Council - Regular Meeting

We'll call the Dallas City Council meeting to order on Monday, July 20th, 2026 at 7 p.m. and ask the city recorder to call the roll, please.

Council President Briggs.

Here.

Councilor Berrientos.

Here.

Councilor Blosser.

Here.

Councilor Fitzgerald is excused. Councilor Holtapel.

Here.

Councilor Jantz.

Here.

Councilor Schilling. Councilor Shane. Spivey is also excused.

All right, please join me in standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

all right thank you brian do we have any introductions tonight you don't mayor all right we'll move right on to public comment i have a script i need to read before this stuff we start um this is the time for public comment for the record please provide us with your name and whether or not you live inside the city limits of dallas you have up to three minutes it's your turn to talk and ours to listen You are responsible for the content, even if it was written by someone else. Please direct all comments to the mayor. Do not direct your comments to individual counselors, staff members, or the audience. Defamatory or libelous comments will not be accepted. It is expected that you'll maintain decorum and respect for each other. A wide variety of viewers watch these proceedings. Therefore, we would kindly ask that you refrain from the use of offensive language and name calling. distractions take attention from the speaker the audience city council members and city staff are asked to focus on the speaker during their time by being respectfully quiet and the first person i have up is bob blesch did i get that right bob okay yeah go ahead and come up to the microphone it's terrible okay

or try to speak into the mic microphone and just give us your name and whether you live in inside the city limits and that's all you need to give and then give us your testimony oh go right so bob what we'll do is i have a timer here and so when it um it goes for three minutes when it hits two minutes the yellow light will turn on and then i'll hold this up when you have 30 seconds left and then the red light will come on when the three minutes is up and that's for everyone in the room okay all right you can go ahead and start with your name and if you live in the city

My name is Bob Lesh. I live on Southeast Hawthorne. For those of you who don't know, it's a dead end street and it's off of Barbary. The reason I'm here is to try and get this council to institute some sort of law or ordinance or whatever you call them on electric bikes and electric scooters. We have, where I live, I'm near the end, we have three houses that have small kids and they play in the streets. And we also have a lot of people have pets. People are coming down the street far in excess of the speed limit. They're riding on sidewalks with their scooters. Most people that have bikes are just riding too fast. They don't have helmets. I'm sure they don't have liability coverage. I'm a former insurance agent, and I would like to see some sort of ordinance put into effect that can shut these people down and prevent them from riding on sidewalks because we have a lot of walkers that come down. My house backs up to the creek and the walkway along the creek. And so walkers come down, they go to the end of the walkway and then there's a little path goes to Hawthorne and then they come out Hawthorne or they go the opposite way. So that's why I'm here. is to try and get some sort of ordinance and i did talk to one of the city's police officers before i came here and he said there are none and i would like to see some enforcement done i don't mind people having electric bikes or scooters let's ride them properly and and get protection if they have helmets That's like riding a bike with no helmets. And if you fall, you can kill yourself. So that's about all I've got to say. And if anybody has questions, I'll take them.

Okay. I usually don't answer questions, but I appreciate your testimony, Bob. And do you need anybody to contact you or?

My number and my address is on that sheet. I hope you can read it.

Okay.

I have a bad tremor and I don't write very well anymore. Okay.

All right. Thank you, Bob.

Thank you.

Next up I have Rodney Auden. Did I get that right, Rodney? All right.

Okay, I want to address something that's been put in by supposedly law enforcement, ALPR cameras. These are the automatic license plate reader cameras. They apparently are unregulated. There's nothing to make regulate them. Why do we have to have them? That's one of my first questions. Is this council... do you have jurisdiction over these things being placed or not placed the other thing is this they're unregulated we don't need that there are several places where they had them they were they were installed but they've been disabled or removed in eugene springfield bend albany and woodburn as well as by odot on route 199. part of that was the outcry of the public saying we don't want these are we going to have any public hearings that before you start installing them before we have them installed and then have to pay to have them removed or deactivated this is a concern of spending money needlessly

We usually don't answer questions during the testimony, but if you want some. Okay. If you have anything else you want to add. That's it. All right. I appreciate your testimony tonight.

