[25. 26-2928A Authorize the City Manager to (1) adopt the Sponsorship Toolkit for the Dallas Police Department Law Enforcement Training Center (“DPD LETC”) project in the form hereto attached as Exhibit A; (2) enter and execute naming and sponsorship agreements in accordance with the terms set forth in the Sponsorship Toolkit; (3) receive the transfer of the Quik Trip Corporation and W.W. Caruth Foundation funds from the Communities Foundation of Texas for deposit into the DPD LETC Fund in an amount not to exceed $17,500,000.00; and (4) establish appropriations in an amount not to exceed $17,500,000.00 in the DPD LETC Fund - Estimated Revenue: Dallas Police Department Law Enforcement Training Center Fund $17,500,000.00 *In alignment with Bond Implementation Program.]

ITEM 25. CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 25. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ONE. ADOPT THE SPONSORSHIP SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER DPD LETC PROJECT IN THE FORM HERETO ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT A TWO ENTER AND EXECUTE NAMING AND SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS SET FORTH IN THE SPONSORSHIP KIT TOOLKIT.

THREE RECEIVE THE TRANSFER OF THE QUIKTRIP CORPORATION AND W.W.

CARUTH FOUNDATION FUNDS FROM THE COMMUNITIES FOUNDATION OF TEXAS FOR DEPOSIT INTO THE DPD LETC FUND IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $17 MILLION AND FOUR ESTABLISH APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $17,500,000.

AND THE DPD LETC FUND. YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

BARRETT JOHNSTON. BARRETT JOHNSTON IS NOT PRESENT.

MR. MAYOR, THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON ROTH AND MENDELSOHN.

IS THERE A MOTION? FOR APPROVAL. I HEARD A MOTION.

SECOND. I HEARD A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

OKAY, MISS BLACKMON. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF CLARIFYING.

FIRST, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO ALL THE PRIVATE DONATIONS FROM THE CARUTH FOUNDATION AND APPRECIATE THEIR, THEIR COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND TO OUR CITY.

BUT WHEN YOU ADD UP THE $10 MILLION GIFTS, BUT WE'RE ONLY RECEIVING 17.5.

I'M AM I READING THIS RIGHT? I NEED A RECONCILIATION OF.

WHY IS IT THE WHOLE 20 COMING IN? WHAT'S THE 2.5? THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON, I KNOW THAT JENNY IS COMING OUT AND WE'LL LET'S SEE IF WE CAN BREAK THIS DOWN FOR YOU AND GET BETTER CLARITY. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. I'M JENNY AND I IS ONE OF THE BOND OFFICE.

SO THE FUNDING FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM OF $20 MILLION, WE ARE USING 2.5 FROM THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM.

AND THE 17.5 IS WHAT WE HAD A PORTION OF WHAT WE HAD IN THE CFT FUND.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE USE TO TO BRING THE 20 TO COUNCIL TODAY.

OKAY. AND SO IF IT DOES NOT PASS BECAUSE THIS IS ON THE, THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, DELTA HERE, RIGHT, THAT WE'RE GOING TO THE VOTERS. WHAT DOES THIS STILL MOVE THROUGH AT UNT YES, IT DOES.

THAT'S OUR I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT THIS ITEM IS LIMITED TO THE DISCUSSION OF THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT AND NAMING RIGHTS AT THE DPD LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER. AND IT'S NOT ABOUT THE UPCOMING BOND ELECTION.

SO JUST PLEASE BE MINDFUL AS WE DISCUSSED THIS ITEM PLEASE.

IF THE BOND PASSES, THAT'S THE MAIN THING. I'LL ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THE ANSWER IS THAT THIS GIFT WAS ALREADY COMMITTED TO.

AND SO WE'RE JUST EXERCISING THE GIFT. AND DEPENDING ON THE RESULTS OF.

I KNOW WE'RE NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE BOND PROGRAM.

WE WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. OKAY, SO THIS IS COMING THROUGH.

AND THEN ON THE TOOLKIT, IS THIS GOING TO BE I MEAN, WE'RE STILL PRIVATELY FUNDRAISING, I GUESS IN THE ONE OF THE MEMOS,

[00:45:02]

IT SAYS THAT IT WILL CONTINUE. AND I GUESS WE'RE STILL GOING WITH THE AUGUST 7TH MEMO TOOLKIT EXERCISE OF FOR NAMING RIGHTS.

AND HAS THERE IS THERE ANYTHING STILL IN THE WORKS THAT WILL BE BRIEFED UPON.

BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'VE GOT SEVERAL YOU KNOW, A MAP HERE THAT HAS A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES.

AND I'M JUST WONDERING IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS STEPPED UP.

YEAH. NO, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. AND ON.

THE I SEE ONE OF OUR PRIVATE FUNDRAISERS IN THE AUDIENCE AND I KNOW THAT THEY ARE ACTIVELY DOING TOURS OF THE FACILITY.

THEY HAVE SEVERAL ITEMS THAT ARE OUT THERE FOR CONSIDERATION THAT WE'RE NOT AT LIBERTY TO TALK ABOUT.

SO THAT IS THE TOOLKIT THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING USED BY THE FUNDRAISING TASK FORCE.

OKAY, THIS PACKET FROM AUGUST 7TH FROM THE AUGUST 7TH MEMO.

YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. AND IF I COULD JUST CLOSE OUT, MR. MAYOR COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON, WHAT WE COMMITTED TO DO IS AS WE WORK WITH OUR PRIVATE FUNDRAISERS TO CONTINUE TO UPDATE THE COUNCIL AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME ABOUT WHERE THEY ARE ON THOSE FUNDRAISING GOALS. AND WE WILL DEFINITELY CONTINUE TO DO THAT AS WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, TEAM.

AND MR. MAYOR, BEFORE YOU MOVE TO THE NEXT SPEAKER, I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON AND COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH, NOT MENDELSOHN. ALRIGHT, MR. ROTH.

THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, I WANTED TO ALSO ENDORSE AND COMMEND ALL THE FUNDRAISING EFFORTS THAT ARE BEING MADE TO TRY TO GET PRIVATE DONATIONS FOR A PARTICIPATION IN THIS. AND, AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO NAMING RIGHTS AND TRYING TO, TO, TO GET MORE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THIS.

SO THANK YOU. THE FUNDRAISING GROUP FOR, FOR ALL YOUR EFFORTS.

I DID WANT TO UNDERSTAND, IS THERE, IS THERE A PROCESS THAT IN THE THE APPLICATION FOR NAMING RIGHTS, IS THERE A ORGANIZED COMMITTEE AND THAT PROCESS ON HOW THE NAMES ARE VETTING THE NAMES AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE THAT FOLKS THAT ARE, ARE MAKING DONATIONS ARE EVALUATED AND THAT THEY'RE GIVEN THE RIGHT CONSIDERATION IN THE PROCESS? HOW IS THAT PROCESS HANDLED? YEAH. WELL, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR, FOR THE QUESTION.

THAT'S WHY WE SHARED WITH YOU GUYS THE, THE THE TOOLKIT.

SO THERE'S SPECIFIC PARTS OF THE FACILITY THAT HAVE THOSE.

OPPORTUNITY FOR NAMING RIGHTS, NOT EVERYTHING.

AND SO YOU KNOW, THAT IS THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE USING TO IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES FOR, FOR NAMING RIGHTS AT THIS POINT IN TIME, IS THERE LIKE A COMMITTEE? IS THERE PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING TOGETHER? THE FUNDRAISING TASK FORCE IS THE ONE THAT IS MAKING THOSE ASKS, AND THEY ARE THE ONES THAT ARE, THAT ARE BRINGING THOSE FORWARD TO US AND, AND WHO MAKES THE DECISION ON THE ULTIMATE DECISION ON THE, THE NAME, IS IT THE TASK FORCE OR IS IT, IS IT THE THIS BODY, IS IT SOME OTHER.

I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS. YEAH. WELL, I THINK THE GOOD THE GOOD NEWS IS WE HAVEN'T HAD ANYBODY THAT WE FELT LIKE WE WOULD WANT TO, TO NOT CONSIDER. AND SO I THINK THAT THE YOU KNOW, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I THINK QT AND THE CARUTH FOUNDATION ARE THE TWO THAT, THAT WERE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT MY PURPOSE IS, IS TO, TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DONATE AND THAT THEY WILL GET A FAIR APPROACH AND A FAIR HEARING. AND THEY'LL THEY'LL BE THAT OUR INTEREST IS TO PROVIDE NAMING RIGHTS, AND THAT WE DO HAVE A PROCESS THAT WILL ALLOW THAT PROCESS TO BE DONE PROPERLY, AND THAT WE WOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT AND TO BE ABLE TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MISS MENDELSOHN, THANK YOU.

I ONLY PULLED THIS ORIGINALLY BECAUSE OF THE QUESTION ABOUT THE RED LINE AND THE LANGUAGE AND WHY IT WAS WRITTEN THAT WAY.

I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH IT. I WILL ACTUALLY SAY THAT IF YOU HAVEN'T TAKEN THE TIME TO GO THROUGH THAT TOOLKIT, YOU REALLY SHOULD. WE HAVE UNIQUE ACCESS TO BUSINESSES AND PEOPLE OF INFLUENCE.

AND IF YOU'RE HAVING A MEETING, PLEASE TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT IT.

THIS IS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN DALLAS IN A WAY THAT WE NEED THEM.

AND SO I APPRECIATE THE FUNDRAISERS WHO ARE DOING THIS AS A CIVIC DUTY, AND IT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED.

UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN THE POLICE ACADEMY WAS ORIGINALLY CONCEIVED, THERE WAS AN OVERRELIANCE, I THINK, ON PRIVATE FUNDRAISING. AND THAT'S PUT US IN A DIFFICULT SITUATION, I THINK, ALL AROUND.

BUT BUT PLEASE LOOK AT IT. A LOT OF PEOPLE CARE ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY IN THIS CITY.

AND I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AND THEY ARE WILLING TO INVEST IN IT.

BUT WE ARE CONDUITS TO HELP MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

AND IT'S A VERY PROFESSIONALLY DONE, WELL THOUGHT OUT TOOLKIT.

[00:50:03]

SO IF YOU HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO LOOK THROUGH IT YET, I HOPE YOU WILL, AND MAYBE JUST ASK YOUR STAFF TO PRINT IT OUT SO THAT YOU CAN JUST LOOK THROUGH IT AND SEE IF YOU DON'T ALREADY KNOW SOMEBODY THAT WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE THAT INVESTMENT.

AND THEN IT'S A REALLY EASY HANDOFF. SO ANY OF THE THREE LEADERS OF THIS FUNDRAISING GROUP, THEY'RE VERY WILLING TO DO THE REST OF THE FOLLOW UP, SAY LIKE, HEY, I DID THIS FIRST CONVERSATION AND, YOU KNOW, PITCH A BIG NUMBER, PICK, PICK A REALLY OUTRAGEOUS NUMBER AND THEY'LL MAKE IT HAPPEN.

I DO WANT TO ASK, HAS THERE BEEN A CHANGE IN WHAT THE FUNDRAISING GOAL IS FOR THE FUNDRAISING SIDE? YEAH. THANK YOU FOR FOR THE COMMENTS. AND NO, THE FUNDRAISING GOAL IS AT THE $70 MILLION ORIGINAL COMMITMENT THAT WAS MADE, THE $70 MILLION. THAT IS CORRECT. AND, AND WHAT ITEMS ARE YOU INCLUDING IN THAT? ARE YOU INCLUDING STATE MONEY IN THAT OR THAT WAS REALLY SEPARATE.

NO, THAT THE THE STATE MONEY. WE HAVE A GRANT FOR $25 MILLION WHICH YOU ALL APPROVED ACCEPTANCE OF 15 OF THAT $25 MILLION UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA. AND SO THE TOTAL PRIVATE FUNDRAISING AMOUNT IS 70 MILLION.

AND WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN ACQUIRING A PORTION OF THAT ALREADY.

AND THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT THIS ITEM IS TO YOUR MIND.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE TOTAL THAT'S COMMITTED NOW ON THE PRIVATE SIDE HAS WHAT WHAT LEVEL HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED SO FAR? MY RECOLLECTION IS THE NUMBER IS $32 MILLION.

IT WENT UP FROM IN THE, IN THE LAST MONTH. AND THEY HAVE ASKED FOR THE REMAINING $38 MILLION.

OKAY. THANK YOU. MISS WILLIS. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

AND THANK YOU HONORABLE COUNCIL MEMBER JENNIFER GATES FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE DEDICATION YOU'VE GIVEN OVER AND ABOVE ON THIS, AS WELL AS TO LYNN MCBEE AND CHAIR TENNELL ATKINS.

AND SO I CERTAINLY CONCUR THAT THIS IS WHEN SPEAKING AS A FORMER NONPROFIT CEO, DONORS LIKE AN IDEA.

THEY LIKE A MISSION. AND THEY'VE DEFINITELY BEEN ABLE TO KNOW THAT THAT'S OUT THERE.

BUT ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, WE HAD A GROUNDBREAKING.

AND THANK YOU, MISS RASTOGI, MISS NISWANDER, FOR SENDING US THE PHOTOS OF THE PROGRESS ON THAT LOT.

I THINK IT IS A TOTALLY CLEARED NOW. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THIS OUT OF THE GROUND.

AND SO I THINK OUR, OUR OUR TEAM IS IN OVERDRIVE NOW BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING TANGIBLE TO POINT TO OF THE PROGRESS THAT WILL BE MADE.

AND YOU KNOW, THE HOLIDAYS ARE COMING AND PEOPLE WHO HAVE A LOT OF THINGS OR DON'T KNOW WHAT TO THE IT STARTS AT $1,000 TO BE ON THE DONOR WALL.

AND SO THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS HERE.

BUT TRULY, I THINK NOW THERE IS SOMETHING TO SHOW ON THE CAMPUS THAT THIS WILL BE COMING OUT OF THE GROUND AND THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT MORE ACTIVITY AROUND THIS.

BUT WE ARE TALKING TO PEOPLE ALL DAY, EVERY SINGLE DAY.

AND SO THIS IS A GREAT THING TO MAKE THEM AWARE OF HOW THEY CAN SUPPORT PUBLIC SAFETY IN DALLAS, AND THIS IS A GREAT WAY TO DO IT. SO THANK YOU ALL.

MISS BLAIR, THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. MAYOR. I WANT TO KIND OF ECHO WHAT CHAIR WILLIS HAS SAID ABOUT THE TRAINING, THE ACADEMY. I DRIVE PAST IT EVERY DAY. WHEN I GO TO MY COMMUNITY OFFICE.

I DRIVE PASS IT TO GET THERE AND GOING BACK. AND I WATCH EVERY DAY THE WONDERS OF BREAKING GROUND, TURNING DIRT, GETTING STOPPED BY BIG TRUCKS, COMING IN WITH MATERIALS THAT ARE NEEDED IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE OUR ACADEMY ACTIVATED WITH NEW RECRUITS.

THIS IS A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY. AND YES, ASK YOUR BUSINESS PARTNERS.

ASK YOUR FRIENDS. HEY, DO IT YOURSELF IF YOU HAVE THE MEANS IN ORDER TO DO SO.

THIS IS A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THE CITY OF DALLAS A WORLD CLASS CITY THAT HAS WORLD CLASS SAFETY, THAT HAS WORLD CLASS POLICE TO BE TRAINED AND TO BE READY TO HIT THE STREETS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS WILLIS, THANK YOU.

I HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION. I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING CHANGE DURATION FOR ALL SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT SHALL BE FOR 20 YEARS FOLLOWING SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. SECOND.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? YES.

IT'S TYPICAL IN CONTRACTS WITH DONORS THAT IT'S A GIFT IS NOT NECESSARILY IN PERPETUITY.

AND SO HAVING A TIME PERIOD ATTACHED IS SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT PART OF THIS.

AND SO, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND BEST PRACTICES, THAT'S WHAT THIS AMENDMENT DOES,

[00:55:03]

IS ADD A TIME FRAME. MISS BLACKMON, I'M JUST CURIOUS ON WHY 20 YEARS AND I DON'T KNOW.

I GUESS IF IT'S COMING FROM YOU, I GUESS YOU MAY HAVE TO ANSWER IT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF ASKED FOR THIS AMENDMENT, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING WHY A 20 YEARS TO USE KEEP USING THE TOOLKIT 20 YEARS AFTER, BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE IN THE CONTRACT WITH THE NAMING RIGHTS FOR 20 YEARS.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE AMENDMENT AND NOT WHEN IT WASN'T IN THE ORIGINAL POSTING IN WHY 20 YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO OVER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. OKAY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CONNIE TANKERSLEY IS GOING TO COME OUT.

HI. CONNIE TANKERSLEY WITH CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. I CAN'T COMMENT ON THE DURATION, THE SELECTION OF 20 YEARS, BUT WE NEED SOME DIRECTION IN THE ADOPTION OF THE TOOLKIT TO BE ABLE TO DRAFT THE AGREEMENTS AND THE TOOLKIT.

RIGHT NOW, WHILE IT HAS THAT GRAPHIC THAT PROVIDES THE VALUES, IT DOESN'T GIVE ANY GUIDANCE AS TO HOW LONG THE NAME WILL REMAIN ON THE BUILDINGS. OKAY, BUT WOULDN'T THAT BE SO THE TOOL YOU WANT TO ADD, I GUESS I'M CURIOUS NOW YOU'RE WANTING TO ADD THIS LANGUAGE INTO THE TOOLKIT OR THIS TOOLKIT ADDS 20.

THE NAMING AGREEMENT, WHATEVER NAME WILL LAST FOR THAT DURATION.

OKAY. SO YOU'RE SAYING THE NAMING OF A BUILDING IS A 20 YEAR AGREEMENT, AND IT'S NOT IN THE TOOLKIT NOW.

IT'S WE NEED TO PUT IT IN THERE. YES. AND I GUESS IT GOES BACK TO IF WE DECIDE THAT MORE THINGS ARE NEEDED OR LESS THINGS ARE TAKEN OUT, YOU CAN ALWAYS BRING THE TOOLKIT BACK TO COUNCIL TO AMEND.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO SO WE'RE ONLY ADDING LANGUAGE INTO THE TOOLKIT THAT SAYS THIS AGREEMENT IS THE NAMING RIGHTS IS ONLY FOR 20 YEARS.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

OKAY. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT.

OKAY. MISS MENDELSOHN, GO AHEAD. SO WAS THIS DISCUSSED WITH THE FUNDRAISERS? YES, IT WAS THE TIME. THE DURATION OF 20 YEARS WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE FUNDRAISERS.

I MEAN, BECAUSE I'VE ALSO SEEN IT WHERE IT STAYS AS LONG AS THAT BUILDING IS IN USE OR OWNERSHIP AS WELL AS A TIME FRAME.

AND THEN IS THERE A SECONDARY CLAUSE ABOUT IF A PERSON OR A FAMILY OR A FOUNDATION WANTS TO CONTINUE WITH THE NAMING THAT IT WOULD BE AT THE SAME AMOUNT THAT IT WOULD BE SOME PORTION OF THAT.

I MEAN, HAS THERE BEEN CONSIDERATION OF WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THAT 20 YEARS? I'D HAVE TO HAVE SO I'D HAVE TO HAVE CONNIE COME OUT AND ADDRESS THAT ISSUE.

SO THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS SO THAT WE CAN GET GUIDANCE ON WHAT THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL IS WITH REGARD TO DURATION.

WHILE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR 20 YEARS YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO CREATE THE SCHEDULE OF DURATION.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE WANT. WE JUST NEED THAT BECAUSE THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT DOESN'T GIVE US ANY DIRECTION ON HOW TO DRAFT.

WE DRAFT AGREEMENTS ALL THE TIME, BUT DURATION IS AN ESSENTIAL, SALIENT TERM THAT WE NEED TO BE GIVEN GUIDANCE ON.

BUT YES, MISS MENDELSOHN, WE DO PROVIDE PROVISIONS IN THERE BASED ON THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNCIL OF WHEN THE TERM EXPIRES, IF THAT. IF THE OPPORTUNITY, YOU KNOW, TO RENEW COULD EXIST.

SO, SO RESPECTFULLY, YOU SAY AT THE DIRECTION OF COUNCIL, BUT WE WEREN'T GIVEN ANY KIND OF NOTICE TO GIVE YOU ANY KIND OF DIRECTION.

I MEAN, THIS WASN'T PART OF THE AGENDA ITEM. IT'S NOT SOMETHING PROBABLY ANY OF US HAVE REALLY SAT DOWN AND THOUGHT ABOUT OR CONSIDERED.

AND THE SECONDARY QUESTIONS OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE TERM EXPIRES AND IF A FAMILY FOUNDATION HAS THE FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL.

AND AT WHAT? WHAT RATE? THESE ARE IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF HOW THIS IS WRITTEN.

AND SO, I MEAN, I'M NOT PREPARED TO GO AHEAD WITH THIS MOTION WHEN I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S EITHER AN ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE THAT NEEDS TO TALK ABOUT.

