Dallas Police Department

[3. Authorize a five-year cooperative purchasing agreement for a cloud-based video management and analytics platform, Verkada, for the Dallas Police Department with Sigma Surveillance, Inc. dba STS360 through the Department of Information Resources cooperative agreement - Not to exceed $4,631,204.78 - Financing: Confiscated Monies-Federal Fund ($946,304.96) and General Fund ($3,684,899.82) (subject to annual appropriations)]

WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR FIRST PULLED ITEM. AGENDA ITEM THREE.

AGENDA ITEM THREE. AUTHORIZE A FIVE YEAR COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT FOR A CLOUD BASED VIDEO MANAGEMENT AND ANALYTICS PLATFORM.

VERKADA FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH SIGMA SURVEILLANCE, INC., DBA STS THREE 60.

THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, NOT TO EXCEED $4,631,204.78.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA AND COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON.

IS THERE A MOTION? YES. MAYOR. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I MOVE TO AMEND THIS ITEM THREE.

I MOVED TO REMAND ITEM THREE TO THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY FOR A BRIEFING.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRMAN JOHNSON? YES. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT DOING BUSINESS WITH BAD COMPANIES.

THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS THAT I HAVE, AND I'VE SENT IT OUT.

AND SO FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, I'LL LEAVE IT. LEAVE IT AT THAT.

BUT I'M AGAIN REMINDED THIS TO OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY FOR A BRIEFING.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON FOR YOUR MOTION.

I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF BRINGING IT TO YOUR COMMITTEE. I'D ASK THAT IN THE CONVERSATION THAT WE CAN ALSO LOOK AT THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS AS THE ITEM IS POSTED.

IT GOES AWAY FROM UTILIZING THE CONFISCATED MONIES FUNDS.

AND I'D HOPE THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT THE AGREEMENT TO BE INCLUSIVE OF EXHAUSTING THOSE FUNDS BEFORE TAPPING INTO THE GENERAL FUND FOR THIS EXPENSE IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS, LIKE WE ARE DOING FOR THIS FIRST YEAR.

SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING I HAD TO ADD. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY CHAIRMAN JOHNSON ON AGENDA ITEM THREE? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. CHAIRMAN.

CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU HAVE RAISED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SECURITY OF THE VIDEO SYSTEM.

I WAS WONDERING IF YOU MIGHT WANT TO ASK ANY OF THOSE QUESTIONS.

WE HAVE THREE BPD FOLKS HERE. OR WERE YOU HOPING TO SAVE THAT FOR COMMITTEE? I'M SORRY. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. I'M SORRY. MAY I ADDRESS HIM? YEAH, YOU CAN IF YOU WANT TO RESPOND. YOU CAN, BUT YES, SIR.

I WILL ADDRESS IT IF WE'RE APPROVED FOR THE BRIEFING.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO PROVE IT SO WE CAN HAVE MORE OF A ROBUST CONVERSATION.

OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? AGENDA ITEM THREE. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. YOUR NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM FIVE.

[5. Authorize a maintenance and use agreement with Southern Gateway Public Green Foundation for the maintenance, operation, and use of Halperin Park located between South Marsalis Avenue and South Ewing Avenue - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information)]

AGENDA ITEM FIVE. AUTHORIZE A MAINTENANCE AND USE AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN GATEWAY PUBLIC GREEN FOUNDATION FOR THE MAINTENANCE, OPERATION, AND USE OF HALPERIN PARK, LOCATED BETWEEN SOUTH MARSALIS AVENUE AND SOUTH EWING AVENUE.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON.

IS THERE A MOTION? YES. YES. YOU RECOGNIZED. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL FEBRUARY THE 25TH, 2026.

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

CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES, IF YOU'D LIKE IT.

NO, SIR. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM SIX.

[6. Authorize a construction services contract for the construction of the Forest Audelia Recreation Center Project located at 9759 Forest Lane - SCI Construction, Ltd., best value proposer of nineteen - Not to exceed $4,010,000.00 - Financing: Capital Gifts, Donation & Development Fund]

MOTION TO APPROVE. LET ME READ THE ITEM INTO THE RECORD.

ONE SECOND. I'M SORRY. I'M JUST A LITTLE ANXIOUS ON MY SYSTEM IS MOVING SLOW.

I'M SORRY. AGENDA ITEM SIX AUTHORIZED A CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOREST AUDELIA RECREATION CENTER PROJECT, LOCATED AT 9759 FOREST LANE. CI CONSTRUCTION LIMITED.

BEST VALUE PROPOSER OF 19 NOT TO EXCEED $4,010,000.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE. IT'S BEEN MOVED.

AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN FIRST THAT YOU PULLED IT? YES.

THANK YOU. FIVE MINUTES. I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, PLEASE.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO NOTE THAT I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH JOHN JENKINS, AND I HAVE TOLD CHAIRMAN STEWART THAT I WOULD BE PULLING IT.

AND THE NATURE OF MY QUESTIONS ARE FINANCIAL, BUT ALSO OPERATIONAL.

[00:45:03]

SO THIS IS TO ESSENTIALLY BUILD A NEW REC CENTER, ALTHOUGH THERE'S THERE'S OBVIOUSLY AN EXISTING BOXING PROGRAM. MY QUESTION IS, OUR REC CENTERS TODAY, 18 OF 40 ARE CLOSED ON SATURDAY AND SUNDAY, 22 ARE OPEN ON SATURDAY FROM 9 TO 2 AND CLOSED ON SUNDAY.

THE HOURS DURING THE WEEK FOR ALL OF THEM ARE 9 A.M.

TO 8 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND THEN FRIDAY.

SUMMER 2 TO 7. THE ISSUE IS THE HOURS ARE SO LIMITED AT ALL OF OUR REC CENTERS RIGHT NOW.

WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO GET THE OPERATIONAL DOLLARS TO SERVICE ANOTHER REC CENTER? YES. SO YEAH, ANYTIME WE BUILD A NEW REC CENTER OR IF WE EXPAND A REC CENTER IN SOME CASES, BECAUSE WE'RE ADDING ON SO MUCH MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

WE HAVE ALWAYS MADE A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL O&M.

THAT'S BEEN THE UNDERSTANDING FOR AT LEAST THE LAST 40 OR 50 YEARS WHEN WE BUILD NEW REC CENTERS.

AND SO HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE DO YOU NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL REC CENTER.

YEAH. SO OUR REC CENTERS ARE A LARGE REC CENTER.

AND I ALSO HAVE STEVE BAKER HERE, WHO'S THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF RECREATION SERVICES, SO HE CAN PROVIDE MORE DETAILS.

BUT TYPICALLY OUR REC CENTERS, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THEM, THEY CAN RUN ANYWHERE FROM WITH 300 TO ABOUT $380,000 A YEAR IN O&M. AND SO, CITY MANAGER, AS YOU'RE CONSIDERING NEXT BUDGET YEAR, ARE YOU ADDING IN AN ADDITIONAL 300 TO 380,000 FOR A NEW REC CENTER ON TOP OF ESCALATING COSTS AT THE EXISTING REC CENTERS? THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCILWOMAN MIDDLETON, FOR THE QUESTION.

I CANNOT TELL YOU WHAT THE BUDGET AT THIS POINT, WHAT WE WILL OR WILL NOT BE DOING AS WE'VE DONE IN PREVIOUS YEARS, ANYTIME THAT THERE'S A REQUEST FOR WHAT WE CONSIDER ENHANCEMENTS, THE DEPARTMENTS ARE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR SHOWING US HOW THEY'RE GOING TO CREATE SOME ADDITIONAL EFFICIENCIES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT. SO I CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION TODAY AS TO WHAT WE WILL DO.

WE WILL DEFINITELY IF COUNCIL APPROVES MOVING THIS FORWARD, THEN WE WILL WORK WITH THE THE LEADERSHIP OF THE PARK AND REC DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FIND A WAY TO CREATE THAT CAPACITY IN THE BUDGET, BUT IT WILL BE A A PROCESS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH TOGETHER.

BUT I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TELL YOU TODAY EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. LOOK, THE COUNCIL PUT THIS TO THE VOTERS.

THE VOTERS APPROVED IT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE DEBT TO BUILD IT.

BUT THE QUESTION IS, HOW ARE WE GOING TO RUN IT? AND I THINK WE HAVE 42 REC CENTERS. IS THAT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO WITH 42 REC CENTERS AND THIS WOULD BE 43, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE ONE HAND IS ADDING A REC CENTER, AND THE OTHER HAND ISN'T SAYING, OH, WELL, WE AUTOMATICALLY KNOW WE NEED TO INCREASE OUR BUDGET.

AND WITHOUT THAT KIND OF ALIGNMENT, WE END UP IN THE SAME SITUATION AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH LIBRARIES, WITH THE POOL MASTER PLAN, WITH OTHER, OTHER FACILITIES THAT WE KEEP ADDING, BUT WE'RE NOT BUDGETING IN TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE AS A. THAT'S MY CONCERN AS A CITY MANAGER, TOLBERT MENTIONED.

THERE'S A PROCESS WE GO THROUGH, AND ONLY THE PROCESS IS AT LEAST ABOUT TWO, TWO YEARS OUT WHERE WE PROJECT, ESPECIALLY BOND PROJECTS, THAT WE WAS APPROVED THROUGH THE BOND PROGRAM.

WE DO PROJECT OUT ALONG WITH THE BUDGET OFFICE, OUR REQUEST FOR FUTURE O&M.

SO THE HOURS THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT WHERE WE'VE GOT THESE 18 REC CENTERS CLOSED SATURDAYS AND SUNDAYS, DID THAT HAPPEN IN NOVEMBER? YES. THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY. IS THERE A COMMITMENT THAT THERE'D BE NO FURTHER REDUCTION IN HOURS AT EXISTING CENTERS? NO, I CAN'T MAKE THAT COMMITMENT. YOU KNOW, AS AS, YOU KNOW, AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS WE WE, WE, WE PARTICIPATE. AND LAST YEAR AND FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE'VE BEEN PARTICIPATING IN THE, IN THE BUDGET PROCESS. IN SOME CASES, IT IT WE LOOK AT EFFICIENCIES AND IN SOME CASES WE HAVE TO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PART OF FINDING THOSE EFFICIENCIES AS WELL AS SOME REDUCTIONS IN IN ORDER TO MEET THE OVERALL BUDGET REQUEST FOR THAT YEAR.

AND SO WE DO OUR PART EVERY SINGLE YEAR. BUT SO THIS YEAR, BECAUSE OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS,

[00:50:01]

WE'VE BEEN REDUCING IT THROUGH EFFICIENCIES. WE'VE BEEN REDUCING OUR BUDGET EVERY SINGLE YEAR THIS YEAR.

I HAD TO LOOK AT REDUCING REC CENTER HOURS IN ORDER FOR US TO MEET OUR GOALS.

AND IN THIS CASE, WE LOOKED AT WE HAVE SOME REC CENTERS THAT WAS OPERATING 60 HOURS.

WE HAVE SOME REC CENTER WHERE MOST OF THEM WAS OPERATING AT ANYWHERE FROM 50 TO 60.

BUT WHAT WE LEARNED THROUGH THE PROCESS WAS ALL THE REC CENTERS DIDN'T NEED THE MAXIMUM HOURS BECAUSE THEY JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE PARTICIPATIONS.

SO STRATEGICALLY, WE WENT THROUGH AND STEVE BAKER AND HIS TEAM WENT THROUGH AND SAID, OKAY, WELL THESE THESE COUPLE REC CENTERS ARE NEVER MAXIMIZING THE 60 HOURS.

AND SO THEY'RE THE ONES WHO DID THAT PROCESS AND USED THEIR METRICS TO DETERMINE WHICH REC CENTER RECEIVED CERTAIN HOURS, WHICH ONES WERE REDUCED, WHICH ONES RECEIVED ADDITIONAL HOURS.

OKAY, I GUESS ARE THERE REC CENTERS YOU'RE LOOKING AT CLOSING? WELL YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT THE BEST WAY TO OPERATE OUR PARKS AND RECREATION. AT ONE TIME, WE USED TO HAVE WHAT WE CALL NEIGHBORHOOD THEY WOULD CALL NEIGHBORHOOD RECREATION CENTERS.

BUT IT WAS. BUT THOSE REC CENTERS DID NOT RECEIVE A LOT OF PARTICIPATION BECAUSE THEY WERE JUST OUTDATED.

THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE AMENITIES THAT THE PATRONS WANTED.

AND I WILL TELL YOU, IT PROBABLY TOOK US 20 YEARS JUST TO GET TO A POINT TO GO FROM NINE OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY, I MEAN, NEIGHBORHOOD REC CENTERS TO CLOSE THEM TOOK US PROBABLY 20 YEARS.

SO NOW WE ONLY HAVE TWO OUT OF THOSE NINE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS STILL IN OPERATION.

SO WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING TO THINGS THAT THAT ARE NOT SERVING THE MASSES, NOT GETTING THE PARTICIPATION.

WE'RE GOING TO ALWAYS LOOK AT HOW DO WE LOOK AT THE INEFFICIENT SERVICES AND MAKE SURE WE CONTINUE TO INVEST IN THOSE SERVICES THAT ARE SERVING THE MASSES. OKAY. WELL, I JUST KEEP GOING BACK TO THIS NOTION THAT THERE'S 42 REC CENTERS. I MEAN, WE HAVE 58 FIRE STATIONS. WE HAVE 30 LIBRARIES.

WE'RE ALREADY TALKING ABOUT REDUCING THAT. AND SO ADDING ANOTHER WHEN WE'RE NOT CERTAIN THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH FUNDING TO OPERATE THEM AND CONTINUING TO ADD MORE, IT JUST DOESN'T MEET.

LIKE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. ALTHOUGH I'M GOING TO SAY THAT AREA NEEDS ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE.

AND I RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S THERE'S CHALLENGES IN THE AREA.

AND I THINK THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD THING FOR IT.

YES. AND I CERTAINLY SEE WHY THE COMMUNITY WANTS IT.

I SEE WHY THE COUNCILWOMAN IS ADVOCATING FOR IT.

I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WORKS, THAT WE JUST KEEP BUILDING THINGS AND WE DON'T KNOW WE HAVE ADDITIONAL OPERATING FUNDS FOR IT. I WOULD SAY YOU NEED MORE FUNDING FOR ALL OF THE REC CENTERS.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DEBT WE GO INTO TO BUILD THEM AND MAINTAIN THEM, AND WE'RE NOT UTILIZING THEM.

I MEAN, TO HAVE 18 OF THEM CLOSE THE ENTIRE WEEKEND.

IF YOU'RE A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT, YOU DON'T GET OUT OF SCHOOL TILL 4:00.

OUR REC CENTERS ARE ONLY OPEN TILL EIGHT AT NIGHT.

YOU HAVE FOUR HOURS MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY. YOU MIGHT POSSIBLY, IF YOU DON'T STAY AFTER SCHOOL FOR ANY ACTIVITY, TO POSSIBLY EVEN USE IT FRIDAY. YOU KNOW, SOME OF THEM NOT AVAILABLE.

SOME OF THEM OPEN TILL SEVEN. SO THEN YOU HAVE THREE HOURS CLOSED.

SATURDAY. SUNDAY. I MEAN, I THINK OUR TARGET MARKET HAS BEEN MISSED.

THEY DON'T OPEN TILL NINE IN THE MORNING IF YOU WANT TO EXERCISE, USE A FITNESS CENTER BEFORE YOU GO TO WORK.

THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE. SO YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY DOING FITNESS CENTERS FOR SENIORS.

I MEAN, I JUST I THINK WE'RE UNDERUTILIZING A REALLY PRECIOUS AND EXPENSIVE AMENITY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE.

AND SO I JUST THINK WE OUGHT TO FUND IT PROPERLY.

OR WE HAVE TO RETHINK SOME OF HOW THIS IS HAPPENING.

AND THAT'S WHY I PULLED IT JUST TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'M. THIS IS NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART, SO I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF THINGS TO SAY.

OBVIOUSLY, I'M GOING TO READ MY STATEMENT THAT I THOUGHT WAS GOING TO BE THE CELEBRATION OF THIS, BUT THEN I WILL TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED.

SO LET ME START HERE. APPROVING THIS ITEM REPRESENTS THE NEXT MILESTONE AND MEANINGFUL PROGRESS ON THE COMMUNITY CENTER FOR FOREST AND ANGELIA.

[00:55:08]

WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH A RENOVATION OF A PORTION OF AN OLD SHOPPING CENTER THAT WILL INCORPORATE A CURRENT BOXING GYM AND CREATE A COMMUNITY CENTER FOR RESIDENTS, ESPECIALLY THE CHILDREN WHO LIVE IN THIS HIGH DENSITY, HIGH CRIME, HIGH POVERTY AREA OF DISTRICT TEN.

THE ONE ACRE PARK SHOULD BE OPEN IN ABOUT 30 DAYS, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE COMMUNITY CENTER OPENING EARLY NEXT YEAR.

BOTH OF THESE PROJECTS ARE FUNDED WITH SKILLMAN CORRIDOR TIF FUNDS, SO NO BOND FUNDS.

AS FAR AS I KNOW. WE WILL RELY ON CURRENT AUDELIA LIBRARY STAFF TO ASSIST WITH THE PROGRAMING AS WELL AS THE PALS PROGRAM.

THAT IS ALWAYS DUE. ALREADY DOING GREAT WORK AT THE BOXING GYM.

I APPRECIATE THE PERSISTENCE OF PARK BOARD MEMBER SCOTT GOLDSTEIN AND THE PARK AND RECREATION STAFF, AS WELL AS THE VISION OF FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER ADAM MCGOUGH AND FORMER PARK BOARD MEMBER ROB STEWART.

WE ARE MAKING SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS. SO WHAT I DO WANT TO DISTINGUISH AND MAYBE ONE OF YOU ALL CAN HELP ME THIS.

DO WE KNOW HOW MANY SQUARE FEET THIS COMMUNITY CENTER WILL BE? THIS CURRENT PROJECT, MA'AM, WILL BE 10,000FT².

AND HOW LARGE IS A NORMAL REC CENTER? GENERALLY WITH A GYM AND ALL OF THAT? MA'AM, OUR WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER TO BE A NORMAL RECREATION CENTER IS 20 TO TO 22,000FT², APPROXIMATELY. SO THIS IS AROUND HALF THE SIZE, AROUND HALF THE SIZE.

AND WE'RE NOT BUILDING ANY NEW STRUCTURE. WE ARE TAKING AN OLD SHOPPING CENTER AND RENOVATING IT SO THAT IT CAN BE USED FOR THIS COMMUNITY.

I THINK THOSE ARE DISTINGUISHING FACTORS, HOW IT'S BEEN FUNDED, THE SIZE OF IT, THE PROGRAM PROGRAMING OF IT.

RIGHT. WHERE I WOULD EVEN SUGGEST IF WE ARE TIGHT ON FUNDS, THAT WE COULD SHARE A DIRECTOR BETWEEN ONE OF THE CURRENT DISTRICT TEN REC CENTERS AND THIS COMMUNITY CENTER. THIS IS NOT DOES NOT HAVE A FULL FLEDGED GYM.

THE GYM THAT IT HAS IS THE BOXING GYM. AND THERE WILL BE SPACE FOR MEETINGS FOR PROGRAMING THROUGH THE LIBRARY, WHICH IS WHAT I'M VERY INTERESTED IN. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS A GED PROGRAM.

IT NEEDS OTHER PROGRAMING FOR EXPECTANT MOTHERS.

I MEAN, THERE'S SO MANY THINGS THAT HAPPEN IN OUR LIBRARIES IN TERMS OF PROGRAMING THAT I LOOK FORWARD TO HAPPENING HERE IN THIS COMMUNITY CENTER NORTH OF LBJ.

THIS PARTICULAR AREA AND CHAIR MENDELSOHN IS CORRECT, IS A HIGH NEED AREA.

THERE ARE HAVE NOT BEEN CITY RESOURCES. THERE ARE NOT CITY RESOURCES HERE ALONG FOREST LANE.

WE HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE LIVING THERE IN VERY CLOSE QUARTERS.

AND THIS IS GOING TO BE THE FIRST PARK. IT'S A ONE ACRE PARK.

THIS IS SMALL, AND IN ADDITION TO ALL OF THOSE FACTS, WE HAVE A PED AND I THINK THE PED CAN BE A RESOURCE FOR FUNDING.

SO THAT'S WHAT KIDS DO. YOU KNOW, TIF, TIF DOLLARS BUILD THINGS AND KIDS COME IN AND MAINTAIN AND TAKE CARE OF THINGS.

AND SO I THINK WE CAN GO TO THE, TO THE, THE PIT AND ASK FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THIS IS NOT A FULL FLEDGED, BRAND NEW REC CENTER WITH A LARGE GYM AND ONE THAT NEEDS A FULL STAFF.

THIS IS A VERY DIFFERENT SCENARIO. THIS IS US TRYING TO FIT CITY RESOURCES INTO AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND INTERSECTION SPECIFICALLY THAT REALLY, REALLY NEEDS IT. SO WE'VE DONE THE BEST THAT WE CAN, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A TERRIBLE DRAIN ON PARK RESOURCES OR CITY RESOURCES. THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE'VE HEARD RAISED HERE.

HOWEVER, I HAVE A QUESTION AROUND LOOKING AT O&M RESOURCES COMING FROM PRIVATE DOLLARS OR GRANT DOLLARS, THAT SORT OF THING. AND I KNOW IT'S HARD WITH GRANTS WHEN YOU'VE GOT AN ANNUAL BUDGET.

HAS THIS BEEN A FOCUS OF ANY OF POTENTIAL FUTURE EFFORTS IN THAT ARENA? THE ANSWER WILL BE YES. AS WE HAVE BRIEFED THE COUNCIL AS WELL AS THE PARK BOARD AS WE TALK ABOUT THAT COMP PLAN, BECAUSE WE HAVE DONE GREAT OVER THE YEARS, BEING ABLE TO RAISE CAPITAL FOR OUR PARKS AND GET PARTNERS WHERE OUR NEXT PHASE OF THE PARK SYSTEM IS FOCUSING ON HOW DO WE BRING PARTNERS TO HELP US OPERATE THESE REC CENTERS AND OFFSET OUR O&M? SO THAT'S WHAT THE COMP PLAN IS GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON MORE REVENUE DEVELOPMENT, SO WE CAN OFFSET OUR RELIANCE ON THE GENERAL FUND.

AND I KNOW WE TALK ABOUT THIS A LOT, SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M FULFILLING MY PATH ON THIS BECAUSE,

[01:00:08]

YOU KNOW, PREVIOUS MASTER PLANS HAVE IDENTIFIED GENERATING MORE REVENUE.

WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT COME THROUGH FEES. I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO RAISE FEES ON THE PUBLIC.

I WOULD LOVE IT IF WE COULD HAVE THESE RESOURCES NOT BE AT AN EXPENSE TO THE PUBLIC, BUT IT'S GOT TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE.

AND THE PARK SYSTEM ARGUABLY HAS THE MOST THINGS A CITY CAN OFFER.

YOU CAN SPONSOR PROGRAMING SPACES INSIDE FIELDS, THE BUILDING ITSELF.

AND SO IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE CONTRACTED VENDOR SUPERLATIVE WOULD WORK ON? ARE THEY DO THEY HAVE A PLAN TO LOOK AT. YEAH.

CENTERS, MA'AM. SO DIRECTOR JENKINS POINT, I WOULD SAY THAT THE COMP PLAN THAT WE WILL BE INITIATING VERY, VERY SOON AND WILL TAKE PLACE THROUGH THIS CALENDAR YEAR THAT WILL IDENTIFY THE STRATEGY THAT WE WILL BE UTILIZING TO TRY TO IDENTIFY PARTNERSHIPS, IDENTIFY ELEMENTS OF RECREATION CENTERS THAT COULD LEND THEMSELVES TOWARDS PARTNERSHIPS.

AND ONCE THAT STRATEGY HAS BEEN FLESHED OUT THROUGH THE COMP PLAN PROCESS, THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD ENGAGE SOMEONE LIKE SUPERLATIVE OR SUPERLATIVE THEMSELVES TO TRY TO HELP US IDENTIFY THAT RIGHT PARTNER, TO DEFRAY SOME OF THE GENERAL FUND EXPENSES IN THE RECREATION CENTERS.

I THOUGHT IDENTIFYING THESE SORTS OF THINGS WAS PART OF THE INITIAL PROCESS.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS PHASE ONE. YOU AWARD IT AND THEN IT'S LIKE THEY IDENTIFY WHAT THAT PORTFOLIO IS.

I MEAN, I THOUGHT THAT HAPPENED TWO YEARS AGO. THEY DID.

SO THEY DID THEY DID DEVELOP THE POTENTIAL VALUATION.

BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE THROUGH THE COMP PLAN IS PERHAPS REIMAGINING WHAT FUTURE RECREATION CENTERS LOOK LIKE TO, AGAIN LESSEN THE RELIANCE ON THE GENERAL FUND FOR AN OPERATIONS PERSPECTIVE.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, PERHAPS A PORTION, A SMALL PORTION OF THE BUILDING COULD BE UTILIZED AS A REVENUE GENERATING OPPORTUNITY THAT WOULD THAT WOULD SUBSIDIZE SOME OF THE CORE PROGRAMS THAT TAKE PLACE IN THE OTHER PORTION OF THE RECREATION CENTER.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, I'D LIKE TO SEE LESS TORTOISE, MORE HARE ON THIS, BECAUSE THE BUDGET I MEAN, WE'RE IN THE PROCESS AND THIS HAPPENS EVERY YEAR.

AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NEEDING MORE MONEY. AND IT'S JUST I MEAN, YOU ALL HAVE JUST SUCH AMAZING, AN AMAZING MENU OF WHAT COULD BE SPONSORED. AND YOU HAVE A CONTRACTED PARTNER.

SO, I MEAN, WE GOT TO, YOU KNOW, LAUNCH THIS ROCKET FOREST AND AUDELIA IN THIS AREA, SOMETHING LIKE THIS EQUATES TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

IT EQUATES TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND SO THE REPERCUSSIONS ARE SO GREAT FOR FOLLOWING THROUGH ON THIS AND DOING THIS.

AND I RESPECT ALL THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE THROUGH THE YEARS TO GET US EVEN TO THIS POINT.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE ARE MOVING ON ON THIS AS FAST AS WE CAN.

AND I KNOW YOU'VE GOT A MARKETING SUBCOMMITTEE AND AND AND ALL OF THAT.

AND SO I WOULD IMPLORE YOU TO PUSH ON THAT AND JUST HAVE SOME MORE REGULAR REPORTING.

AND FRANKLY, MR. CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS COMING TO YOUR COMMITTEE TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THIS IS, BECAUSE WE CAN'T ALWAYS BE THE TROUGH IN THE GENERAL FUND WHEN YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING THAT HAS THE AMAZING OPPORTUNITIES AND EVEN A PARTNER. SO I WOULD ASK THAT THAT BECOME AN ITEM THAT IS, IS LOOKED AT BUT I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS ITEM.

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

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST REALLY QUICKLY, I'M GLAD THAT COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS MENTIONED THE PUBLIC SAFETY ASPECT OF THIS.

SO I JUST WANT TO STATE THAT I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS ITEM BECAUSE IT BECAUSE OF THE SIGNIFICANT AND LASTING BENEFITS IT WILL PROVIDE TO THIS PART OF OUR CITY.

AND I HAVE A UNIQUE UNDERSTANDING OF THAT PARTICULAR SECTION OF OUR CITY AND THAT PARTICULAR TRACT OF LAND, BECAUSE MY COUSIN USED TO BE THE APARTMENT MANAGER AT THE APARTMENTS RIGHT NEXT TO IT.

AND I SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THAT AREA WHEN I WAS YOUNGER.

I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH WITH THE NEEDS AND THE CHALLENGES OF THAT AREA.

AND SO THIS INVESTMENT ADDRESSES REAL NEEDS ON THE GROUND.

AND I BELIEVE IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE COMMIT TO FUNDING IT ADEQUATELY MOVING FORWARD, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S PITT FUNDS, BOND FUNDS. YOU KNOW, AND I WOULD EVEN CAUTION AGAINST ANY FUTURE TAX RATE REDUCTIONS THAT COULD JEOPARDIZE THE SUSTAINABILITY OR EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS INVESTMENT AND OTHER INVESTMENTS LIKE IT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 1616 IS AUTHORIZED A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK AGREEMENT

[16. Authorize a Construction Manager at Risk Agreement with Swinerton Builders, best value proposer of two, for pre-construction and construction services for a new Dallas Police Department Law Enforcement Training Center on the University of North Texas at Dallas located at 7300 University Hills Boulevard to provide (1) pre-construction services for the Project for a fee in an amount not to exceed $150,000.00; and (2) construction management services for a fee at a rate of one and eight hundred fifty-six one hundredths percent of the cost of work included as part of the total guaranteed maximum price within the total construction budget of $150,000,000.00 - Not to exceed $150,000.00 - Financing: Public Safety Facilities (F) Fund (2024 General Obligation Bond Fund) *In alignment with Bond Implementation Program.]

WITH SWINERTON BUILDERS. BEST VALUE PROPOSAL TWO FOR PRECONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR A NEW DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER ON THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AT DALLAS, LOCATED AT 7300 UNIVERSITY HILLS BOULEVARD,

[01:05:06]

TO PROVIDE ONE PRECONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE PROJECT FOR A FEE IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $150,000.

TWO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR A FEE AT A RATE OF ONE AND 856 100% OF THE COST OF WORK INCLUDED AS PART OF THE TOTAL GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE WITHIN THE TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET OF $150 MILLION, NOT TO EXCEED $150,000. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA.

HOWEVER, IT HAS TWO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

YOUR FIRST SPEAKER IS THE HONORABLE JENNIFER GATES.

GOOD MORNING. CAN YOU SEE ME? OKAY. YES. YOU MAY CONTINUE.

GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JENNIFER GATES, AND AS A MEMBER OF THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER TASK FORCE, ALONG WITH TASK FORCE CHAIR, THE HONORABLE TENNELL ATKINS AND TASK FORCE COMMITTEE MEMBER LYNN MCBEE.

I'M HERE TO SHARE MY EXCITEMENT AND OPTIMISM ABOUT THE CENTER.

THIS ITEM IS AN ESSENTIAL ACTION TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD, AND WILL ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD ON PRIVATE FUNDRAISING.

AS YOU ARE AWARE, THERE WAS A PAUSE DURING NEGOTIATIONS REGARDING THE LEASE, BUT THAT IS NOW BEHIND US AND CITY STAFF HAS BEEN HARD AT WORK MOVING THIS PROJECT FORWARD. THE TASK FORCE HAS BEEN WORKING, RAISING MONEY AND AWARENESS FOR THIS IMPORTANT PROJECT.

WE HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH FOUNDATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS TO RAISE PHILANTHROPIC FUNDS TO ACHIEVE TO ACHIEVE THE PROJECT GOALS.

IN ADDITION, WE ARE ATTENDING MEETINGS WITH COMMUNITY AND BUSINESS LEADERS.

THERE IS A LOT OF ENTHUSIASM AND SUPPORT FOR THIS MUCH NEEDED TRAINING CENTER.

RECENTLY, WE HAVE BEEN PLANNING OUR WORK TO ENGAGE CORPORATIONS IN ADDITION TO CONTINUING OUR WORK WITH FOUNDATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS.

WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER A LIST OF NAMING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PROJECT WITH ALL LEVELS OF PARTICIPATION.

ADDITIONALLY, WE ARE BRIEFING THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MONTHLY ON OUR PROGRESS AND APPRECIATE THE LEADERSHIP OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY CHAIR AND ALL THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR THEIR SUPPORT. WE LOOK FORWARD TO A FALL GROUNDBREAKING AND ARE FOCUSED AND CONFIDENT IN MEETING THE NEEDS OF THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT SPEAKER, LORNA BARTON.

GOOD MORNING. COUNCIL. MAYOR AND ALL THOSE IN ATTENDANCE AND ON VIDEO.

I AM LORNA BARTON, CHIEF OF STAFF FOR STATE SENATOR ROYCE WEST AND HIS SENIOR HIGHER EDUCATION AIDE.

THIS PROJECT, THE POLICE ACADEMY CENTER ON THE CAMPUS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AT DALLAS, WILL ADD TO THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AT DALLAS AND ALSO SERVE TO ASSIST THE CITY OF DALLAS IN THE RECRUITMENT, THE TRAINING, AND THE HIRING OF A EXCEPTIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT. SENATOR WEST STANDS READY TO WORK WITH YOU ON ANY EFFORTS MOVING THIS FORWARD.

IT HAS BEEN A LONG, HARD JOURNEY, BUT WE'RE ALMOST AT THE END.

THERE HAVE BEEN THERE HAS BEEN COMPROMISE. AND AS YOU KNOW, WITH COMPROMISE.

NO ONE EVER GETS EVERYTHING THAT THEY WANT, BUT EVERYONE GETS WHAT THEY NEED.

THIS POLICE CENTER WILL ADD TO TO THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE GROWTH AND THE MATURATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AT DALLAS. IT WILL ALSO HELP THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY OF DALLAS IN THEIR EFFORTS TO HAVE AND MAINTAIN THE BEST POLICE FORCE KNOWN TO MAN. SENATOR WEST HAS BEEN A PART OF THIS PROCESS SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING, WHEN WE HAD CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND TASK FORCE MEMBERS AND DALLAS REGIONAL CHAMBER MEMBERS GOING DOWN TO AUSTIN TO INITIALLY GET FUNDING THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE PHILANTHROPIC EFFORTS OF THE TASK FORCE. THE SENATOR THANKS TO ALL INVOLVED AND LOOKS FORWARD AS WELL TO THE GROUNDBREAKING IN THE FALL OF THIS YEAR.

WELL, IN THE FALL AND WE STAND HERE WITH YOU DOING WHATEVER WE CAN TO SUPPORT THIS EFFORT.

JOB WELL DONE. THANK YOU. THERE ARE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.

MR. MAYOR, AGAIN, THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE?

[01:10:05]

HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION FROM ANYONE? MISS BLAIR? RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE'RE ON AGENDA ITEM 16.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO HAVE THIS WORD.

I WAS ON THE THE COMMITTEE, THE BOND COMMITTEE THAT CAME THAT STARTED THIS PROCESS AS A CPC MEMBER. I INHERITED THE GETTING THIS TO THE PLACE WE ARE TODAY AND MOVING IT FORWARD AS THE NEXT AS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER. THIS HAS BEEN A LONG JOURNEY AND I KNOW THAT WE STILL HAVE SOME WORK TO DO.

I'M GRATEFUL FOR ALL THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE IN ORDER TO RAISE ALL THE FUNDS NEEDED IN ORDER TO GET THIS, THIS ACADEMY WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE. IT'S INTEGRAL THAT WE HAVE THIS NEW ACADEMY.

IF YOU HAD A TOUR OF WHAT OUR POLICE OFFICERS USED TODAY, YOU WOULD APPRECIATE THE EXACT NEED.

I TOURED THE EXISTING FACILITY. I'M AMAZED THAT WE PRODUCE SUCH WONDERFUL OFFICERS BASED ON WHAT WE GIVE THEM TO START WITH.

THE POLICE OFFICERS HAVE DONE THE POLICE STATE.

THE POLICE AS A WHOLE HAS DONE AN AMAZING JOB BRINGING OUT NEW OFFICERS TO THE LEVEL THAT WE HAVE.

I GET EMOTIONAL WHEN I TALK ABOUT THE POLICE ACADEMY BECAUSE SAFETY IS NUMBER ONE TO THIS CITY.

IF WE CAN'T PRODUCE THE PERFECT POLICE OFFICERS TO DO THE JOB WE NEED, WE CANNOT BE THE CITY WE NEED IT TO BE.

I LOOK FORWARD FOR THIS POLICE ACADEMY GETTING BUILT.

HOPEFULLY IT WILL ALL BE DONE WITHIN A COUPLE OF YEARS, AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO SEE OUR OFFICERS HAVE THE FIRST RATE FACILITY TO BECOME THE FIRST RATE POLICE STATION. THANK YOU.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM 16.

THANK YOU. WELL, I THINK THIS IS THE MOST EXCITING ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.

IT IS A GREAT STEP FORWARD TO HAVE THE PRECONSTRUCTION WORK INITIATED TO HAVE A MAXIMUM GUARANTEED PRICE RIGHT OFF THE BAT. OUR VOTERS, WHEN THEY VOTED ON THE BOND, THIS ITEM PASSED WITH THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE.

AND OVER AND OVER PEOPLE HAVE RESPONDED SAYING, YES, CITY COUNCIL, YOU'RE SPOT ON.

YOU'RE YOU'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING. WHEN YOU SAY PUBLIC SAFETY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.

AND THEY DON'T ALWAYS SAY THAT ABOUT US, BUT THIS IS THE RIGHT ITEM AND OUR OFFICERS NEED IT.

THEY DESERVE IT. AND OUR RESIDENTS DESERVE TO HAVE HIGHLY TRAINED PROFESSIONAL OFFICERS.

THEY'RE ACCOMPLISHING THAT IN TERRIBLE CONDITIONS RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S MAKING US LESS COMPETITIVE FOR RECRUITING AND RETENTION.

SO THAT'S WHY I SAY IT'S THE MOST EXCITING ITEM.

IT IS THE MOST EXCITING AND IMPORTANT PROJECT, I THINK, FACING THE CITY, EVEN WITH LOTS OF DISCUSSION ABOUT LOTS OF BIG FANCY PROJECTS.

THIS IS THE NUMBER ONE THING. AND, YOU KNOW, JENNIFER GATES, THANK YOU FOR STAYING INVOLVED IN YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.

GETTING THE PHILANTHROPIC COMMUNITY TO HELP US REACH OUR FINANCIAL GOALS IS SO ESSENTIAL.

AND I REALLY APPLAUD EVERYONE WHO HAS ALREADY COMMITTED TO DONATIONS AND IS THINKING ABOUT IT NOW.

SO LET'S GET IT PASSED. THANKS. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM 16.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS IS EXCITING FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

I WANT TO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON PUBLIC SAFETY.

I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO YOU, AND YOUR PASSION COMES ACROSS VERY STRONG CONCERNING PUBLIC SAFETY TO OUR CITY MANAGER, KIM TOLBERT. YOUR LEADERSHIP ON PUBLIC SAFETY MAKING THIS HAPPEN.

AND IT'S CHAIR MIDDLETON SAID, I VOTED, OUR VOTER'S VOICE WAS HEARD.

THIS WAS A VERY IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND CITIZENS OF DALLAS.

AND SO THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY EXCITING. AND TO COUNCILWOMAN.

LORI, I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A WHILE WHEN YOU CPC AND ALL THE WORK YOU'VE DONE AND YOUR VOICE AND THE MEETINGS THAT YOU'VE HAD.

SO I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AS WELL. THIS AGAIN, THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY EXCITING. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM 16.

THANK YOU. AND AGAIN, I'M TO WILL CONCUR WITH EVERY WITH WHAT EVERYONE ELSE SAID.

BUT I ESPECIALLY JUST WANT TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS TO THE POLICE OFFICERS WHO'VE BEEN SUBJECTED TO THE CURRENT FACILITIES FOR QUITE A LONG TIME.

AND I TELL A SECRET. I REMEMBER WHEN I MOVED TO DALLAS, I ACTUALLY WENT IN TO, YOU KNOW, TRY TO BE A POLICE OFFICER.

AND I WENT TO THAT TRAINING FACILITY THEN, AND IT WAS OLD THEN.

[01:15:05]

SO I'M JUST EXCITED THAT YOU ALL ARE GETTING SOME, SOME UPGRADES TO YOUR FACILITY SO THAT YOU ALL CAN ONE TRAIN IN BETTER CONDITIONS.

AND, AND IN AND AROUND AN EDUCATION FORMAT TOO.

SO I'M JUST EXCITED FOR ALL THAT'S GOING TO DO FOR THE POLICE FORCE. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR EVERYONE WHO PLAYED A PART IN MAKING THIS HAPPEN, INCLUDING CITY MANAGER. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST? AGENDA ITEM 16. SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NOTED. HE MEANT NAY.

I THINK NO. RIGHT? NO. WASN'T A LATE I IT WAS A IT WAS OKAY.

YOU'RE VOTING NO ON THAT ITEM SO NOTED. THANK YOU.

NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 24 AUTHORIZED ONE. THE REJECTION OF BIDS RECEIVED FOR GROUP SEVEN FOR SOLID WASTE CONSULTING

[24. Authorize (1) the rejection of bids received for Group 7 for solid waste consulting services; and (2) a three-year service price agreement for Groups 1 through 6 and 8 through 10 for solid waste consulting services for the Department of Sanitation Services - Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc., Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. dba Raftelis, MidAtlantic Solid Waste Consultants, LLC dba MSW Consultants, Risa Fisher & Associates, Inc., Parkhill, Smith and Cooper, Inc., and Ensolum, LLC, most advantageous proposers of twelve - Estimated amount of $3,609,828.00 - Financing: Sanitation Operation Fund (subject to annual appropriations)]

SERVICES. AND 2A3 YEAR SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT FOR GROUPS ONE THROUGH SIX AND EIGHT THROUGH TEN FOR SOLID WASTE CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION SERVICES. BURNS AND MCDONNELL. MCDONNELL ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC..

FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC., DBA MID-ATLANTIC SOLID WASTE CONSULTANTS, LLC, DBA MSW CONSULTANTS, REZA FISHER AND ASSOCIATES, INC., PARK HILL, SMITH AND COOPER INC.

AND INSULIN LLC. MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSER OF 12.

ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $3,609,828. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SECOND. I'M NOT SURE YOU CAN DO BOTH, BUT I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND AND I'LL LET THE CITY SECRETARY SORT OUT WHO WHO DID IT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE PERSON WHO PULLED 24? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. YES. THANK YOU. MY QUESTION ON THIS ONE WAS OH, SO THIS IS $36 MILLION FOR CONSULTING. I'M WONDERING IF D.W.

CAN JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THIS IS EXACTLY.

I'M SORRY, I JUST. YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT'S 3.6.

AND I DO BELIEVE OUR DIRECTOR OF SANITATION SERVICES IS ON THE CALL.

SORRY. YES. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. CLIFF GILLESPIE, DIRECTOR, SANITATION.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SO SANITATION ROUTINELY UTILIZES ON CALL CONSULTANT CONTRACTS FOR BOTH ENGINEERING AND NON ENGINEERING SERVICES TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE TIMELY SUPPORT FOR BOTH OPERATIONAL FINANCIAL AND REGULATORY AS WELL AS PLANNING NEEDS RELATED TO OUR INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.

THESE CONTRACTS ALLOW US TO RESPOND QUICKLY AS ISSUES COME UP FOR ANY COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS OR TIME SENSITIVE INITIATIVES, INITIATIVES WITHOUT DELAY. SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE PUT THESE CONTRACTS IN PLACE IN ADVANCE.

WE HOPE, YOU KNOW NOT TO HAVE TO UTILIZE THEM TO THEIR FULL EXTENT.

IN FACT, AT THIS POINT WE ONLY HAVE A FEW PROJECTS THAT ARE IN LINE.

BUT AGAIN, WE TRY TO KEEP ENOUGH ROOM ON THESE CONTRACTS TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE ANYTHING UNEXPECTED DURING THAT THREE YEAR TERM.

OKAY. WELL, SO THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I PULLED IT, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC INFORMATION.

IT'S JUST $3.6 MILLION FOR CONSULTING FOR A DEPARTMENT THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S FOR OR WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO, AND IT'S FOR THREE YEARS. AND I THINK IF YOU NEED CONSULTING, BRING IT BACK AND TELL US WHAT IT'S FOR.

BUT THIS IS WHY I'M SORRY. YES. I WAS JUST GOING TO POINT OUT THAT WE DID OUTLINE IN THE AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET A NUMBER OF PROJECTS.

THAT FINANCIAL MODELING RECYCLING PROGRAM AUDITS.

AND WHAT THAT IS, IS, IT'S A QUARTERLY AUDIT WITH OUR RECYCLING FACILITY TO DETERMINE THE COMPOSITION OF RECYCLABLES, WHICH IS USED FOR THE BASIS OF OUR REVENUE, REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENT WITH THE OPERATOR.

WE'RE ALSO WORKING TO IMPLEMENT COMPOSTING PROGRAMS. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE PRIORITIES THAT'S THAT'S LINED UP THERE.

THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM WILL BE PAID FOR THROUGH LANDFILL GAS REVENUES.

SO AS THESE COME UP, THEY MAY BE PAID THROUGH RESIDENTIAL FEES, BUT A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS ARE RELATED TO LANDFILL AND WOULD BE PAID FOR THROUGH THOSE REVENUES WHICH WOULD MOSTLY BE COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS.

OKAY. WELL, I READ ALL THE AGENDA INFORMATION.

[01:20:04]

I THINK IT'S NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH FOR US TO HAVE APPROPRIATE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT.

AND I'M NOT WILLING TO JUST BLANKET SAY, HERE'S $3.6 MILLION FOR CONSULTING YOU MIGHT WANT ON A WHIM.

YEAH, YOU LISTED SOME PROJECTS, BUT EVERY DEPARTMENT COULD DO THAT.

AND SO I JUST THINK THIS WAS THIS IS A PROBLEMATIC GOVERNANCE ISSUE TO HAVE THIS KIND OF AUTHORIZATION.

IMAGINE EVERY DEPARTMENT COMING HERE SAYING, HEY, I JUST WANT TO RESERVE A COUPLE MILLION DOLLARS IN CASE IN CASE WE MIGHT NEED A CONSULTANT, BECAUSE, HEY, WE'RE WORKING ON THIS BREADTH OF PROBLEMS. WELL, THAT'S WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT DOES. AND IF YOU NEED TO ADD CONSULTING SERVICES, THEN BRING THAT SPECIFIC ISSUE AND NEED IN CONSULTANT TO US. BUT THIS THIS IS A HARD NO FOR ME.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 24? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES? THE AYES HAVE IT. YOU KNOW, THE NOSE.

SO I HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN AS A NO. AND COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.

IS THAT CORRECT? AS A NO. YEAH. THANK YOU. NOTED.

MR.. MAYOR. OKAY. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 26. AUTHORIZE A THREE YEAR SERVICE CONTRACT WITH TWO ONE YEAR RENEWAL OPTIONS

[26. Authorize a three-year service contract, with two one-year renewal options, for Family Medical Leave Act services for the Department of Human Resources - FMLASource, Inc, most advantageous proposer of four - Not to exceed $663,488.64 - Financing: General Fund (subject to annual appropriations)]

FOR FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE ACT SERVICES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, FMLA SOURCE, INC.. MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSAL OF FOUR NOT TO EXCEED $663,488.64.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND. HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND.

CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN. YES. FOR FIVE MINUTES. QUESTIONS? IS HUMAN RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO ANSWER THEM OR CITY MANAGER? ARE YOU PLANNING TO ANSWER THEM? WE WILL ANSWER THE QUESTIONS AS YOU PRESENT THEM.

THE CFO IS HERE AND OUR HR TEAM IS ON THE CALL VIRTUALLY.

THANK YOU. OKAY, WELL, BEFORE I EVER EVEN CONSIDERED RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL, I WATCHED THE COUNCIL DEBATE THIS ITEM.

AND THE DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT OUTSOURCING FMLA BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY DIFFERENT PEOPLE WITHIN THE HR DEPARTMENT THAT WERE WORKING ON WHEN SOMEBODY APPLIED FOR A LEAVE AND ALL THE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THAT, WHETHER THAT WAS PAYROLL OR BENEFITS, THAT THEY FELT THAT THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT PRIVACY.

SO WHEN FMLA THAT THERE ARE PRIVACY ISSUES AND BECAUSE SO MANY HR PEOPLE WERE INVOLVED, THEY DIDN'T FEEL THAT THEY WERE KEEPING IT PRIVATE. AND THERE WAS NEVER THE DISCUSSION OF, WELL, WHY DON'T YOU NOT HAVE THAT MANY PEOPLE WORK ON LITTLE PIECES OF IT INSTEAD OF JUST OUTSOURCING IT? BUT WHAT HAPPENED IS THE PROCUREMENT WENT FORWARD AND IT ACTUALLY WAS AFTER I WAS ELECTED, AFTER MANY OF US WERE ELECTED, THAT IT WAS JUNE 2020, THAT THE CONTRACT WENT INTO PLACE.

SO ALTHOUGH IT WAS DISCUSSED, I THINK IT WAS SEVEN PEOPLE.

AND AGAIN, THAT'S JUST WHAT I REMEMBER THE CONVERSATION BE IT COULD BE DIFFERENT THAT HAD A PIECE OF FMLA.

NOT ONE PERSON WAS BEING ELIMINATED FROM THE DEPARTMENT, SO DUTIES WOULD BE TAKEN AWAY, COSTS WOULD BE ADDED TO OUTSOURCE, BUT NO CHANGE IN STAFF. SO CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT'S TRUE? NO, MA'AM. THANK YOU. JACK IRELAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER I'M NOT REALLY ABLE TO CONFIRM WHETHER SEVEN PEOPLE IS THE NUMBER THAT MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN 20 PRIOR TO 2020. I WOULD SUSPECT THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAD MULTIPLE TASKS NOT DEDICATED TO FMLA THAT MAY HAVE HAD SOME ROLE. THE CONTRACT HAS GONE FORWARD AND IT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL, AND WE ARE SEEKING THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE A CONTRACT.

AND WITH THE THE TYPE OF INFORMATION IT IS MOST APPROPRIATE THAT THIS BE SOMETHING THAT IS OUTSOURCED.

I AGREE THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT WHETHER WE DO THINGS WITH INTERNAL STAFF OR WE DO EXTERNAL THROUGH CONTRACTS.

AND BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THIS WORK AND THE HIPAA INFORMATION THE PRIVACY MATTERS.

THIS IS VERY MUCH APPROPRIATE FOR BEING OUTSOURCED.

AS FAR AGAIN, AS FAR AS STAFF THAT MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED PREVIOUSLY PRIOR TO 2020 NINA ARIAS IS ON THE CALL.

AND, NINA, DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? DO YOU HAVE ANY BACKGROUND PRIOR TO 2020? YES. THANK YOU. NINA ARIAS, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES.

AND JUST AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION THE STAFF THAT WERE INVOLVED IN INCLUDED STAFF AT THE DEPARTMENT LEVEL.

[01:25:07]

SO TYPICALLY THE PAPERWORK WILL COME FROM DEPARTMENTS AND STEP IN MANY, MANY DESKS BEFORE ARRIVE TO THE HR DEPARTMENT.

WE HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE ROTATING. THIS WAS NOT THEIR FULL JOB.

THIS WAS ACTUALLY A VERY, VERY TINY PORTION OF THEIR JOB.

AND MANY OF THOSE POSITIONS HAS BEEN HAVE BEEN SINCE.

I MEAN, IT'S BEEN QUITE A BIT EITHER REPURPOSED AND, OR THEY HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE ELIMINATED SOME POSITIONS. AT ANY RATE, I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT IN ADDITION TO THE EFFICIENCIES OF AND THE COST THAT BRINGING A PROGRAM OF THIS NATURE WILL BRING YOU KNOW, WILL HAVE IF WE WERE TO OUTSOURCE, BRING IT IN-HOUSE. WE HAVE THE ISSUE OF COMPLIANCE, AND ALSO WE HAVE THE ISSUE OF LIABILITY.

WE'RE ABLE TO TRANSFER THE LIABILITY OF MANAGING THIS PROGRAM OR MAKING THE DETERMINATIONS UP TO A THIRD PARTY TO A VENDOR THAT YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO BRING IT IN-HOUSE, THERE'S JUST A LOT MORE COST THAN STAFF IN TERMS OF INSURANCE, IN TERMS OF THE, THE, YOU KNOW, HAVING DEDICATED STAFF TO WORK ON THIS THE WAY IN WHICH WE STAFFED BEFORE WAS JUST NOT APPROPRIATE. IT WAS NOT AN APPROPRIATE LEVEL.

IT SET US UP FOR POTENTIAL LIABILITY. AND FMLA IS IS A VERY DELICATE MATTER.

WE COULD EXPERIENCE UP TO $10,000 FINES PER INCIDENT IF THERE'S A MISTAKE.

SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT THAT COMPONENT.

AND IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THEM.

SO SINCE THAT TIME, YOU HAVE NOT LOST EMPLOYEES, YOU'VE GAINED EMPLOYEES.

AND I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE CAN'T ADMINISTER IT.

THE THE EXPLANATION THAT IT'S TOO COMPLICATED.

IT'S TOO RISKY THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DO THE COMPLIANCE IS KIND OF SHOCKING, BECAUSE COMPANIES ALL OVER THE CITY AND COUNTRY DO THIS WORK. I MEAN, THERE'S THERE'S A NOTIFICATION LETTER.

THAT STANDARD IS NOT PERSONALIZED, THAT GOES OUT.

THERE'S COLLECTION OF PREMIUM, PUTTING PEOPLE BACK ON AN INSURANCE PLAN.

IF THEY ELECTED AFTER THE THE PERIOD WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE LAPSED BECAUSE OF SEPARATION FROM EMPLOYMENT.

I MEAN, BECAUSE OF A MEDICAL LEAVE, I MEAN, THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT ELEMENTS THAT ARE BEING HANDLED BY COMPANIES ALL OVER. WHY WOULD A CITY LIKE DALLAS NOT BE ABLE TO ADMINISTER THEIR OWN FMLA? I DO BELIEVE THAT WE COULD ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM AND BRING IT BACK IN-HOUSE.

I'M NOT SURE WE COULD DO IT FOR $200,000 A YEAR AND DO IT APPROPRIATELY.

FOR EXAMPLE, IN CALENDAR YEAR 25, THERE WERE 4541 DIFFERENT DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE BY THE VENDOR, APPROVING 65% AND DENYING 35% OF THOSE. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT PREVIOUSLY, WHEN WE HAD IT IN HOUSE, WE HAD A MUCH HIGHER RATE OF APPROVAL. AND BUT WE HAVE A, AN EXPERT IN THE FIELD, OUR EXPERT IN THE AREA OF FMLA. THE PRIOR YEAR, THERE WERE 3704 DECISIONS AND ONLY 59% WERE IMPROVED.

SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE BETTER EYES ON IT, BETTER MONITORING.

WE HAVE EXPERTS IN THE FIELD, WHETHER IT'S LEGAL OR MEDICAL, THAT ARE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS RATHER THAN CITY STAFF.

AND AGAIN, BECAUSE OF THE PRIVACY NATURE, I THINK OUTSOURCING IS MOST APPROPRIATE.

IF YOU WANT TO BRING IT IN HOUSE, IT WILL MOST LIKELY COST US MORE THAN $200,000 A YEAR, AND WE MAY HAVE MORE APPROVALS THAN WE HAVE THROUGH THE OUTSOURCED CONTRACT. IF I COULD JUST ADD TO THAT AND THANK YOU TO TO THE HR DIRECTOR.

THANK YOU, MR. ARIAS, AND THANK YOU TO THE CFO.

SO I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE 2020 TIME PERIOD BECAUSE I THINK THIS CONVERSATION.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

THERE WERE SEVERAL CONCERNS ABOUT JUST OVERALL, NOT ONLY THE STRUCTURE OF HOW WE WERE PROVIDING CERTAIN SERVICES WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT.

WE CAME AND BROUGHT A SERIES OF EXAMPLES OF WHY HAVING THE OUTSOURCING ARRANGEMENT FOR FMLA WAS ACTUALLY A COST EFFICIENCY MEASURE FOR THE CITY.

WE ALSO LOOKED AT BEST PRACTICES AROUND THE COUNTRY.

WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE HIGHLY SENSITIVE NATURE OF THESE TYPES OF REQUESTS, MAKING SURE THAT AT THE DEPARTMENTAL LEVEL THAT WE'RE KEEPING WITH CONFIDENTIALITY AND WHAT WAS HAPPENING BEFORE IS THAT IT WAS VERY DECENTRALIZED.

DEPARTMENTS WERE HANDLING FMLA CLAIMS DIFFERENTLY.

THERE WERE NO CHECKS AND BALANCES IN PLACE. AND SO WHAT MR.

[01:30:02]

IRELAND HAS PRESENTED AS IT RELATES TO THE ACTUAL DATA, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO SEE OVERALL SAVINGS FOR THE CITY BECAUSE WE HAVE A THIRD PARTY THERE DOING THE REVIEWS THERE, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE OVERALL.

SO THIS HAS BEEN AN EFFECTIVE THIRD PARTY ARRANGEMENT.

AND IF WE WERE TO GO BACKWARDS, I CANNOT GUARANTEE OR TO SUGGEST THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A BETTER OPERATION FOR THE CITY AS FAR AS THE PROGRAM ITSELF.

AND SO WE'VE SEEN SUCCESS. WE HAVE TAKEN DEPARTMENTAL STAFF OUT OF THE DAY TO DAY PIECES OF THIS, AND IT'S ACTUALLY A MUCH MORE, I WOULD SAY, A ROBUST PROGRAM.

AND OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE ACTUALLY THANKED US THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE THIS IN THE HANDS OF THE EXPERTS, AND WE'RE NOT DOING IT AT THE DEPARTMENTAL LEVEL. BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS ABOUT IT. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE LOOKED AT VERY CAREFULLY.

WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT WAYS IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE'VE OUTSOURCED THAT WE NEED TO BRING BACK.

BUT MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO CONTINUE WITH A THIRD PARTY ARRANGEMENT THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY WITH PROVIDING THE SERVICE FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND SO WHEN YOU SAY DEPARTMENTAL LEVEL, ARE YOU SAYING THE OPERATIONAL DEPARTMENTS, ARE YOU SAYING THE HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, THERE WERE FMLA PAPERWORK THAT ACTUALLY CIRCULATED AT THE DEPARTMENTAL LEVEL BEFORE IT GOT TO THE HR DEPARTMENT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE PROCESS WAS DECENTRALIZED AND THERE WAS NOT AN EFFECTIVE STRUCTURE IN PLACE.

SO A LOT OF THE PAPERWORK WAS GOING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN EMAILS FROM DEPARTMENTS WHO ACTUALLY HAD SOMEONE ASSIGNED IN THE DEPARTMENT TO DO THE WORK, SEND THE PAPERWORK TO HR. AND SO IT WAS NOT BEING DONE CONSISTENTLY ACROSS EVERY SINGLE CITY DEPARTMENT.

SO IT WAS VERY DECENTRALIZED AND FRAGMENTED. AND I CAN AFFIRM THAT HAVING BEEN IN THE DIRECTOR OF A DEPARTMENT, I HAVE SEEN FMLA TYPES OF PAPERWORK SUBMITTED.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT ON AN EMPLOYEE, AND I KNOW NOW THAT THE SUPERVISOR DOESN'T SEE IT, HR DOESN'T EVEN SEE IT. THE CALL IS MADE. THE PAPERWORK IS SUBMITTED TO THE THIRD PARTY.

THE DETERMINATION IS MADE BY THE THIRD PARTY, AND THE SUPERVISOR SIMPLY GETS A NOTIFICATION IF IT HAS BEEN APPROVED OR NOT.

WITHOUT KNOWING ANY SPECIFICS OF WHAT THE MEDICAL CONDITION IS.

WELL, THE OPERATION YOU'RE DESCRIBING THAT HAPPENED PRIOR TO OUTSOURCING SOUNDS LIKE A MANAGEMENT PROBLEM.

THE OPERATION YOU'RE DESCRIBING FOR OUTSOURCING COULD BE REPLICATED FOR INTERNAL, WHERE AN EMPLOYEE SIMPLY GOES TO A SPECIALIST, AND FMLA. THAT'S AN EMPLOYEE. EVERYTHING IS HANDLED AND THE MANAGER IS JUST NOTIFIED THIS IS THE APPROVED LEAVE.

THERE WOULD NOT BE A CONFIDENTIALITY ISSUE. AND FRANKLY, I THINK THAT IS HOW MOST COMPANIES HANDLE IT.

I AGREE THAT WE ABSOLUTELY COULD BRING IT IN-HOUSE.

IT WILL PROBABLY COST MORE THAN $200,000 A YEAR, AND WE WILL PROBABLY HAVE MORE APPROVALS THAN WE CURRENTLY HAVE WITH THE OUTSIDE VENDOR, WHO ARE EXPERTS IN THIS AREA? WELL, I THINK THAT'S AN INDICTMENT ON THE COMPETENCY OF SOMEBODY IN STAFF APPROVING THINGS, OR THAT THE OUTSIDE VENDOR IS NOT APPROVING THINGS THAT OUGHT TO BE APPROVED.

I MEAN, A PROFESSIONAL, WHETHER THEY'RE IN-HOUSE OR AS A CONSULTANT, EITHER WAY, SHOULD COME TO THE SAME DETERMINATION FOR A LEGITIMATE FMLA LEAVE.

WELL, MY RECOMMENDATION AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE COMMENTS.

DEFINITELY TAKE DIRECTION AND WORK AT THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL.

MY PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THIS OUTSOURCING ARRANGEMENT HAS SERVED THE CITY.

WE HAVE SEEN THE RESULTS OF THE WORK BEING DONE BY THE THIRD PARTY, AND BEST PRACTICES IN THE INDUSTRY IS TO HAVE FMLA PROCESSES HANDLED IN THE MOST CONFIDENTIAL WAY. AND THIS, IN MY OPINION, HAS BEEN AN APPROACH THAT HAS SERVED THE CITY WELL.

AND I DO BELIEVE CONTINUING WITH THIS ARRANGEMENT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY, BOTH FINANCIALLY AND TO ENSURE THAT WE MAINTAIN THAT CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE STAFF.

BUT I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS. AND IF COUNCIL DECIDES THAT YOU DON'T WANT US TO PROCEED WITH THIS CONTRACT, WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AN IN-BETWEEN PROCESS ON HOW WE GET TO A NEW ARRANGEMENT THAT'S DONE INTERNALLY, WHICH WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH A BUDGET PROCESS TO SEE HOW WE BRING IN THE ADDITIONAL STAFF TO BE ABLE TO HELP US DO IT WELL.

SO THAT IS EXACTLY MY POINT. THAT IS EXACTLY MY POINT RIGHT THERE.

I'M NOT OPPOSED AT ALL TO OUTSOURCING SERVICES.

BUT WHAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT WE'RE OUTSOURCING SERVICES WITHOUT COMMENSURATE REDUCTION IN STAFF HERE.

SO IF WE HAVE A DEPARTMENT AND WE GET RID OF A SERVICE BY OUTSOURCING IT, WELL, THAT DEPARTMENT SHOULD SHRINK.

THEY WERE HANDLING A SERVICE. THEY NO LONGER HANDLE IT.

THEY NEED TO HAVE A REDUCTION TO PAY FOR THE OUTSOURCING.

AND THAT'S WHAT'S NOT HAPPENING. WE JUST SAY, WELL, MAYBE WE CAN JUST OUTSOURCE THIS, BUT WE'LL KEEP ALL THE EMPLOYEES.

AND IN FACT, LET'S GROW THE DEPARTMENT. AND SO THAT'S WHAT MY PROBLEM IS.

AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT YOU THINK THAT IT'S BEST FOR OUR CITY BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO APPROVE TOO MANY THINGS,

[01:35:01]

WE'VE GOT A COMPLIANCE RISK. I'LL BELIEVE YOU.

AND I'LL APPROVE THIS CONTRACT. BUT THE ISSUE IS HOW IT'S BEING MANAGED IN TERMS OF OUR STAFFING AND NOT MAKING THE REDUCTIONS THAT EQUATE TO THE WORKLOAD THAT'S BEING OUTSOURCED.

THANK YOU. OKAY. YOU'RE GOOD. OKAY. MISS BLAIR, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

WELL, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I DIDN'T INITIALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY.

I UNDERSTAND WITH CHAIR MENDELSOHN IS SAYING AS FAR AS REDUCTION WITH WORK BEING ALSO.

BUT WHAT I'M ALSO HEARING IS THAT THE WAY IT WAS BEING DONE DID NOT DID NOT PROVIDE FOR THE DECREASE OF HEADCOUNT AND AND ANY DEPARTMENT BECAUSE IT WAS IT'S NOT SOME IT'S NOT EVERY DAY THAT SOMEBODY GOES OUT ON FMLA. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? SO THANK YOU. AND SO AS FAR AS A REDUCTION IN THE HEADCOUNT I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO WHAT HAPPENED IN 2020 WHEN WE FIRST OUTSOURCED IT.

SO JUST SO EVERYONE IS CLEAR. WE HAVE CURRENTLY HAVE A CONTRACT FOR THIS.

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE CHANGING ANYTHING NOW. THIS IS ABOUT WHAT CHANGED IN 2020.

WE'RE JUST NOW PROPOSING TO CONTINUE A CONTRACT RELATIONSHIP.

BACK IN 2019 OR PRIOR TO HAVING IT CONTRACTED, IT WAS PARTS OF MULTIPLE PEOPLE.

AND SO TO REDUCE PARTS OF MULTIPLE PEOPLE IS WHERE WE DON'T SEE THE REDUCTION IN HEADCOUNT.

IF SOMEONE ONLY SPENDS A FEW HOURS A WEEK ON SOMETHING, YOU DON'T ELIMINATE THE PERSON JUST BECAUSE A FEW HOURS A WEEK OF THEIR WORK WENT AWAY.

AND I CANNOT ARTICULATE HERE TODAY HOW MUCH OF INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES WERE USED ON IT.

BUT THAT'S A LOT OF TIMES WHERE YOU SEE IS YOU DON'T SEE A ONE FOR ONE ON A REDUCTION, BECAUSE IT'S NOT A FULL PERSON THAT WAS DOING THE WORK.

IT MAY HAVE BEEN PARTS OF MULTIPLE PEOPLE. WELL, I WORKED FOR A COMPANY THAT OUTSOURCED THEIR FMLA.

AND I USED IT. AND I FOUND IT TO BE A BETTER SOURCE THAN WHEN THEY DID IT IN-HOUSE.

AND I HAD TO TELL MY MANAGER WHAT'S WRONG WITH ME.

IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. SO I GET THAT, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND WHAT MISS MENDELSOHN IS SAYING IS THAT SHE'S CONCERNED.

AND I GUESS IT'S THE THE WAY IT'S BEING ARTICULATED.

IT'S NOT ARTICULATED BY BY FMLA AS THE CATALYST THAT SHOULD REDUCE THE HEADCOUNT ARE OPPOSED TO WHY THE HEADCOUNT INCREASED. I UNDER BUT BUT FMLA BEING OUTSOURCED IS WHAT I THINK IS ABSOLUTELY PERFECT BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE MEDICAL RESOURCES AND THEY HAVE THE THE LEGAL RESOURCES TO MANAGE THE FULL PROCESS. AND WE ALL KNOW THAT THERE ARE THOSE THAT SAY I'M SICK AND THEN GO PARTY AND NOT REALLY SICK.

SO THEY HAVE ALL OF THE TEAM THAT AND WE DON'T HAVE TO DO IT.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT I BUT I THINK WHAT MISS MENDELSOHN IS PROBABLY TRYING TO GET TO IS A CORRELATION OF OUTSOURCING AND THE REDUCTION, AND HOW COME THE REDUCTION OF HEADCOUNT DID NOT HAPPEN.

AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ONE THERE WASN'T A THERE WASN'T A ONE PERSON DOING THE WORK. OR ARE SEVERAL PEOPLE DOING THE WORK TO.

TO SAY, NOW THAT WE'VE OUTSOURCED IT, YOU YOU'RE NO LONGER NEEDED.

THERE WERE STILL THERE WAS. YOU MAY HAVE SOMEONE WHO WASN'T DOING IT, BUT ONCE EVERY SIX MONTHS.

SO I GET IT. I JUST THINK THAT THAT WHAT WHAT WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS CONTINUE WITH THE PROCESS, BUT MAYBE LOOK AT OTHER THINGS THAT COULD HELP.

AND IF IF THERE'S A REDUCTION THAT'S NEEDED, THIS IS NOT IT.

THANK YOU. IF I COULD JUST COMMENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCILWOMAN BLAIR.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE SHOULD NOT CONTINUE TO LOOK AT STAFFING ACROSS EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT.

AND I THINK THIS COUNCIL WILL REMEMBER IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, IN 24 AND IN 25, WE HAVE HAD SUBSTANTIAL DECREASES IN THE NUMBER OF POSITIONS ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING 550, I THINK RIGHT AT IN THE CURRENT BUDGET THAT WE ACTUALLY REDUCED.

AND SO I WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT THAT I'M COMMITTED TO THE ONGOING REVIEWS OF EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT, THE FUNCTIONS, HOW WE OUTSOURCE, WHAT THAT MEANS TO OUR STAFFING LEVELS.

AND WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO THAT CONVERSATION. WHAT WE'RE SPEAKING TO IS THAT THIS CONTRACT WAS DEVELOPED OUT OF A NEED, AND WE'VE SEEN THE RESULTS, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO ANALYZE AND DETERMINE STAFFING LEVELS,

[01:40:03]

NOT JUST WITHIN THIS DEPARTMENT, BUT IN EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT ACROSS THE CITY.

NEW POSITIONS THAT WERE ADDED IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET WERE ALL DESIGNATED FOR THE ADDITIONAL INCREASE IN STAFFING IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

SO WE HAVE BEEN VERY RESPONSIVE IN HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT STAFFING ACROSS EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO BOTH NOW AND GOING FORWARD.

BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS THIS MORNING.

CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR JOHNSON, CITY MANAGER I WAS LISTENING TO THE CONVERSATION WITH CHAIR MENDELSOHN.

AND WHAT YOU JUST SAID. SO IT'S IT'S I KNOW IT'S BEEN OUTSOURCED AND IT WAS DONE.

DONE IN 2020. THE DEPARTMENT THAT WAS THAT WAS HANDLING THIS SERVICE WAS THIS WERE THEY HANDLING MORE THAN THE FMLA OR WHETHER THERE WHERE THERE'S JUST A SPECIFIC DEPARTMENT THAT WAS HANDLING THIS? THANK YOU. I THINK I UNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION.

SO WHAT WE HAD PRIOR TO 2020, AND I THINK MANY OF US HAVE SLEPT A LOT SINCE THEN WAS THE FACT THAT IT WAS A DECENTRALIZED FUNCTION. IT WAS NOT JUST BEING DONE BY THE HR DEPARTMENT AT THE DEPARTMENTAL LEVEL.

THERE WERE SEVERAL LAYERS OF PAPERWORK, DOCUMENTATION, SUBMISSION, FOLLOW UP.

IT WAS NOT JUST THE HR DEPARTMENT, IT WAS HAPPENING ACROSS EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT AND IT WAS NOT CONSISTENT.

AND THE COMMENTS ABOUT MANAGEMENT PROBLEM, I THINK.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WHICH IS WHY THE RECOMMENDATION WAS FOR US TO TAKE IT OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AND CREATE A CONSISTENT STANDARD PROCESS USING A THIRD PARTY. AND MANY CITIES DO EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING, WHICH IS A THIRD PARTY TO COME IN AND OPERATE IT.

AND SO IT WAS NOT JUST A SOLE FUNCTION OF THE DEPARTMENT.

THE HR DEPARTMENT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PAPERWORK ONCE IT WAS ALL COMPILED AND THEN SENT INTO THE HR DEPARTMENT.

THANK YOU. YOU CLEARED IT UP FOR ME. THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIRMAN WEST.

RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

I THINK THIS IS AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION, AND I FEEL LIKE THE HR DEPARTMENT AND THE EFFICIENCIES IS A REGULAR DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE UP HERE DURING EVERY BUDGET SEASON. I THINK BECAUSE WE HAVE HEARD FROM VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS THAT IT IS FOR WHATEVER REASON, THERE ARE SOME ISSUES, AND I KNOW THE CITY MANAGEMENT HAS WORKED TO TRY TO CORRECT THAT.

AND I DO THINK THAT OUTSOURCING EVERYTHING YOU SAID YOU'RE SAYING IS MAKING SENSE HERE.

WE HAVE HAD AN AUDIT, AS ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES REMINDED ME OF, OF OF THE HR DEPARTMENT.

I DON'T THINK WE'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY YET ON, ON THE COMMITTEE TO REALLY DIG INTO THAT.

I'D LOVE TO TAKE, YOU KNOW, TAKE AN ADD THIS TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AGENDA TO REALLY DIG INTO INTO THIS PROCESS OR AT CHAIRMAN JOHNSON'S COMMITTEE, EITHER ONE OF THEM, AND TO ALSO EVALUATE OUR THIRD PARTY CONTRACTS THAT WE HAVE AS WELL.

I THINK THIS, THIS DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING HERE COULD LEAD TO A LITTLE MORE DEPTH IF WE TAKE IT TO COMMITTEE AND KIND OF OUT OF THE VOTING AGENDA TODAY.

THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS. AND I WILL SAY THAT WE DID HAVE REPORT OUTS FROM THE VERY AUDIT THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF.

IT WAS REALLY ABOUT THE RECRUITMENT AND THE ONBOARDING PROCESS.

AND WE ACTUALLY CAME BACK AND PRESENTED IN THE CURRENT BUDGET, A, A NEW STRATEGY AROUND HOW WE'RE DEALING WITH ONBOARDING AND THE ACTUAL TALENT ACQUISITION THROUGH THE NEW TALENT CENTRAL MODEL THAT'S BEING DONE BY HR AND CIVIL SERVICE TOGETHER HAVE NO PROBLEMS BRINGING YOU BACK.

OUR DUE DILIGENCE THAT WE'VE DONE AROUND THE AUDIT FINDINGS AND THE WAYS THAT WE'VE RESPONDED TO ALL THOSE FINDINGS.

DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S BEING PRESENTED IN A TRANSPARENT WAY TO THE COUNCIL.

AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THIRD PARTIES OVERALL, NOT JUST WITHIN THIS DEPARTMENT, IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALSO WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO GET IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL AND TALK ABOUT. THERE ARE THIRD PARTY ARRANGEMENTS ACROSS EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT, AND IF THE COUNCIL WANTS US TO COME IN AND START TALKING ABOUT THOSE ARRANGEMENTS, THE VALUE THAT'S BEING ADDED, WHETHER OR NOT IF WE START LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, DISCONTINUING BRINGING THOSE IN OR OUT, I THINK IT'S A MORE ROBUST CONVERSATION AND NOT JUST FOR THIS ONE SINGLE DEPARTMENT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD, IF I MAY CITY MANAGER WE DID BRING THE AUDIT FOLLOW UP TO FINANCE A YEAR AGO OR SO, BUT WE ABSOLUTELY CAN BRING THAT BACK AGAIN.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE ON THE FORECAST FOR THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY FOR LATER THIS SPRING, TO DO A MORE IN DEPTH REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND CIVIL SERVICE.

ANY POTENTIAL OVERLAP, AS WELL AS HOW THEY'RE STAFFED.

BENCHMARKING. IT WAS A REQUEST OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY BACK IN DECEMBER.

WE HAVE IT ON THE FORECAST FOR THIS SPRING THAT WE WILL BE BRINGING THAT TO CHAIR JOHNSON'S COMMITTEE.

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

THANK YOU. I'LL PICK UP ON THAT SINCE I THINK THAT WAS SOMETHING I HAD BROUGHT UP TO MY COLLEAGUE.

[01:45:04]

BUT THERE WAS THE AUDIT DONE. THERE WAS REPORTING ON THAT.

BUT THEN THERE WAS ALSO ANOTHER PHASE THAT WAS TO PICK UP WHERE THAT ONE LEFT OFF.

AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO COME BACK IN AND EXAMINE THAT AND CLOSE THE LOOP.

FOR REASONS SUCH AS THIS, I APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR BRINGING UP THE PRIVACY OF A THIRD PARTY IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS.

I MEAN, A LOT OF OUR HEALTH BENEFITS, MENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS THAT WE'VE BROUGHT TO OUR FIRST RESPONDERS AND OTHERS ARE THROUGH A THIRD PARTY.

AND SO THERE ARE JUST SOME THINGS OF A NATURE THAT IT MAY BE MORE RESPECTFUL OF OUR STAFF TO BE ABLE TO GIVE THEM THAT BENEFIT.

AND HONESTLY, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE COST, I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S COMING DOWN TO LIKE $50, $65, MAYBE A REQUEST. AND THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A HECK OF A LOT MORE EFFICIENT THAN WE COULD DO THAT IN-HOUSE.

BUT IT DOES BEG THE QUESTION OF STAFFING AND WHAT THE OFFSET IS WHEN YOU GO TO A CONSULTANT.

CERTAINLY THERE ARE COST BENEFITS, BUT THAT'S WHY I THINK WE NEED TO REVISIT WHERE THE AUDIT'S LEFT OFF AND WHERE WE NEED TO GO TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE HAVING A FLUID PROCESS, A RESPONSIVE PROCESS. SO WE HAVE THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST WORKING FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND THAT WE'RE ALSO BEING VERY EFFICIENT IN DOING SO.

SO THANK YOU FOR SHARING THOSE NUMBERS I APPRECIATE THAT.

SO I SUPPORT THIS FMLA OUTSOURCING AGREEMENT.

CHAIRMAN JOHNSON RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO REITERATE WHAT OUR CFO JUST SAID.

COUNCILMAN WEST, WE HAVE BEEN IN A REAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT BRINGING ITEMS LIKE THIS TO OUR COJ MEETING.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY, LIKE, AROUND ABOUT MARCH OR SO, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

YEAH. IT'S GOING TO BE LATER IN THE SPRING. IT MAY BE APRIL OR SO, BUT YES, SIR, WE'RE ABSOLUTELY GETTING IT BACK BEFORE YOUR COMMITTEE BEFORE THE JULY RECESS FOR SURE. ABSOLUTELY. OH, JUST WANTED TO LET YOU GUYS KNOW THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I'VE BEEN VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT AS WE'RE SPEAKING TOGETHER.

SO THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 26? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

[29. 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)]

WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, BEGINNING WITH AGENDA ITEM 29.

AGENDA ITEM 29. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONERS THIS AFTERNOON.

YOU HAVE A FEW INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENTS AND ONE FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT.

YOUR NOMINEES FOR INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENTS TO THE ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION, ELIZABETH SHRUB, IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH. MISS SHRUB MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE CITIZEN HOMELESSNESS COMMISSION.

JOHN P SOBIESKI IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

MR. SOBIESKI MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE DALLAS HOUSING FINANCE BOARD.

DAWN RUDOLPH IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.

ANTHONY J INTERRANTE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH.

MR. INTERRANTE MEETS THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION.

NIKKI SARICA IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH.

MISS RICA IS A FULL TIME STUDENT. YOUR NOMINEE FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE EIGHT BOARD DESIGN DISTRICT.

TANYA REAGAN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER CADENA.

THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

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

CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL OF OUR NOMINEES. MAYOR APPROVED.

[31. A resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a funding and development agreement with Fair Park First to raise funding for the design, development, and construction of the Community Park at Fair Park - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information)]

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

I MOVE THAT THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD BE DISCHARGED FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE FUNDING AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY PARK WITH FAIR PARK FIRST.

SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. LET ME CONFER WITH THE PARLIAMENTARIAN AND MAKE SURE WE ARE PROCEEDING IN ORDER HERE. SO LET'S STAND AT EASE FOR ONE MINUTE. COMMISSIONER, BUT SHE WENT RIGHT INTO READING IT RIGHT WHEN SHE SAID INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

IT JUST HAD TO BE DONE AT ANY TIME BEFORE I COULD HAVE DONE IT AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, BECAUSE IT'S JUST PROCEDURAL. THE MOTION ITSELF HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ITEM.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS AN AGENDA ITEM. YEAH.

ALL RIGHT. THERE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION BECAUSE THERE WAS ONE AGENDA ITEM AHEAD OF IT, BUT WE'LL DEAL WITH THIS NOW.

SO MR. BAZALDUA, I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND.

THE FLOOR IS YOURS. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

[01:50:02]

MAYOR. AND THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES, FOR ENTERTAINING US FOR MORE THAN FOUR YEARS, SOUTH DALLAS RESIDENTS, STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY LEADERS HAVE CONSISTENTLY HELPED SHAPE THE VISION FOR A COMMUNITY PARK AT FAIR PARK THROUGH MEETINGS, SURVEYS AND SUSTAINED ENGAGEMENT. THE COMMUNITY HAS INVESTED NOT JUST TIME, BUT TRUST.

TRUST IN A LONG PROMISED COMMITMENT TO EQUITY, ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITY IN A HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED AND UNDERINVESTED IN AREA.

JUST LAST WEEK, RESIDENTS FROM NEIGHBORHOODS INCLUDING QUEEN CITY, FAIR, PARK ESTATES, JUBILEE, PHILLIS, WHEATLEY, DOLPHIN HEIGHTS, MILL CITY, PARK ROW, SOUTH BOULEVARD AND BONTON ALL SPOKE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL IN STRONG SUPPORT OF MOVING THIS PROJECT FORWARD. THEIR TESTIMONY MADE CLEAR THAT THIS PARK IS DEEPLY PERSONAL, COMMUNITY DRIVEN AND LONG OVERDUE. DONOR CONFIDENCE IS TIED TO TIMELY ACTION.

