Mar 25, 2026 City Council Agenda Meetings

[AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2026 ORDER OF BUSINESS ]

[00:00:02]

ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING. WE HAVE QUORUM AND TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25TH 2026 TIMES 9:27 A.M..

I NOW CALL THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER OUR INVOCATION SPEAKERS, OUR GOOD FRIEND, OUR POLICE CHAPLAIN, AND HE'S RABBI ANDREW PALEY.

HE'S THE SENIOR RABBI AT TEMPLE SHALOM. AND I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO HIM FOR OUR FOR INVOCATION.

GOOD MORNING RABBI. GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.

GOD OF WISDOM AND COMPASSION, WE GATHER THIS MORNING, MINDFUL OF THE SEASON IN WHICH WE STAND, A TIME WHEN MANY IN OUR COMMUNITY ARE PAUSING, OUR REFLECTING AND ASKING DEEPER QUESTIONS ABOUT WHO WE ARE AND WHO WE ARE CALLED TO BECOME. IN THESE WEEKS, SACRED TRADITIONS INVITE US TO SLOW DOWN, TO TAKE STOCK OF OUR CHOICES, AND TO CONFRONT WHAT HAS BEEN BROKEN AND TO RENEW OUR COMMITMENT TO WHAT IS RIGHT.

FOR SOME, THIS IS A SEASON OF TURNING INWARD, OF HUMILITY AND SELF-EXAMINATION.

FOR OTHERS, IT IS A SEASON THAT RECALLS THE ENDURING HUMAN LONGING FOR FREEDOM.

THE JOURNEY FROM NARROW PLACES TOWARD POSSIBILITY, DIGNITY, AND HOPE.

AND FOR ALL OF US, REGARDLESS OF TRADITION, IT IS A REMINDER THAT RENEWAL IS NOT AUTOMATIC.

IT ASKS SOMETHING OF US. SO AS OUR CITY COUNCIL BEGINS ITS WORK TODAY, WE PRAY THAT YOU, O GOD, WILL GRANT THESE LEADERS THE COURAGE TO REFLECT HONESTLY, THE WISDOM TO CHOOSE THOUGHTFULLY, AND THE STRENGTH TO ACT NOT ONLY FOR WHAT IS EXPEDIENT, BUT FOR WHAT IS JUST.

HELP US REMEMBER THAT THE WORK OF A CITY IS NOT ONLY MEASURED IN ROADS AND BUDGETS, BUT IN THE LIVES WE UPLIFT, THE DIGNITY WE PROTECT AND THE FUTURE WE SHAPE TOGETHER.

AND WE ASK YOUR BLESSING UPON ALL WHO SERVE AND PROTECT OUR CITY, OUR POLICE OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS, FIRST RESPONDERS, AND ALL WHO STAND IN THE BREACH WHEN OTHERS ARE IN NEED.

PROTECT THEM IN MOMENTS OF DANGER. STEADY THEM IN MOMENTS OF UNCERTAINTY AND RETURN THEM SAFELY TO THOSE WHO LOVE THEM.

RENEW THEIR SPIRITS FOR THE WORK THEY ARE CALLED TO DO.

AND BLESS ALL WHO SERVE THIS CITY. THOSE WHO LEAD, THOSE WHO PROTECT, AND THOSE WHOSE QUIET WORK SUSTAINS THE WHOLE.

MAY THE WORK OF THIS DAY MOVE US CLOSER TO A DALLAS THAT REFLECTS OUR HIGHEST VALUES.

A CITY OF COMPASSION, OF RESPONSIBILITY AND OF HOPE.

AMEN. FOR EVERYONE WHO IS ABLE, PLEASE RISE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG FIRST AND THEN THE STATE OF TEXAS FLAG.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE.

TEXAS. ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.

THANK YOU EVERYONE. YOU MAY BE SEATED. AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MORNING BY MEMBERS.

SO I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER FIRST TO CHAIRMAN CHAD WEST FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

THANK YOU MAYOR, I APPRECIATE IT. AND YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE NOTICED THAT WE HAVE SOME PENNANTS HANGING IN FRONT OF THE HORSESHOE, WHICH EVERYBODY'S WELCOME TO TAKE AFTER THIS.

AND THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES AND TO ALL OF THE STAFF, MANY OF WHOM WORE GREEN TODAY TO CELEBRATE OUR VERY OWN DALLAS STARS FOR WHO, WHO JUST GOT INTO THE STANLEY CUP PLAYOFFS.

THE STARS MOVED TO DALLAS IN 1993. THEY HAVE PREVIOUSLY WON THREE WESTERN CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIPS AND ONE STANLEY CUP TITLE IN 1999. I KNOW THEY'RE ON THE ROAD TODAY IN NEW YORK, BUT WE DO APPRECIATE CHELSEA LIVINGSTON COMING TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF.

WE DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THE PRESENCE OF OUR DALLAS STARS IN THE DYNAMIC VICTORY PARK AND DEEPLY APPRECIATE THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN THE DALLAS COMMUNITY.

THROUGH THE DALLAS STARS FOUNDATION AND IN YOUTH HOCKEY LEAGUES ACROSS DALLAS.

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, CHELSEA. YEAH. CHAD, THANK YOU FOR THAT INTRO.

AS YOU MENTIONED, MY NAME IS CHELSEA LIVINGSTON. I'M OUR VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND FOUNDATION WITH THE DALLAS STARS HOCKEY CLUB.

ON BEHALF OF THE DALLAS STARS, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR WEARING THE GREEN AND SUPPORTING.

WE'RE VERY, VERY EXCITED. THIS IS OUR FIFTH CONSECUTIVE STANLEY CUP RUN.

SO TO BE HERE AND TO BE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY AND JUST HAVE ALL OF YOU WITH US BEHIND US MEANS MORE THAN WE CAN EVER PUT INTO WORDS.

SO WE JUST WANT TO THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH AND WE HOPE TO SEE YOU AT A GAME SOON.

THANK YOU. GO, STARS. ALL RIGHT. NEXT. RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER

[00:05:04]

TODAY I WOULD LIKE TO READ A SPECIAL RECOGNITION FOR INTERNATIONAL TRANSGENDER DAY OF VISIBILITY.

WHEREAS, INTERNATIONAL TRANSGENDER DAY OF VISIBILITY WAS FOUNDED IN 2009 BY RACHEL CRANDALL CROCKER, A LICENSED PSYCHOTHERAPIST AND AN INTERNATIONAL TRANSGENDER ACTIVIST.

WHEREAS THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 2.8 MILLION INDIVIDUALS IN THE UNITED STATES THAT IDENTIFY AS TRANSGENDER, WITH APPROXIMATELY 122,000 INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN TEXAS.

AND WHEREAS, TRANSGENDER PEOPLE ARE FACING HIGH LEVELS OF DISCRIMINATION AT BOTH STATE AND FEDERAL LEVELS, WITH NUMEROUS BILLS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES SEEKING TO CRIMINALIZE OR RESTRICT GENDER AFFIRMING CARE.

LIMIT LEGAL RECOGNITION OF TRANSGENDER IDENTITIES AND REDUCE ACCESS TO SUPPORTIVE PROGRAMS AND SERVICES.

AND WHEREAS, THROUGH EVENTS, SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGNS, EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES, AND ADVOCACY EFFORTS, TRANSGENDER DAY OF VISIBILITY HELPS TO CHALLENGE STEREOTYPES, COMBAT DISCRIMINATION, AND ENCOURAGE ALLIES TO SUPPORT THE TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY.

NOW THEREFORE, I, ADAM BAZALDUA COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS AND ON BEHALF OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL, DO HEREBY RECOGNIZE MARCH 31ST, 2026 AS INTERNATIONAL TRANSGENDER TRANSGENDER DAY OF VISIBILITY.

I'D LIKE TO INVITE ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN US NEXT TUESDAY, MARCH 31ST AT 12 P.M.

IN THE FLAG ROOM. WE WILL BE HOSTING A PRESS CONFERENCE TO COMMEMORATE INTERNATIONAL TRANSGENDER DAY OF VISIBILITY.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE AND UPLIFT TRANSGENDER MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

AS A CITY, IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT EVERY RESIDENT FEELS SEEN, VALUED AND SUPPORTED.

SUPPORTING ALL RESIDENTS, REGARDLESS OF IDENTITY IS CENTRAL TO BUILDING A STRONGER, MORE INCLUSIVE DALLAS.

I HOPE YOU WILL JOIN US AS WE STAND IN VISIBILITY, UNITY AND SUPPORT FOR THE TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND I JUST WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO WELCOME THE STUDENTS OF VILLAGE TECH SCHOOLS HERE IN THE AUDIENCE.

HERE THEY ARE HAVE A CAMPUS IN MY DISTRICT, AND I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO BY AND VISIT AND IT WAS REALLY PROUD OF THEM.

SO I WOULD, AND THEY EACH HAVE A GIFT FOR ALL OF THE COUNCIL.

MEMBERS. SO ONE, I WANT THEM TO COME AND PRESENT THE GIFT.

MR.. MAYOR. AND IF IT'S OKAY, WE CAN TAKE A QUICK PICTURE. THEY'RE GOING TO DO A QUICK TOUR OF CITY HALL.

BUT I LOVE WHEN STUDENTS ARE, ARE LOOKING TO ENGAGE AT ANY LEVEL BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW, EXPOSURE IS WHAT CHANGED MY LIFE AND ANY MOMENT, ANY EXPERIENCE COULD COULD REDIRECT IT. STUDENTS PATH.

SO AT THIS POINT, I WILL GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO PASS OUT THEIR GIFTS AND WELCOME THEM UP FRONT, IF THAT'S OKAY. MR. MAYOR. YEAH, WE'LL ALWAYS LET THEM GIVE US.

THANK YOU. OH, AND I FORGOT TO ACKNOWLEDGE. THANK YOU.

I FORGOT ABOUT THAT. I DO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO.

ON THE FREE STUFF. I KNOW RECOGNIZE THE CAMPUS DIRECTOR, TANYA WILLIAMS, ASSISTANT CAMPUS CAMPUS DIRECTOR AISHA MARSHALL HERE IN THEIR STAFF.

ALL OF THEM. SHOUT OUT TO, TO EVERYONE THAT THAT IS THERE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OH, HE GOT IT. THANK YOU.

IT IS. ALL RIGHT, MADAM SECRETARY. WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON TO OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS NOW.

[OPEN MICROPHONE]

THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW HEAR HIS FIRST FIVE REGISTERED SPEAKERS.

I WILL RECITE THE SPEAKER GUIDELINES. SPEAKERS MUST OBSERVE THE SAME RULES OF PROPRIETY, DECORUM AND GOOD CONDUCT APPLICABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

[00:10:06]

FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, YOU WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE SESSION.

INDIVIDUALS BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. FOR THOSE IN-PERSON SPEAKERS, YOU WILL 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 ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON ONLY.

YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, DOROTHY PENN. DOROTHY PENN IS NOT PRESENT.

DWIGHT JOHNSON. YES. YOU MAY COME FOR IT. YES, SIR.

OKAY. RIGHT HERE. YES, SIR. OKAY. FOLKS CAN HEAR ME PRETTY GOOD, RIGHT? ALRIGHT. LET'S SEE WHERE I BEGIN HERE. I'M A SENIOR CITIZEN, VETERAN DISABLED, AND I USED TO LIVE AT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX CALLED CITY WALK APARTMENTS OVER OFF OF 511 NORTH.

ACCURATE. I WAS THERE FOR CLOSE TO 20 SOME YEARS.

I'VE MOVED THERE SINCE THEN, ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, AND I RUN INTO A WHOLE LOT OF PROBLEMS. I'VE SEEN A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS THERE. I WAS INVOLVED.

I HAD TO CALL THE POLICE ON CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVE THERE BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF MESSY THING. BUT ANYWAY, I GOT A LAWSUIT GOING AGAINST THE INDIVIDUAL THAT LIVES THERE BY THE NAME OF THE MANAGEMENT AND BY BY THE NAME OF JOSH ALFREDO. WHAT THIS INDIVIDUAL IS DOING IS GOING AROUND ACCUSED OF BEING ABUSIVE TO THE SENIOR CITIZEN THERE. THE, SOME OF THE ATTENDANTS AND, AND MAKING THREATS.

EVEN THIS CAT EVEN MADE A THREAT ON, TRYING TO KILL THE MANAGEMENT THERE.

SO I GOT A LAWSUIT COMING UP IN JULY OF THIS YEAR AT THE PRECINCT ONE, AND I JUST KIND OF WANT TO VOICE MY OPINION TO LET YOU FOLKS KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND TO SEE EXACTLY.

FOR THE ZIP CODE 75201 THAT THEY CAN MONITOR THIS SITUATION THAT I'M SPEAKING ABOUT.

I KNOW THAT'S NOT A, I JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY OPINION.

I SEE I GOT ABOUT A MINUTE LEFT. SO THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER THINGS I WANT TO SAY, BUT I GUESS THAT'S ENOUGH RIGHT THERE, BUT I JUST SEEN TOO MUCH AND AND IT HAS TO BE ADDRESSED TO THE COUNCIL CITY OF DALLAS HERE, THE MAYOR AND ALL THESE GOOD PEOPLE BEHIND ME.

SO ONCE AGAIN, MY NAME IS DWIGHT JOHNSON. AND I LIKE I SAID, I HAVE A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE MANAGEMENT AND THE INDIVIDUAL NAMED JOSH ALFREDO AT CITYWALK APARTMENTS, 511 NORTH.

ACCURATE. AND I GUESS THAT'S ABOUT IT, REALLY.

OKAY. SO I'LL KEEP YOU GUYS POSTED ON WHAT'S GOING ON THROUGH THIS LAWSUIT.

AND MAY GOD BLESS YOU. AND LET'S HOPE THESE STARS CAN MAKE IT TO THE CHAMPIONSHIP.

OKAY. ALRIGHT, Y'ALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DONNA BUSH.

GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS DONNA K BUSH, AND I MIGRATED HERE TO DALLAS BACK IN 1990.

BRIGHT EYED, BUSHY TAILED YOUNG LADY TO TAKE HOME AND TO ADVANCE EDUCATION AT DALLAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY, WHERE I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO OBTAIN TWO BACHELOR'S DEGREE, A BACHELOR OF ARTS AND A BACHELOR'S OF SCIENCE.

I'VE ALSO BEEN ABLE TO BE ESTEEMED TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATION AT HARVARD UNIVERSITY THROUGH BUSINESS MANAGEMENT.

AND RECENTLY I WAS ESTEEMED TO RECEIVE AN HONORARY PHD FOR PHILOSOPHY AND CORPORATE LEADERSHIP.

I'M HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT MY BUSINESSES THAT I'VE ESTABLISHED HERE.

[00:15:03]

SOME OF THE PROGRAMS YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF THAT ARE INTERNATIONAL IN EVERY COUNTRY AROUND THE WORLD.

KIDS LIFE AT DONNA K BUSH MINISTRIES. IT TEACHES CORE CURRICULUM FOR ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE SCHOOL, HIGH SCHOOL AND YOUNG ADULTS. WHAT KIND OF WOMAN ARE YOU? TALKS ABOUT SPIRITUAL ENRICHMENT FOR WOMEN YOUTH PROGRAM AT DONNA K BUSH MINISTRIES, THE STEPPING UP PROGRAM FOR MEN, MEN TAKING ON THE INCUMBENT OF GOING TO CHANGE AND TRANSITION FROM YOUTH TO MANHOOD.

AND THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN ALL COMES FROM DONNA K BUSH MINISTRIES.

DIAMOND PRAISED MUSIC WAS BIRTHED OUT OF ME BEING A PROFESSIONAL SINGER AND A GRAMMY AWARD WINNING SINGER.

THERE. I ESTABLISHED AND PRAISED MUSIC IN 2012 AND FORT WORTH, TEXAS.

THE. IT HAS THREE INTERNATIONAL RADIO STATIONS.

JAZZ. DIAMOND PRAISED MUSIC. CLASSIC DIAMOND PRAISED MUSIC AS WELL AS DIAMOND PRAISED MUSIC GOSPEL.

IT IS URBAN GOSPEL MUSIC. THE OTHER ONE IS VERY INTERESTING IS DONNA K BUSH ENTERPRISE.

THIS BUSINESS WAS ESTABLISHED OUT OF 25 YEARS OF CORPORATE EXPERIENCE ESTABLISHED HERE IN DALLAS METROPOLITAN AREA.

ELEGANCE PROGRAMS, ELEGANCE AND FUSION FOR EDUCATION WAS DEVELOPED OUT OF A.

OUT OF A MEETING HERE WITH THE N DOUBLE, A CP AND ALSO THE DALLAS AND DALLAS.

ISD IS WHERE THEY ASKED AND POSED A QUESTION.

WHAT CAN WE DO TO INCREASE AND CHANGE THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM? AS A RESULT, I CREATED THAT PROGRAM. THAT'S YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JEREMY. BOSS. JEREMY BOSS IS NOT PRESENT. ROBERT. WYLAND. ROBERT. WYLAND. YES.

I'M HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS ROBERT WYLAND AND I WAS BORN AND RAISED HERE.

EDUCATED AT TEXAS TECH AND HAVE LIVED AND WORKED HERE IN THE DALLAS AREA EVER SINCE.

TODAY, I'M HERE SPEAKING TO YOU AS THE VICTIM OF A VIOLENT HIT AND RUN, AND I AM REQUESTING REVIEW AND ACCURATE CLASSIFICATION OF THE INCIDENT SO I CAN ACCESS CRIME VICTIM COMPENSATION FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES.

BRIEFLY, I HAVE SPENT MUCH OF MY LIFE IN PUBLIC SERVICE ENVIRONMENTS.

I WAS A BOY SCOUT, A FIRE EXPLORER. I HOLD EMT TRAINING AND VOLUNTEER WITH TEAM RUBICON, AND I'VE EVEN SERVED AS A TRAINING COACH FOR THE DALLAS COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM. I MENTIONED THIS ONLY TO ESTABLISH THAT I UNDERSTAND ROADWAY SAFETY AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE STANDARDS.

SO THAT NIGHT, WHEN I GRABBED MY FLASHLIGHT AND DONNED A REFLECTIVE VEST AND DEPLOYED EMERGENCY HAZARD LIGHTS BEHIND MY VEHICLE, MY CONCERN WAS PUBLIC SAFETY. SO BACK TO IT. ON OCTOBER 29TH, 2023, I WAS THE VICTIM OF A VIOLENT HIT AND RUN ON US 75 WHILE OUTSIDE OF MY VEHICLE ON THE SHOULDER OF THE HIGHWAY.

AFTER EXPERIENCING CAR TROUBLE, I LOST CONSCIOUSNESS ON THE ROADWAY AND I LATER AWOKE IN THE HOSPITAL AFTER EMERGENCY SURGERY.

NOW, DESPITE THE SEVERITY OF THE INJURY AND DOCUMENTATION, THE INCIDENT WAS NOT FORMALLY TREATED AS A CRIME AND THAT CLASSIFICATION DETERMINES WHETHER VICTIM ASSISTANCE IS AVAILABLE FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES.

MY KNEE REQUIRED EMERGENCY SURGICAL CORRECTION FOR A TORN ACL, PCL AND MENISCUS.

THE ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON ON CALL DESCRIBED MY KNEE AS IN ANOTHER TIME ZONE.

I WAS IN THE HOSPITAL FOR FOUR DAYS AND AN EXTERNAL FIXATION DEVICE WAS REQUIRED TO STABILIZE MY LEG.

SO THE INJURY IS DOCUMENTED AND MEDICALLY UNDISPUTED.

I'M SHARING THIS BRIEFLY, NOT FOR SYMPATHY, BUT TO ESTABLISH THAT A SERIOUS INJURY OCCURRED.

AND I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE THIS IS GOING ON THREE YEARS WITHOUT A RESOLUTION.

IN THAT TIME, I'VE ATTEMPTED TO RESOLVE THE CLASSIFICATION ISSUE THROUGH NORMAL CHANNELS.

I FILED WITH THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CRIME VICTIM ELIGIBILITY, BUT WAS DENIED BECAUSE NO CRIME OCCURRED.

SO I CONTACTED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. I FOLLOWED UP WITH THE DETECTIVES.

[00:20:04]

I ALSO REACHED OUT TO CITY OFFICES AND DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE.

SO I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE THOSE CHANNELS HAVE NOT PRODUCED A RESOLUTION.

THE IMPACT OF THIS INJURY IS LASTING. MEDICAL EXPENSES DIRECTLY TIED TO IT, REMAIN UNRESOLVED.

AND THIS IS EXTENDED FAR BEYOND THE INCIDENT ITSELF.

I'M SIMPLY SEEKING CLOSURE THROUGH ACCURATE CLASSIFICATION OF THE LAW.

AND I'M ASKING FOR A REVIEW OF THAT INCIDENT CLASSIFICATION.

AND IF IT MEETS STATUTORY CRITERIA THAT IT FORMALLY BE RECOGNIZED AS A CRIME SO THAT I MAY PURSUE CRIME VICTIM COMPENSATION FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES TIED TO THIS INJURY. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

NICOLE PAQUETTE.

GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS NICOLE PAQUETTE. I LIVE IN KNOX HENDERSON AND I SERVE AS THE VOLUNTEER BOARD CHAIR OF THE FRIENDS OF THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY.

THIS IS MY EIGHTH YEAR ON THE BOARD AND I AM HERE TODAY FOR THE SAME REASON THAT MANY OF YOU CHOSE PUBLIC SERVICE TO ADVOCATE FOR THE PRIORITIES OF OUR DALLAS RESIDENTS. WHEN I WAS RECRUITED TO DALLAS FOR MY DREAM JOB NEARLY A DECADE AGO, I WAS IN MY 20S STILL, AND I HAD TWO MAJOR HESITATIONS ABOUT MOVING HERE FROM THE MIDWEST.

FIRST, HOW UNDERFUNDED THE PUBLIC LIBRARY SYSTEM WAS HERE.

I WAS TOLD THEN IT WAS ONE OF THE MOST UNDERFUNDED IN THE COUNTRY.

AND SECOND, OUR LOW VOTER ENGAGEMENT, ESPECIALLY AMONG MY MILLENNIAL GENERATION.

I CHOSE TO MOVE HERE ANYWAY, BELIEVING THAT I COULD HELP MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

I GOT INVOLVED WITH THE FRIENDS OF THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY ALMOST IMMEDIATELY.

IT'S REALLY DISHEARTENING THAT NEARLY TEN YEARS LATER, MY SAME CONCERNS REMAIN.

I GREW UP IN THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. BY MIDDLE SCHOOL, I HAD READ THROUGH MY NEIGHBORHOOD BRANCH BOOKS, AND I MOVED ON TO THE CENTRAL LOCATION FOR MORE BOOKS.

LIBRARIANS CHAMPIONED MY SUCCESS AND HELPED SHAPE WHO I AM TODAY.

THERE'S NO WAY MY QUALITY OF LIFE WOULD BE WHAT IT IS TODAY IF IT WERE NOT FOR THE PUBLIC LIBRARY, OR FOR THE ROLE OF LIBRARIANS WHO ENCOURAGED ME TO LEARN AND DREAM THROUGHOUT MY LIFE.

I AM STANDING HERE AS PROOF THAT LIBRARIES CHANGE LIVES, AND YOU HAVE THOUSANDS OF DALLAS RESIDENTS HERE WITH STORIES JUST LIKE MINE.

YOU JUST DON'T ALWAYS GET TO HEAR THEM, BECAUSE LOVE OF LIBRARIES IS OFTEN VERY QUIET.

RECENTLY, AT YOUR ADVISEMENT AND IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS AND LIBRARY LEADERSHIP, WE GATHERED COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY.

I WANTED TO COME IN PERSON TODAY AND SAY THANK YOU, AND ALSO TO DELIVER PRINTOUTS OF THEIR RESULTS TO YOU.

YOU SHOULD HAVE THESE ALL HANDED OUT AT THIS POINT. WE ALSO EMAILED YOU THESE RESULTS LAST WEEK.

OVER 4000 RESIDENTS RESPONDED IN JUST TWO WEEKS.

85% OF THOSE USE LIBRARY SERVICES AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH.

MANY EVEN MORE FREQUENTLY. 97% OF RESPONDENTS BELIEVE THAT LIBRARY FUNDING SHOULD BE MAINTAINED OR INCREASED, NOT CUT. THESE ARE YOUR CONSTITUENTS. THESE ARE THEIR VOICES, AND THEY'RE ASKING YOU TO BE THEIR VOICE AND THEIR ADVOCATE.

DALLAS RESIDENTS DO NOT GET TO VOTE DIRECTLY ON THE LIBRARY BUDGET, BUT EACH OF YOU DO.

SO WE'RE SHOWING UP HOWEVER WE CAN. CALLING, EMAILING, FILLING OUT SURVEY FORMS, ATTENDING MEETINGS, ATTENDING BUDGET TOWN HALLS. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A TIGHT BUDGET YEAR, BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THIS COUNCIL.

OUR REPRESENTATIVES ARE CAPABLE OF CREATIVE SOLUTIONS.

IT'S ALSO THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY'S 125TH ANNIVERSARY THIS YEAR.

SO OUR ASK IS SIMPLE. PLEASE PRIORITIZE AND RESTORE.

LIBRARY FUNDING IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET WILL BE FOLLOWING UP SOON WITH SOME OF THE OPEN ENDED FEEDBACK RESPONSES, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. THANK YOU.

LEON HOLEMAN.

GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE COUNCIL. THE HANDOUT THAT I'VE PASSED OUT IS CONCERNING AN ISSUE THAT I'VE HEARD ON THE NEWS ABOUT CITY HALL RELOCATION OR RENOVATION. I WAS THINKING ABOUT THE BILLION DOLLAR OR SO FIGURE THAT'S BEEN PASSED AROUND ON THE NEWS, AND I JUST HAD THIS VISION.

[00:25:03]

THERE'S ALSO BEEN A LOT OF NEWS ABOUT AT&T RELOCATING TO PLANO.

AND I DID SOME RESEARCH ON WHAT 208 ACCURATE WOULD BE VALUED AT.

AS THAT DOCUMENT SHOWS, YOU AND I DID A LITTLE THINKING.

SINCE GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO DEAL WITH PROBLEMS OF SOCIETY, I SAID THAT.

WELL, LET'S GO DOWN AND SEE WHAT GOVERNMENT THINKS ABOUT THIS.

WHAT ABOUT APPROACHING AT&T SINCE THEY'RE BUILDING IS GOING TO BE VACANT AND THERE'S A LOT OF TALK ABOUT WHAT'S THAT'S GOING TO DO TO THE DOWNTOWN ECONOMY.

WELL, IT'S RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER. MIGHT BE AN IDEAL PLACE FOR CITY HALL.

IT HAS 37 FLOORS. THERE'S SPACE THERE FOR CITY HALL HOUSING, RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE. AND I DARE SAY THAT IT WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN $1 BILLION.

WHICH WOULD ALSO FREE UP THIS PROPERTY FOR DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS A WIN WIN WIN FOR GOVERNMENT, FOR THE TAXPAYER AND FOR BUSINESS.

THIS CONCEPT DESERVES CONSIDERATION BECAUSE IT'S LOGICAL.

IT'S DOABLE. AND AS ONE OF MY FRIENDS WHO IS A ASSOCIATE OR I SAY ADVISOR FOR A COUNCILMAN.

JUST BECAUSE AN IDEA DOESN'T COME FROM A COUNCIL PERSON DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT A GOOD IDEA FOR THE CITY.

SO I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD CONSIDER APPROACHING AT&T AND SEEING WHAT THEIR HOW THEY WOULD BE AMENABLE OR ACCEPTABLE TO SAYING, WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS.

AND THIS WOULD SAVE THE TAXPAYERS MONEY, MAKE THE CITY OF DALLAS MONEY.

AND AT THE SAME TIME, IT WOULD KEEP DOWNTOWN VIBRANT BECAUSE ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE WILL BE MOVING OUT TO PLANO, OTHER THINGS CAN BE MOVING IN TO TAKE THEIR PLACE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES THE FIRST FIVE REGISTERED SPEAKERS.

THE REMAINING SPEAKERS WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE CONCLUSION OF CITY BUSINESS.

MR. MAYOR? MR. MAYOR, FOR WHAT PURPOSE? I MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES AND HEAR ALL CITY OF DALLAS SPEAKERS.

IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE, IT'S SO ORDERED.

SO WE WILL HEAR ALL THE CITY OF DALLAS SPEAKERS.

MADAM SECRETARY NOTED. MR. MAYOR, YOUR NEXT SPEAKER.

OLIVIA CALOPRESTI.

GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, MEMBERS AND MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE.

MY NAME IS OLIVIA NICOLINA CALABRESE. I'M A SECOND GENERATION IMMIGRANT AND I'VE BEEN IN DALLAS FOR TEN YEARS.

I'M HERE TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT THE CITY OF DALLAS AND THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE THE CITY, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY DESERVE BETTER.

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT MARCH 3RD. VOTING MACHINE ISSUES AND LAST MINUTE CHANGES CREATED CONFUSION ACROSS OUR COUNTY.

VOTERS WERE REDIRECTED, FRUSTRATED, UNSURE WHERE TO GO.

AND THIS IS NOT AN ACCIDENT WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES.

IT SUPPRESSES PARTICIPATION AND WE STILL DO NOT KNOW THE SCALE AT WHICH BALLOTS WERE NOT CAST.

WHEN ELECTIONS BECOME COMPLICATED, IT IS NOT THE POWERFUL WHO SUFFER, IT'S THE WORKING FAMILY, THE SENIORS AND ADDITIONALLY PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WHO ARE PUSHED OUT.

THIS IS A POLITICAL FAILURE. A FUNCTIONING GOVERNMENT ENSURES FREE, FAIR AND ACCESSIBLE ELECTIONS, WHICH MEANS CLEAR COMMUNICATION AND RELIABLE SYSTEMS. NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT SOUTH DALLAS AND SOUTH DALLAS.

IN THE LELAND NEIGHBORHOOD, RESIDENTS ARE DEALING WITH GRAY WATER BACKING UP INTO THEIR HOMES.

NEW BUILDS GOING FOR HALF $1 MILLION ARE HAVING GRAY WATER IN THE FRONT OF THEIR BATHROOMS AT OPEN HOUSES.

AT THE SAME TIME, IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, A SHOOTING WAS OCCURRING RIGHT IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE.

MY FIRST CALL TO 911 ASSURED ANOTHER CALLER HAD CALLED ABOUT THE GUNSHOTS AND THAT POLICE WERE ON THEIR WAY.

12 MINUTES LATER, NO ONE SHOWED UP, SO I CALLED BACK WHILE THE GUNSHOTS KEPT GOING OFF.

[00:30:03]

A SECOND IDENTICAL CALL MUST BE CALLED IN IN ORDER FOR POLICE TO RESPOND.

THAT IS THE REALITY OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND THE ABSENCE THAT IS FELT IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT YOU REPRESENT.

I WAS TO BELIEVE OUR POLICE PRESENCE WOULD BE FORTIFIED, BUT SEA OF HAN IS REGULARLY DOWN 30 OFFICERS AND HAS NO RELIABLE DATA ABOUT THESE CRIMES.

AND YET, WHILE RESIDENTS ARE STRUGGLING, THIS COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING MASSIVE MULTIBILLION DOLLAR DEVELOPMENTS TIED TO BILLIONAIRE INTERESTS, INCLUDING EFFORTS CONNECTED TO BRINGING SPORTS GAMBLING TO TEXAS.

IF THIS COUNCIL BELIEVES THAT YOU DESERVE FANCIER BUILDINGS YOUR TIME, THEN YOU SHOULD RAISE THE STANDARD OF LIVING FOR ITS PEOPLE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YES. FOR WHAT PURPOSE? JUST TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE SPEAKER. ACKNOWLEDGE THEM? HOW? I JUST WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY STAY IN THE CHAMBERS WHILE I HAVE A STAFF MEMBER COME.

SURE, WE CAN DO THAT. THANK YOU. FREDDY DELGADO.

FREDDY DELGADO. IT'S NOT PRESENT. MARTHA. TRUBEY.

OKAY. GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME HERE TODAY.

I WAS HERE SIX WEEKS AGO AND A. THIS IS A PART TWO OF MY SPEECH ABOUT OUR DOG THAT WAS KILLED BY AN AGGRESSIVE DOG IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT I'D FIRST LIKE TO HAVE A BIG SHOUT OUT FOR THE DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES AND THE WORK THEY'VE DONE IN THE PAST FEW WEEKS.

AND TELL TELL THEM INCLUDING PAUL RAYMOND AND PATRICK GREEN.

THEY'RE THE GUYS THAT ARE BOOTS ON THE GROUND AND DOING THINGS.

AND WE HAVE A COURT CASE THAT'S COMING UP, BUT I'LL, I'LL MENTION THAT LATER, BUT I'D LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE THE D A S WORK FOR THE COMPLETED WORK THEY DID BEHIND THE SCENES TO CULMINATE THE FEBRUARY 3RD, 2026, 207 DOGS THAT WERE SEIZED AND RESCUED.

IT WAS IN THE METRO SECTION THE DAY AFTER WE CAME ON FEBRUARY 11TH.

AND I WAS SO EXCITED. I DON'T KNOW IF PAUL IS HERE TODAY, BUT WE WERE SO EXCITED TO SEE THIS AND SEE THAT THESE DOGS WERE TAKEN AND THAT THE IT WAS OPERATION FIGHT CLUB WAS CAUGHT BY SURPRISE, BUT IT WAS A FEDERAL AND A STATE AND A LOCAL COOPERATION WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE.

AND I JUST WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT THOSE THINGS ARE GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES, AND WE DON'T SEE THAT OFTEN.

AND IT'S REALLY, REALLY NICE. AND THEN I DIDN'T HAVE TIME LAST TIME, SIX WEEKS AGO TO FINISH MY SECOND PAGE OF MY, MY THOUGHTS. AND I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY THAT AGAIN, THIS IS TIED TO A DOG THAT THAT WE LOST AND HAD TO BE EUTHANIZED BECAUSE OF AN AGGRESSIVE DOG IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THE BIGGER ISSUE HERE IS COMMUNITY PUBLIC SAFETY.

THERE'S A PERSISTENT LACK OF SAFETY FOR RESIDENTS WALKING ON THE STREET WITH OUR DOGS BECAUSE WE'RE MET BY OUT OF CONTROL DOGS, OUR COMMUNITY AND KESSLER PARK RIGHT HERE IN IN DALLAS, OUR COMMUNITY IS SEEKING A PROACTIVE RESOLUTION FOR FURTHER ATTACKS ON CITIZENS WHEN OR ANIMALS OCCUR. THE BACKGROUND AND COMMUNITY IMPACT OF THIS IS.

RESIDENTS. WE HAVE LIVED IN OAK CLIFF AREA. I HAVE FOR OVER 50 YEARS OF MY LIFE, NEVER BEEN AFRAID.

THE PUBLIC SAFETY WAS ALWAYS A GIVEN A STANDARD.

NOW THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT CONCERN REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF OUT OF CONTROL DOGS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

LOCAL HOMEOWNERS ARE STRONG ADVOCATES FOR COMMUNITY SAFETY AND SAFE MOBILITY.

THE PRESENCE OF DANGEROUS AND SOMETIMES AGGRESSIVE DOGS DECREASES THE SENSE OF SECURITY, NEGATIVELY IMPACTING NEIGHBORHOOD WALKABILITY AND POTENTIALLY AFFECTING PROPERTY VALUES.

AGAIN, SINCE FEBRUARY 11TH, THE DAS HAS OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED THE DOG AS AN AGGRESSIVE DOG.

THE CASE IS APPEALING RIGHT NOW IN THE DALLAS MUNICIPAL COURTS.

EVIDENCE WAS GIVEN IN PHOTOGRAPHS AND VIDEOS OF THE ATTACK HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS.

WE APPRECIATE THE PROFESSIONAL SUPPORT AND HELP GIVEN BY ALL OF DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES PEOPLE, THE DIRECTOR AND THE CONTROL AGENTS, THE BOOTS ON THE GROUND PEOPLE.

WE'RE JUST HERE TO PREVENT DEATHS AND SIGNIFICANT TEARING OF FLESH AND PLASTIC SURGERY THAT'S NEEDED BECAUSE AGGRESSIVE DOGS ARE OUT OF CONTROL IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. ERIC. ERIC CAFFREY

[00:35:05]

DEVONTE PETERS. DEVONTE PETERS IS NOT PRESENT.

TALISA. SHAMSID-DEEN. TALISA. SHAMSID-DEEN IS NOT PRESENT.

ISAIAH HARRIS. ISAIAH HARRIS IS NOT PRESENT. RONNIE.

MAESTAS. RONNIE MAESTAS IS NOT PRESENT. OH. I'M SORRY.

THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR JOHNSON. RONNIE MR., 3215 RED STREET, WEST DALLAS, TEXAS.

WAS HERE NOT LONG AGO ON ANOTHER ISSUE. THAT WAS PRETTY IMPORTANT, I THOUGHT.

AND NOW SOMETHING ELSE HAS COME UP THAT'S EVEN MORE IMPORTANT IN MY OPINION.

AND THAT'S JUST A RECENT ALLEGATIONS BY MISS HUERTA, DOLORES HUERTA AGAINST CAESAR CHAVEZ.

AND FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO JUST SYNTHESIZE OR JUST MY HEART GOES OUT TO THE FAMILIES OF HUERTA AND HER CHILDREN AND FAMILY AND ALSO TO, YOU KNOW, TO BOTH VICTIMS AND ALL VICTIMS IN OUR COUNTRY AND AROUND THE WORLD, BECAUSE THIS HAPPENS EVERYWHERE ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S PEOPLE IN POWER THAT CAN MANIPULATE OTHER PEOPLE. I WANT TO START WITH JUST SAYING THAT I'M CHICANO.

I IDENTIFY AS CHICANO. I LIVED THROUGH THAT EXPERIENCE IN THE 60S AND THE 70S.

ALL THE WAY TO THE LITTLE RIOT THAT WE HAD DOWN HERE, UP THE STREET NOT LONG AGO IN 73.

THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORY THAT CAN'T BE ERASED.

YOU CAN CUT AND PASTE. YOU KNOW MISS WORTH'S NAME OVER CESAR CHAVEZ.

AND THAT'S THE SIMPLEST THING TO DO. BUT YOU CAN'T JUST CUT AND PASTE HISTORY, YOU KNOW? HISTORY IS WHAT IT IS. GOOD, BAD, WHATEVER. I JUST I'M SO DISAPPOINTED WITH A LOT OF THE FACEBOOK, SOCIAL MEDIA, COURTROOM JUSTICE LYNCH MOB MENTALITY TO, TO HANG A PERSON WITHOUT EVEN, YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ALREADY TAKING NAMES OFF MONUMENTS BEING COVERED, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THAT STUFF. AND IT'S NOT RIGHT. IT'S NOT RIGHT TO, TO, TO CANCEL OUR CULTURE AND WHAT WE WENT THROUGH, WHAT WE LIVED THROUGH, THE MAJORITY OF Y'ALL THAT WEREN'T EVEN BORN IN THAT TIME.

AND I KNOW YOU WEREN'T, BUT IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT YOU GOTTA GO THROUGH.

YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY WITH CIVIL RIGHTS AND THINGS THAT THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO US AS A COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, AS A PEOPLE. AGAIN, I'M CHICANO. I WAS DIDN'T HAVE AN IDENTITY BECAUSE I WAS EITHER MEXICAN OR AMERICAN.

I COULDN'T BE BOTH. I WAS CHICANO AND THEN WE WERE RAZA, AND THEN WE CHANGED THE HISPANIC AND LATINO AND NOW LATINX.

AND IF WE SAY ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN THOSE NAMES, WE'RE OFFENDING PEOPLE, YOU KNOW? SO IT'S JUST IT'S UNBELIEVABLE THAT THIS IS GOING THROUGH OUR COUNTRY NOW AT A NET OR BREAK NECK SPEED, THAT PEOPLE ARE MAKING DECISIONS THAT ARE GOING TO AFFECT, YOU KNOW, THE FUTURE.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LIKED ABOUT PRESERVATION DALLAS WAS THE ONLY THING THAT I LIKED WAS THAT IT HAD A PRESERVATION PART TO IT.

AND THAT'S PART OF OUR HISTORY. AND I'M ASKING THAT NOT TO PASTE OR CUT AND PASTE DOLORES HUERTA'S NAME OVER CESAR CHAVEZ.

SHE EARNED HER RECOGNITION ON HER OWN ACCORD AS A WOMAN, AS A FIGHTER.

SO SHE'S ENTITLED TO THAT. AND WHATEVER HAPPENS TO CESAR CHAVEZ IN THE FUTURE.

LET IT BE. BUT BUT TO JUST PUT SOMEBODY'S NAME ON SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO OTHER SOLUTION TO IT.

YOU KNOW IT'S NOT RIGHT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

SORAYA SANTOS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK HERE TODAY. I'M AFRAID I MIGHT BE MY FRIEND.

RONNIE'S LITTLE NIGHTMARE FOLLOWING UP, BUT I'M HERE BECAUSE EIGHT DAYS AGO WE HEARD THE NEWS ABOUT CESAR CHAVEZ.

AND LITERALLY ONE PARAGRAPH INTO THE FIRST NEWS STORY I READ ABOUT IT.

THE FIRST THING I SAW IN MY HEAD WAS THE SEAT OF SAVAGE SIGN HERE IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS, WHICH HAS BEEN THERE FOR IT'LL BE 16 YEARS THIS YEAR.

AND THE SECOND THING THAT I THOUGHT OF WAS THAT IT'S TIME TO REPLACE THAT SIGN AND THAT THE, THE ONLY PERSON THAT I COULD THINK OF THAT WOULD BE BEST TO REPLACE. THAT WOULD BE DOLORES HUERTA. DOLORES HUERTA IS A WOMAN WHO, LIKE MANY WOMEN AS PART OF THIS LABOR MOVEMENT THAT CHAVEZ IS THE FACE OF AND AS PART OF THE MANY MOVEMENTS IN AMERICAN HISTORY.

SHE HAS BEEN ERASED LARGELY ERASED. NOT GIVING CREDIT FOR A LOT OF THE WORK THAT SHE HAS DONE.

I THINK THIS WOULD BE AN INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE HER THAT CREDIT.

[00:40:03]

SHE IS 95 YEARS OLD, AND SHE'S STILL KICKING.

SHE'S STILL OUT THERE WORKING. SHE'S BEEN AN ADVOCATE AND AN ACTIVIST ALL OVER THE COUNTRY.

SHE'S INCREDIBLY ADMIRABLE WOMAN. AND IT WOULD JUST BE REALLY WONDERFUL TO GIVE HER HER FLOWERS HERE IN DALLAS WHILE SHE'S STILL ALIVE AND ABLE TO CELEBRATE WITH US.

AND YOU'RE YOU MAY HEAR PEOPLE COME IN AND SAY THAT WE SHOULDN'T NAME IT AFTER DOLORES HUERTA, THAT WE SHOULD NAME IT AFTER A PERSON HERE IN DALLAS.

BUT TO THAT, I WOULD SAY THAT DALLAS IS AS. AS MISS TOLBERT.

I SAW THE SIGNS IN THE THE ELEVATOR TODAY THAT MISS TOLBERT SAYS ABOUT DALLAS REALLY BECOMING AT THE TOP OF THE HEAP AND BEING AN INTERNATIONAL CITY.

AND IF WE'RE GOING TO BE THAT, THEN WE NEED TO BE WE NEED TO CELEBRATE PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY.

AND I JUST THINK THAT WOULD BE THE BEST THING THAT WE COULD DO FOR MISS HUERTA AND FOR DALLAS. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR GIVING ME THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THIS CONCLUDES YOUR CITY OF DALLAS RESIDENCE.

OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR VOTING AGENDA.

[MINUTES]

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. A MOTION FOR APPROVAL IN SEVERAL SECONDS.

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

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. MINUTES ARE ADOPTED.

NEXT ITEM PLEASE. THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, BEFORE WE MOVE TO YOUR CONSENT AGENDA, YOU DO HAVE TWO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEMS.

[CONSENT AGENDA]

DOLORES PHILLIPS, YOU DO HAVE MY ADDRESS. YOU DO HAVE HANDOUTS.

IT'S FIVE HANDOUTS. ALSO, I'LL BE BACK NEXT WEEK TO FURTHER EXPLAIN THESE HANDOUTS ON YOUR AGENDA.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHINSON.

I DO AGREE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE DONE. MONEY NEEDS TO BE SPENT TO GET IT DONE.

WHAT I'M PLEADING WITH YOU TO DO IS TO PLEASE GET THE MONIES TO CHIEF COMO AND HIS MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM IN THE BUILDINGS. AND TO PLEASE FOCUS. SPECIALIZED IN THE FORENSICS OF TECHNOLOGY ON THE HANDOUTS THAT YOU HAVE. YOU HAVE TWO PAGES SPRINT BILL AND IT SHOWS THAT THE OFFICER WROTE.

THIS IS THE FIRST CALL ON THE CD. THE ONLY CALL.

THERE WAS A TOTAL OF THREE CALLS WITHIN ONE WEEK.

IN 2009, TWO CALLS HAD BEEN TOTALLY ERASED. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT REPRESENTING OTHERS, YOU FIRST AND FOREMOST HAVE TO PROTECT YOURSELF IN THIS BUILDING. FOR DECADES HAVE BEEN A NETWORKING OF RETALIATION, NOT JUST AGAINST CITIZENS WHO SPEAK OF INJUSTICES, BUT YOUR OWN MEN AND WOMEN WHO WORK FOR THE CITY AND EVEN THE COUNTY FOR THAT MATTER.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT DOCUMENT TWO OF FIVE, IT SAYS DF-92-11850.

THAT'S AT THE CORE OF WHY MY DAD WAS TAKEN BACK TO CORSICANA AS AN INCAPACITATED ELDER TO FEND FOR HIMSELF. DF-92-11850. HE WORKED TWO DECADES PLUS RIGHT DOWNTOWN DALLAS AT LONE STAR GAS COMPANY, RIGHT OVER AT THE REHABILITATION WELLNESS CENTER IN 2023. HE PLEADED WITH ME NOT TO LEAVE HIM.

SO THIS IS A STORY OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU SPEAK OF INJUSTICES.

BUT I WANT YOU TO TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR HANDS IS IN NEGLIGENCE.

AND THE REASON THAT MY DAD WAS TAKEN BACK AND CAUSING HIS DEMISE BEFORE HIS TIME WAS FOR MONETARY PROFIT.

YOU HAVE HIS DEATH CERTIFICATE IN THREE OF FIVE HANDOUTS, AND IT STATES THAT HE DIED OF SEPSIS ALONG WITH KIDNEY DISEASE.

AND THAT WAS METHODICAL AS RETALIATION. BUT AT THE CORE, NETWORKING IN THIS BUILDING MAYOR JOHNSON STILL TAKE PLACE.

PROTECT YOUR PEOPLE AND GET THEM OUT OF THIS BUILDING.

I'M JUST HUMBLY SAYING THAT. DO THE RIGHT THING AND Y'ALL UNANIMOUSLY VOTE TO GET YOU AND YOUR PEOPLE, THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS, OUT OF THIS BUILDING.

HAVE A GOOD DAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT SPEAKER IS AZAEL ALVARADO.

[00:45:06]

WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR CONSENT AGENDA. YOUR CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEMS TWO THROUGH 50.

AGENDA ITEM NINE HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

AGENDA ITEM TEN HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON.

AGENDA ITEM 11 WAS CORRECTED AND HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. AGENDA ITEM 13 HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER.

BAZALDUA. AGENDA ITEM 41 WAS DELETED. AGENDA ITEM 46 HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. AGENDA ITEM 50 WAS CORRECTED. THEREFORE, YOUR CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEMS TWO THROUGH EIGHT, 12, 14 THROUGH 40, 42 THROUGH 45, AND 47 THROUGH 50.

THIS IS THE CONSENT AGENDA. MR. MAYOR. I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND MISS BLACKMON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON CONSENT.

THANK YOU. TODAY WE ARE TAKING A DEFINITE STEP TOWARD THE FUTURE OF WHITE ROCK LAKE.

ITEM NUMBER 12 ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA AUTHORIZES THE ADOPTION OF THE WHITE ROCK LAKE MASTER PLAN.

A SINGLE, UNIFIED VISION FOR OUR CITY'S MOST TREASURED ASSET, AND IT FEELS LIKE WE'VE BEEN BIRTHING THIS FOR SIX YEARS.

SO I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY INVOLVED. SINCE 1911, THE LAKE HAS BEEN MANAGED BY A PATCHWORK OF MORE THAN A DOZEN OVERLAPPING PLANS AND GUIDELINES. THIS DISJOINTED APPROACH CREATED A CONVOLUTED SYSTEM WHERE PAST INITIATIVES WERE MANAGED IN SILOS, RATHER THAN AS A PART OF A HOLISTIC STRATEGY FOR THE LAKE'S LONG TERM FUTURE.

BY CONSOLIDATING THOSE PLANS AND THE DECADES OF CONFLICTING DOCUMENTS INTO ONE COMPREHENSIVE FRAMEWORK, WE ARE REPLACING A FRAGMENTED SYSTEM WITH A CLEAR STRATEGIC ROADMAP.

WHILE THIS MASTER PLAN IS NOT A LIST OF IMMEDIATE TO DO ITEMS, IT IS AN ESSENTIAL GUIDE.

WE NEED TO IDENTIFY AND IMPLEMENT FUTURE PROJECTS EFFECTIVELY.

IT ESTABLISHES THE FORMAL FOUNDATION REQUIRED TO SECURE THE FUNDING AND RESOURCES NEEDED TO BRING LONG TERM VISION TO LIFE.

FURTHERMORE, IT SERVES AS A LIVING DOCUMENT, ONE THAT CAN BE AMENDED AS NEEDED AS NEEDED.

THIS ACHIEVEMENT IS THE RESULT OF A MULTI-YEAR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COMMUNITY AND TO EVERYONE WHO CALLED, EMAILED AND ATTENDED OUR MINI TOWN HALLS. YOUR INPUT GUIDED THIS ENTIRE PROCESS PROCESS AND ENSURED THIS PLAN REFLECTS THE PRIORITIES OF THE PEOPLE WHO LOVE AND USE THIS PARK. WHITE ROCK LAKE BELONGS TO ALL OF DALLAS, AND I'M INCREDIBLY, INCREDIBLY PROUD OF HOW OUR COMMUNITY SHOWED UP TO SHAPE ITS VISION.

I WANT TO EXTEND MY DEEPEST THANKS TO THE PARK AND REC DEPARTMENT, OUR CONSULTANTS, THE WHITE ROCK LAKE TASK FORCE AND DISTRICT NINE, CURRENT CURRENT BOARD MEMBER MICHAEL YOUNG AND PREVIOUS BOARD MEMBER MARIA HASBANI FOR THEIR HARD WORK AND DEDICATION.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, I WANT TO THANK THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS.

YEARS OF PLANNING AND COORDINATION HAVE BROUGHT BROUGHT US TO THIS MOMENT, AND YOUR EFFORTS HAVE USHERED IN A NEW CHAPTER FOR THE LAKE.

WITH THIS PLAN IN PLACE, WE ARE FINALLY POSITIONED TO REALIZE THE FULL POTENTIAL OF WHITE ROCK LAKE AND UPHOLD ITS STANDING AS THE GEM OF DALLAS.

THANK YOU SIR. MR. BAZALDUA. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON CONSENT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'LL START BY JUST GIVING KUDOS TO COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON.

ON ITEM NUMBER 12, THE MASTER PLAN FOR WHITE ROCK LAKE IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN LONG ANTICIPATED.

AND THERE'S A HUGE COMMUNITY OF ADVOCATES IN EAST DALLAS THAT LOOK AT THIS ASSET AS ONE THAT WE SHOULD BE STEWARDING WITH PRIDE AND CARE.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WHAT THAT BRINGS FOR THE FUTURE OF WHITE ROCK LAKE.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT FIVE, SEVEN, AND EIGHT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TODAY.

ON TODAY'S CONSENT AGENDA, ITEMS NUMBER FIVE, SEVEN, AND EIGHT WILL CONSIST OF AMENDMENTS TO ENSURE COMPLETION OF THREE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. HOMEOWNERSHIP IS NOT ONLY THE CORNERSTONE OF THE AMERICAN DREAM, BUT IT IS ALSO A KEY INGREDIENT IN THE MAKEUP OF A HEALTHY, THRIVING COMMUNITY AND A STRONG, STABLE CITY.

I REPRESENT AN AREA WITHIN DALLAS THAT HAS A RENTER OCCUPANCY RATE OF 68% AND ITS TOTAL HOUSING STOCK.

THIS. THIS DISPROPORTIONATE PERCENTAGE IS THE RESULT OF HISTORIC INJUSTICES AND LACK OF EQUITABLE ACCESS TO CAPITAL.

THESE CONDITIONS MAKE THE COMMUNITIES OF SOUTH DALLAS AND SO MANY OTHERS LIKE IT RIPE FOR DISPLACEMENT.

THE CONTRACT AMENDMENTS PRESENTED TODAY FOCUS ON BRINGING PROJECTS INTO COMPLIANCE, ALIGNING CURRENT POLICY WITH DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES, AND SUPPORTING DEVELOPERS WHO ARE COMMITTED TO PUTTING AFFORDABLE UNITS ON THE GROUND.

THE NEW CONTRACT TERMS WILL ESTABLISH ACCOUNTABILITY AROUND DEVELOPMENT TIMELINES AND DELIVER 67 QUALITY,

[00:50:04]

THE PASSAGE OF THESE ITEMS WILL RESULT IN HOME OWNERSHIP AND GENERATIONAL WEALTH FOR YEARS TO COME.

I WANT TO GIVE A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO OUR STAFF IN OUR IN THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT FOR REALLY ROLLING YOUR SLEEVES UP AND FIGURING OUT A SOLUTION SO THAT WE DON'T LOSE NOT ONLY GREAT PROJECTS, BUT ALSO GREAT PARTNERS.

THE PARTNERS IN THESE PROJECTS THAT THESE AMENDMENTS ARE GOING TO IMPACT HAVE STUCK AROUND FOR YEARS, HAVE BEEN COMMITTED TO THE COMMUNITY, NOT JUST A PROJECT AND PROFITABILITY.

AND THESE AMENDMENTS SHOW OUR COMMITMENT TO THOSE PARTNERS IN REALLY MOVING FORWARD TO A COMMON GOAL TOGETHER.

THERE WILL BE SOME HICCUPS ALONG THE WAY. AS WE SAW THROUGH COVID AND THE INCREASE OF MATERIALS AND THE INCREASED COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE REALLY SLOWED THESE PROJECTS DOWN. AND QUITE FRANKLY, WE'VE LOST SOME OF THE DEVELOPERS THAT, THAT ORIGINALLY STARTED FROM THESE PROJECTS, BUT WE HAVE SOME THAT HAVE STUCK AROUND AND THE, THIS IS A TESTAMENT TO THEIR COMMITMENT. AND I BELIEVE IT'S ONE THAT'S RECIPROCAL FROM THE CITY ON OUR COMMITMENT AS WELL.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO MANY MORE PROJECTS WITH THESE PARTNERS IN THE FUTURE.

SO THANK YOU ALL, HOUSING STAFF, FOR ALL Y'ALL'S WORK TO GET THIS DONE.

SOUTH DALLAS THANKS YOU AS WELL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JEROME STEWART YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON CONSENT.

THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. JUST A COUPLE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND APPRECIATIONS.

I'M STARTING WITH THE WHITE ROCK LAKE MASTER PLAN AND ALL OF THE WORK THAT BOTH PARKS AND COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON HAVE PUT INTO IT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. IT WILL MAKE ALL OF THAT AREA STRONGER IN THE FUTURE.

AND IT IS A HUGE ASSET FOR US, FOR OUR CITY. AND THEN ITEM 25, I WANT TO THANK THE DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION DIRECTOR KEN CALI AND HIS STAFF AS WELL AS THE LAKE HIGHLANDS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR VICKI TAYLOR FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE TO BRING SOME FUNDING FOR IMPROVING THE INTERSECTIONS ALONG SKILLMAN.

WE HAVE NUMEROUS. I WON'T GO INTO ALL OF THAT, BUT I'M JUST GRATEFUL FOR THE FOCUS AND THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE COMING TO THAT PART OF SKILLMAN. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS CADENA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON CONSENT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ITEM NUMBER 3023.

THIS IS AN ACCEPTANCE OF $30 MILLION FROM TEX DOT MONEY.

COUNCIL MEMBER. NARVAEZ AND I STARTED WORKING ON THIS MANY YEARS AGO, SO THIS IS GETTING THIS PROJECT BACK ON TRACK AND IT WILL BRING A FOUR LANE ROADWAY SEPARATED WITH SIDEWALKS AND BICYCLE LANES AND UNDER THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD RAILROAD OVER IN THE WEST DALLAS AREA.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE ITEM 24, 26, AND 32. AND I WANT TO THANK DOCTOR CALI FOR HIS WORK ON THIS PROJECT.

THIS WILL ALSO HELP TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD AND IT'S GOING TO PROVIDE SAFE PASSAGE OVER THE ROAD.