And I'd love to get some feedback.

Okay. Next up, I have David Rand. Did I get that right?

Oh, thank you. My name is David Rand. I live outside the city limit but near Dallas, and I drive in Dallas most every day. I wanted to comment on the same issue of the license plate readers. I want to say I have a privacy concern with those being used in Dallas. That said, I do appreciate the Dallas Police Department and the work they do for us and their efforts to adopt new technology and do their job better. However, the privacy concern is quite important to me. And I think that the risks of to our privacy outweigh the potential benefit. of being surveilled that way. And I just want to remember the COVID times when there were certainly questionable executive orders that were given to us telling us to lock down and that sort of thing. And the ability to enforce those things was rather limited. But as license plates readers go forward and this sort of technology expands, as we know it all is, there comes an ability to enforce executive actions. The other side of the coin would be, you know, some people object to the way ICE uses surveillance to perhaps overzealously apprehend immigrants. Um, both of those things are things that become available with, um, license plate leaders readers. So, um, I just wanted to voice my concern because I understand that, uh, I understand the Dallas police department does want to expand their network in our town. And, um, I wouldn't not, I would prefer not to see that happen. Thank you.

uh next person i have up is amy sledge hello guys good evening um i live also outside of the city of dallas but i am a business owner here in drive in dallas um first of all i want to say that you can be opposed to these a um apl whatever license plate readers and still be in support of law enforcement. So I just want to say that is an important part of this. But I think I agree. I think it's an infringement of our privacy. It's an infringement on how we have structured warrants for collection of data for collection of surveillance. Currently, recent victory in Cleveland, Ohio Supreme Court decision six to three ruled that collecting data from all cellular records in a target area, i.e. geofencing, now requires a court ordered search warrant. We know that you must have consent to search a vehicle from police if you're pulled over. Other things like strict They can search your vehicle under strict causes pertaining to an act of crime resulting in your arrest, suspicion of evidence, they must impound your car to search it after they get a warrant. Other things include, you know, the whole homage that currently you know, if we operated on this, you know, all out collection of data and infringement on privacy and surveillance, if a child goes missing, we don't search every house looking for that child. We would love to find, as much as we would love to find the child, there is boundaries between collection of, you know, evidence and surveillance and our own personal privacy. So I think that's important. But for me, the biggest thing is data farming, data collection. And something that a lot of people may not know is that This was a little excerpt from a little research I was doing. Cutting edge investigation technology capabilities can be protected from citizens by agreements with the vendor through trade secret laws and non-disclosure agreements. So local police actually may not even know what some of the data that's collected from these surveillance systems are actually being used for. And that, to me, is the biggest issue. None of us know where that information is going. i'm not a criminal i'm not out there trying to do things i'm not scared of being caught for a crime but i think that i also want to know where my face is being logged where tiling is being done so so yeah anyway thank you thank you uh next person i have up is sabrina fox

Hi, my name is Sabrina Fox. I live outside of Dallas, but I do my shopping here. I go to the doctor here. I do banking here. I participate in activities outside of work and shopping with local community things. A couple years ago, I took a class right here in this room. I knew how to find it because I took a public class here. So very nice. I am here today to oppose the license plate reading cameras. I think just like the other folks have said, the concern over privacy is huge. There's no regulations at this point on who can have that data and how it's being used once it leaves the camera. We don't know for sure who or what they are doing with it. Our police are going to get some of that data, but not all of it. and i sure am not going to have access to that data for myself which is a privacy problem for me i agree with everybody ahead of me i want our dallas police department to continue to keep our community safe i want them to have the power they need to do that but this is a huge infringement on privacy and there are so many unregulated pieces to it that i just do not think it's safe for the general public to participate in that data collection testimony thank you

