[9. 26-427A Authorize a one-year subrecipient agreement with Lone Star Justice Alliance in an amount not to exceed $300,000.00, with a one-year renewal option in an amount not to exceed $300,000.00, to administer the Youth Safety - Violence Interrupters Program on behalf of the Office of Housing and Community Empowerment - Not to exceed $3600,000.00 - Financing: FY 2025-26 Community Development Block Grant Funds (subject to annual appropriations) *In alignment with Drivers of Opportunity nexus.]

AUTHORIZE A ONE YEAR SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $300,000, WITH A ONE YEAR RENEWAL OPTION IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $300,000 TO ADMINISTER THE YOUTH SAFETY VIOLENCE INTERRUPTERS PROGRAM ON BEHALF OF THE OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT. NOT TO EXCEED $600,000.

THIS ITEM WAS CORRECTED AND IT WAS ALSO PULLED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON.

IS THERE A MOTION? YES. MISTER MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT AGENDA MEETING.

SECOND. THERE'S A SECOND. DO YOU CARE TO HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE ON THE MATTER? YES. THIS IS FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I WAS AROUND IN THE COMMUNITY AS A TRUSTEE WHEN THROUGH YOUR LEADERSHIP, WHEN YOU BROUGHT THIS PROGRAM TO OUR COMMUNITY AND HAS DONE A WONDERFUL JOB.

HOWEVER, I'M, I HAVE NOT BEEN BRIEFED ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM THAT WILL BE DOING A LOT OF WORK IN DISTRICT FOUR.

AND ALTHOUGH I SEE A LOT OF SOME A FEW PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE THAT I WORK WITH THE INDIVIDUAL THAT'S DOING THE WORK ADMINISTRATOR, I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SIT DOWN AND SPEAK WITH THEM.

THIS WILL ALSO AFFECT NOT ONLY MY DISTRICT, BUT SOUTHERN DALLAS AS A WHOLE.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A MEETING SO WE CAN KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND WHAT AND HOW THIS IS GOING TO BE.

I THINK WHEN YOU DID THIS, MR. MAYOR, I THINK THE BUDGET AT THAT TIME WAS RIGHT ABOUT $1 MILLION, 900 000. AND SO WHAT ARE THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES, WHAT THE WORK IS GOING TO BE GOING ON, HOW THIS IS GOING TO GET DONE EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY. I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. SO THEREFORE I'M JUST ASKING FOR JUST TO BE DEFERRED.

SO WE HAVE TIME TO DISCUSS UNTIL NEXT MONTH OR THE NEXT THE NEXT COUNCIL BRIEFING.

THAT'S IT. MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR CHAIR JOHNSON, THANK YOU FOR PULLING THE ITEM.

[00:55:04]

I WILL BE DID SECONDED AND WILL BE SUPPORTING THE ITEM.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR PROCUREMENT. ON THE SCORING.

EVALUATION. IS THE SCORING SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE HELD TILL THE CONTRACT IS AWARDED, OR ARE WE ABLE TO OBTAIN THE THE BREAKDOWN ON THE SCORES? HI. JESSICA GALICIA, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT. THE SCORING INFORMATION IS IN THE AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET.

CAN YOU. YEAH. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE THE I, I SEE THE OVERALL SCORE, BUT IS THERE A WAY TO GET A BREAKDOWN OF THE SCORES.

SO OKAY. THE SCORING BREAKDOWN WAS BRIEFED IN THE MEMO TO QUALITY OF LIFE.

AND THE, THE BREAKDOWN WAS PRESENTED IN THAT MEMO ON MAY 18TH.

THE BREAKDOWN. LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE SCORED 95.75.

DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THROUGH ALL THE. NO, NO, I UNDERSTAND AND I SEE THE OVERALL SCORES, BUT THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, 30 POINTS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY EVALUATION, 30 POINTS FOR PROGRAMING WORK AND SO ON.

ARE WE ABLE TO SEE HOW EACH ONE SCORED ON EACH OF THE FOUR BULLET POINTS.

OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT PROCUREMENT HAS TO HOLD UNTIL UNTIL THE CONTRACT IS AWARDED? WE HAVE THE DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT, JUANITA ORTIZ, HERE. SHE CAN RESPOND, BUT IT WAS A NOFA, I BELIEVE. SO IT WAS A NIGHT.

JUANITA ORTIZ, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES.

SO NOFAS, WHICH ARE GRANT FUNDED OR ADMINISTERED BY THE DEPARTMENTS, BUT IN GENERAL FOR ANY OTHER SOLICITATION, WE CAN RELEASE THE RATINGS. WE JUST DO NOT RELEASE THE NAME OF THE EVALUATORS ON THE COMMITTEE.

GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I DIDN'T WANT TO PULL THIS ITEM, BUT I WILL SAY THAT I CONTINUE TO BE CONCERNED THAT COMMUNITY VIOLENCE INTERRUPTERS ARE BEING MANAGED BY COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT AS OPPOSED TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND THE GOAL IS PUBLIC SAFETY, AND THE GOAL IS TO REACT ONCE THERE HAS BEEN A TRAGIC EVENT TO DEESCALATE, TO DEESCALATE BEFORE THERE'S A TRAGIC EVENT. AND THIS REALLY SEEMS LIKE THE WORK OF OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.

AND I THINK THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE SET UP A DIFFERENT SCORING MATRIX.

I THINK THEY MAY HAVE EVALUATED ORGANIZATIONS DIFFERENTLY BASED ON WHAT THEY SEE ON THE GROUND, WHAT THEY SEE IN SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOODS THAT NEED VERY SPECIFIC ATTENTION, WHO HAVE LEADERS OF THAT COMMUNITY ALREADY THERE.

AND SO I WOULD ACTUALLY EVEN QUESTION THE PLACEMENT OF THIS ITEM IN THAT DEPARTMENT.

I MIGHT EVEN GO FURTHER ABOUT THE ENTIRETY OF THE DEPARTMENT'S ROLE IN THE CITY, BUT I AM SUPPORTIVE OF DEFERRING IT TO CONTINUE LOOKING AT IT AND HELP THE COUNCIL MEMBER GET HIS QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

BUT I THINK THERE'S LARGER QUESTIONS NOT ON IF WE SHOULD HAVE CVI PROGRAMS. I THINK THEY'RE ESSENTIAL AND THEY'VE DONE REALLY GOOD WORK, AND I'VE HEARD THE STORIES IN THE COMMUNITY WHERE WE MIGHT HAVE HAD A VERY EXPLOSIVE SITUATION HAD WE NOT HAD THE RIGHT PEOPLE THERE WHO COULD TALK ABOUT THE REPERCUSSIONS OF VIOLENCE AND RETRIBUTION.

SO I'M FOR IT. I JUST THINK IT IS COMPLETELY MISPLACED.

THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK STAFF SOME QUESTIONS.

SPECIFICALLY WITH ITS FOCUS ON YOUTH AND US APPROACHING ACTUALLY TODAY BEING THE LAST DAY OF DISD WHAT IMPACT WOULD THIS HAVE ON OUR ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT THIS PROGRAMING? HI, JESSICA.

AGAIN, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT. SO THIS IS FIRST AND FOREMOST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS.

AND THE FUNDS WERE PUT FORWARD CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THIS COUNCIL FOR FY 2526, THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. WE ARE ALREADY IN A SITUATION WHERE WE DEFINITELY NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR CDBG EXPENDITURES, OF COURSE. SO THAT WOULD BE POTENTIALLY IMPACTFUL SITUATION IN THAT REGARDS.

ADDITIONALLY, LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE HAS BEEN WORKING IN THE COMMUNITY THROUGHOUT DALLAS, BUT ESPECIALLY IN CERTAIN TARGETED COMMUNITIES.

[01:00:01]

THEY ACTUALLY HAVE AN INCREDIBLY, WONDERFUL VISUAL DASHBOARD OF YOUTH CRIME INDICATORS THAT INCLUDES DATA FROM DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS JUVENILE JUSTICE DATA. THEY ARE WELL VERSED IN THE BEST PRACTICES FROM LEADING NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL CVI ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS.

CURE VIOLENCE GLOBAL AND THE VERA INSTITUTE, AND THEIR PROGRAM AND MODEL IS DESIGNED CONSISTENT WITH ESTABLISHED, WELL RESEARCHED BEST PRACTICES WHEN IT COMES TO VIOLENCE INTERRUPTERS AND CVI WORK.

THE PROPOSAL THAT IS PUT FORWARD IS A COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSAL THAT TARGETS SPECIFIC COMMUNITIES DUE TO CRIME DATA AND OTHER INDICATORS THAT DEMONSTRATE RISK OF CRIME AND BEHAVIORS. HOWEVER, THEY ARE ALSO LOOKING TO REALLY ANCHOR AND BUILD A COALITION AND ECOSYSTEM WITHIN THIS COMMUNITY. I THINK THAT, OF COURSE, AS WE MOVE INTO THIS SUMMER WITH THE EMPHASIS OF THIS WORK BEING ON THEIR ARE HYPE CENTER AND THEIR TRAUMA INFORMED SUPPORT FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE COMMITTED OR AND OR ARE AT RISK OF BEING ENGAGED IN VIOLENT BEHAVIOR, AS WELL AS THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN VICTIMS OF VIOLENT BEHAVIORS.

THEN IT, OF COURSE, RISKS LOSING PEOPLE. AND IN THE SUMMERTIME, BY THE TIME WE KIND OF ROLL DEEPER AND DEEPER INTO THE SUMMER, WHICH OF COURSE WE KNOW TENDS TO BE SOME OF OUR HIGHEST RISK MONTHS FOR CRIME AMONGST YOUTH.

I THINK THAT ANY DAYS THAT ARE LOST COULD BE POTENTIALLY VERY IMPACTFUL.

SO BASICALLY A DELAY WILL IMPACT THE SERVICE.

YES. I BELIEVE THAT ANY DELAYS WOULD IMPACT THE SERVICE AS WELL AS OUR ABILITY TO EXPAND OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS IN A TIMELY MANNER.

YEAH, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. I ALSO WOULD ASK, CAN YOU JUST CONFIRM I BELIEVE THIS WAS ON OUR AGENDA AS A DRAFT FORM UPWARDS OF TWO WEEKS AGO. YES, SIR. THIS ITEM WAS INCLUDED ON THE DRAFT AGENDA THAT WAS PUBLISHED.

IS THAT THE QUESTION THAT YOU WERE ASKING? YEAH. OKAY.

YEAH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I THINK I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE'VE HAD AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO REACH OUT TO STAFF AND GET MORE INFORMATION AND QUESTIONS ANSWERED, ESPECIALLY THAT WOULDN'T IMPACT THE ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT THIS PROGRAMING.

AND I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT TO BE CAREFUL ON A SLIPPERY SLOPE OF DELAYING ITEMS JUST BECAUSE WE WANT OUR OWN PERSONAL MEETINGS ABOUT AN ITEM WHEN WE HAVE AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO GET THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I KNOW AS A FORMER DISD TEACHER JUST HOW CRITICAL THESE PROGRAMS REALLY ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE GOING TO BE NEEDING THEM THE MOST WHEN THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE A WHOLE LOT OF A SUPPORT SYSTEM OUTSIDE OF THE SCHOOL INSTRUCTION HOURS.

AND SO LEADING INTO SUMMER, THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE WORST TIME FOR US TO PROPOSE A DELAY IN A PROGRAM THAT'S INTENTIONALLY TARGETED FOR STUDENTS WHO NEED IT AT THIS TIME THE MOST. I'M JUST NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY WE WOULD NEED DELAY AT ALL IN THAT RESPECT.

THIS IS THIS IS GREAT WORK. THESE ARE PROGRAMS THAT ARE HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED NOT ONLY BY COUNCIL FOR YEARS.

IT'S ALSO PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED BY OUR ASSOCIATIONS AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE IT HELPS NOT STRAIN THEIR RESOURCES.

SO REGARDING MISS MENDELSON'S COMMENTS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHERE IT IS HOUSED, I'D SAY I APPLAUD OUR CITY MANAGER FOR THIS BEING WHERE THIS IS, BECAUSE THAT'S A PART OF REIMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY.

PUBLIC SAFETY IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN ECOSYSTEM.

IT DOESN'T FALL SOLELY ON THE HANDS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.

NEVER HAS, NEVER SHOULD. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE CAN, ON ONE HAND SAY THAT WE ARE STRAINED RESOURCES WITH THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT.

WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT EFFICIENCY EXERCISES AND OUR OUR OUR STAFFING LEVELS, ETC.

BUT YET WE WANT TO LOOK AT A PROGRAM LIKE THIS THAT IS HOUSED IN A IN A PLACE THAT IS MEANT TO BE A SUPPORT TO OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND EXPECT THAT TO BE THROWN IN, TO CONTINUE TO BOG DOWN OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THAT'S IT'S, IT'S JUST COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO THE OVERALL EFFORTS THAT THIS TYPE OF PROGRAMING AND CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP IS MEANT TO, TO SERVE OUR CITY. SO I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS. I THINK THIS IS KIND OF COMING OUT OF LEFT FIELD.

THIS WAS BRIEFED AT COMMITTEE. I DON'T REMEMBER THIS BEING A TOPIC AT COMMITTEE OF, OF NEEDING TO BE DELAYED.

I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER THERE BEING ANY CONCERNS.

SO I'M, I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THIS VOTE AS DOING WHAT WE CAN FOR THE YOUTH IN OUR CITY AND FOR HELPING CURB SOME OF THE VIOLENT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY THAT THAT GOES ON.

THAT UNFORTUNATELY DOES INVOLVE OUR YOUTH. SO I WOULD SAY I WOULD ENCOURAGE COLLEAGUES TO ASK QUESTIONS TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU NEED

[01:05:02]

TO TO WORK OUT FROM NOW UNTIL A VOTE IS TAKEN, BUT TO NOT ALLOW FOR NOT ONLY THESE FUNDS TO BE A JEOPARDY, TO NOT BE SPENT, BUT ALSO FOR THEM NOT TO BE SPENT AT SUCH A CRITICAL PROGRAM AND FOR A CRITICAL POPULATION.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M GOING TO GO TO CHAIRMAN GRAYSON.

I'M GOING TO GET YOU IN A MINUTE, MISS BLACKMON. SO CHAIRMAN GRAYSON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE DEFERRAL OF THIS.

WHILE I DO UNDERSTAND MY COLLEAGUE'S CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, I ABOUT KIND OF THE PROCESS.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR AND LONG OVERDUE.

IT HAS COME THROUGH QUALITY OF LIFE. AND I WILL PUBLICLY I'LL TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY IN NOT MAKING AND NOT MAKING SURE COMMUNICATING FOR THOSE WHO ARE NOT ON PUBLIC QUALITY OF LIFE. WHO KNEW? WHO KNEW ABOUT THIS ITEM? WHO HAD INTEREST IN THIS ITEM FOR NOT COMMUNICATING WHAT THIS ITEM WAS GOING TO DO, HOW IT WAS PROCURED AND THE DETAILS OF THE PROCUREMENT AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS, AND WHY I PERSONALLY WAS COMFORTABLE WITH THIS ITEM, BUT ALSO THE IMPACT THAT IT WOULD HAVE. I THINK WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS, WE'VE HAD THE CVI PROGRAMS IN PLACE, AND THEY TYPICALLY FOCUSED KIND OF AT SOUTH DALLAS, PLEASANT GROVE AREA, AND WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO EXPAND THAT.

AND WE WERE ABLE TO FIND THOSE DOLLARS THROUGH THE CDBG GRANT FUNDS TO, TO DO THAT AND CARRY IT FORWARD INTO THIS AND BE ABLE TO EXPAND IT OVER INTO SOME OF THOSE AREAS OF NEEDS. UNDERSTANDING THERE'S SOME NEEDS IN DEEP ELLUM THAT MAY THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM THIS.

SO THE WAY THAT THIS WAS ESTABLISHED IS THAT THIS ORGANIZATION WILL BE THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SORT OF THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE PROGRAM.

AND FOR THOSE ORGANIZATIONS WHO ARE INTERESTED, A COUPLE OF THEM ARE OUT THERE IN THE AUDIENCE.

I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS HAPPENING AS WELL, THAT THEY WILL THEN BE ABLE TO WRITE THEIR PROGRAMS BECAUSE THEY'RE IN THE COMMUNITY, SERVING THOSE COMMUNITIES, SO THEY KNOW HOW BEST TO WRITE THE PROGRAMS TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THOSE KIDS IN THOSE COMMUNITIES.

AT SOUTH OAK CLIFF AND OTHER AREAS AROUND THERE.

SO IT'S REALLY MEANT TO ESTABLISH THE ADMINISTRATIVE, THE ADMINISTRATION SIDE OF IT AND GIVE THE OTHER NONPROFITS THAT ARE IN THE COMMUNITY REMOVE THE BURDEN OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROGRAM, BUT GIVE THEM THE FOCUS OF SERVING THOSE PEOPLE RIGHT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY AS FAR AS WHETHER IT SHOULD BE THE D, P, D, OR OR THIS PARTICULAR DEPARTMENT, I KNOW D, P, D DOESN'T WANT TO MANAGE A BUNCH OF GRANTS, SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT. SO THAT'S WHY ALL OF THIS WAS ESTABLISHED THE WAY IT WAS.

AND I AND I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH HOW THIS PROGRAM HAS EVOLVED.

AND I CONTINUE AND I THINK THAT IT WILL CONTINUE TO EVOLVE AS WE CONTINUE ROLLING OUT AND IDENTIFYING MORE AND MORE NONPROFITS WHO WANT TO SERVE IN THIS COMMUNITY. SO FOR THAT VERY REASON, AND HAVING JUST DROPPED MY 16 YEAR OFF FOR THE LAST DAY AT CARTER THIS MORNING, I DON'T WANT TO DELAY IT BECAUSE SUMMER IS COMING AND IT'S TIME.

AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR, REALLY, SINCE, I THINK AT LEAST A YEAR AND A HALF TRYING TO GET THIS GOING.

SO I DON'T WANT TO DELAY IT. I DO APPRECIATE MY MY COLLEAGUES CONCERNS, AND I'M HAPPY TO TALK AND, AND HAVE STAFF COME AND TALK TO THEM. BUT AGAIN, I DO WANT TO TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR NOT COMMUNICATING SOME OF THAT TO TO MY COLLEAGUES THERE BECAUSE IT IS A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY IN THAT SUCH.

BUT AGAIN, I SUPPORT THIS AND I SUPPORT THE STRUCTURE OF IT AND THE THOUGHTFULNESS OF IT, BECAUSE IT DOES.

AGAIN, IT GIVES THOSE SMALLER NONPROFITS THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING ALL ALONG.

NOW THEY HAVE THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO DO IT IN A WAY TO BETTER SERVE AND BETTER REACH MORE PEOPLE.

SO I DO SUPPORT THIS, AND THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.

FOR THOSE WHO ARE IN THE AUDIENCE ANTICIPATING THIS, THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS, AND THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS WITHOUT ASKING FOR MONEY, BUT BEING HERE TO RECEIVE IT SO THAT YOU CAN BETTER SERVE.

SO THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS BLACKMON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MY QUESTION IS FOR STAFF AND IT'S SPECIFICALLY AROUND WHAT WOULD A DELAY ACTUALLY DO TO THIS PROJECT.

SO A DELAY IN THE HEARING, OF COURSE, WOULD BE A DELAY IN THE LAUNCH OF THE SERVICES.

SO THE PRESENT THE PROGRAM IS PRESENTED. I'M TRYING TO FIND IT ON MY PAGE AND IN TWO PHASES.

IN TERMS OF HOW THEY'RE BUILDING THEIR OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT IN MONTHS ONE THROUGH SIX AND THEN MOVING ON TO MONTHS SEVEN THROUGH 12.

SO AGAIN, THE PROGRAM ACTUALLY STARTS WITH STREET OUTREACH AND PEER SUPPORTS AND CREDIBLE MESSENGERS COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATION REFERRALS. THEY HAVE A PARTNERSHIP WITH DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT FOCUSED DETERRENCE.

SO THEY RECEIVE REFERRALS THROUGH THAT PROGRAM AS WELL. AND THEY HAVE PARTNERSHIPS WITH ADULT PROBATION AS WELL AS JUVENILE JUSTICE.

AND THEY HAVE COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, REFERRALS FROM ADULT PROBATION. THEY ALSO HAVE THE JUVENILE PROBATION REFERRALS FOR THE YOUTH WHO ARE AGING INTO YOUNG ADULTHOOD. AND THEN THEY ALSO ACCEPT AND RECEIVE SELF-REFERRALS.

[01:10:04]

SO THAT IS THE FIRST STAGE OF THE PROGRAM. AS THEY MOVE FORWARD INTO MONTHS SEVEN THROUGH 12 THE OUTREACH EFFORTS ACTUALLY EXPAND TO SUPPORT THAT CONTINUUM OF CARE AND REALLY START TO EXPAND TO INCLUDE EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND PREVENTION AND OUTREACH FOR YOUNGER YOUTH AS WELL.

SO THAT WOULD BE BACK INTO THE SCHOOL YEAR. AND THEY START ALSO INTEGRATING SCHOOL BASED YOUTH SERVING ECOSYSTEMS AND COMMUNITY BASED AND CONTINUED CREDIBLE MESSENGER OUTREACH, AS WELL AS FAMILY INITIATED OUTREACH.

SO COLLECTIVELY THAT BRINGS TOGETHER THEIR TWO TIERED APPROACH TO, TO DEVELOP AND BUILD THIS ECOSYSTEM ACROSS WHAT THEY OUTLINE AS THREE CATEGORICAL AREAS AROUND YOUTH INTERRUPTER OR VIOLENCE INTERRUPTERS PROGRAMING AND BEST PRACTICES.

SO I THINK THAT BEYOND THAT OF COURSE, IS THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT COMPONENT OF THAT, THAT WE ARE IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ANOTHER COMPONENT WHICH COULD MAKE THINGS CHALLENGING, OF COURSE, UNTIL THE CONTRACT IS AUTHORIZED, THE SERVICES CAN'T START.

AND SO THAT IS JUST THE, THE PRACTICAL AND STRAIGHTFORWARD ANSWER TO THAT.

OKAY. SO MONEY COULD BE JUST MOVING. IT KIND OF PUTS THE MONEY IN AN INTERESTING POSITION, BUT THEN THE PROJECT GETS DELAYED EVEN MORE. AND AS WE SAID, WE WERE GOING INTO THE SUMMER MONTHS WITH SCHOOL BEING LET OUT TODAY.

SO IT'S PRETTY CRITICAL TO GET THESE RESOURCES GOING.

IS THAT FAIR TO SAY? YES. AND I THINK THAT FROM THE EARLY OUTREACH AROUND THE NOFA, THE EXPECTED TIME FRAME FOR AUTHORIZATION AND LAUNCH WAS ALWAYS AROUND THIS MAY, APRIL INTO MAY AND JUNE TIME FRAME.

SO I THINK THAT MOVING THAT INTO JUNE AND ESPECIALLY JULY SO JULY CAN BE VERY CHALLENGING.

AS IT RELATES TO COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS, OUTREACH, CRIME, EVERYTHING.

JULY IS JUST A REALLY, REALLY UNIQUELY CHALLENGING MONTH.

WITH SO MUCH GOING ON SO THAT SOMETIMES CAN MAKE COALITION BUILDING EFFORTS AND OTHER THINGS REALLY DIFFICULT.

I'LL SAY THAT EVEN, YOU KNOW, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, WHEN WE'RE DOING COMMUNITY BASED PLANNING OR OUTREACH PLANNING, YOU HAVE TO BE REALLY PARTICULAR ABOUT JULY JUST BECAUSE OF THE WAY DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS SCHEDULES TEND TO BE IMPACTED.

IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN GET QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY THE COUNCILMAN IN THE NEXT, YOU KNOW, A FEW MINUTES OR EVEN DELAYING THIS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO DELAY IT, BUT I WANT TO HONOR ANY INFORMATION THAT IS NEEDED.

AND SO THAT'S JUST A CURIOUS THOUGHT, BUT BUT I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS, AS MENTIONED, IT'S NOT A SURPRISE. I'M GLAD THAT WE, YOU KNOW, BROADENED THE PROGRAM AND AND SO I'LL, I'LL CONTINUE TO LISTEN, BUT I HAVE A, I THINK I'M GOING TO BE VOTING NO AGAINST THIS.

LISA, THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. YES, MA'AM. WE'D BE PLEASED TO TALK ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND AND COME BACK TO YOU AS APPROPRIATE. MR. CADENA. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR MEETING WITH ME.

Y'ALL DID MEET WITH ME, I THINK, IN BETWEEN. AND I AM ON THE COMMITTEE, BUT I, I HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP AS WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION.

SO THE GROUP IS BASED OUT OF AUSTIN. HOW LONG HAVE THEY BEEN IN DALLAS? ACTUALLY WE HAVE THE DALLAS BASED GROUP. THEY'RE HERE WITH US TODAY AND WE CAN ACTUALLY BRING THEM DOWN HERE.

BUT THEY HAVE BEEN IN DALLAS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. ULISSE WATERS IS THE CHIEF INNOVATION OFFICER AND SHE ALSO RUNS THINGS HERE LOCALLY.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE HER DOWN TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION IF THAT'S OKAY.

YEAH THAT'S FINE.

PERFECT. GOOD MORNING COUNCIL. YES. MY NAME IS ULISSE REEVES WATERS AND I'M THE CHIEF INNOVATION OFFICER FOR LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE. I'M EXCITED TO BE HERE WITH YOU TO BE BACK IN THE HALLS OF CITY HALL.

I SAY BACK BECAUSE I AM A FORMER CITY COMMUNITY PROSECUTOR AND FROM THE DALLAS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

AND WE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN IN DALLAS DOING WORK FOR AS LONG AS I HAVE BEEN WITH THE ORGANIZATION, WHICH HAS BEEN JUST ABOUT EIGHT YEARS. THAT'S WONDERFUL.

AND THEN I NOTICED A LOT OF THE WORK SEEMS TO IT, AND I'M NOT SURE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG AROUND CHILDREN THAT HAVE BEEN IN PRISON INSTEAD OF PREVENTION OR IS IT BOTH? SO THE INTERESTING THING ABOUT DOING REENTRY WORK AS WELL AS VIOLENCE INTERRUPTION WORK IS THAT A LOT OF THE LARGE MAJORITY OF THE UNDERLYING FACTORS THAT CAUSE JUSTICE SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT AND THAT PERPETUATE VIOLENCE ARE THE SAME.

[01:15:02]

AND SO WE HAVE DONE WORK ON THE REENTRY SIDE, ALSO BUILDING PIPELINES FOR PREVENTION.

WONDERFUL. AND THEN WAS DPD DATA USED TO DETERMINE SERVICE AREAS.

AND WAS THAT WHERE THE, WHERE THE YOUTH ARE LIVING OR WHERE INCIDENTS ARE OCCURRING? SURE. SO WE USE A NUMBER OF DATA RESOURCES, INCLUDING THE DPD DATA THAT'S AVAILABLE ON THE CRIME CRIME DATA PLATFORM, AS WELL AS OUR DATA DASHBOARD THAT WE'VE CREATED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE WITH THE CITY, IN FACT, THROUGH A THROUGH FUNDING FROM THE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES.

AND SO WE USED ALL OF THAT DATA TO DETERMINE WHERE THE INCIDENCES OF VIOLENCE WERE OCCURRING, AS WELL AS WHERE THE CONCENTRATION OF, OF PERSONS LIVING WAS, WHERE THEY WERE LIVING AS WELL.

SO WE USED A COMPREHENSIVE, COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO DETERMINE WHERE THOSE AREAS ARE THE MOST CRITICAL AREAS FOR THESE SERVICES, PARTICULARLY LOOKING AT, AGAIN, THE FACTORS OR THE INDICATORS OF BOTH VIOLENCE.

AND FOR THOSE WHO COMMIT VIOLENCE AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE IMPACTED BY VIOLENCE.

OKAY. AND THEN FOR THE GRANT, HOW MUCH MONEY IS GOING TOWARDS ADMINISTRATION COSTS VERSUS THE ACTUAL I GUESS THE, THE PROGRAM. SURE I WILL. MAKE SURE THAT I LOOK AND PULL THOSE NUMBERS.

EXACTLY. BUT I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS A 10% COST FOR ADMINISTRATION.

PARTICULARLY WITH, YES, 10% COST FOR ADMINISTRATION.

IS THERE ANYTHING? I BELIEVE THAT OUR CAPPED ADMINISTRATION RATE FOR THESE CONTRACTS IS ALWAYS 10%.

SO IT WOULD BE 10% OR LESS. OKAY. AND IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO ADD ABOUT THE PROGRAM THAT YOU THINK MIGHT BE HELPFUL? WELL, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT IS THAT AS WE HAVE DONE THIS WORK FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. SO JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ABOUT LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE, WE ARE A WE ARE A MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM OF LAWYERS, SOCIAL WORKERS, MITIGATION INVESTIGATORS, AS WELL AS TRANSITION COACHES AND CASE MANAGERS WHO HAVE BEEN DOING THIS WORK IN THIS SPACE INDIVIDUALLY IN OUR SEPARATE LIVES, BUT THEN ALSO COMING TOGETHER IN THIS ORGANIZATION. SO WE HAVE MORE THAN 60 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH PERSONS WHO HAVE BEEN JUSTICE SYSTEM INVOLVED OR WHO HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY VIOLENCE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE VERY INTERESTED IN SEEING, AND WHAT WE RECOGNIZE IS THE CHALLENGE ACROSS THE STATE, ARE HAVING COMMUNITIES AND ECOSYSTEMS BUILT TO SUPPORT YOUNG PEOPLE, BECAUSE OFTEN WE ALSO ARE VERY STRONG IN DATA RESEARCH, EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICES.

SO PRIOR TO LAUNCHING THE HYPE CENTER, THE HELPING YOUNG PEOPLE SUCCEED CENTER, WE SURVEYED MORE THAN 100 YOUNG PEOPLE, MANY OF WHOM OVER 90% OF WHOM WERE JUSTICE INVOLVED ABOUT WHAT WERE THEIR NEEDS AND WHAT WERE THE THINGS THAT THEY NEEDED TO HELP THEM STAY OUT OF THE SYSTEM.

AND THE SAME FACTORS WERE THE CASE FOR THOSE WHO HAVE EITHER COMMITTED VIOLENCE OR BEEN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE, WHICH WAS NEEDING SAFE PLACES TO BE NEEDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENGAGEMENT WITH MENTORSHIP AND NEEDING ACCESS TO ECONOMIC MOBILITY.

ONE OF THE HUGE FACTORS THAT YOU'LL SEE ALSO INDICATED FROM THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION IS THAT ECONOMIC MOBILITY AND DISPARITIES IN INCOME ARE VERY STRONG DRIVERS OF VIOLENCE IN COMMUNITIES. AND SO PART OF THE WORK THAT WE DO IS WE WORK WITH YOUNG PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY THOSE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 18 AND 24, TO GET THEM PLUGGED INTO BOTH WORK OPPORTUNITIES AND EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES.

UNDERSTANDING THAT WHEN WE ADDRESS THE DRIVERS OF VIOLENCE AND THE DRIVERS OF JUSTICE SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT, WE ARE THEREBY CREATING SAFER ENVIRONMENTS. AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CONVERSATION OR DISCUSSION WITH REGARDS TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

SO AS YOU KNOW, I'M A FORMER PROSECUTOR FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS COMMUNITY PROSECUTOR.

I WAS IN THE SOUTHWEST DIVISION, ENJOYED WORKING WITH MY WITH MY POLICE COLLEAGUES.

AND THERE WERE SO MANY TIMES WHERE THEY CAME TO ME AS A COMMUNITY PROSECUTOR ASKING ME FOR RESOURCES TO WHICH THEY CAN REFER FOLKS, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES IN TERMS OF VIOLENCE PREVENTION, PREVENTION, OFTENTIMES POLICE OFFICERS GET CALLED TO THE SCENE FOR INSTANCES THAT ARE NOT CRIMINAL, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY REALLY CAN'T TAKE ACTION, BUT THEY ARE NEEDING TO HAVE TO REFER THOSE INDIVIDUALS TO SOMEONE ELSE WHO CAN INTERVENE AND WHO CAN PROVIDE THOSE SURROUNDING SUPPORTS.

SO WE'RE EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL TODAY TO BE SUCH AN ORGANIZATION, TO BE A REFERRAL, A SPACE WHERE OFFICERS CAN FIND SUPPORTS AND RESOURCES FOR PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO JUST NEED THAT ADDITIONAL WRAPAROUND SUPPORT BEFORE THE VIOLENCE OCCURS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR FIVE MINUTES.

[01:20:03]

THANK YOU. MAYOR JOHNSON AND I MAY HAVE MISSED SOMETHING HERE, BUT LET ME JUST KIND OF GO THROUGH WHAT I THINK I'M FOLLOWING.

THE DEFERRAL IS UNTIL THE NEXT VOTING AGENDA MEETING, I BELIEVE, WHICH WOULD BE JUNE 10TH.

SO DOES THAT GAP INSTEAD OF APPROVING TODAY, DO WE HAVE A GAP IN SERVICES IF WE DON'T GET APPROVAL UNTIL TWO WEEKS FROM NOW.

SO I'LL JUMP IN. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT QUESTION.

COUNCILWOMAN. STEWART. AND I WANTED TO THANK THE COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THE QUESTIONS, AS WELL AS THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THUS FAR. WE HAVE DEFINITELY BEEN WORKING AS COUNCIL MEMBER CHAIR GRACEY MENTIONED TO REALLY GET THIS PROGRAM RIGHT.

WE'VE HAD SOME STARTS AND SOME STOPS OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.

AND IN FACT AS COUNCIL DISCUSSED THIS DURING THE TIME THAT WE GOT SUPPORT FOR THE CDBG FUNDING THAT IS NOW ASSOCIATED WITH THE ITEM, IT WAS TO REALLY BRING BACK A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO WHERE WE COULD ADD ADDITIONAL ZIP CODES, AND WE COULD ACTUALLY GET THE PEOPLE ON THE GROUND TO DO THE WORK AND ELIMINATE A LOT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN THAT MANY OF OUR SMALLER NON-PROFITS HAVE HAD.

AND SO WE'RE VERY THANKFUL THAT WE HAVE THIS RELATIONSHIP WITH LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE, BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY COMING IN AT A TIME WHEN WE NEED THAT PROGRAM, THAT SUPPORT FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE PERSPECTIVE, BUT IT DOES NOT NEGATE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A LOT OF THE SMALLER.

I WOULD SAY BOOTS ON THE GROUND, INDIVIDUALS HELPING US AND SO THIS WILL ALLOW FOR US.

IF THIS ITEM MOVES, MOVES FORWARD TODAY TO BRING SOME ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO THE TABLE.

A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE WANT TO KIND OF SEE IF WE'RE REALLY GOING TO PUT OUR MONEY WHERE OUR MOUTH IS AND BEGIN THE WORK.

AND THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR SOME OF THE OTHER NONPROFITS, AS WELL AS OTHER PHILANTHROPIC ORGANIZATIONS TO COME IN AND SUPPORT HOW WE EXPAND THIS PROGRAM. SO ANY DELAY AT THIS POINT, IN MY OPINION, AND NO DISRESPECT TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER WHO HAS QUESTIONS AND WHO WOULD LIKE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, BUT WE'RE REALLY ALREADY BEHIND, AND WE'RE GOING INTO A VERY CRITICAL TIME WHERE WE NEED TO MOVE THE PROGRAM FORWARD.

AND IT WOULD ALLOW FOR US, AS WE GO INTO THE BUDGET, WAYS THAT WE CAN BRING ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO THE TABLE.

AND SO THIS IS REALLY A SHOW AND TELL FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, BUT IT IS A WAY FOR THE COUNCIL TO GIVE US A POSITIVE NOD, MOVE IT FORWARD, AND THAT WILL ALLOW FOR US TO CONTINUE TO BRING OTHER RESOURCES TO REALLY MAKE THE PROGRAM EFFECTIVE.

I'VE HEARD FROM MANY OF YOU OVER THIS LAST YEAR ABOUT WAYS THAT YOU WANT THE PROGRAM EXPANDED.

THERE ARE SOME ZIP CODES THAT WE HAVE NOT COVERED IN THE PAST THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO ADD TO THIS PROGRAM, BUT THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SUMMER MONTHS BRING TO OUR CRIME STATS AND TO VIOLENCE AMONG OUR YOUTH.

I HAVE MONITORED CRIME STATS FOR TEN YEARS OR MORE AND AND IT'S VERY TRUE.

AS SOON AS SCHOOL'S OUT AND THERE'S MORE TIME ON THEIR HANDS AND POTENTIALLY NOT SOMETHING POSITIVE TO BE SPENDING THEIR TIME AND ATTENTION ON.

WE DO GET THE VIOLENCE. THAT IS HEARTBREAKING.

SO I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS CITY IS DOING ALL THAT IT CAN TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE.

IT'S, IT'S, THERE'S REALLY NO QUESTION THAT IT WILL OCCUR.

IT, IT SEEMS TO BE JUST A INEVITABLE BASED ON CERTAIN COMBINATION OF CIRCUMSTANCES.

SO I WOULD HATE TO SEE A DELAY. I MEAN, WE'RE ON.

SCHOOL IS OUT. AS I DROVE BY A PARK LAST NIGHT ON MY WAY HOME, THERE WERE LOTS OF YOUNG PEOPLE OUT IN THE PARK HAVING A GREAT TIME.

BUT YOU JUST THINK TO YOURSELF, OH, I HOPE EVERYBODY BEHAVES THEMSELVES.

SO ANYWAY, WE ARE THERE. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT TWO WEEKS IS A GOOD IDEA TO DELAY IT AT THIS POINT.

SO THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER FOR THAT EXPLANATION.

CHAIRMAN JOHNSON RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER, FOR YOUR COMMENT.

IN 2020, I WAS MADE AWARE OF THIS PROGRAM THROUGH A LOT OF MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH OAK CLIFF BROOKHAVEN ALUMNI.

AND AT THE SAME TIME, I WAS A SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE AT THAT TIME WORKING WITH DALLAS AND SOME, SOME OF THE GUYS I SAW TRAINED SOME OF THE GUYS THAT WAS HERE.

AND I KNOW THOSE GUYS, I DON'T KNOW, LONG STAR ALLIANCE.

I KNOW SOME MR. BETTY WHO'S IN THE ROOM HAVE WORKED IN A DIFFERENT CAPACITY WITH THEM.

AND SO AGAIN, I'M USED TO GETTING A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN DISTRICT FOUR AND WORKING WITH PEOPLE THAT IS STRATEGIC, THAT ARE REAL BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

AND I KNOW THOSE INDIVIDUALS BECAUSE I WORK WITH THEM.

NOW, MY OTHER QUESTION IS WHAT THIS IS GOING TO HELP THE KIDS AND IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

AND AS A FORMER TRUSTEE, I WOULD ASK, ARE WE WORKING WITH DALLAS ISD, THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DALLAS ISD, OR ARE WE TALKING TO THEM AND COMMUNICATION WITH THEM AND SEE WHAT ELSE, WHAT KIND OF FUNDING THEY CAN BRING TO THE TABLE TO HELP US, SINCE WE'RE SERVICING OUR KIDS TOGETHER AND WE'RE PARTNERING. THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE.

[01:25:05]

HOW MUCH OF THIS 300,000. BECAUSE WHEN MAYOR JOHNSON DID IT IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, IT WAS RIGHT AT $1 MILLION. IT WAS A GREAT PROGRAM.

I THINK, IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECT. BUT I DO KNOW THAT THIS DALLAS CREDIT WAS GREAT AND THIS PROGRAM I SUPPORT CVI CITY MANAGER, I SUPPORT IT, AND YOU KNOW THAT I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT IN THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE.

SO IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T SUPPORT IT. WHAT I'M ASKING IS HOW WAS HOW WAS THE BREAKDOWN OF THE FINANCES, HOW THIS IS REALLY GOING TO AFFECT IT EFFECTIVELY SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITY WITH LESS FUNDING RIGHT NOW, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO WORK WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DALLAS ISD TO BRING THEM IN A PART OF THIS PROGRAM? SO THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE. NOW. IF WE WANT TO DELAY THIS AND TALK IN THE BACK ROOM AND DELIVER PROBABLY FOR THE TO THE END OF THE THE MEETING TODAY, I'M WILLING TO DO THAT, BUT I KNOW THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I DO SUPPORT, BUT I DO NEED MORE INFORMATION. IF WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION AND SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS I DON'T WANT TO REALLY ASK PUBLIC BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SEEM LIKE I'M BADGERING OR BEATING ANYONE UP AND DISRESPECT THEM. BUT THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE.

AND SO IF YOU CAN HELP ME WITH THAT, THEN I PROBABLY CAN MOVE FORWARD. BUT RIGHT NOW I DON'T HAVE THOSE ANSWERS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON.

VERY, VERY WELL ARTICULATED. AS FAR AS THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT, WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS EITHER NOW, OR WE CAN DO THOSE OUTSIDE OF THE SETTING IF THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL CHOOSES TO DO.

BUT WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO EXPLAIN HOW WE HAVE RECALIBRATED THE WAY WE'RE APPROACHING THE PROGRAM, IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES AND OTHER PROGRAMS THAT ARE ALREADY BEING IMPLEMENTED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

SO THIS IS REALLY IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE UMBRELLA, BUT IT'S AN ALIGNMENT THAT ACTUALLY SUPPORTS ALSO WHAT'S HAPPENING AT THE DISTRICT.

THIS IS THE COMPONENT THAT COUNCIL ASKED US TO, TO RETHINK ABOUT AS WE WENT INTO CONVERSATIONS LAST YEAR DURING THE BUDGET.

AND THIS IS THE WAY THAT WE'VE DONE IT. SO WE CAN ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS DIRECTLY WITH YOU ONE ON ONE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU PREFER. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'M GOING TO GO TO CHAIRMAN GRACEY, THEN.

MISS BLACKMON AND THEN TO YOU, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN.

SO. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'D JUST LIKE TO. IF I CAN PUT A MOTION OUT TO TO DELAY THIS ITEM UNTIL AFTER LUNCH.

THAT GIVES STAFF AN OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER MY COLLEAGUES QUESTIONS, AND WE CAN COME BACK AND REVISIT THIS ITEM.

SECOND, THE MOTION TO TABLE UNTIL AFTER LUNCH.

I JUST WANT TO CHECK WITH THE PARLIAMENTARIAN, MAKE SURE IT'S IN THE ORDER, BUT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN DO IT THAT WAY. SINCE WE HAVE THIS MOTION TO DEFER ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW, I THINK IT'LL I THINK IT TAKES PRECEDENCE.

IT DOES. SO IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO TABLE OR DO WE GO TO A VOTE.

COME ON BERT. MR. PARLIAMENTARIAN NO DEBATE. ALRIGHT.

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

SO IT'S TABLED. THIS ITEM IS TABLED UNTIL AFTER LUNCH, MADAM SECRETARY.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM TEN.

[10. 26-1339A Authorize a seven-month contract for front line outreach services for persons experiencing homelessness in encampments in furtherance of the City of Dallas’ Real Time Rehousing Project - Housing Forward, sole source - Not to exceed $676,455.00 - Financing: General Fund (subject to annual appropriations) *In alignment with Drivers of Opportunity nexus.]

BY THE WAY, JUST TO POINT OUT TO EVERYONE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BURT, BUT WHEN WE PICK IT BACK UP, WE'LL PICK IT BACK UP WHERE WE LEFT OFF WITH IT.

WE WON'T BE STARTING OVER WITH THE FIVE, THREE, ONE ANEW.

IT'LL BE THE SAME CUE, AND I HAVE IT WRITTEN DOWN BY HAND, SO I KNOW WHO SPOKE ALREADY.

ALL RIGHT. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT'S THAT'S HOW IT'S GOING TO. IT'S NOT GOING TO START OVER AGAIN. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM TEN AUTHORIZE A SEVEN MONTH CONTRACT FOR FRONTLINE OUTREACH SERVICES FOR PERSONS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS AND ENCAMPMENTS IN FURTHERANCE OF THE CITY OF DALLAS REAL TIME REHOUSING PROJECT.

HOUSING FORWARD SOLE SOURCE NOT TO EXCEED $676,455.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS, MENDELSOHN, ROTH AND JOHNSON.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM. MR.. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION ON ITEM TEN? I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. IS THERE A SECOND? ALRIGHT.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? WHO PULLED IT? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, PLEASE. I GUESS ACTUALLY, IF I CAN START WITH THE QUESTION OF WHY THIS IS A SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT, AND I'M NOT SURE IF, THOR, YOU'RE THE RIGHT PERSON OR NOT, BUT WHOEVER IS THE APPROPRIATE PERSON TO ANSWER THAT, PLEASE.

THANKS. I'D LIKE TO ASK JUANITA ORTIZ, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT, TO TO JOIN ME FOR THAT QUESTION.

[01:30:26]

THIS IS JUANITA ORTIZ, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES.

I DON'T HAVE THE SOLICITATION. I MEAN, THE SOLE SOURCE REQUEST IN FRONT OF ME TO GIVE YOU, LIKE, THE SPECIFIC DETAILS. BUT WHEN A DEPARTMENT REQUESTS A SOLE SOURCE, WE WILL REVIEW THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE CONTRACT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ISN'T ANOTHER ENTITY THAT CAN PROVIDE SIMILAR SERVICES.

IF THERE IS NOT A YOU KNOW, IF THEY HAVE COPYRIGHTS, ETC.

SO ON THIS ONE, WHAT I DO REMEMBER IS FOR THE CONTINUUM OF CARE.

THERE WAS ONLY ONE ORGANIZATION THAT WAS APPROVED TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE, WHICH WAS HOUSING FORWARD, AND THAT'S WHY WE DEEMED THIS A SOLE SOURCE. I, I CAN GET THE PACKET AND GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION IN A, IN A MEMO. OKAY. WELL, I THINK I'M GOING TO USE UP ALL MY TIME.

SO YOU'RE WELCOME TO GO GET IT. IT. OKAY. I'LL PROBABLY STILL BE TALKING AT THAT POINT.

SO CAN YOU OUTLINE WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THIS ITEM? WHAT, WHAT ACTIVITIES THEY'LL BE PROVIDED. YEAH.

THANK YOU. THORAX AND DIRECTOR, HOUSING COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT. THIS IS FOR WORK DIRECT ENGAGEMENT WITH FOLKS IN HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS.

SO, SO GENERALLY CALLED HOMELESS OUTREACH. THAT'S RIGHT.

HOMELESS OUTREACH, DIRECT INTERACTIONS, DISCUSSIONS ABOUT CRITICAL NEEDS, DISCUSSIONS ABOUT SERVICES AVAILABLE WORKING ON HOUSING NAVIGATION PROGRAMS, REALLY DIRECT SERVICES TO PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO GET CONNECTED BACK TO THE ULTIMATE HOUSING PATHWAY OF GETTING REHOUSED. ARE YOU AWARE OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO HOMELESS OUTREACH? THERE ARE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO HOMELESS OUTREACH.

THIS ORGANIZATION DOES IT SPECIFICALLY AS THE LEAD AGENCY OF THE CONTINUUM OF CARE.

BUT OTHER ORGANIZATIONS DO HOMELESS OUTREACH, SO THEREFORE IT IS NOT A SOLE SOURCE.

AND IN FACT, THEY OFTEN CONTRACT WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS TO DO THAT ACTUAL WORK.