RAILROAD TRACKS IN D6. SO THANKS SO MUCH, THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT FOR GETTING THESE PROJECTS MOVING.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? OH, SORRY. GO AHEAD, MADAM SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THERE IS A CLARIFICATION ON CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 11.

I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT IT'S CLARIFYING THAT THE FUNDS ARE ACTUALLY DEPOSITED BY THE CFO INTO THE FAIR PARK FUND.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST CONSENT TODAY? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT, AND THE CONSENT AGENDA IS ADOPTED.

THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

WE'LL BEGIN WITH YOUR FIRST PULLED ITEM. AGENDA ITEM NINE.

[9. 26-690A Authorize the rejection of all bids received in response to the Request for Proposal and Notice of Funding Availability soliciting a general contractor to renovate the property located at 4150 Independence Drive, Dallas, Texas 75237 for a permanent supporting housing development and operation - Financing: No cost consideration to the City]

SOLICITING A GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO RENOVATE THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4150 INDEPENDENCE DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS, 75237. FOR A PERMANENT SUPPORTING, SUPPORTING HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION, THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION? MOVE. APPROVAL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IT WAS PULLED BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, IF YOU'D LIKE. THANK YOU. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

THIS IS ITEM NINE. ITEM NINE. CAN YOU SHARE WITH US WHAT THIS ITEM IS ABOUT? GOOD MORNING. THOR ERICKSON, DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT. THIS ITEM IS ABOUT REJECTING BIDS FOR OPEN SOLICITATIONS STEMMING FROM 2024 PAST NOFA.

[00:55:03]

WE HAD TO BRING THIS ITEM TO CLOSE THOSE BIDS SO WE CAN CONTINUE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE PROPERTY.

WHEN DID THE RFP GO OUT? THE LAST NOFA WAS ISSUED IN JUNE OF 2024.

I'M SORRY. JUNE OF ONE, 2024 2024. YES. AND YOU RECEIVED MULTIPLE RESPONSES, RIGHT? DIDN'T YOU GET FOR THE ORIGINAL RFP FROM JANUARY 2023? RECEIVED FOUR PROPOSALS, BUT NOFA WAS REISSUED IN 2024 AND ONE PROPOSAL WAS RECEIVED.

SO OF COURSE, IT'S 2026 AND THE RFP WENT OUT JANUARY 2023 AND THEN 2024 FOR FUNDING. SO DO YOU SEE WHAT THE ISSUE IS HERE? LIKE WHY IS THIS BEEN SUCH AN EXTENDED AMOUNT OF TIME? THANK YOU. AS PART OF OUR MERGER OF THE DIFFERENT OFFICES TO FORM.

OFFICE OF HOUSING COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT, WE'VE GONE THROUGH TO. LOOK AT ALL OF OUR ASSETS AND OPEN PROCUREMENTS AND CONTRACTS. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE NEEDED TO BRING FORWARD TO CLOSE ALL BIDDERS. THANKS. CITY MANAGER, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO SHARE WHY THIS HAS TAKEN SO LONG? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN. I THINK WHAT YOU'VE HEARD FROM STAFF IS THAT THERE'S BEEN AN ONGOING CIRCUMSTANCES AS WELL AS MOVEMENTS THROUGH WHETHER IT'S BEEN STAFF ABOUT THE CONTINUATION OF THIS PROJECT, WHAT WE'RE ASKING COUNCIL FOR TODAY IS TO ALLOW FOR US TO REJECT THE BIDS THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED SO WE CAN CONTINUE THE DUE DILIGENCE AROUND THIS PROJECT.

I GUESS I JUST AM NOT UNDERSTANDING. I MEAN, DID IT FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS WHEN YOU REALIGNED DEPARTMENTS OR THERE'S SOME NEW IDEA THAT IS BEING DISCUSSED? I DON'T HAVE A FALL THROUGH THE CRACK MINDSET, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

THIS WAS DONE DURING THE PANDEMIC. CHANGES HAVE HAPPENED IN THE MARKET.

WE HAD SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT SOME FUNDING MECHANISMS THAT DID NOT COME FORWARD.

WE ALSO TRIED TO GET ADDITIONAL PARTNERSHIPS THAT DID NOT PAN OUT.

SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING COUNCIL FOR TODAY IS A REJECTION OF WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK FOR THE PROJECT.

THANK YOU. WELL, I THINK THIS ITEM IS WORTHY OF AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

I KNOW I BROUGHT THAT UP YESTERDAY AT THE HOUSING COMMITTEE MEETING, BUT WE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY BUYING THIS PROPERTY.

WE INVESTED MONEY TO RENOVATE IT PARTIALLY. WE WERE TOLD THE COUNTY WAS GOING TO COMMIT, I BELIEVE, $10 MILLION THAT THEY PULLED BACK BECAUSE THEY SEE THE PROBLEMS WITH THIS PROJECT.

AND I THINK WE NEED A LOT MORE INFORMATION THAN JUST NO INFORMATION EXCEPT WE'RE GOING TO PULL BACK THESE THESE, THESE BIDS. AND I DON'T FEEL LIKE AS A FIDUCIARY OF THIS CITY THAT I.

HAVE GOTTEN THE KIND OF INFORMATION NECESSARY TO EVEN REJECT THESE.

LIKE, DOES ANYBODY HERE ACTUALLY KNOW ABOUT THIS? I DON'T THINK YOU DO. I THINK STAFF PUT THIS OUT.

I THINK LOTS OF THINGS HAVE HAPPENED THAT WERE NOT UP TO DATE ON.

AND NOW WE'RE BEING ASKED TO REJECT IT YEARS LATER AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

AND THAT'S A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE A FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE TAX DOLLARS AND FOR A PROJECT THAT IS SITTING THERE VACANT, THAT WE ACTUALLY EVICTED PEOPLE OUT AND CAUSED THEM TO BECOME HOMELESS AND THEN DID A SETTLEMENT WITH THEM.

SO THIS IS A VERY BIG PROBLEM AND THAT IT'S JUST ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WASN'T EVEN AN INDIVIDUAL ITEM, IS REALLY AN AFFRONT TO THE KIND OF JOB THAT WE ARE EXPECTED TO DO HERE.

SO THAT'S WHY I PULLED IT, AND THAT'S WHY I JUST THINK THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS.

I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING IT, MOSTLY BECAUSE I DON'T APPRECIATE THE PROCESS.

AND I THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED. IT'S REAL ESTATE.

IT SHOULD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. BUT THIS IS THIS IS NOT HOW I EXPECT OUR CITY TO BE OPERATED.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM NINE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THOR, WHY ARE YOU PROPOSING TO REJECT THESE BIDS? WHAT WAS INSUFFICIENT ABOUT THESE BIDS? JUSTIFYING REJECTING THEM ALL? I'M SORRY, SIR, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT QUESTION? YES. WHY ARE YOU PROPOSING TO REJECT ALL OF THESE BIDS? WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THEM? THEY WERE NOT REASONABLE AT THE TIME OF CONSIDERATION.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? NOT REASONABLE? THEY CAME IN A LOT HIGHER THAN MONEY THAT WAS AVAILABLE.

[01:00:02]

THEY WERE NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO BE ABLE TO FULFILL THE NEED OF THE PROCUREMENT TO TURN IT INTO THE PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.

AND SO AS STAFF REVIEWED THIS PREVIOUSLY, THERE WAS NOT A REASONABLE BIDDER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT.

SO WAS THAT A PROBLEM WITH THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE BIDDERS OR JUST THE AMOUNT OF THEIR BIDS? IT WAS PRIMARILY AMOUNT OF BIDS AND ALSO VISION AND CAPACITY TO FULFILL THE DUTIES OF THE PROJECT OR THE PROCUREMENT.

SO IF WE APPROVE THIS, WHAT'S THE PLAN GOING FORWARD? THE PLAN GOING FORWARD IS TO CONTINUE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COUNCILMAN OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PROPERTY AND WORK ON REISSUING PROPOSAL AND OR RECEIVING PROPOSALS FOR OPPORTUNITIES OF THE PROPERTY.

SO ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOME VALUE ENGINEERING TO REDUCE THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT TO GET IT WITHIN THE AVAILABLE FUNDING.

SO THERE IS AN ABILITY TO RETHINK THE PROJECT FROM WHAT IT'S AN ORIGINAL IDEA WAS TO HOW DO WE EXPAND IT? HOW DO WE LOOK AT ADJACENT SITES? HOW DO WE LOOK AT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES IN THE AREA? SO I THINK WE NEED TO START FROM A PLACE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CURRENT OPPORTUNITIES ARE AND HOW WE COULD APPROACH RE-ENVISIONING THIS PROJECT FROM WHAT IT CURRENTLY IS. SO ARE YOU COMMITTED TO PURSUING A RENOVATION PROJECT TO CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT THIS SITE, OR ARE YOU QUESTIONING WHETHER WE SHOULD DO THE PROJECT AT ALL? I AM COMMITTED TO LOOKING AT AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS.

THAT IS THE PURVIEW OF THE OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT. IT'S AN ASSET THAT'S CURRENTLY EARMARKED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

AND SO THAT IS IN THE PURVIEW OF WHAT WE'RE EXPLORING.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM NINE.

THANK YOU. AND JUST AS A REMINDER, COLLEAGUES, I WANTED JUST FOR.

I KNOW THERE'S SOME TRANSITION IN NEW, NEW ELECTED OFFICIALS COMING ON BOARD.

BUT AS PART OF THIS ONCE UPON A TIME IN A WORLD WHERE PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING WAS DESIRED WE WERE GOING TOWARDS TRYING TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IN EVERYONE'S DISTRICT IN DISTRICT THREE.

WE INHERITED THIS MOTEL. IT WENT THROUGH SEVERAL PROCESSES, JUST LIKE THE I FORGET THE NAME OF THE MOTEL THAT'S IN COUNCIL MEMBER WEST DISTRICT IN TERMS OF RENOVATING THOSE AND GETTING THEM DONE IN THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, HOWEVER, DIDN'T HAVE AS MUCH SUCCESS BECAUSE WHEN SOME OF THOSE FOLKS THAT WERE RESPONDED IT TURNS OUT IT WAS GOING TO BE ENTIRELY TOO EXPENSIVE TO ACTUALLY RENOVATE THIS.

SO MOVING FORWARD, THAT KIND OF WAS THERE. AND THERE WERE, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT FOUR BIDDERS THAT RESPONDED.

ALL OF THEM WERE EXTREMELY HIGH. SO THE RENOVATIONS TO DO WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE IN COUNCIL MEMBER WEST DISTRICTS AND SOME OF THE OTHER DISTRICTS, IN FACT, YOURS CHAIR MENDELSOHN, IT WAS TOO EXPENSIVE TO, TO ACCOMPLISH.

SO AS A RESULT, IT JUST KIND OF STALEMATED. AND THEN DURING THE TRANSITION FROM THE DEPARTMENTS, WE WENT THROUGH BUDGETS AND ALL OF THAT IN ORDER FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY IDEAS, THESE NEEDED TO BE CLOSED OUT.

SO THAT'S WHAT THIS IS, IS TO CLOSE OUT THOSE BIDS FROM 2024 SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AND FULFILL THAT COMMITMENT OF PROVIDING HOUSING WITHIN THAT DISTRICT.

MY PLAN HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT 2929 SOUTHAMPTON.

I'LL STAY ON SUBJECT, BUT I'M DONE. I JUST WANTED TO LET EVERYONE KNOW, GET EVERYONE CAUGHT UP TO SPEED AS TO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN AND AROUND THAT AREA.

THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, IF I COULD JUST MAKE AN ADDITIONAL COMMENT, I THINK IT FOR THE PURPOSES OF MAKING SURE THAT COUNCIL FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE CHRONOLOGY AROUND THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE.

COUNCILWOMAN. MENDELSOHN. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO HAVING A FULL BRIEFING ABOUT THIS PROJECT IN PARTICULAR AT YOUR COMMITTEE, TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY QUESTIONS AROUND WHAT WE'RE DOING NEXT ARE ANSWERED, AND IF THAT'S A CLOSED SESSION DISCUSSION THAT THE COUNCIL CHOOSES, THEN WE'RE DEFINITELY ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT. WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TODAY IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE CONTRACTORS WHO HAVE PROPOSED THEY'RE THEY'RE JUST KIND OF SITTING OUT THERE IN AN IDLE STATE. SO WE'RE TRYING TO CLEAN THAT UP SO WE CAN GO BACK INTO MORE DETAILED DISCUSSIONS AROUND WHAT CAN BE DEVELOPED AND WORKING IN COLLABORATION WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER. BUT WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO COMING AND HAVING A FULL DISCUSSION AT YOUR HOUSING AND HOMELESS SOLUTIONS COMMITTEE ABOUT THE PROJECT.

THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM NINE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN. WE SPOKE ABOUT THE CHRONOLOGY WAS JUST MENTIONED.

WHEN DID THIS PROJECT START? THANK YOU. I BELIEVE IT STARTED IN 2022.

IF I HAVE THIS RIGHT IN TERMS OF WHEN WE PURCHASED THE BUILDING, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THIS IS THIS IS MULTIPLE PROJECTS THAT WE'VE HAD FROM

[01:05:01]

AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP IN THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT.

I'M NOT POINTING ANY BLAME PARTICULAR, BUT WE WE WE'VE GOT TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT OUR HOMELESS HOUSING NEEDS.

AND I CONTINUE TO SEE ESSENTIALLY THE POLITICS PREVENT US FROM HAVING ANY PROGRESS IN THESE REGARDS. THIS IT'S ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED IN THIS CONVERSATION.

WE HAVE THREE PROPERTIES THAT ARE OUTSTANDING THAT WE ASK THE VOTERS BACK IN 2017 TO GIVE US THE STAMP OF APPROVAL SO THAT WE CAN PROVIDE HOUSING FOR OUR UNSHELTERED. SINCE THEN, WE'VE HEARD ALMOST DAY TO DAY TO DAY HOW MUCH OF A BURDEN THAT SOME RESIDENTS FEEL THERE IS.

BUT THEN WE ALSO HEARD A COMPASSIONATE PLEA FOR OUR NEED TO HAVE MORE RESOURCES FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNSHELTERED.

WE HAVEN'T ADDRESSED THOSE CONCERNS ON EITHER ONE OF THE SPECTRUMS WHEN WE'VE HAD ASSETS READY.

THIS HAS TO BE LOOKED AT FROM A HOLISTIC LENS OF THE NEEDS OF OUR CITY, NOT JUST ONE COUNCIL MEMBER VERSUS ANOTHER PARTICULAR PLAN.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE FALLEN INTO. THESE CANNOT BE OPERATED AS, AS FIEFDOMS. THIS IS, THIS IS THE MINDSET THAT WE HAVE ALLOWED TO HAVE.

THE REALITY IS, IS IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT DISTRICT AROUND THIS HORSESHOE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A CLEAR POSITIVE CONSENSUS FROM OUR CONSTITUENCIES TO SAY, YES, PLEASE BRING HOMELESS RESOURCES INTO MY DISTRICT.

THIS IS WHEN IT'S GOING TO TAKE LEADERSHIP. THIS IS WHEN IT'S GOING TO TAKE LEADERSHIP LEAD.

WE HAVE TO TELL OUR CONSTITUENTS AT. AT TIMES.

THERE ARE NEEDS OF OUR CITIES THAT THEY INDIVIDUALLY MAY NOT UNDERSTAND, AND WE'RE GOING TO HEAR OPPOSITION, BUT THIS IS A NEED FOR OUR CITY. THAT, IN TURN IS GOING TO BRING A POSITIVE IMPACT TO YOUR COMMUNITY.

BUT WE CONTINUE TIME AND TIME AGAIN TO CATER TO NIMBY AND AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR TAXPAYERS.

WE HAVE WAY TOO MANY BOND FUNDS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN USED FOR WHAT WE'VE PROMISED THE TAXPAYERS, AND THIS IS THE NEXT EXAMPLE OF IT. I'M JUST ASKING FOR US TO PLEASE HAVE A MORE HOLISTIC APPROACH TO WHAT WE CAN DO AND STOP THIS MINDSET OF, WE HAVE TO HAVE A STAMP OF APPROVAL FROM INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS.

WE NEED EIGHT PEOPLE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE TO GET THINGS DONE.

AND IF WE HAVE A CITYWIDE GOAL AND NEED FOR HOMELESSNESS, WE'VE GOT TO AT LEAST ALLOW FOR THE THE NEEDLE TO BE MOVED INSTEAD OF THE CAN BEING KICKED DOWN THE ROAD. THAT'S ALL THIS IS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM.

NO CLAP ON THAT ONE. I DO WANT TO FOLLOW THAT UP AND CONCUR THAT THIS IS A CITY WIDE INITIATIVE.

THIS WAS PART OF A BOND PROGRAM IN 2017. AND EACH DISTRICT THE PHILOSOPHY IS, HAS AN OBLIGATION FOR HOUSING AND RESOURCES BECAUSE OUR NUMBER ONE RESIDENT CONCERN, PER OUR SCIENTIFICALLY VALID SURVEY OF OUR RESIDENTS EACH YEAR, IS THAT THAT HOMELESSNESS IS ONE OF THEIR, THEIR TOP CONCERN. I THINK IT WAS IT'S 67% OF OUR RESIDENTS FEEL LIKE THAT'S THE TOP CONCERN.

AND SO WE HAVE TO DISALLOW THESE DISPROVEN STIGMAS FROM LIVING ON AND WORK TOWARD MANAGING THIS NEED AS MUCH AS WE CAN AS A COMMUNITY.

BUT I SUPPORT THE MOTION. I'VE TOURED THIS PROPERTY.

IT NEEDS A LOT OF WORK. BUT AT THE NUCLEUS OF IT IS LITERALLY A FINISHED AND READY TO GO.

COMMUNITY CENTER WITH ACCESS TO COMPUTERS AND LITERACY TRAINING AND FINANCIAL TRAINING AND GROUP MEETING SPACE THAT CAN STRENGTHEN THAT AREA, BUT THE PUBLIC CAN'T ACCESS IT, AND THAT IS A SHAME.

THE PROPERTY NEEDS TO GET UNSTUCK, AND WHETHER THE CITY FUNDS OR WORKS WITH A PARTNER TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN OR SELLS IT OUTRIGHT, WE'VE GOT TO SET ASIDE THESE FUNCTIONLESS BIDS SO THAT WE CAN MOVE ON WITH THIS PROCESS.

SO I SUPPORT THE MOTION. MISS CADENA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

SO I'M EXTREMELY FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA. AND I JUST WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY FOR YOUR WORK.

I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN COMMUNICATING WITH THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THAT AREA.

THIS AREA WAS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. DPD WAS GETTING CALLED ALL THE TIME.

AND I THINK THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED THE RESIDENTS CAN DEFINITELY SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING? AND WE DO HAVE TO GET THIS RIGHT. WE NEED TO MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD.

OF COURSE. BUT WE ALSO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE COMMUNICATING WITH THE RESIDENTS AND GET THE PROJECT RIGHT.

SO I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH THE CONSTITUENTS IN THE AREA AND TRYING TO BRING SOMETHING THAT THEY WILL BE PROUD OF AND ALSO IMPROVING THE STREET.

[01:10:01]

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR THEIR, FOR THEIR COMMENTS.

HOWEVER, THOSE COMMENTS ASSUME THAT THAT THIS IS A NIMBY APPROACH, THAT THE NEXT STEPS ARE A NIMBY APPROACH.

AND IT'S NOT. I'VE SPENT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME IN THAT AREA IN ORDER FOR US TO MOVE TOWARDS ADDRESSING THAT.

AGAIN, THE PLAN HAS NOT CHANGED FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, SINCE DECEMBER 23RD, 2023, WHEN WE ESTABLISHED THE PLAN STARTING FROM HAMPTON TO INDEPENDENCE. THAT HAS NOT CHANGED. THIS IS A PROCUREMENT MATTER THAT NEEDS THIS ITEM NEEDS TO BE REJECTED SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD FROM THERE.

IF YOU'D LIKE, WE CAN SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT WHAT THE VISION IS AND WHAT THE OPPORTUNITY IS THERE.

BUT IN THE PAST, SOME OF MY OTHER COLLEAGUES HAVE TAKEN LIBERTIES BEYOND, I THINK THEIR DISTRICT FROM THERE.

SO I HAVE KEPT IT CLOSE TO THE CHEST. BUT THIS ASSUMES THAT THIS IS NOT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

WE'RE STILL GOING TO ADDRESS THE HOUSING NEEDS IN THIS CITY. WE'RE STILL GOING TO ADDRESS THE HOMELESS NEEDS IN THIS CITY. BUT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY. BUT WE NEED TO DO THIS IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. WE WILL COME BACK AND BRIEF ONCE WE GET A CLEARER VISION OF WHAT THAT OPPORTUNITY LOOKS LIKE FROM THERE.

BUT THIS IS NOT MEANT TO TRY TO PULL THE WOOL OVER ANYBODY'S EYES OR ANYTHING.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE DONE SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD, AND I CAN FULFILL THE COMMITMENT THAT I MADE TO THE DISTRICT AND TO THIS COUNCIL.

IN TERMS OF WHAT MY PLAN WAS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.

THIS IS NOT MY PLAN. THIS IS WHAT WE ALL SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS AND ESTABLISH PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING WITHIN THE DISTRICT.

SOME OF THAT HAS SHIFTED ALL, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT OPINIONS.

BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO IS WHAT I'M ATTEMPTING TO DO WITHIN THIS DISTRICT.

AND IT'S NOT A ME AGAINST Y'ALL. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL SAID WE WERE TRYING TO DO, AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO CONSIDER DOING MORE.

THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

WELL, I'VE JUST HEARD SOME VERY INTERESTING GOVERNANCE THINGS.

YOU DID ACTUALLY MULTIPLE TIMES SAY MY PLAN. AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I'M NOT AWARE THAT AS AN INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER, ONE GETS TO DETERMINE WHAT ALL THOSE PROJECTS WILL BE BY THEMSELVES.

THIS IS CITYWIDE BOND FUNDS. IT IS CITYWIDE STRATEGY ON HOMELESSNESS.

AND THIS PROJECT, THIS HOTEL WAS PURCHASED WHEN THIS PROPERTY WAS PART OF DISTRICT EIGHT.

THE FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, I BELIEVE HE PURPOSELY REDISTRICTED OUT OF EIGHT BECAUSE IT WAS PROBLEMATIC.

HE SAID THOSE WORDS TO ME AND. POINT OF ORDER.

MAYOR. THIS POINT OF ORDER, THIS ITEM IS ABOUT THE REJECTION OF BIDS THAT FAILED TO QUALIFY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROJECT.

WE'RE GETTING INTO LIKE GENERAL PHILOSOPHY. OKAY.

NARROWLY TAILORED A LITTLE MORE, IF YOU CAN, TO OKAY, WELL, MORE SPECIFIC REJECTION OF THE BID CONVERSATION.

WE'VE WE'VE HEARD CITY STAFF TALK ABOUT THE CHANGES IN LEADERSHIP, BUT THE REALITY IS THAT THE CITY MANAGER WAS THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER THAT HAD THIS ITEM IN HER PORTFOLIO. THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP IN THAT SENSE.

THAT'S CONSTANT LEADERSHIP. AND THE CHANGE IN THE DEPARTMENTS WAS ACTUALLY MADE BY THE CITY MANAGER.

SO THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY DROPPING OF THE BALL THAT THE CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBER WISHES TO CHANGE THE ID OF THE PROJECT WITHOUT EVEN TALKING TO THE REST OF THE COUNCIL. WITHOUT THE COUNCIL BEING BRIEFED ON IT IS OUTRAGEOUS.

I'M SORRY. THAT IS NOT HOW THIS CITY IS GOVERNED.

IT IS NOT HOW OUR FOUNDATIONAL DOCUMENTS DESCRIBE OUR GOVERNANCE.

AND, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA, YOU JUST WERE MENTIONING THAT WE MAY RUN INTO OPPOSITION AND WE SHOULD LEAD OUR RESIDENTS.

AND I'LL JUST TELL YOU, THE ONE THING YOU SAID THAT'S INCORRECT IS, YOU KNOW WHAT? WHEN DISTRICT 12 PROJECT CAME, WE DIDN'T HAVE A SINGLE PERSON COME DOWN HERE AND OPPOSE IT.

IT DOESN'T MEAN BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE CONCERNS.

IT MEANS WE SPENT MONTHS TALKING ABOUT IT. SUSTAINED.

THANK YOU. FAIR ENOUGH. I, I WILL GO BACK TO MY INITIAL COMMENTS AND SAY IT IS IT IS INAPPROPRIATE TO SEE THIS ON A CONSENT AGENDA WITHOUT THE DUE DILIGENCE, WITHOUT THE COMMUNICATION TO THIS COUNCIL ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING AND I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT. REJECTING IT BECAUSE IT REALLY SHOULD COME TO A DIFFERENT MEETING AFTER WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED.

ACTUALLY MOVED. I LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION.

PLEASE STATE YOUR MOTION. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO THE FIRST AGENDA MEETING IN MAY.

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

WE'RE ON YOUR MOTION TO DEFER. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES, I THINK.

[01:15:03]

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK UP? MISS BLACKMON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. THANK YOU.

I GUESS THE QUESTION AROUND A DELAY FOR SIX OR 4 TO 6 WEEKS IS, WHAT DO YOU ANTICIPATE TO HAPPEN DURING THAT TIME? AND IF YOU WOULD MODIFY THAT TO LEAD SOME DIRECTION INTO THE MOTION? BE HAPPY TO MODIFY IT. REQUESTING THAT WE HAVE AN EXECUTIVE BRIEFING ON THE STATUS OF THIS ENTIRE PROJECT.

OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. THANK YOU SIR.

MAY I MAY I MODIFY MY MOTION? YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION.

A SUBSTITUTE MOTION. SO I'D LIKE TO SUBSTITUTE MY MOTION TO SAY TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO THE FIRST AGENDA MEETING IN MAY.

I'M SORRY. FIRST AGENDA MEETING MAY WITH A PRIOR EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THE STATUS OF THIS PROJECT.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, BUT LET ME LET ME LET ME ASK THE PARLIAMENTARIAN A QUICK QUESTION.

WE MAY DECIDE AFTER THE EXECUTIVE SESSION NOT TO REJECT THE BIDS.

THE ISSUE, ACCORDING TO THE PARLIAMENTARIAN, IS THAT SHE'S STRUGGLING TO FIND AN A, A PROVISION OF THE MEETINGS ACT THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THIS SPECIFIC TOPIC.

IT'S REAL ESTATE IS NOT A THAT'S THAT'S TOO BROAD.

IT HAS TO BE RELATED TO THE SALE OF REAL ESTATE, I BELIEVE.

AND I'LL LET HER EXPLAIN THAT FURTHER SO THAT WE CAN HAVE IT ON THE RECORD.

BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT THE EXECUTIVE SESSION PORTION OF YOUR MOTION WILL BE IN ORDER.

BUT I'LL LET HER ANSWER THAT. SO I'M HAPPY TO AMEND TO SAY EXECUTIVE OR OPEN SESSION.

AS APPROPRIATE. I MEAN, I'D RATHER IT BE OPEN.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. THERE ARE. OF COURSE, EVERYTHING WE DO MUST BE AN OPEN SESSION.

UNLESS WE HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC EXCEPTION. THE REAL ESTATE EXCEPTION REALLY ONLY FOCUSES ON DELIBERATING THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE, OR VALUE OF THE REAL PROPERTY, IF THAT WOULD HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON THE NEGOTIATING POSITION OF THE CITY.

THIS ITEM IS A REJECTION OF BIDS. AND SO THAT DOESN'T RELATE TO THIS EXCEPTION.

AND I DON'T I MEAN, I COULD LOOK FOR ANOTHER EXCEPTION, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE ONE THAT WOULD FIT INTO THIS TOPIC.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND EXECUTIVE OR OPEN SESSION AS APPROPRIATE.

IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO HER AMENDING HER MOTION? SHE JUST STATED, I DON'T HEAR ANY.

SO THE EMOTION IS EXECUTIVE OR OPEN SESSION AS APPROPRIATE.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S THE SAME MOTION SHE MADE.

THE ONLY PERSON WHO'S SPOKEN ON THIS MOTION TO DEFER IS MISS BLACKMON.

SO DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SAY ON IT? CHAIRMAN WAS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M A HARD NO, THIS IS I MEAN, THIS THIS ITEM IS A REJECTION OF BIDS.

IF WHICH WHAT ARE WE GOING TO GET INTO PROCUREMENT BUSINESS HERE AND WE'RE GOING TO START TELLING STAFF, YOU KNOW, LET'S CHANGE THINGS ON THE FLY. I THINK IT'S HIGHLY INAPPROPRIATE.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD APPROVE THE ORIGINAL MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

AND THIS, THE INDEPENDENCE PROPERTY IS STILL GOING TO COME BACK FOR US TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH IT IN THE FUTURE.

BUT HOLDING STAFF TO TAKING ONE OF THESE BIDS THAT WAS REJECTED BECAUSE IT DIDN'T MEET REQUIREMENTS SEEMS HIGHLY IMPROPER TO ME.

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

WE'RE ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. THANK YOU. I DO NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DEFER.

HOWEVER, I DO SUPPORT THAT THIS ITEM NEEDS MORE DISCUSSION.

I STILL SUPPORT REJECTING THE BIDS BECAUSE I THINK THIS PROJECT NEEDS TO BE FREE AND CLEAR FOR THE MUCH NEEDED DISCUSSION THAT MUST OCCUR, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN CHARACTERIZED ACCURATELY.

WE ALL MAY HAVE A VISION FOR DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF OUR DISTRICTS, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT YOU CALL MY PLAN, WE ARE STILL A GOVERNING BODY. AND SO YOU HAVE TO RALLY SUPPORT FOR THAT.

AND WE HAVE TO DISCUSS AND DEBATE WHAT THAT BEST PLAN IS.

AND SO I DON'T WANT TO DEFER THIS. I WANT TO FREE THIS PROPERTY OF BIDS THAT WE KNOW WILL NOT WORK BASED ON SOME OF THE DISCUSSION

[01:20:08]

THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR OWN MOTION.

THANK YOU. WE ACTUALLY HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS PROPERTY MANY TIMES AND WE DISCUSSED IT BEFORE WE BOUGHT IT.

WE'VE DISCUSSED IT SINCE MANY TIMES. THERE'S ALREADY AN IDEA OF WHAT THIS SHOULD BE, THAT THIS BODY APPROVED, AND IT INVOLVES THOSE CONTRACTS, AND IT COULD BE THAT WE WANT TO KEEP THOSE CONTRACTS AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE IDEA WE ALREADY AGREED ON, WHICH WAS HOW MANY UNITS OF PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.

108, 108 UNITS OF PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.

DO YOU KNOW HOW MEANINGFUL THAT WOULD BE TO OUR SYSTEM? OUR OVERLOADED EMERGENCY SHELTERS. THIS IS. EXCUSE ME.

I CAN'T HEAR YOU GUYS. WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE SIDEBAR CONVERSATIONS WITH EACH OTHER ON THIS.

WE SPEAK ON THE RECORD ON OUR MICROPHONE. SO GO AHEAD.

EXACTLY. THIS. THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED.

THERE'S NO NEW PLAN THAT'S BEEN APPROVED BY THIS BODY.

THAT'S EVEN BEEN TALKED ABOUT BY THIS BODY. THERE IS A PLAN THAT WAS ALREADY PURSUED.

WE EVEN HAD A RIBBON CUTTING. I WAS AT THE RIBBON CUTTING.

CITY MANAGER YOU WERE AT THE RIBBON CUTTING. JOHN WILEY PRICE WAS AT THE RIBBON CUTTING. TENNELL ATKINS WAS AT THE RIBBON CUTTING.

THERE WAS A TOUR. FOR HOW MANY DOLLARS HAVE WE ALREADY PUT INTO THIS PROPERTY? IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S 6.8 MILLION.

5 MILLION ACQUISITION, 1.8 MILLION IN RENOVATION, 1.8 MILLION IN RENOVATION.

AND I THINK THE THE PLAN THAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN TALKED ABOUT IS TO DEMOLISH THIS BUILDING.

CORRECT. IF I MAY, MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

AND I'M THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN, FOR THE QUESTIONS AND THE COMMENTS.

WHAT WE'RE ASKING COUNCIL TO DO TODAY FOR THE REJECTION OF THE BIDS TO GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECALIBRATE THIS PROJECT, IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL. WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S IN OUR BEST INTEREST AT THIS POINT, BASED ON THE PROPOSALS THAT WERE RECEIVED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDEFINE THE PROJECT.

WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT WE'RE GOING AGAINST THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL. SO THAT'S THE ACTION THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TODAY.

THE HISTORY AROUND THIS PROJECT IS IS, IS, IS, IS ONE THAT DOES HAVE A QUITE A BIT OF MOVEMENT.

THE FUNDING THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT FROM THE COUNTY, THAT IS NOT THE RIGHT NUMBER.

THAT FUNDING WAS ACTUALLY REMOVED FROM THE PROJECT.

AND WHAT STAFF TALKED ABOUT IN THEIR EARLIER COMMENTS WAS THAT SOME OF THE COSTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH IT NOW ARE ABOVE THE ACTUAL FUNDING THAT WE HAD AVAILABLE.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

IF THAT IS NOT THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL WILL WELCOME.

WE WELCOME YOUR FEEDBACK. IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO DISCUSS THE PROJECT BEYOND THE REJECTIONS.

WE HAVE NO PROBLEMS DOING THAT. WE WOULD JUST ASK THAT IT BECOME A AN ITEM, WHETHER IT'S AT THE FULL CITY COUNCIL OR AT THE HHS COMMITTEE, WHERE WE CAN ANSWER THOSE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

BUT TODAY IS NOT ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE PROJECT.

IT'S REALLY ABOUT HOW DO WE NOW RECALIBRATE THE PROJECT TO BE ABLE TO DELIVER WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS ASKED US TO DO? BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS. YES, I AM THE SITTING IN THE SEAT AT THE TIME THAT I WAS THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.

I'VE NEVER SAID THAT I WAS NOT. BUT THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN COMPLICATED.

IT HAS ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS AS WE SPEAK.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MAYOR. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE LATITUDE THAT YOU'VE GIVEN ME IN TALKING ABOUT THIS.

THE REASON WHY THE FUTURE OF THIS PROJECT IS RELATED TO THIS ITEM IS BECAUSE YOU'RE REMOVING THE OPTION OF PURSUING WHAT THESE BIDDERS HAVE PROPOSED BY REJECTING IT WHEN WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD.

THAT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S MORE ON THE FUNDAMENTAL, THE UNDERLYING ITEM.

WELL, BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD THE BRIEFING ON THE PROJECT TO KNOW IF WE MIGHT WANT TO KEEP THESE BIDS.

AND THAT'S WHY DELAYING THE REMOVAL OF THEM AT LEAST GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COUNCIL TO HAVE THE WHOLE PICTURE, WHICH IF YOU VOTE TO IF YOU VOTE TO REJECT THE MOTION, YOU'RE ACTUALLY VOTING TO NOT KNOW THE WHOLE PICTURE AND REJECT IT.

SO I HOPE PEOPLE WILL VOTE YES TO THE MOTION.

THANK YOU. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER.

I APPRECIATE COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN'S EDUCATION OF THIS THIS PARTICULAR ITEM FOR ME PERSONALLY.

[01:25:01]

HOWEVER, I THINK THAT THE, THE, THIS IS A, AN IMPORTANT ITEM, AN ISSUE THAT SHE'S BROUGHT UP.

AND I THINK THAT THE DEFERRAL IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, SO THAT THE OVERALL SCOPE OF THE PROJECT COULD BE VERIFIED, COULD BE REEVALUATED AND POTENTIALLY NOT FOR A NEGATIVE SITUATION, BUT FOR A POSITIVE SITUATION TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO MAKE THIS THING WORK. SO I THINK UNLESS THERE'S SOME DRAMATIC REASON THAT WE THAT THERE'S A TIMING, THERE'S A REQUIREMENT, THERE'S A BID SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE TO KILL THE BIDS IN ORDER TO PRESERVE OUR RIGHTS, IN ORDER TO PROTECT OURSELVES FINANCIALLY FROM SOME RECOURSE.

I SAID THERE'S NO HARM IN PUTTING THIS DOWN FOR A FEW MORE WEEKS TO FIGURE OUT AND EXPLAIN TO EVERYBODY WHAT THIS CURRENT SITUATION IS, ESPECIALLY IN A PROJECT THAT'S THREE YEARS OLD.

THE WORLD HAS CHANGED. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE HAVE, THE NEED FOR EMERGENCY HOUSING THAT THAT WE HONOR THE SENTIMENTS AND THE PROJECTIONS FOR WHAT THE COUNCIL HAD PREVIOUSLY.

BUT WE GOTTA. BUT TIMES CHANGE, AND I THINK WE'RE ENTITLED TO TO UNDERSTAND THE THE FACTS OF THE SITUATION BEFORE WE START PUSHING STUFF OUT OF THE OUT OF THE PROCESSING QUEUE.

SO UNDERSTANDING AND HEARING THE, THE CONCERNS OF EVERYBODY, I THINK THIS WOULD BE A POSITIVE APPROACH TO DEFER THIS THING, GET A RE REEVALUATION AND A RE EDUCATION OF THE PROJECT.

LET US MAKE A REAL SMART DECISION BASED ON THE FACTS.

AND THEN IF WE CAN REJECT BIDS, WE CAN GET NEW BIDS, WE CAN FIGURE OUT IF THE PROJECT EVEN HAS LEGS.

BUT LET'S MAKE A DECISION BASED ON FACTS AND NOT AND NOT STOP A PROCESS THAT NECESSARILY CERTAINLY PERSONALLY, I'M NOT EDUCATED ON. AND AGAIN, THAT'S MY MY PROBLEM, NOT EVERYBODY ELSE'S, BUT I WOULD VOTE FOR YES ON THE ON THE DEFERRAL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MAY I BE RECOGNIZED? THANK YOU.

AND THANK YOU, EVERYONE FOR THE COMMENTS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE HAS BEEN THERE'S HISTORY WITH THIS.

WE WERE TRYING TO BRING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE YESTERDAY AND WE'RE HAPPY TO PLACE IT BACK ON COMMITTEE.

FOR, I THINK WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SPECIAL CALL NEXT WEEK.

SO WE PLEASED TO DO THAT SO THAT EVERYBODY HAS THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO, TO MAKE THE DECISIONS.

THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I CONCUR WITH COUNCILMAN ROTH ABOUT THE DEFERRAL.

AND I'D LIKE TO FOLLOW UP ON AN ISSUE THAT HE RAISED WITH STAFF, WHICH IS, DO YOU ANTICIPATE ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF DEFERRING THIS ITEM FOR 4 TO 6 WEEKS? WE DON'T SEE ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES, SIR.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO I SEE NO REASON NOT TO DEFER THIS ITEM SO THAT THE COUNCIL CAN BECOME FULLY INFORMED ABOUT THE OPTIONS AND THE PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY AND PERHAPS OTHER FUNDING SOURCES THAT COULD BE ALLOCATED TO MAKE UP THE DEFICIT.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT BEFORE US NOW. I THINK WE SHOULD, BEFORE WE MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON THIS.

SO I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. ERICKSON. TELL ME ABOUT THE TIMING OF THESE BIDS.

I MEAN, NORMALLY THEY HAVE A SHELF LIFE. HOW HOW OLD IS IS THIS? THE LAST BIDS WERE RECEIVED IN SEPTEMBER OF 2024.

SO THEY'RE A LITTLE OLD RIGHT NOW. THERE'S ALSO STILL BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT CLOSED THIS PROCUREMENT, WE DO NEED TO REJECT THE BIDS BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT A REASONABLE BID SUBMITTED BASED ON THE PROPOSALS AS SUBMITTED.

SO WE'RE HAPPY TO BRING THE ITEM TO SPECIAL CALLED MEETING TO FURTHER DISCUSS OPTIONS MOVING FORWARD.

OKAY. BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SOME THINGS HAVE CHANGED IN THE WORLD SINCE THEN, ESPECIALLY AROUND CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND THAT SORT OF THING. CITY ATTORNEY, DOES GETTING OUT OF THESE BIDS PRECLUDE COUNCIL FROM BEING ABLE TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION AROUND THIS PROPERTY? I MEAN, IF WE WERE TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE MOTION SO THAT WE REJECT THE BIDS, I MEAN, WE CAN STILL DISCUSS THE PROPERTY AND WHAT HAPPENS WITH IT IF WE STAY THE COURSE THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING, OR IF WE CHOOSE A NEW PATH.

IF YOU REJECT THE BIDS, YES, YOU CAN. STILL, THE TOPIC IS STILL UP FOR DISCUSSION ON THE FINANCING AND THE PROJECT.

AND WHAT WERE SOME ARE YOU ABLE TO SHARE. AND THIS MAY BE SENSITIVE ABOUT THE GAPS IN FUNDING,

[01:30:04]

THAT'S CORRECT. THE PROPOSALS RECEIVED WERE ASKING FOR MORE CITY FUNDING THAN WAS AVAILABLE.

THERE WAS NO PRESENTATION OF ADDITIONAL SOURCE FUNDING AVAILABLE.

AND SO THERE'S A TREMENDOUS GAP STILL TO BE FUNDRAISED.

AND SO THAT'S WHY WE CONSIDER THEM NOT UNREASONABLE, IS THAT THERE WAS NOT OTHER CONSIDERATIONS PRESENTED WITH THE PROPOSALS IN ORDER TO HOW TO MAKE THE PROJECT ACTUALLY FEASIBLE. OKAY. SO I JUST I DON'T WANT EVERYONE TO THINK THAT THIS IS AN EITHER OR DECISION ON, YOU KNOW, WE CLOSE THE DOOR TO BEING ABLE TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER.

SO I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, WE'RE BACK TO YOU FOR THREE MINUTES.

I'M SORRY. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GET.

NO. OKAY. THREE MINUTES. WELL, FIRST I'D LIKE TO REQUEST A RECORD VOTE.

AND SECOND, I DON'T BELIEVE THE MOTION ASKED FOR IT TO BE AT A SPECIAL CALLED COMMITTEE MEETING IS NOT MY INTENTION TO PUT THAT ON MY SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, WHICH I BELIEVE IS THE 30TH OR 31ST.

THAT IS A SINGULAR ITEM ABOUT HFC. PFC NOT TO ADD THIS ITEM.

OUR AGENDAS ARE FULL. THIS WAS INTENDED TO BE FOR THE FULL COUNCIL BECAUSE IT IS A FULL COUNCIL DECISION.

I WASN'T GOING TO GET INTO THE WHOLE WHAT THE FUNDING AVAILABLE WAS ON THE, ON THE NOFA AND WHAT THE PROPOSED WAS.

I THINK THAT'S MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THE BRIEFING THAN TO GO INTO JUST THE REJECTION OF BIDS AT THIS POINT.

I THINK THE REASON THAT I'M ASKING FOR IT TO BE DELAYED IS EVIDENT, AND WE CERTAINLY.

WELL, I GUESS LET ME CLARIFY, AND PERHAPS THIS IS TAMMY.

I THINK THAT COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS WAS ASKING, CAN WE HAVE THE BRIEFING ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE PROPERTY? IF WE HAVE NOT REJECTED THESE BIDS, AND I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A YES OR NO SPECIFIC TO THAT.

I THINK SHE ASKED ME THE OPPOSITE. IF WE REJECT THE BIDS TODAY, CAN WE STILL HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE PROPERTY AND THE FINANCING AND EVERYTHING RELATED? THEN I'LL ASK YES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ASSUMING THIS IS DELAYED, CAN WE HAVE A BRIEFING ABOUT THE PROPERTY? YOUR MOTION SAID TO HAVE A BRIEFING AND THEN BRING IT BACK FOR A VOTE.

OKAY, SO THERE'S CERTAINLY NO REASON THAT CAN'T HAPPEN.

IS THAT CORRECT? I'LL DEFER TO THE CITY MANAGER ON THE BRIEFING TIMING.

I MENTIONED YES, THE ANSWER IS YES. SO I MENTIONED EARLIER, AGAIN, LET ME JUST GO BACK FOR JUST A MINUTE.

SO FIRST OF ALL, THIS ITEM WAS ON THE HHS COMMITTEE THAT HAPPENED THIS WEEK AND THE ITEM WAS NOT ABLE TO BE DISCUSSED.

IF COUNCIL WANTS US NOW TO DEFER IT AND HAVE A BROADER CONVERSATION AT A BRIEFING OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL, WE ARE NOT OBJECTING TO THAT. GREAT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND JUST REAFFIRMING MY REQUEST FOR A RECORD VOTE, PLEASE.

MR. RESENDEZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WAS I WAS CURIOUS TO KNOW, BUT FOR THE FUNDING ASPECT OF IT, WOULD WE BE HERE? I CAN'T ANSWER THAT DIRECTLY. I WASN'T FULLY INVOLVED IN THE PROCUREMENT A FEW YEARS AGO, SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND MAYBE SOME OF THE HISTORY.

SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TODAY IS TO REJECT ALL BIDS BASED UPON A REVIEW OF OPEN PROCUREMENTS.

AND AND TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN CONTINUE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PROPERTY TO FULFILL THE INTEREST OF WHY IT WAS PURCHASED AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS.

BUT GIVEN THE YEARS OLD THAT THEY ARE AND THE HOW THEY WERE PROPOSED THERE WAS NO REASONABLE BIDDERS.

AND SO THIS IS AN ITEM TO CLOSE THE, THOSE BIDS SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW TO PUT THE PROPERTY INTO THE BEST USE FOR THE COMMUNITY.

OKAY. SO MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT IT WAS THE BIDS WERE NOT REASONABLE BECAUSE OF LACK OF FUNDING PRIMARILY.

BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THERE WERE SOME OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT THE BUILDING PERHAPS ITSELF AND MAYBE NEEDING TO ADJUST SOME BIDS.

AND SO SOME OF THE BIDS SUBMITTED WERE, WERE CONTINGENT ON OTHER, OTHER FINDINGS.

OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS WONDERING. IT'S NOT STRICTLY ABOUT THE FUNDING, BECAUSE IF IT WAS, THEN MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE, WHAT'S THE LIKELIHOOD OF US BEING ABLE TO COME UP WITH, YOU KNOW, OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING, AND IF THERE WASN'T A LIKELIHOOD, THEN THERE'S NO POINT IN NOT.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO POINT IN DELAYING THIS. AND I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD.

[01:35:01]

I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD. VOTE NO ON THIS MOTION AND THEN VOTE YES ON ZARIN'S MOTION.

THANK YOU. AND IF I COULD JUST ADD TO THAT. COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ.

AS WE'VE MENTIONED THE REJECTION OF THE BIDS DOES NOT KEEP US FROM COMING AND HAVING A BROADER CONVERSATION AROUND THE PROJECT AND ANY DIRECTION THAT COUNCIL WANTS TO GIVE MOVING FORWARD. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO CLEAN UP WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO ENGAGE AND RECALIBRATE OUR FOCUS AROUND THE PROJECT.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TODAY, AND WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO STILL BRING THIS ITEM AS A FULL BRIEFING TO THE CITY COUNCIL, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU DESIRE. I THINK THE DATE WAS MAY MAY 1ST.

WE COULD STILL DO THAT. CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN YOU RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

SO THE WORD I'M REALLY TAKING UMBRAGE WITH IS RECALIBRATE.

YOU'RE ASKING US TO RECALIBRATE BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HAD NO BRIEFING THAT WOULD ACTUALLY CAUSE US TO WANT TO RECALIBRATE.

WE HAVE NO INFORMATION TO RECALIBRATE. SO WHY WOULD WE DO THAT? WHY WOULDN'T WE WAIT TO HAVE A BRIEFING TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE AND THEN DECIDE? YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION.

YOU KNOW, WE CAN COME UP WITH THE FUNDING BECAUSE, BY THE WAY, THERE'S ADDITIONAL HOMELESS BOND DOLLARS AVAILABLE NOW.

THERE'S MULTIPLE THINGS THAT WE COULD DO. BUT LITERALLY YOU'RE GIVING UP YOUR DUTY AS A FIDUCIARY OF THIS CITY TO GET RID OF THIS, TO, TO, TO REJECT THESE WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION, YOU LITERALLY HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN THE INFORMATION.

SO THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE PROBLEM IS HERE. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION AROUND THIS PROPERTY IN DISTRICT THREE AND IN DISTRICT FOUR PRIOR TO ME GETTING ON THE COUNCIL.

BUT I WANT TO ASK CITY MANAGER A QUESTION. BECAUSE I'M LISTENING TO IT.

IT WASN'T THERE'S BEEN NO BRIEFING, ETC.. BUT DID YOU SAY IT WAS ON THE AGENDA? WHAT AGENDA WAS IT ON OR WHAT, WHAT COMMITTEE AND IT DIDN'T GET GET DISCUSSED.

WELL, CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME INFORMATION ON THAT HISTORY ON THAT PLEASE? YES, SIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. FOR THIS WEEK'S HOUSING AND HOMELESS SOLUTIONS COMMITTEE, WE HAD THIS ITEM LISTED AND IT WAS NOT HEARD AT THE COMMITTEE.

IT WAS DISCUSSED. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DEFER ON AGENDA ITEM NINE.

MR. BAZALDUA. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I DO WANT TO CORRECT THAT.

IT WAS SEEN YESTERDAY. THE ITEM WAS TAKEN UP.

THERE WAS ONE ITEM THAT WAS DEFERRED, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING TO GO TO THE PFC HFC STATEMENT PROGRAM STATEMENTS.

BUT THIS, THIS WAS BROUGHT AND WE HAD THE ABILITY TO DISCUSS, WE WERE NOT EVER GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR I GUESS ROBUST REASONING OR THE ABILITY TO ASK QUESTIONS LIKE WE NORMALLY DO WHEN WE HEAR ABOUT THE PROCUREMENT BIDS.

SO I WILL STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT I THINK THE PROCESS WAS WRONG.

I DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT THAT, THAT, THAT THE PROCESS WAS FOLLOWED IN THE WAY THAT IT NORMALLY WOULD.

I DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT, QUITE FRANKLY, WHAT A DEFERRAL WILL DO.

TO, TO, TO RECTIFY THAT, I THINK I'VE BEEN ABLE TO EXPRESS MY DISSATISFACTION WITH JUST THE OVERALL LACK OF URGENCY AND FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE PROJECT SPECIFIC TO HOMELESSNESS.

THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE DOLLARS THAT WE HAVE PASSED IN SINCE 2017, SEEING MULTIPLE PROJECTS FOR VARIOUS REASONS COME UP SHORT BECAUSE OF WHATEVER THE REASONS ARE. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO TO BE HIGHLIGHTING.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT SUPPORTING A DEFERRAL IS GOING TO HELP US MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT.

OTHER THAN I HOPE THAT AS THIS CONVERSATION, NOT JUST WITH THIS PROPERTY CONTINUES, BUT WITH ANY OTHER USE OF HOMELESSNESS BOND PROPOSITION FUNDS THAT WE DO SO IN A MORE EXPEDITIOUS MANNER AND ONE THAT FOLLOWS OUR NORMAL PROCEDURES AND DOESN'T LEAVE US IN THE DARK. I STILL, BECAUSE OF WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T TALK ABOUT AND JUST BECAUSE OF THE TIMELINESS OF THIS BEING AN AGENDA ITEM TO VOTE ON NOW. DON'T BELIEVE THAT I'M GOING TO GET THE INFORMATION THAT I DO NEED TO FEEL THAT I WASN'T KEPT IN THE DARK TO THIS POINT.

BUT I'M JUST ASKING FOR IT, FOR IT TO BE FOLLOWED LIKE EVERY OTHER REAL ESTATE DEAL, LIKE EVERY OTHER PROCUREMENT DEAL, WHEN THERE'S MULTIPLE BIDS AND THINGS FOR US TO CONSIDER THAT WE ACTUALLY ARE GIVEN MORE CONTEXT.

[01:40:01]

THAT'S THE ONLY POINT THAT I'M MAKING ACROSS.

I DON'T KNOW, AGAIN, THAT A DEFERRAL THAT'S ON THE TABLE IS GOING TO ACCOMPLISH THAT GOAL.

I ALSO DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ACCOMPLISH FOR A DEFERRAL.

FOR THAT, I WILL NOT SUPPORT THAT. I DO BELIEVE THAT THE BEST POINT OF ACTION FOR US MOVING FORWARD IS TO GET THESE BIDS REJECTED SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY SEE SOME COME TO FRUITION. AND I THINK THAT OVERALL, SUPPORTING A DEFERRAL WOULD ACTUALLY PERPETUATE MY OWN FRUSTRATION WITH THE PROCESS, SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING A DEFERRAL. THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DEFER? A 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. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

RESENDEZ. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BAZALDUA. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLACKMON. NO. 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 THREE VOTING IN FAVOR.

12 OPPOSED. THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, SO WE'RE BACK ON ITEM NINE, AND I HAVE THE CUE FOR WHO'S SPOKEN ALREADY.

SO WHO WANTS TO SPEAK IF ANYONE ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM NINE RECORD VOTE PLEASE.

RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED, MADAM SECRETARY.

SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE, YOU CAN CALL THE ROLL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. NO.

IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

GRACEY. YES. COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER RESENDEZ.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER CADENA YES. COUNCILMEMBER BAZALDUA.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR. YES. COUNCILMEMBER BLACKMON.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER ROTH NO.

COUNCILMEMBER MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS.

YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR JOHNSON YES.

WITH 12 VOTING IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, LET'S KEEP IT MOVING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOUR NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM TEN. MR..

[10. 26-745A Authorize (1) a Construction Manager at Risk Agreement with Linbeck Group, LLC, best value proposer of four, to provide preconstruction and construction services for the Dallas Zoo Safari Trail Project located at 650 South R.L. Thornton Freeway; and (2) an increase in appropriations not to exceed $60,000.00 in the Capital Gifts Match Donations and Development Fund - Not to exceed $90,000.00 - Financing: Capital Gifts Match Donations and Development Fund ($60,000.00) and Park and Recreation Facilities (B) Fund (2024 General Obligation Bond Fund) ($30,000.00)]

COUNCIL MEMBER. SORRY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. TO MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL APRIL 22ND, 2026.

IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE TO SECOND.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, ON YOUR MOTION TO DEFER. YES, SIR.

I HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY BRIEFED AND COMMUNICATED WITH CONCERNING THIS PROJECT.

THAT'S BEEN A CONCERN ONLY IN THIS DEPARTMENT THAT MY OFFICE DO NOT GET THE INFORMATION AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

THEREFORE, I DO FULLY SUPPORT THE ZOO. I'VE MADE THAT VERY CLEAR, AND I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER THIS TO THE 22ND.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST OR ASK THESE GENTLEMEN QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. AGENDA ITEM TEN. I CERTAINLY SUPPORT MY COLLEAGUE ON HIS REQUEST FOR A DEFERRAL.

BUT AS THESE GENTLEMEN WALKED UP, I THOUGHT PERHAPS WE SHOULD GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO SPEAK.

I DON'T KNOW. CHAIR JOHNSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ASK THEM SOME QUESTIONS? I'VE BEEN ASKING QUESTIONS SINCE 2025. JULY, JUNE.

I HAVEN'T GOT RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION, SO MAYBE THEY CAN SAY SOMEDAY THEY REFUSE TO GIVE ME FOR SEVEN, SEVEN MONTHS. OKAY, WELL, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO PARK STAFF AND SEE IF THEY COULD ENLIGHTEN US ON THIS.

IT SEEMS TO BE A WELL, I WON'T EVEN CHARACTERIZE IT, YOU KNOW.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. YOU ALL KNOW ME.

Y'ALL KNOW MY OFFICE. VERY TRANSPARENT. AND YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND TAKE THIS.

MY DEPARTMENT OR ME BEING MISREPRESENTED. I WORK WITH EVERY LAST ONE OF YOU.

COUNCIL EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER, YOU KNOW, WE ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU.

WE WOULD NEVER MISLEAD YOU. SO I'M GONNA COME WITH THE FACTS TODAY.

FEBRUARY THE 27TH, COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON, YOUR OFFICE PARTICIPATED IN A CALL WITH THE DALLAS ZOO TEAM IN THAT OFFICE.

IN THAT MEETING. DURING THAT CALL, WE TALKED ABOUT UPCOMING COUNCIL ACTIONS RELATED TO THE SAFARI TRAILS PROJECT, INCLUDING THIS CONTRACT WAS DISCUSSED. THIS WAS AN EARLY HEADS UP THAT ADDITIONAL APPROVALS WOULD BE NEEDED.

[01:45:05]

MARCH THE 4TH DEPUTY DIRECTOR, RONALD CARTER, REACHED OUT DIRECTLY TO YOUR OFFICE TO TRY TO SET UP A MEETING WITH YOU.

THE INTENT OF THIS TIME WAS TO SCHEDULE A BRIEFING AND WALK THROUGH THE PROJECT AND DETAILS.

MARCH THE 16TH. MULTIPLE FOLLOW UP EFFORTS OCCURRED ON THIS DATE.

