6. 25-3078A Authorize a five-year agreement with the American National Red Cross (Red Cross), the Dallas Chapter - North Texas Region, to permit the temporary use of Park & Recreation Department facilities, as a Red Cross public shelter during a declared or undeclared natural disaster or other condition or event requiring the activation of the disaster relief functions of the Red Cross - Financing: No cost consideration to the City

[6. 25-3078A Authorize a five-year agreement with the American National Red Cross (Red Cross), the Dallas Chapter - North Texas Region, to permit the temporary use of Park & Recreation Department facilities, as a Red Cross public shelter during a declared or undeclared natural disaster or other condition or event requiring the activation of the disaster relief functions of the Red Cross - Financing: No cost consideration to the City]

RED CROSS, THE DALLAS CHAPTER, NORTH TEXAS REGION TO PERMIT TEMPORARY USE OF PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FACILITIES AS A RED CROSS PUBLIC SHELTER DURING DURING A DECLARED AND UNDECLARED NATURAL DISASTER OR OTHER CONDITION OR EVENT REQUIRING THE ACTIVATION OF THE DISASTER RELIEF FUNCTIONS OF THE RED CROSS. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? ALRIGHT, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR FIVE MINUTES. ITEM SIX.

EVERYONE. THANK YOU. IN READING THE ITEM AND ALL THE THINGS THAT IT SAYS, IT'S WRITTEN IN A PRETTY AMBIGUOUS WAY ABOUT THE SCOPE OF SERVICES THAT COULD BE ADMINISTERED BY THE RED CROSS AT THE REC CENTERS.

AND GIVEN OUR RECENT BRIEFING WHERE STAFF WAS WORKING TO PUT HOMELESS, INCLEMENT WEATHER SHELTERING IN THE REC CENTERS.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE CITY MANAGEMENT CONFIRM THAT THIS AGREEMENT WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR THAT SPECIFIC PROGRAM.

HOMELESS, INCLEMENT WEATHER, SHELTERING TO BE IN THE REC CENTERS UNLESS THERE'S A STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARED BY THE MAYOR.

FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO SPEAK TO THAT. GOOD MORNING.

TRAVIS HOUSTON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND CRISIS RESPONSE.

SO, IN EFFECT, THE SCOPE OF THIS AGREEMENT IS REALLY A PREPAREDNESS ITEM TO ALLOW US TO PARTNER WITH THE RED CROSS FOR USE OF PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES FOLLOWING A DISASTER AND DISASTER, REALLY? MEANING A DECLARED DISASTER, USUALLY A NATURAL HAZARD OR SOME TYPE OF EVACUATION.

AND THE RED CROSS HAS MADE PRETTY CLEAR TO US THAT ANY SORT OF LIKE HOMELESS SHELTERING IS, IS OUTSIDE OF THEIR MISSION AND SCOPE. AND SO THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF A OR RENEWAL OF AN AGREEMENT WE'VE HELD WITH THEM FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. TRAVIS, THANK YOU. AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THAT.

MY CONCERN, OF COURSE, IS THAT THE RED CROSS COULD SUBCONTRACT TO SOMEBODY ELSE TO DO THAT.

I, I HAVE PUSHED VERY STRONGLY TO MAKE SURE OUR CITY DOES HAVE HOMELESS AND WEATHER SHELTERING.

I JUST DISAGREE THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE IN OUR REC CENTER.

I JUST DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE IN REC CENTERS. SO I'M WONDERING, FROM A CITY MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE I SEE CHIEF ARTIS HERE.

YOU'RE IN WAITING. CHIEF ARTIS CHIEF OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

AGAIN JUST REITERATING WHAT TRAVIS WAS, WAS SAYING IS THAT THIS ALLOWS US.

OF COURSE, WE'VE HAD FIRES BEFORE. WHEN I WAS A FIRE CHIEF, WHERE WE HAD DISASTERS, WHERE WE HAD TO TAKE RESIDENTS TO LOCAL GYMS. THIS HELPS US TO HAVE THOSE TYPE OF TOOLS IN OUR TOOL BELT TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

I UNDERSTAND I'M JUST LOOKING FOR THE COMMITMENT FROM MANAGEMENT THAT THIS WOULDN'T BE USED IN THAT WAY.

THERE'S NO PLANS TO USE THIS IN THAT WAY AT ALL.

THIS HAS BEEN A LONG STANDING AGREEMENT WITH US IN THE RED CROSS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OTHER ITEM THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.

WINTER WEATHER SHELTERING. STILL WORKING ON THAT ONE.

SO IS THERE A COMMITMENT FROM STAFF TO NOT USE IT IN THIS WAY? IT'S NOT DESIGNED TO BE USED IN THAT WAY. WELL, I UNDERSTAND NOT DESIGNED IS DIFFERENT FROM YOU SAYING IT WILL NOT BE USED.

THIS RED CROSS AGREEMENT WOULD NOT BE USED IN THAT WAY UNDER THIS AGREEMENT.

WE'VE NEVER USED IT IN THAT WAY. AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS TO USE IT IN THAT WAY.

OKAY, BUT YOU'RE USING VERY INDEFINITE WORDS.

I'M LOOKING FOR A IT WILL NOT BE USED. NOT. WE DON'T HAVE PLANS TO.

YES, MA'AM. AS AS I JUST STATED, THERE'S NO PLANS TO USE IT THAT WAY, AND WE HAVE NEVER USED IT THAT WAY.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY EVER, THAT WE WON'T EVER DO SOMETHING, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHEN A DISASTER HAPPENS.

HOW WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE TAKEN CARE OF.

WE'VE NEVER USED IT IN THIS WAY, AND THERE'S NO PLANS TO USE IT THAT WAY.

SO I'M SUPER FRUSTRATED THAT THERE'S NOT JUST A DEFINITIVE WE WILL NOT USE IT IN THIS WAY AND INSTEAD INDEFINITE LANGUAGE IS BEING USED.

[01:05:09]

YES, MA'AM, I UNDERSTAND. I'D LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION, PLEASE.

WHO MADE THE MOTION? WHAT MOTION WAS THE MOTION? MY MOTION WAS TO APPROVE. OKAY. THE BODY WOULD HAVE TO AGREE TO THAT, AND I.

IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? HEARING NONE.

IT'S SO ORDERED. THE MOTION IS WITHDRAWN. IS THERE A MOTION ON AGENDA ITEM SIX? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

WE'RE BACK ON AGENDA ITEM SIX. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM SIX? I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. I'M SORRY, IT'S NOT PULLING UP.

WELL, YOU'VE ALREADY SPOKEN ON THE ON THE NEW MOTION.

YEAH. YOU'VE SPOKEN. YOU'VE SPOKEN ON THE SAME ITEM.

YOU WANT TO SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES? THREE MINUTES.

WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THIS. I THINK THAT GIVEN THE BRIEFING THAT WE HAD WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE STAFF PLANS, ALTHOUGH THIS STAFF PLAN HAS BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD PREVIOUSLY.

I MEAN, I WAS THE CHAIR OF THE OF THE CITIZENS HOMELESS COMMISSION WHEN THE SAME IDEA WAS BROUGHT FORWARD AND THAT CITY COUNCIL ALSO DISMISSED IT AS A BAD IDEA.

AND I FIND IT PROBLEMATIC THAT YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO SAY UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN.

IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THERE'S A DIFFERENT PLAN THAT'S DEVELOPED, BUT USING THIS AGREEMENT SHOULD BE EASY FOR STAFF TO SAY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE THIS AGREEMENT TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

AND IT GIVES ME PAUSE THAT YOU'RE UNWILLING TO SAY SUCH A THING.

CITY MANAGER, I SEE YOUR BROWS IS LIFTED. WOULD YOU LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS OR YOU'RE NOT SURE WHAT THE CONVERSATION IS? I'M. I'M VERY WELL AWARE OF THE CONVERSATION.

I THINK WHAT STAFF HAS PRESENTED THAT THIS HAS BEEN A HISTORICAL ITEM WHERE WE ARE WORKING DIRECTLY WITH THE RED CROSS TO ENSURE THAT IN THE NEED OF A DISASTER RECOVERY CIRCUMSTANCE, THAT THESE SPACES ARE AVAILABLE.

WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD WITH CITY COUNCIL LAST WEEK.

YOU ASKED US TO GO AND LOOK AT A HYBRID MODEL WHERE WE WOULD NOT MAKE OUR FIRST PRIORITY THE USE OF ANY OF THE RECREATION CENTERS FOR A HOMELESS SHELTER.

BUT WE DID TALK ABOUT NEEDS THAT MIGHT INCLUDE A WARMING CENTER.

IF WE HAVE ELECTRICAL OUTAGES, HOW WOULD WE THEN UTILIZE THOSE REC CENTERS.

AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE LEFT THE CONVERSATION WITH COUNCIL LAST WEEK. WE UNDERSTAND YOUR COMMENTS THIS MORNING ABOUT THIS ITEM SPECIFICALLY, BUT THE WAY WE'VE LAID THIS OUT AND THE WAY THAT STAFF HAS ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS, IS THAT IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THESE FACILITIES WILL BE USED FOR HOMELESS SHELTER.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. SO CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT IT WILL NOT BE USED IN THAT WAY? THIS ITEM IS NOT FOR THE USE OF OUR RECREATION CENTERS AS HOMELESS SHELTERS DURING INCLEMENT WEATHER.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS ITEM IS. OKAY. THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN WEST. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. ON ITEM SIX.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I UNDERSTAND MY COLLEAGUES KIND OF FRUSTRATION HERE, BUT I ALSO GET STAFF'S POINT THAT IT'S HARD TO JUST HAVE THIS DEFINITIVE ANSWER, NOT KNOWING WHAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE IN AN EMERGENCY.

AND I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR STAFF WOULD BE IF THIS ENDED UP IF YOUR PLAN ENDED UP CHANGING AND THE RECREATION CENTERS WERE BEING PROPOSED FOR THIS TYPE OF USE, COULD STAFF COME BACK TO COMMITTEE TO COUNSEL AND JUST FILL US IN ON LIKE, WHAT MECHANISM COULD WE BE INFORMED OF WHY THIS IS SUCH AN URGENT NEED FOR YOU TO DO THAT? EXACTLY. AND AGAIN, THIS ITEM IS AGAIN FOR DISASTER RECOVERY.

TORNADOES, FLOODS, LARGE SCALE TYPES OF EVACUATIONS.

BUT WE KNOW THAT IN OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE RED CROSS, THEY ARE NOT PREPARED, NOR ARE THEY EQUIPPED TO ACTUALLY OPERATE A HOMELESS SHELTER IN THE NEED OF SOME KIND OF EVACUATION AND USING THESE FACILITIES.

SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE'RE SAYING THAT'S NOT IN THEIR SCOPE.

SO WE WOULD NOT BE ASKING THEM TO DO THAT AS PART OF THIS CONTRACT.

HOWEVER, IF THERE IS A SITUATION WHERE THERE IS AN INCLEMENT WEATHER CIRCUMSTANCE, AS WE LAID OUT LAST WEEK, AND WITHIN NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE PEOPLE NEED TO GET TO A WARMING CENTER, BE ABLE TO CHARGE THEIR CELL PHONES, THAT WE COULD UTILIZE OUR REC CENTERS FOR THAT PURPOSE BECAUSE WE'VE SPENT MONEY OUTFITTING, I THINK IT'S A TOTAL OF SIX OF OUR RECREATION CENTERS TO BE UTILIZED IN THOSE TYPES OF EMERGENCY SITUATIONS.

BUT THIS ITEM THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY IS NOT FOR THE RED CROSS TO OPERATE A HOMELESS SHELTER,

[01:10:02]

ANY HOMELESS SHELTERS AT ANY OF OUR REC CENTERS, THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS ITEM IS.

SO ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING US UTILIZING REC CENTERS FOR THAT IS REALLY NOT GERMANE TO THIS ITEM, BECAUSE THIS IS JUST ABOUT THE RED CROSS CONTRACT.

THAT'S EXACTLY CORRECT. THANK YOU, MR. ROTH. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I THINK THAT IT WAS SOMEWHAT CLARIFIED, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IN TALKING WITH STAFF PREVIOUSLY THAT THIS IS A CONTRACT WITH RED CROSS, AND RED CROSS SAYS THEY WILL NOT UTILIZE THAT TYPE OF A, OF AN OPERATION IN THOSE FACILITIES, AND THAT THIS IS THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT.

AND IF THAT'S IN FACT THE CASE, THEN IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT IT WOULDN'T BE DIFFICULT TO SAY OUR CONTRACT DOESN'T ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT, AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT. IS THAT, IN FACT THE CORRECT UNDERSTANDING, OR AM I AM I CONFUSED? THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND THE AMERICAN RED CROSS ALLOWS FOR THE USE OF ANY OF OUR PARKS AND RECS FACILITIES IN EMERGENCY DISASTER RECOVERY SITUATIONS. THAT IS THE HISTORICAL NATURE OF HOW WE'VE UTILIZED THIS AGREEMENT.

AND SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING THIS MORNING IS THAT THIS ITEM IS NOT AUTHORIZING THE RECREATION CENTERS TO BE USED BY THE RED CROSS AS EMERGENCY SHELTERS DURING INCLEMENT WEATHER, WHICH IS WHAT THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD LAST WEEK.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS ITEM IS BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING THAT I UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M GOING.

IS IT A LITTLE DIFFERENT DIRECTION ACTION, SAYING THAT TO HELP CLARIFY THE SITUATION, IT LOOKS LIKE THE CONTRACT WITH RED CROSS.

THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN DOING THAT TYPE OF OF SERVICE ANYWAY, AND THAT THE CONTRACT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY SAYS THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT KIND OF SERVICE. AND IF THAT'S IN FACT THE CASE OF THE CONTRACT, THEN IT SHOULDN'T BE DIFFICULT TO SAY, YEAH, THIS CONTRACT IS NOT GOING TO REQUIRE OR PERMIT RED CROSS TO DO THAT OR TO PROVIDE THAT KIND OF SERVICE.

WE CAN DEFINITELY. IT'S BACK TO THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING THEM TO DO AND WHAT THEY'RE AGREEING TO DO.

THEY ARE NOT AGREEING IN THE CONTRACT BETWEEN RED CROSS AND THE CITY TO OPERATE THE REC CENTERS AS SHELTERS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THAT IS NOT IN THEIR SCOPE, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS CONTRACT IS AUTHORIZING THEM TO DO.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY, TO MAYBE HELP MOVE THIS INTO THE POSITION TO ALLOW THE TO ALLOW US TO SAY THIS IS GOING TO BE ADEQUATELY TAKEN CARE OF, AND IT'S NOT AN ISSUE.

SO EXACTLY. AND SO WHAT WHAT COUNCIL DISCUSSED LAST WEEK IS THAT IN THE EVENT WE ARE IN AN EMERGENCY INCLEMENT WEATHER SHELTER TYPE OF SITUATION AND WE NEED TO ACTIVATE THE REC CENTERS THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE PRIMARY, THEY WOULD ONLY BE USED AS NEEDED, AND THAT WE NEEDED TO CONTINUE WITH THE MEGA SHELTER OPERATIONS AT FAIR PARK.

THAT'S WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE COUNCIL LAST WEEK. THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM SIX SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 12.

[12. 25-2157A Authorize the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with two two-year renewal options, approved as to form by the City Attorney, with Volunteers of America Texas, Inc. and/or its affiliate for the administration, management, and implementation of the Home Improvement and Preservation Program - Not to exceed $13,074,846.95 - Financing: CDBG Funds ($7,739,959.34) and TIF District Funds ($5,334,887.61) *In alignment with Dallas Housing Policy 2033.]

AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO YEAR AGREEMENT WITH TWO TWO YEAR RENEWAL OPTIONS, APPROVED AS THE FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, TEXAS, INC.

AND OR ITS AFFILIATE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION, MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HOME IMPROVEMENT AND PRESERVATION PROGRAM.

NOT TO EXCEED $13,074,846.95. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

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

ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN? YES. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WELL, I JUST WANT TO SAY I WAS GLAD TO SEE THIS ITEM FINALLY GET TO CITY COUNCIL.

BEFORE I WAS ON CITY COUNCIL. AND IN FACT, IT WAS ABOUT EIGHT YEARS AGO, I WORKED WITH THE THEN HOUSING DIRECTOR, DAVID NOGUERA, TO TRY TO OUTSOURCE THE HOME REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

AS I WAS RUNNING A NONPROFIT THAT DID HOME REPAIR, AND WE NEEDED MONEY AND THEY NEEDED MORE HOUSES DONE.

SO NOW WE KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES. I'M STILL HEARING THAT THERE'S INVOICES TO CONTRACTORS THROUGH OUR CURRENT PROGRAM THAT HAVEN'T BEEN PAID.

I KNOW I'VE FORWARDED THOSE TO CITY MANAGER. MY QUESTION IS HOW WILL THE VOA CONTRACT BE FUNDED? I SAW THERE'S AN UPFRONT PAYMENT ONCE THE CONTRACT IS EXECUTED, BUT THEN IS THE REST OF THAT ON A REIMBURSEMENT BASIS? AND WHAT'S OUR TURNAROUND TIME FOR THEM? HI. GOOD MORNING, THORAX AND DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA WILL SUBMIT A MONTHLY REIMBURSABLE INVOICE.

THE EFFICIENCIES COME BECAUSE IT'S ONE INVOICE A MONTH.

AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE MULTIPLE INVOICES A MONTH WITH THE DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS.

[01:15:03]

SO THE EFFICIENCY WILL COME IN WORKING WITH THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THAT DONE ACCORDINGLY.

AND SO IN LOOKING AT THE INVOICES THAT ARE CURRENT REC BUILDERS AREN'T, ARE SAYING ARE UNPAID.

I KNOW YOU HAD SAID THEY WERE ALL SUBMITTED TO BE PAID.

WHAT IS THE TURNOUT TIME THEY SHOULD EXPECT ON PAYMENT? THANK YOU. SO WE HAVE A 30 DAY TURNAROUND TIME FROM THE TIME THE INVOICE IS SUBMITTED THAT HAS ALL THE APPROPRIATE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION TO TURN AROUND A PAYMENT.

AND ARE WE MEETING THAT? IN MOST CASES WE ARE OCCASIONALLY WE DO NOT.

AND I'M SORRY, MOST CASES WE ARE. BUT WHAT SOMETIMES WE WE DO NOT MEET THAT 30 DAY TURNAROUND.

AND THE CASE THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF IS ONE OF THOSE CASES WHERE WE DID NOT MEET THAT 30 DAY TURNAROUND TIME.

OKAY. AND DO YOU THINK IT'S UNUSUAL OR DO YOU THINK THAT WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH THAT.

NO, I THINK IT'S UNUSUAL. I THINK THAT TO BE FRANK, THE TRANSITION OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS WE WERE DELAYED IN GETTING SOME THINGS SET UP WITH THE NEW OFFICE, AND THERE WERE A COUPLE OF INVOICES THAT WERE DELAYED.

I BELIEVE WE HAVE CAPTURED ALL OF THEM SUBMITTED, AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH OUR CONTROLLER AND HER TEAM TO ENSURE PAYMENT IS BEING PROCESSED. WELL, I JUST SAY THIS, AS A FORMER NONPROFIT DIRECTOR, I MEAN, YOU CAN KILL A NONPROFIT BY NOT PAYING ON A TIMELY BASIS.

I KNOW WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION MULTIPLE TIMES AROUND THE HORSESHOE FOR OTHER NONPROFITS.

SO PLEASE HELP THEM GET THEIR PAYMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, VOA IS A NOTED NONPROFIT IN THIS SPACE, AND I HOPE THAT THEY WILL BE PAID PROPERLY. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 12.

SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE.

AGENDA ITEM 13. AUTHORIZE THE DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION TO ONE.

[13. 25-2955A Authorize the Dallas Public Facility Corporation to (1) acquire, develop, and own Good Homes Dallas, a mixed-income, multifamily development to be located at 6950 North Stemmons Freeway, Dallas Texas 75247 (Project); and (2) enter into a seventy-five-year lease agreement with Good Homes Communities, LLC or its affiliate, for the development of the Project - Estimated Revenue Forgone: General Fund: $16,837,803.00 (see Fiscal Information)]

ACQUIRE, DEVELOP AND OWN GOOD HOMES. DALLAS A MIXED INCOME MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO BE LOCATED AT 6950 NORTH STEMMONS FREEWAY, DALLAS, TEXAS 75247 PROJECT AND TO ENTER INTO A 75 YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GOOD HOMES COMMUNITIES, LLC, OR ITS AFFILIATE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN, BUT YOU DO HAVE THREE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. ADAM FELDMAN.

THERE'S A BUTTON AT THE BASE OF THAT MICROPHONE.

THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS ADAM FELDMAN, AND I'M THE MANAGING PARTNER OF GOOD HOMES COMMUNITIES, THE PROJECT SPONSOR.

I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION TO CONVERT THE SONESTA EXTENDED STAY SUITES AT 6950 NORTH STEMMONS FREEWAY INTO A 142 UNIT WORKFORCE HOUSING COMMUNITY CONSISTING OF ONE AND TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS.

GOOD HOMES IS A MISSION DRIVEN REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOCUSED ON TRANSFORMING UNDERPERFORMING HOTELS INTO HIGH QUALITY, ATTAINABLE HOUSING FOR WORKING CLASS FAMILIES AND ESSENTIAL WORKERS.

RATHER THAN BUILDING FROM THE GROUND UP, WE REPURPOSE EXISTING, UNDERUTILIZED BUILDINGS.

A FASTER, MORE EFFICIENT APPROACH THAT IS ALSO LESS WASTEFUL AND SIGNIFICANTLY MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY, REDUCING CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS, CARBON EMISSIONS AND STRAIN ON CITY INFRASTRUCTURE.

THIS MODEL ALLOWS US TO DELIVER NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN A MATTER OF MONTHS, NOT YEARS.

HELPING CITIES RESPOND QUICKLY TO URGENT HOUSING NEEDS.

TO DATE, WE'VE COMPLETED 13 SUCCESSFUL ADAPTIVE REUSE CONVERSIONS TOTALING MORE THAN 2200 UNITS NATIONWIDE, INCLUDING WITH PARTNERSHIPS WITH PUBLIC ENTITIES LIKE THE SAN ANTONIO HOUSING TRUST, PFC, WHERE WE RECENTLY OPENED THE VALOR HILL APARTMENTS, PROVIDING 118 HOUSING UNITS FOR VETERANS AND HARDWORKING MEMBERS OF THE CITY'S WORKFORCE.

HERE IN DALLAS, WE'RE APPLYING THAT SAME PROVEN APPROACH.

PARTNERING WITH THE CITY'S PFC TO CREATE LONG TERM AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR RESIDENTS EARNING 30% TO 80% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME, INCLUDING TEACHERS, MEDICAL STAFF AND FIRST RESPONDERS.

THE PROPOSED PARTNERSHIP WITH THE DALLAS PFC IS BACKED BY KEY STAKEHOLDERS INCLUDING THE DALLAS HOUSING COALITION, SOUTHERN DALLAS, PROGRESS AND HOUSING FORWARD.

WE BELIEVE THE PROJECT REPRESENTS THE BEST OF PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.

IT ADDRESSES A CRITICAL CITYWIDE HOUSING SHORTAGE WITHOUT NEW CONSTRUCTION, REVITALIZES AN UNDERPERFORMING HOTEL, IMPROVING NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY AND STABILITY, AND DELIVER SUSTAINABLE AFFORDABILITY WITHOUT SACRIFICING QUALITY OR FISCAL

[01:20:05]

RESPONSIBILITY. WE'RE PROUD TO BRING THIS INITIATIVE FORWARD AND TO WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH CITY STAFF, COMMUNITY PARTNERS IN THIS COUNCIL TO CREATE LASTING, POSITIVE IMPACT FOR DALLAS RESIDENTS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU, DANIEL MARTIN.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DANIEL MARTIN AND I'M THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AT GOOD HOMES COMMUNITIES.

UNDER OUR PROPOSED PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION STRUCTURE WITH THE DALLAS PFC, 85% OF THE APARTMENTS WILL BE RENT RESTRICTED.

THIS MIXED INCOME COMMUNITY WILL OFFER UNITS AT 30%, 50%, 60%, 80%, AND MARKET RATE.

PLANNED RENOVATIONS INCLUDE NEW KITCHENS, HARDWOOD FLOORING, UPDATED BATHROOMS AND IN-UNIT LAUNDRY.

AMENITIES INCLUDE AN OUTDOOR POOL, BASKETBALL COURT, FITNESS CENTER, AND CO-WORKING ROOM.

BECAUSE THIS IS AN ADAPTIVE REUSE PROJECT, WE CAN DELIVER HOUSING IN JUST SIX MONTHS, NOT 2 TO 3 YEARS.

LIKE NEW CONSTRUCTION AT A TIME WHEN DALLAS FACES A HOUSING SHORTAGE AND RISING COSTS.

WE NEED FASTER, MORE EFFICIENT SOLUTIONS LIKE THIS.

EXTENDED STAY HOTELS OFTEN EXPERIENCE ELEVATED CRIME RATES DUE TO TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY AND LIMITED SCREENING.

IN CONTRAST, OUR COMMUNITY WILL REQUIRE CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS, EMPLOYMENT VERIFICATION, AND PROOF OF INCOME AT LEAST THREE TIMES THE RENT.

WE'LL ALSO PROVIDE ON SITE RESIDENCE SERVICES TO PROMOTE LONG TERM STABILITY AND ENSURE THIS BECOMES A POSITIVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSET.

THE CITY OF DALLAS WILL NOT LOSE ANY HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE.

IT WILL SIMPLY BE REDISTRIBUTED AMONG NEARBY HOTELS.

OUR PROPERTY AVERAGES 52% OCCUPANCY IN 2024 AND WAS 51% OCCUPIED FOR YEAR TO DATE THROUGH SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR, AND THAT COMPARES TO 61% ACROSS NEARBY COMPETITORS.

CLEAR EVIDENCE THAT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS MORE HOTEL ROOMS THAN THE MAN CAN SUPPORT.

IN SHORT, THIS PROJECT WILL TRANSFORM AN UNDERUTILIZED HOTEL INTO SAFE, ATTRACTIVE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT SUPPORTS DALLAS WORKING FAMILIES, IMPROVES PUBLIC SAFETY, AND DELIVERS LASTING COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.

ANITA TAPIA.

GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS ANITA TAPIA AND I WORK FOR SUMMIT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.

WE HAVE. WE WERE FOUNDED IN 2015 BY RICHARD CHESNEY AND RYAN, BOTH OF OUR FOUNDERS, ARE ALUMNI OF SMU, AND THEY BOTH OBTAINED THEIR MASTER'S DEGREE FROM ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY.

THEIR COMBINED EXPERTISE LAID THE FOUNDATION FOR SUMMIT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.

WE ARE HEADQUARTERED HERE IN DALLAS. WE WE MANAGE 12,500 UNITS IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT MARKETS, INCLUDING DALLAS, ARLINGTON, FORT WORTH, SAN ANTONIO, AND HOUSTON, AND SPECIALIZE IN MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

WE OFFER SEVERAL DIFFERENT SERVICES ACQUISITIONS, REPOSITIONING, IDENTIFYING, AND TRANSFORMING UNDERPERFORMING ASSETS INTO HIGHLY VALUABLE PROPERTIES. WE OFFER THIRD PARTY PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT, MANAGING RENOVATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS TO ENSURE QUALITY AND COST EFFICIENCY AND INVESTMENT SERVICES, WHICH IS SUPPORTING OUR CLIENTS WITH STRATEGIC INVESTMENT PLANNING AND EXECUTION IN THE MULTIFAMILY SECTOR. OUR PORTFOLIO. WE HAVE 40.

CURRENTLY WE HAVE 40 MULTIFAMILY PROPERTIES, WHICH DEMONSTRATES OUR SKILL, OUR SCALE, AS WELL AS OUR OPERATIONAL CAPACITY AND OUR MARKET PRESENCE. OF THE 40 COMMUNITIES THAT WE CURRENTLY MANAGE, TEN OF THOSE ARE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMUNITIES, WHICH REFLECTS OUR COMMITMENT TO THE INCLUSIVE, TO BE TO INCLUSIVE HOUSING AND REGULATORY EXPERTISE OVER THE NEXT 30 TO 60 DAYS.

WE HAVE SEVERAL ADDITIONAL ACQUISITIONS IN OUR PIPELINE.

PART OF WHAT WE OFFER OUR CLIENTS IS THAT WE ARE APPLICANT SCREENING.

WE WE PARTNER WITH REALPAGE, AND WE USE A PROCESS THAT NOT ONLY DOES ID VERIFICATION BUT ALSO INCORPORATES BIOMETRIC BIOMETRICS. WE HAVE A CROSS-REFERENCE OF ALL OF OUR KNOWLEDGE BASE WITH OUR NETWORKS AND DEVICES VERIFICATIONS,

[01:25:09]

OUR ID VERIFICATIONS. AND IT'S AND IT'S DESIGNED TO PREVENT AND TO REDUCE FRAUD WHEN THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

AND BY USING THIS SOFTWARE, WE ARE ABLE TO TO OFFER OUR, OUR CLIENTS, OUR INVESTORS, A REDUCTION OF 75% BY 75% OF FRAUD. AND THAT IS HELPING OUR INVESTORS WITH THE STABILIZATION OF THESE ASSETS THAT WE CURRENTLY MANAGE. OUR OUR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY IN THIS PROJECT IS BEING LED BY OUR OUR VICE PRESIDENT OF THIRD PARTY MANAGEMENT, DEBBIE PATRICK.

SHE ALSO SERVES AS THE VICE PRESIDENT, CHAIR OF NATIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT NAR.

THAT'S YOUR TIME FORCES SUB SUMMITS CREDIBILITY AND INFLUENCE IN THE INDUSTRY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PLEASE CONCLUDE YOUR SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

MR. MAYOR. AND AGAIN THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. WONDERFUL. IS THERE A MOTION ON ITEM 13 MOVE TO REJECT THIS APPLICATION? SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? YES. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES EVERYONE. THE MOTION WAS TO REJECT THE APPLICATION.

THANK YOU MAYOR. SO THIS IS THE 25TH PFC APPLICATION WE'VE RECEIVED AND THAT'S COME BEFORE COUNCIL.

AND I WILL TELL YOU, OF THE OTHER 24, I'VE NEVER ACTUALLY MADE A MOTION TO REJECT IT.

BUT THIS TIME I ACTUALLY THINK YOU'RE GOING TO PAUSE AND AT LEAST CONSIDER IT.

SO I'VE SPOKEN AGAINST THEM. I THINK EVERY SINGLE TIME OF THE 24 WE'VE APPROVED, I HAVE VOTED NO ON 23 OF THEM.

SO WHAT I'D LIKE YOU TO JUST CONSIDER IS THIS WE'RE TAKING AN EXTENDED STAY MOTEL, MOVING IT TO APARTMENTS.

EVERY SINGLE PFC APPLICATION THAT'S COME BEFORE US HAS BEEN APPROVED.

EVERY SINGLE ONE. I'M JUST GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE NUMBERS SO THAT YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE PROBLEM IS HERE.

AND YOU WOULD HAVE SEEN THIS IN A MEMO THAT CAME OUT TO THE HOUSING COMMITTEE.

IT ACTUALLY WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA MATERIAL, SO YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED IT.

BUT FOR A ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT, 16 OF THE UNITS OF THE 142 UNITS ARE GOING TO BE MARKET RATE, THE RENTS GOING TO BE 1375. THE 80% RATE IS ALSO 1375 SAME, SAME PRICE. THE 60% RATE FOR ONE BEDROOM 1319 JUST $56 LESS.

THEN THERE'S 15 UNITS THAT ARE AT THE 30 OR 50% AMI LEVEL THAT ARE AFFORDABLE FOR THE TWO BEDROOMS. MARKET RATE $1,650 80%. SAME EXACT RATE 61,584, JUST $66 LESS. AND THEN THERE'S TWO LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY FOR SIX UNITS.

WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A TOTAL OF 21 AFFORDABLE UNITS.

OUT OF THE 142, LESS THAN 15% OF THE UNITS ARE ACTUALLY AFFORDABLE.

FOR THAT, YOU'RE GIVING UP 75 YEARS OF PROPERTY TAX INCOME.

75 YEARS REVENUE WE NEED TODAY AND WE WILL FOR SURE NEED IN THE FUTURE.

IT'S A MASSIVE GIVEAWAY FOR VERY, VERY LITTLE.

NOW AN ARGUMENT THAT WOULD BE MADE IS THAT, WELL, YOU BUY IT NOW AND ONE DAY.

THIS MAY APPRECIATE SO MUCH THAT THOSE AFFORDABILITY LEVELS AT 60 AND 80% THAT ARE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS MARKET WILL BE MEANINGFUL.

BUT IF YOU LOOK AT WHERE THIS IS LOCATED, WHICH IS RIGHT AT THE 35 SPLIT.

WE HAVE NO ASSURANCE THIS IS EVER GOING TO APPRECIATE, CERTAINLY NOT IN THE NEXT TEN, 20 PLUS YEARS WHEN WE SHOULD BE GETTING THIS REVENUE.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO ASK YOU TO PUT ON YOUR FISCAL HAT AND SAY, THIS IS NOT A DEAL THAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE DALLAS TAXPAYERS OR OUR CITY.

AND INSTEAD OF JUST ALWAYS BOWING TO THE TO THE BANNER OF, WE SHOULD CREATE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

REALIZE THIS DEAL DOESN'T HIT THE MARK. IT'S NOT ENOUGH UNITS THAT ARE AFFORDABLE FOR WHAT WE'RE GIVING AWAY.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT PEOPLE ARE DOWN AT THE LEGISLATURE TALKING ABOUT THE ABUSE OF FCS.

AND I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO. THANK YOU. WELL, TO VOTE YES, TO VOTE NO.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THE MOTION IS TO REJECT THE THE ITEM. ITEM 13.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

[01:30:09]

SO, THOR, HOW WAS THE ESTIMATED REVENUE FOREGONE OF 16.8 MILLION CALCULATED? GOOD AFTERNOON, THORAX AND DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT. THAT REVENUE FOREGONE IS LOOKED AT. THE FUTURE APPRAISED VALUE TIMES THE TAX RATE FOR THAT DURATION OF TIME. SO IS THAT BASED UPON THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT OR IS IT BASED UPON IT AS A RENOVATED PROPERTY PURSUANT TO THIS PROPOSAL? IT'D BE BASED ON A RENOVATED PROPERTY.

OKAY. SO IF THE BUILDING IS NOT RENOVATED WOULD THERE BE ANY REVENUE FOREGONE FROM PROPERTY TAX? YES, THERE STILL WOULD BE. IF THE BUILDING IS IN EXISTENCE, THERE'S STILL.

AND IT MOVES FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT. IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS PROJECT HAPPEN, THOUGH, THEY NEED TO DO RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING FACILITY.

OKAY. AND SO HOW DO YOU PROJECT THE FUTURE TAX REVENUE FROM THIS PROPERTY AFTER RENOVATION? SO I DO NOT HAVE THAT CALCULATION BECAUSE WHAT THIS PROJECT LOOKS LIKE IS FOR THE TOTAL LIFE OF THE TAX EXEMPTION.

SO LOOKING 60 YEARS INTO THE FUTURE FOR THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE DONE.

WELL, I'M NOT ASKING FOR PRECISE NUMBERS. I'M JUST ASKING FOR THE PROCESS.

FOR THE PROCESS. SO THE UNDERWRITERS LOOK AT THIS AND THEY, THEY PREPARE THE 15 YEAR ESTIMATE, WHICH IS MORE ACCURATE ONCE IT GETS INTO THE 30 AND 60 YEARS.

THERE ARE WAYS TO LOOK AT THOSE PROJECTIONS. BUT OBVIOUSLY THE MARKET CHANGES PRETTY QUICKLY AT THOSE AS WE MOVE INTO THE FUTURE.

AND SO THE PROJECT WOULD NEED TO BE REEVALUATED AT CERTAIN MILESTONES TO UNDERSTAND THE ACCURACY OF THE PROJECTIONS.

SO WOULD THAT BE DONE AFTER THE FIRST 15 YEARS? THAT'S CORRECT. AND WHO DOES THESE PROJECTIONS? IS IT CITY STAFF OR AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT? IT'S AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT.

ALL OF THIS IS DONE THROUGH THE PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION STAFF AND THEIR OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS.

CITY STAFF'S RESPONSIBILITY ON THIS IS PREPARING ITEMS FOR COMMITTEE AND AGENDA.

BUT ALL OF THE UNDERWRITING PROJECT REVIEW IS ALL DONE BY THE CORPORATION STAFF.

AND DO YOU HAVE THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY TAX PAID BY THIS PROPERTY CURRENTLY ON AN ANNUAL BASIS? I DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE IT. I CAN SEE IF WE CAN GET IT.

SO I AM LOOKING AT FIGURES SHOWING THAT IN THE CURRENT YEAR, THE CITY OF DALLAS RECEIVED 62,000 A YEAR IN PROPERTY TAX FROM THIS PROPERTY.

DOES THAT SOUND APPROXIMATELY RIGHT? YES. THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN TO ITEM 13.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION.

I'M GOING TO ASK MR. IAQUINTO TO COME UP HERE AND ANSWER A FEW QUESTIONS, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THIS DID GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION BOARD.

CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE PROCESS THE BOARD WENT THROUGH IN RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, WHAT THE APPROVAL PERCENTAGE WAS, IF IT WAS UNANIMOUS, OR IF IT WAS A SPLIT VOTE, AND WHY THE BOARD THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD PROJECT.

GOOD MORNING. ERIN QUINTO, GENERAL MANAGER OF THE PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

SO THIS WAS APPROVED ACTUALLY BEFORE I WAS IN CHARGE OF THE PSC AGAIN.

SO I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW THE BOARD SPLIT ON IT.

MAYBE. DO YOU RECALL SANTA FE WAS UNANIMOUS OR WHAT? THEIR. SAM MCDANIEL, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER.

THERE WAS THREE NO'S AND THE REST VOTED YES. SO I CAN SPEAK GENERALLY HOW THEY APPROVE THESE PROJECTS.

THIS WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT AS CHAIR MENDELSOHN SAID, ALMOST ALL OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE BROUGHT BEFORE THIS BODY HAVE BEEN GROUND UP, JUST BARE LAND DEVELOPMENTS. THIS ONE IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT IS AN EXISTING PROPERTY THAT IS PAYING ABOUT $62,000 IN TAXES TO THE CITY EVERY YEAR.

NOW THAT BEING SAID, THE BOARD TOOK INTO ACCOUNT WHAT IS CURRENTLY GOING ON.

AS THE PROJECT PARTNER SAID, IT'S ABOUT 50% OCCUPIED.

IT WAS RECENTLY PURCHASED BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF A IT'S A FAILING PROPERTY.

AND HIS INTENTIONS, THE CURRENT OWNER'S INTENTIONS ARE TO CONVERT IT TO A MULTIFAMILY PROPERTY.

AND SO THE BOARD THOUGHT IT PRUDENT TO SEE IF THEY COULD PARTNER WITH THIS COMPANY, GOOD HOMES, WHO HAS WHO HAS DONE THIS EXACT KIND OF TEMPLATE OF DEVELOPMENT BEFORE TAKING A EXTENDED STAY HOTEL AND CONVERTING IT INTO A PUBLIC SUBSIDIZED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

AND SO A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS WERE WERE CONSIDERED.

BUT I THINK ULTIMATELY THEY FELT THAT THE AFFORDABILITY LEVELS THAT WERE REACHING HERE ARE DEEPER THAN WE'VE EVER BEEN ABLE TO REACH WITH THE PFC.

[01:35:07]

TYPICALLY, THE PFC PROJECTS AREN'T ABLE TO REACH MORE THAN A 60% AMI AFFORDABLE LEVEL.

THIS ONE IS REACHING 30% AND 50% AS WELL. AND SO I THINK THAT WAS A BIG FACTOR IN THEM APPROVING THIS AT THEIR BOARD MEETING.

AND I'M LOOKING AT THE CASE REPORT FROM NOVEMBER 4TH THAT MY COLLEAGUE WAS REFERRING TO.

AND I SEE THAT ON THE CASE REPORT, THE ONE BEDROOM UNITS AT MARKET RATE MATCH THE 80% NUMBER FOR RENT PER MONTH.

SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THE NUMBERS WOULD BE THE SAME IN THIS SCENARIO? IS IT LOCKING IN LONG TERM AFFORDABILITY? IS THAT OUR GOAL? SURE. THAT WE SEE IS INCREASING IN EXPENSE. SURE.

SO MARKET RATE IS A VERY VARIABLE NUMBER RIGHT.

IN ANY IN ANY AREA OF THE CITY THE MARKET RATE PER SE CAN BE DIFFERENT, RIGHT.

MARKET RATE IN OAK CLIFF IS GOING TO BE A LOT DIFFERENT THAN MARKET RATE IN HIGHLAND PARK.

RIGHT. IT'S JUST WHAT THE MARKET CAN CAN GARNER FOR AN OPENLY RENTABLE UNIT.

NOW THE ARMY RENTS ARE SET BASED ON INCOME LEVELS.

AND SO SOMEONE MAKING A CERTAIN A 60% INCOME LEVEL IN DALLAS, THEY'RE ONLY ABLE TO RENT AT A CERTAIN AMOUNT IF THAT UNIT IS PEGGED AT THAT ARMY LEVEL. AND SO WHILE THE MARKET RENT WILL BE VARIABLE, AND, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA IS, AS DALLAS CONTINUES TO GROW AND AS RENTS CONTINUE TO RISE, THESE RESTRICTED UNIT, THEY WILL STAY THE SAME AND THEY WILL STAY AFFORDABLE TO THOSE AT THOSE INCOME LEVELS.

OKAY. IT LOOKS LIKE ALSO AS PART OF THE REQUIREMENT OF THIS ACQUISITION, THE DEVELOPERS REQUIRED TO INSTALL A DOG PARK, A BASKETBALL COURT, A POOL, A FITNESS CENTER AND THEN IT REFERENCES THE MEMO REFERENCES THAT IT'S ACCESSIBLE TO THE DART BUS STOP IS OUR RAPID TRANSIT BUS STOP. CAN YOU GIVE CLARIFICATION ON HOW CLOSE IT IS TO THAT? MAYBE THE DEVELOPER CAN. YEAH, I CAN, I CAN ASK THE DEVELOPER TO COME DOWN.

I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW CLOSE THE BUS STOP IS.

GOOD AFTERNOON, DANIEL MARTIN WITH GOOD HOMES, THE DEVELOPER.

THE BUS STOP IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. CHAIR. SO I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE CONCERNS OF MY COLLEAGUE.

I ALSO BELIEVE WE AS A COUNCIL NEED TO DIG IN DEEPER WHEN WE'RE TAKING A PROPERTY THAT IS PERFORMING ON THE TAX ROLLS OFF THE TAX ROLLS, AS OPPOSED TO LIKE A BROWNFIELD DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WE'RE GETTING, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A COUPLE THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR.

THIS IS A THIS IS A SCENARIO THAT DESERVES SOME, SOME IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS.

I DO I WANT TO GIVE AARON THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE BENEFIT IS THAT THE BENEFIT ANALYSIS THAT THE BOARD GOES THROUGH WHEN THEY'RE ANALYZING, REMOVING A PERFORMING TAX ASSET OFF IN EXCHANGE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SURE. THANK YOU. SO EVERY, EVERY DEVELOPMENT THAT WE CONSIDER AT THE BOARD IT GOES THROUGH AN UNDERWRITING BY AN OUTSIDE UNDERWRITER, AS BEEN EXPLAINED, BUT THEY PERFORM WHAT'S CALLED A PUBLIC BENEFIT ANALYSIS.

AND THIS IS NOW A STATE REQUIREMENT FOR ANY OF THESE PFC DEALS TO BE APPROVED.

AND SO THEY TAKE THE AMOUNT OF TAXES THAT ARE FOREGONE, AND THEY PROJECT THAT OVER 15 YEARS, AND THEN THEY TAKE THE RENTAL BENEFITS, PLUS ANY REVENUE THAT COMES BACK TO THE PFC.

AND THEY COMPARE THAT AGAINST WHAT THE TAXES ARE FOREGONE.

SO THIS IS ACHIEVING, I BELIEVE, A 64% PUBLIC BENEFIT AGAINST HOW MANY TAXES ARE FOREGONE.

SO IT'S IT'S A PRETTY GOOD RETURN IN TERMS OF DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR INVESTMENT OF TAXES.

SO YOU SAY A 64% PUBLIC BENEFIT ANALYSIS. THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE EARLIER THAT THIS COUNCIL APPROVES EVERY SINGLE PFC DEAL THAT COMES THROUGH HERE, BUT THERE ARE PFC DEALS THAT I ASSUME THE BOARD LOOKS AT THAT NEVER MAKE IT TO US.

CORRECT? MAYBE STAFF NEVER RECOMMENDS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MEET THAT PUBLIC BENEFIT ANALYSIS, CORRECT? CORRECT. YEAH. WE SCREEN SEVERAL DEALS EVERY MONTH, YOU KNOW, AND SOMETIMES THEY JUST AREN'T.

THEY WOULDN'T COME CLOSE TO MAKING THAT THAT CALCULATION.

AND SO THEY'RE NOT EVEN WORTH CONSIDERING AT THE BOARD LEVEL.

AND SO WE DON'T WANT TO WASTE Y'ALL'S TIME. WE DON'T WANT TO WASTE THE BOARD'S TIME.

AND SO A VERY LARGE AMOUNT OF PROJECTS DO NOT COME BECAUSE THEY DO NOT MEET MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.

THANK YOU. IN THIS CASE I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT.

I MEAN, UNLESS I HEAR ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE MY MIND, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING THAT WOULD MAKE ME FEEL LIKE I NEED TO GO AGAINST THE

[01:40:07]

RECOMMENDATION OF OUR MEMBER APPOINTED PFC BOARD.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION.

ITEM 13. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND AND AGAIN, THESE ARE THIS IS ONE OF THOSE TWO THAT I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT.

YOU KNOW, I'VE ALWAYS SUPPORTED THE PFC, BUT AGAIN, FOLLOWING SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES COMMENTS WHEN WE'RE IT'S AN EXISTING PROPERTY, I ALWAYS HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS AND WE UNDERSTAND THE INTENT, LET'S JUST TALK ABOUT THAT.

THE INTENT FOR THESE FOLKS ARE TYPICALLY TO DO WHAT.

INITIALLY WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AROUND THE AREA.

RIGHT. TYPICALLY THE GOAL OF THE PSC IS JUST TO PROVIDE WORKFORCE HOUSING IN BASICALLY ANY AREA THAT THAT WE CAN GET IT DONE.

IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GET ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING DONE WITHOUT SOME SUBSIDY, RIGHT? BECAUSE WHETHER IT'S AN AFFORDABLE PROPERTY OR MARKET RATE PROPERTY, IT COSTS THE SAME TO BUILD AND TO OPERATE.

AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS SOME KIND OF GAP THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE UP TO SUBSIDIZE THE THE PORTION OF THOSE OPERATING COSTS THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE COVERED BY RENTS.

BUT SINCE YOU'RE, YOU'RE PEGGING THE RENTS AT A LOWER LEVEL BELOW MARKET, THEN YOU HAVE TO MAKE UP THOSE THOSE OPERATING COSTS WITH SOME SORT OF SUBSIDY, EITHER A TAX EXEMPTION OR SOME OTHER TYPE OF FUNDS THAT ARE COMING FROM A CHARITY OR GOVERNMENT SOURCE.

AND THEN IT'S TYPICALLY THE HOPE IS THAT ONCE IT'S LOCATED THERE, IT WILL GENERATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AROUND THE THE EXISTING AREA.

CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THE CURRENT EXISTING USE IS A LIKE I SAID, IT'S A FAILING EXTENDED STAY HOTEL.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE EVER DRIVEN BY THAT PARTICULAR AREA, BUT IT'S IT'S KIND OF A SCARY LOOKING PROPERTY.

I THINK IT WOULD BE MUCH IMPROVED IF YOU GARNERED SOME FULL TIME RESIDENTS THERE AND FULL TIME MANAGEMENT WHO ARE INVESTED IN THAT PROPERTY AS THEIR HOME, AND NOT JUST AS, YOU KNOW, A WEEK, A MONTH LONG STAY WHERE OFTENTIMES THERE ARE SOME, YOU KNOW, LESS THAN WHOLESOME ACTIVITIES. SURE, SURE. AND I LOOK AT THESE FOLKS AND REALLY TWO WAYS.

IT'S RIGHT ON ONE WAY IT'S MEANT TO, YOU KNOW, HOW WILL IT REVITALIZE THE SURROUNDING AREA.

AND THEN TO FROM AN AFFORDABILITY PERSPECTIVE, WILL IT CREATE AN AFFORDABILITY? SO WHICH IS BRINGING ME TO MY, MY MY QUESTION THERE.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE EXISTING I'M SORRY IF YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN ASKED THIS QUESTION, BUT WHAT ARE SOME OF THE EXISTING RENTS THAT ARE AROUND THERE? BECAUSE I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT TOO IN THE COMPARISON FOR THE FOR THE THE THE PRICES, THE RENTAL THE RENT FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE.

YEAH. AND I CAN SPEAK A LITTLE TO THIS. I'M GOING TO ASK DANIEL TO COME BACK UP HERE. HE HE'S FULLY DIVED INTO THAT.

BUT OBVIOUSLY THE MARKET RATE IS AVERAGE FOR ONE BEDROOM IS $1,300 IN THAT AREA AND THEN FOR TWO BEDROOM, 1600. BUT I MEAN, REALLY, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF COMPETITION IN THAT PARTICULAR SUBMARKET.

THERE'S JUST NOT VERY MUCH SUPPLY. SO IT'S HARD TO MAKE A COMPARISON.

BUT DANIEL, CAN YOU COME UP AND SPEAK TO THAT QUESTION? SO MARKET RATES RANGE BASED ON THE VINTAGE AND THE QUALITY OF THE PRODUCT. SO A NEW CONSTRUCTION CAN CHARGE 1500 1600 PLUS FOR MARKET RENT.

WE AT GOOD HOMES HAVE A FOCUS ON ATTAINABLE HOUSING.

AND BY THE WAY, I'M SORRY. SO THE MARKET RENT IS FINE.

WELL, MY CONCERN IS, IS THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT'S CONSIDERED THE 60% AMI.

THAT'S NOT A VERY BIG GAP IN MY MIND. THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S REALLY THAT AFFORDABLE.

AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. THAT IS THE MAXIMUM RENT YOU CAN CHARGE AT THAT LEVEL.

THAT IS NOT WHAT WE INTEND TO CHARGE. THAT IS THE MAXIMUM LIMIT BASED OFF OF THE HUD PUBLISHED AREA MEDIAN INCOMES.

SO THAT'S THE ANALYSIS IS DONE BASED ON THE MAXIMUMS YOU CAN CHARGE.

BUT YOU ULTIMATELY HAVE TO SET THE RENT FOR THE AFFORDABLE UNITS AT A LEVEL THAT WILL ATTRACT A RENTER.

SO OUR INTENTION IS NOT TO SET A 60% AMI RESTRICTED UNIT AT THE MAXIMUM, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT PERSON WOULD WANT TO LIVE THERE AT THAT RENT AT THAT AMI RESTRICTED LEVEL. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

AND THANK YOU. AND I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION AND I DON'T REALLY HAVE THIS ONE FULLY DEVELOPED, BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THESE PROJECTS AND WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED.

AND I'M NOT MAKING THIS A NORTH AND SOUTH KIND OF A QUESTION.

IT'S NOT THAT I'M REALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE IN THE THE RENTS BEING CHARGED IN ONE LOCATION COMPARED TO THE OTHER ONE, AND THAT SPREAD FROM MARKET RATE TO EVEN A 60%.

I FORGET WHAT THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT WAS, BUT IT MAYBE MAYBE 100.

WAS IT LESS THAN 100? HERE YOU GO. IT'S FOR ONE BEDROOM.

IT'S $56. YEAH. SO THE DIFFERENCE IS $56. SO IN ANOTHER LOCATION IS THAT TYPICALLY WHAT THAT SPREAD WOULD BE OR IS IT JUST BASED ON THE AREA

[01:45:04]

MEDIAN INCOME. SO. WELL, EVEN THEN THOUGH, THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME IS, THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME IS FOR ALL OF DALLAS.

RIGHT? RIGHT. BUT HOW DOES THAT SPREAD THE MARKET LOCATIONS? THE MARKET IS IS HIGHLY LOCAL. SO YOU TAKE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A 3 OR 4 BLOCK, FIVE BLOCK RADIUS FROM THAT CERTAIN APARTMENT.

THIS IS IN GENERAL, RIGHT? RIGHT. THE MARKET.

IT'S IS BASICALLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT? AND SO WHAT ARE YOUR DIRECT COMPETITORS AT THE SAME QUALITY ABLE TO GARNER ON THE OPEN MARKET VERSUS A RESTRICTED RATE UNIT? SO IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU JUST SAID. DEPENDING ON THE MARKET, DEPENDING ON THE LOCATION, THE THE RENT COULD BE EVEN FOR THE 60% AM, I COULD BECOME THE AM I. THE RESTRICTED ARMY UNITS WILL NOT CHANGE, BUT THE MARKET RENT WILL.

AND SO LIKE LIKE I SAID, IN THIS SUB MARKET, YOU KNOW YOU CAN GET $1,375 FOR A ONE BEDROOM, SAY IN UPTOWN. YEP. YOU'RE GOING TO GET CLOSE TO $2,000, RIGHT.

IT'S A DIFFERENT MARKET. YEAH, BUT THAT'S $54 COMPARED TO IF IT WERE IN DISTRICT THREE, WOULD THAT SPREAD BE $54 OR WOULD IT BE $200. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? BECAUSE 50.

THAT'S NOT. TO ME, IT'S VERY VARIABLE. DEPENDING ON ON WHERE YOU LOOK, IT'S IT'S HARD TO SAY, YOU KNOW, JUST BLANKETLY WHEREVER IN THE CITY, YOU JUST HAVE TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE COMPARING IT TO.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M TYPICALLY A FAN, BUT THIS IS GIVING ME A LITTLE BIT OF.

WE SHOULD SLOW DOWN ON THIS ONE, JUST FYI. THANK YOU.

MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR I HAVE SUPPORTED EVERY PFC AND HFC THAT'S COME BEFORE THIS COUNCIL.

I AM VERY HESITANT ON THIS ONE. AND RIGHT NOW LEANING TOWARDS DENIAL FIRST AND FOREMOST, THAT THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH WITH THIS OR THE LACK OF PROCESS, THIS NEVER CAME BEFORE ME TO GIVE ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IF I WAS IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION OF THIS PROPOSAL UNTIL I CAME TO COMMITTEE. AND SO THAT GIVES ME A LOT OF PAUSE TO EVERY DISTRICT IF THIS IS GOING TO BECOME THE NORM.

ARE WE GOING TO FAIL TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER AND THE COMMUNITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION TO A PROPOSAL? SO AGAIN, WE SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE COUNCIL DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE TO SEE WHERE WE ARE AT.

AND SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHY THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN? YEAH. NO PROBLEM. SO I WAS RECENTLY HIRED AS THE PSC GENERAL MANAGER.

SO THIS CAME TO THE PFC BOARD BEFORE I WAS BACK THERE.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I MAKE IT A POINT BEFORE WE EVEN ACCEPT AN APPLICATION TO KIND OF HAVE A PREVIEW WITH EACH COUNCIL MEMBER BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S ETHICAL, YOU KNOW, NOBODY WANTS TO GET INTO ANY TROUBLE TALKING WITH DEVELOPERS ON CURRENTLY CONSIDERED PROJECTS.

AND SO I MAKE IT A VERY STRONG POINT TO, TO EVERY POTENTIAL APPLICANT, LIKE, HEY, HAVE YOU HAD AT LEAST A CONVERSATION? LET'S LET'S GO TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT. LET'S PREVIEW IT AND SEE WHAT THE LOCAL, YOU KNOW, APPETITE IS FOR THESE PROJECTS.

YOU KNOW, I WASN'T THERE TO SHEPHERD THAT PROCESS THROUGH, SO I APOLOGIZE ON THIS.

BUT THAT IS DEFINITELY NOT THE NORM. AND IT IS CERTAINLY OUR, OUR POLICY GOING FORWARD TO DO THAT.

THANK YOU. THE OTHER CONCERN I HAVE WITH THIS PROJECT IS THAT IT IS CURRENTLY A HOTEL.

AND SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TAX THAT WE'RE FORGOING ON PROPERTY TAX.

BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE HOT TAX THAT IS BEING COLLECTED IN A TIME THAT THIS COUNCIL WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE WORLD CUP COMING TO DALLAS.

WE NEED EVERY SINGLE HOTEL ROOM THAT WE CAN GET.

AND SO THAT GIVES ME SOME CONCERN THERE AS WELL.

THE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE COME BEFORE MY DISTRICT HAVE BEEN IN AREAS THAT ARE MORE AFFLUENT, IN AREAS THAT CAN SUSTAIN BRINGING IN A MIXED INCOME.

THIS IS ACTUALLY AN AREA THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE BE MARKET RATE.

THE POVERTY RATE FOR THIS COMMUNITY IS NOT THE BEST.

AND SO I THINK THAT THIS FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT MAINTAINED AS A AS A HOTEL AND SECOND STRONGLY BELIEVE IN, IN AFFORDABILITY AND BRINGING IN WORKFORCE HOUSING.

BUT THE COMMUNITIES ARE ALREADY SATURATED WITH LOW POVERTY RATES.

AND SO I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS REALLY WON'T BE ADDING TO A VALUE OF MIXED INCOME TO REVITALIZING THE AREA. AND SO DO HAVE THOSE CONCERNS, BUT I'LL, I'LL WAIT UNTIL A SECOND ROUND.

THANK YOU. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

[01:50:06]

THANK YOU. COULD YOU TELL ME WHAT'S THE THE GROSS AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT YOU ALL ARE INVESTING IN IN THIS PROJECT? HOW BIG OF A PROJECT IS THIS, DOLLAR WISE? I'M SORRY, I.

I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING. HOW MUCH MONEY ARE YOU? IS THIS IS IS INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT IN TERMS OF INVESTMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT COSTS? SURE. YOU CAN SPEAK FROM THAT. SO WE'RE PURCHASING THE PROPERTY FOR $11.6 MILLION. OUR PLAN IS TO INVEST OVER TWO AND A HALF TO $3 MILLION ON THE RENOVATIONS AND UPGRADES.

THERE'S ALSO A CHANGE OF USE THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH WITH CITY AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WHICH INVOLVES LIFE SAFETY UPGRADES, BRINGING TWO FIRE HYDRANTS ON SITE AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS THAT TO BRING IT TO MULTIFAMILY CODE.

ALSO, THERE'S A LOT OF CRACKING ACROSS THE SITE WITH REGARDS TO CONCRETE AND SIDEWALKS.

SO WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THE PROPERTY A LOT MORE ACCESSIBLE AND BRING ENHANCED LIGHTING AND SECURITY FEATURES.

AND WAS THERE ANY OPPOSITION BY ANY NEIGHBORS TO TO THIS PROJECT, OFFICIALLY OR UNOFFICIALLY? DID YOU PULL THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SORT OF FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON THERE? YES, ABSOLUTELY. AND WHAT'S WHAT WAS YOUR WHAT WAS THE CONSENSUS? THE CONSENSUS WAS THE NEIGHBORS WELCOME A A DEVELOPER TO COME IN TO TURN THIS PROPERTY AROUND, BECAUSE THIS IS A PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN A HOTBED FOR 911 CALLS AND CRIME.

I THINK I ALLUDED TO THIS EARLIER. YOU KNOW, ANYBODY CAN, WITH $100 IN THEIR POCKET, CAN COME STAY HERE.

THERE'S NO BACKGROUND CHECKS. THERE'S NO INCOME VERIFICATION.

AND THE TYPES OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO STAY HERE WILL NEVER BE APPROVED TO LIVE AT A MULTIFAMILY COMMUNITY THAT'S PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED.

THEREFORE, THEY WERE VERY ATTRACTED TO THE FACT THAT WE WOULD COME CLEAN IT UP, INVEST DOLLARS TO RENOVATING IT, AND TURN IT INTO A COMMUNITY BENEFIT RATHER THAN A A BLIGHTED ASSET.

WHAT? WHEN YOU ESTABLISHED YOUR YOUR FINANCIAL REVENUE FOREGONE, YOU CAME UP WITH $16 MILLION.

THE TAX, THE TAX AMOUNT FOR GOING FOR 60,000 BUCKS FOR 75 YEARS IS 4,000,500.

IS THERE SOME ADDITIONAL COST THAT THAT THE CITY OR THAT, THAT WE'RE PAYING THAT'S GOING TO BE IN IN ADDITION TO THAT $4.5 MILLION? WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THE $16 MILLION FIGURE FROM? I BELIEVE IT'S IT'S PROJECTED TO GROW AT A STATIC RATE, I THINK 3%.

IT'S WHAT, 3%? THEY'LL GROW IT EVERY YEAR. SO STARTED AT YEAR ONE, 60,000.

THEN GROW THAT EACH YEAR AT 3%. AND WHAT'S YOUR CAPITAL STACK HERE? HOW ARE YOU FINANCING THIS? SURE. SO OUR ENTIRE CAPITAL STACK IS FUNDED WITH PRIVATE CAPITAL.

WE HAVE A REPEAT LENDER THAT WE WORK ON THESE DEALS WITH.

THEY WERE OUR PARTNER ON THE SAN ANTONIO HOUSING TRUST, PFC INVESTMENT.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE PROVIDING A LOAN AT ABOUT 67% OF COST FOR THE ACQUISITION, THE RENOVATIONS AND THE LEASE UP, AND THE REMAINDER COMES FROM PRIVATE EQUITY AND IMPACT INVESTORS.

ARE YOU DOING ANY OTHER TAX FINANCING OR ANY OTHER TAX CREDIT OR ANY OTHER OUTSIDE OF THIRD PARTY LENDING FINANCING? NO, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WAS LISTENING TO OUR CONVERSATION WITH OUR COLLEAGUES.

FAILURE TO SPEAK WITH OUR CONTACT, THE COUNCIL MEMBER, FAILURE TO HAVE COMMUNITY INPUT ON THIS, WHICH WAS A CONCERN FOR ME. BUT I WANT TO KNOW, BECAUSE I'M NEW AND I'M LISTENING TO SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS, AND I KIND OF KNOW A LITTLE ABOUT THE PFC, BUT WHAT METRICS WAS USED ARE USED TO DETERMINE WHY ONLY 21 UNITS WERE AFFORDABLE OUT OF 142 UNITS. THAT'S KIND OF CONCERNING TO ME, BUT I WANT TO KNOW WHAT METRICS ARE USED.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, SO AFFORDABLE IS A TERM THAT THAT MANY USE LOOSELY.

WE DEFINE IT AS ANYTHING THAT IS RESTRICTED LESS THAN MARKET RATE.

AND SO THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANY PFC IN THE STATE ARE TO GET 40% OF THE UNITS RESTRICTED AT 80% AMI, AND THEN ADD AN ADDITIONAL 10% OF THE UNITS AT 60% AMI.

SO THIS PROJECT ACTUALLY HAS I THINK 85% OF IT IS RESTRICTED AS OPPOSED TO THE THE MINIMUM OF 50%.

SO ALMOST THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IS AFFORDABLE IN TERMS OF JUST ABSOLUTE AFFORDABILITY.

[01:55:08]

NOW YOU GET INTO THE SEMANTICS ARGUMENT ABOUT WHAT IS AFFORDABLE VERSUS MARKET RATE.

REALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, THIS IS A LONG TERM PROJECT.

THIS IS A 60 YEAR EXEMPTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

AND SO THIS IS GOING TO PRESERVE THOSE AFFORDABLE RATES.

ALL OF THEM, ALL 85% OF THE PROPERTY FOR THOSE ENTIRE 60 YEARS, REGARDLESS OF HOW HIGH THE MARKET'S GOING TO GO.

AND WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO INCREASE AS AS WE MOVE ON THROUGH THE YEARS.

BUT THOSE UNITS ARE GOING TO STAY PEGGED TO THOSE MINIMUM AFFORDABILITY RATES.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THE RATE IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE YEARS TO COME.

IT'S GOING TO IF SO, IF A UNIT IS 1300 IT'S GOING TO STAY 1300 FOR YEARS.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? NOW THE ABSOLUTE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS RELATIVE TO THE HUD PUBLISHED LIMITS LIKE THE DEVELOPER WAS MENTIONING.

EVERY YEAR, THE HUD, THE FEDERAL HUD AGENCY WILL PUBLISH MAXIMUM RENTS FOR EACH METRO AREA, AND SO THOSE ARE UPDATED EVERY YEAR.

BUT THE PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE THAT THOSE ARE BASED ON, THOSE WILL STAY THE SAME.

RIGHT. AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A DEBATE DEFINING MARKET VERSUS AFFORDABLE BECAUSE MY, MY THEORY IS A LOT DIFFERENT. OKAY. BUT LET ME ASK YOU THIS.

AND I'M USED TO WEARING METRICS. THUS THE SAME METRICS THAT THE METRICS VARY FROM DEVELOPER TO DEVELOPER OR PROJECT TO PROJECT.

SO CAN YOU CAN YOU SAY THAT QUESTION AGAIN? SO DOES DOES THE METRICS WHEN IT COMES TO AFFORDABLE VERSUS MARKET.

DOES THE METRICS CHANGE FROM DEVELOPER TO DEVELOPER OR PROJECT TO PROJECT? I THINK YOU SAID SOMETHING EARLIER BASED OFF WHAT AREA YOU'RE IN.

IT'S CHANGED. SO I'M ASKING CAN YOU GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION. SO EACH EACH PROJECT FROM DEVELOPER TO DEVELOPER OR PROJECT TO PROJECT. RIGHT.

SO YOU KNOW WE HAVE MINIMUM STANDARDS. LIKE I SAID, EACH PROJECT HAS TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 40% OF THE UNITS AT 80% AMI AND 10% AT 60.

THAT'S THE MINIMUM STANDARDS. IF THEY CAN'T SURVIVE AT THAT LEVEL, IT'S NOT GOING TO PASS THE BOARD.

BUT THIS PROJECT ACTUALLY EXCEEDS THOSE MINIMUMS. AND SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT PROJECT TO PROJECT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS THAT THE BOARD LOOKS AT.

ONE OF THEM BEING AFFORDABILITY, ANOTHER BEING, YOU KNOW, WHAT MARKET IS IT IN.

IS IT IS IT A ACCRETIVE TO THE COMMUNITY. IS IT GOING TO HELP EVERYTHING AROUND IT? RIGHT. IT'S NOT JUST LOOKING AT RENTS. WILL IT SPUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

WILL IT, YOU KNOW, CORRECT. A BLIGHTED PROPERTY IN A CERTAIN DISTRICT THAT CAN SPUR SOME MORE DEVELOPMENT AROUND IT? IS IT GOING TO ADD INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WILL ALLOW IN TURN, YOU KNOW, OTHER MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENTS TO, YOU KNOW, BE BE ADDED ON TO THAT AFTER THIS ONE IS FINISHED.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT METRICS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD TO SAY.

YOU KNOW THAT THERE'S A CERTAIN SET OF OF APPROVALS THAT ARE GOING TO APPLY ACROSS THE BOARD.

YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT EACH PROJECT ON ITS OWN MERITS AND ITS OWN LOCATION.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL JUST MAKE THIS STATEMENT.

I WAS LISTENING AGAIN TO OUR COLLEAGUES MAYOR PRO TEM, CONCERNING THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION.

AND SO THAT THAT IS A CHALLENGE FOR ME RIGHT NOW.

THANK YOU. IF I CAN ADDRESS THAT POINT, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE? GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD. SO WITH WITH ALL DUE RESPECT COUNCILMAN DISTRICT TWO WE HAD REACHED OUT TO YOUR OFFICE DURING THE PERIOD THAT WE WERE ALLOWED TO REACH OUT EARLIER IN 2025.

AND I'M HAPPY TO SHARE THIS WITH YOUR OFFICE TO REVIEW.

SO WE HAD SENT AN EMAIL UP TO YOUR OFFICE. INTRODUCING OUR COMPANY AND INTRODUCING THE PROJECT AND PROVIDING A PRESENTATION OUTLINING EXACTLY WHAT OUR PLANS WERE BACK ON MAY 22ND.

AND A GENTLEMAN FROM YOUR OFFICE, DEVIN SKINNER, THE POLICY ANALYST, HAD RESPONDED ON MAY 29TH. THANK YOU FOR SENDING THIS TO COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO WITH AN EXCLAMATION POINT.

WE'D BE SURE TO HAVE HIM REVIEW THESE MATERIALS.

HE IS UNFORTUNATELY UNAVAILABLE FOR A MEETING UNTIL AUGUST DUE TO UPCOMING RECESS, BUT I WILL BE HAPPY TO MEET WITH YOU TO DISCUSS FURTHER.

IF YOU ARE SO INCLINED. IF INTERESTED, PLEASE LET ME KNOW YOUR AVAILABILITY.

I'D BE HAPPY TO SCHEDULE SO FROM MAY UNTIL AUGUST.

I THINK THERE WAS A RECESS. YOU WERE NOT AVAILABLE, SO WE HAD RESPONDED ON JUNE 2ND WITH SOME TIMES THAT WE WERE AVAILABLE.

WE HAD FOLLOWED UP SEVERAL TIMES AND WE UNFORTUNATELY WERE NOT ABLE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH YOU.

AND TOTALLY HEAR THE FEEDBACK. AND FOR EVERY SINGLE DEAL WE CONTINUE TO DO IN DALLAS, WE WILL MAKE A POINT TO SPEAK

[02:00:08]

WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBERS PRIOR TO PRESENTING THE DEAL TO THE PFC.

AND WE YOU KNOW, I SINCERELY APOLOGIZE THAT WE DID NOT WE WERE NOT ABLE TO CONNECT.

OKAY. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. IN ADDITION TO THE POINTS I ALREADY MADE, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GO OVER THREE MORE THINGS.

ONE IS, I SINCERELY APPRECIATE THE WORK OF OUR PFC BOARD MEMBERS AND THEIR SERVICE, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE THE DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE REVENUE WE NEED FROM PROPERTY TAXES TO MAKE THAT DECISION ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A BENEFIT TO THE CITY.

SECOND, THE ROLE OF PUBLIC BENEFIT AS DESCRIBED IS REALLY A CALCULATION OF TWO THINGS, IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

ONE IS THE SAVINGS AND RENT TO THE OCCUPANTS, AND SECOND IS THE INCOME THAT THE PFC ITSELF WILL RECEIVE, WHICH OF COURSE ENCOURAGES THE PFC BOARD MEMBERS TO APPROVE THESE DEALS BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GET THE FEE INCOME AND MORE INCOME ALLOWS THEM TO DO MORE DEALS, WHICH IS THEIR CHARGE.

AND THIRD, IN ADDITION TO THE TAX REVENUE THAT THE CITY ITSELF WILL GIVE UP, WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT YOU'RE ASKING OUR OTHER JURISDICTIONS, OUR OTHER PARTNERS, TO GIVE UP 75 YEARS.

WE'RE MAKING THAT DECISION. SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DALLAS ISD.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DALLAS COUNTY, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DALLAS COLLEGE AND PARKLAND.

AND SO WHILE LET'S SEE, YOUR CURRENT YEAR NUMBERS ARE $62,659 FOR CITY OF DALLAS, BUT IT'S 88,670 FOR DALLAS ISD. IT'S OVER 9000 FOR DALLAS COUNTY, OVER 9000 FOR DALLAS COLLEGE, AND OVER 18,850 FOR PARKLAND. THESE ARE SIGNIFICANT DOLLARS FOR OUR PARTNERS THAT WE'RE EXEMPTING.

FOR WHAT? FOR VERY FEW ACTUALLY AFFORDABLE UNITS.

SO, YOU KNOW, LOOK, IT'S GREAT TO HAVE 21 MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS, BUT THE COST IS JUST TOO GREAT ON THIS DEAL.

AND I THINK THAT WE HEARD THAT THERE REALLY HASN'T BEEN THE ENGAGEMENT NECESSARY.

BUT I'LL TELL YOU THIS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MAP OF WHERE THIS IS LOCATED, IT IS RIGHT ALONG THE HIGHWAY.

THERE IS A NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT BEHIND. I'D BE CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS TO SAY ABOUT CHANGING THIS.

MAYBE YOU'RE RIGHT. MAYBE THEY'D BE HAPPY TO HAVE A MOTEL OPERATOR.

THAT'S NOT. PERFORMING WELL BE SWITCHED OUT. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

SO I MOVED TO. SO, YOU KNOW, THE MOTION IS TO REJECT THIS ITEM.

IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T GO BACK AND TRY TO REWORK SOMETHING.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. MR. IAQUINTO, YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR TESTIMONY THAT YOU THOUGHT THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD ENHANCE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. SPUR, I BELIEVE, IS THE TERM THAT YOU USED.

WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT THAT WILL OCCUR? YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD. EXCUSE ME? IT'S HARD TO SAY.

YOU KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE. ALL I KNOW IS WHAT IS EXISTING IS A FAILING MOTEL.

AND WHAT WILL EXIST AFTER THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETE IS A REGULATED, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, PERMANENT DEVELOPMENT WITH LONG TERM RESIDENTS BRINGING THOSE FOLKS IN WHO ARE INVESTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALMOST ALWAYS CONTRIBUTES TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. WAS THERE ANY REVIEW OF MAKING THIS A 4% LIHTC PROJECT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO A PFC? AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE PFC BEFORE I WAS THERE, BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE SO. THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPER DOESN'T DO THAT SORT OF EXECUTION, AND SO I DON'T THINK HIS PROPOSAL INCLUDED ANY OF THOSE.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES. OUR PROPOSED CAPITALIZATION HERE IS 100% PRIVATELY FUNDED WHICH WOULD NOT PUT A STRAIN ON THOSE LITEX BOND DOLLARS OR TAX CREDIT SALES.

WELL, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE SPREAD OF AFFORDABILITY HERE AS COMPARED WITH MARKET RATES.

IF THERE'S ONLY A SAVINGS OF $56 PER MONTH FROM MARKET TO 8 TO 60% OF AMI, I DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH TO JUSTIFY THIS PROJECT FINANCIALLY.

[02:05:01]

I'D LIKE TO ASK THE DEVELOPERS SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

SO YOU MENTIONED THAT THE 1300, SOME DOLLAR, 60% RENT WOULD JUST CONSTITUTE THE MAXIMUM THAT YOU COULD CHARGE. SO WHAT WOULD YOU PLAN TO CHARGE FOR THAT INCOME LEVEL? SO THE PROPERTIES IN THE AREA THAT HAVE THESE SIMILAR 60% AMI RESTRICTED UNITS ARE CHARGING RENTS CLOSER TO $1,000 IN ORDER TO ATTRACT TENANTS AT THAT INCOME LEVEL.

THAT WOULD BE OUR EXPECTATION. ADDITIONALLY, WHAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT IS EVERY REAL ESTATE OWNER HAS A DIFFERENT CRITERIA FOR THE RETURN PROFILE. WHAT MAKES OUR PROGRAM AND OUR BUSINESS MODEL UNIQUE IS THAT WE'RE NOT DOING GROUND UP CONSTRUCTION.

GROUND UP CONSTRUCTION CAN TAKE 225 TO 250,000 A UNIT AND TAKE 2 TO 3 YEARS.

OUR ALL IN BASIS IS A FRACTION OF THAT. ABOUT 130 140,000 A UNIT.

THEREFORE, WE ARE ABLE TO, DURING OUR OWNERSHIP, BRING THE RENTS TO AN ATTAINABLE LEVEL.

AND WE DO THAT ACROSS OUR 2500 UNIT PORTFOLIO.

A ONCE WE SELL THIS PROPERTY TEN YEARS, 15 YEARS, THIS IS A 75 YEAR AGREEMENT.

THE NEXT OWNER WILL HAVE A DIFFERENT BASIS, WILL HAVE A DIFFERENT RETURN PROFILE CRITERIA AND MAY CHOOSE TO INCREASE THE MARKET RENTS 1500 1617. THERE'S NO RESTRICTION ON MARKET RENTS.

SO AS THE AREA IMPROVES OR AS THE FUTURE OWNER HAS A DIFFERENT STRATEGY, THEY MAY INCREASE RENTS FURTHER.

SO WE ARE PUTTING THESE RENT RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE WILL FOR 75 YEARS, GUARANTEE THAT THE RENT WILL NEVER GO ABOVE THOSE ARMY BASED LIMITS, WHICH WILL INCREASE OVER TIME AS INCOMES INCREASE.

CORRECT. SO PROPORTIONATELY IT WILL BE THE SAME RESTRICTION.

OKAY. SO HAVE YOU DONE ANY KIND OF A MARKET SURVEY OF OTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS WITHIN, SAY, A MILE OF YOUR PROPERTY TO DETERMINE WHAT THE MARKET IS FOR THESE RENTS? YES, ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S WHAT WAS INFORMING MY DATA POINT AT ABOUT $1,000.

AT THE 60%. SO HOW MANY UNITS, AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE THERE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU'VE LOOKED AT? I DON'T HAVE THE COUNT IN FRONT OF ME. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THE MARKET RATE RENTS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE NOT HIGH ENOUGH TO SUPPORT NEW MULTIFAMILY, AND THIS IS A UNIQUE APPROACH TO PROVIDE HOUSING THAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR CANNOT PROVIDE DUE TO WHERE RENTS ARE TODAY. WELL, I'M STILL VERY SKEPTICAL OF THE COST BENEFIT RETURN HERE, GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF FOREGONE PROPERTY TAX VERSUS GETTING 21 UNITS.

IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A VERY GOOD PAYBACK TO ME.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. WHAT WAS THE NAME OF THE INDIVIDUALS AND THE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS THAT YOU GUYS REACHED OUT TO? SURE. I WILL PULL THAT UP. YOU'RE SAYING THE LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS AND NONPROFITS, THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

SO WE REACHED OUT TO THE STEMMONS CORRIDOR BUSINESS ASSOCIATION.

COMMUNITY MEMBERS, PLEASE. OH, INDIVIDUALS. BRIAN, TONY, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, PLEASE. HE DOES NOT LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

COMMUNITY MEMBERS IN IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I DON'T I MEAN, THESE ARE ORGANIZATIONS THAT REACHED OUT TO I DON'T KNOW WHO LIVES WHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY, WELL, WELL, THAT'S THAT'S A WE REACHED OUT TO CHURCHES, LOCAL CHURCHES.

SO THE CATHEDRAL OF HOPE, REUNION CHURCH. MAYOR I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO JANUARY THE 28TH. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? MAYOR PRO TEM KNOW EVERYONE WHO WAS IN THE QUEUE BEFORE.

WE'RE NOW ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THAT, STAY IN THE QUEUE.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION, YOU HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE IF THIS PASSES OR NOT.

SO I'M SEEING PEOPLE GET BACK IN. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER.

I WOULD I WOULD SUPPORT A MOTION TO DEFER TO ALLOW THESE FOLKS TO GET BACK AND TRY TO GET SOME MORE INFORMATION FOR US.

[02:10:02]

MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS.

I THINK THAT THERE'S EASY SOLUTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO HEAR FROM YOUR RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORS AND GIVE YOU THE TIME NEEDED.

I THINK A DENIAL WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT TOO HARSH.

WHEN I THINK WHAT WE'VE HEARD THE CONCERNS TO BE TO FOR THE ABILITY TO HAVE IT ADDRESSED.

SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS DEFERRAL AS WELL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

I WILL SUPPORT THE DEFERRAL FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.

ONE, I KNOW IT GIVES YOU A CHANCE TO KIND OF GET GET REVIEW IT AND KIND OF ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS TOO.

BUT AS WE TALK ABOUT THIS PROCESS, THIS GIVES US THE ABILITY THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THESE PFC PROJECTS.

TO PUT IT BACK, SEND IT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD SO I CAN SUPPORT IT FOR THOSE FOR THIS REASON.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN WEST RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO THANK MAYOR PRO TEM FOR GIVING EVERYONE MORE TIME TO SORT OF WEIGH IN ON THIS AND LEARN MORE ABOUT IT.

YOU KNOW, JUST AS A REMINDER AS WELL, WE'RE THE ACCORDING TO THE CHILD POVERTY ACTION LAB, WE ARE 55,000 UNITS SHORT RIGHT NOW AND THE 30 TO 60% AMI CATEGORY, AND WE'RE 88,000 UNITS SHORT IN THAT CATEGORY IF WE DO NOTHING ELSE BY 2030.

SO THE AFFORDABILITY IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THIS CITY OF DALLAS.

WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE MORE OF THESE DEALS AND WHERE WE CAN SAVE THEM.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE TRY TO DO SO, AND I'M GLAD WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE HERE.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DEFER? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT AND THAT DISPOSES OF THE ITEM FOR TODAY.

SO NEXT ITEM PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 16.

[16. 25-2976A Authorized a five-year Maintenance Agreement, with one five-year renewal option with the Turtle Creek Association for the Turtle Creek Association Maintenance Agreement to provide general maintenance, supplemental enhanced maintenance, capital improvement projects, and special projects for the Turtle Creek Corridor, the Turtle Creek shoreline, and medians along Turtle Creek - Financing: No cost consideration to the City]

AUTHORIZE A FIVE YEAR MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH ONE FIVE YEAR RENEWAL OPTION WITH THE TURTLE CREEK ASSOCIATION FOR THE TURTLE CREEK ASSOCIATION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE GENERAL MAINTENANCE, SUPPLEMENTAL ENHANCED MAINTENANCE, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, AND SPECIAL PROJECTS FOR THE TURTLE CREEK CORRIDOR, THE TURTLE CREEK SHORELINE, AND MEDIANS ALONG TURTLE CREEK.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS.

IS THERE A MOTION? CHAIRMAN STEWART? YES, SIR.

I DO HAVE A MOTION. YOU DO? YES. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

THANK YOU. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE.

THE SERVICE AREA IS AMENDED TO COVER THE TURTLE CREEK CORRIDOR.

THE TURTLE CREEK SHORELINE, EXCLUDING THE TURTLE CREEK PARK BOUNDARY, AND MEETINGS MEDIANS ALONG TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN STEWART? YES, PLEASE. FOR FIVE MINUTES. SO THESE TWO ORGANIZATIONS, THE TURTLE CREEK CONSERVANCY AND THE TURTLE CREEK ORGANIZATION? YES, ASSOCIATION. EXCUSE ME, I SEE, I APOLOGIZE.

THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. THESE TWO ORGANIZATIONS HAVE WORKED ALONGSIDE EACH OTHER FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

AND THE TURTLE CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD, AND FOR THE MOST PART, I THINK HAVE WORKED TOGETHER WELL.

BUT THEY DO HAVE SOME VERY SIGNIFICANT BOUNDARIES.