YOU NEED TO BRING FORWARD A PROPOSAL AND LET US REVIEW IT AND THEN GIVE YOU FEEDBACK.

BUT THIS IS FAR TOO BROAD FOR SOMETHING SO IMPORTANT, AND I'M NOT SURE WE'RE THE RIGHT GROUP TO COME UP WITH ALL OF THAT.

LIKE, I WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THAT EITHER AS PART OF THIS AGENDA ITEM OR A FULL COUNCIL BRIEFING WITH INFORMATION, BUT IT'S IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME ON WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS.

NOT THAT IT'S NOT IMPORTANT TO HAVE IT IN THERE.

AND I AGREE WITH YOU THAT IT SHOULD BE, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY FLESHED OUT ENOUGH THAT YOU CAN SAY VOTING ON SUCH GENERIC LANGUAGE IS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL. WHEN, I MEAN, HAD ANY OF US CONSIDERED THIS 30 MINUTES AGO?

[01:00:01]

PROBABLY. NO. THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S JUST THE ADOPTION OF THE TOOLKIT.

IF YOU ADOPT IT TODAY, WILL NOT ALLOW THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO DRAFT A SINGLE AGREEMENT, BECAUSE WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE DURATION IS.

SO COULD YOU BRING FORWARD TO US A DRAFT CONTRACT OR ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT THEN WE COULD CONSIDER? IF I COULD JUMP IN.

START BY SAYING I THINK THE INTENTION OF THE TOOLKIT IS FOR IT TO BE A LIVING DOCUMENT.

I DON'T THINK WE ARE PLANNING FOR THIS TO BE A ONE TIME CONVERSATION.

I THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME OTHER ELEMENTS THAT I DO BELIEVE YOU'RE CORRECT, WOULD REQUIRE US COMING AND HAVING A FULL CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING, BUT IN ORDER FOR US TO ACCEPT THE CURRENT TWO NAMING RIGHTS TODAY AND TO BE ABLE TO MOVE THOSE FORWARD WITH THE FUNDING THAT WE KNOW THAT WE NEED TO KEEP THE PROJECT MOVING. WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT TODAY AND WE CAN DEFINITELY COME BACK, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE OR A FULL CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING.

I THINK WE CAN GO A LITTLE BIT DEEPER ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE TOOLKIT.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, AS WE MOVE, HOPEFULLY, THIS ITEM FORWARD, IF THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU WANT US TO COME BACK AND DISCUSS MORE DIRECTLY, WE CAN DO IT. BUT THIS IS REALLY ABOUT US BEING ABLE TO RECEIVE THESE FUNDS WITH THESE TWO NAMINGS FOR TODAY AND ANY OTHER CHANGES, WE DEFINITELY CAN COME BACK. WE CAN WORK WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SEE AS MANY OF YOU, I THINK, PROBABLY WANT TO READ THE TOOLKIT, WHICH I WOULD SUGGEST THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU WANT US TO CONSIDER, AND WE WILL DEFINITELY COME BACK AND DO THAT BEFORE THE BODY IN ANY WAY THAT YOU WANT.

FULL BRIEFING, PUBLIC SAFETY, ADMINISTRATIVE.

IF YOU GIVE THAT DIRECTION, WE'LL MAKE SURE TO COMPLY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

SO MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE ITEM WAS SIMPLY THAT WE WERE ACCEPTING THE GIFTS, WHICH I'M VERY HAPPY TO ACCEPT, AND THAT WE WERE ACCEPTING THE TOOLKIT, WHICH AGAIN, VERY HAPPY TO ACCEPT.

AND THESE ARE SIMPLE ITEMS FOR US. THEY DON'T NEED MUCH DETAIL, BUT BY ADDING THIS AMENDMENT AND NOW TRYING TO LIKE SPECIFY CONTRACT LANGUAGE, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT AT ALL.

AND THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS. I MEAN, THIS TOOLKIT HAS BEEN AROUND FOR AT LEAST A YEAR.

SO I'M NOT PREPARED TO SAY YES ON THAT. AND I DON'T WANT TO ACCEPT A GIFT IF YOU THINK THAT IT'S IMPLYING THIS KIND THOSE KINDS OF COVENANTS WHEN WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT IT.

SO I, I NOW AM UNCOMFORTABLE WHEN I WAS VERY COMFORTABLE BEFORE, SO I'M NOT SURE WHERE THIS IS GOING.

I'M NOT SURE WHY WE CAN'T ACCEPT THE GIFT. AND THEN YOU'RE WORKING OUT THE CONTRACT AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD EXPECT.

BUT I DO THINK THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SHOULD HAVE PREPARED FOR US THAT KIND OF LANGUAGE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO. SO WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WAS, WAS RECEIVED IN THE SERVICE REQUEST ABOUT THIS ITEM WAS TO ACCEPT TO DO THE RESOLUTION AS PLANNED ABOUT ACCEPTING THE CARUTH AND THE QUIKTRIP GIFT, THE DONATION.

BUT BUT WE THE ITEM ALSO SAID THAT THE CONSIDERATION FOR THAT WAS NAMING UNDER THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT, AND UPON REVIEW OF THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT, THE DETAIL WAS LACKING IN TERMS OF DURATION.

SO YOU CAN YOU CAN ACT TO ACCEPT THE GIFT, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO BRING THE ITEM TO FLUSH OUT WITH THE TERMS WITH REGARD TO HOW LONG THEIR NAMING WILL EXIST ON THE BUILDING, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT GUIDANCE IN THE TOOLKIT.

THE TOOLKIT, WE ADVISE THAT THE TOOLKIT NEEDED TO AT LEAST BE EXPANDED TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL SALIENT TERMS THAT IT IS LACKING.

SO ONE OF THE ITEMS TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM. OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS MAKE A MOTION TO AT LEAST GIVE US THE GUIDANCE ON THE TERM, BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE NEED. AND WE DRAFT THESE KIND OF AGREEMENTS ALL THE TIME FOR THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

WE KNOW WHAT THE PROVISIONS ARE THAT NEED TO BE THERE.

WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE TERMS ARE THAT THAT HOW LONG IT WILL LAST ON THE BUILDING OR WHEREVER YOU'RE DESIGNATING THIS NAME.

SO THAT'S THE ONLY ITEM THAT'S REALLY MISSING IN THE TOOLKIT.

AND SO WE RECOMMENDED THAT THEY MAKE, THEY INCLUDED IN THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM.

IT GOT OMITTED ACCIDENTALLY. AND SO THAT'S WHY THE MOTION IS BEFORE YOU.

WHAT WERE THE CARUTH FOUNDATION AND QUIKTRIP TOLD ABOUT THE DURATION OF THEIR NAMING? WHAT ARE THEY EXPECTING? YEAH, I THINK THAT THE THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC TIME FRAME PROVIDED.

DURING THE DISCUSSIONS, I THINK THAT THEY WERE YOU KNOW, MAKING THE DONATION BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO TO SUPPORT PUBLIC SAFETY AND SUPPORT THIS PROJECT. WELL, DON'T YOU THINK THAT THEY NEED TO KNOW THAT BEFORE WE.

I MEAN, WOULDN'T THAT BE PART OF THEIR GIFT ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THEY KNOW THE TERMS?

[01:05:05]

WHAT IF THE TERM WAS ONE YEAR? YOU THINK THEY'D BE OKAY WITH THAT? PROBABLY NOT. SO I DO THINK THAT THAT CONVERSATION NEEDS TO HAPPEN WITH THEM AS WELL.

IF IT HASN'T ALREADY. SO I DON'T KNOW. THIS THIS HAS KIND OF GOTTEN MUCKED UP.

THANKS. OKAY. JUST REALLY QUICKLY, I THINK MISS MENDELSOHN'S CONCERNS ARE VERY FAIR.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO AVOID THESE SITUATIONS. OTHERWISE, THE VOTING AGENDA MEETING TURNS INTO A BRIEFING.

AND SO, AGAIN, I WANT TO BE AS EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE.

BUT GO AHEAD, MR. RIDLEY. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU.

SO CAN WE APPROVE THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE GIFTS TODAY, AND DEFER THE ADOPTION OF THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED TODAY ABOUT ITS TERMS. YEAH, THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. OKAY. AND, CONNIE, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU ABOUT THE STANDARD TERMS OF THE CITY'S PARKS DEPARTMENT NAMING RIGHTS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO INCORPORATE INTO THIS ONE.

IS THERE AN ESCAPE CLAUSE THAT IF THE DONOR WHO HAS THE NAMING RIGHTS COMMITS SOME CRIMINAL ACT OR BRINGS DISHONOR ON THE CITY, THAT WE CAN CHANGE THE NAME BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF THE PERIOD? YES, YES, WE HAVE NAMING RIGHTS THAT WE'VE DONE TIME AND TIME AGAIN AND WE HAVE ESCAPED.

WE HAVE EXIT CLAUSES FOR THE CITY. FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THEM IS IF THE COMPANY IS ALIGNED WITH SOMETHING THAT IS AGAINST THE CITY'S PUBLIC PURPOSES OR PUBLIC INTEREST. YES, WE HAVE THOSE PROVISIONS, THE ONLY ONE THAT'S MISSING THAT IN ORDER FOR US TO DRAFT THE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN QUIKTRIP AND THE CITY AND THE CARUTH FOUNDATION IS THE DURATION.

AND SO WE WERE ASKING FOR DIRECTION ON THAT. OKAY.

AND WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION BY STAFF AS TO WHAT THAT DURATION SHOULD BE? NOT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. DID ANY OTHER STAFF DEPARTMENT ADDRESS THAT ISSUE OF WHY 20 YEARS? THE THE 20 YEAR TIME FRAME WAS DEVELOPED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE FUNDRAISING TASK FORCE.

OKAY. DID THEY APPROVE THE 20 YEAR DURATION? IT WAS THEIR RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MISS WILLIS. THANK YOU. AND I CERTAINLY HEAR THAT.

AND I THINK YOU MADE A GOOD POINT, IS THAT THIS WAS A LOCAL GROUP GAUGING THE MARKET, GAUGING THE EXPOSURE, TAKING, TAKING A TYPICAL TIME FRAME. IF IT ASSUAGES SOME CONCERN, WE COULD AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO SAY FOR UP TO 20 YEARS TO ALLOW LATITUDE IF WE WANTED TO DO SOMETHING BY DIFFERENT LEVELS.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE SAY THAT AFTER FIVE YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO CHISEL YOUR NAME OFF OF THE WALL BECAUSE YOU ONLY GAVE US $1,000.

SO, I MEAN, THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT YOU GET INTO.

AND THERE ARE OTHER FINER POINTS IN CONTRACTS.

I THINK THAT COULD BE INCLUDED ABOUT FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL OR IF SOMETHING HAPPENS WHERE SOMETHING UNSAVORY OCCURS AND WE DON'T WANT A NAME ON A BUILDING.

I MEAN, ALL OF THESE ARE KIND OF THE STANDARD LANGUAGE.

I WOULD THINK, MISS TANKERSLEY THAT WOULD COME AS PART OF IT, BUT MAYBE NOT AT THIS LEVEL OF THE KIND OF AGREEMENT THAT WE NEED TO MAKE.

SO I WOULD ASK, DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE OF BENEFIT TO GIVE THAT FLEXIBILITY OF UP TO 20 YEARS? SO THAT IF IT'S DETERMINED THAT DIFFERENT TYPES OF GIFTS NEED LIMITED TIME FRAMES.

SO YOU COULD DELEGATE THAT AUTHORITY AND DECISION MAKING TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE SO THAT IF YOU DO AN UP TO 20 YEARS, THEN SHE CAN DECIDE BASED ON WHO THE DONOR IS THAT THE TIME FRAME AND GIVE THAT DIRECTION TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO THE QUESTION IS, WE'VE GOT AN AMENDMENT HERE THAT TALKS ABOUT ALL SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES BEING FOR 20 YEARS.

SO THIS WOULD NEED TO BE AMENDED TO THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT SHALL BE FOR UP TO 20 YEARS FOLLOWING SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION.

SO THAT COULD GIVE US THE LATITUDE TO EXPLORE THIS.

THAT'S CORRECT. BUT IT WOULD ALLOW YOU. THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT WE ALLOW THE CITY TO START ACCEPTING THE GIFTS.

DONORS DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT THINGS ARE STALLING OUT.

AND SO I JUST I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE LET THIS MOVE FORWARD AND THAT IF WE WANT TIME TO EXPLORE, WE CAN DO THAT. SO I'M HAPPY TO. AM I ALLOWED TO AMEND MY OWN AMENDMENT? OKAY. YEAH. IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, THEN THE LANGUAGE WILL SAY UP TO 20 YEARS RATHER THAN 20 YEARS.

CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO NO OBJECTION. AND THAT'S THE THE MOTION TO AMEND.

THAT'S ON THE FLOOR. CHAIR, MAY I BE RECOGNIZED? WHAT? FOR WHAT PURPOSE? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

SURE. SO I'D LIKE TO MOVE. WE'RE GOOD. YEAH, WE'RE GOOD TO GO.

[01:10:02]

GO AHEAD. SO I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO DIVIDE THE QUESTION OF THE TOOLKIT AND ACCEPTING THE THE DONATIONS.

OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DIVIDE. ANY DISCUSSION? SO I'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THAT MOTION. GO AHEAD. SO I THINK THERE'S NO QUESTION WE'D LIKE TO ACCEPT THESE GENEROUS AND THOUGHTFUL DONATIONS TO YOU KNOW CARUTH HAS BEEN SUCH A LONG TIME PARTNER FOR THE CITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND I LOVE THAT THEY WERE THE FIRST PRIVATE DONATION.

QUICKTRIP HAS MADE AN UNUSUALLY STRONG COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC SAFETY IN OUR CITY.

AND REALLY A CORPORATE LEADER NOW IN THAT NOT JUST IN THE CONVENIENCE STORE SPACE.

SO AGAIN, REALLY OUTSTANDING THAT THAT'S THE FIRST FOUNDATION, THAT'S THE FIRST CORPORATION.

AND I WANT TO, I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THAT ACTION AND ACCEPT IT.

ABSOLUTELY. BUT SO BEFORE WE CONTINUE I'VE BEEN INFORMED THAT YOUR MOTION IS ACTUALLY NOT DEBATABLE.

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT TO DIVIDE THE QUESTION WITHOUT DISCUSSION.

OKAY. SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF DIVIDING THE QUESTION SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT. WE NEED WE NEED A RECORD ON THAT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND I CALL YOUR NAME. PLEASE STAY YES IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

NO. IF YOU OPPOSE, COUNCIL MEMBER WEST IS ABSENT WITH VOTE TAKEN.

COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY.

COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA.

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

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS.

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

NO. MAYOR PRO TEM RESENDEZ. YES. MAYOR JOHNSON IS ABSENT.

WITH SEVEN VOTING IN FAVOR, SIX OPPOSE TWO ABSENT VOTE TAKEN.

THE MOTION PASSES, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, SO NOW WE ARE ON THE DIVIDED MOTION.

WE. FIRST, WE CAN DISCUSS THE PART RELATED TO THE 20 YEARS OR THE TIME, THE DURATION.

SO GO AHEAD. THE SECOND PART OF, OF THAT THEN IS IS HAVING A VERY CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THIS WILL WORK AND, YOU KNOW, TO, TO SAY UP TO AND ALLOWING DIFFERENT CONTRACTS FOR DIFFERENT CORPORATIONS AND DONORS SEEMS VERY WRONG TO ME.

THIS SHOULD BE A STANDARD, NOT SUBJECTIVE DECISION AND A DONOR SHOULDN'T BE LIKE, WELL, I WONDER IF I CAN GET A BETTER DEAL THAN THIS OTHER ONE.

IT SHOULD JUST BE HERE'S WHAT THE DEAL IS. HERE'S THE PACKET.

AND YOU NOW CAN DECIDE WHAT LEVEL OF THE MENU YOU WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE IN.

AND I THINK THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT DOES HARM A FUNDRAISING CAMPAIGN IS WHEN THERE IS UNCERTAINTY AND LANGUAGE, LIKE UP TO IS EXACTLY THE THING THAT TANKS IT, BECAUSE THEN THAT'S A NEGOTIATION POINT ALSO.

AND WHETHER IT'S A CORPORATION OR A VERY SUCCESSFUL PERSON THAT CAN MAKE THIS LEVEL OF DONATION, THEY DON'T NEED ANOTHER NEGOTIATING POINT. AND SO WE SHOULD JUST HAVE THIS IS THE MENU, PICK THE ITEM YOU WANT.

BUT WE SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT THIS OUT. IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SPRUNG ON US AT THIS MOMENT.

AND I'M NOT TRYING TO CAST ASPERSIONS ON ANY SINGLE DEPARTMENT FOR THAT, BUT I'M NOT PREPARED TO VOTE ON THAT.

AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S BEEN CAREFUL CONSIDERATION TO ALL THOSE ASPECTS.

AND IT WASN'T EVEN BROUGHT UP. WELL. WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU YOU KNOW, THE 20 YEARS WELL, DO THEY GET FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL? LIKE THAT WASN'T EVEN BROUGHT UP YET. AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SEE THE WHOLE THING LAID OUT AND THEN LET'S ACCEPT IT.

BUT. IF WE'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE THESE KINDS OF DECISIONS ON THE FLY FOR SOMETHING SO IMPORTANT, WITH SO MUCH MONEY AT STAKE, I THINK THAT SAYS A LOT ABOUT WHO WE ARE.

AND WE NEED TO BE MORE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT THINGS LIKE THIS AND NOT JUST SAY, UP TO OR WE'LL GIVE DISCRETION ON THIS ALSO TO A DEPARTMENT, AS OPPOSED TO JUST SAYING, THIS IS WHAT THE POLICY IS.

THANK YOU. PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY. NOW THAT WE HAVE DIVIDED THIS QUESTION, WHICH QUESTION ARE WE TAKING UP FIRST?

[01:15:08]

AND IS THE DISCUSSION LIMITED TO EACH INDIVIDUAL ITEM SEPARATELY? SO YOU ARE CURRENTLY DISCUSSING THE ADOPTION OF THE TOOLKIT WITH THE AMENDMENT OF ADDING A DURATION OF UP TO 20 YEARS.

SO YOU'RE JUST DOING THE UP TO 20 YEARS PART.

YEAH. I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT I WASN'T CLEAR ENOUGH INITIALLY.

MR. ROTH I'M. HAVE A QUESTION IS, IF WE ADOPT THE TOOLKIT, DO WE STILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO AMEND THAT TOOLKIT REQUIREMENTS IN SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS, BRIEFINGS, ETC.? MR. MAYOR, IF I, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH.

THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. AS I STATED EARLIER, I THINK THIS TOOLKIT IS GOING TO BE A LIVING DOCUMENT.

THERE ARE GOING TO BE THINGS THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LEARN ALONG THE WAY. AND WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME BEST PRACTICES OUT THERE THAT WE DEFINITELY, I THINK, HAVE ALREADY INCORPORATED. SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE IS THAT WE PROVIDE ONGOING UPDATES ABOUT JUST THE WHOLE NAMING PROCESS.

THAT WAY YOU'RE GETTING UPDATES AS WE'RE GETTING MORE INFORMATION ABOUT ADDITIONAL WHETHER IT'S ORGANIZATIONS OR INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE COMING IN SUPPORT OF WHAT WE'RE LAYING OUT AND IF THE COUNCIL'S WILL IS IF THIS ITEM MOVES FORWARD WITH US JUST ACCEPTING AND HAVING JUST THE NAMING COMPONENT.

I WOULD DEFINITELY SUPPORT COMING BACK AND GIVING COUNCIL A FULL BRIEFING ON, I THINK, SOME OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE TOOLKIT THAT MAYBE THIS FULL BODY HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO FULLY GO THROUGH IT. THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU WANT US TO ALSO CONSIDER IN HOW WE MOVE FORWARD, AND WE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT AT THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNCIL.

SO I THINK IT NEEDS TO CONTINUE TO BE A LIVING DOCUMENT.

I DON'T THINK IT WAS EVER INTENDED THAT THIS IS A ONE TIME OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THE TOOLKIT AS THIS CONTINUES TO EVOLVE.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND YOUR QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH. SO THE, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF WE CAN ADOPT THE TOOLKIT WITHOUT THE AMENDMENT, WITHOUT THE AMENDMENT FOR THE TIME CONSTRAINTS, THIS REALLY GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH A BASE DOCUMENT THAT ALLOWS THE FUNDRAISING FOLKS, OUR STAFF AND DONORS TO REALLY HAVE A MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION IN IN TRYING TO RAISE MONEY. I THINK THIS IS A POSITIVE APPROACH.

IF WE HAVE A LIVING DOCUMENT, IF WE HAVE A DOCUMENT THAT CAN BE SO-CALLED AMENDED PERIODICALLY, THAT GIVES US MORE FLEXIBILITY IN IN OUR DONATION REQUESTS AND ON OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH DONORS.

