERDAY, RESIDENTS, THEY CAME HERE AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON'T TRUST THE CITY.

I DON'T TRUST THE STAFF.

I DON'T TRUST NOBODY.

AND THAT'S BAD.

AND ALSO, WE HAVE A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY, AND THAT'S BAD AND THAT'S TRUST.

SO WE GOT TO FIND A WAY HOW WE BUILD RELATIONSHIP BACK AND.

AND KIM MR., CITY MANAGER.

THAT'S A RELATIONSHIP I KNOW OUR STAFF TALKED TO KELLY ONE ON ONE.

OUR ATTORNEY TALKED TO JOSH ONE ON ONE.

THOSE ARE THE RELATIONSHIPS WE HAVE TO BUILD.

EVEN THOUGH WE DO REACH OUT TO OLIVE BRANCH, THEY DON'T REACH BACK.

FINE. JUST KEEP REACHING OUT.

KEEP REACHING OUT.

AND EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT WE ARE REACHING OUT.

WE DO HAVE A PLAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO SUBMIT NEXT WEEK.

HOPEFULLY, WE NEED TO SUBMIT OUR PLAN, GET IT DONE, GET IT VOTED ON AND SAY, HEY, WE ARE REACHING OUT.

WE ARE DOING EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO REACH OUT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.

WHAT IS BEST FOR THE RETIREES? FOR THE CURRENT EMPLOYEES IN THE UNIFORM? WE ARE DOING THAT SO WE CANNOT STOP REACHING OUT.

AND SO I ADVISE ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ALL THE EMPLOYEES JUST KEEP REACHING OUT.

KEEP REACHING OUT.

YOU NEVER THROW YOUR CHILD OUT WITH THE DISHWASHER.

KEEP THE CHILD IN THE HOUSE.

WE GOT TO WORK TOGETHER.

IF WE DON'T WORK TOGETHER, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD A GREAT CITY.

AND I LACK ALL THE COMPROMISE WE SEEING.

I LIKE ALL THE PROPOSALS WE'RE SEEING, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE HERE NEXT YEAR, TWO YEARS FROM NOW OR THREE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, WE GOTTA LOOK OUT FOR THE FUTURE OF DALLAS.

WE GOT TO LOOK AT DECADES AND DECADES DOWN THE ROAD.

WE GOTTA BUILD A DEEP FOUNDATION.

YOU CAN'T BUILD A FOUNDATION COVERING 100FT IN THE GROUND.

YOU GOTTA GO HUNDREDS, 100FT IN THE GROUND.

BECAUSE THE DEEPER THE FOUNDATION, THE TALLER BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO BE BUILT.

BUT WHAT I'M GETTING AT WITH EVERYBODY SAYING, WE ALL HERE FOR THE SAME PURPOSE, FOR OUR RETIREES ALSO TO PROTECT OUR TAXPAYERS BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES WHO GOT TO PAY THE BILL. AND SO IF THAT BRAND OF CONSULTANT IN WHATEVER NEED TO DO, BUT WE NEED TO GET ON BOARD NOW, STARTING TODAY, REACHING OUT, IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO THOSE TRUSTEES, PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL THEM.

JUST REACH OUT. EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T REACH OUT TO YOU, JUST CALL AND THEY WILL TALK TO YOU.

I DON'T TALK TO MANY OF THE TRUSTEES, AND I TALK TO NICK MERRILL ON A DAILY BASIS, THE CHAIRMAN.

BUT I DO REACH OUT.

BUT WE NEED TO REACH OUT AND WE NEED TO DO MORE.

THANK YOU. MISS WILLIS.

I BELIEVE YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR.

ACTUALLY, YOU'RE BOTH ON ONE MINUTE ROUNDS, I BELIEVE.

NOW. SO MISS ARNOLD, YOU'RE TECHNICALLY AHEAD OF HER IN THE QUEUE, SO YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. JUST IN CLOSING, I THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK AND THOSE WHO ARE HERE.

AND I DON'T KNOW EVERYONE WHO'S HERE.

AND I'M SURE EVERYBODY IS LISTENING.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS ABOUT DALLAS BEING A SAFE CITY, A CITY THAT IS ON THE MARKET TO HAVE TO TO RECRUIT NEW BUSINESSES, NEW TAXPAYERS.

AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE TODAY AND THE PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE IS VERY IMPORTANT.

PUBLIC PROBABLY DIDN'T KNOW WE HAD BEEN SUED.

PUBLIC DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE STRUGGLES THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH IN TERMS OF DEALING WITH, QUOTE, KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD.

WE NEED TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM.

WE NEED TO SOLVE IT NOW.

TRUST IS VERY IMPORTANT.

OUR TAXPAYERS ARE VERY KEY.

THEY'RE VERY INTEGRAL PART OF THIS.

AND SO CITY MANAGER AND COMMISSION COUNCIL MEMBERS, I WOULD SAY YES, WE NEED TO BEGIN TO LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING A PERSON HERE THAT WILL COMMUNICATE SO THAT TRANSPARENCY IS THERE.

COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE MUST BUILD AN INFRASTRUCTURE BASED ON TRUST AND COMMUNICATION BECAUSE POLICE FIRE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS NOT GOING TO GO AWAY UNLESS WE HELP IT TO DISAPPEAR THROUGH NON-ACTION.

SO THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR WHAT YOU'VE DONE TODAY.

AND I CAN SHARE A LITTLE BIT WITH MY COMMUNITY.

AND OF COURSE, THOSE BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

AND, MAYOR, CAN I JUST HAVE TWO SECONDS TO SAY THIS TO YOU? IF I COULD WRITE A CHECK TODAY FOR THIS PROBLEM, I WOULD DO THAT.

[02:50:01]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS WILLIS.

RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MAYOR.

YOU KNOW, IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO HEAR THE FUNDING SOUNDNESS RESTORATION PLAN.

WE'LL BE VOTING ON IT SOON.

IT'LL BE SUBMITTED TO THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD SOON.

AND SO AS THAT PENSION AD HOC COMMITTEE WINDS DOWN.

AND AFTER WHAT I'VE HEARD TODAY REGARDING THE NEED FOR OTHERS WHO UNDERSTAND THIS FAR BETTER THAN WE EVER COULD, WE JUST NEED THE CLIFFSNOTES ON PERFORMANCE.

I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD LIVE WITH OUR ONLY PERMANENT COMMITTEE IN THE CHARTER, WHICH IS GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, BECAUSE THIS TAKES SUCH A BIG CHUNK OUT OF OUR BUDGET.

AND IF WE APPROVE THAT ADC, IT'LL TAKE MASSIVE CHUNKS OUT OF OUR BUDGET.

BUT ALSO TO DESIGN WHAT THE REPORTING STRUCTURE WOULD BE.

I LIKE THE SUGGESTION ABOUT THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, BUT THE ONLY THING I FEAR IS, WELL, THERE'S A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, LOUIS BRANDEIS SAID SUNLIGHT IS THE BEST DISINFECTANT.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT THIS MAKES IT TO COUNCIL AND TO THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE THESE ARE THEIR DOLLARS GOING BACK IN TO FUND THE PENSION OF OUR FIRST RESPONDERS AND THEIR SUPPORT STAFF.

AND SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT LIVE WITH GFM.

THANK YOU, MR. WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

DOWN, MAYOR. THANK YOU.

THE. I LIKE THAT SUGGESTION AS WELL.

I THINK GBFM WILL SURVIVE ON INTO THE FUTURE.

AS LONG AS IT'S IN THE CHARTER AND IT'S NOT GOING ANYWHERE.

THIS CHARTER SESSION, I DON'T I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

TO ME, THAT SEEMS LIKE A VIABLE PLACE FOR IT TO EXIST, AND I WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM AMENDING THE COUNCIL RULES TO EVEN REQUIRE A QUARTERLY, BI ANNUAL PENSION REVIEW UPDATE ONCE WE GET, WELL, EVEN WITHOUT A THIRD PARTY.

BUT I THINK EITHER WAY, WE GET THE UPDATE THERE.

SO I THINK THAT'S IF THE MAYOR'S WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF PUT IT OVER TO THAT COMMITTEE.

I THINK THAT'S A VIABLE PLACE FOR WHERE IT SHOULD BELONG.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON ITEM A THAT I MISSED? I DON'T SEE ANYONE.

SO WE'RE GOING TO PLOW THROUGH ITEM B BEFORE WE BREAK FOR LUNCH.

[B. 24-2722 Dallas Police and Fire Pension System (DPFPS): Funding Soundness Restoration Plan Discussion and Recommendation]

I JUST TALKED TO THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER ABOUT THAT.

AND THAT IS HER PREFERENCE IS TO GET.

BE DONE. AND THEN WE WILL LEAVE SEE FOR AFTER LUNCH.

AND JUST SO YOU GUYS HAVE A HEADS UP, WE ALSO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION DURING LUNCH.

OKAY. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MADAM INTERIM CITY MANAGER, THANK YOU SO MUCH, MAYOR.

YOUR SECOND PRESENTATION TODAY IS REGARDING THE FUNDING SOUNDNESS RESTORATION PLAN FOR DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM.

SINCE SEPTEMBER 2023, CITY STAFF AND THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON PENSION HAS WORKED TO ADDRESS THE LONG TERM FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY OF DPS AND TO ENSURE THAT OUR POLICE OFFICERS AND OUR FIREFIGHTERS, BOTH ACTIVE AND RETIRED, ARE ASSURED THAT THEIR PENSION IS SAFE BOTH NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE. I WANTED TO PUBLICLY THANK OUR CHAIRMAN, ATKINS, FOR HIS WORK IN LEADING THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, AS WELL AS ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE FOR WORKING WITH STAFF OVER THESE LAST FEW MONTHS TO TAKE ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE.

AND TODAY WE WILL BE DISCUSSING THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF.

THEN NEXT WEEK WE WILL BE ASKING THE CITY COUNCIL AS WE MOVE FORWARD TO VOTE ON THE ACTUAL FUNDING SOUNDNESS RESTORATION PLAN.

AND SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MR. IRELAND AND TO MISS JEANETTE WEEDEN, OUR DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MISS TOLBERT.

I'M JACK IRELAND, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, AND I'M JOINED HERE WITH JEANETTE WEEDEN, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

AND WE WILL WALK QUICKLY THROUGH THE PRESENTATION AND BE AVAILABLE FOR YOUR QUESTIONS.

SO ON SLIDE TWO JUST THE PURPOSE OF OUR CONVERSATION IS TO REMIND YOU OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TEXAS PENSION REVIEW BOARD, DISCUSS OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR A FUNDING SOUNDNESS RESTORATION PLAN.

WE'VE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS OVER THE LAST 11 MONTHS, AND SO WE'RE GETTING TO A POINT WHERE WE WILL BE BRINGING IT BACK NEXT WEEK AS AN ACTION ITEM FOR YOU TO CONSIDER APPROVAL ON SLIDE THREE.

JUST SPEAKING BRIEFLY ABOUT THE PRB REQUIREMENTS, THE TEXAS PENSION REVIEW BOARD IS MANDATED TO OVERSEE ALL TEXAS PUBLIC RETIREMENT SYSTEMS BASED ON CHAPTER 802 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.

AND PART OF THAT REQUIREMENT FROM THE PRB IS THAT ALL PUBLIC PENSION FUNDS BE FULLY FUNDED IN A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 30 YEARS.

AS OF JANUARY 1ST OF 23 DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM IS PROJECTED TO BE FULLY FUNDED IN 82 YEARS.

THEREFORE, ACTION IS NECESSARY ON SLIDE FOUR BASED ON HOUSE BILL 3158 THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IN 2017, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT THAT A PLAN BE SUBMITTED TO THE PRB BY NOVEMBER 1ST OF

[02:55:07]

2024 AND THEN, ACCORDING TO PRB RULES, A FUNDING SOUNDNESS RESTORATION PLAN IS REQUIRED BY SEPTEMBER 1ST OF 2025, SO THE WORK TOGETHER ON THIS WOULD SATISFY BOTH OF THOSE TWO REQUIREMENTS.

BOTH THE HOUSE BILL 3158, AS WELL AS CHAPTER 802 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.

ON SLIDE FIVE, I JUST WANTED TO WALK THROUGH THIS ONE PAGE OF CHANGES FROM HOUSE BILL 3158 AND HOUSE BILL 3158 WAS APPROVED BY THE TEXAS STATE LEGISLATURE IN 2017 TO ADDRESS THE FINANCIAL SOLVENCY ISSUES OF THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM, AND REQUIRED A PERMANENT PLAN TO BE BROUGHT BACK BY NOVEMBER OF 2025.

PART OF HOUSE BILL 3158 CHANGED THE GOVERNANCE OF DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM, MAINLY TO CHANGE THE MAKEUP OF THE BOARD.

SIX MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR, AND FIVE TRUSTEES ARE ELECTED BY THE MEMBERS.

OF THOSE FIVE TRUSTEES, ONE IS AN ACTIVE POLICE OFFICER AND AN ACTIVE FIREFIGHTER.

HOUSE BILL 3158 DID MAKE CHANGES TO THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION RATE AND THE CITY'S FIXED RATE.

IT INCREASED THE EMPLOYEE RATE TO 13.5%, AND IT INCREASED THE CITY'S RATE TO A FLAT RATE OF 34.5%, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL $9 MILLION A YEAR FOR SEVEN YEARS.

HOUSE BILL 3158 ALSO REDUCED FUTURE BENEFITS FOR ACTIVE EMPLOYEES, RETIREES AND BENEFICIARIES, PRIMARILY SUSPENDING COLAS UNTIL THE FUND REACHES 70% FUNDING.

AND THEN LASTLY, HOUSE BILL 3158 REQUIRED THIS 30 YEAR PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED BY NOVEMBER 1ST OF THIS YEAR.

SO WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS, AND AS I MOVE TO SLIDE SIX.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR THE LAST 11 MONTHS VERY ACTIVELY WITH THE AD HOC COMMITTEE.

WE HEARD FROM FINANCIAL AND INDUSTRY EXPERTS THAT WERE A PART OF THE MAYOR'S STUDY GROUP.

WE HEARD FROM CHIRON, WHO IS AN INDEPENDENT ACTUARY THAT WAS SELECTED BY THE PRB AND HIRED BY DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM, AND WE HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD OUR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SEVERAL TIMES.

AND SO WE WILL SUMMARIZE THOSE AGAIN TODAY.

SO IN SLIDE SIX, OUR PRIMARY RECOMMENDATION IS TO IMPLEMENT AN ACTUARIALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTION METHODOLOGY, WHICH ADJUSTS ANNUALLY TO RECOGNIZE ACTUAL EXPERIENCE.

SO WE'VE HAD A FIXED RATE A FIXED RATE OF 34.5%.

BUT GOING FORWARD WE WOULD HAVE A RATE THAT ADJUSTS BASED ON THE ACTUARIAL EVALUATION THAT'S DONE EACH YEAR.

CHIRON, THE INDEPENDENT ACTUARY THAT PUT FORTH THE FIVE YEAR STEP UP PLAN, SAID THAT IT WAS REASONABLE AND THAT IT WOULD BE ACCEPTED BY THE PRB.

AND THAT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION.

OUR RECOMMENDATION MAKES NO CHANGES TO THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION RATE.

CHIRON DID SUGGEST LOWERING THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION RATE, BUT THAT WAS A LOWER PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION UNTIL THE FUND IS AT A BETTER POINT WITH ITS FUNDING SOUNDNESS.

WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND LOWERING THAT RATE.

WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY CHANGE TO THE BENEFIT STRUCTURES THAT WERE OUTLINED IN HOUSE BILL 3158.

SO THE NEXT TWO PAGES I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT SUPPLEMENTAL PAY.

SO SUPPLEMENTAL PAY OR COLAS ARE INCLUDED IN HOUSE BILL 3158.

BUT THEY ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO THE RETIREES OR THE BENEFICIARIES UNTIL THE FUND IS AT 70% FUNDED.

AND WE ARE BELOW THAT NOW, AND WE'RE NOT PROJECTED TO BE AT 70% FUNDED UNTIL 2046.

THE CURRENT METHODOLOGY IN HOUSE BILL 3158 IS BASED UPON A FIVE YEAR AVERAGE RATE OF RETURN -5%, WITH A MAXIMUM NOT TO EXCEED 4%.

WELL, AS WE'VE BEEN TALKING OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, WE HAD SUGGESTED WE HAD RECOMMENDED CHANGING THAT FUTURE METHODOLOGY INSTEAD OF IT BEING BASED ON RATE OF RETURN TO CHANGING IT TO BE BASED ON CPI AND NOT TO EXCEED

[03:00:03]

1.75. AND WHAT'S MAGICAL ABOUT THE 1.75 IS THAT'S THE AMOUNT.

THAT IS WHAT IS ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS, IT COSTS THE SAME AS THE WAY THAT IT'S LAID OUT IN HOUSE BILL 3158. SO IT DID NOT CHANGE THE COST UP OR DOWN TO HAVE A ANNUAL NOT TO EXCEED 1.75% COLA BASED ON CPI. AND THEN WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IF WE HAD OTHER FUNDING IN THE FUTURE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT INCREASE TO A NOT TO EXCEED 3%, BUT THAT WOULD BE CONTINGENT UPON HAVING SOME TYPE OF LUMP SUM CONTRIBUTION OR ADDITIONAL REVENUE STREAM FROM THE CITY.

THAT HAD BEEN OUR RECOMMENDATION.

SO ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PAGE AND THE THE RIGHT HAND BOX, WE HAVE REVISED OUR RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE COLA.

AND THE REASON WE'VE DONE THAT IS BECAUSE ON AUGUST THE 8TH, WHAT WAS PASSED BY THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION BOARD WAS TO MAINTAIN THAT FUTURE COLA AFTER ACHIEVING 70% BASED ON THE CALCULATION AND THE METHODOLOGY THAT'S IN HOUSE BILL 3158.

THAT'S BASED UPON FIVE YEARS RATE OF RETURN, MINUS FIVE MAXIMUM NOT TO EXCEED FOUR.

SO THAT'S WHAT THEIR BOARD APPROVED.

AND SO WE THOUGHT WE WERE RECOMMENDING SOMETHING THAT WAS MORE DESIRABLE TO THEM.

BUT SINCE THEY'VE CHANGED AND RECOMMENDED JUST TO CONTINUE WITH WHAT IS STATED IN HOUSE BILL 3158, NOT TO TO DISAGREE WITH THEM, WE CHANGED OUR RECOMMENDATION TO TO USE THAT AS OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COLA AFTER ACHIEVING 70% FUNDING.

SO ON SLIDE EIGHT, WANT TO TALK ABOUT SUPPLEMENTAL PAY BEFORE REACHING 70% FUNDING? SO BEFORE REACHING 70% FUNDING, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT IN HOUSE BILL 3158 FOR ANY TYPE OF COLA.

IN FACT, IT WAS SUSPENDED.

IT WAS SUSPENDED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE BECAUSE OF THE FUNDING SOUNDNESS OF THE PLAN.

AND AND THE STATE LEGISLATURE AT THAT TIME SAID ONCE THEY ACHIEVE 70% FUNDING, WE WILL PUT A COLA BACK IN PLACE.

WELL, WE REALIZED THAT THAT IS STILL, YOU KNOW, 21 YEARS OUT FROM NOW.

AND SO WE HAD PROPOSED MAKING SOME TYPE OF SMALL, MODEST GESTURE OF PUTTING IN SOME TYPE OF SUPPLEMENTAL PAY BEFORE REACHING 70% FUNDING.

SO VERY LOW BAR.

SO MOVING ON TO SLIDE I GUESS.

SLIDE NINE.

SOME ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE AD HOC COMMITTEE.

WERE SOME ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT, THE OVERSIGHT BASICALLY THREE CONCEPTS THAT WE RECOMMENDED TO PROVIDE SOME TYPE OF OVERSIGHT OF THE EXPENSES THAT ARE INCURRED BY THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM THAT ADD TO THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY AND INCREASE THE COST OF THE CITY. SO RATHER THAN THOSE COSTS JUST BEING ADDED BY THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION BOARD, INCREASING THEIR COST, INCREASING THE LIABILITY, ASKING US TO PAY FOR IT. WE HAVE RECOMMENDED THAT THOSE THINGS THAT WOULD HAVE SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS, SUCH AS CHANGING THE DISCOUNT RATE, SETTLING ANY TYPE OF LAWSUIT THAT THOSE THINGS WOULD BE APPROVED BY THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS THE BOARD.

NOW, IT'S NO LONGER A FIXED RATE.

IT IS AN ADJUSTABLE RATE THAT'S BASED ON THE ANNUAL ADC.

SO IF THERE IS UNDERPERFORMANCE, THEN OUR ADC GOES UP.

SO I WANTED SOME LEVEL OF GUARDRAILS PUT IN PLACE THAT WOULD HELP US MANAGE THAT.

THE GUARDRAILS ARE ACTUALLY FAIRLY WIDE SET AT CHANGES OF PLUS OR -5% FROM THE INITIAL AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE THAT'S PUT IN PLACE.

AND THEN THIRDLY, ESTABLISHING A PROCESS FOR MANAGING DIFFERENCES, BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT ENTITIES CALCULATING ANNUAL ADCS, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF NUMBERS.

WE WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND PUT IN PLACE SOME TYPE OF RECONCILIATION PROCESS SO THAT WE HAVE A METHOD OF WORKING THROUGH THOSE WHEN WE HAVE DIFFERENCES,

[03:05:09]

AND THAT'S WHAT'S LAID OUT HERE ON THE BOTTOM OF PAGE NINE.

SO THESE ARE THE THREE THINGS THAT WE INCLUDED FOR EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT FUND THAT WERE PART OF CHAPTER 48 THAT YOU RECENTLY APPROVED FOR ERF.

I'VE HEARD SOME CONVERSATION THIS MORNING, OBVIOUSLY, ABOUT ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR RETURNS AND THEIR INVESTMENTS.

THAT IS NOT OUTLINED IN THE CONCEPTS THAT WE HAD LAID OUT, BUT OBVIOUSLY WE CAN ADD ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT AT THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

NEXT SLIDE.

JUST A COMPARISON OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH THIS TABLE.

THERE'S THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION ON IT, BUT JUST MOVING FROM LEFT TO RIGHT, WHAT I LISTED AS STATUS QUO IS IF WE DON'T FIX THE FUND, IF WE DON'T COMPLY WITH PRB REQUIREMENT TO BE FULLY FUNDED IN 30 YEARS, AND WE JUST KEEP PAYING 34.5% OF PAY, WE WOULD CONTRIBUTE ABOUT $8 BILLION OVER THE 30 YEARS.

SO WE WOULD BE PUTTING IN $8 BILLION.

BUT THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.

WE HAVE ALL ADMITTED SINCE LAST SEPTEMBER THAT WE NEED TO PUT IN MORE MONEY, AND SO $8 BILLION OVER 30 YEARS IS NOT ENOUGH.

AND SO CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS IN THAT NEXT COLUMN TO THE RIGHT WITH THE ADC WITH A FIVE YEAR STEP UP IS 11.06 BILLION.

THE COLA AFTER ACHIEVING 70% FUNDING, MAINTAINING THAT THE WAY IT IS IN HOUSE BILL 3158 IS ALREADY PART OF THE ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTION FOR THE 11.06 BILLION.

SO THERE'S NO EXTRA COST FOR THAT.

BUT ADDING THE SUPPLEMENTAL PAY PRIOR TO ACHIEVING 70% FUNDING ADDS $136 MILLION OVER THE 30 YEARS, SO THE CITY WOULD BE CONTRIBUTING $11.2 BILLION, OR ABOUT 3.3 BILLION MORE THAN WE WOULD IF WE JUST MAINTAINED THE STATUS QUO.

SO THE CITY IS OBVIOUSLY INVESTING A LOT OF MORE MONEY.

IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO DO THAT TO ENSURE THAT THE FUND COMPLIES WITH THE STATE REQUIREMENTS, IS FULLY FUNDED IN 30 YEARS, AND PROTECTS THE RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR OUR ACTIVE AND OUR RETIREES.

YOU CAN SEE IN THE TWO COLUMNS FURTHER TO THE RIGHT WHAT DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM HAD RECOMMENDED PRIOR TO AUGUST THE 8TH VERSUS WHAT THEY APPROVED ON AUGUST THE 8TH.

THEIR COST ON PRIOR TO AUGUST THE 8TH TOTALED 11.6 BILLION.

THEIR TOTAL COST OVER 30 YEARS THAT THEY APPROVED ON AUGUST THE 8TH TOTALS 11.8 BILLION OVER 30 YEARS.

SO IT'S $600 MILLION MORE COSTLY THAN WHAT THE CITY RECOMMENDS.

SO MOVING TO THE THE NEXT PAGE, PAGE 11 NEXT STEPS.

TODAY BRIEFING, THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING US TO SHARE THE INFORMATION.

NEXT WEEK, WE WILL HAVE AN ACTION ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA TO APPROVE A FUNDING SOUNDNESS RESTORATION PLAN THAT FOLLOWS THE CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION, AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDES.

AND THEN BEFORE THE END OF SEPTEMBER, WE WOULD SUBMIT THAT PLAN TO THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD FOR THEIR REVIEW APPROVAL, AND THEN THEY WOULD FORWARD IT, ALONG WITH THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION PLAN THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

SO THAT'S THE END OF MY REMARKS, MAYOR.

AND OPEN TO YOU, SIR.

SORRY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

APPRECIATE THAT.

AND I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE AGAIN.

I THINK WE'RE HAVING QUEUE ISSUES.

OKAY, MISS WILLIS, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES FOR THE PUBLIC.

WE ARE ON ITEM B OF TODAY'S BRIEFING AGENDA.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. IRELAND. SO LET'S GO BACK TO I THINK IT WAS 2016 WHEN THE LEGISLATURE PASSED HOUSE BILL 3158.

OKAY. SO IN ADDITION TO CHANGING THE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE OF THE BOARD AND DEFINING WHAT THE CITY NEEDED TO CONTRIBUTE.

EVERY YEAR, THEY RECOMMENDED DISCONTINUING THE COLA THAT HAD BEEN GIVEN EACH YEAR AT 4%.

YES, YES, YES MA'AM, AND I THINK YOU MENTIONED IT, BUT I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T TOTALLY CATCH IT.

SO WHY? WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT? SO ON SLIDE FIVE ONE, IF YOU CAN PULL THAT UP, JUST AS A SUMMARY OF THE ACTIONS OF HOUSE BILL 3158 AND YES, MA'AM, THE

[03:10:09]

STATE LEGISLATURE, WHAT WAS APPROVED IN HOUSE BILL 31 58IN 2017 WAS TO SUSPEND THOSE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS UNTIL THE FUND WAS 70% FUNDED, JUST BECAUSE OF THE CONDITION OF THE FUND.

IT WAS UNDERFUNDED.

IT WAS NEEDING TO BE MORE FISCALLY SOUND AND SUSTAINABLE, AND THAT WAS A WAY TO REDUCE EXPENSES.

I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN 2017 WITH THAT, BUT THERE WAS CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN CITY REPRESENTATIVES, DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE BOARD REPRESENTATIVES. STATE LEGISLATURE THAT CAME UP AND AGREED TO THE PLAN.

SO THE GOAL WAS TO FOCUS ON THE CORPUS OF THE FUND BEFORE DOING ANYTHING ELSE.

OUTSIDE OF THAT. I THINK THAT WOULD BE ACCURATE TO MAKE THAT RIGHT.

AND IN ATTENDING SOME OF THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION BOARD MEETINGS IN PERSON, I'VE ALSO HEARD BOARD MEMBERS SAY THAT THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY WOULD BE THE FUND ITSELF.

SO I'VE HEARD A NUMBER, I THINK IT WAS 15 YEARS AGO, MAYBE FARTHER BACK, THAT THE THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND WAS AT OVER 90% FUNDED.

IT LOOKS LIKE IN 2008, WE, THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE WAS FUNDED AT 89.5.

THAT'S THE HIGHEST PERCENT I SEE SINCE 2001, WHICH AS FAR AS MY TABLE GOES BACK, SORRY.

OKAY. AND THEN IN 2016, IF YOU'VE GOT A TABLE, WHAT WAS IT IN 2016 AT 45%? OKAY, SO IT WENT FROM 89% IN 2008 TO 45% IN 2016.

AND THEN I THINK IN THAT LAWSUIT THAT WAS FILED AGAINST THE CITY OF DALLAS, IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE FUND WAS AT 34%.

I THINK EARLIER IT WAS REFERENCED AT 39%, BUT ACTUALLY IT'S AT 34%.

SO WE'RE GOING BACKWARD.

AND ONE IF YOU WOULD GO TO PAGE 14, I BELIEVE THERE'S A CHART IN THE APPENDIX.

THERE YOU GO. AND THE BLACK LINE THAT GOES ACROSS FROM LEFT TO RIGHT.

HERE IT DOES LOOK LIKE IT WAS SLIGHTLY ABOVE 90% IN 0809 TIME FRAME.

YOU CAN SEE WHERE THERE WAS THE BIG DROP IN 14, 15, 16 WHERE WHERE IT TAKES A NOSEDIVE THERE ON THE FUNDING STATUS. SO VISUALLY, THAT'S THE NUMBERS WE HAD.

COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS.

THANK YOU. AND ON PAGE TEN, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THERE'S, I THINK, NO BETTER ILLUSTRATION TO THE TAXPAYER THAN WHAT WE'RE FACING HERE IN THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WORKING TOGETHER OR NOT WORKING TOGETHER ON A FUNDING SOUNDNESS RESTORATION PLAN IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THE COST TO THE CITY OVER 30 YEARS, WHICH INCLUDED A STIPEND, INCLUDED THE OBLIGATION THAT WE HAVE TO PAY IN AT 11.2 BILLION.

AND THEN AUGUST 8TH, THE PRIOR POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND STAFF PLAN HAD $11.6 BILLION.

SO WE WERE $400 MILLION APART.

AND NOW THERE'S A NEW ONE POST AUGUST 8TH THAT EVEN IS GOING HIGHER AND THE GAP IS INCREASING TO $600 MILLION MORE THAN THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION. AND SO I THINK THE CITY KNOWS WHAT OUR COVENANT WITH THE TAXPAYER IS AND WHAT KIND OF SERVICES THEY EXPECT AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE THEY EXPECT, AND THE POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES THEY EXPECT IN THE PARK, CONDITIONS THEY EXPECT.

AND SO THIS ILLUSTRATES ON PAGE TEN, THIS GAP THAT IS GOING THE WRONG DIRECTION AS WELL ON HOW MUCH MORE, WHEN IT'S NOT YOUR CHECKBOOK, HOW EASY IT IS TO START ADDING TO THE TAB.

SO THAT'S REALLY CONCERNING.

AND THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS YOU NOTED THAT IN LISTENING TO THE DISCUSSION AROUND GOVERNANCE, THERE WERE SOME THINGS TO ADD.

AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT IF RATHER THAN MAKE US COME TO YOU WITH THOSE ADS, YOU'VE SUGGESTED SOME THINGS THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD, IF WE OBJECT TO SOMETHING, HAVE TO TAKE AWAY FROM IT, BECAUSE I HOPE THAT WHAT WE GET TO AND WHAT WE VOTE ON WOULD HAVE SOME OF THOSE CONDITIONS AROUND GOVERNANCE.

AND I THINK NOTHING HAS ILLUSTRATED IT BETTER THAN WHAT WE'VE JUST SPENT THE LAST THREE HOURS ON.

SO I WOULD ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO, TO SUPPORT STRONGER GOVERNANCE AS PART OF THIS.

AND COUNCIL MEMBER, IF THERE'S A DESIRE FOR BEYOND THE THREE THAT WE HAD SUGGESTED SOMETHING ELSE, AS YOU TALKED ABOUT THE LAST THREE HOURS.

WE CAN WRITE SOMETHING UP.

AND TAMMY, I'M LOOKING TO YOU KIND OF.

IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD ADD TO THE FSSP FOR NEXT WEEK'S CONSIDERATION? THANK YOU. JACK. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE CONSULTING GOVERNANCE OR THE GOVERNANCE THAT THE THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER? JUST ADDITIONAL GOVERNANCE AROUND HOW WE MIGHT OVERSEE SOME INVESTMENT POLICIES.

[03:15:02]

I MEAN, WE CAN PUT IT IN THE PLAN, BUT IT'S NOT BINDING ON THE PENSION.

WELL, I THINK IT'S A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO CERTAINLY HAVE IT OUT THERE.

SO THE PUBLIC SEES THAT WE'RE DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE ON THIS.