ONE DOES MEDIANS, ONE DOES SHORELINE, ONE DOES PARK.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO CALL THESE OUT, TO DEFINE THESE IN THIS ORDINANCE.

AND SO THAT'S WHY I SUPPORTED THIS MOTION. AND THIS AMENDMENT IS TO JUST CLARIFY THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF EACH OF THE ORGANIZATIONS. THEY HAVE LONG STANDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH EACH OTHER AND RELATIONSHIPS WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND I THINK IT CAN BE A HEALTHY OR STRONGER RELATIONSHIP IF WE ARE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT EACH ORGANIZATION'S RESPONSIBILITIES ARE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU, CHAIR STEWART, FOR CALLING THIS OUT.

I JUST HAD NOTICED THAT THE RESOLUTION DIDN'T REALLY RESPECT OR CONSIDER A CONTRACT FROM 1998 WHERE AN ORGANIZATION THAT'S RAISED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR GOING ON THREE DECADES.

IT JUST SORT OF INFRINGED ON THAT EXISTING CONTRACT.

SO I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT EACH OF THE ORGANIZATIONS BOUNDARIES ARE CLEARLY DELINEATED SO THAT WE CAN KEEP IT CLEAR.

ALSO, AS SOMEONE WHO'S RAISED MONEY DOWN THERE, IT REALLY HELPS IF DONORS HAVE A CLEAR MESSAGE OF WHICH ORGANIZATIONS THEY'RE SUPPORTING.

SO WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS AMENDMENT.

THANKS. JIM RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

QUESTION FOR STAFF, MR. O'CONNOR.

SO, MR. O'CONNOR, YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE STAFF ITEM, CORRECT? YES, SIR. AND I'M JUST CURIOUS DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THAT AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THIS ITEM, OR IS THIS A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE? WELL, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO, RYAN O'CONNOR. DALLAS. PARK. SO I WOULD I WOULD OFFER JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT.

[02:15:01]

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT TCA HAS BEEN CLEANING CLEANING THE CREEK CORRIDOR FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND SO IS TCC. I WOULDN'T SAY THEY'RE DOING EXACTLY IN COLLABORATION, BUT THEY'RE BOTH MAKING MEANINGFUL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WATERWAY.

SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND. AND SECONDLY, THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS AGREEMENT WITH TCA THAT WOULD PROHIBIT TCC FROM CONTINUING TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THEIR PARK CONFINES. SO I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THOSE THOSE TWO POINTS.

SO. THIS FIVE YEAR MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE TURTLE CREEK ASSOCIATION, WOULD NOT PREVENT TURTLE CREEK CONSERVANCY FROM CONTINUING THEIR CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THAT AREA. NO, SIR, IT WOULD NOT. IN FACT, IT WOULD PERHAPS EVEN BE PERCEIVED AS A VALUE ADD TO ENTITIES TRYING TO TO REALLY MAKE SURE THAT PART OF THE CREEK LOOKS GREAT ALL THE TIME. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 16, THE MOTION BY CHAIRWOMAN STEWART SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT.

NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 17. AUTHORIZE A CHAPTER THREE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT AGREEMENT AND ALL

[17. 25-3142A Authorize a Chapter 380 economic development grant agreement and all other necessary documents with RG University Hills, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and/or its affiliates in an amount not to exceed $23,500,000.00 in consideration of the Rivulet Phase 1 Project, a master-planned and mixed-use development proposed on real property currently undeveloped and addressed as 6400 University Hills Boulevard, in accordance with the Economic Development Incentive Policy - Total not to exceed $23,500,000.00 - Financing: Economic Development & Housing Development Fund (2012 General Obligation Bond Fund) ($503,533.00), Economic Development Fund (I) (2017 General Obligation Bond Fund) ($1,721,521.00), Economic Development (G) Fund (2024 General Obligation Bond Fund) ($14,411,515.00), and Infrastructure Investment Fund ($6,863,431.00) (subject to current and annual appropriations) *In alignment with Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

OTHER NECESSARY DOCUMENTS WITH RG UNIVERSITY HILLS LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND OR ITS AFFILIATES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $23,500,000.

IN CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVULET PHASE ONE PROJECT, A MASTER PLAN AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED ON REAL PROPERTY, CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND ADDRESSED AS 6400 UNIVERSITY HILLS BOULEVARD, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE POLICY NOT TO EXCEED $23,500,000. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCILMEMBER ROTH AND MENDELSOHN MAYOR PRO TEM.

YOU HAVE A MOTION. I DO THANK YOU. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL DECEMBER 10TH 2025 SECOND.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. DISCUSSION. YES, I'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY OR FIRST.

WE DID NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR THIS AT COMMITTEE DUE TO DUE TO SOME ISSUES THAT WE HAD.

I'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH STAFF AND THE DEVELOPER AND THE DEVELOPERS IN AGREEMENT TO MOVE THIS ITEM TO DECEMBER 10TH TO ALLOW THEM TO MEET WITH THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS INDIVIDUALLY. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DEFER? CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES. YEAH. MR. MAYOR, I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE, BUT I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT TO MY COLLEAGUES THAT IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THAT IT CUTS IT KIND OF CLOSE.

WHILE THEY ARE OKAY WITH DELAYING IT, MOVING IT TO THE DECEMBER IT FROM A FINANCING PERSPECTIVE, IT PUTS A LITTLE PRESSURE ON THEM FROM A TIMING.

AND AS WE GO THROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEALS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS AND THEIR FINANCING, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I NECESSARILY WANT TO PUT INTO JEOPARDY.

SO THE DEVELOPERS ARE OKAY WITH THAT. I WILL SAY THAT IN FULL DISCLOSURE, BUT I CANNOT SUPPORT THE DEFERRAL OF THIS ITEM TO TO THE NEXT AGENDA FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. ONE IT WAS A BRIEFING MEMO. SO A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REACH OUT AND ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.

IN FACT, I KNOW THE DEVELOPER DID REACH OUT TO SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES TO ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS FROM THERE.

AND THE MEETING WAS 11 THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING WAS NOVEMBER 3RD WHICH GIVE THEM ESSENTIALLY NINE DAYS TO, TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. SO I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, JUST SO I CAN KIND OF GET SOME CLARITY ON WHAT I BELIEVE SOME OF THE ISSUES MAY BE FOR THIS ONE. SO I'M NOT SURE IF SOMEBODY FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CAN COME UP.

GOOD MORNING. KEVIN SPATH DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. MR. SPATH, CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AND UNDERSTAND? YOU KNOW, I KNOW IT'S A GRANT THAT WE'RE GIVEN, BUT WILL YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THIS GRANT IS DOING AND HOW IT'S GOING TO WORK? PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY. PLEASE STATE YOUR INQUIRY.

IF THE MOTION IS TO DEFER, IS IT IN ORDER TO BE ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEAL? IT DEPENDS. I MEAN, IF IT SPEAKS TO THE MERITS OF WHETHER OR NOT THE DEFERRAL WOULD BE HARMFUL OR NOT IT SPEAKS TO THEM.

BUT YOU WOULD NEED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS TAILORED TO THAT.

THE SUBSTANCE CAN BE RELEVANT TO A MOTION TO DEFER IF IT SPEAKS TO THE DETRIMENTAL ASPECT OF THE DEFERRAL.

BUT YOU NEED TO BE PRETTY FOCUSED. YES, SIR. AND WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS, IT SPEAKS TO WHAT I BELIEVE.

SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THE GRANT WORKS FROM THERE, AND NOT SO MUCH THE THE DEAL AND I DON'T AND AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO NECESSARILY DELAY THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S A IT'S QUESTIONS ABOUT EITHER THE CITY'S PROCESS OR HOW THIS GRANT WORKS.

[02:20:01]

SO THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING WITH THAT. I WILL LET YOU CONTINUE. THANK YOU SIR. SO CAN YOU JUST CONTINUE, PLEASE? YEAH, I'LL TRY TO KEEP IT HIGH LEVEL, BUT ANSWER THE QUESTION.

SO THIS IS THIS CAME INTO OUR OFFICE OVER TWO YEARS AGO AS AN APPLICATION FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM.

IT'S A IN TOTAL, A 90 ACRES, BUT PHASE ONE IS 71 ACRES OF COMPLETELY RAW, UNDEVELOPED LAND.

NEVER BEEN TOUCHED. SO THE DEAL HERE, IN SUMMARY, IS THE DEVELOPER WILL BE PROVIDING ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY TO MAKE THE SITE TO TURN THE SITE INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD SO IT WILL HAVE OVER 300 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED LOTS.

IT WILL HAVE A SPACE FOR AT LEAST 200 APARTMENT UNITS.

IT WILL HAVE A COMMERCIAL PIECE SOUTH OF THE CREEK, CLOSER TO THE UNT DALLAS CAMPUS.

BUT ALL OF THAT COSTS A LOT OF MONEY TO PROVIDE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE.

CLOSE TO $50 MILLION, IN FACT, OF INFRASTRUCTURE JUST FOR PHASE ONE.

SO THIS GRANT, AS PROPOSED BY THE STAFF IS 23, FIVE TO HELP SUPPORT THE PROVISION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS NECESSARY FOR DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR. AND HAVE WE DONE THESE TYPE OF GRANTS BEFORE? THIS IS NOT A UNIQUE TYPE OF A GRANT. IT'S NOT.

IT'S NOT A UNIQUE TYPE OF DEAL STRUCTURE. THE UNIVERSITY HILLS STRUCTURE WITH HOPE DEVELOPMENT WAS COMPARABLE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO AGAIN, COLLEAGUES, I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND I RESPECT MY, MY, MY COLLEAGUES POSITION AS THE CHAIR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

AND WE DID HAVE THIS ON THE ITEM. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE MEETING GOT ABRUPTLY STOPPED.

AND I DON'T KNOW, I WANT TO ASK ONE MORE QUESTION AS A MATTER OF RELEVANCE TO THAT, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO DISCUSS IT ON THE AGENDA, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO.

AND I GUESS THIS IS A CITY ATTORNEY'S QUESTION WHY WE HAD TO STOP ABRUPTLY.

I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAD TO STOP THE MEETING.

IS THAT. YEAH. YEAH, THAT'S GETTING THAT'S GETTING TOO FAR AFIELD.

I REALLY DO THINK. ALL RIGHT, WELL, THANK YOU EITHER WAY, COLLEAGUES, THIS IS AN ITEM.

THAT'S BEEN TWO YEARS IN THE MAKING. STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THEM FOR THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME FROM THERE.

AND AGAIN, I CAN APPRECIATE SOME QUESTIONS THAT MY COLLEAGUES MAY HAVE, BUT THEY HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO TO GET THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

SO IF I COULD APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT FROM MY COLLEAGUES TO MOVE THIS ITEM FORWARD, AND THEN I'D BE HAPPY TO HAVE, I'M SURE THE DEVELOPERS CAN FOLLOW UP WITH MY COLLEAGUES IN THE INTERIM. THANK YOU. REALLY QUICKLY, JUST FOR THE NEWER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, I TRY TO BE PRETTY PERMISSIVE ON MOTIONS TO DEFER.

I TRY TO BE PERMISSIVE, BUT IT REALLY DOES HAVE TO KIND OF SPEAK TO THE MERITS OF DEFERRING THE ITEM, NOT A DEBATE ON THE ITEM ITSELF, BECAUSE THE ITEM ITSELF IS NOT ACTUALLY ON THE FLOOR UNLESS THE MOTION TO DEFER WERE TO FAIL, UNLESS SOMEONE WERE TO MOVE TO ACTUALLY DEBATE THE ITEM.

IT'S THE MERIT, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION OF THE MERITS OF IT TO TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK THERE'S HARM TO THE DELAY.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO THERE GENERALLY, JUST SO YOU KNOW.

OKAY. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER.

DEFER? THANK YOU. MAYOR. MR. SPATH. WHEN WE. AND I'M GOING TO ASK MY QUESTION TO HIM IN THE MERITS OF DEFERRING AND FROM WHAT MY COLLEAGUE MR. GRACEY SAID ABOUT HIS RECOMMENDATION NOT TO DEFER.

SO, MR. SMITH, DID YOU AND I NOT HAVE A LONG, LENGTHY CONVERSATION AS TO WHY WE DO AND HOW WE DOING? AND WHAT WAS THE BENEFITS OF THIS? YES, MA'AM.

WE DID. WAS THAT MONDAY? ABSOLUTELY. SO. AND DID WE DID EVERYBODY DID ANYONE OTHER THAN ME HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH YOU? IF YOU'RE ASKING, DID I MEET WITH ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS? THE ANSWER IS YES. SO EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER HERE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, IF I'M NOT CORRECT, TO REACH OUT, ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS ON A BASE ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS, CORRECT? IF YOU'RE ASKING DID, DID I PERSONALLY ASK EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER IF THEY HAD I'M SAYING EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER HAD THE THE CERTAINLY, YES. AFTER AFTER THE COMMITTEE LAST WEEK. THAT WAS CERTAINLY THE CASE.

SO COLLEAGUES, I JUST WANT FOR COMPLETE TRANSPARENCY.

I WAS THE COMMISSIONER THAT WORKED ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE WHEN I WAS IN CPC.

THIS IS MY CASE. I KNOW, I KNOW IT VERY INTIMATELY BECAUSE I SPOKE WITH THE DEVELOPERS.

I NETTED OUT EVERYTHING. I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING ON THE FRONT END.

I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO STAFF ON THE BACK END.

[02:25:04]

I KNOW WHAT THIS IS OFFERING NOT ONLY TO DISTRICT THREE, BUT BECAUSE IT IS SURROUNDED IN THREE CORNERS BY DISTRICT EIGHT.

I ALSO KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HOW IT'S GOING TO BENEFIT THE CITY AS A WHOLE, BECAUSE THIS IS OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR THAT IS SLATED TO BE A GROWTH AREA. DELAYING THIS, HE MR. SPATH HAS JUST SAID IT'S GOING TO TAKE IT TOOK TWO YEARS TO GET IT HERE.

EVERY DAY IS EVERY MONTH A DEVELOPER IS PAYING IS PAYING CARRYING COST ON ALL OF THIS LAND TO DEVELOP THIS DEVELOPER, TO HAVE THIS DEVELOPMENT HAPPEN.

I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF DELAYING IT BECAUSE EVERYONE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO NET OUT ALL THE QUESTIONS.

I CAN PERSONALLY TELL YOU THE BENEFITS OF IT.

BECAUSE I WAS A CPC. I WENT FROM RAW GROUND TO TALKING TO EVERYBODY AND NOW FIGURING OUT THE FINANCES OF IT.

AND DID I NOT HAVE MR. SPATH VERY POINTED QUESTIONS WHY WE ARE DOING IT THIS WAY? YES. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER.

NO, THANK PASS. ALL RIGHT. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. NOT NOT A QUESTION, BECAUSE I WAS LISTENING TO MY COLLEAGUE COUNCILWOMAN BLAIR AND COUNCILWOMAN COUNCILMAN GRACEY.

I'M GOING TO NOT SUPPORT TO DELAY BASED OFF. THIS HAS BEEN A TWO YEAR PROCESS.

SHE'S WORKED ON IT. THE COUNCIL MEMBER OF THAT DISTRICT NEEDS THIS FOR THE GROWTH THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO IN THEIR DISTRICT.

AND SO THEREFORE, I WILL BE NOT SUPPORTING TO DEFER THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AGAIN, PART OF THE REASON. AGAIN, THAT'S THE.

IT'S NOT NECESSARY TO DEFER THIS ITEM. BECAUSE AGAIN, IT IT PUTS THE DEVELOPER.

THE QUESTION WAS ASKED, WELL, IS THIS GOING TO MAKE HIM PUT THEM IN A FINANCIAL SITUATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? WELL, THE ANSWER IS NO.

BUT WHAT IT DOES DO IS IT PUTS THEM TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT IN TERMS OF THEIR FINANCING.

FOR ME TO WANT TO PUT A DELAY ON THIS. AND AGAIN, WE'VE HAD PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT IS IN DISTRICT THREE.

WE JUST SPENT, YOU KNOW, A FAIR AMOUNT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT AN ITEM.

AND WE ALLOWED OUR COUNCIL MEMBER TO MAKE THAT DECISION AND WE SUPPORTED HIM.

SO I'M ASKING FOR THAT SAME LEVEL OF RESPECT AS AS IT RELATES TO THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

HERE AGAIN, THAT I'M BEING AS FULLY AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE.

IT DOES NOT PUT THEM IN. IT ISN'T A DELAY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT WHEN I FIRST TALKED TO THE DEVELOPERS, THEY WERE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT IT POTENTIALLY HAVING TO GO TO A DELAY.

SO BECAUSE AT ONE POINT THEY WERE GOING TO PUT IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.

AND THEN I THINK THE THE RESOLUTION WAS THAT THEY WOULD MOVE IT, JUST DELAY IT AND DEFER IT TO THE DECEMBER 5TH AGENDA ITEM.

AND MY QUESTION IS, AND I STILL DON'T HAVE CLARITY, IS WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TODAY AND DECEMBER 5TH THAT COULD NOT HAVE TAKEN PLACE ANY TIME BETWEEN THE TIME IT WAS POSTED ON THE AGENDA ITEM.

UNTIL NOW. THESE TYPE OF BEHAVIORS QUITE PERSONALLY GIVE ME CONCERN.

IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T TRUST YOU ALL. IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

BUT AS WE KNOW IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPMENTS, THESE TYPE OF DELAYS CAN TYPICALLY RESULT IN EMPTY PROJECTS.

I HAVE PROJECTS ON WESTMORELAND RIGHT NOW THAT HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE AND NO DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S BEEN THAT WAY. I'M NOT GOING TO GET TOO FAR OFF, BUT ANY SORT OF DELAY CAN COST DEVELOPERS A LOT, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO SOUTHERN DALLAS PROJECTS.

SO AGAIN, I'M JUST ASKING THAT WE ALL CAN KEEP THIS PROJECT MOVING FORWARD.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. ROTH, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

I'M SORRY, FIVE MINUTES. EXCUSE ME. THANK YOU.

THE MY, MY, THE REASON THAT I'M ASKING TO DEFER IT IS BECAUSE I HAVE NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TO SPEAK WITH THE DEVELOPER AND GET THE FACTS THAT AND THE INFORMATION AND THE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

AND I FELT LIKE NOT PURPOSELY, BUT BECAUSE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WAS NOT ABLE TO TO TO REVIEW THIS ACTION ITEM AT THAT TIME, I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE A FUTURE TIME.

[02:30:02]

SO THE DEVELOPER HAS REACHED OUT TO ME PARTICULARLY, AND I'M SURE TO OTHERS AS RECENT AS YESTERDAY, WHICH IT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO TO FIND THIS INFORMATION IN AN ACTION ITEM, A DEFERRAL FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS, I THINK IS, IS IS INTERESTING FOR ALL OF US TO ALLOW THIS DEVELOPER TO GIVE HIM A, A FULL TRANSPARENT ABILITY TO APPROVE AND AND ACKNOWLEDGE AND MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD RAPIDLY ONCE WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION, INSTEAD OF HAVING TO VET THE QUESTIONS IN A PUBLIC SETTING, THE THE QUESTION THAT I HAD AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE DEAL POINTS HERE, BUT THIS IS A BIG DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS $23 MILLION OF BOND FUND MONIES THAT WE ARE PROVIDING TO A DEVELOPER, WHICH IS GREAT.

THESE ARE GRANTS. THE PROJECT IS A SERIOUS PROJECT.

IT'S A GREAT PROJECT FOR THE AREA. IT IS, BUT I'M NOT COMFORTABLE UNDERSTANDING THE MONEY PART OF IT.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS OUR STEWARDSHIP, OUR STEWARDSHIP OF OUR PUBLIC FUNDS.

AND IT'S NOT A REFLECTION ON THE DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S NOT A REFLECTION ON THE LOCATION. IT'S IT'S NOT A REFLECTION ON THE PROJECT.

IT'S A REFLECTION ON OUR PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALLOCATING SIGNIFICANT DOLLARS PROPERLY AND THAT WE KNOW HOW THOSE DOLLARS ARE GOING TO BE ADVANCED AND WHAT THE TERMS ARE. AGAIN, IF WE NEED TO DO THAT NOW, I'M I'M NOT REALLY PREPARED TO MAKE A SERIOUS AND, AND PROPER QUESTIONS, ALTHOUGH WE CAN TRY TO DO THAT IF IT'S NOT DEFERRED.

BUT I THINK THAT A TWO WEEK DELAY HOPEFULLY WOULD NOT KILL THIS DEAL AND WOULD ALLOW US ALL TO PARTICIPATE IN A MORE TRANSPARENT WAY IN HELPING MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD, FORWARD QUICKLY IN THE NEXT TIME.

SO AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO TO ASK JUST THE COURTESY AGAIN.

I CERTAINLY WOULD DEFER TO THE REST OF THE GROUP.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. SMITH. YES, SIR. LET ME ASK RE-ASK THE QUESTION.

WHEN THIS WAS SENT OUT, AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE HAD ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU CONCERNING THIS PROJECT AND GET ANY INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO GET IT CORRECT.

YES. SO THAT WHEN THE DRAFT AGENDA GOES OUT APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS AHEAD OF TIME, ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THAT.

WHEN THE COMMITTEE ITEM WAS POSTED, EVEN THOUGH IT WASN'T ACTUALLY HEARD AND DISCUSSED BY THE COMMITTEE, I THINK THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE COPIED ON THOSE AS WELL.

SO YES, THERE'S BEEN TWO TIMES WHEN THIS ITEM HAS BEEN PUBLICLY AVAILABLE FOR FOR DISCUSSION TO COME, TO COME TO ME DIRECTLY. SO IT'S HARD FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND WHEN PEOPLE SAY THEY'RE NOT PREPARED OR HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO PREPARE WHEN WE'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO LISTEN AND ASK QUESTIONS. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF CONCERNING TO ME, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE GETTING THINGS DONE IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR AND WE WANT TO DEFER IT, ESPECIALLY WHEN AND ALSO WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER ITSELF SAID THAT I KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN MY DISTRICT AND I'M WORKING WITH MY COMMUNITY.

THEN THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER THAT WAS ON CPC SAYS, I ALSO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO ALSO AFFECT MY DISTRICT IN A POSITIVE WAY. SO TO SAY THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO PREPARE IS KIND OF DISINGENUOUS.

WE I'M GOING TO SUPPORT I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT, TO DEFER.

I'M ALSO GOING TO SUPPORT, HOPEFULLY, THAT WE CAN GET THE SUPPORT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS GOES ON IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. WELL, I THINK 23 IS THE MAGIC NUMBER.

23 DAYS IS THE NUMBER OF DAYS THAT MAYOR PRO TEM IS ASKING FOR THE DELAY.

JUST 23 DAYS FOR A DEAL THAT WAS FILED, I BELIEVE YOU SAID MORE THAN TWO YEARS AGO.

AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $23 MILLION OF A DEAL.

I THINK IT DESERVES THE TIME FOR US TO BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS.

I DON'T SIT ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. I DID TUNE IN FOR THIS BECAUSE IT'S ACROSS FROM THE UNIVERSITY TIF THAT I SHARE, BUT IT'S ACROSS THE STREET. IT'S NOT PART OF IT. THE TRUTH IS THAT I DID NOT REACH OUT.

I'M. I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS, BUT REALLY, THIS IS THE KIND OF ITEM THAT WE LEARN FROM EACH OTHER AND WE LEARN FROM EACH OTHER'S QUESTIONS.

AND IT DESERVES A FULL DIALOG. AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT $23 MILLION, IT'S NOT NOTHING.

AND IT'S ALSO A REALLY EXCITING DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AS WELL AS MULTIFAMILY AS WELL AS COMMERCIAL.

AND WE NEED IT AND WE NEED IT THERE. THE QUESTION IS, WILL THESE INVESTMENTS ACTUALLY YIELD THE THING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT?

[02:35:01]

AND THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU THAT IT'S NOT EXACTLY CLEAR THAT WE'RE GUARANTEED TO GET THAT WITH THIS INVESTMENT, AS OPPOSED TO JUST IMPROVING SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY.

AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A FULL DISCUSSION.

IT PART OF MY QUESTION TO ABOUT PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE WAS NOT TO CUT OFF YOUR DEBATE.

IT WAS TO SEE IF IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THE FULL DEBATE NOW, WHEN THE MOTION IS TO DEFER.

I TEND TO THINK IT'S NOT. I TEND TO THINK THE QUESTION SHOULD JUST BE ABOUT, WELL, SHOULD WE DEFER IT OR NOT? BUT EITHER WAY, THERE SHOULD BE A ROBUST DISCUSSION, WHETHER IT'S IN A COMMITTEE OR IT'S FULL COUNCIL BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, TO COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR'S POINT, THIS IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT AND IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON A LONG TIME, ALONG WITH THE TIF DEVELOPMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, IF YOU SAY IT'S NOT GOING TO HARM THE ABILITY FOR THE PROJECT TO GO FORWARD, JUST MAYBE MAKE IT A LITTLE TIGHTER. WELL, WE ALL WORK WITH TIGHT DEADLINES, SO I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

BUT I THINK THE SCRUTINY OF $23 MILLION IS WORTHY.

AND WHETHER WE HAVE IT NOW OR LATER, I THINK THAT DISCUSSION NEEDS TO HAPPEN.

THANK YOU, MR. BAZALDUA, FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WANT TO ASK MR. GRACEY A QUESTION. IF HE IF HE'S WILLING TO ANSWER.

BUT WHAT WHAT DO YOU EXPECT TO GET FROM A DELAY? I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU DON'T WANT IT, SO I'M WONDERING, LIKE WHAT WHAT WHAT WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE THERE TO BE A CHANGE? IF I'M FOLLOWING YOUR QUESTION, I DON'T EXPECT THERE TO BE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE OUTCOME IN THE DELAY.

AND I'M PERPLEXED IN TERMS OF WHY THOSE QUESTIONS, WHATEVER QUESTIONS THEY ARE, WHY THEY WEREN'T ASKED WHEN WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER ITEM WE'VE GONE THROUGH.

SO I GET NERVOUS WHEN THEY HAVE THESE UNIQUE AUDIBLES CALLED AND I'M NOT.

AND AGAIN, NO DISRESPECT, LET ME STOP SAYING IT THAT WAY. MY WIFE IS WORKING ON MY EDITING.

BUT I DON'T MEAN TO DO IT THE WAY I JUST GET NERVOUS.

AND AGAIN, WHEN THERE'S DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN AND THAT ANYTHING CAN TURN INTO A SNOWBALL THAT I JUST DON'T WANT ANYTHING. THIS IS MOVING FORWARD. LET'S KEEP IT GOING.

THAT'S IT. THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I GATHERED AS WELL.

I JUST WANT TO ENCOURAGE MEMBERS WHEN THERE ARE ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP YOU KNOW, PULLING AN ITEM IN THE 11TH HOUR THE NIGHT BEFORE AN AGENDA MEETING AND ASKING YOUR QUESTIONS SOLELY HERE ON RECORD.

WHEN WE HAVE AMPLE OPPORTUNITY. I KNOW STAFF ANSWERS CALLS ALL HOURS OF THE DAY, EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WERE QUESTIONS THAT SOME MEMBERS HAD THAT THE INITIATIVE WAS NOT TAKEN TO GET THOSE ANSWERS.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A CLEARLY AMOUNT OF PEOPLE HERE THAT ARE READY TO VOTE FOR THIS.

THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT WASN'T NECESSARILY AFFORDED TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER WHOSE DISTRICT THIS BIG OF A PROJECT IS IN, TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS FROM MEMBERS. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BEFORE, RIGHT HERE ON THE FLOOR.

I THINK THAT THIS IS A REALLY BAD WAY FOR US TO HANDLE BUSINESS THAT'S MADE IT TO OUR AGENDA.

I THINK THAT IF PEOPLE FEEL THAT THEY DIDN'T GET THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED, NOT ONLY WAS IT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TAKE THE INITIATIVE TO GET THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

IT WAS BECAUSE THEY ALSO FAILED TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER WHOSE DISTRICT THIS IS IN.

AND THIS ISN'T A PRECEDENT I BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE SETTING.

WE HAVE COMMITTEE WORK TO DO THE HEAVY VETTING OF OF OUR POLICY DECISIONS, AS THE MAYOR'S SUGGESTED, THAT WE DO. AND I'VE HEARD FROM SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT ARE OPPOSING THIS OR WANTING TO SEE THE DELAY TO GET QUESTIONS ANSWERED, WHO HAVE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH FILLING OUR CALENDAR UP WITH SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS SO THAT WE HAVE AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO GET THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

AND THAT WAS ALSO NOT SOMETHING THAT TOOK PLACE.

SO THESE DELAYS TO ME ARE MORE THEATRICAL WHEN THEY'RE COMING AT THE VERY LAST MINUTE HERE AT THE HORSESHOE.

AND IT ALSO SPEAKS TO IT SPEAKS TO MEMBERS NOT BEING PREPARED.

WE ARE ASKED FOR AGENDAS TO, TO APPROVE VERY HIGH DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND THIS, THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA IS $149 MILLION WORTH OF DEALS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE APPROVING.

AND I PERSONALLY COME TO THE HORSESHOE ON WEDNESDAY MORNINGS READY TO MAKE MY VOTE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, WHETHER I SUPPORT SOMETHING ON THESE ITEMS. AND IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HEARING.

I ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DO YOUR HOMEWORK, TO DO YOUR VETTING, AND GET YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY STAFF.

WITH THE TIME THAT WE HAVE BETWEEN MEETINGS, AND UTILIZE OUR COMMITTEE OPPORTUNITIES TO GET THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

[02:40:07]

DON'T BLINDSIDE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE PUT IN THE WORK, AND WHO HAVE GOTTEN THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED, AND ARE EXPECTING TO SEE THE NEEDLE MOVE FOR THE CONSTITUENCY THEY REPRESENT.

I'M HERE TO FULLY SUPPORT YOU IN THIS REGARD.

I WILL NOT SUPPORT THE DELAY AND I'M READY TO SEE THIS MOVE AS WELL.

AND IT'S SOMETHING GREAT FOR SOUTHERN DALLAS, AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THIS CONVERSATION HAS TAKEN A TURN SO THAT WE AREN'T JUST HIGHLIGHTING THE GREAT WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE AND THIS PROJECT FOR YOUR DISTRICT, SO WE'LL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE DELAY.

THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AND I WANT TO SUPPORT MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER GRACEY BY NOT SUPPORTING THE DELAY.

MY FIRST THOUGHT WHEN I SAW THIS WAS ABOUT MULTIFAMILY, AND I KNOW THAT WE LOOK AT SOUTHERN DALLAS AND SOME OF THE TOPOGRAPHY THERE.

I MEAN, MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

HOWEVER, THIS IS IN SUCH CLOSE PROXIMITY TO A LARGE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS, NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND ONE THING I REALLY LIKED I'M SURE COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR CAN SPEAK TO THIS IS THE WAY THAT IT'S REALLY STILL HONORING THE THE CREEK AND THE LAND AND REALLY INCORPORATING SIX ACRES OF PARKLAND INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND SO I KNOW THIS IS PHASE ONE AND THAT WHAT'S TO COME IS GOING TO BRING THAT MIXED USE FEEL AND EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE BEEN HEARING FOR YEARS, DECADES ABOUT WHAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS.

AND SO I DO THINK THIS HAS BEEN VETTED. IT IS A HIGH DOLLAR AMOUNT, BUT BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF IT, I. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU.

AND THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES THAT ARE SUPPORTING ME.

AND AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. THIS IS NOT ME MAKING ANY ACCUSATIONS.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT YOU'RE NOT PREPARED. I'M NOT SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CHAIRMAN DID ANYTHING WRONG.

I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES THESE THINGS GET LOST AND IT CREATES THIS NEGATIVE ENERGY.

AND THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. WHAT I'M SAYING IS, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY FOR THIS TO BE DELAYED IN ORDER TO GET YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED, BECAUSE DELAYS WE'VE SEEN HISTORICALLY, THEY CREATE ECONOMIC STRUGGLES DOWN THE ROAD.

SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING I'M SAYING. I'M MAKING THAT VERY CLEAR.

THE OTHER THING IS THEY'VE HAD SEVERAL COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND SEVERAL ITERATIONS OF WHAT THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD LOOK LIKE BEEN BACK AND FORTH, UP AND DOWN. THEY'VE TAKEN THEIR, THEIR, THEIR, THEIR, THEIR PUBLIC YOU KNOW, CRITICISMS AND ALL OF THAT.

SO THIS IS JUST US KEEPING THIS PROJECT MOVING FORWARD.

NO NEGATIVE, NO DISRESPECT, NONE OF THAT. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO KEEP THE PROJECT MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DEFER BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM ON ITEM 17? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE NOS HAVE IT. THE MOTION TO DEFER FAILS. SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM 17.

MOVE APPROVAL. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING? NONE. OH, MR. RIDLEY. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 17.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. QUESTION FOR MR. SPATH. SO WILL THIS $23.5 MILLION BE UPFRONT, OR WILL THIS BE ON A REIMBURSEMENT BASIS AS THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE COMPLETED. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO LET ME PULL OUT MY NOTES. SO THE PAYMENT WILL BE DISBURSED IN FOUR PAYMENTS.

THREE. THE FIRST THREE OF WHICH WILL BE PAYABLE AS REIMBURSEMENT.

SO THEY'LL HAVE TO DELIVER ALL OF THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO THAT'S GRADING. THAT'S ALL THE WET UTILITIES, SEWER, STORM SEWER, WATER.

THEY'LL HAVE TO PAVE ALL THE STREETS. AND WHEN THOSE ARE DONE AND ACCEPTED IN EACH OF THOSE THREE PHASES, THEN THEY WILL RECEIVE REIMBURSEMENT UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT, 4.7 MILLION FOR THE FIRST ONE, 5.7 MILLION, 3.3 MILLION. THE FINAL PAYMENT OF 9.6 MILLION WOULD COME WHEN THEY PERFORM ALL THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF THE AGREEMENT.

OKAY, SO I HEARD THAT THIS TOTAL PROJECT WOULD COST 50 MILLION.

WHERE IS THE OTHER 17 MILLION COMING FROM? SO THE DEVELOPER HAS A DEBT FACILITY, A DEBT CREDIT, SORRY, A CREDIT FACILITY REVOLVING THAT THEY WILL DRAW UPON.

AND THEN THEY'RE PUTTING IN 4 OR $5 MILLION OF EQUITY.

OKAY. AND IS THAT. DEBT FINANCING GUARANTEED? YES. SO. SO THIS PROJECT, LIKE ALL OF OUR APPLICATIONS, WENT THROUGH UNDERWRITING AND ALL THESE THINGS WERE VERIFIED, THE OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDS. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE APPROVE THIS ITEM AND THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO FINISH THE

[02:45:01]

PROJECT OR EVEN TO START IT, THAT OUR MONEY IS SAFEGUARDED.

AND IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE IT IS. IT IS. AND I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT WITH NEARLY ALL OF OUR DEALS, WE DON'T ACTUALLY EXECUTE ANY AGREEMENTS UNTIL WE SEE THE FIRM COMMITMENTS OF ALL THE OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDS.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. FIRST, CAN YOU TELL US THE. IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME, FROM READING WHAT I HAVE, THAT THE DEVELOPERS ABLE TO PUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN, GET THIS REIMBURSEMENT, BUT THERE'S NOT ACTUALLY A GUARANTEE THAT THE HOUSING WILL EVER BE BUILT.

SO THE. SO THIS DEVELOPER IS PERFORMING HORIZONTAL DEVELOPMENT.

WE DON'T SEE MANY DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS IN THE CITY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE MANY OF THESE TYPES OF AREAS THAT NEED $50 MILLION OF INFRASTRUCTURE JUST TO BE ABLE TO, TO BUILD A HOME. SO THIS DEVELOPER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE ALL OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE HORIZONTALLY, AND THEN PLAT THE PROPERTY AND SELL THE THREE AT LEAST 300 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS TO A SINGLE FAMILY BUILDER.

THEY WILL ALSO HAVE TO SELL A MULTIFAMILY TRACT THAT IS SHOVEL READY, THAT HAS ALL THE UTILITIES TO IT TO A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPER FOR AT LEAST 200 MULTIFAMILY UNITS. THEY WILL ALSO HAVE TO ACTUALLY BUILD IMPROVEMENTS, NEIGHBORHOOD AMENITY IMPROVEMENTS.

SO THAT COULD EITHER BE AN AIR CONDITIONED CLUBHOUSE AND POOL, OR AT LEAST FOUR OTHER THINGS, INCLUDING PICNIC AND COVERED PAVILION AREA, A DOG PARK, NEIGHBORHOOD TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE SYSTEM, A PLAYGROUND OR A MULTI-SPORT COURT. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE $47.2 MILLION OF PROJECT COSTS THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR. OKAY, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HAVE THIS RIGHT, BECAUSE THIS IS THE CORE OF MY QUESTION.

THEY BOUGHT A PIECE OF LAND. IT'S RAW LAND. THEY'RE GOING TO PUT IN ALL THE UTILITIES.

WE'RE GOING TO REIMBURSE THEM FOR A LARGE PORTION OF THAT.

AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO SELL THE LAND TO SOMEONE WHO MAY OR MAY NOT ACTUALLY BUILD ON IT.

CORRECT? CORRECT. SO ALL WE'VE REALLY DONE IS HELP INFLATE THE PRICE OF THAT LAND FOR THEM TO SELL.

THAT MIGHT STILL SIT THERE. SO AND THIS IS PART OF THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD FROM SOME OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE QUESTION ABOUT HOW THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT OCCURS IS THROUGH A LOT TAKE DOWN CONTRACT.

AND SO THE HORIZONTAL DEVELOPER, THE DEVELOPER IN THIS CASE WILL HAVE TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH A HOME BUILDER THAT IS AT OUR AT MY AS THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL.

AND THAT HOME BUILDER HAS TO WILL EXERCISE TAKEDOWN OF A CERTAIN NUMBER OF LOTS IN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SEQUENCES BASED ON THE ABSORPTION, THE SALE OF THE HOMES THEY BUILT.

SO THEY MAY TAKE DOWN 50 LOTS TO START BUILD THOSE 50 HOMES AND DEPENDING ON HOW THOSE SELL, THEY'LL TAKE DOWN ANOTHER 50 LOTS. AND SO THAT WILL OCCUR THROUGH A LOT TAKE DOWN SEQUENCE BETWEEN A HOMEBUILDER.

SO IF I CAN PAUSE FOR ONE SECOND BUT THEIR REIMBURSEMENT IS NOT CONTINGENT ON THAT HAPPENING.

IS THAT CORRECT? THE FIRST THREE PAYMENTS ARE UPON COMPLETION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WILL BECOME A CITY ASSET WHEN IT IS ACCEPTED BY THE CITY. SO SO AGAIN, I'M CONCERNED THAT THE DEAL WAS STRUCTURED IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T RESULT IN AN OUTCOME THAT REQUIRES HOUSING. IT ONLY REQUIRES INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE PUT IN THE GROUND.

WE DON'T HAVE A DIRECT WE DON'T HAVE DIRECT CONTROL WITH A HOMEBUILDER.

WE HAVE INDIRECT CONTROL THROUGH A VARIETY OF MECHANISMS, INCLUDING DEED RESTRICTIONS, DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT WILL BE FILED.

AND SO THE HOMEBUILDER WILL BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW.

DESIGN GUIDELINES WILL REQUIRE TO DO LOTS OF OTHER THINGS INDIRECTLY THROUGH DEED RESTRICTION.

WE DO HAVE CONTROL OVER WHEN WE GIVE A REIMBURSEMENT, AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN THAT THE DEAL WAS STRUCTURED SUCH THAT THE REIMBURSEMENT DOESN'T HAPPEN UNTIL THE HOUSING HAPPENS, AS OPPOSED TO THAT INFRASTRUCTURE GOES IN, IN THE MARKETPLACE THAT THIS DEAL WOULD NEVER HAPPEN IF IT HAD TO BE THAT WAY.

AND THIS DEAL WAS EXACTLY LIKE THE HOPE DEVELOPMENT FOR UNIVERSITY HILLS.

THAT DEVELOPMENT ALSO DOESN'T GUARANTEE VERTICAL DEVELOPMENT OF HOMES.

AND HOW MANY HOMES ARE THERE RIGHT NOW. I'M SORRY.

AND HOW MANY HOMES ARE AT THE HOPE DEVELOPMENT? HOPE DEVELOPMENT JUST STARTED. HORIZONTAL DEVELOPMENT ZERO.

SO THEY'RE PROBABLY 12 TO 15 MONTHS AWAY FROM DELIVERING A LOT THAT IS SHOVEL READY FOR A HOME BUILDER.

[02:50:03]

OKAY. I'M CONCERNED WITH HOW THE DEAL IS STRUCTURED THAT THE HOUSING MIGHT NOT COME, BUT WE WILL HAVE GIVEN AWAY THIS MONEY.

THAT'S MY CONCERN. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN, IF I MIGHT.

ROBIN BENTLEY WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. THIS IS A COMPLICATED DEAL, SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THE LAST POINT ABOUT THE 9 MILLION PLUS THE FOURTH REIMBURSEMENT, THE LARGEST REIMBURSEMENT. IT REQUIRES THAT ALL 300 OF THE LOTS HAVE BEEN SOLD.

AND AS KEVIN MENTIONED, THE HOME BUILDER IS TAKING THESE DOWN IN A WAY THAT THEIR OWN ABSORPTION STUDY SHOWS THAT THE MARKET WILL ABSORB THE BUILT HOMES.

THEY'RE NOT TAKING DOWN ALL 300 AT ONCE. AND SO WE DO HAVE A DEADLINE BY WHICH THE HOMES HAVE TO BE BUILT, SOLD AND ALL THE LOTS TAKEN DOWN BY THAT HOME BUILDER.

OR ELSE WHAT? OR WE DON'T PAY THE 9 MILLION PLUS DOLLARS OF THE LAST INSTALLMENT.

SO WE WILL HAVE HAD AN INFRASTRUCTURE WE WILL HAVE PAID HOW MUCH WE WILL HAVE PAID 11 OR $12 MILLION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WILL HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE CITY, ACCEPTED BY THE CITY, AND DEEDED TO US. SO IT WILL BECOME CITY ASSET ON OUR, YOU KNOW, THAT WE WOULD OWN AND CONTROL, AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND A DESIGN BOOK RECORDED ON THE PROPERTY.

SO EVEN IF THIS DEAL FALLS OFF IN THE DITCH AFTER THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS BUILT, WHOEVER COMES IN TO BUILD THOSE HOMES STILL HAS TO BUILD THE QUALITY, THE MATERIALS, THE DESIGNS THAT YOU ALL HAVE APPROVED.

AND SO WE'VE GOT CONTROLS OVER WHAT EVENTUALLY GETS BUILT.

WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THE MARKET, RIGHT? IF THE MARKET SLOWS DOWN AND THE ABSORPTION SLOWS DOWN, AND THE BUILDER CAN'T TAKE DOWN ALL OF THE LOTS BY THE END OF I THINK IT'S 20, 29 IS THE DEADLINE FOR THE 300 LOTS TO BE TAKEN DOWN FOR THAT PAYMENT? IF THEY DON'T TAKE IT DOWN, WE WON'T PAY THAT 9 MILLION.

PLUS THE DEVELOPER WILL BE OUT THOSE DOLLARS.

THEY'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CLOSE THAT GAP. BUT WE STILL HAVE A PRODUCT COMING EVENTUALLY.

AND COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY DISTRICT, THAT WILL BE THE QUALITY THAT WE'VE ALL APPROVED. SO MY CONCERN IS NOT WHERE IT'S LOCATED.

IF THIS DEAL IS HAPPENING IN MY DISTRICT, I WOULD HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME QUESTIONS.

AND IT'S REALLY ABOUT PROTECTING THE CITY AND THE CITY'S INVESTMENT.

AND, YOU KNOW, I HAVE WORKED REALLY, REALLY LONG ON THE UNIVERSITY PLACE SITUATION.

WITH COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS SINCE WE SHARE THAT TIFF.

I, I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. YOU KNOW, YOU YOURSELF SAID THIS IS A COMPLICATED DEAL, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY A MEMO IS INSUFFICIENT.

AND IT NEEDED A COMMITTEE BRIEFING. EVEN ONE THAT A MEMBER WHO'S NOT ON THAT COMMITTEE COULD HAVE JUST WATCHED TO LISTEN TO WHAT THE DISCUSSION WAS.

KEVIN, YOU JUST SAID THAT YOU WOULD BE THE PERSON TO AGREE AND DECIDE WITH THE DEVELOPER WHO THE HOME BUILDERS ARE.

AND CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT? THE QUESTION WAS THE APPROVAL OF THE HOME BUILDER. THE BUILDER IN THIS CASE HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED. THEY BROUGHT FORTH A NATIONAL BUILDER CREDITWORTHY WITH EXPERIENCE. I FORGET THE NAME OF THEM, BUT YES, AS LONG AS IT'S A CREDITWORTHY EXPERIENCE BUILDER, THEN THEY STILL HAVE TO RUN THE NAME THROUGH US. BUT IF IT'S SOMEONE WITH THE EXPERIENCE AND THE CAPACITY AND CREDIT TO TO DELIVER, THEN WE WOULD HAVE APPROVED. AND LG IS THE SINGLE FAMILY BUILDER.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION, MR. ROTH.

YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE'RE ON AGENDA ITEM 17.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE OR DEVELOPMENT COSTS THAT THE CITY IS HAVING TO BRINGING UTILITIES TO THIS SITE OR OUTSIDE OF THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT? ARE THERE ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS ON THE CITY TO TO PROVIDE ANY KIND OF ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE UTILITIES CONSTRUCTION TO BEFORE THE INTERNAL DEVELOPMENT OF OUR, OUR SITES IS THAT SITE ALREADY HAS UTILITIES? I'M NOT I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY. THERE ARE UTILITIES IN THE TWO MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAYS ON THE PERIPHERY OF THE SITE.

SO THE DEVELOPER WILL PULL FROM THOSE AND BRING THEM INTERNAL TO THE SITE AND IS.

I NOTICE THERE'S LIKE A CREEK IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS THING, IS THERE IS THERE ANY ISSUES RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND THE, THE WORKING OF THAT, OF THAT WATERWAY THAT WOULD BE NEEDING TO BE IS THAT ADDRESSED IN YOUR.

IT'LL BE PART OF WHAT THE DEVELOPER WILL BE REQUIRED TO DO. THAT'S PART OF THE COST OF HORIZONTAL DEVELOPMENT.

THEY'LL HAVE TO GRADE. THEY'LL HAVE TO DEAL WITH TREE MITIGATION.

THEY'LL HAVE TO DEAL WITH STORMWATER MITIGATION AND FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION, ALL THE PERMITS NECESSARY, BOTH FROM THE CITY AND FROM FEMA, IF NECESSARY.

YES. THAT'S PART OF THE DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY.

AND AND THE I NOTICED THAT IT SAID THAT ANY LOAN ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPERTY BY THE DEVELOPERS WOULD WE WOULD BE SUBORDINATE TO ANY LOAN OF THAT. SO IN THE EVENT THAT THERE WAS A DEFAULT OR THE PROJECT WENT BELLY UP WE WOULD NOT WE WOULD BE IN A LOWER POSITION AND MAY NOT BE HAVING ANY POSITION IN BEING ABLE TO STEP BACK IN TO RECOVER ANY OF OUR MONIES.

[02:55:07]

YEAH. THAT'S CORRECT. ON THE ON THE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS THEMSELVES.

IS IT THE LOTS THEMSELVES OR IS IT ON THE DEVELOPMENT? THERE'LL PROBABLY BE AN OPEN SPACE COMMON AREA AS WELL.

THAT'S NOT AN ACTUAL LOT. YES. WELL, THERE'S A $30 MILLION LOAN THAT'S BEING DONE ON THIS THING TO GET THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN STARTED.

ARE WE SUBORDINATE TO THAT? IF IF WE PROVIDE DOCUMENTS IF WE'RE ASKED TO.

YES. BUT TYPICALLY WE DON'T FOR GRANTS, WE THAT ARE REIMBURSABLE TO ACTUAL COSTS, WE DON'T WE DON'T OFTEN GET ASKED TO SUBORDINATE FOR THAT REASON.

TO, TO COUNCILMAN MENDELSOHN POINT. IT'S, YOU KNOW, I'M THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT PROJECT. IT'S THE RIGHT THING FOR THE RIGHT PLACE.

BUT WE'RE WE'RE PAYING BASICALLY HALF THE COST OF THIS, OF THIS DEAL.

IT'S A $50 MILLION DEAL, AND WE'RE PAYING 25 MILLION OF IT, WHICH IS MAYBE A GOOD INVESTMENT, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROTECTED AND THAT THE DEVELOPERS HAVE SOME THEY HAVE SIGNIFICANT SKIN IN THE GAME AND THAT THEY BASICALLY IF FOR SOME REASON THE MARKET GOES AGAINST THEM, THERE'S A DIFFICULTY WITH WITH THAT, THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'VE GOT SOMETHING TO SHOW AT THE END OF THE DAY FOR THE MONEY THAT WE'RE INVESTING HERE.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'LL HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH LOTS THAT ARE BUILDABLE.

WE WON'T CONTROL THE TIMING OF THE HOMES THAT GET BUILT, BUT WE WILL CONTROL EVERYTHING ELSE ABOUT THOSE HOMES THROUGH THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, THE SECURITY INSTRUMENTS.

I WOULD ALSO, YOU KNOW, WHILE THIS PROJECT IS 50 MILLION OF INFRASTRUCTURE, THE HOME BUILDER WILL ALSO SPEND UPWARDS OF 75 MILLION TO BUILD THE HOMES AND THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPER WILL SPEND 75 TO 100 MILLION ON THEIR PROJECT, AND THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT WILL BE ANOTHER 30 TO $50 MILLION.

SO THIS, IN OUR MINDS, IS AN INVESTMENT IN GETTING THE ENTIRE AREA EVENTUALLY DEVELOPED, YOU KNOW, UPWARDS OF 200 TO $300 MILLION. AND THEN AGAIN, MY COMPARISON IS REALLY TO A TIF SITUATION WHERE THE DEVELOPER WOULD FRONT ALL THE MONEY AND THEN GET IT BACK AS INCREMENTAL VALUES WOULD GO GO UP BASED ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

BUT OBVIOUSLY THIS IS NOT A TIF. THIS IS JUST A GRANT.

SO IT'S AND AND THE OTHER THING THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS WE'RE BORROWING THE $23 MILLION.

AND SO THROUGH THE BONDS. SO AGAIN IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE JUST SPENDING MONEY THAT'S IN OUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT.

WE'RE ACTUALLY BORROWING MONEY TO GIVE TO ANOTHER GUY TO MAKE A DEVELOPMENT.

AND THAT'S OKAY AS LONG AS WE HAVE SUFFICIENT PROTECTION.

AND AGAIN, LOOK, I WANT THIS DEAL TO GO THROUGH.

I WANT IT TO HAPPEN. AND I WANT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IN I WANT THOSE HOUSES ON THE TAX ROLLS, AND I WANT THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY ON THE TAX ROLLS.

BUT IF IF, GOD FORBID, THE THE WORLD GOES UPSIDE DOWN, I DON'T WANT TO THE CITY TO SAY, HOW COME WE SPENT 23 MILLION BUCKS FOR NOTHING? MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT, ABOUT GROWING OUR TAX BASE, BRINGING IN HOUSING IN THESE NUMBERS IN ANY PART OF THE CITY IS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN EASILY.

SO OVERALL ON THE PROJECT, YOU KNOW, I SUPPORT THE PROJECT.

I DO HAVE SOME, SOME QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE COULD DO TO.

THE LAST PHASE OF THE 9 MILLION IS CONTINGENT OF THE HOMES BEING BUILT.

WHY DID WE NOT LOOK AT HAVING THE ENTIRE REIMBURSEMENT AT THE END OF THE PROJECT ONCE THE HOMES WERE DELIVERED? BECAUSE MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THAT THE HOMES WON'T BE BUILT, AND THAT WE'RE SITTING WITH STREETS AND SIDEWALKS IN AN AREA THAT'S NOT THAT'S JUST SITTING THERE. YEAH. YEAH. I'LL TAKE THAT ONE.

ROBIN BENTLEY, THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. I THINK IT'S JUST A FUNCTION OF HOW THE FINANCING ON THIS DEAL WILL WORK. RIGHT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A MASTER DEVELOPER BUILDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE WITH A REVOLVING LOAN AND CITY FUNDING, AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO CLOSE THAT FINANCING WITH THE PERMANENT FINANCING SITUATION, AND THEN INDIVIDUALLY SELL EACH LOT TO A DIFFERENT ENTITY THAT WILL BUILD THE HOMES WITH SEPARATE FINANCING.

IF WE HOLD OUR FINANCING UNTIL THE VERY END. WE'RE JUST MAKING THE WHOLE COMPLEX, THE WHOLE FINANCING STACK, A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED BY MAKING THEM BRIDGE OUR PIECE LONGER AND INTO THE PERMANENT FINANCING STACK.

[03:00:07]

I'LL STOP THERE. YES. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE ON OTHER PROJECTS WE WAIT UNTIL EVERYTHING IS DELIVERED AND COMPLETED.

NOT ALL OF THEM, BUT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF OUR MOST RECENT ONES.

YEAH, I WOULD SAY MOST OF THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT THE COUNCIL SEES ARE NOT LIKE THIS.

THEY ARE ALREADY IN AREAS THAT ARE ALREADY DEVELOPED.

AND THE DEVELOPER, THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE IS WITH THE VERTICAL DEVELOPER.

SO THE ONLY ONE THAT'S COMPARABLE TO THIS, FRANKLY, IS THE HOPE DEVELOPMENT AT UNIVERSITY HILLS, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE SAME STRUCTURE AS THIS. THAT DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT GUARANTEE HOMES WILL BE BUILT.

THAT IS AN INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

OKAY. DO WE TYPICALLY BRING UTILITIES UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE, OR DO WE TYPICALLY DO UTILITIES INSIDE A DEVELOPMENT? WELL, I'M NOT AN I USED TO BE AN EXPERT IN SUBDIVISION LAW, BUT SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS REQUIRED THE DEVELOPER TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET UTILITIES TO AND THROUGH THE PROPERTIES THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DEVELOP.

I SEE OUR CITY ATTORNEY. THAT'S HER REALM OF EXPERTISE, BUT THE CITY DOES DO PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS.

AND SO THROUGH BOND PROGRAMS AND AND OTHER CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS, THEY DO PROVIDE UTILITIES, MOSTLY SYSTEM SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS. SO ROADWAY SEGMENTS THAT WOULD SERVE A LARGER AREA, OR WATER AND WASTEWATER MAINS THAT SERVE A LARGER AREA. BUT AGAIN, THIS IS 90 ACRES OF RAW, UNTOUCHED LAND, PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT HAS TWO ROADS ON EITHER SIDE OF IT, WITH UTILITIES IN THEM, BUT NOTHING INTERNALLY TO THE SITE.

OKAY. IT'S A REALLY NICE PIECE OF PROPERTY WITH A LOT OF TREES AS WELL.

ARE WE DID WE LOOK AT ANYTHING ASIDE FROM THE MONETARY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, LIKE THROUGH TREE MITIGATION OR ANY OTHER OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE COULD HAVE WEIGHED DIFFERENTLY? YEAH. SO THEY'LL BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW ALL THE CITY'S TREE REGULATIONS.

I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT THEY ALREADY WENT THROUGH URBAN DESIGN PEER REVIEW PANEL OVER TWO YEARS AGO NOW.

AND THE PANEL DID MAKE SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT HOW TO TWEAK THE LAYOUT OF THEIR SITE, HOW TO MAKE BETTER USE OF THE CREEK HOW TO LESSEN THE DISTURBANCE TO THE RIPARIAN AREA ALONG THE CREEK.

SO THOSE ARE ALL FACTORS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONTEMPLATED AND AND MADE PROVISIONS FOR ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I REALLY WANTED TO SEE WAS THE MARKET INDEX. I KNOW WE CAN'T CONTROL AND PREDICT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 300 HOMES HERE. UNIVERSITY HILLS, ANOTHER HUNDRED HOMES.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE HOMES ARE BEING BUILT. AND SO NOT NOT A HOUSING DEVELOPER.

SO I'M GOING TO LET I'M GOING TO TRUST THAT THEY ARE DOING THEIR DUE DILIGENCE TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S A MARKET THAT CAN SUPPORT THOSE HOMES BEING BUILT.

AS WE MENTIONED IN OUR MEETING EARLIER THIS WEEK.

SO THE MARKET STUDY IS PART OF THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

SO THE DEVELOPER DID COMMISSION AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY MARKET STUDY.

WE REVIEWED THAT. OUR OUTSIDE UNDERWRITER ALSO REVIEWED THE MARKET STUDY.

AND SO BOTH ALL THE PARTIES WHO LOOKED AT THE MARKET STUDY FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THE ABSORPTION RATES OF THE MARKET OF THE HOMES, HOLMES IS SUFFICIENT AND FEASIBLE TO TO THIS PROJECT.

AND SO THIS IS AN INVESTMENT THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING.

DO WE HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW MANY YEARS IT WOULD TAKE TO RECOUP THE CITY INVESTMENT, ONCE THOSE HOMES ARE BEING BUILT AND THE REVENUE THAT THE PROPERTY TAX WILL BRING? I HAVEN'T DONE THAT CALCULATION YET, BUT I WOULD SAY RIGHT NOW THE PROPERTY IN ITS UNDEVELOPED STATE IS ONLY WORTH ABOUT 700 $800,000 ON THE TAX ROLLS, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY ISN'T GENERATING MUCH FOR THE CITY AT ALL.

SO WITH $75 MILLION OF VERTICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE ACTUAL HOMES, 100 AND $100 MILLION OF AN APARTMENT AND SOME COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, LET'S ASSUME $200 MILLION HITS THE TAX ROLLS.

THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT RETURN ON THE CITY'S TAX INVESTMENT.

I CAN'T DO THE MATH IN MY HEAD, BUT YOU GET THE PICTURE.

YEAH. THANK YOU. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS ITEM.

I JUST MOVING FORWARD ON PROJECTS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE MORE OF A GUARANTEE THAT THESE HOMES ARE GOING TO BE BUILT AND NOT DOING THE REIMBURSEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT, BUT UNTIL IT'S FULLY COMPLETED.

[03:05:03]

SO THANK YOU, MAYOR. MISS BLAIR, ARE YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES? AGENDA ITEM 17. THANK YOU. MAYOR COLLEAGUES, I I'M.

REALLY? LET ME EXPLAIN THE WAY THAT THE DESIGN OF THIS REQUEST CAME.

IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT WHEN I WORKED ON THE CASE WITH THE DEVELOPER, THAT WE HAD SUBSTANTIAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE COMMUNITY ASKED FOR.

THE COMMUNITY AND WHAT THEY ARE. AND THE DEVELOPER ALSO WANTED MULTIFAMILY.

BUT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT IN MY, MY, IN MY MIND THAT IT WAS A GRADUAL THING.

YOU HAD THE RETAIL ON THE FRONT BECAUSE IT'S A NATURAL CREEK.

I, I DEMAND IT IN LAURIE'S FASHION THAT THERE WAS PROTECTION OF THAT CREEK BECAUSE I KNOW UPSTREAM, DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS. IF YOU MESS WITH WITH SOMETHING THAT GOT PUT ON THIS EARTH.

SO THAT WAS ALSO IMPORTANT AS WE MOVED FORWARD TODAY IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES CAME IN AT A MARKET RATE, AND THEY CAME IN AT A RATE THAT WOULD STIMULATE DEVELOPMENT NOT ONLY ON THIS CORNER, BUT ON AT TO ALSO APPRECIATE AND FOLLOW THE MASTER PLAN FOR YOU KNOW,. FOR UNTD, THIS IS DISTRICT THREE AND DISTRICT EIGHT'S OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE BACK TO THE CITY IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE HAVE ALWAYS HISTORICALLY BEEN TOLD WE DON'T SUPPORT. WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY NOW TO SUPPORT THE CITY'S TAX BASE BECAUSE WE HAVE WE HAVE REVENUE THAT'S COMING IN FOR NEW BUILDS.

ALSO, WHAT I WANT YOU GUYS TO APPRECIATE THIS.

THE WATER LINE, THE AND THE AND THE WASTEWATER LINE, THAT WAS ONE OF THE LAST THINGS MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS DID BEFORE HE STEPPED DOWN, HE MADE SURE THAT AN AREA THAT DID NOT HAVE THOSE SERVICES NOW HAVE THE BASIS AND THE FOUNDATION. IT WENT STRAIGHT TO HOAG AND IT BECAME UP TO THIS AREA.

SO THE WASTEWATER AND THE WATER LINES ARE THERE.

AND WORKING WITH MISS STANFORD. WE ALSO APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT SOME OF THE WATER LINES THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN IN PLACE WERE AGED OUT, SO THEY ALSO GOT AN UPDATE AND AN UPGRADE. SO RIGHT NOW THIS IS PRIME.

THIS IS A PRIME EXAMPLE. WELL, LET ME BACK UP TO.

I LIKE TREES. I'M A LOVER OF TREES AND I AND I, AND IN MY DISTRICT WE HAVE TREES THAT IN OUR LIFETIME, NONE OF US WILL EVER BE ABLE TO SEE IF THEY ARE CUT DOWN BECAUSE OF THEIR AGE.

ONE OF THE THINGS I ASKED THE ARBORIST WITH ALL THESE TREES, MOST OF THESE ARE TRASH TREES.

MOST OF THEM ARE JUST ABSOLUTELY GROWN WILD TRASH TREES.

SO THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT IN AND I ALWAYS ASK FOR SOMETHING BETTER THAN ARTICLE TEN, BECAUSE ARTICLE TEN IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME. SO I TOTALLY SUPPORT THIS. AND WHEN I SAW THIS AND I SAW THE MONEY AMOUNTS THAT WAS BEING BROUGHT TO THE TABLE, I WAS ANXIOUS TO HEAR ABOUT IT IN COMMITTEE BECAUSE I'M ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

I WAS SORRY WE DIDN'T GET TO DO IT, SO I MADE IT MY BUSINESS TO ASK KEVIN, TO ASK THE BUILDER, WHY ARE YOU ASKING FOR THIS MONEY FROM MY FOR WHAT? KEVIN TOLD ME THIS IS STANDARD. THIS IS A STANDARD.

WHETHER IT'S FASHION THE WAY YOU WANT, IT'S FASHION LIKE HOPE IS FASHION.

SO IT'S CONSISTENT FOR THE AREA AND THE MANAGEMENT OF THE PROCESS.

ONLY THING WE'RE ASKING TO DO IS GIVE BACK. AND I DON'T THINK THAT GIVING BACK TO THE CITY SHOULD TAKE THIS MUCH WORK.

SO I APPRECIATE IF YOU FOLLOW THROUGH AND YOU VOTE YES ON THIS.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN. CHAIRMAN. RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

[03:10:06]

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM.

EXCUSE ME. THREE MINUTES. THREE. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A GOOD DEAL FOR THE CITY.

I THINK WE HAVE TO CONSIDER IT IN THE CONTEXT IN WHICH WE FIND IT.

AND THAT CONTEXT INCLUDES AN IMPERATIVE TO BUILD PARTICULARLY OWNER OCCUPIED HOUSING IN SOUTH DALLAS.

THERE IS A HUGE NEED FOR THAT SOUTH OF I-30. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE UPFRONT COSTS OF BUILDING THE NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT ARE DIFFICULT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPERS TO PAY 100% OF THE COST OF, BECAUSE IT REQUIRES A HUGE INVESTMENT ON THE FRONT END BEFORE ANY REVENUE COMES IN FROM THE SALE OF LOTS.

AND WE CAN BRIDGE THAT GAP WITH THIS FUNDING.

WHERE'S THE MONEY COMING FROM? WELL, IT'S COMING FROM BOND FUNDS THAT OUR VOTERS DIRECTED US TO SPEND FOR JUST THIS KIND OF A PROJECT FOR HOUSING. IS THERE A RISK? SURE. THERE'S ALWAYS A RISK IN ANY KIND OF INVESTMENT THAT WE MAKE PERSONALLY, OR THAT THE CITY MAKES. IF THERE WAS NO RISK, IT WOULDN'T BE CALLED AN INVESTMENT.

IT'D BE CALLED A GUARANTEE. THERE ARE A FEW GUARANTEES IN LIFE.

AND SO I THINK THAT THERE ARE ENOUGH BUILT IN SAFEGUARDS, AS MR. SPATH HAS DETAILED THEM WITH THE REIMBURSEMENT PROCESS AND THE $9 MILLION HOLDBACK, AND THE CONDITION THAT A HOMEBUILDER CONTRACT TO TAKE DOWN LOTS TO BUILD HOMES. THAT IS THE TYPICAL FASHION IN WHICH PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT OCCURS.

THAT I THINK THE CITY IS SUFFICIENTLY SAFEGUARDED.

WE RETAIN TITLE TO ALL OF THE IMPROVEMENTS. SO IF THIS DEVELOPER FAILS, ANOTHER ONE WILL BE INTERESTED IN HAVING READILY DEVELOPABLE LOTS THAT THEY CAN JUST BUY THE LOTS AND BUILD HOMES. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS.

CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU COLLEAGUES, I APPRECIATE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOUR COMMENTS, AND SINCERELY I TRULY AND I'M SAYING THAT SINCERELY.

THE ONE CAVEAT I JUST WANT TO WANT TO SAY AND I'M JUST BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION BECAUSE WE WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, WE ALWAYS TAKE THIS TONE, AND IT'S THAT TONE OF EXTREME CAUTION.

AND I KNOW WE'RE DOING THAT OUT OF AN ABUNDANCE OF DOING OUR JOB AS WE SHOULD.

BUT I JUST WANT US TO APPRECIATE THE TONE THAT WE HAVE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT CAUTION IN DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS VERSUS THE TONE THAT WE HAVE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT OPTIMISM AND DEVELOPMENTS IN NORTH DALLAS. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS A NORTH AND SOUTH, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT US, BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE CAN PERPETUATE THE SAME THING THAT THE BANKS WITH THE RISKS AND ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE.

WITH THESE DEVELOPMENTS, WE SOMETIMES CAN PERPETUATE THAT RISK AT THE HORSESHOE.

SO AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND CONCERNS.

THIS IS A GREAT DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE EXTREMELY CHANGING IMPACTFUL FOR THAT PARTICULAR CORNER. COUNCILWOMAN. BLAIR AND I TALK ALL THE TIME ABOUT OUR PARTNERSHIP AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT REALLY THAT CAMP WISDOM CORRIDOR LOOK LIKE.

AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S ONLY GOING TO IMPACT THAT ENTIRE AREA. SO I JUST WANT TO REMIND US, AS WE TALK ABOUT PROJECTS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, THAT WE WE CHECK OURSELVES IN THE SAME OPTIMISM THAT WE HAVE WITH OTHER PROJECTS.

WE CARRY THAT OPTIMISM AND NOT SPEAK SO MUCH FROM AN OVERABUNDANCE OF CAUTION WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE LISTENING, AND THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT SO HARD FOR US TO SELL THE DEVELOPMENTS AND THE IDEAS AND THE VISIONS THAT WE OFTEN HAVE IN SOUTHERN DALLAS BECAUSE OF THAT OVERABUNDANCE, THAT SOMETIMES IT'S NECESSARY, BUT SOMETIMES IT CAN BE OVERLY EXAGGERATED.

AND SOMETIMES WHEN PEOPLE HEAR THAT, THEY PICK THAT UP AND WE'RE AT THIS, WE'RE HERE EVERY SINGLE TIME, EVERY SINGLE DEAL. THE DEVELOPERS AT THE BANKS HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS, ASKING, BEGGING, PLEADING TO DO DEVELOPMENTS. SO AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

AND AGAIN, I BELIEVE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. I BELIEVE IN WHAT'S HAPPENING IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, AND I PARTICULARLY BELIEVE IN THE CHANGES THAT IT WILL HAVE FOR THIS CORRIDOR IN AND AROUND UNT, DALLAS AND EVERYWHERE. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR GRACE AND UNDERSTANDING. I APPRECIATE IT. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR JOHNSON, I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE. COUNCILMAN.

GRACEY FOR HIS HUMBLE STATEMENT. BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT SOUTHERN DALLAS AND INVESTMENT, THERE'S ALWAYS A DEEP CONVERSATION. IT'S A DEEP CONVERSATION.

WHEN I WAS ON THE SCHOOL BOARD, IT'S A DEEP CONVERSATION IN OUR COMMUNITIES, A DEEP CONVERSATION. NOW THAT I'M ON THE COUNCIL AND OUR COMMUNITY GETS OFFENDED WHEN WE'RE DOING DEVELOPMENT IN OUR PART OF TOWN, AND THEN WE HAVE ALL THESE CONCERNS.

BUT IT'S NOT THE SAME CONCERNS IN THE NORTHERN PART OF TOWN. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE HONEST.

[03:15:01]

WE'RE GOING TO BE HONEST. NOW, AGAIN, I APPRECIATE PASTOR GRACEY FOR BEING MODEST IN HIS COMMENT, BUT IT IS OFFENSIVE WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP.

AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE GOT SO MANY CONCERNS. AND IT'S NOT IT'S NOT POSITIVE.

IT'S NOT OPTIMISTIC. AND SO I'M GOING TO BE THAT VOICE IN OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE OUR COMMUNITY HAS FOUGHT FOR EQUITY.

WE FOUGHT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY.

AND I LITERALLY MEAN FOUGHT. WE HAVE TO ALWAYS FIGHT TO GET THE THINGS THAT WE NEED IN OUR COMMUNITY.

AND SO IF YOU HEAR THE PASSION IN MY VOICE, WE'RE TIRED OF HAVING TO COME HERE NO MATTER WHAT SEAT WE IN OR HOW MANY COMMUNITY MEETINGS WE HAVE, WE'RE TIRED OF ALWAYS HAVING TO COME AND FIGHT FOR THE THINGS THAT WE SHOULD GET. SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE EQUITY, BUT EQUITY IS IMPORTANT. IT MEANS FAIR. IT MEANS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE SAME RESPECT OF THE OTHER PARTS OF THE TOWN OF DALLAS HAVE THAT WE THAT WE WE SHOULD HAVE.

AND SO I APPRECIATE AGAIN, PASTOR GRACEY SPEAKING AND THANKING EVERYONE, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO IGNORE THE FACT THAT WE ALWAYS HAVE TO FIGHT WHEN WE NEED TO GET THINGS DONE. AND SO I'M SUPPORTING THIS AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S ON RECORD.

THANK YOU, MR. MR.. BAZALDUA. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM 17.

CAN WE HAVE ORDER, PLEASE? YEAH. WE CAN'T HAVE ANY CONVERSATION FROM THE GALLERY, PLEASE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WANT TO JUST SAY I APPRECIATE YOUR PASSION.

COUNCIL MEMBER. PLEASE, PLEASE REFRAIN FROM MAKING COMMENTS FROM THE GALLERY.

THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. WE'RE DEALING WITH THAT.

THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO SAY I APPRECIATE YOUR PASSION.

THAT'S EXACTLY THE PASSION THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED FOR US TO MOVE THE NEEDLE. BOTH. COUNCIL MEMBER.

GRACEY AND JOHNSON. AND ALSO HEARING FROM COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR.

QUITE FRANKLY, THIS IS THIS IS THIS IS NOT SOMETHING NEW.

IN FIGHTING FOR THE SCRAPS THAT OUR DISTRICTS USUALLY HAVE TO GET, AND IT TAKES FIGHTING JUST TO GET SCRAPS.

AND THERE IS AN UNNECESSARY AMOUNT OF SCRUTINY HERE ON THE FLOOR.

AND I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE POINT OF THERE MAY HAVE BEEN QUESTIONS, AND I'M NEVER GOING TO SAY THAT MEMBERS SHOULDN'T GET THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED, BUT I WANT TO FIND OUT IF SOMEONE FROM STAFF CAN TELL ME, WHEN DID THIS COME UP IN COMMITTEE? ARE YOU ASKING WHEN THE ITEM WAS INCLUDED ON THE MOST RECENT COMMITTEE AGENDA? YES. HE CAN SHARE THAT WITH YOU. THANK YOU. LAST MONDAY.

LAST MONDAY. OKAY. AND AND THEN WHEN WERE WHEN WERE THESE ITEMS PULLED, MADAM SECRETARY? SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. AFTER I CHECK MY RECORDS, THIS ITEM WAS PULLED ON ON MONDAY.

ON MONDAY? YES. SO JUST TWO DAYS AGO. OKAY. I WILL TELL YOU WHEN I'VE DONE MY DUE DILIGENCE ON ITEMS THAT I HAVE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS FOR. INSTEAD OF BRINGING UNNECESSARY SCRUTINY TO THE HORSESHOE, I HAVE REACHED OUT TO STAFF WITHIN THE BUILT IN TIME WE JUST SAW.

THERE'S A TIMELINE. WE HAVE MULTIPLE DAYS. MULTIPLE DAYS, IN FACT, A WEEK MORE THAN A WEEK SINCE THIS HAS BEEN VETTED AT COMMITTEE.

AND IT SOUNDS AS IF STAFF HAD NOT BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY HAVE.

BUT I WILL SAY THAT TO THE POINTS OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT IS USUALLY AFFORDED TO DEVELOPMENT THAT WE CELEBRATE IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, THE THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE CELEBRATE ECONOMIC DEALS IN THE NORTHERN PART OF OUR CITY.

WE'VE GOT TO START REALLY MODELING THE WAY OF EQUITY THAT OUR ACTIONS REALLY DO SPEAK TO. AND THIS IS JUST INSANE FOR US TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THESE MOTIONS AND FIGHT FOR THESE SCRAPS, INSTEAD OF ALLOWING FOR THE SAME LEVEL OF SCRUTINY TO BE GIVEN TO OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.

COLLEAGUES, PLEASE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE TIME THAT WE ARE GIVEN WHEN THERE'S TIME BUILT IN FOR YOU TO HAVE ONE ON ONE MEETINGS WITH STAFF FOR YOU TO GET QUESTIONS THAT WEREN'T ANSWERED AT COMMITTEE TO GET IT DONE. WAITING UNTIL THE 11TH HOUR TO PULL ITEMS, AND NOT DOING YOUR OWN DUE DILIGENCE TO GET WITH STAFF TO GET THESE ANSWERS.

AND BRINGING THESE CHARADES HERE JUST TO PUT AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN OR UNNECESSARY GRAY CLOUD OVER WHAT WE SHOULD BE HERE.

CELEBRATING ON DIRT, TURNING IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

THAT'S ABOUT BEING REAL WITH OUR EXPECTATION OF GROWING SOUTH.

SO I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THE PASSION. I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THIS BEING CALLED OUT.

IT'S A CONVERSATION THAT WE SHOULD BE HAVING, HAVING AND NOT TIPTOEING AROUND BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING WE DEAL WITH EVERY OTHER WEEK AT THIS COUNCIL. I HOPE THAT WE CAN DO A LITTLE BIT BETTER OF A JOB AND HELP PROMOTE THE SUCCESSES OF SOUTHERN DALLAS,

[03:20:02]

INSTEAD OF MAKING IT SEEM LIKE WE HAVE TO FIGHT FOR EVERY SINGLE PIECE THAT IS GIVEN TO OUR CONSTITUENTS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES, I BELIEVE.

THANK YOU. I WANT TO I WANT TO SAY TO EVERYBODY, THIS DISCUSSION IS REALLY VERY VALUABLE TO ME BECAUSE WHAT IT TELLS ME IS THAT THIS PROCESS WORKS AND THAT IT GIVES ME AND OTHER FOLKS ON THIS, ON THIS HORSESHOE, THE ABILITY TO EXPRESS OUR OPINIONS, TO GET THE FACTS AND TO MAKE SMART DECISIONS THAT AFFECT EVERY PART OF THIS TOWN.

THIS IS NOT THIS IS ABOUT US BEING LEADERS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND LEADERS IN OUR CITY TO MAKE GOOD BUSINESS AND POLICY DECISIONS. THE FACT THAT THIS, THAT WE WERE ABLE TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION, THAT I WAS ABLE TO ASK MY QUESTIONS, OTHER PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO ASK THEIR QUESTIONS, WAS THE THE PROOF THAT THIS PROCESS WORKS WELL? I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THIS. THIS THIS PROJECT.

I WAS PLANNING ON SUPPORTING IT ANYWAY, BUT WE HAD LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THE DEAL WAS STRUCTURED.

AND I DON'T CARE WHERE THIS DEAL IS LOCATED. IT'S A QUESTION ABOUT HOW THE DEALS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH ARE STRUCTURED, AND THAT'S HOW WE HAVE TO LOOK AT STUFF. WE ARE DEALING WITH THE PUBLIC'S MONEY, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WE'RE GETTING THE BIGGEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET THE BIGGEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK.

AND I APPRECIATE COUNCILMAN GRACIE'S COMMENTS.

I APPRECIATE COUNCILMAN JOHNSON'S COMMENTS. I APPRECIATE COUNCILMAN BLAIR'S COMMENTS THAT THIS IS IMPORTANT TO THIS PART OF TOWN.

JUST AS ANY PROJECT IS IMPORTANT TO ANY PART OF TOWN, AS LONG AS WE VETTED IT PROPERLY.

WE'VE ASKED THE RIGHT QUESTIONS, AND WE'VE DONE THE FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY THAT WE HAVE TO OUR CONSTITUENTS TO BE FINDING THE FACTS AND MAKING GOOD DECISIONS. SO I THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US, AS A BODY TO PERFORM THE JOB THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO WITHOUT PASSION, WITHOUT CONCERN, BUT ON A BUSINESS LIKE MANNER.

SO THANK YOU FOR, FOR THE, THE SUCCESS OF GETTING THIS THING PUSHED OVER THE EDGE.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

WELL, AS I SAID IN MY EARLIER COMMENTS, I SUPPORT THIS DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY THE SINGLE FAMILY, REASONABLY PRICED HOMES AND THE STABILITY THAT SINGLE FAMILY OWNERSHIP BRINGS.

SOUTHERN DALLAS HAS BEEN ASKING FOR MORE SINGLE FAMILY OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES AND WE NEED TO CONTINUE WITH THEM.

I WILL SAY THIS THE THESE WORDS OF CAUTION KIND OF HIT.

STRANGE. I PULLED ITEM 13, A PFC IN NORTH DALLAS WITH FINANCIAL SCRUTINY.

SAME ISSUE. WE CAN'T ALLOW A NARRATIVE SAYING THAT SOUTHERN DALLAS GETS SCRAPS WHEN WE'RE INVESTING $23 MILLION.

THE REALITY IS THAT ANY DEAL THAT COMES TO SOUTHERN DALLAS AT THIS HORSESHOE, SINCE I'VE BEEN IN OFFICE, IS MORE LIKELY TO PASS THAN NORTHERN DALLAS. DEVELOPERS SHOULD TAKE NOTE OF THAT, AND I THINK THEY HAVE.

BRING US SOUTHERN DALLAS DEALS. I'VE EVEN MORE THAN TWICE SAID AT THIS HORSESHOE, ALL ABATEMENTS SHOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED FOR BELOW I-30. ALL WE COULD MAKE AN AGREEMENT. ALL ABATEMENTS, ALL INCENTIVES BELOW I-30.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO SOUTHERN DALLAS IF WE DID THAT? IT WOULD BOOM. OUR CITY WOULD FLOURISH. SOUTHERN DALLAS IS ABSOLUTELY OUR FUTURE NORTHERN DALLAS WILL REDEVELOP AND CONTINUE TO DEVELOP WITHOUT ANY ASSISTANCE. BUT WE KEEP GIVING ABATEMENTS THERE.

ONE SECOND. GENTLEMEN. MENDELSOHN. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, HERE WE GO. ALRIGHT, LET'S JUST GIVE THAT A LITTLE TIME TO PLAY ITSELF OUT, AND I WE'RE ALMOST READY. ONCE THEY CLOSE THE DOORS AND.

THE INSANITY CEASES. OKAY. ALMOST READY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. WELL, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, THOUGH, THAT I NEED TO SAY IS THAT IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO

[03:25:04]

GOVERNMENT, TO OUR TO OUR RESIDENTS AND TO THIS INSTITUTION, THAT WE BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS PUBLICLY ABOUT ISSUES THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO OUR RESIDENTS, ABOUT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND INVESTMENTS THAT WE MAKE.

AND NOBODY SHOULD BE SHAMED FOR DOING SO. IT'S ACTUALLY WHAT WE'RE ELECTED TO DO REPRESENT OUR PEOPLE AND MAKE SURE THE FINANCIAL STEWARDSHIP OF THIS CITY IS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. AND SO I REJECT ANY KIND OF COMMENTS THAT ANYBODY WOULD PULL AN ITEM AND ASK FISCAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM. WE HAVE TO SAFEGUARD OUR REVENUE AND HOW WE SPEND IT.

SO THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT, BUT THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THE DEAL WAS STRUCK AND HOW THE INCENTIVES ARE LAID OUT.

AND I HOPE IN THE FUTURE OUR DEALS WILL REQUIRE ACTUAL COMPLETION OF THE HOUSING, BECAUSE FOR FAR TOO LONG, PROJECTS HAVE STALLED. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST? AGENDA ITEM 17. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 18 AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP AND CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE WATER RESEARCH FOUNDATION.

[18. 25-3052A Authorize payment of annual membership fees and continued participation in the Water Research Foundation - Not to exceed $413,381.00 - Financing: Dallas Water Utilities Fund]

NOT TO EXCEED $413,381. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH.

IS THERE A MOTION? OR A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, I BELIEVE.

IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? MR. ROTH? I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. YOU PULLED IT, SO I DID.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. REALLY? I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION FOR THE FOR THE BODY HERE AS TO WHAT THE NATURE OF THIS PAYMENT WAS FOR. AND I'D LIKE THE WATER DEPARTMENT, IF POSSIBLE, TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE $400,000 MEMBERSHIP CONNECTION IS IS VALUABLE FOR US. GOOD AFTERNOON, SARAH STANDEFER, DALLAS WATER UTILITIES THE WATER RESEARCH FOUNDATION IS AN ORGANIZATION THAT WE'VE PARTICIPATED WITH SINCE THE LATE 80S, AND IT IS A RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ARM. SO WE HAVE UNLIMITED MEMBERSHIPS FOR ALL STAFF.

THEY CAN PARTICIPATE IN VARIOUS CALLS FOR PROJECTS.

THEY CAN ALSO HAVE ACCESS TO THE LIMITED LIBRARY OF TOOLS AND RESOURCES.

OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, THE INVESTMENT WE'VE RETURNED ON PARTICIPATION IN THOSE EQUATE TO ABOUT $22 MILLION THAT WE DID NOT HAVE TO SPEND OUT OF CITY FUNDS.