AND I WOULD THINK THAT IF WE START VOTING ON INDIVIDUAL ITEMS REGARDING TO THE TOOLKIT AT THIS POINT, I THINK WE'RE GOING WE'RE WORKING INTO A WE'RE RUNNING DOWN A A DIRECTION THAT IS REALLY GOING TO BE, I THINK, COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A MORE COMPLETE OR A BRIEFING OR HAVE SOME KIND OF FEEDBACK.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS NOT TO ABSOLUTELY NOT TO DISCOURAGE THE, THE PROCESS.

I WANT TO IN, I WANT TO PROMOTE THIS PROCESS.

I WANT THIS PROCESS TO BE A VIBRANT AND FLUID, AND I WANT IT TO BE TRANSPARENT.

SO I THINK THAT BY IMPROVING THE TOOLKIT AS ITS AS IN ITS CURRENT STATE, WITH THE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING BY OUR CITY MANAGER THAT THIS IS A DOCUMENT THAT CAN BE ADJUSTED, AMENDED, THAT IT'S NOT CARVED IN STONE.

THIS GIVES US A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY TO TO HELP, HOPEFULLY, THE FUNDRAISING EFFORTS OF OUR OF OUR OUTSIDE PROMOTERS TO, TO, TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE IN THEIR FUNDRAISING.

SO IT'S, IT'S NOT AGAINST THE, I'M AGAINST SORT OF PICKING APART THE, THE DETAILS RIGHT NOW WITHOUT HAVING A MORE THOUGHTFUL APPROACH. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO, TO ENCOURAGE US TO APPROVE THE TOOLKITS SET AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED.

MR. MAYOR, I FEEL TO MAKE ANOTHER COMMENT THAT I THINK IS CRITICAL FOR WHATEVER DECISION THAT COUNCIL MAKES TODAY.

WE KNOW THAT THESE ARE TWO VERY TRUSTED PARTNERS.

THEY TRULY ARE COMMITTED TO PUBLIC SAFETY IN OUR CITY.

I THINK THE TOOLKIT, THE ONE PART OF THE TOOLKIT IS WHAT I THINK IS BEING DISCUSSED IN THAT COMPONENT IS NOT INCLUDED.

HOWEVER, WITHOUT, I BELIEVE THE DURATION. I STILL WOULD NOT HAVE EXECUTED CONTRACTS.

EVEN IF YOU ARE PROVING FOR US TO ACCEPT THE GIFTS AND TO INCLUDE THOSE AS THE TWO NAMING COMPONENTS THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, BASED ON WHAT I BELIEVE THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS STATED, AND I'LL BE ASKING FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY TO CLARIFY.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH EXECUTING THE AGREEMENTS, BECAUSE THE DURATION COMPONENT WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN ORDER TO DO THAT.

[01:20:08]

SO, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY IF I'M IF I'M CORRECT ON THAT, YOU ARE.

AND THE WAY THE THE WAY YOU ARE CORRECT AND THE WAY THE MOTION IS CURRENTLY DIVIDED.

AFTER DISPOSING OF THE TOOLKIT ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT TO INCLUDE THE DURATION AS PART OF THE TOOLKIT TODAY YOU WILL.

THE NEXT ITEM FOLLOWING THE DIVISION IS THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE GIFTS.

AND AT THAT POINT, YOU COULD ADD THE DURATION TO THAT AS WELL TO ALLOW THOSE CONTRACTS TO MOVE FORWARD IF YOU IF YOU WANTED TO.

OKAY. SO LISTEN, I WISH I, I WISH I WAS SMARTER IN HOW WE DISCUSS THIS STUFF.

WE'RE GETTING, WE GET BITS AND PIECES OF INFORMATION.

I WANT TO ACCEPT THESE GIFTS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT THE TOOLKIT IS, IS BASICALLY IN PLACE SO THAT WE CAN DO IT.

IF WE HAVE TO HAVE A, A TIME FRAME TO MAKE THIS A LEGAL SITUATION, THEN I HAVE TO CHANGE MY DECISION.

I DIDN'T I DON'T UNDERSTAND WITHOUT HAVING THIS INFORMATION THAT WE NEED THIS IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS MOVE FORWARD.

SO AGAIN, NOW I HAVE TO, TO, TO BE TO WORK BACKWARDS.

I WOULD THEN SUPPORT MAKING AN UP TO 20 YEAR REQUIREMENT OF THE TOOLKIT AND THEN SUBJECT TO AND THEN WHEN WE COME BACK, HOPEFULLY THAT WOULD BE APPROVED, IT WOULD ALLOW THE TOOLKIT TO GO FORWARD.

IT WOULD ALLOW US TO HAVE A, A VALID CONTRACT FOR THE, FOR THE DONATION.

THEN WE CAN, WE CAN MAKE THAT AMENDMENT TO THE, TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE OF THE GIFT.

LOOK, THIS IS I WANT TO TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH US, TO BE ABLE TO PROMOTE THIS.

THIS IS A BIG, BIG DEAL FOR US TO DO THAT. I WANT TO HONOR THE QUICKTRIPS AND THE CARUTH FAMILY AND, AND THE OTHER DONORS THAT THAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH TO, TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE REALLY APPRECIATE, WE REALLY LOVE THE FACT THAT THESE FOLKS ARE COMMITTED TO OUR PUBLIC SAFETY, TO OUR CITY AND ARE WILLING TO, TO, TO MAKE SIGNIFICANT DONATIONS FOR US TO, TO SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS.

AND I WANT THAT TO BE OUR, OUR BRAND, THAT THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO HERE.

AND SO IF THAT'S THE WAY WE NEED TO DO IT TO GET THAT DONE, I WANT TO GET IT DONE.

AND THIS IS AND I WANT, I'M ASKING YOU ALL TO, TO GIVE US GOOD COMMERCIALS FOR PROMOTING THIS.

THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING MY EARLIER QUESTIONS.

HOW IS THIS DONE? HOW CAN WE PROMOTE THIS FOR PEOPLE? I WANT THIS TO BE A TOP OF THE OF THE MIND, A TOP OF THE OF THE SHELF SITUATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WELL.

SO IN THAT CASE, I WILL APPROVE, I WILL SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT TO THIS PORTION OF THE TOOLKIT REQUEST BASED ON, ON THE INFORMATION I'VE JUST HEARD FROM.

THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, IF I COULD JUST GET WILLOW SANCHEZ TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION REGARDING BRINGING THE CONTRACTS FORWARD.

WILLOW SANCHEZ. THE TWO TODAY, YOU'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF THOSE TWO AGREEMENTS.

SO THOSE TWO AGREEMENTS CAN COME BACK WITH THE DURATION IN THEM, AND THAT'S HOW THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD.

SO YOU CAN ADOPT. ENTER AND EXECUTE NAMING AND SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENTS IN GENERAL, BUT NOT NECESSARILY WITH THOSE TWO.

YES. SO THEY CAN COME BACK TO YOU WHEN THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE AGREEMENT FOR AUTHORIZATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF EXECUTION WITH A TERM IN IT THAT ALLOWS THOSE TWO TO MOVE FORWARD WITH YOUR DIVISION OF THE QUESTION TODAY, YOU CAN STILL DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER TO HAVE UP TO 20 YEARS TO HAVE A A CONSISTENT FRAMEWORK BASED UPON THE AMOUNT OR THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING.

OR YOU CAN ASK FOR THAT FRAMEWORK TO COME BACK IN A BRIEFING SESSION OR FOR IT TO BE WITH YOU.

BUT THERE IS A WAY FOR THESE TWO TO MOVE FORWARD, TO ACCEPT THOSE GIFTS AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONTRACT.

SEPARATE AND APART FROM ACCEPTING THE SPONSORSHIP TOOL, HOWEVER, YOU'D LIKE TO PROCEED WITH AMENDMENTS TO IT.

MISS ROTH, IS THAT ALL YOU HAVE, MISS WILLIS? THANK YOU. SO JUST BECAUSE I THINK THIS HAS BEEN THERE'S MISINFORMATION PUTTING UP TO 20 YEARS WOULD NOT BE ON THE MENU HERE. IT WOULD JUST BE TO GIVE OUR LAWYERS LATITUDE TO BE ABLE TO WORK WITH DIFFERENT LEVELS.

SO IT'S NOT INTENDED TO HAVE UNCERTAINTY WITH SOMEONE WHERE THEY DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE GOT A FIVE YEAR OR 20 YEAR AGREEMENT WHEN THEY INK A DEAL.

[01:25:04]

SO I WANTED TO BE SURE THAT WAS CLEAR AND TO THE POINT.

MEANINGFUL DISCUSSIONS HAVE OCCURRED AND THIS FIGURE WAS PULLED FROM OUR OWN PARK STANDARDS.

I KNOW HAVING BEEN IN THAT ROLE 20 YEARS IS COMMON IN OTHER CITY FACILITIES WITH NAMING RIGHTS.

AND ALSO FROM OUR LOCAL FUNDRAISERS ABOUT WHAT THE MARKET WOULD BEAR AND WHAT'S APPROPRIATE.

BUT I'M A LITTLE MURKY AFTER WHAT YOU SAID. I MEAN, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS BE ABLE TO ADVANCE THESE TODAY SO THAT WE REMOVE UNCERTAINTY FROM TWO OF OUR EARLY COMMITMENTS TO HELP SHOW OTHERS THAT WE ARE STABLE AND CERTAIN IN MOVING THIS PROJECT FORWARD. AND WE ARE READY TO ACCEPT THEIR FUNDS.

BUT I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE ALSO GIVE YOU THE LATITUDE AND OURSELVES, THE LATITUDE TO EXPLORE THIS.

THIS WAS THE CHARGE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE IN 2025.

I'M HAPPY TO I MEAN, IT'S BEEN ON THE RADAR TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION AROUND THIS.

BUT SINCE THIS IS BEFORE US TODAY, I'M NEEDING TO UNDERSTAND NOW FROM WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

COULD YOU JUST BE MORE CLEAR ABOUT THAT ON THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT? WHAT WE ARE. WHAT WOULD BE OPTIMAL FOR BEING ABLE TO GET THIS DONE? HAVE THE 20 YEAR COMMITMENT FOR THESE TWO LARGE GIFTS, AND THEN LEAVE THE DOOR OPEN FOR US TO CONSIDER THE REMAINDER? SO MY UNDERSTANDING WHEN THE QUESTION WAS DIVIDED WAS THAT WE SEPARATED THE ADOPT THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT FROM THE QUESTION OF ACCEPTING THE TWO DONATIONS, NUMBER THREE AND NUMBER FOUR.

NUMBER THREE, THERE'S NO NUMBER FOUR BOTH OF THEM ARE IN NUMBER THREE.

SO MOVING FORWARD WITH NUMBER THREE, YOU CAN RECEIVE.

THE DONATIONS. AND THOSE TWO CONTRACTS CAN COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH THE SPECIFIC TERM FOR THE DURATION IN THEM.

AS IT RELATES TO THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT. I THINK A NUMBER OF SUGGESTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE THAT IT CAN.

YOU CAN DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE PARTICULAR SPECIFIC DURATIONS.

YOU CAN HAVE IT COME BACK TO PUBLIC SAFETY FOR A BRIEFING, OR YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH STATING 20 YEARS, BUT HOW DO WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT COME BACK TO US WITHOUT A DURATION? I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT HERE. SO YOU'RE SAYING WE CAN BRING THOSE TWO BACK? YES. BECAUSE THE THE NUMBER TWO WAS AUTHORED.

YOU GUYS WERE AUTHORIZING THEM IN GENERAL TO ENTER INTO ANY AGREEMENTS BASED UPON THE TOOLKIT.

AND SHE WE COULDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT WITHOUT KNOWING THE SPECIFIC DURATIONS FOR ALL OF THE CATEGORIES.

THERE'S A NUMBER, THERE'S BENCHES, THERE'S PATIOS, THERE'S ALL SORTS OF THINGS.

BUT TODAY IN NUMBER THREE, YOU COULD BRING THOSE TWO BACK WITH THE SPECIFIC TERM THAT IS NEGOTIATED, IF NOT TOLD TODAY. AND WHEN IT COMES TO YOU, YOU CAN THEN DEBATE WHETHER YOU LIKE THE TERM OR APPROVE IT OR NOT JUST ON THOSE TWO.

BUT NUMBER TWO HERE, WHICH WASN'T A PART OF THE DIVISION OF THE QUESTION.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO IT. NUMBER ONE IS WHERE YOU CAN ADDRESS THE CONSISTENT BREAKDOWN OF EACH DURATION FOR EACH TYPE OF DONATION. OKAY. WELL, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE MESSAGE THIS IS SENDING TO OUR TWO BIG DONORS. OKAY. I MIGHT BE ABLE TO SAVE US A LOT OF, WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH TIME, BUT SOMETIME MAYBE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WHETHER OR NOT THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, STAFF IS GOING TO WORK ON THE AGREEMENT AND THEN BRING IT BACK ANYWAY.

SO SOMEBODY CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THIS ITEM PASSES OR FAILS, STAFF IS GOING TO COME BACK WITH WHATEVER TERMS. SOMEBODY PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. SO THAT IS CORRECT.

OKAY. SO BIG, MISS BLACKMON. OKAY, SO WHY CAN'T WE JUST AMEND THE RESOLUTION TO PUT IN 20 YEARS ON NUMBER THREE? BECAUSE THE THING IS, IS I WANT TO GET THAT ACCEPTED AND MOVING ON BECAUSE THE LONGER YOU LEAVE IT ON THE TABLE, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN AND IT CAN BE CLAWED BACK.

AND SO WHY DON'T WE JUST AMEND THAT TO GIVE WHATEVER IS AGREED UPON VERBALLY AND EVERYBODY AT THE TABLE AND JUST AMEND IT SO THAT WAY Y'ALL CAN BRING IT FULLY BAKED AND WE SEPARATE THE TOOLKIT FROM AND TALK ABOUT IT AS WE MASSAGE IT HERE OR BRING IT BACK AND GET IT, LET IT GET IT MASSAGED. IN OTHER WORDS, ACCEPT THE MONEY NOW BECAUSE THAT.

CAN WE DO THAT? LAWYERS. YES. OKAY. SO ON THE OKAY, SO ON.

BUT WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER ONE OF THIS. NUMBER 25.

[01:30:03]

OKAY, SO BACK TO THAT. OKAY, SO BACK TO THE TOOLKIT.

I'M OKAY WITH UP TO WHEN I DO GOOGLE CHATGPT OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED IT DIFFERENT THINGS CAUSE FOR DIFFERENT TIME FRAMES.

AND TO SAY 20 YEARS, I THINK IS A LOCK BECAUSE SOME COULD BE A BIGGER GIFT.

YOU COULD GET 30, I DON'T KNOW, BUT OR EVEN ANYWAY, I THINK GIVING THAT FLEXIBILITY TO STAFF IS GOOD.

MY NEXT QUESTION IS, ARE WE GOING TO KEEP WORDSMITHING IT HERE? OR SHOULD WE JUST SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, BRING IT BACK IN TWO WEEKS.

LET Y'ALL GO LOOK AT IT BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO PUT Y'ALL IN A BOX.

AND MAYBE THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO BE MASSAGED, LIKE MAKING IT KIND OF FUN.

I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF BORING ANYWAY, BUT BUT I'M JUST SAYING, I DON'T WANT TO SIT HERE AT THE HORSESHOE FOR THE NEXT HOUR, LOOKING AT UP TO OR AT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO DO I NEED TO SAY BRING IT BACK TO US IN A MONTH? I MEAN, DO I NEED TO AMEND THIS TO SAY BRING THE TOOLKIT? I GUESS WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE TIME FRAME IN WHICH STAFF AND YOUR PRIVATE FOLKS CAN GET US A BETTER, MORE MASSAGED DOCUMENT? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON, IN THE SPIRIT OF TRYING TO GET US TO AT LEAST MOVE FORWARD.

I THINK THAT WHAT WE WOULD DO. WE ARE SO GRATEFUL AND WE'RE VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE THIS TASK FORCE OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE GIVEN A LOT OF THEIR PERSONAL TIME TO HELP US WITH THIS PROJECT. SO WE DEFINITELY WOULD WANT TO WORK WITH THEM.

I THINK THIS TOOLKIT IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST ONES THAT I'VE SEEN DURING MY TENURE, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES WE'RE TRYING TO DO THEM INTERNALLY.

THIS HAS A TRULY BEST PRACTICE APPROACH. AND I THINK IT'S REALLY GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION OUT THERE.

SO WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO ALSO THINK THAT THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE TOOLKIT.

IT'S REALLY ABOUT US JUST CLARIFYING THINGS THAT MAYBE ALONG THE WAY WE'VE LEARNED MORE ABOUT, WHICH IS WHY I CONTINUE TO CALL IT A LIVING DOCUMENT.

SO I DON'T EVEN THINK I NEED A MONTH. I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'RE ALREADY HAVING.

THERE ARE THINGS THAT I BELIEVE THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO COME BACK QUICKLY.

AND SO I WOULD SAY THAT IN THE NEXT. OH, ABSOLUTELY.

I THINK I MEAN, IN FACT, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE WOULD HAVE MUCH OF A CHALLENGE EVEN COMING BACK.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S A BRIEFING NEXT WEDNESDAY AND GOING THROUGH THE TOOLKIT.

IF COUNCIL MEMBERS FEEL THAT YOU HAVE, THAT GIVES YOU ENOUGH TIME TO READ THROUGH IT.

IT'S BEEN OUT THERE FOR A MINUTE, RIGHT? I KNOW WE'RE JUST WE'RE MAKING IT MORE OF A WE'RE PULLING IT INTO THE LIMELIGHT TODAY.

BUT THIS TOOLKIT WAS NOT DEVELOPED OVERNIGHT.

CORRECT. THIS HAS BEEN OUT THERE FOR A MINUTE. OKAY.

SO WE COULD BE WE COULD BE BACK. AND I'M LOOKING AT MY TEAM. WE COULD BE BACK NEXT WEDNESDAY.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO BRING BACK THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT, WHICH IS A ITEM ONE AND TWO FOR THE NOVEMBER 10TH NOVEMBER 4TH TO I MEAN, I'M OKAY WITH YOU PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA FOR A BRIEFING, BUT I THINK VOTING ON IT BY NOVEMBER 10TH.

GOTCHA. BUT WITH THE INTENTION OF NUMBER THREE, WE PUT THE 20 YEAR TIME FRAME IN THERE AND ACCEPT THOSE GIFTS.

YES. IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL. OKAY.

SO I'M MAKING THE MOTION TO AMEND ONE AND TWO TO BRING A HAVE A FULL BRIEFING ON NOVEMBER 4TH AND A VOTING ITEM ON NOVEMBER 10TH ON THE TOOLKITS PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY. I DON'T THINK THAT CAN BE DONE WHEN THE QUESTION'S BEEN DIVIDED.

BECAUSE THE ITEMS CAN STAND ON THEIR OWN. THAT PORTION COULD BE HELD.

AND THEN YOU CAN ADDRESS THE ACTUAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE CURRENT GIFT BEFORE YOU.

BUT IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A BRIEFING ABOUT THE TOOLKIT, HOW CAN WE THEN BE AMENDING WHAT THE TOOLKIT IS NOW? WE'RE NOT. WE'RE LITERALLY SAYING THAT WE'RE NOT READY TO DO THE TOOLKIT.

WHY WOULD WE BE ACCEPTING IT WITH TOOLKIT OR NOT? THINGS THAT WE'RE MAKING UP ON THE FLY. THE CONTRACTS REGARDLESS, WILL BE COMING BACK SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AT THIS TIME WITH ACCEPTING THE GIFTS.

THE CONTRACTS WILL COME BACK TO YOU WITH THE DURATION AND YOU CAN ACCEPT THEM AT THAT TIME.

IN THE MEANTIME, THE TOOLBOX WILL BE ADDRESSED AT THE BRIEFING AND ON NOVEMBER 10TH.

OKAY. SO I NEED TO THINK IF I CAN, I'M KIND OF LOOKING AT COUNCIL BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU JUST SAID WAS THAT IF THAT WASN'T REAL CLEAR FOR ME, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT FOR THE COUNCIL. NO, AGAIN, I CERTAINLY CAN.

THE THE DIVISION OF THE QUESTIONS SEPARATED THE TOOLBOX FROM THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE GIFT.

TODAY, GIFTS YOU CAN ACCEPT THE GIFTS TODAY WITHIN THE CONTRACTS WILL HAVE TO RETURN THAT THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

DURING THE PENDENCY OF WORKING ON THE CONTRACT.

THE TOOLBOX WILL BE BRIEFED AND WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL ON THE 10TH.

[01:35:02]

THEY WILL. THE CONTRACTS WILL NOT BE EXECUTED BEFORE THE TOOLBOX IS ACCEPTED.

OKAY. MISS BLACKMON MADE A MOTION. THERE'S A SECOND.

I JUST THINK THAT MAYBE WE NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO TO WORK THROUGH THIS DOCUMENT AND MAYBE HAVE EXTRA EYES, SINCE THINGS HAVE. ONE THING HAS BEEN FOUND. MAYBE THERE'S 2 OR 3 AND GET A BRIEFING ON IT.

