FINAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOV. 9 at 1:30pm
Dallas City Hall
1500 Marilla Street, 6th Floor

On November 9, the Dallas City Council will vote on whether to create a "neighborhood stabilization overlay" -- a tool that will help neighborhoods address teardowns and McMansions.  If adopted, the overlay will allow neighborhoods to regulate height, front yard and side yard setbacks, and garage placement for new construction in their neighborhood.

It is important to note that the overlay is a tool, not a zoning change.  Not a single home in Dallas will be affected if the City Council creates the Neighborhood Stabilization Overlay tool next Wednesday.  If a neighborhood wanted to become an overlay district, it would first have to submit a petition signed by at least 60% of the property owners.  Even then, the overlay district would have to be approved by the City Plan Commission as well as the City Council.

If adopted, the overlay tool will give neighborhoods across Dallas the option to require new construction to be more sensitive to the context in which they are built.

If you care about this issue, you need to come to City Hall at 1:30PM on Wednesday, November 9, and show your support. 

The overlay discussion has been going on for over a year now.  First, the City's Single-Family Housing Standards Taskforce (made up of residents, builders, realtors, architects, and planners) developed a proposal working in concert with the City's Comprehensive Plan work group. 

HISTORY OF THE OVERLAY
As it was originally envisioned by the Taskforce, the overlay would allow a neighborhood to apply to become an overlay district with the support of 50%+1 of the property owners in the area (the same standard for all other zoning changes in Dallas).  After the neighborhood petitioned for consideration to become an overlay district, the City would provide an interim set of building standards based on what is typical to the neighborhood.  These "prevailing standards" would regulate new construction while the neighborhood met with the City for up to 18 months to determine permanent standards.  The prevailing standards would be based on the neighborhood's typical number of stories, front and side setbacks, garage placement, and percentage of front yard impervious coverage.  The purpose of the prevailing standards period was to immediately address the teardown and McMansion problem and give a neighborhood breathing room to develop permanent standards for new construction.

Under the Task Force's proposal, a neighborhood's permanent overlay ordinance could address height, stories, front and side setbacks, garage placement, and percentage of front yard impervious coverage.  After the ordinance was finalized by the neighborhood, with assistance from the City's Planning staff, the overlay ordinance would then go before the City's Plan Commission for approval.  If approved, the final decision would be made by the City Council.

After the Taskforce made its recommendation on the overlay tool, the City's Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee (ZOAC) reviewed their proposal.  After considering it for months, ZOAC revised the overlay tool and forwarded its recommendation to the City Plan Commission.

At the Plan Commission, the overlay tool was again substantially revised.  Now the issue is before the City Council for determination on November 9.  Unfortunately, each time the ordinance has come before another layer of city bureaucracy, the overlay has become less neighborhood-friendly.

Look at this comparison table to see the differences among the various proposals, and how much the neighborhoods have ceded to the opponents.

This issue first came before the City Council in September, when Councilmembers were briefed on the issue.  At the briefing, the Mayor proposed an alternative overlay tool that compromised the neighborhoods' needs even further.  Most importantly, the "prevailing standards" interim period was stripped away, height and stories were removed as options, and the minimum percentage was increased from 50%+1 to 67%-75%. 

I and neighborhood leaders in attendance at the meeting objected to the alternative proposal.  As a result, the Mayor created an ad hoc council committee to develop a compromise.  The committee was comprised of Councilmembers Ed Oakley, Bill Blaydes, Elba Garcia (later replaced by James Fantroy), Leo Chaney, and me.

The ad hoc committee met to discuss the overlay issue.  Director of the City's Development Services Department Theresa O'Donnell walked us through the different iterations of the overlay.  At the meeting, I was elected chair of the committee.  I asked from input from each member of the committee.  Councilmembers Oakley and Blaydes both stated that they opposed allowing a neighborhood to address height in the overlay, and that they would not move from requiring 75% of all owners to agree to the overlay.  (This is in stark contrast to every other zoning change in our city, which requires a threshold of only 50%+1).

After hearing from each committee member, I proposed a compromise between what the original Taskforce had proposed and what the Mayor had come up with:  >50% to sign the petition, 1 year to gather signatures, and allow neighborhoods to address height, front and side setbacks, garage placement, and front yard pavement.  In exchange, I proposed giving up regulating the number of stories, doing away with the prevailing standards interim period, and increasing the minimum district size from one blockface to 50 homes.  The committee passed the recommendation by a vote of 3 to 2, with Mr. Oakley and Mr. Blaydes voting "no."

Despite the many concessions made to the opponents, the Mayor wanted the supporters to further compromise, and asked Councilmember Garcia to try to develop a new proposal.

CURRENT PROPOSAL
Because I want to see an overlay tool created, I will support a reasonable compromise.  I will support a compromise that would increase the petition requirement to 60%, decrease the time to collect signatures from 1 year to 6 months, allow standards for height, setbacks, and garage placement, and increase the minimum area from one blockface to 50 homes.

