[00:00:03] ALL RIGHT, EVERYONE, GOOD MORNING. WE HAVE A QUORUM, BUT WE DO NOT HAVE AN INTRODUCTORY VIDEO TODAY. [CALL TO ORDER] I THINK THE PUBLIC HAS SPOKEN AND SAID THEY JUST DON'T LIKE IT. AND THEY WANT IT. THEY WANT IT REDONE. SO WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE IT TODAY. BUT SERIOUSLY, WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER NOW. IT'S WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2025. AND I'D LIKE FOR EVERYONE WHO'S TALKING AROUND THE DAIS TO STOP AND SIT DOWN IN THEIR CHAIRS SO WE CAN START THE MEETING. BILL ROTH AND PAUL RIDLEY. THIS MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER. OUR INVOCATION, SPEAKER IS GOING TO BE OUR COLLEAGUE THIS MORNING, DARREN GRACEY FROM DISTRICT THREE, ALSO AN EXECUTIVE PASTOR AT CONCORD CHURCH. THANK YOU FOR OUR INVOCATION THIS MORNING. THEN WE'LL HAVE OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. THANK YOU EVERYONE. GOOD MORNING, MR. MAYOR. LET US BOW OUR HEADS. GRACIOUS GOD, AS WE GATHER TODAY TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS, WE COME BEFORE YOU SEEKING WISDOM, GUIDANCE AND STRENGTH TO LEAD WITH INTEGRITY. YOUR WORD REMINDS US IN PHILIPPIANS TO FOCUS OUR MINDS ON WHATEVER IS TRUE, WHATEVER IS NOBLE, WHATEVER IS RIGHT, WHATEVER IS PURE, WHATEVER IS LOVELY, WHATEVER IS ADMIRABLE, IF ANYTHING IS EXCELLENT OR PRAISEWORTHY THINK ABOUT SUCH THINGS. FATHER, AS WE DELIBERATE THESE MATTERS TODAY, HELP US TO FIX OUR THOUGHTS ON WHAT IS TRUE. MAY WE SEEK FACTS OVER FICTION, SUBSTANCE OVER RHETORIC, AND HONEST DIALOG OVER POLITICAL POSTURING. GUIDE US TO PURSUE WHAT IS NOBLE AND RIGHT IN OUR DECISION MAKING. LORD, GRANT US PURE MOTIVES IN OUR SERVICE. MAY WE FOCUS INSTEAD ON WHAT TRULY BENEFITS THE FAMILIES, BUSINESSES, AND COMMUNITIES WE REPRESENT. HELP US FIND WHAT IS LOVELY AND ADMIRABLE IN OUR WORK TOGETHER, EVEN AMID DISAGREEMENT, MAY WE TREAT ONE ANOTHER WITH RESPECT AND CIVILITY, REMEMBERING THAT WE ARE UNITED IN OUR DESIRE TO SEE DALLAS FLOURISH. MOST IMPORTANTLY, FATHER, HELP EACH OF US TO HOLD OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO THESE HIGH STANDARDS WHEN WE FALL SHORT, AND WE WILL GIVE US THE HUMILITY TO ACKNOWLEDGE OUR MISTAKES AND THE WISDOM TO DO BETTER. LORD, BLESS OUR DELIBERATIONS TODAY, AND MAY WE, THE DECISIONS WE MAKE, REFLECT EXCELLENCE AND BE WORTHY OF PRAISE, BRINGING HONOR TO YOU AND GENUINE BENEFIT TO THE CITY WE LOVE. WE ASK THIS IN YOUR HOLY NAME. AMEN. IF EVERYONE WOULD PLEASE RISE FOR OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG FIRST, THEN THE STATE OF TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE. TEXAS. ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR THAT. I'M GOING TO LOOK AND SEE IF WE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS. I DON'T THINK WE DO. WE DON'T. ALRIGHT, LET'S GET TO WORK THEN, EVERYONE. MADAM SECRETARY, LET'S HAVE OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS. [OPEN MICROPHONE (Part 1 of 2)] THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND GOOD MORNING. THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW HEAR ITS FIRST FIVE REGISTERED SPEAKERS. I WILL RECITE THE SPEAKER GUIDELINES. SPEAKERS MUST OBSERVE THE SAME RULES OF PROPRIETY, DECORUM AND GOOD CONDUCT APPLICABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. ANY SPEAKER MAKING PERSONAL, IMPERTINENT, PROFANE OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS, OR WHO BECOMES BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL, WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ROOM. FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN PERSON. FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, YOU WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE SESSION. INDIVIDUALS ARE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK FOR THOSE IN PERSON. SPEAKERS. YOU'LL NOTICE THE TIME ON THE MONITOR AT THE PODIUM WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP. PLEASE STOP FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, I WILL ANNOUNCE WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. ALSO, SPEAKERS, PLEASE BE MINDFUL THAT DURING YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REFER TO A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER BY NAME. ALSO, ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON. ONLY YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, JAMES COLLETTE. I'M SORRY, MR. COLLETTE. THERE'S A BUTTON AT THE BASE OF YOUR MICROPHONE. LET'S SEE. I'LL RESET YOUR TIME. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? THERE WE GO. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYOR JOHNSON. MY NAME IS JAMES COLLETT, AND I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THOUSANDS OF DALLAS RESIDENTS WHO OPPOSE THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT'S MODIFIED PLAN FOR RESIDENTIAL TRASH COLLECTION THAT ELIMINATES ALL TRASH AND RECYCLING FOR APPROXIMATELY 30,000 DALLAS HOUSEHOLDS LOCATED IN NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGHOUT THE 14 DALLAS COUNCIL DISTRICTS. THESE HOMES WERE INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED WITH ALLEY ACCESS AS A CORE FEATURE OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. THE CITY SPECIFICALLY CREATED THESE ALLEYS TO ISOLATE UTILITIES AND CITY SERVICES AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. [00:05:04] WITH THIS NEW PROPOSAL, THE CITY APPEARS TO BE ABANDONING THAT VISION. WITHOUT PUBLIC INPUT, WITHOUT COUNCIL OVERSIGHT, AND WITH LIMITED ANALYTIC DATA JUSTIFYING THESE CHANGES, THE CITY IS PROPOSING THE ELIMINATION OF ALLEY SERVICE, CITING SAFETY, EQUIPMENT UTILIZATION AND FINANCIAL CONCERNS WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY TRANSPARENCY AROUND THEIR CONCLUSIONS. THE MOVE TO CURBSIDE PICKUP WILL LIKELY INTRODUCE NEW CHALLENGES AND RISKS TO THE CITY. WORKERS WILL BE EXPOSED TO TRAFFIC, CHILDREN, PETS AND PARKED CARS ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS, MANY OF WHICH ARE NARROWER THAN THE ALLEYS AND LACK SIDEWALKS PROTECTING RESIDENTS. THE HELPING HANDS PROGRAM IS NOTED AS A SOLUTION FOR ELDERLY OR DISABLED RESIDENTS, BUT THIS PROGRAM IS LIKELY TO SEE SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF NEW HOUSEHOLDS NEEDING SUPPORT, HAVE THESE ADDITIONAL COSTS AND ASSOCIATED ADA ISSUES BEEN PROPERLY EVALUATED AND THE CONTEMPLATED BUDGET. A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS WILL BE FORCED TO REDESIGN THEIR PROPERTIES, INCURRING SIGNIFICANT EXPENSE TO ACCOMMODATE CURBSIDE BINS FOR WHICH THEIR HOMES WERE NEVER DESIGNED. THIS IS A POTENTIAL EMINENT DOMAIN ISSUE AND AN EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT TAKING WITHOUT COMPENSATION. IN ADDITION, THIS PLAN FAILS TO ADDRESS THE CITY'S EXISTING RESPONSIBILITIES TO RESIDENTS. MANY ALLEYS ARE IN DISREPAIR DUE TO LACK OF CODE ENFORCEMENT AND MAINTENANCE. SANITATION IS AN ENTERPRISE FUND. RESIDENTS PAY FOR THE SERVICE THEY RECEIVE. REDUCING SERVICE WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY VIOLATES THIS PRINCIPLE. TO DATE, NEARLY 9600 RESIDENTS HAVE SIGNED A PETITION OPPOSING THIS CHANGE. THAT'S OVER 30% OF THE AFFECTED HOUSEHOLDS, WITH MANY MORE STILL UNAWARE OF WHAT'S COMING. THIS IS NOT A LOGISTICAL AND OPERATIONAL FAILURE. IT'S A BREACH OF TRUST. THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT'S UNILATERAL ACTIONS EXCEED ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY AND CIRCUMVENT THE OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNANCE ROLE OF THIS COUNCIL. TODAY, I URGE YOU TO CORRECT, COLLABORATE AND COMMIT, CORRECT, IMPROVE ENFORCEMENT OF CODE COMPLIANCE OF CITIZENS AND IMPLEMENT CITY DIRECTED RESTORATION OF ALLEYS IN DISREPAIR, PRIORITIZING ALLEYS WITH THE GREATEST PERSONAL SAFETY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE. COLLABORATE. THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT, THE CITY COUNCIL AND OUR SUPPORTERS SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO REFINE THE SELECTION CRITERIA FOR NEIGHBORHOODS AND DEVELOP WORKABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE EXISTING PLAN. COMMIT TO PAUSING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CURRENT SOLUTION FOR SIX MONTHS TO DEVELOP A PLAN. DALLAS DESERVES BETTER THAN A ONE SIZE FITS ALL GOVERNANCE WE DESERVE A CITY THAT LISTENS, ADAPTS, AND RESPECTS THE COMMUNITIES IT SERVES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. SUSAN PARKER. GOOD MORNING, I'M SUSAN PARKER. I AM A NATIVE DALLASITE. I'VE LIVED IN MANY AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND I AM CURRENTLY THE PRESIDENT OF THE HOCKADAY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND I'M TWO REPRESENTING THE NEARLY 30,000 HOUSEHOLDS THAT COULD BE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY THE SANITATION'S MOVE OF TRASH PICKUP FROM THE ALLEYS TO OUR STREETS. TO REITERATE, THE NEIGHBORHOODS WERE DESIGNED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY, WITH ALLEYS SUPPORTING ESSENTIAL SERVICES, KEEPING THE STREETS CLEAN, SAFE AND ACCESSIBLE. CITY CODES WERE WRITTEN TO MAINTAIN THIS INFRASTRUCTURE. YET SANITATION IS MOVING FORWARD IN A UNILATERAL PLAN TO SHIFT TRASH COLLECTION TO OUR STREETS WITHOUT CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OR MEANINGFUL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. IT HAS BEEN JUST A MONTH. AND AS JIM SAID, WE HAVE OVER. 30,000. WE HAVE OVER 9600 PETITIONS THAT ARE COVERING ALL POCKETS OF ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, OF PEOPLE NOT WANTING THIS CHANGE. IT CREATES CLUTTERED CURBS, NEW SAFETY HAZARDS AND A FINANCIAL BURDEN ON RESIDENTS. IT LACKS THE CREDIBLE DATA THAT THE DEPARTMENTS TWO KEY DRIVERS FOR DOING THIS SAFETY AND PRODUCT AND PERSONAL PROPERTY DAMAGE. THE DEPARTMENT DOES NOT HAVE DATA LINKING PERSONAL INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ANY ALLEY, LOCATION OR CONDITION, AND IT'S NOT AVAILABLE FOR DAILY MANAGEMENT OR AS A FOUNDATION FOR MAKING THIS DECISION. AND IT IGNORES ABANDONED ALLEYS HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS MAGNETS FOR CRIME AND VAGRANTS DUMPING AND INFESTATIONS. AND IT OVERLOOKS HOMEOWNERS FINANCIAL IMPACT THAT ARE REQUIRED TO MODIFY FENCES, WALLS AND LANDSCAPING THEY'VE ALREADY INVESTED IN TO CREATE CLEAR PATHWAYS TO THE STREET. THE SANITATION DIRECTOR ADMITTED AT A RECENT TOWN HALL MEETING THAT HE NOR HIS STAFF HAS BEEN TO THE MAJORITY OF ALLEYS BEING IMPACTED BY THIS DECISION. [00:10:07] IN EFFECT, THE DEPARTMENT IS SHIFTING RESPONSIBILITY FROM THE CITY TO HOMEOWNERS WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE CONSEQUENCES. AND REMEMBER, RESIDENTS PAY DIRECTLY FOR THIS ENTERPRISE SERVICE. ANY CHANGE IMPACTS US, NOT THE CITY BUDGET. SO OUR VOICE HAS TO MATTER THE MOST. AS WE SAID, 9600 VOICES, INCLUDING THESE IN THE ROOM ARE SAYING NO. SO WE URGE THE COUNCIL TO AND SANITATION TO COLLABORATE TO FIND A BETTER SOLUTION. WE NEED TO PAUSE AND GATHER DIRECTIONAL DATA TO GUIDE A SOLUTION THAT REFLECTS BOTH WHAT THE CITY IS DESIGNED TO TELL PEOPLE. THANK YOU, MIKE BRUNNER. MIKE BRUNNER IS NOT PRESENT. TAMMY CUTLER. TAMMY CUTLER IS NOT PRESENT. JEFFREY HELFRICH. OKAY. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JEFFREY HELFRICH. I RESIDE AT 4432 HOCKADAY DRIVE IN DALLAS, TEXAS. THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK THIS MORNING. I, TOO, AM HERE TO TALK TRASH WITH THE CITY COUNCIL. THE ISSUES I WANT TO ADDRESS THIS MORNING OUR SAFETY AND COST. THIS IS WHAT THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT HAS SAID IS THE REASON WE NEED TO MAKE THIS CHANGE WITH RESPECT TO SAFETY. THE ANALYSIS THEY'VE DONE IS INCOMPLETE AND MISLEADING. IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, WE DON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS. SO PEOPLE WALKING THEIR DOGS, RIDING THEIR BIKES. MY TWO DAUGHTERS WALKING TO SCHOOL IN THE MORNING, THEY'RE ON THE STREETS. THIS PLAN PUTS 35,000 POUND GIANT TRASH TRUCKS ON THE STREETS THAT HAVE HUGE BLIND SPOTS, AND THEY'RE ON THE STREETS WITH TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DALLAS PEDESTRIANS. THE INEVITABLE RESULT WILL BE INCREASES IN ACCIDENTS, INJURIES, POSSIBLY EVEN DEATHS. AND THIS CHANGE IS BEING MADE WITHOUT A VOICE BY THE CITIZENS. YOU, THEIR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES ARE NOT TAKING A VOTE ON THIS CHANGE. YOU SHOULD NOT STAND FOR THAT. WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUE OF COSTS THE ANALYSIS THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT HAS GIVEN YOU IS INCOMPLETE AND MISLEADING. TAKING MY HOUSE AS AN EXAMPLE, I HAVE A CONCRETE PAD TO STORE MY CANS IN THE BACKYARD. WHEN WE GO TO CURBSIDE SERVICE, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ROLL MY CANS FROM THE BACK TO THE FRONT WITHOUT GOING THROUGH MY HOUSE, WHICH SEEMS PRETTY ABSURD. SO TO COMPLY WITH THE CITY CODE, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PUT A PAD ON THE SIDE OF MY HOUSE. I GOT A QUOTE FOR SUCH A PAD AND IT WAS $1,800. SO WE'VE GOT 26,000 HOMES THAT ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THIS CHANGE. $1,800 PER HOME. THAT'S NOT INCLUDING TAKING OUT LANDSCAPING I'VE ALREADY PAID FOR, OR PUTTING IN A PATH TO GET THE CARTS TO THE STREET. THAT WOULD BE $46 MILLION OF COST THAT YOUR CONSTITUENTS ARE GOING TO PAY AS A RESULT OF THIS CHANGE, WITHOUT A VOTE IN THIS COUNCIL CHAMBER. IF WE'RE CONSIDERING A ZONING CHANGE THAT IMPACTS 20 PEOPLE, THERE ARE TWO HEARINGS AND A VOTE BY THIS COUNCIL. A CHANGE OF THIS MAGNITUDE TO A CITY SERVICE DESERVES A VOTE. AND I URGE YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS, TO PASS AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN CITY SERVICES LIKE THIS ONE TO REQUIRE A VOTE BY THE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITIZENS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING. THANK YOU. OKAY. JUST WANT TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW WE DON'T ACTUALLY ALLOW FOR OUTBURSTS OR RESPONSES TO SPEAKERS IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEING HERE TODAY. NEXT, SPEAKER JOHN ALBAN. ALBAN. GOOD MORNING. I'M JOHN ALBAN, AND THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU ALL THIS MORNING. I'M HERE. I AM ALSO HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE CESSATION OF TRASH SERVICE. AND I'M SURE YOU'RE TIRED OF HEARING ABOUT IT, BUT REGRETTABLY AND SURPRISINGLY, I HAVE WHAT'S A RELATIVELY NEW PART OF THAT TO DISCUSS WITH YOU BRIEFLY IN MY THREE MINUTES. AND THAT IS QUANTIFYING THE COSTS OF COMPLIANCE. THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT HAS DONE A GREAT JOB ABOUT LAYING OUT UNDER DIFFERENT SCENARIOS HOW MUCH MONEY THEY MIGHT SAVE, [00:15:01] BUT THERE'S BEEN VERY LITTLE IN THE PUBLIC RECORD ABOUT WHAT THE COSTS OF COMPLIANCE TO THE CITIZENS IMPACTED INTO THE CITY AS A WHOLE. SO I DID A STUDY THAT I'M TOLD HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO YOU AND YOUR STAFFS. I CAME UP WITH EIGHT KEY COST DIFFERENCES. AND MIND YOU, I'M A CITIZEN. I'M NOT AN URBAN PLANNING EXPERT. I CAME UP WITH EIGHT KEY COSTS. IT SEEMS REASONABLE THAT A DECIDING BODY AND SOMETHING SO IMPORTANT WOULD WANT AN EXPERT TO PROVIDE MORE THAN THE EIGHT KEY COSTS, BUT WHAT I CAME UP WITH IN MY EFFORTS WAS AN ENORMOUS COST. THE CHANGE IS VERY EXPENSIVE. THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTE DID A STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF INCREASED TRASH IN CITIES, AND CAME UP WITH A REASONABLE EXPECTATION, VERIFIED BY A CITY, BY A STUDY IN THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, TO EXPECT A 2 TO 5% PROPERTY VALUE DECLINE FROM INCREASED BLIGHT. THE SECOND ADDITIONAL COST IS IN AN ACCIDENT RATE. USING A STUDY FROM AUSTRALIA AND ONE HERE IN THE STATES, I IMPUTED AN INCREASED ACCIDENT RATE THAT LEADS TO 30 TO 60 E.R. VISITS PER YEAR FROM COMPLIANCE OF PEOPLE WHO AREN'T NECESSARILY WELL SUITED DON'T QUALIFY FOR HELPING HANDS TO HAUL TRASH OVER UNEVEN TERRAIN, OFTEN WET, OFTEN IN THE DARK. IN MY STUDY INDICATES SOMETHING IN THE ORDER OF $2 MILLION A YEAR IN DIRECT COSTS TO CITIES FROM EXPECTED ACCIDENTS RATES. NOW WE CAN HAVE AN ACTUARIAL ARGUMENT OVER WHAT THE PROPERTY DECLINE WILL BE AND HOW MANY ER VISITS AND HOW MUCH WORK OR RISK TRANSFERENCE GOES ON TO CITIZENS. BUT TO EXPECT ZERO DECLINE AND ZERO INCREASE IN ACCIDENT RATES IS UNREALISTIC. AND I WOULD INVITE YOU. THOSE ARE TWO OF THE EIGHT COSTS THAT I IDENTIFIED. I SUSPECT THERE ARE OTHERS. I INVITE YOU TO TO LOOK AT THIS STUDY, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BRUCE OR. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS BRUCE OHR, A LONGTIME RESIDENT. YOU SHOULD HAVE A HANDOUT THAT I'LL BE REFERRING TO AS I SPEAK TOGETHER WITH MANY OTHERS HERE TODAY. I'M ASKING THE COUNCIL TO DELAY THE ELIMINATION OF ALLEY TRASH PICKUP THAT WOULD BEGIN JANUARY 1ST, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT. AND WHILE THIS IS A TOPIC THAT I KNOW YOU HAVE TALKED FOR YEARS ABOUT, SO HAVE WE IN THE COMMUNITY AND WHAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED AND RECOMMENDED AS IT'S UNFOLDED HAS RAISED MORE QUESTIONS THAN ACTUALLY IT INTENDS TO ANSWER. ONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS HAS TO DO WITH THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT'S TELLING US THAT GARBAGE TRUCKS DALLAS HAS DO NOT WORK WELL IN ALLEYS. THESE ARE THE SAME ALLEYS, THOUGH, THAT THE CITY MANDATED AND PLANNED, AND THE SAME 8 TO 10 FOOT PAVED ALLEYS THAT THE CITY SPECIFIED FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE. HOW IS IT WE COULD END UP NOW WITHOUT ANY TRUCKS SUITABLE TO SERVE 30,000 HOMEOWNERS, WHEN IT'S THE SAME DEPARTMENT THAT'S BUYING THE TRUCKS? IS THE SAME DEPARTMENT THAT CREATED THESE ALLEYS 75 YEARS AGO. BUT THEN I CAME UP WITH A OR SAW. I CAME ACROSS A VIDEO ON YOUTUBE THAT WAS FILMED IN 2022. IT WAS A GARBAGE TRUCK BUILT WITH A SPECIAL FEATURE CALLED ZERO KICKOUT. NOW THAT SOUNDS STRANGE, BUT YOU SHOULD KNOW IT ALLOWS THE TRUCK TO WORK IN VERY TIGHT QUARTERS LIKE ALLEYS. THAT TRUCK IS THE AUTOCAR ACL. I'LL PACK RAPID RAIL GARBAGE TRUCK, AND IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW, DALLAS PURCHASED THEM IN 2020 TO ADD TO ITS FLEET. THE FILMMAKER KNEW DALLAS HAS MORE ALLEYS THAN MOST CITIES, AND YOU POINTED THAT OUT IN YOUR PRESENTATIONS AND FIGURED THAT THAT MUST BE THE REASON THEY PURCHASED. SO HE CREATED A 13 MINUTE VIDEO OF THE TRUCK DRIVEN BY A DALLAS SANITATION EMPLOYEE RUNNING HIS REGULAR ROUTE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SHOTS THAT ARE IN THE HANDOUT TAKEN FROM THIS VIDEO, YOU'LL SEE FOR YOURSELVES THE ALLEYS THE SANITATION TRUCK IS NAVIGATING ARE HANDLED VERY EASILY. ALL SIZES, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE ALLEY IS 8 FOOT OR 10 FOOT. AND YOU CAN SPOT THE EIGHT FOOT ALLEYS BECAUSE THAT IS THE EXACT WIDTH OF THE TRUCK. ALL RIGHT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SCREENSHOTS TAKEN FROM THE VIDEO, YOU'LL ALSO SEE FOR YOURSELF THE ALLEYS THAT THE SANITATION TRUCK IS NAVIGATING. NAVIGATING. OOPS, I ALREADY DID THAT PART. THE IMAGES ALSO SHOW THERE'S ONLY ONE OPERATOR THE DRIVER ON THE TRUCK. INSTEAD OF THE THREE PEOPLE WITH TWO HANGING ON THE BACK OF THE TRUCK. WE'VE BEEN TOLD IT TAKES ON THE TRUCK SANITATION IS USING TODAY. AND WHEN YOU WATCH THE VIDEO USING THE LINK ON THE COVER SHEET, YOU'LL SEE THE DRIVER NEVER, EVER HAS TO LEAVE THE TRUCK ONCE. SO ALL THIS BEGS THE QUESTION IF THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT IS ALREADY USING A GARBAGE TRUCK SPECIFICALLY BUILT FOR TIGHT [00:20:02] ALLEY SPACES, AND IT ADDRESSES THEIR STATED NEEDS OF COST AND SAFETY, WHY HASN'T THE DEPARTMENT SHARED THIS WITH ANY OF US IN THE COMMUNITY OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS WHEN THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED? AND LASTLY, WHY IS SANITATION NOT CONSIDERING THESE TRUCKS FOR THE 30,000 HOURLY HOMEOWNERS INSTEAD OF KICKING US TO THE CURB. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES. LET'S, LET'S LET'S HEAR FROM THE CITY SECRETARY FIRST, AND THEN I'LL ENTERTAIN THAT MOTION. JUST A SECOND. GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY, MR. MAYOR. GO AHEAD. WE JUST. WILL YOU SAY WHAT YOU WERE ABOUT TO SAY? I WAS GOING TO SAY. MR. MAYOR, THIS CONCLUDES YOUR FIRST FIVE REGISTERED SPEAKERS. ALL RIGHT. WE WANT THE PUBLIC TO HEAR THAT. ALL RIGHT. THERE'S BEEN A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? THE MOTION IS TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO HEAR THEM ALL OR DALLAS ONLY. OR WHAT IS DALLAS ONLY? IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE SO ORDERED. WE'LL HEAR ALL THE DALLAS REGISTERED SPEAKERS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOUR NEXT SPEAKER, NORA SOTO. NORA SOTO IS VIRTUAL. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. MY NAME IS NORA SOTO. ONCE AGAIN, I AM HERE AT THIS MEETING, AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT FOUR. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE PROPOSED BUDGET THAT WILL BE VOTED ON SEPTEMBER 17TH. AT THIS POINT IN THE BUDGET CYCLE, EVERYTHING SEEMS TO BE LOCKED IN AND CITY COUNCIL'S PRIORITIES ARE ON DISPLAY. WE CAN SEE CLEARLY THAT THEY HAVE DISREGARDED THE VERY VALUABLE FEEDBACK THAT THEY HAVE GATHERED FROM OUR COMMUNITIES. WE CAN SEE THAT THEY ARE ALLOWING EVERY DEPARTMENT IN THE BUDGET THAT PROVIDES RESOURCES AND SERVICES TO OUR RESIDENTS IN FAVOR OF ADDING MILLIONS TO THE ALREADY INFLATED POLICE BUDGET. DUE TO THESE CUTS, THE CITY IS PLANNING ON SHUTTING DOWN FOUR LIBRARIES IN THE NEAR FUTURE TO, QUOTE UNQUOTE, STABILIZE THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY SYSTEM. THIS IS A FALSE PREMISE. THE LIBRARY SYSTEM AND EVERY OTHER DEPARTMENT CAN BE STABILIZED IF YOU PROPERLY FUND THEM. THE FURTHER WE GO INTO THIS POLICE STATE, THE MORE GOVERNMENT SERVICES WILL BE CUT. IT WON'T STOP WITH THE LIBRARIES. IT WILL CONTINUE ON TO THE CULTURAL CENTERS, OUR PARKS, OUR RECREATION CENTERS, AND ALL OF OUR SERVICES, INCLUDING STREETS AND LIGHTING. WE CAN'T KEEP OUTSOURCING AND DEFUNDING OUR WAY OUT OF THIS. COUNCIL MEMBERS MUST ARE ELECTED TO FIGURE OUT CREATIVE SOLUTIONS TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS. SHUTTING DOWN AND OUTSOURCING SERVICES IS SELLING OUT THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. ONCE THESE THINGS ARE GONE, THEY ARE NOT COMING BACK, ESPECIALLY AS WE CONTINUE TO SEE ECONOMIC DOWNTURNS. THIS IS WHEN WE NEED FREE SERVICES MORE THAN EVER. ALSO, CREATING AN EFFICIENCY DEPARTMENT MODELED AFTER THE DOGE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL IS LAUGHABLE AND SHOWS SHOWS US EXACTLY WHERE THE MAYOR STANDS AND WHAT HE WANTS TO REPLICATE. I AM SAYING THIS TO THE REST OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE HORSESHOE. DO NOT LET THE MAYOR AND HIS HENCHMEN UNDERMINE WHAT YOU ARE ELECTED TO DO. THINK OF THE RESIDENTS. THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT SPEAKER, JENNIFER YEAGER. OKAY. IS THE BACK. WE'RE SETTING THAT UP RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JENNIFER YEAGER. I HAVE A BROKEN TOE. I'M SORRY. I LIVE AT 415 NORTH MONTCLAIR. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. I'M HERE TO ASK THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS PRESERVE OUR ALLEY TRASH PICKUP. IN MY AREA OF WINNETKA HEIGHTS. OUR ALLEY IS WELL-MAINTAINED, PAVED, AND CURRENTLY OFFERS CONVENIENT ALLEY TRASH PICKUP, AS IT'S DESIGNED TO DO. CURRENTLY, SANITATION TRUCKS CAN ACCESS THE ALLEY FROM EITHER END, AND WE HAVE A LITTLE POCKET PARK THERE WHERE THEY WORKED WITH NEIGHBORS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS A RADIUS SO THAT THEY COULD TURN AROUND AND GET TO IT. WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF ALLEY TRASH PICKUP? IT PRESERVES THE NEIGHBORHOOD ESTHETICS AS A HISTORICAL DISTRICT. I HAVE TO APPLY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE COLOR OF MY HOUSE. THAT HAS TO BE APPROVED. AND YET, WHY, WHEN WE ALREADY HAVE A WELL-MAINTAINED ALLEY THAT WORKS WELL FOR RESIDENTS, WOULD WE CHOOSE TO PUT TRASH AND RECYCLING IN FRONT OF OUR HOMES WITH NO INPUT FROM THE HISTORICAL DISTRICT? ET CETERA. THE CITY. CURRENTLY, ALL THE NEIGHBORS ON OUR BLOCK HAVE EASY ACCESS TO THE ALLEY FROM THEIR BACK GATES. WE CAN SAFELY TAKE OUT TRASH BAGS AT ANY TIME THAT IS CONVENIENT FOR US. MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS AND I HAVE LIGHTS INSTALLED IN THE ALLEY TO HELP US STAY SAFE IF WE TAKE OUT TRASH AFTER DARK. I WORK NIGHTS, SO FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO TAKE OUT TRASH QUICKLY AND SAFELY BY OPENING THE BACK DOOR, PUTTING IT OUT THERE INTO THE ALLEY IS A WONDERFUL THING. ALLEY PICKUP IS BETTER FOR OUR ELDERLY AND DISABLED NEIGHBORS. NOT EVERYONE CAN MOVE ALL THOSE HEAVY BINS LONG DISTANCES. THE POTENTIAL ISSUES. CURBSIDE BINS CAN BLOCK SIDEWALKS, ROLL INTO THE STREETS, CREATE HAZARDS TO PEDESTRIANS AND CARS. UNSIGHTLY SPILLS ARE NOW IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE INSTEAD OF IN THE BACK. MY STREET, MONTCLAIR, IS A BUSY STREET. A QUIET ALLEY CERTAINLY SEEMS LIKE A SAFER OPTION FOR BOTH OUR NEIGHBORS AND OUR SANITATION WORKERS. [00:25:04] CURBSIDE PICKUP MEANS PUTTING OUT TRASH WILL BE LESS CONVENIENT AND LESS SAFE FOR ME AND MY NEIGHBORS. BECAUSE WE'RE IN A HISTORICAL DISTRICT, WE HAVE A DRIVEWAY BUILT TO HISTORIC REQUIREMENTS. IT'S A RIBBON DRIVEWAY WITH GRAVEL. IT'S TIGHT NEXT TO OUR NEIGHBORS BECAUSE OF THE HISTORICAL OVERLAY. IF WE HAVE TO MOVE TO A FRONT TRASH PICKUP, I HAVE TO BUMP OVER THE GRAVEL, SQUEEZE IT PAST THE CARS THAT ARE IN OUR DRIVEWAY, AND BUMP IT INTO MY NEIGHBOR'S UNEVEN YARD DOWN DOWN THE STREET. SO MY HUSBAND AND I, AGAIN, I SAID, WE WORK NIGHTS. I DON'T FEEL SAFE DRAGGING THOSE BINS AT NIGHT WHEN WE GET HOME. AND I CERTAINLY FEEL BAD ABOUT BUMPING IT ALONG RIGHT NEXT TO MY NEIGHBOR'S BEDROOM WINDOW, WHICH IS WHERE I WOULD HAVE TO DO IT. WE JUST REALLY WANT TO SAY WE WOULD ALLOW, ALLOW US TO KEEP THIS THING THAT IS WORKING FOR US IN OUR NEIGHBORS. WE ASK YOU TO PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD'S HISTORIC CHARM, WHICH IS ONE OF THE CHARMING THINGS ABOUT DALLAS WINNETKA HEIGHTS. WE ALSO ASK THAT YOU LET US CONTINUE TO HAVE A SAFE AND CONVENIENT WAY TO DEAL WITH OUR TRASH THAT IS ALREADY WORKING IN A SAFE, PAVED, CLEAN MAINTAINED ALI, THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. CAROL HAGLER. HAGLER WILL BE ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL FROM THE BACK PODIUM. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR JOHNSON AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK. MY NAME IS CAROL HAGLER, AND MY HUSBAND, JACK AND I LIVE ON AT 417 NORTH MONTCLAIR AVENUE. I'M HERE TODAY TO URGE YOU TO KEEP TRASH AND RECYCLING SERVICE PICKUP IN THE ALLEY AND NOT MOVE IT TO THE STREET. THE ALLEYS ARE THERE TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE RESIDENTS, AND THEY'RE DOING IT WELL IN A WAY THAT THEY'RE DESIGNED TO DO. HAVING PICKUP OF TRASH FROM THE ALLEYS KEEPS UNSIGHTLY TRASH FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THE YARD. TRASH AND RECYCLING SPILLS HAPPEN, AND THEY DON'T ALWAYS GET CLEANED UP BY THE SANITATION SERVICES WHEN THEY'RE IN THE ALLEY. AND I'M SURE THAT THEY PROBABLY WOULDN'T GET CLEANED UP IN THE STREETS AS WELL ARE PAVED. ALLEYS ARE CURRENTLY BEING USED BY TRUCKS WITH NO PROBLEMS WHATSOEVER. IN FACT, WHEN THE HEIGHTS PARK NEXT TO OUR HOUSE WAS PUT IN, THE CURB WAS REBUILT TO ACCOMMODATE THE SANITATION TRUCKS TURNING RADIUS FROM THE ALLEY. BECAUSE WE LIVE ON A CORNER AND DO NOT HAVE A DRIVEWAY TO THE FRONT STREET, OUR TRANSITION WOULD MEAN GOING OUT THE BACK GATE, DOWN A SIDE STREET, AND TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, WHERE WE WOULD HOPE THAT THERE ARE NO CARS PARKED. THEN WE'D HAVE TO RETURN BACK THE SAME WAY, DEPENDING ON THE SEASON. EACH WAY IS ABOUT 250FT DOWN THE STREET. I'M 72 YEARS OLD AND I DON'T THINK I'M GOING TO GET YOUNGER. AND I DON'T FEEL SAFE DOING THIS IN THE DARK ON A BUSY STREET. OUR NEIGHBOR HAS A DRIVEWAY. I THINK YOU JUST TALKED TO HER. BUILT BASED ON THE HISTORIC OVERLAYS, THE TRASH BINS WILL NOT ROLL DOWN THEIR DRIVEWAY BECAUSE OF THE WHEEL WIDTH THAT'S TOO LARGE TO FIT ON THE DRIVEWAY STRIPS. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ROLL THE BINS OVER THE GRASS ON OUR PROPERTY TO GET TO THE BINS ON THE STREET. THERE ARE MANY EXAMPLES LIKE THIS THROUGHOUT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF THE HISTORIC OVERLAY, WE TRAVEL AND WERE OUT OF TOWN A LOT. DO WE JUST LET OUR TRASH SIT IN THE BIN AND ROT, OR DO WE LEAVE THE BIN IN THE STREET UNTIL WE GET BACK? NEITHER SEEMS LIKE A GOOD SOLUTION. RESPECTFULLY, IN MY OPINION, THIS DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A WELL THOUGHT OUT SITUATION. I QUESTION WHY WE WANT TO PUT WORKERS ON A LOCAL RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR STREET WHEN THE ALLEY IS MUCH SAFER. WE ARE TAKING SERVICES AWAY FROM RESIDENTS WHEN THE ALLEYS WERE DESIGNED TO HANDLE TRASH AND THEY'RE DOING IT BEAUTIFULLY. OUR CURRENT METHOD OF TRASH AND RECYCLING COLLECTION IS SAFER, CLEANER AND FAR MORE CONVENIENT. IT MEETS THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC INTENT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WHY FIX SOMETHING THAT'S NOT BROKEN? THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION. THANK YOU. NATHAN. NATHAN SHADDOCK IS NOT PRESENT. ROBERT WEILAND. ROBERT WEILAND IS NOT PRESENT. JERRY QUEEN. GOOD MORNING. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS JAIRUS QUEEN. [00:30:03] I'VE LIVED IN UNIVERSITY MEADOWS FOR 15 YEARS, AND I'VE SERVED ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOARD FOR MORE THAN 12. I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING OUR 508 HOMES TO ASK YOU TO KEEP ALLEY TRASH. I DON'T THINK THIS IS AN EXAGGERATION. FOR OVER A DECADE, THE CITY HAS NEGLECTED ALLEY MAINTENANCE IN ITS BUDGET. THIS YEAR'S BUDGET DOESN'T LOOK TO MAKE UP FOR THOSE LOST YEARS. NOW, THE SANITATION DIRECTOR CITES ALLEY CONDITION AND SAFETY AS A REASON FOR THIS CHANGE OF SERVICE. THAT'S IRONIC, BECAUSE IT'S THE CITY'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN THE ALLEYS THAT CREATED THESE VERY CONDITIONS. WHAT'S MORE TROUBLING WITH WITH THIS DECISION IS BEING LEFT TO ONE UNELECTED OFFICIAL, THE SANITATION DIRECTOR. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT FOR HIS YEARS OF WORK. IT IS UNREASONABLE TO LET ONE PERSON MAKE A CHANGE THAT AFFECTS TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DALLAS HOMES. THIS IS A POLICY ISSUE THAT BELONGS IN HERE, WITH THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR AND THE PEOPLE THAT YOU REPRESENT. WE ALSO HEAR THAT COST IS AN EXCUSE. DIRECTOR GILLESPIE HAS SUGGESTED ALLEY SERVICE WOULD RUN OVER $80 A MONTH. YET IN CEDAR PARK, TEXAS, THE OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS WITH ALLEYS RECEIVE PRIVATE ALLEY COLLECTION FOR JUST 2121 PER MONTH. THAT'S ONCE A WEEK COLLECTION WITH TRASH AND RECYCLING. YES, CEDAR PARK HAS MANY NEW HOMES WITH GARAGES IN THE FRONT, AND THEY DO GET CURBSIDE COLLECTION. HOWEVER, THOSE OLDER HOMES AND REAR GET ALLEY COLLECTION. IF THE CITY OF DALLAS WON'T MAINTAIN THE SERVICE, AT THE VERY LEAST, GUIDE US TOWARD PRIVATE TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES INSTEAD OF LEAVING US WITH A POOR SOLUTION. MY OWN GARAGE, LIKE MANY IN UNIVERSITY MEADOWS, FACES THE ALLEY. IF THE CITY GIVES UP ON OUR ALLEYS, WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO? THE NORTH SIDE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS UNTOUCHED BY GILLESPIE'S PHASE ONE OR PHASE TWO YET. MY SITE IS TARGETED. THE ALLEYS LOOK THE SAME, THEY FEEL THE SAME, THEY DRIVE THE SAME. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE ON MY SIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS IT WAS BUILT A LITTLE EARLIER. BUT WHY THE DIFFERENCE? I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT WE HAVE CONCRETE THAT MIGHT BE EIGHT FEET WIDE INSTEAD OF NINE. WHY WON'T THE CITY WORK WITH US AND HOW AND WITH THE RESIDENTS SO WE CAN ADD A FOOT OF CONCRETE INSTEAD OF FINDING A SMALL STATISTIC TO FORCE A MAJOR CHANGE? THIS ISN'T ABOUT GARBAGE COLLECTION. IT'S ABOUT FAIRNESS, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND NEIGHBORHOODS BEING A PART OF THE SOLUTION. DALLAS RESIDENTS DESERVE BETTER THAN A UNILATERAL DECISION AND DECADES OF NEGLECT. PLEASE STOP THIS CHANGE AND LET US WORK WITH THE CITY TO RESTORE, NOT ABANDON OUR ALLEYS. KEEP ALLEY TRASH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALEXANDER STEIN. WHAT'S UP? COUNCIL. LONG TIME NO SEE, SADLY. OBVIOUSLY, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE HERE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE CITY AND A LOT OF THE STRUGGLES YOU GUYS ARE HAVING, WHICH IS TYPICAL FOR THIS CITY. BUT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT A BIGGER ISSUE. WE ARE CURRENTLY AT THE 24TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE TERROR ATTACKS THAT HAPPENED ON SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2001. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THOSE TERROR ATTACKS WERE PERPETRATED BY PEOPLE WITHIN THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. I THINK IT'S A FACT. THE IDEA THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO FIND THE PASSPORTS OF THE TERRORISTS, BUT THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO FIND THE BLACK BOXES, MAKES ME ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS. AND THEN YOU LOOK AT WHO BENEFITED FROM THE TERROR ATTACKS ON NINE OVER 11. WELL, IT HELPED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PUT IN WHAT IS CALLED THE PATRIOT ACT. WHAT IS THE PATRIOT ACT? THE PATRIOT ACT GIVES THE GOVERNMENT WARRANTLESS SEARCH AND SEIZURE OF OUR CELLPHONES, OF OUR EMAILS OF BASICALLY ANY OF OUR PRIVATE INFORMATION. SO MY POINT IS, GOVERNMENTS DO FALSE FLAG ATTACKS ALL THE TIME. HITLER ALLEGEDLY DID THE FIRST FALSE FLAG ATTACK. SO GOVERNMENTS THAT ARE IN POWER WILL OFTENTIMES DO THESE ATTACKS IN ORDER TO BENEFIT THE COUNTRY. OVERALL. THEY'RE WILLING TO KILL THEIR OWN CITIZENS, TO PUT THEIR COUNTRY FORWARD, OR TO PUT IN LEGISLATION THAT WILL TAKE AWAY OUR CONSTITUTIONALLY GOD GIVEN RIGHTS. SO I JUST THINK ABOUT IT. 24 YEARS LATER, EVERYBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT JFK AND JFK. GOT HIS HEAD BLOWN OUT OFF HERE IN DALLAS, PROBABLY DONE BY THE CIA. OBVIOUSLY WASN'T JUST A LONE SHOOTER. SO PEOPLE CAN CALL ME A TINFOIL HAT CONSPIRACY THEORIST ALL YOU WANT. I JUST GET FRUSTRATED BECAUSE WHEN I SAW THOSE TOWERS FALL, ESPECIALLY TOWER SEVEN, THAT WAS THE THIRD TOWER THAT FELL THAT DAY THAT DID NOT GET HIT BY ANY PLANES. AND IT WAS ACTUALLY A 47 STORY TOWER. IT WOULD BE THE TALLEST BUILDING IN OVER 30 DIFFERENT STATES. AND IT FELL THE ONLY BUILDING TO EVER FALL FROM OFFICE FIRES. SO WE NEED TO INVESTIGATE NINE OVER 11 ON THIS ANNIVERSARY. I HATE THAT WE ALWAYS FORGET ABOUT IT, ESPECIALLY THIS NEW GENERATION OF KIDS THAT WEREN'T EMOTIONALLY AFFECTED BY NINE OVER 11. SO THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE THE SAME INTEREST THAT WE HAVE BECAUSE WE ALL EXPERIENCE IT. [00:35:04] BUT IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS THAT OUR GOVERNMENT LIED ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED ON THE SEPTEMBER 11TH. THEY LIED ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED AT THE PENTAGON. THEY LIED ABOUT FLIGHT 93. THEY WON'T ADMIT THAT. THEY PROBABLY SHOT THAT DOWN. AND IT'S JUST VERY FRUSTRATING. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, OBVIOUSLY WE WANT TO BRING ATTENTION TO THAT. ALSO, THE DALLAS COWBOYS SUCK. I'M SICK OF THE DALLAS COWBOYS. IT WAS ONE THING WHEN THE MAVERICKS TRADED LUKA. I WAS LIKE, WHO CARES ABOUT THE MAVERICKS? THEY'RE NOT ANY GOOD. THEY DON'T HAVE DIRK ANYMORE. BUT NOW THAT THE DALLAS COWBOYS ARE BASICALLY DOING THEIR OWN FALSE FLAG ATTACK ON THEIR FRANCHISE, IT MAKES ME SICK BECAUSE I WISH JERRY JONES WOULD SELL THE TEAM TO THE CARTEL, BECAUSE AT LEAST THE CARTEL WOULD FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET ACROSS THE GOAL LINE BECAUSE THEY CROSSED THE HARDEST GOAL LINE, THE UNITED STATES BORDER. SO I WISH JERRY JONES WOULD SELL THE TEAM. AND ALSO, SO ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THIS DAIS WAS HANGING OUT WITH REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER BILL HUTCHINSON IN MIAMI. HE WAS ON A TRIP WITH HIM. AND THIS SAME PERSON IS DOING AN ETHICS INVESTIGATION. SO THAT'S CHAD WEST WAS WITH A REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER. NO, WE CAN'T DO THAT. WE CAN'T DO THAT. AND REMEMBER, NINE OVER 11. NINE OVER 11. TRUTH. IT WAS AN INSIDE JOB. THANK YOU. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THIS CONCLUDES ALL OF THE CITY OF DALLAS REGISTER SPEAKERS. THE REMAINING SPEAKERS WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE CONCLUSION OF ITS CITY BUSINESS. THIS IS THE SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR VOTING AGENDA. [MINUTES] THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE'LL BEGIN WITH AGENDA ITEM ONE. ITEM ONE IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 27TH, 2025 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY I MISSED YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. BUT THE AYES HAVE IT AND SO THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED. NEXT ITEM PLEASE. THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR CONSENT AGENDA. [CONSENT AGENDA] YOUR CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEMS TWO THROUGH 27. AGENDA ITEM NINE WAS CORRECTED. AGENDA ITEM 18 WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. AGENDA ITEM 23 WAS CORRECTED, AND AGENDA ITEM 24 WAS CORRECTED AND PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT AGENDA ITEM 14 IS BEING CLARIFIED, CLARIFYING THAT THIS ITEM ONLY AUTHORIZES AN INCREASE TO THE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CONTRACT WITH ESTRADA CONCRETE COMPANY, LLC AND DOES NOT AMEND THE RESOLUTION. ALSO, A CORRECTION TO ITEM OR CLARIFICATION TO ITEM 21. IT'S CLARIFYING THAT THE TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE IS INCREASING FROM $986,740 TO $2,336,740. THEREFORE, YOUR CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEMS TWO THROUGH 17, 19 THROUGH 23, AND 25 THROUGH 27. I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND AND MR. BAZALDUA, I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU FOR FIVE MINUTES TO DISCUSS THE CONSENT AGENDA. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ITEM 16 TODAY. THIS ITEM IS REQUESTING APPROVAL TO ABANDON A 3011 SQUARE FOOT ALLEY NEAR SOUTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY AND PEABODY AVENUE TO BE TRANSFERRED TO FOREST FORWARD AND FOREST THEATER, LLC. THIS ACTION ENABLES THE FOREST THEATER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, A $66 MILLION INVESTMENT THAT WILL RESTORE THE HISTORIC FOREST THEATER AND CREATE A VIBRANT MIXED USE CULTURAL CAMPUS LED BY FOREST FORWARD, A NONPROFIT FOCUSED ON EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT. THE PROJECT WILL INCLUDE A FULLY RENOVATED 500 SEAT THEATER, A NEW EDUCATION CENTER WITH TECH AND MEDIA LABS, A 100 OR 175 SEAT BLACK BOX THEATER, CAFE EVENT LAWN, AND MORE RETAIL OPPORTUNITY. ONCE COMPLETE, THE VENUE WILL HOST OVER 140 PERFORMANCES ANNUALLY, BOOSTING LOCAL ARTS, EDUCATION AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY. THIS ALLEY ABANDONMENT MAY BE A SMALL STEP ON PAPER, BUT IT REPRESENTS A POWERFUL MOVE FORWARD. REALIZING THAT WE HAVE A BOLD, COMMUNITY LED VISION ONE THAT CELEBRATES CULTURE, FOSTERS OPPORTUNITY, AND BRINGS LASTING INVESTMENT TO SOUTH DALLAS. I WANT TO GIVE A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO ELIZABETH WHATLEY FOR HER LEADERSHIP AND HER TEAM. THERE'S A LOT TO NAME. BUT THERE'S A GREAT DEAL OF COLLABORATION TO GET THIS DONE. I ALSO WANT TO THANK CITY MANAGER KIM TOLBERT FOR HER WORK. ON SEVERAL ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP WITH THIS PROJECT TO HELP KEEP IT MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. SO LOOKING FORWARD TO PASSING THIS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. THANK YOU. MAYOR I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ITEM NUMBER 21. [00:40:02] THIS IS ADDITIONAL MONEY FOR THE FAMILY GATEWAY HOMELESS SHELTER, WHICH YOU MAY REMEMBER, WE PURCHASED IN DECEMBER OF 2020. WE COVER THIS ITEM MANY TIMES AT GFM. AND I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER CHAD WEST, WHO BROUGHT THAT UP EVERY SINGLE TIME SO THAT WE COULD KEEP THAT PROJECT ON TRACK. UNFORTUNATELY, IT IS AGAIN OFF TRACK AND IT'S OFF TRACK. I'LL SAY, SINCE MAY, THE ENTIRE BACK OF THE BUILDING HAS MASSIVE SCAFFOLDING. IT'S SHUT DOWN TWO OF THE FOUR MINI PLAYGROUNDS FOUR OF THE ROOMS SINCE MAY FOR FAMILIES HAVE BEEN CLOSED OFF. THOSE WERE JUST OPENED UP WITH BRAND NEW WINDOWS, THANKFULLY. BUT NOW THERE ARE SIX NEW ROOMS THAT HAVE BEEN CLOSED OFF FOR FAMILIES. THE VOGEL ALCOVE, WHICH HAS CO-LOCATED TO PROVIDE CHILD CARE SERVICES AS WELL AS PRESCHOOL AND AFTERCARE FOR OUR STUDENTS, IS NOW SHUT DOWN IN THE INFANT ROOM AS THIS WORK IS HAPPENING. SO I THANK THE MANAGER FOR PUTTING THE DOLLARS IN. IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE CARE OF THIS BUILDING PER THE CONTRACT. I HOPE THAT CHAIRMAN JOHNSON IN THE EFFICIENCY COMMITTEE, GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, WILL CONSIDER HOW WE STRUCTURE THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS WHERE WE OWN THE BUILDING, BUT SOMEBODY IS FULLY OPERATING OUT OF IT, AND PERHAPS THE DISCUSSION NEEDS TO BE ACTUALLY TRANSFERRING THAT BUILDING WITH A DEED RESTRICTION SO THAT THEY ACTUALLY TAKE CONTROL OF THE BUILDING, INCLUDING THE MAINTENANCE. BUT THE REAL QUESTION, THE REAL QUESTION WE NEED TO TALK TO THE CITY ABOUT IS WHAT KIND OF INSPECTION HAPPENED BEFORE WE PURCHASED IT. THIS IS NOT THE ONLY BUILDING ON THE ON OUR LIST THAT HAS HAD PROBLEMS BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAVE A THOROUGH INSPECTION. WE HAVE THE MIRAMAR BUILDING IN DISTRICT ONE. WE ALL KNOW THE WHOLE STEMMONS ISSUE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INDEPENDENCE. THAT PROJECT ALSO, THE BUILDING MAY NOT BE IN THE KIND OF CONDITION WE NEED GOING FORWARD. SO WE HAVE TO REALLY LOOK CLOSELY AT WHAT THE CITY IS DOING IN TERMS OF INSPECTIONS BEFORE WE EVER INVEST IN A PROPERTY. AND THAT DUE DILIGENCE IS CLEARLY NOT APPROPRIATE AND NOT TO THE STANDARDS WE EXPECT. SO WHETHER WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR SOME KIND OF AN APPRAISAL WHERE IT'S NOT GOING DEEPER, WE'RE NOT UNDERSTANDING THE RISK, THE FINANCIAL RISK TO OUR CITY AND TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS LATER. WE'RE PAYING FOR IT. WE'RE PAYING FOR IT IN FAMILY GATEWAY. WE'RE PAYING FOR IT. WE'RE PAYING FOR IT. INDEPENDENCE. WE'RE PAYING FOR IT. MIRAMAR. THAT PROJECT OF NO FAULT OF OF MY COLLEAGUE IS STILL NOT OPEN PURCHASE IN 2020 BECAUSE WE DIDN'T CHECK FOR ASBESTOS. I MEAN, THERE ARE VERY SERIOUS ISSUES WITH US NOT DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE. AND SO, MANAGER, I KNOW THAT YOU'VE PUT A PAUSE ON HIRING. I'M SORRY, ON PURCHASING ANY NEW PROPERTY. I APPRECIATE THAT, AND I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT MOVE. I KNOW YOU'RE GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT A CHECKLIST SO THAT WE WON'T MAKE THESE SAME MISTAKES, BUT TOO MANY HAVE BEEN MADE. AND HERE'S AN EXAMPLE FOR $1.35 MILLION THAT WE'RE ADDING TO ON TOP OF THE MILLIONS WE'VE ALREADY SPENT TO FIX. NOW, I'LL SAY THE LAST TIME WE PUT MONEY TOWARDS FIXING, IT'S BECAUSE WE KNEW THERE WAS A ROOF LEAK AND WE DIDN'T REPAIR IT BECAUSE THEY WERE JUST WAITING FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. AND THEN BIG STORMS CAME. AND AS THAT WATER PENETRATED THE BUILDING, NO SURPRISE MOLD CAME. SO THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE WHERE WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO ALLOCATE THIS MONEY. WE HAVE TO FIX WHAT WAS WRONG. BUT PART OF IT IS OUR OWN DOING. AND WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO MAKE THESE SAME MISTAKES. SO THEY'RE LITERALLY PAYING TO PUT PEOPLE IN MOTELS ALL OF THESE MONTHS BECAUSE THEY CAN'T USE THE ROOMS. THERE ARE BY FAR THE LARGEST FAMILY SHELTER. THEY DO EXCELLENT WORK, AND I'LL TELL YOU THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR VOGEL TO OPERATE WHEN THEY'RE CONSTANTLY HAVING TO SHUT DOWN DIFFERENT FACILITIES DIFFERENT ROOMS THAT THEY'RE OPERATING OUT OF. IT LOOKS TERRIBLE. AND I'M GOING TO PUT AN IMAGE ON MY TWITTER OF WHAT THE BACK OF THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE. AND I THINK YOU'LL MAYBE BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE DEALING WITH AND HAVE BEEN AGAIN SINCE MAY. SO I JUST NEED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT ISSUE BECAUSE IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF VOTING FOR IT. THE QUESTION IS, HOW ARE WE GOING TO IMPROVE ON WHAT WE'RE DOING? BECAUSE THIS IS THIS HAS BECOME A MONEY PIT UNNECESSARILY. THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. PLEASE GO AHEAD. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. AND GOOD MORNING TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN, I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS THIS MORNING. I HOPE THAT THIS COUNCIL WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT WHAT WE'VE ADDED TO THE BUDGET, WHICH IS TWO THINGS THAT I THINK ARE GOING TO BE CRITICAL IN HOW WE LOOK AT OVERALL [00:45:09] FACILITIES GOING FORWARD. WE HAVE THE FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT, INCLUDING IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET, BECAUSE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DEFINITELY HAVE NOT HAD THAT WE NEED. I THINK IT'S GOING TO ALLOW FOR US TO PLAN, BUT ALSO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH A LOT OF THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE ACROSS OUR ENTIRE PORTFOLIO. AND THEN THE SECOND ITEM THAT I HOPE THE COUNCIL WILL ALSO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF A REAL ESTATE MASTER PLAN. I THINK THAT MASTER PLAN IS GOING TO BE A WAY THAT WE BEGIN TO LOOK AT WHAT WE NOT JUST FROM WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, BUT WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT WE NO LONGER NEED TO CONTINUE TO INCLUDE IN OUR PORTFOLIO? WHAT TYPES OF BUSINESS DECISIONS AND CRITERIA SHOULD GO INTO THE ACQUISITION OF ANYTHING NEW? AND SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS QUITE EXTENSIVELY, AND I BELIEVE WITH BOTH OF THOSE ITEMS, WE WILL BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT YOU'VE RAISED THIS MORNING. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR COMMENTS. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON CONSENT. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT ITEM NUMBER TWO AND JUST THANK THE PARKS BOARD AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT FOR THE BAHAMA BEACH WILL BE GETTING AN OVERHAUL. SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT. IT WILL INCLUDE REPLACING THE VORTEX ELEVATION SYSTEM WITH 16 DECKS, 55 INTERACTIVE WATER FEATURES, SIX FAMILY WATER SLIDES AND THREE SUPER SPLASH DUNK FEATURES. THERE. SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING OVER AT THAT, AND I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THANK THE PARKS AND CITY MANAGER PUBLICLY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. CONSENT AGENDA IS ADOPTED. THANK YOU, MADAM SECRETARY. NEXT ITEM PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR FIRST ITEM. [18. 25-2599A Authorize a seven-year lease agreement with 10485 Olympic, LLC, for approximately 15,000 square feet of office and warehouse space located at 10485 Olympic Drive, for the Emergency Medical Services Division of the Dallas Fire-Rescue Department, for the period October 1, 2025 through September 30, 2032 - Not to exceed $1,539,234.24 - Financing: General Fund (subject to annual appropriations)] AGENDA ITEM 18. AGENDA AGENDA ITEM 18 AUTHORIZED A SEVEN YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT WITH 10485 OLYMPIC LLC FOR APPROXIMATELY 15,000FT² OF OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE SPACE LOCATED AT 10485 OLYMPIC DRIVE FOR THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DIVISION OF THE DALLAS FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 1ST, 2025 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2032, NOT TO EXCEED $1,539,234.24. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. IS THERE A MOTION? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IT WAS PULLED BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. SO I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ITEM. GOOD MORNING, ASHLEY EUBANKS. FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT. THANK YOU. ASHLEY. THERE WE GO. ASHLEY. SO NORMALLY WE WOULD HAVE HAD THIS AS AN AGENDA ITEM IN PUBLIC SAFETY, AND WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ASK, BUT BECAUSE OF THE BREAK AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT. SO I CAN'T HELP BUT WONDER WITH THE VAST REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO OF THE CITY OF DALLAS, DO WE NOT HAVE ANY PLACE ELSE FOR THIS TO GO WHERE WE'RE NOT HAVING TO PAY RENT? COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. WE DID CHECK OUR INVENTORY. UNFORTUNATELY, WE DO NOT HAVE A FACILITY OF THIS NATURE. AND WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA YOU ARE LOOKING FOR IN REGARDS TO WHERE WE'RE SO CURRENTLY. WE HAVE A LEASE IN PLACE NOW. THIS WILL BE RELOCATED TO IN IN IF THIS ITEM IS APPROVED WILL BE LOCATED TO 10485 OLYMPIC. CURRENTLY WE'RE LEASING 8371FT². AND THIS WILL BE THE NEW ITEM WILL BE FOR 15,000FT². BUT AS YOU ARE LOOKING FOR A PROPERTY, YOU HAD CERTAIN SPECIFICATIONS YOU NEED TO MEET, RIGHT? THAT IT WAS CLIMATE CONTROLLED, THAT SORT OF THING. CORRECT. COULD YOU GO OVER THAT LIST? THAT'S CORRECT. SO IT NEEDS TO BE CLIMATE CONTROLLED, WHICH WE DO NOT HAVE. AS WELL AS THERE'S MINIMAL ELECTRICAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS THAT ARE NECESSARY. OKAY. AND WHAT PRECIPITATED NEEDING MORE THAN TWICE THE SPACE. ACTUALLY THERE IS FOR DFR THERE IS OFFICE SPACE. THERE COULD BE COMBINATION OF OTHER STAFF THAT COME HERE AS WELL. THE REAL THING WITH THIS ONE IS THE THERE WAS A 21% DECREASE IN REGARDS TO THE PER SQUARE FOOT VALUE. SO WE'RE SAVING THERE. AND SO THEREFORE THE LEASE THAT WE HAVE TODAY ACTUALLY DID NOT EXPIRE UNTIL FEBRUARY OF 2026. BUT DUE TO THE LEASE RATE GOING DOWN NON-APPROPRIATION, WE WERE ABLE TO GET INTO THIS AT A MUCH BETTER PRICE. AND DID YOU HAVE TO PAY OFF THE OTHER LEASE? NO, MA'AM. AND WHAT OFFICE STAFF ARE YOU EXPECTING TO PLACE THERE? I WOULD NEED TO DEFER TO GFR FOR THAT ANSWER. [00:50:06] HELLO? COUNCIL MEMBERS. SCOTT CLUMPNER. I'M THE MS DEPUTY CHIEF. WE WILL HOUSE FOUR FULL TIME PERSONNEL THAT ARE CURRENTLY AT THE WAREHOUSE WE HAVE ON BURBANK. IT WILL BE A LOGISTICS AND FINANCE LIEUTENANT, AS WELL AS LOGISTICS LOGISTICS SUPPORT PERSONNEL. AND SO WHY ARE YOU PUTTING THEM THERE INSTEAD OF OVER ON DOLPHIN. SO THE SPACE REQUIRES THAT. AND THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE MENTIONED REQUIRE A FULL TIME STAFF THERE. THESE SUPPORT OUR SPECIAL OPERATIONS. SPECIAL EVENTS OPERATIONS AS WELL AS MAINTENANCE OF LIFE PACKS, STRETCHERS. AND SO THESE ARE SECURED AMBULANCES THAT CARRY NARCOTICS AND NEED TO BE MAINTAINED AND GO OUT ON THE OVER 1600 SPECIAL EVENTS WE DO ANNUALLY. GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 18. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 24. AUTHORIZE A FIVE YEAR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE [24. 25-2607A Authorize a five-year professional services contract for the audits of the City's financial operations and grant activities for fiscal years ending September 30, 2025 through September 30, 2029 and certain component units for years ending December 31, 2025 through December 31, 2029 - Weaver and Tidwell, LLP dba Weaver, most advantageous proposer of seven - Not to exceed $4,036,750.00 - Financing: General Fund ($3,541,750.00), Sanitation Operation Fund ($7,500.00), Capital Projects Funds ($12,500.00), Dallas Water Utilities Fund ($12,500.00), Aviation Fund ($55,000.00) Dallas Convention Center Hotel Development Corporation ($110,000.00), Downtown Connection TIF ($55,000.00), and Dallas Employee Retirement Fund ($242,500.00) (subject to annual appropriations)] AUDITS OF THE CITY'S FINANCIAL OPERATIONS AND GRANT ACTIVITIES FOR FISCAL YEARS ENDING SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2025 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2029 AND CERTAIN COMPONENT UNITS FOR YEARS ENDING DECEMBER 31ST, 2025 THROUGH DECEMBER 31ST, 2029. WEAVER AND TIDWELL LLP, DBA WEAVER. MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSAL OF SEVEN NOT TO EXCEED $4,036,750. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. IS THERE A MOTION MOVE TO APPROVE? IS THERE A SECOND? ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 24. THANK YOU. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS. CAN WE GET AN ANSWER ABOUT HOW FREQUENTLY WE PROCURE OUTSIDE AUDITORS? GOOD MORNING. JACK GARLAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. THIS IS A FIVE YEAR CONTRACT FOR OUR EXTERNAL AUDITOR. SO THE LAST ONE WAS DONE FIVE YEARS PREVIOUSLY. WE'RE CONCLUDING THAT CURRENT CONTRACT, AND IT'S TIME FOR RENEWAL. OR A NEW CONTRACT EVERY FIVE YEARS. AND HOW IMPORTANT IS IT TO PICK OUTSIDE AUDITORS? I MEAN, HOW IMPORTANT IS THIS FUNCTION TO THE CITY? IN MY OPINION, MA'AM, THIS CONTRACT IS ONE OF THE VERY IMPORTANT ONES THAT WE DO. THE CHARTER REQUIRES THAT WE HAVE THE FINANCIAL AUDITS, AND IT'S IMPORTANT IN REGARDS TO HAVING SOME EXTERNAL ENTITY REVIEWING OUR FINANCES, REPORTING ON THOSE REPORTING TO THE GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE. THE REPORT IS USED BY BOND RATING AGENCIES AND INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT TO BORROW THAT WE LOAN FUNDS TO OR BORROW FUNDS FROM. AND SO IT'S IMPORTANT FOR OUR BOND RATING AND OTHER FINANCIAL ASPECTS. CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THE PROCESS OF HOW THE PROCUREMENT IS DONE? SO IN THIS CASE WE HAD A REQUEST A COMPETITIVE BID. THE GFM COMMITTEE, PER THE CODE, SERVED AS THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE AND WE CONDUCTED RECEIVED SEVEN PROPOSALS. OF THOSE, THEY WERE REVIEWED AND EVALUATED. AND WE HAD INTERVIEWS A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, I THINK A MONTH AGO. AND THEN THE VENDOR WAS SELECTED AS THE HIGHEST RANKED. AND I'M SORRY. WHY IS IT THAT THE GFM COMMITTEE IS SELECTING IS THE THE RATING AND SELECTION COMMITTEE? SORRY. SO THE THE CITY CHARTER INDICATES THAT THE COUNCIL WILL SELECT THE, THE, THE AUDITOR. AND SO THIS TIME AS WELL AS THE LAST TIME AND I CAN'T SPEAK TO PRIOR TO THAT, BUT AT LEAST THESE LAST TWO TIMES WE HAVE USED GFM OR THE CITY'S FINANCE COMMITTEE TO BE THE, THE INTERVIEW PANEL, THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH FOR THE SELECTION, BECAUSE THE CHARTER SAYS THE COUNCIL WILL SELECT. THANK YOU. AND SO WHAT KIND OF TRAINING DO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS GET TO DO THE SELECTION. WE HAVE A MEETING AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS WITH THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE. AND WE GO OVER HOW TO ACCESS THE FILES. WE PROVIDE THE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND THEN THAT'S RANKED AGAINST THE PROPOSALS. AND DID THE GP COMMITTEE PARTICIPATE IN THAT TRAINING? WE HAD THREE OF THE FIVE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE PARTICIPATE. OKAY. AND HOW MANY OF THE GP COMMITTEE MEMBERS PARTICIPATE IN SCORING THE RESPONSES TO THE RFP? THREE. THREE. AND HOW MANY PARTICIPATED IN INTERVIEWING THE THE PROPOSED OR TOP CANDIDATES? [00:55:04] THE SAME THREE THAT SCORED THE EVALUATIONS. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PROPOSALS? DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH TIME IS INVOLVED IN THE TRAINING, REVIEWING AND SCORING AND INTERVIEWING OF THOSE FIRMS. I DON'T HAVE A TIME ESTIMATE, BUT THERE WERE SEVEN PROPOSALS AND THE TOP THREE WERE INTERVIEWED. AND SO A LOT OF IT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT COORDINATING EVERYONE'S CALENDAR SO THAT ALL MEMBERS OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE CAN BE PRESENT FOR THE INTERVIEWS. DID STAFF ALSO EVALUATE THESE PROPOSALS? YES. WE HAD TWO MEMBERS OF OPS THAT DID OR PROCUREMENT SERVICES THAT DID. AND WOULD YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY PAGES EACH ONE OF THESE SUBMISSIONS TO THE CITY WAS? I DON'T HAVE IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I CAN GET IT FOR YOU FROM THE SYSTEM IF YOU'RE GOING TO GUESS HOW MANY PAGES THAT WAS. AT LEAST 1400, 200 PER PROPOSAL. OKAY. SO I JUST REALLY NEED TO SAY THIS. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ITEM. IT'S IMPORTANT TO OUR CITY. IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE TRUST IN OUR CITY TO OUR BOND RATING, TO MAKE SURE THAT DOLLARS COMING TO THE CITY ARE UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE THAT THEY WERE MEANT TO, THAT PEOPLE CAN HAVE TRUST IN GOVERNMENT. AND THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS ACTIVITY. I WAS PRETTY NEW ON GBFM THE FIRST TIME WE DID IT. I THINK I HAD NEWLY BEEN CHAIR AND I'M A LITTLE BIT TAKEN BACK THAT MAYBE WE DIDN'T FULLY HAVE THE PARTICIPATION THAT WE SHOULD HAVE. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 24. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES HAVE IT. THANKS, GUYS. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, [28. 25-2371A 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)] BEGINNING WITH AGENDA ITEM 28. AGENDA ITEM 28 IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. THIS MORNING YOU HAVE INDIVIDUAL AND FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS. YOUR NOMINEES FOR INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENT TO THE ARTS AND CULTURE ADVISORY COMMISSION. AUGUSTINE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST MR. MEETS THE PERFORMING ARTS. PROFESSIONAL EXPERTISE SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE CITIZEN HOMELESSNESS COMMISSION. JASMINE FLORES IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA. MISS FLORES MEETS THE PAST EXPERIENCE AS A HOMELESS PERSON. SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JOANNA L HAMPTON IS BEING NOMINATED BY MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. ELIZA L LEWIS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRACEY TO THE COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD. MARY ELLEN SMITH IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER ROTH TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. REBECCA POSTON IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS, AND PAULA DAY IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY. BOTH NOMINEES MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC. SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR COMMUNITY CENTER BOARD. SANDRA DEE MENDENHALL IS BEING NOMINATED BY MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION. ANDREW D NASH, THE SECOND, IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY AND LILLIANA H. MARSHALL IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. BOTH NOMINEES MEET THE FULL TIME STUDENT SPECIAL QUALIFICATION. YOUR NOMINEES FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ALTERNATE MEMBERS CHERYL GAMBLE IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE EIGHT BOARD DESIGN DISTRICT. PASHA KAY HEYDARI IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER CADENA AND TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE SEVEN BOARD SPORTS ARENA. DEBBIE SOLIS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER WEST. THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES. MR. MAYOR, IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? PROOF. I HEARD A MOTION A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE NOMINEES ARE APPROVED. CONGRATULATIONS, EVERYONE. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM SECRETARY. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM 29 IS A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE DALLAS FORT WORTH INTERNATIONAL [29. 25-2586A A resolution to approve the Dallas Fort Worth International Airport Board’s FY 2026 budget - Financing: No cost consideration to the City] AIRPORT BOARD'S FY 2026 BUDGET. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. LOOKING FOR A MOTION? MOTION FOR APPROVAL. IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 30. [30. 25-2680A Authorize (1) a ten-year beverage services contract with PepsiCo Sales Inc. to provide full-service vending, case sales, and fountain pouring rights at Park and Recreation Facilities; (2) establish appropriations in the amount of $940,038.86; (3) the receipt and deposit revenue generated from this contract in the Imp. Maint. Rep. Programs/Sponsorships; (4) the disbursement of commission to The Superlative Group pursuant to Consultant Contract No. PKR-2021-000017177; and (5) authorize the transfer of 10 percent remaining after commission payment to the Park Endowment Fund - Estimated amount of $869,535.14 - Financing: Imp. Maint. Rep. Programs/Sponsorships Fund ($869,535.95) and Park Endowment Fund ($70,502.91); Estimated Revenue: Imp. Maint. Rep. Programs/Sponsorships $940,038.86 (This item was deferred on August 13, 2025 and August 27, 2025)] AUTHORIZE ONE A TEN YEAR BEVERAGE SERVICES CONTRACT WITH PEPSICO SALES, INC. TO PROVIDE FULL SERVICE VENDING CASE SALES AND FOUNTAIN POURING RIGHTS AT PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES TO ESTABLISH APPROPRIATIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF IN $0.86. THREE. THE RECEIPT AND DEPOSIT REVENUE GENERATED FROM THIS CONTRACT WITH THE [01:00:09] IMPROVEMENT MAINTENANCE REPRESENTATIVE PROGRAMS. REP PROGRAMS. SPONSORSHIPS FOR THE DISBURSEMENT OF COMMISSION TO THE SUPERLATIVE GROUP PURSUANT TO CONSULTANT CONTRACT NUMBER PQR 2021. DASH 000017177 AND FIVE AUTHORIZED THE TRANSFER OF 10% REMAINING AFTER COMMISSION PAYMENT TO THE PARK ENDOWMENT FUND. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $869,535.14. YOU DO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. ALEX SCOTT. ALEX SCOTT IS NOT PRESENT. MR. MAYOR, THIS THIS IS YOUR ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 30. IS THERE A MOTION? YES. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE. MAKE SURE YOU RECOGNIZE FOR THAT PURPOSE I PROVED TO. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. THIS CONTRACT IS EXPECTED TO GENERATE AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $1,140,038.86 IN THE IMPROVEMENTS, MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS AND PROGRAM SPONSORSHIP FUND 0611 OVER THE TEN YEAR CONTRACT TERM. AND THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. MR. MAYOR, POINT OF ORDER. I HAVEN'T HEARD A MOTION. OH, I'M SORRY. IT STARTED OFF AS A MOTION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE. AND THEN IT SEEMS LIKE FACTS. I LOST TRACK OF IT. BUT ANYWAY, CAN YOU CAN YOU GO AHEAD AND STATE THE WHOLE MOTION IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND I CAN DETERMINE THAT POINT? OKAY. THIS IS WHAT HE'S READING. NEVER MIND. YEAH. OKAY. GO AHEAD. CONTINUE YOUR. CAN YOU START OVER AGAIN? I'M SORRY TO DO THAT TO YOU, BUT JUST SO WE CAN HEAR IT AGAIN. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. THE CHANGES ARE. THIS CONTRACT IS EXPECTED TO GENERATE AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $1,140,038.86 IN THE IMPROVEMENTS, MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS AND PROGRAMS SPONSORSHIP FUND. 0611. OVER THE TEN YEAR CONTRACT TERM AND THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER IS AUTHORIZED TO DISBURSE A 15% COMMISSION TO THE SUPERLATIVE GROUP. PER THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT, IN AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $141,005.83 FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS, MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS, PROGRAMS AND SPONSORSHIP FUND. 0611. AND TO TRANSFER 10% OF THE REMAINING REVENUE AFTER THE COMMISSION PAYMENT TO THE PARK ENDOWMENT FUND. AND 0461. IN AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $79,903.30, WITH AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $919,129.73 REMAINING IN FUND. 0611 SECOND I THINK THAT MOTION IS IN ORDER AND AND THEREFORE I'LL RECOGNIZE THE SECOND. SO IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, MR. ROFF? I'VE THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THE FIVE MINUTES I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PARKS STAFF IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'VE MADE AN IMPROVEMENT IN THE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS. THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL SPONSORSHIP FUNDS OF UP TO $200,000 OF IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CONTRACT, AND IT APPEARS THAT THEY'VE ALSO BEEN ABLE TO REDUCE THE COMMISSION PAYMENT OUTSIDE PAYMENT FROM 25% DOWN TO 15. AND I THINK THAT THEY'VE DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB IN TRYING TO REVISE THIS CONTRACT TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM 30. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MAYOR AND I, TOO, HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH PARK AND REC ON THE CONTRACT. MY CONCERN IS THE SAME AS IT WAS WHEN I BROUGHT THIS UP OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, WHICH IS THAT I THINK WE'RE THINKING TOO SMALL ON THIS, AND WHETHER THE HAVING THE VENDING MACHINES PRECLUDES US FROM GOING BIG. ON HAVING A CORPORATE SPONSOR LIKE DOCTOR PEPPER. WELL, CLOSE TO DALLAS BASED DOCTOR PEPPER OR PEPSI, OR SOMEONE WHOSE PARENT HAS A NUMBER OF BRANDS THAT ARE TAILOR MADE FOR THE AUDIENCE THAT WE HAVE, USING OUR PARK AND REC FACILITIES, GOLF COURSES, POOLS, REC CENTERS. I MEAN, PEPSICO HAS TROPICANA AND QUAKER OATS AND GATORADE AND SOME BRANDS THAT WOULD BE GREAT FITS FOR THE AUDIENCE. [01:05:08] THAT IS BASICALLY CRADLE TO GRAVE AT OUR WHOLE PARK AND REC. REC. REC CENTERS, ETC.. SO MY CONCERN IS INITIALLY THAT HAVING THIS CONTRACT FOR VENDING MACHINES WOULD PRECLUDE OTHER CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP PITCHES, AND NOW IT TURNS OUT IT DOESN'T. THEY CAN HAVE A TEMPORARY EVENT WHERE YOU MOVE THE VENDING MACHINE AND HAVE YOUR EVENT. BUT I THINK THAT'S STILL THINKING SMALL. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A COCA COLA OR A BIG BRAND BE ABLE TO COME IN AND DO SOMETHING ACROSS THE PARK AND REC SYSTEM, ACROSS OUR TENNIS CENTERS, ACROSS AQUATICS, WHATEVER FITS THEIR THEIR NEED WITH THE AUDIENCE THAT THAT THE CITY CAN DELIVER. BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY WOULD WANT TO DO THAT ON A TEMPORARY BASIS. I JUST DON'T THINK WE'VE THOUGHT THIS THROUGH ALL THE WAY. THE OTHER THING THAT'S A LITTLE SCARY THAT WE TALK ABOUT AROUND HERE IS THE LENGTH OF THE CONTRACT. SO NOT ONLY ARE WE MAKING THIS DECISION FOR REALLY, YOU KNOW, $100,000 A YEAR COULD BE KNOCKING US OUT OF A POTENTIAL OF $2 MILLION A YEAR. AND I JUST DON'T THINK WE'VE THOUGHT IT THROUGH. AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LOCKING IT IN FOR TEN YEARS. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE GREATER SOURCES OF REVENUE FOR OUR PARK AND REC DEPARTMENT. WE NEED IT ALL DAY LONG. BUT SEEING SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND IN A CATEGORY THAT IS SUCH A GREAT FIT FOR PARK AND REC IS WHAT GIVES ME PAUSE. AND I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS. YOU'LL BE TOLD BY PARK AND REC THAT YOU KNOW, THIS DOESN'T PRECLUDE A WIRELESS COMPANY OR MAYBE A BANK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT A GREAT FIT WOULD BE FOR THE PARK AND REC SYSTEM, THIS IS ONE OF THE CATEGORIES THAT I'D PUT UP AT THE TOP. AND I REALLY HATE THE IDEA OF KNOCKING US OUT OF CONTENTION ON THIS. AND ONE OF MY REMAINING QUESTIONS, BESIDES THE FACT THAT THIS WOULD ONLY ALLOW SOMEONE TO COME IN IN A BIGGER FASHION TEMPORARILY IS ALSO THE ABILITY TO POUR SAMPLES. I MEAN, THIS WAS A WORLD I'VE LIVED IN, AND SO YOU WANT YOUR BRAND OUT THERE, YOU MAY WANT COUPONING, YOU MAY WANT SAMPLING. AND IF YOU'RE ALREADY POURING ONE PRODUCT, IS THIS GOING TO KNOCK YOU OUT OF POURING ANOTHER ONE? AND SO I JUST DON'T HAVE THE ANSWERS THAT I THINK MAKE ME COMFORTABLE WITH MAKING A TEN YEAR DECISION ON THIS. I'D LIKE TO SEE PARK AND REC CONTINUE TO PURSUE SOMETHING THEY ARE ALREADY MAKING PROGRESS ON WITH SUPERLATIVE TO TO SECURE BIG CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS. AND I JUST HATE TO SEE US THROW A SPOKE IN OUR OUR WHEELS ON ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS. SO I, I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN WEST. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 30. THANK YOU MAYOR. I DO APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE HELPING WITH PARKS TO MAKE THIS A BETTER DEAL. I SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT JUST CAME UP THROUGH DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT, BRINGING THESE TO YOU EARLIER, I'M. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ITEMS THAT KIND OF SLIPPED PAST MY RADAR UNTIL TODAY. SO WAS THE TEN YEAR CONTRACT. IS THAT NON-NEGOTIABLE AT THIS POINT? GOOD MORNING, RYAN O'CONNOR, DALLAS PARK AND RECREATION. SO THE TEN YEAR CONTRACT IS IS WHAT WE NEGOTIATED AND AGREED TO WITH OUR CONSULTANT. SUPERLATIVE. SO THAT IS WHAT IS BEING CONSIDERED. OKAY. AND AS DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BROUGHT UP, IF A COCA COLA OR SOME OTHER SPONSOR COMES IN AND WANTS TO TO SPONSOR AN EVENT OR SOMETHING, THEN THE THE PEPSI MACHINES HAVE TO BE MOVED OR WHAT? I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IF YOU'RE HAVING TO MOVE. SO THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE IS EXCLUSIVE ONLY TO POURING RIGHTS. SO FOR INSTANCE, IF WE HAVE A PEPSI VENDING MACHINE IN THE REC CENTER, IT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE A COKE MACHINE RIGHT NEXT TO IT. BUT WITH THAT EXCEPTION, IT'S NOT EXCLUSIVE TO NAMING RIGHTS, SPONSORSHIPS, OR ANY OTHER KINDS OF ACTIVITIES THAT WE WOULD CHOOSE TO DO AT THE REC CENTERS OR AQUATIC CENTERS OR OTHERWISE. OKAY. SO IN THIS, I THINK I UNDERSTAND NOW. SO IN THE SCENARIO OF MARTIN WEISS RECREATION CENTER IN MY DISTRICT, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'RE GOING THROUGH A COMPLETE RENOVATION. IF COCA-COLA WANTED TO COME IN AND MATCH THE $9 MILLION THE BOND PUT FORWARD, THE PEPSI CONTRACT FOR VENDING WOULD NOT PREVENT THAT. THAT IS CORRECT. AND WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY WELCOME THAT OPPORTUNITY WITH COCA-COLA. EXACTLY. WELL, I WAS JUST GOING TO POINT OUT I WAS I REMEMBERED I HAD VISITED WITH THE PARKS FOUNDATION IN LOS ANGELES DURING MY LAST TRIP THERE. AND THE LA CLIPPERS HAD PARTNERED WITH THE PARKS FOUNDATION THERE TO RENOVATE ALL OF THE PUBLIC BASKETBALL COURTS. AND WE'RE PAYING THEY'VE RENOVATED HUNDREDS OF BASKETBALL COURTS WITH A GOAL OF 350 COURTS. AND THIS IS ALL PRIVATELY FUNDED THROUGH A BIG CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP. SO IF LOS ANGELES CAN DO IT, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO IT IN DALLAS. AND I AGREE WITH DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THESE OPPORTUNITIES. [01:10:02] I MEAN, THIS SHOULD BE A HUGE FOCUS OF OF OUR CITY. THANK YOU. YEP. AND WE ARE ABSOLUTELY WORKING ON NEW WAYS TO MONETIZE THE PARK SYSTEM. SO WE'RE DOING JUST WHAT YOU SUGGESTED, MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE ITEM. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMAN OR CHAIR ROTH FOR THE THE WORK HE'S DONE TO IMPROVE THIS PLAN FOR PARK STAFF. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR. SO IF THIS CONTRACT MOVES FORWARD, IT DOES NOT PRECLUDE ANOTHER BEVERAGE COMPANY FROM SPONSORING, LET'S SAY, A BASKETBALL RENOVATION OR A TOURNAMENT. THEY CAN STILL MOVE FORWARD WITH BOTH SPONSORSHIPS. YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. AGAIN, IT'S IT'S EXCLUSIVE RELATED TO POURING RIGHTS. SO SHOULD THEY WANT TO DO A BUILDING NAMING OR SPONSOR A SUMMER CAMP AT A, AT A REC CENTER, FOR INSTANCE? THAT WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE. OKAY. I JUST KNOW THAT LIKE ANY OTHER DEPARTMENT, WE'RE SEEING HARDER AND HARDER TIMES WHEN IT COMES TO FINANCIAL. JUST MAKING, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO GET A BALANCED BUDGET. AND SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS ITEM. I KNOW THE WORK THAT Y'ALL ARE DOING BEHIND THE SCENE IN GOING TO THAT NEXT LEVEL. ALSO, UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT MIGHT REQUIRE US TO SEEK OUTSIDE EXPERTS TO GO DO THAT, NEGOTIATING FOR US. AND SO FOR THOSE REASONS I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE ITEM BEFORE US. THANK YOU, MISS BLACKMON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS IN THE MEMO THAT YOU SENT, IT SAYS THAT WE WENT FROM 15% TO 25% SPLIT WITH THE CONSULTANT OR THE REVERSE. SO WE WENT FROM 25, WHICH WAS THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT. WE NEGOTIATED THAT DOWN TO 15% SO THAT THE CITY COULD BENEFIT AN ADDITIONAL $100,000. OKAY. SORRY, I READ THEM THE. YEAH. OKAY. NOW I'VE GOT IT. OKAY. SO IT SAYS IN THAT YOU'VE DONE 66 OF OUR FACILITIES, BUT THERE'S 410 PLUS PARKS. WELL, PARKS DON'T HAVE A VENDING MACHINE. SO I GUESS WHAT IS FACILITIES TO FACILITIES LIKE. ARE THESE IN EVERY FACILITY. SO. YES, MA'AM. SO THIS WOULD BE OUR REC CENTERS, OUR GOLF, OUR GOLF PRO SHOPS, OUR TENNIS PRO SHOPS. YEAH. AND THEN THERE'S A COUPLE MISCELLANEOUS, THERE'S THE KEY SOFTBALL, SAMUEL FARM, ETC.. SO THIS IS THIS EVERY BRICK AND MORTAR IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT PORTFOLIO. WELL, WHAT IT DOESN'T INCLUDE ARE OUR PARTNER SITES. SO THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE VERY MUCH PARKS BUT ARE OPERATED SEPARATELY. SO THAT WOULD BE ARBORETUM ZOO KLYDE, WARREN PARK, ETC. THOSE ARE EXCLUDED, BUT LIKE THE COTTON BOWL THAT IS FAIR PARK IS NOT A PART OF THIS CONTRACT. FAIR PARK. SORRY, BUT I GUESS WHAT I GUESS I'M TRYING TO SAY IS BECAUSE I HAVE THE EXHIBIT A, ARE THESE ALL OF THE BRICK AND MORTAR? I GUESS I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT IS LEFT OVER FOR THERE TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY. SO THE WHAT IS LEFT OVER WOULD BE OUR PARTNER SITES AND FAIR PARK. OKAY, SO THIS IS REALLY THIS IS REALLY ALL OUR BRICK AND MORTAR. IT'S, IT'S IT'S LARGELY THE FACILITIES. YES. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO GET $1.1 MILLION OVER TEN YEARS RIGHT. FROM A BIG CORPORATION LIKE PEPSICO. SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO LEAVING ANYTHING ON THE TABLE. PARDON ME. DO YOU THINK WE'RE LEAVING ANYTHING ON THE TABLE? I DO NOT. SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS CONTRACT IS PAYING US TO DO WHAT WE ALREADY DO. WE ALREADY HAVE VENDING MACHINES. WE ALREADY DO POURING AT OUR AQUATIC CENTERS, ETC.. WE'RE GOING TO KEEP ALL THOSE REVENUES LIKE WE NORMALLY DO TODAY, BUT THEY'RE PAYING US ADDITIONAL MONEY JUST TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE AN EXCLUSIVE POURING RIGHTS DEAL. BUT I DON'T SEE THE COMPETITION FACTOR BECAUSE I WOULD SAY IF I WAS A COMPETITOR, I WOULDN'T WANT TO COME IN AND DO A TEMPORARY THING. SO YOU'VE BASICALLY LOCKED US IN FOR TEN YEARS ON THIS. I MEAN, I'M JUST POURING, LIKE, POURING AT SAMUEL FARM. I MEAN, IF THERE'S A BIG EVENT THERE FOR A WEEKEND, YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE EVERYTHING OUT, AND A BIG OTHER SOFT BRAND IS GOING TO COME IN AND DO IT FOR A WEEKEND. IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? SO IN THAT, IN THAT SPECIFIC INSTANCE, IF THERE WAS A VENDING MACHINE AT SAMUEL FARM, THERE PROBABLY WILL BE WE WOULD OBSCURE IT AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE THE EVENT AND THEN YOU'D HAVE THE EVENT. THAT'S RIGHT. DOES THAT IS THAT A NORMAL THING? IT IS. AND WHERE HAS THIS HAPPENED BEFORE? I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY A COMMON THIS IS PROBABLY A COMMON PRACTICE FOR ANYBODY THAT HAS POURING RIGHTS. AND THERE'S AN ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY THAT IT HAPPENS. IT'S A COMMON THING. SO WHEN WHERE ELSE HAS IT HAPPENED I'M SURE IT HAPPENS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY WITH WITH FOLKS THAT DON'T REALLY KNOW IF THIS IS COMMON. YEAH. THIS IS NEW FOR US. YES, MA'AM. NO, THIS THIS POURING RIGHTS DEAL IS NEW FOR US. WE HAVE WE DO NOT HAVE THIS IN PLACE. THIS IS A NEW REVENUE OPPORTUNITY FOR US. AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT HOW TO, YOU KNOW, USE OUR FACILITIES TO BRING IN MORE DOLLARS. OBVIOUSLY IF THIS HAPPENS, THEN WE'VE EXCLUDED THESE, THESE BRICK AND MORTARS FROM THE WHOLE DEAL OF A BIG PACKAGE DEAL, [01:15:03] CORRECT. EXCLUSIVELY FOR POURING RIGHTS. SO FOR INSTANCE IF BUT SPONSORSHIP. BUT I'M, I'M KIND OF THINKING THAT IF A COMPETITOR WOULDN'T WANT TO COME IN AND SAY, BUT WE'RE THE COCA-COLA BAHAMA BEACH WHEN YOU'RE POURING PEPSICO. YEAH. I MEAN, I MEAN, I'M NOT A MARKETING, BUT THAT'S KIND OF MY GUT FEELING. YEAH. I MEAN, I WOULD SAY IT CREATES THE COMPETITION BECAUSE IF WE'RE HAVING A BIG EVENT AND WE'RE BRINGING IN 100,000 PEOPLE TO THAT EVENT. I ASSURE YOU, THE POURING RIGHTS IS NOT GOING TO PRECLUDE COCA-COLA OR DOCTOR PEPPER, WHO WILL WANT TO SPONSOR A BIG EVENT AND HAVE THAT MANY EYES AND THAT THAT, THAT BUILT IN CROWD AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME. WHAT IT DOES DO IS CREATE PEPSICO THE OPPORTUNITY, IF WE GET THIS TYPE OF SPONSORSHIP FOR PEPSICO TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO STEP UP AND SPONSOR THAT EVENT, IT CREATES COMPETITION. I THINK IT KIND OF TAMPERS IT DOWN IN MY OPINION. IT JUST BECAUSE, I MEAN, WHY WOULD I, AS A COMPETITOR WANT TO GO TO A FACILITY THAT MY THAT THAT IS ALREADY BEING USED? I MEAN, I HAVE A IT'S ONLY A ONE TIME SHOT. I WOULD THINK I WOULD WANT LONGEVITY OVER A PRODUCT, NOT A ONE TIME SHOT THING. I AGREE. AND THAT'S THE RISK THAT THAT I FEEL LIKE. AND SO IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS TODAY, CAN IT BE PUT IN THE PORTFOLIO OF UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THAT WHOLE STRATEGY LOOKS LIKE? AND WHEN YOU ALL GO OUT TO MARKET OR TO GO OUT TO THE MARKET TO LOOK FOR THE COMPETITION, THEN IT BECOMES A BIGGER, I THINK, A BIGGER DISCUSSION POINT. YEAH, I WAS BASICALLY TAKEN THESE OFFLINE. YEAH, I WILL SAY IT DOES NOT PRECLUDE US BECAUSE WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON SOME OTHER DEALS. THAT DOES INCLUDE LOOKING AT THE BIG PICTURE OF NAMING AND SPONSORSHIPS FOR THE PARK SYSTEM. WE THOUGHT VERY STRATEGIC WHEN IT CAME TO THIS POINT, RIGHTS WHICH ONLY AFFECT OUR REC CENTERS AND POOLS AND THE TENNIS AND GOLF COURSES AND AND YOU ALL KNOW OUR PARK SYSTEM IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THAT. AND WE ARE WORKING ON SOME DEALS RIGHT NOW. THAT'S GOING TO BRING US A LOT MORE MONEY THAN THIS $1.1 MILLION TO THIS PARK SYSTEM TO PUT US ON A PATH OF SUSTAINABILITY. I'M I'M JUST ASKING THE COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC TRUST WHAT WE'RE DOING. TRUST OUR EXPERTISE. WE HAVE A PLAN. TRUST US TO EXECUTE IT. DO DO WE KNOW WHEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THAT PLAN? YOU WILL. AS WE AS Y'ALL HAVE THE COMMITTEES FORMED. WE'RE COMING TO TO THE THE PLANNING OF THE PARK TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE SOON. WE HAVE A ROLLOUT OF ABOUT 5 OR 6 BRIEFINGS. THAT'S LAYING OUT THE LONG TERM STRATEGIC PLAN TO MAKE THIS PARK SYSTEM SUSTAINABLE. SO THEN HOW DOES THIS PIECE FIT INTO YOUR PLAN? IT'S JUST ONE PIECE. AND I DO MEAN ONE PIECE OF THE PLAN. IT IS PROBABLY WHAT I GIVE IT ONE TENTH OF THE OVERALL REVENUE PLAN FOR THIS PARK SYSTEM ONE TENTH. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE HERE. I GUESS WE ARE. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WELL, I ALSO I ALSO WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH FOR HIS WORK IN HELPING GET A BETTER DEAL FOR US. SO THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION, AND I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR GOING BACK AND DOING THAT HARD WORK. YOU GUYS DID IT. THANK YOU. I WILL SAY THE THE QUESTION THAT I THINK IS REALLY COMING UP IS, IS ABOUT SPONSORSHIPS AND ABOUT REVENUE AND SUSTAINABILITY. BUT WHO IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND WHO IN THE CITY IS ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE SPONSORSHIPS? IS THERE SOMEBODY WHO HAS A DEDICATED JOB THAT'S ACTUALLY OUT THERE TRYING TO GET SPONSORSHIPS, OR IS IT MORE YOU HEAR SOMETHING AND YOU BOTH AS LEADERS THEN RESPOND? YEAH. SO IN THIS CASE WE RECOGNIZE THAT TO YOUR POINT, WE DON'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE IN HOUSE WHEN IT COMES TO KNOWING HOW TO GO OUT AND SECURE THESE TYPE OF DEALS BEFORE THAT. YEAH. THE PERSON NEXT TO ME RIGHT HERE WAS RYAN O'CONNOR, WHO I HAD TO DEPEND ON TO DO EVERYTHING FROM PARTNERSHIPS, MARKETING, YOU NAME IT. BUT WE SAID, NO, LET'S GO HIRE A PROFESSIONAL COMPANY. SO IN THIS CASE, IT'S SUPERLATIVE WHO WE HAVE HIRED FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD. BUT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME OTHER OPPORTUNITIES LIKE FAIR PARK AND SOME OF OUR OTHER VENUES, [01:20:03] YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING AT HIRING OTHER COMPANIES AND EXPERTS TO GET US THE BEST DEAL IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. OKAY. WELL, I'M GLAD TO HEAR YOU'RE GETTING OUTSIDE HELP. AND RYAN AND JOHN, BOTH OF YOU HAVE BEEN VERY HANDS ON AS OPPORTUNITIES HAVE COME UP. AND I'VE SEEN THAT FIRSTHAND. SO I KNOW THAT YOU YOU REACT AND YOU GET THE DEAL DONE, BUT THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A LOT OF THAT EFFORT OF LET'S GO FIND THE DEAL. AND SO I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE HIRING OUTSIDE HELP TO DO IT ON THE CITY SIDE. DO WE HAVE ANYONE CITY MANAGER THAT IS ALSO LOOKING AT SPONSORSHIPS. SO IF YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT SPONSORSHIPS, COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR THE ENTIRE CITY. WE HAVE CONTINUED TO WORK THROUGH A COUPLE OF THINGS. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW DO WE RAMP UP THAT LEVEL OF SUPPORT WITHIN OUR OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS? WE TALKED ABOUT HOW DO WE CREATE THE OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT PARTNERSHIPS, SPONSORSHIPS AND ALL OF THAT EMBEDDED TOGETHER. I DON'T HAVE A SPONSORSHIP DEPARTMENT, BUT THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE WOULD USE THAT TEAM TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT LEVEL OF WORK. WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT WAYS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO EVEN RAMP UP, THE WAY WE'RE LOOKING AT GRANT ACQUISITIONS. SO I THINK IT'S A COMBINATION. I THINK THE SPONSORSHIP PIECE IS KEY. BUT WHETHER IT'S THE CONVENTION CENTER WHICH HAS A SPONSORSHIP PIECE THAT'S BEING DEVELOPED WE HAVE AN OUTSIDE ORGANIZATION WORKING ON WHAT THAT WILL LOOK LIKE FOR THE NEW KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER. AND SO IT'S REALLY ABOUT THE DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS IN THE CITY WHERE THAT COULD ACTUALLY BE SUPPORTED. FAIR PARK, OF COURSE. AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT THEIR MODEL IS BASED ON THE WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT. BUT WE WILL LOOK AT THAT CONTINUOUSLY, THE WAY WE'VE DONE IT ACROSS THE BOARD FOR ALL OF OUR OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO DO SPONSORSHIPS. SO DO I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY TO SAY WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE THAT, BUT YOU'RE LOOKING TO ADD IT. IS THAT CORRECT? WE BELIEVE THAT IT IS. IT IS A WAY THAT WE CAN BE MORE PROACTIVE IN FINDING OTHER REVENUE STREAMS. AND THE REASON WHY I TALK ABOUT THE PARTNERSHIP PIECE, BECAUSE I THINK EVEN WITH THE WAY THAT WE'VE APPROACHED THIS LAST YEAR, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REALLY LEVERAGE A LOT OF OUR PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERS TO COME TO THE TABLE AND SUPPORT EFFORTS THAT THE CITY DOES NOT NECESSARILY NEED TO DO IT WITH 100% OF OUR COST. BUT THAT HAS TO BE A PART OF WHAT WE DO GOING FORWARD. AND WE ARE LOOKING TO DO THAT AS PART OF THE GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT. WELL I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION OFFLINE. I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK THAT'S WHERE IT BELONGS. I THINK IT ACTUALLY BELONGS IN YOUR OFFICE WHERE IT'S NOT GETTING INVOLVED IN POLITICS AND IT'S NOT GETTING. I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH IT, BUT I HOPE TO HAVE THAT AS A SEPARATE CONVERSATION. BUT I'M GLAD THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT ADDING IT. WE'RE BEHIND THE TIMES. SO ANYHOW, IN SUPPORT OF THIS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR HARD WORK. COUNCILMEMBER ROTH, THANK YOU, PARKS DEPARTMENT, FOR NOT FREAKING OUT THAT WE PULLED IT AND ASKED YOU TO DO A LITTLE MORE WORK, AND YOU GOT IT. SO THANK YOU. MR. RIDLEY, CHAIRMAN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAVE JUST A FEW QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY. WHAT THIS CONTRACT DOES. THE MEMO SAYS THAT IT'S A BEVERAGE SERVICES CONTRACT TO PROVIDE FULL SERVICE VENDING CASE SALES AND FOUNTAIN POURING RIGHTS AT PARK AND REC FACILITIES. WHAT ARE CASE SALES? SIR, THAT WOULD JUST BE THE THE THE INVENTORY THAT GOES INTO THE VENDING MACHINES, THE CANS. SO IT'S THE SIRUP AND IT'S AS WELL AS THE CANS. OKAY. AND HOW DOES THIS WORK ECONOMICALLY? WHEN THEY HAVE AND I ASSUME THESE ARE EXCLUSIVE BEVERAGE SERVICE RIGHTS. IN OTHER WORDS, WE CAN ONLY SERVE PEPSI PRODUCTS AT OUR PARK AND REC FACILITIES THAT ARE INCLUDED. CORRECT? IT ALSO INCLUDES DOCTOR PEPPER, ACTUALLY. BUT PEPSI, THE. THEY DO HAVE A DEAL WITH DOCTOR PEPPER. SO DOCTOR PEPPER WOULD BE SOLD AS WELL. AND IT'S GATORADE AND ITS OTHER ASSOCIATED PRODUCTS WITHIN THE PEPSI PORTFOLIO, RIGHT? PEPSI PRODUCTS. OKAY. NOW, WHEN WE SELL OUT OF A VENDING MACHINE A CAN OF PEPSI, WHO GETS THE DOLLAR OR WHATEVER THE RETAIL PRICE IS? DOES THE CITY GET A PORTION OF THAT OR DOES ALL OF THAT GO TO PEPSI COLA? SO THE PARK SYSTEM DOESN'T GET ANY OF THAT. THE CITY AND I MIGHT NEED A LITTLE HELP ON THIS, BUT THE CITY HAS AN EXISTING COMMISSION STRUCTURE WITH THE VENDING MACHINES, I BELIEVE IT'S 10%. IT MIGHT BE 20%. SO FOR THE THE PRODUCT THAT'S SOLD IN THOSE VENDING MACHINES, THE PARK DEPARTMENT GETS NOTHING. THE PARK SYSTEM GETS NOTHING, BUT THE CITY GETS A COMMISSION OFF OF THAT VENDING MACHINE. [01:25:01] SO THERE'S A SEPARATE COMPANY THAT OWNS THE VENDING MACHINES, PUTS THEM INTO OUR REC FACILITIES AND MAINTAINS THEM. THEY BUY THE PEPSI PRODUCT TO PUT IN IT. SO THIS THIS DEAL WOULD HAVE PEPSI PROVIDE NEW MACHINES, NEW EQUIPMENT, WOULD MAINTAIN AND OPERATE THESE MACHINES AS A PART OF THIS AGREEMENT. OKAY. AND WOULD THE SAME BE TRUE OF THE FOUNTAIN POURING RIGHTS? THAT'S RIGHT. SO THEY WOULD PROVIDE THE THE DISPENSER, THE DISPENSERS OF THE SOFT DRINK AND AND SELL US THE, THE SIRUP THAT MAKES THE, THE SOFT DRINK. SO DO WE GET ANY MARGIN ON THE FOUNTAIN POURING RIGHTS. SO WE ARE ABLE TO BUY THE PRODUCT AT ADVANTAGEOUS PRICES, AND WE KEEP WHATEVER THE REVENUE IS THAT WE CURRENTLY MAKE. SO FOR INSTANCE, AT THE AQUATIC CENTERS, IT'S OUR COST TO BUY. THE PRODUCT THAT WE SELL IS ABOUT $15,000. OUR GROSS REVENUE IS ABOUT $70,000. SO OUR NET IS ABOUT $55,000. WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE OUR NET INCOME BECAUSE OF THIS DEAL, BECAUSE WE'RE ABLE TO BUY THE PRODUCT AT ADVANTAGEOUS PRICES. SO BOTTOM LINE, WE'RE STILL KEEPING OUR NET INCOME AND WE'RE GETTING THIS POURING RIGHTS REVENUE ON TOP OF THAT. OKAY. SO THIS POURING RIGHTS ARE GENERALLY BEVERAGE SERVICES CONTRACT IS ON TOP OF THAT MARGIN THAT YOU DESCRIBED THE 55,000 IN THAT INSTANCE. THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THIS DOESN'T GIVE PEPSI ANY NAMING RIGHTS OVER PARK FACILITIES OR MARKETING RIGHTS TO ADVERTISE ON CITY PROPERTY. CORRECT. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE THE SKIN OF THE VENDING MACHINE, IF YOU WILL, OR THE THE NOZZLE ON THE DISPENSER OF THE SOFT DRINK. THAT'S THE LIMIT OF THE ADVERTISING OPPORTUNITY. THAT'S A PART OF THIS AGREEMENT. OKAY. SO THAT LEAVES THE CITY FREE TO MAKE A DEAL WITH ANOTHER COMPANY, WHETHER THEY BE A BEVERAGE COMPANY OR SOME OTHER PRODUCT COMPANY TO ADVERTISE THEIR PRODUCTS ON CITY PARK PROPERTY. IT PRESERVES THAT ABILITY. NOW, DID THE SUPERLATIVE GROUP LOOK AT OR APPROACH ANY COMPETITORS OF PEPSI, SUCH AS COKE OR 7UP, IN ORDER TO SEE IF THIS WAS THE BEST DEAL IN THAT BEVERAGE SPACE? ABSOLUTELY. SO WE RECEIVED THREE BIDS, AND THE PEPSI DEAL WAS BY FAR THE MOST FINANCIALLY ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE CITY. WHO WERE THE OTHER BIDS FROM COKE AND DOCTOR PEPPER? OKAY. AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IT'S UNLIKELY THAT EITHER OF THOSE COMPETITORS WOULD PAY THE CITY FOR MARKETING RIGHTS AT A FACILITY WHERE THEY CAN'T SELL THEIR PRODUCT. WOULDN'T YOU AGREE? YES. SO I THINK WE NEED TO GO INTO THIS WITH OUR EYES OPEN THAT THIS ISN'T JUST A BEVERAGE SERVICES CONTRACT, BUT IT MAY LIMIT OUR ABILITY TO ATTRACT OTHER VENDORS WHO MAY WANT TO INVEST IN A PARK FACILITY. IN EXCHANGE FOR PUTTING THEIR NAME ON IT. COKE'S NOT GOING TO DO THAT IF THEY CAN'T SERVE THEIR PRODUCT THERE. HAVE YOU ANY ESTIMATE OF WHAT THOSE POTENTIAL SPONSORSHIP RIGHTS THAT WE MAY BE FOREGOING ARE WORTH? WELL, SO I'LL JUST SOUNDS LIKE MR. JENKINS WANTS TO CHIME IN, BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE HAVE NOT SECURED ANY SPONSORSHIPS AT OUR REC CENTERS FOR PROGRAMS OR OTHERWISE FROM COCA, DOCTOR PEPPER. SO FROM RECENT HISTORY, WE'RE NOT FOREGOING ANYTHING. COULD SOMETHING HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE? OF COURSE. BUT USING HISTORY AS A GUIDE, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY MEANINGFUL SPONSORSHIPS AT ALL FROM COKE OR DOCTOR PEPPER. HAVE WE SOUGHT ANY SUCH RIGHTS? WAS THAT AGAIN COUNCIL MEMBER? HAVE WE SOUGHT THOSE KINDS OF REVENUE STREAMS, OR IS IT JUST THAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN OUT THERE IN THE MARKET SO NOBODY'S COME TO US? NO, WE HAVE NOT. LIKE WHERE WE HAVE SUPERLATIVE. WHO HAS WENT OUT AND BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS TYPE OF WORK? THE ANSWER IS NO. HAVE WE HAD. AND WHEN I TALKED TO MAYOR PRO TEM GAY DONNELL WILLIS. YEAH. HAVE WE HAD REC CENTERS? OR MAYBE WE HAD SOME HIGHER LEVEL MANAGERS WHO TRY TO GO OUT AND GET FOLKS TO SPONSOR EVENTS, THESE OTHER VENDORS, I MEAN COKE OR DOCTOR PEPPER. WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY SUCCESS. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THESE BIDS CAME IN AND THERE WAS SUCH A HUGE DIFFERENCE. I MEAN, A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT, WHAT PEPSI OFFERED VERSUS WHAT THE OTHER TWO OFFER. IF THEY WERE SO INTERESTED IN TRULY WANTING TO BE ABLE TO SPONSOR US, I THINK THEY WOULD HAVE MADE A MORE COMPETITIVE BID. [01:30:03] OKAY. A FINAL QUESTION WITH REGARD TO SUPERLATIVES. FEE. YOU NEGOTIATED IT DOWN FROM 25 TO 15%. I COMPLIMENT YOU ON BEING ABLE TO DO THAT. IS THAT JUST FOR THIS ONE CONTRACT, OR WILL THAT BE TRUE FOR ANY OTHER DEAL THAT SUPERLATIVE BRINGS TO THE CITY? SO IT IS SPECIFIC TO THIS CONTRACT, BUT I FRANKLY KIND OF PUT THEM ON NOTICE THAT WHEN WE DO HAVE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES COMING THROUGH WITH YOU, I EXPECT TO HAVE A SIMILAR NEGOTIATION. WELL, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THAT BECAUSE 25% SEEMS LIKE A LOT, PARTICULARLY IF YOU'RE WORKING ON AN OVERALL PLAN THAT MAY PRODUCE TEN TIMES THIS MUCH REVENUE. YES, SIR. I AGREE WITH YOU. DO WE PAY SUPERLATIVE A CONTRACT FEE IN ADDITION TO THE COMMISSION KIND OF A RETAINER, OR IS THAT THEIR SOLE SOURCE OF PAYMENT? SO THERE ARE TWO ELEMENTS OF THAT CONTRACT. ONE WAS THEY KIND OF DID A VALUATION ANALYSIS. SO THAT WAS A SEPARATE FEE THAT WE PAID THEM. THEY DO HAVE A THEY DO HAVE A RETAINER. IT'S IT'S SMALL. I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT IT MIGHT BE 20 OR 40, $40,000 A YEAR. IT'S A RELATIVELY MODEST RETAINER. OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. FIRST, I DO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH FOR HIS WORK ON THIS CONTRACT. YOU'VE MANAGED TO PUT MORE MONEY INTO THE PARK FUND, AND THAT'S HUGE. AND I THINK EVERYBODY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS OWES YOU A BIG THANK YOU. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THAT. THANK YOU ALSO TO RYAN AND JOHN. I GOT TO SPEND MONDAY WITH YOU GUYS IN LOS ANGELES. VERY, VERY INTERESTING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE TEAM, THE TEAM THAT MANAGES THE ROSE BOWL. WHAT WE HAVE IN COMMON WITH THE ROSE BOWL IS WE ARE BOTH HISTORIC. WE HAVE WE HAVE THE COTTON BOWL, AND WE HAVE AN HISTORIC STADIUM SIMILAR TO ABOUT THE AGE OF THE ROSE BOWL. THEY ARE DOING AMAZING THINGS THERE. THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO GO INTO THAT, BUT I JUST WANT TO COMPLIMENT THESE TWO GENTLEMEN FOR THEIR WORK IN FINDING THIS TEAM IN IN PASADENA. GOT TO MEET WITH THE MAYOR OF PASADENA AS WELL. BUT LONG STORY SHORT, WHAT I LEARNED IN THAT MONDAY MEETING IS THAT NO LONGER DO ORGANIZATIONS GO OUT TO CORPORATIONS AND KNOCK ON THEIR DOOR AND SAY, HEY, WANT TO COME SPONSOR MY PARK? OR MY REC CENTER? THAT'S NOT HOW THIS WORKS IN TODAY'S WORLD. THERE ARE NOW AGENCIES THAT SPECIALIZE IN PLACING CORPORATE DOLLARS AS A SPONSOR OR AS OR NAMING SOME PARTICULAR ITEM. SO I THINK WE HAVE FIGURED THIS OUT FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, BUT I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. WE MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN TAKING THE CORRECT APPROACH FOR AT SOME POINT IN THE CITY'S HISTORY. I BELIEVE WE ARE NOW ON BOARD WITH THIS. WE'RE DOING THAT WORK AND WE WILL GET THOSE SPONSORSHIPS. I FEEL VERY CERTAIN. BUT I JUST THINK IT'S DOUBTFUL, AND I AND I DON'T MEAN TO POKE FUN AT ANYONE, BUT I THINK IT'S VERY DOUBTFUL THAT WE WILL HAVE THE COCA-COLA LAKE HIGHLANDS REC CENTER. I JUST DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING. I THINK THAT'S NOT HOW THIS IS WORKING. AND BUT I DO THINK THESE TWO GENTLEMEN DO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS WORKING, AND I TRUST THEIR JUDGMENT ON THIS. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS CONTRACT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND JOHN AND RYAN, IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN, I DIDN'T ASK YOU ANYTHING SPECIFIC, BUT I'M GOING TO JUST SAY ALONG THOSE LINES WITHOUT US DISCLOSING OUR. BECAUSE WE'LL BE COMING TO THE COUNCIL AND THE BOARD ABOUT OUR BIGGER PLAN WHEN IT COMES TO REALLY SECURING THE TYPES OF SPONSORSHIPS AND NAMING RIGHTS THAT THIS COUNCIL WANTS US TO GO AFTER. WE HAVE A PLAN. THIS IS JUST A LOW HANGING FRUIT RIGHT NOW, AND IT DOESN'T COMPARE TO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BRING YOU ALL AND, AND AND AS A CHAIRWOMAN, STEWART MENTIONED, THE WAY THEY CONDUCT BUSINESS TODAY IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT WHEN YOU GO OUT AND GET SPONSORSHIPS. AND WE'RE SEEING THESE AGENCIES, WE'RE SEEING THE FOLKS WHO'S UTILIZING THESE SERVICES, AND WE'RE SEEING THE THE TYPES OF REVENUES THEY'RE BRINGING INTO THEIR SYSTEMS. AND THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR US NOT TO BE ABLE TO DO THE SAME THING ON BEHALF OF THIS COUNCIL AND BOARD AND THE CITIZENS. WERE YOU FINISHED? CHAIRMAN STEWART OKAY, THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO OUR DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THREE MINUTES. ROUND TWO. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MAYOR. SO THERE ARE THERE HAVE BEEN SOME POINTS MADE THAT I JUST WANT TO GO BACK AND VISIT. AND THAT IS THIS MAY NOT PRECLUDE ANOTHER SOFT DRINK COMPANY FROM SPONSORING SOMETHING. BUT THE QUESTION YOU HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF IS. BUT WOULD THEY? BECAUSE WHY WOULD THEY WANT TO DILUTE THE IMPACT OF THEIR MARKETING SPEND BY HAVING THOSE DILUTING MESSAGES COMPETING? [01:35:07] AND TO YOUR POINT, CHAIR STEWART, I'VE BEEN THAT AGENCY. YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH CARA OR, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, PBS NATIONAL ON A BRAND TO PUT IN AN AFTERNOON KIDS SCHOOL SHOW OR WITH JUNIOR LEAGUE OF DALLAS TO GET MOTT'S BRANDS, APPLE SAUCES AND JUICES TO SPONSOR THE KIDS IN THE KITCHEN PROGRAM. SO YOU'RE PUTTING SAMPLES AND BRANDING INTO THE HANDS OF MOMS WHO ARE THE BUYERS AT THE GROCERY STORE WHO CAN GO BUY THAT? SO THAT'S THAT'S HOW THAT WORKS. AND MAYBE THAT'S WHY I'M SO PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS. BUT EVEN GREATER IS THE FACT THAT CHAIR RIDLEY USED A GREAT WORD, WHICH WAS LIMIT. I, I BELIEVE IN GENERATING THIS MONEY FOR OUR PARKS SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO MAKE THEM THE BEST THAT THEY CAN BE AND GROW THAT SYSTEM. BUT I THINK WE CAN AIM HIGHER. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, IT'S JUST EVEN WITH THE GREATER COMMISSION, IT'S KIND OF PENNIES. AND MY CONCERN IS TEN YEARS, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE ALL REALLY KNOW WHAT WE MIGHT BE TAKING AWAY FROM OURSELVES. I ASK THESE QUESTIONS ABOUT, WELL, IF DOCTOR PEPPER OR COKE DON'T WANT TO DO THIS, WE'VE WE'VE ASKED THEM. AND I SAID, WELL WHO ASKED. WELL, A REC CENTER MANAGER, THESE ARE PACKAGED IN A BROAD WAY WITH A LOT OF YOU LOOK AT THE EYEBALLS, YOU LOOK AT THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR WHERE CAN WE SAMPLE, WHERE CAN WE BE, WHAT CAN THE MESSAGE BE? AND I JUST I THINK THAT WE'VE YOU'VE BEEN MAKING A VALIANT EFFORT. AND WE ALL KNOW THAT IT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING BIGGER AND HIGHER LEVEL. AND BETWEEN SUPERLATIVE WHO SHOULD KNOW WHO ALL OF THESE SPONSORSHIP PLACEMENT AGENCIES ARE? THAT'S HOW IT HAPPENS. AND WHEN WE LOOK AT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT GENERATING REVENUE FROM A VENDING MACHINE. BUT IF SOMEONE COMES IN AND SPONSORS IN THAT SAME CATEGORY, THEN WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT AWAY OR COVER IT UP. SO ARE WE HURTING OUR OWN REVENUE BY BY DOING THAT? I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF CONFUSING TO ME. BUT I KNOW THAT WHEN YOU ALL WERE DOING THE RFP FOR AN AGENCY, I HAD ASKED TO ADD ON TO IT A CITY WIDE COMPONENT THAT WOULD BE FIRE STATIONS AND POLICE STATIONS AND LIBRARIES. AND, YOU KNOW, EVEN THERE MAY BE SOMEONE WHO SELLS BUILDING MATERIALS WHO MIGHT WANT TO HELP SPONSOR OKMOK. I MEAN, WE JUST NEVER KNOW. SO I'VE ASKED BEFORE THAT THAT BE BROADENED TO ALL OF THE CITY. AND I THINK WE'RE WE COULD BE TURNING AWAY DOLLARS IF WE DON'T LOOK AT IT IN A MORE BROAD SENSE. I'M EXCITED ABOUT WHAT YOU MAY BRING TO US. I JUST DON'T WANT US TO HARM OURSELVES FOR TAKING SOME PENNIES TODAY THAT MIGHT HURT US TOMORROW. SO I REALLY WANT TO SEE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BRING. MY GREATEST DISCOMFORT AROUND THIS IS PROBABLY THE TEN YEARS. AND SO IF THIS WAS, I COULD PROBABLY GO THREE YEARS MAX. BUT I WOULD ASK THAT WE ALL THINK ABOUT SHORTENING THIS SO THAT WE DON'T WE DON'T LIMIT OURSELVES. I WANT GREATER THINGS. AND I THINK YOU ALL ARE POISED TO DO IT. BUT THIS WILL LIMIT US. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. SO I WAS ALREADY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS ITEM. BUT AFTER HEARING THE EXPERTISE FROM OUR STAFF ON THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS, GOING TO VARIOUS OTHER VENDORS SOFTWARE PROVIDERS AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THERE WAS AN APPETITE FOR THAT. ALSO, SEEING THE MARKET KNOWING THAT I HAVE SEEN SIMILAR WHERE YOU GO INTO A STADIUM AND YOU HAVE VARIOUS DIFFERENT CAR MANUFACTURERS, THEY'RE STILL THERE. AND YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU USED TO COMPETITION. IT DOES CREATE A MORE COMPETITIVE INDUSTRY, I BELIEVE, TO MAKE IT MAKE IT HIGHER. RIGHT. THE PONY UP. AT THE END OF THE DAY, THOUGH, WE ASK STAFF TO GO OUT TO BE CREATIVE. AND SO I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR MEETING THE CHALLENGE. AND I REALLY SEE THIS AS OUR FIRST FOOT IN THE DOOR, LETTING OTHER FOLKS KNOW THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN WHEN IT COMES TO MARKETING, WHEN IT COMES TO SPONSORSHIPS. AND I KNOW YOU HAVE SOME BIGGER PLANS ON THE WAY, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO EVALUATING THOSE AND MAKING SURE THAT DALLAS IS, IS BENEFITING FROM THAT. SO AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. MAYOR MR. BAZALDUA. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO ASK RYAN OR JOHN IF YOU COULD ELABORATE ON PAST OPPORTUNITIES. BECAUSE I WILL SAY I AGREE WITH A LOT THAT HAS BEEN SAID I THINK COUNCILWOMAN STEWART ARTICULATED VERY WELL. I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THE PREMISE THAT WE'RE WE'RE LEAVING MONEY ON THE TABLE. I THINK THAT BY DENYING THIS, WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE TAKING AWAY FROM SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST. AND SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU COULD GO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER INTO PAST SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES THAT HAS BEEN ALLUDED TO, THAT WE WOULD BE POTENTIALLY FOREGOING IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE IT SEEMS AS IF THIS IS A NEW, [01:40:06] NEW VENTURE, QUITE FRANKLY. ASIDE FROM OUR PARTNER SITES. AND SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT, JOHN? I SAW YOU STARTING TO TALK. YES. SO AS FAR AS HISTORY. AND I CAN ONLY GO OFF THE PAST. SO I REMEMBER ONE TIME WHEN, WHEN WHEN ANOTHER VENDOR WHO BID ON THE CONTRACT WAS OUR HAD TO CONTRACT MANY YEARS AGO. AND EVEN FROM THAT, I DIDN'T SEE WHAT WE GOT. SUDDENLY, $200,000 WORTH OF SPONSORSHIPS HERE. THAT THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. I DON'T EVEN THINK WE CAME CLOSE TO PROBABLY $30,000. YEAH, WE GOT FREE PRODUCT. THAT WAS IT. BUT NO ONE EVER STEPPED UP TO SAY I WAS GOING TO SPONSOR ALL THE SCOREBOARDS AND EVERY REC CENTER LIKE WE ASKED THEM TO. THOSE TYPE OF THINGS DIDN'T MATERIALIZE. I CAN ONLY SAY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MISSED REVENUES, OPPORTUNITIES, I JUST THINK THIS IS THE GROUND FLOOR TO START GENERATING MORE REVENUE OPPORTUNITIES, BECAUSE TO RYAN'S POINT, IT'S JUST A POINT. IT'S $100,000. AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO PAY US $100,000 JUST TO HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF SELLING YOUR PRODUCT IN OUR FACILITY. NOW THAT'S WHAT WE GET. YOU'RE JUST HAVING THE PRIVILEGE NOW TO SELL YOUR PRODUCT. NO. REC CENTER MANAGERS ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO BE NEGOTIATING BIG DEALS LIKE THIS. SO. BUT I DON'T SEE IN THE PAST WHERE WE LOST OR THERE WAS OPPORTUNITIES FOR THIS ADDITIONAL. WELL, WE MAY THINK WE MAY GET 2 OR $300,000 A YEAR IN NEW SPONSORSHIPS. I MEAN, OUR FOLKS WORKS HARD OUT THERE. I KNOW I WAS AT THAT LEVEL. I WAS A DISTRICT MANAGER, I WAS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR. WE WOULD GO TALK TO TO A LOT OF THESE SAME VENDORS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. AND THEY JUST WEREN'T COMING TO THE TABLE WITH THOSE TYPE OF DEALS. BUT I DO BELIEVE BECAUSE WE ARE NOW WORKING WITH TRUE PROFESSIONALS, LIKE I SAID SUPERLATIVE FOCUS IN ONE AREA, BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING WITH A LOT OF OTHER FOLKS WHO FOCUS IN OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH ALL THESE POTENTIAL FUTURE SPONSORS. THAT'S GOING TO HELP US SECURE THOSE TYPE OF BIG SPONSORSHIPS AND NAMING RIGHTS YOU ALL ARE LOOKING FOR. THANK YOU. I, I, I DEFINITELY THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE WHERE THE DISCUSSION IS GOING IS IS KIND OF ARGUING PERFECT TO BE THE ENEMY OF GOOD. AND I THINK THAT WHAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE IS GOOD. IT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ASKED AS A COUNCIL. WE'VE ASKED TO FIGURE OUT NEW REVENUE STREAMS. WE'VE ASKED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN MONETIZE ASSETS. THIS IS, IS ONE OF THE FIRST SINCE WE HAVE ASKED FOR THAT TO BE A PRIORITY. AND IT'S IT'S IT'S FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. THANK YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER ROTH FOR YOUR WORK TO GET US BACK TO THE AGENDA WITH SOMETHING THAT IS PALATABLE. I I'LL GIVE MY MY $0.02 THAT I WILL AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE. I HAVE SOME HEARTBURN ON THE TEN YEAR. I DO WISH IT WAS SHORTER TIME PERIOD FOR THE INITIAL APPROVAL PROCESS AND THEN JUST PERSONALLY WISH IF WE SINCE WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE ALL THROWING OUT SOME WISH LISTS OF WHAT THIS COULD BE. I WISH WE WEREN'T NECESSARILY PROMOTING HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SIRUP IN OUR FITNESS FACILITIES. BUT I DO SEE THIS AS A REVENUE GENERATOR, AND I THINK THAT YOU HAVE DONE WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS ASKED. I THINK IN A PERFECT WORLD, WE COULD MAKE MORE MONEY, BUT THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE BEEN SOMETHING THAT IS, IS VERY FEASIBLE. SO THE LAST THING I'D WANT TO DO IS KEEP THIS OFF OF THE TABLE AND PREVENT US FROM FROM GENERATING THIS REVENUE. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR Y'ALL'S WORK ON THIS. IT'S BLACKMON RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. ONE ONE FINAL QUESTION. OKAY. SO THE TEN YEARS. SO SAY WE GO THROUGH THIS WHOLE PROCESS AND WE HAVE THIS STRATEGIC PLAN, AND THIS DOES NOT FALL IN PLACE WITH THAT STRATEGIC PLAN, WE STILL HAVE TO FULFILL THE TEN YEAR. WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO CANCEL THE CONTRACT. WELL, IT'S A VERY THAT'S A VERY TIMELY QUESTION. SO THE GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE. THE TERMINATION CLAUSE IN THE IN THE CONTRACT THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED THERE IS A TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE CLAUSE WITH 30 DAY NOTICE, SO. VERY SIMPLE. GOT IT. SO WE IF WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND WE REALIZE THIS PART OF THE PUZZLE IS REALLY HOLDING US BACK OVER HERE, [01:45:04] THEN WE CAN DO 30 DAY AND SAY THANK YOU. AND WE'RE AND I GUESS IT'S PRORATED AT THAT POINT. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 30? DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. ALL RIGHT, WELL, YOU BURIED THE LEAD ON THAT, SO I DIDN'T SEE THAT THERE WAS SUCH A GREAT OUT AND THAT IT WAS SO QUICK THAT IT WOULDN'T LOCK US INTO SOMETHING REALLY LENGTHY. SO I'M. I'M WILLING TO TAKE THE BIRD IN THE HAND WHILE WE WORK OUT A BIGGER PICTURE ON HOW WE CAN. WE CAN REALLY GO BIG ON SPONSORSHIPS FOR OUR OUR REC FACILITIES. SO THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT ITEM. [31. 25-2563A An ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 32346, passed by the City Council on November 9, 2022, and amending the Dallas City Code by (1) amending Section 1-5 of Chapter 1, “General Provisions”; (2) amending Section 2-44 of Chapter 2, “Administration”; (3) amending Sections 11-2, 11-18, and 11-19 of Chapter 11, “Cemeteries and Burials”; (4) amending Section 12B-23 of Chapter 12B, “Convenience Stores”; (5) adding a new Section 13-2.1 to Chapter 13, “Courts, Fines, and Imprisonments”; (6) amending Chapter 13A, “Dallas Transit System”; (7) amending Sections 14B-2, 14B-3, 14B-6, 14B-7, 14B-8, and adding a new Section 14B-7.1 of Chapter 14B, “Emergency Management”; (8) amending Sections 17-2.2 and 17-10.2 of Chapter 17, “Food Establishments”; (9) amending Sections 18-2, 18-4, 18-5, 18-6, 18-8, 18-9, and 18-32 of Chapter 18, “Municipal Solid Wastes”; (10) amending Chapter 20, “Earned Paid Sick Time”; (11) amending Chapter 25, “Loan Brokers”; (12) amending Chapter 25A, “Massage Establishments”; (13) amending Sections 27-11, 27-30, 27-31, and 27-42 of Chapter 27, “Minimum Property Standards”; (14) amending Section 28-128.6 of Chapter 28, “Motor Vehicles and Traffic”; (15) amending Sections 31-13.1 and 31-35 of Chapter 31, “Offenses-Miscellaneous”; (16) amending Sections 32-14 and 32-15 of Chapter 32, “Parks and Reservoirs”; (17) amending Sections 36-5, 36-27, 36-34, and 36-49 of Chapter 36, “Poles and Wires”; (18) amending Chapter 38, “Private Detectives”; (19) amending Chapter 39, “Railroads”; (20) amending Sections 43-126.17, 43-126.18, and 43-126.33 of Chapter 43, “Streets and Sidewalks”; (21) amending Sections 48-6, 48-8, and 48-11 of Chapter 48, “Trees and Shrubs”; (22) amending Sections 210.1, 210.3, 601.2, 602.3, and 610 of Chapter 52, “Administrative Procedures for the Construction Codes”; (23) providing a penalty not to exceed $2,000.00; (24) providing a saving clause; (25) providing a severability clause; and (26) providing an effective date - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (This item was deferred on August 13, 2025)] AGENDA ITEM 31 IS AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NUMBER 32346, PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 9TH, 2022, AND AMENDING THE DALLAS CITY CODE BY ONE, AMENDING SECTION 1-5 OF CHAPTER ONE, GENERAL PROVISIONS TWO. AMENDING SECTION TWO, DASH 44 OF CHAPTER TWO ADMINISTRATION THREE AMENDING SECTIONS 11, TWO, 1118 AND 1119 OF CHAPTER 11 CEMETERIES AND BURIALS FOUR. AMENDING SECTION 12 B DASH 23 OF CHAPTER 12 B CONVENIENCE STORES FIVE. ADDING A NEW SECTION 13 DASH 2.1 TO CHAPTER 13. COURTS. FINES AND IMPRISONMENT. SIX. AMENDING. CHAPTER 13. A DALLAS TRANSIT SYSTEM SEVEN. AMENDING SECTIONS 1482, 1483, 1486, 1487 14. B-8 AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 14 B-7.1 OF CHAPTER. CHAPTER 14. B EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT EIGHT. AMENDING SECTION 17, DASH 2.2 AND 17. DASH 10.2 OF CHAPTER 17. FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS NINE. AMENDING SECTIONS 1802, 1804, 1805, 1806, 1808, 1809 NINE AND 1832 OF CHAPTER 18. SOLID MUNICIPAL WASTE TEN. AMENDING CHAPTER 20 EARNED PAID SICK TIME 11. AMENDING CHAPTER 25 LOAN BROKERS. 