MAJOR PRIVATE DONORS WHO HAVE COMMITTED $5 MILLION ARE ACTIVELY REASSESSING THEIR SUPPORT DUE TO ONGOING DELAYS WITH PARK, WITH BOARD DECISIONS IMMINENT. CONTINUED INACTION RISKS UNDERMINING YEARS OF TRUST AND JEOPARDIZING FUTURE PHILANTHROPIC INVESTMENT IN SOUTH DALLAS, NOT JUST FAIR PARK.

IN ADDITION, FEDERAL GRANT FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT REMAINS UNSIGNED, WITH A DEADLINE OF MARCH 10TH TO BE SIGNED BY OUR CITY MANAGER.

FAILURE TO ASK TO ACT RISKS FORFEITING AT LEAST $13.6 MILLION IN PUBLIC AND PHILANTHROPIC FUNDING.

I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS IS NOT PROVIDING DIRECT CONSTRUCTION FUNDING TO THIS PROJECT.

FAIR PARK FIRST HAS RAISED MORE THAN $33 MILLION FOR THE PARK'S DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND LONG TERM STEWARDSHIP, INCLUDING FUNDS FROM THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT.

THANKS TO OUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE, BENTON JONES, WHO IS HERE.

THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AND PRIVATE PHILANTHROPIC PHILANTHROPY.

I'M ASKING ONLY FOR WHAT HAS BEEN PROMISED TO THE COMMUNITY.

COMPLETION OF THIS LONG AWAITED COMMUNITY PARK.

MY MOTION TODAY ALLOWS FOR THE PROJECT TO PROCEED WHILE BEING REFERRED TO THE PARKS, TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW, WHICH IS MY INTENT FOR THE ITEM THAT IS POSTED ON THE AGENDA.

AND NO WAY AM I TRYING TO RAMROD THIS DOWN OUR THROAT, OR TO ALLOW FOR A PROJECT OR AN AGREEMENT THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY VETTED TO BE APPROVED AT THIS TIME. THIS PARK REPRESENTS FOLLOW THROUGH, CREDIBILITY AND RESPECT FOR A COMMUNITY THAT HAS WAITED FOR GENERATIONS. I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN ENSURING THIS PROMISE IS KEPT.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE QUESTIONS WHICH I THINK IS GOING TO BE VERY HELPFUL, BUT I ALSO WANT TO JUST GIVE MY COLLEAGUES A TIMELINE.

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS STRUCK TO MY ATTENTION IN DECEMBER IN THE IN THE 11TH HOUR.

THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION LAST SUMMER. ONCE WE KNEW THAT WE HAD TO DEAL WITH THE COMMUNITY PARK OUTSIDE OF THE FAIRGROUNDS AS A WHOLE. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT DEAL POINTS IN AN AGREEMENT WERE ALREADY VETTED THROUGH OUR ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND THE ONLY THING THAT WAS WAITING WAS FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

THOSE ITEMS WERE READY TO BE TAKEN UP AND CONSIDERED AND DISCUSSED STARTING LAST AUGUST.

THERE WAS AN ANTICIPATION OF THAT DEPARTMENT TO HAVE THIS HEARD IN SEPTEMBER.

THERE WAS INACTION. I SPOKE AT THE PARK BOARD IN DECEMBER, AFTER MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO GET THE PARK BOARD TO SEE THIS ITEM AND ALLOW FOR DISCUSSION TO BE HAD, BECAUSE WE HAD PERTINENT FUNDING THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED TO NO AVAIL.

I WENT TO THE PARKS BOARD AND SPOKE AND GAVE A HEADS UP THAT MY INTENT WOULD BE TO DISCHARGE THIS ITEM.

I ALSO MET WITH FOUNDATIONS OF CORPORATE DONORS AND HEARD THEIR TIMELINE.

ONE IN PARTICULAR IS MEETING NEXT WEEK, AND I GAVE AN ASSURANCE THAT WE WOULD SEE SOME SORT OF ACTION, SOME SORT OF MOVEMENT, BY THE END OF JANUARY.

DECEMBER 8TH, THE PARK BOARD PRESIDENT CREATED A TASK FORCE.

IN THE MEMO THAT HE ISSUED FOR HIS TASK FORCE, HE STATED THAT THIS WORK WOULD BE CONCLUDED IN 4 TO 6 WEEKS.

THE WORK INSTEAD DID NOT BEGIN UNTIL SIX WEEKS LATER.

WE'RE NOW APPROACHING THE EIGHTH WEEK AND WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANY MOVEMENT.

AND THERE ARE THERE IS FUNDING IMPLICATIONS. THE LAST THING I WANT TO SEE IS EGG SPLATTERED ON THE FACE OF SOUTH DALLAS YET AGAIN, THE ALLOW FOR DELAYS AND THE POLITICS TO PREVENT PROGRESS.

I'M ASKING MY COLLEAGUES TO ALLOW FOR THIS TO COME FROM PARK BOARD INTO OUR PURVIEW, SO THAT WE CAN PROPERLY VET AT COMMITTEE LEVEL AND HOPEFULLY SEE SOMETHING DONE IN A

[01:55:07]

TIMELY MANNER. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DISCHARGE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. I BELIEVE IN PROCESSES, PROCEDURES, POLICY AND FOLLOWING THEM.

AND SO I WAS CONCERNED WHEN I HEARD ABOUT THE DISCHARGE.

SO I'M GOING TO ASK COUNCILMAN. BAZALDUA I'M LISTENING TO YOU.

AND I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF OUR COMMUNITY AND STATE REP IS HERE, BEN JONES.

AND SO TELL ME WHAT IS GOING ON, WHY TO DISCHARGE THEM FROM THIS OBLIGATION THAT THEY HAVE.

WHAT WHAT'S REALLY BEEN GOING ON? BECAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE THE COMMUNITY I SAW PASTOR ATKINS COME DOWN SEEMED LIKE THE COMMUNITY IS IN AN UPROAR.

AND I DON'T NORMALLY GET IN TO YOUR BUSINESS.

RESPECTFULLY. BUT CAN YOU, IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT, MR. MAYOR, TO GET MORE INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL BAZALDUA.

YOU CAN ASK HIM. HE CAN CHOOSE TO RESPOND OR NOT, BUT IT WILL COUNT AGAINST YOUR TIME.

OKAY. IT'S YOUR. COULD YOU? YES, SIR. AND I'LL KEEP IT BRIEF.

I THIS WILL ESSENTIALLY JUST ALLOW FOR US TO TAKE UP THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

THE INTENT OF MINE WOULD BE FOR IT TO GO TO COMMITTEE SO THAT THERE IS STILL PROPER VETTING.

I WANT TO ALSO ITERATE. THIS IS A STEP THAT IS NECESSARY.

NO MATTER WHEN THE PARK BOARD WOULD HAVE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, IT STILL WOULD HAVE COME TO US FOR VETTING, WHICH MAKES IT A FURTHER PROLONGED PROCESS. THIS ALLOWS FOR US TO TAKE UP THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ITEM ITSELF, BUT DOES NOT RELINQUISH ALL OVERSIGHT OF THE PURVIEW OF THIS ASSET WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT.

THIS IS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

AND IN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THERE ARE DEAL POINTS WITH METRICS THAT WILL REQUIRE OVERSIGHT THAT WOULD NOT BE TAKEN AWAY FROM THE PARK BOARD TO CONTINUE DOING THEIR JOB MOVING FORWARD. SO. CLEARLY, THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG TIME FROM WHAT I'M HEARING.

HOW MUCH HOW MUCH MONEY ARE WE? IF YOU DON'T MIND ME ASKING, HOW MUCH MONEY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? THAT'S BEEN, I GUESS, WITHHELD OR NOT BEING DONE.

WELL, WE HAVE A TOTAL OF ALMOST 13 MILLION BETWEEN WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD FROM BETWEEN CORPORATE DONORS AND POTENTIAL FEDERAL FUNDING THAT IS AT STAKE WITH STRICT TIMELINES.

THERE'S BEEN A TOTAL OF $33 MILLION THAT HAS BEEN RAISED FOR THE PARK SO FAR, AND IT'S JUST BEEN A DELAY.

LIKE IT'S JUST BEING DELAYED. NONE OF IT IS CITY DOLLARS.

NONE OF IT IS OUR TAX DOLLARS. IT'S ALL BEEN FROM STATE, FEDERAL OR PHILANTHROPY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DISCHARGE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT.

YES, THIS WILL BE COMING TO A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING FOR THE PARKS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE.

IT WILL NOT BE BRIEFED AT OUR REGULAR MEETING BECAUSE THAT'S MONDAY AND WE DON'T QUITE HAVE OUR ACT TOGETHER FOR MONDAY.

AND THIS WILL ALSO BE, I THINK, A LONGER BRIEFING AND ONE THAT NEEDS A COMMITTEE MEETING, ESPECIALLY FOR THIS ISSUE.

WE WILL LOOK AT, AS FAR AS I KNOW AT THIS POINT, TWO BASIC CATEGORIES.

ONE IS WE'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ELEMENTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ARE.

SO WE NEED A BRIEFING ON THAT AGREEMENT. AND THEN THERE'S A TASK FORCE THAT WAS BEEN APPOINTED BY OUR CHAIR OF THE PARK BOARD, ARIN AGARWAL, AND THEY ARE DOING SOME VERY, VERY GOOD WORK.

I HAVE WORKED WITH AND TALKED WITH THEIR CHAIR KIBA BEATTIE AND HE HAS THEY ARE LOOKING AT ALL KINDS OF DOCUMENTS. BUT THE TASK FORCE WAS CHARGED WITH ASSESSING WHETHER OR NOT FAIR PARK FIRST WAS READY TO EXECUTE THIS CONTRACT AND THIS EXECUTE THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND MAKE THIS PARK HAPPEN. I THINK ALL OF US KNOW THAT.

IT IS SO VERY, VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THIS RIGHT, THAT THIS PARK AND THE DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PARK GOES SMOOTHLY, AND THAT WE HAVE OVERSIGHT WITH THE PROJECT MANAGER AND OUR DONORS.

AND ALL OF THOSE FUNDS HAVE BEEN NAILED DOWN.

NOW, I'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, AND I HEAR THAT SOME VERY GOOD THINGS, ACTUALLY, FROM CHAIR BEATTIE, THAT THE TASK FORCE IS, IS, HAS HAD GOOD CONVERSATIONS WITH FAIR PARK FIRST.

THEY HAVE RECEIVED, I THINK, 61 DOCUMENTS, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, AND THERE'S A LOT OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE TASK FORCE AND FAIR PARK FIRST. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANIMOSITY THERE.

I THINK THERE'S COOPERATION FROM FROM WHAT I'M SEEING.

SO I WOULD LIKE THE TASK FORCE TO COME AND GIVE US THEIR CONCLUSIONS.

AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CITY STAFF JUST BRIEF US ON WHAT THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS.

[02:00:03]

SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THINGS STAND. AND I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.

NOT SURE I CAN ANSWER THEM, BUT I'LL DO MY BEST.

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

THANK YOU. I SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DISCHARGE THIS ITEM ON FAIR PARK TO THE PARKS, TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE.

THERE'S NOT JUST HISTORY TO THE TROUBLES. AT BRINGING FAIR PARK BACK TO ITS FORMER GLORY.

THERE'S HISTORY TO THE HISTORY AND A COMMUNITY THAT'S BEEN WAITING TO BE MADE WHOLE.

I SUPPORT DISCHARGING THIS ITEM TO THE PTA COMMITTEE.

THEY CAN PICK UP THE WORK OF THE COMMUNITY TASK FORCE, WHICH I READ THE MEMO.

I UNDERSTAND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INFORMATION GATHERED, AND NOW WE'RE READING THAT NOW A REPORT WOULD BE GENERATED.

I THINK IT NEEDS TO COME TO THE COUNCIL THOUGH, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS COMMITTEE MOVES EXPEDITIOUSLY TO ENSURE THAT NO DOLLARS RAISED WOULD BE LOST. I WOULD CONSIDER THAT WASTE IF WE LOSE ONE PENNY SHOULD THIS ITEM PASS, AND REGARDLESS IF IT PASSES, WHETHER IT GOES TO THE PTA COMMITTEE OR BACK TO THE PARK BOARD, I WOULD ASK THAT THE TERM SHEET OF ANY AGREEMENT INCLUDE AN EX OFFICIO BOARD MEMBER BE ADDED TO THE FAIR PARK FIRST BOARD, AND I THINK WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT CITY STAFF, A CITY STAFF MEMBER WITH THE FINANCIAL EXPERTISE TO REPRESENT GREATER OVERSIGHT FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND FOR THE TAXPAYERS WE REPRESENT, MUST BE A PART OF THIS.

MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE OUR CITY CONTROLLER, SHERI KOWALSKI.

I ALSO THINK THAT THIS THIS BOARD NEEDS TO REPORT TO THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE.

WE WOULD NEED TO RECEIVE A BRIEFING OR MEMO QUARTERLY SO THAT WE CAN RECEIVE THOSE FINANCIALS AND PROJECTIONS AND KEEP AN EYE ON THIS.

FAIR PARK DESERVES THIS OVERSIGHT TO SUCCEED ON BEHALF OF ALL RESIDENTS OF DALLAS.

IT IS BELOVED, AND WE HAVE AN IMPERATIVE NOT TO LOSE ANY DOLLARS ON THIS PROJECT.

SO I IN CLOSING, I SUPPORT DISCHARGING THE ITEM TO THE PTA COMMITTEE.

MISS BLACKMON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I GUESS I HAVE A POINT OF INFORMATION MORE THAN ANYTHING.

MADAM ATTORNEY, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE? JUST LIKE FOR THE PUBLIC. BECAUSE I THINK WE. THERE'S A MOTION THAT'S BEEN MADE THAT'S NOT TYPICALLY ON THE AGENDA.

SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO SHARE.

FIRST. THIS IS A PROCEDURAL MOTION. SO IT'S NOT ACTUALLY ON THE AGENDA.

AND IT CAN BE MADE WITHOUT IT BEING ON THE AGENDA.

AND SO THIS MOTION, BASICALLY, WHEN YOU HAVE A QUESTION IN THE HANDS OF A COMMITTEE OR A BOARD OR COMMISSION AND THAT AND YOU'RE THE PARENT ASSEMBLY, YOU CAN TAKE THAT QUESTION FROM THAT COMMITTEE OR BOARD.

AND THE PREMISE IS THAT YOU CAN'T CONSIDER ANOTHER MOTION INVOLVING PRACTICALLY THE SAME QUESTION WHILE IT'S AT THAT SUBORDINATE BOARD.

AND SO THIS MOTION BRINGS IT BACK TO THE PARENT ASSEMBLY.

IF IT PASSES, THEN THE ITEM ITSELF WOULD BE TAKEN UP.

OKAY. AND THAT THAT'S WHEN WE TAKE UP 31. OKAY.

SO QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT SHOULD BE BROUGHT DURING WHICH ITEM.

I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION. PROJECT QUESTIONS SHOULD BE BROUGHT FORTH ON WHICH ITEM THE DISCHARGING ITEM.

OR IN 31, I'LL LET THE PARLIAMENTARIAN ANSWER THAT ONE.

THE MOTION TO DISCHARGE IS DEBATABLE, BUT BECAUSE THE ITEM IS ACTUALLY POSTED, YOU CAN GO INTO THE MERITS OF THE QUESTION IN THE HANDS OF THE COMMITTEE IN ORDER TO MAKE YOUR OWN AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO DISCHARGE.

SO IT COULD BE ON BOTH. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS PARKS IN THE BUILDING.

60. WELL IT IS A SNOW DAY.

THEY JUST SENT YOU ON JOHN. OH, OKAY. OKAY. SO IN MR. BAZALDUA COMMENTS IT TALKED ABOUT FOR YEARS IN DISCUSSING THE PARK, BUT I THINK IT'S BEEN LONGER THAN THAT.

HOW LONG HAS THE COMMUNITY BEEN WAITING FOR PARK? THE COMMUNITY PARK HAS BEEN IN DISCUSSION EVER SINCE.

THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION, WHICH MAYOR MAYOR ROLLINS.

YES, YES. SO IT'S BEEN ABOUT TEN YEARS. YEAH, THAT'S TEN YEARS MINIMUM.

OKAY. SO IT'S BEEN TEN YEARS OF DISCUSSING THE PARK AND THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN WAITING.

[02:05:03]

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? YES. ONCE THE AGREEMENT WAS TO BUILD, THE PARK NOW SAYS YES.

OKAY. AND WE HAVE $13 MILLION THAT ARE IN JEOPARDY, BUT 33 HAS BEEN RAISED.

IS THAT CORRECT? BECAUSE THERE'S NO RESOLUTION.

I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW I HAVE NO DEAL POINTS, I HAVE NOTHING.

OKAY. SO I'M OKAY WITH WHAT HE SAID, AND I'M FLYING WHAT I'M HEARING IN CONVERSATION.

SO THAT'S WHY I NEED CLARIFICATION. SO. OKAY, MA'AM.

BETWEEN THE THE PRIVATE PHILANTHROPY, THE PLEDGES AND THE STATE AND FEDERAL DOLLARS THROUGH GRANTS THAT HAVE BEEN AGGREGATED, IT'S ABOUT $33 MILLION AND 13 IS AT RISK OF BEING LOST.

ON MARCH 10TH. IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? WELL, SO THAT THAT PIECE OF MONEY WOULD BE THE ORLOFF GRANT THAT HAS TO BE EXECUTED BY MARCH. AND CAN YOU DEFINE WHAT EXECUTED MEANS? FORMALLY SIGNING THE AGREEMENT. SO WE HAVEN'T EVEN SIGNED THAT AGREEMENT.

IT'S JUST NOT FLOATING OUT THE AGREEMENT. OKAY, SO WE HAVE WHAT IS THE TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE PARK? I BELIEVE THE CURRENT ESTIMATE IS AROUND 39, $40 MILLION.

OKAY. WAIT. 40 MILLION. AND WE HAVE 33 RAISED AND WE HAVEN'T BROKE GROUND.

THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. CAN YOU TELL ME WHY? WHY THEY HAVEN'T BROKE GROUND? YEAH. I MEAN, YOU'RE WAY OVER HALF RAISED. YOU'RE ALMOST AT YOUR GOAL AND YET THERE IS NO DIRT FLYING.

I'M JUST CURIOUS BESIDES THE FACT THAT THEY DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT APPROVED.

FIRST STEP WOULD BE THEY WOULD GET A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT APPROVED, AND THEN THEY WOULD GO THROUGH.

THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THEIR DESIGN. OKAY, SO WHY ISN'T THERE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT APPROVED? BECAUSE THE PARK BOARD AND THE COUNCIL HASN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSIDERATION.

SO WE'VE NOT SEEN THIS AT ALL. AGAIN, THERE'S NOTHING POSTED.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT A TERM SHEET. I'VE HEARD ABOUT A TERM SHEET THAT WAS DONE IN THE SUMMER.

SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ON WHY HAVE WE WAITED THIS LONG FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

YEAH. I CAN WALK YOU THROUGH THE TIMELINE BECAUSE YOU DON'T HEAR IT.

YEAH. Y'ALL DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION BEFORE YOU. AGAIN, THERE'S NOTHING POSTED. YES. SO JUST TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE TIMELINE.

AND I DID ASK RYAN TO DOUBLE CHECK BEFORE I CAME DOWN HERE TODAY.

SO BACKING UP THE AND RYAN CORRECT ME, BUT AUGUST, I THINK THERE WAS A BRIEFING TO THE BOARD, AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER BRIEFING TO THE BOARD IN SEPTEMBER.

THERE WAS FEEDBACK FROM THAT PARTICULAR MEETING. LET ME BACK UP REAL QUICK.

AS USUAL, BEFORE WE BRING AN ITEM TO THE BOARD STAFF, WE START WORKING WITH THE PARTNER ON SOME DEAL POINTS.

AND SO WE STARTED THAT PROCESS WITH FAIR PARK FIRST.

JULY, AUGUST TIME PERIOD. AND THEN LIKE WE WOULD NORMALLY OUR NORMAL PROCESS, WE WOULD GO TO THE BOARD.

WE HAVE A BRIEFING IN THIS CASE. WE CAME BACK TO THE BOARD IN SEPTEMBER WITH ANOTHER BRIEFING PROVIDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

AND THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED FROM THAT PARTICULAR MEETING FROM THE BOARD, WE WENT BACK TO THE PARTNER AND SAID, HEY, WE NEED YOU TO INCORPORATE IN OUR DRAFT DEAL POINT.

WE NEED THESE THINGS NOW INCORPORATED INTO THE DEAL POINT.

AND SO I HEAR RYAN DOUBLE CHECK TODAY. WHEN WAS THAT FINAL DISCUSSION? WILL WE INCORPORATED THE FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD, AND THEN OUR PARTNERS AGREED TO THOSE NEW DEAL POINTS.

THAT WAS OCTOBER THE 29TH. AND SO OCTOBER THE 29TH OF 25 OF 25.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND SO THEN IN THE NOVEMBER MEETING, THE CHAIR VERBALLY MENTIONED ABOUT LOOKING AT A TASK FORCE. BUT THEN IN DECEMBER IS WHEN THE TASK FORCE WAS ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED, AND THE TASK FORCE DID NOT HAVE THEIR FIRST MEETING UNTIL JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.

OKAY. CAN I ASK WHY? IF YOU WERE, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WERE ALMOST TO THE FINISH LINE BECAUSE YOU WENT BACK WITH DEAL POINTS, AND IT SEEMS LIKE THEY WERE WORKING THROUGH IT. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, THERE'S A CURVE BALL, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A TASK FORCE. EXPLAIN TO ME WHY YOU'RE ALMOST TO THE FINISH LINE.

AND THERE'S A TASK FORCE CREATED. YEAH. SO THE THE CHAIR MENTIONED THAT HE WANTED THE TASK FORCE ESTABLISHED BECAUSE HE WANTED TO PROVIDE ANOTHER LAYER OF DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE THAT HE COULD, THAT THE BOARD COULD MAKE SURE THEY COULD VERIFY THAT ONE, THAT FINANCIALLY THEY COULD DELIVER TO THAT THEY HAD THE CAPABILITY TO MAKE SURE THEY FINISHED THE PROJECT AND PROVIDE THE PROPER

[02:10:05]

OVERSIGHT. SO DID YOU, AS PART BOARD STAFF, BRING THAT BACK IN THE SEPTEMBER BRIEFING? NO, THIS WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE AT THE DECEMBER BRIEFING.

I KNOW I'M ASKING YOU AS STAFF, WHEN YOU BROUGHT IT BACK FOR THAT BRIEFING, DID YOU FEEL FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THEY COULD DELIVER ON ALL THOSE ITEMS AS AN ENTITY, AS A DEVELOPMENT PARTNER? YEAH. SO AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO TRY TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE BOARD BOY BROUGHT UP.

THAT'S WHY WE WENT BACK TO THE PARTNER AND SAID, HEY, WE'D LIKE FOR YOU TO PUT THESE TERMS IN HERE TO TRY TO MITIGATE SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS. AND THAT WAS AT THE OCTOBER BRIEFING OR SEPTEMBER BRIEFING, BECAUSE THEN YOU WENT BACK TO THE PARK.

YEAH. ON AT THE END OF OCTOBER. YEAH. SO SEPTEMBER WE BRIEFED THE BOARD.

OKAY. WE HEARD THOSE COMMENTS. THEN WE GOT WITH THE PARTNER AFTER THE BRIEFING AND ASKED THEM TO LET'S MODIFY OUR DRAFT DEAL POINTS.

AND THEN ON OCTOBER THE 29TH, STAFF AND OUR PARTNER AGREED THAT THESE ARE THE DEAL POINTS.

WE WILL MOVE FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION. AND SO EVERYBODY WAS AGREEMENT EXCEPT THE PARK BOARD NEEDED TO BE FINALLY BRIEFED ON IT THAT THIS, THAT WHAT YOU SAID WAS WHAT THE PARTNER AGREED TO.

SO THAT'S WHY YOU WENT BACK IN NOVEMBER? YES.

OKAY. BUT THE BOARD HADN'T SEEN ANY OF THESE DEAL POINTS.

I DON'T THINK COUNCIL HAS EITHER. NO. THAT'S CORRECT.

CAN YOU TELL ME WHOSE IDEA THE TASK FORCE WAS? WAS IT A COMMUNITY ONE? WAS IT A PARK BOARD ONE? WAS IT A CHAIR ONE? WAS IT STAFF WHO THOUGHT OF TO HAVE A TASK FORCE? YEAH. THE CHAIR SAID HE WANTED TO ESTABLISH A TASK FORCE.

AS I MENTIONED ABOUT THOSE, THE TWO THINGS THAT WAS COMMUNICATED TO MAKE SURE THE PROPER OVERSIGHT, TO MAKE SURE THEY FINANCIALLY, THEY COULD DELIVER ON THE PARK.

AND TWO, THEY WILL HAVE THE PROPER OVERSIGHT TO BE ABLE TO OVERSEE THE CONSTRUCTION TO MAKE SURE THE PARK IS COMPLETED.

OKAY. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT FINANCIALLY DELIVER ON THE FINANCIALLY IS THE WAY TO VERIFY THAT THEY HAVE THE FUNDS? YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THE THE FUNDS TO ACTUALLY START CONSTRUCTION.

SO THAT YOU'RE SAYING THE 33 MILLION. YES. THAT'S CORRECT.

AND HAVE YOU VERIFIED THAT. NO, NO. THEY THEY WAS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS THROUGH THE TASK FORCE TO ASKING THEM TO VERIFY THAT THEY HAVE THE FINANCIAL CAPABILITY TO DELIVER ON THE PARK. SO WHY ISN'T STAFF DOING THAT? WHY DOES A TASK FORCE? BECAUSE TO ME, IT SEEMS LIKE STAFF SHOULD BE THE ONES TO VERIFY THAT THE MONEY'S IN THE BANK.

YEAH. SO OUR PROCESSES IN THE PAST IS, YOU KNOW, WITH OUR PARTNERS, THEY HAVE PLEDGES AND NO DIFFERENT THAN THE ZOO. ANYBODY ELSE? THERE'S A FORUM THAT YOU INK THAT SAYS THE MONEY'S THERE.

YEAH. AND WE ALL HAVE A THRESHOLD IN WHICH, BEFORE YOU FLY DIRT AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S WELL DONE.

YEAH. AND THE REASON, AND I'M SORRY, I LEFT OUT ONE PART THAT THE CHAIR HAD MENTIONED.

THE REASON WHY HE WON'T. BECAUSE WITH ALL THE PARTNERS, THAT WOULD BE THE NORMAL PROCESS.

THEY WE ALLOWED THEM. WE TRUST THEM. THEY HAVE PROVEN BEFORE THAT THEY CAN DELIVER ON PROJECTS AND THEY CAN GO RAISE MONEY BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE CONCERNS WITH THE $5.8 MILLION THAT HAPPENED BETWEEN THE OVG AND AND AND FAIR PARK. FIRST, THE CHAIR MENTIONED THAT HE WANTED THIS EXTRA LEVEL OF DUE DILIGENCE TO VERIFY THE FUNDING.

AND THAT'S WHY HE WANTED THEM TO LOOK AT THE PLEDGES, BECAUSE THEY CAN'T SEND THAT FINANCIAL INFORMATION BECAUSE OF CONFIDENTIALITY WITH THE DONORS. THEY CAN'T SEND IT. TO WHOM? WHERE YOU CAN JUST SEND A DOCUMENT.

THAT'S NOT THE PRACTICE OF WHERE THEY GET THEIR DONORS.

THEY DON'T WANT TO DISCLOSE A LIST OF EVERY DONOR AND HOW MUCH THEY GAVE TO THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE IT'S A CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSE THEY HAVE WITH THEIR DONORS AND THEIR AGREEMENTS.

SO BUT THEY'RE GOING TO SEND IT TO THE TASK FORCE.

NO, I, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE TASK FORCE BECAUSE I JUST I'M CURIOUS ON WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE TASK FORCE, AND IF IT'S ONLY TO VERIFY THE NUMBERS THAT THOSE IN THE BANK? TO ME THAT IS STAFF WITH THE WITH WITH THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

IT'S NOT A TASK FORCE. IT IS BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO LOOK TO YOU.

IF IT'S NOT IN THE BANK, WE'RE NOT GOING TO LOOK TO THE TASK FORCE.

SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THE TASK FORCE AND WHY THE MONEY'S NOT THERE.

YEAH. SO I CAN ONLY SPEAK FROM BASED ON WHAT THE CHAIR COMMUNICATED, MR. AGARWAL, WHY THE TASK FORCE WAS BEING SET UP, AND HE DID SEND OUT A MEMO DETAILING THE

[02:15:05]

CHARGE OF THE TASK FORCE AND WHY HE WAS SETTING IT UP.

OKAY, SO YOU'RE JUST GOING BY, IS THAT THE NORM? AND, I MEAN, WE HAD THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY PARK HERE.

WE'VE DONE THAT. DOES. I'VE BEEN ON A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS.

THAT SEEMS OUT OF THE NORM. SO I'M KIND OF CURIOUS ON WHY IS YOUR OPINION, IS THAT THE NORM IS IS IS NOT THE NORM, BUT AS THE CHAIR MENTIONED, THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE OF THE CONCERNS OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE $5.7 MILLION THAT WASN'T THAT WASN'T ALLOCATED WHERE THE DONORS WANTED IT TO BE SPENT.

AND THIS WAS HIS WORDS TO ME, IS I HAVE TO PROVIDE THIS ADDITIONAL LEVEL OF OVERSIGHT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, AND WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE GET IT RIGHT THIS TIME.

THOSE ARE THE WORDS OF THE CHAIR, AND I CAN'T SPEAK FOR HIM, BUT I CAN ONLY TELL YOU WHAT WAS COMMUNICATED TO ME AND I.

I AGREE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE BELTS AND SUSPENDERS, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THINK A INDIVIDUAL VOLUNTEER TASK BOARD IS THAT MECHANISM? I DON'T AND BECAUSE I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL, THE D SEVEN REPRESENTATIVES, NOT EVEN ON IT.

I MEAN, LET'S JUST START THERE. I KNOW ALL THESE PEOPLE.

AND SO MY MY QUESTION IS, IF YOU COULD SET IT UP, WOULD YOU HAVE SET IT UP THIS WAY? AND I MAY HAVE BEEN PUTTING YOU UNDER THE. YOU GOT EIGHT SECONDS. YEAH, I CAN BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SET UP TASK FORCE.

I MEAN, TO SET UP A TASK FORCE. IN THE PAST PREVIOUS CHAIR DID SET UP A TASK FORCE WHEN IT CAME TO RIVER SHAUN.

THAT'S THE ONLY PRESIDENTS I KNOW OF FOR SETTING UP A TASK FORCE.

WHO HOLDS THE FUNDS FOR THIS? WHO HOLDS THE FUNDS? WHO HOLDS THEM? I BELIEVE ALL THE ALL THE FUNDS RELATED TO THE PLEDGES ARE WITH THE DALLAS FOUNDATION, AND THEY'RE PRETTY GOOD AT REPORTING OUT PROPERLY. WHAT DO THEY SAY? I HAVEN'T SPOKEN WITH THE DALLAS FOUNDATION, BUT THEY'RE HIGHLY REPUTABLE ORGANIZATION.

OKAY. I THINK Y'ALL PROBABLY SHOULD GET IN TOUCH WITH THEM ANYWAY.

I'LL GET AROUND TO THANK YOU. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAVEN'T BEEN PART OF MULTIPLE PROCESSES IN SETTING UP PARKS, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THIS CONTRACT THAT SEEMS TO NEED TO BE SIGNED BY MARCH 10TH.

OTHERWISE, WE LOSE THE 13 MILLION. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? WHAT I HEARD AS MR. CONNOR JUST MENTIONED, BECAUSE HE'S BEEN CLOSER TO THIS PROJECT THROUGHOUT IT.

IS THAT CORRECT, MA'AM? WAS YOUR QUESTION RELATED TO THE TO THE ORLOP GRANT? WHETHER OR NOT IF IT'S NOT EXECUTED, IT WOULD JEOPARDIZE THE FUNDING.

THAT IS ACCURATE. YES. IT DOES NEED TO BE EXECUTED PRIOR TO THE PRIOR TO THE DATE.

SO. AND WE ARE UNABLE TO EXECUTE THAT MONEY THAT THAT WE ARE NOT ABLE TO MAKE THAT SIGNATURE OR THAT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF WHY? WHY CAN'T WE SIGN IT AND STILL, STILL DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE? I WILL NEED TO CONFER WITH THE ATTORNEYS ON THAT TO ENSURE EVERYTHING IS IN ORDER.

BUT MY ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WOULD BE WE CAN PROCEED WITH EXECUTING THAT AGREEMENT.

YOU CAN OR YOU CANNOT. WE CAN. BUT I NEED TO CONFER WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO MISS ATTORNEY, CITY ATTORNEY, CAN YOU HELP WITH THAT? CAN CAN WE MAKE THE SIGNATURE? CAN WE DO THE DUE DILIGENCE OR WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO TO ENSURE THAT THAT WE GET THE 13 MILLION BY MARCH 10TH? HAVE YOU WORKED WITH CHRISTINE LEONARDS ON THE THE GRANT AGREEMENT? YES, MA'AM. SO THE CITY COUNCIL DID PASS THE ITEM, THE NOW IT'S JUST A MATTER OF EXECUTING THE CONTRACT.

AND THE RESOLUTION, IN MY OPINION, NEED TO CONFER WITH YOUR OFFICE.

BUT IN MY OPINION, IT SEEMS PRETTY CLEAR THAT WE CAN PROCEED WITH EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT, BUT AGAIN, WITHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

AGAIN, NEED TO CONFER WITH YOUR OFFICE. BUT YEAH, THAT WOULD BE MY READ OF THE RESOLUTION.

I DO NEED TO CONFIRM THAT. SO I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR ALL OF THE MONEY.

AND WE HAVE A 33 MILLION RAISED. IS THERE A REASON WHY WE CAN'T WE CAN'T MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN A TIMELY FASHION SO THAT WE DON'T LOSE THIS $13 MILLION WHILE WE WORKING OUT ALL OF THE OTHER CHALLENGES THAT SEEM TO BE AT THIS PARTICULAR TABLE. YES, MA'AM. THAT IS A THAT'S A TOP OF THE PAGE ISSUE FOR ME.

[02:20:02]

IT'S ABSOLUTELY ON THE RADAR SCREEN. THAT'S WHY WE'RE ACTIVELY IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO TRY TO GET THAT EXECUTED AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY.

SO IS IT A POSSIBILITY? IT COULD BE DONE BY. I MEAN, HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO, TO TO GET A THERE'S TO YOUR POINT.

THERE'S AMPLE TIME BETWEEN TODAY AND MARCH 13TH TO GET THE THE DOCUMENT SIGNED.

I'M CHECKING ON THE DOCUMENT WITH MY STAFF. I DON'T HAVE FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE OF THE THE DOCUMENT.

HELLO, THIS IS CHRISTINE. I'M SORRY. OKAY. I'M SORRY.

WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW? MR. MAYOR. CHRISTINE LANDERS IS AN ATTORNEY IN OUR OFFICE, AND SHE IS HAS BEEN WORKING ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND PROBABLY HAS INFORMATION RELATED TO THE GRANT.

OKAY. SO ARE YOU COOL WITH HAVING HER? YES. SURE, SURE, SURE.

OKAY. IF WE CAN GET ANSWERS. GO AHEAD. MA'AM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THANK YOU, MISS PALOMINO.

WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED AN ACTUAL SERVICE REQUEST ON THE GRANT, BUT THE ANSWER IS YES.

WE CAN EXECUTE THE GRANT AGREEMENT BY MARCH. AND AT THE SAME TIME, CONTINUE WORKING ON THE FUNDRAISING AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

THAT SHOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM OR MEETING THE DEADLINE.

OKAY, SO I GUESS THAT'S ONE CHECK MARK. ONE ITEM TAKEN CARE OF.

IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING TODAY? WE ARE ACTIVELY WORKING ON THE EXECUTION OF THAT AGREEMENT.

YES, MA'AM. AND SO NOW THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OVERSIGHT.

HOW LONG HAVE WE BEEN WORKING ON THAT? ARE YOU SPEAKING FOR US? WHEN WE FIRST STARTED CONVERSATION ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE ANSWER WOULD BE WE START A CONVERSATION WITH FAIR PARK FIRST IN JULY.

WE WE HAD A DRAFT AGREEMENT IN AUGUST. WE BRIEFED THE PARK BOARD.

I WANT TO SAY AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER, BUT SEPTEMBER, WE BRIEFED THE PARK BOARD AND GOT ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK REGARDING THE UPDATE ON FAIR PARK FIRST AND THE AND FAIR PARK, THERE WAS COMMENTS MADE REGARDING CERTAIN THINGS THEY HAD CONCERNS ABOUT.

ONCE WE GOT THAT FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD, WE WENT BACK TO FAIR PARK FIRST AND INCORPORATED THOSE CHANGES INTO THE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OCTOBER THE 29TH. BOTH PARTIES AGREED TO THOSE CHANGES.

NOVEMBER MEETING. THE CHAIR MENTIONED THAT HE WANTED TO LOOK AT A TASK FORCE.

DECEMBER. THE TASK FORCE, WITH THE MEMO FROM THE BOARD CHAIR, OUTLINED HE WAS SETTING UP A TASK FORCE AND THE CHARGE OF THE TASK FORCE. JANUARY WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE TASK FORCE MET, AND I THINK THEY'RE ON THEIR THIRD OR FOURTH MEETING. OKAY, SO THIS IS ALL THIS ALL SOUNDS VERY CONVOLUTED TO ME.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND A LOT OF WHAT'S BEING SAID AND WHAT'S.

BUT I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A LOT THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID THAT'S NOT BEING SAID.

SO I, I TOTALLY APPRECIATE THE NEED FOR PARKS.

YOU KNOW, I LOVE PARKS. I JUST DON'T HAVE ANY TRAILS.

BUT I LOVE PARKS. SO I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY THIS ONE IS SO DIFFICULT.

AND MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE I'M IN MY INFANCY ON THE BOARD, OPPOSED TO THOSE THAT ARE GROWN AND MATURE.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON. I JUST UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE A PARK THAT IS REQUIRED, IS BEING REQUESTED BY OUR COMMUNITY. WE HAVE FUNDING THAT IS BEING OFFERED TO US BY OUR STATE REP, AND WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME FOR AND AGAINST AND SAID THAT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS AN AUDIT THAT STILL NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED.

THAT IS NOT I DON'T UNDERSTAND. AND CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE AUDIT THAT IS NOT DUE TO BE COMPLETED UNTIL MARCH.

IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN GET THAT DONE IN A MORE EXPEDITIOUS FASHION? YEAH. SO THERE WAS THIS IS THE SECOND AUDIT AND RANKING A LITTLE MORE ON IT.

[02:25:08]

BUT THE FIRST AUDIT KIND OF FOCUSED MORE ON THE DONATIONS.

THE SECOND AUDIT IS FOCUSED MORE ON THE OPERATIONS, THE CASH FLOW FROM OPERATIONS.

YOU KNOW, CASH FLOW CAME IN. WHERE WAS IT SPENT? AND WE GOT THAT. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHAT THE SECOND AUDIT IS ABOUT.

AND THAT WAS NOT COMPLETE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE.

IT'S HARD TO GET TO THE FINANCIALS THAT OVG DID NOT LEAVE ALL THE FINANCIALS IN A TRANSPARENT WAY.

WE HAVE 47 BOXES OF SOME FINANCIAL RECORDS THAT PRETTY MUCH HAVE TO BE RECREATED THROUGH THE AUDITOR.

AND SO IT IS A VERY DIFFICULT AUDIT TO COMPLETE BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO GET A AHOLD OF THE FINANCIALS.

I'M. AND YOU GUYS KNOW THAT I TAKE ALL THE FLUFF AWAY AND JUST TELL THE BARE FACTS.

WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THAT THE SECOND AUDIT FOR FAIR PARK FIRST HAS BEEN GIVEN.

YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN DOCUMENTATION. THAT'S TOO HARD FOR YOU.

THAT'S DIFFICULT. I'M NOT SAYING TOO HARD, BUT DIFFICULT TO RECREATE IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THE AUDIT.

SO YOU THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE UNTIL MARCH IN ORDER TO GET IT DONE? IS THAT WHAT IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING AT THIS POINT? I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE LONGER THAN THAT, ESPECIALLY IF WE GOT TO GO BACK AND RECREATE EVERY SINGLE FINANCIAL DOCUMENT.