Do we have anyone else in the audience who wants to testify tonight? Yes, come up and give your name and whether or not you live in the city. And you have three minutes.

my name is nathan riggs i do not live in the city i live just outside of the city but do travel through here quite frequently and spend time in the city i wanted to start out by just reading a quote actually from benjamin franklin he said back in the day he who would trade liberty for some temporary security deserves neither liberty nor security and that is what's at stake here is a temporary benefit of these cameras in order to track criminals is not worth the continued loss of privacy for the rest of us who are not criminals and who are just participating in everyday normal life. That's exactly at risk. And as one of the previous commenters pointed out, we have had previous evidence of our government, both on a federal, state and local level, putting down mandates that are not in line with the Constitution, and this is giving them backing to enforce it regardless of whether they are in line with the law. They would have the power to find us no matter where we go, to track all of everyone's movements, to impose shutdowns, crackdowns, to impose curfew at any time, and it would be the tool that they could use to keep track of everyone and make sure everyone stays in line. And that risk is simply not worth the potential benefits. As another commenter had said, if a child is missing, we wouldn't search everyone's house. That's not the way we go about things in America. This is a country built on ideals of freedom and liberty, and you cannot just sacrifice those things for the safety of an individual or to track a few criminals. You have to get warrants. There's due process. There's methods already established to accomplish those ends. You cannot just blanketly punish the American population and track every single person in order to root out a few bad apples. So yeah, I'm here to voice firm disagreement and ask of all of you that you would consider what exactly this looks like and the Constitution, the ideals that this country was built on. not just old ideas, they're still around today, right? The constitution is not an old outdated document. It is the root of our government. The ideas that founded it are still the ideas that found it today. And it is, especially for police officers, they swore an oath to that document. They swore an oath to the people to serve and protect. And this is not what serving and protecting looks like. Unmitigated tracking and surveillance, and as other people have said, with minimal oversight, and we don't know where all that information is going, is not an appropriate measure to be taken. And it is definitely one of huge concern and should be of concern to all of you that the government would have the power to track any person at will so long as they drive past camera. That's just blatantly unacceptable. That's not an acceptable way of practicing law. It's not an acceptable form of surveillance in a Republican government. It is quite frankly a breach of the Fourth Amendment.

Thank you. I appreciate your testimony tonight. Do we have anyone else in the audience who needs to testify tonight or would like to testify? Anyone on the phone? All right, then we'll close public comment for now and we'll go to the consent agenda. We have three items on there. The approval of the work session minutes and the city council minutes of July 6th, 2026 and the June 2026 financial report. Does anyone wish to move anything off the consent agenda tonight? Pull the financial report off?

OK. We'll do that.

I entertain a motion to accept the consent agenda with the removal of the financial report. Second. It's been moved by Councillor Schilling and seconded by Councillor Shane. All those in favor?

Aye. All right. Those opposed?

All right. The June 2026 financial report.

I just wanted to pull it off to make a couple of comments. We're ending our fiscal year, and if you've noticed, every department we have have came in under budget. To extend a thank you to each and every one of our department heads and Brian, It was a challenging year. We had to make some tough decisions. We've got more tough decisions to make, but I think the citizens of this town need to know that the finances are being governed under budget with conservativeness. And I just wanted to thank you. So with that, I approve the financials. Move to approve.

Second.

By Councillor Briggs, seconded by Councillor Shane to approve the financial report. All those in favor? Those opposed. All right. Any comments from council members tonight? Hearing none.

Brian. Okay. Larry. Can we get the policy to discuss for these cameras or this camera that we have and understand what benefits we've had so far? I know that we've We've been able to recover some stolen vehicles and we've done some things. Could we get some data on that?

Yeah, I'd be happy to present that. Do you want that at a council meeting or a committee meeting? That's access. What do we do with it? How is it handled?

Yeah.

Do you want that here at the council or do you want that in a committee meeting at a work session? Council work session? Yeah.