AND I BELIEVE IN THE COMMERCE STREET, ONE OF THE PREVIOUS DECS, THEY HAD COME FORTH WITH JUST SOME TABLE STAKES GOVERNANCE THAT WE WE DON'T HAVE RIGHT NOW.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO REVIEW AND PERHAPS TALK TO, TO COMMERCE STREET AND JUST SEE, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT THIS IN WRITING, WHETHER IT'S BINDING OR NOT, WHAT DO WE NEED TO INCLUDE TO ENSURE THE PUBLIC THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING OUT FOR THEM EVERY WAY THAT WE CAN, AND ALSO TO HOPEFULLY CATCH THE ATTENTION OF THE BOARD AND STAFF AND MEMBERSHIP AND ASSOCIATIONS, ETC., TO IF WE CAN'T HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE, THOSE MEMBERS CAN.

SO I WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO SEE US ADD TO THAT AND MAKE SURE IT'S JUST AS SOLID AS IT CAN BE.

THANK YOU. MISS SCHULTZ, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM B.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I JUST WANTED TO COMMEND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE PENSION COMMITTEE AND PARTICULARLY STAFF FOR ALL THIS INCREDIBLE WORK.

I THINK YOU'VE PRESENTED IT IN A WAY THAT MAKES IT VERY CLEAR TO US AND ABLE TO SHARE WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS WE HAVE THE THE POINTS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL MEMBER ARNOLD, FOR HAVING US PUT IT.

AND SIMPLY PUT, POINTS THAT WE CAN SHARE FROM THE COMMERCE STREET REPORT AND NOW THIS.

I THINK IF WE HAVE A VERY SIMPLE APPROACH TO WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AFTER THE VOTE COMING UP.

SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY FOR THE HOURS AND HOURS OF WORK THAT YOU'VE ALL PUT INTO THIS, AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT TO US.

THANK YOU. AND I DO SUPPORT BRINGING IT FORWARD.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM B.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

JACK, I'D LIKE TO RETURN TO A LINE OF QUESTIONING OF COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS.

HOUSE BILL 3158 YOU MENTIONED WAS APPROVED IN 2017, AND IT ELIMINATED COLAS BECAUSE OF CONCERN OVER THE SHRINKING SIZE OF THE CORPUS.

IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? I BELIEVE, JUST IN GENERAL, THAT THERE WAS CONCERN OF THE THE STATUS OF THE FUND AND HOW IT WAS UNDERFUNDED.

AND SO IT WAS ONE OF THE THE COMPONENTS OF WHAT WAS AGREED TO BETWEEN THE CITY, THE FUND AND THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

OKAY. SO WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A COLA AND A SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT? SO I'M MAKING THE DISTINCTION THAT A COLA, A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT IS ADDED TO THE BASE AND THEREFORE IT HAS AN ONGOING COST, WHEREAS A SUPPLEMENTAL PAY IN THE WAY OF A STIPEND WOULD JUST BE A ONE TIME PAYMENT THAT DOES NOT ADD TO THE BASE AND THEREFORE DOES NOT NECESSARILY CONTINUE TO GO FORWARD INTO THE FUTURE, EXCEPT THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING FOR THIS SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT TO BE AN ANNUAL PAYMENT AS A STIPEND.

YES. YOU SAY IT'S NOT ADDED TO THE BASE, BUT THE POINT IS, IT'S REALLY A DISGUISED COLA, ISN'T IT? SO WE BROKE IT INTO TWO PIECES.

AND ON SLIDE EIGHT, WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THAT 1% WOULD ADD TO THE BASE IN 25, AND THEN AFTER 25, IN CALENDAR YEAR 26 THROUGH PROBABLY CALENDAR YEAR 2045, THERE WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 1% AVAILABLE CONTINGENT ON THE FUND HAVING A POSITIVE RETURN.

SO YOU MIGHT GET IT A FEW YEARS IF THEY HAVE POSITIVE RETURNS.

BUT IF THEY HAVE A LOSS, SOMETHING BELOW A POSITIVE RETURN, THEY WOULD NOT GET IT IN THAT YEAR.

BUT IF THEY HAVE A RETURN OF 0.01%, THEN YOU'D STILL HAVE TO PAY THIS 1% SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT.

SO YOU'D ACTUALLY BE GOING BACKWARDS IN TERMS OF THE CORPUS.

YOU'D BE TAKING MORE MONEY OUT OF THE CORPUS TO PAY THE SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT THAN THEY RECEIVED IN INCOME.

YES, SIR.

WELL, I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

YOU INDICATE THAT'S GOING TO COST UP TO $136 MILLION TO MAKE THESE SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENTS.

AND THE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE IS THAT AFTER THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION BY COMMERCE STREET, IT'S BECOME VERY APPARENT THAT WE NEED BECAUSE THE COUNCIL HAS NO DIRECT INFLUENCE OVER THE MANAGEMENT OF THIS FUND, THAT WE NEED TO HAVE AN INCENTIVE BUILT IN FOR THEM TO HAVE SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE.

AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THAT INCENTIVE IS THAT A SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT IS MADE ONLY IN YEARS WHEN THEIR INVESTMENT

[03:20:10]

PERFORMANCE HAS NOT JUST A POSITIVE RETURN, BUT INCREASES OVER WHAT THEIR GOAL IS IF THEIR GOAL IS SET AT 6.5%, THEN THEY NEED TO EXCEED THAT BEFORE THEY GET THE SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT.

THAT HAS A BUILT IN INCENTIVE FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS TO EXCEED THEIR GOAL IN ORDER TO BENEFIT THEIR MEMBERS WITH THIS SUPPLEMENTAL PAY, AND IT MAKES THEM DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE TO THE MEMBERS FOR ACHIEVING THAT SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT BY EXCEEDING THEIR GOAL FOR INVESTMENT RETURNS.

AND YOU MENTIONED THE CORRECT AMOUNT.

6.5 IS THEIR ASSUMED RATE OF RETURN.

OKAY. A QUESTION ABOUT SLIDE NINE, ABOUT THE SECOND ITEM, ESTABLISHING GUARDRAILS TO MITIGATE YEAR OVER YEAR COST INCREASES. HOW WOULD THIS WORK IN ACTUALITY? YOU SAY IF THERE'S A VARIANCE OF PLUS OR -5% OF THE ADC, THE EXCESS AMOUNT WILL BE AMORTIZED OVER A PERIOD OF 20 YEARS.

THE EXCESS AMOUNT OF WHAT? OVER WHAT? SO BASICALLY WORKS IN THAT.

ON JANUARY 1ST OF 25, THERE WOULD BE A SET SCHEDULE OF WHAT THE UNFUNDED ACTUARIAL ACCRUED LIABILITY IS AND WHAT THE FORECAST NORMAL COST IS FOR THE PERIOD OF 30 YEARS.

THAT GETS SET.

AND THEN ANY VARIATIONS OF ADCS IN THOSE FUTURE YEARS WOULD BE COMPARED BACK TO THAT ORIGINAL SCHEDULE.

AND IF THERE'S VARIATION OF PLUS OR MINUS 5% FROM THAT ORIGINAL GUARDRAIL, THEN IT WOULD REQUIRE US TO AMORTIZE THAT DIFFERENCE OVER THE 20 YEARS.

SO SO WE SET GUARDRAILS IN PLACE AFTER JANUARY 1ST OF 25.

AND THEN ANY VARIATION ABOVE THAT GUARDRAIL GOING INTO THE FUTURE WOULD GET AMORTIZED.

OKAY. CAN YOU ILLUSTRATE THAT WITH AN EXAMPLE.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, IN YEAR FIVE THE INVESTMENT RETURNS HAVE BEEN VERY POOR.

AND SO OUR ADC INCREASES BY MORE THAN 5%.

WHAT HAPPENS. SO IF OUR IF OUR ADC INCREASES BY 6% THEN WE TAKE THAT EXTRA 1% AND WE AMORTIZE IT OVER 20 YEARS.

SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN WHEN YOU SAY AMORTIZED WE WOULD ONLY PAY 1/20 OF IT.

YES. SO WE WOULD SPREAD THAT COST.

WE WOULD LAYER IN NEW AMORTIZATION SCHEDULES.

AND SO AS YOU GO THROUGH TIME AND YOU'RE COMPARING YOUR ACTUAL EXPERIENCE TO YOUR FORECAST EXPERIENCE, THEN YOU COULD BE LAYERING IN ADDITIONAL AMORTIZATION SCHEDULES THAT ADD TO THE COST FROM THESE UNREALIZED GAINS.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

IT'S KIND OF I'M SORRY IF THAT.

BUT MAYBE WE CAN TALK OFFLINE IF I CAN SHOW YOU SOMETHING.

NO, NO, I UNDERSTAND IT.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS EXPLAINED IN SIMPLE TERMS. I'M NOT SURE THERE IS SIMPLE TERMS. WELL WELL, WE'VE JUST SPENT MORE THAN AN HOUR THIS MORNING TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TO PRESERVE THE CORPUS IN THIS INVESTMENT FUND AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO ACHIEVE FULL FUNDING WITHIN 30 YEARS IN ORDER TO FILE THE REQUIRED REPORT WITH THE PRB.

AND I CAN'T HELP BUT NOTING THAT THE CURRENT FUNDING RATE OF 39%, OR PERHAPS IT'S 34%, HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE LAST SEVEN YEARS SINCE 2017, WHEN THIS WHOLE PROBLEM BLEW UP AND IT WAS 49%.

AND SO THAT IF THE PROHIBITION ON COLAS WAS PUT IN PLACE WHEN THE FUND WAS AT 49%, THEN OUR CURRENT SITUATION IS EVEN MORE DIRE.

AND TO ME, PUTTING MORE MONEY INTO THIS FUND THAN IS REQUIRED BY THE 2017 AGREEMENT IS JUST WRONGHEADED. WE NEED TO INSTEAD GEAR THAT TO THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FUND.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY.

I THINK SOMEONE IN THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION ASKED WHAT KIND OF LEVERAGE I THINK IT WAS.

COMMISSIONER COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON WHAT KIND OF LEVERAGE DO WE HAVE OVER THIS BOARD? WELL, THIS IS A WAY TO GET IT IS TO INCENTIVIZE THEM BY OFFERING THIS SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT IF THEY EXCEED THEIR INVESTMENT GOALS.

THANK YOU. TIME.

MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM B.

[03:25:03]

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I GUESS ER, IF THEY HAVE GUARDRAIL.

IS THAT CORRECT? CITY ATTORNEY YES, WE PUT VERY SIMILAR GUARDRAILS INTO CHAPTER 40 A, AND WE CAN LOOK AT ALMOST THE SAME GUARDRAIL WE CAN PUT INTO THE POLICE AND FIRE.

RIGHT. THAT'S OUR PLAN.

YES. AND THAT WAS A PLAN.

SO WHAT WE ARE SUBMITTING TO THE PRB IS A PLAN.

IS THAT CORRECT, JACK? A PLAN, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY, SIR.

IN THIS PLAN THAT IN 2017, THERE WAS A CLOUD BACK IN THE CLOUD BACK, THAT THE RETIREES WHO HAD MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN THEIR RETIREES.

IT WAS PUT OVER A 30 YEAR AMORTIZATION.

IS THAT CORRECT, JACK? SO IN 2017, THE LUMP SUM WITHDRAWALS FROM A DROP ACCOUNTS WERE HALTED AND THEY WERE ANNUITIZED OVER THAT PERIOD. YES, SIR.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING.

OVER 30 YEARS. SO THEREFORE, IF I WAS A RETIREE AND I HAVE $1 MILLION IN MY ACCOUNT, IT SPREAD OVER 30 YEARS.

SO THEREFORE I CANNOT DRAW DOWN A LUMP SUM.

IT HAD TO BE DRAWN DOWN OVER A 30 YEAR PERIOD.

IS THAT CORRECT? I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT KNOWING THE DETAIL ON THAT.

I'M NOT SURE IT WAS ANNUITIZED OVER 30 YEARS OR IF IT WAS OVER THAT MEMBERS LIFE.

I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW THEY DID THAT, AND I'M SORRY.

OKAY, GET THAT QUESTION.

THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO THE RETIREES, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING THE RETIREES SAYING, HEY, IF I GOT $1 MILLION OVER THERE, I THINK ONE OF THE STATE REPRESENTATIVE, YVONNE DAVIS, CAME HERE AND SAID, WE GOT SO MANY RETIREES, OVER 2500 RETIREES WHO GOT OVER $1 BILLION AND THEY GOT TO DRAW THEIR MONEY OVER THE ANNUITY.

SO. WE'LL GET THE ANSWER FOR YOU.

MAYOR PRO TEM, GIVE US JUST A SECOND.

OKAY.

SO WE'RE CONSULTING SOME RETIREES.

GO AHEAD. COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS.

IT'S OVER. THE LIFE. LIFE EXPECTANCY.

THE LIFE EXPECTANCY. SO THEREFORE, THEY DO HAVE AN ISSUE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO DRAW DOWN THE FULL AMOUNT OF THEIR RETIREMENT.

YES. THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE A LUMP SUM, BUT DEPENDING UPON THEIR AGE, IT WOULD BE ANNUITIZED OVER A DIFFERENT PERIOD OF TIME.

A MORE ELDERLY INDIVIDUAL.

IT WOULD BE ANNUITIZED OVER A SHORTER PERIOD OF YEARS THAN SOMEONE WHO IS YOUNGER.

AND THAT'S MY CONCERN THAT I KNOW MY PARENTS AND PEOPLE WHO HAVE WORKED THEIR LIFE AND AND THEY AND AT THE AGE THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE FEW YEARS LEFT AND THEY CANNOT DRAW DOWN THEIR MONEY AND CAN'T GET A COST OF LIVING, CANNOT GET ANYTHING.

THAT'S MY PASSION OF THE CITY.

I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I FEEL.

AND I CAN'T CHANGE THAT.

BUT THAT'S THE WAY I FEEL. AND AND THAT'S WHY I SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOMETHING ON A STIPEND OF OF SOMETHING IN GOOD FAITH FOR THE EMPLOYEES WHO WORK HERE.

THE UNIFORM THE EMPLOYEES HAVE SOMETHING IN GOOD FAITH THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.

I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER IN THIS PARTICULAR BUDGET RIGHT NOW IS WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT BALANCES.

BUDGET IS ALREADY PUT IN THE BUDGET.

IT'S PUT IN THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW.

AND SO I THINK IT'S NOT A GOOD FAITH THAT WE'VE BEEN SAYING WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AND WHAT WE SHOULD DO, AND WE ALREADY PUT IT OUT THERE.

AND YOU SAID WE'RE GOING TO TAKE IT BACK, THAT I TRUST THEY'RE NOT TRUSTING THE THE COUNCIL.

THEY'RE NOT TRUSTING THE EMPLOYEES.

IT AIN'T TRUSTING THAT UNIFORM.

IF WE WERE GOING TO DO THAT, WE NEVER SHOULD PUT IT OUT THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

IT ALSO IN OUR BUDGET RIGHT NOW.

AND SO THEREFORE WE CHANGE IT.

WE GOT TO CHANGE THAT NUMBER.

WE GOT TO MOVE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.

WHERE DO YOU MOVE IT TO WHERE YOU TAKE IT FROM.

AND AND I KNOW IN LEGAL IN LAWSUITS OR WHATEVER YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY THIS IS A, A POSITION OF LEVERAGE.

I THINK PEOPLE IT'S NOT A LEVERAGE.

THEY'RE HUMAN BEINGS. I DON'T THINK WE TRY TO LEVERAGE PEOPLE.

AND WHEN YOU TRY TO LEVERAGE THEIR BENEFIT AND THEIR LIFE AND I'M JUST A FIRM BELIEVER IN THAT YOUR LIFE AND PEOPLE WHO MAY CLEAN THE TOILET, OR PEOPLE WHO PUT THEIR

[03:30:07]

LIFE ON THE LINE THAT WE JUST HAD ONE OFFICER DID.

TO RETIRE THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THE TRUST IN THE CITY.

RIGHT NOW THAT WE CAN SUBMIT A FUNDING PLAN.

AND THAT IS JUST A PLAN.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. DO WE HAVE TO PUT IN A PLAN THAT YOU HAVE TO GIVE THAT STIPEND? RIGHT NOW.

THE REQUIREMENT OF THE PLAN IS TO BE FULLY FUNDED IN 30 YEARS.

AND THE STIPEND IS NOT A REQUIREMENT.

IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT.

IT IS NOT. SO CAN YOU PUT THAT IN ANY TIME AFTER YOU SUBMIT THE PLAN? YES, SIR. WE DO NOT CONSIDER THIS THE LAST TIME THAT WE DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE.

WE'LL BE MAKING OTHER CONSIDERATIONS AS WE GO FORWARD OVER TIME.

OKAY. SO WE CAN MAKE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.

BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE AND GO ON THE RECORD THAT I SUPPORT THE EMPLOYEES WHO RETIRE.

I SUPPORT THE POLICE AND FIREMEN WHO RETIRE, WHO WORK FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.

BUT I JUST CANNOT STAND HERE WITH CLEAR CONSCIENCE THAT IF WE CAN OFFER THE RETIREES SOME TYPE OF STIPEND OR SOMETHING FOR THEIR WORK AND FOR THEIR SERVICE, AND WE DON'T PUT IT IN A BUDGET, AND I WISH WE NEVER PUT IT INTO THE BUDGET IF WE WERE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW THROUGH IT.

AND TO ME, THAT'S NOT TRUST, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE NOT VOTED ON IT, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I'LL BE HERE FOR ROUND THREE.

BUT NUMBER ONE, THAT'S JUST MY FEELING.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM B.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

SO. THIS IS COMPLICATED, RIGHT? AND I APPRECIATE WHAT WE DID EARLIER.

LUCKILY, I HAD SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT WERE KEEPING ME EDUCATED AND THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS BECAUSE I DON'T SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE.

AND THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN, MAYOR PRO TEM AND ALL THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT HAVE DILIGENTLY SERVED ON THAT COMMITTEE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF I DID SOMETHING RIGHT OR I DID SOMETHING WRONG, DID NOT END UP ON THAT COMMITTEE.

BUT I'M TAKING AS I DID SOMETHING.

RIGHT. SO YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S IT'S JUST IT'S SO MUCH WORK THAT YOU ALL HAVE PUT INTO IT.

AND I APPRECIATE EVERY BIT OF WORK YOU ALL DID FOR IT, BECAUSE I FEEL MUCH MORE READY FOR TODAY THAN I THINK I WOULD HAVE HAD I NOT HAD THESE OFF THE CUFF CONVERSATIONS AND PUTTING MY TRUST IN MY OWN COLLEAGUES.

AND I THINK I TOLD MANY OF YOU ALL, YOU KNOW WHAT? WHEN IT COMES TO MONEY AND THINGS LIKE THAT, I'M GOING TO TRUST YOU ALL WAY MORE THAN YOU WOULD WANT TO TRUST ME.

BECAUSE I'M REALLY GOOD AT SPENDING MONEY.

I'M NOT AS GOOD AS CREATING IT.

SO THE FOLKS WHO HAVE BEEN SPEAKING THANK YOU, BECAUSE YOU ALL HAVE REALLY GUIDED ME IN ORDER TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS.

AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS COMMITTEE PROCESS.

RIGHT. SO, JACK, MY QUESTION IS MORE ABOUT THE CHECKS AND BALANCES, BECAUSE WHAT I FEEL LIKE IS THAT BECAUSE I WAS HERE, I GOT HERE IN 2017 RIGHT AFTER THAT, BILL WAS YOU KNOW, BECAME LAW.

AND, YOU KNOW, HERE WE ARE AT SEVEN YEARS LATER AND WE'RE HAVING TO DEAL WITH THIS AND WE'RE PUTTING THIS PLAN TOGETHER.

AND MY MY QUESTION IS ABOUT CHECKS AND BALANCES IS WE HAVE TO HAVE WE HAVE TO WRITE THE CHECKS WE HAVE TO FILL.

WE HAVE TO FILL THE COFFER.

RIGHT. AND I KNOW THE EMPLOYEES IN THE FIREFIGHTERS AND POLICE OFFICERS ALSO GIVE A PERCENTAGE.

BUT WE GIVE THE THE THE REST OF IT.

BUT THEN WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF ALL THE BAD INVESTMENTS THAT HAPPEN, WHATEVER THAT IS.

WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT. I'M NOT POINTING AT ANYTHING.

I'M JUST SAYING WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE AT NOW.

BUT WHO'S WHO ACTUALLY OVERSEES THE BOARD? SO THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION BOARD IS MADE UP OF SIX APPOINTEES BY THE MAYOR AND FIVE TRUSTEES ELECTED BY THE MEMBERSHIP. RIGHT.

BUT WHO OVERSEES THEM? LIKE, YOU KNOW, LIKE LIKE FOR COUNCIL, THE PEOPLE WHO OVERSEE US IS THE GENERAL PUBLIC, RIGHT? THE VOTERS, THE YOU KNOW, ALL OF US.

THERE'S OUR GOVERNMENT IS BUILT ON CHECKS AND BALANCES.

I WANT TO KNOW WHERE'S THE CHECKS AND BALANCES FOR THIS? THE PENSION BOARDS.

SO I WOULD I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE FIVE, THE TRUSTEES THAT ARE ELECTED THEIR CONSTITUENCY IS THE MEMBERS THAT ELECT THEM.

AND SO THEY HAVE TO BE REELECTED.

THE MEMBERS THAT ARE APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR ARE REPUBLICAN.

WELL, THEN WE WE WE RATIFY THEM TECHNICALLY BECAUSE THE MAYOR WOULD PUT THEM UP, AND THEN WE EITHER VOTE YES IN FAVOR OR WE VOTE

[03:35:09]

NO. WE DON'T WANT THEM TO SERVE.

OKAY. THAT'S FAIR.

THAT'S A GOOD THAT'S A GOOD ANSWER.

SO WHAT? BECAUSE HERE'S THE ISSUE IS THAT IT'S LIKE WE HAVE TO JUST KEEP PUTTING ALL THIS TAXPAYER MONEY REGARDLESS OF WHAT MISTAKES HAPPENED OR DON'T HAPPEN.

AND I DO LIKE WHAT WE HEARD EARLIER ABOUT LET'S FOCUS ON GROWING THIS.

BECAUSE THE BIGGER THE FUND, THAT 1% DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A BIG NUMBER, BUT 2%, 3%, 4%.

BUT GROWTH ON AS THAT FUND GETS BIGGER AND BIGGER IS A LOT OF DOLLARS.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU KEEP TELLING US IS THAT WE CAN AMORTIZE IT.

SO THAT MEANS IT'S LIKE, OH, NOW WE OWE LESS AND LESS BECAUSE WE'RE GAINING MORE AND MORE.

RIGHT? THAT IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING? SO IT IS IT DOES BENEFIT THE FUND TO HAVE THE INVESTMENT RETURNS, THE GAINS THAT THAT HELP CONTRIBUTE TO AS A SOURCE OF REVENUE INTO THE FUND, THAT THAT COULD REDUCE OUR CONTRIBUTIONS.

YES. VERY GOOD.

AND THEN SO I JUST, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF IT.

AND I APPRECIATE OUR RETIREES THAT ARE BEEN DILIGENT ON THIS BECAUSE SINCE I GOT HERE, THEY'VE BEEN TELLING ME ALL ABOUT THIS PENSION.

AND IT'S LIKE IT WAS VERY OVERWHELMING.

BUT I CAN ONLY IMAGINE HOW OVERWHELMING IT IS FOR THEM THAT THEY HAVEN'T HAD A RAISE IN THEIR RETIREMENT CHECK IN SEVEN YEARS, AND THE LAW MADE THAT HAPPEN.

AND I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK TOGETHER.

RIGHT. AND SO I HOPE THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, STAY WHERE WE'RE AT.

BECAUSE I CAN'T WELL, I CAN'T IMAGINE I HAVE GONE SEVEN YEARS WITHOUT A RAISE AS WELL.

SO IT'S LIKE SO I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT THEY'RE GOING THROUGH BECAUSE EVERYTHING'S GOTTEN MORE EXPENSIVE RIGHT OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS.

AND I CAN'T IMAGINE BEING ON THAT FIXED INCOME THAT THEY ARE AS WELL, THAT THEY CAN'T GET ANY MORE AND GAIN ANY MORE.

AND IT'S LIKE AND THE INSURANCE WENT UP, THE LIGHT BILL WENT UP, THE, YOU KNOW, THE TAXES WENT UP, THE YOU NAME IT, IT WENT UP.

THAT'S JUST WHAT OUR WORLD IS.

IT'S ALL OF US. ALL OF US ARE GOING THROUGH THE SAME THING.

AND SO AS THIS MATURES AND GETS BIGGER OUR PLAN IS 30 YEARS, RIGHT? THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TURNING.

WE'RE GOING TO TURN IN.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

AND IF THIS GETS APPROVED, WE CAN STILL AMEND IT.

RIGHT. AND LIKE I KNOW WE KNOW THE FIRST.

WE KNOW THE PROJECTION FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, CORRECT? YES, SIR. WE HAVE PROJECTIONS FOR THE FULL 30 YEARS.

AND YES, SIR, WE CAN AMEND OUR PLAN IN THE FUTURE.

RIGHT. BUT BUT I MEAN, WE KIND OF CAN PRETTY MUCH SAY THE FIRST FIVE IS GOOD.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN 22, 27 YEARS FROM NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE ANOTHER GLOBAL PANDEMIC.

WE DON'T KNOW, RIGHT? SO ANYTHING CAN CHANGE IT.

AND THEN WE'D BE WE'D HAVE TO AMEND IT AT THAT POINT.

RIGHT. OR SOME FUTURE.

THAT IS MY TIME.

YEAH. WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO GET AT MAYOR.

AND THANK YOU. I DON'T NEED TO ASK ANY MORE, BUT JUST AGAIN, THANK YOU, EVERYBODY.

AND ESPECIALLY OUR STAFF, CITY MANAGER JACK AND YOUR TEAM.

I'M DONE TO COME BACK.

I WAS JUST BUYING YOU MORE TIME TO GET IT OUT.

YEAH. LET'S SEE WHERE WE ARE.

LOOKS LIKE CHAIRWOMAN ARNOLD.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

WELL, WE WILL DEFINITELY ALL AGREE.

ANYTIME YOU DEAL WITH MONEY AND LACK OF INCOME, IT CREATES A MENTAL BURDEN.

TRUE ENOUGH. AND SO WE KNOW THAT IT'S A STRESS FACTOR IN DEALING WITH THE FOLKS THAT HAVE WORKED FOR 30 YEARS, AND THEY'RE REALIZING THAT, HEY, I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET ALL OF MY MONEY. YOU KNOW, EVEN MY BLOOD PRESSURE BEGINS TO GO UP BECAUSE I'M LIKE, IF I WORK 30 YEARS.

I WANT MY MONEY. I DON'T WANT IT TO BE AMORTIZED, DISGUISED.

YOU JUST NEED TO PAY ME.

OKAY, THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING.

JUST PAY ME. AND SO I UNDERSTAND THAT ALL OF US ARE TAXPAYERS.

WHEN YOU STOP AND THINK ABOUT IT TODAY IN THIS BUILDING, YOU HAVE TAXPAYERS.

YOU'RE A TAXPAYER. I'M A TAXPAYER, AND I WANT MY TAX DOLLAR TO GO TO, TO BUILD AN INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WILL SUSTAIN GROWTH.

AND WE WANT STABILIZATION.

WE WANT A PLACE THAT WE CAN LIVE AND WORK IN AND BE SAFE.

WE KEEP HEARING THAT.

BUT WHAT I WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING TRANSPARENT.

WHEN I CAME, I WAS JUST AMAZED BY WHAT HAPPENED.

SO THE QUESTION FOR ME, FOR FOR YOU AND MAYBE YOU CAN ANSWER IT, WE'LL GO TO THE ATTORNEYS.

DID ANY OF THESE MANAGERS, DID THE MANAGERS BACK IN 2017, DID THEY GET THEIR PAYCHECK? A MANAGERS OF THE FUND.

OF THE FUND, YES. DID THEY GET THEIR PAYCHECK.

YES MA'AM. OR THEY GOT PAID.

YES, MA'AM. DID ANY OF THEM WHEN THE DECLINE WENT FROM 49 TO 39, DID ANY OF THEM GET PENALIZED? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

DID ANY OF THEM GO TO JAIL? NO, MA'AM. SO WE SIT HERE AND WE ALLOW THEM TO STEAL THE MONEY, MISMANAGE, GET PAID TO DO IT, AND WE'RE LEFT HOLDING THE BAG. SO THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW THE WHOLE STORY, BECAUSE SINCE WE'RE NOT COMMUNICATING WHAT'S PUT IN ONE PUBLICATION, MAYBE PAINTING US

[03:40:07]

AS THE BAD GUYS.

SO WE NEED TO KEEP PUTTING THIS OUT IN THE PUBLIC.

THOSE EMPLOYEES WERE TAKEN FAST AND FURIOUS AND THEY WERE LEFT HANGING.

YOUNGER. IT'S HARDER TO RECRUIT YOUNGER TALENT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO SEE WHAT WE HAVE DONE AND HOW WE'VE TREATED THOSE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED AND HAVE EXPERIENCED.

SO IT MAKES IT HARDER, WHETHER YOU'RE POLICE OR FIRE.

SO I THINK WE MUST KEEP WORKING ON THE TRUST FACTOR.

WE MUST KEEP TELLING THE STORY, AND WE MUST KEEP TELLING THE TAXPAYERS IN SUCH A WAY WHERE THEY UNDERSTAND.

NOW MOST TAXPAYERS JUST WANT US TO DO WHAT? TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS.

YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T WANT TO GET ALL DEEP DOWN IN THE DETAILS, BUT WE NEED TO TELL THEM THAT THERE'S SOMEBODY STOLE THE MONEY FROM OUR FIRST RESPONDERS.

THAT'S MY THAT'S MY STATEMENT.

AND THEY HAVE LEFT US TO HEAL THIS PROCESS.

AND SO SOME OF THESE FOLKS MAY VERY WELL GO ON AND NEVER GET ALL OF THEIR MONEY.

SO IN CLOSING, SO THAT MY PRESSURE IS GOOD AND I CAN CONTINUE TO TO SUPPORT WHATEVER PLAN WE CAN GET TO, TO AT LEAST HAVE A COMPROMISE.

BUT WE KNOW WE WILL NEVER, EVER BE ABLE IN THERE IN, IN, IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, BE ABLE TO GET A SYSTEM WHERE THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE WORKED SO HARD AND SO LONG CAN GET ALL OF THEIR MONEY WHEN THEY WANT IT, WHENEVER THEY WANT IT, IS WHEN THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET IT.

AND SO ONCE AGAIN, I HOPE WE.

CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN PUT OUT A PLAN THAT WILL PREVENT THE HEADLINE.

OF ENRON SHOWING UP HERE IN DALLAS, TEXAS.

THANK YOU, MISS BLACKMON.

YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

ON ITEM B THANK YOU.

SO ON PAGE TEN, ARE YOU STICKING WITH YOUR ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION AND NOT WHAT THE REVISED FUND PLAN HAS BEEN, WHAT THEY HAVE? IS THAT CORRECT? SO ON PAGE TEN, THE COLUMN THAT INDICATES CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS WHAT WE WE ARE RECOMMENDING.

THERE IS A CHANGE FROM WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS THAT WE'VE BEEN TO COMMITTEE ON ET-CETERA, AND THAT IS BASED UPON THE COLA AFTER ACHIEVING 70% FUNDING.

OKAY. AND ON WHAT MR. RIDLEY WAS TALKING ABOUT.

AND AND IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE BEHAVIOR, YOU HAVE TO KIND OF PUT SOME, YOU KNOW, EXPECTATIONS TO IT.

I'M I MEAN, I THINK YOU'RE ON POINT IS LIKE IF I MEAN ONE, IT'S ALMOST LIKE I TELL MY KID, LOOK, YOU KNOW, GIVE ME ONE, YOU KNOW, ONE PERCENTAGE POINT AND I GIVE YOU $500, BUT YOU'RE NOT REALLY CHANGING BEHAVIOR.

LIKE, I WANT YOU TO CHANGE A GRADE.

AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO ASK MR. WILEY WHAT IS A REASONABLE AMOUNT TO GET A RETURN ON INVESTMENT.

SO THAT WAY IN REWARD, I MEAN, I THINK WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION IN ONE OF OUR EARLIER MEETINGS AND I THINK IT JUST CAME BACK.

LOOK, JUST GIVE ME A PERCENTAGE POINT AND WE'LL GIVE IT.

I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SKIN IN THE GAME.

AND AND I GET THAT MARKETS ARE CHANGING AND VOLATILE, BUT I THINK WE COULD GET A PROFESSIONAL OPINION ON WHAT THAT MAGIC NUMBER IS. WELL, IF I, IF I MAY, THE I WOULD AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY ON THE MAGIC NUMBER WOULD BE SOMETHING ABOVE 6.5.

AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE 6.5 IS THE ASSUMED, THE LONG TERM ASSUMED RATE OF RETURN.

AND SO ANYTIME THAT THEY ARE EARNING LESS THAN THE 6.5, THEN THAT'S UNDERPERFORMING THE ACTUARIAL ANALYSIS AND THEREFORE COULD COST US MORE MONEY.

SO YEAH.

SO YEAH THERE ARE TWO POINT WHATEVER IT IS.

SO THAT'S FOUR PERCENTAGE POINTS.

HITTING THE 6.5 IS NECESSARY FOR ALL OF THE ASSUMPTIONS TO WORK.

BUT BUT GIVEN THAT THE GIVEN FOR THE ASSUMPTIONS TO WORK, WHAT IF WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET FUND PERFORMANCE UP.

IT'S NOT MAKING THE ASSUMPTION WORK.

IT'S JUST HAVING PERFORMANCE.

WHAT IS. AND IT MAY BE HALF A PERCENTAGE YEAR ONE AND THEN IN YEAR TWO IN OTHER WORDS, RAMPING IT UP TO WHERE MAYBE IN YEAR FIVE IT IS 6.5.

BUT THIS IS SO PEOPLE WHO HAVE MONEY IN THE FUND WILL LOOK AT IT AND GO, WHY AM I NOT MAKING MORE? BECAUSE AS IT'S BEEN MENTIONED, WE'RE OPENING, YOU KNOW, MAMA'S CHECKBOOK.

AND SO MAMA CAN KIND OF SET THE RULES.

SOMETIMES I HAVE TO TELL MY OWN KIDS, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T KEEP COMING BACK.

EVERY TIME WHEN YOU GO INTO THE RED IN YOUR CHECKBOOK, THERE'S SOME.

AND SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT NUMBER IS TO GET THE PERFORMANCE WE NEED.

[03:45:04]

AND IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A PENALTY.

IT'S NOT PUNITIVE.

IT IS AN ENCOURAGEMENT.

LIKE WE ALL NEED TO BE IN THIS BECAUSE WE'RE BACKSTOPPING ALL OF IT.

AND SO HAVE YOU THOUGHT I MEAN, AND I KNOW YOU GOT THE 6.5, BUT COULD IT BE A RAMP UP TO WHERE IT'S NOT 6.5 NEXT YEAR? OH, ABSOLUTELY.

AND WHEN WE TALK THROUGH IT, WE WE REALIZED, AND WE KNOW WE SET THAT BAR LOW AS FAR AS THE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT THE RATE OF RETURN SHOULD BE. AND WE FELT THAT BECAUSE THEY'VE GONE SEVEN YEARS WITHOUT ANYTHING, THIS IS A VERY MODEST 1%.

AND IT WAS OUR RECOMMENDATION TO TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE OF THAT.

AND, AND THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE.

SO IT MAY BE THAT THE FIRST YEAR IT'S NOT AS BIG AND THEN YOU START GROWING IT.

SO WE WERE NOT LOOKING AT IT FROM A STANDPOINT OF NEEDING TO BREAK EVEN ON WHATEVER THAT 1% WOULD BE.

IT WAS JUST IT WAS OUR EFFORT TO TO DO SOMETHING FOR THE RETIREES SO WE CAN PUT SOME THOUGHT INTO WHAT THAT NUMBER WOULD BE AND HOW THAT COULD RAMP UP AND PROVIDE YOU WITH SOME OPTIONS.

BECAUSE I BELIEVE MISS WILLIS AND MR. ATKINS AND I MET WITH THE INDIVIDUALS AT THE FUND AT ONE TIME TO LOOK AT THEIR PORTFOLIO.

AND I TOLD THEM FROM MY PERSPECTIVE IS I'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO GO TO MY INVESTORS, WHICH ARE THE TAXPAYERS, AND SAYING THE CHECK.

WE'RE WRITING THE $200 MILLION, AND IT'S GOING TO GET UP TO $500 MILLION.

IT'S A WISE INVESTMENT BECAUSE THAT IS HOW I'M LOOKING AT THIS, IS THEY ARE TAKING MONEY AND INVESTING IT BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE INVESTED THEIR LIVES FOR US. AND I'VE GOT IT BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO FIGHT FOR A LIBRARY.

AND THAT'S GOING TO BE MOST OF US AROUND THIS HORSESHOE THAT THINGS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO START, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE WHEN IT GETS TO HALF $1 BILLION, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE HUGE CONCESSIONS.

AND SO THAT'S MY THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M TRYING TO GO WITH IS TRUST ME, WE'RE MAKING A GOOD INVESTMENT.

AND I DON'T KNOW, I CAN LOOK AT MY STAKEHOLDERS AND MY AND MY INVESTORS AND SAY, THIS MONEY IS BEING INVESTED WISELY AND THAT AND I WANT TO SAY THAT AND I WANT IT'S NOT THAT I'M NOT GOING TO FULFILL MY OBLIGATION AND MY PROMISE, IT'S JUST THAT I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GOING TO GET THE RETURN TURN ON THIS IN A MARKET THAT EVERYBODY IS KIND OF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LIKE I SAID, I'M MAKING 5% ON MY MONEY MARKET.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M WRANGLING.

AND AND MAYBE WHAT WE DO IS WE PUT THAT MONEY ASIDE AND PUT IT IN A MONEY MARKET AND MAKE MORE AND THEN GIVE IT OVER TO THEM AS IT, AS IT CHANGES.

I MEAN, I I'M TRYING TO THINK CREATIVELY BECAUSE WE CAN'T WE ARE GOING TO FULFILL OUR OBLIGATIONS AND OUR PROMISES.

THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION.

IT'S HOW DO WE GET THERE.

AND AND SO I DO APPRECIATE ALL THE THOUGHTS AND THE MEETINGS THAT WE'VE HAD AND THE CONVERSATIONS.

AND, BUT I THINK YOU KNOW, I'M, I GUESS I'M, I MEAN, I'M READY TO KIND OF MOVE, PUT, WRAP A BOW ON IT AND LET'S GO AND MAKE.

AND I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION IS, IS IF WE COULD ALWAYS COME BACK AND CHANGE IT, IF THE PRB SAYS YOU NEED TO MAKE THIS EDITS OR WE DON'T LIKE THIS OR WHATNOT.

YES, SIR.

I'M SORRY. YES, MA'AM. YES, MA'AM.

THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE AMENDMENTS IN THE FUTURE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD IF I CAN.

MAYOR. I THINK IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE LAID OUT IN HOW WE GOT HERE, THAT IT'S BEEN IT'S BEEN A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH.

THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH NOT ONLY THE EXECUTIVE TEAM AT BOTH OF THE, THE PENSION BOARDS THAT WE'VE ALSO WE'VE ALSO TAKEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME WITH THE ASSOCIATIONS, BOTH THE ACTIVE ASSOCIATIONS AS WELL AS THE RETIREES.

AND SO I THINK BASED ON THE COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL WE DEFINITELY BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT THIS EVERY YEAR.

THIS CAN'T BE JUST A ONE TIME CONVERSATION.

AND WE DON'T COME BACK TO TALK ABOUT WHETHER IT'S A STIPEND WHETHER IT'S A SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT THAT IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A PART OF OUR BUDGET PROCESS.

EXACTLY. SO WE CAN MAKE.

SURE THAT AS WE CONTINUE TO DO WHATEVER THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO DO IN GOOD FAITH.

THAT WE'RE BRINGING THAT CONVERSATION FORWARD, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT.

WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT TRANSPARENCY.

SO IT'S A PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK THROUGH EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

AND SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT EVEN WITH US PUTTING IT INTO THE BUDGET EVEN NOW, IF THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL IS FOR US TO SET THOSE FUNDS ASIDE AND AT THIS POINT NOT DO ANYTHING WITH IT UNTIL WE'RE READY TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS GOING FORWARD, WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A PART OF THE PLAN.

SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE THAT THESE FUNDS CAN BE SET ASIDE.

WE CAN COME BACK AND HAVE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD LIKE FOR US TO DISPERSE THOSE FUNDS, EVEN SAVING THOSE FUNDS FOR A LATER TIME FRAME.

[03:50:09]

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH.

CHAIRMAN GRACIE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM B.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

AGAIN, JACK AND TEAM, THANK YOU ALL FOR THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE.

THE FIRST QUESTION IS, IS THIS PLAN ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS REQUIRED? YES. YES, SIR.

IT IS. SO AGAIN, YOU KNOW, AND I'M GOING BACK TO COUNCILWOMAN ARNOLD'S QUESTION OF WHAT WHAT WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THE PUBLIC? SO I'M TRYING TO TO KIND OF PAINT THIS PICTURE OF, WE HAVE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND TO, TO CURE THIS PENSION PROBLEM. AND I THINK AND I AM IN SUPPORT OF IT, INCLUDING THE, THE STIPEND AND EVERYTHING.

I THINK WE'VE DONE A LOT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COULD RIGHT THIS SITUATION.

AND I THINK THE FRUSTRATING PART, I THINK EVERYBODY IS FEELING AND SENSING IS IN THE MIDST OF ALL OF THIS, THE ABOVE AND BEYOND.

THEY MENTIONED IT. WE'RE GETTING SUED.

SO AGAIN, THE MESSAGE TO THE TO THE TO THE POLICE AND FIRE, WHETHER YOU'RE ACTIVE OR RETIRED, IS ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE PROPER REPRESENTATION BECAUSE WE'RE WORKING.

THE CITY HAS BEEN WORKING, WE'VE BEEN WORKING TO DO THIS.

AND I THINK I'M PROUD THAT WE'VE COME HERE WITH ALL OF THE BUMPS IN THE ROCKY ROADS.

I'M PROUD THAT WE'VE GOTTEN TO THIS POINT.

BUT AGAIN, NOW IT'S AT A POINT WHERE.

WE FOUND A SOLUTION, AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE IT'S STILL IT'S ENOUGH.

SO AGAIN, I THINK WITH WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK.

THANK YOU TO ALL THAT HAVE LED THAT BUT UNDERSTANDING WHEN YOU'RE TALKING TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS, WE'VE, WE'VE WE'VE DONE WHAT WE CAN FOR THE POLICE AND FIRE.

BUT AS IT RELATES TO THE COST TO THE TAXPAYERS, THIS IS A TREMENDOUS COST TO THE TAXPAYERS.

AND I HAVE TO KEEP SAYING THIS.

WE'RE GETTING SUED AS A RESULT OF GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND.

SO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT A HEADLINE.

THAT'S THE HEADLINE WE'VE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND, AND WE'RE GETTING SUED AT THE COST OF THE TAXPAYERS.

AND THAT'S THE THING THAT I WANT TO CONTINUE TO WALK.

NOW, YOU'RE RIGHT. MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS IS 100% RIGHT.

WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO IT. I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

BUT IT DOES MAKE YOU FEEL LIKE YOU WANT TO PULL EVERYTHING BACK AND START OVER FROM THERE.

BUT WE KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO GET US ANYWHERE.

SO AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE LEADERSHIP IN GETTING US HERE.

BUT AGAIN, AS WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THIS LOOKS AND FEELS LIKE TO THE PUBLIC, IT LOOKS AND FEELS LIKE WE'VE DONE WE'VE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND TO CORRECT THIS SITUATION THAT'S BEEN GOING ON AS A RESULT OF NEGLIGENT POOR INVESTMENTS, BAD MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT AND THOSE THINGS.

AND AT THIS POINT, WE ARE ASKING FOR IN ADDITION TO GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND, WE'RE ASKING FOR SOME LEVEL OF OVERSIGHT SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE THAT THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN ANYMORE. AND YET THERE SEEMS TO BE RESISTANCE.

SO AGAIN, I SAY POLICE AND FIRE, BE SURE THAT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE REPRESENTING YOU, BECAUSE I THINK THAT TOO WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN HOW WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM B.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

JACK AND JEANETTE, I DO WANT TO THANK BOTH OF YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK ON THAT.

I HAVE TO READ IT FROM HERE BECAUSE I NEVER GET THE WORDS IN THE RIGHT ORDER.

THE FUNDING, SOUND SOUNDNESS, RESTORATION PLAN LOTS OF MEETINGS, LOTS OF BRIEFINGS, LOTS OF HELP FROM CHIRON AND OTHER GROUPS.

AND I FULLY SUPPORT WHERE WE ENDED UP WITH THE STIPEND.

I WOULD NOT TAKE THE STIPEND OUT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO ACCOMPLISH BY THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE GOING TO BE GIVEN ALL THE OVERSIGHT AND INSIGHTS AND PERHAPS CONTROL THAT WE WANT OVER THE FUND BECAUSE WE HAVE TAKEN AWAY A 1% STIPEND FOR A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T HAD ANY COLA IN A NUMBER OF YEARS. AND SO I THINK OF I THINK OF A WOMAN WHO'S, YOU KNOW, 75, 80 YEARS OLD, AND SHE WAS GOING TO USE THAT $500, AND IT'S ABOUT AN AVERAGE OF $500.

IT'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY.

SHE WAS PROBABLY THINKING SHE MIGHT FLY TO LUBBOCK OR HOUSTON FOR CHRISTMAS THIS YEAR, BECAUSE SHE'S GOT A LITTLE EXTRA CASH THAT SHE CAN COUNT ON. AND WE'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH THAT HERE.

I'M SORRY, I, I, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO I THINK BY TAKING IT AWAY, WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET THE INFLUENCE WE WANT AND WE ARE JUST GOING TO PUNISH SOME PEOPLE WHO I DON'T THINK HAVE INFLUENCE OVER THIS.

NOW, I KNOW AS A BODY, AS A BODY, THEY HAVE CONTROL OVER THOSE 5 OR 6 POSITIONS.

AND SO I WOULD CHALLENGE YOU IF YOU HAVE CONTROL TO EXERT IT.

[03:55:05]

BUT THE GAMES THAT WE'RE PLAYING HERE ARE REALLY DISAPPOINTING TO ME.

WHEN I LOOK AT THE ACTUAL IMPACT OF IT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I BELIEVE WE'RE NOW ON ROUND TWO FOR EVERYONE.

UNLESS I MISSED ANYONE.

OKAY, MISS WILLIS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. IRELAND. DID WE EVER WORK OUT WHETHER PEOPLE WHO GOT THE DROP OR TOOK THE DROP WOULD ALSO GET A STIPEND? THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BEING MADE BETWEEN WHETHER SOMEONE HAS A DROP OR DOESN'T HAVE A DROP.

EVERYONE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE.

SO THOSE WHO WENT INTO THE ACCOUNT AND GOT THEIR WITHDRAWAL THAT HELPED BRING THIS PERCENTAGE DOWN WOULD ALSO BE GETTING A STIPEND.

SO THAT FEELS LIKE DOUBLE DIPPING TO ME.

I'M NOT AND I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY.

AND SO, TAMI, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A BETTER ANSWER FOR THIS, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT I THINK IT WAS AT LEAST THE OPINION OF THE STAFF OF THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUND THAT YOU COULDN'T DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN RETIREES BASED ON WHETHER THEY HAD OTHER INVESTMENTS OR NOT.

SO THEY'VE HAD THE BENEFIT.

EVEN IF THEY PUT IT IN A PASSBOOK SAVINGS ACCOUNT, THEY PROBABLY EARNED MORE THAN THE FUNDS DID.

AND HAVE DERIVED THAT BENEFIT SINCE THE BULL MARKET FROM 2016 ON.

SO. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THAT.

SO ON PAGE TEN YOU'VE GOT THE FOUR ROWS.

IS IT FAIR TO SAY OR ACCURATE TO SAY THAT FROM ROW TWO UP IS WHAT WE'RE OBLIGATED TO DO? YES, MA'AM.

ACTUALLY, ROW ONE IS WHAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE FULLY FUNDED IN 30 YEARS.

THAT COMES WITH, RIGHT NOW A COLA.

ACCORDING TO HOUSE BILL 3158, AFTER ACHIEVING 70% FUNDED.

THAT'S ALREADY BAKED INTO THAT NUMBER.

OKAY. SO ONE AND TWO ARE KIND OF TOGETHER.

OKAY. SO THE OBLIGATE BUT THAT'S OKAY BECAUSE THAT ACHIEVES A 70% FUNDING.

SO ANYTHING YOU KNOW ON LINE THREE, THAT IS AT OUR DISCRETION TO DO THAT.

THAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT'S REQUIRED BY THE HOUSE BILL.

OKAY. ABOVE AND BEYOND.

SO I GUESS SOMETHING WAS BROUGHT UP AND THERE ARE A COUPLE OF POINTS BECAUSE THIS IS GETTING EMOTIONAL AND WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THIS AS THE COLUMNS AND THE NUMBERS TOO, BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO PAY TAXES IN THE CITY AND WE HAVE OBLIGATIONS TO THEM.

AND SO THEY DON'T RELY ON US TO MAKE EMOTIONAL DECISIONS.

THEY NEED US TO WATCH THEIR DOLLARS AND CENTS BECAUSE TO THE POINT ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS, I MEAN, OUR TAXPAYERS ARE HUMAN BEINGS.

THEY'RE SENIORS ON FIXED INCOMES.

THEY'RE YOUNG FAMILIES WANTING TO JUST BUY A HOUSE IN THE CITY.

SO, MISS CITY MANAGER, YOU HAD SAID THAT TO THE POINT ABOUT THIS AS BUDGETED.

WHAT IS OUR OPTION? YOU SAID WE CAN JUST HOLD ON TO IT RIGHT NOW.

IN THE BUDGET FOR 2025, WE'VE INCLUDED THE 1% THAT MR. IRELAND MENTIONED IN HIS PRESENTATION.

I THINK IT'S ROUGHLY ABOUT $900,000.

SO IF THE CITY COUNCIL DESIRED FOR US TO INSTEAD OF DISPERSING THOSE FUNDS NOW BEGINNING WITH OUR FISCAL YEAR, WE COULD ACTUALLY HOLD ON TO THEM AND WHATEVER TIME WE DEEM APPROPRIATE, WHETHER IT'S YOUNG, A LAWSUIT OR ANY OTHER KIND OF TRIGGER, THEN WE COULD COME BACK TO THIS BODY AND WE COULD THEN TALK ABOUT THE ACTUAL RELEASE OF THOSE FUNDS.

WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS THAT IN THE PLAN THAT YOU WOULD ADOPT ON SEPTEMBER THE 11TH, YOU WOULD ACTUALLY NOT BE ADOPTING THE PLAN WITH THAT SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT INCLUDED IN IT.

THIS WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE PLAN.

AND AGAIN, BACK TO MY COMMENTS EARLIER.

THIS COULD BE SOMETHING WE COULD LOOK AT ANNUALLY.

SO IT'S NOT TAKEN AWAY.

IT'S BEING HELD IN A SEPARATE FUND.

YES, MA'AM. SO BUT WE COULD ALWAYS REVISIT THAT.

YES, MA'AM. WE COULD JUST HOLD ON TO IT AND NOT ACTUALLY MAKE A DISBURSEMENT UNTIL SUCH TIME THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD AUTHORIZE US TO DO SO.

OKAY. AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE WORK THROUGH THIS LAWSUIT BECAUSE AS I LOOK AT I MEAN, IT WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER WE HAVE TO TAKE THIS FUND THAT IS IN THE FAR COLUMN, WHICH MEANS $50 MILLION A YEAR OVER AND ABOVE WHAT THE CITY STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED.

AND I ASSUME THAT THE CITY STAFF IS MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON WHAT IT COSTS US TO KEEP OUR STREETS, WHAT IT COSTS US TO KEEP POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS ON OUR STREETS, TAKE CARE OF PARKS, DEAL WITH OUR HOMELESSNESS ISSUES.

ALL OF THAT.

SO WHAT YOU ALL RECOMMENDED IS WHAT WE CAN AFFORD, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. AND SO UNTIL WE UNDERSTAND THE OUTCOME OF THIS LAWSUIT, WE MAY BE HAVING TO COME FORTH WITH $50 MILLION MORE A YEAR ON TOP OF THIS NUMBER.

WE HOPE THAT THAT IS NOT THE CASE.

BUT WE DON'T KNOW AT THIS TIME.

SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT IT IS WE THINK WE'RE ACCOMPLISHING, I THINK IT'S FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY TO OUR TAXPAYERS BECAUSE THIS STIPEND WOULD AMOUNT TO A $4.5 MILLION A YEAR, WHICH IF WE'RE TRYING TO IF WE HAVE TO MAKE UP A BOGEY LIKE 50 MILLION A YEAR, WELL, AT LEAST THAT'S PART OF THE WAY THERE.

[04:00:08]

SO I DON'T LIKE THIS BECAUSE BELIEVE ME, YOU ARE ON THE PRECIPICE OF THIS STIPEND.

I THINK OUR HEARTS ARE THERE, EVEN THOUGH WITH OUR HEADS ON THE FINANCIAL COLUMNS ON THIS SHEET, IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE.

BUT WE WANTED TO DO IT.

AND NOW THIS IS KIND OF GIVEN ME PAUSE AND GONE INTO A BIT OF LIMBO AS WE TRY TO MAKE THE BEST FINANCIAL DECISIONS.

SO I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF HOLDING THIS IN AN ACCOUNT UNTIL WE KNOW THE OUTCOME.

YOUR TIME.

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

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CITY MANAGER, A QUICK QUESTION.

ACTUALLY. THREE MINUTES. I'M SORRY YOU DID PUT THIS IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.

YES, SIR. IT IS BUILT INTO THE CURRENT BUDGET THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED.

YES, SIR. AND THERE IS NO PROBLEM TO ESCROW THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY? THAT'S CORRECT. WE CAN DEFINITELY SET THE FUNDS ASIDE INTO A SEPARATE FUND, AND HOLD ON TO IT UNTIL THE COUNCIL MAKES A DECISION ON DISBURSEMENT.

OKAY. IF YOU DO NOT DECIDE TO DO THAT, IF YOU LEAVE IT IN THE BUDGET, THAT MEANS SOMEONE ELSE CAN MOVE THAT MONEY.

THE COUNCIL CAN MOVE THAT MONEY SOMEWHERE ELSE.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

OKAY. NUMBER ONE, I THINK, COLLEAGUES, IT IS ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS.

IT IS ABOUT NATURE, ABOUT THE PEOPLE.

IT'S ALSO ABOUT BUSINESS.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT ALSO BY TRUST OF THE CITY.

DO THE EMPLOYEES WHO WORK HERE, THE POLICE, DO THEY TRUST US? THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO WORK.

THEY DON'T RETIRE TOMORROW.

BUT. BUT ONE THING I'M GOING TO SAY IS, NUMBER ONE, A LAWSUIT.

YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THE LAWSUIT IS GOING TO LAST.

THAT'S ONE THING. YOU CAN'T SAY IT GOING TO LAST ONE DAY, TWO YEARS, WHATEVER.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE GOT TO MAKE A DECISION.

AND I AM A SHORT TERM.

I'LL BE GOING IN SOME MONTHS.

I'M COUNTING MY MONTHS AND DAYS AND MINUTES EVERY MINUTE OF THE DAY.

YOU WILL BE HERE AND SOMEONE ELSE WILL STILL WILL BE HERE.

BUT THIS IS A DECISION THAT GOT TO BE MADE, BUT IT CANNOT BE MADE ON EMOTION.

I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU GOT TO BE MADE ON FINANCIAL.

YOU GOT TO BE MADE ON A TAXPAYERS AND A TAXPAYER NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

WE GOT TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER WE DO THAT, HOW DO WE GET OUR STORY OUT TO OUR TAXPAYERS? HOW DO WE DO THAT ON THE CITY MANAGER? WHATEVER WE DO IS WE HAVE TO TELL THE STORY TO OUR TAXPAYERS WHAT WE ARE ABOUT TO DO.

AND DO YOU HAVE A PLAN THAT IN YOUR BUDGET TO TO TELL THE STORY? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ON THIS PLAN, WHICH WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO GET PAST NEXT WEEK? BUT THERE IS A PLAN THAT WE GOT TO GOTTA SUBMIT A PLAN AS A THANK YOU SO MUCH.

MAYOR PRO TEM, AS IT RELATES TO THE COMMUNICATIONS, WE'RE DEFINITELY PREPARED TO SHARE INFORMATION WITH THE PUBLIC.

WE'VE ACTUALLY BEEN DOING THAT OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND WE'RE PREPARED EVEN BEFORE NEXT WEDNESDAY'S ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO, OF COURSE, SHARE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WITH ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS.

SO WE ARE PREPARED AND AND READY TO CONTINUE THAT FLOW EVEN BEYOND THE COUNCIL'S ACTION TO CONTINUE TO COMMUNICATE OVERALL, FROM A TRANSPARENCY STANDPOINT ABOUT THE CITY'S COMMITMENT TO BOTH OF THE PENSION FUNDS.

GREAT. AND ONE THING WE DO KNOW WE GOT TO SUBMIT A PLAN IS WHAT IS THE DEADLINE FOR THE PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE? I MEAN, TO THE PROBE.

YEAH. PENSION REVIEW BOARD.

WHAT IS THE DATE THAT THE PLAN GOT TO THE ATTORNEY? I BELIEVE IT'S NOVEMBER 1ST.

NOVEMBER 1ST.

NOVEMBER 1ST, 2024.

NOVEMBER. NOVEMBER 1ST, 2024.

BUT SINCE IT'S A LAWSUIT, WE DON'T KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO ACCEPT THE PLAN.

IS THAT CORRECT? THEY DON'T ACCEPT THE PLAN WE JUST SUBMITTED.

RIGHT. THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD WILL ACCEPT THE CITY'S PLAN.

HOWEVER, THEY WILL NOT DETERMINE BETWEEN THE CITY'S PLAN AND THE PENSION BOARD'S PLAN, WHICH IS A BETTER PLAN.

THEY WILL DETERMINE IF THEY'RE BOTH REASONABLE, IF THEY'RE FULLY FUNDED IN 30 YEARS, AND THEY WILL SEND THEM BOTH AS PART OF THEIR ANNUAL REPORT OR THEIR BI ANNUAL REPORT TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

SO BOTH PLANS WILL GO FORWARD.

OKAY, SO I THINK, COLLEAGUES, IT'S VERY TIMELY THAT WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND SUBMIT OUR PLAN.

I THINK WE NEED TO SUBMIT A PLAN.

YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY AND MOVE DOWN AND MOVE THIS BALL DOWN THE ROAD.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE STILL GOT PLENTY OF TIME TO TAKE CARE OF OUR RETIREES.

TO REVISIT THIS, I BELIEVE WE CAN REVISIT.

BUT ALSO I THINK WE NEED TO REALLY SIT DOWN AND AND LOOK AT CHAIRMAN WEST.

I KNOW YOU'RE COMMITTED TO MONITORING OUR ASSETS AND HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO THIS IN THE LONG TERM?

[04:05:04]

BUT I THINK THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A SHORT TERM.

I THINK IT'S A LONG TERM GOAL.

I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO DO EVERY YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR.

IT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THE BUDGET.

AND JACK AND CITY MANAGER JUST MAKE SURE IT'S PART OF THE BUDGET.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

SO TO MAKE MY POSITION VERY CLEAR, JACK, I CONCUR WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON PAGES SIX AND SEVEN OF THE PRESENTATION TO IMPLEMENT THE ADC METHODOLOGY WITH A FIVE YEAR STEP UP, NO CHANGE TO CONTRIBUTION RATES OR TO THE BENEFIT STRUCTURE AND COLA AFTER 70% FUNDED WHERE I DO HAVE A DIFFERENCE WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS ABOUT THE SUPPLEMENTAL PAY.

AND WHAT THIS STAFF PROPOSAL WOULD DO IS INCENTIVIZE NO, RETURN IT INCENTIVIZE ZERO RETURN BEFORE THEY GET THE SUPPLEMENTAL PAY.

WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT TO INCENTIVIZE THEM TO AT LEAST MEET THEIR TARGET OF 6.5%, WHICH IS NOT A VERY AGGRESSIVE TARGET.

WHEN YOU CAN GET 5% ON A MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT, WITH ALL THE MONEY THAT THESE MONEY MANAGERS ARE EARNING, THEY OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO INCREASE THAT BY AT LEAST 1.5%. AND THE NEXT THING I WILL RECOMMEND IS, WELL, THAT I WILL CALL UPON THE BOARD TO CHANGE THE COMPENSATION STRUCTURE OF THEIR INVESTMENT MANAGERS FROM STRAIGHT SALARY TO INCENTIVE BASED.

THAT'S THE WAY THE WHOLE INDUSTRY WORKS.

YOU MAKE MONEY WHEN YOU MAKE MONEY FOR YOUR THIRD PARTY INVESTORS.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN PLACE NOW.

AND IT NEEDS TO BE.

FINALLY, JACK, A QUESTION.

THE 136 MILLION ON PAGE TEN, BASED UPON THE CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT IS BASED UPON A RETURN OF 6.5% BY THE FUND. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.

SO IF THEY EARN LESS THAN THAT, THAT'S GOING TO COST THE CITY EVEN MORE MONEY.

YES. WELL, AS A MATTER OF LITIGATION STRATEGY, AND THIS IS TO COUNCIL MEMBER GRACIE'S POINT, WE SHOULDN'T EVEN BE DISCUSSING OR NEGOTIATING A SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT UNTIL THIS LITIGATION IS OVER.

WHY SHOULD WE GIVE UP THE CARROTS THAT WE HAVE AS A LITIGANT? IT'S NOT IT'S JUST BAD LITIGATION STRATEGY TO DO THAT BEFORE THE LAWSUIT ENDS.

AND THAT'S AN INCENTIVE FOR THEM TO END THIS LAWSUIT IF THEY WANT TO GET THE SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT.

THAT LAWSUIT COULD DETERMINE A DIFFERENCE OF $50 MILLION IN OUR PAYMENT RESPONSIBILITIES IN ONE YEAR.

THAT'S A HUGE AMOUNT.

SO THE STAKES ARE VERY LARGE IN THAT LITIGATION.

WE NEED TO HAVE A STRONG LITIGATION STRATEGY AND NOT GIVE UP SOMETHING WITHOUT GETTING SOMETHING BACK IN THE FORM OF A DISMISSAL OF THIS LAWSUIT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY SOMETHING, IF I MAY.

WE'VE MENTIONED $50 MILLION A COUPLE OF TIMES, AND I THINK THE NUMBER THAT SHOULD BE TALKED ABOUT IS $20 MILLION.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR RECOMMENDATION AND THE BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION IS $600 MILLION OVER 30 YEARS.

SO IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT $20 MILLION A YEAR.

BUT I HAVEN'T.

I WOULD WANT TO SEE A SIDE BY SIDE ON THOSE NUMBERS.

THAT'S STILL A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY.

I DON'T DISPUTE THAT. I JUST WANT TO CORRECT THE RECORD.

SO. SO IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE 20 MILLION MORE THAN WHAT WE'VE CURRENTLY BUDGETED FOR OUR PAYMENT FOR 2025.

YES. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

MY POINT IS THIS.

I DO NOT SEE HOW WE GET TO THE CONCLUSION THAT TAKING AWAY THE 1% STIPEND WILL ALL OF A SUDDEN MAKE THE LAWSUIT GO AWAY AND WOULD PROTECT US FROM THIS FURTHER LIABILITY.

I JUST IT'S IT'S IT'S A IT'S A SMALL STIPEND.

IT'S A IN THE CITY BUDGET.

IT'S WE'RE NOT TALKING BIG DOLLARS HERE.

I DON'T SEE HOW IT'S GOING TO BE PERSUASIVE ON HOW THIS LAWSUIT MOVES FORWARD.

I JUST I DON'T SEE IT AS A BIG PIECE THAT WE HAVE TO PLAY ON THE CHESSBOARD, AND I SEE IT AS A LOSS TO INDIVIDUAL RETIREES.

AND I WILL ALSO POINT OUT NOT EVERY RETIREE HAS A DROP ACCOUNT.

SOME DO, BUT NOT EVERYONE DOES.

[04:10:02]

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

MISS SCHULTZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER, BLACKMON AND RIDLEY'S AND GRACIE, ALL OF THE SUGGESTIONS THAT THEY MADE.

AND THE REASON WHY IS BASED ON WHAT OUR OUR MAYOR, PRO TEM ATKINS SAID, WHICH IS ABOUT TRUST AND FOR OUR OFFICERS, RETIRED OR ACTIVE, THEY HAVE A COUNCIL WHO'S FUNDED EVERY SINGLE REQUEST THEY'VE EVER MADE, WANTS TO DO MORE FOR THEM COMPARED TO A BOARD WHICH HAS LOST ALL THEIR MONEY, PUT THEM IN THIS POSITION.

