Council - Regular Meeting

We'll call the council work session of November 17th, 2025 to order and ask the city recorder to call the role. Council president Briggs here. Councelor Berentos here. Councelor Blosser here. Councelor Fitzgerald here. Councelor Holesapple here. Councelor Jance is excused. Councelor Schilling here. Councelor Shane here. Councelor Spivey here. Right. We have a quorum. Um, one item on the agenda, police station project upcoming steps. Brian.

Yeah. Thank you, Mayor Slack. Um, so I put a little bit of the background in the report just kind of, you know, where we've been and where we are today. um you know, not reflecting too much on the past or saying too much of what's in the report verbally. Um we had a bond election this last May. Uh the bond measure failed and subsequent to that, the council evaluated a whole bunch of different options um and decided that the next step was to do a value engineering exercise on the the current proposal that was put out to the public. And so that exercise is is almost wrapping up. Um we probably have a couple weeks left. uh working with the contractors to get that that completed. Um and so um but if we're going to move forward with a project um I think we need to start having the conversations uh and those conversations going to have to happen fairly quickly um as I've outlined outlined some dates in here of things that are going to be coming up pretty quick. So, uh, today's conversation is really, um, uh, to kind of get us back up to speed, get the train moving a little bit, um, on the tracks and talking about, um, just some questions and some, uh, some thoughts and just looking at some things. So, um, I did, uh, besides just the value engineering exercise, which we're going to have that again wrapped up in the next couple weeks, we'll have a work session on December 15th. Um, we'll have the architects here. The contractor that that did the value engineering work will be here. They'll be able to answer questions. Um, we'll know at that time what the um value measuring work was able to bring the price of the project down to. Um, looking at construction costs for uh next year following the the bond election. Um, so all that will be brought up at a later date. So that's not what we're going to discuss today. Um but in addition to the value engineering, we also um evaluated how we would finance this project. Um looking at what we did in May of 2025, we were

looking at a general obligation bond, which is a property tax based um revenue stream to pay off that bond. Um so we looked differently this time and said, well, what can we do to maybe make it better? Um and we explored the opportunity for a revenue bond. So, for the purposes of the the numbers that are in here, um I just took a a target um number of 14 million. That's less than the 17.2 million. Um that's not the actual number. Um in fact, the actual number is probably going to be more than that. Um but I just wanted to uh I had the numbers ran by our um financial adviser um for 14 million because we had that work done several months ago. Um, so that information is included in the table um on page three of the report and it's just a side-by-side comparison of the different different debt plans. Um, so you have debt plan A, which is what we put out to the voters for the obligation bond, revenue sources, property taxes, the payer monthly cost would vary depending on the payer, what their assessed value was, um, is depending on how much they would be responsible to pay. Um, and then the project fund amount was 17.2 2 million. The debt term was 30 years and the total debt amount was about $37.5 million. Under debt plan B, which is the revenue bonds, um the revenue source would be a police station fee that would be collected through the city bill. Um the property uh the payer monthly cost would be fixed a fixed amount. So every payer would pay the same. Um it's not based on their property values. It's just whatever the the amount is that is needed to generate that amount of revenue to pay off the bonds. Um again, the project fund amount just for hypothetical purposes is $14 million. Um the debt term would be 20 years and the total debt amount would be 20 just a little over $23 million. Um so the big differences between debt plan A and debt

plan B are um the revenue sources, the tax versus the fee. um the the payer um instead of so under debt plan A it's a variable amount under debt plan debt plan debt plan B it's a fixed amount um the debt term is 30 years under plan A under plan B it's 20 years so you reduce the term of the debt by 10 years and then the overall cost um of debt plan B is less the one of the primary drivers of why that's less besides the the project cost being less um is the amount of payers that are contributing to the revenue um is a lot more under the plan B than it is plan A. So having more payers enables you to reduce the amount of time of the debt which enables you to reduce the amount of interest that's going to be owed on that debt as well. So um you know the total debt amount I don't want to get hung up on those numbers. It's you know roughly you know $14 million. um that number will be different depend depending on what the actual number is of the value engineering exercise that comes back. Um but you will expect it to be you know probably in the you know 9 to $10 million range I'd guess um on on difference in the debts that you'll see between those two different debt plans. All right. Um any questions on that?

See how did we arrive at those numbers?

So the 17.2 two is with the project that we put out. The 14 million was just I had our adviser say if we had a project that cost $14 million under the revenue bond, run that scenario for me and what that would look like. So that's how we arrived at those numbers. Um the actual project cost will depend on what the work the value engineering exercise is going to be. It's going to be more than 14 million, but it'll be less than 17 million. So, um, we'll run those numbers again before December 20 before even December 15th. So, you'll actually have the sideby-side comparison of the the real project numbers. All right. Um, so majority of the conversation today, I really want to focus on kind of what are the the key dates and maybe the next steps um that the council will want to consider. Um, so these are things that we can talk about tonight. Um December 15th again is when the development team will present the results of the the value engineering pro exercise for the project. Um then in January uh the city will receive notification about the green infrastructure grant. Um if you recall we applied for uh a grant through the department of land conservation development for the green roof um and the planners and the the streetscape. Um we asked for $500,000. We'll find out in January whether or not we get that. that will um again inform that project fund amount that's required uh because we'll be able to discount whatever we receive from the grant assuming we are favorable in that regard.

Question, how long assuming that we do get the grant, how long do we have in to use it? 18 months. Yeah. Uh February 27th is the deadline to file a ballot measure with PK County. Um, so there's work that has to happen between December 15th if we decide we want to move forward and um, February 27th, including working with bond counsel um, and our financial adviser to make sure that we have all the paperwork necessary to get a resolution before the council so that you can then refer that measure. Um, but we have to file. Is that to get on to the general election?