CORRECT. THERE ARE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO PERFORM A VARIETY OF SERVICES FOR ENGAGEMENT, GETTING THEM INTO THEIR CRITICAL SERVICE. HOWEVER, THESE CASEWORKERS ADMINISTER IT FROM A VARIETY OF OUTREACH NEEDS AND CAN GET THEM INTO DIFFERENT PLACEMENTS DEPENDING ON THEIR SITUATION. OTHER FOLKS ARE WORKING ON OUTREACH SPECIFICALLY FOR THEIR ORGANIZATIONS, SO THERE IS A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE THERE IN TERMS OF HOW THAT WORK IS DONE.

ARE YOU SAYING THAT THERE'S NOT ORGANIZATIONS DOING OUTREACH THAT ARE PLACING PEOPLE IN SERVICES THAT ARE NOT THEIR OWN? IN TERMS OF THE, THE WAY THIS PROCUREMENT WAS WRITTEN, THIS WAS OUR RESEARCH.

ARE YOU AWARE OF OUR CALLING, WHICH DOESN'T PROVIDE SHELTER SERVICES, BUT DOES MORE THAN 3000 OUTREACH ENGAGEMENTS PER YEAR AND PLACES PEOPLE IN SERVICES ALL OVER THE CONTINUUM? YES, I'M AWARE OF OUR CALLING. SO THEREFORE, IT'S NOT A SOLE SOURCE.

GOOD. GOOD AFTERNOON. KEVIN ODIN, DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND CRISIS RESPONSE.

SO YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. THERE ARE ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO OUTREACH WHERE THERE IS INCLUDING THE CITY STAFF.

HOWEVER, THE DIFFERENCE WITH WHAT THIS ITEM DOES WITH HOUSING FORWARD IS TWO THINGS.

SO FIRST IS BEING THE HOUSING OUT OF THE ENCAMPMENTS.

WE'RE NOT EQUIPPED TO DO THAT AS AS CITY STAFF.

AND I'M NOT AWARE OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT THAT GET THE DIRECT VOUCHERS OR THE COORDINATION WITH WITH THE DALLAS HOUSING AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.

AND SO WHEN WE WORK THESE HOT SPOT LOCATIONS THAT WE'VE WE'VE BRIEFED THE COUNCIL ON, THEY, THEY HOUSING BOARD ARE DOING THE FRONT END OF HOUSING.

THE SECOND PIECE IS THE SHELTER HOUSING THAT THIS COUNCIL HAS APPROVED AS WELL.

SO THESE STAFF ARE ALSO PARTICIPATING IN THAT AS WELL, WHICH I'M NOT AWARE OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS OR ANYBODY THAT DOES THAT PARTICULAR SERVICE FOR THE CITY. SO I JUST WANTED TO ADD, JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU'RE SAYING THAT, I MEAN, ARE YOU AWARE THAT HOUSING FORD HAS ANY VOUCHERS RIGHT NOW? I, WE CAN, WE CAN CALL THEM UP. WHAT I CAN SAY IS WE JUST COMPLETED A BIG PROJECT WITH THEM WHERE THEY HOUSE, I BELIEVE, 47 PEOPLE OUT OF AN ENCAMPMENT. AND SO AND WE'RE WORKING ON OTHER HOT SPOTS WHERE THEY'RE GOING IN AS, AS THE FRONT END TO DO THIS, THIS HOUSING WORK FOR US.

[01:35:04]

SO IN THE DATA THAT WAS PRESENTED FOR THIS ITEM, BOTH AT HOUSING COMMITTEE YESTERDAY AND FOR THIS AGENDA, IT'S LISTED TOTAL ENGAGEMENTS. THE GOAL 1500 FISCAL YEAR 24 646.

FISCAL YEAR 25 1563. FISCAL YEAR 26 TO DATE, WHICH I THINK IS MARCH 523 FOR A TOTAL OF 2732. CORRECT. CORRECT. BUT MEANWHILE, OVER THAT SAME PERIOD, YOU WOULD FIND MORE THAN 9000 ENGAGEMENTS BY OUR CALLING. AND YET WE'RE GOING TO PAY THEM $676,000 TO DO LESS THAN A THIRD OF THE WORK THAT WE'RE SEEING FOR A NONPROFIT, WE DON'T PAY ANY MONEY TO.

YESTERDAY WE HAD A PRESENTATION FROM SALVATION ARMY.

NOW, I WILL AGREE THAT MOST OF THEIR OUTREACH IS FOR THEIR OWN SERVICES.

THERE'S OTHER GROUPS THAT ALSO GO OUT VERY REGULARLY.

AND WHILE KEVIN AND I AGREE THAT WHERE WE'VE SEEN HOUSING FORWARD HAS BEEN AT ENCAMPMENTS, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE SEE OUR CALLING, WALKING DOWN INTO OUR CREEKS, GOING TO THE PLACES THAT ARE LESS VISIBLE, WHERE PEOPLE ARE MORE AT RISK. AND I, I DISAGREE, THIS IS NOT A SOLE SOURCE.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ASSESSMENTS, ARE THEY STILL USING AN ACTUAL FORM OR IS THIS REALLY A SERIES OF QUESTIONS I CAN ASK RACHEL FROM HOUSING FORWARD TO COME DOWN TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ON HOW THEY MONITOR AND COLLECT PEOPLE AND ADD THEM TO MISS.

OKAY, WELL, I DON'T I DON'T NEED TO IF THEY'RE USING THE FORM, I THINK THERE'S MANY, MANY ARTICLES OUT THERE THAT TALK ABOUT THE BIAS OF THE FORM IF THEY'RE NOT USING THE FORM. WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT ARE A SERIES OF QUESTIONS THAT EVERY AGENCY GOES THROUGH TO TRY TO DETERMINE THE SITUATION OF THE PERSON AND WHAT RESOURCES WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

WHEN WE LOOK AT NAVIGATIONS AGAIN, FOR YOUR INFORMATION, THE GOAL WAS 400.

IN FISCAL YEAR 24, THEY HAD 26 FISCAL YEAR 25, 117, FISCAL YEAR 2652.

SO THEY HAD A TOTAL OF 195 WHEN THE GOAL WAS 400.

BUT YET WE REGULARLY SEE MUCH HIGHER NUMBERS FROM OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, AND I DON'T SEE HOW THIS IS THE RIGHT ORGANIZATION TO DO THAT. OTHER ITEMS THAT YOU HAD LISTED IN HERE BESIDES THE OUTREACH BESIDES THE SERVICE COORDINATION, WHICH AGAIN, EVERY SINGLE NONPROFIT AGENCY DOES SERVICE COORDINATION.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM DOES THIS. WAS ACTUALLY DATA ENTRY, WHICH AGAIN, EVERYBODY'S PUTTING DATA IN SOMEWHERE. WHAT I WOULD ASK YOU, SINCE YOU PUT IT IN THERE IS, ARE YOU REQUIRING HOUSING FORWARD TO ACCEPT THE DATA FROM EVERYBODY? SO THERE'S ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE OFFERING DATA AND THEY ARE NOT TAKING IT AND ADDING IT SO THAT WE ARE NOT GETTING THE FULL PICTURE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN HOMELESSNESS. IS IT REQUIRED FOR THEM TO TAKE IT? RACHEL. DO YOU ACCEPT THE DATA FROM EVERYONE? ARE YOU TAKING DATA FROM OUR CALLING, FROM FROM DALLAS LIFE? HI. RAY CLAY, CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER AT HOUSING FORWARD.

SO WE'VE ACTUALLY BEEN WORKING WITH OUR CALLING TO TAKE DATA.

WE'VE HAD PROBABLY EIGHT MEETINGS WITH OUR TECHNOLOGY ON TRYING TO GET THEM TO HAVE THE DATA POINTS THAT ARE NEEDED TO GO INTO A HUD CSV.

SO YES, WE DO ACCEPT OR WORK WITH OUR DATA WAREHOUSE TO TRY TO.

YOU'RE TELLING ME TODAY YOU'RE ACCEPTING IT BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR 12 YEARS.

I'M NOT SAYING TODAY. I'M SAYING IN THIS YEAR, DON'T TAKE IT TODAY.

DO YOU TAKE THE DATA FROM UNION GOSPEL MISSION? YES. FOR HICK AND PIT, WE GET INFORMATION FROM THEM FOR THEIR ENTIRE SHELTER OPERATION, FOR HICK AND PIT.

WE GET INFORMATION FROM THEM. SO JUST FOR THOSE PROGRAMS, FOR THOSE ACCOUNTS THAT GO TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

YES, WE TAKE THE INFORMATION FROM HICK AND PIT HOUSING INVENTORY COUNT.

POINT IN TIME. COUNT THEIR TOTAL SERVICE SHELTER OPERATION.

YOU'RE ONLY DOING THE POINT IN TIME COUNT. THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE IT FOR THIS ROUND. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. DID YOU GET JUST A YES OR NO?

[01:40:08]

DID YOU GET THE ANSWER NO. WE TAKE ALL DATA THAT'S ENTERED INTO MISS.

MR. ROTHI RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

MY QUESTIONS ARE REALLY MORE INFORMATIONAL. I'M REALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE'RE BUDGETING FOR THESE KINDS OF MONIES AND HOW WE'RE ALLOCATING THESE KINDS OF MONIES. IT LOOKS LIKE OVER THE PAST YEAR, IF WE'VE BEEN EXTENDING THESE, THESE CONTRACTS AND WE'RE NOW TALKING ABOUT FOR THIS YEAR, SPENDING $1 MILLION ON THIS PROGRAM, ROUGHLY $900,000.

WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WHERE DOES IS AND WE'VE BEEN GIVING I UNDERSTAND HOUSING FORWARD IS A GOOD ORGANIZATION.

THEY, THEY ALLOCATE MONIES TO OTHER PEOPLE TO PROVIDE SERVICES.

BUT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE, WHERE THIS MONEY COMES FROM IN OUR BUDGET.

AND IS IT NOT ALLOCATED IN ADVANCE? IS IT NOT PLANNED? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF BEFOREHAND? AND WHY DO WE NEED TO BE EXTENDING THESE CONTRACTS RATHER THAN PLANNING FOR THESE CONTRACTS IN A MORE DEFINITIVE WAY? SO I'LL START. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER ROTH, FOR YOUR QUESTION.

SO LAST YEAR, WHEN WE PRESENTED THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET, WE IDENTIFIED FUNDING THAT WE BELIEVED WOULD CONTINUE TO SUPPORT OUR HOMELESS ECOSYSTEM.

THERE ARE SEVERAL PROGRAMS THAT WE LAID OUT AS PART OF THE BUDGET.

SO THE AMOUNT THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TEN WAS ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE ADOPTED BUDGET, AND IT WAS ACTUALLY ALIGNED TO SUPPORTING THE ONGOING WORK THAT IS BEING DONE, WHETHER IT'S OUTREACH, WHETHER THE ONGOING INVESTMENT THAT WE NEEDED TO MAKE INTO HOMELESSNESS, FROM ENCAMPMENTS TO HOUSING TO ALL OF THE THE KIND OF THE DALLAS HOME APPROACH THAT WE RECENTLY BRIEFED THE CITY COUNCIL ON. WE PUT THAT LINE ITEM IN THE BUDGET, AND I THINK IT'S ABOUT A $10 MILLION INVESTMENT TO REALLY SUPPORT THIS WORK.

SO THIS IS NOT NEW AS IT RELATES TO HOW IT'S COME TO THE AGENDA.

IT'S TAKING THOSE FUNDS THAT WERE ALREADY ALLOCATED IN THE ADOPTED BUDGET AND MOVING THEM INTO THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM TO SUPPORT THIS CONTRACT UNTIL THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. WELL, THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. SO THAT THE $10 MILLION THAT WE THAT WE ALLOCATED A FEW MONTHS AGO TO HOUSING FORWARD FOR SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES, IS THAT THE $10 MILLION THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, OR WAS THAT A SEPARATE AUXILIARY $10 MILLION THAT WE ADDED TO THEIR BUDGETED ALLOCATION IN THE LAST YEAR'S BUDGET.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR THOR. YEAH, YEAH. WITH WITH THE BUDGET, THE $10 MILLION WAS ARPA REDEVELOPMENT FUNDS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE STREET TO HOME WORK, THE RAPID REHOUSING WORK. RIGHT. IN ADDITION TO THAT, IN THE IN THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET, WE HAD A, SOME CONTRACT CONTINUATION OF CRITICAL SERVICES TO SUPPORT THE HOMELESSNESS ECOSYSTEM, THIS BEING ONE OF THEM.

THERE'S IN ADDITION TO THIS, THERE'S ALSO EVICTION ASSISTANCE IN THE GENERAL FUND.

SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT SERVICES CONTRACTS THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH PROCUREMENT THIS YEAR, BRINGING TO YOU TO COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL, BUT WITH FUNDS THAT WERE APPROVED IN OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET FROM THE LAST FISCAL YEAR.

SO I GUESS WHAT I'M WONDERING IS, WHY DO WE HAVE TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED? AND SO THAT MAKES ME WONDER WHETHER OR NOT WE DON'T HAVE A CLEAR VISION.

WE DON'T I DON'T HAVE A CLEAR VISION AS TO WHAT WE'RE SPENDING THE MONEY ON AND HOW THAT MONEY IS BEING ALLOCATED TO THE VARIOUS PROGRAMS. AND TO SOME EXTENT, IT SORT OF DOVETAILS INTO A COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN QUESTION OF, OF IS ARE WE ALLOCATING THESE FUNDS TO THE RIGHT SERVICE PROVIDER? IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF ALLOCATING FUNDS.

IT'S A QUESTION OF ARE WE GETTING THE BEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK? ARE WE GOING TO THE MOST DIRECT SOURCE? ARE WE GOING TO THE MOST COST EFFICIENT AND AND EFFECTIVE SOURCE? AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT HOUSING FORWARD IS NOT THAT ENTITY.

I'M WONDERING HOW THAT THAT ANALYSIS IS ESTABLISHED IN OUR BUDGETING PROCESS.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION AND COUNCIL MEMBER. SO AS YOU KNOW, THE BUDGET IS A PLAN.

IT'S A PLANNING DOCUMENT. AND SO WHEN WE COME TO COUNCIL WITH AGENDA ITEMS, WE'RE THEN COMING TO TELL YOU HOW WE PLAN TO THEN MOVE THAT FUNDING FORWARD, WHICH IS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WHAT'S BEEN ADOPTED IN THE BUDGET.

AND SO, AS DIRECTOR THOR LAID OUT, IS THAT THESE.

ARE IDENTIFIED AS NEEDS. AND THE WAYS THAT WE WANTED TO INVEST CONTINUE.

CONTINUATION OF PROGRAMS AS WELL AS SOME OF THE NEW THINGS THAT WE INCLUDED INTO THE BUDGET.

SO AS IT RELATES TO WHY WE'RE BRINGING THE ITEM, WE'RE BRINGING THE ITEM BECAUSE NOW WE'RE ACTUALLY TELLING YOU HOW WE PLAN TO THEN EXECUTE

[01:45:01]

AND MOVE THAT BUDGET LINE ITEM FORWARD. SO THAT'S WHY IT'S ON THE AGENDA FOR TODAY.

IT IS ABOVE THE CITY MANAGER'S THRESHOLD. AND SO WE HAVE TO BRING IT TO YOU TO THEN AUTHORIZE, THEN MOVING THE FUNDING OUT AND THEN PUTTING IT INTO THE PROGRAM, IF THAT IF THAT HELPS WITH YOUR.

YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WOW.

DID I HEAR 47 PEOPLE WERE HOUSED OUT OF AN ENCAMPMENT? IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? YES, MA'AM. THAT WAS OUR FIRST COLLABORATIVE HOT SPOT.

AND THAT OPERATION WAS REALLY OVER THE LAST 7 TO 8 WEEKS.

BUT THE HOUSING CONCLUDED, I BELIEVE ON MAY 6TH WAS THE DATE THAT THAT WRAPPED UP.

WELL, I'VE SEEN THE BENEFIT OF THIS IN DISTRICT 13 UNDER 635 AT JOSE, AT WEBB CHAPEL, AT LOCATIONS THAT I HEAR FROM FARMERS BRANCH ABOUT AND THAT WE WORK COLLABORATIVELY ON. AND SO YOU'VE DONE IT THERE AS WELL.

AND I, I LOOK AT THE ENCAMPMENT REPORTS AND THE CLEANUP REPORTS.

AND SO I DO SEE THAT PROGRESS IS BEING MADE SURE WE STILL SEE THINGS ON THE STREET, BUT THIS IS NOT AN EASY JOB.

WHILE YOU ALL WERE VISITING, I MISS I VISITED WITH MR. ARMSTRONG ABOUT SOME PARTICULARS ON THIS. SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SHARE ANYTHING OR ON WHAT MAKES THIS DIFFERENT.

BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS IS MORE OF AN UMBRELLA.

I MEAN, THAT COORDINATES. I MEAN, SURE, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF GREAT PARTNERS OUT THERE. I SEE SOME IN THE GALLERY.

MISS SCHNITZER AND OTHERS. BUT IT'S THAT COORDINATION.

AND THEN YOU ALSO MENTION HOT SPOTS BECAUSE THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE THAT IS WHAT REALLY JUMPS OUT AT OUR RESIDENTS.

I MEAN, YOU SEE IT COME UP WHEN YOU SEE A CONCENTRATION OF PEOPLE POPPING UP IN AN ALLEY OR NEAR A BACKYARD OR NEAR A SCHOOL.

SO TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT YOU HAD JUST SHARED ABOUT WHAT WHAT THE DISTINCTION IS HERE.

YEAH, THANK YOU FOR THAT. THAT QUESTION. JAMES ARMSTRONG DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT.

SO THE SOLICITATION IS A MORE COORDINATED APPROACH TO ENGAGEMENT THAN THE ONE OFF ENGAGEMENT THAT MAY HAPPEN AT AN INDIVIDUAL PRACTITIONER. RIGHT. AND SO WITH THIS SOLICITATION, YOU HAVE A LOT OF THE DIFFERENT PARTNERS, MENTAL HEALTH PARTNERS, SUBSTANCE ABUSE PARTNERS OBVIOUSLY COORDINATION WITH KEVIN'S GROUP AND DPD HOT TEAM.

AND SO IT'S A DIFFERENT, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE SOPHISTICATED APPROACH TO ENGAGEMENT.

BUT AGAIN, WHAT WAS JUST EXPLAINED. THIS CONTRACT REALLY UNDERGIRDS OUR $10 MILLION INVESTMENT IN THE STREET TO HOME INITIATIVE.

OKAY. WELL, I MEAN, I'M, I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT THIS IS A BIGGER PICTURE.

AND WE CERTAINLY HAVE A LOT OF GREAT PARTNERS OUT THERE.

BUT I, YOU KNOW, MUCH LIKE ON THE LAST ITEM WE DISCUSSED, I JUST DON'T THINK THIS IS A TIME WHEN THERE'S MOMENTUM TO INTERRUPT THIS IF WE WANT TO LITIGATE IT AT, YOU KNOW, HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, GREAT, LET'S LET'S POUR THROUGH IT.

AND, BUT I, I SUPPORT EXTENDING THIS SO THAT WE CAN KEEP THIS PROGRESS GOING.

CHAIR MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. WHEN THEY DO ENGAGEMENTS, ARE THEY PUTTING PEOPLE IN HMIS AT THAT POINT? YES THEY ARE. THEY HAVE PREVIOUSLY SAID NO. WHEN THEY'RE DOING OUTREACH WITH US, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PUT PEOPLE IN HMIS IN THIS CONTRACT. DO YOU WANT TO AFFIRM THAT? YES. AS THEY'RE DOING ENGAGEMENTS, THEY'RE PUTTING PEOPLE IN.

MISS. HOWEVER, WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE THAT REFUSE TO ENGAGE, AREN'T ABLE TO ENGAGE.

SO SOMETIMES IT TAKES A LITTLE BIT OF TIME JUST TO GET INFORMATION ENOUGH TO SAY, THIS IS WHO THE PERSON IS.

SO ONCE THEY HAVE THAT RELATIONSHIP, THEY'RE MAKING AN ENGAGEMENT.

THEN THEY DEFINITELY ARE PUTTING THEM IN. MISS.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF WE AUDITED YOUR RECORDS, THERE'S 2732 OUTREACH ENGAGEMENTS OVER THAT TIME PERIOD THAT WOULD BE IN MISS.

YOUR OFFICE HAS BACKUP DATA FOR EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE TURNED IN FOR OUR PERFORMANCE RESULTS.

WHAT ARE THE LARGEST HOMELESS SHELTERS IN DALLAS AND ARE THEY ON MY S? I HAVE OUR HIC AND I CAN LOOK AT THOSE. NOT EVERYONE IS IN MY S MEANING THAT THEY PUT SHELTER STAYS IN.

COULD YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION? WHAT ARE THE LARGEST ONES AND ARE THEY IN? MISS? WE'VE GOT SALVATION ARMY, WE HAVE DALLAS LIFE WE HAVE.

AND ARE THEY IN MISS? ONLY FOR THINGS THAT THEY REPORT.

BUT SOME OF THEM, THEY ARE VERY LITTLE. OKAY.

AND WHAT'S THE NEXT ONE? WHAT'S THE NEXT ONE? LARGEST SHELTERS. THE BRIDGE, AUSTIN STREET. AUSTIN STREET ACTUALLY DOES MORE THAN THE BRIDGE.

BRIDGE IS NOT ONE OF THE LARGEST SHELTERS. I WAS SAYING AUSTIN STREET HAS MORE THAN THE BRIDGE.

YES. WE'RE HAPPY TO PROVIDE YOU THAT INFORMATION IN A LIST AT A LATER TIME, IF THAT'S ALL I'M AWARE OF THE ANSWER.

[01:50:04]

I'M I OKAY, I'M ASKING A QUESTION I KNOW THE ANSWER TO.

SO YOU DIDN'T MENTION I DID MENTION AND ARE THEY SUPPLYING MISS INFORMATION FOR THEIR SHELTER? THEY SUPPLY MISS INFORMATION WHEN IT COMES TO OUR HOUSING INVENTORY COUNT THAT WE DO.

YES. THEY'RE INCLUDED. THEY ARE NOT PART OF THE SYSTEM.

YOU'RE NOT ACCEPTING THEIR FILE. YOU'RE NOT ACCEPTING DALLAS LIFESTYLE.

YOU'RE NOT ACCEPTING MS FILE. THE DATA WE'RE GETTING IS INCOMPLETE.

CAN I SPEAK TO THAT? IT'S NOT REALLY A QUESTION.

IT'S A COMMENT. AND I'M ALLOWED TO DO THAT. THIS PROCUREMENT STARTED JANUARY 2024.

IT'S AT THE CONTRACT RAN OUT. AND AGAIN YOU'VE NOT TRIED TO MAKE THIS COMPETITIVE.

THAT IS THE BASIS OF PROCUREMENT FOR GOVERNMENT.

AND THERE ARE COMPETITION. THERE'S COMPETITION THAT IS AVAILABLE TO HAVE RESPONDED TO THIS.

I THINK IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE THAT AS A SOLE SOURCE, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S MAYBE A FAVORITE OF CERTAIN PEOPLE.

THE HOUSING NAVIGATION SALVATION ARMY REPORTED YESTERDAY 450 SUCCESSFUL THIS CONTRACT 195 OVER MULTIPLE YEARS. OUR CALLING 1370 JUST IN ONE YEAR.

THEY'RE WORKING WITH EVERYBODY AGAIN. WE'RE NOT EVEN TRYING TO LEVERAGE OTHER VENDORS.

WE'RE TRYING TO ADD ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE LAYER, WHICH IS WHAT HOUSING FORD IS.

THEY'RE NOT DOING THE WORK. THEY'RE THEY'RE CONTRACTING IT OUT JUST LIKE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE VIOLENCE INTERRUPTERS.

WHY AREN'T WE CONTRACTING DIRECTLY WITH THESE GROUPS? SO I WOULD ASK THAT THIS CONTRACT INCLUDE REQUIREMENTS THAT EVERY ENGAGEMENT, EVEN IF IT'S PARTIAL INFORMATION, IS INCLUDED IN MISS THAT YOU REQUIRE CSV FILES FROM TO BE ACCEPTED.

WHEN I WAS AT SAMARITAN IN EVERYTHING WAS ELECTRIC.

WE OFFERED CSV FILES, THEY WOULDN'T TAKE IT. AND TRUST ME, THAT DATA WAS CLEANER THAN THE MR SYSTEM.

SO THERE'S THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES HERE. AND INSTEAD OF TRYING TO FIX IT, WE'RE JUST DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS ITEM. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. JUANITA, CAN YOU COME HERE FOR A SECOND? I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT SOLE SOURCE AND HOW THAT'S DEFINED.

AND JUST AS A MATTER OF CLARITY, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THE DEPARTMENT PUTS ON AN ITEM THAT GOES THROUGH A PROCESS TO BE CONSIDERED SOLE SOURCE.

CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THE DEPARTMENT DID REQUEST A REVIEW OF HOUSING FORWARD AS A SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER.

IN THAT PROCESS, WE ASKED FOR A VENDOR TO SUBMIT ON THEIR LETTERHEAD WHY THEY CONSIDER THEMSELVES SOLE SOURCE.

WE ALSO ASKED FOR A DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE THE JUSTIFICATION, AND THEN WE DO OUR RESEARCH TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS ACCURATE BEFORE WE APPROVE A SOLE SOURCE. IN THIS CASE, THE THE EXPLANATION FOR WHY HOUSING FORWARD SHOULD BE CONSIDERED SOLE SOURCE WAS BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ONLY HUD CERTIFIED LEAD AGENCY FOR THE CONTINUUM OF CARE.

AND WE DID CONFIRM THERE, THERE IS NOT ANOTHER AGENCY THAT CAN PROVIDE THAT CAN PROVIDE THE SERVICE WHO IS HUD ALIGNED WITH THE CONTINUUM OF CARE. AND SO WE DID APPROVE THE SOLE SOURCE.

SO PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEY ARE ALIGNED WITH THE CONTINUUM OF CARE, THAT'S WHAT QUALIFIED THEM AS SOLE SOURCE, NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE OF THE WORK THAT THEY DO. BECAUSE TO CHAIR MENDELSON'S POINT, THERE ARE A LOT OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO THAT WORK, BUT IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE ALIGNED WITH THAT IN THAT CONTINUUM OF CARE THAT MAKES THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SCOPE OF WORK, WAS THAT THEY BE ALIGNED WITH CONTINUUM OF CARE, AND THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'LL JUST MAKE A STATEMENT. CITY MANAGER, CAN WE ALSO DISCUSS THIS? INSTEAD OF MEETING TO DISCUSS THIS PARTICULAR ITEM I'VE BEEN HAVING AND WORKING WITH KEVIN ODOM.

THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING IN DISTRICT FOUR, BUT I DO WANT TO HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS CONCERNING WHEN THERE ARE GIVING AID TO OUR HOMELESS HOMELESS COMMUNITY ON THE HOUSE COMMUNITY THOSE RESOURCES THAT THEY ARE GOING TO, HOW IS THAT WORKING? WHAT SUPPORT SYSTEMS DO THEY HAVE IN PLACE? THE HOUSING IS BRINGING TO THE TABLE? BECAUSE WHAT I, WHAT I'M SEEING AND HEARING IS THAT IT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE.

[01:55:05]

AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO GET MORE INFORMATION AND THIS IS FROM SOME OF THE UNHOUSED COMMUNITY.

SO GET MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT IS SUSTAINABLE AND HOW WE CAN BRING REAL HELP TO THOSE SOLUTIONS.

AND AGAIN, AGAIN TO KEVIN ODIN'S TEAM. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WORKING WITH US IN DISTRICT FOUR.

BUT IF WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION CITY MANAGER, I APPRECIATE IT AND HOW I CAN ALSO BE A BETTER SUPPORT SYSTEM AS WE'RE TRYING TO TACKLE THESE ISSUES. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. MAYOR.

YES, SIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE FOR THE COMMENTS AND THE QUESTION.

AND WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

AND AS WE CONTINUE WITH THE REPORTING AND THE UPDATES THAT WE PROVIDE AT THE THE HOUSING AND HOMELESS SOLUTIONS COMMITTEE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS AND BRING ANY ADDITIONAL DETAIL THAT YOU FEEL THAT YOU NEED IN ORDER TO, TO BE MORE INFORMED.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, CHAIR. MENDELSOHN FOR ONE MINUTE.

THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE PROCUREMENT QUESTION.

EVERY COMMUNITY, EVERY CONTINUUM OF CARE IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A LEAD AGENCY.

AND WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY SAYING IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE LEAD AGENCY, THEIR SOLE SOURCE, THAT MEANS THEY COULD ACTUALLY TAKE ANY CONTRACT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONLY LEAD AGENCY WHICH IS AGAIN, REQUIRED BY HUD TO HAVE A LEAD AGENCY.

BUT I'LL TELL YOU THAT THE HUD DIRECTOR WENT TO OUR CALLING AND GAVE A SPEECH AND HOSTED AN EVENT.

THERE'S LOTS OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE HIGHLY INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED WITH HUD.

LEAD AGENCY STATUS DOES NOT MAKE YOU NONCOMPETITIVE.

YOU'RE YOU'RE PROVIDING I MEAN, THEY'RE PROVIDING ACTIVITIES THAT MANY OTHER ORGANIZATIONS PROVIDE.

AND I WOULD ARGUE IN MANY CASES, THEY DO A BETTER JOB.

AND I'VE JUST PROVIDED THE EVIDENCE OF THE OUTCOMES.

SO BEING THE LEAD AGENCY DOES NOT MAKE IT SOLE SOURCE.

AND ANY ONE OF THESE NONPROFITS COULD PROBABLY SUE ABOUT THAT TIME.

ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST JEN ITEM TEN.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYE. AYES HAVE IT. I. NOTED COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN VOTED NO.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 21 WILL BE HELD LATER IN THE MEETING.

WE WILL NOW MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 28. AGENDA ITEM 28.

[28. 26-1610A Authorize Supplemental Agreement No. 4 to an increase the two-year master Service Price aAgreement with Carahsoft Technology Corporation for the purchase of various software including perpetual, fixed term, subscription and software as a service, software maintenance, support, implementation, and other services - Not to exceed $3,786,672.81, from $15,146,691.20 to $18,933,364.01 - Financing: Data Services Fund (subject to annual appropriations)]

AUTHORIZE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER FOUR TO INCREASE THE TWO YEAR MASTER SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT WITH CARAHSOFT TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF VARIOUS SOFTWARE, INCLUDING PERPETUAL FIXED TERM SUBSCRIPTION AND SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE, SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE, SUPPORT, IMPLEMENTATION AND OTHER SERVICES NOT TO EXCEED $3,786,672.81 FROM $15,146,691.20, TO $18,933,364.01. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CORRECTED AND WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

IS THERE A MOTION ON 28. YES. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO JUNE 10TH, 2026.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. ITEMS DEFERRED. THANK YOU.

NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOUR NEXT ITEM WILL BE AGENDA ITEM 32.

I'M SORRY, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 31 WAS PULLED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON.

LET ME GO BACK TO AGENDA ITEM 31. JUNE ITEM 31.

[31. 26-1140A Authorize a construction services contract for the 2026 Slurry Seal and Polymer Modified Micro-Surfacing Contract for citywide maintenance, repairs, and improvements of City streets - Viking Construction LLC, lowest responsible bidder of four - Not to exceed $20,408,155.00 - Financing: General Fund (subject to annual appropriations) *In alignment with Infrastructure Management Plan.]

AUTHORIZE A CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE 2026 SLURRY SEAL AND POLYMER MODIFIED MICRO SURFACING CONTRACT FOR CITYWIDE MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS AND IMPROVEMENTS BY CITY STREETS. VIKING CONSTRUCTION, LLC, LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR NOT TO EXCEED $20,408,155. AGAIN, THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON.

LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON 31? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU PULLED IT. DID YOU WANT TO? YES. FIVE MINUTES. YES, GUS.

HOW YOU DOING? GOOD MORNING. SO I JUST GOT ONE SIMPLE QUESTION WITH THE SLURRY SEAL, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE DOING A LOT OF STUFF ON THE MAIN STREET.

WELL, THIS ALSO ADDRESSED SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS IN OUR, IN OUR COMMUNITIES, NOT JUST SO MUCH THE MAIN STREET, BUT SOME OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS. WELL, IT'S ALSO ADDRESSED THOSE THAT HAVE REAL ROUGH STREETS.

GOOD MORNING. GUS MCCARTY, DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC WORKS. YES, THIS IS FOR THE CITY WIDE ON ALL ROADWAYS THAT DO HAVE ASPHALT.

SO THIS ITEM IS BASICALLY TO PRESERVE THE LIFE OF THE ASPHALT PAVEMENT ACROSS THE CITY.

[02:00:06]

SO AND I DID, I DID REALLY READ THAT. BUT I WANT TO SPECIFICALLY ASK THAT BECAUSE WHEN WHEN WE HAD A MEETING, I THINK WITH YOUR STAFF, THEY WERE SAYING SOMETHING AND I'M GOING TO TRY TO QUOTE THEM CORRECTLY.

IF, IF THE STREET IS TOO BAD, THEN THIS WILL NOT WORK IN A NEIGHBORHOOD STREET.

SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS, WHAT, WHAT CAN WE DO TO FIX THAT? OR WILL THIS ACTUALLY HELP? SO COULD YOU KIND OF EXPOUND ON THAT? BECAUSE A LOT OF MY COMMUNITY HAS BEEN ASKING ABOUT THE STREET REPAIRS, AND THEY SEE THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING TOGETHER.

AS YOU'RE PARTNERING WITH ME IN DISTRICT FOUR. SO THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT THAT PARTICULAR QUESTION I WANT TO ASK ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS, NOT THE MAIN STREETS, BUT WHERE, WHERE ACTUALLY THEY DRIVE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS. AND IT'S KIND OF ROUGH.

YES, SIR. SO JUST REAL QUICK, WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM THAT PRIORITIZES RANKS, THE ROADWAYS AND PRIORITIZE THEM. AND BASED ON THE LEVEL AND THE SCORING, IF YOU WILL, THAT'S HOW WE DETERMINE THE TYPE OF TREATMENT.

SO THIS IS SPECIFIC FOR ROADWAYS THAT ARE STILL IN DECENT SHAPE, THAT WE CAN JUST APPLY THE SEAL TO PRESERVE THEM AND EXTEND THEIR LIFE.

OTHER TREATMENTS, WHICH INCLUDES COMPLETE RESURFACING, ARE OTHER TREATMENTS THAT WE DO ACROSS THE CITY.

AGAIN, THAT INCLUDES NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS AS WELL AS MAJOR ROADWAYS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND I APPRECIATE AGAIN THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING. WE HAVE SOME CHALLENGES OVER IN OUR COMMUNITY, BUT I APPRECIATE THE WORK AND THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. IS THERE ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST ITEM 31? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 32 IS AN ORDINANCE DENYING RATES AS REQUESTED BY ATMOS ENERGY CORP.

[32. 26-1643A An ordinance denying rates as requested by Atmos Energy Corp. Mid-Tex Division provided pursuant to its January 15, 2026, Dallas Annual Rate Review filing and setting rates as recommended by the City Manager - Financing: No cost consideration to the City]

MID TAX DIVISION PROVIDED PURSUANT TO ITS JANUARY 15TH, 2026, DALLAS ANNUAL RATE REVIEW, FILING AND SETTING RATES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY MANAGER, THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

IS THERE A MOTION? YES, MAYOR. I MOVE TO DENY.

SECOND, THE MOTION TO DENY. AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED.

CHAIRMAN WAS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THIS IS ITEM 32.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I AM IN CARRYING FORWARD THIS FROM THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.

WE HAD A UNANIMOUS VOTE FROM THE COMMITTEE TO DENY THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF RATES.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 32? CHAIRMAN WAS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. YOU'RE OUT.

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

COULD YOU COULD YOU CLARIFY WHAT WHAT THE RATIONALE WAS FOR DENYING IT, PLEASE? DO YOU WANT TO I WILL MAYOR. OKAY. THE COMMITTEE EXPRESSED DISAGREEMENT WITH THE PROPOSED RATE INCREASES BY ENCORE. WE WERE ALSO INFORMED OF THE LIKELY POSSIBILITY THAT ENCORE MIGHT APPEAL, AND THE COMMITTEE CHOSE TO CONTINUE MOVING FORWARD WITH SUPPORTING A DENIAL.

SO I WOULD REFER TO JACK IRELAND OR SOMEONE ON HIS TEAM.

IF YOU WANT TO KIND OF GET INTO THE MORE TECHNICAL ISSUES, BUT THAT'S THE BASIS OF IT.

MR. ROFF, ARE YOU YOU RELINQUISHING? THANK YOU.

THAT'S IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO GO CHAIRMAN RIDLEY FOR FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY. WE'RE ON AGENDA ITEM 32. IT'S A MOTION TO DENY THE ITEM.

WELL, THEN WE'RE DEALING WITH A DOUBLE NEGATIVE HERE.

THE ITEM IS TO DENY THE RATES REQUESTED BY ATMOS.

SO I'D LIKE A CLARIFICATION ON A MOTION TO DENY A DENIAL OF PROPOSED RATES.

WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US? IT'S A GREAT, GREAT POINT.

I THINK IT MAY HAVE BEEN A MIS STATEMENT NOT.

I THINK HIS INTENTION IS. GO AHEAD. I'LL LET YOU CLARIFY.

I'LL CLARIFY THE MOTION. THANK YOU. THE. SO THE MOTION IS TO DENY THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT BY WHICH IS PROPOSED BY STAFF, WHICH DENIES THE THE RATE PROPOSED BY ATMOS. SO STAFF HAS PUT FORWARD A SETTLEMENT WHICH DENIES THE ATMOS RATE AND COMES UP WITH A SETTLEMENT AMOUNT, WHICH IS DIFFERENT. THE COMMITTEE CHOSE TO DENY THAT SETTLEMENT.

WELL, THEN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.

THAT IS NOT WHAT WAS POSTED. WHAT WAS POSTED WAS DENIAL OF THE RATES ORIGINALLY REQUESTED BY ATMOS.

NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT IS NOT THE SUBJECT OF THIS ITEM.

CAN THIS EVEN BE ADDRESSED UNDER THIS ITEM? GO FOR IT, BERT.

YOU'RE UP. MR. MAYOR, THE ITEM AS POSTED. INCORPORATED THE SETTLEMENT THAT WAS PART OF THE POSTED ITEM, AND THEREFORE THAT IS IN ORDER.

[02:05:04]

WELL, THEN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF AS TO THE NATURE OF THIS SETTLEMENT.

AND WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS IF WE TURN THIS SETTLEMENT DOWN, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN NEXT? THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS NEGOTIATED, REDUCED THE RATE REQUEST FROM THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS BY A LITTLE OVER $4 MILLION, WHICH WOULD BE A SAVINGS TO RATEPAYERS IF WE DENY THE RATE REQUEST.

DID YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF? EXCUSE ME? DID YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF, SIR? DID YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF? NICK FEHRENBACH, I'M THE MANAGER OF REGULATORY AFFAIRS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THANK YOU. IF THE CITY DENIES THE RATE REQUEST IN ITS ENTIRETY DOES NOT ADOPT THE SETTLEMENT.

ATMOS HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL THAT DECISION TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS UPON THEIR FILING THE APPEAL, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO IMPLEMENT THE FULL REQUESTED RATES SUBJECT TO REFUND.

WHILE THE CASE IS PENDING AT THE END OF THE RAILROAD COMMISSION CASE, IF THE RAILROAD COMMISSION SETS RATES LOWER THAN THEY WOULD HAVE TO REFUND THAT TO CUSTOMERS. HOWEVER, THE RAILROAD COMMISSION HAS NOT BEEN A FRIENDLY FORUM FOR CITIES OR CONSUMERS IN THE PAST.

SO IF WE GRANT THIS MOTION AND DENY THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, THEN ATMOS CAN APPEAL TO THE PUCK. AND IN THE MEANTIME, WHILE THAT APPEAL IS PENDING, THEY CAN CHARGE THE FULL ORIGINAL RATE AMOUNT AT 38 MILLION.

THAT IS CORRECT. AND WHAT IS THE SUCCESS RATIO OF.

THE APPEALS TO THE PUCK BY ATMOS. THERE HAS BEEN ONE INSTANCE IN THE PAST WHERE A RATE CASE UNDER THE DALLAS ANNUAL RATE REVIEW WAS APPEALED.

IN 2017, ATMOS FILED FOR A RATE INCREASE OF $10.7 MILLION.

WE NEGOTIATED A SETTLEMENT OF 7.8, WHICH THE COUNCIL REJECTED, DENIED THE RATE INCREASE.

THEY APPEALED TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION. ULTIMATELY, THE RAILROAD COMMISSION GRANTED AN INCREASE OF $9.9 MILLION, OR $2.1 MILLION, MORE THAN WHAT WAS OFFERED IN SETTLEMENT SIX MONTHS EARLIER.

AND SO HOW WAS THIS SETTLEMENT ARRIVED AT? IS THIS A NEGOTIATION THAT YOU PARTICIPATE IN EVERY YEAR? YES. THE CITY HIRES CONSULTANTS TO HELP US REVIEW THE CASE.

WE IDENTIFY ISSUES THAT WE THINK ARE APPROPRIATE.

WE SHARE THOSE FINDINGS WITH THE COMPANY. WE TALK THROUGH OUR DIFFERENCES.

AND ORIGINALLY ACTUALLY SENT UP IN A BLACK BOX SETTLEMENT.

WE DON'T ACTUALLY RESOLVE THE ISSUES. WE HAVE A POSITION ON ACCUMULATED DEFERRED INCOME TAXES.

THEY HAVE A POSITION. WE UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER'S POSITION.

BUT THE SETTLEMENT ESSENTIALLY A BLACK BOX, THEY'RE AGREEING TO ACCEPT LESS MONEY JUST TO GET THE RATES IN PLACE AND AVOID THE COST AND UNCERTAINTIES OF LITIGATING THIS FURTHER AT THE RAILROAD COMMISSION. SO YOU MENTIONED A CONSULTANT.

WHO IS THIS CONSULTANT? WHAT ARE THEIR QUALIFICATIONS? WHAT'S THEIR ROLE IN THIS PROCESS? THE CONSULTANT WE USE THIS YEAR, EXCUSE ME, I FORGET NAMES.

WITH NUGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, THIS IS OUR FIRST TIME USING THIS FIRM.

BUT THEY HAVE EXPERTISE IN GAS RATE CASES. THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS.

WE BROUGHT THEM IN TO LOOK AT THE COMPLEX ISSUES.

THE FILING ITSELF IS A COUPLE OF THOUSAND PAGES OF WORK PAPERS AND VERY TECHNICAL DATA.

THEY REQUESTED A LOT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM ATMOS THAT AGAIN, HAD TO SORT THROUGH.

IF IT IS APPEALED, WE'LL PROBABLY KEEP THE SAME CONSULTANT AND USE THEM ON APPEAL TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.

BUT AS I SAID, THAT'S NOT A FAVORABLE FORUM FOR US.

SO WHAT WAS NUIJENS RECOMMENDATION TO YOU AS STAFF? SORRY, WHAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION? WHAT DID THEY CONCLUDE? THE CONSULTANT IDENTIFIED APPROXIMATELY $9 MILLION IN ADJUSTMENTS TO THE FILING IN NEGOTIATION SETTLEMENTS WITH THE COMPANY.

WE REACHED A MIDDLE GROUND THAT WAS ABOUT $4.1 MILLION OFF THE REQUEST, OR ABOUT HALF OF THE IDENTIFIED ISSUES.

THE CONSULTANT FOUND. AND DID YOU FEEL AT THE TIME THAT THAT WAS THE BEST DEAL THE CITY COULD MAKE? I BELIEVE IT'S A VERY REASONABLE OUTCOME FOR THIS CASE AND GIVEN OUR RISK AND CHANCES ON APPEAL, I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY FAVORABLE TO TAKE THIS DEAL.

FOR THOSE REASONS, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.

[02:10:02]

CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

WE TALKED ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY IN THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A CLARIFICATION. I KNOW AT SOME POINT, YOU KNOW, PART OF THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THE IMPACT IT'S GOING TO COST TO THE CUSTOMERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE TWO DIFFERENT RATES, THERE WAS THE RESIDENTIAL RATE AND THERE WAS THE COMMERCIAL RATE.

AND I GUESS I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT AT WHAT POINT OR I GUESS IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT AT WHAT POINT COULD THERE HAVE BEEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROPOSE INCREASING THE COMMERCIAL RATE AND REDUCING THE RESIDENTIAL, OR BALANCING IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT RESIDENTS AREN'T HIT AS HARD WITH THESE PROPOSED RATE INCREASES? THE WAY THE DHA MECHANISM WORKS, WE TAKE THE LAST FULLY LITIGATED FULL RATE CASE THAT HAD A COST ALLOCATION STUDY IN IT.

ON WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE COST ARE ALLOCATED TO THE THREE CLASSES RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL.

AND THEN YOU HAVE INDUSTRIALS ALSO EACH YEAR ON THE DARK CASE, WE KEEP THAT COST ALLOCATION BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DONE A NEW ALLOCATION STUDY.

SO WE'RE KEEPING THAT IN ALLOCATING THOSE. SO ALL THREE RATES ARE GOING UP RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.

AFTER THE COMMITTEE MEETING LAST NIGHT, I DID CRUNCH SOME NUMBERS TO SEE WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE ON THE COMMERCIAL RATE IF WE HELD THE RESIDENTIAL RATES FLAT WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW, AND PUT ALL OF THIS INCREASE INTO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL.

IT WOULD RESULT IN THE COMMERCIAL CUSTOMER CHARGE GOING FROM $88 TO 147.60.

ALMOST GOING UP 80%. THE CONSUMPTION CHARGE WOULD GO UP.

ALSO, THE AVERAGE COMMERCIAL CUSTOMER WOULD SEE THEIR BILL GO UP ABOUT $120 A MONTH.

THE AVERAGE INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMER WOULD SEE AN INCREASE OF ALMOST $2,000 A MONTH, BECAUSE THERE ARE TEN TIMES THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS.

AS COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS SPREADING THAT INCREASE OVER A MUCH BIGGER POPULATION RESULTS IN A SMALLER IMPACT.

BUT AGAIN, THAT COST ALLOCATION IS A POLICY DECISION AND WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THIS COUNCIL.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, EVEN IF WE WERE TO TRY TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER, IF I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU JUST SAID, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH DOLLARS IN THAT COMMERCIAL SPACE TO EVEN COVER THE THE GAP NEEDED FOR WITH THE NUMBER COMPARED TO THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL, WITHOUT MAKING THE COMMERCIAL RATE SO PROHIBITIVELY HIGH THAT IT WOULD NOT BE VIABLE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR OR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING OF THE MOTION.

WHAT I'M HEARING AND HELP ME IF I'M WRONG. BUT THIS IS PRETTY MUCH LIKE A NO WIN FOR OUR RESIDENTS.

IF AND THIS IS WHAT I SAID THIS YESTERDAY, THIS IS WHAT I WAS TOLD BY A FEW MONTHS AGO WHEN I ASKED THIS.

IF WE SAY NO, THEN WE JUST WELL, WE JUST GO TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION AND GET MORE THAN WHAT WE'RE REALLY ASKING YOU GUYS FOR.

SO PRETTY MUCH THAT'S, THAT'S THE HAND THAT YOU'VE BEEN DEALT.

IS THAT PRETTY MUCH FAIR TO SAY? IT IS FAIR THAT IT'S A NO WIN SCENARIO? UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MAIN DRIVER IN THIS RATE CASE IS INVESTMENT IN ACTUAL PLAN ON THE GROUND THAT ATMOS HAS MADE.

AND WE HAVE NEVER SUCCESSFULLY ARGUED TO DISALLOW INVESTMENT IN ACTUAL PLANT THAT'S PUT IN THE GROUND AT THE RAILROAD COMMISSION OR IN THE COURTS.