I DON'T NECESSARILY NEED A BRIEFING, BUT IF FULL COUNCIL WANTS ONE, THAT'S GREAT.

AND THEN TO VOTE ON IT. BUT WE NEED TO GET THESE ITEMS WORKING AS A GIFT ASAP.

THANK YOU, MISS MENDELSOHN. I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHAT TO SAY ANYMORE.

I WANT TO ACCEPT THIS GIFT. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE BRIEFING.

I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THE CONTRACT AFTER THE BRIEFING.

I'M NOT SURE IF THIS AMENDMENT IS DOING THAT.

CAN YOU CLARIFY IF IT IS? IT IS. IT'S DOING EXACTLY THE THREE THINGS YOU SAID IT IS.

IT WILL. IT WILL. IT'S NOT ACCEPTING THE GIFT.

RIGHT. BECAUSE THAT'S A SEPARATE ITEM. WELL, THAT'S THE ITEM IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS. RIGHT. THAT IS DIVIDED QUESTION. SO IT IS ALLOWING THE TOOLBOX TO BE BRIEFED TO COME BACK TO YOU GUYS.

AND JUST BY THE WAY, THE CONTRACT ON ITS OWN HAS TO COME BACK TO YOU GUYS SO THAT THIS MOTION WOULD BE, OF COURSE, THAT THE CONTRACT WOULD COME LATER.

SO THEN WHAT DOES THAT DO TO COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS'S MOTION? WELL NULLIFIES THAT. CORRECT. BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE HOLDING THAT PORTION OF THE ITEM.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I JUST NEED THAT CLARIFICATION.

AND SO I WILL SUPPORT THAT AMENDMENT. THANK YOU.

DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHAT HAPPENS IF I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE CAN ANSWER? WHAT HAPPENS IF THESE ITEMS ARE NOT APPROVED TODAY? WELL, THIS THE SECOND PART OF THIS ITEM IN TERMS OF ACCEPTING THE GIFT IS NEEDED FOR ITEM 26 TO MOVE FORWARD.

OKAY. SO DOES CARUTH. HAVEN AND QUIKTRIP HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE TIME DELAY? IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT THAT 20 YEAR TIME FRAME WOULD WORK FOR THEM.

OKAY. NO, I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE, I SAID EARLIER AND THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM JOHNSON. WE HAVE BEEN VERY INTENTIONAL ABOUT KEEPING THE TIMELINE AND HOW WE KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT TO CONTINUE TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD. SO ITEM NUMBER 25 WITH THE FUNDS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO RECEIVE, IF YOU NOTICE THAT ITEM NUMBER 26 FOLLOWS ALLOWS FOR US TO CONTINUE WITH THE PROJECT.

SO THAT'S WHY I WAS HOPING THAT AS WE WORK THROUGH THIS, IF COUNCIL COULD GIVE US APPROVAL TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE AGREEMENT AS IT RELATES TO US RECEIVING THE FUNDS, AND THEN WE CAN DEFINITELY COME BACK IF THERE'S A BRIEFING THAT'S NEEDED AND DO THAT.

BUT WE CANNOT, IN MY OPINION. IF WE HOLD THIS UP, I CAN'T DO ITEM NUMBER 26.

AND SO AGAIN I DON'T LIKE THAT WE'RE HAVING THIS RIGHT IN THE MOMENT.

AND DEFINITELY WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT AS I WORK THROUGH REMAINING ITEMS OF THIS NATURE WITH MY TEAM, THAT WE'RE BETTER SYNCED UP BEFORE IT GETS BEFORE YOU WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY.

AND SO I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT THIS MORNING. THANK YOU.

WHEN IS THE NEXT BRIEFING? I KNOW WE SAID WE HAVE WE HAVE A FULL CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING THAT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS FOR NEXT WEEK.

NEXT WEEK. AND THAT'S WHY I AGREED. WITH COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON.

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I NECESSARILY NEED TO HOLD. WE COULD BE PREPARED TO COME BACK. IF THE BRIEFING IS WHAT COUNCIL WANTS.

WE COULD DO THAT BY NEXT WEEK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. MORENO, THANK YOU. I THINK THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT IS WHAT I'M GOING TO KEEP GOING BACK TO.

GIVING US THAT LATITUDE OF UP TO 20 YEARS REALLY SOLVES THE ISSUE THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY.

DEB, DO WE HAVE ANY OF THE CORPORATE SPONSORS OR ANYONE ON THE COMMITTEE THAT IS AVAILABLE TO SPEAK? TODAY? I SEE THE HONORABLE JENNIFER GATES IN THE AUDIENCE, SO I WOULD ASK HER TO. THANK YOU.

HI. JENNIFER GATES, PART OF THE TASK FORCE. THANK YOU FOR FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND YOUR SERVICE.

YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY AND HAVE SECURED AT LEAST THESE TWO LARGE CONTRIBUTIONS.

WHAT IS THE COMMUNICATION BEEN WITH THOSE TWO DONORS?

[01:40:02]

AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR US TO TRY TO GET THAT RESOLVED AND RATIFIED TODAY WITH THE ACCEPTANCE OF UP TO 20 YEARS? DO YOU FEEL THAT THAT'S THE LATITUDE THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO ACCEPT THESE TWO DONATIONS? WELL, I WOULD START BY SAYING WE SHARED THE TOOLKIT BACK IN AUGUST.

WE'VE BEEN UTILIZING THIS TOOLKIT SO THAT THE LEVELS OF GIVING WITH THE NAMING RIGHTS HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH MULTIPLE FOUNDATIONS.

WE'VE HAD A COUPLE ONES WE'VE DISCUSSED TODAY THAT WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH NAMING OPPORTUNITIES.

I'M NOT SURE IF AN ACTUAL TIME FRAME IT IS. BEST PRACTICES NOW TO HAVE A TIME FRAME CONNECTED TO YOUR NAMING OPPORTUNITY.

WE WERE ASKED BY JUST THE CITY ATTORNEYS YESTERDAY WHAT WE FELT LIKE WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT, AND LOOKING AT WHAT OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND MUNICIPALITIES DO.

IT WAS SETTLED ON 20 YEARS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S I EXPECT CFT AS WELL AS QUICKTRIP.

EXPECT THERE TO BE A TIMELINE. IT IS NOW PRETTY COMMON IN THESE AGREEMENTS.

WE DID NOT PUT IT IN THE TOOLKIT OR IN THE THE PRESENTATION WE'VE HAD DISCUSSED WITH ANY ENTITY THE TIME FRAME, AND I DON'T THINK THEY'VE QUESTIONED. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY CONCERN THAT THEY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT.

I THINK IT'S BEST PRACTICE RIGHT NOW. WE WEREN'T AWARE THAT ABOUT THE TIME FRAME UNTIL YESTERDAY AND AGREED UPON THAT.

THAT WAS PROBABLY THE BEST PRACTICE. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A WITH A OBVIOUSLY ADOPTING THESE FUNDS OR ACCEPTING THESE FUNDS SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE NEXT CONTRACT BECAUSE THOSE DOLLARS ARE NEEDED.

THIS PROJECT IS MOVING FORWARD. WE'RE GETTING PICTURES.

IT'S REALLY GREAT EVERY DAY ABOUT THE TRUCKS MOVING IN AND OUT.

AND WE WANT IT TO STAY ON SCHEDULE. SO I THINK IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE AGREEMENTS ARE GOING TO COME FORWARD AFTERWARDS THAT WHEN THEY NEGOTIATE BECAUSE IT HAS TO FOLLOW THE CITY POLICIES, AND WE'VE LET DONORS KNOW THAT IN THE PAST THAT NAMING RIGHTS ARE IN THEIR CITY POLICIES TO BE ABIDED BY. SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S A PROBLEM AT ALL WITH YOU ACCEPTING, ACCEPTING THE 20 YEARS AT THIS POINT. WE DON'T WANT TO BE ADJUSTING TO MISS MENDELSOHN'S POINT.

WE WANT SOME CERTAINTY FOR DONORS. THAT'S VERY, VERY HELPFUL.

SO I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO LIKE BE CHANGING NAMING RIGHTS AT THIS POINT OR CHANGING THAT DOCUMENT.

I THINK WE CAN ALWAYS HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH DONORS.

AND THEN WHEN THAT AGREEMENT SIGNED, THAT'S WHEN ALL THE DETAILS ARE WORKED OUT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. BUT IT HAVING THE 20 YEARS AS PART OF THE TOOLKIT IS, I THINK, ACCEPTABLE. AND I THINK IT WOULD HELP US, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOME CERTAINTY AND MOVE FORWARD.

WE'RE ALWAYS HERE TO CONTINUE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, I APPRECIATE IT. THE OTHER CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS MOVING INTO NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER.

I THINK WE ONLY HAVE ONE MEETING IN DECEMBER.

AND WE ARE STOP. WE START WORKING UP AGAINST THE CLOCK.

AND SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE US TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS ITEM TODAY.

THANK YOU. MR. ROTH, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT WE COULD IS IT IS IT APPROPRIATE TO VOTE ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE DONATION FIRST AND THEN TALK ABOUT THE TOOLKIT SECOND, OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE IN THE ORDER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW? YOU WOULD, IF YOU TOOK IT, IF YOU TOOK THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE GIFT BEFORE THE TOOLKIT, IT WOULD BE EFFECTIVELY JUST TABLING THE TOOLKIT UNTIL AFTER YOU DEALT WITH THE. RIGHT. THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE GIFT.

AND IF THERE WAS NO OBJECTION, YOU GUYS COULD DO THAT. OTHERWISE, IT WOULD REQUIRE A MOTION. AND SO SO THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE TABLE OR THAT COULD BE ON THE TABLE WOULD BE TO ACCEPT THE GIFT.

I'D LIKE TO, TO TABLE THE DISCUSSION ON THE, ON THE TOOLKIT AND, AND, AND VOTE ON THE, ON THE OTHER ISSUE OF ACCEPTING THE GIFT DIRECTLY. HOW DO YOU DO THIS? IS THAT A MOTION? I UNDERSTAND. I DON'T I DON'T THINK IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE WHETHER WE ACCEPT ONE BEFORE THE OTHER.

I THINK WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND FINISH, WRAP THIS UP AND THEN MOVE ON TO ACCEPTING THE GIFT.

I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED AS TO WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON ON THE TOOLKIT ISSUE.

QUITE FRANKLY. THE CURRENT MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO HOLD THE TOOLKIT ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL NOVEMBER 10TH AND ALLOWING IT TO BE BRIEFED ON NOVEMBER 4TH.

THE TOOLKIT. THAT'S THE THAT'S THE MOTION RIGHT NOW.

THAT IS THE CURRENT MOTION ON THE FLOOR OF HOLDING THE TOOLKIT UNDER ADVISEMENT.

OKAY. MR. WEST, THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND I WASN'T ALWAYS ON CAMERA, BUT I HEARD THE DISCUSSION AS I WAS DRIVING BACK FROM THE AIRPORT.

[01:45:09]

AND I APPRECIATE OUR PARTNERS, JENNIFER AND OTHERS AND EVERYBODY WHO'S WORKED SO HARD ON THIS.

LET'S NOT FORGET THAT THIS ITEM IS ACCEPTANCE OF A LOT OF MONEY TO HELP US BUILD A VERY IMPORTANT PROJECT THAT WE'VE BEEN PROMISING FOR DECADES.

I DON'T FEEL LIKE, BASED ON THE DISCUSSION I'VE HEARD.

AND THEN BASED ON WHAT MISS GATES JUST JUST TALKED ABOUT, THAT WE NEED TO DELAY THIS.

I FEEL LIKE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TODAY. COUNCIL DOESN'T NEED TO BE GETTING IN THE WEEDS ON EVERY DISCUSSION THAT'S HAPPENING WITH OUR DONORS AND WITH OUR HARD WORKING TEAM. I FEEL LIKE THE, THE UP TO 20 YEARS THRESHOLD, WE'VE HEARD THAT THAT IS A REASONABLE TIME FRAME.

DONORS, IT'S ALREADY BEEN COMMUNICATED TO DONORS.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE AS A COUNCIL NEED TO BE, YOU KNOW, GETTING IN THE WEEDS ON THAT.

I THINK WE CAN OPINE. AND AS DEALS COME UP IN THE FUTURE, IF THERE'S SOME HUGE GIFT, AS SOMEONE MENTIONED, THAT JUSTIFIES SOME LIFETIME NAMING RIGHTS. ABSOLUTELY.

LET'S DO THAT LIKE WE DID, I BELIEVE FOR HALPERIN PARK.

AND AND THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF SITUATIONS THAT ARE ONE OFFS THAT WOULD COME HERE.

BUT OTHERWISE, LET'S NOT LET THE HEADLINE BE.

ONLY DALLAS CAN MESS UP A $17 MILLION DONATION.

THANK YOU, MISS MENDELSOHN. OKAY, WELL, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH HIM.

ABOUT THIS IS PRETTY EMBARRASSING. BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE.

WE. I MEAN, THERE'S A REASON THAT THIS IS A NEW CONVERSATION BECAUSE WE DIDN'T NEED TO BE THIS FAR IN THE WEEDS.

BUT I ALSO AM VERY WORRIED ABOUT THIS UP TO LIKE THAT ACTUALLY THROWS SO MUCH UNCERTAINTY INTO THINGS.

I MEAN, SOMEBODY USE AN EXAMPLE OF A BENCH. WELL, A BENCH MIGHT NOT HAVE A 20 YEAR LIFESPAN.

SO THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT TO HAVE A 20 YEAR NAMING OF A BENCH.

I'VE NEVER EVEN HEARD OF THAT. TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH, IT'S JUST GENERALLY THE LIFESPAN OF THE BENCH.

BUT WHO WOULD EVEN BE TRACKING THIS? I MEAN, WHAT IF ONE DONOR GETS A BETTER DEAL THAN ANOTHER DONOR? THIS IS THE KIND OF THING THAT REALLY IS OFF PUTTING FOR PEOPLE.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL OF US HAVE BEEN NONPROFIT DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND RAISED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR NONPROFITS VOLUNTEER PRESIDENTS OF ORGANIZATIONS.

AND THIS JUST NEEDS TO BE STANDARD. IT SHOULD NOT BE A SPECIAL DEAL FOR ANY SPECIFIC GROUP.

BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO DEVELOP THAT.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE TOOLKIT WAS DEVELOPED BY THE TASK FORCE, THE FUNDRAISING TASK FORCE.

AND SO I'M FINE IF YOU JUST HAVE A SIT DOWN AND GO THROUGH ALL THE ELEMENTS WITH THEM, GET IT SET AND JUST BRING IT BACK AND SAY, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. AND I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ANY DISAGREEMENT.

IT'S THAT YOU'RE NOW TRYING TO BAKE THIS IN BY COMMITTEE, SOMETHING THAT REALLY IS NOT AT THE LEVEL OF A CITY COUNCIL.

AND SO. SO, SO THIS IS WHERE I AGREE WITH YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER WEST.

SO I'LL JUST SAY THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A BRIEFING ON WHAT YOU DECIDE PRESENTED TO US AND WE GO, OKAY, YEAH, THAT'S GREAT, BUT I'M NOT OKAY WITH THE UP TO AND I HOPE THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO PRESENT TO US.

AND I'M NOT OKAY WITH DIFFERENT DEALS FOR DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

I JUST THINK YOU NEED A STANDARD FORM OF THIS IS WHAT THE DEAL IS.

SO THAT'S MY INPUT. I DON'T UNDERSTAND ON THE MOTION WE'RE AT OR DID COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH ACTUALLY MAKE A SEPARATE MOTION? NO. SO WE'RE BACK ON THE SAME THING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON.

OKAY, THANK YOU, MR. RIDLEY. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST LIKE A CLARIFICATION. IF WE APPROVE THESE ITEMS TODAY? WILL THE NAMING RIGHTS AGREEMENTS COME BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL BEFORE EXECUTION? THE TWO IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY WILL. THE THE. I'M SORRY.

I'M SO CONFUSED ABOUT A QUICKTRIP AND CARUTH CARUTH FOUNDATION WILL.

OKAY. EXECUTED CONTRACTS NEED TO COME BACK. ALL RIGHT.

AND SO STAFF DOES NOT HAVE DISCRETION TO ENTER INTO THOSE WITHOUT THE COUNCIL'S APPROVAL.

IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE DONATIONS OR WILL ALL DONATIONS WITH NAMING RIGHTS COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL? SO IF YOU IF THE MOTION TO DEFER IS PASSED AND YOU GET A BRIEFING AND YOU ADOPT THE TOOLKIT THEN WE HAVE THE

[01:50:09]

ABILITY TO DRAFT ANY AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO THE TERMS IN THE TOOLKIT.

SO IF THE TOOLKIT IS UPDATED WITH THE SCHEDULE OF YEARS OR DURATION THAT PERTAINS TO EACH LEVEL OF GIFT, THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU FOR APPROVAL OF ANY CONTRACTS.

THE CITY MANAGER IS DELEGATED PURSUANT TO THIS, THIS AGENDA ITEM TO ENTER INTO THOSE AGREEMENTS.

WELL, THAT SEEMS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT I JUST HEARD FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. IF YOU ADOPT THE TOOLKIT, IF YOU ADOPT AN AMENDED TOOLKIT THAT SETS OUT A SCHEDULE WITH DURATIONS ALONE, WE DON'T HAVE THAT OPTION BEFORE US.

CORRECT. ALL WE HAVE IS AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD SPECIFY THAT STAFF CAN NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT FOR NAMING RIGHTS UP TO 20 YEARS, IF WE APPROVE THAT AMENDED MOTION. WILL THE AGREEMENTS PROVIDING NAMING RIGHTS, COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL AND FOR APPROVAL OF THE NAME THAT THEY WANT TO ADOPT FOR THE BUILDING.

YES, AS THE CITY ATTORNEY SAID, FOR THESE TWO FOUNDATIONS, THAT IS CORRECT, BECAUSE UP TO 20 YEARS DOESN'T GIVE US THE TERM.

SO WE WILL HAVE TO COME BACK TO GET THOSE TWO CONTRACTS APPROVED.

THEN I THINK THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TODAY WITH THE AMENDED MOTION, BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE THE ULTIMATE OPPORTUNITY TO APPROVE OR REJECT THE CONTRACT WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US SPECIFYING THE TERM AND THE NAME.

I PRESUME THAT IF IT'S A NAME THAT WE DON'T LIKE, WE COULD REJECT THE CONTRACT.

IF IT'S A TERM THAT WE DON'T LIKE, WE COULD REJECT THE CONTRACT OR DEFER IT FOR RENEGOTIATION.

SO THIS IS NOT A FINAL DECISION. TODAY IS WHERE I'M COMING OUT, AND WE'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A FINAL DECISION ONCE THOSE DETAILS ARE NEGOTIATED. SO I THINK I'M IN FAVOR AT THIS TIME OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THE AMENDED MOTION.

DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CITY MANAGER, IF WE GO WITH COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON AMENDMENT, WILL THIS CAUSE A DELAY? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM JOHNSON.

SO WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO AVOID IS THE INABILITY FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH RECEIVING THE FUNDS.

WE CANNOT MOVE FORWARD WITH ITEM NUMBER 26, WHICH IS CRITICAL TO WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROJECT RIGHT NOW.

IF WE'RE HOLDING OUT ON ACCEPTING THOSE FUNDS, THE SCHEDULES THAT WE'VE LINED OUT, THE MILESTONES THAT WE'VE LINED OUT HAVE BEEN VERY INTENTIONAL ABOUT KEEPING THE PROJECT ON SCHEDULE.

AND SO I BELIEVE WITHOUT SPEAKING FOR THE ATTORNEY THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE TOOLKIT IS WHAT WE WOULD BRING BACK.

AND THAT WOULD GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COUNCIL TO WEIGH IN ON TIME DURATION.

HOPEFULLY WE'RE NOT GOING TO START REWRITING A TOOLKIT.

THIS WAS A VERY WELL DONE TOOLKIT. AND IT'S ONE OF THE BEST THAT I'VE SEEN.

I SAID THAT EARLIER. AND SO I WOULD HOPE THAT AS COUNCIL READS THROUGH IT, YOU WILL SEE THE LEVEL OF PROFESSIONALISM.

AND IT MEETS A LOT OF INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICES THAT ARE ALREADY OUT THERE.

IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DURATION THIS MORNING.

AND THE CITY ATTORNEY AND I ARE GOING TO WORK ON MAKING SURE THAT THIS KIND OF CONVERSATION DOES NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN IN THE HORSESHOE AGAIN, BECAUSE I THINK IT REALLY DOES DILUTE THE GOOD STORY THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE BEFORE US TODAY.

THESE HAVE BEEN TWO TRUSTED PARTNERS, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW.

AND WE WANT THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO ACCEPT AND MOVE THE RECEIPT OF THESE FUNDS FORWARD.

AND I BELIEVE THAT COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON'S MOTION JUST REQUIRES ANOTHER STEP, WHICH IS TO COME BACK.