Thank you. Anyone else? If not, we'll move on to reports from the city manager and staff. Brian.

Thank you Mayor Slack. The one item that we have on the agenda is the Water Conservation Program. This came through the Public Works Committee with a unanimous recommendation for the Council to review the plan and policy as well as approve it. So the policy is included as attachment B to the report. Attachment A is the full staff report from the last Public Works Committee meeting. Essentially, what we're looking at is in our summer, we have a limited supply of stored water, right? We rely on rainwater that falls starting in the fall months all the way through winter and into spring. And then we capture that behind our earth dam at Aaron Mercer Reservoir. up in the coast range, and it holds about 450 million gallons of water. And then once we start using more water than goes into that reservoir, we start drawing that storage down. And so that occurs usually in the months of July and August and September until the rains start coming back. And so this year, for example, we stopped the overflowing of the reservoir after the first week of July, which is right on average for the last 15 years. But as we continue to grow and demand for our stored water increases, we want to be just mindful about how we're using that water, especially in those drier summer months when we're drawing down our stored supply. I will say, because there's a lot of citizens here tonight, we've never in my time here or before have used more than half of our stored supplies. So we have plenty of water. Having the water is not the issue right now. But long term, it's going to take us time to build a new reservoir. We're working through the permitting with the state to be able to do that. but we're we're slowly making progress and so as we go through probably the few more years before we can build something new we just want to make sure we have an opportunity to promote conservation and this program is one way of doing that so um but along with the the incentive to uh or along with the conservation, we want to provide an incentive to the folks who do conserve. So what the program looks like is creating a baseline for your consumption of water for every customer in the summer months. And the summer months in this case are June, July, August, and September. And so that would be kind of the conservation period that we would track and monitor as someone enters the program. So the first year to be able to enter in this program would be the summer of 2027. So this year, 2026, would be the baseline year. So, say, you know, the Ottons, who testified tonight, who live in Dallas, and they, you know, wanted to enter this program in 2027, the 2026 summer months would be their baseline. And let's say that they used over the summer months 20 units of water, right? So, that's about five units per month. In order to qualify for the incentive, they would have to reduce their consumption by 20%, which means they would have to reduce their consumption over that four month period by four units of water. And so if they're able to do that, then we would award them with a $100 credit on their utility bill for after the summer months were completed. that baseline would be good for three years. So in 2026 is when they establish that baseline of 20 units. And then in 2027, say they used 16 or fewer units. And then in 2028, they would go back to the 2026 baseline of 20 units and they'd have to use again 16 or less. And then in 2029, going back to 2026, 16 units or less. After the three years of program, the baseline would reset to whatever they used, again, the year previous to their reentry to the program. So let's say in 2029, they used 16 units of water. So they were able to reduce by 20%. Then they re-enter the program in 2030, they're now going to have to reduce by 20% of the 16 units, right, as they re-enter that program. So on an ongoing basis, if a water customer wants to continue year after year after year, every three years they're going to have to reduce by that 20% baseline from the previous year's stored water that they used. so that's the, the kind of crux of the program is encouraging conservation of water 20%, uh, over those four months. And it's not 20% each month. It's an aggregate of the four month combined total. Um, and, uh, yeah, that's, that's really it. Um, they, uh, were just, uh, allowing this conservation program of single family residential units in Dallas. We do monitor that by use type in our online software that we use for our water billing system. So we would be able to do that. So as someone applied to enter this program, we would put a notation on their on their account. We would then be able to run reports based on all the notations and then be able to do this. So from a staff perspective, there's not a lot of work that goes into this. It's fairly easy to administer and implement. And there's also a good benefit to the citizens who decide to participate in the program and are able to conserve water. And the benefit for the city is we're able to ensure that we have ample water in our community and our stored water supply over the summer. There is some financial cost to this. The city would not receive the revenue that we would normally receive in the water fund if people do conserve. So there's that one element. The city does save a little bit of money on the amount of water that we have to produce. So there's some saving in chemical and energy consumption. that goes into making all the water that was previously used before conservation. There's also the cost of the incentives. So if 500 customers entered this program and all 500 were to meet the conservation goals, that would equate to $50,000 a year in incentives that we would give. Again, that would reduce the amount of revenue in the water fund by that $50,000. However, the water fund is in good health and could sustain those sorts of reductions in revenue based on this program. So with all that said, that's what's being recommended. There is a recommended motion on page 41 of the council packet, and we're happy to answer any questions. Dr. Shane.