AND WHAT I'M ALSO HEARING IS THAT THERE IS CONCERN WITH THE PARTNERSHIP WITH FAIR PARK.

FIRST, I WOULD SAY THE CHAIR AND SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE CONCERNS BECAUSE BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE FINANCIALS BETWEEN FAIR PARK FIRST AND OVG AND THE DONORS.

SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS AND THE CHAIR FEEL LIKE THERE SHOULD BE ANOTHER LEVEL OF DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN MAKE A GOOD RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL THAT THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH, TO SAY THEY DID THEIR DUE DILIGENCE.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE SAYING. I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT WHAT I'M ALSO HEARING IS THIS, THIS. WAH WAH WAH IS IMPEDING THE ABILITY FOR A COMMUNITY TO GET SOMETHING THEY'VE BEEN WAITING FOR A DECADE TO GET, AND WHICH IS TOTALLY UNFAIR AND SYMPTOMATIC OF WHAT WE ALWAYS HEAR, WHAT GOES ON IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR. SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, WHATEVER IT IS, WHETHER IT BE YOUR TASK FORCE, WHETHER IT BE THE PARK BOARD OR WHETHER IT BE CITY COUNCIL, WE REMOVE THE OBSTACLES AND GET TO THE BARE FACTS.

GET THE JOB DONE. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. FIRST I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA FOR HIS TIRELESS EFFORT IN CHAMPIONING THIS COMMUNITY PARK.

AND I REALLY UNDERSTAND HIS POINT OF VIEW AND HIS FIGHT AND HIS PASSION FOR DISTRICT SEVEN.

I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS FROM DISTRICT SEVEN FOR COMING OUT.

FIRST QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY ATTORNEYS. AND I WANT CLARIFICATION ON WHAT GROUNDS IS A DISCHARGED WARRANTED ON.

I BELIEVE THERE'S A FEW EXAMPLES ON WHEN ONE CAN BRING A DISCHARGE FORWARD.

SO ROBERT'S RULES HAS CIRCUMSTANCES JUSTIFYING THE MOTION OR AND OR THE ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURE.

IT'S WHEN A COMMITTEE HAS FAILED TO REPORT WITH APPROPRIATE WITH APPROPRIATE PROMPTNESS, OR WHEN FOR SOME URGENT REASON, THE ASSEMBLY DESIRES TO PROCEED ON THE MATTER WITHOUT FURTHER AID FROM THAT COMMITTEE OR BOARD.

THANK YOU. JOHN, DO WE HAVE HAS THE PARK BOARD OR THE PARK DEPARTMENT APPROVED OR SELECTED A PARK DEVELOPER PARTNER? NO WE HAVEN'T. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON SOME DEAL POINTS FOR A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH FAIR PARK FIRST.

HOW DID WE COME TO START NEGOTIATING WITH FAIR PARK FIRST? BECAUSE THEY HAD ALREADY STARTED THE PROCESS OF RAISING FUNDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMUNITY PARK.

OKAY. AND SO I BY NO MEANS WANT TO, TO JEOPARDIZE DOLLARS.

I WANT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF HOW MANY DOLLARS ARE AT STAKE.

HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY FORMAL NOTICE FROM ANY OF OUR FUNDING PARTNERS STATING THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE AN EXECUTED

[02:30:07]

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TODAY THAT THEY WILL FORFEIT THEIR DOLLARS OR THAT WE'RE IN JEOPARDY OF LOSING THOSE DOLLARS? YEAH, I HAVEN'T, BUT I'M GOING TO DEFER TO RYAN BECAUSE HE'S BEEN IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH FAIR PARK FIRST AND THESE TYPES OF CONVERSATIONS.

NO, SIR. WE WE ARE NOT AWARE PERSONALLY OF ANY JEOPARDY, BUT THE THE FOLKS THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE CLOSEST TO IT ARE THE FAIR PARK FIRST FOLKS. BUT WE HAVE NOT. NO. OKAY. AND I KNOW THAT THE I BELIEVE THE PROJECT IS ABOUT $30 MILLION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARK. 39. 39 TO 40 MILLION.

AND SO AGAIN, WE OTHER ASIDE FROM THE GRANTS, HOW MANY? HOW MANY DOLLARS ARE IN THE BANK? NOT LETTERS OF INTENT OR SECURED? HOW MUCH FUNDING HAS BEEN ACTUALLY SECURED? I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL AMOUNT.

I WOULD SAY, AND I WOULD, I WOULD NEED TO VERIFY THIS, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THIS ANSWER TO A LITTLE BIT LATER ON TODAY.

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S IN THE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.

OKAY. AND SO WHAT'S THE GAP BETWEEN THE GRANTS AND THE LETTERS, OR, I GUESS, THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS THAT HAVE BEEN COMMITTED.

RIGHT. SO SO FAIR PARK FIRST HAS SECURED PLEDGES WHICH WILL EVENTUALLY TURN INTO CASH ONCE CERTAIN BENCHMARKS ARE MET.

I'M, YOU KNOW, THESE THESE AGREEMENTS ARE ALL DIFFERENT, AND THEY PROBABLY HAVE DIFFERENT MECHANISMS BY WHICH THEY TURN INTO CASH.

BUT AGAIN, THEY'RE PLEDGES AND AND GRANTS THAT HAVE BEEN ASSEMBLED THAT TOTAL APPROXIMATELY $33 MILLION.

OKAY. THE CURRENT DEAL POINTS WITH THE WITH FAIR PARK FIRST.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE OPERATIONS AND THE DAY TO DAY AFTER THE PARK IS DELIVERED? NO, SIR. THE THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH FAIR PARK FIRST WERE SPECIFIC TO THE FUNDRAISING AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARK, NOT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE. OKAY. AND IF THIS WERE TO BE DISCHARGED TODAY, WOULD WE BE ABLE TO START CONSTRUCTION TOMORROW? BECAUSE WE KEEP, YOU KNOW, REFERENCING A DELAY.

YOU KNOW, MY UNDERSTANDING RIGHT NOW IS THAT FIFA WOULD BE AT THE PARK UNTIL AT LEAST SEPTEMBER.

AND THERE'S STILL SOME OTHER PROCESSES THAT NEED TO BE DONE TODAY.

AND SO. IF THIS WERE TO BE DELAYED A COUPLE OF WEEKS, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE ACTUAL DELIVERY AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARK? SO THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE DESIGN OF THE PARK IS THAT THEY'RE AT 100% DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, SO THEY WILL STILL NEED TO FINALIZE THE DESIGN.

THEY'LL NEED TO PRODUCE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS SO THAT THEY CAN BE PROVIDED TO A CONTRACTOR TO ACTUALLY CONSTRUCT THE PARK.

SO THERE IS A LITTLE MORE WORK TO DO. YOU KNOW, ON THE DESIGN OF THE PARK ITSELF, AND AS YOU MENTIONED, THERE IS A THERE IS A DESIRE TO NOT INITIATE CONSTRUCTION UNTIL FIFA HAS BEEN CONCLUDED THIS SUMMER.

OKAY. HOW MANY TIMES HAS THE COMMITTEE, THE TASK FORCE MET SINCE OUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING? SINCE THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING? WELL, THERE HAVE BEEN A TOTAL OF THREE MEETINGS, AND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE SCHEDULED FOR THIS THURSDAY.

AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY INTEND TO CONCLUDE THE MEETINGS THIS THURSDAY AND THEN BEGIN THE WORK TO PREPARE THE REPORT.

A REPORT TO TO THE PARK BOARD, TO THE PARK BOARD PRESIDENT.

OKAY. CITY MANAGER. THIS THE WAY I SEE THIS IN, IN ESSENCE, WOULD BE MOVING A FUNCTION OUT OF THE PARK DEPARTMENT TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE WITH THE EXECUTION OF THE RESOLUTION.

AND I KNOW THAT RIGHT NOW, WE KEEP THE PARK DEPARTMENT AS SOMEWHAT OUTSIDE OF THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

AND SO, DOES THIS BRING ANY PAUSE OR CONCERN? THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, FOR THE QUESTION. I BELIEVE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE ONE THAT I THINK THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT THAT NEEDS FINALIZATION AT SOME POINT ONCE COUNCIL MAKES A DECISION ON IF WE'RE MOVING THAT FORWARD.

BUT THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARK, THE OVERSIGHT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK SHOULD RESIDE WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT.

WE WORK IN PARTNERSHIP ON SEVERAL PROJECTS. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD BE ONE THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT LEADERSHIP TEAM

[02:35:05]

PROVIDE THAT LEVEL OF OVERSIGHT, AND WE WOULD JUST WORK THAT TOGETHER.

BUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THAT FINALIZING THE NEGOTIATION PIECE, I THINK, IS WHAT WE WOULD BE SUPPORTING.

BUT THE ACTUAL DAY TO DAY PIECES OF THAT I STILL BELIEVE SHOULD RESIDE WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT.

THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE. THANK YOU. JOHN AND RYAN, IF THIS WERE TO BE DISCHARGED TODAY AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO POSSIBLY PRESENT TO THE COMMITTEE, WHAT'S THE EARLIEST THAT Y'ALL WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT? THE EARLIEST WILL BE IT WOULD BE LATE FEBRUARY OR THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH.

OKAY. DO YOU KNOW IF WE HAVE ANY? THE SCHEDULE OF THE TW CALENDAR.

ARE YOU AWARE OF THE TW CARA PT CALENDAR SCHEDULED FOR THE FIRST MEETING OF FEBRUARY? THE PROBLEM IS, RYAN IS NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE FOR THE FIRST MEETING.

AND RYAN HAS BEEN THE ONE WHO'S BEEN NEGOTIATING AND AND BEEN AT THE TASK FORCE MEETINGS.

AND SO HE WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR THAT FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY.

OKAY. THAT'S ALL FOR THIS ROUND. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

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

THANK YOU. I APOLOGIZE. SOME OF MY QUESTIONS MAY BE NAIVE AND UNINFORMED.

SO JUST IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME THE. YOU SAID THAT THE PLAN, THE DESIGN PLAN FOR THE PARK IS NOW PRETTY WELL ESTABLISHED. WELL, WHAT I SAID WAS THE THE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS ARE COMPLETE, BUT THEY STILL NEED TO PRODUCE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.

IS THERE A DESIGN? GENERAL DESIGN FOR THE FOR THE PARK? YES, SIR. IT INCLUDES BASICALLY TAKING OVER SOME PARKING LOTS.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE PARKING THAT WAS FROM THOSE PARKING LOTS? THERE IS NOT A CURRENT PLAN TO REPLACE THOSE PARKING SPACES, ALTHOUGH WE ARE DISCUSSING LONGER TERM PARKING SOLUTIONS.

BUT AS OF TODAY, THERE IS NOT A PLAN TO REPLACE THOSE SPOTS.

IS IT? IS IT IS THERE. HAS THERE BEEN SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT BUILDING A PARKING GARAGE? THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST. IN AN EARLY ITERATION OF THE PARK, IT WAS CONTEMPLATED TO HAVE A PARKING GARAGE COMPONENT.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE COST AND SOME OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT WAS DROPPED FROM THE FROM THE PROJECT IS THE SUPPLEMENTAL PARKING IN THE $39 MILLION BUDGETED? NO. NO, SIR. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE BUILDING A PARK.

WE'RE GOING TO BE TAKING A HOW MANY ACRES IS THIS PARK? APPROXIMATELY TEN. TEN ACRES WITH A PARKING LOT AWAY FROM FAIR PARK TO BUILD A PARK.

AND WE'RE NOT REPLACING THE PARKING FOR THAT.

WE'RE ALREADY JAMMED LIKE CRAZY AT FAIR PARK WHEN WE HAVE ACTIVITIES, AND WE'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP MORE ACTIVITIES THERE, AND WE'RE GOING TO LOSE TEN ACRES OF PARKING.

AND IT'S NOT IN ANYBODY'S BUDGET YET. I JUST, I JUST I WANT TO GET A GET A FEEL FOR THIS.

PLUS WE DON'T THIS 39 MILLION ESTIMATE. WHEN DID THAT OCCUR.

I BELIEVE THAT IS BASED UPON THE 100% DESIGN DEVELOPMENT.

SO IT'S A RELATIVELY FRESH FIGURE. AND AND IT'S BASED ON SOME ESTIMATES FROM WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE HAD THE CONSULTANT WHO'S DOING THE DESIGN OFFER A ESTIMATE PROBABLY THROUGH A CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATOR.

THE THE OTHER THING THAT SORT OF CONCERNS ME HERE, IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS, THE PIE? WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE INGREDIENTS SET OUT ON THE TABLE TO PUT INTO THE THE THE PAN TO EVEN START BUILDING THE THE PIE. I THINK WE'RE WAY, WAY, WAY TOO EARLY TO BE WORKING ON THIS THING, MAKING ANY DECISIONS.

WE DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PARTNER. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT FIRST THIS THIS FAIR PARK FIRST.

WHAT KIND OF EXPERIENCE DO THESE FOLKS HAVE IN DOING ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT? WELL, SIR, I WOULD SAY TO THAT AT THE LAST TASK FORCE MEETING THAT I ATTENDED, THE ENTIRE FAIR PARK FIRST DEVELOPMENT TEAM WAS PRESENT AND MADE A PRESENTATION TO THE TASK FORCE. THEY HAD THEIR DESIGN CONSULTANT.

THEY HAD AN OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE WHO'S A LONGTIME ARCHITECT ASSOCIATED WITH FAIR PARK PROJECTS.

SO THEY THEY ARE ASSEMBLING A TEAM WITH APPROPRIATE EXPERTISE TO DELIVER THE PROJECT IN PART OF THE RAISING THE $39 MILLION. WASN'T THERE A RESPONSIBILITY FOR AN ADDITIONAL $6 MILLION? AND AGAIN, I'M I'M NOT SURE OF THE NUMBERS, BUT WASN'T PART OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR US TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS THING IS THAT THEY HAD TO COME UP WITH $6 MILLION OF EXTRA FUNDING SOMEHOW. THERE WAS 33 MILLION, BUT THEN THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL SIX, RIGHT. THAT NEEDED TO BE TO BE RAISED BY SOMEBODY.

YES, SIR. THAT'S THE DEAL ON THAT. SO IT'S JUST ADDITIONAL FUNDRAISING THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE FOR THEM TO FULLY FUND THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.

[02:40:05]

THERE ARE NO CITY DOLLARS IN THIS PROJECT AS OF NOW.

THERE'S STATE AND FEDERAL DOLLARS, OF COURSE, BUT THERE ARE NO CITY FUNDS.

BAKED INTO THE TO THE ESTIMATE. HAVE THEY RAISED THE $6 MILLION EXTRA? NO, SIR. NOT CURRENTLY. NO. AND THERE'S ONLY A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND BUCKS IN THE BANK.

I WILL NEED TO VERIFY THAT NUMBER, BUT THAT'S MY GIVE OR TAKE.

YES, SIR. THERE'S THERE'S INADEQUATE FUNDS TO START THIS PROJECT.

CASH AND PLEDGES. PLEDGES ARE NOT SECURED OR OR THEY'RE NOT.

HOW DO YOU CALL IT? THEY'RE NOT A SECURED PLEDGE.

IN SOME WAYS, THEY'RE THEY CAN BE. THEY'RE NOT FIXED TO BE GUARANTEED, ARE THEY? I DON'T KNOW THE LEVEL OF DETAIL, ALTHOUGH THE THE THE PLEDGES, ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, SEEM TO BE VERY LEGITIMATE FROM VERY LEGITIMATE DONORS.

I, I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE A REASON TO BELIEVE THEY'RE NOT VALID.

I'M SORRY, FOLKS, BUT THIS IS THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME AT ALL.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WITH THE LOCATION OF AND THE AND THE AND OUR AND OUR CONSTITUENTS.

THIS IS A BAD, BAD BUSINESS PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

WE DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION. WE DON'T HAVE THE PLANS.

WE DON'T HAVE THE PEOPLE. WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY.

WE DON'T HAVE THE DESIGN. AND THIS IS NOT. AND WE'RE AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING SHOVELS PUT IN THE DIRT SHORTLY ON A PROJECT THAT WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE STOP THIS AND AND PUT IT INTO A PROCESS WHERE WE GET THE REAL INFORMATION IN ORDER TO, TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECENT DECISION HERE. I DON'T IT'S IRRESPONSIBLE FOR US TO BE TO BE TAKING THIS KIND OF A POSITION WITHOUT HAVING ALL THE INFORMATION. IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE DONORS, IT'S NOT FAIR TO OUR CONSTITUENTS, AND IT'S CERTAINLY NOT FAIR TO THE PEOPLE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WHO ARE EXPECTING A PARK TO BE BUILT WHEN WE CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE DONE IN AN EFFICIENT, PROPER MANNER. AND I'M SORRY, BUT THIS THIS IS THIS IS HEADED COMPLETELY IN THE WRONG DIRECTION FOR ME, FOLKS. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MISS CADENA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAVE SEEN THE COMMUNITY COME TO SPEAK THE PAST FEW WEEKS.

THEY HAVE WAITED A LONG TIME FOR THIS COMMUNITY PARK.

BOTH OF MY PARK BOARD MEMBERS HAVE KEPT ME UP TO DATE ON THIS PROJECT.

A SEEING BLACKMON STATED THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME PROJECT.

I TRUST BOTH OF MY PARK BOARD MEMBERS COMPLETELY WHO HAVE TO ADVOCATE FOR DISTRICT SIX AND THE CITY OF DALLAS.

AS YOU ALL KNOW, TIM DICKEY, MY PREVIOUS PARK BOARD MEMBER, IS A BIG ADVOCATE FOR FAIR PARK AND HAS DONE SO MUCH.

BOTH OF MY PARK BOARD MEMBERS HAVE TRIED TO WORK WITH STAFF AND FAIR PARK FIRST TO COME UP WITH A WAY TO MOVE FORWARD.

I CAN UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION BECAUSE I HAVE A BIKE LANE IN DISTRICT SIX THAT'S BEEN UNDER CONSTRUCTION FOR ALMOST A YEAR.

THAT HAD TO BE PAUSED. I WILL SAY I SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY PARK WHILE ALSO SUPPORTING OVERSIGHT.

THAT DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WALLACE SUGGESTED WE HAVE TO HAVE PROPER OVERSIGHT OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION. SO OVG CONTROLLED THE FINANCES OF AND FAIR PARK FIRST WAS POWERLESS BASED ON THE WAY THE CONTRACT WAS CONSTRUCTED. SO REGARDING THE AUDIT, TO WHAT DEGREE IS IT AN AUDIT OF WHAT OVG DID VERSUS WHAT FAIR PARK FIRST DID? YEAH. WHAT THAT ALLOWS US TO DO IS REALLY TO, TO, TO REALLY DETERMINE HOW WAS THE FINANCES SPENT, REGARDLESS IF IT WAS OVG IF IT WAS FAIR PARK FIRST, WE NEED TO HAVE THAT ANSWER SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE WE'RE PUTTING THE RIGHT PROTOCOLS IN PLACE GOING FORWARD. OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WANTED TO MAKE A JUST A COMMENT OR JUST SECOND WHAT ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, HAD SAID EARLIER ON, JUST SORT OF THE CHECKS AND BALANCES OF THIS I WOULD LIKE I DO AGREE WITH HER REQUEST FOR A QUARTERLY MEMO ON FAIR FROM FAIR PARK FIRST TO COME TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TO JUST UPDATE US ON.

LET US HAVE A LITTLE BIT ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT THERE. AND THEN I DO THINK A YEARLY BRIEFING WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE ORGANIZATION.

I ALSO I MEAN, IF STAFF'S WILLING TO, TO DO THIS, I THINK MISS WILSON MENTIONED SHERRY KOLOSKI FOR POSSIBLY SERVING ON FAIR PARK FIRST BOARD AS AN EX OFFICIO MEMBER TO TO JUST PROVIDE THAT ADDITIONAL LEVEL OF OVERSIGHT FROM THE FINANCIAL SIDE OF THE HOUSE, WHICH ULTIMATELY FALLS AT OUR FEET. I MEAN, WE'RE THE ONES THAT GET QUESTIONED ABOUT IT.

WE'RE THE ONES THAT'S HELD ACCOUNTABLE. AND THAT WOULD MAKE ME FEEL BETTER, FRANKLY.

[02:45:05]

YOU KNOW, AS WE LOOK AT OUR FINANCES GOING FORWARD. THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN JOHNSON. ACTUALLY, CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ONE, I'M GOING TO START BY SAYING I'LL BE SUPPORTING COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA MOTION.

ONE FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. I'M TWO. I'M. I'M LISTENING TO ALL OF THIS BACK AND FORTH AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.

AND AGAIN, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PARK BOARD CHAIR IS TRYING IS ATTEMPTING TO DO IN TERMS OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY.

AND I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IF THIS MOTION IS APPROVED, CAN THOSE THINGS STILL BE ACCOMPLISHED? AND I'M PRETTY SURE WE'VE HAD THAT SAME QUESTION ASKED A COUPLE OF TIMES, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO GET MY OWN CLARITY. CAN THESE ALL THESE THINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY HAPPENING WITH THIS MOTION, IF IT'S APPROVED, CAN THOSE THINGS STILL HAPPEN? IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND COUNCIL MEMBER WILL YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC? THE DUE DILIGENCE AND THE THE TWO THINGS THAT HAD, I THINK, THE DUE DILIGENCE AND THE PROPER CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT, CAN THOSE THINGS THAT THE, THE CHAIR WANTS TO ACCOMPLISH, CAN THOSE THINGS STILL HAPPEN IF THIS IS APPROVED TODAY.

IF THIS IF THIS MOTION IS APPROVED. FAR AS PROPER OVERSIGHT GOING FORWARD, THE ANSWER WOULD BE YES.

THE WORK THAT THE TASK FORCE IS DOING AND ALL OF THAT TO TO EVEN NARROW IT DOWN EVEN MORE.

YEAH. BUT FAR AS, LIKE I SAY, I CAN'T ANSWER FOR THE CHAIR AND THE CHARGE OF THE TASK FORCE, BUT AS FAR AS VALIDATING THE FINANCE, THAT WAS ONE OF THE CHARGE.

AND AND HE WAS DEPENDING ON THE TASK FORCE TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION.

SO I CAN'T ANSWER FOR US IF WE CAN SAY IN GOOD FAITH THAT WE CAN VALIDATE THE FINANCES, WE WE HAVE TO TAKE THEM AT THEIR WORD.

AT THIS POINT, IF IF YOU MOVE IT FORWARD, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD DO.

SO YOU. SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE MOVE THIS FORWARD, THE WORK THAT THE TASK FORCE IS DOING WILL NOT BE REPORTED IN EITHER TO THE PARK BOARD OR TO THE TO THE PARK COMMITTEE.

THAT WOULD BE HOW YOU ALL STRUCTURED THAT GOING FORWARD.

MY UNDERSTANDING WITH THE DT COMMITTEE THAT THAT'S WHAT I HEARD TODAY, IS THAT THE DT COMMITTEE, WHAT I HEARD FROM CHAIR STEWART TODAY IS THAT DT COMMITTEE WOULD HEAR FROM STAFF AND WOULD HEAR FROM THE TASK FORCE.

OKAY. SO YES. OKAY. AND THE REASON I'M ASKING THIS IS BECAUSE AGAIN, SOMETIMES.

THERE'S THIS I'VE BEEN ON THIS WHOLE THING ABOUT JUST PUBLIC TRUST AND THE COMMUNITY AND REALLY RESTORING THAT.

WHAT DOES RESTORING COMMUNITY TRUST LOOK LIKE WHEN WE HAVE INCIDENCES OR NOT? INCIDENTS. THAT'S A BAD WORD. I GOTTA BE BETTER WORD SELECTION.

BUT WHEN WE HAVE THESE ITEMS LIKE THIS THAT COME UP AND YOU HAVE A COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, MEETING AFTER MEETING, COMING UP AND TALKING ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE.

I'M NOT A COMMITTEE, A COMMUNITY SAYING WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE AND WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE ACCOMPLISHED AFTER YEARS AND YEARS OF DELAY, FOR WHATEVER REASON. I THINK IT'S IN OUR BEST INTEREST AS A GOVERNING BODY, BOTH AS THIS BODY AND AS THE PARK BOARD BODY, TO COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS THAT. GIVE THE PUBLIC KIND OF WHAT THEY WANT AND HELPS RESTORE THE PUBLIC TRUST. AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD COMPROMISE IN TERMS OF CONTINUING THE WORK THAT THE TASK FORCE IS DOING, BECAUSE IT'S NECESSARY, AND I UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF IT. AND BECAUSE OF EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED, AND WE DON'T WANT TO SET IT, SET THE COMMUNITY UP FOR DISAPPOINTMENT BY CARELESSLY MOVING FORWARD.

I GUESS I'M SUGGESTING THAT THE REASON I CAN SUPPORT THIS MOTION IS BECAUSE I'VE HEARD NOTHING YET THAT CONVINCES ME THAT THE WORK HAS TO STOP IN ORDER FOR THIS PROCESS TO MOVE FORWARD. AND I THINK AS A GOVERNING BODY, WHETHER WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE PARKING LOTS OR WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHERE THE DESIGN OF IT AND THE LAYOUT AND ALL. I THINK WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THAT AS A BODY AS WELL.

AND THIS RIGHT NOW SEEMS TO CREATE SOME SORT OF A DELAY AND UNNECESSARY CONFUSION WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND WITHIN THE BOTH GOVERNING BODIES THAT I THINK IS UNNECESSARY.

SO FOR THAT REASON, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT BOTH THE WORK THAT THE TASK FORCE IS DOING, THE DUE DILIGENCE THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY AND THE PROPER CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT, I THINK THOSE THINGS CAN CONTINUE TO BE ACCOMPLISHED WHILE MOVING FORWARD.

AND I DON'T THINK IT IMPACTS ANYTHING ELSE, BOTH FROM THE FUNDING THAT WE'VE BEEN THAT'S BEEN RECEIVED SO FAR, AS WELL AS THE DOLLARS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE, HOWEVER MUCH THEY ARE.

I THINK THIS GIVES US THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE MOVING THAT FORWARD.

ANYTHING ELSE SIGNALS TO THE COMMUNITY THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER UNNECESSARY DELAY.

AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AROUND SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AND CONTINUE ALL OF THIS WORK.

[02:50:04]

THIS IS NOT NEW. EACH ONE OF US AT SOME POINT HAS SEEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS BEFORE IN ONE OF OUR ROLES, AND I THINK WE CAN GET PAST THIS. SO THANK YOU.

I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. ALL RIGHT. NOW WE ARE CHAIRMAN JOHNSON FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS IS WHAT I'VE HEARD THUS FAR.

$33 MILLION TOTAL RAISE, TEN YEAR DELAY. PORK BOARD AND COUNCIL COULD NOT OR DID NOT GET TOGETHER TO GET THIS PROJECT GOING BASED OFF WHAT COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON SAID.

THIS WAS BACK WHEN MAYOR ROLLINS WAS SERVING AS MAYOR.

STATE REPRESENTATIVE VAN JONES GAVE FUNDS TO GO TOWARD THIS PROJECT, YET IT HAS NOT BEEN DONE.

THIS IS RIDICULOUS. ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. WHEN WE COME TO THE COMMUNITIES IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, THE BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITY, AND PARTICULARLY THE BLACK COMMUNITY. THIS IS WHAT WE HEAR.

EXTRA CAUTION. LET'S WAIT. BUT BIG MAMA SAID WAIT.

MAY MADE THE WAGON BREAK. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS.

SO I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN BILIERAW TO A DEGREE, HE SAID THIS IS UNFAIR.

I AGREE IT IS UNFAIR. IT'S UNFAIR TO THE SOUTH DALLAS COMMUNITY.

IT'S UNFAIR TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR THIS FOR OVER A DECADE.

WE ARE MISSING AN INGREDIENT, HE SAID. I CALLED THE INGREDIENT ACTION.

WE'RE MISSING ACTION. WHAT WE HAVE IS BROKEN PROMISES, MORE DELAY, MORE FALSE CAUTION, AND IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. IF I WERE TO JUST LISTEN TO WHAT EVERYBODY SAID IN OUR IN OUR COMMUNITY IN DISTRICT FOUR WHEN I WAS TRUSTEE IDENTIFIED, WE WOULDN'T HAVE A BRAND NEW SOUTH OAK CLIFF. WE WOULDN'T HAVE A BRAND NEW JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY BECAUSE PEOPLE DIDN'T WANT THAT. IT WAS ALWAYS CAUTION. SO IT'S ALWAYS CAUTION WHEN IT COMES TO OUR COMMUNITY WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO GET THINGS DONE.

THIS IS WHAT WE NEED. WE NEED PROGRESS, NOT PROCRASTINATION, WRAPPED IN MORE BROKEN PROMISES.

BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY THING I'M HEARING. BROKEN PROMISE AND FALSE CAUTION.

WHAT I CALL FAKE NEWS. THIS IS RIDICULOUS. COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA.

I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO BE DELAYED, DENIED, AND PUSHED TO THE SIDE WHEN PEOPLE JUST DON'T WANT TO GET STUFF DONE FOR THEIR OWN PERSONAL GRANDEUR. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS, AND IT'S UPSETTING TO ME TO CONTINUE TO HEAR PEOPLE IN SOUTH DALLAS, PASTORS COMING DOWN HERE, COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVING TO BEG FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS PROMISED OVER A DECADE AGO.

AND WE'RE ACTUALLY SITTING HERE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. ALL RIGHT.

MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO FOLLOW THAT.

PREACHER. PREACH IT. MAN, THAT WAS PRETTY GOOD.

AND TO YOUR POINT, WE HAVE MADE A PROMISE. TEN YEARS.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT'S BEEN SAYING. SO, CONVERSATIONS AROUND THIS.

YES, WE'RE TAKING A PARKING LOT, BUT IT'S BEEN TEN YEARS IN THE MAKING, AND THERE'S PLENTY OF PARKING AROUND THAT FAIR PARK. WE CAN ALL BE HONEST ABOUT IT.

NEXT QUESTION IS, IS THERE A SOURCE OF FUNDS AND USE OF FUNDS MATRIX FROM FAIR PARK FIRST FROM PARKS.

ANYBODY? HEATHER'S SHAKING HER HEAD. I HAVEN'T SEEN A DOCUMENT LIKE THAT.

NO, MA'AM. CAN I YOU HAVEN'T SEEN A DOCUMENT THAT HAS.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? A USE OF FUNDS AND SOURCE OF FUNDS. IT'S BASICALLY SAYING THIS IS WHAT THE PROJECT COSTS, AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GETTING THE MONEY FROM. SURE.

AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN THE PLEDGES AND THE AND THE STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS, THAT THAT IS THE THE AGGREGATION THAT REPRESENTS THE TOTAL PROJECT COST, THE BUDGET. AND I AM JUST ASKING AGAIN, IS THERE A MATRIX? HAVE YOU ALL SEEN ONE? IS THERE ONE FLOATING AROUND? CAN I GET A COPY OF ONE? WE WILL REQUEST THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE IT'S INTERESTING.

DO YOU REALIZE THE $13 MILLION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A THIRD THAT COULD GO AWAY? WE'RE STILL STICKING ON. THAT IS A THIRD OF THE PROJECT COST.

IT WOULD PUT IT IN JEOPARDY IF WE DO NOT GET SOMETHING SIGNED.

YEAH. AND JUST THE DOCUMENTS THAT I HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT.

THEY SUBMITTED TO THE TASK FORCE. THERE WAS SOME LIKE LAYOUT OF THE FUNDING.

AGAIN, WE HAVE NOTHING BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING POSTED.

YEAH. SO OKAY, WE'LL GET THAT TO YOU. SO IF WE DECIDED TO GO WITH THE TASK FORCE REPORTING PERIOD.

[02:55:02]

DO YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT SAYS RIGHT HERE 4 TO 6 WEEKS AND THAT WAS DATED DECEMBER 8TH.

WE'RE OBVIOUSLY BEYOND THE 4 TO 6 WEEKS. WHEN WOULD YOU GET A REPORT? I KNOW MR. KHAN WAS WRITING DOWN SOME NOTES THERE, BUT I KNOW HE MENTIONED EARLIER THAT THAT KIBA, WHO'S THE CHAIR, IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING THIS TOMORROW.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING, AFTER THAT, HE WILL HE WILL START WORKING ON HIS REPORT, HIS FINAL REPORT.

AND AND AND BETTY, I JUST RECALL THE THE THE EMAIL THAT THE CHAIR JUST SENT OUT, AND I RECALL EXACTLY WHAT WAS IN THERE FROM THE TASK FORCE. SO THE TASK FORCE SUPPOSED TO WRAP UP THIS WEEK, THIS THURSDAY.

SUPPOSED TO SUBMIT A FINAL REPORT HOPEFULLY AROUND SOMETIME IN FEBRUARY.

AND YEAH, THAT WAS IT. SO FINAL REPORT IN FEBRUARY.

AND WE'RE STILL UP AGAINST THE MARCH 10TH. CORRECT? OKAY. NEXT THING IS STAFF PART OF THESE CONVERSATIONS ON THE TASK FORCE.

NO, STAFF IS JUST THERE AS A FACILITATOR. THAT'S THE ROLE.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY INPUT. WE'RE JUST THERE AS A FACILITATOR.

SO WHO'S WRITING THE REPORT? THE ACTUAL CHAIR.

THE CHAIR. OKAY. ANOTHER THING. WHEN Y'ALL SEND OUT MEMOS, CAN YOU ADD COUNCIL TO THE CC, PLEASE? IT'S NOT LISTED WHEN THAT IS, BUT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO COPY YOU ALL AND ALL THAT.

YEAH, WE SHOULD GET EVERYTHING. OH, YES. AND I'M PUTTING EVERYBODY ON NOTICE.

OKAY. BECAUSE IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING TO GO TRACK IT DOWN.

WE GET IT. BECAUSE WHAT DOCUMENT IS THAT. THAT'S THE DOCUMENT.

NO. THAT DOCUMENT SHOULD HAVE WENT TO THE COUNCIL TOO BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT SAID ON IT SAID TO THE CITY COUNCIL, RYAN O'CONNOR. RENEE JOHNSON ASSISTANT. AND ON THE FRONT SIDE, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GOING STRAIGHT TO THE COUNCIL, THE DALLAS PARK AND RECREATION BOARD. NO, THAT'S THE WRONG MEMO.

THERE'S ANOTHER MEMO THAT WAS SENT. THAT SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE BOARD, AND THAT WAS JUST SENT OUT YESTERDAY.

OH, THIS IS FROM DECEMBER 8TH. THAT CREATED THE TASK FORCE.

OKAY. SO I'M JUST SAYING IN TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION IS KEY.

IN THE MEMO, IT SAYS 4 TO 6 WEEKS. WE'RE PUSHING UP AGAINST THREE MONTHS.

WHAT IS A REALITY THAT THAT FEBRUARY COULD BE THE MOMENT WE GET THE REPORT OR NO PARKS GETS THE REPORT CORRECT.

AND THEN IT HAS TO GO THROUGH YOUR PROCESS TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL.

RYAN? WELL, I BELIEVE THE I BELIEVE THE RECIPIENT OF THE REPORT, WHEN IT'S GENERATED, WOULD WOULD GO TO THE CHAIR AND THEN IT WOULD BE DISSEMINATED TO THE BOARD AND COUNCIL. THAT WOULD BE THE THAT WOULD BE THE PROCESS, BUT IT STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH A HEARING OR A BRIEFING AT PARK BOARD.

YOU'RE SAYING IF IT WASN'T DISCHARGED. SO YEAH.

SO IF BECAUSE WE'RE WE'VE GOT THIS MARCH DEADLINE, RIGHT.

OKAY. AND JUST DOING YOUR BACK. SURE. AND YOU GET A REPORT.

IT GOES TO THE CHAIR, HE REVIEWS IT. IT COMES TO YOUR COUNCIL AND TO YOUR BOARD.

AND THEN IT FINALLY GETS TO US. WE'RE WAY INTO MARCH.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT. YES. AND AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS SINCE SUMMER.

I MEAN, IT'S TIME TO DO SOMETHING. THAT'S MY OPINION OF IT.

AND AND HAVING A TASK FORCE. YES. AGREE WITH ALL THESE ELEMENTS, BUT WE'RE PAST THAT.

WE NEED A. I'D LOVE TO SEE A SOURCE OF FUNDS IN THE USE OF FUNDS.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE TIME FRAME, THE CLOCK IS TICKING.

AND TO LOSE A THIRD OF YOUR PROJECT MONEY BECAUSE WE FAIL TO ACT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.

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

THANK YOU. FAIR PARK FIRST IS A NONPROFIT, RIGHT? YES. AND ITS MISSION IS ESSENTIALLY TO RAISE FUNDS TO BENEFIT FAIR PARK.

YES. OKAY. SO HAVE THEY EVER DEVELOPED ANY PROJECT PREVIOUSLY? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. RIGHT. NO, MA'AM, I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY HAVE COMPLETED A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ON THE CAMPUS.

OKAY. SO WE'RE ALL AWARE OF THE OVG ISSUE. IT HASN'T REALLY BEEN SAID DIRECTLY, I DON'T THINK, WITH THESE COMMENTS. BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF OVG SUES FAIR PARK FIRST AND GETS A JUDGMENT? WOULD THOSE DONATIONS BE AT RISK? I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'RE NOT PART OF THAT. RIGHT.

OKAY. WELL, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. JOHN, YOU SEEM TO INDICATE THAT STAFF COULDN'T VERIFY WHAT THE FUNDING LEVELS WERE FOR FAIR PARK, IS THAT RIGHT FOR FAIR PARK FIRST? WELL, I MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR NORMAL PRACTICE WITH OUR PARTNERS, ESPECIALLY OUR ESTABLISHED PARTNERS,

[03:00:06]

IS, YOU KNOW, THEY GO OUT, THEY RAISE FUNDS, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING SURE THEY RAISE THE FUNDS BEFORE THEY START CONSTRUCTION.

AND WE WERE JUST SAYING, AS FAR AS OUR IN THIS PROCESS, THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR A SECOND LEVEL OF DUE DILIGENCE BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE $5.7 MILLION TO MAKE SURE WE COULD VALIDATE THOSE FUNDS.

AND WE DON'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF VALIDATING THOSE FUNDS.

I MEAN, UNLESS. OKAY. WELL, I GUESS I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND.

SO WHEN THE FUNDS WENT MISSING, THEY WERE TAKEN FROM DONATIONS PLEDGED OR GIVEN TO FAIR PARK FIRST, CORRECT? WELL, THE FUNDS, THE FUNDS WAS INTENDED BY THE DONORS FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS, AND UNFORTUNATELY THOSE FUNDS WERE USED TOWARDS SOME OPERATIONAL AND PROJECT.

BUT THE DONORS GAVE THE MONEY TO FAIR PARK FIRST AND OVG TOOK THEM AND USED THEM FOR OPERATIONAL.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING.

THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING. SO IS THERE AN ONGOING FINANCIAL AUDIT RIGHT NOW? YES. OKAY. BUT AS A NONPROFIT. AND THAT'S WHY I STARTED WITH THIS QUESTION.

AREN'T THEY PRODUCING MONTHLY REPORTS FOR THEIR BOARD WITH ALL THEIR FINANCIALS? AND AREN'T THEY PRODUCING AN ANNUAL REPORT, LIKE, WHY ARE YOU DEALING WITH 45 BOXES OF INFO? BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY, A LOT OF THE COUNTING WENT THROUGH OVG.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THE NONPROFIT DIDN'T DO ITS OWN ACCOUNTING? WELL, THEY DID HAVE THEIR OWN ACCOUNTING. THEY HAD THEIR ACCOUNTING FROM THE STANDPOINT OF RYAN.

CORRECT ME. AS FAR AS LIKE THE CAPITAL. MA'AM.

SO THEY DID PROVIDE AUDITED FINANCIALS YEARLY THAT WERE GENERATED BY AN OUTSIDE AUDITOR.

BUT TO TO DIRECTOR JENKINS POINT, A LOT OF THE AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A CONVOLUTED STORY, BUT THE BANK ACCOUNTS WERE IN FAIR PARK FIRST NAME, BUT THEY WERE REALLY CONTROLLED BY OVG, AND OVG WAS THE ENTITY THAT WAS KIND OF DOING THE DAILY TRANSACTIONS AND THAT SORT OF THING.

SO IT BECOMES THIS LITTLE BIT OF A COMPLICATED PROCEDURE TO KIND OF UNWIND THAT.