SO AS WE KIND OF MOVE FORWARD, THEY CHARGE US BASED ON THE POPULATION SERVED, SO NOT OF CITY OF DALLAS, BUT OF OUR CUSTOMER BASE, WHICH IS 2.6 MILLION.

THE DALLAS HAS HAS REALLY PROBABLY ONE OF THE HIGHEST RATINGS FOR A WATER SYSTEM AND AND THE WATER SERVICES THAT WE HAVE IN THE COUNTRY. IS THAT CORRECT? OUR FINANCIAL BOND RATING IS A VERY GOOD ONE.

WE HAVE A SUPERIOR RATED WATER SYSTEM THAT IS IN THE TOP 10% FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS.

WE MEET OUR REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER SERVICES.

AND THIS THIS RESEARCH ARM ACTUALLY WORKS WITH ALL THREE OF THOSE UTILITIES AND ALL THREE OF THOSE WATER SERVICES.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WAS THAT EVERYBODY WAS AWARE OF THAT.

THIS IS NOT JUST A MEMBERSHIP IN A TRADE ORGANIZATION.

THIS IS ACTUALLY RESEARCH. THIS IS INFORMATION.

THIS IS SUPPORT TO MAINTAINING AND CREATING ONE OF THE BEST WATER SYSTEMS IN THE UNITED STATES.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR FOR YOUR ANSWER. AND I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF THIS OF THE MOTION TO PASS THIS.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST? AGENDA ITEM 18. SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.

NEXT ITEM PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 37 WILL BE HELD UNTIL LATER.

UNTIL LATER IN THE MEETING. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 45.

[45. 25-3057A Authorize a one-year service contract for financial counseling services from November 12, 2025 through November 11, 2026, for the Office of Housing and Community Empowerment - International Rescue Committee, Inc., most advantageous proposer of seven - Not to exceed $175,000.00 - Financing: Financial Empowerment Centers Grant Fund (subject to annual appropriations)]

AGENDA ITEM 45 AUTHORIZED A ONE YEAR SERVICE CONTRACT FOR FINANCIAL COUNSELING SERVICES FROM NOVEMBER 12TH, 2025 THROUGH NOVEMBER 11TH, 2026 FOR THE OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE, INC.. MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSER OF SEVEN NOT TO EXCEED $175,000.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION? ALL RIGHT. I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? WHO PULLED IT? I'M SORRY, CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 45.

THANK YOU. I'LL JUST SAY THAT MY MACHINE IS NOT ACTUALLY WORKING PROPERLY.

AND SO IT TAKES QUITE A WHILE OR MANY TIMES FOR ME TO PUSH IT BEFORE I'M ABLE TO GET ON THERE.

I PULLED THIS ITEM TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE CITY WOULD BE FUNDING FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT.

[03:30:04]

I'LL START AS STAFF. THEY'RE MAKING THEIR WAY OUT TO THE PODIUM.

A FEW YEARS AGO, THE CITY OF DALLAS BEGAN WORK WITH THE FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT CENTERS TO START LOOKING AT WAYS THAT WE CAN BETTER EQUIP AND SERVE OUR RESIDENTS THROUGH FINANCIAL COUNSELING. IN THIS ITEM, THE FINANCING IS NOT CITY OF DALLAS FUNDING.

IT'S ACTUALLY COMING THROUGH A GRANT. BUT I'LL HAVE JESSICA GALICIA, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, TO EXPLAIN IT FURTHER. THANK YOU. YES. SO THIS ITEM IS BEING FUNDED BY FUNDING FROM CITIES FOR FINANCIAL OR.

YEAH, CITIES FOR FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT FUND, WHICH IS A NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC ORGANIZATION THAT WORKS WITH CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES TO HELP SUPPORT AND ADVANCE EFFORTS FOR FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT CENTERS AND FINANCIAL COACHING.

THE FUNDING THAT WE'RE USING ENTIRELY CAME FROM THEM.

AND SO ONE OF THE COMPONENTS THAT THAT THEY BRING TO THE TABLE, IN ADDITION TO THEIR BEST PRACTICES AND RESOURCES IS A PROPRIETARY TOOL THAT THEY'VE DEVELOPED FOR CLIENT MANAGEMENT AND COACHING THAT WE'RE ABLE TO MAKE AVAILABLE THROUGH OUR PARTNERSHIP TO OUR NONPROFIT COMMUNITY THAT'S WORKING WITH US IN THIS INITIATIVE.

SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE'RE NOT INVESTING ANY CITY FUNDS INTO A SERVICE CONTRACT FOR COACHING.

RATHER, IT'S GRANT FUNDS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING THAT WITH.

WELL, YOU ACTUALLY SAID THE KEY WORD AS OF NOW, WHICH IS TO SAY THAT FOR SURE, WHEN THE GRANT RUNS OUT, STAFF WILL COME BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND ASK US TO CONTINUE FUNDING THIS.

AND THIS IS NOT THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT TO DO THIS IS THE NONPROFIT WORLD.

I HAVE PERSONALLY OFFERED THIS KIND OF PROGRAM AS A NONPROFIT EXECUTIVE, AND IT'S EXCELLENT AND IMPORTANT, BUT IT IS NOT THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT. AND I'M CONCERNED THAT WE CONTINUE TO BRANCH INTO AREAS WAY BEYOND OUR SCOPE AND FORGET TO TAKE CARE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO. NOT TO MENTION THAT AN ORGANIZATION THAT'S AS IN DEBT AS WE ARE, AND IN LACKING IN MAINTENANCE OF OUR OWN ASSETS, IS PROBABLY NOT IN THE RIGHT POSITION TO BE TEACHING OTHERS.

THANK YOU. THE CITY MANAGER WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW.

YES. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN. WE WE HAVE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION AROUND ENSURING THAT WE ARE NOT CARRYING THE LOAD ON EVERY SINGLE TYPE OF SERVICE AND REALLY STICKING INTO THOSE LEVELS OF PRIORITY.

HOWEVER, WE HEARD FROM THE COUNCIL LAST YEAR AS WE TALKED ABOUT THE WHOLE FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT.

THE FINANCIAL COUNSELING THAT YOU WANTED US TO CONTINUE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT USING CITY FUNDING TO DO IT.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS ITEM IS DOING. AS WE COME BACK IN THE FUTURE, IF THERE ARE, THE FUNDING IS NOT THERE, WE WILL DEFINITELY BE ASKING COUNCIL IF THIS IS A PRIORITY.

IF IT'S NOT, IT WILL NOT SHOW UP AS PART OF OUR CITY BUDGET.

BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERNS. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 45? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NOTED, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR AGENDA. ITEM 47. ITEM 47 AUTHORIZED A ONE YEAR SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH TWO ONE YEAR

[47. 25-3046A Authorize a one-year subrecipient agreement, with two one-year renewal options, for housing and service assistance to homeless youth and adults twenty-four years of age and younger for the Office of Housing and Community Empowerment - Family Endeavors, Inc. dba Endeavors, most advantageous proposer of eleven - Not to exceed $211,013.00 - Financing: FY 2026 TDHCA-Homeless Housing and Services Program 25-26 Fund (subject to annual appropriations)]

RENEWAL OPTIONS FOR HOUSING AND SERVICE ASSISTANCE TO HOMELESS YOUTH AND ADULTS 24 YEARS OF AGE AND YOUNGER FOR THE OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT, FAMILY ENDEAVORS, INC. DBA ENDEAVORS MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSAL OF SEVEN NOT TO EXCEED $211,013.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS AND COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

THIS IS ITEM 47. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? THERE IS.

AND I'D LIKE TO TALK. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. NUMBER 47, EVERYONE.

SO I HAD SOME QUESTIONS ON THIS. THIS IS A CONTRACT TO SERVE OUR HOMELESS YOUTH AND ADULTS UP TO AGE 24.

YES. AND WHAT CONCERNED ME ON THIS WAS THAT OUR CURRENT PROVIDER, OVER THE PAST YEAR OR SEVERAL YEARS, WHO HAS HAD EXCELLENT OUTCOMES IN LOOKING AT THE SCORING? WHEN I LOOKED AT THE TALLY, I UNDERSTAND THEY DID NOT, YOU KNOW, THEY DIDN'T COME OUT ON TOP, BUT WHEN I SAW THAT THEY WERE FIFTH, IT MADE ME WONDER. TWO THINGS. ONE IS, OH WOW, DO WE HAVE FOUR MORE PROVIDERS WHO ARE DOING AN EVEN BETTER JOB AT SERVING OUR HOMELESS YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS? OR IS IT THAT THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE QUESTIONS OR IN SOMETHING IN THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS THAT DIDN'T ACCOUNT FOR THEIR PERFORMANCE? AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING HOW PERFORMANCE WAS ACCOUNTED FOR IN, THIS PROCUREMENT.

I THANK YOU, THORAX AND DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT. WHEN THE REVIEW PANEL LOOKS AT THE PROPOSAL SUBMITTED, THEY THEY BASE IT ON WHAT IS WRITTEN. AND SO THAT PANEL DOES NOT HAVE TYPICALLY BRIEFED OR AWARENESS IN SOME CASES

[03:35:02]

OF ALL OF THE OTHER HISTORY, ANY ORGANIZATION THAT SUBMITTED MAY BE CURRENTLY DOING OR HAS PERFORMED IN THE PAST.

SO THEY SOLELY LOOK ON BASED ON THE EXPERIENCE AS LISTED AND ARTICULATED IN THE PROPOSALS.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THEY COULD HAVE MADE A BETTER CASE FOR THEMSELVES? I THINK ANYBODY APPLYING FOR GRANT FUNDS OR REPLYING TO ANY TYPE OF PROPOSAL A LOT OF THE CASE RELIES ON HOW THEY WRITE THEIR RESPONSE TO THE PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE SEEKING.

SO DID THE FOLKS LOOKING AT THIS HAVE HAVE ANY FAMILIARITY WITH THE OUTCOMES OF THE PREVIOUS CONTRACT? BECAUSE I'M JUST IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A GAP IN HERE BECAUSE I LOOK AT THE OUTCOMES THERE.

AND THEN THIS MEMO FROM NOVEMBER 4TH TALKS ABOUT ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES AND THERE'S SO MUCH LOWER.

AND THIS IS SUCH A CRITICAL POPULATION TO SERVE.

I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO RECONCILE THIS, WONDERING IF WE SHOULD GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND FIGURE THIS OUT.

YEAH. THANK YOU. SO ON THE ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES, FAMILY ENDEAVORS WROTE A PROPOSAL BASED UPON THE SUITE OF SERVICES THEY PERFORM CASE MANAGEMENT, STREET OUTREACH, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, EMERGENCY SHELTER, AND THEY HAVE A CONSERVATIVE BUDGET BASED UPON ALL OF THOSE SERVICES PROVIDED. IF THEY WOULD PROVIDE EVERYTHING TO INDIVIDUALS, THEY'VE MAXIMIZED HOW MANY PEOPLE, AT MINIMUM THEY WILL SERVE IN THAT CONTRACT, AND THERE IS ROOM FOR SERVING MORE, AS NOT EVERYONE WILL NEED THE FULL SUITE OF SERVICES, SO THEY DO ANTICIPATE SERVING MORE THAN 45. HOWEVER, THE PROPOSAL IS BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THEY KNOW FOR SURE.

THEY'LL SERVE WITH THE BUDGETED AMOUNT, BUT I MEAN, THE WAY IT'S DESCRIBED IS SO GENERAL.

I MEAN, CLIENTS SERVED MONTHLY, FIVE YOUTH SERVED ANNUALLY, 45.

IT DOESN'T REALLY GET INTO THEY'VE GOT TO HAVE THE WHOLE SUITE OF SERVICES.

IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S GOING THE WRONG DIRECTION.

I UNDERSTAND, SO WE WILL BE PROVIDING PERFORMANCE UPDATES AND THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE MONTHLY PERFORMANCE REPORTS.

AND SO WE'LL BE HAPPY TO SHARE THIS ALONG WITH ALL OF THE SERVICES THAT WE OFFER IN TERMS OF WHAT WAS CONTRACTED FOR AND WHAT ARE THE OUTCOMES OF THOSE CONTRACTS AND HOW INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATIONS ARE PERFORMING. SO LET ME ASK YOU ON THE MEMO.

IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT FAMILY ENDEAVORS. HAS HAD 12 YEARS WITHIN DALLAS PROPER.

HAS DALLAS EVER HAD A CONTRACT WITH THEM BEFORE? I DO NOT HAVE THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. I WILL FIND OUT REAL QUICK AND SEE IF ANYBODY ON MY TEAM HAS THAT ANSWER.

OKAY. IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT THEY HAVE A NETWORK OF OVER 115 COMMUNITY PARTNERS, BUT THEY'RE NOT BASED HERE.

SO DO WE HAVE ANY SENSE OF HOW MANY OF THAT BIG NUMBER ARE ACTUALLY ACCESSIBLE IN DALLAS? I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER FROM THE 115, BUT IN WORKING WITH THIS POPULATION.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT NOT EVERYONE IS INTENDED TO ALWAYS STAY LOCAL IN DALLAS, AS THEY'RE 18 TO 24 YEAR OLDS, THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PLACEMENT IN OTHER LOCATIONS THAT BETTER SERVE THIS POPULATION.

WELL, KNOWING MY CONCERNS, WHAT ELSE CAN YOU SHARE WITH ME ABOUT THIS? SO WITH ALL SERVICE CONTRACTS LIKE THIS, WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE MONTHLY CHECK INS WITH OUR VENDORS.

WE'LL BE ABLE TO LOOK AT WHERE EFFICIENCIES CAN BE MADE, WHAT POPULATIONS ARE SERVED, AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO REPORT THAT BACK.

I THINK GIVEN AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS SUCH A LONG HISTORY IN THIS SPACE, THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVE THEMSELVES IN THIS CONTRACT IS IS NEEDED.

I THINK THAT BECAUSE THIS WORK ALSO HAS A ONE YEAR TIMELINE TO SPEND GOING BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND PROCURING AND LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO DO THAT, WE'LL POTENTIALLY DELAY THE ABILITY TO SPEND THIS YEAR'S FUNDING ON TIME.

AND I THINK JESSICA MIGHT HAVE AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION.

I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS A CONTRACT WITH ENDEAVORS A FEW YEARS AGO AS PART OF SOME OF THE EFFORTS THAT WERE GOING ON THROUGH THE COVID MANAGEMENT.

I'M GOING TO DOUBLE CHECK ON THAT, BUT I AM PRETTY SURE THAT THAT IS THE CASE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT FORWARD. OKAY.

SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS IS A ONE YEAR AGREEMENT WITHIN TWO YEAR RENEWAL, TWO ONE YEAR RENEWALS.

SO THE OUTCOMES I MEAN WHAT WHAT WILL COME BACK TO US IF YOU ALL SUGGEST THAT THERE SHOULD BE A RENEWAL, IT'S JUST BASED ON THESE OUTCOMES THAT ARE ON THIS MEMO BECAUSE THIS DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A WHOLE LOT.

THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. WE'LL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE EXACT SERVICES OFFERED AND A FURTHER BREAKDOWN OF THE CLIENTELE THAT THEY SERVED AND WHAT THE WHAT THE SERVICES PROVIDED.

AND IF THEY WERE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THEIR HOUSING FOR SIX MONTHS AS LISTED.

AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO ARTICULATE IF THEY PERFORMED ON THE CONTRACT OR NOT.

SO IF WE'RE SIX MONTHS INTO THIS AND THE NUMBERS AREN'T THERE, WHAT KIND OF OUT DO WE HAVE? SO WITH ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS, WE WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE OUTS FOR NONPERFORMANCE AND TO WORK THROUGH RENEGOTIATIONS, CURE DEFAULTS, ALL OF THAT. SO WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THIS CONTRACT AS WELL AS OTHERS VERY CLOSELY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

ITEM 47. THANK YOU. I HAVE SIMILAR CONCERNS. IN THE MEMO THAT WAS SENT TO THE HOUSING COMMITTEE.

YOU SHARED THAT TRACK. SERVED 109 UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH LAST YEAR.

[03:40:05]

BUT YET THE OUTPUT THAT YOU SEEM TO HAVE SET AS THE GOAL IS ONLY 45 FOR THIS COMING YEAR.

WHY THE BIG CHANGE? IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY CHANGE.

THE PERFORMANCE CRITERIA OF THE CURRENT VENDOR WAS SHOWN OF WHAT THEY'VE ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED ON THE CONTRACT.

AND SO WHILE FAMILY ENDEAVORS HAVE SET OUT TO SAY THEY'LL SERVE AT LEAST 45 PEOPLE THERE'S ANTICIPATED TO BE MORE PEOPLE SERVED BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE WILL NEED FULL SUITE OF CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES. SO WE WE EXPECT MORE THAN 45 PEOPLE TO BE SERVED THROUGH THIS CONTRACT.

SO IT SEEMS ODD TO ME THOUGH, HOW IS IT THAT TRACK MORE THAN DOUBLED THE GOAL YOU'RE SETTING, BUT THEN SCORED SO LOW COMPARED TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS? SO AGAIN, THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS WAS LOOKING AT THE PROPOSALS AS SUBMITTED, AND IT WAS BASED UPON WHAT WAS SUBMITTED IN THOSE PROPOSALS.

THAT COMMITTEE DID NOT LOOK AT CURRENT CONTRACTS, PAST CONTRACTS, HISTORIC CONTRACTS FOR AWARENESS.

THEY ONLY ARE REQUIRED TO LOOK AT THE PROPOSALS AS SUBMITTED AND SCORED ACCORDINGLY.

IS ANYONE HERE FROM ENDEAVORS? I'M SORRY, IS ANYONE HERE FROM TRACK? I'M NOT SURE. I'M SORRY. THE ATTORNEYS LOOK LIKE THEY'RE CONSULTING ON SOMETHING. THING. SO THE PEOPLE SCORING, HAD THEY EVER WORKED WITH TRACK? I MEAN, SINCE THEY WERE THE CONTRACT HOLDER, I THINK THE LAST FIVE YEARS, I BELIEVE THEY'RE THE ONLY ORGANIZATION IN TOWN THAT WORKS WITH KIDS EXITING FOSTER CARE RIGHT NOW.

IS THAT CORRECT? THERE ARE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT WORK WITH YOUTH PROGRAMS. MANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO SUBMITTED PROPOSALS WORK WITH THAT.

BUT TRACK DOES HAVE A UNIQUE SERVICE THAT THEY PROVIDE.

AND SO WERE THE PEOPLE WHO WERE SCORING THIS.

ARE THEY AWARE OF TRACK AND THE WORK THEY'VE DONE IN OUR COMMUNITY? I MEAN, THEY'RE A VERY RESPECTED NONPROFIT. AND, YOU KNOW, THEY BROKE OFF FROM CITY SQUARE AND HAVE SORT OF STABILIZED SINCE THAT SPLIT.

SO SO THE PANELS ARE SELECTED FROM PEOPLE THAT HAVE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW PROPOSALS AND SCORE, ACCORDING TO THE RFP THAT WAS PRODUCED. IN TERMS OF THEIR FULL KNOWLEDGE, I CAN'T SPEAK TO INDIVIDUAL PANELISTS KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW.

AND DO YOU KNOW IF FAMILY ENDEAVORS CURRENTLY USES HMAS? I DO NOT KNOW RIGHT NOW, BUT I WILL SEE IF SOMEONE RESPONDS TO THAT QUESTION.

WERE THEY REQUIRED TO DO SO? WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S INTEGRATION WHEREVER POSSIBLE SO THAT WE CAN LOG AND MAKE SURE PEOPLE ARE PART OF THE CONTINUUM OF CARE. OKAY. WELL, I'M GOING TO PUT THIS UNDER THE CATEGORY OF I'M CONCERNED ABOUT OUR PROCUREMENT PROCESS.

AND I JUST SAY THAT BECAUSE I HAVE PROBABLY WORKED WITH TRACK FOR 20 YEARS.

AND THIS IS PRETTY SHOCKING THAT WE WOULD PICK SOMEBODY WHO IS NOT EVEN LOCAL HAS NOT DONE THIS WORK LOCALLY OVER AN ORGANIZATION THAT IS PERFORMING WELL.

AND I MEAN, I THINK, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY IF I DIDN'T THINK THEY WERE, BUT THEY ARE.

AND SO THIS IS PRETTY SHOCKING. AND I'M CONCERNED THAT WHOEVER SET THE CRITERIA MAYBE DIDN'T HAVE THE RIGHT CRITERIA. I'M CONCERNED THAT THE TARGET GOALS ARE WEAK.

AND WE HAVE A VENDOR WHO'S BEEN EXCEEDING THEM TWOFOLD.

AND WE'RE NOT CHOOSING THEM OVER A GROUP THAT WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THEY USE THIS.

AND SO I DO HAVE CLARIFICATION THAT THAT YES, THEY HAVE TO USE HMIS AND THAT THEY CURRENTLY DO.

AND THE PREVIOUS CONTRACT WAS AN EMERGENCY SHELTERING DURING COVID.

RIGHT. THEY RAN THE CONVENTION. THE I THINK FAIR PARK BEFORE WE WENT WITH AUSTIN STREET.

BUT THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. THIS IS STREET OUTREACH.

THIS IS THIS IS YOUTH AGING OUT OF FOSTER CARE.

THIS IS A VERY DIFFERENT GROUP. THAT'S CORRECT.

AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS ORGANIZATION HAS 55 YEARS OF HISTORY WORKING IN THIS SPACE AND HAS DALLAS ACROSS MANY AREAS AND HAVE HAD OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO DO MORE. YES. I MEAN, BEING ABLE TO EVEN FIND PEOPLE WHO ARE AGING OUT OF FOSTER CARE IS ITS OWN CHALLENGE.

AND IN FACT, AT ONE POINT WE DID A POINT IN TIME COUNT JUST TO IDENTIFY THOSE THAT POPULATION.

IT WAS A UNIQUE POINT IN TIME COUNT BECAUSE THEY WERE SO HARD TO FIND.

[03:45:05]

AND SO A NEW ORGANIZATION COMING IN. I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR ABILITY TO REACH PEOPLE WHO ARE AT A REAL INFLECTION POINT IN THEIR LIFE, RIGHT? THEY'VE HAD A BASIC AMOUNT OF SUPPORT THROUGH FOSTER CARE.

THEY'VE BEEN TURNED LOOSE. THE LIKELIHOOD OF BECOMING HOMELESS.

THIS IS THIS POPULATION IS THE MOST LIKELY TO BECOME ADULT HOMELESS WITHOUT PROPER INTERVENTIONS.

AND I MEAN, I WILL SAY THAT LIKE THE FIRST TIME I SAW THIS CONTRACT, I HAD A LOT OF HEARTBURN.

I BELIEVE WE RAN OUT OF TIME. I ASSURED THE COMMITTEE YOU'D COME BACK A SECOND TIME.

IT DID, BUT I, I DON'T I DON'T LOVE PROCEEDING WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION.

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN JOHNSON. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 47.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS AGENDA ITEM TO THE GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY MEETING ON DECEMBER THE 8TH.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRMAN JOHNSON? YES, I WAS LISTENING FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION. THE MOTION IS TO DEFER TO THE DECEMBER 7TH MEETING OF EFFICIENCY. DECEMBER 8TH MEETING OF GOVERNMENT.

EXCUSE ME. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR SOMETHING THAT OUR OTHER PARTNERS WILL BE THAT THAT OUR PARTNERS PAY FOR.

AND WORKING WITH INSTITUTIONS LIKE DALLAS, ISD AND OTHER OUR PARTNERS.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN HAVE THIS CONVERSATION IN OUR GOVERNANCE EFFICIENCY MEETING, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT DOUBLE DIPPING AND FINANCIALLY.

SO THAT'S WHY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO REFER THIS COMMITTEE.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHICH COMMITTEE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THIS WHERE IT HAD LIVED, WAS IT WITH HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS. AND SINCE THAT'S WHO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S MY CONCERN.

I'D LIKE TO WITHDRAW THE MOTION TO APPROVE AND ACTUALLY MOVE TO DENY THIS ITEM.

DID YOU MAKE THE ORIGINAL MOTION TO APPROVE? IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO HER WITHDRAWING THE MOTION? WELL, PARLIAMENTARY STATUTORY INQUIRY. IT'S ABOUT TO GET GOOD.

YEAH, I BELIEVE A WITHDRAW IS APPROPRIATE, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE UNILATERAL DENIAL.

THAT'S FINE. WE CAN DO THAT PART. THAT PART CAN'T BE DONE. THAT CAN'T BE OKAY. THE MOTION.

SHE CAN MOVE TO WITHDRAW HER MOTION. AND IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION TO IT, WE CAN DO IT OR WE CAN VOTE ON IT.

BUT IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, WE CAN DO IT THROUGH ACCLAMATION.

AND THEN WE HAVE NO MOTION ON THE FLOOR OTHER THAN THIS MOTION TO DEFER, WHICH ACTUALLY, I GUESS, WOULD BE MOOTED BY THE FACT THAT THE IT WOULD BE MOOTED.

IT WOULD WE WOULD NEED A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

RIGHT. YEAH. THERE'S NOTHING TO DISCUSS A DEFERRAL. YEAH. BECAUSE THERE WOULDN'T, IT WOULDN'T BE BEFORE US ANYMORE IF. BUT IS THERE AN OBJECTION.

OBJECTION. WITHDRAW THE MOTION. HEARING NONE.

IT'S SO ORDERED. THE MOTION ON ITEM 47 IS WITHDRAWN, SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

MR. BAZALDUA, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE TO REMAND THIS ITEM TO HOUSING AND HOMELESS SOLUTIONS IN DECEMBER.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. SO NOW THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

NOW, JUST TO EXPLAIN REALLY QUICKLY WHERE WE ARE PROCEDURALLY CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOUR MOTION TO DEFER TO THE GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY COMMITTEE WAS MUTED BY THE FACT THAT THE UNDERLYING MOTION THAT YOU WERE HAVING REFERRED TO COMMITTEE TO HEAR WAS ACTUALLY WITHDRAWN BY THE AUTHOR THROUGH ACCLAMATION.

IT'S GONE. SO THERE'S NOTHING TO REFER TO YOUR COMMITTEE AT THIS POINT.

NOW, THERE'S A NEW MOTION TO MOVE THIS ITEM TO HOUSING.

AND WITH THE DATE IS THE NEXT THE NEXT DECEMBER MEETING.

THE NEXT DECEMBER MEETING. SO THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR NOW. AND YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MR. BAZALDUA, FOR YOUR MOTION FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MY FIRST QUESTION IS DELAY IN APPROVAL OF THIS.

WHAT IMPACTS TO SERVICE WOULD WE SEE? THANK YOU.

THERE WILL BE DIRECT IMPACTS AS WE DON'T HAVE A CURRENT CONTRACT.

WE ALSO THESE ARE STATE FUNDS THAT NEED TO BE EXPENDED BY AUGUST 30TH.

SO DELAY WILL PUT THAT INTO JEOPARDY. THAT'S WHAT I HAVE A CONCERN WITH. I, I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO BE ABLE TO TAKE UP THIS.

IS THERE IF LEGAL COULD WEIGH IN ON OUR ABILITY TO PASS A TEMPORARY A 30 DAY EXTENSION TO HONOR THE CONTRACTS WHILE WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO VET? YES, I THINK THEY'RE THEY'RE DOING THAT WHILE LEGAL IS CHECKING ON THAT.

MR. MAYOR, CAN I JUST ASK OR MAKE JUST ONE COMMENT? YEAH, I THINK WHAT MR.. WHAT OUR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT DIRECTOR IS SPEAKING OF IS THAT IF WE HAD TO START THE PROCESS OVER AND GO BACK THROUGH ANOTHER PROCUREMENT,

[03:50:09]

THAT THAT WOULD CREATE AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF TIME THAT COULD THEN RESULT IN A DELAY TO WHEN WE COULD GET THE MONEY EXPENDED.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT HE'S REFERRING TO AS FAR AS THE TIMELINE.

BUT IF WE'RE GOING BACK TO HAVE ADDITIONAL TIME TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE, AND THEN THE ITEM IS COMING BACK FOR COUNCIL TO VOTE UP OR DOWN, I THINK WOULD BE ANOTHER DECISION THAT YOU ALL WOULD BE MAKING.

BUT I THINK HE'S REFERRING TO IF WE HAD TO START ALL OVER.

SO TO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A CONTRACT, SO WE COULDN'T EXTEND IT 30 DAYS AND THE PROCUREMENT WAS FOR A ONE YEAR CONTRACT.

AND SO WE COULD NOT CHANGE IT TO A 30 DAY CONTRACT.

ON THE FLOOR, BECAUSE IT WOULD IT WOULD AFFECT OTHERS PROPOSALS.

SO THERE WOULD BE NO PROCEDURAL MOTION APPROPRIATE TO LIMIT THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT WITH TERMS IN 60 DAYS.

WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO THAT BECAUSE IT AFFECTS THE OTHER BIDDERS PROPOSALS.

IF THEY KNEW IT WAS FOR 60 DAYS, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE MAYBE HAD A DIFFERENT PROPOSAL.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT COUNCIL ACTION ISN'T CONSIDERED IN PROCUREMENT THAT'S BEING LISTED AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND. BUT I'M ASKING WHAT IS LEGAL.

YOU SHOULD NOT MAKE IT FOR 60 DAYS. IT SHOULD BE THE FULL TERM OF THE CONTRACT.

THAT IS WHAT I'M RECOMMENDING. THAT IS THAT'S I MEAN, IF YOU CHANGE THE PROCUREMENT, THEN IT CAUSES OTHER ISSUES AND POTENTIALLY CAUSES OF ACTION BY THE OTHER BIDDERS.

KIM, WITH YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION AUTHORITY, WOULD YOU HAVE THE ABILITY IF WE WERE TO TABLE THIS TO LATER IN THE MEETING, TO HAVE YOUR STAFF GET WITH THE SAID PARTNER AND SEE IF WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT TO BUY US 60 DAYS TO VET AS A POLICY, A DISCUSSION WITHOUT INTERRUPTING SERVICES THAT WE'RE OFFERING TO SOME OF THE MOST CRITICAL AND VULNERABLE.

SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH A COMPETITIVE PROCESS, WHICH MEANS THAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE EXACTLY WHAT WE TOLD COUNCIL THAT WE WOULD DO UNDER THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE THRESHOLDS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE STILL CREATING OPPORTUNITIES FOR INDIVIDUALS TO BE ABLE TO COMPETE.

SO WE'VE DONE THAT PIECE. I THINK THE QUESTION WOULD BE WHETHER OR NOT, IF THE COUNCIL WANTS US TO PURSUE A DIFFERENT NEGOTIATED TERM AND WE COULD GO BACK TO DO THAT, IF THAT'S WHAT THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL IS WHAT WE'VE PRESENTED BEFORE YOU TODAY.

I'M NOT ASKING TO CHANGE THE TERMS OF WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED TODAY. I'M ASKING IF YOU CAN WORK WITH THE PARTNERS TO BUY US SOME TIME SO THAT WE CAN VET OUT THE TERMS THAT IS BEING PRESENTED IN THIS CONTRACT.

WE COULD DEFINITELY CONTINUE TO NEGOTIATE ANY ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS OF THIS THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE FOR US TO DO, AND IF TIMING IS ONE OF THEM, WE COULD DEFINITELY COME BACK AND DO THAT AND THEN BE ABLE TO REPORT BACK ON THE TO THE COUNCIL WHETHER OR NOT THIS VENDOR WOULD BE WILLING TO CONTINUE WITH THE EXISTING CONTRACTUAL TERMS BASED ON THE PROCUREMENT, WITH ANY MODIFICATIONS THAT WE MIGHT BE REQUESTING AT THIS TIME.

SO WE COULD DEFINITELY DO THAT. WE CAN'T ANSWER THAT TODAY BECAUSE THE VENDOR IS NOT HERE. BUT IF THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE FOR US TO GO BACK AND DO, WE COULD DO THAT. I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR YOU TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO TABLE THIS TO BE HEARD BEFORE OUR ZONING AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON.

IS I'LL CHECK TO MAKE SURE THE MOTION IS IN ORDER BEFORE WE GET A SECOND FOR IT. BUT THE MOTION WOULD BE TO TABLE THIS DISCUSSION ON THE REFERRAL, CORRECT TO THE COMMITTEE UNTIL TIME CERTAIN THIS AFTERNOON TO PRIOR TO TAKING UP THE FIRST ZONING CASE.

OKAY. IT'S IN ORDER. SO IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN SECONDED.

DEBATABLE. DISCUSSABLE. WE'RE CHECKING THE RULES.

DEBATABLE? YEAH. WE DON'T DO MOTIONS TO TABLE VERY FREQUENTLY, SO WE'RE CHECKING THE RULES.

I KNEW IT WAS GOING TO GET INTERESTING. I COULD I COULD SEE IN YOUR EYES. MR. BAZALDUA. IT WAS GOING TO GET INTERESTING. NO, IT'S NOT DEBATABLE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. SO IT'S TABLED UNTIL THE TIME CERTAIN THAT YOU SPECIFY THE MOTION.

ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM, MADAM SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, BEGINNING WITH AGENDA ITEM 53.

[53. 25-2802A 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)]

AGENDA ITEM 53 IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

THIS AFTERNOON. YOU HAVE INDIVIDUAL AND FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS, YOUR NOMINEES FOR INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENTS.

TO THE ARTS AND CULTURE ADVISORY COMMISSION AND STUD GUILD IS BEING NOMINATED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS AND SYLVIA

[03:55:03]

BODLE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART.

BOTH MEETS. THE VOLUNTEER CULTURAL BOARD EXPERIENCED SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE DALLAS HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.

CLIFFORD L FRIEDMAN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER ROTH TO THE PERMIT AND LICENSE APPEAL BOARD.

JONATHAN SAXER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER WEST AND MARCIA MARCIA.

LYNNE JACKSON IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR TO THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK OPPORTUNITY FUND BOARD.

SIDNEY WISE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLACKMON.

MISS WISE MEETS THE RESIDENT OF THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK FUND PROGRAM SPECIAL QUALIFICATION AND TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION.

AMARA NAB OR NAB IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR.

YOUR NOMINEES FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.

ALTERNATE MEMBERS. JAMES M ANDERSON IS BEING NOMINATED BY MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO.

MR. ANDERSON MEETS THE HISTORIAN SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE FIVE BOARD CITY CENTER AND TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 11 BOARD DOWNTOWN. JOSEPH F PITCHFORD IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 13 BOARD, GRAND PARK. TERRY FLOWERS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA TO TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 16 BOARD DAVID GARDEN.

PETER JACOBSON IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 18 BOARD.

MAPLE. MOCKINGBIRD. ELIZABETH ORTON IS BEING NOMINATED BY MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO AND TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 20 BOARD.

MALL AREA REDEVELOPMENT. DAVID I. JONES IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER ROTH.

THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES. MR. MAYOR, I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

NOW THESE ARE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, NOT HERE.

OKAY? THOSE ARE. YOU CAN WIPE THOSE OUT OF THE QUEUE SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. OKAY, MR. MAYOR, LET ME CLEAR THE QUEUE. OKAY. OKAY. YOUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS ITEM.

[54. 25-3153A A resolution changing the date on which the City of Dallas holds all future general elections for the purpose of electing members of the City Council to the November uniform election date of odd-numbered years, in accordance with Senate Bill 1494 (signed into law on June 20, 2025) - Financing: No Cost Consideration to the City]

AGENDA ITEM 54. AGENDA ITEM 54 IS A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE DATE ON WHICH THE CITY OF DALLAS HOLDS ALL FUTURE GENERAL ELECTIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELECTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO THE NOVEMBER UNIFORM ELECTION DATE OF ODD NUMBERED YEARS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SENATE BILL 1494, SIGNED INTO LAW ON JUNE 20TH, 2025.

YOU DO HAVE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. YOUR FIRST SPEAKER.

DAVID DE LA FUENTE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DAVID DE LA FUENTE.

106 SOUTH CLINTON AVENUE. DISTRICT ONE. MORE PEOPLE.

VOTING MEANS MORE PEOPLE ARE ENGAGED IN CITY GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS GOOD FOR THE CITY TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE WITH THE TRUST OF ITS CONSTITUENTS.

STATISTICS, MATH. DATA. I'VE BEEN SPAMMING YOUR INBOXES WITH THESE FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS ON THIS ISSUE.

I SINCERELY APPRECIATE YOU ALL PUTTING UP WITH ME.

7% DALLAS 15% MESQUITE 18% HOUSTON IN A NON MAYORAL CYCLE 20% GLENN HEIGHTS.

THAT IS THE VOTER TURNOUT IN THESE CITIES IN 2025.

WHY IS DALLAS SO MUCH LOWER THAN THE OTHER THREE CITIES? IT'S BECAUSE DALLAS HOLDS ITS ELECTIONS IN MAY, WHILE THE OTHER CITIES HOLD THEIR ELECTIONS IN IN NOVEMBER, THE LAST TIME DALLAS HAD 18% VOTER TURNOUT LIKE HOUSTON JUST DID LAST WEEK.

I WAS IN MIDDLE SCHOOL HERE IN DALLAS. NOW I'M THE FATHER OF TWO WITH THINNING HAIR, RAISING MY FAMILY RIGHT HERE IN THE CITY THAT RAISED ME.

THIS IS A CITY OF 1.3 MILLION PEOPLE. WE ALL HAVE SOMETHING TO CONTRIBUTE.

I AM AN ELECTIONS NERD AND PASSIONATE ABOUT OUR ELECTIONS HERE IN DALLAS.

WE HAVE A DEEPLY FLAWED ELECTION SYSTEM HERE THAT HAS EXISTED FOR DECADES ON END.

I KNEW IT WAS NEEDED FOR IMPROVEMENT, AND IN 2021, I SET OUT TO DO SO.

THAT YEAR, I FELT A LITTLE HOPELESS AND DECIDED TO VOLUNTEER ON A COUNCIL CAMPAIGN IN MY HOME DISTRICT.

WE WERE TALKING TO LIKELY MUNICIPAL VOTERS, AND I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY TIMES I KNOCKED ON A DOOR AND FOLKS DIDN'T EVEN KNOW AN ELECTION WAS HAPPENING.

ONE DOOR IN MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD STANDS OUT, AND THAT IT WAS A MAN WORKING IN HIS GARDEN.

WHEN I TALKED TO HIM, HE SAID HE ACTUALLY LOVED OUR COUNCIL MEMBER AND WOULD DEFINITELY VOTE FOR HIM, AS THAT COUNCIL MEMBER HAD PERSONALLY HELPED HIS FAMILY WITH AN ISSUE.

HE HAD NO IDEA COUNCIL ELECTIONS WERE HAPPENING AGAIN SO SOON AFTER THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

THE DAY I KNOCKED ON HIS DOOR WAS THE SATURDAY OF EARLY VOTING.

[04:00:02]

I STARTED A JOURNEY THAT ALL THE DATA, STATISTICS AND NUMBERS MADE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THE MAY ELECTION DATE ITSELF IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONTRIBUTORS TO LOW MUNICIPAL VOTER TURNOUT IN OUR CITY. I SINCERELY THANK ALL THE ACTIVISTS, CIVIC BUSINESS, AND OTHER GROUPS THAT HAVE WORKED WITH ME OVER THE YEARS, STARTING WITH THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS. THIS IS A TASK I TOOK UPON MYSELF TO NOT LET DIE, TO NOT TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER. YOU 15 HAVE THE POWER TO FIX A MISTAKE IN OUR ELECTION SYSTEM.

THE PEOPLE VOTED AND ASKED YOU TO CHANGE IT. I HAVE NO DOUBT YOU WILL LISTEN TO THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CITY VOTERS WHO SAID YES.

LET'S DO BETTER. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE TO OUR CITY.

THANK YOU. JEFF MANKOFF.

GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JEFF MANKOFF. I RESIDE IN DISTRICT 13.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND THE AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE.

THE AMERICAN JEWISH COMMUNITY'S MISSION IS TO ENHANCE THE WELL-BEING OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE AND TO ADVANCE THE HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRATIC VALUES.

THOSE DEMOCRATIC VALUES INCLUDE CIVIC PARTICIPATION AND REPRESENTATION.

TODAY, I SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION TO MOVE THE MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS TO MAY TO NOVEMBER.

VOTING SHOULD FEEL SPECIAL. IT'S HOW WE BUILD TRUST IN OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

BUT RIGHT NOW, WE ARE DROWNING IN TOO MANY ELECTIONS SCATTERED ACROSS THE CALENDAR, LEADING TO VOTER FATIGUE AND CONFUSION.

DALLAS MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS IN MAY ROUTINELY ATTRACT, AS DAVID SAID, LESS THAN 7% OF THE VOTERS.

THAT'S NOT JUST DISAPPOINTING, IT'S UNDEMOCRATIC.

IT MEANS A TINY GROUP OF VOTERS MAKE THE DECISION THAT AFFECTS 1.3 MILLION OF US.

BY CONTRAST, NOVEMBER ELECTIONS ARE WHEN THE PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION.

THAT'S WHEN VOTERS SHOW UP. IT'S ABOUT BUILDING CIVIC HABIT, A SHARED RHYTHM IN OUR DEMOCRACY.

LET'S MAKE IT SO THAT VOTERS KNOW NOVEMBER IS WHEN WE VOTE.

IF WE WANT CITY GOVERNMENT THAT REFLECTS THE WHOLE OF DALLAS, NOT JUST THE HIGHLY MOTIVATED FEW, THEN WE HAVE TO MAKE A CHANGE. VOTING IS HOW WE SHOW WHAT WE VALUE.

LET'S MAKE OUR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS MATTER AGAIN BY PUTTING THEM WHERE THEY BELONG IN NOVEMBER, WHEN THE PEOPLE ARE WATCHING AND READY TO ACT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MATT BOSS WILL BE VIRTUAL.

MATT. BOSS. MR. BOSS, CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY, WELL, WE'LL COME BACK TO MR. BOSS. STATE REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA.

OKAY. I'M TOLD HE'S NOT IN THE. HE'S NOT PRESENT.

HE'S CURRENTLY NOT PRESENT. SO WE'LL GO BACK TO MATT.

WELL, LET ME FINISH THE LIST. DIANE TYSON SPOKE EARLIER ON THE ITEM AND ALBERT BLACK JR HAS CANCELED.

GO BACK TO MATT BOSS. TIME. OKAY.

MR. BOSS. OKAY. MR. MAYOR. WITH THAT THOSE ARE YOUR REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. CHAIRMAN WEST RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION.

MOVE TO APPROVE. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

DISCUSSION. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THIS CONVERSATION BEGAN IN 2023 DURING THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION DISCUSSIONS.

THE DISTRICT ONE COMMISSIONER, DAVID DE LA FUENTE, WHO JUST SPOKE, WORKED WITH MULTIPLE VOTING RIGHTS, CIVIC AND BUSINESS GROUPS TO PROPOSE SHIFTING THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION DATE.

THE GOAL WAS TO ONE INCREASE VOTER TURNOUT, TWO REDUCE VOTER FATIGUE, AND THREE SAVE CITY TAXPAYERS MONEY.

AFTER MANY DISCUSSIONS AT THE HORSESHOE, COUNCIL VOTED 9 TO 6 TO INCLUDE THE ELECTION DATE.

CHANGE IN THE NOVEMBER 24TH BALLOT IS ONE OF THE 21 CHARTER MEASURES, AND IN THAT ELECTION, OVER 65% MORE THAN 220,000 CITY OF DALLAS VOTERS VOTED TO MOVE OUR ELECTION DATE FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER.

THE NEXT STEP WAS OBTAINING STATE APPROVAL, WHICH OCCURRED WHEN THE LEGISLATURE PASSED SENATE BILL 1494.

THIS BODY SUPPORTED THAT LEGISLATION AS PART OF ITS LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE FOR THAT YEAR, AND I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT IT PASSED WITH STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT,

[04:05:04]

31 TO 0 IN THE SENATE AND 129 TO 12 IN THE HOUSE.

THE FINAL STEP TODAY IS THE MOST SIMPLE PASS A RESOLUTION TO MOVE OUR ELECTION DATE FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER OF ODD NUMBERED YEARS, ALIGNING WITH WHAT OUR VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY TOLD US THAT THEY WANT.

THERE ARE THREE REASONS TO MOVE THE ELECTION DATE.

FIRST, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, MOVING THE ELECTION DATE WILL INCREASE VOTER PARTICIPATION.

CURRENTLY, OUR CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS CONSISTENTLY SEE SOME OF THE LOWEST VOTER TURNOUT OF ANY MAJOR CITY IN THE COUNTRY, USUALLY 29TH OR 30TH OF THE 30 LARGEST CITIES IN AMERICA.

VOTER TURNOUT IS ALREADY HIGHER IN NOVEMBER OF ODD NUMBERED YEARS COMPARED TO MAY.

LOOKING AT DALLAS COUNTY IN 2025, TURNOUT IN THE MAY ELECTION WAS JUST 8%, WHILE LAST WEEK'S TURNOUT WAS 16%.

AND IF WE LOOK AT OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE ALREADY MADE THIS CHANGE, LIKE MESQUITE IN 2019, VOTER TURNOUT THERE INCREASED FROM 5.6% TO 11.7%, MORE THAN DOUBLING.

THE SECOND REASON TO MOVE OUR ELECTION DATE IS TO REDUCE VOTER FATIGUE AND MAKE VOTING EASIER.

NOVEMBER ELECTIONS PROVIDE MORE CHANCES TO VOTE, WITH 27 ADDITIONAL VOTING HOURS AND MORE VOTE CENTERS AVAILABLE DURING BOTH EARLY VOTING AND ON ELECTION DAY. MOVING OUR ELECTIONS WILL REDUCE THE NUMBER OF MAY ELECTIONS, HELPING PREVENT THE ELECTION EVERY FEW MONTHS PHENOMENON THAT OUR VOTERS CURRENTLY EXPERIENCE. WE BELIEVE OTHER JURISDICTIONS LIKE DALLAS COLLEGE WILL FOLLOW OUR LEAD, AND THEY WILL BE VOTING NEXT MONTH TO CONSIDER MOVING THEIR ELECTIONS TO FOLLOW US. THIRD, FINALLY, THIS CHANGE WOULD SAVE THE CITY MONEY APPROXIMATELY $432,000 EVERY ELECTION CYCLE BECAUSE OF COST SHARING WITH THE STATE. AT A TIME WHEN THE CITY IS FACING SIGNIFICANT BUDGET CONSTRAINTS.

THIS IS A STRAIGHTFORWARD WAY TO SAVE OUR TAXPAYERS ALMOST HALF $1 MILLION.

EVERY TWO YEARS, WE'RE AT THE FINAL AND EASIEST STEP OF MOVING OUR ELECTION DATE.

I HOPE THAT MY COLLEAGUES WILL THINK ABOUT THE CHANCE WE HAVE TODAY TO CREATE A ONCE IN A GENERATION IMPROVEMENT TO OUR CITY'S ELECTION SYSTEM.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE 15 OF US SITTING HERE AROUND THE HORSESHOE.

IT'S ABOUT MAKING A SYSTEM BETTER FOR DECADES TO COME.

THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 54.

THANK YOU. WELL, I DON'T HAVE A STRONG FEELING ABOUT THIS, BUT I WILL SAY I RECOGNIZE THAT THE VOTERS APPROVE THIS, AND I'M GOING TO VOTE YES. I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT, HOWEVER, ITEMS THAT GIVE ME PAUSE WITH THIS CHANGE.

FIRST, PAIRING MUNICIPAL NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS WITH ELECTIONS THAT INCLUDE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS, WHICH ARE OFTEN PARTIZAN INJECT AN ELEMENT OF PARTIZANSHIP TO THIS ELECTION THAT SHOULDN'T BE THERE.

TWO OUR BUDGET IS DEBATED AND VOTED ON IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER.

AND SO WHAT YOU'RE ASKING TO HAVE HAPPEN IS FOR TERMED OUT COUNCIL MEMBERS IN THEIR FINAL MOMENTS, TO DECIDE A BUDGET FOR A YEAR THAT WILL CONTINUE WITHOUT THEM.

YOU'RE ASKING FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO MAY BE PURPOSELY REMOVED FROM OFFICE, WITH SOMEBODY ELSE REPLACING THEM, TO BE ABLE TO VOTE ON A BUDGET WHERE THE NEW PERSON WILL LIVE WITH A BUDGET FOR NEARLY A YEAR BEFORE THEY'LL HAVE ANY INPUT.

TODAY, SOMEBODY ELECTED, THEY'RE INAUGURATED IN JUNE, AND THEY IMMEDIATELY GET TO WORK ON A BUDGET FOR AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER.

THREE. AS MY COLLEAGUE JUST MENTIONED, SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY COLLEGES WILL EITHER BEAR A HIGHER COST FOR ELECTION OR THEY'RE GOING TO ALSO HAVE TO SWITCH TO NOVEMBER, WHICH IS LIKELY, BUT THAT WILL AGAIN PUT THEIR ELECTION IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ACADEMIC YEAR.

INSTEAD OF STARTING AND BEING ABLE TO SEE A FULL ACADEMIC YEAR THROUGH.

FOUR. IF IT PASSES FOR THE REASONS THAT SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE COMMUNITY SAY, LET'S JUST BE CLEAR THAT I HOPE THERE WON'T BE CHERRY PICKING ON WHEN WE HOLD ELECTIONS.

AND THE BEST EXAMPLE OF THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE BOND ELECTION FOR 2024.

WE HAD NO ELECTION SCHEDULED, BUT WE DID HAVE A NOVEMBER 24TH ELECTION THAT WE KNEW WOULD HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, NOVEMBER, WHERE MORE PEOPLE TURN OUT AND INSTEAD THIS BODY AT THE DIRECTION OF A MANAGER VOTED TO HOLD AN ELECTION FOR OVER $1 MILLION IN MAY FOR THE BOND. WHY? BECAUSE MORE FAVORABLE RESULTS WHEN LESS PEOPLE SHOW UP.

SO WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IS THAT SAME ATTEMPT OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

WELL, WHEN WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO SHOW UP, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT BE IN MAY.

AND I HOPE YOU, AS THE PUBLIC, WILL HOLD US ACCOUNTABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

AND THE LAST ONE IS THIS I AND EVERYONE HERE, WE WERE ELECTED FOR TWO YEARS.

[04:10:05]

WE WERE NOT ELECTED FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS.

SO IF THIS PASSES, THE ITEM ABOUT HOLDOVER SHOULD NOT BE THAT WE ARE THE ONES HELD OVER FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS.

I THINK THIS NEEDS TO STILL HAVE A MAY 2027 ELECTION AND LET THOSE PEOPLE BE THAT BRIDGE FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS WHERE EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE GETTING. I DID NOT INTEND TO TO BE IN OFFICE THROUGH NOVEMBER.

DECEMBER. WHATEVER IT ENDS UP BEING. OF 2027.

SO THAT'S MY INPUT. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. FIRST, I WANT TO THANK REPRESENTATIVES WHO SPONSORED AND PASSED THIS AT THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE.

SENATOR ROYCE WEST, SENATOR NATHAN JOHNSON, REPRESENTATIVE ANCHIA AND REPRESENTATIVE ROSE THANK YOU ALL FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DID.

ON OUR BEHALF TO GET THIS APPROVED. WE KNEW IT WASN'T A SMALL FEAT.

AND I PERSONALLY WITNESSED SOME OF THE HEADACHE THAT WENT INTO GETTING THIS THROUGH THE THE HALLS OF THE CAPITOL.

BUT VERY APPRECIATIVE OF OUR DELEGATION FOR ALLOWING OUR VOTERS THIS, THIS OPPORTUNITY.

THANK YOU. TO OUR CHARTER. CHARTER COMMISSION, DAVID DE LA FUENTE, FOR LEADING THESE EFFORTS.

RELENTLESSLY. HE WAS VERY PASSIONATE. ALSO MY APPOINTEE STUART CAMPBELL, WHO WAS STEADFAST IN, IN SUPPORTING THESE EFFORTS.

IN FACT, I WAS ON THE FENCE MYSELF. I WAS ON THE FENCE FOR SOME OF THE REASONS THAT CARA JUST MENTIONED THAT MISS MIDDLETON JUST MENTIONED I BELIEVE THERE WAS CONCERN OF PARTIZANSHIP FINDING ITS WAY INTO OUR LOCAL NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS.

BUT THAT ALSO SEEMS TO BE SOMEWHAT INEVITABLE AT THIS POINT AS WELL.

SO THERE IS NO MORE BEING ON THE FENCE. ONCE WE SAW A RESOUNDING CONSENSUS FROM OUR VOTERS WHEN WE HAVE WHICH IS WHY I SUPPORTED PUTTING IT TO THE BALLOT WHEN WE HEARD FROM OUR VOTERS FOR FOR ME TO UNILATERALLY SAY THAT IN MY DISTRICT, OVER 63% OF THE VOTERS APPROVED THIS BALLOT MEASURE.

THAT WOULD BE A SLAP IN THE FACE TO THAT 63%.

AND I ALSO WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE, ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS INCREASE VOTER TURNOUT.

AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE 60 PLUS PERCENT OF YOUR DISTRICT'S ELECTORATE THAT SUPPORTED THIS, IT'S MORE THAN LIKELY GOING TO BE TEN TIMES THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP FOR YOU TO BE IN THIS SEAT.

THE LAST TIME YOU WERE ELECTED. SO NOT ONLY IS THIS AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND YOUR ELECTORATE, IT'S ALSO A GREAT WAY TO NOT PISS OFF TEN TIMES THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR YOU TO GET IN THIS, THIS SEAT. IN OUR 2020 4TH NOVEMBER ELECTIONS, MORE THAN 65% OF VOTERS CITYWIDE VOTED YES ON MOVING CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS.

IT'S A CLEAR MESSAGE FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS VOTERS THAT THEY WANT TO SEE MORE PARTICIPATION IN OUR LOCAL ELECTIONS.

WE'VE ALSO HEARD FROM STAFF THAT HAS CONFIRMED, ARMED THOSE NUMBERS IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS WHO HAVE MADE THE SAME CHANGE.

WE ARE DOING JUST THAT NOW BY MOVING OUR ELECTIONS FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER.

THE DATA HAS BEEN CLEAR TO US, AND SO I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THE ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION IN OUR LOCAL ELECTIONS INCREASE IN THE FUTURE.

THIS CHANGE IS ABOUT DOING OUR PART TO GET MORE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

IT SHOULD BE OUR GOAL IN EVERYTHING THAT WE DO TO TO PROMOTE MORE PARTICIPATION AND ENGAGEMENT.

WE'RE ALSO KEEPING OUR ELECTIONS NONPARTIZAN BY HOLDING THEM IN THE ODD NUMBERED YEARS.

I KNOW THAT OFTEN THE TIMES THE LEGISLATURE PUTS IN CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS THAT ARE VERY PARTIZAN. HOWEVER, WE JUST WITNESSED SEVERAL ON OUR BALLOT JUST LAST WEEK.

THAT SEEMED TO HAVE CLEAR CONSENSUS AS WELL, AND WAS NOT VOTED ON BY PARTY LINES IN THE ELECTORATE OF OUR CITY.

SO WE WILL WE'RE ALSO KEEPING ELECTIONS NONPARTIZAN.

AND LASTLY, WE'RE HOLDING ELECTIONS IN NOVEMBER.

MEANING MEANS WE GET TO SHARE THE COSTS WITH OTHER CITIES AND ENTITIES, REDUCING EXPENSES FOR THE TAXPAYERS.

OVERALL, I SEE THIS AS A POSITIVE CHANGE. I ALSO WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO FORMER MAYOR RAWLINGS.

THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT HE DID PUSH FOR. WE DIDN'T GET IT SUCCESSFULLY DONE BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE HAD ALREADY MADE A CHANGE FOR OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.

[04:15:03]

BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'VE HEARD FROM FORMER LEADERS OF OUR CITY WITH A GREAT DEAL OF OF SUPPORT.

AND I HOPE THAT WE WILL GET THIS PASSED WITH FLYING COLORS TO GIVE THE VOTERS WHAT THEY VOTED FOR AND WHAT THEY CLEARLY WISH FOR OUR CITY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS CADENA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. VOTING IS ONE OF OUR MOST IMPORTANT RIGHTS.

MY GRANDFATHER INSTILLED IN MY FAMILY HOW IMPORTANT IT WAS.

HE WORKED AT GRANADA AS A LABORER. BUT TO VOTE, HE WOULD DRESS UP IN HIS SUIT.

VOTING WAS THAT IMPORTANT TO HIM? MY GRAMPS HAD TO PAY A POLL TAX SO THAT HE COULD VOTE.

AND HE INSTILLED IN OUR FAMILY THE IMPORTANCE OF VOTING AND STAYING UP TO DATE ON LOCAL ISSUES.

A TRADITION THAT CONTINUES TODAY WHEN WE GATHER ON SUNDAYS AS A FAMILY.

I SPENT A LOT OF MY PERSONAL TIME HELPING TO GET OUT THE VOTE AND MAKING CERTAIN THAT NEIGHBORHOODS ARE REPRESENTED.

OTHER CITIES HAVE MOVED ELECTIONS TO NOVEMBER AND HAVE INCREASED VOTER TURNOUT, AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT THIS CHANGE WILL INCREASE TURNOUT.

I HAVE ONE CAUSE FOR CONCERN, WHICH I WANT TO PUT ON THE RECORD.

MY HESITATION IS THAT FIVE OUTGOING COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD BE ABLE TO NOMINATE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONERS PRIOR TO LEAVING OFFICE, HAVING SERVED AS THE CHIEF OF STAFF FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER.

I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THESE POSITIONS ARE. THE APPROVAL PROCESS TYPICALLY TAKES A MONTH ONCE AN APPLICATION IS RECEIVED AND SUBMITTED TO THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE BY NOVEMBER, MANY COMMISSIONERS ARE APPOINTED. POSITIONS LIKE CPC PARK BOARD.

BOARDS OF ADJUSTMENTS ARE SUCH IMPORTANT POSITIONS FOR A DISTRICT TO THE TRADITIONAL TERM IS TWO YEARS LONG.

HOWEVER, VOTERS DID APPROVE A MECHANISM FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO MAKE CHANGES TO ASSIST IN THESE SITUATIONS, BUT IT DOES REQUIRE A MAJORITY VOTE. VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY APPROVED MOVING NOVEMBER THE ELECTIONS TO NOVEMBER BY OVER 60% IN DISTRICT SIX, AND I'M VOTING HOPEFUL THAT THIS CHANGE WILL INCREASE TURNOUT.

I KNOW I WILL CONTINUE DOING MY PART TO HELP GET OUT THE VOTE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I SEE STATE REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL LANAKILA IN THE AUDIENCE.

IF HE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO SAY ANYTHING IF HE WISHES.

AND MADAM SECRETARY. HE'S USING THE MAYOR PRO TEM TIME.

CORRECT HIS TIME. WILL. GOOD AFTERNOON. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

THERE IS A BUTTON. THANK YOU. THESE LARGE LETTERS THAT SAY PUSH TO TALK.

HOW'S THAT? MAYOR JOHNSON, MAYOR PRO TEM, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

I SEE A LOT OF FAMILIAR FACES UP HERE. PEOPLE WITH WHOM I'VE COLLABORATED FOR A LONG TIME NOW.

AND TO THE NEW FACES. I LOOK FORWARD TO SPENDING TIME WITH ALL OF YOU IN THE UPCOMING MONTHS.

MY NAME IS RAFAEL ANCHIA, AND I HAVE THE HONOR OF REPRESENTING DISTRICT 103 IN THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE.

AND I'M HERE AS THE HOUSE SPONSOR OF SENATE BILL 1494 THAT WAS AUTHORED ON THE SENATE SIDE BY SENATOR NATHAN JOHNSON, WHO COULDN'T BE HERE TODAY. BUT WHO WHO DESERVES HIS FLOWERS FOR GETTING THIS BILL OUT OF THE SENATE TIMELY SO THAT THEN WE COULD SPEND LEGISLATIVE CAPITAL AND A LOT OF TIME WORKING IT THROUGH THE HOUSE PROCESS AND GETTING IT TO THE GOVERNOR'S DESK.

I'M HERE REPRESENTING THOUSANDS OF DALLAS RESIDENTS FROM NORTH OAK CLIFF, WHERE I LIVE, TO NORTH DALLAS, WHICH I REPRESENT IN DISTRICT 103. AND THEY SHARE A COMMON BELIEF.

THEY BELIEVE THAT EVERY DALLAS RESIDENT DESERVES A MEANINGFUL VOICE IN THEIR LOCAL ELECTIONS.

AND AS HAS BEEN STATED REPEATEDLY HERE, TWO THIRDS OF DALLAS RESIDENTS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTED PROPOSITION D. AND WHEN YOU ALL CAME TO THE LEGISLATURE WITH THAT MANDATE, YOU SAID, GO CHARGE THE HILL, GET THIS BILL PASSED, BECAUSE WE WANT THE ABILITY TO GO AHEAD AND DECIDE IN A MOMENT LIKE TODAY TO GO AHEAD AND HONOR THE THE WISHES OF THE OF THE ELECTORATE. THE PROBLEM IS, IS FAIRLY STARK.

DALLAS HAS AMONG THE WORST VOTER TURNOUT OF ANY MAJOR CITY IN AMERICA IN MAY 2023.

ONLY 7.1% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTICIPATED IN OUR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS.

AND IF YOU BELIEVE THAT VERY LOW TURNOUT AND NOT HAVING A BROAD CROSS-SECTION OF THE ELECTORATE PARTICIPATE IN ELECTIONS WEAKENS DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS AS I DO. THEN WE SHOULD ALL SUPPORT A MEASURE THAT SEEKS TO MAKE IT EASIER, MAKE IT MORE EFFICIENT TO STREAMLINE VOTING SO THAT MORE PEOPLE WILL PARTICIPATE.

THIS IS NOT A SILVER BULLET, BY THE WAY. WE WILL GO FROM ABYSMAL TURNOUT TO JUST LOW TURNOUT, RIGHT? AND SO KEEP THAT IN MIND AS YOU'RE THINKING OF OTHER CREATIVE WAYS TO STIMULATE MORE PARTICIPATION AMONG THE ELECTORATE.

[04:20:01]

WE I HAVE HEARD SOME CONCERNS, AND I HEARD THEM DURING THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS, SO I JUST WANT TO ARTICULATE THEM RIGHT NOW.

ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT CAME UP IN THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE WAS WHETHER PEOPLE SAID, WELL, IT'S IT'S COLDER IN NOVEMBER, IT MAY POTENTIALLY IMPACT TURNOUT. AND I JUST ATTRIBUTED THAT TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW DALLAS WHETHER YOU KNOW, PEOPLE MAY BE FROM HERE OR FROM EL PASO OR SOMEWHERE ELSE BECAUSE THE METEOROLOGICAL DATA AND WE POINTED THIS OUT TO MY COLLEAGUES IN THE LEGISLATURE PROVES THE EXACT OPPOSITE.

ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE, MAY IS ACTUALLY DALLAS'S WETTEST MONTH, AVERAGING 4.13IN OF RAINFALL OVER NEARLY 16 DAYS.

NOVEMBER AVERAGES ONLY 2.6IN OVER SIX DAYS. SO THAT'S LESS THAN HALF THE THE THE DAYS FOR PRECIPITATION.

AND SO IT IS CLEAR. AND IF YOU LOOK, IF YOU LOOK AT ELECTORAL DATA YOU'LL SEE THAT BOTH THE JOURNAL OF POLITICS AND, AND POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY CONFIRM THAT RAINFALL SUPPRESSES TURNOUT BY APPROXIMATELY ONE PERCENTAGE POINT PER INCH OF RAIN.

RIGHT. SO WEATHER IS ACTUALLY BETTER IN NOVEMBER TO STIMULATE TURNOUT.

I DID HEAR THAT AS, AS DURING THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.

AND I AND PEOPLE HAVE MENTIONED THAT TO ME HERE.

THE LAST THING I WILL SAY IS THAT MOVING ELECTIONS TO NOVEMBER ISN'T JUST GOOD FOR DEMOCRACY, IT'S GOOD FOR TAXPAYERS. THE LAST MAY MUNICIPAL ELECTION IN DALLAS COST ALMOST $1 MILLION.

AND I BELIEVE THE DALLAS CITY SECRETARY HAS PREVIOUSLY PREVIOUSLY INDICATED THAT CONSOLIDATING MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS WOULD SAVE THE CITY AROUND $432,000. THIS IS GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY. MEMBERS.

WE CAN DRAMATICALLY IMPROVE DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION WHILE BEING BETTER STEWARDS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

AND THAT MEMBERS IS THE DEFINITION OF SMART GOVERNANCE.

WITH THAT, I WANT TO REITERATE MY THANKS TO THE MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR INVITING ME TODAY.

IT IS GOOD TO SEE ALL OF YOU. THANK YOU. TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS LIKE COUNCILMAN JOHNSON, LIKE COUNCILMAN WEST, LIKE COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON, COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA, AND MANY, MANY OTHERS WHO CAME DOWN TO THE LEGISLATURE TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY TO ADVOCATE FOR THIS BECAUSE THIS WAS NOT A STRAIGHTFORWARD EXECUTION. THIS WAS QUITE DIFFICULT.

AND IT REQUIRED SOME LEGISLATIVE GYMNASTICS TO GET DONE, WHICH I'M, I'M AND I'M REALLY GRATEFUL THAT WE STUCK THE LANDING MEMBERS.

AND NOW WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO RIGHT BY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO BE WITH YOU. GOOD TO HAVE YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.

YOU HAVE EXHAUSTED THE MAYOR PRO TEM TIME, BUT THERE'S PLENTY OF OTHER MEMBERS WHO CAN YIELD THEIR TIME TO YOU IF NECESSARY, OR CAN ASK QUESTIONS TO YOU. SO I WILL TURN. YOU CAN STAY RIGHT THERE IF YOU DON'T MIND, SIR.

AND I WILL TURN TO CHAIRWOMAN STEWART FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. SHOULD I OFFER YOU SOME TIME? DO YOU? DO YOU NEED SOME ADDITIONAL TIME? AT YOUR PLEASURE.

COUNCILWOMAN. I STAND AT THE READY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT ANYONE MAY HAVE ABOUT THE LEGISLATION, OR ARE ANY OF THE RESEARCH UNDERLYING THE THE BILL THAT WAS PASSED? COLLEAGUES, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

WELL, I THINK YOU'RE OFF THE HOOK. AND THANK YOU AGAIN SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN. OKAY. I SUPPORT MOVING OUR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER.

MAKING THIS CHANGE SHOWS A COMMITMENT TO INCREASE VOTER TURNOUT, SOMETHING THAT IS IMPORTANT TO THE HEALTH OF OUR CITY RIGHT NOW.

FAR TOO FEW OF OUR RESIDENTS WEIGH IN ON DECISIONS THAT DIRECTLY SHAPE THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE, AND THE FUTURE OF THIS CITY.

STATISTICS SHOW THAT MORE PEOPLE TEND TO VOTE IN NOVEMBER ELECTIONS THAN IN MAY ELECTIONS.

ALIGNING OUR CITY ELECTIONS WITH THE NOVEMBER CYCLE BRINGS MORE VOTERS AND THEREBY GIVES MORE RESIDENTS A REAL VOICE IN CHOOSING THEIR CITY LEADERS.

I RECOGNIZE THAT SHIFTING TO A NOVEMBER CYCLE BRINGS LOGISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS.

CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL NEED TO SERVE AS HOLDOVERS FOR SEVERAL MONTHS.

OUR APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WILL BE OUT OF SYNC.

WE MAY NEED TO SWEAR IN THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS IN DECEMBER AND THEN HOLD AN INAUGURATION CEREMONY IN JANUARY.

I BELIEVE WITH GOOD PLANNING AND COMMUNICATION, WE CAN WORK THESE ISSUES OUT.

THEY DO NOT POSE A LONG TERM BARRIER. ULTIMATELY, THIS IS ABOUT STRENGTHENING LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

INCREASING VOTER TURNOUT IS A GOOD THING AND A PRACTICAL STEP TOWARDS MAKING SURE MORE DALLAS RESIDENTS ARE HEARD.

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

WELL, I HAD NO PLANS TO ORIGINALLY SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS, AND I FEEL A LOT LIKE CHAIR MENDELSOHN.

[04:25:07]

THERE ARE PROBLEMATIC AREAS OF MOVING FROM JUNE INTO NOVEMBER, BUT GREAT BIG. BUT I SUPPORT MOVING THIS FROM JUNE TO NOVEMBER FOR THE SAME REASONS MOST OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED I AS A NEWBIE. I KNOW WHAT IT TOOK FOR ME TO GET HERE.

I KNOW HOW MANY DOORS I HAD TO KNOCK IN 100 DEGREE WEATHER, AND I KNEW WHAT IT TOOK, WHAT KIND OF TOLL IT TAKES ON YOUR BODY TO WALK AND KNOCK ON AS MANY DOORS AS I DID. TO TO SAVE MONEY, TAXPAYER MONEY.

IT'S IMPORTANT. IT'S BECAUSE AS WE WENT THROUGH OUR 17 HOURS OF BUDGETING, WE DID NOT MOVE THE NEEDLE A LOT.

ANYTHING AT THIS POINT IN TIME HELPS. I SUPPORT I SUPPORT THIS EFFORT BECAUSE IT'S THE BEST THING THAT WE NEED TO DO, NOT ONLY FOR OUR RESIDENTS OR OUR VOTERS, BUT FOR OURSELVES.

I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS AS TO OUR POLICIES AND PROCESSES IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THIS CHANGE.

THERE IS NO POLICY OR OR PROCESS THAT WE HAVE THAT SET SO MUCH IN STONE THAT IT CANNOT BE CHANGED.

SO FOR THAT, I AM VOTING FOR TO SUPPORT THIS.

GOING BACK TO THE MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THREE MINUTES, IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE. OKAY. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION WITH SOME HESITATION. AS MENTIONED, THIS IS NOT A SILVER BULLET.

IT'S NOT PERFECT. BUT ANYTHING THAT WILL INCREASE VOTER TURNOUT IS A GOOD THING.

AND WE DID FOLLOW A PROCESS ON THIS. AND THE VOTERS SPOKE WITH THE BALLOT MEASURE.

CONCERNS THAT I HAVE ARE A OUT POTENTIAL OUTGOING BODY APPROVING A BUDGET, SELECTING COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THE COST OF A POTENTIAL AND LIKELY RUNOFF IN A NOVEMBER CYCLE WILL INCREASE THE OVERALL BUDGET FOR AN ELECTION, WITH DALLAS BEING ONE OF THE ONLY ITEMS ON THAT BALLOT RELINQUISHING SOME CONTROL FROM THE CITY SECRETARY TO THE ELECTIONS IS A CONCERN.

THE POSSIBILITY OF THIS RATE GOING INTO PARTIZANSHIP IS ALSO A CONCERN THAT I HAVE.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GIVING VOTERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME OUT IN A MANNER WHICH THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN ALREADY AND SO LOOK FORWARD TO THIS PASSING TODAY.

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

THANK YOU. WELL, I CERTAINLY SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS OF MY COLLEAGUES.

I LISTENED TO THE MEETING THAT YOU CHAIRED ADMINISTRATIVE AD HOC AND HEARD SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.

SO THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME THINGS TO WORK OUT.

I THINK THE BETWEEN THE GENERAL ELECTIONS AND THE PRIMARIES AND THE POLITICAL ADS, THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE FATIGUE COMES IN, IS IT'S PROBABLY THE ADS MORE THAN IT IS THE ELECTIONS.

HOWEVER, I WANT TO HEAR COLLEAGUES AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE VOTERS.

I HAD BEEN KIND OF AMBIVALENT LOOKING AT BOTH SIDES.

BUT MIKE RAWLINGS GOT TO ME TOO. AND SO I DECIDED, SURE, IT SHOULD GO ON THE BALLOT FOR VOTERS TO DETERMINE.

AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT I'LL SUPPORT THIS. I'M A GREATER PROPONENT OF VOTER ENGAGEMENT AND TURNOUT AND REALLY DRIVING IT TO GET PEOPLE FIRED UP AND PASSIONATE ABOUT AN ISSUE AND COMING OUT TO LET US KNOW AT THE BALLOT BOX HOW THEY FEEL.

HOWEVER, THAT'S EASY FOR ME TO SAY BECAUSE THE DISTRICT THAT I REPRESENT HAS THE HIGHEST VOTER TURNOUT.

WE DON'T SEEM TO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. AND SO I RESPECT THE FACT THAT OTHER OTHER DISTRICTS DO AND MAY WANT TO MAKE IT EASIER TO TURN OUT AND GET PEOPLE TO THE BALLOT BOX.

SO YOU CAN REALLY READ WHAT'S ON THE MINDS OF OF THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE REPRESENTED.

SO I WILL I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOVE TO NOVEMBER.

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

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO STATE REPRESENTATIVE.

BUT I DIDN'T GO TO AUSTIN. I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE, BUT I DIDN'T.

I DIDN'T MAKE IT DOWN THERE. ON THIS ITEM I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS.

THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE WITH THIS IS WHAT I, WHAT I CALL THE LAYOVER WITH WITH THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS COMING IN AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT WE HAVE. AS WE'VE HEARD, MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO SPEAK UP, SO IT'S NOT NEEDING TO GO BACK THROUGH THAT.

[04:30:01]

BUT THAT, THAT THAT IS A HESITATION. ALSO, THE I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SPEAK DIRECTLY WITH MY COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

I NORMALLY LIKE HAVING COMMUNITY MEETINGS ABOUT THINGS LIKE THIS.

SO THEY'RE AWARE, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE EDUCATING THEM ON EVERYTHING.

THOSE THAT MAY NOT KNOW, THAT'S JUST A PART OF ME BEING ACCOUNTABLE AND TRANSPARENT TO THE CONSTITUENTS IN DISTRICT FOUR.

WHETHER IT'S IN MAY OR OFFSET, NOVEMBER IS NOT A PRETTY MUCH BIG DEAL TO ME OUTSIDE OF THE HESITATION, BECAUSE MY JOB IS TO DO A GREAT JOB IN DISTRICT FOUR.

SO NO MATTER WHAT, IF IT'S IN MAY OR NOVEMBER, WE STILL HAVE THEIR SUPPORT.

AND SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS AGENDA ITEM.

THE VOTERS SPOKE CLEARLY, AND SO WE DO NEED MORE VOTERS TO COME OUT AND BE INVOLVED, NOT JUST THE OLDER VOTERS, BUT THE YOUNG VOTERS AS WELL. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON MR. BAZALDUA YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES? THANK YOU.

I JUST WANT TO SEE IF JAKE COULD JUST ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP.

I'D LIKE FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE THEIR CONCERNS TO BE PACIFIED, IF POSSIBLE.

ONE IS FISCAL YEAR STARTING IN OCTOBER. IF THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT THIS, YOU KNOW, A BUDGET BEING PASSED BY OUTGOING COUNCIL MEMBERS IS THIS WHAT IS THE STANDARD TIME FRAME THAT WE HAVE ON OTHER GOVERNMENTAL BODIES THAT HAVE THEIR ELECTIONS IN NOVEMBER AND ASSUME OFFICE AT THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. COUNCILMEMBER. JAKE ANDERSON, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS.

I BELIEVE YOU'RE ASKING IF THERE ARE OTHER ENTITIES THAT HAVE ELECTIONS IN NOVEMBER, BUT MAY ALSO HAVE FISCAL YEARS THAT BEGIN IN OCTOBER.

AND I WOULD SAY THAT THAT THAT IS STANDARD. I DON'T HAVE THOSE IN FRONT OF ME.

BUT THAT IS THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS IN SEVERAL ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS THE STATE.

AND BUDGET TIME FRAMES DO VARY, AND BUT THE OCTOBER TIMELINE IS GENERALLY WHAT HAPPENS IN TEXAS.

I JUST WANT TO POINT IT OUT. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN, HOWEVER, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE IN MANY CASES WHO HAVE SPENT EIGHT YEARS AND ARE PROBABLY THE MOST SEASONED IN A BUDGET SEASON AND NAVIGATING THE HALLS OF CITY HALL.

WHO WILL BE DOING THIS ON THEIR WAY OUT WHEN THE CURRENT SYSTEM HAS PEOPLE BEING ELECTED AND BEING INAUGURATED IN JUNE AND HAVING RECESS IN JULY, AND THE VERY FIRST MEETING THEY'VE EVER HAD BEFORE, THEY KNOW WHERE ALL THE BATHROOMS OF CITY HALL ARE, IS IN FACT, OUR BUDGET WORKSHOP. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT GIVING A PERCEPTION TO THE PUBLIC THAT THIS IS GOING TO IN ANY, IN ANY WAY. DISINTEGRATE THE LEVEL OF OF EXPERTISE THAT WE HAVE DEALING WITH THE MOST IMPORTANT TASK WE ARE GIVEN AS A COUNCIL, WHICH IS TO PASS A BALANCED BUDGET EVERY OCTOBER.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS CLEAR WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 54? SEEING NONE, A RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

AND, MADAM SECRETARY, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ.

COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. YOU'RE YOU'RE MUTED.

YEAH. YOU'RE MUTED. YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLAIR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO.

YES. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH ALL 15 MEMBERS OF COUNCIL VOTING IN FAVOR, THE ITEM PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM. OKAY. THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW MOVE TO ALLOW THE OUTBURST. BUT SINCE Y'ALL EDGED THEM ON, YOU KNOW, GO AHEAD.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 55 WILL BE HELD UNTIL LATER IN THE MEETING.

THEREFORE, WE WILL MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 56, AGENDA ITEM 56, AUTHORIZED AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE ADVANCE FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE

[56. 25-3157A Authorize Amendment No. 2 to the Advance Funding Agreement (CSJ No. 0918-47-237, Assistant Listing No. 20.205) between the City of Dallas and the Texas Department of Transportation for the East Wheatland Road Extension Project to (1) replace Attachment C-1 with Attachment C-2, Project Budget; and (2) amend the funding participation, increasing the total estimated cost by $10,278,893.00, from $4,445,390.00 to $14,724,283.00, the federal participation by $7,768,000.00, from $3,400,000.00 to $11,168,000.00, the indirect state cost by $433,543.00, from $191,140.00 to $624,683.00, and the local participation by $2,077,350.00, from $854,250.00 to $2,931,600.00 - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (This item was deferred on October 22, 2025)]

CITY OF DALLAS AND THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE EAST WHEATLAND ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT TO ONE REPLACE ATTACHMENT C-1 WITH ATTACHMENT C-2 PROJECT BUDGET AND TO AMEND THE FUNDING PARTICIPATION, INCREASING THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST BY

[04:35:04]

$10,278,893 FROM $4,445,390 TO $14,724,283. THE FEDERAL PARTICIPATION BY $7,768,000, FROM $3,400,000 TO $11,168,000. THE INDIRECT STATE COST OF $433,543 FROM $191,140 TO $624,683, AND THE LOCAL PARTICIPATION BY $2,077,350 FROM $854,250 TO $2,931,600. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. LOOKING FOR A MOTION? ITEM 56, MR. MAYOR. YES. MR. BLAIR, YOU HAVE A MOTION.

YES. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

APPROPRIATE RECEIPT, DEPOSIT AND DISBURSE $11,000,056.

WELL, LET ME START. $11,056,320 IN THE TEXT. WHEATLAND ROAD EXTENSION FUND AUTHORIZE A PAYMENT OF $159,020 FROM THE STREET AND TRANSPORTATION, A FUND FOR I'VE 22 TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR A PORTION OF THE LOCAL PARTICIPATION FOR DIRECT STATE COSTS. IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY. IF THERE'S BEEN A SECOND.

SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES, MISS BLAIR. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 56.

YOU HEARD THE MOTION. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 57.

[57. 25-3158A Authorize adoption of the 2026 City Calendar - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (This item was deferred on October 22, 2025)]

AUTHORIZED ADOPTION OF THE 2026 CITY CALENDAR.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

YEAH. YOU JUST WANT ME TO SAY THAT OR.

I'LL SAY THAT IN MY COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT. JUST WANT TO GIVE AN UPDATE.

WE ARE GOING TO TO GO INTO RECESS AT TWO. SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

TWO. WE'RE GOING TO GO TO LUNCH AT TWO. RECESS FOR AN HOUR.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO KEEP GOING. SEE AS MUCH AS WE CAN GET DONE BEFORE TWO. BUT WE'RE GOING TO STOP AT TWO. ALRIGHT. SO 57 HAS BEEN RAN TO THE RECORD. IS THERE A MOTION? YES, MAYOR. YOU RECOGNIZED MISTER WEST. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

MOVE THE JANUARY 5TH, 2026 PARKS, TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETINGS TO JANUARY 6TH, 2026. DESIGNATE APRIL 1ST, 2026 AS A BUDGET WORKSHOP.

MOVE THE AUGUST 26TH, 2026 COUNCIL VOTING AGENDA AND BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING TO AUGUST 25TH, 2026 AND AUGUST 26TH, 2026 AS AN ADDITIONAL COUNCIL BRIEFING DATE AND DESIGNATE IT AS A BUDGET WORKSHOP DESIGNATE.

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2ND, 2026 AS A BUDGET WORKSHOP FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING THE CITY MANAGER'S REFINED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION BASED ON CITY COUNCIL FEEDBACK ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND ADOPT BUDGET ON FIRST READING AND MOVED THE SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2026 HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS SOLUTIONS AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS TO SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2026. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

DISCUSSION. MR. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES? THANK YOU. MAYOR. THESE WERE THE SAME CHANGES RECOMMENDED IN OUR LAST MEETING.

WE ASKED THESE TO BE PUSHED BACK TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, JUST TO GIVE EVERYBODY A CHANCE TO GO OVER THEM.

WE WENT OVER THEM. NO PROBLEMS, NO ISSUES. I WOULD JUST ASK THE CITY MANAGER AND HER TEAM FOR THE APRIL 1ST, 2026 BUDGET WORKSHOP TO JUST PROVIDE US, TO THE EXTENT YOU'RE ABLE, WITH A FULL LIST OF PROGRAMS BY DEPARTMENT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A CHANCE TO GO OVER THEM.

OR IF THEY'RE NOT PREPARED BY THEN, YOU KNOW, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER THAT MEETING.

OTHER THAN THAT. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 57.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR REWORKING THE ITEMS SO THAT COUNCILMEMBER ROTH AND I CAN CELEBRATE YOM KIPPUR, AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL BUDGET WORKSHOP. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 57 SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.

OKAY, I'M GOING TO READ YOU SOME STATUTORY LANGUAGE.

[CLOSED SESSION]

WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO RECESS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

WE'LL RECONVENE AT 3:00. IT IS 1:57 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12TH, 2025.

THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTIONS FIVE, 51.071 AND 551 .072 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING MATTERS DESCRIBED IN

[04:40:03]

TODAY'S AGENDA. ITEMS NUMBER 37, 55, 58 AND 59 WILL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 3 P.M..

