[00:00:01] ALL RIGHT. IT IS 1:13 P.M. AND THIS WEBINAR IS BEING TRANSCRIBED AND SUMMARIZED. [VOTING AGENDA] AND THE SPECIAL CALLED CITY COUNCIL MEETING IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER. AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE CITY SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOU HAVE ONE ITEM, BUT YOU DO HAVE. 76 INDIVIDUALS HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. I WILL CALL SPEAKERS IN GROUPS. BUT BEFORE I DO THAT, LET ME RECITE THE SPEAKER GUIDELINES. SPEAKERS MUST OBSERVE THE SAME RULES OF PROPRIETY, DECORUM, AND GOOD CONDUCT APPLICABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. ANY SPEAKER MAKING PERSONAL, IMPERTINENT, PROFANE, OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS, OR WHO BECOMES BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL, WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ROOM. FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN PERSON. FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, YOU WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE SESSION. INDIVIDUALS AGAIN ARE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. YOU'LL NOTICE FOR THOSE IN PERSON SPEAKERS, YOU'LL NOTICE THE TIME ON THE MONITOR AT THE PODIUM WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP. PLEASE STOP FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS. I WILL ANNOUNCE WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. ALSO, SPEAKERS, PLEASE BE MINDFUL THAT DURING YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REFER TO A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER BY NAME AND TO ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON ONLY. YOUR FIRST GROUP OF SPEAKERS WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME. WELL. WELL, THE CHAMBER IS PRETTY FULL. SO THE FIRST SPEAKER, HARRY SWANSON. YOU MAY BEGIN. GOOD AFTERNOON. MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL. HARRY SWANSON, 82, TWO THREE CLAREMONT DRIVE, DISTRICT SEVEN. I AM HERE TODAY TO PRESENT ANOTHER OPTION FOR THE FUTURE OF DALLAS CITY HALL BUILDING. THE DISCUSSION SO FAR HAS CENTERED ON TWO PATHS. KEEPING CITY FUNCTIONS IN THE BUILDING AND UNDERTAKING MAJOR RENOVATION OR DEMOLISHING THE BUILDING AND SELLING THE LAND. BUT THERE HAS BEEN LITTLE DISCUSSION ABOUT A THIRD PATH ADAPTED FOR USE. REPOSITIONING THIS BUILDING FOR PUBLIC PRIVATE USE THAT GENERATES REVENUE BY PRESERVING THE ICONIC CIVIC STRUCTURE. WHY CONSIDER ADAPTIVE REUSE? BECAUSE IT CAN GENERATE PRIVATE INVESTMENT. PRESERVE AN IMPORTANT LANDMARK IN DALLAS ARCHITECTURE. CREATE ONGOING TAX REVENUE, SUPPORT CONVENTION CENTER ACTIVITY, ATTRACT ARCHITECTURAL TOURISM, AND BECAUSE IT DEMONSTRATES DALLAS COMMITMENT TO INNOVATION AND SUSTAINABILITY IN A WAY TO COMBINE TWO PATHS OF DISAGREEMENT WHERE THE CITY MOVES AND CONSOLIDATES IN THE DOWNTOWN. AND IF WE STRUCTURE THE ADAPTIVE REUSE CORRECTLY, NO TAX MONEY WILL BE PUT IN THE RENOVATION OF THE BUILDING. A NATURAL PRIVATE REUSE OF THE BUILDING COULD BE A BUSINESS BOUTIQUE HOTEL WITH A RESTAURANT, A LOUNGE, COFFEE SHOP AND RETAIL, ESPECIALLY GIVEN ITS PROXIMITY TO THE CONVENTION CENTER. THERE ARE MANY USES FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE AROUND THE WORLD. I WON'T GO INTO THEM RIGHT NOW, BUT ADAPTIVE REUSE WORKS ENHANCES COMMUNITIES. IT GENERATES REVENUE AND ATTRACTS VISITORS RATHER THAN LIMITING OURSELVES TO RENOVATION OR DEMOLITION. WE SHOULD EXPLORE. THIS BUILDING COULD BECOME AN ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL DESTINATION THAT DRAWS PEOPLE DOWNTOWN FOR EXPERIENCES, LIVE, WORK, AND LEARN FROM A TRULY UNIQUE CIVIC LANDMARK. NOW IS IT TIME TO BEGIN THE WORK FOR RESEARCH, PROGRAM PLANNING, LEGAL STRUCTURE, INCENTIVE DEVELOPMENT, FINANCIAL MODELING, AND BROAD PUBLIC PRIVATE ENGAGEMENT TO IDENTIFY THE BEST ADAPTIVE YOU REUSE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THIS REMARKABLE BUILDING BEFORE ANY IRREVERSIBLE DECISION IS MADE? WE SHOULD NOT BE NARROW IN OUR THINKING, AND WE SHOULD NOT RUSH TO TEAR IT DOWN. AND I WANT TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND PATIENCE OF LISTENING TO ME. THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT SPEAKER, AMY LOUIS HOFFMAN. AMY LOUIS HOFFMAN, IS NOT PRESENT. SYDNEY WALKER. PAUL. SYDNEY. MISS WALKER IS COMING FORWARD. I WILL ASK THAT ANDREW SCOLA AND SARAH CRANE, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. THANK YOU. MY FAMILY. CONDOLENCES TO YOUR FAMILY. CITY MANAGER. SO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT PROJECTS AND MONEY. SO WE HAVE THE OMNI HOTEL, CITY COUNCIL. I MEAN, CITY OWNED COST 480 MILLION IN BONDS. HOW MUCH DO WE STILL OWE ON THIS HOTEL? OKAY. BAILEY HUTCHINS RENOVATION INITIAL BRIDGE LOAN FOR $1 BILLION IN JUNE, [00:05:09] AND NOW IT'S UP TO $3.7 BILLION. AND THE INCREASE IN THE HOTEL TAX THAT WAS VOTED ON IN 2022 IS SUPPOSED TO PAY FOR THAT. AND THE ASK. SO IT'S BEEN GENERATING REVENUE SINCE 1998. SO NOW THERE'S CONFLICT BETWEEN THE MAVS AND THE STARS ON THE 300 MILLION OF RENOVATIONS. SO BOTH TEAMS ARE LOOKING TO RELOCATE. WHAT HAPPENS IF EITHER OR BOTH TEAMS LEAVE THE ARC? WHAT DO WE DO WITH THIS STADIUM AND THE INCOME THAT WE WOULD LOSE? SO IF WE'RE SELLING CITY HALL, WHAT KIND OF OFFERS ARE WE GETTING? IS THIS MONEY THAT'S GOING TO COVER ALL OF OUR MOVING EXPENSES, DEMOLITION EXPENSES? WILL IT HELP TO OFFSET THE RENT THAT WE WILL END UP PAYING? BECAUSE AT 20 TO $30 PER SQUARE FOOT, WE'RE LOOKING AT MILLIONS PER MONTH. SO AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT GETTING RID OF THIS BUILDING FOR ANOTHER STADIUM ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. SO HAS ANYONE ASKED WHAT ARE THE REAL PROJECTIONS OF HAVING A SECOND ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT SO CLOSE TO THE OTHER ONE? WHAT KIND OF REVENUE IS GOING TO COME IN FOR THAT? WHAT REVENUE IS GOING TO GET IMPACTED OR LOST FROM THE ARC BY HAVING ANOTHER ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT SO CLOSE? SO. AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT HERE AND A LOT OF TALK WITH CONNECTING TO SOUTH DALLAS. HOW DOES THAT IMPACT THE FAIR PARK AND THE PROGRAMING THAT GOES ON THERE? SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING THREE PLACES WHERE THERE WILL BE CONCERTS IN ADDITION TO GAMES. SO HOW IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT DOSES? HOW IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO RENOVATE AND GET MORE AMENITIES INTO OUR COMMUNITY SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE OUR DOLLARS ELSEWHERE? SO I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, AS IT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT FROM PREVIOUS SPEAKERS VALLEY VIEW AND MONEY THAT IS BEING LEFT ON THE TABLE WITH THAT TIF, AND THAT MONEY COULD BE COMING INTO SOUTH DALLAS TO HELP US GET THE THINGS THAT WE NEED. AND THE OTHER DISTRICTS IN SOUTH IN SOUTHERN DALLAS. THANK YOU. ANDREW ESKOLA. HI, I'M ANDREW SCOLA FROM CORNELIA LANE IN DALLAS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS AFTERNOON. I'D LIKE TO ADVISE THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR ON TWO SPECIFIC CHALLENGES AND ONE POTENTIAL SOLUTION. THE FIRST IS THE LACK OF COMPARATIVE COSTS FOR ABANDONING CITY HALL. THE EDC, YOUR CONSULTANT AND STAFF HAVE NOT OUTLINED SCENARIOS OF WHAT IT WILL COST TO LEAVE FOR A NEW HOME. SO I DID, AND YOU HAVE THAT ON SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU. IF YOU EXTEND THE BASE NUMBERS AND THE LOGIC OF THE REPAIR SCENARIO, THE BOND FINANCING RATES, MOVING AND OUTFITTING EXPENSES, MARKET RENT, IT'S LIKELY THAT MOVING TO LEASE SPACE FOR 20 YEARS WOULD COST COULD COST 200 TO $400 MILLION MORE THAN A REPAIR SCENARIO. OR IF WE BUILD, BUY, AND RENOVATE A NEW HOME DOWNTOWN THAT COULD RUN HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, ALSO REQUIRE FINANCING AND MOVING AND OUTFITTING COSTS, RESULTING IN TOTALS THAT COULD BE 300 $500 MILLION HIGHER. SO THAT MEANS THE CITY'S ANNUAL BOND DEBT SERVICE WOULD THEN BE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ABOVE THE REPAIR SERVICE BOND SERVICE EVERY YEAR. THAT'S TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS NOT AVAILABLE FOR YOUR POOLS, YOUR LIBRARIES, YOUR STAFF, YOUR PARKS, YOUR HOUSING. A VOTE FOR LEAVING CITY HALL TODAY IS A VOTE FOR PAINFUL CUTS IN SERVICES DOWN THE ROAD, TO PAY FOR THE HIGHER COSTS OF LEAVING THIS BUILDING. THE SECOND IS A SIGNIFICANT TRUST AND CREDIBILITY PROBLEM THAT THIS BODY NOW HAS WITH RESIDENTS, AND MANY RESIDENTS OF ALL POLITICAL STRIPES BELIEVE THAT THE PROCESS IS RIGGED, THAT THE ADELSONS ARE GREASING EVERYBODY'S POCKETS. THAT I HEARD LAST NIGHT THAT STAFF AND COUNCIL ARE HAVING SECRET MEETINGS IN THE NIGHT WITH THE MAVS AND THE ADELSONS TO TO FIX THIS OUT. THOSE ARE REAL BELIEFS. I'M NOT SAYING I BELIEVE THAT THOSE ARE REAL BELIEFS, AND IT'S DRIVEN BY THINGS LIKE RELEASE OF A REPORT LATE ON A FRIDAY NIGHT. VOTING ON A MONDAY BY COMMITTEE VOTES FIRST, THEN GETTING INPUT SECOND. BY NOT HAVING FULLY INDEPENDENT EVALUATION, BY NOT PROVIDING COMPARATIVE COSTS, BY RUSHING THIS THROUGH. WE MIGHT DISAGREE ON THE NUMBERS, BUT THAT LACK OF TRUST IS REAL AND IT MUST BE FIXED. NOT FOR ME. FOR YOU. YOUR CREDIBILITY AND OUR TRUST IS ESSENTIAL TO THE CITY'S SUCCESS. [00:10:05] YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THOSE HAVE ERODED. YOU HAVE ANY BIG DEVELOPMENT OR INITIATIVE THAT THE CITY NEEDS GOING FORWARD IS GOING TO BE UPHILL SLEDDING AND LESS SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE OF HOW VOTERS FEEL AND THE CITIZENS FEEL ABOUT THE DECISIONS OF THIS COUNCIL. YOU CARE ABOUT THE CITY. YOU ALL DO. THESE TWO CHALLENGES CAN BE BEGIN TO BE SOLVED BY VOTING AGAINST THE RESOLUTIONS AT HAND TODAY AND STEPPING BACK TO BUILD A TRANSPARENT, INCLUSIVE AND STRATEGIC PROCESS FOR OUR SHARED VISION AND OUR SHARED SHARED CITY HALL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, SARAH CRANE. HELLO. MY NAME IS SARAH CRANE, AND I'M HERE AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PRESERVATION DALLAS, LOCATED AT 2922 SWISS AVENUE. EACH MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL HAS VOICED INDIVIDUALLY THAT THE IMPORTANCE OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IN REGARDS TO THE FUTURE OF THIS DALLAS CITY HALL SITE. THE MOTION BEFORE YOU INCLUDES THE REMOVAL OF 911 OR 9 ONE ONE AND 311 SERVICES FROM CITY HALL. THIS MOTION RIGHT NOW IS DEVOID OF ANY DETAILS REGARDING THE COST OF MOVING POTENTIAL, FUTURE LOCATIONS, AND THE COST OF HARDENING THE STRUCTURE FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY. SO THIS IS A PROCESS THAT COULD BE TENS TO HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE MOVE. VOTING TO MOVE THIS PROCESS FORWARD WITHOUT PROPERLY UNDERSTANDING THE COST IS NOT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. AND FRANKLY, THIS NEEDS MORE INFORMATION BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE. ADDITIONALLY, WE NEED MORE INFORMATION REGARDING THE ECONOMIC IMPACT TO SOUTH DALLAS. THE $3 BILLION INVESTMENT AT THE CONVENTION CENTER NEXT DOOR WILL FINALLY CONNECT THE CORE OF SOUTH DALLAS WITH DOWNTOWN. SO YOU SEE, WE REALLY CAN HAVE BOTH BECAUSE WE'RE CURRENTLY HAVING BOTH. YET ALL OF THE STUDIES REGARDING THE FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF SUCH AN INVESTMENT WERE ALL KEPT NORTH OF I-30. AND THIS IS A PROBLEM. THIS IS A REPEATED PROBLEM. THIS IS A DOWNTOWN DALLAS PROBLEM. BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH SOUTH DALLAS AND DOWNTOWN REMAIN NEIGHBORS, ESPECIALLY THROUGH THE CEDARS NEIGHBORHOOD, DOWNTOWN DALLAS RARELY IF EVER, INCLUDES THEM IN THEIR PLANS. I URGE THIS COUNCIL TO MOVE THE STUDY, TO MOVE THIS MOVE, TO STUDY THE IMPACT OF THESE ECONOMIC EXPLORATIONS ON SOUTH DALLAS. I URGE YOU TO REMAIN COMMITTED TO YOUR PROMISES OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND PAUSE THE MOVE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OUT OF CITY HALL UNTIL WE CAN UNDERSTAND THE TRUE RANGE OF COSTS. LASTLY, I URGE YOU TO PLEASE TAKE YOUR TIME. EXPLORE THE TRUE COSTS. GET SECOND OPINIONS. THIS IS LIKELY THE BIGGEST, MOST IMPACTFUL, MOST EXPENSIVE DECISION YOU MAY EVER MAKE IN YOUR CAREER. AND YOU CAN SEE BY THE OUTPOURING OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS HERE HOW IMPORTANT THIS PROCESS IS. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE THIS QUICKLY OR LIGHTLY OR WITHOUT THE SERIOUSNESS OF THOUGHT A DECISION LIKE THIS DESERVES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, DOLORES LEVY SOROKA. WHILE MR. ROCHA IS COMING FORWARD, I WILL ASK MICHAEL SORRELL AND JIM ANDERSON TO COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. DOLORES LEVY SOROKA I LIVE AT 4822 SWISS AVENUE IN DISTRICT TWO. CITY HALL IS NOT JUST A BUILDING, IT'S A PUBLIC ASSET, A CIVIC SYMBOL AND A PIECE OF DALLAS HISTORY. WHY IS URGENCY BEING MANUFACTURED? THE MAVERICK CEO RECENTLY STATED THERE'S NO PROJECT TO TALK ABOUT UNTIL THE CITY WOULD SIGNAL TO US THAT THERE'S SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT. SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE MAVS WANT THIS SITE FOR A NEW ARENA AND ARE AWAITING COUNCIL ACTION. THERE ARE TWO FINALIST LOCATIONS DOWNTOWN CITY HALL AND THE 110 ACRE VALLEY VIEW SITE. THE VALLEY VIEW PROPERTY OFFERS SCALE FOR A FULL ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, POSSIBLY EVEN A CASINO RESORT IF THE LEGISLATURE EVER EXPANDS. GAMBLING. DOWNTOWN IS DESCRIBED AS BASKETBALL FIRST BECAUSE OF THE ACREAGE IS LIMITED. IF A PUBLICLY OWNED CIVIC INSTITUTION IS BEING CLEARED TO SATISFY A PRIVATE TIMETABLE, THAT'S NOT LEADERSHIP. IT IS BETRAYAL. BETRAYAL. ONCE I AM PAY, CITY HALL IS GONE. IT IS GONE FOREVER. DO NOT VOTE TODAY TO GIVE AWAY PUBLIC TRUST. DO NOT LET DALLAS HISTORY, ITS INTEGRITY AND ITS CIVIC PRIDE BE TRADED FOR A SCOREBOARD. THANK YOU. MICHAEL. MICHAEL SORRELL. THANK YOU. [00:15:06] MR. MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITY MANAGER. IT IS A PLEASURE TO BE HERE TODAY. MY NAME IS MICHAEL SORRELL. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF PAUL QUINN COLLEGE. I AM HERE TODAY BECAUSE I AM SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY HAS HAD TO EXECUTE ON WHAT IT IS YOU ARE WRESTLING WITH. 19 YEARS AGO, WHEN I TOOK OVER THE PRESIDENCY AT PAUL QUINN, WE HAD 15 ABANDONED BUILDINGS ON OUR CAMPUS. IT WAS A CAMPUS THAT PEOPLE LOOKED AT THE BUILDINGS AND SAID, IF WE ONLY COULD RENOVATE THEM, IF WE ONLY COULD DO THESE THINGS, WE CAN RETURN IT TO ITS GLORY. THE REALITY OF IT IS IT WOULD HAVE COST ROUGHLY $50 MILLION TO RENOVATE EVEN HALF OF THE 15 BUILDINGS THAT WERE ABANDONED. SO WE HAD TO MAKE A DIFFICULT DECISION, WHICH WAS TO TEAR DOWN THOSE BUILDINGS, PRESERVE THOSE WHICH WE COULD, AND CREATE A DIFFERENT VISION FOR THE INSTITUTION TO MOVE IT FORWARD. 19 YEARS LATER, OUR INSTITUTION IS RADICALLY DIFFERENT THAN IT EVER HAD BEEN DURING ITS TIME IN DALLAS. WE ARE AN INSTITUTION THAT REGULARLY HAS SEVEN FIGURE SURPLUSES. WE HAVE WAITING LISTS FOR STUDENTS TO ATTEND OUR INSTITUTION. IT IS THRIVING. WE WIN NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. WE SEND STUDENTS OFF TO IVY LEAGUE GRADUATE SCHOOLS, ALL BECAUSE WE HAD THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT WHAT WAS BEFORE US AND SEE NOT WHAT WAS THE BEST DAYS OF IT BEFORE, BUT THE POSSIBILITIES AHEAD OF US. AND SO AS YOU WRESTLE WITH THIS, I UNDERSTAND HOW IT FEELS TO HAVE PEOPLE BE VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT BUILDINGS AND ABOUT THEIR IDEAS AND HOW THEY INTERNALIZE IT AND SEE THEMSELVES. BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT'S LIKE TO MAKE A DECISION, TO GO FORWARD, TO HAVE A VISION, TO EXECUTE THAT VISION AND TO COMPLETE SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE COULDN'T SEE BUT YOU COULD SEE. SO AS YOU GO FORWARD WITH IT, JUST REMEMBER THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE EASY. IT'S NOT SET UP TO BE EASY. BUT THE COURAGE IT TAKES TO CREATE A NEW VISION, TO ARTICULATE THAT VISION AND THEN TO MOVE IT FORWARD. AND ONE LAST THING ABOUT DOING SO, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POSSIBILITIES ABOUT IMAGINING A NEW MODEL OF GOVERNMENT OPERATION ARE QUITE SIGNIFICANT. THE ABILITY TO SEND JOBS INTO OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY SHOULD NOT BE IGNORED. WE ARE A COMMUNITY SURROUNDING AND COUNCILWOMAN BLAIR'S DISTRICT, WHERE WE'RE ALWAYS OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITIES OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, JUST AS MANY OF YOUR DISTRICTS ARE AS WELL. I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU, AS YOU GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, NOT TO MISS THE OPPORTUNITIES ON THE TABLE AS YOU THINK OUTSIDE OF THE BOX. THANK YOU. AND I JUST ALSO WOULD ALWAYS LIKE TO REMIND YOU, YOU ARE ALWAYS WELCOME TO COME VISIT PAUL QUINN COLLEGE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JIM ANDERSON. JIM ANDERSON, FORMER HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS IN THE MID 1990S, DOWNTOWN DALLAS WAS DEAD. REALLY DEAD. THERE WERE 40 LARGE, VACANT HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT WERE UP FOR DEMOLITION. ONLY NEIMAN MARCUS AND HIS OFFICE WAS WAS OCCUPIED. THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL AT THAT TIME SAID, TEAR THEM DOWN. THIS IS DALLAS. WE'LL START OVER. A SMALL GROUP OF COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WENT AGAINST THE GRAIN HAD ANOTHER GREAT IDEA. HOW ABOUT IN-TOWN HOUSING? CAN WE CONVERT THESE BUILDINGS INTO NEW RESIDENCES? A HUGE INCENTIVE PACKAGE WAS ESTABLISHED. THESE BUILDINGS CAME BACK SLOWLY BUT SURELY, BECOMING RESIDENCES AND OLD DEPARTMENT STORES, OFFICES AND BANKS. DOWNTOWN DALLAS POPULATION SOARED TO 15,000 PEOPLE. 15,000 PEOPLE LIVE IN DOWNTOWN IN 2025 YEARS. SO THIS SMALL GROUP OF COUNCIL MEMBERS SAW HOPE. IF THESE 40 BUILDINGS HAD BEEN DEMOLISHED, DOWNTOWN DALLAS WOULD HAVE SPIRALED DOWN AND BE NOTHING LIKE THE DOWNTOWN WE HAVE TODAY. ONE OF THE INCENTIVES IS A HUGE INCENTIVE IS THE NATIONAL REGISTER 20% INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT, AND THE STATE OF TEXAS MATCHES THAT WITH 20% CREDIT. THE NATIONAL BANK BUILDING, WHICH IS IMAGES 1960S. HISTORIC BUILDING WAS A $450 MILLION RENOVATION. 45% OF $450 MILLION WAS A GAME CHANGER FOR THAT BUILDING. IF LISTED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER, 45% OF THAT $1 BILLION WILL BE TALKING ABOUT CAN BE SOLD TO FOR PROFIT ENTITIES LIKE A DEVELOPER. SO THERE'S THE WAY YOU CAN MAKE THESE INCENTIVES WORK FOR CITY HALL. AND IF THE BUILDING IS RENOVATED BY ANOTHER DEVELOPER, THAT'S 45% CAN GO DIRECTLY TO THAT, THAT ENTITY. SO THERE ARE WAYS THAT HISTORIC PRESERVATION WORK FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS AND FOR THIS BUILDING. [00:20:01] THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ELIZABETH BETH BRANDT, WHILE MISS BRANDT IS COMING FORWARD, IF KEVIN PFEIFFER AND MARTHA HAMBURG WOULD COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ELIZABETH BRANDT AND I LIVE AT 2611 ROSS AVENUE IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS. I HAVE BEEN A PROUD RESIDENT FOR 22 YEARS AND A DOWNTOWN RESIDENT FOR THE LAST THREE. I LOVE THIS CITY AND THAT IS WHY I'M HERE TODAY. THINK OF ANY GREAT CITY IN THE WORLD PARIS, NEW ORLEANS, BOSTON, WHAT COMES TO MIND? THEIR SKYLINES, THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, THE MIX OF HISTORIC AND MODERN STANDING SIDE BY SIDE. THAT VARIETY OF BUILDING STOCK DID NOT HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT. IT IS THE RESULT OF CITY LEADERS WHO EMBRACED THEIR HERITAGE AND THEY KNOW IT HAS VALUE. OLDER BUILDINGS TELL A STORY, AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO TEAR THEM DOWN IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD. DALLAS HAS NOT ALWAYS UNDERSTOOD THIS LESSON. OF THE 200 PLUS BUILDINGS IN OUR CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. VERY FEW BUILT BEFORE 1960 REMAIN. THANKFULLY, THERE WAS A BIG BUILDING BOOM IN THE 70S AND THE 80S WHICH GAVE DALLAS ITS ICONIC SKYLINE. THOSE GENERATIONS BUILT SOMETHING TO BE PROUD OF, AND WE HAVE DEMOLISHED A REMARKABLE PART OF OUR OWN HISTORY IN THE NAME OF PROGRESS. NOW IT FALLS TO THIS COUNCIL, TO US AS CITIZENS, TO BE THE GENERATION, TO PROTECT IT. BUILD NEW. LET IT DECAY. TEAR DOWN. REPEAT. THAT IS NOT PROGRESS. THAT IS A CYCLE OF WASTE. WHICH BRINGS ME TO MY SECOND POINT. COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU ARE ELECTED TO BE THE STEWARDS OF THIS CITY'S RESOURCES, ALL OF THEM. AND THAT INCLUDES THE BUILDINGS THAT THE DALLAS CITY OF DALLAS OWNS. IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS, DALLAS CITY HALL WILL BECOME ELIGIBLE TO BE PUT ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. THIS IS A TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY, NOT A BURDEN. THERE IS AN EXISTING BOND. MONEY FROM PAST ELECTIONS HAS NOT YET BEEN ALLOCATED. USE THAT MONEY. DIRECT THOSE FUNDS TOWARDS THE MINOR BUT NECESSARY REPAIRS AND DO IT IN A WAY THAT ALIGNS WITH THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION. WE CANNOT LET CITY HALL FOLLOW THE SAME PATTERN WE HAVE WATCHED PLAY OUT ACROSS DOWNTOWN, NEGLECT IT, DECLARE IT BEYOND SAVING, AND TEAR IT DOWN, ONLY TO BUILD SOMETHING NEW THAT WILL FACE THE SAME GENERATION OR THE SAME FATE IN ANOTHER GENERATION. THAT IS NOT STEWARDSHIP, IT'S NEGLIGENCE. I'M ASKING CITY COUNCIL TO DO TWO THINGS OWN OUR HISTORY THE POSITIVE AND THE DIFFICULT. COMMITTED TO PRESERVING IT, AND FULFILL YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AS STEWARDS FOR THE RESOURCES ENTRUSTED TO YOU BY THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS, YOU ARE ELECTED TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF DALLAS RESIDENTS. BUILDINGS ARE RESOURCES. HISTORY IS A RESOURCE. PLEASE PROTECT THEM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. KEVIN PFEIFFER. GOOD AFTERNOON. COUNCIL. I LIVE AT 1905 OLD ORCHARD I SPENT OVER 42 YEARS OF SERVICE AS A PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECT, GETTING PROJECTS SUCCESSFULLY BUILT, NOT ABANDONING THOSE BUILDINGS AND TEARING THEM DOWN. THE ABILITY OF CITIZEN LEADERS WITH A STRONG DESIRE FOR ACTUAL PUBLIC SERVICE HAS LARGELY BEEN REPLACED WITH CANDIDATES WHO CATER MORE TO THEIR WEALTHY DONORS THAN TO THE CITIZENS THEY ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT. KEY WORDS ARE STEWARDSHIP AND LONG TERM FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY AND THE PATIENCE TO SLOW THIS ENTIRE PROCESS DOWN. WHERE DOES CAP FIGURE INTO THE CURRENT PROPOSALS TO ABANDON CITY HALL AND JUST GIVE UP? DALLAS IS NOT A CITY OF QUITTERS. MAYBE YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH JOHNNY TAYLOR'S SONG CHEATER. CHEAPER TO KEEP HER. LIKE IF WE KEEP THE CITY IT'S MUCH OR KEEP THIS BUILDING. IT'S MUCH EASIER TO DO THAT. IS THIS CIVIC CENTER AT THE RISK OF BEING ABANDONED? IF SO, WHY? THE CONCEPT OF OUR TAX DOLLARS BEING USED TO PAY RENT, AND THOSE ASSOCIATED TAXES FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL HUNDRED YEARS FOR NO REASON, WHEN STANDARD SCHEDULE MAINTENANCE WOULD KEEP THIS FACILITY OPERATIONAL FOR GENERATIONS IS CERTIFIABLY CRAZY. THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS HAVE PAID FOR AND OWN THIS BUILDING AND THE LAND IT CURRENTLY OCCUPIES. BECAUSE OF THAT, WE ALL NEED TO BE EXCELLENT STEWARDS FOR THE CONSTITUENTS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS, NOT THE LANDLORDS OF EXISTING BUILDINGS IN THE CBD OR OUT OF STATE OWNERS OF LARGE LOCAL SPORTS FRANCHISE. WHAT IS THE RUSH SCHEDULE AND HAVE QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED THIRD PARTY PROFESSIONALS WHO DO NOT HAVE ANY VESTED INTEREST IN THE THOROUGH AND UNBIASED REVIEW OF THE ACTUAL CONDITION OF THE FACILITY? HAVE THOSE PROFESSIONALS ISSUE RFP TO TO SUITABLE GENERAL CONTRACTORS IDENTIFYING AND OUTLINING SCOPES OF WORK. [00:25:06] THIS PROCESS WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE TIME, PROBABLY 4 TO 6 MONTHS, INCLUDING RESPONDING TO RFIS AND RFQS HAVE A PUBLIC BID OPENING WHERE QUALIFIED BIDS ARE OPENED AND REVIEWED. NONE OF THIS HAS HAPPENED TO ARRIVE AT THE CURRENT BUDGET. WHY NOT TRY COMING FROM A PLACE OF REPAIRING WHAT IS NECESSARY? LIKE A GLASS HALF FULL TO REUSE THIS CIVIC CENTER INSTEAD OF BOWING AT THE FEET OF AN OUT OF TOWN SPORTS FRANCHISE OWNER. IS IT BETTER TO POLISH A DIAMOND ONE ALREADY HAS RATHER THAN TO CONSTANTLY ASPIRE FOR ANOTHER? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GREG JOHNSON. MR. JOHNSON IS VIRTUAL. YES. THANK YOU. I AM GREG JOHNSON AT 536 ENCHANTED LANE IN DISTRICT SEVEN. CITY HALL SERVES AS OUR CIVIC CENTER AND BELONGS TO DALLAS OUTRIGHT. THE STRUCTURE IS INTERNATIONALLY RESPECTED AND HAS ALREADY BEEN DETERMINED ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. THE ROBUST BUILDING TOOK SIX YEARS TO CONSTRUCT. THE MASSIVE CONCRETE STRUCTURE WOULD REQUIRE AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF ENERGY COST AND DISRUPTION TO DEMOLISH. THIS ACT WOULD REVERSE THE COURSE OF THE CITY'S GREEN BUILDING INITIATIVES. OVER THE PAST DECADES, ROOFING, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, RESTROOMS, AND OTHER ACCESSIBILITY MODIFICATIONS ARE NOT UNUSUAL FOR A BUILDING OF ITS AGE. THE PLAZA DECK HAS ISSUES, AND THIS COULD SERVE AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REIMAGINE THIS PUBLIC SPACE. REPORTS INDICATE ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALS IN THE BUILDING, ALSO NOT UNCOMMON FOR BUILDINGS OF THIS ERA. ABATEMENT EFFORTS WILL BE REQUIRED. EVEN IF THE BUILDING WERE TO COME DOWN, THE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COULD BE PHASED AND COULD BE COMPLETED WITH THE BUILDING PARTIALLY OCCUPIED. LOOK AT THE DFW AIRPORT IMPROVEMENTS OF THE TERMINALS FROM THE SAME ERA WHERE THIS APPROACH HAS BEEN GOING FOR SEVERAL YEARS. YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAVE THIS ICONIC STRUCTURE AND HELP REIMAGINE IT FOR ITS NEXT 50 TO 100 YEARS. WHY RUSH A DECISION WHICH WILL SEVERELY AFFECT THE CITY FOR DECADES? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MARTHA. HAMBURG. MAYOR. MAYOR. PRO TEM MORENO. COUNCIL PERSONS. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE PUT ON THE BRAKES FOR THIS PROPOSAL TO TEAR DOWN OUR GLOBAL LANDMARK CITY HALL. OUR CASTLE FORTRESS HOME. WHERE? OUR LEADERS, OUR PLANNERS, WORK AND CREATE OUR FUTURE. I PUT ON MY WE THE PEOPLE. STICKER. WE BUILT THE CITY HALL AND WE WANT A REFERENDUM. THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO INVITE CITIZENS ALL OVER DALLAS TO COME IN AND TALK ABOUT THE OPTIONS. ONCE WE HAVE MORE THAN ONE BID, MORE THAN ONE REVIEW OF WHAT IT COSTS TO REPAIR IT. IT IS A CASTLE. IT IS A FORTRESS. IT IS OUR HOME FOR ALL THE REASONS, ECONOMIC AND SENTIMENTAL. WHAT A GREAT CHANCE TO BRING MORE PEOPLE IN TO TALK TO. THIS IS WHERE YOU COME TO VOTE. YOU CAN COME TO THIS PLACE TO SAY WHAT YOU WANT FOR OUR CITY TO LEARN THINGS ABOUT OUR CITY. IT MAY BE THERE ARE OPTIONS, OTHER OPTIONS. BUT PLEASE, LET'S OPEN IT UP AND EXTEND IT SO THAT OTHER PEOPLE, SO THAT THE PEOPLE THAT BUILT THE CITY. I THINK WE'RE GETTING NEAR THAT AND I HOPE SO. AND WHEN WE DO RENOVATE AND I THINK WE WILL, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOMEONE PUT IN A TASTEFUL STAIR RAIL HERE AND HERE. SO THAT ALL OF US DON'T FALL DOWN THE STAIRS. [00:30:03] I I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT. IT COULD BE BRASS. IT COULD BE WOOD. LOOK AT THIS ROOM FULL OF ARCHITECTS SO THAT WE'RE NOT DOING ONE STEP. HALF STEP. OKAY, I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME. BUT DO CONSIDER THAT. AND THANK YOU. MR. MORENO. JESSIE, DEAR. THANK YOU, MICHAEL AMONETTE. WHILE MR. AMONETTE IS COMING FORWARD, IF MICHAEL KING AND JESSICA STEWART COULD COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I LIVE AT 2210 WEST 10TH. I'M A THIRD GENERATION OAK CLIFF NATIVE. IT'S HARD TO BE AN OLD BUILDING IN DALLAS AND OAK CLIFF. IT'S HARD BECAUSE THEY'RE LIKE PREY AND DEVELOPERS ARE THE PREDATORS. THE BEST ANCHOR FOR THIS AREA IS THIS BUILDING. REPAIR IT. RESTORE IT. CREATE A MASSIVE LAWN IN FRONT OF IT, LIKE KLYDE WARREN PARK FOR PARK GOERS FOR LARGE GATHERINGS. TAKE ADVANTAGE OF WHAT YOU HAVE. THAT'S THE SORT OF AUTHENTICITY THAT VISITORS DESIRE, AND REAL CITY NEEDS SOMETHING UNIQUELY DALLAS THAT CAN'T BE FOUND ANYWHERE ELSE. BUILD AROUND IT. LET IT ANCHOR THE DISTRICT ALONG WITH MEMORIAL AUDITORIUM. I'D LIKE TO READ YOU JUST A COUPLE OF STATISTICS FROM YOUR OWN REPORT THAT WAS RELEASED LAST YEAR ABOUT THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN DALLAS. HISTORIC AND CONSERVATION DISTRICTS ARE 15% MORE VALUABLE THAN OTHER AREAS. BETWEEN 2012 AND 2022, COMMERCIAL HISTORIC DISTRICTS SAW AN OVERALL 57% JOB INCREASE IN SMALL BUSINESSES, 273 INCREASE IN LARGE COMPANIES. THIS FAR OUTPACES JOB GROWTH IN THE REST OF DALLAS. IN BOTH CATEGORIES, HISTORIC DISTRICTS HAVE A HIGHER SHARE OF CREATIVE WORKER JOBS THAN THE REST OF THE CITY. 64.1% OF THE JOBS FALL INTO PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES. HERITAGE TOURISM SPENT $2.5 BILLION ANNUALLY IN DALLAS. THERE IS AN INCREASING APPETITE FOR AUTHENTIC CULTURAL EXPERIENCES. MILLENNIALS DRIVE THE INDUSTRY AS THEY TRAVEL THE MOST. THEY ARE WILLING TO PAY MORE FOR UNIQUE, CULTURAL AND AUTHENTIC TRAVEL EXPERIENCES. REALIZE WHAT YOU HAVE HERE. THERE'S A REASON WHY THERE ARE SO MANY ADVOCATING FOR THIS BUILDING. EVERY TIME YOU TALK ABOUT IT, MORE AND MORE VOICES ARE VOICED THEIR OPPOSITION TO THIS. WITH EACH DAY WE DISCUSS DEMOLISHING IT. MY PARTNER AND I BOUGHT A BUILDING AT THE CORNER OF BISHOP AND EIGHTH IN BISHOP ARTS 20 YEARS AGO. IT WAS LARGELY VACANT. IT WAS FULL OF BULLET HOLES. THERE WERE BULLETS. THERE WERE BIRDS FLYING AROUND INSIDE OF IT. THE ROOF WAS FALLING IN AND THERE WERE PACKS OF DOGS OUTSIDE. ALL THESE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DEMOLISH THIS BUILDING WOULD SURELY HAVE SAID, TEAR IT DOWN. WE DID NOT. WE INVESTED IN IT. TODAY, THE AREA IS ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL AND POPULAR DISTRICTS IN THIS CITY, SPURRING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN NEW DEVELOPMENT AND ADDITIONAL HOUSING ANCHORED BY THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS, THEY HAVE BEEN A CATALYST FOR GROWTH AND A CHANGE IN THE OVERALL PERSPECTIVE OF PERCEPTION OF OAK CLIFF. WE ARE A PART OF THOSE STATISTICS. THE PRESERVATION OF CITY HALL HAS NEITHER BEEN CONSIDERED NOR QUANTIFIED. LOOK AROUND YOU. PEOPLE LOVE OLD BUILDINGS. PLEASE DON'T TAKE AWAY OUR PUBLIC GATHERING SPACE. EASY, CENTRALIZED ACCESS TO OUR GOVERNMENT. BE HONEST AND STOP MAKING BACKROOM DEALS WITH DEVELOPERS. DIRECT STAFF TO CREATE A PLAN FOR THIS BUILDING'S FUTURE INTACT, LIKE THE VAST MAJORITY OF US WANT. CREATE A TASK FORCE OF EXPERTS TO HELP YOU IMPLEMENT IT. WHO WON'T CREATE POLICIES TO BENEFIT THEMSELVES. BE VISIONARIES. ABANDONMENT, SELLING OUT, SELLING OUT TO BILLIONAIRES, AND HIDING IN OFFICE BUILDINGS SCATTERED AROUND TOWN IS THE OPPOSITE OF THAT. DEMOLISHING THIS BUILDING WOULD BE AN INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED TRAVESTY. WE DON'T WANT THAT TO BE YOUR LEGACY OR OURS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. MICHAEL KING HAS CANCELED JESSICA STEWART. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS JESSICA STEWART, AND I LIVE AT 155 CLASS IN DALLAS, TEXAS, 75218. I'D ALSO LIKE TO OFFER MY CONDOLENCES TO THE CITY MANAGER. MR. MAYOR, I'M AN ARCHITECT AND A CONSTITUENT, AND I CAN SAY FROM A PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE PERSPECTIVE THAT THERE IS NO MORE SUSTAINABLE APPROACH THAN TO STAY PUT, AND THERE'S NO MORE AFFORDABLE APPROACH THAN TO STAY PUT. WE HAVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT IN THIS BUILDING FINANCIALLY. AND WE WOULD LOVE AS THE ARCHITECT AND DESIGN COMMUNITY TO SPEND MORE TIME EXPLAINING OUR POSITIONS AND THOUGHTS. BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF BENEVOLENT ARCHITECTS AND DESIGN MEMBERS WHO WOULD LOVE NOTHING MORE THAN TO PARTICIPATE IN MAKING THIS THE BEST CITY THAT IT CAN BE THE BEST CITY IN THE WORLD. NOT ONLY AM I AM I AN ARCHITECT, BUT I'M A CONSTITUENT. AND I AM DEEPLY PASSIONATE ABOUT SOCIAL JUSTICE. [00:35:04] AND I CARE ABOUT ALL PEOPLE. I HAVE COME TO THIS PLACE SO MANY TIMES TO SPEAK OUT ABOUT THE THINGS THAT MATTER THE MOST TO ALL OF US. HARM AGAINST CHILDREN PEOPLE BEING ABUSED, CIVIL RIGHTS SO MANY ISSUES. FAMILY SEPARATIONS. IN 2006 AND 2017, I WALKED IN THE MEGA MARCH WITH FAMILIES, STROLLERS, PEOPLE IN CANES FROM THE CATHEDRAL TO THIS BUILDING. WE WERE IN A PROCESSION FROM THE HEART OF THE CITY IN THE ARTS DISTRICT, THE CATHEDRAL TO THE HEART OF THE CITY CITY HALL, AND WE WERE ABLE TO EXPRESS OURSELVES AND HAVE THE POWER OF THIS PEACEFUL MARCH BECAUSE WE HAD A PLACE TO GO. CAN YOU IMAGINE US JUST WALKING TO SOME BUILDING AND JUST STANDING THERE ON A STREET? THIS PLAZA RECEIVED US. IT GAVE US CONTEXT FOR OUR POWER AS CITIZENS TO VOICE OUR GRIEVANCES AND OUR VISION FOR CARE. AND GUESS WHAT? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO. BECAUSE YOU GUYS CANNOT DO THIS BY YOURSELF. YOU NEED US. THERE'S NOT AN ARCHITECT HERE. THERE'S NOT A PLANNER HERE. YOU GUYS NEED US. PLEASE USE US. DON'T VOTE TO DO SPEND ONE SINGLE PENNY WITHOUT THE PROPER PROCESS. WE NEED TRANSPARENCY. WE NEED YOUR INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT AND CITY HALL DALLAS TO SAY. HEY GUYS, WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT SPENDING SOME MONEY ON OUR HOUSE, OKAY? WE NEED A LOT MORE INFORMATION AND AND INVESTMENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW GO BACK TO SPEAKER NUMBER TWO, AMY LEWIS HOFFMAN, WHOSE VIRTUAL. THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR JOHNSON AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. AND MY CONDOLENCES TO YOU, CITY MANAGER. AND MY NAME IS AMY LEWIS HOFFMAN. AND I SERVE AS BOARD CHAIR OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS INC, THE PRINCIPAL ADVOCATE AND STEWARD OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS. FOR NEARLY 70 YEARS, DD HAS WORKED TO STRENGTHEN THE ECONOMIC VITALITY AND LONG TERM COMPETITIVENESS OF OUR CITY'S URBAN CORE. TODAY, I AM HERE REPRESENTING THE POSITION OF OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS. BASED IN PART ON THE FINDINGS OF THE EDC REPORT. DD SUPPORTS RELOCATING CITY HALL OFFICES WITHIN THE CBD CORE AND FREEING THE CURRENT SITE FOR BOLD, CATALYTIC REDEVELOPMENT WE KNOW THIS WILL REQUIRE THE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. THIS WAS NOT A CASUAL DECISION. IT FOLLOWED CAREFUL DELIBERATION ABOUT WHAT KIND OF DOWNTOWN WE WANT AND NEED. WE UNDERSTAND THIS CONVERSATION HAS BEEN FRAMED LARGELY AS A CULTURAL PRESERVATION VERSUS COMMERCE. WE BELIEVE IN CULTURE. WE ALSO BELIEVE IN DOWNTOWN GROWTH AND COMPETITIVENESS. DOWNTOWN DALLAS IS AT A PIVOTAL MOMENT. BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INVESTMENT ARE UNDERWAY ALONG THE SOUTHERN EDGE OF DOWNTOWN. THE CONVENTION CENTER REDEVELOPMENT, THE FUTURE DALLAS WINGS ARENA, MAJOR I-30 CONSTRUCTION AND CONNECTIVITY PROJECTS LINKING DOWNTOWN TO THE CEDARS. AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE CONFRONTING HISTORIC OFFICE VACANCY AND AGING BUILDINGS AND WORKING TO STABILIZE AND MODERNIZE OUR CORE. IN THAT CONTEXT, THE CITY HALL SITE REPRESENTS ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES OF OUR GENERATION IN A GENERATION. THIS IS OUR CHANCE TO MODERNIZE GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS WHILE UNLOCKING ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AND VIBRANCY IN A LONG DORMANT CORNER OF DOWNTOWN, BENEFITTING THE RESIDENTS, SMALL BUSINESSES, ENTREPRENEURS AND WORKERS. SOME HAVE CRITICIZED THE PACE OF THIS PROCESS. WE BELIEVE IT HAS MOVED AT THE PACE REQUIRED TO MEET THIS MOMENT OF URGENCY, INVESTING SUBSTANTIAL RESOURCES INTO A BUILDING THAT DOES NOT MEET LONGTIME LONG TERM FUNCTIONAL NEEDS DOES NOT POSITION DALLAS FOR THE NEXT 50 YEARS. LEVERAGING THIS SITE IN ALIGNMENT WITH SURROUNDING PUBLIC INVESTMENTS DOES. LET ME BE CLEAR ABOUT ONE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE. IF CITY HALL MOVES THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT BELONGS IN DOWNTOWN, IT SHOULD REMAIN WITHIN THE HIGHWAY LOOP, ACCESSIBLE BY TRANSIT, INTEGRATED WITH OUR BUSINESS AND CULTURAL DISTRICTS, AND SYMBOLIC OF DALLAS COMMITMENT TO ITS URBAN HEART. PART OF THIS DECISION IS ENSURING THAT WE DO NOT PUT FUTURE LEADERS IN THE SAME TOUGH POSITION DECADES FROM NOW. GENERATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES REQUIRE GENERATIONAL DECISIONS. AND ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD, THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP, YOUR HARD WORK, AND YOUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION. [00:40:01] THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PATRICIA. SIMON. PATRICIA SIMON IS NOT PRESENT. MATTHEW BACH. OKAY. WHILE MR. BACH IS COMING FORWARD, I WILL ASK THE HONORABLE VALETTA, FORSYTH, LILLE AND RENE SCHMIDT TO COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MATT BACH. I LIVE AT 15746 COVID CIRCLE, DALLAS, TEXAS. AND THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TODAY. I'M NOT HERE TO REPEAT THE MANY SUBSTANTIVE ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE ABANDONMENT AND DEMOLITION OF CITY HALL. OTHERS WILL SPEAK TO THOSE ISSUES. I'M HERE TO ADDRESS THE PROCESS. AND AS A COUNTERPOINT TO WHAT YOU JUST HEARD, I WOULD ARGUE THE PROCESS IS NOT GOING WELL. FRANKLY, THE PROCESS UNDER WHICH IS YOUR CONTROL IS FALLING SHORT. IT'S BEING RUSHED AND NOT MAKING NOT BEING FULLY TRANSPARENT BY NOT FOSTERING A ROBUST PUBLIC DISCUSSION, AND BY NOT SEEKING MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT, EXPERT OPINIONS ON THE SCOPE AND COST OF THE REPAIRS, YOU'RE SQUANDERING PUBLIC TRUST. THIS IS A LEADERSHIP ISSUE. THE PROCESS ITSELF SHOULD NOT BE AS CONTENTIOUS AS THE OUTCOME IF THE PROCESS IS CLEAR, OPEN AND WELL DOCUMENTED. PEOPLE MAY STILL DISAGREE WITH THE FINAL DECISION, BUT AT LEAST THEY'LL UNDERSTAND THE INPUTS THAT LED TO IT. THAT TRANSPARENCY BUILDS CREDIBILITY AND ACCEPTANCE. RIGHT NOW, THERE IS UNNECESSARY SUSPICION SURROUNDING THIS DECISION. THE DISCIPLINED, TRANSPARENT PROCESS A DISCIPLINED, TRANSPARENT PROCESS WOULD REMOVE MUCH OF THAT DOUBT. SLOW DOWN. OPEN IT UP. GET THE FACTS FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES. AND THEN YOU LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY. AND ULTIMATELY, PLEASE RETURN THE COUNCIL'S FOCUS TO THE CORE RESPONSIBILITIES WE ELECTED YOU TO HANDLE. FUNDING LIBRARIES, ADDRESSING PUBLIC SAFETY AND MANAGING THE ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF THIS CITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HONORABLE VALETTA FORSYTH LEAL. MAYOR COUNCIL. MISS TOLBERT, MY HEARTFELT CONDOLENCES. AS A PERSON WHO USUALLY HAS LOTS TO SAY. I STRUGGLE TO ARTICULATE ALL MY CONCERNS TODAY AS THEY ARE MULTI-LAYERED AND COMPLEX. WHILE THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS A SPORTS TEAM, I WILL LEAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS TO OTHERS. THERE IS LOADS OF DATA FOR YOUR DECISION MAKING. BEYOND THAT CONCERN IS MY CONCERN ABOUT TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT AS WE AS THERE MAY NEVER BE ANOTHER CITY HALL. WILL OUR GOVERNMENT BE OPEN TO THE PEOPLE, WILL BE ACCESSIBLE, AND WILL WE HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC PLAZA TO CELEBRATE, TO GRIEVE, TO PROTEST THAT THERE IS A COST OF THAT INACCESSIBILITY, THAT FOR THE GOVERNMENT SPACE, YOU WILL BE RENTING IT IN PERPETUITY. WE WILL NOT HAVE EXPLORED THE TRUE COST OF DEPARTURE OR DEMOLITION TO YOUR GENERAL FUND. THERE IS THE LOSS OF THE ARCHITECTURAL, CIVIC AND CULTURAL HERITAGE. OUR CULTURAL MEMORY ERASED. FINALLY, THERE IS A PLAN FOR OUR DOWNTOWN. THIS DISCUSSION IS BEING DRIVEN BY THE ECONOMICS OF PERSONAL WEALTH RATHER THAN THE VALUE OF HUMAN SCALE URBAN PLANNING. OUR DOWNTOWN SHOULD BE CONNECTED AND ACTIVATED THROUGHOUT. THIS IS NOT AN EITHER OR. IT'S AN AND. THIS IS A TIME TO HIRE AN URBAN PLANNER, NOT A DEVELOPER. DO NOT TODAY ALLOW THIS TO BE A DEATH KNELL FOR OUR SEAT OF GOVERNMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RENE. SCHMIDT. RENE. RENE. SCHMIDT 715 PARKMONT IN DALLAS. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU. [00:45:02] PLEASE DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT DEMOLISHING CITY HALL. THIS ICONIC BUILDING IS THE HEART OF DALLAS, A SYMBOL OF THIS GREAT CITY KNOWN THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. CAN YOU IMAGINE BERLIN WITHOUT THE BRANDENBURG GATE? PARIS WITHOUT THE EIFFEL TOWER, OR LONDON WITHOUT BIG BEND? IT IS UNTHINKABLE THAT DALLAS WOULD EVEN CONSIDER TEARING DOWN ITS ICONIC, AWARD WINNING I.M. PEI ARCHITECTURAL MASTERPIECE. WHY HAS THE CITY NOT MAINTAINED IT ALL THESE YEARS? WHY IS IT SO CRUCIAL NOW, SUDDENLY, WITHOUT ANY FANFARE, THAT ELEMENTS IN THE CITY WISH TO DEMOLISH IT RATHER THAN REPAIR IT? THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT IN PART AS A UNIFYING SYMBOL AFTER THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK. THE CITY LOOKED FORWARD WITH THE VISION OF GREATNESS AND UNITY. THE CONVERSATION SHOULD BE HOW TO REPAIR AND MAINTAIN IT, NOT DESTROY THIS EMBRYONIC ICON OF DALLAS. WHY IS THIS VOTE BEING RUSHED? WHAT ARE THE EXPENSES OF BUILDING AND DESIGNING A NEW CITY HALL? AT A MINIMUM, THERE SHOULD BE MORE TIME FOR STUDY AND DISCUSSION AND PERHAPS A VOTE BY THE ENTIRE ELECTORATE OF DALLAS. IT IS OUR BUILDING, OUR HEART, OUR SOUL, AND OUR TAX DOLLARS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CYNTHIA MICHAELS. WHILE MISS MICHAELS IS COMING FORWARD, I'LL ASK THAT CHARLES BROWER AND JOANNA HAMPTON, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. GOOD AFTERNOON, MISS TOLBERT. I'M VERY SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS. I'VE LIVED. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AS WELL AS FOR HERITAGE OAK CLIFF, OF WHICH I AM PRESIDENT. I'VE LIVED IN DALLAS ALL MY LIFE, AND I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING MOVE SO FAST WITH SPEED LIGHTNING THROUGH CITY HALL, JUST 13 DAYS FROM THE TIME THE REPORT WAS MADE PUBLIC. 13 DAYS NOW FOR THE VOTE. THIS FACT ALONE COULD CAUSE YOU TO VOTE NO. IT WOULD BE LUDICROUS TO DO OTHERWISE. TOO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS. YOU DO NOT KNOW THE TRUTH. COST OF REPAIRING AND REMODELING CITY HALL. YOU HAVE NO CLUE THE COST OF RELOCATING CITY HALL OVER A 20 YEAR PERIOD. YOU HAVE NO IDEA OF THE COST TO TEAR DOWN CITY HALL. BEN HENDERSON'S POST IS EYE OPENING. I'LL SEND IT TO YOU. HIS POST ALONE SHOULD GET YOU TO VOTE NO REGARDING TEARING DOWN CITY HALL. THE COST VERY WELL MAY BE $1 BILLION. YES, $1 BILLION. EVEN THOUGH MOST OF YOU NEVER ENTERTAINED THE IDEA OF REPAIRING CITY HALL. I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU A GREAT EXAMPLE OF A REMODELED BUILDING RIGHT HERE IN DALLAS. THE SAME COULD BE DONE WITH CITY HALL. IT WAS THE LARGEST HISTORIC RENOVATION OF A COUNTY BUILDING IN TEXAS HISTORY. THE DALLAS COUNTY RECORDS BUILDING, ONCE CRUMBLING STRUCTURE WITH OVER A THIRD OF ITS SPACE UNUSABLE AND IN DESPERATE NEED OF RESTORATION. NOW IT IS ONE OF THE MOST MODERN AND EFFICIENT FACILITIES IN THE COUNTRY IN THE COUNTY'S REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO. THE PROJECT BEGAN IN 2015. NO MAJOR UPGRADES HAVE BEEN DONE IN THE BUILDING IN OVER 50 YEARS, AND THE COMPLEX HAD TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DEFERRED MAINTENANCE NEEDS FROM PLANNING TO COMPLETION. THE PROJECT TOOK ALMOST SEVEN YEARS. BECAUSE IT'S A HISTORICAL BUILDING, HISTORICAL AGENCIES HAD TO CONSULT AND APPROVE APPROVED STRUCTURAL AND FACADE IMPROVEMENTS. IT HAD ASBESTOS AND LEAD PAINT WHICH WAS CAREFULLY REMOVED, EVEN ADDED THE SEVENTH FLOOR. THE BUILDING. THE RECORDS BUILDING IS A LEADERSHIP IN ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL LEED SILVER CERTIFIED STRUCTURE IN THE FIRST GOVERNMENT BUILDING IN THE STATE TO OBTAIN THE WELL BUILDING STANDARD CERTIFICATION FOR HEALTH AND WELL-BEING. ITS COST 200 MILLION, NOT 1 BILLION. ALSO, PLEASE SEE HOW BOSTON REFURBISHED AND REMODELED THEIR CITY HALL WITH WHICH IS A BRUTALIST DESIGN AND MOST COMPARABLE TO THE DALLAS CITY HALL IN AGE AND AGRICULTURAL AND ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE. IN 2022, MAJOR RENOVATIONS WERE COMPLETED FOR 95 MILLION. YOU WANT. OH, I MEAN, THE MAVERICKS WANT. OH, WAIT. NOW IT'S THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER THAT IS DRIVING THE NEED TO RELOCATE CITY HALL. PLEASE LOOK AT ZBA PRESENTATION THAT SHE GAVE TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. IT GIVES A VERY GOOD PLAN OF HOW YOU CAN USE THE MIXED USE PROJECT. LAND AROUND CITY HALL WITH THE DEMOLITION OF THE CONVENTION CENTER. AND LOOK, YOU STILL GET CITY HALL. AND YOU EVEN HAVE A SPACE FOR THE MAVS ARENA. PLEASE, I BEG YOU, DO NOT MAKE A HORRIFIC MISTAKE TODAY. VOTE NO. RELOCATING AND TEARING DOWN THE PEOPLE'S BUILDING. THE DAMAGE CAUSED TO THE CITY OF DALLAS BY LOSING CITY HALL WOULD BE UNFATHOMABLE. AND THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CHARLES BROWER. HELLO. I WANT TO THANK THE CITY COUNCIL ALLOWING TIME FOR ME TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY. I'M CHARLES BROWER. I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 13. [00:50:01] MY WIFE AND I MOVED BACK TO DALLAS IN 2016 AFTER GRADUATING FROM SMU IN THE 80S AND WORKING IN LOS ANGELES AND NEW YORK OVER A COUPLE OF DECADES, WE'VE BEEN WELCOMED WARMLY BY OLD AND NEW FRIENDS ALIKE, AND WE'RE MEMBERS OF SEVERAL CIVIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS HERE IN TOWN MORE THAN 60 YEARS AGO. THIS CITY FOUND RENEWAL AND HOPE AFTER EXPERIENCING A SERIOUS CRISIS IN 1963. AT THE TIME, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYOR J. ERIC JOHNSON KNEW THEY NEEDED TO BUILD A BOLD CREATIVE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. THEY RALLIED AROUND A NEW VISION FOR DALLAS, PROCLAIMING THAT OUR EFFORTS SHOULD BE TO BUILD OUR CITY NOT NECESSARILY INTO A BIGGER ONE, BUT ALWAYS A BETTER ONE. THAT VISION FOR DALLAS FEATURED SYMBOLS FOR REBIRTH AND OPPORTUNITY, INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY HALL WE'RE IN TODAY. AFTER SELECTING WORLD CLASS ARCHITECT I.M. PEI, MAYOR JOHNSON AND SEVERAL CITY LEADERS DELIVERED TO DALLAS WHAT HAS BECOME AN ICON AND A CIVIC CENTERPIECE. OVER TIME, THE STRUCTURE HAS PLAYED HOST TO GLOBAL, NATIONAL AND LOCAL LEADERS AND MANY, MANY SUCCESSES TODAY, CITY HALL IS USED WEEKLY AS A HOST OF MYRIAD ACTIVITIES AND HAS BECOME ARGUABLY THE CENTER AND SOUL OF OUR CITY. BOTH THE CITY OF BOSTON THAT YOU JUST HEARD, AND THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES THAT I LIVED IN, HAVE FACED SIMILAR CHALLENGES THAT NOW FACE US. THEY BOTH CHOSE TO RENOVATE AND RENEW EXISTING STRUCTURES, TO NOT ABANDON THE SOUL OF THE CITY. WE'D BE WISE TO FOLLOW THEIR LEAD AND CONSIDER A PROPER, TRANSPARENT APPROACH TO RENOVATION. THAT DOES NOT DIMINISH THE YEARS OF EFFORT THAT HAVE RESULTED IN CITY HALL BEING THE CIVIC SOUL OF DALLAS. I WANT TO LEAVE YOU WITH TWO THOUGHTS. FROM A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, I'D ASK THE COUNCIL TO CAREFULLY CONSIDER RENOVATION AND REUSE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SEVERAL PROMINENT ARCHITECTS IN TOWN WHO'VE OFFERED UP THEIR TIME AND IDEAS. MORE IMPORTANTLY, FROM A FIDUCIARY PERSPECTIVE, I'D ASK THIS COUNCIL TO RECONSIDER A FLAWED AND INACCURATE FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT AND TO PULL TOGETHER AN INDEPENDENT COMMITTEE SIMILAR TO THE ONE THAT WAS ASSEMBLED UNDER MAYOR JOHNSON YEARS AGO, KEEPING THE SOUL OF THIS BUILDING IN PLACE. THE DECISION YOU MAKE TODAY TO ABANDON THE CIVIC AND CULTURAL LANDMARK WILL HAVE REPERCUSSIONS IN OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY AND ACROSS THE NATIONAL DIALOG FOR YEARS TO COME. PLEASE MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. JOANNA HAMPTON. GOOD AFTERNOON, HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL. JOANNA HAMPTON, 5408 SWISS AVENUE. AS YOU CONSIDER THE FUTURE OF CITY HALL, THE CHOICE IS NOT BETWEEN A VIBRANT DOWNTOWN AND THE STATUS QUO. THERE HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT THEMES FROM ALL ADVOCATES, INCLUDING FOSTERING A VIBRANT AND ACTIVATED DOWNTOWN AND ARENA ENVIRONMENT AND POTENTIALLY ENTERTAINMENT ENVIRONMENT BUILDING ON CURRENT PUBLIC INVESTMENTS. RECONNECTING DOWNTOWN TO THE CEDARS IN SOUTH DALLAS AND CREATING A DOWNTOWN THAT ATTRACTS AND KEEPS BUSINESSES, RESIDENTS AND OUR CITY. SPORTS FRANCHISES. BUT THE MATTER BEFORE YOU TODAY IS BASED ON ANALYSIS REPORTS WITH SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS REGARDING THE DATA. AS STATED BY MANY, THE AVAILABLE DATA DOES NOT SUPPORT THE COST ESTIMATES WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF AN RFP PROCESS. TO DEFINE THE PARAMETERS, IT IS NOT SURPRISING THAT SO MANY QUESTIONS EXIST. THE PROPOSED RELOCATION ALSO DOESN'T REFLECT THE NEEDS OF A LARGE WORKFORCE, REFLECTED IN THE AT&T RELOCATION FOR HORIZONTALLY INTEGRATED CAMPUS. THAT LAYOUT EXISTS TODAY IN THIS BUILDING ADDRESS THE EXISTING BUILDING CHALLENGES, WHICH ARE MANY, BUT THOSE WERE CREATED OVER TIME IN PIECEMEAL RENOVATIONS AND COMPLETE A COMPREHENSIVE SPACE PLANNING PROCESS. THIS COUNCIL SHOULD NOT BE ASKED TO TAKE ACTION ON SUCH A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE. WITH QUESTIONABLE DATA AND NO ESTABLISHED VISION OR DEFINED FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE PATH BENEFITING ALL CITIZENS TO CREATE THE VIBRANT DOWNTOWN WE ALL ENVISION. MY PERSPECTIVE THE SOLUTION TO DOWNTOWN'S DALLAS DOWNTOWN'S CHALLENGES SHOULD NOT BE AT THE COST OF THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE. I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO, AND INSTEAD ALLOW FOR A PLANNING VISION TO ESTABLISH WHAT DOWNTOWN COULD AND SHOULD BE FOR ALL OF ITS RESIDENTS, AND TO COMPLETE AN EFFECTIVE, INDEPENDENT AND ASSESSMENT GUIDED BY THE CITY'S STANDARD RFP PROCESS THAT WOULD REQUIRE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND WITHOUT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. THIS WOULD PROVIDE COUNCIL IN ALL CITIZENS A BASIS FOR EVALUATION THAT EVERYONE CAN HAVE CONFIDENCE IN. [00:55:02] THANK YOU. THANK YOU. KAREN MUNCIE. YES. KAREN. MUNCIE. 2614 LAKE FOREST COUNCIL, DISTRICT NINE. IT IS BEYOND BELIEF THAT THIS CITY COUNCIL WOULD SEE THE ABANDONMENT OF OUR CITY HALL AS NOTHING BUT A REAL ESTATE TRANSACTION AND A LOGISTICS CHALLENGE. A CITY HALL IS NOT JUST ANOTHER BUILDING. IT IS THE CENTER AND HEART OF A COMMUNITY. ITS PRESENCE AND STABILITY ARE ESSENTIAL TO CITIZEN ACCESS TO AND PARTICIPATION IN THEIR MUNICIPAL, GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITY ISSUES. AS PREVIOUS SPEAKERS HAVE NOTED, THIS IS NOT THE ONLY POSSIBLE LOCATION FOR A NEW SPORTS FACILITY. NOT EVEN THE ONLY ONE DOWNTOWN. IT JUST SEEMED TO BE THE EASIEST ONE TO ACQUIRE WITHOUT A FIGHT, OR EVEN MUCH THOUGHT BEYOND HOW TO SNEAK IT THROUGH AS QUICKLY AND QUIETLY AS POSSIBLE. PLEASE STEP ON THE BRAKES AND GIVE THIS HUGELY IMPORTANT PROPOSAL THE CONSIDERATION AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IT DESERVES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GREG BOX. WHY? MR. BOX IS COMING FORWARD. I'LL ASK MEREDITH JONES AND AZIEL ALVAREZ TO COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS GREG BOX. I'M A THIRD GENERATION DALLAS. I BORN AT BAYLOR HOSPITAL. I'M A FORMER DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS FOR THE GREATER DALLAS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND A FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE DALLAS PRESS CLUB. MY FATHER, HAL BOX, WAS A PARTNER IN THE ARCHITECTURAL FIRM PRATT, BOX AND HENDERSON. HE WAS INVOLVED IN GOALS FOR DALLAS AND WAS THERE FOR THE 1970 UNVEILING OF THE MODEL. HE POINTED TO THE STREET IN FRONT AND SAID THIS WILL BE RENAMED I.M. PEI BOULEVARD. I GOT A BIG LAUGH. 