SO THE PLACE FOR TRUST OUGHT TO BE IN KNOWING OF OUR OF ALL OF OUR OFFICERS, AGAIN, ACTIVE OR RETIRED, THE PLACE FOR TRUST IS KNOWING THAT WE ARE FIGHTING AND TRYING SO HARD TO GET YOU THIS, AS OPPOSED TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T CARED ABOUT YOUR ABOUT THE COLA, HAVEN'T CARED ABOUT YOUR INVESTMENTS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

AND SO IN WORKING TOGETHER, I THINK THAT WE CAN BE ABLE TO EXPEDITE AND GET TO THAT PLACE EVEN FASTER.

SO I STRONGLY RECOMMEND PUTTING THAT MONEY IN RESERVE FOR THE COUNCIL THEN TO DISTRIBUTE ONCE THAT PERFORMANCE BEGINS TO SHOW. TRUE.

BUT BANKRUPTING THE CITY AND THE FELLOW TAXPAYERS THAT THESE THAT SO MANY OF YOU AND SO MANY OF YOU WHO MAY BE LISTENING, WHO ARE WORKING NOW AS OUR PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS, YOU'VE RISKED YOUR LIVES TO HELP THESE VERY PEOPLE.

AND SO TO HURT THESE PEOPLE IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE, THE, THE FACADE OF A OF A BOARD THAT'S BEEN ACTING IN YOUR INTEREST DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO ME.

IT'S MUCH BETTER TO DO TO PUT THE TRUST IN THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE PROVEN, YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR, THAT YOUR FULL BUDGET IS THERE, YOUR OVERTIME IS THERE.

EVERY CAR YOU NEED, EVERY AMMUNITION, EVERYTHING YOU NEED, EVERY FIRE TRUCK IS THERE.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN WE USE THE WORD TRUST.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

MR. GRACEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'VE BEEN SITTING UP HERE DEBATING ON HOW HARD I WANT TO GO ON THIS JOKE THAT I HAVE, BUT THE.

DO WE HAVE? WELL, THE FIRST THE FIRST JOKE IS THIS.

THE FIRST JOKE IS IF WE WERE TO PUT THAT IN THE RESERVE, CAN WE PUT IT IN THE ERF BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO BE PERFORMING A LITTLE BIT BETTER? THAT'S THE JOKE. THE SERIOUS QUESTION IS THE SERIOUS QUESTION IS THIS.

IF WE WERE TO PUT THAT IN THE RESERVE WE JUST HEARD IN THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION, IF WE WERE, COULD WE ESSENTIALLY INVEST THAT IN THAT SECONDARY PRIVATE EQUITY MARKET? I KNOW OUR INVESTMENT POLICY DOESN'T GIVE US THE ABILITY TO DO THAT, BUT IS THERE SOME WAY HE'S SHAKING HIS HEAD? NO. OKAY.

I BELIEVE THE FUNDS WOULD HAVE TO BE INVESTED ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S INVESTMENT BECAUSE UNTIL WE DISPERSE IT, IT'S CITY'S MONEY.

CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROUND TWO BEFORE I GO TO MR. RIDLEY FOR HIS FINAL? MR. RIDLEY IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST BRIEFLY, I WANTED TO RESPOND TO THE ASSERTION THAT THE 1% SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT WOULDN'T BE MUCH LEVERAGE IN THE LITIGATION.

I'LL TELL YOU WHY IT WILL BE IS BECAUSE THAT'S A DIRECT IMPACT ON THE PARTICIPANTS PAYCHECKS THAT THEY WILL RECEIVE EACH MONTH.

WHEREAS IN THE LAWSUIT, THE STAKES ARE HIGH IN TERMS OF DOLLAR AMOUNT, BUT THEY DON'T PUT DOLLARS INTO THE PARTICIPANTS POCKETBOOKS IMMEDIATELY.

ALL THAT WILL ACCOMPLISH IS HASTEN THE DAY WHEN THEY REACH THE 70% FUNDING RATE SO THAT THEY CAN THEN GET A COLA.

BUT THAT'S STILL 20 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.

AND SO THAT'S WHY THAT HAS LEVERAGE IN THE LITIGATION.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS OR ASK ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANYONE.

SO HERE'S THE WORK PLAN.

I'VE DISCUSSED IT WITH THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER, AND SHE AGREES THAT WE WILL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[CLOSED SESSION]

NOW TALK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.

IT SHOULDN'T BE. IT SHOULDN'T BE TOO MUCH.

WE'LL HAVE LUNCH AT THE SAME TIME.

COME BACK, PICK UP ITEM C OF OUR BRIEFINGS, WHICH WE HAVE TO LEGALLY TAKE UP BEFORE WE GO INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO ADDRESS OUR AGENDA.

ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS A NOT A VOTE.

IT'S A STRAW VOTE ON THE BUDGET AMENDMENTS THAT WE'VE SEEN.

SO THAT'S THE PLAN.

SO NOW I NEED TO READ YOU THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE, AND THEN WE'LL WE'LL RECONVENE IN AN HOUR, SAY 230.

[04:15:01]

IT IS 1:33 P.M.

ON SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2024.

THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 551 .072 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

ON THE FOLLOWING MATTER DESCRIBED ON TODAY'S AGENDA.

DELIBERATE THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7800 STEMMONS.

BECAUSE DELIBERATION IN AN OPEN MEETING WOULD HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON THE POSITION OF THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY AND NEGOTIATIONS WITH A THIRD PERSON AND UNDER SECTION FIVE, 51.07, ONE OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING MATTER DESCRIBED ON TODAY'S AGENDA.

SEEKING THE ADVICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM VERSUS THE CITY OF DALLAS.

SO WE STAND AT RECESS UNTIL 230.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU TO ALL OF OUR ASSISTANT CITY SECRETARIES, PAUL BLACKMON AND OTHERS WHO ARE REALLY GOOD AT COUNTING THE HEADS AROUND HERE.

IT HELPS ME A LOT. SO THANK YOU.

THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HAS COMPLETED ITS CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTIONS FIVE, 51.071 AND 551 .072 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

AND AT 2:40 P.M.

ON SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2024, WE'VE RETURNED TO OPEN SESSION.

OKAY, I'M GOING TO NOW TURN IT BACK OVER TO OUR INTERIM CITY MANAGER.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH, MAYOR.

AND TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THE THIRD TOPIC FOR TODAY IS THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET.

[C. 24-2723 FY 2024-25 & FY 2025-26 Budget Discussion and Amendments *For budget purposes, the City Council will be sitting as a Committee of the Whole.]

AFTER SEVERAL MONTHS OF WORKING ON THE CITY'S BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR, WE ARE NEARING THE END OF THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT AND THE APPROVAL PROCESS.

I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU, AS WELL AS OUR STAFF, WHO HAVE WORKED TOGETHER OVER THESE LAST FEW MONTHS, TO GET US TO TODAY.

YOU WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED AT THIS TIME, AND AFTER CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDMENTS, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE ASKED TO APPROVE THE BUDGET UPON FIRST READING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY CHARTER.

WE HAVE OUR BUDGET TEAM HERE TODAY LED BY OUR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, JACK ARLEN, JEANETTE WEEDEN, THE DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES, TO EXPLAIN THE TIMELINE AND KICK OFF TODAY'S DISCUSSION.

JACK, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU.

THANK YOU. A POINT OF INFORMATION.

DO I NEED TO DO THE MOTION TO GO INTO COMMITTEE OF A WHOLE AT THIS POINT? I THINK WE COULD EITHER DO IT AFTER THEY'VE SPOKEN, OR WE COULD, AS LONG AS IT'S BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING.

BUT I'LL FIND OUT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY.

SHE HAS A PREFERENCE. I WAS JUST GOING TO KIND OF LEAN OVER AND ASK THAT MYSELF.

OKAY, PRESENTATION FIRST, AND THEN WE'LL GO INTO A COMMITTEE UPON A MOTION THAT'S SUCCESSFUL TO DO THAT.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR INQUIRY.

GO AHEAD JACK AND TEAM.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. THIS WILL BE PRETTY QUICK AND THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO TAKE UP THE MOTION.

THE CONVERSATION TODAY IS AROUND ANY AMENDMENTS THAT THE MAYOR OR COUNCIL HAS TO MAKE AGAINST THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS MADE ON AUGUST THE 13TH.

AFTER WE DO STRAW POLLS, STRAW VOTES ON ANY AMENDMENTS, THEN WE HAVE AN ACTION ITEM, WHICH IS MISS TOLBERT MENTIONED IS THE FIRST READING OF THE BUDGET. WE ARE REQUIRED, PER THE CITY CHARTER, TO ADVERTISE THE BUDGET ORDINANCE AFTER FIRST READING, TEN DAYS HAS TO ELAPSE BEFORE WE HAVE OUR FINAL APPROVAL.

SO WE'LL BE BACK ON SEPTEMBER THE 18TH, TWO WEEKS FROM TODAY, FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET, INCLUDING OTHER ACTION ITEMS SUCH AS ADOPTION OF THE TAX RATE AND FEE ORDINANCE AND OTHER CHANGES THAT GO ALONG WITH THE BUDGET.

WE HAVE THREE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO US AT THIS POINT.

AND SO, MAYOR, IF YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH THOSE IN THE ORDER IN WHICH WE RECEIVE THEM AND THEN OPEN UP TO OTHER POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS, IT'S REALLY UP TO YOU AS THE PRESIDING OFFICER HOW YOU WANT TO DEAL WITH THAT. BUT WE HAVE A CITY MANAGER, PROPOSED AMENDMENT, COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON SUBMITTED AMENDMENT.

AND THEN WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH COUNCIL MEMBER WEST ON AN AMENDMENT.

AND SO AT THIS POINT, IT'S JUST THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.

AND I THINK MISS JOHNSON HAS PROVIDED THE THE VOTING PADDLES, IF YOU WILL, FOR WHEN WE GET TO THE STRAW STRAW VOTES.

DOES THAT COMPLETE YOUR PRESENTATION BEFORE I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GO INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

OKAY. AND SO I WON'T MAKE ANY COMMENT YET ABOUT THE ORDER OF AMENDMENTS.

I'LL JUST WAIT UNTIL WE'RE OFFICIALLY IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FIRST.

SO IS THERE A MOTION ON.

YES, MAYOR. I MOVE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL GO INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO CONSIDER THE RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 20 2425 BUDGET.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE. WE'RE NOW IN A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

AND I NEED TO READ A LITTLE A LITTLE LANGUAGE HERE TO EXPLAIN KIND OF WHAT WHAT THE WHAT'S FAIR GAME HERE? SO WE'RE NOT ACTING AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE VOTES ON THE AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2024, 2025 BUDGET ARE NOT FINAL ACTIONS, BUT

[04:20:04]

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 CITY OF DALLAS FANS 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 CITY OF DALLAS FANS IN FAVOR OF A MOTION.

WE WILL FOLLOW OUR USUAL 531 FORMAT FOR DEBATE, SO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO THAT.

AND WE ARE NOW IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

SO I THINK TO ANSWER JACK IRONS QUESTION, I'M FINE WITH JUST TAKING THEM IN THE ORDER THAT THEY WERE SUBMITTED.

USUALLY TRADITIONALLY WE'VE STARTED ALWAYS WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S AMENDMENT, IF THERE IS ONE, AND I THINK THERE IS.

SO I'LL JUST RECOGNIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPLAIN HER AMENDMENT, AND THEN WE'LL NEED A MOTION, I GUESS, TO INTRODUCE IT AND STRAW VOTE IT.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. AND SO THE AMENDMENT FROM THE CITY MANAGER IS MANAGER'S ACTUALLY LISTED IN THE HANDOUT THAT YOU RECEIVED.

WE RECEIVED SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDING THROUGH ARPA INTEREST EARNINGS AS WELL AS THROUGH THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, FROM A REIMBURSEMENT TO THE TUNE OF ABOUT $5.8 MILLION. AND WE'RE PROPOSING THAT AS PART OF THE USE OF THOSE FUNDS, THAT WE INCREASE OUR STREET MAINTENANCE BY 5.8 MILLION.

THAT SAME AMOUNT, WHICH WILL BRING OUR LANE MILES FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR FROM 676 TO 710 LANE MILES.

OKAY, SO THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN JUST IT'S A TINY LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY MANAGER IS NOT A MEMBER OF THE BODY.

SO SHE DOESN'T INTRODUCE HER OWN MOTIONS.

BUT TO MAKE SURE IT GOT EXPLAINED.

EVERYONE, I LET HER GO BEFORE WE ACTUALLY HAD ANY DISCUSSION.

SO WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MOVE THIS AS AN AMENDMENT? I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO MOVE THAT.

I MOVE THAT WE I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THE CITY MANAGER'S AMENDMENT FOR THE BUDGET.

SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ABSOLUTELY. MR. MAYOR, AS CHAIR OF TRANSPORTATION.

ADDING, THOUGH, THAT 5.8 MILLION FOR STREET LANE MILES IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO BE AS CLOSE TO ZERO DEGRADATION AS WE POSSIBLY CAN BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO GO BACKWARDS IN WHAT WE'VE DONE, ALL THE HARD WORK WE'VE DONE FOR THE LAST TWO AND A HALF YEARS, THREE YEARS.

WE WANT TO CONTINUE MOVING FORWARD AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE NEXT.

THE 2024 BOND DOLLARS ABOUT TO GO INTO EFFECT.

THIS WILL KEEP US AT THAT ZERO DEGRADATION.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES WE ARE ON FOR THE PUBLIC.

WE ARE ON ITEM C IN OUR.

I'M SORRY. WE'RE WE'RE ACTUALLY TECHNICALLY IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE DEALING WITH AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE BY THE CITY MANAGER.

SO I'M REALLY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THAT AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

A QUESTION FOR THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER.

WHAT WOULD THIS $5.8 MILLION BE SPENT ON IN YOUR ORIGINAL BUDGET, BUT FOR THIS AMENDMENT? SO WE DID NOT HAVE THIS AMOUNT.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER, REALLY, FOR THE QUESTION.

WE DID NOT HAVE THE THE 5.8 MILLION WAS NOT A NUMBER THAT WE WERE AWARE OF UNTIL RECENTLY.

AND NOW THAT WE'VE RECEIVED THIS ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY TO UTILIZE THESE FUNDS, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO AGAIN, GO BACK AND LOOK AT WAYS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO INVEST IN STREET MAINTENANCE. SO WHEN WE PUT THE ORIGINAL BUDGET TOGETHER, THE 5.8 MILLION WAS NOT FUNDING THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO US AT THE TIME.

SO THE FEMA REIMBURSEMENT FOR TESTING AND VACCINATION FUNDING, WAS THAT COVID FUNDING? YES, SIR.

YES. IF I WOULD ADD TO THAT, AND JUST TO EXPAND A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT MR. TOLBERT HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT, AS THE COUNCIL ASKED US TO DO BACK IN THE SPRING TO PREPARE A QUARTERLY REPORT ON OUR ARPA SPENDING. AND SO WE WERE WORKING ON OUR QUARTERLY ARPA REPORT THAT WE SENT TO GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE DURING THE MONTH OF AUGUST. AND AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WE IDENTIFIED THE INTEREST EARNINGS, AND WE IDENTIFIED THIS FEMA REIMBURSEMENT THAT HAD NOT BEEN ALLOCATED TO ANYTHING.

AND IT WAS AT THAT POINT THAT WE WORKED WITH MISS TOLBERT TO IDENTIFY THIS USE OF FUNDS.

SO THIS IS REIMBURSEMENT FOR TESTING AND VACCINATION FUNDING THAT THE CITY ALREADY INCURRED.

YES, SIR.

SO THE REIMBURSEMENT JUST GOES BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND.

IT'S A REIMBURSEMENT TO THE ARPA FUND.

[04:25:01]

ACTUALLY, THE CITY SPENT ARPA DOLLARS ON VACCINATION AND TESTING.

AND SO THEN WE SUBMITTED THAT TO FEMA.

AND FEMA TURNED AROUND AND PAID FOR IT AS WELL.

AND SO WHEN IT CAME BACK AS A FEMA REIMBURSEMENT, IT'S A REIMBURSEMENT TO THE ARPA DOLLARS.

OKAY. SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT BY REALLOCATING THAT REIMBURSEMENT MONEY TO SOME OTHER PURPOSE, THAT THAT OTHER PURPOSE HAS TO BE A QUALIFIED ARPA EXPENSE BECAUSE OF THE REALLOCATION OF THE FUNDS BETWEEN ARPA AND FIRE SALARIES? IT'S MOVES THE MONEY AROUND AND MAKES IT AVAILABLE FOR THIS PURPOSE.

OKAY, SO THIS IS A STREETS AND ROADS IS LEGITIMATE USE.

IT IS A LEGITIMATE USE OF THE AFTER WE'VE MOVED THE MONEY.

YES. OKAY.

AND THE INTEREST EARNINGS ON THE ARPA PROGRAM ARE DOES THIS NUMBER INCLUDE ALL OF THE INTEREST THAT WE'VE EARNED BEFORE EXPENDING THE ARPA FUNDS, OR ARE THERE ADDITIONAL INTEREST FUNDS OUT THERE SOMEWHERE? NO, IT REFLECTS WHAT BASED ON THE BALANCES THROUGH THE QUARTERLY REPORTS.

SO IT'S ACCOUNTING FOR INTEREST THAT WE'VE EARNED.

SO THAT'S ALL OF THE INTEREST IS IN THIS 5.8 AT THIS TIME.

BUT THERE AS THERE'S STILL A BALANCE IN THOSE FUNDS, THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL INTEREST THAT EARNS OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS THAT WE WOULD BE BACK TO YOU WITH.

SO WHAT IS THE BALANCE OF THE ARPA FUNDS? WHO? DO YOU HAVE AN ANSWER? SO IN THE ARPA GRANT FUND, THE TOTAL UNENCUMBERED BALANCE IS 27.4 MILLION.

THAT INCLUDES THE 5.8, WHICH IS THE INTEREST EARNINGS AND THE FEMA REIMBURSEMENT.

AND THEN THE TOTAL SPENT 290.6 MILLION.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

MISS WILLIS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT ONE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WELL, I THINK, YOU KNOW I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS.

SO, AND I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT I'M VERY EXCITED TO HAVE US, THAT THIS WOULD HELP US MOVE FROM 676 LANE MILES TO 710 LANE MILES.

BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IN 2022, 23, WE WERE AT 787.

AND THEN LAST YEAR, 2324, WE WERE AT 792.

AND SO I THINK THAT SOMETIMES WHEN A BOND IS PASSED, WE THINK, OH, OKAY, WE CAN COAST IN SOME AREAS.

AND THIS IS JUST A WAY THAT WE DON'T NECESSARILY COAST.

IT'S LITERALLY SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE DRIVE IN ON, AROUND, ON OUR THROUGH OUR CITY EVERY SINGLE DAY.

AND SO I SUPPORT IT BECAUSE WHAT WAS THE NUMBER ONE THING THAT OUR RESIDENTS WANTED IN THE CITIZENS SATISFACTION SURVEY STREET AND INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE, 12 OUT OF 14 DISTRICTS.

AND SO I THINK THIS IS ANOTHER WAY THAT WE'RE DELIVERING ON AND LISTENING TO OUR RESIDENTS AND WHAT THEY WANT.

SO THANK YOU. YES, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS.

MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT ONE.

OKAY. I'M JACK, WHAT WAS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF LANE MILES FOR MAINTENANCE LAST YEAR? THE LAST YEAR BUDGET? 792.

SEVEN. 92. SEVEN.

792. YES.

IS ANY REASON WHY IT DECREASED? YES, SIR. THE THE FUNDING THAT WE HAD IN THE CURRENT YEAR AND THE LANE MILES THAT WE HAD IN THE CURRENT YEAR WERE HIGHER BECAUSE WE USED SOME CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION IN THE CURRENT YEAR BECAUSE WE DID NOT HAVE A BOND PROGRAM IN PLACE.

AND SO LAST YEAR IN THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE RECOMMENDED ABOUT $75 MILLION OF CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, AND THAT WAS A HIGHER LEVEL THAN WE HAVE NOW THIS YEAR.

AND SO, SO THEREFORE.

SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT NEXT YEAR PERTAINING TO THE SAME FINANCE, THE SAME BUDGET AMOUNT, WE STILL WOULD BE SHORT OF OUR PROJECTED LANE MILES THAT WE NEED TO KEEP UP WITH THE STATUS QUO BECAUSE WE DID REDUCE THE LANE BALANCE.

I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT HOW DO WE GET BACK TO THE STATUS QUO? SO THE THE LANE MILES THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR NEXT YEAR AT THIS POINT ARE 710, COMPARED TO 792 THAT WE DID IN THE CURRENT YEAR.

SO WE'RE 82 LANE MILES SHORT OF WHAT WE DID IN THE CURRENT YEAR.

AGAIN, IT'S BECAUSE WE HAD MORE FUNDING IN THE CURRENT YEAR THAN WE DO FOR THE NEXT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL DEBT THAT WE ISSUED.

IF I COULD ALSO ADD MAYOR PRO TEM SOMETHING THAT ADDITIONALLY THAT WE'VE DONE AND THIS IS ACTUALLY IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET ALREADY.

[04:30:07]

THAT WE'VE ALSO IDENTIFIED ABOUT $3.4 MILLION THAT WE'RE ALLOCATING TO DEAL WITH CROSSWALKS, PAINTING, DEALING WITH THE LONG LINES IN THE IN OUR STREETS.

SO IT'S ALSO THE ESTHETICS THAT NOW WE'RE ALSO ABLE TO INVEST IN THAT WE HAVE NOT DONE PREVIOUSLY.

SO WE'VE GOT ABOUT I THINK IN THE PREVIOUS BUDGET IT WAS ABOUT 1.25 MILLION.

WE'VE UPPED THAT NUMBER TO ABOUT 3.4.

AND THAT WILL ALLOW FOR US TO CONTINUE OUR INVESTMENT IN VISION ZERO AS WELL.

OKAY. DO DISD DO ANYTHING WITH CROSSWALK? WANTS TO PAINT WITH STREET? NOTHING. MAYOR PRO TEM, LET US GET YOU THE ANSWER.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT DISD MAINTAINS ANY OF THE CROSSWALKS.

I THINK THAT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY.

WELL, YOU KNOW, BUT WE'LL CONFIRM THAT FOR YOU.

I SEE IT. I SEE A WHOLE LOT OF, YOU KNOW, SCHOOL ZONE SIGN COMING UP AND I SEE STRIPING FOR CROSSWALKS.

IN MY DISTRICT, I SEE IT COMING UP ALL AROUND.

I JUST WONDER WHO PAYING FOR IT.

YOU KNOW, I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY.

BUT WE'LL CONFIRM THAT ANSWER FOR YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT ONE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO COMMEND CITY MANAGER AND THE BUDGET TEAM ON THIS ITEM.

I AGREE WITH WHAT WAS SAID EARLIER BY COUNCILWOMAN WILLIS.

THIS IS IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.

THE COMMUNITY SURVEY IS CONSISTENT YEAR AFTER YEAR.

IT'S EITHER PUBLIC SAFETY OR IT'S INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND I THINK ACROSS THE BOARD IN ALMOST EVERY DISTRICT IN THE CITY THIS YEAR, IT WAS INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND SO THERE IS A CALL FOR THAT IN THE CITY.

YOU'RE ANSWERING THAT CALL.

WITH THIS, I MEAN, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE US GET TO A POINT WHERE WE CAN PAY AS WE GO AND NOT HAVE TO USE HALF OF OUR BOND EVERY 5 OR 6 YEARS TO PAY FOR STREETS. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A POSSIBILITY WITH THE CITY THIS OLD IF WE CAN GET THERE, BUT EVERY LITTLE BIT THAT WE CAN CHIP AWAY DEFINITELY HELPS.

AND CONGRATULATIONS ON THIS.

I'M VERY HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS.

I WANT TO CONGRATULATE YOU AND JINX IT YET.

THANKS. CHAIRMAN MORENO, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT ONE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I THINK WE CAN ALL APPRECIATE MORE DOLLARS GOING INTO STREETS.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

HOW MANY LANE MILES ARE WE CURRENTLY FUNDED FOR IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET? IN IN THE CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGET.

WE'RE FUNDED FOR 792 LANE MILES.

AND HOW MANY OF THOSE MILES HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED OR INVESTED IN TO THE STATE? IT'S AN OPERATIONAL QUESTION, AND I'LL NEED SOMEBODY FROM PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION TO HELP ME ANSWER THAT.

AND I SEE DEV MOVING.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

DEBORAH SOGGY, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.

I. MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE COMPLETED THE 792.

WE'RE ON TRACK TO COMPLETE THE 792 FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.

SO THE 710 THAT WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO BE ACCOMPLISHING WITH THIS ADDITIONAL FUNDS WILL BE, YOU KNOW, RELATIVELY CLOSE TO THAT.

OKAY. THAT'S GREAT TO HEAR.

IF WE CAN JUST GET THE CONFIRMATION ON THE EXACT LANE MILES THAT HAVE BEEN TO DATE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

WE'LL DO THAT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GENTLEMEN, ARNOLD, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT ONE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND LOOKING JUST SO THAT I CAN HAVE A PUBLIC RECORD.

THIS ITEM IS PROPOSED BY THE CITY MANAGER, KIMBERLY TOLBERT.

AND I'M JUST SO EXCITED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE COMMUNITY STILL GETS THE BENEFIT FROM THIS.

I HAVE BEEN VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE MOVEMENT THAT I'M SEEING IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR ON THESE STREETS.

AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T FREQUENT THAT AREA, IT IS GREAT TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY WHICH WAY, WHICH SIDE OF THE ROAD DO I NEED TO BE ON? BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH CONSTRUCTION, IT'S GOOD TO BE ABLE TO COUGH IF YOU HAVE ALLERGIES BECAUSE THE DUST IS TURNING AND IT IS JUST JUST IT JUST REALLY MAKES US HAPPY AND IT MAKES IT BEGINS TO RESONATE WITH THE COMMUNITY AS A SIGNAL OF TRUST AND WE BELIEVE YOU BECAUSE ALL THE HEADLINES THAT WE HAD ABOUT PREVIOUS BONDS BEFORE 2017 WAS, WHY ARE WE STILL SPENDING 2005 BOND MONEY AND IT'S 2024.

[04:35:01]

YOU KNOW, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL KNOW THAT I AM SEEING I DO DRIVE THE DISTRICT.

AND LAST NIGHT WHEN WE HAD ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEETING, I HAD ONE OTHER GENTLEMAN WHO WALKED UP AND HE SAID, CAN YOU HELP ME? I'M LIKE, WELL, I'M TRYING, I'LL TRY.

AND THAT BIG CHUNK OF PLASTER, IT RESEMBLES SOME TYPE OF CONCRETE MONSTROSITY THAT BACKS UP TO HIS DRIVEWAY. I TOLD HIM WE WOULD DO WHAT WE CAN.

AND SO I THINK THIS MONEY KIND OF GIVES US HOPE.

AND JUST SO THE PUBLIC KNOWS THAT WE CAN'T PROMISE YOU ANY.

I DIDN'T PROMISE THEM ANYTHING FOR A PARTICULAR ADDRESS, BUT IT JUST GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW THERE'S MORE MONEY OUT THERE THAT I'M WILLING TO FIGHT FOR, TO MAKE SURE THAT MR. PROCTOR, THAT'S HIS NAME, GETS THAT TAKEN CARE OF.

SO, CITY MANAGER, THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR WHAT I CALL A VERY BRILLIANT MOVE.

BUT ONCE AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO THE TAXPAYERS WHO HAVE PUT THEIR EARNED TAX DOLLARS AND THEY KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE SPENDING THIS BUDGET.

SO I WOULD MUCH RATHER SAY WE HAVE ON THE RECORD TODAY.

AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY PER POSSIBLY GOING FOR STREETS MAINTENANCE AND TO INCREASE THESE MILES IS JUST A GREAT REPORT TODAY.

SO THAT THAT'S PRETTY MUCH MY REPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY TODAY.

THEY NEED MORE. THEY'RE BENEFITING FROM IT.

AND YOU SHOULD BE SMILING TODAY AS WE AS I AM WITH FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTOR AS, AS I REFER TO IT AS DISTRICT FOUR.

THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I AM IN SUPPORT OF OF THIS.

I WANT TO GIVE SOME KUDOS TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR FINDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE THE FUNDING.

IT WAS A LITTLE ALARMING TO ME WHEN I SAW THE TOTAL NUMBER GO BELOW WHAT I THOUGHT THE THRESHOLD WAS 150 MILLION.

IN ORDER FOR US TO MAINTAIN ZERO DEGRADATION.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE SOLD TO OUR RESIDENTS TO GO OUT AND VOTE.

AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MAKING RIGHT BY OUR PROMISES TO THE TAXPAYERS.

AND I'VE SINCE CORRECTED THAT IT WAS REALLY MORE ABOUT ELAINE MILEAGE INSTEAD OF AN ARBITRARY NUMBER.

AND SO BY THIS ALMOST $6 MILLION, GETTING US ABOUT 700 MILES KEEPS US WITHIN THE PROMISES THAT WE MADE TO THE VOTERS FOR THIS BOND.

AND I JUST THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I WILL END ON A NOT SO HIGH NOTE AND SAY THAT I DON'T SEE ANY AMENDMENTS THAT HELP THE HVAC AT CITY HALL.

SO I'LL LEAVE THAT ONE THERE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT ONE? UNDER ITEM C, I'M SEEING NONE.

IF YOU WOULD INDICATE YOUR SUPPORT OF SAID AMENDMENT BY SHOWING YOUR CITY OF DALLAS FAN SO THE CITY SECRETARY CAN TABULATE.

THANK YOU. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR.

COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART.

WILLIS. RIDLEY.

ARNOLD. NARVAEZ.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BAZALDUA.

MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS.

COUNCIL. MEMBERS. RESENDEZ.

WEST. BLACKMON.

SCHULTZ. GRACIE AND MORENO.

THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT.

IS THERE ANYONE? MISS BLACKMON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION? THANK YOU. I MOVE TO MOVE OR REDUCE THE TRANSFER OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BY $485,486 TO THE LIBRARY TO ADD FUNDS TO RESTORE SKILLMAN SOUTHWESTERN LIBRARY TO 53 HOURS A WEEK, SIX DAYS A WEEK, INCLUDING NINE STAFF.

IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? MISS BLACKMON? YES.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

EVERYONE. WE ARE ON AMENDMENT TWO.

AMENDMENT TWO.

I WANT TO THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER KIM TOLBERT, FOR PRESENTING US A BALANCED BUDGET.

IT IS JENGA. LITERALLY.

YOU COULD PULL ONE AND IT COULD ALL FALL APART.

AND SO AND I REALIZED THAT YOU'VE HAD TO MAKE TOUGH DECISIONS.

AND I THINK THE COMMUNITY REALIZES IT AS WELL.

AND SO I WANT TO APPLAUD YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR THAT.

THANK YOU. BUT I AM OFFERING ONE AMENDMENT AFTER HAVING BUDGET TOWN HALLS TO RESTORE THE SKILLMAN SOUTHWESTERN LIBRARY, AS MENTIONED, A SIX DAYS A WEEK.

I KNOW THAT THIS ONE HAS BEEN RANKED AS A LOW ATTENDANCE, LOW PROGRAMING ATTENDANCE, BUT WHAT I HAVE FOUND IN THE DISCUSSION WAS THERE IS MANY PEOPLE WHO DO LOVE THIS LIBRARY, AND THEY CAME TO MY BUDGET TOWN HALL AND THEY BECOME ACTIVE IN THE PROCESS IN THE MEANTIME. SO IF ANYTHING, PEOPLE ARE NOW REALIZING WHAT PUBLIC POLICY AND PUBLIC IS THE THE, THE OUTCOMES AND THE I GUESS, THE PROCESS IN WHICH TO GET HERE.

AND SO WITH THAT, I WANT TO THANK THE PUBLIC TO STAFF AND D9 RESIDENTS FOR THE ADVOCACY OF THE LIBRARY, THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT ATTENDANCE IS DOWN IN THE PROGRAMING AND WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON THAT.

AND SO PLEASE COME TO OUR BAND BOOK CLUB I THINK WE'RE GOING TO START HAVING AND WE ARE COMMITTED TO CONTINUING TO LOOK FOR PARTNERSHIPS AND IMPROVE OUTCOMES FOR OUR LIBRARY AND COMMUNITY. AND THIS IS A SENSE OF A COMMUNITY.

[04:40:03]

BUT WHAT WE ARE DOING IS THIS FUND WAS ESTABLISHED AHEAD OF THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.

SO IT HAS 6 MILLION FROM FY 24 SITTING, AND IT'S PROPOSED TO ACCEPT ANOTHER 6 MILLION AND AROUND 6 MILLION AT FY 25. SO I'M ASKING ROBIN, DO WE HAVE ANY PROGRAMS OR ANY PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE FOR THIS SPECIFIC INFRASTRUCTURE FUND? AND, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO DEFINITELY ROB PAUL TO PAY PETER, BUT I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS THAT WE ARE WANTING TO INVEST IN.