Many councilmembers are supportive of the Neighborhood Stabilization Overlay.  However, it is a grave disappointment to me that other councilmembers do not want to give neighborhoods even a small voice in their future development.

If you think this is an important tool for neighborhoods, let your voice be heard.  If you already enjoy the protections provided by an historic or conservation district, let the Mayor and Councilmembers know how it has positively affected your neighborhood, and show your support for creating the overlay tool.

Write, email, call and fax the Mayor and councilmembers and attend the City Council meeting at Nov. 9 at 1:30PM at Dallas City Hall, 1500 Marilla Street, 6th floor. 
 

The Neighborhood Listening Sessions are going incredibly well.  If you haven't attended one yet, don't miss out!  This is your opportunity to let me hear what what's going on in your neighborhood, what your priorities are for our city, and what you would like to see accomplished over the next couple of years -- for your neighborhood and our city.

So far, I'm getting great feedback about what we need to fix in our city, and I'm getting great ideas, too.  I've collecting a great deal of information from each Listening Session and will publish the results and my responses on the website and via email once all the sessions are completed (after Nov. 22).  See the left column for remaining Listening Sessions.
 

Dallas Police Chief Kunkle has recommended that the City go to a verified response system for burglar alarms in order to free up police to respond to other crime.  The proposal is to require alarm companies to respond first to their burglar alarms, then contact the police only after verifying that an actual crime is occurring. The city would still respond immediately to burglar alarms that are the result of someone pressing a panic button. Residential alarms would no longer require a permit fee. Commercial alarms would still pay a permit fee.

The verified response proposal arose due to the incredibly high rate of false alarms.  In 2004, the DPD received about 62,000 burglar alarm calls. Of those, 97% were false alarms (60,100). Responding to these false alarms took approximately 47,000 police officer hours, which equals about 41 full-time police officers at a cost of approximately $3.485 million in police time. This takes our officers away from responding to real crimes in our city.

Many residents have written me to suggest that the City increase the false alarm fee.  Unfortunately, the State Legislature has taken away a city's ability to set false alarm fees, and cities may only charge $50 after the first three false alarms.

I was initially very supportive of the verified response system, given the remarkably high number of false alarms.  However, residents have raised some important questions, such as how other cities that have adopted verified response have fared, and I am looking very closely at this issue.

The City Council will likely vote on this issue before the end of the year, though no date has been set yet.  I have heard from a lot of folks who have burglar alarms (14% of Dallas residents), but I would like to hear from those who DON'T have burglar alarms (86% of Dallas residents).  What are your thoughts on verified response?  Please shoot me an email.
 

Please let your voice be heard on election day, November 8.  There will be a referendum on proposed Dallas City Charter changes, a City bond initiative for a homeless assistance center, and proposed State Constitutional changes.

There has been a lot of controversy the last few days about some councilmembers withdrawing their support for the stronger mayor proposal on the ballot.  I just wanted you to know where I stand.

I opposed the Blackwood strong mayor proposal in May because it was a poorly thought-out Charter amendment that lacked checks and balances.  I pledged to support an alternative proposal and bring it before the voters.  I stand by that pledge. 

I believe that Proposition 1 will make our city government more accountable and responsive to the residents of Dallas.  In particular, it will let the Mayor hire and fire the City Manager and increase the Mayor's authority over the budget.  We need to have a form of government in which our chief administrator is directly responsive to our top elected official.  It is important to take personalities out of this issue, and focus on what is best for the City of Dallas in the long term.  I encourage you to vote in favor of Proposition 1.

CHARTER CHANGES
Our Charter is like our city's constitution: it dictates how our city is governed and how the power is divided among the different branches of government.  The proposed Charter changes are set forth in 13 separate propositions on the ballot.  I've put together an explanation of the ballot initiatives in plain language.

I support all of these changes to our City Charter except for Proposition 10, which changes the name of the Fire Department to "Fire and Rescue" Department.  Firefighters tell me they don't want the name change, and kept silent until now out of respect to the former Fire Chief who supported the change.  I think our first responders should choose the name of their department, and if they want it to stay "Fire Department," then so be it.  I urge you to vote "no" on Proposition 10.

You can see a redlined version of the Charter here.

HOMELESS ASSISTANCE CENTER
Proposition 14 is for a $23 million bond package to build a homeless assistance center (the location for the center is not part of the election).  The assistance center is not a shelter, but a facility to help the homeless get off the streets by providing mental health services, drug rehabilitation resources, job training resources, and other services.

Dallas has failed for too long to address our homeless problem.  While the assistance center is not a complete solution by itself, it is an important step in the right direction, and I support it.  We must get our homeless of the streets, both for humanitarian reasons and to lessen the detrimental economic and public safety effects on our city.

You can early vote through November 4.  Check out www.dalcoelections.org for locations and times.  To see the proposed changes to the Texas Constitution, go to the Texas Secretary of State website: www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/voter/2005novconsamend.shtml.