PARK AND RECREATION SENT FOLLOW UP EMAILS AGAIN REQUESTING A MEETING.

THE DALLAS ZOO CEO, LISA NEW SENT A FULL PROJECT OVERVIEW AND PRESENTATION DECK DIRECTLY TO YOU AND YOUR TEAM.

YOUR CHIEF OF STAFF. YOUR STAFF WERE COPIED TO ENSURE FULL VISIBILITY.

THAT COMMUNICATION INCLUDED THE PROJECT SCOPE, TIMELINE.

CONTRACT DETAILS. CLEAR. NOTE THAT THIS TEAM WILL BE ON THE MARCH 20TH.

THAT THIS ITEM WILL BE ON THE MARCH 25TH COUNCIL AGENDA.

ADDITIONAL FOLLOW UP ON MARCH THE 17TH PROCEEDED.

ALL THE WAY UP TO MARCH THE 23RD BECAUSE MR. O'CONNOR REALIZED THAT YOU HAD SOME OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND.

AND CALENDARS WAS CLEARED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROVIDE THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU.

COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON. BUT I HAVE TO CLOSE AGAIN.

AND THANK YOU, MISS STEWART, FOR GIVING ME THIS TIME.

BUT WHAT I CANNOT APPRECIATE IS FOLKS GOING OUT IN PUBLIC TRYING TO MISREPRESENT ME OR THIS DEPARTMENT, AND I AM ALWAYS GOING TO COME TO WITH THE FACTS WITH YOU ALL.

I AM WILLING TO WORK WITH MR. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON TO MAKE SURE THIS PROJECT COME TO FRUITION IN EVERY SINGLE PROJECT IN HIS DISTRICT COME TO FRUITION, BECAUSE WE HAVE THE SAME VISION, AND THAT IS TO MAKE SURE THESE UNDERSERVED AREAS MAKE SURE THEY GET THE ATTENTION THEY DESERVE.

WE HAVE INVESTED OVER $500 MILLION IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR SO FAR, AND WE HAVE ANOTHER 500 MILLION THROUGH THE BOND PROGRAMS, THROUGH FEDERAL THROUGH PARTNERSHIPS THAT WE PLAN ON SPENDING ANOTHER $500 MILLION TO THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

WE WOULD NOT INTENTIONALLY NEGLECT COUNCIL MEMBERS JOHNSON'S DISTRICT.

IT'S STILL MY TIME, CORRECT? IT IS STILL YOUR TIME.

SO I ALWAYS LIKE PLAYING THE PEACEMAKER, BUT THIS ONE'S TOUGH.

I THINK WE'VE GOT SOME REAL JUST THERE'S JUST A DIVIDE HERE.

AND THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS SAID IN OUR PRAYER THIS MORNING THAT I WROTE DOWN FOR A REASON.

I GUESS QUIET WORK SUSTAINS THE WHOLE AND WE NEED TO BE A WHOLE RIGHT NOW. WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER AND WE NEED PERHAPS ALL OF US JUST TO STEP BACK A BIT FROM THE EDGE AND BEGIN TO FIND THE WAY WE CAN COME TO THE MIDDLE.

I HAVE LISTENED TO CHAIR JOHNSON, I THINK. HE HAS SOME DEEP CONCERNS.

HE HAS SOME NEIGHBORS WHO ARE ASKING QUESTIONS AND HE NEEDS ANSWERS.

SO I WOULD JUST ASK THAT WE DO SOME OF THAT QUIET WORK, AND WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S AT STAKE HERE IS THE WHOLE IT'S THE FUNCTIONING OF OUR CITY.

IT'S THE FUNCTIONING SPECIFICALLY OF OUR COUNCIL AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF OUR COUNCIL TO THIS VERY IMPORTANT DEPARTMENT, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. SO THAT'S MY INPUT ON THIS.

AND THANK YOU. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART.

I MEAN, I KNOW THE REQUEST IS 2 TO 26. WE HAVE NO PROBLEM DEFERRING IT FOR TWO WEEKS TO THE APRIL MEETING TO HAVE TO, TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER ANY OF COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON'S ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

HE MAY HAVE, BUT THIS IS A SEYMOUR. WE'RE TRYING TO GET THIS PROJECT STARTED AND FINISHED.

YES, I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT URGENCY. SO, CHAIR JOHNSON, WOULD YOU CONSIDER MOVING IT AND THEN WITH THE OPTION, IF YOU DON'T HAVE WHAT YOU NEED, YOU COULD PULL AND MOVE AND MOVE AGAIN.

AS I UNDERSTAND IT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I CAN SPEAK ON YOUR TIME.

YES, IT'S FINE WITH ME. I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON OVER THERE.

[01:50:01]

THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. MAYOR, I THINK I'M.

I'VE SAID ALL I CAN SAY. ALL RIGHT, MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY. THANK YOU. MAYOR JOHNSON. CAN YOU EXPLAIN? I KNOW THAT YOU SAID THE DEFERRAL TO THE NEXT, THAT YOU WOULD PREFER IT TO BE A SHORTER DEFERRAL.

THIS HAS MATCHED DONATIONS. CAN YOU EXPLAIN ANY IMPACT OF A LONGER DEFERRAL, PLEASE? YES, SIR. GOOD MORNING, RYAN O'CONNOR DALLAS PARKS.

THE IMPACT OF THE DEFERRAL COULD BE AN ISSUE.

SO THIS IS A, A HIGHLY PHASED SEQUENCE, COMPLICATED PROJECT, AND THEY'RE TRYING TO GET THE FIRST PHASE, WHICH WILL INITIATE IN ABOUT 6 TO 9 MONTHS ONCE WE GET THE GMP IN THE SPRING OF 28.

SO ALTHOUGH A MONTH MAY NOT SOUND LIKE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME, WEEKS MATTER IN THIS CASE.

AND SO THAT'S WHY THERE IS THE REQUEST OF A OF A TWO WEEK DEFERRAL IN LIEU OF A ONE MONTH DEFERRAL, BECAUSE AGAIN, TRYING TO ROLL OUT PHASE ONE IN THE SPRING, WHICH IS A TIME THAT'S POPULAR FOR THE, FOR FOLKS TO VISIT THE ZOO AND SEE THE NEW ATTRACTION.

OKAY. AND IN YOUR TIMELINE THAT YOU GAVE, I MEAN.

I KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF ITEMS AND, AND EVEN RECENTLY THE, THE ZOO ITSELF HERE FOR THEIR STIPEND AND ANNUAL UPDATE. YOU ALL PRESENTED THIS ON WHAT DAY TWO? OUR COMMITTEE, IT WAS THE IT WAS, IT WAS THE, IT WAS MARCH 2ND.

IT WAS MY BIRTHDAY, AS A MATTER OF FACT. SO I DON'T KNOW, I FORGOT THAT. OKAY.

WELL, I GUESS WOULD IT PARLIAMENTARIAN WOULD A MOTION TO AMEND THE DATE BE APPROPRIATE? YES, THAT WOULD BE AN ORDER. OKAY. WELL, I MOVE TO DEFER THIS TO APRIL 8TH.

ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. AND SO WE ARE NOW ON THE AMENDED MOTION TO DEFER.

SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES IF YOU LIKE IT. YEAH.

I JUST THINK IN THE SPIRIT OF BEING A PEACEMAKER, LIKE MY MY NEIGHBOR HERE TO, TO MY LEFT I THINK THAT SHE'S TRYING TO FIND A COMPROMISE.

WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE CAPITAL FUNDS TO, TO BE MATCHED FOR THOSE TO BE COMPROMISED.

I ALSO DON'T WANT TO BRING ANY UNNECESSARY BLACK CLOUD OVER A GOOD, POSITIVE PROJECT.

I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IN TWO WEEKS, I WOULD HOPE THAT THAT WOULD GIVE MY COLLEAGUE ENOUGH TIME TO NOT ONLY GET HIS ANSWERS, HIS QUESTIONS ANSWERED FROM STAFF, BUT ALSO TO BE ABLE TO DO WHAT HE FEELS HE NEEDS TO DO OUT IN THE COMMUNITY BEFORE WE ACTUALLY TAKE UP A VOTE.

I, I TRY TO SEE WHERE THERE CAN BE A MIDDLE GROUND.

I SEE THIS AS A PRETTY CLEAR ONE. INSTEAD OF IT BEING DEFINITIVE.

I FELT THAT I PERSONALLY, AS A MEMBER OF THE PTB COMMITTEE AND IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU ALL WAS UP TO SPEED. I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT THAT I NEED TO ANSWER TO OR TALK TO.

AND SO THERE MAY BE, YOU KNOW, AN EXTRA LAYER OF DUE DILIGENCE THAT MY COLLEAGUE FEELS THAT HE NEEDS TIME AFFORDED TO, TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH. SO I WILL SUPPORT THAT.

BUT I DON'T WANT IT TO BE AT THE, THE, THE EXPENSE OF THE PROJECT ITSELF.

AND I JUST, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE GO, BUT WE, I HOPE THAT WE CAN GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE DON'T HAVE THIS TO BE A CONTINUING TONE FOR PROJECTS. NOT ONLY WITHIN YOUR DEPARTMENT NOT ONLY WITHIN YOUR DISTRICT BUT WE'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO COME TOGETHER AND LOOK AT WHERE SOME OF THESE COMMON DENOMINATORS ARE AND HOW WE CAN WORK THROUGH THAT.

SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL PARTIES INVOLVED TO LOOK AT HOW WE CAN IMPROVE OUR COMMUNICATIONS LEADING UP TO THESE MEETINGS SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THIS CARRY OUT AT THE HORSESHOE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. WELL, TECHNICALLY, WE'RE ON AN AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA TO CHAIRMAN JOHNSON'S MOTION. SO IF YOU'RE IN THE QUEUE, YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THE AMENDMENT.

[01:55:07]

THANK YOU. MAYOR AND MY COLLEAGUE BROUGHT UP SOME REAL CONCERNS I'M SENSITIVE TO.

CERTAINLY. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE A THIS IS A STAFF COUNCIL OFFICE SITUATION, AND I HATE TO SEE THE ZOO CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS.

I WANTED TO SEE IF THE ZOO CAN SPEAK ON IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A DIFFERENCE IN THE 2 OR 4 WEEK DELAY BECAUSE MY COLLEAGUE NEEDS FOUR WEEKS.

I WANT TO SUPPORT THAT. IF. IF THERE'S SOME REASON FROM THE ZOO'S PERSPECTIVE WHY THAT DOESN'T WORK OR NO DELAY WORKS, I WANT TO KNOW THAT TOO. AND NOT THAT I DON'T TRUST OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT.

I JUST I WANT TO HEAR THE ACTUAL BOOTS ON THE GROUND ANSWER TO THIS.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN WEST AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.

WE WE ARE DIRECTOR JOHNSON IS CORRECT WHEN HE SAYS THAT WEEKS MATTER.

THE SCHEDULE IS INCREDIBLY TIGHT. AND FOR US, THE DELAY COULD MEAN A DELAY IN WHEN WE BREAK GROUND.

THE CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE RIGHT NOW IS ABOUT A LITTLE OVER A YEAR IN ORDER FOR US TO MAKE A SPRING OPENING.

SO AGAIN, WEEKS MATTER, A ONE MONTH DELAY COULD DELAY OUR OPENING FROM MARCH OF 2028 TO APRIL.

EVERY WEEK, RAIN, ALL THOSE THINGS IN CONSTRUCTION MATTER.

SO AN UNNECESSARY DELAY COULD CAUSE US HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN PROMOTION, ATTENDANCE AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS.

COULD YOU ALSO INTRODUCE YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD? OH, I'M SORRY, I'M LISA, NEW CEO OF DALLAS.

WILL YOU COMMIT TO IF THE VOTE, THE AMENDED MOTION FOR TWO WEEKS PASSES, WILL YOU COMMIT TO MEETING WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND MAKING SURE HIS COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE WHAT THEY NEED AND HELP SUPPORTING THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IF IF NEEDED TO DO THAT.

YES, OF COURSE, WE HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH COUNCILMAN JOHNSON'S OFFICE.

AND HAVE A WEEK, A MONTHLY MEETING WITH DISTRICT FOUR, AND WE CAN KEEP HIM UPDATED EVERY MONTH.

AS WE TAKE STEPS IN THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND THANK YOU, MISS NEWELL, FOR FOR SAYING THAT, BECAUSE YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

YOU HAVE A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR OFFICE.

SO IT'S NOT THE ZOO. LET'S GO OVER THE TIMELINE FOR MY COLLEAGUE COUNCILMAN BAZALDUA.

OKAY. I RECEIVED A TEXT OR HE SAID HE TEXTED ME ON MY CELL PHONE.

I'M SORRY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON SOMETHING. IS THIS GOING TO BE SPEAKING TO WHY THIS DEFERRAL SHOULD OCCUR? THE DATE THAT THE AMENDMENT SAYS? YES, SIR. I'M GOING TO BE SPEAKING ON WHY I I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT.

YES, SIR. THE REASON WHY I DON'T SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT IS BECAUSE I HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY COMMUNICATED WITH MY OFFICE, HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY COMMUNICATED WITH. ON MARCH THE 4TH, MR. RYAN SAID HE SENT ME A TEXT. WE DID NOT RECEIVE THAT.

I EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT I DID NOT RECEIVE THAT.

I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON. HE THEN BEGAN TO SPEAK TO ME AND SAY, HEY, WE CAN DO THIS QUICKLY.

LET'S TALK ON THE 16TH. MY SCHEDULE WAS ALREADY SET.

I SAID, WHY DO I HAVE TO CROWN MEETINGS IN WHEN I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR INFORMATION? I HAVE NOT RECEIVED. HE THEN ACKNOWLEDGED BECAUSE IN EMAIL I SAID THAT I HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY BRIEFED ON THIS.

MR. RYAN O'CONNOR AGREED THAT YOU HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY BRIEFED ON THIS.

THEREFORE, I SAID, WELL, I'M GOING TO PUSH IT BACK.

HE. THIS IS A CONSTANT SITUATION THAT HAPPENS IN MY OFFICE.

I HAVE GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ZOO AND I WALK WITH INTEGRITY.

WE MAY NOT AGREE ON POLITICS, BUT I WALK WITH INTEGRITY.

THE CITY MANAGER HAS, WHEN I ASKED FOR THE SAME THING, HAS DONE EVERYTHING TO MAKE SURE THAT MY OFFICE IS WELL AWARE OF EVERY PROJECT THAT'S GOING ON IN MY DISTRICT, I ASK THE SAME THING FROM THE PARK BOARD, AND I DON'T DO THAT EVEN TODAY.

MR. RYAN O'CONNOR CAME TO ME AND SAID, PLEASE DO THIS FOR THE EIGHTH.

AND I SAID, THERE'S BEEN NO COMMUNICATION WITH ME.

AND YOU KNOW THAT HE AGREED. HE SAID, BUT TRUST ME, I WILL MAKE SURE WE COMMUNICATE.

I SAID, WHY CAN MY OFFICE GET THIS KIND OF RESPECT PRIOR TO SOMETHING BEING THROWN ON THE AGENDA WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE? EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER UP HERE WANTS THE SAME RESPECT TO BE PROPERLY COMMUNICATED WITH, SO YOU CAN MAKE A CONSCIOUS AND PRUDENT DECISION WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR COMMUNITY.

[02:00:02]

I HAVE SAID THIS IN EMAIL SEVERAL TIMES. I'VE ALSO INCLUDED THE CITY MANAGER ON THESE EMAILS SO PEOPLE CAN SEE MY CONVERSATION.

AND THERE'S THERE ARE SOME SUBSTANCE AND SOME SOME UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT I AM EXPERIENCING AS A COUNCIL MEMBER.

I'VE BEEN IN AN ELECTED OFFICIAL MAYOR FOR FOR SIX YEARS.

I'VE NEVER RECEIVED THIS KIND OF PROFESSIONAL DISRESPECT AT ALL.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS, BECAUSE I'VE ASKED FOR ALL OF THIS SINCE JUNE 2025, JULY 2025. AND THE ONLY PERSON THAT HAS HELPED ME TREMENDOUSLY WHEN GETTING THAT INFORMATION IS THE CITY MANAGER AND MR. GORY I'VE. ANYONE ELSE IN THE CITY HALL HAVE NOT TREATED MY OFFICE DISRESPECTFULLY.

THERE IS A STANDING MEETING EVERY FOURTH FRIDAY THAT MY CHIEF OF STAFF, DOCTOR JACKSON, HAS ON THE CALENDAR FOR PARKS.

THAT'S WHY MRS LEE NEW CAN ATTEST TO IT, BECAUSE THEY DO TALK TO ME.

I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THE AMOUNT OF MONEY UNTIL TWO DAYS AGO, BECAUSE NO ONE TOLD ME THAT AND I HAVE BEEN REACHING OUT.

SO THAT IS WHY. MR. COUNCILMAN ADAM BAZALDUA.

I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN TOTALLY DISRESPECTED.

I WANT AMPLE ENOUGH TIME SO I CAN GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, UNDERSTAND THE BUDGET, AND KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

I WILL NOT DELAY A PROJECT KNOWING IT'S GOING TO COST THE ZOO.

I LOVE THE ZOO AND THEY KNOW THAT. I TOLD THEM I TRULY SUPPORT THEM AND THEY WOULD ATTEST TO THAT.

BUT I NEED TO MAKE SURE I DON'T CRAM. I'M WELL READ AND I STUDY, BUT MOST OFTEN I OPERATE WITH INTEGRITY AND WHAT I.

HOW I'VE BEEN TREATED ONLY BY THE PARK DEPARTMENT HAS NOT BEEN FAIR AND IT'S NOT BEEN RIGHT.

THEREFORE, I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS. THANK YOU. JEROME STEWART.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA. THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. I AM GOING TO SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA MOTION, BUT WITH CAUTION.

WE HAVE GOT TO MEND THIS SITUATION, AND I AM GOING TO ASK THE GENTLEMAN AT THE PODIUM TO PLEASE WORK TOWARDS THAT GOAL. WHETHER IT'S A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING, WHATEVER THAT HAPPENS TO BE, LET'S MOVE TOWARDS IT. NOW IF WE GET TO THE EIGHTH.

AND CHAIR JOHNSON IS STILL WHERE HE IS TODAY AND WE HAVEN'T MOVED THE NEEDLE.

JUST KNOW THERE WILL BE. I WILL BE SUPPORTING MOVING IT TO THE 22ND.

IF WE. HOWEVER, ALL THIS PLAYS OUT I JUST WE JUST HAVE TO.

WE JUST HAVE TO WORK AS A WHOLE AND AND WE'RE NOT THERE.

WE'RE SPLINTERED. AND I KNOW TWO OF THE THREE OF YOU ALL UP THERE VERY WELL, AND I KNOW THIS CAN BE BETTER.

I KNOW IT CAN. THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. MISS KENNEDY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION.

BY MR. BAZALDUA. IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO CHAIRMAN JOHNSON'S ORIGINAL MOTION.

YES, DIRECTOR JOHNSON AND I JUST WAS WONDERING, HAVE YOU ALL COMMUNICATED WITH THE DISTRICT FOR PARK BOARD MEMBER AND THE PARK BOARD ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND WHAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT HAS BEEN COME OUT OF THAT CONVERSATION? YES. WE HAVE. OKAY. THANK YOU. POINT OF CLARITY, MR. MAYOR. SORRY. STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. IS THAT YOUR POINT OF ORDER? DID I HEAR SOMEBODY SAY YES? WHAT IS IT TO COUNCIL? LAURIE'S COMMENT. MY PARK BOARD APPOINTEE JUST GOT APPOINTED AND HE'S TOO JUST LEARNING THIS INFORMATION AND DOES NOT KNOW EVERYTHING.

THAT WASN'T A POINT OF ORDER, BUT THANK YOU FOR SHARING.

YES, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL. GO AHEAD.

COUNCILWOMAN THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. CAN I BECAUSE HIS BOARD, HIS HIS BOARD MEMBER HAS BEEN ON THE BOARD FOR AT LEAST AT LEAST 3 TO 4 MONTHS, IF NOT LONGER, AND HE HAS BEEN BRIEFED ON THIS ITEM.

YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MR. BAZALDUA AMENDMENT. IT'S MOST UNFORTUNATE THAT WE'RE HERE.

I RESPECT BOTH PARTIES THAT ARE SPEAKING TODAY.

I REALLY DO WANT TO SUPPORT MY MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBER AND HIS ONE MONTH DELAY, BUT I

[02:05:02]

AND THAT DELAY WITH THAT DELAY CAN DO TO THE BUDGET OF THIS REQUEST.

I THINK THAT I'M THIS IS HARD, BUT I THINK I'M SITTING WITH WITH MISS STEWART HERE WITH DELAYING IT TO, FOR THE TWO WEEKS AND IF BY LORD HELP US AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, MY COLLEAGUE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO, TO RECEIVE EVERYTHING AND I DO MEAN EVERYTHING THAT HE NEEDS TO MOVE FORWARD.

I WILL NOT BE SPEAKING NICELY, JUST LIKE HE'S NOT SPEAKING AS, AS AS CONGENIAL AS WE WOULD LIKE.

BUT I ALSO RESPECT THE FACT THAT WHEN WE COME, WE COME WITH THE NEED FOR PARTNERSHIP AND COLLABORATION.

THERE IS NOTHING AND THERE IS NOTHING THAT I WOULD.

I STAND ON TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND COLLABORATION.

AND I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON DOES THE SAME THING.

TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY, COLLABORATION. I KNOW THAT DIRECTOR JOHNSON, WITH YOU AND ME, IT'S THE SAME THING.

TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND COLLABORATION. I JUST HATE THAT.

AND IT HURTS THAT I'M HERE AND I'M NOT SEEING.

I'M NOT SEEING THAT. LISA. COLLABORATION PART.

EVERYBODY HAS THEIR OWN TRUTH. WHETHER YOUR TRUTH AND HIS TRUTH ARE THE SAME TRUTH EVERYBODY HAS HAS THEIR OWN TRUTH.

BUT THE ONE THING I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IS COLLABORATION.

SO I'M GOING TO COLLABORATE WITH MY PARTNER OVER HERE, MISS STEWART, AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.

AND EVEN I'M GOING TO REACH OUT TO BOTH OF YOU AND, AND USE SOME OF MY MEDIATION SKILLS TO SEE IF WE CAN GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER.

I JUST CAN'T HAVE THE PUBLIC THINK THAT I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON.

LET'S JUST MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR. I'M GOING TO WORK WITH HIM.

I'M GOING TO COLLABORATE WITH HIM, AND I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT DISTRICT STILL RECEIVES ALL THE ATTENTION IT DESERVES.

WE JUST HAVE A DISAGREEMENT TODAY ON WHAT WAS EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION OR NOT.

I FEEL THAT AND I HEAR THAT, BUT WHAT I ALSO FEEL IN HERE IS A FRUSTRATION ON BOTH PARTS.

AND I HAVE A RELATIONSHIP THAT IS CONGENIAL WITH BOTH OF YOU AND ALL ACTUALLY WITH ALL OF YOU.

AND I JUST NEED THE COLLABORATION AND I JUST NEED THE YOU'RE BOTH VERY STRONG MEN.

YOU GUYS ARE ALL STRONG MEN. AND WITH STRONG PERSONALITIES, SOMETIMES COMES THE INABILITY TO STEP BACK. STEP BACK, MEN. GENTLEMEN.

STEP BACK. STEP BACK AND. AND COME TO A PLACE OF CALM COLLABORATION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, WE ARE.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THREE MINUTES. YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I'M LOOKING AT MY NOTES. OKAY. SO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW THAT THE MINISTERIAL PAUSE COUNTS AGAINST YOUR TIME HERE.

LIKE IT'S NOT CHURCH LIKE THIS COUNTS. YES, SIR.

YES, SIR. I HAVE EMAIL THREAD, NOT THE CONVERSATION.

I HAVE EMAIL THREAD STATING THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY COMMUNICATED.

NOT SOMETHING THAT JUST RECENTLY HAPPENED. THAT'S BEEN AN ONGOING SITUATION BECAUSE I'M FROM THE OLD SCHOOL. IF IF IT AIN'T DOCUMENTED, IT NEVER HAPPENED.

DOCUMENTATION RULES THE NATION. I SPOKE TO MR.

[02:10:03]

I CAN'T DO TEXT MESSAGES WHEN I'M TRYING TO DO BUSINESS.

MY PARK BOARD, WHO IS RESPECTED IN THIS COMMUNITY, MR. TAYLOR TORRENCE. ON THE FORKLIFT. GOT APPROVED OCTOBER THE 20TH 22ND 2025. HE STILL DIDN'T KNOW ALL OF THIS INFORMATION BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT.

IF $90 MILLION. IF THAT'S WHAT'S GOING IN MY DISTRICT, THAT'S GOING TO.

THAT'S GOING TO SUPPORT THE ZOO OR WHATEVER THE PROJECT IT IS.

AND I MAY BE WRONG BECAUSE AGAIN, I HAVE NOT FULLY BEEN BRIEFED.

WHY WOULD I NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN? AND WHY WOULD I NOT SUPPORT THAT? MY CONCERN, AGAIN, IS NOT WITH THE ZOO. I JUST DID A TOUR OF THE ZOO.

I TOLD EVERYONE HOW EXCITED I WAS ABOUT THE HOSPITAL AND ET CETERA.

AND EVERYONE WANTS TO GO SEE IT. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANYTHING BUT LACK OF COMMUNICATION FROM THE PARK DEPARTMENT.

AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR BECAUSE IF ANYTHING ELSE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE, I WANT TO BE KNOWN FOR OPERATING WITH INTEGRITY, TRANSPARENCY IN MY COMMUNITY, HONESTY AND ACCOUNTABILITY, AND THAT'S WHAT BROUGHT ME HERE.

I DON'T PLAY THOSE GAMES AND I'M VERY HONEST.

PEOPLE MAY NOT LIKE MY STYLE. I GET RESULTS AND I'M HONEST AND THAT'S WHAT I'M BRINGING TODAY.

THIS IS WRONG AND NO ONE HERE WOULD WANT TO BE DISREGARDED AND DISRESPECTED AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AND A HUMAN BEING.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO THIS? OKAY. MISS CADENA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR HOW MANY MINUTES? MADAM SECRETARY, THREE. THREE MINUTES. AND AGAIN, THIS IS ON MR. BAZALDUA AMENDMENT. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR MY OWN CLARIFICATION FROM DIRECTOR JENKINS.

SO THIS GOES TO THE PARK BOARD BECAUSE IT'S QUASI JUDICIAL.

DID THIS ITEM GET APPROVED BY PARK BOARD AND WHAT WAS THE.

DO WE REMEMBER THE WHAT THE VOTE WAS? I'M PRETTY SURE I.

YEAH. WE'RE CHECKING, BUT I AM PRETTY SURE IT WAS UNANIMOUS VOTE.

BUT WE WILL VERIFY. YEAH, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO VOTE.

I DON'T HAVE THAT WITH US, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE.

AND SO IT WOULDN'T BE ON THE AGENDA IF IT WENT PAST PARK BOARD.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THAT'S ALL. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA. THIS IS FOR $90,000, RIGHT? NO, IT'S FOR 90.

WHAT? GO AHEAD. YES, MA'AM. YOU'RE CORRECT. THIS IS THE THE PRELIMINARY STEP OF A MULTI YEAR PROJECT.

BUT YES, $90,000. THAT'S CORRECT. SO DID THIS ACTUALLY NEED TO EVEN COME TO COUNCIL BECAUSE IT'S A MULTI YEAR CONTRACT.

YES MA'AM. BECAUSE IT CAN ESCALATE AND COST. THERE WILL BE THREE SUBSEQUENT GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE PACKAGES THAT WILL BE COMING BEFORE THIS BODY THAT Y'ALL WILL CONSIDER. SO YES, THERE WILL BE MANY MORE EXPENSES COMING FOR THE PROJECT, BUT THIS ONE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE TO COME TO US, RIGHT? IT DID BECAUSE IT'S A MULTI YEAR CONTRACT. YES, MA'AM.

OKAY. APPROVING THIS ONE. DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY APPROVE THE OTHERS? NO, MA'AM. THE OTHER GMP PACKAGES, THE FIRST ONE THAT YOU'LL SEE IN APPROXIMATELY 6 TO 9 MONTHS WILL BE THE THE FIRST OF THREE PHASES THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT. OKAY, SO I'M JUST GOING TO SAY AGAIN, THIS IS $90,000.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY MR. BAZALDUA? IT'S AN AMENDMENT. MR. RESENDEZ RESENDEZ FOR FIVE MINUTES.

JUST REALLY BRIEFLY I, I FEEL YOUR FRUSTRATION.

COUNCIL MEMBER. JOHNSON FOR SURE. I THINK THAT MIGHT ALSO BE JUST PART OF THE NATURE OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BEING SEPARATE FROM, YOU KNOW, CITY STAFF AND NOT ANSWERING DIRECTLY TO US.

AND SO THERE'S, THERE'S JUST A DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THAT WE KIND OF DEAL WITH EACH OTHER.

BUT I DO THINK THAT A DELAY IS IN ORDER. I HOPE, I HOPE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IS LEARNING HOW EACH ONE OF US OPERATES AND HOW COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON WANTS TO BE COMMUNICATED WITH. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THAT, FOR THERE TO BE A DELAY IN ORDER FOR COOLER HEADS TO PREVAIL.

BUT I DO AGREE THAT A SHORTER DELAY IS IN ORDER TO SEE WHAT CAN HAPPEN.

[02:15:04]

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? I DON'T SEE ANYONE. SO DO WE HAVE A RECORD REQUEST? ALL IN FAVOR, THEN SAY I.

ANY OPPOSED? NAY. I CAN'T CALL IT. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND BY THE WAY, BEFORE WE CALL THE ROLL, THIS IS ON MR. BAZALDUA AMENDMENT TO CHAIRMAN JOHNSON'S ORIGINAL MOTION.

BOTH WERE MOTIONS TO DEFER, BUT THIS CHANGES THE DATE, I BELIEVE, TO JUST RESTATE THE DATE APRIL 8TH.

EVERYONE UNDERSTAND WE'RE VOTING ON APRIL 8TH.

ALRIGHT. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

NO. IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. 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. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLACKMON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. YES.

MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR JOHNSON. NO.

WITH NINE VOTING IN FAVOR, SIX OPPOSE. THE MOTION PASSES.

MR.. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, SO TECHNICALLY, WE'RE NOW VOTING ON THE UNDERLYING AMENDMENT THAT'S BEEN AMENDED WITH THE NEW DATE, RIGHT? SO ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK ON IT FOR OR AGAINST IT? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. ALRIGHT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR.

[11. 26-626A Authorize (1) a fifth third amendment to the agreement with The Dallas Convention and Visitors Bureau, dba VisitDallas, to allow VisitDallas to provide turnkey booking, and sales, and other enhanced services for at Fair Park for a two-year term; and (2) the receipt and deposit of estimated annual revenue funds of $3,050,000.00 from The Dallas Convention and Visitors Bureau, dba VisitDallas into the Fair Park Fund - Not to exceed $2,439,500.00 - Financing: Fair Park Fund (subject to annual appropriations) (see Fiscal Information); Revenue: Fair Park Fund $3,050,000.00]

AGENDA ITEM 11 AUTHORIZED ONE A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE DALLAS CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU DBA.

VISIT DALLAS TO ALLOW. VISIT DALLAS TO PROVIDE TURNKEY BOOKING AND SALES AND OTHER ENHANCED SERVICES FOR FAIR PARK FOR A TWO YEAR TERM, AND TO THE RECEIPT AND DEPOSIT OF ESTIMATED ANNUAL REVENUE FUNDS OF $3,050,000 FROM THE DALLAS CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU. DBA VISIT DALLAS INTO THE FAIR PARK FUND, NOT TO EXCEED $2,439,500.

THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CORRECTED AND IT WAS ALSO PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION AGENDA ITEM 11? I'VE HEARD A MOTION TO APPROVE.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IT WAS PULLED BY WHO? COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. WOULD YOU LIKE FIVE MINUTES ON IT? YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. CHAIRWOMAN. MENDELSOHN. THANK YOU. THIS IS A $3 MILLION ITEM, AND I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT WAS DETERMINED TO PAY THE THREE.

I'M SORRY, THE 3 MILLION FOR REVENUE, BUT WE'RE.

WELL, WHY DON'T YOU EXPLAIN THE ITEM AND HOW THE HOW THE MONEY IS WORKING? YES, MA'AM. RYAN O'CONNOR DALLAS PARKS. SO THE PREFACE TO THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS WE HAVE BEEN IDENTIFYING EXPERTS TO PROVIDE SERVICES AT FAIR PARK. THE SALES MARKETING BOOKING IS A KEY SERVICE FOR OUR SUCCESS AT FAIR PARK.

AND WE HAVE IDENTIFIED VISIT DALLAS AS A, AS A PARTNER THAT COULD BE SUCCESSFUL IN THAT REGARD.

SO THEY DO HAVE A FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR SERVICES, WHICH IS STAFF COSTS PLUS OTHER EXPENSES.

THAT EQUATES TO THE $2.4 MILLION. IT'S A TWO YEAR CONTRACT, BUT VERY CLEARLY THIS WILL BE A REVENUE CONTRACT TO THE PARK AND WE EXPECT TO BE RECEIVING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF REVENUE. ALL REVENUES WILL BE COMING TO FAIR PARK.

THEY WILL NOT GO THROUGH VISIT DALLAS. THEY WILL COME DIRECTLY TO FAIR PARK. OKAY, SO I'M JUST GOING TO PREFACE IT.

I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY A REALLY GOOD IDEA TO HAVE VISIT DALLAS DO THAT.

I THINK THAT WAS ACTUALLY KIND OF A GENIUS IDEA.

SO GOOD JOB, GREG. NOT TALKING TO YOU. YOU'RE GOOD.

THE QUESTION IS, HOW IS IT DETERMINED THAT THE $2.4 MILLION WOULD BE THE FEE? IT WAS A NEGOTIATION WITH VISIT DALLAS. THEY HAD CERTAINLY EXPENSES RELATED TO STAFF AND OTHER COSTS.

AND SO IT WAS JUST A NEGOTIATED AMOUNT, $2.4 MILLION, 1.2 PER YEAR.

YES, MA'AM. SO HOW MANY STAFF MEMBERS ARE GOING TO BE WORKING FOR THE.

THERE WILL BE THREE FULL TIME AND TWO PART TIME THAT WILL BE LOCATED AT FAIR PARK, DIRECTLY ENGAGED IN THE SALES AND BOOKING OF THE VENUE'S.

[02:20:01]

AND SO FOR THREE FULL TIME AND TWO PART TIME, IT'S $1.2 MILLION A YEAR.

THERE ARE OTHER EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT MARKETING AND OTHERWISE, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THE COST IS RELATED TO STAFF.

LIKE WHAT KINDS OF WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT OR WHAT DOLLAR AMOUNT OF THE 1.2 PER YEAR.

YEAH. IS MARKETING EXPENSES, IF I MAY? I'M CRAIG DAVIS, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF.

VISIT DALLAS. SO THE. THE 1.2 IS A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT.

THESE WILL INCLUDE THREE FULL TIME PEOPLE. ALL THE SALARIES AND BENEFITS THAT WILL BE RUN THROUGH.

VISIT DALLAS. WE'RE GOING TO HIRE THESE PEOPLE, RUN IT THROUGH, VISIT DALLAS.

THERE WILL BE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DOLLARS FOR SEAT LICENSES.

THERE'LL BE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DOLLARS FOR THE ACTUAL ACTIVITY OF SALES.

SO AND THERE WILL BE A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL SALARY FOR THOSE PEOPLE ON THE VISIT.

DALLAS LEADERSHIP, NOT INCLUDING MYSELF THAT WILL BE ACTUALLY SUPERVISING THESE, THESE PEOPLE.

SO IT'S MOSTLY STAFF, BUT IT DOES INCLUDE SALES AND MARKETING EXPENSES DIRECTLY TOWARDS INCREASING THE SALES AT FAIR PARK.

AND SO OF THE 1.2 MILLION A YEAR, HOW MUCH IS FOR MARKETING VERSUS FOR SALARIES.

SO AND ADMINISTRATION IS I'M ASSUMING. YEAH, THERE THERE IS FOR, FOR MARKETING.

THERE'S $409,000 IN STAFF COSTS IN TOTAL, AND THERE'S ABOUT $50,000 WORTH OF MARKETING.

AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER THERE'S FIVE $50,000 CONTINGENCY.

I CAN PROVIDE THIS ALL FOR YOU IF YOU WANT. BUT EVERYTHING IS SPECIFIC.

AND THEN THERE'S ACTUALLY A $400,000 A YEAR ON A FULL YEAR FEE FOR MANAGEMENT FEE FOR VISIT DALLAS.

OKAY. WELL, SEE, THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT. SO 490,000 FOR STAFF, BUT ANOTHER 400,000 FOR A FULL YEAR.

YES. A YEAR FOR MANAGEMENT FEE. YES. AND SO THAT'S TO DO THE ACCOUNTING.

PAYROLL. YES. YES. WOW. THAT'S PRETTY HIGH. I MEAN IT'S NOT FAR FROM BEING EQUIVALENT TO SALARY.

WELL, THERE ARE SEVERAL PEOPLE ON THE TEAM THAT WILL BE ACTUALLY INVOLVED IN THE DIRECT SALES OF, OF FAIR PARK AND WITH TIED WITH THAT IS ACTUALLY TIED IN WITH THAT IS ACTUALLY COMING BACK WITH THE INCREASED SALES THAT THE SALES HAVE BEEN VERY FLAT FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS, AND WE ARE GOING TO INTEND TO INCREASE THEM SIGNIFICANTLY.

I'M ABOUT TO GET TO THAT. SO IT'S LISTED ON OUR AGENDA FOR THE $3 MILLION FOR REVENUE.

IS THAT A GUARANTEE? IT'S NOT TO EXCEED THE REVENUE IS WHAT YOU'RE PROMISING TO BOOK.

RIGHT. WE WE DON'T HAVE A REVENUE NUMBER YET BECAUSE THE GROUP THAT MANAGED IT BEFORE US DIDN'T LEAVE MUCH INFORMATION TO INFORM HOW MUCH WE COULD.

SO WE WENT TO A STRAIGHT MANAGEMENT FEE FOR THE FIRST YEAR OR MAYBE TWO.

THEN WE'RE GOING TO TURN THAT INTO LESS EXPENSE.

NOW I'M SWITCHING TO REVENUE. OKAY. AND SO FOR THE 3 MILLION REVENUE THAT YOU HAVE LISTED IN THIS AGENDA ITEM, HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH THAT? YES MA'AM. I WILL ATTEMPT THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.

AND BRETT WILKIE, OUR FAIR PARK GENERAL MANAGER, WILL BACK ME UP IF NEEDED.

BUT THAT IS AN ESTIMATE. THAT IS AN ESTIMATE BASED UPON PREVIOUS RECORDS THAT ARE INCOMPLETE.

BUT $3 MILLION IS THE ESTIMATE THAT WE FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT WILL BE COMING INTO THE PARK AS A RESULT OF THE SERVICE OFFERED BY.

VISIT DALLAS. SO WHAT KIND OF PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE DO YOU HAVE FROM.

VISIT DALLAS ABOUT BOOKINGS? WELL, WE INTEND TO SET VERY STRICT KPIS AFTER YEAR ONE, ACKNOWLEDGING THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE CLEAR AND CONCISE RECORDS FOR PREVIOUS.

BUT THERE WILL BE KPIS ASSOCIATED WITH REVENUE UTILIZATION OF THE FACILITIES IN ATTENDANCE THAT WILL BE ESTABLISHED BASED UPON THE PERFORMANCE OF YEAR ONE.

HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THEY WON'T EVEN BOOK ENOUGH TO COVER THEIR OWN EXPENSE? WE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THAT CONCERN. BUT I WONDER WHY.

WHY DON'T YOU HAVE THAT CONCERN? OKAY. IF YOU MISS MR..

I HAVE THAT CONCERN. YEAH. COUNCIL MEMBER. AND WHEN THIS WAS BROUGHT TO ME.

COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. THE MAIN THING I TOLD RYAN AND BRETT WAS JUST LIKE IN BUSINESS AT THE END OF THE DAY, KNOW WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING FROM THIS DEAL IS AT LEAST WE KNOW THE FIRST YEAR IS GOING TO BE TOUGH, BUT WE ARE EXPECTING THAT A MINIMUM OF 2X2, A3X RETURN PER YEAR ON OUR ONE POINT.

DOES IT SAY THAT IN THE CONTRACT THAT THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED.

BUT THAT'S WHAT WE THAT'S GOING TO BE OUR EXPECTATION.

AND JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CONTRACT IN THIS CASE, IF THEY DON'T PERFORM THEN GUESS WHAT? WE HAVE TO MOVE ON TO SOMEONE ELSE. BUT WHAT I DO KNOW FOR A FACT IS THAT MY TEAM DOES NOT HAVE THIS EXPERTISE, AND I GOTTA HIRE SOMEONE WITH THAT EXPERTISE. AND IF THEY DON'T PERFORM, GUESS WHAT? WE HAVE TO TERMINATE THEM. IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE. MR. JENKINS, I COMPLETELY

[02:25:02]

I THINK IT'S WAY BETTER THAN ANYTHING THAT I'VE SEEN PROPOSED.

SO. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. WHAT I'M QUESTIONING IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THIS MONEY, AND YOU DON'T KNOW THAT THEY CAN DELIVER, AND YOU'RE NOT PUTTING IN PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THEIR PERFORMANCE.

AND I'M SORRY, I DISAGREE WITH YOU. WE DO NOT CALL BACK VENDORS AND AND CANCEL THEM FOR LACK OF PERFORMANCE.

WE DON'T NEARLY SEVEN YEARS ON COUNCIL. WE DON'T DO THAT.

WE SHOULD, BUT WE DON'T. AND SO IF WE DON'T PUT IT IN TO BEGIN WITH, IT JUST NEVER HAPPENS.

SO I BELIEVE THEY HAVE EVERY INTENTION TO DO THE BEST JOB THEY CAN, BUT WHEN WE DON'T PUT IN THOSE SPECIFIC MEASUREMENTS, WE WILL NOT GET THOSE OUTCOMES. AND SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO GO BACK AND DO IT BASED ON, WELL, JUST TRY YOUR HARDEST OF THE FIRST YEAR AND THEN WE'LL TRY AND SET SOME GOALS FOR YOU AND MAYBE YOU CAN POSSIBLY HIT THEM.

THAT'S JUST NOT HOW WE SHOULD BE RUNNING THIS CITY.

AND SO I UNDERSTAND THAT WE DIDN'T GET ALL OF THE PRIOR ENTITY'S RECORDS, BUT WE KNOW WHAT WAS BOOKED.

YOU COULD MAKE SOME CALCULATIONS FROM THAT AND AT LEAST SET SOME MARGINAL GOALS FOR WE'RE EXPECTING THIS MANY CONCERTS, THIS MANY SHOWS, ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS AND WHAT WE EXPECT THAT REVENUE TO BE.

I'M SORRY IF WE DIDN'T CLARIFY. COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. THAT WILL BE THE REQUIREMENT AS IN.

AS I MENTIONED ABOUT PERFORMANCE METRICS THAT WILL BE IN THERE, BUT GO AHEAD.

I'M GONNA LET BRANT SPEAK TO IT. YEAH, IT'LL BE IN THE CONTRACT.

AND TO ADDRESS WHERE THE NUMBER CAME FROM, WE DID GO OFF THE HISTORICAL RECORDS WE HAD.

TOOK THE MATH ON WHAT AN AVERAGE EVENT COST AND THEN UPPED OUR REQUIREMENT OR ESTIMATED REVENUE BY ADDING 10 TO 15 EVENTS PER YEAR, WHICH WE THINK IS A VERY REALISTIC NUMBER FROM THEM.

SO YOU'RE ASKING US TO AUTHORIZE AN AMENDMENT.

IS IT IN THE AMENDMENT? WHAT ARE WHAT ARE THE KPIS WILL BE IN THE AMENDMENT? YES. WILL BE. I MEAN, YOU'RE ASKING US TO AUTHORIZE IT RIGHT NOW.

IS IT IN THE AMENDMENT? THAT IS NOT. THE CONTRACT IS NOT FINALIZED YET.

THE AMENDMENTS NOT FINALIZED. LET ME. LET ME CLARIFY THAT.

THERE WILL BE KPIS IN THE CONTRACT. ABSOLUTELY.

IT'S BASED UPON FACILITY UTILIZATION, ATTENDANCE AND REVENUE.

WHEN WE GET TO, WE'RE GOING TO SIT DOWN AND MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ARE VERY, VERY TIGHT.

BUT IN YEAR TWO, WE'RE GOING TO REEVALUATE THOSE KPIS BASED UPON THE YEAR ONE PERFORMANCE AND MAKE A DETERMINATION.

DO THEY NEED TO BE ADJUSTED UP? BUT THERE WILL ABSOLUTELY BE KPIS IN THE CONTRACT WITH VISITDALLAS.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE ASKING US TO AUTHORIZE THE AMENDMENT, BUT YOU HAVEN'T PUT IT IN YET.

BUT THEN YOU'RE GOING TO PUT IT IN LATER. IS THAT IS THAT HOW YOU'RE EXPECTING THIS TO WORK? NO, MA'AM. SO AGAIN, THERE WILL BE THERE WILL BE.

I HEAR YOUR QUESTION VERY CLEARLY. THERE WILL BE KPIS IN THE CONTRACT.

ABSOLUTELY. AND THEY WILL BE THE THREE THAT I JUST MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO.

BUT AGAIN, IN YEAR TWO, WE WILL TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVISIT THOSE AND ADJUST THOSE BASED UPON THE FIRST YEAR'S PERFORMANCE.

OKAY. SO I'M JUST GOING TO SAY AS A GOVERNANCE ISSUE, I'M EXPECTING YOU TO BRING ME ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT INCLUDE THE PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. NOW, LIKE WE SHOULD SEE IT BEFORE WE APPROVE THINGS, NOT AFTER.

AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO REDO IT. AND WE'RE IT'S A TWO YEAR CONTRACT.

WE'RE STILL NOT GOING TO SEE IT. SO THIS IS JUST BACKWARDS TO ME.

AND THAT'S WHY I PULLED THIS ITEM. NOT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA.

I DO. I THINK IT'S A VERY GOOD IDEA. BUT AGAIN, THE EXECUTION OF IT IS VERY QUESTIONABLE THAT WE HAVEN'T ALREADY PUT IN PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. AND, YOU KNOW. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY.

THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO SAY BECAUSE MY TIME IS UP.

THAT'S GOOD, THAT'S GOOD. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU ALL ARE BEING PROACTIVE IN TRYING TO GET SOME SIGNIFICANT MARKETING SALES EFFORTS TO REALLY MONETIZE THE FAIR PARK SITUATION. I THINK THAT'S REALLY CRITICAL TO US.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE YOU THE RESOURCES AND THE ABILITY TO DO IT.

BUT I'M ALIGNED IN MANY RESPECTS TO THE COMMENTS OF COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN IN THAT I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT REALLY IS GOING TO BE, WHAT THE PLAN IS, WHAT THE MARKETING PLAN IS, WHAT YOUR BENCHMARKS ARE, WHAT YOUR, WHAT YOUR EVIDENCE OF SUCCESS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

[02:30:01]

YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T. THIS IS ALMOST A CONTINGENCY TYPE OF A OF A PERFORMANCE SITUATION.

IN MANY CASES, YOU WOULD SAY. WE'LL GIVE YOU A PERCENTAGE OF WHAT YOU BRING IN.

AND I'M I'M JOKING, BUT I'M SERIOUS. THERE HAS TO BE SOME SOME GOALS.

THERE HAS TO BE SOME PRESSURES. FOR THE SALES FORCE TO SELL.

AND THERE HAS TO BE SOME CRITERIA FOR THE EVIDENCE OF SUCCESS.

AND, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THE EXHIBIT A IN WITH YOUR TERMS PROVIDES THAT THERE WILL BE BENCHMARKS IDENTIFIED AND THAT THAT SUCCESS WILL BE MEASURED BY THOSE BENCHMARKS.

I'M A LITTLE BIT UNCOMFORTABLE THAT I DON'T SEE ANY BENCHMARKS THERE.

NOW THEY ARE TO BE DETERMINED, I'M ASSUMING, AND I'D LIKE SOME.

I'D LIKE SOME UNDERSTANDING. OF WHAT THOSE GOALS WOULD BE.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND. AND I DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST.

I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE, AND I WANT YOU ALL TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

I WANT THIS PLACE TO BE MAKING MONEY AND TO BE ABLE TO GENERATE THE REVENUES THAT WE NEED TO HAVE TO KEEP THIS PLACE UP.

I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE PROVISION IN THIS, IN THIS AGREEMENT, SO THAT WE CAN PULL THE PLUG WHENEVER WE WANT TO.

BUT THAT PRESUPPOSES THAT SOMEBODY IS MANAGING, MONITORING THIS AND PAYING ATTENTION TO IT.

AND AT OUR LEVEL THAT I THINK THAT PRESSURE IS GOING TO BE ON YOU ALL.

AND I'D LIKE SOME ASSURANCE THAT SOMEBODY IS LOOKING AT THIS CRITICALLY WITH OUR EYES AND EARS AND, AND AND COLLABORATIVELY AND SUPPORTIVE OF THE SALES FORCE THAT WE'RE GIVING, BUT THAT THEY'RE HOLDING THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE, SO TO SPEAK. SO IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THAT, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

YES, SIR. APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. FULLY AGREE WITH YOUR COMMENTS.

AND I DO WANT TO OFFER YOU ASSURANCE THERE IS GOING TO BE A HIGH DEGREE OF MONITORING OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS CONTRACT.

THERE'S PERHAPS NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT AT FAIR PARK THAN BRINGING IN ATTENDANCE AND BOOKING EVENTS IN THE VENUE.

SO IT THIS CONTRACT WILL BE 100% TOP OF MIND FOR THE FAIR PARK STAFF LED BY BRETT, MYSELF, AND DIRECTOR JENKINS. IS IS THERE. DO WE HAVE SOMEBODY DEDICATED AND LISTEN YOU'RE YOU'RE BUSY.

YOU ARE A BUSY GUY, BUT ALL OF YOU GUYS ARE BUSY GUYS, HAVE YOU DEDICATED SOMEBODY TO BE THE MONITORING THE THE THE THE SORT OF THE EYES AND EARS, THE THE, THE MANAGER OF THIS PROJECT. AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE VISIT, THIS IS NOT A REFLECTION ON YOU ALL.

THIS IS. YOU ALL ARE STELLAR. THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING YOU TO TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS.

BUT FROM AN ACCOUNTABILITY AND A FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SOMEBODY IS PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS THING.

I HAVE A DEDICATED CONTRACT MANAGER THAT HANDLES ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS AT FAIR PARK, AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ALSO HAS A CONTRACT COMPLIANCE DIVISION THAT MONITORS US IN ADDITION. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I THINK THIS HAS BEEN A GOOD DISCUSSION, BUT I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TALKING APPLES TO APPLES, NOT APPLES TO ORANGES. AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE COMPARING SOME HISTORY AT THE GROUNDS TO WHAT THIS COULD POTENTIALLY BE.

AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCES THAT I THINK THIS TYPE OF ABILITY TO PROGRAM IS BRINGS THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD IN THE PAST WITH OUR OPERATING AGREEMENT.

THAT WAS TERMINATED IS THE LEVEL OF CONVENTION TYPE PROGRAMING.

AND I WANTED TO JUST ASK IF YOU COULD ELABORATE ON THE THE VARIETY OF PROGRAMING VERSUS THAT OF, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT TAKING THAT FROM WHEN OVG AND FAIR PARK FIRST WERE, AS MISS MENDELSOHN MENTIONED, WOULD BE A GOOD COMPARISON BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS VERY TAILORED TO ENTERTAINMENT SPECIFIC VERSUS THIS THAT I THINK VISIT DALLAS ALREADY HAS SHOWN EXPERTISE ON AND THE ABILITY TO, TO EXPAND THAT PROGRAMING WITHIN THE GROUNDS OF FAIR PARK.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN. YES, WE'RE TAKING A MORE GLOBAL VIEW OF BRINGING BUSINESS INTO FAIR PARK.

WE ARE ALREADY, WE HAVE SEVERAL SALESPEOPLE THAT ARE PRESENTLY WORKING VERY, VERY HARD TO, TO SELL FAIR PARK FOR CONVENTIONS, TRADE SHOWS, SPORTING EVENTS.

WE'VE UNCOVERED ONE ONE GROUP IN PARTICULAR THAT'S BASED HERE IN DALLAS, OR THEY HAVE PARTS OF THE BASE HERE IN DALLAS THAT THEY WANT TO INCUBATE A BRAND NEW TRADE

[02:35:04]

WHAT WE NEED IN FAIR PARK IS REVENUE IN THE IN THE FORM OF MEETING ROOM RENTAL.

WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED THE ROOM NIGHTS THAT GO ALONG.

THAT'S A VERY BIG PART OF HOW WE SELL THE CONVENTION CENTER.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A DIFFERENT APPROACH IN MAKING SURE THAT MORE REVENUE FLOWS INTO FAIR PARK SPECIFICALLY.

SO WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR THE BEST PIECES OF BUSINESS WE CAN DURING THE MONTHS THAT THE STATE FAIR IS NOT OPERATING.

SO WE HAVE A MUCH LARGER UNIVERSE TO DRAW FROM.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. I JUST WANT TO SAY WE'VE DEFINITELY SEEN SOME EBBS AND FLOWS WHEN IT COMES TO FAIR PARK.

BUT THIS TO ME IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE MOMENTUM THAT HAS CONTINUED THERE.

WE'VE HAD SOME SOME HICCUPS, IF YOU WILL. RIGHT? BUT IT HASN'T. IT HASN'T PREVENTED US FROM MOVING FORWARD WITH WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY AGREED TO.

EVEN BACK IN THE IN THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL THAT BROUGHT IN OUR OPERATING AGREEMENT THAT HAS SINCE BEEN TERMINATED.

THERE'S BEEN A VISION AND AN EXPECTATION, AND WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS IS DELIVERED ON THE COMMUNITY PARK. WE'VE CONTINUED ON OUR EXPECTATION AND HOPE THAT WE WILL PROGRAM THE GROUNDS 365 DAYS A YEAR, THAT IT WILL BE A REVENUE GENERATING ASSET INSTEAD OF ONE THAT IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO ACCRUE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE BECAUSE WE ARE NOT BRINGING IT IN. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT IT'S WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE OFTEN BLINDED OR, OR STALLED BY THE HEADLINE HEADLINES THAT HAVE SHOWN WHERE THERE'S BEEN NEGATIVE OR THOSE HICCUPS. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHERE WE ARE HERE AND IN THE TIMELY MANNER, BRETT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THE GROUNDS, BECAUSE WE'VE ONLY CONTINUED TO MOVE FORWARD.

AND I DON'T SEE THIS AS AS ANY ANY DIFFERENCE.

IN FACT I THINK WE'VE LEARNED FROM MISTAKES OF OUR PAST LOOKING TO A PARTNER LIKE VISIT DALLAS WITH THE RELATIONSHIP THAT WE'VE ALREADY BUILT.

AND I CAN TELL YOU PERSONALLY, AS A FORMER BOARD MEMBER FOR VISIT DALLAS THAT I KNOW YOU AND YOUR LEADERSHIP AND THE TEAM UNDER IS MORE THAN CAPABLE.

I'VE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF, OF BEING A PART OF SOME OF THESE RECRUITMENT EFFORTS WITH VARIOUS CLIENTS OF VISIT DALLAS ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO SEE THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT'S PUT IN TO BRING THEM TO SPECIFIC TAILORED EVENTS.

I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME SMALLER OPPORTUNITIES FOR CONVENTIONS TO COME TO DALLAS THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE OPERATING BUDGETS TO ADHERE TO THOSE ROOM NIGHT MINIMUMS, TO BRING IN A FULL SCALE PRODUCTION CONVENTION AT OUR CONVENTION CENTER AND COMPETE WITH A LOT OF THOSE BIGGER COMPANIES THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH.

THIS IS THE TYPE OF PROGRAMING THAT'S BEEN MISSING FROM FAIR PARK, AND THIS IS THE TYPE OF PROGRAMING THAT I TRULY BELIEVE TO BE FILLING IN THAT GAP.

AND THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT WE'VE GOT LARGER VISIONS AND BIGGER GOALS FOR THE GROUNDS.

THIS IS JUST GOING TO HELP BRING SOME SUSTAINABLE REVENUE.

I THINK THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ITEM ITEMIZED ACTUALLY AS A REVENUE ITEM VERSUS THAT AS AN EXPENSE ITEM, THAT SHOULD SHOULD NOT BE IGNORED. AND I ALSO THINK THAT TO YOUR POINT, MISS MENDELSOHN, IT I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S MUCH REVENUE THAT WE CAN CONSIDER TO BE GUARANTEED REVENUE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FORECASTED REVENUE OTHER THAN AD VALOREM THAT WE KNOW HAS BEEN LOCKED IN AT A CERTAIN RATE.