THANK YOU. OKAY. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HAS COMPLETED ITS CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTIONS FIVE, 51.071 AND 551 .072 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

AND AT 5:12 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12TH, 2025, WE'VE RETURNED TO OPEN SESSION.

[37. 25-3156A A resolution (1) declaring approximately 48,180 square feet of improved land unwanted and unneeded, located near the intersection of Skillman Street and Southwestern Boulevard, and authorizing its advertisement for sale by public auction or through a real estate brokerage service; (2) establishing a reserve for the auctioned surplus property; (3) authorizing a Purchase and Sale Agreement to be prepared for the auctioned surplus property receiving highest qualified bid that meets or exceeds the reserve or the highest cash offer; and (4) authorizing the conveyance of a deed in a form acceptable to City Attorney - Estimated Revenue: TBD - Real Estate Market to determine the value]

MADAM SECRETARY, LET'S TAKE UP REALLY QUICKLY WHILE WE WAIT FOR CHAIRMAN WEST.

37. CAN WE DO 37? OKAY. OKAY. MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 37.

A RESOLUTION ONE DECLARING APPROXIMATELY 48,100FT² OF LAND, 48,100FT² OF LAND, OF IMPROVED LAND, UNWANTED AND UNNEEDED, LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF SKILLMAN STREET AND SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD AND AUTHORIZING ITS ADVERTISEMENT FOR SALE BY PUBLIC AUCTION OR THROUGH A REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE SERVICE TO ESTABLISHING A RESERVE FOR THE AUCTION.

SURPLUS PROPERTY THREE AUTHORIZING A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT TO BE PREPARED FOR THE AUCTION.

SURPLUS PROPERTY RECEIVING HIGHEST QUALIFIED BID THAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE RESERVE OR THE HIGHEST CASH OFFER, AND FOR AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A DEED IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO CITY ATTORNEY.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS AND COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION ON ITEM 37? YES. THANK YOU. THE PURCHASE AND SALE. OH, I MOVE TO THAT.

THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.

SECOND. OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. THAT WAS THE WHOLE.

THAT WAS THE WHOLE MOTION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED.

SECOND DISCUSSION. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. NO, I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED IT.

OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE.

IT LET'S STAND FOR JUST ONE SECOND.

OKAY. WE'LL. GO BACK TO ITEM 60. WE'LL TAKE UP ITEM 60.

[60. 25-2161A Authorize the (1) Amendment No. 7 to the contract agreement with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for the Whole Air Monitoring Program (Contract No. 582-21-22370, CFDA No. 97.091) to accept additional grant funds in an amount not to exceed $457,333.14 from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security passed through the TCEQ, to continue the Whole Air Monitoring Program for the period September 1, 2025 through July 31, 2026; (2) increase of appropriations in an amount not to exceed $457,333.14 in the TCEQ 23-24 Whole Air Monitoring Program Fund; (3) receipt and deposit of funds in an amount not to exceed $457,333.14 in the TCEQ 23-24 Whole Air Monitoring Program Fund; and (4) execution of the contract agreement with TCEQ and all terms, conditions, and documents required by the agreement - Not to exceed $457,333.14, from $1,799,771.04 to $2,257,104.18 - Financing: TCEQ FY 23-24 Whole Air Monitoring Program Fund]

LET ME.

AGENDA ITEM 60. AUTHORIZE THE ONE AMENDMENT NUMBER SEVEN TO THE CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.

FOR THE WHOLE AIR MONITORING PROGRAM TO ACCEPT ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $457,333.14 FROM THE US DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, PASSED THROUGH THE TCSEC TO CONTINUE THE WHOLE AIR MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2025 THROUGH JULY 31ST, 2026 SIX TWO INCREASE OF APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $457,333.14 IN THE FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $457,333.14 IN THE 2324 AGREEMENT WITH T-C-E-Q AND ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THE AGREEMENT NOT TO EXCEED $457,333.14, FROM $1,799,771.04 TO $2,257,104.18. THIS

[04:45:01]

IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION ITEM? 60. THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN MOVED IN. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. 61, PLEASE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA. ITEM 61 AUTHORIZED THE EXECUTION

[61. 25-2245A Authorize the execution of (1) an agreement with North Texas Food Bank to provide emergency food distribution programming for the period of November 12, 2025 through February 11, 2026; and (2) any and all terms, conditions, and documents required by the contract - Not to exceed $1,000,000.00 - Financing: ARPA Redevelopment Fund]

OF ONE. AN AGREEMENT WITH NORTH NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK TO PROVIDE EMERGENCY FOOD DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMING FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 12TH, 2025 THROUGH FEBRUARY 11TH, 2026, AND TO ANY AND ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACT NOT TO EXCEED $1 MILLION. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION? 60 ONE MEMBERS. MOVE.

APPROVAL. MOTION. AND A SECOND CHAIRWOMAN. MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'M WONDERING IF SOMEONE COULD EXPLAIN WHERE THIS ARPA MONEY WAS FROM.

LIKE, WHAT WAS IT ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED FOR? THANK YOU.

COUNCILWOMAN. OUR CFO, JACK ALLEN, IS COMING.

THIS IS ACTUALLY INTEREST EARNINGS ON NEW FUNDING FROM NEW INTEREST EARNINGS ON THE CURRENT ARPA BALANCE.

BUT I'LL HAVE MR. IRELAND JUMP IN. THAT'S THE CORRECT ANSWER.

IT IS INTEREST EARNINGS IN THE ARPA REDEVELOPMENT FUND.

WE DID CLEAN THROUGH THAT FUND AND DID SOME REALLOCATION IN THE END OF YEAR, AND WE DID ALLOCATE INTEREST EARNINGS AT THAT TIME, BUT WE CONTINUE TO EARN INTEREST IN THAT FUND.

AND SO WE HAVE ABOUT $1 MILLION AVAILABLE FOR THIS ITEM.

IT IS NEW MONEY NOT BEING TAKEN FROM A DIFFERENT PROJECT.

AND SO I SEE IN THE AGENDA ITEM IT TALKS ABOUT FUNDING TODAY THROUGH FEBRUARY.

SO GIVEN CONGRESS MAY ACTUALLY REINSTATE US FUNDING TODAY, IS $1 MILLION STILL NEEDED? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION ON COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT DURING THIS TIME OF THE YEAR THAT THE FOOD BANK TYPICALLY HAS ADDITIONAL NEEDS BECAUSE THEY GO INTO THE HOLIDAY SEASON, THAT EVEN DURING THESE LAST FEW MONTHS, THEY'VE CONTINUED TO SERVE FAMILIES, AND THAT THIS ADDITIONAL FUNDING WOULD SUPPORT JUST THEIR ONGOING EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THAT RESIDENTS IN THIS AREA ARE CONTINUING TO RECEIVE THE ASSISTANCE THAT'S NEEDED.

SO IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WITH THIS CONTRIBUTION, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE WITH JUST THEIR OVERALL NORMAL SERVICES THAT THEY PROVIDE.

SO THE FOOD BANK IS AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT NONPROFIT IN OUR COMMUNITY AND SUPPORT SO MANY OTHER NONPROFITS AND OTHER FOOD PANTRIES, BUT THIS IS ALSO THE SEASON THAT IT'S VERY EASY FOR THEM TO BOTH GET FOOD DONATIONS AND DOLLARS NOW THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR, AS WE'VE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT WITH OTHER AGENDA ITEMS TODAY.

AND, YOU KNOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS WAS SORT OF AN EMERGENCY REQUEST BECAUSE OF THE SNAP ISSUE.

AND WITHOUT THAT BEING THE ISSUE, I WOULD WONDER IF THAT MILLION DOLLARS SHOULDN'T GO TOWARDS A WHOLE HOST OF OTHER THINGS THAT WE MAY BE FACING, INCLUDING A REDUCTION IN SALES TAX BASED ON OUR BUDGET.

I DON'T KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE SOME REPAIRS AT CITY HALL.

I MEAN, THERE'S THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT THAT COULD GO TOWARDS THAT ARE DIRECTLY IN OUR LANE.

SPEAKING OF LANES, POTHOLES. SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF THIS IS A NECESSARY ALLOCATION OR IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE ABLE TO HELP SUPPORT A NONPROFIT THAT DOES GOOD WORK. I'LL GO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL ANSWER IS THAT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS FUNDING WOULD HELP WITH THEIR ONGOING SERVICES, THAT THEY HAVE BEEN PROVIDING SERVICES DURING THE TIME OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN.

SO THEY HAVE BEEN REQUESTING ADDITIONAL SUPPORT.

SO THIS WOULD CONTINUE TO HELP THEM MEET THOSE NEEDS.

DEFINITELY. WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNCIL TODAY.

IF YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO MOVE THIS ITEM FORWARD, THAT WOULD REALLY BE THE CITY COUNCIL'S DISCRETION.

WELL, IN AN EFFORT NOT TO BELABOR SOMETHING, SINCE, YOU KNOW, IT'S 520.

I'LL JUST SAY THAT I WOULD BE OPEN TO HOLDING THIS AND HAVING YOU GO BACK AND HAVE A CONTACT CONTACT WITH THEM TO REALLY UNDERSTAND IF IT'S NECESSARY. IF THERE'S AN EMERGENCY NEED WHICH IN WHICH CASE, I WOULD VERY MUCH WANT TO FUND THIS.

OR IF IT'S IT'S IT'S HELPFUL TO RECEIVE THE FUNDING, BUT THEY'RE DOING WELL WITH THEIR OWN FUNDRAISING EFFORTS.

ESPECIALLY WHEN SOMETHING OF SUCH NATIONAL ATTENTION HAS HAPPENED TO DISRUPT POVERTY SERVICES.

THERE'S A LOT OF VERY GENEROUS PEOPLE THAT STEP UP.

AND SO I'M NOT I'M NOT SURE THAT WE SHOULD JUST GIVE $1 MILLION AWAY WHEN WE'RE NOT 100% SURE THAT IT'S NECESSARY TO DO SO WHEN WE HAVE A LOT OF NEEDS OURSELVES. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCIL MENDELSOHN FOR YOUR QUESTIONS. QUESTIONS I SEE ARE ONE OF OUR DEPUTY DIRECTORS.

[04:50:05]

I'M GOING TO HAVE HER COME OUT AND SEE IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL DETAILS THAT SHE HAS FOR THE ITEM. THANK YOU.

JESSICA. YES, MA'AM. JESSICA. EXCUSE ME. JESSICA.

DIRECTOR. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT.

I WILL SAY THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH THE FOOD BANK DIRECTLY, AND WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS, AND THERE'S VERY MUCH A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR THIS. EVEN IF THE GOVERNMENT REOPENING WERE TO TAKE PLACE, THERE WOULD STILL BE A DAYS LONG DELAY, POTENTIALLY LONGER, IN GETTING THOSE SNAP BENEFITS ISSUED TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN NEED.

WE'VE HEARD THAT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT GOES OUT AND SNAP ON A MONTHLY BASIS IS IN THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, SO EVEN THIS DELAY, BEING ABOUT HALF OF A MONTH, IS STILL PUTTING A HUGE, HUGE STRAIN ON BOTH THE POCKETBOOKS OF OUR RECIPIENTS AND STRUGGLING TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD FOOD. MOST SNAP RECIPIENTS ACTUALLY DRAIN THEIR ENTIRE BALANCE IN THOSE FIRST FEW DAYS OF THE MONTH, BECAUSE THAT MONEY, THEY REALLY STRUGGLE TO MAKE IT LAST THE WHOLE MONTH.

AND SO HAVING THIS ADDED DELAY HAS MADE IT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT FOR THEM.

AND SO THE FOOD BANK HAS STEPPED UP AND THEY'VE DONE MANY, MANY ADDITIONAL EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES TO GET THEIR FOOD OUT, BUT THAT'S ALSO CREATING AN ISSUE FOR THEM AND WHAT THEY HAVE.

AND THEY'RE GOING TO STRUGGLE TO MAINTAIN THE CAPACITY JUST TO DO THEIR REGULAR SERVICES.

PLUS KEEP CONTINUE TO SERVE IMPACTED AND FURLOUGHED FEDERAL WORKERS, AS WELL AS SNAP RECIPIENTS WHO ARE NOT GETTING THEIR BENEFITS UNTIL THAT REOPENS.

SO I WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S VERY MUCH STILL A NEED FOR THIS.

EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT A POTENTIAL CHANGE IN THE STATUS WITH THE WITH THE SHUTDOWN.

OKAY. WELL, I BELIEVE THE FURLOUGHED WORKERS ARE ALL ABOUT TO GET PAID ALL THEIR BACK PAY, SO THEY SHOULDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE AN ISSUE. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK SOME SNAP BENEFITS WERE PAID.

NOT ALL OF THEM. BUT I JUST THINK THERE'S AN EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO WANT TO HELP THE FOOD PANTRY.

AND ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS SHOULD DO SO FINANCIALLY AS WELL AS MAKING FOOD DONATIONS.

BUT I'M CONCERNED THAT WE ARE REACTING WHEN THERE MIGHT NOT BE A NEED FOR US TO SPEND $1 MILLION WHEN, YOU KNOW, WE CAN ALL COME UP WITH 100 THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE FUNDING THROUGH CITY GOVERNMENT.

AND SO I WOULD JUST ASK IF THERE'S ANY ANYBODY ON COUNCIL WHO AGREES THAT WE PAUSE THIS, BRING IT BACK AT THE NEXT ONE, AND WE CAN ALWAYS FUND IT IF THAT'S IF THAT'S THE SITUATION.

BUT I THINK THINGS ARE CHANGING DAY TO DAY. AND AGAIN, I PERSONALLY AM A DONOR.

I THINK THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT AGENCY AND SERVICE THAT NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK PROVIDES.

AND, YOU KNOW, I HATE THAT I'M EVEN SAYING THIS IN SOME WAYS.

BUT WE HAVE TO SAY THAT BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT IS OUR JOB TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS AND FISCALLY PRUDENT WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS.

AND EVEN IF WE HADN'T BUDGETED THIS BECAUSE IT'S INTEREST, WE HAVE A LOT OF BACKLOGS, A LOT.

SO I JUST THINK HAVING THAT CONVERSATION IS IMPORTANT.

AND THAT'S MY COMMENTS ON THIS. THANK YOU. MR. ROTH. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 61.

THANK YOU. LISTEN, THE FOOD BANK IS ABSOLUTELY AN ESSENTIAL, CRITICAL SUPPLIER OF NEEDS TO THE COMMUNITY. AND AND THEY'RE A FIRST CLASS ORGANIZATION.

I NOTICED THAT IN THE RESOLUTION, IT REALLY WAS SPECIFICALLY TARGETED TO TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF SNAP BENEFITS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ALLOCATION OF THESE MILLION DOLLARS.

AND SO I WOULD I THINK THAT COUNCILMAN MENDELSOHN HAS COME UP WITH A GOOD IDEA AS TO MAYBE JUST POSTPONE THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THAT THAT MONEY WOULDN'T BE AVAILABLE. BUT IF IT LOOKS LIKE THE SNAP PROGRAM IS REINSTITUTED, THAT THE THAT FUNDS ARE BEING ALLOCATED THROUGH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROPERLY THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THESE FUNDS IN A DIFFERENT MANNER, RATHER THAN TYING THEM UP AND MAKING SURE THAT AND AND USING THEM NOT SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PARTICULAR NEED, WHICH I THINK IS SIGNIFICANT IF THE SNAP PROGRAM IS IS IN FACT NOT RENEWED OR IT'S DELAYED FURTHER, THEN I THINK THIS GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO TO STILL PROVIDE THE RESOURCES, EVEN IF IT'S A LITTLE BIT LATER THAN IMMEDIATELY.

BUT IT GIVES US A CHANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT THESE FUNDS ARE REALLY BEING ALLOCATED FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL NEEDS OF THE SNAP PROGRAM. MR. CHAIRMAN, GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. IF THIS WERE ANY OTHER TIME OF YEAR BESIDES THIS TIME OF YEAR, I MIGHT BE INCLINED TO TO AGREE.

[04:55:05]

BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT. AND YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE COME UP WITH THESE SOLUTIONS.

BUT I'VE ALSO BEEN EXPERIENCING AND SEEING AND TALKING TO FOLKS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY THIS.

AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT IT'S A VERY STRESSFUL TIME.

SO IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO TO PROVIDE EVEN JUST A LITTLE BIT OF SUPPORT, I MEAN, THE LINES EVEN NOW ARE ALREADY EXTENDED IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT PLACES.

THERE. SO THIS IS JUST ANOTHER ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO KIND OF WHAT MY FOLKS USED TO SAY, KEEP THE WOLVES OFF THEIR BACK.

RIGHT? BECAUSE THINGS ARE GETTING VERY TIGHT. AND IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN IN THESE SITUATIONS, IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, EVERY LITTLE BIT HELPS. AND PEOPLE ARE GRASPING, CLINGING.

AND YES, THERE ARE SOME VERY GENEROUS PEOPLE WHO ARE DONATING AND WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT.

THERE. BUT THE NEED IS STILL GREATER THAN WHAT MANY OF US CAN ACTUALLY DONATE.

SO I'M JUST ASKING FOR SUPPORT. SO WE CONTINUE HELPING SOME OF THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE IN NEED WHO MAY NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THESE BENEFITS JUST YET.

THANK YOU, MISS KENNEDY. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I ACTUALLY MY STAFF CALLED OUR FOOD PANTRIES IN DISTRICT SIX JUST LAST WEEK TO SEE WHAT THEIR NEED WERE TO SEE WHERE WE COULD DIRECT SOME OF OUR CONSTITUENTS.

BROTHER BILL'S HELPING HAND, WHICH IS ONE OF THE LARGEST DISTRIBUTORS AND IS IN MANY OF OUR DISTRICTS, SAID THAT EVEN PRIOR TO THE FEDERAL WORKERS GOING ON FURLOUGH, THEY HAD SEEN A 30% INCREASE IN PEOPLE COMING TO RECEIVE ASSISTANCE.

AND SO THEY'RE ACTIVELY FUNDRAISING AND TRYING TO GET ADDITIONAL RESOURCES FOR CONSTITUENTS THAT ARE IN NEED.

SO THE NEED IS DEFINITELY GREAT. AND WE DO HAVE MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE STEPPING UP TO DONATE YOU KNOW, TO FOR OUR COMMUNITY. BUT WE DEFINITELY NEED TO DO OUR PART.

THE NEED IS DEFINITELY THERE. THANK YOU, MR. BAZALDUA.

YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'M DEFINITELY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROGRAM.

I'D LIKE TO JUST GET SOME CLARIFICATION, ESPECIALLY NOW.

AND I THINK WE'VE LEARNED HOW MUCH WE CAN COUNT ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RIGHT NOW, AND SNAP BENEFITS REPLENISHED AND AVAILABLE TO THOSE WHO QUALIFY RIGHT NOW.

RIGHT NOW. NO. OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO. NO, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY NO, WHICH IS WHY WE PUSHED TWO WEEKS AGO.

THE REQUEST CAME IN FOR THE CITY TO DO THIS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH DALLAS COUNTY, WHO ALSO GAVE $1 MILLION.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT, WE HAD TO BRING IT TO COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE THE THE APPROPRIATION.

SO WE'RE ABOUT TWO WEEKS BEHIND TO GET IT ON THE AGENDA.

SO IT HAS BEEN A REQUEST, AND WE VERIFIED WITH THE NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK THAT THIS WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE WAY FOR THE CITY TO SUPPORT THEIR ONGOING EFFORTS.

SO THAT'S WHY THE ITEM IS BEFORE YOU TODAY. THANK YOU.

AND YOU ANSWERED. MY NEXT QUESTION WAS, WHICH WAS I WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE ELSE ALSO KNEW THIS IS A MATCH FOR MATCH THE COUNTY HAS ALSO PUT IN.

NOT ONLY IS IT THE HOLIDAYS WHERE I THINK MANY OF US TAKE FOR GRANTED THE PRIVILEGE THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE FOOD ON OUR TABLE DURING THE HOLIDAYS.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, AS A FORMER DISD EDUCATOR DURING THE WEEKS OF OF HOLIDAY BREAK WE, WE HAD PROGRAMS THAT DISD FURNISHED MEALS.

AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE OUT OF SCHOOL, BECAUSE MANY OF MY STUDENTS WOULDN'T HAVE EATEN IF THEY WEREN'T GETTING THOSE MEALS AT SCHOOL.

I, I GUESS I'M MORE CONFUSED THAN ANYTHING ON WHY WE WOULD EVEN BE CONSIDERING NOT PASSING THIS OR DELAYING THIS.

DELAYING THIS WOULD PREVENT FOOD FROM BEING ON THE TABLE, WOULD PREVENT WORKING PARENTS FROM BEING ABLE TO FEED THEIR CHILDREN, WOULD PREVENT WHAT WE HOPE TO BE A SMALL PIECE OF THE COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR YOUTH AND TRYING TO GET THEM NOURISHED BEFORE SENDING THEM TO SCHOOL TO GET THEIR EDUCATION.

THIS THIS IS ABSOLUTELY A FUNCTION OF OUR GOVERNMENT, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE OTHER FORMS OF GOVERNMENT WHO AREN'T EVEN WILLING TO COME TO WORK TO DO THEIR JOB RIGHT NOW. SO THIS IS ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING THAT I SUPPORT, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY WE'RE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION, QUITE FRANKLY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU KNOW, LAST WEEK I ATTENDED OUR LOCAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY VIOLENCE MEETING, AND IT RAISED AN ISSUE THAT I HAD NOT REALLY THOUGHT OF.

I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE ARE AWARE OF THE ISSUES WITH SNAP BENEFITS BEING DENIED AND WORKERS BEING FURLOUGHED, ETC.

BUT ALL OF OUR NONPROFIT LEADERSHIP AND THOSE THAT ARE WORKING ON THE GROUND WITH THOSE WHO ARE FLEEING FAMILY VIOLENCE SAID THAT THIS HITS THOSE IN THAT KIND OF

[05:00:08]

SITUATION DOUBLY, TRIPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE LEAVING.

THEY'RE LEAVING THEIR SAFETY NET. THEY'RE JUST GETTING OUT FOR THE PROTECTION OF THEMSELVES AND FOR THEIR FAMILIES, FOR THEIR CHILDREN. AND SO THAT REALLY HIT HOME WITH ME.

I HADN'T THOUGHT ABOUT THAT ASPECT OF IT, ABOUT HOW, AS BAD AS THIS CAN SEEM, IT IS JUST EXPONENTIALLY WORSE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE JUST TRYING TO KEEP THEMSELVES AND THEIR CHILDREN SAFE. THEY DON'T HAVE TIME TO WAIT FOR THE BENEFITS OR GO TO A FOOD BANK WHERE THE CUPBOARD IS BARE.

SO THIS REALLY IS MEANINGFUL. I WAS GLAD TO SEE THAT THIS WAS BEING BROUGHT FORTH.

I THINK THE TIMING IS CRITICAL AND I SUPPORT IT.

AS BLAIR RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. IN MY SATELLITE OFFICE, WE HAVE ADDITIONAL SERVICES THAT COME EVERY DAY.

EVERY DAY WE SEE THEM. DURING THE DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME.

MY STAFF MEMBERS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO REACH OUT AND JUST GET ADDITIONAL FOOD FOR MY COMMUNITIES.

IT'S HARD OUT THERE. WE HISTORICALLY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET AN ABUNDANCE OF TURKEYS THAT WE WOULD GIVE AWAY.

THAT'S EVEN DIFFICULT RIGHT NOW. NOW I'M GOING TO GIVE A PLUG TO MY CHURCH.

MY MY CHURCH THIS LAST SUNDAY RAISED $400,000 AND GAVE 200 RESIDENTS WHO WERE FURLOUGHED AND WHO DID NOT. WHO HAD LOST THEIR BENEFITS, LOST THEIR JOBS.

THEY GAVE THEM $2,000. IF WE AND WE'RE SAYING, CAN WE YOU KNOW, THIS SHOULD BE THE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF NONPROFITS. WELL, I KNOW ONE ONE GREAT BIG NONPROFIT CONCORD CHURCH THAT'S DONE THEIR THEIR FAIR SHARE.

IF WE'RE GOING TO PARTNER AND AND THE COUNTY HAS ALREADY DONE THEIRS.

I THINK THAT THIS IS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY, BECAUSE EVEN WHEN SNAP STARTS, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE FUNDED TOMORROW. BY THE TIME THE MONEY COMES TO THE RESIDENT.

IT WILL BE EITHER AFTER THANKSGIVING OR BEFORE THE 1ST OF DECEMBER.

SO IF WE CAN HELP, PEOPLE ARE HUNGRY TODAY. I DO NOT WANT TO BE A CITY THAT LETS PEOPLE GO HUNGRY. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE CITY MANAGER FOR BRINGING THIS TO THE AGENDA.

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN ADAM BAZALDUA, FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

THIS IS ROUGH. IT'S ROUGH FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE JOBS THAT'S LIVING PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK.

MY COMMUNITY, WE'RE IN A FOOD DESERT IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

AND TO SEE PEOPLE STRUGGLING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE FOOD ON THE TABLE ON A NORMAL DAY, AND THEN TO SEE ALL THE STUFF THAT'S HAPPENING NOW.

THIS IS THIS IS WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE AN ON TIME ITEM THAT WE'RE VOTING ON.

AND I REMEMBER MAYOR JOHNSON PARTNERED WITH ME WHEN I WAS A TRUSTEE, AS WE WAS, AS YOU WERE SAYING, FEEDING OUR KIDS IN WEST DALLAS AND THE DISTRICT THAT I SERVED IN, SO MANY PEOPLE THAT THAT NEED IT, NOT JUST OUR SENIOR CITIZENS, BUT THOSE STRUGGLING MOMS, THOSE STRUGGLING DADS THAT'S OUT THERE TRYING TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

SO THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS.

WE CAN'T WAIT. BIG MAMA SAID WEIGHT MADE THE WAGON BREAK, SO WE CAN'T.

WE CAN'T WAIT. WHEN WE'RE IN A CRISIS. WE CAN'T WAIT WHEN PEOPLE NEED US.

AND THIS IS. THIS IS THE LEAST THAT WE CAN DO.

TO DO OUR LEVEL BEST. TO SERVE ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES AND LET THEM KNOW THAT WE DO CARE.

AND SO THIS IS IMPORTANT. AND I WANT TO THANK YOU CITY MANAGER, FOR BRINGING THIS UP.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS ITEM.

MR. ROTH IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. I WANTED TO ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE ALL THE COMMENTS I THINK ARE TERRIFIC.

AND THEY ARE RIGHT ON POINT. AND I WOULD, IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THIS IS A MATCHING GRANT, IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. IT'S MONEY THAT IS GOING TO THE RIGHT PLACE, AND IT REALLY DOES SERVE PEOPLE ALL OVER THE COMMUNITY.

[05:05:06]

AND I THINK THAT IN RETROSPECT, DELAYING THE, THE PRESENTATION OF THESE FUNDS IS A MISTAKE.

I THINK WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND AND ALLOCATE IT.

AND I WOULD VOTE FOR THIS. THANK YOU, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL DETAILS.

WITH THE MILLION DOLLARS, IF THE FOOD PANTRIES WOULD RECEIVE THE FOOD FREE OF COST.

TYPICALLY THEY PAY A PRICE PER POUND FOR VARIOUS ITEMS THAT THEY PREORDER FROM THE FOOD PANTRY, AND I'M WONDERING IF THIS GIFT WOULD THEN ACTUALLY REACH THE LOCAL FOOD PANTRIES, OR IF IT'S JUST UP TO THE FOOD BANK TO MANAGE THAT.

SO THE FUNDING WILL ENABLE A DISTRIBUTION FROM THE FOOD PANTRY OR FROM THE FOOD BANK DIRECTLY TO RESIDENTS AND CLIENTS, AS WELL AS TO LOCAL PANTRY PARTNERS THAT THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DISTRIBUTE TO RESIDENTS AND CLIENTS.

SO ARE THEY ADDING NEW DISTRIBUTION DATES? YES, THEY ARE WORKING ON EXPANDING AND ALSO WORKING WITH THE LOCAL PANTRIES PARTICULARLY THOSE IN COMMUNITIES WHERE THERE'S, YOU KNOW, HIGHER RATES OR HIGHER LEVELS OF NEED BASED ON INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE SNAP RECIPIENTS OR EVEN POTENTIALLY I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH DATA THERE IS OUT THERE, BUT THOSE WHO MIGHT BE IMPACTED BY THE FURLOUGHS AS WELL, BUT THEY'LL BE DOING A WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE REALLY FOCUSED IN PARTICULAR ON WORKING WITH THOSE PANTRY PARTNERS.

BUT THE FUNDING WILL ENTIRELY SUPPORT FOOD PURCHASING.

IT'S IT'S ALL FOR FOOD. SO I'M SORRY, I. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IF YOU WERE SAYING THAT THE LOCAL PANTRIES, WHEN THEY ORDER FROM THE FOOD BANK, THOSE COSTS WILL BE WAIVED IN THIS.

YEAH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING ITS DISTRIBUTION.

SO IT'S PROVIDING THE FOOD TO THEM? YES. OKAY.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 61 AS YOU HEARD IT READ INTO THE RECORD HEARING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.

NEXT ITEM, MADAM SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

WE WILL NOW MOVE SLIGHTLY AHEAD TO AGENDA ITEM 63.

[63. 25-3265A A resolution directing the City Manager to evaluate real estate and economic development opportunities related to the future of Dallas City Hall and surrounding properties - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information)]

AGENDA ITEM 63 IS A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EVALUATE REAL ESTATE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES RELATED TO THE FUTURE OF DALLAS CITY HALL AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. YOU DO HAVE 41 INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

I'M GOING TO CALL SPEAKERS IN TWO GROUPS WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, AND EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, WILL YOU COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT IF YOU'RE IN THE AUDIENCE? IF YOU COULD COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST THREE ROWS OF THIS INTERSECTION FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, I DO ASK THAT YOU GO AHEAD AND HAVE YOUR AUDIO AND VIDEO PREPARED AT THIS TIME.

I WOULD THE FIRST GROUP. IN THIS FIRST GROUP I WOULD LIKE TO CALL UP FIRST MISS HONORABLE VALETTA FORSYTH LEAL.

YOU CAN COME TO THE PODIUM. OKAY. SPEAKERS NICOLE LEBLANC, SARAH CRANE BOBBY ROSBERG HAS CANCELED. MELISSA KINGSTON, ALICE RIGGINS, STEVENSON, MARCEL QUIMBY, MICHAEL AMONETTE, DEVIN THOMPSON, MELINDA FAGAN EVAN EDER HAS CANCELED JOANNA HAMPTON.

MARTHA. MARTHA. HEIMBERG. RENE. SCHMIDT. QUINN.

MATTHEWS. JEREMY. BOSS. PETER BRODSKY HAS CANCELED.

MIKE NORTHROP. EVAN SHEETS AND MELANIE VANLANDINGHAM K.

MISS. MISS. LIL. YES. VALETTA FORSYTHE LIL 622.

BLAIR BOULEVARD. WHILE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF FORMER TITLES ASSOCIATED BY MY NAME, TODAY, I REFERENCE THAT I AM A FORMER MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF ADVISORS OF THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

IN THIS RESOLUTION. IN THIS EFFORT, WE WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW OUR COMMUNITY WILL BE SERVED BY THESE DECISIONS.

WE ARE TOLD THAT BY VACATING THIS BUILDING, WE WILL CRACK OPEN NEW DEVELOPMENT, PERHAPS PROVIDE A NEW HOME FOR OUR HOME TEAM.

SO THE REALITY IS, IF YOU BUILD A NEW ARENA ON THIS SITE, YOU WILL NEED TO TEAR DOWN NOT ONLY CITY HALL.

YOU WILL NEED TO TEAR DOWN THE AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER.

WHILE YOU STILL HAVE A VACANT LOT WHERE REUNION ARENA ONCE STOOD, 25% OF DOWNTOWN IS PARKING LOTS AND VACANT SPACES.

[05:10:06]

PER THE LETTER YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED THIS MORNING FROM THE NATIONAL TRUST THAT EXPRESSED THEIR CONCERN ABOUT THE RESOLUTION THAT IT DOES NOT ADEQUATELY CONSIDER THE PRESERVATION OF CITY HALL.

I HAVE THAT SAME CONCERN. HOW MUCH DOES IT REALLY COST TO FIX THIS BUILDING? PLEASE HIRE AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT, AN EXPERT, TO ASSESS THIS BUILDING.

THE NATIONAL TRUST IS WILLING TO HELP. THERE ARE OTHERS I'M CERTAIN THAT WOULD BE WILLING TO HELP WITH THE FINANCE OF THAT.

TO ENSURE THE VERACITY OF THAT STUDY. PLEASE CONSIDER APPOINTING POSSIBLY A TASK FORCE REGARDING SAVING CITY HALL. MY FEAR IN THIS DISCUSSION IS CERTAINLY THE LOSS OF AN ICONIC HISTORIC BUILDING, BUT AS THE LOSS OF CIVIC SPACE. THE SPACE THAT SERVES OUR COMMUNITY.

HOW DOES RIPPING OUT OUR CIVIC SPACE, BY ITS VERY ROOTS, AND SPRINKLING OUR CIVIL SERVANTS ACROSS THE LANDSCAPE, MAKE OUR GOVERNMENT EASIER TO ACCESS, MORE EFFICIENT, LESS SILO WISE. HOW WILL THAT BE MEASURED? INDEED. DON'T SEE.

I DON'T SEE HOW. DESTROYING THIS PLACE MAKES DALLAS A BETTER PLACE.

AND THE QUESTION THAT SHOULD BE ASKED. THAT'S YOUR TIME.

INDEED, FROM YOUR OWN PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, THERE ARE TWO REASONS THAT YOU CAN TEAR DOWN A HISTORIC BUILDING.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. THAT'S YOUR NUMBER ONE, MISS LIL.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NUMBER ONE IS IF IT IS IRRETRIEVABLE.

OKAY. NUMBER TWO IS IF SOMETHING CULTURALLY SIGNIFICANT.

THANK YOU. REPLACE IT. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOU.

THANK YOU. NICOLE LEBLANC. NICOLE LEBLANC. IT'S NOT ONLINE.

IT'S NOT PRESENT. SARA CRANE. HELLO, I'M SARA CRANE, 60, 350 KELLER SPRINGS, AND I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF PRESERVATION DALLAS AS THEIR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.

I'D LIKE TO START BY THANKING COUNCIL FOR RECOMMENDING STAFF ANALYZE AND EXPLORE THE TRUE COSTS.

WHEN CONSIDERING THE ISSUE OF WHETHER CITY HALL IS TO BE MAINTAINED OR ABANDONED.

PRESERVATION DALLAS WOULD LIKE COUNCIL TO ADD ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO BE ON SECTION TWO, ITEM D, TO INCLUDE A FULL PROFESSIONAL FACILITY ASSESSMENT.

NOT ONLY IS A PROFESSIONAL FACILITY ASSESSMENT A STANDARD PRACTICE WHEN CONSIDERING LARGE SCALE MAINTENANCE, BUT IT IS ALSO THE BEST WAY FOR DALLAS TO UNDERSTAND THE TRUE COST OF REPAIR BY KNOWING WHAT EXACTLY NEEDS REPAIRING A FACILITY ASSESSMENT OF THE ENTIRE BUILDING DONE BY PROFESSIONALS CAN ALSO HELP CALM PUBLIC CONCERNS OVER AN EVER INCREASING MAINTENANCE ESTIMATE, WHICH BEGAN AROUND 50 TO 100 MILLION AND NOW SITS SOMEWHERE AT ALMOST 5 OR 6 TIMES THAT.

PRESERVATION. DALLAS ALSO STRONGLY BELIEVES THAT DALLAS CITY HALL IS WORTHY OF SUCH AN ADDITIONAL DIRECTIVE, NOT ONLY BECAUSE IT'S ARCHITECTURALLY OR HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT, BUT ALSO BECAUSE THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN THE SYMBOL OF DALLAS DEMOCRACY FOR ALMOST 50 YEARS. I AM PAID TO DESIGN THIS STRUCTURE FOR THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS, WITH TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR RESIDENTS AT THE FOREFRONT OF THIS DESIGN.

GENERATIONS OF DALLASITES HAVE COME TO THE CITY HALL TO SPEAK, CELEBRATE, ADVOCATE AND MAKE THEIR VOICES HEARD.

TO BE FACE TO FACE WITH THEIR LEADERS. WITHOUT A FULL FACILITY ASSESSMENT, DALLAS NOT ONLY RISKS LOSING THIS VITAL SYMBOL OF DEMOCRACY, IDENTITY AND COMMUNITY, BUT THE FAITH OF THE VERY PEOPLE THAT THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT FOR.

AN INABILITY TO DETERMINE EXACT REPAIRS AND THEREFORE EXACT COSTS, SETS A DETRIMENTAL PRECEDENT FOR DALLAS'S OTHER PROPERTIES, EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT HISTORICALLY OR ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT.

ALTERNATIVELY, DALLAS HAS AN INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITY TO EMBRACE STEWARDSHIP AND BEST PRACTICES BY INCLUDING THIS LANGUAGE FOR THE EXPERT ASSESSMENT.

AND I DO HOPE THAT COUNCIL CHOOSES TO TAKE THAT OPPORTUNITY TODAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BOBBY ROSEBURG HAS CANCELED MELISSA KINGSTON.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. MY NAME IS MELISSA KINGSTON, 5901 PALO PINTO AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I SENT YOU ALL AN EMAIL THAT OUTLINES MY THOUGHTS ON THIS MATTER.

[05:15:01]

AS A PRESERVATIONIST AND A VOLUNTEER IN THE CITY FOR 25 PLUS YEARS, I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THIS BUILDING.

AND WHILE I REALIZE IT'S NOT EVERYBODY'S TASTES, IT IS AN ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE BY ONE OF THE WORLD'S LEADING ARCHITECTS.

AND I'M NOT GOING TO USE ALL THREE MINUTES. IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN WHAT I HAD TO SAY, I SENT YOU AN EMAIL.

YOU CAN READ IT. BUT I WILL SAY THIS. THIS IS THE PEOPLE'S BUILDING.

IT'S NOT YOUR BUILDING. IT'S NOT MY BUILDING.

IT BELONGS TO ALL OF US. AND IF YOU ARE CERTAIN YOU'RE MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION, HOPEFULLY AFTER YOU HAVE INFORMATION AND YOU WANT TO TEAR DOWN THIS BUILDING, I WOULD PROPOSE THAT YOU PUT IT TO THE PEOPLE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THAT FOR THE PARKLAND ANYWAY. THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT I DON'T SEE A BIG DISTINCTION BETWEEN US TEARING DOWN THIS HISTORIC STRUCTURE, OUR CITY HALL AND DONALD TRUMP TEARING DOWN THE WHITE HOUSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ALICE RIGGINS. STEVENSON.

I'M ALICE RIGGINS STEVENSON. I RESIDE AT 3310 FAIRMONT AND DISTRICT 14.

I'M SPEAKING TODAY TO OPPOSE THE SHOWS THE RESOLUTION TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES TO PERFORMING REMEDIAL MAINTENANCE ON THE CURRENT CITY HALL BUILDING.

I SUGGEST THAT THE TIME AND EFFORT TO PERFORM THAT EVALUATION IS EXTREMELY MISGUIDED.

TIME WOULD BE BETTER SPENT TO EVALUATE IN DETAIL THE MAINTENANCE NEEDED TO PRESERVE THE SYMBOL OF DALLAS BEST ARCHITECTURE.

TIME SHOULD BE SPENT DEVELOPING COMPREHENSIVE COST ESTIMATES TO PERFORM THE REQUIRED REPAIRS.

IN ADDITION, I SUGGEST THAT AN ANNUAL BUDGET BE ALLOCATED FOR BUILDING MAINTENANCE TO PREVENT THIS OCCURRENCE IN THE FUTURE.

FOR 33 YEARS AS A TOUR OPERATOR AND TOUR GUIDE, I BROUGHT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO DALLAS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD TO TOUR THIS CITY. AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU, DALLAS IS A HARD SELL, EVEN FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE.

THERE'S THAT'S NOTHING TO DO. THAT'S WHAT I GET.

AND THE PEOPLE THAT DO GO ON MY TOURS THAT LIVE HERE, THEY COME AWAY OD WITH ALL THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO OFFER IN THIS CITY.

SO I FIND IT APPALLING TO HEAR THAT ANYONE THINKS IT'S A GREAT IDEA TO REMOVE I.M.

PEI'S ICON FROM THIS SPOT. HE HAS BUILT FIVE BUILDINGS IN THIS CITY.

EVERYONE WANTS TO COME TO DALLAS, AND THE FIRST THING THEY WANT TO SEE IS WHERE KENNEDY WAS ASSASSINATED.

IT IS MY DUTY, MY JOB, AND MY BUSINESS TO SHOWCASE THE BEST OF WHAT DALLAS HAS TO OFFER IN ALL AREAS OF THE CITY.

OUR HERITAGE TOURS INCLUDE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS OF SOUTH DALLAS, DALLAS, HERITAGE VILLAGE.

WE ALSO SHOWCASE SMU, HIGHLAND PARK, MEADOWS MUSEUM, SANTIAGO, CALATRAVA BRIDGE, KLYDE WARREN PARK AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, A ONE OF A KIND 68 ACRE ARTS DISTRICT WHICH HAS ANOTHER I.M.

PEI BUILDING, THE DALLAS SYMPHONY. DALLAS SHOULD SPEND ITS TIME ON CREATING A CONFLUENCE OF STRUCTURES THAT WEAVES A WONDERFUL COMMUNITY.

AND THAT'S WHAT I DON'T GET A COMMUNITY SHOWCASE, FOR INSTANCE.

THERE'S PLENTY OF SPACE BEHIND THIS DALLAS CITY HALL, SO CONSTRUCT ANEW WITH THE NEW CONVENTION CENTER.

HOW ABOUT CONNECTING DALLAS AND THE MAYBE FARMERS MARKET UNDERGROUND, OVERGROUND? WHATEVER YOU DO, CONSTRUCT SOMETHING FOR THE CONVENTIONEERS THAT ARE GOING TO BE COMING TO DALLAS, ESPECIALLY THOSE FOR THE WORLD CUP. AND THERE ARE PLENTY OF IDEAS I THINK WE COULD SHARE.

AND FOR COMMUNITY BUSINESS, I'LL JUST END IT BY SAYING, I VISITED PARIS AND THE PYRAMIDS AND THE LOUVRE, AND THEY HAVE AN I.M. PEI STRUCTURE THAT'S NOW THE CONFLUENCE OF THE ENTRY AND THE EXIT FOR THE FOR THE BUILDING AND TEARING DOWN THIS WOULD CREATE ANOTHER ASSASSINATION IN DALLAS. THAT'S YOUR TIME.

OKAY. BONES ARE BURIED HERE. AND DON'T LET THIS BE A BONE THAT WE HAVE TO POINT OUT ON OUR TOURS.

THANK YOU. MARCEL. QUIMBY.

I'M MARCEL QUIMBY, AND I LIVE AT 7001 HAMMOND AVENUE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 14.

I'M AN ARCHITECT, BUT SPEAKING TODAY IS A LONG TERM RESIDENT OF DALLAS WHO HAS SERVED ON SEVERAL CITY COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES, INCLUDING ONE FOR 30 YEARS. TODAY I WANT TO TALK ABOUT DALLAS ICONS.

WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY DEFINES AN ICON AS A BUILDING, OR A THING THAT IS WIDELY ADMIRED FOR HAVING GREAT INFLUENCE OR SIGNIFICANCE IN A PARTICULAR SPHERE. WHEN WE TRAVEL, WE ENCOUNTER AND VISIT ICONS IN OTHER CITIES.

[05:20:01]

THOSE ARE THE REASONS WE TRAVEL. SYDNEY HAS THE SYDNEY OPERA HOUSE, PARIS HAS THE EIFFEL TOWER AND IS THE PRECEDING SPEAKER SPOKE, I AM PLEASED. NEW PYRAMID ENTRANCE TO THE LOUVRE, WHICH IS JUST A FABULOUS FACILITY.

MOSCOW HAS BASIL'S CATHEDRAL AND LOS ANGELES HAS THE HOLLYWOOD SIGN, WALT DISNEY CONCERT CENTER, HOLLYWOOD BOWL. THE QUESTION OF HOW CAN YOU TELL IF A BUILDING IS CONSIDERED AN ICON OR SYMBOL HAS BEEN ANSWERED BY TOM WRIGHT.

HE SAYS, IF YOU CAN DRAW IT IN FIVE SECONDS AND EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT IT IS, IT'S AN ICON.

CITY HALL CAN BE EASILY DRAWN IN FOUR LINES WITH A 34 DEGREE ANGLE AND ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.

IT IS DEFINITELY AN ICONIC BUILDING AND IN DALLAS, AND WE'RE LUCKY TO HAVE IT.

THE CONCEPT OF CITY HALL EVOLVED FROM THE FIRST MAYOR ERIC JOHNSON GOALS FOR DALLAS, A MULTI YEAR PRESERVATION, A MULTI YEAR CONVERSATION WITH THE PUBLIC THAT IDENTIFIED WHAT DALLAS NEEDED TO DO TO BECOME A WORLD CLASS CITY.

DALLAS MOST IMPORTANT INSTITUTION RESULTED FROM THAT AREA.

DALLAS DFW AIRPORT. DALLAS COMMUNITY COLLEGE UTD AND A NEW CITY HALL THAT EMBRACE TRANSPARENCY AND CITY GOVERNMENT WITH ITS INTERIOR, LIGHT FILLED LAYOUT AND MODERN DESIGN. THE THOUGHT THAT THIS BUILDING COULD BE ABANDONED BY THE CITY AND USED FOR AN UNKNOWN USE IS A RECKLESS APPROACH TO ITS FATE. BUT EVEN WORSE, THE THOUGHT OF THE CITY CHOOSING TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING IS UNFATHOMABLE TO CONSIDER. BOTH OPTIONS WOULD HAVE A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT NOT ONLY ON OUR DOWNTOWN, BUT ON THE CITY'S REPUTATION. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS TO BECOME KNOWN AS A CITY THAT TEARS DOWN ITS ICONS.

IF IT DOES THIS, WHAT ELSE WILL IT DO? ONE QUESTION I HAVE IF YOUR ANTIQUE CAR NEEDS REPAIR INSTEAD OF REPAIRING IT, DO YOU TAKE IT TO THE DEMO YARD AND HAVE IT CRUSHED? NO YOU DON'T. YOU FIX IT. IN SUMMARY, THIS ICONIC BUILDING IS IS IRREPLACEABLE, AND ITS LOSS WOULD DAMAGE THE CITY'S REPUTATION FOR DECADES AS WELL AS ITS URBAN FABRIC.

IN SUMMARY, I URGE YOU TO RETAIN AND REHABILITATE CITY HALL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MICHAEL AMONETTE.

MR. AMONETTE IS VIRTUAL. MICHAEL AMONETTE.

OKAY. SORRY. SORRY, SORRY. GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MICHAEL MONETTE. I LIVE AT 2010 WEST 10TH DALLAS, TEXAS.

I SERVED FOUR TERMS ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR DISTRICT ONE.

IT WAS AN HONOR AND A PRIVILEGE TO DO IT IN THAT BUILDING, IN THAT CHAMBER AND AT THAT HORSESHOE.

I'VE BEEN ALL OVER THAT BUILDING. WE COULD NEVER BE ABLE TO REPLACE THE QUALITY OF ITS CONSTRUCTION OR THE ART OF ITS DESIGN.

IT IS A WORK OF ART, AND WORLD CLASS CITIES DON'T DEMOLISH ART.

AS A NATIVE, IT'S INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT TO BE PROUD OF THIS CITY.

I WAS OUT OF TOWN WITH AN ARCHITECT FRIEND OF MINE WHEN THIS STARTED.

HE TOLD ME, MICHAEL, WE STUDY THAT BUILDING IN ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL.

IT'S IN OUR TEXTBOOKS. THEY CAN'T DO THAT. OH, YES THEY CAN.

AND ALL FOR A DISPOSABLE SPORTING ARENA AND POTENTIAL CASINO THAT'S NOT EVEN LEGAL YET.

APPARENTLY THE SHELF LIFE ON A SPORTING ARENA IS ABOUT 20 YEARS NOW.

SO IN 20 YEARS, WHEN A NEW ONE IS PASSÉ, WE'LL HAVE A HUGE ALBATROSS STANDING HERE.

NO, I AM NO WORK OF ART. NOTHING TO BE PROUD OF.

ONLY THE SHAME OF WHAT WE TORE DOWN. WE WILL BE TOLD BY FUTURE TEAM OWNERS THAT WHAT IS PUT IN ITS PLACE JUST ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH.

AND SO ON AND SO ON AND SO ON. LIKE REUNION ARENA, LIKE AMERICAN AIRLINES, LIKE THE BALLPARK IN ARLINGTON.

HISTORY IS OUR TEACHER. WHAT ANGERS ME MOST IS HOW WE CONTINUE TO IGNORE THE IRREPLACEABLE ASSETS FAIR PARK, KALITA, HUMPHREYS, AND NOW CITY HALL. WE ACT SURPRISED.

AS IF. DO YOU MEAN SOMEBODY WANTED US TO TAKE CARE OF THEM? THIS IS NOT HOW YOU RUN A CITY. AND THERE IS ZERO TRUST.

THE EVER INCREASING AMOUNTS STAFF CLAIMS THAT THE STRUCTURE NEEDS COMES FROM THE SAME PEOPLE WHO HAVE AMASSED QUITE AN EXPENSIVE COLLECTION OF UNUSABLE BUILDINGS.

THE MOST EMBARRASSING OF WHICH IS PERMIT, OFFICE AND STEM.

AS THAT WAS SO BAD IT COULDN'T GET A CEO. I DON'T BELIEVE THESE ESTIMATES.

WE NEED AN INDEPENDENT, UNBIASED FACILITY INSPECTION, PARTICULARLY FOR SUCH A SIGNIFICANT BUILDING.

WHY ARE WE NOT PRESENTING A PLAN TO SAVE THE BUILDING? INSTEAD, WE SEEM MORE EAGER TO HELP SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T EVEN LIVE HERE.

ENRICH YOURSELF AT OUR EXPENSE. THAT'S WRONG TODAY, AND IT WILL BE WRONG YEARS FROM NOW.

WHY DO DEVELOPER INTERESTS ALWAYS COME BEFORE THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY? TIME AFTER TIME AFTER TIME. WHY DO WE NOT MATTER? AND WHY CAN'T WE HAVE NICE THINGS? WHY MUST EVERYTHING WE DO MAKE MONEY FROM SOMEONE?

[05:25:04]

EVERYTHING ISN'T ABOUT MONEY. THIS IS ABOUT CIVIC PRIDE.

AT A TIME WHEN FAITH AND PRIDE IN OUR GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS IS AT AN ALL TIME LOW.

THE ACTION. THIS ACTION WILL ONLY EXACERBATE THAT.

PLEASE DON'T DO THIS. WE WILL REGRET IT FOR DECADES.

THIS IS NOT WHAT VOTERS WANT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. DEVIN THOMPSON. DEVIN THOMPSON IS NOT PRESENT.

MELINDA FAGAN. MELINDA FAGAN IS NOT PRESENT. EVAN EDER HAS CANCELED JOANNA HAMPTON. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS JOANNA HAMPTON, 5408 SWISS AVENUE. OTHERS WHO ARE HERE TODAY TO SPEAK, UNFORTUNATELY, HAVE HAD TO LEAVE DURING THE RECESS.

I WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE CATHERINE SEALE, FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PRESERVATION DALLAS AND PAST CHAIR OF THIS BODY'S LANDMARK COMMISSION, THE FUTURE OF CITY HALL, NOT SIMPLY AS A BUILDING, BUT AS A CIVIC INSTITUTION, IS A VITAL ISSUE FOR THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS.

WHILE THE COMMITTEE BRIEFINGS HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD SOME INFORMATION, KEY QUESTIONS REMAIN THAT DO NOT APPEAR TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU TODAY. MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE CITIZENS IN THIS CITY COUNCIL DESERVE A QUALITY FULL FACILITY ASSESSMENT THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE INVESTMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE IN THIS BUILDING IN THE LAST 20 YEARS, A COMPLETE REPLACEMENT COST ASSESSMENT, AND AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFICIENCY COSTS THAT MAY BE LOST WITH A CONSIDERATION OF RELOCATION. THESE ARE ALL NEEDED PRIOR TO ANY DECISION ON WHETHER TO RELOCATE OR TO INVEST IN CITY HALL.

AS YOU CONSIDER THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU, I WOULD ASK THAT A TASK FORCE BE ESTABLISHED WITH AN IMMEDIATE CHARGE TO CHARGED TO RECOMMEND THE SELECTION OF A TEAM OF QUALIFIED PROFESSIONALS FOR THAT FULL BUILDING ASSESSMENT AND THE ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS FOR THE SITE IN THE CITY.

THE TASK FORCE MEMBERS COULD LEVERAGE THE WISDOM OF A DIVERSE COLLECTION OF STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING DEVELOPERS, ARCHITECTS, THE PRESERVATION COMMUNITY, DOWNTOWN AND COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS.

THIS MUCH NEEDED STEP WOULD PROVIDE TRANSPARENCY AND ALLOW FOR STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AS THIS PROCESS MOVES FORWARD.

CITY HALL IS THE HEART OF OUR CITY, AND AS WE LOOK AHEAD TO THE NEXT 50 YEARS, IT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE IN ITS ROLE AS A BEACON FOR OUR CITY, ITS RESIDENTS, AND TO SERVE THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. MARTHA HEIMBERG.

GOOD AFTERNOON. AT LAST, I'M MARTHA HEIMBERG.

I LIVE AT 1523 ABRAMS IN JUNIUS HEIGHTS. AND I URGE YOU, CONSIDER ONLY DOING A VERY THOROUGH STUDY OF HOW TO REPAIR THIS BEAUTIFUL BUILDING THAT I'VE BEEN COMING TO FOR 40 YEARS TO TALK ABOUT EVERYTHING FROM PRESERVATION TO EDUCATION TO TRANSPORTATION FOR THE PUBLIC, FOR SCHOOLS, AND FOR THE HOMELESS. I HAVE BEEN HERE SO MANY TIMES.

I LOVE THIS BUILDING FOR ALL OF THE REASONS THAT EVERYONE HERE HAS URGED YOU.

DON'T GIVE IT UP FOR MONEY. IT CAN BE REPAIRED.

IT'S ALWAYS A GOOD THING TO DO THAT I'VE TAKEN CARE OF A VERY OLD HOUSE FOR A VERY LONG TIME, AND I'M TAKING GOOD CARE OF MY VERY OLD BODY.

AND I URGE YOU, DON'T TO ABANDON THIS BUILDING.

COME ON, GUYS, THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

RENE SCHMIDT. MY NAME IS RENE SCHMIDT. 715 PARKMONT IN DALLAS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HEARING OUR CONCERNS. PLEASE DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT DEMOLISHING CITY HALL.

THIS ICONIC BUILDING IS THE HEART OF DALLAS, A SYMBOL OF THIS GREAT CITY KNOWN THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

CAN YOU IMAGINE BERLIN WITHOUT THE BRANDENBURG GATES, PARIS WITHOUT THE EIFFEL TOWER, OR LONDON WITHOUT BIG BEND? IT IS UNTHINKABLE THAT DALLAS WOULD EVEN CONSIDER TEARING DOWN ITS ICONIC, AWARD WINNING I.M.

PEI ARCHITECTURAL MASTERPIECE. WHY HAS THE CITY NOT MAINTAINED IT ALL THESE YEARS? WHY IS IT SO CRITICAL NOW, SUDDENLY, WITHOUT ANY FANFARE, THAT ELEMENTS IN THE CITY WISH TO DEMOLISH IT RATHER THAN REPAIR IT, THE BUILDING WAS BUILT IN PART AS A UNIFYING SYMBOL AFTER THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK.

THE CITY LOOKED FORWARD WITH A VISION OF GREATNESS AND UNITY.

THE CONVERSATION SHOULD BE ABOUT HOW TO REPAIR IT AND MAINTAIN IT, AND NOT DESTROY THIS EMBLEMATIC OF DALLAS.

[05:30:09]

I LIVE IN JUNIUS HEIGHTS. YEARS AGO, WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF BECOMING A LANDMARK DISTRICT IN THE CITY.

AT THE HEART OF THE DISTRICT IS LIPSCOMB ELEMENTARY, WHICH DATES BACK TO 1920, WHEN WE WENT TO THE DALLAS ISD BOARD BACK IN 2005 TO GET THEIR SUPPORT TO INCLUDE THE SCHOOL IN JUNIUS HEIGHTS DISTRICT, ONE OF THE TRUSTEES ASKED WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE SCHOOL BECOMES OBSOLETE AND NEEDS TO BE TORN DOWN. IT'S THE SAME QUESTION REVERBERATING TODAY.

WE ASSURED HER THAT THE SCHOOL WOULD NOT BECOME OBSOLETE AND WOULD NOT NEED TO BE DEMOLISHED.

TODAY THAT SCHOOL HAS BEEN REFURBISHED AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO STAND LONG AFTER WE ARE GONE.

IT IS THE HEART AND SOUL OF OUR COMMUNITY. THE I AM PAY CITY HALL IS LIKEWISE A GREAT BUILDING THAT WILL NOT BECOME OBSOLETE AND SHOULD NOT BE DEMOLISHED. IT IS THE HEART OF DALLAS. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THE HEART TO BE TORN FROM THE CITY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. QUINN MATTHEWS. THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS QUINN MATTHEWS. I'M A JOURNALIST, FILMMAKER, AND RESIDENT OF DISTRICT NINE.

I WAS BORN IN THE CITY. I GREW UP HERE. I SAW PRESIDENT KENNEDY SHORTLY BEFORE HE WAS KILLED.

ALONG WITH EVERYONE IN THE CITY. I FELT THE PAIN OF WHAT DALLAS HAD SUDDENLY BECOME TO THE WORLD.

AND I HAVE DONE FILMS ON THIS, HISTORICAL FILMS ON DALLAS THAT HAVE BEEN SEEN HERE AND ABROAD.

THIS CITY HALL WAS BUILT NOT ONLY TO SHOW THE WORLD WHAT DALLAS WAS OR IS, BUT WHAT IT IS TO OUR CITIZENS.

THIS IS ABOUT THE SOUL OF OUR CITY. IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT A BUILDING, IT'S ABOUT THE SOUL OF OUR CITY.

MAKE SURE, PLEASE, THAT YOU ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS OR YOU WON'T GET THE RIGHT ANSWERS.

AND THE RIGHT QUESTION IS NOT NECESSARILY WHAT CAN WE DEVELOP HERE? WHAT CAN WE MAKE MONEY FROM HERE? I'VE HEARD THAT THIS CITY HALL IS SHABBY.

LOOK AT THIS PLACE. IT'S NOT FALLING DOWN. IT'S NOT GOING TO FALL DOWN ANYTIME.

LOOK AT THE OTHER MAJOR OFFICE BUILDINGS IN DOWNTOWN.

THEY WERE BUILT WITHIN EIGHT YEARS OF THIS BUILDING.

IT IS. IMPORTANT TO HAVE A PLACE TO COME. A PLACE THAT IS THE CENTER AND THE HEART OF THIS CITY.

THAT IS WHAT THIS HAS BEEN ON THE INSIDE AND THE OUTSIDE.

AND I HOPE YOU WILL TABLE THIS RESOLUTION AND LOOK TOWARD REPAIRING CITY HALL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JEREMY. BOSS. JEREMY BOSS IS NOT PRESENT. PETER BROSKY HAS CANCELED MIKE NORTHROP.

GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS MIKE NORTHROP. I LIVE AT 5703 GOLIAD AVENUE.

I'M A FORMER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBER, A FORMER LANDMARK COMMISSIONER AND A FORMER CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSIONER.

I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME VOLUNTEERING IN THIS BUILDING, BUT TODAY I STAND IN FRONT OF YOU AS A CURRENT CITIZEN AND TAXPAYER.

THIS IS THE WRONG CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE HAVING TODAY.

THIS RESOLUTION, THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, REFERRED TO IT THIS MORNING AS A A FARCE OR A RUSE.

I CALL IT AN ADMISSION OF GROSS MISMANAGEMENT OF CITY PROPERTY.

IT'S EXHIBIT A IN A LEGAL CLAIM FOR ABUSE OF CITY PROPERTY UNDER THE CITY CODE.

ANY EMPLOYEE FOUND TO HAVE ABUSED CITY PROPERTY, OR TO HAVE CAUSED A LOSS OF THAT PROPERTY MAY BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES CAUSED AND SUBJECT TO DISCHARGE. THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION IS NOW ENFORCEABLE BY ANY CITIZEN OF THE DALLAS OF DALLAS, PURSUANT TO OUR CHARTER THAT WAS AMENDED A YEAR AGO.

THE NUMBERS TO REPAIR THIS BUILDING THAT I'VE SEEN IN PRINT AND BANDIED ABOUT ARE STAGGERING.

I ASK THIS COUNCIL TO ENSURE THAT THE BOND FUNDS THAT HAVE BEEN VOTED ON BY THE VOTERS OF THIS CITY TO REPAIR THIS BUILDING BE APPLIED AND WITHOUT DELAY, THAT SHOULD BE THE CONVERSATION THAT SHOULD BE HAD, BECAUSE THAT'S AN EXISTING OBLIGATION OF THIS COUNCIL, AND THAT'S WHAT THE TAXPAYERS EXPECT OF ITS COUNCIL.

[05:35:03]

I WOULD ASK THAT TO THE EXTENT ANY STEPS ARE TAKEN TODAY, AND IN LOOKING AT THE STATUS OF THIS BUILDING, THAT THOSE FOCUS ON THE APPOINTMENT OF AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION TO DETERMINE WHAT REPAIRS NEED TO BE DONE AND AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION THAT ASSESSES HOW WE GOT HERE SO WE CAN AVOID IT IN THE FUTURE.

AND WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT? AGAIN, I WOULD ASK THAT THIS COUNCIL TAKE STEPS TODAY TO ENSURE THAT THIS BUILDING IS REPAIRED AND MAINTAINED FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, EVAN SHEETS.

EVAN SHEETS, 1401 ELM, SUITE 500. GOOD AFTERNOON.

EVENING. ACTUALLY. HONORABLE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, ON BEHALF OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS, INC., I'M HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT THE ITEM 63.

WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S BOTH RESPONSIBLE AND PERTINENT TO THOROUGHLY AND TRANSPARENTLY ASSESS THE CURRENT NEEDS OF CITY HALL AND MATERIALLY IMPORTANT TO PROVIDE FOR PROFESSIONAL ANALYSIS OF BOTH RENOVATION COSTS AS WELL AS VETTED PROJECTIONS ON POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES.

IT'S ALSO CRITICAL, IN ANY SCENARIO TO FULLY EXPLORE HOW THIS PROPERTY CAN ENHANCE ITS INTEGRATION INTO THE FABRIC OF DOWNTOWN, IN CONCERT WITH BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT.

THE THREE 60 PLAN BEGAN TO ENVISION A CONVENTION CENTER DISTRICT BETTER INTEGRATED INTO DOWNTOWN, ACTING AS A HUB OF DEVELOPMENT LINKING DOWNTOWN AND THE CEDARS UNDER YOUR LEADERSHIP.

THAT WORK IS MATERIALIZED INTO THE CONVENTION CENTER MASTER PLAN CURRENTLY UNDERWAY.

WE BELIEVE THAT EXPANDING THAT EXPLORATION TO INCLUDE ADJACENT PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROPERTY IS SENSIBLE AND APPROPRIATE.

A THOROUGH AND TRANSPARENT ANALYSIS WILL PROVIDE FACTUAL AND CURRENT INFORMATION THAT'S CRITICAL TO INFORM A PATH FORWARD, ONE THAT'S RESPONSIBLE AND COMPREHENSIVELY INVESTIGATES THIS ICONIC CITY PROPERTY AND HOW IT CAN MAXIMIZE ITS INTEGRATION INTO THE VISION OF DOWNTOWN'S FUTURE.

WE APPLAUD THIS COUNCIL FOR CALLING FOR STAFF TO PERFORM THIS ADDITIONAL DUE DILIGENCE THAT WILL ALLOW FOR GROUNDED ASSUMPTIONS AND PROVIDE POLICY MAKERS AND THE PUBLIC WITH FACTUAL INFORMATION TO GUIDE FUTURE DECISIONS.

AS THE STEWARDS OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS, DD REMAINS COMMITTED TO PARTICIPATION IN THIS DIALOG.

WE OFFER OUR SUPPORT AND ON BEHALF OF OUR CEO, WE REQUEST ENGAGEMENT IN THIS EFFORT TO ENSURE AN OUTCOME REFLECTIVE OF THE ESTABLISHED VISION FOR THE CORE OF OUR CITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

MELANIE VAN LANDINGHAM.

MELANIE VAN LANDINGHAM, 6311 LAKESHORE. AS WRITTEN, THIS RESOLUTION IS DEEPLY FLAWED AND UTTERLY IGNORES THE OPTION TO ASSESS AND RENOVATE THIS ICONIC CITY HALL. INSTEAD, ITS INTENT IS TO JUSTIFY SELLING AND REDEVELOPING THE SITE AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES SECRETLY, INCLUDING OUR CENTRAL LIBRARY AND GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE, AND LEADING TO THEIR NEEDLESS DEMOLITION.

THESE BUILDINGS BELONG TO THE CITY, TO THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS, NOT TO DEVELOPERS OR CASINO OR SPORTS INVESTORS LOOKING FOR A SWEET DEAL AND WHO ARE FORCING THIS PREMATURE VOTE.

THIS ALL HAS BEEN DRIVEN BY A SUSPICIOUSLY INFLATED AND OBVIOUSLY FABRICATED REPAIR COSTS RANGING FROM 58 MILLION TO A SHOCKING HALF $1 BILLION. NUMBERS CHANGE BY THE DAY. A TOTAL LACK OF RELIABLE INFORMATION.

WHERE IS THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATION, TRANSPARENCY AND MEANINGFUL PUBLIC INPUT? THIS IS A RUSH JOB. EXCEEDINGLY IRRESPONSIBLE.

IT IS AN ABUSE OF PUBLIC TRUST. I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS PROPOSED RESOLUTION AS WRITTEN.

INSTEAD, YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH GOOD DECISION MAKING BY COMMISSIONING AN OUTSIDE, REPUTABLE CONSULTANT TODAY TO DO A THOROUGH FACILITY ASSESSMENT. DEMAND TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC RELEASE OF ACCURATE EVALUATIONS AND COSTS.

LEAD PUBLIC MEETINGS AND TOWN HALLS ACROSS THE CITY BEFORE YOU VOTE ON GIVING UP ON CITY HALL.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY AND DUE DILIGENCE AND RESPONSIBLE STEWARDSHIP.

TABLE THIS VOTE TODAY TO CONSIDER ALL OPTIONS AND GET ACCURATE DATA.

BECAUSE RUSHING THIS PROCESS IS GROSSLY DECEPTIVE AND IRRESPONSIBLE.

INSTEAD, BE RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE AND TRUSTWORTHY.

THIS IS A CULTURAL ASSET OF ALL OF DALLAS. VOTE NO ON THIS RESOLUTION AND SAVE CITY HALL.

[05:40:02]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I WILL NOW CALL THE. THE NEXT GROUP OR THE FINAL GROUP OF SPEAKERS.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST THREE ROWS OF THE CENTER SECTION AND VIRTUAL SPEAKERS.

PLEASE HAVE YOUR AUDIO AND VIDEO PREPARED. CAROL.

BILL WALTON. MISS BILL WALTON, YOU MAY COME TO THE PODIUM.

ALEX. SCOTT. ZAIDA. BASURA. TERRY. RATHE DE ANDRE.

MONTGOMERY. JESUS. PENA. KEVIN. PFEIFFER. ANTON.

LUCKY. JOSEPH. EMERSON. BRANT. BROWN. SHELLEY.

POTTER. DAMIEN. LEVESQUE. TOMMY. BROWN. HARRISON.

BLAIR. RANDALL. BRYANT. MATT. HOUSTON. SHAUN.

TODD. DOLORES. SOROKA. BRUCE. RICHARDSON. MICHAEL JASPER HAS CANCELED AND MALA BAHN HAS CANCELED.

MISS BELLE WALTON, YOU MAY BEGIN. HELLO. MY NAME IS CAROL BELLE WALTON.

I LIVE AT 6705 VELASCO. THANK YOU FOR THE ABILITY FOR THE HEARING ME SPEAK.

I'VE BEEN COMING HERE SINCE 2010. AND I TELL YOU, I HAVE SEEN SOME THINGS.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE SEEN IS WHEN A DEAL IS DONE BEFORE IT'S EVER BROUGHT BEFORE THE PUBLIC.

AND THIS REEKS LIKE A DONE DEAL. YOU CAN TELL THAT IT'S A DONE DEAL BECAUSE IT'S NUMBER 63 ON THE AGENDA, AND YOU'VE HAD ALL THESE PEOPLE WAITING ALL DAY.

AND IF YOU'RE FOR NOT TEARING DOWN CITY HALL, PLEASE STAND UP.

THANK YOU. RAISE YOUR HAND OR STAND UP. THANK YOU.

THE CONTINUOUS AND RIDICULOUS ESCALATION AND EXAGGERATION OF ESTIMATES HAS CAUSED A CRISIS IN CONFIDENCE WITH THE PUBLIC. WE DON'T BELIEVE THE ESTIMATES. THEY'VE DOUBLED EVERY WEEK.

THEY'RE RIDICULOUS. THE VOTE TODAY WILL BE MANDATING THAT COST ESTIMATES WILL BE RETURNED IN A COMPRESSED AND ESCALATED TIME FRAME.

NOW, I MANAGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT NOTHING HAPPENS IN DECEMBER.

I CAN ALSO TELL YOU THAT JANUARY IS A MONTH OF COMPRESSION WHERE WE CATCH UP BECAUSE WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING IN DECEMBER.

AND YOU'RE ASKING FOR THESE NUMBERS TO BE RETURNED IN FEBRUARY? IT'S RIDICULOUS. IT'S A DONE DEAL, RIGHT? CREATE A TASK FORCE.

INVOLVE THE PUBLIC. MAKE THIS A PUBLIC PROCESS.

THIS IS A PUBLIC GATHERING SPACE. IT'S AN IRREPLACEABLE PARK.

WE HAVE MOURNED HERE. WE HAVE CELEBRATED HERE.

AND WE HAVE. YEAH. PROTESTED HERE. VOTERS ARE SUPPOSED TO APPROVE ANY SALE OF PARKLAND, BUT THIS PROCESS SEEMS A BIT DESIGNED TO CIRCUMVENT THAT PROCESS. THAT PARK OUT FRONT IS A PLAZA. THAT PLAZA IS A PARK.

IT'S NOT CITY HALL. IS THAT PART OF THE ACREAGE BEING CONSIDERED? BECAUSE I THINK THAT SHOULD REQUIRE A PUBLIC VOTE.

WE HAVE THE SCULPTURES, THE FLAGS, THE BUILDING.

THEY'RE ALL ENDURING. RAIN. AND IT'S NOT ONLY THE ENDURING LEGACY OF I.M.

PEI, IT'S THE MORE IMPORTANT, ENDURING LEGACY TO DALLAS.

AND THAT IS THE LEGACY OF ERIC JOHNSON. TWO S'S.

WHY WOULD WE WANT TO ERASE THAT LEGACY? OUR NATIONAL GOVERNMENT STABILITY IS TEETERING, AND THIS BUILDING RADIATES STRENGTH AND STABILITY. IF YOU TEAR THIS DOWN.

YOU HAVE ADDED TO THE STABLE PERCEPTION. THE PERCEPTION THAT WE HAVE THAT GOVERNMENT CAN JUST IS, IS UNSTABLE. HOW DO WE HOW WE HAVE TO KEEP ENDURING BUILDINGS? DO WE WANT TO ARREST JOHNSON'S LEGACY? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE? IT SURE SEEMS LIKE IT. THANK YOU. ALEX. SCOTT.

HEY, Y'ALL. GOOD EVENING. I'M ALEX SCOTT 60 FOR 72 TRAMMEL DRIVE, AND I'M YOUR NEIGHBOR IN DISTRICT NINE.

WHAT'S BEING HANDED OUT TO Y'ALL IS THE ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE THAT WAS ACTUALLY PRESENTED IN JUNE OF THIS PAST YEAR.

WITH THE MOST RECENT NUMBERS FROM THE FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE, WHEN THEY ARE FROM THE REAL ESTATE GROUP, WHEN THEY PROVIDED THE POLICY UPDATES TO THIS COUNCIL.

[05:45:04]

AND SO BASICALLY WHAT I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT IS HOW ONE THE ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE ESCALATING TO OVER 160% WITHIN FOUR MONTHS. NOW BRINGS A LOT OF DOUBT TO THE ACTUAL VALIDITY OF THESE NUMBERS.

SECOND WITH THE MEMORANDUM AFTER LISTENING TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE LAST WEEK VERSUS THE MEMORANDUM THAT WAS PUT IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL TODAY IT'S VASTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU ALL AGREED UPON.

Y'ALL ASKED TO HAVE OVERSIGHT WITH THE ECONOMIC COMMITTEE AS WELL AS THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.

THIS MEMORANDUM GIVES COMPLETE CONTROL TO THE CITY MANAGER TO GO AHEAD WITHOUT ANY OVERSIGHT.

THE NEXT THING IS, Y'ALL ASKED FOR A PROFESSIONAL ASSESSMENT OR AN ENGINEERING TEAM TO COME IN THAT'S NOT PUT IN THERE.

IT'S JUST BRINGING IN PEOPLE, PER THE LAW. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

SORRY. I'M REALLY TIRED. AND THEN ALSO THE CEOS OF THE MAJOR REAL ESTATE COMPANIES AND PROJECT COMPANIES AROUND THIS CITY HAVE MADE IT VERY CLEAR THEIR STANCE ON WHAT THIS BUILDING SHOULD BE.

AND SO I FEEL LIKE ANY CONSULTANTS THAT COME IN TO DO ANY ASSESSMENTS SHOULD BE COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT IN ANY BUSINESS DEALINGS THAT THEY HAVE WITH THEM.

SO THAT WAY WE UNDERSTAND WHO POTENTIALLY IS INFLUENCING THEIR NUMBERS.

AND THEN FINALLY WITH THIS WE'RE NOT IN AN EMERGENCY PROCUREMENT PROCESS.

AND SO WITH THIS MOVING FORWARD, ANY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT COME FORWARD, THEY SHOULD GO THROUGH A PROCUREMENT PROCESS WHICH TAKES AROUND 13 WEEKS IN 24, IF IT'S EVEN LONGER. I FULLY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS CAN BE DONE BY FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR.

AND I THINK THAT WE'RE JUST GOING TO COME BACK HERE IN FEBRUARY AND NOT HAVE ANYTHING REALLY TO DO AND JUST MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE AT ALL.

I'M SORRY. I'M REALLY TIRED. YOU GUYS. BUT AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU ALL THE ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE.

SO THAT WAY YOU UNDERSTOOD THAT THESE NUMBERS WERE EXTREMELY INFLATED WITHIN FOUR MONTHS.

AND NOT EVEN OVER A YEAR. AND I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THOSE NUMBERS CAME FROM AND HOW IT CAME SO HIGH, AND WHY THERE'S NO EXPLANATION TO IT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. HELLO, EVERYBODY. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR JOHNSON AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS SARAH, AND I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AA DALLAS AT 325 NORTH SAINT PAUL STREET.

I ALSO PREVIOUSLY SERVED IN SEVERAL CAPACITIES HERE AT THE CITY AS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR IN BUILDING SERVICES.

IN THE DEPARTMENTS THAT YOU AND I KNOW AS THE OFFICE OF CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITY MANAGEMENT AND REAL ESTATE.

THOSE ARE NEW. BUT MY ROLE WAS OVERSEEING BUILDING AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT AND CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS THROUGH 2017, INCLUDING DALLAS CITY HALL PROJECTS. BUT I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF ADA DALLAS, AND WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS LANDMARK ISSUE.

DALLAS CITY HALL HAS SERVED AS AN ICONIC CENTER OF CIVIC LIFE FOR HALF A CENTURY.

AS YOU DELIBERATE ITS FUTURE, IT IS CRITICAL THAT DECISIONS ARE GUIDED BY OBJECTIVE DATA AND TRANSPARENT PROFESSIONAL ANALYSIS.

YOU'VE HEARD THAT BEFORE. THIS EVENING, OUR MEMBERS INCLUDE MANY OF THE REGION'S LEADING ARCHITECTS EXPERIENCED IN RESTORING AND ADAPTING IMPORTANT BUILDINGS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS. WE STAND READY TO SUPPORT THE CITY IN ASSESSING AND REHABILITATING THIS VITAL CIVIC ASSET.

WHILE ALL FACILITIES REQUIRE ONGOING CARE, THE FOCUS SHOULD BE ON STEWARDSHIP, NOT REPLACEMENT.

AA DALLAS STRONGLY OPPOSES DEMOLITION OF DALLAS CITY HALL.

THIS BUILDING IS AN INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED MASTERPIECE BY I.M.

PEI. RENOWNED FOR ITS BOLD INVERTED PYRAMID FORM, ITS ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE, AND ITS ROLE IN RESHAPING DALLAS'S CIVIC IDENTITY AFTER NATIONAL TRAGEDY.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF DEMOLITION WOULD BE ENORMOUS, AND THE HIGH COST OF DEMOLISHING AND REBUILDING FAR OUTWEIGHS THE PROVEN VALUE OF REVITALIZING THIS STRUCTURALLY SOUND CIVIC ANCHOR.

ACROSS THE NATION, CITIES LIKE BOSTON HAVE CHOSEN STEWARDSHIP OVER ERASURE, ADAPTING THEIR MOST SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS TO MEET NEW STANDARDS AND CIVIC NEEDS. THE RESPONSIBLE AND FUTURE MINDED PATH IS TO STEWARD, RESTORE AND ADAPT THIS IRREPLACEABLE

[05:50:01]

CIVIC ASSET FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. THEREFORE, WE URGE COUNCIL TO EXPLORE EVERY PATH TOWARD PRESERVING AND REVITALIZING DALLAS CITY HALL.

WE SPECIFICALLY RECOMMEND AMENDING TODAY'S RESOLUTION TO REQUIRE ONE.

A CURRENT INDEPENDENT STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT BY QUALIFIED EXPERTS, AND TWO PROFESSIONAL ASSESSMENTS AND COST ESTIMATES FOR SIGNIFICANT REPAIRS PREPARED BY LICENSED ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS. THESE DUE DILIGENCE PROTECTS THE LEGACY OF DALLAS CITY HALL AND ENSURES RESPONSIBLE STEWARDSHIP OF TAXPAYER RESOURCES. WE STAND READY TO ASSIST YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU, TERRY RATH. HELLO, I'M TERRY RATH.

I LIVE AT 1518 ABRAMS ROAD. I'M A PART OF DISTRICT 14, IN JUNIUS HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT.

I'M A DALLAS NATIVE. I LIVE IN A HOME THAT'S 107 YEARS OLD.

AND IT'S ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORY OF HISTORIC PLACES.

I KNOW A WHOLE LOT ABOUT RESTORATION AND TAKING CARE OF AN OLD STRUCTURE.

ANY BUILDING IS ORGANIC. EVEN CONCRETE AND STEEL EXPAND AND CONTRACT AND BREATHE AND THEY TAKE UPKEEP.

I THINK THAT DALLAS HAS ALWAYS BEEN A GEOGRAPHICALLY CHALLENGED CITY, AND WE'RE ALSO ARCHITECTURALLY CHALLENGED.

YOU CAN COUNT ON BOTH HANDS, PROBABLY ANY SIGNIFICANT ARCHITECTURAL EXAMPLES IN OUR TOWN.

AND ANY TIME THAT I HAVE INTERNATIONAL VISITORS, I BRING THEM TO THIS PLAZA BECAUSE IT'S SO IMPRESSIVE.

THEY LOVE IT. CITY HALL IS OUR SPACE FOR GATHERING AS CITIZENS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE.

I, I DON'T THINK THAT WE WANT TO SEE CITY HALL IN A HIGH RISE OR CHOPPED UP INTO A FEW DIFFERENT HIGH RISES.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU HAD TO WORK WITH THE RECORDS BUILDING, GOING THROUGH REPAIRS AND TRY TO ACCESS OUR RECORDS, BUT THAT WAS A NIGHTMARE. NO ONE'S TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE DO AS AN ALTERNATIVE.

IF WE DO TEAR DOWN CITY HALL, AND I GUARANTEE YOU WE COULDN'T BUILD THIS BUILDING FOR 345 MILLION.

PROBABLY NOT EVEN THE HALF BILLION. DO WE MOVE OUR HENRY MOORE TO A NEW LOCKED UP MUSEUM AND PUT IT WHERE SOMEONE'S GOT TO PAY $20 TO SEE ART? I THINK IT'S A RARE THING TO HAVE THAT AVAILABLE ON OUR PLAZA FOR THE PUBLIC AT ALL TIMES.

WHEN I HEAR THE WORDS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY, I LAUGH.

IT'S A GREAT ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME DEVELOPER, AND THEY JUST GET ALL IN A LATHER OVER THINKING ABOUT 12 ACRES IN DOWNTOWN.

THE THOUGHT THAT WE WOULD SELL THIS TO SOMEONE FOR AN ARENA, WHICH, BY GOD, THEY HAVE A 20 YEAR SHELF LIFE.

I'VE LIVED HERE LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW THE COWBOYS ARE ON THEIR FOURTH STADIUM.

THESE THINGS ARE BUILT AND THEY ARE OUT OF DATE BY THE TIME ANY RANGE APARTMENT BUILDING IS DONE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THE APPLAUSE AT AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER IS DOING.

WE WERE SOLD THE SAME BILL OF GOODS, AND THAT THING HAS HAD A HARD TIME BEING FILLED OR KEEPING A RESTAURANT THE WHOLE TIME.

IT WILL COST MORE TO BUILD, TO REPAIR. IT IS NOT THE TIME TO TEAR DOWN OUR EIFFEL TOWER.

IT IS TIME TO REPLACE THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN IN CHARGE OF TAKING CARE OF IT, BECAUSE THEY HAVE FAILED MISERABLY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANDRE MONTGOMERY.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ANDRE MONTGOMERY, AND I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 13.

I AGREE WITH ALLOWING THE CITY TO EXPLORE OPTIONS.

DALLAS NEEDS A BOLD MOVE AND NOW IS THE TIME.

FOR DECADES, OUR CITY HALL HAS STOOD AS A PROUD SYMBOL OF INNOVATION, AND IT WILL ALWAYS HAVE A PLACE IN OUR CITY'S HISTORY.

BUT HISTORY SHOULD BE INSPIRED BY PROGRESS, NOT NOT HOLD IT HOSTAGE.

THE TRUTH IS UNDENIABLE. OUR 47 YEAR OLD CITY HALL HAS BECOME A FINANCIAL AND FUNCTIONAL BURDEN.