AND THAT'S, THAT IS THE NATURE OF THE AUDIT. IT IS LOOKING AT EVERY SINGLE TRANSACTION THAT FLOWED THROUGH THE BANK ACCOUNTS THAT WERE IN FAIR PARK FIRST NAME, BUT WERE ACTUALLY CONTROLLED BY OHB THREE 60.

SO THIS IS MY QUESTION. HAVING BEEN A NONPROFIT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EVEN IF THIS OTHER ENTITY HAD SOME CONTROL OVER ELEMENTS OF THE BANK ACCOUNT, WHY WASN'T THAT MONTHLY REPORTED ALL THAT DETAIL TO THE BOARD? LIKE, WHY WOULD YOU HAVE TO BE DOING THIS AT THIS POINT? THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME.

I WE WILL WE CAN CERTAINLY CLARIFY YOUR QUESTION, BUT IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT FAIR PARK FIRST DID RECEIVE REGULAR I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS MONTHLY, IT COULD HAVE BEEN QUARTERLY REGULAR UPDATES FROM OVG RELATED TO THE FINANCES, AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO THEIR FINANCES, NOT OVG FINANCES.

AND SO THE PICTURE THAT'S BEING PAINTED, THOUGH, IS A CARELESSNESS ABOUT FINANCIAL REPORTING TO THE BOARD AND THE BOARD INSISTING ON THAT KIND OF TRANSPARENCY THAT GOES TO THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT BEING ABLE TO CARRY OUT THIS PROJECT AND ACCEPT MORE GRANT MONEY.

THAT IS CONCERNING TO ME. SO. OKAY. THE NEXT THE NEXT THING I WANT TO SAY.

DIDN'T WE FIND OUT THAT THERE WERE UNPAID VENDORS AND ARE THOSE UNPAID VENDORS FROM SPECTRA, OR ARE THEY FROM FAIR PARK FIRST? AS AS MR. O'CONNOR MENTIONED, THIS IS SO CONVOLUTED.

WE'RE WE'RE STILL WE'RE STILL TRYING TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF WHOSE OWED WHAT AND AND THIS ONCE AGAIN, THIS FINANCIAL AUDIT WE'RE HOPING WILL HELP ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.

SO IF FAIR PARK FIRST IS THE ONE THAT OWES THE VENDORS, WOULD THESE DONATIONS BE AT RISK FOR A JUDGMENT TO PAY THEM? YEAH, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. OKAY, SO, JOHN, IF A DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT GOES THROUGH WITH FAIR PARK FIRST, WHO WOULD BE MONITORING THAT CONTRACT? AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPMENT WELL, AS IS YOUR DEPARTMENT GOING TO END UP MONITORING A CONTRACT AS I'VE? NOT IN YOUR PURVIEW.

[03:05:03]

WELL, AS I EXPRESSED BEFORE, BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE LAST CONTRACT, THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON YOU KNOW, NO, I IF I'M NOT GOING TO BE PART OF BEING ABLE TO HAVE THE FINAL SAY AND WORKING WITH THE COUNCIL AND BOARD THAT'S NOT AS I SAID BEFORE, I WOULDN'T WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A CONTRACT THAT I DID NOT RECOMMEND TO THIS BOARD OR COUNCIL.

WELL, IT DEFINITELY SEEMS LIKE AN ARRANGEMENT THAT IS DESIGNED TO FAIL.

SO THE BOTTOM LINE FOR ME ON THIS CONVERSATION, WHICH HAS A LOT OF PARTICULARS THAT I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH AND, YOU KNOW. THAT ARE LEFT TO THE PARK BOARD. BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE HAVE TO GET THIS RIGHT, LIKE IT HAS TO BE DONE RIGHT. AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT DONOR CONFIDENCE.

IF WE'RE ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL DONATIONS OR TAKING ADDITIONAL GRANT MONEY WITHOUT THE PROPER SYSTEMS IN PLACE, THE POSSIBILITY OF REPEATING THE SAME MISTAKES IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF US.

AND THERE'S A RISK TO OUR CITY, A REPUTATIONAL RISK ABOUT THE ABILITY TO COMPLETE PROJECTS TIMELY.

I COULD GIVE YOU A DOZEN PROJECTS THAT ARE LATE THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE WORKING ON, BUT ALSO IF WE'RE JUST REACTING TO POLITICAL PRESSURE OR COMMUNITY PRESSURE TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT PUTTING THOSE PROPER SYSTEMS IN PLACE.

I GOT TO TELL YOU, THERE'S ALREADY DONORS ON THE POLICE ACADEMY ASKING ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT FUNDING THINGS AND ABILITY TO EXECUTE. WE HAVE TO DO IT RIGHT. AND. OUR JOB IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE FINANCIAL AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN PLACE, AND IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE WE'RE THERE YET.

SO AGAIN, WE HAVE TO DO THIS RIGHT AND NOT JUST RUSH BECAUSE OF PRESSURE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INSTRUCT THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD TO REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL, WITH A RECOMMENDATION BY FEBRUARY 20TH 5TH TO 2026.

OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, BUT I WANT TO CONFIRM SOMETHING REALLY QUICKLY WITH THE PARLIAMENTARIAN.

OKAY. OKAY. THE MOTION IS IN ORDER. AND SO I'LL RECOGNIZE THE THE MAYOR PRO TEM FOR FIVE MINUTES ON HIS AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. IN ORDER TO DISCHARGE, WE MUST SET CLEAR GUIDANCE AND EXPECTATION AND GIVE NOTICE TO THE GOVERNING BODY THAT WE'RE DISCHARGING NOW. AT THAT TIME, IF THE PARK BOARD DOES NOT DELIVER, I'M OPEN TO TAKING UP THE DISCHARGE.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH ON. I DEEPLY VALUE PARKS, GREEN SPACES AND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION.

HAVING SERVED ON BOTH THE PARK BOARD AND NOW THE CITY COUNCIL, I BRING A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE TO THIS CONVERSATION.

FAIR PARK IS A JEWEL TO DALLAS, EVEN A NATIONAL TREASURE.

IT'S DEEPLY PERSONAL TO MANY OF US, INCLUDING TO MYSELF.

I GREW UP THERE, PROPOSED TO MY WIFE. NOW OUR DAUGHTER IS MAKING HER OWN MEMORIES.

UNFORTUNATELY, FAIR PARK HAS TAKEN FROM ITS SURROUNDING COMMUNITY WITHOUT DELIVERING WHAT WAS PROMISED SINCE ITS BEGINNING, AND THE CITY BEARS THAT RESPONSIBILITY. JUST LAST YEAR, THE CITY HAD TO REMOVE THE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION.

NOW WE'RE DEBATING WHO SHOULD DECIDE THE FUTURE OF THE LONG AWAITED AND PROMISED COMMUNITY PARK.

THE PARK BOARD IS MADE UP OF DEDICATED, HIGHLY QUALIFIED PUBLIC SERVANTS.

IF THERE HAS BEEN A FAILURE IN TIMING AND DELIVERY, THAT'S ON US AS A CITY, NOT ON THE BOARD.

AS A FORMER MEMBER, I KNOW THEIR EXPERTISE AND IT TAKES WHAT IT TAKES TO MEET THESE HIGH STANDARDS THAT WE EXPECT.

OUR PARK BOARD AND OUR PARK DEPARTMENT DO THE WORK EVERY DAY.

IN FACT, OUR PARK DEPARTMENT IS NOW RECOGNIZED AS ONE OF THE BEST IN THE NATION.

THE PARK BOARD OPERATES UNDER THE CITY COUNCIL OVERSIGHT, BUT IT ALSO HAS CLEAR AUTHORITY UNDER THE CHARTER.

UNDERMINING THIS AUTHORITY SETS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT AND DISRUPTS PROGRESS.

IT IS NOT THE COUNCIL'S ROLE TO DO THE BOARD'S WORK.

STRIP IT OF ITS RESPONSIBILITIES. WE SHOULD RESIST ABRUPT STRUCTURAL CHANGES AND INSTEAD RESTORE STABILITY AND PUBLIC TRUST.

LET THE PARK BOARD AND THE PARK DEPARTMENT MOVE FORWARD WITH CLEAR, TRANSPARENT AND SUPPORTED BY PROPER OVERSIGHT AND RESOURCES.

I VERY MUCH LOOK FORWARD TO THE DEVELOPMENT, CONSTRUCTION AND DELIVERY OF THIS COMMUNITY PARK.

IT WILL BE A PLACE FOR HEALING AND FOR NEW MEMORIES FOR GENERATIONS TO COME.

IN CLOSING, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COMMUNITY PARK TASK FORCE IS FINALIZING ITS MEETINGS AND WILL BEGIN PREPARING A REPORT

[03:10:09]

SOON TO BE DELIVERED TO THE BOARD. NEXT MONTH, THE PARK BOARD WILL BE IN A POSITION TO CONSIDER THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OF THE PARK IN FEBRUARY AND BRINGING IT TO TO THIS COUNCIL. THE PARK BOARD EXISTS FOR A REASON.

LET IT LET IT ALLOW TO DO ITS JOB. THANK YOU.

MAYOR MR. BAZALDUA. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS THIS MOTION.

I THINK THAT THERE'S A LEVEL OF HYPOCRISY BUILT IN THE IRONY OF HEARING THE FIRST COMMENTS FROM MY COLLEAGUE WHO OFFERED THIS AMENDMENT TO SAY HOW MUCH HE SUPPORTS THE WORK THAT I'VE DONE IN THE COMMUNITY WHEN THIS IS A DIRECT SLAP IN THE FACE TO THE COMMUNITY WHO SHOWED UP LAST WEEK AND TWO WEEKS AGO AND TOLD US TO MOVE.

I ALSO THINK THAT THERE'S A LEVEL OF DISINGENUOUS MESSAGING.

THE DISINGENUOUS MESSAGING THAT I HEAR TODAY IS ONE THAT IS NOW ATTEMPTING TO BE AT THE TABLE TO NEGOTIATE WHEN WE'VE HAD YEARS OF EXTENSIVE OUTREACH. I UNDERSTAND HOW THIS ASSET MEANS A LOT TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, AND EVERYONE CAN PROBABLY GIVE US SOME HEARTFELT STORIES ABOUT HOW THEY'VE SPENT TIME WITH THEIR FAMILY.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU A LOT OF HEARTFELT STORIES ABOUT THE EVENINGS THAT WE SPENT CRAFTING THIS THAT I DID NOT SEE ANY PRESENCE OF PEOPLE WHO WHO NOW WANT TO BE AT THE TABLE. IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING TO UNDERMINE THE WORK THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS DONE.

IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING TO PIN ONE GOVERNING BODY AGAINST THE OTHER.

AND IT'S ALSO FRUSTRATING TO IGNORE THE SIMPLE FACT THAT WE, AS A GOVERNING BODY, WERE THE ONES THAT WERE ELECTED FROM THE ONES THAT WE REPRESENT.

WE WERE ELECTED TO MAKE THE HARD DECISIONS. WE WERE ELECTED TO HAVE THE OVERSIGHT OF THE APPOINTED BODIES THAT WE HAVE PUT IN PLACE, INCLUDING THE PARK BOARD. I HAVE THE UTMOST RESPECT FOR THE PARK BOARD AND EVERY OTHER APPOINTMENT THAT I HAVE.

FOR DISTRICT SEVEN, OUR PARK BOARD REPRESENTATIVE, DANIEL WOOD, IS HERE NOW WHO HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY NOT ON THIS ONLY, BUT ON EVERYTHING THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE CITY.

BUT THE REALITY IS, IS THE VOTERS OF DISTRICT SEVEN DIDN'T VOTE MR. WOOD INTO OFFICE. THEY DON'T HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF EXPECTATION FOR HIM TO DELIVER ON WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'VE SET EXPECTATIONS OUT FOR.

SO I DO BELIEVE THIS MOTION IS AN ATTEMPT TO PLAY BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE AND TO CARRY WATER FOR SOMEONE ELSE'S AGENDA, BUT IT'S NOT ONE THAT IS MET WITH GENUINE EXPECTATIONS FOR WHAT THE COMMUNITY HAS ASKED US ON HOW TO ACT.

THERE'S A LEVEL OF DISCREPANCY OF WHERE WE HAVE PRIORITIZED SOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO HAVE ORGANIZED. AND JUST AS MR. JOHNSON MENTIONED CHAIR JOHNSON, YOUR COMMENTS WERE SPOT ON.

YOU KNOW, IF WE HAD $33 MILLION STARING US IN THE FACE BECAUSE WE NEEDED IT FOR KLYDE WARREN PARK OR ONE OF OUR OTHER BELOVED PARK ASSETS IN THIS CITY, WE WOULDN'T BE SEEING THE SAME LEVEL OF SCRUTINY IF WE SAW NEIGHBORS SHOW UP IN FORCE AND HAVE A COLLECTIVE VIEW OF WHAT THE CONSENSUS IS FROM THE COMMUNITY. WE'VE SEEN SOME OF THE SAME PEOPLE WHO NOW WANT TO, QUITE FRANKLY, PUT NEGATIVE LIGHT ON A PROJECT LIKE THIS. THEY EMPHASIZE THE VOICES OF THE COMMUNITY WHO HAS COME TOGETHER FOR OTHER REASONS WHEN THEY HAVE FILLED OUR OUR CHAMBERS. I WOULD ASK THAT THERE'S THE SAME LEVEL OF RESPECT GIVEN TO THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH DALLAS THAT WE'VE SEEN BE GIVEN TO PEOPLE ALL AROUND THIS CITY. AND THIS MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR DOES EXACT OPPOSITE OF THAT.

THANK YOU, MISTER MAYOR. MISS CADENA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT.

YES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT IN REGARDS TO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS SAID.

SO AT THE DECEMBER 11TH PARK BOARD MEETING, I ACTUALLY WENT TO GO BECAUSE TIM WAS BEING RECOGNIZED AND COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WAS THERE SPEAKING TO THE PARK BOARD ABOUT THE COMMUNITY PARK AND HIS CONCERNS.

AND I HAD NO IDEA HE WAS GOING TO BE SPEAKING, BUT I'VE SEEN HIM AND OTHER, EVEN OTHER PARK MEMBER BOARD MEMBERS TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THIS SITUATION, SO I JUST FELT LIKE I NEEDED TO TO MENTION THAT.

MR. ROTH, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU. I REALLY AM. I THINK THAT THE AMENDMENT WAS VERY THOUGHTFUL, AND I THINK IT IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

AND NOBODY IS AGAINST PUTTING A PARK THERE. WHAT I'M WHAT I THINK WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IS DOING IT IN THE RIGHT WAY.

[03:15:03]

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF MONEY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HALF BAKED PLANS.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN IRRESPONSIBLE PROCESS THAT'S BEEN OCCURRED FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

AND WE'VE GOT TO GET THE THE PLAN SET INITIALLY PROPERLY DONE, IN ORDER TO GET A SUCCESSFUL DEAL DONE.

AND WE'RE IT'S NOT HOW FAST WE DO IT, IT'S HOW WE DO IT CORRECTLY.

AND I THINK THAT THE PARK BOARD DOES HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY.

THERE'S NEW MEMBERS ON THAT PARK BOARD. THIS IS A COMPLICATED PROCESS.

I THINK THEY HAVE, AND I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THEIR INPUT INTO THE VETTING OF THE DETAILS OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

AND I THINK IT'S IT'S TO OUR ADVANTAGE TO TO HAVE THE AN ADEQUATE SMART GROUP OF FOLKS TO REVIEW THIS THING, HELP US MAKE MAKE THAT PROCESS THE, THE COMMITTEE PROCESS FUNCTIONAL AND GIVE US THE ADVICE AND DIRECTION FOR US TO BE ABLE THEN TO MAKE A FINAL DECISION THAT'S, THAT'S THOUGHTFUL AND HAS BEEN VETTED PROPERLY.

SO I, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THIS GROUP TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER THE AMENDMENT AND AND TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT.

THE RIGHT WAY IS TO PRODUCE. AND IT DON'T TAKE A DECADE TO PRODUCE.

SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT AGAIN.

WE'RE WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION OF SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF A LONG TIME AGO, AND THE COMMUNITY IS TIRED OF BROKEN PROMISES.

AND SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. WE DO NEED TO HAVE PRODUCTIVITY THERE.

AND I'M GONNA SAY IT AGAIN THE COMMUNITY IS TIRED OF PROCRASTINATION WRAPPED AROUND BROKEN PROMISES.

MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU. OKAY, SO THE AMENDMENT IS SAYING 225.

I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE TIMELINE. REMEMBER, WE'RE STILL ON DECEMBER OR MARCH 10TH, CORRECT? OKAY, SO IT GOES. YOU JUST SAID IN MY LAST QUESTIONING YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO GET A THEY'RE WRAPPING UP TOMORROW, AND YOU SHOULD BE GETTING A FINAL REPORT IN FEBRUARY.

HAVE YOU GOT AN INDICATION? INDICATION OF WHICH? THERE'S 28 DAYS IN FEBRUARY. INDICATION OF WHICH DAY? NO, MA'AM. NOT AT THIS TIME. NO INDICATION. OKAY, SO LET'S JUST SAY THEY FINALIZED THE MEETING.

IT TAKES TWO WEEKS. WHEN IS YOUR NEXT PARK BOARD? BECAUSE I'M SURE YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE PARK BOARD WITH THIS.

SO THE THE MEETINGS OF THE PARK BOARD IN FEBRUARY THE 5TH AND THE 19TH, SO YOU TECHNICALLY COULD PUT IT TO THE 19TH, AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS THEN? IT WOULD IT WOULD COME BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT THEN WE NEED TO SEND IT TO PARKS, TRAILS AND THE ENVIRONMENT, PROBABLY TO WORK THROUGH IT.

THAT'LL BE UP TO Y'ALL'S PROCESS. SO, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THAT WE HAD A MEMO THAT SAYS 6 TO 8 WEEKS DATED BACK IN DECEMBER, WE'RE NOW UP AGAINST THIS MARCH 10TH DEADLINE.

I JUST DON'T SEE HOW WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT. I'M JUST BEING HONEST.

I'VE BEEN AT CITY HALL A LONG TIME, AND 13 MILLION, A THIRD OF THE PROJECT COSTS IS A BIG DEAL.

IS IT ALREADY DESIGNED, BY THE WAY? SO IT'S 100% DESIGN DEVELOPMENT.

SO? SO THE CONCEPT, A LOT OF THE DETAILS HAVE BEEN FLESHED OUT, BUT THERE HAVE NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PREPARED.

OKAY. SO YOU DON'T HAVE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, BUT YOU HAVE A SITE PLAN.

SO OF COURSE. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. SO YOU KNOW PRETTY MUCH WHERE THE PLAYGROUND IS GOING TO GO.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF FILLING IT IN THE THE TECHNICAL DETAILS SO THAT A CONTRACTOR COULD BID THE JOB.

THAT'S RIGHT. SO IT'S BAKED. CAN WE BE HONEST? THIS IS THIS IS A PARK THAT'S READY TO GO. THERE IS THERE'S A SITE PLAN.

THERE'S THERE'S RENDERINGS OF THE ELEMENTS, ETCETERA. YES.

YEAH. I DON'T KNOW HOW. ARE YOU READY AS PARK STAFF TO GET THIS THING MOVING, TO GET IT BACK TO US, TO GET IT TO COUNCIL, TO GET IT ON AN AGENDA WHICH WE ONLY HAVE ONE WEEK IN 1ST OF MARCH BECAUSE WE TAKE TWO WEEKS IN THE MIDDLE OFF.

I'M JUST CURIOUS ON IT. ARE Y'ALL READY TO TO SPRINT? WE ARE ALWAYS READY. OKAY. BUT YOU START ANY PROJECT.

WE JUST HAVE TO FOLLOW THE PROCESS. BUT YOU HAVEN'T, OKAY.

BECAUSE YOU HAD IT IN THE SUMMER AND THEN IT KIND OF GONE THROUGH.

IT WENT THROUGH DIFFERENT QUESTION ABOUT PARK STAFF.

YES. WE ARE READY. WE'RE ALWAYS READY. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. RESENDEZ. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WON'T BE I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT EITHER.

[03:20:03]

I THINK THAT I RESPECT THE COMMENTS FROM OUR COLLEAGUES.

BUT I DO THINK THAT SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT MR. ROTH MADE ACTUALLY AN ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF NOT GOING BACK WHERE WE'VE ALREADY BEEN.

YOU KNOW, THIS PROCESS SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN A MESS, AND AND THAT'S PRECISELY WHY THIS MOTION SHOULD, SHOULD NOT BE SUPPORTED. YOU KNOW, THE PARK BOARD HAS ALREADY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK THROUGH THESE ISSUES.

AND I THINK THAT DELAYING THE PROCESS AT THIS POINT DOESN'T, WOULDN'T FIX ANYTHING.

AND, AND SO, YOU KNOW, JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I VOICED MY OPPOSITION TO THIS MOTION.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY. NAY.

THE AYES HAVE IT. THE AMENDMENT FAILS. WE'RE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION TO DISCHARGE, AND I STILL SEE THE QUEUE FROM THAT.

SO ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DISCHARGE.

CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. MAYOR JOHNSON, THERE ARE A FEW PEOPLE HERE IN THE ROOM WHO COULD POTENTIALLY ANSWER SOME OF OUR QUESTIONS THERE WITH FAIR PARK.

FIRST, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THEM TO COME DOWN? I BELIEVE THEY CAN.

UNDER OUR RULES. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO ASK THEM A QUESTION, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THEM A QUESTION.

WELL, TELL THEM TO COME ON DOWN. OKAY. I BELIEVE THE NEXT CONTESTANT, HEATHER STEVENS, JASON BROWN AND ALYSSA ARNOLD.

IF YOU ALL WOULD COME DOWN. MAYOR. YES.

FOR WHAT PURPOSE? MR. I IN THE LAST VOTE, I THINK I MISSED VOTED AND I WOULD JUST LIKE THE RECORD TO REFLECT THAT.

I VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT RATHER THAN OPPOSED TO IT, IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE.

THERE WAS A VOICE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT. OKAY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT. OKAY. YEAH. OKAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. JUST THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND CONVERSATION OVER HOW MUCH WAS RAISED AND WHAT DOES THAT COMMITMENT LOOK LIKE? AND HEATHER, I THINK YOU MIGHT BE THE BEST PERSON, BUT I'M GOING TO LEAVE THAT OPEN. TO WHICH ONE OF YOU WANTS TO ANSWER, BUT TALK TO US ABOUT HOW MUCH HAS BEEN RAISED AND HOW HAVE YOU SECURED THESE FUNDS.

HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THIS PLEDGE OR THAT THESE FUNDS CAN BE COUNTED ON? THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART. SO THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT.

ONE IS THE PHILANTHROPY, WHICH ALL PLEDGE DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY RYAN DIRECTLY.

I SAT WITH HIM AND WENT THROUGH EACH OF THE PLEDGED DOCUMENTS. BUT ON TOP OF THAT, THE DALLAS FOUNDATION WENT THROUGH EACH PLEDGE DOCUMENT TO VERIFY SOURCE AND OBLIGATION OF FUNDING AND PROVIDED A LETTER TO PARK AND REC, AND THE TASK FORCE THAT SHOWS THAT THE SIX SOME ODD MILLION DOLLARS IN PHILANTHROPY THAT'S REMAINING IS STILL AVAILABLE FOR DISBURSEMENT.

SO AS SOON AS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS READY, THOSE FUNDS WOULD BECOME AVAILABLE BETWEEN NOW AND SEPTEMBER.

AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, THERE'S STATE FUNDING.

THERE'S TWO LEVELS OF STATE FUNDING. THERE'S A TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE, 1.29 MILLION, WHICH IS MATCHED BY PHILANTHROPY, AND THAT IS ACTIVELY READY TO BE WITHDRAWN. SO IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT A BANK ACCOUNT, THE WAY IT WORKS IS YOU HAVE YOUR PHILANTHROPY OVER HERE, WHICH IS DISPERSED AS NEEDED. THERE'S NOT A BANK ACCOUNT SITTING THERE WITH ALL THIS MONEY IN IT.

TYPICALLY, PHILANTHROPISTS LIKE TO HOLD ON TO THEIR FUNDING UNTIL NEED IT SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO BUILD ON THE GOODWILL THEY THEY DO THROUGH THEIR FOUNDATIONS.

THE PUBLIC FUNDING IS A DRAW DOWN REIMBURSEMENT, WHICH MEANS IT SITS AT THE STATE'S BANK ACCOUNT UNTIL WE SUBMIT PAPERWORK TO THE PARK AND REC DEPARTMENT, AT WHICH POINT IT GOES THROUGH THE PARK AND REC DEPARTMENTS, FINANCE AND AUDITING, AND THEN IT GOES TO THE STATE'S FINANCE AND AUDITING.

AND THEN A REIMBURSEMENT IS SENT DOWN TO THE CITY AND THEN TO FAIR PARK FIRST.

THEN YOU GO TO THE FEDERAL LEVEL WITH THE FUNDING THERE.

AND THAT IS THE SAME PROCESS. SO EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF PUBLIC AND STATE FUNDING, WHICH ADDS UP TO A LITTLE OVER 13 MILLION, IS DONE THROUGH AN AUDIT AND FINANCE DEPARTMENT TWICE BEFORE IT ACTUALLY COMES BACK TO FAIR PARK FIRST.

THE FUNDING IS AVAILABLE FOR DISTRIBUTION AS SOON AS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS READY.

FAIR PARK FIRST DOES NOT FEEL CONFIDENT OR COMFORTABLE.

ONE DRAWING DOWN ON ANY MORE PHILANTHROPY UNTIL THEY HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SO THEY CAN STEWART THE FUNDING OF THE DONOR'S MONEY APPROPRIATELY, AND THEN TECHNICALLY CANNOT DRAW DOWN ON STATE AND FEDERAL UNTIL THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN PLACE PER THE CITY'S PROCESS.

SO YOU ALL HAVE PROCESSES IN PLACE, AS DOES THE STATE, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND CITY TO MONITOR AND TO KNOW WHEN THESE FUNDS CAN BE EXPENDED.

YES. CORRECT. YES. THERE'S A DISTRIBUTION SCHEDULE OF, YOU KNOW, PROJECTED SPENDING FOR THE PROJECT AS WELL AS LIKE THE TIMING BETWEEN

[03:25:01]

REIMBURSEMENTS, WHICH WILL TYPICALLY TAKE ANYWHERE TO 4 TO 8 WEEKS.

AND SO FAIR PARK FIRST HAS A PLAN FOR THAT AS WELL, AND HAS PROVIDED THAT SCHEDULE AND ALL OF THOSE DOCUMENTS TO PARK AND REC AND THE TASK FORCE. AND, HEATHER, I KNOW YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF FUNDRAISING FOR ORGANIZATIONS.

IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THESE FUNDS THAT MAKES THEM LESS SECURE THAN ANY OTHER FUNDRAISING THAT YOU'VE DONE FOR OTHER ORGANIZATIONS? ABSOLUTELY NOT. NO. THE FUNDING IS SECURED. THERE ARE SIGNED AGREEMENTS BETWEEN FAIR PARK FIRST AND THE DONORS.

THE DONORS HAVE STAYED THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE PROCESS, SUPPORTING, INCLUDING ONE OF THE ONES THAT I TOOK COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA.

EXCUSE ME, I APOLOGIZE THAT I TOOK ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WITH TO VISIT SO THAT THEY COULD TALK DIRECTLY TO EACH OTHER AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SITUATION WAS, AND THEY SHARED SERIOUS CONCERNS OVER THE PROCESS AND DELAY NOT REALLY UNDERSTANDING WHY AT 100% DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, ENTERING INTO CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, THERE WAS NO MOVEMENT.

AND YOU ALL HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE TASK FORCE, AND I THINK I MIGHT.

I JUST HAVEN'T BEEN SPEAKING FIVE MINUTES. IT'S WAY, WAY DOWN.

SORRY. AND I NEVER COMPLAIN ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I NEVER USE MY TIME.

BUT TALK TO ME ABOUT THE THE TASK FORCE, SORRY.

AND HOW WHAT DOCUMENTS YOU ALL HAVE PROVIDED THEM WITH RESPECT TO DONORS AND FUNDING.

SO COLLECTIVELY, FAIR PARK FIRST, WE WANT TO TAKE THAT.

YEAH. YEAH. SO BASED OFF THE ORIGINAL MEMO THAT WE RECEIVED ABOUT THE ITEMS THAT THEY WANTED TO DO WITH, YOU KNOW, FROM A DUE DILIGENCE STANDPOINT, AND WE WERE ABLE TO MEET MOST OF ALL OF THOSE.

WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANY FEEDBACK. THERE WERE SOME GAPS THAT WE MISSED OUT FROM THE FIRST PART.

SO WE PROVIDED A SUPPLEMENT PACKET. SO I THINK IT'S CONSISTENT.

I THINK WE'RE UP TO ALMOST 100 PAGES OF, OF INFORMATION, BUT IT JUST SHOWS OVERALL, IT GIVES A STORY AND CONTEXT ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING, WHERE WE'RE BEING AND WHERE WE'RE HEADED TO SHOW THE DEAL READINESS ON THE EXECUTION.

AND YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT YOU HAVE WHATEVER PROJECT MANAGEMENT PIECE IN PLACE SO THAT YOU HAVE A GOOD, STRONG PROJECT MANAGER FOR THIS PROJECT. BECAUSE I HAVE A ONE ACRE PARK IN ORION WILL TELL YOU IT TAKES A LOT OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT, EVEN IF IT'S ONLY A ONE ACRE PARK. YEAH. AND THEN ADD TO THAT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ASSETS IN THE COUNTRY.

SO WE DO WE HAVE SOMEONE THAT HAS HISTORIC PRESERVATION, THAT UNDERSTANDS ARCHITECTURE, THAT UNDERSTANDS COST ESTIMATION.

I THINK MOST IMPORTANTLY, ACROSS OUR TEAM, THEY'RE ACTIVELY DOING DEALS.

SO THEY'RE NOT JUST HYPOTHETICALLY ON ESTIMATES. THEY'RE IN THE DEALS AND THEY'RE SEEING PRICING IN REAL TIME. AND I THINK ALL OF US BEING IN THE INDUSTRY, WE STILL REMEMBER THE PANDEMIC AND WHAT HAPPENED AND CAME OUT OF THAT.

IT'S STILL A STILL IN THE BACK OF OUR HEADS. AND WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS AND UNDERSTANDING THAT, AND SO WE KEEP THAT IN MIND WITH OUR WITH THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING ON DELIVERING THE PROJECT.

AND CAN YOU DESCRIBE THIS TEAM FOR ME? WHO ARE THE DIFFERENT PLAYERS? WHO ARE YOU ALL? WHO DO YOU PULL TOGETHER AS YOUR TEAM TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

YEAH, YEAH, KIND OF A HOUSEHOLD NAME. WE HAVE STUDIO OUTSIDE THAT'S FAMILIAR WITH.

I THINK THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, PREVIOUSLY THAT IT'S NOT TOO MANY MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAVE NOT WORKED WITH THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

WE HAVE NORM AND AUSTIN, WHO'S A PRESERVATION ARCHITECT THAT THAT UNDERSTANDS THESE TYPE OF PROJECTS AND MANAGEMENT.

WE HAVE ROSS THREE 60 HEATHER HERE TO MY LEFT THAT HAS SHE IS THE GOAT WHEN IT COMES TO PHILANTHROPY AND AND HELPING US FIND, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL SOURCES TO MEND ANY POSSIBLE GAPS AND HELP US CLOSE THE GAP THAT WE HAVE.

I HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH HOUSING AND AS WELL AS HORIZONTAL DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE STATE.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD TEAM AND CONFIDENT ON, ON DELIVERING THIS PROJECT.

AND YOU WOULD SAY YOUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS FEELS CONFIDENT IN THE ABILITY TO PERFORM.

ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN, WE HAVE WE HAVE A BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAT RANGES FROM FORMER U.S.

ATTORNEYS PARTNERS AT YOUR LARGEST, LARGEST ACCOUNTING FIRMS GLOBALLY, REGIONALLY FIRMS PHILANTHROPY CIVIL CIVIL ENGINEERS THAT UNDERSTAND THESE TYPE OF PROJECTS AND MOVING FORWARD FROM A SINGULAR TASK.

RIGHT. WE'RE RIGHT NOW WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS ONE, ONE TASK, AND THAT'S DELIVERY OF THE PART.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER 260 SOMETHING ODD ACRES.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DELIVERY OF A SINGLE PURPOSE USE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD TO THAT? DO YOU WANT TO KNOW MY CONCERNS? SURE. AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DELAYS, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR.

RIGHT. THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. YOU GUYS HEARD EARLIER ABOUT THE THE CONVERSATION STARTED HAPPENING IN THE SUMMER, BUT WE GOT TO GO BACK TO BEFORE THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE THE MISSPENT WHEN WE WERE NOTIFIED OF IT AND WE DISCOVERED IT.

SO WE DIDN'T WE COULDN'T REALLY FUND RAISE. RIGHT.

SO OUR THING IS JUST, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE REALIZE THIS STUFF HAPPENED, IT'S HOW DO WE RESOLVE IT? LET'S LET'S WORK THROUGH IT. RIGHT. BUT, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THAT, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN FOCUS ON OUR ONE THING, AND THAT'S TO THE PARK. AND WHEN WE CAME TO YOU GUYS BACK THEN, WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT WE WERE DOING, AND THAT WAS REDEFINING AND REIMAGINING THE PARK SCOPE AND ENSURING THAT WE CAN DELIVER ON IT.

SO IT'S BEEN A LOT OF TIME THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING BEHIND THE SCENES TO ENSURE WE GOT TO THIS POINT. A LOT OF MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT, GOOD MONEY TOWARDS GOOD THINGS, AND THAT'S HOW WE'RE TO THIS POINT.

SO IT'S NOT LIKE THERE ARE A LOT OF GAPS AS IT RELATES TO DEAL READINESS.

[03:30:02]

IT'S JUST ULTIMATELY ON THE NEXT LEVEL FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD, TO CLOSE THE FUNDING GAP AND CONTINUE THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.

AND JASON, YOUR ROLE IS PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. AS PRESIDENT, BOARD CHAIR AS WELL AS THE SUBCOMMITTEE, THE PARK SUBCOMMITTEE.

OKAY, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

SO I THINK IN THE LAST FEW SECONDS HERE, WHAT I SEE IS DEEP CONCERNS FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT WE HAVEN'T MOVED FORWARD QUICKLY ENOUGH AND THE DELAYS HAVE CAUSED AND ARE CAUSING US, YOU KNOW, JUST I GUESS I'LL JUST DEEP CONCERN IS THE BEST WORD FOR THAT. AND THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, WE DO HAVE AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS HAD SOME HICCUPS.

AND THE TASK FORCE, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, IS.

DOING ITS JOB TO ASSESS WHETHER OR NOT THIS ORGANIZATION CAN MOVE FORWARD.

AND I BELIEVE WE NEED TO GET THE REPORT FROM THE TASK FORCE.

AND THAT'S WHAT I KNOW, AND THAT'S WHAT I NEED.

IS THAT TO COME TO MY COMMITTEE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE? OF COURSE. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

NO. I'M SORRY. YES. THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

GOING BACK TO TO THE FAIR. FAIR? FAIR. PARK FIRST GROUP IS I'M CURIOUS AS TO YOUR FEELING ABOUT THE CONFIDENCE IN THE NEED FOR AN AUDIT OR A VERIFICATION OF OF WHAT HAS TRANSPIRED TO MAKE YOU COMFORTABLE THAT THINGS ARE ARE AT A POINT OF SECURITY WITH REGARD TO YOUR FINANCIAL SITUATION AND THE AND THE ALLOCATION OF THE FUNDS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY AT RISK OR, OR IN OR VAGUELY DETERMINED TO BE USED OTHER PLACES. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S YOUR CONFIDENCE LEVEL ON YOUR FINANCIAL SITUATION WITH REGARD TO THE TO THE MISAPPROPRIATION OF FUNDS? I WILL SAY I'M A LOT MORE CONFIDENT NOW THAT WE KNOW THERE'S NO MIDDLEMAN, THAT IS NO MIDDLEMAN, THAT WE CAN DIRECTLY SEE INPUT AND OUTPUT. SO PREVIOUSLY WE DID NOT HAVE THAT LUXURY.

WE THE WAY STUFF WAS PRESENTED WAS MORE OF A CONSOLIDATED FASHION, AND IT TOOK A WHILE TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENED WITH SOME OF THE PARTICULARS.

SO NOW THE FACT THAT WE HAVE DIRECT CONTROL, DIRECT OVERSIGHT, BOARD OVERSIGHT WE HAVE OUR WE HAVE OUR AUDIT PARTNERS AT THE TABLE THAT SEE EVERYTHING.

SO I'M A LOT MORE CONFIDENT NOW, ARE THESE NEW PROCEDURES AND PROCESSES THAT YOU'VE IN PLACE THAT YOU PUT IN PLACE SINCE THEN, OR, OR IS THIS OR IS THIS AS A RESULT OF THIS ACTIVITY, THIS BAD ACTIVITY THAT OCCURRED? IS THIS CHANGES IN YOUR MANAGEMENT OF YOUR ORGANIZATION? YEAH, IT IS IT. ONCE WE REALIZED, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENED AND WE HAD TO COME UP WITH A PLAN IMMEDIATELY TO ENSURE THAT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AND MAKE SURE THAT THE MONEY AS IT COMES IN AND IT'S INTENDED FOR EXTERNAL PURPOSES. ARE YOU CONFIDENT NOW THAT YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'VE GOT ALL THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN RAISING WITH REGARD TO TO VENDORS, TO ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, THE POSSIBILITIES OF OF DONOR RELATIONS.

ARE YOUR DONORS CONCERNED OR NOT? I REALLY I MEAN, Y'ALL, I'M NOT LOOKING JUST FOR A FEEL GOOD ANSWER.

I'M LOOKING FOR AS THE PRESIDENT OF THAT ORGANIZATION.

I MEAN, YOUR REPUTATION AS AN ORGANIZATION IS ON THE LINE, TOO.

AND IF I WAS SITTING IN YOUR CHAIR, I'D BE REAL CONCERNED ABOUT ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THAT WE'VE GOT EVERYTHING SCRUBBED, THAT IT'S READY, THAT EVERYTHING'S GOOD AND THAT WE'VE GOT EVERYTHING PUT, PUT TO BED SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY, ANY CONFUSION OR OR DISTRUST OR MISTRUST AT ALL.

AND I'M I'M NOT GETTING THAT FEEL GOOD FROM YOU.

WELL NO, NO, IT'S NO FEEL GOOD STORIES HERE. RIGHT. I CAN TELL YOU THIS. THERE'S A THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER THINGS I CAN BE DOING WITH MY TIME RIGHT NOW. RIGHT. I HAVE I HAVE TWO KIDS UNDER THE AGE OF TEN. SO IF IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, CONCERNING, I WOULD HAVE JUMPED SHIP A LONG TIME AGO.

AND I CAN TELL YOU THIS, THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS STUFF HAPPENED, THE THING THAT I WENT ON WAS FIGURING OUT FACTS BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF OPINIONS AROUND. SO IT'S LIKE, HOW DO WE GET TO THE FACTS? SO FROM DONORS. THE FIRST THING FIRST WE WENT TO THE DONORS.

HEATHER, I MADE HEATHER AND OTHERS LIKE, HEY, WE NEED TO GET AS MANY MEETINGS AS POSSIBLE TO SIT DOWN.

AND I WANT TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THE DONORS AND NOT THIRD PARTY, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE IN, IN, IN THIS SPACE, YOU KNOW, INFORMATION GETS REGURGITATED.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE GOT TO CUT THAT OUT, RIGHT? THAT GOT US IN TROUBLE BEFORE.

[03:35:05]

AND I'M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND BE A PART OF THAT AGAIN.

SO WE GOT TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND UNDERSTAND.

AND THAT'S WHERE HEATHER CAME ALONG AND MADE SURE THAT FROM THAT DONOR CONFERENCE IT WAS THERE.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT DONORS, ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I THINK THAT ALL OF THEM ARE VERY SADDENED ABOUT THE SITUATION THAT OCCURRED. YOU KNOW, AN OUTSIDE PARTY MANAGING FUNDS AND THEN MISAPPROPRIATING OR MISMANAGING THEM DOES NOT SIT WELL WITH ME.

I DON'T LIKE IT. SO I DO HOPE THERE'S RESOLUTION ON THAT IN THE FUTURE.

BUT THE DONORS DO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THIS PARK BEING DELIVERED.

THEY HAVE WATCHED FAIR PARK FIRST, REALLY BATTLE SOME INTERESTING STORMS AND YET STILL KEEP FOCUSING ON DELIVERING THAT COMMUNITY PARK.

SO THAT HAS BEEN THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL THROUGH THE DONOR'S EYES.