WE HAVE TO PUT SOME SORT OF TRUST IN THE PARTNERS THAT WE'RE WERE GOING TO BE CONTRACTING WITH.

AND I DO BELIEVE JUST IN HAVING PRETTY GOOD UNDERSTANDING IN THE ANNALS OF VISIT DALLAS ITSELF AS WELL, THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE FULLY CAPABLE OF DELIVERING ON, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THOSE RESULTS WITH THIS CONTRACT.

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

THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO I TOO HAVE SERVED ON THE VISIT DALLAS BOARD, AND I'M CURRENTLY ON THE MARKETING COMMITTEE AND THE BUSINESS LEADERSHIP COUNCIL.

AND SO I THINK THAT VISIT DALLAS WILL BRING THE STRATEGY, DISCIPLINE AND PROFESSIONALISM THAT WE SO DESPERATELY NEED THERE.

I HAVE A DEPARTED MENTOR WHO WOULD CALL THIS A B O, A BLINDING GLIMPSE OF THE OBVIOUS.

SO I WAS VERY EXCITED TO SEE THIS PARTNERSHIP BEGIN TO JELL IN THIS THIS WAY.

SO IN CHATTING WITH MR. O'CONNOR THIS MORNING, YOU KNOW, HE POINTED OUT, I DON'T THINK I REALIZED HOW MUCH EXHIBIT HALL SPACE IS THERE AT FAIR PARK, 520,000 520,000FT² OF EXHIBIT SPACE.

SO WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT THIS IN TERMS OF WE'VE GOT KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER, WHICH IS LIKE OUR DFW AIRPORT AND FAIR PARK CAN BE LIKE OUR LOVE FIELD, SO THEY CAN ALL GENERATE REVENUE FOR US AND WE NEED TO MAXIMIZE THEM.

[02:40:01]

MAYBE THIS IS A DRAFT. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, LET'S START WITH WHAT'S WHAT WE'VE GOT HERE BEFORE US.

SO THIS $3 MILLION. SO YOU'RE SAYING YOU HAVE PIECED TOGETHER A PROJECTION.

AND SO THIS SAYS THAT'S AN ANNUAL REVENUE PROJECTION.

SO WE DO HAVE A TARGET. WE DO HAVE A TARGET. AND THAT'S OUR BASELINE.

OKAY. SO WE HAVE A NUMBER TO WORK WITH TO BALANCE WITH OUR EXPENSE.

SO I NOTICED IN HERE THAT IT TALKS ABOUT YOUR CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AT VISIT DALLAS, WHICH I WOULD IMAGINE IS PRETTY ROBUST. SO THIS WILL BE ABLE TO BE USED FOR FAIR PARK.

IS THAT AN EXPENSE? IS THIS ONE OF YOUR EXPENSES? IT IS ONE OF THE EXPENSES. WE'RE NOT CERTAIN IF OUR.

OUR CRM OR CUSTOMER RELATIONS MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR FAIR PARK.

WE'LL USE SOMETHING MORE. THAT WOULD BE A CONVENTION CENTER, KIND OF A CONTROL.

BUT A LOT OF THE WHAT WE'RE BAKING IN ARE ALL THE EXPENSES IT WOULD TAKE TO ACTUALLY DO BUSINESS, INCLUDING SOFTWARE, INCLUDING PRINTERS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, COMPUTERS.

THAT'S ALL BAKED INTO THIS. BUT THE BUT THE CONTENT OF THAT IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GETTING THE THE YEARS OF HISTORY THAT YOU'VE HAD.

ABSOLUTELY. TO HELP. THE HISTORY IS LACKING. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE.

WE ARE WE'RE STARTING WITH A BASELINE WITH VERY LITTLE INFORMATION.

BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE HAVING GOALS.

AND WE WILL WE WILL WORK VERY HARD TO LESSEN THE AMOUNT OF MANAGEMENT FEE THAT WE HAVE AND WORK MORE TO WHAT MR. ROTH SAID, AND INTO AN INCENTIVE FOR PUTTING IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE.

THAT'S WHERE WE WANT TO BE. SO WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT KPIS, AND I DO SEE THERE'S A COMPONENT HERE OF SATISFACTION SURVEYS.

AND IT HAS SIX MONTH TIME FRAMES WHERE IF YOU FALL BELOW 80% OF.

AND SATISFACTION YOU KNOW, THAT'S GOING TO, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN FOR HOW THAT IMPROVES.

WHO MONITORS THAT? HOW WILL THAT BE REPORTED? THAT'LL BE MONITORED BY MY CONTRACT MANAGER. AND THAT GOES BOTH WAYS.

THE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION IS ON THE SALES END AS WELL AS THE EVENT EXECUTION, WHICH FALLS ON MY STAFF.

OKAY, SO WE'VE GOT THIS. ACTUALLY, THAT'S PRETTY GOOD THAT THAT'S LOOKING AT BOTH PRONGS OF THAT.

OKAY, SO YOU'RE GOING TO BE MANAGING THAT AND THAT WOULD, I ASSUME BE REPORTED. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS SINCE THIS IS A NEW DAY.

GO TO THE CHAIR OF PARKS AND TRAILS AND HAVE THAT COMMITTEE BE ABLE TO PLUG IN AND MONITOR THIS AS WELL.

SO AND IT DOES LOOK LIKE THE, THE CONVENIENCE CLAUSE, IT'S A 90 DAY OUT.

SO IF THERE'S THIS DOESN'T WORK OUT, WE'VE GOT JUST 90 DAYS NOTICE.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, I AM, I'M AM EXCITED TO SEE THIS AND I'M VERY OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THIS, MAYBE MORE SO THAN ANY OF THE PREVIOUS ITERATIONS OF WHAT HAVE COME.

THIS IS OUR BELOVED JEWEL, AND THOUGH WE KNOW IT, WE NEED TO BE SURE OTHERS KNOW IT.

AND I HOPE THAT FIFA AND THE FAN ZONE IS JUST ROCKET FUEL FOR YOUR TEAM, MR. DAVIS. THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO I SUPPORT THE IDEA OF VISIT DALLAS TAKING OVER THE MARKETING TASK HERE.

BUT I'M ALSO FAMILIAR WITH THE MENTALITY OF SALESPEOPLE.

THEY HAVE TO HAVE SPECIFIC QUOTAS TO SHOOT FOR, OTHERWISE THEY DON'T PERFORM.

SO I'D LIKE CLARIFICATION. YOU'VE REFERRED TO PERFORMANCE CRITERIA ARE IN THE AMENDMENT.

ARE THEY IN THIS SPECIFIC AMENDMENT NOW OR IS THIS SOMETHING YOU'RE GOING TO DEVELOP LATER BECAUSE OF ITS LATER? I WANT TO DEFER THIS UNTIL WE CAN SEE WHAT THOSE PERFORMANCE CRITERIA ARE.

SO. RYAN. YEAH. SO. THE AMENDMENTS, WE CAN WE WILL HAVE THEM PUT INTO THE CONTRACT.

BUT IF WE NEED A DEFERRAL. I MEAN, I'M NOT AGAINST IT.

WELL, WHERE ARE WE TODAY? HAVE THOSE BEEN NEGOTIATED? HAVE THEY BEEN DRAFTED? ARE THEY PART OF THE AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE ASKED TO AUTHORIZE TODAY, OR IS THIS JUST GIVING A BLANK CHECK? ESSENTIALLY, THE KPIS THAT ARE NEGOTIATED ARE BASED ON REVENUE GENERATION, FACILITY USAGE RATES, AND ATTENDANCE FIGURES.

OKAY. AND THOSE ARE IN THE AMENDMENT TERMS. THAT IS WHAT WE'VE NEGOTIATED.

OKAY. IS THE $3 MILLION FIGURE AS A GOAL IN THE AMENDMENT OR IS THAT JUST ASPIRATIONAL? THE 3 MILLION IS NOT SPECIFICALLY STATED IN THE AMENDMENT.

OKAY, BUT YOU HAVE THE OTHER CRITERIA. CAN YOU BRIEFLY STATE WHAT THOSE ARE IN TERMS OF FIGURES? THE FACILITY? I WOULD HAVE TO SEND THAT TO YOU. I DO NOT HAVE THAT ON ME.

OKAY. BUT THEY'RE ALREADY DRAFTED. THEY'VE BEEN NEGOTIATED.

THEY'RE IN THIS AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE TODAY.

THE SPECIFIC NUMBERS FOR FACILITY USAGE RATES AND ATTENDANCE IS NOT DRAFTED AT THIS MOMENT.

[02:45:04]

I WOULD SAY THAT THE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS HAVE THE THE TYPES OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS HAVE BEEN AGREED TO.

THE SPECIFIC NUMBERS OF THE INDICATORS STILL NEED A LITTLE MORE WORK.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS, IS BECAUSE OF A LACK OF INFORMATION FROM THE PRIOR OPERATOR.

SO AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THEY WILL BE AGREED TO.

WE'VE IDENTIFIED WHAT THEY ARE, BUT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS WILL BE AGREED TO VERY SOON AND THEY WILL BE ADJUSTED AFTER YEAR ONE BASED UPON THE PERFORMANCE. I UNDERSTAND THE ADJUSTMENT, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THEM NOW.

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET TO THAT? WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO WORK TOGETHER WITH VISIT DALLAS TO COME UP WITH THE ACTUAL NUMBERS THAT BOTH PARTIES CAN AGREE TO. SO THE INDICATORS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED, BUT NOT THE SPECIFIC NUMBERS YET.

OKAY. WELL MR. MAYOR, AT THIS POINT, I WILL MOVE TO DEFER THIS MATTER FOR 30 DAYS SO THAT THEY CAN COMPLETE THESE NEGOTIATIONS AND PROVIDE US A DRAFT OF THE AMENDMENT.

I WAS WORKING ON A DATE CERTAIN FOR THAT FOR 30 DAYS.

JUST KIND OF COME UP WITH THE DATE. BUT I HEARD THE MOTION AND I HEARD THE SECOND.

SO BE READY FOR FIVE MINUTES IF YOU WANT IT. APRIL 22ND.

SOUND RIGHT? YEAH. OKAY. MEMBERS, THE MOTION IS TO DEFER TO APRIL 22ND.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED. DO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES? CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, ON YOUR MOTION? WELL, I JUST HAVE A REMAINING QUESTION FOR STAFF. WILL THAT 30 DAY DEFERRAL GIVE YOU TIME TO ARRIVE AT THESE NUMBER OF FIGURES FOR THE PERFORMANCE CRITERIA? COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY I MEAN WE CAN HAVE THIS IN THE CONTRACT BY THE APRIL 8TH MEETING, IF THAT'S OKAY WITH YOU.

OKAY. WELL, THEN I'LL AMEND MY MOTION TO DEFER TO APRIL 8TH.

IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE. SO ORDERED.

SO IT'S APRIL 18TH. EIGHTH. SORRY. EIGHTH. EIGHTH.

EIGHTH. EIGHTH. SO IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BEFORE WE AUTHORIZE A CONTRACT WITH BLANK TERMS IN IT THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE APPROVING. POINT OF INFORMATION OR ORDER, I WOULD SAY YES.

PLEASE STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NOT OR IT'S.

THERE ARE TERMS. IT'S JUST. I WANTED TO MAKE KNOWN.

NOT EXACTLY THE POINT OF ORDER, BUT YOU GOT IT IN THERE.

WE WERE STILL ON YOUR. WERE YOU DONE? JIM RIDLEY, I MEAN, YOU WERE YOU WERE ON YOUR MOTION TO DEFER STILL.

OKAY. THEN, MR. ROTH, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. WITH WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO, TO MY COLLEAGUES, I DO UNDERSTAND THE THE NEED TO CLARIFY AND DEFINE THESE TERMS A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DETAIL, BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT AN OUT IN THIS CONTRACT THAT IF IF WE DON'T, WE HAVE A, A CONVENIENCE TERMINATION THAT ALLOWS US TO, TO CANCEL IT. WE ALSO HAVE THERE ALSO IS A COMMITMENT WITHIN THIS CONTRACT TO CREATE SOME BENCHMARKS.

WHAT MY CONCERN IS NOT THE IDEA THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THESE THINGS, BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS WE HAVE A TREMENDOUS, TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY TO START A MARKETING EFFORT IMMEDIATELY FOR A AN EVENT, A SCENARIO THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN 60 DAYS OR 90 DAYS.

AND SO WE'VE GOT TO GET THESE FOLKS IN THE SADDLE WITH THE PEOPLE STARTING TO START MARKETING.

FAIR PARK, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 30,000 TO 100,000 PEOPLE SHOWING UP THERE FROM JUNE 15TH TO JULY 30TH.

AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, WE'VE GOT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES SET UP THAT WE'VE GOT PEOPLE READY TO GO, THAT WE'VE GOT COLLATERAL MATERIAL THAT THIS ISN'T, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T TAKE 30 DAYS TO DO.

THAT BEING SAID, YOU ALL BETTER BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

AND IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT, I'M SERIOUS.

YOU NEED TO TELL US THAT YOU CAN'T DO THIS, BECAUSE THE EXPECTATION THAT I'M GOING TO HAVE PERSONALLY IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO THE STORE IS GOING TO BE OPEN, AND THERE BETTER BE SOME MERCHANDISE IN THAT STORE TO SELL.

AND WE BETTER HAVE THE SALESPEOPLE PLANNING THIS.

AND I ALSO WOULD DEMAND, AND I'M SORRY, THE BAND IS THE WRONG WORD.

I WOULD REQUEST STRONGLY THAT WE GET REPORTS FROM YOU ALL.

I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING REQUIRED HERE. ANY REPORTING THAT WE SEE THAT.

I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING. WHO YOU'RE.

I DON'T NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY WHO YOU'RE CONTACTING, BUT I WANT TO KNOW THE OUTREACH.

I WANT TO KNOW THE RESPONSES. I WANT TO KNOW THE, THE NEGOTIATION PROGRESS, NOT WITH ANY PARTICULAR PERSON,

[02:50:04]

AND TO THE EXTENT THAT, THAT YOU CAN GIVE US THAT COMFORT LEVEL THAT THE JOB'S BEING DONE, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. WE WANT VERIFICATION, WE WANT COMMITMENT, AND WE WANT TO SEE IMMEDIATE RESULTS SO THAT IF WE NEED TO MAKE A CHANGE. WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE. WE CAN ALSO THAT'S ALSO A LITTLE BIT OF PRESSURE ON YOU ALL TO PERFORM.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, IS WE WANT TO PERFORM.

I ALSO WANT TO KNOW, ARE WE ABLE TO DOES, DOES YOUR SCOPE OF WORK ALSO INVOLVE DEALING WITH EXISTING VENDORS AND USERS OF THE FAIR PARK, WHETHER IT'S THE SOCCER TEAMS, WHETHER IT'S THE, WHETHER IT'S SOME OF THE OTHER, THE ABILITY TO HAVE RESTAURANTS, WHETHER IT'S THE ABILITY TO HAVE NOT JUST EVENTS, BUT TO HAVE POTENTIAL LONGER TERM OR MEDIUM TERM RELATIONSHIPS WITH PEOPLE BECAUSE THOSE ARE ALSO MARKETING.

THEY'RE ALSO FINANCIAL OPPORTUNITIES, OPPORTUNITIES FOR US.

I WANT THAT PLACE MAKING MONEY. WE GOT TO PAY THE BILLS.

WE GOT TO FIX IT UP. WE NEED TO HAVE THAT PLACE AS ONE OF OUR GYMS IN ATTRACTING TOURIST DOLLARS, SALES TAX AND, AND AN ACTIVITY. AND AND THAT'S WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THAT'S GOING TO BE A THAT'S GOING TO BE YOUR JOB.

VISIT DALLAS AND GET IT DONE. AND I WANT YOU TO SAY, TELL ME THAT'S OUR GOAL AND WE'RE GOING TO GET IT DONE.

AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO HEAR. I'M TELLING YOU THAT THAT'S WHAT WILL HAPPEN.

WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO OUR OUR PARTNERS AT THE PARKS, IN THE PARKS FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS NOW.

WE'RE TEED UP. WE HAVE JOB DESCRIPTIONS WRITTEN, WE'RE READY TO HIRE PERSONNEL, BUT WE ARE ONLY GOING TO DO THAT WHEN WE GET THE GO FORWARD. BUT RIGHT NOW WITH OUR OUR CONTRACT WITH THE CITY AS IT COMES TO SELLING THE CONVENTION CENTER, WE'RE VERY SPECIFIC. EVERY MONTH, EVERY TWO MONTHS, WE LAY OUT.

EXACTLY. THERE'S A VERY DEFINED AMOUNT OF INFORMATION THAT WE MUST PROVIDE.

AND WE DO PROVIDE IT ON TIME EVERY TIME. SO THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN OUR CONVERSATION OR RATHER, THAT OUR RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAVE ON THE SIDE WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER. SO THIS WILL EASILY WORK WITHIN OUR PRESENT SETUP TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO US AS COUNCIL PEOPLE, IF WE'RE IF WE'RE GETTING IT, AND I'M NOT SPECIFICALLY AWARE OF THE DETAILS OF IT, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF THAT WOULD BE PART OF YOUR CORRESPONDENCE WITH US OR, OR SOME KIND OF PERSONAL BRIEFINGS PERIODICALLY TO US.

WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. ABSOLUTELY, SIR. WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE REGULAR PRESENTATIONS OF THE PPE, IF THAT'S THE BODY'S WILL. HAPPY TO ALSO PROVIDE MEMOS TO THE FULL BOARD.

ALL RIGHT. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY.

OKAY. I'M TRYING TO KIND OF FIGURE OUT MY NEXT STEP HERE, BUT I BELIEVE I'M GOING TO MOVE THAT WE AMEND MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION TO BRINGING IT TO THE PARKS, TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE THE DEFINITIONS OF THE BENCHMARKS RATHER THAN. I KNOW IT SOUNDS LIKE AN ENTIRELY NEW MOTION, DOESN'T IT? THE MOTION IS OUT OF ORDER. I'M AFRAID OF. THE MOTION IS OUT OF ORDER, I'M TOLD, BECAUSE OF ITS RANKING IN PRECEDENCE.

AND OKAY, THEN I. OKAY, LET ME JUST SPEAK TO WHAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT AT THIS POINT, AND WE'LL FIGURE OUT PROCEDURALLY WHERE WE GO.

NO, I'M NOT MAKING ANY MOTIONS OR AMENDMENTS AT THIS POINT, JUST SPEAKING TO MR. RIDLEY'S MOTION. FAIR ENOUGH. SO FIRST AND FOREMOST, I APPRECIATE EXHIBIT A AND THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT BEING LAID OUT.

I THINK THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE AGREEMENTS, THAT WE ALL GO AND CHECK THAT AND LOOK AT THOSE TERMS. BUT WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED ARE THE REALLY THE BENCHMARKS AND THE BENCHMARK IS YOUR LAST PARAGRAPH.

AND WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF DETAIL THERE. SO I THINK WE NEED THAT MORE OF THAT DETAIL.

AND WHEN WE GET THAT AND AT WHAT POINT, I MEAN, THAT MAY MAY STILL BE UP FOR DEBATE, BUT I WANT TO ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO ALWAYS LOOK AT THESE EXHIBITS AND LOOK AT WHAT'S ALREADY THERE.

WHAT I LEARNED IN THE COMMUNITY PARK SITUATION WAS THAT MANY, MANY OF THE CONCERNS THAT SO MANY PEOPLE HAD EXPRESSED WERE ACTUALLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND WE HAD A GOOD SOLID AGREEMENT AND REALLY ONLY NEEDED TO MAKE A FEW CHANGES. WE DIDN'T NEED TO START FROM THE AND REDO EVERYTHING.

IT WAS REALLY A SOLID AGREEMENT. AND MY ASSUMPTION IS GOING TO BE THAT THIS AGREEMENT IS ALSO SOLID,

[02:55:03]

SO WHETHER THIS BODY NEEDS TO SEE THAT OR WHETHER PARKS, TRAILS AND THE ENVIRONMENT CAN HANDLE THAT.

I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO Y'ALL. THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY.

WELL, I, I THINK SOME OF THE THINGS WE'RE ASKING FOR ARE ALREADY IN THIS RESOLUTION AND ARE ALREADY IN THIS TERM SHEET.

I MEAN, WE'RE ASKING FOR A A REVENUE AMOUNT, AN ANNUAL REVENUE PROJECTION.

AND ISN'T THAT WHAT THIS 3 MILLION, $50,000 IS? COME ON UP AND TELL US. YES, THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

THAT WOULD BE OUR YEAR ONE BENCHMARK. SO WE HAVE A REVENUE TARGET.

WE DO FOR YEAR ONE. OKAY. WE HAVE SOME KPIS. WE HAVE A SATISFACTION SURVEY FOR SALES AND WE HAVE IT FOR EVENTS. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ARE THERE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT YOU'VE HEARD THAT PEOPLE ARE ASKING FOR THAT ARE DOCUMENTED IN A RESOLUTION AND ON THE ATTACHED TERM SHEET THAT WE ALL RECEIVED.

I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? WELL, I MEAN, I'M HEARING THAT PEOPLE ARE WANTING MORE INFORMATION. AND I MEAN, THAT'S WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE ABLE TO GET MORE INFORMATION, BUT I'M, I'M FEELING LIKE WHAT IS BEING ASKED FOR.

WE ALREADY HAVE YES, THE KPI, KPI SPELLED OUT THERE, THE BENCHMARKS ARE LISTED IN THE RESOLUTION.

YES. AND THIS ISN'T OKAY. AND THIS IS IN THE FIRST YEAR.

AND THIS CAN BE REPORTED TO DT AND MAYBE MODIFIED OR REFINED.

CORRECT. BECAUSE THERE'S ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WE'RE GOING TO WANT TO MONITOR ON OUR SIDE. WELL, I JUST WITH WHAT'S COMING TO FAIR PARK GLOBAL ATTENTION, GLOBAL SIGNIFICANCE, I'M JUST HESITANT TO DEFER WHEN THERE'S WE'VE GOT A REVENUE TARGET, WE'VE GOT THE EXPENSES DELINEATED.

AND, AND THEN WE'VE ALSO GOT WHAT WE CAN HAVE AT THIS POINT TO UNDERSTAND THE STAND THE PERFORMANCE, AND THAT CAN BE REFINED OVER TIME. SO I JUST.

YOU KNOW, I GUESS I'VE JUST SEEN WHAT THIS TEAM DOES.

AND FRANKLY, THE WAY WE TALK TO. PROFESSIONALS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND SCOLDING THEM ABOUT SHOWING UP FOR WORK WHEN I'VE BEEN IN YOUR MEETINGS AND I HAVE SEEN THE DEPTH AND BREADTH OF WHAT. VISIT DALLAS REPORTS AND YOUR PERFORMANCE.

SO I JUST, I'M HESITANT TO DEFER. I THINK WE NEED TO JUST UNLEASH THIS TEAM AND GET THEM GOING.

AND I'M OKAY WITH THIS $3 MILLION PROJECTION BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE AND ON THE THE KPIS AROUND SATISFACTION FOR THIS FIRST YEAR AND THEN LET'S COURSE CORRECT IF WE NEED TO ALONG THE WAY.

SO I DO NOT, I DO NOT WANT TO DEFER THIS. I WANT TO LET THIS TEAM START WORKING ON GENERATING REVENUE FOR FAIR PARK AND OUR TAXPAYERS.

THANK YOU. MR.. BAZALDUA. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE MOTION TO DEFER BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY.

THANK YOU MAYOR. I WOULD CONCUR WITH MOST OF EVERYTHING THAT DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM JUST SAID.

I, I THINK ALSO WITH WHAT CHAIR STEWART WAS LOOKING AT FINDING A MIDDLE GROUND ON WAS I THINK THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE INFORMATION SPECIFIC TO THE BENCHMARKS AND FORECASTED REVENUE FOR YEAR ONE, BUT I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ALSO HAVE A MORE ROBUST CONVERSATION AND LOOK AT WHAT SUBSEQUENT YEARS LOOK LIKE AND WHAT IS BEING FORECASTED.

I DON'T KNOW THAT AN APPROVAL TODAY WOULD HINDER OUR ABILITY TO DO THAT.

AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US AS AS MISS WILLIS SAID, TO SEE Y'ALL GET TO WORK.

AND I THINK THAT Y'ALL CAN GET TO WORK WHILE STAFF ALSO DELIVERS MORE DATA AND INFORMATION THAT WE'VE ASKED.

AND SO I WOULD ASK. FOR ME TO NOT SUPPORT A DELAY.

FOR THERE TO BE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING FROM THE CHAIR AND A WILLINGNESS TO HAVE THIS BE AN ITEM ON A.

THE NEXT, OR IF IT WON'T WORK ON THE NEXT, BUT MAYBE TO HAVE THE ITEM SO THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THE BENCHMARKS.

ASK MORE QUESTIONS, HEAR FROM YOU ALL MORE AND THEN JUST CONTINUE THIS ACTUALLY AS A, AN ONGOING CONVERSATION.

BUT I DON'T BELIEVE A DEFERRAL IS NEEDED RIGHT NOW IN ORDER FOR US TO GET THERE.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US PASS THIS AND STILL ACCOMPLISH WHAT MR. RIDLEY HAS BROUGHT FORTH. I THINK WHAT SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE SAID THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS WELL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIR RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY A MISCONCEPTION THAT THERE ARE KPIS IN THIS CURRENT EXHIBIT A THAT WAS ATTACHED TO OUR PACKET.

[03:00:09]

NEXT SENTENCE. THE DEFINITIVE AGREEMENT WILL INCLUDE THE BENCHMARKS.

THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY BENCHMARKS IN THIS EXHIBIT A Y BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN NEGOTIATED YET.

THIS $3 MILLION FIGURE. AS STAFF HAS ADMITTED, IS NOT IN THIS AMENDMENT.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, IF IT ISN'T WRITTEN, WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

SO THE REASON TO DEFER THIS IS TO ALLOW THEM TO COMPLETE THEIR NEGOTIATIONS, PROVIDE US A COMPLETE AGREEMENT THAT CONTAINS THE SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE CRITERIA OF NUMBER OF CONCERTS. ET CETERA, ET CETERA.

AND POSSIBLY REVENUE GENERATION TARGETS. IT WILL NOT DEFER THEIR ABILITY TO START WORK ON THIS BECAUSE THEY CAN'T HIRE ANYBODY. EVEN IF WE VOTE TO APPROVE THIS AUTHORIZATION, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE A CONTRACT UNTIL THEY CAN COMPLETE NEGOTIATING THOSE TERMS, THEY'VE ADMITTED THAT THEY HAVE TO NEGOTIATE THOSE, BUT THAT THEY CAN DO THAT WITHIN TWO WEEKS.

SO IF WE DEFER THIS FOR TWO WEEKS, IT'S NOT GOING TO LENGTHEN THEIR TIME FRAME TO HIRE PEOPLE AND BEGIN WORK ON THIS CONTRACT. AM I RIGHT, MR. JENKINS? YES. SO WHAT THIS WHAT THIS MOTION DOES IS TO PRESERVE OUR DUE DILIGENCE, OUR OBLIGATION TO DO DUE DILIGENCE, TO KNOW WHAT IT IS WE'RE APPROVING IN OUR CONTRACTS RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE APPROVING.

AND THIS MOTION IS TO DETERMINE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE IN TWO WEEKS TIME.

I'M NOT AVERSE TO REFERRING IT BACK TO DT FOR THAT ANALYSIS, BUT THAT'S GOING TO DELAY US ANOTHER MONTH OR TWO.

AND I AGREE WE DON'T WANT TO DELAY IT THAT LONG.

TWO WEEKS IS ENOUGH TIME FOR THEM TO COME BACK TO US.

TELL US WHAT THESE PERFORMANCE CRITERIA ARE SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE APPROVING.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. WELL, I HOPE EVERYONE LISTENED CLOSELY TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY JUST SAID.

IT'S EXACTLY WHY I PULLED THIS ITEM IS THAT I THINK IT'S THE VERY LAST LINE IN THERE SAYS THERE'S NO PERFORMANCE MEASURES THAT WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON THEM.

I MEAN, I COULD READ IT TO YOU. THEY'RE NOT THERE.

AND THIS IS LITERALLY A GOVERNANCE ISSUE. HERE WE GO.

I'LL READ IT TO YOU. THE DEFINITIVE AGREEMENT WILL INCLUDE THE BENCHMARKS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT THERE NOW.

THAT'S WHY I PULLED IT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THIS DISCUSSION.

AND AGAIN IT GOES BACK TO OTHER ITEMS. WELL ITEM NINE THAT I PULLED ABOUT THE THE HOMELESS PROJECT.

IT'S A GOVERNANCE PROBLEM TO ACCEPT THIS AMENDMENT WITHOUT IT.

AND IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD WITHOUT IT, I GUESS THAT'S HOW WE GOVERN.

BUT LITERALLY YOU'VE JUST HEARD THE PARK DIRECTOR SAY IT WON'T IMPACT ANYTHING IF WE WAIT TWO WEEKS, THAT THEY'LL HAVE THE NUMBERS IN TWO WEEKS AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE DONE YOUR JOB PROPERLY.

NOW, IF THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO DISCUSS ANY NUMBER OF THINGS ABOUT THIS, GREAT, GO FOR IT.

I DON'T THINK IT DELAYS US TAKING ACTION ON THE AMENDMENT IN TWO WEEKS, BUT I JUST THINK IT'S OUTRAGEOUS FOR US TO COMMIT $2.6 MILLION WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANY KIND OF PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

THANK YOU. I SUPPORT YOUR MOTION, MR. RIDLEY.

MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

CAN YOU JUST GIVE SOME CLARITY, PLEASE, TO WHAT THIS AGENDA ITEM IS SPECIFICALLY? ARE WE APPROVING THE CONTRACT THAT YOU ARE, OR ARE WE APPROVING THE AMENDMENT TO THE ALREADY EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH.

VISIT DALLAS TO OPEN UP THEIR SCOPE? YES, SIR.

APPROVING THE AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING AGREEMENT.

SO AGAIN, THIS DOESN'T PROHIBIT YOU ALL FROM GOING INTO THE NEGOTIATION PHASE OF THE CONTRACT.

WOULD THERE REQUIRE WITH THE EXPANSION OF THIS SCOPE, WOULD IT REQUIRE SEVERAL SEPARATE COUNCIL ACTION FOR THIS SPECIFIC CONTRACT? DEAL POINTS OR WOULD THERE NOT BE ANY SUBSEQUENT NEED FOR COUNCIL ACTION?

[03:05:06]

AND IT WAS MENTIONED THAT IF THIS WASN'T IF THIS WAS APPROVED NOW THAT WE WOULDN'T, IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

WE'RE NOT APPROVING THE CONTRACT. SO THAT'S NOT ACCURATE TO SAY.

AND THEY STILL HAVE TO NEGOTIATE AND STILL WHAT WE'VE ASKED, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S BUILT INTO A MOTION, WOULD HAVE TO PRESENT TO DT. FOR INSTANCE I WOULD LIKE TO JUST HAVE SOME LEGAL CLARIFICATION ON THE ABILITY FOR THERE TO BE A REQUEST FOR A SUBSEQUENT ACTION.

SO WHEN THOSE DEAL POINTS COME BACK SPECIFIC TO THE CONTRACT AFTER THIS AGREEMENT HAS BEEN AMENDED THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE A SEPARATE COUNCIL ACTION ON THE DEAL POINTS.

ON THE KPI. I BELIEVE THE INTENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY'S MOTION WAS, WOULD BE TO HAVE ALL OF THAT PUT TOGETHER AND FOR YOU ALL TO REVIEW BY APRIL 8TH SO THAT YOU CAN AUTHORIZE US TO ENTER INTO THE CONTRACT ONCE THEY GET THE, THE, ALL OF THIS NEGOTIATED SO THAT I THOUGHT WAS THE INTENT WAS SO THAT YOU COULD SEE THE DEAL POINTS CLEARLY BEFORE YOU VOTE ON THEM ON THE EIGHTH AND YOU BELIEVE THE EIGHTH IS PLENTY ENOUGH TIME TO GET IT DONE.

YES. I GUESS. CAN YOU GUYS GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF WHY THIS.

IT'S IT'S IT'S BEING FRAMED AS IF IT WAS POOR GOVERNANCE.

CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF PASSED ITEMS THAT HAVE HAD SIMILAR ACTIONS OR CHRONOLOGY OF, OF THE NEGOTIATIONS COMING IN AFTER A REQUEST FOR THE AMENDMENT, ETC.. SURE. SO IN DEALS LIKE THIS, WE TYPICALLY NEGOTIATE THE KPIS THAT WE'RE GOING TO MONITOR.

AND THEN YOU USE THAT FIRST YEAR TO BENCHMARK AND THEN YOU UPDATE YOUR NUMBERS FOR YEAR TWO.

NOW WE NEED TO BENCHMARK A COUPLE OF THESE NUMBERS BASED ON LIMITED DATA.

BUT OUR REVENUE AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION IS READY TO GO.

SO WHAT LEVEL OF DETAIL WOULD YOU SEE CHANGING AND BEING PRESENTED TO US IN TWO WEEKS? IF I GUESS THE INTENT OF A DEAL LIKE THIS WOULD BE TO ONLY IDENTIFY.

YEAH, I MEAN, WE WOULD JUST BE SPELLING OUT WHAT'S WHAT.

WE'VE ALREADY STATED OUR REVENUE FIGURE OF 3 MILLION.

OUR CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PERCENTAGE IN DETERMINING HOW WE'RE GOING TO MEASURE THE FACILITY USAGE RATE.

WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M THAT'S WHAT I'M MOST INTERESTED IN BECAUSE I'M REALLY NOT UNDERSTANDING EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GET IF THE INFORMATION WE'RE MISSING IS FOR SUBSEQUENT YEARS.

I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN ARTICULATED SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO GET, AND I DON'T HAVE TIME.

BUT IF YOU ARE SO INCLINED, I JUST AM CURIOUS ON WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU ARE YOU LOOKING AT TO BE PRESENTED TO US OR NEGOTIATED? THAT WOULD BE INKED DIFFERENTLY THAN THAN WHAT IS IN FRONT OF US TO APPROVE TODAY.

I MEAN, YOU DON'T HAVE TIME, BUT WE WILL HOLD ON TO YOUR ANSWER HERE BECAUSE YOU'RE COMING UP.

MR. ROTH, WILL YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY, FOR CLARIFYING YOUR MOTION.

I THINK THAT YOUR YOUR YOUR CHANGES TO THE MOTION AND I IN, IN EVALUATING WHAT YOU'VE JUST SAID, THAT GIVES ME A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. I THINK THAT ESPECIALLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE, THAT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT SAYS THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE A CRITICAL DELAY.

I WAS CONCERNED PRIMARILY THAT WE WOULD BE PUSHING THE OPPORTUNITY TO START OUR MARKETING EFFORTS.

IT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY POSTPONED, WHICH I DO NOT WANT TO ACCOMPLISH.

I THINK THAT IN RETROSPECT, I AM GOING TO CHANGE MY POSITION AND SUPPORT YOUR, YOUR, YOUR SITUATION TO, TO REVIEW THE, THE DETAILS BY APRIL 8TH. I THINK THAT'S A SHORT ENOUGH TIME.

[03:10:04]

AND I THINK THAT IT'S THE RIGHT COMMUNICATION.

IT ALSO GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY AS A BODY PERSONALLY TO WEIGH IN AND TO TALK TO THESE FOLKS AND GIVE THEM SUGGESTIONS AND GIVE THEM SOME GUIDELINES OR SOME SUGGESTIONS AS TO OUR PARTICULAR SITUATION.

SO I AM GOING TO CHANGE MY POSITION AND SUPPORT YOUR, YOUR EXTENSION.

AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GET THIS THING DONE.

LET'S GET IT MOVING. LET'S GET IT BACK HERE, BUT LET'S GET THESE FOLKS SORT OF GEARED UP SO THAT THEY CAN HIT THE GROUND RUNNING AFTER THAT PERIOD OF TIME. THANK YOU. JIM RIDLEY OF ONE MINUTE AND THE COUNCIL MEMBER.

THAT'S EXACTLY MY INTENT TO RESPOND TO COUNCILWOMAN BAZALDUA QUESTION.

THE RESPONSE, THE THE ANSWER TO THAT IS CONTAINED IN EXHIBIT A, WHERE IT SAYS FAIR PARK AGREES TO ACHIEVE THE FOLLOWING BENCHMARKS CENTERED ON REVENUE GENERATION AND USAGE RATE. AND THEN THE DOCUMENT IS BLANK BECAUSE IT SAYS THE AGREEMENT WILL INCLUDE THE BENCHMARKS.

SO THEY HAVEN'T BEEN NEGOTIATED YET. THEY'RE NOT IN WRITING.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE. AND SO ALL I'M SAYING IS IN AN EXERCISE OF DUE DILIGENCE, WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT BENCHMARKS WE'RE APPROVING AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE IN THE ULTIMATE AGREEMENT.

IF THEY'RE NOT THERE. NOTHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE THERE AND THAT THEY'RE REASONABLE.

THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. OKAY, LET'S. FIVE MINUTES.

THREE MINUTES, THREE MINUTES. I'LL TAKE WHATEVER.

THREE. I'M TOLD. OKAY, SO THESE BENCHMARKS. WHAT IS IT REALLY JUST GOING TO SAY 3 MILLION IN THE FIRST YEAR? OR WOULD YOU SAY SOMETHING LIKE JUST TO SORT OF TEMPER OUR EXPECTATIONS? AND THE FIRST QUARTER, IT'LL ONLY BE 15% OF THAT.

AND, BUT BUT BY THE SECOND QUARTER, WE'RE WE'LL BE RAMPING UP WITH OUR SALES.

AND IN OTHER WORDS, ARE YOU ARE THERE GOING TO BE MORE SPECIFICS? I DON'T HAVE FAMILIARITY WITH HOW WE DO BENCHMARKS ON THIS TYPE OF IN THIS TYPE OF AGREEMENT.

YEAH. AND I HAVE I'M I'M HAVE BRETT COME UP AND I WAS JUST SPEAKING TO MR. O'CONNOR AND BECAUSE I'M LISTENING TO THE COUNCIL AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT THE ASK IS FROM US.

AND SO TO MR. RIDLEY'S POINT, SO WHAT WE COULD BRING BACK IS.

TO TO MR. WILKIE POINT, IT'S CLEAR THAT THE FIRST YEAR THEY WANT TO COME BACK THE SECOND YEAR, BECAUSE WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY ON THE REVENUES OR THE BENCHMARKS.

HOWEVER, WE CAN SET A MINIMUM IN THERE. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? BUT WE'RE STILL GOING TO COME BACK YEAR TWO AND RENEGOTIATE THOSE BENCHMARKS, BECAUSE THEN WE WILL HAVE REAL DATA TO TELL US WHERE WE ARE.

AND IF THE ISSUE IS, IS LIKE, WELL, IS IT REALLY ABOUT THE GUARANTEED REVENUES, THEN THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT DISCUSSION.

OKAY. SO DO WE HAVE ANOTHER SITUATION THAT ALIGNS WITH THIS? IT'S SIMILAR TO THIS WHERE WE CAN, WE KNOW JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, IF OUR GOAL IS 3 MILLION, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IF IT WERE ME, I WOULD PUT IN THAT WE HAVE A QUARTERLY REPORT, RIGHT? AND THAT THAT WOULD GO OBVIOUSLY TO PARK BOARD AND TO TO COUNCIL MEMBERS THROUGH HT.

HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO THAT. BUT BUT YOU NEED TO HELP US SET OUR EXPECTATIONS.

I DON'T THINK YOU TAKE 3 MILLION AND DIVIDE IT BY FOUR.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S HOW THIS WILL, WILL FLOW.

RIGHT? IT'LL IT'LL THERE'LL BE A START UP PERIOD.

SO IS THERE MORE INFORMATION THAT YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER AGREEMENT WHERE YOU CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH DETAIL GOES INTO THAT FORECAST? OR ARE WE JUST KIND OF. NO, THE ONLY OTHER AGREEMENT THAT WOULD BE SIMILAR WOULD BE THE F AND B, AND YOU BASED OFF HISTORICAL DATA. AND THEN AGAIN, YOUR KPIS, YOU MONITOR THEM ANNUALLY AND RESUBMIT ANNUALLY AND COUNCIL MR..

I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD A LITTLE BIT OF AN UNUSUAL SITUATION.

SO AS WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING, WE FIND OURSELVES IN A POSITION WITH OUR PREVIOUS OPERATOR THAT WE JUST DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THE INFORMATION.

SO IN A, IN A, IN A COMPLETELY TYPICAL SCENARIO, WE WOULD HAVE ALL THE HISTORY, WE WOULD HAVE ALL THE DATA, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO WITH CONFIDENCE, YOU KNOW, CREATE VERY HARD AND FAST BENCHMARKS.

BUT AGAIN, WE FIND OURSELVES IN KIND OF AN UNUSUAL SITUATION THAT WE JUST DON'T HAVE IT.

AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THE APPROPRIATE BENCHMARKS AND WE'VE GOT SOME TARGETS THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO REFINE.

[03:15:07]

SO OTHER THAN INCOME OR SALES AND SURVEYS, YOU MENTIONED FACILITY USAGE RATE.

DO WE HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE ON THAT? WHAT IS WHAT IS THAT EXACTLY? THE AMOUNT OF TOTAL HOURS THAT ARE ABLE TO BE RENTABLE IN THE FACILITIES.

WHAT IS THAT USAGE RATE? ARE THEY AT 80%, 50, 40 SOME OTHER AMOUNT, RIGHT.

AGAIN, WE DON'T HAVE GOOD DATA ON THAT. BUT WE KNOW THAT THAT'S AN IMPORTANT METRIC TO MONITOR.

AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE IDENTIFIED IT AS A KPI. BUT AGAIN WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE WE DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY.

THOSE ARE. YEAH, YEAH. IF I MAY ALSO CLARIFY, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT REVENUE THAT'S ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FUTURE REVENUE. SO THE TEAM WILL GET IN AND START TO SELL FOR THE FUTURE.

SO WHATEVER'S ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH WE WILL NOT TAKE ANY CREDIT FOR.

OKAY. THE OTHER THING THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS A TOP DOWN REVIEW IN TERMS OF WHAT THE FACILITY RENTAL CHARGES ARE, WE BELIEVE THAT WE'RE MISSING A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY THERE.

WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE SOME STONES THAT WE CAN TURN OVER THAT AND GET REVENUE THAT WE'VE NEVER GOTTEN BEFORE.

SO. IT'S HARD FOR US TO SAY THAT WE WILL DO. WE'LL BE VERY CAREFUL BECAUSE AS WAS MENTIONED MULTIPLE TIMES.

THE OPERATORS BEFORE LEFT VIRTUALLY NOTHING BEHIND.

SO I'M VERY HESITANT TO MAKE PROMISES I CAN'T KEEP.

BUT WE FEEL MUCH BETTER AFTER YEAR ONE THAT WE'RE.

WE HAVE NO TROUBLE TYING OURSELVES TO SPECIFIC GOALS.

THAT'S WHAT WE DO ON THE CONVENTION CENTER'S SIDE VERY WELL, AND WE WOULDN'T BE COMFORTABLE OTHERWISE.

WE WANT TO HAVE VERY AGGRESSIVE GOALS. THAT'S WHAT SETS OUR OUR PEOPLE APART.

SO FOR US, WE JUST NEED THE THE PATIENCE THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE HAVE TO SELL.

AND IT'S MY OPINION THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD A SALES FORCE IN THE PAST SINCE I'VE BEEN IN DALLAS THAT IS GOING TO GO OUT IN THE MARKET AND ACTIVELY SELL THE SPACE.

IT WAS VERY MUCH A PASSIVE SELL. IT WAS ANSWERING A PHONE.

AND SO NOW IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY DIFFERENT STRATEGY, AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO OUTLINE STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

WELL, ALL OF THAT SOUNDS VERY GOOD, AND I THINK EVERYONE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE IS 1,000% BEHIND THAT APPROACH.

RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT WE'VE NEEDED AT FAIR PARK FOR SO LONG.

SO IT'S A IT'S A MISSING PIECE THAT IS GOING TO BE, I THINK, JUST CRUCIAL TO THE SUCCESS AND TO THE FUTURE AND FOR INCOME AND ALL OF THAT.

BUT I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS HOW COMPLEX ARE THESE BENCHMARKS? IS IT PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD? IT'S GOING TO BE REVENUE AND IT'S GOING TO BE PERCENTAGE OCCUPANCY OF THE, OF THE BUILDINGS. AND KNOWING THAT THE, THE STATE FAIR NEEDS A LOT OF TIME TO SET UP, TEAR DOWN AND OPERATE.

WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING IN A, IN A SEVERAL MONTH PERIOD.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE A TRICKY SELL. WE CAN'T SELL 12 MONTHS OF THE YEAR, SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REALLY REFINE HOW WE HOW WE SELL THE THE FACILITY.

BUT WE'RE VERY, VERY OPTIMISTIC THAT WE CAN DO IT.

BUT IT'S GOING TO BE IT'S REALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S GOING TO BE REVENUE.

THAT'S ALL IT'S GOING TO MATTER. RIGHT? EXACTLY.

SO ONE LAST QUESTION THAT WE'VE ASKED YOU ALL THIS ONE QUESTION AS MANY WAYS AS WE CAN THINK OF IT.

DO WE NEED THIS IS A CRITICAL PIECE, I THINK, TO THE AGREEMENT.

DO YOU ALL NEED ADDITIONAL TIME TO WORK ON THAT OR.

I MEAN, IS THAT IS, IS IT GOING TO TAKE A WHILE TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN TO GET THOSE NUMBERS? I'M ASSUMING THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ALREADY.

THIS WILL NOT TAKE MUCH TIME AT ALL. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR MONTHS, AND WE JUST DIDN'T INCLUDE IT IN THE EXHIBIT BECAUSE WE JUST WEREN'T READY TO.

OR IF IT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE EXHIBIT, IT'S AN OVERSIGHT.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

OKAY. WELL, THAT ACTUALLY SURPRISED ME. YOUR ANSWER? IF IT'S AN OVERSIGHT, CAN YOU JUST SHARE WHAT THEY ARE? IT'S THE REVENUE AND THE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION.

AND THE FACILITY USAGE RATE IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO DISCUSS AND BENCHMARK OVER THE FIRST YEAR.

SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO INCLUDE IT FOR THE FIRST YEAR. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? CORRECT.

THAT ONE HAS TO BE BENCHMARKED, BUT THE REVENUES ABSOLUTELY ARE INCLUDED IN THE FIRST YEAR.

AND YOU'RE LEAVING IT COMPLETELY OPEN ON REVENUE BASED ON, YOU KNOW, CONCERT VERSUS EVENT OR ANYTHING ELSE.

IT'S ALL EVENT RENTAL INCOME. WOW. THAT'S SURPRISING.

YOU KNOW, THE THING THAT THAT KEEPS BEING SAID THAT I FIND DIFFICULT TO HEAR IS TO SAY, WELL,

[03:20:09]

WE CERTAINLY KNOW WHAT HAPPENED AT FAIR PARK, AND WE CAN SCRAPE IT OFF THE INTERNET AND WE CAN ASK PEOPLE WHO ARE NEARBY AND ASSOCIATED WITH FAIR PARK TO RECREATE THE CALENDAR OF ALL THE EVENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED THERE.

YOU MAY NOT KNOW THE REVENUE THAT WAS PRODUCED EACH TIME, BUT BETWEEN SECURITY AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW WHO WAS IN WHAT BUILDING. SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE DON'T HAVE AN IDEA OF THE LEVEL OF ACTIVITY THAT WAS OCCURRING.

WE DO. DO YOU KNOW THE REVENUE PRODUCED? I DON'T THINK YOU DO.

BUT THEN WE HAVE NATIONAL STANDARDS AND FIGURES TO BE ABLE TO SAY THIS IS PROBABLY IN THE RANGE OF WHAT THE REVENUE WAS GIVEN THIS NUMBER OF EVENTS, CONCERTS WITH THIS ATTENDANCE, BLAH, BLAH.

SO I DON'T THINK IT'S BEYOND YOU TO COME UP WITH SOME VERY SPECIFIC MEASURES.

I THINK HE DIDN'T INCLUDE HIM BECAUSE THAT'S PRETTY WEAK.

AND I THINK YOU CAN DO A BETTER JOB AT PUTTING IN BENCHMARKS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LEVEL OF PAYMENT.

AND THE OTHER THING I'LL SAY IS THIS IS NOT LIKE ANY OTHER LOCATION.

FAIR PARK HAS EXPERIENCED EPISODE AFTER EPISODE AFTER EPISODE OF MISMANAGEMENT, AND IT IS ABSOLUTELY INCUMBENT UPON US TO GET THIS AS LOCKED DOWN AS WE CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER FAILURE.

WE NEED THIS TO BE SUCCESSFUL. AND IF YOU DON'T PUT PERFORMANCE MEASURES IN, WE WILL NOT GET THAT SUCCESS.

SO I THINK ASKING TWO WEEKS THAT YOU HAVE SAID WILL NOT CAUSE ANY HARM IS SO EASY THAT IT'S INSANE THAT WE'RE CONTINUING TO DEBATE IT.

SO I'M READY TO TAKE A VOTE AND SUPPORT THE DELAY FOR TWO WEEKS.

THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I, I JUST, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT MY COLLEAGUE WANTING MORE TIME.

I DON'T KNOW OTHER THAN ARBITRARY NUMBERS THAT YOU ALL ARE GIVING JUST TO APPEASE THE.

REQUEST FROM A COUNCIL MEMBER. WHAT MORE DETAIL WE'RE GOING TO HAVE.

THIS IS BASICALLY YEAR ZERO. I KNOW WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT YEAR ONE, BUT WITH THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE THE, THE, THE VARIABLE OF PROGRAMING VERSUS THAT OF WHAT WE'VE HAD HISTORICALLY, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS ANY HISTORICAL DATA THAT CAN LEAD TO THIS BEING CONSIDERED A YEAR ONE. THIS IS YEAR ZERO. AND WITH THIS REVENUE BEING OUR BASELINE, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANY SPECIFIC QUARTERLY BENCHMARKS OR REVENUE BENCHMARKS FOR US TO HAVE SPECIFICALLY LAID OUT UNLESS THEY ARE JUST THROWN OUT OF A HAT.

AND I DON'T KNOW WHY A DELAY WOULD BE WORTH HEARING WHAT YOU ALL PULL OUT OF A HAT.

I DON'T THINK THAT THE DELAY IS GOING TO GIVE US ANYTHING FOR THAT.

I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT IT. I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A WELL THOUGHT OUT PLAN.

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

THANK YOU. AND I THINK WE WE WANT AS MUCH DETAIL AS WE CAN GET DEPENDING ON WHAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE.

THIS BODY NEEDS TO BE THOUGHTFUL AND WE DO HAVE A FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION.

BUT AS I HEAR WHAT THE BENCHMARKS THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY BE INCORPORATED WOULD BE, WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE REVENUE.

I MEAN, I CAN TELL YOU FROM MY STANDPOINT, HOW YOU GO ABOUT GETTING TO THAT NUMBER IS YOUR BUSINESS.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE DEALING WITH AN ORGANIZATION WITH A TRACK RECORD. IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BENCHMARKS OF WE NEED TO KNOW EACH SALES REP IS GOING TO MAKE 25 CALLS A DAY, THAT THAT IS IN THE WEEDS. WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN THAT.

WHAT WE NEED IS TO KNOW THAT AT THE END OF THE YEAR, CRAIG DAVIS IS GOING TO COME TO US AND SAY, WE HAVE HIT OUR 3 MILLION, $50,000 GOAL OR WE HAVE NOT.

WE'LL BE WATCHING. ALONG THE WAY, BECAUSE THE EXPECTATION IS THAT YOU WOULD REPORT TO US.

I'M HEARING ABOUT FACILITY USAGE RATES, AND I DON'T IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW AS MUCH ABOUT THAT, BUT YOU SAID SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT, WHICH WAS THAT YOU NEED TO ASSESS WHAT THE RENTAL IS ON THESE FACILITIES BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE WE COULD BE UNDERCUTTING WHAT WE COULD GET.

AND SO THAT IS A CRITICAL PART OF THIS. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GIVE US THAT USAGE RATE WHEN YOU MAY BE CHANGING OR MOVING THE GOALPOSTS TO SOMETHING THAT COULD ACTUALLY BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE TAXPAYER.

AND I'M HEARING, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO GET IT MOVING, BUT WE WANT TO DELAY.

AND I KNOW WE SAY TWO WEEKS WON'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BUT THIS IS A DIFFERENCE IN DAYS THAT YOU CAN GET TO WORK FOR US.

[03:25:02]

I MEAN, DO WE NEED TO FIGURE THEM OUT NOW? BECAUSE I'D HATE FOR THEM TO COME BACK IN TWO WEEKS AND THEN NOT MEET THE GOALS OF SOME PEOPLE IF THEY WANT TO KNOW HOW MANY PHONE CALLS YOU'RE MAKING A DAY. I JUST I'D RATHER NOT GIVE YOU A CONSTRUCTION PLAN OR ASK FOR A CONSTRUCTION PLAN TO BUILD THE BIRDHOUSE.

IF YOU TELL ME YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE ME A BIRDHOUSE, A $3 MILLION BIRDHOUSE.

I JUST WANT THE BIRDHOUSE. I DON'T NEED TO KNOW ALL OF THE STEPS TO GET THERE, BECAUSE IN THE NEXT YEAR, THAT IS WHEN WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE HAMMERING THIS OUT BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A TRACK RECORD.

SPEAKING OF TRACK RECORDS, VISIT DALLAS HAS ONE.

AND SO THIS IS A GROUP THAT HAS ALREADY GOT METRICS THAT THEY DO REPORT TO US AND TO THE CITY.

AND SO I THINK IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE TO SAY, THIS IS A PROFESSIONALLY RUN ORGANIZATION THAT IS DELIVERING ON THEIR GOALS FOR US.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT RECORD ALONG WITH A REVENUE GOAL AND ALONG WITH A SATISFACTION SURVEY THAT WILL TELL US HOW YOU'RE DOING.

AND IN YEAR ZERO, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO GO WITH.

AND AT YEAR ONE, WE COME BACK AND WE DRILL INTO MORE DETAIL.

SO I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DEFER THIS. I THINK WE'RE ONLY HURTING OURSELVES.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY CHAIRMAN RIDLEY TO DEFER? I DON'T SEE ANYONE. I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A RECORD VOTE REQUESTED.

SO ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OH, OKAY.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT. I THINK I, I THINK I KNOW, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE.

SO LET'S 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.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLAIR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. NO. 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. ALL RIGHT, WE'RE BACK ON AGENDA ITEM 11.

MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. I ACTUALLY WAS ALREADY ON THE FLOOR, SO WE.

AND WE HAD A Q ALREADY, SO IT'S ALRIGHT. IT'S BEEN SO LONG.

IT'S BEEN SO LONG, I UNDERSTAND. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED.

I NOTED, I THINK I THINK THE AYES HAVE IT. OKAY.

YOU GUYS WANT A RECORD ON THAT? WELL, I JUST LIKE TO HAVE HER NOTE THAT I WAS A NO.

OKAY. NOTED. I THINK THE AYES HAVE IT, BUT PLEASE NOTE THE NAMES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM. YOUR NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM 13.

[13. 26-773A A resolution amending the Board of Adjustment's Rules of Procedure by (1) modifying the process for removing a board member; (2) adding that the composition of the board shall reflect the community served by the city; (3) amending duties of the chair, board administrator, and board secretary; (4) requiring the physical presence of board members for attendance; (5) informing members to refrain from discussing pending cases until the 10-day appeal process expires; (6) providing that the board decision is final unless appealed to district court; and (7) making other non-substantive changes - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

OKAY. I'M HAVING. I'LL READ THE ITEM INTO THE RECORD.

AGENDA ITEM 13 IS A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, RULES, OR PROCEDURE BY ONE.

MODIFYING THE PROCESS FOR REMOVING A BOARD MEMBER TO.

ADDING THAT THE COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD SHALL REFLECT THE COMMUNITY SERVED BY THE CITY.

THREE AMENDING DUTIES OF THE CHAIR, BOARD ADMINISTRATOR AND BOARD SECRETARY FOR REQUIRING THE PHYSICAL PRESENCE OF BOARD MEMBERS FOR ATTENDANCE. FIVE INFORMING MEMBERS TO REFRAIN FROM DISCUSSION PENDING CASES UNTIL THE TEN DAY APPEAL PROCESS EXPIRES.

SIX PROVIDING THAT THE BOARD DECISION IS FINAL UNLESS APPEALED TO DISTRICT COURT, AND SEVEN MAKING OTHER NON SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES. THIS IS YOUR ITEM MR.. MAYOR. AND THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER.