AND IF THERE'S ANYTHING COMING IN THE PIPELINE.

SURE. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.

ROBIN BENTLEY, INTERIM ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.

YES. YOU'LL REMEMBER COUNCIL FORMED THIS FUND BACK IN 2023 AS PART OF THE NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE POLICY, AND IT IS FUNDED THROUGH EXPIRING TIFS.

AND SO THE FIRST TIFS JUST EXPIRED LAST YEAR, THE CEDARS TIF AND TWO SUBDISTRICTS OF THE CITY CENTER TIF.

AND SO THAT FIRST $6 MILLION IN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND FUNDING JUST ACTUALLY HIT THE ACCOUNTS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TWO MONTHS AGO SO THAT WE HAVEN'T BROUGHT ANY TERM SHEETS TO COUNCIL YET. BUT WE ARE NEGOTIATING WITH TWO DEALS THAT ARE EXACTLY THE KIND OF DEAL YOU WOULD WANT TO SEE FUNDED OUT OF THIS CATALYTIC DEALS WITH BIG INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS. AND SO WE WOULD BE BRINGING THOSE OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS TO COUNCIL.

WOULD THEY EXHAUST THE WHOLE 12 MILLION? YES. BUT IF THIS IS USED FOR THE LIBRARY WE'LL FIND ANOTHER WAY.

THEY'RE GOOD DEALS. SO WE'LL FIND A WAY TO GET THEM DONE.

OKAY. AND JOE LET'S TALK ABOUT THE LIBRARY.

AND I KNOW YOU WROTE US A MEMO THAT KIND OF OUTLINED THE RATIONALE, AND IT MAKES I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND IT.

IT MAKES SENSE.

BUT I KNOW THAT THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT PROGRAMS, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH HOW YOU MEASURE THOSE, BUT CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THE PROGRAMING IS IN AROUND HOW YOU RATE THEM? SURE.

SO JOE GEDDES, DIRECTOR OF LIBRARIES.

SO WE HAVE LOOKED AT ADDITIONAL STATISTICS.

WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY LOOK AT THESE WHEN WE WERE MAKING OUR DECISIONS.

I WILL BE UPFRONT AT THAT.

I SHARED THE DATA THAT WE LOOKED AT WHEN WE WERE MAKING THAT DECISION.

AND WITH THE PROGRAMS OFFERED AT THE SKILLMAN LOCATION, THEY ARE RANKED 27TH OUT OF THE 28 BUILDINGS THAT THEY'RE MEASURED AGAINST.

WHEN WE MOVED IT UP AND LOOKED AT AN AVERAGE ATTENDANCE PER PROGRAM, WHICH MOVED THEM UP TO 18, WHICH WAS A LITTLE MORE FAIR BECAUSE IT'S NOT BASED ON THE NUMBER OF EVENTS AND PEOPLE.

IT ACTUALLY IS THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ATTEND AN EVENT AT ANY OF OUR LOCATIONS.

SO THEY MOVED UP TO NUMBER 18 WHEN WE DID IT THAT WAY.

AND CAN I GO AHEAD? SORRY. WELL, I'VE ALSO BEEN REAL UP FRONT WITH THE FACT THAT THEIR CIRCULATION IS GOOD.

THEY'RE RANKED NUMBER SEVENTH.

I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW.

AND NUMBER SIX FOR HOLDS PICKUP.

SO PEOPLE ARE VISITING THE BUILDING AND PICKING UP MATERIALS THERE WHICH WE HAD EXPRESSED PREVIOUSLY.

SKILLMAN IS NOT A LOCATION WHERE WE'VE HAD TO DO ADULT LEARNING CLASSES.

WE DON'T DO OUR SUMMER LUNCH PROGRAM OR OUR AFTER SCHOOL MEALS PROGRAM, WHICH MAKES THE ATTENDANCE AT PROGRAMS AT SOME OF THE OTHER LOCATIONS MUCH HIGHER BECAUSE WE HAVE THESE SPECIFIC PROGRAMS THAT ARE NEEDED IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEY'RE NOT OFFERED AT SKILLMAN.

IS THERE? I MEAN, WE COULD OFFER THEM IF IT WAS NEEDED IN THE IF IT WAS NEEDED.

WE DON'T SEE THE NEED THERE ARE CURRENTLY.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND GIVEN THE YOUNG PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE.

CAITLYN DID WRITE A LITTLE NOTE AND SAID, THANK YOU FOR TRYING.

AS YOUNG PEOPLE CULTIVATED IN A POLITICAL LANDSCAPE OF CHAOS, IT'S ADMITTEDLY DIFFICULT TO HAVE FAITH IN POLITICS.

YOU HAVE DONE A LOT IN CREATING A FOUNDATION OF TRUST AND FAITH BETWEEN US AND THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS ENDS AND BECOMES, WE'VE CREATED A FAN BASE, IF YOU WILL, BECAUSE THIS IS ABOUT LISTENING AND TRYING TO MAKE THINGS BETTER AND MEETING THEM HALFWAY.

AND FOR 485,000.

I APPLAUD EVERYBODY FOR COMING TOGETHER TO TRY TO FIGURE THIS OUT.

I THINK I WAS RAIDING THE LIBRARY BUDGET AND EVERYBODY WAS FRETTING, BUT I THIS IS I KNOW I DON'T WANT TO TAKE MONEY FROM A FUND, BUT I'M I'M WILLING TO GO THERE IF I NEED TO AND HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND ASK THE QUESTION.

AND SO I HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL SUPPORT ME ON THIS.

I DIDN'T REALIZE HOW EXCITED AND HOW ENERGIZED THE COMMUNITY WAS.

UNTIL YOU TELL THEM THAT YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE SOMETHING AWAY AND YOU SHOWED UP.

AND I THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE ALL MORNING.

I'M SURE YOU ALL ARE WELL VERSED ON PENSIONS.

AND SO AND THERE'LL BE A TEST AT THE END.

AND SO I DO HOPE THAT YOU WILL SUPPORT THIS AND AND THEN JOIN A BOOK CLUB MEETING AND A CROCHET CLUB.

I THINK I COMMITTED TO THAT AS WELL.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT TWO.

[04:45:03]

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

SO REALLY QUICKLY BECAUSE YOU BROUGHT UP THE PROGRAMING AND STUFF.

SO IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE IT'S A GOOD THING THAT THERE'S NOT NEED FOR CERTAIN PROGRAMS, RIGHT? AND NOT EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD IS THE SAME, AND NOT EVERY LIBRARY DOES EXACTLY THE SAME THINGS, BECAUSE IF THEY WERE, THEY'D BE ALL COOKIE CUTTER AND THEY'D BE BORING.

RIGHT? SO AND THAT'S NOT WHAT A LIBRARY IS ABOUT.

A LIBRARY IS ABOUT FEEDING THE MIND AND THE SPIRIT OF THE COMMUNITY OF THAT COMMUNITY.

AND SO DO WE HAVE DATA THAT BECAUSE TO ME, THIS SOUNDS MAYBE LIKE IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE ADULT LIBRARY THAN IT IS CHILDREN'S.

I'M NOT SAYING THERE'S NOT YOUTH THAT GO THERE.

I'M JUST SAYING MAYBE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE ADULT PROGRAMING WE'RE CROCHETING.

WE HEARD I'M ALL IN ON THE BANNED BOOK BOOK CLUB.

I MEAN, I LOVE THAT WE DO THAT ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

AND I JUST EVERY TIME I SEE IT, I'M LIKE SHARING IT AND LOVING IT.

I HAVE THE BANNED BOOK CLUB T-SHIRT AS WELL.

AND YOU CAN BUY ONE IF YOU WANT TO HELP SUPPORT OUR DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY.

AND SO WE NEED TO SELL THEM AT SKILLMAN LIBRARY SO Y'ALL CAN GET SOME EXTRA FUNDING.

SO, BUT AND AND BUT CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? LIKE, HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHAT PROGRAMING GOES WHERE? I MEAN, JUST REALLY QUICKLY BECAUSE YOU BET.

SO WE DO HAVE A PROGRAM PERSON CURRENTLY IN THE CURRENT YEAR.

WE DO HAVE A PERSON DEDICATED TO CREATING PROGRAMING AT EVERY LOCATION, AND THAT'S THE SAME ACROSS THE BOARD.

SO THERE IS A DEDICATED LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL THAT IS THERE CREATING PROGRAM BASED ON THE NEEDS AND FEEDBACK OF THE COMMUNITY.

SO THAT IS THE SAME ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND THEN WE CREATE THE PROGRAMS BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY.

A LOT OF TIME IT EBBS AND FLOWS.

WE MAY PUT OUT SOME REALLY GREAT IDEAS AND THEN NO ONE COMES OR AND SO WE TRY AND SWITCH THINGS UP.

WE JUST HAVEN'T HAD THAT SUCCESS AT SKILLMAN GETTING PEOPLE TO COME TO LIBRARY PROGRAMING.

THEY COME OUT FOR THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY BOOK SALES.

THAT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT WE HAVE WE THERE ARE NOT A LOT OF FAMILIES WITH SMALL CHILDREN IN THE AREA.

SO THE STORYTIME ATTENDANCE IS IS LOW.

THE ONE YOUTH IS LIKE WAVING, LIKE, I'M HERE, I'M HERE.

YOU HAVE THE WEIGHT OF A LOT OF PEOPLE ON YOUR SHOULDER, YOUNG PERSON, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU'RE THE ONLY YOUTH HERE.

BUT I KNOW THERE'S MORE.

I DO NOT WANT TO DISAPPOINT THEM.

YEAH, I KNOW, I KNOW THERE'S MORE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

AND AND THANK YOU TO THOSE OF YOU IN YOUR COMMUNITY WHO I MEAN, INSTANTLY.

I THINK THE SECOND Y'ALL HEARD WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THIS LIBRARY? I, I WASN'T I MEAN, I PAID ATTENTION, BUT NOBODY WAS REALLY SEEMING TO GET IN AN UPROAR YET.

AND THEN IT WAS LIKE FIVE SECONDS, I THINK, AFTER IT WAS SAID.

AND I THINK YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER ALSO KIND OF MENTIONED SOMETHING AND IT WAS LIKE BOOM HOUR OR MY EMAIL STARTED GETTING A DELUGE OF EMAILS AND I WASN'T WORRIED. I KNEW THAT I, I KNEW THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON WOULD BE TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT, AND IF SHE NEEDED HELP, SHE WOULD ASK AND SHE DIDN'T NEED IT.

SHE WENT AND ASKED THE PEOPLE WHO SHE NEEDED TO ASK.

AND THANK YOU FOR LOOKING UNDER ALL THE COUCH CUSHIONS AND EVERYWHERE.

485,000 ISN'T A LOT OF MONEY IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF CITY HALL, BUT IT IS A LOT OF MONEY IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF A BUDGET.

THAT IS, I MEAN, RAZOR THIN, BALANCED.

AND SO THOSE OF YOU WHO SAT HERE AND HEARD ALL THAT TALK ABOUT THE PENSION, THAT'S WHAT'S REALLY YOU KNOW, WE WERE 38 MILLION SHORT IN TAX REVENUE AND WE HAD TO FUND THIS BIG OLD, YOU KNOW, GAP IN THE PENSION FOR POLICE AND FIRE AND EMPLOYEES.

AND IT'S LIKE, AND OUR CITY MANAGER HAS DONE EVERYTHING SHE COULD AND SHE PRESENTED A BALANCED BUDGET WITHOUT RAISING THE TAX RATE, ACTUALLY DECREASING IT BY THE LARGEST PERCENTAGE IN LARGEST TAX RATE DECREASE IN HISTORY FOR DALLAS.

AND THAT SAYS A LOT.

BUT THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT GOT CUT TO THE WAYSIDE.

AND YOURS WAS IT. BUT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A GOOD AMENDMENT TO BRING IT BACK.

AND I'M A HUGE ADVOCATE FOR THE LIBRARIES.

I GREW UP IN LIBRARIES DOWN IN HOUSTON WHERE I GREW UP, AND I LOVE MY DALLAS WEST LIBRARY BRANCH HERE.

AND, YOU KNOW, MY BACHMANN LIBRARY.

AND THERE'S DIFFERENT PROGRAMING THERE AS WELL.

AND I LOVE IT. THEY BROUGHT PROPS, THEY BROUGHT PROPS.

AND AND I THINK I MIGHT HAVE TO JOIN YOU IN FOR ONE CLASS OR A BOOK CLUB READING, BUT I CAN'T GO ALL THE TIME BECAUSE I GOT TO, YOU KNOW, HANG OUT IN MINE AS WELL.

BUT I DON'T WANT MY NUMBERS TO GO DOWN.

AND THEN THIS IS, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER IS OVER HERE NEXT YEAR DOING THE NEXT BUDGET.

BUT I WILL BE SUPPORTING YOU ON THIS ONE MISS BLACKMON, BECAUSE THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

AND THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER, FOR WORKING WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER, AS WELL AS OUR STAFF TO HELP FIND IT IN OUR COMMUNITY.

GET THOSE NUMBERS UP AND LET'S.

THIS IS SCARY, RIGHT? SO DON'T EVER GO IN THAT.

GO THROUGH THIS AGAIN. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN MORENO YOU RECOGNIZE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT.

AND IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T WANT THE LIBRARY FUNDED.

I HOPE THAT THE AUTHOR HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO BACK TO A DIFFERENT SOURCE.

TO KEEP THE LIBRARY CONTINUING TO BE OPEN.

MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS IS COMING OUT OF THE TIFF FROM THE CEDARS, AND WE HAVE SOME PROJECTS THAT ARE LINED UP SOUTH OF I-30 THAT WILL THAT ARE ALREADY

[04:50:07]

LINED UP AND ALSO MOVING INTO YEAR TWO, YEAR THREE.

WHERE WOULD WHERE WILL WE CONTINUE FUNDING THIS LIBRARY? ARE WE GOING TO BE CONTINUING TO COME BACK TO THIS SAME SOURCE.

SO I GUESS I WILL.

I DON'T KNOW WHO THAT QUESTION IS FOR.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

I'LL START. IF THE DECISION OF THE CITY COUNCIL IS TO CONTINUE THE OPERATIONS OF THIS PARTICULAR BRANCH AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE WILL DEFINITELY LOOK AT HOW WE CONTINUE TO FUND IT GOING FORWARD.

WOULD NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT WOULD CONTINUE TO COME FROM THAT PARTICULAR INVESTMENT FUND.

BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH OUR ACTUAL BUDGET PROCESS, AS WE WOULD DO WITH ALL OF OUR OTHER CITY SERVICES.

SO IT WOULD BE TREATED THE EXACT SAME WAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ROBIN SINCE THIS HAS EXPIRED, DOES THE TIF BOARD NO LONGER APPROVE THOSE PROJECTS? YES. EXACTLY.

RIGHT. SO THE TIF IS EXPIRED.

THE INCREMENT THAT THE CITY WAS CONTRIBUTING TO THE TIF NOW GOES INTO THIS FUND.

AND DECISIONS ON WHICH PROJECTS TO FUND COME TO THE COUNCIL.

THE FUNDING IS RESERVED FOR OUR HIGH POVERTY AREAS OF THE CITY, WITH A MAJORITY VOTE OR A THREE QUARTER VOTE TO SPEND OUTSIDE OF THOSE AREAS, BUT THERE'S NO TIF BOARD INVOLVED.

OKAY. AND THEN WHAT IS THE CENSUS TRACK OF THE SKILLMAN LIBRARY? I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

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

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WANT TO JUST SAY THANK YOU TO COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS BRINGING IN AN AMENDMENT TO BRING MORE MONEY TO OUR LIBRARIES, ARTS, AND PARKS AT BUDGET SEASON IS ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT I WILL SUPPORT.

HEARD FROM PLENTY OF PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, A LOT WHO ARE TRANSIT DEPENDENT.

AND SO THANK YOU ALL FOR Y'ALL'S ADVOCACY.

IT MEANS A LOT. IT IS ESSENTIALLY A ROUNDING ERROR.

WITH HOW BIG THIS BUDGET IS.

AND SO KNOWING THAT, THAT THAT IS THE CASE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS.

BUT LOOKING AT YOUR FACES, I KNOW HOW BIG OF A SMALL AMOUNT THIS IS.

AND THAT IT IMPACTS EVERYONE'S LIVES.

SO THANK YOU ALL FOR Y'ALL'S ADVOCACY.

THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY ALWAYS MAKES THEIR STANCE KNOWN, SO WE APPRECIATE THAT FOR SURE.

BUT I ALSO JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE CITY MANAGER AGAIN, BECAUSE I LOOK AT OUR AT OUR SHEET.

AND THIS IS USUALLY A DAY WHERE WE COULD TELL OUR FAMILY TO GO HAVE DINNER.

YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE SEEING US.

AND I THINK IT SPEAKS VOLUMES TO SUCH A DIFFICULT YEAR THAT WE HAVE.

BUT HOW THOUGHTFUL.

WHAT WE HAVE PROPOSED TO US IS BECAUSE THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A NIGHTMARE, AND I WAS REALLY DREADING IT.

I LOVE BUDGET SEASON, BUT I LOVE IT BECAUSE IT GIVES US OUR ABILITY TO REALLY PUT OUR FINGER ON THE SCALE.

BUT WHEN WE'VE HAD AN ADMINISTRATOR TO TAKE THE TIME TO FIGURE OUT HOW OUR FINGER ON THE SCALE CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT HAVING TO DO THIS ON THE FLOOR, TO ME, IS IS SOMETHING NEW IN THE FIVE YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE.

SO THANK YOU FOR THIS BUDGET ULTIMATELY.

AND THANK YOU FOR, I GUESS THE THE SMALL COUCH CUSHIONS THAT WERE ABLE TO BE TURNED OVER TO FIND THIS, THIS WAS 100% THE BIGGEST PIECE OF FEEDBACK THAT I GOT THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN IT.

SO THE LIBRARIES AND, AND NOW WE'RE BACK UP TO ZERO DEGRADATION WITH OUR STREET LANE MILES.

I COULDN'T BE MORE HAPPY WITH WHAT YOU'VE PRESENTED US.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM I'M SORRY, ITEM C, AMENDMENT TO.

RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

FIRST THE LIBRARIES.

YOU KNOW, MY HEART IS IN THE LIBRARY.

I HAD THREE LIBRARIES IN MY DISTRICT.

AND I REMEMBER LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THE THE OWL'S GOING TO GET CLOSE, CUT DOWN AND THE CHILDREN DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.

AND HOW DO WE FIND MONEY? AND THERE IS A GREAT DEAL.

I WANT TO THANK THE CITY MANAGER FOR FOR LOOKING AT THIS KIND OF AS ROBIN BAILEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

JUST $485,000.

WHAT INVESTMENT INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING IS HOW MUCH WE HAVE.

WHAT IS THE BALANCE? THE BALANCE AS OF TODAY IS A LITTLE BIT OVER $6 MILLION.

IT'S LAST YEAR'S TRANSFER FROM THOSE TWO EXPIRED TIFFS.

AND THEN A LITTLE BIT OF INTEREST AND ALL THAT MONEY THAT WAS DESIGNATED IS IS FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.

IS THAT IS A PROJECT BY PROJECT.

[04:55:01]

IS THAT CITYWIDE? HOW IS THAT INVESTED? IT'S AVAILABLE FOR ANY PROJECT IN THE CITY.

BUT LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, IT'S REALLY RESERVED FOR THOSE CATALYTIC PROJECTS IN HIGH POVERTY AREAS OF THE CITY WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GROW THE TAX BASE BECAUSE WE KNOW THOSE PROJECTS HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS, OUTDATED INFRASTRUCTURE, UNDERSIZED INFRASTRUCTURE OR NO INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND SO THE INTENT OF THE FUND, WHEN COUNCIL APPROVED IT, WAS TO HELP THOSE DEVELOPERS THAT ARE COMING TO THE TABLE WITH A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE EXPENSE TO GET THEIR PROJECTS DONE, IT CAN BE SPENT CITY WIDE, BUT SPENDING IT OUTSIDE OF THOSE HIGH POVERTY TARGET AREAS IS A THREE QUARTER VOTE THRESHOLD.

OKAY. AND DO WE HAVE A MAP WHICH CONSISTS OF THE HIGHEST INVESTMENT AREAS? WE DO. IF YOU GOOGLE DALLAS TARGET AREA MAP, IT'S THE FIRST LINK OR I CAN EMAIL IT TO EVERYONE.

YEAH. PLEASE MAP YOU'VE ALL SEEN BEFORE, RIGHT? CITY MANAGER, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN AROUND.

MAYBE THIS IS MY 15TH BUDGET IN 15 YEARS IN THE BUDGET.

AND IT'S AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS BUDGET TO US.

YOU KNOW, WE HAD WE BROUGHT ALL NIGHT TO MIDNIGHT, AND THE NEXT DAY.

THE NEXT MORNING, YOU KNOW, TO LOOK AT IT.

BUT IT SHOWED THAT I'LL NOT GET A CITY MANAGER CREDIT, BUT I DON'T GET THE COUNCIL MEMBER CREDIT.

I MEAN, Y'ALL HAD DUG INTO IT.

YOU KNOW, NORMALLY WE'D BE MEETING IN ONE ROOM OR THE OTHER ROOM TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE WHAT MONEY FROM WHAT DEPARTMENT AND PUT IT INTO THIS DEPARTMENT AND WHAT LINE ITEM YOU NEED TO TAKE FROM AND PUT IT OVER HERE.

BUT I SEE RIGHT NOW THAT THE COUNCIL FOR THE FIRST TIME IN A LONG TIME, YOU KNOW, HAD REALLY LOOK AT THE BUDGET AND SAY, HEY, WHAT IS BEST FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS AND HOW CAN WE PUT THAT MONEY? AND I'M GLAD IT'S IN LIBRARIES.

ONE THING, DURING THE PANDEMIC, THE LIBRARY WAS OUR SOURCE OUR CALLING POINT THAT THE CHILDREN DURING THE SUMMERTIME, THE FREE LUNCH PROGRAM, ALL THOSE ACTIVITIES IS IN THE LIBRARY.

AND I'M GOING TO SAY ONE THING THAT FORMER CITY MANAGER MARY SUE, WHO WAS A LIBRARIAN WHEN SHE FIRST STARTED, WORKED FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.

AND AND WE CREATE A LIBRARY WITHOUT A BUN PACKAGE.

SO, SO THEREFORE IT IS AN HONOR, YOU KNOW, TO SEE THAT WE'RE PUTTING MONEY BACK INTO OUR CHILDREN, INTO OUR FUTURE.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO PUT MORE MONEY INTO THE FUTURE OF LIBRARIES.

BECAUSE WITHOUT THAT, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO BE DOING, ESPECIALLY DURING THE SUMMERTIME, ESPECIALLY DURING THE HOLIDAYS.

THE LIBRARY IS GREAT.

AND AND ONE THING I ASK THAT ON MOST OF THE LIBRARIES, THAT IS GREAT TO BE INSIDE, BUT ALSO I WISH THAT CITY MANAGER I KNOW IN MY LIBRARY WE HAVE BOUGHT MORE SPACE OUTSIDE OF THE LIBRARY, YOU KNOW, GREEN SPACE AND FOR CHILDREN TO SIT IN THE PARK, AROUND THE BLEACHERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

AND I KNOW THAT WHEN WE BOUGHT THE HIGHLAND HILLS LIBRARY, WE BOUGHT ENOUGH ACREAGE TO DO THAT.

AND I KNOW IN, I THINK DISTRICT 13, THERE MIGHT BE THE LIBRARY THAT WE BOUGHT.

WE DID HAVE MORE LAND AROUND THE LIBRARY, BUT WE'RE NOT USING THAT.

WE'RE NOT INVESTING THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR KIDS GO INSIDE THE LIBRARY.

BUT DURING THE SUMMERTIME, A NICE FALL DAY, A NICE DAY, THEY CAN GO OUTSIDE AND LEARN, YOU KNOW, PICNIC OR WHATEVER, A PLACE TO DO THAT.

BUT WE NEED TO TO DO MORE TO SAID GOING INTO THE LIBRARY BUT ALSO OUTSIDE WITH RECREATION WITH THE QUARTER LIKE WITH AMENITIES THAT THAT WE NEED TO LOOK INTO INVESTMENTS.

SO SO THEREFORE I WILL BE LOOKING AT NOT THIS BUDGET.

MAYBE NEXT WEEK I MIGHT BE TRYING TO FIND AMENDMENT, TRYING TO FIND SOME MONEY TO SAY HOW CAN WE INVEST OUTSIDE THE LIBRARY? AND BECAUSE THAT'S ONE THING I DEFINITELY NEED TO DO.

THANK YOU MISS SCHULTZ.

RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

AMENDMENT TWO. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOU KNOW I AM.

I THOUGHT OF THREE C'S THAT I WANT TO SHARE ABOUT THIS.

I AM VERY WORRIED FOR.

EXACTLY BASED ON THE COMMENT THAT MY OUR MAYOR PRO TEM JUST MADE.

I'M THE BEAUTY OF THE BUDGET THAT WE GOT WAS THAT AS AS I THINK, I THINK, YOU KNOW, MISS BLACKMON SAID, IS THAT IT'S JENGA.

AND I'M VERY WORRIED THAT WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN NOW TO TO TAKE IT APART AS WE SEE THE CREATIVITY AND THE AND THE INSIGHT OF OUR FELLOW, OF OUR COLLEAGUES FINDING FUNDING.

SO I'M WORRIED ABOUT THAT, AND I'M WORRIED THAT IT'S GOING TO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MONEY THAT'S GIVEN THIS YEAR FOR THE LIBRARY DOESN'T GET.

IT DOESN'T IMPACT NEXT YEAR'S LIBRARY BUDGET, BECAUSE I WOULD WANT IT TO ONLY BE FOLDED INTO THE LIBRARY BUDGET MOVING FORWARD, THAT THIS WOULD REALLY BE MADE, MAKE A COMMITMENT THAT THIS IS A ONE TIME FUNDING.

AT THE SAME TIME, I WANT TO CONGRATULATE BOTH MY COLLEAGUE, OUR CITY MANAGER, AND OF COURSE OUR RESIDENTS FOR SHOWING UP. NOT HERE, I MEAN.

[05:00:01]

I'M GLAD YOU'RE HERE. BUT I MEAN, IN TERMS OF THE BUDGET, TOWN HALL, LEARNING ABOUT SOMETHING, TAKING ACTION THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN RESPECTFUL AND INSIGHTFUL. AND EACH EMAIL CONGRATULATE, YOU KNOW, SORRY.

EACH EMAIL INFORMED US MORE AND MORE ABOUT WHY THIS MATTERS.

IT WASN'T JUST SORT OF A FORM LETTER THAT EVERYBODY SENT IN AND SIGNED COPY PASTE SENT IN.

SO IT WAS WITH REAL PASSION AND PERSONALITY THAT THIS WAS SENT.

AND I APPRECIATE YOUR FIGHT, AND I WANT TO USE THE LAST SEAT AND CHALLENGE YOU TO REALLY MAKE THIS A VIBRANT LIBRARY SO THAT THAT QUESTION NEVER COMES UP AGAIN AND THAT IT'S NOT AN EXCEPTION IN TERMS OF ITS FUNDING.

IT DOES GET IT BECOMES OBVIOUS TO THE LIBRARY BUDGET TEAM THAT THIS HAS TO BE AN ACTIVE PART OF THE OF THE BUDGET.

SO I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE I DON'T I GUESS THAT'S THE FOURTH.

SEE, I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO START TO SEE THIS BUDGET BEGIN TO NOW GO, OH, LOOK, HERE'S 5 MILLION BUCKS WE CAN ALL GO PICK FROM FOR OUR PROJECTS.

SO I DON'T KNOW YET HOW I'M GOING TO SUPPORT ON THIS, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE ALL GOING TO DO IT.

I WILL MAKE A COMMITMENT NOT TO DO IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE IS GOING TO DO THAT.

BUT I DO APPLAUD YOU FOR THIS, AND I AND I, I DO HOPE THAT IT PASSES.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AN OPEN PANDORA'S BOX ON TAKING APART THIS BUDGET NOW, BECAUSE THERE'S PLENTY OF THINGS I'D LOVE TO ADD AS WELL.

BUT I CHOSE TO RESPECT, YOU KNOW, THIS, NOT THAT YOU DIDN'T, BECAUSE YOU FOUND SOMETHING BASED ON A COMMUNITY NEED.

AND IT IS TRUE.

AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, BAZALDUA SAID THAT WITHIN THE BUDGET, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ARTS, THIS IS THE ONLY ITEM THAT I'VE GOTTEN A TON OF EMAILS ABOUT FROM PEOPLE ACROSS THE CITY.

SO I IT'S ALSO A MESSAGE, I THINK, TO SHOW UP TO BUDGET TOWN HALLS, NOT JUST TO DO THINGS BY WORD OF MOUTH.

SO THANK YOU.

GENTLEMEN. ARNOLD. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS ABOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS.

AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU ALL ARE HERE SO THAT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HOW THE PROCESS WORKS.

I AM GOING TO BE ONE OF THOSE WHO WILL SPEAK ON THIS MONEY, BECAUSE IT IS TAXPAYERS DOLLARS AND BECAUSE OF THE WORDS OF EQUITY AND TARGETED AREAS OF WHICH MISS ROBIN BENTLEY HAS MENTIONED, I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T SPEAK ON IT.

NOW I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO THE BRILLIANCY OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBER FOR FIGHTING FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

BUT IT IS BUDGET SEASON, AND SO WE MAY HAVE TO COMPROMISE.

I'M ONE OF THOSE WITH THE LIBRARY, AND I'M.

I HAVE A ONE LIBRARY.

AND TO YOU, MISS GOODNESS.

ARE YOU AWARE OF THE FACT THAT PAUL LAURENCE DUNBAR LIBRARY HAD MALFUNCTIONS IN THEIR AC AND HEATING? SO COULD YOU TELL US WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT? HAVE YOU CLEANED IT UP? BOUGHT A NEW ONE OR WHERE ARE WE? I'M NOT SURE THIS IS.

WELL, THIS IS WHAT I'M GETTING READY TO SAY IN TERMS OF EQUITY AMENDMENT.

OKAY. WELL, LET ME JUST SPEAK TO THIS.

YES. I JUST WANT YOU TO STAY.

SHE HAS THE GERMANE TO THIS AMENDMENT, GERMANE TO THIS COMMITTEE, TO THIS AMENDMENT IS CALLED EQUITY.

YOU OPEN THE DOOR.

WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT TARGETED AREAS, WOULD THAT BE RIGHT, MAYOR? WOULD THAT BE RIGHT? DID SHE OPEN UP THE DOOR? I MEAN, IT'S HARD TO ARGUE.

DID SHE OPEN UP THE DOOR WHEN SHE TALKED ABOUT TARGETED AREAS OF WHICH YOU'VE BEEN WATCHING A LOT OF THAT COURT TV, TALKING ABOUT OPENING UP THE DOOR AND STUFF.

THIS SOUNDS LIKE VERY LAW AND ORDER ISH TO ME.

I'M NOT TRYING TO. I'M NOT TRYING TO TURN INTO A TRIAL.

I'M JUST SAYING I'M NOT.

I'M JUST BASICALLY SAYING THAT THE AMENDMENT IS ABOUT SKILLMAN LOCATION, AND YOU'RE DIRECTLY ASKING HER ABOUT THE REPAIRS THAT A LIBRARY DISTRICT. SO MAYBE WE'RE A LITTLE CAN WE TALK ABOUT TARGETED IN TERMS OF THE FUNDS FOR TARGETED? THIS IS WHERE SHE OPENED UP THE DOOR WHEN ROBIN OPENED THE DOOR ABOUT TARGETED AREAS OF WHICH THIS LIBRARY IS IN PAUL LAURENCE DUNBAR LIBRARY.

THAT'S WHERE THE EQUITY PIECE COMES FROM.

AND SO FOR US, MRS PEREIRA IS HERE.

I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK TO THAT.

SO DO YOU MIND IF SHE SPEAKS TO THAT? I WOULD LIKE HER TO SPEAK ON EQUITY IN THESE AREAS.

COULD YOU DO THAT? SURE, SURE SURE, SURE.

AND WHILE YOU ALL ARE DOING THAT, I'M GOING TO LEAVE A NAME WITH YOU.

HER NAME IS ALGERINE.

CRAIG. YOU CAN COME ON DOWN BECAUSE I WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.

I HAD THE HONOR OF BEING A STUDENT IN AN AFRICAN AMERICAN SCHOOL IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, WHERE SHE WAS THE FIRST AFRICAN AMERICAN LIBRARIAN CERTIFIED IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

SO I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF LIBRARIES.