THE THING I HEAR MOST FROM THEM IS WE JUST NEED TO GET THIS BUILT.

WE WANT TO STOP TALKING ABOUT IT. WE WANT TO STOP TALKING ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE OCCURRED THAT REALLY DON'T AFFECT THE COMMUNITY PARK ITSELF. AND SO I'LL JUST ADDRESS ONE THING THAT WAS, WAS SHARED OR COMMENTED ON. FUNDS ARE PROTECTED THROUGH THE DALLAS FOUNDATION, WHICH MAKES THEM A THIRD PARTY ASSET. AND IT'S NO LONGER FAIR PARKS, BUT SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED FOR THE COMMUNITY PARK SO THEY WOULD BE PROTECTED UNDER ANY ANYTHING THAT MIGHT HAPPEN. AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, STATE AND FEDERAL ARE ABSOLUTELY PROTECTED.

SO ALL FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT IS SECURED, PROTECTED WEATHERING ANY FUTURE STORMS. AND I THINK WE ADDED, OH GOSH, HOW MANY NEW POLICIES DO WE ADD? WAS IT OVER? IT WAS OVER A DOZEN NEW POLICIES RELATED TO FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND OTHER CONTROLS, AND NOT ONLY THE POLICIES, BUT WE WENT OUT AND WENT AFTER PEOPLE THAT HAD EXPERTISE AROUND SET POLICIES THAT CAN SHORE UP THAT THAT PART IN THAT COMMITTEE.

SO WE WANT TO JUST, YOU KNOW, CONTROL THE CONTROLLABLES IS MY MESSAGE TO THE BOARD.

WE HAVE TO STICK TO THE FACTS AND CONTROL THE CONTROLLABLES AND SHORE UP RESOURCES WHERE WE'RE LACKING.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON OVER THE LAST 18 MONTHS OR SO. ARE YOU ALL COMFORTABLE WITH THE WITH THE PROJECTED PRICING ON THE ON THE DEVELOPMENT? I AM, I AM AND WE HAD WE'VE HAD WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH PARTNERS THAT SAY ACTIVELY LOOKING AT PRICING.

AND WE HAVE REAL TIME PRICING WITH OTHER ASSUMPTIONS BEING MADE INCLUDING A WE HAVE CONTINGENCIES BUILT INTO IT AS WELL.

SO WE WERE PRETTY CONFIDENT CONSIDERING DELAYS, THAT THIS WAS MORE OF A VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION TYPE PRODUCT, I'LL BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONCERNED. BUT THE FACT THAT THIS WILL KIND OF LOOK AT THIS MORE HORIZONTAL WITH OTHER FIXTURES THAT WE CAN PRICE AND LOCK IN EARLY, IT GIVES ME A LITTLE BIT MORE CONFIDENCE ON SEEING WHERE WE LOCK IN ON PRICING AND IS IN THE TIMING ASPECT.

I'M REALLY SORT OF INCLINED TO SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART'S REQUEST TO GET A TASK FORCE ISSUE.

WOULD THAT DELAY CREATE ANY UNDUE BURDEN ON ON THE PROGRESS OF THIS PROCESS? WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A YEAR. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LITTLE WHILE FOR THE FOR THE TASK FORCE TO TO GET RESOLVED, TO GET THE AUDIT SQUARED AWAY, TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, GET EVERYBODY A CONFIDENCE LEVEL THAT WE CAN GET THIS THING MOVING FORWARD.

AND WE'VE GOT IT SORT OF NAILED DOWN. WOULD THAT CREATE A BIG PROBLEM IF WE WAIT A LITTLE BIT OF TIME AND I'M TALKING ABOUT A MONTH OR TWO RATHER THAN I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT TEN YEARS FOR SURE. YEAH. AND THAT'S WHERE I ALLUDED TO EARLIER, IS THAT WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THIS FOR, YOU KNOW, STARTING THE SUMMER. SO WE'RE WE'RE COMING UP ON, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER SUMMER. AND SO THAT'S WHERE THE DELAY IS GETTING BECAUSE SOME OF THE DOLLARS, ESPECIALLY THE STATE AND FEDERAL, NOT ONLY DO THE DOCUMENTS HAVE TO BE SIGNED, BUT FUNDING HAS TO BE DEPLOYED. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE THE SEVERAL ASPECTS OF OF ACTIVITY HAS TO HAPPEN OUTSIDE OF A SIGNATURE.

SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT COULD START BECOMING PROBLEMATIC.

AND WHERE MY CONCERN LIES AT WITH ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL DELAYS.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DISCHARGE? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. AND WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO BREAK FOR LUNCH.

AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO COME BACK AND TAKE UP 3031 AND THE AGENDA ORDER.

BUT 31 IS NOW IN ORDER TO TAKE UP BECAUSE OF THE VOTE WE JUST HAD.

SO WITH THAT TIMES 156, WE'RE GOING TO STAND AT RECESS UNTIL 230.

SO GRAB SOME LUNCH REAL QUICK AND COME BACK 230, PLEASE.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THE TIME IS 252. AND THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL NOW BACK IN SESSION.

MADAM SECRETARY, LET'S PICK UP WITH ITEM 31. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 31 IS A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A FUNDING AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH FAIR PARK FIRST TO RAISE FUNDING FOR THE DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMMUNITY PARK AT FAIR PARK.

YOU DO HAVE FOUR INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. YOUR FIRST SPEAKER IS STATE REPRESENTATIVE BENTON JONES.

[03:40:22]

ALL RIGHT. THERE WE GO. OH. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN.

I HOPE YOU ALL HAVE BEEN SAFE AND WELL DURING THIS, WINTER WEATHER THAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING.

AND I THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE TO HANDLE THE IMPORTANT BUSINESS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS. I'M HERE TODAY TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AGAIN FOR THE COUNCIL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FAIR PARK FIRST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. I TRY NOT TO COME TOO MUCH BEFORE THIS BODY, BUT I AM HERE TODAY BECAUSE WE ARE LOSING A VITAL OPPORTUNITY DUE TO ISSUES THAT CANNOT BE HANDLED WITH THE NECESSARY NEUTRALITY AT THE PARK BOARD LEVEL.

THIS IS ABOUT FAIRNESS. IT'S ABOUT TRANSPARENCY, AND NOTHING ABOUT THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN FAIR NOR TRANSPARENT AS I HAVE EXPERIENCED SINCE I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THIS PROJECT, WHICH HAS BEEN ABOUT TWO YEARS.

ALL OF I HAVE EXPERIENCED IS DELAY WITHOUT ADEQUATE EXPLANATION.

THIS INCLUDES THE ROLE OF THE RECENT TASK FORCE IN DISCOVERING NEW INFORMATION.

THIS TASK FORCE WAS SELECTED AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF ONE PERSON WHO HAS BEEN KNOWN AND IN PUBLIC OPPOSITION OF FAIR PARK FIRST AS RECENT AS TODAY IN THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS. AGAIN, ONE PERSON, NOT THE MEMBERS OF THE PARK BOARD, NOT THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. ONLY ONE PERSON HAS BEEN MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT THE MOVEMENT OF THIS PROJECT.

MY PERSPECTIVE IS NOT BASED ON SPECULATION. ONE OFF CONVERSATIONS ARE WHAT I HAVE READ IN THE NEWS.

MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL I HAVE SO MUCH RESPECT FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU, BUT MANY OF YOU STATED THIS MORNING THAT YOU KNEW THAT YOU DID NOT KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE SITUATION. WELL, I HAVE BEEN DIRECTLY INVOLVED AS A STAKEHOLDER, NOT MY STAFF, BUT ME.

REGARDING FUNDING, THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS ALREADY COMMITTED $4.29 MILLION TO THIS PROJECT.

OVER $33 MILLION HAS BEEN RAISED. THAT'S 80% OF THE TOTAL BUDGET FOR THIS PROJECT.

I WILL ASK THIS BODY, THIS WHAT PROJECT NEEDS TO RAISE 100% OF FUNDING BEFORE BREAKING DOWN, BEFORE BREAKING GROUND. THIS INVESTMENT WAS MADE BECAUSE THIS PROJECT IS SHOVEL READY AND MEETS THE EVERY STANDARD FOR THE RESPONSIBLE USE OF PUBLIC AND PHILANTHROPIC DOLLARS. NO RESOURCES HAVE BEEN REQUESTED FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS REGARDING THE QUESTIONS OF GOVERNANCE RAISED TODAY.

SINCE THE YEAR 2018. FAIR PARK FIRST HAS BEEN AUDITED NINE TIMES.

THREE OF THOSE TIMES HAS BEEN WITH CITY FUNDING.

THERE HAS NOT BEEN A SINGLE FINDING AGAINST FAIR PARK FIRST.

HOWEVER, THERE WERE FINDINGS ISSUED AGAINST OAK VIEW GROUP, WHICH IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT, NOR ARE THEY LEADING THE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL OPERATIONS OF FAIR PARK AS A RESULT OF THESE FINDINGS.

I'M HERE TO REMIND US OF THE PROMISES THAT WE BREAK TO THE SOUTH DALLAS COMMUNITY WHEN WE CONTINUE TO DELAY PROGRESS.

I MEAN, NO DISRESPECT TO THE PARK BOARD OR ITS LEADERSHIP, BUT I MUST SPEAK THE FACTS, AND I AND MANY OTHER LEADERS HAVE WITNESSED FIRST HAND.

I'M ASKING THE COUNCIL TO FINALIZE THE FAIR PARK FIRST AGREEMENT.

TODAY THE FUNDING IS IN PLACE, THE COMMUNITY HAS SPOKEN AND SOUTH DALLAS HAS WAITED LONG ENOUGH.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, CHERYL WALKER. MISS WALKER WILL BE VIRTUAL.

YES, I AM HERE. I YIELD MY TIME BACK TO THE PODIUM IN LIEU OF OTHER PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO SPEAK.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SCOTTY SMITH. GOOD AFTERNOON. CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME? I'M ONLINE. YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU AND SEE YOU.

YOU MAY CONTINUE. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF MY NEIGHBORS AND MY COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS FAIR PARK, COMMUNITY PARK, PARKS AND GREEN SPACES ARE NOT JUST AMENITIES.

THEY ARE PROVEN TOOLS FOR URBAN REVITALIZATION.

THEY ATTRACT FAMILIES, INVESTMENTS AND ACTIVITY, AND THEY OFTEN SERVE AS CATALYSTS FOR POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT TO FOLLOW.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS COUNCIL AGREED TO AND ADOPTED WHEN YOU VOTED TO APPROVE THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK AREA PLAN.

SOUTH DALLAS, ESPECIALLY FAIR PARK, HAS BEEN STUDIED, ANALYZED AND TASK FORCE FOR YEARS ALMOST TO DEATH.

WE'RE NOT LACKING INFORMATION. WE'RE LACKING ACTION AT SOME POINT.

CONTINUED STUDIES CONTINUE. TASK FORCE AND THE LIKE STOPPED BEING ABOUT PLANNING AND START BEING ABOUT DELAY, PROCRASTINATION, UNWANTED OR UNWANTED PAUSES.

THAT'S ESPECIALLY FRUSTRATING IS WHAT'S ESPECIALLY FRUSTRATING IS THAT THAT EVERY TIME FAIR PARK SHOWS EVEN A GLIMMER OF HOPE,

[03:45:03]

WHETHER IT'S HOUSING, ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, OR A COMMUNITY PARK IN THIS CASE IS CONSISTENTLY MET WITH DELAYS, NOT REJECTION, BUT DELAYS. AND WHEN THAT PATTERN REPEATS IN THE SAME COMMUNITY, IT SENDS A VERY CLEAR MESSAGE.

LET'S BE CLEAR THIS COMMUNITY PARK IS NOT AN IDEA.

IT'S BEEN PLANNED. AND YES, AS MENTIONED, THERE'S A PRETTY CLEAR PLAN FOR THE PARK AND FUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED.

THE COMMUNITY HAS SPOKEN TIME AND TIME, TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

AND WHAT'S MISSING NOW IS EXECUTION. AND WE KNOW THAT THIS CAN BE DONE DURING THE SAME TIME.

THE PARK HAS BEEN DELAYED. ANOTHER PARK ELSEWHERE IN THIS CITY HAS STARTED AND IS JUST NOW NEARING COMPLETION.

THIS ISN'T A CAPACITY ISSUE. IT'S A PRIORITY ISSUE IN SOUTH DALLAS.

DOES NOT NEED ANOTHER TASK FORCE TELLING US WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW.

WE NEED FOLLOW THROUGH. WE NEED ACTION. AND I SINCERELY HOPE THE COMMITMENTS MADE TO THIS COMMUNITY WHEN THE AREA PLAN WAS ADOPTED WERE NOT JUST WORDS, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH DALLAS TOOK THIS COUNCIL AT ITS WORD.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. NO MORE DELAYS. NO MORE EXCUSES.

LET'S DELIVER WHAT WAS PROMISED. AND I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO APPROVE THIS MOTION BEING BROUGHT TODAY BY MY COUNCIL MEMBER AND ALLOW FOR THIS FAIR PARK COMMUNITY PARK TO FINALLY MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HASANI BURTON.

HASANI BURTON IS NOT IN THE AUDIENCE AND NOT ONLINE.

SUNNY BURTON IS NOT PRESENT. MR.. MAYOR. THIS CONCLUDES OUR SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION? ITEM 31 I MOVE TO COMMIT THIS ITEM TO PARKS, TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I'LL BE BRIEF.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I WANT TO JUST THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR THE SUPPORT TO DISCHARGE THE ITEM.

THAT WAS THE FIRST STEP. THE NEXT STEP, JUST AS WE SPOKE DURING THAT DISCUSSION, IS TO GET ON TO THE VETTING AND HOPEFULLY BRING A SOUND DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN AN EXPEDITIOUS MANNER.

I'VE ALREADY SPOKEN. I WANT TO THANK CHAIRWOMAN STEWART FOR ALL OF YOUR COMMUNICATION THROUGH THE PROCESS.

YOUR HELP IN TRYING TO FIND VIABLE SOLUTIONS AND YOUR WILLINGNESS TO HOLD A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING IN FEBRUARY TO ACCOMMODATE THIS PROJECT. SO REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO DELIVERING FOR THE COMMUNITY.

WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO REPRESENTATIVE JONES, NOT JUST FOR THE FUNDING THAT YOU'VE HAD, BUT FOR YOUR FOLLOW THROUGH AS ALL AS WELL.

IT'S A LOT. I MEAN, IT'S EASY FOR OFFICIALS TO SLAP THEIR NAMES ON THINGS.

BUT TO FOLLOW THROUGH REALLY SHOWS YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY.

NOT JUST SHOWING UP. THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, BUT SHOWING UP HERE.

I'M SURE YOU HAD OTHER THINGS YOU COULD BE DOING WITH YOUR TIME AS WELL.

AND SO I DO APPRECIATE YOU HEATHER, AS WELL, IS ONE WHO HAS BEEN ESSENTIALLY A LIAISON BETWEEN FAIR PARK FIRST QUITE FRANKLY, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND IN THE WORK THAT SHE'S DONE, BUT ALSO WITH THE PHILANTHROPIC COMMUNITY.

HEATHER IS A GODSEND TO WHAT WE ARE HERE CELEBRATING HERE.

GOING TO CELEBRATE WITH THE PROJECT. LIKE THIS.

WE'VE NEVER HEARD OF PEOPLE GETTING TO BE EXCITED ABOUT MORE THAN $30 MILLION RAISED.

THAT DOESN'T TOUCH ANY OF THE TAXPAYERS TO DELIVER A PROJECT LIKE THIS FOR FOR SOUTH DALLAS SPECIFICALLY.

THIS IS A HUGE WIN FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND I'VE ALREADY HEARD FROM SEVERAL COMMUNITY MEMBERS SINCE WE HAVE MADE THE DISCHARGE.

BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT HOPE LOOKS LIKE. THIS ISN'T JUST PROMISES TO BE KEPT.

THIS IS ACTION. SO I WANT TO THANK ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES FOR YOUR IMPASSIONED COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS AND FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO US COMPLETING THIS PROJECT IN A TIMELY MANNER. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 31? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

[30. 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 Foregone: General Fund: $16,837,803.00 (see Fiscal Information) (This item was deferred on November 12, 2025) *In alignment with Dallas Housing Policy 2033.]

WE'LL NOW GO BACK TO AGENDA ITEM 30. ITEM 30 IS AUTHORIZED THE DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION TO ONE 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.

I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE A CORRECTION TO ITEM 30.

THE ITEM SHOULD STATE IN A LINE WITH DALLAS HOUSING RESOURCE CATALOG, RATHER THAN IN ALIGNMENT WITH DALLAS HOUSING POLICY 2033.

YOU ALSO HAVE FOUR INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

[03:50:02]

THE SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, GARNER RAWLINGS.

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

GUNNER RAWLINGS FOR 807 SWISS AVE. I'M HERE AS A CONSULTANT THAT WAS HIRED BY GOOD HOMES TO PUT TOGETHER AND WORK WITH THEM INTIMATELY ON A COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLAN.

AFTER THE NOVEMBER DEFERRAL THAT YOU ALL PUT TOGETHER.

SO I I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT. WE PUT TOGETHER A PACKET THAT I THINK STAFF GOT TO Y'ALL LAST NIGHT.

LOVE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF Y'ALL HAVE THEM.

ONCE THE DISCUSSION STARTS, IF THERE IS DISCUSSION, I WILL MENTION A COUPLE OF OUR SPEAKERS FROM ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WE WE'VE GOT A LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM. WE'RE NOT ABLE TO STICK AROUND TILL THE AFTERNOON, UNFORTUNATELY JUST BECAUSE OF THE DELAY OF THE MEETING, AND THAT'S FINE. SO I CAN SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF A LITTLE BIT, BUT THEIR LETTER IS IN THERE.

IT'S THE STEMMONS BUSINESS CORRIDOR ASSOCIATION.

SO YEAH, WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THEM SPEAK, BUT THEY COULDN'T MAKE IT ANYMORE.

SO WITH THAT, I'LL YIELD MY TIME. AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT GOOD HOLMES EFFORT IN THE COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DEBBIE. SORRY IF I MISPRONOUNCED YOUR LAST NAME.

HI. THAT'S OKAY. CAN YOU SEE AND HEAR ME? YES.

OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME THE TIME TO SPEAK TODAY.

MY NAME IS DEBBIE VATRE. I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF SUMMIT MANAGEMENT, A LOCAL DALLAS BASED COMPANY ESTABLISHED IN 2015.

AND I'M HERE SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF AGENDA ITEM 30.

I WANTED TO BRIEFLY SHARE HOW THIS PROPERTY WILL BE PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED, HOW WE WILL MAINTAIN A WELL-RUN COMMUNITY, AND HOW RESIDENT SCREENING WILL HELP ENSURE QUALITY HOUSING FOR EVERYONE WHO LIVES HERE.

WITH OUR FOCUS BEING ON LONG TERM STABILITY, RESPONSIBLE OPERATIONS AND A POSITIVE NEIGHBOR WITHIN THE CITY, I PERSONALLY HAVE SERVED AS THE PAST VICE CHAIR OF THE TEXAS APARTMENT ASSOCIATION AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE, AND I AM CURRENTLY THE VICE CHAIR OF THE NATIONAL APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE.

I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS, WHICH INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, TAX CREDIT, PROJECT BASED SECTION EIGHT, PUBLIC HOUSING, HUD TWO, 2024, PFC AND HFC ASSETS AS WELL.

WE WILL HAVE A PROFESSIONAL ON SITE MANAGEMENT AT THIS COMMUNITY SUMMITS CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS ARE BASED IN DALLAS AND ONLY NINE MILES FROM THE COMMUNITY WE'RE DISCUSSING.

AND BOTH OF OUR PRINCIPAL OWNERS, RICK AND RYAN, ALSO LIVE IN DALLAS AS WELL.

WE CURRENTLY HAVE APPROXIMATELY 13,000 UNITS OR 50 PROPERTIES WITHIN OUR PORTFOLIO.

SUMMIT HAS PROVEN EXPERIENCE MANAGING MULTIFAMILY COMMUNITIES, INCLUDING PROPERTIES WITH RENT RESTRICTIONS AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING THOSE STRUCTURED THROUGH PFC PARTNERSHIPS.

THIS EXPERIENCE MATTERS BECAUSE IT ENSURES THE ON SITE TEAM UNDERSTANDS BOTH THE OPERATIONAL SIDE OF PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF AFFORDABLE AND INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS CORRECTLY.

THE COMMUNITY WILL HAVE A DEDICATED ONSITE COMMUNITY MANAGER WHO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAY TO DAY OVERSIGHT.

RESIDENT COMMUNICATION BUILDING A POSITIVE RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT WHICH DOES INCLUDE SCHEDULING RESIDENCE EVENTS.

COMMUNITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES. BECAUSE STABLE HOUSING AND A SUPPORTIVE COMMUNITY DO GO HAND IN HAND, WE'LL ALSO HAVE ON SITE MAINTENANCE. SO ANY ISSUES THAT MIGHT ARISE MAY BE ADDRESSED QUICKLY, WHETHER IT'S A WORK ORDER OR AN URGENT REPAIR.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

DANIEL MASON.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DANIEL MARTIN, AND I'M THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF GOOD HOMES COMMUNITIES, THE PROJECT SPONSOR. I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE DALLAS PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION TO CONVERT A FORMER EXTENDED STAY HOTEL AT 6950

[03:55:02]

NORTH STEMMONS FREEWAY INTO A 142 UNIT WORKFORCE HOUSING COMMUNITY.

SINCE THE NOVEMBER COUNCIL MEETING, WE'VE TAKEN YOUR FEEDBACK SERIOUSLY.

WE STRENGTHEN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH AND MADE MEANINGFUL AFFORDABILITY IMPROVEMENTS WITH TRINITY PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND SUMMIT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.

WE HOSTED TWO OPEN HOUSES AT THE PROPERTY IN MID-DECEMBER.

TURNOUT WAS STRONG AND MANY NEIGHBORS SHARED POSITIVE FEEDBACK.

WE ALSO MET WITH WEST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH PROVIDED A LETTER OF SUPPORT.

ADDITIONALLY, WE PARTICIPATED AS A GUEST SPEAKER IN THE ARLINGTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS COMMUNITY EVENT IN DECEMBER AND SPONSORED A NEIGHBORHOOD BARBECUE LAST THURSDAY TO KEEP THE CONVERSATION GOING. FEEDBACK HAS BEEN POSITIVE, AND MANY RESIDENTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SEE THAT THE PROJECT WILL INCLUDE INCOME BASED RENT RESTRICTIONS. WE'VE MET WITH THE STEMMONS CORRIDOR BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, WHO WAS PLANNING TO SPEAK TODAY IN SUPPORT AND WERE AN ACTIVE DIALOG WITH MAJOR NEARBY EMPLOYERS, INCLUDING UT SOUTHWESTERN AND CHILDREN'S HEALTH, TO BETTER ALIGN THE PROJECT WITH THEIR WORKFORCE HOUSING NEEDS.

UT SOUTHWESTERN'S REAL ESTATE TEAM TOURED THE PROPERTY LAST MONTH AND CONFIRMED THAT THE PROPOSED PRICING FITS THE NEEDS OF MEDICAL STUDENTS AND STAFF WITH REGARDS TO AFFORDABILITY. 85% OF THE APARTMENTS WILL BE RESTRICTED, WELL ABOVE THE 50% AFFORDABILITY REQUIRED FOR A PFC PARTNERSHIP. UNITS WILL BE AFFORDABLE AT 80%, 60%, 50% AND 30% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME.

THIS IS THE DALLAS PFC FIRST DEAL TO INCORPORATE 30% AMI UNITS.

ADDITIONALLY, WE'RE NOW IMPLEMENTING AT LEAST A 10% DISCOUNT TO MARKET RATE RENTS ACROSS ALL THE AFFORDABLE UNITS.

THESE ENHANCEMENTS INCREASE THE PROJECT'S PUBLIC BENEFIT SCORE FROM 62% IN NOVEMBER TO 104% TODAY.

FROM A DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT, OUR PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY'S BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND WE ANTICIPATE COMPLETION BY JUNE OF THIS YEAR.

THIS ADAPTIVE REUSE PROJECT WILL DELIVER HOUSING AT DEEPLY AFFORDABLE LEVELS, MUCH FASTER THAN NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT IS NOT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE WITHOUT THE PFC PARTNERSHIP.

IN SHORT, THIS PROJECT WILL TRANSFORM AN UNOCCUPIED HOTEL INTO SAFE, ATTRACTIVE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR DALLAS WORKFORCE WHILE DELIVERING REAL AND LASTING BENEFITS FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.

MICHAEL SNYDER.

MICHAEL SNIJDERS. HE'S THE ONE THAT HE'S NOT.

HE'S NOT PRESENT. THANK YOU. THERE ARE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM, MR. MAYOR. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU HAVE A MOTION. MOVE TO DENY.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? MAYOR PRO TEM? YES. FIRST, I WANT TO THANK THE FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT AND THE THE PARTNERS THAT WENT OUT AND AND MET WITH THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

FIRST NOTE I WANT TO MAKE IS THAT WES LOVE DOES NOT REPRESENT, NOR DOES IT MAKE UP THE COMMUNITY THAT'S AN ADJACENT COMMUNITY.

AND THE COMMUNITY THAT IS BEING IMPACTED HAS NOT SENT A LETTER OF SUPPORT.

I BELIEVE THIS CONTINUES TO CONCENTRATE LOW INCOME UNITS IN AN AREA THAT ALREADY HAS ITS FAIR SHARE OF OF POVERTY.

AND THIS PROJECT IS NOT GOING TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND FOR THOSE REASONS, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE ITEM.

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN WEST. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DENY ITEM 30.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO BRING UP STAFF FROM THE PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION JUST TO GO OVER THE EVALUATION PROCESS AND JUST KIND OF UNDERSTAND SOME OF WHAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP TODAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN WEST. WE ALSO HAVE AARON AQUINO ONLINE WHO WILL PROBABLY BE. CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE LOUDER, PLEASE? YEAH. SORRY. SAM MCDANIEL, ASSISTANT GM. WE ALSO HAVE AARON ONLINE, AND HE'LL BE FIELDING A FAIR AMOUNT OF THESE QUESTIONS.

OKAY, SO THERE'S A MOTION TO DENY ON THE TABLE, AND BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS HAS GONE THROUGH AN EVALUATION PROCESS BY OUR COUNCIL APPOINTED PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION.

CAN YOU TALK US THROUGH THE EVALUATION OF THIS PROJECT, WHY YOU'RE RECOMMENDING SUPPORT AND WHAT FACTORS CAME INTO PLAY HERE? CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME AS WELL? YES. OKAY. SO THANK YOU.

[04:00:04]

COUNCIL MEMBERS. AARON QUINTAL, GENERAL MANAGER OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION.

THIS LIKE YOU SAID, CHAIRMAN WEST HAS GONE THROUGH EVALUATION BY THE PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION BOARD.

THEY SAW THE PROJECT ON. I MEAN, BASICALLY THE MERITS OF THE AFFORDABILITY THAT WE WERE ABLE TO REACH IN SUCH A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME IS REALLY WHAT STOOD OUT TO THE BOARD.

AS DANIEL MENTIONED EARLIER, WE'VE NEVER YET BEEN ABLE TO REACH THE LEVELS OF 30% AFFORDABILITY AND ANY PSC PROJECT TO DATE. I THINK JUST THE NATURE OF THE CONVERSION AND THE PURCHASE PRICE IS WHAT'S ALLOWING THAT TO HAPPEN.

AND I THINK THE BOARD SAW WHAT THEY VIEWED AS A A DECAYING SHORT TERM RENTAL PROPERTY, AND THEY SAW AN OPPORTUNITY TO TO TURN THIS INTO A LONG TERM, PERMANENT HOUSING OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY, WHILE CATALYZING MORE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TRANSFORMING AN ASSET THAT HAD THE POTENTIAL TO BECOME NOT NOT A DESIRABLE ASSET FOR FOR THAT COMMUNITY AND FOR THAT NEIGHBORING ARLINGTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD.

OKAY. ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WAS MADE IS THAT APPROVAL OF THIS PROPERTY WITH THESE INCOME LEVELS WOULD ADD TO THE CONSOLIDATION OF POVERTY.

CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? SO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS WHAT WE CALL A MIXED INCOME PROPERTY.

TYPICALLY, PFC PROJECTS ARE STRATIFIED BETWEEN 50% OF THEM AT MARKET RATE AND 50% OF THEM AT RESTRICTED RATES.

NOW WE DO REACH A MUCH DEEPER AFFORDABILITY LEVEL WITH THESE 50% AND 30% MI UNITS ON THIS PROPERTY.

BUT THERE WILL ALSO BE MARKET RATE UNITS HERE.

AND SO WE FEEL THAT THE MIXED INCOME STRATEGY HERE IS NOT GOING TO CONCENTRATE ONE LEVEL OF POVERTY, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, POVERTY IS DEFINED BY HUD AS ANYTHING UNDER 30% UPPER INCOME AREA MEDIAN INCOME.

AND SO HERE HAVING THESE MULTIPLE LEVELS OF INCOME STRATIFIED ACROSS THE PROPERTY DILUTES THAT CONCENTRATION IN THIS PROJECT.

CAN YOU ADDRESS THE PUBLIC BENEFIT ANALYSIS JUST AT A HIGH LEVEL AND EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS AND AND HOW THIS SCORED ON THAT.

SURE. SO BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE EACH OF THESE PROJECTS HERE TO COUNCIL FOR YOUR ANALYSIS AND THEN FOR YOUR APPROVAL BECAUSE WE TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TAX EXEMPTION. RIGHT. AND SO IF THE PFC IS GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN A PARTNERSHIP WITH THIS DEVELOPER, THAT MEANS THAT WE WILL BE PROVIDING THEM A TAX EXEMPTION IF WE CLOSE ON THE PROPERTY.

AND SO THAT IS ITS DISSEMINATED DOWN INTO WHAT WE CALL A PUBLIC BENEFIT ANALYSIS.

AND SO WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT WE TAKE THE TAXES THAT ARE CURRENTLY COLLECTED FROM THE PROPERTY, AND WE COMPARE WHAT WE CALL THE PUBLIC BENEFIT TO THOSE THOSE AMOUNTS OF TAXES THAT ARE FOREGONE.

AND SO HERE ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, WE WERE ABLE TO ACHIEVE OVER 100% RETURN ON THOSE TAXES INVESTED.

AND SO THAT'S EVEN INCLUDING A 90% LEVEL OF OF RENT DISCOUNTS.

AND SO THAT TELLS US THAT THE MAJORITY OF THIS PUBLIC BENEFIT IS TIED UP IN RENTAL DISCOUNTS TO THE RESIDENTS AT THIS PROPERTY.

ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT I HEARD STATED BY THE SPEAKERS, AND I SEE IN THE LETTER FROM THE STEMMONS CORRIDOR BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, WHICH WROTE IN SUPPORT, IS THAT THIS PROPERTY HAS SUFFERED CURRENTLY AS THE SHORT TERM HOTEL FROM CRIME AND BLIGHT.

DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OF THAT OR IS THAT JUST DO WE JUST TAKE THAT AT FACE VALUE? HOW DO WE HOW DO WE FACTOR THAT INTO OUR DECISION? YOU KNOW, I'M SURE WE CAN PULL SOME CRIME STATISTICS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, ANECDOTALLY, WE TRUST WHAT THE NEIGHBORS AND THE SURROUNDING BUSINESSES HAVE SAID.

AND I'VE DRIVEN THE PROPERTY MYSELF. IT'S A LITTLE SCARY TO GET ON SITE.

IT'S PROBABLY NOT SOMEWHERE THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND HANGING OUT.

BUT AGAIN, THAT'S THAT'S ANECDOTAL. THAT'S THAT'S NOT HARD DATA.

I DON'T HAVE THAT WITH YOU, BUT I CAN DEFINITELY GET SOME MORE STATISTICS ON THAT IF YOU GUYS PREFER.

AND I KNOW WE'VE BEEN ASKING AS A COUNCIL FOR THIS DEEP AFFORDABILITY TO COME IN, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE CAN MIX IT WITH MARKET RATE.

THE NOTES I HAVE HERE THAT THIS INCLUDES SEVEN UNITS AT THE 30%, AMI, 14 AT THE 50%, AMI 64 UNITS AT THE 60% AMI, AND THEN THE REST ARE EITHER MARKET RATE OR 80%.

DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. BASED ON THESE

[04:05:09]

FACTORS, I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.

AND I WOULD I WOULD SUPPORT A MOTION TO APPROVE WHEN APPROPRIATE.

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

THANK YOU. SO THIS LOOKS LIKE A FAMILIAR SIGHT THAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT RECENTLY.

IS THAT CORRECT OR ARE WE OKAY? SO I'M JUST. AND I DON'T KNOW WHO THE BEST PERSON TO POSE THIS TO WOULD BE, BUT I'M. I'M WONDERING WHAT THIS WILL BECOME IF IT IS NOT WHAT THIS IS BECAUSE THESE SHORT TERM STAY.

HOTELS AND THEN SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE AROUND HERE.

I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S JUST A, YOU KNOW, WE CAN MAKE A DECISION HERE THAT IS POTENTIALLY GOING TO SEND THIS IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION OR STATUS QUO. AND THAT'S MY CONCERN.

SO, I MEAN, I WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING, BUT I ALSO WANT TO BE REALISTIC ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN HERE IF WE DIDN'T MAKE THIS MOVE.

YEAH, THAT. THAT'S RIGHT. COULD YOU PULL THAT.

IT WOULD IT WOULD MOST LIKELY. I'M GOING TO INVITE THE DEVELOPER TO COME DOWN AND SPEAK MORE TO IT.

BUT THE PLAN WOULD BE TO TO PUT IT BACK ON THE MARKET AND, AND SELL IT TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER.

SO, I MEAN. OKAY. SO, I MEAN, YOU SELL IT, BUT WHAT I MEAN, AND SO WE WAIT FOR IT TO BECOME MARKET RATE IS THAT.

GO AHEAD AND JUMP IN. WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE THROUGH THIS.

SURE. THANK YOU. DANIEL MARTIN WITH GOOD HOMES.

OUR PLAN, IF THIS PFC DEAL IS NOT APPROVED, IS TO SELL IT.

MOST LIKELY TO ANOTHER HOTEL. MOTEL OWNER. OPERATOR.

SO WHAT DO YOU BASE THAT INFORMATION ON? BECAUSE THE ECONOMICS OF THE DEAL ARE NOT VIABLE.

WITH THE COST TO CONVERT THE PROPERTY TO A APARTMENT COMMUNITY.

AND IT REQUIRES THE PFC PARTNERSHIP IN ORDER TO BE ECONOMICALLY VIABLE.

DEAL. OKAY, LET ME ASK MR. AARON, ARE YOU ON THERE? YES. ABOUT I MEAN, THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION AROUND THE CONCENTRATION OF CERTAIN INCOME LEVELS.

CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT ABOUT KIND OF WHAT THE MAKEUP IS RIGHT NOW? RIGHT. SO WE HAVE SEVEN UNITS AT 30%. CAN YOU SPEAK UP, PLEASE? NO, I MEAN THE THE MAKEUP OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND IT BECAUSE I SEE SOME SINGLE FAMILY YOU KNOW, ALL AROUND THAT. CORRECT. SAM, DO WE HAVE NUMBERS ON THE POVERTY AREA IN THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY? THIS IS ONE OF THE 20% OR GREATER POVERTY TRACTS.

23.3%? 23.3%, TO BE PRECISE. SO THIS IS KIND OF WHERE THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT IS ASKING US TO FOCUS WITH THE CURRENT POLICY DISCUSSIONS. THEY'RE ASKING YOU TO FOCUS ON AREAS LIKE THIS FOR PROJECTS LIKE THIS.

IN THE MOST RECENT DRAFT THAT I'VE SEEN THAT YES, THAT'S THAT IS CORRECT.

AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT EVEN CHANGING THAT NUMBER.

THERE HAS BEEN DISCUSSIONS AROUND THAT. I HAVEN'T BEEN A PART OF THEM.

AARON MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK MORE TO THAT. OR POSSIBLY SOMEONE FROM THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS, I THINK THE IDEA HERE FROM THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT IS THAT SINCE THE PFC PROJECTS HAVE THESE MIXED INCOME STRATEGIES, IT DOESN'T CONCENTRATE LARGE NUMBERS OF VERY POOR INDIVIDUALS IN ONE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

IT SPREADS IT OUT ACROSS DIFFERENT INCOME STRATIFICATIONS.

AND SO THE IDEA IS THAT YOU WILL DILUTE THE CURRENT CONCENTRATION OF POVERTY BY BRINGING IN FOLKS ABOVE THAT LEVEL WHILE STILL PROVIDING AFFORDABILITY TO THOSE WHO ARE AT THOSE LOWER INCOME LEVELS.

OKAY. AND THAT'S ONE THING. THIS ISN'T AN HFC PROJECT THAT HAS A MUCH LOWER INCOME STRATA.

I MEAN, THIS FORCES THE MARKET RATE 50% OF IT.

CORRECT. SO THE IDEA IS THAT AS THE MARKET AND AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTINUES TO DEVELOP AND THE RENTAL PRICES SLOWLY RISE, THE THOSE WHO ARE RENTING AT THOSE LOWER INCOME LEVELS WILL BE PROTECTED FROM A METEORIC RISE AT OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY OF SEEING, WHILE STILL ALLOWING A RISE IN THOSE MARKET RENTS.

AND THOSE WHO WANT TO LIVE IN THIS AREA AND WHO CAN PAY MARKET RATE.

WELL, I MEAN, AS I LOOK AT THIS CORRIDOR, I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE HAVING SOME MARKET, NEW PRODUCT MARKET RATE WOULD START TO TAKE IT THE RIGHT

[04:10:04]

DIRECTION. YOU DON'T ALWAYS JUST JUMP RIGHT TO MARKET RATE HERE.

SO I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE IDEA OF ANOTHER HOTEL PROPERTY COMING IN HERE AND THE NATURE OF WHAT IT WOULD BE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA.

AND I I MEAN, THAT'S JUST CONCERNING. SO I THINK I'M INCLINED TO BE MORE SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROJECT, BECAUSE WE NEED HOUSING AND IT'S NOT HFC, IT'S PFC.

SO THAT'S THAT'S, YOU KNOW, BRINGING IN WHAT WE HOPE TO MOVE IT TO AT SOME POINT.

BUT SOMETIMES YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE THAT INTERIM STEP. SO I, I DON'T I WON'T SUPPORT THE MOTION.

IS THERE, MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DENY ITEM 30.

THANK YOU. OKAY, SO I'M HAVING I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

I GUESS IT WAS SAID THAT AROUND THE SURROUNDING THIS, THERE WAS ALREADY A IT'S A LOW POPULATION OR LOW POVERTY TRACK, RIGHT? CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT IS ADJACENT TO THIS PARCEL OF LAND? IT'S PRIMARILY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND IS. AND I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF LIKE, WHAT IS THE MEDIAN INCOME THERE? DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME IS WOULD NOT SUBTRACT.

BECAUSE I SEE A SLEEPY HOLLOW DRIVE RECORD CROSSING THAT.

I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE DYNAMICS IN THIS AREA ECONOMICALLY? ECONOMIC DYNAMICS. YES. SO BECAUSE IT WAS SAID THAT WE'RE ADDING MORE POVERTY OR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THE AREA.

AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND I'M TRYING TO RECONCILE THAT, GIVE YOU A FEEL OF THE AREA.

RIGHT. IT'S BY THE MEDICAL DISTRICT. YES. SO YOU HAVE SOME OF THE LARGEST NON-CITY EMPLOYERS IN THAT AREA.

YOU HAVE UT SOUTHWESTERN AND SOUTHWESTERN AIRLINES THERE AND ALL THE HOSPITAL NETWORK IN THAT AREA.

THERE IS INSUFFICIENT HOUSING. THERE'S AN ABUNDANCE OF HOTEL MOTELS THAT ARE UNDERPERFORMING THE AVERAGE 50% OCCUPANCY.

SO YOU HAVE AN OVERSUPPLY OF HOTEL MOTELS AND NOT ENOUGH PLACES FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THE MEDICAL DISTRICT TO LIVE.

AND SO WHAT IS THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT SLEEPY HOLLOW RECORD CROSSING? SURE. SO THE ZIP CODE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN.

75235 THE AREA THE MEDIAN INCOME IN 2023 WAS ABOUT 60,000.

OKAY, BUT THAT DOESN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT WHAT IS THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT THANK YOU. THAT WAS THE OTHER QUESTION. THAT WAS YOUR EARLIER QUESTION. WHAT WAS THE NEW QUESTION? WERE SLEEPY HOLLOW RECORD CROSSING AND THOSE ARE SINGLE FAMILY.