Yeah, I think it's worth just as background i think it's worth remembering that that our current mercer reservoir came online in 1960 when the town was not much more than a quarter the size it is today um so we've we've had a lot of use out of it and but we do need to expand it and we have that project underway as we navigate the uh I was going to say optical course, but I think minefield would be a better description as we navigate the federal and state requirements and all the other hoops that have to be jumped through before we can build the new reservoir. In the meantime, it is essential that we conserve, given that context. And I like the basic idea of this program because it provides incentives, but there's no compulsion. So from my point of view, it's probably the best of both worlds.

Mr. Briggs.

How do we handle the signup of this? And also how do we handle communicating it on a regular basis? So the customer knows, okay, I'm ahead or I'm behind each month. They can kind of adjust.

Yeah, so those are great questions. You know, we will have an online application form for people that want to sign up. We'll start, we'll create that form here over the rest of the summer and into the fall. We'll really start advertising this probably as we reach the later fall months, October, November, December, and going into next winter and spring so that people, you know, one can learn about the program. We'll probably do, you know, one of our podcasts. We'll put it in the city newsletter. We'll have some posters in our utility billing office so people can see it and become familiar with it. Hopefully ask some questions. We'll probably put some messages in the utility bill that we send out each month, encouraging people to look into the program. We'll have a webpage. So there'll be all of our kind of traditional ways of communicating it. I anticipate we'll probably put a couple of press releases in the newspaper, maybe one in the near future and then one again in the spring as we approach. You will have to sign up before the program begins. So you'll need to sign up probably prior to May by the end of April. We say June, but the billing cycles are offset. You have a cycle that kind of begins in the beginning of the month and one that kind of begins mid-month. So one of the billing cycles will start, I believe it's like May 15th and will run through September 15th. The other one starts June 3rd and runs through October 3rd. So that's the actual conservation periods of when we do meter reading. So depending on what cycle you're in, we'll just want to make sure that we have everyone signed up before those dates with enough time for us to make sure we input the notations on the customer's account. But yes, so when someone fills out the online application, we would receive that. We would then have a staff member put the notation on the account so we know who we're going to be evaluating as they go through the program. And then we would have a report that would include their consumption from 2026. If a customer said, hey, what was my consumption for 2026 or whatever year, you know, the baseline year was when they entered the program, we could let them know what that was. They could also look at their own bills for the previous year and their own counts and make that determination. But yeah, that's how we would communicate that out. And then I don't think we would do any proactive, like kind of here's where you are. But if someone wanted to track that on their own, they could certainly ask our city staff, hey, what was my baseline and what have I used this year? And we could easily provide that information on a request basis.

Any other questions for staff? If not, I'd entertain a motion. If someone wants to make a motion, it's on page 41.

City of Dallas Water Conservation Incentive Program is presented in attachment B. Seconded.

State Councilor Holzapfel and seconded by Councilor Vlaser. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Those opposed? Thank you.

All right, we'll move on to first reading of ordinances. Ordinance number 1925.