DEFERRED MAINTENANCE EXCEEDS 150 MILLION, AND FULL RESTORATION COULD SURPASS 345 MILLION.

FOR A BUILDING THAT FLOODS AND NO LONGER MEETS THE MODERN NOR CITY STANDARDS.

THAT'S NOT CIVIC PRIDE. THAT'S FISCAL NEGLIGENCE.

FORT WORTH MADE THIS MOVE TO MODERN, EFFICIENT SPACES.

THEY CUT COSTS, IMPROVE SERVICES AND REVITALIZE THEIR DOWNTOWN.

IT WORKED. DALLAS SHOULD LEAD, NOT LAG BEHIND.

WE COULD SELL THIS COMPLEX. LEASED SPACES AVAILABLE DOWNTOWN AND REINVEST THE SAVINGS INTO SOUTHERN DALLAS TRANSFORMATION OF FAIR PARK.

[05:55:04]

PUBLIC SAFETY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SO MUCH MORE.

DALLAS BECAME GREAT BECAUSE WE DARED TO CHANGE.

NOW IT'S TIME TO DO IT AGAIN. LET'S MOVE DALLAS INTO THE FUTURE.

THANK YOU GUYS. THANK YOU. JESUS, PENA. ALL RIGHT.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL ATTENDEES AND ALL THE TWO PEOPLE AT HOME PROBABLY WATCHING.

MY NAME IS JESUS. I'M THE OWNER OF PENA REAL ESTATE AND A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT ONE.

I'M HERE. NOT TODAY, TO TALK ABOUT DEED RESTRICTIONS NOR FLUORIDE IN THE WATER.

I'M NOT HERE TO POINT OUT THE CLEAR INCONSISTENCIES AND EXAGGERATIONS BEING PUSHED ABOUT THE RENOVATION COSTS OF CITY HALL.

ONE DAY IT'S 100 MILLION. THE NEXT IS 300 MILLION.

I'VE EVEN HEARD AS HIGH AS 600 MILLION. NOW, WE ALL KNOW AT THIS POINT THESE NUMBERS ARE A SCARE TACTIC TO FEED HEADLINES.

I'VE COME HERE WITH A WARNING FROM THE FUTURE.

A FUTURE WHERE DALLAS KEPT CHASING TRENDS INSTEAD OF SETTING THEM.

A FUTURE WHERE DALLAS CONTINUES TO FALL BEHIND THE GREAT CITIES IT LIKES TO COMPARE ITSELF TO.

A FUTURE WHERE UNNECESSARY CHANGE FOR BIG POCKET INTERESTS CONTINUES TO BE PRIORITIZED OVER GROWTH FOR THE PEOPLE THAT CALL THIS CITY HOME.

THIS FUTURE COMES WITH RENT INCREASES, UNFORESEEN BUILD OUT COSTS, AND A DEPENDENCY ON A PRIVATE LANDLORD WHO HOLDS ALL THE POWER.

THE SAME CITY THAT STRUGGLES TO BALANCE MAINTENANCE COSTS TODAY WILL BE SITTING ACROSS THE TABLE FROM A LANDLORD HOLDING ALL THE CARDS TOMORROW.

AND BY THEN WILL BE TOO INVESTED, TOO DEPENDENT AND TOO BROKE TO WALK AWAY.

THIS FUTURE DOES NOT SPARK GROWTH. IT IGNORES THE ACRES OF VACANT LAND THIS CITY ALREADY OWNS PARTS OF SOUTH DALLAS, WEST DALLAS, PLACES THAT ACTUALLY NEED DEVELOPMENT AND THE PEOPLE THAT WILL BENEFIT FROM IT THE MOST.

SELLING CITY HALL DOESN'T GROW OUR TAX BASE, IT JUST RESHUFFLES IT INSIDE THE SAME BUBBLE THAT'S ALREADY A GETTING INVESTMENT FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER PLAN. REAL GROWTH MEANS CREATING NEW OPPORTUNITY.

ALL OF THESE MISTAKES ON THE BACK OF OUR TAXPAYERS, WHO ARE PROBABLY TOO BUSY RIGHT NOW WORKING TO PAY THOSE TAXES TO EVEN KNOW THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. THE TRUTH IS, NO MATTER WHAT THE ACTUAL REPAIR ESTIMATES COME BACK AS IF THEY EVEN MAKE IT BACK BY FEBRUARY, OR EVEN RELIABLE AS IT'S NOT CRAZY TO ASSUME BIAS WHERE IT'S ALREADY HAS BEEN SHOWN.

THERE'S NO SCENARIO WHERE REPAIRING CITY HALL IS LESS ECONOMICALLY BENEFICIAL THAN PAYING RENT FOREVER, OR BUILDING AN ENTIRELY NEW CITY HALL FROM SCRATCH.

NO SCENARIO WHERE THAT'S EASIER AND CHEAPER TO FUND.

THE ESTIMATES LAID OUT TO THE COUNCIL WERE BASED ON A TEN YEAR TIME FRAME, AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT Y'ALL, BUT I HOPE DALLAS SURVIVES LONGER THAN TEN YEARS.

THE SHORT SIGHTEDNESS AND PASSING DOWN THE PROBLEMS TO THE NEXT GENERATION WE SEE HERE, WE SEE HERE IN OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, ECHOES THE SAME AS WE SEE IN OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND I HOPE WE CAN ALL HOLD OURSELVES TO A HIGHER STANDARD THAN THAT.

I'M NOT HERE TO STOP PROGRESS. I'M HERE TO REDEFINE IT.

BECAUSE PROGRESS ISN'T MEASURED BY HOW FAST WE SELL OUR PAST.

IT'S MEASURED BY HOW BOLDLY WE INVEST INTO OUR FUTURE.

SO I CHALLENGE YOU ALL. MANY OF Y'ALL, IN Y'ALL'S FINAL TERM ARE READY TO MOVE ON TO BIGGER AND BETTER THINGS.

DON'T ALLOW YOUR PARTING DECISION TO BE A STAIN ON OUR GREAT LEGACY AND YOURS.

PROVE ME AND THE FUTURE I LAID OUT HERE WRONG AND SAVE OUR CITY HALL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. KEVIN PFEIFER.

KEVIN PFEIFER IS NOT PRESENT. AND TOM. LUCKY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. COUNCIL FOR ALL Y'ALL DO. MY NAME IS ANTON LUCKY.

I'M A RESIDENT BUSINESS LEADER, NONPROFIT LEADER.

I'VE BEEN HERE 27 YEARS WORKING TO UPLIFT AND EMPOWER UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES IN DALLAS BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

LET ME SAY THIS UP FRONT. I SUPPORT GIVING OUR CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS.

I'M GONNA SAY THAT UP FRONT. I TRAVEL THE WORLD, AND ONE THING I ADMIRE CITIES WHO ARE MOVING INTO THE FUTURE, RIGHT? I LOVE THAT GOING TO CITIES WHERE THEY HAVE BUILDINGS AND STUFF.

THAT'S WITH THE FUTURE. THE NEWS STORY OF THIS CAUGHT MY ATTENTION BECAUSE OF THE IRONY IN IT.

RIGHT? AND IT JUST GREW ON ME. GREW ON ME. SO MUCH SO I SPENT EIGHT HOURS HERE TODAY.

MY WHOLE DAY HERE WAITING TO HAVE A FEW WORDS.

AND I GOT A LOT OF STUFF TO DO. BUT LET ME SAY THIS RIGHT.

IT SEEMS LIKE NOSTALGIA AND CONNECTED TO MEMORIES ONLY FLARE UP WHEN IT'S NOT IN COMMUNITIES WHERE UNDERSERVED PEOPLE ARE.

LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. I GREW UP IN FRAZIER COURT HOUSING PROJECTS, AND THEY LOOKED LIKE ARMY BARRACKS.

AND I REMEMBER WHEN HO SIX CAME AND THEY WAS TALKING ABOUT TEARING THEM DOWN AND REBUILD THEM.

[06:00:02]

I WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT WAS REALLY PISSED OFF BECAUSE I HAD SO MANY MEMORIES.

I USED TO PLAY CURVEBALL. ET CETERA, ET CETERA.

BUT THEN I HAD TO THINK TO MYSELF, I SAID, MAN, IN ORDER TO GET SOMETHING NEW, YOU GOTTA DO AWAY WITH WHAT'S OLD.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE PROJECTS, RIGHT, THERE USED TO BE PROJECTS.

THEY TOWNHOMES. RIGHT NOW, IT'S WELL SUITED FOR FAMILIES.

FAMILIES LOVE IT. AND I JUST HAD TO SAY, MAN, THAT'S SOMETHING I LOVE CITY HALL.

BUT IF YOU ASK THE PEOPLE WHO WORK, I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WORK AT CITY HALL HATE COMING TO CITY HALL.

THEY HATE BEING THERE. YOU KNOW, THEY FOR ALL THE REASONS HE NAMED.

SO AT WHAT POINT DO DALLAS SAY, LET'S MOVE FORWARD, LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

LET'S GET NEW BUILDING. LET'S DO NEW STUFF. AT WHAT POINT DO WE SAY THAT? OR DO WE JUST HAD A WHOLE CONVERSATION ABOUT, SHOULD WE GIVE A NONPROFIT GIVING FOOD TO THE UNDERSERVED $1 MILLION? I'VE WORKED IN COMMUNITIES, AND I'VE SEEN OUR COMMUNITIES SUFFER FROM THE CUTS OF SERVICE FROM CITY HALL.

I'VE SEEN THAT IN THE NAME OF BEING FRUGAL, BEING FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE, ETCETERA, ETCETERA.

I JUST FEEL THAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD HAVE OUR CITY MANAGER SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS FOR CITY HALL, LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS. LET'S REMOVE THE NOSTALGIA.

THEY DID IT ON JEFFERSON WITH THE DEVELOPMENT BUILDING.

AIN'T NOBODY SAYING, LET'S GO BACK TO THE OLD BROWN BUILDING OVER THERE.

AIN'T NOBODY SAYING THAT. WE'RE SAYING WE'RE GOING IN GETTING OUR LICENSE AND ALL THAT STUFF IN 10S.

SO I SUPPORT GIVING THE CITY MANAGER THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS FOR NEW CITY HALL.

THANK YOU. JOSEPH EMERSON. JOSEPH EMERSON. IT'S NOT PRESENT.

BRANT BROWN.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS BRANT BROWN. 2500 MCKINNEY AVENUE.

DALLAS 75201. AND HOPEFULLY A RESIDENT AT ONE AT 1111 POWHATAN, ABOUT 1500 FEET FROM HERE.

SOON. GOTTA GET A BUILDING PERMIT. WE'LL SEE HOW FAST THAT MOVES US.

I COME BEFORE YOU TODAY WITH THE EXPECTATION YOU WILL CARRY OUT AN EVALUATION.

BUT BEFORE YOU DO THAT, I ASK YOU TO CONSIDER MODIFYING THIS RESOLUTION.

IT, IF NECESSARY, DELAY IT IN ORDER TO MODIFY IT SO YOU CAN GET IT RIGHT.

TRUST IS QUESTIONABLE AND YOU NEED TO BUILD PUBLIC TRUST.

MANY THINK THROUGH SPECULATION. THE DEAL IS ALREADY DONE.

WE'VE HEARD THAT FROM OTHERS. SPECULATIVE PROPOSALS FOR THIS AREA OF DOWNTOWN HAVE BEEN ONGOING FOR DECADES.

AT NO TIME, NO MATTER HOW FORWARD LOOKING AND BOLD DID ANYONE EVER CONSIDER TEARING DOWN THIS BUILDING.

IT IS A SYMBOL OF OUR CITY AND A STATEMENT OF VISION AND LEADERSHIP, AND DESERVES ALL OF OUR RESPECT.

EVENTUALLY, THE LAND SURROUNDING DALLAS CITY HALL WILL BE DEVELOPED, MAYBE WITH A NEW ARENA, MAYBE NOT. KEEP OUR OPTIONS OPEN. IT WILL CHANGE.

AND YES, THAT CHANGE IS BEING EXPEDITED BY THE INVESTMENT MADE BY THE CITIZENS OF THIS CITY WITH A VOTE OF $2 BILLION TO BUILD A NEW CONVENTION CENTER. IT WILL CATALYZE NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

AS THIS PROGRESSES, THERE IS MORE THAN ENOUGH VACANT LAND AVAILABLE FOR A WHOLE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD.

IMAGINE ONE. ENVISION ONE THAT IS ANCHORED BY DALLAS CITY HALL BY THE J.

ERIC JOHNSON MAIN PUBLIC LIBRARY BY THE DALLAS BLACK ACADEMY OF ARTS AND LETTERS, DALLAS BLACK ACADEMY OF ARTS AND LETTERS, AND THE DALLAS MEMORIAL AUDITORIUM AS CIVIC ANCHORS.

NOWHERE IN OUR CITY DO WE HAVE THE PRESENCE OF THAT TYPE OF DEEP DEBATE, CULTURAL REPRESENTATION AND EXPERIENCE.

IT WOULD RIVAL THE ARTS DISTRICT FOR ITS PRESENCE IN THE CIVIC MIND.

TURNING TO THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU. THERE ARE TWO FINAL TWO ITEMS I FIND IRRESPONSIBLE.

ONE IS THE TIMING. THREE MONTHS. TWO IS THAT THERE IS NO COST BURDEN TO THE CITY FOR SUCH AN IMPORTANT EXERCISE.

I ASK YOU TO DO THREE THINGS. ONE. CONSIDER MODIFYING THE RESOLUTION THAT WOULD ADD MORE TIME.

MAKE IT SIX MONTHS INSTEAD OF THREE, AND INVEST THE TIME NOW TO ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER TO DO THE THOROUGH AND DILIGENT INVESTIGATION.

[06:05:02]

AND AS MY FRIEND MR. GERSH SAID THIS MORNING, BRING YOU THE DATA, THE REAL DATA, AND NOT A SHAM REPORT.

THE SECOND THING, THAT'S YOUR TIME. COME BACK AND BRING A REPORT BEFORE YOU IN 30 DAYS.

AND THE THIRD THING IS ALL OPTIONS. CONSIDER THIS BUILDING NOT TO BE REMOVED.

THANK YOU. SHELLEY POTTER. HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL BOY.

BRETT BROWN'S HARD TO FOLLOW. MY NAME IS SHELLEY POTTER, 4437 COAL AVENUE.

WHILE LISTENING TO THE COMMITTEE MEETING, MANY OF YOU SEEMED TO CLEARLY HAVE YOUR MINDS MADE UP.

I WANT TO GO ON RECORD TONIGHT IN OPPOSITION TO TEARING DOWN CITY HALL.

JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

I MOVED TO DALLAS IN 2007. I GET IT, I LIVE IN KNOX.

EVERYONE LOVES THE SHINY OBJECTS AND THE BUZZ THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS.

I'VE DONE MY HOMEWORK TO LEARN MORE ABOUT VISIONARY MR. J. ERIK WITH A K JOHNSON, HIS MOTIVATION TO BUILD CITY HALL AND HIS AMBITIOUS GOALS FOR DALLAS.

IN FACT, WHEN I CAME IN, I STOOD AND ADMIRED HIS LARGER THAN LIFE STATUE.

I MEAN, WHICH ONE OF YOU WANT TO CARRY HIS STATUE TO THE DUMPSTER? HIS INITIATIVES WERE COMMUNITY SOURCED AND COMMUNITY LED.

IT'S ON EVERY PAGE OF THE DOCUMENT. COMMENT. NO DOUBT HE TAPPED HIS MILLIONAIRE BILLIONAIRE FRIENDS AS WELL AS A CROSS-SECTION OF CITIZENS AND EXPERTS.

WHY NOT THIS TIME? COUNCIL. SINCE, AFTER ALL, CITY HALL BELONGS TO WE THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS, AND WE DO CARE ABOUT IT DEEPLY. ON THE STAFF DRIVEN TO DO LIST FOR MISS TOLBERT.

I DON'T SEE ANY COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT NOTED. WE'VE ALREADY HEARD A SUGGESTION ABOUT A TASK FORCE.

AND, MISS TOLBERT, WOULDN'T YOU WANT A TASK FORCE TO HELP YOU WITH ENGAGEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY? SINCE HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED, SO MANY PEOPLE THINK THE NUMBERS IN THE BOOKS ARE ALREADY COOKED AND THE FIX IS IN ALL DAY LONG.

I'VE HEARD YOU QUESTIONING THIS NUMBER OR THAT NUMBER, BUT NOBODY WAS QUESTIONING THOSE MOVING ESTIMATES FROM THE OTHER NIGHT THAT, AS THE GENTLEMAN BEFORE ME SAID, HAVE GROWN EXPONENTIALLY.

AS A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, I SAY IF DALLAS CAN BUILD KLYDE WARREN AND HELP HER AND DECK PARTS OUT OF THIN AIR.

THEN WE CAN RESTORE THE ICONIC CITY HALL AS THAT REFLECTION OF SOCIETY, TRANSLATING DEMOCRATIC IDEALS OF TRANSPARENCY AND ACCESSIBILITY INTO MONUMENTAL FORM. AND WE CAN REIMAGINE THE PLAZA, THE PARK, SO THAT IT FULFILLS A GREAT DREAM OF MAYOR ERIK WITH A K JOHNSON AND MR. PEI, OF HAVING A GRAND OPEN SPACE ACTIVATED FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND ACCESSIBILITY.

ISN'T THAT THE ULTIMATE ROLE OF DEMOCRACY? WHY CAN'T A RESTORED CITY HALL AND REIMAGINED PLAZA BECOME PART OF THAT REAL URBAN PLAN, WITH A GRAND VISION TO CONNECT ALL OF DOWNTOWN? CITY HALL IS OUR PLACE, THE SOUL OF OUR CITY.

PRESERVING CITY HALL DESERVES FAIR CONSIDERATION BY CITIZENS OF DALLAS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DAMIEN LEVESQUE.

DAMIEN LEVESQUE, 6215 GEORGIAN COURT. WHEN A CHILD IS GIVEN A TOY, TAKES GOOD CARE OF IT, KEEPS IT CLEAN, CHANGES THE BATTERIES. THE TOY COULD LAST FOR MANY YEARS.

BUT IF THE CHILD IS IRRESPONSIBLE WITH HIS TOY, NEGLECTS IT, LEAVES IT EXPOSED TO THE ELEMENTS, OR PLACED TOO ROUGHLY WITH IT, IT CAN BREAK OR BE DAMAGED.

THAT CHILD MIGHT THEN COME TO HIS MOMMY AND DADDY AND BEG THEM FOR A NEW ONE.

IT WOULD BE BAD PARENTING FOR THEM TO GRANT THE REQUEST.

IT WOULD INSTILL IN THE CHILD A SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT THAT HE CAN HAVE WHATEVER HE WANTS, REGARDLESS OF HIS OWN BEHAVIOR.

IT IS THE JOB OF THE PARENT TO TEACH THE CHILD BOTH A SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND GOOD STEWARDSHIP.

YOU SEE, WHEN IT COMES TO THE ISSUE OF WHAT TO DO WITH OUR AGED CITY HALL, THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS ARE THE PARENTS WHO FOR DECADES HAVE BLESSED YOU, THE CITY STAFF, AND THE CITY COUNCIL WITH HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS WITH WHICH YOU WERE MEANT TO WISELY STEWARD TO MAINTAIN YOUR TOY CITY HALL IN THIS CASE.

TO CONTINUE THE ANALOGY. SADLY, YOUR POOR STEWARDSHIP OF CITY PROPERTY IS A PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR, BE IT OUR SWISS CHEESE STREETS, OUTDATED STOPLIGHTS, CRUMBLING CITY BUILDINGS, OR DISASTROUS REAL ESTATE DEALS, THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS DEMONSTRATED AN ASTOUNDING LEVEL OF INCOMPETENCE WHEN IT COMES TO SPENDING TAXPAYER MONEY AND TAKING CARE OF ITS OWN PROPERTY.

IT WOULD BE MISGUIDED FOR ME, OR ANYONE ELSE IN THE CITY, TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO FIND A NEW HOME FOR YOUR OFFICES,

[06:10:03]

RATHER THAN TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CURRENT ONE.

THE REASONS FOR THIS ARE LEGION, BUT I'LL LIST A COUPLE.

ONE THE BUILDING IS PAID FOR. THE COST OF BUILDING A NEW ONE WOULD FAR EXCEED THE COST TO REPAIR THIS ONE.

TWO THIS CITY IS BROKE $9 BILLION IN DEBT, $15 BILLION IN DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ON STREETS, CONSTRUCTION OF A $5 BILLION CONVENTION CENTER AND EXPONENTIALLY GROWING PENSION OBLIGATIONS.

THEREFORE, YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO MOVE INTO A NEW HOME EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO.

TODAY, YOU'RE VOTING TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO EXPLORE ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS FOR CITY HALL.

BY ALL MEANS, DO THE DILIGENCE AND GET SOME HARD NUMBERS FOR THE COST OF ALL OPTIONS.

BUT THAT SHOULD INCLUDE GETTING ESTIMATES FROM MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS ON THE COST TO FIX THIS BUILDING.

REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOUR RESEARCH COMES BACK WITH. IT'S DOUBTFUL THAT RELOCATING OR BUILDING A NEW CITY HALL MAKES ANY FINANCIAL SENSE, NOR SHOULD THE TAXPAYERS BE BURDENED WITH IT.

FINALLY, I FIND IT BOTH TROUBLING AND CURIOUS THAT SOME OF YOU HAVE ALREADY DECIDED THAT SCRAPPING CITY HALL IS THE BEST OPTION WITHOUT HAVING ALL THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE COST TO DO SO. COULD IT BE THAT YOU'RE HAVING BACKROOM CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR CITY MANAGER IN THE DALLAS MAVERICKS TO BROKER A DEAL FOR A NEW ARENA? IF THAT'S THE CASE? FIRSTLY, THIS SHOULD BE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION, NOT ONE DONE IN SECRET.

SECONDLY, IF THERE IS A DEAL ON THE TABLE, I HOPE YOU'LL HAVE SENSE ENOUGH TO MAKE IT WORTHWHILE.

IN OTHER WORDS, MAKE THE MAVS PAY FOR YOUR NEW BUILDING.

DON'T NEGOTIATE A DEAL TO SELL OFF THIS LAND, ONLY TO BE LEFT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR A NEW LOCATION, ALL IN THE NAME OF KEEPING THE MAVS IN DALLAS.

A PRO SPORTS TEAM MIGHT BE VALUABLE TO THE CITY, BUT GOOD STEWARDSHIP IS IS GOOD STEWARDSHIP, AND NOT GOING BROKE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, TOMMY BROWN.

OKAY, MR. BROWN IS NOT ON VIRTUAL OR IN OR IN PERSON.

HARRISON. BLAIR. COUNCIL. MR. MAYOR, MADAM CITY MANAGER, THANK YOU ALL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU.

I GUARANTEE YOU I DON'T NEED THREE MINUTES TO TELL YOU WHY.

I THINK GIVING THE CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO CHECK OUR OPTIONS IS A GREAT IDEA.

FIRST AND FOREMOST, MY FAMILY HAS BEEN A PART OF THIS CITY SINCE BEFORE DALLAS WAS DALLAS.

SO WE'VE SEEN THE SUNSET ON MANY CITY HALLS, AND SEEING THE SUNSET ON THIS ONE WON'T KILL US.

WE CAN SET OUR NOSTALGIA ASIDE AND THINK ABOUT ALL OF THE MONEY THAT MIGHT BE INVESTED INTO FIXING THIS BUILDING, AND THEN COMPARE IT TO INVESTING THAT MONEY IN NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND THERE ARE A LOT OF REAL ESTATE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SPOKEN TO YOU TODAY, BUT THEY'VE ALL FORGOTTEN THE VERY FIRST RULE OF REAL ESTATE.

DON'T FALL IN LOVE WITH YOUR PROPERTY. THINGS CHANGE, COMMUNITIES CHANGE.

AND IF ANYTHING, IS THE SOUL OF THE CITY OF DALLAS, IT'S THE PEOPLE THAT WE SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT PROTECTING AND SECURING, NOT A FACILITY THAT MAY BE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN REPAIRS.

THAT'S ALL I NEEDED WAS ONE MINUTE. MADAM CITY MANAGER, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RANDALL BRYANT. OH, I'M SORRY.

I WAS ALSO REPRESENTING THE DALLAS BLACK CHAMBER, WHICH IS RANDALL BRYANT, MATT HOUSTON, MR. TOMMY BROWN AND SEVERAL OTHER PASTORS. SO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MATT HOUSTON, IT'S NOT PRESENT.

SHAUN. TODD. OKAY. I'M TOLD MR. TODD WILL BE VIRTUAL, SO WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT SPEAKER. DOLORES SOROKA.

MY NAME IS DOLORES SOROKA. I LIVE AT 4822 SWISS AVENUE.

I AM SPEAKING WITH YOU TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE PEAKS EDITION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

OUR BOARD HAS FORMALLY RESOLVED TO OPPOSE OPTION THREE, AND INSTEAD, WE URGE THE COUNCIL TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION NOW BEFORE YOU.

DALLAS CITY HALL, DESIGNED BY I.M. PEI AND COMPLETED IN 1978, IS AN INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED MASTERPIECE OF MODERN CIVIC ARCHITECTURE. PRESERVATION. DALLAS, THE AIA DALLAS CHAPTER AND LEADING EXPERTS WORLDWIDE HAVE URGED ITS PROTECTION. YET, CITY STAFF HAVE PRESENTED UNVERIFIED COST ESTIMATES RANGING FROM 152 MILLION TO 345 MILLION. NUMBERS THAT DON'T SEEM CREDIBLE AND HAVE NOT BEEN MADE HAVE NOT BEEN MADE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC OR INDEPENDENT REVIEW. A RECENT ESTIMATE I SAW OF UP TO 600 MILLION OVER TEN YEARS SEEMED TO INCLUDE NORMAL,

[06:15:08]

ONGOING COSTS, SUCH AS SECURITY AND OPERATIONS.

THIS IS, AT MINIMUM, QUITE MISLEADING AND INTENDED TO INFLUENCE, I THINK, THE COUNCIL'S DECISION.

FURTHER, THE CITY HAS NOT YET USED THE $7 MILLION IN BOND FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR CITY HALL REPAIRS AND HAS NOT YET CONDUCTED THE COMPREHENSIVE BUILDING INSPECTION THAT'S SCHEDULED FOR 2026.

PROCEEDING TO OPTION THREE NOW WOULD BE PREMATURE, FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE, AND CONTRARY TO PUBLIC TRUST.

DALLAS CITY CODE FORBIDS DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS.

YET THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS PROCESS RISKS BECOMING ON A CIVIC SCALE.

THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS DESERVE FACTS, NOT SPECULATION.

STEWARDSHIP, NOT ABANDONMENT OF ITS MOST IMPORTANT CIVIC LANDMARK.

WE ASK COUNCIL TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION RELATED TO THE FUTURE OF DALLAS CITY HALL TO REQUIRE TRANSPARENCY, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND PROFESSIONAL VALIDATION OF ALL DATA BEFORE ANY DECISION IS MADE ABOUT SELLING OR DEMOLISHING CITY HALL.

SAVE DALLAS CITY HALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW GO BACK TO SEAN TODD.

MR. TODD IS VIRTUAL. GOOD EVENING, EACH OF YOU.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY. WE CAN HEAR YOU. HOWEVER, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. MAYOR JOHNSON. MAYOR JOHNSON, MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO, THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THIS TIME AND FOR ALL THAT ALL OF YOU ARE IN THE HORSESHOE ARE DOING RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS THINKING THROUGH A VERY CONSEQUENTIAL PROCESS REGARDING WHAT WE DO WITH OUR CITY HALL. I GREATLY, GREATLY RESPECT WHAT EACH OF YOU ARE DOING AND TRYING TO FIND OUT THE BEST PLAN AND WHAT TO DO WITH RESPECT TO OUR EXISTING CITY COUNCIL BUILDING, AND I GREATLY RESPECT THE PLAN THAT'S BEEN PUT IN PLACE OF YOU. Y'ALL, I'M SO SORRY I'M GETTING SUCH FEEDBACK ON THIS.

I'M GOING TO GO OFF, I APOLOGIZE. LET ME GO OFF OF TAKE THIS OFF REMOTE.

HANG ON ONE SECOND. NOT THE BEST SITUATION. HANG ON.

OKAY. CAN YOU HEAR ME? I APOLOGIZE, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.

THANK YOU. HOWEVER, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING MR. TODD. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S FINE. SO I WANT TO THANK EACH OF YOU FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING RIGHT NOW, MR. TODD. YES. I'M SORRY TO STOP YOU, BUT IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL, YOUR VIDEO MUST BE DISPLAYED.

OKAY, OKAY. MY VIDEO IS WORKING. I WANT TO THANK EACH OF YOU FOR WHAT YOU'RE CONTEMPLATING AT PRESENT.

AND THIS ENTIRE PROCESS THAT'S BEEN PUT BEFORE THE COUNCIL I GREATLY RESPECT WHAT'S BEEN LAID IN FRONT OF YOU.

AND I THINK PEOPLE ARE JUMPING TO REAL QUICK CONCLUSION THAT A DECISION HAS BEEN MADE.

AND WHAT I CLEARLY SEE IS THAT THERE'S A PROCESS IN FRONT OF YOU TO TRY TO DETERMINE WHAT THE NEXT STEPS SHOULD BE.

I'M PRESERVATIONIST. I'M A CONSERVATIONIST. OUR FIRM HAS OWNED TWO I.M.

PEI BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN. WE HAVE RESTORED OVER 24 HISTORICAL BUILDINGS IN THE EAST QUARTER.

WE'VE RESTORED THE LARGEST PRESERVATION PROJECT IN THE HISTORY OF TEXAS, THE FORMER FIRST NATIONAL BANK TOWER.

WITH A COST OF 500 MILLION. WE'VE INVESTED IN THE CORE OF DOWNTOWN OVER $2.5 BILLION OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS.

I GREATLY RESPECT I.M. PEI. I'VE OWNED TWO OF HIS BUILDINGS THAT CANDIDLY DIDN'T WORK.

I WILL YIELD THAT BEAUTY IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER.

BUT THE DECISION THAT THIS COUNCIL IS MAKING IS, I THINK, THE SAME DECISION THAT ERIC JOHNSON MADE IN THE EARLY 1970S, WHICH WHAT IS THE BEST THING TO DO FOR OUR CITY? I CAN TELL YOU, HAVING REPURPOSED MULTIPLE BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN, THAT IT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION THAT THE COST OF PUTTING HUMPTY DUMPTY BACK TOGETHER AGAIN WILL BE MASSIVE. THAT WILL BE FOR EACH OF YOU TO DECIDE TO LOOK AT THAT DATA AND DECIDE WHAT THE BEST THING IS TO DO FOR OUR CITY.

I WILL ALSO SHARE THIS WITH YOU BECAUSE I'M A DEVELOPER.

IF THIS BUILDING WERE EMPTY TODAY, OUR FIRM WOULD NOT BUY IT.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. I WILL ALSO SHARE THIS WITH YOU AS A DEVELOPER.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. IF THIS. THANK YOU. BRUCE RICHARDSON.

[06:20:17]

HELLO. BRUCE RICHARDSON, DISTRICT 14. I SERVED AS THE CHAIR OF YOUR ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FROM 2011 TO 2019.

I SERVED ON THE CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE OF YOUR LATEST BOND EFFORT.

AND IF I MIGHT DEDICATE A FEW SECONDS OF MY TESTIMONY TO MY FRIEND OF 32 YEARS WHO DIED THIS WEEK AND WHO USED TO SIT IN THOSE CHAIRS RIGHT THERE, BREAKING BALLS IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER EVERY WEEK FOR AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER. WILLIE COCHRAN I DEDICATE MY TESTIMONY TO HIM.

HE LOVED THIS BUILDING. I LOVED THIS BUILDING.

I BELIEVE THAT THE THREE OPTIONS THAT YOU WERE PRESENTED WERE ALL KIND OF FALSE CHOICES.

I BELIEVE SOMETHING THAT BRIDGES THE GAP BETWEEN OPTION TWO AND AND BITS OF OPTION THREE ARE ACTUALLY THE BETTER CHOICE.

AND SPECIFICALLY THAT YOU'VE ASKED THE STAFF TO GO FACT FINDING FOR EXPENSES AND COSTS.

AND IT'S THIS IS A VERY COMPLEX THING TO COST OUT BUT ALSO TO EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS EITHER WITH OPTION TWO, THE OTHER OPTIONS WOULD BE TO TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT GO OPTION THREE WOULD BE FIGURE OUT WHAT IT WILL COST TO GO SOMEPLACE ELSE. I THINK IT'S WORTH THE TIME AND WORTH THE EFFORT TO JUST GET THE COSTING RIGHT, I BELIEVE WE MIGHT NEED A TASK FORCE TO GIVE SOME INDEPENDENCE TO THE SELECTION OF AN ENGINEER.

I THINK THAT'S NOT A TERRIBLE IDEA. WE OBVIOUSLY NEED A STAMPED PLAN FROM AN ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE THE SUPPORTS FOR THE CANTILEVER THAT RUN THROUGH THE PARKING GARAGE UP THE BACK OF THE BUILDING AND AND CANTILEVER THE UPPER FLOORS.

WE NEED TO KNOW THAT THOSE ARE SECURE. THEY WERE AS OF THE BOND COMMITTEE.

THAT SHOULD BE CONFIRMED. BUT WE ALSO NEED A COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCESS FOR EACH ELEMENT, BECAUSE UNTIL WE HAVE A BIDDING PROCESS, IT'S COMPETITIVE.

PEOPLE WON'T BRING INNOVATION AND THEY WON'T LOOK FOR EFFICIENCIES.

I HAVE A FEW SECONDS LEFT. I BELIEVE GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY WILL BE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY THIS MOVE.

SHOULD WE MAKE IT? I THINK IT WILL BE DRAMATICALLY AFFECTED BY THE MOVE.

AND THE LAST THING I WOULD SAY TO YOU IS ENGAGE THE CITY'S CREATIVES.

WE'RE COMING FROM A PLACE OF LACK. WE SHOULD COME FROM A PLACE OF CREATIVITY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MICHAEL JASPER HAS COUNCIL AND MALA BAHN HAS CANCELED.

MR. MAYOR, THIS INCLUDES YOUR SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

CHAIRMAN WEST. THANK YOU. PURPOSE. YOU HAVE A MOTION, I DO.

MAYOR. OKAY, LET'S HEAR IT. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

SECTION TWO. THE SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION IS AMENDED TO INCLUDE IN TWO A EVALUATE OFFICE SPACE NEEDS FOR DEPARTMENTS CURRENTLY LOCATED WITHIN CITY HALL. OAK CLIFF MUNICIPAL CENTER AND OTHER MAJOR CITY STAFF FACILITIES TO DE RETAIN EXTERNAL EXPERTISE PURSUANT TO APPLICABLE LAWS.

TO REVIEW CITY HALL REPAIR NEEDS AND COSTS. TO PRESENT FINDINGS ON THE SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT NOT LATER THAN FEBRUARY 2026. SECTIONS THREE AND FOUR ARE COMBINED TO READ AS FOLLOWS.

THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO EVALUATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS FOR CITY HALL IN A WAY THAT IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER MASTER PLAN AND FAIR PARK IMPROVEMENTS THAT INCREASES TAX REVENUE TO THE CITY, AND THAT CREATES CATALYTIC GROWTH IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, INCLUDING. COMPLETE A MARKET STUDY OF THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THE SITE BASED ON THE MARKET STUDY FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF THE POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACT OF REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE VERSUS THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT, AND DETERMINE THE VALUE OF THE CITY HALL SITE.

[06:25:01]

THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO CONSIDER AND DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE FUNDING SOURCES TO SUPPORT THE EVALUATIONS, INCLUDING THE ARPA REDEVELOPMENT FUND. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. CHAIRMAN WEST WOULD YOU LIKE TO START THE DISCUSSION? YES, PLEASE. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. SO TODAY'S VOTE IS NOT ABOUT THE CITY MOVING FROM CITY HALL.

IT'S NOT ABOUT THE CITY STAYING AT CITY HALL.

IF IT WERE, MY COMMENTS WOULD BE VERY DIFFERENT THAN THEY ARE NOW.

THE POINT OF TODAY'S RESOLUTION IS TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON MAYOR JOHNSON'S DIRECTIVE TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.

I'M GOING TO READ THE POLICY PRIORITY THAT THE COMMITTEE IS TASKED WITH.

DETERMINE WHETHER DALLAS, CITY HALL AND OTHER MUNICIPAL FACILITIES EFFECTIVELY SUPPORT CITY OPERATIONS AND BEST SERVE THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS.

CONSIDER ALL POTENTIAL OPTIONS AND IDENTIFY IDENTIFY THE THE MOST FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE COURSE TO ADDRESS THE MOUNTING, DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CARRYING COSTS OF DALLAS CITY HALL.

THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND NON-COMMITTEE MEMBERS RECENTLY HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS THE PAST FEW WEEKS ABOUT THIS IMPORTANT TOPIC.

WHAT IS CLEAR? THE ONE THING THAT IS CLEAR IS THAT WE NEED TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE OPTIONS AND THE COSTS TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.

WE OWE IT TO OUR TAXPAYERS TO DO SO. I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES, SPECIFICALLY VICE CHAIR KATHY STEWART, FOR ADDING A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND REALLY DIGGING INTO SOME OF THE ANALYZES THAT HAVE THAT HAVE OCCURRED.

I WANT TO THANK COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON FOR TIGHTENING UP THIS THIS, THIS AMENDED MOTION AND REALLY MAKING SURE WE'RE ADDRESSING ALL CITY FACILITIES. DIGGING INTO OAKMONT MUNICIPAL CENTER AND UTILIZING OUR SPACE.

WELL, AND I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA FOR, OR YOU KNOW, DEMANDING THAT LANGUAGE IS INCLUDED IN THERE REGARDING THE SOUTHERN SECTOR AND INCLUDING FAIR PARK, AS THAT HAS BEEN ALWAYS TIED TO THE CONVENTION CENTER MASTER PLAN AND SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS LANGUAGE.

SO THOSE ARE THE MAJORITY OF MY COMMENTS. I JUST WANT TO I'VE GOTTEN YOUR EMAILS.

I'VE GOTTEN EMAILS FROM A LOT OF FOLKS NOT HERE AND PHONE CALLS.

AND I DO APPRECIATE EVERYONE COMING DOWN HERE.

THIS IS A VERY EMOTIONAL DECISION FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE.

I HAVE A LOT OF PRESERVATIONISTS IN DISTRICT ONE AS WELL.

AND PRESERVATION IS A BIG PIECE OF MY DISTRICT.

AND THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT CITY HALL.

I'VE STILL GOT QUESTIONS, AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET THOSE ANSWERED UNLESS WE HAVE THE EVALUATION THAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS PROMISED US.

AND I WANT TO ASK THE CITY MANAGER NOW, LIKE IF YOU'VE HEARD THE CONCERNS, YOU'VE HEARD SOME OF THE COMMENTS, IF YOU WANT TO JUST ADDRESS FOR US HOW THIS RESOLUTION AND THE AMENDED LANGUAGE IS GOING TO GUIDE YOU OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF SEVERAL MONTHS.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER WEST. AND TO THE CITY COUNCIL, I DEFINITELY BELIEVE THAT THE RESOLUTION AND THE AMENDED LANGUAGE THAT YOU'VE PROVIDED ACTUALLY IS A RESOLUTION ABOUT OPPORTUNITY. IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE A CLEAR EYED LOOK.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COUNCIL AS TO HOW WE ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING WITHIN THE EXISTING CITY HALL.

THIS IS NOT A DECISION TONIGHT ABOUT A MOVE AWAY, BUT I THINK YOU'RE ASKING US TO GATHER THE FACTS AND BRING YOU BACK SOUND DATA, ALL OF THE ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS THAT YOU CAN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.

WE ARE CLEAR THAT THIS IS ABOUT A RESEARCH PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

IT'S ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE NOT JUMPING TO ANY CONCLUSIONS, BUT WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING THE INFORMATION THAT WE KNOW THAT COUNCIL DESIRES. AS WE LOOKED AT THE RESOLUTION, I THINK IT DOES GIVE US THE CHARGE TO MOVE WITH URGENCY.

AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE OFTENTIMES WE GET BLAMED FOR NOT MOVING QUICKLY.

AND THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS CRITICAL AND IT IS A PRIORITY OF THIS BODY.

THROUGH THIS RESOLUTION, I DO BELIEVE THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO COME BACK WITH A COMPLETE ASSESSMENT OF OUR SPACE NEEDS, AS YOU'VE LAID OUT, REGARDING NOT ONLY CITY HALL, BUT OTHER CITY FACILITIES.

I THINK IT ALLOWS FOR US TO TAKE ALL OF THE CURRENT DATA THAT WE HAVE AROUND COST, AND RETAIN THIRD PARTY EXPERTISE TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THOSE NUMBERS HAVE BEEN FULLY TRUED UP, AND THAT WE CAN BRING BACK A TRUE SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON.

I THINK IT ALSO ENSURES THAT WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ENSURE THAT YOUR DECISIONS THAT YOU MAKE, THAT YOU WILL ACTUALLY HAVE THAT DATA TO BE ABLE TO DO SO.

AND I THINK IT'S ALSO CLEAR THAT YOU WANT US TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER MASTER PLAN, ENSURING THAT WE LOOK AT HOW THAT PROJECT IS GOING TO REVITALIZE DOWNTOWN AND WHAT MIGHT BE POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO LOOK AT THE CURRENT SITE.

SO I DO BELIEVE THAT IT GIVES CLEAR DIRECTION AND GUIDANCE.

IT GIVES ME IT GIVES ME THE CHARGE AND ALLOWS FOR ME TO DELIVER ON WHAT I KNOW COUNCIL WANTS.

[06:30:02]

AND IT'S MY JOB TO DELIVER THE HOW. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

DID YOU HAVE FURTHER YET? YOU STILL HAVE TWO MINUTES, 21 SECONDS IN YOUR OPENING? OKAY.

BEFORE I RECOGNIZE ANY FURTHER MEMBERS, I WANT TO SAY THIS REALLY QUICKLY. IT'S ABOUT THE THE THE PRESIDING OFFICER'S RESPONSIBILITY IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS. SO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, THE ONLY RULES THEY'RE SUBJECT TO WHEN THEY COME HERE ARE OUR RULES ABOUT DECORUM.

THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY RULES ABOUT GERMANENESS.

THEY CAN TALK ABOUT ANYTHING THEY WANT. THEY HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SAY ANYTHING THEY WANT. THE COUNCIL, THOUGH WE DO HAVE RULES ABOUT GERMANENESS, AND I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE I ENFORCE THEM TONIGHT SO THAT WE DON'T KEEP FOLKS HERE ALL NIGHT ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT BEFORE US. SO THE MOTION THAT I HEARD FROM CHAIRMAN WEST HAS TO DO WITH DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPLORE OPTIONS. THIS IS NOT A DEBATE FOR US AROUND THE HORSESHOE TODAY ABOUT ANY.

LAND USE OR SPECULATIVE IDEAS ABOUT WHAT COULD BE COMING OR WHAT THE.

THIS IS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT SHE SHOULD BE AUTHORIZED OR NOT.

TO EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR CITY HALL AS A PLACE TO CONDUCT OUR CITY BUSINESS.

THAT WAS THE DIRECTIVE TO THE COMMITTEE. THAT'S WHAT THE RESOLUTION I HEARD WAS.

NOW, IF THERE'S A SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION THAT DOES SOMETHING DIFFERENT, I'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE STAY GERMANE TO THAT RESOLUTION.

BUT I WILL HAVE TO RULE OUT OF ORDER DEBATE AND DISCUSSION THAT GOES FAR AFIELD INTO SPECULATIVE THINGS OR CONCLUSORY STATEMENTS ABOUT OUT ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE ISSUE THAT IS BEFORE US TODAY, WHICH IS WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER OR NOT.

TO EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR CITY HALL. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT IS SORT OF IN BOUNDS AND WHAT'S NOT IN.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF OUR RULES. AND THE RULES ON GERMANENESS ARE JUST THERE TO MAKE THE DEBATE EFFICIENT.

THAT'S IT. SO I'M HERE AS THE PRESIDING OFFICER.

MY JOB IS TO CALL BALLS AND STRIKES ON GERMANENESS, AND I'M ALSO A VOTING MEMBER OF THE BODY, SO I VOTE. BUT MY MAIN JOB DURING THE DEBATE IS TO JUST BE AN UMPIRE.

SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO UMPIRE THIS MEETING THE BEST I CAN.

AND WITH THAT, I'LL RECOGNIZE CHAIRMAN RIDLEY FOR FIVE MINUTES.

CAN I GET A POINT OF CLARIFICATION FROM YOU, PLEASE, MA'AM, PLEASE, CAN YOU EXPAND ON WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE GERMANE IN THIS TOPIC? I FEAR IF WE HAVE A STRONG. UNTIL I HEAR IT AND I CONFER WITH HER, I DON'T KNOW AHEAD OF TIME, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T REALLY I DON'T REALLY HAVE AN IDEA.

I'LL KNOW IF SHE LOOKS AT ME AND GOES. IT FEELS LIKE WE'RE GETTING PRETTY FAR OFF THE TOPIC OF WHAT THE OF WHAT THE WORDS OF THAT RESOLUTION WERE.

I DON'T WANT TO EVEN CAN CAN WE PROMPT YOU? I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN HAVE PERSONAL ANECDOTES TO OUR OWN DECISIONS ON WHY WE HAVE A STANCE, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, OF THE DIRECTION WE WANT TO SEND THE CITY MANAGER. I DON'T HAVE A I DON'T HAVE A WAY OF, I GUESS, UNILATERALLY PICKING THAT. OKAY. I DON'T I DON'T HAVE ANY DESIRE TO PUSH ANYTHING ONE DIRECTION OR ANOTHER.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SAY. YES, SIR, BUT I JUST KNOW THAT IF IT GETS INTO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT IN THE RESOLUTION BEFORE US, I HAVE TO RULE IT OUT OF ORDER. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

THANK YOU. AND I WILL BE, AS ALWAYS, RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE ON THAT AND DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S GOING.

SO. BUT I APPRECIATE THAT QUESTION. YOU YOU, MR. RIDLEY, DID YOU HAVE THE FLOOR? I DON'T SEE YES, I HAVE THE FLOOR.

OKAY. I DON'T SEE HIM ON MY CUE, BUT GO AHEAD.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WANT TO START BY THANKING THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS FOR TAKING THE TIME TO SHARE THEIR THOUGHTS ON CITY HALL.

I, LIKE MANY OF YOU, HAVE RECEIVED OVERWHELMING CONSTITUENT FEEDBACK ON THIS ISSUE.

ONE PROBLEM I HAVE, AND ONE THAT I SHARE WITH MANY RESIDENTS I'VE HEARD FROM, IS THAT THEY ARE CONFUSED.

WHY NOW? WHY ARE WE HOLDING THREE SEPARATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS IN JUST TWO WEEKS, AND THEN VOTING THE VERY NEXT WEEK? ON SUCH A MONUMENTAL DECISION, A DECISION THAT AFFECTS NOT ONLY WHERE WE GOVERN, BUT HOW REPRESENTATION CONNECTS WITH THE PEOPLE THAT WE SERVE.

WHEN WE MOVE THIS QUICKLY ON AN ISSUE THIS SIGNIFICANT AND WITHOUT ALL THE FACTS, IT ERODES PUBLIC TRUST.

WE ALL AGREE THAT CITY HALL NEEDS ATTENTION. THERE ARE DECADES OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND MUCH NEEDED MODERNIZATION TO ADDRESS, BUT THE CURRENT PROPOSAL LEANS HEAVILY TOWARD LEAVING CITY HALL, AND I BELIEVE THAT DIRECTION IS PREMATURE AND INADEQUATELY SUPPORTED BY THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED UP TO THIS POINT. BEFORE WE EVEN DISCUSS RELOCATING OR PURSUING OUTSIDE REAL ESTATE OPTIONS, WE MUST HAVE AN ACCURATE, PROFESSIONAL THIRD PARTY FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT FOR CITY HALL.

[06:35:02]

IT IS OUR FIDUCIARY DUTY TO THE TAXPAYERS AND BASIC DUE DILIGENCE.

WE ARE BEING ASKED TO COMPARE INCOMPLETE AND INCONSISTENT NUMBERS SOMEHOW.

WHAT STARTED AS A $54 MILLION REPAIR ESTIMATE IN JUNE OF 2023, WHICH WAS REITERATED BY THE SAME STAFF TWO YEARS LATER IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR, HAS BALLOONED INTO MORE THAN $500 MILLION, WITH LITTLE EXPLANATION OF HOW WE GOT THERE.

THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME AND IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO THE PUBLIC.

WE CAN'T TAKE THIS NUMBERS SERIOUSLY BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT SERIOUS NUMBERS.

CITY HALL IS NOT JUST A BUILDING, IT IS AN ARCHITECTURAL ICON.

THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE. WE MUST SLOW THIS PROCESS DOWN, RETAIN A CREDIBLE INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT, APPOINT AN OBJECTIVE TASK FORCE TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AND HAVE PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS ON HOW WE CAN FUND THE NECESSARY REPAIRS FOR THE BUILDING.

ONLY THEN CAN WE MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION ON WHAT IS A RESPONSIBLE FUTURE FOR CITY HALL.

EARLIER TODAY, WE VOTED TO CHANGE OUR ELECTION DATE FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER.

IN LARGE PART, I BELIEVE, DUE TO THE RESPONSE OF OUR CITIZENS WHO VOTED IN THE CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT THEY WANTED TO MOVE THE ELECTION DATE.

WE LISTENED TO OUR CONSTITUENTS. WE SHOULD LISTEN TO OUR CONSTITUENTS NOW WITH COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN A WEEK AGO MONDAY, I HOSTED A TOWN HALL IN THIS VERY BUILDING IN WHICH 150 PEOPLE APPEARED AND EVERY SPEAKER WAS IN FAVOR OF SAVING CITY HALL. THERE IS A PETITION CIRCULATING THAT HAS 3000 SIGNATURES IN SUPPORT OF SAVING CITY HALL.

WE HEARD 27 SPEAKERS HERE TONIGHT, 23 OF WHICH WERE ADAMANT THAT WE SHOULD SAVE CITY HALL.

I AM CONFIDENT THAT THE COST OF REPAIR OF THIS BUILDING CAN BE DONE REASONABLY, AND THUS THE DECISION IN THAT CASE SHOULD BE TO STAY AT CITY HALL. IT IS NOT NECESSARY, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, TO ASSESS REAL ESTATE OPTIONS AND TALK TO EVERY DOWNTOWN LANDLORD ABOUT MOVING INTO THEIR BUILDINGS. THERE IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE TIME TO DO THAT, AND THAT DOING THAT NOW IS WASTED EFFORT WHEN WHAT WE NEED TO DO, FIRST AND FOREMOST, IS TO ASSESS THE TRUE CONDITION OF CITY HALL AND THE COST TO REPAIR.

AS A RESULT, I MOVED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION AS PROVIDED IN THE HANDOUT.

I'VE CIRCULATED SUCH THAT SECTION ONE WOULD READ THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY DIRECTS THE CITY MANAGER TO OBTAIN A CURRENT FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF CITY HALL, AND TO REPORT THE FINDINGS TO THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 26TH.

SECTION TWO THAT THE SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION OF CITY HALL SHOULD INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING A FINALIZE THE EVALUATION OF OFFICE SPACE NEEDS FOR DEPARTMENTS CURRENTLY LOCATED WITHIN CITY HALL, THE OAK CLIFF MUNICIPAL CENTER, AND OTHER MAJOR CITY STAFF FACILITIES.

B RETAIN EXTERNAL EXPERTISE TO CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO APPLICABLE LAWS AND DETERMINE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE COSTS. C DEVELOP A PHASED PLAN AND FUNDING STRATEGY TO ADDRESS DEFERRED MAINTENANCE.

D REVIEW ALTERNATE SITING OPTIONS FOR NONTRADITIONAL OFFICE USES CURRENTLY HOUSED AT CITY HALL, SUCH AS DATA CENTER SPACE AND CALL CENTER. STAFF AND E PRESENT AN UPDATE ON EACH ITEM ABOVE TO THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 2026.

SECTION THREE. CREATE A TASK FORCE OF 5 TO 7 PROFESSIONALS OUTSIDE OF CITY GOVERNMENT WITH NO FINANCIAL STAKE TO REVIEW CITY HALL OFFICE SPACE NEEDS. THE RESULTS OF THE FCA AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND SECTION FOUR THAT THIS RESOLUTION SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY FROM AND AFTER ITS PASSAGE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY, AND IS ACCORDINGLY SO RESOLVED.

THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, MR. RIDLEY. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A RULE THAT ALL AMENDMENTS MUST BE RECITED FROM MEMORY AND NOT.

I'M JUST KIDDING. IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MY AMENDMENT AND THE RESOLUTION ADVANCED BY MR. WEST, IS THAT IT PUTS EMPHASIS ON THE NEED FOR A COMPREHENSIVE FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT, INCLUDING THE CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING, TO DETERMINE IF, INDEED, IT IS FEASIBLE, AT REASONABLE FINANCIAL COST, TO STAY IN THIS BUILDING.

[06:40:01]

THAT'S STEP ONE OF THE PROCESS. IF THAT PROCESS DETERMINES, WITH THE ADVICE OF THE ADVISORY TASK FORCE, THAT IT IS NO LONGER TENABLE TO STAY IN CITY HALL, THERE IS PLENTY OF TIME TO INVESTIGATE CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS FOR LEASED SPACE OR OPPORTUNITIES TO BUILD A NEW CITY HALL AT ANOTHER LOCATION.

WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT NOW. WE SHOULD ANSWER THE PRIMARY QUESTION FIRST, WHICH IS WHAT IS THE TRUE CONDITION OF THIS BUILDING? WE DON'T HAVE AN ACCURATE ASSESSMENT THAT'S UP TO DATE.

THE LAST ONE WAS DONE 8 OR 9 YEARS AGO. WE NEED TO UPDATE THAT FIRST AND FOREMOST BEFORE WE WASTE A LOT OF STAFF TIME AND CONSULTANTS TIME IN CANVASING THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR ALTERNATIVE OFFICE SPACE.

THERE IS PLENTY OF TIME TO DO THAT, PARTICULARLY IF WE HAVE A REPORT TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE BY FEBRUARY, ALTHOUGH I THINK THAT'S A VERY AGGRESSIVE SCHEDULE.

AND SO THE DIFFERENCE IS ALSO THAT I INCORPORATED A TASK FORCE IN MY MOTION, WHICH YOU HEARD MANY SPEAKERS TODAY ADVOCATE FOR BECAUSE THEY WANT SOME INVOLVEMENT IN THIS PROCESS SO THAT THIS IS NOT A BEHIND CLOSED DOORS DECISION THAT WILL ALSO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE CITIZEN EXPERTS IN VARIOUS DISCIPLINES WHO ARE FAMILIAR WITH HOW TO EVALUATE THE BUILDING'S CONDITION AND WHAT THE REPAIR NEEDS ARE SO THAT WE CAN GET AN OBJECTIVE VIEW.

AND WE DON'T FILTER THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT THROUGH CITY STAFF.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT OUR CITIZENS WANT AND EXPECT IS THAT KIND OF INDEPENDENCE AND TRANSPARENCY.

MY MOTION PROVIDES THAT THE PREVIOUS MOTION DOES NOT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS BLACKMON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MR. RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. AND I WANT TO THANK BOTH OF YOU FOR CHANGING SOME WORDS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE OUTSIDE EXPERTISE TO LOOK AT THE FACILITY. THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO ME.

I'M MARRIED TO AN ARCHITECT, SO I HEAR IT EVERY DAY.

I CAN'T ENJOY A BUILDING BECAUSE HE'S ANALYZING EVERY LITTLE BIT.

BUT WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS I'VE BEEN AROUND THIS BUILDING SINCE 2007.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, I REMEMBER COMING HERE IN 2001, PREGNANT WITH OUR SECOND CHILD.

THIS BUILDING DOES MEAN A LOT TO ME. I THINK MR. MAYOR, YOU CAN PROBABLY RELATE THAT GOING OUT ON THAT PORCH IS PRETTY DARN COOL.

ON DAYS THAT IT WAS HARD I REMEMBER GOING OUT THERE AND I WORKED FOR MAYOR LEPPERT, AND I HAD TO PINCH MYSELF BECAUSE A SMALL TOWN GIRL FROM WEST TEXAS WAS WORKING FOR THE NINTH CITY. THE MAYOR FOR THE NINTH LARGEST CITY.

THAT. THAT'S PRETTY COOL. THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT, YOU KNOW, WITH A VISION AFTER JFK.

AND I DID A LOT OF RESEARCH. MATTHEW QUINN, IT WAS SO GOOD TO HEAR FROM YOU BECAUSE YOU WERE PART OF THAT 50TH CELEBRATION THAT WE ARE NOT CELEBRATION, THE COMMEMORATION OF OF THE JFK ASSASSINATION AND WHAT WE DECIDED OR WHAT THE CITY DECIDED IS THAT WE NEEDED A BIG FUTURISTIC BUILDING. AND THAT'S WHAT MAYOR JOHNSON WANTED THEN, IS SOMETHING RENOWNED THAT SHOWED THE WORLD THAT WE ARE NOT A SMALL TOWN ANYMORE. WE ARE FUTURE. WE'RE LOOKING PAST OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE 60S.

AND SO THIS BUILDING DOES MEAN A LOT. SO THAT'S WHY I AM HAPPY TO HEAR THAT WE ARE GOING, WHETHER IT'S MR. RIDLEY'S OR MR. WEST, THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET REAL NUMBERS, BECAUSE IT'S LIKE EVERYBODY'S SAYING, I THINK THAT WE'VE LOST A ZERO IN TRANSLATION EVERY TIME WE HAVE A CONVERSATION.

IT WENT FROM 50 TO 100 AND 50 TO 550. AND ANYWAY, AND SO I'M EXCITED TO TO KNOW THAT THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE WANT AROUND THIS, THIS HORSESHOE IS WE WANT TO GET REAL DATA AND WE WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS REALLY HAPPENING.

AND I MEAN, I WAS COMMENTING EARLIER, IT TOOK US TWO MONTHS TO GET THE CLOCK FIXED IN OUR BREAK ROOM, BUT IT'S TAKEN US SIX WEEKS TO GET TO MOVE OUT OF A BUILDING.

IT MAKES NO SENSE. I UNDERSTAND DOWNTOWN IS CHANGING.

I UNDERSTAND AFTER COVID. THIS CITY HALL HAS CHANGED, BUT I ALSO REMEMBER IT IN 2007 WHEN IT WAS A WHEN I WAS RUNNING UP AND DOWN STAIRS AND IT WAS FULL AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS THE PLAZA LOOK LIKE? I MEAN, THERE IS A STUDY FROM 1983 THAT HAS TALKED ABOUT CREATING THE PLAZA WITH A PLACE THAT PEOPLE CAN COME TO.

SO I'M HOPING THAT WHEN YOU ARE GOING THROUGH THESE PROCESSES THAT WE LOOK AT IT, KEEPING THE BUILDING AND KEEPING IT AS AN ECONOMIC HUB, BUT TRANSLATING ALL OF THIS STUFF AROUND IT. SO THAT WAY IT BECOMES THE INTEGRAL PART OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD, AND NOT JUST A VACANT LOT THAT BECOMES SOMETHING ELSE.

AND SO MR. RIDLEY, THANK YOU FOR PUTTING IT FORTH.

[06:45:04]

I APPRECIATE MR. YOU KNOW,, MR. WEST, FOR YOU INCORPORATING INCORPORATING MY THOUGHTS.

BUT I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH AND WHY WE'RE DEALING WITH IT AND WHAT WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH WHEN WE GROW UP, BECAUSE THIS IS IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US. I THINK EVERYBODY CAN AGREE, WHETHER YOU'RE A DEVELOPER OR A PRIVATE CITIZEN OR A PRESERVATIONIST, THIS IS IMPORTANT TO US BECAUSE THIS IS OUR GOVERNMENT.

THIS IS WHERE IT HAPPENS. AND SO I JUST HOPE THAT WE ARE VERY CAUTIOUS AND THAT WE DON'T FEEL PRESSURED BECAUSE WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION NOW IN ORDER TO KEEP X FROM HAPPENING OR HELP Y TO HAPPEN.

AND AND SO I JUST THINK THAT THOUGHTFULNESS, TAKING IT VERY DELIBERATE AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE'RE DOING IS THE WAY TO GO.

SO I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM THIS, BUT THANK YOU.

AND THAT'S IT. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY TO ITEM 63.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SPEAK WITHOUT TAMMY COMING, COMING OVER ON ME.

BUT I'LL START BY SAYING THAT I. THIS IS ALSO BEEN VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME.

BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WE DO NEED TO HAVE REAL NUMBERS TO MAKE AN EDUCATED DECISION.

I ALSO KNOW THAT NOTHING AT CITY HALL MOVES FAST.

WHEN THINGS MOVE FASTER THAN THEY NORMALLY DO.

IT STARTS TO GIVE ME PAUSE AND I ASK WHY? JUST LIKE I WOULD EXPECT ANYBODY THAT I REPRESENT TO ASK WHY I STAND FOR WHATEVER WE STAND FOR ON ANY POLICY DECISION THAT WE MAKE.

THOSE DECISIONS SHOULD BE MADE TO SOLVE FOR SOMETHING.

THE MOTION THAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE FLOOR, I BELIEVE, HAS A CLEAR SOLVE FOR SOMETHING.

I BELIEVE IF WE HAVE ALLOWED FOR A CITY ASSET LIKE CITY HALL TO GET TO THE POINT OF NO REPAIR.

THEN I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT WITH DATA TO SUPPORT IT.

I SAY THAT AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF FAIR PARK, WHERE WE AS A CITY DID ALLOW IT TO GET TO A STATE OF DISREPAIR.

AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE US CONTINUE TO PERPETUATE THAT AS A NORM IN OUR CITY.

I WAS TALKING WITH MY WIFE ABOUT HOW THIS IS A PRETTY CONTENTIOUS ITEM.

AND MY DAUGHTER, WHO'S 13, WHO HAS BASICALLY GROWN UP AT CITY HALL AT THIS POINT AND LOVES THIS PLACE, CAME UP TO ME AND SAID, DAD, WHY WOULD Y'ALL GET RID OF CITY HALL? AND I SAID, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THE VERY NEXT QUESTION SHE ASKED ME WAS, WHAT'S EVEN WRONG WITH THE AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER? AND I THINK THAT THAT WAS A VERY TELLING QUESTION.

AND I'M ASKING I'M SAYING THAT I THINK IT WAS A TELLING QUESTION BECAUSE THROUGH THE EYES OF A 13 YEAR OLD WHO'S GATHERING THE LITTLE INFORMATION THAT SHE'S GATHERING, AND FROM ME AS THE ELECTED OFFICIAL WHO'S TRYING TO MAKE SENSE OF HOW THIS IS MOVING SO FAST, I HAVE TO ASK MYSELF THE SAME QUESTION, AND I HAVE TO ASK MYSELF, WHAT PROBLEM ARE WE SOLVING FOR? AM I IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIVES FOR THE RESIDENTS OF DISTRICT SEVEN? BY ASKING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPLORE AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY, WITH CITY HALL AS THE REAL ESTATE AT PLAY? OR AM I MOVING THE NEEDLE FROM THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS ON WHY PEOPLE IN OUR CITY ARE HAVING TO DECIDE ON A MONTHLY BASIS WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD GO TO THE GROCERY STORE, OR IF THEY SHOULD PAY RENT. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS SOLVING FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN ANSWERING THE CALL WHEN WE'VE WE'VE HEARD VERY CLEARLY IN THE MEDIA THAT PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR LAND IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS.

WHAT IS IT THAT WE ARE SOLVING FOR? I'M MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE IN VOTING FOR A MOTION THAT HAS A CLEAR SOLUTION THAT IS AIMED AT SOLVING FOR AND THAT IS TO HONOR THE PROMISES THAT WE'VE HAD TO THE TAXPAYERS OF DALLAS. IT IS TO INVEST IN A BUILDING THAT HOUSES THE MOST CRITICAL SERVICES FOR OUR RESIDENTS THAT WE REPRESENT. IT'S TO RIGHT THE WRONG THAT WE JUST AS THE MOST RECENT ITERATION OF THIS COUNCIL, FAILED TO DO IN THIS LAST BOND PACKAGE, WHICH WAS ADDRESSED, THE NEEDS RIGHT NOW MY

[06:50:04]

SHOULDERS ARE FREEZING AND MY TOES ARE SWEATING BECAUSE I HAVE A HEATER UNDER THIS DESK.

BECAUSE THE HVAC IN THIS BUILDING SUCKS. THAT'S NOT HOW WE SHOULD BE OPERATING IN THE NINTH LARGEST CITY IN THIS COUNTRY.

BUT WE CAN'T GET MAD THAT THAT'S THE STATE THAT WE'RE IN.

WHEN WE HAVE CONTINUED TO KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND NOT TAKING CARE OF IT UNTIL WE HAVE SEEN THE NUMBERS LAID OUT TO US, AND KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE FOR US TO EXHAUST THAT.

I'M NOT SOLD THAT. THE THE BEST OPTION FOR US TO DO RIGHT NOW IS TO SKIP AS COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY LAID HIS MOTION OUT, SKIP THE FIRST STEP AND MOVE TO THE SECOND AND THIRD.

FOR THAT REASON, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR NOW.

I DO WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER WEST FOR THE MOTION THAT YOU HAVE.

THAT'S THE UNDERLYING MOTION THAT WE MOST LIKELY WILL END UP BACK ON.

AND TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS INCLUSIVE OF LANGUAGE THAT CAN MAKE ALL OF US FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE FINDINGS THAT WE WILL HAVE, BUT FOR RIGHT NOW, I THINK WE NEED WE NEED TO BE FOCUSING ON TAKING CARE OF OUR OWN ASSETS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. ROTH, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY TO ITEM 63.

THANK YOU. I WANT TO COMMEND COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY FOR HIS HIS AMENDMENT.

I THINK THEY'RE ABSOLUTELY ON POINT. I THINK THEY'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

I WOULD I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT ALL OF OUR COLLEAGUES SHOULD SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT.

THIS IS A THIS IS THE RIGHT PROCESS. WE NEED TO GET THE FACTS FIRST.

THE PROBLEM WHICH WE ARE SOLVING IS WE HAVE A BUILDING THAT NEEDS FIXING.

AND BEFORE YOU CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU FIX, YOU GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE PROBLEMS ARE.

AND I THINK THAT COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY HAS ABSOLUTELY FOCUSED ON THE MAIN ISSUES HERE, WHICH IS LET'S GET THE FACTS, LET'S GET THE ESTIMATES AND THEN WE'LL START MAKING DECISIONS ON WHERE WE GO FROM THERE.

AND I MY ONLY CONCERN IS, IS THAT FEBRUARY OF 2020 6TH MAY BE A VERY AGGRESSIVE TIMELINE TO GET THE ACCURATE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET.

AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IF THE CITY MANAGER FEELS LIKE THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE TIME TIMELINE THAT SHE GIVE ME SOME DIRECTION ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S A ACHIEVABLE TIMELINE FOR THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET.

I DON'T WANT TO KICK THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD TOO FAR, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE TIME, CONSIDERING THE THE TIME OF THE YEAR AND AND THE SCHEDULES OF PEOPLE, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN ADEQUATELY OBTAIN THE INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THE NEXT PART OF THE DECISIONS IN THIS PROCESS.

THANK YOU, CHAIRWOMAN STEWART. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I CANNOT SUPPORT CHAIR RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT AS WE TAKE THE NEXT STEPS INTO LOOKING AT CITY HALL. WE MUST GROUND OUR DECISION IN THE REALITIES WE ARE FACING, AND THUS ASK OUR CITY MANAGER TO LOOK AT ALL OF THE ITEMS IN THE RESOLUTION. WE ARE MANAGING GROWING PRESSURE POINTS IN OUR BUDGET AND I WOULD LIST THOSE OUT, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT'S GOING TO BE GERMANE, SO I WON'T DO THAT.

WE ARE HEARING FROM OUR RESIDENTS AN INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR OUR CORE SERVICES.

EVERY DOLLAR OF OUR BUDGET MUST BE DIRECTED WHERE IT PRODUCES THE GREATEST BENEFIT FOR THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS.

SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE SOLVING FOR. MY TO MY NEIGHBOR HERE ON THE RIGHT IS TO LOOK AT THESE BUDGET PRESSURES, TO LOOK AT THE DEMANDS ON OUR BUDGET AND FIND WAYS THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO SUSTAIN THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY WE KNOW WE HAVE FOR THE FUTURE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, IN ORDER TO MAKE THE BEST, MOST GROUNDED DECISION, WE NEED MORE INFORMATION.

WE MUST EVALUATE THE REAL ESTATE OPPORTUNITIES, EVALUATE OUR NEEDED OFFICE SPACE, COMPARE COSTS TO LEASE, BUY OR BUILD. GET SOME OUTSIDE EXTERNAL EXPERTISE TO EVALUATE THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE.

WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS.

COMPLETE A MARKET STUDY, COMPLETE THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF A REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE, AND DETERMINE THE VALUE OF THIS SITE.

THIS DECISION NEEDS TO BE MADE IN THE CONTEXT OF ALL OF THAT INFORMATION, NOT JUST ONE PART.

AND THEN WE PAUSE, AND THEN WE WAIT AND WE SLOW THE PROCESS WAY, WAY DOWN.

[06:55:01]

IT'S TIME TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE. WE NEED TO GROUND OUR DECISION, AS I SAID, IN THE REALITIES THAT WE'RE FACING.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. WHOA, WHOA. HOLD ON. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. SO I KNOW I'M GOING TO DISAPPOINT MANY FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS TODAY.

I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A THOUGHTFUL DECISION.

AND I WANT TO HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION BEFORE US SO THAT I CAN MAKE A SIDE BY SIDE DECISION, LOOKING AT ALL THE FACTS, LOOKING AT ALL THE DATA.

AND I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN DO THIS SIMULTANEOUSLY, DOING BOTH AT THE SAME TIME.

AND I'LL RESERVE MY REASONS ON WHY I SUPPORT CHAIR WEST'S MOTION WHEN IT'S APPROPRIATE.

THANK YOU. OKAY. CHAIRMAN WEST RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I THINK THAT CHAIR RIDLEY'S MOTION IN MIND TO A LOT OF THE SAME THINGS THE ONE THING THAT'S DIFFERENT ABOUT IT, AND I THINK REALLY IMPORTANTLY, AS MAYOR PRO TEM AND CHAIR STEWART JUST LAID OUT ELOQUENTLY, IS THAT WE GET THE FULL PICTURE OF OUR OPTIONS IN THE MOTION, THE ORIGINAL MOTION.

WE ARE NOT JUST LOOKING AT ONE THING, WHEREAS IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, THEN YOU WAIT SIX MORE MONTHS TO LOOK AT SOMETHING ELSE.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE FULL PICTURE IN FRONT OF YOU. WE CAN WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME.

LET'S DO A DEEP ANALYSIS OF THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, AND LET'S DO A DEEP DIVE ON THE ECONOMIC REALITIES.

AND THEN WE COME BACK AND WE MAKE THE HARD DECISION THAT WE KNOW IS COMING OUR WAY WHEN IT COMES HERE.

WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT TODAY. TODAY IS JUST ABOUT GATHERING DATA.

AND WHY WOULD WE LIMIT OURSELVES WHEN WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT? THANK YOU. MISS CADENA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I CAME TO CITY HALL EIGHT YEARS AGO.

I WAS SO EXCITED TO WORK IN THE IAAP BUILDING.

OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE GIVEN TOURS TO PEOPLE WHO LOVE I.M.

PEI AND HIS WORK. HOWEVER, AS AN EMPLOYEE, I QUICKLY LEARNED THAT THERE ARE ISSUES WITH THIS 45 YEAR OLD BUILDING.

WHEN I ARRIVED, IT WAS 37 YEARS OLD. FOR SOME, FIXING THE BUILDING SEEMS LIKE A FAST DECISION FOR ME.

IT SEEMS VERY SLOW. IN JULY OF 2017, WHEN THE WHEN THE BOND PASSED, THE FUNDS WERE A PARTIAL REMODEL OF THE FIFTH FLOOR WERE CUT BY THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THERE WERE SOME ISSUES BECAUSE IT WAS A PARTIAL REMODEL AND NOT A FULL.

WE PUT A BAND-AID AID ON THE ISSUES. I LEARNED ABOUT THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT LIST AND HOW BOND PROJECTS ARE PROPOSED, CHOSEN AND FUNDED. IN 2025 WE STARTED THE BOND PROCESS.

EACH COUNCIL MEMBER CHOSE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY TO REPRESENT THEM ON VARIOUS COMMITTEES.

EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT WAS REPRESENTED. I REACHED OUT TO TIM DICKEY, WHO REPRESENTED DISTRICT SIX, TO SEE WHAT HE RECALLED. HE SAID HE RECALLED THE RESISTANCE TO PUTTING BOND MONEY INTO FIXING THE BUILDING, EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS A PUSH TO APPROVE OTHER PROJECTS.

COMMITTEES WERE PRESENTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF NEEDS FROM THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

THERE WERE COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND A COMMUNITY SURVEY.

THE COMMUNITY TASK FORCE RECOMMENDED THE AMOUNT NEEDED TO MAKE SOME REPAIRS TO CITY HALL, NOT BE FULLY FUNDED AS AN EMPLOYEE.

I BECAME USED TO HAVING A SPACE HEATER, WALKING AROUND WITH A BLANKET, WALKING AROUND THE PUDDLES IN THE PARKING GARAGE WEARING A SWEATER SEEING GUNK COME UP OUT OF THE SEATS, SINKS, AND KNOWING IF I WRITE ON A PARTICULAR ELEVATOR, I MIGHT GET STUCK.

THE CITY HAS TRADITIONALLY RELIED ON A CITY BOND TO FUND MAJOR REPAIRS.

IN 2024, THE BOND SURVEY OF DALLAS RESIDENTS RANKED CITY FACILITIES LOW.

I SPEAK AS A FORMER CITY EMPLOYEE. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE BUILDING BROUGHT UP TO CODE.

I'VE WATCHED FROM THE SIDELINES, HOPEFUL THAT RESIDENTS AND COUNCIL WOULD SUPPORT INVESTING IN THE BUILDING.

I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO RECEIVING A COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT TO UNDERSTAND THE TRUE COST OF FIXING THIS BUILDING AND MAKE A GOOD DECISION FOR OUR CITY, OUR RESIDENTS, AND OUR EMPLOYEES. FOR THIS REASON, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION, BUT WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALL OF THE OPTIONS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON CHAIRMAN RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND I'D LIKE TO TRY SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT, AND THAT IS TO HEAR FROM A COUPLE OF MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF ON FUNDING.

BECAUSE ONE OF THE ISSUES IN THIS AMENDMENT IS AROUND THAT.

SO MISS NISWANDER A BOND AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND MR. IRELAND CFO. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE HEARD IS THAT THERE ARE POTS OF MONEY AROUND HERE THAT COULD BE PUT TOWARD REPAIRS, AND IT'S KIND OF LINGERED AND HASN'T NECESSARILY BEEN RESOLVED.

[07:00:06]

AND SO I KNOW THAT MISS NISWANDER, YOU'VE COMBED THROUGH PREVIOUS BONDS TO FIND WHAT MIGHT, MIGHT ACTUALLY BE IN EXISTENCE THAT HASN'T BEEN ENCUMBERED OR SPENT.

CORRECT. YES. EXCUSE ME. HELLO, JENNY. AND I WAS WONDERING, THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF BONDING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.

AND THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION ON PAST BOND PROGRAMS AND CITY HALL MAINTENANCE.

SO AND JUST AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THIS IS ACTUALLY A QUESTION THAT CAME UP AFTER THE 2024 BOND PROPOSITIONS HAD BEEN FINALIZED, AND THERE WAS ACTUALLY A MEMO THAT HAD BEEN PUBLISHED ABOUT THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM AND THE DOLLARS AMOUNT THAT HAD BEEN ALLOCATED.

SO THIS IS KIND OF AN EXTENSION OF THAT. IN 2017, THERE WAS $7 MILLION THAT WAS ALLOCATED TOWARDS A CITY HALL.

EXCUSE ME. TO DATE, WE'VE COMPLETED PROJECTS THAT TOTAL ABOUT $4.4 MILLION, WHICH LEAVES ABOUT 1.7 AVAILABLE IN THE CITY HALL LINE. THERE WAS NO MONEY IN THE 2012 BOND PROGRAM, AS YOU MAY REMEMBER.

AND IN 2006, WE HAD APPROXIMATELY 9.4 MILLION FOR FUNDING FOR CITY HALL.

TODAY, WE'VE COMPLETED PROJECTS THAT TOTAL $8.77 MILLION, AND WE HAVE ABOUT 160 IN RESERVE FROM THAT ENTIRE PROPOSITION.

SO IN TOTAL, FOR THE BOND PROGRAMS THAT GO BACK TO 2006, WE HAD ABOUT 16.4 MILLION ALLOCATED TOWARDS CITY HALL, AND TO DATE WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY 2.8 MILLION.

THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE IN RESERVES IF WE SO CHOSE TO USE THAT.

SO GOING BACK AND THAT WENT BACK TO 2003 SIX, 2006 O 2006.

OKAY. AND THEN MR. IRELAND, I NOTICED ONE OF THE THINGS IN THIS AMENDMENT IS ABOUT WELL, MAYBE IT WAS IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT ABOUT ARPA FUNDS.

SO WHAT WHAT COULD WE REACH INTO WITH REGARD TO ARPA FUNDS TO HELP FUND REPAIRS? YES, MA'AM. JACK IRELAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER IN OUR ARPA REDEVELOPMENT FUND ALL OF THE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE AS OF THIS MORNING, BECAUSE THERE WAS $1 MILLION OF INTEREST AND THAT GOT PUT TOWARDS A SPECIFIC PROJECT.

SO AT THIS POINT, ALL OF THE ARPA FUNDS ARE ALLOCATED TO SPECIFIC PROJECTS, SPECIFIC LINE ITEMS. THERE IS A LINE ITEM THAT FUNDS WERE PREVIOUSLY REALLOCATED TO FOR OR CITY HALL GENERATORS AND ELECTRICAL UPGRADES NECESSARY FOR THE GENERATORS. THERE'S ABOUT $6.6 MILLION IN THAT LINE ITEM THAT REMAINS.

OKAY. AND SO WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT FUNDS IN THE BOND IN 2024, WE ULTIMATELY DEFAULTED TO ARPA FUNDS.

AND THAT'S WHAT THAT IS ONE TIME USE. THAT'S CORRECT.

THE THE LINE ITEM FOR CITY HALL IN THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM WAS ZERO.

AND SO WHAT WE DID WAS TO COME UP WITH A WAY TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD UTILIZE.

AND THAT'S THE AMOUNT THAT JACK IS MENTIONING THAT'S ON THE ARPA SIDE.

SO IN TOTAL BETWEEN BOND FUNDS AND ARPA. SO AGAIN, LIKE MISS TOLBERT JUST MENTIONED, THERE WERE $0 FOR CITY HALL IN 20 FOR BONDS, AS JENNY MENTIONED 2017 AND 2006 FOR CITY HALL.

THERE THERE'S ABOUT $2.8 MILLION REMAINING THAT IS NOT ENCUMBERED FOR CITY HALL.

AND THEN THE ARPA, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T PUT ANYTHING IN THE 24 BOND WE MOVED SOME MONEY AROUND AND FREED UP WHAT IS $6.6 MILLION FOR CITY HALL? SO 6.6 AND 2.98, A LITTLE OVER 10 MILLION, 10 TO $11 MILLION.

OKAY, SO SOME OF THE NUMBERS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, THE RANGE JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS THAT WHAT WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE APPLIED, ALTHOUGH THAT 6.6 IS PRETTY MUCH EARMARKED TO THE GENERATORS AND AND.

YES, BUT AT THIS POINT IN TIME THE PROJECT FOR THE GENERATORS IS ON HOLD.

THEY DID SOME DESIGN WORK. I BELIEVE THEY WENT OUT FOR PROPOSALS OR BIDS TO DO THE WORK.

FOUND OUT THAT THE THE FUNDS WE HAD SET ASIDE WERE NOT SUFFICIENT TO DO IT.

AND SO UNTIL WE FIND ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THAT, THEN WE'RE NOT ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT PROJECT.

SO RIGHT NOW THOSE FUNDS ARE SITTING THERE UNENCUMBERED.

OKAY. SO THANK YOU THAT THAT HELPS BECAUSE I THINK THERE THERE HAVE BEEN SOME THINGS DISCUSSED LIKE THERE'S $176 MILLION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT COULD GET AT THIS VERY QUICKLY. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S ABOUT $10 MILLION.

YES, MA'AM. THAT'S CORRECT. BETWEEN 10 AND 11.

OKAY. WELL THIS PAST WEEKEND, I WENT BACK AND I FOUND MY 2017 BOND SUBCOMMITTEE BOOK FOR CRITICAL FACILITIES AND TOOK A WALK THROUGH THAT.

[07:05:07]

AND I GUESS THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF MYTH BUSTING BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THERE THERE'S TALK ABOUT WHAT THE REAL NEEDS ARE, AND THEN THERE'S THE NEEDS INVENTORY. SO WHAT I SAW IN LOOKING AT THE HISTORY, WHICH THERE'S A GREAT DOCUMENT THAT THE ARCHIVIST HAS THAT'S FROM 1872 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. ALL THE BOND PROGRAMS, I MEAN, IT GOES WAY BACK THAT SHOWS THAT OVER TIME, YOU KNOW, THEIR CITY HALL WAS ATTENDED TO. BUT WHAT I SAW HERE WITH THIS LIST OF PROJECTS WAS THAT I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT 9 MILLION WAS PROPOSED AND THEN ULTIMATELY IT ENDED UP BEING $7 MILLION. BUT I'M SURE THAT THE NEEDS INVENTORY, I THINK WAS MUCH HIGHER AT THAT TIME.

I MEAN, IT WAS OVER, I WANT TO SAY LIKE 200 MILLION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SO WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THAT THE REALITY OF PARKS AND LIBRARIES, AND IN 2017 IT WAS POLICE AND FIRE STATIONS.

WE HAD A BIG BACKLOG AND WE HEARD FROM OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, AND WE HEARD FROM THE PEOPLE.