AND SO, YES, YOU ALL ARE GOING TO HEAR ME FIGHTING FOR MY COMMUNITY TODAY.

SO COULD YOU TALK TO US ABOUT WHERE DOES EQUITY FIT IN THE REALM OF IS THIS MONEY THAT MISS ROBIN JUST TALKED ABOUT? SHE SHE CAUTIONED US BECAUSE IT SPEAKS TO TARGETED AREAS.

IS THAT WHAT STATEMENT SHE MADE OR DO YOU UNDERSTAND HER TO SAY THE SAME THING THAT I'M SAYING? SHE SAID. GOOD AFTERNOON, LIZ PERERA, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, CHAIR ARNOLD.

YES. YOU KNOW, IN MY OVERSIGHT OF LEADING THE LIBRARY, WORKING WITH OUR LIBRARY LEADERS, IT WAS A TOUGH DECISION TO MAKE, RIGHT?

[05:05:03]

WE WE VALUE EACH ONE OF OUR LIBRARIES AND THE COMMUNITIES THAT THEY SERVE.

BUT IT IS TRUE THAT THIS LIBRARY HAS A LOWER POVERTY RATE THAN OTHERS.

INDICATING FROM OUR EQUITY INDICATOR SCORE.

SO THAT WOULD BE A CORRECT STATEMENT.

SO MY QUESTION ABOUT THE PERHAPS I NEED TO GET MRS. ROBIN BACK. SO WHAT DOES EQUITY MEAN IN TERMS OF BUDGETS AS WE COMMITTED INFUSING EQUITY THROUGH OUR BUDGETS? UNEQUIVOCALLY, THE FUND THAT ACM ROBIN HAS SPOKEN OF IS AN EQUITY ENDEAVOR SO THAT WE CAN INVEST IN HISTORICALLY UNDERINVESTED AREAS. IF I COULD JUMP IN FOR JUST A MINUTE.

COUNCIL WOMAN.

ARNOLD. SO WHEN THIS INVESTMENT FUND WAS SET UP ORIGINALLY.

I BELIEVE THERE WAS A $6 MILLION CONTRIBUTION.

SO THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE FUND RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S WHAT ROBIN SPOKE OF IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET.

WE WERE RECOMMENDING THROUGH MY PROPOSED BUDGET TO THE COUNCIL TO PUT ANOTHER 6 MILLION.

SO THE AMENDMENT THAT'S BEFORE THE COUNCIL RIGHT NOW WOULD TAKE THE ADDITIONAL 6 MILLION THAT WE WERE PLANNING FOR 2025 AND REDUCE THAT AMOUNT BY THE 425, 485,000 THAT IS IN THE CURRENT AMENDMENT.

SO THE PLAN WAS TO PUT ANOTHER 6 MILLION INTO THE FUND, WHICH WOULD TAKE THE FUND TO A TOTAL OF 12.

AND THEN WE COULD BEGIN TO USE THAT FUNDING FOR NEEDED INFRASTRUCTURE IN THOSE UNDERINVESTED UNDERINVESTED AREAS, INCLUDING EQUITY AREAS AROUND THE CITY, WHICH IS WHAT ROBIN DESCRIBED.

SO WE WOULD HAVE 485,000 LESS THAN WHAT WE WERE PLANNING.

SO CITY MANAGER, THE QUESTION WOULD BE IS DISTRICT 4 IN 1 OF THOSE TARGETED AREAS? THERE ARE SEVERAL AREAS WITHIN DISTRICT FOUR THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED ONE OF THE UNDERINVESTED INVESTED AREAS.

INVESTMENT AREAS. YES, MA'AM.

SO WE WANT TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD SO THAT SO COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL KNOW WE ARE ONE OF THE TARGETED AREAS AND AND THIS IS IN ONE OF THE TARGETED AREA NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO WHAT I'M SIMPLY DOING IS WHAT I'VE BEEN HIRED TO DO BY MY CONSTITUENTS.

I HAVE TO SPEAK UP NOW, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, I'M SPEAKING ON THIS MONEY.

SO FOR CLARITY, BECAUSE I'M NOT I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU ALL UNDERSTAND WE ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE TO FIGHT FOR OUR DISTRICT.

SO I HAVE TO HAVE TO BE PRESENT TODAY.

SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE, MONEY, WHERE WE HAVE BEEN HAS BEEN A DISINVESTMENT.

I HAVE TO SPEAK TO IT.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE TODAY THAT WE HAVE SOME MORE MONEY THAT WE CAN SPEAK TO THAT WILL GO TO THE TARGETED AREAS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED, DISTRICT FOUR BEING ONE OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS. AND SO I PROBABLY WILL NOT SUPPORT TOTALLY ALL TOTALLY TODAY THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, BECAUSE I'M SURE WE'RE GOING TO DO SOME NEGOTIATION.

BUT PLEASE, THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE HERE UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON IS DOING WHAT SHE NEEDS TO DO TO FIGHT FOR YOU, AND YOU'RE FIGHTING FOR YOUR COMMUNITY.

AND I HAVE A COMMUNITY THAT HAS SENT ME HERE TO 1500 MARYLAND TO FIGHT FOR INVESTMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE AND EQUITY THAT WE ALL SIGNED OFF ON A FEW YEARS AGO IN. OUR COMMITMENT SHOULD REMAIN THE SAME SO THAT WE WILL NOT BELABOR THE POINT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET AN UNDERSTANDING AND I WILL COME BACK AND GET WITH YOU SO WHEREVER WE CAN FIND SOME MONEY.

MAYOR, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO LOOK FOR IT.

AND BECAUSE WE'RE LONG OVERDUE, FOLKS NOW ARE TALKING TO ME ABOUT REPARATIONS.

WHAT DO REPARATIONS LOOK LIKE? IT LOOKS LIKE INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN NEGLECTED FOR SO LONG.

AND SO WHEREAS MISS COUNCIL MEMBER IS LOCATED THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY, I'M GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR OTHER WAYS THAT WE CAN BRING BACK THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION OF WHAT WE COMMITTED TO AROUND THIS HORSESHOE, WHICH IS EQUITY.

SO I'M GOING TO LET YOU ALL.

RELIEVE YOURSELF FROM THOSE SEATS.

LET MR. THE DICE.

GET BACK IN HER SEAT.

BUT THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS CONVERSATION AROUND FOR ME AND MY COMMUNITY.

ALL 91,000 OF THEM THAT ARE IN THE DISTRICT, TO HAVE A VOICE THAT SPEAKS TO EQUITY SO THAT NO ONE IS LEFT BEHIND IN THIS DISTRICT THAT I REPRESENT.

SO THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR HAVING THE PATIENCE.

CAN'T HOLD YOUR HEART BECAUSE WHAT ARE WE GOING ON? YOU MAY HAVE A HEART ATTACK BECAUSE I'M GOING TO KEEP SPEAKING ON THE FOLKS AND THEIR NEEDS IN MY DISTRICT.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SMILES AND YOUR SUPPORT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

AND YOU DID BRING IT BACK AROUND TO I APPRECIATE IT.

MISS WILLIS, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT TWO.

OKAY. WELL, I WAS GOING TO THANK EVERYONE FOR THEIR SMILES, SO I KNOW YOU TOOK THAT FOR ME.

ANYWAY SO LET ME PREFACE THIS BY SAYING FOR EIGHT YEARS I WAS ON THE FRIENDS OF THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD.

I WAS A GALA CO-CHAIR.

I WAS ONE OF THOSE ADVOCATES THAT WOULD COME DOWN TO CITY HALL AND GO TO TOWN HALL MEETINGS TO ADVOCATE FOR LIBRARY FUNDING, TO GET IT BACK TO WHERE IT WAS BEFORE MAJOR CUTS HAPPENED DURING THE RECESSION AROUND 0809.

SO, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT TALKING TO SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE IN LIBRARIES.

[05:10:02]

SO THE FIRST THING THAT STRUCK ME ON THIS WAS THE SOURCE OF FUNDS.

THAT WAS REALLY CONCERNING.

WE HAVE AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICY IN THIS CITY, AND A LOT OF IT FOCUSES ON DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

AND THIS, YOU KNOW, THE NEED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE TO DRAW DEVELOPERS AND TO DRAW THE ATTENTION AND OFFSET SOME OF THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROVIDING THAT FOUNDATION SO THAT WE CAN GROW OUR TAX BASE, WHETHER IT'S WITH HOUSING OR OFFICES OR ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTS, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT GOT ME, YOU KNOW, INTO SUPPORTING THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT EXPIRING TIFFS AND WHAT WE WOULD DO.

I SUPPORTED THIS BECAUSE I'VE GOT, I THINK SECOND ONLY LANE MILES TO DISTRICT 14, I BELIEVE.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M FIGHTING FOR THOSE STREETS.

AND I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE SEEN SOME OF THESE GO TO INFRASTRUCTURE AND D 13.

BUT THE UNDERSERVED AREAS AND THE WAY IT DELIVERS ON OUR ECO DEV PLAN, WHICH LET'S FACE IT, YOU KNOW, MONEY WISE, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO DELIVER ON THAT OTHER WAYS, BUT THIS WAS THE WAY WE COULD START TO GET AT IT.

SO THEN FLIP OVER TO LIBRARIES.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE EXERCISE THAT THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER HAD EVERYONE GO THROUGH, I THINK, FORCED THE EXAMINATION OF EVERYTHING.

AND SO WHAT THIS REVEALED WAS THAT THOUGH IT MAY BE BELOVED TO SOME PEOPLE WHAT IT WAS MOSTLY USED FOR, IT'S A HALF $1 MILLION DRIVE UP BOOK EXCHANGE.

SO IT SOUNDED LIKE.

AND I MEAN, MISS GADDIS, I MEAN, YOU SAID THAT THE PRIMARY USE OR THAT, YOU SEE, I'M NOT GOING TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH.

YOU'VE SAID THEM BEFORE.

WHAT'S THE PRIMARY USE? WE HAVE A LOT OF CUSTOMERS WHO MAKE REQUESTS FOR BOOKS HERE AND GO AND PICK THEM UP.

OKAY. SO IT'S KIND OF A DRIVE UP.

IT'S NOT. I MEAN, WHILE SOME PEOPLE MAY USE THE SPACE, IT'S NOT LIKE YOU TYPICALLY SEE IN OTHER LIBRARIES COMPARED TO OTHER LOCATIONS.

THEIR NUMBERS ARE LOWER FOR PEOPLE WHO COME INTO THE BUILDING AND STAY AND USE THE SPACE AND USE THE LIBRARY EXPERTISE.

OKAY. SO THIS IS MAKING ME ASK IF WE'RE LOOKING AT EFFICIENCY AT A KIOSK EXPLORATION.

I KNOW YOU MAY HAVE SOME OTHER THINGS POTENTIALLY, BUT FOR THE PRIMARY USE OF THIS LOCATION TO SPEND THE HALF $1 MILLION, IT'S KIND OF OUT OF WHACK WITH WHAT THE ACTUAL USE IS, THE PRIMARY USE.

BUT IN LISTENING TO SOME OF THE WELL, THE NUMBERS BEAR IT OUT.

I MEAN, SO THE OTHER ISSUE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IS THE THIRD SPACE OPPORTUNITY.

SO A PLACE TO JUST GO AND BE ABLE TO SIT AND BE PEACEFUL AND DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I, I STRUGGLE WITH THAT BECAUSE I'M A BELIEVER IN THAT.

HOWEVER, IN DISTRICT 13 THERE IS A FOUR YEAR OLD LIBRARY.

IT'S 1.4 MILES AWAY.

IT'S LESS THAN A MILE AND A HALF AWAY.

IT'S OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL, FOR THAT.

IT HAS A PLAY YARD.

IT HAS A STORYBOOK TRAIL.

IT'S A GREAT LOCATION, AND I REALIZE IT'S NOT AS EASY AS A WALK OUT THE BACK DOOR TO GET TO IT, OR JUST DOWN THE STREET, BUT IT'S A MILE AND A HALF AWAY.

AND SO THAT IS PART OF MY STRUGGLE, WHERE WE LOOK AT WHERE THE SOURCE OF FUNDS IS COMING FROM, AND THEN WE LOOK AT THE USE.

AND SO IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT SOURCE OF FUNDS, I MIGHT BE WILLING TO EXAMINE IT.

BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT HOW WE PAY FOR THIS GOING FORWARD, BECAUSE WE COULD JUST SAY WE DON'T WANT TO TAKE FROM THE SOURCE OF FUNDS.

WE WANT TO KEEP THIS LIBRARY.

BUT YOU SAID THAT WOULD FORCE SOME OTHER HARD DECISIONS.

BECAUSE IF WE KEPT THIS OPEN.

I'M ACTUALLY NOT SURE HOW TO ANSWER THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD BE ASKED OF US IN THE FUTURE.

WELL, I MEAN, IT WAS CUTTING HOURS OR I MEAN, WHERE WOULD YOU TAKE FROM TO FUND THIS? RIGHT. IF WE WERE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS, WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.

YES, MA'AM. SO.

AND THAT SOMETIMES TAKES THE SHAPE OF CUTTING HOURS OR STAFF OR.

YES. THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY, SO IF YOU LOVE LIBRARIES AND YOU BELIEVE IN THE STRENGTH OF THE LIBRARIES IN THE CITY, THIS ISN'T A BAD OR A MEAN THING TO DO.

THIS IS ABOUT KEEPING AND PRESERVING THE SIX DAYS A WEEK, THE STAFF THAT WE NEED, THE PROGRAMING THAT WE NEED AT OTHER LOCATIONS, AND SO CORRECT.

THIS CHOICE ENABLED US TO KEEP EVERY OTHER LOCATION FROM REDUCING THEIR HOURS.

SO THAT'S PRETTY POWERFUL.

ANYWAY, SO I AND I BELIEVE YOU MADE THE POINT THAT I MEAN, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE DISTRICT 13 VICTORY PARK LIBRARY BEING A MILE AND A HALF AWAY, BUT I THINK THERE WERE TWO OTHERS WITHIN THREE MILES OR JUST JUST UNDER FOUR MILES.

SO AGAIN, IT'S I MEAN, THIS WAS JUST WHAT THE EXAMINATION REVEALED.

AND SO I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT I OUTLINED.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M NOT SUPPORTING IT.

OKAY. LET'S SEE HERE.

LOOKS LIKE MISS STEWART IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT TWO.

[05:15:05]

THANK YOU.

SO I DRIVE BY THIS LIBRARY JUST ABOUT EVERY DAY.

ESPECIALLY WHEN WAZE TAKES ME DOWN.

SKILLMAN TO LOVER'S.

AND HAVE USED IT AS A AS A VOTING LOCATION.

HAVE USED IT AS A LIBRARY.

AND SO I WILL SAY, BECAUSE I HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE I WOULD REALLY LOVE TO PUT A LIBRARY AND PROBABLY WON'T BE ABLE TO, BUT HOPEFULLY WE'LL PUT SOME PROGRAMING THERE.

I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OF A LIBRARY TO A NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT GROUNDS IT.

IT GIVES IT A PLACE TO HAVE MEETINGS.

MY GOODNESS. I'M AT THE FORT GREENE LIBRARY FOR MEETINGS ALL THE TIME.

IT'S WHERE WE WE GATHER AS A COMMUNITY.

SO AT THIS POINT, I AM GOING I WOULD VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THIS AMENDMENT.

I WOULD ASK THAT WE JUST DO A LITTLE DIGGING INTO THE FUTURE AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

AND BECAUSE I THINK SOME QUESTIONS, SOME VALID QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED.

BUT I THINK AT THIS POINT YOU FOUND SOME MONEY AND THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT.

AND I'M GOING TO RESPECT THAT PROCESS AND THAT DECISION.

HOWEVER, I'M VERY EXCITED BECAUSE I WASN'T HERE, I GUESS WHEN WE VOTED ON THE TAKING THE THE TIF MONEY THAT WAS AFTER A TIFF HAD EXPIRED AND MOVED FORWARD WITH WHAT WOULD HAPPEN.

I'M LIKE, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE A PLAN FOR THAT MONEY.

IF WE HAVE 6 MILLION THERE NOW AND WE SAY 6 MILLION IS COMING TO ME, THIS IS LIKE THE BEST NEWS OF THE DAY, THE WEEK OR THE YEAR.

AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT IT COMES TO DISTRICT TEN BECAUSE I, IT JUST I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE PLACE FOR IT AT ALL.

I'M JUST I'M NOT EXCITED ABOUT IT FOR THAT REASON.

I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

BUT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE WHAT THE PLANS ARE FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTOR AND OTHER OTHER AREAS WHERE WHATEVER IT WAS THAT YOU ALL HAD IN MIND WHEN YOU FIRST DESIGNATED IT.

THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY.

AND JUST TO ADD TO THAT, COUNCILWOMAN STEWART, WE WOULD DEFINITELY BRING PROJECTS THAT WE BELIEVE FIT THE CRITERIA THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN THOSE UNDERSERVED AREAS, DEVELOPING AREAS OF THE CITY, AND BRING THOSE TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION.

WE KNOW OF AT LEAST ONE THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING THROUGH NOW, THROUGH THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT WE SHOULD BE BRINGING TO THE COUNCIL HERE VERY SOON.

BUT WE ARE WORKING ON AN OVERALL STRATEGY, AND THE GOAL WOULD BE OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS, WHICH IS WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL AGREED TO, IS TO MAKE AN INVESTMENT ANNUALLY INTO THAT FUND. SO WE WOULD MAKE SURE TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

WAS THAT IT, CHAIRMAN? OKAY. LOOKS LIKE.

WE'RE ON ROUND TWO FOR EVERYONE.

SO CHAIRMAN MORENO YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES? THANK YOU. I WANT TO LOOK AT THE AUDIENCE FOR THIS ONE.

I TRULY LOVE OUR LIBRARIES.

I HAVE A SIX AND A HALF YEAR OLD, AND WE FREQUENT OUR LIBRARIES AT LEAST EVERY OTHER WEEK.

MORE SO DURING THE SUMMER THAN ANY OTHER TIMES.

AND I'M GRATEFUL FOR WHAT OUR LIBRARIES DO.

AND SO I HOPE THAT WE CAN LOOK AT A DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCE FOR THIS.

MADAM CITY MANAGER, I HAVE A QUESTION.

WHEN IT COMES TO AN IMPOVERISHED AREA, WOULD AN AREA THAT HAS A 5% POVERTY RATE BE AN IMPOVERISHED AREA, IN YOUR OPINION, WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL DEFINITION, I DO BELIEVE SO.

AND IN FACT WE HAVE THOSE TARGETED AREAS ALREADY IDENTIFIED.

I THINK ROBIN MENTIONED WE COULD SHARE THAT WITH THE COUNCIL.

WE WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO LOOK AT THOSE EQUITY TARGET AREAS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO COUNCIL ABOUT, AND MAKE SURE THAT PROJECTS ARE FITTING WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THOSE AREAS.

SO THE ANSWER WOULD BE YES BASED ON WHAT I KNOW AT THIS TIME.

OKAY. AND THEN I THINK THERE'S BEEN QUESTIONS AROUND THIS HORSESHOE, IF THERE ARE ANY PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THE PIPELINE OR THAT WOULD BE QUEUED UP TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE DOLLARS.

AND I BELIEVE THE QUESTION IS, YES, WE DO HAVE PROJECTS LINED UP WHO ARE READY TO PROCEED TO BE ABLE TO WORK IN IN TARGETED AREAS.

THERE IS ONE IN PARTICULAR THAT I AM AWARE OF.

WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THAT ONE AND MEETING WITH THAT PROJECT TEAM OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS.

IT'S ACTUALLY A PROJECT THAT'S CURRENTLY IN DISTRICT SEVEN, SO WE DO HAVE AN ACTIVE PROJECT THAT WE KNOW OF THAT WE WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO BE ABLE TO USE THESE FUNDS TO SUPPORT IT FROM AN INFRASTRUCTURE STANDPOINT.

SO. YES, SIR. THANK YOU.

MISS BLACKMON, WE'RE BACK TO YOU FOR THREE MINUTES AND THANK YOU.

AND I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATIONS, BUT I HAVE CHALLENGED OUR FRIENDS GROUP TO THIS IS THE YEAR THAT WE NEED TO SHOW THE YOU SHOW THAT THIS IS A VIABLE WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO AND TO TO SHUT IT DOWN.

AND SIX I GUESS 70 DAYS.

[05:20:04]

AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S A CLEAR PLAN OF HOW TO SHUT IT DOWN.

AND WE'VE HAD SOME CHALLENGES AROUND A VACANT BUILDING.

SO I'M, I THINK THAT FOR A YEAR THAT WE CAN TRY, YOU KNOW, WORK TO GET THIS TO THE NUMBERS THAT PEOPLE EXPECT AND THAT WE HAVE THE FUNDING AND.

BUT IF THIS DOES FAIL, THEN I ASK, CAN WE KNOW WHERE THAT MONEY IS GOING TO HAVE TO SECURE IT? BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH WHAT WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH WITH SOME OF OUR OTHER VACANT BUILDINGS.

SO. YES, MA'AM.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

CHAIRWOMAN. ARNOLD, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I DON'T WANT I WANT TO SEE THAT SERVICE CONTINUED AND AS WOULD GREATLY SUPPORT PERHAPS ANOTHER SOURCE OF FUNDING, MAINLY BECAUSE OF THE SYSTEMIC OVERSIGHT OF THIS OF THE DISTRICT THAT I REPRESENT.

AND SO THE QUESTION GOES BACK TO YOU, CITY MANAGER, AND I ASK THIS QUESTION AGAIN AND AGAIN, BUT I NEED IT FOR THE RECORD, ARE WE HAVE WE PROCLAIMED TO BE A DATA DRIVEN CITY? YES, MA'AM.

SO WHAT DOES DATA DRIVEN MEAN? WE SHOULD BE UTILIZING DATA TO HELP US DRIVE DECISIONS.

AND IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, I THINK OUR LIBRARY DIRECTOR SPOKE ABOUT THAT, HOW THE DATA GAVE US THE ANALYSIS THAT WE NEEDED TO DETERMINE HOW TO MAINTAIN THE STRENGTH OF THE OVERALL SYSTEM AND LOOK FOR EFFICIENCIES.

AND THIS WAS ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MADE IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS TO ACTUALLY CEASE THE OPERATIONS OF THIS CURRENT LIBRARY BASED ON THAT DATA.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S LOOK AT THE SOURCE OF INCOME ON INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND.

WOULD THAT FUND WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT THIS INVESTMENT FUND WAS CREATED BY THE NEED BY BY DOCUMENTED BY DATA? I THINK THE FUND STARTED FROM THE EXPIRATION OF BOTH THE CEDARS AND THE CITY CENTER TIF.

AND AT THAT TIME, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT WE COULD THEN USE THIS TO ESTABLISH A FUND.

THIS WOULD BE THE SECOND YEAR OF THE FUND TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE ONGOING INVESTMENTS THAT OFTENTIMES WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO IN UNDERSERVED AND DEVELOPING AREAS OF THE CITY.

SO THIS WAS TO REALLY CREATE NOT ONLY KIND OF A GAME PLAN, BUT THE FUNDING THAT WE WOULD THEN USE TO BE ABLE TO EXECUTE THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS.

SO WITH THOSE, THOSE WERE THE UNDERSERVED AREAS IDENTIFIED BY DATA? YES, MA'AM. SO IT WAS DRIVEN.

IT'S A DATA DRIVEN.

SO YOU HAD TO IDENTIFY THOSE DISTRICTS BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME TYPE OF NEED ESTABLISHED.

WOULD THAT BE FAIR TO SAY EXACTLY.

THIS FUND IS AN EQUITY BASED INITIATIVE.

ALL RIGHT. SO IN TERMS OF NEEDS, IF THE DATA SAYS IT'S GOING TO A SPECIFIC AREA, THEN THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO GO BASED ON DATA.

AND ARE WE COMMITTED TO EQUITY TO FOLLOW THAT DATA.

CITY MANAGER YES, MA'AM.

I'M SORRY, MAYOR, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO ESTABLISH THE FACT THAT THIS FUND WAS CREATED BASED ON A NEED.

AND SO AS THE TARGETED AREAS WERE IDENTIFIED AND I HEARD THOSE CONVERSATIONS AROUND QUESTIONS AROUND, WELL, WHAT ABOUT MY DISTRICT? BUT THE DATA IS SAYING THAT IT GOES TO CERTAIN AREAS, TARGETED AREAS.

WOULD THAT BE FAIR TO SAY? MISS ROBIN BENTLEY? THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.

THE AREAS WERE CHOSEN BASED ON THE STATE OF TEXAS ENTERPRISE ZONE DATA, WHICH IS ANY CENSUS TRACT WITH A POVERTY RATE OF 20% OR HIGHER.

WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THE DISTRICT FOUR IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED BY THAT SOURCE? YES, MA'AM. MORE THAN HALF OF YOUR DISTRICT IS A TARGET AREA.

ALL RIGHT. AND SO, COUNCIL MEMBERS, WHAT I'M SIMPLY ASKING US TO DO, AND I COMMEND THIS BUDGET CITY MANAGER, BUT YOU KNOW THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME MINOR CHANGES.

AND THAT'S HOW THIS SAUSAGE IS MADE.

IF WE'RE WE'RE EITHER GOING TO STICK TO BEING DATA DRIVEN OR WE'RE NOT.

WE CAN'T BE SELECTIVE ABOUT WHICH DATA WE WE CHOOSE TO USE.

EITHER DATA MATTERS OR IT DOESN'T.

THAT'S THAT'S BASICALLY MY POSITION.

AND SO DISTRICT FOUR, THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, THE TARGETED AREAS SPEAK TO DATA.

AND IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT BUILDING THE TRUST AND SUSTAINING TRUST, THEN THOSE FOLKS IN THOSE IDENTIFIED AREAS NEED TO SEE THE REAP THE BENEFITS OF A COMMITMENT THAT WE MADE THROUGH CREATING PROGRAMS THAT WOULD HELP US, AS THE MAYOR USED TO SAY.

MAYOR ROLLINS, GROWING SOUTH, WE'VE SEEN GROWTH SOUTH, NEIGHBORHOOD UP AND NEIGHBORHOOD UP HAS NOT GOTTEN US ANYWHERE BUT DOWN.

SO ALL I'M ASKING IS WE GO THROUGH THIS BUDGET PROCESS AND IT MAY BOTHER SOME OF YOU FOR ME TO TALK ABOUT IT, BUT GUESS WHAT? JUST AS YOU ALL ARE HERE, MY CONSTITUENTS HOLD ME TO MY FEET, TO THE FIRE.

AND I COMMEND YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER.

BUT MY FOLKS ARE GOING TO BE VERY UPSET IF I DON'T SPEAK TO THE FACT THAT DATA DRIVEN IS WHAT'S THROWN UP TO THEM EVERY TIME THEY ASK FOR SOMETHING.

SO EITHER DATA MATTERS OR IT DOESN'T, AND WE CAN'T BE SELECTIVE ABOUT WHEN WE FEEL LIKE MAKING IT, APPLYING IT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HOLD US TO THE FIRE.

[05:25:02]

IF WE MADE A COMMITMENT AROUND EQUITY, AND I KNOW I CAN PULL THE VOTE ON THAT DAY TO FIND OUT WHO WAS HERE TO COMMIT TO THAT.

SO THANK YOU ALL SO VERY MUCH.

BUT I'M NOT THROUGH.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

I THINK I'M GOING TO GO TO.

JAYNIE SCHULTZ.

THANK YOU. THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.

DID WE SET IN THE BUDGET THE SHUTDOWN COSTS OF THIS LIBRARY? NO, MA'AM. SO, DO WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE FROM ANYONE ABOUT HOW MUCH IT WILL COST TO KEEP IT WHILE WE.

AND LET ME LET ME ADD THAT TO ANOTHER QUESTION.

AND THAT IS IT'S ON THE POTENTIAL FOR SALE LIST.

IS THAT CORRECT? IF THE ONCE COUNCIL DECIDES ON WHETHER OR NOT IF THEY WANT US TO CEASE OPERATION, IT WOULD IMMEDIATELY MOVE OVER TO OUR LIST THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON FOR MONETIZATION OF ASSETS.

SO YES, IT WOULD MOVE OVER.

SO THAT WHOLE PROCESS TAKES SEVERAL MONTHS FROM THE TIME IT GETS LIT, BLA BLA BLA.

SO MY QUESTION IS, DO WE IF WE HAVE JUST EVEN A RULE OF THUMB OF HOW MUCH IT COSTS US TO SHUTTER A BUILDING AND SECURE IT DURING THAT TIME? BECAUSE WHAT I'M WONDERING WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS IS, IS THERE THE IS THERE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THIS BE A BREAK EVEN COST WHERE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE NECESSARILY 53 HOURS A WEEK, SIX DAYS A WEEK, BUT WE ACTUALLY GET TO ZERO BY WHAT IT WAS GOING TO COST US ANYWAY, TO CLOSE IT DOWN AND KEEP IT OPERATING AT HALF TIME OR WHATEVER. SO THEY HAVE A CHANCE TO SEE MAYBE THEY CAN RAISE ENOUGH MONEY TO KEEP IT GOING EVERY YEAR.

I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT THAT BUYS TIME AND AT THE SAME TIME IT SAVES THE CITY MONEY.

SO I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT THAT COST MIGHT BE.

I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE THAT AT THE MOMENT.

I SEE MY TIME.

MR. GIBSON, OUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, WHO'S MANAGING THE THE ASSETS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE ON OUR MODERNIZATION LIST.

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON.

DONZELL GIBSON, INTERIM ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.

MISS SCHULTZ, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A BUDGET THAT'S BEEN SET ASIDE $1.5 MILLION AS A PART OF OUR TOTAL BUDGET RELATED TO TAKING CARE OF PROPERTIES. THAT'S WHERE THAT'S BEEN ISOLATED.

AND IN FACT, THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, I SPOKE TO THE ADVENT OF US USING A THIRD PARTY TO DO THAT.

SO STAFF RIGHT NOW, JOHN JOHNSON, OUR DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT, HE'S SOURCING CONTRACTS JUST FOR THAT PURPOSE.

RIGHT NOW WE HAVE SOME EXISTING CONTRACTS THAT CAN SUPPORT.

THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT WE'RE STILL GOING TO NEED.

WE'RE GOING TO WORK THROUGH SECURITY, BUT WE'RE DOING THAT IN THE BACKGROUND NOW SO THAT WHEN THE TIME DOES COME, IF YOU IF THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO SHUTTER, THE LIBRARY STAFF WILL BE READY TO GO IN AND DO ALL THAT'S NECESSARY SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY REPEAT EPISODES LIKE SOME OTHER BUILDINGS, AND IT WON'T COST US ANYTHING.

NO, MA'AM.

IT WILL COST. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, IS WHAT IS THAT NUMBER? SO THAT WE COULD MAYBE.

HERE'S WHERE I'M GOING WITH IT.

MR. IS, COULD WE POTENTIALLY TAKE THAT X DOLLARS AND SAY, THIS IS HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO GIVE TO THE LIBRARY? IT WON'T OPEN, WON'T BE RUNNING FULL TIME, BUT IT COULD BE FOR AT LEAST SO THAT IT DOESN'T COST US ANYTHING, OR IT'S DE MINIMIS IN A WAY TO KEEP IT OPERATIONAL.

I WOULD TELL YOU THAT WE WOULD NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO PENCIL THAT MATH.

OKAY. WE DON'T HAVE THAT.

BUT I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.

AND IN PART OF THE PHASE OUT, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IS THAT THE LIBRARY WOULD NOT CLOSE IMMEDIATELY.

IT WOULD BE SOMETHING TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR.

SO IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN RIGHT AWAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR..

CHAIRMAN WEST. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU WERE TRYING TO GET IN BEFORE OR NOT, BUT I THINK YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, SIR.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

FIRST OF ALL, I'LL SAY I APPRECIATE JOE AND THE CITY MANAGER FOR MAKING THE HARD RECOMMENDATIONS.

THIS IS NOT A FUN ONE.

I'M SURE, FOR YOU TO RECOMMEND.

I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE PEOPLE WHO SHOWED UP TODAY.

SAT WITH US ALL DAY, ADVOCATED YOU KNOW, FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IS PARAMOUNT AT THE CITY, ESPECIALLY NOW DURING BUDGET TIMES.

BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE WEIGH THE NEED FOR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY WITH THE SOCIAL IMPACT OF IT.

AND SO I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT TODAY BY MY COLLEAGUE.

I KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING IN YOUR DISTRICT THAT IMPACTS YOUR PEOPLE, THE STREETCAR, FOR ME, IT'S YOU HAVE TO GET UP HERE AND FIGHT FOR IT.