WHAT IS THAT? WHAT CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS THE ARLINGTON PARK COMMUNITY.

OKAY, SO THAT'S ARLINGTON PARK, AND THAT HAS A 60,000.

THAT'S THE MEDIAN INCOME THERE, ROUGHLY. YES.

AND THEN I BELIEVE WE HAVE A PROPERTY SOMEWHERE AROUND IN HERE THEN THAT'S NORTH.

SO WHAT ELSE IS AROUND IT? I'M TRYING TO BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, THERE SEEMS TO BE, YOU KNOW, A RAILROAD STEMMONS.

AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS IS IS IT THE HOTELS THAT'S CREATING THIS? WHAT HAS BEEN SAID. I GUESS YOU SAID IT WAS ADDING MORE, CONCENTRATING POVERTY.

I'M TRYING TO RECONCILE THAT STATEMENT WITH WHAT'S REALLY HERE.

I THINK WHAT'S NOT MOTIVATED DEVELOPERS TO BUILD IS THAT THE MARKET RATE RENTS DON'T SUPPORT NEW CONSTRUCTION CURRENTLY, AND THERE ARE TREMENDOUS EMPLOYERS THERE AT THE MOMENT.

IT'S ONE OF THE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE LARGEST EMPLOYERS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS ARE THERE IN THE MEDICAL CENTER. SO YOU HAVE ACROSS THE STREET A GAS STATION, YOU HAVE THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, YOU HAVE A PARK, AND YOU HAVE A SCHOOL THAT ARE BETWEEN US AND THE MEDICAL AND A REC CENTER.

OKAY. AND SO NOW BACK TO YOUR STRATUS FOR ALL THE VARIOUS LEVELS OF, OF OCCUPANTS, I MEAN, YOUR MARKET RATE IS 15%. SO YOU DO HAVE MARKET RATE IN THERE, AND THEN IT'S LOOKING LIKE 36 OF THOSE IS 80%.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND THEN AND THEN 64. SO YOU'RE ABOUT 90 100 OF THE 142 ARE GOING TO BE THE 60 TO 80.

AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT IS THE THOSE ARE USUALLY FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE WORKING IN THE HOSPITAL? THAT'S CORRECT. SO TO GIVE YOU CONTEXT, WE MET WITH UT SOUTHWESTERN.

THEY SENT THEIR REAL ESTATE TEAM. WE TOURED WITH THEM, AND THEY CONFIRMED THAT THE 50 AND 60% AMI RESTRICTED UNITS WOULD BE A PERFECT FIT FOR THEIR MEDICAL STUDENTS AND STAFF. THEY WOULD QUALIFY FOR THOSE UNITS AND WERE PROXIMATE ENOUGH THAT THEY WOULD.

WE'RE ENGAGING IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM TO MASTER LEASE UNITS, AND THEY'RE VERY INTERESTED TO HOUSE THEIR STUDENTS AND STAFF AT THIS PROPERTY.

OKAY. AND THEN YOU MENTIONED, I GUESS, GUNNER, YOU WERE HIRED TO DO COMMUNITY OUTREACH.

[04:15:06]

YES, MA'AM. CAN CAN YOU FEEL LIKE I MEAN, I'VE DONE COMMUNITY OUTREACH, BUT TELL ME WHAT YOU DID.

YEAH. SO I THINK SOME OF THE FEEDBACK I WASN'T ON BOARD WITH GOOD HOMES BEFORE THE NOVEMBER MEETING WHEN YOU ALL DECIDED ON THE DEFERRAL.

WAS THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT, SIGNIFICANT GAP IN COMMUNITY OUTREACH, SPECIFICALLY WITH THE ARLINGTON PARK COMMUNITY.

WHICH IS THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WE OPENED THE PROPERTY UP TWO TIMES IN DECEMBER FOR MULTI-HOUR COMMUNITY MEETINGS FOR PEOPLE TO DROP BY AND JUST GET TO KNOW US. DEBBIE WAS THERE AND HER TEAM WAS THERE FROM SUMMIT.

DANIEL AND HIS TEAM WERE THERE AND MYSELF WHAT WE DID IN THOSE SESSIONS WERE JUST WALK PEOPLE AROUND THE PROPERTY, TALKED ABOUT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, TALKED ABOUT THE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY. AND WE HAD POSITIVE INTERACTIONS WITH EVERYONE.

WE WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY THEN TO COUNCILMAN MORENO OFFICE GAVE US THE CONTACT INFO OF THE TWO COMMUNITY LEADERS THERE THAT KIND OF RUN THE COMMUNITY CYGWIN.

TYLER AND MELANIE GAMBLE, THEY INVITED US TO SPEAK IN DECEMBER AT THEIR COMMUNITY THE KIND OF MEETING AT THE REC CENTER.

WE SPENT PROBABLY 12, 15 MINUTES, TOPS, SPEAKING ABOUT THE PROJECT AND ANSWERING QUESTIONS.

THERE WAS NO SIGNIFICANT FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY.

IT VOCALIZED US. DANIEL STAYED AFTER AND MET ONE ON ONE WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS, ONE ON ONE.

I KEPT THE CONVERSATION GOING WITH WITH MELANIE.

I WENT LAST THURSDAY. GOOD HOMES WAS NICE ENOUGH TO CATER BARBECUE FOR THE COMMUNITY MEETING IN JANUARY, SO I WENT. DANIEL DIDN'T COME DOWN, BUT I WENT AS WELL AS SOME MEMBERS FROM SUMMIT CAME AND JUST SAT, ANSWERED QUESTIONS, TALKED ONE ON ONE WITH THE COMMUNITY, MET WITH MISS TYLER AGAIN, MET WITH MISS MISS GAMBLE AGAIN, AND JUST TALKED ABOUT THINGS. WE'D LOVE TO HAVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT.

MY LAST EMAIL FROM BOTH OF THEM SAYS, FINGERS CROSSED.

HOPE THIS GETS DONE. BUT THEY WERE NOT. REPEAT THAT THE LAST EMAIL I HAVE FROM THEM YESTERDAY SAID FINGERS CROSSED, HOPE THIS GETS DONE. THEY JUST WEREN'T COMFORTABLE.

THEY SAID AT THIS TIME THEY HAD NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO, YOU KNOW, REALLY COMMUNICATE TO THEIR WHOLE COMMUNITY EVERYTHING THEY JUST SAID.

YOU KNOW, THEY SENT ME AN EMAIL LATE MONDAY NIGHT.

WE'VE BEEN EXCHANGING EMAILS AND CALLS THE LAST WEEK ABOUT A LETTER, AND I GOT AN EMAIL LATE MONDAY NIGHT SAYING, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKE TO SEE THIS GET DONE, BUT WE CAN'T WRITE A LETTER RIGHT NOW.

BUT FINGERS CROSSED ON TUESDAY IS WHAT THEY TOLD ME.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THEM. ACTIVE CONVERSATIONS.

YOU KNOW, GOOD HOMES HAS MADE COMMITMENTS TO CONTINUE TO ENGAGE WITH THE COMMUNITY PRODUCTIVELY AND BE A POSITIVE NEIGHBOR.

AND JUST TO PIGGYBACK OFF THAT, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THE CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I HAD WAS THEY'RE VERY EXCITED TO SEE DOLLARS BEING INVESTED IN THIS PROPERTY. AND ONE OF THE POINTS OF FEEDBACK THAT CAME UP IN THE COMMUNITY MEETING ON DECEMBER 17TH WAS, THEY WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE RENT RESTRICTED UNITS HERE.

AND I EXPLAINED TO THEM THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE PFC PARTNERSHIP COMMITS US TO.

AND LASTLY, IT WAS A REQUEST FROM MELANIE GAMBLE AND TYLER THAT WE PAY FOR THE PARK FEES FOR SOME OF THE CHILDREN, AND WE HAVE AGREED TO THAT. OKAY.

SO I GUESS JUST TO CLARIFY, DALLAS PARKS AND REC SOMETIMES HAS SUMMER FEES FOR STUDENTS.

AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT GOOD HOMES HAS SAID, YOU KNOW, WE'D LOVE TO KIND OF PARTNER WITH YOU ALL ON WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, DO YOU CAN YOU DISCLOSE HOW MUCH? OVER $3 MILLION. SO YOU'RE PLANNING TO INVEST $3 MILLION IN THIS HOTEL? YES. DO WE HAVE ANY CODE VIOLATIONS OR IS THERE ANY DPD ARE THEY A NUISANCE PROPERTY OR OF SUCH? SO CHARLIE, WHO RUNS. SHE'S THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE STEMMONS BUSINESS CORRIDOR ASSOCIATION.

SHE ACTUALLY BROUGHT OFFICERS FROM DPD NORTHWEST TO TOUR THE PROPERTY WITH DANIEL'S TEAM.

AND IT WAS A VERY POSITIVE MEETING. AND THEY SAID, YEAH, THIS IS A PROPERTY WHERE CRIME, SEX WORK, YOU KNOW, DRUG DEALING AND BLIGHT HAPPENS. THEY DON'T WE DON'T HAVE ANY DATA, THOUGH.

YEAH. AND TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHY THAT HAPPENS AT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, THE NATURE OF AN EXTENDED STAY ASSET IS A TRANSIENT BY NATURE.

YOU SHOW UP, YOU PAY $90, YOU CAN STAY THERE.

SO THE TYPE OF CRIME THAT HAPPENS AT THIS PROPERTY IS BREAK INS, DRUG DEALING, SEX WORK, THAT SORT OF THING.

AND THERE'S NO SCREENING PROCESS. I THINK WHAT DEBBIE WAS ALLUDING TO AND PART OF HER RESPONSIBILITIES AS A PROPERTY MANAGER IS ANYTIME AN APPLICANT COMES FORTH, SHE VERIFIES THEIR INCOME, THAT THEY QUALIFY FOR THAT UNIT AND DOES A BACKGROUND SCREENING, WHICH NO ONE WHO'S A CONVICTED FELON OR A SEX OFFENDER WOULD QUALIFY BASED ON THEIR SCREENING PROCESSES.

[04:20:03]

SO I THINK TURNING IT FROM A TRANSIENT PROPERTY INTO A FULL TIME RESIDENCY IS A BIG BENEFIT TO THIS COMMUNITY, BECAUSE THOSE TYPES OF BAD ACTORS WILL BE REJECTED FROM STAYING HERE.

DO WE HAVE ANY DATA ON WHAT HAS GONE? WHAT GOES ON IN THIS? I HAVE A VIDEO ON MY PHONE THAT I RECEIVED. I'M ASKING MY STAFF TO I'M HEARING.

YES. AND I'M HEARING. SO I'M TRYING TO GET WHAT WHAT WHAT IS A REAL PICTURE OF ACTIVITY IN THIS AREA? WE WE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS, WE HAD TALKED TO THE HOTEL OWNER, AND WE BECAUSE I WENT TO TOUR WITH STAFF AND AND THEY MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE RECEIVING COP CALLS AND PUTTING THEM IN THEMSELVES ON A FAIRLY REGULAR BASIS.

THAT COPS WERE THERE. IT WAS JUST IN AN AREA THAT WAS VERY EASY TO HOP ON A HIGHWAY AND GET OUT OF THERE IF SOMETHING WENT WRONG.

SO WELL, THAT'S CONVENIENT FOR A SO THERE IS THERE IS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY HAPPENING.

CORRECT. YOU CAN'T CAN YOU CAN YOU QUANTIFY IT? I CANNOT AT THIS POINT IN TIME. BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT WITH THE $3 MILLION INVESTMENT IN HAVING, YOU KNOW, FOLKS THAT ARE WORKING, THAT MAYBE THERE'LL BE A DECREASE OR THERE SHOULD BE A DECREASE IN, I GUESS WITH YOUR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, YOU'LL MAKE SURE OF THAT. YES.

AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE'RE GOING TO BE INVESTING IN A NEW SECURITY SYSTEM.

SO THAT'S CAMERAS THAT'S ACCESS PART OF THE 3 MILLION OR IS THAT OKAY.

THAT'S PART OF IT. AND THAT COSTS OVER $100,000.

JUST THE CAMERAS ITSELF AND THE ACCESS CONTROL.

SO YOU CAN'T ENTER INTO ANY OF THE BUILDINGS WITHOUT HAVING A FOB.

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

THANK YOU. COULD YOU JUST REMIND ME ON THE THE ECONOMICS OF THE DEAL? THIS IS A PFC PROJECT. SO? SO YOU ALL ARE BUYING THE PROPERTY, YOU'RE LEASING IT, YOU'RE GIVING IT TO PFC TO TAKE OVER.

YOU ALL ARE LEASING IT BACK FROM PFC FOR 75 YEARS.

YOU GET A TAX CREDIT, YOU GET I MEAN, TAX BENEFITS.

NO TAX ABATEMENTS FOR 75 YEARS. THE LEASE TERM IS FOR 75 YEARS.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE TAX ABATEMENT. THE PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT IS 60 YEARS.

IS SIX YEARS. 60, 60, 60 YEARS. YES, SIR. 60 YEARS.

AND HOW MANY AND AND ARE YOU GETTING? HOW ARE YOU PAYING FOR THE PROPERTY? YOU'RE GETTING TAX CREDITS? NO. SO WE CURRENTLY OWN THE PROPERTY.

WE PURCHASED IT IN DECEMBER AND IT'S 100% FUNDED WITH PRIVATE CAPITAL.

SO IT'S ALL. SO YOU BOUGHT IT ALL CASH PRIVATE CAPITAL EQUITY OR YOU BOUGHT.

DID YOU BORROW. DID YOU DO BORROWINGS. WE HAVE A 60% LOAN TO COST LOAN FROM A PRIVATE REAL ESTATE INVESTOR FOR? FOR HOW LONG OF A PERIOD. IT IS A THREE YEAR TERM WITH TWO ONE YEAR EXTENSIONS.

THIS IS A BRIDGE LOAN. IT TAKES US THROUGH THE ACQUISITION, THE RENOVATION, THE LEASE UP.

ONCE WE'RE FULLY LEASED, WE WILL REFINANCE WITH A GOVERNMENT AGENCY, FANNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC OR A DIFFERENT TYPE OF LONG TERM PERMANENT FINANCING.

AND SO, SO THE YOU'RE NOT USING TAX CREDIT SITUATIONS THEN? THAT'S CORRECT. AND BUT YOU ARE ASKING FOR A 60 YEAR TAX ABATEMENT ON THE PROJECT, WHICH IS WHAT THE DEAL WOULD REQUIRE ECONOMICALLY TO BE A VIABLE INVESTMENT. AND 3 MILLION. THIS IS HOW MANY UNITS.

142. SO YOU'RE BASICALLY LOOKING AT 20,000 A UNIT FOR 3 MILLION BUCKS, GIVE OR TAKE, IF THAT'S THE MATH.

YES. THE 3 MILLION BUCKS IS WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING INTO IT.

WELL, THAT'S JUST THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, RIGHT? WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY FOR $12 MILLION. THAT'S WHAT.

THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THIS. THERE'S RESERVES REQUIRED FOR THE INTEREST FOR THE OPERATING RESERVE.

SO THE FULLY LOADED BUDGET IS WAY MORE THAN THE $3 MILLION.

SO YOU BOUGHT IT ABOUT 100,000 A UNIT, PLUS OR MINUS? YES. WITH WHEN YOU WHEN YOU'RE ALL IN. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. MISS CADENA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR AARON. IF HE'S STILL ON.

YES, I'M STILL ON. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS IS A CONVERSION.

IT'S NOT A NEW BUILD, RIGHT? YES. AND CONVERSION IN THE SENSE THAT IT WILL BE FROM ONE USE TO A DIFFERENT USE.

OKAY. AND THEN ARE PFC PROJECTS USUALLY NEW BUILDS OR ARE THEY CONVERSIONS? IS THIS TYPICAL? THIS THIS IS ATYPICAL. THIS IS THIS IS A VERY ATYPICAL PRODUCT.

[04:25:03]

WE HAVE NEVER DONE A CONVERSION SUCH AS THIS.

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A BRAND NEW CONSTRUCTION ON A GREEN PIECE OF LAND.

SO THIS WILL BE A FIRST FOR THE PFC AS WELL. OKAY.

THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BECAUSE I'VE BEEN.

I'M. I'M LOOKING ON. YOU KNOW, I LOVE GOOGLE EARTH.

SO I'M LOOKING ON HERE, AND I'VE JUST KIND OF BEEN AROUND THIS AREA, AND I LOOK, I SEE, YOU KNOW, NOT TOO FAR. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE DISTANCE IS, BUT THERE'S A CROWNE PLAZA DALLAS MARKET RIGHT UP THE STREET.

THERE'S A COMFORT INN AND SUITES RIGHT UP THE STREET FROM THERE.

AND THEN YOU HAVE THIS EXTENDED STAY PLACE. AND I THINK THERE MAY BE ANOTHER APARTMENT UNIT NOT TOO FAR FROM THERE.

AND TYPICALLY WHEN WE DO THESE PFC PROJECTS AND WE APPROVE THEM, IT'S MEANT TO STIR ADDITIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN AND AROUND THE AREA.

NOT THAT YOU ALL HAVE THE MASTER PLAN OR VISION FOR THAT, BUT IF SOMEBODY, AARON OR OR PERHAPS YOU ALL COULD SPEAK TO, WHAT DO YOU SEE THE INTENDED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL COME FROM APPROVING A PROJECT LIKE THIS IN AND AROUND THAT AREA? WHAT TYPE OF OPPORTUNITIES EITHER FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, WHAT DOES THAT WHAT TYPE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DOES IT? DOES IT SPUR? YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER GRACEY.

SO THIS PROJECT IS INTENDED TO REALLY MESH IN WITH A GREATER MOVEMENT IN THIS, THIS AREA OF TOWN.

I'VE SEEN A LOT OF INTEREST FROM A LOT OF DEVELOPERS TRYING TO CONTACT ME FOR BOTH HFC, PFC PROJECTS, AND YOU SEE SOME MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENT COMING ON.

I KNOW JUST TO THE NORTH, THERE'S A THERE'S A NEWER, LARGE DEVELOPMENT THAT THAT JUST GOT FINISHED IN THE LAST YEAR OR SO AND WE HAVE SEEN A LARGE INTEREST IN THIS AREA OF TOWN SURROUNDING THAT MOCKINGBIRD LANE CORRIDOR, JUST BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION.

RIGHT? IT'S IT'S VERY CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN. IT'S VERY ACCESSIBLE TO THE LOVE AIRPORT.

AND SO DEVELOPERS RIGHT NOW ARE SHOWING A LOT OF INTEREST IN TRYING TO GET SOMETHING DONE AROUND THIS AREA.

NOW FOR OUR OUR DEVELOPER HERE, MR. MARTIN, THIS IS IS A DIFFICULT PROJECT TO DO WITHOUT THE PARTNERSHIP OF THE PFC, JUST BECAUSE OF THE AFFORDABILITY THAT HE IS TRYING TO IMPLEMENT INTO THIS PROPERTY.

JUST THE THE EXISTING BUILDING ITSELF AND WHAT'S CONSTRUCTED THAT LENDS ITSELF TO A CONVERSION TO MULTIFAMILY.

BUT LIKE YOU SAID, COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF INTEREST IN THE GREATER SURROUNDING AREA FOR A LOT OF REDEVELOPMENT.

AND I THINK OVER THE NEXT 5 OR 10 YEARS, THIS AREA WILL LOOK A LOT DIFFERENT COMPARED TO TODAY.

AND I'M GOING TO I KNOW SHE'S PROBABLY MY COLLEAGUE MAY ASK IT, BUT I'M GOING TO ASK IT TO JUST IN CASE IF THERE'S ALREADY AN INTEREST IN THE AREA.

FROM AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, IS THIS NECESSARY TO TO TO SPUR THAT ON? AND THAT'S TO EITHER EITHER ONE OF Y'ALL. YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S PRETTY SUBJECTIVE.

BUT IN MY OPINION, I FEEL LIKE IF YOU DON'T TAKE ACTION EARLY ENOUGH TO PRESERVE AFFORDABILITY IN THESE AREAS OF HIGH INTEREST OF REDEVELOPMENT, IT'S OFTEN TOO LATE, AND IT'S REALLY A LOT HARDER TO GO BACK AND ADD AFFORDABILITY INTO AN AREA THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN GENTRIFIED THAN IT IS TO PRESERVE AFFORDABILITY IN AN AREA THAT IS IS GOING TO EXPERIENCE THAT. OKAY.

AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION IS REALLY JUST ABOUT THE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

I SEE THIS WHOLE COMMUNITY. I THINK YOU SAID IT'S ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, THIS SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT THERE.

WHAT ARE THEY SAYING ABOUT WHAT COULD BE WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT VERSUS WHAT WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW? WE KNOW THE CRIME, AND I'M SENSITIVE TO THESE TYPE OF MOTELS AND THINGS AND WHAT THEY DO TO THE COMMUNITY.

SO WHAT ARE THEY SAYING? OR HAVE WE HAD ANY FEEDBACK FROM THEM IN TERMS OF WHAT'S RIGHT THERE NOW VERSUS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED? SURE. WHEN WE HAD THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH MEETINGS ON SITE AT WHAT WAS THE SONESTA AND NOW IS HOPEFULLY WILL BE THE NORA THE NUMBER ONE THING IN TERMS OF CRITICAL FEEDBACK WE GOT WAS CAN SENIORS LIVE HERE? AND OF COURSE, THE ANSWER IS YES. YOU KNOW, WE RECOGNIZE A LOT OF SENIORS ARE ON A FIXED INCOME.

AND YOU KNOW, DANIELS EVEN TALKED TO HIS MARKETING TEAM ABOUT PUTTING TOGETHER, YOU KNOW, A CAMPAIGN REACHING OUT TO SENIORS. OF COURSE, WE CANNOT DISCRIMINATE.

THEY CANNOT DISCRIMINATE. YOU KNOW, AND HOLDING UNITS BACK FOR A SPECIFIC AGE GROUP.

BUT THAT WAS THE NUMBER ONE THING WE HEARD. THE OTHER THING WAS JUST, YEAH, CRIME, THE BLIGHT, THE THE TRANSIENT POPULATION OF PEOPLE JUST HANGING AROUND THE PROPERTY OUTSIDE IN FRONT OF IT.

PEOPLE NOTICE THAT THERE IS A PHYSICAL KIND OF YOU HAVE TO GET ON RECORD CROSSING TO GET INTO ARLINGTON PARK AND TO GET TO, TO THIS SITE, AND THERE'S ONLY ONE ENTRANCE INTO IT.

SO I THINK THEY WERE EXCITED ABOUT DANIEL'S PLANS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF SECURITY.

[04:30:06]

PERFECT. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

OH, I'M SO GLAD TO TALK ABOUT MY FAVORITE SUBJECT, FCS.

HEY, COLLEAGUES, $16.8 MILLION. DO YOU THINK WE NEED THAT IN OUR GENERAL FUND? OR SHOULD WE GIVE THIS AS AN ABATEMENT FOR SOMETHING THAT WILL BE CREATED, WHETHER WE GIVE IT MONEY OR NOT? BECAUSE, I DON'T KNOW, WE'RE HAVING SOME PASSIONATE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT LIBRARIES, ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY, FACILITY MAINTENANCE, STREETS, ALLEYS, SIDEWALKS, TRAFFIC SIGNALS SERVING THE HOMELESS EVEN DURING INCLEMENT WEATHER.

KEEPING OUR REC CENTERS OPEN. HOME REPAIR PROGRAMS. I PROBABLY DON'T NEED TO GO ON. I THINK YOU GET IT.

60 YEARS OF TAX ABATEMENT OF FUNDING THAT WOULD BE COMING TO WHATEVER COUNCIL'S HERE TO SERVE THE CITY'S NEEDS.

ARE WE REALLY GIVING IT UP FOR SO FEW AFFORDABLE UNITS? I THINK THAT IS VERY PROBLEMATIC. WE HAVE MANY, MANY TOOLS AVAILABLE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS A VERY CHALLENGING ONE, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET PRESSURE WE'RE UNDER.

SO I WILL NOT BE VOTING FOR THIS. AND MAYOR, PLEASE, I REQUEST A RECORD VOTE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION TO DENY ITEM 30.

THANK YOU. MAYOR AND I, I ACTUALLY HAVE THE CRIME AND 311 REPORTS COMING INTO THE CHAMBER HERE MOMENTARILY WHICH WILL SHOW YOU THAT THIS AREA IS NOT HEAVILY TARGETED BY BY BLIGHT AND CRIME.

THIS IS AN AREA I'VE SUPPORTED EVERY PFC AND HFC THAT HAS COME THROUGH HERE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S AN APPROPRIATE AREA, AN AREA THAT WE NEED TO STABILIZE AN AREA THAT IS BECOMING TO UNATTAINABLE FOR OTHERS.

BUT THE REALITY IS THAT THIS AREA DOES NOT MEET THOSE SAME CRITERIAS THAT I'VE SUPPORTED ON PREVIOUS PROJECTS.

CAN YOU REMIND ME WHAT THE PURCHASE AMOUNT WAS? THE PURCHASE AMOUNT WAS ABOUT $12 MILLION. OKAY.

AND WHAT'S THE MARKET VALUE? THAT'S A VERY SUBJECTIVE QUESTION, BUT WHAT WE PAID FOR IT WOULD BE THE DEFINITION OF A MARKET VALUE.

SO TO DCAD HAD SUBJECTIVE MARKET VALUE IS $8 MILLION.

SO YOU GUYS, WHY DID Y'ALL INVEST SO MUCH OVER THE DCAD VALUE ONTO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY? WHAT DID Y'ALL SEE IN THIS PROPERTY THAT MADE IT SO LUCRATIVE FOR YOU GUYS TO PAY $4 MILLION OVER THE VALUE? SURE. SO THE DCAD VALUE THAT'S FROM THE CITY ASSESSOR, AND THAT'S BASED ON THE PERFORMANCE AS A HOTEL.

THE OWNER, THE PREVIOUS OWNER, HAS SINCE SHUT DOWN THE HOTEL DUE TO POOR PERFORMANCE AS A HOTEL.

IT WAS 50% OCCUPIED OR LESS. AND IT'S NOW A SHUTDOWN HOTEL THAT WE PURCHASED.

WE SEE IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPLEMENT OUR COMPANY'S MISSION, WHICH IS TO FOCUS ON HOUSING FOR THE MIDDLE INCOME.

SO AS A HOUSING OPPORTUNITY, IT HAS A DIFFERENT VALUE THAN A STRUGGLING, STRUGGLING HOTEL.

WE'VE DONE 17 OF THESE PROJECTS NATIONALLY. 3000 UNITS.

WE'VE JUST CLOSED OUR SECOND PROJECT WITH THE SAN ANTONIO HOUSING TRUST, PFC, AND WE VALUE THE PROPERTY DIFFERENTLY THAN A HOTEL BECAUSE THAT'S THE VALUE. AS A STRUGGLING HOTEL, WE VALUE IT AS A STABILIZED MULTIFAMILY PROPERTY.

OKAY. WELL THANK YOU. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE BEST THING THAT YOU DID FOR THIS PROJECT WAS TO BRING ADDITIONAL OUTSIDE HELP TO GET YOUR POINTS ACROSS, BECAUSE YOU REALLY HAVE JUST. UPSET AT A COMMUNITY.

AND YOUR APPROACH TO OUR BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITIES IS REALLY BEEN TONE DEAF.

AND I, I HOPE IN THE FUTURE THAT THAT YOU DO A BETTER JOB IN DELIVERING YOUR MESSAGE TO ENSURE THAT THE WAY YOU COME ACROSS. IT'S JUST BEEN COMPLETELY DISRESPECTFUL TO TO MY COMMUNITY.

SO WISH YOU THE WELL AND I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. MR. BAZALDUA YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR.

I THINK IT'S FIVE MINUTES, BUT OKAY. IT SHOULD BE FIVE MINUTES.

FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO I I'M I THINK A LITTLE CONFUSED.

[04:35:01]

I WANTED TO SEE IF YOU COULD GIVE US SOME BETTER INFORMATION ON THE TIMELINE OF THIS PROJECT.

I SEE, I KNOW THAT IT WAS DEFERRED IN NOVEMBER.

THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THOR, BUT WHAT IS THE EXTENT OF THE CONVERSATION HAD AT COMMITTEE? THORAX AND DIRECTOR, HOUSING, COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT COUNCILMAN. THE QUESTION WAS WHAT WAS THE EXTENT OF THE CONVERSATION AT COMMITTEE? THIS ONE WAS AT NOVEMBER 4TH.

I THINK THE SAME CONVERSATION AT HOUSING COMMITTEE TOOK PLACE.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, IN TERMS OF ABOUT THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS.

THIS IS ONE AT THE END OF THE MEETING, I BELIEVE.

COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN YOU HAD BROUGHT UP, IF YOU'RE EVER GOING TO LOOK AT A PFC PROJECT AND IT'S DETAILS, THIS IS THE ONE TO EXAMINE AND TO UNDERSTAND MORE.

AND I THINK THE MEETING CONCLUDED WITH NOT A LOT OF THOROUGH DISCUSSION.

OKAY. WELL, I'M JUST CONFUSED ON A ON A STRAIGHT DENIAL.

QUITE FRANKLY, I, I BELIEVE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN THINGS THAT WE'VE HEARD TODAY THAT I WOULD HOPE WOULD BE A PART OF OUR VETTING PROCESS AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL. AND SO I'M, I'M JUST A LITTLE PERPLEXED ON THROWING THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER. INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT HOW THIS PROJECT COULD BE A MORE VIABLE OPTION IF IT'S ABOUT THE AFFORDABILITY MIX THAT NEEDS TO GET ADJUSTED. IF IT'S ABOUT. I KNOW THAT IT WAS MENTIONED THAT YOU CAN'T DISCRIMINATE ON.

WE DO HAVE AVAILABLE LAND USE SPECIFIC TO SENIOR HOUSING.

IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE MORE DESIRED FROM THE COMMUNITY, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THAT THAT CAN BE EXPLORED.

I KNOW THAT WHEN IT'S COME TO KIND OF THAT BALANCE OF WANTING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT CONCENTRATING OR PERPETUATING A CONCENTRATION OF POVERTY, BUT STILL UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S A DEMAND WHEN IT COMES TO FIXED INCOME SENIORS.

AND SO THERE'S A GOOD PLACE FOR THIS TO BE. I LIKE MORE SEEING PROJECTS LIKE THIS COME TO SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE INSTEAD OF IT BEING A STRAIGHT UP OR DOWN, ZERO SUM TYPE TYPE OF APPROACH.

SO THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO KNOW THE EXTENT OF THE CONVERSATION, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THERE WAS MUCH OF ONE WHEN IT WHEN, YOU KNOW, BEYOND THE HOUSING COMMITTEE HEARING FROM OTHER COLLEAGUES HERE ON THE FULL HORSESHOE, I THINK THAT THERE IS ROOM FOR NEGOTIATION AND A COMPROMISE TO BE MET.

SO I'M REALLY NOT INCLINED TO SUPPORT A DENIAL JUST BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS SO ZERO SUM THAT IT WOULD PREVENT US THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE ON WITH THE CONVERSATIONS, KNOWING WHAT OUR HOUSING NEEDS ARE AND WHAT THIS COULD BRING AS FAR AS THE AMOUNT OF UNITS.

I ALSO WOULD HATE TO SEE US JUST DENY IT. BUT WITH THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, I CAN EMPATHIZE WITH WHAT THE COUNCILMEMBER MENTIONED ABOUT CONCENTRATIONS OF POVERTY SPECIFICALLY. SO, LIKE, IF IT WERE MY DISTRICT, I WOULD BE ASKING FOR THERE TO BE MORE OF AN APPROPRIATION OF MARKET RATE.

I THINK THAT IT IS GEARING MORE TOWARDS DEEPER AFFORDABILITY INSTEAD OF TRULY MIXING THAT INCOME LEVEL.

WHEN WE WHEN WE CALL AFFORDABILITY ALL THE WAY UP TO WHAT, ONE 2140 WITH 15% ONLY IN MARKET RATE, IT'S A HUGE MISSED OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IN A TRUE MIXED INCOME MODEL.

AND SO I WOULD ASK THE COUNCIL MEMBER IF HE'S WILLING TO ANSWER IF THERE'S SOME SORT OF AVENUE THAT WE COULD GO TO TO REMAND THIS TO A COMMITTEE TO TAKE IT UP, HOPEFULLY AS A FULLY BRIEFED ITEM WHERE WE CAN HAVE AN ACTUAL ROBUST DISCUSSION, BUT ALSO IF THERE WOULD BE A WILLINGNESS TO FIND WHAT THAT COMPROMISE COULD LOOK LIKE INSTEAD OF GOING IN A DENIAL ROUTE.

IF YOU'RE WILLING TO ANSWER. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA.

YES, ABSOLUTELY. I WILL IF THIS WANTS TO GO BACK TO THE HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION, I AM OPEN TO IT. SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE THAT, I WOULD SUPPORT IT.

OKAY. WITH THAT, I WOULD MOVE TO REMAND THIS TO HOUSING AND HOMELESS COMMITTEE.

SECOND. SECOND. SORRY, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES IF YOU LIKE IT. THANK YOU. I WON'T TAKE IT. I JUST I THINK I SAID WHAT I SAID.

I HOPE THAT WE WILL JUST APPROACH THIS WITH THE SPIRIT OF WE'VE GOT HOUSING NEEDS TO BE MET.

WE'VE GOT REALLY GREAT TOOLS. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF GREAT PARTNERS IN FRONT OF US.

[04:40:04]

REALLY DON'T WANT TO SEND THE WRONG MESSAGE THAT THIS ISN'T A PRIORITY OF OUR CITY.

AND I THINK THAT THERE THERE IS A COMPROMISE TO BE MET.

I'VE HEARD IT FROM WHAT YOU'VE SAID. I'VE HEARD IT FROM SOME OF THE QUESTIONS HERE. I THINK THAT WE JUST REALLY NEED TO HAVE A MORE ROBUST CONVERSATION TO TO FIND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. I REALLY WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO GET TO THE TABLE AND, TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION. I HOPE WE CAN FIND A SOLUTION BEFORE WE COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL.

SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION TO REMAND AND HOPE THAT MY COLLEAGUES WILL AS WELL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. IF YOU WERE IN THE QUEUE TO SPEAK ON THE MOTION TO DENY, AND YOU ARE NO LONGER INTERESTED IN SPEAKING BECAUSE WE'RE NOW ON A MOTION TO REMAND TO HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS, YOU CAN DROP OUT OF THE QUEUE SO I CAN SEE.

OKAY. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THE MOTION TO REMAND TO HOUSING HOMES? DO YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES FOR THAT PURPOSE? OKAY, WELL, I'M OPPOSED TO PUTTING IT BACK TO HOUSING AND HOMELESS COMMITTEE BECAUSE, NUMBER ONE, IT WAS ALREADY ON THE AGENDA FOR HOUSING AND HOMELESS COMMITTEE.

I BELIEVE I WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO SPOKE ABOUT IT.

AND IT WASN'T LIKE I SAID ONE THING. I WENT THROUGH THE DEAL POINTS AND I SAID, MY GOODNESS, WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE VOTED FOR EVERY SINGLE PFC THAT HAS EVER COME BEFORE THIS COUNCIL, AND EXPLAINED WHY I DIDN'T THINK THEY SHOULD.

I DON'T THINK ANY OTHER PERSON SPOKE. DO YOU RECALL THOR? I DO NOT RECALL. OKAY. I COULD BE WRONG. WE COULD GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT.

BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED. AND FRANKLY, COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA, YOU'RE ON THAT COMMITTEE.

SO WE HAVE EXTREMELY FULL AGENDAS. OUR MEETINGS RUN LONG.

WE JUST LOST THE MEETING BECAUSE OF WEATHER. WE ALREADY HAD A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING IN FEBRUARY SCHEDULED IN ADDITION TO OUR REGULAR ONE.

I'M NOW TRYING TO FIT THREE AGENDAS INTO TWO MEETINGS.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SEE IT AGAIN. THE TRUTH IS, IF WE SAY NO TO THIS DEAL, THEY HAVE A BRIDGE LOAN.

THEY CAN RECALCULATE. COME ON BACK AGAIN. THAT IS POSSIBLE.

BUT THIS IS TO ME, A WASTE OF TIME. THE POINTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN OUT THERE.

THEY'VE BEEN OUT THERE FOR A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME. THIS HAS ALREADY COME TO THE COUNCIL ONCE BEFORE AND BEEN DEFERRED.

LIKE HOW MANY TIMES ARE WE GOING TO SAY SEE THE SAME EXACT DEAL? I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO COME PREPARED, WHETHER IT'S A COMMITTEE MEETING OR COUNCIL, AND TO BE PREPARED TO ACT AND VOTE, BUT NOT KEEP SENDING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE AGAIN, TO COUNCIL AGAIN.

I MEAN, IF IT GOES TO COMMITTEE, IT'S GOING TO COME TO COUNCIL A THIRD TIME.

I WOULD ONLY WONDER IF WE DON'T HAVE SOME FRIENDS AND FAMILY HERE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE.

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

THANK YOU. I'M A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION.

IS DOES THIS REALLY NEED TO GO BACK TO THE HOUSING COMMITTEE OR IS THIS A PFC ISSUE? IN OTHER WORDS, THE THE DETAILS ON THE FINANCING AND THE LEASE AND THE TERMS AND THE AFFORDABILITY OF THE UNITS.

IS THAT NOT THE PURVIEW OF THE OF THE PFC RATHER THAN THE HOUSING FINANCE? WHO ARE YOU DIRECTING THAT OR THE HOUSING COMMITTEE? I DON'T KNOW WHO. I'M TRYING TO GET A CLARIFICATION IF IF HOUSING IS THE RIGHT DEPARTMENT TO GO TO.

THOR. YES, SIR. SO THE WAY THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION OF THIS PROGRAM WORKS IS THAT BOTH THE PFC AND HFC HAVE INDEPENDENT BOARDS THAT ARE APPOINTED BY YOU ALL AS COUNCIL. THE FIRST ROUND OF APPROVALS IS DONE BY THAT BOARD.

THEY BRING ALL OF THAT APPLICATION FORWARD, REVIEW EVERYTHING, AND THEN THE HOUSING COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT STAFF REVIEW THAT PACKAGE AND PREPARE IT FOR HOUSING COMMITTEE TO BE BRIEFED IN ORDER TO MOVE IT FORWARD TO A CITY COUNCIL AGENDA.

SO AT THIS POINT, SINCE THEY'VE ALREADY RECEIVED THEIR FIRST APPROVAL AT THE PFC LEVEL, AND THEY'VE HAD A BRIEFING AT HHS AND THEN IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD INTO A DECEMBER COUNCIL AND DEFERRED TO TODAY. IF THERE'S FURTHER CONVERSATION THAT'S NEEDED, IT SHOULD BE DEFERRED BACK TO A COMMITTEE, IF THAT IS THE WILL OF COUNCIL FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AND OR TO CONTINUE THAT CONVERSATION TODAY TO MAKE A DECISION.

SO WHICH IS IS IT APPROPRIATE TO GO BACK TO PFC SEE FIRST AND SEE IF THEY COULD PRESENT SOMETHING THAT'S ACCEPTABLE TO THE PFC, BECAUSE THE PFC ULTIMATELY HAS TO HAS TO BENEFIT, HAS TO APPROVE THE DEAL.

RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT. THEY'VE ALREADY DONE THEIR FIRST ROUND OF APPROVAL. RIGHT. AS COUNCIL APPROVED. WE'RE APPROVED TODAY. IT WOULD THEN GO BACK TO THAT BOARD AGAIN FOR ITS FINAL APPROVAL IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE THE CLOSING AND THE WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? FINAL APPROVAL. YOUR FINAL APPROVAL IN ORDER TO MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD. I'M SORRY.

YOU'VE CONFUSED ME AGAIN. IF WE REMAND IT BACK, WHO DO WE REMAND IT BACK TO? HOUSING OR TO PFC? TO A COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER.

WHICH COMMITTEE? THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASK YOU. SO THE ITEM WOULD GO TO A HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS SOLUTIONS COMMITTEE. IF I COULD JUST JUMP IN FOR JUST A SECOND, IT COULD GO

[04:45:02]

TO WHATEVER COMMITTEE THE COUNCIL CHOOSES TO SEND IT TO.

IT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE HHS COMMITTEE, BECAUSE THE ISSUE REALLY IS ABOUT THE FINANCING OF IT AND THE LEASE TERMS, AND ALSO THE AFFORDABILITY MATRIX. IT'S MORE THAN JUST THE THE MATRIX OF THE AFFORDABILITY.