12 AMENDING CHAPTER 25 A MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS. 13 AMENDING SECTIONS 27 DASH 1127 DASH 30. 27 DASH 31 AND 27 DASH 42 OF CHAPTER 27 MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS. 14 AMENDING SECTION 20 8-1 20 128 DASH 20 8-128.6 OF CHAPTER 28 MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC. 15 AMENDING SECTIONS 31, 13.1 AND 31 DASH 35 OF CHAPTER 31 OFFENSES. MISCELLANEOUS. 16 AMENDING SECTIONS 32, 14 AND 32. DASH 15 OF CHAPTER 32 PARKS AND RESERVOIRS. 17 AMENDING SECTIONS 30 6-5, 36, DASH 27, 36 DASH 34 AND 36 DASH 49 OF CHAPTER 36 POLES AND WIRES. 18 AMENDING CHAPTER 38 PRIVATE DETECTIVES 19. AMENDING CHAPTER 39 RAILROADS 20. AMENDING SECTIONS 40 3-1, TWO, 6.17, 43, DASH ONE, TWO, 6.18 AND 43. DASH 126.33 OF CHAPTER 43. STREETS AND SIDEWALKS 21. AMENDING SECTIONS 48, DASH SIX, 48. DASH EIGHT AND 48. DASH 11 OF CHAPTER 48. TREES AND SHRUBS 22. AMENDING SECTIONS TWO ONE, 0.1210.360, 1.260, 2.3 AND 610 OF CHAPTER 52. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION CODES THREE PROVIDING A PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $2,000. 24 PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE. 25 PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND 26 PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. NO, I NEED A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. BE RECOGNIZED. I HEARD A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. ARE YOU WITHDRAWING YOUR MOTION? YES. YES. OKAY. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? YES. OH, REJECT. I'M SORRY. NO. NO OBJECTION. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO MR. RIDLEY WITHDRAWING HIS MOTION THERE? OKAY. IT'S BEEN WITHDRAWN. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE THE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 12, B DASH 23 IS REMOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDED MOTION. SO STAFF HAS BROUGHT THIS FORWARD JUST SO EVERYONE [01:50:02] UNDERSTANDS THAT WHAT IT IS, IS ADDRESSING THE ITEM OF THE ATM PLACEMENT AND CONVENIENCE STORES. AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, CONVENIENCE STORES ARE HIGH ON LOCATION FOR CRIME. SECOND ONLY, OF COURSE, TO APARTMENTS. BUT WHAT THIS DOES IS IT REQUIRES WHERE THE ATM CAN BE PLACED AND STRATEGICALLY PLACING IT FOR DETERRENCE OF CRIME IS ESSENTIAL. AND THIS FOLLOWS THE LAW. AND ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AS MANY TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX AS WE CAN TO DETER THAT CRIME. SO THAT'S THAT ITEM. BUT WHAT WAS DISCOVERED THROUGH DISCUSSION IS THAT REALLY THERE WAS FLEXIBILITY BEING PUT IN. AND WE CAN ALL UNDERSTAND THAT SOME CONVENIENCE STORES ARE PHYSICALLY SITUATED DIFFERENTLY THAN OTHERS. AND SO INSTEAD OF THIS BEING A CLEAN UP ORDINANCE, WHICH IS, I THINK, HOW IT WAS PRESENTED TO ALL OF US, THAT WE'RE STRICTLY JUST FOLLOWING THE LAW TO CLEAN UP THINGS. IT REALLY WAS A POLICY CHANGE BECAUSE IT WAS GOING TO ALLOW FLEXIBILITY IN A WAY THAT WE'VE NEVER DISCUSSED, CERTAINLY NOT AT THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. I DON'T KNOW THAT ANY COMMITTEE HAS DISCUSSED THIS. SO MY QUESTION TO THE CITY ATTORNEY IS IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE IN THIS EXTREMELY LONG ORDINANCE THAT BILLY RAY JUST READ THAT IS POLICY AS OPPOSED TO STRICTLY CLEANUP OF THE LAW. THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION. NO, I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE ARE. WE ARE. OUR FOCUS WAS ON OUTDATED AND PREEMPTED LANGUAGE IN OUR CODE FOR THE MOST PART, OR UPDATING THE CODE TO REFLECT THE CURRENT STATE LAW. SO THAT WAS THE FOCUS OF THIS PROJECT. AND I DO BELIEVE STAFF ASKED FOR THIS TO COME OUT. YES THEY DID. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS CHANGE IS THERE CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. ITEM 31. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'D LIKE STAFF TO ADDRESS THE PROPOSED REMOVAL OF SECTION 12 B 2023 FROM THIS ORDINANCE. WHY WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU THOUGHT NEEDED TO BE REPEALED? I THINK THERE'S A CLARIFICATION. IT WASN'T THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE REPEALED. THE LANGUAGE. THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT TO 12 B 23 THAT ADDED AN EXCEPTION TO THE PLACEMENT. AND WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT AMENDMENT THAT ADDED THE EXCEPTION TO BE TAKEN OUT. OKAY. THAT'S THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR. COULD YOU ELABORATE ON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. COUNCIL MEMBER RADKE CHRIS CHRISTIAN DIRECTOR OF CODE COMPLIANCE SERVICES. AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION 12, B DASH 23 AUTOMATIC TELLER MACHINES OF THE CODE, THERE'S BASICALLY TWO ITEMS THERE. ONE IS THE ATM MUST BE SECURED TO THE FLOOR OF THE CONVENIENCE STORE USING BOLTS AND SIMILAR HARDWARE. AND TWO LOCATED MORE THAN 12FT AWAY FROM GLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS. WHAT WE ATTEMPTED TO ADD WAS THIS ADDENDUM TO THAT SECTION TO SAY, UNLESS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, THE CHIEF OF POLICE, OR THE DIRECTOR OF CODE COMPLIANCE OR THEIR DESIGNEE. SO BASICALLY WE WERE CREATING A VARIANCE TO THE 12 FOOT FROM GLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS REQUIREMENT. OKAY. AND SO THIS OMNIBUS ORDINANCE ITEM 31 WOULD REMOVE THAT EXCEPTION. YES, THE AMENDMENT ON THE FLOOR WOULD REMOVE THAT EXCEPTION OR VARIANCE, AND THE CODE LANGUAGE WILL REMAIN AS IS CURRENTLY. AND SO LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. SO WITH THE MOTION AS MADE TO REMOVE THE CHANGE IN 12 B 34, DOES THAT LEAVE THE BUILDING CODE OFFICIALS RIGHT TO GRANT AN EXCEPTION TO THE 12 FOOT DISTANCE? IT REMOVES THE RIGHT FOR AN EXCEPTION OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, THE CODE DIRECTOR, OR THE CHIEF OF POLICE. IT LEAVES IT AS WRITTEN. CURRENTLY, THE ATM MUST BE SECURED TO THE FLOOR USING BOLTS AND OTHER SIMILAR HARDWARE, AND IT MUST BE LOCATED 12FT AWAY FROM GLASS DOORS AND WINDOWS. OKAY, SO THERE WOULD BE NO DISCRETION BY THOSE OFFICIALS TO VARY THOSE TERMS. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST? AGENDA ITEM 31. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 32 IS A CLOSED SESSION ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 33, AUTHORIZE THE ONE ACCEPTANCE OF THE FY 20 2526 GRANT FROM THE US DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN [33. 25-2603A Authorize the (1) acceptance of the FY 2025-26 grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Fair Housing Assistance Program in an amount not to exceed $250,000.00 (subject to grant award), to process, investigate and conciliate housing discrimination complaints, administrative costs and HUD required staff training for the period October 1, 2025 through September 30, 2026; (2) establishment of appropriations in an amount not to exceed $250,000.00 (subject to grant award) in the HUD FY25 Fair Housing Assistance Program FY26 Fund; (3) receipt and deposit of grants funds in an amount not to exceed $250,000.00 (subject to grant award) in the HUD FY25 Fair Housing Assistance Program FY26 Fund; and (4) execution of the Fair Housing Assistance Program Grant and the Cooperative Agreement and all terms, conditions, and documents required by the grant agreement - Total not to exceed $250,000.00 (subject to grant award) - Financing: HUD FY25 Fair Housing Assistance Program FY26 Fund] DEVELOPMENT, HUD FOR THE FAIR HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $250,000 TO PROCESS, INVESTIGATE, AND CONSOLIDATE HOUSING DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINTS, ADMINISTRATIVE COST AND HUD REQUIRED STAFF TRAINING FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 1ST, 2025 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2026 TWO ESTABLISHMENT OF APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $250,000 [01:55:08] IN THE HUD. FY 2025 FAIR HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FY 26 FUND THREE RECEIPT AND DEPOSIT OF GRANTS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $250,000 IN THE HUD. FY 25. FAIR HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FY 26 FUND, AND FOR EXECUTION OF THE FAIR HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM GRANT AND THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT IN ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THE GRANT AGREEMENT NOT TO EXCEED $250,000. THIS IS YOUR ITEM. MR. MAYOR. LOOKING FOR A MOTION ITEM 33. MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND. I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 34. [34. 25-2636A Authorize an amendment of the tax increment financing (“TIF”) development agreement (“Agreement”) executed pursuant to Resolution No. 20-1480, previously approved on September 23, 2020 between the City of Dallas (“City”) and Villas at WH 20, LP and its affiliate Villas Development Corporation (collectively, “Owner/Developer”) and the associated deed restrictions recorded on February 28, 2024 under Clerk’s File No. 202400040173 (“Deed Restrictions”) to subordinate the Deed Restrictions (in favor of the City) to Bellwether Enterprise Mortgage Investments, LLC (“Bellwether” or “Lender”) and Owner/Developer and amend the Agreement and Deed Restrictions to terminate the City’s recapture of the TIF Subsidy in the event of a default, and in consideration, extend the Affordability Period as defined in the Agreement and Deed Restrictions by an additional five years from fifteen years to twenty years, approved as to form by the City Attorney, to facilitate the permanent financing loan to be provided by Lender for the mixed-income apartment development commonly known as Mariposa at Western Heights, formerly known as the Villas at Western Heights (“Project”), addressed as 1641 North Windomere Avenue in Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Fifteen (“Fort Worth Avenue TIF District”) - Financing: No cost consideration to the City] AUTHORIZE AN AMENDMENT OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING TIF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT EXECUTED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NUMBER 201480, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 23RD, 2020. BETWEEN THE CITY OF DALLAS CITY AND VILLAS AT 20 L.P. AND ITS AFFILIATES, VILLAGE VILLA VILLAS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND THE ASSOCIATED DEED RESTRICTIONS RECORDED ON FEBRUARY 28TH, 2024 UNDER CLERK'S FILE NUMBER 202400040173. TO SUBORDINATE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS TO BELLWETHER ENTERPRISE MORTGAGE INVESTMENTS, LLC AND OR AND OWNER DEVELOPER, AND AMEND THE AGREEMENT AND DEED RESTRICTIONS TO TERMINATE THE CITY'S RECAPTURE OF THE TIF SUBSIDY IN THE EVENT OF A DEFAULT AND, IN CONSIDERATION, EXTEND THE AFFORDABILITY PERIOD AS DEFINED IN THE AGREEMENT AND DEED RESTRICTIONS BY ADDITIONAL FIVE YEARS FROM 15 YEARS TO 20 YEARS. APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY TO FACILITATE THE PERMANENT FINANCING LOAN TO BE PROVIDED BY THE LENDER FOR THE MIXED INCOME APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT COMMONLY KNOWN AS MARIPOSA AT WESTERN HEIGHTS, FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE VILLAS AT WESTERN HEIGHTS. PROJECT ADDRESSED AS 1641 NORTH WINDERMERE AVENUE AND TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE 15 FORT WORTH AVENUE, TIF. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION? ITEM 34 MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? OH, SORRY. OKAY. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 34. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. THANK YOU. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FINANCIAL COST IS OF THIS ITEM BY EXTENDING IT FOR FIVE YEARS ON THE TIF. WHAT IS THE COST TO OUR GENERAL FUND? KEVIN SPATH, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S NO COST TO THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND. THE ADDITIONAL FIVE YEARS OF AFFORDABILITY ARE BEING PROVIDED, OFFERED TO THE CITY AND CONSIDERATION FOR THIS AMENDMENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE YOU ARE YOU DONE? YES. YES. YOU'RE. YES. YOU'RE DONE. YEAH. OKAY, GOOD. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, I THINK IT'S IT'S TREMENDOUS THAT THERE'S A HOUSING FACILITY LIKE THIS FOR SENIORS THAT ARE AVAILABLE AND THAT IT'S THAT'S AFFORDABLE. AND THIS KIND OF A OF A PROJECT IS IN THE AREA, ESPECIALLY IN COUNCILMAN DISTRICT IS IS REALLY SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD ENCOURAGE AND TRY TO PROMOTE IN THOSE AREAS WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE DONE. I'M, I WOULD LIKE TO, TO RAISE THE ISSUE ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE TIF MONEY THAT IS DESIGNATED TO BE REIMBURSED IF THERE'S A DEFAULT WOULD BE TERMINATED, WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE GETTING BACK FROM BY THIS NEW LOAN THAT'S BEING PLACED, AND THAT IN THE EVENT OF A DEFAULT OF THE PROJECT AND THAT THE. THE FUNDS ARE SUBORDINATE TO THE LENDER'S FUNDS. AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED. THERE'S A LOT OF NUMBERS AROUND HERE. AND IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK IN THE FUTURE WE NEED TO BE REALLY PAYING ATTENTION TO. [02:00:04] WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $7 MILLION WORTH OF MONEY THAT WE'VE GIVEN TO THE DEVELOPER TO ENCOURAGE THIS PROJECT. AND UNDER THE TERMS OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT, IF THERE'S A DEFAULT IN THIS PROJECT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REIMBURSE THAT AMOUNT. THIS THIS PROPOSAL IS SAYING THAT THE LOAN WOULD WOULD NOT REQUIRE THAT TO BE REIMBURSED. IS MY UNDERSTANDING AND I'D LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT. AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A REFERENDUM ON THE PROJECT. IT'S A TERRIFIC PROJECT. BUT I THINK OUR FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS IN REVIEWING THESE EXPENDITURES OF TAX INCENTIVE DOLLARS TO PROMOTE THESE KIND OF PROJECTS STILL REQUIRES US TO BE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE IN MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T LOSE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET THOSE MONIES BACK IF SOMETHING TRAGIC HAPPENS TO THE PROJECT. GOOD MORNING. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROBIN BENTLEY WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN. LET ME EXPLAIN. THIS IS NOT A TYPICAL ECO DEV DEAL. THIS PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT AND IS OCCUPIED. AND SO THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE CITY'S RISK IS GONE. USUALLY OUR DEFAULTS ARE RELATED TO MISSING DEADLINES, NOT BUILDING THE PROJECT AS PLANNED, NOT COMPLYING WITH ALL OF THAT IS DONE. AND THEY DID IT CORRECTLY. THE ONLY COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION REMAINING IS THE AFFORDABILITY, WHICH IS SECURED BY THE DEED RESTRICTION, WHICH THE FANNIE MAE LENDER HAS ASKED TO BE SUBORDINATE TO THEM. REMEMBER, ON LY TECH DEALS, IT'S A BELT AND SUSPENDERS. THE STATE HAS THEIR OWN LURA, WHICH IS A 45 YEAR AFFORDABILITY THAT'S SENIOR TO EVERYTHING. WE PUT OUR OWN DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THERE JUST TO BE REALLY SURE WE'VE GOT SOME WAY TO ENFORCE. AND SO THE FANNIE MAE FOLKS WILL LEAVE THE STATE. LAURA SENIOR BUT HAVE ASKED US TO SUBORDINATE OURS, WHICH IS VERY TYPICAL OF ANY FANNIE, FREDDIE OR HUD LENDER. THEY WANT ALL THE CITY'S DOCUMENTS TO BE SUBORDINATED TO THE FEDERALLY FUNDED LOAN. AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. WE HAVE VERY MINIMAL RISK IN THIS DEAL BECAUSE IT'S COMPLETE AND THE AFFORDABILITY IS SECURED MULTIPLE DIFFERENT WAYS. WE FELT LIKE THIS WAS A REASONABLE REQUEST. THANK YOU FOR YOUR FOR YOUR ANSWER. AGAIN, THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE AFFORDABILITY ASPECT. THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE PROJECT BEING BUILT AND BEING OCCUPIED RIGHT NOW. THE THE FACT IS HERE IS THAT THE DEVELOPER GOT TAX CREDIT MONEY FROM THE STATE. HE'S GOTTEN A LOAN FROM A THIRD PARTY. AND THEN WE AS A CITY PROVIDED TIF MONEY TO GIVE ADDITIONAL INCENTIVE. THE THE BANK, THE LENDER IS PROTECTED BY THE BY HAVING COLLATERAL. THE TAX CREDIT MONEY HAS BEEN GIVEN HAS BEEN PAID BY A THIRD PARTY COMPANY, AND THEY'VE GOT A RESPONSIBILITY. BUT WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE SECURED FOR OUR $8 MILLION OUT OF THIS $30 MILLION PROJECT. AGAIN, I'M NOT IT'S TOO LITTLE TOO LATE ON THIS DEAL. BUT I WOULD REALLY CAUTION US IN THE FUTURE IN WHEN WE'RE EVALUATING, PROVIDING CITY FUNDS FOR INCENTIVES TO THESE PROJECTS, THAT WE ARE STRONGLY POSITIONED TO GET THOSE FUNDS BACK IN THE EVENT OF A PROBLEM. AND I'LL TELL YOU SOMETHING. WE'RE GIVING AWAY SOMETHING HERE THAT WE CAN'T GET BACK. AND SO IT'S JUST A CAUTION. AND AGAIN TOO LITTLE TOO LATE HERE ON ON THIS DISCUSSION. OKAY. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. ITEM 34 EVERYONE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. SO I'M CURIOUS IF THE CITY'S RISK PERIOD HAS EXPIRED. WHY IS THIS AMENDMENT COMING UP NOW INSTEAD OF WHEN THE CITY WAS STILL AT RISK? SURE. WE THE ITEM WE BROUGHT BACK IN 2020 HAD US SUBORDINATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION LENDER. NOW THAT THE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE AND THE PROJECTS COMPLETE, THEY'RE CONVERTING THE CONSTRUCTION FINANCING TO PERMANENT FINANCING. AND THE PERMANENT FINANCING LENDER IS BACKED BY FANNIE MAE AND REQUIRING THIS SUBORDINATION. OKAY. AND IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE DONE BEFORE IN OTHER PROJECTS AND VIRTUALLY EVERY PROJECT WITH THE FEDERALLY BACKED PERMANENT LENDER? YES. OH, OKAY. SO THIS IS PRETTY CUSTOMARY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IT IS, I WOULD ADD, BUT THE STAFF FAILED TO INCLUDE THIS AS PART OF THE COUNCIL'S AUTHORIZATION IN 2020. THAT'S WHERE WE GOOFED. I'M SORRY. SAY THAT AGAIN. RIGHT? SO THE COUNCIL ITEM IN 2020 ALLOWED FOR SUBORDINATION TO THE THE CONSTRUCTION FINANCING. [02:05:04] RIGHT, BUT DID NOT EXPRESSLY ALSO INCLUDE SUBORDINATION TO PERMANENT FINANCING. OH, OKAY. AND WE TYPICALLY DO THAT. YES, WE TYPICALLY DO ON THESE KINDS OF DEALS. OKAY. SO THIS IS JUST A CLEAN. IT WAS A STAFF OVERSIGHT IN 2020. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MISS CADENA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. ITEM 34. YES. SO I JUST WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THIS PROJECT. SO IT'S AT 99% OCCUPANCY RIGHT NOW. IT IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN FORT WORTH AVENUE AREA OF DISTRICT SIX. AND IT IT HELPS OUR SENIOR CITIZENS WHO ARE 55 PLUS THERE ARE ABOUT 130 APARTMENT UNITS. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THIS IS NEW CONSTRUCTION. THEY CONSTRUCTION COMPLETED LAST YEAR. IT WAS PLACED IN SERVICE 130 APARTMENT UNITS. 80% OF THOSE ARE 104 UNITS ARE DESIGNATED FOR HOUSEHOLDS EARNING AT 30%, 50%, AND 60%. SO I JUST HAVE THE NUMBERS HERE. 11 OF THE UNITS ARE AT 30%, 42 UNITS AT 50% AMI AND 51 UNITS AT 60% AMI. I DO RECALL WHEN WE PASSED THIS ORIGINALLY UNDER COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ THAT THERE WERE TWO PROJECTS ALONG FOURTH AVENUE, AND WE HE SPECIFICALLY CHOSE THIS ONE BECAUSE IT DID MEET THE NEED OF PROVIDING AFFORDABLE UNITS FOR OUR SENIOR CITIZENS. SO THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PROJECT IN OUR DISTRICT. THANKS. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. ITEM 34. THANK YOU. MAYOR, I WAS JUST TELLING MY COLLEAGUE THAT I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT THE SENIOR AGE STARTS AT 55. AND I HEARD THE GOLDEN GAMES THAT THE PARKS WAS PUTTING ON IS ACTUALLY STARTS AT 50. I'M LIKE, WAIT, WAIT, WHAT? WHAT? SO IT'S YOU KNOW, I REALLY LOVE THE COMMENTS BY JUST KIND OF SHEDDING LIGHT ON WHAT THIS PROJECT IS ABOUT. BY BY COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA. ONE OF THE THINGS WE LEARNED IN THE HOUSING COMMITTEE IS THAT SENIORS ARE COST BURDENED REALLY BADLY IN THE CITY RIGHT NOW, AND THEY'RE AND IT JUST IS GETTING WORSE AS THE CITY GOES ON. I'LL JUST ASK STAFF THIS QUESTION OR OUR DEVELOPERS, DO THEY BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR FREE? ARE THEY DOING IT OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF THEIR HEARTS, OR DO WE HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE IT? THEY DO NOT. ALL OF THESE ARE A BASIC MATH PROBLEM. SO IF THERE'S A GAP IN THE FINANCING STACK, THEY'LL COME TO THE CITY TO HELP. AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED ON THIS ONE. OKAY. AND SO I JUST LIKE WHEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SORT OF DISCUSSIONS UP HERE, I THINK THESE ARE HEALTHY TO TALK ABOUT THE FINANCING. I JUST WHEN THERE'S VERBIAGE ABOUT TALKING ABOUT A GIVEAWAY FOR DEVELOPERS OR, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY'RE GETTING MONEY, THEY'RE JUST GETTING ALL OF THESE. IT'S LIKE A GIVEAWAY. BONANZA IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE. I THINK IT PAINTS A PICTURE THAT KIND OF PUTS DEVELOPERS IN A BAD LIGHT. THAT'S COMING FROM THE HORSESHOE. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY FROM MY END, LIKE, I APPRECIATE OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS, I APPRECIATE OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILDERS BECAUSE THE CITY CANNOT DO IT ON OUR OWN. AND I JUST WANT THE MESSAGE THAT AT LEAST IS COMING FROM ME TO BE, WE WANT MORE OF THIS. YOU'RE VERY WELCOME HERE. AND AND WE NEED IT, FRANKLY, IN THE CITY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 34? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. MR. MAYOR, THIS CONCLUDES YOUR AGENDA FOR THIS SESSION. OKAY, LET ME JUST CONFIRM WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT WE'RE GOING TO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND IF SO, ON WHICH ITEM, AND I'LL READ THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE. BUT LET ME MAKE SURE WE ARE DOING THAT FIRST. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. LET'S JUST STAND AT EASE FOR LIKE A MINUTE. OR WE ARE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO LET ME READ YOU THE LANGUAGE. [32. 25-2640A Deliberate the appointment, employment, or duties of an interim inspector general and seek the advice of the city attorney on this matter. (T.O.M.A. Sec. 551.071)] IT IS 11:27 A.M. ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2025. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION FIVE, 51.071 AND SECTION 551 .074 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING MATTER DESCRIBED IN TODAY'S AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER 32. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION NOW. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 1 P.M.. AND LET'S YEAH, LET'S TRY TO WRAP THIS UP [02:10:01] AS QUICK AS WE CAN, MAYBE IN THE NEXT 30 MINUTES TO GIVE YOU A FULL HOUR TO HAVE LUNCH. IF WE CAN TRY TO GET IT DONE BETWEEN NOW AND NOON, YOU'D HAVE FROM NOON TO ONE TO ACTUALLY GET SOME STUFF DONE. HAVE LUNCH. OKAY, SO THAT'S THE GOAL. WE'RE COMING BACK AT 1 P.M., BUT THE GOAL IS TO WRAP THIS EXECUTIVE SESSION UP TECHNICALLY IN THE NEXT 30 MINUTES. OKAY. BUT WE'LL COME BACK AT 1 P.M.. WE'RE AT RECESS UNTIL 1 P.M.. EVERYONE ALL RIGHT? WHOA WHOA WHOA. THANK YOU. WHAT'S. WHOA. OKAY. IT IS 1:06 P.M. IN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. HAS COMPLETED ITS CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTIONS FIVE, 51.071 AND 551 .074, THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. AND WE'VE NOW RETURNED TO OPEN SESSION HERE ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2025. MADAM SECRETARY, TAKE IT AWAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING AGENDA. [ZONING CASES - CONSENT] YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEMS Z ONE THROUGH Z THREE. ITEM Z ONE HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA AND ITEM Z TWO HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY. THEREFORE, YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEM OF ONLY ITEM Z THREE. I'LL READ THAT ITEM INTO THE RECORD. ITEM Z THREE IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT. DISTRICT NUMBER 153, ON THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF LEMON AVENUE BETWEEN CARLISLE STREET AND COLE AVENUE. YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR YOUR CONSENT AGENDA, BUT ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON CONSENT? ITEM Z THREE NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. MOVE! APPROVAL. I HEARD A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CONSENT AGENDA. AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING AND HEARING. NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. [Z1. 25-2520A A public hearing to receive comments regarding a City Plan Commission authorized hearing to determine the proper zoning on property zoned Planned Development District No. 842 with Specific Use Permit No. 1879 for a late-hours establishment, on the east line of Greenville Avenue, north of La Vista Road, south of Oram Road and with consideration to be given to evaluating whether Specific Use Permit No. 1879 is compatible with adjacent property and consistent with the character of the neighborhood and an ordinance granting the repeal of Specific Use Permit No. 1879 Recommendation of Staff: Repeal Specific Use Permit No. 1879 for a late-hours establishment limited to an alcoholic beverage establishment operated as a bar, lounge, or tavern Recommendation of CPC: Repeal Specific Use Permit No. 1879 for a late-hours establishment limited to an alcoholic beverage establishment operated as a bar, lounge, or tavern Z234-289(TB)] WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR FIRST PULL ZONING ITEM. ITEM Z ONE. ITEM Z ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A CITY PLAN COMMISSION AUTHORIZED HEARING TO DETERMINE THE PROPER ZONING ON PROPERTY ON THE EAST LINE OF GREENVILLE AVENUE, NORTH OF LAVISTA ROAD, SOUTH OF OREM ROAD, AND WITH CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN TO EVALUATING WHETHER SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1879 IS COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING THE REPEAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1879. MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 50 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST. WE RECEIVED THREE REPLIES IN FAVOR AND 27 REPLIES IN OPPOSITION DUE TO MORE THAN 20% OPPOSITION. THE ITEM REQUIRES A THREE QUARTERS VOTE TO PASS. THE CPC'S RECOMMENDATION. YOU DO HAVE SIX INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM, AFTER WHICH YOU WILL BE OPEN TO ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE. YOUR FIRST SPEAKER. MICHAEL NYHUS NYHUS. SORRY IF I MISPRONOUNCED IT. YEAH. NO PROBLEM. YOU ARE. OKAY, I'LL GO AHEAD. SO I'M MICHAEL NYHUS. MY ADDRESS IS 1911 HOPE WAY IN DALLAS, TEXAS. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AS A PROPERTY OWNER, A RESIDENT OF THE COMMUNITY, AND ALSO AS A PRESIDENT OF THE HOPE TERRACE HOA, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE TOWNHOMES THAT BACK UP DIRECTLY TO THE NIGHTCLUB THAT OPERATES AS MILLIE. I'M CALLING TO REPRESENT A VOTE IN OPPOSITION ABOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. YOU KNOW, WE'VE WE'VE CONTINUED TO HAVE LOTS OF ISSUES WITH MILLIE SINCE THE DAY THEY OPENED. THE DAY THEY OPENED WAS ACTUALLY SOMETIME IN 2020. AND THAT WAS WHENEVER I ACTUALLY FIRST OR EXCUSE ME, THEY OPENED IN JANUARY 5TH, 2022. I HAVE WRITTEN RECORDS BACK AS FAR AS JANUARY 17TH, 2022. THAT YOU KNOW, HAVE HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THEIR NOISE. THEY HAVE BEEN A CONSTANT NUISANCE OVER THE PAST COUPLE YEARS DUE TO NOISE DISTURBANCES TO THE COMMUNITY. THEY OPERATE A NIGHTCLUB FROM WEDNESDAY, WEDNESDAY TO SATURDAY UNTIL 1 TO 2 A.M. IN THE MORNING. AND THEIR NIGHTCLUB BACKS UP DIRECTLY TO OUR TOWNHOMES. AND WE HAVE NO FORMAL ALLEY. SO WE'RE FILING AN OPPOSITION OF MILLIE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS. FIRST, BECAUSE OF PROXIMITY. SO DUE TO THE PROXIMITY OF OUR TOWNHOMES, WHICH WERE IN PLACE BEFORE MILLIE OPENED, MILLIE IS NOT A FIT FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, OUR PROPERTIES, BEDROOMS, HOMES AND CHILDREN'S HOMES BACK UP DIRECTLY TO THE NIGHTCLUB. A NIGHTCLUB IS NOT COMPATIBLE BECAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY TO OUR HOMES AND THE AMOUNT OF NOISE THAT THEY EMIT ON A REGULAR BASIS. THAT BRINGS ME TO MY SECOND POINT NOISE. MYSELF AND MANY OF THE OTHER RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY HAVE HAD MULTIPLE DISCUSSIONS WITH MILLIE IN THE PAST, AS WELL AS THEIR GENERAL COUNSEL, OWNERS AND OTHER FOLKS THAT ARE LIKELY GOING TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY. [02:15:01] MILLIE'S MUSIC VIBRATES OUR WALLS AND FLOORS AND DISTURBS OUR SLEEP. OFTENTIMES UNTIL 1 OR 2 IN THE MORNING, ON WEEKNIGHTS AND WEEKDAYS OR EXCUSE ME, WEEKDAYS, WEEKNIGHTS AND EVEN THE WEEKENDS. MILLIE HAS TAKEN NO ACTION AND WE FILED NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS WITH DALLAS CODE COMPLIANCE. WHENEVER WE AFTER WE'VE SPOKE WITH MILLIE AND THEY CHOSE NOT TO HEED OUR CONCERNS. MYSELF AND OTHER NEIGHBORS HAVE SPOKEN WITH OPERATORS OF MILLIE. THEY WE'VE CONTINUED TO HAVE ISSUES WITH OPERATOR. THEY'VE BEEN VERY DISMISSIVE OF OUR CONCERNS AND HAVE FAILED TO TAKE ACTION. I MYSELF HAVE HAD NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS MOVE FROM THE AREA BECAUSE OF THE CONSTANT ISSUES WITH THE NOISE. AS A RESULT OF ME NOT BEING ABLE TO TAKE CONSISTENT ACTION TO MITIGATE THE NOISE ISSUES AND REALLY RESPECT THE VOICE AND THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, THIS IS THE REASON WHY WE'RE FILING AN OPPOSITION OF THEM BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE ON IN THEIR CURRENT THEIR CURRENT ROLE WITH THEIR SPECIAL USE PERMIT THAT ALLOWS THEM TO OPERATE UNTIL ONE AND TWO IN THE MORNING. SO WE HOPE OUR SPECIAL USE PERMIT DOES ITS JOB. YOU KNOW, OTHER OPERATORS ARE ABLE TO KEEP THEIR SPECIAL USE PERMIT BECAUSE THEY OPERATE WITHIN THE RULES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CATHERINE CARMIER. I'M SORRY. YOUR. YOUR MICROPHONE IS NOT ON. THERE'S A BUTTON AT THE BASE. YES. THANK YOU. HI. MY NAME IS CATHERINE CALMEYER. I LIVE AT 4413 WALL STREET, APARTMENT TWO, DALLAS, TEXAS. 75246. I AM THE SERVICE LEAD AT BILLY ON LOWER GREENVILLE. I AM THE LONGEST TENURED EMPLOYEE IN THAT BUILDING NEXT TO MY GM JOSHUA BACK. I'M THE SERVICE LEAD THERE, SO THEREFORE I MANAGE ALL OF THE SERVICE THAT HAPPENS WITHIN THAT SPACE. AND I'VE BEEN THERE FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS. I STARTED AT MILLI ABOUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO WHEN I GOT SOBER. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT I DECIDED TO DO ON THE WEEKENDS TO GET ME BUSY. AND MILLI HAS MADE HUGE STRIDES TO SUPPORT THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T WISH TO DRINK. SO THERE ARE NONALCOHOLIC OPTIONS AT MILLI. SO IT'S NOT JUST AN ESTABLISHMENT IN WHICH PEOPLE ARE DRINKING ALL THE TIME. PEOPLE COME FOR THE GOOD VIBES, THE GOOD TIMES. SOMETHING THAT I WANTED TO SPEAK TO IS THE WORK ETHIC OF THE EMPLOYEES IN THIS ENVIRONMENT THAT WE CREATE. WE WANT TO MAKE A UNIQUE SPACE THAT FOSTERS BOTH CONNECTION AND COMMUNITY, THAT OUR GUESTS CAN COME FORWARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN. IN THE PAST TWO YEARS, I HAVE HAD THE JOY OF SEEING FAMILIAR FACES EACH WEEKEND THAT HAVE EVOLVED INTO GENUINE FRIENDSHIPS. SO MUCH SO THAT NEXT MONTH, A MONTH FROM TOMORROW, A BUNCH OF OUR REGULARS, OUR STAFF ARE JOINING ME AT MY WEDDING, WHICH IS VERY COOL. MILLIE'S WHERE FRIENDSHIPS ARE BORN. STORIES ARE SHARED IN LIFE'S BIG MOMENTS ARE CELEBRATED. EACH WEEKEND WE GET TO CELEBRATE BIRTHDAYS, WEDDING PARTIES, JOB PROMOTIONS, AND EVERY MOMENT IN BETWEEN. ALL BECAUSE THE GUESTS HAVE CHOSEN US AS THE PLACE THAT THEY WANT TO BE AND THE PEOPLE THAT THEY WANT TO BE WITH. OVER TIME, WE'VE HAD TO SAY SOME GOODBYES OR REALLY SEE YOU LATER. SO SOME REGULARS FROM THE BEGINNING WHO PURSUED OPPORTUNITIES IN OTHER CITIES. NEEDLESS TO SAY, GOING AWAY PARTIES HAVE ALSO BEEN CELEBRATED AT MILLIE, AND EVERY VISIT BACK ISN'T COMPLETE WITHOUT STOPPING IN TO RELIVE THE MEMORIES MADE WITHIN OUR FOUR WALLS. I'VE EVEN LEVERAGED SOCIAL MEDIA TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GROW CLOSER AND KEEP IN TOUCH WITH OUR REGULARS BY MAKING A PAGE DEDICATED TO MY WORK AT MILLIE. MILLIE BARKATI AT MILLIE. WE AREN'T JUST ANOTHER BUSINESS ON LOWER GREENVILLE, BUT A DESTINATION THAT IS SOUGHT OUT FOR OUR UNIQUE EXPERIENCE. HERE YOU ARE ABLE TO COME IN AND ENJOY YOURSELF FOR HOURS INTO THE NIGHT. WHETHER IT'S AFTER A LONG DAY AT WORK, CELEBRATING A SPORTS WIN, OR MOURNING A SPORTS LOSS, OR JUST A QUICK NIGHTCAP FOLLOWING DINNER BEFORE HEADING HOME, MILLIE IS HERE FOR OUR PEOPLE. WORKING HERE HAS ALSO SHOWN ME HOW SMALL THE WORLD IS. I GREW UP 600 MILES AWAY FROM DALLAS AND SAINT LOUIS, MISSOURI, BUT EVERY WEEKEND I GET TO SEE PEOPLE WHO ALSO WENT TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI OR GREW UP IN SAINT LOUIS, WHICH IS REALLY COOL, AND I GET TO SEE THAT WHENEVER I SEE THEM. AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, I HAVE BEEN ON THE TEAM FOR OVER TWO YEARS. JUST AS MUCH AS WE AS MILLIE ARE HERE FOR OUR PEOPLE. THE TEAM AND OUR REGULARS ARE MY PEOPLE. ANYWHERE YOU GO, COWORKERS, COWORKERS, COKER'S COWORKERS WILL SAY THAT THEY HAVE CAMARADERIE AMONGST EACH OTHER AND REFER TO THEMSELVES AS FAMILY. BUT HOWEVER. HOWEVER, NOTHING COMPARES TO WHAT THE STAFF AT MILLIE FEELS FOR EACH OTHER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CHAD COBB. GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS CHAD COBB, AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU ALL HERE TODAY. [02:20:02] I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF MILLIE KEEPING ITS LATE NIGHT HOURS PERMIT. I RECENTLY PURCHASED A PROPERTY DIRECTLY BEHIND MILLIE'S IN THE HOA HOPE TERRACE. I ALSO SPEND MOST OF MY TIME AT MILLIE'S WHEN I'M OFF OF WORK AND ENJOYING MY WEEKEND. IT'S A WELL RUN BAR AND A GREAT ATMOSPHERE. THE STAFF ARE PROFESSIONAL. THE VIBE IS WELCOMING AND IT'S GENERALLY ADDS VALUE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE INCO AND MURPHY SPECIFICALLY. THEY'VE BEEN INCREDIBLY EASY TO WORK WITH. I FELT VERY COMFORTABLE REACHING OUT TO ALL OF THEM, AND THAT KIND OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIVENESS AND CARE SAYS A LOT ABOUT HOW MILLIE OPERATES AS A BUSINESS. NOW, I KNOW NOISE IS OFTEN A CONCERN WITH LATE NIGHT PERMITS, BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE, MILLIE'S HASN'T BEEN AN ISSUE AT ALL. I ENJOY MULTIPLE HOURS ON THE EVENING ON MY ROOFTOP, WHICH IS OPEN AIR, AND I CAN HONESTLY SAY THAT I HEAR MORE SOUNDS FROM HYDE OR DIFFERENT MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REVVING THEIR ENGINES LATE AT NIGHT, RATHER THAN ANY NOISE COMING FROM MILLIE. IN FACT, MURPHY AND HIS TEAM HAVE REACHED OUT TO ME MULTIPLE TIMES DIRECTLY TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S NO NOISE EMITTING TO MY PROPERTY AND THAT I CANNOT HEAR IT. I FIND THAT VERY RESPECTFUL AND I APPRECIATE THEM REACHING OUT TO CONFIRM THAT THE NOISE TRULY IS NOT REACHING MY PROPERTY. WHAT WORRIES ME MORE HERE IS THE BIGGER PICTURE. IF WE START TO PULL PERMITS FROM WELL-MANAGED LOCAL BUSINESSES LIKE MILLIE'S, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS FOR OUR PROPERTY VALUES AND LONG TERM HEALTH OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I CHOSE TO LIVE IN THIS SPECIFIC PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE FUN, SAFE AND VIBRANT AREA THAT IT BRINGS. AND MILLIE IS A PART OF WHAT MAKES IT THAT WAY. MILLIE'S ISN'T JUST A BAR IN MY OPINION. IT'S A COMMUNITY. AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU ALLOW THEM TO KEEP THEIR PERMIT AND CONTINUE CONTRIBUTING TO THE LIFE AND ENERGY THAT WE CALL GREENVILLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU ALL TODAY. I DO HAVE TO RUN TO WORK, BUT IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS I CAN ANSWER I WOULD LOVE TO ANSWER THEM HERE FOR YOU NOW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CASEY SQUIRES. HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? WOW. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A LONG SPEECH HERE, SO PLEASE BEAR WITH ME. BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE ALLOWING US TO SPEAK TODAY. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO BE THERE IN PERSON. I'M CURRENTLY AT WORK, AS YOU CAN SEE. SO, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ME. MY NAME IS CASEY SQUIRES, ALSO KNOWN AS DJ CASEY FARRELL. OUT OF THE 13 YEARS I'VE LIVED IN DALLAS, EIGHT OF THOSE YEARS I HAVE CHOSEN TO LIVE IN THE LOWER GREENVILLE AREA. I HAVE BEEN A DJ AT MILLIE ALMOST THREE YEARS TO THE DAY STARTING ON SEPTEMBER 17TH, 2022. I'VE BEEN IN DALLAS A LITTLE. I'VE BEEN A DJ IN DALLAS A LITTLE OVER FIVE YEARS NOW, AND I'VE BEEN IN THE ELECTRONIC MUSIC SCENE FOR WELL OVER EIGHT YEARS. WHILE MILLIE IS A PHENOMENAL COCKTAIL BAR, MILLIE IS ALSO STAPLED TO HOUSE MUSIC SCENE HERE IN DALLAS. EMILY WAS THE FIRST PLACE WHERE I WAS ALLOWED TO PLAY ONLY HOUSE AND DISCO MUSIC FOR FOUR HOURS STRAIGHT. WHILE THIS MAY NOT SEEM LIKE A BIG DEAL TO MOST OF YOU, IF YOU KNOW THE MUSIC SCENE IN DALLAS, THERE ARE LESS THAN A HANDFUL OF PLACES THAT PLAY AND ALLOW STRICTLY HOUSE MUSIC, AND 99% OF THE PLACES WHERE DJ'S PLAY THE MUSIC IS TOP 40 OR HIP HOP. NO DISRESPECT TO THOSE GENRES OR DJ'S. THAT IS ONE OF THE MANY THINGS THAT MAKE MILLI SO SPECIAL AND UNIQUE. BECAUSE I'VE PLAYED AT MILLI FOR THREE YEARS, I PERSONALLY WITNESSED ALL THE CHANGES THAT MILLI HAS GONE THROUGH IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE UP TO SPEED ON REGULAR REGULATIONS, FOLLOWING THE LAW AND ENSURING THE NOISE REGULATIONS ARE BEING FOLLOWED. HERE ARE A LIST OF SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE BASED ON WHAT I CAN REMEMBER OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS. MILLI INITIALLY AND THIS IS YEARS AGO, BOUGHT A NEW SOUND SYSTEM TO ENSURE THAT THE GUESTS WERE GETTING THE BEST POSSIBLE EXPERIENCE IN THEIR SPACE IN REGARDS TO SOUND. SHORTLY AFTER, THEY WERE FORCED TO REMOVE IT IN ORDER TO ENSURE THEY WERE NOT DISTURBING ANYONE, AND THEY GLADLY DID SO. NOT ONLY DID THEY REMOVE THE SOUND SYSTEM, THEY ENCLOSED THE WINDOWS, THEY PUT EXTRA SOUNDPROOFING AND WE AS DJ'S AND ALSO THE MANAGERS CONSTANTLY USE A DECIBEL READER. IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH WHAT A DECIBEL READER IS, IT MEASURES THE VOLUME AMOUNT TO ENSURE, AGAIN, THEY'RE WITHIN REGULATION STANDARDS TO ENSURE THE SOUND WAS WAS WITHIN REGULATORY STANDARDS. NOT LONG AFTER THAT, THEY WERE UNDER SCRUTINY FOR THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT WERE IN THE ESTABLISHMENT FOR ZERO REASON. [02:25:03] HOWEVER, THIS WASN'T JUST A SILLY THING. IT WAS HAPPENING ALL OVER LOWER GREENVILLE. WHAT DID MILLY DO? THEY TOOK IT VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY. THEY ENSURED THAT THEY'RE IN LINE WITH OCCUPANCY RULES AND REGULATIONS. RELATIONS. THEN THE CITY CUT THEIR OCCUPANCY IN HALF. WHAT DID MILLY DO? EVEN THOUGH THAT MEANT LESS MONEY FOR THEIR ESTABLISHMENT AND THEIR STAFF? THAT'S YOUR TIME. OH, I DIDN'T KNOW AT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. THANK YOU. SHELBY BISHOP. SHELBY BISHOP IS NOT PRESENT. MURPHY. SAYRE. MR. MAYOR, WE HAVE SOME HANDOUTS. IF YOU'LL JUST GIVE US A MOMENT. SO JUST GO THROUGH. THIS LAST ONE. OKAY. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JOSHUA BACH. I'M THE GENERAL MANAGER OF MILI, AND I WANTED TO GO OVER A COUPLE OF THINGS TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND ABOUT ANCO AS A HOSPITALITY GROUP AND WHAT WE DO. SO ANCO IS A HOSPITALITY GROUP. WE CURRENTLY HAVE 12 LOCATIONS. THOSE LOCATIONS ARE BASED OFF SIX DIFFERENT BRANDS. THOSE BRANDS ARE SPREAD OUT ALL OVER NORTH TEXAS AT THE MOMENT. WE CURRENTLY EMPLOY IN THE REGION OF 700 PEOPLE. IN MY 18 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY. YOU KNOW, HAS BY FAR BEEN THE BEST COMPANY I'VE EVER WORKED FOR. THEY TAKE CARE OF THEIR STAFF AND THEY TAKE CARE OF THEIR STAFF WITH A LOT OF INTENTION. THERE ARE LOTS OF PROGRAMS PUT IN PLACE, SUCH AS PATERNITY LEAVE AND MATERNITY LEAVE, WHICH YOU DON'T TYPICALLY SEE IN THE SERVICE INDUSTRY. THEY OFFER PROGRAMS SUCH AS HEALTH INSURANCE AND LIFE INSURANCE TO ALL SALARIED MEMBERS, AND IT'S THE FASTEST WAY TO GET FOUR WEEKS OF PAID TIME OFF OF ANY COMPANY I'VE EVER COME ACROSS. THEY REALLY DO STAND FOR THEIR PEOPLE. THEY STAND FOR THEIR MORALS AND THEY STAND BY THEIR VALUES. ONE OF THE THINGS TO BE AN OPERATOR OF MILLIE IS TO UPHOLD THOSE STANDARDS AND THOSE VALUES. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY. A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY OF THE SPACE ITSELF. IT'S BEEN A BAR SINCE 1954, SO THERE'S QUITE A LONGEVITY THERE. AND UP UNTIL 2017, IT WAS OPERATED BY VARIOUS OTHER ENTITIES. IN 2017, UNKO TOOK OVER THAT SPACE FROM CROWN AND HARP AND TURNED LEELA'S THE WINE BAR DOWNSTAIRS DURING THE PANDEMIC. THE SPACE ABOVE IT WAS CLOSED TEMPORARILY BECAUSE IT DIDN'T OFFER FOOD. AND THEN AFTER THE PANDEMIC AND THE RESTRICTIONS WERE LIFTED, MILLIE OPENED IN AUGUST OF 2021. WE CONTINUE TO WORK UNDER THE SAME SUP. THE LICENSES FOR THE BUILDING ARE FOR THE SAME ENTITY. WE HAVE THE SAME TAX ID NUMBER. THE SAME TABC NUMBER. ALL THE SAME CODES AND REGULATIONS APPLY TO BOTH ENTITIES. THERE ARE TWO CONCEPTS IN THE SAME BUILDING, BUT THE SAME BUILDING IS OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE SAME PEOPLE. IN 2008, THE CONDOS BEHIND DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PROPERTY WERE BUILT. THOSE PROPERTY BUILDERS BUILT RIGHT UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE. SO WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A VERY DISTINCT PROXIMITY ISSUE. AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE WORKED TIRELESSLY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH THE COMMUNITY AND WITH VARIOUS DALLAS CITY ENTITIES TO BE ABLE TO COME TO THE BEST RESOLUTION FOR EVERYBODY, WHETHER THAT'S TURNING THE MUSIC DOWN, WHETHER THAT'S MONITORING THE LINE WHATEVER THAT MAY BE. WE'RE MORE THAN WILLING TO HELP AND ABLE TO HELP. SINCE OUR OPENING, WE HAVE GOT A LOT OF SUPPORT FROM OUR NEIGHBORS. WE KNOW THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS A VERY, VERY SPECIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S NEAR AND DEAR TO EVERYBODY'S HEARTS. AND ENCORE HAS DONE EVERYTHING THAT THEY CAN. WE HAVE TWO LOCATIONS ON LOWER GREENVILLE. THERE WAS THREE IN THE PAST, BUT ONCO TAKES THINGS VERY SERIOUSLY WHEN IT COMES TO PEOPLE. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE A HOSPITALITY GROUP AND HOSPITALITY MEANS TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE. WE WANT TO BUILD LEADERS THAT TAKE CARE OF THE NEXT GENERATION AND SO ON AND SO ON. THAT'S YOUR TIME, SIR. WILL YOU PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? YES, MY NAME IS JOSHUA BECK. I'M THE GENERAL MANAGER OF MILI. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. SO MURPHY SAYRE IS NOT PRESENT. YOU'RE OKAY. YOU MAY COME FORWARD. THANK YOU. MURPHY SAYER, 703 NEWELL AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS 75223. I'LL BE STARTING WITH THE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY ON PAGE SIX. THERE'LL BE A LITTLE BIT OVERLAP WITH JOSH. SO THE HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY IS 1914. [02:30:01] GREENVILLE HAS BEEN A NIGHTLIFE VENUE SINCE 1954. IN 2017, WE TOOK OVER THE LOCATION AND WE'VE AUTO RENEWED THE SUP SINCE THEN. MILI OPENED IN 2021. SAME. SO WE OPERATE LEELA'S WINE BAR DOWNSTAIRS IN MILI. UPSTAIRS. SAME. SAME CO, SAME LEASE. TWO DIFFERENT CONCEPTS IN ONE BUILDING EACH FOR REFERENCE ARE ABOUT 1800 SQUARE FEET. ON PAGE SIX OF YOUR PACKET, THERE'S A MAP THAT SHOWS 1914 GREENVILLE AVENUE IN BLUE AND THE CONDOS THAT WERE BUILT IN 2008, IN ORANGE. JUST FOR REFERENCE, ON THE NEXT SLIDE WITH THE HEADING NEIGHBOR SUPPORT ON PAGE SEVEN SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE TWO CONDO UNITS IN CLOSEST PROXIMITY TO MILLION GREEN. THESE TWO CONDO OWNERS BOTH FILED AFFIDAVITS IN OPPOSITION OF THIS REVOCATION, AND ALSO PROVIDED LETTERS OF SUPPORT THAT HAVE INCLUDED ON THE NEXT THREE PAGES CHAD, WHO OWNS 1915 HOPE WAY, WAS HERE TODAY AND ALREADY SPOKE THE FIRST EMAIL FROM THE OWNER OF 1917, HOPE WAY FROM FEBRUARY 2025, CONFIRMED THE RESOLUTION OF THE NOISE ISSUES IN SUPPORT OF OUR BUSINESS. THE NEXT SLIDE, PAGE NINE, SHOWS A SECOND LETTER IN SUPPORT FROM THAT SAME OWNER OF 19 1917. HOPEWELL SENT JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO THAT REITERATES HIS SUPPORT. THIS IS THE NEIGHBOR. THIS IS THE PROPERTY OWNER WHOSE EMAIL FROM SUMMER OF 2024 COMPLAINING ABOUT THE NOISE WITH MILLIE WAS USED AS PRIME EVIDENCE OF CPC AGAINST OUR ABILITY TO WORK WITH NEIGHBORS. THIS OWNER PERSONALLY INVITED ME INTO HIS CONDO TO DO SOUND MEASUREMENTS, AND WE'VE BEEN IN TOUCH SINCE THEN. THE NEXT SLIDE, PAGE TEN, CONTAINS AN EMAIL FROM CHAD THAT SHOWS HE SUPPORTS US. SO JUST TO BACK UP. WE, AS A RESULT OF OUR OUTREACH EFFORTS TO THE CONDOS, WE HAVE SUPPORT FROM THESE TWO CONDO OWNERS THAT ARE THE CLOSEST PROXIMITY TO OUR LOCATION. WE'LL RETURN TO SLIDES 12 AND 13 THAT DISCUSS A PETITION OVER 1400 RESIDENTS SIGNED IN SUPPORT OF MILLIE. THE SLIDE, ENTITLED NOISE REDUCTION EFFORTS, WHICH IS PAGE 13, SHOWS THE ACTIONS WE'VE TAKEN TO REDUCE NOISE. WE SOUNDPROOFED AND SEALED 14 EXTERIOR WINDOWS. WE ADDED BASS CATCHERS ALL OVER MILLIE TO ABSORB BASS. WE HIRED A SOUND ENGINEER TO CAP SPEAKERS. WE CONDUCTED SOUND MEASUREMENTS WITH THE ADJACENT CONDO OWNER. WE USE A DECIBEL READER AND WE REMOVED BOTH SUBWOOFERS. THE NEXT SLIDE, PAGE 14, SHOWS MILLIE'S FLOOR PLAN WHERE THESE SOLUTIONS WERE IMPLEMENTED WITHIN THE SPACE. THE BASS CATCHERS ARE SHOWN IN RED STARS. THE TECTUM SOUND PANELS ARE SHOWN IN GREEN, AND THE SEALED AND SOUNDPROOF WINDOWS ARE IN YELLOW. IT ALSO SHOWS WHERE THE FOUR SECURITY GUARDS ARE STATIONED AT MILLIE, WHICH WILL BE DISCUSSED LATER IN MORE DETAIL. THE FOLLOWING TWO SLIDES, PAGE 15 AND 16, SHOW EXAMPLE PHOTOS OF THE SEALED AND SOUNDPROOF WINDOWS AND THE BASS CATCHERS, WHICH AGAIN ARE THERE TO HELP CATCH LOW END BASS, AS WELL AS THE TECTUM SOUND PANELS, WHICH ARE ON THE CEILING AND HELP WITH HIGHER FREQUENCY. I'M SORRY, THOSE ARE ON SLIDES 15 AND 16. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MOST OF THESE WERE YOUR REGISTERED SPEAKERS. NOW I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO THE FLOOR. I HAVE A SPEAKER AT THE PODIUM. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU MAY BEGIN. THANK YOU. SANTOS MARTINEZ, 2489 CAMINO PLATA LOOP, NORTHEAST RIO RANCHO, NEW MEXICO, 87144. I'D JUST LIKE TO PICK UP WHERE THE LAST SPEAKER LEFT OFF, IF YOU'LL LOOK AT YOUR PACKET. PDA 42 IS A UNIQUE PLAN. DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF DALLAS IS. IT'S THE ONLY PD THAT ALLOWS YOU TO LOOK AT CRIME STATS AND CODE VIOLATIONS AND THE REVIEW OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT IF IT COMES UP FOR RENEWAL. AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR CONSIDERATION TODAY. AND IF YOU LOOK STARTING ON PAGE 17, WE'VE HAD 49 VISITS FROM CODE COMPLIANCE SINCE JUNE OF 2024. THEY'VE HAD 49 VISITS THAT HAVE GENERATED ZERO CITATIONS OR WARNING VIOLATIONS. I THINK THAT'S SIGNIFICANT THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A RESPONSE THAT GENERATES NO ACTIVITY, THAT THERE IS NO CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUE. I WANT TO REITERATE THE LAST SPEAKER ON WHAT WAS DONE TO THE BUILDING ITSELF, WHICH WAS, I BELIEVE, BUILT PRIOR TO 19, WELL, CLEARLY BUILT BEFORE 1954, BECAUSE IT'S BUILT TO THE PROPERTY LINE WITH OPENINGS ON THE PROPERTY LINE. THEY HAVE SEALED ALL THEIR WINDOWS. THEY HAVE SECURITY. IT'S 1800 SQUARE FEET ON THE SECOND FLOOR, AND YOU HAVE FOUR SECURITY MEMBERS AS WELL. WE'VE HAD NO CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUES AT ALL OUTSIDE OF NOISE CONCERNS. OUR CRIME STATISTICS, IF YOU CONTINUE ON UP, WE'VE ACTUALLY LISTED ALL THE VISITS THAT CODE OF CAME TO THE PROPERTY. I BELIEVE ON PAGES 1819. IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 20, YOU'VE HEARD THE SPEAKERS EARLIER WHO LIVED DIRECTLY BEHIND THE ESTABLISHMENT, WHO HAVE BEEN THANKFUL AND MINDFUL OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED TO THE BUILDING TO MITIGATE SOUND. YOU HAVE A FLOOR PLAN THAT GIVES YOU A VISUALIZATION OF WHERE WE SEALED WINDOWS. WE'VE REMOVED SUBWOOFERS WHERE WE'VE ADDED BASS CATCHERS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT A BASS CATCHER IS, BUT APPARENTLY THAT'S A THAT'S A THING. BUT I DON'T KNOW OF ANOTHER OPERATOR GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND TO MAINTAIN A GOOD RELATIONS WITH IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS WHO HAD CONCERNS ABOUT NOISE IN THE PAST THAT HAVE NOW BEEN RECTIFIED. [02:35:05] TO MAINTAIN AN OPEN COMMUNICATION THAT YOU ACTUALLY HAVE RESIDENTS TESTIFY TODAY. TAKING OFF FROM WORK TO SAY THAT THEY'VE HAD NO ISSUES. AND THEY ARE THANKFUL THAT THEY'VE WORKED THROUGH THOSE TO BE MITIGATED. I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. ALSO, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 21, YOU HAD A CONDO ASSOCIATION ACROSS HOPE. IT'S THE LARGE SQUARE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE ON THE MAP. THEY ORGANIZED AMONGST THEMSELVES TO GENERATE A BALLOT AND OPPOSITION. THE ASSOCIATION DIRECTLY BEHIND US IS NOT IN UNISON LIKE YOU WOULD SEE THE CONDO ASSOCIATION ACROSS THE STREET FROM HOPE. YOU HAVE RESIDENTS WHO'VE BEEN THERE WHO SUPPORT THE VENUE. YOU HAVE SOME RESIDENTS WHO ARE OPPOSED TO THE VENUE, BUT YOU DO NOT SEE AN ORGANIZED BALLOT OR A LETTER. I USED TO BE THE PRESIDENT OF THE HOLLYWOOD HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. INCIDENTALLY, I THINK IT'S THE BEST CONSERVATION DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. AS A BOARD, IF WE WERE TAKING ACTION ON A ZONING CASE, WE WOULD PUT THAT IN WRITING AS A BOARD THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT TODAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? I SEE ONE. OKAY. TWO, THREE. OKAY. YOU MAY COME FORWARD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, AND YOU MAY BEGIN. OKAY. IT'S LEWIS SPRADLEY. MY ADDRESS IS 5769 BELTLINE ROAD. DALLAS, TEXAS. I WORK, I DO SECURITY AT MILLIE'S AND LILA'S. I'M A PART OF FIVE SECURITY LICENSED SECURITY GUARDS THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING AND SECURING THE PREMISES. DURING THOSE OUT DURING THE HOURS OF 9 A.M. TO TWO. I'M SORRY, 9 P.M. TO 2 A.M.. EM. WHAT WERE I MOSTLY WORKED ON? FRONT DOOR. ME AND ANOTHER GENTLEMAN. SO IT'S TWO OF US IN FRONT. IT'S TWO OF US UPSTAIRS. ONE BY THE DJ BOOTH AND ONE BY THE BATHROOMS. AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER SECURITY PERSON OUTSIDE OF LILA'S WHICH IS ALSO, OF COURSE, ANOTHER CONNECTING ESTABLISHMENT. WE ARE RESPONSIBLE AT THE FRONT DOOR. WE'VE BEEN THERE. I WORKED WITH D AND D SERVICES. SECURITY SERVICES. WE WORK THROUGH ALPHA PROTECTION. WE PARTNERED UP WITH THEM IN REGARDS TO THAT PROPERTY. SO BASICALLY, WE'VE BEEN THERE MAYBE I THINK SINCE SEPTEMBER OF 2024. AND WHAT BASICALLY WE OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO JUST, YOU KNOW, CHECK IDS. WE ALSO CHECK PURSES. THE ONE WHO WANTS TO BRING IN ANY BOTTLES OF, YOU KNOW, EXTRA STUFF. ANY WEAPONS. OF COURSE. WE KEEP THE SIDEWALK CLEAR, WE MAINTAIN ONCE WE DO HAVE A LINE BECAUSE WE TEND TO WE TEND TO HAVE LINES MADE MOSTLY ON SATURDAY, SOMETIMES ON FRIDAYS. WE MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS AGAINST THE WALL AND OUT OF THE PATHWAY OF PEOPLE WALKING, PEDESTRIANS WALKING PAST, WALKING BY. ALSO, WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR, YOU KNOW, JUST ANYONE THAT GETS OUT OF LINE. WE, YOU KNOW, WE WE ESCORT THEM OUT. WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY, YOU KNOW, INCIDENTS OF MISBEHAVIOR OR WHAT WE'VE DONE. WE TRY AND MAINTAIN, YOU KNOW, CALMING THE SITUATION DOWN AND ESCORTING PEOPLE OUT WITH KINDNESS. I, YOU KNOW, WE DEAL WITH A CUSTOMER SERVICE SORT OF SECURITY OR BALANCING IF YOU, IF YOU SO WE TRY TO HANDLE EVERYONE WITH RESPECT. SO AS FAR AS I GUESS THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. OF COURSE WE WE WE WE WE'RE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR CAPACITY. SO WE TRY AND KEEP A CONSTANT COMMUNICATION WITH JOSH WHEN HE'S ON A WHEN HE'S THERE AT NIGHT AS FAR AS, HEY, THIS IS WHERE WE AT? DO WE NEED TO SLOW IT DOWN? SO ON AND SO FORTH AND ALWAYS MAKING SURE WE'RE RIGHT WHERE WE DON'T EITHER, I BELIEVE I THINK WHERE WE GOT OUR CAP AT IS THIS IS SOMETHING SIMILAR, NOT SIMILAR TO WHERE THE ACTUAL CAP IS AT. THE CAP IS I THINK I FORGOT WHAT THE NUMBER IS, BUT WE TRY TO BE 10 TO 15 BELOW THAT. SO JUST IN ORDER TO, TO MAINTAIN THE PROPER CAPACITY COMMUNICATION, AS FAR AS OUR COMMUNICATION, WE HAVE WALKIE TALKIES THAT WE WORK WITH. I MYSELF IS USUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WALKIE TALKIE. I HAVE DIRECT COMMUNICATION WITH THE MANAGER. THAT'S YOUR TIME. SORRY ABOUT THAT. IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS PATRICIA MORGAN. I AM AT 110 GREENVILLE LANE IN FAYETTE, TEXAS, [02:40:02] 75087. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CONCEPT TODAY AND HAS I WANT TO BRING IT TO EVERYONE'S ATTENTION THAT THIS CONCEPT HAS BEEN REFERRED TO NOTHING MORE THAN A BOOM BOOM CLUB. WE KNOW WITH ATTENTIONS IN DALLAS AND THE THINGS THAT WE SEE GOING ON IN OUR NEWS REPORTS THERE'S A CERTAIN WAY THAT WE DON'T WANT DALLAS TO BE REPRESENTED. AND WHEN YOU THUMB THROUGH AND YOU SEE WHAT UNCO OR UNCO IS, THE CONCEPTS, THE BRANDS, IT'S CULPEPERS WHERE YOU CAN GET YOUR TORTILLA BUTTERED, IT'S HG SUPPLY, WHERE YOU'RE CELEBRATING GRADUATION WITH YOUR FAMILY. THIS IS NOT A DERELICT CLUB. IT'S NOT A BOOM BOOM CLUB. AND WE'VE BROUGHT THE SPEAKERS THAT WE HAVE HERE TODAY TO SHOW YOU THE STEADY OPERATION, THE WAY THAT WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION NOT ONLY A SYSTEM SECURITY, SAFETY, BUT EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE HAD TO DO TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY TO OPERATE WITH OUR PERMIT. SO WE'RE HERE BEFORE YOU PROVING TO YOU GUYS OR HOPING TO PROVE TO YOU GUYS THAT WE HAVE TAKEN ALL OF THE STEPS NECESSARY TO IDENTIFY ANY OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION. MAKE THE CORRECTIONS AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, DO IT IN THE NAME OF APPEASING OUR NEIGHBORS. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE STEPS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN, WE HAVE THE DJ THAT'S TESTIFIED AS TO ALL OF THE STEPS THAT'S BEEN TAKEN IN HER ROLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MUSIC AND THE SOUND IS IN COMPLIANCE. WE'VE HAD MURPHY TALK ABOUT THE STEPS THAT HE'S TAKEN TO NOT ONLY TWEAK THE SYSTEMS AND FIX THEM, BUT TO GO INTO THE APARTMENTS OF THE NEIGHBORS WHO WE HAVE HERE TODAY WHO HAVE SAID AT ONE POINT WE HAD AN ISSUE, BUT THIS COMPANY IS THE COMPANY THAT'S GOING TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND TO CORRECT IT. WE'VE DONE THAT WORK. IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE REPORT, WE DON'T HAVE ISSUES WITH CRIME, AND WE KNOW THAT THAT'S ONE OF THE PRONGS AS TO WHY YOU GUYS WOULD WANT TO SAY YES OR NO TO KEEPING US GOING. WE DON'T HAVE THAT ISSUE BECAUSE WE TAKE IT VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY. WE DON'T WANT TO BE WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE NEWS. YOU GUYS DON'T WANT TO ALLOW IN WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE NEWS. YOU WANT MORE MILLIE'S? YOU WANT THE COMPANY THAT'S GOING TO SAY, HEY, OUR NEIGHBORS ARE NOT HAPPY. LET'S FIX IT. HEY, THE CITY IS NOT HAPPY WITH US. LET'S TALK WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. LET'S GO TO THE COMMISSION. LET'S HAVE MEETINGS. LET'S HAVE PHONE CALLS. LET'S CHECK ON THEM. LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE THIS BETTER. THAT'S WHAT MILLIE IS. THAT'S WHAT MILLIE'S ALWAYS BEEN. MILLIE IS MORE OF WHAT YOU WANT ON LOWER GREENVILLE. YOU'VE HEARD IT HERE. I'VE GOT IN FRONT OF ME PETITIONS. ABOUT 1600 PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED IN SUPPORT OF MILLIE. LET ME TELL YOU WHY. BECAUSE MILLIE ISN'T THE PLACE WHERE YOU HAVE TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE DRIVING THE FINEST OF CARS, THAT YOU'RE SPENDING YOUR RENT ON YOUR TAB. MILLIE IS THE PLACE WHERE YOU GO TO FIT IN. YOU CELEBRATE LIFE'S ACCOMPLISHMENTS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE, HOW YOU DRESS, WHERE YOUR CAR IS CAR'S PARKED AND SPENDING THAT BOTTLE TAB TO FIT IN. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT. WE WANT MORE MILLIES IN OUR CITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL. MY NAME IS ABEL MULUGHETA. I'M THE SERVE AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF 24 HOUR DALLAS. WE ARE A NONPROFIT DEDICATED TO BUILDING A SAFER, MORE INCLUSIVE, AND MORE VIBRANT NIGHT TIME ECONOMY FOR OUR CITY. AND ONE OF OUR SIGNATURE INITIATIVES IS THE COPPER STAR CERTIFICATION PROGRAM. COPPER STAR IS A RIGOROUS PROGRAM THAT RECOGNIZES VENUES DEMONSTRATING BEST PRACTICES AND SAFETY, COMPLIANCE, AND COMMUNITY RESPONSIBILITY. TO EARN CERTIFICATION, BUSINESSES MUST SUBMIT DETAILED DOCUMENTATION, INCLUDING EMPLOYEE HANDBOOKS, SAFETY PROTOCOLS, OPERATING PROCEDURES, AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT POLICIES. CERTIFICATION IS NOT PERMANENT. VENUES MUST RECERTIFY EVERY 16 MONTHS TO ENSURE THEY STAY CURRENT WITH EVOLVING STANDARDS. TODAY, OVER 100 VENUES ARE COPPER STAR CERTIFIED IN DALLAS, INCLUDING HAPPIEST HOUR, DALLAS COMEDY CLUB AND THE AT&T PERFORMING ARTS CENTER. TOGETHER, THESE BUSINESSES RAISE THE BAR FOR NIGHTLIFE IN DALLAS. MILLIE IS ONE OF THESE COPPER STAR VENUES, AND THEIR COMMITMENT TO COMPLIANCE AND SAFETY IS WELL DOCUMENTED. NOW, LET ME QUICKLY ADDRESS THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MEETING, WHERE IT WAS SUGGESTED BY THE COMMISSIONER THAT THE PREVIOUS USE OF MILLIE'S SPACE WAS A QUIET DINNER. AFTER DINNER. JAZZ CLUB. RESPECTFULLY, THAT IS NOT ACCURATE. THE PRIOR TENANT, CROWN AND HARP, WAS ONE OF LOWER GREENVILLE'S LIVELIEST MUSIC VENUES. IN 2017, THE DALLAS OBSERVER QUOTED A LOCAL GUITARIST WHO SAID CROWN AND HARP WAS, QUOTE, UNSTABLE WOBBLE LIKE A VASE ON THE EDGE OF A TABLE. WHEN IT WAS PACKED, IT WAS LIKE PLAYING IN A VAN FULL OF DRUNK PEOPLE DRIVEN BY A PERSON ON TRUCKER SPEED. END QUOTE. CROWN AND HARP EVEN HOSTED A WEEKLY SERIES CALLED WAR DANCE FEATURING DEATHROCK, DARK POST-PUNK, TRAD, GOTHIC ROCK AND COLDWAVE MUSIC EVERY WEDNESDAY FROM 10 P.M. TO 2 A.M.. THAT'S RIGHT, CROWN AND HARP WAS OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK UNTIL 2 A.M.. BY CONTRAST, MILLI UTILIZES A DJ WITHOUT SUBWOOFERS, A VOLUME LIMITER ON ITS SPEAKERS, AND IT'S OPEN UNTIL 2 A.M. [02:45:08] ONLY ON THE WEEKENDS, FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. SO THE REAL QUESTION IS WHAT HAS CHANGED? THE USE OF THE PROPERTY HAS NOT. THIS LOCATION HAS CONTINUOUSLY OPERATED AS A BAR AND MUSIC VENUE FOR OVER 70 YEARS. LONG BEFORE THE ADJACENT TOWNHOMES WERE BUILT IN 2008. TO SUDDENLY DECLARE THIS SITE INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE SAME USE IT HAS ALWAYS HAD IS INCONSISTENT, UNFAIR AND UNDERMINES THE STABILITY THAT BUSINESSES DEPEND ON WHEN MAKING INVESTMENTS IN OUR CITY. WE URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THE REVOCATION OF MALI'S SUP, NOT ONLY TO PROTECT ONE VENUE, BUT TO REAFFIRM DALLAS COMMITMENT TO RESPONSIBLE OPERATORS WHO ARE WORKING TO MAKE OUR CITY'S NIGHTLIFE BOTH SAFE AND VIBRANT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. MR. MAYOR, THERE ARE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION? YES. I MOVE THAT WE FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY THE RENEWAL OF THIS SUP. OR DENY THIS SUP. IS THERE A SECOND? GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE. THE MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF A SECOND. IS THERE A MOTION? MAYOR. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION, MR. BAZALDUA. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I MOVE TO NOT FOLLOW THE CPC RECOMMENDATION TO REPEAL THE SCP, BUT INSTEAD APPROVE THE SCP FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTO RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL TWO YEAR PERIODS. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, MR. BAZALDUA, IF YOU'D LIKE. THANK YOU. MAYOR CAN I SPEAK? SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED FROM ANDREA, PLEASE. I AM HERE. HI, ANDREA. I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD TELL ME. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS SUP IS IS SPECIFIC TO THIS PD. BUT WITH THERE BEING AN INTERNAL INITIATION OF A REVOCATION LIKE THIS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PERIOD I WAS LOOKING FOR THERE TO BE EXTENUATING EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD LEAD TO IT. AND I WANTED TO KNOW IF YOU COULD GIVE ME SOME HISTORY ON HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE HAD A CITY PLAN COMMISSION INITIATED REVOCATION IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS? WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. IN THE PAST YEAR OR SO, WE HAVE THIS SUP BEING INITIATED VIA AN AUTHORIZED HEARING TO BE RECONSIDERED. WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE THAT WAS INITIATED IN DISTRICT SIX ON LUNA ROAD. AND FURTHER BACK IN TIME, THERE WAS ANOTHER INITIATION TO REVOKE OR TO RECONSIDER AN SUP ON LOWER GREENVILLE, A LITTLE BIT ACROSS FROM THIS LOCATION. THESE ARE THE ONLY THREE THAT I HAVE IN MY MEMORY RIGHT NOW. AND IN CREATING 42. CAN YOU GIVE A HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT WAS? THE PURPOSE OF THE OF THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING? YES. IT'S THE PURPOSE OF, OF THE PD WITH CONDITIONS LIKE THESE SPECIFICALLY THAT ARE PRETTY UNPRECEDENTED FROM OTHER PD'S IN THE CITY. WELL THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN OTHERS IN THE CITY. IT DOES ESTABLISH, CREATE AND ESTABLISH A LAND USE LATE HOURS. AND FOR THIS SPECIFIC LAND USE, AS YOU WILL SEE IN MY STAFF REPORT AT PAGE NINE IT ADDS FACTORED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL, WHICH ARE UNIQUE TO ALL THE PD OR ALL THE ZONING IN THE CITY. IT'S NUMBER OF CITATIONS ISSUED BY POLICE. I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THOSE NEXT. SO IF YOU COULD ACTUALLY ANSWER BECAUSE IT SAYS FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR LATE NIGHT HOUR ESTABLISHMENTS. THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL SHALL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING FACTORS WHEN MAKING THE FINDINGS REQUIRED BY SECTION 50 1A4 .2191. THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS ISSUED BY POLICE TO PATRONS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. DO YOU HAVE THE NUMBER OF THAT OF THAT NUMBER ONE? YES. IF YOU LOOK IN THE STAFF REPORT, PAGES 12 AND 13, WE PULLED UP CRIME STATS. I ONLY HAVE SO I WOULD BELIEVE, THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS. [02:50:05] I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE ARE THE INCIDENTS, SO I DON'T KNOW IF INCIDENTS RESULT IN CITATIONS, BUT THERE ARE THERE HAVE BEEN 14 INCIDENTS SINCE 2020, SINCE 2020, OF THOSE INCIDENTS. BUT I'M SORRY. LET ME MAKE A DISTINCTION. THE DATA THAT WE PULLED IN THE CRIME STATS ARE BASICALLY ALL CALLS OR EVERYTHING THAT IS PINNED TO AN AREA AND THAT LOCATION. IT DOESN'T LINK OR WE DON'T. WE'RE NOT PRIVY. IT DOESN'T LINK WITH PATRONS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. SO ALL OF THIS INFORMATION THAT'S IN THE IN THE PD, I DO NOT KNOW IF THOSE ARE LINKED TO THE PATRONS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. ALSO, OF THOSE 14 THAT YOU HAVE LISTED IN THE MATERIALS. FOR THE RECORD, CAN YOU TELL ME HOW MANY OF THOSE ACTUALLY WERE BETWEEN THE HOURS THAT THIS PERMIT WOULD BE GRANTING MIDNIGHT TO 2 A.M.? GREAT QUESTION. ONLY ONE. OKAY. NUMBER TWO, THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS ISSUED BY POLICE FOR NOISE ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS BY THE ESTABLISHMENT. HOW MANY HAVE BEEN ISSUED? LOOKING AT THE INCIDENTS THAT THEY WERE FILED NONE OF THEM SEEM TO BE FOR NOISE. YOU'LL SEE. PAGE 13. SO NUMBER THREE, THE NUMBER OF ARRESTS FOR PUBLIC INTOXICATION OR DISORDERLY CONDUCT ASSOCIATED WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT. AGAIN, IT'S I, I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T IT'S NOT LINKED TO PUBLIC INTOXICATION. I DON'T KNOW ONE OF THOSE 14. YOU WILL SEE THE INCIDENTS ARE LISTED LIKE ASSAULT THEFT BECAUSE THIS DISORDERLY CONDUCT CONDUCT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S IT. SO I'LL GO BACK TO THOSE 14 CALLS IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS. AND NUMBER FOUR IS THE NUMBER OF TEXAS, THE TABC VIOLATIONS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT? MY APOLOGIES. I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT TO RESPOND TO ABC. SORRY, I HAD A LITTLE MOMENT. NUMBER THREE SAYS THE NUMBER OF ARRESTS. MY ANSWER IS ZERO. YOU WILL SEE ON PAGE 12 THAT THERE WERE NO ARRESTS IN THIS AREA AND THE LOCATION, AND I WILL ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME AND ADDRESS THE ABC VIOLATIONS BECAUSE WE DO NOT CHECK THAT. WE ONLY ADDED THE LINKS IN THE REPORT. THEY KNOW THEIR ABC NUMBER AND ALL OF THAT. OKAY. IF THE APPLICANT WILL COME DOWN, THAT'D BE GREAT. BUT NUMBER FIVE, IT SAYS THE NUMBER OF VIOLENT CRIMES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT, WITH AN EMPHASIS ON VIOLENT CRIMES ORIGINATING INSIDE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. SAME. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT VIOLENT CRIMES. IS IT. I. WE ONLY HAVE A NUMBER OF INCIDENTS. ONLY ONE IS WITH DEADLY WEAPON. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF AN INCIDENT IS DEEMED TO BE A CRIME. NO ARRESTS AT THIS LOCATION OR AROUND THIS LOCATION. OKAY. AND CURRENTLY, WHAT IS THE STRUCTURE OF THEIR SOUP? AS FAR AS AUTO RENEWALS, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WHY THE MOTION WAS READ THE WAY THAT THEY WERE READ. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THEY ALREADY HAVE THE AUTO RENEWALS IN PLACE, AND THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE AN APPLICATION FOR THEIR AUTO RENEWAL AS OF EARLIER THIS YEAR. YES. SO CURRENTLY, AS YOU'LL SEE PAGE 15 WHERE WE HAVE EXISTING SUP CONDITIONS IT LISTS ON PAGE 16 THAT THEY WERE THE LAST ORDINANCE WAS APPROVED IN 2017 AND IT WAS FOR TWO YEARS WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR ADDITIONAL TWO YEAR PERIODS, AUTOMATIC RENEWALS SINCE 2017, THEY RENEWED AUTOMATICALLY RENEWED FOUR TIMES. AND WE DO HAVE AN APPLICATION FOR AUTO RENEWAL THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH OUR OFFICE EARLIER THIS YEAR. AND THE STAFF REPORT, IT SAYS THAT THE BUSINESS IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE PD BUT NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT SENTIMENT? ELABORATE ON THAT. BUT ALSO IF CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THEM GETTING THEIR AUTO RENEWALS IN THE PAST? YES. SO I THINK YEAH, WE DID A PRETTY EXTENSIVE EXPLANATION IN THE STAFF REPORT, PAGE TEN. WE DO SAY THAT IT'S STILL COMPATIBLE WITH THE INTENT OF THE PD. I THINK STAFF TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT THIS LOCATION HAS RESIDENTIAL RIGHT BEHIND. AND THE THE WALLS ARE VERY CLOSE BECAUSE THEY ARE BOTH, LIKE, BUILT OUT TYPE OF LOTS. I WOULD MAKE A COMMENT THAT SINCE WE STARTED THIS PROCESS, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPLICANT MADE SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE DISTURBANCE. THAT WAS THE BASIS OF OUR RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE WE CANNOT, AS YOU KNOW, FOR ANY LAND USE DECISION, [02:55:07] WE DON'T STAFF DOESN'T CONSIDER ANYTHING OTHER THAN IS THIS A GOOD USE OF LAND AT THIS LOCATION? WE JUST LOOKED AT THE ADJACENCY WITH THE HOMES IN THE BACK IN THE REAR. AND WITH THAT SAID, THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE VERY, VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY. BUT IN THE BALLOTS THAT WE SAW BACK, A COUPLE OF THOSE WHO ACTUALLY SUPPORT, NOT GOING WITH THE CPC'S RECOMMENDATION HAPPENED TO BE THE CLOSEST UNITS TO THE ESTABLISHMENT. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT A NORMAL AMOUNT OF CODE INSPECTIONS SINGULAR BUSINESS HAS FOR THESE LATE NIGHT HOURS WITH OUR TEAM? WITHIN A MONTH, FOR INSTANCE? I DO NOT KNOW. WE DON'T LOOK AT THOSE. I WILL ASK THE APPLICANT TO STEP IN. I DID GIVE A HEADS UP TO CODE COMPLIANCE I DO, I DO NOT KNOW. THOSE WOULD BE THE THREE. WITH YOUR EXPERIENCE ON REVIEWING THESE CASES, IS IT PRETTY NORMAL TO SEE 70 INTERNALLY INITIATED CODE INSPECTIONS WITHIN A TWO YEAR PERIOD? OR WOULD YOU YOU CONSIDER THAT TO BE SOMEWHAT EXCESSIVE? COULD BE EXCESSIVE I DON'T KNOW. IT'S IT'S A LOT OF IT'S A LOT WITH CODE COMPLIANCE. AND I DON'T WANT TO VENTURE TO GUESS THEIR PROCESS. DO THEY COME FROM THE SAME PERSON IN THE SAME TIME? IS IT THE SAME VIOLATION OR THE SAME ALLEGED VIOLATION? I DO NOT KNOW. SO I THINK IT WOULD MERIT A CONVERSATION WITH CODE ON THAT. WE, AS I SAID, SUV STAYS WITH THE LAND, NOT WITH THE OPERATOR. SO WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH CODE COMPLIANCE BECAUSE WE WANT TO NOT BE BE FAIR AND JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THE LAND USE. THANK YOU. WELL, I JUST WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO REVIEW WHAT IT IS THAT'S BEFORE US. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TALKING. I KNOW THAT PDDS ARE PUT IN PLACE AND THAT THEY SERVE A PURPOSE. AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS PROBABLY HAS SERVED ITS PURPOSE FOR WHAT IT WAS INTENDED TO DO. BUT THE LAST THING I WANT US TO DO IS WEAPONIZE THESE TOOLS AGAINST GOOD OPERATORS AND BUSINESS OWNERS WHO ARE WILLING TO MAKE CONCESSIONS, WHICH I KNOW THAT THIS OPERATOR HAS. I HAVE VISITED MYSELF AS WELL. I'VE SEEN SOME OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO MAKE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DATA AND THE LANGUAGE IN THE PD, IT SAYS THAT WE SHALL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION FIVE VERY SPECIFIC POINTS IN WHICH WE DON'T HAVE ANY DATA TO SUPPORT HERE TODAY TO GO WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION. I THINK IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE AND A BAD PRECEDENT FOR US TO SET FOR OUR LOCAL BUSINESS OWNERS TO SEE THAT WE CAN, AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT PULL THE PLUG FROM THEIR BUSINESS MODEL JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE THEIR BUSINESS MODEL. AND I THINK WHEN WE LOOK AT SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE APPROVED HERE RECENTLY, JUST LIKE ONE OF THEIR NEIGHBORS IS VOODOO DONUTS, I REMEMBER A DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD WHEN APPROVING THEM FOR A LATE NIGHT OPERATOR, WE HAVE A THRIVING ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT HERE THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING WHAT WE CAN TO SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES TO SUCCEED. BECAUSE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE OTHER BUSINESSES THAT DON'T HAVE ANY FOOT TRAFFIC IF WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW FOR THIS TO BE A SLIPPERY SLOPE TRICKLE DOWN TO OTHER BUSINESSES IN GREENVILLE THAT HAVEN'T SHOWN TO BE A BAD OPERATOR. I THINK THIS IS A VERY BAD USE OF OUR TIME AND TOOLS, AND FOR THAT I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO DENY CPC. I SEE THAT THAT'S YOUR TIME. SO CAN YOU JUST ANSWER THAT ONE QUESTION HERE? YEAH. HE CAN. I WAS GOING TO LET YOU TRY TO WRAP UP YOUR QUESTION. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. YES. THANK YOU FOR THOSE QUESTIONS. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. WHAT I WILL SAY ABOUT THIS ESTABLISHMENT FOR CODE COMPLIANCE IS WE HAVE ISSUED ZERO CITATIONS FROM OUR NIGHT TIME ENTERTAINMENT TEAM AT THIS VENUE. WE HAVE BEEN OUT ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS OF NOISE, BUT HAVE ISSUED ONLY TWO NOTICES OF VIOLATIONS SINCE DECEMBER OF 2021 AND JANUARY OF 2022, BOTH FOR NOISE, NO SUBSEQUENT NOTICES OF VIOLATION AND NO CITATIONS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MILLIE IS A NIGHTCLUB THAT OPERATES IN LOWER GREENVILLE AVENUE. AS A RESULT OF A LARGE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS FROM CONSTITUENTS WHO LIVE IN DIRECT PROXIMITY TO THIS CLUB, THE PLAN COMMISSION INITIATED THE REPEAL OF THEIR LATE HOURS SUB CPC AND STAFF, BOTH RECOMMENDED UNANIMOUSLY IN THE CASE OF CPC, FOR THE REPEAL OF THIS SUB. AS A RESULT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THIS CLUB, TWO NEIGHBORS HAVE MOVED FROM THEIR HOMES DUE TO THE NOISE AND OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO THIS BAR. THERE HAVE BEEN COMPLAINTS OF LONG QUEUING ON GREENVILLE DUE TO THE LINE OUT THE DOOR, AND ROUTINE BUS DROP OFFS OF PATRONS AT THIS ESTABLISHMENT. THIS CREATES A NOISY, BLOCKED SIDEWALK. THIS IS THE DISTRICT'S ONLY AUTO RENEWING SHOP, WHICH WAS GIVEN TO THE PREVIOUS [03:00:07] BUSINESS UNDER DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP AND CONCEPT. THERE ARE NO OTHER AUTO RENEWING SUBS IN THIS DISTRICT FOR A REASON, AND THAT IS TO AND IT IS TIME TO ELIMINATE THIS ONE. THAT IS AN IMPORTANT TOOL WHICH I WANT TO EMPHASIZE ONLY REGULATES LATE NIGHT HOURS FROM THE HOURS OF 12 UNTIL 2 A.M.. AND SO THE REPEAL OF THIS SUP DOES NOT PUT THIS BUSINESS OUT OF BUSINESS. IT MERELY RESTRICTS THEIR HOURS SO THAT THEY HAVE TO SUSPEND OPERATIONS AT MIDNIGHT INSTEAD OF 2 A.M.. NOW, I WILL NOTE THAT THERE IS SOME BALLOT CONFUSION AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS TO THE BALLOTS. THE REPORT BY STAFF OF 27 OPPOSED TO THE REPEAL VERSUS TWO IN FAVOR, IS THE RESULT OF CONFUSION OF A DOUBLE NEGATIVE. AND INDEED I HAVE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM THE RESIDENT, THOMAS KEELING OF 1910 HOPE STREET, WHICH IS THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY BEHIND IT, WHO SAYS THAT THEY'RE 16 VOTES WERE INTENDED TO SUPPORT THE REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT, AND IT WAS ERROR TO CAUSE THEIR VOTES TO BE INCORRECTLY COUNTED ACCORDING TO THEIR ACTUAL WISHES. AND THAT IS AN ABSOLUTE TRAVESTY. I'M QUOTING I HAVE BEEN WORKING AND ORGANIZING OUR COMMUNITY, WHO HAS SUFFERED THROUGH THE FALLOUT OF THE ABUSE OF THIS PERMIT FOR SOME TIME, AND I IMPLORE YOU TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE TWO TRUE WISHES OF THE RESIDENTS WHO ARE SOME OF THE MOST IMMEDIATE IN PROXIMITY AND WHO'VE HAD TO SUFFER MOST DIRECTLY FROM IT. IN ADDITION, CONTRARY TO WHAT THE APPLICANT SAID, THERE IS ALSO ORGANIZED NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION. YOU HAVE ALL RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM MICHAEL NORTHROP REPRESENTING THE BELMONT ADDITION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHO SAYS THAT THEY ARE OPPOSED TO THE CONTINUED OPERATION FOR THE LATE NIGHT HOURS. BUT THIS IS NOT ABOUT SHUTTING DOWN A BUSINESS ON GREENVILLE. IT IS ABOUT FAIRNESS, ACCOUNTABILITY AND ENSURING THAT OUR SUP PROCESS REFLECTS ACTUAL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACT. THE AUTO RENEWING PERMIT IS AN OUTLIER AND IT HAS CAUSED REAL PROBLEMS. THE PURPOSE OF HAVING A TERMINATION DATE ON AN SUP IS TO MAKE THE OPERATOR AND THE OWNER ACCOUNTABLE TO THE RESIDENTS THAT THEY ARE IN PROXIMITY TO. IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE THREAT THAT THAT CAN BE WITHDRAWN FOR BAD OPERATION, THEN THEY WILL CONTINUE OPERATING IN THE SAME FASHION. AND SO FOR THIS MOTION TO INCLUDE AN AUTO RENEWAL OPTION IS VERY AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT WILL JUST PERPETUATE THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY HAVE HAD TO PUT UP WITH FOR YEARS NOW. SO AT THIS POINT, I WOULD REGISTER MY OPPOSITION TO THIS MOTION. IF YOU ARE GOING TO CONSIDER ALLOWING A PERMIT TO CONTINUE, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IT BE FOR A SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME ONE YEAR AND NOT BE AUTOMATICALLY RENEWED SO THAT THE PLAN COMMISSION, WHICH IS BEST POSITIONED TO MONITOR AND ENFORCE THE SUP REQUIREMENT, CAN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RENEW THE LATE NIGHT PERMIT UPON APPLICATION AND NOT AUTOMATICALLY. THANK YOU. MISS BLAIR. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. ITEM Z ONE. MISS DOCTOR EUDORA, CAN I ASK YOU A FEW MORE QUESTIONS? I. ANDREA? YES. MY APOLOGIES. YES. CAN YOU PLEASE HELP US UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS OF AUTO RENEWALS AND AS WELL AS THE PROCESS OF WHEN WHAT WE NEED TO DO WHEN WE HAVE A REQUEST THAT HAS AUTO RENEWALS AND WE HAVE OPPOSITION TO THAT AUTO RENEWAL PROCESS. YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. YES. AUTOMATIC RENEWAL I KNOW IT'S COUNTERINTUITIVE IS NOT AUTOMATICALLY RENEWED, JUST NOTHING. IF THE THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO SUBMIT WITHIN A CERTAIN WINDOW TO STILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE AUTOMATIC RENEWAL IF THEY SUBMIT WITHIN A CERTAIN [03:05:09] WINDOW, WE START THE REVIEW. WE CHECK FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. THE CODE SAYS THAT IF WE FIND NONCOMPLIANCE, WE AUTOMATICALLY MUST SCHEDULE IT FOR CPC CONSIDERATION. AFTER WE'VE DONE OUR COMPLIANCE CHECK, WE SEND NOTIFICATION LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS TO 100FT WITHIN THE AREA OF REQUEST. IF WE RECEIVED OPPOSITION TO THE RENEWAL, THAT'S 20%. IT AUTOMATICALLY IS SCHEDULED FOR CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL. AND CITY COUNCIL. BUT AGAIN, IF THEY ARE STILL COMPLIANT AND IF THEY DO NOT HAVE OPPOSITION, STAFF WILL AUTOMATICALLY RENEW THE THE REQUEST. SO IF IF YOU GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS OR IF YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS, BUSINESSES OR WHOEVER WITHIN THAT, THAT THAT NOTIFICATION AREA, THAT OBJECT, WHAT IS THAT NUMBER? HOW MANY HAVE TO OBJECT BEFORE IT HAS TO COME? BEFORE CPC, IT'S 20% OF THE AREA OF NOTIFICATION. SO IF 20% OF THE AREA OF NOTIFICATION SAYS, I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS THAT HAS AN SUP THAT HAS AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, THEY MUST COME TO CPC AND THEN TO CITY COUNCIL, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. YES. DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY DENY THEIR ABILITY TO HAVE AUTOMATIC RENEWALS IN THE FUTURE? NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT. THAT AUTOMATICALLY PLACES THEM ON THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION, AND CPC AND CITY COUNCIL MAY MAKE ANY MOTION THEY WISH TO APPROVE, TO DENY, TO APPROVE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD TO ADD AUTO RENEWALS BACK ON. IT'S UP TO COUNCIL TO TAKE ACTION. SO WITH THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST THAT THEY DIDN'T GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, IS THAT NOT CORRECT? THEY DID GO THROUGH THE PROCESS EVERY TIME. IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, CITY PLAN COMMISSION AUTHORIZED A HEARING TO RECONSIDER THE SWAP. WHILE THE SWAP WERE STILL ACTIVE. SO WHAT I WAS SAYING, THEY DID NOT GO THROUGH THE AUTOMATIC RENEWAL PROCESS BECAUSE INSTEAD, CPC ASKED FOR AN AUTHORIZED HEARING TO REVOKE THEIR THEIR SWAP. CORRECT. CPC INITIATED A TIMING ISSUE. CPC INITIATED THIS HEARING IN JULY 2024. THEIR AUTOMATIC THEIR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL TIME FRAME COMES IN AUGUST OF THIS YEAR AND THEY HAVE LIKE BETWEEN 90 AND 120 DAYS BEFORE TO APPLY AND THEY DID APPLY FOR THEIR AUTO RENEWAL. SO CURRENTLY WE HAVE TWO STAGGERED ACTIONS. ONE IS THE CPC AUTHORIZED HEARING. AND THEN THEY SUBMITTED FOR THEIR AUTO RENEWAL THAT IS WAITING ON THE SHELF. WE WANTED TO SEE WHAT THE OUTCOME IS BECAUSE IF THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN REPEALED, LIKE WE CANNOT PROCESS THE AUTO RENEWAL. GREAT. SO THEN THE THE NEXT THING IS THE TIMELINE IN WHICH THE BUILDINGS WERE BUILT. IF I'M CORRECT. DID I HEAR THAT THE THE BUILDINGS BEHIND IT WAS BUILT AFTER THE BUILDING THAT HOUSES MILLIE'S WAS BUILT. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. THERE HAS BEEN AN ESTABLISHMENT AT THIS LOCATION, A BAR LOUNGE. IT WAS CALLED DIFFERENTLY DEPENDING ON THE CODE SINCE 1954. THE SUP WAS FIRST GRANTED IN 2011 ONLY BECAUSE WHEN THE WHEN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WAS CREATED, IT CREATED THIS USE AND INSTEAD OF IT MADE THEM, IT WOULD HAVE MADE THEM IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN THEIR RIGHTS AWAY. SO THEREFORE THEY GOT AN SUP TO OPERATE AFTER MIDNIGHT. BUT THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING WITHOUT RESTRICTED HOURS SINCE 1954, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, 1954. YES. AND THE BUILDINGS BEHIND IT WAS BUILT IN 2008. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. PER DECADE. AND SO NORMALLY WHEN WE HAVE ANY TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT, IT HAS A SETBACK. HOW MUCH OF A SETBACK DOES MILLIE HAVE OPPOSED TO THE BUILDING THAT WAS BUILT IN 2008? NO SETBACK. THOSE TO IN IN THE BACK. THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION IS ALSO 100% LOT COVERAGE, THE SAME AS THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT WAS BUILT WAY, WAY BACK. SO THE THERE IS LIKE PROBABLY A FEET OR TWO BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS. IS THAT A NORMAL OCCURRENCE? NOT REALLY. WE MAY HAVE THAT OCCURRENCE IN DOWNTOWN IN AREAS THAT WERE BUILT TO 100% LOT COVERAGE. NOT ALWAYS, BUT THIS IS ALSO AN OLDER PART OF THE TOWN WHERE THERE WAS BUILT TO DIFFERENT STANDARDS. [03:10:08] SO IF WE DID NOT HAVE BUILDINGS BUILT WITH THE WITH AT 100% LOT COVERAGE, WE WOULD THEN NOW HAVE SOME BUFFERING THAT WE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT IN OR MAYBE SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT IN. TO ELIMINATE THIS TYPE OF CONTENTIOUS. YOU KNOW, I WAS THINKING ABOUT THAT LAST NIGHT. WE DO HAVE SOME FOR ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENTS BECAUSE AS I SAID, THIS ONE IS VERY, VERY DIFFERENT THAT IT HAS AN SOP FOR LATE HOURS. BUT WE DO HAVE SOPS FOR ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENTS FOR FIRST FLOOR OF A OF A MULTIFAMILY OR A MIXED USE BUILDING. SO THEY ACTUALLY DO SHARE THE ROOF, RIGHT? I THINK THE USES CAN COEXIST AS LONG AS THEY ABIDE BY THE CONDITIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. SOUPS ARE A GREAT TOOL. SOUPS ARE NEEDED. AND I KNOW THAT I HAVE MY SHARE OF VENUES THAT ARE BAD OPERATORS, AND SOUPS ARE, AGAIN, A GOOD TOOL TO HAVE. WE'RE THE NINTH LARGEST CITY IN AMERICA. WE HAVE TO HAVE A THRIVING, SAFE NIGHTTIME ECONOMY. AND I WANT TO THANK THE CITY MANAGER AND ROSA FOR THE WORK THEY'VE DONE TO CREATE THE NEW NIGHTTIME MANAGER ROLE IN ADDRESSING ISSUES AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE SUCCESSFUL IN IN BEING A VIBRANT CITY. I DO HAVE AN AMENDMENT OR PERHAPS THE THE MOTION MAKER CAN ACCEPT THIS. AND THAT IS TO THE ADDING THE CONDITION OF USE OF SUBWOOFER SPEAKER IS PROHIBITED. MAYOR, MAY I ADDRESS COUNCILMEMBER BAZALDUA WILL REPLY. HE'S ON VIRTUALLY THAT. I WOULD ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THAT. BEING IN AS LONG AS THE SECOND WOULD TAKE IT IN. THE MAYOR IS OKAY WITH US ADDING SECOND MOTION. THANK YOU. THERE IS A MOTION. YOU'VE MADE A MOTION, AND THERE'S A SECOND. SO YOU'RE RECOGNIZED ON YOUR MOTION FOR. THANK YOU. WHAT I'M HEARING FROM SOME OF THE OPPOSITION, FROM SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS IS THAT SOUND IS THE CONCERN, NOT NECESSARILY CRIME. AND SO I THINK THAT THIS WILL MITIGATE THE THE NOISE THAT'S COMING FROM THE VENUE AND IN GOOD FAITH FROM THE OPERATOR. I THINK THAT WE CAN COEXIST THIS ESTABLISHMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY MEMBERS. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM? OKAY, ANDREA. SO BASED ON EVERYTHING I'VE HEARD ONE, THE REVOCATION WAS STARTED BEFORE THE RENEWAL, ABOUT TWO MONTHS BEFORE THE RENEWAL. OH, ABOUT A YEAR AND TWO MONTHS. IT WAS IN 2024 WHEN THE REVOCATION STARTED. WHEN THE SUP RECONSIDERATION. THAT'S HOW WE CALL IT. OKAY. BUT AS IT RELATES TO THE ANNUAL RENEWAL THAT WOULD HAVE STARTED RIGHT ABOUT NOW. CORRECT. IT WOULD HAVE STARTED MARCH APRIL THIS YEAR. FAIR ENOUGH. OKAY. AND THEN. DURING THAT PROCESS. AND THANK YOU. I ALMOST SAID COMMISSIONER BLAIR. LORI BLAIR. COUNCILWOMAN BLAIR. DURING THAT PROCESS, THEY Y'ALL YOU SAID YOU SEND OUT THOSE NOTICES, RIGHT? AND IN THE PREVIOUS NOTICES, DID YOU DID WAS THERE ANY OPPOSITION OR WAS THERE WHAT YOU SAID 20%. YES. AND IT IS A LITTLE BIT COUNTERINTUITIVE. THAT'S WHY WE REDID THE COUNT. BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE COUNTED WAS THE OPPOSITION TO CPC'S RECOMMENDATION TO REPEAL, NOT THE OPPOSITION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT. AND WHERE THERE WAS A NOTE BY WHOMEVER RETURNED THEIR REPLY FORMS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THEY OPPOSED THE REPEAL. WE COUNTED AS THE OPPOSITION TO THE REPEAL. BUT YOU SEE, IT'S IN REVERSE. THEY ACTUALLY SUPPORT THE SUP TO STAY. THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. OKAY. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION, AND THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK AGAINST STAFF OR ANYTHING. I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU HAVE ALL OF THESE THINGS WITH THE POLICE REPORTS AND ALL OF THESE CODE, ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT ARE POSITIVE, WHY WOULD WE THEN SUPPORT THE REPEAL? YEAH, I TOLD YOU OUR OUR LOOK AND THAT'S WHAT WE CODED IN THE STAFF REPORT WAS ONLY BECAUSE OF THE ADJACENCY WITH THE WITH THE [03:15:06] RESIDENTIAL IN THE BACK. AND I KEEP ON ADDING THIS. I UNDERSTAND THE THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THEN. HOWEVER THE CONDITION ON THE GROUND IS STILL THE SAME. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, COLLEAGUES, I'LL. I'LL SAY I HAD A BIRTHDAY PARTY I WENT TO AROUND THERE, SO I DECIDED TO START. AND IF YOU KNOW ME, I DON'T GET OUT MUCH. SO I BUT I SAW IT OVER THERE, AND I DECIDED TO STOP BECAUSE I WAS DRIVING BY THERE. SO I ACTUALLY WENT TO THE SPOT. THEY DIDN'T KNOW I WAS COMING. I ACTUALLY WENT IN, HAD A GLASS OF WINE DOWNSTAIRS AND THEN WENT UPSTAIRS JUST TO SEE WHAT THE CROWD WAS LIKE, GET A FEEL FOR IT AND ALL OF THAT. PROBABLY STAYED ALL OF MAYBE TEN, 15 MINUTES JUST SO I COULD SEE. I WANTED TO HEAR WHAT IT SOUNDED LIKE ON THE INSIDE. AND THEN I WENT DOWN THAT ALLEY TO WHERE THAT THE PICTURES Y'ALL SEEN AT THE RESIDENCE, SO I COULD SEE IF I COULD ACTUALLY HEAR THE MUSIC FROM THE OUTSIDE. AND WHEN I WAS OUT THERE, THE ONLY MUSIC I HEARD WAS FROM THE RESTAURANTS THAT WERE ON THE SIDEWALK NEXT DOOR. SO WHATEVER THEY'VE DONE TO FIX THE SOUND, I THINK THEY HAD AN ENGINEER COME IN SO THE DJ CAN'T TURN THE MUSIC UP. THEY HAVE A DECIBEL MEASURE, AND THEY HAVE ALL THESE PADS AND EVERYTHING UP THERE. I SAW ALL OF THOSE THINGS WHILE I WAS UP THERE, AND IT SOUNDED VERY LOUD WHEN IT WAS IN THERE. AND AGAIN, IF YOU KNOW ME, I'D RATHER BE SOMEWHERE QUIET. SO I LISTENED TO HOW IT SOUNDED ON THE INSIDE, LOOKED AT THE THE CROWD AGAIN, NOT FROM A JUDGMENTAL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT JUST WANTED TO SEE. IT WAS A VERY DIVERSE CROWD, VERY YOUNG CROWD MAYBE LOOKED LIKE SOME COLLEGE STUDENTS. I DON'T KNOW, I'M OLD NOW, BUT BUT NEVERTHELESS, I ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO SEE WHAT IT WAS. AND I WENT AND EVERYTHING THAT THEY'RE SAYING ABOUT THE SOUND AND ALL OF THAT, I DID NOT HEAR ANY OF THAT FROM THE ALLEY. THERE WAS A LINE OUTSIDE DOWN THE SIDEWALK. BUT AGAIN, I LIKEN THAT TO IT WAS AGAIN, YOU HAD A VALET STAND RIGHT NEXT DOOR. YOU HAD A RESTAURANT ON THE SIDEWALK RIGHT THERE AND WITH EATING ON THE OUTSIDE. SO IT WAS A LOT OF ACTIVITY. MY POINT IS, WHATEVER THEY'VE DONE TO GO IN AND CORRECT THESE ITEMS. I PERSONALLY WITNESSED THAT IT WAS FIXED. SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF CONTINUING ALLOWING THIS BUSINESS CONTINUE OPERATING. BECAUSE OF THAT, THEY'VE TALKED TO THE RESIDENTS, AND THEN WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF THEM THAT LIVE IN THOSE UNITS DIRECTLY BEHIND THIS PLACE THAT ACTUALLY SHOWED UP TO SPEAK. AND AGAIN, I WENT IN THAT ALLEY SO I COULD LISTEN. I COULD NOT HEAR ANY MUSIC IN THAT ALLEY COMING FROM THAT ESTABLISHMENT. SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I THINK THEY'VE DONE MADE EXTREME EFFORTS TO REACH OUT TO THE COMMUNITY. THEY'VE DONE EXTREME EFFORTS TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE COMPLAINTS, AND THEY'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF ADDRESSING ALL OF THOSE COMPLAINTS, IN MY OPINION. SO FOR THAT REASON, I WILL BE I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW TO SAY IT ANYMORE. BUT I SUPPORT THIS THIS ORGANIZATION, HOW THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING AND THE CHANGES THEY'VE BEEN MAKING. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU. BEFORE MY TIME BEGINS, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY. STATE YOUR INQUIRY. SO, I BELIEVE ARE WE ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION? IS, IS IT IN ORDER TO HAVE ANOTHER AMENDMENT? I DON'T THINK WE ARE. THERE'S ONLY ONE AMENDMENT. ONLY ONE. THEN I'D LIKE TO MAKE A NEW MOTION. AND THE MOTION IS TO ISSUE A ONE YEAR SUP WITH NO RENEWAL. NO AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, I APOLOGIZE. OKAY, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. SO NOW WE ARE ON YOUR MOTION, YOUR AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. SO YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. I THINK IF WE GO DOWN THE LIST OF PLACES TO, LIKE PARTY IN DALLAS AND WE THINK ABOUT DEEP ELLUM AND UPTOWN AND WE THINK ABOUT THE CEDARS AND WE THINK ABOUT DOWNTOWN AND TRINITY GROVES AND BISHOP ARTS, THE ONE THAT'S MISSING IS GREENVILLE AVENUE. SO THIS ISN'T AN AREA THAT IS SUBURBAN IN NATURE, AND IT WOULD BE REALLY OUT OF PLACE TO HAVE A BAR. IT'S LIKE WHAT IT'S KNOWN FOR. LIKE THAT'S WHERE YOU GO TO HAVE A PARTY AND HAVE FUN. SO I'M GLAD THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING THAT KIND OF SPACE FOR PEOPLE. AND I THINK IF I LIVED BEHIND GREENVILLE AVENUE, I WOULD EXPECT THERE TO BE BARS AND PARTIES HAPPENING. NOT SO MUCH IN DISTRICT 12. JUST SAYING. SO WE HAVE AN INTERESTING TIMING OF THINGS THAT IF WE DO A ONE YEAR AND IT HAS TO COME BACK IN ONE YEAR. WE'RE ALL STILL HERE. LIKE WE ALL KNOW THE SITUATION. IT'S NOT THAT THE COUNCIL WILL CHANGE OVER, DYNAMICS WILL CHANGE AND THERE'S ACCOUNTABILITY BECAUSE WE'LL NOW KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH DPD, WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH CODE. AND IF IT'S ALL GOOD, WELL, MAYBE YOU ISSUE TWO YEARS, BUT IF THE CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE, IT'S GOING TO COME BACK CLEAN AND THEN YOU CAN GO FORWARD. BUT CLEARLY THERE ARE RESIDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN VERY UNHAPPY WITH THE SITUATION AND THE SITUATION HAS CHANGED. [03:20:01] BUT THIS PROVIDES BOTH THE ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE RESIDENTS BUT ALSO LETS THE BUSINESS OPERATE AS INTENDED. SO THAT'S WHY I AM MAKING THIS MOTION AND I HOPE YOU WILL CONSIDER IT. THANK YOU. MISS BLAIR. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. MAY I ASK DOCTOR, TO COME BACK UP, PLEASE? ON A ONE YEAR SUV WITH NO AUTOMATIC RENEWALS. IF WE WERE TO GRANT ONE TODAY FOR ONE YEAR, WHEN WOULD THEY HAVE TO APPLY FOR A RENEWAL? TECHNICALLY, THE SUV EXPIRES IN A YEAR. IT IS BETTER FOR THEM TO NEVER EVEN HAVE AN OPEN APPLICATION ON AN EXPIRING SUV. SO I DON'T KNOW, SIX MONTHS? I WOULD SAY IT MAY BE THE PROCESS DOESN'T TAKE AS LONG, BUT HAS TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS. THINGS CAN HAPPEN POSTPONEMENTS, HOLDOVERS. SO YOU NEVER KNOW. SO BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IN ORDER TO HAVE A ONE YEAR SUV, YOU'D ONLY GET SIX MONTHS WORTH OF WORTH OF DATA BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE TO APPLY WITHIN SIX MONTHS PRIOR TO IT BEING RENEWED. CORRECT? YES. SO WHAT THE STANDARD RENEWAL PROCESS BE TWO YEARS SO THAT WE DO HAVE SOME TRUE INFORMATION, DATA AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. AND DO WE NORMALLY DO AN 18 MONTH SUP. THAT IS A WONDERFUL QUESTION. I'M SO HAPPY. I LOOKED AT THE SUPS IN LOWER GREENVILLE LAST NIGHT. I CANNOT TELL YOU. SO I FOUND LIKE 11 SUBS FOR THIS TYPE OF USE OR IN GENERAL, A LOT OF THEM. MOST OF THEM ARE FIVE YEARS, THREE YEARS, THREE YEARS. ONE, I FOUND THE PERMANENT ONE. TWO YEARS. SO I WOULD SAY ONLY TWO OF THEM HAVE TWO YEARS. MOST OF MOST OF THEM HAVE 3 TO 5 YEARS. THIS ONE HAS AUTO RENEWALS AS WELL. AND I FOUND ONE THAT'S PERMANENT. IT'S IT'S UP TO THE BODY TO CONSIDER. I WOULD SAY ALSO, IF WE ARE TO GO DOWN THAT PATH, USUALLY WE GIVE ONE YEAR OR 18 MONTHS TO BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY NOT BUSINESSES, LAND USES THAT ARE NOT THAT EVOLVED. THE AREA AROUND THEM EVOLVED AND IT'S BETTER FOR THEM TO RELOCATE. WE'VE DONE THAT WITH SOME INDUSTRIAL USES, FOR INSTANCE. LIKE LIKE AS A WARNING. SO YOU CAN WIN YOUR OPERATION OUT. IN RECENT PAST, I REMEMBER WE DID A ONE YEAR SWAP FOR, FOR FOR A LATE HOURS IN, IN GREENVILLE, AND NOW WE INSTATED IT WITH LIKE, I THINK THREE, 3 OR 5 YEARS. SO AND SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, YOU ONLY HAVE ONE THAT WE'VE EVER DONE IN ON GREENVILLE. AND THEY MADE CHANGES AND THEY, THEY AND NOW THEY HAVE AN SOP FOR THREE YEARS. AND WITH THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS, THEY'VE ALREADY MADE THE CHANGES THAT WERE REQUESTING. AND, AND THEY HAVE ALREADY SAID THAT THEY WOULD CONSIDER THE DEED RESTRICTION ON THEIR SWAP CONDITIONS. I HAD TO GET THEM RIGHT. SNP CONDITIONS TO SAY NO SUBWOOFERS IN THE BUILDING. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S I UNDERSTAND THAT WAS THE PRIOR MOTION. YES. SO AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING FOR ONE YEAR SNP, WE USE THEM MORE SO FOR TYPE OF LAND USES THAT ARE IN CHANGING AREAS AND THAT THAT PARTICULAR USE IS TRYING TO MOVE OUT. CORRECT. THAT IS VERY CORRECT. YOU PUT IT BEAUTIFULLY. OKAY. FOR THOSE REASONS, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT A ONE YEAR SNP. THIS IS AS DOCTOR UDARA HAS JUST SAID, IN LOWER GREENVILLE. LOWER GREENVILLE IS AN AREA FOR ENTERTAINMENT. MOST OF THE SHOPS WITHIN LOWER GREENVILLE ARE THREE YEAR FIVE YEARS. VERY FEW, IF ANY ARE EVEN NOTED TO BE TWO YEARS. SO I CAN'T I THIS WOULD BE A ADVERSARIAL TYPE OF SUP FOR THIS ONE PARTICULAR BUSINESS AND NOT A NOT A TIMELINE THAT WE WOULD USE CONSISTENTLY FOR THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS AT THIS, AT THIS TYPE OF, IN THIS AREA. I DO NOT WANT TO BE A COMMISSION OR COUNCIL THAT WEAPONIZES. I CAN'T GET IT RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE I AM. I DON'T WANT TO BE A COUNCIL. THAT WEAPONIZES OUR TOOLS, BUT USES OUR TOOLS IN ORDER TO BETTER OUR [03:25:04] CITY AND THE AREAS IN WHICH WE SERVE. SO FOR THAT PARTICULAR REASON, I WOULD GO BACK TO TWO YEARS WITH TWO YEARS AUTOMATIC RENEWALS OR AND OR THREE YEARS WITH A PERM WITHOUT AUTOMATIC RENEWALS BECAUSE THEY'VE DONE WHAT WE'VE ASKED THEM TO DO. THEN CAN I CAN I MAKE AN AMENDMENT? NO. WELL, I MEAN, I'M NOT IT'S NOT PERSONAL. IT'S JUST WE HAVE A RULE AGAINST HAVING MORE THAN TWO ON THE FLOOR AT A TIME. YEAH. NO PROBLEM. IT'S IT'S JUST TO KEEP IT. IT'S HARD ENOUGH TO TRACK IT WITH TWO. MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. MAYOR, I WILL SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. I THINK THE PRINCIPLE ISSUE HERE IS THE AUTO RENEWALS. NOT SO MUCH THE TIME OF THE RENEWAL OF THE SUP, ALTHOUGH THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER OCCASIONS WHERE WE HAVE GRANTED ON THE PLAN COMMISSION JUST A ONE YEAR RENEWAL, WHERE THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP OR THERE HAVE BEEN MANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT A BUSINESS. AND SO TO LOOK AT JUST WHAT THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF SUP IS NOW ON. SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES THAT OPERATE AT LATE HOURS, AND SUP IS NOT COMPARING APPLES WITH ORANGES. THOSE ARE ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN THERE AND HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLIED WITH CITY CODES AND WITH THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD SENSIBILITIES, AND SO THEY GET A LONGER TIME PERIOD. BUT FOR THOSE THAT HAVE HAD A HISTORY OF NOISE COMPLAINTS AND OTHER THINGS, THAT IS NOT UNCOMMON TO SHORTEN THE LENGTH OF THE SUP. BUT I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE AUTO RENEWAL ISSUE. THE STAFF TALKED ABOUT THERE IS A 20% THRESHOLD FOR COMPLAINTS IN THE EVENT OF AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, TO BRING IT BACK TO PUBLIC HEARING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL. BUT WHAT THEY DIDN'T SAY WAS THAT THAT IS 20% OF THE LAND AREA WITHIN THE NOTICE AREA, NOT RESIDENTS WITHIN THE NOTICE AREA. AND SO GIVEN THE CONFIGURATION OF LOWER GREENVILLE, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE RESIDENTS WHO WERE AFFECTED BY THE LATE NIGHT OPERATIONS TO MUSTER THAT 20%, BECAUSE MOST OF THAT PROPERTY IN THE NOTICE AREA IS IN THE BUSINESS STRIP, AND THOSE ARE BUSINESS OWNERS THAT SHUT DOWN IN MANY CASES BEFORE MIDNIGHT AND ARE NOT AFFECTED BY THE NOISE. BUT THIS IS THE ONLY AUTO RENEWAL SHOP ON LOWER GREENVILLE, AND IT JUST MAKES SENSE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE OTHERS THAT HAVE TO SUBMIT TO PUBLIC HEARING RENEWAL FOR THEIR SUPS ON A 2 OR 3 YEAR BASIS, WHATEVER THE DURATION OF IT IS. THAT'S THE ACCOUNTABILITY THAT IS BUILT INTO THE SYSTEM. AND WE LOSE THAT IN THIS CASE, IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE OF THE CONFIGURATION OF THE LAND. IF THEY HAVE TO MUSTER 20% OPPOSITION TO BRING IT BACK TO A PUBLIC HEARING AND ENSURE THAT ACCOUNTABILITY. SO I AM GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS MOTION AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT PROVIDES FOR A CONTINUANCE OF THEIR LATE NIGHT OPERATIONS, BUT SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND NOT THE AUTOMATIC RENEWAL. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO YOUR AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I AM NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. I DO THINK THAT PERHAPS WE CAN PUT IN A TIME PERIOD, BUT A YEAR IS JUST UNFAIR. A YEAR IS IS TOO SOON. THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY INVESTED A SUBSTANTIAL DOLLAR AMOUNT TO BECOME COMPLIANT AND TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. AND I WANT TO GIVE THE BUSINESS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECOVER THOSE INVESTMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE. AND TO THIS DATE, THE AGAIN, THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO BE A GOOD PARTNER. THERE. BUT I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT A ONE YEAR PERIOD IS IS SUITABLE IN THIS INSTANCE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MAYOR, MAY I BE RECOGNIZED? FOR WHAT PURPOSE? TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND RESTATE IT. WITHDRAW IT AND RESTATE IT. OKAY. TO JUST RESTATE IT, DO YOU WANT TO JUST CLARIFY WHAT IT WHAT IT DOES, WHAT IT SAYS? IS ANYBODY UNCLEAR ON WHAT IT SAYS? OKAY, THEN I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE YOU FOR THAT PURPOSE AT THIS TIME. WHAT IF I WAS GOING TO CHANGE MY MOTION? WELL, WE'RE DEFINITELY NOT RECOGNIZING YOU TO CHANGE YOUR MOTION. THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER AMENDMENT. SO MR. WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. MAYOR, AND I'M I'M ACTUALLY WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM ON THIS. [03:30:01] I THINK THAT I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING THAT MR. RIDLEY GAVE FOR WANTING TO KIND OF HAVE EVERYBODY WORKING UNDER THE SAME UMBRELLA OF HAVING SURETY, OF HAVING AN SVP AND HAVING A TIMELINE THAT, THAT YOU KNOW, THERE IS A REVIEW PERIOD. YOU KNOW, WE BENEFIT FROM THAT IN BISHOP ARTS WITH, WITH OUR OPERATORS BEING ABLE TO YOU KNOW, HAVE A REVIEW PERIOD FOR, FOR THEIR HOURS, THEIR OPERATIONS. AND EVERYBODY'S AWARE OF IT. AND THERE'S A TIMELINE THEY CAN FOLLOW. WE KNOW FROM BEING UP HERE AND WATCHING ALL OF THE ZONING CASES THAT IF YOU HAVE A ONE YEAR SVP, YOU'RE GOING TO BE FILING IN 4 OR 5 MONTHS TO GET THROUGH THE PROCESS ON TIME. SO THEY WOULD LITERALLY HAVE TO BE FILING RIGHT NOW FOR RENEWING THEIR SVP. SO I CAN'T SUPPORT ONE YEAR. I COULD SUPPORT A LONGER TERM PERIOD. THANK YOU. OKAY. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE'RE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. LISTENING TO THE CONVERSATION AROUND THE HORSESHOE, LISTENING TO MY COLLEAGUE COUNCILMAN GRACE, WHO ACTUALLY TOOK THE TIME TO GO OUT THERE, ALSO LISTENING TO CHAD WEST ABOUT THE TIMING OF THE RENEWING OF THE BEING ONE YEAR. I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED. OH. I'M SORRY. OH, I'M SORRY, MR. BAZALDUA. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. ACTUALLY, ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT, I DO APOLOGIZE. I HAD THAT NOTE. NO WORRIES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS FOR SOME OF THE SAME REASONS. I'M GLAD THAT IT WAS COVERED ON. ON HOW HOW MUCH TIME IT WOULD TAKE. BUT I ALSO JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE TALKING HERE. I THINK THAT THE THE SENTIMENT THAT MISS MENDELSON'S MOTION WAS DESCRIBED MAKES SENSE. HOWEVER, THERE'S NO DATA TO SHOW THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM. SO GIVING A SHORTER PERIOD WITH THE NOTION THAT WE WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE THERE, THEY'RE UP TO SPEED THAT I MEAN, THE ONLY THING I EVEN HEARD FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBER WHO IS IS WANTING TO GO WITH THE CPC RECOMMENDATION WAS HE SAID THAT THERE'S NOISE COMPLAINTS, NOISE COMPLAINTS ARE NOWHERE IN THE PD AND IN IN MY OPINION. AND ANDREA, CAN YOU CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHAT IT IS REALLY THAT WE'RE DOING HERE? BECAUSE I THINK IF WE'RE GOING OUTSIDE OF THE LANGUAGE THAT'S ACTUALLY WRITTEN IN THIS CP THAT'S BEEN PRESCRIBED FOR HOW THEY ARE GOING TO BE SCRUTINIZED IT SEEMS AS IF WE'RE GOING AWAY FROM APPROPRIATE USE OF LAND. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TAILOR IT BACK TO ACTUALLY YOU KNOW, ADDRESSING WHAT THE CP IS THERE FOR. AND IF ALL OF THIS WERE TO FAIL OUTRIGHT. I ALSO WANT TO JUST REITERATE, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THEIR AUTO RENEWAL TIME PERIOD NOW? LIKE WHAT IS ALREADY EXISTING? YES. SO AS I SAID, ALL SUPS AND EVERY TYPE OF ZONING STAYS WITH THE LAND, NOT WITH THE OPERATOR. SO WE ALWAYS HAVE TO GO BACK TO IS THIS A GOOD USE OF LAND AT THIS LOCATION? FOR THIS ONE IS A LATE HOUR. SO THE QUESTION IS CAN THIS CAN ANY TYPE OF BUSINESS CAN BE OPEN AT THIS LOCATION AFTER MIDNIGHT? HOWEVER, THIS PD AND THAT'S FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, CPC AND COUNCIL HAS AN ADDITIONAL LAYER OF AUTHORITY BY THE PD TO CONSIDER CITATIONS, CITATIONS, ARRESTS AND VIOLATIONS. NOT CALLS, NOT COMPLAINTS. IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT BECOMES AGAIN AN AN ARREST OR A CITATION. SO I WOULD SAY THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. AND THAT'S UNDER THE PREROGATIVE OF CITY COUNCIL AND CPC TO TO CONSIDER WHEN MAKING A RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS USE OF LAND. AND FURTHERMORE, WE JUST GO BACK TO THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE SUP, THE USE THE SITE PLAN. THE FLOOR AREA HOURS OF OPERATION, FOR INSTANCE, THIS IS SET TO CLOSE AT 2 A.M.. IT'S NOT LATER THAN THAT. OUTDOOR SPEAKERS ARE PROHIBITED. I SAW THEY HAVE A FEW TABLES ON THE SIDEWALK, SO IT HAS TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THE SUP WITH THE CONDITIONS IN THE SUP. IF THIS. AND NOW, SECOND QUESTION, IF THIS MOTION WAS TO FAIL I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE SUP 1879 PER THE CONDITIONS AND THE TIME FRAMES THAT THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW, AND CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE AN APPLICATION IN FOR THE AUTO RENEWAL OF THEIR SUP, THEY UNLESS WE GET 20% OPPOSITION AND WE FIND THEM IN VIOLATION OF THOSE CONDITIONS. [03:35:03] WE WOULD BE ABLE TO APPROVE IT AS AUTOMATIC. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT I AM FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT THAT WAS PUT ON BY MISS MORENO. WE CAN ABSOLUTELY IN MY OPINION, ADD THAT TO BE CODIFIED, TO GIVE SOME SORT OF CLARITY. HOWEVER, I MEAN, I'M NOT TRYING TO REINVENT THE WHEEL HERE. AND IF IT'S BEEN IF IT'S BEEN STATED AND IN MY OPINION, PROVED THAT THE THIS OPERATOR HAS NOT VIOLATED THEN I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT THE MOTIONS WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING SHOULD BE CHANGING THEIR CURRENT, THEIR CURRENT TERMS. IF THAT WERE THE CASE, IT JUST GOES BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION TO FOLLOW CPC'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS PRETTY UNPRECEDENTED. AND IT'S IT'S JUST ARBITRARY AND IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE THAT I DON'T KNOW, WE NEED TO GO DOWN. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT WE'RE UTILIZING THIS TOOL AND THAT IF WE WERE GOING TO BE TAKING AWAY A AN OPERATOR'S ABILITY TO UTILIZE AUTO RENEWAL, IT'S BECAUSE THERE'S SOME DATA TO SUPPORT THAT, THAT THAT THAT'S NOT WARRANTED. THAT'S NOT WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO US WITH THE LANGUAGE OF THE PD AND ANY OF THE DATA SPEAKING, EVEN TO THE DIRECTOR OF CODE I CAN TELL YOU THIS IN 2024, THERE WERE 24 INSPECTIONS DONE BY CODE, ZERO VIOLATIONS. IN 2025, THERE WERE 46 INSPECTIONS DONE BY CODE. STILL NO VIOLATIONS. I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO GO BY DATA TO SUPPORT, NOT THIS NOTION THAT THERE IS A LOT OF COMPLAINTS WHEN CLEARLY A HIGHER THRESHOLD WAS EVEN TRIGGERED TODAY BECAUSE THE BALLOTS DID NOT EVEN RESULT IN THAT NOTION AS WELL. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS ONE YEAR RENEWAL. I HOPE THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO ALLOW FOR THEM TO OPERATE UNDER THE TERMS THAT THEY HAVE NOW, WHICH IS THE UNDERLYING MOTION. AND I AM STILL FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO ADD IN LANGUAGE FOR THE SUBWOOFERS TO BE PROHIBITED. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZE THREE MINUTES NOW ON YOUR MOTION. THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO WITHDRAW THE MOTION AND MAKE A NEW MOTION. HAVING WITHDRAWN IT, THERE'S ROOM FOR THE SECOND. CORRECT. I'M SORRY. YOU'D HAVE TO BE NO OPPOSITION. OTHERWISE YOU'D HAVE TO VOTE ON BEING ON YOU. BEING ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION BECAUSE IT BELONGS TO THE BODY. I UNDERSTAND. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO HER WITHDRAWING HER MOTION? HEARING NONE. IT'S SO ORDERED. SO THE MOTION IS WITHDRAWN. NOW YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO I MOVE THAT WE HAVE A TWO YEAR SUP WITH NO AUTO RENEWALS. SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. I'M JUST MAKING A NOTE WHERE WE ARE. AND YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION. THANK YOU. IT'S CLEAR THE THE BODY IS NOT INTERESTED IN A ONE YEAR. HOWEVER, A TWO YEAR DOES PROVIDE THAT DATA SPAN. I WILL SAY THE MOST ALARMING THING IN THIS CONVERSATION TO ME IS HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET AN SCP. SO WE HAD OUR OUR DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SAY AT LEAST SIX MONTHS IN ADVANCE. WE'VE HEARD OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE SERVED ON PLAN COMMISSIONS SAY AT LEAST EIGHT MONTHS. THIS SHOULD BE VERY ALARMING TO US. THIS IS THE PROBLEM. THAT IS THE PROBLEM FOR OUR ENTIRE CITY, NOT JUST THIS CASE AND CITY MANAGER. I HOPE YOU WILL DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO GET THIS DOWN TO A REASONABLE NUMBER. I THINK A REASONABLE NUMBER, JUST SO YOU KNOW, IS LIKE THREE MONTHS. A 90 DAY TURNAROUND FOR AN SCP SEEMS REASONABLE. SIX MONTHS IS OUTRAGEOUS, FRANKLY, AND I THINK IT'S IMPROVED FROM WHERE IT WAS. SO ALL THAT SAID TWO YEARS, WHICH I THINK IS VERY STANDARD, BUT WITHOUT THE AUTO RENEWAL SO THAT WE CAN HEAR IT. THE LAST THING I JUST WANT TO MENTION IS THAT THERE'S A REASON THE CPC DENIED THIS, RIGHT? IT'S BECAUSE THEY HEARD ALL THESE COMPLAINTS FROM RESIDENTS. IT'S WHY THEY VOTED IT DOWN. AND WHILE OUR OUR CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICE MAY NOT HAVE GIVEN A VIOLATION, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S NOT INTRUDING ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I THINK THAT'S BEEN HAPPENING. IT SOUNDS LIKE PERHAPS THEY'VE SOLVED IT. IF SO, IN TWO YEARS WE'LL KNOW THAT. AND MAYBE THEN YOU ADD AN AUTO RENEWAL, IF YOU LIKE. I WILL ALSO SAY, BECAUSE WE HAVE NEW PEOPLE HERE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT CODE COMPLIANCE AND NOISE. THEY DON'T HAVE SOME MAGIC WAY OF DETERMINING IT. CHRIS, ARE YOU OVER HERE? YOU'RE ONLINE. MENDELSOHN, I HEAR YOU. SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO HOW YOU DETERMINE IF THE NOISE IS TOO LOUD? THIS WAS HEAVILY DISCUSSED WITH SHORT TERM RENTAL, SO THE CODE THAT WE'RE USING TO ENFORCE NOISE IN OUR ENTERTAINMENT AREAS IS CHAPTER [03:40:07] 30 OF DASH FOUR. AND THE LANGUAGE IN THAT CODE IS BASICALLY THE MUSIC AUDIBLE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION. AND SO IF OUR CODE OFFICER CAN STAND AT THE EDGE OF THE VENUE, THE SIDEWALK OR ON THE SIDE OF THE VENUE OR THE ALLEY OF THE VENUE, IF WE CAN HEAR THE AMPLIFIED SPEAKERS FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT, THEN THAT WOULD CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION. BUT IS IT CAN THEY HEAR IT AT ALL, OR IS IT, CAN THEY HEAR IT AND THEY THINK IT'S TOO LOUD? NO. WHAT CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION IS IF THEY CAN HEAR IT AT ALL FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT. SO AUDIBLE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE VENUE. OKAY. AND THERE'S NO MEASUREMENT DEVICE. IS THAT CORRECT? WE DO HAVE A SOUND MEASURE. SOUND METERS THAT WE CAN USE FOR MEASUREMENT DECIBEL READINGS. THAT'S A DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE CODE THAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. CHAPTER 50 1-6 NOISE CODE THAT REQUIRES CERTAIN DECIBEL THRESHOLDS. AND WE HAVE DECIBEL READERS. WE HAVE TO SET UP A MICROPHONE AND A MEASUREMENT TOOL ON A TRIPOD. WE HAVE TO TAKE AN EIGHT MINUTE AMBIENT RECORDING. WE HAVE TO TAKE AN AMBIENT RECORDING, AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK AND TAKE ANOTHER RECORDING. OUTSIDE OF THE AMBIENT READING. WE DON'T USE THAT CODE FOR THIS TYPE OF NOISE ENFORCEMENT JUST BECAUSE OF OF THE HAVING TO HAVE THE AMBIENT READING, AS WELL AS RETURNING A SECOND TIME TO GET THE READING OUTSIDE OF THE AMBIENT. AND SO WE PREFER TO USE CHAPTER FOR FOR ENTERTAINMENT VENUE ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE IT'S A LOT IT'S A LOT EASIER TO ENFORCE, AND IT DOESN'T REQUIRE US TO HAVE THAT AMBIENT READING OR MEASUREMENT TOOL TO ENFORCE IT. SO I'M IMPRESSED. YOU KNOW, ALL THOSE CHAPTERS BY HEART. THAT'S GOOD. HOW MANY NOISE VIOLATIONS HAVE YOU? CITATIONS HAVE YOU ISSUED? DO YOU KNOW THIS YEAR? THIS YEAR? I COULD GET THAT NUMBER IF YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT MEASUREMENT, IF YOU HAVE IT FOR A MONTH OR LAST YEAR. IS THIS A FREQUENT VIOLATION FOR YOU? IT IS. I, I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU AND THE ENTIRE BODY, IF NECESSARY, WITH THAT RESPONSE. I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU AN INACCURATE NUMBER. I DO HAVE IT PROBABLY RIGHT HERE AT MY DESK IN FRONT OF ME SOMEWHERE, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S AN ACCURATE RESPONSE. SO IF I COULD FOLLOW BACK UP WITH YOU WITH THAT RESPONSE, I'D GREATLY APPRECIATE IT. WOULD YOU SAY IT'S IN THE TOP FIVE OF VIOLATIONS FOR CODE? NO IT'S NOT. WOULD YOU SAY IT'S IN THE TOP 25? YES I WOULD. OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK PLANNING ONE MORE QUESTION. IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF STEPS FOR BARS ESPECIALLY SEEM TO BE A TWO YEAR TIME PERIOD. IS THAT PRETTY STANDARD? WE HAVE SOPS FOR LATE HOURS, SO THIS IS FOR LATE HOURS, NOT BAR IN THIS AREA FOR FIVE YEARS. IT'S NOT WE DON'T HAVE A STANDARD. IT'S WHATEVER IS THE FINDING OF THE BODY. AND OBVIOUSLY I DIDN'T ASK YOU THIS IN ADVANCE. YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT DATA, BUT OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, WOULD YOU SAY THE MAJORITY ARE TWO YEAR, FIVE YEAR? HOW WOULD YOU HOW WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THAT IN. WE'RE TALKING STRICTLY ABOUT LATE HOURS. I DO HAVE THE DATA IN FRONT OF ME. AS I SAID, THANK GOD I LOOKED AT ALL THE SOPS THAT I COULD FIND IN LOWER GREENVILLE. SO I FOUND 11 SOPS IN LOWER GREENVILLE. ONE OF THEM WAS FOR BARS. SO IT'S NOT COMPARABLE, BUT TEN ARE FOR LATE HOURS ASSOCIATED WITH ALCOHOL OR RESTAURANTS OR ONE WAS FOR A STORE WITH A GAS STATION, 3 OR 2 YEAR, TWO YEAR TWO YEAR WITH AUTO RENEWALS, THREE YEARS, FIVE YEARS, THREE YEARS, FIVE YEARS, THREE YEARS, FIVE YEARS. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY A PATTERN. OKAY. SO THERE'S QUITE A FEW THAT ARE TWO YEARS AS WELL AS THREE YEARS AND FIVE YEARS. YES YES YES. OKAY. SO LOOKS TO BE PRETTY STANDARD. AND I WOULD SAY IT'S NOT VERY OFTEN THAT WE SEE CPC SAY NO. I MEAN, IT'S PRETTY RARE ACTUALLY. SO I'M GOING TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. AND IT'S PART OF WHY I'M SUPPORTING THE COUNCIL MEMBER OF THAT DISTRICT, WHO KNOWS HIS DISTRICT AND KNOWS WHAT HIS COMMUNITY NEEDS. WITH THE TWO YEAR NO AUTO RENEWAL. THANK YOU, MR. [03:45:04] BLACKMON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO, ANDREA, SO THIS IS THE QUESTION BETWEEN AUTO RENEWAL VERSUS A NON AUTO RENEWAL. AND IT'S FOR TWO YEARS THEY COME BACK IN. WE DO THIS EXERCISE FOR TWO YEARS. THEY SEEM TO BE IN COMPLIANCE. IT'S CALMED DOWN. MANAGEMENT HAS FOUND THEIR RHYTHM. IT SEEMS TO BE. CAN YOU THEN CHANGE IT BACK TO BECOME AN AUTO RENEWAL. YES. AND SO SO IT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE IT THIS ONE TIME THAT IN INTO THE FUTURE WE CAN ALSO GET BACK. NO. ANY TYPE OF RECOMMENDATION IS UP TO THE BODY'S DISCRETION. OKAY. AND SO A A REGULAR RENEWAL MEANS THEY COME BACK IN, WHAT, 18 MONTHS? A REGULAR RENEWAL OR A NON AUTO RENEWAL? A REGULAR RENEWAL, AS I SAID THEY CAN APPLY UP TO THE DAY PRIOR TO THEIR EXPIRATION. OKAY. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE CODE IS VERY SPECIFIC THAT ONCE YOUR EXPIRED IS EXPIRED, EVEN IF YOU'RE IN THE PROCESS. SO IT IS SAFER. AND THAT'S WHAT WE ADVISE APPLICANTS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE PROCESSING AND THE PROCESSING. I DO WANT TO SAY AGAIN, WE DON'T HAVE A BACKLOG. STAFF'S PROCESS IS NOT LONG, BUT BECAUSE IT INVOLVES TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, CPC AND COUNCIL. AND THERE IS ALSO AN OPTION FOR POSTPONEMENT. IT'S UNPREDICTABLE. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. SO IT MAY TAKE SIX MONTHS. IT MAY TAKE EIGHT MONTHS. CPC CAN HOLD CASES. COUNCIL HOLDS CASES. SO IT'S HARD TO TELL AN APPLICANT APPLY SIX MONTHS IN ADVANCE BECAUSE IT IS UNPREDICTABLE BY THE NATURE OF THE PROCESS, NOT BECAUSE OF US. SO WHAT'S THE REMEDY IF THEY FALL INTO THAT TIME CRUNCH? I MEAN, THEY'RE JUST S.O.L. THERE IS NO REMEDY OTHER THAN OKAY. YEAH WE PROPOSE SOME, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS. THAT'S THE PROCESS. SO. OKAY, GOING BACK THEN, I MEAN, MY, MY MY WHOLE ISSUE IS I APPRECIATE THE WHAT HAS HAPPENED BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN THERE WAS SOME IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS SOME ISSUES. THEY'VE BEEN REMEDIED. AND I MEAN, I HAVE A RESTAURANT THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY THINKS IT'S LOUD MUSIC AND IT'S REALLY NOT WHEN YOU TAKE YOUR DECIBEL METER OUT THERE, YOU KNOW, IT IS A SUBJECTIVE SITUATION, BUT YOU CAN ACTUALLY MEASURE IT. SO A COMPLAINT IS A COMPLAINT, BUT A CITATION IS AN ACTUAL CONFIRMED CONFIRMATION THAT IT'S HAPPENING. SO HOW DO YOU HOW DO WE GET ASSURANCES THAT WE DON'T LAPSE? THAT'S WHY. SO YOU GO INTO AN AUTO RENEWAL PROPOSITION. AND WHAT'S TO SAY THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO BACK INTO HAVING, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE A CITATION OR IT COULD ACTUALLY BECOME A PROBLEM. IS THAT WHEN YOU CAN THEN DO THE REVOCATION? I MEAN, I GUESS YOU CAN START THE PROCESS TO START. I WOULD SAY THAT THIS WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US IS ACTUAL PROOF OF THAT. CPC AND COUNCIL HAS THE POWER TO BRING BACK AN SCP AT ANY POINT. OKAY, SO IT'S NOT EVEN IF IT'S PERMANENT, IT DOESN'T MEAN IT STAYS THERE FOREVER. YOU CAN ALWAYS BRING IT BACK AND YOU CAN CONSIDER THOSE. AND AND YOU DID TALK ABOUT THE THRESHOLDS OF BRINGING IT BACK, BUT IT'S REALLY AT THE DISCRETION. IT'S A YEAH IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A MATTER OF CPC OR COUNCIL AUTHORIZING A HEARING TO REOPEN THE SCP AND RECONSIDER IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, GREENVILLE AVENUE IS SUCH A LEGACY ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. I'M SURE YOU COULD TALK TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE DECADES WORTH OF STORIES ABOUT THAT AREA. SO I THINK WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE ARE PRESERVING THAT HISTORY AND ALSO THE FUTURE OF HAVING IT BE SUCH A THRIVING, VIBRANT AREA. AND THIS IS AN EXAMPLE I THINK OF. IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THERE WERE NOISE COMPLAINTS TO START WITH. HOWEVER, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A BUSINESS EITHER STEPPING UP OR NOT STEPPING UP. AND IN THIS CASE, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'VE TAKEN EXTRAORDINARY MEASURES TO WORK WITH RESIDENTS AND ADDRESS THE NOISE SITUATION. I AM A LITTLE PUZZLED ABOUT SOME OTHER CLUBS OR BUSINESSES THAT MAY BE OPERATING CREATING SOME NOISE. AND SO I DON'T ENVY YOU. CHAIR RIDLEY ON HAVING TO COMB THROUGH THAT, BUT I THINK THAT IN ORDER TO HAVE THIS AREA THRIVE, WE NEED TO COMB THROUGH THAT AND BE SURE WE'RE TAKING CARE OF RESIDENTS WHILE ALSO ALLOWING OUR BUSINESSES TO OPERATE. AND YOU KNOW, I'M HEARING ABOUT THE EFFICIENCY SIDE, OUR PERMITTING PROCESS ON THESE SPECIAL USE PERMITS. THAT IS LENGTHY. I MEAN, THAT IS REALLY PUNITIVE TO BUSINESS. SO I KNOW THE CALL HAS BEEN MADE TO SHORTEN THAT PERIOD, AND I REALLY HOPE THAT IS TAKEN TO HEART, BECAUSE WE NEED TO SUPPORT THEM AND BE ABLE TO MOVE THESE REQUESTS THROUGH. BUT ANOTHER ASPECT OF EFFICIENCY I'M SEEING IS WHEN I LOOK AT THIS VOLUME OF CALLS EVERY SINGLE DAY, AND SO MANY OF THEM, I MEAN MOST, IF NOT ALL, NO VIOLATION FOUND. SO I'M THE WORD VEXATIOUS IS STARTING TO POP INTO MY HEAD. [03:50:03] AND THIS IS SOMETHING FOR CODE TO SORT THROUGH. BUT I'D LIKE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THAT, BECAUSE IF WE'RE PERPETUALLY GETTING THESE CALLS FOR CODE AND THERE'S NOT A VIOLATION, THOSE ARE CALLS THAT THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO GO TO FOR ANOTHER RESIDENT WHO MAY HAVE A VALID COMPLAINT. SO I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND MORE ABOUT THAT AND WHAT WE COULD DO THERE. BUT I'M HEARING FROM CHAIR RIDLEY. SO THIS IS A CONSISTENCY ISSUE AND THAT OTHERS AROUND HERE DO NOT HAVE AN AUTO SHOP. IS THAT THE CASE? IT'S OKAY. WELL, THEN I THINK IN THE NAME OF BEING CONSISTENT. AND FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBER WHO IS REPRESENTS THIS DISTRICT, IT'S IT'S FAIR TO SAY LET'S BE CONSISTENT IN WHAT WE OVERLAY WITH BUSINESSES AND TO THE POINT MADE. IF YOU'RE A GOOD OPERATOR AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ARE TO BE ABLE TO COME BACK THE NEXT TIME, HAVE A GOOD RECORD, ASK FOR A THREE YEAR OR UP TO FIVE YEAR, OR EVEN REINTRODUCE THE IDEA OF AN AUTO RENEWAL. I THINK IS FAIR AS WELL, BUT I'LL SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT TO BE ABLE TO DO A TWO YEAR NON AUTO RENEWING. SUP. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. LOOKING ON PAGE 17 IT SAYS FROM JUNE 20TH, AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS WAS SAYING FROM JUNE 24TH, 2024 TO MAY 2025, CODE COMPLIANCE HAS VISITED MERELY 49 TIMES SPECIFICALLY TO CHECK FOR NOISE VIOLATIONS. AND THERE WERE ZERO CITATIONS OR WARNINGS. IS THAT CORRECT? I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE ASKING FROM THIS PRESENTATION. THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. OKAY. SO SO LET ME ASK YOU, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU GUYS BEEN OUT THERE? DO YOU HAVE THAT DATA? THAT WOULD BE FOR CODE COMPLIANCE. IF CHRIS CHRISTIAN IS STILL HERE I'M STILL ON. THANK YOU FOR THE THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. AND COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON. WE'VE HAD 67 TOTAL INSPECTIONS VISITS, SO 67, NOT 49. OKAY. OUT OF THE 67 WERE THERE ANY CITATIONS GIVEN? NO, SIR. WE ISSUED TWO NOTICES OF VIOLATION. ONE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED DECEMBER THE 12TH, 2021 FOR NOISE. AND WE ISSUED ANOTHER NOTICE OF VIOLATION ON JANUARY THE 14TH, 2022 FOR NOISE. BUT SINCE THAT TIME WE'VE BEEN OUT 20 TO 28 TIMES, PROACTIVELY JUST MONITORING THE LOCATION BECAUSE OF THE NOISE COMPLAINTS TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE OPERATING IN COMPLIANCE. AND WE DID NOT FIND ANY CAUSE FOR ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT ON OUR SUBSEQUENT VISITS OR OUR PROACTIVE VISITS. OKAY. SO THE CHANGE THAT WAS MADE, THEY HAVE BEEN A GOOD BUSINESS PARTNER AND COACHES GOING OUT THOSE NUMBER OF TIMES AND HAVEN'T FOUND ANY VIOLATIONS. THEN I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT. I THINK THEY HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES AGAIN, LISTENING TO MY COLLEAGUE WHO ACTUALLY WENT OUT TO THE CLUB, VISITED THE CLUB, STOOD IN THE BACK OF THE ALLEY AND COULDN'T HEAR THE NOISE BECAUSE THEY CORRECTED THE PROBLEM. YOU HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING WRONG. THEN I DON'T SEE WHY WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THEM A HARD TIME IF I CAN SAY IT LIKE THAT. SO I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I TOO WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. WE'RE PUNISHING AN ESTABLISHMENT THAT HAS A PROVEN TRACK RECORD THAT HAS TAKEN THE NECESSARY CORRECTIONS TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. AND THIS IS REALLY JUST A TAKING OF A GOOD SMALL BUSINESS WHO HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY CAN BE A GOOD OPERATOR WHEN THE ISSUES ARE BROUGHT TO THEIR ATTENTION. AND SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION THAT'S BEFORE US. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MR. RESENDEZ, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT THAT'S ON THE TABLE EITHER. I THINK THAT RESTRICTING A RESPONSIBLE, WELL-RESPECTED BUSINESS DOESN'T SOLVE ANY PROBLEMS. SENDS THE WRONG MESSAGE TO EVERY BUSINESS OWNER WHO WORKS HARD TO FOLLOW THE RULES. WHEN BUSINESSES DO THINGS THE RIGHT WAY, THEY SHOULDN'T BE JERKED AROUND BY SHIFTING STANDARDS. CITY HALL SHOULD BE A PARTNER TO RESPONSIBLE BUSINESSES, NOT A ROADBLOCK. AND WHEN WE LET RESPONSIBLE OPERATORS OPERATE FREELY, IT SETS THE TONE FOR OTHERS, SHOWING THAT PLAYING BY THE RULES PAYS OFF AND ENCOURAGING MORE BUSINESSES TO FOLLOW SUIT. AT THIS POINT, WE'RE JUST WASTING TIME FIGHTING THE WRONG BATTLES INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON THE REAL PROBLEMS THAT NEED FIXING. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES FOR LACK OF WASTING TIME TO MY GUYS. MESS WITH HIM. NO. THANK YOU. I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK. I WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT THIS PROCESS. AND WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE CITY OF DALLAS AND WHAT TYPE OF CITY WE WANT TO BE AND ALL OF THAT. [03:55:05] ONE OF MY OBSERVATIONS, AGAIN, IT WAS JUST MY OBSERVATION. I DON'T KNOW IT TO BE TRUE, BUT LOOKING AT THE DEMOGRAPHICS, I THINK HAVING A PLACE LIKE THAT IN GREENVILLE GIVES PEOPLE OPTIONS, RIGHT? THERE MAY BE SOME PEOPLE, NO DISRESPECT TO CHAIR TO TO MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO DISTRICT. BUT THERE MAY BE SOME PEOPLE WHO MAY DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE GOING TO DEEP ELLUM, AND THEY WANT ANOTHER OPTION WHERE THEY CAN HAVE A BAR OR EXPERIENCE, AND LORD GREENVILLE GIVES THEM THAT OPTION. SO AS WE THINK ABOUT THESE RENEWALS AND SOUNDS AND ALL OF THAT, I WANT TO THINK ABOUT, I WANT US TO BE THINKING ABOUT OUR OPTIONS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS AS WELL. AND WE NEED DIFFERENT PLACES TO GO. AND FOR THOSE WHO MAY NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE BECAUSE OF WHATEVER STIGMA THEY MAY HAVE OR WHATEVER TRUTHS THEY MAY HAVE EXPERIENCED, THEY WANT OTHER OPTIONS. I THINK THIS GIVES FOLKS ANOTHER OPTION. SO FOR THAT REASON, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AUTO RENEWAL SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG. IN FACT, THEY'VE DONE EVERYTHING TO CORRECT IT AND REACHED OUT TO THEIR NEIGHBORS AND COMMUNITY MADE INTENTIONAL EFFORTS TO FIX IT. SO THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE NEED A RECORD VOTE. GO AHEAD, MADAM SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. NO. COUNCILMEMBER CADENA NO. COUNCILMEMBER BAZALDUA. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. NO. COUNCILMEMBER BLACKMON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCILMEMBER MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. NO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH SEVEN VOTING IN FAVOR, EIGHT OPPOSED THAT THAT MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, WE'RE BACK ON THE MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM, AND I HAVE DISTRICTS TWO, THREE AND 12 HAVE SPOKEN FOR FIVE MINUTES. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY MAYOR PRO? YEAH. WOULD YOU WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO RESTATE YOUR MOTION, MR. MAYOR? PRO TEM. AND THIS IS INCORPORATING COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA MOTION AND I BELIEVE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. COUNCIL MEMBER I MOVE TO NOT FOLLOW CPC. SO MY ONLY AMENDMENT WAS WITH THE CONDITION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION. THE USE OF SUBWOOFERS SPEAKERS IS PROHIBITED. CAN YOU SAY CAN YOU SAY THE ENTIRE MOTION? OR CAN YOU GET SOME HELP FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY TO MAKE IT CLEAR? YEAH, YEAH, JUST SO YOU CAN HEAR IT SO EVERYBODY CAN KNOW. OKAY, SO I MOVED TO NOT FOLLOW THE CPC RECOMMENDATION TO REPEAL THE SUP WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION THE USE OF SUBWOOFER SPEAKERS IS PROHIBITED. THAT WAS THAT WAS JUST RESTATING SO EVERYONE CAN HEAR IT. UNLESS SOMEONE ELSE WANTS TO GO WHO HAS NOT SPOKEN, I'M GOING TO. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR THREE MINUTES. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, I DON'T BELIEVE I SPOKE ON THE FIRST ONE. I HAVE YOU DOWN. OKAY. THAT'S FINE. IT WON'T TAKE THAT LONG. DISTRICT 12. RIGHT. MY QUESTION IS, IF WE HAVE A DEFINITION OF WHAT SUBWOOFER IS. SO. I KNOW WHAT IT IS. DON'T ALL JUMP AT ONCE, FOLKS. SO I WAS THINKING MAYBE A CITY ATTORNEY MIGHT ANSWER IF THERE'S A LEGAL DEFINITION FOR SUBWOOFER. I THINK IT'S A IT'S A COMMON TERM AND THERE ARE DEFINITIONS FOR IT. WE WOULD JUST GO WITH THE PLAIN MEANING OF WHAT IT IS. IT'S SELF-CONTAINED SPEAKER. I MEAN, I COULD READ YOU THE DEFINITION, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD GO WITH. BUT I SEE ANDREA ALSO SHAKING HER HEAD. WE DON'T DEFINE EVERY TERM. COULDN'T ANY SPEAKER ACTUALLY BECOME A SUBWOOFER JUST BY PLAYING VERY LOW TONES? I HAVE NO IDEA. WELL, I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY THE PROBLEM HERE. WELL, I MEAN, LET ANDREA, I THINK SHE HAS AN ANSWER ON THAT. I WOULD YES, WE WILL WORD IT IF IT NEEDS CLARIFICATION. WE MAY WORK WITH THE ATTORNEYS TO ADD ONE, BUT WE USUALLY USE THE DICTIONARY DEFINITION. AND I THINK IT'S A IT'S A HARD TYPE OF IS THIS A SUBWOOFER. NO. IT'S EASIER TO ENFORCE LIKE IT'S THE PRESENCE OF A THING THAT'S PHYSICAL. SO I THINK THAT ANY DJ COULD EMIT THE SAME MUSIC WITHOUT A SUBWOOFER BASED ON THE I'M SORRY, [04:00:09] THE FREQUENCY THEY USE AND THE AMPLITUDE THEY USE, ANY SPEAKER COULD ACTUALLY BECOME THAT, OR MANY SPEAKERS COULD BECOME THAT. AND SO THERE ISN'T A DEFINITION, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL. YOU SEEM TO BE STRUGGLING TO COME UP WITH ONE. HOW WOULD CODE COMPLIANCE ENFORCE THAT? THERE IS A DEFINED TERM. IT IS A LOUDSPEAKER COMPONENT DESIGNED TO REPRODUCE A VERY LOW BASS FREQUENCY. SO HOW WOULD YOU KNOW THAT A REGULAR SPEAKER WASN'T PRODUCING THAT SAME SOUND? YOU WOULD HAVE TO ASK CODE OR I MEAN, IT IS A IT'S A IT'S A COMPONENT OF THE DESIGN OF THE THIS IS JUST OFF OF SOMEBODY'S HEAD. THIS IS NOT SERIOUSLY THOUGHT OUT FOR US TO MAKE THIS KIND OF REQUIREMENT. AND SO I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR ANYTHING THAT HAS JUST SOME MADE UP IDEA OF WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO WHEN WE CAN'T ENFORCE IT, BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY NOTHING THAT DEFINES IT. AND THIS IS PART OF THE PROBLEM OF HOW WE MAKE POLICY HERE. SO IT IS DEFINED. SO IT'S DEFINED IN THE DICTIONARY. IT. SO I MEAN I DON'T THINK I CAN'T, I CAN'T RECALL WHEN WE'VE EVER DEFINED THE WORD SUBWOOFER. YEAH I DON'T THINK THERE'S A NEED. AND AS I SAID, IT'S A PHYSICAL OBJECT THAT CAN BE IDENTIFIED. AND THE INTENT, I UNDERSTAND TO BE TO ENSURE THAT AFTER HOURS THERE ARE NO SOUNDS BECAUSE IT'S. WELL, I THOUGHT WE HAD ALREADY DETERMINED THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN CARE OF THE SOUND ISSUE, AND IF SO, THERE'S REALLY NOT A NEED FOR THIS SUBWOOFER ITEM. AND I WOULD ASK THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO CONSIDER AMENDING HIS MOTION. SUCH. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON. ARE YOU DROPPING OUT? GERALD GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. SURE. MR. MAYOR, MAY I. MAY I CALL THE THE MANAGER UP TO ASK A QUESTION IF THEY WANT TO COME UP? SURE. THEY CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS. AND THE REASON I'M DOING THAT, AGAIN, IN MY BRIEF EXPERIENCE IN THAT SPACE, I BELIEVE THEY ALREADY REMOVED THOSE SUBWOOFERS. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. SORRY. I'M JUST TO CLARIFY. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, I APOLOGIZE. TURN YOUR MIC ON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBERS. THAT'S ACCURATE. I'M NOT A SOUND ENGINEER, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THE BASIC DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SPEAKER AND A SUBWOOFER. A SPEAKER IS SOMETHING THAT EMITS SOUND OF ALL DIFFERENT VARIATIONS. A SUBWOOFER IS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO ONLY EMIT LOW END FREQUENCY. WE DID HAVE TWO SUBWOOFERS INSIDE, MILLIE. THOSE HAVE BEEN REMOVED, AND THEY'RE NOT EVEN WITHIN THE CITY OF DALLAS. THEY ARE COMPLETELY OUT OF THE BUILDING. WE TOOK THE EFFORTS TO PUT IN THE TECTUM, WHICH PROTECTS AGAINST SOME OF THE HIGH END FREQUENCY. AND THEN ALSO ON THE DIAGRAM IN THE PACKET YOU RECEIVED, YOU'LL SEE THAT WE PUT BASS CATCHERS IN. NOW THERE IS A LOW END FREQUENCY THAT WILL COME OUT OF A SPEAKER. I THINK ANYONE THAT HAS A CAR STEREO HAS EVER LISTENED TO MUSIC KNOWS THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME TYPE OF BASS. A SUBWOOFER IS A SPECIFIC PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THAT'S DESIGNED TO EMIT ONLY LOW END FREQUENCY, THAT YOU GET TO INCREASE THE RICHNESS OF THE SOUND. SO WITH US REMOVING THOSE TWO SUBS, THE ONLY LOW IN FREQUENCY IS COMING FROM THE SPEAKERS. AND THAT'S MINIMAL WOULD BE ANY LOW END FREQUENCY, AS YOU WOULD EXPERIENCE AGAIN FROM A CAR STEREO. THE SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT TO EMIT ONLY LOW END FREQUENCY IS NOT EVEN IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. IT'S IN GREENVILLE, TEXAS. ALL RIGHT, COLLEAGUES, AGAIN, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AGAIN, WHERE WE'RE WE'RE THEY'VE DONE ALL OF THOSE THINGS. AND EVEN IN OUR EFFORTS TO TRY TO HELP, THEY'VE ALREADY DONE THESE THINGS. SO I JUST WANT TO KEEP BRINGING THIS BACK. I THINK THERE MIGHT HAVE EVEN BEEN A LITTLE PLACE WHERE THE SPEAKER USED TO BE. BUT AGAIN, THEY'VE ALREADY MADE ALL OF THESE EFFORTS. SO I'D LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION OR CALL TO VOTE OR SOMETHING. CAN WE DO THAT? YOU CAN CALL THE QUESTION, OR YOU COULD JUST LET US DO IT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? TWO NOS. NOTED, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. YOUR NEXT ITEM WILL BE ITEM Z TWO. I'LL READ. I'LL READ THAT ITEM INTO THE RECORD ITEM Z TO ORDER. YES. DISPOSE OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION OR JUST THE AMENDMENT. I FELT LIKE THAT WAS ALL THERE WAS, BUT I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. WELL, HIS HIS RESTATEMENT OF THE AMENDMENT DID NOT INCLUDE THE AUTO, AND THAT WAS A BIG PART OF OUR DEBATE. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. I PROBABLY I PROBABLY DID. [04:05:03] I PROBABLY DIDN'T DO THAT THE RIGHT WAY, TECHNICALLY. SO WE'LL GO BACK. LET'S GO BACK TO Z ONE NOW AS AMENDED. SO IT'S BEEN AMENDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. AND THERE'S AN ORIGINAL MOTION ON Z ONE THAT THAT MOTION WE JUST APPROVED AMENDED. SO NOW WE ARE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION AS AMENDED. SO IS THERE ANYONE. THIS IS A TECHNICALITY, BUT IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO BE ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION AS AMENDED? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES HAVE IT. YOU NOTE THE NAYS. THE TWO NOS ARE NEEDED. COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MENDELSOHN AND RIDLEY. THANK YOU, MR. BAZALDUA. YOUR NEXT ITEM. IS ITEM Z TWO. [Z2. 25-2567A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting MU-1 Mixed Use District on property zoned IR Industrial Research District and Planned Development District 525 with Specific Use Permit 98, on the east line of Stone Mesa Drive and the west line of Pinnacle Park Boulevard, between Rock Quarry Road and Pinnacle Point Drive] ITEM Z TWO IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING MU DASH ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE EAST LINE OF STONE MESA DRIVE IN WEST LINE OF PINNACLE PARK BOULEVARD BETWEEN ROCK QUARRY ROAD AND PINNACLE POINT DRIVE. MR. MAYOR. WE SENT EIGHT NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT OF THE AREA. REQUEST. WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST. THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM C2? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, MR. WEST. YOU HAVE A MOTION. YES, I DO, MAYOR. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. DISCUSSION, MR. WEST? YES. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THIS ITEM, COLLEAGUES, IS TO FURTHER SUPPORT THE DALLAS WINGS PRACTICE FACILITY THAT WE ALL VOTED ON. NOT TOO LONG AGO. AT JOEY G PARK IN FAR WEST OAK CLIFF. IT IS A NEEDED ITEM FOR TO CHANGE THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING THAT UNDERLIES THIS PARK NOW SO THAT THE FACILITY CAN BE BUILT. I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, JUST BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY BE A COUPLE COLLEAGUES WITH QUESTIONS. I'M HOPING TO GET THOSE OUT OF THE WAY NOW. SO IF WE COULD GET STAFF UP HERE, AND I THINK, MR. O'CONNOR, WE MAY NEED YOU AS WELL. IN A MINUTE. HI. HI. HI. CAN YOU REMIND US WHAT IS WITHIN THE REZONING BOUNDARY TODAY OF THIS PARK? SO, YEAH, IT'S A PROPERTY THAT IS 37.8 ACRES, BUT IS DUALLY ZONED. IT HAS THE PORTION ON THE EASTERN SIDE IS ZONED IR, WHICH IS INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH, BUT THE PORTION ON THE WESTERN SIDE IS PD 525 WHICH DEFAULTS TO IR, AND THIS PD IS VERY ODD THAT IT DOESN'T ALLOW ANY RECREATION USES, WHICH TYPICALLY ARE ALLOWED IN ALL ZONING DESIGNATIONS IN THE CITY. BUT THE PROPERTY, AS I UNDERSTAND, IS OWNED IS OWNED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS, BUT IT'S ALSO THE PROPERTY THAT HAS A MARKER PARK. SO IT'S DEDICATED AS PARK. AND WE'RE IN THIS IMPASSE WHERE WE CANNOT DEVELOP THE PARK BECAUSE IT'S NOT ON ALLOWED LAND USE ON HALF OF THE PROPERTY. SO THIS PARK WAS ACTUALLY DONATED BY A FAMILY. IT'S 100 ACRES THAT WAS DONATED TO THE CITY. AND THE UNDERLYING ZONING THAT WAS THERE WAS IR, AND IT JUST HASN'T BEEN CHANGED. RIGHT. IT'S SPLIT IR AND THIS PD AND THIS PD DOES NOT ALLOW THE PARK USE LAND USE. GOT IT. WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO MU ONE, WHICH IS THE PROPOSAL. IT'S IT'S A LESS INTENSE USE. IT IT ALLOWS A MIX OF USES AND INCLUDING THOSE RECREATION TYPE OF USES AND LOOKING AT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. IT'S ANOTHER PORTION THAT'S PD 590 I'M SORRY. 525 AND THERE IS ANOTHER PD TO THE NORTH IS BASICALLY SURROUNDED BY INDUSTRIAL, BUT THERE IS ALSO MULTIFAMILY FURTHER AWAY. SO WE WERE TRYING TO FIND A ZONING CATEGORY TO FIT, TO BE OBVIOUSLY LESS INTENSE THAN THE INDUSTRIAL AND SOMEHOW MAKE A TRANSITION. SO STAFF CAME UP WITH THE MU ONE ZONING. WE KNOW IT ALLOWS SOME COMMERCIAL USES, MULTIFAMILY, BUT IMPORTANTLY IT IS THE USE THAT STAFF BELIEVES BEST FITS IN WITH THE PROPOSED USES FOR THE PRACTICE FACILITY, RIGHT? YES, THE PRACTICE FACILITY, WE WILL WHEN WE WILL ISSUE A CEO, WE WILL DECIDE WHAT TYPE OF LAND USE. BUT AT THIS POINT, I THINK WE SAID THAT IT'S GOING TO PROBABLY BE A PRIVATE RECREATION CENTER. IT'S A RECREATION TYPE OF USE AS WELL. OKAY. AND UNDER NEW ONE ZONING, THE WINGS FACILITY WILL BE ABLE TO BE BUILT AS WE ARE CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED. CORRECT? YES. GREAT. LET'S SEE. OKAY. [04:10:06] IF THERE WAS IF SOME DEVELOPER TRIED TO COME IN AND BUILD HOUSING IN THE PARK IS CAN THEY JUST COME IN AND DO THAT? THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION. PER THE ZONING, AN MU ONE DOES ALLOW MULTIFAMILY. HOWEVER, WE HAVE TO NOT FORGET THAT THIS IS DEDICATED AT PARKLAND, AND I'M LOOKING AT RYAN O'CONNOR TO EXPLAIN TO US WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE TO THE PARK, THE PROPERTY AND ALLOW OTHER TYPE OF USES. YEAH, AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY INTEREST, AT LEAST IN MY DISTRICT. IF YOU COULD COME ON UP, RYAN, IN MY DISTRICT IN D PARKING, THIS PARK, WHICH WAS DONATED TO US WITH THE UNDERSTANDING IT WOULD STAY A PARK. SO CAN YOU CLARIFY IF THERE'S AN INTEREST IN DOING SOMETHING ON PARKLAND OTHER THAN THEN PARK TYPE ACTIVITIES. WHAT WOULD NEED TO HAPPEN? NO, SIR. THERE IS NOT AN INTEREST. NO. WHAT WOULD NEED TO HAPPEN LEGALLY, PROCEDURALLY, WITH THE CITY TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN? SO THAT IS THAT IS A PROCESS THAT'S PRETTY CLEARLY DEFINED IN STATE LAW. IT'S THE PARKING, THE PROPERTY, WHICH REQUIRES A PUBLIC REFERENDUM. SO IT WOULD NEED TO BE VOTED ON BY THE VOTERS IN DALLAS THE ENTIRE CITY. CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. WITH THAT BEING SAID, COLLEAGUES, I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS VERY IMPORTANT ITEM. WE HAVE CITY MANAGER. HOW LONG DO WE HAVE CONTRACTUALLY TO BUILD THE WINGS PRACTICE FACILITY? THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. THAT'S A GOOD ONE. WE ARE CONTRACTUALLY REQUIRED TO DELIVER THE PRACTICE FACILITY BY APRIL 2026. THAT'S NEXT YEAR. OKAY, SO. YES, SIR. IT IS. SO WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO DELAY THIS. BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK QUESTIONS ARE A GREAT THING, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING WE HAVE HAD ALL TRAINS MOVING FORWARD ON UNTIL NOW. THANK YOU ALL RIGHT. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. RON I'VE Z2. EVERYONE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WANT TO REGISTER MY CONTINUING OPPOSITION TO SPENDING 55. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE RELEVANT TO THE ZONING. IT IS. OKAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU SOUND LIKE YOU'RE YOU SAID, CONTINUING. WE HAVEN'T WE HAVEN'T HAD THE ZONING BEFORE US BEFORE. SO YOU SAID YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT YOUR CONTINUING. I WAS JUST GIVING YOU A HEADS UP THAT I'M GOING TO NOT SAY IT'S GERMANE IF IT GETS BEYOND THE ZONING QUESTION. SO GO AHEAD. I LOVE YOU TO DEATH. I'M JUST GIVING YOU A HEADS UP. WELL, I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS ZONING CHANGE. BECAUSE IT IS FOR A CITY OWNED $55 MILLION FACILITY WHEN IT IS FAR DISTANT FROM THE ARENA AND THE DUE DILIGENCE REQUIRED TO LOOK AT EXISTING CITY OWNED BUILDINGS SUCH AS THE FAIR PARK COLISEUM WASN'T DONE, AND I BELIEVE THAT IS A MUCH PREFERABLE LOCATION. IT IS AN EXISTING FACILITY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE REZONING. I'M NOT SURE THAT'S REALLY ABOUT THE ZONING. WELL, I'M JUST EXPLAINING WHY I'M OPPOSED TO THE REZONING BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE FACILITY FOR THAT LOCATION WHEN THERE ARE BETTER LOCATIONS FOR IT. CHAIRWOMAN MILLS, ARE YOU GOING TO DO ANY BETTER THAN MR. RIDLEY AND TRYING TO MAKE IT ABOUT THE ZONING MINE ALSO, OR AM I RECOGNIZED? YOU ARE. I CANNOT SUPPORT CHANGING THE ZONING THAT WILL RESULT IN SPENDING $52 MILLION ON A WOMEN'S BASKETBALL PRACTICE FACILITY IN WEST DALLAS. SO LET ME BE CLEAR. I'M ABSOLUTELY IN FAVOR OF SUPPORTING WOMEN'S SPORTS AND INVESTING INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUNG ATHLETES. BUT THIS PROPOSAL IS AT THE WRONG PRICE AND AT THE WRONG LOCATION. RECRUITING AND RETAINING SPORTS TEAMS IN OUR SPORTS CITY IS A WORTHY ENDEAVOR. STATE YOUR POINT. STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. IT'S NOT GERMANE TO THE ZONING. SUSTAINED. IT'S LITERALLY ABOUT THE LOCATION. YOU JUST START TALKING ABOUT COST, THE COST AND THE LOCATION. IT SUSTAINED. SO IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND BEING A LITTLE MORE NARROWLY TAILORED TO THE ZONING ASPECT OF THIS. OKAY. SO, PLEASE, WE'LL JUST RECOGNIZE THAT MY OBJECTION TO THE COST IS OUT THERE. AND SO LET ME GO TO ITEMS THAT ARE MORE SPECIFIC TO THE LOCATION. IN CONSIDERING THE LOCATION, THE SITE IS NOT CENTRALLY LOCATED AND WILL NOT BRING BROAD COMMUNITY BENEFIT THAT THE 52 MILLION OUGHT TO DELIVER. SO I ALSO AM IN FAVOR OF A FAIR PARK LOCATION, WHICH IS ACCESSIBLE BY TRANSIT, WILL ALLOW US TO RESTORE A HISTORIC BUILDING INSTEAD OF POURING MONEY INTO A BRAND NEW ONE. POINT OF ORDER, MAYOR. SUSTAINED. IT'S SUSTAINED. I MEAN, I'M TRYING TO, I UNDERSTAND, WORK WITH FOLKS HERE, BUT IT REALLY. [04:15:06] I MEAN, YOU'RE GETTING BACK TO THE MERITS OF THE PROJECTS LOCATIONS AS OPPOSED TO THE ZONING PARTICULARS OF THE SELECTED LOCATION. SO PLEASE TRY TO TALK ABOUT. RIGHT. POINT OF ORDER, MAYOR. COULD WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS POSTED? READ. BECAUSE I THINK THAT MIGHT HELP FOLKS STAY MORE ON POINT. I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN JUST SO EVERYONE CAN KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT ME BEING MEAN, BUT WE'RE. YES, IT IS AN APPLICATION OF THE PROJECT AGAIN. MY APOLOGIES. IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER FIVE. 25. SO I ALWAYS SAY IS THIS IS A MU A GOOD USE OF THE LAND AT THIS LOCATION? THANK YOU. SO THE MERITS OF CHANGING IT FROM WHAT WAS IT I IN PD 595 TO AN MU ONE. OKAY. SO TRY DO YOUR BEST TO GET IN THERE. YEP. THE MERITS OF THAT. SO NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE ZONING CHANGE. MU ONE IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR A FAR WEST DALLAS AREA THAT IS AN INDUSTRIAL AREA SURROUNDED BY WAREHOUSES. IT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO RESIDENTS, NOT AS A PRACTICE FACILITY ON RAW LAND. THAT WOULD REQUIRE ALL OF THE UTILITIES, WHICH IS PART OF WHAT'S DRIVING UP THIS COST. OKAY, THAT'S JUST A LITTLE, TINY BIT. SO. I'M, I'M TRYING TO SAY WITHIN THE SCOPE, BUT I'M NOT WILLING TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM SOMETHING THIS WAS INTENDED TO BE FOR A PLACE FOR KIDS TO PLAY, NOT A PLACE FOR A PRACTICE FACILITY THAT COULD GO MANY OTHER PLACES. THANK YOU, MR. ROTH. IMPRESS US ALL WITH YOUR ABILITY TO STAY WITHIN THE POSTED ITEM THAT'S BEFORE US, WHICH IS A ZONING ITEM TO CHANGE FROM ONE TO ANOTHER RELATED TO THE ZONING. MIKE, I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS. NUMBER ONE, THE THAT PARK GENERALLY WAS, WHAT, ABOUT 200 ACRES? IS THAT WHAT IT WAS? TOTAL. YEAH. YOU CAN YOU RESTATE YOUR QUESTION AND COUNCILMEMBER ROTH, JUST SO IT'S GOING TO BE I'M GOING TO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT ZONING, ABOUT THE ABOUT THE PROXIMITY OF INDUSTRIAL. SIR, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IT IS APPROXIMATELY 200 ACRES. AND HOW MUCH IS IN THE PD PART OF IT? AND WHERE IS THE MU ONE PORTION OF THIS? THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. ARE WE ARE WE REZONING THE WHOLE 200 ACRES OR ARE WE REZONING PORTIONS OF IT? A PORTION OF IT? YES. WHICH PORTION ARE WE ARE WE DOING? IF WE LOOK AT PAGE I DON'T KNOW, 14 THROUGH THE END, YOU'LL SEE. FOR INSTANCE, PAGE 15 HAS AN AERIAL MAP AND YOU CAN SEE THE AREA UNDERLINED. IT'S 37.8 ACRES. AND WHAT WOULD BE THE EFFECT ON SB 840 IF WE TOOK AWAY THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING THERE? MU ONE ALLOWS MULTIFAMILY AS IS. SO IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SB 840 AND THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN MU ONE, I THINK ARE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN ZBZ 40. SO I WOULD SAY NONE. AND IR IS AN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, SO WE EXCLUDED THAT FROM SB FROM SB 40. SO I WOULD SAY NO CONVERSATION ABOUT SB 40. THE PROXIMITY OF INDUSTRIAL TO A COMMERCIAL ZONING. IF THIS WAS ZONED SOMETHING ELSE, THE PROXIMITY TO INDUSTRIAL ZONING WOULD LIMIT THE EFFECTS OF OF SB 840, WOULDN'T IT, IF WE IF THAT PROPERTY WAS ULTIMATELY CHANGED TO COMMERCIAL. I MEAN, AS I SAID, MU ONE ALLOWS MULTIFAMILY ANYWAY, AND THERE IS NOTHING THAT OTHER THAN ITS PARKLAND AND WE NEED TO PARK IT. SO THE FACT THAT IT HAS INDUSTRIAL PROXIMITY DOESN'T BEAR ANY EXCLUSION OR ANYTHING ON AN MU ONE. IS THERE ANOTHER CLASSIFICATION OTHER THAN MU ONE THAT WOULD ALLOW THE THE THE FACILITY TO BE BUILT WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. YEAH. PROBABLY INDUSTRIAL. I CAN JUST. SO CAN YOU DO BUT CAN YOU DO IT IN AN INDUSTRIAL ZONING? I WOULD SAY THAT WE CHOSE MU ONE FOR A PURPOSE BECAUSE IT ALLOWS MORE RETAIL TYPE OF USES THAN INDUSTRIAL DOESN'T. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO PRESERVE THAT FLEXIBILITY IN CASE THE FACILITY NEEDS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS A DIFFERENT CEO. [04:20:07] SO I WOULD STILL RECOMMEND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD STILL BE TO HAVE THE PARK PROPERTY REZONED INTO A MIXED USE TYPE OF DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS, IN ADDITION TO A PUBLIC PARK, THE FACILITY ITSELF, DEPENDING ON THE USES THAT WILL CONTAIN AND EVEN SERVING THE PUBLIC. WE WANT TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO NOT RUN INTO KO ISSUES. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ISSUES. I MEAN. OKAY, I'M MAY HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS LATER. THANK YOU. MISS CADENA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS ITEM. THIS ACTUALLY WAS A PART OF CEMENTO GRANDE WHERE MY MOTHER LIVED AND WHERE MY GRANDFATHER WORKED. SO TO SEE IT REZONE FROM INDUSTRIAL TO THIS USE IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK WEST DALLAS PEOPLE WOULD GREATLY SUPPORT CHANGING THE INDUSTRIAL PORTIONS OF WEST DALLAS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL IS SOMETHING THAT OUR RESIDENTS HAVE CHAMPIONED AND HAVE GREATLY SUPPORTED. AND SO I KNOW THAT THEY ARE EXCITED ABOUT HAVING THE WINGS IN JUST CLOSE TO DISTRICT SIX. THIS AREA ACTUALLY USED TO BE DISTRICT SIX. AND WE HAVE A LOT OF OTHER SPORTING FACILITIES. SO IT WILL ACTUALLY COMPLEMENT WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN DISTRICT SIX. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCIL MEMBER WEST FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND FOR THE WORK THAT YOU'VE BEEN DOING ON THIS. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. Z2 THANK YOU. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS ITEM FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. ONE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PROXIMITY, IT'S 15 MINUTES FROM HERE. AND AGAIN, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE IT'S AN EXPERIENCE. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO AND I DROVE OUT THERE RIGHT AFTER A COUNCIL MEETING JUST TO CHECK THE TRAFFIC. THIS WAS RIGHT AROUND 5:00 HOUR. IT TOOK US 15 MINUTES TO GET THERE. AND IN THAT DEVELOPMENT, EVEN IN AND AROUND THAT AREA, WE KEEP REFERRING TO IT AS INDUSTRIAL. YOU'RE RIGHT. THERE ARE A LOT OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS, BUT IT'S RIGHT THERE OFF OF PINNACLE PARKWAY AND PINNACLE PARKWAY. YOU HAVE SEVERAL NEW DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE BEING BUILT AS WE SPEAK AND A NEW OFFICE BUILDING. SO IT'S NOT JUST THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER DEVELOPERS THAT ARE SEEING THE POTENTIAL IN THIS AREA. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT AN ASSET LIKE THIS AND GETTING STUFF TO MOVE INTO WEST DALLAS, INTO SOUTHERN DALLAS, THESE ARE THE TYPE OF ASSETS THAT WILL HELP REALLY UPLIFT THAT AREA. AND I THINK IT STARTED WITH A I THINK IT WAS A HOTEL THAT WAS OVER THERE. SO THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN EVOLVING. IN ADDITION TO THIS, THIS WILL BE ANOTHER PIECE THAT WILL ACTUALLY SPARK MORE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING IT FOR THAT REASON. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. QUESTION FOR STAFF ZONING. DOES THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOW FOR PUBLIC PARK USE? CAN THE LOCATION IS IS IT A PARK CURRENTLY? NO. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. DISTRICT NUMBER 525 DOESN'T ALLOW ANY RECREATION USES. AND SO THE FAMILY DONATED THIS TO THE CITY FOR A PARK USE. BUT IT'S CURRENTLY NOT ALLOWED. YES. SO WHY DID WE ACCEPT THE PROPERTY IF THAT WAS NOT AN ALLOWED USE? AND I AGAIN, NOT A ZONING QUESTION, BUT IF RYAN HAS AN ANSWER, I DON'T KNOW. PROBABLY I DON'T KNOW. SIR, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. IT IS A BIT OF AN ANOMALY, THOUGH, AS AS WE ALL KNOW, YOU KNOW, PARK USES ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN ALMOST ANY ZONING DISTRICT. IT'S HIGHLY UNUSUAL THAT DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT IS VERY MUCH A PARK AND WAS INTENDED TO BE A PARK THAT THE THE PD THAT WAS IN PLACE DIDN'T ALLOW RECREATIONAL USES. THAT'S A REAL ANOMALY. I DON'T UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. THAT WAS I THINK THAT PD HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. AND OF COURSE WE ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY APPROXIMATELY 25 YEARS AGO. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE ZONING ITEM. I APPRECIATE THAT WE'RE TAKING THIS OUT OF THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING. IT STILL DOES NOT NEGATE THE FACT THAT THERE'S INDUSTRIAL USES IN AND AROUND ADJACENCY TO THIS PROPERTY, AND I DO NOT FEEL THAT IT'S A COMPATIBLE USE FOR THE RECOMMENDED USE. THEREFORE I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE ITEM. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I THINK WE'RE BACK TO YOU, CHAIRMAN WEST, FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I'LL JUST END ON A QUESTION AND A COMMENT. THE THE RETAIL COMPONENT THAT'S NECESSARY OR THAT'S RECOMMENDED THROUGH MU ONE. DID THE WINGS AT SOME POINT GIVE GIVE US INDICATION THAT THEY MIGHT NEED THAT RETAIL COMPONENT THERE? [04:25:03] I DON'T KNOW. AS I SAID IT'S A SPECULATION. WE THINK THAT THIS WILL FIT UNDER THE PRIVATE RECREATION USE. BUT WE WOULD PREFER THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND, ESPECIALLY FOR CITY OWNED PROPERTIES TO ALLOW A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY. AND THEN WHERE STAFF WAS WHEN STAFF WAS LOOKING AT VARIOUS SITES ACROSS THE CITY TO TO GO THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS. THIS SITE WAS CHOSEN IN LARGE PART BECAUSE OF THE ABILITY TO GET THIS ZONING COMPLETED IN TIME TO THEN BEGIN THE CONSTRUCTION. SO IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK THE BIG SURPRISE TO RYAN O'CONNOR'S POINT WAS THE FACT THAT NOBODY EXPECTED THAT WE WOULD HAVE A ZONING DESIGNATION IN THE CITY THAT DOESN'T ALLOW RECREATION. USES THOSE USES. USES ARE TYPICALLY ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN THE CITY IN ANY ZONING DESIGNATION. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THAT WOULD BE YES, COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND ALL OF THE OTHER FACTORS THAT WERE CONSIDERED IN OUR CRITERIA FOR A, A LOCATION THAT WOULD BE FEASIBLE AND WOULD ALSO ALLOW FOR US TO DELIVER THE FACILITY ON TIME. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT QUESTION. I THINK YOU HIT ON MY POINT THERE. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER, THAT THIS WASN'T JUST A RANDOM SELECTION TO TRY TO BUILD SOMETHING NEW IN AN AREA THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY AMENITIES. IT WAS A TIMING ISSUE AS MUCH AS ANYTHING ELSE. AND WE WE NOT ONLY HAVE A CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION TO OUR PARTNERS, THE DALLAS WINGS, FOR THIS FACILITY TO BE CONSTRUCTED. WE INVITED THEM TO COME TO OUR CITY FROM ARLINGTON, AND WE, MOST OF US CELEBRATED WITH THEM AT THEIR PRESS CONFERENCES AND HAVE BEEN BIG CHAMPIONS OF THE WINGS. AND WE LIKE TO GET THE SIGNED BASKETBALLS AND TAKE PICTURES WITH THEM. SO THIS IS OUR THIS IS A CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION FOR US TO GO THROUGH THIS ZONING TO FURTHER OUR COMMITMENT TO THEM, NOT JUST SHOW UP FOR THE PICTURES, BUT ACTUALLY DO THE HARD WORK THAT IT TAKES UP HERE. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, I WANT TO THANK THE CITY MANAGEMENT FOR DOING THIS, THE MAYOR FOR CHAMPIONING BRINGING THE WINGS HERE AND LET ALL OF OUR PROFESSIONAL SPORTS PARTNERS KNOW THAT THAT WE'VE GOT YOUR BACK. THANK YOU. MAYOR, I JUST ALSO WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING. I KNOW THAT MOST OF THIS CONVERSATION HAS BEEN ABOUT THE ZONING CHANGE FOR THE ACTUAL PRACTICE FACILITY, BUT I ALSO WANT TO REMIND THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WE WILL HAVE THE PRACTICE SOCCER FIELDS THERE FOR OUR DALLAS TRINITY WOMEN'S SOCCER TEAM AS WELL. SO IT'S NOT JUST THE PRACTICE FACILITY. I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT SINCE THAT'S BEEN LEFT OUT OF THIS CONVERSATION. THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES COULD SOMEBODY EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS MOTION DOES NOT PASS THIS ZONING CHANGE? IT'S VERY SIMPLE. WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD IN DELIVERING THE PRACTICE FACILITY FOR THE WOMEN'S BASKETBALL TEAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR WITH OUR APPROVED CONTRACT, DOES THE CONTRACT ACTUALLY SPECIFY THIS LOCATION? I DON'T BELIEVE WE ACTUALLY VOTED. I THINK WE'RE GETTING BACK INTO THE MERIT OF THE ACTUAL PROJECT. THIS AGAIN, AND I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE MAYOR, BUT WE'RE NOT DEBATING THE PROJECT ITSELF. THE ONLY REASON I'LL ALLOW IT, AND I STILL WANT TO KEEP IT NARROW, IS IT'S GETTING TO THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THE ZONING FAILING. BUT THAT'S THE EXTENT TO WHICH I WANT YOU TO GO DOWN THAT PATH, BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S ABOUT IT'S ABOUT DEBATING WHAT WE'RE IT'S I KNOW WHAT SOME PEOPLE ARE THINKING, AND THIS IS ALL ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE DISCUSS AND DEBATE WHAT WE POST. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF OF OPEN MEETINGS AND GOOD GOVERNANCE. WE DON'T POST THINGS. THE THE PUBLIC WAS ON NOTICE THAT WE WOULD BE DISCUSSING A ZONING CHANGE TODAY, NOT THAT WE'D BE DEBATING THE MERITS OF A PRACTICE FACILITY OR NOT FOR THE WINGS. SO WE HAVE TO DEBATE WHAT WE TOLD THE PUBLIC WE'D BE DEBATING TODAY. THEY DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON A DIFFERENT DEBATE. THEY HAD A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON A ZONING CHANGE TODAY. AND SO THAT IS WHY I AM SO STRICT ABOUT GERMANENESS ON STUFF. SO I'M ASKING YOU TO. SO I'M ALLOWING HER TO RESPOND TO THIS BECAUSE I NEED YOU TO KEEP IT TO YES, TO THE MERITS OF WHAT HAPPENS IF THE ZONING CHANGE FAILS. AND SO IF IT FAILS AND YOU ARE SAYING THAT WE WOULD NOT BE HONORING OUR CONTRACT. MY QUESTION IS IF THE CONTRACT INCLUDED THIS LOCATION OR NOT. WE HAVE UPDATED BASED ON THE DECISION THAT COUNCIL MADE. I THINK THERE WAS AN ACTION ITEM, AND I'M DRAWING A BLANK THAT WE WERE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE THE ACTUAL DELIVERY OF THIS LOCATION. I THINK ALL OF OUR CONTRACTUAL DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN UPDATED TO ACTUALLY INCLUDE THIS AS AN ADDRESS FOR THE PRACTICE FACILITY. SO IT IS A PART OF THE EXECUTED AGREEMENT. AND IF THIS ZONING CASE PASSES, IS IT ACTUALLY POSSIBLE TO BUILD THIS LOCATION IN EIGHT [04:30:08] MONTHS, A TIME FRAME GIVEN JUST FOR APPROVING AN SUP ON ANOTHER CASE? NOW, I THINK WE'RE A LITTLE BIT INTO THE MERITS. I MEAN, AGAIN. WHETHER OR NOT THE PROJECT CAN BE DELIVERED IF WE PASS IT OR NOT. I MEAN, LIKE I'M SAYING, THAT'S OUT OF BOUNDS. OKAY. SO THE REASON I WAS ASKING IS BECAUSE IF WE APPROVE THE ZONING AND WE CAN'T, WE STILL COULD END UP WITH A VERY DIFFERENT ZONING AND THE PROJECT MIGHT NOT EVEN HAPPEN. AND SO IF WE'RE INTENT ON CHANGING THE ZONING FOR THE PROJECT, THAT MIGHT NOT BE THE RESULT ANYHOW. AND THEN WE'RE STUCK WITH A NEW ONE. WHERE HAD THAT PROJECT NOT GONE FORWARD? WE MIGHT HAVE WANTED IT TO BE A DIFFERENT ZONING. SO SINCE SINCE THERE WAS THE ASSERTION THAT THE CONTRACT SAYS THIS LOCATION, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MIGHT BE IN VIOLATION BECAUSE I'M NOT AWARE OF THE CITY EVER BUILDING ANYTHING IN EIGHT MONTHS. OKAY, YOU GOT IT OUT. OKAY. SO THOSE WERE ALL OF MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. OKAY, MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I JUST HAD A QUESTION RELATED TO A RECOLLECTION. I THINK IT WAS BEFORE I WAS HERE. DIDN'T WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE HAD SOME SOCCER FIELDS IN AN INDUSTRIAL AREA THAT WAS CREATING SOME PROBLEMS WHERE THE WHERE WE WERE, WHERE WE HAD COMBINED WHERE WE HAD SOME, SOME AVAILABILITY FOR RECREATIONAL USES IN AN INDUSTRIAL AREA THAT CAME TO A POINT OF ORDER. I DON'T SEE HOW OTHER SOCCER FIELDS IN ANOTHER PART OF THE CITY ARE IS GERMANE TO THIS PARTICULAR ZONING MATTER. I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN THAT ONE, TOO. MR. ROTH, DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THE WHAT THE NATURE OF MY RULINGS ARE ABOUT TODAY? IT'S ABOUT WHERE I WAS GOING WITH MY ZONING QUESTION. WAS A CHANGE IN THE ZONING TO ALLOW FOR THE RECREATIONAL PART OF THAT USE MAY HAVE AN IMPACT ON A FUTURE DECISION BECAUSE THE SURROUNDING AREA, ALL THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES DO HAVE INDUSTRIAL USES ON THEM. AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN, IN THE, IN THE REZONING REQUEST. THAT'S IT. FAIR ENOUGH. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. I WAS WONDERING WHEN FOR DALLAS IS GOING TO COME UP. THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT IN THIS CASE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS INCLUDED IN THE PLACE TYPE REGIONAL OPEN SPACE. SO IT MAKES ALL THE SENSE TO REZONE IT TO A ZONING DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS RECREATION TYPE OF USES. AND AGAIN, IS THERE ANOTHER ZONING CLASSIFICATION THAT WOULD NOT BE MU THAT WOULD ALLOW THE PARTICULAR USE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE, WHICH WOULD BE THE, THE, THE STADIUM OR THE RECREATIONAL USE. COULD IT COME? IS THERE A IS THERE AN INDUSTRIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT TO TO HAPPEN? PROBABLY. I CAN DO THAT RESEARCH. AS I SAID, WE WERE LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT'S LEAST INTENSE AND A GOOD TRANSITION BETWEEN INDUSTRIAL. THERE IS SOME MULTIFAMILY AROUND. SO WE WERE TRYING TO ACTUALLY ALSO PLAY INTO OR RESPOND TO FOR DALLAS RECOMMENDATION FOR REGIONAL OPEN SPACE. SO I WOULD SAY THAT A, ANOTHER INDUSTRIAL TYPE OF USE OR ZONING DESIGNATION WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE VERY COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT FOR DALLAS RECOMMENDS HERE, WHICH IS REGIONAL OPEN SPACE. WELL, NOT SO MUCH FOR DALLAS AS MUCH AS TO ALLOW. IS THERE ANOTHER CLASSIFICATION THAT HAS RECREATIONAL USE AS A AS ONE OF THE SUB KEY CATEGORIES THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO RETAIN THE INDUSTRIAL USE, THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING, BUT WOULD IN FACT ALLOW THE THE PARTICULAR SPECIFIC USE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH THERE. AS I SAID, WE MAY FIND SOME LESS INTENSE COMMERCIAL TYPE BUT I, I MEAN, I WILL HAVE TO GO LOOK. PAGE THREE OF THE STAFF REPORT. WE DO SAY THAT IT'S NOT ONLY THAT WE ARE CONSISTENT WITH REGIONAL OPEN SPACE, BUT SURROUNDING IS FLEX, COMMERCIAL PLACE TYPE OR COMMUNITY MIXED USE, WHICH IS THAT'S WHY IT LED US TO BELIEVE THAT AN MU AT THIS LOCATION WOULD MAKE SENSE AND WOULD PLAY INTO FOR DALLAS ADOPTED VISION. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. ANDREA. I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY. I JUST HAD THE DISCUSSION, BUT I WAS GOING TO GET YOU IN THIS CONVERSATION, [04:35:02] THEN WENT RIGHT TO JEREMY GRACEY, I APOLOGIZE. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I DO APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE'VE KIND OF GONE BACK AND FORTH AND A LOT OUTSIDE OF THE ACTUAL GERMANE NESS OF THIS TOPIC. SO FOR THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A RECORD VOTE, PLEASE. OKAY. THAT NEEDS TO BE SECONDED, DOES IT NOT? THE MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED. SO NOW WE'LL PROCEED TO A VOTE. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO REQUEST A RECORD VOTE FOR THE MAIN MOTION. NOT FOR THE FOR THE. OKAY. DULY NOTED ON THAT. THANK YOU. WE WILL HAVE A ROLL CALL ON THE CALLING OF THE QUESTION BECAUSE WE NEED. WHAT'S THE THRESHOLD? DOES EVERYONE KNOWS TWO THIRDS? OKAY, LET'S GO FOR IT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OR IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCILMEMBER GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCILMEMBER CAZANA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. RIDLEY. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. NO. WITH 11 VOTING IN FAVOR, FOUR OPPOSE. THE CALL PASSES HAS BEEN CALLED. OKAY, SO NOW WE ARE ON THE THE MOTION VOTE ON THE UNDERLYING MOTION. CHAIRWOMAN, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON IT? I SEE YOUR YOU'RE STILL YOU'RE STILL IN THE QUEUE. WELL, A RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED, SO, MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THIS IS ON Z2. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE POLICE STATE. YES, IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. CADENA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. ROTH. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. RIDLEY. NO. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. NO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH 11 VOTING IN FAVOR, FOUR OPPOSE. THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT ITEM WILL BE Z FOUR. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO. [Z4. 25-2681A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a CS Commercial Service District and a resolution accepting deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant on property zoned Planned Development District No. 635, on the north side of Royal Lane, between Newkirk Street and Goodnight Lane Recommendation of Staff: Approval] WE'RE NOW IN YOUR INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. ITEM Z FOUR IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ROYAL LANE, BETWEEN NEWKIRK STREET AND GOODNIGHT LANE. MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 21 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 400FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST. WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND TWO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST. YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, JONATHAN VINCENT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS JONATHAN VINCENT, 2323 ROSS AVENUE. AND I'LL I'LL BE BRIEF. I'VE COMMUNICATED WITH YOU BY EMAIL, AND YOU'VE SEEN THIS CASE ON YOUR AGENDA BEFORE, AND WE APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH US WHILE WE GET THE TRANSACTIONAL SIDE OF THIS LINED UP AND READY TO GO. I THINK THIS IS A WIN FOR EVERYBODY. THIS IS A SURPLUS. THE ISD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR FIVE YEARS. DISD HAS IT ON THE MARKET, AND OUR CLIENT IS VERSA PRINTING. AND I HAVE MR. SERGIO GODINEZ WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OF VERSA, IS HERE WITH US TODAY. HE HAS A THRIVING LOCAL PRINTING BUSINESS IN NORTHWEST DALLAS, WISHES TO BE ABLE TO EXPAND BETTER SERVE THE COMMUNITY. SO HE WANTS TO ACQUIRE THIS SITE, ADAPTIVELY, REUSE IT TO MOVE HIS PRINTING BUSINESS INTO THE BUILDING, AND THAT WAY, EXPAND BETTER SERVE THE COMMUNITY. WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA PRIOR, COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. AND SO WHAT WE ARRIVED AT IS A REQUEST TO CHANGE THIS FROM PD SIX 35 TO THE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT, WHICH WILL ALLOW MR. GODINEZ USES BY. RIGHT. BUT WE ALSO COMMUNICATED WITH THE COMMUNITY. WE MET WITH THE KOREAN CHAMBER, WE REACHED OUT TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS. GOT A GOOD RECEPTION AND OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE OFFICIALS REPRESENTING DISTRICT SIX, LED US TO VOLUNTEER PUBLIC DEED RESTRICTIONS TO RESTRICT AGAINST SOME OF THE MORE INTENSIVE AND OR INDUSTRIAL TYPE USES. [04:40:01] WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE THE LONG TERM VISION FOR THIS PART OF THE COMMUNITY. SO LIKE I SAY, I THINK IT'S A WIN FOR EVERYBODY. ISD GETS TO SELL THIS AFTER FIVE YEARS. BETTER FOR DISD AND ITS TAXPAYERS. IT'S GOOD FOR MR. GODINEZ AND HIS BUSINESS COMMUNITY SERVING CONTRIBUTING BUSINESS. IT'S GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE THEY GET TO RESTRICT SOME OF THE USES THEY MIGHT NOT OTHERWISE WANT TO SEE. SO WE ARE RESPECTFULLY ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT TODAY TO CHANGE THE ZONING. PD 635 TO CS WITH OUR VOLUNTEERED PUBLIC DEED RESTRICTIONS, ACCEPTING THOSE BY RESOLUTION. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM Z FOUR? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION? YES. MOTION TO APPROVE. ITEM NUMBER Z4. IS THERE MORE? AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. THERE IT IS. ALRIGHT. IT'S BEEN SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION, MISS KATINA? YES. FIVE MINUTES IF YOU'D LIKE IT. YEAH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT. I WANT TO THANK MR. GODINEZ FOR WORKING SO CLOSELY WITH THE COMMUNITY. I KNOW HE WORKED WITH THE KOREAN CHAMBER AND APPRECIATE THAT THE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE OFFERED THIS BUSINESS HAS BEEN IN IN OPERATION FOR OVER 20 YEARS. AND SO THIS IS GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO EXPAND THEIR BUSINESS AND STAY IN THE NORTHWEST DALLAS AREA. SO JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE DONE TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY AND LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING YOU IN THIS EXPANDED BUSINESS. IN NORTHWEST DALLAS. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST Z4? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. ITEM ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON ONE READOPTING AND CONTINUING IN [PH1. 25-2605A A public hearing to receive comments on (1) re-adopting and continuing in effect Chapter 12, "City Youth Program Standards of Care," of the Dallas City Code, to re-establish standards of care for certain city youth programs in compliance with state law; and, (2) at the close of the public hearing; approving of an ordinance to re-adopt Chapter 12 of the Dallas City Code - Financing: No cost consideration to the City] EFFECT. CHAPTER 12. CITY YOUTH PROGRAM STANDARDS OF CARE OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE TO REESTABLISH STANDARDS OF CARE FOR CERTAIN CITY YOUTH PROGRAMS IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW. AND TWO AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING APPROVING AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT CHAPTER 1212 OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE. THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM ONE? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SECOND. WONDERFUL. IT'S BEEN MOVED IN. SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. MADAM SECRETARY. MR. MAYOR, THIS CONCLUDES YOUR AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING. [OPEN MICROPHONE (Part 2 of 2)] HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE REMAINING OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS. ALL RIGHT, LET'S DO IT. OKAY, I'LL RECITE THE SPEAKER GUIDELINES. SPEAKERS MUST OBSERVE THE SAME RULES OF PROPRIETY, DECORUM, AND GOOD CONDUCT APPLICABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. ANY SPEAKER MAKING PERSONAL AND PERTINENT, PROFANE OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS, OR WHO BECOMES BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING CITY COUNCIL, WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ROOM FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN PERSON. FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, YOU'LL BE REMOVED FROM THE SESSION. INDIVIDUALS WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. YOU'LL NOTICE THE TIME ON THE MONITOR AT THE PODIUM FOR THOSE IN PERSON SPEAKERS. WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP, PLEASE STOP. FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, I WILL ANNOUNCE WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. ALSO, SPEAKERS, PLEASE BE MINDFUL THAT DURING YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REFER TO A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER BY NAME AND ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON. ONLY YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, ROBERT ROSS. THANK YOU. MAYOR. COUNCIL. I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK ON PROP U. MY NAME IS ROBERT ROSS. I LIVE IN CEDAR HILL. MY WIFE AND I WERE VERY CONCERNED REGARDING DALLAS AND THE SURROUNDING CITIES. CRIME IS AT AN ALL TIME HIGH. WE KNOW THE NUMBERS, BUT WE ALSO KNOW WHAT WE SEE. EVERY WEEK WE READ ANOTHER STORY ABOUT CRIME, A SHOOTING, A ROBBERY, A CARJACKING. AND I THINK TO MYSELF, HOW DID WE LET IT GET THIS BAD? AND THE ANSWER IS RIGHT HERE IN THIS ROOM. WE'RE A THOUSAND OFFICERS SHORT OF WHAT WE NEED. THAT'S NOT AN OPINION. THAT'S WHAT THE CITY'S OWN REPORTS HAVE SHOWN. YEAR AFTER YEAR. AND WE KNOW THAT MOST CRIMES AREN'T EVEN REPORTED FOR FEAR OF RETALIATION. WE KEEP LOSING OFFICERS TO CITIES THAT PAY MORE, THAT TREAT THEM BETTER, AND ACTUALLY INVEST IN PUBLIC SAFETY. THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS PASSED PAST PROP YOU TO FIX THAT. IT WASN'T VAGUE. IT SAID RAISE POLICE PAY TO THE TOP THREE IN TEXAS. STAFF UP PUT 50% OF NEW GENERAL REVENUE INTO PUBLIC SAFETY. THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS VOTED FOR IT. THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS PASSED IT. [04:45:04] SO WHY ARE WE NOW PRETENDING THAT 58 MILLION IS CLOSE ENOUGH TO 111 MILLION? IF I WERE TO SEND IN HALF OF MY ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX PAYMENT AND DECLARE THIS AS CLOSE ENOUGH, IT WOULDN'T FLY. THIS WON'T FLY EITHER. IT'S A BETRAYAL. AND IF YOU KEEP UNDERFUNDING THIS DEPARTMENT, MORE FAMILIES WILL BE VICTIMS. MORE KIDS WILL BE CAUGHT IN THE CROSSFIRE, AND MORE OFFICERS WILL WALK AWAY FROM DALLAS FOREVER. YOU MAY ALL BE OKAY WITH THIS LEGACY, BUT WE'RE NOT. AND THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR THIS ARE WATCHING, INCLUDING MYSELF, MY WIFE, AND THE CITIZENS OF THE SURROUNDING CITIES. THIS IS NOT A TIME FOR HALF STEPS FUND PROP YOU. NOT PARTIALLY, NOT CREATIVELY, BUT COMPLETELY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SARAH SEGAL IS NOT PRESENT. DOLORES PHILLIPS. DOLORES. DOLORES PHILLIPS, YOU DID HAVE A HANDOUT SENT TO YOU VIA EMAIL. AS I HOLD UP THESE ENVELOPES, I WAS INFORMED THAT THERE WILL BE A TRIAL STARTING DECEMBER 8TH AND YOU WILL BE ABLE TO STAND BEFORE THE JURY TO EXPLAIN TO THEM WHY EXHIBITS WERE STOLEN FROM THE COURT OF LAW. IN THESE SEALED EXHIBITS THAT WERE IN THE POSSESSION OF THE COURT WERE PROOF OF YOUR COVER UP WITHIN A COVER UP. COVER UPS ARE VEXATIOUS. THEY'RE DANGEROUS. THEY'RE FRIVOLOUS. AND IT'S NOT GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY. IT'S NOT GOOD FOR POLICE. IN 2009, YOU ERASED 2911 CALLS WITHIN A WEEK. 2013 OCTOBER 25TH, 2013. YOU ERASED TWO HOURS OF VIDEO FROM THE MEETING AT HEADQUARTERS. AND IT WAS CORPORAL COTNER WHO YOU WERE TRYING TO PROTECT WHO WANTED NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CORRUPTION. WITH THAT BEING SAID, IN THESE TWO SEALED ENVELOPES WERE MEDICAL IMAGES, THE POLICE REPORT THAT WAS FABRICATED AND OTHER DOCUMENTS AND 911 CALLS. NOT ONLY THAT, ON THE USB THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN NAVARRO COUNTY, THE SAME DOCUMENTS, THE SAME 911 CALLS HAVE NOW BEEN ERASED FROM THAT EXHIBIT TO PROTECT YOU. WHAT I NEED YOU TO KNOW IS COME TIME FOR THE TRIAL, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE NO EXCUSES. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE NO INTIMIDATION THAT'S GOING TO WORK. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE NO RETALIATION THAT WORKS. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEAK THE TRUTH OF YOUR ONGOING COVER UP WITHIN A COVER UP. AS FOR AS WAS ON THE HANDOUT FOR THE SPEAKERS LIST, IT SHOULD READ DPD REPORT NUMBER 0273291. DASH, A CORPORAL COTNER CAME TO THE MEETING WITH HIS OWN PERSONAL DPD REPORT NUMBER. MISS CUSUMANO. MISS SHERRY SUMINO, MISS MARY LOU VELEZ. THORN SAID THAT THEY WERE READY TO RIGHT THE WRONG ON THE RECORD IN THE COURT OF LAW. MISS CUSUMANO, BOTH YOUR EMPLOYEES SAID THAT SHE HAD SPOKE WITH CORPORAL COTNER. HE HAD RETIRED AND GOT MARRIED AND LIVED DOWN IN ARKANSAS AND WAS WILLING TO RIGHT HIS WRONG. MISS CUSUMANO, WHEN I SPOKE TO HER IN 2019, 2020, SHE TALKED TO ME AS THOUGH IT WAS NOTHING. SHE SAID, OH DOLORES, WE ALL GET IT WRONG SOMETIME. BUT THAT FABRICATED POLICE REPORT WAS USED AGAINST MY DAD RIGHT OVER THERE AT THE REHABILITATION WELLNESS CENTER. WHO COULD MAKE THE CALL TO TAKE AN ELDERLY PERSON BACK TO LET HIM DIE BEFORE HIS TIME? IT'S FUNNY. NOW, MISS TOLBERT, YOU SAID YOU WAS TRYING TO BUILD TRUST WITH THE COMMUNITY. YOU CAN'T BUILD TRUST WITH THE COMMUNITY ON LIES, DECEPTION, AND MANIPULATION. I'M READY TO TAKE YOUR BLOWS AS I HAVE BEEN TAKING THEM. HAVE A GOOD DAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NAKIA. DOUGLAS. GOOD AFTERNOON. MAYOR. CITY COUNCIL PERSONS. MY NAME IS NAKIA DOUGLAS. [04:50:04] I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DALLAS EDUCATION COLLECTIVE, A NEW NONPROFIT HERE IN DALLAS. OUR MISSION IS TO SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION IN THE AREAS OF GREATEST NEEDS WITHIN OUR CITY. THE MAIN PURPOSE IS TO CREATE ACCESS TO POWERFUL EDUCATION. EXCELLENT EDUCATION FOR ALL KIDS, REGARDLESS OF THEIR ZIP CODES. WITH THAT, WE ARE HOSTING COMMUNITY CONVENINGS. THE REMAINING COMMUNITY CONVENINGS ARE SEPTEMBER 23RD AT PARK SOUTH. WHY? OCTOBER 21ST AT PLEASANT OAKS RECREATION RECREATION CENTER, WHERE WE'RE BRINGING TOGETHER NOT ONLY OUR FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY IMPORTANTLY, ELECTED OFFICIALS, COMMUNITY LEADERS TO TALK ABOUT A NEW VISION OF WHAT PUBLIC EDUCATION CAN BE. WE KNOW THAT OUR DALLAS ISD SCHOOLS HAVE DONE TREMENDOUSLY WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, BUT WE ALSO KNOW AND RECOGNIZE THE CONTINUED WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. COMING HERE AND STANDING BEFORE YOU ALL TODAY AS AN INVITATION TO BE A PART OF THIS CONVERSATION WITH US. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. SHARON SHEPHERD HAS CANCELED. COURTNEY SCOTT WILL BE VIRTUAL. COURTNEY. SCOTT. HELLO? CAN YOU SEE ME? NO. WE CAN. I'M TRYING TO GET ON VIDEO. WE CAN ONLY HEAR YOU, MISS. YEAH. SORRY. OKAY. SORRY ABOUT THAT. I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IT VISIBLE. AND LET'S SEE. HOLD ON. I JUST FIGURED IT OUT. ALRIGHT. SORRY FOR THAT DELAY. SHOULD BE ON THERE FOR A SECOND. IN A SECOND. THERE IT GOES. OKAY, WE CAN SEE YOU. GREAT. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY MY NAME IS COURTNEY SCOTT. I DO LIVE IN PORTLAND, OREGON, BUT I ALSO HAVE VISITED DALLAS AND I PLAN TO VISIT AGAIN. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL, THRIVING CITY, AND THERE'S ONE WAY IT COULD MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. AND THAT IS TO BAN HORSE CARRIAGE. THE HORSE CARRIAGE BUSINESS. THIS IS JUST A VERY CRUEL BUSINESS TO HORSES. AND IT ALSO MAKES THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS UNSAFE. THERE'S BEEN SO MANY ACCIDENTS WITH HORSES. RECENTLY, A HORSE IN NEW YORK CITY COLLAPSED AND DIED. ANOTHER ONE WAS SPOOKED AND RAN AWAY, THREATENING, IMPERILING THE LIVES OF THE CITIZENS AND THE OTHER CARS. HORSES DON'T BELONG IN TRAFFIC. THAT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST KIND OF COMMON SENSE. SO I WANTED TO ENCOURAGE DALLAS TO BECOME A LITTLE BETTER CITY, A LITTLE BIT MORE HUMANE AND COMPASSIONATE BY DOING WHAT OTHER CITIES HAVE ALREADY DONE, WHICH IS TO BAN THIS TRADE, INCLUDING CHICAGO, SALT LAKE CITY, BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI, CAMDEN, NEW JERSEY, LONDON, PARIS AND TORONTO. BUT HERE'S THE THING THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE TO COMPLETELY GET RID OF CARRIAGES. IT CAN STILL BE A THRIVING TOURIST BUSINESS BY ADOPTING WHAT MANY CITIES HAVE DONE, WHICH IS USING ELECTRIC CARRIAGES. THESE ARE REALLY BEAUTIFUL. I'VE LOOKED THEM UP ONLINE. THEY HAVE. IT'S A BUSINESS GOING ON RIGHT NOW IN GUADALAJARA, MEXICO. BOMBAY, INDIA BRUSSELS, BELGIUM, AND IN MOUNT DORA, FLORIDA. AND STARTING IN 2026, IT WILL ALSO BE ELECTRIC CARRIAGE IN PHILADELPHIA. SO THIS IS A WAY TO TRANSITION OUT OF USING HORSES. AND IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN IT YET, I HIGHLY RECOMMEND A DOCUMENTARY. IT'S AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR FREE. IT'S IT'S UNDER AN HOUR. IT'S CALLED BLINDERS BASED ON THE BLINDERS THAT ARE PUT ON HORSES SO THEY CAN'T SEE OUT OF THE SIDES OF THEIR FACE. HORSES HAVE 350 DEGREE VISION, SO THEY'RE BASICALLY GOING AROUND FOR HOURS EVERY DAY, ONLY BEING ABLE TO SEE FORWARD, BECAUSE OTHERWISE THEY COULD GET SPOOKED. BUT THEY DO GET SPOOKED ANYWAY FROM NOISE AND OTHER TRAFFIC ISSUES. SO IT'S JUST A VERY UNSAFE AND VERY IT'S JUST AN INHUMANE PRACTICE AND IT CAN END. AND I WANT TO SAY AT THE END OF THIS FILM, BLINDERS HAS A HAPPY ENDING. THE HORSES THAT HAVE BEEN USED FOR THEIR WHOLE LIVES AND, YOU KNOW, SUFFERED TREMENDOUSLY. AND THE HORSE TRADE, HORSE CARRIAGE BUSINESS WERE RESCUED. MANY OF THEM WERE RESCUED TO A SANCTUARY. AND THEY NOW HAVE THE WONDERFUL LIFE OF RUNNING FREE. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL THING TO SEE, AND IT WOULD BE WONDERFUL TO SEE THOSE HORSES HERE IN DALLAS EXPERIENCE THAT SAME WONDERFUL NEW LIFE AND PROTECT THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS AT THE SAME TIME. THANK YOU. [04:55:04] THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES YOUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS FOR THIS MEETING, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY MORE BUSINESS BEFORE US TODAY? MR. MAYOR, THIS CONCLUDES YOUR BUSINESS FOR THIS MEETING. ALL RIGHT, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS FOR THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL AND THE TIME BEING 03:51 P.M.. I NOW ADJOURN THIS MEETING. THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.