BAZALDUA. IS THERE A MOTION? I MOVE TO REMAND THIS ITEM BACK TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH INSTRUCTION TO REMOVE LANGUAGE, REQUIRING THE PHYSICAL PRESENCE OF BOARD MEMBERS FOR ATTENDANCE, AND TO REMOVE ALL LANGUAGE THAT IS DUPLICATIVE WITH THE DALLAS CITY CHARTER AND DALLAS CITY CODE. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? YES. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION TO REMAND? THANK YOU. MAYOR. WHEN I WAS REVIEWING THE AGENDA AND LOOKING AT THESE PROPOSED RULE CHANGES FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, I WAS TAKEN BACK BY ONE IN PARTICULAR, WHICH WAS THE PRESENCE OF THE REQUIRING THE PHYSICAL PRESENCE OF BOARD MEMBERS.

[03:30:02]

I THINK THAT THE RULES THE COUNCIL ADOPTED MAY HAVE BEEN MISINTERPRETED BY.

THIS BOARD AND WHO PROPOSED THEM? THIS RULE, THE RULE THAT WAS PROPOSED BY MAYOR JOHNSON AND LATER PASSED BY THIS BODY WAS HAVING TO DO WITH ATTENDANCE RECORDS AND NOT PARTICIPATION.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO ADD ANY UNDUE BURDEN OR UNNECESSARY QUIREMENTS ON OUR VOLUNTARY BOARDS, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S INCONSISTENT WITH OTHER VOLUNTARY BOARDS.

WE HAVE OTHER QUASI JUDICIAL BOARDS, SPECIFICALLY THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION AND OUR CPC, BOTH OF WHOM HAVE THE ABILITY TO JUGGLE AND PRIORITIZE THEIR OWN PERSONAL LIVES.

AND SOMETIMES MEANING THEY PHYSICALLY CANNOT BE PRESENT, BUT ALLOWS THEM TO COME IN VIRTUALLY.

THIS ALSO IS COMPLIANT WITH WHAT IS AFFORDED TO US FROM THE GOVERNOR'S ORDERS.

AND THE LAW, THE STATUTE WITHIN TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

SO I JUST THINK THAT THIS WAS NOT WELL THOUGHT OUT.

AND WHEN BRINGING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF STAFF AND THEN TALKING WITH THE ATTORNEYS, IT SEEMS AS IF THERE ARE SEVERAL OF THESE RULES THAT ACTUALLY ARE DUPLICATIVE AND UNNECESSARY FOR US TO TAKE COUNCIL ACTION ON.

FOR THAT REASON, I THINK THAT THERE'S MORE THAN JUST MY REQUEST OF REMOVING THAT, WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN A MOTION IN ITSELF, BUT INSTEAD I THINK IT WOULD BE A BETTER EXERCISE TO SEND THIS BACK TO THE BODY AND ALLOW THEM TO CLEAN THIS UP SO THAT WE CAN PASS WHAT THIS QUASI JUDICIAL BODY WORK TOWARDS AND SENT OUR WAY IN A MORE CLEANED UP MANNER INSTEAD OF THE WAY IT IS NOW.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. ROTH FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I, I WOULD HOPE THAT IF WE DO REMAND THIS BACK TO THE, TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THAT THERE BE SOME CONSIDERATION AS TO THE REASON WHY YOU HAVE TO HAVE PERSONAL SHOWING PEOPLE SHOWING UP TO THIS MEETING. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AND I NEED CLARIFICATION AND PERHAPS AT THE, AT THE, AT THE MEETING, IF IT DOES GET REMANDED, IT'S DISCUSSED.

IS THAT THE PURPOSE FOR HAVING PEOPLE IN THE ROOM IS THAT THESE I THINK ARE CONFIDENTIAL HEARINGS.

THESE ARE THE INFORMATION IS NOT IS, IS, IS SORT OF A VERY DISTINCT AND, AND PROPRIETARY IN MANY CASES.

AND THAT THE, IT'S POSSIBLE. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LEGAL ISSUE IS, BUT IT MAY BE POSSIBLE THAT A REMOTE DEAL MIGHT BE AFFECTED BY THAT, NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, THAT THERE ARE THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THERE, THERE'S A SYSTEM OF ALTERNATES THAT ARE ACTIVELY, THERE ARE SUFFICIENT ALTERNATES TO ALWAYS BE AVAILABLE FOR LIVE MEETINGS. AND CERTAINLY I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT INTO CONSIDERATION.

I AM CONCERNED THAT THERE MAY NOT BE PANELS, QUORUM PANELS THAT ARE ABLE TO BE FORMED BECAUSE OF APPEARANCES BY PEOPLE.

AND CERTAINLY THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CERTAINLY IMPORTANT TO THE ABILITY TO, TO CREATE THE, A SUFFICIENT PANEL TO HEAR THESE CASES.

BUT I'M NOT AWARE I'M NOT EDUCATED ENOUGH ABOUT THE LEGAL ISSUES.

AND IF THOSE BECOME ISSUES IN THE DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THAT THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO CONSIDER THAT IN MAKING A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FOR THE PARTICULAR ITEM OF HAVING PERSONAL ATTENDANCE.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. SO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HERE, THEY ARE QUASI JUDICIAL, BUT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

AND SO EVERYTHING THEY DO HAS TO BE IN PUBLIC JUST LIKE COUNCIL UNLESS THERE'S AN EXCEPTION.

AND SO AGAIN, EVERYTHING IS OUT IN THE OPEN UNLESS, AND IT'S NOT TYPICAL THAT THEY DO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, BUT THEY HAVE THE SAME TECHNOLOGY THAT WE DO SO THAT THEY, SOMEBODY WHO'S REMOTE CAN GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

SO THEY DO VARIANCES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND APPEALS FROM THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.

AND AGAIN, THOSE ALL OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS ARE IN OPEN SESSION.

ALL RIGHT. MR. BAZALDUA, DID YOU WANT THE FLOOR BACK FOR THREE MINUTES? YES. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO ALSO REITERATE THAT THERE'S CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT THIS BODY TAKES UP AS THE ELECTED BODY.

[03:35:05]

THE CPC AS WELL. I MEAN, SO I JUST BELIEVE THAT THERE TO BE CONSISTENCY NEEDED.

WHAT I, WHAT I DON'T REALLY WANT TO SEE, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT WAS CITED TO ALIGN WITH OUR RULES.

I, I TRULY BELIEVE OUR RULE WAS MISINTERPRETED.

MAYOR JOHNSON SAID THAT WE WERE NOT ABLE TO HAVE AN ATTENDANCE FOR ACCREDITED ATTENDANCE FOR THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS. AND IT WASN'T FOR COUNCIL, BUT IT WAS SPECIFIC TO COMMITTEE MEETINGS.

BUT NOWHERE IN WHAT HE ASKED FOR US TO CONSIDER OR WITH WHAT WE PASSED, DID IT PROHIBIT US FROM PARTICIPATING EVEN.

AND SO THE SCRUTINY OF OUR ATTENDANCE IS BECAUSE WE GET PAID BY TAX DOLLARS AND OUR ATTENDANCE HAS TO MEET A CERTAIN THRESHOLD.

THEY'RE NOT BEING PAID. AND I JUST THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR CONSISTENCY.

AND IT'S THE ONLY REASON I'D LIKE TO SEE IT CLARIFIED. I DON'T KNOW THAT THE WAY THAT IT WAS WRITTEN.

AND AGAIN, ONCE I BROUGHT UP THE ONE THAT WAS THERE'S SEVERAL THAT ARE IN THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY'VE BROUGHT THAT THE ATTORNEYS BELIEVE TO BE DUPLICATIVE AND THAT THEY NEED TO CLEAN UP SO THAT WE CAN HAVE SOMETHING BETTER TO PASS.

ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO REMAND? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. ALL RIGHT. NEXT. NEXT ITEM, MADAM SECRETARY.

[46. 26-937A Authorize Supplemental Agreement No. 1 to increase the service contract with RNDI Companies, Inc. for asbestos abatement and demolition services for city and non-city owned structures for citywide use - Not to exceed $2,892,233.10, from $11,568,932.39 to $14,461,155.49 - Financing: General Fund (subject to annual appropriations) *In alignment with Neighborhood Revitalization Plan.]

AGENDA ITEM 46, AUTHORIZED SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER ONE, TO INCREASE THE SERVICE CONTRACT WITH R&D COMPANIES, INC. FOR ASBESTOS ABATEMENT AND DEMOLITION SERVICES FOR CITY AND NON CITY OWNED STRUCTURES FOR CITYWIDE USE, NOT TO EXCEED $2,892,233.10, FROM $11,568,932.39 TO $14,461,155.49. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION ON ITEM 46? MOVE TO APPROVE.

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

DISCUSSION. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN. YOU PULLED IT. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM 46.

THANK YOU. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ITEM.

I'M HOPING THAT WE CAN HAVE SOMEBODY FROM STAFF EXPLAIN IT.

GOOD MORNING OR AFTERNOON? COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. OR WHAT IS THE QUESTION? CHRIS? CHRISTIAN DIRECTOR THE QUESTION IS IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN THE ITEM. SO.

THERE YOU GO. THEY'RE NOT AS TALL AS YOU. IT'S OKAY.

OKAY, SO I REQUESTED THE INCREASE FOR MY DEPARTMENT.

THIS IS THE CONTRACT THAT WE USE TO DEMOLISH URBAN NUISANCE PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

IT'S A CITYWIDE CONTRACT. IT'S PART OF OUR ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT PROCESS.

SO WHEN WE'VE REACHED THE THRESHOLD OF UNABLE TO OBTAIN VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE AND WE REFER PROPERTIES TO OUR COMMUNITY PROSECUTION TEAM, THEY GO THROUGH THE MUNICIPAL COURT PROCESS AND A JUDGE GIVES US A COURT ORDER FOR DEMOLITION ON HABITUAL HAZARDOUS PROPERTIES.

AND SO IT'S COMING FROM THE GENERAL FUND. ARE YOU EVER REIMBURSED? WE DO. WE DO LEAN FOR THE COST OF THESE DEMOLITIONS.

AND THAT COST IS RECOVERABLE. AND DOES THE LEAN GO BACK TO GENERAL FUND OR DOES IT GO SOMEWHERE ELSE? WHEN YOU RECOVER IT, YEAH, WE DON'T GET THE MONEY, SO I'M ASSUMING IT DOES GO BACK TO THE.

IT GOES BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND. THANK YOU. OKAY.

AND SO WITH THIS COULD THIS DEMOLITION CONTRACT, I UNDERSTAND IT'S BEING USED FOR PROPERTIES THAT HAVE THAT ARE NOT ORIGINALLY CITY OWNED. THE CITY MAY END UP OWNING THEM BEFORE YOU DEMOLISH.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. MY, MY PURPOSE AND PRIMARY USE OF THE CONTRACT IS FOR NON CITY OWNED, PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTIES THAT ARE URBAN NUISANCES.

HAS THIS CONTRACTOR EVER DONE A CITY FACILITY THAT WAS BUILT TO BE A CITY FACILITY? TO MY I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO, BUT I WOULD HAVE TO. SO THE ONLY THING THAT COMES TO MIND THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT I TYPICALLY DO IS THE TRI CITY HOSPITAL THAT WE DID FOR COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ IN DISTRICT FIVE.

WE WE WERE IN NEGOTIATIONS TO POTENTIALLY GET THAT PROPERTY.

I BELIEVE IT WAS UNDER RECEIVERSHIP WHEN WE DEMOED IT.

GIBSON CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MR. MENDELSOHN. THERE ARE RARE EXAMPLES AND I GOT SARA STANDIFER HERE IN THE WINGS TO HELP.

[03:40:07]

AND SHE CAN GIVE SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT. SARA, CAN YOU HELP ME? GOOD AFTERNOON. SARA STANDIFER, DALLAS WATER UTILITIES.

AND WE HAVE USED THIS CONTRACT AND CONTINUE TO USE IT AS WE MAKE RENOVATIONS OR CORRECT BUILDINGS SUCH AS SCOTTSDALE.

SO YOU ALL HAVE APPROVED US TO BUILD AN ADDITIONAL COMPONENT TO THE SCOTTSDALE BUILDING.

WE DID USE THAT AS PART OF THE TESTING. WE'VE ALSO USED IT ABOUT TEN DIFFERENT TIMES FOR PROPERTIES THAT WE'VE PURCHASED FOR A PIPELINE ALIGNMENT, SAY LAKE TAWAKONI OR THE CADILLAC AND LAMAR LEVEE ALIGNMENTS, WHERE THEY HAVE EXISTING STRUCTURES.

AND AS PART OF THAT PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY, WE'RE GOING TO DEMO THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE ITSELF.

SO WE'VE USED IT ABOUT TEN DIFFERENT TIMES ON THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT.

SO THE ALL THE ANSWERS. EVERY EVERY DESCRIPTION YOU'VE USED HAS BEEN ABOUT DEMOLITION.

BUT OF COURSE, THE ITEM ISN'T JUST DEMOLITION.

IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT ASBESTOS. YES, MA'AM. SO WHEN SO WHEN WE DO A DEMO OF A STRUCTURE, THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO DO THE ASBESTOS TESTING.

AND SO THAT IS PART OF THAT. ASBESTOS TESTING COMES BACK IN A POSITIVE MANNER.

THEN THEY FOLLOW THE STATE LAW THAT PRECEDES THAT.

AND SO IT'S ALL DONE UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE WITH THE DEMO. SO THEY'RE ONLY DOING THE TESTING OR THEY'RE DOING A DIFFERENT KIND OF DEMOLITION WHERE THEY REMEDIATED THE ASBESTOS FIRST. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

THAT IS CORRECT. AS PART OF THIS CONTRACT, THEY ARE ABLE TO REMEDIATE THE ASBESTOS IF IT IS FOUND.

OKAY, SO I'M JUST GOING TO BE VERY HONEST WITH YOU.

I'M CONCERNED THAT YOU'RE GOING TO USE THIS TO TO ENGAGE IN DEMOLITION OF ITEMS OUTSIDE OF THE CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUE.

COUNCILWOMAN. MENDELSOHN. I DEMOED 31 PROPERTIES LAST YEAR FOR A TOTAL OF $1,141,000.

I DEMOED 33 PROPERTIES THE YEAR BEFORE THAT, FOR A TOTAL OF $1,018,000, AND THE CONTRACT IS CURRENTLY SHOWING ZERO.

I'VE PERFORMED. I'VE PERFORMED FIVE DEMOLITIONS THIS YEAR TOTALING $178,000, AND I HAVE SIX MORE CURRENTLY IN THE PIPELINE RIGHT NOW, AND THERE'S NO MONEY TO DEMO THOSE PROPERTIES.

SO MY CONCERN IS THAT YOU WOULD THEN HIRE THIS COMPANY TO EVEN GET AN ESTIMATE ON WHAT IT WOULD COST TO DEMOLITION THIS BUILDING.

MA'AM, I CAN HONESTLY SAY TO YOU THAT THAT WAS NEVER A THOUGHT IN MY MIND WHEN I ASKED FOR THIS ENHANCEMENT.

WELL IT'S NOT A PART OF MY PRIMARY USE FOR THIS CONTRACT, AND I HAVE ENOUGH PROPERTIES MYSELF AND SARAH CURRENTLY IN THE PIPELINE TO EXHAUST THOSE FUNDS. AND SO THE FUNDING WOULD NOT ACTUALLY BE AVAILABLE TO PERFORM A DEMO OF THIS PROPERTY.

WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THIS AGREEMENT TO SAY THAT ANY PROPERTY CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE CITY COULD NOT BE USED WITH THIS CONTRACT.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S A MOTION UNDER OUR CURRENT CONTRACT.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. I JUST WANT TO CHECK ON SOMETHING REALLY QUICK. COUNCILWOMAN.

MENDELSOHN WE ARE WE ARE UNDER THE TERMS OF AN EXISTING CONTRACT.

I WOULD LET PROCUREMENT SPEAK TO THOSE, BUT THIS IS AN ENHANCEMENT TO THAT ORIGINAL CONTRACT TO JUST ALLOW FOR 25% MORE IN SPENDING CAPABILITY.

IT'S NOT A. WE HAVE TO SPEND THE MONEY, BUT IT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO REACH THAT THRESHOLD IF WE NEED TO AND TO A NEW SOLICITATION IS DONE, AND I'LL LET JUANITA SPEAK TO THAT PROCESS. I WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE ATTORNEYS IF WE CAN ADJUST THE SCOPE.

AS CHRIS MENTIONED, THE CONTRACT. THIS IS A. ADDING FUNDS TO IT.

IT'S NOT ADJUSTING THE SCOPE OF THE EXISTING CONTRACT.

SO WE'D HAVE TO ASK IF THAT REDUCTION WOULD BE ANY IMPLICATION.

SO I THINK WHAT I'M PROPOSING IS ACTUALLY CONTINUING THE CONTRACT, NO CHANGE, BUT RESTRICTING ANY ADDRESSES THAT ARE CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE CITY. YES, MA'AM. I HEAR YOU 100%.

I THINK WE UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENT. I THINK WHAT YOU MIGHT NOT REALIZE THERE'D BE SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES RELATED TO THAT.

BASED ON THE WORK THAT SARAH DOES, BASED ON WORK THAT WE'LL BE DOING IN CADILLAC HEIGHTS.

BECAUSE WHEN WE ACQUIRE THOSE PARCELS AND THEIR IMPROVEMENTS THERE, IF THERE'S A NEED FOR DEMOLITION AND OR, GOD FORBID, THERE'LL BE ASBESTOS INVOLVED. THAT'S A PART OF THE PROCESS.

SO IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON OTHER PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE, POTENTIALLY BEYOND WHAT YOU MIGHT BE THINKING AT THE MOMENT.

OKAY. LET ME LET ME STOP EVERYONE HERE AND JUST WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT THE MOTION IS EVEN IN ORDER FIRST.

SO LET'S JUST STAND AT EASE FOR JUST A MOMENT SO WE DON'T WASTE ANYBODY'S TIME.

AND BY ANYBODY'S, I MEAN ALL OF OUR TIME. AND SO HOLD ON ONE SECOND, OKAY.

[03:45:05]

AND SO I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE OKAY IF YOU'RE REDUCING THE SCOPE, IF YOU WOULD BE EXPANDING IT, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO THE MOTION IS IN ORDER AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED.

SO YOU ARE NOW RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR ON YOUR MOTION.

THANK YOU. MY, MY PRIMARY CONCERN IS ACTUALLY THIS BUILDING AND THIS ADDRESS, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT DOESN'T EXTEND TO SOME OF OUR LIBRARIES.

IT MEANS SOME OF THE OTHER FACILITIES THAT WE MAY HAVE.

AND SO I'M WILLING TO OFFER THAT IF YOU WANT TO BRING A CITY FACILITY BACK TO US FOR AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE AND APPROVAL.

I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. BUT I'M WORRIED THAT THERE'LL BE ACTIVITIES AT CITY OWNED FACILITIES THAT WE ARE NOT AWARE OF.

AND I'M SORRY, I HAVE TO SAY IT THAT WAY, BUT I ALREADY I'M CONCERNED THAT THERE'S ACTIVITIES HAPPENING THAT WE ARE NOT AWARE OF.

AND SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS WITH SUSPICION NOW.

THAT'S THE LEVEL OF DISTRUST THAT'S HAPPENED.

SO THAT'S MY MOTION. I HOPE YOU WILL SUPPORT IT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE ASSURANCE ABOUT WHAT OUR DOLLARS ARE ACTUALLY BEING USED FOR. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON, FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY THE AMENDMENT BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN TO LIMIT THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT, AS SHE DESCRIBED. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. SOUNDS LIKE, NOTED, MR. MAYOR. I NOTED ONE. SO NOW WE ARE ON ITEM 46 AS IT'S BEEN AMENDED.

ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 46, AS AMENDED? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

[51. 26-843A Consideration of appointments to boards and commissions and the evaluation and duties of board and commission members (List of nominees is available in the City Secretary's Office)]

ITEM 51 IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THIS AFTERNOON.

YOU DO HAVE FULL COUNCIL INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICER APPOINTMENTS.

YOUR ITEM WILL BE SEPARATED TO ALLOW THE CHAIR APPOINTMENT TO BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.

YOUR NOMINEES FOR INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENT TO THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD.

JACQUELINE RIVERS OWNS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR TO THE SENIOR AFFAIRS COMMISSION.

PATRICIA A STEVENS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA.

MISS STEVENS MEETS THE 55 PLUS YEARS OF AGE SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE VETERAN AFFAIRS COMMISSION.

KHALIL COLEMAN IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON.

MR. COLEMAN MEETS THE PREVIOUS MILITARY SERVICE SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.

YOUR NOMINEE FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 14 BOARD SKILLMAN CORRIDOR.

PAYTON ROBERTS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART AND THERE'S A VICE CHAIR APPOINTMENT.

DAVID PREZIOSI IS BEING NOMINATED VICE CHAIR OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS.

THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES. MR. MAYOR, IS THERE A MOTION MOVE TO APPROVE? I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NOW YOUR CHAIR APPOINTMENT. MICHELLE IS BEING NOMINATED CHAIR OF THE CITY AUDITOR NOMINATING COMMISSION BY MAYOR JOHNSON. I'M SORRY. BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS.

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

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

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. AND PLEASE NOTE MY ABSTENTION.

NOTED, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 52 AUTHORIZED AN ACQUISITION, INCLUDING THE EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT OF

[52. 26-876A Authorize an acquisition, including the exercise of the right of eminent domain, if such becomes necessary, from Columbia Packing of Texas, Ltd. of an unimproved tract of land containing approximately 1.678 acres located on East 11th Street near its intersection with Cedar Crest Boulevard for the Dallas Floodway Extension Project - Not to exceed $411,900.00 ($401,900.00, plus closing costs and title expenses not to exceed $10,000.00) - Financing: Storm Drainage Management Capital Construction Fund (This item was deferred on February 25, 2026) *In alignment with Capital Improvement Program.]

BECAUSE THIS IS AN EMINENT DOMAIN ITEM, IT WILL REQUIRE A RECORD VOTE.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION ITEM 52? MOVE. MOVE TO APPROVE. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, MISS CADENA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

MISS STANDIFER, HAS THE PROPERTY OWNER AGREED TO SELLING THE PROPERTY? SARAH. STANDARD FOR DALLAS WATER UTILITIES. THIS IS A SECOND TRANSACTION WITHIN THE SAME HOLDING COMPANIES.

[03:50:03]

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 52? SEEING NONE, RECORD A RECORD VOTE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

NO. IF YOU OPPOSE COUNCIL MEMBER WEST COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY IS ABSENT.

ONE VOTE TAKEN. COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER RESENDEZ.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER CADENA NO. COUNCILMEMBER BAZALDUA.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR. YES. COUNCILMEMBER BLACKMON.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER STEWART. YES. COUNCILMEMBER ROTH YES.

COUNCILMEMBER MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO.

YES. MAYOR JOHNSON. YES. WITH 13 VOTING IN FAVOR.

ONE OPPOSED, ONE ABSENT. VOTE TAKEN. THE ITEM PASSES, MR. MAYOR. GREAT. NEXT ITEM PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM 53.

[53. 26-884A Authorize (1) an economic development grant agreement with the Dallas Wings Development, LLC to construct a facility on City-owned park property located at 1200 North Cockrell Hill Road in an amount not to exceed $54,000,000.00, a developer fee not to exceed $3,240,000.00, and a delay reimbursement in an amount not to exceed $653,000.00 - Not to exceed $57,893,000.00 - Financing: Convention Center Construction Fund; (2) an amendment to the Dallas Memorial Auditorium Resident Use and Incentive Agreement (CCT-2024-00024819 No. 24-0616) with Full Court Partners LLC, d/b/a/ Dallas Wings; and (3) a decrease in project management services contract with McKissack and McKissack for a reduction in scope to eliminate the Dallas Wings Practice Facility in the amount not to exceed ($1,847,485.00), from $13,945,684.00 to $12,098,199.00 - Financing: Convention Center Revenue Bonds Series 2023 Fund; For a total not to exceed $56,045,515.00 - Financing: Convention Center Construction Fund ($57,893,000.00) and Convention Center Revenue Bonds Series 2023 Fund (-$1,847,485.00) (This item was committed to the next Ad Hoc Committee on Professional Sports Recruitment and Retention) *In alignment with the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center Dallas Master Plan.]

A DEVELOPER FEE NOT TO EXCEED $3,240,000, AND A DELAY REIMBURSEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $653,000 TOTAL, NOT TO EXCEED $57,893,000. FINANCING CONVENTION CENTER CONSTRUCTION FUND.

TWO. AN AMENDMENT TO THE DALLAS MEMORIAL AUDITORIUM RESIDENT USE AND INCENTIVE AGREEMENT WITH FULL COURT PARTNERS, LLC, DBA, DALLAS WINGS AND THREE. A DECREASE IN THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES CONTRACT WITH MCKISSACK AND MCKISSACK FOR A REDUCTION IN SCOPE TO ELIMINATE THE DALLAS WINGS PRACTICE FACILITY IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $485 FROM $13,945,684 TO $12,098,199. FINANCING CONVENTION CENTER REVENUE BONDS SERIES 2020 2023 FUND FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $56,045,515. THIS IS YOUR ITEM. MR.. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION, CHAIRMAN? YES, MAYOR. IT'S A LONG ONE AND IT'S GETTING PASSED OUT RIGHT NOW.

I MOVED TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

AMEND SECTION ONE BY DELETING THE REFERENCE TO THE DELAY REIMBURSEMENT.

AUTHORIZING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT FOR $51,250,000, PLUS THE $3,240,000 DEVELOPER FEE FOR A TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED $54,490,000. DELETING THE REFERENCE TO 56,000 $15 IN DELETING THE REDUNDANT REFERENCES TO THE CONVENTION CENTER, CONSTRUCTION FUND AND CONVENTION CENTER REVENUE BONDS.

SERIES 2023 FUND AND AMEND SECTION TWO BY REPLACING $54 MILLION WITH $51,250,000 REQUIRING REQUIRING THAT BEFORE THE FIRST INSTALLMENT PAYMENT.

DALLAS WINGS DEVELOPMENT LLC SHALL DEMONSTRATE TO THE CITY SATISFACTION THAT IT HAS THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY TO FUND ITS SHARE OF THE PROJECT COSTS.

REDUCING THE INSTALLMENT FOR PAYMENT TO $1,250,000 AND REQUIRING THAT FAILURE OF THE DALLAS WINGS DEVELOPMENT LLC TO COMPLETE THE PROJECTS, SHALL RESULT IN ITS REQUIRED REPAYMENT OF ANY INCENTIVES RECEIVED AND THE FORFEIT OF ANY INCENTIVES YET TO BE RECEIVED, AND AMEND SECTION FOUR BY DELETING ANY REFERENCES TO THE DELAY REIMBURSEMENT.

REVISING THE PROJECT FINANCING PROVISION TO CLARIFY THAT THE CITY'S TOTAL CONTRIBUTION IS BASED ON $54 MILLION LESS LESS $2,750,000 IN FUNDS PREVIOUSLY EXPENDED, RESULTING IN A TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED $51,250,000, AND REVISING THE SUPPLEMENTALS TO THE PREVIOUS AGREEMENT PROVISION TO REFLECT THAT.

THAT SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER THREE PROVIDES FOR THE EXTENDING THE COMPLETION DEADLINES FOR THE ARENA AND THE SECONDARY FACILITY.

TRANSFERRING CONSTRUCTION OBLIGATIONS FOR THE SECONDARY FACILITY FROM CITY TO DALLAS WINGS DEVELOPMENT LLC AND REMOVING ANY REFERENCES TO PROJECT REVENUE SHARING. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'M GLAD YOU DIDN'T ASK ME TO READ THAT AGAIN.

[03:55:03]

OBVIOUSLY REGARDING THE DALLAS WINGS AND THE CITY'S MOVE FORWARD MOVING FORWARD, THE RECOMMENDATION TO FINALIZE A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT WITH THE ORGANIZATION TO COMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PRACTICE FACILITY THAT WE ARE OBLIGATED TO COMPLETE FOR THEM AT JOYCE PARK.

SINCE THE DEFERRAL OF THE DALLAS, WINGS HAVE WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH CITY OF DALLAS STAFF AND HAVE SHOWN THEIR COMMITMENT AS GREAT PARTNERS BY AGREEING TO PAY ANY ADDITIONAL COSTS RELATED TO THE FACILITY BEYOND THE AMOUNT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THIS BODY.

I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR PUSHING FOR THE CITY TO GET THE BEST DEAL POSSIBLE FOR OUR TAXPAYERS, AND I WANT TO THANK THE WINGS FOR COMING TO THE TABLE TO MEET THAT OBLIGATION.

ADDITIONALLY, THE WINGS HAVE ASKED FOR NO REIMBURSEMENT FOR THEIR COMMITMENT AND HAVE AGREED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THEIR ABILITY TO FINANCIALLY HONOR THEIR COMMITMENT WITH A POSITIVE VOTE TODAY, WHICH WHICH I HOPE WE WILL HAVE.

WE WILL CONTINUE DOWN THE ROAD TO SOLIDIFYING OUR LONG TERM COMMITMENT TO PROFESSIONAL WOMEN'S SPORTS.

I WANT TO AGAIN THANK MR. BIBB, CEO AND MANAGING PARTNER OF THE DALLAS WINGS, WHO'S HERE, WHO IS HERE TODAY FOR HEARING THE CITY COUNCIL AND FOR RESPONDING POSITIVELY TO THE CITY'S NEED FOR HIM TO MEET US HALFWAY AS A TRUE PARTNER IN THE COMPLETION OF THE PRACTICE FACILITY. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THIS DONE TODAY AND WE GET THIS PROJECT BACK ON TRACK.

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

WE'RE ON AGENDA ITEM 53. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. COULD ROBIN BENTLEY COME FORWARD? SO, MISS BENTLEY, I UNDERSTOOD THAT AS A RESULT OF THE HEARING OF THIS MATTER AT THE SPORTS AD HOC COMMITTEE YESTERDAY, THAT THERE WOULD BE A PROVISION FOR OUR CONSIDERATION TODAY THAT THE WINGS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PUT THEIR PORTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS TO WORK BEFORE THE CITY HAD TO CONTRIBUTE ITS PORTION OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS. I DON'T SEE THAT IN THESE AMENDMENTS. WHAT HAPPENED? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. ROBIN BENTLEY WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. I HAVE TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO DISCUSS WHAT WAS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, BUT I'LL SAY THE TERMS THAT WERE AGREEABLE WERE IN THE MOTION READ BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

SO THE TERM THAT I MENTIONED WAS NOT AGREEABLE TO THE WINGS.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THE TERMS THAT WERE AGREEABLE WERE IN THE MOTION READ BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

CORRECT. THANK YOU. I WILL BE OPPOSED TO THIS ITEM.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM 53.

THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE DOLLARS.

THE SECOND BULLET IN THE AMENDMENT. I'M SORRY.

IN THE MOTION IS SPECIFYING 51,250,000 FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT.

CORRECT? YES. CORRECT. AND 3,240,000 FOR A DEVELOPER FEE.

CORRECT. OKAY. BUT THEN ALSO WE'VE ALREADY SPENT 2,750,000.

THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S WHY THE GRANT DECREASED FROM 54 MILLION TO THE 51 AND CHANGE YOU JUST READ, BECAUSE THAT REDUCES THE AMOUNT THAT THE CITY HAS SPENT SO FAR ON SITE PREP, ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, ETC.. SO THE TOTAL CONTRIBUTION FROM THE CITY WOULD BE 57,240,000.

IS THAT RIGHT? INCLUDING THE COST WE'VE SPENT TO DATE AND THE GRANT AND THE DEVELOPER FEE? YOU ARE CORRECT. OKAY. AND THIS IS MAGNANIMOUS LANGUAGE THAT CHAIRMAN WEST JUST USED ABOUT THE WINGS. THOSE DOLLARS ARE ACTUALLY JUST TO PAY FOR THE EXPANDED SCOPE AND LUXURY AMENITIES THAT THEY WANT TO ADD IN.

IS THAT CORRECT? THE WINGS WILL FUND ANY COSTS FOR ANY PORTION OF THE PROJECT THAT EXCEEDS OUR 54 MILLION.

AND WILL THEY'RE ESTIMATING AN $81 MILLION TOTAL BUDGET.

BUT IF THE PROJECT EXCEEDS THAT, THE WINGS ARE TAKING THE FULL RISK TO COVER ALL OF THE COSTS BEYOND OUR 54 MILLION.

WELL, IT'S NOT REALLY 54 MILLION BECAUSE THERE'S ALSO THE DEVELOPER FEE.

SO IF I HIRE SOMEONE TO BUILD MY HOUSE FOR ME, BUT I'M BUILDING A HOUSE THAT'S PROBABLY VALUED AT $1 MILLION, BUT I'M GOING TO PAY THEM 2 MILLION.

AND THEY SAY, I GUARANTEE I WON'T GO OVER THE 2 MILLION TO BUILD YOUR $1 MILLION HOUSE.

ARE THEY ACTUALLY TAKING A RISK? I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.

[04:00:05]

THE CITY WILL FUND 54 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY COUNCIL AND THE WINGS WILL FUND THE BALANCE.

OKAY, WELL, THE ESTIMATE WAS NOT 81 MILLION PREVIOUSLY.

IT'S BECAUSE THE WINGS ASKED FOR CHANGES, CORRECT? THE PREVIOUS ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION BUDGET WAS 54 MILLION, WHICH IS THE PIECE THAT WE'VE AGREED TO FUND.

AND THEN ANY COST ESTIMATES ABOVE THAT FOR, LIKE YOU SAID, DIFFERENT FINISHES OR ESCALATING CONSTRUCTION COSTS TO GET THIS DONE IN TIME FOR THE NEXT SEASON, ALL OF THOSE COSTS ARE THE WINGS COSTS.

OKAY. SO I NEVER VOTED FOR THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, BUT THE KEY ONE IS THAT WE WERE TOLD THIS WOULD BE A BASIC PRACTICE FACILITY, A BARE MINIMUM, DO WHAT'S REQUIRED BASED ON WNBA.

AND SUDDENLY IT'S $54 MILLION, WHICH IS OUTRAGEOUS FOR LIKE A STADIUM, AN ACTUAL ARENA COMPARED TO A PRACTICE FACILITY. AND ALSO, I FEEL VERY UNCERTAIN THAT THIS LEGAL EVEN CONTINUE.

WE HAVE NO GUARANTEES. AND THEN WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THIS DEBT? SO LET ME ADDRESS THIS IN ORDER. WHAT WE WOULD DO WITH THIS FACILITY IS WE'LL OWN IT.

WE'RE PAYING FOR, LIKE I SAID, ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THE COST.

THE WINGS WILL PAY FOR THE ADDITIONAL AND THEN THE ENTIRE FACILITY WILL BE OWNED BY THE CITY. IT WILL BE A PARKS AND REC FACILITY AT JOEY G.

PARK. IF I THINK YOU HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS IF THE PROJECT IS NOT COMPLETED OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

WELL, WHAT HAPPENS IF THE LEAGUE FOLDS? OH, IF THE LEAGUE.

WELL, THEN THEY WOULDN'T DELIVER ON THEIR OBLIGATION TO PRACTICE AT THE FACILITY.

IT WOULD JUST BE A CITY PARK FACILITY THAT WE WILL BE PAYING DEBT ON AND MAINTAINING.

WE'RE NOT PAYING DEBT ON THIS, RIGHT? NO, THIS IS THIS IS FROM THE OPERATING CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER.

AND THEN THE WINGS MAY, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY'RE GOING TO FUND THEIR PIECE. THEY'LL DOCUMENT THAT BEFORE WE MAKE OUR FIRST REIMBURSEMENT. BUT THERE'S NO CITY DEBT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT. SO GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP THE CONVENTION CENTER.

HOW MUCH IS IN THAT ACCOUNT? I DON'T HAVE THAT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO EXPAND THE SCOPE MUCH FURTHER THAN THIS. AND YOU NEED TO TIE IT BACK TO THE, THE AGENDA ITEM FOR THE ABILITY TO, TO INCLUDE KEEP IT TIGHTLY TAILORED TO THAT, PLEASE.

SO WE DID. ROSA FLEMING DIRECTOR OF CONVENTION AND EVENT SERVICES AND THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO CURRENTLY WE HAVE $86 MILLION IN THAT ACCOUNT OR FUND.

HOWEVER, THIS IS A FUND THAT WE ADD TO EVERY YEAR.

AS I EXPLAINED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE YESTERDAY, THIS IS A FUND THAT IS THE OVER AND ABOVE OPERATIONS FUND AND EXCESS OPERATIONS FUND THAT WE USE AT THE CONVENTION CENTER EVERY YEAR.

EVERYTHING THAT IS ABOVE, EVERYTHING THAT IS ABOVE THE OPERATIONAL COST OF THE FACILITY, OUR EXPENSES GOES INTO THAT FUND.

SO THAT FUND GROWS YEAR OVER YEAR BASED ON OUR ABILITY TO MANAGE OUR BUDGET.

SO IT'S NOT A FUND THAT IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE 86 MILLION NOW AND THAT'S ALL THAT WE HAVE.

IT'S A CONTINUAL GROWTH FUND. SO YOU JUST SAID BASED ON YOUR ABILITY TO MANAGE THE BUDGET, BUT IT'S REALLY BASED ON YOUR ABILITY TO PROGRAM THE CONVENTION CENTER, CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THAT INCLUDES THE PROGRAMING OF THE FACILITY, THE MAINTENANCE OF HOW WE SPEND OUR MAINTENANCE FUNDS, WHAT WE BRING IN, HOW WE WORK AND RETOOL WITH BIZOR, DALLAS AND OUR OPERATOR AND ENSURE THAT THE CLIENTS THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN ARE THOSE THAT ARE MOST BENEFICIAL TO THE BOTTOM LINE OF THE FACILITY.

CORRECT. SO IN DEFERENCE TO THE MAYOR ALREADY MENTIONING THE THE LIMITED LATITUDE IN TALKING ABOUT THIS FUND WHICH IS ALSO BEING USED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONVENTION CENTER AND SOME OTHER THINGS.

I WOULD SAY 86 MILLION IS PROBABLY NOT SUFFICIENT.

GIVEN ALL THOSE OTHER USES THAT I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO BRING UP AT THIS POINT.

I THINK THIS IS AN OBSCENE AMOUNT OF MONEY AT A TIME THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS LIKE CLOSING LIBRARIES.

I THINK IT'S PRETTY SHOCKING THAT WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS KIND OF A NUMBER.

AND I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AGENDA ITEM 53.

THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. ROSA AND ROBIN. I'M SORRY, I THINK I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

I WAS LIKE, WAIT, THERE'S NOBODY THERE. THE 21 MILLION THAT THE WINGS BRING TO THE TABLE, IS THAT AMOUNT

[04:05:06]

AND SO WHETHER THAT AMOUNT IS 5 MILLION OR 21, IT'S, IT'S UP TO THEM TO BRING THOSE FUNDS TO MAKE TO PUT IN THE EXTRAS.

THAT'S CORRECT. I THINK IT'S 27 MILLION. AND YES, THE WINGS WILL BE FUNDING THAT ON THEIR OWN.

SO BECAUSE WE DON'T NEED THOSE DOLLARS TO ACTUALLY BUILD THIS PRACTICE FACILITY, WE ARE NOT PUTTING SOME TYPE OF PROVISION IN THE DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THAT WOULD MAKE SURE THAT THEY COULD BRING THAT MONEY TO THE TABLE.

LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IN A PAST AGREEMENT I LOOKED AT, THEY NEEDED TO PUT THE AMOUNT ON DEPOSIT WITH A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION, WHERE THEN THE CITY COULD GO IN AND BE ASSURED THAT THAT AMOUNT COULD BE ACCOUNTED FOR.

YES. SO WE WILL YES, WE WILL NEED THOSE FUNDS TO BUILD THE FACILITY AT THE ESTIMATED $81 MILLION.

AND SO THE MOTION THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER READ HAS A PROVISION SAYING BEFORE THE CITY PUTS IN $1, WE NEED DOCUMENTATION TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY MANAGER THAT THE WINGS HAVE SECURED THEIR PORTION OF THE FUNDING AND ARE READY TO CO-FUND WITH US.

AND THAT AGREEMENT, THAT'S PART OF THE AGREEMENT THAT THEY WILL BRING THAT THAT IS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS KENNEDY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

YES. ROBIN AND ROSA DOES THIS SPACE HAVE A COMMUNITY SPACE FOR RESIDENTS TO USE? YES IT DOES. SO PART OF THE ABILITY TO USE PARKLAND IS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE COMMUNITY BENEFIT AND THAT INCLUDES SPACE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO USE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE WINGS, TO BE ABLE TO ALLOW FOR THEM TO FOR PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE EVENTS THAT THEY OFFER THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. AND SO THEIR ORIGINAL AGREEMENT WITH US DOES INCLUDE COMMUNITY BENEFIT REQUIREMENT.

YEAH. SO THIS BORDERS DISTRICT SIX, MY GRANDFATHER ACTUALLY WORKED ON THE LAND.

THIS USED TO BE A CEMENT PLANT. AND SO I THINK TO USE IT FOR SOMETHING FOR THE COMMUNITY IS DEFINITELY A BENEFIT.

SO WILL THERE BE LIKE COMMUNITY CLINICS THAT THEY'LL HAVE? AND WHAT ARE SOME OTHER, HAVE THERE, THERE BEEN A DISCUSSION ON WHAT KIND OF THINGS WILL BE OFFERED? SURE. ABSOLUTELY. SO IN A NEGOTIATION WITH THE WINGS, THEY WILL OFFER SPACES IN THEIR COMMUNITY CLINIC.

THEY WILL OFFER SPACES TO INTERACT WITH THE PLAYERS DEPENDING ON SCHEDULES.

THOSE WILL ALL BE ARRANGED THROUGH THE PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT AND IN COORDINATION WITH THE WINGS AND THEN THE COMMUNITY SPACE THAT'S AVAILABLE.

AND THEN I SO BECAUSE IT WAS A CEMENT PLANT, WAS THERE SOME CLEANUP THAT WAS DONE AT THE SITE AS WELL? YES. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SO THERE WAS REMEDIATION WHEN THE LAND WAS FIRST DONATED TO THE CITY.

IT'S PART OF THE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE EXPENDED TO DATE INCLUDE ENVIRONMENTAL AND RELOOKING AT THE SITE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS NO OTHER ACTION NEEDED.

THERE WAS A SMALL SITE THAT NEEDED TO BE REMEDIATED THAT HAS BEEN DONE, AND THAT'S PART OF THE ALREADY EXPENDED FUNDS AS WE MADE THE SITE READY FOR DEVELOPMENT.

OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. MR. ROTH, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

JUST A COUPLE CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS FOR ME.

WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS CREATING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE.

WHICH WOULD WHICH WOULD CONTAIN THE TERMS OF NOT ONLY THESE TERMS THAT ARE IN THIS AMENDMENT.

I MEAN, THIS THIS MOTION, BUT IT WOULD ALSO FLESH IT OUT WITH CONSTRUCTION TIMELINES.

IT WOULD WOULD IT HAVE CERTAIN GUARANTEES, CERTAIN OVERSIGHT PROTECTIONS, CERTAIN FUNDING MECHANISMS. I MEAN, HOW DETAILED IS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? AND, AND AND TO WHAT EXTENT DO WE AS A BODY GET TO WEIGH IN TO THE SORT OF THE, THE TERMS AND THE DETAILS IN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER ROTH.

YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. WHAT YOU'RE APPROVING TODAY ARE MATERIAL TERMS TO BUILD A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

WE WILL PROBABLY START WITH THE SAME. I MEAN, I DON'T SPEAK FOR THE ATTORNEYS, BUT WE'VE DONE THIS A FEW TIMES BEFORE FOR FIRE STATIONS.

AND SO I WOULD ASSUME WE WOULD START WITH A SIMILAR TEMPLATE WITH EXACTLY BENCHMARKS AND DELIVERABLES.

AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S A DEFAULT AND RECAPTURE IF THE PROJECT ISN'T COMPLETED AS SPECIFIED BY THE COUNCIL.

SO THAT WILL ALL BE BUILT OUT INTO A MORE COMPREHENSIVE CONTRACT.

AND WHEN AND WHEN DO WE WHEN DO WE GET TO SEE IT AND APPROVE IT OR OPINE ON IT?

[04:10:02]

TODAY IS THE MOMENT TO MAKE. WELL, THEN I'M NOT.

I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE MAKING THAT KIND OF. THIS IS A COMPLICATED DEAL.

I'M CONCERNED THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT ON THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION IS I.

WITH THE REDUCTION IN OUR OVERSIGHT, OUR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE CONNECTION I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THIS AMENDMENT THAT REFERS TO OUR ABILITY TO FUND OR TO REQUIRE OR TO PASS ON A COST FOR AN OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE FOR, FOR SOMEBODY TO BE PAYING ATTENTION ON OUR BEHALF TO MONITOR THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE, AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY A MATERIAL TERM.

I WOULD ALSO THINK THERE MIGHT BE OTHER MATERIAL TERMS IN TERMS OF PROJECTED TIMELINES, IN TERMS OF, OF FACILITIES ISSUES IF IT'S NOT BUILT TO STANDARDS.

AND I DON'T KNOW. AND AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A REFLECTION ON OUR, ON OUR CUSTOMER, ON OUR DEVELOPER ON, ON. IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A REFERENDUM ON THE QUALITY AND THE, AND THE INTEREST IN HAVING THE WINGS AS A, AS A COMMUNITY PARTICIPANT. BUT THIS IS A BUSINESS DECISION.

IT'S A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. IT'S, IT'S BIG MONEY THAT THE CITY IS HAVING TO FRONT.

AND I'M CONCERNED. SO I'M UNCOMFORTABLE THAT THAT THIS MAY NOT ENCOMPASS ALL OF THE DETAILED MAJOR TERMS THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO WEIGH IN ON. WHAT IS OUR RECOURSE? WHAT WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH IS I DON'T I'M NOT PREPARED TO DISCUSS WITH YOU DETAILS IN, IN HOW THOSE CONTRACTS COME UP. MAYBE THAT'S NOT MY PURVIEW OR, OR OUR PURVIEW, BUT THIS IS, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED THAN, THAN JUST BUILDING A HOUSE.

COULD YOU SORT OF HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR PROTECTIONS ARE, WHAT WE CAN DO TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT INCLUDES MORE SIGNIFICANT MAJOR TERMS THAT WE MIGHT NEED TO DISCUSS PRIVATELY IN EXECUTIVE SESSION OR IN A WORKSHOP OR IN A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT WITH THE WINGS IN SOME KIND OF A PUBLIC SETTING. SURE.

SO THIS WILL HAVE THE SAME KIND OF CONTROLS AND PROTECTIONS AS EVERY OTHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHERE WE ARE ESSENTIALLY ENGAGING THE WINGS AS THE DEVELOPER FOR THE CITY. IF THEY DON'T BUILD WHAT WE ASK THEM TO BUILD BY THE TIMELINE.

WE ASKED THEM TO BUILD IT AND THE BUDGET. WE ASKED THEM TO BUILD IT. THEN WE HAVE RECOURSE.

WE CAN RECAPTURE ALL OF THE FUNDING WE PAID TO THEM.

THAT'S A THAT'S AN OBLIGATION IN ALL OF OUR AGREEMENTS.

IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING OR FOR SOME REASON THE, THE LEAGUE FOLDS, WHICH I DON'T THINK IT WILL, I'M A BIG FAN, BUT IF SOMETHING GOES AWRY, WE HAVE OUR NORMAL STANDARD CONTRACTUAL DEFAULT AND CURE OBLIGATIONS LIKE WE DO IN EVERY OTHER AGREEMENT.

ROSE'S TEAM, YOU REFERENCED OUR OWNERS REP. WE ARE DOING A DEDUCTIVE CHANGE ORDER TODAY TO REMOVE THE PRACTICE FACILITY FROM THEIR SCOPE OF WORK.

BECAUSE THE WINGS ARE TAKING THAT ROLE, THEY'LL BE OUR DEVELOPER.

ROSE'S TEAM OBVIOUSLY WILL BE MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE STAYING IN IN ALIGNMENT.

AND I SAW VERNON YOUNG JUST RUN UP THE STAIRS. VERNON AND HIS TEAM ARE DOING ALL OF THE PERMITTING OVERSIGHT.

AND SO WE'RE VERY INVESTED FREQUENTLY MEETING WITH THE TEAM.

AND THIS WILL JUST BE A NORMAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT LIKE THE OTHERS WE'VE DONE.

DOES OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AS A GENERAL RULE.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS NOT SPECIFICALLY TIED TO THIS PARTICULAR GROUP.

BUT DO OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS TYPICALLY PROVIDE SOME KIND OF A BONDING OR SECURITY PROVISION SO THAT IF THE FACILITY IS NOT BUILT, IF THERE'S A TRAGEDY, IF THERE'S A CASUALTY, IF THE THAT WE HAVE A THIRD PARTY INSURANCE OR THIRD PARTY BONDING REQUIREMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TO PROTECT US.

ABSOLUTELY. THIS IS A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. AND SO THERE'S A SUBMISSION OF PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BONDS.

THERE'S QUARTERLY REPORTING THAT'S REQUIRED. THERE IS INSURANCE REQUIRED.

IN FACT, WE HAVE HAD SIGNIFICANT CALLS WITH WITH OUR PROVIDER, OUR OWNERS CONTROLLED INSURANCE PROGRAM PROVIDER AS WE'VE WALKED THROUGH THIS NEGOTIATION. SO ALL OF THE SAME THINGS THAT YOU WOULD SEE IN A TYPICAL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT ARE INCLUDED AS IN THIS AGREEMENT. THAT'S TYPICAL OF THE CITY'S STANDARD DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AS WE UNDERSTAND THEM.

AND AGAIN, I'M SORRY, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

THIS IS A AND THIS COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S UNUSUAL.

YEAH. I'M ALSO JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I REALLY DO THINK THAT WE DO HAVE TO HAVE AN OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE THAT.

AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE QUALITY OF OUR STAFF, WHICH IS EXCELLENT, AND THE ABILITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION PEOPLE TO TO DO THE WORK THAT

[04:15:07]

THE OTHER THING IS I WOULD EXPECT THAT SOME OF THESE EXTRA COSTS, I WOULD HOPE AND I'M ASKING, ARE THOSE EXTRA COSTS FOR BONDING, ETC., INCLUDED IN THESE, IN THESE $50 MILLION REQUIREMENTS FOR US FOR OUR.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. THE OBLIGATION TO SECURE THE BONDS BELONGS TO THE WINGS THAT WILL BE AT THEIR EXPENSE.

AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY TO EVERYONE EVERYTHING WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE RECAPTURE, THE BONDING, ALL OF THOSE ARE IN THE RESOLUTION TODAY. THERE'S NOTHING YOU NEED TO DO TO ADD THOSE.

THEY'RE ALREADY BAKED IN THERE. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO GO OVER A HYPOTHETICAL WORST CASE SCENARIO.

AND IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THE PERFORMANCE BONDS THAT ARE REQUIRED WOULD BE TRIGGERED AND WHERE WE CAN FEEL THAT THERE'S SOME ASSURANCE LET'S JUST SAY WORST CASE SCENARIO THAT THE, THE TEAM DECIDES TO GO SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE COUNTRY, RIGHT? DON'T WANT YOU TO DO THAT. WE LOVE OUR DALLAS WINGS, BUT WE HAVE A HALF OF A BUILDING ERECTED, AND WE'VE ALREADY ISSUED THE LARGEST TRANCHE EXPECTING THE FACILITY TO BE BUILT OUT.

AND IF WE WERE TO EVEN GET TO THE FINAL POINT OF CONSTRUCTION, THE ENHANCEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO THE PLAN THAT IS GOING TO BE ASSUMED BY THE WINGS. HOW HOW WOULD THE PERFORMANCE BONDS COME INTO PLAY AT THAT POINT IF WE WERE LEFT WITH A SHELL HALF DONE OR, AND, OR THE FINISH OUTS NOT COMPLETE. THAT IS NOT OUR FINANCIAL OBLIGATION.

SURE. I WOULD NEED A LITTLE BIT OF ASSISTANCE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON HOW WE ENGAGE THE PERFORMANCE BOND THROUGH THEIR OFFICE, BUT PERFORMANCE BONDS WOULD BE ENGAGED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

OR WE WOULD RECAP AND WE WOULD RECAPTURE FUNDS IF THE BUILDING IS NOT COMPLETED.

SO THERE'S A DUALITY THERE THAT WOULD MAKE THE CITY WHOLE.

AND I BELIEVE THAT CONNIE TANKERSLEY IS COMING UP TO EXPLAIN HOW THE PERFORMANCE BONDING WORKS.

DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA.

OR DID YOU NEED TO EXPOUND ON THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE? IT DID. BUT IF IF YOU ARE ABLE TO I MEAN, YOU WERE WALKING OUT HERE, SO YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING TO ADD TO IT.

WELL, SO AS YOU MIGHT KNOW, I'VE SPOKEN ON THIS BEFORE, CONNIE TANKERSLEY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

BUT WHEN A CONTRACTOR DEFAULTS ON SOMETHING THAT'S BEING BUILT ON CITY LAND, WE DO REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BONDS.

THE PERFORMANCE BOND IS THE ONE THAT WILL ACTUALLY, IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT, WILL FINISH OUT THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.

SO UNDER THEIR CONTRACT, THEY HAVE THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CURE, THEY WOULD BE PUT ON DEFAULT, OBVIOUSLY, AND THEN THEY'D BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO CURE.

SIMULTANEOUSLY, WE WOULD NOTIFY THE SURETY OF THAT DEFAULT.

AND SO THAT THEY'RE PUT ON NOTICE THAT THERE MIGHT BE A CLAIM AGAINST THE SURETY.

AND SO IF IT DOESN'T WORK OUT AND THE SURETY DETERMINES THAT THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO GO AHEAD AND UNDERTAKE THE, THE, THE CONSTRUCTION AND FINISH IT, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO HIRE SOMEONE TO FINISH IT OUT.

IF THEY DON'T WANT TO BE ENGAGED IN THE CONSTRUCTION, THEY WILL DEFER TO THE CITY OF DALLAS AND ALLOW US TO FINISH OUT THE CONSTRUCTION WITH THE FUNDING UNDER THE SURETY BOND. SO THAT'S HOW IT WORKS.

ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT I WANTED TO ADD TO COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA AS PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL'S SPORTS AD HOC COMMITTEE, I THINK IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR US TO COME IN AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT, SHARE THOSE MILESTONES.

TALK ABOUT WHERE WE ARE. SO YOU REALLY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALSO ASK QUESTIONS AND BE ENGAGED IN THE DELIVERY OF THE PROJECT THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL AND SOMETHING THAT WE DEFINITELY WOULD BUILD IN AS PART OF OUR ONGOING REPORTING, SO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING. AND JUST TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR ON ON RECORD, WE.

THIS DEAL IS EXPECTED TO BE PAID OUT FROM OUR FINANCIAL OBLIGATION IN TRANCHES.

IS THAT ACCURATE? YES, SIR. AND THAT'S BY DESIGN.

SO WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE MILESTONES THAT WE'RE REACHING AS WELL AS THE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ALSO THE WINGS WITH US IN THIS PARTNERSHIP.

SO IT'S NOT ABOUT JUST THE CITY SPENDING THE WHOLE 51 MILLION AND THE WINGS NOT SPENDING ANY MONEY AT ALL UNTIL THE END.

AND YOU KNOW, WHERE I HAD SOME CONCERN IN SOME EARLIER ON CONVERSATIONS, I THINK HAS ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED BECAUSE THERE WAS SUBSTANTIAL

[04:20:02]

THAT IS IS NOW GOING TO BE DONE BY THE WINGS.

THAT ASSURANCE HAS NOW BEEN GIVEN TO US THAT WITHIN THAT FIRST TRANCHE, THERE HAS TO BE A CLEAR PICTURE OF THAT, THOSE MONIES BEING AVAILABLE. ABSOLUTELY, YES.

AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN WITH THE WINGS ABOUT.

THEY HAVE AGREED TO PROVIDE THAT FOR US. AND AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE BEFORE WE SEND ANY BEFORE WE MAKE ANY TYPE OF INITIAL PAYMENT IN THIS FIRST BUCKET.

THANK YOU. THAT DOES DEFINITELY HELP. I THINK MY BIGGEST CONCERN WOULD BE JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE KIND OF CROSSED OUR T'S, DOTTED OUR EYES AS FAR AS NOT BEING LEFT WITH SOMETHING WE CAN'T FINISH.

DON'T HAVE THE BUDGET FOR. I THINK THAT THAT'S ALL COVERED.

I DO FEEL BETTER ABOUT IT. I JUST WANT TO SAY IN THAT RESPECT THERE WERE, THERE WAS SOME BACK AND FORTH.

THERE WAS SOME NEGOTIATION. AND I WASN'T, I ON THE SIDE OF LOVING WHERE THE NEGOTIATION WAS FROM THE CITY.

AND I BELIEVE THAT WE GAVE SOME CLEAR DIRECTION TO STAFF.

AND I THINK THAT THE ULTIMATE RESULTS OF COMING BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AND THEN WHAT THIS ITEM IS THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING NOW IS A RESULT OF Y'ALL HEARING THE COUNCIL LOUD AND CLEAR. SO I APPRECIATE Y'ALL HEARING US AND I APPRECIATE THE, THE HARD, FAST NEGOTIATION ON THAT.