AND I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO THE TRENCHES FOR YOUR FOLKS.

I WILL SAY THIS LIKE, YOU KNOW, TO ME, THIS IS KIND OF A NO BRAINER IN A SENSE.

YOU KNOW, THIS AMOUNT IS NOT PENNIES.

EVERY DOLLAR MATTERS.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BIG SCHEME OF THINGS, JUST TWO WEEKS AGO, WE WERE GETTING A PROPOSAL TO DO $200,000 IN FOOD KITS FOR PEOPLE THAT HAD NO METRICS TO SUPPORT THEM. AND IT.

AND NOW THIS IS A PHYSICAL LIBRARY THAT SERVICES PEOPLE.

WHAT I WILL SAY IN SUPPORTING THIS ITEM IS, I REALLY HOPE THAT WE NEXT YEAR HAVE BETTER METRICS THAT ARE SHOWING OR BETTER RESULTS THAN I THINK THE FRIENDS GROUP

[05:30:10]

IS DOWN WITH THAT.

FOR THE BISHOP ARTS NORTH OAK CLIFF LIBRARY, THAT'S GOING TO GET REDONE.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE THINKING ABOUT OVER THERE.

HOW DO WE LURE IN THE YOUNG PEOPLE THAT ARE ALL MOVING INTO INTO BISHOP ARTS? AND BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S A SMALL POP.

NOT NOT AS SMALL AS YOU GUYS HAVE HERE, BUT IT'S NOT AS MANY AS WE NEED THERE.

AND HOW DO WE GET KIDS IN THERE? SO I MEAN, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE A CAFE INSIDE THE LIBRARY AND A LIBRARY THAT OPENS UP TO THE STREET TO WELCOME PEOPLE IN INSTEAD OF KIND OF BEING AN INSULAR, CLOSED REDESIGN.

SO I WOULD HOPE NEXT YEAR WE SEE SOME GOOD NUMBERS AND THAT THIS IS NOT ONE OF THE ITEMS ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK, BECAUSE WE KNOW OTHER ITEMS WILL BE ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK.

AND SO I ONCE AGAIN JUST APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION AND THE GOOD COMMENTS TODAY.

THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER.

I JUST WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO CLARIFY THAT THERE ARE FUNDS THERE, BUT WE HAVE FUNDS THAT ARE COMMITTED FOR YEARS AHEAD. THIS IS NOT TAKING MONEY THAT'S ALREADY SITTING IN THE FUND.

BUT LESS THAN WHAT YOU WOULD BE PUTTING IN FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.

THAT IS CORRECT. AND THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO THE CURRENT FUND HAS $6 MILLION IN IT NOW.

AND THAT WAS BASED ON 2324 IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR 25, IT WAS TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL $6 MILLION ON TOP OF THE 6 MILLION THAT'S CURRENTLY THERE.

SO WITH THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT, WE WOULD THEN BE REDUCING THAT 6 MILLION THAT WE'RE PLANNING TO CONTRIBUTE FOR 25 BY THE 485,000, BUT WE WOULD CONTINUE TO INVEST INTO THAT FUND.

THE COMMITMENT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL WAS TO DO IT OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS.

SO EVERY YEAR IS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS.

WE WILL BE BRINGING ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO ACTUALLY ADD TO THAT INVESTMENT FUND.

AND WHAT OTHER AMENDMENTS DO WE HAVE WITH THIS AS A SOURCE OF FUNDS? THERE ARE NONE, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, SIR.

OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS SET ON RECORD, BECAUSE I'VE HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT WHERE THIS MONEY COULD BE USED, BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING TURNED IN OF WHERE THEY EXPECTED IT TO BE USED.

AND THE REALITY IS, IS THAT IF THERE IS MONEY SITTING ASIDE AND WE HAVE A NEED, THEN THAT NEED NEEDS TO BE MET.

AND I THINK THAT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS DOING.

NOW, I THINK THAT WE'VE HAD SOME GREAT CONVERSATION TO SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN THE NEXT STEPS.

BUT TO PULL THE PLUG FROM THIS, BECAUSE THERE'S JUST THIS HYPOTHETICAL THAT IT COULD GO SOMEWHERE ELSE WITHOUT ROLLING UP YOUR SLEEVES AND SAYING WHERE YOU THINK THAT IS TO ME IS A DISSERVICE, BECAUSE HERE WE WE HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO DID JUST THAT AND FOUND A NEED THAT IT WAS THAT EXISTED IN HER DISTRICT.

AND I AGAIN WILL REITERATE, WE CAN TALK ABOUT DATA AND STATS A LOT, AND I'M ALWAYS ABOUT BEING DATA DRIVEN.

BUT WHEN I'VE ACTUALLY HEARD FROM CONSTITUENTS WHO ARE TRANSIT DEPENDENT, WHO ARE NOT IN DISTRICT NINE, WHO ARE MY RESIDENTS, WHO BECAUSE THIS IS CONVENIENT AND CLEARLY AN ASSET TO THEIR ROUTINE.

I DON'T I DON'T LOOK AT THIS AS ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL.

I DON'T LOOK AT THIS AS FAVORING AN INEQUITY.

I LOOK AT THIS AS A LEADER WHO LOOKED FOR A SOLUTION BECAUSE THE PROBLEM EXISTED IN FRONT OF HER FACE.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE HERE.

NOW, THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS BE A VOTE AGAINST THAT SOLUTION, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS COULD GO SOMEWHERE ELSE NOW IF THIS HAD A COMPETING AMENDMENT, THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DISCUSS AND DEBATE THE LEGITIMACY OF WHERE WOULD BE MORE EFFECTIVE, THEN THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER ARGUMENT.

BUT I THINK THAT WE'RE CONFLATING THE TWO, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW.

SO THERE'S A PROBLEM AND WE HAVE A SOLUTION IN FRONT OF US.

AND THAT'S WHAT I'M READY TO VOTE ON.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

CHAIRWOMAN ARNOLD, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU TO THE CITY MANAGER.

CITY MANAGER, WOULD YOU SAY BASED ON YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND YOUR POSITION, NOW THAT WE HAVE A COUPLE OF EMPLOYEES IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE THAT HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS CITY SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 10 AND 20 YEARS? I THINK THAT'S CORRECT.

YES, MA'AM. WOULD THOSE INDIVIDUALS, BASED ON YOUR PRESENT POSITION, HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT A TARGETED AREA IS AND WHAT THE NEEDS OR THE DESCRIPTION OF A TARGETED AREA WOULD BE.

THEY SHOULD BE VERY WELL VERSED ON AREAS OF THE CITY WHERE WE'VE HAD UNDERINVESTMENT, AND WHERE SOME OF THE CURRENT NEEDS ARE, AND WHERE THEY'RE CURRENTLY

[05:35:03]

FOCUSED AND WORKING ACROSS THE CITY.

SO. YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. SO WOULD THEIR OBLIGATION AS EMPLOYEES OF THIS CITY BE TO ADDRESS THOSE AREAS WITH IDEAS AND, AND PROJECTS BASED ON THE NEED AND DATA THAT THEY HAVE? WOULD THAT BE A FAIR STATEMENT? THAT IS A FAIR STATEMENT.

AND THEY SHOULD BE DOING THAT WORK IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THOSE RESPECTIVE AREAS.

SO YOU ALL ARE ALSO AWARE OF THE FACT THAT I'VE BEEN ON STAFF AND IN TALKING WITH YOU, BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF PRODUCTION THAT I'VE SEEN OVER THE LAST, WITHIN THE LAST 10 OR 20 YEARS AS IT RELATES TO THE SOUTHERN SECTOR THAT I REPRESENT.

IS THAT CORRECT? HAVE WE HAD THOSE STATEMENTS, THE CITY MANAGER? YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. SO AS WE TALK ABOUT EQUITY, THE WHOLE PRINCIPLE OF EQUITY WAS CREATED BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF BECAUSE OF THE SYSTEMIC TREATMENT OF THOSE UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES. AND SO WHAT WE'RE READING, I'M GOING TO READ THIS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS TO HEAR WE'RE TRANSFERRING MONEY FROM INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND TO A MEDIA CENTER.

THANK YOU. AND SO THAT'S ALL I REALLY WANTED TO PUT ON THE RECORD FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO HAVE THAT QUESTION ABOUT WHY THERE'S NO AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO? HI, MAYOR RESENDEZ, THERE YOU ARE.

YOU HAVE YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I THINK COUNCILWOMAN KING ARNOLD RAISES SOME VERY, VERY VALID POINTS.

SO I'M WONDERING, COULD YOU REMIND ME WHAT THE PROPOSED TAX RATE IS RIGHT NOW? THE PROPOSED TAX RATE IS 0.704 $0.07.

I'M SORRY, POINT 70.4 2.4 $0.07.

SORRY. AND THAT WOULD BE A HISTORIC TAX RATE REDUCTION, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.

AND HOW HOW WOULD THE TAX RATE BE IMPACTED BY $485,486? SO THE I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION, BUT THE TAX RATE BEFORE YOU IS THE HIGHEST AMOUNT THAT WE CAN LEVY.

SO YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO ADJUST THE TAX RATE.

OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS WONDERING.

THAT'S A VALID TRY. RIGHT.

OKAY. I JUST WANT TO THE LAST POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND HOW SACRED PEOPLE SEE THE TAX RATE.

WE SHOULD. RIGHT. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND IN THE SAME MANNER FOR FOR THE REASONS THAT COUNCILWOMAN KING OTTO HAS MENTIONED.

SO I JUST WANT TO STATE THAT.

THANK YOU. I STILL SEE CHAIRMAN ARNOLD'S LIGHT ON.

BUT YOU WERE OUT OF ROUND, JUST SO YOU KNOW.

SO IF YOU TURN YOUR MIC OFF OR.

I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S SO SHORT. IS THERE A MIC ON? ANYONE ELSE? BEFORE WE GO TO A STRAW VOTE ON AMENDMENT TWO? I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE.

DID WE HAVE. I DON'T THINK SO.

THAT'S COMING UP ON THE BUDGET ITEM ITSELF.

JUST JUST SO YOU GUYS CAN UNDERSTAND IN THE PUBLIC THERE THERE WILL BE A VOTING ITEM LATER IN THE AGENDA THAT YOU GUYS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON. THIS PORTION OF THE AGENDA IS LIKE A WORK SESSION ALMOST.

AND SO THE SPEAKERS COME A LITTLE LATER.

SO WITH THAT MADAM SECRETARY, WE'RE GOING TO DO THE STRAW VOTE PROCEDURE NOW.

WILL YOU PLEASE RAISE YOUR SEAL IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT? SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR.

STUART RIDLEY, NARVAEZ DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BAZALDUA MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS COUNCIL MEMBERS WEST BLACKMON SCHULTZ.

THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT.

I ONLY SAW THE TWO, BUT I KNOW THERE'S A THIRD AMENDMENT SOMEWHERE, SO IF WE COULD HAVE THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION FROM SOMEONE WHO WHO NEEDS THE FLOOR TO MAKE A MOTION.

OH, OKAY. JUST ONE SECOND.

OKAY. YEAH.

THAT'S IT ON THE SCREEN.

ALL RIGHT, SO THIS AMENDMENT I MAKE A MOTION TO PUSH FORWARD THE AMENDMENT THAT WILL USE A SOURCE OF FUNDS, FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT.

ELIMINATE EXPENSES FOR BULLINGTON TRUCK AND PEDESTRIAN TERMINAL.

AND THEN USE OF FUNDS TO PUT THOSE FUNDS INTO GENERAL FUND REVENUES.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRMAN WEST? I HOPE SO. YES.

FIVE MINUTES.

I'M JUST SAYING I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW IT EXISTED, SO I'M GLAD.

I'M GLAD TO HEAR IT. WELL, AND I HAVE TO APOLOGIZE TO EVERYBODY THAT THIS KIND OF CAME LATE.

I WAS HOPING TO GET ALL MY ANSWERS FROM STAFF, BUT THAT DID NOT HAPPEN.

[05:40:03]

I WANT TO SAY, FIRST OF ALL, AS THANKS, YOU KNOW, THE MAYOR HAS BEEN VERY EMPHATIC ABOUT US ON GBFM GETTING INTO THE CITY'S BOOK OF REAL ESTATE, AND WE HAVE DONE THAT OVER THE LAST YEAR, BOTH IN THE FOR SALE PROPERTIES AND IN THE LEASED PROPERTIES.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP RECENTLY IN THE IN EARLY AUGUST IN OUR GPF SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, WAS GOING OVER THE CITY'S LEASED ASSETS.

I HANDED YOU GUYS ALL A PACKET THAT HAS THE THREE AMENDMENTS ON THEM.

IT'S CLIPPED, AND THEN WITHIN THAT PACKET IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PACKET ARE ALL THE LEASED ASSETS THAT THE CITY IS CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED TO LEASE. THAT CAME IN A MEMO DATED JUNE 28TH, 2024.

NOW, AS ONE OF THOSE ITEMS THAT CAME UP, AND I'M GOING TO NEED SOME STAFF MEMBERS UP HERE FROM BUILDING SERVICES, REAL ESTATE, WE'VE GOT AND POSSIBLY EVEN PARKS ON THIS ONE FOR THIS, FOR MY QUESTIONS.

BUT ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT CAME UP, IF YOU'LL TURN TO THE THIRD PAGE, IS CIRCLED.

IT'S 1627 PACIFIC AVENUE, AND THAT IS THE THANKS-GIVING SQUARE TUNNELS FOR AN ANNUAL RENT OF $65,000.

NOW, THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED TO THE GFM COMMITTEE AS OUR ONGOING LEASE OBLIGATION.

I FOUND OUT ABOUT 24 HOURS AGO THAT OUR AMOUNT THAT WE ARE OBLIGATED TO ENTER INTO IS ACTUALLY MORE IN THE RANGE OF $650,000 PER YEAR, WHICH IS CONCERNED TO ME THAT IT WAS ONE NOT REPORTED CORRECTLY TO THE COMMITTEE, AND SECONDLY, THAT IT TOOK A MONTH OR CLOSE TO A MONTH FOR ME TO GET THE CORRECT INFORMATION.

SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY.

IN THE LAST 24 HOURS WE WE, YOU KNOW, I'VE, I'VE HEARD SEVERAL DIFFERENT ANSWERS ON WHO WE'RE LEASING THE PROPERTY FROM, WHAT EXACTLY WE'RE LEASING, HOW MUCH THE LEASE IS FOR.

AS I JUST MENTIONED, IT'S CHANGED 3 OR 4 TIMES.

SO. AND I JUST LEARNED THIS MORNING THAT WE ACTUALLY DON'T LEASE A TRUCK TERMINAL.

WE OWN ONE UNDERNEATH THE GROUND THAT SERVICES FOR COMMERCIAL TOWERS.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M BRINGING THIS ITEM UP.

MY INTENT IS, SINCE I'VE LEARNED ALL THIS IN THE LAST 24 HOURS, I'VE ASKED FOR THIS FOR THREE WEEKS FROM GFM.

IS FOR US TO TAKE THIS FUNDING, DEBIT, PUT THAT MONEY INTO RESERVES SO WE CAN PUT THE PARK IT THERE.

AND WHEN WE DO CLEAN THIS UP AND WE FIGURE THIS OUT FROM STAFF, WE CAN MOVE THE MONEY BACK OVER ASSUMING WE CAN'T GET OUT OF THIS LONG TERM CONTRACT.

I THINK THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS TO LOOK AT HERE.

THERE'S THE THE TRUCK TERMINAL THAT WE OWN, AND THERE'S THE PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL WAY THAT WE ACTUALLY LEASE.

SO IN MY LAST COUPLE OF MINUTES, I WANT TO ASK MR. GIBSON IF YOU CAN JUST EXPLAIN WHAT IS THE TRUCK TERMINAL, WHY DO WE OWN THE TRUCK TERMINAL? AND ALSO WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL ITSELF? YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

I'LL GIVE MY BEST HISTORICAL PURVIEW BASED ON THIS AGREEMENT BEING ACTUALLY INKED IN 1972.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AS PART OF A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP AND TO INCENTIVIZE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA.

BACK IN THE EARLY 70S THE CITY ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT BY WHICH WE WOULD DO TWO THINGS.

ONE, BUILD A TRUCK TERMINAL THAT WOULD SERVICE, DO A SUBSURFACE TRUCK TERMINAL THAT WOULD TAKE TRAFFIC OFF OF THE SURFACE STREETS, BUT WOULD SERVICE THOSE FOUR BUILDINGS AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT.

AND THAT WOULD ALSO BE A PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL WAY THAT'S ALSO SUBSURFACE, THAT THE CITY WOULD THEN LEASE BACK AND THEN WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBLEASE FOR SHOPS AND FOR OTHER PUBLIC USES.

OKAY. WELL, WHAT WHAT DO WE DO? WHAT ARE OUR RESPONSIBILITIES AS A CITY BEYOND JUST THE COST ON THIS SPREADSHEET THAT YOU GUYS GAVE ME THIS MORNING? WHAT ARE OUR OBLIGATIONS AS A CITY FOR THESE TWO FACILITIES? SO ON THE SPREADSHEET I GAVE YOU, IT WAS FAIRLY SUCCINCT.

SO I'LL REPEAT SOME THINGS AND HOPEFULLY I'LL SAY IT ALL IN TOTAL.

SO THE CITY OWNS THE TRUCK TERMINAL AND WE OPERATE AND TAKE CARE OF ALL THE EXPENSES, EVERYTHING FROM CUSTODIAL TO SECURITY, TRAFFIC CONTROL, YOU NAME IT. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR.

HOWEVER, WE HAVE LICENSE AGREEMENTS FOR THE SERVICE PARTNERS THAT OPERATE THE BUILDINGS ON THE SURFACE, THE TRUCKS THAT GO UNDERGROUND, THAT ACTUALLY SERVICE THEIR BUILDINGS, THEY ACTUALLY REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR OUR SAID COSTS.

SO IN THEORY, WHATEVER WE SPEND RIGHT, RELATED TO SERVICING THE TRUCK TERMINAL, WE THEN IN CHARGE, IN TURN CHARGE OUR CUSTOMERS, WHICH ARE THE FOUR BUILDING TENANTS THERE FOR THE REIMBURSED COST.

[05:45:03]

OKAY. THEN IT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE ALTOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT THE PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A LEASE.

WELL, LET'S GET INTO THAT.

AND AND I REALIZE I'LL PUT THIS OUT THERE.

I REALIZE THIS ALL HAPPENED BEFORE ANYBODY UP HERE GOT TO CITY HALL.

AND YOU GUYS, I WAS BORN, ACTUALLY.

YEAH. AND YOU ALL ARE LEARNING THIS JUST LIKE WE ARE.

BUT YOU'RE THE ONLY PEOPLE I HAVE TO HOLD ACCOUNTABLE.

YOU KNOW, AND GIVE ME ANSWERS.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS.

YES. SO THE PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL WAY, WHY DO WE NEED TO PAY $512,000 TO LEASE A PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL? SO I WASN'T THERE IN 1972, BUT BUT SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY, THE LANGUAGE IN THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAD THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO INCLUDE THIS LEASE, THERE WAS A CONSUMER PRICE INDEX THAT WAS BUILT IN SO THAT EVERY THREE YEARS, THIS LEASE THAT WE HAD FOR THIS SUBSURFACE PEDESTRIAN WAY WOULD CONTINUE TO GO UP AND WOULD MATCH THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.

I THINK THE INITIAL MINIMUM VALUE WAS 65,000.

AND OVER THE LAST 50 PLUS YEARS, IT HAS ESCALATED AND GROWN TO THAT.

HALF $1 MILLION MARK THAT YOU MAKE REFERENCE TO IS THE $65,000 AMOUNT.

THE REASON IT WAS INCORRECTLY REPORTED TO GFM IS THAT BECAUSE IT WAS THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT OF THE LEASE.

ABSOLUTELY, SIR.

AND LET ME GET ONE OTHER CLARIFICATION THAT.

WELL, FIRST LET ME LET ME STOP AND SAY I APOLOGIZE FOR THE FOR THE ERROR AND THE TIME THAT IT TOOK FOR US TO GET THAT CORRECTED, THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO BE DEALING WITH ON THE BACKSIDE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN CLEAN ALL THIS STUFF UP.

BUT SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY, THIS IS LISTED UNDER THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

AND WHEN THIS AGREEMENT WAS DONE MANY, MANY YEARS AGO, THERE WAS SOME CONNECTIVITY WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

I BELIEVE IT WAS RELATIVE TO SOME USE OR THE MAINTENANCE OF OF SOME SURFACE GREEN SPACE.

AND SO SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT GOT INVOLVED IN THIS DEVELOPMENT.

AND SO THERE IS THIS LEASE FROM ITS INITIATION IS STILL LISTED ON OUR BOOKS TODAY AS SAYING THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND ON OUR REGISTER WE HAD THE ORIGINAL LEASE AMOUNT OR THE PAYMENT AMOUNT OF 65,000.

IN A PERFECT WORLD, WE WOULD HAVE UPDATED THIS BECAUSE TODAY THIS ACTUAL CONTRACT IS ACTUALLY ADMINISTERED BY FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT AND ACTUALLY NOT ADMINISTERED AT ALL BY THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

I WAS ABLE TO CLARIFY WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT EARLIER TODAY THAT THE PARK THAT'S THERE, THAT'S ABOVE ON THE SURFACE, IS ACTUALLY COMPLETELY MAINTAINED BY THE BUILDING OWNERS THERE, AND THAT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS NO INVOLVEMENT AT THE SURFACE LEVEL.

SO IN A PERFECT WORLD, THE INVENTORY THAT YOU GOT WOULD HAVE SHOWN THAT THIS LEASE WAS BEING MANAGED BY ANOTHER CITY DEPARTMENT ALTOGETHER AWAY FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, AND THEY WOULD HAVE HAD THE CORRECT LEASE AMOUNT.

ALL RIGHT. NORMALLY I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO CLEAN THIS UP IN COMMITTEE.

THIS WAS JUST REVEALED IN AUGUST.

WE JUST GOT THE ANSWERS LITERALLY THIS MORNING.

OR I WOULD HAVE DONE THIS AND WE WOULD HAVE DONE THIS IN COMMITTEE WITH MY COLLEAGUES.

AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING AT THIS POINT, WE HOLD THESE FUNDS IN RESERVES BECAUSE I HAVE A LOT MORE QUESTIONS, AND I DON'T WANT TO JUST BELABOR IT TODAY BECAUSE I DOUBT YOU'VE GOT ALL THE ANSWERS. FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT IS OUR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS THAT WE HAVE TO DO ON TOP OF LEASING IT? DO WE KNOW WHAT THE COST FOR THAT IS? SO WE HAVE SOME FIXED COSTS ON JUST BASIC MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS, BUT OVER THE YEARS IT JUST DEPENDS ON BREAK FIX.

RIGHT. SO THERE'S NO, YOU KNOW, COMPLETE ESTIMATE ON EXACTLY WHAT IT COST FOR EITHER THE TRUCK TERMINAL, WHICH AGAIN, SHOULD WE HAVE SOME LARGE EXPENSE TO REPAIR SOME HVAC OR SOME OTHER SYSTEM OR PLUMBING SOMEWHERE UNDERGROUND THERE.

THE IDEA WOULD BE IS THAT WHATEVER OUR COST WOULD BE, WE WOULD PASS THAT ON TO THE TERMINAL USERS, RIGHT? IT'S A LITTLE TRICKIER WHEN IT'S ON THE PEDESTRIAN WAY, WHERE IT'S A LEASE, AND THE CITY IS COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS FOR ALL OF THE STUFF IN THAT LEASED AREA UNDERGROUND.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THIS WHOLE SITUATION.

YOU KNOW, IT'S I MENTIONED THE FOOD KITS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST, LAST, LAST WEEK, AND NOW WE'VE GOT THIS ITEM.

I MEAN, WE ARE EVERY DOLLAR MATTERS TO OUR TAXPAYERS AND WE'VE GOT TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THAT MONEY.

THIS IS. THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE NEED TO COMB THROUGH EVERY REAL ESTATE ITEM THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WHERE WHERE WE'RE BLEEDING MONEY. ABSOLUTELY.

AND SO I KNOW YOU'RE COMMITTED MOVING FORWARD.

I CERTAINLY AM, AND I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES ARE AS WELL.

THANK YOU. IS OKAY.

MISS SCHULTZ. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I COMPLETELY CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE, AND I DID JUST VERIFY THAT THE THANKS-GIVING SQUARE FOUNDATION IS NOT.

I DON'T KNOW WHO WHO WHO GETS THE MONEY WHEN WE WRITE A CHECK, WHO DOES IT GO TO? I'D LIKE TO CONFIRM THAT, BUT I BELIEVE IT'S THE THANKSGIVING FOUNDATION.

[05:50:01]

GETS THE CHECK. JOHN.

OH, THERE HE IS. SORRY.

YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

THANKS-GIVING FOUNDATION.

OKAY, SO ACCORDING THE MY CONCERN WITH VOTING FOR THIS ITEM IS THAT IT'S JUST BECAUSE I'M GETTING TEXTS RIGHT NOW FROM THE CEO SAYING THAT THEY HAVE THE PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL AND THE SQUARE.

THE LEASE. THEY LEASE THE PEDESTRIAN TO THE CITY OF DALLAS ON A 75 YEAR LEASE.

SO I GUESS THAT MEANS THAT THEY ARE IMPACTED BY THIS.

I DON'T KNOW. MY POINT OF THIS IS THAT THERE'S SO MUCH CONFUSION AROUND THIS, AND I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE QUITE A FEW LEASES LIKE THIS THAT WE'RE DISCOVERING, JUST LIKE MY GUESS IS IN 1972, THERE WERE FINDING THINGS FROM 1927.

AND SO WE'RE JUST ALWAYS CONSTANTLY CLEANING UP THINGS WHEN WE'RE IN OPERATION THIS SIZE.

SO WHAT I WOULD RATHER DO, RATHER THAN A ONE OFF ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THE IMPACT OF THE THANKSGIVING FOUNDATION.

WE DON'T KNOW THE COSTS OF THIS.

WE DON'T KNOW ENOUGH TO SAY NO, THEY DON'T GET THEIR MONEY WHEN WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT OUR CONTRACT IS GOING TO REQUIRE OF US.

SO WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS THAT WE NOT DO THIS, BUT THAT WE DO EXACTLY WHAT THE CHAIR OF GPM SUGGESTED THAT WE DO, WHICH IS REVIEW ALL OF OUR LEASES, ALL OF THESE PROPERTIES AS WE'RE DOING.

WE GOT SOME OF THEM ON A LIST.

I KNOW OUR CITY MANAGER.

I KNOW YOU, MR. GIBSON, ARE DEEPLY COMMITTED TO THIS OVER THE NEXT YEAR OF LOOKING AT ALL OF OUR SITUATIONS LIKE THIS.

SO RATHER THAN TAKING THEM ONE AT A TIME WHERE WE DON'T KNOW THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THIS BUDGET DECISION, I WOULD RATHER WAIT AND DO THEM AS A WHOLE OR ONE AT A TIME IN ONE PACKAGE.

SO FOR THAT REASON, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.

I THINK IT'S NOT RESPONSIBLE BECAUSE WE COULD END UP, AS WE'VE DISCOVERED IN MANY WAYS WITH, AS I SAID, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT END UP COSTING US MORE.

AND WE DON'T KNOW WITH CLARITY WHAT IT WILL DO TO THE THANKS-GIVING SQUARE FOUNDATION, WHICH OUR CITY HAS BEEN PARTNERED WITH AND IS DEEPLY COMMITTED TO AS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT AND ICONIC ARCHITECTURAL PIECES AND COMMUNITY PIECES IN TERMS OF GRATITUDE AND EVERYTHING THAT THEY BRING TO OUR CITY.

SO I DON'T WANT TO DO ANY DAMAGE AT ALL, POTENTIALLY TO THEM.

IF IT TURNS OUT THAT IT'S NOT ANY DAMAGE TO THEM AND IT'S NOT HURTING ANYTHING AND ALL THAT, THEN PLEASE, WE CAN DO THIS.

WE CAN MAKE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT ALL YEAR LONG, BUT I'M NOT PREPARED TO DO IT PROACTIVELY WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT COULD HAPPEN ONCE WE DO.

THANK YOU. AND I'M SORRY THAT I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT.

CHAIRMAN NARVAEZ RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES AMENDMENT THREE ON ITEM C.

EVERYONE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THIS, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO.

NOW KNOWING THAT WE HAVE WE POSSIBLY COULD HAVE A 75 YEAR CONTRACT WITH THANKS-GIVING SQUARE.

AND THE IMPLICATIONS THAT THAT COULD CAUSE IS US GETTING SUED FOR SOME PIDDLY MONEY THAT WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WAS THERE, NOT THERE.

SO I LOVE THE SPIRIT OF THE MOTION.

MR. WESLEY IS NOT AGAINST YOU.

I'M GLAD YOU CAUGHT THIS, BECAUSE NOW WE.

I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IN THIS BUILDING REALIZED THAT WE HAD THAT ODD LITTLE ODD LITTLE PEDESTRIAN UNDERGROUND BRIDGE OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

NOT SAYING THAT'S A BAD THING.

IT'S JUST FROM 1970.

I WASN'T BORN YET EITHER, SO BARELY.

BUT I WASN'T BORN, AND.

SO SORRY.

I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE ANYBODY FEEL.

I LOVE MY ELDERS, SO SO MY BEST FRIEND ON THE COUNCIL IS ELDER ATKINS.

SO SO BUT IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS KILL THIS, AND WE COULD BRING IT BACK.

MR. WEST, IF WE DISCOVER THAT TO GET THOSE ANSWERS, I WOULD RATHER KILL THIS THAN TO MAKE THAT MOTION AND PUSH IT FORWARD.

AND THEN IT'S IN THE BUDGET IN DIFFERENT PLACE.

AND THEN NEXT, WHEN WE DO COME BACK WITH THE BUDGET AGAIN, THEN WE HAVE TO AMEND IT AND DO IT.

WHY DO THE TWO STEP IF WE CAN JUST DO A ONE STEP IF THAT'S THAT'S WHY I'M GOING TO BE AGAINST IT.

BUT I DO GREATLY APPRECIATE YOU COMING THROUGH BECAUSE I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT, MR. MAYOR, TO MOVE THIS FUNDING TO THE ARTS, BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN CUT, BUT I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE.

AND THAT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE OF OF US AS A COUNCIL TO DO THAT.

AND FOR ME TO DO IT BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM.

IF WE HAVE A I DON'T I'M NOT GOOD WITH THE MATH LIKE THAT ON THE CUFF, BUT 72 TO 24, WE STILL HAVE, WHAT, ANOTHER 25, 24 YEARS POTENTIALLY ON THIS CONTRACT WITH THANKS-GIVING SQUARE.

NOW THIS MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE DISCOVER.

WE HAVE IT AND WE COULD MAYBE TALK TO THEM.

MAYBE THEY'RE WILLING TO LET THAT GO.

WE NEVER KNOW. WE COULD MAYBE RENEGOTIATE THAT.

I MEAN, 75 YEARS IS A LONG TIME AND, YOU KNOW, BUT I'M NOT SAYING WE NEED TO DO THAT EITHER.

JUST SAYING THERE'S A LOT OF POTENTIAL THAT WE AS A COUNCIL COULD GET AND PUT OURSELVES IN VERY, VERY BIG TROUBLE FOR THE CITY AND FOR $369,000. I WOULD HATE TO HAVE OUR CITY ATTORNEYS SPENDING TIME ON THAT.

[05:55:08]

YOU KNOW, THEM HAVING TO SPEND TIME ON THAT.

AND IT COULD JUST BE SOMETHING THAT ENDS UP NOT BEING GOOD FOR ALL OF US.

AND WE HAVE A GREAT PARTNERSHIP WITH THANKS-GIVING SQUARE.

SO FOR THAT, I'M JUST GOING TO NOT GO FOR IT, I HOPE.

I WISH YOU'D JUST PULL IT SO WE CAN NOT HAVE TO DO THIS WHOLE LONG DEBATE, BUT THAT'S UP TO YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS BLACKMON, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT THREE.

SO THIS IS KIND OF, I GUESS, A LEGAL QUESTION.

SO WE HAVE NO TERMINATION PROVISION, BUT WE HAVE A 75 YEAR LEASE AND WE ARE IN YEAR, WHAT, 23 YEARS LEFT? SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DON'T PAY THE BILL? I GUESS THAT'S MY POINT.

I GUESS WE GO TO COURT.

I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO ALL THE LEGAL ISSUES ON THE RECORD, BUT I MEAN, YOU DON'T PAY TERMS, RIGHT? IF YOU DON'T PAY THE RENT, YOU'RE IN DEFAULT, OKAY? YOU'RE IN DEFAULT. BUT THESE FUNDS ARE JUST GOING TO GENERAL FUND RESERVE, SO IT'LL STILL SIT THERE AND WE CAN PULL IT OUT IF WE NEED TO TO.