TALK ABOUT THE TOOLKIT. AT THAT TIME, THE DURATION CONVERSATION WOULD THEN HAPPEN.

AND THEN I COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER THE 10TH.

I THINK THAT I THINK THAT'S WHAT I THINK THAT'S WHAT I HEARD.

SO [INAUDIBLE] THE AMENDMENT THAT'S ON THE FLOOR FROM COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON MOVES IT FORWARD.

IT DOES NOT DELAY IT. IT ONLY MOVES FORWARD THE ABILITY FOR US TO ACCEPT.

BUT AGAIN, NO ONE'S GOING TO WRITE ME A CHECK OR SEND ME FUNDS.

AND THERE'S NO CONTRACTUAL COMPONENT IN PLACE.

I WOULDN'T DO THAT. SO IN THEORY IT GIVES US THE APPROVAL, BUT THE EXECUTION OF WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO THEN DO DOES NOT

[01:55:01]

HAPPEN UNTIL WE COME BACK. THAT'S, KIM'S THINKING AND THE WAY I'M LOOKING AT THE ITEM AND WHAT I UNDERSTAND I'VE HEARD IN THE CONVERSATION.

SO I'M NOW I'M NOW I'M NOW WITH A THREE STEP PROCESS.

I UNDERSTAND TODAY IS STEP ONE. NEXT WEDNESDAY WILL BE STEP TWO.

NOVEMBER THE 10TH WOULD BE STEP THREE. THAT'S A DELAY.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY.

SO SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF MISS BLACKMON'S PROPOSAL? OKAY. RECORD VOTE HAS BEEN REQUESTED. MR. MAYOR, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHICH ONE OF THESE AMENDMENTS WE ARE ABOUT TO VOTE ON RIGHT NOW. I'M SORRY, I JUST. MISS BLACKMON IS RELATED TO SUBSECTIONS ONE AND TWO OF ITEM 25.

CORRECT. OKAY. 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 MORENO.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA.

COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART.

NO. COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY.

NO. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM JOHNSON NO. MAYOR PRO TEM RESENDEZ.

YES. MAYOR JOHNSON IS ABSENT. WITH FIVE VOTING IN FAVOR, NINE OPPOSE, ONE ABSENT THE. THE MOTION FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, SO NOW WE'RE BACK ON MISS WILLIS'S MOTION FOR THE UP TO 20 YEARS LANGUAGE SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALRIGHT.

MOTION CARRIES. NOW WE'RE BACK ON THE GIFT, MR. ROTH.

MOTION. OKAY. OKAY, SO NOW WE'RE ON THE MAIN MOTION FOR THE TOOLKIT.

YEAH. WAIT A MINUTE. PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY. I DON'T THINK THAT HER HER MOTION WAS FOR AN UP TO.

I THINK HER MOTION WAS THE 20 YEARS. NO, IT WAS UP TO 20 YEARS.

AND I SAID, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GOT IT.

MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. SO NOW WE'RE ON THE MAIN MOTION.

CAN YOU REITERATE WHAT THE MAIN MOTION IS, PLEASE? YES. THE MAIN MOTION AFTER THE DIVISION IS TO ADOPT THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER PROJECT IN THE FORM HERE TO ATTACH AND ENTER INTO AND EXECUTE NAMING AND SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS SET FORTH IN THE SPONSORSHIP TOOLKIT WITH A DURATION OF UP TO 20 YEARS.

EVERYBODY GOOD TO GO? SEEING NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NOW WE'RE ON SUBSECTIONS THREE AND FOUR RELATED TO THE GIFT.

SEEING NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM 26. AUTHORIZED SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE CONSTRUCTION

[26. 26-2941A Authorize Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to the Construction Manager at Risk contract (“CMAR Contract”) with Swinerton Builders for the Dallas Police Department Law Enforcement Training Center on the University of North Texas at Dallas campus to provide (1) City’s acceptance of Supplemental Agreement No. 2 Guaranteed Maximum Price (“GMP”) 2 for construction services in the amount of not to exceed $148,193,088.00 $158,616,112.00 (which includes the CMAR’s contingency of $4,445,792.00 $3,840,944.00); and (2) the appropriation and encumbrance of only $20,000,000.00 in currently available funding for the project as part of the GMP 2 for Phase I construction services, increasing the total CMAR Contract price to date from $29,007,276.00 to $49,007,276.00 - Total not to exceed $20,000,000.00, from $29,007,276.00 to $49,007,276.00 - Financing: Public Safety Facilities (F) Fund (2024 General Obligation Bond Fund) ($2,500,000.00) and Dallas Police Department Law Enforcement Training Center Fund ($17,500,000.00) *In alignment with Bond Implementation Program]

MANAGER AT RISK CONTRACT. CMAR CONTRACT WITH SWINERTON BUILDERS FOR THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER ON THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AT DALLAS CAMPUS TO PROVIDE ONE CITY ACCEPTANCE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT.

NUMBER TWO. GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE GPM 2 FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $158,616,112, WHICH INCLUDES THE CMAR'S CONTINGENCY OF $3,840,944, AND TO THE APPROPRIATION AND ENCUMBRANCE OF ONLY $20 MILLION IN CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT. AS PART OF THE GPM 2 PHASE ONE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES INCREASE IN THE TOTAL CMAR CONTRACT PRICE TO DATE FROM $29,007,276 TO $49,007,276 TOTAL, NOT TO EXCEED $20 MILLION, FROM $29,007,276 TO $49,007,276.

THIS ITEM WAS CORRECTED, AND YOU DO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM BARRY JOHNSON.

BARRY JOHNSON. JOHNSTON IS NOT PRESENT. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON ROTH AND MENDELSOHN.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. MOVE TO APPROVE.

MOTION AND A SECOND. MISS MENDELSOHN DISCUSSION.

[02:00:03]

YES. SO I HAD ASKED A QUESTION THAT THE CITY MANAGER RESPONDED TO ON THE MEMO TO ALL OF US ABOUT THE AGENDA ITEMS, AND I JUST NEED TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARIFICATION ON IT.

SO THE QUESTION I WAS ASKING WAS ABOUT THIS $20 MILLION FOR THE CMAR.

WE ALREADY HAVE GIVEN $29 MILLION FOR A CMAR.

IS THAT RIGHT? SO THIS WOULD BE THE SAME VENDOR, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE CLARIFYING PARTS.

I WAS ASKING ABOUT. THE SAME VENDOR FOR THE SAME UN PORTION OF THIS PROJECT.

IS THAT CORRECT? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN, I SEE THAT JENNY IS COMING OUT TO CLARIFY WHAT WE ARE, WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS ALREADY APPROVED AND WHAT THIS ITEM INCLUDES.

NOW I KNOW THAT THERE'S A CONTINGENCY PIECE ALSO BUILT IN.

SO JAYNIE, WILL YOU JUST CLARIFY THE THE CHANGE IN THE AMOUNTS? SURE. SO YOU'RE RIGHT. THIS IS FOR SWINERTON, WHO HAD THE ORIGINAL GMP OF $29 MILLION.

THEIR ORIGINAL CONTRACT WAS A PRE-CONSTRUCTION SERVICES THAT ALLOWED THEM TO START REACHING OUT TO THE SUB SUBCONTRACTING COMMUNITY.

AND THAT WAS EARLIER THIS YEAR IN MARCH FOR $150,000, THIS GMP TWO FOR 158 WILL GO TO THE SAME FIRM FOR THE SAME LOCATION. SO IT'S JUST A CONTINUATION OF WORK.

THAT $29 MILLION INITIALLY WAS FOR SITE WORK, UTILITIES, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO THIS WOULD JUST ALLOW THEM TO CONTINUE WITH SOME LONG LEAD ITEMS AND THAT TYPE OF WORK.

AND THAT WOULD BRING THE OVERALL GMP TO $185 MILLION, WHICH WAS WITHIN OUR CONSTRUCTION BUDGET THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

ONCE YOU REMOVE THE OWNER'S CONTINGENCY OF ABOUT $2 MILLION.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR. OKAY.

SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? I NOTED ONE NAY, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON.

MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW GO BACK TO CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 19.

AGENDA ITEM 19. AUTHORIZED DISBURSEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,807,875.34

[19. 26-2988A Authorize disbursement in an amount not to exceed $2,807,875.34 to Dallas Area Rapid Transit for operation and maintenance costs for the Dallas Streetcar System from Union Station to Bishop Arts District for FY 2027 - Not to exceed $2,807,875.34 - Financing: Dallas Streetcar System Fund ($2,507,875.34) and DART Six-Year General Mobility Program Fund ($300,000.00)]

TO DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR THE DALLAS STREETCAR SYSTEM FROM UNION STATION TO BISHOP ARTS DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027, NOT TO EXCEED $2,807,875.34.

THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH AND COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. SECOND.

SECOND. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION, MR. WEST? ALL RIGHT. SO I HOPE WE DON'T SPEND A LOT OF WASTED TIME GOING THROUGH OUR ANNUAL BEATING OF DEBATING THE STREETCAR.

I'M SUPPORTIVE OF, OF THE WORK AND CONTINUE TO YOU KNOW, SUPPORT THE FUNDING SOURCES HERE THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED WHILE WE CONTINUE TO IDENTIFY NEW FUNDING SOURCES. THE STREETCAR IS AN IMPORTANT PUBLIC TRANSIT TOOL TO PROVIDE LOW COST CAR FREE TRANSIT BETWEEN NORTH OAK CLIFF AND DOWNTOWN.

WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER REDEVELOPMENT UNDERWAY, THIS CONNECTION IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER. THIS ACTION IS GOING TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF $2.8 MILLION TO TO DART WITH 2.5 FROM THE DALLAS STREETCAR SYSTEM GENERAL FUND AND $300,000 FROM THE DART GENERAL MOBILITY PROGRAM.

THE FUNDS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CITY'S MOST RECENTLY APPROVED FISCAL YEAR BUDGET.

CITY MAINTAINS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS WITH THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND DART PERTAINING TO THE DALLAS STREETCAR SYSTEM.

THESE AGREEMENTS ESTABLISHED THE CITY OF DALLAS AS THE OWNER OF THE DALLAS STREETCAR AND THE RESPONSIBLE ENTITY FOR FUNDING THE ONGOING O&M EXPENSES, AND IDENTIFIES DART AS THE OPERATOR. THE CITY IS LEGALLY REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN THE STREETCAR OR COULD BE FORCED TO REPAY FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS USED TO IMPLEMENT THE STREETCAR. TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL'S REQUEST TO EXPLORE OTHER FUNDING SCENARIOS FOR THE ONGOING O&M EXPENSES, A CONTRACT AWARD WAS AWARDED ON NOVEMBER 13TH, 2024, TO GRESHAM SMITH TO EVALUATE AND RECOMMEND ALTERNATIVE FUNDING MODELS.

THE TREE COMMITTEE WAS BRIEFED ON THE STATUS OF THE O&M STUDY ON OCTOBER 19TH, 2026, AND THE STUDY IS ANTICIPATED TO BE COMPLETE IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF NEXT YEAR. THAT'S IT FOR NOW, MISS MENDELSOHN.

THANK YOU. I'M SORRY TO COUNCIL MEMBER WEST, BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT WE ONLY HAVE ONE MORE YEAR AFTER THIS YEAR TO DO THIS.

THIS IS A $2.8 MILLION ITEM, OF WHICH $2.5 MILLION IS COMING FROM THE GENERAL FUND, $2.5 MILLION.

[02:05:08]

AND BY THE WAY, THE STREETCAR IS 2.5 MILES FOR 2.5 MILES OF A STREETCAR.

WE'RE GOING TO SPEND $2.5 MILLION OF GENERAL FUND 300,000 ALSO COMING FROM GENERAL MOBILITY.

SO THE RIDERS ON THE STREETCAR PAY $1. ONE. YOU KNOW WHAT IT COSTS FOR A DART PASS FOR A RIDE? THREE. BUT IF YOU'RE ON THE STREETCAR, YOU GET ONE RIDERSHIP.

I HOPE YOU SAW THE CITY MANAGER'S RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS ABOUT RIDERSHIP.

LESS THAN 500 RIDERS A DAY. THINK ABOUT THAT.

BECAUSE IF YOU'RE COMING OUT, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING BACK.

SO THAT'S REALLY ONLY 250 PEOPLE. WHEN YOU DO THE MATH ON THIS, WE ARE SUBSIDIZING $17 A RIDE EACH WAY.

THAT'S WHAT OUR TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING TO SUBSIDIZE A TINY LITTLE AREA WITH HARDLY ANYBODY ON THIS TRAIN.

WHEN YOU SEE THAT IT'S A DOLLAR AND YOU SEE THE RIDERSHIP, YOU ALSO REALIZE THEY'RE ONLY COLLECTING FARE ON LESS THAN 70% OF THE RIDERS THAT THEY'RE CLAIMING TO HAVE. SO THIS IS A TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE DEAL FOR THE CITY.

THE QUESTION I HAVE IS ABOUT D2 AND WHAT WE WERE PROMISED FROM DART ABOUT D TWO. SO, GUS, I THINK WE HAD A RESOLUTION.

WELL, FIRST THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT THAT DART WOULD PROVIDE A CAPITAL PROJECT TO US.

IT'S IN EXCHANGE FOR HAVING BUILT THE SILVER LINE.

AND THAT IS WHY I'M GOING TO ALWAYS TALK ABOUT THIS.

WE ENDURED A TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE PROJECT THROUGH DISTRICT 12.

POINT OF ORDER. THIS ISN'T GERMANE AT ALL. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SILVER LINE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT D TWO. THIS IS FOR THE FUNDING FOR THE STREETCAR.

SO THE D TWO PROJECT IS RELATED TO THIS FUNDING.

OKAY. LET'S TRY TO KEEP MORE FOCUSED ON THIS SPECIFIC ITEM AND AWAY FROM THE.

THANK YOU. D TWO PIECE. WAS THERE A RESOLUTION THAT SAID THAT DART WOULD CONSIDER INCLUDE THAT INCLUDED THE LANGUAGE. THE WORD STREETCAR IS IN THAT RESOLUTION.

AND I THINK I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS 2021 OR 2022.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? YEAH. GOOD MORNING GUS.

DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC WORKS. YES.

THE FEBRUARY 9TH, 2022 RESOLUTION INCLUDED SPECIFIC LANGUAGE ABOUT THE STREETCAR.

COULD YOU READ THAT? DO YOU HAVE IT? SURE. SECTION THREE.

IT SAYS THAT IF AT THE 30% DESIGN MILESTONE OF THE REVISED D2 ALIGNMENT, OR BY THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR 2024, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER, THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINES THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE D2 PROJECT WILL BE DEFERRED.

THERE WILL BE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY AND DART REGARDING THEIR FUTURE POTENTIAL.

INCREASED CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DALLAS STREETCAR PROGRAM.

OTHER DART TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS AND OTHER TRANSIT SERVICES IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY RESULT IN FUTURE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS.

I MEAN, ARE YOU GUYS HEARING THIS DART RECOGNIZED THEY THEY AGREED WITH THIS.

I MEAN, THEY SIGNED OFF ON IT, CORRECT. THIS WAS THIS WAS A CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION.

THEY WERE SITTING HERE IN THE CHAMBER AS THIS WHOLE THING WAS DISCUSSED. AND THE DEAL WAS THEY WOULD GET OUT OF BUILDING D2, WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A SUBWAY IN DOWNTOWN.

AND IN EXCHANGE, WE GET A CAPITAL PROJECT. COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY, I BELIEVE YOU WERE ONE OF THE PEOPLE ADVOCATING FOR IT TO GO TO STREETCAR AND FOR IT TO CONNECT THE CURRENT STREETCAR WITH A TROLLEY.

AND OF COURSE, OUR OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM ADDRESSES SOME OF THAT.

BUT THIS FUNDING COMING OUT OF GENERAL FUND, THE 2.5 MILLION ON THIS ITEM.

IT'S JUST NOT SUSTAINABLE. WHEN I STARTED ON COUNCIL, I THINK IT WAS 1 MILLION.

I MEAN, THERE'S A THERE'S AN ESCALATION OF COSTS THAT'S HUGE.

AND THEN RIDERSHIP IS ACTUALLY DECLINED OR IS PROJECTED TO DECLINE THIS NEXT YEAR.

SO I JUST THINK THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE, I MEAN, HAVE YOU TALKED WITH THEM ABOUT THAT RESOLUTION AND WHAT THEIR ACTIONS WILL BE TO

[02:10:01]

HELP WITH FUNDING FOR THE STREETCAR? WELL, AGAIN, WE NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AND AND ABOUT THIS ITEM.

AND I BELIEVE THERE IS A NEW LEADERSHIP AND MOST LIKELY WE WILL HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS AND OTHER ITEMS WITH THEM.

WELL, I HOPE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BRING A, I MEAN, LIKE, PLEASE GIVE THEM A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION AND PLEASE EDUCATE THEM ON WHAT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY WAS WITH THE TWO TO OUR CITY.

I MEAN, WE SPEND $460 MILLION A YEAR FOR DART.

AND I'M SORRY, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GETTING OUR SHARE BACK.

AND I DON'T SEE HOW THE CITY HAS ANY BUSINESS OPERATING.

A STREETCAR LIKE THAT IS NOT WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING WHEN WE HAVE A TRANSIT AGENCY THAT WE'RE GIVING ONE PENNY TO.

SO I REALIZE NONE OF US WERE HERE WHEN THIS HAPPENED, BUT WE SHOULD REMEMBER THAT THE DECISIONS WE'RE MAKING ARE HAVING LONG TERM FISCAL CONSEQUENCES FOR OUR CITY. AND THIS IS NOT GIVING US A RETURN THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WE PAY INTO IT.

MR. ROTH? THANK YOU. I GUESS I'M REALLY NEEDING TO UNDERSTAND MORE ABOUT THE NUMBERS HERE.

AND MY CONCERN IS, AND MY QUESTIONS ARE RELATED TO THE INCREASE IN THE OPERATION COSTS.

IT SEEMS LIKE OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS, WE'RE NOW GOING TO BE UP ALMOST $1 MILLION ON A FROM GOING UP FROM 1.8 TO 2.8. AND THEN IF YOU GO BACK TO 22 WE WERE, WE WERE BACK, WE WERE AT 01,000,005 THEN. SO WE'RE REALLY AT ALMOST 1,000,003, ALMOST ALMOST 50% INCREASE OVER A FOUR YEAR PERIOD.

AND WHAT I'M TRYING TO, TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I DON'T, I DIDN'T DO THE RESEARCH.

I APOLOGIZE IF THERE IS RESEARCH IS WHAT WHAT IS WHAT IS PART OF THAT O&M OPERATION COST THAT THAT IS, IS DRIVING UP THESE, THESE NUMBERS SO, SO SEVERELY AND SIGNIFICANTLY.

RIGHT. THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON THAT STREETCAR.

SO WHEN IT FIRST WAS CONCEIVED BACK IN, IT STARTED BACK IN 2009, AND THEN UNTIL IT GOT INTO OPERATION IN 2015, THE FIRST TIME. SO THERE IS THERE WAS CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE DEVELOPERS ALMOST $3 MILLION THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DELIVERED AT A MAXIMUM INTERVAL OF TEN YEARS, TEN EQUAL PAYMENTS.

SO PART OF THE REASON THAT YOU WILL SEE IN THE EARLIER DAYS, AS FAR AS THE LOWER OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE WAS RELATED TO THE FUNDS THAT WE WERE GETTING FROM THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE DEVELOPER THAT WERE GOING TOWARDS THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STREETCAR.

HOWEVER, WE THE LAST $100,000, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, WERE EXPENDED TWO YEARS AGO, AND THAT'S WHEN YOU WILL SEE THE SPIKE.

AND OF COURSE, DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME, WE HAD A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN INFLATION SPARE PARTS AND SO ON.

AND THE SYSTEM IS STARTING TO AGE BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN AGAIN, IT WAS PUT IN OPERATION IN 2015 AND NOW 2026.

SO THE COMBINATION OF THESE TWO THINGS IS LEADING TO THE APPARENT SIGNIFICANT INCREASE OR SPIKE IN THE IN THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.

SO THE SUBSIDY THAT WE WERE RECEIVING EXPIRED TWO YEARS AGO.

CORRECT. AND SO NOW WE'RE PAYING FULL BOAT. THAT'S WHY.

CORRECT. SO THESE NUMBERS, THE COST, THE ACTUAL COST FOR THE OPERATION MAY HAVE BEEN THIS TYPE OF A COST.

BUT BUT PART OF THAT WAS BEING SUBSIDIZED PREVIOUSLY.

CORRECT. OKAY. AGAIN, LOOK, THIS IS NOT A REFERENDUM ON THE NEED TO HAVE CONNECTIVITY FROM DOWNTOWN OAK CLIFF.

I WANT THAT CONNECTIVITY FOR ON BEHALF OF, OF THE RESIDENTS OF OAK CLIFF AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY CENTER, I THINK IT'S VITAL, VITAL THAT WE HAVE A GOOD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM GOING BACK AND FORTH.