AT THE SAME TIME, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE THE WINGS ORGANIZATION BECAUSE THERE IS GOING TO BE A GIVE AND TAKE ALWAYS IN THESE NEGOTIATIONS AND RELATIONSHIPS. I DON'T THINK THAT ANY OF US HAVE SHIED AWAY FROM OUR SUPPORT THAT WE HAVE FOR THE FRANCHISE.

AND THAT WILL ONLY CONTINUE TO GROW STRONGER.

YOU ARE A PART OF THE FUTURE OF DALLAS. YOU'RE A HUGE FABRIC.

WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING YOU ALL IN OUR CITY.

SO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS. TO HEAR US PUSH BACK A LITTLE.

IT SHOWS A GOOD FAITH IN GOING INTO A LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP.

SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO, TO PASSING THIS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO SAY I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION AND REALLY TO ECHO A LOT OF THE LAST PARTS OF WHAT I COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WAS SAYING TO THANK STAFF ROBYN AND ROSA FOR GETTING IT ROLLING UP THE SLEEVES AND TO THE WINGS FOR ROLLING UP YOUR SLEEVES AS WELL, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, MAKING THAT COMMITMENT, NOT JUST MAKING THE COMMITMENT, BUT FULFILLING AND FIGURING OUT WAYS TO KEEP THAT COMMITMENT TO THIS PART OF TOWN. THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT'S HAPPENING IN AND AROUND THAT AREA IS ALREADY HAPPENING.

THESE ARE THE SMALL THINGS, BUT MY FAMILY AND I, WE LOVE CHEDDAR'S AND IT'S A CHEDDAR'S THAT'S UP THERE. IT'S A NEW CHEDDAR'S THAT'S OVER THERE. SO ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING IN AND AROUND THERE, AND IT'S BUILDING SOMETHING THAT WASN'T THERE BEFORE AND HOTELS CONTINUE TO OPEN.

SO ALL OF THIS IS JUST YET ANOTHER COMMITMENT TO NOT JUST THE CITY OF DALLAS.

AND GLAD TO HAVE THE WINGS HERE, BUT IT'S ALSO AN IMPACT TO THAT AREA.

SO THANK YOU ALL FOR THE COMMITMENT, CHAIR. WES, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO SEEING THIS ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

SO THANK YOU ALL. WE'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS. THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I THINK A LOT OF QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. AND I TOO, YOU KNOW, HAD SOME SOME CONCERNS, BUT I THINK THE TRANCHES OF HOW THE FUNDS WILL BE RELEASED IS CRITICAL AND THE GUARANTEES AND THE OVERAGES THAT WILL BE MET BY THE WING.

SO I APPRECIATE THAT. AND I DO WANT TO, YOU KNOW, IN ENTERING INTO SOMETHING, YOU DO WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE HEALTH OF NOT ONLY THIS BUSINESS BUT OF THE SPORT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF NEW.

AND SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE MARKETPLACE.

AND I KNOW THAT IN SOME RESEARCH AROUND WITH THE DELOITTE SPORTS BUSINESS GROUP, WITH ESPN SIGNING AN 11 YEAR, $2 BILLION CONTRACT FOR THE WNBA. YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN WATCHING THE NCAA WOMEN'S BASKETBALL GAMES.

AND LAST YEAR IT WAS SO EXCITING. I THINK EVERYBODY WAS PROUD WHEN THE WOMEN'S GAMES DREW A HIGHER AUDIENCE THAN THE MEN'S GAMES.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE ON PAR TO EVEN EXCEED LAST YEAR.

AND SO SOMETIMES YOU'VE GOT TO LOOK TO THE MARKETPLACE FOR SOME INDICATORS IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT ALL RIGHT THERE BEFORE YOU.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I CERTAINLY WISH YOU THE BEST BECAUSE WE ARE WE'RE IN THIS TOGETHER.

AND I LOVE HAVING A DALLAS TEAM WITH A DALLAS NAME PLAYING IN DALLAS.

SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS LONG MOTION. MR. WEST.

THANK YOU. MR. WEST. WE'RE BACK TO YOU FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP THAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS IS OF COURSE, WE HAVE A LEGAL OBLIGATION TO BUILD THIS FACILITY.

NOW, CERTAINLY WE NEED TO PICK IT APART AND MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY.

BUT WE DO HAVE THIS LEGAL OBLIGATION. AND JUST LIKE WE HAVE A LEGAL OBLIGATION, I'M LOOKING AT THE CITY MANAGER HERE.

THEY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO US, RIGHT? THERE'S AN AGREEMENT WHERE THEY HAVE TO STAY IN DALLAS OR THEIR INCENTIVES ARE PULLED BACK.

[04:25:05]

I THINK WE HEARD THE COUNCIL EARLY ON ABOUT ENSURING THAT THERE ARE SOME SAFEGUARDS BUILT INTO HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

AND SO THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, THE WAY THAT YOU CHALLENGED US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PROTECTING THE INTERESTS OF THE CITY THAT HAS BEEN BUILT IN. AND IN FACT, YOUR MOTION ADDRESSED A LOT OF THOSE ITEMS THAT I KNOW WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WERE INCLUDED.

AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT THE WINGS HAVE AGREED TO.

THESE ARE NOT THINGS THAT STAFF JUST SUGGESTED AND THE WINGS HAVE NOT GIVEN CONFIRMATION ON.

SO THEY SUPPORT AND THEY UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT THE CITY IS ASKING FOR THEM TO DO.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE ARENA TODAY OTHER THAN THE EXTENSION.

A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN WITH MCKISSICK, AND WHEN WE GET TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT THEIR WORK ON THE ARENA, WHEN WILL THAT COME BACK TO COMMITTEE? WE WILL BE COMING BACK TO A CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMITTEE SOMETIME IN APRIL.

I THINK WE'LL WORK WITH THE STAFF TO GET AN UPDATE PLAN FOR THE NEXT SPORTS AD HOC COMMITTEE.

AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE, THERE'S STILL SOME DUE DILIGENCE THAT WE HAVE TO DO IN THAT REGARD.

BUT WE HAVE HAD SOME INITIAL CONVERSATIONS AND WE ARE WORKING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BUTTON UP ALL OF THE CONCERNS AROUND THE ACTUAL ARENA.

SO WE'LL BE COMING BACK TO THE COMMITTEE IN APRIL TO DISCUSS THAT FURTHER.

THANK YOU. AND I'LL TAKE JUST TEN MORE SECONDS TO THANK THE JOEY FAMILY ONE MORE TIME.

OF COURSE, THEY'RE NOT HERE, BUT THEY DONATED THE 200 ACRE PARK THAT USED TO BE IN DISTRICT THREE AND MY COLLEAGUE'S DISTRICT, AND WE GOT IT REDISTRICTED INTO DISTRICT ONE.

SO I KNOW THE FAMILY'S VERY ANXIOUS TO SEE THIS FACILITY.

THEY CAME UP HERE AND THEY'LL BE WATCHING TO SEE THE PROGRESS AS WELL.

THANK YOU, MISS ANY, FOR THREE MINUTES. YES. SO I JUST WANT TO CONGRATULATE MY COLLEAGUE.

YOU KNOW, THIS IS A HUGE ONE FOR DISTRICT ONE, DISTRICT SIX AND DISTRICT THREE.

IT BORDERS ALL THREE OF OUR DISTRICTS. AND I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES JUST FOR TAKING TIME TO TALK THROUGH ALL OF THE SAFEGUARDS FOR THE CITY.

THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO HEAR.

AND FOR OUR RESIDENTS TO BE AWARE OF. THE WNBA HAS BEEN AROUND FOR 30 YEARS, SO IT'S NOT TOO NEW.

AND THE WINGS HAVE BEEN IN DALLAS SINCE 2016.

SO I JUST WANT TO THANK CITY STAFF FOR WORKING THROUGH THIS AND ALSO THE WINGS.

LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING YOU IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO REQUEST A RECORDED VOTE, PLEASE.

SO WERE YOU FINISHED, MISS KENNEDY? YOU'RE DONE. OKAY. YES. AND THAT'S DULY NOTED.

JULIA MENDELSOHN, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 53 BEFORE WE HAVE A VOTE? ALL RIGHT. RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. I'M SORRY.

I JUST HAD ANOTHER QUICK QUESTION THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DOES PROVIDE FOR BUILDER'S RISK INSURANCE.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REQUIRES THE STANDARD CONSTRUCTION INSURANCE, WHICH INCLUDES BUILDER'S RISK.

AND IS THERE ANY IS THERE ANY ON THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE OF IT? IS THERE ANY ISSUES WITH REGARD TO. DOES THAT INCLUDE ALSO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE THE PARCEL ITSELF, RATHER THAN JUST THE THE THE IMPROVEMENTS. IN OTHER WORDS, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT OCCUR IN THE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GROUNDS OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE FACILITY. THAT'S ALL PART AND PARCEL OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CONTRACT AND ENCOMPASSES THE SCHEMATIC AND THE PLANS.

YES. SO THIS WOULD INCLUDE ALL OF THAT. WE HAVE TRANSFERRED ALL OF THE ENVIRONMENTALS AND THE REMEDIATION.

SO ALL OF THAT NOW BECOMES THEIR PROPERTY. AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY THIS IS A BUSINESS ISSUE. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WINGS, WITH THE, WITH ANY ORGANIZATION OR ANYBODY ELSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAKING DECISIONS FOR HUGE, BIG PROJECTS.

AND I THINK THAT WE ALL ARE CONCERNED IN OUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITIES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROCESS A LARGE EXPENDITURES ESPECIALLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES AND IN REAL ESTATE RELATED AND IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE DO IT IN THE CORRECT WAY.

THAT'S PART OF THE FUNCTION OF OUR, OF THE CITY.

IT'S PART OF OUR JOB AS, AS COUNCIL PEOPLE. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR AGREEMENTS AND THAT OUR, OUR PLANS AND THAT OUR PROCESSES REALLY ARE FOR THE PROTECTION OF OUR CITIZENS, FOR OUR FINANCIAL WELL-BEING AND, AND WILL IN, IN DUE TO THE SUCCESS OF OUR CITY, THIS IS WHAT WE REALLY IS OUR JOB.

I THINK AND I, AND I RESPECT AND I THANK EVERY, EVERY COMPANY, EVERY ORGANIZATION WANTS TO COME TO THIS TOWN TO DO BUSINESS WITH

[04:30:08]

WE WANT TO DO BUSINESS EFFICIENTLY, SUCCESSFULLY, BUT WE WANT TO DO IT IN THE RIGHT WAY.

AND I THINK PART OF US HAVING GOOD PROCESSES, HAVING US HAVE LEGITIMATE DOCUMENTATION AND BEING THOUGHTFUL IN HOW WE CRAFT OUR AGREEMENTS WITH FOLKS WILL HELP GIVE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH US A CLEAR VISION ON HOW WE SHOULD DEAL WITH US, THAT WE ARE ABLE TO DEAL WITH US, AND THAT THEY'LL KNOW THE PLAYING THE RULES OF THE GAME GOING IN, AND THAT WE'LL HAVE AN EASIER WAY TO PROCESS THINGS IN A MORE EFFICIENT AND SUCCESSFUL MANNER.

SO THANK YOU FOR FOR ALLOWING US TO ASK THIS QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR AGREEMENT IN PARTICULAR.

ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 53? SEEING NONE. A RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED. SO, 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. YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER. GRACEY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. JOHNSON.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLAIR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. NO. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR JOHNSON YES.

WITH 13 VOTING IN FAVOR TO OPPOSE THE ITEM PASSES, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, HOLD ON ONE SECOND, MADAM SECRETARY.

ALL RIGHT, MADAM SECRETARY. THAT WAS A WHAT WAS THAT? ITEM 53. YES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S LET'S COME BACK AT 230 AND PICK UP WITH 54 SO EVERYBODY CAN FINALLY HAVE SOME LUNCH AND ALL THAT.

SO WE'LL STAY IN AT RECESS UNTIL 230. 30 MINUTES MAYBE.

OH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IT'S 257. WE'RE BACK IN REGULAR SESSION. THANK YOU GUYS. MADAM SECRETARY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND PICK UP WITH OUR THANK YOU LEFT OFF.

[54. 26-941A Authorize (1) an Interlocal Agreement with Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) to establish a six-year General Mobility Program to allow the City of Dallas to receive and utilize funding equivalent to up to 10 percent of DART sales tax revenues for eligible projects that enhance DART’s Public Transportation System or provide Complementary Transportation Services within the City of Dallas; and (2) the receipt and deposit of funds in an estimated amount of $211,061,217.00 in the DART General Mobility Program Fund - Estimated Revenue: DART General Mobility Program Fund $211,061,217.00]

GARIN. ITEM 54 AUTHORIZED ONE AND INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH DALLAS AREA.

RAPID TRANSIT. DART TO ESTABLISH A SIX YEAR GENERAL MOBILITY PROGRAM TO ALLOW THE CITY OF DALLAS TO RECEIVE AND UTILIZE FUNDING EQUIVALENT TO UP TO 10% OF DART SALES TAX REVENUES FOR ELIGIBLE PROJECTS THAT ENHANCE DART'S PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM OR PROVIDE COMPLEMENTARY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND TO THE RECEIPT AND DEPOSIT OF FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT ESTIMATED IN AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $211,061,217 IN THE DART GENERAL MOBILITY PROGRAM FUND.

YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, RANDAL BRYANT.

OKAY. RANDALL BRYANT IS NOT PRESENT. MR.. MAYOR.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM. IS THERE A MOTION IN A SECOND? ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

AGENDA ITEM 54. THANK YOU. YESTERDAY. SORRY. MONDAY.

WE HAD THIS AS A TRANSPORTATION ITEM, AND THERE WERE A NUMBER OF COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS, AND I WANTED TO FIND OUT IF ANY OF THE COMMENTS MADE WERE INCORPORATED INTO THE DOCUMENT IN FRONT OF US.

GOOD AFTERNOON. JAKE ANDERSON, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER YOU MADE A COUPLE POINTS REGARDING CHAPTER EXCUSE ME, REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF COMPLIMENTARY TRANSIT SERVICES AS WELL AS YOU MADE A POINT ABOUT THE. HANG ON. LET ME CHECK MY NOTES.

WHETHER THESE WOULD BE FEDERALLY RESTRICTED DOLLARS.

AND IN BOTH CASES, WE DO HAVE A RESPONSE FOR THAT.

NOTHING HAS BEEN UPDATED OR CHANGED IN WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE.

THE COMPLIMENTARY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES ARE DEFINED IN CHAPTER 452 OF THE TRANSPORTATION CODE.

AND SO THIS THIS LANGUAGE IS LIFTED DIRECTLY FROM THAT.

[04:35:02]

AND SO ANYTHING THAT WAS ELIGIBLE UNDER THE PTI WOULD BE ELIGIBLE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT.

OKAY. THE PROBLEM IS THE PTI WAS A ONE TIME ISSUE WITH A LIMITED AMOUNT OF MONEY.

THIS IS AN ONGOING ISSUE AND IT'S A LOT MORE.

SO THE COMPLEMENTARY SERVICES IS DEFINED IN THE DOCUMENT.

COMPLEMENTARY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES MEANS A SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR PERSONS, ELDERLY OR HAS A DISABILITY. I THINK THAT'S ALREADY CLEARLY DART'S RESPONSIBILITY.

B MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES ALSO NOT A CITY FUNCTION.

C ASSISTANCE IN STREET MODIFICATIONS TO IMPROVE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE OR AS NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. AND SO IN THAT CASE, WELL, AND I'M GOING TO READ JUST SO THAT THE WHOLE THING IS IN THERE.

ANY OTHER SERVICE THAT COMPLEMENTS DART'S PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, INCLUDING PROVIDING PARKING FACILITIES, ROADWAYS AND PEDESTRIAN CORRIDORS. SO MY QUESTION IS, IF IT'S NOT ALREADY ON A BUS ROUTE, BUT IT'S PERHAPS A STREET LEADING TO A BUS ROUTE, IS IT ELIGIBLE? COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, DEBORAH. ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AS WE DISCUSSED AT THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE THIS IS THE SAME DEFINITION THAT IS IN OUR CURRENT PTI.

ISLA. AND, AND, AND SO THEREFORE, WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROJECTS THAT YOU'RE MENTIONING WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OR SUPPORTED IN THIS, IN THIS ALA DOCUMENT. BUT THE PROBLEM, WHICH IS WHAT I BROUGHT UP AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING, IS THAT THERE'S NOT A FIRM CRITERIA. IT'S VERY SUBJECTIVE.

SO LET'S JUST SAY THEY LOVE BILL ROTH. YES. YOUR STREET THAT YOU WANT TO IMPROVE IS A QUARTER OF A MILE AWAY.

WE'RE GOING TO DO IT. WE DON'T LOVE CARA MENDELSOHN.

AND YOUR STREET IS A QUARTER MILE AWAY AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT.

AND INSTEAD, WHAT WE NEED ARE FIRM CRITERIA THAT SAY IF IT IS WITHIN, AGAIN, I'M WILLING TO SAY A QUARTER MILE, HALF MILE OF A BUS ROUTE, THEN IT IS INCLUDED.

AND SO I DON'T NEED TO USE A DEFINITION THAT'S DEFINED SOMEWHERE ELSE.

THE ENTIRE POINT OF AN ISLA IS TO DEFINE NEW THINGS AND TO UNDERSTAND THE RELATIONSHIP AND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

AND IN THIS CASE, RANDALL HAD SAID AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING THAT STAFF WOULD BE MAKING THIS DETERMINATION.

SO THERE'S LITERALLY NO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SOMEBODY MAKING SOMETHING THAT IS COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE BASED ON HOW IT'S WRITTEN.

YES, I THAT WAS THAT WAS HIS RESPONSE. AND I BELIEVE WHAT WE DISCUSSED WAS THAT WE INTEND TO TO HAVE A VERY BROAD DEFINITION AND SUBMIT PROJECTS THAT WE BELIEVE ARE ELIGIBLE PROJECTS THAT THAT ARE GOING TO BE WITHIN THE CRITERIA THAT, THAT YOU MENTIONED. THAT'LL BE THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'LL BE HAVING WITH THIS BODY AND THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE IN ADVANCE OF SUBMITTING THE PROJECTS. IN ADDITION AS WE'VE SUBMITTED PROJECTS UNDER THE PTI WHICH WAS ABOUT 80 MILLION DART HAS, HAS APPROVED EVERY PROJECT THAT WE HAVE SUBMITTED.

AND THAT HAS BEEN THE HISTORY. AND SO WE BELIEVE THAT THE DEFINITION PROVIDES US WITH ENOUGH INFORMATION TO PROVIDE A LIST OF ELIGIBLE PROJECTS. SO ALL OF THE $80 MILLION OF PROJECTS WERE ACTUALLY ON THEIR BUS LINE OR LEADING TO THEM LIKE AN ADA RAMP.

SO ALL OF THEM ACTUALLY FIT THE DEFINITION, NOT AN EXPANDED DEFINITION.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE USE OF THE WORD LIKE WE INTEND AND WE BELIEVE IS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM.

THEY'RE NOT DEFINITE WORDS. AND WHAT'S MISSING FROM THE ILA IS CLARITY OF YES, IT WILL BE APPROVED IF IT'S WITHIN X NUMBER OF FEET OF OUR BUS LINE, OR IF IT IS SIMPLY IT MUST BE THE BUS LINE.

THEY OWN THEIR OWN TRANSPORTATION, THEIR OWN TRANSIT STATIONS FOR THE FOR THE TRAINS.

BUT IT NEEDS TO BE VERY CLEAR. HE ACTUALLY USED AN EXAMPLE WHERE THEY MIGHT NOT APPROVE IT.

IF IT'S AN EXISTING BUS LINE THAT THEY DON'T INTEND TO CONTINUE, OR THEY MIGHT APPROVE IT FOR ONE THAT THEY THINK THEY MIGHT HAVE SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE.

I MEAN, THIS IS WAY TOO SUBJECTIVE TO, AGAIN, SALES TAX DOLLARS FROM OUR RESIDENTS.

[04:40:02]

WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERNS. THE PROJECTS WILL BE DEVELOPED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

SOME OF THEM MAY USE MULTI-YEAR FUNDING. AND SO THERE MAY BE FLUCTUATIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT SERVICES DART WILL BE PROVIDING OVER THAT PERIOD OF TIME.

NEW BUS LINES OTHER SERVICES OVER THAT SIX YEAR PERIOD.

AND SO I THINK THE STAFF IS PREPARED WITH SOME IDEAS AROUND PROJECTS THAT WILL UTILIZE THIS FUNDING AND UTILIZE THE FUNDING IN A WAY THAT THE COUNCIL WILL SUPPORT.

WELL, RESPECTFULLY, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE STAFF TODAY.

FOR PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE DUE IN JUNE. CORRECT.

THAT'S THE DEADLINE. YES. THE FIRST SET OF ELIGIBLE PROJECTS HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED BY JUNE 30TH.

SO I'M LOOKING AT THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT AS I'M NOT IN OFFICE.

AND NONE OF YOU STAFF MEMBERS ARE EVEN HERE BECAUSE THIS WILL LAST.

AND THE QUESTION IS WHAT'S ELIGIBLE AND WHAT ARE THOSE DOLLARS THAT ARE ELIGIBLE? AND IT'S NOT CLEARLY DEFINED. THAT'S WHAT THE PROBLEM IS.

AND I WOULD JUST ADD COUNCIL MEMBER YOU THE SECTION YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS 3.3.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOT APPROVALS. AND YOU'RE RIGHT THAT WE, THE COMPLIMENTARY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DOES NOT DICTATE LIKE SPECIFIC PROJECTS THAT THAT MIGHT BE APPROVED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. BUT IN 3.3, IT DOES TALK ABOUT HOW THE DART STAFF IS REQUIRED TO OR TO TO NOT UNREASONABLY WITHHOLD APPROVAL FOR PROJECTS CONSIDERED LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE.

SO I DO THINK THAT THERE'S SOME SOME ROOM FOR THE CITIES.

I THINK THAT FLEXIBILITY IS ACTUALLY BUILT IN FOR THE CITIES TO TO, TO LOOK AT PROJECTS THAT MAY BE OUTSIDE OF WHERE THE LINES CURRENTLY ARE AND TO, TO MAKE THE CASE THAT, HEY, THIS IS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ALIGNS WITH THIS. ISLA.

AND I THINK THAT THAT WAS, THAT WAS BUILT IN ON BEHALF OF ALL OF THE CITIES IN THESE NEGOTIATIONS.

I DISAGREE THAT IT IS SUFFICIENT. I THINK IT IS PURPOSELY VAGUE TO OUR DETRIMENT.

AND THEN WHEN YOU LOOK ON PAGE SEVEN AT THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION, WE GO BACK TO THE CITY MANAGER OF ANY CITY.

I'M ASSUMING THIS IS A STANDARD. ISLA, FOR ALL THE CITY'S CORRECT? YEAH.

AND THE DART PRESIDENT AND CEO WHO WE ALSO DON'T KNOW WHO THAT WILL BE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT HAS SERVED US WELL.

AND I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE WHERE THERE'S AN OUTSIDE MEDIATOR, LITERALLY SOMEBODY FROM OUTSIDE OUR REGION WHO WOULD ACTUALLY MEDIATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WE SEEM TO ALWAYS BE ON THE LOSING END WHEN IT GOES BACK TO THAT.

THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, MISS BLACKMON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AND I GUESS I'M GOING TO TAKE THE OPPOSITE TONE.

AND THANK YOU ALL FOR WORKING ON THIS. AND I KNOW IT'S NOT BEEN AN EASY LIFT.

I KNOW YOU WERE UP EARLY MORNINGS AND TALKING WITH YOUR CITY MANAGERS AND RANDALL, WHO HELPED SHEPHERD IT THROUGH AND, AND THE WILLINGNESS TO KIND OF COME TO A MIDDLE GROUND.

I THINK THE DOCUMENT IS INTENTIONALLY A BROAD DOCUMENT.

SO THAT WAY WE CAN DEFINE ALONG, GIVEN THE PARAMETERS ON HOW TO IMPLEMENT THE DOLLARS.

SO THEY DON'T WANT TO BE TOO PRESCRIPTIVE, BUT THEY WANT TO GIVE US SOME DIRECTION.

AND SO AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR REALLY FOCUSING AND STAYING WITH IT, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE ARE TIMES THAT YOU PROBABLY COULD HAVE CASHED IN AND SAID, I'M DONE. PEACE OUT. SO I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU ALL.

AND I'M SURE THAT THERE'LL BE MORE CONVERSATIONS AFTER I FINISH.

SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WANT TO ENCOURAGE THE MEMBERS TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THE CONTEXT UNDER WHICH WE'RE CONSIDERING THIS.

ISLA. AND THAT IS THAT THIS IS THE CULMINATION OF MONTHS AND MONTHS OF MEETINGS AND NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE 13 MEMBER CITIES, AND PARTICULARLY THOSE SIX WHO HAD PROPOSED REFERENDA ON THEIR PARTICIPATION IN DART TO COME UP WITH A JOINT AGREEMENT THAT AFFECTED THE GOVERNANCE OF DART AND THE FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO DART AND REBATES THEREFROM.

AND I KNOW IT'S TEMPTING TO MICROMANAGE THE AGREEMENT FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, BUT THAT'S A VERY DIFFICULT THING TO DO BECAUSE AS STAFF HAS INDICATED, THIS IS A STANDARD TEMPLATE DOCUMENT THAT IS AGREED UPON THROUGH THE NEGOTIATIONS AMONGST THE CITY MANAGERS OF ALL OF THE DIFFERENT CITIES.

[04:45:03]

I LIKEN THIS SITUATION TO LEGISLATION AT THE STATE OR FEDERAL LEVELS, WHERE THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT INTERESTS THAT HAVE INPUT TO THE FINAL DRAFT OF LEGISLATION.

AND AS A RESULT OF SOMETIMES CONFLICTING OR INCONSISTENT INPUT.

THEY MAKE THE LEGISLATION SOMEWHAT AMBIGUOUS SO THAT EVERYBODY WILL VOTE FOR IT, AND THEY FREQUENTLY LEAVE IT TO THE COURTS OR A DECISION MAKER TO REFINE THE INTERPRETATION BASED UPON THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. WE CAN'T HAVE A PERFECTLY PRESCRIPTIVE AGREEMENT AT THIS POINT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT FOR EACH CITY.

AND SO WE HAVE TO HAVE A LOOSE ENOUGH TEMPLATE THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.

AND I THINK THIS IS SUCH A DOCUMENT. AND SO I THINK WE HAVE TO DEPEND IN PART ON THE GOOD FAITH OF DART.

I HEAR FROM STAFF SAYING THEY'VE NEVER TURNED DOWN ONE OF OUR REQUESTS FOR FUNDING FOR ANY OF THE $80 MILLION IN PTI FUNDING.

AND I THINK IF WE MAKE A GOOD CASE REPRESENTING THE REMEMBERING THAT AT LEAST.

CURRENTLY WE HAVE A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS OF DART THAT WE APPOINT THAT WE WILL SEE THAT THIS IS NOT AN IMPEDIMENT TO UTILIZATION OF THESE FUNDS.

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP OUR EYE ON THE BALL, THAT THIS IS WHAT DOCUMENTS OUR AGREEMENT WITH THE OTHER CITIES IN DART TO PRESERVE THE FABRIC OF DART AS A 13 MEMBER CITY PLUS ORGANIZATION FOCUSED ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN THE DFW AREA. AND I THINK ANY ISSUES ABOUT WHAT PROJECTS ARE ELIGIBLE AND WHICH ONES AREN'T IS SECONDARY TO THAT PRIMARY CONSIDERATION. THEREFORE, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE FOR THIS.

MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO SAY, WOW. ON WHAT THE DIFFERENCE A YEAR CAN MAKE.

I THINK 12 MONTHS AGO, WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE HALLS OF THE LEGISLATURE ADVOCATING HEAVILY ON KILLING BILLS THAT WERE MEANT TO ATTACK US AND TO PUT US, YOU KNOW, BACK DECADES, QUITE FRANKLY IN REGARDS TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.

I THINK THAT OUR ULTIMATE OUTCOME HAS TO DO WITH Y'ALL'S LEADERSHIP AND WITH THE LEADERSHIP OF OUR NEW.

I DON'T SEE HIM HERE ANYMORE, BUT OUR NEWLY APPOINTED DART BOARD CHAIR RANDALL BRYANT I THINK WE'VE SEEN NOTHING BUT A VERY FAST PACED MOVEMENT. THAT WAS ONE THAT BUILT COALITION WITH MEMBER CITIES ACROSS THE REGION THAT RECTIFIED SOME PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL MOVEMENT TOWARDS THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.

EVEN WITH OUR COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE MEMBER CITIES THERE, I THINK THAT THIS ILA IS VERY THOUGHT OUT, VERY, VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT. I THINK IT ADDRESSES A LOT OF THE CONCERNS FROM MEMBER CITIES WHO WERE TRYING TO GO 0 TO 60.

AND, AND WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO PUT THEIR OWN JURISDICTION, OF COURSE, AS A PRIORITY, BUT AT THE EXPENSE OF WHAT THAT WOULD DO TO US ACTING AS A PARTNER IN THE REGION.

THIS COULD NOT HAVE ENDED IN A BETTER WAY WITH WHERE WE WERE HEADED, ESPECIALLY WITH CLAUSES IN THIS ILA THAT PREVENTS US FROM JUST TURNING AROUND AND GOING BACK TO THE LEGISLATURE NEXT SESSION AND DEALING WITH THE SAME FIGHT AND IT JUST BEING ONGOING.

THIS GIVES US THE ABILITY TO LOCK IN AND FOCUS ON HOW WE CAN REALLY ELEVATE BEING THE NINTH LARGEST CITY IN THE COUNTRY.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LACK MORE THAN ANY OF OUR OTHER PEER CITIES IN THAT TOP TEN IS EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION AND BEING ABLE TO CATER TO MORE URBAN DWELLERS.

BEING ABLE TO CATER TO THOSE WHO ARE NOT DEPENDENT ON A VEHICLE AND MAKING IT JUST OVERALL A MORE WORLD CLASS CITY, AS WE LIKE TO CALL DALLAS, TEXAS. SO I THINK THIS IS A GREAT ISLA, I'M VERY EXCITED TO VOTE FOR THIS.

I'M VERY HAPPY TO CLOSE THE CHAPTER OF FEELING LIKE WE HAVE TO BE AT THE DEFENSE IN ORDER JUST TO DELIVER SOMETHING POSITIVE WITH TRANSIT FOR OUR

[04:50:10]

I THINK I'VE PROBABLY EXHAUSTED THE WORD STREETCAR IN SOUTH DALLAS SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL.

NOW, MISS MENDELSOHN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO TAP INTO TIF FUNDS IN ORDER TO OPERATE THOSE.

AND SO I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF POSITIVES THAT ARE GOING TO COME FROM THIS.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE THE TRAJECTORY OF WHERE THAT WHERE THAT'S GOING TO LEAD US.

SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN. BAZALDUA. I'M NOT CONCERNED WITH USING TIF FUNDS FOR STREETCAR.

I'M CONCERNED WITH USING GENERAL FUNDS FOR THAT.

SO I AGREE, AND I HOPE THAT THE CITY STAFF WILL BE PUTTING IN THE FULL AMOUNT THAT IS REQUIRED FOR OUR CURRENT OBLIGATION.

THE OTHER THING THAT I HAD BROUGHT UP AT THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING IS THAT WE CURRENTLY DESIGNATE ABOUT $50 MILLION IN OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR STREET REPAIR. IS IT EXPECTED THAT THAT WILL CONTINUE AND THIS WILL SUPPLEMENT WHAT WE'RE DOING? OR IS IT MEANT TO REPLACE THE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS THAT WE ALLOCATE TO THIS.

I'LL RESPOND AS I DID WHEN YOU ASKED THAT AT THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, WE ARE IN IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING OUR BUDGET FOR FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. AND SO I, I, WE KNOW HOW IMPORTANT STREET REPAIR IS IN TERMS OF BEING A PRIORITY FOR, FOR THE CITY. AND SO WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, AT THIS POINT IN TIME ESTIMATE THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE THIS MONEY IN ADDITION TO OUR PLANS TO CONTINUE TO HAVE STREET REPAIR AS A PRIORITY.

AND I'LL LET THE CITY MANAGER ADD SOMETHING FURTHER.

BEFORE I HAND IT OVER TO HER, I DO WANT TO RECOGNIZE HER LEADERSHIP IN BRINGING FORWARD THIS ILA AND THROUGH THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS.

SO OVER TO YOU, KIM. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT.

AND I WANTED TO JUST ECHO THE ONGOING SUPPORT THAT WE'VE HAD FROM THE CITY COUNCIL IN HELPING US GET TO DO TODAY.

I THINK YOUR DUE DILIGENCE AND THE WAY YOU MADE SURE THAT WE STAYED ON TRACK OVER THESE LAST FEW MONTHS AND WORKING WITH DART, GIVING US SUGGESTIONS, GIVING US INPUT AND SUPPORT THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS, I THINK IS HOW WE GOT HERE TODAY.

SO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

WE DEFINITELY ARE ALWAYS WANTING TO DO ADDITIONAL LANE MILES EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

I THINK THIS YEAR WITHIN OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET, WE DID THE PROBABLY THE GREATEST NUMBER OF LANE MILES WITH TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE ONGOING NEEDS THAT WE HAVE FOR STREET INFRASTRUCTURE, WE WOULD UTILIZE THESE FUNDS TO CREATE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY AND SUPPLEMENT NOT TO REPLACE THE EXISTING LINE ITEMS THAT WE'VE ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE PLANNED BUDGET FOR 2027.

SO THIS FUNDING CAN ACTUALLY HELP US EXPAND AND EVEN DO MORE AROUND OUR STREET INFRASTRUCTURE.

BUT THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I DON'T THINK MY TIME IS OVER.

OKAY. MAYOR, I THINK THIS IS ONE OF YOUR P'S WHETHER YOU WANT TO CALL IT PUBLIC WORKS OR POTHOLES, I THINK YOU'VE CALLED IT BOTH. AND IT DOES, IT ACTUALLY CAME IN HIGHER THAN PUBLIC SAFETY IN OUR COMMUNITY SURVEY THIS YEAR, WHICH IS ONLY TO SAY HOW VERY BAD THAT MEANS OUR ROADS ARE.

AND SO I DO HOPE THAT WHEN WE GET THE DRAFT BUDGET, IT IS NOT REDUCING WHAT WE'RE TAKING OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND.

IT IS ONLY SUPPLEMENTING IT BECAUSE THAT IS THE KIND OF ATTENTION THAT OUR ROADS NEED.

THANK YOU. I DON'T SEE ANYONE, BUT IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 54? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 55. AUTHORIZED A ONE YEAR COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT FOR A

[55. 26-1046A Authorize a one-year cooperative purchasing agreement for continuous use of a device security and management software to protect laptops, tablets, and other mobile equipment for the Department of Information and Technology Services with GTS Technology Solutions, Inc. through the Texas Department of Information Resources Cooperative Purchasing Agreement - Not to exceed $404,208.00 - Financing: Data Services Fund]

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION ITEM 55? ALL RIGHT. I HEARD A MOTION TO APPROVE. AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

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

NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 56 AUTHORIZED A THREE YEAR COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT FOR A CLOUD BASED CYBER SECURITY SYSTEM THAT PROTECTS PRIVILEGED

[56. 26-1102A Authorize a three-year cooperative purchasing agreement for a cloud-based cybersecurity system that protects privileged accounts for the Department of Information and Technology Services with Carahsoft Technology Corporation through the Omnia Partners agreement - Not to exceed $1,684,573.47 - Financing: Data Services Fund (subject to annual appropriations)]

[04:55:05]

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION? ALL RIGHT. I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 57. AUTHORIZED THE APPROVAL OF

[57. 26-1049A Authorize the approval of the City Council of the City of Dallas, as the applicable elected representative as defined by Section 147(f)(2)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), of the issuance of Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Roseland Homes) Series 2026, by the Dallas Housing Authority (“DHA”) through its subsidiary, Housing Options, Inc., in one or more series of tax-exempt bonds in an amount not to exceed $69,152,737.00 (collectively, the “Bonds”); proceeds of the Bonds will be loaned to Roseland II, LP, a Texas limited partnership, or an affiliate of Roseland II, LP (together, the “Borrower”), to finance the rehabilitation and construction of an approximately 276-unit multi-family residential project to be known as Roseland Homes located near 3335 Munger Avenue, Dallas, Texas, 75204 (the “Project”) - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with Dallas Housing Policy 2033.]

THE CODE OF THE ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS.

ROSELAND HOMES SERIES 2026 BY THE DALLAS HOUSING AUTHORITY.

D H A THROUGH ITS SUBSIDIARY HOUSING OPTIONS INC.

AND ONE OR MORE SERIES OF TAX EXEMPT BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $37. COLLECTIVELY, THE BOND'S PROCEEDS OF THE BONDS WILL BE LOANED TO ROSELAND.

THE SECOND LP, A TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OR AN AFFILIATE OF ROSELAND.

THE SECOND LP, TOGETHER THE BORROWER TO FINANCE THE REHABILITATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 276 UNIT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS ROSELAND HOMES.

LOCATED NEAR 3335 MUNGER AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS, 7520.

FOR THE PROJECT, THIS IS YOUR ITEM MR. MAYOR.

I HEARD A MOTION A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

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

NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW.

MOVE TO YOUR ZONING AGENDA. MR. MAYOR, WILL YOU ALLOW ME? ONE MINUTE. MR. MAYOR.

[05:00:11]

[Z2. 26-887A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a new Planned Development District for MF-2(A) Multifamily District uses on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the east corner of Worth Street and North Peak Street Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to a development plan, façade plan, and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to a development plan, façade plan, and conditions Z234-354/Z-25-000015 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

MISS CADENA? YES, ON ITEM Z TWO, I MOVE TO DEFER THE ZONING MATTER UNTIL APRIL 8TH, 2026.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? IS THERE A DISCUSSION? NO, I JUST HAVE A COMMENT.

WE'RE DEFERRING THIS ITEM BECAUSE THE APPLICANT AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITY HAVE A MEETING SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 30TH, AND THIS GIVES THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK TOGETHER.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? NAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

[Z3. 26-888A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting MF-2(A) Multifamily District and a resolution accepting deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, between the north terminus of North Boulevard Terrace and Plymouth Road Recommendation of Staff: Approval of MF-2(A) Multifamily District and deed restrictions as volunteered by the applicant Recommendation of CPC: Approval of MF-2(A) Multifamily District and deed restrictions as volunteered by the applicant Z-25-000069 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU MAYOR. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL APRIL 8TH, 2026.

ANY DISCUSSION? YEAH. JUST A COUPLE QUICK THINGS FOR STAFF ON THIS ONE.

IF WE CAN GET PLANNING STAFF UP HERE. ANDREA WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT. HELLO.

SO COLLEAGUES AND THIS IS ALSO FOR STAFF. ON MARCH 10TH, AT THE REQUEST OF ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, I MET WITH APPROXIMATELY 30 NEIGHBORS TO HEAR THEIR THOUGHTS, CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS CASE.

ON MARCH 12TH, I RECEIVED A JOINT LETTER FROM SEVERAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ASKING FOR A DELAY TO THE CASE.

WHILE IN GENERAL I AM HESITANT TO SUPPORT DELAYS, I DELAYS.

I BELIEVE A TWO WEEK DELAY WILL GIVE US TIME TO ENSURE THAT ALL THE RESIDENTS AND MY OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED.

I'VE ALREADY RECEIVED A NUMBER OF ANSWERS FROM STAFF, BUT I'M WAITING ON A FEW IMPORTANT ANSWERS.

ASSUMING WE AGREE TO THIS DELAY TODAY, I'M GOING TO WAIT TO JUMP INTO THE FULL BACKGROUND AND COMPLEXITY OF THIS CASE.

YOU'VE RECEIVED MANY EMAILS ON UNTIL THIS CASE IS BROUGHT BACK.

HOWEVER, I DO WANT FOR STAFF TO LAY OUT WHAT I'VE.

I'VE HEARD ARE FOUR MAIN CONCERNS THAT I'M GOING TO ASK FOR YOU TO BRING BACK TO US IN TWO WEEKS.

AND THIS IS ALL PART OF THE DELAY AND WHY WE'RE DOING IT.

SO AS I SEE IT, THERE ARE THREE ZONING OPTIONS FOR THIS CASE.

OPTION ONE IS DO NOTHING, WHICH COULD ALLOW, DEPENDING ON STAFF'S ANSWER.

SENATE BILL 15 ENTITLEMENTS TO KICK IN. OPTION TWO GO WITH STAFF'S INITIAL RECOMMENDATION OF THREE OR OPTION THREE GO WITH CPC'S RECOMMENDATION OF MF2 WITH PUBLIC DEED RESTRICTIONS OFFERED UP BY THE APPLICANT.

SO THE FIVE MAIN THINGS I WANT STAFF TO BE PREPARED TO ANSWER NEXT WEEK OR IN TWO WEEKS.

ONE A LARGE LOT COVERAGE AND AS A RESULT, ADDITIONAL STORMWATER RUNOFF INTO COOMBS CREEK.

THAT'S A PRIMARY CONCERN OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

TWO ANY DEVELOPMENTS REQUIRED SETBACK FROM COOMBS CREEK GIVEN CONCERNS ABOUT THE EROSION INTO THE CREEK? THREE TOTAL UNIT COUNT AND DENSITY FOR TRAFFIC CONGESTION CAUSED BY ADDITIONAL ON STREET PARKED CARS AND FIVE HEIGHT OF POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENT. SO I WOULD ASK THAT STAFF PROVIDE A CHART COMPARING THE THREE OPTIONS AND SHOW HOW EACH ZONING CATEGORY, IF BUILT INTO THE MAXIMUM, WOULD COMPARE ALONG THOSE FIVE CONCERNS.

SO THAT'S JUST MY REQUEST TO YOU. CAN STAFF COMMIT TO BRINGING THAT BACK IN TWO WEEKS? YES, ABSOLUTELY. GREAT. AND IN THE MEANTIME, I'LL CONTINUE.

I'LL MEET WITH NEIGHBORS AND WE'LL HOPEFULLY WORK THIS OUT.

THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR TEN YEARS. MAYOR. AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN COME TO A RESOLUTION THAT EVERYONE CAN LIVE WITH.

TEN YEARS NOW, THIS CASE HAS BEEN DENIED A COUPLE OF TIMES PRIOR TO MY TIME, AND THEN ONCE IT WAS PULLED DURING MY TIME.

YEAH. THANK YOU. MISS MENDELSOHN SO I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE TEN YEARS.

YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE CASE CAME BEFORE A COUNCIL PRIOR TO US AND IT WAS REJECTED, AND THEN IT WAS REFILED AND IT WAS REJECTED, AND THEN NOW IT'S BEEN REFILED AGAIN. IT WAS CLOSE.

I THINK I MIGHT HAVE MISSPOKEN THE FIRST TIME IT WAS IT WAS APPROVED BY CPC AND DENIED PRIOR TO OUR TIME.

AND THEN IT WAS FILED AGAIN AND WITHDRAWN. AND SO NOW IT'S CHANGED.

AND IT'S A NEW CASE, BUT IT'S THE THE PROJECT AND THE NEIGHBORS HAVING TO GO THROUGH THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN HAS HAPPENED THREE TIMES NOW AND TEN YEARS.

I'M HOPING TO SEE A RESOLUTION ONCE AND FOR ALL.

WELL, I'LL JUST SAY THIS. IT SOUNDS LIKE THE NEIGHBORS HAVEN'T LIKED THIS PROJECT FOR A DECADE.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON Z3? ALL RIGHT.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM, MADAM MAYOR.

[Z6. 26-891A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a Specific Use Permit for an open enrollment charter school on property zoned IR Industrial Research District, on the northeast line of Harry Hines Boulevard and southeast of Wadley Lane Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to site plan, traffic management plan, and staff’s recommended conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval for a ten-year period, subject to site plan, traffic management plan, and conditions Z-25-000151 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

[05:05:07]

MISS CADENA? YES, ON ITEM Z SIX, I MOVE TO DEFER ITEM NUMBER Z SIX UNTIL APRIL 8TH, 2026.

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION ON Z SIX. WE'RE DEFERRING THIS ITEM BECAUSE WE ARE STILL GATHERING COMMUNITY INPUT AND WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THE NEIGHBORS TIME TO GIVE THAT INPUT. THAT'S IT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON ITEM Z SIX? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED?

[Z9. 26-894A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting the renewal of Specific Use Permit No. 2175 for a flea market on property zoned Subdistrict 2 within Planned Development District No. 357, the Farmers Market Special Purpose District, on the southwest corner of South Harwood Street and St. Louis Street Recommendation of Staff: Approval for a permanent time period, subject to staff’s recommended amended conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval for a ten-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional five-year periods, subject to amended conditions Z-25-000175 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON ITEM Z NINE.

ALL RIGHT, MISS CADENA, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.

I MOVE TO DEFER ITEM Z NINE UNTIL APRIL 8TH, 2026.

HAVE A SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? WE'RE DEFERRING THE ITEM BECAUSE THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY IS GOING TO SCHEDULE A MEETING WITH THE APPLICANT. ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON Z NINE? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM, MADAM MAYOR.

[Z10. 26-895A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 2180 for an open-enrollment charter school on property zoned RR Regional Retail District, on the northwest corner of East R. L. Thornton Freeway and Ferguson Road Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to a traffic management plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to a traffic management plan and conditions Z-25-000184 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

DO WE HAVE A MOTION? YES. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL APRIL 8TH.

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? JUST WORKING OUT.

TRAFFIC PLAN DETAILS. NEED A COUPLE MORE WEEKS.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON Z TEN? ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM, MADAM MAYOR.

[Z25. 26-910A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 1054 for an auto auction on property zoned IM Industrial Manufacturing District, on the northwest corner of Kiest Boulevard and Duncanville Road Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to an amended site plan Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to an amended site plan Z-26-000005 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

Z 25 YES, MR. GRACEY DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.

I MOVE APPROVAL WITH THE WITH SOME AMENDMENTS, IF I COULD READ THEM OUT.

IS THIS THE APPROPRIATE TIME? NO, THAT'S. OKAY.

I DON'T HAVE THESE ITEMS. WE'RE GETTING CLARIFICATION ON WHAT YOU NEED TO DO.

THIS WAS. I WANTED TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT. I WAS TOLD A DEFERRAL.

YEAH. RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST DOING DEFERRALS. YEAH.

I'M SORRY. IT'S NOT A DEFERRAL. NO, THAT WAS AN OPTION.

THEN I'LL KEEP. I'LL KEEP IT ON. YES. PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY.

I'M SORRY. YES? COULD YOU HAVE SOMEONE RECITE ALL THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN DEFERRED ONCE THEY'RE ALL.

I WILL. THANK YOU. YES. MADAM MAYOR, I'M TOLD

[Z16. 26-901A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting (1) R-7.5(A) Single Family District; and (2) and a resolution accepting the termination of existing deed restrictions [Z789-237 Tract 2], on property zoned P(A) Parking District with H/72, Peak's Suburban Addition Neighborhood Historic District, on the northeast line of North Carroll Avenue, between Swiss Avenue and Gaston Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Approval of (1) R-7.5(A) Single Family District; and approval of (2) the termination of existing deed restrictions [Z789-237 Tract 2] Recommendation of CPC: Approval of (1) R-7.5(A) Single Family District; and approval of (2) the termination of existing deed restrictions [Z789-237 Tract 2] Z-25-000203 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

16. MISS CADENA, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE TO DEFER THE ITEM TO APRIL 8TH. DO YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? OH, IT'S C 16, I DON'T KNOW. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION ON Z 16 DEFERRAL.

ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. PASSES. THANK YOU. LET ME RESTATE ALL OF THE DEFERRALS AND THEN I'LL COME BACK TO THE YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.

I BELIEVE I STILL HAVE A DEFERRAL. WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED ON IS ITEM Z 26.

[Z26. 26-350A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for MU-3 Mixed Use District, with consideration for FWMU-5 Form subdistrict, on property zoned FWMU-3 Form subdistrict with a shopfront overlay within Planned Development District No. 595, the South Dallas/Fair Park Special Purpose District, on the north corner of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Colonial Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Consideration of FWMU-5 Form Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 595 Recommendation of CPC: Denial Z245-200(TB)/Z-25-000073 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearing on January 14, 2026, and is scheduled for consideration on March 25, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

YES. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. NO DISCUSSION.

Z 26 ANYONE HAVE ANY. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES. I BELIEVE THAT'S IT.

MADAM MAYOR, LET ME RESTATE ALL OF THE DEFERRALS.

YOUR DEFERRALS WERE ITEM Z2Z3, Z SIX, Z NINE, Z TEN Z 16 AND Z 26. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEM Z ONE THROUGH Z 25. YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEM Z ONE THROUGH Z 25. ITEM Z ONE HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ ITEM Z 25.

[05:10:03]

[ZONING CASES - CONSENT]

YOUR. YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEM Z FOUR, Z SEVEN, Z EIGHT, Z 11 THROUGH Z 15 AND Z 17 THROUGH Z 24 BEFORE THERE IS A MOTION.

MADAM MAYOR, I BELIEVE STAFF HAS ASKED TO MAKE A STATEMENT.

YES. HI. MEGAN WEIMER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR WITH PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.

SO WE HAVE A KIND OF UNUSUAL SITUATION TODAY WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SO BY APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA, YOU'RE FOLLOWING CPC'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND WE JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT BY DOING SO. ITEM Z SEVEN WILL BE DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

JUST SO THERE'S NO CONFUSION. THAT WAS CPC'S RECOMMENDATION ON Z SEVEN.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU. I'LL READ YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS INTO THE RECORD ITEM Z FOUR.

IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR GEO GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAMUEL BOULEVARD AND SAINT FRANCIS AVENUE. ITEM Z SEVEN IS A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING.

REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR 41TH-3. A TOWN HOUSE DISTRICT AND TWO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH LINE OF BAKER STREET, EAST OF ISMAIL.D DRIVE. ITEM Z EIGHT IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING MU DASH ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH LINE OF WYNNEWOOD DRIVE BETWEEN NORTH BOULEVARD AND SOUTH LLEWELLYN AVENUE.

ITEM Z 11 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2506 FOR A LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE. USE ON PROPERTY ON THE EAST LINE OF GREENVILLE AVENUE NORTH OF ORANGE STREET.

ITEM Z 12 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2515 FOR A LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE. USE ON PROPERTY IN AN AREA BOUNDED BY GREENVILLE AVENUE, LA VISTA DRIVE, LEWIS STREET AND HOPE STREET.

ITEM 13 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A BAR, LOUNGE OR TAVERN ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF ELM STREET BETWEEN GOOD LATIMER EXPRESSWAY AND CROWDED STREET.

ITEM 14 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 963 ON PROPERTY ON THE WEST LINE OF DURHAM AVENUE BETWEEN NORTHWEST HIGHWAY AND WESTWOOD DRIVE. ITEM 15 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE ORDINANCE GRANTING MU-2 MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH WEST LINE OF LOUISE LEWIS AVENUE BETWEEN MALCOLM X BOULEVARD, I-45 EXPRESSWAY AND EAST R.L.

THORNTON FREEWAY. ITEM Z 17 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING NOAA NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NUTWOOD CIRCLE AND DAVENPORT ROAD.

ITEM 18 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE GRANTING A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE.

3500FT² OR LESS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BRIGHTON ROAD AND NORTH PRAIRIE CREEK ROAD.

ITEM 19 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE GRANTING D A DUPLEX DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF ELM ROAD.

WEST LINE OF BUTTERCUP LANE. ITEM Z 20 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2358 FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A MICROBREWERY, MICRO DISTILLERY OR WINERY ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF COMMERCE STREET AND BROUGHTON STREET. ITEM Z 21 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 703 BOUNDED BY HILLCREST ROAD, ABERDEEN AVENUE, AIRLINE ROAD AND LAKEHURST AVENUE.

ITEM Z. 22 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING NSA NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE.

DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE WEST LINE OF URBAN AVENUE.

[05:15:01]

R-7.5A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH CORNER OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND TIFFANY WAY.

ITEM Z. 24 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2507 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THRU SERVICE, AND A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE.

3000 3500FT² OR LESS ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LAKE JUNE ROAD, EAST OF NORTH SAINT AUGUSTINE ROAD.

YOU DO HAVE A FEW INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON A FEW OF YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. ON ITEM Z 21. DIMPLE. SARIKA. DIMPLE SARIKA IS VIRTUAL. YES, I AM VIRTUAL. YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS DIMPLE SARIKA AND I LIVE AT 7136 ABERDEEN AVENUE, 75230 IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 11, LESS THAN A QUARTER MILE FROM THE BASEBALL FIELD.

I'M HERE TODAY, NOT IN OPPOSITION OF STUDENT ATHLETICS.

IN FACT, I'M A PARENT OF PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS WHO ARE ATHLETES.

AND I'M HERE BECAUSE THIS PROPOSAL IS WRITTEN HAS CRITICAL GAPS THAT WILL HARM THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE, AND I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN DO BETTER. THE PROPOSAL ALLOWS FOR LIGHTS TO OPERATE FROM 6 A.M.

TO 10 P.M., SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, WITH NO SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS AND NO NOISE LIMITATION REQUIREMENTS.

IT'S NOT A SPORTS LIGHTING PLAN. IT'S A BLANK CHECK WITH NO BOUNDARIES.

OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS COMPRISED OF FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS, YOUNG AND OLD, WORKING FAMILIES, SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN AND RETIRED INDIVIDUALS, FOLKS ON FIXED INCOMES. AND I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO TALK ABOUT THESE POTENTIAL HARMS. SO FIRST, LET'S TALK ABOUT SLEEP AND HEALTH RESEARCH AND PUBLISHED IN PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS, INCLUDING PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL OF AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.

JOURNALS OF PSYCHIATRY AND INTERNAL MEDICINE HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT ARTIFICIAL LIGHT AT NIGHT SUPPRESSES MELATONIN, DISRUPTS CIRCADIAN RHYTHMS, AND IS ASSOCIATED WITH AN INCREASED RISK OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE, METABOLIC DISORDERS, ANXIETY, AND MOOD DISORDERS, AND, IN CERTAIN STUDIES, CERTAIN CANCERS WITH PROLONGED EXPOSURE.

A 10 P.M. CUTOFF MEANS LIGHTS, CROWD, CROWD NOISE AND TRAFFIC ARE ACTIVE DURING THE EXACT WINDOW 9 P.M.

TO 11 P.M. WHEN OUR BODIES NEED TO BE WINDING DOWN.

THIS AFFECTS EVERY RESIDENT ON THIS, ON THIS STREET AND IN THIS REGION, INCLUDING CHILDREN AND THE ELDERLY.

LET'S GO ON TO NOISE. SOUND TRAVELS FARTHER AT NIGHT DUE TO ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS.

IN THE CURRENT PROPOSAL, IT OVERLOOKS POTENTIAL HARMFUL EFFECTS OF NOISE DISTURBANCE.

THERE IS NO INDICATION IN THE PROPOSAL OF WHAT HAS BEEN DONE THUS FAR TO LOOK INTO WHAT ARE THE NOISE IMPLICATIONS ON THE COMMUNITY WITH THE CURRENT PA SYSTEM? ARE THERE BETTER SYSTEMS IN PLACE THAT SHOULD BE INSTALLED AS WELL AS HOW DO THESE IMPACT SLEEP AS WELL? WITHOUT DECIBEL LIMITS WRITTEN INTO THE ZONING APPROVAL, THERE'S NO ENFORCEABLE STANDARD FOR US NEIGHBORS TO RELY ON.

WITH LIGHTS ON, PA ANNOUNCEMENTS, CROWD NOISE AND PARKING LOT ACTIVITY WILL BE ONGOING THROUGH THOSE SAME CRITICAL HOURS OF WINDING DOWN IN EARLY SLEEP.

AND THEN LET'S TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC. 10 P.M. SHUTDOWN ALSO MEANS THAT LATE NIGHT DRIVING THROUGH OUR STREET, WHICH AGAIN IS ON ABERDEEN, THE SAME STREET AS THE FIELD.

AND THERE'S NO, NO, NO INDICATION IN THE PROPOSAL TO MITIGATE THOSE CONCERNS.

THE CURRENT TRAFFIC PLAN DOES SPEAK TO REVIEW AND UNFORTUNATELY IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT LOOKING AT WHAT'S NOT INCLUDED IT. WHAT I SEE LISTED IN THAT PROPOSAL IS LOOKING AT THE PROPOSED DROP OFF AND PICKUP AREAS.

THAT'S YOUR TIME WITH LIGHTING. THANK YOU. LATE HOURS.

THANK YOU. ALSO SPEAKING ON ITEM C 21, SUE STRICKFADEN.

YES. IN REGARDS TO PD 703, THE HILLCREST HIGH SCHOOL PLAN DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT PROJECT.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MEN AND WOMEN.

MY NAME IS DOCTOR SUE STRICKFADEN. I LIVE AT 6834 MIMOSA LANE, DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM HILLCREST HIGH SCHOOL.

IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU ALL TO JUST CLOSE YOUR EYES FOR JUST A FEW SECONDS.