Premier Slack ordinance 1925 is an ordinance regulating the use of electric assisted bicycles in public parks. So Mr. Lesh, who provided some testimony earlier tonight, was talking about regulating e-bikes and e-scooters on sidewalks in particular, maybe some of the rules around those. This ordinance doesn't address that particular issue. So if you wanted to create an ordinance for that, we could do that in the future. This ordinance is really limited to regulating speed limits and the use of e-bikes, certain types of e-bikes in our city parks on trails that are both paved and unpaved. And so there's three different classifications of bikes as you get into the ordinance in state law. There are class one, two, and three e-bikes. And what makes the differentiation between a class is a class one bike is one where you are Um, the, I want to make sure I get this right. Um, the bicycle, I didn't write my notes down. So hopefully I get this right. Um, the bicycle does not require you to pedal, um, in order to be a, no, that's class one requires pedaling while you are, um, in order to activate the, the assistance. Um, So you have to be pedaling, and the speed limit is less than 28 miles per hour. I think it's even less, 20. 20. 20, correct. 20 miles per hour. Class 2. Class 2 is also 20 miles per hour, but it does not require... pedaling in order to be assistance. So you could just run the motor without any pedaling. Class three has a cap limit of 28 miles per hour on the bike. And it does require pedaling while you to get the assistance. So those are the three types of classes. Thank you for helping me with that. I think it does according to state law. Does it require pedaling? Yes. So it requires pedaling in order to go.

It's an option.

Well, state law says it requires pedaling when I'd read the state law. So that's what's written in the Staff Report, David. Yeah. So but whether it does or doesn't is kind of immaterial to the ordinance. So what the ordinance says is in public parks, we allow in Section six point one ten, we allow electric assisted bicycles as defined in the Oregon Vehicle Code as an exemption from self-propelled motor vehicles in city parks. So we're saying you can have these vehicles in city parks. However, in Section 6.105, which is speed limits in public parks, we say electric-assisted bicycles, again, as defined in the Oregon Vehicle Code, may drive on paved park trails provided they shall not exceed 10 miles per hour. And then electric-assisted bicycles categorized as Class 1 may also drive on unpaved park trails, provided they shall not exceed 10 miles per hour. And then electric-assisted bicycles categorized as Class 2 or 3 in the Oregon Vehicle Code may not drive on unpaved park trails. So on paved park trails, any of the classifications can go and can be used, but they're limited to 10 miles per hour. On unpaved trails, only class one bicycles are allowed. So that's what the ordinance is stating and has been presented for the council to approve. This was reviewed by the Public Works Committee, again, with a unanimous recommendation to adopt this.

What's the reasoning behind the unpaved class 1-0?

I think when you're on an... So we didn't get into that in the committee, so I think it's worth a discussion to have that here. Councillor Holtzapel, do you want to...

So the only example I can think of is Kingsborough Park is part of the Rick Reel Creek Trail area. but to get to it you have to go on an unpaved section of that path to connect from the pay part to the rick real creek trail that goes to the west in the town it's the only example i could think of where it would i mean and even then it's it's very narrow and not i mean i i i don't see a need to i mean i'm thinking of like the um the Arboretum in the City Park or that, do we really want to have bicycles on those trails at all?

Yeah, so those are some examples of unpaved trails. The one you mentioned, the Arboretum has unpaved trails. City Park has unpaved trails. The east end of the Rickerel Creek Trail System is unpaved. So there are multiple locations in Dallas that you have unpaved trails. I think you could even say, you know, driving on the grassy area of a park, would be an area where we would say, no, you're not going to do that. And the differentiation between class one and the other classes in my mind, again, we didn't discuss as the public works committee is on a class one, you have a bike that is lower speed and requires you to be pedaling in order to get the assistance. And so, you know, we're a class two, you don't have to pedal. So you can really kind of, you know hit the speed without, really a lot of effort on your part as a cyclist. And class three, I think just the higher speed is a consideration not to have those on unpaved trails. So I think there's probably some safety considerations that I would consider can see with those higher classes. But if you feel that you don't want any electric assisted bicycles on the unpaved trails, that's a change to the ordinance we could certainly make.

Go ahead.