TO, TO SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES POINTS, THIS MAY NOT BE THE BEST SOLUTION TO DO THAT IN A MORE EFFICIENT WAY.

AND CONSIDERING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE GETTING INTO THE REPOSITIONING OF THE VIADUCT TRAFFIC PATTERNS IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONVENTION HALL DEAL, I THINK THAT THIS REQUIRES WE CERTAINLY HAVE TO APPROVE IT BECAUSE WE GOT WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO OPERATE THIS THING FOR THE TIME BEING, BUT I THINK THE. I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AND AND US GENERALLY IN CONNECTION WITH THE ALL THE CONVENTION CENTER IMPROVEMENTS TO TAKE A HARD LOOK ON WHAT OTHER ALTERNATIVES THERE ARE, ESPECIALLY ON, ON A TEMPORARY BASIS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD TO MITIGATE SOME OF

[02:15:01]

THESE COSTS THAT WE'RE ASSOCIATED WITH, BUT STILL ALLOWING US TO PROVIDE THE CONNECTIVITY THAT I THINK WE ABSOLUTELY NEED TO THE OAK CLIFF COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU, MR. MORENO. THANK YOU. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE ITEM BEFORE US TODAY, BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE IT AGAIN CLEAR TO STAFF THAT WE MUST COME UP WITH AN ALTERNATIVE FUNDING, NOT JUST FOR THIS PORTION BETWEEN THE CONVENTION CENTER AND OAK CLIFF, BUT FOR ANY FUTURE EXPANSION OF THE STREETCAR.

WE SHOULD NOT BE EVEN HEARING EXPANSION OF STREETCAR WITHOUT A SOURCE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND FOR THE OPERATION. AND I AGREE, WE. I SUPPORT, AND I THINK THE MAJORITY OF THIS COUNCIL STILL SUPPORTS BRINGING BACK A, A, SOME SORT OF A D2 ALIGNMENT THAT GOES THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PART OF DOWNTOWN AND EXPANDING OFF OF THE CONVENTION CENTER.

SO AGAIN, JUST DIRECTING STAFF TO CONTINUE EXPLORING NEW ALTERNATIVE MODELS.

WE, WE TALK ABOUT COLLECTING FARE. DART IS IN THE PROCESS OF ADDING ADDITIONAL SECURITY ON THE RAIL STREETCARS, BUSSES TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE COLLECTING THE ADEQUATE FARE THAT IS THERE.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE HEARING THAT WE DON'T WANT TO CHARGE FARE AT ALL FOR OPERATION OF DART.

SO WE'VE GOT TO BE MINDFUL OF THOSE. THANK YOU, MR. RIDLEY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO, DOCTOR KHANKARLI, THE RESOLUTION THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT IN RESPONSE TO COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN'S QUESTIONS RELATES TO CAPITAL EXPENSES ONLY, NOT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.

IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, IT IS OPEN FOR ALL BASICALLY THE RESOLUTION RELATES TO THE DECISION ON D2.

SO IF THE DECISION IS TO ABANDON OR DEFER D2, THE CONVERSATION IS WHAT FORM OF CONTRIBUTION WILL BE LOOKED AT TO THE STREETCAR SYSTEM. WELL, YES, BUT YOU MENTIONED WHEN YOU READ IT THAT IT WAS FOR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, NOT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE. CORRECT. IT SAYS THERE WILL BE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY AND DART REGARDING THEIR FUTURE POTENTIAL, INCREASED CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DALLAS STREETCAR PROGRAM.

SO IT IS A PREVIOUS REFERENCE IN WHAT YOU READ TO CAPITAL EXPENSE EXPENDITURES, WASN'T THERE? NO. SO JUST THE REFERENCE IS ONLY TO THE D2. OKAY.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN MENTIONED. SO IS IT EXPECTED THAT ANY SYSTEM OF MASS TRANSIT WILL PAY FOR ITSELF FROM THE FARE BOX? SO AS MENTIONED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND MORENO, WE'RE WORKING ON THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MODELS THAT WE WILL BE COMPLETING IN Q1 2027.

AND WE'LL BE BRINGING TO THE COMMITTEE, AND I HAVE SAID IT BEFORE IN PUBLIC, AND I CONTINUE TO SAY IT IS.

I DO NOT RECOMMEND THAT WE VENTURE INTO ANY CAPITAL INVESTMENTS WITHOUT IDENTIFYING THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

WELL, I UNDERSTAND. I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT.

MY POINT IS SIMPLY THAT THE FACT THAT WE ONLY CHARGE A DOLLAR FARE, AND THAT ISN'T SUFFICIENT TO DEFRAY THE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COSTS. MASS TRANSIT SYSTEMS NEVER DEFRAY THEIR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COSTS SIMPLY FROM THE FARE BOX, DO THEY? CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE TO ADJUST OUR EXPECTATIONS HERE.

THE SYSTEM IS NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO PAY FOR ITSELF.

THE ENTIRE DART SYSTEM DOESN'T PAY FOR ITSELF FROM THE FARE BOX.

THAT'S WHY WE CONTRIBUTE 1% IN OUR SALES TAX EVERY YEAR FOR THE COSTS OF RUNNING AND IMPROVING THE DART SYSTEM.

AND SO THIS QUARTER, ONE, 2027 REPORT THAT WE'RE EXPECTING TO GET FROM THE CONSULTANT ABOUT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COSTS WILL ENCOMPASS NOT JUST THE CENTRAL LINK THAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO CONNECT THE DALLAS STREETCAR WITH MARTA, BUT IT WILL ALSO PROVIDE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OPTIONS FOR THE EXISTING DALLAS STREETCAR OPERATION.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR. AND IF YOU ALLOW ME TO TO MENTION, IS THAT AS A BUILDING ON WHAT WE PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE BACK IN APRIL THE FIRST STEP HAS BEEN TAKEN, WHICH IS THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL HAS APPROVED THE SEPARATION OF THE STREETCAR FROM THE DART

[02:20:01]

SYSTEM AND GAVE US A CREDIT FOR THE FDA STATE OF GOOD REPAIR COMPENSATION, IF YOU WILL.

AND THAT AMOUNTED TO ABOUT ALMOST $600,000 OR SO.

SO WE'VE ALREADY TAKEN THE FIRST STEP OF TRYING TO MITIGATE THE COST, IF YOU WILL, OF OPERATING AND MAINTAINING THE SYSTEM.

AND AND THIS WAS A SIGNIFICANT STEP FORWARD. WAS THAT A CONTINUING OBLIGATION TO FUND O&M EXPENSES GOING FORWARD, OR WAS THAT A ONE TIME EVENT? SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE STREETCAR FIRST BECAME ELIGIBLE FOR SUCH FUNDS BACK IN 2023.

SO I'M CURRENTLY WORKING ON WITH DART ON TRYING TO EXPLORE BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, HOW WE CAN GET CREDIT FOR THAT FUNDING.

SINCE 2023 AND THE NEW FUNDING IS A, BASICALLY BASED ON THE FEDERAL AUTHORIZATION FUNDS THAT COME TO THE REGION FOR AND IS DISTRIBUTED FORMULA DISTRIBUTED TO THE OPERATORS OF TRANSIT.

AND WE ARE CONSIDERED AS AN OPERATOR OF A TRANSIT SYSTEM.

SO THAT WOULD BE A RECURRING SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.

THAT IS CORRECT BASED ON FEDERAL FUNDING AVAILABILITY.

SO IN FUTURE YEARS AFTER THE ONE FOR WHICH YOU'RE SEEKING THE O&M EXPENDITURE THIS YEAR, DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THAT CURRENT LEVEL OF 2.8 MILLION WILL DECLINE IN FUTURE YEARS BECAUSE OF THAT SUBSIDY AND BECAUSE OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MAY CHOOSE TO ADOPT OUT OF THE O&M STUDY? SO MY OBJECTIVE IS TO RECOMMEND TO THIS BODY IS TO BE ABLE TO STABILIZE THE CONTRIBUTION AND START GOING ON THE DOWNWARD TREND.

AND THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I'M TRYING TO ACCELERATE THE PRESENTATION OF THIS ITEM TO THE COMMITTEE.

THE SOONEST I CAN GET IT, THE SOONEST. I WILL RECOMMEND THAT WE SCHEDULE THE DISCUSSION AND AGREE ON SOME OF THE SHORT TERM STEPS THAT WE CAN TAKE THAT WILL ALLOW ME TO IMPLEMENT THE.

SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO BEGIN THE PROCESS OF STABILIZING AND THEN START GOING DOWN ON THE DOWNWARD TREND.

GREAT. WELL, I COMMEND YOU FOR ATTEMPTING TO EXPEDITE THAT BRIEFING OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE.

AND I ASSURE YOU THAT AS SOON AS YOU INDICATE TO ME THAT YOU ARE PREPARED TO MAKE THAT PRESENTATION, I WILL SCHEDULE IT FOR A COMMITTEE HEARING SO THAT WE CAN MOVE THIS MATTER FORWARD.

THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU SIR. OKAY. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 20. AUTHORIZE A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT WITH ACOM

[20. 26-2996A Authorize a professional engineering services contract with AECOM Technical Services, Inc. to provide planning and engineering services for the Dallas Streetcar project that connects the existing streetcar planned northern extension terminus near the Omni Hotel to the McKinney Avenue Transit Authority system - Not to exceed $1,096,786.68 - Financing: Greater Downtown Dallas Master Plan FY23 EDI-CPF Fund ($982,102.00) and General Fund ($114,684.68) *In alignment with Vision Zero Plan.]

TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. TO PROVIDE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE DALLAS STREET CAR PROJECT THAT CONNECTS THE EXISTING STREETCAR PLANNED NORTHERN EXTENSION TERMINUS NEAR THE OMNI HOTEL TO THE MCKINNEY AVENUE TRANSIT AUTHORITY SYSTEM.

NOT TO EXCEED $1,096,786.68. THIS ITEM WAS PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON AND COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH.

SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? ARE WE ALLOWED TO STOP NOW? ONCE WE STARTED VOTING.

I THINK WE I THINK WE HAVE TO. YEAH. IT'S UP TO YOU.

OKAY, I'LL GO AHEAD AND LET MR. ROTH GO AHEAD.

IT'S TECHNOLOGY. I'M NOT SURE YOUR MICROPHONE IS ON, SIR. IT'S YOUR MIC. IT'S TECHNOLOGY.

TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. MY MY QUESTION HERE. IT'S NOT IN OPPOSITION TO IT.

I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND IT. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S AN INTERESTING PROJECT TO CONNECT.

WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? THE THE DALLAS STREETCAR IS IN AS OPPOSED TO THE MCKINNEY AVENUE TROLLEY.

IS THE DALLAS STREETCAR A DIFFERENT THING THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? PREVIOUSLY ON THE ON THE VIADUCT STREETCAR. OKAY.

SO THE STREETCAR SYSTEM, IT'S THE WE CALL THEM THE MODERN STREETCAR SYSTEM THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS OWNED.

AND THIS ITEM HAS BEEN ALSO HAS SOME HISTORY TO IT.

BACK IN 2017, THE CITY OF DALLAS COUNCIL APPROVED A LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES OR AN LPA THROUGH THE DOWNTOWN TO CONNECT WHAT WE CALL IT, THE CENTRAL LINK. SO WHAT WE DID BACK IN 2023 OR 20 22 OR 23 TIME FRAME, WE APPLIED FOR A GRANT CALLED THE REIMAGINED DOWNTOWN TO TO DO TWO THINGS ON THIS ITEM IS NUMBER ONE TO EITHER REAFFIRM THE EXISTING LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

[02:25:06]

OR EXPLORE A NEW ALIGNMENT AND PRODUCE THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING FOR THAT ALIGNMENT.

AND ONE OF THE KEY OBJECTIVES THAT WE WILL BE ACHIEVING IS TO INTERFACE WITH THE UPTOWN MCKINNEY AREA TROLLEY, SO THAT WE HAVE FULL CONNECTIVITY OF THE SYSTEM FROM UPTOWN ALL THE WAY TO BISHOP ARTS AND THE, AND THE, THE CONSULTING FEE THAT WE'RE TRYING, WE'RE PLANNING ON APPROVING OR THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING NOW, IS THAT $1 MILLION? IS THAT A REASONABLE CONSULTING FEE FOR THIS TYPE OF A PROJECT FOR, FOR DOING THIS KIND.

AND I'M NOT ASKING FOR YOU TO VERIFY THAT IT'S AMOUNT, BUT I, I DON'T HAVE A CONTEXT OF, OF WHAT IS INVOLVED IN, IN THE TYPE OF REPORTING AND REPORT TYPE OF SCOPE OF WORK THAT WE'RE ASKING THESE FOLKS TO, TO PERFORM. SO WHAT YOU'RE APPROVING TODAY IS THE REAFFIRM AFFIRMATION, IF YOU WILL, OF THE ALIGNMENT.

SO THERE WILL BE A LOT OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENTS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH OUR STAKEHOLDERS AND SO ON.

AND ONCE WE COMPLETE THAT, WE WILL PRODUCE WHAT WE CALL THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING OR THE SCHEMATIC LEVEL THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO IDENTIFY ALL THE ENGINEERING CHALLENGES, CONSTRAINTS AND SO ON, AND ALSO POSITION THIS STREETCAR EXTENSION FOR POTENTIALLY APPLYING FOR THE NEXT STEP OF THE FULL DETAILED DESIGN AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS OR CAPITAL GRANTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT EXTENSION.

IT SOUNDS LIKE GENERALLY THAT THIS REALLY WILL HELP STIMULATE A TRAFFIC AVAILABILITY IN A MOBILE, A MOBILITY AVAILABILITY FOR FOLKS THAT ARE NEEDING TO GET AROUND THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND CONNECT UP TO THE TO THE MCKINNEY AVENUE TROLLEY.

THAT IS CORRECT. I MEAN, AGAIN, WE LOOK AT THINGS AS A SYSTEM AND RELATED.

AND THIS ITEM KIND OF RELATED TO THE PREVIOUS ITEM THAT WAS APPROVED IS IN THE FACT THAT IF WE'RE TRYING TO INCREASE RIDERSHIP AND IF WE'RE TRYING TO INCREASE UTILIZATION AND IMPROVE ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS ITEM.

AGAIN, MY, MY PURPOSE IN ASKING THESE QUESTIONS IS TO EXPLAIN TO THE, TO THE, TO THE PUBLIC THAT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS GENERATE MORE ACTIVITY DOWNTOWN, THAT WE'RE TRYING TO STIMULATE THE AVAILABILITY OF PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO MANEUVER DOWNTOWN, AND THAT WE'RE TRYING TO, TO CREATE VENUES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE VITALITY AND THE, AND THE EXPANSION AND THE CREATIVITY AND THE ABILITIES FOR ALL OF OUR, OUR VENUES DOWNTOWN TO SUCCEED. SO I THINK I THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATION.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH.

THANK YOU SIR. DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON. THANK YOU.

WHERE WERE THE THE, I GUESS TRANSPORTATION CARS, WHERE WERE THEY? WHAT COMMUNITY WOULD THEY BE IN? ARE YOU GUYS DOING A STUDY ON THAT? I'M SORRY, I DON'T GET THE QUESTION.

CAN YOU REPEAT IT? SO ON THIS ITEM, WHERE WOULD THEY BE LOCATED? OR ARE YOU GUYS DOING THE STUDY ON WHICH COMMUNITY, WHICH AREA TO PUT THESE IN? WELL, THAT'S THE INTENT OF THIS CONTRACT IS TO EITHER REAFFIRM THE EXISTING LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE THAT WAS SELECTED BY COUNCIL BACK IN 2017, OR POTENTIALLY LOOK FOR ANOTHER ALIGNMENT.

AND CERTAINLY WHEN WE START LOOKING AT THESE THINGS, WE'LL LOOK AT WHERE ALL THAT STUFF WILL BE.

OKAY. CITY MANAGER, I KNOW I WASN'T HERE IN 2017.

CAN YOU GUYS UPDATE ME ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST.

SO I KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO AND HAVE THESE RESOURCES IN MY COMMUNITY.

YES, SIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE CAN DO THAT. THANK YOU SIR. YOU GOOD, MISTER JOHNSON? YOU DONE? OKAY, MR. MORENO. OKAY. NO ONE ELSE.

I SEE NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? NOTED. COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON VOTED.

MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. WE ARE NOW AT YOUR ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

[48. 26-3235A 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 48. AGENDA ITEM 48 IS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IS YOUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ITEM.

THERE ARE NO APPOINTMENTS FOR THIS MEETING. AGENDA ITEM 49 IS A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE

[49. 26-3423A A resolution adopting the City’s Legislative Program for the 90th Texas Legislature - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (This item was deferred on October 14, 2026)]

PROGRAM FOR THE 90TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. MR. MORENO, THANK YOU. I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL AFTER THE FULL CITY COUNCIL IS BRIEFED ON THE STATE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM.

SECOND. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 50 IS A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY OF DALLAS FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR THE 120TH UNITED STATES

[50. 26-3425A A resolution adopting the City of Dallas’ Federal Legislative Program for the 120th United States Congress - Financing: No cost consideration to the City (This item was deferred on October 14, 2026)]

CONGRESS. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. MR. MORENO, THANK YOU.

I MOVE TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL AFTER THE FULL CITY COUNCIL IS BRIEFED ON THE FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM.

SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. SEEING NO DISCUSSION.

[02:30:03]

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 51. AUTHORIZED ONE. A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH HEALTH ASSOCIATES,

[51. 26-3301A Authorize (1) a professional services contract with Halff Associates, Inc. to provide engineering design services for the McKinney Ave/Cole Avenue Two-way Conversion Project (also known as the Uptown McKinney Avenue/Cole Avenue Couplet); and (2) the release of the remaining encumbered funds following the termination of the professional services contract with Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc., previously authorized by Resolution No. 23-1636, on December 13, 2023, to be utilized under the new contract - Not to exceed $3,552,041.00 - Financing: Street and Transportation (A) Fund (2017 General Obligation Bond Fund) ($1,544,043.49), 2024B Certificates of Obligation Fund ($1,892,997.51), Water Capital Improvement F Fund ($50,905.00), and Wastewater Capital Improvement F Fund ($64,095.00) *In alignment with Infrastructure Management Plan.]

INC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE MCKINNEY AVENUE COLE AVENUE TWO WAY CONVERSION PROJECT, AND TWO, THE RELEASE OF THE REMAINING ENCUMBERED FUNDS.

FOLLOWING THE TERMINATION OF THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TO BE UTILIZED UNDER THE NEW CONTRACT NOT TO EXCEED $3,552,041.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

MISS BLACKMON DISCUSSION. YES. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS.

I'M SUPPORTIVE OF IT, BUT I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS ON HOW LONG THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING.

BELIEVE ME, I GET I GET PEOPLE IN MY EAR ABOUT IT.

AND KATHY PROBABLY MS. STEWART PROBABLY KNOWS.

I MEAN, THIS IS, I THINK PREDATED ME. CORRECT.

HOW LONG HAS THE CONVERSION BEEN IN WORKS? THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC WORKS EVEN IT PREDATES ME FROM I MEAN, PREDATES MY TIME WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS.

SO 2016, I THINK. YEAH, 2015, 2016. OKAY. SO WILL THIS GET US OVER THE HUMP OR WILL WE BE EXPECTING MORE? IN OTHER WORDS, ARE WE GOING TO GET IT DONE IN THE BY THE TIME THAT IS THE COMMITMENT THAT WE ARE MAKING AND WE WILL BE GETTING THIS THING FINISHED, THE DESIGN BEING FINISHED, HOPEFULLY. CURRENTLY, THE CURRENT SCHEDULE THAT I WAS GIVEN ABOUT TEN MONTHS OF DESIGN FROM THE EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT. OKAY. BECAUSE THIS I KNOW THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR THIS COMMUNITY AND I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR IT.

AND I THINK THERE'S BEEN SOME MOVEMENT OF DOLLARS AND BUT IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN.

AND SO I'M ENCOURAGING YOU TO BECAUSE IT WILL I THINK IT'LL BE MEANINGFUL CHANGE FOR THE AREA.

YES, MA'AM. EVEN THOUGH I DON'T REPRESENT IT, I JUST HEAR PEOPLE TALK ABOUT IT. CORRECT. AND THE CONTRACT HAS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE AND THE SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLES. THANK YOU, MR. RIDLEY.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO I'M STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF THIS.

THIS HAS BEEN A LONG STANDING PROJECT. WE NEED TO MOVE IT FORWARD.