THEY'RE ENTITLED TO GET A RETURN ON THAT. IT'S THAT'S SORT OF A NO WIN.

THE QUESTION IS, DO WE WANT TO APPROVE A SETTLEMENT, WHICH IS NOT A BIG INCREASE, IS WHAT THEY ASK FOR, OR ROLL THE DICE AT THE COMMISSION AND SEE IF THEY GET THE FULL AMOUNT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT'S A BIG DICE TO ROLL. IT'S TOUGH WHEN THEY ARE ALREADY EXPENSIVE IN MY OPINION.

AND A LOT OF MY RESIDENTS ARE SENIOR CITIZENS IN DISTRICT FOUR.

WE'RE GROWING. HOWEVER, I'VE HAD MORE COMPLAINTS ABOUT ATMOS BEING MORE THAN ELECTRIC BILL.

SO THIS IS A TOUGH ONE. I'M MAKING THESE STATEMENTS PUBLICLY BECAUSE MY COMMUNITY IS LISTENING AND IT'S KIND OF TOUGH WHEN WE'RE BEING, I WOULD USE THE WORD AS I USED YESTERDAY, SEEM LIKE FOR A GAME OF STRONG ARM.

IF YOU DON'T DO THIS, THEN WE'LL DO THIS. AND SO THAT THAT'S BEEN A PROBLEM FOR ME.

AND SO ALTHOUGH IT IS A ROLL OF THE DICE, I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT INCREASING THE RATES ON OUR ON OUR COMMUNITIES, ESPECIALLY IN, IN DISTRICT FOUR, WHERE I HAVE A LOT OF LOW INCOME FAMILIES THAT'S ALREADY STRUGGLING.

THAT, THAT SEEMS UNFAIR, BUT WE ARE IN A UNFAIR TOUGH SITUATION.

[02:15:01]

AND AGAIN, WHEN IT WAS STATED TO ME AND MY TEAM WHEN WE MET, PRETTY MUCH IF YOU GUYS DON'T GO IN THIS DIRECTION AND WE'RE JUST DOING THAT OTHER DIRECTION AND I DON'T, IT'S LIKE BULLYING IN MY OPINION, BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT. BUT IF YOU CAN ADDRESS IT, IF YOU CHOOSE TO, WELL, AND I CAN APPRECIATE YOUR SITUATION, YOUR RESPONSIBILITY, CONSTITUENTS, BUT AS A REGULATORY BODY, WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO SET RATES THAT ARE FAIR AND REASONABLE FOR ATMOS FAIR TO THE RATEPAYERS AND REASONABLE FOR THE COMPANY TO EARN A REASONABLE PROFIT TO BE AN ONGOING CONCERN. AND THAT'S A TOUGH BALANCE BECAUSE SOMETIMES THEY'RE AT ODDS WITH EACH OTHER.

AND I UNDERSTAND IT. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS SAID, AND I'M GLAD THEY CLEARED IT UP YESTERDAY AFTER WE MET THAT WHEN I WAS ASKING HIM ABOUT THE RATE INCREASE AND WHY IT WAS STATED, A LOT OF THE COMMUNITY WORK THAT WAS DONE.

AND I KNOW A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE THAT DO A LOT OF COMMUNITY WORK, GREAT COMMUNITY WORK AND GIVE AND NEVER HAVE THEIR HAND OUT TO RECEIVE.

SO THAT WAS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WAS A CONCERN TO ME WHEN I FIRST MET WITH THEM. BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR EXPERTISE AND YOUR COMMENT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. YOU KNOW WHAT? NOBODY WANTS AN INCREASE IN THEIR RATE FOR ATMOS.

NOBODY. I NOT EVER HAD SOMEBODY ASK ME FOR THAT.

AND IT WOULD FEEL REALLY GOOD TO VOTE AGAINST THE SETTLEMENT.

RIGHT. LIKE I'M STANDING UP FOR THE PEOPLE AND THEY'RE THIS THIS IS JUST OUTRAGEOUS.

WE CAN'T HAVE A BIGGER ATMOS BILL, BUT IT'S REALLY CUTTING OFF OUR FACE, OUR NOSE TO SPITE OUR FACE BECAUSE THERE IS GOING TO BE AN INCREASE. THE QUESTION IS ONLY WILL WE ACCEPT THE SETTLEMENT, WHICH IS A LOWER INCREASE, OR WILL WE TAKE OUR CHANCES AT THE RAILROAD COMMISSION, WHICH IS MOST ASSUREDLY GOING TO GO WITH ATMOS, AND WE WILL END UP WITH A HIGHER RATE? SO WHILE I UNDERSTAND POLITICALLY WHY IT FEELS REALLY GOOD TO SAY WE ARE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT THE SETTLEMENT, THE REALITY OF WHAT HAPPENS IS ATMOS HAS TO HAVE A COST BASIS FOR THE RATE INCREASE, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. THE RATES WERE CALCULATED. LOOKING AT LAST YEAR'S ACTUAL EXPENSES FOR THE COMPANY SAID ON THEIR COST OF SERVICE, AND BECAUSE THEY INVESTED SO MUCH MORE IN PLANT, THEY'RE ENTITLED TO RETURN ON IT.

IT'S A FORMULAIC EQUATION, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE AMOUNT OF PIPE THEY'RE REPLACING, WHICH SOME OF IT'S QUITE OLD AND PROBABLY NEEDS TO.

I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE SAFETY ON NOT REPLACING PIPE, BUT WITH THE INVESTMENTS THEY'RE MAKING, THEY'RE ENTITLED TO AN INCREASE IN RATES, AND THEY WILL PROBABLY KEEP INVESTING IN THE NEAR FUTURE BECAUSE ATMOS BOUGHT A SYSTEM THAT WAS QUITE OLD WHEN THEY BOUGHT IT.

AND THERE'S PIPE OUT THERE THAT'S 50 YEARS OLD.

AND WHEN WE HAVE GAS PIPES THAT ARE LEAKING, WHAT IS THE CONSEQUENCE OF THAT? HOPEFULLY ALL THOSE LEAKS ARE IDENTIFIED BEFORE THEY BECOME CATASTROPHIC.

BUT GAS LEAKS ARE A REAL SAFETY ISSUE, AND WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT ANY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND CERTAINLY DON'T WANT A CATASTROPHIC INCIDENT, AS THERE HAVE BEEN SOME IN THE PRESS IN THE PAST.

FORTUNATELY, NONE RECENTLY. BUT. WELL, I REMEMBER SERVING ON THE COUNCIL WHEN A HOUSE BLEW UP AND KILLED A YOUNG, A YOUNG WOMAN. AND I DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN ALL OVER OUR CITY.

WE HAVE GAS PIPES THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED. AND IN FACT, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE AGGRESSIVELY TRYING TO DO IT, I THINK THEY'RE ALSO TRYING TO STAGE IT BECAUSE OF THESE RATE INCREASES.

AND IF WE HAD A MAGIC WAND, WE'D PROBABLY WANT THEM TO DO A LOT MORE THAN WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING.

DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? THEY ARE CONSTRAINED A AND HOW MANY CREWS THEY HAVE THAT CAN REPLACE PIPE AND HOW MUCH MONEY THEY HAVE TO SPEND EACH YEAR.

IF YOU LOOK HISTORICALLY, 2016 IS WHEN THEY REALLY STARTED THIS MASSIVE REBUILD OR REPLACEMENT AND THEY STARTED RAMPING UP CREWS.

THEY HAVE PROBABLY TWICE THE NUMBER OF CREWS THEY HAD IN 16.

BUT IT TAKES TIME TO TRAIN NEW CREWS HOW TO GO OUT AND SAFELY REPLACE PIPES.

AND THEY'VE BEEN RAMPING UP AND WILL PROBABLY CONTINUE AT THIS SPEND RATE, AT LEAST IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.

OKAY. SO ONCE THEY PROPOSE IT. YOUR JOB, WHICH.

NICK. I MEAN, I THINK YOU'VE BEEN HERE LONGER THAN ME.

YOU GET ALL THE DATA. YOU WORK WITH OTHER CITIES IN A CONSORTIUM.

YOU ALL PORE THROUGH THE DATA WITH CONSULTANTS, YOU CHALLENGE SOME OF THE ITEMS. YOU'VE OBVIOUSLY MADE SOME HEADWAY TO GET THE SETTLEMENT TO BE LOWER.

AND THEN YOU COME BACK TO US TO TRY TO RATIFY THE SETTLEMENT.

AND IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND I LIKE TO THINK OF THE SETTLEMENT AS RATHER THAN INCREASING RATES BY 32 MILLION,

[02:20:02]

I LIKE TO THINK OF IT AS SAVING $4 MILLION OF THE CITY OF DALLAS RATEPAYERS MONEY.

WELL, I THINK THAT YOU SHOULD BE THE POLITICIAN THEN.

RIGHT. SO BY VOTING NO ON THIS ITEM, YOU'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY SAVE DALLAS RESIDENTS $4 MILLION.

THAT'S THE POLITICAL MESSAGE THAT WE OUGHT TO BE SAYING.

AND THE TRUTH IS, WE CAN'T ALWAYS DO THE POPULIST THING HERE.

WE HAVE TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR OUR PEOPLE, EVEN IF THE.

THE CANDY VERSION IS, OH, WE APPROVED A RATE INCREASE.

WELL, NO MATTER WHAT, THEY'RE GETTING A RATE INCREASE.

SO I WOULD JUST ASK EVERYONE, HAVE THE POLITICAL COURAGE.

LET'S ACCEPT THE SETTLEMENT, WHICH WILL AGAIN BE LOWER THAN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE FACING THROUGH THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.

WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SAY WE DENIED THE RATE INCREASE.

WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SAY, OH, WE HAD TO HAVE THIS BECAUSE THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU WILL HAVE SAVED YOUR RESIDENTS $4 MILLION COLLECTIVELY.

THANK YOU. MISS CADENA, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

WELL, COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN, YOU ASKED THE QUESTION THAT I WAS GOING TO ASK WAS HOW MUCH WE WOULD SAVE OR RESIDENTS WOULD SAVE WITH FOLLOWING THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION. AND SO $4.1 MILLION COMPARED TO WHAT RESIDENTS WOULD HAVE TO PAY IS, IS NOBODY WANTS TO SEE AN INCREASE, BUT AT LEAST IT'S NOT THE INCREASE. IF WE WENT TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.

I KNOW FOR DISTRICT 6 IN 2017, WE HAD A PLANNED GAS OUTAGE AND ATMOS REPLACED A LOT OF THE AGING PIPES AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND INVESTED INTO THE SYSTEM. WEST DALLAS WE HAD A MAJOR ROAD THAT HAD A PIPE FOR, YOU KNOW, THAT PROVIDED SERVICE FOR A LOT OF THE CITY AND THAT WAS REPLACED AS WELL. AND SO I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT THEY NEED TO ALSO BALANCE INVESTING IN THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE TO KEEP OUR RESIDENTS SAFE AS WELL.

SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. FOR WHAT PURPOSE? I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT? ALL RIGHT. NOT DEBATABLE. SO WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE ON THE MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. NAY. ALL RIGHT.

LET'S HAVE A RECORD VOTE ON THAT BECAUSE I WANT TO SEE.

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 CATANA.

NO. COUNCILMEMBER BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR.

COUNCILMEMBER BLACKMON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER STEWART.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. COUNCIL MEMBER.

ROTH NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY YES.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS NO. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO NO.

IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN. NO. OH. THANK YOU.

MAYOR JOHNSON. NO. WITH NINE VOTING IN FAVOR, TEN OPPOSE THE CALL FAILS, MR. MAYOR. I THINK IT REQUIRES TWO THIRDS. OKAY. TEN.

TEN MEMBERS VOTING IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. I TRUST YOUR COUNT.

I DIDN'T COUNT IT MYSELF, BUT I TRUST YOU. SO DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE WE DID HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION AROUND THIS AND LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS.

AND SO WHO HAS PAID FOR THE NEGOTIATION TO DATE THAT WE USUALLY ENTER INTO.

WHO WHO FOOTS THAT BILL FOR THIS CONSULTANT. THE IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION, WHO'S PAYING FOR THE CONSULTANT OUTSIDE COUNSEL. THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS A CONTRACT FOR THE CONSULTANT AND OUTSIDE COUNSEL.

AT THE CONCLUSION OF THIS CASE, ATMOS WILL REIMBURSE THE CITY THAT EXPENSE AND THAT EXPENSE IS NOT PASSED ON TO RATEPAYERS.

AND HOW MUCH IS THAT? BOTH THE CONTRACTS WERE DONE BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBERS, BUT I KNOW THEY WERE DONE UNDER A A, SO THAT PUTS THEM UNDER 75,000 EACH.

I BELIEVE IF I REMEMBER MY NUMBERS. OKAY. SO IF WE GO ON AND AGREE TO THIS, THEN WE GET A REIMBURSEMENT FOR NEGOTIATING DOWN AN AMOUNT.

OKAY. WELL, IF WE REJECT THIS WHO PAYS THE BILL IF WE GO THROUGH THE APPEAL AND ALL THE LEGAL PROCESS, IF WE GO THROUGH THE APPEAL AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASE AT THE RAILROAD COMMISSION, OUR EXPENSES IN FIGHTING THE CASE AND ATMOS WILL BE LUMPED TOGETHER AND

[02:25:10]

PUT IN A SURCHARGE THAT WILL GO TO THE CUSTOMERS.

SO WE WILL STILL GET REIMBURSED. BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS, RATHER THAN ATMOS PAYING US, IT WILL BE SURCHARGED OUT TO ALL OF THE CUSTOMERS.

SO FOR TRYING TO APPEAL, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE PAYING THE PRICE FOR THAT.

OKAY. AND THEN IF WE REJECT THIS, IF WE, IF WE WANT TO GO ON AN APPEAL, THIS HIGHER RATE, THAT RATE, THE HIGH RATE GOES INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

THEY CAN PLACE THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE REQUEST IN SERVICE SUBJECT TO REFUND, BUT THE RATES WOULD GO UP JUNE 1ST TO THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE REQUEST.

AND AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASE, THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.

IF RATES WERE LOWER, THERE WOULD BE A CREDIT ON CUSTOMERS BILLS EITHER ONE TIME OR SPREAD OUT OVER 12 MONTHS, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE COMMISSION DECIDES TO DO. BUT THE REALITY IS, WITH GAS PRICES AND GROCERY PRICES AND ALL THAT, THIS COULD BE AN IMMEDIATE HIGHER RATE. IT'S THE 1125 VERSUS THE 946, $9.46.

SO I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $4 MILLION BECAUSE WE'RE HERE AT CITY HALL, BUT KITCHEN TABLE.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S ABOUT 25 BUCKS A YEAR. AND IT MAY NOT SOUND LIKE A LOT, BUT.

YOU KNOW, IN SOME HOUSEHOLDS, YOU'VE REALLY GOT TO RESPECT THAT.

EVERY PENNY COUNTS. AND SO I KNOW WE WORK THROUGH THIS EACH YEAR.

IT'S JUST A KIND OF A HARD PILL TO SWALLOW, BUT I THINK WE DO NEED TO GO ON AND LOOK AT THE, THE ODDS ARE NOT IN OUR FAVOR. SO AND TO TAKE THIS CAREFUL NEGOTIATION THAT TOOK PLACE AND GO WITH THE LOWER RATE BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT IS WHAT'S GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

AND THE DOLLARS AND CENTS AT THOSE AT THAT KITCHEN TABLE.

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

THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. I WASN'T GOING TO SPEAK, BUT BECAUSE I'M CHANGING MY VOTE FROM YESTERDAY WHEN I SERVED, WHEN I WAS ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, I FELT LIKE I SHOULD EXPLAIN THE CHANGE OF MIND.

I WILL SAY CHAIR AND CHAIR. MENDELSOHN COMMENTS ARE VERY PERSUASIVE, AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE RAILROAD COMMISSION WOULD I THINK, AWARD US ANYTHING LOWER THAN OUR NEGOTIATED 34 MILLION BECAUSE THEY HAVE SAID THE INCREASE IS GOING IS, IS THE INVESTMENT BACK INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I THINK BECAUSE IT'S SO VERY UNLIKELY THAT WE WOULD WIN THAT RATE CASE, I WOULD THEN SUPPORT THE COMPROMISE. THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE WORKED OUT, WHICH IS THE 34 MILLION.

THANK YOU. MR. ROTH RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON HERE.

IF WE IF WE VOTE TO DENY THE MOTION, ARE WE APPROVING THE SETTLEMENT AMOUNT? OKAY, LET ME INTERVENE HERE. LET ME STOP THIS TIME TO GET YOUR QUESTION ANSWERED, BUT NOT ON YOUR TIME.

THAT'S REALLY A PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY A LITTLE BIT IN TERMS OF WHAT THE VOTE AT THIS POINT WOULD BE, BECAUSE I DO THINK IT'S CONFUSING, AND I'VE HAD TO CLARIFY IT PRIVATELY, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY GET BENEFITED FROM IT OF WHAT A VOTE FOR MR. WEST'S MOTION, WHICH WAS A MOTION TO DENY THE ITEM, WOULD ACCOMPLISH.

SO YOU CAN FIGURE OUT WHICH WAY YOU NEED TO VOTE TO ACHIEVE YOUR OBJECTIVE, NOT NOT TRYING TO PERSUADE EITHER WAY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT A VOTE FOR HIS MOTION TO DENY WOULD DO, VERSUS WHAT A VOTE AGAINST HIS MOTION TO DENY WOULD DO.

SO PLEASE, IF WE COULD GET THAT CLARIFICATION, THAT'D BE GREAT. COUNT AGAINST YOUR TIME. PERFECT. MR. MAYOR, THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO DENY THIS ITEM WOULD ESSENTIALLY KEEP THE STATUS QUO, THE RATES AS THEY ARE.

IT'S WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING. THEN THAT ATMOS WOULD THEN APPEAL THAT TO THE TRC.

ACCORDING TO OUR EXPERT, THE. IF THE MOTION FAILED, IT WILL LEAVE THE FLOOR OPEN TO THEN HAVE ANOTHER MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEM, WHICH WOULD BE TO ACCEPT THE SETTLEMENT AS NEGOTIATED BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

SO. WHAT THAT MEANS IS IF YOU VOTE FOR THIS MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW, THAT WOULD BE THE END OF THE OF THE VOTING FOR THE DAY ON THIS ON THIS ITEM, IF YOU WANT. AND THERE WOULD NOT BE THE SETTLEMENT IS NOT BEING SELECTED AT THAT POINT.

IF YOU WANT TO GO TO A SECONDARY VOTE ON THAT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY DEFEAT THIS MOTION AND SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THE

[02:30:03]

AFFIRMATIVE MOTION ON 32 TO DO WHAT? ITEM 32 IS ON OUR AGENDA.

SO THAT'S. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPED ANY. BUT IT DOES.

AND THAT'S THAT'S TERRIFIC CLARIFICATION. SO THE.

SO THEN THAT'S WHAT I AM GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE CONSIDER THAT WE BASICALLY.

VOTE DOWN THIS MOTION SO THAT WE CAN BRING ANOTHER MOTION TO THE TABLE ACCEPTING THE SETTLEMENT.

AND SO I WANT EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND THAT, INCLUDING MYSELF, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON HERE.

I DO HAVE SOME SOME SUBSTANTIVE QUESTIONS ALSO IS THAT THE THE SAVINGS WAS $4 MILLION.

WHAT WAS THE BEGINNING NUMBER VERSUS THE ENDING NUMBER? WHAT'S THE SAVINGS FROM THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE INCREASE WAS 38.1 MILLION, 38 MILLION VERSUS 344.1. AND THE CHANGES. OKAY. AND THEN AND YOU DISCUSSED THAT THERE'S A POLICY CONSIDERATION IN THE ALLOCATION OF THOSE. THAT INCREASE IS SOMETHING THAT THIS BODY MAKES A DECISION ON, ON, ON HOW WE ESTABLISH OR ALLOCATE THOSE INCREASES VERSUS RESIDENTIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL.

IT IS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THIS BODY TO CHANGE THE ALLOCATION IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT WAS PUT FORWARD.

WE KEPT THE COST ALLOCATION AS IT WAS IN OUR LAST FULLY LITIGATED CASE, WHERE THEY HAD A COST ALLOCATION STUDY.

OUR EXPERTS AND THEIR EXPERTS DEBATED THE MERITS OF THAT, AND THAT WAS WHAT CAME OUT OF THAT FULLY LITIGATED CASE.

WE DID NOT CHANGE THE COST ALLOCATION FOR THIS.

JUST THE INCREASE IN RATES WAS SPREAD THE WAY IT WAS HISTORICALLY.

AND SO, YES, WE COULD CHANGE THAT COST ALLOCATION.

NOW, ATMOS WOULD NEED TO AGREE WITH OUR NEW ALLOCATION.

OR AGAIN, THEY COULD APPEAL OUR DECISION. AND WE'RE BACK TO THAT OTHER NEGATIVE OPTION.

BUT YES, WE CAN CHANGE THE COST ALLOCATION, BUT AND ALWAYS HAS A RIGHT TO APPEAL ANYTHING WE DO.

AND SO THE IN THE ALLOCATION RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE'RE NOT CHARGING RESIDENTIAL FOR THE INCREASE, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE ALLOCATING IT TO COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL.

THE SETTLEMENT THAT'S BEFORE YOU ALLOCATES TO ALL THREE CLASSES IN THE LARGER PORTION OF THAT DOES GO TO THE RESIDENTIAL CLASS.

AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE CUSTOMERS THERE.

AND ACTUALLY FROM THE COST OF SERVICE STUDY, BECAUSE YOU HAVE MORE CUSTOMERS, THERE'S MORE PIPE IN THE GROUND TO REACH ALL THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS MORE. THE COST IS DIRECTLY ASSIGNABLE TO THEM.

AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION IS, AND COULD YOU TELL ME WHAT THE THE AVERAGE INCREASE FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL. WAS IT $9 BASED ON THE SETTLEMENT AMOUNT PLUS OR MINUS? YEAH. TOGETHER WITH SEVERAL CITIES TO THEM. SORRY, I HAVE TO LOOK AT NOTES. TOO MANY NUMBERS FLOATING THROUGH MY HEAD. WITH THE.

YES, WITH THE SETTLEMENT. THE AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL BILL WOULD INCREASE BY 946 PER MONTH, AND THE AVERAGE COMMERCIAL BILL WOULD GO UP $32.35 PER MONTH. WE DID NOT CALCULATE AN AVERAGE INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMER BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE AVERAGE INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMER IS.

THERE ARE ONLY 94 OF THEM, AND THEY VARY FROM VERY SMALL GLASS SHOPS TO GIANT RECYCLING PLANTS, SO AN AVERAGE WOULD BE MEANINGLESS. OKAY. SO AT THIS POINT, MY MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO DEFEAT THE MOTION AND THEN ASK FOR ANOTHER MOTION TO TO ALLOCATE THE SETTLEMENT. THANK YOU, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE, THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. WELL, I'M GLAD THAT WE GOT TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS.

I THINK IT IS COMPLICATED WITH ALL THE NEGATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE WAY THIS HAS BEEN STYLIZED.

BUT WHAT I THINK IS FASCINATING, AND I REALLY WANT TO POINT OUT FOR MY COLLEAGUES TO THINK ABOUT, ARE THE COMMENTS MADE ABOUT THE PRICE SENSITIVITY OF OUR RESIDENTS.

I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. I THINK WE DO HEAR FROM RESIDENTS SAYING ALL THE UTILITY BILLS ARE GOING UP, BUT YET WE ALSO SAW THEM VOTE TO INCREASE A D ISD BOND TO TO THE LARGEST EVER.

AND SO AS WE ARE ENTERING BUDGET SEASON, I WOULD SAY TO YOU, THE TOTALITY OF YOUR RESIDENTS BUDGET NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED.

AND THAT INCLUDES THEIR TAX RATE AND TO TO MARGINALIZE THAT THEIR TAXES ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT AS THEIR

[02:35:05]

MONTHLY BILL IS TO NOT UNDERSTAND THEIR FINANCES.

AND THE PROPERTY TAX BILL ONLY SHOWS UP ONCE A YEAR, UNLESS YOU'RE A RENTER, WHEN IT'S EVERY SINGLE MONTH PART OF YOUR RENT, I'M GOING TO TWEAK YOU A LITTLE BIT ON GERMANENESS.

SO AGENDA ITEM, THE BILL IS SHOWING UP MONTHLY AND IT'S IN YOUR FACE.

AND SO DON'T LET THAT TAKE YOUR EYE OFF THE PRIZE OF LET'S WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE AFFORDABILITY, NOT JUST WITH ATMOS, BUT WITH MULTIPLE ITEMS THAT WE IMPACT.

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO FOLLOW UP ON THE LINE OF QUESTIONING I PREVIOUSLY HAD WITH YOU, NICK. WHEN I ASKED ABOUT WHEN, WHAT WAS THE OUTCOME WHEN THE CITY DENIED THE RIGHT REQUEST.

THE COUNCIL DENIED THE SETTLEMENT ON THE RATE REQUEST AND IT WENT UP TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.

YOU IDENTIFIED THE LAST TIME WE DID. THAT WAS 2016, 2017, 2017.

ALL RIGHT. AND I TAKE IT THAT EVERY YEAR SINCE THAT 2017.

I THINK YOU HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THOSE NEGOTIATIONS.

WE HAVE A NEGOTIATION WITH ATMOS AND EACH ONE OF THOSE YEARS.

CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. AND IN EACH ONE OF THOSE YEARS, WE HIRED A CONSULTANT JUST LIKE WE DID THIS YEAR TO ADVISE US ON WHAT WAS A REASONABLE RATE INCREASE. IS THAT RIGHT? YES. AND EVERY YEAR SINCE 2017, THIS COUNCIL HAS APPROVED THE A THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ATMOS TO REDUCE THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT THEY ASKED FOR IN TERMS OF AN INCREASE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THAT ONE YEAR IN 2017, 2017.

SO FOR THE LAST EIGHT YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN ACCEPTING THIS COUNCIL HAS BEEN ACCEPTING THE RATE THAT YOU AND YOUR PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH US.

YES. SO IF WE APPROVE THIS MOTION, WE WILL BE DEPARTING FROM THAT EIGHT YEAR PRACTICE OF ACCEPTING THE WORK OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES IN NEGOTIATING THE BEST DEAL THEY COULD WITH ATMOS.

CORRECT. NOW, LET'S PUT THIS INTO CONTEXT. THIS ISN'T JUST BETWEEN DALLAS, THE CITY OF DALLAS AND ATMOS.

THIS NEGOTIATION INVOLVES OTHER CITIES AS WELL, DOESN'T IT? THIS RATE CASE IS ONLY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.

OUR RATES ARE SEPARATE FROM ALL THE SURROUNDING CITIES.

THE DALLAS ANNUAL RATE REVIEW APPLIES ONLY TO US.

SO THERE'S NO CONSORTIUM ANYMORE WHERE CITIES BAND TOGETHER TO NEGOTIATE THE BEST DEAL.

THERE IS A CONSORTIUM OF ALL THE CITIES AROUND US, BUT WE ARE NOT A PART OF THAT BECAUSE.

I'LL GIVE YOU A RATE HISTORY HERE. WE'LL GO BACK 15 YEARS BEFORE WE HAD A ANNUAL RATE REVIEW.

IT USED TO BE EACH CITY WAS COMPLETELY SEPARATE.

CITY OF DALLAS RATES WERE MUCH LOWER THAN EVERY OTHER CITY ON THE LONE STAR GAS SYSTEM, THE PREDECESSOR TO ATMOS.

WHILE TXU GAS OWNED IT, THEY WANTED TO GO TO UNIFIED RATES STATEWIDE.

WE FOUGHT IN THAT CASE, AND WHAT ENDED UP THE OTHER CITY DECIDED TO SETTLE BECAUSE THEIR RATES STAYED THE SAME IN DALLAS, RATES WENT UP DRASTICALLY TO EQUAL WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAD.

AND BECAUSE OF OUR DENSITY OF HOUSING, OUR AGE OF OUR SYSTEM, THE WAY THE DALLAS SYSTEM WAS BUILT, OUR COST OF SERVICE WAS LOWER, AND WE SHOULD HAVE LOWER RATES BENEFITING FROM THAT DENSITY OF CUSTOMERS.

AND THAT'S THE REASON WE'VE STAYED SEPARATE FROM THE OTHER CITIES, NOT CARRYING THEIR WATER, BUT TRYING TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR CITIZENS.

AND SINCE 2014, WHEN WE STARTED THE DA, EVERY YEAR AFTER THIS CASE IS DONE AND THE OTHER CITIES HAVE THEIR RATE REVIEW MECHANISM DONE, I'VE LOOKED AT THE RATES AND DALLAS CUSTOMERS HAVE BENEFITED FROM US HAVING SEPARATE RATES FROM THE OTHER CITIES.

SO WE HAVE LOWER RATES THAN SMALLER CITIES. OUR RATES HAVE BEEN LOWER FOR DALLAS CUSTOMERS.

AVERAGE CUSTOMER IN DALLAS USES SLIGHTLY MORE GAS THAN SYSTEM WIDE.

SO YOU CAN'T REALLY LOOK AT THE PUBLISHED AVERAGE BILL.

YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL COMPONENTS AND CALCULATE WHAT A DALLAS CUSTOMER WOULD PAY.

AND YES, WE HAVE FARED BEEN FAVORABLE FOR DALLAS RESIDENTS TO HAVE OUR OWN RATES.

RIGHT. WELL, I THINK WE SHOULD SUPPORT WHAT OUR NEGOTIATORS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH ATMOS.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT AS A COUNCIL. WE'VE EMPOWERED OUR STAFF TO NEGOTIATE WITH ATMOS AND I THINK WE SHOULD SUPPORT WHAT THEY DID AND THE BEST DEAL THAT THEY COULD MAKE. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON, FOR OR AGAINST?

[02:40:01]

CHAIRMAN WEST MOTION TO DENY THE AGENDA. ITEM 32.

SEEING NONE. LET'S HAVE A RECORD VOTE ON THIS.

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. COUNCIL MEMBER. CADENA. NO. I'M SORRY.

NO. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

BLAIR. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER.

STEWART. NO. COUNCILMEMBER ROTH. NO. COUNCILMEMBER MENDELSOHN.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

WILLIS. NO. MAYOR. PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR.

JOHNSON. NO. WITH ONE VOTING IN FAVOR, 14 OPPOSED.

THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MAYOR? MAY I BE RECOGNIZED? YES YOU ARE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEM.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN ANY? NO, I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED IT AT ALL, MR. ROFF. OKAY. YOU CAN TURN OFF YOUR MIC. SORRY.

ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOUR AGAINST ITEM 32? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR.

[34. 26-1630A Authorize (1) a secured, zero percent interest, forgivable loan agreement, approved as to form by the City Attorney, in the amount of $800,000 to First Presbyterian Church of Dallas, Texas dba The Stewpot to provide for rehabilitation of the property located at 1610 South Malcolm X Boulevard, Dallas, Texas 75226 which provides comprehensive, no-cost, barrier-free medical, dental, and psychiatric services for individuals experiencing homelessness for the period June 1, 2026 through July 31, 2027; and (2) the execution of any and all terms, conditions, and documents required by the forgivable loan agreement - Not to exceed $800,000 - Financing: FY 2025-26 CDBG Reprogramming No. 2 Fund *In alignment with HUD Consolidated Plan.]

MAYOR. YOUR NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM 34. AGENDA ITEM 34.

AUTHORIZE ONE. A SECURED 0% INTEREST FORGIVABLE LOAN AGREEMENT APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY IN THE AMOUNT OF $800,000 TO FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF DALLAS, TEXAS, DBA.

THE STEWPOT TO PROVIDE FOR REHABILITATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1610 SOUTH MALCOLM X BOULEVARD, DALLAS, TEXAS 75226, WHICH PROVIDES COMPREHENSIVE, NO COST, BARRIER FREE MEDICAL, DENTAL AND PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES FOR INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS FOR THE PERIOD JUNE 1ST, 2026 THROUGH JULY 31ST, 2027, AND TO THE EXECUTION OF ANY AND ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THE FORGIVABLE LOAN AGREEMENT NOT TO EXCEED $800,000. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

STEWPOT IS A GREAT ORGANIZATION AND I SUPPORT THIS ITEM.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO START WITH THAT. BUT I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS. I'M WONDERING IF THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO DIRECTLY ANSWER THEM.

HI BRENDA. CAN YOU TELL US SPECIFICALLY WHAT THE 800 000 WILL DO? OH, YOU GOT TO PUSH THE BUTTON THERE AND THEN SPEAK RIGHT INTO THE MICROPHONE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL AND COUNCIL MEMBER.

MENDELSOHN. MANY OF YOU MAY KNOW THAT IN DECEMBER OF 2024, WE PURCHASED THE CITY SQUARE CAMPUS THAT THEY HAD UNFORTUNATELY LET THE CITY KNOW THAT IN MAY THAT THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS.

AND SO WE BEGAN AFTER THEY SELECTED US TO PURCHASE THE CAMPUS FOR $7 MILLION TO BEGIN A FUNDRAISING CAMPAIGN STARTING IN JULY, WE HAD TO CLOSE ON THE CAMPUS BY DECEMBER.

THAT WASN'T A LOT OF TIME TO DO THAT. AND IT'S ABOUT A $10 MILLION LIFT THE, THE CAPITAL TO, TO PURCHASE THE CAMPUS AS WELL AS THE REFURBISHMENT OF THE CAMPUS.

IT'S A BIG LIFT. SO WE MOVED INTO THE CAMPUS IN DECEMBER SO THAT THE FOOD PANTRY THAT NOW SERVES OVER 300 HOUSEHOLDS A DAY MIDWEEK WOULD NOT STOP AND THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE THOSE RESOURCES WHEN WE WERE AT OUR OLD LOCATION FOR ALMOST 50 YEARS WE HAD OUR CLINICS, MEDICAL AND DENTAL CLINICS, AS WELL AS MENTAL HEALTH CLINICS IN THE BUILDING.

THAT'S JUST RIGHT DOWN THE STREET HERE. FIRST STARTED WITH DOCTORS AND DENTISTS FROM THE CHURCH AS A VOLUNTARY CAPACITY, AND THEN BEGAN A PARTNERSHIP IN THE 90S WITH PARKLAND.

WHEN WE MOVED TO THE NEW CAMPUS, WE HAD TO DO MANY UPGRADES.

THAT WAS THE 3 MILLION OF OUR 10 MILLION CAPITAL CAMPAIGN.

[02:45:02]

AND SO WE HAVE RAISED A LITTLE OVER 8 MILLION.

SO THE THE HOMES, CLINICS, THE MEDICAL AND DENTAL HAVE BEEN ON OUR CAMPUS SINCE EARLY OF 2025.

HOWEVER, THEY'RE IN THEIR MOBILE UNITS BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT A FACILITY OR ONE OF THE BUILDINGS THAT WOULD REALLY MEET THE NEEDS FOR THE CLINICS.

THE ONE THAT WE'RE USING IS GOING TO NEED A LOT OF WATER AND HVAC AND OTHER ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS.

SO THAT THAT IS ABOUT A $2 MILLION INVESTMENT IN THAT BUILDING.

BEING ABLE TO HAVE THIS $800,000 FROM THE CBDG FUNDS WILL ALLOW US, ALONG WITH 500,000 THAT WE ARE RECEIVING FROM THE COUNTY AND 500,000 FROM A PRIVATE FOUNDATION, AND THEN SEVERAL OTHER MISCELLANEOUS GROUPS TO BE ABLE TO OUTFIT, CONSTRUCT AND HAVE THE MEDICAL AND DENTAL CLINICS.

WE ALREADY HAVE METRO CARE IN THE PARTNERS BUILDING.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CALLING IT. IN THE BUILDING.

SO IT WILL OUTFIT THE TWO CLINICS, FOUR DENTAL BAYS AND THREE MEDICAL BAYS, AS WELL AS MUCH MORE SPACE THAN THEY HAD AT OUR OLD BUILDING. SO THAT'S WHAT THE 800,000 WILL DO FOR CAPITAL UPGRADES.

THANK YOU. SO HERE'S HERE'S TWO THINGS THAT ARE THE ISSUE.

ONE, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MEDICAL, DENTAL AND MENTAL HEALTH.

YES. NONE OF THOSE SERVICES ARE THE CITY. THOSE ARE ALL THE COUNTY.

CORRECT. AND WHAT WE'RE SUPPLYING ON THE FORGIVABLE LOAN IS CDBG FUNDS, MEANING IT'S FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

YOU'RE AN ESSENTIAL AGENCY. I THINK THESE ARE ESSENTIAL SERVICES.

I'M OKAY WITH DOING THIS, BUT I DO THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A RECOGNITION THAT THIS IS REALLY THE COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY.

AND WHILE THEY MAY HAVE GIVEN YOU HALF $1 MILLION, THEY SHOULD HAVE GIVEN YOU THE REST OF THE MONEY AS WELL.

AND I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE COMING FROM US.

OKAY. THAT'S ONE PART. THE SECOND PART IS IF YOU CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE WITH THE EXPANSION AND NEARBY PARTNERSHIP WITH AUSTIN STREET. OKAY. AND I DO WANT TO RESPOND ON THE COUNTY.

THEY WILL ALSO BE DOING THE FIXTURE, FURNITURE, FIXTURE AND EQUIPMENT.

SO THEY ARE PUTTING MORE MONEY IN AS WELL AS RUNNING THE SERVICES.

SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN AS FAR AS THE PARTNERSHIP, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THIS $800,000 COULD ALSO BE TO REHAB OUR OWN CITY PROPERTIES, WHICH HAVE BEEN EXTENSIVELY COVERED IN THE NEWS AS NEEDING REPAIR.

AND IT COULD BE MANY PROPERTIES THAT IT COULD BE.

THIS IS A PRIORITY. AGAIN, I'M FOR THIS ITEM, BUT REALLY THE COUNTY SHOULD BE DOING ALL OF THIS IN MY OPINION.

SO BUT PLEASE TELL US ABOUT THIS EXPANSION PLANS.

SO OUR EXPANSION OF OUR CAMPUS HAS BEEN TO MEET THE NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY, PARTICULARLY IN SOUTH DALLAS.

WE ALREADY EXPANDED OUR FOOD PANTRY FROM FOUR DAYS THAT CITY SQUARE WAS DOING TO FIVE DAYS A WEEK.

AND THEY WERE SERVING ABOUT 200 HOUSEHOLDS A DAY.

WE'RE NOW OVER 300 HOUSEHOLDS A DAY. WE ARE EXPANDING OUR ID SERVICES, WHICH DO MANAGE THE ALL THE OTHER AGENCIES REFER TO US TO DO ID SERVICES FOR FOLKS TO GET EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING.

OUR EXPANSION WITH AUSTIN STREET IS JUST IN THE FACT THAT WE WILL BE SERVING MORE OF THEIR CLIENTS COMING OVER FOR.

THEY COME OVER FOR ID SERVICES. THE. AS ONCE PEOPLE ARE HOUSED, THEY USE OUR FOOD PANTRY.

THEIR CASE MANAGERS, LIKE OUR CASE MANAGERS, HELP WITH GETTING FOOD TO THEIR NEWLY HOUSED FOLKS.

AND THEN OF COURSE, THE EXPANSION OF THE MEDICAL AND DENTAL AND MENTAL HEALTH.

WE WILL BE ABLE TO SERVE, SERVE, AND AUSTIN STREET WILL BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE CAMPUS MORE.

AND MANY PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE GEOGRAPHICALLY YOU ARE VERY CLOSE TO THEM.

HOW WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE YOUR DISTANCE? THERE'S ONE STREET IN BETWEEN US.

DAWSON AND AUSTIN STREET IS RIGHT BEHIND OUR KIND OF U SHAPED CAMPUS.

WE'RE A FOUR ACRE CAMPUS, DAWSON. WE HAVE PARKING ON DAWSON.

AND THEN THERE ARE SOME EMPTY LOTS AND AUSTIN STREETS.

THE BACK OF THEIR FACILITY BACKS UP TO US. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT THE FUTURE PLANS TO MAKE THIS A VERY LARGE HOMELESS SERVICE CENTER? WELL, WHAT WE ALREADY DO IS COLLABORATE WITH AUSTIN STREET.

WE ALREADY ALWAYS HAVE, AND WE ARE ONE OF THE LEADING AGENCIES IN THE CONTINUUM OF CARE AND SERVE FOLKS.

AND SO THE IDEA IS FOR BOTH OF OUR CAMPUSES TO CONTINUE OUR UPGRADES TO BE SAFE AND MORE ATTRACTIVE.

WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT DOING THINGS BETWEEN THE TWO CAMPUSES SO THAT PEOPLE AREN'T JUST LIVING BETWEEN THE CAMPUSES,

[02:50:09]

THAT WE ARE GETTING THEM HOUSED, THAT WE ARE BEAUTIFYING THE AREA FOR OUR NEIGHBORS AND OUR OUR CONSTITUENTS.

AND WHAT ABOUT LONGER TERM PLANS TO ADD ADDITIONAL BUILDINGS AND MAKE A VERY LARGE SERVICE CENTER THERE.

CURRENTLY, WE'RE JUST THINKING ABOUT THE TWO CAMPUSES AND WHAT WE HAVE UPGRADES.

OUR UPGRADES ARE FOR THE PARKLAND FACILITY, AND I KNOW AUSTIN STREET IS DOING THE RESPITE CENTER BEDS AND DOING THE RENOVATION OF THEIR OLD FACILITY. WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS AND LOOKED AT WHAT WE CAN DO TO BEAUTIFY THE CAMPUSES TOGETHER, AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY TALKING ABOUT.

WE HAVE TALKED IN SMALL GROUPS ABOUT POTENTIALLY THINGS DOWN THE ROAD IN OTHER PHASES, BUT THERE ARE NO IMMEDIATE PLANS TO DO THAT.

BUT AREN'T THESE UPGRADES THE 800,000 FOR THE MEDICAL, DENTAL AND MENTAL HEALTH? REALLY A FIRST STEP IN CREATING A VERY LARGE NEW HOMELESS CENTER.

WE WERE ALREADY GOING TO DO THAT WHETHER WE COLLABORATED WITH AUSTIN STREET OR NOT.

IT DOES PROVIDE THE SERVICES THAT ARE NEEDED IN SOUTH DALLAS, NOT ONLY FOR THE FOLKS THAT ARE ARE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, BUT ALSO SOUTH DALLAS RESIDENTS AND NEWLY HOUSED FOLKS.

SO THE 800 000 IS TO SUPPORT WHAT THE STEWPOT NEEDS TO CONTINUE DOING WHAT WE WERE DOING, AS WELL AS TO MEET MORE NEED WITH THE FOOD PANTRY AND THE MIDDLE OR LOWER TO MIDDLE INCOME FOLKS THAT ARE COMING FOR THE PANTRY.

SOME OF THE OTHER SERVICES THAT WE HAVE. SO WE ARE DOING OUR BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE, WHAT'S NEEDED.

I KNOW AUSTIN STREET IS ALSO LOOKING AT WHAT'S NEEDED FOR THEIR CAMPUS.

AND SO WE, WE ARE IN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT IF WE WERE TO CONTINUE ON WHAT OTHER PHASES MIGHT LOOK LIKE, BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MANAGE TO UPGRADE THE CAMPUS.

THE, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL CAPITAL RAISE THAT I, I AM HAVING MY TEAM DO IS A LOT OF MAINTENANCE THAT WAS NOT NEGLECTED OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.

SO OUR CURRENT CAPITAL RAISE IS TO OUTFIT OUR PARKLAND, WHICH WAS TO MEET THE NEED OF THE, THE NEIGHBORS THAT WE'VE BEEN SERVING FOR YEARS AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, EXPANDING AND SERVING MORE.

THANK YOU. THIS IS INTENDED FOR THAT USE. AND IT'S THE DISCUSSION IS TO CLOSE THE BRIDGE AND BUILD A BIG CAMPUS THAT'S ADJACENT AND INCORPORATES THE STEW POT AND AUSTIN STREET.

THAT IS NOT OUR INTENT AT ALL. THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE HAD, EVEN WITH THE BRIDGE, IS THAT WE WANT TO TAKE PRESSURE OFF THEM TO BE ABLE TO HAVE MORE FOLKS COMING AND BEING AT THE TWO CAMPUSES AND THEN WORK WITH THE BRIDGE, THE OTHER SHELTERS DALLAS LIFE, SALVATION ARMY TO CONTINUE TO, TO HAVE A TRIAGE CENTER THAT CAN GET FOLKS TO OTHER PLACES. BUT THE, AT LEAST IN, I MEAN, AS YOU KNOW, WE DO MEAL SERVICES FOR THE BRIDGE.

WE WOULD NOT BE A PART OF ANYTHING THAT WOULD TRY TO PUT THE BRIDGE OUT OF OUT OF COMMISSION.

THE BRIDGE MAY BE MOVED OVER THERE. SO I UNDERSTAND.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE INFORMATION, I APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER COLLEAGUES, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THIS. SOMETIMES WE ARE FED INFORMATION AND DRIPS.

THIS IS A DRIP. AND AS YOU'RE APPROVING THIS, WHICH I THINK YOU SHOULD, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS PART OF A PLAN THAT WE'RE NOT EVEN AWARE OF YET, THAT WE'RE NOT EVEN READ INTO.

BUT THIS IS THE STAGE WHERE WE'RE GETTING THE MENTAL HEALTH, THE PHYSICAL HEALTH AND THE DENTAL SITUATED FOR A NEW CAMPUS THAT'S COMING.

AND JUST LIKE WE'RE NOT READ INTO WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING WITH CITY HALL, WE'RE NOT REALLY READ INTO WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE EITHER.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 34? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYE. AYE. THE AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

BEFORE I MOVE TO YOUR NEXT ITEM, COUNCIL MEMBER.

I WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED, MR. MAYOR. COUNCILWOMAN.

FOR WHAT PURPOSE? I MOVE TO SUSPEND CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE, SECTION 7.6 TO ALLOW FOR A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AN ITEM FROM THE APRIL 8TH, 2026 VOTING AGENDA. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?

[02:55:03]

I'M SORRY. IS THERE ANY DEBATE ALLOWED ON THIS? PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY TO WHAT THAT AGENDA ITEM IS.

THE ITEM I WILL ALLOW THE PARLIAMENTARIAN TO EXPLAIN IT.

ONCE I MADE SURE WE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND.

SO WE'RE ACTUALLY TECHNICALLY. SUPPOSED TO BE MOVING STRAIGHT TO VOTING ON THIS, NOT DISCUSSING IT.

SO THERE ISN'T A SECOND AT THIS TIME. THERE WAS.

BUT I WANT TO ENTERTAIN A PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS.

SO IT'S NOT DISCUSSION. WE'RE NOT DEBATING THIS.

IT'S NOT A DEBATABLE MOTION I'M TOLD. SO I'M GONNA LET THE PARLIAMENTARIAN EXPLAIN THE CONTEXT OF THE MOTION AND WHAT, WHAT THE, THE UNDERLYING AGENDA ITEM WAS. SO GO AHEAD, MR. MAYOR. THIS ITEM, I BELIEVE THE THE NEXT MOTION WILL ASK, COULD YOU SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE I'M SORRY, THE, THE NEXT MOTION SHOULD BE IF THIS MOTION PASSES, THERE WOULD BE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER A ZONING ITEM FROM THE APRIL 8TH AGENDA. IT WAS A OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL, I BELIEVE.

THANK YOU. SO THERE'S NO DEBATE ON THIS. SO IT'S JUST A SIMPLE VOTE.

BUT IT WILL REQUIRE TWO THIRDS TO SUSPEND THE RULES.