THEY WANTED TO TAKE CARE OF POLICE AND FIRE. AND THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF MONEY WENT. AND SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS TO THAT WHEN STAFF CAME FORTH WITH NUMBERS, IT WASN'T NECESSARILY THE WHOLE TAB, YOU KNOW, IT WAS LIKE, WHAT DO WE THINK WE CAN GET INTO THIS? THE OTHER PART OF BOND PROCESS IS OFTENTIMES IS THAT THEY ARE GIVEN A CAP BY THE CITY MANAGER, OKAY, CRITICAL FACILITIES. THERE'S $120 MILLION THAT YOU CAN HAVE OUT OF THIS EQUATION OF 800 MILLION, WHICH ACTUALLY WENT UP TO LIKE 1.1 BILLION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT ENDED UP WITH 80 MILLION.

SO THAT GOT YOU KNOW, BROUGHT DOWN AS WELL. SO THIS IS JUST TO GIVE SOME GROUNDING AROUND WHAT THE BOND PROGRAMS HAVE CONTRIBUTED AND WHY IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ENOUGH TO, YOU KNOW, RESOLVE ALL OF THE ISSUES ALL ALONG THE WAY.

AND AT THOSE TOWN HALL MEETINGS. OH GO AHEAD.

I JUST WANTED TO ADD TO YOUR POINT ABOUT THAT.

SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE BOND PROGRAM PROPOSITIONS IT IS CITY HALL, CITY FACILITIES CITY SERVICE CENTERS.

IT'S NOT JUST A CITY HALL PROPOSITION. AND SO WHILE IN 2006, FOR EXAMPLE, THE PROPOSITION WAS ABOUT $35 MILLION, ONLY 9.4 OF IT WAS FOR CITY HALL. THERE'S OTHER CITY FACILITIES.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BOND PROGRAM, YOU THINK, OH, THAT'S THAT'S ALL CITY HALL.

NO, IT'S CITYWIDE CITY FACILITIES, AND CITY HALL IS BUT ONE LINE ITEM IN THAT IT MAKES IT EVEN LESS THAN THAN OTHERS MAY THINK.

AND IT IS. AND THERE ARE TOWN HALL MEETINGS WHERE THESE THINGS ARE REVIEWED. AND SO I WOULD THINK THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYONE COMING OUT TO TALK ABOUT THE NOSTALGIA AND ALSO THE ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE. THERE HAVE BEEN THINGS THROUGH THE YEARS TO TRIP THAT TRIGGER AS WELL.

IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GREAT TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT, BUT WHAT WE TEND TO HEAR MORE ABOUT ARE THE VERY PUBLIC FACING, PUBLIC USED THINGS THAT A CITY HAS TO TAKE CARE OF STREETS, OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, LIBRARIES, PARKS, ETC. SO THAT HELPS EXPLAIN WHY THE NUMBERS LOOK SMALLER THROUGHOUT THE YEARS IN THESE BOND PROGRAMS. BUT I THINK I'LL HAVE TO COME BACK IN THE NEXT ROUND.

ON THIS MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY MR. RIDLEY? THANK YOU. MAYOR. SO MY SUPPORT LIES WITH ADDRESSING PROBLEMS LOGICALLY, STEP BY STEP, IT'S VERY CLEAR WE NEED A PROFESSIONAL FACILITY ASSESSMENT FIRST.

JUST FIRST. LIKE, SHOW ME THAT FIRST. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BY FEBRUARY.

I THINK THAT MIGHT BE TOO QUICK OF A TIME FRAME.

I SAY THAT HAVING NOTED A NEW PROGRAM IN DALLAS THAT TOOK EIGHT YEARS TO HAPPEN.

SO I HAVE A FEELING THAT THIS IS PROBABLY MORE LIKELY TO BE AN APRIL ITEM, BUT THAT'S FINE.

THE PROBLEM WITH ADDING AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS BY FEBRUARY MEANS ALL THIS WORK WILL BE RUSHED.

EVERY BIT OF IT. ALL OF THE STAFF WILL BE CONSUMED WITH TRYING TO GET TOGETHER THE BEST DATA FOR US, BECAUSE NOBODY WANTS TO SIT, STAND UP THERE AND ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS AND NOT BE PREPARED, ESPECIALLY FOR SOMETHING THAT'S SO HIGH PROFILE.

SO, CITY MANAGER, DO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF HOW MANY EMPLOYEES WOULD BE WORKING ON THIS PROJECT IF IT'S JUST TO DO THE FACILITY ASSESSMENT OR IF IT'S A FACILITY ASSESSMENT AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS.

I DO NOT HAVE A STAFF BREAKDOWN, BUT I DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M VERY CLEAR WE TAKE DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL.

IT'S MY JOB TO DETERMINE HOW TO DELIVER WHATEVER TIMELINE THAT THIS BODY SETS.

I DO BELIEVE THAT BASED ON A LOT OF THE WORK THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE, WE UNDERSTAND THE NEED OF WHAT WOULD TAKE TO ENSURE THAT WE RETAIN EXTERNAL EXPERTISE, TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE COST, THE DATA THAT YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN, WE'VE HEARD RANGES.

[07:10:03]

SOME OF THOSE RANGES WERE NOT RANGES THAT WERE GIVEN BY STAFF THAT WERE GIVEN OUTSIDE OF THIS BUILDING.

SO I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. STAFF PRESENTED NUMBERS BASED ON DATA THAT WE HAD CURRENTLY AVAILABLE.

SO WE DO BELIEVE THAT BASED ON THE TIMELINE THAT COUNCIL SETS, IF THE TIMELINE IS FEBRUARY, IT'S MY JOB TO MAKE SURE THAT STAFF PROVIDES THE REPORT AND THE WORK THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING.

AND THEN I WOULD ASSEMBLE A TEAM TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DELIVER THAT.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WAS TALKING ABOUT FAIR PARK.

AND YOU KNOW, WHAT'S REALLY DIFFERENT ABOUT FAIR PARK IN THIS BUILDING IS THAT ANYBODY GOES TO FAIR PARK SAYS, WOW, WHAT A SPECTACULAR BUILDING. SAME THING WITH THIS.

WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT, IT'S PRETTY SPECTACULAR.

EXCEPT WHEN YOU'RE IN FAIR PARK, YOU OBVIOUSLY KNOW THERE IS SIGNIFICANT MAINTENANCE NEEDED.

PROBABLY BEYOND MAINTENANCE. RIGHT? RESTORATION AT THIS POINT.

AND YET DALLAS POSSIBLY PAST THE WHOLE CONVENTION CENTER ITEM BASED ON GETTING $300 MILLION TO FIX FAIR PARK.

AND THE CITY LOVES FAIR PARK. I LOVE FAIR PARK.

THE CITY WANTS TO RESTORE FAIR PARK, BUT HARDLY ANYBODY WALKS THROUGH THIS BUILDING AND GOES, OH MAN, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS BUILDING IS GOING TO MAKE IT THROUGH THE NEXT BIG STORM.

I MEAN, DO YOU EVEN SEE A CRACK IN THIS CHAMBER? I CHALLENGE YOU ON YOUR WAY OUT. DO YOU SEE ANYTHING THAT GIVES YOU PAUSE? THAT YOU'RE NOT IN AN EXTREMELY DURABLE BUILDING? YES. THE ELEVATORS. THEY PROBABLY NEED TO ALL GO AND BE REPLACED BECAUSE THEY ARE VERY OLD.

AND THAT'S NORMAL FOR A BUILDING. AND I HAVE ALSO BEEN STUCK IN THEM.

LOTS OF FIREFIGHTERS PULLING ME OUT AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

SO YES, LET'S DO THAT. THERE'S PROBABLY SOME LEAKS FROM THE ROOF.

THE ROOF NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED AND REPLACED. THERE'S SOME PLUMBING ISSUES.

AGAIN, IT'S A 47 YEAR OLD BUILDING. THERE'S GOING TO BE PLUMBING ISSUES, BUT THERE'S NOT A SINGLE THING THAT'S BEEN SAID.

OTHER THAN THE PARKING GARAGE, WHICH HAS BEEN LEAKING SINCE BEFORE THIS BUILDING OPENED, THAT GIVES ME PAUSE TO SAY, WOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS BUILDING CAN MAKE IT.

NOT A SINGLE THING. BUT FRANKLY, EVERY TIME I'M IN A FAIR PARK BUILDING, I SAY, OH, WHAT HAVE WE GOT TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS CAN LAST? BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE. AND SO WE NEED A PROFESSIONAL FACILITY ASSESSMENT.

BUT WE ALSO KNOW WHAT WE SEE AND LIVE EVERY SINGLE DAY.

THE THE SPEED OF THIS PROCESS IS SOMETHING I'VE NEVER SEEN, WHETHER I WAS SERVING ON A BOARD OR COMMISSION OR AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, I'VE NEVER SEEN THE COUNCIL HAVE THREE MEETINGS IN TWO WEEKS ABOUT ANY TOPIC, INCLUDING WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE A CITY MANAGER OR CITY MANAGER WAS LEAVING.

WE STILL DIDN'T DO THAT. BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME EVER WE DIDN'T EVEN DO THAT FOR COVID.

SO I THINK WHAT THAT'S DONE IS IT HAS RAISED A LOT OF SUSPICION WITH THE PUBLIC.

I THINK IT HAS RAISED, ESPECIALLY WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE CHANGING AND ESCALATING COSTS THAT WERE BEING TOLD ON WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO MAKE NECESSARY, NECESSARY REPAIRS. LIKE WE MIGHT NOT EVEN BE ABLE TO STAY IN THIS BUILDING KIND OF REPAIRS.

THESE NUMBERS, AGAIN, HAVE CHANGED SO WILDLY OVER SUCH A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME THAT, AGAIN, IT'S ERODED THE CONFIDENCE THAT WE ALL HAVE IN OUR PUBLIC INSTITUTION.

AND WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO MAKING DECISIONS STEP BY STEP, WHICH IS WHY I DEFINITELY WILL BE SUPPORTING COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY'S MOTION TO START WITH A PROFESSIONAL FACILITY ASSESSMENT AND GO FROM THERE ONCE WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. EXCUSE ME. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY'S MOTION.

I, I UNDERSTAND WHERE HE'S GOING, AND I AGREE, I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO HAVE AN ASSESSMENT OF THIS BUILDING, AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ALL OF THAT IS GOING TO BE HAPPENING ANYWAY AS WE MOVE FORWARD. BUT ONE OF THE POINTS I WANTED TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THERE ARE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS, WE TALK ABOUT THE NEGLECT AND WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE WE'VE ALMOST WILLINGLY NEGLECTED THIS. AND I'M GLAD IT CAME OUT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER PRIORITIES, OTHER FACILITIES THAT HAVE TAKEN PRECEDENCE THROUGHOUT THE YEARS.

AND CITY HALL TYPICALLY TAKES THE BACK SEAT TO A LOT OF THOSE.

BUT AGAIN, FROM, FROM ARTS TO, TO POLICE STATION, FIRE STATIONS AND SO FORTH.

SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH FROM A LACK OF, OF, OF NEGLECT.

THE REASON I WANT TO GO AHEAD AND DO AN ASSESSMENT OF THIS FACILITY, IT'S ONE I WANT TO ASSESS THE CONDITION OF IT TOO.

BUT AGAIN, I'VE SAID THIS SEVERAL TIMES IN SEVERAL MEETINGS. I WANT TO ASSESS THE FUNCTIONALITY OF IT.

[07:15:03]

AND IF YOU HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF PARKING IN THE PARKING LOT ON THE SURFACE LOT, YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO WALK ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BUILDING TO GET TO THE SECURITY ENTRANCE AND EVERYTHING. THOSE TYPE OF THINGS AREN'T FUNCTIONAL.

SO WHEN I SAY TALK ABOUT FUNCTIONALITY, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FUNCTIONALITY.

HOW ARE EMPLOYEES CURRENTLY USING THIS BUILDING AND WHAT ARE WE MISSING OUT ON THAT COULD MAKE OUR JOBS, MAKE THE JOBS MORE EFFICIENT, MAKE US SERVE THE PEOPLE MORE EFFICIENTLY? WHAT ARE SOME WAYS WE COULD MAKE YOUR EXPERIENCE WHEN YOU WALK INTO CITY HALL? HOW CAN WE MAKE THIS MORE OF AN EXPERIENCE? I JUST SAW A LADY TRIP UP THE STAIRS EARLIER TODAY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE GUARDRAILS HERE.

SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT MOVING.

IS SHE OVER THERE? NO. THERE WAS A LADY THAT TRIPPED. I DON'T KNOW WHERE SHE WENT, BUT EARLIER TODAY, SHE TRIPPED UP THE STAIRS. THERE. BUT IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT GETTING OUT OF THIS BUILDING. I DO WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ARE AND WHAT THOSE ARE, JUST IN CASE. IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BENEFIT THIS CITY, THEN I THINK WE OWE IT TO OURSELVES TO LOOK AT THAT.

BUT I'M ALSO PERSONALLY HAVING WORKED IN THIS BUILDING FOR 15 YEARS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS BUILDING CAN BE SOMETHING THAT'S FUNCTIONAL.

IT'S A BRICK. IT'S NOT. WE UNDERSTAND THE STRUCTURE SIDE OF THINGS, BUT INSIDE IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND HOW ARE WE ABLE TO UPGRADE AND DO ALL OF THESE THINGS. SO I THINK AN ASSESSMENT IS NECESSARY.

BUT I ALSO WANT US TO CONSIDER AND I WANT YOU ALL TO CONSIDER, IS THIS BUILDING FUNCTIONAL FOR RESIDENTS WHEN THEY COME IN AND HAVE THEIR EXPERIENCE, OR IS IT JUST A BUILDING WHERE THEY CAN COME AND DO BUSINESS? BUT TO ME, IT'S NOT FUNCTIONAL. AND FOR THAT REASON, THOSE ARE SOME OTHER REASONS WHY I WANT US TO BE ABLE TO ASSESS NOT JUST THIS, THIS ICON. BECAUSE IT IS. AND AGAIN, I'M GETTING VERY SENTIMENTAL.

I CAME IN 2005, AND I REMEMBER I GOT MY FIRST TICKET OUT THERE, MY FIRST CITY OF DALLAS PARKING TICKET IN THIS PARKING LOT, ACTUALLY ON A JOB INTERVIEW, IRONICALLY ENOUGH.

BUT SO I HAVE THESE MEMORIES, AND I HAVE THESE EMOTIONAL TIES TO THIS BUILDING AND SOME SENTIMENTAL TIES.

BUT AGAIN, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A FUNCTIONAL SPACE FOR ALL OF US TO OPERATE CITY STAFF, CITY COUNCIL, CITY EMPLOYEES, AND THE RESIDENTS WHEN YOU COME IN AND YOU HAVE TO BE HERE ALL DAY.

DO YOU ENJOY SITTING IN THESE SEATS? OR WE COULD GO AND GRAB SOME LUNCH SOMEWHERE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE'RE MISSING OUT ON THAT I WANT US TO CONSIDER. SO FOR THAT REASON, I DON'T WANT TO BE ABLE TO JUST STAY RIGHT HERE ASSESSING THIS BUILDING.

I WANT US TO DO BOTH AND I WANT US TO ASSESS, BUT ALSO LOOK AT THE BENEFITS OF IF WE WERE TO RELOCATE CITY HALL.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. MAYOR. MR. BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY.

ITEM 63. THANK YOU. MAYOR. WHEN I MOVED TO DALLAS, MY MY JOB WAS WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE.

AND I LOOKED OVER HERE AND I SAW THIS BUILDING, AND I SAID, IT'S UPSIDE DOWN.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. IT WASN'T UNTIL I BECAME A ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSIONER AND I HAD ARCHITECTURAL FRIENDS, ONE SITTING RIGHT OUT THERE TODAY WHO HELPED ME APPRECIATE THE VALUE OF THIS BILL, THE, THE THE WAY THIS BUILDING IS DESIGNED UPSIDE DOWN. SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT TEARING IT DOWN OR IF YOU THINK ABOUT EVEN REPLACING IT, IF YOU THINK ABOUT ANYTHING THE, THE. YEAH, I'M GETTING THERE.

WELL OKAY, I'LL HURRY UP. SO I SUPPORT LOOKING AT THE COST, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT IN 2024 BOND PACKAGE THIS. THE COUNCIL DECIDED TO NOT PUT THE MONEY INTO THE REPAIRS AND THEY REALLOCATED THE THE FUNDS ELSEWHERE. I WILL SUPPORT CHAIR WEST DECISION NOT ONLY BECAUSE IT DOES THE SAME THING. IT GIVES THE THE COMPLETE ASSESSMENT, BUT IT GIVES US ALL THE OPTIONS.

IT GIVES US ALL OF THE VISIONS AND VIEWS. DO WE WANT TO DO ONE THING OR ANOTHER? IT'S TOO EARLY TO DECIDE. THE ONLY THING WE'RE DOING TODAY IS LOOKING AT WHAT IS.

WHAT WILL IT TAKE IN ORDER TO MAKE CITY HALL FUNCTIONAL AND AND HOPEFULLY COMFORTABLE BECAUSE I'M FREEZING. BUT THAT'S ALL WE'RE LOOKING FOR TODAY.

AND AND NOW IF THE PROBLEM IS THAT FEBRUARY 2026 IS TOO SOON, I WOULD SUPPORT MOVING THE TIME OUT IF THAT'S WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE. IN ORDER FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO HAVE ALL OF THE TOOLS THAT SHE NEEDS TO COME BACK WITH THE WITH ALL OF THE OPTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BE AVAILABLE TO US. SO I SUPPORT CHAIR WEST, HIS PROPOSAL OR

[07:20:05]

HIS AMENDMENTS BECAUSE IT LOOKS AT THE WHOLE PICTURE.

IT LOOKS ON MR. RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT JUST TO REMIND YOU.

OH, YES, I'M SORRY, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD, I WOULD PREFER A MOTION THAT WOULD SUPPORT ALL ALL OPTIONS AND NOT JUST ONE. THANK YOU. IT'S IT'S JUST SORT OF A SEMANTIC DIFFERENCE REALLY, BUT TRYING TO STICK TO THE RULES. LET'S SEE, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GO TO YOU FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. SO TO FOLLOW ON WITH THAT, I'M NOT SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH I LIKE THE PARTS ABOUT KNOWING HOW MANY PEOPLE SHOULD STAY IN CITY HALL AND HOW MANY SHOULD MOVE OUT, THAT'S IMPORTANT.

WE NEED TO KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE A CITY HALL WOULD ACTUALLY NEED TO HOLD.

WE NEED TO KNOW THE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE COST WHICH ARE CURRENTLY REPRESENTED AS A RANGE.

SOME COSTS WERE RECENTLY ESTIMATED. SO WE CAN BANK ON THOSE.

OTHERS ARE OLDER AND WE NEED TO UPDATE THEM. I'M WORRIED ABOUT FEBRUARY.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S ATTAINABLE. I SUSPECT WE'LL BE BACK HERE ASKING FOR MORE TIME.

BUT WE NEED TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON REALISTIC NUMBERS.

BUT WE ALSO NEED TO KNOW THE VALUE OF THIS LAND AND THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THIS SPACE.

WE'RE DOING IT WITH OTHER CITY ASSETS, SO I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS WOULD BE AN EXCEPTION.

THIS SHOULDN'T BE A SACRED COW. WE HAVE GOT A PORTFOLIO OF ASSETS, AND WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT WE SHOULD DIVEST OURSELVES OF, WHAT'S THE BEST USE FOR THEM. AND WE NEED TO DO THAT HERE, TOO.

THAT'S JUST SMART BUSINESS. AND WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE.

IF THE COST THAT WE GET BACK ARE NOT ARE SUPER HIGH AND DON'T ALIGN WITH THE PRIORITIES THAT OUR RESIDENTS TELL US ABOUT TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO HAVE STAFF COME AND TELL US ABOUT HOW MUCH WE HAVE TO WORK WITH.

IT'S NOT MUCH. SO, CHAIR WEST, I WROTE DOWN THE SAME THING THAT YOU SAID, WHICH IS I THINK WE CAN WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE ALL OF THE CARDS ON THE TABLE.

AND IN FACT MISS BLACKMON SAID, WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH, AND I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW WE WILL UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH IF WE JUST HAVE ONE PIECE OF THIS EQUATION, WHICH IS WHAT ARE THE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE COSTS, WE NEED TO KNOW THE VALUE OF THIS LAND AND WHAT WE COULD GET FOR IT, AND WHAT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE IS. WE ALSO NEED TO SOMETHING THAT WAS DROPPED OUT OF OF THAT AMENDMENT FROM THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION, BUT IS INCLUDED IN MR. WEST IS ABOUT UNDERSTANDING WHERE WE COULD MOVE TO.

MAYBE THERE'S ANOTHER PART OF DOWNTOWN THAT COULD BE REVITALIZED A LOW OCCUPANCY BUILDING THAT COULD BECOME CITY HALL.

AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE A COMPETITION FOR THAT AND SEE WHAT SOMEONE MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE WILLING TO DO IN TERMS OF FINISH OUT AND HAVING A DIFFERENT SPACE FOR US AND PERHAPS MAKE THIS PART OF A VIBRANT BIG DISTRICT WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER, ETC..

SO, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE CAME DOWN TO TALK TO US ABOUT SAVING CITY HALL, BUT WE'VE ALSO HAD PEOPLE EMAIL US, CALL US, TALK TO US ON THE STREET ABOUT WANTING TO EXPLORE THE OPTIONS.

AND SO IF WE'RE LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE WE'RE HEARING, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT WHOLE MENU.

SO THIS IS JUST DUE DILIGENCE. IT'S NOT A MOVE OUT ORDER.

SO I THINK WE REALLY OWE IT TO OURSELVES AND TO THE TAXPAYERS TO DO THE DUE DILIGENCE ON ALL OF THESE FRONTS.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, TO YOU FOR ON YOUR AMENDMENT FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THERE IS A CERTAIN SEQUENCE TO CONDUCTING THE TASKS THAT ARE AT HAND, AND THAT SEQUENCE IS IMPORTANT. INSTEAD OF PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE, WE MUST FIRST EXAMINE THE CONDITION OF OUR CURRENT SURROUNDINGS AND THE COST OF REPAIR. IN ADDITION, WE MUST ALSO EVALUATE THE OFFICE SPACE NEEDS FOR DEPARTMENTS CURRENTLY LOCATED WITHIN CITY HALL WITHOUT DOING THAT FIRST.

WE CAN'T DO ANY ANALYSIS OF OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO RENT OFFICE SPACE IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR NEED IS.

SO THERE'S A DEFINITE SEQUENCE. MY MOTION DOES NOT PRECLUDE US EVALUATING ALTERNATIVE OFFICE SPACE OR ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDIES FOR THE USE OF THIS LAND.

IT SIMPLY PUTS THEM IN THE PROPER ORDER. ANSWER THE FIRST QUESTION FIRST.

IS CITY HALL A VIABLE LOCATION FOR CITY GOVERNMENT OR NOT? IF IT IS NOT, THEN WE CAN PASS ANOTHER RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXAMINE ALTERNATIVES AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES.

BUT BY PUTTING THIS TOGETHER IN THE SAME MOTION, ATTENTION WILL INEVITABLY BE FOCUSED ON DOING THESE FANCY ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDIES, WHICH, BY THE WAY, ARE NOT GOING TO HAPPEN BETWEEN NOW AND FEBRUARY.

[07:25:05]

THAT WILL TAKE MONTHS OF TIME, AND THAT EFFORT WILL BE WASTED IF WE DECIDE, AS A RESULT OF SIMPLY DOING AN ASSESSMENT OF OUR CURRENT BUILDING AND A STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, THAT THIS IS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE, WHICH I PERSONALLY AM CONFIDENT IT WILL SHOW.

SO IF WE TRY TO DO ALL OF THESE AT ONCE, THAT CONDITION ASSESSMENT, I'M CONCERNED, WILL GET SHORT SHRIFT.

IT WILL BE PUSHED TO THE BACK BURNER WITH A LOW BUDGET CONSULTANT AND IGNORED, SO THAT WE CAN FOCUS ON THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF VACATING CITY HALL AND TURNING IT INTO SOME SORT OF A DEVELOPMENT SITE.

SO I'M NOT PRECLUDING THAT ANALYSIS WITH THIS MOTION.

I'M JUST SAYING. PUT IT IN THE PROPER ORDER. ANYONE MR. BAZALDUA YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. I'LL BE QUICK. I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR.

I AM CONFLICTED FOR THE REASONS THAT I'VE SAID, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S ANY NEFARIOUS INTENT FROM STAFF.

I THINK THAT STAFF'S DOING WHAT WE'VE DIRECTED THEM TO THIS POINT TO GIVE US.

THIS IS A POLICY DISCUSSION, AND IT SHOULD BE BETWEEN OUR BODY.

THE LAST THING THAT I WANT TO DO IS LEAVE THE PERCEPTION THAT I BELIEVE THERE IS A NEFARIOUS INTENT BEHIND WHAT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO CONSIDER.

I BELIEVE THAT THE UNDERLYING MOTION SPEAKS TO EXHAUSTING ALL IN ONE SWOOP.

AND GIVING US THOSE OPTIONS TO, TO WEIGH OUT I BELIEVE THAT I AM MORE INCLINED TO SUPPORT INITIALLY THE MOTION THAT IS ON THE FLOOR THAT FOCUSES MORE ON ONE OF THE OPTIONS INSTEAD OF LAYING ALL OF THEM IN FRONT OF US.

BUT THE LAST THING I'D LIKE TO DO IS MAKE IT SEEM AS IF I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS ANY, ANY NEFARIOUS OR UNDERLYING MOTIVE FROM STAFF AND THE WAY THAT THIS IS BEING PRESENTED.

AND AND I REALLY THINK THAT WE AS A BODY SHOULD TRY NOT TO HINT AT THAT BECAUSE WE ARE THE POLICY MAKERS AND IN THE END RESULT, THE DECISION THAT'S GOING TO GET MADE IS GOING TO GET MADE FROM THIS BODY.

SO THAT'S THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. FIVE MINUTES? DO YOU WANT 3 OR 5? THREE? I'M JUST KIDDING. WHY DO I NOT HAVE YOU WRITTEN DOWN FOR ON THE AMENDMENT? HAVE YOU SPOKEN ON THE AMENDMENT? I DID OKAY, YOUR THREE MINUTES.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. SO I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH A HUGE LITANY OF ITEMS, BUT I'LL JUST SAY THE REASON THAT WE DON'T HAVE FUNDS FOR CITY HALL IS NOT BECAUSE WE SPENT ALL OF OUR FUNDS ON PUBLIC SAFETY.

THAT'S NOT TRUE. AND I'LL JUST GIVE YOU THE TWO THAT COME TO MIND AS I'M SITTING HERE.

ONE IS THE $6.2 MILLION FOR THE TREE INVENTORY.

I HOPE THAT GIVES EVERYONE PAUSE THAT VOTED FOR THAT.

THE SECOND WOULD BE $48 MILLION FOR A PRACTICE FACILITY FOR THE WINGS.

I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULDN'T HAVE A PRACTICE FACILITY FOR THE WINGS, BUT $48 MILLION IS AN EXTREME NUMBER AND POINT OF ORDER. MAYOR STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. THIS IS NOT GERMANE TO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO GO DOWN A DIFFERENT PATH THEN.

SO WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF CONVERSATIONS. ABOUT THINGS LIKE CITY STAFF CAME TO US AND ASKED MONEY FOR A BOILER.

THIS WAS BRIEFED IN ONE OF COUNCIL MEMBER WEST COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND WE APPROVED THOSE NUMBERS.

WE GAVE THOSE DOLLARS. BUT THEN THE THING THAT STAFF SAID IS, WELL, WE REPLACE THE BOILER, BUT NOT THE CONTROLLER. SO WE GET HEAT, BUT WE CAN'T DIRECT IT TO THE RIGHT PLACES.

SO IF YOU'RE FREEZING, THAT'S WHY. BUT WE WEREN'T ASKED FOR THE MONEY FOR THE CONTROLLER.

IT'S NOT THAT WE WERE ASKED FOR BOTH, AND WE ONLY DID ONE.

IT'S THAT STAFF AS SORT OF A VALUE ENGINEERING OF NOT WANTING TO TAKE MONEY FROM A PROJECT THEY WANTED OR THEY THOUGHT WE WANTED, DIDN'T EVEN ASK FOR IT. THEY ONLY ASKED FOR THE MOST NECESSARY ITEM, WHICH WAS THE BOILER ITSELF.

SO THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DECISIONS LIKE THAT.

NOW, I'LL JUST TELL YOU, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT BOILERS.

I DIDN'T KNOW THEY HAD A SEPARATE CONTROLLER.

I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD GO TOGETHER, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT WE DIDN'T EVEN ASK THE QUESTION.

WELL, DO YOU ALSO NEED A CONTROLLER? BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE HAVE PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT AT THE CITY.

[07:30:02]

THE THE ITEM THAT MR. GRACEY WAS TALKING ABOUT, HOW YOU CAN PARK IN THE BACK, BUT YOU HAVE TO WALK AROUND THE BUILDING TO GET IN.

THAT'S OPERATIONAL. THERE'S A DOOR THERE. YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN IT LONG AGO.

I USED TO WALK IN THAT WAY. BUT OPERATIONALLY, FOR SECURITY AND REDUCED STAFFING, WE CLOSE THAT DOOR.

IT COULD BE OPENED BACK UP. IT COULD BE OPENED BACK UP TOMORROW IF WE WANTED TO.

BUT THAT'S A MANAGEMENT DECISION FOR OPERATIONS.

THAT WAS NOT A BUILDING DEFECT. YOU DON'T GET RID OF A BUILDING BECAUSE YOU'VE DECIDED TO CLOSE THE DOOR VOLUNTARILY.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS, AGAIN THAT ARE BEING TALKED ABOUT THAT ARE CERTAINLY THINGS TO ADDRESS, BUT THEY'RE NOT REASONS TO GET RID OF A BUILDING THAT I THINK IS YOUR TIME.

AND I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW. SO A RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED ON CHAIRMAN RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT ON ITEM 63.

SO SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION MADAM SECRETARY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

GRACEY. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. NO. COUNCILMEMBER.

RESENDEZ. NOPE. COUNCILMEMBER. CADENA. NO. COUNCILMEMBER.

BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. NO. COUNCILMEMBER.

BLACKMON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. STEWART. NO. COUNCILMEMBER.

ROTH. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. NO.

MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. NO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. NO.

WITH FIVE VOTING IN FAVOR, TEN OPPOSED. THAT MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, SO WE ARE NOW BACK ON ITEM 63. THE MOTION BY CHAIRMAN WEST, I BELIEVE, AND WE ONLY HAD DISTRICTS ONE AND 14 SPEAK ON THIS BEFORE. SO NOW I WILL GO TO MR. BAZALDUA FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I HAD A FEELING THAT THIS IS THE MOTION WE'D REALLY BE DEBATING, AND I JUST WANTED TO AGAIN SAY THANK YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER WEST FOR LOOKING TO BE COLLABORATIVE AND FIND OUT WHERE PEOPLE'S CONCERNS WERE. ULTIMATELY, WE'RE ASKING THE CITY MANAGER TO GIVE US A LIST OF OPTIONS. SOME OF THE OPTIONS I DON'T AGREE WITH.

IF IF IT WERE TO COME BACK AND TELL US THAT THE ABSOLUTE BEST AND MOST ADVANTAGEOUS OPTION FOR US IN THE CITY IS TO GET RID OF CITY HALL IN A SALE, THEN THE LAST THING THAT I WANT TO DO IS FOR THAT TYPE OF DECISION TO BE MADE WITHOUT TRULY LEVERAGING IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW, AS I MENTIONED IN MY FIRST COMMENTS, WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE QUITE A BIT OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE IN THIS BUILDING, JUST LIKE WE HAVE QUITE A BIT OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE OR RESTORATION NEED, AS WAS POINTED OUT AT FAIR PARK.

THE LAST THING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN A DRASTIC AND HISTORIC DECISION THAT THIS COUNCIL COULD POTENTIALLY MAKE IN THE FUTURE IS FOR THE SALE OF THIS PROPERTY TO NOT BE INCLUSIVE OF A COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON HOW WE CAN TRULY LEVERAGE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO THIS AT FAIR PARK WITH MORE THAN $300 MILLION OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED THERE AND US BARELY BEING ABLE TO SCRATCH THE SURFACE, IF WE REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT WHAT THIS TYPE OF AN OPPORTUNITY COULD BE, IT SHOULD BE ONE THAT IS DONE THOUGHTFULLY AND ONE THAT IS MORE THAN LIP SERVICE TO OUR CITY AND WANTING TO RIGHT THE WRONGS OF THE INTENTIONAL SEGREGATION OF SOCIOECONOMICS THAT EXISTS IN OUR CITY.

IF WE HAVE A MULTI, MULTI, MULTI HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR OPPORTUNITY IN REAL ESTATE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUPLED NEXT TO WHERE WE KNOW OTHER DEVELOPMENT IS HAPPENING IN THIS CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.

I'M ASKING THAT A PART OF WHAT WE ARE DIRECTING SPECIFICALLY TO BE INFORMATION AND DATA TO COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL.

INCLUSIVE OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ESTABLISHED WITH SUBDISTRICT IN FAIR PARK IN SOUTH DALLAS, EXPLORE AND EXHAUST ALL OPTIONS OF POTENTIAL BARBELL TIFS OR WAYS TO LEVERAGE THAT TYPE OF A PLAY IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS

[07:35:07]

DISTRICT TO ACTUALLY GROW SOUTH. WE'VE HEARD MANY ADMINISTRATIONS AND MANY, MANY ITERATIONS OF COUNCIL AROUND THIS HORSESHOE.

TALK ABOUT THE NEED TO GROW SOUTH, THE SOUTHERN SECTOR OF OUR CITY, THE CHEAPEST LAND OF OUR CITY, THE BIGGEST OPPORTUNITY FOR DEVELOPMENT, THE BEST WAY FOR DEALS TO PENCIL OUT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND AND OPPORTUNITIES.

HOWEVER, WE ALSO KNOW THAT IT IS THE PART OF OUR CITY THAT STRUGGLES TO HAVE ADEQUATE GROCERY STORES TO HAVE ADEQUATE JOBS THAT ARE LIVING WAGE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE.

IF AN OPPORTUNITY LIKE THIS WERE TO COME UP, ALTHOUGH IF I WERE TO SAY THE BEST CASE SCENARIO AND I WAS ABLE TO CHOOSE IT, IT WOULD BE TO PRESERVE THIS AND TO INVEST IN CITY HALL, THAT MAY NOT BE FEASIBLE.

AND IF THAT IS THE CASE, I'M ASKING THAT THIS IS DONE SO AND WE CAN MAKE A DECISION THAT IS NOT A PROMISE FOR THE FUTURE, NOT ONE THAT THE CAN GETS KICKED DOWN THE ROAD.

AND WE JUST HAVE HOPE THAT A FUTURE LEADERS CITY MANAGER, I'VE SEEN YOU BE BOLD AND I APPRECIATE YOUR BOLD LEADERSHIP.

THIS IS THE TYPE OF BOLD LEADERSHIP THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.

IS THAT A DEAL LIKE THIS IS NOT JUST ONE THAT'S GOING TO LINE THE POCKETS AND MAKE A BILLIONAIRE EVEN MORE RICH, BECAUSE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE REAL ESTATE IN OUR CITY THAT THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO AGAIN.

THAT CAN HAPPEN ON TOP OF LEVERAGING THAT TYPE OF OPPORTUNITY TO HELP BRING OUR CITY FORWARD.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO BRING OUR CITY FORWARD IF THAT TYPE OF OPPORTUNITY DOESN'T.

BRING SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT TO SOUTH DALLAS, SPECIFICALLY, A STREETCAR CONNECTING THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE MASTER PLAN OF THE CONVENTION CENTER REPAIRING THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE IN THE FAIRGROUNDS, ACTUALLY ACTIVATING IT TO GENERATE THE REVENUE THAT THAT 277 ACRES SHOULD BE. AND BRINGING IT TO ITS GLORY FOR THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, FINALLY, IS SOMETHING THAT I'M ASKING THAT THIS OPPORTUNITY WILL AFFORD.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, CHAIR RIDLEY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT IN CONSIDERING THIS MOTION THAT WE MAKE PROVISION FOR A TRANSPARENT PROCESS THAT CAN INVOLVE OUR CITIZENRY IN THE REVIEW OF DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS BODY. ACCORDINGLY, I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD THE FOLLOWING PROVISION TO CREATE A TASK FORCE OF 5 TO 7 PROFESSIONALS OUTSIDE OF CITY GOVERNMENT WITH NO FINANCIAL STAKE TO REVIEW CITY HALL OFFICE SPACE NEEDS.

THE RESULTS OF THE CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON.

SAME TO THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. SECOND. ONE.

SECOND.

SO THE MOTION IS APPROPRIATE. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION? WELL, I'VE ALREADY PROVIDED THE BASIS FOR MY AMENDMENT.

THERE'S BEEN NO DISCUSSION ABOUT A TASK FORCE, BUT I THINK IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE HAVE THAT KIND OF INPUT FROM QUALIFIED PROFESSIONALS IN A SMALL GROUP THAT WOULD PROVIDE AN INDEPENDENT VIEWPOINT OF THE PROCESS AND THE INFORMATION THAT'S PROVIDED BY EACH OF THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS CONDUCTING THE DIFFERENT ANALYZES.

AND I THINK THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT BY INVOLVING OUR CITIZENRY IN THAT PROCESS.

CHAIR MIDDLETON. THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, THIS IS A BIG CONTROVERSIAL IDEA AND PLAN, AND A LOT OF TRANSPARENCY CAN BE ACHIEVED BY LETTING THE PEOPLE'S BUILDING HAVE THE PEOPLE'S INPUT.

AND THE TASK FORCE IS ONE WAY. WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT OTHER WAYS THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS CAN SPEAK UP ABOUT THIS.

I WILL ADD ON JUST SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA SAID THAT FOR ME, THERE'S ONLY TWO SITES WE SHOULD REALLY EVEN BE LOOKING AT.

ONE OF THEM IS DISTRICT 12. I SAID THAT FOR YOU.

[07:40:01]

AND THE SECOND ONE IS FAIR PARK. IF WE'RE GOING TO MOVE, THAT'S THE ONLY OTHER PLACE I THINK WE SHOULD BE.

AND SO I'M JUST I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT. SO IT'S EVEN A STEP FURTHER THAN I THINK WHAT YOU WERE GOING TO SAY.

BUT I BET WE WOULD TAKE A LITTLE BIT BETTER CARE OF FAIR PARK IF WE WERE DOWN THERE.

SO ANYHOW, I DON'T WANT TO MOVE TO FAIR PARK.

I WANT THIS BUILDING TO WORK OUT. BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO MOVE, I DON'T EVEN SEE WHY WE'RE LOOKING DOWNTOWN.

THAT'S. THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT.

SO WITH THAT, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL APPROVE COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE DESERVE TO HAVE THAT VOICE AND THE CONFIDENCE THAT THIS PROCESS IS TRANSPARENT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, CHAIR WEST. I NORMALLY AM IN FAVOR OF TASK FORCES I JUST CREATED.

WE JUST CREATED ONE WITH MORENO AND SOME OTHER FOLKS FOR THE NIGHTLIFE ISSUE WE WERE DEALING WITH WITH REVELERS HALL.

IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE THIRD PARTY RETAINED EXPERTS.

THAT WAS PART OF THE MOTION. WE HAVE A FINANCE COMMITTEE THAT'S GOING TO BE REVIEWING THIS, AND WE HAVE FULL COUNCIL THAT'S GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THIS. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO ADD YET ANOTHER STEP IN THE PROCESS.

I THINK THAT'S JUST GOING TO SLOW THIS DOWN. AND WHEN WE ALREADY HAVE THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, ALL 15 OF US LOOKING AT THIS. THANK YOU. CHAIR STEWART, MY SUGGESTION IS THAT WE TAKE CARE OF THIS WITH COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

I THINK EACH DISTRICT SHOULD PLEDGE TO HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING, AT LEAST ONE, IF NOT MORE.

WE NEED ALL OF THE VOICES ALL AROUND THE CITY.

LOTS OF VOICES, NOT JUST A SMALL GROUP. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE ADDING THESE SUBCOMMITTEES.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GO THROUGH OUR THIRD PARTY, AND I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING COMMUNITY MEMBERS, AND I THINK WE CAN SCHEDULE THOSE INDEPENDENTLY.

OKAY HEARING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION WE'LL TAKE A VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, I LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

I'M SORRY. POINT A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. WHAT? WHAT ARE WE VOTING ON? I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CORRECT. THE VOTE IS TO CHAIR RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT TO ADD A SUBCOMMITTEE.

A TASK FORCE CHAIR. RIDLEY. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLAIR. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

STEWART. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO.

NO. MAYOR JOHNSON WITH FOUR MEMBERS VOTING IN FAVOR, 11 OPPOSED.

THAT MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST? ITEM 63. MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR.

YOU TELL ME FIVE MINUTES. THIS IS THE MAIN MOTION.

YES. FIVE MINUTES. OKAY, I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHO TO ASK ON THE RESOLUTION.

ITEM NUMBER C, IT SAYS COMPARE, YOU KNOW, COST TO LEASE, BUY, BUILD REPLACEMENT.

ON THE LEASE COMPONENT. I KNOW THAT WE PUSHED OUT TEN YEARS.

HOWEVER, A LEASE OF A CITY OF DALLAS. WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT LEAVING.

SO IT'S LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE WHAT IS THAT LEASE PAYMENT LOOK LIKE FOR EVER.

AND SO I'M JUST GETTING THE CLARIFICATION THAT YOU CAN'T JUST SAY TEN YEARS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE US BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING OUT OF BUSINESS.

I HOPE WE CAN DEFINITELY ADD THAT TO THE ANALYSIS.

COUNCILWOMAN. BLACKMON. SO YEAH, SO JUST MAKE SURE WHEN YOU DO THE LEASE IT'S BECAUSE THAT WAS KIND OF WE'LL STILL SHOW A TEN YEAR PERIOD, BUT IT CAN ACTUALLY BE BEYOND THAT. IT'S GOING TO GO UP BECAUSE I MEAN LEASE PAYMENTS GO UP.

AND SO AS IT COMES AND RENEWED AND THEN I GUESS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW IS THE CEDARS NEIGHBORHOOD INCORPORATED INTO LOOKING AT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS FOR THE CITY HALL IN A WAY THAT SUPPORTIVE OF THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON IS THE CEDARS NEIGHBORHOOD INCORPORATED INTO THE KB MASTER PLAN OR IS IT NOT? I THINK THERE WAS A BOUNDARY INCLUDED IN THE ECONOMIC IMPACT WHEN THEY DID THE ACTUAL MASTER PLAN FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER, I DON'T SEE, I'M TRYING TO SEE IF I SEE ROBIN BENTLEY.

[07:45:01]

I DO BELIEVE THAT IT GOES TO A CERTAIN POINT WHERE IT INCORPORATES THE CEDARS, BUT I'LL HAVE ROBIN.

SHE'S COMING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT PIECE, BECAUSE I'M KIND OF SEEING YOU GO TO THE I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HOW MUCH OF THE CEDARS YOU TAKE IN, BECAUSE THEN YOU GO TO FAIR PARK AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE MISSING A NEIGHBORHOOD THERE BECAUSE THE CEDARS IS DIRECTLY SOUTH OF ALL THIS.

GOT IT. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION OF WHERE THAT BOUNDARY IS.

GOOD EVENING, ROBIN BENTLEY, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN BOUNDARY WAS NOT JUST THE CONVENTION CENTER.

IT WAS A MUCH LARGER AREA OF THE SOUTHERN DOWNTOWN.

I DON'T BELIEVE IT DIPPED INTO THE CEDARS, AND I KNOW IT DIDN'T GO AS FAR AS FAIR PARK, BUT WHEN WE AMENDED THOSE STUDIES AS PART OF TONIGHT'S MOTION, IF IT PASSES, WE WOULD PULL THE BOUNDARY OUT FURTHER TO COVER ALL OF THE MENTIONED AREAS.

HAVE YOU ALL LOOKED AT HOW FURTHER IT WOULD GO OUT? BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT THE CEDARS NEEDS TO BE INCORPORATED. IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO ALL THE WAY TO FAIR PARK, YOU MAY WANT TO GET THAT LITTLE GROUP TO. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD ADD FOR THE THIRD PARTY, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT LIMITING WHAT THAT ECONOMIC IMPACT PIECE IS, AND THEY WOULD COME BACK AND ACTUALLY DO THE BODY OF WORK.

OKAY. SO THE ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY THAT WAS DONE FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER, WE THINK IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO ACTUALLY TAKE THIS AND ADD ADDITIONAL TO IT, INCLUDING, I THINK, COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA COMMENTS ABOUT FAIR PARK. OKAY, SO WE'LL DO BOTH.

AND THEN ALSO TOO, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MARKET STUDY FOR HIGHEST AND BEST USE, ARE YOU ALSO GOING TO I GUESS ROBIN YOUR BACK UP.

ARE YOU ALSO GOING TO INCLUDE KEEPING A CITY HALL WITH AN X AMOUNT OF NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THAT, IN THAT? BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS BUILDING POTENTIAL IN OUR EMPLOYMENT BASE, AND IF YOU HAVE I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S 2000 OR IF IT'S 1500, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS. THAT IS A HUGE ECONOMIC HUB OF PEOPLE ACTIVATED IF THEY ARE IN THE BUILDING.

AND THEN IF YOU CREATE BETTER CONNECTIONS WITH THE EXISTING, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT IN CREATING PLACE, SUCH AS IN THE PLAZA, THEN YOU'VE ACTUALLY CREATED YOUR PLACE, YOUR PLACE MAKING.

AND SO I DON'T WANT TO AUTOMATICALLY SAY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT SCRAPING THE BUILDING AND BECOMING A NEW BUILDING, BUT ARE YOU GOING TO INCORPORATE? IF WE KEEP THE BUILDING AND WE HAVE X AMOUNT OF NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES COMING HERE AND WE DO THESE IMPROVEMENTS, THIS IS THE ECONOMIC IMPACT. SO WE'LL HAVE TO HIRE A THIRD PARTY EXPERT TO DO THIS.

AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT A MARKET STUDY DOES IS SAY BASED ON WHAT IS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, KNOWN DEVELOPMENTS THE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS WE'RE SEEING, WHAT ARE THE HIGHEST AND BEST USES OF THE SITE? I WOULD ASSUME, GIVEN THAT THERE'S A BUILDING HERE, A GOVERNMENT USE WOULD BE ONE OF THEIR RECOMMENDED USES.

BUT I DON'T KNOW. UNTIL WE DO THE STUDY, I SUGGEST THAT YOU ACTUALLY FORCE THAT CONVERSATION.

I THINK YOU CAN. I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THE HIGHEST BECAUSE THAT MAY NOT MEAN THEY NEED TO THEY NEED TO EXAMINE IT BECAUSE I THINK IF YOU FAIL TO EXAMINE IT, THEN YOU WILL YOU HAVE CREATED A NARRATIVE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE SCRAPED, AND THEN WE'RE NEVER GOING TO KNOW WHAT THAT IMPACT IS.

COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON. SO WE WILL DEFINITELY WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS TO LIMIT, I THINK, THAT WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS ASKED FOR IS THAT YOU WANT THE TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO NEED IN ORDER TO MAKE WHATEVER DECISIONS ARE MADE, AND SO WE WILL NOT TAKE THINGS UP AND TRY TO LIMIT THAT SCOPE.

I THINK WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS MUCH AS WE CAN GET INCLUDED.

INCLUDED ON TOP OF IT. SO IT'S KEEP THE BUILDING, SELL THE BUILDING, SCRAPE THE BUILDING LIKE YOU.

AND THEN WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE EXACTLY? BECAUSE OPTION THREE WAS NOT ABOUT REALLY KEEPING THE BUILDING.

ABSOLUTELY. AND I THINK YOU THIS IS AN ECONOMIC HUB OF 2000 PEOPLE.

AND I THINK AND I'VE SEEN IT BE AN ECONOMIC HUB, AND I THINK IT HAS POTENTIAL TO BE ONE.

AND I DON'T WANT TO HAVE DATA THAT DOESN'T GIVE US A CLEAR PICTURE OF THAT, BECAUSE IF AND IF WHATEVER IT IS, IF IT SAYS NO, IT'S NOT AN ECONOMIC IF YOU GET PEOPLE THERE AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO IMPROVE THE PLAZA, THEN. NO, IT'S NOT THAT IS THAT IS A DATA POINT.

WE DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND WE TAKE YOUR POINTS AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S INCLUDED. THANK YOU.

THAT'S IT. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

WELL I WAS NEXT. ON 60. OH, YOU HAVE I HAVE YOU HAVE SPOKEN ALREADY ON 60.

NOT ON UNDERLYING MOTION, ONLY ON PAUL'S. I HAVE YOU WRITTEN DOWN THE UNDERLYING MOTION? I HAVE.

I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE. I HAVE WRITTEN DOWN AND I DON'T WRITE IT DOWN.

IF IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, I CAN FORGET THINGS. I DON'T ADD THINGS.

SO THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION BEFORE US.

I WANT TO THANK ALL THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT HAVE SENT EMAILS THAT SHOWED UP TODAY THAT ARE STILL HERE TODAY.

I TRULY RESPECT AND HOLD A LOT OF THE SPEAKERS AND HIGH REGARDS THAT WERE HERE AND VALUE THEIR INPUT AND THEIR CONCERNS.

AS A THIRD GENERATION DALLAS SITE, DALLAS IS IS MY HOME.

DALLAS WILL CONTINUE TO BE HOME FOR MY FAMILY.

I LIVE IN A HOME THAT IS OVER 100 YEARS OLD, SO PRESERVATION IS IMPORTANT TO ME.

[07:50:09]

SO PLEASE KNOW THAT I WOULD NOT BE VOTING ON ANYTHING WITHOUT DOING MY DUE DILIGENCE AND ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS AND THOSE TOUGH QUESTIONS.

AND THAT INCLUDES HAVING ALL THE OPTIONS IN FRONT OF US UNDERSTANDING THE TRUE COST, THE DATA, AND VERY IMPORTANTLY, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IMPACT AND HOW WE CAN POTENTIALLY GROW INTO THE SOUTHERN SECTOR REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE DO WITH THIS BUILDING.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE CRITICAL TO US, THE RENOVATION COST.

AS SOMEONE THAT REPRESENTS THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING WHERE CITY HALL SITS, I KNOW THAT IT'S MUCH BIGGER THAN THAT.

AND IT INCLUDES ALL THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.

BUT THE NEIGHBORS OF DEEP ELLUM, FARMERS MARKET, THE CEDARS.

I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM. AND WHAT THIS CAN BE KEEPING IT AS IT IS IMPROVING THE PLAZA HAVING SOMETHING DIFFERENT HERE. SO THEIR THOUGHTS AND CONCERNS ARE ALSO TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AS I'M MAKING MY DECISION TODAY.

THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY THEORY. THERE IS NO DECISION THAT IS ALREADY MADE.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS COUNCIL WILL BE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS, NOT STAFF.

AND SO PLEASE KNOW THAT WE WILL TAKE ALL THE INFORMATION INTO CONSIDERATION AND LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THIS MOTION MOVED FORWARD SO WE CAN HAVE ALL THAT INFORMATION BROUGHT BACK TO US.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 63.

THE UNDERLYING MOTION, FOLKS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I WILL BE SUPPORTING COUNCILMAN WES MOTION. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A VERY SENSITIVE AND SERIOUS MATTER.

I GREW UP IN DALLAS. WENT TO ALBERT SIDNEY JOHNSTON, O.W.

HOLMES ROOSEVELT, GRADUATED FROM MACEIO, SERVED AS A SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE.

BEEN HERE ALL MY LIFE AND UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS BUILDING TO NOT JUST MY COMMUNITY, BUT TO THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS AS A WHOLE. HOWEVER, I'VE BEEN IN A BUILDING THAT WAS DEPLORABLE AND WE HAD TO MAKE TOUGH DECISIONS. I'M A PASTOR OF NEW MORNINGSTAR BAPTIST CHURCH, AND WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT DOING ANY KIND OF RENOVATIONS, EVEN TO CARPET, JUST CHANGING THE COLORS OF THINGS, IT GETS SENSITIVE TO PEOPLE BECAUSE YOU'VE INVESTED SO MUCH IN IT.

SO WE'RE WE'RE ATTACHED TO BUILDINGS, WE'RE ATTACHED TO THINGS.

IT'S OUR HISTORY. THAT'S WHO WE ARE. AND THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.

HOWEVER, THE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GROW IS IMPORTANT.

TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A FUNCTIONING BUILDING IS IMPORTANT.

I SERVED AS, AGAIN, A SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE, AND WE HAD SOME BUILDINGS IN OUR COMMUNITY, SOUTH OAK CLIFF HIGH SCHOOL, THAT WAS REALLY IN A DEPLORABLE SHAPE. AND SOME OF THE SAME PICTURES THAT I'VE SEEN HERE AND THE SAME FUNCTIONALITIES THAT WE'VE HAD HERE IS WHAT WE EXPERIENCED THERE. AND IT WAS A TOUGH DECISION FOR SOME, BUT WE KNEW THAT WE HAD TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

AND SO MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT DATA, GIVING THE CITY MANAGER THE OPPORTUNITY AS A COUNCIL TO GO GET THE INFORMATION THAT'S NEEDED SO WE CAN MAKE A PRUDENT DECISION AND CAREFUL DECISION.

AND AS CHAIR STEWART SAID, INCLUDING THE COMMUNITY IN THIS DECISION, THAT HAVING THOSE ROBUST AND SENSITIVE CONVERSATIONS IS NEEDED.

SO I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS. AND AND LOOKING AT COUNCILMAN WES MOTION ABOUT THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY HERE, NOT JUST HERE IN, IN PORT AREA, BUT DOWNTOWN.

TOTALLY. AND WHEN, WHEN YOU HEAR COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA MENTIONED ABOUT GROWTH SOUTH AND HOW THAT'S IMPORTANT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT SOUTHERN.

THE SOUTHERN PART OF DALLAS DOWNTOWN, RIGHT HERE AT CITY HALL IS A PART OF THAT.

IT'S A PART OF THE SOUTHERN. IT'S A PART OF THE SOUTH. IT'S A PART OF SOUTHERN DALLAS. AND TO SEE THE OPPORTUNITY THAT WE WILL POSSIBLY HAVE IS GOING TO BE IMPORTANT.

I BELIEVE IT WILL ALSO HELP INCREASE OUR TAX BASE.

NOW WE HAVE TO CUT COSTS. AND I SAID THIS AT OUR FINANCIAL MEETING.

WE CAN DO WE CAN DO BOTH, AND WE CAN GROW SOUTH.

AND CITY HALL IS A PART OF THAT. THE CITIES WILL THRIVE.

IT WILL IGNITE GROWTH, ESPECIALLY IF IT MAKES US ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE SOUTHERN SECTOR IN DISTRICT FOUR, CEDAR CRESCENT, ETC.. SO THIS IS GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OF US TO ENGAGE IN.

THIS IS GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO COME TOGETHER AND WORK AS A CITY.

ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES COME TOGETHER AS WE GET THE DATA, AS WE'RE THE CITY MANAGERS, GIVING US EVERYTHING THAT WE NEED SO WE CAN MAKE A PRUDENT DECISION. SO MISTER MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, AND I AM SUPPORTING THIS DECISION.

THANK YOU. OKAY. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM 63.

[07:55:01]

THANK YOU. I ACTUALLY HAVE A GOVERNANCE QUESTION.

SINCE THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT BY WAS BUILT WITH BOND MONEY THAT THE VOTERS DECIDED TO SUPPORT.

WILL WE ALSO PUT THE QUESTION TO THE VOTERS ABOUT WHAT WE WILL DO WITH THIS BUILDING? SOMEBODY LIKED MY QUESTION. DO YOU WANT TO DIRECT THAT TO OUR I BELIEVE THAT MIGHT BE A CITY ATTORNEY QUESTION.

PUBLIC FINANCE GROUP AND ALL THAT. NO, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT.

YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT THE QUESTION TO THE VOTERS BASED ON THE BONDS.

HOWEVER, THERE IS UNDER STATE LAW, YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT THE QUESTION BASED ON THE FACT THAT IT'S A PUBLIC FORUM AND A PARK PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY IS CONSIDERED PUBLIC FORUM AND A PARK.

OKAY. AND SO IF THE COUNCIL IS MAKING THE DECISION FOR EVERYTHING, THAT'S NOT THE PLAZA AREA, IS IT? A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE. I'M SORRY TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.

I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE STAYED. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE GOVERNANCE OF HOW THE DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE TODAY.

EVERY EVERY DECISION ASSOCIATED WITH THIS BUILDING, IS IT JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL OR IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE INVOLVED? I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I IF IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO THE DECISION WE HAVE TO MAKE TODAY, I THINK, AREN'T WE GETTING A LITTLE AHEAD OF OURSELVES WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE IN CERTAIN SCENARIOS DOWN THE ROAD IF WE WERE TO TAKE A MAYOR? I THINK WE ARE WAY AHEAD OF OURSELVES. YEAH. YES.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU JUST TO TRY TO FOCUS ON THE DECISION THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY AND ASK ABOUT MAYBE VOTING PROCEDURES RELEVANT TO TODAY, BUT NOT FOR A VOTE WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO TAKE.

WE'RE BEING ASKED TO TAKE A VOTE ON DISPOSING OF A BUILDING TODAY THAT WAS PAID FOR WITH BOND FUNDS.

I LET THAT ONE SLIP THROUGH, BUT I'M PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE. WELL, IT'S LATE, SO HERE IS.

SOME OF THEM ARE GETTING PAST ME. IS THERE ANY ANSWER TO WHY THIS IS MOVING SO QUICKLY? IS THERE A MANAGEMENT ANSWER TO THAT? THANK YOU FOR THE ANSWER.

FOR THE QUESTION. COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN I WORK AT THE PLEASURE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WE ARE MOVING BASED ON THE DIRECTION THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN.

I'M SORRY I DIDN'T HEAR THE ANSWER. I WORK AT THE PLEASURE OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

WE ARE MOVING BASED ON THE DIRECTION THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO ME BY THIS BODY OR WHAT THE WHATEVER THE DIRECTION IS THAT'S GIVEN IS THE WAY WE WILL PROCEED.

WELL, THE REASON WHY I ASK IS THAT WE OFTEN HEAR HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET SOMETHING PUT ON AN AGENDA.

BUT THESE MEETINGS JUST HAPPENED. AND YET THIS WAS ABLE TO GET ON THE AGENDA VERY, VERY QUICKLY.

AND SO USUALLY THAT'S KIND OF AN EMERGENCY ITEM.

AND I WAS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THAT MIGHT BE DRIVING THIS DECISION.

THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND PROVIDED GUIDANCE TO BRING THIS ITEM BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL.

ON TODAY'S AGENDA. AND WE PROCEEDED ACCORDINGLY.

BUT THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. THANK YOU. OKAY.

MR. BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. SUSTAINED. I'M JUST KIDDING. GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD.

I JUST GOT A LITTLE THROWN OFF. I WANTED TO TO BRING UP SOME POINTS THAT WERE JUST MADE.

SPECIFICALLY ABOUT FAIR PARK. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THE MOTION THAT IS ON THE FLOOR AND THE MENTION OF FAIR PARK SAYS FAIR PARK IMPROVEMENTS. IT DOES NOT SAY FAIR PARK SOUTH DALLAS TO COMPARE FAIR PARK SOUTH DALLAS IN THE WAY THAT THIS IS WRITTEN AND TO INCORPORATE THE CEDARS AS IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT IS UNFAIR, I THINK IS UNFAIR A WAY TO CHARACTERIZE IT.

AND SO IT'S NOT SKIPPING OVER A NEIGHBORHOOD AND TAKING CARE OF ONE. THIS IS TAKING CARE OF A CITY ASSET OF FAIR PARK THAT HAS KNOWN DEFERRED MAINTENANCE.

THAT IS WHAT THIS MOTION INCLUDES. IT'S NOT ABOUT SKIPPING OVER A NEIGHBORHOOD.

IN FACT, IF ROBIN COULD COME TO THE PODIUM, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO HAVE IT VERY CLEAR THAT WE HAVEN'T SKIPPED OVER THE CEDARS.

I THINK THAT THE CEDARS TIFF AT THIS POINT HAS NOW BEEN DISSOLVED, AND THE INCREMENT IS GOING INTO THE INFRASTRUCTURE FUND.

BUT CAN CAN YOU VERIFY THE CEDARS TIFF INFORMATION, PLEASE, FOR ME?

[08:00:03]

YES. THE CEDARS TIFF EXPIRED IN 2022 AND COUNCIL DEDICATED IN THE POLICY AMENDMENT THAT YEAR ALL EXPIRED TIFF INCREMENTAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND.

AND SO THE CITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT THAT EXPIRED IN 2022 AND THE CEDARS TIFF FULL DISTRICT THAT COMBINED $7 MILLION IS NOW BEING CONTRIBUTED ANNUALLY TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND, PER STATE STATUTE.

WHEN TIFF BOUNDARIES ARE ESTABLISHED, ELIGIBLE USE IT IS ARTICULATED, THAT CAN BE USED OUTSIDE IN THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENCY IF THERE'S A BENEFIT TOWARDS THE GOAL OF THE TIF.

IS THAT ACCURATE? PARTIALLY. IT CAN BE USED OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY, THE TIF BOUNDARY FOR PARTICULAR USES, FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, FOR PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY.

WHICH WHO KNOWS WHAT THAT MEANS. BUT YES, THOSE THREE CATEGORIES ARE LAID OUT IN STATE LAW AS ALLOWABLE USES OUTSIDE OF A BOUNDARY.

SO I BRING THAT UP JUST TO SAY THAT I'M NOT NEGATING THE POINT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON MADE, BUT I AM SAYING THAT THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY, IF THERE WERE TO BE A BARBELL TIFF ESTABLISHED WITH BOUNDARIES THAT LINE UP TO THE CEDARS, TO NOT ONLY HAVE A BENEFICIARY OUTSIDE OF THE CONTIGUOUS LINES, WHICH COULD BE FAIR PARK, BUT WE COULD POTENTIALLY ALSO USE WITHIN THE ADJACENCY OF THE BOUNDARIES, WHICH WOULD BE THE CEDARS.

SO THEY COULD ALSO BE A BENEFICIARY OF SAID ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOLS.

CAN THAT CAN YOU VERIFY THAT AT ALL? SO WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT.

WE HAVEN'T DONE ANY ANALYSIS ON IT. TIFF, I'VE GIVEN YOU A HYPOTHETICAL, BUT SURE, HYPOTHETICALLY, YES, A TIFF WOULD FOLLOW STATE LAW, AND THE TIFF COULD FUND ANYTHING THAT SUPPORTS THE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE TIFF, INCLUDING THOSE THREE TYPES OF EXPENSES OUTSIDE OF ITS BOUNDARIES.

THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE I WANTED TO MAKE IT REAL CLEAR ABOUT WHERE IT IS THAT I STAND, AND I GO BACK TO THE VERY FIRST TIME THAT I TALKED. AND WHEN I SAID THAT THERE'S THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THAT I CAN TELL MY CONSTITUENTS THAT WE ARE SOLVING FOR.

AND I BELIEVE THAT IF EXPLORING A SALE IS WHAT THERE IS A WILL OF THIS BODY TO BE, I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT THAT MONEY IS GOING TO SOLVE FOR A PROBLEM. WE ARE MAKING A DECISION BASED ON CLEAR NEGLECT THAT HAS OCCURRED FROM THIS FACILITY AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T CONTINUE THAT TREND TO OTHER CITY FACILITY, AS IN FAIR PARK, WHERE THERE'S ALSO BEEN THE SAME NEGLECT. AND IF WE CAN LEVERAGE THIS TYPE OF OPPORTUNITY THERE.

THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT. AND THEN I CAN TURN TO MY CONSTITUENTS AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE SOLVING FOR. WE'RE FINALLY GOING TO BRING IN THE MONEY THAT WE'VE NEVER DONE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT'S THE, THE REASON FOR THAT.

SO I DON'T WANT TO SKIP OVER THE CEDARS. AND I THINK THAT WE CAN ALL WE CAN ALL FLOURISH IF YOU BRING US BACK WHAT WE'RE ASKING TO IN THIS MOTION.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'D LIKE CLARIFICATION ON THE TEXT OF THE MOTION.

WHEN IT WAS READ, IT WAS UNCLEAR WHETHER THE LANGUAGE THE SUBPOINTS FOLLOWING THE SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION, INCLUDES THE ORIGINAL PROVISIONS IN SECTION TWO OF THE ADVERTISED RESOLUTION.

COULD I HAVE CLARIFICATION ON WHAT'S INCLUDED AND WHAT ISN'T? WHO ARE YOU SEEKING CLARIFICATION FROM? THE AUTHOR OF THE MOVER, MR. WEST, IF HE'LL RESPOND. YEAH, OKAY. SURE. SO THE ORIGINAL SECTION TWO.

I READ AMENDMENTS FOR TWO A TO D, AS IN DELTA AND TWO F.

THE OTHER SECTIONS, ACCORDING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, HAD AND FEEL FREE TO CHIME IN.

BERT WAS THE ONE WHO WAS HELPING ME WOULD NOT BE CHANGED.

SO THE ORIGINAL B, C, AND E ARE PART OF YOUR MOTION.

THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU. WAS THAT ALL YOU NEEDED? YES. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 63? I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE. OKAY. WAS A RECORD VOTE REQUESTED ON THE UNDERLYING MOTION OR NO, I WASN'T, I'D LIKE ONE. OKAY. IT'S BEEN REQUESTED.

AND SO, MADAM SECRETARY, IF YOU'LL PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. CADENA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

BLACKMON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

ROTH. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCILMEMBER.

[08:05:01]

RIDLEY. NO. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES.

MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES.

WITH 12 VOTING IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. LET'S GO BACK, I GUESS, AND PICK UP MR.

MAYOR, YOU HAVE A TABLED ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 47 WAS TABLED.

YOU HAVE 55, AND YOU HAVE AN ITEM 62 THAT ARE REMAINING ON THE AGENDA, THE ORIGINAL AGENDA.

OKAY. AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A LITTLE BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT BEFORE WE GO INTO OUR ZONING AGENDA.

OKAY. PERSONAL PRIVILEGE STUFF. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO I WILL GO BACK TO THE TABLED ITEM 4747, 5562 TWO.

AND THEN ZONING AND THEN ZONING. THANK YOU. WE'LL DO A QUICK BREAK BEFORE ZONING.

OKAY. OKAY. LET ME GET THE ITEM LOADED. ONE SECOND.

SO AGENDA ITEM 47, IT HAS BEEN READ INTO THE RECORD.

MR. MAYOR, WOULD YOU LIKE FOR ME TO READ THE ITEM AGAIN? NO, I THINK WE'RE GOOD. OKAY. I THINK WE GOT IT.

WE GOT THE GIST OF IT, I THINK IS WHAT THEY'RE SAYING. WE CAN READ IT FROM HERE.

OKAY. YEAH. SO ON ITEM 47, I'M TRYING TO THINK.

HAVE WE HAD ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT YET? YES, THERE WAS DISCUSSION, MR. MAYOR. I HAVE TO FIND MY CUE HERE TO SEE ON ITEM 40.

OKAY. 47. DISTRICTS 13 AND 12 HAD ALREADY SPOKEN ONCE.

SO YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES? IF YOU'D LIKE TO. IT'S MAYOR.

I HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR THAT I NEED TO WITHDRAW FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GO FOR IT.

I'D LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION. WELL, I'M SORRY, I THINK I CAN STILL ASK QUESTIONS BEFORE A MOTION IS WITHDRAWN.

WELL, IF I NOT IF THE FLOOR WAS TABLED WHEN I WAS RECOGNIZED ALREADY, IT WOULD COME BACK TO ME.

HOLD ON ONE SECOND. SO I NEED MY PARLIAMENTARIAN TO REMIND ME OF PROCEDURALLY WHERE WE LEFT OFF WITH THIS ONE, BECAUSE I, I VAGUELY REMEMBER IT WAS TABLED UNTIL SOMETIME BEFORE THE ZONING AGENDA.

IS THAT WHAT IT WAS? YES. AND SO NOW WE'RE BRINGING IT BACK UP, AND THE ITEM HAD ALREADY BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

HAD IT NOT JUST THE MOTION TO TABLE. SO. SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY THERE WAS AN UNDERLYING MOTION TO COMMIT TO HOUSING AND HOMELESS SERVICES BY COUNCIL MEMBER. RIGHT. RIGHT. SO THAT WAS THE 47 THE MOTION WAS TO SEND TO.

ORIGINALLY, THERE WAS A MOTION BY CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, AND THAT WHEN WE MOVED IT, IT WAS MOOTED.

AND THEN WE TOOK UP YOURS TO COMMIT IT TO HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS.

RIGHT. CORRECT. SO WHAT'S WHAT'S WHAT AM I MISSING? SO DIFFERENT MOTION. OH. YOU WANT YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT NOW THAN THE ORIGINAL? YES. I THINK I'D GIVEN HER THE FLOOR, THOUGH.

ON AFTER I BROUGHT IT BACK FROM BEING TABLED.

I ORIGINALLY GAVE HER THE FLOOR, SO I NEED TO LET HER SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES ON IT BEFORE I ACTUALLY RECOGNIZE YOUR MOTION. CAN I JUST HAVE A PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY? SURE. THE MOTION WAS MADE WHILE I STILL HAD TIME.

AND THAT WAS NOT EXHAUSTED. AND SO IF WE WERE COMING BACK IMMEDIATELY TO THE MOTION, THEN I SHOULD STILL BE ABLE TO YIELD BACK TO MY TIME.

WHAT TIME DID YOU HAVE ON ITEM 47? I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT.

I HAD TWO MINUTES AND 38 SECONDS. YOU MADE THAT UP.

I DID OKAY, BUT IT WAS VERY. IT WAS VERY GOOD WHAT YOU TRIED TO DO THERE.

SO. OKAY, LOOK, DO YOU WANT TO TALK FOR THREE MINUTES ON WHAT'S LAID OUT THERE BEFORE I'M.

I'M GOING TO INEVITABLY GOING TO RECOGNIZE HIM FOR A DIFFERENT MOTION. SO GO AHEAD. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

THOR, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. DO YOU NEED THIS MOTION? SO IN THE TIME SINCE WE LAST SPOKE ABOUT THIS, WHICH DOES SEEM LIKE A LONG TIME AGO HAVE YOU HEARD FROM ANY OF THE PARTIES THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT? YES, I HAVE.

AND HAS THERE BEEN AN OFFER BY ANY OF THEM TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH US? YES. THERE HAS. SO WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? AND IS THAT POSSIBLE? I NEED TO DEFER TO ONE OF ORDER MAYOR PROCUREMENT.

THE MOTION THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED IS A REMAND TO COMMITTEE.

AND SO THIS IS NOT GERMANE QUESTIONING. THAT'S ONE ISSUE.

AND THE OTHER ISSUE IS I'VE FOUND IN MY HANDWRITTEN NOTES HERE A SUBSEQUENT NOTE WHERE YOU ACTUALLY HAD YOU WERE THE

[08:10:04]

FIRST PERSON TO SPEAK IN THAT FIRST ROUND AND NOT AND WE WEREN'T ON ROUND TWO.

I JUST, I JUST TURNED THE PAGE AND FOUND ANOTHER SET OF NOTES.

I OWE YOU AN APOLOGY. MAYOR. I'M SORRY. IT'S HARD TO HEAR YOU.

YEAH, I'M SAYING THAT I'M ACTUALLY MESSED UP HERE BECAUSE I FOUND ON ANOTHER PAGE WHERE WE WERE STILL IN ROUND ONE.

AND HE HAD HE DID HAVE THE FLOOR WHEN WE HAD THE MOTION TO TABLE.

SO TECHNICALLY I RECOGNIZED YOU IMPROPERLY AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

SO AND SO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DISPOSE OF THIS? I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO CORRECT MY MISTAKE AND GIVE HIM BACK THE FLOOR, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE LITERALLY WHERE WE WHERE WE LEFT OFF.

I SEE IT RIGHT HERE. SO THIS WILL NOT COUNT AS A ROUND FOR ME.

NO. OKAY. THANK YOU. NO. MR. BAZALDUA, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN I HAVE TOO MANY HANDWRITTEN NOTES HERE.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION.

IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE SO ORDERED.

YOUR MOTION IS WITHDRAWN. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I MOVE TO DENY THIS ITEM AND REJECT ALL PROPOSALS.

ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. AND NOW WE ARE ON THAT MOTION AND YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I THIS IS AN EASY SOLUTION.

THIS IS ONE THAT I THINK WE ALL WANTED TO TO SEE THE THE ABILITY TO PUT STAFF BACK AT, AT WORK WITHOUT MAKING A TRUE IMPACT TO THE INTENT. SO JUST PROCEDURALLY, I THINK THAT THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO GO.

AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION. THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN, FOR FIVE MINUTES.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCE OF THE MOTION IS.

SO THIS WOULD ALLOW THE MANAGER TO THEN CONTRACT WITH A FIRM OF HER CHOICE.

IS THAT CORRECT? YOU'RE ASKING THAT QUESTION OF.

WELL, I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY A LEGAL QUESTION.

OKAY. CITY ATTORNEY. I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK FOR THE CITY MANAGER, BUT OUR CODE AND THE STATE LAW ALLOWS US TO DO A A CONTRACT IF IT'S UNDER A CERTAIN AMOUNT WITHOUT PROCURING IT.

OKAY. AND YEAH, OUR CODE ALSO ALLOWS THE CITY MANAGER TO DO THAT WITHOUT COUNCIL APPROVAL IF IT'S WITHIN THE THRESHOLD AMOUNT.

SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. RIGHT. OKAY. SO IN THIS CASE, THE CONTRACT AMOUNT IS 211,000.

I THINK THE STATE CONTRACTED AMOUNT IS SOMETHING LIKE 140,000.

IS THAT CORRECT? I'M WONDERING IF PROCUREMENT CAN COME OUT. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A PERSONAL SERVICES OR PROFESSIONAL AND WHAT THE THRESHOLD AMOUNT IS FOR.

I'M SORRY. CONSULTING SERVICES I DON'T KNOW THE THRESHOLD AMOUNT.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION LIMIT IS 100 IS 300,000.

BUT THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENT IS 100,000.

SO WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS.

WHAT PROCESS WOULD YOU GO THROUGH. IN THIS CASE, SINCE THERE'S GRANT FUNDS, ANTICIPATE IT'S GOING TO BE AN NOFA.

FOR 211,000. CORRECT. AND SO THE MANAGER IS NOT ABLE TO DO HER OWN ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I THINK THAT WE'RE KIND OF TALKING PAST EACH OTHER.

SO I BELIEVE THAT THE THE NOFA WILL GO BACK OUT.

RIGHT? CORRECT. BUT IF WE NEED A STOPGAP, THEN THE CITY MANAGER CAN IF THE IF IT'S BELOW THE THRESHOLD, DO AN ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION. OKAY. DOES THAT.

IT DOES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY MR. BAZALDUA? ITEM 47. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. ITEM 55, PLEASE.

[55. 25-3076A Authorize an acquisition including the exercise of the right of eminent domain, if such becomes necessary, from 5901 South Lamar Street LLC, of a commercially improved tract of land containing approximately 18.796 acres located on South Lamar Street near its intersection with South Central Expressway for the Dallas Floodway Extension Project - Not to exceed $11,090,000.00 ($11,040,000.00 plus closing costs and title expenses not to exceed $50,000.00) - Financing: Storm Drainage Management Capital Construction Fund ($11,090,000.00)]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 55 AUTHORIZE AN ACQUISITION, INCLUDING THE EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT OF EMINENT DOMAIN, IF SUCH BECOMES NECESSARY.

FROM 5901 SOUTH LAMAR STREET, LLC, OF A COMMERCIALLY IMPROVED TRACT OF LAND CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 18.796 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LAMAR STREET NEAR ITS INTERSECTION WITH SOUTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY FOR THE DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION PROJECT, NOT TO EXCEED $11,090,000. BECAUSE THIS IS AN YOU DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER, BUT I'M TOLD THAT SPEAKER HAS CANCELED.

THAT'S REGISTERED FOR THIS ITEM. THEREFORE, THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.

ALSO, BECAUSE THIS ITEM IS AN EMINENT DOMAIN ITEM, IT WILL REQUIRE A RECORD VOTE.

[08:15:03]

MR. MAYOR, BUT THIS IS YOUR ITEM. WONDERFUL. IS THERE A MOTION, MAYOR? CAN WE HAVE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS, PLEASE? OKAY.

WE WILL STAND AT RECESS FOR FIVE. OH, THEN WE WON'T STAND AT RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY, GREAT. ALL RIGHT, SO I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE. INCREASE THE PURCHASE AMOUNT FROM $11,040,000 TO AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $23,291,000. SECOND. SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? MR.. BAZALDUA? NO, SIR.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE? SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT.

NEXT ITEM I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE BEFORE WE MOVE ON FROM AGENDA ITEM 55, THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN DID HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RECUSED HERSELF FROM VOTING ON THIS ITEM. SO COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN, YOU MAY RETURN TO THE COUNCIL CHAMBER.

THANK YOU. SO INFORMED COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN THAT SHE CAN COME BACK.

WE'LL NOW MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 62. AND THERE'S A RECORD VOTE ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU. SO 55. WE NEED A RECORD. THAT IS CORRECT, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL.

LET'S KEEP MRS MENDELSOHN OUT OF THE ROOM AND WE'LL HAVE THE ROLL CALL.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER WEST. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

NO. IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER WEST IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCILMEMBER GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER RESENDEZ IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCILMEMBER CADENA. IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCILMEMBER BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER BLACKMON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER ROTH IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCILMEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS.

YES, MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR JOHNSON.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER CADENA. NO. THANK YOU.

WITH TEN VOTING IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED FOR ABSENT.

VOTE TAKEN. I'M SORRY. THREE ABSENT. ONE TAKE.

THREE ABSENT. ONE VOTE TAKEN. ONE ABSTAIN. THE ITEM PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

[62. 25-2985A Authorize an Interlocal Agreement (“ILA”) with Dallas Area Rapid Transit (hereinafter "DART") for activities occurring during the first eighteen months of the Project related to the temporary closure and vacation of the DART facility located at the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center - in an amount not to exceed $3,000,000.00 - Financing: Convention Center Capital Construction Fund]

THAT'S AGENDA ITEM 62. AND COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN CAN RETURN TO THE COUNCIL CHAMBER.

LET'S BRING HER BACK AND TAKE UP ITEM 62, AGENDA ITEM 62.

AUTHORIZE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. ILA WITH DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT HERE IN AFTER DART FOR THE ACTIVITIES OCCURRING DURING THE FIRST 18 MONTHS OF THE PROJECT, RELATED TO THE TEMPORARY CLOSURE AND VACATION OF THE DALLAS OF THE DART FACILITY, LOCATED AT THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3 MILLION.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. LOOKING FOR A MOTION.

MOTION FOR APPROVAL. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, MAYOR PRO TEM, ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I KNOW EVERYONE'S SO EXCITED AT 10 TO 9 TO HAVE SO MUCH DISCUSSION.

SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE PAYING DART $3 MILLION.

COULD SOMEONE EXPLAIN THAT TO ME? HI. GOOD EVENING. FLEMING. DIRECTOR, CONVENTION AND EVENT SERVICES.

AND THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SO AS WE'VE MOVED THROUGH AND BRIEFED COUNCIL ABOUT THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER DALLAS MASTER PLAN AND THE IMPLEMENTATION INTO PRE ENABLING WORKS ENABLING.

AND THEN AS WE MOVE INTO DEMOLITION CONSTRUCTION, IT IS ALWAYS BEEN DISCUSSED THAT THE DART STATION WOULD NEED TO HAVE SOME KIND OF INTERMITTENT CLOSURE. WE WILL BE COCOONING THE STRUCTURE.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION THAT WILL BE TAKING PLACE AROUND IT, IT IS NOT SAFE FOR PASSENGERS TO GET OFF THE TRAIN AT THAT POINT.

AND SO WE HAVE MET WITH THEM. CITY LEADERSHIP AND INSPIRED DALLAS TRINITY ALLIANCE AND OUR DESIGN TEAM EVERY WEEK FOR SEVERAL MONTHS TO WALK THROUGH WHAT A PLAN WOULD BE. THE MOST ECONOMICAL PLAN WOULD BE TO ENSURE THAT THE CUSTOMERS WHO CURRENTLY IN

[08:20:02]

THE RIDERSHIP THAT CURRENTLY USES THAT STOP ARE STILL ABLE TO GET INTO DOWNTOWN TO CONTINUE TO WORK, OR WHATEVER OTHER REASON THEY ARE COMING INTO DOWNTOWN.

AND SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS ASKED FOR LICENSE TO ONE VACATE THE STATION, TWO FOR THEM TO CONTINUE.

IT'LL CONTINUE THROUGH AND STOP AT UNION STATION.

BUT GIVEN ALTERNATE FOR THE BUSSES THAT WILL BE INTERRUPTED AS WELL.

SO A TEMPORARY BUS LAYOVER. WE'RE DISCUSSING THAT TO BE AT MARILLA CURRENTLY, AND THEN TO PROVIDE A GO LINK THAT WE WILL TEST OVER THE NEXT 18 MONTHS TO SEE WHAT THE WHAT THE RIDERSHIP WILL BE ON THAT.

THAT WILL HAVE THREE DESIGNATED STOPS. SO IT WILL STOP AT THE BUS LAYOVER, IT'LL STOP AT UNION STATION AND IT'LL STOP AT THE CEDAR STATION, KIND OF A CIRCULAR STOP. WE'LL USE THAT TIME TO WORK WITH DART TO NOT JUST LOOK AT THE COST, BUT LOOK AT RIDERSHIP. MAKE SURE THAT THE GO LINK IS BEING USED AS WELL AS THE BUS LAYOVER, WHICH IS WHY WE ONLY DID 18 MONTHS OF A LONGER CONSTRUCTION PERIOD SO THAT WE COULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL AT AN INTERIM POINT AND DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD CONTINUE THE SERVICE OR NOT. ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE ASKED THEM BECAUSE WE ARE BUILDING OVER THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE TO PROVIDE US CONSULTANTS WHO CAN WORK WITH US TO LOOK AT AND TO EVALUATE AND REVIEW THE PLANS AS WE START TO CONSTRUCT OVER THEM.

WHAT IS THE CURRENT DART RIDERSHIP AND FARE RECEIVED FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER LOCATION? I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT FARE, BUT IT'S ABOUT 700 IN TERMS OF RIDERSHIP ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS THAT COME THROUGH AND GET OFF AT THAT STOP.

OKAY. WAIT, YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S 700 PEOPLE THAT GET OFF AT THE CONVENTION CENTER.

STOP EVERY DAY. THAT IS THE INFORMATION WE WERE PROVIDED BY DART.

YES. MAYOR, IF I DIDN'T HAVE PLANS TOMORROW, I WOULD GO DOWN THERE AND I WOULD STAY 24 HOURS AND COUNT THEM.

BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY THAT IS TRUE. OKAY IF WE WERE ADDING A TRAIN STOP SOMEWHERE, WOULDN'T WE EXPECT DART TO CHARGE US FOR THAT? LIKE THEY NEED TO TAKE CARE OF A TRAIN SHELTER.

THEY NEED TO EMPTY THE TRASH. THEY NEED TO DO ALL THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, AND THEY WOULD CHARGE US TO ADD A STATION.

WOULDN'T YOU AGREE? I ASSUME SO, YEAH. SO WHY IS IT WE'RE BEING CHARGED TO STOP SERVICING A STATION? LIKE, THE TRAIN'S JUST GOING TO GO RIGHT ON BY.

IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO STOP RIGHT NOW. IT STOPS.

IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE THROUGH. NOW THEY WON'T HAVE TO PICK UP TRASH.

THEY WON'T HAVE TO PROVIDE SECURITY. ALL THE THINGS THAT HAPPEN WITH A STATION.

IT SEEMS INVERSE THAT WE WOULD PAY THEM TO NOT HAVE A STATION, AS OPPOSED TO PAYING THEM TO ADD A STATION.

SO AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH AND LOOKED AT THE AMOUNT OF CIRCULAR WALKING THAT PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO DO AROUND THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, ETC. TO GET BACK TO THEIR LOCATIONS, THIS IS KIND OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS WITH THEM, WHICH IS WHY AND WE CAN SOME OF THE SAME LOGIC, SOME OF THE SAME QUESTIONS.

AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING IT ON A TRUNCATED SESSION.

WE'VE ASKED THEM TO PROVIDE US RIDERSHIP AS WE GO THROUGH AND TO PROVIDE US INFORMATION ON IF THAT SERVICE IS ACTUALLY PICKING UP THE RIDERSHIP THAT THEY'VE PROVIDED US IN TERMS OF DATA.

NOW, THERE'S A PRECEDENT FOR IT. TEX-DOT IS ALSO DOING SOME OF THEIR BUS LAYOVER AND HAS A RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM THAT ARE ALSO PAYING FOR THE DISRUPTION OF SERVICES AS WELL. AND SO WE HAVE TAKEN WHAT THEIR INITIAL COSTS WERE, WHICH WAS A MUCH HIGHER NUMBER, NARROWED IT DOWN TO THE TO THE 3 MILLION TO INCLUDE PREDOMINANTLY.

THE COST IS FOR THE GO LINK TESTING AND THEN FOR THE REVIEW OF PLANS AS WELL AS SOME FLAGGERS, ETC., WHO WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ALONG THAT ROUTE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO DISRUPTION TO THEIR SERVICE AS THEY CONTINUE THROUGH TO UNION STATION? WELL, WHO DECIDED THAT WE NEEDED A NEW GO LINK? THAT WAS AN OPTION. AND THAT WAS DECIDED RATHER THAN TO PAY AN EXORBITANT COST FOR ADDITIONAL BUS ROUTES, WHICH IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY HAD SUGGESTED.

AND SO WE CAME TO THAT AS SOMETHING THAT THE CONVENTION CENTER HAS USED BEFORE.

IN THE PAST WE PAID MUCH MORE THAN THAN 300. I THINK WE WERE PAYING OUR PORTION OF IT FOR JUST TWO STOPS WAS ABOUT

[08:25:03]

360,000 A YEAR. THAT WAS WITH THE SERVICE STILL UNDER HALL F AT THE CONVENTION CENTER.

AND SO IT WAS A WORKABLE SOLUTION AT THE TIME WITH LESS RIDERSHIP AND LESS STOPS.

BUT THIS ALLOWS THE PEOPLE WHO ADDRESSES SOME PEOPLE WITH MOBILITY CONDITIONS, ETC., AND WHO CANNOT WALK THE LONGER ROUTE THAT WE'LL HAVE TO DO WHEN WE PRESENT OUR TRANSPORTATION PLAN TO YOU IN JANUARY, TO KIND OF SHOW WHAT THOSE WALKING ROUTES ARE GOING TO BE, TO SHOW YOU WHAT THE CIRCULAR AREA IS GOING TO BE AS WE START TO CLOSE.

BECAUSE REMEMBER, IT WILL NOT BE JUST US THAT ARE CLOSING CERTAIN ROADWAYS.

WE'LL HAVE CLOSURES FOR FIFA AND WE'RE WE'RE MAKING AN ASSUMPTION ABOUT THE RIDERSHIP INCREASES THAT WILL HAPPEN DURING FIFA.

ALONG WITH SOME OF THE STUDIES THAT HAVE COME BACK FROM THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, FROM DART, AND FROM TXDOT AS WE PREPARED FOR THAT.

SO THAT PLAYED A PART IN WHY WE JUST SELECTED THE 18 MONTHS TO TAKE IN THAT ADDITIONAL RIDERSHIP.

BUT ALONG THOSE LINES, WE'LL ALSO WHEN WE BRIEF YOU IN JANUARY, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE CLOSURES THAT WILL OCCUR BECAUSE OF THE I-30 RECONSTRUCTION, THE CLOSURES THAT WILL OCCUR BECAUSE OF FIFA, AND THEN OUR PLANNED STRUCTURES AS WE MOVE INTO DEMOLITION.

IF YOU LOOK NOW, YOU'LL SEE FENCING ALREADY GOING UP ON THE EAST SIDE AND FENCING THAT'S GOING TO START GOING UP NEXT MONTH ON THE WEST SIDE OF LAMAR.

AND SO YOU'LL START TO SEE SOME OF THOSE CLOSURES BEGIN TO HAPPEN, WHICH WILL MAKE IT NOT NECESSARILY NAVIGABLE FOR SOMEONE HAVING TO WALK, WHICH WHAT WOULD SEEM LIKE A VERY SHORT DISTANCE.

SO THE RED AND BLUE LINES FOR THE TRAIN WILL STILL STOP IN THE CEDARS AND THEY'LL STILL STOP AT UNION STATION.

CORRECT? CORRECT. I MEAN, I THINK WHEN YOU HAVE CONSTRUCTION OR A CLOSED STOP, YOU JUST HAVE A CLOSED STOP.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY MITIGATION NEEDED FOR THAT.

THERE'S FOUR BUS ROUTES THAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO SEE THAT GO TO THE CONVENTION CENTER NOW.

WILL ALL FOUR OF THOSE REMAIN IN EFFECT? SO SOME OF THOSE ARE GOING TO BE LAYOVER TO MARILLA.

AND SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH WHAT THOSE WILL BE AND I DO.

I'M SO SORRY. CAN YOU JUST ANSWER OUR ARE THOSE FOUR BUS ROUTES STILL GOING TO BE IN EFFECT? NOT ALL OF THE ROUTES. THEY WILL BE REROUTED AND NOT JUST BECAUSE OF OUR PROJECT, BUT BECAUSE OF THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE OCCURRING.

THEY HAVE TO GO AROUND THE CONSTRUCTION, BUT ALL FOUR ROUTES ARE STILL GOING TO BE RUNNING CORRECT. THEY'LL STILL BE RUNNING JUST IN A DIFFERENT ORIENTATION.

OKAY. SO AGAIN, NOT SURE WHY WE WOULD BE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

PLEASE TELL ME WHAT YOU MEAN BY AN ALTERNATE BUS LAYOVER ON MARILLA.

I'M NOT AWARE OF THIS. AND SO WE ARE PLANNING TO HAVE A BUS STOP.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE BUS STOP UNDER HALL F CURRENTLY, RIGHT? THERE'S NO WHERE TO STAGE THEM. NOT ENOUGH ROOM AT UNION STATION TO DO THAT.

WE'VE STUDIED THAT. THERE'S ALSO SOME TURN RADIUS CONCERNS AND ISSUES WITH OTHER LOCATIONS THAT WE LOOKED AT.

AND SO, MARILLA, THE CUT OFF AT MARILLA THAT COMES TO THE SIDE OF THE CONVENTION CENTER SEEMS TO BE THE MOST OBVIOUS LOCATION WILL BE ABLE TO SET UP REFRESHING STATIONS FOR RESTROOMS FOR THE DRIVERS, AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO STOP THERE SAFELY WITHOUT CAUSING ANY TRAFFIC CONCERNS.

SO A REFRESHING STATION IS A BATHROOM? YES. IS THAT A PORTA POTTY? NOT A PORTA POTTY. IT'LL BE THE SAME TRINITY ALLIANCE IS ALREADY PUTTING RESTROOM STALLS ON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, AND SO WE'LL JUST HAVE ONE OF THOSE ALONG THE PIONEER PARK PARKING LOT.

SO THEY'RE NOT JUST GOING TO GO IN THE CONVENTION CENTER TO GO TO THE BATHROOM THERE.

THEY WON'T THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO FOR THE MOST PART OF THAT, IT'LL BE FIFA AND IT'LL BE A PERIMETER.

SECURITY PERIMETER ONLY SECURED. PEOPLE WHO HAVE PASSED CERTAIN BACKGROUND CHECKS WILL BE ABLE TO GO INTO THE CONVENTION CENTER.

SO THAT IS NOT AN OPTION. IS THAT GOING TO BE AT THE POLICE MEMORIAL? NOT ON THE SIDE THAT IS ABUTTING THE CONVENTION CENTER.

YOU'RE GOING TO PUT PORTA POTTIES ON THE POLICE MEMORIAL. WE ARE NOT PUTTING PORTA POTTIES ON THE POLICE REPORT.

THAT IS NOT, I'M SORRY, A REFRESHING STATION.

WE ARE NOT PUTTING A REFRESHING STATION ON THE POLICE MEMORIAL AREA AT ALL.

IT WILL BE IN THE PARKING LOT THAT ABUTS PIONEER PARK.

SO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET, AWAY FROM THE POLICE MEMORIAL.

WE WOULD NOT PUT A PORTA POTTY ON THE POLICE MEMORIAL.

WE WOULD NOT DO THAT. YOU'RE GOING TO LINE UP THE BUSSES THERE, THOUGH. WE'RE GOING TO LINE THE BUSSES UP ON THE SIDE THAT IS THE CONVENTION CENTER SIDE OF THE STREET. I AM GOING TO GO BACK TO

[08:30:07]

$3 MILLION. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE GETTING.

THE TRAIN IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO GO AS IT'S ALWAYS GONE FROM THE CEDARS TO UNION STATION AND BACK.

IT JUST WON'T STOP. THAT'S NO EXPENSE. IT'S ACTUALLY A COST SAVINGS TO DART.

THE BUSSES ARE STILL GOING TO ROUTE, JUST AS IF WE HAD CONSTRUCTION ANYWHERE ELSE.

THEY'RE GOING TO GO AROUND THE CONSTRUCTION AGAIN.

I DON'T SEE HOW THAT'S AN EXPENSE TO THE CITY, LET ALONE $3 MILLION.

I ABSOLUTELY DON'T UNDERSTAND PUTTING IN A NEW GO ZONE IN A TEST IN A CONSTRUCTION AREA THAT SEEMS LIKE A VERY BAD IDEA.

AND NOW I'M. I'M PRETTY CONCERNED WITH THIS PLAN.

YOU ALSO MENTIONED 18 MONTHS. WHAT IS THE 18 MONTHS? SO WE WANTED TO GIVE OURSELVES THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET THROUGH FIFA, THE INCREASED RIDERSHIP THAT FIFA IS FORECASTING TO CREATE ALONG THOSE BUSSES AND ON THAT LINE AND COME BACK TO COUNCIL, PROVIDE YOU RIDERSHIP NUMBERS MINUS THE FIFA INCREASE AND MAKE A DECISION, A POLICY RECOMMENDATION THAT WE EITHER CONTINUE TO GO LINK OR FOR THE TERM OF THE CONSTRUCTION, DECIDE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE IT BECAUSE WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE RIDERSHIP POST FIFA WILL CARRY THE SAME NUMBER OF OF OF NEED AND SERVICE NEED. SO IN YOUR UNIVERSE, YOU CAN SEE COMING BACK TO COUNCIL ASKING FOR EVEN MORE THAN THIS $3 MILLION? NO. TO ASK TO TO DO SOMETHING PROBABLY LESS THAN THAT, GIVEN THE FACT THAT FIFA WILL HAVE COMPLETED BY THAT POINT, AND WE WILL HAVE PROBABLY LESS RIDERSHIP ON IT.

ARE YOU USING THE GO LINK TO TRY TO MOVE THE FIFA MEDIA? I'M ASSUMING THAT'S WHO YOU'RE REALLY TARGETING TO UNION STATION IN THE CEDARS.

IS THAT WHAT THE GOAL OF THE GO LINK IS? WELL, IT'S NOT JUST THE MEDIA.

WE'LL HAVE VOLUNTEER CENTERS. WE'LL HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON DOWNTOWN, INCLUDING THE OFFICES FOR FIFA.

AND SO THE RIDERSHIP THAT IS PREDICTED BOTH BY FIFA, THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT, ETC., IS NOT JUST US. IT'S NOT JUST FOR THE BROADCAST CENTER.

THERE'S OTHER ACTIVITIES DOWNTOWN THAT INCLUDE FIFA OFFICES.

THERE'S BACK AND FORTH TO THEIR HOTELS, ETC. AND SO AS THE TEAMS COME INTO TOWN AND THEY'RE INTERVIEWED, THEY WILL, DEPENDING ON THE COUNTRY THEY'RE FROM, THEY'RE USED TO USING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.

SO THERE'S AN ASSUMPTION THAT THEY WILL BE USING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AS WELL TO DO THEIR INTERVIEWS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA.

YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT SOCCER PLAYERS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD ARE GOING TO USE GO LINK ON DART TO GET TO THEIR INTERVIEW.

THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, NOT JUST THEM, BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING TO TRY TO GET IN, TRY TO GET AUTOGRAPHS, ETC. FOR THEM. THAT WILL PROBABLY BE OUTSIDE THE PERIMETER OF THE CONVENTION CENTER SECURITY PERIMETER.

SO I WENT BACK THROUGH OUR AGREEMENTS WITH DART.

I DON'T SEE ANYWHERE IN THERE WHERE IT OUTLINES THAT WE NEED TO PAY THEM FOR THIS KIND OF CLOSURE.

WHAT WHAT AGREEMENT ARE YOU USING THAT SAYS WE SHOULD PAY THEM $3 MILLION.

SO THIS IS A NEW ILA. THIS IS NOT A SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXISTING INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST.

AND WE DID THAT IN A IN A GROUP SETTING. WE HAD CITY LEADERSHIP IN THE ROOM, INCLUDING THE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS, TO DISCUSS THE BEST VEHICLE FOR DOING THIS. AND AS WE WORK THROUGH WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC WORKS AND THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS WHO WERE IN THE ROOM WITH US, WE DECIDED THAT THAT WAS THE BEST VEHICLE TO DO A SEPARATE STANDALONE, WHICH, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS NOT UNUSUAL.

WE HAVE A FEW OF THOSE THAT WE'VE DONE WITH DART.

SO THIS IS NOT A SUPPLEMENTAL TO THE EXISTING ONE THAT INCLUDED THE SILVER LINE AND OTHERS.

AND WHAT IF WE DON'T APPROVE IT? WHAT HAPPENS THEN? WE GO BACK TO DART. WE RUN THE RISK OF NOT BEING ABLE TO ONE VACATE THE STATION AT THE TIME WE NEED IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY COCOON IT, BECAUSE WE WON'T HAVE A RESOLUTION AND WE'LL HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE TABLE WITH DART.

TO BE ABLE TO TO LOOK AT SOME OF THESE THINGS AGAIN IN A DIFFERENT WAY.

SO IN MY SIX SECONDS, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, COLLEAGUES, YOU'RE JUST SITTING HERE BEMOANING ABOUT CITY HALL AND NOT HAVING ENOUGH MONEY. WELL, HERE IS $3 MILLION WE ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO PAY.

[08:35:02]

THANK YOU. CHAIR RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. ROSA, WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT AFTER THE FIFA INFLUX OF REPORTERS THAT ONCE WE START DEMOLISHING THE CONVENTION CENTER, THE RIDERSHIP FOR A DART LINE STOPPING THERE IS GOING TO BE MINIMAL? I CAN'T REALLY SAY THAT THE PEOPLE WHO WHO USE THAT SERVICE LINE ARE NOT WORKERS AT THE CONVENTION CENTER.

THEY'RE NOT PART OF THE STAFF AT THE CONVENTION CENTER, OR TYPICALLY PEOPLE WHO ARE ATTENDING A CONFERENCE THERE, FOR EXAMPLE. TYPICALLY, THEY'RE WORKERS WHO ARE COMING TO SOME OF THE HOTELS THAT ARE NEAR.

THE OMNI, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS A HUGE RIDERSHIP OF THEIR WORKERS WHO OPT TO TAKE THE TRAIN.

THEY'RE COMING FROM SOUTHEAST DALLAS AND OTHER PORTIONS OF THE CITY.

THEY'RE COMING TO THE LORENZO. SO HOTELS AROUND THERE, AS WELL AS THE RESTAURANTS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA IS WHEN WE DID A HOT WE DID A STUDY THAT WE BROUGHT TO COUNCIL BACK IN 2022 AND REFRESHED IT IN 23.

AND PROVIDED THAT IN, IN OUR ONE OF OUR BRIEFINGS TO SHOW YOU KIND OF WHERE PEOPLE WERE COMING WHEN THEY CAME TO WORK IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, BECAUSE IT WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT STATION AND WHETHER OR NOT WE WERE GOING TO DAYLIGHT IT OR WORK WITH DART TO JUST BYPASS IT ALL TOGETHER.

AND SO AS WE DID THAT, WE WENT AND DID OUR HOMEWORK AND MOST OF THAT, IF I BELIEVE THE NUMBER WAS 89%, I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT AND PROVIDE THAT TO YOU.

OF PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AROUND THE CONVENTION CENTER.

SO HOW WAS THE $3 MILLION ARRIVED AT? I NOTICED THAT THE ITEM SAYS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 3 MILLION.

SO WILL THIS BE A CHECK THAT YOU WRITE TO DART, OR IS IT GOING TO BE BASED UPON RECEIPTS FOR REIMBURSEMENT? THIS IS BASED UPON ACTUAL REPORTS. THEY'LL NEED TO PROVIDE REPORTS TO US, AND WE'LL REIMBURSE THEM FOR THE WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE.

AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE WHAT THE GO LINK CONNECTION WOULD INCLUDE THE GO LINK CONNECTION.

IT WOULD INCLUDE ANY CONSULTANTS OR STAFF THAT THEY ARE HAVING TO REPROGRAM TO LOOK AT THE ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND DEMOLITION PLANS, MOST IMPORTANTLY, THAT ARE OCCURRING AROUND THE AROUND THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE SO THAT THEY CAN SUCCESSFULLY REOPEN AND WE DON'T DAMAGE IT. THEY CAN SUCCESSFULLY REOPEN WHEN WE REOPEN THE CENTER.

AND SO THOSE WILL BE DOCUMENTS THAT THEY GIVE US.

WE WILL DO CONTRACT COMPLIANCE THE SAME WAY WE DO, AND HAVE SUCCESSFULLY PASSED ALL OF OUR CONTRACT COMPLIANCE AUDITS THROUGH THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE BY PROVIDING A GOOD LOOK AT AND ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT COSTS BEFORE WE EXPEND.

SO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION. HOW DID WE GET THE $3 MILLION FIGURE THEY PROVIDED DURING OUR WEEKLY SESSIONS WITH DART? THEY PROVIDED COST ESTIMATES THAT WERE VETTED BY A GROUP THAT INCLUDED NOT JUST US, BUT INSPIRED DALLAS TRINITY ALLIANCE, WHO ARE HERE ALONG WITH INSPIRED DALLAS, TWO OF OUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS, ROBIN BENTLEY AND DEB RASTOGI, AND OUR TRANSPORTATION DIRECTOR, GUS CALI. WE LOOKED AT THEM AND PROVIDED FEEDBACK, TAKING OFF MANY THINGS THAT THEY PROVIDED TO US THAT THEY THOUGHT WOULD BE COST, AND ARRIVING AT A MUCH SMALLER NUMBER THAN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY REQUESTED.

BECAUSE WE DID JUST THAT. WE SAID, HEY, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO NEED THIS.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS, SO WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR? WE WANTED TO PAY THE LOWEST COST POSSIBLE TO ENSURE THAT ONE, ANYONE WITH MOBILITY ISSUES WOULDN'T BE INTERRUPTED AND THAT WE WERE NOT WE WERE NOT OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, DART AND TXDOT AGREED TO, ALONG WITH OUR TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

WHEN WE SIGNED THAT AGREEMENT TO SAY THAT WE WOULD MAKE SURE THERE WAS ADEQUATE TRANSPORTATION DOWNTOWN.

SO IS THERE SOME CONTINGENCY BUILT INTO THIS 3 MILLION SUCH THAT WE MAY ACTUALLY END UP SPENDING LESS THAN THAT FIGURE.

YES, THERE'S I BELIEVE IT'S 4% CONTINGENCY. BUT IN THIS AGAIN, WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THESE COSTS.

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WHERE WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO AND WRITE THEM A $3 MILLION CHECK AND SAY, HEY, DELIVER WHATEVER TO US. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE DATA AND THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO THAT.

THEY'VE COMMITTED TO PROVIDING DATA ON RIDERSHIP, DATA ON EXPENDITURES, ETC.

AND WE WILL LOOK AT THAT AND IF NECESSARY, PROVIDE MEMOS TO COUNCIL TO SHOW YOU WHAT THAT RIDERSHIP IS.

[08:40:02]

OKAY. WELL, I DO EXPECT THAT OUR STAFF WILL TAKE A CLOSE LOOK AT WHATEVER BILLS DART PROVIDES US TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE JUSTIFIED EXPENDITURES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

IT SAYS CAN CAN YOU JUST VERIFY THE FUNDING SOURCE OF THIS ITEM? YES, IT'S THE CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER AND IS AN ELIGIBLE USE OF THOSE FUNDS. REPAIR AT CITY HALL FOR ANYTHING THAT'S CONSTRUCTION RELATED THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE EXPANSION OF THE CONVENTION CENTER ARE ALLOWABLE EXPENSES WE ARE ALSO USING.

SO WHAT WE WILL DO, WILL WE REIMBURSE OURSELVES FROM THE DRAW THAT WE'RE DOING? I THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION. WHAT IS THE QUESTION? THE QUESTION IS THAT THE FUNDS THAT YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED FOR THIS PURPOSE, WOULD THOSE FUNDS BE ABLE TO BE UTILIZED TO DO DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AT CITY HALL? AND THE ANSWER IS, I'M SORRY I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION.

NO, THE ANSWER IS NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, BECAUSE IT'S IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE AT LEAST GIVING ACCURATE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC, ESPECIALLY AFTER THAT VOTE AND HOW CONTENTIOUS IT WAS.

WE ARE NOT TURNING AWAY $3 MILLION THAT COULD BE USED FOR CITY HALL.

THAT'S ABSOLUTELY FALSE. NO. THERE ARE NINE ALLOWABLE USES FOR HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX AND THE RENOVATION OF A BUILDING THAT IS NOT FOR AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, OR THE RETURN OF HOT IN SOME WAY, OR A TRANSPORTATION MODE THAT RESULTS IN THAT IS NOT ALLOWABLE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY. ALL RIGHT, LET'S DO A RECORD.

I'M AGAINST THOSE. SO LET'S DO A RECORD JUST SO I CAN SHOW THAT I'M AGAINST IT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

JOHNSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

ROTH. THANK YOU. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO.

MAYOR. JOHNSON. NO.

WITH TEN VOTING IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED. TWO ABSENT.

VOTE TAKEN. THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NOTED, MR. MAYOR.

MR. MAYOR, WE'RE. WE ARE NOW AT YOUR ZONING AGENDA.

FULL. WONDERFUL. OKAY, WE HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

WE HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT. WE'VE NEVER DONE ONE THIS LATE, BUT OUR DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM IS HAVING A BIRTHDAY, AND WE'RE CELEBRATING HER TODAY. GAY WILLIS, HAPPY BIRTHDAY.

THERE'S A LOVELY CAKE FOR YOU AND ADAM BAZALDUA HAS VOLUNTEERED.

ARE YOU READY TO LEAD THE COUNT OF THREE? ON THE COUNT OF THREE. OKAY. GO FOR ONE. TWO.

READY? HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY. TO.

OKAY, WHILE WE ARE HAVING CAKE AND CELEBRATING, WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR ZONING AGENDA.

[ZONING CASES - CONSENT]

MADAM SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. BEFORE WE MOVE TO YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA, MR. MAYOR COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM C-6.

I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO DECEMBER 10TH, 2025.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? NO, SIR. SEEING NO DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM C7.

[08:45:02]

GO AHEAD. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ZONING MATTER UNTIL JANUARY 28TH, 2026.

IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION. SEEING? NONE. ANY DISCUSSION FROM ANYONE? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MR. MAYOR, AT THIS TIME, COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM Z EIGHT COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA.

I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL DECEMBER 10TH, 2025.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? NO, SIR. SEEING? NONE. ANY DISCUSSION FROM ANYONE? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. MR. MAYOR, AT THIS TIME, COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM Z 13.

CHAIR STEWART. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL JANUARY 28TH, 2026.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.

YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEM ITEMS Z1 THROUGH Z14.

ITEM Z6 WAS PREVIOUSLY DEFERRED. ITEM Z7 WAS PREVIOUSLY DEFERRED.

ITEM Z8 WAS PREVIOUSLY DEFERRED. ITEM Z NINE IS BEING PULLED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS.

ITEM Z 13 WAS PREVIOUSLY DEFERRED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART.

THEREFORE, YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEM Z1 THROUGH Z5, Z10 THROUGH Z12 AND Z14.

I'LL READ THOSE ITEMS INTO THE RECORD. ITEM Z1 IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING F RT N RESIDENTIAL TRANSITION SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF HAMILTON AVENUE, NORTHEAST OF FOREMAN STREET. ITEM Z2 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2008 FOR AN ATTACHED PROJECTING NON PREMISE DISTRICT ACTIVITY VIDEO BOARD SIGN ON PROPERTY ON THE WEST LINE OF SOUTH ERVAY STREET BETWEEN COMMERCE STREET AND JACKSON STREET.

ITEM THREE IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT, AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2009 FOR AN ATTACHED PROJECTING NON PREMISE DISTRICT ACTIVITY VIDEO BOARD SIGN ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF COMMERCE STREET BETWEEN MAIN STREET AND SOUTH ERVAY STREET.

ITEM C4 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 166 AND TO REZONE THE SOUTHWEST PORTION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 166 TO MF DASH TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY BETWEEN LA PRADA DRIVE AND SHILOH ROAD, SOUTH OF BLYTHE DRIVE. ITEM C5 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXPANSION OF SUBDISTRICT ONE G ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH CORNER OF OAK LAWN AVENUE AND NORTH STEMMONS FREEWAY.

ITEM Z10 IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN APPLICATION FOR THREE TOWNHOUSE SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF COLLINS AVENUE BETWEEN CARTER STREET AND TROY STREET.

ITEM 11 IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO TRACK THREE WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER TWO, 78, ON THE SOUTH LINE OF IRVING. IRVING BOULEVARD, EAST OF LACKAWANNA STREET.

ITEM Z 12 IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NEW, NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD AND BRUTON ROAD IN ITEM Z 14 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1113 ON THE EAST LINE OF NORTH WALTON WALKER BOULEVARD, NORTH OF WEST DAVIS STREET.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THOSE ITEMS. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ANY OF THE ZONING ITEMS THAT WERE JUST READ INTO THE RECORD? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. COUNCILMEMBER BAZALDUA MOTION TO APPROVE.

IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER. FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT Z4. THIS IS THE NEXUS FAMILY RECOVERY CENTER.

AND THE NEXUS FAMILY RECOVERY CENTER HAS BEEN WORKING ON THEIR FIVE YEAR RECOVERY RISING CAMPAIGN, WHICH FOCUSES ON ENHANCING CARE AND SUPPORT FOR WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN AS THEY RISE UP, REGAIN HOPE, AND RETAKE CONTROL OF THEIR LIVES. FOR THOSE WHO AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH NEXUS, THEY SERVE ADULT WOMEN, PREGNANT AND PARENTING WOMEN WITH CHILDREN, AND ALSO HAVE A CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER.

[08:50:04]

ON SITE SERVICES OFFERED AT THE NEXUS INCLUDE MEDICAL DETOXIFICATION, MEDICALLY ASSISTED TREATMENT, AND MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS. THIS PAST SPRING, NEXUS HELD A GRAND OPENING FOR THEIR DOSWELL MEDICAL BUILDING, A STATE OF THE ART FACILITY THAT IS NOW THAT NOW HOUSES THEIR ADMISSIONS, DETOX AND MEDICAL ASSISTED TREATMENT.

ONCE PAST, THIS ZONING CASE WILL ALLOW NEXUS TO BEGIN WORK ON PHASE TWO OF THEIR RECOVERY RISING CAMPAIGN, WHICH INCLUDES BUILDING A NEW DORMITORY FOR THEIR PREGNANT AND PARENTING WOMEN WITH CHILDREN PROGRAM, AS WELL AS A NEW HOME FOR THE NEXUS CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER.

THE WORK THAT NEXUS IS DOING IS TRULY INDISPENSABLE.

I'M INCREDIBLY PROUD TO HAVE SEEN THE GROWTH ON THE NEXUS CAMPUS AS THEY WORK TO SERVE MORE WOMEN AND FAMILIES, BUT I'M EVEN PROUDER TO APPROVE THIS ITEM TODAY AND PLAY A SMALL PART IN HELPING MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER SPEAKERS? SEEING NONE, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

[Z9. 25-2704A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a new planned development district for R-5(A) Single Family District uses on property zoned R-16(A) Single Family District, on the north line of Walnut Hill Lane and the east line of Betty Jane Lane, east of Marsh Lane Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan and conditions Z-25-000021]

WE'LL NOW MOVE TO ITEM Z9. I'LL READ THAT ITEM INTO THE RECORD.

ITEM Z9 IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR R-5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH LINE OF WALNUT HILL LANE AND THE EAST LINE OF BETTY JANE LANE, EAST OF MARSH LANE. YOU DO HAVE. YOU DO HAVE 19 INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

I'LL CALL ALL SPEAKERS NOW. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, IF YOU WOULD.

I THINK EVERYONE SEATED TO THE FRONT. SO YOUR FIRST SPEAKER WILL BE PHILIP KINGSTON, THE HONORABLE PHILIP KINGSTON.

THE FORMERLY HONORABLE PHILIP KINGSTON MRS JOHNSON.

THANK YOU. PHILIP KINGSTON, 5901 PALO PINTO AVENUE.

I AM TOLD THAT WILLIS HAS A PLAN THAT WILL OBVIATE THE NEED FOR MY PRESENTATION.

SO I'M JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT HER MOTION, WHATEVER IT IS.

I'M SORRY, MR. MAYOR. BEFORE I CALL THE NEXT SPEAKER, OUR CITY STAFF NEEDS TO MAKE SOME APOLOGIES.

WE SENT 76 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED TWO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND 58 REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST.

DUE TO MORE THAN 20% OF POSITION. THE ITEM REQUIRES THREE QUARTERS VOTE TO PASS.

THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT SPEAKER. LAURA. BAGUETTE.

BAGUETTE. IF I HAVE A USE. IF I HAVE A PRESENTATION.

IF I HAVE SLIDES, WHAT DO I NEED TO DO? I AM LOGGED IN ON MY ONE SECOND.

YEAH. ONCE. YEAH, IT. CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? THERE IS SHOULD BE STAFF THAT CAN HELP YOU PLUG IN.

DOES IT START MY TIME? NO, I WON'T START YOUR TIME YET.

BUT THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. WE'LL TRY TO GET YOU PLUGGED IN.

YEAH. DO I HAVE TO PLUG IN? SHE SAID I CAN. I DO HAVE AN ADAPTER.

WHAT DO YOU WHAT IS YOUR WHAT ARE YOU LOGGED IN AS AS A GUEST OR.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ME. SORRY. YOUR NAME? OH.

LAURA BAGGETT. OH, THIS IS NOT A TOUCH SCREEN.

OH, PEOPLE DO THAT ALL THE TIME. YEAH. OKAY. SHARE.

WANT ME TO DO IT? PEOPLE HATE MY TRACKPAD TO.

SHARE THE WINDOW. YEAH. AND THEN I WILL GO TO THIS WINDOW.

THERE WE GO. OKAY. SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT SHARING IT.

SHARE THIS WINDOW. SHARE THIS WINDOW. AND THEN CLICK ON THIS LITTLE THING.

YEAH I HEAR I KNOW HOW TO DO IT LIKE THIS. THIS IS THE WAY I DID IT.

OKAY. YOU MAY BEGIN. OKAY. OKAY. WAIT. DO I HAVE THREE? OKAY. I'M LAURA BAGGETT. I LIVE ON COPPEDGE, AND I HAVE BEEN PRACTICING RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURE FOR OVER 20 YEARS.

I'M A RESIDENT ON COPPEDGE LANE. SO THIS IS MY AREA OF EXPERTISE.

I DISAGREE WITH THE CPC REPORT BECAUSE IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE SCALE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPOSAL THE PROPOSED IS ON THE LEFT MOST OF THE HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE LIKE MY HOUSE.

SOME ARE GETTING REPLACED WITH NEWER HOMES LIKE MY NEIGHBOR'S HOME, AS YOU CAN SEE IN MY GRAPHIC.

[08:55:01]

BUT REGARDLESS, THE PROPOSED IS NOT SENSITIVE TO THE EXISTING CONTEXT GOING AGAINST FORWARD DALLAS 2.0.

MOST OF THE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD SUPPORT AND PROPOSED EXISTING PD 416, WHICH LIMITS TO TWO STORIES LOT SIZE 5000FT² ALONG WITH PD TEN 60 UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW, WHICH LIMITS HEIGHTS TO 30FT IN LOT SIZES OF 4600FT².

THE HERE ARE THE PROJECTS GIVEN TO ME BY THE CPC AS SUCCESSFUL.

NOT ONE OF THESE PROPERTIES HAS THREE STORIES.

THE SMALLEST ALLOWABLE LOT SIZE IS 2000FT², BUT THE ACTUAL AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS 3000FT².

THE TWO PDS PDES THAT ALLOW THREE STORIES ARE ONLY TWO AND A HALF STORIES, MEANING THEY THEY PRESENT AS TWO STORIES FROM THE STREET.

THE PD 758 IS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS COMPLETELY MULTIFAMILY, SO IT WOULD BE REASONABLE FOR IT TO BE THREE STORIES, BUT IT IS NOT. AND THEN PD 978, WHICH WAS COMPLETED PASSED IN 2022.

AGAIN, LIMITS TO 30FT WITH 2000FT² LOT SIZE. THE MOST RECENT PD 393, WHICH WAS PASSED IN 2025 UNDER CONSTRUCTION, NOW ALLOWS 36 36FT, BUT AGAIN LIMITS TO TWO STORIES.

SO THIS IS NOT OUR FIVE ZONING. THIS IS MORE LIKE A TOWNHOUSE ZONING.

IF IT WAS R5 I WOULD DEFINITELY BE IN FAVOR. OR IF IT WAS MORE LIKE WHAT THE CPC CALLS SUCCESSFUL PROJECTS, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR. THIS IS CLEARLY VEHICLE CENTRIC DESIGN, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE DEVELOPER'S OWN IMAGES.

THIS PROJECT IS ABOUT MAXIMIZING PROFIT AND NOT MOVING FORWARD.

DALLAS 2.0. I WELCOME MORE DENSITY, BUT NOT LIKE THIS.

SO I ASK YOU NOT TO APPROVE THIS REZONE. I URGE YOU TO QUESTION WHY THE CPC APPROVED SUCH AN AGGRESSIVE PD.

PD THAT IS NOT LIKE ANYTHING THEY DEEMED SUCCESSFUL.

THANKS. OH, DO I NEED TO STOP SHARING? ONE SECOND.

STEPH. DO I NEED TO STOP SHARING? IS IT JUST YOUR PRESENTATION? OKAY. YOU CAN. YES. THANK YOU. JORGE GUERRERO.

OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. JORGE GUERRERO.

SO OVER A DECADE AGO, MY FAMILY AND I CAME TO IMMIGRATE TO HERE TO DALLAS.

ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS FOR THIS MOVE IS WE WANTED TO LIVE IN A COUNTRY WHERE JUSTICE, LAW, ORDER AND REASON PREVAIL. SO JUST BEING HERE IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR IS AN OPPORTUNITY, AND IT'S A PRIVILEGE THAT I DO NOT TAKE FOR GRANTED.

AND GOD BLESS AMERICA FOR THIS. AS A HISPANIC, I FEEL REPRESENTED BY OUR COUNCIL, MEMBERS, MRS CADENA MR. BAZALDUA MR. MORENO AND MR. RESENDEZ.

AND TODAY I'M COMING HERE TO TELL YOU WHAT OUR COMMUNITY FEELS ABOUT THIS PD.

OVER THE PAST THREE MONTHS, WE'VE WE'VE WALKED DOOR TO DOOR IN DISTRICT SIX.

I PERSONALLY SPOKEN TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THAT COMMUNITY IN SPANISH TO LEARN FIRSTHAND HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT THIS, ABOUT THIS PD, AND THEY DON'T WANT 50 HOMES IN THIS SMALL LOT.

THEY ARE PARTICULARLY VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND THE ACCIDENTS THAT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL CAUSE, BECAUSE THEY'RE SEEING THEY'RE ENVISIONING HOW THE AMOUNT OF CARS THAT WILL NEED TO CROSS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT WHEN THEY ENTER AND THEY EXIT WALNUT HILL. SO THEY ARE VERY WORRIED ABOUT THEIR SAFETY, OF THEIR FAMILIES, ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT. A CLEARER POSITION IS IF YOU WERE THERE IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS, THERE'S A LOT OF REZONE, NO REZONE IN THEIR YARDS. SO PLEASE SUPPORT OUR HISPANIC NEIGHBORS AND ALL THE RESIDENTS OF DISTRICT SIX.

THEY'VE SIGNED THE PETITION FOR NO. TWO STORY HOMES AND LARGER LOTS, NO THREE STORY HOMES, AND NO LOTS SMALLER THAN 4000FT. YES, WE ALL WANT GROWTH IN DALLAS, BUT IT HAS TO BE SAFE.

IT HAS TO BE THOUGHTFUL, AND IT HAS TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ROSS COLTER.

[09:00:03]

ROSS COLTER WILL BE VIRTUAL. YES. MR. COLTER, CAN YOU HEAR ME? MR. COLTER? HE SAID HE'S LISTED AS AN ATTENDEE AND NOT A PARTICIPANT.

OKAY. CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW. HOWEVER, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING.

I AM. I'M NOT SURE WHY IT'S. WHY DON'T YOU GO ON TO SOMEBODY ELSE? OKAY. WE CAN SEE YOU NOW, MR. COLTER. YOU OKAY? THERE WE GO. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ROSS COLTER, AND I LIVE AT 3851 REGENT DRIVE.

AND I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND BOB NOYCE.

AND ALONG WITH WALNUT HILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS PROJECT AS DESIGNED.

BOB AND I ARE THE TWO IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENTS OF THE WALNUT HILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTING 24 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, ALONG WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS, ALL THE WAY BACK TO DONNA BLOOMER, MITCHELL ROZANSKI, AND MARGOLIN AND JENNIFER GATES.

I SHARE THAT HISTORY BECAUSE EVEN WHEN WE DIDN'T GET EVERYTHING WE ASKED FOR IN PRIOR CASES, THERE WAS ALWAYS A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO BALANCE THE NEEDS OF DEVELOPERS WITH THE INTEGRITY OF ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD.

UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS NOT THE CASE WITH THIS PROJECT.

LET ME BE CLEAR. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT OPPOSED TO ADDITIONAL HOUSING OR RESPONSIBLE DENSITY ON THIS SITE.

WHAT WE OBJECT TO IS THIS PARTICULAR PLAN, WHICH BEARS NO RESEMBLANCE TO THE UNDERLYING SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, WHETHER IN LOT SIZE, SETBACKS, BUILDING HEIGHT, LOT COVERAGE, OR DENSITY.

EVERY CORE, SINGLE FAMILY ZONING ELEMENT HAS BEEN SET ASIDE TO MAKE THIS PROJECT FIT WITHIN THE PD.

THIS RAISES A SIMPLE QUESTION WHAT IS THE JUSTIFICATION FOR BUILDING THIS NUMBER OF UNITS IN SUCH A CONFINED SPACE? WE'RE TOLD THIS PROPOSAL ALIGNS WITH FORWARD DALLAS, BUT WE'VE ALSO BEEN TOLD REPEATEDLY THAT FORWARD DALLAS IS NOT ZONING.

IF THAT'S TRUE, THEN WHY IS THE CLEAR, ESTABLISHED ZONING OF THIS PROPERTY BEING IGNORED AND TWISTED INTO SOMETHING IT'S NOT? WE ALL RECOGNIZE THE LAUDABLE GOAL OF CREATING MORE HOUSING IN DALLAS, BUT THAT GOAL SHOULD NOT MEAN COMPLETELY UPENDING THE CHARACTER OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS WITH DEVELOPMENTS THAT BEAR NO RELATIONSHIP TO THE PREVAILING STYLE, SCALE OR SIZE.

DENSITY CAN BE ACHIEVED RESPONSIBLY WITHOUT DISREGARDING THE ZONING FRAMEWORK THAT GIVES RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS A SENSE OF PREDICTABILITY AND FAIRNESS.

FINALLY, LET'S NOT OVERLOOK THE IRONY THAT THESE PROPOSED HOMES, COSTING UP TO $1 MILLION EACH, ARE NOT AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION.

SO IF THE CITY IS BEING ASKED TO TOSS OUT ITS ZONING PROTECTIONS, IT'S NOT EVEN IN THE SERVICE OF AFFORDABILITY OR EQUITY.

IT'S PURELY TO MAXIMIZE PROFIT. IF NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS ARE DISMISSED AND ZONING IS IGNORED, TO DROP AN URBAN CORE STYLE PROJECT IN THE HEART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THEN WE NO LONGER HAVE MEANINGFUL ZONING IN DALLAS.

THIS WILL RESULT IN EVEN DEEPER PUBLIC DISTRUST IN CITY PROCESSES AND THE LOSS OF FAITH THAT RESIDENTS VOICES MATTER.

I URGE YOU, PLEASE DENY THIS PROJECT AS PROPOSED.

ASK THE DEVELOPER TO COME BACK WITH A PLAN THAT RESPECTS BOTH THE SPIRIT AND THE LETTER OF OUR ZONING, AND THAT GENUINELY REFLECTS THE CHARACTER OF OUR COMMUNITY.

AND REASONABLE REQUESTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS WILL BE INCORPORATED.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.

KATIE FORD. HI. MY NAME IS KATIE FORD. I OPPOSE THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THESE REASONS.

THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED TO BUILD 50 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ON 3.7 ACRES.

WHICH IS A DENSITY OF ABOUT 14 UNITS PER ACRE.

THE DENSITY IS MORE ALIGNED WITH MULTIFAMILY ZONING AND NOT SINGLE FAMILY ZONING.

THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A PD DISTRICT THAT THE CASE REPORT STATES IS BASED ON R5 ZONING, WHICH IS VERY MISLEADING. FOR FOR THESE REASONS, THE LOT SIZES FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT IS 1650 SQUARE FOOT, NOT 5000 SQUARE FOOT FOR AN R4 R5 LOT.

[09:05:02]

R5 ZONING HAS A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 30FT, AND THE UNITS PROPOSED ARE THREE STORIES WITH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 36 FOOT. THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS ARE R TEN R 16.

ZONING. IT IS INAPPROPRIATE TO PUT THIS HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS WELL ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD IN MY OPINION, I BELIEVE THE CPC GOT THIS INCORRECT WITH DISREGARD FOR THEIR OWN POLICIES AND OUR CITY'S ESTABLISHED CODES.

PROTECT AND PRESERVE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. I SAY NO TO THREE STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND I PRESENT THIS POSITION, THIS PETITION CARRYING 289 SIGNATURES, WHICH SERVES AS THE CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF WALNUT HILL COMMUNITY'S POSITION.

THIS DOCUMENT FORMALIZES THE CLEAR EXPECTATION OF OUR RESIDENTS HAVE THAT YOU WILL PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BY VOTING AGAINST THIS PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANDREA SPIKA. YES. GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I HOPE YOU DON'T MIND ME READING MY NOTES.

I LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT VALUES ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY, SAFETY, AND THE QUIET CHARACTER THAT HAS MADE IT A WONDERFUL PLACE TO RAISE FAMILIES.

THE PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY PROJECT THREATENS TO CHANGE THAT BALANCE IN VERY REAL WAYS.

OUR STREETS ARE NARROW AND WINDING. THEY WERE NEVER DESIGNED TO HANDLE THE LEVEL OF TRAFFIC AND PARKING PRESSURE THIS PROJECT WOULD BRING.

RIGHT NOW, NEIGHBORS WALK, JOG, AND CHILDREN PLAY OUTSIDE.

FAMILIES COME AND GO WITHOUT ISSUE WITH ADDITIONAL VEHICLES AND CONGESTION.

THESE SIMPLE, EVERYDAY ACTIVITIES WILL BECOME MORE DANGEROUS AND DIFFICULT.

WE ALSO ARE CONCERNED THAT THE PROJECT WILL FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE FABRIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, TURNING A PEACEFUL, CLOSE KNIT AREA INTO ONE STRUGGLING WITH NOISE, SAFETY AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.

THESE ARE NOT ABSTRACT CONCERNS. THEY DIRECTLY AFFECT THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND SAFETY FOR EVERYONE WHO LIVES HERE IN THE CURRENT FORM.

THIS PROJECT DOES NOT FIT THE SCALE AND INFRASTRUCTURE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

I URGE THE COUNCIL TO RECONSIDER OR REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS BEFORE APPROVAL.

LET'S ENSURE THAT GROWTH HAPPENS RESPONSIBLY WITHOUT COMPROMISING THE SAFETY, CHARACTER, AND LIVABILITY OF OUR COMMUNITY.

I LIVE ON BETTY JANE PLACE, WHICH IS OFF BETTY JANE LANE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. JOHN WIMBERLEY.

PUSH BUTTON. MY NAME IS JOHN WIMBERLY. I LIVE AT 25 WIMBERLY COURT, THE STREET DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.

I'M ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF WIMBERLY COURT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.

I WANTED TO QUOTE FORWARD DALLAS CHANGES TO AREAS WITHIN COMMUNITY.

RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS SHOULD LOOK TO ADD HOUSING IN A WAY THAT IS GENTLE, EQUITABLE, INCREMENTAL, AND SENSITIVE TO THE EXISTING CONTEXT, WHILE DOING SO IN A MANNER THAT STRENGTHENS THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND INCORPORATES INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS. THAT IS EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE.

THE GOAL OF FORWARD DALLAS IS TO INCREASE HOUSING, NOT TO LET A DEVELOPER USE IT AS AN EXCUSE TO CRAM IN AS MANY HOUSES AS IS PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE, WHILE IGNORING THE FEEDBACK FROM THE RESIDENTS.

THERE'S NOTHING ABOUT THIS PD THAT'S R5 ZONING.

THEY'RE TRYING TO CREATE A WHOLE NEW SINGLE FAMILY ZONING CATEGORY THAT'S EVEN DENSER THAN THE MOST DENSE TOWNHOUSE ZONING IN DALLAS, WHICH IS TH THREE. THEY WANT 13.5 UNITS PER ACRE.

THAT'S MORE THAN 12 UNITS PER ACRE IN TH THREE.

THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE THAT THEY WANT IS 1650. THAT'S SMALLER THAN 2000FT² FOUND IN TH THREE.

THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THREE STORY 36FT IS THE SAME IN TH THREE, WHICH IS MORE THAN THE EXISTING TWO STORY 30 FOOT LIMIT.

JUST TO BE CLEAR, THERE IS NO SINGLE FAMILY ZONING IN THE ENTIRE WALNUT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD OR ANY OF OUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ALLOW LOTS THIS

[09:10:05]

SMALL ARE AND ARE THREE STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, WE'VE BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT WE SUPPORT THE GENTLE DENSITY DESCRIBED IN FOUR DALLAS NOT EXTREME.

THE LARGE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS WHO SIGNED OUR PETITION.

WE SENT THIS DEVELOPER AFTER THE AUGUST CPC MEETING SHOWED THAT WHILE WE OPPOSE HIS EXTREME PLAN, WE FULLY SUPPORT AN ALTERNATE PLAN THAT'S STILL MORE THAN TRIPLES THE DENSITY OF THIS EXISTING ZONING.

SO WE ARE NOT NIMBYS. WE ARE TOTALLY FINE WITH MORE DENSITY.

WE'VE BEEN CALLED NIMBYS BY THE DEVELOPER IN SOCIAL MEDIA AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

IT'S MORE WHAT WE'RE SUPPORTING IS MORE THAN THREE TIMES THE CURRENT ZONING.

THE RESPONSE TO THE CITY'S GREEN NOTICES SINCE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS 58 OPPOSED AND TWO IN FAVOR.

THAT'S A PRETTY INCREDIBLY CLEAR MESSAGE. SO PLEASE, WE WANT YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL TO LET THE DEVELOPER KNOW THAT WE WANT TO WORK WITH HIM, IF HE'LL JUST RESPECT OUR VERY REASONABLE CONCERNS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CATHERINE RAFTER.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. KATHERINE RAFTER AT 10141 BETTY JANE LANE.

BETTY JANE LANE HAS A LOT OF WALKERS ON IT. A LOT OF PEOPLE TAKE THEIR KIDS OUT TAKE THEIR DOGS OUT.

THEY GO FOR A RUN. SOME OF US OLDER FOLKS GO FOR A SLOW WALK, BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THAT ROAD, AND THAT REFLECTS THE TYPE OF COMMUNITY WE ARE.

WE SEE EACH OTHER, WE SAY, HI, HOW'S IT GOING? WHAT'S NEW TODAY? SO WE ARE A VERY STRONG COMMUNITY.

AND BY THE WAY, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS, HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU.

BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF PEOPLE WE ARE. WE SAY HAPPY BIRTHDAY.

AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE COMPLIMENT THAT ACTUALLY YOU GAVE DISTRICT 13 ABOUT THE HIGHEST VOTER TURNOUT AND THE FACT THAT OUR CITIZENS ARE FIRED UP, ENGAGED, PROUD OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND OUR CITY.

AND WE ARE. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID WAS WHAT I REALLY APPRECIATE ABOUT OUR OUR REPRESENTATIVE IS THAT SHE SAYS IT OUT HERE.

NEIGHBORHOODS FIRST. EVEN A BUSTLING CITY LIKE DALLAS AT LAKE DALLAS, RESIDENTS WANT PEACE OF MIND WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR EVERYDAY LIFE. AFTER ALL, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE RETURN TO THE CORE OF OUR LIVES, OUR FAMILY, OUR HOMES, AND OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. AND IT SHOULD BE SAFE AND CLEAN AND OUR CITY A PLACE TO BE PROUD OF.

THAT'S WHY I START WITH NEIGHBORHOOD FIRST. AND YOU ARE RIGHT.

AND IT WAS REALLY GRATIFYING TO HEAR MANY OF YOU EXPRESS THIS SAME SENTIMENT.

WHAT WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS SHOW YOU THE VIEW.

THIS IS SHOW AND TELL. THE VIEW FROM MY KITCHEN THIS MORNING.

WASHING THE COFFEE POT. THIS IS WHAT I SEE. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD.

I WISH THERE WERE MORE PEOPLE IN THE PHOTO, BUT IT'S A REALLY GREAT PLACE TO LIVE.

WE WORK TOGETHER ON A LOT OF THINGS. WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS.

WE TAKE CARE OF EACH OTHER'S KIDS. WE FEED EACH OTHER'S ANIMALS.

THIS IS WHAT IS PROPOSED. SO. OOPS. THIS IS HANDS LIKE FEET. OKAY, SO HERE WE HAVE IT. GENTLE. ABRUPT.

THIS IS WHAT WE ARE COMBINING, BETTY JANE LANE.

THIS IS 300 STEPS FROM MY DRIVEWAY. THIS WILL BE THERE.

I'M A FITBIT PERSON. BETTY JANE LANE IS SEVEN STEPS WIDE.

THAT MEANS THAT'S THE LENGTH OF THE CENTER SECTION OF THIS AUDITORIUM.

SEVEN STEPS WIDE. THAT'S HOW BIG BETTY JANE LANE IS.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. HOPE YOU ENJOYED THE PICTURE SHOW.

THANK YOU, SARAH FULMER.

WHERE'S MY PRESENTATION? GO.

[09:15:05]

258. OKAY, I BETTER GET GOING. GOOD EVENING. Y'ALL.

I KNOW IT'S A LATE NIGHT. MY NAME IS SARA FULMER.

I LIVE IN WIMBERLEY COURT, ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

I WOULD SIMPLY LIKE TO SAY THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF FOLKS COMING UP SPEAKING TO THIS, BUT I'M OPENING IT UP, AND I WOULD LIKE TO START OUT WITH THIS, AND I'VE HEARD IT ALREADY.

BUT IT'S WORTH SAYING AGAIN, ALL OF US SUPPORT, ALL OF US SUPPORT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN OUR COMMUNITY.

WE SUPPORT IT WITH TWO STORY HOMES. WE DON'T SUPPORT IT THE CURRENT STATE.

AND FRANKLY, I'M SURPRISED THAT THE CURRENT CRESCENT DEVELOPMENT PD GOT THIS FAR TONIGHT THAT IT'S ACTUALLY BEING VOTED ON HERE BECAUSE IT'S IN NO WAY R5 53 STORY HOMES ON LOT SIZES OF A TENNIS COURT DOES NOT PRESERVE THE LOOK OF OUR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS BY A LONG SHOT.

AND I JUST I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY CAN'T DO BETTER AND STILL MAKE MONEY.

I'M FORGETTING TO TURN THE SLIDES. I'VE GONE.

I'M NOT AT THE RIGHT SLIDE, I I APOLOGIZE. WE ARE SIMPLY ASKING FOR NO THREE STOREY HOMES.

FEWER THAN 50 HOMES AND LARGER LOT SIZES. OUR OTHER CONCERNS ARE LACK OF GREEN SPACE, INCREASED TRAFFIC, A LACK OF SIGHT RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITED PARKING.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? IF WE COULD JUST GET THOSE TOP THREE PRIORITIES CHANGED, WE'D BE ALL FOR THIS.

HERE'S A COUPLE RENDERINGS OF WHAT THEY SUBMITTED AFTER THE 3:00 YESTERDAY, SO WE COULDN'T LIKE I GOT THEM ADDED TO MY PITCH.

BUT THIS IS THE RENDERINGS. WHAT CRESCENT ESTATE WANTS TO PUT RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

THIS IS A COMPLETE CONTRADICTION TO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS FOR MILES AROUND US, AND THE PROPOSED PLAN ONLY HAS GARAGE PARKING FOR TWO AND A TOTAL OF 17 SHARED VISITOR PARKING SPACES. THIS IS IN STARK CONTRAST TO THE ADJOINING CUL DE SAC, WHERE WE HAVE 12 PARKING SPACES PER HOME. EVEN WITH REZONING, MAJOR CONCESSIONS WILL STILL BE HAVE TO BE MADE THAT GO AGAINST OUR FIVE. IN FACT, BEFORE YOU VOTE TODAY, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE READ PARAGRAPH THREE ON PAGE FIVE OF THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION YOU WERE GIVEN ON THIS CASE.

IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. THANK YOU. AND I DON'T KNOW WHY MY PRESENTATION KEEPS.

IT WON'T CHANGE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. VIRGINIA WORLEY.

VIRGINIA WORLEY I LIVE ON MARTHA LANE, AND I'M DELIGHTED TO BE HERE.

AND THANK YOU FOR STAYING SO LATE. THE MAP OF OPPOSITION.

58 NEIGHBORS OPPOSED WITHIN A 500 FOOT RADIUS.

ACHIEVING A SUPERMAJORITY. AND I HAPPEN TO BE IN ONE OF THOSE.

I SURVIVED THE TORNADO, AND THE WHOLE COMMUNITY HAS COME BACK AND REBUILT.

WHO OPPOSES THE CURRENT PLAN? 97% OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE WALNUT HILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THE WIMBERLY COURT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.

NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION OF DALLAS. MEMBERS OF THE MIDWAY HOLLOW CRIME WATCH.

NEIGHBORING CHURCHES. AND ON CHANGE.ORG. A PETITION OF OVER 289 SIGNED OPPOSING THIS CHANGE. SO I ASK YOU TO PLEASE SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I HAVE LIVED IN FOR OVER 50 YEARS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ANNE BAUM. HELLO, MY NAME IS ANNE BAUM.

I LIVE AT 26 WIMBERLY COURT. HAPPY BIRTHDAY. I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS KEEPS MOVING.

I DON'T EITHER. I'M NOT EVEN TOUCHING ANYTHING.

OKAY. WHY DO WE OPPOSE THE CURRENT PLAN? I, I WE'RE GOING TO SOUND LIKE A BROKEN RECORD HERE.

YOU DO THAT, BUT IT'S THE HEIGHT AND THE DENSITY.

THEY JUST DON'T FIT IN. AND THEY'RE CONTRADICTORY TO FORWARD DALLAS 2.0 IN MAINTAINING CHARACTER DENSITY AND THE LOOK OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS UNDER THE CITY'S CURRENT DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE ONLY ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ALLOW FOR LOTS OF SMALLER MULTIFAMILY.

AGAIN, I'LL SAY THE PROPOSAL REQUESTS ARE FIVE ZONING, BUT WITH LOT SIZES REDUCED TO ONE THIRD THE STANDARD.

THE PROPOSAL ALSO REQUESTS THREE STORY HOMES WHERE ONLY TWO STORY HOMES ARE ALLOWED.

THE PROPOSAL ALSO REQUESTS A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR 50 HOMES WHERE WE'RE CURRENTLY,

[09:20:02]

THE NUMBER IS LIMITED TO 36. THERE ARE TOO MANY EXCEPTIONS IN THE ASK, AND I'M WONDERING WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE ZONING REGULATIONS IF THEY CAN ALL BE DISMISSED BY A DEVELOPER'S REQUEST? WHAT DO WE WANT? WE WANT A BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD AT WALNUT HILL AND BETTY JANE.

BUT THIS ISN'T IT. WE WANT A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT RESEMBLES OURS, AND WE'RE WILLING TO COMPROMISE ON LOTS AS SMALL AS 4600FT², TWO STORY HOMES WITH PRETTY YARDS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S ENJOYABLE TO WALK THROUGH.

GO TO NINE, PLEASE. THE CURRENT PLAN CREATES AN UNHEALTHY BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR BRAIN HEALTH, WHICH DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS THE CITY OF DALLAS STATED GOAL OF PROMOTING BRAIN HEALTH.

AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE EYE LEVEL RENDERING FROM CRESCENT ESTATES, IT'S A CONCRETE DEVELOPMENT WITH THREE STORY BUILDINGS ONLY FIVE FEET APART, LEAVING LITTLE SPACE FOR TREES OR NATURAL LIGHT, WHICH ARE ELEMENTS THAT ARE ESSENTIAL FOR REDUCING STRESS AND SUPPORTING MENTAL WELL-BEING. PLEASE PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND DON'T SET THIS PRECEDENT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. TINA TUCHEL.

GOOD EVENING. I PROMISED MY NOTES THIS MORNING.

SAID GOOD MORNING, BUT HERE WE ARE. SO I ADMIRE YOUR STAMINA AND APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY.

MY NAME IS TINA TUCHEL. I'M HERE WITH MY MOM, KATIE KELLY, WHO LIVES WITH ME ON BETTY JANE PLACE.

SHE'S A PROUD RETIREE OF THE CITY OF DALLAS. I'M JOINING WITH MY NEIGHBORS WHO ARE HERE TONIGHT, AND THOSE WHO COULDN'T QUITE HANG WITH US ALL THE WAY.

TO BE OPPOSED TO THIS PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE.

25 00021 WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT. I THINK EVERYONE SAID IT.

I WANT TO SAY IT AGAIN. WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE ARE OPPOSED TO THIS PROPOSAL AND THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE DENSITY.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE PRESENTATION THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED, YOU'LL SEE THAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORS HAS HAS BROUGHT UP THE ISSUE OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND THE THE MISNOMER OF THIS BEING R5 ZONING.

THIS IS NOT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THIS IS MORE DENSE THAN THE MOST DENSE TOWNHOME DISTRICT IN DALLAS.

WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, AND THE REASON THAT WE'RE HERE TODAY IS REALLY AS RECENTLY AS LAST NIGHT, WE HAD NEIGHBORS WORKING TIRELESSLY, TIRELESSLY TOWARDS COMPROMISE.

IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO US THAT WITH 30 HOMES, EIGHT PER ACRE, A 30 FOOT TWO STORY HEIGHT LIMIT AND EVEN 4600 SQUARE FOOT LOTS THAT WE COULD LIVE WITH A PROPOSAL THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY. THIS PERSPECTIVE IS SIX TIMES AS DENSE AS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

IT PROPOSES 50 UNITS WHERE NINE HOMES SIT TODAY.

THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION COMPROMISE IS HUGE.

IT'S HUGE EVEN FOR ME, WHOSE HOME SITS ON THREE ACRES.

AND THIS PROPOSAL WOULD PUT EIGHT UNITS ON A LOT THE SIZE OF MINE AT 1600 AND 50FT² AND 0.03 ACRES. THE R5 ZONING WITH SO MANY DEVIATIONS REALLY CHANGES THIS FROM BEING A DUCK TO NOT A DUCK.

WHEN YOU MAKE SO MANY CHANGES THAT IT NO LONGER RESEMBLES THE ZONING THAT IT WAS ALLEGED TO BE BASED OFF OF, IT REALLY CHANGES THE THE TENOR OF THE PROPOSAL ALTOGETHER.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S OPPORTUNITY. HAVING SAT HERE ALL DAY AND LISTENED TO YOU, I KNOW THAT IF YOU WANT TO SAY YES TODAY, YOU CAN PLEASE BE PRO-COMPROMISE PRO-DEVELOPMENT.

YOU CAN APPROVE THIS WITH CHANGES. AND WE PROPOSE THOSE CHANGES TO BE 30 HOMES, TWO STORIES AND 4600 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. TRICIA PITTMAN. OKAY.

HELLO. I'M TRICIA PITTMAN ON 22 WIMBERLEY COURT.

WE'RE ON THE RIGHT SIDE. OKAY. BECAUSE THIS IS SO OUT OF THE REALM OF WHAT? FORWARD DALLAS 2.02.0 WAS MEANT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION OF DALLAS REACHED OUT TO US.

THEY IDENTIFIED DEEP INCONSISTENCIES AND EXTREME DEVIATIONS FROM EXISTING ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

HERE'S HERE'S A LIST AND HOPEFULLY YOU CAN SEE THIS ON WHAT WE SENT YOU.

BUT HERE'S A LIST OF SOME OF THOSE DISCREPANCIES.

[09:25:05]

IT DOES NOT PROTECT OR PRESERVE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS.

IT DOES NOT REDUCE IMPERVIOUS SERVICE AREAS, WHICH, BY THE WAY, WE DID ON THE RENDERINGS THAT WE DID RECEIVE FROM FROM CRESCENT ESTATES, THAT THE GREEN SPACE IN FRONT OF ALL THE UNITS THAT SHOWS GRASS, THEY DID CONFIRM THAT THEY WILL ALL BE USING CRUSHED GRANITE.

SO AGAIN, NOT MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. IT'S A MISAPPLICATION OF ADDING MORE DENSITY.

IT DID NOT PRIORITIZE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. IT DID NOT GIVE THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK WITH COMMUNITIES FEEDBACK SIGNIFICANT WEIGHT.

ITS CHANGES ARE NOT GENTLE, EQUITABLE, INCREMENTAL, OR SENSITIVE TO THE SURROUNDING AREA.

THIS PLAN IS AN EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT IS OUTLINED IN FOUR DALLAS 2.0.

THIS PLAN IS HAS INADEQUATE SPACE, LIMITING YARD SPACE AND PRIVACY.

THE MISLEADING R5 BASED ZONING, WHERE EVEN A CPC ASSERTED THAT IT SKIRTS AROUND CURRENT ZONING LAWS, WHICH ARE TO PROTECT AND ENCOURAGE INTERMEDIATE DENSITY.

IT'S AT DIRECT ODDS WITH MOST WITH THE PROPOSED WITH THE PURPOSE OF EXISTING ZONING.

THE TRAFFIC AND SAFETY. THIS WOULD DOUBLE THE NUMBER OF HOMES USING BETTY JANE, WHICH WOULD DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC.

BETTY JANE HAS NO CURBS AND NO SIDEWALKS. THEY DID DO A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS AT THE INTERSECTION OF WALNUT HILL AND BETTY JANE.

BUT WHAT IT DOESN'T CONTEMPLATE IS THAT THERE'S WHEN YOU'RE WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING WEST EASTBOUND ON WALNUT HILL, YOU WILL YOU'RE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO USE BETTY JANE, A RESIDENTIAL STREET, TO ACCESS THE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH FOR DALLAS 2.0.

THEY WILL ONLY BE ABLE TO TURN IN FROM FROM BETTY JANE IF THEY'RE HEADING EASTBOUND.

GO TO THE NEXT PAGE. THE HIGH DENSITY AREAS WITH THE SMALL FOOTPRINT.

STUDIES SHOW THAT PEOPLE ARE MORE AGGRESSIVE AND PRONE TO HAVING MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, INCLUDING DEPRESSION, ANXIETY, AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. THERE WILL ALSO BE A PARKING ISSUE WITH THESE WITH THESE UNITS, WITH ONLY 2.34 PARKING SPOTS WHERE WE HAVE OVER 12 PARKING SPOTS ON THE NEIGHBORING ADJACENT STREET USING OUR DRIVEWAYS AND STREET PARKING, BECAUSE THERE'S NO STREET PARKING ON THIS DEVELOPMENT.

AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. THANK YOU, CHRISTINA GOUGH.

MY NAME IS CHRISTINA GOUGH. I LIVE AT 3851 BEUTEL COURT, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE ALLEY FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

WHEN I GET HOME FROM WORK IN THE EVENINGS, MY TWO AND A HALF YEAR OLD DAUGHTER AND I GO OUT ON THE BACK ALLEY AND DRAW WITH SIDEWALK CHALK, AND WE WATCH THE SUNSET OVER THE VACANT LOT WHERE THIS DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING TO BUILD THESE HOMES.

AND I WANT TO BE REALLY CLEAR, NOBODY WANTS TO SEE THIS DEVELOPED MORE THAN I DO.

I AM TIRED OF LOOKING AT A VACANT LOT WITH TRASH IN IT.

BUT I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT DONE LIKE THIS. WE WANT TO SEE IT DONE IN A WAY THAT WILL ALLOW WHAT'S BUILT TO BECOME A COHESIVE PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS INCREDIBLY SPECIAL. THE EXISTING PROPOSAL IS FUNDAMENTALLY AT ODDS WITH WHERE WE LIVE NOW.

IT IS, AS MANY HAVE SAID, EFFECTIVELY A TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT IN ANYTHING BUT NAME.

AND SO WE ASK YOU TO PLEASE VOTE NO FOR THE PROPOSED REZONING, AS IT CURRENTLY IS BEING PROPOSED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.

VOTING NO MEANS THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE CURRENT PROPOSAL IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS.

IT MEANS THAT YOU SUPPORT THE VISION OF FORWARD DALLAS 2.0 FOR BLENDING INCREASED DENSITY HOUSING INTO EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS, NOT ABRUPTLY PLACING IT NEXT TO THEM. THAT YOU SUPPORT THE 97% OF THE CONSTITUENTS LIVING IN THE AREA WHO DO NOT WANT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

THAT YOU SUPPORT OUR SAFETY BECAUSE WE HAVE VERY REAL CONCERNS ABOUT THE ISSUES WITH TRAFFIC RELATED TO THIS DEVELOPMENT, THAT YOU VALUE THE INCLUSION OF GREEN SPACES IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE KIDS ARE PLAYING OUTSIDE ALL THE TIME.

MY KIDS, MY KIDS ARE PLAYING OUTSIDE ALL THE TIME, WHERE PEOPLE KNOW EACH OTHER BY NAME AND TALK TO EACH OTHER AS THEY WALK THEIR PETS.

VOTING NO MEANS THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR AN ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

WE WANT THIS LAND DEVELOPED, BUT WE WANT IT DEVELOPED IN A WAY THAT CAN MAKE IT A COHESIVE PART OF OUR COMMUNITY.

WE AGREE THAT GROWTH IS IMPORTANT, BUT GROWTH THAT DOESN'T ENHANCE BOTH THE PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH OF A COMMUNITY IS NOT PROGRESS.

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DISREGARDS THE THINGS WE VALUE MOST OUR SAFETY, OUR PRIVACY, AND THE STABILITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

[09:30:06]

PLEASE VOTE NO TO THE CURRENT PROPOSAL. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ALEX BRENNER. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. MY NAME IS ALEX, AND I LIVE AT 10155 BETTY JANE LANE, JUST A FEW HUNDRED YARDS FROM THE SITE IN QUESTION.

AND WHAT YOU'VE HEARD TONIGHT FROM MY NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS IS AN IMPASSIONED PLEA NOT AGAINST CHANGE, BUT FOR PROTECTION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND ITS PEOPLE.

WE ARE A LOYAL GROUP OF RESIDENTS, PRO DALLAS AND PRO DEVELOPMENT.

MANY OF US LOST OUR HOMES OR EXPERIENCED SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE TO OUR PROPERTIES IN THE 2019 TORNADO.

AND DESPITE THAT DEVASTATION, WE ROLLED UP OUR SLEEVES, HELPED ONE ANOTHER, AND REBUILT OUR COMMUNITY IN A WAY THAT I HOPE MAKES YOU PROUD AS OUR CIVIC LEADERS. TODAY, I ASK YOU TO PUT YOURSELF IN OUR SHOES TO CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL AS IF IT WERE YOUR OWN STREET, YOUR OWN HOME, YOUR OWN FAMILY, AND YOUR OWN CHILDREN AFFECTED BY ITS IMPACT.

OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WELCOMES DEVELOPMENT, BUT ONLY WHEN IT'S REASONABLE.

AND WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED BY CRESCENT ESTATES IS ANYTHING BUT THAT.

50 HOMES ON LESS THAN FOUR ACRES, WITH THREE STORY UNITS AND LOTS SMALLER THAN EVEN TOWNHOUSE TOWNHOUSE ZONING ALLOWS DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH FORWARD DALLAS 2.0. IT'S MORE THAN TWICE THE DENSITY OF THE SHIRE ESTATES REDEVELOPMENT ACROSS TOWN.

A PROJECT THAT LIMITED HOMES TO TWO STORIES REQUIRED LARGER LOTS AND INCLUDED BUFFERS TO PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORS.

THAT'S WHAT RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT CAN LOOK LIKE.

IN A RECENT PRESIDENT THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY SET, BUT BEYOND DENSITY, THIS COMES DOWN TO SAFETY.

THE PROPOSED THROUGH STREET FROM WALNUT HILL TO BETTY JANE WOULD FUNNEL CARS ONTO A BLOCK NEVER DESIGNED FOR THAT LEVEL OF TRAFFIC.

THAT'S WHERE MY SIX YEAR OLD TWINS AND MANY OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD CHILDREN RIDE BIKES, CHASE SOCCER BALLS, AND PLAY WITH FRIENDS. WE ARE REAL FAMILIES, FACING REAL RISKS.

FOR MONTHS, WE'VE ENGAGED IN GOOD FAITH. WE'VE OFFERED REASONABLE COMPROMISE, INCLUDING 3032 STORY HOMES ON LARGER LOTS THAT WOULD STILL BE PROFITABLE WHILE PROTECTING THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY, CHARACTER, AND GREEN SPACES.

THE DEVELOPER HAS CONSISTENTLY SIMPLY SAID, NO, NOT INTERESTED.

WE'VE DONE OUR PART IN CARING FOR DALLAS AS LOYAL RESIDENTS.

NOW, I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU DO YOUR PART IN CARING FOR US, THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS.

PLEASE UPHOLD BALANCE, SAFETY AND REASON IN YOUR DECISION AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE TO OUR CITY.

PLEASE VOTE NO TO REZONING AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ROBERT BRECHT. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ROBERT BRECHT, AND I RESIDE AT FOUR ONE, TWO SIX KILLIAN DRIVE.

I'M HERE TO VOICE MY STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE PROJECT PROPOSED TO US TONIGHT.

I HAVE THREE POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IN MORE DETAIL.

FIRST, I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND HOW THIS PROPOSAL HAS GOTTEN TO THIS POINT.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING R5 REZONING WITH MANY, MANY, MANY EXCEPTIONS ON TOP OF IT.

THESE EXCEPTIONS ARE MORE DENSE THAN THE MOST DENSE TOWNHOME ZONING THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS.

WHY ISN'T THE APPLICANT REQUESTING THIS TO BE A TOWNHOME DISTRICT WITH ZERO OR FEW EXCEPTIONS? WELL, IT'S BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT THE STIGMA OF A TOWNHOME APPLICATION.

AND SO THEY CAN KEEP TOUTING THE LINE OF, QUOTE, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

ANY RATIONAL PERSON SEEING THIS PROPOSAL WOULD SAY THESE ARE TOWNHOMES, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO CLASSIFY THEM AS.

ONE OF CRESCENT'S TWO STORY DEVELOPMENTS ON ENTRADA WAY HAS LOTS DOUBLE THE SIZE OF THIS PROPOSAL, AND IN THE HANDOUTS YOU ALL RECEIVED FROM ME, YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE CONGESTION THEY CAUSE.

THERE ARE QUOTE. DRIVEWAYS ARE ALSO DOUBLE THE LENGTH OF THIS PROPOSAL WHICH BASICALLY AREN'T DRIVEWAYS AT ALL.

PEOPLE ARE PARKING PARKING PERPENDICULAR BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ADEQUATE DRIVEWAY SPACE AND VISITOR PARKING IS NONEXISTENT.

THIS IS TOTALLY OUT OF CHARACTER FOR OUR NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORHOOD AND SURROUNDING AREA.

SECOND, THE HEIGHT STRUCTURES NEED TO BE LIMITED TO 30FT.

NO ONE ELSE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE HOMES OVER 30FT.

AT THE CPC HEARING, ONE OF THE DEVELOPER'S REPRESENTATIVES STATED THAT THERE ARE CHURCHES HIGHER THAN 30FT AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST.

THIS IS A TRUE STATEMENT, BUT IT'S QUITE DISCONNECTED.

CHURCH HEIGHTS DON'T FALL UNDER THE SAME CRITERIA AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

I ALSO DON'T THINK ANYONE'S COMPLAINING ABOUT CHURCH BELL TOWERS BEING HIGHER THAN 30FT.

LASTLY, I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT GENTLE TRANSITION.

THE AGENDA TONIGHT SAYS THAT THIS REZONING IS COMPLIANT WITH FOUR DALLAS 2.0, AND HAS REFERENCES TO GENTLE TRANSITIONING.

I WOULD BE FINE WITH THIS, EXCEPT THE CITY OF DALLAS AND THE CPC HAVE YET TO DEFINE WHAT GENTLE TRANSITIONING IS.

[09:35:01]

THIS VAGUE REFERENCE IS EXACTLY WHAT FRUSTRATES SCORES OF RESIDENTS RESIDENCES RESIDENTS BECAUSE IT IS 100% SUBJECTIVE.

THE COMMUNITY WELCOMES MORE DENSE DEVELOPMENT AT THIS SITE, JUST NOT WITH THE OUT OF CHARACTER PROPOSAL THAT IS BEFORE US.

NOTHING IN THE AREA EVEN REMOTELY RESEMBLES THE LOT SIZE.

HEIGHT DENSITY REQUESTS THAT THIS THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR.

AT MOST. GENTLE TRANSITIONING COULD MEAN GOING FROM R 16 TO A TRUE R5 ZONING, WITH NO EXCEPTIONS BEING MADE.

ANYTHING ELSE WOULD REQUIRE A NEW ZONING CATEGORY. HAVE A FALL INTO TOWNHOME OR SOMETHING ELSE.

IF THE CITY OF DALLAS NEEDS TO UPDATE THEIR ZONING, THAT'S FINE.

BUT WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO DISREGARD CURRENT ZONING AND HAVE DEVELOPERS WORK TIRELESSLY TO FIND LOOPHOLES TO PUSH PROJECTS THROUGH WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE CITY AND ITS RESOURCES.

WE NEED AT LEAST FIVE BRAVE REPRESENTATIVES TONIGHT BEFORE US TO VOTE NO ON THIS PROPOSAL.

IF YOU NEED MORE TIME OR MORE INFORMATION, THEN VOTE TO DELAY IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JASON. TRAFTON.

JASON. TRAFTON. MR. TRAFTON, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I CAN. CAN YOU HEAR ME? MR. TRAFTON, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.

HOWEVER, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE THAT ONE OUT.

I CAN COME BACK TO YOU WHILE YOU WORK ON THAT.

I ACTUALLY HAVE. SO YOUR VIDEO MUST BE DISPLAYED.

SO I'LL COME BACK TO YOU. MR. TRAFTON. OKAY. FRANCIS BELL.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YOUR MICROPHONE.

YES. IS IT WORKING NOW? GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.

MY NAME IS FRANCIS BELL. I LIVE AT 10141 BETTY JANE LANE.

AS CATHERINE SAID, IT'S A WONDERFUL, BEAUTIFUL STREET.

WE'VE LIVED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR NOW FOR 25 YEARS.

WE'RE ON VOLUNTEERISM PATROL. WE HOST NEIGHBORHOOD PARTIES.

WE LOVE OUR NEIGHBORS. I LOVE THE ENGAGEMENT OF OUR NEIGHBORS THAT WE SIT HERE ALL DAY LONG AND LEARNED HOW DEMOCRACY WORKS.

GOD BLESS YOU GUYS THAT YOU DO THIS DAY IN AND DAY OUT.

IT'S PRETTY AMAZING. CLEARLY YOU'VE KIND OF CAUGHT THE GRIFT TONIGHT THAT THE HOMES ARE TOO HIGH.

THERE'S TOO MANY OF THEM. MY BEEF IS THAT THE R 16 TO R5 IS COMPLETELY MISLEADING BECAUSE THEY'RE PUTTING IN ON A LOT OF 1650.

SO WHEN WE WATCH THE CPC COMMITTEE MEETING, EVEN SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE LIKE, HOW MANY EXCEPTIONS ARE YOU GOING TO OFFER TO THIS CASE, THOUGH? IT JUST BEFUDDLES US THAT IT'S EVEN GOTTEN TO THIS POINT.

SO I JUST WANT TO KIND OF GO BACK TO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.

AND AS WE LISTENED IN THE MEETINGS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK.

WE'VE GOT A CHURCH IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DOES FOOD PANTRIES. WE LOVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE SUPPORT THEM.

YOU KNOW, AS YOU'RE LOOKING TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH THIS, YOU HAVE TO REALLY TO QUOTE, I THINK IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN YOU LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE.

YOU GUYS ARE THE POLICY MAKERS HERE. YOU CAN DO THE RIGHT THING AND VOTE NO FOR THIS SWITCH AND ZONING THAT IS JUST NOT APPLICABLE FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, JEFFREY CARGILL.

JEFFREY CARGILL. YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.

HOWEVER, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING. I HAVE TURNED IT ON.

GIVE IT A SECOND. WE CAN SEE YOU. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I'M JEFFREY CARGILL. I'M AT 10336 COFFEY LANE.

AND I APPRECIATE THE THE COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION OF THIS SITUATION.

I WOULD, AND I APPRECIATE YOU ALLOWING ME TO BE JOINING VIRTUALLY.

WE'RE ATTENDING THE WORLD ARCHITECTURAL FORUM IN MIAMI BEACH.

SO IT'S 1110 AT NIGHT RIGHT NOW. BUT THIS IS A WORTHY CAUSE AND WORTH STAYING UP FOR.

I'M SPEAKING AGAINST THE REZONING PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU TODAY FOR THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AND I TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR POSITION ON THIS.

FOR OVER TWO DECADES, I SERVED ON A ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL AND IN MY OWN HOMETOWN AND WITH VERY SIMILAR DEMANDS FOR, YOU KNOW, PLACING UNIQUE PROPERTY OR JUST PLACING UNIQUE DEVELOPMENTS INTO PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT EXIST INSIDE OTHER DEVELOPING, DEVELOPED AREAS WITH NO UNIQUE SITE CONSIDERATIONS.

I REALLY FEEL LIKE THERE'S LACK OF JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PD, IN THIS CASE, THE HIGH DENSITY.

[09:40:06]

WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT 50 HOUSES IN 3.7 ACRES.

IT'S JUST OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE AREA, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE SETBACKS AND BUILDING HEIGHTS IMPINGE UPON THE PRIVACY OF OTHERS, AND THAT NEEDS TO NEEDS TO BE CAREFULLY ADDRESSED.

THE SAFETY, TRAFFIC AND PARKING CONTINUE TO BE A SIGNIFICANT CONCERN FOR THIS COMMUNITY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE CURRENT ZONING IS INTENTIONAL TO MAINTAIN COMPATIBLE RESIDENTIAL USE.

THIS DOES NOT DO THAT TO A PERSON THAT I'VE SPOKEN WITH.

EVERYONE WANTS THIS PROPERTY DEVELOPED. THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE A VACANT LOT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE WANT TO SEE IT DEVELOP, BUT WE WANT TO SEE IT DEVELOP WITH WISDOM AND CONSIDERATION FOR OTHERS.

DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA SHOULD COMPLEMENT AND NOT COMPETE WITH THE AREA HOUSING, AND THIS DESIGN COMPETES DRAMATICALLY WITH AREA HOUSING. DURING MY TENURE ON THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, WE USED TO HAVE A SAYING THAT SOME DEVELOPERS ARE TRYING TO PUT 7 POUNDS OF SUGAR IN A 5 POUND BAG, AND I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING.

THE DEVELOPERS ARE TRYING TO CRAM TOO MUCH INTO TOO SMALL OF A SPACE.

I'M CONFIDENT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SHOW WISDOM AND LEADERSHIP AND SUPPORT OF OUR CONSTITUENT NEIGHBORS TO AND VOTE NO TO REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR YOUR ELECTED SERVICE TO THE CITY.

APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO MR. TRAFTON. MR. TRAFTON.

YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU. HOWEVER, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING.

ONE SECOND.

MR.. MR.. YEAH, I'M TRYING TO GET IT TO WORK.

OKAY. YOU CAN YOU CAN DISREGARD MY PARTICIPATION.

IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE WORKING. OKAY. I'M SORRY.

THANK YOU. THESE ARE YOUR REGISTERED SPEAKERS.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? I SEE ONE INDIVIDUAL. YOU MAY COME FORWARD, STACY.