[05:20:03]

IMAGINE WALKING ON YOUR STREET WITH YOUR DOG OR YOUR BABY IN A STROLLER, AND YOU HAVE CARS THAT ARE ZOOMING BY YOU.

AND IMAGINE YOU GO TO CHECK IN ON A NEIGHBOR, ONLY TO FIND THAT HILLCREST HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS HAVE BROKEN IN, THEN ASSAULTED YOU, AND STEAL YOUR PHONE. THEN THROUGH YOUR RING CAMERA THEY SAY.

I SEE YOU, I'M COMING FOR YOU. NOW OPEN YOUR EYES.

THOSE ARE JUST A FEW OF MANY THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING WITH ALL THE EXPANSIONS GOING ON AT HILLCREST HIGH SCHOOL.

I AM HERE BECAUSE MY HOME, MY SANCTUARY, IS BEING TRADED AWAY IN A REZONING REQUEST THAT CLAIMS TO BE ABOUT LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPING, BUT WE KNOW THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINE PRINT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, TO THE FAMILIES ON MIMOSA LANE.

THOSE ARE FIVE WORDS THAT ARE THAT ARE A THREAT TO OUR SAFETY AND OUR FUTURE.

EVERY NIGHT I LOOK OUT MY WINDOW AND I SEE A BLARING, CLINICAL BLUE LED GLARE THAT STRIPS AWAY MY PRIVACY AND MY SLEEP.

THIS ISN'T STATE OF THE ART. IT'S AN INTRUSION.

IT HAS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES TO ALL THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE HERE 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, 365 DAYS A YEAR. MOST OF US HAVE LIVED HERE FOR 18 TO 30 PLUS YEARS AND ALREADY HAVE LIVED THROUGH HILLCREST HIGH SCHOOL EXPANSIONS.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. WE DID NOT BUY HOMES IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS.

WE BOUGHT HOMES IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS NOW BEING URBANIZED WITHOUT OUR CONSENT.

BUT THE LIGHTS ARE JUST THE BEGINNING. WE ARE BEING OVERWHELMED BY 13 TO 16 PLUS BUSLOADS OF STUDENTS BROUGHT IN FROM 30 MILES AWAY.

NOT FOR OUR COMMUNITY, BUT FOR SPORT MACHINE THAT GENERATES REVENUE WHILE WE PAY THE PRICE IN CHAOS.

OUR STREETS HAVE BECOME A PERMANENT PARKING LOT FOR STRANGERS, AND EVERY DAY, A SIMPLE WALK WITH MY DOG OR THE NEIGHBOR'S CHILD IS A GAMBLE.

WITH SCHOOL BUSSES AND CARS THAT SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING THROUGH RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS MOST PAINFULLY.

COUNCIL. WE ARE BEING LEFT TO FEND FOR OURSELVES AND A TERRIFYING RISE OF CRIME.

FROM BREAK INS TO PHYSICAL ASSAULTS AND THEFT.

THE SCHOOL PROJECT IS. THE SCHOOL PROTECTS THE ATHLETES AND ITS BOTTOM LINE.

BUT WHO WHO PROTECTS THE TAXPAYING CITIZENS OF MIMOSA LANE? COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M ASKING YOU TODAY IF THIS WERE YOUR WINDOWS BLARING WITH BLUE LIGHTS, IF IT WERE YOUR FAMILY BEING BLOCKED BY ENDLESS TRAFFIC, OR YOUR HOME, OR YOURSELF BEING TARGETED FOR BY CRIMINALS, WOULD YOU CALL THIS PROGRESS? THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. ITEM Z 21, DAVID TROTT.

MY NAME IS DAVE TROTT. I'M A RESIDENT SINCE 1980 AT 6811 MIMOSA LANE.

IN 2023, HAD MY HOUSE BROKEN INTO BY HILLCREST HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.

$20,000 WORTH OF DAMAGE. SPRAY PAINTED WALLS IN THE INTERIOR.

THREE MONTHS LATER. THREE FOUR MONTHS LATER. ANOTHER INVASION, ANOTHER $5,000 WORTH OF DAMAGE.

LAST OCTOBER, I HAD HIGH SCHOOLERS THAT WERE ACTUALLY CAUGHT ON MY PROPERTY AT 1030 IN THE MORNING BY THE D ISD.

POLICE. NOW I'M, I'M APPRECIATIVE OF WHAT DPD HAS DONE FOR ME TO HELP ME AS A VICTIM.

AND I SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT D I S D POLICE WHO ARE RIGHT THERE ON CAMPUS.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED FROM THIS EXPERIENCE, TALKING TO THE TO THE DPD, VERY RESPECTFUL, VERY HELPFUL.

YOU, YOU BELIEVE YOU'RE GOING TO BE HELPED THROUGH THIS INCIDENT.

AND THEN I SAY, WHAT COULD BE DONE DIFFERENTLY? WELL, OUR HANDS ARE KIND OF TIED BECAUSE THE STUDENTS, THE CRIMINALS ARE REALLY COMING FROM THE SCHOOL AND WE ONLY TAKE CARE OF THE COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY. JURISDICTION OVER THE HILLCREST HIGH SCHOOL PROPERTY.

I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU TALK TO THE DISD POLICE.

THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ONLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERIMETER OF THE SCHOOL.

WE DON'T GO OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY. SO WHERE'S THE GAP? WHO? WHO FILLS THE GAP? IT'S US. IT'S IT'S. WE HAVE TO HAVE THE SECURITY CAMERAS.

THE HOA. IT'S $600 A YEAR FOR THE PATROL. AND TALKING TO MY NEIGHBORS.

AS A RESULT OF WHAT I'VE EXPERIENCED, WE HAVE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE DEFENDING THEMSELVES WITH GUNS, AND THAT'S FINE. THAT'S THAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT WE, WE HAVE.

[05:25:02]

I'M NOT ONLY TALKING ABOUT WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT MY SAFETY.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE STUDENTS WHO ARE ACTUALLY COMING ONTO OUR PROPERTY.

THEY ARE NOW FACING BEING VICTIMS THEMSELVES, BUT THEY JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT COULD OCCUR TO THEM.

SO WHAT I SUGGEST HERE IS THAT WE DEFER THIS BECAUSE ALL THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN ABOUT LIGHTS AND NOISE.

I CARE ABOUT SAFETY. AND THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS.

WE'VE BEEN TO DIFFERENT CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SCHOOL AND WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT SAFETY IS D I S D WILL BE THERE AT THE BASEBALL FIELDS TO PROVIDE SAFETY.

I'M TALKING ABOUT SAFETY WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ITSELF, WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

OKAY. WHAT I PROPOSE IS THAT WE DEFER THIS FOR AT LEAST ANOTHER MONTH.

TIME. THAT'S YOUR TIME. YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.

THANK YOU. ITEM Z 23. HAVE A SPEAKER ONE SPEAKER.

MR. VENTURA. MISS VENTURA. WE CANNOT. WE CAN SEE YOU.

HOWEVER, YOUR AUDIO IS. WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. MISTY VENTURA, 9407 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD.

I'M THE APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER. I SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION, BUT WANTED TO BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS TO THE EXTENT THERE ARE ANY.

THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ANY OF THE ZONING ITEMS THAT WERE READ INTO THE RECORD? I SEE ONE INDIVIDUAL. YOU MAY COME FORWARD.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND ALSO THE ITEM YOU WILL BE SPEAKING ON.

OKAY. MY NAME IS DONALD EVANS. I'M IN DISTRICT SEVEN.

IT'S REGARDING ZONING CASE Z2025-00107, AND I THINK THAT'S ITEM NUMBER FOUR ON THE LIST. I SUBMITTED TO THE CITY SECRETARY ON YESTERDAY DOCUMENTS THAT I HOPE THAT ALL OF YOU HAVE.

AND I'M GOING TO READ FROM A STATEMENT THAT I HAVE PREPARED MYSELF REGARDING THAT PROPOSED PD.

THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAMUEL BOULEVARD AND SAINT FRANCIS, THE RESIDENTIAL GATEWAY TO BUCKNER TERRACE, SECOND INSTALLMENT. FAMILIES HAVE LIVED ON KIVA LANE, TERESITA TRAIL, ROLLING FORK DRIVE AND SAINT FRANCIS AVENUE FOR DECADES.

THIS IS AN ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.

THIS PRESENTATION IS NOT AN OPPOSITION TO HEALTH CARE.

IT'S ABOUT THE PROPOSED PLANNED, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AS WRITTEN WILL PERMANENTLY DUE TO THIS COMMUNITY.

I'LL START WITH THE ACCESS. THE HOSPITAL IS ON TWO ACCESS ROADS, SAINT FRANCIS AVENUE, A LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET WITH NO CONFINED WIDTH, NO CONFINED WIDTH, CARRYING ALL PATIENTS, VISITORS, STAFF AND DELIVERY TRAFFIC AT SAMUEL BOULEVARD OPENING ON CHURCH PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS CASE CASE PLAN. EXISTING ENTRANCE OF 19 FOOT WIDE CORRECT.

CONNECTED TO THE CHURCH'S PRIVATE LOOP ROAD ON THE CHURCH'S EIGHT ACRE PROPERTY.

THE PROPOSED PD DOES NOT REFLECT ANY ACCESS AGREEMENT TO USE THE CHURCH PROPERTY UNDER ARTICLE TWO.

DALLAS DEVELOPMENTAL CODE, WHICH PROPOSED PD ADOPTS TO REFERENCE ON PAGE 16 A PLAN DEVELOPMENT B USING ACCESS EASEMENT IN PLACE OF THE PUBLIC STREET.

BUT THAT ACCESS EASEMENT MUST BE DOCUMENTED LEGALLY.

THE PROPOSED PD CONTAINS NO SUCH DOCUMENTATION.

PAGE THREE OF THE CASE REPORT DOES NOT MENTION THE CHURCH PROPERTY ACCESS CONDITION ANYWHERE IN THE DOCUMENT.

THE SECOND ITEM CONCERNS THE STREETS. THE CASE REPORT AND THE CASE PLAN DO NOT AGREE WITH THE WIDTH OF SAMUEL BOULEVARD.

THE CASE REPORT SAYS 80FT. I MEASURED IT IS 80FT.

THE CASE PLAN SAYS IT'S 125 20FT. UNCONFIRMED AND AND CONTRADICTED TWO OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS.

SAME CASE. THEY DO NOT AGREE. THIS AGREEMENT MATTERS BECAUSE SAMUEL BOULEVARD IS CLASSIFIED AS A IN THE CASE AS A COLLECTIVE STREET, MEANING A STREET THAT'S USED TO BRING AND TO BRING TO AND EXIT RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC, WHICH SAINT FRANCIS BOULEVARD IS.

THE WIDTH OF THE COLLECTIVE STREET DETERMINES WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS, AND THE PROPERTY LINE IS WHERE. EVERY SETBACK AND DEVELOPMENT CALCULATION ON THIS SITE BEGINS. A 40 FOOT DISCREPANCY ON THE COLLECTIVE STREET IS NOT A MINOR CLERICAL DIFFERENCE.

IT DIRECTLY AFFECTS THE LEGAL MEASUREMENTS ON WHICH THIS PROPOSED PD IS BUILT AT SAINT FRANCIS AVENUE.

THE STREET CARRIES ALL NON-EMERGENCY HOSPITAL TRAFFIC.

[05:30:03]

NO RECORDED MEASUREMENTS ON FILE. YOU CANNOT CONFIRM.

YOU CANNOT CONFIRM THE SETBACKS ON EITHER BOUNDARY OF THIS SITE BECAUSE THE STREET WIDTH IS CONFIRMED WITH IS CONFIRMED THE TIME. THE THIRD ITEM ON THE SIZE. THAT'S YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE ZONING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS. THIS IS YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.

CONSENT AGENDA. DO I HAVE A MOTION? SECOND. ALL RIGHT.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT.

THAT PASSES. GOT A MOTION.

ALRIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO STAND AT EASE FOR JUST A COUPLE MINUTES WHILE WE WORK THROUGH AN ISSUE, AND THEN WE WILL, WE'LL CARRY ON. SO EVERYONE JUST HOLD TIGHT FOR JUST A MINUTE.

MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED AT THIS TIME.

MR.. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. I MOVE TO RECONSIDER THE ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.

SECOND, IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? LET'S DO IT WITHOUT OBJECTION.

IS THERE NO OBJECTION? ALL RIGHT THEN. SO ORDERED. SO WE'RE BACK ON THE ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.

WE'RE GOING TO. MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO SEPARATE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND REMOVE Z FOR ANY OBJECTION.

HEARING NONE. SO ORDERED. SO WE'VE NOW SEPARATED.

WE'VE DIVIDED THE QUESTION WITH Z FOUR, AND THEN THE REST.

IS THAT RIGHT? ALL RIGHT. WE'LL TAKE UP Z FOUR FIRST, C4 FIRST.

[Z4. 26-889A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a new Planned Development District for GO(A) General Office District uses on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the southwest corner of Samuell Boulevard and St. Francis Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to a development plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to a development plan and conditions Z-25-000107 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

CROP PRODUCTION IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

DISCUSSION. MR.. BAZALDUA. NO, SIR. ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE SEEING? NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.

Z FOUR IS HANDLED. NOW, THE REMAINDER OF THE ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.

MOVE TO APPROVE. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. THE REMAINDER IS ADOPTED. BUT NOW WE'RE WHERE WE WERE BEFORE.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR TO ITEM Z ONE, YOUR PULLED ZONING ITEMS

[Z1. 26-886A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a new Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store greater than 3,500 square feet within a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on a property zoned CR Community Retail District, on the north corner of Lovett Avenue and Military Parkway Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to a site plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval for a three-year-period, subject to site plan and conditions Z234-164(JG)/Z-25-000123 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

ALL RIGHT, MR. MAYOR. WE SENT 20 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

[05:35:05]

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM, BUT ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM C ONE? I SEE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO MAY COME FORWARD.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU MAY BEGIN.

GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS AMIR LALANI AND I APPLIED FOR THE SETUP FOR THE LOVETT AVENUE AND MILITARY PARKWAY ON 5900, AND MY CASE NUMBER IS Z 230 4-1 64. AND I CAME HERE TO SEE ABOUT MY, MY APPLICATION THAT WENT THROUGH OR WAS THE REASON TO STOP IT.

SO FAR, I DON'T KNOW WHAT EXACTLY GOING ON, BUT THE AGENT WHO WORKED FOR WORKED WITH ME.

HE TOLD ME THAT CITY COUNCIL THEY STOPPED THE THE CASE OR THEY DENYING THE CASE.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REASON BEHIND IT TO DENYING THE CASE.

WE'RE JUST HERE TO HEAR COMMENTS. I THINK THE CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE, THEY WANT THE AREA NEED TO BE CLEANED UP.

BUT IN ORDER TO CLEAN THIS AREA, SOMEBODY HAD TO BE THERE OR ANY BUSINESS HAD TO BE OPEN TO CLEAN THIS AREA.

IF THE LAND IS EMPTY, ANYBODY CAN COME AND SIT THERE 24 OVER SEVEN.

SO THERE SHOULD BE ANY BUSINESS NEED TO BE OPERATED SO THEY CAN CLEAN THIS AREA OR MOVE PEOPLE WHO ARE UNFORTUNATELY HOMELESS, YOU KNOW. SO THERE'S SOMEBODY HAVE TO BE THERE TO CLEAN THIS AREA WITHOUT ANY PERSON OR WITHOUT ANY BUSINESS.

THE AREA WILL BE THE SAME NO MATTER WHAT. SO THIS IS THE REASON I CAME HERE TO SAY THAT WE SHOULD GET ANY OPPORTUNITY, AT LEAST TO OPEN THE BUSINESS AND CLEAN THIS AREA, THAT WHATEVER CITY REQUIRED, ESPECIALLY LIKE A HOMELESS OR ANY OTHER REASON, YOU KNOW? SO THAT'S ONLY THE REASON I CAME HERE TODAY WAS MY HEARING UP HERE.

SO, SO THAT'S ONLY THE OPTIONS. I MEAN, THERE'S ONLY THE QUESTION I HAVE TO CLEAN THIS AREA.

WE HAVE TO HAVE SOMEBODY TO OPEN THE BUSINESS AND CLEAN THIS AREA.

OTHERWISE IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME THING NO MATTER WHAT.

HOWEVER, YOU KNOW HOW MUCH WE CAN DO IT. I'M WITH HIM.

YEAH. ONLY ONE PERSON AT THE PODIUM. SO, I MEAN, THIS IS ONLY THE, YOU KNOW, THE REASON I CAME HERE TO GET APPROVAL TO OPEN THE BUSINESS AND CLEAN THIS THIS AREA, WHATEVER AREA I AM RIGHT NOW IS A SHOPPING CENTER WITH A DOLLAR GENERAL DOLLAR, FAMILY DOLLAR AND THE WASHETERIA.

BUT THERE IS NOBODY WHO ATTENDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE A PARKING LOT OR THE THE BUSINESS BUSINESS SIDE.

ONCE I GET APPROVED FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, THEN WE MIGHT HIRE THE SECURITY TO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S YOUR TIME.

OKAY. THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL? THANK YOU. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU MAY BEGIN.

HI, MY NAME IS ROBERT. SORRY. MY NAME IS ROBERT NUNEZ, AND I'M AT 513 MULBERRY LANE IN DESOTO, TEXAS. AND I REPRESENT MR. AMIR. HE IS A TENANT TO THIS PROPERTY.

AND SO HE SIGNED A LEASE ROUGHLY ABOUT A YEAR AGO WHEN HE SUBMITTED THE S U P BECAUSE HE WAS TOLD RIGHT AWAY HE NEEDED TO SUBMIT AN S U P IN ORDER TO GET BEER AND WINE IN THAT LOCATION. AND SO WE SUBMITTED THE S U P.

HE HAS NOT OPENED THIS PROPERTY. THAT PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN OPERATING.

HE'S GONE OVER THERE A FEW TIMES, JUST PRIMARILY TO JUST GO AND CLEAN UP HIS AREA, HIS SUITE PRETTY MUCH.

AND THAT'S IT. HE WAS NOT AWARE THAT WE HAD A HOMELESS AND OTHER ISSUES IN THAT MATTER.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PROPERTY MANAGER WITH MR. RESENDEZ, HE'S AWARE THAT PROPERTY MANAGER HAS NOT TAKEN CARE OF THIS PROPERTY.

AND SO MR. AMIR HAS HAD CONVERSATIONS AND BASICALLY THEY DEVELOP A PLAN.

SO WE'RE HERE ASKING NOT NECESSARILY FOR A VOTE, BUT WE'RE ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE.

[05:40:03]

WELL, AND WE'LL DO IT THIS WAY. THE GENTLEMAN, MR. AMIR, IS PLANNING ON FIRST ADDING LIGHTS TO THE PROPERTY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT OPERATING.

HE'S PLANNING ON ADDING LIGHTS, CAMERAS, AS WELL AS HE'S PLANNING ON HAVING SOMEONE GO OVER THERE.

ONE OF HIS EMPLOYEES THAT HAS EXPERIENCE IN SECURITY TO GO OVER THERE DAILY TO, TO KEEP, TO KEEP THE AREA A LITTLE BIT CLEAN.

AND HE'S NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT JUST HIS SUITE.

HE'S SPOKEN TO THE LANDLORD, THE LANDLORD HAS GIVEN HIM LEEWAY AS WELL AS HE'S NEGOTIATED SOME SOME RENTAL FEES WITH HIM IN ORDER TO TO PAY FOR ALL THIS SECURITY. SO THAT WAY THE SECURITY CAN GO EVERY DAY AND THEN KEEP THE AREA AWAY FROM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S LOOTERS OR HOMELESS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

HE'S ALSO PLANNING ON KEEPING CONTINUAL DAILY CLEANUP OF THE AREA AS WELL.

AND THEN AGAIN, HE SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE, BUT THE TENANT JUST DID NOT KNOW THIS WAS HAPPENING.

AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE TIME SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY COME BACK AND SAY, OKAY, LOOK, HERE'S THE PROOF. WE MADE CHANGES. NOW CAN WE PLEASE GET A VOTE ON IT? AND THIS, AND IT CAN MAKE WITH CONDITIONS AS WELL.

IF IN CASE WE COME BACK TO YOU THREE MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD, WE'LL SHOW YOU THAT WE HAVE ACTUAL EVIDENCE THAT WE MADE CHANGES AND WE COMMUNICATED WITH THE COMMUNITY. THEN YOU CAN APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS AS WELL.

AND SO AGAIN, IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'M HERE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM C ONE.

NO FURTHER SPEAKERS. MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION? YES, ONE. GO AHEAD, MR. RESENDEZ. I MOVE TO DENY THE ZONING CASE.

IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? MR.. BRIEFLY, MR. MAYOR, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

TAKE AS MUCH TIME AS YOU NEED, BROTHER. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR COMING HERE MAKING Y'ALLS CASE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE INFORMATION Y'ALL SHARED IS IS WHAT MY DECISION IS BASED ON.

YOU KNOW, IT COMES DOWN TO LOCATION. MY DECISION IS GROUNDED IN THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AT THIS INTERSECTION.

IT'S AN AREA THAT HAS HISTORICALLY STRUGGLED WITH LOITERING, LITTER, SUBSTANCE ABUSE, AND BROADER PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS.

I'VE ALSO HEARD CONSISTENTLY FROM RESIDENTS ABOUT ONGOING ISSUES INVOLVING TRASH, OPEN DRUG USE AND OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE AT THIS SITE.

SO ADDING ALCOHOL SALES HERE INTRODUCES A USE THAT, IN MY VIEW, IS MORE LIKELY TO INTENSIFY THOSE EXISTING CONDITIONS THAN THAN HELP STABILIZE THEM. EVEN IF THIS IS A STANDARD REQUEST, CONTEXT MATTERS, AND IN THIS CONTEXT, I'M CONCERNED IT WOULD FURTHER STRAIN AN ALREADY CHALLENGED AREA.

UNTIL WE SEE SUSTAINED, MEASURABLE IMPROVEMENT IN CONDITIONS AT THIS INTERSECTION, I DON'T BELIEVE ADDING ALCOHOL SALES IS THE RIGHT STEP.

SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS REQUEST.

AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU ALL SUPPORT ME IN THIS ONE.

THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS. COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ HEARD A LOT FROM THIS IS RIGHT ON THE LINE OF US, AND I'VE HEARD A LOT FROM THE PARKDALE RESIDENTS. SO ON BEHALF OF PARKDALE, THANK YOU FOR HEARING THEIR CONCERNS AND GREAT REASONINGS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ZONING MZ1? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. ITEM Z FIVE. ITEM Z FIVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

[Z5. 26-890A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 129 for electrical substation uses on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the west line of Calumet Avenue, between Meredith Avenue and Garfield Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to an amended site plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to an amended site plan and conditions Z-25-000142 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

ALL RIGHT, MR. MAYOR. WE SENT 39 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 400FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM Z FIVE? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION Z FIVE? YES, MAYOR. IN A SHORT COMMENT, I MOVE TO REMAND THIS ITEM BACK TO THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO RE-ADVERTISE.

IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY, IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. CHAIRMAN WEST. THANK YOU. THIS IS A TECHNICAL ERROR. THIS REQUEST FROM STAFF TO REMAND THE CPC TO RE NOTICE. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST? ALRIGHT.

SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. ITEM Z 25. ITEM Z 25 IS A PUBLIC

[05:45:06]

ALL RIGHT, MR. MAYOR. WE SENT 20 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM C 25? NO SPEAKERS. MR. MAYOR, IS THERE A MOTION? MR. MAYOR, I MOVE APPROVAL. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES ADDING A CONDITION PERMITTING AN ADDITIONAL 50,000FT² OF FLOOR AREA WITHOUT UPDATING THE SITE PLAN.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRMAN GRACEY. YES. JUST REALLY QUICKLY. THANK YOU SIR. THIS IS IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE OTTAWA ACTION.

THEY'VE BEEN THERE. I'VE BEEN AROUND I BELIEVE, SINCE THE EARLY 90S, HAVEN'T HAD ANY PROBLEMS IN TERMS OF FUNCTIONING.

THIS WILL GIVE THEM THE ABILITY WITHOUT HAVING TO COME BACK TO REALLY DO SOME EXPANSION IN TERMS OF DOING SOME SHELTERS AND HEAT STRUCTURES AND COOLING SHELTERS, STRUCTURES FOR SOME OF THEIR EMPLOYEES, AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY EXTENDING SOME OF THEIR SHOPS FOR TO CREATE SOME MORE JOBS.

SO SIMPLE. BUT THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS ITEM.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON, FOR OR AGAINST ITEM Z 25? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASES BEGINNING WITH ITEM Z 27.

[Z27. 26-533A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a new Specific Use Permit for a tower/antenna for cellular communication limited to a monopole cellular tower on property zoned RR Regional Retail District, on the south line of East Clarendon Drive, east of South Beckley Avenue Recommendation of Staff: Approval for a ten-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional ten-year periods, subject to a site plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval for a ten-year period, subject to a site plan and conditions Z-25-000113 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearing on January 28, 2026, and is scheduled for consideration on March 25, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

LIMITED TO A MONOPOLE CELLULAR TOWER ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF EAST CLARENDON DRIVE, EAST OF SOUTH BECKLEY AVENUE. RIGHT. MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 52 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED THREE REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ONE REPLY IN OPPOSITION.

YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, CHRIS PATTERSON.

YOU MAY COME FORWARD.

YOU WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. YOU MAY BEGIN.

GOOD AFTERNOON. CHRIS PATTERSON, WEST MONROE, LOUISIANA. I REPRESENT THE TOWER COMPANY, HEMPHILL TOWERS, LLC IN THEIR APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED TOWER FACILITY LOCATED AT EAST CLARENDON.

THIS REQUEST WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING STAFF WITH RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT THE TEN YEAR SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH AUTOMATIC TEN YEAR RENEWALS.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED THE APPLICATION AS WELL.

BUT THE AUTOMATIC RENEWALS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECOMMENDATION.

MY CLIENT WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THE COUNCIL GRANT APPROVAL, INCLUDING THE AUTOMATIC RENEWALS, AS WAS ORIGINALLY RECOMMENDED BY PLANNING STAFF.

WE HAVE A LONG TERM LEASE WITH THE UNDERLYING LANDOWNER.

VAZQUEZ SUPPLY, A LOCAL BUSINESS. THE INTENDED USE OF THE TOWER WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME OF THAT LEASE.

THE AUTOMATIC RENEWALS WOULD BE IN LINE WITH THE LACK OF ANY EXPECTED CHANGE OF USE OF THE TOWER ITSELF AND ANY MINOR ALTERATIONS TO THE SITE OVER THAT TIME FRAME, SUCH AS ADDING A CARRIER OR REMOVING OR REPLACING ANTENNAS.

IN MORE OF A, ANYTHING IN, IN EXCESS OF GENERAL MAINTENANCE WOULD REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT, WHICH I BELIEVE IS REQUIRED TO GO BACK THROUGH AT LEAST ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS STILL IN LINE.

SO THAT'S MY REQUEST THAT IF APPROVED, THAT THE AUTOMATIC TEN YEAR RENEWALS BE REINSTATED IN THE RECOMMENDATION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM Z 27.

NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE.

THE SBP IS APPROVED FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH NO AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.

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

CHAIRMAN JONES, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES. HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. ITEM Z 28 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE

[Z28. 26-879A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a new Specific Use Permit for Commercial Motor Vehicle Parking on property zoned CS Commercial Service District with Specific Use Permit No. 890 for a radio, television, or microwave tower, on the southwest line of South-Central Expressway, between Youngblood Road and Lyndon B. Johnson Freeway Recommendation of Staff: Approval for a 10-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional 10-year periods, subject to a site plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval for a five-year period, subject to a site plan and conditions Z-25-000152 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearing on January 25, 2026, and is scheduled for consideration on March 25, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

[05:50:06]

ALL RIGHT, MR. MAYOR, WE SENT THREE NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS.

I'M SORRY. WE I'M FLUBBING EVERY ONE OF THESE TODAY.

WE SENT SEVEN NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 400FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED ONE REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.

YOU DO HAVE FIVE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AND DREW RÜEGG.

MR. RIG YOUR AUDIO IS. WE'RE NOT ABLE TO HEAR YOU.

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR ME NOW? YES. ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR ME? YES. OKAY. REPRESENTING THE 33RD STREET.

I'M SORRY, MR. RIGG. WE ARE NOT ABLE TO HEAR YOU.

ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR ME? YES. THAT'S MUCH BETTER.

OKAY. YES. WE'RE NOT ABLE TO HEAR YOU, MR. ROIG.

OKAY. OKAY. I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER.

THANK YOU. NASIR. ALI. NASIR ALI IS NOT ONLINE AND NOT IN PERSON.

NOT PRESENT. MARCY.

MARCY. MOCKAITIS. HELLO? YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU. HOWEVER, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING.

WE CANNOT SEE YOU. OKAY. LET ME. JUST GIVE ME ONE SECOND.

I'M. JUST TRYING TO. CAMERA. IS NOT SHOWING ME.

OKAY, OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO. HELLO, EVERYONE.

THANK YOU. THIS IS MARZIA. ACTUALLY, I'M TALKING ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.

THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT. SORRY. I JUST WANT TO.

YOU KNOW, VERY CLOSE. EXACTLY. IT'S GOING TO BE.

SO JUST GIVE ME ONE SECOND. I DON'T KNOW, SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH MY. OKAY.

SO ACTUALLY WE ARE UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE LAND, WHICH IS EXACTLY IS GOING TO BE BY THE THAT PROPERTY WE ARE DOING THE OPPOSITION FOR IT. THIS TRUCK TRUCK PARKING IS NOT COMFORTABLE NEXT TO THE HOMES BECAUSE IT'S BRINGING HEAVY TRAFFIC, TRUCK TRAFFIC, SAFETY RISK, DIESEL NOISES. AND YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF NIGHTMARE ACTIVITY.

THIS AREA ALREADY HAS A LOT OF INDUSTRIAL USE, AND APPROVING THIS WOULD FURTHER HARM THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER IN THAT AREA.

AND IT'S GOING TO BE MAKE IT HARDER TO DEVELOP AND MENTIONED PROPERTY VALUE.

SO RIGHT NOW WE ARE UNDER CONTRACT FOR 40 ACRE LAND, WHICH IS BEHIND THIS PARCEL, AND ANOTHER PARCEL WHICH IS EXACTLY IN THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, 1.74 ACRE LAND. SO AND WE HAVE A PLAN TO DO THE ZONING CHANGE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL.

BUT ZONING CHANGE FOR THIS PARCEL IS GOING TO BE BRINGING THE VALUE OF OUR PROPERTY VERY LOW AND WE ARE DISAGREEING.

FOR THE ZONING CHANGE OF THIS PARCEL. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LINDA BURNS.

LINDA BURNS. MISS BURNS, I BELIEVE YOUR YOUR.

WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. YOUR AUDIO IS NOT. IT'S NOT WORKING.

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES. WE CAN. YOU MAY CONTINUE.

[05:55:02]

I AM A SITE LOCATION CONSULTANT THAT BASED OUT OF DALLAS WORKING THROUGHOUT THE US.

THIS IS MY CLIENT THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH IN, NOT ONLY THIS PROJECT, BUT OTHER PROJECTS.

I'M SPEAKING TODAY IN OPPOSITION TO THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING BEING LOCATED, TO THE PROPOSED 42 ACRE DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD ALREADY BE GOING IN NEXT TO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL. SO IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S BEING MOVED INTO AN INDUSTRIAL AREA.

AND I WANTED TO REFLECT BACK ON THE FORWARD DALLAS 2.0 THAT COUNCIL UPDATED IN 2024, WHERE YOU INDICATED THAT IT'S VITAL TO SEPARATE RESIDENTIAL AND INDUSTRIAL.

IF NOTHING ELSE, TO BE SURE THAT IT'S A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL OF THE RESIDENTS.

THERE ARE FIVE PROPOSED PLAN THEMES WITHIN THAT DOCUMENT.

FOUR OF THOSE I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT. THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUSTAINABILITY.

ONE, ALL OF THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THIS 28 ACRE, EXCUSE ME, 28 SINGLE NEW HOMES AND 18 GUEST HOUSES THAT WOULD BE RENTED OUT FOR GUESTS AND TOURISTS. ALL WOULD BE OF NEW GREEN CONSTRUCTION.

THE HOUSING. THIS WOULD GIVE HOUSING CHOICES AND ACCESS TO SOUTHERN DALLAS RESIDENTS.

THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION IS NOT ONLY PROVEN BY THE FACT OF THE NEW SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, BUT ALSO BY THE FACT THAT THERE WOULD BE THE 18 GUEST CABINS THAT.

SO YOU WOULD NOT ONLY HAVE PROPERTY VALUES INCREASED IN COMING IN, BUT YOU ALSO HAVE THE POTENTIAL TAX REVENUE FROM THE VISITATION.

THE COMMUNITY AND URBAN DESIGN THAT WAS POINTED OUT WITHIN YOUR PLAN SPECIFIED SINGLE FAMILY PLACE TYPE WAS A PRIORITY. AND THESE ARE ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

AND WHAT'S THERE NOW IS A SINGLE OR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AS MARCY POINTED OUT.

THERE ARE ISSUES WITH THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE.

AND THE HEALTH. THE DIESEL EXHAUST EMISSIONS WOULD BE TERRIBLE FOR THE AREA.

THE NOISE, HEADLIGHTS, TRUCK TRAFFIC, THE TRUCK LANES.

IT'S A TWO LANE ROAD. THERE'S NOT TURNING LANES OR ANYTHING FOR THEM.

THERE'S ALSO THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ISSUE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE RESIDENTS, AS WELL AS THE GUESTS OF TRYING TO MOVE AROUND WITH THE 18 WHEELERS.

THE IMPACT WOULD BE HUGE ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

THEY'RE ALREADY HAVING WORKED WITH DALLAS ALL MY CAREER.

ALL THE WAY DOWN 20 IN CENTRAL. THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE IS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

YOU HAVE THIS POCKET HERE RIGHT THERE AT THE GATEWAY OF RESIDENTIAL THAT SHOULD BE CHERISHED AND USED AS A CATALYST TO ATTRACT NOT ONLY THIS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. MALIK BAKARIA.

MALIK BAKARIA.

MALIK, MR. BAKARIA. ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR ME? OKAY. I'LL COME BACK. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM Z 28. NO SPEAKERS. MR. BAKARIA.

OKAY. MR. MAYOR, WE WILL MOVE ON. WE'RE GOING TO CALL IT A DAY ON THAT.

OKAY. IS THERE A MOTION THEN? THIS IS. THESE ARE YOUR SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR, FOR THIS ITEM. WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION.

MEMBERS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I MOVE TO DENY THIS ITEM WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? MR. BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. IF SO, THANK YOU. FIVE MINUTES.

THIS AREA IS OUTSIDE OF THE INLAND PORT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE ALWAYS CONSISTENTLY SAID IS THAT COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING DOES NOT BELONG OUTSIDE OF THE INLAND PORT. ALTHOUGH THEY SAY THEY WILL ONLY DO A NUMBER OF TRUCKS PER DAY, WE FIND THAT CONSISTENTLY THEY EXCEED THAT NUMBER. SO I'M FOR THAT PARTICULAR REASON, I AM DENYING THIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE, SO THAT IT COULD BE RETHOUGHT AS TO WHAT TO DO WITH THIS PROPERTY.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST M Z 28,

[06:00:09]

ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM P ONE. IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 53

[PH1. 26-619A A public hearing to receive comments on an ordinance amending Chapter 53, “Dallas Building Code,” of the Dallas City Code by amending Section 430, “Electric Vehicle Charging Facilities”; amending Chapter 57, “Dallas One-to Eight-Family Dwelling Code,” of the Dallas City Code by amending Section R333, “Electric Vehicle Charging Facilities”; providing (1) a maximum number of required electric vehicle capable spaces; (2) a saving clause; (3) a severability clause; and (4) an effective date - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with CECAP and Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

AMENDING CHAPTER 57 DALLAS 1 TO 8 FAMILY DWELLING CODE OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE BY AMENDING SECTION R 30 3R3 33.

ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING FACILITIES PROVIDING ONE A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF REQUIRED ELECTRIC VEHICLE CAPABLE SPACES TO A SAVING CLAUSE THREE A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? PH1I SEE AN INDIVIDUAL COMING FORWARD. YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YES.

MY NAME IS MICHAEL WILLIAMS, AND I'M HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL, 3100 MACKINNON STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS, 75201. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR JOHNSON AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE DALLAS BUILDING CODES. EV PARKING REQUIREMENTS SINCE PARKING REFORM IMPACTED THE ASSUMPTIONS UTILIZED IN THE CHART FOR EV PARKING, OUR MEMBERS HAVE CONSISTENTLY RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT HOW EV PARKING CHARTS SHOULD BE INTERPRETED, PARTICULARLY WHETHER THE REQUIREMENT APPLIED TO REQUIRING REQUIRED PARKING ONLY OR TO ALL PROVIDED PARKING, WHICH HAS IMPACTED PROJECTS AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW.

TREK SUPPORTS THIS AMENDMENT, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED CAP AT SIX REQUIRED EV CAPABLE SPACES AS A PRACTICAL CHANGE THAT WILL BENEFIT A WIDE RANGE OF PROJECTS ACROSS DALLAS. IT ALSO BRINGS GREATER CLARITY AND CONSISTENCY TO THE CODE, WHICH IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF UNCERTAINTY THAT CAN IMPACT PROJECT DESIGNS, COST AND TIMELINES. AND WE WANT TO THANK THE WORK OF MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR THE WORK ON THIS AMENDMENT, AND ALSO TO APPRECIATE STAFF'S RESPONSIVENESS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.

AND WE ARE ESPECIALLY GRATEFUL TO ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER ROBIN BENTLEY, DIRECTOR EMILY LIU AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR SAM ESKANDER FOR THEIR COLLABORATION IN DEVELOPING A WORKABLE SOLUTION, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING THIS CONVERSATION AROUND BROADER EV PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND RELATED CODE UPDATES GOING FORWARD.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS AN INTERIM SOLUTION TO ADDRESS PROJECTS THAT NEED APPROVAL TODAY, AND STAFF WILL EVALUATE AND BRING BACK SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER CHANGES IN THE FUTURE, AND WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM FF ONE? YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. VICTORIA MORRIS WITH JACKSON WALKER, 2323 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 600 IN DALLAS. MR. MAYOR, HONORABLE COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

WE ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE HOME DEPOT, TO PROVIDE A HOLISTIC REVIEW OF THE CITY'S EV CHARGING REQUIREMENTS AND TO SUPPORT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE, EV CHARGING SPACES REQUIRE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF UPFRONT CONSTRUCTION OF PRIVATE AND PUBLIC UTILITY EQUIPMENT.

CONDUIT RACEWAYS CONDUCTORS, ATTACHMENT PLUGS, FITTING POWER OUTLETS, SWITCH GEARS, UTILITY EQUIPMENT, AND OTHER FIRE SUPPRESSION UPGRADES, ALL OF WHICH MAY REMAIN DORMANT OR UNUSED UNLESS AND UNTIL THESE ARE INDIVIDUALLY CONVERTED TO EV READY OR EV INSTALLED SPACES. THIS INFRASTRUCTURE IS CONNECTED TO OUR CONVENTIONAL POWER GRID THAT SERVICES OUR CITY, AND PHYSICAL CONSTRUCTION OF THESE EV SPACES INVOLVES REMOVING EXISTING CONCRETE, EXCAVATION OF SOIL, NEW CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION AND INCREASED WATER CONSUMPTION FOR FIRE SUPPRESSION PURPOSES.

FROM A HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, THE INDUSTRY STANDARD COST ESTIMATE FOR CONSTRUCTING A SINGLE EV CHARGING SPACE IS APPROXIMATELY 7500 TO $16,000 PER SPACE. FOR EXAMPLE, A 5000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT WITH 53 PARKING SPACES THAT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $97,000 TO $208,000.

A 25 UNIT TOWNHOME COMMUNITY WITH 38 PARKING SPACES 60,000 TO $128,000.

150 APARTMENT UNIT BUILDING WITH 180 SPACES, 1.3 MILLION TO $1.8 MILLION.

OR, MORE DRAMATICALLY, THE KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER WITH 4170 PARKING SPACES.

[06:05:01]

7500 TO $16,000. $16,000 FOR EVERY ADDITIONAL EV SPACE.

THAT COST DIRECTLY IMPACTS HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES IN OUR CITY.

PRIOR TO PARKING REFORM, EV CHARGING WAS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED BY CODE.

BUT AFTER IT HAS BEEN BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES PROVIDED, THIS HAS RESULTED IN A DISPROPORTIONATE EV CHARGING REQUIREMENT FOR USERS WITH HIGH PARKING NEEDS. THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT ADDRESSES THIS ISSUE AND FOLLOWS A NATURAL PROGRESSION OF EV TABLE.

WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL TO STAFF AND THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE FOR ALL OF THEIR ASSISTANCE IN GETTING US A PRACTICAL, WORKABLE SOLUTION. WE SUPPORT THIS CODE AMENDMENT AND RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT IT AS WELL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR.

MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL, SUZANNE KEDRON, 2323 ROSS AVENUE.

I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF OUR CLIENT, AS YOU HEARD FROM MISS MORRIS, THE HOME DEPOT, WHICH IS ACTIVELY PURSUING A NEW STORE AT 9334 EAST R.L.

THORNTON FREEWAY IN DISTRICT SEVEN. THIS IS A NEW GROUND UP DEVELOPMENT WITH AN ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST OF $18 MILLION.

DURING THE PERMIT PROCESS, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE NEW STORE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 87 EV CHARGING SPACES.

THAT WAS AT A COST OF OVER $1 MILLION. SINCE THEN, THIS PROJECT HAS STOOD IN LIMBO.

THAT'S SINCE DECEMBER. THE EXISTING EV CHARGING REQUIREMENTS POSE A NUMBER OF ISSUES.

FIRST, A DISPROPORTIONATE BURDEN ON USERS WITH LARGER PARKING FACILITIES, INCLUDING MUCH NEEDED HOUSING PROJECTS AND OTHER MAJOR CITY PROJECTS, SUCH AS THE KAY BAILEY CONVENTION CENTER, TWO EXTENSIVE UPFRONT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT MAY BE OBSOLETE WITH TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES.

THREE THIS UNDERMINES THE PURPOSES OF THE CITY'S OWN PARKING REFORM INITIATIVE, WHICH WAS ADOPTED TO IMPROVE PARKING, HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESILIENCY.

AS A BUSINESS FRIENDLY CITY, DALLAS MUST BE COMPETITIVE WITH OUR SUBURBAN NEIGHBORS OR RISK LOSING OUT PLANO, FRISCO, MCKINNEY AND OTHERS. NONE OF THESE CITIES HAVE AN EV CHARGING REQUIREMENT.

THE SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL OBLIGATION IMPOSED BY HIGH EV CHARGING REQUIREMENTS WILL IMPEDE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND STIFLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN DALLAS.

WE ARE EXCITED ABOUT THE NEW HOME DEPOT STORE IN EAST DALLAS.

WE SUPPORT THE CODE AMENDMENT AS PRESENTED. WE SUPPORT THE CODE AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED BY CITY STAFF.

WE. WE SUPPORT THE CODE AMENDMENT RECOMMENDED BY THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, AND WE'RE HERE, RESPECTFULLY, TO ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT AS WELL AS PRESENTED.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM FF ONE? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR A MOTION.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THE ORDINANCE TAKES EFFECT APRIL 24TH, 2026, AND THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF REQUIRED ELECTRIC VEHICLE CAPABLE SPACES IS TEN. ALL RIGHT.

IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRMAN RIDLEY? YES.

FIVE MINUTES, SIR. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FROM PLANNING.

GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. MY NAME IS EMILY LIU, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.

ALSO HERE WITH ME TODAY IS DEPUTY DIRECTOR SAM ISKANDER, AS WELL AS OUR CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR.

THREE NEXT. SO JUST IN CASE YOU HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS.

GREAT. AND PLANNING DIRECTOR LIU I RAISED EVEN BEFORE THE RECENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING ON THIS ITEM THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT A MORE PARTICULARIZED CRITERIA FOR REQUIRING EV CAPABLE SPACES, NOT JUST BASED UPON TOTAL NUMBER OF PROVIDED PARKING SPACES, BUT BASED UPON SUCH THINGS AS THE LAND USE, DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN LAND USES WITH LONG PARKING TIMES AND SHORT PARKING TIMES, AND PERHAPS OTHER CRITERIA.

AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING, WE DISCUSSED THIS ISSUE AND AT THAT TIME, I BELIEVE THAT YOU ENDORSED THAT CONCEPT, BUT SAID THAT IT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE ADEQUATE STUDY OF WHAT OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE AND WHAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR DALLAS TO

[06:10:10]

AND I WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT YOU AND YOUR STAFF WILL BE STUDYING GOING FORWARD.

WE HEARD ONE OF THE SPEAKERS, IN FACT, REFERRED TO TODAY'S AMENDMENT AS AN INTERIM AMENDMENT.

COULD YOU TALK ABOUT THAT? YES. WE AGREE WITH YOU, AND WE MAKE THE COMMITMENT AT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE THAT WE STAFF WILL TAKE THE TIME TO DO RESEARCH BECAUSE THAT DOES NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME.

BUT WE DO NEED TO GET THESE TWO THINGS FIXED.

ONE IS THE PROVIDED RIGHT NOW IS PROVIDED. REQUIRED DEPENDS ON INTERPRETATION.

IT'S VERY CONFUSING. THE OTHER ONE WILL HAVE A CAP BECAUSE WE LOOK AT ECONOMIC ESPECIALLY ATTRACT BIG USERS.

BUT I THINK THE ONE BY LAND USE AND MORE CATEGORIES DOES MAKE SENSE.

WE WOULD LIKE TO DO SOME RESEARCH. AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE ALREADY STARTED REACHING OUT TO OTHER CITY AS WE SPEAK.

I THINK WE NEED A COUPLE MORE MONTHS ON THOSE RESEARCH AND GET BACK WITH YOU TO THE COMMITTEE FIRST AND THEN TO CITY COUNCIL.

WHEN DO YOU THINK YOU'LL BE ABLE TO COME BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AFTER THAT? RESEARCH IS COMPLETED SOMETIME IN JUNE.

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

I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE DOING THIS AT ALL.

WHY WOULD WE REQUIRE THIS? COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

THERE'S TWO THINGS. WE BROUGHT IT BACK TO YOU.

ONE IS, IF YOU LOOK AT. THERE'S A TABLE THERE, SET PROVIDED THE WORD WE ADDED PROVIDED.

SO THIS ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO.

AT THE TIME, IT WASN'T CLEAR WHAT THE PARKING NUMBER MEANS.

SO THE STAFF HAS BEEN OVER THE YEARS, INTERPRET TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

ONE IS THE PARKING SPACES AS PROVIDED FOR THIS PROJECT.

AND LATER ON, THE INTERPRETATION GOES TO THE PARKING THAT WAS REQUIRED FOR THE SITE.

AND SINCE WE HAVE THIS PARKING REFORM IN MAY, AND AT THE TIME THE INTERPRETATION WAS PARKING REQUIRED, BASICALLY MEANING COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT, A LOT OF THEM NO LONGER REQUIRED.

THIS EV CHARGING SPACES, WHICH I DON'T THINK THAT MEET THE INTENT OF THIS ORDINANCE.

SO WE IMMEDIATELY STARTING TO LOOK INTO THIS.

WE THINK THEY NEED TO FIX VERY QUICKLY SO THAT WE CLARIFY IT'S PROVIDED EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED AT ALL.

BUT YOU PROVIDE 100 SPACES. THE CALCULATION WILL BE BASED ON THOSE PROVIDED.

SO WE NEED THAT CALCULATION CLARIFICATION FIRST.

THE SECOND ONE IF YOU LOOK AT THE EV. CAPABLE.

CAPABLE. IF YOU ALREADY HAVE A CAP BUT EV CAPABLE DOES NOT HAVE A CAP IS 20% ON AND ON IN, YOU KNOW, INDEFINITELY. AND THIS WE DID SOME RESEARCH WITH OUR SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.

NONE OF THE CITY AROUND US HAVE THIS REQUIREMENT.

SO WE ARE TRYING TO BALANCE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SIDE AND ALSO THE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT SIDE.

SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH OUR ENVIRONMENTAL AND AIR QUALITY OFFICE TRYING TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION.

THE CAP WILL HELP. DALLAS FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, KEEP THE NUMBERS STILL IN THERE WILL HELP US ADDRESS THE CAP AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. SO THAT'S KIND OF A BALANCE. NO. CAN YOU BACK UP YOUR STATEMENT THAT SAYS HAVING A CAP WILL HELP OUR CITY WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT? YES. BECAUSE FOR EXAMPLE, SOMEBODY MENTIONED SAY A LARGE USER WANT TO LOCATE TO DALLAS.

NONE OF OUR CITY PLANO FORWARDS, I CALL THEM THE OTHER DAY, THEY DO NOT HAVE THIS REQUIREMENT.

HOWEVER WE DO 20% OF THE PARKING HAS TO BE EV CAPABLE RIGHT NOW BEFORE THIS PASSES.

ASSUMING SOMEBODY HAS 2000 PARKING, YOU KNOW, A LARGE USER, WHICH IS VERY TYPICAL, PROBABLY MORE YOU'LL BE REQUIRED 400 CAPABLE SPACES, WHICH IS GOING TO COST MANY MILLIONS DOLLARS MORE.

NO, I AGREE WITH YOU. I THINK THAT ACTUALLY IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, YOU WOULD REMOVE ALL REQUIREMENTS JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHER CITIES AROUND US, BECAUSE IT IS REALLY NOT THE PLACE OF US TO TELL A PRIVATE BUSINESS THAT THEY MUST HAVE EV CAPABLE OR AVAILABLE CHARGING.

IF THEIR CUSTOMERS DEMAND IT, THEY'LL PUT IT IN.

I THINK THAT'S A POLICY DISCUSSION. WELL, THIS IS A POLICY DISCUSSION.

YES, I THINK YOU CAN ALL MAKE THAT DECISION. SO I WOULD SAY THIS IS NOT IN OUR PURVIEW.

WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THIS. WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN DOING THIS.

[06:15:03]

WE SHOULD ALSO NOT BE TELLING THEM YOU HAVE TO HAVE EV CHARGING.

I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S A BALANCE I'M TALKING ABOUT.

WE DID TALK ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, BUT ALSO THE ENVIRONMENTAL CAP.

THIS IS ONE OF THE C CAP. I DON'T CARE. THIS IS HARMING OUR BUSINESSES.

IT IS ARTIFICIALLY INFLUENCING THE MARKET. IT IS NOT GOOD FOR DALLAS WHEN YOU PURCHASE AN EV, WHICH PEOPLE IN MY FAMILY HAVE EVS. THIS IS PART OF YOUR CALCULUS OF WHAT AM I GOING TO DO ABOUT CHARGING? WHETHER YOU DO IT AT YOUR HOME OR YOUR APARTMENT AT SOME OF THE VARIOUS STORES AND PARKING.

THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS HAS ALSO HELPED WITH THIS.

BUT TO REQUIRE BUSINESSES TO DO THAT IS TRULY OVERSTEPPING.

THERE'S HIGH UPFRONT COSTS FOR THESE BUSINESSES.

WE'RE MAKING IT HARDER TO DO BUSINESS AND MORE EXPENSIVE TO DO BUSINESS IN DALLAS, WE'RE ALREADY HARD TO DO BUSINESS WITH, SO I THINK THAT'S A VERY BAD IDEA. IT'S ALSO VERY ONE SIZE FITS ALL.

AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT BUSINESSES THAT HAVE PEOPLE THAT COME IN QUICKLY AND LEAVE QUICKLY, CHARGING IS REALLY NOT A FEASIBLE ISSUE AS OPPOSED TO SOMEBODY WHO MIGHT BE THERE A LONG TIME.

IF YOU'RE AT A HOTEL AND YOU ARE SAYING OVERNIGHT, YOU MIGHT NEED YOUR CHARGER TO GO.

CONTINUE MAYBE ON YOUR ROAD TRIP. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S FOR A HOTEL TO DECIDE HOW.

MANY CUSTOMERS HAVE THAT NEED IN ORDER TO TELL THEM.

STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE DEBATING THE UNDERLYING CODE AND NOT THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED.

I THINK I FEEL THAT WAY TOO, A LITTLE. JUST FEEL IT A LITTLE.

I FEEL LIKE I MIGHT. BE INCLINED TO AGREE, BUT YEAH, NO, I'M AGAINST THE CODE AND I'M AGAINST THE AMENDMENT.

I'M AGAINST THE WHOLE THING. I THINK THE WHOLE THING SHOULD BE STRIPPED OUT.

SO THAT IS ABSOLUTELY FAIR. AND THEN SAY ONE ADDITIONAL THING ABOUT THE PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING CODE AND EVEN THE AMENDMENT IS THAT SOME BUSINESSES DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO PUT THIS IN AT ALL BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE. THE TRANSFORMERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.

AND SO YOU MAY BE ASKING BUSINESSES TO DO THINGS THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY NOT CAPABLE WITHOUT REBUILDING SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO I'M A NO ABOUT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS BECAUSE IT'S FRANKLY NOT OUR PLACE FOR CITY OF DALLAS TO BE DOING THIS.

MR. BAZALDUA YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU MAYOR.

I JUST WANT TO ASK IF YOU COULD. SO YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO BRING UP DATA AND PEER CITY INFORMATION IN JUNE. YES, THAT'S WHAT WE DISCUSSED.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WILL BRING THE RESEARCH BACK TO THE COMMITTEE IN JUNE.

AND WHEN YOU DO, I KNOW THAT YOU'VE MENTIONED SOME SOME CITIES, I WON'T CALL THEM PEER CITIES, BUT SOME OTHER CITIES IN OUR REGION THAT ARE MUCH SMALLER THAN OURS. CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT THE PEER CITIES ACTUALLY REFLECT THOSE OF POPULATION SIZE ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

THAT'S THE INTENT, YES. IN MY OWN INDEPENDENT RESEARCH, WE ARE ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT BEHIND THE MARK.

AND THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME VERY AGGRESSIVE POLICIES IN PLACE, SPECIFICALLY IN LARGER CITIES IN THE COUNTRY ON BOTH COASTLINES.

AND THERE ARE THERE'S GROUNDWORK, I THINK, ALREADY IN PLACE THAT ARE IS PRETTY ARBITRARY IN MY OPINION, JUST BASED ON A SLIDING SCALE, A STAIR UP SCALE OF PERCENTAGES.

AND YOU KNOW, THIS I THINK THAT WE COULD HAVE A LOT MORE THOUGHT PUT INTO IT.

AND IN TALKING WITH CHAIR RIDLEY AND TALKING TO OTHER COLLEAGUES, I THINK THAT THERE IS DEFINITELY JUST AS MRS MENDELSOHN MENTIONED, THE UNIQUE SITUATIONS LIKE WE'VE HEARD, I MEAN, 87 EV CHARGING STATIONS AT A HOME DEPOT WOULD BE RIDICULOUS.

SO WE DO NEED TO FINE TUNE THIS. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE FACT THAT THE AVERAGE PERSON GOING IN AND OUT OF HOME DEPOT IS PROBABLY NOT EVEN THERE LONG ENOUGH TO SPEND ANY MONEY AND PLUG THEIR CAR UP INTO A CHARGER.

THAT'S IN A LOT. SO TYING THIS TO LAND USE IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT I HOPE THAT WE ARE REALLY LOOKING INTO.

AND I'VE ALSO SPOKEN WITH YOU ALL BEFORE, AND PART OF WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE BROUGHT BACK TO US IS A POTENTIAL FEE IN LIEU OF THIS POLICY.

I THINK THAT WHAT I DON'T WANT US TO DO IS DRASTICALLY MAKE POLICY BECAUSE WE'VE REALIZED THAT IT WAS NOT AS THOUGHT OUT AS IT COULD BE.

[06:20:03]

BUT WHAT IS BEING ORIGINALLY PROPOSED FROM CPC OR FROM ECO DEV IS AND WHAT WAS ADVOCATED FOR BY TREC, I BELIEVE IS JUST TOO LOW OF A CAP.

AND SO I APPRECIATE THE MOTION BY CHAIR RIDLEY, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT IT GIVES US A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY.

WITHOUT COMPLETELY UNDOING AND CONTRADICTING TWO PIECES OF VERY MONUMENTAL.

POLICIES THAT WE'VE PUT IN PLACE, WHICH IS THE ELIMINATION OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

WE DIDN'T ASK HOME DEPOT TO HAVE THAT MANY SPOTS.

LET'S JUST PUT THAT ON RECORD. SO THE RATIO THAT THEY WOULD BE ADHERING TO IS BECAUSE OF THE SITE PLAN THAT THEY CHOSE AND THE AMOUNT OF SPACES THAT THEY WANTED TO PROVIDE, WHICH MOST OF THE HOME DEPOTS I SEE HAVE A REALLY GREAT AMOUNT OF EMPTY SPACES.