SO ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED. HEARING NO NO'S.

THE AYES HAVE IT. SO MISS CADENA DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER MOTION.

YES. I MOVE TO RECONSIDER THE APRIL 8TH, 2026 VOTE ON AGENDA ITEM Z 25000151 AND DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO NOTICE THIS ITEM AND TO PLACE IT ON THE JUNE 24TH, 2026 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA.

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

SO THIS MOTION TO RECONSIDER. DEBATABLE. I ASSUME THAT ONE IS, BUT I'LL CONFIRM IT.

TECHNICALLY THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS AS DEBATABLE AS THE UNDERLYING MOTION, WHICH WAS DEBATABLE.

HOWEVER, THIS HASN'T ACTUALLY BEEN POSTED, SO IT'S SORT OF A FINE LINE BETWEEN HOW FAR INTO THE MERITS YOU WOULD GO.

CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR WHAT PURPOSE? MY PURPOSE IS TO JUST SAY THAT I BELIEVE YOU'RE READING A MOTION THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY GAVE YOU, AND I WOULD REQUEST THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY, WHEN DOING THINGS LIKE THIS, ACTUALLY EXPLAIN WHAT THE MOTION IS, INSTEAD OF A DATE FROM A WHILE AGO THAT NO ONE WOULD REMEMBER WHAT THE AGENDA ITEM IS.

AND SO IF THAT CLARITY COULD BE GIVEN, IT WOULD BE APPRECIATED.

I THINK THAT'S DULY NOTED AND A FAIR OBSERVATION IN THIS CASE.

IT'S A LITTLE STRANGE. OKAY. FOR WHAT PURPOSE, CHAIRMAN RIDLEY.

NOW REMEMBER, WE ARE STILL WE'RE ON THIS MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND WE'RE GOING TO. YES, IT'S A PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY.

I'M JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW WHICH WAY THE COUNCIL VOTED ON IT ORIGINALLY, SO WE'LL KNOW WHAT ARE RECONSIDERATION DOES ON MR. MAYOR. ON APRIL 8TH, THE CITY COUNCIL VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO DENY AN APPLICATION FOR AN SCP FOR AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL LOCATED ON HARRY HINES.

THANK YOU. I BELIEVE. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY PERMANENT INQUIRIES BEFORE WE GET TO THE UNDERLYING MOTION TO RECONSIDER? ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT, SO THE ITEM PASSES. THANK YOU.

MISS CADENA AND MADAM SECRETARY, WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.

[39. 26-1709A Authorize a three-year service price agreement for temporary sanitation field labor for the Department of Sanitation Services - A & Associates, Inc., most advantageous proposer of ten - Estimated amount of $66,324,838.08 - Financing: Sanitation Operation Fund (subject to annual appropriations) *In alignment with Solid Waste Management Plan.]

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YOUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM 39.

AGENDA ITEM 39. AUTHORIZE A THREE YEAR SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT FOR A TEMPORARY SANITATION FIELD LABOR FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION SERVICES A.

AND ASSOCIATES, INC.. MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSAL OF TEN.

ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $66,324,838.08. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL, MEMBERS, MENDELSOHN AND ROTH.

IS THERE A MOTION MOVED TO DEFER TO JUNE 24TH? IS THAT THE AGENDA? IT IS JUNE 24TH. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR MOTION TO DEFER ITEM 39.

THANK YOU. THIS IS A VERY LARGE CONTRACT AND THERE'S TWO ITEMS ON HERE.

ONE IS A CONTRACT IS PREDICATED ON A LIVING WAGE THAT MAY EXCEED THE COMPETITIVE WAGE.

CHAIRMAN WEST HAD INDICATED TO ME THAT HE WILL BRING THAT TO A SPECIAL CALLED FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING FOR DISCUSSION.

[03:00:02]

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO ALLOW THAT DISCUSSION TO HAPPEN.

THE SECOND ITEM IS ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE WHO'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT SANITATION, ABOUT CURB AND ALLEY PICKUP. AND REPEATEDLY I'VE ASKED ABOUT NEIGHBORHOODS BEING ABLE TO OPT OUT OF SANITATION SERVICES WITH THE CITY.

AND THE ANSWER IS NO. THEY MAY NOT. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S PROPER.

IF A NEIGHBORHOOD WISHES TO CONTRACT WITH A PRIVATE PROVIDER, SINCE WE ARE DOING A COST RECOVERY MODEL, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO. NUMBER TWO, THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT.

I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO SEE WHAT. IF THE WHOLE THING WAS OUTSOURCED? LIKE, WHY DO WE EVEN RUN THIS? AND I WILL JUST SAY, GIVEN ALL THE THINGS I HAVE SEEN OVER SEVEN YEARS, I CAN'T IMAGINE THERE AREN'T MANY VENDORS IN OUR AREA THAT COULDN'T RUN THIS IN A LOWER COST AND MORE EFFICIENT MANNER.

AND I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND FOR THE COUNCIL TO BE ABLE TO EVALUATE IT.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION BY CHAIRWOMAN.

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

ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF THE TRASH TO TRASH PICKUP SITUATION, WHICH I THINK IN OUR PAST, PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS REQUESTED ANALYSIS OF PERHAPS OUTSOURCING OR MAKING MODIFICATIONS TO OUR OUR ARRANGEMENTS ON THAT.

AND I THINK SO IT'S, IT'S I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO DEFER THIS.

LET US RE RE REEVALUATE THE THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT ARRANGEMENT, AND ALSO CLARIFY SOME OF THESE OPERATIONAL POTENTIAL POSSIBILITIES THAT MIGHT BENEFIT OUR CITIZENS BETTER.

SO I WOULD ASK EVERYBODY TO AGREE TO TO THE DEFERRAL.

MADAM CITY MANAGER. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND I WANTED TO THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER ROTH, FOR YOUR QUESTIONS. SO I WANTED TO JUST GO BACK TO A COUPLE OF COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE.

WE HAVE PROVIDED CONSISTENT UPDATES ON THE WHOLE ALLEY TO CURB TRANSITION.

IN FACT, THERE WAS A MEMO THAT YOU RECEIVED LAST FRIDAY WHERE WE REQUESTED FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO GIVE US TIME SO THAT WE CAN MEET WITH YOU INDIVIDUALLY TO DISCUSS AND TALK ABOUT THE ROLLOUT OF HOW WE'RE PLANNING FOR THAT TRANSITION.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT QUITE EXTENSIVELY THAT I KNOW YOU'VE, YOU AND I HAVE HAD SEVERAL ONE ON ONE CONVERSATIONS, BUT WE ALSO ISSUED TWO SEPARATE MEMORANDUMS FOR THE ITEM THAT IS BEFORE YOU.

TODAY, WE ISSUED A MEMORANDUM ON APRIL THE 21ST TO GIVE THE CITY COUNCIL AN OPPORTUNITY TO AGAIN KNOW ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, WHICH IS ABOUT THE TEMPORARY HELP THAT HELPS US PROVIDE THE CURRENT SERVICES ACROSS THE CITY.

WE THEN ISSUED ANOTHER MEMORANDUM ON MAY THE 26TH TO GIVE YOU ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS ITEM IS ABOUT.

AND SO MY REQUEST WOULD BE IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ACTUAL TEMPORARY LABOR, WHICH IS WHAT WE NEED RIGHT NOW IN ORDER TO KEEP COLLECTIONS WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS STAY WITH OUR CURRENT MODEL.

WE HAVE NEVER SAID THAT WE WOULD NOT COME BACK AND CONTINUE TO EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT HOW WE BECOME MORE EFFICIENT.

WE TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE ENTIRE DEBATE ABOUT THE WHOLE ALLEY TO CURB TRANSITION, HOW WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES IF THERE'S A THIRD PARTY WHERE WE COULD HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS BE ABLE TO OPT OUT. SO THAT IS NOT OFF THE TABLE.

BUT THIS ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS THE SERVICES RIGHT NOW AND THE SUPPORT THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO CONTINUE TO PICK UP TRASH ACROSS THE CITY. AND SO THAT IS THE ITEM THAT'S BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I CLARIFIED AND THE COMMUNICATION THAT WE'VE HAD ABOUT THIS ITEM IN PARTICULAR OVER THE LAST A MONTH AND A HALF.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. SO MY QUESTION REGARDING THE NUMBERS IS THAT IS THE CONTRACT AMOUNT THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH THESE FOLKS ON A TEMPORARY BASIS.

HOW MUCH ARE WE PAYING THEM VERSUS WHAT WHAT IS THE DELTA ON THE LIVING WAGE THAT'S BEING INCORPORATED IN THAT DEAL? AND, AND I DO HAVE A COPY OF THAT. MAY 26TH THAT WAS JUST HANDED TO ME.

UNFORTUNATELY, I DIDN'T HAVE IT BEFOREHAND. THE WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS, IS IF WE'RE DEALING, WHAT IS THE LIVING WAGE? ARE WE DEALING WITH A MARKET RATE? ARE WE IMPOSING A RESPONSIBILITY ON OUR CONTRACTING PEOPLE TO CREATE A LIVING WAGE MODEL BASED ON THE CEMETERY.

[03:05:05]

YES, SIR. FORMALLY, RATHER THAN SOME OTHER OPPORTUNITY.

SO I NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEING WHERE THE $22 MILLION A YEAR IS BEING SPENT.

YES. YES, SIR. AND SO AGAIN, THIS ITEM IS A THREE YEAR SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT.

AND WE CAN DEFINITELY EXPLAIN WHAT THE LIVING WAGE COMPONENT, WHEN THE ITEM WAS PROCURED, IS PROCURED UNDER THE CURRENT LIVING WAGE THAT HAS BEEN ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

AND SO WE CAN DEFINITELY EXPLAIN WHAT THAT INCREASE IS COMPARED TO WHEN WE HAD THIS PREVIOUS AGREEMENT AND WHAT THE LIVING WAGE WAS DURING THAT TIME.

BUT STAFF IS PREPARED TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS NOW.

THANK YOU. MR.. CLIFF. YES, MA'AM. CLIFF GILLESPIE, DIRECTOR, SANITATION.

THE CURRENT CONTRACT THAT FOR TEMPORARY LABOR WAS PROCURED IN 2021, THE LIVING WAGE AT THE TIME WAS $15.23 PER HOUR. WE PAID THE TOTAL HOURLY COST THAT WE PAID UNDER THAT CONTRACT IS $20.31 AN HOUR. SO THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE HOUR, THE LIVING WAGE THAT'S BEING PAID TO THE TEMPORARY LABORER ON THE TRUCK, AND WHAT WE'RE PAYING IS THE VENDORS OVERHEAD.

OKAY. UNDER THE NEW CONTRACT WE'RE THIS PROCUREMENT PROCESS WAS STARTED IN FY 25.

THE LIVING WAGE AT THE TIME WAS $22.05 AN HOUR.

THAT'S A 45% INCREASE OVER FIVE YEARS AGO. AND OUR OVERALL CONTRACT HOURLY RATE IS $29.63 AN HOUR, ALSO A 45% INCREASE. SO THE VENDORS OVERHEAD IS STAYING PERCENTAGE WISE, THE SAME AS IT WAS UNDER THE PREVIOUS CONTRACT.

SO THERE'S BASICALLY A $5 DELTA ROUGHLY. YES, SIR.

VERSUS WHAT IT WAS. AND WHAT IS IT. AND THE BEGINNING NUMBER ON THAT $5 DELTA IS A NUMBER THAT WE'VE ESTABLISHED THROUGH THIS MIT LIVING WAGE ITEM. I MEAN ANALYSIS, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

JUANITA ORTIZ OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES THE COUNCIL ADOPTED IN NOVEMBER 2015 THE LIVING WAGE POLICY.

AND SO IT BASICALLY STATES THAT FOR OUR COMPETITIVE SOLICITATIONS, WE WILL INCLUDE A LIVING WAGE BASED ON THE MIT CALCULATOR FOR DALLAS COUNTY.

AND SO AT THE TIME OF THE, WHEN WE FIRST IMPLEMENTED THE LIVING WAGE, IT WAS 1037, BUT THAT'S UPDATED ANNUALLY TO REFLECT THE LIVING WAGE CALCULATOR. AND SO AT THE TIME OF THIS SOLICITATION, IT WAS 2205.

SO WE'RE PAYING BASICALLY A GUY TO RIDE ON THE BACK OF A TRUCK, $50,000 A YEAR TO DO THAT.

WHICH IS 25 BUCKS A HOUR TIMES 2050 HOURS IF THEY WERE A FULL TIME EMPLOYEE.

I'LL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR THAT. I HAVE NOT DONE THE WELL, IT'S IT'S MATH.

25 TIMES TWO IS 50. AND SO I'M ASKING MY QUESTION IS, WHY ARE WE PAYING $50,000 FOR THE GUYS WHO ARE HANGING ON THE BACK OF THE TRUCK TO PICK UP THE TRASH? SEEMS LIKE TO ME IT'S A LOT OF MONEY. AND AGAIN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS IT'S WE NEED THE PEOPLE TO PICK UP THE TRASH.

I'M NOT GOING TO SCHLEP MY TRASH TO THE FRONT, SO SOMEBODY'S GOING TO PAY FOR IT.

IF IT'S COSTING US MORE, THAT'S OKAY IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT.

AND, AND BUT I WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE NUMBERS.

IT'S $22 MILLION A YEAR THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR EXTRA LABOR.

FIVE, 25% OF THAT IS THE OVERHEAD. AND I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHY AREN'T WE STARTING IN A LOWER AMOUNT OR IF THAT'S POSSIBLE.

AND THIS IS A CONTRACT DEAL. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IT'S AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY.

THESE ARE CONTRACTING SITUATIONS THAT WE'RE IMPOSING ON THE CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE A HIGHER WAGE TO THEIR EMPLOYEES.

THE PEOPLE THAT THEY'RE CONTRACTING WITH AND I'M NOT I NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE NUMBERS.

IT'S $66 MILLION OVER THREE YEARS. THIS IS REAL MONEY, FOLKS, AND IT'S BEING PASSED ON TO OUR CITIZENS.

WE JUST TALKED ABOUT NINE BUCKS FOR THE ENCORE.

WE'RE NOW ADDING ANOTHER INCREASE FOR THE TRASH PEOPLE.

SO PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN WE CAN GET THIS THIS ANALYZED.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS, COUNCILMEMBER ROTH. I'LL START AND THEN I'LL HAVE STAFF TO TO FINISH IT OUT.

AS JUANITA, OUR DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT JUST STATED, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED A LIVING WAGE POLICY THAT LIVING WAGE POLICY APPLIES TO THIS CONTRACT. WHEN WE PROCURED THE CONTRACT, WE HAVE A NEW LIVING WAGE AMOUNT.

[03:10:01]

WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY STAFF TO SAY THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO IMPLEMENT THE CITY COUNCIL'S POLICY.

SO THE CONVERSATION THAT WE'VE HAD AND WE'VE ASKED THIS QUESTION ALREADY, I THINK IT WILL BE A PART OF SOME ONGOING CONVERSATIONS, IS WHAT DECISIONS NOW WITH THE COUNCIL LIKE TO MAKE REGARDING LIVING WAGE POLICY? DO YOU WANT THAT POLICY TO BE ADJUSTED? DO YOU WANT US TO TO COME BACK WITH SOME ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH WE STARTED HAVING THAT CONVERSATION LAST YEAR WHEN WE RECOMMENDED TO MOVE TO A TASK PAY PROGRAM.

BUT WE STILL HAVE A POLICY RIGHT NOW. SO STAFF HAS FOLLOWED THAT POLICY AS PART OF THIS CONTRACT, WHICH IS WHAT'S CAUSING THAT INCREASE THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.

IT IS BECAUSE WE ALSO KNOW THAT THAT LIVING WAGE AMOUNT IS DIFFERENT TODAY THAN WHAT IT WAS WHEN WE HAD THESE SERVICES PREVIOUSLY.

AND MR. GILLESPIE, IF I MISSED ANY PART OF THAT, I'D LET YOU JUMP IN OR OUR CFO.

BUT THAT IS PART OF THE REASON FOR THE INCREASE.

WELL, MR. TOLBERT, IF I MAY, I JUST WANT TO ADD ONE THING THAT CAME UP IN THE FINANCE COMMITTEE YESTERDAY, AND THAT WAS THAT WE COME BACK TO FINANCE COMMITTEE AND TALK ABOUT THE POLICY IN MORE DETAIL FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCIL.

BUT AS YOU MENTIONED, WHEN THIS SOLICITATION OCCURRED, WE FOLLOWED THE CITY COUNCIL'S POLICY, AND UNTIL THAT POLICY IS CHANGED, WE WOULD CONTINUE IN THAT IN THAT WAY.

BUT WE WILL REVISIT WITH FINANCE COMMITTEE ON THE POLICY FOR GOING FORWARD.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION THAT AND I'LL PROBABLY I'M GOING TO RUN OUT OF TIME, BUT I'LL COME BACK.

BUT WHAT I WANT TO UNDERSTAND IS IF WE APPROVE THIS CONTRACT, WE CAN'T CHANGE THE NUMBERS.

THEN IF WE CHANGE THE POLICY AND THE THING AND WE'RE NOW MAKING A THREE YEAR COMMITMENT AT THE.

IF WE CHANGE OUR LIVING WAGE ANALYSIS, WE'RE COMMITTING TO A $66 MILLION CONTRACT, WHICH IF WE.

IF WE CHANGED OUR. OUR POLICY WOULD NOT BE $66 MILLION.

NOW, IF THIS IS A MAXIMUM AMOUNT. IF THIS IS SUBJECT TO CHANGING.

I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS ARE OF OUR APPROVING THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT.

THANK YOU FOR THE FOR THE CLARIFYING QUESTION.

COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH. WE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO COMPLETELY MOVE AWAY FROM THIS PROCUREMENT AND START THE PROCESS OVER, BECAUSE THIS PROCUREMENT AND THE SOLICITATION WAS ADVERTISED WITH THIS CURRENT LIVING WAGE THAT WE ARE AT TODAY.

SO IF COUNCIL DECIDED NOT TO MOVE THIS CONTRACT FORWARD, WE WOULD HAVE TO START THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS OVER.

AND I DO WANT TO TO MENTION, I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS EXISTING CONTRACT EXPIRES IN AUGUST.

MAKE SURE I'VE GOT IT RIGHT. IT EXPIRES IN AUGUST.

THE CURRENT CONTRACT EXPIRES IN AUGUST. CHAIRWOMAN.

MENDELSOHN. SORRY, MR. BAZALDUA. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WOULD JUST SAY IT'S IT'S A IT'S A LITTLE FRUSTRATING WHEN I HEAR THESE CONVERSATIONS COME UP.

IT SEEMS ABOUT EVERY YEAR WHEN WE, WE EVALUATE OR REALLY ANY CONTRACT, I GUESS THAT THIS WOULD, THIS PARTICULAR POLICY TOUCHES. I'M, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY WE WOULD LOOK AT A SAVINGS.

SO IN A VACUUM WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A VERY DANGEROUS JOB, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE LOWEST WAGES.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOSE WHO ARE MAKING WAGES WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE IN OUR CITY.

WE SUBSIDIZE HOUSING FOR THOSE WHO ARE MAKING THIS TYPE OF OF SALARY.

AND SO WE PUT THIS IN PLACE BECAUSE CLEARLY WAGES HAVE NOT CAUGHT UP TO THE RATE OF INFLATION ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO THE COST OF LIVING IN OUR CITY. IF WE REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT WHERE WE CAN SAVE MONEY, WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THE OTHER SIDE OF PAYROLL.

WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT HOW TOP HEAVY OUR ORGANIZATION IS, HOW WE CAN LOOK AT.

MOST MONEY IN OUR ORGANIZATION, BUT PICKING ON THE ONES THAT ARE MAKING THE LOWEST IS ABSOLUTELY ABSURD TO ME.

IT SPEAKS. IT'S COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO EVERYTHING THAT OUR COUNCIL HAS SAID THAT WE SUPPORT AND WE PRIORITIZE AND WE WANT TO MAKE OUR CITY A LIVABLE, VIBRANT CITY TO LIVE IN. THAT INCLUDES THOSE IN OUR WORKING CLASS, THAT INCLUDES THOSE THAT ARE THE BACKBONE OF OUR ECONOMY.

WE CAN CONTINUE TO USE LOW HANGING FRUIT AND, AND THEM BE ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK WHEN WE HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS.

BUT IT'S JUST TO ME COMPLETELY BACKWARDS BECAUSE NO ONE IS STARTING THE CONVERSATION TO TO TALK ABOUT HOW MUCH OF A TOP HEAVY SALARY WE HAVE WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION.

SO IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ADDRESSING SOME NICKEL AND DIME SAVINGS, MAYBE WE SHOULD BE DOING THIS HOLISTICALLY INSTEAD OF PICKING ON ONE CLASS OF LABOR.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR THREE MINUTES.

[03:15:05]

WELL, I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA THAT I THINK WE'RE TOP HEAVY AND WE SHOULD LOOK AT THAT. CAN YOU GIVE US AN IDEA OF WHAT THE EXPECTED MONTHLY INCREASES FOR SANITATION BASED ON AT LEAST THIS CONTRACT AND COST RECOVERY? IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS ITEM JUST ALONE IN OUR CALCULATING THE SANITATION RATE UNDER OUR CURRENT UNIFORM RATE WITH ALL CUSTOMERS PAYING THE SAME RATE, IT'S $1.59 A MONTH.

BUT I DO WANT TO STRESS THAT THERE ARE MANY OTHER THINGS THAT FACTOR INTO SETTING THE RATE? SOME COST OR SOME SOME THINGS GO DOWN, SOME THINGS GO UP.

SO I CAN'T SAY THAT THIS ONE THING IS GOING TO CHANGE.

CHANGE THE RATE BY THAT EXACT AMOUNT. AND WHAT'S YOUR EXPECTATION FOR THE TOTAL RATE INCREASE FOR SANITATION.

I CAN'T SAY THAT'LL BE PART OF THE CONVERSATIONS IN AUGUST WITH THE CITY MANAGERS RECOMMENDED BUDGET.

WELL, I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT THING FOR US TO KNOW BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS, DON'T YOU? WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS WHAT THE ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS WHAT THE COST PER HOUR, WHAT THE ESTIMATED SPEND PER YEAR WOULD BE, AND WHAT I JUST SAID ABOUT REGARDING THE LOOKING AT THIS IN ISOLATION, BEING $1.59 PER MONTH COST.

JACK, AS YOU'RE WORKING ON THE DRAFT BUDGET THAT'S COMING UP, HAVE YOU PLUGGED IN ANY INCREASES FOR SANITATION? SO AS WAS MENTIONED, IT'S EARLY FOR US TO ACTUALLY GIVE WHAT THE RATE INCREASE WOULD BE FOR THIS PARTICULAR ENTERPRISE.

CLIFF IS TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE ITEM FOR THE LABOR COSTS, BUT THERE'S OTHER FACTORS, AS HE MENTIONED, FROM EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS TO IT CHARGES TO FUEL CHARGES, TO FLEET MAINTENANCE CHARGES THAT WILL ALL GO INTO THE CALCULATION FOR HIS RATE RECOMMENDATION THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE COUNCIL IN EARLY AUGUST.

WELL, SO ONE OF THE THINGS YOU JUST SAID, CLIFF, IS THAT SOME THINGS GO UP AND SOME THINGS GO DOWN.

CAN YOU GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING WHERE THE COST HAS GONE DOWN? AND THANK YOU FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO YES, MA'AM.

WE'VE IDENTIFIED WE'VE CONTINUED YEAR OVER YEAR IDENTIFYING A NUMBER OF SAVINGS AND EFFICIENCIES WITH OUR BRUSH AND BULKY ITEM COLLECTION PROGRAM.

SO THERE WILL BE SOME CONTRACTOR A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR DECREASE IN CONTRACTOR EXPENSES RELATED TO THE BRUSH AND BULKY ITEM COLLECTION PROGRAM.

SORRY. YOU'RE YOU'RE TRAILING OFF A LITTLE BIT.

YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CONTRACTORS YOU HAVE FOR BRUSH PICKUP.

THAT'S PRIMARILY DONE BY OUR CREWS. IN FACT, WE HAVEN'T HAD TO USE CONTRACT ASSISTANCE THIS YEAR.

WE, WE HARDLY USED IT LAST YEAR. WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A SIZABLE CUT AROUND THAT SINCE WE'VE SEEN YEAR OVER YEAR EFFICIENCY GAINS WITH USING OUR OWN CREWS. SO THAT'S WHERE THAT SAVINGS WILL BE GENERATED FROM.

SO MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT THOSE BIG BRUSH CREWS WERE FOR THINGS LIKE THE TORNADO.

WE HAD SOME STRAIGHT WINDSTORMS AND WE HAD NOT JUST WEEKS.

WE HAD MONTHS OF DEBRIS ALL OVER, NOT JUST THE SIDEWALKS, BUT INTO THE STREETS.

WASN'T THAT WHAT THAT WAS FOR? WE HAVE SEPARATE CONTRACT, WE HAVE DIFFERENT CONTRACTS.

WE HAVE STORM DEBRIS RELATED CONTRACTS AND WE HAVE STANDBY CONTRACTS FOR BRUSH AND BULKY ITEM COLLECTION ASSISTANCE.

SO THE THE SET OUTS THAT WE SEE AROUND THE CITY ARE SEASONAL.

SO SPRING AND FALL ARE THE HEAVY SEASONS, AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE SET UP MUCH MORE THAN WE ARE STAFFED OR EQUIPPED TO HANDLE.

OTHER TIMES THERE ARE THERE COULD BE STAFFING OR EQUIPMENT ISSUES THAT NECESSITATE BRINGING IN CONTRACTOR ASSISTANCE IN THE YEARS 2122 IMMEDIATELY COMING OUT OF COVID THERE WERE DUE TO SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES AND STAFFING ISSUES, WE RELIED HEAVILY ON CONTRACTOR ASSISTANCE. THAT HAS TRAILED OFF SIGNIFICANTLY.

SO WE'RE NOT SEEING CONTRACTOR ASSISTANCE LIKE WE WERE IN THOSE YEARS.

WELL, I'LL GIVE YOU A COMPLIMENT. WE ALMOST ANNUALLY WILL HAVE A PROBLEM IN JANUARY WITH BULK TRASH AFTER CHRISTMAS.

WE ALMOST ANNUALLY WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM IN MARCH AFTER SPRING BREAK.

AND EVERYBODY SEEMS TO DO SPRING CLEANING. AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS IN THE PAST YEAR.

AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S YOU. AND SO THANK YOU. SO YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY MANAGING THAT FLOW BETTER THAN IT HAD BEEN IN THE PAST.

BUT I WILL ALSO SAY THAT GETTING AN OUTSOURCED CONTRACT, WHETHER IT'S BY NEIGHBORHOOD OR EVEN THE WHOLE SYSTEM, OR WE TRY IT IN ONE AREA AND SEE HOW IT GOES, WHICH FOR AS LARGE OF A SYSTEM WE HAVE, WE PROBABLY WOULD WANT TO DO THAT.

WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE AUTOMATED TRUCKS THAT ARE THE PROPER SIZE TO DO THIS WORK.

[03:20:03]

THE TRUTH IS THIS JOB IS GOING AWAY. IF IT'S NOT GOING AWAY THIS YEAR, IT'S GOING AWAY SOON BECAUSE THE MANUAL COLLECTION IS NOT GOING TO CONTINUE.

AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN THIS LIVING WAGE CONCEPT.

YES, WE DO TALK ABOUT IT EVERY TIME BECAUSE I THINK I BRING IT UP EVERY TIME.

I BELIEVE IN COMPETITIVE WAGES AND WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE COMPETITIVE.

AND THAT IS THE WAY OUR ECONOMY IS FOUNDED, AND THERE ARE LOTS OF OPPORTUNITIES IN THIS WORLD TO MAKE MONEY AND TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

SO THANK YOU. I THINK WE NEED TO DEFER THIS TO GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

COUNCIL MEMBER, I AGREE WITH YOUR COMMENTS AROUND THIS JOB GOING AWAY.

MANUAL COLLECTION IS AT THE SCALE THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS DOES.

IT IS NOT SEEN IN OTHER CITIES. THE CHALLENGE IS THE MANY CUSTOMERS THAT WE SERVICE FROM ALLEYWAYS THAT ARE LESS THAN TEN FEET WIDE, ABOUT 50,000 CUSTOMER SERVICE FROM EIGHT ALLEYWAYS WHERE THE PAVEMENT IS ONLY EIGHT FEET WIDE.

YOU CANNOT DO THAT WITH AUTOMATED COLLECTION EQUIPMENT, MAYBE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.

BUT THAT IS NOT A TECHNOLOGY THAT IS RELIABLE AT THIS POINT.

YEAH. SO WE WILL WE COMMITTED WHEN WE BRIEFED THE COUNCIL IN FEBRUARY TO DO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AROUND THIS, TO SEE WHAT NON INDUSTRY STANDARD SOLUTIONS ARE OUT THERE OR WHAT MAY BE EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES.

WE'VE ENGAGED A CONSULTANT THAT IS ASSISTING US WITH THAT, INCLUDING LOOKING AT PRIVATE SERVICE PROVIDER OPTIONS.

WE'VE GOT LITTLE GUYS RUNNING AROUND POWER WASHING THE TRASH CANS.

AND I BELIEVE IF WE OPEN THIS UP AND WE ALLOW PRIVATIZATION, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE PEOPLE WHO DO THIS JOB TODAY AS A MANUAL COLLECTOR, OPEN UP A BUSINESS SAYING, I CAN ACTUALLY COLLECT ALL OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD STUFF, PROBABLY FOR HALF COST, AND HAUL IT OVER ON OUR OWN TO, TO THE LANDFILL.

AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BY ALLOWING THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY TO TAKE OVER TIME FOR THIS ROUND.

YOU HAVE ONE MORE THOUGH. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS ONE TOO, AND JUST KIND OF SPEAK TO I FEEL THAT I'VE BEEN MENTIONING IT FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS NOW. EVERYBODY'S BEEN FLOATING AROUND THIS LIVING WAGE AND TRYING TO GET RID OF THE LIVING WAGE. BUT I WANT TO JUST REMIND PEOPLE, AND I KNOW THIS IS NOT GERMANE TO THAT. BUT. BUT THIS LIVING WAGE WAS ALSO CENTERED AROUND. WE PUT THAT IN PLACE ALONG WITH LOCAL HIRING AS WELL, TO TO SPUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF DALLAS.

SO IT WAS NOT JUST THE WAGE FLOOR POLICY. WE IMPLEMENTED THAT WITH THE LOCAL HIRING POLICY AS WELL, SO THAT WE CAN ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO, ONE, MOVE TO DALLAS, BUT ALSO HIRE IN DALLAS.

SO AS WE TALK ABOUT THIS WAGE FLOOR, I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT BACK INTO OUR REMEMBRANCES WHILE WE HAVE THIS.

SO AS WE START GETTING TO OUR BUDGET AND SAYING, OKAY, HERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TAKE, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ALSO SEE THAT. IS IT ACTUALLY DOING WHAT WE HOPE THAT IT WOULD DO FROM A LOCAL HIRING PERSPECTIVE, FROM A LOCAL BUSINESS, USING UTILIZING LOCAL BUSINESSES, PERHAPS TO KERRY'S POINT, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COULD COME AROUND THIS, IF THIS GOES AWAY, PERHAPS THERE IS A LOCAL HIRING PIECE THAT WE THAT POLICY THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE, BUT ALSO THE WAGE FLOOR, THESE TWO WERE TOGETHER.

SO IT WASN'T JUST THE WAGE FLOOR. IT WAS BOTH.

AND IT WAS MEANT TO DRIVE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

AND THAT'S WHY WE PUT THEM, PUT THEM THERE. SO I JUST AGAIN, AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS, I DON'T WANT TO GET AWAY FROM THAT. I KNOW WE'RE FACING OUR BUDGET, BUT SOME OF THESE PEOPLE ACTUALLY LIVE IN DALLAS.

AND IF WE'RE WORRYING ABOUT FEES AND ALL OF THIS, IF WE TAKE THEIR INCOME, THEN WE GOT TO WORRY ABOUT EVERYTHING BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO INCOME. SO I JUST WANT TO JUST THINK ABOUT ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING AT THE SAME TIME. SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO I'VE BEEN LOOKING AROUND A LITTLE BIT AT WHAT THE CURRENT LIVING WAGE IS, BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THIS WAS A 2025 RATE. AND SO IT'S GONE UP, I BELIEVE, BY $1.26.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE KIND OF ALREADY GOT THAT BAKED IN THAT WE WOULDN'T BE LOCKED INTO THE POLICY, AS THE CITY MANAGER POINTED OUT. BUT AND I DO HAVE ISSUES AROUND AND THINK IN OUR THIS BUDGET SEASON, WE'VE GOT TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO MAKE THESE RATES WHO SIT IN AN AIR CONDITIONED SITUATION, AND IT'S VERY DIFFERENT FROM BEING A TEMPORARY WORKER ON THE BACK OF THESE TRUCKS.

I MEAN, WE'VE ALL SEEN THEM. THEY GO THROUGH EXTREME HEAT, EXTREME COLD.

IT'S DANGEROUS. WE'VE SEEN THE VIDEO OF SOME.

YOU KNOW, WHEN THE LINES SAG IN THE HEAT OF THE SUMMER.

ELECTRICAL LINES SAG AND THERE'S A RISK OF FIRE AND ELECTROCUTION AND ACCIDENTS IN THESE NARROW ALLEYS, ETCETERA. I MEAN, WE'VE WE'VE SEEN THAT. IT'S SMELLY, IT'S DIRTY.

IT'S A TOUGH JOB. SO IF YOU LOOK AT ANNUALIZING THAT.

2205 IT'S NOT 5000. I MEAN, IT'S 458. BUT IF YOU GO TO WHAT WILL WE SAY WE PAY THEM.

OH, I DON'T KNOW, 20 BUCKS FOR THAT JOB. YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S LIKE 41 SOMETHING.

[03:25:04]

SO WE'RE KIND OF GETTING INTO THIS $4,000, WHICH YOU KNOW, IN THIS WHOLE SANITATION DISCUSSION, WHICH, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE IN LETTING OUR RESIDENTS DETERMINE ALL THAT WE CAN AS LONG AS IT'S WITHIN SAFE PARAMETERS.

EVERYBODY SAID, IF I HAVE TO, IF I WANT TO KEEP MY SERVICE, I'M WILLING TO TO PAY FOR THAT.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THERE'S AN OPEN CHECKBOOK AT ALL.

IT MEANS WE HAVE TO BE VIGILANT AND PROCURE, JUST LIKE YOU ALL HAVE GONE THROUGH THE EXERCISE TO DO.

BUT THE REALITY IS THAT THIS LIVING WAGE AND WHAT WE MIGHT MOVE AROUND ON, ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT MUCH MOVEMENT ON THIS. IT SOUNDS LIKE FROM THE DISCUSSION WITH YOU YOU KNOW, PRIVATIZATION, I DEFINITELY WE JUST TALKED ABOUT IT THIS MORNING. I SAID, I SURE HOPE YOU'RE CONTINUING TO LOOK AT THAT.

AND I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE GOT TO EXPLORE.

MAYBE IT GOES THE CITY'S WAY TO SAY WE NEED TO OFFLOAD THIS.

MAYBE WE STICK WITH WHAT WE'VE GOT. I THINK WHEN NEIGHBORS UNDERSTAND THE LIABILITY THEY MAY INCUR FROM THEIR SCENARIO AND SOME OTHER ASPECTS OF THIS, IT'S NOT THE SLAM DUNK THEY MIGHT THINK IT IS.

BUT IF WE'RE NOT PAYING THIS WAGE TO COUNCIL MEMBER GRACIE'S POINT, I MEAN, WE'RE PUSHING PEOPLE INTO USING GOVERNMENT RESOURCES.

WE'RE NOT GIVING THEM THE DIGNITY OF ECONOMIC MOBILITY AND LIFTING UP OUR COMMUNITY.

AND I'M, I'M SAYING THIS IN THIS PARTICULAR ZONE BECAUSE I DO THINK IT NEEDS TO COME UP FOR DISCUSSION.

BUT THIS IS A VERY HARD JOB. IT'S A DANGEROUS JOB.

IT HAS ASPECTS OF IT THAT MANY OF US WOULD NEVER, EVER WANT TO DO, BUT THEY'RE SHOWING UP FOR US.

THE OTHER THING IS PEOPLE DON'T WANT AN INTERRUPTION IN THIS SERVICE.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU PICKED UP ON THAT VIBE OVER THE PAST YEAR, BUT THEY WANT THEIR SANITATION IN THEIR ALLEY.

THEY'RE WILLING TO PAY A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR IT AS LONG AS IT'S IN LINE.

AND IF WE CAN SHOW THEM THAT IT IS IN LINE I THINK THAT THEY'RE GOING TO UNDERSTAND THAT MORE.

SO I'M, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THE DISRUPTION.

I THINK THAT THIS WAGE AT LAST YEAR'S RATE IS PROBABLY GOING TO SET US UP FAVORABLY FOR THE NEXT FEW YEARS IN COMPARISON OF WHERE IT WOULD BE IF WE STARTED IT ALL OVER AGAIN.

AS WE KNOW, WE'RE CONTINUING TO EXPLORE ALL THE COST EFFICIENT OPTIONS THAT WE CAN TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THIS SERVICE.

SO I'LL I'LL SUPPORT THE CONTRACT. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CONTRACT FORCING CONTRACTORS, FORCING PEOPLE THAT WE ARE ASKING TO GIVE US SERVICES FOR, TELLING THEM WHAT KIND OF CHARGES THEY'RE GOING TO CHARGE, WHAT KIND OF PAYMENTS THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE TO THEIR EMPLOYEES AND THEIR THEIR COSTS. WE'RE TELLING THEM IN THIS SITUATION WHERE WE'RE CONTRACTING FOR SOMETHING, THAT WE'RE IMPOSING A DUTY ONTO THEM TO PAY A CERTAIN AMOUNT TO THEIR EMPLOYEES. THAT'S NOT OUR BUSINESS.

WE SHOULDN'T BE IN THE BUSINESS OF TELLING OTHER BUSINESSES WHAT TO DO.

IF WE HIRE SOMEBODY, YEAH, WE'RE THE BUSINESS AND WE'RE GOING TO TELL HOW MUCH WE WANT TO PAY PEOPLE, BUT THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. AND THIS IS A BIGGER ISSUE THAN JUST SANITATION.

THIS IS A POLICY DECISION ON WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO FORCE CONTRACTORS TO PAY A WAGE THAT WE FEEL IS CORRECT, RATHER THAN WHAT THEY FEEL THEY SHOULD BE PAYING.

AND I AND THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT MY I WANT TO GET THAT CONVERSATION IN THE RIGHT VENUE.

I'M SENSITIVE TO THE MANAGER'S CONCERN THAT WE'VE GOT TO MAKE A CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS TO KEEP OUR TEMPORARY SERVICE GOING.

WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS COMMITTING TO A THREE YEAR CONTRACT WHERE WE MAY BE CHANGING OUR POLICY GLOBALLY AND BEING STUCK WITH THIS CONTRACT IN A FOR A COUPLE YEAR MORE PERIOD.

I DO SEE THAT IT SAYS THAT THE APPROPRIATIONS ON THIS ARE THAT THAT THE CONTRACT IS ALWAYS SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS.

IS THAT CORRECT? THANK YOU SO MUCH. COUNCIL MEMBER FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

AND YES, THERE'S ALSO PROVISIONS WITHIN ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS THAT WE HAVE A RIGHT TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT.

MY COMMENTS ABOUT THE MOVING THIS FORWARD IS REALLY ABOUT THE CURRENT PROCESS, HOW WE ADVERTISED IT AND WHAT THE RATES CURRENTLY ARE.

THAT DOES NOT PREVENT THE COUNCIL FROM CHANGING THE POLICY AND HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

AND WE AGAIN, WE HAVE ALREADY COMMITTED TO COMING BACK TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TO SHARE MORE FULLY AND GIVE YOU A MORE COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW ABOUT THE CURRENT LIVING WAGE ENVIRONMENT THAT WE'RE IN.

WE INTRODUCED SOMETHING LAST YEAR THAT I FELT COUNCIL WAS VERY SUPPORTIVE AROUND, AND THAT WAS THE WHOLE TASK PAY PROGRAM, LOOKING AT SOME OF THE HARD TO FILL POSITIONS, THOSE WHERE WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE THE WORKING CONDITIONS ARE VERY DIFFERENT.

[03:30:02]

AND HOW WE START LOOKING AT MAYBE MAKING THOSE POSITIONS, THE ONES THAT WE CONTINUE TO ELEVATE AND THEN ANYTHING ELSE, IT WOULD NOT BE AN ACROSS THE BOARD TYPE OF INCREASE.

AND SO WE'VE ALREADY STARTED THAT CONVERSATION. WE WANT TO BRING YOU BACK MORE WORK AROUND THAT.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE BELIEVE IS PROBABLY THE BEST WAY FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD.

BUT BASED ON WHERE WE ARE TODAY WITH THE SERVICES THAT WE NEED WITH THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT, WE FOLLOW THE COUNCIL'S POLICY. AND CONTRACTUALLY, ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS EVEN NOW, HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT LIVING WAGE POLICY THAT'S BEEN SET BY THIS BODY. OKAY. AND THANK YOU FOR CLARIFICATION.

SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND IS THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM.

I WANT TO CONTRACT WITH THESE FOLKS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO BE ABLE TO, TO BE CONTRACTING FOR THREE YEARS IF, IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE OUR POLICY.

AND SO IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT, IF WE CHANGE OUR POLICY AND TO REBID IT OUT LATER ON, THEN, THEN THAT GIVES US AN ALTERNATIVE TO, TO HAVE SORT OF THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS.

WE CAN STILL TALK ABOUT IT AND DEFER THE MAYBE NOT DEFER THIS ISSUE, BUT TALK ABOUT THE POLICY ISSUE SEPARATELY AND GET A DECISION ON THAT, BUT STILL ALLOW YOU ALL TO BE ABLE TO CONTRACT ON A ON A ANNUAL BASIS BECAUSE WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE.

WOULD THAT IS THAT AM I AM I UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY? THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND YOUR QUESTIONS. COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH, IF COUNCIL WANTED TO.

IF A CHANGE HAPPENS WITH THE CURRENT LIVING WAGE POLICY AND THIS CONTRACT HAS MOVED FORWARD WITH THE CURRENT RATES, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A RE PROCUREMENT TO GET ANOTHER VENDOR.

AND THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL WANTS US TO DO, BUT THAT WOULD BE A PART OF THE PROCESS AND HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

WE DO HAVE OTHER PROVISIONS THAT ARE BUILT INTO ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS AROUND PERFORMANCE, THE METRICS, ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD.

BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. WE DO HAVE A FORMAL SOLICITATION THAT THIS VENDOR HAS COMPLIED WITH.

THEY'VE BEEN SELECTED AND THIS IS CURRENTLY THE CONTRACTUAL TERMS THAT ARE INCLUDED.

I APPRECIATE THAT, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE VENDOR AND WITH THE IDEA OF TEMPORARY.

THIS IS THE PERFECT TYPE OF SITUATION FOR WHAT WE WANT TO.

THE EMPLOYMENT POSITIONS THAT WE WANT TO BE IN BY CONTRACTING.

SO IT'S NOT ABOUT THEM. IT'S ABOUT GETTING THE THE OTHER POLICY ISSUE ON THE TABLE.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO DEFER BY CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN? ALRIGHT. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? NAY. NAY. ALRIGHT. SOUNDS LIKE A RECORD VOTE.

IT'S GOING TO NEED TO BE HAD, MADAM SECRETARY.

YES. 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. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ IS ABSENT WHEN VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA. NO. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER.

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

NO. THANK YOU. AND COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON IS STILL ABSENT.

ONE VOTE TAKEN. WITH FOUR VOTING IN FAVOR, TEN OPPOSED, ONE ABSENT, ONE VOTE TAKEN. THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION ON 39? MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NO. AYES HAVE IT.

ONE NOTED AS NO VOTING AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 40.

[40. 26-1615A Authorize a three-year service price agreement for armed security guard services for the Department of Sanitation Services - Andy Frain Services, Inc., most advantageous proposer of thirty-two - Estimated amount of $979,224.48 - Financing: Sanitation Operation Fund (subject to annual appropriations)]

IS YOUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM. ITEM 40 AUTHORIZED A THREE YEAR SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT FOR ARMED SECURITY GUARD SERVICES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION SERVICES AND EFRAIN SERVICES, INC..

MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSAL OF 32. ESTIMATED AMOUNT $979,224.48.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCILMEMBER ROTH. IS THERE A MOTION? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND.

[03:35:03]

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

MR. ROFF, HOLD ON. SORRY. HI. NO, NO, SORRY, MR. ROFF CHIMED IN. JUST A LITTLE LATE. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, MR. ROFF. I'D LIKE TO JUST UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.

AND AGAIN, WE'RE WE'RE SPENDING SOME MONEY FOR I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SECURITY GUARD DOES.

WHAT? WE'RE SPENDING THE MILLION, THE 300,000 EVERY YEAR FOR AND WHAT THIS IS ABOUT SO THAT WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF, OF WHAT THE NEEDS ARE OF THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT AND THE AND THE VALIDITY OF THIS PARTICULAR CHARGE.

THANK YOU, MR. ROFF, FOR THE QUESTION. CLIFF GILLESPIE, DIRECTOR, SANITATION. THIS IS CONTINUING SECURITY SERVICES AT MCCOMAS BLUFF LANDFILL.

THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 2000 ACRES. IT'S CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENCOMPASSES NUMEROUS FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT ASSETS.

SECURITY SERVICES ARE NECESSARY TO KEEP THE SITE SECURE FROM THEFT, VANDALISM, DAMAGE TO CITY FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, ETC.. EXCUSE ME. PREVENTING ILLEGAL OR UNPAID DISPOSAL WHEN THE FACILITY IS CLOSED. IT ALSO ASSISTS WITH THE EARLY IDENTIFICATION OF UNCONTROLLED LANDFILL FIRES AND OTHER HAZARDOUS HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS BEFORE THEY ESCALATE INTO LARGER ISSUES. AND YOU HAD MENTIONED TO ME THAT THIS IS A IT DEALS WITH WHEN 24 HOUR SERVICE ON WEEKENDS, POTENTIALLY EVENINGS WHEN THE WHEN THE PROPERTY IS CLOSED.

IT ALSO INCLUDES MULTIPLE SECURITY GUARDS. SO IT'S NOT ONE GUY FOR $300,000 WALKING AROUND 2000 ACRES.

THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. THAT'S CORRECT. THE SECURITY SERVICES ARE USED WHEN THE FACILITY OR WHEN THE LANDFILL SITE IS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.

AND OUR REGULAR STAFFING IS NOT PRESENT BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE SITE.

IT DOES INVOLVE SECURITY WITH VEHICLE ROVING SECURITY AS WELL AS STATIONED SECURITY.

AND THIS IS NOT AN ADDITIONAL NEW EMPLOYMENT OR CONTRACTUAL SERVICES IS SOMETHING THAT YOU TYPICALLY HAVE.

AND THIS IS AN ONGOING HISTORICAL REQUIREMENT AS WELL AS A FUTURE NEED.

AND IS THE COST OF SIMILAR TO PREVIOUS COSTS.

THE COST UNDER THE CURRENT CONTRACT IS $30 $30.32 PER HOUR.

UNDER THIS NEW CONTRACT, IT'S $33.44. SO THERE'S BEEN A REASONABLE INCREASE.

BUT IT'S NOT CRAZY. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S FOR FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

CHAIRMAN WEST RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU MAYOR.