To me, the speed limit's the speed limit whether you're riding a Class 1 or Class 3. And I happen to ride that Arboretum Trail through Kingsborough to see my mom about twice a week on my bike, which is a Class 3. And I don't see any difference between a Class 1 or Class 3 if we're all doing 10 miles an hour. So I would suggest an amendment to that.

I'd be in favor of that, and it also brings up a question I was going to ask. I think you answered it by implication, but I want to nail it down. The 10 mile an hour speed limit applies in all circumstances across the board within the context of this ordinance, no matter what bike, no matter what trail.

So if you were to make the change that Councilor Briggs is asking for, then yes, you would say just electric assisted bicycles, whether you're on a paved or unpaved trail, is limited to 10 miles per hour. Okay.

I like that. Aside from all of its other virtues, it's simpler and easier to remember.

Dr. Schilling, do you want us to make a motion to amend that between the first and second reading? That would be appropriate. Yeah. So in order to make the change from the first reading to the second reading, I would look for a motion to change it so that... on unpaved trails, the speed limits 10 miles per hour for any classification of e-bike.

Yep. I'm assuming you know how fast you're going on those bikes.

It has a, so according to the state, according to state law, class three includes a speedometer class one and two doesn't require it. I don't know if they don't have them or not, but they're required for class three.

so i would have to make a motion here to amend the ordinance so to remove the uh requirement for class two and three i would just say i would say i'll give you the motion you can say so moved so the motion would be to allow all classifications of e-bikes

on unpaved trails at 10 miles per hour, a speed limit of 10 miles per hour.

So we did not include on paved trails because it's in here. It's already allowed on paved trails. He moved it, so I'll second it.

Just changing it. Yeah. So the language on paved trails is already that way. We're just changing the language on unpaved trails to match the language on paved trails. Yeah, and we may take, we'll wordsmith that section. We might just say on paved and unpaved trails, the speed limit of UV box is 10 miles per hour. We'll clean it up.

Motion was from Councilor Briggs, and the second was by Councilor Shane. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed? All right. Passes at first reading as amended. Uh, second reading of ordinance ordinance number 1924.

Slack. So this ordinance is coming back for second reading and it is an ordinance amending the provisions of Dallas development code relating to the establishment of the lock real mixed use node and the corresponding zoning designations.

Any questions or discussion?

Did it get changed, correct? The height limit was changed, correct?

Yeah, the changes that were recommended between the first and second reading were incorporated. So that's, if I get to it.

D on page 13, well, on page 65. So it's there. Yep.

Thank you. There were a couple of changes that were made. Okay.

Right. If there's no further discussion, I'll ask the city recorder to take a roll call vote.

Councilor Blosser?

Yes.

Councilor Holzapfel?

Yes.

Councilor Jantz? Yes. Councilor Schilling? Yes. Councilor Shane? Yes. Councilor President Briggs?

Yes.

Councilor Berrantos?

Yes. All right. Passes unanimously. Thank you. Next, we have a resolution. Resolution 3574.

Slack. Resolution 3574 is a resolution authorizing refunding of an interfund loan from the Special Public Works Fund with the Oregon Infrastructure Financing Authority. So if you recall, a couple years ago, we applied for a loan from Business Oregon through the Special Public Works Fund for the replacement of the covers, the floating covers at the Clay Street reservoirs. we also were repairing a major leak in one of the cells and so business oregon gave us a loan through some interim financing meaning the the ultimate loan is going to be through a bond sale but the state doesn't sell bonds every year or with every loan application so business Oregon gave us some money on an interim basis and now the state is preparing to sell bonds for that loan so what this resolution does is it authorizes the sale of bonds for our loan and then the bond sale will pay back business Oregon for the interim financing which we've already spent and then we will have the terms and the interest that will be applied to the bond sale which the city will then start repaying in December of 2027. So that's what the resolution does, is it authorizes the sale of bonds, which we've already kind of agreed to, and having those bond sales refund the interim financing, which we've already taken and spent on our project.