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WE PUT THAT POLICY IN PLACE.

I DON'T WANT TO GO BACK AND UNDO THAT WHEN WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUR CITY BE BETTER DEVELOPED AND NOT AS VACANT WITH SURFACE PARKING LOTS ACROSS THE CITY.

AT THE SAME TIME WHEN WE CAN'T EVEN ADEQUATELY MOVE MONEY AROUND AT BUDGET SEASON TO INCREASE OUR FLEET TO GO INTO A CONVERSION OF EV BECAUSE WE SPEAK CONSTANTLY ABOUT THE LACK OF EV INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE IN OUR CITY.

SO WE'VE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED THAT THERE'S A NEED THERE, AND WE ARE TRYING TO LEVERAGE THE PRIVATE SECTOR, AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

IT DOES NEED TO BE DONE SO A LITTLE BIT MORE THOUGHTFULLY AND HOPEFULLY ONE WITH LAND USE.

I HOPE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH OTHER PARTNERS IN THE INDUSTRY TO TO CRAFT THAT.

BUT I DON'T WANT US TO THROW OUT THE BABY WITH THE BATHWATER ON SOME PROGRESSIVE POLICIES THAT WE'VE ALREADY SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED.

SO FOR THAT, I WILL SUPPORT THAT. I THINK TEN IS A GOOD CAP, A GOOD INTERIM SOLUTION, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU IN THE COMMITTEE AND THE STAKEHOLDERS TO FIND A BETTER SOLUTION FOR LONG TERM.

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

THANK YOU. MAYOR JOHNSON. I JUST HAVE A QUICK REQUEST FOR THE CHAIR OF ECO DEV CHAIR.

RIDLEY COULD WE BRING IN THE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY AND THE PARK TRAILS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE INTO THE DISCUSSION, INTO THE POLICY DEBATE, PERHAPS WE COULD JOIN THE MEETING THAT YOU.

YOU HAVE THIS ON THE AGENDA. I AM HAPPY TO RECOMMEND THAT TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CHAIR.

MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. OKAY. I WILL REACH OUT TO HIM.

I JUST SAW YOU AS THE AS THE POINT PERSON ON THIS TODAY.

BUT YES, THAT THAT WOULD BE MY HOPE IS THAT WE COULD BRING THE TWO COMMITTEES TOGETHER FOR THIS AS WELL AS DIRECTOR GÖTZ THERE.

SHE WOULD BE A WONDERFUL RESOURCE FOR YOU ALL.

CAP IS PART OF THIS. WE'RE I MEAN, THIS IS CLEARLY A CAP BASED INITIATIVE, SO I WOULD I JUST THINK YOU'RE MISSING A HUGE PIECE OF THIS POLICY DISCUSSION WITHOUT BRINGING IN BOTH HER OFFICE AND THIS COMMITTEE.

THAT'S GREAT. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH HER ON THIS FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, AND WE MET A COUPLE OF TIMES.

GREAT, GREAT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. ROTH RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'M. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE CAP SUGGESTION ON THIS, BUT I AM REALLY CONCERNED THAT THIS IS REALLY BAD POLICY GENERALLY AND THAT WE NEED SOME REAL STRONG THOUGHTFULNESS ABOUT HOW TO DEAL WITH LAND USE COSTS AND FOCUSING THAT THIS KIND OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHT, THAT A PERSON HAS TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE THEIR PROPERTIES SHOULD BE PARAMOUNT AND TO TO SOME OF THE POLICIES THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING. AND I'M, I'M VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE CAP BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE GOT A BAD ORDINANCE NOW THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED A LITTLE BIT, BUT THIS IS NOT A PERMANENT SOLUTION TO ME.

AND I AM GOING TO, I WANT THIS PERSONALLY ON THE ON THE MINDS AND ON THE AGENDAS OF OF OUR COUNCIL PEOPLE, OF OUR STAFF AND ALSO OF OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY TO, TO BE AWARE THAT THIS DISCUSSION HAS TO CONTINUE.

THIS IS A BIG DEAL IN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.

AND IT'S A, AND IT'S A STRONG IMPOSITION COST.

AND TO SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES COMMENTS, THIS IS NOT ECONOMICALLY DEVELOPMENT FRIENDLY.

AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT DALLAS IS BUSINESS FRIENDLY, BUSINESS RECEPTIVE.

AND WE NEED TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN OFFER UP TO OUR CONSTITUENTS BOTH IN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND BOTH IN THE

[06:25:08]

AND, AND I'M ACTUALLY VERY SURPRISED THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'VE GOTTEN TO THIS PLACE.

AND AGAIN, SHAME ON ME FOR NOT BEING HERE EARLIER IN THIS SEAT, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE GOT TO CHANGE AND I'M, AND I'M GOING TO BE A PROPONENT OF CHANGING IT IN THE FUTURE HERE.

SO I'M SUPPORTING THIS CAP, BUT THIS ISN'T THE LAST TIME WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS.

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

THANK YOU. WELL FOLLOWING ALONG THAT LINE, I TEND TO AGREE WITH YOU.

THE CITY OF DALLAS, WHILE C CAP IS INCREDIBLE AND MUCH NEEDED AND A GREAT GUIDEPOST WITH MILESTONES FOR US TO ACHIEVE.

I MEAN, THE CITY OF DALLAS DOES NOT HAVE TO DRIVE EVERY INITIATIVE.

AND SO THIS DOES CONCERN ME FROM AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT AND FROM SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED ABOUT BEING ONEROUS ON CERTAIN BUSINESSES.

AND SO THIS IS VERY MUCH A CONSUMER DRIVEN FREE MARKET AMERICAN ISSUE.

AND A SMART BUSINESS IS GOING TO RESPOND TO THEIR CONSUMERS.

IN FACT, YOU CAN SEE IT ALL OVER THE CITY. I MEAN, YOU SEE THESE THINGS APPEARING I REMEMBER MANY YEARS AGO DRIVING THROUGH CORSICANA AND STOPPING AT THE COLLIN STREET BAKERY ON THE HIGHWAY, AND THEY HAD TESLA CHARGERS.

I MEAN, IT'S PROBABLY BEEN TEN YEARS AGO. AND SO IT WAS A LITTLE AHEAD OF ITS TIME THEN, BUT NOW THEY'RE OCCUPIED.

AND SO I FEEL LIKE THAT IS UP TO A BUSINESS TO MAKE THAT DECISION AND STATEMENT.

NOW MAYBE THERE IS A WAY. I LIKE THE IDEA OF MAYBE WORKING THROUGH FEE IN LIEU.

I THINK THIS DOES NEED MORE WORK. AND SO I THINK IT'S PREMATURE TO JUMP UP TO A A HIGHER NUMBER NOW.

I MEAN, I THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE THE STUDY THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT GETTING MORE DATA FOR US TO CONSIDER, BUT PUTTING THE THE WEIGHT OF THIS. A YOKE ON THE BACK OF BUSINESSES.

AT THIS POINT JUST DOES FEEL PREMATURE. I THINK WE STILL NEED TO LET THE CONSUMER DRIVE THIS.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO SUPPORT OUR OUR BUSINESSES IN THAT.

SO I'M NOT SUPPORTING RAISING THIS CAP. CHAIRMAN WEST RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU MAYOR. I'M GOING TO ASK WHAT MIGHT BE SOME ELEMENTARY QUESTIONS, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN FOLLOWING THIS AS CLOSELY AS I HAVE.

OTHER THINGS I STILL REMEMBER WHEN THE WELL-INTENDED C CAP WAS GOING TO REQUIRE US TO REQUIRE BUILDERS TO PUT EV CHARGING STATIONS IN EVERY NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME, AND WE HAD A SANITY CHECK ON THAT BECAUSE ALL THAT COST WAS GOING TO BE PASSED ON TO THE THE PEOPLE TRYING TO BUY THEIR FIRST HOMES.

AND SO THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS, WELL INTENDED MEETING OUR GOALS ON C ON C CAP.

BUT THE REALITY, THE ECONOMIC REALITY IS MENTIONED BY SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES.

HOW IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT DEVELOPMENT. IF IF MESQUITE ISN'T REQUIRING IT.

AND JUST ACROSS THE BORDER IN DALLAS IS THE SALES TAX DOLLARS ARE GOING TO GO OVER THERE.

YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE GOING TO MISS OUT. ON A POINT OF ORDER, MR. MAYOR. OH, GOD.

PAUL, THIS IS NOT GERMANE TO THE SUSTAIN. JUST STOP TALKING.

THANK YOU. JUST KIDDING. GO AHEAD. SO AS I WAS, AS I WAS GOING INTO THE I NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S ON THE TABLE. SO THE, THE AGREEMENT THAT STAFF GOT INTO WITH THE, WITH, WITH TREK WAS, WAS TEN STATIONS, RIGHT? SIX. RIGHT NOW THE RECOMMENDATION IS SIX OUT OF THE ECONOMIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, I THINK CHAIR RUDELY AMENDED THAT TO INCREASE TO TEN.

OKAY. CAP AT TEN FOR EV CAPABLE ONLY BECAUSE EV READY ALREADY HAVE A CAP AT TWO FOR ALL THE USERS.

OKAY. AND SO THE CAP AT TEN IF A NEW BUSINESS WAS COMING IN.

IT WOULD, IT WOULD, IT'S TIED TO THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES.

RIGHT? SO IT'S 20% OR TEN, WHICHEVER IS LESS.

IT COULD BE SO 20% OF IF YOU HAVE 50 PARKING PROVIDED YOU'LL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE TEN.

IF YOU HAVE 60, IT'S STILL TEN. SO IT'S CAPPED AT TEN, BUT 20% OF 50 IS TEN.

IF I MAY, I JUST CLARIFIED THIS WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RADKE.

IT'S NOT 20% CAPPED AT TEN IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

IT'S JUST TEN RIGHT IN THE CHART. OR IS IT 20%? NOT TO EXCEED TEN. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET IT RIGHT.

THE LATTER 20% NOT TO EXCEED TEN. THANK YOU. OKAY, THEN WITH THAT CLARIFICATION, EXPLAIN IT TO ME ONE MORE TIME, PLEASE. SO HOW DOES THIS. I'M THE NEW BUSINESS.

I'M APPLYING FOR A PERMIT. I'M LOOKING AT MY PARKING.

[06:30:03]

ANY CHANGE TODAY IS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PARKING 26 OR MORE.

IF YOU HAVE, THERE'S A TABLE THERE. IF YOU HAVE 26 OR MORE, IT'S 20% OF THE TOTAL PARKING.

SO IF YOU HAVE 50, IT'S GOING TO BE TEN. IF YOU HAVE 500, IT'S GOING TO BE FIVE 100.

THERE IS NO CAP. IT'S GOING ON THE LARGEST PROJECT.

THE MORE YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE THAT. SO YEAH, WE HAVE SOME ISSUES IN THE LAST THREE YEARS.

THIS WAS ADOPTED THREE YEARS AGO. THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT THAT.

BUT RECENTLY BECAUSE THE PARKING REQUIRED THE PARKING REFORM, BASICALLY A LOT OF OFFICE USE RETAIL, LIKE THE HOME DEPOT NO LONGER REQUIRE. SO ONE TIME STAFF INTERPRET THAT IS CALCULATE BASED ON THE REQUIRED.

SO THAT'S WHY WE BRING IT BACK AND ASK YOU TO CLARIFY THAT SHOULD BE PROVIDED.

BUT THE CAP IS REALLY HELPING THE LARGER USERS COMING TO DALLAS.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO PROVIDE LIKE 100, 200 AND THE CONVENTION CENTER, IT COULD BE CLOSE TO 1000.

CAP IT AT 1006. YOUR DECISION WILL HELP US RECRUIT THE LARGER WILL HELP THE LARGER BUSINESS TO LOCATE TO SEE THAT'S THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SIDE.

OKAY. SO IT'S REALLY JUST OUR DECISION AS A BODY IF WE SUPPORT A LOWER CAP OR IF WE SUPPORT A HIGHER CAP, EITHER WAY, WE'RE GOING TO GET SOME EV CHARGING STATIONS OUT OF IT. AND IF THEY WANT TO PROVIDE MORE BECAUSE THEIR CUSTOMERS AS DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WAS SAYING, IF THEIR CUSTOMERS ARE DEMANDING IT THEN THE MARKET WOULD DO THAT, RIGHT? WE'RE NOT JUST BUREAUCRATS TELLING THEM WHAT TO DO WITH AN ARBITRARY NUMBER.

YES. RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO CAP. SO YOUR DECISION.

I'M SORRY. I JUST HAD A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

OKAY. SPECIFICALLY, THAT IS NOT CHARGING STATIONS, IT'S CHARGING CONDUIT.

WE HAVE NO CAP ON STATIONS. THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT SOMETHING WE DO.

I WAS CLARIFYING YOU GAVE IT TO ME. WELL, I MEAN, A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. A POINT OF INFORMATION IS NOT REALLY JUMPING INTO THE DEBATE.

I THINK IT WAS REALLY CRITICAL CONTEXT THOUGH, BECAUSE IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE WAS CONFUSION. SO YEAH, IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, RIGHT? WE CAN'T HAVE A MEETING THIS WAY. ALRIGHT.

GO AHEAD. OKAY. THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY.

AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A DELAY OF WHEN THIS TAKES EFFECT.

THAT'S ON THE TABLE. THAT'S NOW NOT TODAY, BUT IN APRIL.

AND I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND IF MR. RIDLEY WANTS TO EXPLAIN THAT OR IF STAFF WANTS TO EXPLAIN WHAT THAT DELAYS.

WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE DELAY? WE CAN IMPLEMENT THAT.

HAVE THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICER. I THINK WE CAN IMPLEMENT IT RIGHT AWAY.

RIGHT. IF IT'S PASSED TODAY, I DON'T THINK WE NEED A MONTH'S WAIT.

WE CAN JUST STOP REQUIRING THE 20% AND THEN START USING THE CAP.

OKAY, SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS HOME DEPOT'S HOLDING UP STARTING CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE OF THIS, RIGHT? THEY APPROACH US A COUPLE MONTHS AGO BECAUSE OF THIS ISSUE.

THEY EITHER BUILD IT HERE WITH 80 SOME EV CAPABLE OR THEY SAID THEY MAY MOVE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SO THAT'S THAT IS ONE PROJECT WAITING FOR THIS.

BUT IN TERMS OF EFFECTIVE DATE, WE'RE FLEXIBLE.

ALL RIGHT. I'M INCLINED TO SUPPORT THE COMPROMISE THAT CAME OUT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. I THINK IT'S WELL-INTENDED, BUT I, I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULD GO BEYOND THAT.

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

WELL, THANKS FOR HOME DEPOT, BECAUSE AT LEAST THEY COULD HIRE A LAW FIRM TO COME ADVOCATE FOR THEM.

OUR SMALL BUSINESSES DON'T HAVE THAT. AND THIS COMPROMISE WORKS WELL FOR BIG BUSINESSES LIKE THE ONE HIRED BY THE LAW FIRM.

SO. I THINK THIS IS VERY PROBLEMATIC. THE ENTIRE THING.

I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE AMENDMENT, BUT I AM WANTING TO THANK HOME DEPOT FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.

SO THE CLARIFICATION THAT I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WAS WANTING TO MAKE WAS TO SAY, YOU ONLY HAVE TO HAVE TWO EV CHARGING SPOTS, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE TEN EV CAPABLE SPOTS. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. THE EV READY KEPT AT TWO, BUT EV CAPABLE.

THERE'S NO CAP RIGHT NOW. BUT THAT'S WHAT THE THE MOTION WAS FOR A CAP OF TEN.

CORRECT. TO MAKE THAT CHANGE. SO MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS ABOUT THIS 20%.

HOW DID THE 20% COME TO BE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I SHOULD HAVE REVIEWED THE THE VIDEO WHEN THIS WAS ADOPTED. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF RESEARCH PUT INTO THIS.

[06:35:05]

IT'S BECAUSE OF WHAT WAS ADOPTED YEARS AGO. THIS WAS ADOPTED THREE YEARS AGO.

AND WE NOTICED THERE ARE SOME PROBLEMS, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE PROCUREMENT REFORM.

SO WE'LL BRING IT BACK. SO THE THE REASON WHY I'M QUESTIONING THE 20% IS BECAUSE WHY WOULD WE REQUIRE 20% OF THE PARKING SPOTS TO BE EV READY WHEN EV ADOPTION OF ALL REGISTERED VEHICLES IN DALLAS FORT WORTH IS 1.2%, 1.2% REGISTERED VEHICLES EV ADOPTION. POINT OF ORDER, MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR SAYING IT SO CALMLY AND QUIETLY.

WHAT WOULD YOU WOULD YOU STATE THE POINT OF ORDER? YES. THIS IS NOT THIS IS AN ISSUE PERTAINING TO THE UNDERLYING ORDINANCE WHICH WAS ADOPTED THREE YEARS AGO.

NOT TODAY'S AMENDMENT. CORRECT. AGAIN. SUSTAINED.

FAIR ENOUGH. AND I BELIEVE I MADE THIS POINT THEN AS WELL.

AND I JUST WANTED IT ON THE RECORD. SO FAIR. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT ONLY BECAUSE AT LEAST IT FIX ONE PROBLEM.

THERE ARE MASSIVE PROBLEMS HERE. NUMBER ONE, WE SHOULDN'T EVEN BE IN THIS BUSINESS OF TELLING THEM THAT.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR. OKAY.

CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES? YES.

I'D LIKE TO CALL CASEY BURGESS TO THE PODIUM TO EXPLAIN THE APRIL 24TH EFFECTIVE DATE.

YOU SHOULD REFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND ASK HER TO.

OKAY, MADAM. CITY ATTORNEY. MAY CASEY BURGESS ADDRESSED THE REASON HE INSERTED THE APRIL 24TH DATE INTO MY MOTION.

I CAN ANSWER THAT, OR CASEY CAN ANSWER THAT AS WELL.

GO AHEAD CASEY. IT'S ACTUALLY COMES FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

SECTION TWO 14.2 18. ANYTIME WE'RE ADOPTING OR AMENDING A NATIONAL CODE LIKE THE RESIDENTIAL CODE OR THE BUILDING CODE, IT REQUIRES AN EFFECTIVE DATE 30 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF ADOPTION.

SO LOOK LIKE YOU ACTUALLY HAD AN OLD VERSION OF THE ORDINANCE IN THE COUNCIL PACKET THAT HAD A MARCH EFFECTIVE DATE.

SO THAT'S JUST CORRECTING THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. BURGESS, AND THANK YOU, CITY ATTORNEY. SO I THINK THIS IS REALLY A PRETTY SIMPLE ISSUE.

WE'RE TRYING TO AMELIORATE THE EFFECTS OF A THREE YEAR OLD ORDINANCE WHICH HAD AN OVERLY AGGRESSIVE REQUIREMENT FOR LARGE LAND USES WITH A LOT OF PARKING SPACES.

THAT HAS TURNED OUT NOW TO BECOME AN ECONOMIC BURDEN.

AND AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE EXAMINING A MORE PARTICULARIZED SYSTEM OF REQUIRING THESE KINDS OF EV CHARGING FACILITIES. AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT WILL ALLOW US TO REMAIN ECONOMICALLY COMPETITIVE. AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THE CONTEXT THAT THIS WAS ADOPTED IN, WHICH WAS TO CARRY OUT ONE OF THE PRINCIPLES OF C-CAP.

OUR COMPETING SUBURBS DON'T HAVE A C CAP. WE MADE A POLICY DECISION OR SOME OF OUR PREDECESSORS DID THAT.

THE ENVIRONMENT WAS IMPORTANT TO US. THAT'S WHY WE PASSED C CAP.

NOW, IF WE WANT TO INSTEAD PRIORITIZE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THEN WE SHOULD CONSIDER RESCINDING CAP.

BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE PREPARED TO DO THAT.

AND SO I THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE REGULATION THAT NEEDED SOME MITIGATION.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ABOUT HERE TODAY. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST? PAGE ONE. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? TWO TO AN OPPOSITION DEPUTY MAYOR.

PRO TEM WILLIS AND COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

OKAY. NEXT ITEM. OKAY. NOTED. NEXT ITEM, PAGE

[PH2. 26-53A A public hearing to receive comments on an amendment and an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 26371, passed by the Dallas City Council on June 14, 2006, as amended by Ordinance No. 32885, passed by the Dallas City Council on September 25, 2024; (1) complying with federal directives; (2) providing a saving clause; (3) providing a severability clause; and (4) providing an effective date - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

ONE COMPLYING WITH FEDERAL FEDERAL DIRECTIVES.

TWO PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE. THREE PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND FOUR PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

[06:40:04]

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM FF TWO? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION ON PAGE TWO? ANYONE GOT A MOTION ON PAGE TWO. ANYBODY WANT TO JUST MOVE? YES, YES. GO AHEAD. CHAD WEST, I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION.

IS THERE A SECOND? WONDERFUL. A DISCUSSION, MR. WEST. ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. NO, NO. I'M SORRY.

I PUT MY THING IN. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. IT POPPED IT OFF. SO THE ITEM IS LISTED THIS WAY.

A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON AMENDMENT AND AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 26371, PASSED BY THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 14TH, 2006, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 32885, PASSED BY DALLAS CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2024.

AND IT GOES ON. I THINK THIS IS NOT A GOOD WAY TO LIST INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC.

HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? WE DON'T ANSWER THE ITEMS INTO THE SYSTEM. THOSE ARE DONE BY THE DEPARTMENTS.

BUT THIS HAS BEEN OUR CUSTOM FOR AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN AROUND.

AND YOU CAN GO ON TO THE CITY SECRETARY'S WEBSITE, I BELIEVE, OR GOOGLE THE ORDINANCE NUMBER AND IT POPS RIGHT UP.

RIGHT. SO I THINK THERE SHOULD AT LEAST BE A BASIC EXPLANATION, EVEN IF IT'S ONE SENTENCE OF WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT.

COULD I HAVE SOMEBODY EXPLAIN WHAT ORDINANCE NUMBER 32 885 IS? COUNCIL MEMBER. MAYOR. HONORABLE MAYOR. ANDREA WOODRUFF, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.

YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE FOR THE COMMENT.

YES. THE ITEM REFERS TO AN AMENDMENT TO FOUR DALLAS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT IS BEING.

AMENDMENT AMENDED TO COMPLY WITH THE FEDERAL DIRECTIVES.

AND YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN. OKAY. BUT THAT STILL DOESN'T SAY WHAT THE CHANGE IS.

THE CHANGES ARE LISTED IN THE IN THE ATTACHMENT THAT COMES WITH THE WITH THE AGENDA AND COUNCILWOMAN, I WOULD ADD THESE BOTH WENT TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AS WELL. SO THE PUBLIC HAD AN ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTICE THAT THESE WERE COMING TODAY.

OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO SAY I THINK THIS IS NOT GOOD TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT.

AND I THINK THIS OUGHT TO BE CHANGED. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE AD HOC QUESTION.

DO YOU THINK THAT'S WHERE IT BELONGS? I MEAN, IT'S IT'S THE IT'S THE OPERATIONAL SIDE OF THE HOUSE.

IF YOU'RE ASKING THEM TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR, ADD A FEW MORE CLARIFYING WORDS.

I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S FINE. I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO GO TO ADMINISTRATIVE AD HOC.

IT IS. THAT'S I MEAN, IT'S IT'S REALLY. THE OPERATIONAL SIDE.

WELL, I WOULD DISAGREE WHEN IT'S ON A VOTING AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL THAT IT'S OPERATIONAL.

I THINK THIS IS ABOUT TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT.

AND IF I GO ASK 100 PEOPLE ON THE STREET, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? AND I SHOW THEM THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE NO IDEA.

SO I, I, I JUST SAVED IT FOR THIS. YOU'RE RIGHT.

IT OCCASIONALLY IS LIKE THIS. AND I THINK I HAVE REPEATEDLY BROUGHT THIS UP THAT THIS IS NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION FOR.

I MEAN, WE HAVE RESIDENTS WHO ACTUALLY READ THIS STUFF AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS RIGHT.

SO YES, I'M FOR THIS ITEM. YES, WE NEED TO CHANGE TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL LAW, BUT WE SHOULD AT LEAST SAY WHAT IT'S FOR. WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW? ARE YOU ARE YOU FINISHED? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, I STAFF ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT, MR. ROTH I'M I WANTED TO ECHO THE COMMENT OF OF COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. THE, THE ATTACHMENTS THAT I HAD ATTACHED TO THE ORDINANCE WAS BASICALLY A, A, A DECK SHEET. AND IF THIS IS WHAT WE'RE APPROVING CHANGES TO.

IT WASN'T REDLINED. IT WASN'T JUST I DON'T HAVE A COMPARABLE DEAL IN MY IN MY INFORMATION.

AND IF IN FACT IT WAS IT WAS REDLINED AND I DIDN'T PRODUCE THE CORRECT ATTACHMENT.

AGAIN, I'LL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT. BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF IF THIS WAS THE, THE HANDOUT THAT WAS DONE AND IF I RECEIVE,

[06:45:08]

THE ATTACHMENT EXHIBIT A CONTAINS THE RED LINE VERSION.

THAT'S PH THREE. WHERE AT PH ONE. PH TWO. I'M SORRY.

SO PH TWO HAS ATTACHMENT EXHIBIT ONE. IT'S ABOUT FOUR DALLAS.

I HAVE IT OPEN HERE ON MY PHONE. YES. AND IT DOES HAVE AGAIN, ATTACHMENT EXHIBIT A DOES HAVE THE RED LINED VERSION.

THERE ARE ONLY FEW. I UNDERSTAND IT'S ONLY EIGHT CHANGES OR EIGHT PAGES THAT HAVE JUST A SENTENCE REWORDED IN THOSE PAGES. AND I'M SORRY, THAT WAS IN THIS EXHIBIT A FOR FOR DALLAS.

YES, I HAVE IT OPEN. I WILL SAY, FOR INSTANCE, PAGE 2612.

IT HAS I HAVE IT OPEN RIGHT NOW ON MY PHONE AND IT SHOWS THE RED LINING.

I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE TIME TO, TO GO THROUGH THIS RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S, IT'S ABSOLUTELY NOT EASILY, EASILY CLEAR TO ME WITHOUT READING EVERY LITTLE BIT HERE, BUT THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.

IT SHOULD BE IN BOTH OF THESE. I THINK WE'LL HAVE THE SAME QUESTION ON THE FAIR PARK ORDINANCE ALSO.

THANK YOU. I MIGHT MAYOR FOR ANYONE WHO WAS NOT AT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, PH TWO AND PH THREE ARE SIMPLY MAKING AMENDMENTS TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL DIRECTIVES.

THEY SHOULD HAVE PROBABLY COME WITH A WHOLE BIG SWOOP OF THESE IN DECEMBER, BUT THEY REQUIRED A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND SO THEY'RE ON A DIFFERENT TIMELINE. BUT THOSE ARE THE ONLY CHANGES ARE THE FEDERAL DIRECTIVE CLEANUPS.

AND FOR ALSO. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND JUST JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN WE MAKE CHANGES IN ORDINANCES OR EXHIBITS, WE UNDERLINE WHAT'S NEW AND WE STRIKE OUT WHAT WE'RE TAKING OUT.

SO ANYTHING THAT'S UNDERLINED IS NEW. IF IT'S NOT UNDERLINED OR STRICKEN, IT'S IT'S IT'S NOT CHANGING.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. AND AGAIN, THIS, THIS IS ON ME FOR NOT GETTING THROUGH THE THE THE PAPERWORK COMPLETELY.

BUT. BUT I APPRECIATE THE THE EXPLANATION AND THE CLARIFICATION.

CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR HOWEVER LONG YOU WANT.

WELL, THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR YOUR GENEROSITY. JUST BRIEFLY, I AGREE THE PH TWO DESCRIPTION IS OPAQUE.

IT DOESN'T INDICATE THE SUBJECT MATTER. PERHAPS IN FUTURE FOR ITEMS LIKE THIS WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN AMENDMENT, WE COULD SAY AFTER CITING THE AMENDMENT NUMBER CONCERNING X SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW THE GENERAL SUBJECT MATTER AND THEY CAN EITHER LOOK FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR DISMISS IT AS NOT RELEVANT TO THEIR CONCERNS.

COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK. WE WILL DO THAT GOING FORWARD. IT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST PH TWO OR HOW IT'S PRESENTED OR WHATEVER? OKAY. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. ITEM PH THREE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON AN AMENDMENT AND AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER

[PH3. 26-882A A public hearing to receive comments on an amendment and an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 33165, passed by the Dallas City Council on June 25, 2025; (1) complying with federal directives; (2) providing a saving clause; (3) providing a severability clause; and (4) providing an effective date - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM PH THREE? NO SPEAKERS. MR. MAYOR, IS THERE A MOTION ON PAGE THREE? MOVE TO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.

IS IT OKAY? THERE'S A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. ITEM FOUR IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS AND TWO.

[PH4. 26-918A (1) A public hearing to receive comments; and (2) consideration of authorizing a public hearing to amend Article XIII, "Form Districts," of Chapter 51A, "Dallas Development Code," to list tattoo and body piercing as an example of permitted personal service uses instead of as an example of prohibited personal service uses in form-based zoning districts (This is a hearing to consider the request to authorize the hearing and not the amendment of the development code at this time) - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

[06:50:03]

OH, YEAH. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? YES.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANY COMMENTS? YES. SO I THIS ITEM IS A FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO.

THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES WHO SIGNED ON TO THIS AND THIS.

THE FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO WAS REQUESTED BY STAFF IN ORDER FOR US TO HELP EXPLORE A SURGICAL EDIT TO THE CITY'S FORM BASED CODE, WHICH CURRENTLY PROHIBITS TATTOO PARLORS AND BODY PIERCING IN FORM CODE AREAS.

THIS WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION WHEN PEGASUS STUDIOS, A LOCALLY OWNED BUSINESS THAT HAS OPERATED IN ELMWOOD IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE 2017, HAD TO TEMPORARILY MOVE OUT OF THEIR SPACE DURING SOME RENOVATION WHEN THEY TRIED TO APPLY FOR A NEW CEO AT THE LOCATION, THEY WERE DENIED AS PART OF THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN.

WE CHANGED THE ZONING IN SEVERAL AREAS TO FORM BASED CODE AT THE REQUEST OF NEIGHBORS TO SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESSES, HISTORIC PRESERVATION, AND ENCOURAGE WALKABILITY.

NO ONE WAS AWARE THAT THIS CHANGE WOULD PROHIBIT A USE THAT NO ONE, AT LEAST IN OAK CLIFF, HAS AN ISSUE WITH. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS PROHIBITION WAS MADE IN THE EARLY 2000, WHEN FORM BASED CODE WAS NOT A POPULAR ZONING TOOL.

NO ONE KNOWS WHY THIS PROHIBITION WAS ADDED. BESIDES, A FEW INDIVIDUALS DISLIKE OF CERTAIN BUSINESSES, SUCH AS TATTOO AND BODY PIERCING SHOPS. THE ENTIRE POINT OF FORM BASED CODE IS THAT WE FOCUS ON THE BUILDING FORM, NOT THE USES. WHILE THIS ZONING CATEGORY IS NOT VERY POPULAR ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY, IT IS IMPACTING MY DISTRICT PRIMARILY.

SO I'M HOPING TO MAKE A SMALL TWEAK TO SUPPORT OUR SMALL BUSINESSES.

I'VE ASKED STAFF TO PROVIDE CLARITY ABOUT WHICH COUNCIL DISTRICTS MAY HAVE FORM BASED ZONING AND WHICH DOESN'T.

STAFF HAS CREATED A MAP, AND I BELIEVE THEY'VE SENT IT TO ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS SHOWING THE AREAS THAT HAVE FORM BASED ZONING.

AS A REMINDER, THIS VOTE IS NOT TO CHANGE THE PROCESS HERE.

IT'S JUST TO START THE PROCESS WHICH WILL GO THROUGH ZOE AND THEN CPC AND HAVE LOTS OF DISCUSSION THERE, I'M SURE. AND THEN BACK TO US FOR A FINAL VOTE.

AND WE LEARNED THANKS TO COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY AT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE THAT THIS SMALL CODE CHANGE WOULD NOT TAKE UP VALUABLE AUTHORIZED HEARING STAFF BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO GO ON A SEPARATE TRACK. SO I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR US TO OPEN UP THIS PROCESS.

LET CBC WORK ON IT AND HOPEFULLY MAKE IT WHERE IT DOESN'T IMPACT ANYBODY IN A NEGATIVE WAY.

AT THE COUNCIL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? OH, MR. BAZALDUA, FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR SPEARHEADING THIS.

I WAS HAPPY TO TO SIGN. I DO THINK THAT THIS IS A CODE AMENDMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED.

I DO WANT TO JUST SAY THOUGH, CLEARLY FOR ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO MAY BE CURIOUS TO WHAT THIS WILL BRING ABOUT REGARDLESS OF THE CODE CHANGING FOR FORM BASED ZONING AS AN ALLOWABLE USE, WE ALL STILL HAVE THE ABILITY, EVEN WITHIN FORM BASED ZONING, TO WORK ON VOLUNTARY DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THIS USE IN PARTICULAR PROPERTIES.

SO IF YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS, IF YOU THINK THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD OPEN UP A CAN OF WORMS, JUST REMEMBER THERE ARE THERE ARE TOOLS AND RECOURSE.

STILL, THIS ISN'T MEANING TO LOCK ANYONE INTO CERTAIN USES THAT YOU MAY HAVE HAD SOME ISSUES WITH IN YOUR DISTRICT IN THE PAST.

I WANTED TO JUST REITERATE THAT THAT THAT DOESN'T PROHIBIT THE USE OF DEED RESTRICTIONS.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER COMMENTS.

ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED.

MOTION PASSES. ITEM FIVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

[PH5. 26-837A (1) A public hearing to receive comments on the adoption of Reprogramming Budget No. 2 (Substantial Amendment No. 2) to the FY 2025-26 Action Plan to: (a) use unspent prior year Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds in the amount of $2,566,661 for public improvement projects and (b) use unspent prior year Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Funds, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG-COVID) in the amount of $450,000 for the emergency rental and mortgage assistance program; and, (2) at the close of the public hearing, authorize final adoption of Reprogramming Budget No. 2 (Substantial Amendment No. 2) to the FY 2025-26 Action Plan - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information) *In alignment with HUD Consolidated Plan.]

NUMBER TWO, SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE FY 20 2526 ACTION PLAN TO A USE UNSPENT PRIOR YEAR.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT CDBG FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,566,661 FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, AND B USE UNSPENT PRIOR YEAR CORONAVIRUS AID, RELIEF AND ECONOMIC SECURITY CARES ACT FUNDS.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT CDBG HYPHEN COVID IN THE AMOUNT OF $450,000 FOR THE EMERGENCY RENTAL AND MORTGAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND TWO AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AUTHORIZE FINAL ADOPTION OF REPROGRAMING.

BUDGET NUMBER TWO. SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE FY 20 2526 ACTION PLAN.

[06:55:07]

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM FIVE? NO. NO SPEAKERS. MADAM MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BAZALDUA. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? YOU DO NOT. PH FIVE.

YEAH. OH. PH FIVE. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE.

THE UNSPENT CDBG FUNDS MAY ALSO BE USED FOR OTHER OTHER ELIGIBLE USES.

ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. NO DISCUSSION.

MR.. BAZALDUA. OKAY, NOW I'M CONFUSED. SO I'VE SEEN THE BREAKDOWN OF WHAT IT WAS INTENDED TO BE USED FOR.

WHAT IS THIS NEW LANGUAGE? I READ AN OLD MOTION.

OKAY, CAN I RESTATE? MAY I RESTATE MY MOTION? PLEASE RESTATE THE MOTION. THANK YOU. IF THE PERSON WHO SECONDED DOESN'T MIND.

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

THE UNSPENT CDBG FUNDS MAY ALSO BE USED FOR SECTION 108 DEBT PAYMENTS.

A SECOND, WE NEED TO SECOND THE NEW MOTION SECOND.

ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A SECOND. THANK YOU. THIS WAS A REQUEST BY STAFF, AND I THINK MISS WHEDON IS PROBABLY HERE.

OR OR JACK IRELAND IF IF THERE'S QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

AND THIS WENT THROUGH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. ALL RIGHT.

COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. I'M STILL ON. I STILL HAVE TIME.

IT WAS AT 452. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE STILL ON BAZALDUA.

YEAH. FIVE MINUTES, 452. THANK YOU. SO I THINK THAT THIS AMENDMENT IS TO ALLOW FOR DEBT PAYMENTS SPECIFIC TO THE LORENZOT HOTEL. I HAVE SOME CONCERN AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR.

I UNDERSTAND THAT MAKING THIS AMENDMENT ALLOWS FOR ITS ELIGIBLE USE.

HOWEVER, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS $2.5 MILLION IN HOW IT'S BEING ALLOCATED, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $800,000 TO THE STEW POT, WHICH IS INCREDIBLE PARTNER DOING INCREDIBLE WORK, 107,000 FOR BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB.

INCREDIBLE PARTNER, DOING INCREDIBLE WORK. $611,000 TO THE BRIDGE.

INCREDIBLE PARTNER. DOING INCREDIBLE WORK. AND THEN WE WANT TO SPEND $935,000 ON DEBT FOR THE LORENZOT HOTEL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS IS THE ACRONYM OF A CDBG FUND.

I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF MAKING COUNCIL ACTION TO BRING THIS, BUT I'M ASKING WHY IS THIS THE SOLUTION VERSUS FINDING ANOTHER PLACE OR COUCH CUSHION TO FIND THIS $935,000? YEAH, I'M GLAD TO TAKE THAT ONE.

SO THIS WAS A LOAN MADE UNDER THE FORMER. I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS CALLED, THE OLD HOUSING DEPARTMENT A ZILLION YEARS AGO.

AND IT'S A SECTION 108 LOAN. THE LOAN, OUR LOAN FROM HUD IS BACKED BY OUR CDBG DOLLARS.

AND THEN WE USED THE PROCEEDS FROM OUR LOAN TO MAKE A LOAN TO THE LORENZOT HOTEL, WHICH HAS NOW BEEN INHERITED BY THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND THEY'RE MANAGING THE LOAN. WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A CHOICE HERE EITHER.

WE MAKE THE PAYMENT WITH OUR CDBG DOLLARS OR HUD WILL GARNISH OUR CDBG DOLLARS.

AND SO WE'RE JUST ASKING TO CLEAN UP THE PAPERWORK SO WE CAN MAKE OUR LOAN PAYMENT AND STAY GOOD ON OUR LOAN WITH HUD.

AND THEN WE'LL BE WORKING WITH MR. HAMILTON. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE WITH THE HOTEL OWNERSHIP AS PART OF THE SALE OF THE HOTEL, TO TRY TO RECOUP OUR FUNDING ON THE BACK END.

HOW MUCH IS CURRENTLY OUTSTANDING? MARIA. GO AHEAD.

GOOD AFTERNOON. MARIA SMITH, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

SO THE WE STILL OWE HUD $6.5 MILLION IN PRINCIPAL, AND THE HOTEL OWNER OWES US 6.9 MILLION IN PRINCIPAL. AND I GUESS EXPLAIN TO. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SAID, ROBIN, BUT COULD THIS NOT BE PAID FROM ANOTHER SOURCE? I DON'T KNOW WHAT SOURCE THAT WOULD BE. OUR OUR WHEN IS OUR PAYMENT DUE? MARIA, DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE THAT DATE OR. JANETTE.

WHAT DATE IS OUR PAYMENT DUE TO HUD? SORRY, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? WHAT DAY IS OUR PAYMENT DUE TO HUD? DO WE HAVE TIME BASICALLY TO FIGURE OUT ANOTHER SOURCE.

SO THE NEXT. OUR PAYMENT IS DUE TO HUD APPROXIMATELY TEN DAYS BEFORE AUGUST 1ST, 2026.

SO WE DO HAVE TIME TO FIGURE THAT OUT. IT'S $1 MILLION ALMOST.

BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE US TO GO IS $1 MILLION, BUT ESSENTIALLY A ROUNDING ERROR IN OUR OVERALL BUDGET.

AND IF WE'RE AT MID-YEAR REVIEW TIME AND YOU'RE TELLING ME YOU CAN'T FIND $935,000, THEN I THINK THAT THERE'S A BIGGER PROBLEM.

I DO BELIEVE WE CAN FIND IT. IT'S REALLY ABOUT HOW WE'RE PRIORITIZING THESE EXPENSES AND WHEN WE HAVE OTHER ELIGIBLE USES WITH THESE FUNDS SPECIFICALLY,

[07:00:04]

I SEE THE USE OF THIS AS BEING A LOW HANGING FRUIT, AND I UNDERSTAND WHY IT WAS BEING BROUGHT UP IN THIS MANNER, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S THE MOST RESPONSIBLE USE OF CDBG FUNDS.

AND I THINK THAT WHEN YOU SEE IT LISTED OUT NEXT TO THE OTHER PARTNERS WHO WOULD BE RECEIVING FUNDS FROM CDBG, IT REALLY PUTS INTO PERSPECTIVE HOW. UNORTHODOX THIS IS.

SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. WELL, ACTUALLY, THIS IS FAR BEYOND UNORTHODOX.

IT'S UNCONSCIONABLE. WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION. IF YOU CAME IN MY CLASS YOU MAY REMEMBER LEE KLEIMAN WAS THERE.

WE WERE DOING REMOTE MEETINGS DURING COVID AND IT WAS RECOGNIZED MAYBE FOR THE FIRST TIME THAT THIS WAS CDBG BACKED AND OUR CITY MANAGER AT THE TIME SAID HE WAS GOING TO GET OUT OF THAT.

CLEARLY DID NOT. SO FIRST OFF, IF THIS WAS TO GO FORWARD, WHICH I HOPE IT WILL NOT, BUT IF IT DOES, WOULD THE CURRENT OWNER BE BARRED FROM EVER RECEIVING AN INCENTIVE IN THE FUTURE FROM THE CITY? GOOD QUESTION. THE CURRENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE POLICY DOES SAY THAT ANYONE WITH A DEFAULT ON AN EXISTING INCENTIVE AGREEMENT CANNOT RE-APPLY FOR ADDITIONAL INCENTIVE OR A PRIOR. CORRECT ME IF THAT'S NOT EXACTLY CURRENT OR PRIOR DEFAULT.

I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT EXACTLY WHAT THE WORDING IS.

I'M NOT. OKAY, WELL, THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT POINT.

IF WE'RE GOING TO BE OUT $6.5 MILLION. HAVING BACKED SOMEBODY, I DON'T WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH THEM AGAIN.

THAT'S NUMBER ONE. THAT'S JUST THE BEGINNING.

NUMBER TWO, I'LL GIVE YOU A HISTORY LESSON. YOU KNOW WHY THIS IS THE LORENZOT HOTEL? BECAUSE WE CAN ALL SEE IT. IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A HOMELESS FACILITY, AND THE PEOPLE IN THE CEDARS FLIPPED OUT.

AND THAT'S HOW IT BECAME THE LORENZOT AND MONEY THAT WAS ACTUALLY MEANT TO ADDRESS PEOPLE IN SEVERE POVERTY, LIKE THE HOMELESS, WAS THEN USED FOR AN UPSCALE HOTEL.

AS THE LOAN GUARANTEE, I MEAN, THIS IS A COMPLETE AFFRONT TO WHAT THE PROGRAM IS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, TO HOW IT WAS ADMINISTERED HERE AT THE CITY. NOW, THIS IS BEFORE ALL OF OUR TIME, BUT THEN TO TAKE THE MONEY THAT WAS GUARANTEED INAPPROPRIATELY LIKE THAT, COUNCIL SHOULD NEVER HAVE DONE THAT.

AND LIKE, I HOPE YOU, IN WHATEVER AMOUNT OF TIME YOU'RE ON COUNCIL WILL NEVER USE CDBG FUNDING FOR AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

THAT'S NOT WHAT IT'S FOR. IT'S NOT WHAT YOU PAY YOUR FEDERAL TAXES FOR, BUT THEN TO SAY, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE $900 MILLION THAT'S ELIGIBLE MEANT FOR CHILD CARE, HOMELESS SERVICES, SENIORS ARE MOST ELIGIBLE PEOPLE, AND WE'RE GOING TO PAY OFF A LUXURY, UPSCALE HOTEL THAT LITERALLY TOOK AWAY A HOMELESS SERVICE WE NEEDED.

I MEAN, I JUST THINK THIS IS A GROSS AMENDMENT.

I MEAN, THIS IS THIS IS REALLY EVERYTHING WRONG WITH HOW THINGS HAD BEEN OPERATING? AND I KNOW WE NEED TO CORRECT IT. NOW. I UNDERSTAND WHY THE MANAGER IS COMING FORWARD WITH THIS IDEA.

RIGHT? IT WON'T IMPACT OUR BUDGET, BUT IT WILL IMPACT OUR RESIDENTS.

AND I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO BE HERE FOR. AND SO I JUST THINK THIS IS SHAMEFUL.

IT COULD BE DOING A LOT OF OTHER THINGS. WE SAT THERE AND HEARD IT.

HOUSING. HOW? VERNA JONES FROM UNDER ONE ROOF.

HOW MANY PEOPLE. ON THE VERY DAY THE PHONE OPENED UP.

WERE CALLING IN, SAYING THEY NEED RENTAL ASSISTANCE.

HOMELESS PREVENTION DOLLARS AND $900 MILLION WOULD ACTUALLY PREVENT A LOT OF PEOPLE FROM FALLING INTO HOMELESSNESS.

SO I JUST THIS THIS IS JUST ABSOLUTELY SHAMEFUL.

AND I THINK THIS SHOULD ACTUALLY COME FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S WHAT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FROM TO BEGIN WITH, NOT FROM CDBG.

COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA FIVE MINUTES. I REMEMBER AN ECO DEV THAT THERE WAS A PARTICULAR REASON.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS HERE, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO EXPAND A LITTLE BIT ON THE REASON WHY WE'RE HERE.

YEAH, WELL, MR. HAMILTON'S COMING DOWN. I'LL JUST SAY THERE WERE A SERIES OF SECTION 108 LOANS DONE IN THE EARLY 20 TENS.

[07:05:07]

YOU MAY REMEMBER DURING COVID, THERE WAS AN INABILITY TO MAKE PAYMENT, AND WE REWORKED THE LOAN AND ADDED IN A GUARANTEE FROM THE HAMILTON FAMILY TRUST.

AND SO WE ARE ACTUALLY IN A BETTER POSITION NOW TO RECOUP THE CITY'S FUNDING, BOTH THROUGH THE SALE OF THE HOTEL.

AND IF THERE'S A SHORTFALL, THEN THROUGH THE FAMILY TRUST.

MR. HAMILTON'S BEEN A REALLY GOOD PARTNER HELPING US WORK THROUGH THIS DIFFICULT SITUATION.

BUT THE SECTION 108 LOANS ARE A CDBG SOURCE. I DON'T KNOW IF THE BUDGET TEAM WANTS TO TALK ABOUT CDBG USES, BUT ANYWAY, I'LL STOP THERE. HI. TED HAMILTON, 301 SOUTH HARWOOD. REMEMBER WHEN WE WERE AT ECO TECH COMMITTEE THAT YOU DID HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPLANATION ABOUT WHY WE. YOU KNOW, WHY THIS WAS COMING FORWARD.

THE HOTEL HAS EXPERIENCED FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES.

A COMBINATION OF KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CENTER BEING SHUT DOWN ALONG WITH ALL THE I30.

CANYON IMPROVEMENTS. THE HOTEL IS NOT ABLE TO SERVICE ALL OF ITS DEBT AND MEET ALL OF ITS FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS.

AND SO WE HAD A PAYMENT DUE TO THE CITY ON MAY 1ST OF THIS YEAR.

THAT I INFORMED THE CITY THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT PAYMENT TIMELY.

AND WE ARE CURRENT ON OUR FIRST MORTGAGE. WE HAVE PUT THE PROPERTY UP FOR SALE. WE'VE HIRED CBRE TO HELP US SELL THE HOTEL.

WE, THE SALES PROCESS IS ACTUALLY GOING SURPRISINGLY WELL.

IDEALLY WE HAVE THE CITY PAID OFF IN FULL BEFORE ITS PAYMENT IS DUE AT THE END OF JULY.

I WOULD EXPECT THAT WE WILL HAVE THE SALE TRANSACTION COMPLETED BY THEN.

SO THIS IS PROBABLY ALL A MOOT POINT. SO, BUT THE REASON THAT IT'S BEFORE YOU GUYS IS BECAUSE I INFORMED THE CITY THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THE PAYMENT COME MAY 1ST.

SO COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

SO I'D LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, FROM MS..

BENTLEY'S PREVIOUS STATEMENT, THIS WAS A LEGITIMATE LOAN THROUGH THE CDBG PROGRAM AT THE TIME.

THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO THE LOGISTICS OF HOW THE PAYMENTS WORK WAS THE BORROWER TO MAKE MONTHLY PAYMENTS TO THE CITY.

AND THEN THE CITY MADE WHAT QUARTERLY PAYMENTS TO THE GOVERNMENT.

SO INITIALLY IT'S TWO PAYMENTS A YEAR. OUR PAYMENTS TO HUD ARE DUE FEBRUARY AND AUGUST, AND THE BORROWER'S PAYMENTS TO US ARE DUE IN MAY AND NOVEMBER.

AND SO THEIR PAYMENTS ARE DUE ABOUT A QUARTER BEFORE OUR PAYMENTS ARE DUE TO HUD.

OKAY. AND SO THE FEBRUARY PAYMENT WAS MADE TO HUD.

YES. OKAY. AND WE RECEIVED THE NOVEMBER PAYMENT FROM THE BORROWER.

CORRECT. OKAY. SO CURRENTLY WE'RE WHERE WE SHOULD BE.

WE'VE PAID AND THE BORROWER'S PAID US BACK. SO THIS IS AN ANTICIPATORY PROBLEM, BASED UPON MR. HAMILTON'S STATEMENT THAT HE CAN'T MAKE THE MAY 1ST PAYMENT, BUT IS HOPEFUL THAT HE'LL BE ABLE TO MAKE GOOD ON THAT OBLIGATION BEFORE OUR PAYMENT IS DUE TO HUD AUGUST 1ST. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

MR. BAZALDUA, THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION BY STRIKING THE PROVISION ALLOWING THE UNSPENT CDBG FUNDS.

ALLOWING THAT THE UNSPENT CDBG FUNDS MAY ALSO BE USED FOR SECTION 108 DEBT PAYMENTS.

AND DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO BRING BACK A DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCE.

BY. APRIL 22ND, I BELIEVE IS THE. SECOND AGENDA MEETING. YES. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

OR AN AMENDMENT? YES. THANK YOU. I JUST BELIEVE THAT WE COULD LOOK AT ANOTHER FUNDING SOURCE FOR THIS, ESPECIALLY AT MID-YEAR REVIEW. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS AN ELIGIBLE USE.

[07:10:02]

I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE TIME ON OUR SIDE WITH THE TIMES THAT HAVE BEEN GIVEN US AT THE PODIUM, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT OUR CITY MANAGER WOULD GIVE US ANOTHER AGENDA ITEM TO CONSIDER WITHIN A MONTH.

AND TO BE CLEAR, SO EVERYONE ELSE IS AWARE. I DID TALK WITH THE ATTORNEYS AND THAT THIS ONLY ADDRESSES THE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD OPEN UP THE ELIGIBLE USES. DOESN'T DO ANYTHING TO THOSE OTHER USES THAT ALREADY ARE ELIGIBLE UNDER CDBG FUNDS.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN, FIVE MINUTES ON THIS AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU. AM I CORRECT THAT THE CITY IS IN THE SECOND POSITION ON THE LOAN? YES. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND WASN'T THERE A GUARANTEE OUT OF A FAMILY TRUST? CORRECT. SO WHY ISN'T THE FAMILY TRUST PAYING FOR THIS? BECAUSE THE PAYMENT IS NOT QUITE DUE YET. SO WE BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS PUTTING THE CITY IN POSITION TO MAKE SURE WE DO NOT DEFAULT ON OUR LOAN, BUT NO ONE HAS DEFAULTED ON ANY PAYMENTS AT THIS TIME.

WE'RE JUST GETTING PAPERWORK READY TO MAKE SURE WE CAN MAKE OUR.

BUT IF YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE PAYMENT MAY NOT BE FORTHCOMING, WOULDN'T YOU BE DEMANDING THAT THE FAMILY TRUST PAY IT SO WE CAN'T ACT ON THE TRUST UNTIL THERE'S A DEFAULT, AND THERE WOULDN'T BE A DEFAULT UNTIL MAY.

AND HOPEFULLY BY MAY. THE HOTEL HAS BEEN SOLD AND WE'VE BEEN PAID.

AND THIS IS ALL SQUARED AWAY WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING.

SO FOR MR. BAZALDUA MOTION, IF WE END UP PAYING HUD OUT OF SOME OTHER GENERAL FUND ACCOUNT AND THEN MR. HAMILTON MAKES THE PAYMENT, THEN WHAT? SO I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION ACTUALLY, FOR JEANETTE AND SHAN. I'M NOT SURE IF WE MAKE OUR PAYMENT TO HUD OUT OF A NON HUD SOURCE.

IF THEN THE SALE OF THE HOTEL WOULD TRIGGER PROGRAM INCOME.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD WORK. SO I'M GOING TO ASK SHAN TO WEIGH IN ON WHETHER OR NOT WE'D BE ABLE TO REPAY OURSELVES IF WE USE ANOTHER SOURCE.

THAT IS MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. YES. AS WE STILL OWE HUD ON THE REMAINING PRINCIPAL IN 27. WHATEVER'S OVER THAT THAT'S DUE TO HUD WOULD BE CONSIDERED PROGRAM INCOME.

YES. SO TO CLARIFY THEN, IF WE ENDED UP MAKING.

THE PAYMENT AT A GENERAL FUND, AND THEN WE GET THE PAYMENT FROM MR. HAMILTON. WE CAN PAY IT BACK INTO OUR GENERAL FUND.

OR YOU'RE SAYING NO, WE WOULD PASS THAT ON TO HUD ALSO.

AND SO WE WOULD HAVE MADE LIKE A SECOND MORTGAGE PAYMENT, SO TO SPEAK.

BUT WE'RE OUT FOR OUR GENERAL FUND FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.

NO, IF WHEREVER THE SOURCE IS FROM, IF IT'S DUE BACK, IT WOULD GO BACK TO THAT SOURCE BECAUSE UNTIL THE DATE THE CDBG FUNDS, THE THE BORROWER HAS BEEN MAKING THOSE PAYMENTS.

SO CDBG. THE ONLY REASON CDBG BECOMES ENGAGED IS THERE IS A POTENTIAL NONPAYMENT ON TEN DAYS BEFORE THE DUE DATE.

OKAY, SO EVEN IF THIS BODY PASSED THIS ITEM, YOU'RE NOT MAKING THE PAYMENT UNTIL AUGUST OR TEN DAYS BEFORE AUGUST. AND SO YOU MAY NOT NEED TO TRIGGER IT IF MR. HAMILTON PAID. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. THANK YOU.

COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH, FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT.

JUST TO CLARIFY, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT IF THE PAYMENT IS NOT MADE, THESE THE CBC GRANTS CAN, WILL THEY'LL TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF OUR ALLOCATION ANYWAY.

SO IT'S EITHER WE MAKE A PAYMENT OR THEY TAKE IT OUT OF OUR ACCOUNT.

SO THE QUESTION THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME IS IF WE'RE AUTHORIZING THOSE FUNDS TO BE AVAILABLE TO MAKE THAT PAYMENT, IF WE NEED TO, WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED AT LEAST WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A SOURCE OF FUNDS TO PAY THAT PAYMENT TO PROTECT OUR $7 MILLION IN OTHER DEBT. THAT'S NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT PRECLUDES US FROM INVESTIGATING OTHER SOURCES OF PAYOFF MONEY IF WE WANT TO DO THAT. BUT WHAT IT DOES DO IS IT ALLOWS US AT THIS POINT TO SAY, OKAY, IF THE WORST HAPPENS AND PAYMENT DOESN'T SHOW UP, WE NEED TO DO IT.

WE, WE HAVE A CHOICE AT THAT POINT OF MAKING THE PAYMENT OUT OF THIS, OUT OF THOSE FUNDS OR ALLOWING THE,

[07:15:05]

SO IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF HOW DO WE WANT TO TAKE IT.

THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE US FROM LOOKING FOR OTHER MONEY. IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THIS PROCESS WORKS.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. SO IF IT IS THE WILL OF THE BODY TODAY TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WE CAN CERTAINLY GO BACK AND CONTINUE TO EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS.

HOWEVER, APPROVING THE ITEM WITH THE AMENDMENT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO USE CDBG FUNDS IF NO OTHER OPTIONS ARE FOUND.

AGAIN, MY. SO IT'S. WE'RE. I THINK MY MY POSITION IS THAT I WANT TO PROTECT THE THE THE OUR SECOND LIEN. WE HAVE A SECOND LIEN SITUATION.

SO IT'S NOT JUST 7 MILLION. THEY'VE GOT A LOAN THAT'S ON TOP OF US THAT WE ARE SUBORDINATE TO.