I JUST WANTED TO PUBLICLY THANK YOU, DIRECTOR AND YOUR TEAM FOR GETTING BACK WITH ME ON.

I HAD THE SAME QUESTIONS AND YOU ANSWERED THEM.

AND AND I APPRECIATE YOUR DILIGENCE IN DOING SO.

THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

SO THE CONTRACT'S ALMOST $1 MILLION. WHAT IS THE EXPECTED INCREASED MONTHLY COST ON SANITATION BILLS FOR THAT? THIS THE COST FOR THIS SERVICES ARE COME OUT OF LANDFILL COMMERCIAL REVENUES.

WE ALSO HAVE REVENUE FROM THE CITY'S LANDFILL GAS PRODUCTION FACILITY AS WELL.

SO THIS DOES NOT HAVE AN IMPACT ON RESIDENTIAL RATEPAYERS.

OKAY. BUT THOSE FUNDS WERE BEING USED FOR OTHER THINGS, RIGHT.

THIS IS CONTINUING SERVICES. SO WE'VE ALL, WE'RE JUST CONTINUING TO PAY FOR SERVICES THAT HAVE BEEN IN PLACE PRIOR.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE A SECURITY CONTRACT IN PLACE, AND HOW MUCH ARE WE PAYING FOR THAT EVERY YEAR? I, AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WE'RE SPENDING YEAR OVER YEAR, BUT THE CURRENT CONTRACT RATE IS $30.32 PER HOUR.

THE NEW CONTRACT IS $33.44 PER HOUR. WE DON'T EXPECT WE'RE NOT EXPECTING ANY INCREASED USAGE FROM THE PAST THREE YEARS.

SO ANNUALLY JUANITA IS SHOWING ME $133,000 A YEAR PREVIOUSLY.

OKAY. AND HOW MUCH IS IT NOW? I BELIEVE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT IS, WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY SPENT AND WHAT THIS IS SHOWING INCLUDES UNKNOWNS.

IF IF SERVICES WERE NECESSARY AT THE TRANSFER STATIONS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WAS USED IN THE IN THE BID TABULATION ON ESTIMATED NUMBER OF HOURS, JUST SO THAT WE WOULD RATHER COME IN HIGH THAN THAN HAVE USAGE OVER WHAT THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT IS.

SO DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS? THE NUMBER.

[03:40:03]

COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES FOR US. WHAT HAVE YOU BEEN SPENDING? WHAT ARE YOU GOING. WE PROJECT THE SPEND TO BE THE SAME PER YEAR, SAVE FOR THE $3.

A DIFFERENT $3 PER HOUR DIFFERENCE INCREASE PER SECURITY OFFICER.

CORRECT. AND THAT'S TWO SECURITY OFFICERS. OKAY.

THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

I'M SORRY. JUST JUST TO CLARIFY AGAIN COUNCILMAN COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN BROUGHT UP AN ISSUE THAT I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND.

THE $3 EXTRA PER HOUR IS WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING HAVING MORE HOURS.

THAT'S CORRECT. SO SO THE SO THE COST, IF IT'S 300,000, IT'S GOING TO BE 10% SHOULD GOES UP FROM 270 TO 300.

IT'S GOING TO GO UP 10%. BASICALLY WHEN THIS WAS WHEN THE SPECIFICATIONS WERE WRITTEN, THE SPECIFICATIONS INCLUDED POTENTIAL FOR SECURITY. IF IT BECAME NECESSARY AT SOME POINT DURING THE THREE YEAR TERM FOR SANITATIONS OTHER FACILITIES, OR IF ADDITIONAL SECURITY BECAME NECESSARY. WE DO NOT ANTICIPATE HAVE NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT WE WOULD NEED THAT ADDITIONAL SECURITY SERVICES.

BUT WE. WE AIM TO PREPARE SHOULD THAT BECOME NECESSARY DURING THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT.

SO YOU'RE SORT OF BUILDING UP YOUR YOU'RE BUILDING UP YOUR YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE ADDITIONAL MONIES TO DO ADDITIONAL SECURITY IN OTHER PLACES.

SO AT MCCOMAS, NOW YOU'RE AT 100. SO IT'S NOT THAT IT'S GOING TO 300 AND MCCOMAS, BUT YOU'RE BASICALLY ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS AT THIS POINT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME IF YOU NEED SOME IN THE FUTURE.

THE CURRENT CONTRACT WAS, IS I'D I, Q AS WELL AS THIS ONE.

SO I'M NOT ASKING FOR ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDS. THIS JUST HAS AN ESTIMATED VALUE HIGHER.

BECAUSE STAFF WERE PLANNING FOR POTENTIAL UNKNOWNS.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 40? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 41.

[41. 26-1541A Authorize a three-year service price agreement in the estimated amount of $2,470,120, with two one-year renewal options in the estimated amount of $1,703,470, as detailed in the Fiscal Information section, for environmental monitoring and engineering consulting services for the Department of Sanitation Services - Stearns, Conrad and Schmidt, Consulting Engineers, Inc. dba SCS Engineers, SCS Field Services, most advantageous proposer of seven - Total estimated amount of $4,173,590 - Financing: Sanitation Operation Fund (subject to annual appropriations)]

AUTHORIZE A THREE YEAR SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $2,470,120, WITH TWO ONE YEAR RENEWAL OPTIONS IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $703,470. AS DETAILED IN THE FISCAL INFORMATION SECTION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING, MONITORING AND ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION SERVICES.

STEARNS, CONRAD AND SCHMIDT CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC., DBASS ENGINEERING'S SCS FIELD SERVICES MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSAL OF SEVEN. TOTAL ESTIMATED AMOUNT $4,173,590.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.

MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION, MR. ROTH? YOU PULLED IT? YES.

THANK YOU. JUST A COUPLE. JUST A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS.

IT LOOKS LIKE I JUST WANT TO AGAIN UNDERSTAND.

I'M NOT CRITICIZING IT. I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE SPENDING $4 MILLION FOR OVER THE THREE YEAR PERIOD.

AND WHAT, WHAT IS THE SERVICES THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING? YES, SIR. AGAIN. CLIFF GILLESPIE, DIRECTOR, SANITATION. THIS IS AGAIN AT MCCOMAS BLUFF LANDFILL.

THIS IS TO MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS, ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS GOVERNING GROUNDWATER PROTECTION, LANDFILL GAS CONTROL, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND WASTE CONTAINMENT SERVICES.

THESE ARE ALL NECESSARY SERVICES WHERE IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO HAVE A CONTRACTED ENGINEERS PROVIDE IT THAN STAFF ENGINEERS.

AND THESE ARE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU HAVE TO, TO KEEP.

YOU HAVE TO CERTIFY CERTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL METRICS AND, AND, AND HAVE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FEDERALLY, ETCETERA. IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT THIS IS? THAT IS TAKEN CARE OF AND IT'S CONTINUING SERVICES AND IT'S A SERVICE YOU'VE BEEN HAVING PREVIOUSLY.

I'M SORRY. YOU PREVIOUSLY BEEN PROVIDING THESE SERVICES PROVIDED AND THESE ARE FUTURE SERVICES THAT ARE REQUIRED.

YES, SIR. AND THE INCREASE FROM THE LAST ADJUSTMENT IS THE LAST ONE WAS 3 MILLION.

FOR NOW, WE'RE IN 4 MILLION. TWO. SO THE $800,000 PLUS OR MINUS, IS THAT A REASONABLE INCREASE IN SERVICE PROVIDERS BASED ON THE BIDS THAT YOU GOT? JUANITA ORTIZ OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES.

[03:45:02]

THIS THIS ONE LIKE THE LAST TWO ARE ID, IQ CONTRACTS.

SO THE NUMBER THAT YOU SEE THAT WE HAVE AS ESTIMATED IS BASED ON ALL THE POSSIBLE STUDIES AND, AND INFORMATION THAT SANITATION MIGHT NEED FROM THE VENDOR.

HOWEVER WE WILL, WE ARE JUST SETTING A PRICE UNDER THIS PRICE AGREEMENT.

AND THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT IS A CAP, IT'S NOT REALLY A CAP, BUT IT'S AN ESTIMATED, IF WE WERE TO USE EVERY SINGLE SERVICE THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED. SO ANNUALLY THE SPEND IS. $700,000.

AND WE DON'T ANTICIPATE A LARGER EXPENSE THAN THAT.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S FRONT LOADED FOR THE INITIAL TERM AT 2,000,005.

AND THEN IT'S, IT'S LESS. WAS THERE A REASON FOR THAT FOR THAT PROCUREMENT PROCESS OR THOUGHTFULNESS OF THAT? WHY? WHILE THE DIRECTOR IS LOOKING FOR THAT ANSWER, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I CLARIFY SOMETHING.

COUNCIL MEMBER THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTIONS. THIS ACTION DOES NOT ENCUMBER THE FUNDS.

IT'S SETTING THE PRICING. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS CLEAR.

I GET IT. AND THE 2,000,005 IS THE INITIAL TERM.

SO IT'S THE THREE YEARS. AND THEN THE RENEWAL OPTIONS ARE IF WE DECIDE TO GO BACK AND RENEW THE CONTRACT WITH THE VENDOR.

RIGHT. SO SO THREE YEARS AT 2,000,005 IS 2 MILLION, FOUR IS 800,000 FOR EACH YEAR.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. IT'S THE SAME AMOUNT.

THEN ROUGHLY IF WE WERE TO USE EVERY SERVICE.

YES. YEAH. SO YOU'VE FIXED YOUR PRICE AT 800,000 FOR THE FIVE YEARS.

OKAY. THAT'S I'M TRYING TO GIVE YOU ALL CREDIT FOR DOING SOMETHING THAT'S GOOD.

OKAY. THANK YOU. WELL, WE WE DO TRY TO DO GOOD STUFF ALL THE TIME, BUT BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK FOR AGAINST 41.

SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. AGENDA ITEM 42. AUTHORIZE A FIVE YEAR SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT FOR INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR CITYWIDE

[42. 26-1542A Authorize a five-year service price agreement for integrated pest management services for citywide use - Seed Family Premier Services LLC dba Pestmaster of Plano & McKinney, lowest responsible bidder of five - Estimated amount of $892,592.83 - Financing: General Fund ($699,412.83), Dallas Water Utilities Fund ($54,335.66), Sanitation Operation Fund ($50,554.16), FY 2026 WIC Program-Women, Infants, and Children Grant Fund ($40,781.16), Aviation Fund ($28,143.66), Communication Services Fund ($6,773.68), Data Services Fund ($6,773.68), and Stormwater Drainage Management Fund ($5,818.00) (subject to annual appropriations)]

USE. SEED FAMILY PREMIER SERVICES, LLC, DBA PET MASTER OF PLANO AND MCKINNEY.

LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER OF FIVE. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $892,592.83.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. IS THERE A.

IS THERE A MOTION? ALL RIGHT. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE.

ANY DISCUSSION? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. YES.

THIS IS A CONTRACT FOR PEST, MASTER OF PLANO AND MCKINNEY.

THIS IS FOR PEST SERVICES. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHO RESPONDED, WE ONLY HAD ONE FROM DALLAS THAT WAS ON THE LIST, AND THEY'RE ALMOST THREE TIMES THE PRICE OF THE OTHER 3 OR 4 THAT WERE ON THE LIST.

AND I JUST LIKE TO UNDERSTAND FROM PROCUREMENT, WHAT KIND OF WORK HAPPENED TO TALK TO ANY OF OUR CHAMBERS OR CONTRACTORS TO GET MORE DALLAS PEOPLE. I MEAN, THE NINTH LARGEST CITY IN AMERICA, AND WE ARE GOING TO PLANO AND MCKINNEY FOR OUR PEST CONTROL.

JUANITA ORTIZ, OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR THIS SOLICITATION WENT OUT DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME THAT WE DID NOT HAVE A DRIVE POLICY.

SO WE DID NOT HAVE A POSSIBILITY OF USING CRITERIA THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, HELP INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE IN THE CITY ACTUALLY BID ON THIS PROJECT.

THIS WAS ALSO AN RFP. SO WE ARE TIED TO THE LOWEST BIDDER AND THEY WERE THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER.

BUT THE COUNCIL IS ABLE TO REJECT THIS AND PUT OUT A NEW SOLICITATION THAT WOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL POINTS FOR DALLAS BUSINESSES.

CORRECT. IF WE WERE TO REISSUE IT AS AN RFP. SP THIS CONTRACT EXPIRES JUNE 8TH, 2026. WELL, I HAVE NO INTEREST IN APPROVING THIS CONTRACT, AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE MY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED TO HELP SUPPORT OUR DALLAS BUSINESSES.

AND IF THIS DIDN'T INCLUDE ANY KIND OF PRIORITIZATION FOR DALLAS, SOMETHING THAT WE ALL AGREED WE WANTED TO DO A BUSINESS THAT'S VERY ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE DOESN'T TAKE A WHOLE LOT OF TRAINING.

I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT THAT WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE IT.

AND I'M I'M GOING TO VOTE NO. AND WOULD CERTAINLY WELCOME ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION TO REJECT THE ITEM.

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

HELLO. WELL, THAT CAUGHT MY EYE TOO, IS THAT THIS IS NOT A DALLAS BUSINESS.

YOU KNOW, I SIT HERE AND TALK ABOUT SHOPPING LOCAL, AND IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING TO ME THAT,

[03:50:03]

YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU ORDER YOUR BUSINESS CARDS, YOU'RE ORDERING FROM EULESS. HOWEVER, WE IN MCC ARE ALLOWED TO USE A DALLAS BUSINESS.

SO MAYBE THERE ARE SOME PLACES LIKE THAT THAT YOU CAN HIGHLIGHT FOR US.

BUT AS SOON AS I STARTED LOOKING AT THE BID AND THAT THIS BIDDER FROM PLANO AND MCKINNEY WAS AT $823,000 AND THE ONLY DALLAS BUSINESS WAS AT $2.5 MILLION. I TOOK A STEP BACK ON THIS ONE BECAUSE THIS IS THE COMPETITIVE MARKETPLACE. THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY THEY PUT THEIR PRICE IN AND THEY WERE AMONG THE HIGHEST.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS AN ISSUE WHERE WE NEED TO GO SHAKE SOME BUSHES MORE TO FIND MORE VENDORS IN DALLAS.

I KNOW YOU DO A LOT OF OUTREACH. I KNOW I BEND YOUR EAR ON DOING BUSINESS IN DALLAS SO THAT OUR FUNDS GO BACK INTO OUR COMMUNITY TO FIX OUR ROADS AND KEEP LIBRARIES OPEN AND PAY POLICE OFFICERS. BUT YOU KNOW, IN THIS CASE, IT'S JUST TOO MUCH.

IT'S TOO MUCH. I MEAN, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO WHEN OTHER CONTRACTS COME UP, AS YOU ARE CREATING OTHER RFPS YOU KNOW, LET'S MAKE SURE WE ARE EXHAUSTING EVERY RESOURCE WITH OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS AND ASSOCIATIONS SO THAT WE GET LOTS OF DALLAS BIDDERS.

BUT IN THIS CASE, I MEAN, IT WAS SO MUCH MORE MONEY.

AND IN THIS CLIMATE, I JUST DO NOT THINK WE CAN BEGIN TO JUSTIFY THAT.

SO I I'LL SUPPORT THE ITEM AS IT IS. THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 42? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. I NOTED TWO NO'S. THREE NO'S.

COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY COUNCIL MEMBER RADKE AND COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

AND COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH FOR KNOWS. YOUR NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM 43.

[43. 26-1601A Authorize a five-year service price agreement for feral hog control and abatement services for the Dallas Water Utilities Department - Striker Outfitters LLC, most advantageous proposer of seven - Estimated amount of $2,227,500.00 - Financing: General Fund ($339,916.50), Stormwater Drainage Management Fund ($843,791.75), Dallas Water Utilities Fund ($843,791.75), and Sanitation Operation Fund ($200,000.00) (subject to annual appropriations)]

NO. ITEM 43 AUTHORIZE A FIVE YEAR SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT FOR FERAL HOG CONTROL AND ABATEMENT SERVICES FOR THE DALLAS WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT. STRIKER OUTFITTERS, LLC.

MOST ADVANTAGEOUS PROPOSAL OF SEVEN. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $2,227,500.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN AND COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH.

SAME DEAL. I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE. ALL RIGHT.

I HEARD A MOTION. AND A SECOND. SO YOU PULLED IT? COUNCILWOMAN. WHICH ONE ARE YOU TWO YOU BOTH PULLED.

WHO WANTS TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES? I'M ASSUMING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE SAME QUESTION, ALTHOUGH WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED IT. LET'S SEE HOW HE DOES.

GOING FIRST. GO. GO FOR IT FOR FIVE MINUTES. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW HOW MUCH OF A PROBLEM THIS REALLY IS.

HOW MANY PIGS ARE WE REALLY LOOKING TO KILL OR TO OR TO HOUSE? AND WHAT ARE WE DOING FOR TWO? FOR BASICALLY $2.3 MILLION.

AND I REALLY WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM, AND I'M BEING A LITTLE BIT FACETIOUS, BUT I REALLY WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM. GOOD AFTERNOON, SARAH STANDIFER WITH DALLAS WATER UTILITIES.

I ALSO HAVE BRETT JOHNSON WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT IN THE EVENT I'VE GOT A LOT MORE DETAILED QUESTIONS AND THE FERAL HOG POPULATION.

WE FIRST BEGAN STUDYING THEM ABOUT 2015, CREATED SOME PILOT PROGRAMS IN 2016, AND STARTED OUR FIRST CONTRACT.

SO THIS PROTECTS OUR LEVEES, OUR FLOODWAYS, OUR GOLF COURSES, AND A LOT OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE THAT RUNS ALONG THE TRINITY RIVER.

AND THEN OUR MAJOR TRIBUTARIES LIKE WHITE ROCK CREEK AND OTHERS.

IT IS DONE ON A CITY WIDE BASIS. SO WE HAVE A TEAM THAT STANDS BEHIND BRETT FROM THE TECHNICAL PERSPECTIVE.

THEY GO THROUGH, LOOK AT DAMAGES AND ASSESS. AND THEN BASED ON THAT, THEY WILL SET THE NUMBER OF TRAPS THAT ARE NEEDED BECAUSE YOU CAN'T JUST GO ONE SPOT AT A TIME. THE THE FERAL HOG POPULATION IS VERY SMART.

THEY REPRODUCE ABOUT EVERY 115 DAYS. EACH FERAL HOG CAN REPRODUCE ANYWHERE BETWEEN 4 AND 6 LITTLE HOGS.

THEY'RE VERY SMART. THEY KEEP EVOLVING. I THINK IN YEAR ONE AND TWO, WE GENERALLY WERE TRAPPING AROUND 5 TO 600 PER SEASON OF TRAPPING.

WE'RE DOWN TO ABOUT 300. SO WE'VE CUT THAT POPULATION IN HALF.

IF WE DELAY OR DON'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE, THEN WE JUST GO RIGHT BACK TO THE DAMAGES THAT WE WERE FACING AND HAVING TO RE RE GRADE PLACES. RESOD. IT'S REALLY MORE, IT'S MORE OF A PREVENTATIVE MEASURE AND IT'S GOT A PROTOCOL SET UP WITH DPD SHOULD THERE HAVE TO BE A FIREARM DISCHARGED ENTIRE PROTOCOLS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T DISCHARGE A FIREARM IN THE CITY LIMITS. HOWEVER FERAL HOGS ARE NOT THE NICEST THINGS.

AND SO THIS HAS BEEN WORKED ACROSS THE CITY OVER A DECADE NOW.

IT'S ABOUT 2000 HOGS, 2000 HOGS THAT YOU'RE HAVING TO GET RID OF.

BUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU CAN'T KILL THEM. YOU HAVE TO TRAP THEM AND LET THEM OUT.

THEY ARE TRAPPED AND THEN TAKEN TO AN APPROVED PROCESSOR, OKAY, AS PART OF THESE EFFORTS.

AND SO IS. AND SO YOU'RE, ARE YOU DOING IT ON A PER COST BASIS ON A PER TRIP BASIS, OR IS IT A OR IS IT A GENERAL CONTRACT?

[03:55:07]

SO THE FERAL HOG COMPANIES DO IT BASICALLY ON A PER TRAP PER MONTH.

SO SOME MONTHS WE'LL HAVE 8 OR 9 TRAPS OUT. OTHER MONTHS THERE MAY BE 16 OR 17 TRAPS.

WE'RE ON KIND OF THE BACK END OF THE FERAL HOG SEASON RIGHT THIS MOMENT.

WE'LL KIND OF LEAN BACK UP IN THE FALL AGAIN.

AND SO WHERE I'M GOING WITH MY QUESTION IS, AGAIN, THIS IS A CONTRACT FOR A SERVICE.

ARE YOU THAT BUT IT'S BEING CHARGED PER TRAP, NOT AS A MONTHLY PAYMENT FOREVER AND EVER FOR THE FOR THE.

YES, SIR. AND JUST LIKE THE PRIOR ONES, THIS IS AN I'D I.

Q. SO THIS IS SETTING THE BASE POINTS FOR US FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

SO THAT'S WHERE I'M TRYING TO GO IS THAT YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY SPENDING ALL OF THIS AND THAT AND THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S, THAT'S A NON-RECURRING SITUATION WHERE YOU CAN SCALE UP OR SCALE DOWN, YOU CAN DEAL WITH IT, YOU CAN SCALE UP OR SCALE DOWN, BUT YOU JUST WANT TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HANDLE THE PROBLEM.

YES, SIR. OKAY. SO IT'S, IT'S ABOUT $1,200 A A TRAP.

IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERY TIME YOU GET A, YOU GET ONE.

I BELIEVE THAT UNDER THE NEW CONTRACT, THAT'S ABOUT WHAT IT IS. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M A CITY GIRL, AND WHEN I SAW FERAL HOGS, I JUST HAD TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM, I THINK. COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH ASKED THAT QUESTION, AND I THINK SARAH ANSWERED IT SUFFICIENTLY.

BUT I'LL BET YOU THAT WE ARE THE LARGEST CITY IN AMERICA THAT'S SPENDING MONEY ON FERAL HOGS.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, MISS. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

A COMMUNITY THAT HAS FERAL HOGS. I WOULD PAY THIS AND THEN SOME TO HAVE A MOM, A DAD AND A FAMILY OF SIX LITTLE FERAL HOGS. THEY WILL DESTROY A WHOLE COMMUNITY.

THEY DID. AND IN DISTRICT EIGHT. SO. YES. CAN WE HURRY UP AND PAY THIS ONE? ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 43? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION,

[47. 26-1629A Consideration of appointments to boards and commissions and the evaluation and duties of board and commission members (List of nominees is available in the City Secretary's Office)]

BEGINNING WITH AGENDA ITEM 47. AGENDA ITEM 47.

CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THIS AFTERNOON.

YOU HAVE INDIVIDUAL AND FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS.

YOUR NOMINEES FOR INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENT TO THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD.

CHRISTOPHER MOORE. THE SECOND IS BEING NOMINATED NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY TO THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK OPPORTUNITY FUND BOARD.

TRENT HUGHES IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

MR. HUGHES MEETS THE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK COMMUNITY SPECIAL QUALIFICATION.

YOUR NOMINEE FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 14 BOARD SKILLMAN CORRIDOR.

SHANNON MCCOURT IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART.

THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION? SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION, A SECOND DISCUSSION SEEING NONE.

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

CONGRATULATIONS TO THOSE NOMINEES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. BEFORE I MOVE FORWARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION AND I'M STILL UNDER AGENDA ITEM 47 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 12, A DASH 42 OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE. I AM REQUIRED TO ANNOUNCE NAMES OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WHO HAVE FAILED TO SUBMIT THEIR FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REPORTS.

ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION MEMBER LAUREN MELTON ON THE REINVESTMENT ZONE SIX BOARD FARMERS MARKET.

ANGELA DOWNS ON THE REINVESTMENT ZONE EIGHT BOARD DESIGN DISTRICT.

PETER HAHN TO THE TRINITY RIVER. I'M SORRY. ON THE TRINITY RIVER WEST MMD, LUIS CRUZ AND LARRY MACGREGOR.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 48.

AGENDA ITEM 48 IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR POSITIONS ONE AND TWO FOR THE.

[48. 26-1823A Consideration of appointments to the Dallas Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors for Positions 01 and 02 for the 2026-2028 Board Term (Closed Session, if necessary, Personnel, Sec. 551.074, T. O. M. A.) (Name of nominee in the City Secretary’s Office) - Financing: No cost consideration to the City]

FOR THE 2026 2028 BOARD TERM. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. LOOKING FOR A MOTION? I MOVE TO APPOINT MAUREEN MILLIGAN AND CARMEN GARCIA TO THE DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO POSITIONS ONE AND TWO WITH THE TERMS TO BEGIN JULY 1ST, 2026 AND EXPIRE JUNE 30TH, 2028.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. DISCUSSION. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY. NO.

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

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 49 IS AN ORDINANCE ONE APPOINTING TEN FULL TIME MUNICIPAL JUDGES AND 16 ASSOCIATE PART TIME MUNICIPAL

[49. 26-1691A An ordinance (1) appointing 10 full-time municipal judges and 16 associate (part-time) municipal judges for the City of Dallas municipal court of record for a two-year term ending May 31, 2028; (2) designating an administrative municipal judge; (3) establishing the annual salaries for the administrative municipal judge, the municipal judges, and the associate municipal judges; (4) providing a severability clause; and (5) providing an effective date - Not to exceed $TBD annually - Financing: General Fund]

JUDGES FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD FOR A TWO YEAR TERM ENDING MAY 31ST,

[04:00:07]

2028. TWO DESIGNATING AND ADMINISTRATIVE MUNICIPAL JUDGE THREE ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL SALARIES FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE MUNICIPAL JUDGE, THE MUNICIPAL JUDGES AND THE ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGES FOR PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND FIVE PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. LOOKING FOR A MOTION? I MOVE TO FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE AD HOC JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE AND APPROVE THE APPOINTMENT OF TEN FULL TIME MUNICIPAL JUDGES AND 16 ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGES FOR A TWO YEAR TERM ENDING ON MAY 31ST, 2028.

THE APPOINTMENT OF PRESTON ROBINSON JR AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE MUNICIPAL JUDGE AND A 3.2% PAY INCREASE FOR FULL TIME MUNICIPAL JUDGES.

ADDITIONALLY, I MOVE TO APPROVE A 3.2% PAY INCREASE FOR ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGES.

SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. ANYONE. SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM, MR. MAYOR. YOU HAVE THERE ARE NO ITEMS FURTHER. BUT YOU DO HAVE SOME UNFINISHED BUSINESS ON AGENDA ITEM NINE.

OKAY, THEN, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. I'M TOLD THAT ITEM IS BEING HAILED, MR. MAYOR. THEN THIS CONCLUDES YOUR ITEMS FOR THIS SESSION.

OKAY? OKAY. THEN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WE'LL RECESS FOR LUNCH FOR AN HOUR, AND WE'LL COME BACK AND WE'LL PICK UP THAT ITEM AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT WAS DEFERRED TO AFTER LUNCH. SO WE'LL RECONVENE AT 230. EVERYONE.

230. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON. THE TIME IS 240 AND WE ARE BACK IN SESSION.

MADAM CITY SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL GO BACK TO YOUR UNFINISHED BUSINESS ON AGENDA ITEM NINE.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON, WE ARE BACK ON ITEM NUMBER NINE.

YES. I DID NOT MAKE IT. I THINK IT WAS GRACEY MR. GRACEY. THAT MADE IT. THAT'S CORRECT. WE WERE JUST GOING BACK TO THE SPEAKER LIST AND YOU WERE NEXT.

OH, NO. I'M SORRY. I WAS GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION TO TABLE IT TILL THE END.

I APOLOGIZE, THAT'S WHY I. OKAY. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

COUNCIL MEMBER MIDDLETON, THREE MINUTES. OKAY.

COUNCIL MEMBER, CHAIR JOHNSON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS IS CONCERNING THE CV, I CORRECT? OKAY.

THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER FOR ALLOWING ME TO MEET, I THINK.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE STILL HERE. I WANT TO CHALLENGE MY COLLEAGUES THIS UPCOMING BUDGET, THE MONEY THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS NOT GOING TO BE SUSTAINABLE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CVI PROGRAMS AND WHAT THEY BRING.

AND WHEN YOU BREAK IT DOWN, $300,000, WHICH WE JUST FINISHED DOING A FEW MINUTES AGO 100 OR $30,000 GOES TO ADMINISTRATION FEES, $105,000 OF THOSE 300,000 GOES TO THE HYPE CENTER.

AND THEN WITHIN THAT, YOU HAVE YOUR MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELOR.

SO THERE'S, THERE'S THE ACTUAL DOLLARS THAT'S GOING TO GO BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

IT'S GOING TO GO BETWEEN 15 TO $20,000 WHICH WILL ONLY GET US THROUGH THE SUMMER.

AND SO THAT'S SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT I WAS HAVING BECAUSE I'VE DONE THIS WORK AS A SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE.

I'VE DONE THIS WORK AS A COMMUNITY LIAISON FOR DALLAS ISD.

AND I KNOW. WHAT IT TAKES TO GET THIS KIND OF WORK DONE EFFECTIVELY.

AND IN THE MEETING WE'VE DISCUSSED HOW MANY KIDS HAVE WE HAVE LOST LIVES DUE TO VIOLENT CRIME.

I LOST MY OLDEST BOY DUE TO GUN VIOLENCE. SO THIS WORK IS NOT POLITICAL TO ME.

IT'S I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT IT AND I WANT TO SEE IT BE SUSTAINABLE SO IT CAN BRING REAL RESULTS TO OUR KIDS.

ALSO PARTNERING WITH DALLAS ISD AND TRYING TO ALSO GET THOSE RESOURCES AND HAVE A WAY THEY CAN HELP US.

SO DURING THIS UPCOMING BUDGET, IT. I'M ASKING MY MY COLLEAGUES AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH A TOUGH SEASON WITH THIS BUDGET,

[04:05:08]

BUT TO FIND A WAY WHERE WE CAN BRING A REAL SOLUTION WITH THE CVI PROGRAM, WHERE IT SAYS 300 000 FOR A YEAR, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO LAST A YEAR BECAUSE THE BOOTS ON THE GROUND WORK IS REALLY COST MORE THAN WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO GIVE.

SO CITY MANAGER IS DOING HER LEVEL BEST. WE HAVE TO MEET THE NEED OF JUST NOT JUST MY DISTRICT OF THE DISTRICTS THAT ARE DEALING WITH SOMETHING, SOME OF THE SAME PROBLEMS THAT EXIST.

AND SO IT'S TOUGH TO SUPPORT IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE.

HOWEVER, I WANT TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE SUMMERTIME, WITH THE LITTLE THAT WE DO HAVE AND GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD IN BETWEEN THOSE TIMES SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A REAL ROBUST DISCUSSION OF HOW THAT WILL LOOK GOING FORWARD SO WE CAN KEEP THIS PROGRAM SUSTAINABLE FOR OUR KIDS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. CHAIR MENDELSOHN THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. SOME OF THE FOLKS HAVE SAID THAT WHILE WE'VE GOT TO GO FORWARD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, WE GOTTA GET. WE GOTTA GET THIS GOING. SCHOOL'S OUT.

TODAY'S LAST DAY OF SCHOOL. COULD WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF IF THEY ARE READY TO DEPLOY IMMEDIATELY OR IF THEY'RE NOT? HOW IS THAT WORKING? WELL.

JESSICA GALICIA, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT.

SO THE CONTRACT IS BEING FINALIZED. AND THE STIPULATION WAS ACTUALLY THAT THEY WOULD BE READY TO WORK WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT.

SO THEY'RE READY TO DEPLOY IMMEDIATELY. AND HOW DOES THAT WORK? WHEN ONE OF THE COMMENTS MADE WAS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO WORK WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS TO COME UP WITH PROPOSALS THAT THEN THEY WOULD FUND, BECAUSE THERE ARE LAYERS TO THE PROJECT AND TIME FRAMES, AND ACTUALLY SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE WORKING OUT ON ARE LAID OUT WITHIN THE PROPOSAL, AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE CONTINUING TO BUILD THOSE AS WELL.

SO THERE'S ONGOING WORK STREAMS AT TWO LAYERS.

OKAY. SO THEY ARE NOT READY TO DEPLOY PEOPLE IN FIVE DAYS FROM THE EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT.

THEY ARE READY TO DEPLOY PEOPLE, AND THEY ARE ALSO GOING TO BE BUILDING AND EXTENDING RELATIONSHIPS.

OKAY. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? I'M NOT SURE HOW TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

WELL, WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE INVOLVED WITH BUILDING AND EXTENDING THE RELATIONSHIPS? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SO THE RELATIONSHIP AND I THINK THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE JOINING US AGAIN SHORTLY.

SO THE ORGANIZATION HAS THE CAPACITY TO DELIVER DIRECT SERVICES.

AND ADDITIONALLY, THE ORGANIZATION IS DOING ECOSYSTEM BUILDING WORK IN ORDER TO STRENGTHEN PARTNERSHIPS AND STRENGTHEN COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS AS WELL. AND SO THERE'S BUT SPECIFICALLY, WHAT ARE THEY DOING TO STRENGTHEN A PARTNERSHIP? LIKE, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? LIKE TAKE AWAY THE ORGANIZATIONAL LANGUAGE AND SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY WHAT WILL THEY BE DOING? SO MISS ULIS IS HERE AND SHE CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

YES SIR. YES. COUNCILMAN WOULD YOU MIND JUST REPEATING THE QUESTION.

I LITERALLY JUST WALKED BACK INTO THE CHAMBER. SO THE QUESTION IS IF THIS CONTRACT WENT FORWARD TODAY, WHAT IS IT YOU'RE PREPARED TO DO? AT WHAT TIME SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING? PLEASE DON'T USE THESE GENERAL WORDS. BUT SPECIFICALLY, WHAT WILL YOU BE DOING WITH WHOM? BECAUSE YOU DID MENTION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO WORK WITH THESE OTHER VENDORS TO THEN DO THE WORK, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE AGREEMENTS IN PLACE, IS THAT CORRECT? SO THERE ARE SEVERAL AGREEMENTS WE DO HAVE IN PLACE PRESENTLY.

THERE ARE TWO STREAMS, TWO WORKFLOW STREAMS THAT WE'VE OUTLINED IN OUR PROPOSAL.

THE FIRST ONE IS OUR WORK THAT WE PROVIDE TO YOUNG PEOPLE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 18 TO 24.

SO AS I MENTIONED, SOME OF THE SOME OF THE DRIVERS OF VIOLENCE AND OF JUSTICE SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT HAVE TO DO WITH CONNECTING YOUNG PEOPLE INTO RESOURCES, INTO EDUCATION, INTO WORKFORCE EMPLOYMENT. AND WE DO THAT WORK RIGHT AWAY.

SO ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE NOFA WAS TO BE ABLE TO START WORK WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF THE CONTRACT BEING EXECUTED, AND THAT IS WORK THAT WE CAN START RIGHT AWAY, BECAUSE THAT IS WORK THAT WE DO AND THAT THOSE EFFORTS MANY PEOPLE DO YOU HAVE THAT ARE ON DAY SIX GOING TO GO HELP KIDS FIND JOBS. WE HAVE A WE HAVE A STAFF.

WE HAVE A TEAM OF THREE. HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU HAVE THAT ARE GOING TO GO OUT IN THE FIELD AND WORK WITH KIDS THAT ARE AT RISK OF VIOLENCE TO HELP THEM FIND JOBS. SO WE HAVE THREE ON STAFF AND ALL THREE OF THEM WILL BE DEPLOYED ON DAY SIX.

[04:10:03]

SO ALL THREE OF THEM ARE PRESENTLY DOING THAT WORK.

NOW THAT THIS IS PART OF THE WORK THAT WE PRESENTLY DO.

SO YES, THEY WILL BE AVAILABLE TO REACH OUT TO KIDS, TO REACH OUT TO YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE NEEDING TO BE CONNECTED TO WORKFORCE AND TO EDUCATION. AND WE ARE HAPPY TO CONNECT WITH ANY OF THE PROGRAMS IN YOUR RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS.

IF YOU HAVE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO NEED TO HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE SERVICES, THAT SOUNDS VERY PASSIVE THAT YOU'RE AVAILABLE TO HELP PEOPLE.

THE QUESTION IS, ARE YOU GOING TO BE DOING IT? ARE YOU LIKE, HEY, I WILL BE STATIONED AT MLK.

EVERY TEENAGER THAT WALKS IN THERE, WE'RE GOING TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT A JOB. WE'RE GOING TO BE STATIONED HERE. HERE'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. I'M ACTUALLY ASKING FOR LIKE, WHAT WILL YOU AFFIRMATIVELY DO? NOT LIKE WHAT YOU'RE AVAILABLE TO DO.

SURE. WHICH IS DIFFERENT. OKAY. SO WHAT WE ARE, WHAT WE DO IS WE HAVE A ENGAGEMENT SPECIALIST WHO GOES INTO THE COMMUNITY, WHO HAS BEEN AT BUS STOPS, WHO HAS BEEN AT TRAIN STOPS, WHO GOES TO RECREATION CENTERS, WHO HAVE BEEN TO MLK, WHO GO TO DIFFERENT EVENTS HAPPENING IN THE COMMUNITY WHERE WE KNOW THESE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE DISCONNECTED FROM WORKING FROM SCHOOL, EXIST, AND WHERE THEY ARE, ARE SITUATED. THEY MEET DIRECTLY WITH THOSE YOUNG PEOPLE.

THEY BRING THEM BACK TO OUR HELP CENTER. THEY DO AN ENTIRE ASSESSMENT, INCLUDING THE POSITIVE ACHIEVEMENT CHANGE TOOL, WHICH IS THE TOOL THAT THE JUVENILE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT'S TO USE TO ASSESS RISK LEVEL FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS.

THEY WILL THEN BE THEY WILL THEN DEVISE AN INDIVIDUALIZED CARE PLAN THAT ADDRESSES THEIR UNDERLYING NEEDS, THAT CAUSES THEM TO BE DISCONNECTED FROM WORK AND SCHOOL, AND AT RISK BOTH FOR VIOLENCE AND FOR JUSTICE SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT.

THEY WILL HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL CARE PLAN, WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO ACCESS LIFE SKILLS SERVICES AS WELL AS JOB READINESS SERVICES THROUGH OUR CAREER LABS PROGRAMING. AND THEN THEY WILL HAVE ACCESS TO WHATEVER CAREER PATH, WHATEVER EDUCATION PATH THEY ARE INTERESTED IN, WHETHER THEY WANT TO GET A CERTIFICATION IN HVAC, WHETHER THEY WANT TO GET A CERTIFICATION IN HEO HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR SERVICES, WHETHER THEY WANT TO GET PHLEBOTOMY CERTIFICATIONS, WHATEVER THEIR INTEREST IS, WE WILL SEEK TO FIND THOSE AVENUES.

WE HAVE THOSE PARTNERSHIPS, BUT IF THERE IS SOMETHING OUTSIDE OF OUR SCOPE, WE WILL GO FIND THOSE RESOURCES TO CONNECT THEM.

THANK YOU. THAT WAS A VERY GOOD ANSWER. IT WAS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS ASKING ABOUT.

THE SECOND PART IS THE OTHER NONPROFITS THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, WHAT IS THE TIME FRAME FOR ENGAGING THEM AND WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? ABSOLUTELY. SO THOSE WORK, SO WE ALREADY HAVE NONPROFITS THAT WE ARE ENGAGED WITH.

SO WE ARE PRESENTLY ENGAGED WITH YOUTH 180, WHICH IS A MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES PROVIDER.

WE ARE ALSO ENGAGED WITH SOUTH DALLAS DRIVING ACADEMY.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF YOUNG PEOPLE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 18 AND 24 WHO ARE INTERESTED IN CDL LICENSURE, SO WE GET THEM PLUGGED INTO THOSE SERVICES. AS FAR AS ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL NONPROFITS THAT WANT TO BE A PART OF THE ECOSYSTEM, WORK THAT WORK. WE WILL BEGIN HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS AGAIN FROM DAY ONE AS WELL.

WE WILL GO BACK TO OUR YOUTH SAFETY STRATEGIC PLAN, WHICH WE DID IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY JUST A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, RIGHT AT THE END OF IT WAS RELEASED IN THE END OF 2020.

FOR THOSE PARTNERS THAT WERE PART OF THAT WORK WILL BE A PART OF THE DISCUSSIONS IN TERMS OF BUILDING OUT ADDITIONAL PATHWAYS FOR YOUNG PEOPLE AND GETTING THE BOOTS ON THE GROUND WORK CONNECTED TO THESE SERVICES. OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SHARING WHAT YOU DO.

IT SOUNDS LIKE IMPORTANT WORK AND I'M FOR IT.

I WILL SAY IT ALSO SOUNDS LIKE JOB SKILLS AND EDUCATION.

IT'S NOT AS MUCH AS DEALING WITH THE ACTUAL CRIME FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, SO I'M INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE.

THIS IS PROBABLY NOT THE TIME, BUT THANK YOU FOR AT LEAST ANSWERING THE QUESTION, I QUESTION.

I APPRECIATE THAT. ABSOLUTELY. COUNCILWOMAN THANK YOU FOR ASKING THE QUESTION. HAPPY TO COME BY AND SHARE MORE ABOUT THE WORK THAT WE DO AND THE ADDITIONAL PARTNERSHIPS THAT WE HAVE WITH THOSE THOSE DIRECT BOOTS ON THE GROUND VIOLENCE INTERVENTION PERSONS AS WELL.

OKAY. WELL, I MEAN, I SEE NOW WHY THIS PART IS NOT PART OF DPD, WHICH I'M INTERESTED IN THE CVI THAT WOULD BE PART OF DPD. THANK YOU CHAIR. JOHNSON ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU.

CAN YOU DESCRIBE MORE OF THE MENTAL HEALTH COUNCIL THE MENTAL HEALTH PIECE THAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE OFFICE? I KNOW WE DIDN'T GET DIRECTLY INTO IT. IF YOU CAN DO THAT.

ABSOLUTELY. SO WE HAVE OVER THE YEARS EXCUSE ME, WE ENGAGE DIRECTLY WITH YOUNG PEOPLE.

WE GET SIGNIFICANT FEEDBACK FROM THEM. WE ASK OFTEN, WHAT DO YOUNG PEOPLE NEED AND WHAT ARE THE SERVICES THAT THEY NEED.

WE CONDUCTED A SURVEY, A LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS OF OUR OPPORTUNITY YOUTH IN DALLAS, OF WHICH IN DALLAS COUNTY THERE'S ABOUT 43,000 OPPORTUNITY YOUTH.

THOSE ARE FOLKS, AGAIN, DISCONNECTED FROM WORK AND FROM SCHOOL, ALSO SUSCEPTIBLE, SUSCEPTIBLE TO VIOLENCE AND JUSTICE SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT IN ASKING OVER 100 YOUNG PEOPLE WHAT THEY NEEDED. MANY OF THEM HIGHLIGHTED MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORTS AND SERVICES.

[04:15:01]

WE HAVE A NUMBER OF YOUNG PEOPLE WHO HAVE UNDIAGNOSED MENTAL HEALTH CONDITIONS WHERE THEY JUST DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE APPROPRIATE SERVICES.

MANY OF OUR YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE HAVE ENCOUNTERED MULTIPLE LAYERS OF TRAUMA.

SO FOR OUR PARTICIPANTS WHO COME THROUGH OUR PROGRAM, OUR PARTICIPANTS HAVE ON AVERAGE FOUR OR MORE ACES ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES SCORE, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY HAVE EXPERIENCED A NUMBER OF TRAUMAS THAT IMPACT BEHAVIOR.

AND THOSE ARE SOME OF THE UNDERLYING FACTORS THAT ARE CRITICAL TO ADDRESS, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT YOUTH VIOLENCE.

DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? SURE. COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, I SAID THIS EDUCATION AND EQUITY OR EQUALITY LEADS TO POVERTY, AND POVERTY LEADS TO VIOLENCE. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO FIX THE VIOLENCE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND WE MUST ADDRESS THE POVERTY THAT THAT IS THAT'S IN OUR COMMUNITY.

IT'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO GET THIS THING DONE THE WAY IT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT IN THE OFFICE. AND SO 15 TO $20,000, WHEN IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE, WILL ONLY CARRY US THROUGH THE SUMMER.

AND TO MILSONS POINT, SHE'S LOOKING FOR THE VIOLENCE INTERRUPTERS OR RESOURCES THAT WILL HELP WITH THE VIOLENCE PART OF THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED IN THE OFFICE. SO IN ORDER TO GET THAT DONE, WE NEED MORE RESOURCES AND MORE FUNDING SO IT CAN BE SUSTAINABLE.

AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO CHALLENGE MY COLLEAGUES DURING THIS TOUGH BUDGET SEASON THAT WE LOOK HOLISTICALLY IN THAT AND THEN TALK TO DALLAS, ISD AND OTHER PARTNERS THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES SO IT CAN BENEFIT ALL OUR COMMUNITIES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW.

THERE IS A MOTION BY CHAIR JOHNSON TO DEFER THIS ITEM.

MR. MAYOR. I DON'T WANT TO. KNOW WHAT'S CORRECT? WHERE MY MIND WENT BLANK. YEAH, I DEFER MY I WITHDRAW MY MOTION.

I'M SORRY. MY MIND WENT BLANK. OKAY, I WITHDRAW MY MOTION.

MOTION IS WITHDRAWN. IS THERE A MOTION? NEW MOTION FOR THE ITEM.

SECOND, A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NO DISCUSSION. CHAIR MIDDLETON FIVE MINUTES.

SO I DON'T NEED FIVE MINUTES. I WILL ACTUALLY JUST DO THE ONE MINUTE THAT WAS LEFT ON THE OTHER ONE.

OUT OF RESPECT TO EVERYBODY, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM AND THE KIDS NEED OPPORTUNITIES AND I'M FOR THAT.

BUT THE COMMENT THAT CHAIR MAXEY, CHAIR JOHNSON JUST MADE THAT POVERTY LEADS TO VIOLENCE.

I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO PUSH BACK ON THAT AND SAY NO.

MY PARENTS GREW UP IN POVERTY. MY FATHER LITERALLY GREW UP HUNGRY.

WORKING JOBS TO BE ABLE TO FEED HIMSELF. AND THERE WASN'T VIOLENCE.

SO POVERTY DOES NOT HAVE TO LEAD TO VIOLENCE.

THERE'S OTHER CHOICES. AND THAT'S THE PART THAT'S MISSING, IS TO SHOW PEOPLE, WHAT ARE THE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES THAT CAN HELP TAKE YOU OUT OF POVERTY AND LEAD TO A SUCCESSFUL LIFE? IT DOESN'T REQUIRE VIOLENCE, AND I DON'T THINK THOSE TWO ARE JOINED.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE NOT CONNECTED IN SOME WAYS, BUT IT IS NOT YOUR FATE TO BE VIOLENT JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE POOR.

THANK YOU. CHAIR JOHNSON, FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT BECAUSE YOU ARE LACKING FUNDING, THAT YOU DECIDE TO BE POOR OR YOU DECIDE TO BE VIOLENT.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IN MY COMMUNITY, DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE BECAUSE THAT'S ALL THEY HAD DUE TO RACISM AND DISPARITIES.

WE DO NOT GET THE RESOURCES THAT WE NEED. THAT WAS HAPPENING IN YOUR COMMUNITY.

IN MY COMMUNITY. WE WAS LEFT WITHOUT. THEREFORE, WE MADE DECISIONS THAT WAS TO THEIR BEST INTEREST TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAMILY.

SO I REPEAT IT. EDUCATIONAL INEQUITY OR INEQUALITY LEADS TO POVERTY AND POVERTY LEADS TO VIOLENCE.