I SEE TWO. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. GOOD EVENING.

I'M STACY HOUSTON. I ADDRESS 10151 BETTY JANE LANE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE TIME. I KNOW Y'ALL ARE EXHAUSTED, BUT THANK YOU FOR THE TIME AND YOUR WILLINGNESS TO HEAR ALL OF OUR THOUGHTS.

WE REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE IT. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE WALNUT HILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THEIR BOARD COULD NOT BE HERE TONIGHT.

SO I HAVE A STATEMENT PREPARED FOR THEM THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE.

THE WALNUT HILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION JUST MET WITH CRESCENT ESTATES AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ONE LAST TIME BEFORE TODAY'S COUNCIL MEETING, IN HOPES OF COMING TO AN AGREEMENT ON THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE WERE UNSUCCESSFUL IN THAT EFFORT.

CRESCENT ESTATES HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED A MEANINGFUL EFFORT TO COLLABORATE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON REASONABLE REQUESTS.

THE WALNUT HILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS IT IS BEING PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE.

WE CANNOT SUPPORT THE LEVEL OF DENSITY OF 50 UNITS, NOR THREE STORY HOMES ON LOTS AS SMALL AS 1600 SQUARE FEET.

WE WOULD SUPPORT 30 SINGLE FAMILY, TWO STORY HOMES WITH LOTS CLOSER TO 4600FT².

WE HAVE LISTENED TO OUR NEIGHBORS AND WE ARE PROUD TO SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER.

HELLO, MY NAME IS MATT WILKERSON. I LIVE AT 23 WIMBERLEY COURT.

THANK YOU ALL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK HERE TONIGHT. I THINK OVER AND OVER WE'VE SHOWN THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT COMPLY WITH FORWARD DALLAS ZONING ANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS, ANYTHING ANYBODY WANTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND I WANT EVERYBODY HERE TO THINK REAL LONG AND HARD BEFORE YOU VOTE.

WOULD YOU WANT THIS BEHIND YOUR STREET? WOULD YOU WANT A 36 FOOT HIGH HOME WITH NO PARKING, NO YARD LOOKING DOWN INTO YOUR HOME THAT YOU'VE LIVED IN FOR A LONG TIME WITH YOUR FAMILY FOR NO REASON OTHER THAN A DEVELOPER WANTS TO MAKE A LOT OF MONEY.

AGAIN, EVERYBODY SAID IT OVER AND OVER. WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS. NOBODY WOULD WANT THIS A BLOCK AWAY FROM THEIR HOME.

IF YOU CAN HONESTLY SAY THAT ABOUT YOURSELF HERE TONIGHT, VOTE NO AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL.

COME BACK WITH SOMETHING REASONABLE. EVERYBODY WILL COME BACK HERE THE NEXT TIME AROUND AND SAY YES,

[09:45:04]

WE SUPPORT SOMETHING REASONABLE. THIS IS NOT REASONABLE.

THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING.

THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. ON MY TIPTOES. GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PERSEVERING WITH US TONIGHT.

I'M KATHY ADCOCK SMITH. MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE LIVED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AT 105 35 SOMERTON DRIVE FOR 41 YEARS.

WE'VE LOVED THE GREEN SPACES, THE FRIENDLY PEOPLE, AND THE WALKABILITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE THING THAT REALLY CONCERNS ME THE MOST ABOUT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS THE LACK OF PARKING.

WE SEE THESE HOMES THAT HAVE NO ROOM IN FRONT OF THE GARAGES FOR A CAR TO PARK.

MANY PEOPLE DRIVE OVERSIZE VEHICLES WHICH WON'T FIT IN A SMALL GARAGE IN A TINY HOUSE LIKE THESE ARE PROPOSED TO BE.

THERE'S ONLY 17 SPACES AVAILABLE THAT ARE NOT WITHIN A GARAGE IN THIS WHOLE DEVELOPMENT.

CAN YOU IMAGINE WHERE THOSE CARS ARE GOING TO PARK IF SOMEONE HAS EVEN JUST THEIR CLOSE FAMILY COME VISIT? THEY'RE GOING TO BE ALL OVER THE PLACE. THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO PARK ON BETTY JANE, WHICH HAS BEEN WELL ESTABLISHED TO BE A NON B NOT WIDE ENOUGH FOR THAT KIND OF SITUATION. WITH THE BAR DITCHES ON ONE SIDE AND PEOPLE WALKING THEIR DOG ON THE OTHER.

SO PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE VOTE NO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS, I MOVE TO DENY THIS ITEM WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? WELL, FIRST I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR STICKING WITH US.

IT IS 10:18 P.M., AND SO OF ALL THE DAYS YOU COULD COME DOWN HERE, WE'RE NOT USUALLY HERE THIS LATE, BUT I LIKE THE REFERENCE TO WATCHING YOUR GOVERNMENT IN ACTION BECAUSE, BOY, WE'VE HAD SOUP TO NUTS ON SUBJECTS TODAY.

SO INCLUDING THE, YOU KNOW, CITY HALL. SO I GUESS IF IT'S, IF YOU HAVE TO BE DOWN HERE ON A DAY WHERE IT'S GOING TO KEEP YOU HERE FOR THIS LONG, I HOPE IT WAS FAIRLY ENTERTAINING WITH SOME OF OUR AGENDA ITEMS TODAY, BUT SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.

I, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATE NEIGHBORS COMING OUT.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T COME OUT.

AND SO AS THIS MAY CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD YOU KNOW, I GOT LETTERS AS EARLY AS THIS MORNING OR AS LATE AS THIS MORNING OF PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPORTIVE, BUT THEY FEEL LIKE THEIR OPINIONS ARE UNWELCOME AND THEY FEEL THREATENED.

AND SO MY APPEAL TO YOU WOULD BE TO HUM. THAT THAT THEY WOULD NOT FEEL THAT WAY.

SO ANYTHING YOU CAN DO TO JUST SELF-EXAMINE ON HOW YOU'RE ADDRESSING IT.

I KNOW HOW YOU ALL ARE ON YOUR STREET AND ENGAGE WITH EACH OTHER, SO PLEASE BROADEN THAT AND INCLUDE OTHERS WHO JUST MAY THINK DIFFERENTLY.

BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THIS WAS THE NEIGHBOR'S REQUEST, AND THE APPLICANT IS AMENABLE TO THIS MOTION.

SO THAT IS WHY I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. COUNCIL MEMBER.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I THIS AREA BORDERS DISTRICT SIX.

I JUST WANT TO THANK ALL OF THE RESIDENTS WHO CAME TO SPEAK TODAY.

I KNOW MANY OF YOU ALL DID BLOCK WALKING IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

I ACTUALLY DROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD YESTERDAY AND SPOKE TO RESIDENTS OVER IN THE DISTRICT SIX SIDE.

AND SO I KNOW PEOPLE WERE EDUCATED ON THIS CASE, SO I JUST WANT TO TAKE THANK YOU FOR THE TIME THAT YOU ALL TOOK TO ADVOCATE FOR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

AND, I MEAN, YOU ALL HAVE BEEN HERE FOR A WHILE THIS MORNING, SO I APPRECIATE ALL THE INPUT.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR. IF. MISS. IF COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON WOULD KNOW. WILLIS. IT'S TOO LATE.

IT'S 1012. IT'S IT'S 13 HOURS. IF IF IF YOU WOULD ENTERTAIN A QUESTION FROM ME.

I HAVE A QUESTION OR TWO FOR YOU. IS THAT OKAY? YOU COULD, YOU CAN YOU CAN ASK THE QUESTION. OKAY.

I, I YOU'RE DOING THIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THE RESIDENTS ARE NOT AMENABLE, ARE AMENABLE TO LESS DENSITY. ARE YOU AWARE THAT IF IT'S WITH PREJUDICE THAT YOU CAN'T THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING FOR TWO YEARS? THEY CAN'T COME BACK WITH A ZONING CASE FOR TWO YEARS? THIS IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE. I'M SORRY. IT'S IS 13 HOURS.

[09:50:01]

I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

WE HAVEN'T STARTED VOTING YET, SO GO AHEAD. THANK YOU.

CHAIR MENDELSOHN. WELL, I JUST WANT TO SAY, FIRST OF ALL, I'M IMPRESSED THAT YOU ALL STAYED THIS LONG. SO GOOD FOR YOU.

PLUS, I THINK YOU DID AN EXCELLENT PRESENTATION, SO YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY VERY ORGANIZED.

YOU WEREN'T REPETITIVE. YOU HAD BEAUTIFUL VISUALS.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT IS A EXAMPLE FOR OTHER COMMUNITIES, RIGHT? YOU WERE NOT REPETITIVE ABOUT WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, BUT YOU ALSO MADE YOUR CASE.

AND I HOPE YOU KNOW THAT. I THINK IT WAS VERY CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT A GOOD DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO ANYHOW, I'M, I'M VERY GLAD TO SEE THE COUNCIL MEMBER REPRESENTING IT IS DENYING IT.

I WILL BE SUPPORTING HER MOTION. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER.

ROTH. YES. THANK YOU. ALSO, I WANT TO COMPLIMENT ALL OF YOU ALL FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS.

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE SO LATE. I KNOW WE'RE ALL GETTING AN EARLY START ON TOMORROW BY STAYING HERE TONIGHT.

AND I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE THE MOTION.

ALSO, I HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL BE ABLE TO WORK SOMETHING OUT WITH THE FOLKS THAT ARE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THERE THAT'S COMPATIBLE FOR WHAT YOU ALL NEED.

BUT THANK YOU AGAIN FOR SPENDING THE EVENING WITH US.

CHAIR JOHNSON. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. I WILL BE SUPPORTING DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM AS WELL.

THANK YOU GUYS FOR STAYING. I LOVE THE PICTURES.

IT WAS VERY ENLIGHTENING. AND BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT YOU GUYS ARE RIGHT AND COME DOWN HERE.

AND AS CHAIR MIDDLETON SAID, BE WELL ORGANIZED AND VOICE.

YOUR CONCERN IS IMPORTANT. SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM AS WELL.

THANK YOU. I TOO WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION BEFORE US.

I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO VISIT THE SITE AND JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU KUDOS FOR FOR BEING ORGANIZED.

THANK YOU. WITH THAT NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

[PH1. 25-2530A A public hearing to receive comments regarding amending Chapters 51 and 51A of the Dallas City Code regarding park land dedication, including Divisions 51-4.900, “Park Land Dedication,” Section 51A-1.105, “Fees”, and Division 51A-4.1000, “Park Land Dedication,” and related sections to update development standards and bring park land dedication requirements into conformity with the requirements of Texas House Bill 1526, 88th Legislature and an ordinance granting the amendments Recommendation of Staff: Approval Recommendation of ZOAC: Approval, subject to conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to conditions DCA234-002(LG)]

WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. BEGINNING WITH PH ONE.

PH ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS REGARDING AMENDING CHAPTERS 51 AND 51 A OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE REGARDING PARK LAND DEDICATION, INCLUDING DIVISIONS 50 1-4.900, PARKLAND DEDICATION, SECTION 51, DASH 1.105 FEES AND DIVISION 51, A-4.1000. PARKLAND DEDICATION AND RELATED SECTIONS TO UPDATE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND BRING PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS INTO CONFORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF TEXAS HOUSE BILL 1526 88 LEGISLATURE AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING THE AMENDMENTS.

YOU DO HAVE ONE REGISTERED SPEAKER, RUDY KARIMI.

GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS RUDY KARIMI 60.

214 GOLIAD, COUNCIL DISTRICT 14. AS MY DISTRICT'S PARK BOARD MEMBER, I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES CLOSELY THROUGH OUR CITY PLAN COMMISSION, OUR COMMITTEE MEETINGS, AND COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS.

THESE FEES, PAID BY DEVELOPERS ARE ONE OF OUR MOST SUSTAINABLE TOOLS.

WE HAVE TO ENSURE OUR PARKS KEEP PACE WITH DALLAS DEMAND FOR NEW HOUSING.

UNFORTUNATELY, SOME HAVE PROPOSED THE FEE FOR TWO BEDROOM FAMILY UNITS, CLAIMING TO REDUCE THE FEES FOR TWO BEDROOM FAMILY UNITS, CLAIMING IT WOULD INCENTIVIZE MORE FAMILY SIZED HOUSING.

BUT LET'S BE HONEST WITH ONE ANOTHER, THAT'S NOT HOW DEVELOPMENT WORKS.

A $300 REDUCTION IN PARK FEES SIMPLY DOES NOT MOVE THE NEEDLE IN A DEVELOPER'S DECISION MAKING, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT'S DRIVING UP HOUSING COSTS.

IF WE WANT TO MAKE HOUSING MORE ATTAINABLE, LET'S CALL OUT THE REAL ISSUES THE 12 PLUS MONTH ZONING AND PERMITTING DURATIONS, THE UTILITY DELAYS, THE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS OR THE WORKFORCE SHORTAGES THAT DRIVES PRICES UP.

IF A LITTLE BIT OF CASH IS AN ISSUE, WHY DON'T WE CONSIDER DEFERRING IMPACT FEES UNTIL THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS ISSUED, GIVING DEVELOPERS MORE FLEXIBILITY WITH THEIR CASH DURING CONSTRUCTION? A FEW HUNDRED DOLLARS OFF A PARK FEE WON'T MAKE A DEVELOPER SUDDENLY BUILD MORE HOUSING.

IF WE CUT THESE FEES, WE'LL END UP WITH NEITHER MORE HOUSING NOR QUALITY PARKS.

AND THAT'S THE ULTIMATE LOSE LOSE SITUATION. THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT THE MAXIMUM FEES ALLOWED UNDER HOUSE BILL 1526,

[09:55:02]

JUST AS FORT WORTH HAS DONE. THEY'VE PROVEN YOU CAN BUILD MORE HOUSING AND INVEST IN PUBLIC PARKS AND GREEN SPACES AT THE SAME TIME.

BECAUSE THE TRUTH IS, THIS DENSITY ON ITS OWN IS A BURDEN.

BUT DENSITY WITH PROPER INVESTMENT INTO PUBLIC AMENITIES LIKE OUR PARKS IS AN OPPORTUNITY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? I DO SEE ONE INDIVIDUAL COMING FORWARD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU MAY BEGIN.

MY NAME IS MICHAEL WILLIAMS, 3100 MACKINNON STREET.

AND I AM THE PUBLIC POLICY AND COMMUNITY COMMUNITY RELATIONS MANAGER AT THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL.

TREK KNOWS THAT GREAT PARKS, GREAT COMMUNITIES, AND GREAT DEVELOPMENTS ALL GO HAND IN HAND.

AND TREK HAS WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT'S LEADERSHIP.

AND ON THE ORIGINAL PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED BACK IN 2018 AND FOLLOWING THE 88TH LEGISLATURE THAT PASSED A BILL TARGETING THE FIVE LARGEST CITIES IN TEXAS. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AGAIN, AS WELL AS COUNCIL MEMBERS TO REVISE AND UPDATE THIS ORDINANCE TO BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE.

THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT IS A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT IN SEVERAL WAYS, AND WE ARE GRATEFUL TO BE INCLUDED AS A KEY STAKEHOLDER IN A CONVERSATION ON TWO OUTSTANDING ITEMS AND ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE FINAL COMPROMISE.

AND WE WOULD LIKE TO GIVE SPECIAL THANKS TO CHAIR STEWART, VICE CHAIR WEST AND PARKS DEPUTY DIRECTOR RYAN O'CONNOR FOR LEADING THESE DISCUSSIONS.

THE PARKS, TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE ENDORSED THE RECOMMENDATION THAT ACHIEVES THE FOLLOWING TWO KEY POINTS.

FIRST IT SETS APPROPRIATE FEES BECAUSE THIS PARKLAND FEE WILL NOW RISE ANNUALLY BASED ON THE AREA MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME, AND WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THE INITIAL RATE INCREASE GRADUALLY WITH ECONOMIC CONDITIONS, WHILE STILL RECOGNIZING THE NEEDS OF THE PARK DEPARTMENT.

STATE LAW ALSO NOW GRANTS A PARK DIRECTOR, IN EFFECT, EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHORITY FOR PARKLAND ACQUISITION, AND REQUIRED SOME ADDITIONAL LOCAL GUARDRAILS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

THE AGREED TO LANGUAGE PROPOSED WAS DEVELOPED COLLECTIVELY WITH INPUT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, COMMITTEE LEADERSHIP AND THE PARK DEPARTMENT AND THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL.

AND WITH THESE CHANGES, TREC IS GLAD TO SUPPORT THE REVISED PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE.

AND WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND CONSIDERATION.

AND DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM PRO TEM WILLIS. HAPPY EARLY BIRTHDAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM.

ITEM FF ONE. NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. CHAIR STEWART.

THANK YOU. IF I'M AWAKE ENOUGH, I WILL GET THROUGH THIS MOTION.

OKAY. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

DIVISION 50 1-4. 1000 PARKLAND DEDICATION IS MOVED INTO A NEW ARTICLE EIGHT A ALSO TITLED PARKLAND DEDICATION. THE FEES FOR THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEE IN LIEU ARE FOR SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX, 2% FOR MULTIFAMILY, ONE BEDROOM, 1% FROM TWO OR MORE BEDROOMS, 1.5% AND HOTEL AND MOTEL 1%. NEXT CHANGE THE DIRECTOR MAY NOT REQUIRE DEDICATION OF PARKLAND UNLESS A DEDICATED PARKLAND WILL BE LOCATED WITHIN A TEN MINUTE WALK.

PARENTHESES APPROXIMATELY APPROXIMATELY 0.5 MILES OF 1000 OR MORE RESIDENTS.

IF THE DIRECTOR REQUIRES DEDICATION OF PARKLAND, CITY COUNCIL MUST APPROVE THE EXPENDITURES OF ANY FUNDS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE LAND.

FOR PURPOSES OF THIS REQUIREMENT, A TEN MINUTE WALK FOR PURPOSES OF THE ACTUALLY THE REQUIREMENT IN THE FIRST SENTENCE FOR PURPOSES OF THIS REQUIREMENT, A TEN MINUTE WALK IS DETERMINED USING THE SAME OR SIMILAR METRICS USED BY THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND TO DETERMINE ITS TEN MINUTE WALK SCORE.

AND FINALLY, UP TO 20% OF THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FUND MAY BE USED FOR INDIRECT COSTS REASONABLY INCURRED IN CONNECTION WITH PARK ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT.

THE SECOND. IS THERE A SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND.

SECOND. I'M LOOKING FOR MY CHAIR. STEWART DISCUSSION.

YES, PLEASE. GO AHEAD. FIVE MINUTES. OKAY. AS CHAIR OF THE PARKS, TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE, I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN MANY CONVERSATIONS ON THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE.

IT WAS BRIEFED TO PARKS, TRAILS AND THE ENVIRONMENT TWICE, BOTH LAST SPRING AND THIS FALL.

THIS MOTION IS A COMPROMISE THAT COMES OUT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH PTA MEMBERS, STAFF AND THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.

[10:00:04]

I BELIEVE THE FEE STRUCTURE AND THE LANGUAGE AROUND THE DEDICATION OF PARKLAND HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY VETTED AND WILL STRENGTHEN OUR ABILITY TO CREATE AND SUSTAIN OUR PARKS.

THANK YOU, CHAIR WEST. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WANT TO THANK DEPUTY DIRECTOR RYAN O'CONNOR AND, OF COURSE, CHAIR KATHY STEWART FOR YOUR STRONG LEADERSHIP AND MONTHS AND MONTHS OF WORK ON ON GETTING THIS COMPROMISE TOGETHER OF WHERE WE ARE TODAY ON WITHOUT GOING THROUGH ALL THE TALKING POINTS I DID IN COMMITTEE.

I WILL JUST SAY THAT THE COMPROMISE RECOMMENDATION DOES INCREASE FEES.

IN SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY, ONE BEDROOM, MULTI-FAMILY, TWO PLUS BEDROOMS AND IN HOTEL MOTEL.

ACROSS THE BOARD FEES ARE GOING UP. IT'S VERY CLOSELY ALIGNS WITH THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDATION WITH THE ONE EXCEPTION THAT IT DOES GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCOUNT FOR BEDROOMS IN MULTIFAMILY UNITS THAT ARE TWO OR MORE, BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE MORE BEDROOM UNITS TO BE BUILT FOR, FOR FAMILIES BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH OF THEM.

SO OTHER THAN THAT, IT MOSTLY MAXES OUT WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT PLAN.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. YOU KNOW, THIS IS THIS IS REALLY ABOUT THE PROCESS AND HOW IT'S GOING TO EVOLVE MOVING FORWARD. THIS IS A UNIQUE ISSUE THAT IMPACTS BOTH BOTH OUR DEVELOPMENT FEES AND OUR PARKLAND ACCESS.

THE PLAN COMMISSION IS NOT TASKED WITH UNDERSTANDING HOW THE FEES FUNCTION, AND FRANKLY, NEITHER IS THE PARK BOARD.

THE CPC FOCUSES ON LAND USE. PARK BOARD FOCUSES ON PARK ACCESS.

CPC DOESN'T REALLY GRASP THE ISSUES OF PARKS.

PARK BOARD DOESN'T GRASP THE THE NEED FOR OUR HOUSING.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE THESE FEE DISCUSSIONS SHOULD BE GOING TO EITHER OF THESE BOARDS BECAUSE IT BECOMES POLITICAL AND IT'S USED FOR, YOU KNOW, VARIETY OF PURPOSES. AND ONCE AGAIN, JUST LIKE DURING THE BOND PROCESS WHERE HOUSING WAS PITTED AGAINST PARKS, THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENED AGAIN. SO WHEN IT COMES TO FEE DISCUSSIONS, IT SHOULD BE LIMITED TO CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE WE SEE THE FULL PICTURE.

HOW DO WE MAKE THAT HAPPEN? THAT'S MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCILMAN. RYAN O'CONNOR, DALLAS PARKS.

I BELIEVE THE SOLUTION THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED IS TO PLACE THE PARKLAND DEDICATION IN A IN A CERTAIN PROVISION OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 51 A, SO THAT FUTURE CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE WOULD GO THROUGH A PROCESS THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE PROCESS THAT THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT HAS GONE THROUGH.

AND WOULD WOULD HAVE MORE INTERACTION WITH THE COUNCIL AND LESS WITH THE OTHER GOVERNING BODIES.

IS THAT PART OF THE RECOMMENDED MOTION? I'M LOOKING TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THEY'RE SAYING, YES, IT IS. EXCELLENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIR.

RIDLEY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. O'CONNOR COULD YOU CONFIRM THAT IT WAS YOUR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THAT OF THE PARK BOARD THAT THE FEE IN LIEU FOR TWO OR MORE BEDROOM MULTIFAMILY BE 2% RATHER THAN 1.5%.

YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

SO I FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THE SMALL DOLLAR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE AND A HALF AND 2% IS REALLY GOING TO DISINCENTIVIZE ANY DEVELOPER FROM BUILDING OUT A TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT.

THERE ARE MUCH GREATER INFLUENCES ON THEIR WILLINGNESS TO BUILD TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT UNITS THAN A FEW DOLLARS FOR A PARKLAND DEDICATION FEE. ALL OF THESE FEES ARE GOING UP ANYWAY.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE FACTORED INTO THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

AND IT'S MUCH MORE INFLUENCED BY COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION, LAND COSTS, DEVELOPMENT COSTS, ETC.

THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY KIND OF AN INCENTIVE TO BUILD MORE TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS.

CONSEQUENTLY, I MOVE TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO INCREASE THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEE IN LIEU FOR MULTIFAMILY.

TWO OR MORE BEDROOMS TO 2% IN LINE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. CHAIR RIDLEY DO YOU HAVE DISCUSSION? YES. AS MR. O'CONNOR TESTIFIED THIS WAS NOT MY AMENDMENT IS WHAT THE PARK BOARD AND THE PARK STAFF RECOMMENDED. I THINK IT'S DISINGENUOUS TO SAY THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THE PARK BOARD WEIGHING IN ON WHAT IS CLEARLY

[10:05:05]

I THINK THEY BOTH HAVE VALUABLE INSIGHTS INTO WHAT THIS FEE SHOULD BE, AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD RESPECT, PARTICULARLY THE STAFFS AND THE PARK BOARD'S DECISION THAT THIS SHOULD BE A 2% FEE, WHICH I WOULD ALSO NOTE AS A FOOTNOTE, FORT WORTH HAS ADOPTED EVEN HIGHER FEES AT 2% MAXIMUM ALL ACROSS THE BOARD.

SO WE WOULD NOT BE WITHOUT PRECEDENT IN DOING THE SAME.

WITH RESPECT TO TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS, I'M SURE THEY ALSO ARE ANXIOUS TO HAVE MORE TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS BUILT IN FORT WORTH.

AND THEY'VE MADE THE DECISION, OBVIOUSLY, THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO DISCOURAGE THAT.

THANK YOU. CHAIR MENDELSOHN, THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY, FOR YOUR MOTION, WHICH I SUPPORT. I ACTUALLY QUESTION WHY WE'RE NOT DOING 2% ACROSS THE BOARD, TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH.

THAT IS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED. AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE HAVE A FUNDING ISSUE IN PARKS AND IT'S SO SIGNIFICANT.

DO YOU GUYS REALIZE THE CUTBACK WE'RE SEEING IN OUR REC CENTER HOURS.

WE SPEND SO MUCH MONEY TO BUILD THEM AND NOT ENOUGH HOURS EVEN TO OPERATE THEM.

NOW WE HAVE SERIOUS FUNDING ISSUES AND AT LEAST LET THE DOLLARS GO.

LET'S GET THE DOLLARS WHERE WE CAN, NUMBER ONE, SO THAT THE OTHER DOLLARS CAN SPEND FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.

WE HAVE A LOT OF AREAS THAT ARE STILL VERY OR DESIGNATED AS PARK DESERTS.

AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT URBANIZING DALLAS FURTHER AND MAKE NO MISTAKE, THAT'S WHAT FORD DALLAS IS.

WE HAVE TO HAVE GREEN SPACES FOR PEOPLE AS WE'RE TRYING TO CRAM THEM IN.

OTHERWISE, WE COMPLETELY LOSE EVERY QUALITY OF LIFE ASPECT.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION. IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE ANOTHER ONE TO INCREASE THE ONE BEDROOM FOR MULTI-FAMILY OR EVEN THE HOTEL MOTEL, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT AS WELL. BUT THIS IS A NO BRAINER, AND I AGREE THAT AS MUCH INPUT AS WE CAN GET BOTH FROM PARK BOARD AS WELL AS CPC, WE SHOULD. THESE ARE THE TWO COMMISSIONS THAT SPEND MY GOODNESS THE MOST TIME AND ATTENTION.

AND I WOULD SAY GENERALLY ALL OF THE MEMBERS UNDERSTAND THE FULL CITY MORE THAN MOST OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

SO I APPRECIATE THEIR INPUT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACTLY THE SAME.

IT'S JUST ANOTHER WAY FOR US TO RECEIVE INFORMATION.

SO I'M HAPPY TO HAVE MORE PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY TRUSTED, KNOWLEDGEABLE, DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS GIVE THAT INFORMATION AS WELL AS PARK STAFF, AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION MATTERS AS WELL.

SO ALL THAT TO SAY, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION.

THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD, CHAIR WEST.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M GOING TO ASK IF WE COULD HAVE SOMEBODY FROM TREK WHO WORKED ON THIS WITH PARK STAFF TO COME DOWN.

YOU CAN IF YOU CAN USE MY TIME TO. I THINK I'VE GOT I'VE GOT FIVE.

BUT LET'S NOT TRY TO USE ALL THAT TO TALK ABOUT THE COMPROMISE THAT WAS WORKED ON WITH PARKS ON ON THE ONE BEDROOM AND THE REALITY OF THE COST. WHO PAYS THE COST IF WE INCREASE THE COST FOR PARKLAND ACQUISITION FUNDS? OH, SHE'S NOT USING MY TIME. OKAY, THANKS. I'LL.

I'LL SPEAK VERY QUICKLY. KATIE O'BRIEN WITH TRINITY PUBLIC AFFAIRS ON BEHALF OF THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL.

THE THE FEE IMPACT THROUGH A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND A NUMBER OF CONVERSATIONS, A FEW OF OUR MEMBERS PUT TOGETHER SOME SAMPLED PRO FORMAS TO HELP DEVELOP WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT OF THE CEILING THAT THE STATE PROVIDED THE ZOO AND PARK BOARD RECOMMENDATION. THE CITY PLAN, COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND THE COMPROMISE APPROACH.

IF WE TOOK THE FEES TO THE FULL CEILING. THE OUR NUMBERS AND THE PARK DEPARTMENT'S NUMBERS SHOWED THAT IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 172% MORE THAN THE PRIOR FEES THAT WE HAD IN DALLAS, THE FEES THAT WERE RECOMMENDED BY THE PARK BOARD AND INCREASE OVER THE PRIOR FEE SCHEDULE BY ALMOST 50%. AND THE COMPROMISE THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT AND CHAIR WEST AND VICE CHAIR WEST AND CHAIR STEWART REPRESENTS A FEE INCREASE OF ALMOST 30%.

SO TAKEN AS AN AGGREGATE ON A PRO FORMA PRO FORMA PROJECT, THAT WAS THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE MADE.

[10:10:08]

AND THE ADVANCED THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE THEY BELIEVED IT WAS COUNCIL'S DECISION, NOT THEIRS, TO TAKE THIS INTO THESE FEES, INTO TO CONSIDERATION.

I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. YEAH. THANK YOU. YOU MIGHT WANT TO STICK AROUND CLOSE BY IN CASE YOU'RE NEEDED. I MEAN, WHEN WE COLLEAGUES IN THE BUDGET SEASON, WHEN WE'VE INCREASED FEES FOR RESTAURANTS AND PERMITTING FEES, WE'VE DONE IT TYPICALLY ON A STAIR STEP PROCESS OVER 3 TO 5 YEARS.

WE HAVEN'T JUMPED DIRECTLY TO THE COST RECOVERY.

IF YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH OLD BUDGET DISCUSSIONS, YOU'LL REMEMBER THE BATTLES WE HAD ON THAT.

AND GENERALLY COUNCIL HAS ENDED UP DOING A STAIR STEP SO THAT WE DON'T JUST MAX IT OUT IN YEAR ONE.

I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE, YOU KNOW, HERE, NOT KNOWING HOW THESE FEES COULD IMPACT YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT WHEN WE HAVE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS IN THE CITY.

SO I'M GOING TO STICK WITH WHAT WE DETERMINED IN THE PARKS COMMITTEE.

THAT IS A COMPROMISE. AND I WOULD ASK YOU TO DO THE SAME.

THANK YOU. CHAIR STEWART FIVE MINUTES. I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE.

THE 1.5% FOR THE TWO BEDROOMS IS THE ONLY PIECE OF ALL THE FEES WHERE WE MADE A CHANGE FROM WHAT PARK BOARD RECOMMENDED.

SO IT'S THE ONLY PIECE. IT'S A HALF A PERCENT, AND IT REALLY WAS AN EFFORT TO GET THE ATTENTION OF DEVELOPERS AND TO SAY THAT THE CITY IS PRIORITIZING TWO BEDROOMS. I HAVE APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN MY DISTRICT THAT ARE ALMOST ALL ONE BEDROOM.

I HAVE MORE ISSUES IN THOSE COMPLEXES THAN ANY OTHER OF THE COMPLEXES THERE.

THERE'S SO MUCH TURNOVER IN THE ONE BEDROOMS. WHEN YOU GET A FEW OF THE MORE OF THE TWO BEDROOMS IN, YOU GET MORE OF THE FAMILIES.

THEY'RE GOING TO THE SCHOOLS, THEY'RE IN THE PARKS, THEY'RE USING THE COMMUNITY, THEY ARE THE COMMUNITY.

AND THAT STABILIZES THOSE COMPLEXES. SO I WANT TO INCENTIVIZE TWO PLUS BEDROOMS WHENEVER AND WHEREVER POSSIBLE.

THIS MAY SEEM SMALL, BUT IT WOULD ADD UP AND I THINK IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

I'VE BEEN ASSURED BY THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY THAT IT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT THEY WILL LOOK AT, AND IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THE COMPROMISE.

THE COMPROMISE COMES FROM CONVERSATION. IT COMES FROM PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK IS BEST AND AND WEIGHING A LOT OF THINGS.

AND SO YOU HAVE STAFF LOOKING AT THIS. YOU HAVE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY LOOKING AT LOOKING AT THIS.

YOU HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS LOOKING AT THIS. AND THIS IS WHAT WE CAME UP WITH.

THIS IS WHAT THE COMPROMISE WAS OF STAFF, OF DEVELOPMENT, OF COUNCIL MEMBERS.

ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE WERE REPRESENTED. SO I JUST ASK YOU TO, TO TO, TO TO HEAR THAT THERE WAS WORK DONE ON THIS.

THIS IS NOT A NUMBER THAT WAS JUST PULLED OUT OF THE BLUE.

IT IT WAS A NUMBER WE GOT TO THAT WE WORKED TOWARDS.

AND IT HAS SOME SUSTAINABILITY THERE BECAUSE WE, WE, WE WORKED ON IT.

SO SORRY I HAVE LIKE NO MORE WORDS IN MY HEAD.

SO I'M GOING TO CALL IT QUITS. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA.

THANK YOU. CAN I SEE THOR? CAN YOU COME? MAYBE ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS.

RYAN, YOU MAY ALSO NEED TO BE OUT HERE, BUT I GUESS, YOU KNOW, MY BIGGEST QUESTION, ACTUALLY, WAS THE CHANGE THAT WAS JUST PUT ON THE FLOOR.

AND I'M INCLINED TO SUPPORT MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION AND PARK STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

I UNDERSTAND THAT A COMPROMISE WAS WAS MET. BUT I'M OR WAS REACHED.

I'M NOT REALLY UNDERSTANDING WHY I AM. SO CAN YOU CAN YOU TELL ME ON MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, WHAT IS THE HIGHEST DEMAND UNIT THAT WE SEE BUILT? I I'M NOT EXACTLY ONE BEDROOM, TWO BEDROOMS, THREE BEDROOM, ONE BEDROOMS AND PRETTY SUBSTANTIALLY, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND. IS THAT ACCURATE? YES.

LIKE 80% OF THE DEMAND. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YES.

OKAY. AND SO CAN YOU EQUATE TO PERCENTAGES FROM OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE AT 457? WHAT THE INCREASE IN THE HIGHEST DEMAND, SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHEST DEMAND IN THE ONE BEDROOMS, GOING FROM 457 TO 677. 60. WELL, THAT'S AN INCREASE OF WHAT, 30%? NO, IT'S LIKE 40, 42, 43%. OKAY. AND THEN WE LOOK OVER AT THE TWO BEDROOM, WHICH HAS A MUCH LOWER DEMAND.

AND IT THE, THE PRODUCT MIX, IF YOU WILL, OF ANY DEVELOPMENT IS SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER WHEN WE TALK ABOUT TWO

[10:15:05]

PLUS BEDROOMS TO THAT OF THE ONE BEDROOMS IN THE SAME DEVELOPMENT.

WHY DID YOU GO UP FROM 917 TO 10 TO 1016? I MEAN, WHAT IS THE INCREASE THERE? THAT INCREASE IS FIVE, SIX, 5 TO 6%, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SMALL. SO WE INCREASED THE HIGHEST DEMAND UNITS BY 40%.

AND WE'RE LOOKING AT A LITTLE PAT ON THE BACK FOR THE TWO BEDROOMS. I'M JUST NOT UNDERSTANDING. AGAIN, WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE SOLVING FOR I'M I'M CURIOUS HOW THIS IS HELPFUL TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WAS LOBBYING EFFORTS AND AN ATTEMPT TO FIND WHAT IS BEING SAID TO BE A COMPROMISE, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE CITY.

WHAT IS IN MARKET RATE? THE DIFFERENCE IN AN AVERAGE DIFFERENCE OF A ONE BEDROOM MARKET RATE RENT VERSUS THAT OF A TWO BEDROOM.

SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT SUBMARKETS ALL ACROSS THE THE CITY, BUT ANYTHING FROM ONE BEDROOM CAN GO ANYWHERE FROM 700 TO 2000, DEPENDING ON THE MARKET ACROSS THE CITY. AND WHAT WOULD THAT RANGE BE FOR A TWO BEDROOM? I THINK WE'RE SEEING GENERALLY AROUND A SIMILAR RANGE, DEPENDING ON THE SUBMARKET ACROSS THE CITY, BUT TWO BEDROOMS, TYPICALLY FROM 1000 TO 2500.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, ACROSS THE CITY, USUALLY WHEN THERE'S MORE COST ACCRUED IN A DEVELOPMENT, THERE'S THE ABILITY TO WORK THAT INTO WHAT THEY HAVE FROM A RENT, ESPECIALLY WITH SUCH A WIDE RANGE THAT YOU JUST LISTED.

SO IT'S PRETTY SAFE TO SAY THAT A DEVELOPER OR MANAGING PROPERTY IS GOING TO MAKE UP THAT DIFFERENCE BY WHAT THEY'RE CHARGING IN RENT.

ISN'T THAT USUALLY HOW IT WORKS? SO A LOT OF DEVELOPERS WILL LOOK AT ALL OF THEIR FEES, PROPERTY TAXES, EVERYTHING THAT GOES INTO OVERALL OPERATION OF A OF A BUILDING AS WELL AS THEIR DEBT.

AND THEY'LL LOOK AT WAYS TO PAY OFF THAT DEBT DEPENDING ON HOW SUBSTANTIAL THOSE DEBTS ARE ON THAT PROPERTY.

WHEN WE STARTED THE FEE IN LIEU BECAUSE WE HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS IN OUR CITY.

MR. WEST JUST MENTIONED HOW WE'VE STAIR STEPPED FEES.

WHAT WAS THE STAIR STEP IN THE FEE IN LIEU. SO THE FEE IN LIEU PROGRAM WAS BASED UPON A MARKET VALUE ANALYSIS.

SO WE LOOKED AT THE AREA OF TOWN ON ITS RESIDENTIAL STRENGTH.

AND THEN THERE'S A FORMULA THAT DIVIDES IT BASED ON TYPES OF FLOORS.

TIMES THE FEE THAT WAS SET FOR THE DIFFERENT MVA CALCULATIONS.

TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE HIGHER PERFORMING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS IN OUR CITY WOULD PAY A HIGHER FEE IN LIEU IN ORDER TO OPT OUT OF REQUIRING ON SITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO WHEN THAT PROGRAM WAS IMPLEMENTED, THE BANDAID WAS RIPPED OFF.

IT WASN'T STAIR STEPPED IN AS IT WAS JUST FRAMED.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. WHEN COMPARING THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT VERSUS THAT OF FEES TO SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESTAURANTS. I THINK IT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT BALL GAME.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT APPLES AND ORANGES HERE. WHEN WE ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT A COMPARISON OF THE LAST TIME WE'VE IMPLEMENTED OR CHANGED A POLICY TO IMPLEMENT NEW FEES TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY. IT WAS NOT STAIR STEPPED.

IT WAS ONE THAT WE HAD TO IMPLEMENT THE POLICY.

AND THERE WAS A PURPOSE FOR OUR CITY. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS COMPROMISE HAS A PURPOSE FOR OUR CITY.

I THINK STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION HAD THE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS OPPORTUNITY FOR US.

AND I THINK ANYTHING LESS THAN WHAT STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED AND WHAT MR. RIDLEY HAS IN HIS MOTION IS JUST A BREAK TO THE DEVELOPERS.

AND IT KIND OF IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO THE ENTIRE EXERCISE THAT WE'RE DOING HERE.

FOR THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION. I DO BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THIS OPPORTUNITY.

I ALSO THINK THIS IS A SHINING EXAMPLE OF WHEN THAT BANDAID NEEDS TO BE RIPPED OFF.

I'M NOT SURE HOW THIS IS GOING TO BE HELPFUL TO STAIR STEP THIS WHEN THERE'S QUITE FRANKLY NOT ANY PRECEDENT THAT THAT CAN BE COMPARED TO FOR THAT TO BE THE REASON WE'RE DOING IT. SO I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT YOUR MOTION, MR. RIDLEY. THANK YOU, CHAIR JOHNSON. THANK YOU. I WILL BE SUPPORTING CHAIR STEWART OF THE WORK THAT THAT THAT HAVE BEEN INPUTTED AND THAT SHE'S DONE TO MAKE THIS WORK.

SO I'M JUST I'M BE SO I'M BE SUPPORTING HER HER EMOTION, HER AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE ON ROUND ONE? DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WALLACE.

THANK YOU. I KNOW HOW MUCH WORK CHAIR STEWART AND WEST PUT INTO THIS.

AND ALSO WITH OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS. THAT'S SOMETHING WE ALWAYS DO IS SAY, YOU KNOW, AT A CERTAIN POINT WE'RE LIKE,

[10:20:01]

WELL, HAVE WE GONE OUTSIDE OF THIS BUILDING TO LOOK AT THIS? AND SO I THINK IT'S FAIR TO DO THIS. I MEAN, TO ALL THE POINTS THAT CHAIR STEWART RAISED AROUND THE KIND OF HOUSING WE NEED FOR FAMILIES, TWO AND THREE BEDROOM APARTMENTS, THEY'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T COME BY THEM AS EASILY.

AND SO I JUST DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE TO MAYBE INCREASE THE NUMBER OF UNITS BECAUSE OF THIS KIND OF INCENTIVE, AND THEN LET'S COME BACK AND REEVALUATE IT. AND IF WE IF WE START MEETING OUR NEED IN THAT CATEGORY, THEN THEN LET'S LET'S REEVALUATE IT BY ALL MEANS.

BUT I THINK AT THIS POINT, WHAT WE NEED IN TERMS OF HOUSING IS PRETTY TREMENDOUS.

I MEAN, WE SEE IT ON OUR STREETS. WE SEE IT IN, YOU KNOW, EVERY DISCUSSION WE HAVE AROUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND JUST HOUSING IN GENERAL.

SO I SUPPORT CHAIR STEWART'S POSITION. THANK YOU.

BEFORE I GO TO ROUND TWO FOR EVERYBODY, I AM GOING TO SPEAK UP ON THIS ONE.

AS EVERYONE KNOWS, I'VE SERVED ON THE PARK BOARD FOR ALMOST EIGHT YEARS, AND I KNOW THE VALUE THAT OUR PARKS BRING TO TO THE CITY OF DALLAS AND TO THE RESIDENTS.

THEREFORE, I WILL BE SUPPORTING CHAIR RIDLEY'S MOTION THAT ARE IN LINE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AT 2% FOR A MULTIFAMILY OF TWO OR MORE OUR PARK SYSTEM HAS GROWN AND BEING RECOGNIZED AROUND THE COUNTRY.

AND WE'VE GOT TO CONTINUE THAT PROGRESS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE AWARDING AMPLE GREEN SPACE TO TO ALL RESIDENTS, ESPECIALLY THOSE IN MULTIFAMILY. AND SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I WILL BE SUPPORTING CHAIR RIDLEY'S MOTION.

WITH THAT, WE'LL GO TO CHAIR RIDLEY FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. O'CONNOR, COULD YOU COME BACK TO THE MICROPHONE? I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE, FIRST OF ALL, THAT IT'S PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE TO CHARGE A HIGHER FEE FOR PARKLAND FOR A HIGHER DENSITY UNIT. IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO BEDROOM UNITS.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FAMILY UNITS THERE. THE ONES THAT MOST NEED PARKLAND TO PROVIDE RECREATIONAL SPACE FOR THE ENTIRE FAMILY.

NOW, MR. O'CONNOR, YOU'VE HEARD THE TESTIMONY FROM THE TREK REPRESENTATIVE ABOUT THE INCREMENTAL COST OF A AN INCREASE TO 2% FOR THE TWO BEDROOM UNITS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, IT WAS GIVEN IN PERCENTAGES, WHICH MADE IT MEANINGLESS. DEVELOPERS DON'T MAKE DECISIONS ON WHAT SIZE UNITS TO BUILD BASED UPON A PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN A SINGLE FEE. AT BEST, THEY WOULD LOOK AT IT AS A DOLLARS AND CENTS ISSUE.

SO MY QUESTION TO YOU, MR. O'CONNOR, IS WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE FOR THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEE FOR A TWO BEDROOM UNIT IN DOLLARS BETWEEN THE 1.5%, THAT IS THE UNDERLYING MOTION AND THE 2% IN MY AMENDMENT.

I BELIEVE THE ANSWER IS $330 APPROXIMATELY PER UNIT.

AND THAT'S FOR THE TWO BEDROOM UNITS. YES, SIR.

OKAY. THAT'S NOT ENOUGH WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT $100,000 UNIT COST TO INFLUENCE DEVELOPERS TO ALL OF A SUDDEN BUILD TWO BEDROOM UNITS INSTEAD OF ONE BEDROOM UNITS.

PARTICULARLY CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM HOUSING, THAT 80% OF THE DEMAND IS FOR SINGLE UNITS, SINGLE BEDROOM UNITS, NOT TWO BEDROOM UNITS. AND SO THAT $300 IS JUST INCONSEQUENTIAL AND IS NOT GOING TO INFLUENCE ANY INFLUX OF TWO BEDROOM UNITS. SO THEREFORE, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO GATHER AS MUCH AS WE CAN UNDER THE NEW STATE LAW, PARTICULARLY FROM TWO BEDROOM UNITS, WHICH ARE GOING TO BE THE HEAVIEST USERS OF PARKLAND.

CHAIR STEWART CHAIR. WESTWOOD. YOU JUMP OFF. CHAIR STEWART THREE MINUTES.

A COUPLE OF THINGS HAVE BEEN RAISED ABOUT WHETHER.

WELL, FIRST, LET'S ADDRESS WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD MOTIVATE A DEVELOPER.

I THINK WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TELLS YOU THAT THAT WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE, I HAVE TO BELIEVE THEM.

I'M NOT A DEVELOPER. I DON'T KNOW HOW THOSE NUMBERS WORK, BUT I THINK THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY SAID TO US, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THAT'S IT'S A IT IT MAY BE A SMALL INCENTIVE, BUT IT'S AN INCENTIVE.

SO WE'LL LISTEN TO THEM BECAUSE THEY MAKE THOSE DECISIONS AND THEY KNOW WHAT THE DOLLARS AND CENTS ARE IN TERMS OF WHAT THE PURPOSE IS.

WHAT FOR THIS. I THINK WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHAT WAS GOOD FOR THE CITY.

IT'S GOOD FOR THE CITY TO HAVE MORE STABILITY IN OUR APARTMENT COMPLEXES.

MORE STABILITY IS MORE TWO BEDROOMS. SO JUST AS I LISTENED TO THE COMMENTS AROUND THE HORSESHOE,

[10:25:01]

THOSE ARE THOUGHTS THAT I WANTED TO SHARE. ONE THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY PROBABLY KNOWS BETTER THAN WE DO.

AND TWO, IT DOES STABILIZE TWO BEDROOMS, DO STABILIZE OUR APARTMENT COMMUNITIES.

AND THAT IS GOOD FOR THE CITY. THANK YOU. CHAIR MENDELSOHN FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. WELL, FIRST, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY TREK.

I LOVE YOU, BUT YOUR JOB IS TO ADVOCATE FOR WHAT IS BEST FOR DEVELOPERS, AND THAT IS SAVING MONEY.

NUMBER TWO, WE COULD REDUCE COSTS FOR YOU MUCH EASIER BY SPEEDING UP ZONING.

IN TODAY'S DOCKET, WE HAD AN AVERAGE OF 218 DAYS WITH THAT EQUATING TO 31 WEEKS.

THAT'S WHAT'S COSTING YOU MONEY IS THE TIME. NUMBER THREE, I'M GOING TO SAY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA.

I BELIEVE THIS IS OUR THIRD ITEM TODAY WE'VE AGREED ON.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE. NUMBER FOUR, THERE'S A COMMENT THAT THIS IS JUST A TINY HALF OF A PERCENT, BUT THAT ACTUALLY GOES BOTH WAYS. MEANING I DON'T BELIEVE A TINY ONE HALF PERCENT IS A HINDRANCE TO DEVELOPMENT.

NUMBER FIVE, I'M GOING TO SAY THAT WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED FORWARD DALLAS.

THIS IS A GREAT BENEFIT TO DEVELOPERS. WE'VE APPROVED PARKING REFORM, WHICH I WILL CALL PARKING REDUCTION PLAN.

THIS IS A GREAT BENEFIT TO DEVELOPERS, AND SB 840 IS AN UNBELIEVABLE GIFT TO DEVELOPERS.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SACRIFICE THIS MONEY, WHICH WE NEED FOR OUR PARKS.

THE LAST THING I HAVE IS NUMBER SIX, WHICH RYAN, IF YOU COULD ANSWER THIS QUESTION FOR US.

WHAT'S THE ESTIMATED REVENUE CHANGE PER YEAR IF WE MADE THIS.

IF THIS AMENDMENT PASSES WITH THE 1.5% TO 2%, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IN YOUR REVENUE? HAVE YOU CALCULATED THAT? DO YOU HAVE A SENSE? NO, MA'AM, I HAVEN'T CALCULATED THAT. BUT GIVEN THE FACT THAT MOST MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS ARE ONE BED AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $300 PER UNIT, I ALTHOUGH I HAVEN'T CALCULATED IT, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT WOULD BE A MATERIAL DIFFERENCE, BUT IT WOULD CERTAINLY BE A DIFFERENCE. IT WOULD CERTAINLY BE ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO THE PARK SYSTEM FOR NEW PARK ACQUISITIONS, IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING PARKS, AND IMPROVEMENT OF PARKS THAT HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED.

HOW MANY PARKS NEED IMPROVEMENT? MANY. I HAVE A PARK WITH A 50 YEAR OLD PLAYGROUND.

YES, MA'AM. OKAY, ALMOST ALL OF OUR BOND PROJECTS, ARE FOCUSED AROUND PARKS.

ALL OF THE DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS THAT I HAD, I WENT TO PARKS BECAUSE OUR PARKS, FRANKLY, HAVE NOT BEEN MAINTAINED AS NEEDED FOR, FRANKLY, JUST EVEN SAFETY THERE BEYOND THEIR LIFESPAN.

THE REC CENTERS NEED A LOT OF WORK. WE'RE GOING THROUGH A MAJOR RENOVATION FOR CAMPBELL GREEN RIGHT NOW.

THIS IS VERY CLEAR TO ME THAT WE SHOULD MAKE THIS CHANGE.

AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, IF YOU'RE NEW AND YOU DO NOT REALIZE HOW IMPORTANT YOUR PARKS ARE TO YOUR RESIDENTS AND TO THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE, THIS IS THE MOMENT TO REALLY THINK THROUGH THAT.

I'M NOT SURE I APPRECIATE THAT. WHEN I FIRST STARTED, I REALLY DIDN'T.

AND THE LONGER YOU'RE HERE AND THE MORE YOU HEAR ABOUT HOW THIS AFFECTS EVERYONE'S LIFE, THE MORE YOU REALIZE THAT WE HAVE TO INVEST IN OUR PARKS AND THERE'S REALLY NO SENSE IN HAVING THEM IF WE CAN'T KEEP THEM UP IN A SAFE AND BEAUTIFUL MANNER.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. THANK YOU.

CAN I SPEAK TO THOR AND ROBIN, PLEASE? THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALKS ABOUT THE NEED FOR THE COLLABORATION WITH THE INDUSTRY EXPERTS. AND I PERSONALLY BELIEVE WE HAVE SOME OF THE BEST EXPERTS IN THE INDUSTRIES THAT WE HAVE HERE IN OUR DEPARTMENTS.

AND SO WHEN IT COMES TO TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEALS AND WHAT WILL PENCIL OUT, I USUALLY HEAR FROM BOTH OF Y'ALL QUITE OFTEN.

ON WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. I JUST WANT TO HEAR YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION ON THE DIFFERENCE IN THIS HALF PERCENT.

AND IF I WAS SITTING IN A MEETING WITH YOU IN MY OFFICE TALKING ABOUT A POTENTIAL DEAL, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT WHAT FEES ARE THERE AND DIFFERENT GAP FUNDING NEEDS, ETC., IS THE DIFFERENCE IN THIS HALF VERSUS THE TWO ONE AND A HALF VERSUS THE TWO. IS THAT HALF PERCENTAGE POINT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD ADVISE NOT TO PUSH BECAUSE YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT WOULD HELP? A DEAL WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE. SURE. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.

ROBIN BENTLEY WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. I'LL TELL YOU ON THE ECO DEV DEALS, EVERY DEAL COST JUST INCREASES THE GAP.

[10:30:05]

AND SO ESSENTIALLY, WE'RE USING ECO DEV FUNDING TO PAY FOR A PROJECT COST THAT GOES TO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

RIGHT? WE'RE JUST SHUFFLING MONEY BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS FOR THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT.

I BELIEVE THERE'S A WAIVER PROVISION WHERE HOUSING PROJECTS CAN WAIVE THE FEE.

BUT ECO DEV PROJECTS, EVEN IF THEY ARE HOUSING PROJECTS, CANNOT WAIVE THE FEE AS MY UNDERSTANDING OF HOW IT'S WRITTEN.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT REALLY MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

IT'S JUST A IT'S ANOTHER PROJECT COST THAT WOULD INCREASE THE GAP FOR A PROJECT APPLYING FOR INCENTIVES.

YEAH, I'LL JUST CONFIRM THAT. AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEALS THAT ARE HAVING CITY INCENTIVES GOING THROUGH THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT FOR GAP FINANCING, WE'LL WORK WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO TO GET THAT WAIVER. SO IT'S ONE OF THE MECHANISMS THAT WE USE TO ACHIEVE AFFORDABILITY IN THAT CAPITAL STACK.

SO ULTIMATELY, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR NOW, WHICH IS A HALF OF A PERCENTAGE POINT HIGHER THAN WHAT THE UNDERLYING MOTION IS, YOU'RE TELLING US THAT WOULDN'T BE OF DETRIMENT FOR YOU TO SECURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS AS IT WAS FRAMED, COMPLETELY A POLICY DECISION. AND WE'LL JUST REACT LIKE WE DO WITH EVERY OTHER POLICY DECISION.

OKAY. AGAIN, I THINK THAT THIS THE POINT WAS MADE VERY WELL BY MISS MENDELSOHN.

OUR PARKS ABSOLUTELY NEED MORE FUNDING. WE ARE LOOKING AT MORE AND MORE OF A A HARDSHIP IN EACH BUDGET SEASON. CITY MANAGER, CAN YOU CONFIRM WHAT IS THE PAYMENT THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT NEXT YEAR FOR OUR POLICE AND FIRE PENSION? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. THE PAYMENT FOR FY 26 FOR THE FOR THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION WILL BE 225 MILLION.

AND THEN IN THE 27 BUDGET, IT'S 245 MILLION. AND THAT'S JUST POLICE AND FIRE.

THAT'S WITHOUT THE CIVILIAN PENSION. AND WHAT IN THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET, HOW MUCH IS THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BUDGET? I'M GOING TO LOOK AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT MR. RYAN IS HERE. I THINK WITH ALL OF HIS FUNDS COMBINED, YOU WANT THE TOTALITY EVEN WITH. OKAY. MR. O'CONNOR IS HERE.

SIR, I BELIEVE WE'RE AT 126 MILLION. I THINK IT'S OUR NUMBER FOR THIS YEAR.

AND WE'VE GOT HOW MUCH IN BONDS TO SELL OFF FOR PROJECTS IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

345 MILLION IS THE TOTAL ALLOCATION OF THE BOND PROGRAM.

SO WE'VE PUT OURSELVES IN A POSITION TO COMMIT TO THE PROMISES WE'VE MADE TO OUR VOTERS AND WITH SOME REALLY HARD DECISIONS BUDGETARY MOVING FORWARD. I WOULD SAY IT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO BE LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVE REVENUE STREAMS FOR US TO SUSTAIN THE PROMISES THAT WE'VE ALREADY MADE TO OUR PUBLIC. IF NOT, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN? WE WOULD FIND OURSELVES IN A CHALLENGING POSITION SIMILAR TO FAIR PARK.

I THINK IT'S YEAH, I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THE THAT THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE KNOW THAT OUR OUR NEEDS ARE GROWING AND THE DEMANDS.

AND I CALL THEM PRESSURE POINTS. I DON'T SEE THOSE PRESSURE POINTS LETTING UP ANYTIME SOON.

AND SO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, LIKE ALL OF OUR OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS, WE'RE GOING TO BE CONTINUING THE WORK THAT WE'VE STARTED.

BUT IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME BOLD DECISIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE ABOUT THINGS THAT WE CAN EITHER NOT DO OR THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO FIND OTHER WAYS, OTHER OTHER REVENUE STREAMS, OTHER PARTNERSHIPS, AND HOW DO WE BRING NEW REVENUE TO THE TABLE? SO AS THE COUNCIL KNOWS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ALREADY WE'RE FACING THAT NOW.

AND ALL OF THESE DECISIONS DEFINITELY ARE INTERTWINED.

AND WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF UNMET NEED RIGHT NOW.

SO YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THE WAYS THAT WE'VE GOT TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT NOT ONLY THIS DEPARTMENT, BUT ALL OF OUR OTHER BUDGETS ACROSS EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO BE IT'S GOING TO BE CRITICAL.

IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT, AND THERE ARE NO EASY ANSWERS.

LET ME JUST SAY IT THAT WAY. WELL, WHEN WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE THOSE REVENUE STREAMS, I THINK IT'S COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO THE, THE, THE CHARGE AT HAND THAT CHAIRMAN WEST'S COMMITTEE IS LOOKING INTO WHEN IT COMES TO OUR PORTFOLIO AND TRYING TO MONETIZE ASSETS AND TRYING TO BRING AS MUCH OF A NEW REVENUE STREAM SO THAT WE CAN OFFSET THE HARD, HARD YEARS WE HAVE AHEAD OF US IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN THE SERVICES THAT WE'VE ALREADY GIVEN OUR OUR PUBLIC.

SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD BE LOWBALLING IN ORDER TO GIVE THE DEVELOPERS A BREAK, WHEN THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY, WE COULD LEVERAGE SOME NEW REVENUE FOR OUR CITY.

[10:35:01]

THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'M INCLINED TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.

I. I DO LIVE IN AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, AND I WALK TO MY LOCAL PARK ON A REGULAR BASIS.

IT'S ACTUALLY AN AMENITY THAT I THINK HELPS OUR APARTMENT COMMUNITY.

THERE'S ABOUT MAYBE 3 OR 4 APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN THE AREA, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WALK AND ENJOY THEIR PARKS.

SO AND WE JUST HAVE A GROWING NUMBER OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN D6.

SO I THINK ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO HELP AND IF THIS IS A TOOL THAT WE CAN USE TO DO THAT, I WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO SUPPORT IT. I KNOW THERE'S EVEN SOME AREAS IN D6 THAT WE DON'T HAVE A PARK WITHIN A TEN MINUTE WALK, AND SO THESE FUNDS WOULD BE ABLE TO GO TOWARDS THAT.

SO I WHOLEHEARTEDLY WOULD SUPPORT THIS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. CHAIR WEST THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

GOOD DISCUSSION. ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE WE ALL SHOULD REMEMBER HOW IMPORTANT PARKS ARE TO OUR QUALITY OF LIFE.

WE KNOW WHAT ELSE IS IMPORTANT TO OUR QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE CITY IS HOUSING AFFORDABILITY.

AND YES, AT $300 AND $300 INCREASE FOR THE TWO BEDROOM UNITS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT AS A SINGLE UNIT, NOT A BIG DEAL. YOU MULTIPLY THAT BY A 300 UNIT COMPLEX.

IT BECOMES A LOT OF MONEY AND YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT? IT GETS PASSED DOWN TO THE TENANT. THE DEVELOPER IS NOT GOING TO EAT THAT COST.

THE TENANTS ARE GOING TO PAY THAT COST. HOUSING RENT IS GOING TO INCREASE AND IT JUST EXACERBATES OUR AFFORDABILITY PROBLEM IN THE CITY.

SO THE ATTEMPT BY CHAIR STEWART'S COMMITTEE HERE WAS TO NOT JUMP TO THE FULL INCREASE IN YEAR ONE, BUT INSTEAD DO THAT ON SOME OF THE CATEGORIES AND STAIR STEP IT UP FOR THIS FIRST YEAR FOR THE TWO BEDROOM UNITS.

THAT'S THE ONLY DIFFERENCE HERE. AND I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO STICK WITH THAT.

AT THE END OF THE DAY. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO MAKE THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE, BUT I DO BELIEVE IT WILL IMPACT HOUSING AFFORDABILITY.

THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WALLACE FOR THREE MINUTES.

YEAH, I HAD A QUESTION FOR MR. O'CONNOR WILL COME BACK ON THIS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN INTERESTING PREDICAMENT BECAUSE YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE A COUNCIL PERSON WHO MAYBE ISN'T ALWAYS SUPPORTIVE OF DEVELOPMENT, SMART DEVELOPMENT. YOU KNOW, THIS IS TRICKY BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE KIND OF TAKING AWAY FROM THIS FUND IN A WAY.

SO WHEN WHEN THESE FUNDS ACCUMULATE, HOW HOW ARE THEY EXPENDED? I MEAN, I THINK YOU SAID YOU'RE WORKING ON POLICY BECAUSE SOME PARTS OF TOWN HAVE A LOT OF ACREAGE.

I DON'T HAVE AS MUCH ACREAGE, OR WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH ACREAGE IN THE NORTH.

SO YOU WOULD OUTLINE LIKE THREE PRIORITIES, BUT THAT MAY NOT WORK FOR EVERY DISTRICT.

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

SO THE APPROPRIATE USES OF THE FUNDS THAT THAT HAVE ACCUMULATED IS TO ACQUIRE NEW PARKLAND IN AREAS THAT WERE DEFICIENT, TO IMPROVE PARKS THAT WE HAVE ACQUIRED AND TO IMPROVE EXISTING PARKS.

AND THAT'S IN THAT PRIORITIZED ORDER. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE METHODOLOGY AND THE LOGIC THERE IS THIS IS A THIS IS A TEN YEAR WINDOW AT THE TEN YEAR MARK. THOSE THOSE FEES ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE REFUNDED.

AND SO AS WE GET CLOSER TO THAT TEN YEAR MARK OF WHEN THE FEES WERE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY, IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SPENDING THOSE DOLLARS IN EXISTING PARKS.

IF THERE ARE NOT OPPORTUNITIES TO ACQUIRE PARK LAND TO IMPROVE THOSE EXISTING PARKS BASED UPON A CATEGORIZATION OF NEEDS AND CONDITION.

SO AS YOU ALL WORK THROUGH THIS PROCESS OF WHAT THE POLICY WILL BE FOR THESE FUNDS, I MEAN, I THINK IF THERE ARE DISTRICTS THAT ARE YOU KNOW, MOVING PROJECTS FORWARD, DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FORWARD, I MEAN, THAT'S A CHANGE FOR NEIGHBORS. ET CETERA.

THEY MAY NOT ALWAYS LIKE IT AS WE CAN, YOU KNOW, HERE TONIGHT.

IT MAY MEAN, YOU KNOW, SOME COMPROMISES THERE, BUT IT'S PUTTING MONEY INTO THOSE COFFERS.

WHEREAS IF OTHERS, YOU KNOW, DON'T SUPPORT THAT AND AREN'T DOING THAT, YOU KNOW, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM AS FAIR TO GO PUT YOUR HAND IN THAT PARK BUCKET IF OTHERS ARE REALLY, YOU KNOW, HELPING CONTRIBUTE TO IT MORE.

SO I DON'T I WOULDN'T SAY THAT IT'S A WHAT YOU RAISE IN YOUR DISTRICT GOES TO THAT PARK BECAUSE THAT'S NOT REALLY EQUITABLE.

BUT I WOULD SAY AWAITING WOULD BE SOMETHING I WOULD WANT LOOKED AT.

YES, MA'AM. AND THEN ON THE JUST PARK BUDGET, I MEAN, TALKING ABOUT REC CENTERS.

YES, POOLS, REC CENTERS. WE WANT MORE HOURS, BUT THOSE ARE HIGHLY SPONSORED OPPORTUNITIES IN BRICK AND MORTAR AND PROGRAMING.

SO I HOPE THAT THAT CAN BECOME MORE ROBUST SO THAT WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, JUST LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE THIS TO BE ABLE TO TO GIVE YOU ALL MORE OF WHAT YOU NEED TO PROVIDE THIS AMAZING AMENITY FOR OUR RESIDENTS.

I AGREE WITH YOU. THANK YOU. CHAIR MENDELSOHN ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU. I'M JUST GOING TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF MATH BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE DO AT 1111.

[10:40:03]

SO IF IT'S $330 A UNIT AND WE AMORTIZE THAT OVER 30 YEARS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT $11 A YEAR, LESS THAN $1 A MONTH FOR A TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT TO BE PUTTING INTO A FUND THAT'S MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE PARKS WITHIN A TEN MINUTE WALK EVERYWHERE.

I THINK THAT'S A GREAT DEAL. AND THE LAST COMMENT I'M GOING TO MAKE FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS IS IF YOU DO NOT VOTE TO SUPPORT THIS, I HOPE YOU'RE GOING TO EXPLAIN TO YOUR RESIDENTS WHY YOU TURNED DOWN PARK REVENUE IN FAVOR OF DEVELOPERS.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA ONE MINUTE.

YES. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'VE SPOKEN WITH SEVERAL PEOPLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AS WELL.

I'VE ASKED POINT BLANK IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD HURT THEIR DEVELOPMENT.

THEY HAVE TOLD ME EXPLICITLY THAT THIS WOULD NOT HURT THEIR DEVELOPMENT.

WE'VE HEARD IT FROM OUR HOUSING EXPERTS. WE'VE HEARD IT FROM OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EXPERTS.

I ABSOLUTELY LOVE TRUCK. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT I HOPE THAT WE WOULD MAKE SOUND HISTORIC POLICY DECISIONS OF OUR CITY BASED ON MUCH MORE THAN JUST ONE GROUP THAT HAS SHOWN UP TO ADVOCATE.

WE HAVE A MUCH GREATER OPPORTUNITY HERE TO HELP ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, SPECIFICALLY THOSE WITH UNDERSERVED CONSTITUENTS, THAT HAS A GREATER NEED. AND WE HAVEN'T HAD FUNDS TO INVEST IN THESE COMMUNITIES BEFORE.

WE ARE LITERALLY A VOTE AGAINST THIS IS A VOTE AGAINST BRINGING MORE DOLLARS TO YOUR COMMUNITY IN UNDERINVESTED AREAS.

THANK YOU, MISTER MAYOR. CHAIR STEWART ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU. BUT I THINK A VOTE AGAINST THIS MOTION AND FOR THE UNDERLYING MOTION ACTUALLY BRINGS YOU AN INCREASE IN, IN PUBLIC SAFETY AND INCREASE IN QUALITY OF LIFE BECAUSE YOU ARE INCENTIVIZING MORE TWO BEDROOMS. AND WHEN YOU DO THAT, HISTORICALLY, AT LEAST IN MY DISTRICT, YOU HAVE LOWER CRIME RATES AND YOU HAVE A HIGHER QUALITY OF LIFE.

AND IF YOU NEED TO SEE THOSE NUMBERS, I'D BE HAPPY TO SHOW THEM TO YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I DO WANT TO, FOR THREE MINUTES FOR MYSELF.

WANT TO APPRECIATE CHAIR STEWART AND HER WORK FOR THIS THROUGH HER COMMITTEE.

BUT I WILL BE STICKING TO COUNCIL MEMBER OR CHAIRMAN RIDLEY'S MOTION AGAIN, JUST BECAUSE I SEE WHAT THE VALUE OF OUR PARKS BRING TO OUR COMMUNITIES.

AND THIS IS NOT A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE. AND SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I WILL BE SUPPORTING CHAIR RIDLEY'S MOTION CHAIR JOHNSON FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM.

I WILL BE AGAIN SUPPORTING CHAIR STEWART. QUALITY OF LIFE IS VERY IMPORTANT.

AND WHEN YOU HAVE MORE FAMILIES IN OUR MULTI-FAMILY HOMES, IT DOES SLOW A CRIME.

AND I'M IN THE COMMUNITY WHERE I SEE IT'S HAPPENING. SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, SINGLE FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY HOMES.

ONE BEDROOMS, AND I'M DEALING WITH A LOT OF CRIME IN THAT AREA.

AND WORKING WITH THE CITY MANAGER RIGHT NOW AND HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH HER.

SO WE'RE WE'RE NOT JUST IGNORING PARKS AS A AS A TRUSTEE.

I'VE BUILT PARKS AS A AS A DAD IN THE COMMUNITY.

WE WORK TO DEAL WITH, BUILD PARKS AND ADVOCATED FOR PARKS IN DISTRICT FOUR.

SO I JUST I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF PARKS, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF QUALITY OF LIFE.

AND SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING CHAIR STEWART. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. CHAIR RIDLEY. ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THERE ARE ALSO STUDIES THAT INDICATE THAT BETTER PARKS MORE EASY ACCESS TO PARKS REDUCES CRIME RATES. SO I FIND IT HARD TO CONNECT THE PERCENTAGE OF TWO BEDROOM UNITS WITH LOWER CRIME RATES.

BUT LOGICALLY, I FIND IT EASY TO ACCEPT THAT IF PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY YOUTH, HAVE A PLACE TO RECREATE, TO ENJOY THE OUTDOORS, THAT THAT IS WHAT REDUCES CRIME RATES.

THANK YOU. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, A RECORDED VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED AND WE WILL DO A RECORD VOTE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ IS ABSENT. ONE VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLACKMON IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN. COUNCIL MEMBER.

STEWART. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

[10:45:05]

MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO.

YES. MAYOR JOHNSON IS ABSENT AND VOTE TAKEN.

WITH SIX VOTING IN FAVOR, SIX OPPOSED. THREE VOTE TAKEN.

THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL GO BACK TO CHAIR WEST AS MOTION. SORRY, CHAIR. STEWART. AND SO WE ARE. WE'VE HEARD FROM DISTRICTS TEN, 14 AND ONE.

ANY. CHAIR MENDELSOHN. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO MOVE MULTI-FAMILY TWO BEDROOMS TO 1.75.

OKAY, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. DO YOU HAVE DISCUSSION? WELL, THERE SEEMS TO BE AN INTEREST IN COMPROMISE, SO PERHAPS THIS IS THE COMPROMISE OF THE COMPROMISE.

THANK YOU. THIS IS WHAT YOU GET AT 1118. OKAY.

COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA FOR FIVE MINUTES. I WILL SAY THAT IT MUST BE A FULL MOON BECAUSE I APPRECIATE YOUR SENTIMENT.

I DO THINK THAT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMPROMISE.

IT WAS SAID SEVERAL TIMES THAT THERE WAS A DESIRE TO COMPROMISE.

AND WE KNOW THAT EVERYTHING THAT COMES FROM COMMITTEE IS INCORPORATING EVEN MORE OF THE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY.

ONCE WE GET HERE TO THE HORSESHOE. AND IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THE COMPROMISE WAS INCLUSIVE OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE BODY.

AND NOW THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM AND THERE IS A DESIRE TO GO HIGHER THAN WHAT THE COMPROMISE IS THAT YOU ALL FOUND AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL, I WANT TO SEE, IN THE SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE WHERE THAT WILL ACTUALLY LIES.

SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS IN THE SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE.

I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE SEEN, JUST AS WE SAW HALF AND HALF GO HIGHER THAN WHAT WAS BEING RECOMMENDED AS THE COMPROMISE.

OTHERS WHO VOTED OTHERWISE WANTED TO SEE LOWER.

AND SO HERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO WORK TOGETHER, FIND A MIDDLE GROUND.

AND I BELIEVE IT'S STILL INCLUSIVE OF THE FEEDBACK YOU GOT FROM THE PARTNERS THAT YOU CONTINUED TO CITE AS THE REASON FOR THIS COMPROMISE.

SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THERE IS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OPPOSED.

NOTED. MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, SO WE DO HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION. WITH THE CHANGE FOR THE TWO BEDROOM TO 1.75.

OKAY. AND SO STEWART'S MOTION. SO WE'RE BACK ON STEWART STEWART'S MOTION WITH COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN CHANGE. OKAY, CAN I WITHDRAW THE ORIGINAL? I MEAN, IT'S JUST THE MOTION TO APPROVE. I WAS JUST A MOTION TO APPROVE.

I'M SORRY. OKAY. I'M NOT TRACKING. SORRY. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT, SO IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS NO DISCUSSION. EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THE MOTION BEFORE US.

OKAY ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

[PH2. 25-3103A (1) A public hearing to receive comments on a proposed municipal setting designation to prohibit the use of groundwater as potable water beneath property owned by CantTex BH Sharp, LLC, CanTex 5025 Sharp, LLC, CanTex Sharp, LLC, CanTex BH Commonwealth, LLC and generally located near the intersection of Irving Boulevard and West Mockingbird Lane and adjacent street rights-of-way; and, at close of the public hearing (2) an ordinance authorizing support of the issuance of a municipal setting designation to CanTex BH Sharp, LLC by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and prohibiting the use of groundwater beneath the designated property as potable water - Financing: No cost consideration to the City]

YOUR NEXT ITEM IS PH TWO. PH TWO IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON A PROPOSED MUNICIPAL SETTING DESIGNATION TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF GROUNDWATER AS POTABLE WATER BENEATH PROPERTY OWNED BY CONTEXT SHARP, LLC.

CONTEXT 5025 SHARP, LLC CAN TEXT SHARP, LLC CAN TEXT B H COMMONWEALTH, LLC AND GENERALLY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF IRVINE BOULEVARD AND WEST MOCKINGBIRD LANE AND ADJACENT STREET RIGHTS OF WAY, AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ONE AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING SUPPORT OF THE ISSUANCE OF A MUNICIPAL SETTING DESIGNATION TO CONTEXT SHARP, LLC BY THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND PROHIBITING THE USE OF GROUNDWATER BENEATH THE DESIGNATED PROPERTY AS PORTABLE POTABLE WATER. BECAUSE THIS IS A MUNICIPAL SETTING DESIGNATION, I'M REQUIRED TO READ THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT.

[10:50:01]

PURSUANT TO SECTION 51, A-6.108G3 OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THE APPLICANT OR LICENSED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT WHO IS FAMILIAR WITH THE APPLICATION MUST BE PRESENT AND AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS WITH THAT INDIVIDUAL. PLEASE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU MAY MAKE A STATEMENT.

GOOD EVENING, I'M KENNETH TRAM. I'M A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL GEOSCIENTIST AND LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.

I'M ALSO YOUR LAST REGISTERED SPEAKER THIS EVENING.

HAPPY TO BE HERE. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM FF TWO. NO FURTHER SPEAKERS. MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER CARDENA.

MOTION TO APPROVE. MOTION FOR. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

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

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM THREE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ONE REGARDING AN APPLICATION BY JPI

[PH3. 25-2952A A public hearing to receive comments (1) regarding an application by JPI Affordable Acquisition, LLC (Applicant), to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) for 4% Non-Competitive Low Income Housing Tax Credits for Torrington Forest, a 248-unit multifamily residential development for persons of low and moderate income to be located at 7100 South Great Trinity Forest Way, Dallas, Texas 75217 (Project); (2) pursuant to Section 394.9025 of the Texas Local Government Code regarding bonds to be issued by the City of Dallas Housing Finance Corporation to finance the Project; and at the close of the public hearing; and (3) authorize a Resolution of No Objection for Applicant, acknowledging the One Mile Three Year Rule, and the Project’s location in a census tract with more than twenty percent Housing Tax Credit units per total households, related to its application to TDHCA for the development of the Project - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information)]

AFFORDABLE ACQUISITION, LLC, APPLICANT TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, FOR 4% NONCOMPETITIVE, LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS FOR TORRINGTON FOREST, A 248 UNIT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR PERSONS OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME TO BE LOCATED AT 7100 SOUTH GREAT TRINITY FOREST WAY, DALLAS, TEXAS. 75217 PROJECT TWO PURSUANT TO SECTION 394.9025 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE REGARDING BOUNDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION TO FINANCE THE PROJECT AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND AND THREE AUTHORIZE A RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION FOR APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGING THE ONE MILE, THREE YEAR RULE AND THE PROJECT'S LOCATION IN A CENSUS TRACT WITH MORE THAN 20% HOUSING TAX CREDIT UNITS PER TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS RELATED TO ITS APPLICATION TO TD HCA FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT.

YOU DON'T HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS, BUT ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM FF THREE NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.

COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE.

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

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING. NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM FF FOUR IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS, ONE REGARDING AN APPLICATION BY TABOR VILLAGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND

[PH4. 25-2950A A public hearing to receive comments (1) regarding an application by Tabor Village Limited Partnership, and/or its affiliate(s) (collectively referred to as Applicant) to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) for 4% Non-Competitive Low Income Housing Tax Credits (4% Housing Tax Credits) for Tabor Village a 229-unit multifamily residential development for persons of low and moderate income to be located at 6200 Baraboo Drive, Dallas, Texas 75241 (Project); (2) pursuant to Section 394.9025 of the Texas Local Government Code regarding bonds to be issued by the City of Dallas Housing Finance Corporation to finance the Project; and at the close of the public hearing; and (3) authorize a Resolution of No Objection for Applicant related to its application to TDHCA for the development of the Project - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information)]

OR ITS AFFILIATE, COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS APPLICANT TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS HK FOR 4% NONCOMPETITIVE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS FOR TABOR VILLAGE, A 229 UNIT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR PERSONS OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME TO BE LOCATED AT 6200 BARABOO DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 75 241.

PROJECT TWO. PURSUANT TO SECTION 394.9025 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE REGARDING BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION TO FINANCE THE PROJECT, AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THREE AUTHORIZE A RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION FOR APPLICANT RELATED TO ITS APPLICATION TO TD FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? YES. I DO HAVE SOMETHING I NEED TO SAY.

THIS LOCATION IS RIGHT BEHIND HIGHLAND HILLS LIBRARY.

RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET ACTUALLY IS RIGHT ACROSS FROM HIGHLAND HILLS LIBRARY.

IT WILL BE THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT FOR SENIORS IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA.

THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE THAT ARE NEEDING TO TRANSITION INTO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, INTO A DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL GIVE THEM THE SPACE AND SECURITY THEY NEED.

AS I WALKED THIS PARTICULAR COMMUNITY, I WALKED AND KNOCKED ON A LOT OF DOORS WHERE THERE WERE SENIORS THAT REALLY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AT HOME BY THEMSELVES.

THIS GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEIR FAMILIES TO MOVE THEM IN A IN A LIVING THAT SURROUNDS THEM IN A MORE HEALTHY AND SAFE ENVIRONMENT THAN IN ONE THAT IS A HOUSE THAT THEY CAN'T MAINTAIN AND THEY CAN'T HANDLE ON THEIR OWN.

SO WITH THIS ONE, I AM SO HAPPY TO BE ABLE TO OFFER THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IN THIS PARTICULAR COMMUNITY.

[10:55:08]

THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM FIVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS,

[PH5. 25-2951A A public hearing to receive comments (1) regarding an application by Westmoreland Townhomes Limited Partnership and/or its affiliate(s) (collectively referred to as Applicant) to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) for 4% Non-Competitive Low Income Housing Tax Credits for Westmoreland Townhomes, a 216-unit multifamily residential development for persons of low and moderate income to be, located at 6600 South Westmoreland Road, Dallas, Texas 75237 (Project); (2) pursuant to Section 394.9025 of the Texas Local Government Code regarding bonds to be issued by the City of Dallas Housing Finance Corporation to finance the Project; and at the close of the public hearing; and (3) authorize a Resolution of No Objection for Applicant, acknowledging the Project’s location in a census tract with more than twenty percent Housing Tax Credit units per total households, related to its application to TDHCA for the development of the Project - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information)]

ONE REGARDING AN APPLICATION BY WESTMORELAND TOWNHOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND OR ITS AFFILIATE, COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS APPLICANT TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, FOR 4% NONCOMPETITIVE, LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS FOR WESTMORELAND TOWNHOMES, A 216 UNIT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR PERSONS OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME TO BE LOCATED AT 6600 SOUTH WESTMORELAND ROAD, DALLAS, TEXAS.

75237. PROJECT TWO PURSUANT TO SECTION 394394.9025 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE REGARDING BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION TO FINANCE THE PROJECT AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THREE AUTHORIZE A RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION FOR APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGING THE PROJECT'S LOCATION IN A CENSUS TRACT WITH MORE THAN 20% HOUSING TAX CREDIT UNITS PER TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS, RELATED TO ITS APPLICATION TO TBD FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM FF FIVE NO SPEAKERS. MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY MOVE APPROVAL.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? YEAH. THIS IS ONE. AND AGAIN I SEE THE DEVELOPER THERE. THANK YOU ALL FOR STAYING ALL DAY.

GOOD LOOKING OUT. BUT THIS IS ANOTHER SENIOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA.

AND AGAIN, AS WE WORK ON A HOUSING STRATEGY, PART OF IT IS SPREADING OUT HOUSING FOR SENIORS SO THAT THEY CAN AGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING. THIS IS A WONDERFUL DEVELOPMENT RIGHT DOWN WESTMORELAND. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM SIX IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS,

[PH6. 25-2954A A public hearing to receive comments (1) regarding an application by Waters at Waterchase, LP and/or its affiliate(s) (collectively referred to as Applicant), to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) for 4% Non-Competitive Low Income Housing Tax Credits for Waters at Waterchase, a 130-unit multifamily residential development for persons of low and moderate income to be located at 12365 Plano Road, Dallas, Texas 75243 (Project); and (2) authorize a Resolution of No Objection for Applicant, related to its application to TDHCA for the development of Waters at Waterchase - Financing: No cost consideration to the City]

ONE REGARDING AN APPLICATION BY WATERS AT WATER CHASE LP AND OR ITS AFFILIATE, COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS APPLICANT TO TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. TD FOR 4% NONCOMPETITIVE, LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS FOR WATERS AT WATER CHASE, A 130 UNIT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR PERSONS OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME TO BE LOCATED AT 12365 FIVE PLANO ROAD, DALLAS, TEXAS. 75243 PROJECT AND TWO AUTHORIZE A RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION FOR APPLICANT RELATED TO ITS APPLICATION TO TD FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF WATERS AT WATER CHASE.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE? THERE ARE NO INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE.

NO SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. MR. MAYOR CHAIR STEWART.

THANK YOU. I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND AUTHORIZE THE RESOLUTION.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MR. MAYOR, THIS CONCLUDES YOUR AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING BEFORE WE ADJOURN.

IT HASN'T MADE IT TO MIDNIGHT YET, BUT I JUST WANT TO WISH MY WIFE, MONICA, A HAPPY BIRTHDAY IF SHE'S STILL WATCHING AT THE TIME IS 1130, AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. GOOD GAME, BRO.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

Nov 12, 2025 City Council Agenda Meetings

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item