56 YEARS AGO, PRATT BOX HENDERSON DESIGNED THE GREAT HALL OF THE APPAREL MART, BROOKHAVEN COLLEGE, THE GARDEN CENTER AT FAIR PARK PARK. SAINT STEPHEN'S UNITED METHODIST CHURCH AND THE QUADRANGLE. ON HIS LAST TRIP TO DALLAS, I ASKED HIM IF HE WANTED TO DRIVE BY THE QUADRANGLE, AND HE SAID NO. HE DIDN'T WANT TO SEE WHAT WAS DESTROYED BY DEVELOPERS, AND THAT THE BEST PART OF THE DESIGN WAS THE LARGE PLAZA IN FRONT. THIS PLAZA WAS REPLACED WITH A 12 STORY OFFICE BUILDING. THE SAME THING SEEMS TO BE HAPPENING HERE. REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS SEE THE LARGE PLAZA IN FRONT AND BELIEVE THAT THAT SPACE SHOULD BE MONETIZED. MY FATHER BELIEVED THAT GREAT CITIES NEED GATHERING PLACES. A PLAZA IS NOT AN EMPTY SPACE. IT IS A CIVIC SPACE. IT'S WHERE A CITY SEES ITSELF. I ASK THAT THIS COUNCIL TABLE. THE MOTION TO DEMOLISH THIS GREAT BUILDING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MEREDITH JONES. GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ALL OF US TODAY. MY NAME IS MEREDITH JONES AND I CURRENTLY LIVE IN DISTRICT 14. I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN DALLAS AND I WORK IN URBAN DESIGN AND PLANNING. I'M SPEAKING TODAY IN FAVOR OF SAVING CITY HALL. PEOPLE THAT KNOW ME KNOW MY TWO FAVORITE THINGS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ARCHITECTURE AND SPORTS. I'VE BEEN SADDENED BY THIS CONVERSATION AT HAND, NOT AT THE THOUGHT OF LOSING ONE OF THESE LOVES, BUT AT THE CONTINUED PATTERN OF A LACK OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND CREATIVITY IN SOLVING ISSUES IN OUR CITY. THIS FABRICATED NEED FOR A RUSHED TIMELINE HAS TURNED WHAT COULD BE A VISIONARY AND PARTICIPATORY DISCUSSION INTO ONE OF EXTREMES. THE QUESTION IS NOT TO SAVE CITY HALL OR TO SAVE THE MAVS, AND IT IS NOT TO SAVE CITY HALL OR TO SAVE DOWNTOWN. THE QUESTION IS, HOW DO WE TURN THAT PLAZA BACK INTO A BEACH? I'M ONLY PARTIALLY KIDDING. THERE IS NO DOUBT A NEED TO REIMAGINE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. HOWEVER, THIS CAN BE DONE WITHOUT ABANDONING CITY HALL AND INSTEAD HIGHLIGHTING IT AND THE PLAZA AS THE ASSET THEY ARE. THE THOUGHT OF LOSING THIS BUILDING AND LAND IN THE HEART OF OUR CITY TO PRIVATE INTERESTS IS DISHEARTENING, AND AS A FULLY PAID OFF CITY ASSET, IT IS UNFAIR TO PRESENT AND FUTURE GENERATIONS OF DALLASITES. THIS IS THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE. WHAT MAKES CITIES BEAUTIFUL ARE THE LAYERS BUILT OVER TIME. WE DO NOT NEED TO START FROM SCRATCH, BUT BUILD UPON WHAT IS HERE. I'VE BEEN TO SEVERAL MEETINGS ABOUT CITY HALL SINCE NOVEMBER, AND A LOT OF REALLY BEAUTIFUL STORIES WERE SHARED ABOUT WHAT THIS BUILDING AND PLAZA MEAN TO BOTH THE CITY AND INDIVIDUALS. UNFORTUNATELY, VERY FEW COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE AT THESE MEETINGS, AND NOW THE CONVERSATION IS CENTERED AROUND A FINANCIAL REPORT THAT MANY HAVE POINTED OUT TO BE FLAWED AND MISLEADING. PLEASE TABLE THIS VOTE TODAY. TAKE THE TIME TO PLAN EFFICIENT RENOVATIONS OF THIS BUILDING. [01:00:04] ENVISION A MORE VIBRANT PLAZA AND NEIGHBORHOOD. INCENTIVIZE THE MAVERICKS TO MOVE ELSEWHERE IN DALLAS. BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, PLEASE INVITE THE PEOPLE TO CO-CREATE THE FUTURE WITH YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ASA ALVAREZ. ALVAREZ. DISTRICT NINE. I'M ONE OF THE YOUNGER LATINO RESIDENTS SPEAKING OUT TONIGHT. AND LIKE MANY PEOPLE IN MY GENERATION, I WILL LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS BUILDING LONG AFTER THIS DEBATE IS OVER. EVERYONE AGREES CITY HALL'S HAS DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ISSUES. THE ROOF, EMERGENCY POWER, HVAC. IT'S ACTUALLY COLD IN HERE TODAY. CLEARLY THE NEED ATTENTION. BUT TONIGHT WE ARE NOT JUST DECIDING HOW TO REPAIR A BUILDING. WE ARE DECIDING WHETHER TO PERMANENTLY RELOCATE THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT AND POTENTIALLY REDEVELOP ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CIVIC SITES IN DALLAS, BASED ON A $1 BILLION HEADLINE THAT BUNDLE BUNDLES, REPAIRS, MODERNIZATION, FINANCING, RELOCATION, AND TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES ALL INTO ONE. THAT IS NOT A FACILITIES DECISION. THAT IS A GENERATIONAL DECISION ABOUT LAND GOVERNANCE AND THE FUTURE OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS. AND WE ARE ALREADY SEEING HOW QUICKLY THE STAKES AROUND THIS SITE ARE ESCALATING. JUST YESTERDAY, THE CEO OF THE DALLAS MAVERICKS SAID THAT THERE IS NO DEAL AND NO PROJECT TIED TO CITY HALL. BUT HE ALSO SAID SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT. HE SAID THE DOMINOES WILL FALL BASED ON WHAT THE CITY DECIDES HERE. IN OTHER WORDS, WHATEVER HAPPENS IN THIS CHAMBER DETERMINES WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS LAND. AND ONCE THOSE DOMINOES START FALLING, THEY'RE GOING TO BE VERY HARD TO STOP, BECAUSE THIS BUILDING IS NOT JUST REAL ESTATE. THIS IS THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE. AND THE PEOPLE DESERVE NUMBERS THAT THEY CAN TRUST BEFORE THE CITY STARTS TALKING ABOUT MOVING OUT OF IT. THERE'S ALSO PUBLIC SAFETY QUESTION HERE, TOO. IF PROPOSALS INVOLVE RELOCATING CRITICAL OPERATIONS LIKE 911, THIS CITY COUNCIL SHOULD ASK WHAT CONTINUOUS CONTINUITY PLAN EXISTS TO GUARANTEE UNINTERRUPTED EMERGENCY SERVICE DURING ANY TRANSITION. THE PUBLIC DESERVES AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON. SO FIRST COMMISSION AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND COST VALIDATION, NOT CONSULTANTS CONNECTED TO REDEVELOPMENT INTERESTS. A TRULY INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING REVIEW USING FULLY FULL INDUSTRY STANDARDS, NOT LIMITED SITE SURVEYS. THERE'S PLENTY OF PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM WHO WOULD VOLUNTEER RIGHT TO CONDUCT THIS, RIGHT? THERE YOU GO. SECOND, SEPARATE CORRECTIVE REPAIRS FROM MODERNIZATION UPGRADES. AND THIRD, IF A RELOCATION IS PURSUED, REQUIRE A PUBLIC LAND VALUATION AND REDEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK BEFORE ANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT SELLING OR REDEVELOPING THIS SITE AGAIN, BECAUSE BEFORE DALLAS EVEN CONSIDERS LEAVING THE BUILDING, THE PUBLIC DESERVES TO KNOW THE VALUE OF THIS LAND THAT WE ARE GIVING UP. THIS DOES NOT DELAY NECESSARY REPAIRS, SO FIX WHAT MUST BE FIXED. BUT DO NOT RUSH TO REALLOCATE THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE BASED ON BUNDLED NUMBERS. DALLAS DESERVES A CAREFUL DECISION. NOT A FAST ONE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. QUINN MATTHEWS, WHILE MR. MATTHEWS IS COMING FORWARD, I'LL ASK THAT RAVI AND DAMIEN LEVESQUE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. MAYOR JOHNSON, I WOULD LIKE TO BE POLITE, BUT IT'S HARD TO HIDE MY ANGER. JUST AS I BELIEVE IT'S HARD FOR EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM WHO SUPPORTS KEEPING OUR CITY HALL. THERE IS NO ONE IN THIS ROOM WITHOUT A OR. EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM WHO'S SUPPORTING CITY HALL DOES NOT HAVE A FINANCIAL CONNECTION. WE'RE HERE AT OUR OWN EXPENSE. WE WILL NOT BENEFIT FROM WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS CITY HALL. WE CANNOT SAY THAT FOR THE OTHER SIDE. NO ONE WHO IS INFORMED, NO ONE WHO IS INFORMED ABOUT THIS CITY, KNOWS THE HISTORY OF THE CITY, KNOWS ABOUT THE CITY HALL, BELIEVES THE FIGURES THAT WERE ADOPTED AND PRESENTED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. THEY ARE JUST BOGUS. WHEN THIS CITY HALL WAS DREAMED OF AND BUILT OVER 50 YEARS AGO, IT WAS NOT JUST A COUNCIL. IT WAS NOT JUST MAYOR ERIC JOHNSON. IT WAS TWO MAYORS, FIRST OF ALL, AND IT WAS CITIZENS FROM ALL OVER THE CITY WHO MET FOR YEARS, WHO MET FOR YEARS TO SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT THE CITY TO BE. I WAS HERE IN 1963. I WAS AMONG THE THOUSANDS THAT GREETED PRESIDENT KENNEDY. HE ACKNOWLEDGED ME. THE CITY WAS BROKEN EVEN THEN, EVEN BEFORE HE WAS KILLED. BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU THE KIND OF PAIN THIS CITY WENT THROUGH FOR YEARS. [01:05:04] AND THIS CITY HALL WAS NOT JUST ABOUT REPAIRING THAT, BUT IT WAS PRESENTING A NEW DALLAS TO THE WORLD. THERE IS NOT A CITY IN THIS WORLD THAT IS KNOWN BY ITS ARENA. YOU MAY SAY ROME, BUT THEY WERE DISMANTLING THAT ONE. BRICK BY BRICK. THE THE PANTHEON IN ROME, WHICH IS PROBABLY THE MOST FAMOUS BUILDING IN ROME, IS MADE OUT OF WHAT POURED CONCRETE. AND IT HAS STOOD FOR 2000 YEARS. WE KNOW WHAT THIS IS ABOUT, AND WE KNOW WHAT THIS IS NOT ABOUT. I TRUST YOU TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION. YOU'RE OUR COUNCIL PEOPLE AND TRUST US TO GIVE YOU INPUT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RAVI. RAVI. PAOLA CIARDI IS NOT PRESENT. DAMIEN LEVESQUE. DAMIEN LEVESQUE. IS NOT PRESENT. OKAY. MR. LEVESQUE, YOU MAY BEGIN. MR. LEVESQUE, YOUR AUDIO. WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. WE'LL COME BACK TO MR. LEVESQUE. CATHY KAUFMAN. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS KATHY KAUFMANN, AND AM I. AND I'M HERE TODAY TO ASK YOU TO SLOW THIS DOWN. WE SHOULD NOT TEAR DOWN THE PEOPLE'S BUILDING. IN A RUSHED EFFORT TO INCENTIVIZE THE MAVERICKS TO STAY IN DALLAS, ESPECIALLY WHEN ALTERNATIVES EXIST. VALLEY VIEW OFFERS MORE THAN 110 ACRES OF VACANT, BUILD READY LAND AT THE INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 35, WHICH, BY THE WAY, IS DOUBLE DECKED FROM CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY ALL THE WAY OUT TOWARDS THE AIRPORT AND THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY. IT SITS AT THE CROSSROADS OF NORTH DALLAS AND THE BOOMING NORTHERN SUBURBS. IT IS ACCESSIBLE, INFRASTRUCTURE, READY AND LARGE ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY MEET THE ACREAGE REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN PUBLICLY DISCUSSED FOR A MODEM. I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY FOR A MODERN SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. IF THIS CONVERSATION IS TRULY IN KEEPING WITH THE MAVERICKS ABOUT KEEPING THE MAVERICKS IN DALLAS, THEN LET'S PURSUE THE SITE. THAT MAKES SENSE. I AM A NEIGHBORHOOD OF VALLEY VIEW AND HAVE SAT AND LOOKED AT THE UGLINESS OF THAT FOR MORE YEARS THAN I CARE TO TALK ABOUT. AND HERE'S THE PART THAT MAKES THIS A WIN WIN. THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REVENUE GENERATED BY A VALLEY VIEW REDEVELOPMENT COULD BE DIRECTED TO SUPPORT INVESTMENT IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, INSTEAD OF CONCENTRATING OPPORTUNITY IN ONE AREA THRIVING CORRIDOR. WE COULD LEVERAGE GROWTH IN NORTH DALLAS TO DRIVE RESOURCES WHERE THEY ARE NEEDED MOST. THIS IS HOW YOU UNIFY A CITY. WHAT WE CANNOT DO IS RUSH A VOTE TO DEMOLISH THE PEOPLE'S BUILDING WITHOUT MEANINGFUL PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. PEOPLE ACROSS POLITICAL PARTIES, ACROSS NEIGHBORHOODS, AND ACROSS ECONOMIC BACKGROUNDS ARE UNITED IN ONE THING. THE SPEED OF THIS PROCESS IS UNACCEPTABLE. IF YOU THINK RESIDENTS WERE UPSET ABOUT THE LUCA TRADE, WAIT UNTIL YOU VOTE TO TEAR DOWN CITY HALL WITHOUT TRANSPARENCY AND DELIBERATION. TOO MANY BACKROOM MEETINGS. NOTHING ABOUT THIS HAS BEEN TRANSPARENT AND INCLUSIVE. DELAY THIS VOTE. LET THE PUBLIC WEIGH IN AND VOTE. AND DO NOT TEAR DOWN OUR PEOPLE'S HOUSE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DAVID PREZIOSI. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'M DAVID PREZIOSI. I'VE BEEN A HISTORIC PRESERVATION 30 YEARS NOW, WORKING TO SAVE HISTORIC BUILDINGS. IT'S VERY HEARTENING TO SEE ALL OF THESE PEOPLE BEHIND ME WITH THE BLUE STICKERS SAYING SAVE CITY HALL, ESPECIALLY FOR A BRUTALIST BUILDING THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS GET THE LOVE. [01:10:01] IT'S HARD WHEN YOU HAVE CONCRETE TO LOVE, BUT THIS IS AN INCREDIBLE AND ICONIC BUILDING FOR DALLAS, AND I WANTED TO GIVE YOU ALL A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT ABOUT HOW WE GOT HERE TO THIS BUILDING. AS MENTIONED BEFORE, THE 1966 GOALS FOR DALLAS HELPED ESTABLISH THIS BUILDING AS A REACTION TO THE DEATH OF THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY AND AS A WAY TO REINVENT THE CITY. AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU A QUOTE FROM THE DEDICATION BROCHURE FOR THIS BUILDING. THE QUOTE IS THE 1966 GOALS FOR DALLAS EXPRESSED WELL THE COUNCIL'S DETERMINATION THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS SHOULD TAKE THE LEAD IN SEEING THAT ITS BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES REPRESENT THE HIGHEST ATTAINMENTS AND CIVIC AND DESIGN EXCELLENCE. WITH THIS NOBLE CHALLENGE IN MIND, THE ARCHITECTS DESIGNED A BUILDING UNIQUE IN STRUCTURE AND INNOVATIVE IN STYLE, AND THEN MAYOR ROBERT FOLSOM STATED IN THE SAME BROCHURE IN THE PRACTICAL SENSE, A GOVERNMENT BUILDING SEEKS TO BE AN EFFECTIVE PLACE FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC BUSINESS, PUBLIC BUSINESS WHILE ENHANCING THE EFFORTS OF THOSE WHO WORK THERE. IN AN IDEALISTIC SENSE, PUBLIC ARCHITECTURE HAS ANOTHER AIM TO REFLECT CIVIC ASPIRATIONS. WE THINK THE CITY HALL FULFILLS THE HIGHEST PURPOSES OF PUBLIC ARCHITECTURE, AND CITY MANAGER GEORGE R SCHROEDER STATED IN THE BROCHURE. BEYOND THE CITY HALL'S DISTINCTIVE APPEARANCE IS A WORKABLE STRUCTURE FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE NEEDS OF DALLAS DALLAS MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT. THE BUILDING'S INTERIOR WAS DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE 400 1400 WORKSTATIONS. WITH THE FLEXIBILITY FOR FUTURE EXPANSION. THE STRUCTURE IS MORE THAN JUST AN OFFICE BUILDING, IT'S A PUBLIC BUILDING. AS SUCH, IT WILL BE THE FOCAL POINT FOR CIVIC AFFAIRS, PROVIDING MEETING SPACE FOR CIVIC ORGANIZATION ORGANIZATIONS AND DISPLAY FOR AREAS FOR CITYWIDE PROJECTS OF ART. ENHANCING THE PUBLIC ASPECT IS A 4.7 ACRE PARK PLAZA, A NATURAL ATTRACTION FOR STROLLERS WITH ITS NATIVE TEXAS TREES, REFLECTING POOL, FOUNTAIN, AND SCULPTURE. IN SHORT, DALLAS CITY HALL IS A FACILITY THAT WORKS FOR EVERYONE. AS YOU ARE MAKING THIS DECISION TODAY TO START THE PROCESS OF LEAVING THIS ICONIC STRUCTURE, I ASK YOU TO THINK ABOUT THE IMPETUS FOR THIS BUILDING AND THE DESIRE OF PAST CITY LEADERS TO CREATE A BUILDING THAT IS A STATEMENT FOR DALLAS, OF ITS CIVIC PRIDE AND DESIRE TO BE A GREAT CITY. THEN ASK YOURSELF WHAT CITY HALL, IN A NONDESCRIPT OFFICE TOWER, WOULD SAY ABOUT THE ASPIRATIONS OF THE CITY. WE CAN BE A GREAT CITY WITH PAYS CITY HALL BUILDING, INTACT, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS SURROUNDING IT, A REVITALIZED CONVENTION CENTER, AND THE MAVERICKS ARENA IN BETWEEN ALL OF THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW GO BACK TO SPEAKER 29 DAMIEN LEVESQUE, WHOSE VIRTUAL. MR. LEVESQUE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. THANK YOU. DAMIEN LEVESQUE, 60 215 GEORGIAN COURT. TODAY I'M SPEAKING TO THOSE OF YOU IN CITY LEADERSHIP WHO HAVE BEEN PUSHING TO SCRAP CITY HALL FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND WITHOUT PUBLIC INPUT. YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE. WE ALL WANT TO KEEP THE MAVS IN DALLAS, BUT IF THAT WERE TRULY THE STORY HERE, WE WOULD BE HAVING AN OPEN PUBLIC CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW TO INCENTIVIZE THEM TO STAY. INSTEAD. WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THAT A DEAL IS BEING BROKERED OUT OF PUBLIC VIEW, HIDDEN BEHIND A MANUFACTURED CRISIS ABOUT THE CONDITION OF CITY HALL. THIS DISCREDITED $1 BILLION ASSESSMENT, PROVIDED FOR FREE BY CONFLICTED PARTIES, HAS ZERO CREDIBILITY WITH THIS COMMUNITY, AND THE GASLIGHTING STRATEGY IS DEEPLY OFFENSIVE. TO ASSUME THAT WE WOULD JUST NOD OUR HEADS AND GO ALONG WITH IT UNDERMINES THIS COMMUNITY AND OUR COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE. BUT FINE. I'LL GIVE YOU THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT AND ASSUME YOU'RE WORKING BEHIND THE SCENES FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE CITY. IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MAKE US FEEL BETTER? THIS CITY HAS AN ABYSMAL TRACK RECORD WHEN IT COMES TO REAL ESTATE DEALS. THE HOSPITAL ON SOUTHAMPTON, WHICH WILL NEVER RECOUP OUR COSTS ON THE LEMON ON STEMMONS, THE $5 BILLION CONVENTION CENTER BOONDOGGLE, WHICH STILL DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A FINAL BUDGET, THE WINGS FACILITY, WHICH THE CITY MANAGER TOLD US TO HOLD HER PERSONALLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR IF IT DOESN'T OPEN ON TIME. NEED I GO ON? WHY WOULD ANY OF US TRUST YOU TO MAKE DEALS ON OUR BEHALF AFTER SUCH A RECORD OF INCOMPETENCE, NOT JUST IN REAL ESTATE, BUT IN MAINTAINING THE CITY'S ASSETS, KEEPING AT&T AND MANAGING THE DART SITUATION, MAINTENANCE OF CITY BUILDINGS FALLS SQUARELY ON THE SHOULDERS OF OUR CITY MANAGER, WHO HAS WORKED FOR DALLAS LONGER THAN ANYONE SITTING AT THIS HORSESHOE. WE ALL WANT TO SEE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZED. WE ALL WANT TO SEE DOWNTOWN DALLAS THRIVE. BUT THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO DO IT. A YES VOTE TODAY IS A CAREER DEFINING CHOICE. ENDING THIS BUILDING OVER TO PRIVATE INTERESTS WILL PERMANENTLY STAIN YOUR RECORD. AND GIVEN HOW THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS MISHANDLED PAST REAL ESTATE DEALS, WE HAVE EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THIS ONE WILL BE NO DIFFERENT. EXCEPT FOR ONE THING. IT MAY BE THE FINAL STRAW THAT MAKES THIS CITY UP AND MAKES THEM REALIZE WHO IS REALLY REPRESENTING THEM, AND IT'S NOT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THEIR OPINIONS AND FEEDBACK. UNLESS, OF COURSE, THEY'RE A BILLIONAIRE DEVELOPER. [01:15:03] THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JOE. THANK YOU. CAN YOU HEAR ME? HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? MR. ZILLA? IS MY MICROPHONE ON? WE CAN HEAR YOU. YOU MAY CONTINUE. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU AT THE TIME. MY NAME IS JOE. I AM A DALLAS RESIDENT, A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, A TAXPAYER, AND A MEMBER OF THE ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION. THIS IS SIMPLY NOT A FACILITIES DECISION. IT'S A GENERATIONAL CIVIC DECISION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF DALLAS CITY HALL. AND SOMETHING OF THIS MAGNITUDE SHOULD NOT BE RUSHED THROUGH THIS CHAMBER. IT SHOULD BE DECIDED BY THE VOTERS OF DALLAS. FORMER MAYOR LAURA MILLER RECENTLY REMINDED US THAT DALLAS HAS SEEN THIS MOVIE BEFORE. IN THE MID 1990S, DURING THE NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER. CITY STAFF NEGOTIATED A MASSIVE DEAL FOR CITY COUNCIL WAS LARGELY SHUT OUT OF THE PROCESS. THE CITY MANAGER LATER LEFT TO WORK FOR THEIR AREA DEVELOPER. THE RESULT WAS A FLAWED DEAL THAT DALLAS TAXPAYERS ARE STILL LIVING WITH TODAY. THE EXPERIENCE IS EXACTLY WHY DALLAS STRENGTHENED ITS ETHICS CODE AND CREATED DALLAS ETHICS COMMISSION. YET WE. HERE WE ARE AGAIN. WE ARE BEING TOLD THAT CITY HALL IS FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. WE'RE BEING TOLD THAT THIS MUST HAPPEN QUICKLY, BUT TRANSPARENCY IS MISSING. REPORTERS HAVE REQUESTED THOUSANDS OF EMAILS BETWEEN CITY STAFF, DEVELOPERS AND SPORTS TEAMS INVOLVED IN THESE DISCUSSIONS. THOSE COMMUNICATIONS STILL HAVE NOT BEEN RELEASED. TRUST COLLAPSES WHEN TRANSPARENCY DISAPPEARS. WE ARE ALSO BEING TOLD THAT CITY HALL IS BEYOND SAVING. YET THE RECENT CONDITION ASSESSMENT FOUND NO WIDESPREAD STRUCTURAL FAILURES. AGING INFRASTRUCTURE EXISTS IN NEARLY EVERY SINGLE DOWNTOWN BUILDING OF COMPARABLE SIZE. DEFERRED MAINTENANCE IS NOT A DEMOLITION WARRANT. AND LET'S BE HONEST ABOUT THE STAKES. DALLAS CITY HALL IS NOT JUST ANOTHER OFFICE BUILDING. IT'S THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE. IT'S WHERE RESIDENTS GATHER TO PROTEST, TO CELEBRATE, TO MOURN, TO HOLD GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE AFTER THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. IT IS WHERE THE PUBLIC MUST BE ABLE TO SEE THEIR GOVERNMENT OPERATE. IF YOU BELIEVE DEMOLISHING THIS BUILDING IS THE RIGHT DECISION FOR DALLAS, THEN LET THE OWNERS DECIDE THAT. PUT IT ON THE BALLOT. HISTORY REMEMBERS VOTES LIKE THIS AND SO WILL THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M JUST GOING TO GO. THANK YOU, MR. ROSELLA. YOUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE BRIAN CARTER. ONE SECOND. MISS TERESA. TERESA. ONE SECOND. I DIDN'T CALL YOUR NAME YET. OKAY. BRIAN. CARTER. SORRY, BRIAN. BRIAN. MAYOR. JOHNSON. CITY COUNCIL. MR. TOLBERT, YOU HAVE OUR CONDOLENCES. MY NAME IS REVEREND BRIAN CARTER. I SERVE AS THE SENIOR PASTOR OF CONCORD CHURCH AND PRESIDENT OF THE AFRICAN AMERICAN PASTORS COALITION. WE TALK ABOUT THE REDEVELOPMENT IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS, INCLUDING THE FUTURE OF DALLAS CITY HALL. WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT A BUILDING. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VISION AND THE FUTURE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN OPPORTUNITY. AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PREPARING DALLAS FOR THE FUTURE. CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE RETHINKING HOW PUBLIC SPACES SERVE PEOPLE, BOTH IN MODERN AND A MODERN WORLD. TECHNOLOGY HAS CHANGED AS RESIDENTS INTERACT WITH CITIES. ACCESSIBILITY. ACCESSIBILITY. EXPECTATIONS OF CHANGE. INFRASTRUCTURE MUST SUPPORT INNOVATION, DIGITAL SERVICES, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND THE NEXT GENERATION OF GROWTH. AND THAT MEANS WE MUST ASK AN HONEST QUESTION ARE OUR FACILITIES DESIGNED FOR THE FUTURE? DALLAS IS BECOMING. IF DALLAS WANTS TO COMPETE WITH THE GREAT CITIES OF THE FUTURE, WE MUST BUILD FOR THE FUTURE, AND WE MAKE WISE DECISIONS ABOUT HIGH VALUE LAND AND AGING INFRASTRUCTURE DOWNTOWN. WE UNLOCK BIGGER THAN DEVELOPMENT. WE UNLOCK REVENUE. WE UNLOCK OPPORTUNITY. WE UNLOCK THE ABILITY TO REINVEST ACROSS DALLAS AND INCLUDING COMMUNITIES IN SOUTH DALLAS AND SOUTHERN DALLAS THAT HAVE WAITED FAR TOO LONG FOR CONSISTENT REINVESTMENT. WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN WHAT INTENTIONAL INVESTMENT CAN DO. CONSIDER REDBIRD RIGHT NEAR OUR CHURCH. FOR YEARS, PEOPLE WONDERED IF THAT CORRIDOR WOULD EVER COME BACK. BUT WHEN LEADERS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS CHOSE TO INVEST, BRINGING HEALTH CARE, RETAIL, OFFICE SPACE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES TOGETHER, [01:20:06] THAT COMMUNITY RESPONDED. WE RESPONDED. MOMENTUM RETURNED. ENERGY RETURNED AND POSSIBILITY RETURNED. AND THAT IS THE LESSON. WHEN REAL INVESTMENT SHOWS UP, COMMUNITIES RESPOND. NOW IMAGINE PREPARING THAT SAME MOMENTUM WITH A FORWARD LOOKING DOWNTOWN. MODERN FACILITIES. TECHNOLOGY. READY. READY. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVED ACCESSIBILITY AND REDEVELOPMENT THAT ALLOWS THE CITY TO MAXIMIZE THE VALUE OF ONE OF ITS MOST IMPORTANT SITES. IMAGINE NEW RESOURCES HELPING TO STRENGTHEN SMALL BUSINESSES, IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION, EXPAND OPPORTUNITY, AND CREATE JOBS ACROSS THE DALLAS AND INCLUDING AND COMMUNITIES THAT DESERVE GREATER INVESTMENT. THIS IS NOT AN EITHER OR CONVERSATION. IT'S ABOUT ALIGNMENT. A THRIVING MODERN DOWNTOWN CAN FUEL A THRIVING SOUTHERN DALLAS AND ULTIMATELY A STRONGER DALLAS FOR EVERYONE. NOW IS THE TIME TO MOVE FORWARD TOWARDS THE FUTURE. THERE ARE WAYS TO STILL MEMORIALIZE THE SPACE IN A SMALLER WAY, BUT WE SHOULD NOT SACRIFICE THE FUTURE OF DALLAS FOR A BUILDING THAT IS COST PROHIBITIVE TO RENOVATE. WE INVEST STRATEGICALLY. OPPORTUNITY EXPANDS. WE MODERNIZE WISELY, WE ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS, AND WE CAN LEAD WITH VISION THAT MOVES FORWARD FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR ENTIRE CITY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. TERESA ROCKWELL. MISS ROCKWELL, ONE SECOND. IF DAVID VOSS AND RONNIE MESTAS COULD COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW, YOU MAY BEGIN, MISS ROCKWELL. I'M TOLD I'M THE 33RD SPEAKER, SO I HOPE I CAN TELL YOU SOMETHING THAT HASN'T ALREADY BEEN SAID OR EMPHASIZED. WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID. MR. MAYOR, KATHY STEWART, I AM TERESA ROCKWELL, TRUMAN'S MOM. I'VE TRAVELED THE WORLD. DALLAS IS MY CHOSEN HOME. AND THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE OF THIS BUILDING IS AN EXAMPLE. IT'S A DIAMOND. AND THE THOUGHT I'M LATE TO THE GAME. I'VE ONLY KNOWN OF THIS TWO TWO WEEKS THAT IT COULD BE POSSIBLY TORN DOWN. JUST ROCKED ME. AND THAT'S WHY I'M HERE. WHAT DO LA. CHICAGO AND NEW YORK CITY HAVE IN COMMON? TOWNHOUSE. CITY HALL. SAME. BUILDING. ALWAYS. WHAT DOES HOUSTON HAVE IN COMMON? ONLY TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. WHAT IS FORT WORTH HAVE IN COMMON FOR FOUR DISTINCT LOCATIONS FOR CITY HALL. WHO TOPS IT? DALLAS. THIS IS THE FIFTH CITY HALL. CAN YOU IMAGINE? AND WE'D EVEN CONSIDER TEARING IT DOWN. NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT IT IS AN ARCHITECTURAL DIAMOND. EVERY DAY PEOPLE DRIVE PAST. OR MAYBE THEY DON'T. MAYBE THEY WALK PAST. MAYBE THEY WORK HERE GOING. THIS IS SPECIAL. I WANT TO ADDRESS SOME THINGS THAT THAT CAME TO MIND. PRIMARILY THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN NEGLECT. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT IT'S GOING TO BE TORN DOWN OR RENOVATED OR WHATEVER WE'VE HAD SINCE IT WAS BUILT. TEN MAYORS, TEN CITY MANAGERS, TEN, AND NOW IT'S IN TOTAL DISREPAIR. WHAT HAS HAPPENED IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY TO BEGIN WITH ALONG THE WAY IN ORDER TO KEEP THIS DIAMOND? WHY NOW? PRIME REAL ESTATE. THAT'S ANOTHER REASON I'LL TAKE YOU ON A WALK AFTER THIS MEETING. I'LL SHOW YOU PLACES THAT REALLY COULD DO WITH SOME DEVELOPMENT. MANY, MANY PLACES. HERE IN DALLAS. THIS PLACE WAS ESTABLISHED TO BE THE DIAMOND OF THE HEART OF THE CITY OF DALLAS. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU. MY LAST THOUGHT. EVEN THOUGH I HAVE MANY MORE. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. [01:25:02] DAVID VOSS. MY NAME IS DAVID VOSS. I LIVE AT SIX FIVE, FOUR SIX ORIOLE DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS I'VE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. I SPOKE TO THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT 30 DAYS AGO. I WAS THE FIRST BUILDING MANAGER OF THIS BUILDING IN 1970S WHEN IT OPENED AND ME AND MY TEAM, WE ACTUALLY UNVEILED THAT CITY SEAL RIGHT THERE FOR THE FIRST TIME. SO I'VE GOT A LOT OF HEART AND A LOT OF MY LIFE IN THIS BUILDING, AND I FEEL VERY EMOTIONAL ABOUT IT. AND I SPOKE TO THOSE EMOTIONS THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE. TODAY I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE, THOUGH, NOT MY EMOTIONS. WHEN I LEFT THE CITY OF DALLAS, I CONTINUED MANAGING BUILDINGS. I SPENT 40 YEARS PLUS YEARS IN MY CAREER AS A PROFESSIONAL FACILITY MANAGER. I WAS INVOLVED IN OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, CONSTRUCTION, REPAIR, RENOVATIONS OF BUILDINGS, MANY OF WHICH WERE LARGER AND OLDER THAN THIS CITY HALL. I'VE READ AND EVALUATED HUNDREDS OF FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENTS, REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, PROPOSALS, ESTIMATES, BIDS, CONTRACTS AND RELATED RELATED TO BUILDING RENOVATION OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE READ THE ASSESSMENT OF DALLAS CITY HALL REPORT THAT WAS DELIVERED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE ON FEBRUARY 23RD. THE ASSESSMENT OF DALLAS CITY HALL SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED AN ACCURATE DECISION INFORMATION GROUP, BUT FOR THAT PURPOSE IT IS FLAWED AND INADEQUATE AT BEST. FIRST, MANY EVALUATIONS HAVE BEEN RUSHED WALKTHROUGHS, VISUAL INSPECTIONS DRIVEN BY ARTIFICIAL DEADLINES NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO MAKE A DECISION. SECOND, THE PARKING GARAGE, CITY HALL, PLAZA AND REFLECTING POOL HAVE ALL BEEN LUMPED INTO THE PLAN FOR THE CORE BUILDING ITSELF. IT'S CONFUSING THE INFORMATION AND PLANS, THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS AT BEST FOR THE GARAGE PLAZA POOL HAVE BEEN MADE BY OBSERVATIONS ONLY WITHOUT DIGGING A HOLE AND LOOKING WITHOUT PERFORMING CORE SAMPLES, WITHOUT USING IMAGING TECHNOLOGIES TO INVESTIGATE THE REBAR AND CONCRETE, AND WITHOUT ANALYZING THE WATER ENTERING THE GARAGE TO DETERMINE IF IT'S RAINWATER, POOL WATER OR DOMESTIC IRRIGATION WATER. NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO MAKE A DECISION. THIRD, NO RATIONAL BUILDING OWNER WOULD ASSUME THAT TO COMPLETE THE LEVEL OF REPAIRS NEEDED BY THIS CITY HALL, THEY WOULD MOVE EVERY ONE OUT OF A 700,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING LEASE SPACE FOR FIVE YEARS TO HOUSE THE FUNCTIONS AND COMPLETELY REFIT THE LEASE SPACE WITH NEW FURNITURE, FIXTURES AND EQUIPMENTS. PROPERTIES DO STAGED AND STAGGERED RENOVATIONS ALL THE TIME. ABANDONING CITY HALL FOR REPAIRS IS AN ASSUMPTION TO FIT THE NARRATIVE. IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO MAKE A DECISION. I BELIEVE THE DECISION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF CITY HALL BELONGS WITH THE PEOPLE, NOT THE COUNCIL. WITH A DETAILED, THOROUGH, FACT BASED INVESTIGATION OF THE ALTERNATIVES. DEVELOPMENT OF A REALISTIC AND EFFECTIVE PROJECT TO REHABILITATE THIS BUILDING FUNDED BY GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROPOSAL THAT IS VOTED ON BY THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RONNIE MESTAS. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR RONNIE MESTAS, WEST DALLAS, TEXAS, 75212. THANK YOU FOR APPOINTING ME COMMISSIONER. AND IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY. AS A WEST DALLAS RESIDENT, I WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE OF THINGS CLEAR. THIS IS NOT JUST A BUILDING. THIS IS A PIECE OF ART. YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THAT'S RESPECTED BY, I THINK, BY ALL DISTRICTS, NOT JUST 1 OR 2. I'M GOING TO REFERENCE A TRIP I RECENTLY TOOK TO CHICAGO, AND A GENTLEMAN SPOKE EARLIER ABOUT THE PYRAMIDS AND THE EIFFEL TOWER, OR THE THINGS IN ITALY AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT I WENT TO CHICAGO 1967, AND I'M GOING TO AGE MYSELF. THERE WAS A PICASSO PUT IN THE KING DALY PLAZA, AND I CALL HIM KING DALY. BECAUSE KING DALY RICHARD DALY WAS THE MAYOR OF CHICAGO AT THAT TIME. THAT'S BEEN THERE SINCE 1967. IN THAT PLAZA. WENT BACK THIS WEEKEND. SAME THING. I STILL DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS, BUT IT'S THERE. I WENT TO AS PART OF MY MILITARY TRAINING. I WENT TO GOSH THE BOARDWALK AND JERSEY CITY THE TRUMP TOWER WITH THE NEW ONE AT THAT TIME. NOW IT'S VACANT, IT'S EMPTY, IT'S GONE. IT'S, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THERE'S THINGS THAT DO CHANGE AND SOME THINGS THAT DON'T CHANGE. THIS DOESN'T NEED TO BE CHANGED, BUT IT DOES. AS A GENTLEMAN JUST SAID, IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S VOTED ON BY THE VOTERS, NOT NOT TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY OR WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE. BUT THIS BUILDING BELONGS TO ALL OF US, THE VOTERS, EVEN YOU GUYS, YOU KNOW. OR I SHOULDN'T EVEN SAY GUYS, YOU COUNCIL PEOPLE, IT BELONGS TO YOU ALL TOO. AND I SEE THESE CAMERAS ON THE SIDES. I DON'T KNOW WHO PAYS FOR THOSE, BUT THEY CAN ONLY FILM PARTIAL TRANSPARENCY. [01:30:06] THEY CANNOT FILM HONOR OR INTEGRITY, AND THEY CAN'T FILM WHAT'S GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES. SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. AND THE NEXT THING IS, WHEN WE'RE FIGHTING FOR OUR COMMUNITIES, BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASK FOR, YOU KNOW, OR WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO RECEIVE. BECAUSE IN WEST DALLAS AND YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENED IN WEST DALLAS IS STILL HAPPENING. WE'VE LOST 200 OVER 200 FAMILIES OVERNIGHT, NOT OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS OVERNIGHT, BECAUSE THEY DESERVED A BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE. SO WE CAME UP WITH CHAPTER 27, AND THIS IS GOING TO PUT A FINE ON ALL THE HOMEOWNERS THAT WERE RENTING. AND YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENED? HE MADE THE RENTERS HOMEOWNERS. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD REALLY COULD LOOK AT. BUT THOSE THINGS TAKE NEGOTIATION AND THEY TAKE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. AND JUST NOT JUST UP HERE IN THE HORSESHOE. YOU HAVE TO GO OUT TO YOUR COMMUNITIES BECAUSE I SEE CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CERTAIN DISTRICTS, BUT THIS INFORMATION IS NOT GOING OUT TO ALL THE PEOPLE IN ALL THE COMMUNITIES. SO AGAIN, I THINK THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAKING THE DECISION ON THIS BUILDING AND THE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE PROCESS BELONGS TO THE VOTERS. AND I, YOU KNOW, APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MARA. SCHREIER. FLEMING. MARSH. SCHREIER. FLEMING. HI, THERE. CAN YOU. AND I'M SURE YOU CAN HEAR ME. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ARRANGING THIS VIRTUAL PRESENTATION. MAURA SCHREIER, FLEMING, DISTRICT 12. IT IS HORRIFYING THAT CITY COUNCIL WOULD RUSH A DECISION ON CITY HALL'S FUTURE. YOU HAVE HEARD HOW MANY CITIZENS OPPOSE DESTROYING AN I.M. PEI DESIGNED BUILDING. I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO EXAMINE THE MAINTENANCE EXPENSES THAT ARE OVERSEEN BY CITY MANAGEMENT, AND THAT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY. LETTING NOT ONE, NOT JUST ONE, BUT TWO BUILDINGS DETERIORATE BECAUSE OF A LACK OF MAINTENANCE IS VERY CONCERNING. FIRST WAS THE CONVENTION CENTER, AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CITY HALL. EUROPE'S BUILDINGS LAST HUNDREDS OF YEARS, SOME EVEN THOUSANDS. WHY CAN'T DALLAS GET A BUILDING TO LAST 50 YEARS? I THINK YOU NEED TO INVESTIGATE WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THESE VERY IMPORTANT BUILDINGS AND MAKE THE NEEDED ADJUSTMENTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. MARY COOK. MR. MAYOR, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU SIR. CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE. I'M MARY MCDERMOTT COOK. I JUST WANT TO. I'VE LISTENED TO EVERYBODY, AND I WANT TO SAY ONE THING THAT YOU ALL PROBABLY DON'T KNOW. WHY WAS I IN PAID BILL SELECTED FOR THIS BUILDING? BECAUSE WE HAD SHOT PRESIDENT KENNEDY. I AM PAID DESIGNED THE KENNEDY LIBRARY. WHEN HE WAS YOUNG. HE WAS NOT WELL KNOWN. THIS WAS DALLAS WAY TO MAKE US RECOGNIZE HOW WRONG THEY WERE TO BE CALLED THE CITY OF HATE, WHICH WE WERE CALLED. I. AM SAD THAT YOU ALL HAVE THOUGHT THAT YOU ARE NOT. THAT YOU ALL WANT TO TEAR THIS DOWN. IT IS NOT JUST KIM'S FAULT. IT GOES BACK TO PROBABLY GEORGE SCHRADER, WHO WAS CITY MANAGER WHEN THIS WAS BUILT. I LIVE IN A HOUSE THAT SOME OF YOU ALL HAVE BEEN TO. I CAN TELL YOU THAT IF I DON'T HAVE A WORKMAN THERE ONCE A WEEK OR ONCE EVERY OTHER WEEK, SOMETHING IS BROKEN. YOU ALL, EACH COUNCIL CANNOT BIND ANOTHER COUNCIL WELL, THAT'S WRONG BECAUSE YOU MAKE DECISIONS THAT BIND US AND YOU BIND THE CITIZENS. WHY DON'T YOU ALL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS BEAUTIFUL BUILDING [01:35:01] THAT WAS BUILT DURING A VERY BRUTAL TIME OF DALLAS? I AM SORRY, BUT I TOTALLY HOPE YOU ALL WILL MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION, NOT AN ECONOMIC ONE. THANK YOU, BRETT SHIPP. CHIEF, DON'T RUN OFF. BRETT SHIPP, 1902. MARY DALE, INVESTIGATIVE AND DALLAS CITY HALL REPORTER SINCE 1991. AND TRUST ME, I DO KNOW ALL THE PROBLEMS WITH THIS BUILDING. I KNOW THE GHOSTS THAT HAUNT IT AND THE SCANDALS THAT PLAGUED IT. I HAVE COVERED MANY, MANY OF THEM. BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT INSPIRATIONAL VIEW IN THE FLAG ROOM RIGHT BEHIND US, OVERLOOKING THE MAJESTY AND THE VIBRANCY OF OUR DOWNTOWN. I HAVE ALSO, HOWEVER, TIPTOED AROUND THE PERPETUAL PUDDLES IN THE BASEMENT GARAGE, AND I HAVE EXPERIENCED THE CLAUSTROPHOBIA OF THE BASEMENT, OFFICES AND MEETING SPACES DOWN THERE. BUT THEN THERE IS THE DRAMATIC SIXTH FLOOR ATRIUM. VIEW THE BIRD'S EYE. LOOK INTO OFFICES AND CONFERENCE ROOMS, A DELIBERATE ACHIEVEMENT OF THE ARCHITECT I.M. PEI, UNDERSCORING THE IMPORTANCE OF TRANSPARENCY IN THIS CITY HALL. I HAVE WITNESSED MANY OF THE INSPIRATIONAL DECISIONS MADE BY THIS AND OTHER CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. JUST WEEKS AGO, POLICE CHIEF COMO STOOD RIGHT IN THIS SPOT AND DECLARED THAT HIS DEPARTMENT WOULD NOT ACCEPT ONE DIME OF MONEY TO PARTNER WITH FEDERAL IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS, CHIEF COMO SAID NO. AND THIS ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL JOINED WITH HIM. NO TO EASY MONEY, NO TO MILLIONS OF FEDERAL DOLLARS. YOU SAID NO BECAUSE IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I BELIEVE HISTORY WAS MADE IN THIS, AT THIS HORSESHOE ON THAT DAY, COUNTLESS TIMES OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. DALLAS CIVIC LEADERS HAVE STEPPED FORWARD TO SAVE HISTORIC AND ICONIC STRUCTURES. DEVELOPER SHAUN TODD, WHO WILL SPEAK IN JUST A BIT, IS ONE OF THE GREATEST BUILDING PRESERVATIONISTS IN THE HISTORY OF DOWNTOWN. HE RESTORED THE OLD DALLAS POST OFFICE, THE FIRST NATIONAL BUILDING. HE, THE ICONIC OLD KLIF IN THE EAST QUARTER SHAUN TODD SAVED IT AND PRESERVED IT. OTHERS HAVE SAVED THE COUNTY RECORDS BUILDING, THE MAJESTIC THEATER, THE SCHOOL BOOK DEPOSITORY, THE HALL OF STATE. AND LET'S NOT FORGET THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT WAS POURED INTO SAVING THE OLD CITY HALL. THAT'S RIGHT. A FEW YEARS AGO, GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO DEMOLISH THE OLD DALLAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING, CITY COUNCIL SAVED IT. YOU CAN DO THE SAME THING RIGHT NOW. YOU CAN STOP THE DEMOLITION FREIGHT TRAIN, STOP THE BULLDOZER, STOP THE WRECKING BALL. AND WE ASK YOU, PLEASE FIND A WAY TO RENOVATE AND GIVE LOVE TO THIS CITY HALL. AND HERE'S AN IDEA. HOW ABOUT WE ASK THE PEOPLE FOR THEIR OPINION? IN FACT, WHO IN THIS AUDIENCE RIGHT NOW STAND UP IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF DEMOLISHING CITY HALL, STAND UP. IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF DEMOLISHING CITY HALL, THAT'S YOUR TIME. THAT'S THAT'S YOUR MAYOR. CITY COUNCIL. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THERE'S YOUR ANSWER. THANK YOU. ELIZABETH GIFFORD. HERE. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ELIZABETH GIFFORD. I LIVE IN THE CEDARS NEIGHBORHOOD. I LIVE. DO WHAT? CLOSER. HOW'S THAT? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? OKAY. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ELIZABETH GIFFORD. I LIVE IN THE CEDARS NEIGHBORHOOD. I LIVE ABOUT A HALF A MILE FROM THIS FACILITY. AS A NEARBY RESIDENT I EITHER WALK OR DRIVE BY THIS CITY HALL DAILY. AND SO I SEE THE HOMELESSNESS, THE STREET FEEDINGS AND THE SAFETY CONCERNS THAT ARE OCCURRING AROUND THIS PROPERTY AND AROUND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES BECAUSE IT'S VASTLY UNDERUSED. ON THIS PROPERTY, AS WELL AS THE ADJACENT ONES. SO IN MY OPINION, REDEVELOPING THIS SITE INTO THIS PRIME SITE INTO AN ACTIVE [01:40:04] MIXED MIXED USE AREA, WHETHER IT BE HOTELS OR RESTAURANTS OR ENTERTAINMENT, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BRING THIS AREA. IT WOULD BE A SAFER AND MORE VIBRANT PART TO THIS AREA, WHICH IT JUST IS NOT RIGHT NOW. AND I THINK WE ALL CAN ADMIT TO THAT. SO LASTLY, THE BUILDING'S ORIGINAL INTENTION IN DESIGN FROM THE 1970S SHOULD NOT OVERRIDE TODAY'S REALITY. AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO REIMAGINE THIS AREA AND REVITALIZE THIS PORTION OF SOUTH DALLAS, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME. AND I KNOW IT IS TOO AS WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MARLA BANE. MISS BANE, WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. YOUR AUDIO IS NOT COMING THROUGH. WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU. MISS BANE. REGAN. ROTHENBERGER. AND AS MR. ROTHENBERGER COMES FORWARD, I WILL ASK MATT HOUSTON AND SHELLEY POTTER TO COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FRONT ROW. THANK YOU. CITY STAFF MAKE MANY UNSEEN SACRIFICES. MY CONDOLENCES, MADAM CITY MANAGER. MAYOR. THERE'S AN OLD SAYING THAT YOU CAN'T FIGHT CITY HALL. BUT I'M PROUD TO BE ONE OF THE MANY WHO ARE FIGHTING FOR CITY HALL TODAY. AS THE LANDMARK COMMISSIONER WHO BROUGHT FORTH THE NOMINATION REQUEST OVER A YEAR AGO. I ONLY MENTION THIS BECAUSE MY DISTINGUISHED COLLEAGUES REPRESENT ALL PARTS OF DALLAS, JUST LIKE YOU. WELL, BEFORE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WAS EVEN A THOUGHT, THE COMMISSION VIEWED THIS BUILDING AS HISTORICALLY VIABLE AND UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO BEGIN THE ARDUOUS PROCESS OF INITIATION. IT WAS AN IMPARTIAL CALL, AND FOR THE RECORD, NO STAFF MEMBER CAME TO TALK TO THE COMMISSION ABOUT THE BUILDING'S IMMINENT FAILURES. I TALK ABOUT THIS BUILDING TO ANYONE WHO WILL LISTEN AND HAVE BEEN FOR MORE THAN A YEAR. THE THOUGHT OF IT BEING UNDER THREAT. YES, SOME OF US ARE EMOTIONAL, BUT I ARGUE THAT LEAVING NO STONE UNTURNED TO FIND A REASON TO DO AWAY WITH THE BUILDING IS JUST AS EMOTIONAL. THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN UNDER THE IMPRESSION THIS BUILDING WOULD REMAIN JUST ONE EXAMPLE. DOWNTOWN DALLAS INC. 360 MASTER PLAN SHOWS CITY HALL REMAINING A KEY ACTIVITY NODE OF THE DISTRICT. AND NOW I'M AFRAID THERE'S A NEW PLAN FOR THIS BUILDING, NOT ONE SHOWN ON A PUBLIC DOCUMENT. A NEW, LESS EGALITARIAN FORM OF THE GOALS FOR DALLAS. AT MONDAY'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING, NO ONE HAD EVEN HEARD OF THE MAVS. SO NOW THE PURPOSE OF THIS INTENSE SCRUTINY OF THE BUILDING IS FURTHER CLOUDED. WHY MUST WE PRESUME WITH THE SALE IS ABOUT IF THERE'S TRULY NO REASON OTHER THAN A FACT FINDING MISSION? WHY SPECIAL MEETINGS? ESTABLISH A SPECIAL COMMITTEE. CLOSED DOOR EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. THE BUILDING'S FOOTPRINT ITSELF IS JUST UNDER THREE ACRES. WHAT WILL THESE EXACT THREE ACRES OF THOUSANDS AMONG US REALLY DO TO TRANSFORM DOWNTOWN? THE FIVE ACRES OUT FRONT THERE, A PARK. GOOD LUCK WITH THAT VOTE. SO IN CLOSING, YOU'LL FIND ANY REASON FOR LETTING THIS GO. WHAT'S TO SAY THE COUNCIL DECIDES IT'S NOT FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE TO MAINTAIN THE HALL OF STATE. THE MEYERSON, KALITA, HUMPHREYS, YOU NAME IT. WE WILL NEVER HAVE TRULY INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES BUILT LIKE THIS AGAIN, AND WE NEEDN'T DESTROY THE FEW WE HAVE. ESPECIALLY A BUILDING CHAMPIONED BY GREAT CIVIC LEADERS OF THE MID-CENTURY LIKE ERIC JOHNSON, GEORGE ALLEN, STANLEY MARCUS, ELIZABETH BLESSING WHO SOUGHT TO GIVE US SOMETHING MONUMENTAL TO REMEMBER DALLAS BY ANY DECISION TO MOVE FROM THIS SITE SHOULD BE UNANIMOUS FROM THIS BODY AS A UNIFIED CITY COUNCIL AFTER TRUE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND EVEN AN ELECTION, BECAUSE THE TEMPLE FOR THE PEOPLE SHOULD NOT MAKE WAY FOR A TEMPLE INTENDED ONLY TO WORSHIP THE GODS OF SPORTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HASANI BURTON HAS CANCELED. MATT HOUSTON. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR. CITY COUNCIL, CITY CITY MANAGER AND STAFF. MY NAME IS MATT HOUSTON AND I STAND HERE AS A LIFELONG DALLAS RESIDENT. THIS IS MY HOME AND I AM SOMEONE WHO PUTS MY SKIN IN THE GAME. INVESTING MY TIME, MY ENERGY, AND MY RESOURCES TO CONTINUE BUILDING THE FABRIC OF THIS CITY. BUT MY INVESTMENT ISN'T JUST IN REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT AND PERMIT APPLICATIONS OR ZONING AND LAND USE, [01:45:02] BUT IT'S ALSO IN HUMAN CAPITAL AT UNT DALLAS. I WORK DIRECTLY WITH STUDENTS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS, EDUCATING THEM ON HOW TO BE MORE ENGAGED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOUTHERN DALLAS AND BEYOND. FOR THE RECORD, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS OF THE VIEWS SHARED HERE AT CITY COUNCIL OR CITY HALL AND HOW WE CAN WORK AS A UNIFIED CITY. I TEACH THEM THAT THEY DON'T JUST HAVE TO LIVE IN THIS CITY. THEY CAN HELP SHAPE IT. BECAUSE OF THAT, I HAVE A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE ON WHAT THE GENERATION EXPECTS FROM ITS GOVERNMENT. THAT BRINGS ME TO THE PROPOSED REMODEL OF THIS BUILDING. WE ARE CURRENTLY SITTING IN AN I.M. PEI MASTERPIECE, A 1970S INVERTED PYRAMID THAT WAS MEANT TO BE A HEROIC STATEMENT OF STRENGTH. BUT AS A DEVELOPER AND EDUCATOR, THERE'S A FINE LINE BETWEEN LANDMARK AND SUNK AND A SUNK COST. BRUTALISM, BY ITS VERY NATURE, IS INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT AND EXPENSIVE TO MODERNIZE, SINKING HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO SPECIALIZED CONCRETE. AND A FORTRESS LAYOUT DOESN'T JUST STRAIN OUR BUDGET. IT KEEPS OUR GOVERNMENT PHYSICALLY ISOLATED FROM THE PEOPLE IT SERVES. WE ARE TRYING TO FORCE A 20. WE'RE TRYING TO FORCE 2026 WORKFLOWS INTO A 1977 SHELL. LET'S DISCUSS A PIVOT IN OUR THINKING OF HOW WE'RE USING THIS CITY HALL INSTEAD OF A STANDALONE MODEL, LET'S EXPLORE MIXED USE CIVIC CAMPUS THROUGH A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. IMAGINE A DEVELOPMENT THAT INTEGRATES A CITY SERVICE OR SERVICES WITH WORKFORCE HOUSING, RETAIL, GREEN SPACE CONNECTING THE CONVENTION CENTER DISTRICT BACK TO THE HEART OF DOWNTOWN. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THINK OF THE MESSAGE IT SENDS TO THE STUDENTS I TEACH AT UTD. A PROJECT OF THIS SCALE AND INNOVATION COULD SPARK THE CREATIVITY OF OUR FUTURE LEADERS. IT SHOWS THEM THAT DALLAS IS A CITY THAT ISN'T AFRAID TO EVOLVE. SO LET'S JUST NOT REPAIR THE PAST. LET'S BUILD AN ENVIRONMENT THAT INSPIRES THE NEXT GENERATION TO LEAD. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH AND HAVE A GREAT. THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW GO BACK TO SPEAKER 40 MARLA BOWEN, WHOSE VIRTUAL. MISS SPAIN. MISS BAIN, YOUR AUDIO IS STILL NOT WORKING. I'M SORRY. WE'LL COME BACK. SHELLY POTTER. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR JOHNSON AND COUNCIL. MY NAME IS SHELLY POTTER AND I LIVE AT 437 COAL AVENUE IN KNOX, WHICH IS DISTRICT 14. YOU KNOW ME AS A PASSIONATE ADVOCATE FOR URBAN PLANNING AND ALSO A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. APPARENTLY, I WAS ON TV ON MONDAY FROM THE ONE OF THE SOUND BITES. I'M KIND OF GLAD I HAD SOME DECENT HAIR. BUT HOW DID I FIND OUT? I GOT MESSAGES FROM COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE COUNTRY WHO ARE WATCHING DALLAS. THEY SAID, THANK YOU FOR SHOWING UP AND STANDING UP TO SAVE CITY HALL. I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT WHAT I SAID MONDAY BECAUSE MANY OF YOU HEARD THAT. BUT I WANT TO JUST ADD A COUPLE POINTS. AS A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL, IF I HAD ISSUED A REPORT LIKE YOU ALL RECEIVED LAST WEEK, I WOULD BE CALLED IN TO MEET WITH MY CLIENTS AND I SURE BETTER BE READY BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE ASKING ME A LOT MORE QUESTIONS THAN I HEARD AT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING. THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO CHALLENGE THE ASSUMPTIONS. ASK QUESTIONS. WHERE DID THE MARGIN OF ERROR PERCENTAGE COME FROM? HAVE WE GOTTEN SECOND OPINIONS? DO WE HAVE NON-CONFLICTED PEER REVIEW? WHAT IS REASONABLE? PHASING ALL OF THOSE THINGS TO MY KNOWLEDGE. THAT MEETING HAS NOT TAKEN PLACE SINCE THE REPORT WAS RELEASED. AS I HAVE DIGESTED THE FINDINGS AND THE COSTS MYSELF, IT OCCURS TO ME THAT IT COSTS $750 MILLION TO REBUILD NOTRE DAME AFTER THE FIRE WITH THE FINEST CRAFTSMEN IN THE WORLD. AND WHEN THE EIFFEL TOWER NEEDED TO BE REPAINTED FOR THE 20TH TIME AT $70 MILLION COST, DID THEY CONSIDER TEARING IT DOWN BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME RUST THAT THEY HAD TO DEAL WITH AS PART OF THE RECONSTRUCTION? NUMBER TWO POINT. I SAID IT MONDAY AND I'LL SAY IT AGAIN PLEASE TELL THE TRUTH. PLEASE BE TRANSPARENT. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND CITY STAFF SAID IN PUBLIC FORUMS, TO THE MEDIA AND ON SOCIAL MEDIA, WE WILL DO ANYTHING TO KEEP THE MAVS. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN REGARDING THE MAVERICKS CAREFULLY WORDED DENIAL TODAY? AS SHAKESPEARE ONCE SAID, DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH, METHINKS. [01:50:05] AND FOR MISS MENDELSOHN, I WORE MY STAR BRACELET. THE POOR STARS AREN'T EVEN GETTING ANY ATTENTION. CITY HALL BELONGS TO ALL OF US. AND WHILE I COULDN'T SEE BECAUSE I WAS ONLINE, ONE OF THE ARCHITECTS PRESENTATION THIS MORNING, WHAT I DID SEE IS WE HAVE A ROADMAP. LET'S REPAIR CITY HALL, RE-ENVISION THE PEOPLE'S PLAZA. EVEN BETTER IDEA. ALL THESE DEVELOPERS AND ORGANIZATIONS WHO ARE FOR TEARING IT DOWN HAVE THEM GIVE US THE MONEY FOR INVESTMENT IN THAT PLAZA. PLEASE SLOW DOWN. PLEASE LISTEN TO THE CITY AND YOUR CITIZENS. DON'T SELL YOUR SOULS AND THE SOUL OF OUR CITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CHRIS BOWERS. MR. BOWERS IS COMING FORWARD. I'LL ASK THAT TAMMY PEARCE AND ANTHONY RESCH COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. CHRIS BOWERS, 4115. RAIN SONG, DISTRICT 12. FOR OVER 20 YEARS. AND BEFORE THAT DISTRICT 14, EXPERTS SAY $1 BILLION WILL BE NEEDED TO REPAIR CITY HALL. IF IT SEEMS TOO BAD TO BE TRUE, IT PROBABLY IS. I'VE HEARD THIS STORY BEFORE. 25 YEARS AGO, AN OUT-OF-TOWN DEVELOPER TOLD DALLAS CITY OFFICIALS THAT A GOVERNMENT BUILDING WAS TOO DILAPIDATED TO BE REPAIRED. THEN COUNCIL MEMBER VALETTA LYLE PERSUADED HER COLLEAGUES ON THIS COUNCIL TO DESIGNATE THAT BUILDING TO BE A LANDMARK. ANYWAY, THE DEVELOPER HIRED ONE OF DALLAS BIGGEST LAW FIRMS, AS WELL AS VERY RESPECTED ARCHITECTS, A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, A COST ESTIMATE, A REAL ESTATE BROKER AND AN APPRAISER. AND THE DEVELOPER TOLD CITY OFFICIALS THAT THE BUILDING WOULD THE PROPERTY WOULD BE WORTH ALMOST $12 MILLION IF THE CITY WOULD LET HIM DEMOLISH THE PROPERTY. BUT IF THE CITY REFUSED TO ALLOW HIM TO DEMOLISH THAT FORMER GOVERNMENT, BUILDING, THE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE A VALUE OF -$4 MILLION BECAUSE IT WAS NOT FEASIBLE TO RESTORE, AND PROPERTIES CAN IN FACT HAVE NEGATIVE MARKET VALUES IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY ARE HEAVILY, ENVIRONMENTALLY CONTAMINATED. WHEN THE CITY REFUSED TO ALLOW THE PROPERTY OWNER TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING, THE DEVELOPER SUED THE CITY, CLAIMING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT THE CITY'S HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGNATION HAD TAKEN HIS PROPERTY RIGHTS WITHOUT COMPENSATION. SEEKING MORE THAN $11 MILLION, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY ASSIGNED ME TO HANDLE THAT LAWSUIT, THE DEVELOPER WAS CONFIDENT THAT THE CITY COULD NOT DAMAGE THE CREDIBILITY OF HIS APPRAISER, BECAUSE THAT APPRAISER HAD WORKED FOR THE CITY AND HAD PERFORMED THE APPRAISAL JUSTIFYING THE CITY'S SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESS 1000 FOOT SPACING SEPARATION. BUT AFTER A FOUR WEEK TRIAL, THE JUDGE RULED FOR THE CITY AND ISSUED FINDINGS OF FACT GIVING 31 REASONS WHY THAT DEVELOPER APPRAISER WAS NOT CREDIBLE AND THE DEVELOPER APPEALED, BUT THOSE APPEALS LOST. IT TOOK A FEW YEARS, BUT JACK MATTHEWS RESTORED THAT FORMER GOVERNMENT BUILDING AND IT IS STILL STANDING TODAY. THAT FORMER GOVERNMENT BUILDING IS THE ORIGINAL DALLAS HIGH SCHOOL, BETTER KNOWN TODAY AS CROSIER TECH. TODAY, FOLKS SAY THAT ANOTHER OUT-OF-TOWNER WANTS TO DEMOLISH THIS GOVERNMENTAL BUILDING, AND RESPECTED EXPERTS SAY IT IS NOT FEASIBLE TO RESTORE IT. DO WE NEED ANOTHER TRIAL TO PROVE THEM WRONG? THANK YOU, TAMMY PIERCE. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR JOHNSON AND COUNCIL. SITTING HERE TODAY LISTENING TO THE RHETORIC IN REGARDS TO CITY HALL, I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT. WE NEED TO MOVE. CITY HALL NEEDS TO MOVE. AND I'M GOING TO EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY. HOW DOES THE CITY MAKE MONEY? PROPERTY TAXES, BUSINESS LICENSE AND SALES TAXES. ONLINE, IT SAYS 500 PEOPLE A DAY ARE RELOCATING TO THE CITY OF DALLAS. THAT'S MORE WATER, MORE SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE AND JOBS. AND HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PROVIDE THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS? YOU HAVE TO CONTINUOUSLY BE ABLE TO GENERATE INCOME INTO THIS CITY, TO KEEP THIS CITY VIABLE AND TO KEEP THIS CITY COMPETITIVE AND TO HOLD ON TO A BUILDING THAT'S FULL OF ASBESTOS AND THAT'S OLD, AND SIT HERE AND NOT BE A SINGLE ASSET ENTITY THAT'S MAKING MONEY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS IS NOT LOGICAL. MY UNDERSTANDING IS 1.2 BILLION WILL COST TO RENOVATE THIS BUILDING. ONLY A FRACTION OF THAT IS NEEDED IN ORDER FOR THIS BUILDING TO MOVE. [01:55:02] SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND ABOUT ALL THIS EMOTION THAT I'VE HEARD, BECAUSE IT'S NOT CHECKERS, IT'S CHESS. THIS IS A BUSINESS MOVE FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. THE CITY OF DALLAS ALLOWED A MAJOR, A MAJOR, OKAY, A MAJOR ECONOMIC ENGINE TO LEAVE THIS CITY AND GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT. AND BILLIONS WENT TO THAT CITY. SO RIGHT NOW, THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECOUP THOSE DOLLARS WITH KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, WITH SINGLE ASSET ENTITIES THAT WILL CREATE TAX REVENUE FOR THIS CITY, THESE INDIVIDUALS THAT YOU HEARD, THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND LOCAL GOVERNMENT. WE ELECTED YOU IN OFFICE AND YOU UNDERSTAND THE WAY LOCAL GOVERNMENT WORKS. IT'S AS IF A CHILD, A CHILD, WILL EAT CANDY ALL DAY LONG IF THE PARENT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT. BUT THE PARENT KNOWS THAT THE CHILD NEEDS GREEN VEGETABLES AND WHOLE GRAINS IN ORDER TO GROW. I SAID THE WORD GROW. THE CITY OF DALLAS NEEDS GROWTH IN ORDER TO REMAIN VIABLE IN THIS CITY. I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND SOMETHING. THE TOPIC I WAS GOING TO SAY I WAS GOING. I HAD A WHOLE SPEECH PREPARED. BUT I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO THIS RHETORIC HERE TODAY. BUT THE TOPIC OF MY SPEECH WAS CALLED THE CYCLE OF LIFE. RIGHT NOW. THIS IS THE MONTH OF MARCH, RIGHT? WE'VE WATCHED THE LAST QUARTER OF THE YEAR, WHICH WE WATCHED THE LEAVES DIE. OKAY. WE'VE WATCHED THE GRASS TURNS BROWN, BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN THE SPRING. WE'RE SEEING BIRTH. THIS IS NOT A MOVE TO SLIGHT THE CITY OF DALLAS. THIS IS BIRTHED INTO THIS CITY. IN ORDER FOR THE CITY TO REMAIN VIABLE AND COMPETITIVE. LIKE I CONTINUE TO SAY, YOU NEED TO MOVE AND YOU NEED TO MOVE ON A UNITED BLACK CONTRACTORS. OUR MOTTO THIS YEAR IS ALL GAS AND NO BRAKES. LET'S GO. AND WHAT I SAY TO YOU, MAYOR, AND I SAY TO YOU, CITY COUNCIL, LET'S GO. THANK YOU, ANTHONY RASH. IS A TOUGH ACT TO FOLLOW. LET'S REGROUP HERE. MAYOR. MISS TOLBERT MY SINCERE CONDOLENCES. IT'S A TOUGH TIME TO BE HERE, AND I'M SORRY YOU'RE UNABLE TO BE WITH YOUR FAMILY TODAY, BUT CAN WE JUST TALK? Y'ALL, THIS THIS PROCESS IS. THIS IS A BANANA REPUBLIC OF A PROCESS. THIS PROCESS IS A PARODY, RIGHT? LIKE, AM I THE ONLY ONE TO SEE THAT? RIGHT? I JUST I HAVE TO SAY THAT IT FEELS AS THOUGH IT'S BEEN A FOOL'S ERRAND. RIGHT? AND A VOTE FOR ABANDONMENT CAN ONLY LEAD TO NATIONAL EMBARRASSMENT. WE'RE THE PRIVILEGED FEW WHO ARE SITTING HERE TODAY ABLE TO BE HERE, PAID, MAYBE. PROBABLY NOT PAID. WHAT ABOUT THE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF OTHER PEOPLE WHO, BY NECESSITY OF DESIGN, CANNOT BE HERE TODAY? TO THE WOMAN WHO SPOKE JUST RECENTLY, SHE HAD ONLY HEARD ABOUT THIS TWO WEEKS AGO. MY NOTES HERE DON'T WORK ANYMORE AFTER EVERYBODY ELSE WHO'S TALKED TODAY AND THERE IS A LOT OF EMOTION, BUT WE ELECTED Y'ALL OUT OF EMOTION TO TO REPRESENT OUR CONSTITUENCY AND NOT DEVELOP OUR INTEREST. YES, WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T PUT AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT NEXT TO A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? WOULD ANY OF Y'ALL PUT YOUR KIDS THERE? WE'LL SEE ABOUT THAT. THIS HAS BEEN A DIZZYINGLY FAST CLOWN SHOW, AND I SEE PEOPLE ON THEIR PHONE. I SEE PEOPLE MOVING AROUND. BUT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT CONVERSATION AND A VOTE. TO ABANDON THIS CITY HALL RIGHT NOW IS A NEGLECTFUL MOVE TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS, YOUR DUTY AND YOUR AIR OF LEADERSHIP. AND I'M NOT SAYING I HAVE ANSWERS. I'M NOT SAYING THAT ANYONE HERE DOES. BUT INDIVIDUAL MOTIVES MUST BE PUT ASIDE, AND A VOTE TO SLOW DOWN DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE DON'T CONTINUE TO TRULY DISCUSS AFFORDABILITY IN THIS CITY, WHICH IS ONE OF THE PREMIER TOPICS THAT HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED. AND WE HAVE ALL RECENTLY SEEN THIS COUNCIL FAIL TO ADOPT POLICIES AND CAPITULATE TO FORCES OF FASCISM IN OUR COUNTRY. IT DOESN'T MEAN WE DON'T MISUSE TAX DOLLARS BY WHICH ANY HISTORICAL ACCOUNT WILL CERTAINLY HAPPEN IF PRIVATE INTERESTS COME IN, AND TOO OFTEN REVEAL OVERWHELMING DISINTEREST IN OUR COMMUNITY'S WELL-BEING. I'M SHORT ON TIME, BUT VERY QUICKLY. I'VE RECENTLY JUST WROTE ABOUT WORK OF THIS TYPE AND IT DIRECTLY TRANSLATES TO THIS CURRENT DEBACLE. THE ONLY WAY TO ACHIEVE PROGRESS THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE CULTURAL CULTURAL ERASURE IS THROUGH A COMMITMENT TO PLACE TO PEOPLE, AND A COLLECTIVE FORM OF CIVIC IDENTITY. MAKE SPACE FOR PEOPLE. VOTE NO ON THIS RESOLUTION AND GIVE YOUR CONSTITUENTS THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVE YOUR COMMITMENT. THAT, MAYOR, IS THE HARD DECISION. THANK YOU. [02:00:01] THANK YOU. DONNA DENISON. DONNA DENISON, WHILE MISS DENISON IS COMING FORWARD, I'LL ASK BRANT BROWN AND BENJI FEEHAN TO COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY TO HEAR HERE ON THE CITIZENS. I AM HERE TO SUPPORT CITY, THE CITY HALL. FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, TOWN SQUARES HAVE BEEN AN IMPORTANT, INTEGRAL PART OF COMMUNITY AND CIVIC LIFE. OUR CITY HALL WITH THIS CHAMBER, THE CONFERENCE ROOMS FOR MEETING OUR REPRESENTATIVES, AND THE OUTSIDE PLAZA FOR GATHERING IS OUR TOWN SQUARE. IF WE LOSE IT, THIS IMPORTANT GRAND PUBLIC SPACE WILL NEVER BE REPLACED. CONSULTANTS HAVEN'T PROVIDED AN INDEPENDENT, COMPLETE DATA STUDY OF THE REPAIR COSTS AS DIRECTED BY THE NOVEMBER 12TH RESOLUTION FROM THIS COUNCIL. IN FACT, AT THAT MEETING, AN AMENDED RESOLUTION REQUIRING AN INDEPENDENT STUDY FOR DATA DID NOT PASS. MANY OF US NOW HAVE LOST TRUST IN OUR MUNICIPAL POLITICAL SYSTEM, ALONG WITH OUR TRUST OF MANY OF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS. THERE MUST BE AN OPEN, HONEST AND INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF BUILDING REPAIRS BALANCED AGAINST THE COSTS OF A PERMANENT MOVE OUT AND SUBSEQUENT SETUP AND RENT PAYMENTS. DO NOT DESTROY THIS BUILDING. OUR TOWN SQUARE. WE MUST HAVE AN HONEST PROCESS WHICH INCLUDES AN INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF ALL COSTS, BOTH MONETARY AND THE COST OF THE LOSS OF THIS BUILDING TO OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BRANT BROWN. MAYOR JOHNSON. GOOD AFTERNOON. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. CITY MANAGER TOLBERT. MIKE WALLACE WITH YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. WE WISH YOU PEACE. OH. OH, SORRY. A LITTLE TALLER. I'LL START AGAIN. WELL, I WON'T I APOLOGIZE. AND TO CITY STAFF. THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU DO. THE LAST TIME THIS MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT BEGAN TO CONSIDER A VOTE ON CITY HALL WAS WAS 1964. IT TOOK 14 YEARS BEFORE THIS BUILDING WOULD BE OCCUPIED, 14 YEARS TO MOVE FROM A VOTE TO BEGIN THE EXPLORATION AND HIRE SOMEONE. 14 YEARS. WHAT PROPELLED AND WE TALK A LOT ABOUT THE BUILDING, AND THE BUILDING IS DEFINITELY A STATEMENT, BUT THE BUILDING WAS A RESPONSE. IT WAS A RESPONSE TO A DREAM. IT WAS A RESPONSE TO A VISION. THE GOALS FOR DALLAS AS THE DISTINGUISHED EMERITUS PROFESSOR THIS MORNING BEGAN TO TALK ABOUT. I WISHED HE COULD HAVE FINISHED WHAT FOLLOWED BEYOND THIS BUILDING. AND DURING THAT SAME TIME, DALLAS GREW FROM UNDER 700,000 PEOPLE TO 900,000 PEOPLE. IT WAS THE MOST EXPANSIVE PERIOD IN OUR CITY. WHY? BECAUSE WE HAD A VISION. AND THAT VISION WAS LED AT THAT TIME. BY THE WAY, THE COUNCIL WAS MADE UP OF NINE PEOPLE. ALL MADE UP. ALL VOTED AT LARGE. THERE WERE NO WARDS OR COUNCIL DISTRICTS AT THE TIME. TODAY WE HAVE A DIFFERENT SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT. DURING THAT SAME TIME, ACTUALLY, WE EVOLVED OUR GOVERNMENT. WE BECAME MORE INCLUSIVE. WHAT I COMPEL YOU IS DO NOT TAKE ACTION TODAY, DELAY OR SAY NO BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO VISION. AND MR. MAYOR, WITH RESPECT, IT STARTS WITH YOU. IT'S YOUR JOB, BUT YOU CANNOT HAVE THAT VISION. YOU HAVE TO COMPEL IT BY BRINGING US TOGETHER AS A CITY AND DEMANDING THAT WE HAVE A GREAT VISION FOR WHAT OUR CITY WILL BE 50 YEARS FROM NOW. AND WHATEVER THAT CITY HALL IS, LET IT PLAY OUT. BUT LET US DREAM AND LET US VISION, AND LET US NOT BE ONLY TRANSACTIONAL, ONLY IN THE MOMENT, ONLY IN A VERY BRIEF TIME WHERE ONE CHOICE IS MADE. DO WE INVEST OR NOT INVEST. NO, THAT'S NOT THE POINT. THE POINT IS WHETHER OR NOT OUR CITY WILL BE SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE, FOR THE FUTURE. NOT RIGHT NOW. AND THAT REQUIRES BOLD VISION. [02:05:04] MY TAKE. I THINK I CAN TALK ABOUT THIS. IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE AROUND A 9 TO 6 VOTE TODAY. JUST IMAGINE, IN 1998, THE AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER PASSED BY LIKE 1.5%. IF THAT HAD FLIPPED, IT WOULDN'T BE THERE. MAYBE WE'D HAVE TRIED AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE THERE. SO IF TWO PEOPLE DECIDE TO VOTE NO, THAT MAY BE CONSIDERING TO VOTE YES. THAT'S YOUR TIME. WE MOVE ON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BENJI FEEHAN. THANK YOU. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS. STAFF. MY NAME IS BENJI. I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT NINE. I'M ALSO AN ARCHITECT LICENSED HERE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. I FEEL LIKE I NEED TO SAY THAT SOMETIMES BECAUSE OF THE ACCENT. I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK FROM TWO PERSPECTIVES, ONE AS A TECHNICAL PROFESSIONAL AND THE SECOND AS A CONCERNED RESIDENT. MY PROFESSIONAL CRITIQUE IS WHAT WE ARE WITNESSING IS EVIDENTLY A FAILURE OF PROCESS. I DO NOT BELIEVE WE ARE WITNESSING DUE DILIGENCE, AND IT APPEARS TO BE A RUSH TO A PRE-DETERMINED CONCLUSION. THERE IS A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY. THERE IS A FAILURE OF ANALYSIS AND THERE IS A LEVERAGING OF INTENTIONAL DECAY. THE FAILURE OF THIS BUILDING IS NOT ARCHITECTURAL INEVITABILITY. IT'S THE RESULT, AS WE ARE AWARE OF DECADES OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE. USING THAT NOW AS A PRETEXT FOR A QUICK OUT IS A BREACH OF THE PROFESSIONAL QUALITIES OF CIVIC STEWARDSHIP. PERSONALLY, I ALSO BELIEVE YOU'RE SIGNALING EXCLUSION BEYOND THIS BUILDING. I HAVE DEEP CONCERNS ABOUT THE SIGNAL THIS RUSH PROCESS SENDS TO OUR RESIDENTS, PARTICULARLY OUR MOST VULNERABLE, WHEN WE TREAT THE HOUSE OF GOVERNMENT AS A DEAL TO BE TRADED RATHER THAN A HOME TO BE PROTECTED. WE TELL OUR RESIDENTS THAT DALLAS DALLAS VALUES A DEAL OVER A DEMOCRACY AND THAT CULTURE, HISTORY AND IDENTITY CAN BE ERASED IN A MATTER OF MONTHS. LET'S BE HONEST, WHEN IT COMES TO THIS INSTITUTION, THE CITY OF DALLAS TRUST IS HARD TO COME BY. TRANSPARENCY IS THE ONLY CURRENCY. YOU HAVE TO BUILD TRUST WITHIN THE COMMUNITIES. BY BYPASSING A BROADER PUBLIC DISCOURSE AND CITY WIDE REFERENDUM, YOU'RE RUNNING THE RISK OF FURTHER ERODING THAT TRUST IN THE COMMUNITIES YOU SERVE. MY PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATION IS SLOW DOWN. GIVE THE DECISION TIME. AUDIT THE DATA. OPEN UP THE PROCESS TO A BROADER PUBLIC DISCOURSE. DO NOT TRADE OUR CIVIC HERITAGE FOR A PROJECT PERFORMER. LET'S PROVE THAT IN DALLAS OUR DEMOCRACY IS NOT FOR SALE AND OUR CITY HALL TRULY BELONGS TO ALL THE PEOPLE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE'LL GO BACK TO MARLA AGAIN. MISS BAIN, IS YOUR AUDIO WORKING? MARLA BAIN. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. YOU MAY CONTINUE. FINALLY. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SORRY ABOUT THAT. ANYWAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MARLA. AND EXCUSE ME, BECAUSE I CAN'T REALLY LOOK AT YOU AT THE CAMERA WHILE I'M TRYING TO READ, BUT GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MARLA BAIN. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 13 AND 75244. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK THIS AFTERNOON. AN EXCITING AND INNOVATIVE OPPORTUNITY EXISTS TO ENHANCE AND REVITALIZE DOWNTOWN THROUGH INNOVATION AND CREATIVITY THAT CAN AND SHOULD INCORPORATE CITY HALL IF WE ARE ABLE TO EXPRESS. EXPLORE THESE OPTIONS. INSTEAD OF GOING DOWN THE PATH OF TEARING DOWN CITY HALL, THE CITY HALL SHOULD BE A MARQUEE, A SOURCE OF CIVIC PRIDE, A FOCAL POINT FOR RESIDENTS AND VISITORS, AND AN ICON FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. SOUND BUSINESS DECISIONS SHOULD NOT BE MADE BY THE COUNCIL, SHOULD BE MADE BY THE COUNCIL AS CUSTODIANS FOR THE PEOPLE AND THIS PUBLIC EDIFICE. BE MINDFUL OF OUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO PLACE, TO ACT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE, AND NOT FOR COMMERCIAL INTERESTS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ASK THAT WE REVIEW AND FIX THE ENTIRE DALLAS REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO BEFORE MORE TAX DOLLARS ARE WASTED OR DEFERRED MAINTENANCE IS ACCRUED, OR WE WILL BE PERPETUALLY TRAPPED IN THIS ENDLESS LOOP OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. A CLEAR AND CONCISE COMMUNICATION PLAN IS NEEDED, DETAILING WHAT WE ARE, WHERE WE ARE AT, AND IDENTIFYING OPTIONS WITH CLARITY TO ALL RESIDENTS. IN-PERSON AND VIRTUAL MEETINGS SHOULD BE HELD TO SOLICIT PUBLIC OPINION. PLEASE DO NOT SEND OUT ONLINE SURVEYS. WE NEED TO HAVE THIS COMMUNICATION AND PUBLIC FORUMS. [02:10:08] PLEASE DO NOT VOTE TODAY TO VACATE OR MOVE OUT OF ANY PART OF CITY HALL, OR TO ACT ON ANY LEASES CURRENTLY WITH NEW PARTIES. I STRONGLY OPPOSE BREAKING UP CITY HALL INTO ANY MULTIPLE LEASED OFFICE BUILDINGS UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. WE NEED ONE CENTRAL LOCATION DOWNTOWN. DO NOT TAKE THIS LIGHTLY. PLEASE LISTEN TO ALL THE IMPASSIONED AND ELOQUENT MESSAGING THAT YOU HAVE HEARD TODAY, MONDAY, AND HAVE READ FROM EMAILS FROM CITIZENS ACROSS THE DISTRICT. A PROP A PROJECT OF THIS SCOPE AND MAGNITUDE SHOULD REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL, BUT AS THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, I IMPLORE EVERY THE COUNCIL TO STAND TOGETHER, DO THE RIGHT THING AND TO ACT TO SAVE, PRESERVE, REFRESH, REVITALIZE, INNOVATE AND SAVE. THAT'S YOUR TIME AND THE ACRES IT STANDS ON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. EVA JONES. EVA JONES IS NOT ONLINE. IS NOT PRESENT. LORI STAHL. LORI STAHL IS NOT PRESENT. KAREN LORENZ. WELL, MISS LORENZ IS COMING FORWARD. I'LL ASK THAT CHRISTOPHER WEISS AND SANFORD DENNISON, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. HI EVERYONE. MY NAME IS KAREN LAWRENCE. I'M IN DISTRICT 14 AND I AM REALLY NERVOUS. I DON'T LIKE PUBLIC SPEAKING, BUT I READ THE MOTIONS MORE CLEARLY LAST NIGHT AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK TO YOU. AS A LICENSED MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL, I WAS SCARED TO DEATH WHEN I READ THE FIRST PART SAYING DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO MOVE EMERGENCY SERVICES AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. THAT SHOULD FRIGHTEN ALL OF US. MR. ALVAREZ MADE A COMMENT EARLIER ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY. THIS IS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE. MOVING EMERGENCY SERVICES IS NOT A ROUTINE FACILITIES MOVE. IN MY CAREER. I MANAGED CRISIS LINES 24 OVER SEVEN. YOU HAVE TO MITIGATE THE RISK, NOT MANAGE THE ISSUES THAT COME UP AFTERWARDS. THAT'S NOT THE ANSWER TO THIS. SPEED IS NOT A STRATEGY. SAFETY IS. PUBLIC SAFETY IS. I'M NOT COMFORTABLE. IN FACT, I'M REALLY, REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE. I HAVE NO PEACE OF MIND. I DON'T KNOW WHERE. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PART OF THIS PROCESS IS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR PLACES OR WHATEVER. I'VE HEARD DIFFERENT THINGS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TRUE. I HEARD THAT THERE MAY BE A MALL AVAILABLE THAT THAT RAISES ALL KINDS OF ISSUES FOR ME AND IT SHOULD FOR YOU AS WELL FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY PERSPECTIVE. WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT MONEY, BUT THERE IS NO GREATER RISK THAN THE LOSS OF LIFE. AND IF THIS ISN'T DONE VERY THOUGHTFULLY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BIG PROBLEM. AND THAT'S WHY I'M HERE SPEAKING TODAY. EVERYONE ELSE HAS SHARED MANY, MANY, MANY THINGS I AGREE WITH, BUT I REALLY WANT YOU TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY TO PUNCH AS MANY HOLES INTO THIS PLAN AS POSSIBLE IN ORDER TO MAKE IT GO RIGHT. SO I HAD THINGS PLANNED OUT TO SAY, BUT THAT'S THE CORE. AND I WANT TO KNOW AS A CITIZEN WHAT THOSE PLANS ARE. WHAT HAPPENS IF A TORNADO HITS THE BUILDING. WHERE ARE THE REDUNDANCIES? WHEN I CALL, MY HOUSE IS ON FIRE. WILL IT. WILL IT GET THROUGH? I WANT TO KNOW THAT. THAT'S YOUR TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CHRISTOPHER WEISS. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M CHRISTOPHER WEISS. I LIVE AT 1419 GRIFFIN STREET. 75215. MAYOR, MAYOR, PRO TEM, COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITY MANAGER AND STAFF. [02:15:08] I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY ON MARCH 4TH, NATIONAL PUNK ROCK DAY. 25 YEARS AGO, I MOVED TO DALLAS, SPECIFICALLY THE CEDARS ON A LYLE LOVETT VISA. NOW, AS A DALLAS RESIDENT AND BUSINESS OWNER, I'M INTENSELY INTERESTED IN THE ECONOMIC HEALTH OF THE CITY, ESPECIALLY IN DETERMINING HOW WE GROW SOUTHERN DALLAS. TODAY, I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS RESOLUTION FOR CITY HALL. WE NEED NEAR AND LONG TERM STRATEGY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. NOT A RECKLESS, BREAKNECK DASH TO APPROVE DEMOLITION WITHOUT CONSIDERATION FOR THE OTHER ACTIONS IT SETS IN MOTION. I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING, AS EACH IS A DOMINO THAT SETS THE NEXT IN MOTION. RUN A COMPREHENSIVE RFP PROCESS ADDRESSING THE OPTIONS AND COST FOR BOTH RENOVATION AND REPLACEMENT OF CITY HALL. VALIDATED BY PARTIES WITHOUT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. HELP US UNDERSTAND THE LATEST $1.4 BILLION, WHICH IS NEARLY 36,000% MORE THAN THE $39 MILLION QUOTED JUST SIX YEARS AGO. AS THINGS STAND, THIS SMELLS LIKE A TOLLWAY THROUGH THE TRINITY RIVER. SHARE THE ECONOMIC PLAN FOR THE CITY OWNED AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER AND SURROUNDING AREA. ONCE THE STARS AND MAVS MOVE OUT, WE CANNOT HAVE ANOTHER REUNION ARENA THAT SITS IDLE FOR DECADES. JUSTIFY THE COST OF THE NEW MAVERICK STADIUM. ANOTHER BILLION DOLLAR PLUS PROJECT THAT WILL LIKELY BE PUT ON THE SHOULDERS OF DALLAS CITIZENS. DESPITE THE OWNERS HAVING A NET WORTH OF OVER $40 BILLION, WHY DOESN'T NEW PARK WORK AS A AS A SITE FOR POSSIBLE LOCATION? WHY CAN'T WE DO THE LAND NEXT TO THE CONVENTION CENTER AND BE FREED UP WITH DEMOLITION THERE? PRODUCE A STUDY ON HOW THIS PROJECT WILL DELIVER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, TOUTED BY SEVERAL AS PARTIES AS JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROJECT. GIVEN THE LACK OF PROGRESS IN THE LAST 25 YEARS, I HAVE SERIOUS DOUBT THESE ACTIONS, WITH THE TOTAL COST LIKELY MORE THAN $4 BILLION WITHOUT ANY FUNDS EVEN BEING DISCUSSED FOR AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER, HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO LIFT THE ECONOMY IF DONE WELL, OR FURTHER ITS DECLINE IF DONE WITHOUT COLLABORATION WITH THE DALLAS COMMUNITIES. THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN RUSHED WITHOUT REAL EFFORT TO JUSTIFY THE COST AND PROVE SUPPOSED BENEFITS. INSTEAD, WE HAVE FEAR TACTICS. CITY HALL IS A DISASTER. THE DEMOLITION IS THE ONLY ANSWER. WE'LL LOSE THE MAPS. I IMPLORE YOU TO TAKE A PAUSE. CONSIDER LONG TERM EFFECTS OF EACH OF THESE ITEMS ON THE CITY AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. MAKE THIS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR INNOVATIVE RENOVATION AND INTEGRATION WITH SOUTHERN DALLAS. IF NOT THAT, AT LEAST PUT THIS ON THE BOND REFERENDUM FOR THE NOVEMBER BALLOT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. SANFORD DENNISON. GOOD AFTERNOON. SANFORD DENNISON, 45 YEAR RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 14. WHAT ELSE CAN I SAY TO CONVINCE YOU THAT ABANDONING CITY HALL IS AN ILL CONCEIVED, DARE I SAY, CRAZY IDEA THAT HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN SAID BY OTHERS? INDEED. SAID BY EVERYONE WHO DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE SOME SELF-INTERESTED REASON FOR SEEING THIS BUILDING TORN DOWN. BE THAT REASON. FINANCIAL PROMISE OF POWER OR INFLUENCE, OR FOR SOME OTHER REASON OTHER THAN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS AND THIS CITY. WHEN I FIRST HEARD THAT CONSIDERATION WAS BEING GIVEN TO TEARING DOWN CITY HALL, MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS, THIS SURELY IS A JOKE. IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THIS IS A LANDMARK, A SYMBOL OF THE CITY. IT'S OUR TOWN SQUARE THAT SHOULD BE PRESERVED. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE JUST SELF-EVIDENT THAT REALLY DON'T NEED PROOF. YOU KNOW, WHEN I WALK THROUGH THIS BUILDING, IT'S SELF-EVIDENT TO ME THAT THIS BUILDING. THIS BUILDING IS NOT A TEAR DOWN THAT NEEDED REPAIRS CAN BE MADE IN A COST EFFECTIVE MANNER. MOREOVER, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS TO ME SELF-EVIDENT THAT DEMOLITION OF THIS BUILDING WOULD BE A MONUMENTAL ENDEAVOR. I WONDER, IS ANY THOUGHT REALLY BEEN GIVEN TO THE CHAOS AND DISRUPTION THAT DEMOLISHING THIS BUILDING AND HAULING AWAY THE MASSIVE. THE MASSIVE RUBBLE OF CONCRETE AND STEEL WOULD CAUSE. WHY THE RUSH, YOU KNOW. WHY DO WE MAKE THIS DECISION? WHY DO WE HAVE TO MAKE THIS DECISION IN A MATTER OF WEEKS? IT SEEMS PRETTY CLEAR TO ME THAT THIS TIMETABLE IS DICTATED NOT BY THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS, NOR BY THE NEEDS OF THE CITY, BUT RATHER BY CONCERNS THAT ARE ONLY CONCERNED WITH THEIR OWN SELF-INTEREST, SHORT TERM SELF-INTEREST, AND NOT THOSE OF THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS. [02:20:03] AT THE COUNCIL MEETING LAST FALL, AN AMENDMENT WAS PROPOSED THAT BEFORE WE RUSH HEADLONG TO AN ILL INFORMED DECISION ABOUT THE FATE OF THE CITY HALL, THAT PRUDENCE DICTATED THAT WE FIRST CONSIDER WHAT A CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE FACILITY ASSESSMENT WOULD SHOW ABOUT THE REAL NEEDS FOR REPAIR AND THAT A TASK FORCE BE APPOINTED OF INDEPENDENT PROFESSIONALS TO REVIEW THAT. WHY WOULDN'T THE CITY WANT TO KNOW THE RESULTS BEFORE IT MADE THIS DECISION? THE ONLY CONCLUSION I CAN COME TO IS THAT THE DECISION HAD ALREADY BEEN MADE WITHOUT PUBLIC INPUT, AND THEY KNEW THAT THE DECISION THAT THE THAT ASSESSMENT WOULD MADE WOULD NOT SUPPORT THE DECISION THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN MADE. FINALLY, YOU KNOW, IF WE TEAR DOWN THIS BUILDING DESIGNED BY I.M. PEI, WHAT ARCHITECT WOULD EVER ACCEPT A COMMISSION? THE CITY OF DALLAS TO BUILD ANY KIND OF WORLD CLASS CENTER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BRIAN CHEESEMAN. BRIAN CHEESEMAN IS NOT PRESENT. JOHN MARTINEZ, WHILE MR. MARTINEZ IS COMING FORWARD, I'LL ASK STEVE JENNINGS AND DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER TO COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT IN THE FIRST ROW. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JOHN MARTINEZ. I'M THE PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE REGIONAL HISPANIC CONTRACTORS. I REPRESENT THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO WILL EITHER WORK ON REMODELING THIS OR NEW STRUCTURE. THEY'RE NOT HERE TODAY BECAUSE THEY'RE WORKING, AND I'M HERE BECAUSE I'M I'M PAID TO BE HERE. I, I HAVE THAT LUXURY. THE MEN AND WOMEN I REPRESENT, THEY LIKE DIAMONDS. BUT IF YOU GAVE THEM ONE TODAY, THEY PROBABLY HAVE TO SELL IT TO PUT FOOD ON THEIR TABLE TO PAY FOR THEIR KIDS EDUCATION, TO LIVE. RIGHT. SO WHEN I COME HERE AND I SAY, AND I HERE I AM PAY. I WORKED HERE WHEN I WAS A YOUNG MAN IN MY 20S. EVER SINCE THIS BUILDING HAS OPENED, WE HAVE WORKED TO MAKE IT FUNCTIONAL FOR THE MEN AND WOMEN THAT WORK HERE I AM PAY IMAGINE IT TO BE OPEN, RIGHT SO THAT THE CITIZENS AND THE EMPLOYEES WOULD MIX. COULD YOU IMAGINE IF PEOPLE COULD WALK UP TO KIM'S OFFICE RIGHT NOW WITHOUT ALL THE SECURITY? COULD YOU IMAGINE IF THEY COULD WALK UP TO YOUR OFFICES? SO THIS BUILDING HAS ALWAYS BEEN A DIAMOND. ALWAYS BEEN A PIECE OF ARTWORK. IT HAS NEVER BEEN FULLY FUNCTIONAL FOR THE MEN AND WOMEN HERE. AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT YOUR BEING BOLD. BOLD IS MAKING DECISIONS THAT MAY NOT BE POPULAR NOW. BUT WHEN JESSIE'S LITTLE GIRL GROWS UP THAT SHE KNOWS SHE HAS GOOD ROADS, GOOD PLACES TO LIVE, AND THAT SHE HAS POLICE AND FIRE, ONE DAY I CAME TO MARY SUE AND ONE OF THE CITY MANAGERS AND I ASKED HER FOR SOME MONEY FOR OUR OUR OWN BUILDING, AND SHE TOLD ME, JOHN, HOW MANY AMBULANCES DO YOU WANT ME NOT TO BUDGET FOR? AND I UNDERSTOOD EXACTLY HER ROLE. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MAINTENANCE, PLEASE DON'T POINT FINGERS, BECAUSE WHEN THOSE DECISIONS WERE MADE, WE WERE LOOKING AT BUDGETS AND WE WERE SAYING, HEY, HOW MUCH PAINT FOR THIS BUILDING OR HOW MUCH AMBULANCE FOR THE CITIZENS? SO I'LL CLOSE WITH THIS. ANOTHER EXAMPLE. WE JUST DID OUR BUILDING. I LOVE 1960 ARCHITECTURE. WE BUDGETED $1.5 MILLION. IT COST $4.5 MILLION. WE DID NOT DO ANYTHING EXTRA. WE DID EXACTLY WHAT WE BUDGETED FOR. BUT IN THE END, THAT'S HOW MUCH IT COST. IT WAS AN OLD BUILDING. EVERY TIME WE OPENED UP SOMETHING, IT WAS SOMETHING WE DIDN'T KNOW. WE HAD ENGINEERS. WE HAD ARCHITECTS. LOVE THEM ALL. THE ARCHITECT ARGUED TO SAY WE CANNOT HAVE THE DEWALT SIGN. IT'LL DESTROY THE WAY IT LOOKS. DEWALT PAYS THE BILLS. RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ASKED. RIGHT NOW, IT'S ALL ABOUT SAVING THE DIAMOND. BUT IN A FEW MONTHS WHEN YOU HAVE THAT BUDGET, THEY'RE GOING TO BE SAYING, WHERE ARE YOU IN A FEW YEARS WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE AN ECONOMIC ENGINE TO PAY THE BILLS, THAT'S WHEN YOU REALLY BEING BOLD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. STEVE JENNINGS. STEVE JENNINGS IT'S NOT PRESENT. DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER. OKAY, I HAVE A VIDEO THAT'S GOING TO BE PLAYED. [02:25:11] YOU TURN THE VOLUME UP. TURN THE VOLUME UP HERE. START IT OVER. CAN AUDIO WORK? MR. ALEXANDER? YES. WOULD YOU LIKE FOR ME TO JUST COME BACK TO YOU? SAY IT AGAIN. YES. OKAY, I'LL GO TO THE NEXT SPEAKER. THANK YOU. EXCELLENCE. ZAIDA. BIZOR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS SAIDA. I'M EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AYA DALLAS, BUT ALSO A FORMER ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS. SO I TOO HAVE SPENT MANY YEARS HERE AND MANAGED MANY PROJECTS I HAVE. I WANT TO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON FOUR POINTS, FIRST ON ASBESTOS. EVERY MAJOR PUBLIC BUILDING FROM THIS ERA THAT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY MODERNIZED HAS DONE SO THROUGH CAREFUL PHASING AND PROFESSIONAL ABATEMENT DALLAS ASBESTOS IN MANY OF ITS FACILITIES OVER THE YEARS AND MAINTAINS A STANDING SERVICE CONTRACT. THIS IS FAMILIAR A FAMILIAR, WELL-MANAGED PROCESS FOR THE CITY, NOT A CRISIS AND NOT A REASON TO ABANDON THE BUILDING. SECOND, REGARDING 911 AND 311, THE STANDARD CITED IN YOUR BRIEFING IS ABOUT SURVIVABILITY AND SEPARATION. IT REQUIRES THAT A COMMUNICATION CENTER EITHER BE IN ITS OWN BUILDING OR SEPARATED WITHIN A JOINT USE BUILDING WITH FIRE RATED BARRIERS AND DEDICATED SYSTEMS, SO A FAILURE ELSEWHERE DOES NOT COMPROMISE SERVICE. A PURE CITY SLIDE THAT SIMPLY LISTS 911 IN CITY HALL, YES OR NO, REDUCES A TECHNICAL STANDARD TO A CHECKBOX MISSING THE REAL MEASURES THAT CITY HALL ALREADY FUNCTIONS AS THE HEART AND BACKBONE OF OUR EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK, SOMETHING OTHER CITIES ARE NOW SPENDING TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO BUILD FROM SCRATCH. THIRD, THERE IS A PROCESS AND EXPERIENCE GAP. THE ADVISORS PRESENTING THESE SCENARIOS ARE EXPERIENCED PLANNING AND REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONALS. THEY CAN BRIEF YOU ON STUDIES AND MARKET OPTIONS, BUT THEY ARE NOT THE ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS OR CONTRACTORS WHO WOULD DESIGN AND BUILD THIS WORK. WITHOUT THOSE TEAM MEMBERS AND THAT PERSPECTIVE AT THE TABLE SO THAT YOU CAN ASK ALL YOUR QUESTIONS TO FAIRLY JUDGE WHAT IS TOO HARD TO KEEP, OR WHETHER A SERIES OF RENOVATION PROJECTS COULD PROCEED WITHIN A NORMAL CAPITAL SCHEDULE BEFORE MOVING TOWARD ANY RELOCATION, COUNCIL SHOULD REQUEST SIDE BY SIDE PERFORMANCE FOR AT LEAST THREE OPTIONS RENOVATING, PLACE, ACQUIRE, AND OWN, AND LONG TERM LEASE SO YOU CAN NEGOTIATE FROM INFORMATION, NOT URGENCY. FINALLY, THE SOUTH EDGE OF DOWNTOWN. WE'VE HEARD MUCH ABOUT THAT. THE REAL OPPORTUNITY IS TO USE A RENEWED CIVIC DISTRICT TO RECONNECT THE CORE BY STRENGTHENING CITY HALL'S ROLE AS AN ANCHOR, BRINGING OTHER PUBLIC FACING SERVICES TO THE SOUTH FRONTAGE, AND DESIGNING STREETS AND PUBLIC SPACES THAT TURN A HARD EDGE INTO A BRIDGE TOWARD THE NEIGHBORHOODS BEYOND. I URGE YOU NOT TO RUSH TOWARD RELOCATION ON THE BASIS OF PARTIAL INFORMATION, AND TO REINVEST IN RENEWING AND REUSING CITY HALL AS A CATALYST FOR REVITALIZING THE SOUTH SIDE OF DOWNTOWN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, RICHIE BUTLER. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY MANAGER TOLBERT AND STAFF AGAIN, RICHIE BUTLER, SENIOR PASTOR OF THE SAINT LUKE COMMUNITY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH HERE IN DALLAS, TEXAS. AND I JUST WANT TO ARTICULATE SOME SOME THOUGHTS AS IT RELATES TO THIS MOMENT. FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE SERVED AS THE PASTOR OF OF A CHURCH THAT WAS A HISTORICAL BUILDING, SAINT PAUL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH IN THE ARTS DISTRICT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO RENOVATE A HISTORICAL BUILDING AND [02:30:04] HAD PEARL AND COMMERCE, THE FIRST BLACK HEALTH CLINIC IN DALLAS. THE BLUE FLOWERS BUILDING. AND I UNDERSTAND THE VALUE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF HISTORICAL PRESERVATION. BUT I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE PIVOTAL MOMENTS, MOMENTS OF WHAT WE CALL CATALYTIC MOMENTS, OPPORTUNITIES WHERE PRESERVATION MAY NOT BE THE BEST OPTION AND SOURCE OF CHOICE. AND SO AS YOU PONDER THIS, THIS DECISION AND THE WORK GOING FORWARD, I WANT YOU TO KEEP IN MIND THE GREAT OPPORTUNITY THAT I THINK IS BEFORE YOU AS A CITY COUNCIL, AS YOU THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS CITY HALL, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE CITY OF DALLAS. AND I REMEMBER IN 2004, I SERVED ON THE INSIDE THE LOOP COMMITTEE THAT WAS TASKED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF TRYING TO THINK ABOUT HOW TO REIMAGINE DOWNTOWN. AND I THINK, SOME PROGRESS CLEARLY HAS BEEN MADE. BUT WE DID NOT HAVE A CATALYTIC OPPORTUNITY BEFORE US. AND AROUND THAT SAME TIME, THE DALLAS, THE DALLAS COWBOYS WERE CONSIDERING THEIR OPTIONS AND OUR CITY WAS AT THE TABLE AND COULD NOT GET A GET SOMETHING DONE. AND THEY MOVED TO ARLINGTON. AND THE REST IS HISTORY. AND SO I JUST WANT US TO RECOGNIZE THIS, THIS MOMENT, THIS MOMENT THAT I BELIEVE WILL BE IS SEMINAL TO THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE US AS A CITY. AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO YOUR PART TO ENSURE THAT ALL THE VOICES THAT HAVE BEEN HEARD ARE REPRESENTED AND THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN IN. YOU WILL GATHER, BUT REMEMBER THAT WE HAVE SEMINAL MOMENTS WHERE WE CAN CATALYZE AND TRANSFORM A CITY IN A MANNER IN A WAY THAT WE'VE NEVER HAD BEFORE. AND I BELIEVE THIS IS ONE OF THOSE MOMENTS. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. AND GOD BE WITH YOU AS YOU MAKE YOUR DECISIONS. THANK YOU. ALEX. SCOTT. HEY, Y'ALL. ALEX SCOTT, 64, 72 TRAMMELL DRIVE. AND I'M YOUR NEIGHBOR IN DISTRICT NINE. SO I'M GOING TO CUT TO THE CHASE. I'M GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THIS RESOLUTION GETS PASSED TODAY, BECAUSE NOT ONLY WILL YOU BE IN VIOLATION OF ETHICS YOU'LL ALSO BE IN VIOLATION OF THE BOND COVENANT THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS SIGNS, AS WELL AS THIS RESOLUTION TRIGGERS THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. NUMBER 20 OF THE CITY OF DALLAS, WHICH STATES THAT PRIOR TO AUTHORIZATION OF NEW OR REQUIRED FACILITY BUILDINGS OR RENOVATION OF PREVIOUSLY DECOMMISSIONED FACILITIES, THE CITY MANAGER WILL PROVIDE THE TOTAL ESTABLISHED CAPITAL COST AND FIVE YEAR FORECAST OF ONGOING OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL. OPERATING EXPENDITURES WILL BE PROGRAMED TO INCLUDE THE COST OF IMPLEMENTING SERVICE TO THE CAPITAL, IMPROVEMENTS. THE FUTURE REVENUES OF THE NECESSARY OF THE NECESSARY FOR THESE EXPENDITURES WILL BE ESTIMATED AND PROVIDED PRIOR TO UNDERTAKING ANY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL AUTHORIZE EACH NEW OR REOPENED FACILITY BUILDING BY SUPERMAJORITY VOTE, WHICH IS THREE FOURTHS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. ALSO PER THE DALLAS BOND COVENANT NUMBER G OR LETTER G STATES THAT DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY IT, WHILE WITH PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BONDS OR BONDS OR ADDITIONAL BONDS ARE OUTSTANDING UNPAID WILL NOT SELL, CONVEY, MORTGAGE, ENCUMBER OR LEASE ANY MANNER, TRANSFER TITLE TO OTHERWISE DISPOSE OF THE SYSTEM OR ANY SIGNIFICANT OR SUBSTANTIAL PART THEREOF. THERE ARE OUTSTANDING BONDS THAT ARE UNPAID ON THIS BUILDING, WHICH MEANS THAT YOU CAN'T SELL THIS OR LEASE THIS, OR DO ANYTHING UNTIL THOSE BONDS ARE PAID OFF. THE NEXT THING IS THAT IN IN NOVEMBER DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL INTERVIEW SEAN TODD, FOUNDER OF THE CEO OF TODD INTEREST, WHICH IS BEHIND SEVERAL ADAPTIVE REUSE PROJECTS IN DOWNTOWN, SAID THAT DALLAS CITY HALL IS OBSOLETE AND A DRAIN ON CITY RESOURCES, EVEN IF IT'S HERALDED AS AN ARCHITECTURAL LANDMARK. HE SAID THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT THE BUILDING DOES NOT SERVE THE LONG TERM NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT INDIVIDUAL WAS WHO? LINDA MCMAHON, THE CEO OF THE DALLAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, USED TO FOR TWO OF THE ASSESSMENTS OF THIS BUILDING. HE SHE IS ON SHE IS ON RECORD STATING THAT SHE USED HIM SPECIFICALLY FOR TWO OF THE REPORTS OF THIS BUILDING. AND SO YOU'RE GOING TO TELL ME THAT A MAN WHO'S ON RECORD SAYING THAT THIS BUILDING IS OBSOLETE AND THAT IT SHOULD BE SOLD, IS THE ONE THAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THE DALLAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION TO USE AS AN IMPARTIAL INDIVIDUAL TO RECOMMEND FOR TWO OF OUR REPORTS. [02:35:03] THAT IS NOT ETHICAL. THE LAST THING IS THAT, PER THE DALLAS CITY CHARTER, AT ANY TIME FIVE MEMBERS CAN SUBMIT A RESOLUTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND GET 5% OF OUR VOTES. AND I'M GOING TO PUT TOGETHER A FIVE PERSON ORDINANCE THAT'S GOING TO PROVIDE THAT ANY FACILITY THAT'S UNDER BOND, THAT'S BOND FUNDED, YOUR TIME HAS TO BE VOTED ON BY THE CITY, BY THE CITY OFFICIALS. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. ERIC WILSON HAS CANCELED LUCY BILLINGSLEY. LUCY BILLINGSLEY, 1722 RUTH STREET, DOWNTOWN DALLAS. IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE WITH YOU. THIS IS AN ICONIC BUILDING, AND IT'S ALWAYS BEEN INEFFICIENT. IT HAS NEVER SERVED THE FUNCTION OF THE STAFF AND THE OPERATIONS AND DELIVERY OF THE CITY OF DALLAS, AS IT SHOULD HAVE. THIS STAFF, THIS CITY, DESERVES BETTER. FORT WORTH BOUGHT THE PIER ONE BUILDING AND THEIR DOWNTOWN. BEAUTIFUL OUTDOOR PLAZA. SIGNIFICANT BUILDING. BRAND NEW SPACE. ANY TIME A COMPANY RELAUNCHES ITSELF INTO A GREAT ENVIRONMENT, SO GOES THE MORALE AND THE ENERGY OF THE BUSINESS. SO THAT'S ONE ASPECT OF THIS CONSIDERATION. I'M ON A PANEL TOMORROW AND WAS REVIEWING THE QUESTIONS, AND ONE OF THEM WAS, WILL THE ARTS DISTRICT MERGE WITH UPTOWN AND ITS DOWNTOWN? DALLAS DEAD. I'M GOING TO JUMP IN AND DISCUSS THAT TOPIC. AND OF COURSE, I BELIEVE THERE'S TREMENDOUS HOPE FOR DOWNTOWN DALLAS. THAT'S AN AGGRESSIVE QUESTION, BUT WE DON'T WANT DALLAS, DALLAS AND ALL THE GROWTH OF DOWNTOWN TO BE MOVING NORTH, TO BE MOVING TO THE UPTOWN AND THEN MOVING ON DOWN TURTLE CREEK. THOSE ARE GREAT AREAS. BUT IT IS WRONG FOR DALLAS TO ONLY LOOK NORTH. THIS AREA HAS BEEN DETERIORATING AND SLIDING FOR A LONG TIME. OUT OF 34,000,000FT² OF OFFICE SPACE IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS, 9 MILLION IS VACANT AND THE 9 MILLION IS THE CLOSEST TO THIS AREA. SO FIRST, THE CITY WOULD HELP SOLVE PART OF THAT BY ACQUIRING SOME OF THAT SPACE. BUT SECONDLY, THIS AREA DESERVES ENERGY, ECONOMIC INVESTMENT. AND PEOPLE, WE NEED TO BE ENGAGED. THE CONVENTION CENTER IS GOING TO BE FANTASTIC AND DO A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT FOR US, BUT IT'S TOO FAR AWAY FROM THESE BUILDINGS OF THE 1940S, 50S AND 60S. TO REINVIGORATE THIS PROPERTY IS NOT. THIS IS AN UNUSUAL MOMENT AND OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REINVEST WITH THE GROWTH OF THE CITY. AND AS MUCH AS I LOVE HISTORY, I LIVE FOR TOMORROW. AND I KNOW YOU OWN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF TOMORROW IN YOUR HANDS WITH GREAT ESTEEM AND THOUGHTFULNESS. SO THANK YOU FOR ALL THE CONSIDERATIONS, FOR ALL THAT'S BEEN SAID TODAY. THANK YOU. SHAUN TODD. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M GLAD I SHOWED UP. MY NAME'S BEEN MENTIONED A COUPLE OF TIMES. I'VE BEEN ATTENDING THIS BUILDING SINCE 1985. I'VE HAD HUNDREDS OF MEETINGS SINCE THEN. OUR FIRM HAS INVESTED IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, OVER $1.5 BILLION IN THE CORE OF DOWNTOWN, OVER 30 BUILDINGS, TWO EMPTY I.M. PEI TOWERS, THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK TOWER. THE TOWER PETROLEUM BUILDING. WE WON NUMEROUS PRESERVATION AWARDS. WE ARE ACTIVE, CARING PRESERVATIONISTS. I SEE MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT SHARE WITH ME IN THE CARE FOR PRESERVATION. TO THAT END, I'VE BEEN VERY MUCH INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS AND THAT I WAS CONSULTED BY LINDA MCMAHON, TWO OF THE ENGINEERING FIRMS THAT PROVIDED YOU ESTIMATES ARE FIRMS OF GREAT REPUTATION, FIRMS THAT DEALT WITH MANY OF US THAT HAVE REPURPOSED BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN. AND I WAS PLEASED TO SEE THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CITY STAFF HAD INITIALLY PRESENTED TO YOU, THAT THESE ENGINEERS SUBSTANTIATED BASICALLY WHAT CITY STAFF HAD ALREADY SAID. WE LIVE IN A WORLD OF DRIVE BY ANYTHING YOU CAN SAY. MEDIA COUNCILMAN RIDLEY AND I HAVE A GREAT FRIENDSHIP AND WORKING GROUP TOGETHER FOR YEARS. I CALLED PAUL BEFORE MY EDITORIAL THAT WAS RECENTLY MENTIONED OUT OF GREAT RESPECT FOR PAUL, BECAUSE I RESPECT HIM IMMENSELY. JUST BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ON THE SAME SIDE OF THIS ISSUE DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE DON'T HAVE RESPECT FOR EACH OTHER. [02:40:04] WE HAVE A GREAT CITY MANAGER. I'VE BEEN THOROUGHLY IMPRESSED WITH THE DILIGENCE IN WHICH SHE'S GOING TO TRY TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL WANT TO GET ANSWERS TO. I STAND HERE AS A MAN WHO NO LONGER HAS ANY FINANCIAL INVESTMENT IN DOWNTOWN. I STAND NOTHING TO GAIN FROM THE DECISION THAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO MAKE OTHER THAN CARING. JUST LIKE MANY OF THE MEMBERS HERE CARING ABOUT OUR CITY, JUST AS YOU ALL CARE. I'M GLAD I'M NOT IN YOUR SEAT BECAUSE EACH OF YOU COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA. CONGRATULATIONS ON THE NEW PARK. IT WAS MUCH NEEDED, AND I WATCHED YOU FERVENTLY STAND UP FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS AS EACH OF YOU ARE DOING FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS. OUR DOWNTOWN GENERATES A MASSIVE TAX BASE FOR OUR CITY. YOU KNOW HOW TIGHT THE PURSE STRINGS ARE. YOU KNOW WHAT LITTLE MONEY YOU HAVE TO SPEND? SO MY PRAYERS ARE WITH YOU. I MAY NOT AGREE WITH SOME OF YOU ON YOUR POSITION, BUT I KNOW ULTIMATELY THAT YOU WANT THE VERY BEST FOR THIS CITY. WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT PEOPLE OF INTEGRITY HAVE LOOKED AT THESE NUMBERS. I DON'T KNOW ALL OF THEM, BUT I KNOW THE LADY LEADING THE PROCESS. LINDA MCMAHON. I'VE WORKED BESIDE HER FOR YEARS IN THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL. SHE'S A LADY OF TREMENDOUS INTEGRITY. I'VE SEEN THAT EXHIBITED BY YOUR STAFF THAT ANSWERS TO YOUR CITY MANAGER EVERY DAY. DOWNTOWN IS AT A CROSSROADS. WE HAVE MULTIPLE EMPTY BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN THAT CAN BE PICKED UP LITERALLY FOR A SONG. SO MY BEST TO YOU. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER. YOU MAY RESUME YOUR TIME. I THINK THEY FOUND THE SOLUTION. I'M GOING TO SCRAP THE VIDEO. I SPOKE IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE. IF ANYBODY WANT TO SEE THE VIDEO, THEY CAN GO ON THE NEXT GENERATION ACTION NETWORK'S SITE. I'M BORN AND RAISED IN THIS CITY. I'VE USED I'VE SEEN POLITICAL SITUATIONS BE USED FOR THE EXPEDIENCE OF WHATEVER NARRATIVE OR WHATEVER CONVERSATION. I BELIEVE THAT A REPORT HAS BEEN GENERATED. I THINK THAT A LOT OF DEAL OF THE FRUSTRATIONS IS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF HOW MUCH IT COSTS. I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF SITTING ON VICE CHAIR OF THE DALLAS ISD BOND BOARD AND IN THAT HAS BEEN ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY SEE $3.5 BILLION BE DONE. AND AT THE BEGINNING OF THAT, WE ALWAYS PRICE OUT SCHOOLS NOTHING, NEVER BE THE NUMBER OF WHAT IT IS. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I AM FEELING LIKE WHAT IS BEING LEFT OUT OF THIS DISCUSSION THAT IS TRULY DISGUSTING AND IT MAKES IT VERY HARD FOR ME TO FEEL LIKE THIS IS MY HOME CITY, BECAUSE I DON'T HEAR NOBODY SAYING NOTHING ABOUT IT. WHAT ABOUT THE EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE TO WORK IN THIS FACILITY? WHEN YOU VOTE, I WANT YOU TO GO DOWN THERE IN THAT BASEMENT, AND EVERY LAST ONE OF THOSE EMPLOYEES THAT YOU SEE WORK DOWN THERE, LOOK AT THEM DEAD IN THEIR EYES AND TELL THEM THAT THEIR HEALTH MATTER, THEIR LIFE MATTER. THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD TO WORK HERE. JUST BECAUSE THEY HAD THE WORKER DOESN'T MEAN IT, RIGHT? THINK ABOUT IT. IF YOU COME RIGHT HERE ON THIS FLOOR, IT SMELLS TOTALLY DIFFERENT ON L1 AND L2. THAT'S NOT A LIE. LOOK AT THEM IN THE FACE WITH YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NATE YOU DAILY. WHILE MR. YOU DAILY COMES FORWARD, I'LL ASK FOR MARCEL QUIMBY AND CEDRIC JORDAN TO COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST ROW. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CITY COUNCIL, CITY STAFF. MY NAME IS NATE DALY. I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DALLAS ARCHITECTURE FORUM, AND I ALSO SERVE ON THE ADVISORY BOARD TO SUPPORT CITYLAB HIGH SCHOOL, A DISD INNOVATION AND TRANSFORMATION SCHOOL. I WANT TO COVER FOUR POINTS BRIEFLY. [02:45:03] THE FIRST ONE, AS MISS COOKE MENTIONED, VISIONARY LEADERS COMMISSIONED I.M. PEI TO DESIGN THIS BUILDING AS A CIVIC HEART OF DALLAS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT DALLAS WAS LEAVING ITS STAINED REPUTATION OF HATRED AND BIGOTRY. AFTER THE JFK ASSASSINATION, JACKIE KENNEDY PERSONALLY SELECTED I.M. PEI TO DESIGN THE PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY FOR JFK AND BOSTON, AND HE REMAINED A CLOSE CONFIDANT OF MRS. KENNEDY AND THE KENNEDY FAMILY THROUGHOUT HER LIFE. TO ALLOW THIS BUILDING TO BE DEMOLISHED AND RELOCATE CITY HALL TO COMMERCIAL SPACE WOULD BE SEEN BY THOUGHT LEADERS AROUND THE WORLD AS A BACKWARD STEP BY SHORTSIGHTED CITY AND A SCAR ON JFK'S LEGACY CAUSED BY THE CITY IN WHICH HE WAS ASSASSINATED. VICTORY PARK. VICTORY PARK INITIALLY WAS A BOONDOGGLE. AS FAR AS FINANCIAL, IT DIDN'T WORK. WELL A LOT OF MONEY WAS INVESTED INTO IT. AND FOR A LOT OF TIME, THE MEDIA TALKED ABOUT VICTORY PARK AS BEING A GHOST TOWN. MOST OF THE STORES THAT OPENED ORIGINALLY CLOSED. SO WHAT HAVE WE DONE NOW AFTER MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF INVESTMENT BY THE CITY? WELL, THE AVERAGE PRICE OF A RESIDENCE IN VICTORY PARK IS $1,050,000 FOR 1500 SQUARE FEET. THE AVERAGE RENTAL RATE IS 2300 FOR LESS THAN 900FT². SO VICTORY PARK IS GOOD FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE WEALTHY. BUT VICTORY PARK DOES NOT WORK FOR FAMILIES. THE AVERAGE FAMILY IN DALLAS. THERE'S A SOBERING REPORT IN THIS SUNDAY'S METRO SECTION THAT STATED THAT BETWEEN 21 AND 2023 TWO YEARS, RENTAL UNITS AVAILABLE IN DALLAS FOR LESS THAN A THOUSAND A MONTH, DECREASED BY OVER 50%. DALLAS HAS A LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. MOVING THE MAVS TO DOWNTOWN DALLAS MAY HAVE MANY BENEFITS, BUT THE CITY MUST RECOGNIZE THAT IT WILL CAUSE THE PRICE OF HOUSING FOR THE AVERAGE CITIZEN OF DALLAS TO INCREASE, AND WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BRING THOSE TO DALLAS UNTIL ALL FINALIST SITES ARE COMPARED. WE HAVEN'T REALLY SEEN ANYTHING ABOUT OKAY. LET'S MOVE. WHAT DOES IT COST TO MOVE? WE'RE MOVING. WE WOULDN'T MAKE A DECISION WITHOUT HAVING APPLES TO APPLES. WE MUST HAVE COMPLETE DATA. AS FOR COSTS TO MOVE BEFORE THAT DECISION IS MADE, I THINK IF WE DO THAT, IT'S BEFORE THAT DECISION IS AVAILABLE TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION. IT'S A DISSERVICE TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE DALLAS CITY, AS WELL AS AN AGGREGATION OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. AND FINALLY CITY LAB HIGH SCHOOL, IF THIS SITE IS SOLD TO THE MAVERICKS THEY MAY BUILD THEIR PRESENCE HERE. CITY LAB IS THREE BLOCKS FROM HERE. IT'S A TRANSFORMATIONAL SCHOOL FOR DISD. IT WILL BASICALLY CHOKE AND POTENTIALLY CAUSE THAT TO CLOSE. WE REALLY WANT TO INVEST IN EDUCATION AND BRINGING CITIES TO DALLAS AND CHILDREN. WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT CAREFULLY MOVE THE MAVS OVER BY WHERE THE LAND IS BEING VACATED BY THE ARENA. PLEASE BE STEADFAST IN YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE CURRENT AND FUTURE GENERATIONS OF THE CHILDREN OF DALLAS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CHRISTOPHER ECKMAN. CITY MANAGER TOLBERT. MY SINCERE CONDOLENCES. CHRIS HEDGEMAN, 1841 SCHOLLMAIER DISTRICT ONE, OAK CLIFF. ON SUNDAY, THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS EDITORIAL BOARD WROTE THAT THE COST TO REPAIR CITY HALL HAD, QUOTE, GROWN IN WAYS BOUND TO GENERATE SKEPTICISM. THEY DID NOT WRITE ABOUT ALL THE OTHER COSTS THE COUNCIL IS NOT LOOKING INTO. DEMOLITION ALONE WOULD COST TENS OF MILLIONS, AT LEAST. THE UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI IS CURRENTLY DEMOLISHING A SIMILAR CONCRETE BUILDING THAT'S ONE SEVENTH THE SIZE OF CITY HALL. THE PRICE TAG IS $47 MILLION. IS THIS REALLY ABOUT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY? THIS IS ABOUT THE MAVERICKS. THIS IS ABOUT THE ADELSON. DUMONT'S THREATENING TO MOVE OUR TEAM. THIS IS ABOUT GIFTING OUR LAND TO BILLIONAIRES. IN 2024, MIRIAM ADELSON GAVE $106 MILLION TO HER OWN SUPERPAC TO ELECT DONALD TRUMP. THAT SAME YEAR, JUST IN TEXAS, THEY SPENT $13 MILLION LOBBYING TO LEGALIZE GAMBLING. PATRICK DUMONT, GOVERNOR OF THE MAVS, IS ALSO CHAIRMAN AND CEO OF LAS VEGAS SANDS. POLITICAL MANIPULATION IS A CORE PART OF THE ADELSON DUMONT BUSINESS MODEL. THEY DON'T RESPECT THIS PROCESS. THEY'RE NOT HERE TODAY. THEY HAVE NEVER SHOWED UP HERE. IF YOU VOTE YES TO THIS, YOU'RE VOTING TO GIVE TAXPAYERS MONEY TO A FAMILY ALREADY WORTH OVER $40 BILLION. A FAMILY THAT BOUGHT THE DALLAS MAVERICKS TWO YEARS AGO TRADED AWAY THE TEAM'S FRANCHISE PLAYER ONE YEAR AGO. AND THIS YEAR, THEY WANT TO DESTROY CITY HALL TO BUILD A STADIUM SLASH CASINO. THESE AREN'T PARTNERS. THE MAVS ARE AN ASSET TO THEM. THE CITY, A REVENUE STREAM. WHAT DO WE GET FOR DESTROYING CITY HALL? YEARS OF DEMOLITION AND UNTOLD COSTS. A COUNCIL THAT RENTS INSTEAD OF OWNS AN EMPTY AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER. [02:50:02] AND 20 YEARS FROM NOW, THE SAME THING ALL OVER AGAIN. THERE'S NO REAL RUSH HERE. THE MAVS CHOSE THEIR JULY DEADLINE ON PURPOSE TO TRY TO CREATE ONE. IF THIS REALLY IS JUST ABOUT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, THEN JUST PROVE IT. LOOK AT BOTH SIDES OF THE LEDGER ACTUALLY FUND DEMOLITION AND PHASED RENOVATION STUDIES AND DON'T MOVE. 91911 OR ANYONE OUT OF CITY HALL UNTIL THAT'S DONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MARCELLE QUIMBY. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M MARCELLE QUIMBY, AND I LIVE AT LIVE AT 7001 HAMMOND AVENUE IN DISTRICT 14. AS THE COUNCIL HAS EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN HISTORIC TAX CREDITS OVER THIS WEEK, I'D LIKE TO SHARE SOME FOLLOWING BASICS WITH THIS VERY VALUABLE FINANCIAL TOOL FOR TO USE HISTORIC TAX CREDITS ON A BUILDING SUCH AS THIS, THE BUILDING MUST BE OVER 50 YEARS OLD AND MUST BE ELIGIBLE OR ELIGIBLE OR LISTING AND LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. WE'RE WE'VE WE'VE GOT THAT COVERED. THE REHABILITATION PROJECT MUST COMPLY WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION, WHICH IS A COMMON STANDARDS THAT MANY HISTORIC PROJECTS FOLLOW. THERE ARE TWO TWO DIFFERENT CREDITS AVAILABLE. THE FIRST IS THE FEDERAL CREDIT, WORTH 2,520% OF THE CONSTRUCTION COST. AND THAT AND THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1976 1976. YEAH. AND THE SECOND IS TEXAS, WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2017, AND THAT IS WORTH 25% OF THE CONSTRUCTION VALUE, SO THAT THOSE MONIES GO BACK AGAINST THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION. THE BUILDINGS MUST BE INCOME PRODUCING AS THE CREDITS APPLY AGAINST THE OWNER'S INCOME TAXES OR IN TEXAS, THE STATE FRANCHISE TAXES. THE OWNER OF CITY HALL, CITY OF DALLAS IS NOT AN INCOME PRODUCING COMMERCIAL BUILDING, BUT THERE ARE WAYS TO TEAM UP WITH PROFIT. WITH FOR PROFIT ENTITIES THAT CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN. AND THE FACT THAT THE CITY HALL IS NOT DOESN'T PAY TAXES IS ON PAR WITH EVERY OTHER GOVERNMENT BUILDING IN THE WORLD. HISTORIC TAX CREDIT PROJECTS HAVE HAD A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS. DALLAS RENEWAL IN 2010 THERE WERE 45 HISTORIC BUILDINGS IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS THAT HAD USED THEM, WITH A TOTAL INVESTMENT OF $1.45 TRILLION OVER, YOU KNOW, THE LAST, YOU KNOW, 15 YEARS. THAT'S AN AMAZING INVESTMENT. AND IT JUST GOES TO SHOW THAT KEEPING BUILDINGS AND KEEPING THE ENVIRONMENT, YOU KNOW, THAT AREA THERE'S A BENEFIT TO BEING CLOSE TO, YOU KNOW PART OF A HISTORIC AREA AS WELL AS BENEFITS TO THE OWNERS. THE INVESTMENT TAX CREDITS ARE AN IMPORTANT TOOL AND ONE THAT CAN OFFSET MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR THE CITY HALL'S RENOVATION PROJECT. IF THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION, WHICH WE STRONGLY ENCOURAGE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. CEDRIC JORDAN. TO THE HONORABLE ERIC JOHNSON, DALLAS CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS CEDRIC JORDAN. BORN, RAISED, ATTENDED PUBLIC SCHOOL. MARRIED IN DALLAS. PROPERTY OWNER. THERE APPEARS TO BE TWO LOOMING QUESTIONS. AND THEY ARE. SHOULD THE CITY OF DALLAS RENOVATE THE CURRENT CITY HALL AT A STAGGERING PRICE OF 1.2 BILLION OR 2? SHOULD THE CITY OF DALLAS ABANDON THE CURRENT LOCATION BY RELOCATING AND SELLING THE PRESENT SITE? NOW, LET ME SAY CITY HALL IS AN ARCHITECTURAL WONDER WHY I AM PI. I HAVE NEVER SEEN A CITY HALL WITH SUCH DESIGN AND CHARACTER, AND IT CAN BE DIFFICULT TO SEE AN ARCHITECTURAL WONDER RAISED. BUT DOES CITY HALL MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT DALLAS OR PEOPLE MOVING TO DALLAS JUST BECAUSE OF CITY HALL? NOW PLEASE CONSIDER THIS NO ONE BUILDING ALONE CAN MAKE A CITY GROW. THE QUESTION IS WHAT'S BEST FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS? WITH THE CURRENT LOCATION, PROMOTE ADVANCEMENT FOR THE CITY. DO PEOPLE COME TO DALLAS JUST TO TOUR CITY HALL? NO. THEY COME BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES THAT THIS CITY OFFER AND BECAUSE OF RETAIL EXPERIENCE. [02:55:09] IF THIS BUILDING IS SOLD WITH DALLAS SURVIVED, YES, IT WILL SURVIVE. IF THEY WERE RAISED TO EMPIRE STATE BUILDING WITH NEW YORK. FAIL. NO, IT WOULD NOT FAIL. I'M ASKING YOU TO NOT SUPPRESS PROGRESS. WE CAN'T SUPPRESS PROGRESS, OR WE CAN EMBRACE IT. SELLING OR REPURPOSING THE CURRENT LOCATION CAN RESULT IN ENHANCEMENTS TO ATTRACT ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES. NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TRUE IF THE CURRENT OWNERS OF THE MAVERICKS WANT THE CURRENT SPACE. BUT IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO SELL THE CURRENT LOCATION, THINK OF THE JOBS THAT WILL BE CREATED, THE TAX REVENUE THAT CAN BE GAINED, THE SALES TAX, THE ENTERTAINMENT TAX. NOW, I'M A AVID DALLAS COWBOY FAN, BUT I DON'T GO TO AT&T STADIUM JUST TO SEE THE BUILDING. I GO THERE TO SEE THE TEAM THAT PLAYS IN THE BUILDING. IN MY OPINION, CITY HALL IS FULLY UTILIZED, BUT CAN I BE MORE CREATIVE? USE AND IN CLOSING, IF WE'RE NOT CAREFUL SURROUNDING CITIES AND I CALL THEM MAGNET CITIES, WE KEEP LURING AND DRAWING BUSINESS AWAY FROM DALLAS. NOW WE DON'T HATE OUR SURROUNDING CITIES, BUT THEY ARE GOING TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THEIR CITIES. AND IF DALLAS DOES NOT EMBRACE PROGRESS. PROGRESS WILL MOVE AWAY FROM DALLAS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. VICKY MEEK. VICKY MEEK IS NOT PRESENT. DOLORES PHILLIPS. DOLORES PHILLIPS. OKAY. WHILE MISS PHILLIPS IS COMING FORWARD, I'LL ASK THAT DIANE BIRDWELL, TRISTAN TALKINGTON, IRA ALLEN, BRUCE RICHARDSON, AND HARRISON BLAIR, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT IN THE FIRST ROW. MISS PHILLIPS. OH, NO. DOLORES PHILLIPS. THEY ARE DOING THINGS WITH YOUR PHONE. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I DO APPRECIATE YOU. I DID GIVE YOU A HANDOUT. MY NAME IS DOLORES PHILLIPS. AND ON THIS HANDOUT, I GOT IT FROM THE LIBRARY TODAY. AND THIS IS AN ARCHIVED DOCUMENTED IT STATES DALLAS CITY HALL THE BLUEPRINT, 1966. CONSTRUCTION STARTED IN 1972, DEDICATED MARCH 12TH, 1978, AND THE FIRST PARAGRAPH READS. IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT THAT DALLAS BE MERELY EFFICIENT. A RICH AND REWARDING URBAN LIFE FOR DALLAS PEOPLE REQUIRES THE ENVIRONMENTAL NECESSITIES OF ORDER, CLEANLINESS, AND BEAUTY. IT'S NOBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO COME IN THIS BUILDING AND BULLY OR INTIMIDATE YOU FOR ANY REASON. I ASK THAT YOU PRAY AND ASK GOD FOR DISCERNMENT TO MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE. THIS STRUCTURE WAS NEVER A BUILDING ABOUT THE PEOPLE. THIS IS A STRUCTURE THAT WAS BUILT FOR A SELECT GROUP. IT WAS NEVER ABOUT THE PEOPLE. I ASKED YOU FOR THE MANY YEARS THAT YOU KNOW OF 30 PLUS YEARS, SOMEBODY HAD TO COME. A GROUP, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THIS COMMUNITY BEGGING FOR A PARK, DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM FOR 30 PLUS YEARS STILL TO THIS VERY DAY, BEGGING YOU, THEIR EMPLOYER, TO GET IT RIGHT IN THIS BUILDING. I ASK YOU TODAY TO VOTE, GET ON THE GAS AND VOTE UNANIMOUSLY TO BE DONE. ABANDONED. LET'S MOVE ON AND DO SOMETHING TRULY FOR THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS. THE PEOPLE AS A WHOLE. DIVERSITY. MEN, WOMEN, NO MATTER IF THEY'RE GAY OR STRAIGHT, POOR, WEALTHY IN THIS BUILDING. SINCE I'VE BEEN SPEAKING HERE, 2012 ABOUT A COVER UP WITHIN A COVER UP, THERE HAS BEEN MANY PEOPLE BLACK, WHITE, BROWN, AND EVEN A FEW GAY THAT WAS FORCED OUT BECAUSE THEY DID THEIR JOB. [03:00:04] THAT'S NOT ABOUT THE PEOPLE. MAYOR JOHNSON. YOU OWE YOURSELF BETTER. YOU OWE YOURSELF. YOU HAVE A DUTY. DUTY TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR SECURITY, FOR THE PEOPLE. IT'S NOT SAFE IN HERE. I HAVE TO WALK DOWNSTAIRS. ELDERLY PEOPLE. IT'S NOT SAFE. NOBODY SHOULD HAVE TO GO BEHIND YOU. YOUR SECURITY DISRUPTING YOUR SECURITY. IT'S A WHOLE NEW DAY. THEY WENT DOWN TO DALLAS COUNTY, TO DPD. THEY WENT DOWN TO THE FEDERAL BUILDING. THEY WENT DOWN TO EL CENTRO. MOVE YOUR PEOPLE UP OUT OF HERE. DO THE RIGHT THING. LET'S BE HAPPY. IF IT'S GOING TO BE A DALLAS MAVERICKS, LET THEM COME AND BE HAPPY. THIS WAS NEVER A PLACE OF PEACE. IT WAS NEVER A PLACE ABOUT THE PEOPLE. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DIANE BIRDWELL. I'M BACK. I KNOW THIS CITY. I'M OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER KENNEDY BEING SHOT. I REMEMBER IT BEING THE CITY OF HATE. I REMEMBER WHEN THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT. AND I ALSO REMEMBER WHEN THEY MOVED THE COWBOYS TO TEXAS STADIUM, AND THAT WAS GOING TO BE A GREAT BIG DEVELOPMENT. GO OUT THERE NOW AND LOOK AT IT. I WORKED AT TEXAS STADIUM SELLING COKES BACK IN 75 REUNION ARENA. WHAT HAPPENED TO IT? AMERICAN AIRLINES WAS FLAILING AMERICAN AIRLINES. SO NOW IT'S KIND OF COMING BACK. BUT TO SAY THAT DOWNTOWN NEEDS AN ARENA NEEDS A BASKETBALL TEAM. NO WE DON'T NO WE DON'T. NO ONE GOES TO ROME OR LONDON FOR A BASKETBALL TEAM. THEY GO TO SEE OLD ARCHITECTURE, THEY GO TO SEE CULTURE, AND THEY TRADED LUCAS. SO TO HELL WITH THEM. BUT THE THING IS, MY MOTHER USED TO SAY, FORT WORTH IS WHERE THE WEST BEGINS. BUT DALLAS IS WHERE THE EAST PETERS OUT. WE HAVE ALWAYS TRIED TO BE MANHATTAN ON THE PRAIRIE, BUT INSTEAD WE'RE GOING TO BECOME DETROIT ON THE TRINITY. AND I QUOTED THAT. I DID THAT. WHY? BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT AT&T IS LEAVING DOWNTOWN DALLAS, HOW DO YOU THINK WE FEEL IF CITY HALL LEAVES DOWNTOWN DALLAS? WHY SHOULD ANYBODY STAY? YOU KNOW WHAT MOST PEOPLE ARE WORRIED ABOUT? THEY'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE MAVERICKS. THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THINGS LIKE MY ROOMMATE WHO'S A VETERAN LIKE ME. HE WAS A FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, RETIRED, WHO WAS AT THE DOG PARK AT MOCKINGBIRD, AT WHITE ROCK LAKE AND WAS HARASSED BY THIS CRAZY GUY, A TROUBLEMAKER, AND WAS KNOCKED UNCONSCIOUS AND HAD HIS FACE CRACKED AND IS INJURED. IT TOOK 90 MINUTES FOR THE DALLAS POLICE TO SHOW UP. NO PICTURES TAKEN. BASIC STATEMENT IT'S BEEN OVER A WEEK. NO INVESTIGATOR, NO DETECTIVE. SO IF ANYONE HERE FROM THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT WANTS TO TALK TO ME, I'M WEARING PINK FOR A REASON. YOU CAN FIND ME UP THERE. THIS GUY IS A RETIRED SPECIAL AGENT, AND HE FEELS ABANDONED BY THIS CITY THAT HE NOW CALLS HOME BECAUSE THE ONE TIME HE NEEDS HELP TO GET THIS OTHER BAD GUY AWAY, NOBODY'S LISTENING. BUT WHY BRING ALL THAT UP? BECAUSE I'M ALSO HEARING. OH, WHAT? IT'S GOING TO BRING JOBS WE HEAR THAT ALL THE TIME. IT'S ALWAYS THE SAME PEOPLE FROM THE SAME PART OF TOWN WHO ARE BEING TOLD THIS BY THE PEOPLE FROM NORTH DALLAS, THAT IT'S GOING TO HELP SOUTH DALLAS, AND IT NEVER DOES. IT'S A LIE. AND FINALLY, I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT WITH ONE THING THAT'S GOING TO SOUND A LITTLE BIT AWFUL. BUT LADIES, WE ALL KNOW WHEN WE'RE BEING BAMBOOZLED BY A MAN ON A DATE, WE ALL KNOW THAT MOVING 911 AND 311 IS THE EXACT SAME THING AS WHEN WE HEAR, OH, COME ON, HONEY, JUST THE TIP. TRISTAN TALKINGTON. TRISTAN TALKINGTON IS NOT PRESENT. IRA ALLEN. IRA ALLEN IS NOT PRESENT BRUCE RICHARDSON. I WONDER WHEN YOU LAST FELT FEAR. I'D ASK MY FRIENDS WHO ARE HERE TO TO STAND WITH ME AND STAND WITH ME WHILE I'M HERE. I FEEL LEFT OUT, I FEEL IGNORED. ERIC JOHNSON, WHO HAD CHANGED THE WORLD. YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THESE IF ERIC JOHNSON HADN'T LICENSED THE INTEGRATED CIRCUIT TO IBM. [03:05:06] NO TELLING HOW LONG IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BEFORE WE HAD THESE. AND WHEN HE WAS DONE, HE TOOK ON THE JOB OF RE-IMAGINING DALLAS GOVERNMENT. HE CREATED GOALS FOR DALLAS. THAT WAS A MOVEMENT OF INCLUSION. IT INCLUDED PEOPLE. THEY BROUGHT IN. AND I'M GOING TO PAUSE AND QUOTE JUANITA CRAFT, WHO SAID AT GOALS FOR DALLAS THAT I AFTER ALL I'VE DONE, I'VE NEVER FELT LIKE A CITIZEN UNTIL NOW, SITTING AT THE TABLE WITH THESE PEOPLE. FOR THE RECORD, TRANSPARENCY IS WHAT THIS BUILDING WAS ABOUT. YET THIS PROCESS, YOU DID VOTE TWICE TO EXCLUDE US, YOUR CONSTITUENTS. YOU EXCLUDED US. DALLAS MAVS HAVE SAID, DON'T. DON'T BLAME US. WHATEVER THEY'RE DOING, WE'LL WE'LL TALK TO THEM AFTER THEY'RE DONE. WE'RE NOT TALKING TO THEM. WE PROBABLY WILL BLAME THEM. BUT MOST OF ALL, YOU EXCLUDED US. YOU BETRAYED US. WE. WE BEG FOR A VOICE IN THREE MINUTE INTERVALS HERE, THINKING OF WHAT WE CAN SAY, WHAT WE CAN CRAM INTO THREE MINUTES WHILE PEOPLE GET TO SIT AT A TABLE WHO ARE TASKED WITH FINDING OUT WHAT PEOPLE NEED TO MOVE OUT, WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE IN AN OFFICE SPACE. THAT IS NOT THIS OFFICE SPACE, FOLKS. TRANSPARENCY. NO INCLUSION, NO NO ONE HERE I AM. I HAVE 22 SECONDS TO MAKE A CLOSING ARGUMENT. AND THAT CLOSING ARGUMENT IS SOMEHOW YOU HAVE BETRAYED US, YOUR CONSTITUENTS. ALL THE VOICES IN THE ROOM WERE MORE IMPORTANT THAN OUR VOICES. ALL OF THEM. SO I BEG YOU, DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS. NOT TODAY. THANK YOU. YOUR FINAL. YOUR FINAL SPEAKER, HARRISON BLAIR. GOOD. GOOD AFTERNOON. OR RATHER, GOOD EVENING. COUNCIL. MEMBERS. MADAM CITY MANAGER, LET ME START BY JUST GIVING AND OFFERING OUR CONDOLENCES FROM THE BLACK CHAMBER AND FROM MY FAMILY. MY FAMILY HAS BEEN IN DALLAS SINCE BEFORE THERE WAS A CITY HALL. WE'VE SEEN MANY CITY HALLS, AND WE'RE PRETTY SURE WE'LL SEE ANOTHER ONE. HOPEFULLY, IF THIS PROJECT GETS THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE MOVING FORWARD. I WALKED IN TODAY AND FOR MANY OTHER MEETINGS, I'VE COME DOWNTOWN FOR MY BOARD SERVICE. I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN THE PLAZA FULL OF PEOPLE MAYBE ENLISTED IF THERE'S A TURKEY TROT OR SOME KIND OF MAJOR EVENT. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE BUILDINGS AROUND CITY HALL AND ALSO NOT GETTING ANY ACTION OR ANY PLAY. I THINK THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND $1 BILLION ON AN ASSET, JUST ONE, THERE ARE SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES THAT TAKE PRECEDENT TO ME. THE FIRST IS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE 4000 NEW POLICE OFFICERS ON THE STREET OF DALLAS, STREETS OF DALLAS TO PATROL. THAT'S NOT HAPPENING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THE BUDGET. WE HAVE $3.2 BILLION DEFICIT IN OUR POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SPENDING. $1 BILLION ON THIS ONE ASSET IS NOT GOING TO HELP THAT. YOU ALSO HAVE THE CHOICE BETWEEN FAIR PARK, $1 BILLION THAT IS REAL AND AND YOU CAN ACTUALLY GO OUT THERE AND LOOK AND TABULATE WHAT WOULD COST $1 BILLION TO FIX THERE. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IN INVESTING IN FAIR PARK VERSUS CITY HALL IS THAT IT'S ACTUALLY A DESTINATION THAT WILL SEE A RETURN IF I PUT ON MY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEAD. SO I DO THINK, IN ALL FAIRNESS, THIS BODY DOES NEED THE POWER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AT LEAST EXPLORING WHAT COULD BE BETTER FOR THE CITY. BECAUSE CITY HALL DOESN'T REPRESENT A PROPERTY, IT REPRESENTS PEOPLE. AND AT THE CHAMBER WE ARE PEOPLE OVER PROPERTY. AND IF YOU GOT $1 BILLION THAT YOU WANT TO PUT ON A BUILDING, I'VE GOT $1 BILLION WORTH OF PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS AND SERVICES THAT THIS COUNCIL CAN OFFER TO PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. I KNOW YOU'RE FACED WITH A TOUGH DECISION, AND I KNOW PEOPLE FROM NORTH DALLAS AND OTHER PLACES CAN AFFORD TO BE HERE, AND THEY HAVE TIME. BUT THE PEOPLE I REPRESENT FROM THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, I COULD ASK THEM TO STAND, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE THE TIME OR THE LUXURY TO BE HERE BECAUSE THEY'RE PROBABLY AT WORK. BUT THESE ISSUES ARE IMPORTANT. AND I'VE HEARD, YOU KNOW, THE THE MAVERICKS MENTIONED, I DON'T WANT THE MAVERICKS TO LEAVE CITY HALL. I DON'T WANT THEM TO LEAVE DOWNTOWN. WE'VE ALREADY LOST THE RANGERS. WE'VE LOST THE COWBOYS. HELL, I'LL THROW IN THE HORSE TRACK. BUT FOR $1 BILLION, WE DESERVE SOMETHING NEW. AND AT LEAST A NICE STEAK LUNCH AND SOME GUCCI SLIPPERS OR SOMETHING. BUT WE CAN'T DO $1 BILLION ON AN OLD FACILITY THAT'S MOSTLY MADE OF CONCRETE. I LOVE THIS LOVELY PIECE OF ART, BUT I AM FOR PEOPLE OVER PROPERTY, AND I BELIEVE MOST OF DALLAS RESIDENTS WILL FEEL THE WAY THAT I FEEL. [03:10:06] AND I'LL JUST MAKE THIS QUICK POINT. WHERE WERE THE PRESERVATIONISTS WHEN THEY WERE TEARING DOWN THE HOMES ON HISTORIC 10TH STREET IN MY COMMUNITY? WHERE WERE THE PRESERVATIONISTS WHEN THIS BODY PUT UP THE BOND IN 2024, AND THEY PUT $30 MILLION ON THE TABLE TO FIX THIS BUILDING AND SOME OF THE MOST PERNICIOUS ISSUES. I ALMOST SLIPPED AND BROKE MY NECK ON A ON A DRIP DOWNSTAIRS ON MY WAY IN. WHEN ARE WE GOING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT? THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. POINT OF ORDER, MAYOR. STAGE POINT OF ORDER. YEAH. I BELIEVE IT WAS A VIOLATION OF RULES TO HAVE SOMEONE SPEAK WHO WASN'T SIGNED UP. AND IF THAT IS THE CASE, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE RIGHT WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT TO OFFER THAT SAME AFFORDABILITY TO ANYONE ELSE WHO WAS WHO WAS PRESENT AND DID NOT SIGN UP. I LET THE PARLIAMENTARIAN ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION, I SUPPOSE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT RELIEF YOU'RE GOING TO GET FOR. ANYBODY TO SPEAK, BECAUSE OUR RULES ARE A SUSPENSION OF THE RULES WOULD BE WHAT YOU'D HAVE TO REQUEST IF YOU WANT TO LET ANYBODY SPEAK. I MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES, TO ALLOW FOR EVERYONE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY THAT SOMEONE WAS JUST GIVEN, THAT VIOLATED OUR RULES ALREADY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IT'S NOT DEBATABLE. SO WE WOULD VOTE ON THAT TWO THIRDS. SO, MADAM SECRETARY, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. COUNCIL MEMBER. WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR IS ABSENT. ONE VOTE TAKEN. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROSS. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH 14 VOTING IN FAVOR. NO OPPOSED. ONE ABSENT VOTE TAKEN. THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, SO, MADAM SECRETARY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HAVE NOT ADDRESSED THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL, PLEASE. BY SHOW OF HANDS. AND YOU MAY COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT IN THE FIRST TWO SECTIONS. ONE. TWO. THREE. FOUR. FIVE. AND ANY SPEAKER CAN COME TO THE PODIUM. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. NORMAL. 6219 PROSPECT AVENUE, DISTRICT 14. I'M JUST HERE TO POINT OUT ONE LITTLE TEENY TINY BIT OF HISTORY THAT HAS BEEN LEFT COMPLETELY OUT OF THIS. THIS BUILDING WAS FINISHED AND OCCUPIED IN 1978. IN 1979, AFTER A COURT ORDER, THE CITY OF DALLAS HAD ITS FIRST SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT. ELECTIONS. PRIOR TO 1979, MOST OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE ALL WHITE MEN IN BLUE SUITS. THE WOMEN WHO SERVED ON THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS DIDN'T EVEN HAVE FIRST NAMES AFTER THE 1979 ELECTION. THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND FOR THE LAST 47 YEARS, THIS HORSESHOE HAS LOOKED JUST LIKE YOU ALL LOOK TODAY. I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER. AND THIS SITUATION MUST BE REPLICATED SOMEWHERE. WILL NOT BE REPLICATED SOMEWHERE ELSE. PLEASE DO NOT SELL THIS BUILDING. DO NOT DESTROY IT. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. MR. MAYOR, HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. SAUL VILLASANA, 6144. AVERILL WAY, DISTRICT 13. ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO, I STOOD RIGHT HERE BEFORE A DIFFERENT COUNCIL, A DIFFERENT MAYOR, REPRESENTING A GROUP OF FOLKS WHO ARE TRYING TO SAVE A LITTLE RED BRICK SCHOOLHOUSE CALLED SAINT ANNE'S IN THE OLD LITTLE MEXICO NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S GONE. THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S GONE. THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE IS THE TIME OUR TWO SILK STOCKING LAW FIRMS DOWNTOWN. THE BEST LAND GUY IN THE CITY. YOU KNOW WHO HE WAS AND OPPOSED THE SAVING OF THAT LITTLE RED BRICK SCHOOLHOUSE IN THAT LITTLE RED SCHOOLHOUSE. SAINT ANNE'S. NO GREAT ARCHITECT DESIGNED IT. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENED THERE? [03:15:05] THOUSANDS OF KIDS, MEXICAN KIDS WENT TO SCHOOL THERE. THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WERE HAD FUNERALS IN THE CHURCH NEXT DOOR TO THAT SCHOOL. THOUSANDS OF MEXICAN BOYS AND GIRLS PLAYED IN THE SCHOOL GROUND OF THAT SCHOOL BECAUSE THERE WAS A LITTLE MEXICAN SCHOOL. IT WAS AN OLD MEXICAN NEIGHBORHOOD. I DIDN'T THINK WE HAD THE CHANCE TO SAVE THAT POOR LITTLE SCHOOL. I EVEN TOLD MY CLIENTS I DIDN'T THINK IT HAD A CHANCE. RIGHT OVER THERE. IT WAS HARD. WE WERE UP AGAINST THE DIOCESE AND SOME OF THE BEST LAWYERS IN TOWN, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO, AFTER NINE MONTHS OF DEBATE AND DISCUSSION BEFORE SEVERAL COMMITTEES, IT AT THE CITY HALL FINALLY GOT TO THE COUNCIL. WE WERE ABLE TO VOTE ON IT AND SAVE THAT LITTLE SCHOOL. AND THE IRONY IS THAT TODAY, THAT LITTLE SCHOOLHOUSE GOT MORE DISCUSSION FOR THE PUBLIC THAN YOU'RE GIVING CITY HALL. HOW RIDICULOUS IS THAT? THE THE THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU SHOULD BE TABLED. AND LET MORE CITIZENS DISCUSS THIS WITH YOU AND BE HONEST WITH YOU ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY HALL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT SPEAKER. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ROSEANNE MESSINEO MILLS. I LIVE AT 6906 CASA LOMA AVENUE. I AM A CONSTITUENT OF DISTRICT 14. MY HOUSE IS 100 YEARS OLD. I AM CURRENTLY RENOVATING A HISTORIC CHARLES DILBECK HOME THAT WAS SAVED FROM A DEVELOPER'S WRECKING BALL. I'M A MEMBER OF THE CONGRESS OF NEW URBANISM, AND I HAVE SERVED ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF A GLOBALLY KNOWN NEW URBANISM COMMUNITY. EARLIER TODAY, A MEMBER OF THE CITY OF DALLAS CITIZEN CAME HERE AND EXHORTED OUR MAYOR TO SHOW VISION. AND IN THINKING ABOUT THAT, I THOUGHT THAT RECALLS A MEMORY I HAVE FROM A LONG TIME AGO, BECAUSE BACK WHEN I WAS ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THAT TOWN, THE MAYOR AND I HAD SUCH A CONVERSATION ABOUT VISION, AND THAT VISION OCCURRED IN FRONT OF THAT NEW URBANISM TOWN. ICONIC TOWN HALL. AS WE WERE SURROUNDED BY CHILDREN, RIDING ON BICYCLES, RUNNING PAST, GOING THROUGH THE MOTIONS OF WHAT EVERY TOWN NEEDS TO HAVE, WHICH IS A VIBRANT CIVIC CENTER AND AN ICONIC CIVIC HALL. AND AS A CONSEQUENCE, THAT ICONIC TOWN DIDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO HAVE A CIVIC HALL. BUT THE FOUNDER OF THAT COMMUNITY SAID EVERY COMMUNITY OF NOTE, WHETHER TOWN OR GLOBAL CITY, SHOULD HAVE A CITY HALL, A TOWN HALL AND A CIVIC COMMUNITY AND SPACE AROUND IT. AND SO WITHOUT NECESSARILY AN ECONOMIC REASON, THAT TOWN DOES HAVE SUCH A PLACE, AND IT IS INDEED ICONIC. LIKEWISE, DALLAS, WHICH CONSIDERS ITSELF AND I DO BELIEVE WITH ALL MY HEART, AS SOMEONE WHO IS BORN IN THIS TOWN, IS INDEED A WORLD CLASS CITY, SHOULD LIKEWISE HAVE A CITY HALL THAT IS ICONIC. THAT IS A PLACE WHERE WE DO, IN FACT GATHER FOR DEMONSTRATIONS, FOR FESTIVALS, FOR WALKING THE DOG IN COMMUNITIES NEAR AND FAR IN THIS CITY. THAT WE IN FACT SHOULD KEEP THIS PLACE AS OUR TOWN CENTER AND OUR TOWN LIVING ROOM. AND I STRONGLY URGE EVERYONE IN THE HORSESHOE TO TABLE OR REJECT WHAT IS BEING CONSIDERED TODAY. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. HI, I'M JAN BRIDGES. 987 SOUTH RUSTIC CIRCLE, DALLAS, TEXAS. I HAVE A LOT OF GOOD MEMORIES OF THIS PLACE. BEING UP ON THE FIFTH FLOOR WHEN I WAS ON THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WE'D HAVE MEETINGS UP TO 2 OR 3 IN THE MORNING, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I WAS ASKING SO MANY QUESTIONS OF CITY STAFF. JUST IT WAS JUST KIND OF A FUN THING. ANYWAY I'M ASKING YOU NOT TO DO THIS, OKAY. [03:20:04] THIS IS REALLY THE SOUL OF THIS CITY. THIS IS OUR PUBLIC HOME. I MEAN, THIS IS WHERE WE COME TO PROTEST OR TO HAVE PARADES OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S A PUBLIC SPACE, AND IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT IT BE CENTRALLY LOCATED, THAT IT BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC. IT JUST WILL NOT BE THE SAME TO HAVE CITY HALL IN SOME RENTAL SPACE ON CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY OR WHATEVER. IT JUST WOULDN'T BE THE SAME, Y'ALL. Y'ALL KNOW THAT YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ALWAYS JUST DELAY. JUST PUT IT OFF UNTIL YOU GIVE IT SOME MORE THOUGHT. THIS IS JUST A MAJOR, MAJOR DECISION. OKAY. AND YOU KNOW, AND I THINK MOST IMPORTANT, IT'S IT'S THE PUBLIC TRUST, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT THAT THAT KEEP INTACT BETWEEN OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND THE CITIZENS OF THIS CITY. YOU KNOW, DO YOU REALLY WANT TO BREAK THAT PUBLIC TRUST? SO I'M ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE Y'ALL. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. MY NAME IS FITZGERALD DODD. I LIVE AT 508 FOURTH STREET. 75203. AND I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT MAY GET LOST WITH A FEW PEOPLE. AND THAT'S THE CONVERSATION ABOUT CITY HALL AND DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT. AND THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT IT ACTUALLY MEANS FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE LIKE MYSELF, NOT JUST DOWNTOWN, BUT ACROSS DALLAS AND ESPECIALLY SOUTHERN DALLAS. FIRST, DOWNTOWN IS AN ECONOMIC ENGINE FOR THE WHOLE CITY, AND RIGHT NOW IT NEEDS A JUMPSTART. I MEAN, REALLY, DOWNTOWN DALLAS HAS BEEN STRUGGLING I'VE OFFICE VACANCIES ARE UP, FOOT TRAFFIC HASN'T FULLY RECOVERED, AND WE'RE LOSING GROUND TO SUBURBS WHEN DALLAS. WHEN DOWNTOWN THRIVES, TAX BASE GROWS, CITY SERVICES IMPROVE, AND EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD BENEFITS. A NEW ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT NEAR THE CONVENTION CENTER COULD MEAN 50 ACRES OF REDEVELOPMENT, OVER 50 BILLION OR OVER BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN INVESTMENT AND LONG TERM ECONOMIC IMPACT. THAT'S NOT JUST A NUMBER ON A SPREADSHEET. THAT CITY REVENUE THAT FUNDS PARKS, ROADS, LIBRARIES, PUBLIC SAFETY IN EVERY DISTRICT. SECOND, SOUTHERN DALLAS STANDS TO GAIN A BULK OF THIS. THE PROPOSED ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT SITS RIGHT AT THE DOORSTEP OF SOUTHERN DALLAS. THAT'S NOT AN ACCIDENT. IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOUSANDS OF CONSTRUCTION JOBS, PERMANENT HOSPITALITY AND SERVICE JOBS, NEW RETAIL, NEW RESTAURANTS. MICHELLE. SO I'M LEANING TOWARDS THE RESTAURANTS AND NEW HOUSING, ALL IN AN AREA THAT HAS BEEN WAITING DECADES FOR THIS KIND OF INVESTMENT. WHEN THE CONVENTION CENTER, EXPANSION AND ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT ON COME ONLINE TOGETHER, THE THE ECONOMIC RIPPLE EFFECT DOESN'T STOP AT I-30 LIKE NORMAL. IT ACTUALLY CROSSES OVER I-30. IT REACHES THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKING THE CITY TO SHOW UP FOR THEM. THIS IS HOW WE START TO CLOSE THE GAP BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH DALLAS. NOT WITH PROMISES, BUT WITH REAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND DOLLARS FLOWING IN. LASTLY, OUR COMMUNITY HAS A VOICE IN THIS AND WE INTEND TO USE IT. OUR COMMUNITY HAS ALWAYS SHOWN UP WHEN DALLAS MAKES BIG DECISIONS. THAT'S NOT NEW. WHAT I WANT THE COUNCIL TO HEAR IS THAT WE'RE NOT UP HERE ADVOCATING FOR ANY TEAM OR BUILDING WE'RE ADVOCATING FOR EQUITABLE INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITIES WE SERVE. OUR VOICE CARRIES WEIGHT BECAUSE WE SEE THE PEOPLE BEHIND THE NUMBERS EVERY SINGLE DAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. MY NAME IS ERICA HUDDLESTON. MY ADDRESS IS 5028 MILAM STREET IN DISTRICT 14. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF YOUR DELIBERATIONS. AND I WOULD REQUEST THAT YOU, OF COURSE, SAVE CITY HALL. I LIVED DOWNTOWN FOR TWO YEARS. I WAS RESTORING A CHARLES DILBECK HOUSE, AND I NEEDED A PLACE TO LIVE. AND I LIVED IN MANOR HOUSE, AND I. ABSOLUTELY. WHEN I GOT DONE AND READY TO MOVE IN MY HOUSE, I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE DOWNTOWN. WHEN I LIVED DOWNTOWN, I WALKED EVERYWHERE. AND THAT'S PART OF THE FUN. [03:25:03] AND THE ARCHITECTURE IS A BIG DRAW. IF YOU BUILD APARTMENTS IN SOUTH OF YONGE STREET, I MIGHT RENT ONE OF THOSE APARTMENTS. IF I'M LOOKING AT AN I.M. PEI BUILDING. IF I'M LOOKING AT A BAR DOWNSTAIRS WITH HOT DOGS, I WILL NEVER STEP FOOT IN THAT AREA. AS A RESIDENT, WHEN I LIVED DOWNTOWN, I OFTEN WANTED TO WALK ACROSS YONGE STREET SOUTH OF YONGE STREET. WHAT A GREAT NAME. SOHO. PERFECT. I WALKED DOWN THERE AND I ALWAYS FELT LIKE, WELL, YOU KNOW, OKAY, I WANT TO END A LITTLE DANGEROUS. IF YOU PUT STREETSCAPING ON YONGE STREET FROM THE FARMER'S MARKET TO UNION STATION, AND YOU REDO THE INTERIOR OF UNION STATION BACK TO THE VICTORIAN OR EDWARDIAN ERA WITH TAX CREDITS, AS MENTIONED, THOSE PEOPLE FROM FORT WORTH ARE GOING TO HAVE A BALL. THEY'RE GOING TO COME ON THE TRAIN AND EVERYONE IN FORT WORTH, EVERYONE IN DOWNTOWN WHO LIKES TO WALK WILL BE WALKING SOUTH OF YONGE STREET. IF YOU LIVE IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS, YOU LIKE ARCHITECTURE, YOU LIKE ART, YOU LIKE THE NASHER. DON'T PUSH THOSE TENANTS AWAY. I BELIEVE YOUR ROI WILL BE MUCH BETTER. YOUR PERFORMERS I'VE A MASTERS OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE FROM UT AUSTIN. I DON'T PRACTICE, BUT LOOK AT THE NUMBERS OF SOMEONE WHO BUILDS IN AN AREA THAT IS ALL NEW, AND A PERSON WHO BUILDS PROJECTS IN AN AREA WITH SOME DIVERSITY OF ERAS AND VISUAL INTEREST. THIS BUILDING COULD BE MADE BETTER FOR THE EMPLOYEES. I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH THAT. SPEAKER. THE STAFF NEED REALLY GOOD OFFICES. I ACTUALLY SEE THE FOUNTAIN AT THE KALITA HUMPHREYS, AND I THINK I WANT TO MAKE A BETTER STAFF OFFICE TO FIX THAT FOUNTAIN. IF I WERE WORKING HERE AND I HAD A BAD OFFICE, I WOULDN'T REALLY HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO WANT TO OR THE SENSE OF URGENCY ON ANY PROJECT. SO I DO ASK FOR YOU ALL TO REALLY CONSIDER WHAT STAFF NEEDS ARE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. OH, OKAY. THANK YOU. HI. MY NAME IS CATHERINE SEAL. I'M AT 5500 CHATHAM HILL ROAD. I'M A MEMBER OF A OF RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 13 FORMER LANDMARK COMMISSIONER AND FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PRESERVATION DALLAS. AND I'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF THE PROPONENTS WHO YOU KNOW, I KNOW IT'S NOT AN EASY DECISION. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY IS LIKE, LET'S TAKE A WRECKING BALL. WELL, THERE'S ONE GUY, ONE PERSON THAT WANTS TO TAKE A WRECKING BALL TO CITY HALL. BUT I THINK A LOT OF YOU'VE ALREADY MADE UP YOUR MINDS ARE ARE FACED WITH YOU SEE A LACK OF LEADERSHIP IN, IN A SPIRALING DOWNTOWN. AND YOU SEE THIS AS PERHAPS A WAY TO AN ECONOMIC ENGINE THAT CAN BRING SOMETHING NEW LIFE TO YOUR DOWNTOWN. AND YOU'RE YOU'RE REALLY DESPERATE FOR A MIRACLE, AND YOU'RE HOPING THAT BRINGING THE MAVS INTO DOWNTOWN IS THE MIRACLE THAT YOU'VE BEEN WAITING FOR. BUT I'D JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE HUNDREDS, MAYBE THOUSANDS OF EMAILS AND SPEECHES AND PRESENTATIONS THAT ARE BEFORE YOU. IS THE MIRACLE. THAT'S ACTUALLY THE MIRACLE. YOU THINK THAT THERE'S A LACK OF LEADERSHIP AND RESOURCES AND ENERGY TO PUT INTO OUR DOWNTOWN TO TRY TO SAVE IT? THE DEVELOPERS WILL TELL YOU IT'S GOING TO TAKE 20 YEARS TO BRING US BACK TO THE LEVELS THAT WE WERE AT PRE-COVID. IT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT TAPPING INTO THE RESOURCES THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY. IT'S ASTOUNDING TO SEE THE SUPPORT FOR CITY HALL, AND PEOPLE ARE OFFERING TO HELP YOU ALL PEOPLE WHO ARE COMPETENT AND HAVE A LOT OF BACKGROUND IN URBAN PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN AND, AND AND MAKING CITIES GREAT AGAIN. SO UTILIZE THE RESOURCES, THE MIRACLES RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU. AND IT'S A TOUGH VOTE, I KNOW, BUT DON'T BE AFRAID TO TO TO LET CITY HALL WORK ITS PROCESS AND PUT YOUR FAITH IN THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES OUR SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. MR. MAYOR. HI, I'M ERICA COLE. I'M 9246 FOREST HILLS BOULEVARD. I'VE COME HERE BEFORE, BUT I'VE NEVER BEEN THIS ANGRY, SO FORGIVE ME. AND I'VE BEEN SITTING UP IN THE LISTENING TO THIS FOR THE LAST TWO DAYS, AND I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A DONE DEAL. I'M FROM DALLAS. I WAS BORN IN OAK CLIFF. I LIVED IN NORTH DALLAS. I LIVE IN EAST DALLAS NOW. I'M 73 YEARS OLD. I REMEMBER WHEN DALLAS, DOWNTOWN DALLAS WAS A PLACE WE COULD MEET. IT WAS A COMMUNITY. THERE WAS MOVIES. THERE WAS ALL SORTS OF THINGS. [03:30:03] I LIKE OUR CITY COUNCIL IN DOWNTOWN. I THINK IT BELONGS HERE. I THINK WHEN I WAS A KID WE CAME DOWN. SO I THINK THAT IT CREATES A COMMUNITY AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A COMMUNITY AND WE SAVE AND PROTECT EACH OTHER. I FEEL THIS IS TURNING INTO DOWNTOWN DALLAS, IS TURNING INTO A CARNIVAL OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT WHERE IT'S ALL, I DON'T CARE. WHY NOT PUT A STADIUM OVER IN SOME PART OF THE OTHER PLACE? AND ANOTHER THING THAT REALLY, REALLY CONCERNS ME IS IF WE MOVE THIS TO SOMEPLACE ELSE, IT'S NOT IN THE CENTER OF DALLAS. HOW ARE PEOPLE GOING TO GET AROUND? HOW ARE THEY GOING TO ARE WE GOING TO PUT PUBLIC? I KNOW SOME OF YOU WANT TO GET RID OF CARS, AND SOME OF YOU WANTED YOU KNOW, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, THEN SOME DON'T WANT IT. HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET THE PEOPLE FROM OAK CLIFF OR SOME OF THE OTHER PARTS OF TOWN DOWN HERE? WHAT DO WE DO? I MEAN, I JUST THINK THE WHOLE THING IS POORLY THOUGHT ABOUT, AND AND WHAT ABOUT ALL THE BUILDINGS AROUND HERE? I WENT TO THAT. I DROVE BY THE THE THAT BUILDING. THAT'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. WHERE ARE ALL THOSE BUILDINGS GOING TO GO? IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A REALLY, REALLY COLD PLAN THAT YOU HAVE, AND I DON'T REALLY CARE. AND I THINK THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T CARE ABOUT WHETHER WE HAVE SOME KIND OF CIRCUS DOWNTOWN. SO THAT'S FURIOUS. THANK YOU. I THINK WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER. OKAY. HELLO. I'M MICHELLE WALKER. I'M IN DISTRICT ONE, OAK CLIFF. I SERVE ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF PRESERVATION DALLAS. I SERVE ON THIS BOARD WITH MANY INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE ACTUALLY WORKED ON THIS BUILDING, AND I KNOW THE $1 BILLION REPAIR ESTIMATE IS GROSSLY INFLATED. A LOT OF PEOPLE IN FAVOR OF ABANDONING CITY HALL SEEM TO HAVE FALLEN FOR THIS RIDICULOUS $1 BILLION REPAIR STORY, WHICH IS DISHEARTENING. IT IS ALSO BEING PRESENTED AS EITHER RESTORE CITY HALL OR REVITALIZE DOWNTOWN AND CONNECT DOWNTOWN WITH THE SOUTH. THIS IS NOT AN EITHER OR, AND WE MUST DO BOTH. SOME SUGGEST NOT DEMOLISHING CITY HALL, BUT REDEVELOPING THE BUILDING INTO SOMETHING ELSE. THIS IS A VERY PARTICULAR BUILDING TO CHANGE ITS USE. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHERE WOULD OUR PUBLIC CITY CENTER, I'M SORRY, CITY CENTER OF CITY GOVERNMENT BE? ARE WE SUPPOSED TO HOLD PROTESTS OR RALLIES IN AN OFFICE BUILDING, PARKING GARAGE? A GROUP OF PEOPLE IN FAVOR OF ABANDONING THE CITY HALL? WANT TO CONNECT THE CORE? I THINK THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NEEDED AND NEEDS TO HAPPEN SEPARATELY FROM PRESERVING CITY HALL. I WOULD ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUST THE ADELSON FAMILY OR ANY BILLIONAIRE TO ACT IN FAVOR OF THE NEEDS OF SOUTH DALLAS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS INCLUDES YOUR SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. WELL, I THINK PROCEDURALLY AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO SAY THAT AT 4:47 P.M., THE SPECIAL CALLED CITY COUNCIL MEETING STANDS AT RECESS UNTIL THE CONCLUSION OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING MEETING AND GO BACK INTO OUR BRIEFING MEETING NOW, MADAM SECRETARY, THAT IS CORRECT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GIVE US A FEW MINUTES. ALL RIGHT, EVERYONE, IT'S 8:52 P.M. AND OUR SPECIAL CALLED MEETING IS BACK FROM RECESS. AND, MADAM CITY SECRETARY, I'LL LET YOU TAKE IT FROM HERE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOU HAVE ONE ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA. I'LL READ THAT ITEM INTO THE RECORD. AGENDA ITEM ONE IS A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE ON CITY COUNCIL POLICY DIRECTION FOR THE STATE OF DALLAS CITY HALL. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU HAVE A MOTION. YES, MAYOR. I MOVE TO FOLLOW THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO ONE. EXPLORE RELOCATION OPTIONS FOR 311911 AND EMERGENCY OPERATIONS TO NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS. TWO. EXPLORE OPTIONS TO RELOCATE ALL OTHER CITY HALL STAFF AND FUNCTIONS TO NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS, AND THREE EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR THE DISPOSITION OF CITY OF THE CITY HALL SITE. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRMAN WEST? YES. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE ARE ON JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS RESET. SPECIAL CALLED MEETING AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE. [03:35:03] THANK YOU GEORGE. CHAIRMAN WISE THANK YOU. THIS VOTE TODAY IS ABOUT TWO THINGS SEVERAL CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES BEFORE US. I'M GOING TO START WITH THE CHALLENGES. FIRST, THE CITY COUNCIL'S JOB IS TO MAKE DECISIONS. BUT THOSE DECISIONS ARE ONLY AS GOOD AS THE INFORMATION WE RECEIVE. WE DO NOT SIT AT THE NEGOTIATION TABLE WITH BROKERS, DEVELOPERS OR PROFESSIONAL SPORTS TEAM OWNERS. WE RELY ON CITY STAFF TO CONDUCT THOSE NEGOTIATIONS AND BRING FORWARD COMPLETE, ACCURATE INFORMATION SO WE CAN ACT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF DALLAS. I HOPE, AND I EXPECT THAT WE RECEIVE THAT FULL PICTURE. APPROVING THIS ITEM TODAY MUST MOVE US TOWARD THAT STANDARD. THE SECOND CHALLENGE IS THAT DALLASITES ARE UNDERSTANDABLY ANGRY ABOUT THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN THIS PROCESS TO DATE. WHILE THERE ARE CERTAINLY SOME THINGS THAT MUST BE DONE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, LIKE NEGOTIATING A LEASE AT ANOTHER BUILDING. WE OWE IT TO OUR RESIDENTS TO BE HONEST ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. THE THIRD CHALLENGE IS THAT THIS ICONIC BUILDING HAS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF NEEDED REPAIRS. WHETHER THE NUMBER IS 150 MILLION OR 329 MILLION, IT IS MONEY THE CITY SIMPLY DOES NOT HAVE. I DON'T KNOW HOW I COULD STOMACH FIRING POLICE OFFICERS, OR CLOSING POOLS AND LIBRARIES, OR LETTING STREET REPAIRS GO UNANSWERED IN MY DISTRICT, BY SHIFTING FUNDS AWAY FROM THOSE SERVICES TO CITY HALL, A BUILDING THAT SIMPLY HAS LESS DIRECT BENEFIT TO OUR RESIDENTS. AND FRANKLY, I KNOW THAT MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES FEEL THE SAME WAY BECAUSE ALL OF US, AS WELL AS PAST COUNCILS, HAVE DECIDED TO FUND OTHER CITY SERVICES IN BOND AFTER BOND INSTEAD OF PUTTING MONEY INTO THIS BUILDING. LAST AND CERTAINLY NOT LEAST, DOWNTOWN TODAY AND ESPECIALLY THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF DOWNTOWN IS STRUGGLING. AT&T IS LEAVING AND WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT HERE IN YEARS. I SEE MORE HOMELESS PEOPLE WALKING AROUND THAN RESIDENTS, TOURISTS OR EMPLOYEES. CIVIC BUILDINGS PLUS EMPTY PARKING LOTS. DO NOT EMPTY DO NOT EQUAL A THRIVING DOWNTOWN. IT EQUALS A GHOST TOWN. AND OUR CITY'S CAPITULATION TO SHAKY PROMISES FROM THE STATE REGARDING I-345 HAVE ONLY MADE REVITALIZING DOWNTOWN HARDER BECAUSE IT IS CHOKED OFF BY HIGHWAYS TAKING PEOPLE ANYWHERE BUT DALLAS. BUT IT'S NOT ALL DOOM AND GLOOM. WE ARE DALLAS, AND IN DALLAS WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET BIG THINGS DONE. HERE IS WHY I'M OPTIMISTIC WE CAN MOVE FORWARD IN A BETTER DIRECTION. FIRST, ONE THING I'VE HEARD, AND I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE ON, IS THAT OUR RESIDENTS IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS DON'T WANT TO SEE MASSIVE CHANGES TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. BUT PEOPLE ARE STILL GOING TO MOVE HERE. POINT OF ORDER. STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. I DON'T KNOW HOW SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE AGENDA ITEM, I'M GOING TO REFER TO DENSITY, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH DEVELOPMENT HERE. PEOPLE ARE STILL GOING TO OVERRULE. I MEAN, THANK YOU. EXPLAINING HIS MOTION. PEOPLE ARE STILL GOING TO MOVE TO DALLAS BECAUSE OF BUSINESSES LIKE SCOTIABANK, GOLDMAN SACHS AND OTHERS ARE COMING HERE AND THEIR EMPLOYEES NEED A PLACE TO LIVE. WHY NOT PUT MORE HOUSING IN DOWNTOWN INSTEAD OF PUTTING PRESSURE ON OUR SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS? WHY NOT FINALLY CREATE A DOWNTOWN RICH WITH HOUSING OPTIONS FOR OUR WORKFORCE INSTEAD OF ALLOWING ENDLESS SPRAWL AND TRAFFIC CONGESTION? SECOND OPPORTUNITY IS THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHERN SECTOR OF DOWNTOWN WILL CAUSE WILL CREATE INCREDIBLE ECONOMIC BENEFIT AND REVENUE. AS FORMER MAYOR MIKE RAWLINGS ARGUED IN HIS OP ED THIS PAST WEEKEND THAT REVENUE WILL GO TO FUNDING POLICE, FIRE, STREETS, PARKS, LIBRARIES ACROSS OUR ENTIRE CITY WITHOUT INCREASING TAXES FOR OUR RESIDENTS. THERE'S A THIRD OPPORTUNITY. THERE ARE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES RIGHT HERE AROUND US. THE $3 BILLION CONVENTION CENTER REDEVELOPMENT IS HAPPENING NEXT DOOR. WHETHER WE FIND THE MONEY TO FIX THIS BUILDING WE'RE IN NOW AND INVEST IN IMPROVING THE PLAZA, OR WE MOVE OUT AND THIS LAND TURNS INTO SOMETHING ELSE. AND YES, IT COULD EVEN BE A STADIUM FOR THE MAVERICKS. ALL OF THESE OPTIONS ARE BETTER THAN OUR STATUS QUO GHOST TOWN THAT WE HAVE DOWN HERE NOW. WE NEED TO START DREAMING ABOUT THE LONG TERM VISION FOR DOWNTOWN. AND AS THE MAYOR HAS POINTED OUT, WE NEED A DOWNTOWN THAT WORKS FOR THE NEXT CENTURY. WE HAVE A GENERATIONAL OPPORTUNITY TO TRANSFORM DOWNTOWN INTO A HUSTLING, BUSTLING HUB FOR RESIDENTS, TOURISTS AND WORKERS. AND AS CHAIR OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL SPORTS RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION, I SEE KEEPING THE MAVERICKS AND STARS AND BRINGING THE WINGS AS CRITICAL TO DOWNTOWN'S FUTURE. TODAY'S VOTE IS A CRITICAL STEP TO ENSURING WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION WE NEED TO MAKE A FINANCIAL AND A FACT BASED DECISION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF CITY HALL IN DOWNTOWN. WITHOUT IT, WE ARE ALL OPERATING IN THE DARK. IF YOU WANT MORE DATA, MORE INFORMATION, AND MORE TRANSPARENCY THAN I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I BELIEVE I WAS NEXT IN THE QUEUE AND FOR SOME REASON IT DROPPED ME OFF. [03:40:04] SAY IT AGAIN. I SEE YOU. YEAH, BUT I WAS FIRST IN THE QUEUE AND IT DROPPED OFF. OKAY, IT'S. IT'S OKAY. PAUL, YOU GOT IT. YOU GO RIGHT NOW. OKAY. YOU GO RIGHT NOW. YOU. HOW MANY MINUTES YOU WANT? YOU GOT IT, BABY. OKAY. 20 MINUTES. GIVE IT TO PAUL. 20 MINUTES. GIVE AS MUCH TIME AS HE WANTS. THANK YOU. I MEAN, IT'S ALL GOOD, MAN. NO, BUT YOU KNOW. BUT, PAUL, YOU KNOW, PAUL SEEMS REALLY CONCERNED. GO AHEAD, MA'AM. I'M JUST MESSING WITH YOU. GO AHEAD. REALLY? JUST FIVE MINUTES. WELL, I WANT TO START BY THANKING THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS FOR TAKING THEIR TIME TO SPEND MOST OF THEIR AFTERNOON, AND MANY OF YOU, YOUR EVENINGS, BY SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US TONIGHT. I, LIKE MANY OF YOU, HAVE RECEIVED OVERWHELMING CONSTITUENT FEEDBACK ON THIS ISSUE. ONE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE, AND ONE THAT I SHARE WITH MANY RESIDENTS I'VE HEARD FROM, IS THAT THEY ARE CONFUSED BY A PROCESS THAT HASN'T BEEN TRANSPARENT. WHY NOW? WHY ARE WE HOLDING THREE SEPARATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS IN JUST TWO WEEKS, AND THEN VOTING THE VERY NEXT WEEK ON SUCH A MONUMENTAL DECISION, A DECISION THAT AFFECTS NOT ONLY WHERE WE GOVERN, BUT HOW REPRESENTATION CONNECTS WITH THE PEOPLE THAT WE SERVE. WHEN WE MOVE THIS QUICKLY ON AN ISSUE OF THIS MAGNITUDE, AND WITHOUT ALL THE FACTS AND MANY REMAINING QUESTIONS. IT ERODES PUBLIC TRUST. WE ALL AGREE THAT CITY HALL NEEDS ATTENTION. THERE ARE DECADES OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND MUCH NEEDED MODERNIZATION TO TO ADDRESS, BUT THE CURRENT PROPOSAL CREATES A FALSE NARRATIVE TO JUSTIFY LEAVING CITY HALL, AND I BELIEVE THAT DIRECTION IS PREMATURE AND INADEQUATELY SUPPORTED BY THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED UP TO THIS POINT. THE EDC REPORT CONTAINS A FALSE NARRATIVE BECAUSE A IT LACKS TRANSPARENCY. THE CITY PRODUCED THE EDC REPORT THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE FINANCIAL COMMITTEE MEETING ON A MONDAY, NOT ALLOWING ADEQUATE TIME FOR REVIEW. THE EDC PRODUCED RESPONSES TO CRITICAL COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS AT 530 LAST NIGHT, INCLUDING AN INCOMPLETE BREAKDOWN OF COSTS. THE CITY FAILED TO PRODUCE 800 EMAILS REQUESTED BY D MAGAZINE ON JANUARY THE 20TH THAT ARE STILL OUTSTANDING. B THE EDC CONSULTANTS HAVE ADMITTED THAT THEY ARE SELF-INTERESTED IN RELOCATION. C THE EDC STUDY IS BIASED TOWARD ABANDONMENT. THEY ASK THE WRONG QUESTION, NOT WHAT ARE THE CRITICAL REPAIR NEEDS OF CITY HALL, BUT WHAT WILL IT COST TO REPLACE ALL SYSTEMS, WHETHER THEY ARE FUNCTIONAL OR NOT. THIS WAS UNDERSCORED BY THEIR TESTIMONY TONIGHT THAT THEY INCLUDED THE COST FOR REPLACING A HEATING SYSTEM THAT WAS JUST REPLACED TWO YEARS AGO FOR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. THEY ALSO INCLUDE COSTS OTHER THAN FOR NECESSARY REPAIRS. OVER 50 MILLION FOR INTERIORS, 20 TO 45 FOR F.F.A. 15 FOR TECH INFRASTRUCTURE, 20 MILLION FOR SOFT COSTS AND MOVING OPERATING COSTS OF $277 MILLION, WHICH WE WILL INCUR NO MATTER WHAT OPTION WE PURSUE A COST AND CHANGE CONTINGENCY. ALL OF THESE TOTALING OVER $400 MILLION OUT OF THE $900 MILLION THEY ESTIMATE IT WILL COST TO STAY AT CITY HALL. THEY ALSO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEIR UNSUPPORTED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS TO THE TUNE OF OVER $50 MILLION, WHICH ONE OF THEIR CONSULTANTS SAYS ARE TOTALLY UNNECESSARY. THEY'VE ADMITTED THAT THERE IS A 20 TO 30% ERROR RANGE ON THE DOWNSIDE. THERE IS NO APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON WITH RELOCATION COSTS. WE SAW THEIR TABLE ON PAGE 14. IT CONTAINS, AS THE VERY FIRST LINE, THE $906 MILLION COST ESTIMATE FOR STAYING IN CITY HALL AS THE BASIS FOR COMPARING ALL OTHER OPTIONS. WE HAVE TO REFINE THAT NUMBER IF WE'RE GOING TO BE COMPARING IT TO ALL OF THEIR MOVE OPTIONS. THE NEED FOR A RUSHED DECISION IS ALSO A FALSE NARRATIVE. WHAT'S THE RUSH FOR SUCH AN UNPRECEDENTED, MONUMENTAL DECISION WITH LITTLE OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC INPUT? THE CITY MANAGER HAS PROVIDED NO RATIONALE FOR AN IMMEDIATE RELOCATION OF THE EOC, AT A COST OF OVER 200 MILLION. THE MAVS HAVE SAID THAT THEY DON'T HAVE A DEAL WITH THE CITY. NO NEGOTIATIONS OVER THE CITY HALL SITE. SO THERE'S TRULY NO URGENCY. THERE'S NO REASON TO RUSH TO JUDGMENT. AS A RESULT, I MOVE TO DEFER THE FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND DURING THE DEFERRAL, DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO RETAIN OUTSIDE CONSULTING EXPERTS WITH NO FINANCIAL STAKE IN THE RELOCATION OR REPAIR OF CITY HALL, APPROVED BY THE FULL COUNCIL TO UNDERTAKE A COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN STUDY OF OPTIONS FOR THE REPAIR, [03:45:07] MODERNIZATION AND IMPROVEMENTS OF DALLAS CITY HALL. THE MASTER PLAN STUDY SHALL EVALUATE, PLAN AND RECOMMEND A STRATEGIC APPROACH FOR THE REPAIR, MODERNIZATION, AND IMPROVEMENT OF DALLAS CITY HALL AND PLAZA, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING ONE. ASSESSMENT OF CONDITIONS TWO. PRIORITIZATION OF CRITICAL NEEDS, THREE. FUNDING STRATEGY AND FOUR A TIMELINE. THE STUDY SHALL BE CONDUCTED THROUGH A TRANSPARENT AND PUBLICLY ENGAGED PROCESS, INCLUDING INTERIM BRIEFINGS TO THE FULL COUNCIL AND BE COMPLETED AND PRESENTED TO THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL NO LATER THAN THE END OF THE DEFERRAL PERIOD ON AUGUST 31ST, 2026. ALL RIGHT. SO THERE WAS A MOTION TO DEFER, AND IT WAS SECONDED BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. SO WE'RE NOW ON YOUR MOTION TO DEFER, WHICH I HONESTLY COULD NOT QUITE FOLLOW ALL THE DETAILS OF IT, BUT IT HAD A DATE CERTAIN IN THERE. SOME. IS THERE A DATE IN THERE? YES. AUGUST 31ST. OKAY. SO MEMBERS, YOU'VE HEARD. YOU HEARD THE MOTION. THE MOTION TO DEFER. THERE'S A DATE CERTAIN IN THERE, I JUST AUGUST, OKAY. Y'ALL HEARD IT. SO YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION TO DEFER. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND COPIES OF MY MOTION ARE BEING PASSED OUT AS I SPEAK. THE PURPOSE FOR THIS MOTION IS TO SIMPLY DEFER, NOT DENY, THE EFFORTS THAT WERE CONTAINED IN THE ORIGINAL MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO EXAMINE MOVE OUT OPTIONS. WHAT I WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WAS THE STATEMENT BY LINDA MCMAHON THAT THEY, IF THIS ORIGINAL MOTION PASSES, WILL DO NOTHING FURTHER TO REFINE THE COST ESTIMATES FOR STAYING IN PLACE AT CITY HALL AND REPAIRING OUR FACILITY. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS, IS THAT THAT GIVES US NO REFINED BASIS FOR COMPARING ALL OF WHAT SHE IS GOING TO PREPARE IN TERMS OF THE RELOCATION OPTIONS. WE WON'T HAVE AN APPLE ON THAT SIDE TO COMPARE WITH THE APPLES THAT SHE'S GOING TO PRESENT TO US. AND THAT MEANS THAT WE ARE AUTOMATICALLY DETERMINING WE HAVE TO MOVE OUT OF CITY HALL. THAT'S THE IMPORT OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION. WE HAVE SO MANY OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE REPAIR COSTS FOR THIS BUILDING? JUST THE FACT THAT THERE'S A 25% ERROR FACTOR IS ENOUGH TO RAISE CONCERNS THAT WE NEED TO REFINE THAT ESTIMATE, INCLUDE ONLY TRUE REPAIR COSTS, AND GET AN AN OBJECTIVE THIRD PARTY OPINION TO LOOK AT THOSE COSTS WITH NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST. IT'S FOR THOSE REASONS THAT I BELIEVE THIS IS THE REASONABLE PATH TO TAKE. IF WE DECIDE AT THE END OF THIS ADDITIONAL REVIEW PROCESS THAT WE CANNOT STAY IN CITY HALL, THEN WE CAN TAKE THIS MOTION UP. THERE IS NO REASON WHY WE CAN'T DEFER THIS FOR A FEW MONTHS, SO THAT WE ARE IN FULL POSSESSION OF THE ANSWERS TO THE MANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE ALL ASKED TONIGHT AND THAT ARE BURNING TO BE ANSWERED. AND SO THIS PUTS THINGS IN THE PROPER PERSPECTIVE TO TELL US WHAT THE TRUE COSTS OF STAYING WILL BE. AND THEN WE CAN COMPARE THAT APPLE WITH THE APPLES IN THE ORIGINAL MOTION IF IT IS ULTIMATELY APPROVED. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA ON THE MOTION TO DEFER BY MR. RIDLEY, RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AS SOME OF OUR RESIDENTS HAVE SAID I THINK VERY ACCURATELY NOTHING AT CITY HALL MOVES FAST. AND SOMETIMES IT'S EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING JUST TO GET THE ADMINISTRATION TO ACT ON THINGS THAT I DO BELIEVE ARE CRITICAL AND QUALITY OF LIFE IMPACTING. BUT IT SEEMS WHEN BILLIONAIRES KNOCK ON THE DOOR, WE MOVE A LITTLE FASTER. AND FOR THAT REASON, I AM NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS RUSHED DECISION. I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF A FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE DECISION. I AM NOT READY TO VOTE ON SOMETHING WHERE WE HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN ADEQUATE INFORMATION WITH TRUE APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISONS. I AM NOT READY TO MAKE A VOTE IF THE ONLY INFORMATION THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN IS BEEN COMMISSIONED BY PEOPLE WHO STAND TO BENEFIT FINANCIALLY ON THE OVERALL BIDDING OF THESE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS AND CALL IT WHAT IT IS, I'M CALLING BALLS AND BALLS AND STRIKES AND STRIKES, AND I KNOW IT MAKES SOME PEOPLE UNCOMFORTABLE, BUT THAT'S WHAT TRANSPARENCY IS SUPPOSED TO [03:50:04] DO. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BUILDING IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT. AND WE'VE BEEN LACKING IT A LOT THROUGH THIS PROCESS. I'M HOPING THAT GIVING A THIRD OPINION WOULD GIVE US SOME OBJECTIVITY, WOULD GIVE US ADEQUATE INFORMATION TO TRULY ANALYZE AND WEIGH OUT THE OPTIONS IN FRONT OF US, AND WOULD GIVE US THE ABILITY TO TALK TO OUR CONSTITUENTS. AND IN A MANNER THAT DOES EMPHASIZE THE ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY THAT THEY ELECTED US TO, TO GOVERN WITH TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE BUZZWORDS WHEN IT'S CAMPAIGN SEASON. AND I THINK I'VE HEARD IT FROM JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY HERE. THIS PROCESS DOES NOT HAVE TRANSPARENCY OR ACCOUNTABILITY. WE SHOULD BE PUMPING THE BRAKES. I WILL ADD THAT THERE IS THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, AND THERE IS A CLEAR TIMELINE FROM THAT ELEPHANT THAT THEY'VE SAID THEY HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION. IF WE ARE ON THE CITY OF DALLAS TIMELINE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY A DEFERRAL TO GET MORE INFORMATION WOULD BE A PROBLEM IF WE WERE ON THE MAVERICKS TIMELINE. I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WOULD BE AN ISSUE, BUT I'M WITH THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS AND I'M GOING TO BE VOTING FOR THIS DEFERRAL SO WE CAN GET THE RIGHT INFORMATION AND MAKE A SOUND DECISION. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. THANK YOU. CITY HALL IS NOT FOR SALE BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE WE'LL PROBABLY JUST GIVE IT AWAY IF WE ARE FORCED TO VOTE ON THIS MOTION. IF THIS MOTION PASSES. WHILE MANY PEOPLE WILL SAY, WELL, WE CAN ALWAYS TURN BACK LATER. I WILL TELL YOU, WE HAVE NEVER TURNED BACK. WE HAVE ALWAYS PAID OURSELVES INTO A CORNER. THAT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. IT'S ALWAYS LAYER BY LAYER BY LAYER, WHICH WE BURY OURSELVES. AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN. THIS LAND WILL BE CURSED. IT'LL HAUNT WHATEVER ORGANIZATION OCCUPIES THIS SPACE. AND WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT WE DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE STORY, BUT WE KNOW IT'S ALL BEING ORCHESTRATED AND IT'S TRYING TO SHIELD AN ORGANIZATION FROM BEING HATED FOR CAUSING AND TAKING OUR CITY HALL. THE PEOPLE CAN SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING AND THEY'RE NOT STUPID. AND IT'S WHY SO MANY PEOPLE, I THINK WE HAD 125 PLUS TODAY, AND MOST OF THE CITY DOESN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT THIS YET BECAUSE WE'VE ONLY HAD THIS REPORT FOR TEN DAYS. BUT PEOPLE CAME OUT HERE WITH PASSION AND THEY DID IT FOR A REASON. THE BEST THING WE COULD DO IS START NEGOTIATING WITH THE MAVERICKS FOR VALLEY VIEW. IT WOULD BE THE WIN FOR THE CITY. EVERY PART OF THE CITY. OTHERWISE YOU THINK YOU'RE DRIVING FAR TO GO TO VALLEY VIEW. LET ME TELL YOU, YOU'RE GOING TO BE DRIVING TO FRISCO. TAKE THE WIN. DOWNTOWN DOES NEED MORE HOUSING UNITS. I AGREE WITH YOU. IT ALSO NEEDS MORE POLICE. IT NEEDS STREETS THAT AREN'T TORN UP. IT NEEDS HOMELESS ENFORCEMENT. BUT A STADIUM WILL NEVER FIX DOWNTOWN. BECAUSE, BY THE WAY, WE'VE ALREADY HAD TWO. AND WE HAVE THESE PROBLEMS. SO CLEARLY THE STADIUM IS NOT THE ANSWER. I HOPE THE MAVERICKS REALIZE HOW THEY WILL BE HAUNTED IF THEY TOOK THIS LAND. WE'RE BROKE FOLKS. WE TALK ABOUT THIS AT THE BUDGET ALMOST EVERY SINGLE YEAR. I MEAN, I THINK YOU HELD UP A BOAT. I HELD UP A BOX WITH MONEY ON IT THAT SAID, THANKS A BILLION, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT WE HAD A BILLION MORE REVENUE. AND THAT WAS ONLY AT YEAR FIVE. WE'RE NOW AT YEAR SEVEN, SO WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DEBT. WE HAVE NO ADDITIONAL BOND CAPACITY. WE HAVE ONE OF THE HIGHEST TAX RATES. WE HAVE A 3.5% STATE MANDATED CAP. OUR RESERVES ARE ONLY EXACTLY WHERE THEY OUGHT TO BE. IT'S NOT LIKE WE HAVE SOME MASSIVE I DON'T THINK A TAX ELECTION WOULD PASS AND I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT IT. WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER TIFF TAKING REVENUE FROM OUR GENERAL FUND. I'M NOT LOOKING TO GIVE PEOPLE MORE INCENTIVES AND ABATEMENTS TO COST US $1 BILLION TO MOVE OUT OF A BUILDING THAT I'M SORRY, IS SUITABLE FOR GOVERNMENT. AND IF YOU THINK THAT GOVERNMENT WORK DESERVES THE THE FOUR SEASONS, YOU'RE WRONG. THE BATHROOMS IN THIS PLACE THAT SOME OF THE ARE EVEN PICTURES. YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY'RE WAY BETTER THAN THE BATHROOMS AT TERMINAL C IN THE AIRPORT. GOVERNMENT WAS NOT MEANT TO BE THE FOUR SEASONS. IT SHOULD BE SAFE. IT SHOULD BE SUITABLE. THERE COULD BE FANCY SECTIONS OF IT, HOPEFULLY THAT THOSE ARE FOR THE PUBLIC. BUT THERE'S THERE'S THIS IDEA HERE THAT WE'RE COMPETING WITH THE MOST ELITE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE GOLDMAN SACHS. WE'RE NOT THAT'S NOT WHO OUR COMPETITION IS. SO I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, I FEEL LIKE THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN A BETRAYAL OF THE PUBLIC TRUST. [03:55:06] WE HAVE MAJOR PROJECTS, MAJOR ISSUES, AND INSTEAD WE HAVE DIVERTED ALL OF STAFF'S ATTENTION, ALL OF OUR ATTENTION, THE PUBLIC'S ATTENTION TO THIS PROCESS. FOR WHAT? WHY CAN'T WE SAY THE TRUTH OF WHAT? WHAT ARE WE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT? I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING AT CITY HALL RUSH LIKE THIS. PEOPLE RECOGNIZE THE FIXES IN WHEN THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING. WE'VE HAD INCOMPLETE DATA, WE'VE HAD INADEQUATE DATA, AND WE'VE HAD AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF SECRECY. SOMEHOW WE WENT FROM WE NEED $36 MILLION TO A BILLION. THE $36 MILLION WE DIDN'T EVEN GET A BRIEFING ON. WE GOT AN AMENDMENT FROM A COUNCIL MEMBER OF WHICH ONLY THREE OUT OF 15 VOTED FOR THIS THING ON THE LAST HOUR OF THE LAST DAY OF A YEAR LONG BOND PROCESS. WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT PROJECTS WERE GOING TO BE CANCELED. THEY PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN MINE AND RETRIBUTION, BUT THAT'S A FACT. WE DIDN'T HAVE THE INFORMATION AND WE DIDN'T NEED MORE DEBT TO FIX CITY HALL. WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO WAS USE ARPA MONEY, WHICH WAS SITTING IN AN ACCOUNT OR BUDGET PROPERLY. IN OUR GENERAL FUND, WHICH REPEATEDLY WE'VE ASKED FOR, SOMEONE BROUGHT UP THE FMPC. I BRING THAT UP EVERY SINGLE YEAR. WE FAIL THAT WE HAVE NEVER MET IT. WE ARE NOT BUDGETING TO MAINTAIN OUR FACILITIES, I CHALLENGE US. WE MUST DO THAT THIS YEAR. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. BECAUSE SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW. AND AGAIN, IT FEELS LIKE WE'RE JUST TALKING OUT OF BOTH SIDES ON ONE SIDE, AND I GET THEIR CONCERNS AND ALL OF THAT, BUT I JUST WE STARTED THIS PROCESS. STAFF CAME WITH SOME NUMBERS. WE DIDN'T LIKE THOSE NUMBERS. LET'S GET AN OUTSIDE. AND THEN WE CAME. WE GOT THE OUTSIDE. THEN WE, YOU KNOW, CRITICIZED THEIR INTENTIONS BEHIND ALL OF THIS STUFF. WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. AND SOMETIMES WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE DECISIONS FASTER THAN NORMAL, THAT IS, I BELIEVE, THE CITY MANAGER TRYING TO DO WHAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO EXECUTE. WE SPEND TIME TALKING AND TALKING AND TALKING OR AKA KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD THAT NOTHING HAPPENS. SO SOMETIMES I JUST WANT US TO TAKE A STEP BACK. ALL OF THESE ISSUES AND CONCERNS WE BROUGHT UP FROM THE AUDIENCE, FROM THE PROFESSIONALS, FROM THE COUNCIL, ARE ALL LEGITIMATE CONCERNS. BUT AS WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD, IT MAY FEEL A LITTLE BIT UNCOMFORTABLE BECAUSE IT'S MOVING FASTER THAN WHAT IT NORMALLY HAS. I THINK WE'VE GONE THROUGH ALL THE STEPS AND WE'RE TRYING TO CONTINUE THOSE STEPS TO MAKE A DECISION SO THAT WE CAN MOVE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS BECAUSE THE FIRST MOTION GIVES US THE ABILITY TO DO IT. AND YES, IT IS UNCOMFORTABLE BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A BIG DECISION, BUT I THINK IT'S NECESSARY, AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO KEEP US MOVING. AND I THINK WHATEVER WE'RE FEELING THAT'S CAUSING US TO GET OUT OF THE HEAD, THE CONSPIRACIES, BUT WHATEVER IT IS THAT'S MAKING US WANT TO SLOW DOWN, LET'S KIND OF ASSESS THAT AND SEE, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS KEEP THIS THING MOVING SO WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION. OTHERWISE NOTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN. TWO YEARS FROM NOW, WE'LL BE HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS AGAIN. THAT PART WE KNOW IS TRUE BECAUSE FOOTBALL GUY, THAT'S OUR SCOUTING REPORT. OUR SCOUTING REPORT SAYS WE'LL GO AROUND THE HORSESHOE A HORSESHOE, HORSESHOE, HORSESHOE AND WE'LL NEVER MAKE A DECISION. THIS IS MOVING US IN THAT DIRECTION. SO OR NOT THIS MOTION, BUT THE OTHER ONE. SO I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS MOTION FOR THAT REASON BECAUSE IT WILL JUST BE YET ANOTHER DELAY. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN WILLIS, ACTUALLY, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION TO DELAY. WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THIS AS AN INSPIRATION. I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY WE LOST YOUR VIDEO. WE NEED TO GET IT BACK. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS AS AN EXPLORATION AS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD DO WHEN YOU HAVE A BIG DECISION TO MAKE, WHICH THIS IS A BIG DECISION. SO WE HAVE GOTTEN THE EXPERTISE OF SEVERAL FIRMS TO ASSIST US OBJECTIVE, CREDIBLE, REPUTABLE. AND WE NEED TO TAKE THAT AND STUDY IT. AS I HAVE STUDIED IT, I'VE ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS. I'VE HAD MEETINGS WITH THAT TEAM. I'VE TALKED TO OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE. AND SO I CANNOT SUPPORT A DELAY BECAUSE I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP OUR PROCESS MOVING DUE TO THE MARKET. IF PEOPLE STILL HAVE QUESTIONS AND THEY WANT TO FIND TURN OVER THAT INFORMATION AND GET ADDITIONAL OPINIONS, THAT'S FINE. BUT WE'RE NOT JUST CHANGING THE TEAM TO GET TO AN OUTCOME THAT SOME PEOPLE WANT. [04:00:02] THIS HAS BEEN OPEN. IT HAS BEEN TRANSPARENT. ALL OF THOSE DOCUMENTS ARE ON THE WEBSITE. THERE HAVE BEEN PUBLIC MEETINGS. MY GOODNESS. WE HAD ABOUT 85 SPEAKERS TODAY IN THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE. IF WE LEAVE 1500, MARILLA, WE WILL STILL HAVE A PEOPLE'S PLACE TO CONVENE. WE WILL STILL HAVE A PLAZA THAT WILL NEVER GO AWAY. BUT I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT A DELAY WHEN WE NEED TO KEEP CONCURRENT PATHS GOING. AND SO THANK YOU, MISS BLACKMON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S MORE FOR. I THINK IT'S MORE FOR STAFF. IS IT ALMOST OVER? NO. I DIDN'T I DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION, SO I DIDN'T KNOW. I KNOW I WAS WAITING FOR DENZEL, SO. DENZEL, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT WE HAVE FROM THE CONSULTANTS RIGHT NOW? WHAT? WHAT IS IN YOUR MIND OR WHAT IS IT? IT IS JUST AN ASSESSMENT, CORRECT? ABSOLUTELY. THEY WERE GIVEN THE CHARGE, THE NOVEMBER RESOLUTION THAT YOU GUYS PASSED AND THAT WAS PASSED ON TO LINDA MCMAHON, WHO USED THAT AS THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES BY WHICH THE TEAM WAS SUPPOSED TO ACTUALLY GO OUT AND PROVIDE THOSE DELIVERABLES. THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED EARLIER THAT THERE'S A MICRO SITE AND ALL OF THOSE REPORTS. AND AGAIN, THE THE NIGHT WE SENT OUT THE BRIEFING OUT ON THE 23RD, WE'VE UPDATED IT SINCE THEN. THERE'S SOME OTHER REPORTS THAT ARE OUT THERE, BUT THE WHOLE RECORD OF THEIR WORK THE REPORTS ARE ALL OUT THERE FOR THE PUBLIC. SO IT'S MORE OF AN EVALUATION, I THINK. ABSOLUTELY. IT WAS AN EVALUATION REQUESTED BY COUNCIL. MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION IS TALKING ABOUT A MASTER PLAN, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT NEEDS YOU TO DEFINE IT OR WHETHER, BUT CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVALUATION AND A MASTER PLAN? I WOULD, I WOULD HATE TO SPECULATE WITHOUT FURTHER CONSULTATION FROM COUNCILMAN. RIDLEY. MY UNDERSTANDING OF MASTER PLAN AND HIS DEFINITION, I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE ON THE SAME PAGE AS IT RELATES TO WHAT THAT MEANS. I MEAN, IT'S NOT JUST PRICING. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ASSESSMENT OF CONDITIONS, PRIORITIZING FUNDING AND TIMELINES. SO IT'S NOT JUST GOING AND LOOKING AT HOW MUCH IS IT GOING TO COST TO FIX THE PIPES IS FROM WHAT I'M READING. SO I THINK IT'S A MORE COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH AS TO WHAT THIS BUILDING IS, IS. AND YOU CAN NOD, MR. RIDLEY, IF THAT'S YOUR DIRECTION. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT IS DESIRED AND DESERVED AND EXPECTED FROM OUR RESIDENTS IS TO NOT JUST HAVE AN EVALUATION. AND THAT'S THE WORD THAT Y'ALL PUT IN YOUR RESOLUTION ON OR THAT WE VOTED ON FOR NOVEMBER 12TH IS EVALUATION. AND IT'S SIX MONTHS LONG. I THINK THAT'S A FAIR AMOUNT TO GET A MASTER PLAN THAT TALKS ABOUT FUNDING ASSESSMENTS AND PRIORITIZATION. IF THIS FAILS, I AM HOPING THAT THEN MAYBE WE CAN GET IT INTO THE MAIN MOTION AS ANOTHER COMPONENT, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A FAIR LOOK AT HOW TO FIX THIS BUILDING, NOT JUST AN EVALUATION. I'VE BEEN AT THIS PLACE FOR A LONG TIME, AND IT TOOK US THREE MONTHS TO GET THE CLOCK CHANGED IN THE BREAK ROOM. ACTUALLY FIVE MONTHS, I THINK. MISS MENDELSOHN. AND YOU ORDERED THE CLOCK YOURSELF. AND I THINK YOU EVEN TRIED TO HANG IT UP TO HAVE THIS GO FROM NOVEMBER OF WHAT WE HEARD AT FIRST ONE, BUT MAYBE NOT. MAYBE EARLIER, I DON'T KNOW. ALL I KNOW IS THAT THIS PLACE MOVES AT THE SPEED OF THE TITANIC. IT DOESN'T MOVE OR TURNS AT THE SPEED OF, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S A LATE DAY. SO MY QUESTION IS IF YOU'RE GOING TO COME BACK IN IN IN AUGUST, COULD YOU EVEN DO A MASTER PLAN IF WE ASKED YOU TO SOONER? SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE HAD AN OUTLINE OF ALL THE DELIVERABLES AND MORE CLARITY TIED TO THEM, BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T WANT TO GO OUT ON A VENTURE AND GET SOME WORK DONE, AND THEN LATER ON COME BACK AND YOU GUYS DECIDE THAT THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE FIT, YOU KNOW, FORGIVE ME, I'LL SAY THIS. THERE'S 15 OF YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE FIT EVERYBODY'S CRITERIA. SO AS LONG AS WE HAVE SOME DEFINED DELIVERABLES, WHETHER IT'S ONE MONTH OR SIX MONTHS, WHATEVER THAT WOULD TAKE TO GET IT DONE PROPERLY, WE COULD GET THAT DONE. WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE GOOD DIRECTION FROM YOU GUYS ABOUT AND ANY SPECIFICITY THAT YOU COULD GIVE US THAT WOULD HELP US DRILL DOWN. BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE HIRING ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS, A LOT OF WHAT THEY DO AND A LOT OF THEIR STANDARDS ARE BASED ON SPECIFICITY. AND THE MORE WE GET, THE THE MORE LOCALIZED WE CAN GET YOU A DELIVERABLE. AND WE STILL HAVE ARPA MONEY LEFT OVER FOR CITY HALL, RIGHT? I'D HAVE TO HAVE JACK IRELAND HELP ME WITH THAT. I'M NOT REALLY SURE HOW MUCH ARPA MONEY IS LEFT FOR CITY HALL, BECAUSE, I MEAN, WE COULD USE THAT MONEY TO HELP TO HELP DEVELOP THIS MASTER PLAN. [04:05:07] JACK'S COMING. I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE FUNDING. YES, MA'AM. THERE WAS SOME ARPA MONEY THAT HAS BEEN PAUSED UNTIL THE DECISION IS MADE ON THE DIRECTION WE'RE TAKING. BUT THERE WAS SOME ARPA MONEY LEFT ALLOCATED FOR CITY HALL. OKAY. AND IT COULD BE USED FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS. THIS IS AN ELIGIBLE EXPENSE. IT'S IT'S RESERVED FOR CITY HALL AT THIS POINT FOR IMPROVEMENTS. AND IT'S BEING USED FOR DIRECTION RELATED TO THIS BUILDING. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, MR. ROTH. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I REALLY AM TERRIFICALLY IMPRESSED WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY'S SUGGESTION. I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY A REALLY THAT'S THIS IS A PERFECT SOLUTION TO A VERY COMPLICATED PROBLEM HERE. I'M REALLY CONCERNED. I SORT OF HAVE BEEN OUT THERE CAMPAIGNING THAT WE HAVE TO REPRESENT OUR RESIDENTS. I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE ALL ARE FOCUSED ON. AND THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN COMING INTO TO THIS CHAMBER TO EXPRESS THAT IS A REAL CONCERN OF MINE, THAT WE NEED THAT WE'RE WE'VE GOT TO REPRESENT THESE FOLKS AND WE'VE GOT TO LISTEN TO THEM. AND I THINK THE THE OPPORTUNITY THAT COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY IS GIVING US IS TO REALLY SORT OF GET MORE INFORMATION TOGETHER, MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THIS THE RIGHT WAY AND GIVING US A TIMELINE THAT REQUIRES US TO COME BACK AND REALLY HAVE A PLAN. AND I THINK THE, THE, THE CRITICAL WORD HERE IS A PLAN WHICH WE DO NOT HAVE. AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PLAN, THEN THE PLAN IS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO FAIL. AND I THINK WE NEED TO CREATE THAT PLAN. AND AND YOU CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT HAVING A TIMELINE, WITHOUT HAVING THE INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY, WITHOUT HAVING MORE DETAIL ON WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. WE'RE A WE'RE A $5.2 BILLION COMPANY. DECISIONS ON RELOCATING AND DECIDING WHAT YOU'RE DOING WITH YOUR HEADQUARTERS ARE NOT DONE BY BIG COMPANIES. IN SHORT, LITTLE TIME. IF WE WANT TO BE A BIG COMPANY, WE WANT TO ACT. THEN WE GOTTA ACT LIKE A BIG COMPANY. WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AT THIS STRATEGICALLY. WE'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT THIS PROPERLY, AND WE'VE GOT TO HAVE A PLAN. THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE HAVE TO MOVE. THE QUESTION IS, DO WE NEED TO MOVE? WE DON'T. THE BUILDING IS NOT FALLING DOWN. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS STABLE. WE'RE NOT. WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH OUR. OUR SPACE SIZE. WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY ANYWAY. WE GOT TO FIGURE THAT OUT, TOO. THE FACT THAT THERE'S THAT IT COULD ECONOMICALLY BENEFIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN DOING SOMETHING ELSE IS GREAT, BUT THAT'S HYPOTHETICAL. I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WE'RE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE DOING. THIS THE THIS MEETING FOLLOWED. IT'S FOLLOWING AN ACCELERATED PROCESS. THAT'S THAT'S RAISED SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS. THE INFORMATION REGARDING COST ESTIMATES AND POTENTIAL RELOCATION CONCEPTS HAS BEEN RELEASED ON A COMPRESSED TIMELINE, LEAVING BOTH ALL OF US AS COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC, WITH LIMITED OPPORTUNITY TO FULLY REVIEW THE DETAILS OF WHAT'S BEING PROCESSED AND WHY WHEN DECISIONS OF THIS MAGNITUDE ARE PLACED ON A FAST TRACK. IT IS FAIR TO ASK WHAT IS DRIVING THE URGENCY? TO BE TO BE, YOU KNOW, FUNDAMENTALLY CLEAR. I MEAN, THE ELEPHANT IS IN THE ROOM IS THE MAVERICKS. AND, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT IT'S THEIR DECISION TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. I'M HAPPY AS A AS A REPRESENTATIVE FOR VALLEY VIEW, FOR THE VALLEY VIEW SITE. I'M IN DISTRICT 11. I WANT TO BE THE FIRST ONE TO SAY THAT. THAT WE ARE ABSOLUTELY WELCOMING THEM TO THAT LOCATION WITH OPEN ARMS. IT'S A SHOVEL READY SITE. WE CAN GET THEM IN, IT CAN GET DONE. AND WE DON'T HAVE TO BE WORRYING ABOUT THAT. THAT IS NOT GOING TO ADVERSELY IMPACT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA. AND AND I THINK THAT THERE'S THIS IS NOT WE ARE NOT IN A WEAK POSITION. WE ARE NOT IN A DESPERATE POSITION. WE ARE NOT IN AN URGENT POSITION. WE NEED TO BE THOUGHTFUL. WE NEED TO BE PAYING ATTENTION. [04:10:01] AND WE'VE GOT TO DO THIS RIGHT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $1 BILLION. THAT'S RIDICULOUS. YOU DON'T MAKE DECISIONS ON ANYTHING. THAT'S $1 BILLION WITH TWO WEEKS, THREE WEEKS NOTICE. AND I'LL TELL YOU SOMETHING. THE CONSULTANTS THAT WE'VE HAD, THE FOLKS THAT HAVE MADE PRESENTATIONS, HAVE DONE THE JOB WE ASKED THEM TO DO. AND I THINK THEY'VE BEEN FORTHRIGHT AND THEY'VE BEEN TRYING TO GIVE US WHAT WE WANT. BUT I DON'T THINK WE KNOW WHAT WE WANT. AND I THINK THERE'S MORE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE. AND I THINK PAUL COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY HAS HAS HELPED US DEFINE THE PLAN THAT WE NEED TO PURSUE. AND I WOULD ABSOLUTELY RECOMMEND THAT THIS GROUP VOTE FOR ALLOWING THIS DEFERRAL SO WE CAN GET THIS THING BACK ON TRACK AND GET TO A POINT WHERE WE CAN MAKE AN EXCELLENT DECISION. THANK YOU. MR. CADENA. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. SO I WAS AT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, BUT I WASN'T ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS BECAUSE I HAD TO LEAVE EARLIER. SO DO WE HAVE A LIST OF THE PRIORITIZATION OF MOST CRITICAL NEEDS ALREADY? THAT'S THE SECOND POINT OF THE POINT OF ORDER. WE'RE DISCUSSING THE MOTION TO DELAY. I DIDN'T HEAR IT. IT'S ON. IT'S PART OF I DIDN'T HEAR THE I DIDN'T EVEN HEAR WHAT SHE SAID. SO I CAN'T I CAN'T HONESTLY RULE ON IT. I COULDN'T HEAR WHAT DID YOU WHAT DID YOU SAY. SO I CAN SO I CAN OVERRULE HIS POINT OF ORDER. JUST KIDDING. JUST KIDDING. THERE'S A LIST ON THE MOTION, AND I'M WONDERING IF NUMBER TWO, IF WE ALREADY HAVE THAT, THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE. IF IT'S ON IN THE IF IT'S IN THE MOTION, THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE SUSTAINED. SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SAY IT'S OVERRULED. AND YOU CAN KEEP GOING OKAY. IF IT'S ON THE PIECE OF PAPER THAT YOU'RE YEAH YEAH. YOU'RE OKAY. SO IT'S IT'S. KEEP GOING. IS. CAN STAFF ANSWER THAT QUESTION? I WASN'T IN IN. I'LL ANSWER IT. NO, WE DO NOT. WHAT WE HAVE IS THE FULL ASSESSMENT THAT WAS COMPLETED THAT HAS BEEN SHARED. OKAY. BUT THERE'S IS THERE A PRIORITIZATION OR. NO. BASED ON THE WAY I THINK WE'VE HEARD THE ANSWER FROM THE TECHNICAL TEAM SEVERAL DIFFERENT TIMES. IT WAS PRETTY MUCH THE OVERALL. HERE'S THE WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. IT WOULD BE UP TO US IF WE IF THIS COUNCIL DECIDED THAT YOU ONLY WANTED TO DO CERTAIN THINGS, BUT THEY RECOMMENDED ALL IN ON THE BASED ON THE EVALUATION AND THE WAY THAT THEY HAVE PRESENTED THEIR PROPOSED WHAT THEY BELIEVE WOULD BE IN OUR BEST INTEREST. OKAY. AND THEN, JACK, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE FUNDING STRATEGY, WHICH IS NUMBER THREE ON HERE. WOULD CAN WE USE CONTINGENCY CONTINGENCY FUNDS FOR THAT? I'M SORRY. THE QUESTION AGAIN FOR NUMBER THREE ON MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION. WOULD WE BE ABLE TO USE CONTINGENCY FUNDS FOR THAT? YOU'LL HAVE TO TELL ME WHAT NUMBER THREE SAYS. IT'S A FUNDING STRATEGY FOR THE MODERNIZATION AND IMPROVEMENTS OF DALLAS CITY HALL PLAZA, DALLAS CITY HALL AND THE PLAZA. THANK YOU. SO, CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUNDS WAS YOUR QUESTION. SO THE CITY COUNCIL CAN MAKE AN ALLOCATION OUT OF CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUNDS FOR UNBUDGETED ITEMS AT YOUR DISCRETION? PRETTY MUCH. WHAT ITEMS WOULD FALL UNDER THAT? IS IT. CAN YOU BE A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC? SO TYPICALLY WE USE CONTINGENCY RESERVE FOR ITEMS THAT ARE PROGRAMS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO IMPLEMENT MIDYEAR THAT ARE NOT BUDGETED. SO THEY IT CAN BE FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF THINGS. SO. LET'S LET'S LET US READ THE RESOLUTION OR THE PROPOSAL. SO YES, THE FUNDS COULD BE USED FOR ASSESSMENTS ASSESSING CRITICAL NEEDS, DEVELOPING FUNDING STRATEGIES, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. OKAY. AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS THE TIMELINE. DOES STAFF SEE AN ISSUE WITH WITH THE DATE THAT MR. RIDLEY PROVIDED? WILL THAT HINDER ANY OF THE WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE? I'LL JUST JUMP IN IF I IF I MAY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLY ON, AND I THINK I'VE MADE THIS COMMENT BEFORE WE STARTED WORKING ON THE CITY'S UPCOMING ANNUAL BUDGET RIGHT AFTER WE FINISHED THE APPROVAL OF THE LAST BUDGET, STARTING IN NOVEMBER, BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT IS REQUIRED, WE CAN'T COMPRESS THAT OVER THE MONTHS. DURING THE SUMMER, AS WE THINK ABOUT WHATEVER DECISION THAT THE COUNCIL MAKES. WAITING UNTIL AUGUST. FROM MY OPINION, WE HAVE ALREADY DEVELOPED A BUDGET, AND OUR BUDGET IS A TWO YEAR BY YEAR BUDGET THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE [04:15:03] PREPLANNING FOR ANY TYPES OF RESOURCES THAT WE NEED. AS WE GO INTO THIS UPCOMING BUDGET YEAR, YOU'RE GOING TO GET AN UPDATE FROM US IN APRIL WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE WE'RE STARTING GOING INTO THE BUDGET CYCLE NOW AND THE, THE, THE, THE GAP THAT WE ALREADY KNOW THAT WE'RE ALREADY PROJECTING. SO MY HOPE WOULD BE IF COUNCIL REALLY DOES WANT US TO BEGIN TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES, NO MATTER WHICH DIRECTION THAT YOU GO, WAITING UNTIL AUGUST DOES NOT GIVE US ANY CAPACITY TO BE ABLE TO START THINKING ABOUT THAT FROM A BUDGETARY PERSPECTIVE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT US TO DO. SO IT'S AFTER BECAUSE WE TYPICALLY PROVIDE YOU WITH THE BUDGET FOR YOUR ANNUAL BUDGET BY THE SECOND. I WANT TO SAY IT'S THE SECOND WEEK OF AUGUST. AND SO ANYTHING LATER THAN THAT IS AFTER I'VE ACTUALLY DEVELOPED THE BUDGET FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION AND FOLLOW UP QUESTION. SO DO WE USUALLY DO MAJOR REPAIRS LIKE ON BUILDING CITY BUILDINGS THROUGH THE BUDGET, OR IS THAT TYPICALLY THROUGH BOND? WE ACTUALLY HAVE A MAJOR MAINTENANCE LINE ITEM THAT WE WE TRY TO INCLUDE FOR JUST ANNUAL. WE KNOW THAT SOMETIMES THERE ARE REPAIRS THAT ARE NEEDED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. SOME OF THOSE REPAIRS COULD END UP BEING EMERGENCIES, A REC CENTER, SOMETHING GOES DOWN THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME FUNDING. I WANT TO SAY IN THIS CURRENT OPERATING BUDGET FOR 26, IS IT ROUGHLY 1314 MILLION? JACK CAN CONFIRM THAT NUMBER. AND WE CAN DEFINITELY SHARE WITH YOU EVEN WITH THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE THIS YEAR, THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE ALREADY THAT WE'RE PLANNING, WHAT DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ITEMS THAT ARE ALREADY INCORPORATED IN WHAT'S IN THE CURRENT BUDGET. BUT WE DO TRY TO HAVE A LINE ITEM. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL RECALL, BUT IN LAST YEAR, IN JUNE, WE CAME WITH A FULL DEFERRED MAINTENANCE DISCUSSION. WE TALKED ABOUT OUR CURRENT NEEDS AND WHAT WE WANTED TO START DOING THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS AND HOW WE WANTED TO BEGIN TO DO THAT THIS YEAR. SO I KNOW WE INCREASED THE LINE ITEM IN THE CURRENT BUDGET SO WE CAN BEGIN TO START ADDRESSING DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ISSUES. AND AS COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN MENTIONED EARLIER, NOT JUST HERE, BUT AT ALL OF OUR OTHER CITY FACILITIES. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MISS. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS MOTION WITH THE DATE OF 831 EIGHT. AUGUST 31ST, 2026 WILL BE IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUDGET SEASON AND WILL BE TOO DISTRACTED WITH BUDGET SHENANIGANS THAT ONCE AGAIN WILL KICK THIS CAN DOWN ANOTHER ROAD. TO CHANGE OUR FOCUS AND TO NOT MOVE AHEAD IS A TRAVESTY. THIS IS ANOTHER DELAY TACTIC THAT PLACES US IN ANOTHER PRECARIOUS POSITION AND IS ABOUT THAT. THAT IS ABOUT SAFETY AND BEING TECHNOLOGICALLY POSITIVE FOR OUR 911311 AND EOC. THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY PLACE DECIDED THAT I'VE THAT'S BEEN SHARED WITH ME. SO TO SAY THAT THERE HAS BEEN IS INTERESTING, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING THAT IT'S BEEN IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR MALL THAT'S FULL OF CRIME. I THINK THAT THAT, AGAIN, IS ANOTHER DELAY TACTIC AND A SCARE TACTIC TO SAY, LET'S NOT MOVE FORWARD. WE'RE NOT ASKING TO MAKE A TRUE DETERMINATION, BUT TO EXPLORE RELOCATION, TO EXPLORE OPTIONS AND AND NOT TO MAKE A FIRM DECISION. SO FOR THAT REASON, I CANNOT, I CANNOT I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS DELAY TACTIC. AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR LETTING US MOVE FORWARD AND NOT STAND STILL. MR. RESENDEZ RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I AGREE WITH WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY WANTS TO DO IN ITEMS ONE, TWO, THREE AND FOUR. BUT I, I ALSO THINK THAT THAT CAN BE DONE WHILE AGREEING TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS THAT RIDLEY'S MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION REFERENCES. I MEAN, THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION DIRECTS THE CITY MANAGER'S MANAGER TO EXPLORE MOVING 311911 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS. IT DIRECTS STAFF TO EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR RELOCATING OTHER CITY HALL FUNCTIONS. IT DIRECTS THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPLORE REDEVELOPMENT OPTIONS. ALMOST EVERYONE AGREES THAT WE DON'T YET HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE A FINAL DECISION. YET MANY PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY MADE UP THEIR MINDS ABOUT WHAT THE OUTCOME SHOULD BE. THAT OBSERVATION APPLIES TO PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE DEBATE. AT EVERY STEP OF THIS PROCESS, I VOTED TO MOVE FORWARD SO THAT WE CAN GATHER MORE INFORMATION AND BETTER UNDERSTAND THE OPTIONS BEFORE US. [04:20:07] THAT IS PRUDENT GOVERNANCE. I CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR MYSELF, BUT NO FINAL DECISION HAS BEEN MADE ABOUT DEMOLITION. NO FINAL DECISION HAS BEEN MADE ABOUT SELLING THE SITE. NO FINAL DECISION HAS BEEN MADE ABOUT ABANDONING THE BUILDING. IF I HAD TO VOTE TODAY TO DEMOLISH CITY HALL, I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR. HOWEVER, IT'S DIFFICULT FOR ME TO OPPOSE GATHERING MORE INFORMATION BEFORE MAKING A FINAL DECISION. I THINK THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO ADDRESS THIS IS TO VOTE DOWN THIS MOTION AND THEN MOVE TO INCLUDE WHAT MR. RIDLEY WANTS, WITHOUT DEFERRING THE ORIGINAL ITEM. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. NO. NO. AND SOMEONE ELSE WAS IN THE QUEUE? NO. OKAY. YOU'RE OKAY. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. THANK YOU. SO I GUESS I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. ON WHAT? THE MOTION. I KNOW THAT THE MOTION HAS GONE THROUGH A COUPLE ITERATIONS OF LANGUAGE TODAY. AND THE ORIGINAL MOTION WAS A DIRECTIVE AND THE WORDS WERE DIRECT. I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY WE WOULD EVEN NEED TO TAKE ACTION ON EXPLORE. AND SO I AM JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN GET SOME GUIDANCE ON FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, BECAUSE JUST AS I SAID FROM THE FIRST ROUND, I 100% WILLING TO GET MORE INFORMATION. BUT I'M ALSO CURIOUS AS TO TO MR. RESENDEZ POINT, WHY IT WOULD EVEN BE NECESSARY WITHOUT ANY BUDGETARY ACTION FOR US TO GET TAKE ACTION FOR YOU TO EXPLORE. I MEAN, I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU. SEEMS LIKE THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND STAFF EXPLORES THINGS ALL THE TIME. WITHOUT CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECT ACTION THAT THAT TELLS YOU TO DO THAT. AND THAT'S WHY THINGS ARE BROUGHT TO US TO CONSIDER ACTUALLY TAKING VOTES. SO IF THE CITY MANAGER CAN EXPLAIN TO US WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IN AN ACTION TO EXPLORE SOMETHING. BEFORE YOU ANSWER, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I NEED TO KNOW THIS BEFORE I KNOW IF I WANT TO. I'M I'M TRYING TO I DON'T WANT TO GET BROADER, SO I'M JUST GOING TO TRY TO BOUND IT A LITTLE BIT BY SAYING SO WE ARE ON THE MOTION TO DEFER, NOT THE ORIGINAL MOTION. BUT I'M GOING TO SAY THAT BECAUSE I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE THE ORIGINAL, ESPECIALLY TO CONSIDER WITH WITH WHAT MR. RESENDEZ SAID, BECAUSE I'M NOT 100% OPPOSED TO WHAT HE JUST LAID OUT AS FAR AS IT BEING INCLUDED. BUT I'M STILL NOT UNDERSTANDING EVEN THE NEED FOR WHAT THAT UNDERLYING MOTION SAYS. I'M TRYING TO FRAME THIS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE DEBATE TWICE ON THE UNDERLYING MOTION. SO TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU NEED TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY WHETHER OR NOT YOU'D BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION TO DEFER. MADAM CITY MANAGER, ANSWER THE QUESTION, BUT I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE DEBATE TWICE ON THE UNDERLYING MERITS OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION. WELL, AND TO BE TO BE FAIR TO MR. RESENDEZ POINT AND TO MY POINT IN SAYING THAT I DON'T OPPOSE THAT. I DON'T KNOW THAT TAKING UP MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION WOULD PROHIBIT US OR PROHIBIT YOU FROM EXPLORING. I MEAN, I HAVE EMAILS THAT SHOWS YOU ARE EXPLORING THINGS THAT WE BEFORE WE TOOK ANY ACTION ON. SO I'M ASKING YOU WHY YOU NEED DIRECTION FROM US TO EXPLORE SOMETHING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. WE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT CAME FROM COUNSEL ABOUT POTENTIAL OPTIONS IN THE MARKET. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE COMMUNICATED BACK TO ALL OF YOU. IS THAT THE ONLY THING THAT WE HAD DONE AS IT RELATES TO THE MARKET WAS ASKED FOR PROPOSALS, BUT THERE HAD NOT BEEN ANY DIRECT ENGAGEMENT BEYOND THAT, AND THAT IF COUNCIL WANTED ADDITIONAL DETAILS AND WANTED TO GET TO ADDITIONAL COST FACTORS AND WORK MORE DIRECTLY WITH POTENTIAL OPTIONS, THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT, BECAUSE THAT WOULD THAT WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE US TALKING MORE AND PEOPLE WOULD BE PUTTING TOGETHER THINGS IN A MORE DIRECT WAY VERSUS JUST RESPONDING TO HERE IT IS WITHOUT ANY DETAILS. SO ARE YOU ENTERING IN NEGOTIATIONS? SO AS WE HAVE ASKED FOR COUNCIL TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE ON THE WAY, YOU WOULD LIKE FOR US TO PROCEED. [04:25:03] SO IF THE GUIDANCE IS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE FOR US TO EXPLORE. I'M ASKING YOU WHAT EXPLORE MEANS. EXPLORE IS, IN MY OPINION, THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS FROM THE MARKET ENGAGEMENT THAT WE DO NOT HAVE. IN ORDER FOR US TO GO AND DO THAT, WE WOULD HAVE TO DIG A LITTLE BIT MORE AND ACTUALLY HAVE CBRE, WHO'S CURRENTLY RETAINED BY THE CITY, TO ENGAGE IN MORE, DEEPER CONVERSATIONS REGARDING THOSE POTENTIAL OPTIONS. WE DID NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT. IS YOUR EXPECTATION FOR THEM TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS TO BRING BACK TO US? IN ORDER FOR MY UNDERSTANDING ON COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA, AND I'M NOT THE MARKET CONSULTANT OR THE BROKER, BUT IT WAS OUR UNDERSTANDING AND I THINK THIS WAS COMMUNICATED QUITE EXTENSIVELY DURING THE CLOSED SESSION. AND I WON'T GO INTO A LOT OF THOSE DETAILS. I JUST WOULD PREFER, BUT YES OR NO QUESTION, BUT I JUST I'M DOING I'M DOING MY VERY BEST, SIR, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, AND WHAT I'M SHARING WITH YOU IS THAT THE QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL ASKED WHEN WE GAVE YOU JUST THE PROPOSAL INFORMATION WE SHARED, THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE ANOTHER STEP AND DO THAT MORE DIRECTLY WITH THE MARKET. SO IS YOUR ANSWER YES THAT YOU IT WOULD REQUIRE GOING INTO NEGOTIATIONS IN ORDER TO GET YOU TRUE COST INFORMATION. WE WOULD HAVE. SO WHAT IS THE COST TO THE CITY ON AN ACTION? IF WE WANT TO DEFER THIS AND MOVE FORWARD WITH EXPLORATION, HOW MUCH DOES EXPLORING COST US? SIR, I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I'M SORRY, BUT I WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT'S THE REASON THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO GIVE DIRECTION FOR AN ACTION LIKE THIS. THAT'S WHAT I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING. IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S JUST PAPER ON A MOTION THAT WAS AMENDED IN THE DAY OF IT WAS DIFFERENT THAN THE MOTION EXISTED WHENEVER I FIRST WALKED ONTO THE HORSESHOE. AND I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT THIS GIVES THE CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO DO, BECAUSE THERE IS NO FISCAL NOTE TO IT. THERE'S IT'S VERY VAGUE, AND I'M JUST CURIOUS ON WHY A DEFERRAL WOULD PROHIBIT YOU FROM STILL EXPLORING. AND IT HAS NOT YET BEEN ARTICULATED WHY YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT IF WE DID TAKE UP MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION INSTEAD OF WHAT WAS BEING RECOMMENDED BY MR. RESENDEZ. SIR, I'LL GO BACK TO MY ANSWER. THE ADDITIONAL DETAILS THAT WERE REQUESTED, WE DO NOT HAVE. AND IF COUNSEL WANTS US TO BE ABLE TO BRING BACK MORE DETAILS FROM THE WHOLE MARKET COMPONENT, WE WOULD HAVE, WE NEED TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT IN A WAY THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING MORE DIRECTLY ABOUT POTENTIAL OPTIONS, BRINGING BACK TRUE COST. AND THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION AT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. AND WE ARE RESPONDING TO THAT DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. I THINK THAT GIVES ME WHAT I NEED TO KNOW, AND THAT THIS ISN'T JUST ABOUT GETTING MORE INFORMATION. THIS IS ABOUT DIRECTING STAFF TO GO AND ACT ON OUR BEHALF OF THE CITY, TO TALK ABOUT NEGOTIATIONS, TO TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC LEASE AGREEMENTS. THAT IS NOT JUST PROVIDING MORE INFORMATION FOR US TO MAKE A SOUND DECISION. I DO SUPPORT THIS DEFERRAL. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO AT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE YESTERDAY, ACTUALLY MONDAY. NO, I'M THINKING MAYBE I NEVER HAD MY TIME. YEAH. YOU HAVE FIVE. YEAH. THANK YOU. I BELIEVE, LINDA, YOU SAID THAT YOU INTENDED TO BRING BACK ONE OPTION. WAS THAT CORRECT? THAT THE IDEA WOULD BE THAT YOU'D GO OUT TO THE MARKET AND YOU WOULD TALK TO EVERYBODY, AND YOU'D FIND THE BEST IDEA, AND WE WOULD BE PRESENTED WITH THE ONE OPTION FOR THE REAL ESTATE OPTIONS. NO, THAT IS NOT CORRECT. HOW MANY OPTIONS WILL WE BE PRESENTED WITH? I'M NOT REALLY SURE. SO I THINK WHAT I THINK WHAT YOU MIGHT BE REFERRING TO, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. THERE WAS ONE THING THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WHICH WAS MORE ABOUT IDENTIFYING WHAT MIGHT BE POTENTIAL CALLS TO HAVE PEOPLE SUBMIT IDEAS FOR ANY POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT. NO, I'M SORRY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE REDEVELOPMENT PART. IT IS ABOUT US MOVING. SO THAT WOULD ACTUALLY NOT BE ANYTHING THAT THE EDC WOULD BE DIRECTING. SO I'M I'M THINKING THAT THAT WAS BACK TO SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD AND SOME OF THE RESPONSES FROM CBRE, BUT NOT THE EDC THAT YOU WERE. DID YOU GIVE US AN ANSWER THAT YOU WERE GOING TO LOOK AT ALL THE OPTIONS OF HOW THIS COULD BE REDEVELOPED, AND YOU WOULD PRESENT US WITH ONE REDEVELOPMENT OPTION? THAT IS, I'M NOT INVOLVED AT ALL IN REDEVELOPMENT. DID YOU TELL US SOMETHING ON MONDAY THAT YOU WOULD PRESENT ONE OPTION FOR? NOT THAT I RECALL. OKAY, WELL, IT'S ON VIDEO. I GUESS I'LL GO LOOK. SO AS YOU'RE EXPLORING RELOCATION OPTIONS FOR 31191 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER, [04:30:01] HOW MANY OPTIONS DO YOU EXPECT TO GIVE TO US? OH, YOU CAN RENT THIS. YOU CAN BUY THAT. HERE'S FOUR DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. OR IS IT. NO. YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT AND YOU'RE GOING TO NEGOTIATE WITH ONE. BECAUSE USUALLY YOU DON'T NEGOTIATE WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT VENDORS. AND HOW WILL YOU DETERMINE WHETHER YOU SHOULD BE NEGOTIATING FOR A LEASE OR FOR A PURCHASE, OR FOR THIS MANY SQUARE FEET OR OTHER CRITERIA THAT WE THINK ARE IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE NOT EVER EVEN TALKED ABOUT? COUNCIL MEMBER. I'LL JUST OFFER UP. I WISH WE COULD CLEARLY ELABORATE EVERY SINGLE STEP FOR YOU. WITH RESPECT TO YOUR QUESTIONS. AND I THINK THEY'RE ALL APPROPRIATE. BUT WE DEFINITIVELY DO NOT WANT TO BROADCAST OUR PLAYBOOK TO THE MARKET. THAT WILL BE VERY DETRIMENTAL TO NEGOTIATIONS. SO VERY MUCH UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT OF YOUR QUESTION. AND THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY STEPS WE WANT TO TAKE TO REFINE THE GROUP OF OPTIONS AND REFINE THE STRUCTURES AND BRING THAT INFORMATION BACK TO YOU SO THAT IT CAN BE LOOKED AT IN AN ORGANIZED FASHION. BUT MY COMMENTARY HERE WOULD BE JUST TO SUGGEST THAT WE DO NOT REALLY WANT TO BROADCAST OUR PLAYBOOK TO THE MARKET. WELL, THAT'S LOVELY FOR PRIVATE BUSINESS, BUT FOR GOVERNMENT THAT'S NOT TRANSPARENT. AND YOU'VE NEVER EVEN ASKED US LIKE WE'VE NEVER EVEN HAD AN INPUT SESSION. YOU'VE NEVER EVEN HAD THIS AT PUBLIC SAFETY TO TALK ABOUT A911311. SO HOW COULD WE POSSIBLY GO FORWARD WITH EXPLORE LIKE YOU'RE AN EXPLORER, LIKE YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SEEKING TO FIND. HOW WOULD YOU KNOW TO BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH ONE, TO BRING IT BACK TO US WHEN WE HAVEN'T EVEN TOLD YOU WHAT WE WANT? BECAUSE SOMEBODY ELSE IS MAKING THESE DECISIONS, AND WE ARE THE POLICY MAKERS AND WE ARE NOT BEING ASKED. SO FOR AS UPSET AS THE RESIDENTS ARE ABOUT TRANSPARENCY. WELL GUESS WHAT WE ARE TOO. SO I'M GLAD YOU THINK MY QUESTIONS ARE APPROPRIATE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS. I THINK THEY'RE APPROPRIATE TO ADDRESS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. BUT THEY WEREN'T. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO THINGS LIKE CITY HALL WERE MEANT TO UNIFY US. AND INSTEAD, WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT IS TEARING US APART. THERE'S A FLAW IN THIS PROCESS, AND THAT FLAW IS THE UNDERLYING TRANSPARENCY OF IT. I KNOW THAT EVERYONE WOULD LIKE TO USE THIS AS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO GET THE POINTS THEY WANT TO MAKE ABOUT THE MERITS OF CHAIRMAN WEST'S MOTION, BUT THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY OR NOT TO DO THAT IF WE GET BACK TO THAT MOTION. SO CAN WE TRY TO ARGUE THE MERITS OF CHAIRMAN RIDLEY'S MOTION? SURE. IT WOULD BE WONDERFUL IF WE COULD. THANK YOU. SO IN THE DELAY, I WILL SAY ONE OF THE REASONS I'M SUPPORTING IT IS THAT YESTERDAY, MONDAY, WHEN WE HAD THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING, WE HAD A LOT OF ANSWERS THAT WERE, I DON'T KNOW, WELL, WE DIDN'T EVALUATE THAT. WELL, THAT WASN'T PART OF THE SCOPE. WELL, THAT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING WE'VE CONSIDERED. WELL, WE HAVE TO SLOW DOWN AND WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THOSE THINGS, AND WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THEM LIKE THERE ARE MISSING PIECES IN THIS ENTIRE PROCESS. AND AS MUCH AS WE HAVE THIS LITTLE CATCH PHRASE, THE SPEED OF BUSINESS, WHICH REALLY IS SO IRONIC, WE ARE NOT THE SPEED OF BUSINESS. WE ARE THE SPEED OF GOVERNMENT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO THINGS THAT BUSINESSES DON'T. AND PART OF THAT IS TALKING TO THE PUBLIC. BUT PART OF THAT IS ALSO ASKING US AND IT HAS NOT HAPPENED. AND WE NEED INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION BECAUSE IT'S NOT OUR MONEY. IT'S EVERYBODY ELSE'S MONEY THAT WE TAKE FROM THEM, AND WE MUST SPEND IT WISELY. IT MEANS NOT USING DEBT. WHEN WE CAN USE FEDERAL FUNDS. IT MEANS NOT USING DEBT WHEN WE CAN BUDGET APPROPRIATELY. SO WE NEED INDEPENDENT PEOPLE. WHEN YOU DID THE ANALYSIS, YOU KEEP REFERRING TO THIS ASTM GUIDES. BUT YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT THAT WAS NOT PART OF IT. ADA IS NOT PART OF IT. THERE'S NO ACTUAL CRITERIA THAT QUALIFICATIONS THAT ARE EVEN REQUIRED FOR PEOPLE TO DO THAT WORK. AND WHAT IS SAID OF ITS OWN PROCESS IS THAT VARIABILITY CAN AFFECT CONSISTENCY ACROSS FIRMS OR EVEN ASSESSORS WITHIN THE SAME FIRM. COST OPINIONS ARE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE. THEY ARE NOT DETAILED ESTIMATES AND MAY VARY SIGNIFICANTLY FROM CONTRACTOR PRICING. [04:35:02] IT'S EXACTLY WHY WE NEED ANOTHER LOOK AT THIS BY PEOPLE WHO DO NOT STAND TO BENEFIT IF WE MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYBE I'M MISUNDERSTANDING SOMETHING, BUT I THINK WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY WAS TRYING TO FOCUS ON WITH HIS MOTION AND HE CAN CORRECT ME, IS THAT THIS IS. WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE IN THIS BUILDING. IF WE REPAIR IT, MODERNIZE IT IMPROVEMENT, WE GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN DO HERE IN A BROADER SENSE. THEN WE CAN TAKE THAT INFORMATION AND START COMPARING IT TO OTHER THINGS. WHAT THIS WHAT THIS DEFERRAL ALLOWS US TO DO IS REALLY THINK ABOUT OTHER ALTERNATIVES FOR HERE. IT'S NOT JUST A TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT LEAVE OR GO. IT'S NOT. IT'S THIS GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY THINK ABOUT WHAT DIFFERENT ITERATIONS THERE COULD BE. AND THIS IS SMART FOLKS. THIS IS THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT. AND IT DOESN'T DELAY EXTENSIVELY. WHAT IT DOES IS IT GIVES US THE RIGHT INFORMATION, AND IT ALLOWS US TO THEN PROSECUTE THE RIGHT SOLUTION. AND AND WHAT THIS DOES IS IT FOCUSES ON WHAT CAN WE DO WITH THIS BUILDING IN DIFFERENT WAYS TO MAKE IT WORK. AND I THINK I THINK THAT IT IT REALLY IS THE, THE IT ALLOWS US TO FOCUS ON, ON USING THIS AS THE BASIS OF A PLAN, NOT AS A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE GOING OUT LOOKING FOR, FOR INFORMATION FROM OTHER PEOPLE BEFORE WE EVEN KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO HERE. I'M TELLING YOU, THIS IS REALLY THE TIME IS IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS. IT'S NOT THAT LONG. IT'S GOING TO GIVE EVERYBODY THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF TIME TO DO IT IN THE RIGHT WAY. AND THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO REALLY GIVE SOME DIRECTION TO STAFF AND TO OUR CONSULTANTS TO THEN GO OUT AND DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO AFTER WE KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO HERE. WE DON'T HAVE THIS BASIC INFORMATION YET. LET'S GET IT AND LET'S DO IT RIGHT. LOOK IT. IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, THIS IS NOT WHERE WE ARE PROSECUTING THIS THE RIGHT WAY. AND WE'RE GOING TO GO GO FORWARD. BUT LET'S DO IT. NOT IN REVERSE. LET'S DO IT IN THE RIGHT WAY. THANK YOU. MISS ANY RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION. I THINK MR. RIDLEY IS TRYING TO GET PUBLIC INPUT AND SEE WHAT THEY THINK OF THIS BUILDING. AND ALSO PERHAPS DIRECTION FOR A NEW BUILDING. I REWATCHED THE BOND MEETINGS, AND THE CM MENTIONED TWO YEARS AGO THAT CITY HALL MIGHT BE USED FOR SOMETHING ELSE. WE KNEW THIS TWO YEARS AGO, ACCORDING TO THE TAPES. NOTHING HAPPENED FOR TWO YEARS AND NOW THIS DOES FEEL RUSHED. IF WE NEED THIS CONVERSATION NEEDED TO BE HAD, WHY RUSH FORWARD WITHOUT COMMUNITY INPUT? MY COMMUNITY IS A WORKING CLASS COMMUNITY. A COUPLE WERE PRESENT, BUT MANY HAD TO WORK BECAUSE THEY WERE. BUT THEY WERE THEY CALLED ME AND TOLD ME WHAT THEY WANTED ABOUT, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THIS HOUSE. THEIR HOUSE. THEY WERE NOT PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BECAUSE MEETINGS WERE NOT HELD AFTER WORK HOURS. FOR MONTHS, RUMORS HAVE BEEN SWIRLING AND I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS. I HAVE HAD MEMBERS OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY APPROACH ME WITH INFORMATION BEFORE STAFF. MY COMMUNITY WAS OFFERED A MEETING WITH LESS THAN A DAY'S NOTICE. IF THIS MOTION FAILS, I HOPE WE ALL ADVOCATE FOR COMMUNITY INPUT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN GREATLY LACKING TO THIS POINT. MR. RESENDEZ RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I DON'T WANT TO NEED TOO MUCH TIME, BUT I THINK THAT PEOPLE'S THE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE ARE EXPRESSING RIGHT NOW ARE ADDRESSED BY MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION. OTHER THAN THE DEFERRAL ASPECT OF IT, YOU KNOW, A DEFERRAL BY DEFINITION MEANS TO POSTPONE. AND THAT MEANS, LOGICALLY TO POSTPONE EXPLORING. AND EVEN IF EXPLORING INCLUDES NEGOTIATIONS, I GET I NEGOTIATE WITH PROSECUTORS ALL THE TIME. I NEGOTIATE WITH INSURANCE ADJUSTERS ALL THE TIME. THAT DOESN'T MEAN I MAKE A DECISION. I GATHER INFORMATION, GATHER INTEL, AND THEN ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, THAT HELPS WITH WHATEVER FINAL DECISION THAT I THAT I NEED TO MAKE. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S BEEN PLENTY OF PEOPLE WHO, WHO, WHO, WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED. THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN ENGAGED AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE ENGAGED. I DON'T THINK THAT A DEFERRAL IS NECESSARY IN ORDER FOR THOSE THINGS TO HAPPEN. [04:40:07] THANK YOU, MISS BLACKMON. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I GOT SOME QUESTIONS ON FUNDING AND BUDGETING, JACK. SO WE HAVE A NUMBER THREE FUNDING STRATEGY, AND THIS CAN BE A GENERAL FUND EXPENSE, CORRECT? YES. AND SO WHEN YOU'RE BUDGETING AND YOU'RE WORKING ON THAT NOW, AND THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD BE MOVING, RIGHT? I'M SURE YOU'RE PUTTING IT IN YOUR BUDGET RIGHT NOW FOR MOVING. FOR ANY POSSIBLE LIKE, IF OEM. I MEAN, THERE'S GOT TO BE A LINE ITEM SOMEWHERE. WE'RE IN THE EARLY STAGES OF WORKING ON THE FISCAL YEAR 27 BUDGET THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TO YOU IN AUGUST, AND THERE'S SO MUCH WORK TO DO BETWEEN NOW AND AUGUST. AND SO AS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS RECEIVED FROM COUNCIL ON THE DIRECTION YOU WANT US TO TAKE, THEN WE WOULD INCORPORATE THAT INTO THE BUDGET. BUT I GUESS YOU HAVEN'T ANSWERED MY QUESTION. OKAY. WHEN YOU ARE PREPARING FOR NEXT YEAR AND ACTIVITIES THAT WE TAKE AS THAT, YOU BUDGET FOR THOSE? YES. AND YOU PUT IN A BALLPARK THAT YOU THINK AND WE WE'RE WORKING WITH DEPARTMENTS NOW DEVELOPING BUDGETS. SO IF WE'RE MOVING OR IF WE'RE STAYING, ARE YOU PUTTING IN LINE ITEMS WE HAVE NOT PUT IN EITHER. AT THIS POINT, WE DO NOT HAVE THE DIRECTION FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, AND SO THERE'S NOT ANYTHING PUT IN TO MOVE OR NOT. SO IT COULD BE A MOVE OR STAY IN REPAIR LINE ITEM. WE WILL BUDGET FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF A CITY HALL, BECAUSE I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS WHILE WE ARE IN THE BUDGET SEASON IN AUGUST, YOU CAN STILL PUT LINE ITEMS IN BECAUSE IT STILL TAKES 60 MORE DAYS BEFORE WE FINALIZE IT. SO YOU CAN HAVE LINE ITEMS IN THE BUDGET FOR SPECIFIC THINGS, SUCH AS IF IT'S A REPAIR OR IF IT'S A MOVE. SO WE WILL BRING YOU A BALANCED BUDGET ON AUGUST THE 13TH OR WHATEVER THE DAY IS, AND WE WILL INCORPORATE WHAT WE UNDERSTAND AS THE THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNCIL. I APOLOGIZE, NOT TRYING TO AVOID YOUR QUESTION, I'M JUST TRYING TO I'D LIKE TO ANSWER THAT. WHAT SO BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN THAT DIRECTION TO DO EITHER OR IN AUGUST AS WE DEVELOP THE BUDGET LIKE WE NORMALLY DO. IF COUNCIL THEN CHOOSES TO AMEND THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GET DIRECTION ON, THEN OF COURSE YOU ALWAYS HAVE THE LIBERTY OF MAKING THOSE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE BUDGET. AND AS YOU KNOW, THAT EXERCISE INCLUDES ALSO IDENTIFYING WHERE WE TAKE IT FROM IF THAT IS THE CASE. SO THAT WOULD BE THAT'S JUST THE WAY WE DO THE BUDGET ANYWAY. I THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS A CLAUSE IN THE RFP OR RFQ FOR FACILITIES THAT SAID IT HAD TO BE READY BY JANUARY OF 27. IS THAT WAS THAT IN THE RFP? AND I PROBABLY PETER, BECAUSE I SEE HIM GETTING UP TO RFP. I'M NOT SURE WHICH RFP IS BEING REFERENCED. THE MARKET SOLICITATION THAT WENT OUT AT GENERAL PARAMETERS TO GIVE THE MARKET CONSISTENT INFORMATION TO WHICH THEY COULD RESPOND. SO THERE THERE'S NO DIRECTIVE TO OPEN ANYTHING BY A CERTAIN DATE, BUT WE HAVE TO GIVE EVERYBODY A A REASONABLE TARGET SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THE AVAILABILITY OF SPACE, AVAILABILITY OF OPTIONS AND GIVE PEOPLE A FRAMEWORK. THAT SAID YOU KNOW, THE MARKET RESPONDS WITH VARIOUS INFORMATION, AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY CLEAR FROM THE MARKET THAT NOT EVERY SINGLE OPTION CAN MEET THE EXACT SAME DATE. SO I THINK THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY IS, YES, THAT WE PRESCRIBE THIS IS A TARGET TO GIVE EVERYBODY A REASONABLE TARGET. BUT THAT IS A MOVABLE TARGET, DEPENDING ON THE DIRECTIVE OF COUNCIL AND THE ALIGNMENT OF DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION BUDGETS AND A NUMBER OF OTHER FACTORS. SO IT WAS JANUARY. WE GAVE EVERYBODY AN AGGRESSIVE TARGET. I DON'T KNOW, WE SAID I THINK IT WAS FIRST QUARTER OF 2027. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE GOING TO BE MONEY IN THE BUDGET FOR THAT? I MEAN, WHICH COULD ALSO BE USED TO TO FIX CITY HALL. AND I'M TRYING TO FIND IF WE ARE HAVING TO MOVE, WHERE'S THAT MONEY AND CAN IT THEN JUST BE A LINE ITEM THAT IS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I GUESS IT'S GOING TO BE, WHAT, $115 MILLION A, YOU KNOW, TO RENT. I'M JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE. THEN IT WOULD BE EITHER USED TO FOR THE FACILITY RENOVATION OR COULD BE TO MOVE. SO WE WILL INCORPORATE INTO THE 27 BUDGET THE COST THAT WE THINK THAT WE NEED TO PRESENT TO THE COUNCIL IN AUGUST BASED UPON WHAT WE KNOW. [04:45:01] OKAY. SO AND THERE ARE SO MANY UNKNOWNS. SO THE BUDGET WILL BE PREPARED EITHER WAY TO MAKE EITHER MOVE, EVEN THOUGH WE MAY NOT. IF WE DEFER THIS, YOU ARE STILL GOING TO PROBABLY HAVE A LINE ITEM SOMEWHERE. GIVEN THAT WE'VE ASKED THE MARKET TO PREPARE FOR A MOVE IN THE FIRST QUARTER, I CAN'T SAY THAT THE BUDGET WOULD INCLUDE THAT THE BUDGET WILL BE PUT TOGETHER BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW AND UNDERSTAND AT THE TIME. DID YOU WANT TO I JUST I ACTUALLY DON'T THINK THE LINE OF QUESTIONING IS IS TOTALLY FAIR. I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH IT, BUT I THINK IT'S TOTALLY FAIR BECAUSE THE MARKET AND THE AVAILABILITY AND WHETHER THEY ARE CHARGING YOU RENT, WHETHER YOU HAVE EXPENDITURES IN A RENTAL SCENARIO JUST TO FOLLOW YOUR LINE OF THINKING. THAT IS ALL VERY NEGOTIABLE DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU ALL NEED AND PRESCRIBE. BUT HERE WE ARE IN MID-MARCH. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE THERE ARE A LOT OF TIMELINES TO BE MET FOR A SPRING 2027 OCCUPANCY. DEFERRING THIS, DELAYING THIS CERTAINLY PUTS INTO QUESTION WHETHER THAT CAN BE ACHIEVED, WHETHER IT'S BEING EXECUTED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR OR NOT. BUT AS YOU'VE HEARD, PETER, WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT WE HAVE TO ADOPT IN SEPTEMBER. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO PREPARE WHERE THAT NUMBER WILL BE AND WHAT THE NUMBER COULD BE. I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO SAY IN THE EVENT THAT YOU ALL APPROVE MOVING FORWARD, THAT THERE ARE MILESTONES THAT COULD BE ACHIEVED IN ANY NEGOTIATIONS IN A NON-BINDING WAY, AND THEN LATER IN A BINDING WAY TO GIVE YOU ALL CLARITY ON THOSE THINGS. SO THERE'S A THERE'S A RANGE OF WAYS WE CAN BRING CERTAINTY TO THE PROCESS TO ALIGN WITH BUDGETING. OKAY. AND YOU TALKED ABOUT NEGOTIATIONS AND BINDING VERSUS NON-BINDING. ARE THESE NEGOTIATIONS BINDING? NO, MA'AM. NOT IN ANY WAY. SO WE WILL NOT BE SUED IF WE DON'T KNOW IF WE GO DOWN A PATH. ABSOLUTELY NOT. OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WANT TO CLARIFY MY MOTION AND THE PURPOSE FOR IT. WHEN I SAID IT WAS A MOTION TO DEFER, IT WAS NOT TO DEFER THE ENTIRE PROCESS THAT WE'VE LAUNCHED UPON. IT WAS SIMPLY TO DEFER THE ORIGINAL MOTION, WHICH CALLED FOR US TO GO DOWN ONE PATH, WHICH WAS NEGOTIATING LEASE TERMS TO MOVE OUT OF CITY HALL. AND AT THE SAME TIME, IT WOULD DO THAT. IT WOULD FORECLOSE THE OTHER PATH THAT WE'VE BEEN EXPLORING NOW FOR MANY HOURS TODAY, WHICH IS THE COST OF STAYING IN PLACE. IF I MAY ANALOGIZE THIS TO A PERSON WHO IS OWNING A FIVE YEAR OLD CAR WITH 50,000 MILES ON IT, AND HE'S JUST THINKING, GEE, MY CAR HAS LOST ITS LUSTER, MAYBE I SHOULD THINK ABOUT BUYING A NEW CAR OR LEASING ONE. AND HE HAS TO CONSIDER, FIRST OF ALL, THE COSTS OF KEEPING HIS CURRENT CAR. DOES IT NEED NEW TIRES? DOES IT NEED A TUNE UP? DOES IT NEED A NEW PAINT JOB? WHAT ARE HIS PAYMENTS? IS IT ALREADY PAID FOR AND WHAT ARE THE IMPROVEMENTS GOING TO COST? TO COMPARE THAT WITH THE OPTION OF BUYING A NEW CAR. WHAT THAT NEW CAR WILL COST. HOW HE CAN FINANCE IT TO A REASONABLE MONTHLY PAYMENT. WHAT OPTIONS TO ORDER ON IT, WHAT COLOR TO ORDER. SO WE'RE AT THAT DECISION POINT ABOUT WHICH WAY TO GO. IF WE GO WITH THE ORIGINAL MOTION. WE'VE DISMISSED KEEPING THE OLD CAR, AND WE'RE ONLY GOING TO BUY A NEW CAR OR LEASE ONE. IF INSTEAD YOU SUBSCRIBE TO MY MOTION, WE LOOK AT WHAT OUR CURRENT SITUATION IS, WHETHER IT'S WORTH GOING DOWN THE PATH OF IMPROVING IT SO THAT WE CAN DRIVE IT ANOTHER 50,000 MILES AND OWN IT OUTRIGHT, AND NOT HAVE TO MAKE PAYMENTS ON IT EVERY MONTH. AND MY MOTION SIMPLY GIVES US THE SIX MONTH TIME TO EXPLORE THAT OPTION. IT DOES NOT PROHIBIT THE OPTION THAT THE CITY MANAGER CAN DIRECT TO EXPLORE LEASE NEGOTIATIONS AND SPECIFIC TERMS. IT DOES NOT PROHIBIT THAT. IT JUST SAYS WE SHOULD GIVE PRIMARY ATTENTION TO WHAT OUR CURRENT CONDITION IS TO PRIORITIZE OUR MOST CRITICAL NEEDS, WHICH WE HAVE NOT DONE YET, TO LOOK AT OUR FUNDING STRATEGY, WHAT THE COST OF IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE AND THE TIMELINE FOR DOING THAT NOW. IF THE STAFF CAN GET THAT DONE BEFORE AUGUST 31ST. GREAT. I JUST THOUGHT I WOULD LEAVE AN AMPLE TIME THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE RETENTION OF THE THE NEW CONSULTANTS TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS KIND OF WORK, SINCE WE HAVEN'T DONE ANY OF THIS BEFORE. I THOUGHT IT MIGHT TAKE A FEW MONTHS TO DO IT, BUT IF THEY CAN DO IT QUICKER AND THEN WE CAN GET BACK TO CONSIDERATION OF BOTH OPTIONS, THAT'S FINE TOO. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. [04:50:06] I WONDER IF ANYONE'S THOUGHT ABOUT IT THIS WAY. OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET IS $1.96 BILLION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $1 BILLION PROPOSAL EQUIVALENT TO MORE THAN HALF OF OUR GENERAL FUND. WE'VE HAD THESE DOCUMENTS FOR TEN DAYS. THERE'S THOUSANDS OF PAGES OF IT. IF YOU UPLOAD THEM INTO AI AND YOU ASK IT LOTS OF QUESTIONS, IT PUTS A LOT OF HOLES IN WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD. IT RAISES A LOT OF ISSUES. WE REGULARLY HEAR AROUND THIS HORSESHOE THAT, OH, MY CONSTITUENT DOESN'T EVEN USE THE INTERNET. THEY HAVE TO HAVE A PAPER COPY OF SOMETHING. AND I'M TELLING YOU, THE PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING. THEY NEED TO SLOW DOWN. AND WE NEED TO HAVE THESE MEETINGS. BUT WHAT COUNCIL MEMBERS RIDLEY'S MOTION IS DOING IS NOT ACTUALLY DEFERRING IT. LIKE, DON'T WORK ON IT UNTIL THIS TIME. IT'S ACTUALLY DIRECTING A LOT OF WORK TO HAPPEN RIGHT AWAY FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO RIGHT AWAY BEGIN TO PUT EXPERTS TOGETHER TO DO THIS ASSESSMENT OF CONDITIONS, TO PRIORITIZE, TO SET UP THE FUNDING STRATEGY AND TO CREATE THE TIMELINE. IT'S JUST THE DATE IS WHEN IT'S COMING BACK TO US. SO THERE'S A VERY BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, OH, I'M GOING TO DEFER THIS ITEM LIKE A ZONING CASE WHERE WE'RE NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT AT THE HORSESHOE AGAIN. A LOT OF ACTIVITY IS HAPPENING, BUT ALSO WE CAN TALK TO OUR RESIDENTS AND WE CAN TALK TO THEM ABOUT IT. AND I THINK THEY'RE VERY AFRAID FOR US TO TALK TO OUR RESIDENTS ABOUT IT. A NUMBER OF PEOPLE HAVE SAID TO ME, WHY ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT CITY HALL WHEN YOU REPRESENT THE FARTHEST AWAY DISTRICT? AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU THAT EVEN RESIDENTS WHO'VE ONLY DRIVEN BY OR WHO HAVE ONLY COME AS TOURISTS, OR I THINK WE HAD FOUR DISTRICT 12 PEOPLE IN PERSON TODAY. IT IS FAR, BUT IT'S STILL OUR CITY HALL TOO, AND PEOPLE DO CARE ABOUT IT. AND THERE SEEMS TO NOT BE THAT UNDERSTANDING. IT'S NOT EMOTIONAL AND IT'S NOT JUST THE PRESERVATIONISTS AND ARCHITECTS CARE ABOUT IT. A LOT OF PEOPLE CARE ABOUT THIS BUILDING AND THIS LAND AND WHAT IT MEANS. AND TO TO GO FORWARD WHEN YOU CAN SO QUICKLY UPLOAD ALL OF THIS STUFF INTO CLAUDE, ALL THE DOCUMENTS, AND YOU CAN ASK IT, HEY, WHAT SHOULD I BE LOOKING FOR? WHERE ARE THERE ANY ISSUES THAT THAT MIGHT HAVE CONTRADICTORY DATA AND IT'S ALL THERE. I'VE PUT IT ON TWITTER FOR PEOPLE TO FIND. YOU COULD LOAD IT YOURSELF, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND WE NEED AN OUTSIDE VIEW OF THIS. AGAIN, FROM DISINTERESTED PARTIES. WE DEFINITELY HAVE TO UNDERSTAND FUNDING BECAUSE OTHERWISE THIS IS ALL ACADEMIC. THANK YOU. MR.. MR.. BASIL, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU. I IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE IT WOULD BE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR INPUT SESSIONS. AND I'M JUST CURIOUS WHEN IT COMES TO OTHER LOCATIONS, BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT THIS IS A VERY RUSHED DECISION, WHICH IS WHY I SUPPORT THE DELAY. HOW MUCH INPUT HAVE YOU ALL GATHERED FROM THE BODY OF DECISION MAKERS HERE THROUGH Y'ALL'S PROCESS? I UNDERSTAND THAT Y'ALL HAVE TAKEN TOURS OF POTENTIAL FUTURE CITY HALL SITES. CAN SOMEONE ANSWER HOW MANY TOURS, HOW MANY LOCATIONS WE'VE TOURED? HOW MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS YOU HAVE TAKEN ON TOURS? I'M OF THE OPINION THAT SOME OF THAT DATA WOULD COMPROMISE YOUR POSITION IN THE MARKET SHARING THAT. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE HAVE RECEIVED SIGNIFICANT INPUT OVER THE THOUSANDS OF HOURS THE TEAM HAS COLLECTIVELY WORKED AND DISCUSS THIS WITH YOU ALL IN YOUR ONE ON ONES AND WITH STAFF AND THE COLLECTIVE BODY OF OF STAKEHOLDERS AT CITY HALL. SO WE FELT VERY CONFIDENT WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAD THAT WE COULD MAKE A MARKET AND UNDERSTAND. SO HOW MANY SITES HAVE YOU TOURED AND HOW MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE YOU TAKEN ON TOURS? I CAN'T SHARE THAT INFORMATION, BUT IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT WITH THAT, WITH THAT ANSWER, THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME. I'LL TELL YOU, AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, I HADN'T BEEN ASKED TO GO ON ANY TOURS. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THESE PLACES THAT YOU'RE EXPLORING. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO TELL THE PUBLIC THAT THIS ISN'T MOVING AT A FAST PACE, AND I'M TELLING YOU, AS YOUR ELECTED OFFICIAL IN DISTRICT SEVEN, I HAVE NOT BEEN PRIVY TO THESE CONVERSATIONS. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY MOVING AT A RAPID PACE, AND IT'S MOVING WITH A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY. [04:55:06] I UNDERSTAND THAT PERSPECTIVE AND I APPRECIATE THAT SENTIMENT. I WOULD JUST OFFER UP THAT. THANK YOU. I DIDN'T ASK YOU ANY QUESTIONS. YEAH. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DEFER? MR. RESENDEZ, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. JUST REALLY QUICKLY. ONCE AGAIN, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE DEFINITION OF DEFER IS TO DEFER. AND IF YOU KNOW NEITHER MOTION, IF NEITHER OF THE MOTIONS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED WOULD PREVENT THE OTHER, THEN WE WOULDN'T NEED ANY MOTIONS. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I COMMENTED ON THAT. SO I THINK THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO DO THIS AGAIN, TO ACCOMPLISH EVERYONE'S GOALS IS TO DENY THIS ONE HERE, VOTE TO DENY, AND THEN MOVE TO INCLUDE THE OTHER LANGUAGE OUTSIDE OF THE DEFERRAL LANGUAGE. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. BECAUSE MY COLLEAGUE IS ASKING PARLIAMENTARY PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION ABOUT DEFERRAL. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A MOTION TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION INSTEAD, AND JUST INCLUDE THESE ITEMS WITH THIS DEADLINE. AND I WONDER IF MY COLLEAGUE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN CONSIDERING THIS AS AN AMENDMENT INSTEAD OF A DEFERRAL. THIS MOTION IS ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED AND IT BELONGS TO THE BODY. I SECONDED IT. YEAH. AND SO IF HE WANTED TO CHANGE IT, I WOULD BE WILLING TO WITHDRAW MY SECOND. IT WAS NOT UP TO YOU. IT'S ON THE FLOOR. I THINK IT BELONGS TO THE BODY. AND I THINK THE BODY SHOULD VOTE ON IT. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? SEEING. NONE. RECORD VOTE. MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. NO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. NO. WITH SIX VOTING IN FAVOR, NINE OPPOSED. THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, SO WE ARE BACK ON ITEM NUMBER ONE. AND WE HAD A COUPLE PEOPLE WHO HAD SPOKEN FOR FIVE MINUTE ROUNDS. SO RECOGNIZE CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR FIVE MINUTES. MAYOR I'M SORRY, I THINK THE MACHINE IS NOT ACTING PROPERLY. I ACTUALLY CAME IN AFTER MR. RIDLEY. MR. RIDLEY IS NOT SHOWING UP AT ALL NOW. HE IS. IT POPPED OFF. I DID TRIGGER IT. OKAY. MAY I BE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION? OF COURSE. IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT. OKAY. SO YOU OKAY? WAIT A MINUTE. YOU HAD ALREADY SPOKEN ON IT ONCE FOR FIVE MINUTES, SO I NEED TO TAKE ANYONE ELSE WHO HASN'T SPOKEN AT ALL BEFORE I GET TO YOU, THOUGH, THAT'S THE ISSUE. SO ON MR. WES MOTION, HE'D SPOKEN ON HIS OWN MOTION. YOU'D SPOKEN ON IT. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE RIGHT NOW. SO, MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THIS IS ON MR. WES MOTION THAT HE HAD PRINTED OUT HERE. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. I WORKED FOR AT&T FOR 34.5 YEARS. I STARTED AS A SERVICE REP IN A CALL CENTER. I WORKED IN A CALL CENTER FOR TEN YEARS BEFORE MOVING ON INTO MANAGEMENT. WHEN I WORKED IN, I WORKED IN A BUILDING THAT WAS GOING THROUGH COMPLETE REHABILITATION. AND THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REHABILITATION AND RENOVATION. THE BUILDING WAS BEING REHABILITATED. ONE DAY WE WERE ALL SITTING AROUND WORKING AND WE LEARNED THAT THE BUILDING HAD CAUGHT ON FIRE. THE TECHNOLOGY OF THAT DAY REQUIRED US TO, IN OUR CALL CENTER, TO CLEAR THE CALLS AND QUEUE BEFORE THE CALLS WERE ABLE TO BE TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER OF ONE OF OUR CALL CENTERS THAT TECHNOLOGY MUST NOT, [05:00:09] DID NOT, MUST NOT EXIST HERE. BECAUSE IN JANUARY, WHEN WE HAD THE SNOWSTORM. I TRIED CALLING NOT 311 AND NO ONE ANSWERED. I TRIED USING THE 311 APP. IT DIDN'T WORK. I THERE WAS NO WAY I COULD GET THE THE THINGS THAT I NEEDED, BUT BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT 911 URGENCY DONE. WHEN WE WERE ABLE TO MOVE BACK INTO OUR OFFICES, NEW TECHNOLOGY HAD BEEN INSTALLED, REDUNDANCY HAD BEEN IMPORTED, ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES THAT HAD BEEN IN THE BUILDING HAD BEEN CORRECTED. OSHA REQUIRED THEM. AT&T WAS CITED FOR HAVING DEFICIENCIES SUCH AS TODAY BEING ADA NON-COMPLIANT. HAVING ENVIRONMENTAL. ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES SUCH AS ASBESTOS IN THE BUILDING. THAT BUILDING WAS AT. I STILL REMEMBER THAT. THAT BUILDING LOCATION. IT'S CALLED 611 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD. TODAY, THAT BUILDING DOESN'T EXIST AS IT DID WHEN I WAS THERE. TODAY WE HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF OPPORTUNITY SITTING IN FRONT OF US. WE HAVE A BUILDING HERE THAT HAS DEFICIENCIES THAT BY OUR OWN STANDARDS, CODE WOULD CODE US OUT OF HERE BY OUR OWN STANDARDS. IF WE WERE LOOKING FOR PERMITS, WE WOULDN'T GET THEM. WE HAVE FIRE DEFICIENCIES AND OUR FIRE, OUR NOT OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT WOULD NOT GIVE US A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. BUT WE ARE STILL SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT WHAT IFS, HOW COMES AND WHAT WE DON'T NEED AND WHAT WE DO NEED. I REMEMBER WHEN 911 WAS THE NEW THING TO LOOK AT IT, AND THE TECHNOLOGY THAT WE HAVE TODAY DOES NOT SUPPORT A911311 OR E O C OPERATION THAT WE ARE SO ENTITLED TO HAVE. I ASK THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR TO NOT DELAY IT, TO EXPLORE ALL OPTIONS. FRANKLY SPEAKING, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF WE'RE EVEN THINKING OF SELLING OR WHO WE WHO IS LOOKING TO BUY? UNTIL WE TAKE CARE OF THE MATTERS AT HAND. WE JUST REPLACED IT TWO YEARS UNTIL WE TAKE CARE OF THE MATTERS AT HAND. WE ARE PROVIDING OURSELVES WITH LAWSUITS, CHALLENGES AND THINGS THAT ARE UN DENIABLE. WRONG. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WILL BE SUPPORTING CHAIR WEST'S MOTION. TODAY MARKS ANOTHER IMPORTANT STEP IN OUR ONGOING DISCUSSIONS REGARDING DALLAS CITY HALL. LET ME BEGIN BY REMINDING EVERYONE THAT NO FINAL ACTION WILL BE TAKEN TODAY. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ABANDONING CITY HALL. WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS RESPONSIBLE AND PRUDENT. WE ARE COMMITTING TO EXPLORE ALL OPTIONS AND TO GET CLEAR, COMPREHENSIVE ANSWERS TO OUR QUESTIONS WE AND OUR RESIDENTS HAVE RAISED TODAY AND PREVIOUSLY, BOTH THE COUNCIL'S FINANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEES HAVE BEEN BRIEFED AND RECEIVED THE INFORMATION WE REQUESTED, AND STAFF HAS PROVIDED ADDITIONAL RESPONSES TO OUR QUESTIONS. THE FULL COUNCIL WAS INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE MEETINGS. TODAY'S ITEM IS INTENDED TO GAUGE THE MARKET'S INTEREST IN CITY HALL AND THE CITY HALL BUILDING AND THE SITE, SO THAT WE CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND THE FULL RANGE OF POSSIBILITIES BEFORE US AS WE MOVE FORWARD. IT IS CRITICAL THAT ALL OPTIONS REMAIN UNDER CONSIDERATION, INCLUDING REPURPOSING CITY HALL AND REMAINING AT CITY HALL OR KEEPING THE BUILDING WHILE DEVELOPING THE SURROUNDING AREA. THIS BRIEFING ALSO INCLUDES AN OVERVIEW OF POTENTIAL ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS TO HELP INFORM OUR FUTURE DELIBERATIONS, INCLUDING OPTIONS LIKE ADDING COMMUNITY FUNDING FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION. FOR THREE MONTHS, WE HAVE ENGAGED IN THOUGHTFUL DIALOG ACROSS MULTIPLE BRIEFINGS AND PUBLIC MEETINGS, HEARING FROM RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS WITH DIFFERENT VIEWS AND PERSPECTIVES. [05:05:04] THAT IS WHAT GOOD GOVERNANCE REQUIRES. I HAVE HEARD STRONG OPINIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE, AND WHILE MANY QUESTIONS REMAIN, THAT IS THROUGH NO FAULT OF STAFF, WE SIMPLY HAVE NOT YET FORMALLY DIRECTED THEM TO GATHER EVERY ANSWER. TODAY'S VOTE WILL ALLOW WILL ALLOW US TO DO EXACTLY THAT, TO INSTRUCT STAFF TO SEEK THE DATA, EVALUATE THE OPTIONS, AND BRING BACK THE INFORMATION NECESSARY FOR US TO DETERMINE WHAT IS TRULY IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR CITY THAT IS RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP. WE MUST ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THE REALITY. CITY HALL IS FACED WITH CHALLENGES AND DEFERRED NEEDS FOR DECADES. NO MATTER WHAT WE CHOOSE TO, WHETHER WE CHOOSE TO STAY OR RELOCATE. WE MUST ENSURE THAT WE DO NOT FIND OURSELVES IN THE SAME POSITION 20 OR 50 YEARS FROM NOW. SO IT IS THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION BEFORE US IS, DO WE INVEST HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS INTO BUILDING THAT WILL CONTINUE TO REQUIRE SUBSTANTIAL PUBLIC INVESTMENT, OR DO WE FULLY EXAMINE ALTERNATIVES THAT MAY CREATE NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR CITY? WHAT WE DECIDE TODAY IS WHETHER WE'RE WILLING TO GATHER THESE FACTS NECESSARY TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS WISELY. THOSE ARE THE ANSWERS WE SEEK. AND TODAY IS SIMPLY THE NEXT STEP IN MAKING SURE WE GATHER THEM THOUGHTFULLY, TRANSPARENTLY, AND RESPONSIBLY. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAVE A MOTION I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REQUIRE THAT BEFORE ANY SOLICITATIONS THAT INCORPORATE ANY OF THE WORK PERFORMED BY THE COMPANIES ENGAGED BY THE EDC FOR THE PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ON THE DISPOSITION OF CITY HALL ARE ISSUED, CITY STAFF WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THESE COMPANIES ARE CONFLICTED FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE SOLICITATIONS. BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT WANTING TO GATHER THE NECESSARY INFORMATION ABOUT RESPONSIBLE GOVERNANCE, ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY, BUT THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE MUCH IN THE PROCESS THAT'S IN FRONT OF US. I APPLAUD THE COMPANIES THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD TO DO THE JOB THAT THEY WERE TOLD TO DO, AND I NOT ONCE HAVE SAID THAT THEY HAVEN'T DONE A GOOD JOB WITHIN WHAT THEY WERE HIRED TO DO. AND WHEN I CONTINUE TO REFER TO THE FLAWED PROCESS, YOU ALL WERE HIRED. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT Y'ALL'S PROCESS. I THINK THAT YOU ALL WERE DOING WITH WITHIN THE SCOPE YOU WERE GIVEN. I THINK THE FLAWED PROCESS CAME FROM OUR STAFF, AND I THINK THAT THEY HAVE LED US DOWN A PATH TO FAIL BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT GIVEN US ADEQUATE INFORMATION TO MAKE THE NECESSARY INFORMATION. HOWEVER, I DO THINK THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO FLUSH SOME OF THAT OUT, AND I DO THINK THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO LOOK AT HOW WE CAN GET SOME OF THE ANSWERS THAT WE AND MANY OF THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS HAVE ASKED FOR. ONE THING THAT I CAN'T CONTINUE TO IGNORE IS THE INCESTUOUS NATURE OF DALLAS BEING DALLAS. AND IF WE ARE GOING TO ACT AS IF THE INFORMATION WE ARE GIVEN IS BEING GIVEN TO US TO MAKE DECISIONS OBJECTIVELY, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT THOSE WHO ARE GIVING ME THE INFORMATION ARE NOT SEEKING TO BENEFIT FINANCIALLY IN THE FUTURE. I THINK THAT THAT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE ASK. I THINK THAT IT COMES WITH INTEGRITY. YOU ALL SAID THAT YOUR COMPANIES HAVE IT, THEN I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD ALL BE WILLING TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP BY SO MANY OF THE RESIDENTS THAT WE SERVE. I WOULD ABSOLUTELY FEEL A LOT BETTER, EVEN AT THE PACE THAT IT SEEMS. MY COLLEAGUES ARE READY TO MOVE UP. IF WE HAVE SOME SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO BUILD IN SOME CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND CONTINUE TO PERPETUATE THE THINGS OF THE PAST OF OUR CITY, QUITE FRANKLY. SO THAT'S WHY I'VE BROUGHT THIS MOTION IN. I DON'T BELIEVE IT TO BE CONTENTIOUS. I THINK THAT IF WE AREN'T WILLING TO DO THIS, THEN WE AREN'T TRULY WILLING TO PUT IN GUARDRAILS FOR TRANSPARENCY THROUGH THIS PROCESS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GENTLEMEN. STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. MAYOR JOHNSON ON THAT MOTION? YEP. OKAY. I DIDN'T PLAN TO SPEAK ON HIS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO. YOU'RE SORRY? WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE YOU DO IT. THANK YOU. JUST ANYONE WHO DOESN'T WANT TO SPEAK ON THE MOTION BY MR. BAZALDUA SHOULD JUST GO AHEAD AND TURN THE MICROPHONE OFF. [05:10:03] ALL RIGHT. MR. RIDLEY. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WELL, NO, DON'T DON'T DO US ANY FAVORS. DID YOU WANT TO TALK OR NOT? YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. I THINK IT'S A REASONABLE MOTION. I THINK THAT IS KIND OF UNFORTUNATE THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SUCH A MOTION. BECAUSE THAT PRINCIPLE SHOULD UNDERLIE ALL OF OUR CONTACTS WITH OUTSIDE VENDORS. BUT SINCE IT HAS BEEN MADE, I WILL SUPPORT IT. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE MOTION MAKER, IF I MAY WHAT HIS DEFINITION OF CONFLICTED AS. I BELIEVE IF A COMPANY WAS DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN PRODUCING INFORMATION TO SHAPE OR GUIDE OUR DECISION MAKING, THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE BENEFICIARIES OF SAID DECISION THAT WE ARE MAKING. WOULD YOU CONSIDER IT A CONFLICT IF A NEARBY LANDOWNER WANTED TO PROPOSE SOMETHING? I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT MY ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WOULD REFLECT ME WANTING TO ADD IT TO THE MOTION. IF THAT'S WHERE YOU WERE GOING WITH THIS, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DEFINITION IS. I WOULD I WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S PROBABLY A CONVERSATION TO BE HAD THERE, BUT I'M TALKING MORE SPECIFICALLY ON THOSE WHO WERE COMMISSIONED TO GIVE US PRELIMINARY DECISION MAKING INFORMATION AND SHOULD MR. RIDLEY'S PRIOR MOTION BECOME AN AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION. WHERE THERE'S AN OUTSIDE GROUP OF CONSULTANTS WHO WILL LOOK AT THINGS, WOULD THEY ALSO BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE A CONFLICT? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT YOUR MOTION. ARE YOU STILL IN THE QUEUE? CHAIRMAN RIDLEY OR NO. OKAY. THERE YOU GO. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY MR. RECORD? VOTE, PLEASE. DULY NOTED. MR. RESENDEZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. BAZALDUA JUST BRIEFLY WANT TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THIS MOTION. I BELIEVE IT'S PART OF WHAT MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION WOULD, WOULD HAVE INCLUDED. AND SO, YOU KNOW, VOTE YES. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? MISS BLAIR RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. I HAVE A QUESTION. IS, AND MR. BAZALDUA, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO ANSWER IT. ARE YOU ASKING IN YOUR MOTION TO GET NEW CONSULTANTS? SO CAN YOU PLEASE REDEFINE YOUR MOTION TO ME? NO. IT'S SIMPLY THAT THE CONSULTANTS WE HAVE COMMISSIONED ARE NOT GOING TO, IN TURN, ALSO BE DIRECT BENEFICIARIES TO THE POTENTIAL SALE OR REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY THAT THEY ARE GIVING US, GIVING US INFORMATION ON MAKING THE DECISION ON. SO ARE YOU STATING THAT THERE IS A BELIEF THAT THERE ARE CONSULTANTS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY HIRED? IS IS IS IN RISK OF OF RECEIVING A BENEFIT FROM THE WORK THEY'RE DOING FOR US. WELL, I BELIEVE THAT QUESTION WAS ANSWERED DURING THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, AND IT WAS A RESOUNDING YES WHEN I ASKED. SO I THINK THAT'S INSULTING, DON'T YOU? INSULTING TO THE TO THE PEOPLE, TO THESE FORTUNE 500 COMPANIES THAT ARE THEY ANSWERED THE QUESTION YES. WHEN I ASKED IF THEY STAND TO BENEFIT FROM THE SALE OF CITY HALL, THAT WAS THE EXACT QUESTION. AND THEIR ANSWERS WERE, YES. I DON'T REMEMBER THAT. CAN I ASK A QUESTION TO OUR OF OUR OF OUR CONSULTANTS? I DON'T REMEMBER IT. SO I'M GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN IF THAT'S OKAY WITH YOU. STEPHEN DOYNE WITH AECOM. WE DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION. SO WILL YOU BE RECEIVING A BENEFIT FOR THE WORK YOU'RE DOING FOR FOR US IN THE SALE OR THE THE LEASE OR THE ANYTHING THAT IS GOING THAT ANY WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING FOR US, ARE YOU GOING TO RECEIVE A FINANCIAL BENEFIT OTHER THAN THE PAYMENT THE CITY GIVES YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU'RE HIRED TO DO? NO, MA'AM. AND YOUR QUESTION WAS ABOUT THE SALE OF CITY HALL, CORRECT? I MEAN, CBRE IS NOT ENGAGED TO ASSIST IN THE SALE OF CITY HALL. ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE IN IN THE RELOCATION, THE LOOKING AT RELOCATING OF ANY ENTITY, ANY DEPARTMENT IN THIS CITY [05:15:10] OUTSIDE OF THE CONTRACT WE HAVE WITH YOU ALL, WHICH IS PUBLIC RECORD. I MEAN, THAT'S A FEE FOR SERVICE. BUT A BROADER BENEFIT THAT IS UNDEFINED IS PRETTY HARD TO ANSWER. BUT YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A VERY DEFINED CONFLICTS OF INTEREST POLICY AND VERY CLEAR GUIDELINES, BOTH ETHICALLY AND LEGALLY, FOR HANDLING THESE KINDS OF SITUATIONS. AND THAT'S ALL PART OF OUR CONTRACT WITH THE CITY. LET ME CLARIFY THAT THESE CONSULTANTS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CBRE, ARE EMPLOYED BY THE EDC AND NOT DIRECTLY BY THE CITY. SO THE EDC IS IS EMPLOYED BY THE CITY THROUGH THE ILA ADDENDUM. BUT THE CONSULTANTS ARE WORKING FOR THE EDC RELATIVE TO CBRE. THEY HAVE A SEPARATE CONTRACT WITH THE CITY. THAT WAS THAT WENT THROUGH A PROCUREMENT PROCESS AND THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL. AND SO I REALLY CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THAT THAT CONTRACT WOULD HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS CONFLICT. I REALLY I DON'T RECALL THAT THERE WAS A QUESTION AND PEOPLE ANSWERED YES, THAT THEY WERE CONFLICTED FOR SCHMIDT AND STACY ENGINEERS. OUR JOB IS TO DESIGN MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING. IF YOU PLEASE, SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE. THANK YOU. FOR SCHMIDT AND STACY ENGINEERS, OUR JOB IS TO DESIGN MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS, AND WE'D CERTAINLY BE HAPPY TO SUBMIT A BID WITH OTHER COMPETING FIRMS TO DO ANY PART OF WHAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE. DESIGN FIXES FOR THIS BUILDING. DESIGN A NEW CITY HALL, GROUND UP. DESIGN A TENANT FINISH OUT SPACE FOR CITY HALL. BUT ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHER PROCESSES OF GETTING MULTIPLE BIDS FROM MULTIPLE ARCHITECTS AND MULTIPLE MEP CONSULTING FIRMS, THE THE COMPETITION STILL EXISTS, SO NO DIRECT BENEFIT. SO THEN I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS MOTION BECAUSE THIS MOTION THEY JUST THEY JUST SAID THEY'RE NOT GETTING ANY DIRECT BENEFITS. SO WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF EMOTION WHEN THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET THAT, THAT THAT DIRECT BENEFIT AS THE MOTION. THIS IS SAYING THEY WILL THANK YOU. MR. ROTH, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. I'M I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED. AND MAYBE YOU ALL CAN HELP ME. ON THE THE THE MOTION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION. IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING? ARE WE DISCUSSING THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION? YOUR AMENDMENT? YEAH. AND OKAY, IF THAT AMENDMENT, WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT THE MOTION, EVEN WITH THE AMENDMENT, DOES NOT REFER TO EXPLORING ANY CURRENT OPTIONS WITH THIS BUILDING. IT ONLY TALKS ABOUT RELOCATION. IT TALKS ABOUT RELOCATION AND RELOCATION IN THREE PLACES. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT WE WILL LOOK AT ANY OPTIONS AT THIS BUILDING. THAT'S WHAT THE MOTION SAYS. AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EVERYBODY SAYS, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS. BUT IT DOESN'T SAY THAT HERE. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. NUMBER ONE, THE OTHER THING IT SAYS HERE IS THAT THE FINANCE WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW THE FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS. I HAVE A SOMETHING THAT I GOT ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE IS EVERYBODY CLEAR WHAT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE? I'M SORRY I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE WE'RE WE'RE ON THE WE'RE ON MR. BAZALDUA AMENDMENT. RIGHT. SO IF THAT THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. THAT'S TO DEAL WITH CONFLICTS. I'M SORRY. THAT'S TO DEAL WITH CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. BUT ONCE THAT AMENDMENT, IF THAT AMENDMENT GOES FORWARD, THEN YOUR LINE OF QUESTIONING WOULD BE APPROPRIATE BECAUSE WE'D BE ON THE UNDERLYING MOTION AT THAT POINT. BUT AT THIS POINT, OKAY, SO WE'RE ON THE MERITS OF THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. YEAH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU DON'T. THANK YOU. GO EARLY. YOU'RE GOING A LITTLE EARLY. OKAY. MR. BAZALDUA. YOU WANT THREE MINUTES? YOU'RE GOING AFTER THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M SIMPLY JUST ASKING FOR SOME UNBIASED INFORMATION. I THINK THAT THERE HAS BEEN A CLEAR DIVISION ON OUR COUNCIL ON PEOPLE THAT FEEL THAT WHAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN IS. AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN ISN'T. I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GREAT GUARDRAIL TO PUT IN PLACE TO GIVE SOME ASSURANCE THAT WE DO, [05:20:01] IN FACT, HAVE OBJECTIVITY. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR. I WANT TO READ JUST ONE PARAGRAPH FROM TODAY'S OP ED FROM FORMER MAYOR LAURA MILLER. THE HIGH PROBABILITY OF CONSULTANTS MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS FROM WHICH THEY COULD POTENTIALLY PROFIT DID NOT GO UNNOTICED BY COUNCILMEMBER ADAM BAZALDUA, WHO ASKED SEVERAL TIMES DURING THE COMMITTEE MEETING IF THERE WAS ANYONE WHO WORKED ON THE ANALYSIS WHO DIDN'T HAVE A POTENTIAL FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THE SALE OF DALLAS CITY HALL. THE RESPONSE WAS A PROMISE THAT EVERYONE INVOLVED WAS A PROFESSIONAL AND A PATRONIZING, TRUST ME LECTURE THAT WAS GIVEN. THAT'S THE POINT THAT I'M MAKING, IS THAT THIS IS NOT AN OUTRAGEOUS QUESTION. THIS ISN'T AN ACCUSATION. THIS IS JUST WANTING TO PUT IN SOME GUARDRAILS AND SOME SAFETY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT CONTINUING TO PERPETUATE THE THINGS OF OUR CITY'S HISTORY, WHERE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT THE GOOD OLD BOY SYSTEM AND WHO IS RUBBING ELBOWS WITH WHO. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS. IT IS SOMETHING I CAN TURN TO MY CONSTITUENTS TO SAY THAT I'VE BEEN GIVEN ADEQUATE INFORMATION. IF I DIDN'T FEEL THAT I WAS HAVING CONTRASTING DATA TO TO ANALYZE AND REVIEW, WHICH IS SOMETHING I'VE ALREADY BEEN VERY VOCAL ABOUT. BUT IF THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF DATA THAT I WAS GIVEN WAS GIVEN BY PEOPLE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY DIRECTLY BENEFIT OR MAKE MONEY FOR THEIR COMPANY. THIS SHOULD NOT BE. AS MR. RIDLEY SAID, EVEN SOMETHING WE HAVE TO PUT INTO EMOTION. SO IT IS UNFORTUNATE IN THAT REGARD. BUT THE FACT THAT I HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT AND WANTING TO JUST HAVE SOME FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY IS A LITTLE BIT TROUBLING AS WELL. I'M NOT TRYING TO MUDDY THESE WATERS, GUYS. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ULTIMATE BIDDING AND RFP DO NOT END UP GOING TO PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN IN LOCKSTEP AND HAND IN HAND, AND WORKING WITH CITY STAFF ALONG THE WAY TO PROVIDE US WITH INFORMATION THAT LEADS TO US MAKING THE DECISION TO GET RID OF OUR BUILDING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. LOOK, I'M SORRY. OUR JOB IS NOT TO GUARD CORPORATE SENSIBILITIES. IT IS TO GUARD THE TAXPAYERS DOLLARS. AND IF ONE THINKS THAT THERE'S JUST ABSOLUTELY NO WAY ANY OF THESE BUSINESSES WILL SOMEHOW BENEFIT, THEN WHY NOT JUST PASS THIS? BECAUSE IT WILL. IT'S NO HARM. IT'S ONLY HARMFUL IF THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A CONFLICT AS YOU DEFINED. MY MY MY RECOLLECTION OF THE MEETING IS YOU DID ASK THOSE QUESTIONS, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS CBRE WHO SAID, WELL, YEAH, WE WERE HIRED AS CONSULTANTS, BUT WE WOULD RECEIVE A COMMISSION. MAYBE NOT YOU SPECIFICALLY, BUT YOUR CORPORATION, IF WE WERE TO PURCHASE OR LONG TERM LEASE SOMEWHERE. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE COMMENT FROM YOUR COLLEAGUE, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I DIRECTLY SAID. DID ANYBODY FROM INDICATE THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME COMMISSION PAID TO CBRE IF WE ENTERED INTO A LEASE OR PURCHASE. YES, THE CITY COUNCIL DID WHEN THEY AWARDED US A CONTRACT. SO YOU ONLY HAVE THE OPTION OF GETTING A FLAT FEE. YOU'LL GET NO AMOUNT OF COMMISSION REGARDLESS OF OUR ACTIONS. I DIDN'T SAY THAT. I SAID I SAID OUR CONTRACT WITH THE CITY CLEARLY SPELLS OUT COMPENSATION FOR DIFFERENT SERVICES, OF WHICH THERE ARE A RANGE OF FEE STRUCTURES. IT'S PREMATURE TO DISCUSS SOME OF THIS BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE CLEAR DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL ON TRANSACTION STRUCTURE OR A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS. SO THE WORK WE'VE BEEN DOING HAS BEEN UNDER REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT THAT CALLS FOR SUCCESS FEES. IF THERE ARE TRANSACTIONS YOU ALL AUTHORIZE. THAT SAID, WE DON'T HAVE CLEAR DIRECTION YET, SO WE HAVE BEEN WORKING AT RISK TO THIS POINT. SO IF WE DECIDED TO REPAIR CITY HALL AND NOT GO ANYWHERE, YOU ACTUALLY WOULD NOT RECEIVE AS MUCH MONEY. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S UNDETERMINED. AND THERE'S A RANGE OF WAYS THAT WE COULD HAVE SUCCESS FEES IN THAT AS WELL. CITY MANAGER I'D LIKE TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THAT CONTRACT, PLEASE. THAT WOULD BE AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST I'M ASKING FOR. THAT'S FINE. IT WAS VOTED ON IN DECEMBER OF 2025. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. I DON'T SEE WHAT THE HARM IS ON HAVING THIS. AND THE ONLY THING IT DOES IS PROTECT THE TAXPAYERS. SO AGAIN, I WOULD ASK FOR A RECORD VOTE. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. [05:25:01] THANK YOU. MAYOR. CAN I ASK COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA TO REPEAT HIS MOTION? I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REQUIRE THAT BEFORE ANY SOLICITATIONS THAT INCORPORATE ANY OF THE WORK PERFORMED BY THE COMPANIES ENGAGED BY THE EDC FOR THE PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ON THE DISPOSITION OF CITY HALL, OR ISSUED, THAT CITY STAFF WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THESE COMPANIES ARE CONFLICTED FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE SOLICITATIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. MY MONITOR WENT OUT. I'LL JUST TURN THESE OFF. WE'RE HAVING SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES HERE FOR ONE SECOND. AND WE LOST. WE LOST? YES. THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM TO. IF WE COULD TRY TO GET HER RECONNECTED. I KNOW SHE WAS TRYING TO GET IN TO SAY SOMETHING. SO. WELL. IF WE COULD STAND EASTER JUST A COUPLE OF MINUTES JUST TO SEE IF WE CAN GET GAY RECONNECTED, BUT IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A RECORD VOTE ON THIS. ISSUE. LOOKS LIKE WE'VE LOST THE CITY SECRETARY'S ENTIRE MAIN. THE WHOLE MAIN SCREEN THING IS GONE. OH, NO. I'M SORRY. ARE WE GOING TO STAND AT EASE FOR JUST A COUPLE OF MINUTES? HAVE WE SOLVED ONE OF THE PROBLEMS? I SEE THE SEA SECRETARY'S MONITORS BACK UP. BUT IF WE CAN GET THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECONNECTED, THAT WOULD BE GOOD. SHE'S BEEN A GOOD SPORT. ALL RIGHT. MADAM SECRETARY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND. LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL ON MR. BAZALDUA MOTION. MAYBE BY THE TIME WE GET TO HER NAME ON THE ROLL CALL, SHE'LL BE BACK UP. THERE SHE IS. OKAY. DID YOU. DO YOU WANT TO ACTUALLY SAY SOMETHING? RIGHT? DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. CAN YOU HEAR US? WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. YOU GOTTA UNMUTE YOURSELF. YOU'RE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. OKAY, THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. OKAY. I HAD A QUESTION. IT MAY BE BEST FOR THE CITY MANAGER, BUT THIS IS REGARDING THE FIRMS THAT WE HAVE PRESENT TODAY THAT WORKED ON THE ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS. MISS MCMAHON STATED THAT THEY ACTUALLY WORK FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORP.. SO IF ANY OF THEM WERE TO PARTAKE IN ANYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH CITY HALL AND REPAIRING IT OR WHETHER THEY WERE PART OF, YOU KNOW, IF WE DECIDED TO MOVE AND HELPING US WITH THAT MOVE, WOULD THEY HAVE TO BE PART OF A LAWFUL PROCUREMENT THAT WOULD BE COMPETITIVE? IF I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION, THE OTHER, THE CBRE, IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS. WE WENT THROUGH A FORMAL PROCUREMENT PROCESS AND WE SELECTED THEM FOR TO BE THE ACTUAL BROKER FOR THE CITY, AND THAT CONTRACT WAS APPROVED IN DECEMBER. ALL OF THE OTHER FIRMS THAT HAVE WORKED ON THIS ENGAGEMENT WERE ACTUALLY RETAINED THROUGH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND NOT DIRECTLY BY THE CITY. SO IF WE WANTED TO USE CORRIGAN FOR THE SPACE PLANNING OR AECOM, THEY WOULD HAVE TO ENTER INTO. THEY'D HAVE TO SUBMIT A BID WITH OTHERS, AND IT WOULD BE COMPETITIVE. AND THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THEY THEY HAVE NO GUARANTEE OF DOING BUSINESS WITH THE CITY. [05:30:06] THEY CURRENTLY ARE NOT UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS DIRECTLY. YES, MA'AM. BUT SO IF THEY WANTED TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY OF THESE PROJECTS, THERE WOULD BE AN RFP AND THEY COULD COULD PARTICIPATE ALONG WITH OTHERS. AND THEN WE'D SELECT BASED ON THE CRITERIA. YES, MA'AM. WE WOULD GO THROUGH A COMPETITION. WE WOULD GO THROUGH A COMPETITIVE PROCESS AS WE NORMALLY DO. AND WE WOULD THEN BRING BASED ON THE EVALUATION OF THAT, OF THOSE PROPOSALS, WE WOULD THEN BRING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. RIGHT. OKAY. WELL, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR BECAUSE, I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS MOTION IS TRYING TO KICK OUT SOME HIGHLY RECOMMENDED, WELL THOUGHT OF EXPERTS IN THEIR FIELD. AND IT JUST MAKES ME WONDER WHO YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE ROOM FOR TO MAYBE MAKE IT LESS COMPETITIVE. SO I DON'T I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE IT'S LIKE TURNING IT BACK ON OUR OUR PROCUREMENT PROCESS THAT IS LAWFUL AND COMPETITIVE AND TRANSPARENT. THANK YOU. MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. JACK, CAN YOU TELL ME, DO WE GIVE DOES THE CITY GIVE ANY MONEY TO THE EDC? OH, WAIT, IS OUR CFO GONE? YES, MA'AM. WE DID THE SEAT. WE ACTUALLY PROVIDED THE SEED MONEY FOR THE TO STAND UP THE CDC TO SEND UP THE DALLAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. AND THEN SINCE THAT TIME, I THINK WE'VE ALSO MADE ANOTHER PAYMENT DIRECTLY TO THE CITY. I WANT TO SAY THE LAST PAYMENT. ROBIN IS COMING. I WANT TO SAY 4 MILLION, BUT LET ME MAKE MAKE SURE I'M GETTING THAT CORRECT. I THOUGHT IT WAS SEVEN. GOOD EVENING. YES, IT WAS 7 MILLION IN SEED FUNDING. AND THEN FOR THE SIMMONS ADDENDUM, IT WAS A 100,000. AND THEN FOR THIS WORK, 300,000. SO A TOTAL OF 7.4. AND, LINDA, HOW MUCH ARE YOU ASKING FOR THIS COMING YEAR FOR OUR BUDGET? I THINK YOU ALL TALKED ABOUT IT ON MONDAY. FOR FOR FISCAL YEAR 27. WHATEVER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR FISCAL YEAR 26, WE WE DID NOT MAKE ANY REQUESTS FOR FUNDING. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO COME THIS COMING YEAR FOR REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 27, WE JUST SUBMITTED OUR BUDGET YESTERDAY AND WE WILL BE REQUESTING $4 MILLION. SO YOU'RE GOING TO BE ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL 4 MILLION. SO I THINK WE HAVE A PARTNERSHIP RIGHT. I'M SORRY. THIS IS A PARTNERSHIP WHERE WE OPERATE UNDER AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. SO I MEAN, I THINK IT'S A FAIR AMENDMENT, TO BE QUITE HONEST, BECAUSE, I MEAN, WE'RE DOING A LOT OF WORK HERE, AND I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE DO STAND TO MAKE SOME MONEY. AND YOU ARE AN EXTENSION OF US, WHETHER WHATEVER, HOWEVER PEOPLE THINK ABOUT IT. SURE. EVEN THOUGH WE CAN'T GET INFORMATION. BUT I DO THINK IT'S A FAIR AMENDMENT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE TAXPAYER KNOWS THAT WE ARE NOT TRYING TO, THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR TAX DOLLAR IS BEING ACCOUNTED FOR. AND SO YOU'RE COMING BACK FOR 4 MILLION FOR THIS COMING NEXT YEAR? FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 27. OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIRWOMAN. MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE COMMENTS WERE DIRECTED TO CBRE, A COMPANY THAT I LOVE. MANY PEOPLE I KNOW THAT WORK THERE. A COUPLE OF THEM WHO I THINK ARE GOING TO HAVE SOME THINGS TO SAY TO ME TOMORROW. BUT IT'S NOT JUST THEM. AECOM. ARE THEY NOT PART OF THE CONVENTION CENTER? SEEMA. I THINK THEY'RE PART OF AN ALLIANCE GROUP. THAT'S THE SEEMA. CORRECT. OUR CONSTRUCTION ENTITY, AECOM HUNT CONSTRUCTION IS. YEAH, YEAH. SO WE'RE NOW CALLING THIS A CONVENTION CENTER PROJECT, APPARENTLY, WHICH THAT ALSO IS NEWS TO ME THIS WEEK. SO THAT'S ALSO A CONFLICT. AND SO I JUST THINK THERE'S A LOT OF TENTACLES OF A LOT OF THE SAME PLAYERS. AND THIS DOES PROVIDE SOME ASSURANCE TO OUR TAXPAYERS THAT THERE WILL BE FAIRNESS IN THIS VERY EXPENSIVE CONSIDERATION. IF I MAKE COUNCILWOMAN, THIS IS NOT A CONVENTION CENTER PROJECT. JUST FOR CLARITY, THIS IS NOT PART OF THE CONVENTION CENTER MASTER PLAN. EXCUSE ME, I BELIEVE AT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING. I'M SORRY. THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING. IT WAS TALKED ABOUT HOW THIS COULD BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF. YOU'RE APPARENTLY OUT OF TIME. I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT. YOU HAVE THE ONE MINUTE. IF YOU'D LIKE. YOU STILL HAVE WHAT? I'D BE GLAD TO RESPOND IF IT DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST HER TIME. SO AT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE SHOULD BE COMPLIMENTARY OF THE CONVENTION CENTER, BUT NOT THAT IT WAS PART OF THE CONVENTION CENTER. I BELIEVE CHAIRMAN WEST HIMSELF WAS TALKING ABOUT. [05:35:01] YOU'RE ACTUALLY OUT OF TIME. I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT I HAD THE ONE MINUTE. NO. YOU DID. YOU USED IT. GOT IT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY MR. BAZALDUA? ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE HAD A REQUEST FOR RECORD VOTE. YES. CALL THE ROLL. THANK YOU. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. YES, MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH 14 VOTING IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, SO WE ARE NOW ON ITEM ONE AS IT WAS JUST AMENDED. SO WE'RE BACK ON ITEM ONE. HAS THAT AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA INCORPORATED INTO IT. AND I'M LOOKING FOR FOLKS WHO HAVE NOT SPOKEN YET. OH. I'M STILL WAITING TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE BESIDES CHAIRMAN RIDLEY BECAUSE HE HASN'T SPOKEN YET. OKAY, I'M GOING TO GO TO MR. ROTH FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I NEED TO CLARIFY THE MOTION AT THIS POINT. IT IT'S IT SAYS THAT WE'RE MOVING TO FOLLOW THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. I'M NOT CLEAR WHAT IS THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS? WAS THAT A SEPARATE. I HAVE A A SITUATION HERE, A PIECE OF PAPER FROM THE COMMITTEE, THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. BUT I'M WONDERING IF THAT'S STILL PART OF THIS MOTION OR NOT. IF SOMEBODY CAN CLARIFY THAT. NO, THIS IS DIFFERENT. THERE'S. ANYONE WANT TO HELP MR. ROTH OUT WITH THAT? I CAN, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO READ WHAT WHAT I HAVE HERE IS IT SAYS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS. AND IF THEY DO, IF IF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS THE RECOMMENDATIONS, THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS. NUMBER ONE, IT WAS COORDINATING WITH CBRE TO CREATE TO IDENTIFY ONE FINALIST PROPERTY OPTION FOR RELOCATION. NUMBER TWO, LAUNCH A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SURVEY. NOW THIS IS DIFFERENT. NUMBER THREE, IT SAYS COORDINATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE WITH PROPERTY OWNERS. NUMBER FOUR, THE CITY MANAGER DETERMINE SOURCES OF POTENTIAL FUNDING FOR THE PROPOSED FINALIST OPTIONS DETERMINED BY CBRE. NUMBER FIVE WAS. FINANCE COMMITTEE REFERS TO THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CURRENT CITY HALL SITE TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, AND THEN SIX DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO UPDATE THE COMMITTEE REGULARLY ON THE STATUS OF TWO, THREE AND FOUR. AGAIN, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE AND IF BECAUSE THE SECOND PART OF THIS IS THAT WE'VE GOT ON THE MOTION, THE CHANGES ARE ONE, TWO AND THREE, WHICH SAYS WE'RE GOING TO EXPLORE RELOCATION OPTIONS FOR THREE, ONE ONE. WE'RE GOING TO EXPLORE RELOCATION OPTIONS FOR CITY HALL STAFF. AND WE'RE GOING TO EXPLORE DISPOSITION OPTIONS. BUT IT DOESN'T SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR THIS BUILDING OF RENOVATION AND IMPROVEMENTS AND OTHER IDEAS. SO I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A NUMBER FOR FOUR. AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS. AND IT MAY BE YOU KNOW, COUNCIL MEMBER WEST CAN CAN EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THIS WORKS. THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE ITEM THAT CAME OUT OF FINANCE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT IS, BUT I'M GOING TO ASK STAFF TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I REMEMBER SOME OF THAT LANGUAGE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE ENDED UP APPROVING. SO I'M GOING TO READ THERE WAS SOME ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS. BACK TO THE MOTION. SO WHAT THE COMMISSION WHAT THE COMMITTEE HAD WAS IF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION MOVED FORWARD, [05:40:05] THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD ASK FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO COORDINATE IN WITH THE CBRE TO DEFINITELY LOOK AT THE 311911 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS AND BRING BACK PROPOSALS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE EARLIEST DATE LUNCH OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SURVEY TO POLL RESIDENTS TO DETERMINE ATTRIBUTES AND CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY. BEGIN TO DISCUSS WITH PROPERTY OWNERS TO DETERMINE A LIST OF PROPERTY OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION, LOOK AT POTENTIAL FUNDING FOR ANY PROPOSED OPTIONS. AND THEN WE THE REFERRAL TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT OPTIONS FOR THE CITY HALL SITE AND THEN TO COME BACK AND BRIEF OPTIONS IN FRONT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE NO LATER THAN MAY OF 2026. SO THOSE WERE THE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY THE CHAIR AT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING. BUT IF I COULD FOLLOW UP, THAT WAS NOT THE MOTION THAT CAME OUT OF FINANCE. THOSE WERE JUST COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR. RIGHT. I PASSED THAT ONE TO CHAD. IS THAT THAT'S WHAT HIS COMMENTS. THANK YOU. YES, WE GOT IT. THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS AND I WAS I WAS READING THE MOTION LANGUAGE. SO YEAH, LET'S I MEAN, WHAT CITY MANAGER READ IS THE ACTUAL MOTION, BUT THERE WERE SOME DIRECTIVES IN THERE FROM THE COMMITTEE THAT WERE COMMENTS, CERTAINLY. BUT I THINK WHAT'S WHAT'S BEEN PASSED OUT IS THE SPECIFIC DIRECTIVE FROM COUNCIL. SOMETIMES AFTER WE MAKE THOSE, WE ALSO CONTINUE TO GIVE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER AS WELL, WHICH I ASSUME WE'RE GOING TO DO TODAY. AND AGAIN, I'M SORRY TO BE SO THICK ON THIS, BUT WHERE THE MOTION IS THAT WE'RE FOLLOWING THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. THE THREE ITEMS ARE THE CHANGES. WHAT ARE THE CITIES? WHAT ARE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE VOTING ON? CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE HELP MR. ROTH WITH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU. SO THE ACTUAL MOTION THAT CAME OUT OF FINANCE COMMITTEE WAS TO RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE CONDITIONS OF CITY HALL. AND THERE WERE ONE, TWO AND THREE THAT THIS IS THE MOTION THAT CAME OUT OF THE COMMITTEE. THESE ARE CHAIR COMMENTS AND REQUESTS. HE MODIFIED THIS. THE CHAIR MODIFIED THE FIRST THREE TODAY SLIGHTLY BY USING THE WORDS EXPLORE. SO HE BASED HIS TODAY'S MOTION ON THIS. THESE THREE, NOT THE REST OF THIS. I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS DONE VIA VISUAL AID BEFORE, BUT OKAY. SO DID IT HELP YOU, MR. ROTH, TO SEE THAT WHAT SHE JUST SHOWED YOU OR OR DO YOU WANT HER TO READ IT OUT LOUD? AND JUST. THESE WERE THE WORDS THAT WERE CHANGED. THIS WORD NEEDS TO BE OUT. NO, BECAUSE IT'S WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. WHAT IS THE SHOW AND TELL GUYS? I MEAN, LIKE, WE HAVE TO DO THIS STUFF ON THE RECORD, GUYS. I MEAN, YOU GUYS CAN HAVE YOUR SIDEBAR WHERE YOU'RE JUST SHOWING PEOPLE PICTURES AND STUFF. IF YOU WANT TO READ IT OUT LOUD, READ IT OUT LOUD. BUT I MEAN, YOU KNOW, COME ON. OKAY. I'M SORRY. THE MOTION THAT CAME OUT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WAS I MOVED THAT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE CONDITIONS OF CITY HALL ONE. DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER MOVE 311911, AN EMERGENCY. EMERGENCY OPERATIONS TO NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO PURSUE OPTIONS. TO RELOCATE ALL OTHER CITY HALL STAFF AND FUNCTIONS TO NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS, AND THREE DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO PURSUE OPTIONS FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF CITY HALL. THAT WAS THE MOTION THAT CAME OUT OF THE COMMITTEE TODAY ON THE FLOOR. THE FINANCE COMMITTEE CHAIR MOVED TO FOLLOW THAT RECOMMENDATION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. AND THE CHANGES WERE FROM. THE CHANGES WERE. INSTEAD OF DIRECTING HER TO PURSUE OPTIONS OR TO ACTUALLY MOVE IT, WAS TO EXPLORE RELOCATION OPTIONS, EXPLORE OPTIONS TO RELOCATE ALL OTHER CITY HALL STAFF AND FUNCTIONS, AND EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR THE DISPOSITION. SO THERE WERE MINOR CHANGES TO THE WORDS FROM THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. THERE WERE CHANGES TO THE WORDS UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD THAT WE ALSO INCLUDE AS AN OPTION FOR THE REPAIR, MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT OF DALLAS CITY HALL TO EXPLORE THE REPAIR, MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT OF DALLAS CITY HALL AS A NUMBER FOUR. [05:45:01] I THINK IT'S IN ORDER. I MEAN, IS THAT IS THAT AMENDMENT ORDER? YEAH. BUT I'M WONDERING. IF THERE'S A SECOND FOR IT. PAULA BLACKMON SECONDED YOUR MOTION. SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR ADDITION OF A NUMBER FOUR. THANK YOU. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO I REALLY AM NOT TRYING TO COMPLICATE THIS THING. BUT I THINK THERE'S THE ITEM THAT COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY PROVIDED SUGGESTED EARLIER IS THAT WE IDENTIFY REALLY A MORE DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK THAT WE MIGHT NEED TO DO. IT ALLOWS US TO CREATE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. IT ALLOWS US TO FOCUS ALSO ON WHAT WE MIGHT NEED TO DO AS ALTERNATIVES FOR THIS BUILDING. IT DOESN'T EXCLUDE THIS BUILDING FROM THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF, OF OF EXPLORING OTHER IDEAS. AND IN FACT, WHAT IT DOES IS IT'S IT CREATES THAT AS ONE OF THE SIGNIFICANT OPTIONS THAT WE ARE TASKED TO TAKE TO, TO PURSUE. AND SO I THINK THAT BY LIMITING IT TO THOSE THREE ITEMS ONLY, WE HAVE SPECIFICALLY SAID WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THIS BUILDING. WE ARE ONLY LOOKING AT EXPLORING THOSE OTHER OPTIONS WHICH ARE RELOCATION SALE DISPOSITION AND AND RELOCATING 911311 AND 911. SO I THINK IT HELPS IT HELPS ADDRESS PERHAPS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY HAD. I THINK IT MIGHT CLARIFY SOME, SOME CONCERNS, POSSIBLY THAT COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ HAD. AND IT WOULD ALSO BE MORE, MORE IN LINE WITH WHAT OUR, OUR TASK WAS, WAS TO EXPLORE ALL OPTIONS, INCLUDING LOOKING AT THIS BUILDING. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO, IF I MAY ASK COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH. A QUESTION WOULD YOU, GIVEN THE SENSE OF YOUR AMENDMENT, BE WILLING TO INCORPORATE THE LANGUAGE IN THE AMENDMENT THAT I OFFERED EARLIER WITH THE FOUR POINTS? ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. SO THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THE AMENDMENT READS. I MOVE TO ADD TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION A DIRECTION THAT THE CITY MANAGER RETAIN OUTSIDE EXPERTS WITH NO FINANCIAL STAKE IN THE RELOCATION OR REPAIR OF CITY HALL, APPROVED BY THE FULL COUNCIL TO UNDERTAKE A COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN STUDY OF OPTIONS FOR THE REPAIR, MODERNIZATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF DALLAS CITY HALL. THE MASTER PLAN STUDY SHALL EVALUATE, PLAN AND RECOMMEND A STRATEGIC APPROACH FOR THE REPAIR, MODERNIZATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF DALLAS CITY HALL AND PLAZA, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING. ONE ASSESSMENT OF CONDITIONS TWO. PRIORITIZATION OF MOST CRITICAL NEEDS, THREE FUNDING STRATEGY AND FOUR TIMELINE. THE STUDY SHALL BE CONDUCTED THROUGH A TRANSPARENT AND PUBLICLY ENGAGED PROCESS, INCLUDING INTERIM BRIEFINGS TO THE FULL COUNCIL AND TO BE COMPLETED AND PRESENTED TO THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL. IS THAT YOUR MOTION TO AMEND HIS? I'M NOT DOING IT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. THAT'S SIGNIFICANT. WELL, HE ACCEPTED MY PREVIOUS LANGUAGE, WHICH I READ FOR EVERYONE'S CLARITY. OKAY. BUT THERE'S NO PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO JUST SAY I ACCEPT HIS AMENDMENT AND IT GETS ON AS A SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT LIKE THAT. WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY HAVE THAT. SECONDED. SECOND AND DISCUSS IT. OKAY. IT'S BEEN SECONDED. AND YOU HAVE THE FLOOR NOW. THANK YOU. YES. SO I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN ROSS EFFORTS TO MAKE A MOTION TO PRESERVE THE OPTION OF EXAMINING FURTHER ALONG THE LINES OF THOSE FOUR POINTS, THE OPTION OF STAYING AT CITY HALL AND REPAIRING IT. THIS IS ESSENTIAL INFORMATION AND EVALUATION, WHICH IS ALL WE HAVE NOW, IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE. AND THAT'S WHY WE NEED MORE SPECIFICITY OF THE ASSESSMENT OF CONDITIONS, PRIORITY OF CRITICAL NEEDS, THE FUNDING STRATEGY IN THE TIMELINE TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THE VALIDITY OF THIS OPTION GOING FORWARD. AND SO THAT'S WHY I'VE INCORPORATED THE LANGUAGE OF MY PREVIOUS MOTION, SO THAT WE CAN BENEFIT FROM THIS ADDITIONAL [05:50:01] INFORMATION AS PART OF THE UNDERLYING MOTION TO EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR MOVING EVERYBODY. FOLLOW WHAT'S GOING ON THERE SO FAR. SO WE GOT MR. RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT OUT THERE. NOW THAT WAS HIS ORIGINAL HIS ORIGINAL LANGUAGE. AND ONCE WE DISPOSE OF THAT WE'LL GO TO MR. ROSS AMENDMENT AND THEN WE'LL BE BACK ON THE ORIGINAL ONE. SO WE'RE ON MR. RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT RIGHT NOW TO YOUR AMENDMENT. CAN I HAVE A POINT OF INFORMATION? IS WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE IF I WANTED TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND JUST LET IT JUST LET HIM AMEND THIS OTHER MOTION? IF I IF I WITHDREW MY MOTION, IF THERE WAS NO OBJECTION TO IT, WE COULD DO IT. BUT ARE YOU SAYING YOU DON'T WANT WHAT YOUR CHANGE WOULD DO ANYMORE? AND THEN I WOULD ALLOW THEN I WOULD SUGGEST THAT COUNCILMAN RIDLEY'S MOTION MOVE FORWARD WITH HIS CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING HIS I DON'T YOUR AMENDMENT DIDN'T SUBSUME HIS DID IT. IT WAS IT WAS IT COMPLETELY. YES. OR DID IT DO IT IN ADDITION TO WHAT HE WAS DOING. SO IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO HIM, MR. ROTH WITHDRAWING HIS AMENDMENT? ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, THEN YOUR AMENDMENT IS WITHDRAWN. THE ONLY AMENDMENT WE HAVE NOW, IT WILL BE MR. RIDLEY'S. DID YOU HAVE THE FLOOR STILL? OKAY, SO MR. BAZALDUA YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THERE'S ONLY ONE AMENDMENT ON THE FLOOR NOW. OKAY. I ALSO NEED SOME POINT OF CLARITY, IF YOU CAN. I THINK I UNDERSTAND. CAN YOU JUST LET ME KNOW? MR. RIDLEY, WHERE DID YOU START YOUR LANGUAGE? FROM YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION. I MOVE. DID YOU. DID YOU OMIT DEFER? YES. OKAY. I SAID, I MOVE TO AMEND, TO ADD THE DIRECTION THAT THE CITY MANAGER RETAIN OUTSIDE EXPERTS. AND THE REST WAS THE SAME AS MY ORIGINAL MOTION. SO I JUST ASK IF THAT IF BECAUSE I BELIEVE WITH WHAT MR. RESENDEZ WAS SAYING WAS THAT MY HE BELIEVED MY MOTION WAS KIND OF ACCOMPLISHING SOMETHING THAT YOU WERE. AND I THINK THAT MY MOTION ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH. I WOULD I WOULD ASSUME ESSENTIALLY THOSE CONSULTANTS WE HAVE HIRED NOW ARE OUR OUTSIDE OPINIONS, BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT BE BIDDERS OF THE JOB. SO I'M JUST I'M JUST ASKING IF I CAN GET SOME CLARITY THERE. AND IS THAT. WELL YOU'RE CORRECT UP TO A POINT TO THE LANGUAGE ABOUT RETAINING OUTSIDE EXPERTS WITH NO FINANCIAL STAKE IN THE RELOCATION OR REPAIR OF CITY HALL. I THINK THAT WAS THE SUBSTANCE OF YOUR MOTION. BUT THEN THE REST OF IT IS ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT THOSE EXPERTS WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE FULL COUNCIL TO UNDERTAKE A COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN STUDY OF OPTIONS FOR THE REPAIR, MODERNIZATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF DALLAS CITY HALL, WHICH WAS NOT IN YOUR MOTION. OKAY. AND I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE CAN CAN THE ATTORNEYS JUST CONFIRM IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BE DOING ANYWAY? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT MUDDIED. I THINK IT DEPENDS ON THE AMOUNT OF THE MASTER PLAN STUDY, WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL. BUT DID YOU SAY THAT IN YOUR MOTION YOU WANTED TO COME? YOU WANT THAT CONTRACT TO COME TO COUNCIL? IS THAT PART OF THE MOTION? WELL THE SELECTION OF THE OUTSIDE EXPERTS WOULD COME TO THE FULL COUNCIL. YOU WOULD BE THE. YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU WOULD BE THE COMMITTEE TO SELECT THE THE VENDOR? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? WELL, THAT WE WOULD APPROVE IT AS A FULL COUNCIL. OKAY, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I ASKED FIRST. IS IT? WERE YOU SAYING THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO COME TO FULL COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL? OKAY. SO IT WOULD BE LIKE WE ALREADY SEE, IT'S NOT ASKING US TO DRAW LOTS OR. NO, HE'S SAYING THAT HE WANTS AS PART OF THE MOTION, RIGHT, THAT HE WANTS THAT CONTRACT TO COME TO COUNCIL. OKAY. FOR APPROVAL, THEN. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT PART, I THINK THAT THERE MAY BE SOME DUPLICATIVE LANGUAGE IN THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IT HURTS ANYTHING. I THINK WE'RE OKAY, BUT I WANT TO JUST EMPHASIZE THAT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONDITIONS, PRIORITIZATION OF MOST CRITICAL NEEDS THE FUNDING STRATEGY, I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT THE FUNDING STRATEGY, NUMBER THREE IS ONE THAT IS EXHAUSTIVE OF ALL OPTIONS. I WOULD LIKE FOR IT TO BE INCLUSIVE OF ANY TIFF OPPORTUNITIES, ANY HOT TAX USAGE, ANY OF THAT CONTINGENCY FUND, ETCETERA. LIKE, I WANT US TO SEE A COMPREHENSIVE FUNDING STACK OF ALL OPTIONS TO COMPARE TO AS WELL. [05:55:10] THE TIMELINE IS, IS IS ALSO GREAT. I WOULD ASK, THOUGH, THAT IF STAFF COULD COULD COULD MAKE SURE THAT. I GUESS. HOW COULD IT BE? I DON'T KNOW, WITHOUT AN AMENDMENT. I, I'M WONDERING IF WE'RE ABLE TO GET THE SAME INFORMATION, BUT ALSO SPECIFIC TO THE REPAIR. I KNOW THAT IT'S ASKING FOR THE ASSESSMENTS, BUT IS IS IT CLEAR THAT THE DIRECTION WE'RE GIVING IS TO GIVE US COMPARATIVE DATA, APPLES TO APPLES IN ANY OF THE SCENARIOS THAT ARE GIVEN? LIKE, I DON'T WANT JUST CHECKING THE BOX OF AN ASSESSMENT OF OUR CONDITIONS WITH THE PRIORITIZATION, WITH HOW THAT WOULD COST. BUT WE'RE NOT BEING WE'RE NOT BEING GIVEN THE DIRECT COMPARISONS OF WHAT A RELOCATION WOULD BE VERSUS THAT OF A RENOVATION VERSUS THAT OF POTENTIAL LEASE AGREEMENTS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET. THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT OUT HERE, AND IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT THE MARKET. AND I WANT STAFF TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT AND NOT TO RELY SOLELY ON THE DATA THAT'S GOING TO BE GIVEN TO US BY OUR CONSULTANTS AND INSTEAD ALSO PROVIDE SOMETHING, EVEN IF IT'S SOME SOMEWHAT HYPOTHETICAL, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE ACTUAL CONVERSATIONS AND THAT THERE'S NOT ELEPHANTS IN THE ROOM, AND THAT OUR PUBLIC IS NOT GOING TO BE KEPT IN THE DARK ON SOME OF THESE MAJOR DECISIONS. IF WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY OUR DECISION FOR ONE WAY VERSUS THE OTHER, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE FULL TRANSPARENCY, WHICH IS GOING TO BE INCLUSIVE OF AN EXACT COMPARISON OF WHAT THOSE DIFFERENT OPTIONS LOOK LIKE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MOTION HAD DIRECT AS THE VERB ON ONE, TWO AND THREE. AND NOW WE'RE GOING ONE, TWO AND THREE. EXPLORE. CAN I HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING FROM WHY WE CHANGED THAT TERMINOLOGY? I DON'T I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WAS CHANGED TO THE WORD EXPLORE. I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS MOTION. I DIDN'T DRAFT IT. I DIDN'T TALK TO THE CHAIR. SO WHY WHY IS THERE A DIRECT VERSUS. IT'S DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPLORE RELOCATION OPTIONS. EXPLORE OPTIONS. IT'S A SLIGHT DIFFERENCES. IN THE SECOND AND THIRD BULLET THEY THEY SUBSTITUTED OUT THE WORD. LET ME GET BACK TO THAT. THEY USE PURSUE OPTIONS. NOW THAT SWITCHED TO EXPLORE OPTIONS. AND THE SECOND AND THIRD. AND IN THE FIRST ONE IT IT WAS TO MOVE THROUGH ON NINE AND ONE. AND THAT WAS CHANGED TO EXPLORE RELOCATION OPTIONS INSTEAD OF JUST MOVE. SO WHO WROTE THE MOTION? THE AUTHOR. I'M JUST CURIOUS ON WHY EXPLORER VERSUS DIRECT. I CAN MAKE IT. IT DOES DIRECT. IT'S DIRECTING HER TO EXPLORE. OKAY, SO I'M ASKING, WHY DID WE CHANGE IT? ANYONE? BUELLER? BUELLER? I'M HAPPY TO CHIME IN ON THIS. YOU TAKE MY TIME. SO, WHO WROTE THE MOTION? CHAD. I MEAN, MR. WEST, DID YOU WRITE THE MOTION? MOTION ON YOUR TIME. YOU CAN SHAKE YOUR HEAD. YES OR NO? I DID NOT WRITE THE MOTION. OKAY. WHOEVER WROTE THE MOTION. BUELLER? BUELLER? BUELLER? I'D JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHY WE CHANGED WORDS AT THE DIRECTION I BELIEVE OF. OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER. I MEAN, WE DIDN'T. WE DON'T CHANGE WORDS WITHOUT MR. WEST. DID YOU CHANGE THE WORD FROM EXPLORER TO. FROM DIRECT TO EXPLORER, I GUESS. TAKE FIVE MINUTES. CHANGE THE WORD FROM PURSUE TO EXPLORER TO SOFTEN IT A LITTLE BIT SO THAT IT WAS TO LET IT, I MEAN, TO, I THINK BETTER REFLECT THAT COUNCIL WASN'T ALL READY TO JUST START GETTING SUPER AGGRESSIVE ON IT. AND I THINK THE MAIN CHANGE IS IN THE ORIGINAL MOTION. IT WAS DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO MOVE 311911. WE TOOK OUT THAT WORD. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. HAS IT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH OUR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CRITERIA NUMBER 20. YES IT DOES. ANYONE ANYONE WHICH IS OPERATING IMPACT OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS I THINK THERE'S A SUPERMAJORITY. SO MY QUESTION IS IS IT MAYOR? I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING. ARE YOU SORRY? YOU WANT ME TO YELL LONGER OR MORE? IS IT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH OUR FINANCIAL CRITERIA? NUMBER 20 AS TO THE VERB THAT WE'RE USING. IT DOES. THIS IS WHY SHE WENT TO CHANGE. OKAY, I GUESS WE'LL JUST SIT HERE. [06:00:04] SO I'LL TRY TO ANSWER. I ORIGINALLY DRAFTED THE MOTION FOLLOWING THE FINANCE COMMITTEE SHARED IT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. THERE WERE SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CHAIR AND THE EDITS WERE MADE THAT WERE PRESENTED AS THE MOTION. SO WAS THERE DISCUSSION ABOUT FINANCIAL CRITERIA NUMBER 20. THIS MORNING I HEARD CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT THIS MORNING. YES, MA'AM. SO THIS GOES INTO EFFECT. I DO NOT KNOW THAT THIS IS THE NUMBER 20 GO INTO EFFECT WITH ANY DIRECTION OR VERSUS EXPLORING THOSE VERBS MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND IT'S OPERATING IMPACT OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. IF YOU JUST GOOGLE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CRITERIA. CITY OF DALLAS. HERE IT IS. HERE I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE IF YOU WANT IT. WELL, THE BIG CATCH IS THE CITY COUNCIL WILL AUTHORIZE EACH NEW OR REOPENED FACILITY OR BUILDING BY A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE. SO YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THIS AMENDMENT THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US, NOT THE FINANCE, DOES NOT TRIGGER A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE? THE MOTION BEFORE YOU RIGHT NOW DOES NOT TRIGGER A THREE QUARTER VOTE. BUT IF WE USE DIRECT, THEN IT DOES. YOU WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY INSTRUCT HER TO TO ACTUALLY MOVE IT. AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE. SO THAT'S THE DIRECT THE THREE. NO IT'S TO OR NEW GOVERNMENT I GUESS TO OPEN MOVE TO MOVE DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO MOVE WHICH WOULD TRIGGER. IT SAYS IN THE F FM PC 20. CITY COUNCIL WILL AUTHORIZE EACH NEW OR REOPEN FACILITY SLASH BUILDING BY SUPERMAJORITY VOTE. BUT EXPLORE DOES NOT TRIGGER THIS. NO, BUT IF YOU USE THE WORD DIRECT TO MOVE, IT WOULD. I THINK IT WOULD. YEAH. OKAY, SO MY NEXT QUESTION IS WHEN DID WE TALK ABOUT NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS IN ANY OF OUR REAL ESTATE DISCUSSIONS OF BREAKING UP, HOW WE'RE GOING TO FACILITATE GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS? DID I MISS A MEETING? ANYONE CITY STAFF. BECAUSE IT SAYS RIGHT HERE TO NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS. NEW MEANS WE'RE CHANGING THE WAY WE'RE DOING IT. I'M JUST CURIOUS OF WHEN THAT DISCUSSION HAPPENED, BECAUSE YOU GO IN NUMBER TWO, ALL OTHER CITY HALL STAFF AND FUNCTIONS TO NEW GOVERNMENT CITY LOCATIONS. JUST CURIOUS. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SO AS PART OF THE SPACE PLANNING PROCESS BY CORGAN, THEY MET WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND WE HAD OPEN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT CITY HALL, IF IT GOT REIMAGINED AND WAS NO LONGER LOCATED IN THIS FACILITY, HOW WE COULD POTENTIALLY BREAK CITY HALL UP IN SUCH A WAY THAT COULD MAKE IT POTENTIALLY MARKETABLE. RIGHT. FOR US TO BE ABLE TO RELOCATE TO OTHER COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE. SO IT WASN'T A DIRECTIVE FROM CITY COUNCIL OR A FINANCE COMMITTEE. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE ORIGINAL CHARGE THAT WAS BACK IN NOVEMBER ASKED US TO DO SPACE, ASK US TO DO SPACE PLANNING. SO NOW WE'VE DECIDED BECAUSE OF THIS, THAT WE'RE JUST NOW GOING WITH THE NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATION MODEL. NO, MA'AM. THOSE WERE THOSE WERE ALL OPTIONS. THERE WAS NOTHING THAT WAS FIXED OR DETERMINED THAT WOULDN'T HAVE COME BACK TO COUNCIL. CORRIGAN WAS JUST WORKING THROUGH SPACE PLANNING OPTIONS WITH US AND EXPLORING THOSE WITH US, INCLUDING. EVERYTHING IS AS LOW LEVEL AS WHAT SIZE SOMEBODY'S CUBICLE WOULD BE. SO WHY DO WE HAVE TWO RESOLUTIONS SAYING TO EXPLORE IF YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN DOING IT SO. IN THE NOVEMBER 12TH RESOLUTION FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, THERE WAS AN EVALUATION OF OFFICE SPACE NEEDS THAT WERE INCLUDED. REVIEW AVAILABLE OFFICE SPACE IN THE MARKET, LEASED BY OR PROVIDE A BUILD ANALYSIS REVIEW THE OVERALL CITY HALL NEEDS AND COSTS. DO THE MARKET STUDY ECONOMIC IMPACT IN THAT COMPONENT. SO IN THAT SECOND BULLET ABOUT THE ACTUAL OFFICE, I MEAN, I'M SORRY ABOUT EVALUATING THOSE OFFICE SPACE NEEDS. IT WAS INCORPORATED UNDER THAT UNDER THAT PARTICULAR BULLET. SO YOU INTERPRETED THAT TO MEANING CHANGING OUR WHOLE WAY. WE DELIVER GOVERNMENT SERVICES TO NEW GOVERNMENT CITY CENTER LOCATIONS FROM A EVALUATE OFFICE SPACE NEEDS TO NOW WE'RE CHANGING IT TO A TOTAL NEW DIFFERENT GOVERNMENT DELIVERY SYSTEM. NO, I THINK IT'S BACK TO THE OPTION THAT WAS PRESENTED BACK IN OCTOBER. ON OCTOBER 21ST, THERE WERE THREE OPTIONS. ONE WAS TO MAINTAIN STATUS QUO. THIS IS THE BRIEFING THAT WAS PROVIDED. ORIGINALLY, THERE WAS AN OPTION TO TO BEGIN TO LOOK AT PLANNING AND FUNDING REPAIRS, [06:05:03] AND THEN THERE WAS AN OPTION THREE TO EXPLORE ALTERNATIVES. AND THE WORD NEW CITY HALL WAS ACTUALLY IN THE OPTION NUMBER THREE. BUT I'M FOCUSING. SO THAT WAS CORRECT. BUT I THINK I THINK I THINK I THINK IT'S JUST A MIXTURE OF TERMINOLOGY. COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON I DON'T THINK IT'S DIFFERENT. OKAY. BECAUSE THEN WE'RE NOW EVALUATING, I BELIEVE IT SAYS PURSUE OPTIONS TO RELOCATE ALL OTHER CITY HALL STAFF AND FUNCTIONS TO NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS. AGAIN, TO ME, IS BREAKING UP THE MODEL THAT WE HAVE HERE. BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE CORRIGAN, YOU'VE GOT US ALL DISPERSED. I GO INTO OAKMONT AND VARIOUS OTHER PLACES, SO I'M JUST. BUT THOSE BUT THOSE AGAIN, WERE JUST BASED ON THEIR ANALYSIS. THAT IS NOT THE DIRECTION THAT YOU GUYS HAVE GIVEN THE. WHEN I SAY THE DIRECTION, YOU'VE NOT TOLD US TO GO AND DO ANYTHING AT THIS POINT OTHER THAN THE ASSESSMENT THAT WE'VE DONE, THE SPACE NEEDS AND THE PLANNING. THE WORD NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER CAN BE CITY HALL. IT'S JUST THE TERMINOLOGY THAT WAS USED, PERIOD. BUT WE'RE REFERRING BACK. GIVE ME ONE SECOND. I DIDN'T WANT TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT Y'ALL ARE GETTING PRETTY DEEP INTO THE MAIN MOTION. YOU'RE RIGHT. OKAY. I THINK I HAD MY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE OTHER ONE. OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THAT LENIENCY. YEAH. THANK YOU. BEFORE I GO BACK TO MR. BAZALDUA, I THINK CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. NOW, REMEMBER, EVERYONE, WE'RE STILL ON. WE'RE ON MR. RIDLEY'S. WE'RE ON HIS MOTION THAT HE REINTRODUCED ESSENTIALLY AS AN AMENDMENT. OKAY. YES. SO HIS AMENDMENT IS ASKING STAFF TO DO A NUMBER OF THINGS. AND HERE WE ARE AT 11:25 P.M.. WE JUST HAD COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON ASKING ABOUT SOME VERY INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT WORD CHANGING AND HOW IT TRIGGERS A VOTE BASED ON THE WORDING AND THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT CENTER THING, WHICH WE'VE NEVER BEEN BRIEFED ON. HAVING A GOVERNMENT CENTER, LIKE, THERE'S SO MUCH THAT'S HAPPENING IN THIS CRISIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE MODE THAT THIS ENTIRE THING HAS TO SLOW DOWN AND ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS. WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT FOR OUR MODEL? BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN UNDER ONE ROOF, EXCEPT FOR THIS, AND EXCEPT FOR THAT AND EXCEPT FOR THIS. AND SO I'M CONCERNED. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT? I'M CONCERNED. DO WE HAVE THE STAFF CAPACITY TO DO THIS KIND OF REPORTING AND THIS KIND OF WORK? AND AND I'LL SAY IT THIS WAY, IT'S NOT A LACK OF CONFIDENCE IN ANY ONE PERSON. IT'S THE COLLECTIVE ON HOW WE HAVE HANDLED REAL ESTATE IN THIS CITY. THE LORENZO HOTEL OFFERING GUARANTEES WITH CDBG MONEY, MEANING WE'RE PUTTING OUR PEOPLE IN POVERTY AT RISK OF LOSING THEIR FEDERAL FUNDS SO WE CAN HAVE A HOTEL, THE MIRAMAR, PURCHASED IN 2020 TO HELP THE HOMELESS. NOT A SINGLE HOMELESS PERSON LIVES THERE. THE HAMPTON. ARE WE ON MR. RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT? WE ARE, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ABILITY TO DELIVER WHAT'S WHAT HE'S REQUESTING. SO YOU'RE SPEAKING AGAINST. I'M SPEAKING ABOUT IT. I DON'T THINK I HAVE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST IT. WELL, I MEAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF YOU'RE BEING IF YOU'RE BEING FORTHCOMING AND WHERE YOU REALLY ARE GOING WITH THIS. BECAUSE IF YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING ON HIS AMENDMENT, THEN WE REALLY NEED TO SAVE THAT. ON THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO DELIVER THAT. CAN CAN STAFF DELIVER THAT WHEN THERE'S THIS HISTORY OF LORENZO HOTEL, THE MIRAMAR, THE HAMPTON, IT'S NOT RELEVANT. IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO SAY, CAN THEY ACTUALLY DO IT? I THINK IT IS. OLD FAMILY GATEWAY DOWNTOWN, THE STEMMONS BUILDING, THE INDEPENDENCE PROPERTY, THE TRUCK TERMINAL WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW EXISTED. FAMILY GATEWAY IN MY DISTRICT WHERE WE DID NOT DO A COMPLETE ASSESSMENT. AND NOW WE'RE SPENDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. THE CONVENTION CENTER, THE WINGS FACILITY, THE POLICE ACADEMY, THE FIVE YEAR TUNNEL. THAT'S JUST PROJECTS SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL. BUT WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND WHAT DO OUR BUILDINGS ACTUALLY NEED? EVERY BUILDING IN FAIR PARK. OLD CITY PARK. BATHHOUSE. MAJESTIC. MEYERSON, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. I'M BEING SERIOUS NOW. WHAT PART OF OF MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION IS THIS GOING TO? IS THIS DIRECTED AT THAT? THIS IS THAT THIS IS HELPING CLARIFY. I'M I'M HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING HOW THIS IS GETTING US ANYWHERE ON THIS. [06:10:04] I UNDERSTAND HOW WE GETTING TO THE MAIN MOTION, WHICH IS GOING TO HAPPEN AT SOME POINT. I'M JUST NOT SURE HOW IT GETS US ANYWHERE ON ON THIS. THE QUESTION IS HOW WILL STAFF BE ABLE TO DELIVER THESE RESULTS? ALL RIGHT. THAT IS THE QUESTION. OR WILL WE END UP WITH THE SAME KINDS OF RESULTS WE'VE HAD? OKAY. MISS CADENA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION. SO I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR CLARIFICATION. SO WILL THIS MOTION. IF IT PASSES, WILL THE INFORMATION BE BRIEFED AT FINANCE COMMITTEE OR WILL IT COME BACK TO THE FULL COUNCIL? MY MOTION TO AMEND CALLS FOR THE INFORMATION TO COME BACK TO THE FULL COUNCIL, BECAUSE IT'S WITH THE BODY NOW. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW. THANK YOU. BACK TO MR. BAZALDUA FOR THREE MINUTES. I BELIEVE I NEED TO SAVE IT FOR THE UNDERLYING MOTION. THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST MR. RIDLEY'S AMENDMENT RECORD? VOTE, PLEASE. DULY NOTED. AND, MADAM SECRETARY, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL. 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. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. JOHNSON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. NO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. NO. WITH SEVEN VOTING IN FAVOR, EIGHT OPPOSED. THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL CLEAR WHERE WE ARE. WE'RE BACK ON ITEM NUMBER ONE. IT WAS SUCCESSFULLY AMENDED ONCE BY MR. BAZALDUA. SO IT HAS THAT AMENDMENT INCORPORATED. OTHER THAN THAT, EVERYTHING ELSE IS HAS FAILED. SO WE'RE BACK ON ITEM ONE, AND I SEE CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE YOU FOR FIVE MINUTES BEFORE I GO TO MR. WEST. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO SEND ALL UPDATES TO THE FULL COUNCIL. RECORD VOTE PLEASE. I HAVE NO COMMENTS. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ON THAT? ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THAT MOTION? MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MISS MENDELSON'S AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. SO THIS MOTION WOULD BRING ALL UPDATES. IS THIS IN BRIEFING FORM OR IS THIS AN ITEMS. BECAUSE I DO HAVE A QUESTION SPECIFIC TO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BRINGING A VOTING ITEM BACK. IN BRIEFING FORM. IN BRIEFING FORM. OKAY I WILL HOLD MY QUESTION. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT BY MISS MENDELSOHN? SEEING NONE. A RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED. SO, MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. CADENA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH ALL 15 MEMBERS OF COUNCIL VOTING IN FAVOR, THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, WE'RE BACK ON ITEM ONE AS IT'S BEEN AMENDED NOW BY MR. BAZALDUA AND MISS MENDELSOHN NOW. SO I'M GOING TO GO TO. MR. BAZALDUA FOR FIVE MINUTES. IT'S A MIRACLE. FIVE MINUTES. FIVE MINUTES. HOLD YOUR FIRE A LONG TIME ON THIS, I HAVE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'LL FIRST ADDRESS WHAT MISS BLACKMON WAS ASKING. [06:15:04] I THINK THAT IT IS IMPORTANT CONTEXT, BUT I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS IN THAT REGARD. SO WE WERE COMING TO ASK THE ATTORNEYS TODAY, ACTUALLY ABOUT A RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED IN 2021 SPECIFIC TO NEW CITY FACILITIES. AND WE BELIEVED THAT THE ANTICIPATED ACTION THAT WAS GOING TO BE TAKEN TODAY WAS GOING TO REQUIRE A HIGHER THRESHOLD OF VOTE. UNFORTUNATELY, THAT WAS NOT HELD IN CONFIDENCE. AND IT WAS TALKED TO BY OUR ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WITH OUR, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. AND THEN THEY, I BELIEVE, ADVISED FOR THE MOTION TO BE AMENDED AND THE LANGUAGE MIRACULOUSLY CHANGED, WHICH THEN DID CHANGE THE THRESHOLD OF VOTE. BUT I ASKED THAT BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT CONTEXT. IT WAS IMPORTANT TO KNOW TODAY BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THAT MOTION WAS WRITTEN. BUT ALL THESE MOTIONS ARE ASKING FOR CERTAIN SCENARIOS AND INFORMATION TO COME BACK TO US TO MAKE VOTES ON. AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CLARITY ON ONE IN PARTICULAR IN THIS MOTION WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT 911311 AND OEM. AND IF WE ARE TAKING A DEFINITIVE UP OR DOWN VOTE ON A NEW FACILITY, IS IT SAFE TO SAY WITH THE RESOLUTION THAT WE HAVE HAD PASSED IN 2021 THAT IT WILL REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY THRESHOLD VOTE OF THREE THREE QUARTERS? THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO DISAGREE WITH THE STATEMENT MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. YOU AND I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION, AND AS PART OF DOING MY JOB AND TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M GOING TO ADVISE THE COUNCIL REGARDING THE FMPC, I ASKED THE THE CFO ABOUT THE FMPC BECAUSE THEY ARE CRITERIA TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO ADVISE. I NEVER SPOKE WITH THE CHAIR. I DID NOT A THREE QUARTERS VOTE. LET ME FINISH MY STATEMENT. I DIDN'T ASK YOU AN EXPLANATION. THAT'S A THAT'S A PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. I'M. THIS IS MY TIME. AND I'VE. I'VE ASKED HER A SPECIFIC QUESTION TO WHAT YOU SAID. SHE IS THE CITY ATTORNEY. JUST LET HER LET HER ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IN THE CONTEXT OF ALSO, I GUESS I'LL GIVE MORE CONTEXT TO THE SITUATION SINCE SHE WANTS TO. OKAY. HOLD ON, HOLD ON ONE SECOND. I'M REALLY TRYING TO MAINTAIN SOME CIVILITY HERE. HERE'S WHAT. HERE'S WHY I'M LETTING HER DO. I'M LETTING HER ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IN THE CONTEXT. ALSO, RESPOND TO SOMETHING THAT YOU SAID IN THE COURSE OF YOUR COMMENTS. SHE'S A SHE'S A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL. I THINK SHE'S ENTITLED TO SAY HER PIECE. SO AND IT'S NOT COUNTING AGAINST YOUR TIME, BUT I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. SO MY CONVERSATION WAS WAS BASED ON THE MOTION FROM THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. I HAD DID NOT SPEAK TO THE CHAIR OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. I DID NOT KNOW WHETHER HE HAD A DIFFERENT MOTION OR NOT. I DIDN'T SPEAK TO ROBIN. I DIDN'T SPEAK TO ANYBODY EXCEPT THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT FMC 20 MEANT AND WHAT I WAS GOING TO ADVISE COUNSEL. THAT'S ALL I DID. AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT I SHOULD DO TO ANSWER THIS WHOLE BODY. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, UNDER THE FMPC THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 2021. FMP 20, I GOT TO GET IT IN FRONT OF ME AGAIN. THERE'S PARAGRAPH SIX. THERE'S A FULL I THINK THERE'S 2 OR 3 SENTENCES THAT TALK ABOUT PRIOR AUTHORIZATION OF NEW AND REPLACEMENT FACILITIES. BUT THE LAST SENTENCE SAYS THE CITY COUNCIL WILL AUTHORIZE EACH NEW OR REOPENED FACILITY BUILDING BY SUPERMAJORITY VOTE. THAT'S WHAT THE LAST SENTENCE OF THAT MEANT. OR SAYS. I'M SORRY. ARE YOU ARE YOU DONE NOW? OKAY, WELL, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S VERY CLEAR. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I SAID HAPPENED IS THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. I DIDN'T MENTION ANYBODY BY NAME. DID GO TO THE THE THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. AND THEN MIRACULOUSLY, LANGUAGE WAS CHANGED THAT PREVENTED US FROM NEEDING THE SAME THREE QUARTERS VOTE. I STAND BY WHAT I SAID, AND I DO THINK THAT THAT IS IMPORTANT CONTEXT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE EXPECTING TO VOTE ON AND WHAT THRESHOLD WE'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO GET ANYTHING PAST. THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE AN EIGHT SEVEN VOTE. WHENEVER WE COME WITH SOME OF THE SOLUTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO COME OUT OF THIS WHOLE FIASCO, QUITE FRANKLY. SO IT IS IMPORTANT CONTEXT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, I THINK. YEAH. MR. WEST. JERRY WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WOULD LIKE TO. SO I HAVE THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW. [06:20:01] CORRECT. IT'S BEEN A MINUTE. TWICE. BUT YES, IT'S YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION. I'D LIKE TO PROCEDURALLY, CITY ATTORNEY ADD TO MY MOTION IS IS THAT APPROPRIATE? I KNOW YOU YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ELABORATE A LITTLE MORE THAN THAT. I WANT TO ADD TWO ELEMENTS FROM MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION TO MY ORIGINAL MOTION. WAIT, WAIT, WAIT A MINUTE. WAIT A MINUTE TO AMEND MY OWN MOTION FOR THAT. OKAY. SO I'M TRYING TO OKAY. SO WE HAD MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION DID NOT PASS BEFORE. SO THAT YOU'RE SAYING SOME PARTS OF THAT YOU WANT TO CORRECT. WELL YOU COULD MAKE THE MOTION AND IF THERE'S A SECOND FOR IT, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO TAKE IT UP IN AN ORDINARY COURSE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IS NUMBER FOUR FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO PRIORITIZE THE MOST CRITICAL NEEDS FOR THE DALLAS CITY HALL AND PLAZA AND FIVE DEVELOP TWO FUNDING STRATEGIES. ONE TO LEAVE CITY HALL AND ONE TO REMAIN AT CITY HALL. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES IF YOU NEED IT ON YOUR ON YOUR AMENDMENT. I DON'T THINK I DO. I THINK WE COVERED IT IN LENGTH. THANK YOU. I THOUGHT YOU'D APPRECIATE THAT. YEAH I, I CERTAINLY DO APPRECIATE THAT AT THIS POINT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THAT AMENDMENT? YES. WHO'S THAT? WHO SAID YES? OH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. THANK YOU. SO COUNCILMEMBER WEST, YOU'VE ADDED NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE. NUMBER FIVE IS THE FUNDING STRATEGY, WHICH I WAS ABOUT TO MAKE THAT MOTION SO VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF IT. WHAT I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING IS NUMBER FOUR THE ITEM JUST SAYS THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO PRIORITIZE THE MOST CRITICAL NEEDS FOR DALLAS CITY HALL AND PLAZA. PRIORITIZE THEM TO DO WHAT? CAN I CLARIFY? YEAH. YEAH. NO. I MEAN, I THINK IN THE SPIRIT OF MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION, IT WAS TO IF WE DID PURSUE A A REPAIR TO THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE PLAN, WHAT WOULD BE THE PRIORITIES OF OF WHAT YOU WOULD FIX FIRST, WHAT ARE THE MOST CRITICAL NEEDS? WHAT'S REALLY NOT THAT URGENT? WHAT IS THAT URGENT? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. SO I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR ITEM FOUR TO BE AMENDED IN THE LANGUAGE. I KNOW YOU CAN'T. BECAUSE IT'S GETTING VERY UNWIELDY. IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF A REPAIR PROGRAM AS A CLAUSE BEFORE THE WORD PRIORITIZE THAT PRIORITIZES THE MOST CRITICAL NEEDS. IF I'M UNDERSTANDING, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR INTENT ON NUMBER FOUR, IT'S TO DEVELOP A REPAIR PROGRAM. RIGHT. AND HOW WOULD THAT WORK. AND SO USUALLY WE GET ASSESSMENTS THAT WOULD SAY THIS IS CRITICAL TO DO HERE'S HERE'S A 1 OR 3 YEAR AND HERE'S A FIVE YEAR MAYBE EVEN A TEN YEAR. BUT THINGS WOULD BE LAID OUT IN THAT KIND OF MANNER. AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET AT. YEAH, I'LL ACCEPT THAT. THE WORDING I'LL ACCEPT THAT. SO ARE WE INSERTING IS THAT REPAIR BEFORE DEVELOP A SO SO HIS WORDING FOR NUMBER FOUR WAS PRIORITIZE THE MOST CRITICAL NEEDS FOR DALLAS CITY HALL AND PLAZA. BUT WHAT NEEDS TO COME BEFORE THAT IS DEVELOP A REPAIR PROGRAM THAT PRIORITIZES THE MOST CRITICAL NEEDS FOR DALLAS CITY HALL AND PLAZA. ACCEPTED. OKAY, SO IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION THAT WILL ALLOW HIM TO TO TO SUBSTITUTE THAT. BUT THAT'S ONLY IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE NEED TO GO THROUGH THE WE'LL HAVE TO DISPOSE OF IT IN THE ORDINARY COURSE. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO IT SINCE HE'S OKAY WITH. OKAY. SO THE AMENDMENT NOW DOES WHAT MISS MENDELSOHN JUST SAID YOUR AMENDMENT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO. I GUESS Y'ALL TALKED ABOUT THAT. ALL RIGHT, SO GO AHEAD. YOU STILL HAVE THE FLOOR. MISS NELSON, DO YOU NEED IT ANY LONGER? WELL, I THINK THAT THIS MAKES A BETTER MOTION BECAUSE IT DOESN'T JUST TALK ABOUT LEAVING CITY HALL. IT LEAVES OPEN THAT IDEA OF LET'S, LET'S LOOK AT THE WHOLE THING AND SEE HOW THAT WOULD WORK AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. AND THEN IT ALSO ADDS IN THE FINANCIAL PLAN, BECAUSE AGAIN, NONE OF THIS MATTERS IF WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY, WHICH BY THE WAY, WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY. SO I SAY ALL THAT THOSE WERE MISSING ELEMENTS. I THINK THAT MR. RIDLEY WAS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THAT WITH THAT MOTION WITHOUT IT PASSING. THOSE ARE ESSENTIAL TO WHATEVER WE DO NEXT. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE'RE ON. WE'RE ACTUALLY ON AN AMENDMENT BY MR. WEST. IT'S JUST GOT REWRITTEN BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. SO REAL TIME, I HAVE A POINT OF INFORMATION ON THE AMENDMENT BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA [06:25:10] ON THE CURRENT CONTRACTS, I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOME MASTER CONTRACTS WITH SOME OF THE FIRMS. AND I JUST WANT TO GET SOME CLARITY ON WHAT RESTRICTIONS THAT WOULD LIMIT THEM TO. SO MAYBE WE CAN GET ROBIN. YEAH, THAT'S DEFINITELY GOING TO COUNT AGAINST YOUR TIME, THOUGH. THAT'S A DISCUSSION TOPIC. OKAY. IT'S TIME. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. GO AHEAD. I'M NOT IN CHARGE OF REAL ESTATE, BUT WE'LL RESPOND TO THE QUESTION. I THINK THERE'S SOME DISCUSSION ON THE SIDE ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION ABOUT WHETHER THE CONFLICTS AMENDMENT MEANS THAT WE CAN OR CANNOT CONTINUE USING CBRE FOR REAL ESTATE DISCUSSIONS. IF WE COULD GET CLARIFICATION, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. POINT OF ORDER. GO AHEAD. I BELIEVE THAT MOTION HAS BEEN DISPOSED OF. I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY THIS IS NOT GERMANE TO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR. I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW WHERE HE'S I WAS I DON'T KNOW WHERE HE'S GOING WITH IT. BUT SINCE IT'S HIS TIME, IF HE HAS, IF THAT'S SOMEHOW HELPING HIM UNDERSTAND WHAT HE NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO DECIDE HOW HE FEELS ABOUT MR. WEST AMENDMENT. I WAS GOING TO WAIT AND HEAR. I MEAN, BUT YEAH, I MEAN, I ASSUME HE HAS HIS REASONS FOR ASKING, BUT WE'LL SEE. ROBIN, CAN YOU DO THAT AGAIN OR. YEAH. THANK YOU. ROBIN. AND I THINK THERE WAS A THERE'S SO MUCH GOING ON TONIGHT. SO Y'ALL JUST BEAR WITH US. AND WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE NOTES AS FEVERISHLY AS WE CAN AND TRACK ALL THE MOTIONS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. THE I THINK THE QUESTION WAS, OR THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE WERE WE HAVE AN EXISTING CONTRACT FOR CERTAIN SERVICES THAT CARRIES FEES WITH CBRE, AND SOME OF THOSE SERVICES WOULD BE THINGS THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE RELATED TO THIS BUILDING. AND SO THE QUESTION WAS, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN IN THEORY, THIS MOTION ALMOST MADE A CONTRACT AMENDMENT IN OUR MINDS BECAUSE THEY ALREADY WANT AN RFP THAT SAYS THEY DO THESE SERVICES ON BEHALF OF THE CITY FOR SAID SERVICE. SERVICE FEES. SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION. IF THE WEIGHT OF THE MOTION DISQUALIFIED THEM FOR FURTHER WORK ON ANYTHING RELATIVE TO THIS BUILDING OR NOT. WELL, I THINK HE WAS ASKING YOU GUYS A QUESTION. YEAH. AND THAT WAS MY ANSWER IS THAT WE WE'RE CONFUSED. NOT WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR AT 11:46 P.M., BUT. SO I ASSUME YOU'RE GOING SOMEPLACE WITH THIS AS IT RELATES TO MR. WEST'S AMENDMENT, THOUGH. OKAY. RIGHT. BECAUSE WE'RE ON MR. WEST'S AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION. WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO AND THIS MIGHT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ON THE MAIN MOTION. SO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST, MR. CHAIRWOMAN? MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. I'M. I'M SORRY, I ACTUALLY IT'S OKAY. YOU TOOK MY NAME OFF BECAUSE I'M WAITING FOR THE NEXT. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOUR AGAINST MR. WEST AMENDMENT? IS THAT A RECORD VOTE, PLEASE? YEAH, I GOT YOU. I GOT YOU, CHAIRMAN JOHNSON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. I JUST CAN WE READ THE AMENDMENT AGAIN? I GOT LOST IN THE SAUCE. HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY GET LOST IN THIS? THIS IS SO EASY. THIS IS EASY. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO CHAIR? I'M ASHAMED. MAYOR. MAYOR. IS IT JUST THE AMENDMENTS TO HIS MAIN MOTION? THAT'S WHAT I WANT CLARITY ON. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. YOU FIXED HIS. YOU FIXED HIS AMENDMENT. SO I GUESS YOU. MAYBE YOU DO. BUT THE QUESTION IS, IS IT ALSO THE ENTIRE MOTION THEN, OR IS IT ONLY THE AMENDMENTS TO HIS MOTION? IT'S JUST THE AMENDMENT. WE'RE JUST ON THE AMENDMENT. SO JUST FOUR AND FIVE. JUST EXPLAIN FOUR AND FIVE. YOU WANT ME TO EXPLAIN IF YOU IF YOU ARE CONFIDENT HE CAN DO IT, THAT'S WHAT I WILL SAY THE MOST TIME BECAUSE AS CHAIRMAN JOHNSON GOT IT. CAN WE READ FOUR AND FIVE PLEASE. I READ IT ACTUALLY COUNTS AGAINST HIS TIME, SO IT SHOULD BE ROLLING. I'LL BE QUICKLY. QUICK. NUMBER. SO WE'RE ADDING TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION. NUMBER FOUR, DEVELOP A REPAIR PROGRAM THAT PRIORITIZES THE MOST CRITICAL NEEDS FOR DALLAS CITY HALL AND THE PLAZA. AND FIVE DEVELOP TWO FUNDING STRATEGIES. ONE TO LEAVE CITY HALL AND ONE TO REMAIN AT CITY HALL. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT, MR. MAYOR. NO PROBLEM. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOUR AGAINST MR. WEST? AMENDMENT RECORD VOTES BE REQUESTED. MADAM SECRETARY, YOU CAN CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. CADENA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. [06:30:01] BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR JOHNSON. YES. WITH 15. WITH ALL 15 MEMBERS OF COUNCIL VOTING IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, SO WE ARE BACK ON ITEM ONE. IT'S BEEN AMENDED SUCCESSFULLY BY MR. WEST. LAST MOTION. AND MR. BAZALDUA AND MISS MENDELSOHN. MAYOR. YES. THANK YOU. TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. MOTION TO A MOTION TO RECONSIDER MR. BAZALDUA MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? AND I NEED TO CONFER WITH THE PARLIAMENTARIAN ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T VOTED ON A MOTION DEBATABLE OR NO. OKAY. IT'S BEEN SECONDED. SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION TO RECONSIDER. JUST STATING THAT THERE'S ALREADY A MASTER CONTRACT IN IN PLACE, AND THIS WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM DOING JOBS THAT THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN ASSIGNED TO DO. DOING. MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER. I BELIEVE THIS MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS INDICATIVE OF THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY OF THIS WHOLE PROCESS. IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS BODY ACTUALLY HAD A PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION AND MADE A PRODUCTIVE CONSENSUS DECISION. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IT WAS PROBABLY SOMETHING STAFF DIDN'T LIKE. AND NOW THERE'S A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. THIS IS PAR FOR THE COURSE. SO I'M ABSOLUTELY NOT GOING TO GO BACK ON WHAT ROBUST CONVERSATION LED TO WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE A CONSENSUS OF THIS GOVERNING BODY. MR. MAYOR, GO AHEAD. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT THE COMMENT ABOUT WHAT STAFF DID NOT LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA, THAT'S NOT A FACTUAL STATEMENT. STAFF WAS ASKED A QUESTION AND WE ANSWERED THE QUESTION, BUT IT WAS NOT ABOUT WHAT STAFF LIKES OR DISLIKE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S VERY CLEAR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. REQUEST A RECORDED VOTE, PLEASE. IT'S BEEN DULY NOTED. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER? SEEING NONE. MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. CADENA. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. BAZALDUA. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. NO. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH EIGHT VOTING IN FAVOR, SEVEN OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES. MR. MAYOR, JUST WANT TO CONFIRM. WHAT'S THE THRESHOLD ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER? SIMPLE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, HOLD ON ONE SECOND. ALL RIGHT, GUYS, GIVE ME ONE SECOND TO TURN OVER A WHOLE NEW SHEET OF PAPER HERE FOR KEEPING TRACK OF ALL THIS STUFF, BECAUSE WE'RE NOW BACK ON THE BAZALDUA MOTION. THAT'S YOUR REWARD FOR VOTING FOR THAT? ALL RIGHT. AND, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. IF YOU'RE IF IF YOU WANT. I'M SORRY. YOU'RE RECOGNIZING ME TO MAKE A MOTION. YOU'RE RECOGNIZING HIS MOTION. THE ORIGINAL. YEAH. WE'RE IT'S LIKE WE'RE IT'S LIKE WE'RE BACK TO IT THEN. THEN I WILL JUST GIVE THESE COMMENTS. YEAH. FIVE MINUTES. BY THE WAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I DON'T BELIEVE ANYBODY HERE WANTS TO AWARD PAYMENTS TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. TAKING A VOTE TO SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA MOTION IS TO SAY WE DON'T ACCEPT CONFLICT OF INTEREST. WE WANT PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THE WORK HERE. YOU SHOULD GET PAID FOR THE TIME YOU'VE SPENT, BUT YOU SHOULD NOT BE GETTING A COMMISSION THAT ENCOURAGES US TO LEAVE WHEN THE REPORT IS SO QUESTIONABLE THAT EVEN THE MORNING NEWS ISN'T GOING TO DEBATE THE FACTS OF THE COSTS, WHEN EVEN MAYOR RAWLINGS ISN'T GOING TO DEBATE THE FACTS OF THE COSTS ANYMORE. [06:35:07] VERY FEW PEOPLE CAN, WITH A STRAIGHT FACE, SAY, YEAH, I BELIEVE THIS IS WHAT IT'S REALLY GOING TO COST. YOU'VE ALREADY GIVEN A WINDOW THAT SAYS, WELL, IT MIGHT BE 25% LESS, OR IT MIGHT BE 25% MORE. THAT IS A MASSIVE TARGET. THE SCOPE IS NOT WHAT WE ASKED FOR. IT SOMEHOW BECAME NOT ONLY SHOULD WE REPAIR IT, WE SHOULD THEN ALSO REPLACE EVERY SYSTEM IN THE ENTIRE BUILDING, REGARDLESS OF FUNCTIONALITY, AND WE SHOULD UPGRADE IT. WE SHOULD BE THE NICEST FACILITY THERE IS. WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE ASKED FOR. AND THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP WITH $1 BILLION. THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP WITH BEING ASKED TO LEAVE THE BUILDING FOR FIVE YEARS, HAVING TO BUILD A NEW CHAMBER. ALL THOSE EXPENSES. FINANCING IT FOR FIVE YEARS TO THEN COME BACK HERE. WELL, OF COURSE, THAT POINTS YOU TO A VERY LOGICAL CONCLUSION, WHICH IS, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO ALL THAT, WHY WOULD YOU COME BACK? THAT WAS THE INTENT. IT'S VERY CLEAR. AND WHAT WE NEED ARE REPORTS AND ADVISORS AND CONSULTANTS THAT HAVE NO INTEREST. SO THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T ASK AN ENGINEERING COMPANY TO COME OUT AND TELL YOU ABOUT YOUR FOUNDATION. YOU ACTUALLY JUST HIRE THE INDIVIDUAL ENGINEER WHO WILL NOT GET THE JOB TO FIX IT. AND I THOUGHT WITH SOME OF OUR CONSULTANTS AND WITH OUR EDC, THAT'S WHAT WE WERE GETTING. BUT OF COURSE THE EDC DOES HAVE AN INTEREST IN REDEVELOPING THIS. AND OF COURSE, WHEN WE HEAR FROM DD, WHOSE MEMBERS ARE THE NEARBY LANDOWNERS, THEY HAVE AN INTEREST. ALL OF THESE ARE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. I'M GOING TO HAVE A MOTION COMING UP THAT'S GOING TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE SHOULDN'T LET NEARBY LANDOWNERS DO IT BECAUSE THEY ALREADY SOME OF THEM ALREADY HAVE A CONFLICT IN MY OPINION. SO IF YOU BELIEVE IN MAKING SURE WE DON'T HAVE THAT CONFLICT, YOU WILL VOTE TO SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA MOTION. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. I JUST HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WORDING IN COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA MOTION. DOES IT CREATE AN ISSUE? AND THIS IS JUST GOING TO BE A STAFF QUESTION. IS IT CREATING AN ISSUE SOME SOMEHOW, SOME WAY, AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE FROM HAVING THAT LANGUAGE IN THIS MOTION? I KNOW IT'S LATE AND MY WORDS ARE NOT COMING OUT VERY SMOOTH, BUT BASICALLY THAT'S MY QUESTION. IS THERE AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF THIS LANGUAGE? IT'S NOT. IT'S LANGUAGE THAT I THINK WE ALL SUPPORT, BUT IF IT'S ALREADY SOMEPLACE ELSE, OR IF IT'S GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE CONTRACT OR CURRENT RELATIONSHIPS, THEN I WON'T SUPPORT PUTTING IT IN THIS MOTION. IT DOESN'T MEAN I DON'T SUPPORT THE SPIRIT OF THE WORDS. IT JUST MEANS IF IT'S GOING TO CREATE AN ISSUE, IT IF IT'S IN THIS MOTION. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING OUT OF ORDER FOR THE LAST TIME AND SUGGESTING THAT WE WERE CONFUSED BECAUSE WE WERE JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WE WANT THE COUNCIL TO MAKE THIS DECISION. IF YOU GUYS VOTE TO LEAVE IT THAT WAY. WE JUST WERE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE WHEN WE HAD OUR SIDEBAR OVER THERE AND ALL THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WERE HELD IS THAT WE HAVE AN EXISTING CONTRACT. SO WHAT IMPACT DOES THAT HAVE ON THAT? THIS MOTION, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEYS, WE WERE LIKE, OH, THAT MEANT SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE KNEW AND UNDERSTOOD. COUNCILMAN MORENO. EXCUSE ME. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO CAME OVER AND ASKED ME, DOES THIS MEAN X? AND I GO, NO IT DOESN'T. IT'S BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN EXISTING CONTRACT. I LATER FOUND OUT THAT I GAVE HIM BAD INFORMATION RIGHT NOW, LATER SHARED WITH MY BOSS WHAT I BELIEVE THE IMPLICATION WAS OF IT AS WELL. WE JUST WANT CLARITY, WHICH BASICALLY MEANS ANY FURTHER WORK THAT WE WOULD BE DOING AS DIRECTED BY COUNCIL, WE WOULD NEED SOMEONE ELSE TO TO HELP US ON THE MARKET WITH THAT. IF THEY WERE PRECLUDED FROM CONTINUING ANY FURTHER WORK OR ANY NEW WORK. THAT'S ALL WE WERE TRYING TO CLARIFY. THAT'S IT, THAT'S IT. THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL. SO IT IS THE UNDERSTANDING THE CONCLUSION OF OUR STAFF THAT IF THIS LANGUAGE IS IN THIS MOTION, THAT IT WILL SOMEHOW PRECLUDE US FROM. CAN YOU FILL IN THAT BLANK? YES, MA'AM. SO FIRST OFF, I DON'T I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE MOTION. WE WERE JUST LISTENING VERBALLY. AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE INTENT OF THAT MOTION IS. BY LISTENING TO EACH ONE OF YOU INDIVIDUALLY WEIGH IN ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU SUPPORT HIS AMENDMENT OR NOT. [06:40:04] AND THAT'S PRETTY HARD TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT MEANS, AND THEN ALSO TRYING TO HAVE A SIDEBAR WITH THE ATTORNEYS TO, TO UNDERSTAND. SO THE THE X THAT YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT IS DO WE NEED A NEW SUPPORT VENDOR OR NOT? BECAUSE IN THEORY, ANYTHING RELATIVE TO CITY HALL, YOU GUYS JUST BASICALLY SAID ANY OF THESE CONSULTANTS THAT SUPPORTED THE GENERATION OF THESE REPORTS CAN NO LONGER WORK. YES. CAN NO LONGER DO ANY FURTHER WORK, WHICH WOULD MEAN IF WE WERE TO CONTINUE BASED ON THE VARIOUS OTHER MOTIONS THAT YOU GUYS GAVE, WE WOULD NEED TO FIND HELP ON PRIORITIZATION OR OR TO GIVE US SOME THOUGHTS ON THE FUNDINGS OR ANYTHING OUT IN THE MARKET THAT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE FOR THE CITY. IF IF YOU GUYS DECIDED THAT YOU WANTED US TO LOOK AT ANYTHING THAT'S OVER AND ABOVE THE SCOPE OF THEIR CURRENT CONTRACT, YOU'RE CONCERNED WOULD. YES, MA'AM. THEY WOULD BE PRECLUDED FROM IN IN ANY AND ALL OF THAT. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. MULTIPLE CONCERNS, THAT'S ALL. THAT'S WHY WE'RE ONLY ASKING FOR CLARITY. THAT'S IT. OKAY, YOU GUYS GET TO MAKE THE CALL. COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART. I ASKED CONNIE TANKERSLEY TO COME OUT AND HELP TRY TO EXPLAIN. GREAT. THE MORE THE MERRIER. WE'RE. WE ARE ALL TIRED. THANK YOU. CONNIE. HI. CONNIE TANKERSLEY WITH CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. SO THE INTENT OF THE MOTION IS TO BASICALLY TO THE EXTENT ANY OF THESE VENDORS PRODUCED ANY INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO A FUTURE SOLICITATION OR, IN THE CASE OF CBRE, A FURTHER TASK THAT REQUIRED AN AUTHORIZATION WHERE THEY MIGHT GET A COMPETITIVE EDGE WITH THE INFORMATION THEY PRODUCED. THAT IS THE INTENT OF THE CONFLICT ASSESSMENT TO BE DONE. AND THAT'S THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE INTENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NEVER TOOK THE POSITION THAT ANY OF THESE VENDORS WERE CONFLICTED OUT FROM ANY FUTURE CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY OR ANY FUTURE TASK WITH THE CITY. IT'S ALL DEPENDENT ON THE WORK PRODUCT THAT THEY GENERATE. WORK PRODUCT FROM ANY CONTRACTOR HAS THE POTENTIAL, WHEN IT'S UTILIZED BY THE CITY, TO CONFLICT THEM OUT AS A POTENTIAL PROPOSER ON A FUTURE SOLICITATION. IT'S A CASE BY CASE BASIS, AND THIS WOULD REQUIRE STAFF TO SEEK AN INQUIRY, OPINION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, OR WORK WITH THE PROCUREMENT OFFICE TO ASSESS WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S ANY CONFLICT. OKAY. OKAY. I THINK I THINK I'VE GOT IT. DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO REPEAT IT BACK TO YOU, BUT I THINK I'VE GOT IT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN WEST RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. CONNIE, COULD YOU PLEASE STAY? I'M STILL CONFUSED. ALL RIGHT. SO I NEED A SCENARIO HERE. I SUPPORTED THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER BECAUSE I WANTED TO JUST MAKE SURE I HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS. CHAIRMAN STEWART DID 100%. I MEAN, ALL OF US WERE NODDING UP HERE WHEN THIS ORIGINAL MOTION WAS WAS FILED. BECAUSE WE ALL BELIEVE IN THE WORDS AND THE TRANSPARENCY AND THE PROCESS. BUT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES ARE WHAT WORRY ME. SO GIVE ME A SCENARIO. LET'S USE CBRE, FOR EXAMPLE, OF WHEN THERE MIGHT BE AN ISSUE YOU'D HAVE. STAFF WOULD HAVE TO COME CHECK WITH YOU. SURE. SO LET'S JUST FOCUS ON CBRE. THEY WERE ASKED TO DO SEVERAL THINGS, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT ONE OF THOSE THINGS RESULTED IN CONVERSATIONS WITH POTENTIAL LANDOWNERS, POTENTIAL OFFICE OWNERS THAT HAD POTENTIAL VACANT SPACE, AND THEY ASSESS THE POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE CITY. SO THEY ACQUIRED ALL THAT INFORMATION ON 1 TO 1 CONVERSATIONS WITH THESE PROPERTY OWNERS WHEN YOU WOULD AUTHORIZE THE CITY, THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, TO PURSUE AN ACTUAL ACQUISITION, IT WOULD REQUIRE A RESOLUTION IN THE FUTURE SO THAT RESOLUTION WOULD AUTHORIZE, AS YOU'RE FAMILIAR NOW, EITHER TO DEEM IT SURPLUS AND SELL IT, OR PURSUE ACQUISITION OPPORTUNITIES AND AND SEEK PROPERTY. OKAY. BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL CONVERSATIONS OR THE NATURE OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE HAD THAT LED THEM TO PRESENT YOU WITH INFORMATION HERE TODAY. THEY MAY HAVE THEY MAY BE FOUND. I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEY WILL, BUT THEY MAY BE FOUND TO HAVE HAD A COMPETITIVE EDGE OR AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE THAT COULD PUT THEM IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE CONFLICTED. THAT'S THAT'S THE EXAMPLE. AND THEN WHAT WOULD BE OUR COURSE OF ACTION IN THAT SCENARIO? WE'D HAVE TO GO FIND A NEW VENDOR. WELL, YOU HAVE A DEPARTMENT OF FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT THAT IS EXPERIENCED IN SELLING PROPERTY OR ACQUIRING PROPERTY, OR YOU COULD ENGAGE A DIFFERENT BROKER. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO LISTEN TO MY COLLEAGUE'S QUESTIONS HERE, BUT THAT THAT GIVES ME A LITTLE PAUSE FOR CONCERN. [06:45:04] NOT THAT I DON'T LOVE OUR REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT, BUT I LIKE HAVING THE ADVICE OF PROFESSIONALS WHEN WE'RE DOING REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS HERE. SO THAT DOES GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN THERE. AND YOU COULD ENGAGE, AS I SAID, A DIFFERENT BROKER FOR THAT. YES. YOU COULD ALWAYS ENGAGE A DIFFERENT BROKER FOR THAT PARTICULAR TRANSACTION. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA WAIT, CONNIE, WAIT. YOU YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND THANK YOU, CONNIE. I THINK YOU ARTICULATED THE INTENT OF THE MOTION VERY WELL. AGAIN, THIS IS NOT MEANT TO SINGLE ANYONE OUT. IT'S REALLY MEANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE OBJECTIVE INFORMATION. I THINK THAT IF THERE'S INFORMATION WE HAVE ASKED FOR ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO ESSENTIALLY SHAPE THE SOLICITATIONS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE PUT OUT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OPPORTUNITIES WE USUALLY GIVE POTENTIAL BIDDERS TO BE A PART OF THE WRITING OF SOLICITATIONS AND RFPS. I'M TRYING TO AVOID THAT AT ALL COSTS. AND JUST AS WAS ARTICULATED, YOU SAID THAT WE COULD SOLICIT OTHER NOW DOES THIS WE HAVE OTHER CONTRACTS WITH CBRE. WE HAVE THE NEXT BIG REAL ESTATE PROJECT DEAL SURPLUS PROPERTY, WHATEVER THE CASE IS, DOES THAT PROHIBIT US FROM GOING INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM AND THEM PARTICIPATING IN ANY OTHER SOLICITATIONS OUTSIDE OF WHAT THIS MOTION IS SPECIFIC TO THE PRELIMINARY WORK OF. ABSOLUTELY NOT. THEY HAVE A MASTER CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND THEY RECEIVE TASKS. AND AS YOU AUTHORIZE RESOLUTIONS FOR THE SALE OF SURPLUS LAND AND DIRECT THEM TO POSSIBLY ENGAGE IN OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK OTHER LAND FOR VARIOUS PURPOSES UNDER THEIR CONTRACT, THEY WOULD NOT BE CONFLICTED OUT. NO. THANK YOU. I MEAN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WOULD BE VIEWED AS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE UNFAIR. I THINK THAT IF VOTING THIS DOWN IS BASICALLY SAYING YOU'RE OKAY WITH WHO GIVES US THE INFORMATION TO HELP WRITE THESE SOLICITATIONS, THAT WE THINK THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE A FAIR CHANCE TO COMPETE FOR THEM WITH OTHER ENTITIES THAT HAVEN'T BEEN ENGAGED FOR MONTHS THROUGH THIS PROCESS. I JUST THERE'S A CLEAR DISADVANTAGE TO ALL OF THE OTHER POTENTIAL BIDDERS, AND THERE'S A CLEAR ADVANTAGE TO THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN ENGAGED WITH THE PROCESS AND ARE PRIVY TO A LOT OF INFORMATION LEADING UP TO BIDDING FOR THIS SOLICITATION. SO, I MEAN, ULTIMATELY, THIS VOTE IS ABOUT TRANSPARENCY. I STAND ON WHERE I STOOD ON THE INTENT OF BRINGING THIS FORWARD IN THE FIRST PLACE. I HOPE THAT THIS PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT OF COMFORT FOR THE PUBLIC, SINCE THEY HAVE EXPRESSED SO MUCH DISGUST WITH THE THEIR PERCEPTION OF HOW THIS PROCESS HAS GONE. AND I THINK THAT THIS IS A VERY GOOD SAFEGUARD THAT WE SHOULD BE WILLING TO ADHERE TO. SO THANK YOU, CONNIE, FOR YOUR HYPOTHETICALS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR EXPLANATION. AND ALSO, THANK YOU ALL FOR HELPING ME WRITE THIS SO THAT IT WASN'T TOO RESTRICTIVE AND SPECIFICALLY TAILORED. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. OKAY. CONNIE. CONNIE. I'M SORRY. JUST TRYING TO GET SOME CLARITY ON THIS AS WELL. WHEN WE ARE PERHAPS. MAYBE NOT. BUT WHEN WE WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS, WE WERE ABLE TO ENGAGE. OR HOW WERE THESE FIRMS ENGAGED? BECAUSE I'M GETTING CONFUSED ON THE TRANSPARENCY PART, TOO. SO HOW WERE THEY ENGAGED FROM FROM WAS IT BECAUSE USING CBRE. BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAD A CONTRACT? I KNOW THEY'VE DONE WORK FOR US. SO IS THAT HOW THEY WERE HERE? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT UNDER THE MASTER AGREEMENT, YES. THEY WERE GIVEN THIS TASK TO FULFILL SOME OF THE DIRECTIVE FROM THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. THE OTHER THE OTHER VENDORS WERE ENGAGED UNDER THE ILA. A COUPLE OF THEM WERE ACTUALLY NAMED IN THE ILA. AND SO THEY WERE ENGAGED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE EDC. AND THEN EDC ALSO ENGAGED THEM. SO, OKAY. AND THEN IF, IF AND WE ENGAGE THEM. AND PART OF WHAT THIS DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING TODAY IS SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD EXPLORING OR WHATEVER THE WORDS ARE TO MAKE PEOPLE FEEL COMFORTABLE. BUT WHATEVER THOSE WORDS ARE. WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD, TO EXPLORE THOSE OPTIONS WITH THIS VOTE. I UNDERSTAND THE TRANSPARENCY AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT. BUT WITH THIS VOTE. WOULD WE HAVE SOMEONE IN PLACE TO HELP US MOVE FORWARD, OR WOULD WE HAVE TO RESET AND IDENTIFY A NEW PERSON, A NEW ORGANIZATION? IF YOU'RE SPEAKING PARTICULARLY OR ASKING PARTICULARLY ABOUT CBRE OR ANY OF THESE FIRMS THAT [06:50:10] HAVE PROVIDED INFORMATION, THEY CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION AND PERFORM UNDER THE TASK THAT THEY WERE GIVEN. IT'S JUST THAT IN THE FUTURE, IF ANY OF THEIR WORK WAS INCORPORATED INTO A SOLICITATION, THEY MAY BE CONFLICTED OUT. WE DON'T KNOW THAT FOR CERTAINTY RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GOING TO UTILIZE THE INFORMATION THAT THEY'RE PRODUCING. SO IT JUST DEPENDS. OKAY. BUT CONFLICT IS IS A CONCERN AT ANY TIME WHEN YOU ENGAGE A CONTRACTOR, THEY MAY BE CONFLICTED OUT DEPENDING ON THEIR WORK PRODUCT. SO OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE REVISITED BAZALDUA AMENDMENT? SEEING NONE, I ASSUME THE RECORD VOTE AGAIN. BUT FIRST OF ALL, MAYOR POINT OF INFORMATION. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO IS WHAT? WE'RE LITERALLY JUST BACK TO WHERE WE WERE BEFORE. WE IT'S LIKE YOU GO BACK IN TIME TO THE EXACT SAME OKAY AMENDMENT THAT MR. BAZALDUA INTRODUCED BEFORE. THERE'S NO CHANGES TO IT. GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THE. AND ONE MORE TIME WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY. HOW DOES THIS MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR IMPACT KBR'S ABILITY TO CONTINUE NEGOTIATING? IN THE SPIRIT OF THIS MOTION? THAT'S ON THE MINUTES, BY THE WAY. YEAH. OH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IT DOES NOT KNOW THAT THEY ARE NOT IMPACTED AT ALL FROM CONTINUING TO WORK UNDER THE UNDER THE TASK THAT THEY WERE GIVEN. OKAY. CBRE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY AUTHORIZATION TO GO AND ACQUIRE PROPERTY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, OR TO SELL ANY PROPERTY THAT REQUIRES A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. OKAY. SO BASED THEY CAN CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK THAT THEY WERE CHARGED TO DO AND PRESENT THAT INFORMATION TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, WHO CAN FORMULATE IT INTO A RESOLUTION FOR FURTHER DIRECTION FOR THEM TO ACTUALLY NEGOTIATE AN ACQUISITION WITH THIRD PARTIES. THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE, THE UNDERLYING CONTRACT, WHICH I THINK MISS MENDELSOHN SOMEONE'S ASKED FOR UP HERE, I REMEMBER HAS HOW WILL THAT BE IMPACTED BY THIS MOTION? IT DOESN'T IMPACT THEM. IT DOESN'T IMPACT THEM AT ALL BECAUSE YOU HAVE THEY'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON TWO OTHER PROPERTIES AND IT HAS NO IMPACT ON THAT. SO THEY WILL BE ABLE TO CONTINUE MOVING FORWARD WITH DOING THE EVALUATION PROCESS THAT WE NEED TO COLLECT THE DATA THAT WE NEED TO MAKE A DECISION HERE. CORRECT. WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT SOME OF THEIR WORK PRODUCT MAY CONFLICT THEM FROM BEING THE BROKER THAT ACTUALLY SELLS OR ACQUIRES PROPERTY, IF THAT IS A DIRECTIVE THAT YOU WANT TO ACT ON IN THE FUTURE. OKAY, I JUST WANT TO ASK IF IF STAFF OR LINDA, DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS SITUATION OR DOES THAT ANSWER SATISFY YOU AS WELL. I THINK NOW THAT IT'S BEEN CLARIFIED, THAT'S NOT OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY, WHICH IS WHY WE WERE ALSO ASKING THE QUESTION. SO WE DIDN'T ASSUME THAT WE UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS MEANT BY THE MOTION. SO THAT WAS THE POINT OF CLARIFICATION. I THINK NOW THAT CONNIE HAS ANSWERED IT IN THIS FASHION, I THINK WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHICH DIRECTION WE'RE HEADED. OKAY. BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ALL WANT MORE INFORMATION. AND IF WE CAN'T, CBR CAN'T GO OUT AND GET THAT. IT DEFEATS THE WHOLE PURPOSE. THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR ASKING FOR THE CLARIFICATION. RECORD. RECORD. VOTE, PLEASE. DULY NOTED. ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE BAZALDUA AMENDMENT? MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. NO, I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THAT MUCH, I JUST HAVE. WELL, YOU'RE STILL RECOGNIZED FOR THAT. OKAY. CONNIE. DON'T LEAVE UNTIL THE VOTE IS DONE. OKAY, SO HERE'S A REAL GOOD QUESTION. WE ALL HAVE. WE NOW ALL UNDERSTAND THAT CBRE CAN CONTINUE DOING THE WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING AND AND BUT IT'S ONLY IF CBRE IS ASKED TO BUY OR SELL AFTER THEY'VE GOTTEN THIS INFORMATION THAT THEY MAY BE CONFLICTED OUT. CORRECT. CORRECT. AND IF WE ARE, IF WE ARE GOING TO MOVE IN ANY OF THOSE TYPE OF DIRECTIONS, WE WOULD THEN NEED TO GO THROUGH THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS ALL OVER AGAIN, FIND A NEW COMPANY TO DO THAT PARTICULAR ACQUISITION AND OR SALE. CORRECT. IF YOU IF THE IF IT WAS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL TO ENGAGE A BROKER TO ACTUALLY [06:55:02] EXECUTE ON THAT SALE OR ACQUISITION, AS OPPOSED TO USING THE DEPARTMENT OF FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT THAT DOES IT FOR FOR THE ENTIRE CITY? YES. YOU WOULD NEED TO PROCURE SOMEONE ELSE. POTENTIALLY. GOT IT, GOT IT. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST? BAZALDUA AMENDMENT. SEEING NONE. RECORD VOTE'S BEEN REQUESTED. MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. MAYOR JOHNSON. YES. WITH ALL 15 MEMBERS VOTING IN FAVOR, THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, LET ME GO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL PIECE OF PAPER HERE. OKAY. YES. THAT WAS AN INTERESTING EXERCISE. OKAY. ALRIGHT, SO WE ARE BACK ON ITEM ONE AND IT'S BEEN AMENDED SEVERAL TIMES. I WON'T AT LEAST MAYOR. MAY I BE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION? SURE. LET'S HEAR IT. I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REQUIRE NO FEWER THAN TWO LEASE OR PURCHASE OPTIONS FOR ITEMS ONE AND TWO OF THE MAIN MOTION. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE MINUTES. SURE. THIS IS SUPER EASY, ACTUALLY. NUMBER ONE IS EXPLORE RELOCATION OPTIONS FOR 391 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS TO NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS. AND AS I WAS RECALLING EARLIER THAT IT WAS SAID IT WAS NOT LINDA WHO SAID THAT SHE WOULD GIVE US ONE OPTION. IT WAS ACTUALLY IN CHAD WEST'S COMMENTS OF THE FINANCE MOTION WHERE IT SAYS THAT IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER, CBRE, EXPEDITIOUS NEGOTIATION EXPEDITIOUSLY NEGOTIATE WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AND IDENTIFY ONE FINALIST PROPERTY OPTION. THAT'S WHERE THAT CAME FROM. SO NO, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE ONE OPTION. I WANT TO HAVE AT LEAST TWO OPTIONS. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE OPTIONS THAN TWO. BUT AGAIN, SAYING NO FEWER THAN TWO I THINK TAKES CARE OF THAT BECAUSE PERHAPS THERE COULD BE THREE. BUT THAT'S THAT'S THE MOTION. AND IT'S THE SAME THING FOR EXPLORE OPTIONS TO RELOCATE ALL OTHER CITY HALL STAFF AND FUNCTIONS TO NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER LOCATIONS. I DON'T WANT ONE CHOICE, SO THAT'S WHAT THE MOTION IS. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN WEST. RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION BY MISS MENDELSOHN. THANK YOU. COMPLETELY AGREE. THAT WAS BAD LANGUAGE THAT WAS IN THE NOTES. I THINK WE SHOULD. THE MORE OPTIONS THE BETTER. SO TWO IS I THINK A GREAT, GREAT SUGGESTION. FEWER, NO FEWER THAN TWO IS OR MORE IS A GREAT SUGGESTION. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST MISS MENDELSON'S AMENDMENT? REQUEST A RECORD VOTE. DULY NOTED. MADAM SECRETARY, GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. COUNCILMEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH ALL 15 MEMBERS VOTING IN FAVOR, THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, WE'RE BACK ON ITEM ONE, AS AMENDED. AND MAY I BE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION? YES. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION FOR ITEM FOUR, WHICH IS DEVELOP A REPAIR PROGRAM THAT PRIORITIZES THE MOST CRITICAL NEED FOR DALLAS CITY HALL AND PLAZA TO INCLUDE NO FEWER THAN TWO OPTIONS FOR PHASE REPAIRS AND REPLACEMENTS OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD. OKAY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND SOMETHING YOU WERE REFERRING TO, SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN INCORPORATED. SO THE MAIN MOTION HAS ADOPTED ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE TO IT. AND SO THIS IS ITEM FOUR IS ABOUT THE REPAIR PROGRAM. AND THIS IS ADDING LANGUAGE TO REQUIRE NO FEWER THAN TWO OPTIONS FOR PHASE REPAIRS AND REPLACEMENTS OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD. [07:00:04] OKAY. SO IT'S IT'S JUST AMENDING THE MAIN AMENDING THE LANGUAGE HAS ALREADY BEEN INCORPORATED. OKAY. IT'S BEEN SECONDED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. SO THIS IS NOT DISSIMILAR TO THE MOTION. WE ALL JUST PASSED UNANIMOUSLY WHERE WE ASKED FOR TWO NO FEWER THAN TWO LEASE OR PURCHASE OPTIONS. IN THIS CASE, WE ALSO WANT NO FEWER THAN TWO OPTIONS ON HOW THIS COULD BE PHASED. SO WE'VE ALREADY HEARD AN OPTION OF LET'S MOVE OUT AND DO IT ALL AT ONCE. BUT I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO DO THINGS. AND THOSE OTHER WAYS ARE ACTUALLY DONE QUITE OFTEN. AND SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SEE MORE THAN ONE WAY TO DO THINGS. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOUR AGAINST MISS MENDELSOHN'S AMENDMENT? I'D LIKE TO REQUEST A RECORD VOTE. THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY. SEEING NONE. MADAM SECRETARY, GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. JOHNSON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CADENA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH 11 VOTING IN FAVOR FOR OPPOSE, THE AMENDMENT PASSES. THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, WE'RE BACK ON THE MAIN MOTION AS IT'S BEEN AMENDED NUMEROUS TIMES. MAYOR, MAKE A MOTION. YEAH, I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE LEGAL OPINION ON PLAZA OR ANY OTHER LAND AROUND CITY HALL AS PARK. PARKLAND. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I THINK SEVERAL TASKS HAVE BEEN GIVEN STAFF TO GIVE US OPTIONS. WE'VE ASKED FOR MULTIPLE OPTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO INCLUDE A NEED FOR A DETERMINATION TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS LAND IS, IN FACT, DEEMED PARKLAND. THE PARK STAFF, THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS EARLIER SAID IT IS IN FACT, PARKS STATED THAT IT HAS BEEN MAINTAINED AND OPERATED BY THEM FOR DECADES. THERE ARE PROPOSITIONS IN THE 60S THAT WENT OUT TO THE VOTERS THAT SPECIFIED THAT PARK PLAZA IS, IT WAS ACTUALLY CALLED A PARK PLAZA. THE PEOPLE'S PARK PLAZA. CIVIC PLAZA. AND PER STATE LAW WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN THINGS AND THE POTENTIAL SALE OF THAT LAND WOULD REQUIRE GOING TO THE VOTERS. SO I WOULD THINK THAT A PART OF IF WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE EQUIPPED WITH ALL INFORMATION NEEDED TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS, THERE'S GOING TO BE MULTIPLE OF THE OPTIONS THAT ARE PRESENTED TO US THAT ARE GOING TO REQUIRE THIS LAND OR THE VOTE TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY OUR VOTERS. WE'VE ALSO HEARD FROM OUR VOTERS MANY A TIMES ON THEM WANTING TO SEE A REFERENDUM. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS A LEGAL WAY FOR US TO PUT A REFERENDUM OUT JUST TO ASK THEM WHAT WHAT IS REALLY MEANT TO BE OUR JOB TO DECIDE? SO THIS WOULD BE A WAY THAT THEY WOULD WEIGH IN. I'M NOT ASKING, JUST TO BE CLEAR THAT THE ELECTION BE CALLED AND TAKEN. I'M ASKING THAT THAT DETERMINATION BE CLEARLY DETERMINED AND MADE AND BROUGHT FORTH WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE ASKED IN THIS MOTION, SO THAT THAT IS CLEAR ON A TIMELINE, ON IF WE DO HAVE TO ISSUE THE ELECTION TO BE CALLED FOR THE VOTERS, FOR THE PARKLAND. MRS BLACKMON YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES? I GUESS HAS THERE BEEN IS PARK STILL HERE? I KNEW THEY WERE IN THE BACK. BUT ANYBODY, I GUESS CONNIE OR ANYBODY. I MEAN, HAS THERE BEEN DISCUSSION OR EVEN TAMMY AROUND TABLES ABOUT IS THIS OR IS NOT? AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO. YOU CAN JUST SAY YES OR NO TO SAY WHAT THEY ARE. BUT, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S TIME THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO START MAKING THESE DECISIONS BY MAY, THAT IS A KEY COMPONENT, BECAUSE I BELIEVE BOND DOLLARS WERE USED IN THE BACK AS WELL. AND I MEAN, AND SO WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS AT STAKE HERE ABOUT BECAUSE IT DETERMINES WHICH AVENUE YOU GO. [07:05:08] AND I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW THAT SOONER THAN LATER, BECAUSE THE LAST THING WE WANT IS, OH, CRAP, WE NEED TO DO A AN ELECTION. SO I GUESS IS, I GUESS, CONNIE, I MEAN, ARE YOU STILL THE PARKS PERSON OR WHO'S. OH. OH, SO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WON'T MAKE THE DETERMINATION WE CAN HELP WITH THE RESEARCH. I BELIEVE WE HAVE AN ARCHIVIST WHO'S ALSO DONE SOME RESEARCH AND AND JOHN AND HIS FOLKS. SO ALL THE INFORMATION WE GATHER WILL PRESENT TO YOU AND, AND AND THEN WE'LL GIVE LEGAL ADVICE ON WHETHER OR NOT IT HAS TO GO TO THE VOTERS, WHICH PORTIONS HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS AND THEN DEALING WITH IT. AND THAT IS ALL DEPENDENT ON WHETHER OR NOT COUNCIL DECIDES TO SELL THE PROPERTY. CORRECT. AND THEN ALSO WE'LL ADDRESS THE BOND ISSUES AS WELL IN THE LEGAL OPINION. AND WILL YOU ALSO GIVE US AND I DON'T KNOW IF MR. BAZALDUA INTENT, BUT I BELIEVE I'VE HEARD THAT IF THE CITY RETAINS OWNERSHIP, THAT CERTAIN THINGS CAN HAPPEN ON PARKLAND OR YOU WILL BE ABLE TO GIVE THAT DIRECTION AS WELL. AND I THINK ONCE WE GET DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL ON WHAT THOSE CERTAIN THINGS ARE, WE CAN WE CAN TELL YOU WHETHER IT'S ZONED FOR IT. AND IF IT'S DETERMINED, FOR INSTANCE, TO BE PARKLAND, WHAT RECREATIONAL USES COULD GO THERE AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS. BUT I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU GUYS ARE GOING. AND I THINK THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH PARK BOARD I'M SORRY, PARK DEPARTMENT. RIGHT. I THINK IT'S TIME IF WE'RE GOING TO BE DECIDING IN I BELIEVE IN MAY. RIGHT. IT COMES BACK TO SOME COMMITTEE. I DON'T EVEN KNOW MY TIME COUNCIL ACCORDING TO COUNCIL THEN I THINK MOTION. BUT SO I THINK THAT IT'S TIME FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT, BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE'D HAVE TO CALL AN ELECTION IN FOR NOVEMBER IF THAT'S THE WAY WE GO OR WHATEVER IT IS. AND I JUST BELIEVE IT'S TIME FOR US TO UNDERSTAND A FULL PICTURE IF WE'RE TRYING TO GET A FULL PICTURE AND THAT INCLUDES IS IT PARK OR NOT? AND I THINK THAT'S THAT'S A VERY VALID QUESTION. SO THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. COULD I JUST ASK FOR THE MOTION TO BE RESTATED? MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE TO INCLUDE A LEGAL OPINION ON PLAZA OR ANY OTHER LAND AROUND CITY HALL AS PARKLAND. SO ASKING FOR A CLEAR DETERMINATION? YEAH. SO FROM WHAT YOU JUST SAID, TAMMY, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT WOULD OFFER LEGAL OPINIONS, BUT THE DECISION AS TO WHETHER IT IS PARKLAND WOULD BE UP TO THIS BODY. I DON'T THINK IT'S UP TO THIS BODY. IT'LL BE UP TO THE, YOU KNOW, HOW THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN TREATED IF IT'S BEEN TREATED AS A PARK, THEN ALL THAT WILL. I THINK WHAT WE I THINK THIS IS THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING IS A LITTLE BIT PREMATURE TODAY. WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE FULL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. WE'VE HAD A FEW. BUT I'M NOT PREPARED TO TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT THIS BODY DETERMINES WHETHER IT'S PARK LAND OR NOT. I THINK IT'S HOW IT'S TREATED. SO YOUR LEGAL OPINION MAY STATE WHETHER OR NOT IT IS PARKLAND, WHETHER IF IT IS PARKLAND, AND IF YOU WANT TO SELL THE PROPERTY, THAT PORTION THAT IS PARKLAND WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS. THERE'S ALSO A PROVISION IN STATE LAW THAT IF THERE'S A PUBLIC PLAZA AND THAT'S AGAIN, NEEDS TO BE THE CONVERSATION NEEDS TO BE HAD. IS THAT ALL PARK? IS IT NO. PARK. IS IT PARK PLAZA ALL THAT? I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A HANDLE ON THE PROCEDURE OF WHAT YOUR OFFICE CAN DO AND WHAT THIS BODY DOES WITH THAT OPINION. SO IF YOU'RE THE FINAL DETERMINANT OF WHETHER IT'S PARKLAND OR NOT. WELL WHO IS. I THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CONSULT WITH THE ARCHIVIST, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO TO GATHER ALL THAT INFORMATION. AND TO TO GIVE ADVICE ON WHETHER WE SHOULD TREAT IT AS A PARK OR NOT. AND SO I DON'T THINK THAT FULL RESEARCH HAS BEEN DONE. WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT. ALL RIGHT. I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION. CHAIR. I'M SORRY. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO CITY ATTORNEY DOES. I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE ALREADY WORKING ON THIS. WHEN WERE YOU PLANNING TO BRING IT TO COUNCIL TO SORT THROUGH ALL OF ALL OF THE POINTS YOU RAISED? I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THIS BELONGS IN THE AMENDMENT OR IF IT'S SOMETHING WE JUST DIRECT YOU TO DO. WELL, I MEAN, I THINK WE'VE HAD SOME PRELIMINARY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND WE'VE DONE SOME PRELIMINARY RESEARCH. I THINK IT WOULD BE A COMBINATION OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BRINGING FORWARD THE CONVERSATION, [07:10:04] AND THEN WE CAN PROBABLY WORK WITH THEM ON THE PRESENTATION, I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, IT'S UP TO COUNCIL WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO PUT IT IN THE MOTION. BUT IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE PART OF THE CONVERSATION, WHETHER IT'S IN THE MOTION OR NOT, IF THE COUNCIL MAKES A DETERMINATION TO SELL THE PROPERTY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF AGAIN. WHEN WE GET TO A CERTAIN POINT IN THIS PROCESS, WOULD WE NOT DO A SURVEY, A NEW SURVEY? YOU KNOW, YOU GET THE BRAND NEW SURVEY, THE SURVEYORS TO GO OUT AND DO BRAND NEW MEASUREMENTS. AND THEN THEY ALSO DO THE RESEARCH. COUNCIL MEMBER REALLY, YOU CAN PROBABLY HELP ME FILL IN THE DETAILS HERE, BUT THEY WOULD LOOK AND SEE, YOU KNOW, WHAT LIMITATIONS OR RESTRICTIONS COULD BE ON THE LAND. YOU'VE GOT TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF INFORMATION. BUT WE WOULD WE WOULD WANT A SURVEY OF OUR PROPERTY BEFORE WE SELL IT BECAUSE WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT WE'VE GOT. RIGHT. SO I ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS UNDERSTAND IF IF IT'S APPROPRIATE. WOULDN'T WOULDN'T THAT SURVEY JUST BE PART OF THE PROCESS? OR. NO. YES. DOES ANYBODY I KNOW, IT'S LIKE I'M SAYING THAT WOULD BE THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT FOR US TO DO AN COUNCILWOMAN STEWART AS PART OF A PROCESS TO SELL ANYTHING, TO KNOW ANY PROCESS. YES, MA'AM. THAT WE DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, WHATEVER WE DON'T KNOW, WE NEED TO KNOW. AND I'M GOING TO JUST STOP TALKING BECAUSE I'M MAKING NO SENSE. YES, MA'AM. I THINK WE ALL KIND OF DOZING OFF, BUT WE DID HEAR YOUR QUESTION, AND I'M SORRY IT TOOK US A MINUTE TO CHIME IN, BUT. YES, MA'AM. MAYOR MAY I JUST SAY THAT THE SCREEN IS INACCURATE AND I HAVE NOT SPOKEN YET? OH YOU HAVEN'T. OKAY, THEN YOU CAN GO NOW FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT RESOURCES THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL BE LOOKING AT. FOR INSTANCE WILL YOU BE LOOKING AT THE PARK MASTER PLAN? I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT ALL OF OUR ARCHIVES AND DIFFERENT VOTES. BY THE PUBLIC, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION OUT THERE THAT WE'LL BE LOOKING AT. I'M SORRY. I'M JUST NOT EQUIPPED TO TO DIVE DEEP INTO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO TO DRAFT THAT LEGAL OPINION. WELL, I DO THINK THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC WHO ARE VERY INTERESTED TO KNOW IF IT IS PARKLAND YOU KNOW, RAGING DEBATES ABOUT THAT. AND WHAT WOULD THAT MEAN IN TERMS OF WOULD IT HAVE TO HAVE A VOTER REFERENDUM. AND SO I THINK ASKING YOU TO FORMALLY DO THAT RESEARCH AGAIN, LOOKING AT WE'LL DO THAT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT AND THE ARCHIVIST. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO MAYBE IT'S TIME OF MOURNING. BUT LET ME LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION. WE CAN'T. I DON'T THINK WE'RE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION, A VOTE. IF WE CAN'T HAVE THE PARK DEPARTMENT HERE TO MAKE. HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT IS AND WHAT ISN'T. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? I MEAN, I THINK ALL THE MOTION IS ASKING FOR IS THAT LEGAL OPINION, EVENTUALLY, PRIOR TO ANY DECISIONS BEING MADE, WHICH WE WOULD DO ANYWAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW WHO IS GOING TO TAKE THIS, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD ASK WOULD THERE BE IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT THAT DETERMINATION WILL GIVE US A ROADMAP OF WHAT IS POTENTIAL WITH THIS LAND ONCE WE HAVE A BETTER PICTURE? YES. SHORT ANSWER. YES. SHORT ANSWER IS YES. THE REASON I'M ASKING, AND THE REASON THAT I'M ASKING FOR THIS TO BE DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OTHER THINGS WE'VE ASKED FOR, IS WE'VE LITERALLY ASKED FOR THE MARKET TO BE ASSESSED. WE'VE LITERALLY ASKED TO BRING US EXHAUSTIVE OPTIONS OF WHAT WE CAN DO. IF THERE IS A RESTRICTION THAT IS OUT THERE THAT WE HAVE NOT YET DISCUSSED OR HAVE A CLEAR DEPICTION ON, HOW CAN CBRE COME AND GIVE US A TRUE DEPICTION OF WHAT THE MARKET DICTATES BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS BUILDING. SO I DO BELIEVE THAT IT IS IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO HAVE IN A TIMELY MANNER SO THAT IT CAN BE DONE COMPREHENSIVELY. THAT'S THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS SHOULD ADD ANY MORE TIME TO WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ASKED, THAT WE ARE ASKING STAFF TO BRING BACK TO THE FULL COUNCIL. [07:15:01] THIS IS JUST TO ME MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE CHECKING THAT BOX AND THAT IS ACTUALLY WRITTEN DOWN. AND THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN INSTEAD OF GETTING SOME RESULTS. AND THEN A POTENTIAL RULING OF THE PARKLAND WOULD DETERMINE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER OF HOW PROFITABLE OR HOW VALUABLE THE PARCEL COULD END UP BEING. I DO BELIEVE THAT IT IS IMPORTANT CONTEXT. AND I'M JUST ASKING FOR THE SUPPORT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET IT IN A TIMELY MANNER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MISS BLACKMON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. ONE. SO IF THIS MOTION FAILS TAMMY, WOULD YOUR TEAM STILL BE DOING THIS? YES, BECAUSE, I MEAN, I GET THAT IT MAY NOT GO HERE, BUT I THINK WHAT I'VE LEARNED IN ALL THESE MOTIONS, IF IT'S NOT WRITTEN DOWN, IT DOESN'T GET DONE. THIS IS A PAPER TRAIL. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I AM HOPING BECAUSE IT'S MOVED FROM EVALUATE TO I MEAN, NOW WE'RE MOVING AND DIRECTING AND EXPLORING. SO THAT IS THE PURPOSE. WHY I THINK IT FITS HERE IS BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE YOU ALL A LIST AS STAFF TO COME BACK BECAUSE WE'RE BEING PIECEMEAL, FED THIS PIECEMEAL. AND I BELIEVE THIS IS A KEY FACTOR IF THE MARKET IS LISTENING, THIS IS A KEY FACTOR. IF IT IS PARKLAND AND IT IS DEEMED AS SUCH AND THERE IS A PROCESS WITH THAT. SO THAT'S JUST BEING PREDICTABLE TO THE MARKET. AND SO THAT IS THE REASON WHY I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS. BECAUSE THERE WILL BE A LIST OF THINGS THAT DELIVERABLES THAT WE WANT FROM YOU STAFF AND ALSO TO. SO THAT WAY WHEN WE NEGOTIATE, PETER, THEN WE KNOW THAT THERE IS A POSSIBILITY BECAUSE THERE COULD BE SOME INTERESTING OBSTACLES FOR THE MARKET TO HAVE TO MANEUVER AROUND. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA? SEEING NONE, WAS THERE A RECORD REQUESTED? ALL RIGHT. MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BLAIR. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. NO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. NO. WITH SIX VOTING IN FAVOR, NINE OPPOSED. THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. MAYOR, MAY I BE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION? SURE. THANK YOU. OKAY. THIS ONE'S LONG, Y'ALL. I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STIPULATE THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT MUST GENERATE ENOUGH REVENUE TO FULLY REPAY THE CITY THROUGH PROPERTY AND SALES TAX FOR ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ABANDONING CITY HALL, INCLUDING DEMOLITION, STORAGE, IT AND UTILITY ISSUES SECURITY, AND TO PAY THE CAPITAL AND OPERATIONAL COSTS FOR REPLACEMENT SPACE, INCLUDING 911311 OEM WITHIN TEN YEARS, OR PAY THE UNPAID BALANCE TO THE GENERAL FUND. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND SOMETHING. IS THIS IS THIS AN ORDER? I MEAN, LIKE, IT'S GOING TO THE DEAL. THAT HASN'T EVEN BEEN. YEAH, IT HASN'T EVEN BEEN CONSIDERED. SO IF I CAN SPEAK TO THE MOTION. WELL, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ACTUALLY IN ORDER, SINCE THE SINCE THE ACTUAL MAIN MOTION DOESN'T ACTUALLY CONTEMPLATE ANY OF THE THINGS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE REASON WHY I THINK IT'S IN MOTION AND WHY I MADE IT IS BECAUSE. ITEM THREE EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR THE DISPOSITION OF THE CITY HALL SITE. THIS IS FURTHER STIPULATING THAT WE MUST RECOVER THE EXPENSES FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT DISPOSITION. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO SOMETHING VERY BIG IS BEING CONSIDERED HERE. SOMETHING MONUMENTAL IS BEING CONSIDERED HERE AND IT IS GOING TO COST A LOT OF MONEY. A LOT OF MONEY. IT'S GOING TO COST, WOW, MAYBE EVEN $1 BILLION. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT, BUT LET'S JUST SAY IT WILL. WHY SHOULD OUR TAXPAYERS BE OUT $1 BILLION TO MAKE WAY FOR THIS? AND WHAT THEY SHOULD DO IS GET REPAID. AND SO NOT REPAID ON DAY ONE. I MEAN, AFTER THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN CAST AS A TERRIBLE NOT NO ONE SAYING STRUCTURALLY UNSOUND, [07:20:05] BUT STRUCTURAL ISSUES. NO ONE'S SAYING IT'S FULL OF ASBESTOS, BUT THERE'S SOME ASBESTOS. NOBODY'S SAYING THAT THERE'S PLUMBING PROBLEMS. BUT YEAH, WE ARE. OKAY, SO WITH ALL THE THINGS WE'VE SAID, ARE WE EVEN GOING TO GET $1? AND WHAT I'M HEARING ABOUT WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING? I DON'T REMEMBER WHO SAID IT, IT. BUT IF IT'S A COUNCIL MEMBER, A SIMILAR TYPE BUILDING THAT'S A SEVENTH OF THE SIZE WAS OVER 40 MILLION TO DEMOLISH. THIS IS GOING TO TAKE I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG, BUT ENGINEER FRIENDS TELL ME MORE THAN A YEAR TO DEMOLISH THIS BUILDING BECAUSE YOU CAN'T IMPLODE IT. AND ACTUALLY YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MANUALLY CUT COLUMNS, WHATEVER IT IS. OUR TAXPAYERS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO DO THAT AFTER THEY ACTUALLY PAID FOR THIS BUILDING. SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER DEAL IS FOR THE EXPLORED OPTIONS THAT OUR TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO BE REPAID. IT HAS TO BE A GOOD DEAL FOR US. SO THAT'S WHAT THE MOTION IS. IF ANYONE NEEDS ME TO READ IT AGAIN, I'M HAPPY TO DO IT. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN WEST. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU MAYOR. I MEAN, I STILL QUESTION WHETHER THIS IS EVEN IN ORDER OR NOT BECAUSE THERE'S NO DISPOSITION OF CITY HALL. THERE'S NO DEAL. ANY DEAL THAT DOES COME TO COUNCIL IF WE CHOOSE TO MOVE OUT OF HERE, WOULD HAVE TO TAKE A THREE FOURTHS VOTE. THERE'S SO MANY STEPS BETWEEN NOW AND THAT. ALTHOUGH I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID, COLLEAGUE, I THINK IT'S IT'S A GREAT POLICY TO HAVE. BUT WE'RE WE'RE JUMPING THE GUN SO FAR AND WE'RE JUST THROWING IN EVERYTHING IN THE KITCHEN SINK AT THIS POINT. I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S IT'S A DELAY TACTIC AT THIS POINT. SO I'M A NO. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND I COULDN'T FOLLOW THE MOTION COMPLETELY. BUT THERE'S NO NEED TO REPEAT IT BECAUSE I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING IT. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MENDELSOHN AMENDMENT? I'D LIKE TO REQUEST A RECORDED VOTE, PLEASE. DULY NOTED. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I WON'T SUPPORT IT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE EXPLORED WHEN THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME KIND OF DEAL TO REACT TO. I THINK SOME OF THE THINGS LISTED IN THE AMENDMENT ARE VERY FINITE WAYS THAT THE PUBLIC COULD BENEFIT OR BE REPAID, WHEN THERE COULD BE SOME OTHER THINGS WORTH EXPLORING. ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT THAT COULD PAY OUT, BUT THAT THIS AMENDMENT DOESN'T CAPTURE. AND IT'S GOT A TIME FRAME THAT IS ARBITRARY. I MEAN, I THINK THAT SOMETHING OF THIS SIZE AND SCOPE COULD POTENTIALLY NEED A LOT MORE THOUGHT BEFORE JUST THROWING A NUMBER LIKE TEN YEARS OUT THERE. I MEAN, MAYBE IT'S DOABLE, BUT IT MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT TIME PERIOD. SO I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MERITS MORE EXPLORATION, BUT THAT IT DOESN'T JUST GO DOWN RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT BY MISS MENDELSOHN? SEEING NONE, RECORD VOTES ARE REQUESTED. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSED COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. NO. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. NOPE. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. NOPE. MAYOR. JOHNSON. NO. WITH SIX VOTING IN FAVOR, NINE OPPOSED. THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. MAYOR, MAY I BE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION? YES. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STIPULATE THAT ANY LANDOWNERS WITHIN TWO MILES OF CITY HALL ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THIS LAND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR FIVE MINUTES. I THINK THIS KIND OF GOES BACK TO THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND I DON'T REALLY NEED TO SAY ANYTHING ELSE. I THINK I HAVE SAID WHAT I FIND THE CONFLICT TO BE. SO I'LL JUST. I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE AMENDMENT BY MISS MENDELSOHN? CAN I CAN I JUST GET CLARIFICATION? DID YOU SAY TWO MILES? I DID, BUT I'M OPEN TO AMENDING THAT. I WOULD MOVE TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO A HALF MILE RADIUS. SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. NOW THAT AMENDMENTS ON THE FLOOR. THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY I DO UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT. I THINK TWO MILES, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT OUTSIDE OF OF WHAT IS MEANT TO ACCOMPLISH I THINK THAT THE LAST THING I DO WANT TO DO IS [07:25:05] FACILITATE A LAND ACQUISITION DEAL FOR SOMEONE WHO'S JUST BEEN HOLDING OUT AND ON VACANT PROPERTIES AND WANTS TO PIECE TOGETHER THAT THAT LAST, BILLION DOLLAR OPPORTUNITY, WHATEVER, WHATEVER IT IS. SO I DO THINK I DO SEE SOME MERIT TO IT. I DON'T KNOW IF WHAT THE RIGHT GEOGRAPHIC BUFFER IS. BUT I BELIEVE THAT IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE IS, IN FACT, QUITE A BIT OF CONCERN FROM THE DIFFERENT PLAYERS INVOLVED AND THE DIFFERENT NARRATIVES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE, INCLUDING SOME THAT THE MEDIA HAS BROUGHT ON. IT'S ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED. WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF MAYORS, EVEN FORMER MAYORS WEIGH IN WITH OP EDS AND, AND TALK EXPLICITLY ABOUT THE LANDOWNERS AND ABOUT THIS ACTUAL LAND OPPORTUNITY. AND SO I THINK THAT THIS IT REALLY BRINGS IN A SAFEGUARD AND A LEVEL OF TRANSPARENCY AND HOPEFULLY PREVENTS ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST MOVING FORWARD. SO I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIR MENDELSOHN, YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THE AMENDMENT TO YOUR AMENDMENT? I WOULD. YEAH. FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I THINK I HAVE THREE ON YOUR AMENDMENT. CORRECT. THANK YOU. SO HALF A MILE MIGHT BE SLIGHTLY TOO SMALL. IF YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO COMPROMISE AT THREE QUARTERS. I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO PASS ANYHOW. MY CONCERN, FRANKLY, IS WE HAVE A LANDOWNER THAT IS ALREADY INVOLVED IN OTHER PROJECTS THAT DOESN'T NEED TO TAKE OVER ALL OF CITY, THE WHOLE DOWNTOWN. AND WE'VE HAD OTHER LANDOWNERS THAT HAVE WRITTEN OP EDS TRYING TO FORCE US TO ACT IN CERTAIN WAYS AND MAKE CERTAIN MOVES. WE'VE HAD OTHER LANDOWNERS THAT HAVE COME DOWN HERE AND LITERALLY SAID TO US THAT IT'S OUR JOB TO HELP THEM MAKE MORE MONEY, AND THAT IS NOT OUR JOB. OUR JOB IS TO SERVE THE PEOPLE, AND I HOPE WE CAN CREATE CONDITIONS THAT THEY CAN MAKE A LOT OF MONEY. I HOPE SO. BUT THAT IS ACTUALLY NOT MY PRIMARY JOB. AND SO ALL THAT SAY, I'M CONCERNED THAT THERE ARE NEARBY LANDOWNERS THAT NEED TO BE EXEMPTED FROM THIS. SO THAT'S MY COMMENT. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM. AND THEN I'M GOING TO GO TO THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM AND THEN TO YOU, CHAIRMAN WEST. THANK YOU MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. WE SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR THE BEST POSSIBLE OPTION FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. THIS IS GOING TO BE COMPETITIVE, AND WE NEED TO BE LOOKING FOR THE FOR THE BEST DEAL FOR THE CITY. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE ITEM. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. AND I AGREE WITH WHAT MAYOR PRO TEM JUST SAID. AND HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S SERVING THE PEOPLE TO REMOVE A ROBUST COMPETITIVE SITUATION. BY BY MINIMIZING THOSE WHO COULD BE INVOLVED IN THIS. I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE TARGETING AND GOSH, I THOUGHT, I MEAN, IS THIS EVEN LEGAL? I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE ARE PEOPLE IN MIND THAT ARE TRYING TO BE EXCLUDED. AND I WANT THIS. I MEAN, SHOULD ANYTHING HAPPEN THAT IT WOULD BE HIGHLY COMPETITIVE AND THAT SOMEONE WHO MIGHT HAVE INCENTIVE WOULD YOU KNOW, REWARD THE TAXPAYER WITH THAT? SO ULTIMATELY THE COUNCIL WOULD DECIDE ON THIS. SO IT STILL LIES WITH US. AND IF IF WE DON'T LIKE THE SITUATION, WE CAN REJECT IT. SO I'M FORGETTING THE TAXPAYERS THE BEST MOST COMPETITIVE SITUATION THAT WE CAN. SO I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. AGREE WITH MY LAST TWO COLLEAGUES. AND IN ADDITION TO WHAT THEY'VE SAID, WHICH ARE GOOD POINTS, THE WAY THIS AMENDMENT IS WRITTEN EVEN IF WE CHOOSE TO STAY IN CITY HALL AND ARE DEVELOPING THE LAND AROUND IT, IT WOULD EXCLUDE EVERYBODY WHO'S WITHIN THREE FOURTHS OF A MILE FROM BEING ABLE TO ACTIVATE ALL THE LAND AROUND HERE THAT I THINK ALL OF US THINK WE SHOULD BE DOING. SO THIS AMENDMENT JUST CAUSES ALL KINDS OF PROBLEMS. JUST TO CLARIFY, IT'S STILL A HALF MILE. WE DIDN'T LET THEM STRIKE THEIR OWN SIDE. DEAL. WE DON'T DO THAT, YOU KNOW THAT. OKAY. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT. I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A COMPETITIVE, HIGH COMPETITIVENESS. AND I AGREE WITH WHAT DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM AND MAYOR PRO TEM SAID ALTOGETHER. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA. RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M HAPPY TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION. IF YOU ARE WILLING TO AMEND YOUR IF MAYOR WILL ALLOW SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DISPOSE OF TWO MOTIONS. WORKS FOR ME. I WITHDRAW MY MOTION. OKAY, SO THE BAZALDUA AMENDMENT IS WITHDRAWN. [07:30:08] YOU WANT TO AMEND YOUR MOTION. SO I'D LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION TO BE HALF MILE, THREE QUARTERS, THREE QUARTERS. OKAY. THREE QUARTERS IT IS. NOW I'M WRITING YOUR AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU SIR. YOU KNOW, IS THERE A SECOND? ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE BACK ON TO THE MENDELSOHN MOTION, WHICH IS NOW THREE QUARTERS. AND YOU'VE ALREADY SPOKEN ON IT, BUT YOU CAN. I HAVE NO OTHER COMMENTS. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MENDELSOHN AMENDMENT OTHER THAN THE RECORD VOTE? OF COURSE, MADAM SECRETARY. OH, SORRY. OKAY, DEPUTY MAYOR, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? NO. OKAY. THANKS, GUYS. THANK YOU. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. MAYOR. JOHNSON. NO. WITH FIVE VOTING IN FAVOR, TEN OPPOSED. THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR. THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. MR. MAYOR. MAY I BE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION, PLEASE? SURE. THANK YOU. SORRY. HE JUST ASKED ME HOW MANY MORE I HAVE. OKAY. MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CALL FOR A VOTER REFERENDUM AT THE NOVEMBER UNIFORM ELECTION DATE. TO DETERMINE THE FUTURE USE OF THE CITY HALL LAND, WITH EXACT WORDING TO BE INTRODUCED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE MAY 27TH, 2026 AGENDA MEETING. POINT OF ORDER. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT MOTION IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO. I'LL LET THIS APPEAL TO THE PARLIAMENTARIAN ON THAT. MAKE A DETERMINATION. I'M GOING TO BE FAIR AND CALL BALLS AND STRIKES. SO MY MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU'RE CALLING FOR A NOVEMBER REFERENDUM ON WHAT TO DO WITH CITY HALL. MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CALL FOR A VOTER REFERENDUM AT THE NOVEMBER UNIFORM ELECTION DATE TO DETERMINE THE FUTURE USE OF CITY HALL LAND, WITH EXACT WORDING TO BE INTRODUCED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE MAY 27TH, 2026 AGENDA MEETING. FIRST, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS DOESN'T COMPLY WITH TOMA BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DID AND THOSE THREE THINGS RELATED TO THAT. AND SECOND, I'M HAPPY TO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT ANOTHER DATE ABOUT THAT TOPIC. BUT THERE'S ONLY CERTAIN REFERENDUMS THAT CAN BE CALLED. SO, AND THAT IS NOT ONE OF THEM. THE COUNCIL CANNOT PUT THAT QUESTION TO THE VOTERS. IT'S RULED OUT OF ORDER. SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A DIFFERENT MOTION THEN. SURE. MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION AS THE OTHER ONE. I'M SORRY. IS THIS AS FUNNY AS THE OTHER ONES? NOPE. THE MOTIONS. NOT FUNNY. IT WAS FUNNY THAT HE ASKED ME HOW MANY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT A 2027 BUDGET THAT COMPLIES WITH THE FMPC, REQUIRING A STATE OF GOOD REPAIR FOR ALL CITY FACILITIES. POINT OF ORDER. STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO THE UNDERLYING MOTION. SUSTAINED. NEXT MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO CONDUCT A FACILITY ASSESSMENT OF ALL CITY FACILITIES AND REPORT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE CONDITION OF EACH ASSET. POINT OF ORDER. SAME OBJECTION. SUSTAINED. NEXT. THIS IS THE LAST ONE. MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INSTRUCT THE CITY MANAGER TO BEGIN NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE DALLAS MAVERICKS AT THE VALLEY VIEW LOCATION AND FORECAST THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT WOULD BE GENERATED FOR THE MALL TIF AND AVAILABLE FOR SOUTHERN DALLAS INFRASTRUCTURE AND REPORT BACK TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL. POINT OF ORDER. STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL AGENDA THAT'S POSTED. SUSTAINED. NEXT, I'LL WITHDRAW IT. THAT'S THE END OF MY MOTIONS. LAST ONE WAS GOOD. YOU'RE STILL ON THE QUEUE. ARE YOU DONE? ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO MAKE ANY MORE MOTIONS? THIS IS. WE'RE BACK ON ITEM ONE AS IT'S BEEN AMENDED SEVERAL TIMES. REQUEST A RECORD VOTE, PLEASE. MR. BAZALDUA, DID YOU WANT TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES? I DO, THANK YOU. MAYOR. WELL, I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S STAMINA. AND I APPRECIATE EVERYONE FROM THE PUBLIC FOR MAKING YOUR VOICE HEARD. [07:35:01] WE'VE GOT SOME THAT HAVE STUCK IT OUT LONG WITH US HERE. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR Y'ALL'S STAMINA AS WELL. I WANTED TO TO BRING A SHOW AND TELL. WE TALKED ABOUT WHEN WHEN MAYOR. IT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER WHEN MAYOR BROUGHT SOME SHOW AND TELL TO THE HORSESHOE. AND I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR MY MY MOMENT. AND I WANTED TO TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I CAME INTO MY OFFICE AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS WEEK, AND I HAD THIS AWESOME PIECE OF ART THAT WAS MADE FROM A FOUR AND A HALF YEAR OLD CONSTITUENT IN DISTRICT SEVEN WHO THINK SAW ON THE NEWS, HEARD FROM HIS HIS PARENTS, BOTH WHO WORK AT CITY HALL. ONE OF HIS MOM HAS WORKED HERE FOR TEN YEARS. HIS DAD HAS WORKED HERE FOR 18 YEARS. HIS GRANDFATHER RETIRED FROM THE CITY AFTER 30 YEARS AT CITY HALL. AND WHEN HE HEARD THAT THIS IS POTENTIALLY GOING TO GO AWAY, HE JUST SOBBED AND HE CRIED AND HE WANTED TO DRAW A PICTURE TO GIVE TO HIS COUNCIL MEMBER. AND HIS MOM DROPPED THIS OFF IN MY OFFICE. AND IT SAYS, I'M SURE GOING TO MISS IT. AND IT HAS A PICTURE OF HIM CRYING AND IT SAYS, DEAR BAS, DON'T DESTROY CITY HALL. I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, RIGHT FROM THE THE MOUTH OF BABES. WE GET THE DIRECTION AND IT'S UNSOLICITED. BUT IT'S ONE THAT IS POWERFUL. I THINK IT SPEAKS VOLUMES. IT WAS GIVEN TO ME IN A WAY THAT HE WAS ABLE TO ARTICULATE AS A FOUR AND A HALF YEAR OLD, BUT IT SHARES THE SENTIMENT OF MORE THAN 90% OF THE CONSTITUENTS THAT I'VE HEARD FROM, WHETHER IT'S BY EMAIL, WHETHER IT'S BY PHONE CALL, WHETHER IT'S GRABBING ME OUT IN PUBLIC, WHETHER IT'S JUST GRABBING ME HERE AT, AT THE HORSESHOE JUST FROM PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING HERE. BUT I'VE CONTINUED TO HEAR FROM CONSTITUENTS, AND IT HAS BEEN A RESOUNDING PORTION OF WHO WE'VE HEARD FROM AT THE VERY MOST, 5 TO 10%. AND I'LL TELL YOU, OF THAT 5 TO 10%, ALMOST EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM I CAN POINT TO WHO IN THE AS AN ORGANIZATION THEY BELONG TO AND WHY THEY HAVE AN INTEREST IN ME SUPPORTING THE OTHER DIRECTION. IT'S VERY TELLING. THIS EXERCISE HAS BEEN VERY TELLING. THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN VERY TELLING. AND IT'S FAR FROM OVER. WANT EVERYBODY TO DO YOUR HOMEWORK ON THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED AND KNOW WHAT'S COMING AHEAD OF US, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE MORE THAN EIGHT VOTES TO DO ANYTHING TO THIS BUILDING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS BLACKMON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO I'M HERE TODAY NOT JUST AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT AS A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF DALLAS WHO UNDERSTANDS THE HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF CITY HALL. ALTHOUGH THERE'S ENOUGH TO BE SAID ABOUT ITS DESIGN, THE MORE IMPORTANT REALITY IS WHAT IT SYMBOLIZES. THIS BUILDING IS THE PHYSICAL EMBODIMENT OF OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. FOR DECADES, IT HAS SERVED THE HEART OF OUR CIVIC LIFE. IT'S WHERE RESIDENTS COME TO PAY THEIR WATER BILLS, WHERE THEY SPEAK TO THEIR LOCAL LEADERS. AND THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING, AND WHERE THEY EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT TO PROTEST OUT ON THE PARK PLAZA. WE, THE COUNCIL, OCCUPY THESE SEATS AS TEMPORARY REPRESENTATIVES, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT OUR TENURE HERE IS BRIEF. THIS BUILDING DOES NOT BELONG TO US. IT BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS BECAUSE IT'S THEIRS. ANY DECISION ABOUT ITS FUTURE MUST BE ROOTED IN TRANSPARENCY AND BACKED BY THOROUGH, UNBIASED ANALYSIS. WITHOUT THESE TWO THINGS, WE CANNOT HOPE TO MAINTAIN THE PUBLIC'S TRUST. AND RIGHT NOW, I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE THAT. THE SPEED AT WHICH THIS IS UNFOLDING IS ALARMING, AND I'VE BEEN AROUND CITY HALL A LONG TIME, AND I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING MOVE THIS QUICKLY. WE'VE SPENT NEARLY TWO YEARS DEBATING TRASH PICKUP. WE'RE ON YEAR FIVE OF TALKS ABOUT THE NEW LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER, AND IT TOOK FIVE MONTHS TO CHANGE THAT BROKEN CLOCK IN OUR IN OUR BREAK ROOM. BUT THE THIS DECISION IS AS MONUMENTAL AS SELLING CITY HALL OR RELOCATING. AND WE ARE EXPECTING TO MAKE A VOTE IN SIX MONTHS. MEANWHILE, WE ARE IN A BUDGET CRUNCH. D9 WE'VE ALREADY EXPERIENCED A PAINFUL CLOSURE OF A LIBRARY DUE TO THESE CONSTRAINTS. WE'RE DISCUSSING THE POSSIBILITY OF CLOSING MORE LIBRARIES AND COMMUNITY POOLS. IT IS A MASSIVE CONTRADICTION TO CLAIM WE CAN'T AFFORD THESE BASIC SERVICES, WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY COMMITTING US TO INDEFINITE LEASE ON A PROPERTY THE CITY WOULD NOT OWN MY OFFICE AND EVEN INDIVIDUALLY OUT IN THE COMMUNITY. I'VE BEEN INUNDATED WITH CALLS AND EMAILS AND PEOPLE STOPPING ME FROM MY CONSTITUENTS, AND THEY'RE ALL SAYING THE SAME THING DO NOT SELL CITY HALL. AND I KEEP GETTING ASKED, IS THIS ABOUT A NEW BASKETBALL ARENA? AND IF THAT'S THE MOST FRUSTRATING PART ABOUT THIS PROCESS, IS THAT LACK OF TRANSPARENCY. IF THIS CONVERSATION IS TRULY ABOUT THE MAVERICKS AND LET'S HAVE IT PUBLICLY AND HONESTLY, INSTEAD WE'RE BEING TOLD THAT CITY HALL IS IRREPARABLE. [07:40:02] EVEN THOUGH SEVERAL REPORTS STATE THE BUILDING IS NOT AT THE RISK OF IMMINENT FAILURE. MAKE NO MISTAKE, PASSING THIS MOTION IS NOT A SMALL STEP. IT'S THE FIRST DOMINO. ONCE CORE OPERATIONS LEAVE, THE NARRATIVE THAT WE MUST VACATE ENTIRELY BECOMES MUCH EASIER TO ADVANCE. I CAN'T SUPPORT ANY ACTION THAT MOVES US TOWARDS SELLING THE THE PEOPLE'S BUILDING, ONLY TO MAKE US A TENANT SOMEWHERE ELSE. THE PUBLIC TRUST IS FRAGILE, AND IF WE PUSH THIS THROUGH WITHOUT A COMPLETE, UNBIASED ANALYSIS, WE RISK BREAKING THAT TRUST FOR GOOD AND OUR RESIDENTS EXPECT BETTER. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT ONCE AGAIN I HAVE A STAR, BUT I HAVE NOT SPOKEN ON THIS MOTION. OKAY, THEN YOU CAN GO FOR. ACTUALLY YOU HAVE. YEAH. OKAY. THEN YOU HAVE. THIS IS THE UNDERLYING MOTION. BUT I'M GOING TO GO RIGHT BACK TO YOU AFTER I GO TO MISS CADENA, BECAUSE SHE HASN'T SPOKEN ON THE UNDERLYING MOTION AT ALL. SO YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO SAY, ARE WE GOING TO BE A CITY KNOWN FOR INVESTING IN OUR EMPLOYEES AND BUILDINGS, OR JUST TEARING BUILDINGS DOWN AND AVOIDING THE PROBLEM? IN FACT, NOT FROM NOT FAR FROM HERE IS A 100 YEAR OLD CITY OWNED BUILDING, LAST RENOVATED IN 1972. IT HAS THE SAME ISSUES. THIS BUILDING HAS LACK OF ADEQUATE FIRE SAFETY CHECK, A LACK OF SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS? CHECK. OBSOLETE BUILDING SYSTEMS? CHECK. LEAKING ROOM? CHECK. ADEQUATE SPACES FOR CURRENT INDUSTRY STANDARDS? CHECK. WE NEED TO CHANGE THE WAY THAT WE DO MAINTENANCE IN WEST DALLAS. WE EXPERIENCED A HOUSING CRISIS WHERE PEOPLE ALMOST LOST THEIR HOMES. PEOPLE SAID THE SAME THINGS WE'RE SAYING ABOUT CITY HALL. IT IS FALLING APART. IT LOOKS UGLY. IN FACT, IT WAS A LAND GRAB. THE CRY FROM MY RESIDENTS WAS, THIS HOUSE HAS VALUE TO ME, AND I HAVE THIS CASITA IN MY OFFICE THAT REMINDS ME EVERY DAY OF MY RESIDENCE AND WHY I'M HERE. RESIDENTS IN MY DISTRICT HAVE OVERWHELMINGLY TOLD ME THAT CITY HALL HAS VALUE TO THEM. I HAVEN'T BEEN INVOLVED IN THE DISCUSSION UNTIL LAST WEEK. THAT MEANS MY COMMUNITY WAS LEFT OUT TOO. I HOPE WE CONTINUE TO FIND WAYS TO INVOLVE OUR CONSTITUENTS. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO ASK THE CITY MANAGER TO CONFIRM THAT THIS MOTION DOES NOT PRECLUDE ANY COMMITTEE FROM HAVING A DISCUSSION. FOR INSTANCE, I EXPECT TO PUT ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY AGENDA THE 901 FACILITY. I WORK AT THE PLEASURE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. ANY ACTIONS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE REGARDING ANY OF YOUR COMMITTEES? WE WILL COMPLY. YEAH. GO AHEAD. I DID WANT TO JUST CLARIFY THAT ONE OF THE MOTIONS THAT PASSED WAS THAT ALL UPDATES REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION COME TO FULL COUNCIL. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THIS QUESTION. OKAY. SO IT BELONGS TO THE COUNCIL. BUT SO EVERY SINGLE DISCUSSION. I MEAN, I GUESS I WOULD ASK THAT YOU AND I'LL DEFER TO THE MAYOR. I MEAN, THE MOTION THAT PASSED WAS ALL UPDATES GO TO FULL COUNCIL, RIGHT? BUT THAT WOULD BE AN UPDATE FROM STAFF AS OPPOSED TO A REQUESTED BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M LOOKING FOR THEM FOR A DETERMINATION. I MEAN, I THINK WE VOTED ON IT. SO THE ANSWER IS IT COULD NOT GO ON A COMMITTEE AGENDA. I THINK ALL UPDATES RELATED TO THIS ENTIRE RESOLUTION GO TO FULL COUNCIL. THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS. YES. OKAY. DECIDED? THAT'S FINE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THIS STATEMENT THAT AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, I'VE RECEIVED THOUSANDS OF ADVOCACY EMAILS OVER THE YEARS. IN THE LARGEST WAVE I HAD EVER SEEN WAS ABOUT GEORGE FLOYD'S DEATH AND REIMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY. BUT THE RECORD HAS BEEN BROKEN, AND THE PROPOSAL TO ABANDON DALLAS CITY HALL HAS GENERATED THOUSANDS OF EMAILS TO SAVE IT. THE MESSAGE IS UNMISTAKABLE RESIDENTS DO NOT WANT TO GIVE UP THEIR CITY HALL. SO LET'S BE HONEST ABOUT WHAT THIS IS. IT IS NOT SOME GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT. THERE'S NO PUBLIC DEMAND TO DO WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE. THIS IS A TOP DOWN PUSH DRIVEN BY A SMALL CIRCLE OF POWERFUL INTERESTS TO THE DALLAS MAVERICKS. UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE WHAT THEY'RE ATTACHING THEIR NAME TO, BECAUSE THE RESIDENTS WILL NOT QUIETLY ACCEPT THE TAKING OF CITY HALL. THIS WILL HAUNT THE MAVERICKS IF THEY MOVE HERE. DO CITY STAFF UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH PUBLIC TRUST HAS BEEN DAMAGED BY WILDLY INCONSISTENT REPAIR NUMBERS? [07:45:01] 31. 30 MILLION. ONE YEAR. 900 MILLION. THE NEXT. IT'S NOT CREDIBILITY. IT IS CONFUSION. AND TO MY COLLEAGUES, OUR CONSTITUENTS ARE WATCHING. AND THEY EXPECT US TO DEFEND THEIR PUBLIC ASSETS, NOT SURRENDER THEM WITHOUT A PLAN. VOTES DON'T DISAPPEAR ABOUT THINGS LIKE THIS. THEY ACTUALLY ARE THE THING THAT MAKES OUR LEGACY AND THEY SHAPE FUTURE ELECTIONS. AND THIS IS WHAT THE PEOPLE WILL THINK ABOUT HOW WE DO OUR WORK. WE'VE NOT SEEN A COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR DOWNTOWN. YET SOMEHOW WE'RE BEING ASKED TO WALK AWAY FROM ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PUBLIC PROPERTIES IN DALLAS. THIS IS ALL BACKWARDS. I WANT TO KEEP THE MAVS IN DALLAS. THE VALLEY VIEW SITE IS A SMART PATH FORWARD. DOWNTOWN DOESN'T NEED A GIVEAWAY OF CITY HALL. IT NEEDS PUBLIC SAFETY, ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS, REMOVAL OF ENCAMPMENTS, AND A SERIOUS OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL CONVERSION PROGRAM WITH SAFETY AND RESIDENCE. THE MARKET WILL RESPOND. BUT BACK TO EMAILS. WERE NOT BEING FLOODED WITH MESSAGES ASKING US TO ABANDON CITY HALL. THE PRESSURES COMING FROM OPINION COLUMNS HIRED PEOPLE FROM NON-PROFITS AND BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS, SOME WHO STAND TO BENEFIT AS CONTRACTORS, AND IT'S ALL DESIGNED TO CREATE COVER. DALLAS DESERVES TRANSPARENCY, FACTS, AND LEADERSHIP THAT'S NOT INTIMIDATED BY POWER OR WEALTH. THAT'S YOUR TIME. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. AS A COUNCIL MEMBER REPRESENTING PARTS OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS AND IS THE CHAIR OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. I UNDERSTAND THE VALUE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS. DOWNTOWN DALLAS STANDS AT A PIVOTAL, PIVOTAL MOMENT. THIS POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT OF CITY HALL SITE, INCLUDING THE OPTION TO REMAIN IN OR REPURPOSE DALLAS CITY HALL, PRESENTS A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TO MASTER PLAN THE SOUTH SIDE OF DOWNTOWN. THIS IS ABOUT UNLOCKING GROWTH IN OUR SOUTHERN SECTOR, STRENGTHENING THE CORE OF OUR CITY, AND CREATING MOMENTUM THAT LIFTS EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD. STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS HERE WILL EXPAND OUR TAX BASE, GENERATING NEW PROPERTY AND SALES TAX REVENUE THAT CAN BE REINVESTED INTO BETTER ROADS, SAFER COMMUNITIES, AND SMART ECONOMIC INCENTIVES THAT RETAIN AND ATTRACT BUSINESSES. IT MEANS SUPPORTING JOB GROWTH, WELCOMING NEW RESIDENTS AND SPURRING PRIVATE INVESTMENTS. WHEN OUR CORE IS STRONG, THE BENEFIT RIPPLES ACROSS OUR ENTIRE CITY. A VALLEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION, WHICH IS WHY EVERY OPTION, INCLUDING KEEPING KEEPING CITY HALL, DESERVES THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION. BUT WE MUST ALSO HAVE THE COURAGE TO EXPLORE POSSIBILITIES THAT UNLOCK THE FULL POTENTIAL OF DOWNTOWN AND ENSURE TAXPAYER DOLLARS WORK HARDER FOR THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS. THIS IS ABOUT BUILDING A STRONGER ABOUT BUILDING A STRONGER DALLAS. FOR THOSE WHO CALLED DALLAS HOME TODAY AND FOR OUR CHILDREN, GRANDCHILDREN, AND FUTURE RESIDENTS. WHEN DOWNTOWN THRIVES, THE ENTIRE CITY THRIVES. DALLAS HAS ALWAYS BEEN A CITY OF OPPORTUNITY. WE DID NOT GET HERE BY THINKING SMALL. AND WE CANNOT MOVE FORWARD THAT WAY. NOW IS THE TIME TO BE BOLD, THINK BIG, HAVE THE COURAGE, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, HAVE THE POLITICAL WILL TO POSITION DALLAS FOR A STRONGER FUTURE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. DALLAS CITY HALL IS IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US. IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS. IT'S IMPORTANT TO US AS A COUNCIL. IT'S AMAZING TO ME. FIVE MINUTES, ACTUALLY, THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE THAT HAS HAPPENED IN PAST COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE'VE KICKED THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. YET I HEARD PEOPLE SAY THIS IS A RUSH DECISION OR THIS IS A DECISION THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE BECAUSE PEOPLE NEGLECTED THIS BUILDING AND NOW WE'RE HAVING TO MAKE A TOUGH DECISION, AS OUR MAYOR HAS STATED PREVIOUSLY. AGAIN, I'M GOING TO REPEAT, I'VE SEEN VIDEOS WHERE FORMER CITY MANAGERS WERE SAYING WE NEED MONEY AND PRESENTED MONEY, YET IT WAS NOT GIVEN TO THIS BUILDING TO RESTORE, TO REVIVE, TO FIX THE PROBLEMS THAT WAS EXISTING. AND SO NOW WE'RE SAYING SAVE CITY HALL. WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SAYING SAVE CITY HALL TEN YEARS AGO, SAVE CITY HALL 15 YEARS AGO, SAVE CITY HALL 20 YEARS AGO. AND THE SAME PEOPLE THAT WERE SAYING, DON'T GIVE CITY HALL ANY MONEY NOW SAYING SAVE CITY HALL. IT'S A BIT DISINGENUOUS AND THE VIDEO IS OUT THERE. SO WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR BEST. MY COMMUNITY IS SAYING, MAKE A PRUDENT DECISION. LET'S EXPLORE ALL OPTIONS AND BRING AND BE TRANSPARENT AND ACCOUNTABLE. WE CAN'T HAVE SELECTIVE ACCOUNTABILITY AND JUST SAY ONE OPTION AND THEN DON'T SAY THE OTHERS. WE HAVE TO BE COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT AND ACCOUNTABLE TO OUR COMMUNITY. [07:50:03] AND THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO DO. THAT'S WHY I'M HAVING A MEETING IN MY DISTRICT ON MARCH 12TH, SO WE CAN HAVE A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON AND CONTINUE TO BE TRANSPARENT. THE CITY MANAGER NEVER SAID WE COULDN'T HAVE A MEETING, SO WE'RE HAVING OUR COMMUNITY MEETING, AND I'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAY THAT WE NEED TO TALK TO THE COMMUNITY. SHE NEVER SAID WE COULDN'T. SO IT'S OUR JOB AS COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INITIATE THAT PROCESS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR. LET'S SEE. FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. THE FUTURE OF CITY HALL IS BEING RUSHED, AND I DO NOT SUPPORT FAST TRACKING AN ITEM OF THIS MAGNITUDE. CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT YET HAVE ALL THE NECESSARY DETAILS TO MAKE A RESPONSIBLE FINAL DECISION. WE MUST ENSURE THAT EVERY FACT IS CAREFULLY REVIEWED BEFORE MOVING FORWARD. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF MEDIA ATTENTION AND DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DALLAS MAVERICKS POTENTIAL INTEREST IN EITHER A DOWNTOWN LOCATION OR AT VALLEY VIEW. MY VOTE WOULD BE FOR THE MAVERICKS TO BUILD AT VALLEY VIEW. THIS WOULD HELP REVITALIZE THE AREA, BRING ECONOMIC GROWTH AND CREATE JOBS, AND BRING NEW ENERGY AND INVESTMENT TO OUR DISTRICT. I REMAIN COMMITTED TO TRANSPARENCY, FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND MAKING DECISIONS THAT SERVE THE BEST INTERESTS OF OUR COMMUNITY. OUR COMMUNITY IS THE WHOLE CITY OF DALLAS, AND I THINK WE NEED TO BE RESPONSIBLE AND MAINTAIN OUR COMMITMENT TO ALL THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN. DO YOU WANT TO GO AGAIN? YES, SIR. OKAY. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. I JUST WANT TO GO ON RECORD. I DO NOT SUPPORT THE MAVERICKS MOVING TO NORTH DALLAS. THAT'S HOW I STAYED IN MY OP ED. WE NEED TO KEEP DOWNTOWN THRIVING AND KEEP THE MAVERICKS CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN, CLOSE TO SOUTHERN DALLAS. EVERYTHING SHOULD NOT HAVE TO MOVE OUT TO NORTH DALLAS FOR IT TO BE SUCCESSFUL WHEN THAT HAPPENED. THE POINT OF ORDER, MAYOR. SO THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SAY. I DIDN'T CALL ON ANYBODY ELSE ON. I KNOW YOU DON'T LIKE THAT, MR. BAZALDUA, BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT'S GOING INTO THIS TOPIC. EVERYONE ELSE IS TOUCHED ON, SO I'M NOT GOING TO CALL IT ON HIM. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT GO ON RECORD THAT WE NEED TO KEEP THE MAVERICKS DOWNTOWN. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. YEAH. THANK YOU. MAYOR, I DIDN'T KNOW WE COULD TALK ABOUT THE MAVERICKS. WE WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO, BUT NOW, SINCE WE CAN. I MEAN, I'M NOT GOING TO CALL ON YOU EITHER. EVERYONE ELSE DID. I APPRECIATE THAT. YOU KNOW, I, I DO LOVE ME SOME MAVERICKS. AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM STAY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. I DON'T KNOW THAT BEING IN CBD SPECIFICALLY IS GOING TO MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. BECAUSE HERE WE ARE. I THINK THE NEXT BIG DECISION WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ONCE WE FIGURE THIS OUT, IS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE ARENA THAT THE TAXPAYERS ALREADY PAID FOR. THAT'S GOING TO BE VACANT IN A FEW YEARS. SO I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO SUPPORT OUR SPORTS TEAMS AND THE ECONOMIC GROWTH THAT THEY CAN BRING. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS TAILORED TO ONE SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION, AS LONG AS THEY'RE IN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS, THAT WOULD BE A WIN FOR US ALL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE, SO I WILL I'LL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SAY A FEW THINGS. I DON'T THINK THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S REALLY THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE ANYBODY'S OPINION ABOUT THIS. THAT'S NOT REALLY THE PURPOSE OF MY REMARKS. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT A COUPLE THINGS THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME TO SAY AT THIS POINT. NUMBER ONE IS, I FEEL LIKE TODAY I DON'T THINK THAT WE DID OURSELVES A SERVICE TODAY BY WHETHER INTENTIONAL OR NOT. I TRY NOT TO ASSUME PEOPLE'S MOTIVES, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WHETHER IT WAS INTENTIONAL OR NOT, I THINK THE IMPLICATIONS THROUGHOUT THE DAY AT TIMES WERE THAT PEOPLE WHO I THINK ARE ACTUALLY COMPETENT AND ETHICAL PROFESSIONALS, WHETHER THEY BE THE PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR US BECAUSE THEY ARE VENDORS OF OURS IN A CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP, OR THEY ARE OUR OWN CITY STAFF. I FEEL LIKE AT DIFFERENT POINTS TODAY, SOME PEOPLE TOOK FIRE THAT I DON'T THINK IS I. I DON'T THINK IT WAS RIGHT. I JUST I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU. I DON'T THINK IT WAS RIGHT. I DON'T THINK IT WAS FAIR, AND I DON'T THINK IT WAS NECESSARY FOR PEOPLE TO ACHIEVE THEIR POLICY OBJECTIVES. [07:55:02] TODAY. I THINK AND WE MAY PAY A PRICE FOR THAT. WE MAY PAY A PRICE FOR THAT. I DON'T THINK IT NEEDED TO GO THERE, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE ALL ELECTED TO DO YOUR JOBS THE WAY YOU SEE FIT TO DO THEM. AND IN THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT, THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE. AND SO I DO MY JOB HERE TO TRY TO PRESIDE OVER THESE MEETINGS AND DO IT FAIRLY, BUT I GET TO EXPRESS MY OPINION, TOO. I TRY TO BE JUDICIOUS ABOUT HOW I DO IT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT WAS RIGHT HOW WE TALKED ABOUT OUR OWN STAFF TODAY AND ABOUT SOME PEOPLE WHO I THINK WE DON'T HAVE ANY REASON TO QUESTION THEIR ETHICS IN HOW THEY'VE DONE THEIR JOB. SO I'M TROUBLED BY THAT. THE SECOND THING I WOULD SAY IS, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN I'VE BEEN IN A POSITION TO MAKE LAWS ON BEHALF OF PEOPLE FOR A LONG TIME NOW, ALMOST. WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO 20 YEARS I'VE BEEN DOING THIS. AND SO I'VE SEEN ALL THE TRICKS. I'VE SEEN ALL THE TACTICS. I'VE SEEN ALL THE STRATEGIES. IT'S NEVER SAT WELL WITH ME, EVEN WHEN I WHEN I'VE SEEN IT DONE IN AUSTIN WHEN I'VE SEEN IT DONE HERE. IT'S NEVER SAT WELL WITH ME. WHEN I FEEL THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT DEBATING THE THING THAT'S IN FRONT OF THEM, BUT THEY'RE DEBATING SOMETHING ELSE. AND I THINK TODAY IT WAS VERY CLEAR THAT WE WEREN'T WE WEREN'T DEBATING THIS. LIKE CHAIRMAN WEST MOTION WAS VERY CLEAR, IN MY OPINION, ABOUT WHAT IT WAS INTENDING TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO DO. AND WE ENDED UP, I THINK, HAVING A VERY, VERY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION ABOUT THINGS THAT HAVE NOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO BEING DECIDED OR I FEEL LIKE IF WE HAD STUCK TO THIS, EVERYBODY COULD STILL HAVE GOTTEN WHERE THEY WANTED TO GO POLICY WISE. AND I THINK THAT THE THE VOTE THRESHOLDS ARE WHAT THEY ARE, AND PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO TO TAKE THE HIGH ROAD ON, ON THESE THINGS. AND WHAT WE HAD IN FRONT OF US TODAY WOULD HAVE ALLOWED EVERYBODY TO, TO, TO, TO DO THAT. BUT INSTEAD, I THINK WE STARTED TO TALK ABOUT WHERE WE THINK WE WANT THINGS TO GO. IF YOU, YOU KNOW, THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT A PARTICULAR SPORTS TEAM AND WHERE YOU WANT THEM VERSUS, YOU KNOW, WHERE OTHER PEOPLE WANT THEM, SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PART OF THIS CONVERSATION TODAY BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT IT WAS IN FRONT OF US. BUT WE DID IT. AND I THINK, AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT WILL PROBABLY HAVE CONSEQUENCES. BUT YOU KNOW, MY RECOMMENDATION FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH IS THAT WE WE VOTE TO APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE I DO THINK, AGAIN, I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE LANGUAGE. OPTIONS ARE GOOD. EXPLORING OPTIONS IS GOOD. I'VE NEVER SEEN PARTICULARLY CERTAIN PEOPLE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE WHO I FIND MYSELF MORE OFTEN THAN NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH. I'VE NEVER SEEN SUCH VEHEMENT OPPOSITION TO GATHERING MORE INFORMATION AND EXPLORING OPTIONS WHEN WE'RE NOT EVEN BEING ASKED TO DECIDE A THING. SINCE WHEN HAS GETTING MORE INFORMATION THAN ASKING THESE QUESTIONS EVER BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE SHOT DOWN LIKE THIS? SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE, YOU KNOW, GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT IT MATTERS AT THIS POINT. I'M REALLY NOT SURE. SO YOU KNOW, WITH THAT WE'LL HAVE OUR VOTE. BUT I THINK TODAY WAS A WAS NOT A GOOD DAY. SO, MADAM SECRETARY, GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE. YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. MEMBER NO COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. NO. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR. JOHNSON. YES. WITH NINE VOTING IN FAVOR, SIX OPPOSED. THE ITEM AS AMENDED. PASSED. MR. MAYOR. OKAY. NOW I HAVE TO REMEMBER WHAT THE MEETING WE'RE IN. IN A SPECIAL MEETING, WHICH I NEED TO ADJOURN. I SUPPOSE THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS, MR. MAYOR, FOR THIS SPECIAL. AND THERE WERE NO THERE WERE NO SPEAKERS WE DIDN'T GET TO ON THE SPECIAL [08:00:01] CALLED MEETING. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE WE'RE GOOD TO ADJOURN THIS THING AT 1:18 A.M. THE FOLLOWING DAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MEMBERS. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.