DOCTOR KHANKARLI, WOULD YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE CONTEXT OF WHY WE'RE DOING THIS WITH A NEW ENGINEERING FIRM? IS THIS A FOLLOW ON TO THE PREVIOUS TERMINATION OF THE PREDECESSOR ENGINEERING FIRM BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T ADVANCING THE PROJECT? WELL, THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT WE HAD LOOKED AT THE ABILITY TO TO DELIVER THE PROJECT AND TO STAY ON SCHEDULE. AND THAT WAS THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION THAT MYSELF AND MY TEAM, WE LOOKED AT AND CERTAINLY WORKING WITH OUR STAKEHOLDERS WE NEEDED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE NECESSARY RESOURCES TO DELIVER ON TIME.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. AND PART OF THOSE RESOURCES ARE PERSONNEL AT HALF AND ASSOCIATES WHO WORKED ON THIS PROJECT PREVIOUSLY AT ANOTHER EMPLOYER, AND THEREFORE HAVE THE INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE, IF YOU WILL, TO CARRY THIS PROJECT FORWARD IN AN EXPEDITIOUS MANNER.

SO WHILE THIS IS TRUE, HOWEVER, WHEN WE DID THE EVALUATION, WE EVALUATE THE PROPOSALS BASED ON THEIR MERITS. AND CERTAINLY WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE HOLISTIC VIEW OF THE PROPOSAL PROPOSALS THE SELECTED AND RECOMMENDED PROPOSAL WAS HALF AN ASSOCIATES.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MISS STEWART. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO TOUCH ON ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS FOR THIS PROJECT EXISTING.

WHY WOULD WE TAKE THE ONE WAY STREETS AND MAKE THEM TWO WAY AGAIN? AND I SEE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE UPTOWN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT UP IN THE AUDIENCE HERE.

AND HE MAY OR MAY NOT WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS, BUT WE ACTUALLY WORKED ON THIS BECAUSE IT WAS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE.

IT WAS TO MAKE OUR STREETS MORE SAFE FOR PEDESTRIANS.

AND WHEN YOU HAVE ONE WAY TRAFFIC, PEOPLE TEND TO DRIVE AT A FASTER PACE, AND PEDESTRIANS ALONG MCKINNEY AND COLE ARE NOT AS SAFE, ESPECIALLY THERE AT UNCLE PARK. THE SO HAVING THE TWO WAY TRAFFIC, THE PURPOSE BEHIND THIS IS POTENTIALLY, I GUESS WE ARE GETTING SOME MORE EFFICIENT TRAVEL FOR THE CARS, BUT IT'S REALLY THE UNDERLYING.

I THINK WHAT MOTIVATED EVERYONE BACK IN. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS 2012 OR 2016.

YEAH, SOMETHING IN THAT RANGE. WHAT MOTIVATED THIS COMMUNITY TO ASK FOR THIS CHANGE WAS TO YES, WAS TO PROTECT OUR PEDESTRIANS. UPTOWN IS A VERY WALKABLE AREA AND PEOPLE CERTAINLY ENJOY THAT.

AND SO I JUST, JUST FOR THE RECORD, IF ANYBODY WONDERS, WHY WOULD WE GO FROM ONE WAY STREETS TO TWO WAY STREETS?

[02:35:06]

IT ACTUALLY IS SAFER FOR PEDESTRIANS. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM, AGENDA ITEM 52.

[52. 26-2930A Authorize the (1) acceptance of a grant from the Texas Office of the Governor, Criminal Justice Division (CJD) for the Regional Law Enforcement Facility program (Grant No. 4922902, Award ID No. 2027-LE-ST-0001), in the amount of $10,000,000.00 for the construction and implementation of a new Dallas Police Department Law Enforcement Training Center at the University of North Texas at Dallas campus located at 1200 East Camp Wisdom Road for the period September 1, 2026 through May 31, 2029; (2) establishment of appropriations in an amount not to exceed $10,000,000.00 in the CJD Regional Law Enforcement Facility 10M Grant Fund; (3) receipt and deposit of grant funds in an amount not to exceed $10,000,000.00 in the CJD Regional Law Enforcement Facility 10M Grant Fund; and (4) execution of the grant agreement with the CJD and all terms, conditions, and documents required by the agreement - Not to exceed $10,000,000.00 - Financing: CJD Regional Law Enforcement Facility 10M Grant Fund *In alignment with Bond Implementation Program.]

AUTHORIZE THE ONE ACCEPTANCE OF A GRANT FROM THE TEXAS OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION.

CJD FOR THE REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $10 MILLION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AT DALLAS CAMPUS, LOCATED AT 1200 EAST CAMP WISDOM ROAD, FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026 THROUGH MAY 31ST, 2029. TWO. ESTABLISHMENT OF APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $10 MILLION IN THE CJD REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY.

10 MILLION OR 10 M GRANT FUND THREE RECEIPT AND DEPOSIT OF GRANT FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $10 MILLION IN THE CJD REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY TEN M GRANT FUND AND FOR EXECUTION OF THE GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE CJD AND ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THE AGREEMENT NOT TO EXCEED $10 MILLION.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

SEEING NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 53.

[53. 26-2929A Authorize the (1) acceptance of a grant from the Texas Office of the Governor, Criminal Justice Division (CJD) for the Regional Law Enforcement Facility program (Grant No. 6003001, Award ID No. 2027-LE-ST-0001), in the amount of $5,000,000.00 for the construction and implementation of a new Dallas Police Department Law Enforcement Training Center at the University of North Texas at Dallas campus located at 1200 East Camp Wisdom Road for the period September 1, 2026 through May 31, 2029; (2) establishment of appropriations in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000.00 in the CJD Regional Law Enforcement Facility 5M Grant Fund; (3) receipt and deposit of grant funds in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000.00 in the CJD Regional Law Enforcement Facility 5M Grant Fund; and (4) execution of the grant agreement with the CJD and all terms, conditions, and documents required by the agreement - Not to exceed $5,000,000.00 - Financing: CJD Regional Law Enforcement Facility 5M Grant Fund *In alignment with Bond Implementation Program.]

AUTHORIZED THE ONE ACCEPTANCE OF A GRANT FROM THE TEXAS OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION CJD FOR THE REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $5 MILLION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT.

LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AT DALLAS CAMPUS, LOCATED AT 1200 EAST CAMP WISDOM ROAD FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026 THROUGH MAY 31ST, 2029. TWO ESTABLISHMENT OF APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5 MILLION IN THE REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY. 5M GRANT FUND THREE RECEIPT AND DEPOSIT OF GRANT FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5 MILLION IN THE CJD REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY. 5M GRANT FUND AND FOR EXECUTION OF THE GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE CJD AND ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THE AGREEMENT NOT TO EXCEED $5 MILLION.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

SEEING NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM, AGENDA ITEM 54.

[54. 26-3451A Authorize the City Manager to (1) accept and deposit the donation in the amount of $10,000 from an anonymous donor to support the purchase of service pins recognizing employee tenure and dedication; and (2) establish appropriations in an amount not to exceed $10,000 in the General Gifts and Donations Fund - Not to exceed $10,000 - Financing: General Gifts and Donations Fund]

AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ONE. ACCEPT AND DEPOSIT THE DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000 FROM AN ANONYMOUS DONOR TO SUPPORT THE PURCHASE OF SERVICE PENS, RECOGNIZING EMPLOYEE TENURE AND DEDICATION.

AND TWO ESTABLISH APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $10,000 IN THE GENERAL GIFTS AND DONATIONS FUND, NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. MR. WEST.

DISCUSSION. I DON'T KNOW WHO GAVE THE $10,000, BUT I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE ANONYMOUS DONOR WHO ALLOWED OUR STAFF AND PEOPLE ACROSS THE CITY TO HAVE SERVICE PINS. SINCE WE CUT THAT FROM THE BUDGET.

I KNOW THERE'S ONE PERSON IN MY OFFICE WHO WANTS HER SERVICE PIN, SO SHE'S VERY HAPPY TO HAVE THAT.

MISS BLACKMON, I WASN'T GOING TO SPEAK EITHER, BUT YES, MY THERE'S SOMEBODY IN MY OFFICE TOO.

BUT THE THING IS, IS IT'S. HOW BIG IS OUR BUDGET? 5 BILLION. 3 BILLION. AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO. IT'S RHETORICAL, AND WE CAN'T FIND.

EVEN THOUGH IT WAS CUT, WE CAN'T FIND $10,000.

I MEAN, I GAVE YOU BACK $100,000 LAST YEAR FROM MY PERSONAL ACCOUNT.

IT'S JUST KIND OF EMBARRASSING. I'M JUST SAYING, AS A GENERAL NOTE.

AND I WANT TO THANK THE DONOR FOR STEPPING UP, BECAUSE WITHOUT OUR EMPLOYEES, THIS WORK WOULDN'T GET DONE.

AND THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE. AND SO BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? IT SHOULD JUST BE AN AUTOMATIC THAT IT'S GOT TO BE.

ANYWAY, THANK YOU. AND IT'S ALMOST TIME FOR LUNCH.

MISS MENDELSOHN, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, ARE THE PINS AVAILABLE FOR EMPLOYEES OF EVERY DEPARTMENT? YES. THE WAY THE SERVICE PINS WORK IS THAT THE MILESTONE YEARS THROUGH THEIR DEPARTMENT, THE PINS ACTUALLY GET ORDERED, AND THEN THEY GET DISTRIBUTED. AND THEN FOR THE EXECUTIVE TEAM, WE DO IT AS PART OF OUR OVERALL END OF THE YEAR CELEBRATION IN DECEMBER.

SO WE GIVE OUT ANY ASSISTANT DIRECTORS AND UP.

[02:40:03]

WE DO IT AS PART OF THE EXECUTIVE TEAM, BUT AT THE DEPARTMENTAL LEVEL, THEY GET SENT TO THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS AND THEN THEY DISTRIBUTE THEM. BUT IT'S FOR EVERY SINGLE CITY DEPARTMENT. YES, MA'AM. AND IF AN EMPLOYEE MISSED GETTING A PIN ON THEIR, LET'S SAY, 5 OR 10 YEAR ANNIVERSARY, HOW IS THAT HANDLED? WHAT WE TYPICALLY DO, SOMETIMES THERE IS A DELAY.

WE HAD A COUPLE OF ISSUES. I THINK IT WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WITH THE ACTUAL VENDOR OF GETTING THE PINS ORDERED IN TIME.

AND SO WE WOULD JUST ASK FOR THAT EMPLOYEE TO WORK WITH THEIR DIRECT SUPERVISOR.

WE HAVE WE HAVE HAD SITUATIONS WHERE WE MIGHT HAVE MISSED A FEW FIVE YEAR MARKS, BUT THEN WE ALWAYS GO BACK AND MAKE SURE THAT THOSE EMPLOYEES RECEIVE THEIR PINS.

SO ANYBODY THAT IS DUE A PIN THAT DID NOT GET IT PREVIOUSLY, WE ALWAYS WORK TO GET THOSE PINS ORDERED AND GET THOSE OUT TO THEM.

AND WHO WOULD ONE CONTACT IF THAT IT ACTUALLY GOES THROUGH.

IT'S THROUGH THE HR DEPARTMENT. THEY MAINTAIN THE DATABASE THAT SHOWS THE YEARS OF SERVICE.

AND WHEN THOSE MILESTONES ARE REACHED, THEY KNOW HOW MANY PINS, EVEN IN THE UPCOMING YEAR, THEY KNOW HOW MANY WE NEED BY THE FIVE YEAR MARK, TEN YEAR MARK AND ON DOWN.

SO THEY ACTUALLY WORK TO GET THOSE PINS ORDERED.

BUT WE DID HAVE A COUPLE OF VENDOR ISSUES THAT I'M AWARE OF IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WHERE WE WERE A LITTLE BIT BEHIND, BUT WE MADE THOSE UP. AND THEN I'M SORRY TO REALLY GO SO GRANULAR HERE, BUT DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE COST PER UNIT IS FOR THE PIN? I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE LIKE A $10 ITEM OR $100 ITEM OR OH, I'D HAVE TO ASK FOR I DON'T THINK.

DO Y'ALL HAVE THE PER UNIT? I DON'T HAVE THE PER UNIT RIGHT NOW, BUT I AM CURIOUS TO KNOW THAT, OKAY, WE CAN PROVIDE THAT TO THE COUNCIL. WE CAN GIVE YOU THE PER YEAR.

AND THEN WE CAN ALSO MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE ARE EMPLOYEES THAT AGAIN, IF THEY'VE GOT MISSED, WE WILL SEND SOMETHING OUT AS WE ALWAYS DO, JUST ASKING FOR THE DEPARTMENT TO NOTIFY HR SO WE CAN GET THOSE PINS DISTRIBUTED.

AND I DO SEE OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR HERE FROM THE, THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU GOOD, MISS MENDELSOHN? OKAY, MISS KATRINA, I JUST WANT TO THANK THE ANONYMOUS DONOR.

I STILL HAVE MY PIN THAT I EARNED, AND I THINK MINE WAS A LITTLE BIT LATE, BUT WHEN I GOT IT, IT WAS VERY MEANINGFUL. AND SO I KNOW THAT IT IS FOR THE EMPLOYEES AS WELL.

SO THANK YOU WHOEVER MADE THE DONATION. ALL RIGHT.

SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I'D ALSO LIKE TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE FOR WHOEVER MADE THE DONATION AS WELL.

IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT OUR EMPLOYEES AND.

AND IT DOESN'T EVEN FEEL RIGHT. WE MADE THIS A LITTLE BIT TOO EASY. YOU SURE YOU GUYS SURE YOU DON'T WANT TO DRAG IT OUT A LITTLE BIT LONGER? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 55.

[55. 26-3496A Authorize an extension to the service price agreement with POLIHIRE Strategy Corporation for executive and professional search firms for multiple areas of expertise for the Department of Human Resources from October 29, 2026 to April 28, 2027 - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information)]

AUTHORIZE AN EXTENSION TO THE SERVICE PRICE AGREEMENT WITH POLY HIRE STRATEGY CORPORATION FOR EXECUTIVE AND PROFESSIONAL SEARCH FIRMS FOR MULTIPLE AREAS OF EXPERTISE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES FROM OCTOBER 29TH, 2026 TO APRIL 28TH, 2027.

THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

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

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 56 IS A RESOLUTION APPOINTING BLANK AS CITY AUDITOR FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR A

[56. 26-3487A A resolution appointing _________ as City Auditor for the City of Dallas, for a period of two years, with an annual base salary of $______, effective _______- Not to exceed $________ - Financing: General Fund]

[57. 26-2216A A resolution appointing Baron Eliason as Inspector General for the City of Dallas, for a period of two years, with an annual base salary of $XXXX, effective XXXX - Not to exceed $XXXX - Financing: General Fund]

PERIOD OF TWO YEARS, WITH AN ANNUAL BASE SALARY OF BLANK.

EFFECTIVE NOT TO EXCEED BLANK. THIS IS YOUR ITEM, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH THE FOLLOWING TWO ITEMS. SO IT IS 1145 ON OCTOBER 28TH, 2026. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION FIVE FIVE, 1.07. FOUR OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING MATTERS DESCRIBED ON TODAY'S AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER 56 AND 57.

ALL RIGHT. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HAS COMPLETED ITS CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 551.074 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, AND AT 1:30 P.M. ON OCTOBER 28TH, 2026, WE HAVE RETURNED TO OPEN SESSION.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. BEFORE WE GO TO YOUR INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND YOUR ZONING ITEM, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE AHEAD TO ITEM PH 2.

[PH2. 26-3422A A public hearing to receive comments regarding a proposal to change the name of North Harwood Street, between Woodall Rodgers Freeway and Harry Hines Boulevard, to “Exchange Place” and an ordinance granting the name change - STNAME-26-000006 - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information for potential future costs) Note: This item was held under advisement by Councilmember Jesse Moreno at the public hearings on September 23, 2026, October 14, 2026 and is scheduled for consideration on October 28, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

MR. MORENO. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO HOLD. HOPE I MOVE TO HOLD THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL DECEMBER 9TH, 2026. NO DISCUSSION. SECOND.

ITEM PAGE TWO.

I NEED TO READ THE. SINCE IT'S BEING HELD, I NEED TO READ THE ITEM INTO THE RECORD AND WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS.

AGENDA ITEM PAGE TWO IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS REGARDING A PROPOSAL TO CHANGE THE NAME OF NORTH HARWOOD STREET BETWEEN WOODALL RODGERS FREEWAY AND HARRY HINES BOULEVARD TO EXCHANGE PLACE AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING THE NAME CHANGE.

[02:45:05]

YOU DO HAVE FOUR INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES GEAR, BUT. THEY'RE NOT SPEAKING. GARRETT BUD IS NOT PRESENT. SUZANNE KEDRON NOT OKAY. NOT SPEAKING.

ANTHONY PAGE. KELLEN BUDS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ITEM PH TWO. NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. MR. MORENO. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I MOVED TO HOLD THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL DECEMBER 9TH, 2026. OKAY, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

SEEING? NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO YOUR ZONING AGENDA.

[ZONING CASES - CONSENT]

YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA. YOUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTED OF ITEMS Z ONE THROUGH Z SEVEN.

ITEM Z FOUR HAS BEEN PULLED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO.

I'LL READ THOSE ITEMS INTO THE RECORD. ITEM Z1 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2167 FOR A BAIL BONDS OFFICE ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD AND ROCK ISLAND STREET.

ITEM Z TWO IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING ONE A NEW SUB DISTRICT FOR TH-3A TOWNHOUSE USES ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MOCKINGBIRD LANE AND MCMILLAN AVENUE AND THE SOUTH LINE OF WINSTON STREET, WEST OF MCMILLAN AVENUE, AKA 5400 EAST MOCKINGBIRD LANE AND 5432 WINSTON STREET.

ITEM Z THREE IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE AN.

AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 555 FOR PRIVATE SCHOOL USES ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FRANKFORT ROAD AND HILLCREST ROAD AKA18011 HILLCREST ROAD. ITEM Z FIVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A MULTIFAMILY USE ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF WEST BOULEVARD AND THE EAST LINE OF BOULDER DRIVE, AKA 3130 SPRINGWOOD LANE.

ITEM Z SIX IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 637 FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL USES ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COURTLAND AVENUE BETWEEN BOMBAY AVENUE AND ANSON ROAD, AND ITEM Z SEVEN IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2556 FOR A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SUNSET AVENUE, EAST OF NORTH MADISON AVENUE. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ANY OF THE ZONING CONSENT ITEMS THAT WERE JUST READ INTO THE RECORD ITEM Z ONE THROUGH Z THREE AND ITEM Z FIVE THROUGH Z SEVEN, NO SPEAKERS.

MR. MAYOR. MR. RIDLEY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES ON ITEM Z TWO.

THE PROHIBITION ON COIN OPERATED AMUSEMENT DEVICES IS REMOVED, AND THE ORDINANCE IS SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WITH A NOTE STATING THAT AREAS NOT SHOWN ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN ARE REGULATED AS A D DUPLEX DISTRICT ON ITEM Z THREE, THE AGRICULTURAL USES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND ON ITEM Z FIVE, THE HEIGHT, DENSITY AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE REMOVED.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION, MISS MENDELSOHN? WELL, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THE Z THREE IS FOR A SCHOOL, AND THERE WERE ACTUALLY 121 HOMEOWNERS THAT WERE NOTIFIED. IT'S RIGHT, RIGHT INSIDE RESIDENTIAL AREA.

ONLY ONE OF THEM SENT BACK A CARD SAYING OPPOSED.

AND SO I WANT TO SAY THERE WERE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, COLLABORATION, AND THERE WERE CHANGES MADE ALONG THE WAY.

AND I REALLY WANT TO THANK THE STAFF. I WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT AND THEIR CONSULTANT FOR WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY.

LEVINE ACADEMY HAS BEEN A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND A VALUED MEMBER OF OUR COMMUNITY.

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, I WANT TO THANK THE NEIGHBORS FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE MULTIPLE COMMUNITY MEETINGS WE HAD AND PARTICIPATING IN DIRECT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE SCHOOL SO THAT WE COULD COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE THAT HAS WORKED FOR EVERYBODY.

I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE THE SCHOOL EXPAND AND TO SERVE THE INCREASING DEMAND FOR BOTH THEIR SECULAR AND RELIGIOUS EDUCATION SERVICES.

THANK YOU, MR. MORENO. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ITEM Z SIX.

THIS IS ALSO A NEW OR REPLACEMENT SCHOOL, AND I JUST WANT TO THANK THE DISTRICT FOR WORKING CLOSELY WITH NEIGHBORS AND STAFF.

[02:50:09]

AND AS WE CAN SEE, YOU KNOW THAT THERE'S NO ONE HERE TO SPEAK IN IN OPPOSITION OF THESE SCHOOLS.

AND SO I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING THAT DISCUSSION WITH OUR STAFF ON HOW TO EXPEDITE AND HAVE SOME STANDARDS FOR OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS MOVING FORWARD.