I TEND TO AGREE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT A MORE UP MARKET RATE OR ADJUSTABLE HIGHER VALUE RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA IN PARTICULAR, BECAUSE THERE'S THERE'S A TREMENDOUS EMPLOYMENT BASE THERE.

THIS IS THIS SHOULD NOT BE A A LOW INCOME TYPE OF SITUATION.

IT SHOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR AFFORDABLE AT A HIGHER LEVEL AND MARKET RATE PROJECTS THERE.

THIS IS A GROWING, IMPROVING AREA. AND TO GIVE FINANCIAL BENEFITS I THINK IS SHORTSIGHTED ON A LONG TERM INVESTMENT. BUT BUT MY POINT IS, IS THAT IF THE DECISION IS REALLY GOING TO BE ON THE PFC TO SEE IF THEY WANT TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROJECT AND THEN PROVIDE THE TAX CREDIT, THE TAX ABATEMENTS. SO I'M, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WOULD BE THE RIGHT DEPARTMENT.

AND I'M AND MAYBE I'M JUST THICK ON THIS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S.

TO ME, IT WOULD SEEM LIKE IT SHOULD GO BACK TO PFC WITH SOME DIRECTION FROM THIS BODY TO SAY WE WANT A DIFFERENT, HIGHER AFFORDABILITY MATRIX. WE WANT A WE WANT PERHAPS A LIMITATION ON THE ABATEMENT TERM, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. AND MAYBE SOME OTHER JUSTIFICATIONS OR REQUIREMENTS FOR, FOR WHATEVER OPPORTUNITIES ARE TO PRESENT TO PFC FOR A BETTER DEAL FOR THE CITY AND A LESS OF A TAX A HIT ON US.

CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND I'VE GOT A PROMPT FROM MY COLLEAGUE ABOUT THE MOTION THAT HE MAY WANT TO CHANGE IT IF THAT.

HOW TO PROCEDURALLY. HOW DO I DO THAT? BECAUSE I WOULD THEN COMMENT ON THAT.

I'M SORRY. WHAT WHAT? I'LL TREAT THIS AS A PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY.

THANK YOU. TIME. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION EXACTLY? CAN I YIELD MY TIME TO MR. BAZALDUA FOR A MOMENT TO CLARIFY, MY QUESTION IS, HE WANTS TO HE'S.

HE HAS MENTIONED TO ME HE MIGHT REMAND THIS TO FINANCE INSTEAD OF HOUSING, AND THAT WOULD JUST REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT TO HIS AMENDMENT.

OKAY. I MEAN, NOT TO HIS AMENDMENT IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE TO THE MOTION THAT HE MADE TO REMAND IT SO HE COULD DO THAT DURING HIS TIME THEN.

WELL, ANYONE COULD THIS IS NOT ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANYTHING WE NORMALLY DO.

ANYONE CAN MAKE THE MOTION TO AMEND, AND IF IT GETS SECONDED, IT'S THE THING THAT'S WORTH DISCUSSING AT THAT POINT.

OKAY, SO YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT MOTION. I'M JUST GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO MY COMMENTS.

MAYOR. AND THEN IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE THAT MOTION THEY CAN. OKAY. THANKS. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. SO WE'RE ON THE MOTION TO BACK TO HOUSING AT THIS POINT.

SO A COUPLE COMMENTS THAT HAVE CAME UP ON REQUESTS FOR STAFF THAT I WANT TO JUST SAY WE GOT TO BE CAREFUL WITH IS.

WE HAVE BEEN FOLKS HAVE BEEN COMMENTING ON WANTING TO SEE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY, MORE MARKET RATE. I DON'T WE CAN'T BE I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR US TO BE NEGOTIATING ON THE NEGOTIATING ON THE FLY AND JUST TELLING YOU GUYS WHAT WE WANT.

I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO SEE IS MORE DETAIL FROM STAFF ON WHY THE AFFORDABILITY MIX WAS PRESENTED TO US FROM THE PFC. AND THEN IF COUNCIL MEMBERS, ONCE WE HAVE THAT DATA, I THINK THAT MAKES MORE SENSE.

ALONG WITH THAT, THERE'S BEEN SOME CLAIMS THAT THIS AREA IS A CONCENTRATION OF POVERTY.

YOU KNOW, I'M INCLINED TO BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ANY DATA TO THE CONTRARY.

BUT I DO WANT TO UNDERSTAND, LIKE WE NEED THE DATA FROM YOU SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THAT AND NOT JUST BE GUESSING UP HERE AT THE HORSESHOE.

THERE'S ALSO HAS BEEN A CLAIM THAT THERE WAS DISRESPECT TO THE COMMUNITY FROM THE DEVELOPERS.

IF YOU ARE GOING TO, IF THAT'S CORRECT, I MEAN, EITHER WAY, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A RESPONSE BY YOU IF THIS GETS REFERRED, CLARIFYING WHAT THAT IS AND IF THAT IS TRUE HOW YOU'RE GOING TO FIX THAT.

OR IF IT'S NOT TRUE, YOU KNOW, CLARIFY THAT. SO THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CLEANED UP IF IT'S GOING TO BE REMANDED.

BUT THE QUESTION I HAVE AFTER ALL OF THAT IS IF IT DOES GET REMANDED, YOU'RE DELAYED BY ANOTHER 60 DAYS.

HOW DOES THAT IMPACT YOUR DEAL, IF AT ALL? IS IT OKAY? I MEAN, WE'LL STILL GET DONE. POSSIBLY. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE TIMELINE, THE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE DALLAS PFC STARTED IN DECEMBER OF 2024.

I'VE BEEN DOWN HERE NOW FOR AN HHS, HHS MEETING.

WE DIDN'T GET TO THE TOPIC. IT WAS RESCHEDULED, SO I CAME BACK FOR A SECOND HHS MEETING.

[04:50:05]

THE ONLY COMMENT MADE I RECALL WAS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

THERE WASN'T A DISCUSSION. AND THEN WE CAME TO CITY COUNCIL.

IT WAS DEFERRED. WE'RE NOW BACK AT A SECOND CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN DECEMBER, AND WE'RE NOW ON THE HOOK FOR INTEREST.

WE WE CANNOT AFFORD TO WAIT 60, 90 DAYS AT THIS POINT TO SEE IF THIS IS VIABLE.

I MEAN, THIS IS CURRENTLY A SHUTDOWN HOTEL, AND WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT DIRECTION WE'RE GOING HERE.

AND IF THE DECISION IS THAT IT'S NOT SUPPORTIVE, THEN WE NEED TO GO BACK WITH MY MANAGEMENT TEAM AND DECIDE IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT THIS BACK ON THE MARKET TO REMAIN AS A MOTEL. OKAY. FOR STAFF, IF IT'S REMANDED BACK TO COMMITTEE.

THERE'S A HOUSING COMMITTEE AND A FINANCE COMMITTEE SCHEDULED.

BOTH ARE SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. COULD THIS MAKE IT TO ONE OF THOSE COMMITTEES BY NEXT WEEK.

IF IT'S REMANDED, WE WE COULD DEFINITELY. WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THE POSTING HAPPEN TOMORROW.

OKAY. IN ORDER TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AT EITHER OF THOSE COMMITTEES FOR NEXT WEEK, I THINK TOMORROW WOULD BE THE POSTING DATE THURSDAY.

OKAY. I MEAN, I, I DO FEEL LIKE WE CAN HAMMER THIS OUT HERE.

YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH CHAIR MENDELSOHN ON THAT. LIKE, WHETHER YOU'RE FOR IT OR AGAINST IT, I THINK WE COULD, BUT I WILL SUPPORT A SHORT REMAND IF FOLKS NEED TO GET SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED, AND I.

I'M EITHER WAY ON EITHER I'M GOING TO GO TO BOTH OF THEM. SO THANK YOU MR. BAZALDUA. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU MAYOR.

FIRST, I'D LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE SO ORDERED. YOUR MOTION IS WITHDRAWN.

THANK YOU. I'D. I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO REMAND THIS ITEM TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE COMMITTEE AGENDA MEETING.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. WOULD YOU LIKE FIVE MINUTES TO DISCUSS THIS? NO. I THINK THAT SOME GOOD POINTS HAVE BEEN RAISED. FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU SIR.

I THINK IT'D BE. SOME GOOD POINTS HAVE BEEN RAISED. I WILL JUST COMMENT THAT.

YES, YOU WERE CHAIR MENDELSOHN THE ONLY ONE THAT SPOKE ON THIS ITEM.

I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE THE MEETING THAT I ACTUALLY LEFT EARLY BECAUSE ANOTHER ONE OF OUR MEMBERS WAS PROHIBITED FROM SPEAKING AND PARTICIPATING IN THE MEETING AT THE TIME.

SO BUT THE THE REASON THAT I BELIEVE THAT THERE'S SOME VALIDITY TO HAVING THIS DISCUSSION, IT SEEMS THE DISCUSSION STAYS AROUND THE FINANCING PIECE WHENEVER WE TALK AND DISCUSS FCS, I BELIEVE THERE'S SOME, SOME VALIDITY TO IT GOING TO THAT COMMITTEE FOR US TO DISCUSS THE FORGONE TAX COMPONENT OF THIS FINANCE TOOL VERSUS JUST THE HOUSING STOCK NEED THAT WE ARE FULFILLING.

SO I APPRECIATE THE WILLINGNESS TO HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS.

I AGREE WITH YOU, MR. WEST, THAT WE I WISH WE COULD GET IT WORKED OUT HERE, BUT I DO THINK THAT THERE'S ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE COMMUNITY NEEDING TO BE A PART OF THE PROCESS AND SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED BY THE COUNCIL MEMBER. I THINK THAT THAT IT WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE FOR US TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO VET THIS. AND I WOULD I WOULD ASSUME THAT IF YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE THIS ON NEXT WEEK IN A COMMITTEE LEVEL, THAT WE COULD STILL SEE THIS EXPEDITIOUSLY IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, BACK AT FULL COUNCIL.

SO DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT TO THAT TIMELINE CITY MANAGER? I DO NOT, I THINK I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE GET THE DECISION, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO GET THAT VERY SOON SO WE CAN MEET OUR POSTING REQUIREMENTS, IS THE RECOMMENDATION TO BRING IT BACK TO FULL COUNCIL FOR ACTION ON THE FEBRUARY 11TH AGENDA? I WILL LEAVE THAT UP TO THE THE COMMITTEE BODY TO MAKE THE DECISION ON A DATE CERTAIN, BUT I'M JUST HOPING THAT THIS CAN BE DONE SOMEWHAT EXPEDITIOUSLY WITH THE ABILITY TO GET IT ON THEIR COMMITTEE NEXT WEEK.

WE DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM MAKING THAT SCHEDULE HAPPEN.

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

THANK YOU. OKAY I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

AND THE REASON I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION IS BECAUSE A LOT OF PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE OVER THE LAST TIME THAT THIS WAS A COUNCIL.

THE APPLICANT HIRED CONSULTANTS TO ENGAGE WITH THE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH THEY'VE DONE.

I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH BOTH THOR AND JAMES.

I THINK THERE'S STILL SOME MORE GAPS THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO COME TO THE TABLE.

AND SO I APPRECIATE THE, THE OFFER TO TO BRING THIS BACK TO COUNCIL SO THAT WE CAN REEVALUATE THE AMIS AND THE INVESTMENT THAT THE DEVELOPER IS MAKING. THANK YOU, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE SAY FACTS AT THE HOUSING COMMITTEE.

[04:55:03]

THIS WAS DISCUSSED, I BELIEVE, IN NOVEMBER. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.

NOVEMBER HAD THE FULL AGENDA COMPLETED. IS THAT CORRECT? THOR? YES. RIGHT. SO, COUNCIL MEMBER, IF YOU LEFT EARLY, YOU LEFT EARLY.

BUT IT WAS NOT THE MEETING YOU WERE REFERENCING.

THIS WAS FULLY COMPLETED AGENDA. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MR. BAZALDUA, FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE RECORD CLEAR.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE MEETING THAT WE LOST. QUORUM.

I'M TALKING ABOUT THE MEETING THAT THERE WAS A MEMBER THAT PARTICIPATED VIRTUALLY BECAUSE OF HER SICKNESS AND WAS DENIED THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS AND PARTICIPATE.

THAT'S THE REASON THAT I WALKED OUT. THE MEETING CONTINUED.

THE AGENDA WAS ALL FULLY SAID. BUT THIS IS WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO PRIORITIZE ALL OF OUR COLLEAGUES VOICES THROUGH THE PROCESS OF POLICY MAKING.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE'RE READY TO VOTE.

I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE. THIS IS ON THE MOTION TO REMAND TO FINANCE NOW.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. I ASK FOR A RECORDED VOTE, PLEASE.

OKAY. A RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED, AND BY RULE, IT'S BEEN GRANTED.

SO WE'LL HAVE A RECORD VOTE ON AGAIN. EVERYONE.

THE MOTION IS BY MR. BAZALDUA TO REMAND TO FINANCE NOW.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL FINANCE.

I'M SORRY. THE FINANCE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE. YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. COUNCIL MEMBER.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLAIR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR.

JOHNSON. YES. WITH 14 VOTING IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED THE ITEM.

THE REMAND OR THE ITEM PASSES OR IT'S REMANDED.

MR.. MAYOR. MERCY. OKAY. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU.

[32. Authorize an increase in the amount of $26 million to a previously authorized application approved on May 28, 2025, by Resolution No. 25-0814, for a loan in the amount of $90 million from the State Infrastructure Bank for a total loan amount of $116 million, to finance transportation related improvements and transportation related demolition surrounding the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center Dallas Master Plan.]

WE'LL NOW MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 32. AGENDA ITEM 32.

AUTHORIZE AN INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF 26 MILLION TO A PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED APPLICATION APPROVED ON MAY 28TH, 2025, BY RESOLUTION NUMBER 25 0814. FOR A LOAN IN THE AMOUNT OF $90 MILLION FOR THE STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK FOR A TOTAL LOAN AMOUNT OF $116 MILLION TO FINANCE TRANSPORTATION RELATED IMPROVEMENTS AND TRANSPORTATION RELATED DEMOLITION SURROUNDING THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION? IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? THIS IS ITEM 32. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? WHOA.

WHAT? OKAY, HOLD ON A SECOND. DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ON ITEM 32? YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WELL, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

OKAY, I'M COMING TO GET MY ITEMS. SO I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE LOAN APPLICATION THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THIS DOCUMENT.

TO THE AGENDA. SO IN THE LOAN APPLICATION, IT SAYS THAT WE HAVE A VERTIPORT AS PART OF OUR MOBILITY.

DOES THAT REQUIRE US THEN TO PUT A VERTIPORT THERE? BECAUSE IT DIDN'T SOUND LIKE FROM LAST WEEK THAT YOU WERE GOING TO NECESSARILY DO THAT.

ROSA FLEMING, DIRECTOR OF CONVENTION AND EVENT SERVICES, AND THAT'S JUST A SAMPLE APPLICATION.

NOTHING'S BEEN SUBMITTED YET. IT'S A DRAFT APPLICATION THAT'S BEING REVISED.

SO NOTHING HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. SO WHAT THE. SO GO BACK JUST A MOMENT AND KIND OF GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT.

SO ATTACHED TO OUR AGENDA IS AN APPLICATION. AND IT DOESN'T SAY ANYWHERE ON THERE THAT THIS IS JUST A FIRST DRAFT.

I MEAN, IS THERE ANY WAY I WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT'S NOT WHAT'S BEING SUBMITTED? IN TERMS OF WHAT'S ATTACHED? YEAH. ATTACHED TO AN AGENDA FOR A COUNCIL TO VOTE ON.

SO THE RESOLUTION PROCESS IS THIS WE WE SUBMIT THE RESOLUTION.

WE AT THE TIME WHEN WE FIRST DID THIS BACK IN, IN IN MAY, WE HAD A DRAFT THAT WE NEEDED TO TAKE TO AUSTIN AND

[05:00:08]

DISCUSS AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION DRAFTING AT THE BEGINNING, WE'VE NOT YET GOTTEN ANY INFORMATION BACK FROM FAA ON THE SITING, RECITING, ETC. OF THE VERTIPORT.

AND SO IT WAS LEFT AS THE PLANS WERE LAID OUT.

SUBSEQUENTLY, WHEN WE WENT ON NOVEMBER 17TH TO MEET WITH REPRESENTATIVES AT TXDOT, AND THEY TOLD US ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL $26 MILLION, WE SAID THAT WE WOULD REDRAFT THE APPLICATION THAT WE WERE GOING TO SUBMIT TO THEM, AND IT WOULD PRIORITIZE IT IN A IN A DIFFERENT ORDER.

THAT APPLICATION, BEFORE WE SUBMIT, WILL OBVIOUSLY COME TO THE COUNCIL AND TO CITY LEADERSHIP IN A DRAFT FORM THAT YOU ALL CAN OPINE ON BEFORE FINAL SUBMITTAL. SO AT THE TIME, MAY 28TH, WHEN WE TOOK THE RESOLUTION THE FIRST TIME AGAIN, WE HAD NOT YET GOTTEN ANY INFORMATION BACK FROM FAA.

WE SUBSEQUENTLY HAVE. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE HASN'T BEEN UPDATED.

WE MET WITH THEM ON NOVEMBER 17TH. WE ARE GOING TO RE UPDATE IT ONCE IF THIS ITEM IS APPROVED TODAY THAT YES, WE CAN APPLY FOR 116 MILLION. WE'LL REDRAFT THE ITEM, THE APPLICATION THAT WAS TWO MONTHS AGO.

AND IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT HIGH SPEED RAIL IN THIS.

AND WE'VE JUST HAD A RESOLUTION THAT SAYS NO.

AS OF MAY, IT'S A IT'S AS OF MAY 28TH, THE KNOWN INFORMATION AS OF MAY 28TH.

AND SO WE ARE REDRAFTING THAT APPLICATION. NOTHING HAS BEEN FORMALLY SUBMITTED TO TEXDOT.

THE RESOLUTION IS REQUIRED FIRST IN ORDER FOR US TO RESUBMIT OR REDRAFT.

HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE YOU TO REVISE THE DOCUMENT? AFTER TODAY, I'LL GO BACK. I'LL WORK WITH INSPIRE, DALLAS AND OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS, AND PROBABLY A WEEK OR TWO TO REVISE IT.

THERE'S A LOT OF FINANCIALS THAT HAVE TO BE ATTACHED TO IT.

SO IT'S NOT JUST THE WRITTEN COMPONENT, IT'S IT'S FINANCIALS AND OUR RATING AS A DEPARTMENT ETC.

FINANCIAL RATING. SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD BRING THIS FORWARD TODAY INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING DONE THAT 1 OR 2 WEEKS WORTH OF WORK TO UPDATE IT, WHICH I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IT'S A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD DOCUMENT.

MAYBE THERE'S SCHEDULES ATTACHED THAT ARE MORE COMPLICATED, BUT I MEAN, FOR A NARRATIVE, IT'S REALLY BASIC AND STRAIGHTFORWARD.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY IT WAS NOT BROUGHT TO US IN A, IN A MORE FINISHED FORM WHEN THERE'S, YOU KNOW, JEFFERSON ALSO LOOKS TO BE PROBLEMATIC IN THAT WRITE UP.

SO THAT'S THREE DIFFERENT ITEMS THAT, YOU KNOW, I'VE NOTICED.

AND THIS IS YOU KNOW, I'M JUST GOVERNANCE. YOU GUYS ARE DOING THE PROJECT.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WASN'T PUT IN A BETTER FORM.

ABSOLUTELY. AND SO IF THE ITEM DIDN'T PASS TODAY, WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO GO IN A DIFFERENT YEAR TO APPLY FOR FUNDING FROM TEXDOT. SO DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE OUR CONSULTANTS START TO REDRAFT SOMETHING THAT MAY OR MAY NOT PASS TODAY. I DIDN'T WANT TO BE PRESUMPTIVE ABOUT THAT.

BUT THEN WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT AN ACTUAL DRAFT.

I MEAN, IT'S IT'S WRONG. I MEAN, IT'S WRONG IN THREE, AT LEAST THREE PLACES.

WE ARE NOT SUBMITTING THE APPLICATION WITH THE RESOLUTION.

THERE'S SEVERAL STEPS TO THIS. FIRST, WE SUBMIT THE RESOLUTION AT THE END OF THE MONTH.

THIS MONTH, THE BEGINNING OF NEXT MONTH. IF IT PASSES TODAY, THAT RESOLUTION THEN GOES INTO YET ANOTHER MEETING WITH TEXDOT SO THAT WE WALK THROUGH THE APPLICATION, THE CHANGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THE PROJECT, OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH, FOR EXAMPLE, FAA, OUR DISCUSSIONS ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUT HIGH SPEED RAIL, ETC.

AND WE'LL PROVIDE THEM A LIST OF WHAT WE KNOW TO DATE ABOUT HOW WE'LL TREAT THE JEFFERSON VIADUCT, ETC.. IN TERMS OF AID SCENARIOS AND THEN ALL OF THE OTHER TRANSPORTATION INITIATIVES THAT WILL TAKE PLACE AS PART OF THIS PROJECT WILL TAKE THEM ALL. THEY WILL GIVE US GUIDANCE ON HOW THEY WOULD LIKE US TO CRAFT THE APPLICATION SO THAT THE PRIORITY PROJECTS THAT BEST FIT WITH THE PRIORITIES THAT THEY HAVE IN QUEUE RIGHT NOW WOULD MAKE OUR APPLICATION SUCCESSFUL.

SO THAT MEETING HAS NOT HAPPENED BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT YET BROUGHT THEM BACK A REFRESHED RESOLUTION.

[05:05:04]

I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE THAT THIS IS SO BACKWARDS AND WE SHOULD HAVE COMPLETE CORRECT INFORMATION TO APPROVE.

THAT'S WHAT SHOULD COME TO A CITY COUNCIL. AND IF YOU'RE TELLING ME ALREADY, YOU KNOW, THESE THREE THINGS ARE NOT PRESENTED CORRECTLY IN THIS APPLICATION.

IT SHOULD NOT HAVE COME TO US. AND I'M GOING TO VOTE NO.

BUT I REALLY THINK THAT IF IT'S JUST A MATTER OF UPDATING AN ACTUAL CORRECT APPLICATION LIKE THAT.

THEN IT SHOULD JUST COME TO THE NEXT MEETING AND IT SHOULD BE CORRECT.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 32? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? OH, SORRY. MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I, TOO, AM CONCERNED ABOUT APPROVING A RESOLUTION WHICH HAS SO MANY INACCURACIES IN IT.

AND UNDERLYING THAT IS MY CONCERN OVER THE INCLUSION OF VERTIPORT, WHICH I HAVE SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NEED FOR. SO, ROSA, ISN'T THERE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO AMEND THIS PROCESS TO ADDRESS THOSE THREE INCORRECT ISSUES AND THEN BRING IT BACK TO THE COUNCIL AT OUR NEXT AGENDA MEETING FOR ACTION AT THAT POINT? THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN RIDLEY, WHAT? HE'S. WHAT COUNCILMAN MENDELSOHN WAS REFERRING TO WAS THE APPLICATION THAT IS ATTACHED.

THE APPLICATION THAT'S ATTACHED IS THE APPLICATION THAT WAS GOING TO GO IN MAY 28TH OF 2025, WITH THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE PROJECT AT THE TIME.

WE'VE NOT REDRAFTED IT BECAUSE THIS WASN'T APPROVED FOR US TO ONE ADD THE 26 MILLION AND IF WE WERE GOING TO REDRAFT IT, I NEEDED TO HAVE THE RESOLUTION FIRST. SO YOU ALL WILL SEE THE ACTUAL APPLICATION BEFORE IT GOES.

IT'LL COME TO YOU WITH WHAT THOSE POINTS ARE THAT WILL HAPPEN IN THE APPLICATION ONCE WE SUBMIT THE RESOLUTION.

THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THERE'S SUCH A SHORT TIME FRAME.

WE WERE ASKED BY TEXDOT ONLY TWO WEEKS AGO, AND I THINK OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR WAS ON EARLIER.

WE WERE NOTIFIED THROUGH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR OF TEX DOT'S REQUEST FOR US TO REVISE THE EXISTING RESOLUTION BEFORE WE COULD RESUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR 116 MILLION, THE RESOLUTION NEEDS TO SAY 116 MILLION, AND THEN WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AFTER THAT TO REDRAFT RECRAFT AND GIVE OUR CURRENT FINDING AS AS WE KNOW THEM RELATIVE TO THE PROJECT IN A REVISED APPLICATION. SO IN OTHER WORDS, WE COULD APPROVE A RESOLUTION TODAY INCREASING THE LOAN AMOUNT TO 116 MILLION. AND THEN YOU WOULD AT WHAT POINT BRING BACK A REVISED APPLICATION FOR THE COUNCIL'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL? CERTAINLY, I CAN TYPE THE DEAL POINTS OUT IN A FRIDAY MEMO TO YOU OF WHAT WE INTEND TO SUBMIT AND A SAMPLE OF THE APPLICATION AS WE INTEND TO SUBMIT IN ABOUT TWO WEEKS AFTER TEX-DOT RECEIVES OUR THE REVISED RESOLUTION AND SAYS, OKAY, REVISE YOUR APPLICATION AND RESUBMIT.

SO ALL YOU REALLY NEED FROM US TODAY IS A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE INCREASE IN THE LOAN AMOUNT.

IF I CAN ADDRESS COUNCIL MEMBER REALLY? MR. MAYOR COUNCIL MEMBER.

REALLY? YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. WE DO NOT HAVE YOUR AUTHORITY YET TO SUBMIT AT THIS AMOUNT.

SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT YOU WOULD BE GIVING US THE AUTHORITY TO DO TODAY.

SO WE CAN NOW GET THE APPLICATION PROCESS UPDATED AND RESTART THE SUBMISSION.

SO TODAY IT'S REALLY GIVING US THE AUTHORITY FOR THIS ADDITIONAL AMOUNT THAT WE DON'T HAVE BASED ON THE RESOLUTION FROM MAY OF 2025.

SO WE'RE NOT WITH THIS CURRENT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION FORM THAT WAS ATTACHED.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YOU'RE NOT APPROVING THE APPLICATION THAT IS ATTACHED, YOU'RE APPROVING WHAT WOULD BE A COMPLETELY REVISED APPLICATION, WHERE WE WOULD THEN REQUEST 116 MILLION, WHICH IS A GOOD THING.

WHEN WE MET WITH TXDOT, THEY SAID THEY HAD AN ADDITIONAL FUNDS THAT THEY COULD ALLOCATE TO DALLAS OF 26 ADDITIONAL MILLION.

IT NOW GIVES US THE TIME TO REVISE THE APPLICATION, WHICH IS STEP TWO OF THE PROCESS, AND WE WOULD PUT IN THE INFORMATION THAT IS KNOWN ABOUT TRANSPORTATION. NOW, YOU KNOW, WE SUBSEQUENTLY WE'VE HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH FAA ET-CETERA.

[05:10:04]

WE WOULD REVISE THE APPLICATION THAT'S ATTACHED AND WE WOULD RESUBMIT THAT APPLICATION.

BUT THE FIRST STEP IS TO DO AS CITY MANAGER, TOLBERT SAID, IS TO SUBMIT ONLY THE REVISED RESOLUTION.

WELL, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION TO APPROVE A REVISION TO THE RESOLUTION, INCREASING THE LOAN AMOUNT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT STAFF IS GOING TO INFORM US OF HOW THEY HAVE REVISED THE APPLICATION, AND PREFERABLY SHOW US WHAT THEY PROPOSE TO SUBMIT TO TEXTILE. ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S OUR INTENT. YES, I WAS GOING TO SAY YES, SIR.

THAT WOULD BE OUR PLAN. AND MISS FLEMINGS MENTIONED A MEMORANDUM, BUT WE CAN ALSO BE PREPARED TO UPDATE THE RESPECTIVE COMMITTEE TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE THE FINAL APPLICATION AS WELL.

WELL, I THINK I WOULD PREFER THE, THE COMMITTEE BRIEFING.

WHICH COMMITTEE WOULD THIS BE? ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

WE COULD DO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR WE COULD DO TRANSPORTATION EITHER.

WELL, I GUESS I'M ON BOTH, BUT I PREFER IT COME TO TRANSPORTATION SINCE THIS IS A THE TRANSPORTATION RELATED RESOLUTION.

SO WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING WILL SUPPORT IT. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE TRANSPORTATION AS WELL.

COUNCILMEMBER RILEY, SO WE WILL PREPARE THAT.

WE WILL STILL SEND YOU A MEMORANDUM THAT JUST KIND OF LAYS OUT THIS PROCESS SINCE THAT WAS NOT CLEAR.

AND SO THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN, FOR JUST MENTIONING THAT IT WAS CONFUSING WHAT WE WERE ASKING YOU TO DO TODAY.

AND THEN WE'LL PLAN TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE AT THE NEXT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'M NOT CONFUSED. YOU'RE ASKING US TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT BY $90 MILLION WITHOUT GIVING US THE REASON FOR THE INCREASE? LIKE YOU'RE GIVING US AN INCORRECT DOCUMENT AND SAYING, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO PAPER IT UP ON THE BACK END, BUT JUST ALLOW US TO APPLY FOR 90 MILLION MORE, 90 MILLION MORE, AND WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO FIX THE THE DOCUMENTATION IN ADVANCE, SO I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A RECORD VOTE.

THANK YOU. IF I MAY. COUNCILWOMAN ROBIN BENTLEY WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

IT'S NOT 90 MILLION MORE. IT'S 26 MILLION MORE.

AND THAT'S A GOOD THING FOR THE CITY. THIS IS SOME OF THE MOST FLEXIBLE AND FRIENDLY FUNDING WE HAVE FOR THE PROJECT.

THE TXDOT FUNDING TO HELP WITH THE TRANSPORTATION COMPONENTS. AND SO THIS IS A GOOD FUNDING SOURCE FOR THE CITY.

IT'S A VERY FLEXIBLE LOAN. AND SO WE'RE WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL THAT THEY'VE IDENTIFIED ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT.

ALL RIGHT. A RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED AND BY RULES HAVE BEEN GRANTED.

AND I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE. SO, MADAM SECRETARY, GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO, IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLAIR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR.

JOHNSON. YES. WITH 13 VOTING IN FAVOR TO OPPOSE, THE ITEM PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING AGENDA.

[ZONING CASES - CONSENT]

MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM Z FOR CHAIRMAN JOHNSON.

YOU RECOGNIZED. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ITEM Z4I MOVE TO THE FURTHEST ITEM UNTIL MARCH 25TH, 2026. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? YES. I AM REQUESTING TO THIS DEFERRAL TO ALLOW ME TIME FOR A COMMUNITY MEETING TO INFORM NEIGHBORS OF THIS APPLICATION AND SEEK THEIR INPUT.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, I'D LIKE TO KNOW THE DATE THAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPLIED FOR.

MEGAN WYMER, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANT DIRECTOR YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER AND I'M SORRY, I DO HAVE THE CHART TO PASS OUT.

I FAILED TO DO THAT, BUT THIS ITEM WAS THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED ON SEPTEMBER 10TH.

IT WENT TO CPC OR. I'M SORRY. YES, SEPTEMBER 10TH.

IT WENT TO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION IN DECEMBER.

AND THEN THIS IS ITS FIRST TIME AT COUNCIL. THANKS.

YEAH. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION?

[05:15:04]

HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? EYES HAVE IT. MOTION PREVAILS. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. NEXT ITEM. BUT WHOEVER NEEDS TO BE RECOGNIZED.

MR. MAYOR COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM Z6.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED SIR. I MOVE TO DEFER ITEM Z6 UNTIL FEBRUARY 25TH, 2026.

IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? NO, SIR. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. I'D LIKE TO KNOW THE DATE THAT THIS WAS FIRST APPLIED FOR. YES. AND I'M SORRY, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER SIX, Z6.

THE APPLICATION FOR THIS ONE WAS FIRST MADE SEPTEMBER 23RD, 2025.

WENT TO CPC ON 12 FOUR. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.

YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEM Z ONE THROUGH Z SIX.

ITEM Z4 AND Z SIX WERE PREVIOUSLY DEFERRED. YOUR.

THEREFORE YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEMS Z1 THROUGH Z Z3 AND Z5.

I'LL READ THOSE ITEMS INTO THE RECORD. ITEM Z1 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING ONE A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ON MF TWO, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT AND COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE USES, AND TWO A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT ON GARAGE USES ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF VIRGINIA AVENUE AND THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF NORTH FITZHUGH AVENUE.

ITEM Z2 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1262 FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL OR ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ROSA ROAD AND MIDWAY ROAD.

ITEM Z3 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SITE.

PLAN FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 40 FOR COMMERCIAL DASH ONE.

USES ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF CAYUGA DRIVE, NORTHEAST OF PEAVY ROAD IN ITEM Z5 IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO ADD THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2441 FOR A RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THRU SERVICE ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF BRUTON ROAD, EAST OF PLEASANT DRIVE.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ANY OF THESE ZONING ITEMS THAT WERE JUST READ INTO THE RECORD? ITEM Z1, Z2, Z3 AND AND Z5. NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR.

IS THERE A MOTION? NO. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED.

AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

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

ZONING CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED. THANK YOU.

[Z7. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an NS(A) Neighborhood Service District on property zoned CR Community Retail District with deed restrictions DR Z834-293, on the northwest corner of North Masters Drive and Bruton Road Recommendation of Staff: Approval of (1) NS(A) Neighborhood Service District; and (2) approval of termination of deed restrictions Recommendation of CPC: Approval of (1) NS(A) Neighborhood Service District; and (2) denial of termination of deed restrictions Z245-216(LC) / Z-25-000099 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearing on November 12, 2025, and is scheduled for consideration on January 28, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO YOUR INDIVIDUAL ZONING ITEMS BEGINNING WITH ITEM Z7.

ITEM Z7 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN NSA NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH MASTERS DRIVE AND BRUTON ROAD. OKAY, MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 37 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST. WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND TWO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE? OKAY.

YOU MAY COME FORWARD. YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

OKAY. YOU MAY HAVE A SEAT, SIR. YES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU MAY BEGIN.

MY NAME IS NAZIR. LAST NAME IS MOOSA. I'M AT 2451 MAYWOOD LANE IN PALMER, TEXAS.

MY APOLOGIES. I BROKE MY ARM THIS WEEKEND ON THE ICE, SO I'M KIND OF MOVING AROUND A LITTLE BIT.

THIS WAY. I'M DRESSED THE WAY I AM. SO WHAT I LIKE TO DO IS ON THE Z7.

I'D LIKE TO REMOVE THE PROHIBITION ON MULTIPLE FAMILY USES AND ON DRIVE IN RESTAURANTS, WHILE MAINTAINING THE OTHER PROVISIONS THAT I'VE TALKED TO.

COUNCILMAN ADA BAZALDUA ON THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. YOU CAN GO BACK TO YOUR. THANK YOU.

YOU'RE DONE SPEAKING. I'M DONE SPEAKING. OKAY. YOU MAY GO BACK TO YOUR. THANK YOU. YOUR SEAT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM Z7? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS.

MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO. IS THERE A MOTION? I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE, SUBJECT TO THE AMENDED DEED RESTRICTIONS.

VOLUNTEERED AT THE PODIUM TODAY. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? NO.

I HOPE YOU GET BETTER, SIR. WHAT'S THAT? IF I MAY, ONE.

YES. IF I MAY MAKE ONE COMMENT REGARDING THE VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS WITH SB 840, WE CAN NO LONGER ENFORCE OR ENACT A

[05:20:07]

PROHIBITION ON MULTIFAMILY. WE REMOVED THAT, RIGHT? OKAY. SO WE ARE REMOVING THAT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.

SORRY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. THAT'S BEING REMOVED AS A RESTRICTION.

YES, YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

YEP. OKAY. SO YOU MEMBERS YOU'VE HEARD THE MOTION.

IT WAS DULY SECONDED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM PLEASE. ITEM EIGHT IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING MU DASH ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT.

[Z8. A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting MU-1 Mixed Use District and a resolution accepting deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant on property zoned NO(A) Neighborhood Office District, on the northeast line of LBJ Freeway (I-635), between Abrams Road and Greenville Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Approval Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant Z-25-000083 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearing on November 12, 2025, and is scheduled for consideration on January 28, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

AND A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF LBJ FREEWAY I-635 BETWEEN ABRAMS ROAD AND GREENVILLE AVENUE. MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 15 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST. WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR TO THE REQUEST AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM C EIGHT? NO SPEAKERS. MR. MAYOR, IS THERE A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION.

I MOVE TO REMAND THIS ITEM TO THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRMAN STEWART? NO.

IT NEEDS A LITTLE WORK AND IT NEEDS A COMMUNITY MEETING. THAT'S DISGUSTING. YES.

OKAY. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. GO FOR IT. YES. IT NEEDS A LITTLE WORK, AND IT DEFINITELY NEEDS A COMMUNITY MEETING.

AND SO WE ARE. I DON'T WANT HIM TO HAVE TO PAY EXTRA FEES, SO WE'RE JUST GOING TO REMAND IT TO CPC, GET THAT DONE, AND WE'LL BE BACK. SORRY, GUYS, I KEEP NOT TURNING THIS THING ON.

ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? WE'RE ON Z8 SEEING NONE.

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

NEXT ITEM. NEXT ITEM IS PH ONE. PH ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS REGARDING AMENDMENTS AND UPDATES TO THE CITY OF DALLAS ECONOMIC

[PH1. A public hearing to receive comments regarding amendments and updates to the City of Dallas Economic Development Incentive Policy, and, at the close of the public hearing, authorize the adoption of the Economic Development Incentive Policy for the public purpose of promoting economic and community development and stimulating business and commercial activity in the City of Dallas, including: (1) updated language to ensure alignment with federal directives and associated policy amendments specifically including updated language regarding the new Developing Regional and Inclusive Vendor Enterprises program; (2) addition of a new provision allowing City Council to approve a non-conforming negotiated incentives project with a three-quarters vote of City Council; (3) clarification that the Office of Economic Development has administrative responsibility for funding from Proposition H of the 2024 City’s General Obligation Bond Program and funding from the City’s Mixed Income Housing Development Bonus Program; and (4) general clean-up revisions and minor/technical corrections - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE POLICY, AND, AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AUTHORIZED THE ADOPTION OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE POLICY FOR THE PUBLIC PURPOSE OF PROMOTING ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND STIMULATING BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, INCLUDING ONE UPDATED LANGUAGE TO ENSURE ALIGNMENT WITH FEDERAL DIRECTIVES AND ASSOCIATED POLICY AMENDMENTS, SPECIFICALLY INCLUDING UPDATED LANGUAGE REGARDING THE NEW DEVELOPING REGIONAL AND INCLUSIVE VENDOR ENTERPRISES PROGRAM.

TWO ADDITION OF A NEW PROVISION ALLOWING CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE A NONCONFORMING NEGOTIATED INCENTIVES PROJECT WITH A THREE QUARTERS VOTE OF CITY COUNCIL. THREE CLARIFICATION THAT THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HAS ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR FUNDING FROM PROPOSITION PROPOSITION H OF THE 2024, CITY'S GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROGRAM, AND FUNDING FROM THE CITY'S MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS PROGRAM, AND FOR GENERAL CLEANUP REVISIONS AND MINOR TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM PF ONE? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU HAVE A MOTION.

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

2024 BOND PROGRAM FUNDS CANNOT BE USED TO FINANCE ANY PROJECT APPROVED UNDER THE NONCONFORMING NEGOTIATED INCENTIVES PROVISION.

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

DISCUSSION. MAYOR PRO TEM? NO. ANY DISCUSSION? OH, I SEE SOME PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE. SO IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY DISCUSSION IF YOU COULD DROP OUT.

MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON PH ONE.

YES. MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU SO MUCH. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS HERE.

THIS IS JUST STRICTLY TO CLEAN UP OR TO KEEP US IN ALIGNMENT.

CORRECT. WITH OUR WITH THE FEDERAL GUIDELINES IN REGARDS TO THE REMOVAL, THE REMOVAL OF DI TYPE OF INFORMATION, IS THAT CORRECT? NO, THIS IS NOT.

I'M SORRY. THEN I MISREAD IT. THANK YOU. KEVIN SPATH, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, COUNCIL MEMBER. THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS YES, BUT NEARLY EVERYTHING IN HERE IN TERMS OF AMENDMENTS, IS TO ALIGN WITH FEDERAL DIRECTIVES AND POLICY CHANGES THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVED BACK IN DECEMBER.