THAT'S NOT SAYING THAT YOU. IF YOU'RE POOR, YOU MUST BE VIOLENT.

THAT IS SAYING THAT SOME HAVE MADE THE DECISION TO GO A DIFFERENT ROUTE.

AND THAT DECISION HAS LED TO VIOLENCE. SO LET'S BE CLEAR.

IN DISTRICT FOUR AND IN SOUTHERN DALLAS, WE HAVE BEEN WITHOUT DUE TO BEING UNDERFUNDED, DISPROPORTIONATELY DISENFRANCHIZED IGNORED AND THEREFORE PEOPLE MADE THE WRONG DECISION.

POVERTY THAT LED TO VIOLENCE. THE DATA SHOWS THAT AND HISTORY SHOWS THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CHAIR. GRACEY FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THAT CLARITY, CHAIR MAXEY.

MISS WALTERS, I WANT TO THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE JUST NOT JUST WHAT YOU WILL BE DOING ON THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT, BUT THE WORK YOU'VE BEEN DOING IN THE COMMUNITY FOR, FOR THIS LONG.

[04:20:03]

AND I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR, FOR BEING THOUGHTFUL THROUGH PUTTING THIS PROPOSAL TOGETHER, UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT NEEDS, SO MANY DIFFERENT AREAS, SO MANY DIFFERENT TOUCH POINTS.

YOU CALL THEM ACES, TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCES THAT WE'VE ALL HAD.

WE'VE ALL GROWN UP WITHOUT EVEN HAVING THEM ADDRESSED AND DON'T KNOW WHY WE THE WAY WE ARE TODAY.

SO WITH ALL OF THIS IDEA OF KIDS CRASHING OUT AND ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT THINGS, AND THEY DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHY THEY'RE DOING THAT.

THE THOUGHTFULNESS THAT GOES INTO THIS PIECE, MAKING SURE PSYCHOLOGICALLY THEY ARE ABLE TO TRAUMA INFORMED ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT THEY NEED TO, TO FUNCTION IN SOCIETY. BECAUSE AGAIN, WHEN YOU HAVE POVERTY AS ONE ITEM, BUT THEN YOU HAVE ALL OF THESE OTHER ISSUES, PEOPLE AREN'T PROCESSING THAT.

ME AND MY BEST FRIEND, WE JUST, WE CALL IT A FRONTAL LOBE MALFUNCTION IS WHAT WE'RE CALLING IT. AND, AND, AND THESE ARE THE TYPE OF PROGRAMS THAT NEED TO BE IN PLACE TO CATCH THEM BEFORE IT'S INTERVENTION.

IT'S INTERVENTION. THESE THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH THESE EMOTIONS WHEN THEY COME.

THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO RESPOND, HOW TO PROCESS THESE FEELINGS AND ALL OF THIS.

SO EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF THIS AND WHAT YOUR ORGANIZATION IS GOING TO BE DOING FROM JUMP FROM DAY ONE IS JUST THAT IT'S TOUCHING EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF THAT. AND THEN WHEN IT GETS TO THE STREETS, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

THIS IS NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO REALLY DO WHAT WE NEED, BUT ADDING THESE TWO ESSENTIAL PIECES.

AND I THINK THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE HAD BEFORE AND WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE.

WE HAD THAT, AND WE JUST HAD THEM IN THE STREETS DOING THE WORK.

IF I MY UNDERSTANDING IS CORRECT, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE MENTAL SIDE OF THIS PIECE, THE PLACES TO SEND THEM, TO REDIRECT THEM. AND NOW WE'RE PUTTING ALL OF THAT TOGETHER.

SO I'M VERY GLAD THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS PROCESS, AND I'M PLEASED THAT YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE CONVERSATIONS THERE.

BUT BUT I DON'T WANT US TO GET HELD UP ON DELAYING SOMETHING AT A VERY CRITICAL TIME, NOT JUST BECAUSE SUMMER'S TOMORROW, BUT THIS IS A CRITICAL TIME THAT WE'RE IN, AND WE NEED THESE SERVICES IN PLACE, AND WE NEED THE FOLKS THAT ARE IN PLACE.

AND AGAIN, I KNOW YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE DOING THE WORK. SO I DON'T HAVE ANY DOUBT THAT BUILDING THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AND BUILDING UPON THIS WILL BE A CHALLENGE FOR YOU. SO AGAIN, MR. CITY MANAGER JESSICA DEPUTY DIRECTOR, I THINK THANK YOU ALL THE TITLES AND MISS WATERS, THANK YOU FOR, FOR, FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. BUT AGAIN, I JUST I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS AND, AND STRESS THAT THIS WAS A PROCESS THAT WAS THOUGHT THROUGH AND MEANT TO ENHANCE PREVIOUS PROGRAMS TO MOVE US FORWARD.

SO AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING.

AND THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, FOR YOUR TIME. AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. JOHNSON, FOR FLEXIBILITY. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I WILL JUST ECHO THE SENTIMENTS OF BOTH MY COLLEAGUES AND JUST SAY THAT I DEFINITELY THINK THERE IS CLEAR DATA THAT SUPPORTS THAT CORRELATION THAT, THAT COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MENTIONED IN POVERTY.

AND I THINK JUST TO, JUST TO ASK ANECDOTALLY WHERE, WHERE ARE, WHERE SPECIFICALLY ARE THESE EFFORTS DEPLOYED? COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. THAT'S DIRECTED TO ME. I'M, I'M ASSUMING. YES. EITHER EITHER OR, JESSICA, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD FEEL APPROPRIATE, BUT IF WHOEVER HAS THE ANSWER, I'LL TAKE IT.

SO IN TERMS OF INTENTIONAL DEPLOYMENT, THE ZIP CODES WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT WE LAID OUT IN THE PROPOSAL WERE BASED ON DATA THAT WE PULLED FROM, YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNITY HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT FROM DPD, FROM OUR OWN DATA DASHBOARD.

BUT THOSE ZIP CODES ARE 75215216 AND 217. NOW, AS AN ORGANIZATION, WE DO SERVICE YOUNG PEOPLE ACROSS THE COUNTY.

AND SO IF THERE ARE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO NEED OUR SERVICES AND WE ENCOUNTER THOSE YOUNG PEOPLE, WE DO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THEM AS WELL. BUT THERE'S CLEAR DATA TO SHOW THAT THIS IS THIS IS A CONCENTRATION, AND IT'S MOSTLY IN SOUTHERN DALLAS THAT ALSO CORRELATES TO SOME OF OUR LOWER SOCIOECONOMIC COMMUNITIES.

CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT. AND HOW MUCH OUTREACH DO YOU SEE IN YOUR IN YOUR FIELD, IF YOU WILL, JUST PROPORTIONATELY PERCENTAGE WISE IN MORE AFFLUENT HIGHER INCOME AREAS.

WHEN YOU SAY OUTREACH FROM OUR ORGANIZATION, IN PARTICULAR FROM OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS THE CITY AS A WHOLE, LIKE IN THE, IN THE, IN THE INDUSTRY. YOU KNOW, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT I COULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION WITH, WITH PARTICULARITY. I KNOW THAT WE AS AN ORGANIZATION, WE FOCUS ON WHERE THE DATA TELLS US TO GO.

BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE MEETING THE NEEDS AND FILLING THE GAPS AND ACTUALLY MOVING THE NEEDLE ON THE CHALLENGES AND THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE SEE.

WELL, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S SOMEWHAT OUT OF TOUCH TO A

[04:25:08]

BLANKET STATEMENT THAT, THAT THERE IS NO CORRELATION WHEN THERE IS A LACK OF ACCESS AND A LACK OF OPPORTUNITY.

WE SEE DATA WITH EVEN OUR CHILD POVERTY ACTION LAB, WE'VE SEEN DATA WITH OUR COUNTY'S NEEDS HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT.

WE HAVE DISPARITIES IN INEQUITIES THAT EXIST AND THEY HAVE CLEARLY RESULTED TO MORE CONCENTRATION IN VIOLENT CRIME.

I WANT TO SAY ONE THING. WHEN WHEN CHIEF GARCIA CAME TO OUR CITY I DID A RIDE ALONG WITH HIM THROUGH MY DISTRICT AND TALKED TO HIM ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON. AND THERE WAS ONE QUESTION THAT STUCK OUT TO ME, AND I'LL NEVER FORGET IT.

BUT HE SAID, WHO LIVES IN THAT HOUSE OR NO? HE SAID, WHY DON'T Y'ALL DEMOLISH HOMES LIKE THAT? I SAID, SIR, SOMEONE LIVES THERE. AND HE SAID HE WAS SHOCKED AND IT CAN BE SHOCKING.

AND HE SAID, I, HE SAID, YOU KNOW, THE REASON WHY WE HAD I, I CAME FROM A CITY THE SAME SIZE AND WE HAD 1000 LESS OFFICERS.

HE SAID, I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW POVERTY EXISTED LIKE THIS.

AND SO WHEN YOU CORRELATE THE HOT SPOTS THAT WE SEE WITHIN OUR PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO CONCENTRATE, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE HARD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT OUR YOUNG PEOPLE ARE NOT AFFORDED IN SOME PARTS OF OUR CITY THAT THEY ARE IN OTHERS.

WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THESE AS AN INVESTMENT THAT'S GOING TO HELP EVEN OUT THAT SCORE, BECAUSE IT'S DEFINITELY AN UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD.

SO I WANT TO COMMEND YOU AND THANK YOU FOR THIS WORK.

I'M GLAD THAT WE ARE NOT DEFERRING THIS. I THINK IT'S IT'S REALLY CRITICAL.

AND JUST AS COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY MENTIONED, THIS IS AN ADD ON TO EFFORTS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKING PLACE NOW FOR QUITE A WHILE.

IN FACT, FROM WHEN WE WERE GETTING DATA FROM COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY AS A STAFFER TELLING US TO DO THINGS LIKE THIS BECAUSE OF THE INEQUITIES THAT EXIST IN THE CITY.

SO IT'S THIS IS A THIS IS A HUGE PROGRAM THAT I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF.

AND, AND I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE NOT DEFERRING THIS. HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU.

COUNCILMEMBER RESENDEZ, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I'M SUPPORTING THIS ITEM AS WELL, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR ME TO CHIME IN JUST SO THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS HOW I THINK MAYBE THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL FEELS.

WE CAN'T CLAIM TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY WHILE IGNORING THE ROLE THAT CONCENTRATED POVERTY, HOPELESSNESS AND DISINVESTMENT PLAY IN FUELING VIOLENCE.

RESEARCH CONSISTENTLY SHOWS THAT COMMUNITIES FACING PERSISTENT POVERTY AND GENERATIONS OF NEGLECT EXPERIENCE HIGHER RISKS OF CRIME AND VIOLENCE.

I GREW UP IN PLEASANT GROVE, AND I SAW FIRSTHAND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE FEEL TRAPPED WITHOUT OPPORTUNITY.

I SAW PEOPLE SELL DRUGS, ROB PEOPLE, AND STEAL IN THE COMMUNITY WHERE I GREW UP.

AND THAT REALITY DOES NOT EXCUSE CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR, AND IT NEVER SHOULD.

AT THE SAME TIME, I'LL ALWAYS COMMEND THE MANY PEOPLE WHO GROW UP SURROUNDED BY REDLINING, DISINVESTMENT, STRUGGLING SCHOOLS, POVERTY AND VIOLENCE, AND STILL CHOOSE NOT TO RESORT TO CRIME.

THERE ARE COUNTLESS PEOPLE IN COMMUNITIES LIKE PLEASANT GROVE WHO WORK HARD, RAISE FAMILIES, SERVE OTHERS, AND OVERCOME OBSTACLES THAT MANY PEOPLE NEVER HAVE TO FACE.

BUT IF WE TRULY WANT SAFER NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS DALLAS, THEN WE MUST BE WILLING TO INVEST NOT ONLY IN ENFORCEMENT, BUT ALSO IN OPPORTUNITY, STABILITY, EDUCATION, MENTAL HEALTH RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND HOPE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING AGENDA.

[Z11. 26-1808A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment and an expansion of Specific Use Permit No. 129 for electrical substation uses on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District and R-7.5(A) Residential Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 631, 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 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearing on May 13, 2026, and is scheduled for consideration on May 27, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

BEFORE WE MOVE TO YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA, MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER WEST WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED AT THIS TIME ON ITEM Z 11.

CHAIR WEST. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO JUNE 24TH, 2026.

SECOND. SECOND. A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.

YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEM Z ONE THROUGH Z NINE.

ITEM Z ONE HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.

ITEM Z TWO HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH AND ITEM Z THREE HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA.

THEREFORE, YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEM Z FOUR THROUGH Z NINE.

I'LL READ THOSE ITEMS INTO THE RECORD. ITEM Z FOUR IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1831 FOR A BAIL BONDS OFFICE ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF REUNION BOULEVARD AND SOUTH RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD.

ITEM Z FIVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A WMU-3 WALKABLE MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT C ON PROPERTY ON THE WEST CORNER OF NORTH MADISON AVENUE AND BALLARD AVENUE. ITEM Z SIX IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO TRACKS ONE AND TWO WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 814 ON

[04:30:08]

PROPERTY ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD AND INWOOD ROAD.

ITEM Z7 IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN HISTORIC OVERLAY FOR THE WESLEY IN 1159 NORTH MADISON AVENUE ON PROPERTY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF NORTH MADISON AVENUE, WEST OF BALLARD AVENUE.

ITEM D8 IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN EXPANSION OF SUBDISTRICT ONE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 101 ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH WEST LINE OF WEST CAMP WISDOM ROAD BETWEEN BELTLINE ROAD AND TURNOUT LANE AND ITEM Z9 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF GARLAND ROAD AND THE NORTHWEST LINE OF ALVIN STREET.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR ANY OF THESE ITEMS. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ANY OF THE ZONING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS THAT WERE JUST READ INTO THE RECORD ITEM Z FOUR THROUGH Z NINE? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.

IS THERE A MOTION? CHAIR WEST. THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. I WANTED TO POINT OUT Z SEVEN BECAUSE IT'S A REALLY, REALLY COOL CASE.

THIS IS AN ITEM KNOWN AS THE MADISON HOTEL, WHICH, IF YOU KNOW MY DISTRICT, YOU'LL KNOW HOGG ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IS RIGHT THERE BY METHODIST HOSPITAL. THIS IS A HISTORIC IT'S A LANDMARKING FOR THIS HISTORIC PROPERTY.

THE MADISON HOTEL WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED IN 1926, AND IN 2026, EXACTLY 100 YEARS LATER.

LANDMARKING THE PROPERTY IS A MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO PROTECT AND RECOGNIZE AN AUTHENTIC PIECE OF DALLAS HISTORY.

THE BUILDING REPRESENTS A RARE SURVIVING NEIGHBORHOOD HOTEL FROM OAK CLIFF'S EARLY GROWTH PERIOD, AND HAS REMAINED PART OF THE AREA'S ARCHITECTURAL FABRIC THROUGH GENERATIONS OF CHANGE.

UNLIKE MANY HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT WERE DEMOLISHED OR HEAVILY ALTERED, THE MADISON STILL REFLECTS ITS ORIGINAL PURPOSE AND CHARACTER.

LANDMARK DESIGNATION WILL HELP ENSURE THE LONG TERM PRESERVATION OF THE BUILDING'S HISTORIC IDENTITY BEYOND THE CURRENT OWNERSHIP.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW GO TO YOUR FIRST POLL.

ZONING ITEM ITEM Z ONE. ITEM Z ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN

[Z1. 26-1588A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment to Planned Development Subdistrict No. 154 within Planned Development District No. 193, the Oak Lawn Special Purpose District, on property bounded by McKinney Avenue, North Akard Street, and North St. Paul Street Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to an amended development plan, amended landscape plan, and staff’s recommended amended conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to an amended development plan, amended landscape plan, and amended conditions Z245-150(LG)/Z-25-000158 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT NUMBER 154 WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 193, THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY BOUNDED BY MCKINNEY AVENUE, NORTH AKARD STREET AND NORTH SAINT PAUL STREET.

MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 99 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED TWO 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 ONE? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. CHAIR RIDLEY, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, I DO. I MOVE TO REMAND THIS ITEM TO THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION OF AN ALTERNATE LAND USE.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? YES.

THE APPLICANT HAS DECIDED THAT THEY WISH TO EXPLORE A HOTEL USE IN LIEU OF MULTIFAMILY IN THIS SITE, AND THEREFORE WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO BACK TO THE PLAN COMMISSION AND TO ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THAT POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE LAND USE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM Z TWO IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN

[Z2. 26-1589A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment to Planned Development District No. 880, on the north line of Lyndon B. Johnson Freeway, between Ridgeview Circle and Hughes Lane Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to traffic management plan and amended conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to traffic management plan and amended conditions Z-25-000232 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 880 ON THE NORTH LINE OF LYNDON B JOHNSON FREEWAY BETWEEN RIDGE VIEW CIRCLE AND HUGHES LANE.

ALL RIGHT. MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 97 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED FOUR REPLIES IN FAVOR AND SIX 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 TWO? I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER ROSS, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO, I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

AGRICULTURAL USES, OPEN ENROLLMENT, CHARTER SCHOOL AND PUBLIC SCHOOL.

[04:35:01]

OTHER THAN AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL ARE PERMITTED BY.

RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY DISCUSSION, COUNCILMEMBER ROTH? OKAY. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM Z THREE. IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE

[Z3. 26-1590A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a new Planned Development District for TH-3(A) Townhouse District uses on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family and MF-1(A) Multifamily Districts with Specific Use Permit No. 2287 for Seminary and a Convent or Monastery, on the west line of La Prada Drive and east line of Shiloh Road Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan and conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan and conditions Z-25-000235 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

GRANTING A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER, TH-3.

A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ON THE WEST LINE OF LA PRADA DRIVE AND EAST LINE OF SHILOH ROAD.

MR. MAYOR, WE SENT SEVEN NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA.

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 CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM Z THREE? HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. CHAIR WEST. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

AGRICULTURAL USES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND.

EXCEPT FOR A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT, THE YARD LOT AND SPACE REGULATIONS FOR THE THREE A DISTRICT APPLY.

THANK YOU. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING? NO DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR INDIVIDUAL ZONING ITEMS.

[Z10. 26-1809A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting the removal of Shop Front Overlay SH-6 on property zoned WMU-5 Walkable Mixed Use Subdistrict D within Planned Development District No. 468, the Oak Cliff Gateway Special Purpose District with SH-6 Shop Front Overlay, on the west corner of East 8th Street and Lansing Street Recommendation of Staff: Approval Recommendation of CPC: Approval Z-26-000025 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearing on May 13, 2026, and is scheduled for consideration on May 27, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

ITEM Z TEN. ITEM C TEN IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING THE REMOVAL OF SHOPFRONT OVERLAY S, H-6 ON PROPERTY ON THE WEST CORNER OF EAST EIGHTH STREET AND LANSING STREET.

ALL RIGHT, MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 29 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.

AND YOU DO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

FRED PENA MR. PENA IS NOT ONLINE AND NOT IN THE AUDIENCE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM Z TEN? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. CHAIR WEST, YOU HAVE A MOTION.

I MOVE TO DENY THE ZONING CHANGE WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM Z 12 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2180 FOR AN OPEN

[Z12. 26-1515A 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 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearings on April 8, 2026, and April 22, 2026, and is scheduled for consideration on May 27, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST R.L.

THORNTON FREEWAY AND FERGUSON ROAD. MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 12 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 C 12? THANK YOU. NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, CHAIR WEST.

I THINK I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY CITY PLAN COMMISSION, SUBJECT TO THE REVISED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN DATED MAY 20TH, 2026 THAT SHOWS REMOVAL OF RIGHT TURN RESTRICTIONS FOR OUTBOUND TRAFFIC ONTO VALLEY GLEN DRIVE.

IS THERE A SECOND? THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA FIVE MINUTES.

I JUST WANT TO THANK UPLIFT FOR WORKING WITH STAFF AND THANK THANK STAFF FOR BEING INNOVATIVE.

THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT. AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THESE ZONING CASES AFFORD, WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY TO BE HEARD AND FOR US TO MAKE CHANGES AS NEEDED.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT SCHOOL YEAR BEING MORE EFFICIENT AND SMOOTH AROUND THESE INTERSECTIONS.

SO THANK YOU STAFF. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS REGARDING A

[PH1. 26-1633A A public hearing to receive comments regarding a proposal to change the name of Fairshop Drive between S. R. L. Thornton Freeway and Village Fair Drive to “John Beckwith Sr. Drive” and an ordinance granting the name change - STNAME-26-000001 - Financing: New Street blades to be prepared and paid for by the City of Dallas (see Fiscal Information for potential future costs) *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

PROPOSAL TO CHANGE THE NAME OF FAIR SHOP DRIVE BETWEEN SOUTH R.L.

THORNTON FREEWAY AND VILLAGE FAIR. DRIVE TO JOHN BECKWITH SENIOR DRIVE AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING THE NAME CHANGE.

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? ITEM PH ONE. I SEE AN INDIVIDUAL COMING FORWARD.

IF THERE ARE ANY MORE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, WILL YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HAVE A SEAT ON THE FIRST COUPLE OF ROWS IN THE CENTER SECTION?

[04:40:03]

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. GOOD EVENING. I'M MARY BONAPARTE, PEACH LANE IN DESOTO, TEXAS. THANK YOU. HONORABLE MAYOR AND ESTEEMED MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL. IT IS BOTH AN HONOR AND A PRIVILEGE TO STAND BEFORE YOU TODAY TO RECOGNIZE AND CELEBRATE THE LIFE AND LEGACY OF A MAN WHO SERVED THE DALLAS COMMUNITY WITH DIGNITY, COMPASSION, AND UNWAVERING GRACE.

MR. JOHN BECKWITH, THE SENIOR MR. BECKWITH WAS FAR MORE THAN A MORTICIAN, FUNERAL DIRECTOR, OR BUSINESS OWNER. HE WAS A TRUE HUMANITARIAN.

HE CHOSE DALLAS, TEXAS, AS BOTH HIS HOME AND THE FOUNDATION FOR HIS ENTREPRENEURIAL JOURNEY, DEDICATING HIS LIFE TO SERVING THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY, DOING SOME OF THE MOST DIFFICULT TIMES.

AS A YOUNG POLICE OFFICER, BEGINNING MY CAREER IN DALLAS DURING THE EARLY 1980S, I WITNESSED FIRSTHAND THE DEVASTATING VIOLENCE THAT PLAGUED MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

COUNTLESS YOUNG MEN FROM IMPOVERISHED COMMUNITIES LOST THEIR LIVES TO SENSELESS CRIMES.

MOST OF THE VICTIMS FAMILIES WERE ALREADY STRUGGLING TO AFFORD BASIC NECESSITIES NOT TO INCLUDE HAVING A PROPER BURIAL.

IT WAS DURING THOSE PAINFUL YEARS THAT I MET MR. BECKWITH, NOT BY COINCIDENCE, BUT BY FATE. WHEN FUNERAL HOMES WERE OVERWHELMED BY THE NUMBER OF VICTIMS, MR. BECKWITH DID NOT TURN PEOPLE AWAY. HE RENTED REFRIGERATED UNITS TO PRESERVE THE DIGNITY OF THE DECEASED WHEN SPACE BECAME UNLIMITED AND WHEN GRIEVING FAMILIES COULD NOT AFFORD BURIAL SERVICES, HE PROVIDED THOSE SERVICES FOR FREE OF CHARGE, AT NO COST. HIS SACRIFICE, HIS OWN FINANCIAL WELL-BEING.

HE ENSURED THAT OTHERS COULD MOURN THEIR LOVED ONES WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT.

WHAT KIND OF MAN PLACES THE NEEDS OF GRIEVING FAMILIES ABOVE HIS OWN? WHAT KIND OF MAN GIVES SO SELFLESSLY DURING THE DARKEST MOMENTS OF ANOTHER PERSON'S LIFE? THAT MAN WAS MR. JOHN BECKWITH, SENIOR. TODAY, I RESPECTFULLY AND SINCERELY ASK THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS APPROVE AND HONOR HIS LEGACY BY PERMANENTLY REPLACING THE NAME OF FAIR SHOP STREET TO JOHN BECKWITH SENIOR STREET.

THIS LOCATION IS ADJACENT TO GOLDEN GATE FUNERAL HOME, AND PRESENTLY THERE ARE NO ABUTTING PROPERTIES THAT WOULD AFFECT THE ZONING.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, SUCH RECOGNITION WOULD WILL SERVE AS A LASTING TRIBUTE TO HIS HARD WORK, COMMITMENT, COMPASSION AND HIS SERVICES TO THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS.

MR. BECKWITH WAS TRULY A MAN OF HONOR, COMPASSION AND LEGACY, A MAN WHOSE NAME RESOUNDS EVEN AFTER HIS DEATH IN HIS LOVING MEMORY.

I ASK THAT THE MAN, THE MYTH, THE LEGEND, MR. JOHN BECKWITH, SENIORS THAT HIS HONOR WILL BE PRESERVED.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. HELLO, MY NAME IS BOBBY NGUYEN.

I LIVE IN FORT WORTH. I'VE KNOWN THE BECKWITH FAMILY SINCE 1989.

ON THE SUPPLY SIDE AND OVER SINCE 89. GETTING TO KNOW MR. BECKWITH IN THE FUNERAL INDUSTRY. I'VE BEEN IN THE FUNERAL INDUSTRY 43 YEARS.

I CALL ON FUNERAL DIRECTORS ALL OVER THE STATE OF TEXAS AND OTHER STATES.

AND THE ONE WORD WE ALWAYS USED WHEN I TALKED TO OTHER FUNERAL DIRECTORS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES OR EVEN IN TEXAS.

IT WAS THE WORD COMPASSION. AND THE YOUNG LADY SAID IT PERFECT.

MR. BECKWITH ALWAYS. ONE THING THAT ALWAYS COUNTED MORE THAN ANYTHING WAS THAT FAMILY AT THE WORST TIME OF THEIR LIFE, HIM TAKING CARE OF THEM, WHETHER FINANCIALLY, THEIR EMOTIONS.

AND WE NEVER KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THAT FUNERAL DIRECTOR IS UNTIL YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE ONE.

AND I'VE BEEN HONORED TO HAVE MR. BECKWITH WAIT ON ME, MY FAMILY, BECAUSE I SAW THE PROFESSIONALISM AND THE RESPECT HE GAVE EVERY FAMILY THAT CAME INTO THAT FUNERAL HOME. SO IT IT WOULD MAKE MY DAY TO SEE JOHN BECKWITH SENIOR'S NAME ON THAT STREET SIGN.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. GOOD AFTERNOON, ATTORNEY EZEKIEL TYSON.

ADDRESS IS 342 WEST MONTANA AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS, 75224.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE TODAY. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT MOTION.

FOR THE NAME CHANGE. THE BACKWARDS AND GOLDEN GATE ARE JUST INSTITUTIONAL NAMES.

I MOVED HERE IN 2004 AND THEIR, THEIR NAME JUST PRECEDED THEM AND THEIR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY.

[04:45:05]

SO I JUST THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A GREAT CHANGE.

I FULLY SUPPORT IT. I HOPE YOU ALL DO AS WELL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, MR. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS FRED CONWRIGHT. I'M A PASTOR OF GREATER AMOUNT HEBREW BIBLE CHURCH, OAK CLIFF, TEXAS. I ALSO OWN A RESTAURANT CO-OWNER, TWO PARTNERS RESTAURANT FOR 45 YEARS.

I'VE KNOWN MISS THE LATE MR. BECKLEY SINCE HE FIRST CAME TO DALLAS AND STARTED HIS FUNERAL HOME SERVICE.

HE IS A MAN THAT I'VE KNOWN THAT HAVE COMMITTED TO THIS COMMUNITY AND WELL SERVED.

AND I'M HERE TODAY STANDING IN ON HIS BEHALF, ASKING HIS COUNSEL TO CAREFUL TO CONSIDER THIS NAME CHANGE FOR HIM BECAUSE HE SO WELL DESERVED IT. SO I PRAY THAT YOU ALL WOULD TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY AND RENAME THIS STREET AFTER HIM.

THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER.

MY NAME IS PASTOR DENNY DAVIS. I LIVE AT 1400 HIGHLINE DRIVE, DALLAS.

I STARTED PASTORING THE MOUNT ROSE BAPTIST CHURCH ON COPELAND AVENUE IN THE HEART OF SUNNY SOUTH DALLAS IN 1984.

AND IT WAS THEN THAT I BECAME ACQUAINTED WITH DOCTOR JOHN E BECKWITH, SENIOR AND HIS ENTIRE FAMILY, AS THEY WERE MEMBERS OF MY CONGREGATION. I'VE BEEN BLESSED TO KNOW THIS FAMILY NOW OVER 40 PLUS YEARS I'VE WITNESSED THEIR BUSINESS GROW. I'VE WATCHED IT MOVE FROM WAXAHACHIE TO DALLAS AND FROM BECKLEY AVENUE TO CEDAR CREST TO LANCASTER, AND CURRENTLY RESIDING AT 35 HIGHWAY 35 HERE IN DALLAS, AS WELL AS EXTENDING OVER TO FORT WORTH AND THEN TO TALLULAH, LOUISIANA.

I'VE WATCHED THIS FUNERAL HOME GROW, AND AS I THINK ABOUT THE LIFE OF JOHN BECKWITH, SENIOR, I THINK HIS COMMITMENT TO THE PEOPLE IN HIS SURROUNDING AREAS, HIS COMMITMENT TO THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE CITY. HE'S WELL DESERVING OF SUCH AN HONOR SUCH AS THIS, FOR HIS COMMITMENT WAS, TO THE LEAST, THE LAST AND THE LOWEST OFTEN I.

I WOULD ASK HIM WHAT INSPIRED HIM IN TERMS OF THE BUSINESS MODEL THAT HE HAS.

AND HE WOULD SAY TO ME, PASTOR, HE SAID, I WATCHED THE FUNERAL HOME TAKE ADVANTAGE OF MY FAMILY WHEN MY MOTHER DIED.

AND I PROMISED GOD THAT IF HE EVER BLESSED ME TO HAVE A FUNERAL HOME, I WOULD MAKE SURE THAT A FAMILY IS LEFT WITH SOMETHING TO LIVE OFF OF ONCE THEIR LOVED ONE HAS BEEN BURIED. AND THAT'S WHAT INSPIRED THE GOLDEN GATE FIELD, HOME TO OPEN UP IN DALLAS BACK IN 1984, WITH BILLBOARDS ALL OVER THE CITY DECLARING THE HIGH PRICE OF FUNERALS ARE OVER, ADVERTISING A $600 COMPLETE FUNERAL PACKAGE WHICH WAS NOT JUST A DOOR KNOCKER, BUT A TRUE PROMISE AND COMMITMENT TO THE CITY AND TO THE COMMUNITY.

I'VE WATCHED HIM TAKE IN MANY YOUNG MEN ALONG THE WAY WHO HAD GOTTEN OFF ON THE WRONG PATH IN LIFE.

I'VE WATCHED THEM HOUSE THEM IN HIS FUNERAL HOME, GIVE THEM A JOB.

I'VE WATCHED SO MANY LIVES TURN AROUND AND WATCH SO MANY OTHER FUNERAL HOMES OPEN UP IN THE DALLAS AREA, ALL BECAUSE OF THE COMMITMENT OF A MAN LIKE JOHN BECKWITH, SENIOR.

AND NOW THAT LEGACY CARRIES ON WITH HIS FAMILY AND WITH JOHN BECKWITH JR.

AS CEO. I THINK WE COULD NOT HONOR A MORE DESERVING INDIVIDUAL WHO LIVED IN THE CITY AND LIVED IN THE COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. JOEL MILLER.

I LIVE IN ALLEN, TEXAS. I'M SURE, LIKE MANY OF YOU, WE WERE RAISED TO SPEAK THE LANGUAGE OF HONOR.

WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT WHEN WE WERE BEING TAUGHT TO SAY, YES, MA'AM.

AND YOU KNOW. YES, SIR. AND THANK YOU. AND YOU'RE WELCOME.

I MEAN, WE JUST DID IT BECAUSE WE GOT SMACKED IN THE MOUTH IF WE DID.

BUT IN THAT PROCESS OF LEARNING TO HONOR IT. NOT ONLY DID WE LEARN TO HONOR OTHERS, BUT WE LEARNED TO HONOR OURSELVES.

BUT IT'S QUITE A DIFFERENT THING WHEN YOU SEE A LIFE THAT IS COMMITTED TO HONOR.

AND WHEN YOU THINK OF JOHN BECKWITH SENIOR, THAT IS A LIGHT, A SEED THAT WAS IN THE EARTH THAT WE GOT TO SEE UP CLOSE, A MAN WHO LIVED A LIFE OF HONOR. AND I, I KNOW THIS IS GOING TO SOUND A LITTLE STRANGE, BUT A MAN WHO, AS I SEE HIM, WHO SOUGHT TO BECOME LESS. NOW WHEN I SAY NOT LESS OF A MAN, BUT I EVEN THINK IN TERMS OF JESUS WHO WHO

[04:50:12]

YOU KNOW, CAME DOWN FROM GLORY AND TOOK ON HUMAN FLESH TO BECOME LESS SO THAT HE CAN LIFT OTHERS.

AND THAT'S JOHN BECKWITH SENIOR, A MAN WHO STRIVED BECAUSE IT IS WHEN A PERSON BECOMES LESS THAT WE CAN TRULY SEE THE VALUE OF OTHER PEOPLE AND LIFT OTHER PEOPLE.

AND THAT'S WHAT HE DID. PASTOR JUST SPOKE TO THAT TO THAT END WERE EVEN TODAY WE, WE, WE, WE HAVE A SAYING OF, OF GOLDEN GATE WHERE SERVICE BEGINS AND NEVER ENDS.

AND HE WHO DOES THIS, HE TALKS ABOUT, WELL, YOU KNOW, HE STARTED WHERE WE, WE WILL MEET OUR BEAT ANY COMPETITOR'S PRICE NOW.

I MEAN, I, I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS TODAY. MERCEDES IS NOT THEY'RE NOT DOING THAT.

YOU KNOW, LEXUS TOYOTA'S NOT DOING THAT. KIA'S NOT DOING THAT.

I MEAN, THIS IS JUST AND NOT ONLY, YOU KNOW, PASTOR JUST TALKED ABOUT IT AGAIN WHERE FAMILIES CAME IN DID NOT HAVE MONEY.

IT'S ONE THING TO SERVE A FAMILY AND HELP THEM OUT.

IT'S ANOTHER THING TO GIVE THEM A, A PRESIDENTIAL HOME GOING, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST HELP THEM, BUT TAKE IT TO A WHOLE NOTHER LEVEL. THIS WAS AN UNUSUAL MAN.

AND YOU SEE THE LEGACY CONTINUING TO BE LIVED OUT RIGHT HERE.

SO IT'S AN HONOR IT, YOU KNOW, TO, TO BE HERE.

AND IT IS BE AN INCREDIBLE HONOR TO SEE THAT STREET RENAMED IN HONOR OF WHO HE WAS AND IS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. I AM PASTOR DARRELL TURNER, THE PASTOR OF THE JOHNSON CHAPEL AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN AMARILLO, TEXAS.

A RESIDENT OF DALLAS FOR 70 YEARS. I STAND TO SHARE WITH THIS COUNCIL THE GREATNESS OF MR. JOHN BECKWORTH SENIOR. MANY TIMES WHEN PEOPLE SPEAK OF GREATNESS OF INDIVIDUALS, THEY TALK ABOUT THEIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND I BELIEVE THAT'S COMMENDABLE.

HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT TRUE GREATNESS IS MEASURED BY THE GREATNESS OF THOSE THAT INDIVIDUAL TOUCHES.

AND WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE LIVES TOUCHED BY MR. JOHN BECKWITH, SENIOR, AND THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THIS CITY AND STATE.

THE WISDOM HE POURED INTO SO MANY OTHERS IN HONORING HIM WITH THIS NAME CHANGE.

YOU SHALL NOT ONLY THIS CITY, BUT THIS STATE AND THIS COUNTRY.

HOW THE CITY OF DALLAS HONORS GREATNESS WHEN IT HAS BEEN IN ITS PRESENCE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. OKAY. I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY SPEAKERS LEFT.

MR. MAYOR, THIS CONCLUDES YOUR SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU. CHAIR. JOHNSON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES. I MOVE TO NOT FOLLOW THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND INSTEAD APPROVE THE STREET NAME CHANGE WITH A WAIVER OF SECTION 51, A DASH 9.304 A FIVE, WHICH PROVIDES THAT A STREET NAME MAY NOT CONTAIN MORE THAN 14 CHARACTERS. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. CHAIR JOHNSON, FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. JOHN BECKWITH, SENIOR IS A LEGEND IN OUR COMMUNITY.

ALTHOUGH HE HAS TRANSITIONED TO BE WITH THE LORD, HE IS STILL CONSIDERED A LIVING LEGEND BECAUSE HIS REPRESENT HIS REPUTATION AND HIS CONTRIBUTION AND ALL THAT HE HAS DONE FOR THE CITIZENS, CITIZENS OF NOT JUST DISTRICT FOUR, BUT THE ENTIRE CITY, CITY, CITY OF DALLAS LIVES ON THROUGH HIS GENEROSITY, THROUGH HIS LOVE AND HIS CARE.

GOLDEN GATE FUNERAL HOME ON THAT STREET IS THE ONLY BUSINESS THERE TO HONOR THE LEGACY OF SUCH A GIANT THAT HAVE CARED FOR SO MANY FAMILIES IS AN HONOR.

HE BURIED MY OLDEST BOY. HE BURIED SO MANY KIDS.

WHEN WE DIDN'T KNOW HOW WE WAS GOING TO BURY THEM AT SOUTH OAK CLIFF HIGH SCHOOL.

MY DISTRICT DIRECTOR, MR. BATTEY, HAD TO GO AND SIT IN THE OFFICE AND TALK TO THIS FAMILY TO HELP KIDS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

THIS IS WHAT BUILDING THE COMMUNITY LOOKS LIKE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT JOHN BECKWITH SENIOR AND HIS FAMILY.

THEY ARE HELPING BUILD A COMMUNITY WITH THE COMMUNITY.

THEY ARE STILL INVESTING COUNTLESS OF DOLLARS, COUNTLESS OF VOLUNTEER TIME.

[04:55:04]

ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO SUPPORT OUR CITY AND OUR COMMUNITY, THEY CONTINUE TO LET THAT LEGACY LIVE ON. AND SO I'M ASKING MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT US, MAKING SURE THAT WE CONTINUE THIS LEGACY BY NAMING THIS STREET AFTER A MAN WHO HAS TRANSITIONED BUT LIVES ON THROUGH SO MANY OF US. JOHN BECKWITH SENIOR. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

CHAIR. GRACEY FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I WON'T USE ALL OF THE FIVE MINUTES BECAUSE MANY OF.

MUCH OF WHAT I WOULD SAY HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID, AND I THINK WE ALL KNOW IT IN THIS IN THIS CHAMBER.

BUT THE POINT I WANT TO MAKE, THIS IS AN HONOR.

I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY PEOPLE THAT HAVE COME OUT OF OUR COMMUNITIES THAT OFTEN GET OVERLOOKED OR GET FORGOTTEN, IN MANY CASES, BY THE LARGER MASSES, BUT HAVE HAD SUCH AN IMPACT ON OUR COMMUNITY.

AND WHEN WE SAY LEGEND, IT'S NOT JUST LEGEND.

YOU'RE A PILLAR. YOUR FAMILY'S A PILLAR IN OUR COMMUNITY.

AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE THE TRAUMA INFORMED, ALL THESE EXPERIENCES THAT THAT OUR YOUTH ARE GOING THROUGH, YOU KNOW, WHO'S BEEN THERE JUST ABOUT EVERY SINGLE TIME.

GOLDEN GATE BACK WITH FAMILY. THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR THESE FAMILIES.

THEY'VE BEEN HERE. SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT JUST HONORING YOUR FATHER AND YOUR FAMILY.

THIS IS HONORING THE COMMUNITY AND SO MANY PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY THE SERVICES THAT YOU PROVIDE, NOT JUST PROVIDE, BUT WITH SUCH EXCELLENCE. SO I AM HONORED TO SUPPORT THIS.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR. FIVE MINUTES. I TOO, WILL NOT TAKE UP FIVE MINUTES.

BUT LET ME ALSO SAY THIS WITH ALL THESE PASTORS IN HERE ON SUNDAY MORNING, CAN YOU KEEP YOUR SERVICES IN YOUR YOUR SERMONS DOWN TO THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME THAT YOU DID TODAY? ALSO, THOSE THAT ARE SITTING AT THE CHAMBER, CAN YOU ALSO DO THE SAME? SO BUT LET ME ALSO SAY THIS. I'VE KNOWN THE BECKWITH FAMILY SINCE ALMOST SINCE I MOVED HERE.

THEY HAVE ALWAYS EXTENDED A HEART AND COMPASSION NOT ONLY TO THOSE THAT ARE IN NEED OF THEIR SERVICE, BUT LOOK AT ALL THE PEOPLE HERE. THIS IS GOLDEN GATE, NOT THIS IS NOT ALL OF GOLDEN GATE.

YOU SAW THEM EARLIER, BUT THIS IS GOLDEN GATE IN DALLAS.

YOU WILL SEE PREACHERS, YOU WILL SEE EVERYBODY.

YOU'LL SEE RETIREES IF YOU NEED IT. ALSO, IF YOU NEED A JOB, GO TO GOLDEN GATE.

THE BECKWITH FAMILY WILL HELP YOU. THEY WILL HONOR YOU.

THEY WILL TREAT YOU WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT.

I KNOW, I KNOW SEVERAL OF THEM AND I LOVE A LOT OF THEM.

SO I TOO WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS, THIS CHANGE.

THANK YOU. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND, MADAM CITY SECRETARY.

THIS ITEM REQUIRES. IT REQUIRES 12 MEMBERS VOTING IN FAVOR FOR PASSAGE, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

[PH2. 26-1631A A public hearing to receive comments regarding consideration of amendments to Sections 51-4.208, 51-4.210, and 51A-4.210 of the Dallas City Code to remove “Commercial Wedding Chapel” and create regulations for a new “Reception Facility” land use, and an ordinance granting the amendments Recommendation of Staff: Approval of staff’s recommended amendments Recommendation of ZOAC: Approval of ZOAC’s recommended amendments Recommendation of CPC: Approval of CPC's recommended amendments DCA 256-001(MW) *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

AGENDA ITEM TWO IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 51-4.208, 51-4.20210 AND 51, A DASH 4.210. OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT. THE DALLAS CITY CODE TO REMOVE COMMERCIAL WEDDING CHAPEL AND CREATE REGULATIONS FOR A NEW RECEPTION FACILITY, LAND USE AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING THE AMENDMENTS.

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 TWO? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED BY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND QUALITY OF LIFE, ARTS AND CULTURE COMMITTEE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE. GENERAL ADMISSION FEE IS ALLOWED FOR FUNDRAISERS OR EVENTS FOR POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS.

SECOND, I HEAR A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NO DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. AND, MADAM CITY SECRETARY, LET'S WAIT ABOUT A MINUTE TO HAVE THE GALLERY EXIT AND CONTINUE.

[05:00:06]

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO ITEM THREE.

[PH3. 26-1375A A public hearing to receive comments on the FY 2026-27 Operating, Capital, and Grant & Trust Budgets - Financing: No cost consideration to the City]

ITEM THREE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE FY 2020 627 OPERATING CAPITAL AND GRANT AND TRUST BUDGETS.

YOU DO HAVE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, SAM WILLIAMS. MY NAME IS SAM WILLIAMS IN DISTRICT NINE. HERE TO SPEAK ON MY BUDGET PRIORITIES AS A RESIDENT.

I WANT TO START BY ADDRESSING A COMMENT MADE EARLIER THAT APARTMENT DWELLERS SHOULD NOT HAVE INPUT TO PROPERTY TAX ADJUSTMENTS AND CITY REVENUE.

I LIVE SOLELY IN APARTMENTS, PAYING RENT EVERY MONTH AND SPENDING MY PAYCHECKS WITH LOCAL DALLAS SMALL BUSINESSES, EVEN AS PRICES RISE. IF THERE IS A CONCERN WITH HOW MY CONTRIBUTION REFLECTS IN THE CITY'S BOTTOM LINE, MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT COMPANIES TO PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE.

PARKS AND RECREATION SEEMS TO BE THE LATEST DEPARTMENT IN CITES FOR DRASTIC REDUCTION IN BUDGET AND SERVICES.

AS I UNDERSTAND, 13 TO 14 MILLION, WHICH I OPPOSE.

CITY RESIDENTS WOULD ALSO SEEM TO OPPOSE THIS SUGGESTION.

VOTERS APPROVED A $345 MILLION BOND IN 2024 TO INVEST IN OUR PARK SYSTEM.

HOW WILL SERVICE CUTS ENABLE THE CITY TO STAFF AND SUPPORT THESE NEW INVESTMENTS? RESIDENTS ARE EXCITED ABOUT. MULTIPLE RESIDENTS TODAY SPOKE ON THEIR CONCERNS REGARDING CHANGES TO STAFFING FOR THE COMMUNITY HUB KEY TENNIS CENTER.

SPEAKING OF COMMUNITY HUBS, THE ISD DAYTIME PROGRAMING HAS ALSO BEEN DISCUSSED FOR A REDUCTION IN SERVICES.

AS SOMEONE RAISED THROUGH THE D ISD SYSTEM AND PARTICIPATED IN THESE PROGRAMS, I WOULD HAVE MISSED OUT ON FOUNDATIONAL EXPERIENCES AND MORE GERMANE TO THE QUESTION.

MY PARENTS WOULD HAVE HAD LESS WORKING FLEXIBILITY.

IN A TIME WHEN WORKING FAMILIES ARE MAKING DIFFICULT DECISIONS, REMOVING CHILDCARE OPTIONS WILL ONLY CREATE MORE DOWNSTREAM FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS.

I ATTENDED THE PUBLIC SAFETY SYMPOSIUM PUT ON BY THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY POLICE OVERSIGHT EARLIER IN MAY.

THE MOST SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM WITH CLEAR PROCEDURES AND PERFORMANCE METRICS, APPEARED TO BE THE MED ONE PROGRAM, WHICH TAKES A METHODICAL AND TRUST BUILDING APPROACH TO FINDING HOUSING AND SOLUTION HOUSING SOLUTIONS FOR UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS.

I'M DIRECTLY COMPARING THIS TO THE HOMELESS OUTREACH TEAM, A PROGRAM THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED WITHIN THIS SYMPOSIUM, BUT AS REPORTED BY LAB REPORT IN APRIL, HAS DETAINED 281 INDIVIDUALS ACROSS 61 LOCATIONS OVER ONLY EIGHT MONTHS.

WE ARE REPLACING LONG TERM TRUST BUILDING OPPORTUNITIES WITH SHORT TERM APPEARANCES IN A JARRING MANNER.

CRIME, HOMELESSNESS, FOOD INSECURITY ARE QUESTIONS OF SAFETY, EFFICIENCY AND POLICY CHOICES.

THE GOAL IS NOT TO REACT TO AFTER CRIME OCCURS.

REACTIVITY IS A FAILURE. WE NEED PROACTIVE MEASURES THAT SOLVE THE SYSTEMIC ISSUES LEADING TO CRIME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

COUNCIL DISCUSSED AT LENGTH THE POSITIVE IMPACTS OF SCHOOL PROGRAMS AND HOW THEY KEEP STUDENTS SAFE.

AND YET THESE PROGRAMS ARE CANDIDATES OF BUDGET REDUCTIONS.