THEN AFTER WE KIND OF SORT THIS OUT BECAUSE WE PASSED THE BUDGET IN TWO WEEKS.

CORRECT. AND THEN THE WINDOW SHUTS.

CORRECT. AND SO EVEN AFTER THE BUDGET IS APPROVED, WE CAN BRING BACK ANYTHING THAT COUNCIL WANTS TO DO, A BUDGET AMENDMENT, IF WE ARE STILL SORTING THIS OUT, WE COME TO A RESOLUTION, THEN THAT MONEY CAN BE MOVED TO THE GENERAL FUND OR WHATEVER.

WE COULD WE COULD ACTUALLY PUT IT BACK TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND, WHICHEVER DIRECTION THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO GO.

YES, MA'AM. OKAY.

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

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

DONZELL. YOU SAY THERE ARE CHALLENGES WITH COLLECTING FOR THESE COSTS FOR THE TRUCK TERMINAL DUE TO HISTORICAL OBSTACLES IN KEEPING OWNERSHIP OF THE KARTWAY AND CURRENT LICENSE AGREEMENTS UPDATED AS BUILDING OWNERSHIP CHANGES.

COULD YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT.

ARE WE NOT COLLECTING ALL OF OUR COSTS? SO WHEN THE AGREEMENT WAS STRUCK BACK IN 1972, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THE EXISTING SURFACE OPERATORS AND THE BUILDING HAS CHANGED HANDS OVER THAT TIME.

SO AS THEY CHANGED HANDS AND THEY SELL AND CHANGE OWNERSHIP, ALONG WITH THAT IS A SERIES OF LICENSES THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GET WITH THE CITY OR GET FROM THE CITY IN EXCHANGE.

SO AS THEY DO THOSE BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS THAT WE ARE LIKELY, IN MOST CASES, NOT PARTY TO WHEN WE GO TO MAKE OUR ANNUAL COLLECTION THAT SAYS, HEY, THIS IS THE BILL FOR US OPERATING THE TERMINAL.

THIS BUILDING IS ONE OF THE FOUR BUILDINGS THAT USES THE TERMINAL.

SOMETIMES THERE ARE DISPUTES RELATIVE TO NEW OWNERSHIP.

THAT SUGGESTS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE RECORD OF OF THIS AGREEMENT AND THAT THEY OWE.

SO SOMETIMES THERE'S CHALLENGES WITH US WORKING WITH THEM TO GET PAYMENT.

WELL, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.

I MEAN, IF THEY'RE NOT PAYING THE LICENSE FEES, WE JUST SHUT OFF THEIR ACCESS TO THE TUNNEL.

SINCE IT'S CITY OWNED, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS A COLLECTION PROBLEM.

YES, SIR. LET ME LET ME SAY THIS TO SHUT IT DOWN.

AND I HEAR YOU 100%.

THERE'S THERE'S THREE.

THERE'S FOUR USERS.

IF ONE DECIDES NOT TO PAY, YOU THEN HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHO'S ACTUALLY MAKING USE TO MAKE ACCESS TO THAT BUILDING.

SO IT IS A LITTLE CUMBERSOME.

BUT WE DO HEAR YOU AND I DO UNDERSTAND WELL, ARE ALL FOUR OF THEM AS AN ENFORCEMENT OPTION? ARE ALL FOUR PAYING NOW? I'M GOING TO NEED TO GET SOME HELP ON THAT ONE AND POTENTIALLY GET BACK TO YOU.

WELL, OKAY, THIS ISN'T A POLICY QUESTION.

IT'S A COLLECTION PROBLEM.

AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE CITY WOULDN'T COLLECT THE FULL COST IF WE'RE CONTRACTUALLY ENTITLED TO DO THAT.

BUT I'M CURIOUS, WHERE ARE THE 653,659? WHAT'S THAT BASED ON.

YES, SIR. SO THAT 653 NUMBER THAT I BELIEVE THAT YOU'RE REFERENCING A LARGE PORTION OF THAT IS THE ACTUAL LEASE TIED TO THE PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL? OKAY. SO THE MAJORITY OF THE THE COST IS SOLELY ASSOCIATED WITH A LEASE PAYMENT THAT WE'RE MAKING TO THE THANKSGIVING FOUNDATION.

ALL THE OTHER COSTS IN THAT 200,000 PLUS RANGE IS OUR SECURITY, CUSTODIAL AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR US DOING MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR IN THE PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL AND DOING MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR IN THE TRUCK TERMINAL THAT ACTUALLY IS REIMBURSABLE.

OKAY. SO WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO PAY MORE THAN $512,491 IN FISCAL YEAR 25 FOR LEASING THE PEDESTRIAN WAY TUNNEL.

THAT IS CORRECT BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR MAINTENANCE COSTS.

MAINTENANCE COSTS. OKAY.

AND WE'RE SUBLEASING ALL OF OUR SPACE IN THE TUNNEL, ALL 12,277FT².

WE'RE NOT USING ANY OF THAT AS A CITY FUNCTION?

[06:00:04]

AS A CITY FUNCTION? NO. I BELIEVE ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THAT 12,000FT² IS ACTUALLY BEING LEASED, THAT THERE IS SOME VACANT SPACE AT THE AT THE MOMENT, I BELIEVE.

SO NOT ALL OF IT, NOT ALL OF IT IS, IS ACTUALLY OCCUPIED.

OH, OKAY. WELL, THIS SHEET THAT I HAVE SAYS CITY SUBLEASE IS SPACE IN 12,277FT², WHICH IS WHAT THIS ALSO SAYS WE LEASE.

YES, SIR. IT'S THE CITY'S CAPACITY TO LEASE.

SO THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A BETTER WAY TO PHRASE IT.

BUT NOT ALL OF IT'S LEASED.

AND IT BRINGS IN ROUGHLY ABOUT $50,000 A YEAR APPROXIMATELY.

RIGHT. SO WE'RE PAYING 650,000 TO LEASE THIS SPACE.

AND WE'RE RECOVERING 50,000 IN REVENUE FOR SUBLEASING IT.

THAT'S AN APPROXIMATE MAGNITUDE.

YES, SIR. SO WE'RE LOSING 600,000 A YEAR ON THIS.

I'LL HAVE TO PENCIL THE MATH I DON'T.

I KEEP THE TWO SEPARATE AGAIN.

THEORETICALLY, THE TRUCK TERMINAL SHOULD.

SHOULD BE. WHICH IS IN THOSE EXPENSES.

NO, I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE PEDESTRIAN WAY NOW.

RIGHT. SO IF I HAD TO SPLIT THAT OUT, I DON'T HAVE THOSE NUMBERS.

I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S A LITTLE LESS THAN THAN THE NUMBER THAT YOU QUOTED.

OKAY. BUT IT'S CLOSE TO 600,000.

YOU WOULD CONCEDE.

YES, SIR. CLOSE.

OKAY. WELL, I WOULD ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO EXPLORE OUR OPTIONS FOR GETTING OUT OF THIS LEASE BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A MONEY LOSER.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

ALL RIGHT. LOOKS LIKE WE ARE.

WELL. LET'S SEE.

YEAH. WE'RE ON.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, CHAIRWOMAN ARNOLD, AMENDMENT THREE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, I'M GOING TO REMOVE MY NAME UNTIL THE HONORABLE CHAD WEST HAS MADE HIS STATEMENT.

SO THAT I CAN TRY TO GIVE HIM SOME SUPPORT.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

WE'RE DOING THE TAG TEAM STUFF NOW.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT, CHAD, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES SO YOU CAN GET YOUR SUPPORT.

THANK YOU TO MY BUDDY FROM DISTRICT FOUR.

FIRST OF ALL, COLLEAGUES, YOU WILL NOT HURT MY FEELINGS IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR FOR THIS AMENDMENT.

BUT I DO THINK IT'S A MISTAKE IF YOU IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT.

I THINK ANY TIME, NO MATTER HOW SMALL THE ITEM IS OR IF IT'S A ONE OFF, WE HAVE A DUTY, A FIDUCIARY DUTY AS A COUNCIL TO HOLD FUNDS ASIDE UNTIL WE CAN VET OUT A CONTRACT OR VET OUT A SITUATION.

AND THIS IS NOT REAPPROPRIATING THE FUNDS TO SOMETHING ELSE, IT'S SIMPLY HOLDING IT BACK WHILE WE CLEAN UP THIS MESS THAT IS CLEARLY BEEN OPENED.

AND WE'VE TRIED TO PARSE THROUGH TODAY UNSUCCESSFULLY.

SO THAT'S WHAT THIS IS.

DO WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH IT.

REGARDLESS, WE'LL BE BRINGING IT TO GFM.

I THINK IT'S A MISTAKE TO GO AHEAD AND APPROPRIATE THE FUNDS.

I THINK WE SHOULD PUT THEM IN RESERVES.

I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER IS ON TOP OF IT.

I KNOW MR. GIBSON IS ON TOP OF IT.

THE CITY ATTORNEY IS ON TOP OF IT.

WE'LL WORK IT OUT.

AND AS WE START TO REVEAL WHAT THE CONTRACT IS AND EXACTLY WHAT OUR EXPENSES ARE, AND WHETHER WE CAN OR CANNOT GET OUT OF THE CONTRACT, WE CAN START RELEASING THE FUNDS FROM RESERVES AND PUT THEM BACK TOWARDS PAYING WHOEVER IT IS WE PAY, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE WE QUITE KNOW THAT FOR SURE YET EITHER.

SO THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU. MR. SCHULTZ IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'M SORRY.

ONE SECOND. MR. MORENO JUMPED IN, AND HE HASN'T GONE AT ALL YET FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT.

I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DIG A LITTLE BIT DEEPER INTO.

AND WE HAVE 20 YEARS, OVER 20 YEARS ON THIS LEASE.

IT MIGHT BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO RENEGOTIATE THAT OR JUST OPEN IT UP AND LOOK AT IT THAN THE LONG TERM COST THAT IT'S GOING TO COST OUR CITY.

AND SO I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT.

NOW MISS SCHULTZ RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I THINK THIS IS THE EXACT WRONG THING TO DO FOR THE EXACT OPPOSITE REASONS OF MY COLLEAGUE.

AND THAT IS THAT IF WE HAVE A PROBLEM IN OUR CITY WITH A LEASE, WE DON'T, OUT OF NOWHERE SAY TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THE BENEFICIARY OF THAT LEASE, WHICH INCLUDE CAFE MOMENTUM AND THANKS-GIVING SQUARE FOUNDATION, SORRY, LAST MINUTE, WE HAVE TO DO SOME EXAMINATION.

SO YOUR BUDGET IS NOW MESSED UP FOR THE YEAR AND YOU'RE ABOUT TO BE POTENTIALLY HOMELESS.

CAFE MOMENTUM BECAUSE THEY HAVE HUGE THEY HAVE ALL THESE OFFICES THERE.

I DEFINITELY AGREE THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT THIS.

WE NEED TO EXAMINE IT IF THE LEASE NEEDS TO BE CHANGED, ADJUSTED, EVEN CANCELED, LET'S DO SO.

BUT FOR US TO ACT, I THINK IT'S UNETHICAL.

I ALSO THINK THAT IT'S NOT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE TO PUT NONPROFITS AT RISK, BECAUSE WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOMETHING.

THERE'S NO REASON AT ALL THAT IF SOMETHING CHANGES OR WE GET RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF THAT THIS IS WRONG AND IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGES, THEN WE NEED TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH WITH PEOPLE WHO'VE HAD TRUST IN US FOR THESE YEARS.

IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE OVER THERE THAT HAVE BEEN THAT THEY'VE BEEN MESSING US OVER AND THERE HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, LAUGHING BEHIND THEIR HAND AT US.

[06:05:06]

THESE ARE INNOCENT NONPROFITS THAT ARE ABOUT TO BE VICTIMIZED BECAUSE WE HAVE A SYSTEM THAT NEEDS SOME REPAIR.

SO I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS.

AND I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT TO DO THIS TO CAFE MOMENTUM OR TO THANKS-GIVING SQUARE FOUNDATION.

ALL RIGHT. NOW YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, CHAIRWOMAN ARNOLD.

THANK YOU. I JUST AND I HEAR THOSE WORDS AND I'VE HEARD THE WORDS.

BUT AS WE TALK ABOUT THE TRUST AND TREATING PEOPLE AND OUR PARTNERS, WE DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR PARTNERS, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, OUR TAXPAYERS.

AND SO THE IN LISTENING TO THE COMMENTS, PARTICULARLY OF COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY, TO YOU, MR. GIBSON? DO YOU RECALL THE STATEMENT THAT MR. RIDLEY JUST MADE ABOUT THE EXPENSES? YOU REMEMBER THE EXCHANGE YOU ALL JUST HAD? YES, MA'AM. SO DO YOU BASICALLY AGREE OR DISAGREE, IF YOU CAN RECALL HIS HIS STATEMENT? YES, MA'AM. I THINK WHAT MY EXACT WORDS WERE, I HADN'T PENCILED THE NUMBER AND HE WAS ASKING ME FOR ORDER OF MAGNITUDE AND SAID WAS IS THAT CLOSE AND HOW CLOSE IS DEFINED? I SAID YES.

ALL RIGHT. AND SO I THINK IN LISTENING TO THAT EXCHANGE, I WOULD I'M GOING TO SUPPORT MR. CHADWELL. I REALLY DIDN'T HAVE I REALLY WANTED TO HEAR A FEW MORE COMMENTS, BUT WHEN I LOOK AT SOME DECISIONS WE HAVE TO MAKE, THIS IS A DIFFICULT BUDGET DECISION TO MAKE. AND SO WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SATISFY EVERYBODY.

YOU KNOW THAT WE REDUCE THE TAX RATE.

WE JUST GOT THROUGH IGNORING THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A DATA DRIVEN DECISION MADE BY THIS CITY COUNCIL ABOUT INVESTING IN TARGETED AREAS.

SO WE IGNORED THAT PARTICULAR POSITION.

SO I DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE TO IGNORE THE FACT THAT THERE IS A COMMITMENT THAT WE MUST MAKE TO BUDGET SEASON, THAT HARD DECISIONS WILL BE MADE.

AND SO IF THERE INDEED IS A POSSIBILITY, I'M SURE WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT CAFE MOMENTUM IN ALL OF THEM OUT NEXT FRIDAY.

SO BUT I WANT US TO LOOK AT THIS AND WHATEVER IT TAKES, I'M STILL GOING TO SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

AND SOMEHOW IF WE GET DOWN THE ROAD AND WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND REEVALUATE, THAT'S FINE.

BUT I DO KNOW THAT I'M SUPPORTING THIS PARTICULAR INITIATIVE.

I'VE HEARD WONDERFUL THINGS.

I DIDN'T KNOW WHO WAS IN THE LOCATION IN TERMS OF A NONPROFIT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY VOTE.

I'M I'M JUST NEVER GOING TO INTENTIONALLY MOONWALK ON DATA THAT'S CREDIBLE.

NOW, IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S CREDIBLE PRETTY MUCH, AND YOU DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO PENCIL IT EVEN ON A NAPKIN, I'M GOING TO TAKE THE FACT THAT YOU CAN STILL BE IN THE IN THE AREA WHERE WHERE HE HAS OFFERED HIS EXPERTISE AND INSIGHT.

AND SO WHAT I WOULD OFFER TO ALL OF US, AND I'M HERE TO MAKE SURE AS I VOTE, AND WE MAY NOT BE ON THE SAME PAGE WITH EVERY, EVERY ISSUE THAT COMES UP, BUT THIS ONE I HAVE TO SUPPORT WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CHAD WEST.

AND ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS BUDGET SEASON.

AND IF WE CAN FIND ADDITIONAL DOLLARS TO GO BACK INTO THOSE AREAS OF THE CITY THAT HAVE DEMONSTRATED A NEED BASED ON DATA, THEN THAT'S WHERE I'D MUCH RATHER SEE THESE TYPES OF MONIES TO BE RESERVED, SENT BACK TO.

SO TO THE CITY MANAGER UNDER GENERAL FUND RESERVES, COULD YOU TELL US WHAT THAT MEANS? WE WOULD JUST SET THE MONEY ASIDE, MISS ARNOLD, AND NOT USE IT FOR ONGOING OPERATIONAL EXPENSES AND USE THAT FUNDING AS ONCE WE COME BACK WITH WHATEVER PROCESS THAT WE NEED TO GO THROUGH TO DETERMINE THE MAGNITUDE OF THE CONTRACT OPTIONS TO EITHER RENEGOTIATE OR TO LOOK AT HOW THE CITY MIGHT BE ABLE TO TO GET OUT OF IT.

THEN WE COULD COME BACK AND THEN ACCESS THOSE FUNDS.

IT WOULD JUST GO SIT IN A RESERVED ACCOUNT.

WE WOULDN'T START SPENDING ANYTHING TOWARDS THOSE FUNDS.

SO IS IT A POSSIBILITY THAT AN AMENDMENT COULD BE WRITTEN, OR STAFF COULD GIVE SOME RECOMMENDATION ON HOW THIS FUNDS MIGHT BE REDIRECTED TO A TO AN AREA THAT HAS DEMONSTRATED NEED, WHETHER IT'S INFRASTRUCTURE, WHETHER IT'S HOUSING, IS IT A POSSIBILITY IF THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL CHOOSES TO DO.

BUT I THINK THE CURRENT AMENDMENT IS TO MOVE THE FUNDS JUST INTO A RESERVE AT THIS TIME.

O GENERAL RESERVES, GENERAL FUND RESERVE.

YES. WE WOULD SET THE HOW LONG WOULD THAT BE? WE WOULD SET THOSE FUNDS THERE UNTIL SUCH TIME THE COUNCIL WOULD ASK FOR US TO REALLOCATE IT.

SO I THINK I THINK FROM WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS THAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO CONTINUE THE DUE DILIGENCE REGARDING THIS, THIS POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER RENEGOTIATE, COME BACK WITH THE WAY THAT THE CITY MIGHT BE.

ABLE TO MAYBE EITHER REIMAGINE OR HOW WE GET OUT OF THE CONTRACT.

WE JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO BE ABLE TO SAY WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE AT THIS TIME.

AND THEN WE COULD COME BACK WITH ANY KIND OF ALLOCATION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO DECIDE UPON.

SO IT'S A POSSIBILITY THAT UPON FURTHER DUE DILIGENCE, WE COULD COME BACK AND REDEDICATE THE FUNDS TO, TO, TO GENERAL OPERATIONS.

[06:10:09]

SO IT'S A POSSIBILITY WE MAY BE ABLE TO USE THE TAXPAYERS DOLLARS FOR DATA DRIVEN AREAS, AS WE HAVE IDENTIFIED AS OUR GOAL OF OUR CITY.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT COULD BE AN OPTION WHEN WE COME BACK FOR COUNCIL TO TO THEN DIRECT FOR US TO USE THOSE FUNDS IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION.

BUT THAT WOULD BE REALLY AT THE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF AT LEAST EIGHT PEOPLE WHO ARE COMMITTED TO THE EQUITY PRINCIPLE, IS WHAT I WOULD SAY.

AND SO AS WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD, I'M JUST GOING TO ENCOURAGE US TO BE STAY WOKE ON OUR COMMITMENT THAT MANY OF US MADE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE, AROUND EQUITY AND DATA DRIVEN.

EITHER DATA MATTERS OR IT OR IT DOESN'T.

AND SO I'M SAYING THIS ON THE RECORD BECAUSE I NEED THE PUBLIC TO HEAR.

I OFTEN HEAR PEOPLE SAY, WELL, I'M LISTENING TO Y'ALL.

I NEED THEM TO KNOW THAT I'M VERY COMMITTED TO THE MISSION OF BEING DATA DRIVEN.

AND EITHER WE'RE GOING TO SUPPORT AND RESPECT DATA OR WE'RE NOT.

NOW, AT THIS POINT, DISTRICT FOUR HAS A HIGH SCORE WITH DATA THAT SAYS THEY NEED, WHETHER IT'S SANITATION, WHETHER THEY NEED INFRASTRUCTURE, WHEREAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

BUT THERE IS A DEMONSTRATED NEED BASED ON DATA AND THE DATA MATTERS OR IT DOESN'T.

THANK YOU. CITY MANAGER AND MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU.

MISS WILLIS, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT THREE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

I JUST I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING ACCURATE.

I MEAN, I WAS AT THANKS-GIVING SQUARE ON SUNDAY AND I'VE BEEN TO CAFE MOMENTUM AND THEY DON'T LOOK LIKE THIS.

SO THIS LOOKS LIKE TUNNELS.

SO AND THEN WHAT I'M READING OF THIS THANKS-GIVING SQUARE FOUNDATION CONTRACT IS THAT BOTH OF THEM DISCUSS MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS IN THE PEDESTRIAN WAY TUNNEL.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THERE'S A DISTINCTION HERE BETWEEN OFFICES OR OPERATING SPACE FOR THANKS-GIVING SQUARE OR CAFE MOMENTUM VERSUS WHAT MAY BE UNDERGROUND.

AND THAT WE THIS WOULDN'T MEAN A DISRUPTION TO THEIR OPERATIONS.

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

SO THE THE REQUEST FOR PHOTOS WERE FOR PHOTOS OF THE BULLETS AND TRUCK TERMINAL.

OKAY. AND I BELIEVE THE PHOTOS THAT YOU MADE REFERENCE TO THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THE PAPERWORK THERE.

THOSE ARE PICTURES OF THE BULLINGTON TRUCK TERMINAL.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE SUPPLIED COUNCIL WITH TODAY'S PHOTOS.

OF WHAT THE PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL WAY LOOKS LIKE.

OKAY, SO IT'S A TUNNEL WAY, THOUGH.

I MEAN, CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT THE CONTRACT TALKS ABOUT A TUNNEL WAY AND NOT ABOUT AN OFFICE OR THE CAFE MOMENTUM DINING AREA OR KITCHEN? SO I'D LIKE TO GET SOME SUPPORT FROM THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO MAKE SURE I'M ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY.

BUT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WHEN YOU WHEN YOU WHEN YOU SAY THAT WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO SUBLEASE THAT 12,000FT², WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE DOING FOR OTHER PUBLIC PURPOSES, AND THAT'S WHAT CAFE MOMENTUM OR I THINK THERE'S A CAFE MOSAIC, THERE'S SOME THERE'S TWO, 2 OR 3 OTHER LESSEES THERE THAT ARE SUBLEASED THROUGH THE CITY OF DALLAS THAT REPRESENT THAT ROUGHLY $50,000 A YEAR WORTH OF REVENUE THAT I MADE MENTION OF.

RIGHT. SO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT.

OKAY, SO BUT THIS SAYS PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL.

MAYBE YOU'RE HERE TO CLARIFY THIS WHAT THE CONTRACT SAYS.

I MEAN, WE DON'T YOU KNOW, NOBODY WANTS TO DISRUPT THE THE OPERATIONS OF EITHER OF THESE NONPROFITS.

BUT IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TUNNEL UNDERNEATH THAT, SOMEONE'S JUST GETTING MAILBOX MONEY ON YEAR AFTER YEAR THAT WE NEED TO WORK OUT.

THAT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

SO CAN YOU CLARIFY? YEAH. CONNIE TANKERSLEY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO UNDER THE CONTRACT WITH THANKS-GIVING SQUARE, THE CITY HAS A GROUND LEASE.

UNDER THAT GROUND LEASE, WE WERE ABLE TO BUILD SEVERAL THINGS.

ONE OF THEM IS A TRUCK.

BULLINGTON TRUCK TERMINAL, WHICH WE OWN THE IMPROVEMENTS.

AND THEN THERE WAS THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS THE PEDESTRIAN WAYS.

AND IN THE PEDESTRIAN WAYS YOU HAVE SOME RETAIL LEASING THAT WAS DEVELOPED AND THAT'S WHAT DONZELL IS REFERRING TO THOSE.

THE CAFE MOMENTUM IS ONE OF THE RETAIL LEASING AREAS.

THE BULLINGTON TRUCK TERMINAL ARE THE IMPROVEMENTS WHERE THE WHERE THE SURFACE DELIVERY WAS CONSOLIDATED FOR THE FOUR FOUR HIGH RISE TOWERS, AND THOSE FOR HIGH RISE TOWERS HAVE CARTWAY, WHAT THEY CALL CARTWAY AGREEMENTS THAT THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY OPERATE UNDER LICENSE AGREEMENTS THAT HE WAS REFERRING TO, THAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO PAY THE CITY A LICENSE FEE TO HAVE PRIVILEGES WITHIN OUR BULLINGTON TRUCK TERMINAL.

SO THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT OPERATIONS THAT THE CITY CONTROLS THERE, THE PEDESTRIAN WAYS, WHICH WE DON'T PAY.

[06:15:03]

WE DON'T PAY THE USERS OF THAT PEDESTRIAN WAY FEES, WE PAY THANKS-GIVING SQUARE.

AND THEN WE HAVE THE BULLINGTON TRUCK TERMINAL, WHICH WE CHARGE FOR USE, THE FOUR HIGH RISERS.

OKAY. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE CONFUSING PART OF IT.

SO WE OWN THOSE IMPROVEMENTS.

WE CAN WE HAVE TOTAL CONTROL FOR 75 YEARS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL OPTION PERIOD OF 75 YEARS.

SO THOSE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE VALUE.

SO, YOU KNOW, WITH THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL, WE CAN DECIDE WITH ADDITIONAL VETTING OF WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THEM.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT PROVIDES SOME CLARITY.

SO IT PROVIDES SOME, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S STILL SOME COMBING THROUGH TO DO ON THIS.

AND SO LET ME ASK CHAIR WEST, IF YOU IF THIS DID HAVE AN IMPACT ON NONPROFITS OPERATIONS, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO AMEND THIS LATER? I MEAN, I GUESS THIS IS JUST A STRAW VOTE ANYWAY.

YEAH. WHEN DO WE WHEN'S THE FINAL VOTE? IT'S NEXT SEPTEMBER 18TH.

IS IT THE 18TH? SURE.

I MEAN, NO PROBLEM.

YEAH, I'LL JOIN IN AND I'LL LEAD THE AMENDMENT.

ACTUALLY, IF WE CAN DETERMINE THAT THERE'S AN ACTUAL IMPACT ON FOLKS BEFORE THEN.

OTHERWISE I WOULD PREFER IT JUST GOES TO RESERVES AND THEN WE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE BUDGET DOESN'T EVEN START TILL OCTOBER 1ST.

SO. YEAH.

SO BUT YES. ANSWER.

SHORT ANSWER. YES. WELL, IN THE INTEREST OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, GIVEN THAT THIS IS A BIG QUESTION MARK, I THINK I WOULD SUPPORT WHAT YOU'VE GOT BEFORE US.

FOREST. BUT I WOULD SAY I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT YOU'VE BEEN WAITING FOR AN ANSWER ON THIS FOR THREE WEEKS.

AND SO IT'S TIME.

SO IT IS TIME TO FIGURE IT OUT.

AND BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO HAVE AN ANSWER ON THIS SO THAT WE CAN MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION ON SEPTEMBER 18TH.

TO BE SURE THAT'S HEARD.

SO SO IF I COULD JUST FOR JUST A MINUTE, I WANT TO FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO ADDRESS TWO THINGS.

AND LET ME APOLOGIZE TO CHAIRMAN WEST FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT TOOK FOR US TO GATHER THE INFORMATION.

BUT AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THIS IS NOT INFORMATION THAT THE CITY CURRENT STAFF HAD READILY AVAILABLE.

SO WE HAD TO IT WAS REALLY LIKE, LET'S GO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE DON'T KNOW.

SO I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT TOOK FOR US TO GET HERE.

BUT WHAT YOU DO HAVE IS WHAT WE KNOW RIGHT NOW.

WE DO NEED THE ADDITIONAL TIME WHETHER THIS AMENDMENT PASSES OR NOT.

WE DO NEED THE TIME TO BE ABLE TO GO IN AND REALLY ASSESS THE IMPACT.

THERE ARE SOME LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO WORK THROUGH WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND BE ABLE TO COME BACK WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE JUST DON'T HAVE AT THE MOMENT.

SO WHATEVER ADDITIONAL TIME THAT WE CAN GET, WHETHER THAT'S A WEEK OR TWO WEEKS OR EVEN BEYOND OCTOBER 1ST, I WOULD PREFER TO GIVE US TIME TO WHERE WE'RE NOT RUSHING, AND THEN WE BRING BACK SOMETHING THAT'S HALF BAKED AND DOES NOT REALLY ADDRESS THE MATTER AT HAND, SO THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT THAT WAY.

STAFF DOES HAVE THE TIME TO DO THE PROPER DUE DILIGENCE AND BRING BACK A REASONABLE PLAN ON HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY.

SO WE KIND OF HAVE A FINITE ISSUE THOUGH WITH THE BUDGET VOTE ON SEPTEMBER 18TH.

SO I WOULD HOPE WE COULD ACCOMPLISH IT.

BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I MEAN, A CONTRACT FROM 1972, YOU KNOW, MAY BE HARD TO PUT YOUR HANDS ON OR.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, I SUPPORT JUST PUTTING THIS IN RESERVE FOR NOW WHILE WE WORK THIS OUT.

THANKS. AND I WANT TO CLARIFY, THIS WILL NOT GO INTO LIKE A CONTINGENCY.

IT WOULD JUST SIT OUTSIDE OF OUR NORMAL CONTINGENCY FUNDS.

IT WOULD NOT BE ACCESSED AND USED FOR ANY TYPE OF ONGOING EXPENSES, AND WE WOULD BRING BACK ANY RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL FOR THEM TO EITHER THE USE OF THOSE FUNDS AT A LATER TIME.

OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE.

SO THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO SHOW CARDS IF YOU ARE IN SUPPORT, MADAM SECRETARY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR.

OUR COUNCIL MEMBER, WILLIS RIDLEY ARNOLD, MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS COUNCIL MEMBERS COUNCIL MEMBERS RESENDEZ WEST, BLACKMON GRACIE AND MORENO.

THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO HAS ANY AMENDMENTS THEY WANT TO PUT FORWARD TODAY BEFORE WE CLOSE THIS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AND THEN MOVE INTO BACK INTO OUR BRIEFING AGENDA, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TO TAKE UP AN AGENDA ITEM, AND WE HAVE PUBLIC SPEAKERS WHO SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON IT.

OKAY. THEY GOT WHAT THEY WANTED DURING THE THEY THEY'RE SMARTER THAN WE ARE.

THEY LEFT, THEY LEFT. THEY GOT WHAT THEY WANTED OUT OF THE DEAL.

THAT'S GOOD, THAT'S GOOD.

IT'S GOOD TO KNOW WE SERVE SMARTER PEOPLE.

OKAY, THEN. THIS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, WITHOUT OBJECTION, IS CLOSED.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE DONE WITH THAT.

AND NOW WE'RE BACK, MADAM SECRETARY, INTO OUR REGULAR AGENDA.

NOT AN AGENDA MEETING, BUT, YOU KNOW, OUR BRIEFING AGENDA.

[3. 24-2620 First reading and passage of the appropriation ordinance appropriating funds for the proposed FY 2024-25 City of Dallas Operating, Capital, and Grant & Trust Budgets (1) for the maintenance and operation of various departments; (2) authorizing the City Manager to make certain adjustments; (3) appropriating funds for public improvements to be financed from bond funds and other revenues of the city of Dallas for fiscal year 2024-25; (4) providing for publication; and (5) providing an effective date - Not to exceed $5,257,653,898 - Financing: General Fund ($1,902,654,000), General Obligation Debt ($485,754,134), Capital Funds ($912,273,932), Enterprise/Other Funds ($1,482,754,855), Internal Service and Other Funds $284,005,397, Grants, Trusts, and Other Funds ($183,165,378), and Employee Retirement Fund ($7,046,202)]

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOUR NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM THREE ON YOUR AGENDA.

ITEM THREE IS THE FIRST READING AND PASSAGE OF THE APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 20 2425.

[06:20:09]

CITY OF DALLAS OPERATING CAPITAL AND GRANT AND TRUST BUDGETS ONE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.

TWO AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO MAKE CERTAIN ADJUSTMENTS.

THREE APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FINANCED FROM BOND FUNDS AND OTHER REVENUES OF THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR FISCAL YEAR 20 2425. FOUR PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION AND FIVE PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE NOT TO EXCEED 5,257,653,000 AND $898.

YOU DID HAVE NINE INDIVIDUALS TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM.

MARION MCILROY IS NOT PRESENT.

MARY MARGARET WATSON IS NOT PRESENT.

EMMA SLOUGH IS NOT PRESENT.

EMMA BALES IS NOT PRESENT.

JONATHAN HARPER IS NOT PRESENT.