Questions for staff? If not, I'll ask the city recorder to take a roll call vote.

Councilor Holzapfel?

Yes.

Councilor Jantz?

Yes.

Councilor Schilling? Yes. Councilor Shane? Yes. Council President Briggs? Yes. Councilor Berrientos? Yes. Councilor Blosser?

Yes.

This is unanimous. It's resolution 3574. Thank you. Is there any other business to bring before the council before we close and go into our urban renewal meeting? Seeing none, I'll adjourn the City Council meeting for Monday, July 20th, 2026 at 744 and open the Urban Renewal Agency Board of Directors meeting at 744. We use the same role. There are two items on the agenda. One is the approval of the minutes of the April 20th Urban Renewal Agency Board of Directors meeting. Do I have a motion for approval of those minutes?

Second.

Been moved by Councilor Sane, seconded by Councilor Holzapfel. All those in favor?

Aye. Opposed? Thank you.

Next item on the agenda is a building improvement grant application evaluation and approval.

Thank you, Slack. I'll invite our economic development specialist, Tyler Ferrari, to come to the dais and present on this topic.

Good evening. Thank you for having us tonight to present on this topic. Tonight we have two applications from the Urban Renewal Grant Program for your consideration. Application 2601 and 2602. Both applications met the necessary minimum scoring and eligibility requirements to be considered for funding by the agency. Application 2601 will replace the roof of the building to further preserve and weatherproof this building. The roof replacement will also benefit tenants on the second floor of the building who live in apartments there. The project will also make improvements to a commercial kitchen located inside the building so that can be leased to a future user. And then finally the project also adds interior improvements to residential tenant windows that improve sound suppression from outside as well as weatherproofing and those improvements also maintain the historic character of the windows. The second application replaces a leaky roof and makes repairs to the sewer line to allow the building to be used for a law office. The building's previous use was also a law office and the applicant indicates they plan to relocate their primary operations to this location and may hire additional staff. The project will also allow them to rent out an additional office space in the building to another business. Both applications were received on time and were scored by the scoring committee. On your scoring committee summary sheet, you'll see that application one did receive two sessions of scoring. And the reason for that is because there were some inconsistencies on the website regarding the documents that were available. We removed some PDFs to get ahead of making the website ADA accessible with some changes coming up in later years. However, those PDFs were not equally provided to the applicant, so we provided them an option to have the application resubmitted and rescored. And so you will see their original score and the updated score reflected there. staff's analysis is the both applicants are qualified to apply there's no outstanding taxes bills or fines due to the city the applicants are going to be required to obtain any necessary permits before reimbursement can be issued both of the projects are within the downtown urban renewal district and result and permanent improvements to commercial buildings and both the projects and the properties are privately owned and non-tax exempt for Application 2601, the total project cost is $68,157 and they've requested the maximum amount of $25,000 for their grant award. The second grant application is a total cost of $26,343 with a requested amount of $13,171.50. Staff's recommendation is to approve both of these applications. Approving both the applications tonight will result in allocating $38,171.50 from the urban renewal grant line item. And that will leave about $34,579.50 remaining in the program. And we expect to open up another window of applications beginning in August.

These are the only two from the first round? Yes, that's correct.

Questions for Tyler to look like they're really good. Proposals my 2 cents. I like the idea of the, uh. Communal kitchen interested to see how that plays in.

I particularly like the idea that the roof will benefit, not just the business, but the residential occupants also.

And maintaining the historical look with the windows updates.

There's a recommended motion on page five. Someone wants to make that motion.

There's no other discussion. I move to award the amount of $25,000 for application 2601 and $13,171.50 for application 2602 and authorize the city manager to execute a grant agreement with applicants.

Seconded by Councilor Schilling and seconded by Councilor Briggs. Any further discussion? All those we need a roll call vote on this. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed passes unanimously. All right. That's great. Is there any other items before the agency tonight?

All right. We will adjourn at 7 49.

Thank you everybody.