CITYWIDE EDUCATION AND JOB SKILLS HAVE A WELL DOCUMENTED, STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT INVERSE RELATIONSHIP WITH JUSTICE SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT.

OUR INVOCATION TODAY MENTIONED REAL FAMILIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS DEPENDING ON CITY SERVICES FOR HELP.

PLEASE KEEP THIS IN MIND AS YOU DETERMINE YOUR BUDGET PRIORITIES FOR THE UPCOMING CYCLE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, BRENDA GURUMOORTHY. HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU AND WE CAN SEE YOU. YOU MAY CONTINUE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS BRENDA GURUMOORTHY.

I'M A CO-CHAIR OF THE LOCAL DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA CHAPTER, AND I'M A DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT.

I'M CALLING IN TO ASK FOR A CITY OF DALLAS BUDGET THAT FUNDS HUMAN FLOURISHING ABOVE ALL ELSE.

THAT MEANS PROTECTING FUNDING FOR PARKS AND LIBRARIES PROGRAMS, ASSISTING OUR UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS, AND PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE, SUCH AS BIKE LANES, WHICH EXIST IN PARTS OF OAK CLIFF AND IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY BUT

[05:05:03]

ARE STILL MISSING IN MANY PLACES. THESE ARE ALL RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT CONCERNS THAT DALLAS RESIDENTS EXPRESS ABOUT THEIR CITIES.

ASIDE FROM INFRASTRUCTURE, ONE BIG CONCERN IS PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND I UNDERSTAND MANY PEOPLE ASSOCIATE THAT WITH FUNDING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, BUT IT ALSO MEANS MAINTAINING AND BUILDING STREETS THAT ARE NOT DEATHTRAPS.

IT MEANS GIVING OUR KIDS SAFE PLACES TO GO AND PRODUCTIVE THINGS TO DO AFTER SCHOOL IN LIEU OF DOOM SCROLLING ON THEIR PHONES OR GETTING INTO TROUBLE.

AND IT MEANS SOLVING THE ROOT CAUSES OF HOMELESSNESS RATHER THAN JUST TRYING TO HIDE THOSE PEOPLE FROM PUBLIC VIEW. WE NEED TO INVEST IN ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

MY WORRY IS THAT THE CITY THINKS THROWING A BOATLOAD OF MONEY AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS THE ONLY SOLUTION TO KEEPING DALLASITES SAFE, WHEN IN FACT, THE POLICE BUDGET DOES CUT INTO FUNDING FOR OTHER THINGS THAT WE NEED IN OUR CITY.

WE ARE CURRENTLY HAMSTRUNG BY THE STATE'S LIMITS ON INCREASING TAX REVENUE, AS WELL AS PROP U, WHICH WAS PUSHED BY RIGHT WING BILLIONAIRES AND REQUIRES THE CITY TO PUT HALF OF ALL EXCESS REVENUE TOWARDS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

I HOPE MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL PUT A PROPOSITION TO REPEAL THAT AMENDMENT ON THE BALLOT NEXT YEAR.

ASIDE FROM THAT, THE CITY MANAGER REPORTED THAT A MAJOR REASON FOR OUR FINANCIAL TROUBLES IS POLICE OVERTIME AND PAY.

THOUGH THE CITY ONLY CUT BACK ON NON-UNIFORM OVERTIME IN RESPONSE.

TO TOP IT OFF, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT INVESTMENTS IN SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY LIKE FLOCK CAMERAS THAT ENCROACH ON OUR CIVIL RIGHTS. WE NEED MORE TRANSPARENCY ON WHAT IS CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED TO THE POLICE UNION AND WHAT CAN ACTUALLY BE CUT DOWN, BUT I REFUSE TO BELIEVE THAT NOTHING CAN BE TRIMMED THERE.

IF THE COUNCIL DOES NOT EXAMINE THE POLICE BUDGET WHEN PUBLIC SAFETY IS AROUND 60% OF THE GENERAL FUND, IF NOT MORE, AND SIMPLY TRIES TO NICKEL AND DIME OTHER DEPARTMENTS LIKE OUR PARKS AND OUR LIBRARIES INSTEAD, WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY MAKING A SERIOUS EFFORT TO FIX THE ISSUE WITH THE BUDGET IN THE FIRST PLACE, AND WE'RE CHIPPING AWAY AT PUBLIC SAFETY AND OUR QUALITY OF LIFE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANGELICA. PORTILLA.

GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ANGELICA PORTILLO.

I'M HERE REPRESENTING DALLAS AFTER SCHOOL. DALLAS AFTER SCHOOL IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT SUPPORTS 40 OUT OF SCHOOL TIME PARTNERS IN OVER 200 AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM SITES ACROSS DALLAS TO INCREASE THE AVAILABILITY OF QUALITY AND QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY OF FREE AND LOW COST AFTER SCHOOL AND SUMMER PROGRAMS. I AM HERE NOT ONLY REPRESENTING DALLAS AFTER SCHOOL, BUT A GROWING COALITION OF OVER 100 ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT HAVE ALL SIGNED ON TO ASK COUNCIL ONE THING DO NOT ELIMINATE FUNDING FOR CITY OF DALLAS PARKS AND RECREATION AFTER SCHOOL AND SUMMER PROGRAMS. THE CITY OF DALLAS IS ONE OF THE LARGEST PROVIDERS OF FREE AND LOW COST AFTER HIGH QUALITY AFTER SCHOOL AND SUMMER PROGRAMS ACROSS THE CITY.

OVER 2000 CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ACROSS EVERY COUNCIL DISTRICT DEPEND ON THESE PROGRAMS AND.

LAST YEAR, DALLAS AFTER SCHOOL CERTIFIED NINE AFTER SCHOOL.

CITY OF DALLAS AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR ACHIEVING HIGH QUALITY PROGRAMING. THAT MEANS THEY MASTER TEN ELEMENTS OF WHAT IT TAKES TO BE A HIGH QUALITY PROGRAM, AND THEY PASSED THEIR SAFETY ASSESSMENTS AT 100%.

THIS IS A SYSTEM THAT WORKS BECAUSE THE CITY HAS INVESTED IN THESE PROGRAMS AND THE STAFF THAT RUN THESE PROGRAMS. THE DEMAND IN DALLAS CURRENTLY EXCEEDS WHAT'S AVAILABLE IN DALLAS.

FOR EVERY CHILD ENROLLED, THREE ARE WAITING FOR A SPOT.

THESE CHILDREN COME FROM FAMILIES WHO CANNOT PROVIDE, CANNOT, CANNOT AFFORD PRIVATE ALTERNATIVES.

THEY'RE RANGING FROM $400 TO $1200 A MONTH. WHEN CITY FUNDED SEATS DISAPPEAR, THOSE FAMILIES DO NOT FIND ANOTHER OPTION.

THEY LOSE ONE DALLAS AFTER SCHOOL. WORKING WITH PROVIDERS, WE ASKED THEM, IF THESE PROGRAMS GO AWAY, DO YOU HAVE THE CAPACITY TO TAKE ON THESE STUDENTS? THERE WAS AN OVERWHELMING NO AFTER SCHOOL AND SUMMER PROGRAMS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS THAT ARE COMMUNITY BASED DO NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO TAKE ON MORE STUDENTS.

THEY LACK FUNDING, THEY LACK STAFFING. AND SO SO THERE'S THAT PIECE IN A STUDY COMMISSIONED BY DALLAS AFTER SCHOOL, SMU CENTER FOR RESEARCH AND EVALUATION FOUND THAT STUDENTS IN AFTER SCHOOL AND SUMMER PROGRAMS PERFORMED BETTER IN MATH, READING AND IN SIGNIFICANTLY ATTEND SCHOOL MORE.

THESE PROGRAMS KEEP CHILDREN SAFE. THEY HELP WORKING FAMILIES, AND THEY GIVE ENRICHMENT IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT DON'T HAVE ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE.

CUTTING THIS FUNDING DOES NOT JUST HARM CHILDREN. TODAY, IT DISMANTLES AN ALREADY FRAGILE SYSTEM THAT'S TAKEN YEARS TO STRENGTHEN, AND IF IT GOES AWAY, WILL TAKE FAR LONGER TO REBUILD.

WE UNDERSTAND YOU'RE FACING TOUGH BUDGET CHALLENGES, BUT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO PROTECT FUNDING FOR AFTER SCHOOL AND SUMMER PROGRAMS IN THIS UPCOMING BUDGET. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ELENA ULMER.

GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR FROM THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS.

MY NAME IS ELENA AND I'M CURRENTLY A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 12, BUT I'M ACTUALLY MOVING INTO DISTRICT 6 IN 2 DAYS.

I AM ALSO A MEMBER OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA.

I AM HERE TODAY TO SPEAK ON A PH THREE. THE PROPOSED BUDGET CUTS TO THE DALLAS PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.

[05:10:05]

IF IMPLEMENTED, THESE CUTS WOULD INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, A 33% REDUCTION IN MOWING SERVICES AND IN THE SERVICES OF SIX DIFFERENT AQUATIC CENTERS ACROSS DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, UP TO A 50% REDUCTION IN LITTER PICKUP AND COMPLETE CLOSURES OF FOUR DIFFERENT COMMUNITY CENTERS ACROSS THE CITY. THESE CUTS ARE PROPOSED TO MAKE UP FOR A BUDGET DEFICIENT DEFICIENCIES.

PROPONENTS WILL CLAIM THAT THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT HAS ALREADY RECEIVED ITS DUE SHARE WITH THE INVESTMENT IN HALPERIN PARK, BUT THIS COULDN'T BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. HALPERIN IS JUST ONE STEP IN A LONG MARCH OF REVITALIZING THE LONG NEGLECTED COMMUNITIES OF DALLAS AND MAKING THIS CITY TRULY SOMETHING TO BE PROUD OF. SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO PLEASE PICTURE IN YOUR MIND A VIBRANT AND THRIVING COMMUNITY.

WHAT DO YOU SEE? IS IT EMPTY LOTS AND DILAPIDATED ABANDONED BUILDINGS? IS IT OVERGROWN FIELDS FENCED OFF FROM PUBLIC ACCESS? OR IS IT A PARK FLOURISHING WITH TREES THAT PROVIDE SHADE FOR FAMILIES WHERE THERE ARE FARMERS MARKETS AND CULTURE FESTIVALS BEING HELD THAT CELEBRATE DALLAS MELTING POT OF COMMUNITIES AND SMALL BUSINESSES? IS IT COMMUNITY CENTERS PROVIDING CLASSES TO EDUCATE, CULTIVATE AND MOTIVATE PEOPLE TO BECOME CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS OF SOCIETY? WE CAN'T MAKE THOSE VISIONS A REALITY WHEN YOU DEFUND THOSE VERY TOOLS THE COMMUNITY CENTERS, THE DAYTIME PROGRAMING, THE SWIMMING POOLS BY TAKING AWAY THE PUBLIC THIRD SPACES FOR PEOPLE TO GATHER IN AND CREATE AND CULTIVATE THEIR COMMUNITY.

YOU SIGNAL THAT THEY NO LONGER MATTER, THAT THEIR GOVERNMENT HAS DECIDED THEIR VERY OWN TAX DOLLARS ARE BEST SPENT ELSEWHERE THAN INVESTING THEIR MONEY BACK INTO THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES. THE COMMUNITIES BECOME LESS VIBRANT AND EVENTUALLY, WITHOUT THESE VITAL SERVICES, LESS SAFE. IS THIS THE MESSAGE THAT THE COUNCIL WISHES TO SEND TO THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS? I URGE YOU TO RECONSIDER THIS BUDGET CUT PROPOSAL.

PLEASE DO NOT SACRIFICE THE SOUL OF THE CITY FOR A LINE ITEM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ROBERT HOBSON. I DIDN'T REALIZE IT'S GOING TO BE IMMORTALIZED ON FILM WITH THE BRADLEY FAMILY.

WANT TO SIT DOWN THERE? BUT I'M PROUD TO BE A MEMBER OF THAT FAMILY NOW.

SO I'VE BEEN A DALLAS MEMBER DALLAS CITIZENS IN 1979.

IN THE EARLY 90S, I WENT SOUTH ON CAPE HORN AND BECAME FAMILIAR WITH THE FLOODPLAINS.

AND IT'S BEEN MY LIFE EVER SINCE. FLOODPLAINS, HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAINS.

WE GOT FLOODS ONCE EVERY 30, 4000 YEARS. THESE FLOODS LAST 3 OR 4 DAYS OUT OF THOSE 100 YEARS, 100, THOSE 100 YEARS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, HOW CAN WE BUILD HOUSES THAT WILL SURVIVE FLOODPLAINS.

SO WE CAN USE THOSE FLOODPLAINS FOR GOOD LIVING.

THE REST OF THAT TIME, SAFE LIVING. SO I KIND OF DEDICATED MYSELF TO THAT WHOLE THING, AND I CAME UP WITH ALL SORTS OF BARRIERS.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ONLY REQUIRES TWO THINGS ON FLOODPLAIN. IF YOU LIVE IN BUILD A HOUSE, YOU GOT TO BE ANCHORED. THE BUILDING HAS GOT TO BE ANCHORED SO IT WON'T FLOAT AND IT'S GOT TO BE ABOVE THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.

THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO. SO YOU WOULD THINK IF YOU BUILD A HOUSE THAT WOULD FLOAT, IT'D BE ENOUGH.

WELL, NO, FEMA WON'T ALLOW THAT BECAUSE THEIR ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS.

SO FIRST OF ALL, BUILT, DESIGNED AND STARTED PAINTING A HOUSE THAT FLOATED WASN'T ENOUGH.

SO I BUILT A HOUSE AND DESIGNED A HOUSE. IT'S CALLED THE AMPHIBIOUS, THE ANCHORED AMPHIBIOUS, ELEVATED, BUOYANT, WATERPROOF MULTI-HAZARD SMART BUILDING MODULE, WHICH IS A LONG TITLE, BUT IT GREW FROM BEGINNING TO END BECAUSE I LEARNED MORE AND I WANTED TO FACE THE CLIMATE WARMING ISSUES THAT WERE ALL THE COUNTRIES FACING NOWADAYS, HURRICANES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BECAUSE HURRICANES ARE OUR BIGGEST DISASTER FOR FOR OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

OUR INSURANCE PROGRAM COST US ABOUT $17 BILLION A YEAR.

AND IT GOES DIRECTLY INTO OUR NATIONAL DEBT. AND WE WE END UP PAYING FOR IT.

SO AS I AS I PROCEEDED, I FIGURED THAT OUT AND HOW TO DO IT IN FLOODPLAINS.

I MOVED OVER ACROSS THE STREET OVER THERE INTO THE DALLAS HORSE PARK, WHICH HAS THE SAME SIMILAR PROBLEMS. HERE'S A FAILED MULTIBILLION DOLLAR PROJECT THAT THE CITY HAD.

WHAT CAN WE DO WITH IT? WELL, I DECIDED THAT YOU COULD BUILD A HIGH END RV RESORT THERE.

YOU COULD PUT THE SAME AMPHIBIOUS BUILDINGS ON IT THAT A A RV PARK WOULD REQUIRE THAT YOU COULD BUILD A, A, I BUILT A CLUBHOUSE ON THE LAKE. THERE'S A BEAUTIFUL LAKE IN THE CLUBHOUSE THERE, AND YOU COULD USE A HORSE PARK FACILITIES, THE HORSE PARK FACILITIES. PROBABLY NOBODY KNOWS MUCH ABOUT THIS, BUT THERE'S A HORSE TRACK AT THE AT THE PARK THERE, AND THAT'S BEEN UNUSED FOREVER. BUT A COMMUNITY HORSE PARK WOULD GROW INTO THAT WHOLE THING.

AND AS I FINISHED THAT, I MOVED UPSTREAM. I SAID, WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THIS DRY RIVERBED THAT WE CALL A RIVER OVER HERE,

[05:15:07]

THE TRINITY RIVER, A JOKE OF A RIVER. THERE'S A CREEK MOST OF THE TIME, BUT WHEN IT FLOODS, IT FLOODS. SO I SPENT MY MIND AND I CAME UP WITH A SOLUTION.

IT'S CALLED THE SMART DAM AND TELEMETRY SYSTEM.

THAT'S YOUR TIME ANYWAY. THANK YOU. AS CUBA GOODING SAID, THANK YOU, SIR.

JERRY MAGUIRE, SHOW ME THE MONEY. THIS IS WHERE THE MONEY IS TO PAY FOR OUR BUDGET.

RYAN GUTHRIE. HI, MY NAME IS RYAN GUTHRIE. I AM A RESIDENT IN DISTRICT 11.

I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO PROTECT AND INVEST IN PARKS AND RECREATION LIBRARY AND INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING.

WHEN CONSIDERING THE THE UPCOMING BUDGET AS SOMEONE WHO PERSONALLY USES THE LIBRARIES AND PARKS QUITE A LOT AND WANTS TO USE DART MORE ESPECIALLY AS COSTS IN OUR COMMUNITY CONTINUE TO RISE, IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME AND MANY OTHER PEOPLE THAT THERE ARE ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATIONAL SPACES, PROGRAMS AND RESOURCES AVAILABLE THROUGH THE CITY.

THEY ENHANCE THE VALUE AND QUALITY OF LIFE PRESIDENT IN OUR COMMUNITIES. IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT PUBLIC SAFETY RECEIVES A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE YEARLY BUDGET, WHILE DEPARTMENTS LIKE PARKS AND REC AND LIBRARIES MUST MAKE CUTS.

I WANT THE CITY I LIVE IN TO BE A SAFE ONE, BUT I ALSO WANT TO LIVE IN A CITY WHERE CULTURE, ART AND ENTERTAINMENT ARE VALUED AND SUPPORTED BY THE CITY ITSELF.

THERE ARE MANY IMPORTANT ASPECTS TO CONSIDER WHEN RUNNING A CITY, BUT THE VALUE THAT CITIZENS AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE GAIN FROM HAVING ACCESS TO THESE SPACES AND SERVICES SHOULD NOT BE OVERLOOKED.

CONTINUING TO FUND AND INVEST IN THESE PROGRAMS AND SERVICES IS AN INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALEX. SCOTT. ALEX SCOTT IS NOT PRESENT.

JEDEDIAH ULRICH. CAN I BE SEEN AT ALL OR DO YOU ALL NEED TO SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU. HOWEVER, YOUR VIDEO IS NOT DISPLAYING.

WE CANNOT SEE YOU. OH. THAT'S WEIRD. IT WON'T LET ME.

IT SAYS I'M UNVERIFIED. WELL, I CAN COME BACK TO YOU.

IS THERE ANY WAY I'D RATHER YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL UNLESS YOUR VIDEO IS DISPLAYING.

ACTUALLY, THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THERE WE GO. OKAY, PERFECT.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. ALL RIGHT. HELLO? YES. JED ULRICH, DISTRICT ONE.

AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I KNOW THAT THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF A BUDGET ISSUE RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING.

THERE'S A LOT OF LOW HANGING FRUIT AND A LOT OF OUT OF CITY CORPORATE INTERESTS THAT ARE VERY INTRIGUED ABOUT THE CURRENT LOCATION OF CITY HALL AND WHATEVER THEY CAN DO TO UPROOT THAT AND EXPLOIT OUR DOWNTOWN URBAN CORE.

I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF MONEY TO REALLY GET OUT OF THAT AND IT SEEMS VERY TEMPTING.

BUT I THINK IT'S A DEFINITE BLOW TO TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

IF YOU WERE TO SAY, RENT A OR A SPACE OUT OF SOME HIGH RISE THERE IN DOWNTOWN, SO, BUT BACK TO TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND BEST WAYS TO ALLOCATE THAT.

THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY GOING TO THE DPD. I KNOW THERE'S ANOTHER, A LOT MORE OTHER OUTSIDE INTERESTS THAT ARE ADAMANT ABOUT YOU ALL MEETING A QUOTA.

VERY FRUSTRATING, INFURIATING BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO IDEA, LET ALONE TO WALK THE STREETS OF DALLAS AND WHAT THAT IS LIKE.

I AM I RUN QUITE A BIT AND WALK AROUND LAKE CLIFF PARK, AND I FIND IT COMFORTING THAT I GREET MY NEIGHBORS AND THEY WAVED AT ME FROM THEIR DOORSTEPS. AND I THINK FUNDING PARKS AND REC AND LIBRARIES ARE MUCH MORE ADEQUATE WAY TO IMPROVE PUBLIC SAFETY.

INSTEAD OF MEETING A QUOTA AND STRAPPING A GUN TO EVERYONE'S HIP. ON THAT NOTE, THE, THE FLOCK AND THE CAMERA SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS IS VERY TROUBLING. AND TO HEAR, ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOW WHEN RACIAL PROFILING IS NOW LEGAL COURTESY OF OUR ESTEEMED SUPREME COURT IT MAKES PEOPLE AFRAID.

YOU WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO LEAVE THEIR HOMES AND GREET ONE ANOTHER, AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO FEEL SAFE WHEN YOU'RE JUST MEETING QUOTAS QUICKLY.

A FEAR OF A LAWSUIT. SO I WANT MY TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO CULTIVATE A SENSE OF IDENTITY AND CULTURE AS OPPOSED TO DEMOLISHING CITY LANDMARKS OR PAINTING OVER MURALS. I WANT TO SEE MORE GREENERY WHERE CHILDREN AND FAMILIES CAN COME OUT AND GREET ONE ANOTHER TO CREATE A SENSE OF IDENTITY AS OPPOSED TO OUTSIDE CORPORATE INTERESTS TO STERILIZE OUR CITY, AS WE SEE CURRENTLY WITH A LOT OF ENTITIES.

AND THEY WERE QUICK TO DEFUND YOU AND CREATE THESE QUOTAS AND POLICE AND THIS OVER MILITARIZATION OF OUR STREETS.

THAT IS NOT THE ANSWER. CHILDREN DESERVE TO HAVE A SENSE OF CULTURE.

OUR NEIGHBORS DESERVE TO HAVE A SENSE OF CULTURE AND SELF AND IDENTITY AND TO SIMPLY, LIKE I SAID,

[05:20:03]

STRAP A GUN TO EVERY HIP THAT WALKS IN AND TO PUT A CAMERA ON EVERY CORNER IS NOT GOING TO MAKE US FEEL SAFE.

AND IT ALSO, FOR THAT MATTER, GO TOWARDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING MOVING FORWARD, BUT DO NOT DEFUND OUR PARKS, DO NOT DEFUND OUR LIBRARIES. THEY ARE RESOURCES WHERE THE UNHOUSED CAN FIND JOBS THAT THEY CAN WORK TOWARDS AND CONNECT WITH THEIR FAMILY AND FRIENDS.

AND YOU CANNOT SIMPLY SWEEP THEM UNDER A RUG, DO MORE TO INVEST IN OUR COMMUNITIES INSTEAD OF MILITARIZING THEM AND BEING BEHOLDEN TO OUT OF CITY CORPORATE INTERESTS, EXCLUDING A CERTAIN CITY WITHIN OUR OWN LIMITS THAT BUILD THEIR WALLS EVEN HIGHER.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. JOHN PUTNAM.

HI. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. AWESOME.

I'M JOHN PUTNAM, A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT TEN, AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT BUDGET CUTS TO OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT AND THE DIRECTION OF OUR CITY BUDGET AS A WHOLE. I GREW UP GOING TO DAYCARE AT FIRST PRESBYTERIAN IN DOWNTOWN, SO SOME OF MY EARLIEST MEMORIES WERE WALKING TO THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY TO HAVE STORIES READ. I'D ALSO GO TO TIETZE PARK WITH MY THE TIETZE PARK WITH MY DAD, AND WE WORKED ON THE INSTRUMENTS.

PROGRAMS LIKE LIBRARIES AND POOLS ARE BELOVED SERVICES THAT MAKE DALLAS A SAFE AND FUN PLACE TO LIVE.

SO OF COURSE, IT BOTHERS ME THAT WHEN THE CITY NEEDED TO MAKE BUDGET CUTS THE FIRST PLACE.

AND THEN WHEN THE PEOPLE SPOKE OUT TO SAVE OUR LIBRARIES, IT'S NOW ASKING THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO ME WHEN THE BUDGET GETS TIGHT, DOES DALLAS CONTINUE TO BELOVED PROGRAMS LIKE LIBRARIES AND TOOLS THAT MAKE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS SAFER, PRETTIER, AND STRONGER? FIRST, I'M DISSATISFIED WITH THE CONTINUAL NEED AFTER OUR PUBLIC SERVICES TO SAVE A BUCK FOR CORPORATE DEVELOPMENT IN A DYSTOPIAN POLICE SURVEILLANCE STATE. TWO THINGS MAKE THIS MORE INTIMIDATING.

THE FIRST IS THAT WHEN I SAW BACHMAN, THE BACHMAN RECREATION POOL, WHICH SITS IN A HISTORICALLY BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK FOR HOURS, I WENT TO CHECK IF MY NEIGHBORHOOD POOL AT THE LAKE HIGHLANDS NORTH REC CENTER, WHICH IS IN A WIDER AND MORE MIDDLE CLASS PART OF TOWN, WAS ALREADY OPERATING AT FOUR DAYS A WEEK. NO, IT'S OPERATING AT SIX DAYS A WEEK AND ITS HOURS ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK.

THAT'S A HUGE SLAP IN THE FACE, ESPECIALLY SINCE BACHMAN LAKE IS ALREADY ONE OF THE HARDEST HIT BY ICE TERROR IN THE COUNTRY.

NOW YOU WANT TO CUT THEIR POOL HOURS DOWN WITHOUT PROVIDING A SINGLE VOTE ON A RESOLUTION TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY FROM ICE TERROR.

THAT'S THE SECOND THING IS THAT THE CITY IS PROPOSING CUTS TO BELOVED PROGRAMS LIKE LIBRARIES, PARKS AND POOLS, BUT CONTINUES TO USE DYSTOPIAN BLOCK AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER ALPR TECHNOLOGY TO SURVEIL RESIDENTS THROUGHOUT DALLAS.

ICE USES OUR FLOCK CAMERAS TO TARGET CITY RESIDENTS, AND A DPD OFFICER ADMITTED AS MUCH THAT THE CBP AT A PUBLIC HEARING IN DECEMBER.

THE 3.9 MILLION OF FUNDING FOR FLOCK IS NEARLY ONE THIRD OF THE 13 MILLION.

YOU'RE ASKING THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO CUT NEARLY 100% OF THE TOTAL 2.59 MILLION LIBRARY PROGRAMING BUDGET.

LET ME REPEAT THAT WE SPEND MORE MONEY SURVEILLING OUR RESIDENTS THAN WE DO ON LIBRARY PROGRAMS. THAT IS UNACCEPTABLE. I'M HERE TODAY WITH A SIMPLE ASK.

INVEST IN YOUR RESIDENTS THROUGH LIBRARIES, PARKS, AND POOLS, NOT IN DYSTOPIAN TECHNOLOGY.

DALLAS SHOULD BE SAFE, FRIENDLY, AND AFFORDABLE FOR ALL.

NOT A DYSTOPIAN POLICE SURVEILLANCE CITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. THOSE ARE YOUR REGISTERED SPEAKERS.

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM THREE YOU MAY COME FORWARD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU MAY BEGIN. HELLO, I'M DENISE MCGOVERN, I LIVE AT.

IS IT NANA? THERE WE GO. APOLOGIES. MY NAME IS DENISE MCGOVERN.

I AM A RESIDENT OF SEVEN THREE, FOUR, SEVEN LA BOLSA DRIVE IN DALLAS.

I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 11. I THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND BEING ABLE TO ADDRESS YOU.

I STAND AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LIBRARIES.

I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE FRIENDS OF THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY.

I'VE HAD THE HONOR AND PRIVILEGE OF SPEAKING TO MANY OF YOU INDIVIDUALLY, AND I THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME DURING THIS VERY DIFFICULT BUDGET SEASON AND LOOKING FOR WHAT OUR LIBRARIES CAN DO FOR US HERE IN THE CITY.

I KNOW AS THE BUDGET IS GETTING CLOSER TO BEING FINISHED, AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT DIFFICULT CHOICES THAT EVERY CHOICE MEANS SOMETHING.

AND A CHOICE FOR THE LIBRARY MEANS A CHOICE TOWARDS PUBLIC SAFETY, INVESTMENT AND COMMUNITY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

SO THE LIBRARY HAS TAKEN THE BRUNT OF A LOT OF BUDGET CUTS THROUGH THE YEARS.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF THE LIBRARY'S BUDGET, YOU WILL SEE THAT IT HAS STAYED FLAT REGARDLESS OF WHERE THINGS ARE.

A LOT OF THE OTHER LINE ITEMS IN THE GENERAL FUND HAVE MOVED UP, IF ONLY SLIGHTLY.

THE LIBRARY HAS MOVED DOWN. SO THROUGH. IN THIS BUDGET PROCESS, WE ASK THAT YOU KEEP THE BUDGET OF THE LIBRARY FLAT,

[05:25:04]

RESTORE THE $2.6 MILLION THAT IS ASKED TO BE CUT NEXT YEAR.

KEEP IT FLAT FOR THE NEXT YEAR AND LET OUR LIBRARIES DO WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.

THEY'RE HERE TO HELP ENRICH THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF OUR RESIDENTS, TO HELP THEM LEARN, TO HELP THEM FIND JOBS, TO BRING SAFETY AND COMMUNITY ALL THROUGH THE SYSTEM.

SO AGAIN, I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOUR TIME, FOR ALL THE TIME YOU'VE SPENT OUTSIDE OF COUNCIL AND WORKING WITH YOUR CONSTITUENTS ON THIS. I HOPE THAT YOU WILL VISIT YOUR BRANCH LIBRARY, AND I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AS YOU ALL GO THROUGH THIS SEASON.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THERE ARE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM, MADAM MAYOR.

ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? YES. I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE TO.

[PH4. 26-1642A A public hearing to receive comments on proposed amendment of the Project Plan and Reinvestment Zone Financing Plan (“Plan”) for Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Eighteen, the Maple/Mockingbird Tax Increment Financing District (“Zone”) to: (1) increase the geographic area of the Zone by approximately 9.3 acres to add the property currently addressed as 1545 West Mockingbird Lane; (2) make corresponding modifications to the Zone’s boundary and Plan; and (3) include findings that (a) vacant and underutilized property in the proposed expansion area substantially arrests or impairs the sound growth of the City, (b) development or redevelopment in the proposed expansion area will likely not occur solely through private investment in the foreseeable future, and (c) inclusion of the proposed expansion area will have an overall benefit to, and further the purposes of, the Zone; and, at the close of the public hearing, consider an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 27435, previously approved on December 10, 2008, as amended, and Ordinance No. 27690, previously approved on September 23, 2009, to reflect these amendments - Financing: No cost consideration to the City *In alignment with Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

ITEM FF FOUR. IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF THE PROJECT PLAN AND REINVESTMENT ZONE FINANCING PLAN. PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER 18, THE MAPLE MOCKINGBIRD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT ZONE TO ONE. INCREASE THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF THE ZONE BY APPROXIMATELY 9.3 ACRES.

TO ADD THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY ADDRESSED AS 1545 WEST MOCKINGBIRD LANE TWO, MAKING CORRESPONDING MODIFICATION TO THE ZONE'S BOUNDARY AND PLAN, AND THREE INCLUDE FINDINGS THAT A VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTY IN THE PROPOSED EXPANSION AREA SUBSTANTIALLY ARREST OR IMPAIRS THE SOUND GROWTH OF THE CITY.

B DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT IN THE PROPOSED EXPANSION AREA WILL LIKELY NOT OCCUR SOLELY THROUGH PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, AND C INCLUSION OF THE PROPOSED EXPANSION AREA WILL HAVE AN OVERALL BENEFIT TO AND FURTHER THE PURPOSES OF THE ZONE AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 27435 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ON DECEMBER 10TH, 2008, AS AMENDED, AND ORDINANCE NUMBER 27690 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 23RD, 2009 TO REFLECT THESE AMENDMENTS. 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 FOUR? NO SPEAKERS, MADAM MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT.

NOTED, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU. ONE SECOND.

[PH5. 26-1552A A public hearing to receive comments concerning the proposed creation of the Halperin Park Public Improvement District (“District” or “HPPID”), in accordance with Chapter 372 of the Texas Local Government Code (“Public Improvement District Act” or “Act”), for the specified area of the District, to provide supplemental public services to be funded by assessments on real property and real property improvements in the District; and, at the close of the public hearing, authorize: (1) approval of a resolution creating the District for a period of ten years from 2027 to 2036; (2) approval of the District’s Service Plan for 2027-2036 to provide supplemental public services to be funded by assessments on real property and real property improvements in the District; and (3) approval of a management contract with Southern Gateway Public Green Foundation, a Texas non-profit corporation, as the management entity for the District - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information) *In alignment with Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVE TO YOUR NEXT PUBLIC HEARING ITEM, FF PH FIVE.

PH FIVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS CONCERNING THE PROPOSED CREATION OF THE HALPERIN PARK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DISTRICT OR HHPP IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER THREE SEVEN, TWO OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT ACT, DISTRICT ACT, OR ACT FOR THE SPECIFIED AREA OF THE DISTRICT TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC SERVICES TO BE FUNDED BY ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DISTRICT AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AUTHORIZE ONE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION CREATING THE DISTRICT FOR A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS FROM 2027 TO 2036.

TWO APPROVAL OF THE DISTRICT SERVICE PLAN FOR THE 2027 2036 TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC SERVICES TO BE FUNDED BY ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DISTRICT, AND THREE APPROVAL OF A MANAGEMENT CONTRACT WITH SOUTHERN GATEWAY PUBLIC GREEN FOUNDATION, A TEXAS NONPROFIT CORPORATION, AS THE MANAGEMENT ENTITY FOR THE DISTRICT.

YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND HAGAN.

AND HI, I'M JUST HERE ON BEHALF OF HALPERIN PARK AND IN THE EVENT THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. THOSE ARE YOUR THAT'S YOUR REGISTERED SPEAKERS.

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM FIVE? OKAY. I SEE AN INDIVIDUAL. YOU MAY COME FORWARD.

[05:30:09]

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU MAY BEGIN.

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

IS IT ON NOW? OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS TIM BONNER AND MY ADDRESS IS 737 SOUTH R.L.

THORNTON FREEWAY. AND WE'RE RIGHT ON THE SERVICE ROAD JUST SOUTH AND WEST OF HALPERN PARK.

AND I SIMPLY I'M A I'M A PROPERTY OWNER IN THAT DISTRICT MAP THAT WAS DRAWN OUT.

AND I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT IMPLICATIONS IT HAS FOR OUR PROPERTY.

AND I WANTED TO. IF SOMEONE COULD EXPLAIN TO ME A LITTLE BETTER WHAT THIS SPECIAL ZONING DISTRICT IS GOING TO MEAN IN TERMS OF SERVICES OR INCREASED TAXES, OR HOWEVER IT MIGHT AFFECT US, THE COUNCIL HERE IS JUST TO LISTEN TO YOUR COMMENTS.

I'M SORRY, THE COUNCIL IS ONLY HERE TO LISTEN TO YOUR COMMENTS.

OH WELL, I GUESS MY COMMENTS ARE THAT I WANT TO KNOW HOW IT AFFECTS US BECAUSE I DON'T I DON'T UNDERSTAND, WE GOT THIS LETTER IN THE MAIL THAT SHOWED A MAP OUTLINING A RATHER LARGE AREA SURROUNDING HALPERIN PARK, AND I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT WILL AFFECT US.

I DON'T KNOW WHO'S SUPPOSED TO EXPLAIN THAT TO US, HOW THE CITIZENS IN THE AREA ARE TO LEARN AND UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS TO US, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE A TAX INCREASE OF SOME SORT.

YOU CAN FINISH YOUR COMMENTS. I THINK I'M I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S THE END OF MY COMMENT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM FF FIVE? THERE ARE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM, MADAM MAYOR.

ALL THANK YOU MISS. MOVE TO APPROVE. ALL RIGHT.

THIS. I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT THIS GENTLEMAN IS WE'RE GETTING CONTACT WITH HIM.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? YES. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. SO I BELIEVE MR. SPATH IS GOING TO TALK WITH THE GENTLEMAN.

IF WE HAVE, SIR, WE HAVE SOMEBODY COME IN TO SPEAK WITH YOU IF YOU'LL JUST HANG OUT FOR A FEW MINUTES FROM THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

SO AS MOST OF YOU HAVE BEEN AWARE THIS THIS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT HAS BEEN COMING FOR A WHILE NOW WITH TODAY'S APPROVAL VOTE.

HALPERIN PARK PIT WILL BECOME THE CITY'S 16TH PIT AND THE FIRST NEIGHBORHOOD PIT TO BE ESTABLISHED IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE, AND I BELIEVE, DISTRICT FOUR TWO. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANOTHER ONE OVER THERE.

PROPERTY OWNERS REPRESENTING 54.5% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE AND 53% OF THE LAND AREA OF TAXABLE REAL PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT SIGNED PETITIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE CREATION OF HALPERIN PARK PIT, THEREBY EXTENDING THE MINIMUM PETITION THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS IN THE CITY'S PET POLICY AND THE STATE LAW GOVERNING PITS.

HALPERIN PARK PIT WILL BE MANAGED BY THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY PUBLIC GREEN FOUNDATION AND WILL PROVIDE A DEDICATED FUNDING STREAM FOR 24 OVER SEVEN SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY PATROL SERVICES WITHIN THE NEW PARK AND AROUND THE PARK BORDERS.

AND WE HOPE THAT THAT WILL EXPAND INTO INTO ALL KINDS OF OTHER THINGS FOR, FOR THE AREA AROUND THE PARK IN THE FUTURE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CHAIR JOHNSON. THANK YOU MAYOR.

I GUESS ADMINISTRATION MRS, WHO DO WE NEED TO SPEAK WITH? YES. KEVIN SPATH, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

HEY, MISTER. DID DID WE DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY IS AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON? THE GENTLEMAN CAME. MR. BONNER, WHO? HIS NAME PRECEDES HIM.

DID WE DID WE REACH OUT TO THEM, TO THE BUSINESS OWNERS IN, IN THAT COMMUNITY THAT THAT QUESTION SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE PETITIONER, WHICH IS SOUTHERN GATEWAY. OKAY. FOUNDATION. YEAH.

THEY ARE THE APPLICANT AND THEY CIRCULATED THE PETITION TO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE, IN THE AREA. DO WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE? I THINK MISS HAGAN IS ON.

SHE'S WAIVING. MISS HAGAN, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT QUESTION? SURE. HAPPY TO. YES. WE DID PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTICE TO ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE PIT AREA.

WHEN YOU SAY YOU PROVIDE A NOTICE, DID YOU HAVE A MEETING? DID YOU HAVE A DISCUSSION? DID YOU INVITE THEM TO COME IN AND GET A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON?

[05:35:05]

OR DID WE JUST SEND LETTERS OUT SAYING THIS IS HAPPENING? NO, WE SENT A LETTER OUT SAYING, YOU KNOW, DESCRIBING THE PROCESS AND THEN HELD A PUBLIC MEETING.

MR. MAYOR, MAY I CALL THE SPEAKER BACK DOWN, SIR? GO AHEAD, MR. BONNER.

AS YOU HEARD THERE, THEY'RE SAYING THAT REPRESENTATIVE FROM SOUTHERN GATEWAY SAID THAT THEY HAVE SENT INFORMATION OUT TO GIVE YOU GUYS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME.

DID YOU GET A LETTER ABOUT A MEETING THAT WAS HAPPENING? WE GOT A LETTER IN THE MAIL THAT WAS ONE PAGE, BOTH SIDES.

IT HAD A LARGE MAP ON THE BACK, ON THE BACK. AND THEN WE GOT A PHONE CALL STATING THAT THE THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME TAXATION ON THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA.

AND I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT. AND THAT'S THE ONLY CONTACT WE HAD.

SO NO ONE INVITED YOU TO A MEETING? NO, SIR. MISS ANN, COULD YOU CLARIFY THAT, PLEASE? WELL, I BELIEVE THAT THE NOTICE HE'S REFERRING TO DID HAVE NOTICE OF A MEETING.

THAT THAT WAS THE NOTICE THAT WE SENT OUT. IT INCLUDED A MAP AS WELL.

YOU KNOW, I AM HAPPY TO, TO MEET WITH MR. BONNER.

I ACTUALLY JUST EMAILED KEVIN SMITH TO PLEASE FEEL FREE TO SHARE MY CONTACT INFO.

AND ACTUALLY, THE NEXT STEP IN THIS PROCESS IS ANOTHER PUBLIC MEETING THAT WE'LL BE SENDING OUT A NOTICE FOR SOON.

SO, BUT I CAN IF I CAN GET WE JUST HAVE MAILING ADDRESSES, BUT IF I CAN GET MR. BONNER'S CONTACT INFO, I CAN MAKE SURE TO GET THAT TO HIM IN OTHER WAYS AS WELL.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE LETTER THAT HE IS EXPLAINING ALSO HAD THE INFORMATION WHERE THE MEETING WOULD TAKE PLACE.

TIME AND DATE, IT WOULD BE HELD. YES. OKAY. THERE'S.

DO WE HAVE A COPY OF THAT LETTER HERE? MRS. I KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WILL HAVE IT.

OH, CAN I MAKE A. MARIA SMITH, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

CAN I MAKE A QUICK CLARIFICATION? SURE. SO OUR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT POLICY REQUIRES THAT ANY NEW PIT CREATION REQUESTS, THE PETITIONER HAS TO HOLD AT LEAST ONE MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY.

AND SO THEY NEED TO SEND A NOTICE OF THAT, OF THAT COMMUNITY MEETING TO ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE WITHIN THE PROPOSED PIT AREA.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE SEND OUT A NOTICE OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING TO EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY OWNER IN THE PIT.

AND THAT'S PROBABLY, I'M ASSUMING THAT'S MAYBE THE LETTER YOU'RE REFERRING TO. THAT'S THE ONE THAT CITY STAFF MAIL OUT TO ALL RECORD OWNERS WITHIN THE PROPOSED BID. OKAY, SO SO THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN TWO NOTICES, ONE SENT OUT BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE FOR THE COMMUNITY MEETING AND THEN A SECOND NOTICE FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. BONNER. YES, SIR. WE DID GET THE NOTICE FOR THIS MEETING, AND THAT'S WHY I, I MADE A POINT OF COMING BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE A MEETING TO FURTHER EXPLAIN WHAT THIS PROCESS, WHAT AFFECT THIS PROCESS WAS GOING TO HAVE ON OUR PROPERTIES, BECAUSE IT'S A REALLY LARGE AREA THAT IS ENCOMPASSED BY THE RELATIVELY SMALL DECK PARK AND THE ASSOCIATED AREA. AND WE MADE A POINT TO COME TO THIS MEETING BECAUSE I THOUGHT THIS IS THE ONLY MEETING I KNEW OF.

SO DID YOU GET THE FIRST LETTER? I KNOW IT SEEMED LIKE YOU GOT THE LETTER THAT WAS SENT BY THE CITY.

DID YOU GET THE LETTER THAT WAS SITTING BY THE SOUTHERN GATE? THE ONLY LETTER WE RECEIVED, SIR. IS THE ONE THAT, THAT THAT WE GOT, THAT WAS A SINGLE PAGE.

AND ON BOTH SIDES IT HAD A, IT HAD A FULL PAGE OF WRITING ON THE FRONT.

IT HAD THE MAP ON THE BACK. I'VE GOT IT ON MY PHONE AND I CAN SHOW IT TO YOU IF YOU WANT ME TO.

DO YOU DESIRE THAT? SURE. THAT'S FINE. I CAN GET THAT IN A FEW.

YOU GO AHEAD. I CAN GET THAT IN FOR YOU. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE'RE DOING THE PROJECTS AND WHEN THAT WE'RE WE ARE EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATING, WE AS A COUNCIL, THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW LAW, BUT WE CAN'T CONTROL WHAT ANOTHER, ANOTHER ORGANIZATION DOES.

BUT THE YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED ACCORDING TO WHAT THE CITY OF DALLAS JUST SAID TWICE.

SHE SAID THAT SHE SENT IT OUT. SO THERE WAS A DISCONNECT SOMEWHERE IN THAT PROCESS.

BUT WE ARE HAPPY TO SPEAK WITH YOU ABOUT IT AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO GOING FORWARD TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE INVOLVED IN ALL THE COMMUNICATIONS.

[05:40:03]

I BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE IN YOUR BUSINESS IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT ONE, MY COLLEAGUE CHAIR WEST.

BUT I WILL ALSO MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT GOING FORWARD THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

SO NOTHING CATCHES YOU BY SURPRISE. OKAY. WE'RE JUST SOUTH OF THE JACK IN THE BOX.

YES, SIR. YES. YES, SIR. YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. CHAIR RIDLEY.

FIVE MINUTES. MISS HAGAN CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT YOU DID HOLD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC MEETING OF PROPERTY OWNERS? HOW MANY PEOPLE ATTENDED? I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK.

I WOULD PROBABLY SAY AROUND 25. AND WHEN WAS THAT MEETING HELD? IT WAS HELD ON SEPTEMBER. EXCUSE ME. SEPTEMBER 4TH OF LAST YEAR, 2025.

OKAY. THANK YOU. MISS BLACKMON COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON FIVE MINUTES. OKAY. THANK YOU. REGARDING THE MEETING, HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE DID YOU PETITION IN THE SERVICE AREA? TO BE IN THE PIT? AND SO THAT FOR THAT ORIGINAL MEETING WE WERE THAT WAS UNDER OUR, THE ORIGINAL MAP WE DREW WHICH WAS A LARGER AREA.

AND SO I BELIEVE THAT NOTICE AND I'M LOOKING IT UP RIGHT THIS MINUTE.

BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WERE ABOUT 920 PROPERTY ACCOUNTS UNDER THAT ORIGINAL MAP. AND SO THAT'S WHO WE SENT THOSE NOTICES TO.

SO YOU HAD 25 PEOPLE ATTEND A MEETING WHERE YOU SENT 900 INVITES? YEAH. AND YOU'VE ONLY HAD IT'S BEEN ALMOST A YEAR.

DID YOU AMEND YOUR MAP? WE REDUCED THE MAP. YES.

AND DID YOU HAVE ANOTHER MEETING AFTER YOU REDUCED IT? NO, WE DID NOT. WE DID HAVE, YOU KNOW, MEETINGS ONE ON ONE WITH VARIOUS PROPERTY OWNERS WHO REACHED OUT TO US, BUT NOT A GROUP MEETING, BECAUSE WHEN WE CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING, WE'RE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF THE DISTRICT.

IS THAT THAT'S CORRECT, RIGHT? CORRECT. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

I MEAN, I THINK THERE WELL, I'LL I'LL DEFER. SOMEBODY FROM STAFF.

CAN YOU VERIFY THAT? SORRY. YES, THAT'S CORRECT, MISS BLACKMON.

SO MR. BONNER WON'T HAVE ANY RECOURSE. THERE WILL BE NO WAY FOR HIS FOR HIM TO GET HIS QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

HE'LL BE TAXED. AND THAT'LL BE IT. IS THAT CORRECT? THE ASSESSMENT BY THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WILL APPLY TO HIS PROPERTY.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. IF THERE'S A DELAY IN THIS, DOES IT KILL IT? BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO BE LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU SEND OUT A 900 INVITES, 25 COME, BUT THEN THEY AMEND THE MAP AND THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY MORE, ISN'T THERE? IT SEEMS LIKE THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY MORE CONVERSATION.

AND THEN THIS GENTLEMAN COMES DOWN AND HAS SOME CLEAR QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT IS TO BE EXPECTED.

AND IF WE APPROVED THIS, HE GETS DINGED WITH THE TAX BILL.