THANK YOU, MR. RIDLEY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST BY WAY OF EXPLANATION, THE CHANGES THAT I'VE READ IN AS PART OF MY MOTION TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA, WERE DRIVEN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW FROM RECENT STATE LAW CHANGES.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. ITEM Z FOUR. ITEM Z FOUR IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NEW

[Z4. 26-3187A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting a new Specific Use Permit for a bar, lounge, or tavern and inside commercial amusement limited to a live music venue on property zoned Tract A within Planned Development District No. 269, the Deep Ellum/Near East Side District, on the south line of Elm Street, west of North Crowdus Street, AKA 2704 Elm Street Recommendation of Staff: Approval, subject to a site plan and staff’s recommended conditions Recommendation of CPC: Approval for a two-year period, subject to a site plan and conditions Z-26-000149 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A BAR, LOUNGE OR TAVERN AND INSIDE COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT LIMITED TO A LIVE MUSIC VENUE ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF ELM STREET, WEST OF NORTH CROWDER STREET AKA2704 ELM STREET.

MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 16 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT 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 FOUR? NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. MR. MORENO THANK YOU.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

THE SUP IS APPROVED FOR THREE YEARS WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR A TWO YEAR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION, MR. MORENO? THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR WORKING CLOSELY WITH MY OFFICE AND WITH THE DEEP ELLUM FOUNDATION.

THREE LINKS IS AN ESTABLISHED VENUE IN DEEP ELLUM.

IT'S ONE OF OUR VERY FEW LIVE MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT VENUES AND THEY'VE PROVEN TO BE A GOOD PARTNER.

AND SO AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO THANK THIS COUNCIL, THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, FOR WORKING AS WE LOOK TO BRING IN OUR ENTERTAINMENT LICENSE AS WELL. THANK YOU. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT ITEM ITEM C8 IS A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT

[Z8. 26-3191A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for a new Planned Development District for Commercial Service District uses on property zoned CS Commercial Service District, on the north line of C. F. Hawn Freeway, and west of Garden Springs Drive Recommendation of Staff: Denial Recommendation of CPC: Denial Z-25-000210 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

USES ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH LINE OF CF HAN FREEWAY AND WEST OF GARDEN SPRINGS DRIVE.

ALL RIGHT, MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 138 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM C EIGHT? I SEE ONE, INDIVIDUAL. TWO. YOU MAY COME FORWARD.

ONE SPEAKER AT A TIME MAY COME TO THE PODIUM.

YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. PLEASE STATE YOUR.

JUST ONE AT A TIME. YES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU MAY BEGIN MY ADDRESS.

MY NAME IS STEPHEN MCFADDEN. MY ADDRESS IS 2432 BIG SPRING DRIVE, FORT WORTH, TEXAS, AND THAT'S 76120.

GOOD AFTERNOON COUNCIL. MY NAME AGAIN. I'M STEVE MCFADDEN.

I'M THE GENERAL COUNSEL FOR THE CAR SOURCE. DOING BUSINESS AS HIDE AND SEEK REAL RECOVERY.

WE'RE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OF 11461 AND 11505 CF HAHN FREEWAY IN DISTRICT EIGHT.

SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW ME FROM MY TIME AS AN ASSISTANT ATTORNEY HERE AT THE CITY OF DALLAS.

SERVICE IS VERY IMPORTANT NOT ONLY TO ME, BUT MY FAMILY IS ACTUALLY A FAMILY TRAIT.

WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TODAY IS THAT THE WE'RE ASKING FOR A PATH TO KEEP THIS SITE OPEN, OPERATING, AND FULLY COMPLIANT ON TERMS THAT PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORS.

WE'VE WORKED TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR FROM THE DAY THE CITY TOLD US THIS PROPERTY NEEDED A ZONING CHANGE.

WE RECEIVED A CODE COMPLIANCE NOTICE IN DECEMBER 2023.

WITHIN WEEKS, HIRED A ZONING CONSULTANT, AND IN 2024, THE CITY ACCEPTED OUR APPLICATION.

WE KEPT THE CODE COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE OFFICER INFORMED.

WE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND CRIME WATCH.

WE PAID FOR SURVEYS, SITE AND SITE PLANS. MONTHS LATER, THE CITY TOLD US THE APPLICATION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BECAUSE OF A 500 FOOT SPACING RULE. TO ITS CREDIT, THE STAFF APOLOGIZED AND ACKNOWLEDGED THE ACCEPTANCE WAS THE CITY'S ERROR.

HERE'S WHAT THE RECORD WILL SHOW ABOUT THIS SITE.

IT SITS ON A FREEWAY FRONTAGE ROAD. THE PROPERTY IS NEXT TO AN OUTSIDE SALVAGE AND RECLAMATION RECLAMATION YARD STAFF'S OWN REPORT SHOWS HEAVY

[02:55:02]

INDUSTRIAL USE ARE PREVALENT IN THE AREA. THIS IS NOT A SALVAGE YARD, HAS ONLY STORES VEHICLES FOR A LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME, JUST LONG ENOUGH FOR EITHER THE LIEN HOLDER TO PICK UP THE VEHICLE OR THE OWNER OF THE VEHICLE TO PICK IT UP.

TRANSPORTATION STAFF FOUND NO SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC IMPACT, AND OF THE 138 PROPERTY OWNERS NEXT TO US, NOT ONE OPPOSED OUR REQUEST. AND WHILE I'M HERE, THIS SITE MATTERS TO PEOPLE.

THERE ARE MORE THAN 25 MEMBERS OF THE OF THE DALLAS COMMUNITY WHO WORK AT THIS VERY LOCATION.

MANY ARE GIVING. THIS IS A SECOND CHANCE FOR THEM.

THERE ARE FAMILIES THAT ARE DEPENDENT ON THIS, THIS PLACE.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE PAYING THEIR CHILD SUPPORT. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO TURN, AND THEY CAN'T JUST FIND A NEW JOB IN INSIDE OF A DAY OR TWO DAYS NOTICE.

SO OUR COMPANY HIRES SECOND CHANCE PEOPLE. AND THAT'S WHY THIS IS REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT TO US.

NOW, AS FAR AS WITH CODE COMPLIANCE, WE ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH AND DO WHATEVER IS DEEMED NECESSARY TO KEEP THIS SITE OPEN.

NOW, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU APPROVE OUR OUR REQUEST, OR IF THIS COUNCIL NEEDS MORE TIME TO GIVE US OPPORTUNITY TO FINISH THAT WORK WITH THE STAFF HAS WANTS TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR IN DISTRICT EIGHT FOR A LONG TIME TO COME.

AND I'D LIKE TO JUST THANK YOU FOR THIS TIME AND INTRODUCE MISTER MAGIC CALIPH AS OUR NEXT SPEAKER.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. GOOD AFTERNOON.

MY NAME IS MAJID KHALAF. I'M WITH ROCK DESIGN ENGINEERS AND I LIVE AT 650 EAST TRIPP, SUNNYVALE, TEXAS, 75182. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WHEN WE ACTUALLY WHEN THIS ITEM WENT IN FRONT OF THE P AND Z, WE WERE ACTUALLY NOT NOTIFIED THAT WAS THE APPLICANT ON RECORD AND WE HAD NO REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER.

SO I THINK THAT EXPLAINS WHY P AND Z DENIED IT COMPLETELY WITHOUT CONSIDERING OUR PRESENTATION.

THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO MENTION, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE WITH THE 500 FOOT SEPARATION FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL. BUT IN REALITY, THE SITE IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CF HAHN, AND THE RESIDENCE IS ON THE WEST ON THE WEST SIDE. SO THERE'S A HIGHWAY SEPARATION THAT ACTUALLY SEPARATE IT COMPLETELY.

SO WE APPEAL TO YOU, AND WE WOULD WANT TO SEE IF YOU CAN CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THE HIGHWAY SEPARATION ACTUALLY PROVIDES THE INTENT OF THAT ORDINANCE. ALL THE INTENTIONS THAT WERE THAT ORDINANCE FOR IT TO BE THERE IS ACTUALLY PROVIDED WITH THAT HIGHWAY SEPARATION. THERE IS NO TRAFFIC IMPACT ON THAT RESIDENTIAL.

THERE IS NO POLLUTION IMPACT. THERE IS NO NOISE.

IT'S ACTUALLY COMPLETELY SEPARATED. AND AS IN THE REPORT, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FROM THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT WAS SAYING THEY ACTUALLY REPORTED BACK THAT THAT WASN'T AN IMPACT THAT WILL NOT AFFECT THEM IN ANY WAY.

SO THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS THAT'S BEEN OPERATING FOR THREE YEARS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE WERE NOTIFIED, HEY, YOU NEED TO CHANGE, YOU NEED TO GET A ZONING.

AND THEN WE TRY TO GET THAT ZONING GOING THROUGH THE SUP.

AND THEN THEY SAID, WELL, WAIT A MINUTE. SOMEBODY DISCOVERED THAT ACTUALLY AFTER WE PAID AND WE WERE SCHEDULED TO GO TO P&Z AND COUNCIL AND THEY SAID, OKAY, WE'LL REFUND THE MONEY BECAUSE THE PROBLEM IS THIS SEPARATION, THE 500 FOOT, WHERE THE BUSINESS IS ONE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY AND THE TRAILER PARK IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY.

SO WE APPEAL TO YOU TO CONSIDER THAT. I THINK THE INTENT OF THAT ORDINANCE IS COMPLETELY SATISFIED FROM THAT STANDPOINT.

THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM C EIGHT? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. MISS BLAIR. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO FOLLOW CPC'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL.

WITHOUT PREJUDICE. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND STRAIGHT.

YOU STOLE MY THING. I'M LOOKING FOR IT. GO AHEAD.

IS IT THE CPC OR IS IT JUST STRAIGHT DENIAL? STRAIGHT DENIAL.

OKAY. BECAUSE THE CPC IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE. STRAIGHT DENIAL.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. OKAY, SO THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

WELL, MISS BLAIR, GO AHEAD. THIS PARTICULAR AREA OF THE CITY HAS LONG BEEN DESIRED.

[03:00:03]

DESIRED TO BE THE DUMPING GROUND OF THE CITY.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE. THERE'S RESIDENTS THAT ARE COMPLETELY ADJACENT TO THIS LOCATION.

IF WE WANT TO HAVE CAR TRUCK PARKING, I. WE HAVE AN AREA OF THE OF THIS DISTRICT THAT IS DESIGNED FOR THAT. AND THAT'S THE INLAND PORT.

THE INLAND PORT IS NO MORE THAN FIVE MILES WEST.

AND EVERYBODY, I ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GO TO THE INLAND PORT FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AND THIS TYPE OF, OF USE. LAND USE WITH THE RESIDENTS THERE REALLY WANT THEY WANT RETAIL, THEY WANT RESIDENTIAL USE.

THEY WANT TO TO PRESERVE THEIR COMMUNITY FOR WHAT THEY LIKE TO USE IT FOR ITS RESIDENTS, FOR ENTERTAINMENT, FOR HORSES. THIS IS A PLACE WE GOT 500 HORSES.

THEY WANT THE ABILITY TO UTILIZE THE LAND FOR THOSE USES.

SO I MUST FOLLOW THEIR DESIRES, FOLLOW THEIR WISHES.

AND AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE AUTHORIZED HEARING TO APPROPRIATELY DESIGN THIS AREA, THIS AREA WILL NOT BE USED FOR TRUCK PARKING, CAR PARKING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

THANK YOU. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM ITEM Z9 IS A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR D,

[Z9. 26-3248A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for D(A) Duplex District on property zoned R-10(A) Single Family District, on the southwest corner of Seaton Drive and Humphrey Drive Recommendation of Staff: Approval Recommendation of CPC: Denial without prejudice Z-26-000146 *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

A DUPLEX DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SETON DRIVE AND HUMPHREY DRIVE.

MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 19 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ONE REPLY 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 THIS ITEM? ITEM Z NINE. NO SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAVE A MOTION. I MOVE TO DENY THIS ITEM WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION, MR. JOHNSON? NO, SIR. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT ITEM. ITEM Z TEN IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 94 FOR CONSIDERATION FOR A CS COMMERCIAL

[Z10. 26-3179A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment to Planned Development District No. 94 with consideration for a CS Commercial Service District or RR Regional Retail District on property zoned Planned Development District No. 94, on the north line of West Camp Wisdom Road, between South Cockrell Hill Road and American Way, AKA 4201 West Camp Wisdom Road Recommendation of Staff: Approval of an RR Regional Retail District, in lieu of an amendment to Planned Development District No. 94 Recommendation of CPC: Approval of an amendment to Planned Development District No. 94, subject to amended conditions Z-26-000073 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearings on September 9, 2026, and September 23, 2026, and is scheduled for consideration on October 28, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

SERVICE DISTRICT OR RR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE NORTH LINE OF WEST CAMP, WISDOM ROAD BETWEEN SOUTH COCKRELL HILL ROAD AND AMERICAN WAY.

A KA4201 WEST CAMP, WISDOM ROAD. MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 60 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.

WE RECEIVED FOUR REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ONE REPLY IN OPPOSITION.

THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUAL? I SEE ONE COMING FORWARD THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

ITEM Z TEN PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. ANDREW RUIG 1341 WEST MOCKINGBIRD.

HERE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH THIS PD, WE'RE GOING THROUGH A PD AMENDMENT TO FIX A CO ISSUE.

THERE'S CURRENTLY TWO BUSINESSES OPERATING ON SITE, THE AUTO CAVE AND CAR STAR REDBIRD.

THIS IS PART OF AN OLD PD. PD 94. SO WE'RE AMENDING THE CONDITIONS SO WE CAN ALLOW THESE TWO ENTITIES TO OPERATE INDEPENDENTLY.

AND THEN ALSO JUST UPDATING PD 94 REGULATIONS TO BRING IT UP TO CURRENT STANDARDS.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. SHOULD THERE BE ANY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM Z TEN? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION? MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE. ALLOW AGRICULTURAL USE BY RIGHT.

SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? NO, SIR. SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM. ITEM Z 11 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER

[Z11. 26-3064A A public hearing to receive comments regarding an application for and an ordinance granting an amendment to Planned Development District No. 241 with consideration for a CS Commercial Service District on property zoned Planned Development District No. 241, on the southeast corner of Haymarket Road and C.F. Hawn Freeway, AKA 10600 C.F. Hawn Freeway Recommendation of Staff: Approval of a CS Commercial Service District Recommendation of CPC: Approval of an amendment to Planned Development District No. 241, subject to a conceptual plan and conditions Z-26-000091 Note: This item was deferred by the City Council at the public hearing on September 9, 2026, and is scheduled for consideration on October 28, 2026. *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

241 WITH CONSIDERATION FOR A COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HAYMARKET ROAD AND CF HAN FREEWAY AKA 10600 CF HAHN FREEWAY. MR. MAYOR, WE SENT 65 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE AREA OF REQUEST. WE RECEIVED ONE REPLY IN FAVOR AND FIVE REPLIES IN OPPOSITION.

YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

BRAND STATS. GOOD AFTERNOON COUNCIL. MY NAME IS BRANT STOTTS.

[03:05:06]

I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE A PROGRESS LAND DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS A REQUEST TO BUILD A TECHNICAL SCHOOL, SPECIFICALLY A WELDING SCHOOL.

MY ONLY COMMENT RIGHT NOW IS AFTER THIS CASE WAS HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, THE APPLICANT AND MYSELF HAD A CHANCE TO MEET WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR WHERE SHE EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS. AND TO THAT END, WE SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO THE PD AMENDMENT, WHICH INCLUDED AN ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT FOR LANDSCAPING, SPECIFICALLY A TREE REQUIREMENT.

AND WE ALSO ADDED AN ADDITIONAL SECTION RELATING TO SCRAP METAL, SUCH AS THE STORAGE AND THE HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION OF THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ITEM Z 11? NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, MR. MAYOR. MISS BLAIR. YES, MR. MAYOR. I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.

FOUR INCH CALIPER TREES MUST BE PLANTED EVERY 60FT ALONG THE NORTHERN AND EASTERN PROPERTY LINE FRONTING CF HAN FREEWAY.

ALL SCRAP METAL ASSOCIATED WITH THE TECHNICAL SCHOOL MUST BE STORED IN A METAL DUMPSTER CONTAINER LOCATED IN A SECURE PLACE ON THE PROPERTY, AS DETERMINED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER. THE METAL DUMPSTER CONTAINING CONTAINER MAY BE VISIBLE FROM CF FREEWAY FRONTAGE ROAD. THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL COORDINATE WITH A THIRD PARTY COMPANY TO RETRIEVE SCRAP METAL FROM THE PROPERTY ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS, BUT SUCH RETRIEVAL MUST OCCUR AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THERE'S A MOTION. SECOND.

WE NEED A SECOND. OKAY, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? YES. GO AHEAD, MR. RIDLEY. WELL, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THAT LAST ADDED CONDITION. THAT STRIKES ME AS A MORE OPERATIONAL IN NATURE AND NOT A LAND USE REGULATION AS TO HOW FREQUENTLY A THIRD PARTY SERVICE HAS TO PICK UP SCRAP METAL. CAN YOU OPINE ABOUT THAT? I THINK IN THIS CASE, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT BECAUSE THE THE USE OF THE TECHNICAL SCHOOL, WHICH WILL BE PRODUCING A PROFUSE AMOUNT OF, WELL, MAYBE NOT A PROFUSE AMOUNT, BUT A LARGE AMOUNT OF THIS MATERIAL THAT IT WORKED WITH THE LAND USE ITSELF.

OKAY. MISS BLAIR, THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. MAYOR, AND THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.

CHAIR RIDLEY? YES, THIS IS A TECHNICAL SCHOOL.

YES, I DID HAVE CONCERNS. YES, THEY DID ANSWER THOSE CONCERNS.

YES, I DID HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT BEAUTIFICATION TREES.

YOU GUYS KNOW I LIKE TREES AND I WANT TO KEEP MY TREES.

SO THEY'RE THEY'RE WILLING TO DO THAT. BUT ALSO, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LEARNED IN THE PROCESS THAT BECAUSE IT'S SCRAP METAL, IT'S AN. IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE. THEY WILL BE ABLE TO TURN BACK OVER AND TO REUSE.

SO THE SCRAP. MY CONCERN WAS WHETHER SCRAP METAL WAS GOING TO BE LINGERING AROUND THE PROPERTY AND FROM MY.

FOR THE. FROM THE EXPLANATION I WAS ABLE TO RECEIVE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER.

IT'S GOING TO BE CLEAN. IT'S IT'S GOING TO BE A CLEAN ENVIRONMENT, A CLEAN USE, AND THAT THERE WILL BE NOTHING LEFT BEHIND.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

THAT WAS A QUESTION I DID NOT CONSIDER, BUT BUT I WAS VERY COGNIZANT THAT I DIDN'T WANT SCRAP METAL LEFT BEHIND.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT ITEM. ITEM PH1 IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS AND TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION GRANTING

[PH1. 26-3249A A public hearing to receive comments and to approve a resolution granting a request to consider the Ceremonial Street Name request for “Dr. Curtis W. Wallace” as a street topper on Roseland Avenue, between Washington Avenue and McCoy Street - STNAME-25-000001 - Financing: This action has no cost consideration to the City (see Fiscal Information) *In alignment with ForwardDallas.]

A REQUEST TO CONSIDER THE CEREMONIAL STREET NAME REQUEST FOR DOCTOR CURTIS W WALLACE AS A STREET TOPPER ON ROSELAND AVENUE BETWEEN WASHINGTON AVENUE AND MCCOY STREET. YOU DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, AFTER WHICH WE'LL BE BE OPEN TO ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE.

EDWARD. BROADWAY. YEAH.

YOUR. YOUR MICROPHONE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS EDWARD BROADWAY.

301 STONERIDGE SUNNYVALE, TEXAS. 75182. MAYOR JOHNSON, ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I STAND ALONG WITH MEMBERS OF THE PILGRIM REST MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH TO ADVOCATE FOR A STREET TOPPER IN HONOR OF OUR FORMER PASTOR,

[03:10:04]

PASTOR EMERITUS DOCTOR CURTIS WILBERT WALLACE, WHO SERVED AS SENIOR PASTOR FOR 30 YEARS FROM 1990 TO 2020.

THE PILGRIM REST MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH. DURING HIS TENURE, HE STARTED THE TRANSITIONAL MINISTRY, WHICH IS A MINISTRY WHERE WE GATHER HOMELESS IN THE COMMUNITY, BRING THEM TO OUR CRISIS CENTER.

PROVIDE THEM WITH A MEAL, TEACH THEM THE WORD OF GOD IN HOPES OF GOD TRANSFORMING THEIR LIVES AND THEM GOING BACK INTO THEIR HOMES OR TO THEIR FAMILIES. ALSO DURING HIS TENURE, DOCTOR WALLACE GAVE LEADERSHIP TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PILGRIM REST VILLAGE, WHICH IS A SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING COMPLEX THAT HOUSES SENIORS 65 AND OLDER WITH A SUBSIDIZED RENT AND UTILITIES.

HE ALSO GAVE LEADERSHIP TO OUR CRISIS MINISTRY, WHERE WE ASSIST CLIENTS WHO HAVE FALLEN BEHIND ON RENT, MORTGAGE AND UTILITIES BECAUSE OF DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES IN THEIR LIFE.

AND WE ALSO GIVE FOOD BOXES ON THE SECOND THURSDAY OF EACH MONTH.

DOCTOR WALLACE WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN STARTING THESE MINISTRY AND MANY MORE.