SO REGARDING THE TIMING OF THE CREATION, UNFORTUNATELY DALLAS COUNTY DOES HAVE A STRICT JUNE 1ST DEADLINE FOR PPID CREATIONS.

AND THAT'S SO THAT IT GIVES THEM SUFFICIENT LEAD TIME TO SET UP, THERE.

I GET IT. THEIR SYSTEM, THEY'RE TAXING. YEAH.

THIS THIS ISN'T MY DISTRICT, BUT I FEEL FOR INDIVIDUALS.

I MEAN, HOW MUCH ARE WE HOW MUCH ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE THAT COULD BE ADDED TO HIS TAX BILL.

THE ASSESSMENT ANNUAL ASSESSMENT IS GOING TO BE BASED ON THE VALUE OF HIS PROPERTY.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT WHAT HIS PROPERTY VALUE IS BUT THAT'S GREAT.

WHAT IS WHAT IS THE VALUATION? WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE.

IT'S $0.15 PER $100. VALUATION IS THE ASSESSMENT RATE.

AND IT CAN'T BE CHALLENGED ONCE THEY GET THE BILL.

SO THE WAY THAT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS WORK IS IT DOESN'T REQUIRE EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY OWNER IN THE PROPOSED BOUNDARY TO, TO SUPPORT THE CREATION OF A PIT. CORRECT. SO AS LONG AS 50% OF THE PROPERTY, EVERY BUT EVERY BUT EVERY PROPERTY OWNER MUST PAY INTO IT.

CORRECT. ONCE A PIT IS APPROVED, WHETHER EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY OWNER SIGNED OR SIGNED THE PETITION IN SUPPORT OR NOT, AS AS LONG AS HALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS APPROVED THE PETITION IN TERMS OF VALUE AND LAND AREA,

[05:45:01]

THEN YES, EVERY ALL THE THE REMAINING OWNERS WILL WILL BE ASSESSED.

HOW MANY PROPERTY OWNERS ARE IN THE NEW KID? THE NEW PIT MAP THAT WE'RE.

APPROVING. MISS HAGAN, DO YOU HAVE THAT READILY AVAILABLE? I BELIEVE IT'S CLOSER TO ABOUT 200. DO WE NOT HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER? I CAN WELL, AND SO IT'S A LITTLE OVER 200 PROPERTIES.

BUT THERE'S FEWER OWNERS THAN THAT BECAUSE SOME OWNERS OWN CORRECT, 189 ACCOUNTS.

OKAY. SO 189 ACCOUNTS. BUT HOW MANY PROPERTIES? THAT'S YEAH, THERE'S 189 PROPERTIES. SO SOME OWNERS MAY OWN MULTIPLE PROPERTIES, BUT THERE'S 189 PROPERTY ACCOUNTS.

PROPERTY ACCOUNTS. OKAY. AND AND YOU SAID HOW MANY THEY HAVE TO SIGN A PETITION.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES. SO AT LEAST HOW MANY SIGNED, HOW MANY SIGNED IN SUPPORT? SO THE PERCENTAGE OF APPROVAL WAS 55 54.5% OF RECORD OWNERS, REPRESENTING 54.5% OF THE VALUE AND 53% OF THE LAND AREA. AND WHAT WE CHANGED THAT THRESHOLD, RIGHT? YES. SO LAST YEAR CITY COUNCIL AMENDED ITS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT POLICY TO REDUCE THE PETITION APPROVAL THRESHOLD FROM 60% TO 50%. SO IT BARELY CAME IN AT THE AT THE THRESHOLD.

YEAH. THE CURRENT THRESHOLD IS 50%. PER STATE LAW.

I MEAN, I REALLY FEEL FOR THIS GENTLEMAN. HE OBVIOUSLY HAS SOME REAL QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS.

AND IT'S HIS PROPERTY. AND I JUST FEEL THAT YOU KNOW, I JUST WAS HE EVER MET WITH INDIVIDUALLY AND OR ANYBODY FROM STAFF? WELL, AND SO I'LL BE HONEST THIS WAS A WHILE AGO AND SO I'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH MY NOTES, BUT MR. BONNER MENTIONED A PHONE CALL. AND I ACTUALLY THINK THAT MR. BONNER AND I DID SPEAK ON THE PHONE BACK IN THE FALL OR EARLY SPRING.

OKAY. EARLY SPRING OF THIS YEAR. YES. BUT IT MAY HAVE BEEN FALL AND I, AND I'M SORRY, I'VE BEEN TRYING TO GO BACK THROUGH MY NOTES TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHEN IT WAS, BUT IT WAS SOME TIME AGO. BUT HE SAID HE HAD A PHONE CALL.

I'M ALMOST POSITIVE THAT WAS WITH ME BECAUSE, I MEAN, I SUPPORT THE PARK, I SUPPORT THE PIT.

I SUPPORT YOU ALL. BUT I MEAN, IT'S ALL IT'S.

AND I'M JUST WONDERING HOW MANY MORE MR. BONNER'S ARE OUT THERE.

AND THEY'RE GOING TO GET A BILL BECAUSE THEY HAVE REALLY NO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

AND IT'S GOING TO IT COULD GET REALLY MESSY PRETTY FAST WHEN THEY SEE AN EXTRA EXTRA ITEM ON THEIR BILL.

AND THAT'S ALL I'M. BUT YOU DO HAVE 54% OF THE AREA VALUE, BUT ONLY 53% OF THE LAND AREA SUPPORTING IT. SO I MEAN, IT'S AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE HITTING UP AGAINST THE DEADLINE.

SO IT'S NOT MY DISTRICT, BUT I JUST, I. MR. BONNER, I REALLY APOLOGIZE THAT THIS IS WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S UNFAIR, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO. THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. CHAIR STEWART FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. OKAY, JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS.

IT'S TOTALLY NORMAL TO HAVE 25 PEOPLE COME TO A PROPERTY OWNER MEETING FOR A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

I WISH I COULD TELL YOU IT'S USUALLY 200 OR 75 OR WHATEVER, BUT I'VE RUN A LOT OF THOSE.

AND I WILL SAY UPTOWN WAS ALWAYS VERY WELL ATTENDED.

YOU DEFINITELY PROBABLY HAD 50 TO 75 THERE, BUT AT LEAST IN LAKE HIGHLANDS, YOU KNOW, WE, WE WERE IN THE 25 TO 30 RANGE FOR PEOPLE ATTENDING THESE MEETINGS AND THAT A WIDE VARIETY OF MEETINGS REASONS. EXCUSE ME THAT THEY, THAT THE ATTENDANCE FOR THOSE MEETINGS IS, IS LOW.

I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT YOU HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION.

I REMEMBER HAVING MANY OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH NEW INCOMING PROPERTY OWNERS AS WE HAD EXPANDED OUR BOUNDARIES ACTUALLY.

AND WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THE ASSESSMENT THAT YOU PAY OR ALL OF THE, THE PROPERTY OWNERS PAY IS USED TO BETTER THE COMMUNITY. IT'S USED TO WORK ON PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES.

MORE THAN LIKELY IT PROBABLY WILL BE WORKED ON BEAUTIFICATION ISSUES.

IT'S A GOOD THING. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS IS GOING TO TURN OUT TODAY, BUT I THINK THERE WILL BE A PIT THERE AT SOME POINT IN TIME.

[05:50:04]

AND I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THAT.

PERHAPS YOU COULD SERVE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

SO YOU HAD AS A PROPERTY OWNER, YOU HAVE THAT RIGHT.

AND YOU COULD GIVE SOME INPUT INTO HOW THOSE DOLLARS ARE SPENT.

SOMEBODY IS FEEDING ME SOME INFORMATION. I SHOULD NOT SOMEBODY, MY STAFF IS FEEDING ME INFORMATION THAT YOUR, THE TOTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR COULD BE 213 000.

AND I THINK YOU HAVE 179 PROPERTY OWNERS. SO I WAS COMING UP WITH ABOUT 11 OR $1200.

MIGHT BE YOUR ASSESSMENT, BUT SOMEONE SHOULD CHECK MY MATH. IT WAS NOT MY STRONG POINT.

BUT I THINK THAT THAT THOSE DOLLARS, WHAT I CAN PROMISE YOU IS THAT THEY ARE TRULY SPENT TO IMPROVE THAT AREA. THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A PED IS TO PULL A, A GROUP, PULL A, THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA, THAT MAP THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY, AND TO WORK ON THE ISSUES THAT ARE CHALLENGING THAT COMMUNITY FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND BEAUTIFICATION AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND ALL THOSE THINGS.

SO IT'S A, I THINK PEDS ARE GOOD FOR COMMUNITIES.

I THINK THEY STRENGTHEN THEM. BUT I KNOW THAT THIS IS AN, THIS IS ROLLING OUT WITH A BIT OF A ROUGH SPOT HERE SINCE YOU WEREN'T ABLE TO GET YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED AT A, AT A PUBLIC MEETING, BUT I DID, I DID WANT TO JUST THROW SOME OF THE FACTS IN THERE, SOME OF THE INFORMATION TO YOU ABOUT HOW IT WORKS AND WHAT ITS PURPOSE IS.

I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ALL RIGHT, MAYOR PRO TEM, THANK YOU. SO IT'S NICE TO HAVE SOMEONE WITH THAT BACKGROUND ON OUR PIT ON OUR COUNCIL TO GIVE US SOME, SOME HISTORICAL CONTENT. SO THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA THAT'S PRESENTED TODAY WITH ABOUT 180, 190 PROPERTIES, ARE THEY A MAJORITY RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES? MOST OF THE PROPERTIES ARE COMMERCIAL. THERE ARE ONLY 41 RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS.

AND THE INTERESTED PARTIES DO THEIR BEST TO EXCLUDE AS MANY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AS POSSIBLE.

YES. THAT WAS A DELIBERATE EFFORT THAT THE PETITIONER MADE TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS IN THE PROPOSED BOUNDARY.

AND PRIOR TO TODAY, WHAT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES WERE PRESENTED TO BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS TO SHARE THEIR THOUGHTS AND CONCERNS.

SO AS I MENTIONED, THERE WAS A PUBLIC MEETING THAT WAS HELD WITH ALL THAT WERE ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WERE INVITED TO ATTEND THAT MEETING.

AND THEN WE 15 DAYS BEFORE TODAY, THE STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE SEND OUT NOTICES OF PUBLIC HEARING.

OUR CONTACT INFORMATION IS ON THAT LETTER AS WELL AS YOU KNOW, OUR PHONE NUMBER, EMAIL ADDRESS, LINK TO OUR WEBSITE. AND, YOU KNOW, IF PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE QUESTIONS, THEN THAT'S ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE WE CAN PROVIDE RESPONSES.

SO ON THAT LETTER, JUST TO REITERATE, THERE, THERE WAS OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE TO ENGAGE AND HAVE QUESTIONS ADDRESSED.

THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, MR. ROTH, FIVE MINUTES. JUST A CLARIFICATION. DID YOU MENTION THAT THE THE THE ESTIMATED PIT TAX IS GOING TO BE $0.15 PER 100? YES. SO THE ASSESSMENT RATE, IT'S NOT A TAX OR RATE.

IT'S AN ASSESSMENT THAT IS ON TOP OF PROPERTY TAXES.

AND IT FUNDS THE SERVICES THAT THE THE PIT PROVIDES AND THE THE REVENUE IS CALCULATED BY MULTIPLYING THE PROPERTY VALUE, DIVIDING IT BY 100 TIMES THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT RATE.

SO FOR $100,000, THAT REPRESENTS ABOUT $150 PER $100,000 OF VALUE. SO, MR. BONNER, IF YOUR PROPERTY IS $100,000, IT'S THE AMOUNT OF THE TAX OF THE OF THE DATA TAX.

THE RECOVERY WOULD BE ABOUT $150 PER $100,000.

IT'S NOT IT'S IT'S IT ISN'T AMOUNT OF MONEY. IT'S.

AND IT'S THE OTHER PART OF THE TAX, THE THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE PYD EVERY YEAR IT GETS REEVALUATED.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO EVERY YEAR CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THE PIT'S PROPOSED SERVICE PLAN BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT RATE.

SO IF YOU KNOW THERE'S A NEED TO TO LOWER THE RATE THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CITY COUNCIL CAN CAN DO.

AND THE AND THE PYD BUDGETS ARE MADE BY THE FOLKS THAT ARE ON THE, THE PYD BOARD OR THE, THE PYD ADVISORY GROUP.

[05:55:01]

RIGHT. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THEN FOR THOSE WE ALSO REQUIRE OUR PYD MANAGEMENT ENTITIES TO HAVE ONE MEETING ANNUALLY WHERE THEY PRESENT THEIR BUDGET TO PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO WEIGH IN ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR, FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR.

GREAT. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. YEAH.

ALL RIGHT. WE'LL GO TO CHAIR WEST. THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I WANTED TO GIVE MISS HAGAN AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE GROUNDWORK THEY DID TO GET THE MESSAGING OUT, AND TO TRY TO GET FEEDBACK AND INPUT FROM ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AFFECTED AREA.

SURE, ABSOLUTELY. SO THE INITIAL STEP WAS THE WRITTEN NOTICE WITH THE INFORMATION FOR THE MEETING AND THEN HOLDING THE PUBLIC MEETING.

AND THEN AFTER THAT, WE DID ATTEMPT TO REACH OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS IN OTHER WAYS.

I WILL ADMIT IT IS CHALLENGING TO GET A HOLD OF EVERYONE.

ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS OFTEN, YOU KNOW, ALL WE HAVE TO GO ON ARE THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES THAT ARE UNDER DALLAS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

AND SO IT'S OFTEN DIFFICULT TO CONNECT THAT OWNER ENTITY WITH A PERSON.

BUT WE DID MAKE THAT ATTEMPT TO, TO TRY TO TALK TO PEOPLE THAT WAY AND HAD, YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS AND PHONE CALLS WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WAY AS WELL. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME PROPERTIES THAT WE ACTUALLY WENT BY IN PERSON AND TRIED TO GET CONTACT INFO FOR, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WITH SUCCESS AND SOMETIMES NOT TO BE QUITE HONEST, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, JUST WERE AVAILABLE FOR ANYONE WHO CALLED, I THINK I RESPONDED TO ANY PHONE CALL OR EMAIL WE RECEIVED WHICH ALL OF MY CONTACT INFORMATION WAS ON THOSE INITIAL NOTICES THAT WERE SENT OUT AS WELL. IF SOMEONE WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE IT TO THE MEETING.

YOU IS THAT ALL RIGHT? CHAIR JOHNSON, THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. MR. BONNER, LET ME ASK YOU ONE MORE QUESTION.

FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR COMING AND MAKING THIS CLEAR AFTER I SPOKE WITH YOU A FEW MINUTES AGO.

I REMEMBER YOU WHEN I WAS A YOUNG MAN IN MINISTRY.

YEARS AGO, I THINK, AND I CONFIRMED THAT YOU WERE THE SAME PERSON YOU USED TO WORK FOR THE CITY.

YES, SIR. YEARS AGO. SO WHAT IS YOUR OBJECTIVE? I KNOW YOU'RE LETTING US KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. HOW? WHAT? WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SEE FROM THIS? AND ETCETERA.

FIRST I WANT TO SAY THAT I CERTAINLY AM NOT OPPOSED TO HELPING PARK.

IT IS A WONDERFUL VENTURE FROM THE UPPER DECK.

MY WIFE AND I WENT WALKED OVER THERE. WE'RE TWO BLOCKS FROM IT.

WE WALKED OVER THERE. WE WALKED THE PARK. I WENT UP TO THE UPPER DECK AND I TOOK A PICTURE OF MY OFFICE BUILDING FROM THE UPPER DECK.

THAT'S HOW CLOSE I AM TO THE PARK. I THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL EXTENSION OR AMENITY TO THE CITY.

I THINK IT'S GREAT. MY ONLY ISSUE HERE AND AND AND I THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE A ROOM FULL OF PEOPLE GETTING UNDERSTANDING, GETTING, GETTING INFORMATION CONCERNING THE TAX INCREASE.

I HAVE SEVERAL PROPERTIES AND I FIGHT TAXES EVERY YEAR.

EVERY YEAR I'M AT DCAD DISPUTING MY TAX VALUE.

IT GOES UP LIKE $100,000 A YEAR. AND I'M SURE MANY OF YOU ARE AS WELL.

THIS WAS KIND OF BACK DOOR TO ME. IT FELT BACKDOOR.

AT LEAST WITH DCAD I GET THE NOTICES. I KNOW MY CUTOFF IS APRIL 15TH.

I'VE GOT TO SUBMIT MY OBJECTION. I GET A DATE, A HEARING DATE, AND I CAN PRESENT MY ARGUMENT.

I DIDN'T COME HERE TO ARGUE IT. I JUST BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE AT A POINT OF VOTING.

I JUST WANTED TO COME HERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT.

AND YOU'RE RIGHT. MY BUILDING IS WORTH ABOUT $800,000.

SO THAT'S $1,200. $1,200 IS $1,200. AND THEN YOU GOT 500 OVER HERE, A FEW THOUSAND OVER THERE, 6 OR 10,000 OVER THERE. YOU GET A A VEHICLE THAT BREAKS DOWN AND PRETTY SOON YOU'RE TALKING REAL MONEY.

I HAVE TO WATCH EVERY PENNY. AND THIS IS 12000 PENNIES.

AND I JUST WANTED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT IT, THAT'S ALL.

I DON'T WANT MY NAME ASSOCIATED WITH THE ONE GUY THAT CAME DOWN AND WAS AGAINST HALPERIN PARK,

[06:00:04]

BECAUSE I AM NOT. I JUST WANTED MORE INFORMATION.

AND IT JUST SOUNDS LIKE TO ME THAT THE DEAL IS KIND OF DONE.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT COULD BE WITHOUT ME KNOWING ABOUT IT, BECAUSE I'M AT MY OFFICE EVERY DAY AND I GET EVERY PIECE OF MAIL THAT COMES TO MY OFFICE. THAT'S WHY I'M HERE. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I THINK ABOUT WHERE WE'RE AT.

I WILL CLEARLY HAVE TO ACCEPT WHATEVER RULING Y'ALL Y'ALL DECIDE TO MAKE.

AND AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO GO DOWN AS THE GUY THAT THAT THREW THE WRENCH IN THE GEARS.

I JUST WANTED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT IT. I KNOW MORE ABOUT IT NOW.

A LITTLE LATE, IT SEEMS. BUT HERE WE ARE. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

AND I THINK THAT HALPERIN PARK WILL BE IS A WONDERFUL, UNBELIEVABLE, INCREDIBLE ASSET TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.

AND I WILL BE THERE FOR LUNCH MUCH MORE THAN MOST OF YOU WILL BECAUSE IT'S WALKING DISTANCE FROM MY OFFICE, AND I JUST THANK YOU FOR YOUR ALLOWING ME TO SAY WHAT I'VE SAID.

THANK YOU, MR. BONNER. THANK YOU. MR. SPAT WITH THE THE PIT.

WE SHARE THAT MYSELF AND COUNCILMAN WEST. CORRECT.

SAY THAT AGAIN, PLEASE. WITH THE PIT. IS THAT CHAIR WEST? IS THAT WHAT WE'VE BEEN SHARING? WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT? WE SHARE THE TIFF.

I'M NOT SURE ABOUT TIFF. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE PIT BOUNDARIES IS, THE TIFF, BUT THE PIT BOUNDARY IS ON BOTH SIDES.

IT'S IN DISTRICT FOUR AND DISTRICT ONE. YES. OKAY.

BUT THE PIT IS ONLY FOR THE BUSINESS IN DISTRICT ONE, CORRECT? NO, THE THE THE PIT PIT ASSESSMENT IS SOLELY GOING TO BE USED, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, FOR PARK SECURITY.

GOTCHA. UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THERE'S SUFFICIENT REVENUES TO PAY FOR OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES THAT BENEFIT THE AREA.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I WAS GETTING CONFUSED WITH THE TIFF AND.

YEAH. THANK YOU, MISS PAT. THANK YOU, MR. BONNER, FOR SPEAKING UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT YOU DIDN'T RECEIVE FROM YOUR POINT PROPER NOTIFICATION.

I WOULD HAVE HOPED TO SEE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM HARPER AND PARK TO ACTUALLY BE PHYSICALLY HERE INSTEAD OF ONLINE.

BUT NEVERTHELESS YOU KNOW, I'M WILLING TO DO MORE COMMUNICATION WITH YOU TO HELP YOU GET ACCLIMATED TO WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING AND SPEAKING. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. CHAIR STEWART THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU.

I THINK MAYBE AND DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? I THOUGHT I SAW YOU WAVING YOUR OH, I JUST WANTED TO AND I'M SORRY.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT COUNCILMAN UNDERSTOOD THAT I WAS HERE FROM HALPERIN PARK.

I UNDERSTAND I'M NOT THERE IN PERSON. THAT WAS ACTUALLY THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF THAT WE ATTEND VIRTUALLY.

I THINK I HAVE BEEN AT EVERY COUNCIL MEETING WHEN IT'S EVER BEEN RECOMMENDED THAT WE ATTEND IN PERSON.

SO. YOU'RE RIGHT. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THAT ALL THE PERSONNEL BE BE AVAILABLE VIRTUALLY.

JUST SAYING THAT THAT'S BEEN THE THAT'S BEEN THE THE HABIT OF OF US FOR SURE.

I, I THINK WHAT I WANT TO SAY IS, FIRST OF ALL, WE APOLOGIZE THAT YOU DIDN'T GET THE INFORMATION IN SUCH A WAY THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS THAT YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE MEETING.

AND I'M GRATEFUL THAT YOU AT LEAST IT SOUNDS LIKE HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH AN I THINK I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS IF, IF WE APPROVE THIS, THAT YOU WOULD FIND WAYS TO EMBRACE THIS THIS PIT AND GET TO, YOU KNOW, BE ONE OF THOSE WHO REALLY GETS TO KNOW AND UNDERSTANDS HOW PITS WORK AND HOW WELL THEY CAN WORK FOR ALL COMMUNITIES AND THEN HOW IT WOULD BEST SERVE YOUR COMMUNITY. I KNOW IT'S INITIAL FOCUS WILL BE ON PROVIDING SECURITY FOR THE PARK, AND THAT'S A GOOD THING.

WE DO WANT TO PROTECT THAT ASSET, BUT THERE'S MORE TO PITS THAN THAT, AND IT CAN BE EXPANDED TO DO MORE THAN JUST THE SECURITY PIECE.

SO I AM QUITE SURE YOU AND ANN WILL HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS, AND YOU'LL HOPEFULLY FIND A WAY THAT YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE PARTICIPATING AND PERHAPS GIVING IT LEADERSHIP.

I THINK YOU WOULD BE YOU WOULD BE GREAT AT THAT.

AND IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR ALL OF THE COMMUNITY TO HAVE YOUR VOICE HEARD.

AND YOU MIGHT KNOW SOME OTHER PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO WOULD WANT TO HAVE THEIR VOICES HEARD AS WELL.

[06:05:03]

SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND FOR YOUR QUESTIONS.

QUESTIONS ARE VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. AND THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

ALL RIGHT, CHAIR JOHNSON, ONE MINUTE. I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T KNOW I WAS ON I WASN'T TRYING TO SPEAK.

SORRY. ALL RIGHT. I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE.

SO ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT.

IT CARRIES. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. WE'LL MOVE TO YOUR NEXT PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.

[PH6. 26-1551A A public hearing to receive comments concerning the proposed expansion of the Dallas Tourism Public Improvement District (“District” or “DTPID”), in accordance with Chapter 372 of the Texas Local Government Code (“Public Improvement District Act” or “Act”), allowing the City to include property in a hotel-public improvement district with the property owner’s consent if such property could have been included in the District, when created, without violating the petition thresholds, to provide supplemental public services funded by assessments on Dallas hotels with 100 or more rooms (“Qualifying Hotels”); and, at the close of the public hearing, authorize a resolution approving District boundary expansion to include four additional Qualifying Hotels in the District not described in the resolution or petition renewing the District in 2016 or expanding the District’s boundaries in 2020, 2022, 2023, or 2024 - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information) *In alignment with Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

FF SIX IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS CONCERNING THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THE DALLAS TOURISM PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DISTRICT, OR D T IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ACT, OR ACT, ALLOWING THE CITY TO INCLUDE PROPERTY IN A HOTEL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER'S CONSENT.

IF SUCH PROPERTY COULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT WHEN CREATED WITHOUT VIOLATING THE PETITION THRESHOLDS TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC SERVICES FUNDED BY ASSESSMENTS ON DALLAS HOTELS WITH 100 OR MORE ROOMS, QUALIFYING HOTELS AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AUTHORIZE A RESOLUTION APPROVING DISTRICT BOUNDARY EXPANSION TO INCLUDE FOUR ADDITIONAL QUALIFYING HOTELS IN THE DISTRICT NOT DESCRIBED IN THE RESOLUTION OR PETITION, RENEWING THE DISTRICT IN 2016 OR EXPANDING THE DISTRICT BOUNDARIES IN 2020, 2022, 2023 OR 2024. YOU DO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, FRED UHLER.

GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS FRED UHLER. I LIVE IN DISTRICT TEN AND I SERVE THE DALLAS TOURISM PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AS THEIR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD. AND I WANT TO FIRST THANK THE COUNCIL FOR YOUR SUPPORT OVER THE 15 YEARS, AND I'M BASICALLY HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM PH SIX. NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT.

IS THERE A MOTION ON PH SIX? ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.

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

ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. NEXT ITEM. ITEM PH SEVEN IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS CONCERNING THE PROPOSED RENEWAL AND EXPANSION OF

[PH7. 26-1553A A public hearing to receive comments concerning the proposed renewal and expansion of the South Side Public Improvement District (“District” or “SSPID”), in accordance with Chapter 372 of the Texas Local Government Code, for the specified area of the District, to provide supplemental public services to be funded by assessments on real property and real property improvements in the District; and, at the close of the public hearing, authorize approval: (1) of a resolution renewing the District for a period of ten years from 2027 to 2036; (2) of the District’s Service Plan for 2027-2036 to provide supplemental public services to be funded by assessments on real property and real property improvements in the District; and (3) of a management contract with South Side Quarter Development Corporation, a Texas non-profit corporation, as the management entity for the District - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information) *In alignment with Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

THE SOUTH SIDE, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, DISTRICT OR SPD.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER THREE, 72 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE FOR THE SPECIFIED AREA OF THE DISTRICT TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC SERVICES TO BE FUNDED BY ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DISTRICT AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AUTHORIZE APPROVAL. ONE OF A RESOLUTION RENEWING THE DISTRICT FOR A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS, FROM 2027 TO 2036.

TWO OF THE DISTRICT'S SERVICE PLAN FOR 2027 2036 TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC SERVICES TO BE FUNDED BY ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DISTRICT.

AND THREE OF A MANAGEMENT CONTRACT WITH SOUTH SIDE WATER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, A TEXAS NONPROFIT CORPORATION, AS THE MANAGEMENT ENTITY FOR THE DISTRICT. YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

BUI NGUYEN. HI. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M BUI NGUYEN.

I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE SOUTH SIDE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE RENEWAL ITEM UNDER CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM PH SEVEN NO SPEAKERS. MR. MAYOR. LOOKING FOR A MOTION? ALL RIGHT, I HEARD A MOTION. AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM. ITEM EIGHT IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS CONCERNING THE PROPOSED RENEWAL OF THE

[PH8. 26-1554A A public hearing to receive comments concerning the proposed renewal of the Uptown Public Improvement District (“District”), in accordance with Chapter 372 of the Texas Local Government Code (the “Act”), for the specified area of the District, to provide supplemental public services to be funded by assessments on real property and real property improvements in the District; and, at the close of the public hearing, authorize: (1) approval of a resolution renewing the District for a period of seven years from 2027 to 2033; (2) approval of the District’s Service Plan for 2027-2033 to provide supplemental public services to be funded by assessments on real property and real property improvements in the District; and (3) approval of a management contract with Uptown Dallas, Inc., a Texas non-profit corporation, as the management entity for the District - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information) *In alignment with Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

UPTOWN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DISTRICT. IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, THE ACT FOR THE SPECIFIED AREA OF THE DISTRICT TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC SERVICES TO BE FUNDED BY ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DISTRICT AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AUTHORIZE ONE APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION RENEWING THE DISTRICT FOR A PERIOD OF SEVEN YEARS, FROM 2027 TO 2033, TO A PLAN FOR 2027 2033 TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC SERVICES TO BE FUNDED BY ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DISTRICT, AND THREE APPROVAL OF A MANAGEMENT CONTRACT WITH UPTOWN DALLAS INC.,

[06:10:03]

A TEXAS NONPROFIT CORPORATION, AS THE MANAGEMENT ENTITY FOR THE DISTRICT.

YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, BROOKLYN GLESSNER.

YEAH. HI. THIS IS THIS IS ACTUALLY KELLEN BUTTS.

I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF UPTOWN DALLAS, INC..

BROOKLYN IS HERE WITH ME, AND WE'RE JUST HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM PH. EIGHT. NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR.

THANK YOU FOR A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED.

AND SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

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

NEXT ITEM.

[21. 26-1644A Authorize a tax increment financing (“TIF”) development agreement with Mockingbird Owner LP, a Texas limited partnership and/or its affiliates (“Developer”) in an amount not to exceed $29,000,000 (“TIF Subsidy”), payable from current and future funds in the Maple/Mockingbird TIF District (“TIF District” or “Zone”), in consideration of the Developer’s design, engineering, financing, and construction of the Oak Park Mixed-Use and Mixed-Income Project (“Project”) on approximately 5.9 acres currently addressed as 1545 West Mockingbird Lane - Not to exceed $29,000,000.00 - Financing: Maple/Mockingbird TIF District Fund (subject to current and annual appropriations from tax increments) *In alignment with Economic Development Incentive Policy.]

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. BEFORE I GO TO YOUR LAST PUBLIC HEARING, I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO AGENDA ITEM 21, WHICH IS TIED TO PH FOUR. ACTUALLY, PH FOUR WAS HEARD, AND ACCORDING TO THE RULES, IT MUST BE HEARD BEFORE AGENDA ITEM 21ST MAY BE CONSIDERED. SO AT THIS TIME, AGENDA ITEM 21 AUTHORIZED A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING TIF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH MOCKINGBIRD OWNER L.P., A TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AND OR ITS AFFILIATES DEVELOPER IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $29 MILLION TIF SUBSIDY PAYABLE FROM CURRENT AND FUTURE FUNDS IN THE MAPLE MOCKINGBIRD TIF DISTRICT, TIF DISTRICT OR ZONE IN ACCORDANCE IN CONSIDERATION OF THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGN, ENGINEERING, FINANCING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE OAK PARK MIXED USE AND MIXED INCOME PROJECT PROJECT ON APPROXIMATELY 5.9 ACRES. CURRENTLY ADDRESSED AS 1545 WEST MOCKINGBIRD LANE, NOT TO EXCEED $29 MILLION.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

ALL RIGHT. LOOKING FOR MOTION ON 21. ALL RIGHT.

I HEARD A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. OKAY. I HEARD A SECOND TIER ONE.

SO YOU PULLED ITEM 21. SO YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. WE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THIS RECENTLY, I THINK TWO WEEKS AGO.

I'M OPPOSED TO EXPANDING TIFS THAT WE NEED THOSE REVENUES FOR OUR GENERAL FUNDS.

AND I BELIEVE THIS PROJECT WOULD HAVE GONE FORWARD EVEN WITHOUT BEING PART OF THIS PROJECT.

PART OF THE TIF FUNDING THAT'S AVAILABLE. SO I WILL BE VOTING NO.

THANK YOU. MR. ROTH. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. I'VE BEEN CONCERNED ALSO ABOUT EXPANDING TIFS AND AND WHERE THE NEED MAY NOT BE AS, AS REQUIRED AS AS IN OTHER PARTS. AND IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, I'M CONCERNED THAT THE TIF EXPIRES IN, IN SEVEN YEARS. THE MONEY COMING INTO THAT TIF IS $5 MILLION A YEAR, WHICH WOULD BE ABOUT $35 MILLION.

THIS, THIS PARTICULAR ASK WOULD, WOULD WOULD EVAPORATE THAT, THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THAT TIF NUMBER ONE, NUMBER TWO, THERE'S ABOUT $25 MILLION IN THAT TIF.

I UNDERSTAND NOW THAT'S WE JUST ALLOCATED TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT LIQUIDATING OUR, OUR, OUR TIF RESERVES IN SOME OF THESE COMMUNITIES THAT MIGHT REALLY HAVEN'T FULLY TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THE, OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE EXISTING TIF BOUNDARY.

SO AGAIN IT'S NOT A REFLECTION ON A PROJECT, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT WOULD, WOULD REQUIRE THE, THE TIF FUNDS TO PROCEED. AND IF THEY AND THE OTHER, THE LAST ISSUE IS, IS THAT IT LOOKS LIKE THAT PART OF TOWN REALLY IS STARTING TO DEVELOP ON ITS OWN.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THE INCENTIVES THAT WE'RE PROVIDING BY ALLOWING THESE TIF FUNDS TO BE REIMBURSED TO THESE FOLKS ARE, ARE NECESSARY TO THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROJECT.

SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THIS REQUEST BE DENIED.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 21? MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. QUESTION FOR MR. SPATH.

SO IF WE DO NOT APPROVE THIS ITEM, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE $29 MILLION? THE COMMITMENT GOES AWAY. THAT'S IT. THERE ARE NO OTHER PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE.

[06:15:05]

OKAY. AND SO IS IT CORRECT THAT THERE'S CURRENTLY A CASH BALANCE OF $25 MILLION IN THE TIF FUND? ABOUT. YES. OKAY. AND DOES THE 29 MILLION THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS ITEM COME OUT OF THAT 25 PLUS FUTURE TAX REVENUES? THAT'S CORRECT. AND HOW MUCH DOES IT EARN EACH YEAR IN TAX REVENUES? IS IT 5 MILLION. ABOUT 5.9 MILLION. OKAY. SO THEY'LL RAISE ANOTHER 35 MILLION PLUS THE 25.

THAT'S 60 MILLION. THAT'S CORRECT. AND SO IF THERE ARE NO OTHER PROJECTS THAT APPLY FOR THIS, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT CASH IF THIS ITEM IS NOT APPROVED AT THE END OF THE TIF? RIGHT. STATE LAW REQUIRES US TO RETURN THE FUNDS TO THE CONTRIBUTING TAXING ENTITIES.

SO TO THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND AND THE TAXING AND THE COUNTY WHO'S ALSO BEEN PARTICIPATING.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON IT? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. WOW.

WHAT DO YOU THINK WE COULD DO WITH $60 MILLION, Y'ALL? OKAY, SO IT'S NOT ALL COMING TO US, BUT A GOOD CHUNK IS.

SO DO YOU NEED TO INCENTIVIZE THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ANYHOW? I MEAN, THIS IS JUST NOT A GOOD USE OF OUR TAX DOLLARS.

AND I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO GO INTO I HAVE IT HERE, BUT HOPEFULLY YOU WATCH THE HOUSING COMMITTEE YESTERDAY.

WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF AFFORDABLE UNITS AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW THAT ARE VACANT.

YOU WANT ME TO TELL YOU HOW MANY MAYOR. I'LL TELL YOU HOW MANY, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

POINT OF ORDER. I'M GOING TO GIVE HER A LITTLE LATITUDE TO MAKE HER POINT IF SHE'S GOING TO COME BACK TO THE ULTIMATE AGENDA ITEM.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE GET A LITTLE RHETORICAL LEEWAY AROUND HERE.

THANK YOU. BUT ALL THOSE, YOU KNOW, THOSE RHETORICAL QUESTIONS.

I MEAN, I'M NOT GOING TO ANSWER THEM. YOU KNOW THAT, RIGHT? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW THAT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 1299 CURRENTLY VACANT UNITS FROM THE HFC AND PFC. THAT'S JUST THOSE.

WE ALREADY KNOW THAT IN THE MARKET, WE HAVE BETWEEN PROBABLY TEN AND 12% VACANCY IN DALLAS AT ALL LEVELS.

BUT THE 1299 THAT IS AFFORDABLE UNITS SITTING VACANT TODAY.

WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF AVAILABLE UNITS THAT, I'M SORRY, UNITS THAT ARE IN THE PROCESS OF BEING BUILT.

IN FACT, 3828 UNITS UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW THAT ARE NOT MARKET RATE.

SOME OF THE MARKET RATE, BUT MOST OF THEM ARE AFFORDABLE.

SO WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO GIVE UP TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF MONEY THAT COULD COME TO THE GENERAL FUND. AS OPPOSED TO INCENTIVIZING THIS KIND OF A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, ARE YOU AWARE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW AT OUR REC CENTERS? THIS ISN'T WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER.

IT'S NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REC CENTERS. MAYOR. IT'S JUST ONE SECOND AGO, SHE WAS MAKING THE POINT OF DIVERTING DOLLARS FROM THE GENERAL FUND INTO TIFF, WHICH WAS GERMANE ISH. ALL RIGHT. AND I THOUGHT SHE WAS GOING TO STAY THERE.

AND THEN SHE JUST DEVIATED FOR JUST A SECOND AND YOU CAUGHT HER. SO I'M GOING TO SAY, CAN YOU GET BACK TO GOING BACK? SHE'S MAKING A POLICY ARGUMENT, I THINK, FOR WHY THIS IS.

I AM MAKING THE POLICY IDEA, BUT I NEED HER TO STAY IF SHE CAN.

THANK YOU. IT'S SEMI SUSTAINED. THE POINT IS ONLY WE HAVE TO MAKE VERY CAREFUL DECISIONS ON WHAT WE DO WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS. AND WE ARE ALLOCATING MONEY AND MAKING DECISIONS THAT WILL DIVERT FUNDING THAT WE NEED IN OUR GENERAL FUND TO INCENTIVIZE A PROJECT THAT DOESN'T EVEN NEED TO BE INCENTIVIZED.

AND IF THE TIF NO LONGER SERVES ITS PURPOSE, WELL, LET'S END IT AND STOP ASKING THESE PEOPLE TO PAY EXTRA MONEY INTO A SYSTEM FOR PROJECTS THAT AREN'T NEEDED. THERE'S A LOT OF CRANES OVER ON MOCKINGBIRD RIGHT NOW.

THERE'S ACTIVITY HAPPENING. SO I JUST THINK WE MAKE THESE ONE OFF DECISIONS INSTEAD OF THINKING STRATEGICALLY ABOUT WHAT ARE THE ACTUAL NEEDS IN THE CITY? THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

SO I TOO WASN'T GOING TO CHIME IN ON THIS ONE.

BUT AS OUR BUDGET BECOMES MORE TIGHT, WE WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AT EVERY DOLLAR.

FIRST, I WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK THIS PROJECT IS A GREAT PROJECT.

[06:20:03]

IT IS GOING INTO AN AREA THAT IS HAS A LOT OF INDUSTRIAL NOT A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING CURRENTLY.

THE SITE IS A GREAT SITE. IT IS OFF OF MOCKINGBIRD AND STEMMONS.

SO I DO BELIEVE IT IS MARKETABLE AND WE DO SEE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROGRESS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO BE IN A YEAR OR FIVE YEARS.

ECO DEV STAFF. HOW DID WE ARRIVE TO THE NUMBER THAT'S BEING ASKED? WAS THERE. WAS THERE A GAP FUNDING? WHAT WAS THE CRITERIA OR THE FORMULA THAT WE ARRIVED AT? THE NUMBER THAT'S BEING REQUESTED. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO WE FOLLOW OUR INCENTIVE POLICY. WE FOLLOW AN APPLICATION PROCESS.

THERE'S A BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR THIS DISTRICT AND FOR ALL TIF DISTRICTS.

AFTER WE INTAKE THE APPLICATION, WE REVIEW IT FOR HOW WELL IT PROPOSES TO IMPLEMENT ALL OF THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT PLAN FOR THIS DISTRICT.

AND THIS PROJECT, BY THE WAY, DOES CHECK ALMOST ALL THE BOXES FOR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR THE DISTRICT.

WE ALSO SET IT OUT FOR INDEPENDENT OUTSIDE UNDERWRITING AND CONFIRMED THAT THE GAP WAS APPROXIMATELY 29 MILLION.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE OFFER IN OUR OFFER LETTER, WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DEVELOPER.

THAT ENTIRE TERM SHEET WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR THIS TIF DISTRICT.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW IT WAS COINCIDENCE THAT THE NUMBER THAT'S AVAILABLE IS KIND OF THE NUMBER THAT WAS REQUESTED AND THE NUMBER THAT WAS ARRIVED AT.

I KNOW IT WAS A LITTLE BIT THEY REQUESTED A LITTLE BIT HIGHER. SURE.

THEY REQUESTED MUCH HIGHER THAN 29 MILLION. AND THE 29 MILLION IS NOT WHAT'S AVAILABLE.

25 MILLION IS WHAT'S AVAILABLE CURRENTLY. SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE GETTING IN RETURN FOR THE TIF DOLLARS.

I KNOW WE'RE GETTING HOUSING AT CERTAIN INCOME LEVELS.

WE'RE GETTING SOME RETAIL. WHAT ELSE DOES THIS HOW DOES THE CITY BENEFIT? SURE. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE TAX BASE. THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND IT GENERATES $50,000 A YEAR FOR THE CITY.

UPON COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT, WE PROJECTED THAT THE TAXABLE VALUE WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 75 MILLION, WHICH WOULD GENERATE UPWARDS OF A HALF $1 MILLION TO THE CITY FOR THE CITY, WHICH WOULD BE SPLIT BETWEEN THE TIF DISTRICT FOR A SHORT TIME, FOR THE TIME THAT IT REMAINS, AND THE GENERAL FUND.

SO TAX BASE OBVIOUSLY IS THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCE.

THE OTHER BENEFITS TO THE CITY ARE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WILL BE PROVIDED.

SO THAT'S 18 UNITS WITH VERY DEEP AFFORDABILITY AT OR BELOW 30% AMI, 54 UNITS AT OR BELOW 80% AMI AND 18 UNITS AT OR BELOW 100% AMI.

SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN OUR, OUR THE STANDARD REQUIREMENT OF OUR POLICY.

THERE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 15,000FT² OF RETAIL.

AS YOU MAY RECALL THIS, WHEN THIS ITEM CAME THROUGH ECO COMMITTEE EARLIER THIS MONTH, THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABOUT THE PROJECT NOT HAVING ENOUGH SPACE DEVOTED TO RETAIL. GIVEN THAT THE PROJECT IS ON MOCKINGBIRD LANE.

AND SO WE WORKED WITH THE DEVELOPER IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS TO SECURE A COMMITMENT TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF RETAIL SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THE PROPERTY TO 15,000FT². SO YOU KNOW, THAT 15,000FT² WILL BE LEASED BY RETAIL TENANTS THAT GENERATE SALES TAX FOR THE CITY AND GENERATE BUSINESS, PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE CITY.

SO, YOU KNOW, ALL IN, WHEN IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE, THIS PROPERTY COULD BE GENERATING UPWARDS OF $750,000 WHEN CURRENTLY IT'S GENERATING $50,000. OKAY. THE PROPERTY WAS ACQUIRED PRIOR TO OBTAINING THE OR APPLYING FOR THE TIF DOLLARS, OR DID THEY APPLY FOR THE TIF DOLLARS BEFORE ACQUIRING THE PROPERTY? THAT'S CORRECT. THE DEVELOPER ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY FIRST.

OKAY. AND SO WHEN THE DEVELOPER ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY, THEIR INTENTION WAS TO BUILD A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT INCENTIVES. OR WHAT WAS THE INITIAL? YOU'D HAVE TO ASK THE DEVELOPER IF YOU'D LIKE TO DIRECT THAT QUESTION TO THE DEVELOPER.

SIR. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

[06:25:01]

WE BOUGHT IT OUT OF FORECLOSURE, SO IT WAS REALLY MORE ABOUT A LAND TYPE PLAY.

WE FELT THAT WE WERE BUYING IT AT A VERY DEPRESSED VALUE, SO WE COULD THEN IN TURN SELL IT TO A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF USERS.

THE INTENT WAS NOT TO BUILD WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TODAY. THANK YOU.

AND WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO BUILD THE DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT THE INCENTIVES OR AT A REDUCED.

DOLLAR THAT'S BEING REQUESTED. NO, 100%. NOT NOT POSSIBLE.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST? AGENDA ITEM 21? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES HAVE A RECORD VOTE, PLEASE.

OH, I COULDN'T REALLY TELL YOU. I COULD TELL, BUT YOU KNOW, WHAT? DO YOU GUYS WANT TO HAVE A RECORD VOTE? ANYBODY HAVE AN OBJECTION TO IT? PAUL, DOES YOUR DOG HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO US HAVING A RECORD VOTE? PAUL'S DOG SAID NO. A RECORD VOTE, SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE IT.

ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE'LL NOW MOVE BACK TO PUBLIC HEARING.

[PH9. 26-1344A A public hearing to receive comments to amend Ordinance No. 20860, “City of Dallas Thoroughfare Plan” to (1) Change the designation of Wheatland Road from the Dallas/Lancaster City Limit line to Lancaster Road from a four-lane undivided residential collector roadway within 60 feet of right-of-way and 40 feet of pavement (M-4-U) to a special four-lane undivided community collector roadway in 96 feet of right-of-way with a bicycle facility (SPCL 4U); and (2) add Wheatland Road from University Hills Boulevard to the Dallas/Lancaster City Limit line as a special four-lane undivided community collector roadway in 96 feet of right-of-way with a bicycle facility (SPCL 4U); and, at the close of the public hearing, authorize an ordinance implementing the change - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (This item was deferred on April 8, 2026) *In alignment with Thoroughfare Plan.]

9PH9. P NINE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS TO AMEND ORDINANCE NUMBER 20860. CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGHFARE PLAN TO ONE.

CHALLENGE TO ONE. CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF WHEATLAND ROAD FROM THE DALLAS LANCASTER CITY LIMIT LINE TO LANCASTER ROAD FROM A FOUR LANE, UNDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ROADWAY WITHIN 60FT OF RIGHT OF WAY AND 40FT OF PAVEMENT.

M DASH FOR DASH YOU TO A SPECIAL FOUR LANE, UNDIVIDED COMMUNITY COLLECTOR ROADWAY IN 96FT OF RIGHT OF WAY WITH A BICYCLE FACILITY AND TWO AT WHEATLAND ROAD FROM UNIVERSITY HILLS BOULEVARD TO THE DALLAS LANCASTER LANCASTER CITY LIMIT LINE AS A SPECIAL FOUR LANE, UNDIVIDED COMMUNITY COLLECTOR ROADWAY IN 96FT OF RIGHT OF WAY WITH A BICYCLE FACILITY AND AT THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AUTHORIZED AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING THE CHANGE.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM. THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL.

NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION? PAGE NINE. YES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YES. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF WHEATLAND ROAD FROM DALLAS LANCASTER CITY LIMIT LINE TO LANCASTER ROAD IS CHANGED TO A SPECIAL FOUR LANE, UNDIVIDED COMMUNITY COLLECTOR ROAD AND 80FT OF RIGHT OF WAY WITH A BICYCLE FACILITY.

IS THERE A SECOND? ALL RIGHT. SO MOVED AND SECONDED.

MR. BLAIR, YOU WANT THE FLOOR FOR FIVE MINUTES TO EXPLAIN YOUR MOTION? ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM NINE? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? EYES HAVE IT. ALL RIGHT, MADAM SECRETARY. NEXT ITEM.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THAT CONCLUDES YOUR ITEMS FOR THIS AGENDA.

YOU DO HAVE A COUPLE OF REMAINING OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS.

I WILL FIRST SEE IF THEY ARE PRESENT. JENNIFER SANCHEZ IS NOT ONLINE.

JENNIFER SANCHEZ. NOT IN THE AUDIENCE. NOT PRESENT.