That's to get on to the primary election in May. Right. Right. So we're this this assumes a a May election. Um, so there's some scheduled council meetings that you could discuss this topic before this before the deadline. Um, from December 15th, January 5th, the 20th of January, February 2nd, and February 17th. Um, nothing that says you can't add meetings if you needed to to discuss this topic, but those are the meetings that you have already set in your schedule. Um, already talked about the the running the final numbers and getting bond counsel to prepare those documents if needed. and then the council would have to pass that resolution to place uh a measure on the ballot. Um again, the the May election is May 19th of 2026. So, uh any work if you were to refer a measure to the ballot um as far as campaigning and stuff like that would take place between when you refer that measure um and May 19th. Um once the measure is referred, so let's assume that's on the last day, February 27th, maybe February 26th, um uh city staff at that point can no longer work on campaign. So, it'll really be up to the elected officials to then carry the torch from that point forward. Um, I did include, you know, just some topics of discussion uh that the council can kind of pick up and and run with. There might be others that aren't on this list. So, certainly, um, if there's other things you want to discuss that aren't here, make sure you bring those up. Um, formation of a of a pack, political action committee if you want to do that. Um, kind of the who, when, what, where, and how to make that happen is stuff that could be discussed. Um, what does campaigning look like? you know, we we just did a campaign. There were some pros and cons I think that we learned from that, some lessons. Um, so you can talk about what that might look like. Um, that could be something you discussed tonight. Um, fundraising, that's a key component of campaigning. Uh, so how's that going to work? Um, polling. We did polling before. Uh, so the question is, do we want to do polling again? Do we find value in that? There's a cost associated with that that would have to be um considered, but you can certainly uh do that. Um, is this a

good time to place a bond measure on the ballot? Um there's pros and cons to that. Um I think you have things uh that are in your favor of uh that were maybe against us last time where we don't we are unaware if there's going to be anything that would compete uh for money on the ballot um with the police station if you put it out in May. Um last time we competed uh both with the CHCA bond and also the county fairgrounds. um in speaking with the county uh and any of the other tasking districts that cover Dallas, there's nothing that's going to be proposed for May. Um as of today, that could change. Um but right now, I don't expect anything. Um I've talked with the school district. I've talked with the county um and Shemecka that just went out, they're not going out again. So, those are the three big ones that would really affect us.

On that subject, under under plan B, what exactly would we be asking the voters to authorize? So you would you would author you would ask I mean dollar terms because that we don't know that but I mean structurally so you would ask them to authorize the council to implement a fee to pay a revenue bond of a certain amount. So it's it's similar to it's a similar question that you would ask for an obligation bond. It's just you're asking them for revenue bonds and you're not required by by statute to that's what I was wondering. you're not required to ask the citizens um for revenue bonds. That's something that's within the council's authority just to approve by motion. Um climate though,

I think that's the the risk, right? Because if you if you decide not to um put it out to the voters and just do it, that's a that's a subject that could be referred by the voters of Dallas. And I think if the Dallas voters were to refer that measure, then you're fighting a a more challenging uphill battle than you would if you put the vote out in the first place. maybe telling you something you already know because it was before your time but that exact thing happened about 15 years ago and uh streets I believe right yeah and what we had authorized went down in flames in the election was overturned by margin

I think that's a lesson that you can learn from the past and be proactive and putting um you know a different you know putting a different structure alto together out right um a different financial structure a way to pay for that that's different um that ends up let up savings um you know, a lot of money in terms of the interest payments that would come along with that, the the duration of debt. Um so the the overall project cost or not the overall project cost, the the cost that people see, right, the 17 million, let's say it's um somewhere north of 14 million. They're going to look at that and say, "Oh, that wasn't a whole lot of savings, but you're able to sell." Well, we reduced it here, but this this financial picture that we're putting together now actually saves you a whole lot more money um because of the bond type that we're pursuing. um

and and the and the term and the duration term and the other things like that. So

there's um there's things there. You know other things to consider are um you know I think you have to look at external factors like you know what's the state and the federal government doing you know how does that um uh sadly we don't live in a vacuum right we're we're impacted by all those things uh whether they be tariffs or you know maybe the government not functioning very well with the federal government shutdown is how is that going to impact citizens you know p just feelings about government in general. Um you know we're still six six and a half months away from election. Um, so what's that going to be like, you know, then versus now? What could come up between now and then? Um, I think you also can't be so um focused in on just what's happening now um and say, well, maybe if we wait, you know, a year or two years, it's going to be better. We don't know what two years is going to look like, right?

Longer we wait, the more it costs.

There's that aspect, but it also, you know, it's it's we're looking at the issues that are in front of us right now, but there's probably always going to be issues, right? And so you have to weigh that, you know, what what does 2 years down the road look like? Is it better? Are we hoping it's better and it ends up just getting worse? Um, you just don't know. So that's that's a risk that you have to to weigh in all this. Um, but that's I think things that you want to think about and talk about tonight with, you know, that question about being a a good time to put it out there. Um, and then the last question I I posed is, you know, what are you hearing in the public both positive and negative that could impact, you know, the decision to put something out to the voters? I think, you know, as elected officials, you're out in the community, you're uh, you know, in churches and grocery stores, other places where you might, you know, have conversations with members of the public and, um, you know, there might be things you're hearing. So

besides missing out on the grant funding um prior to May grant funding in February, is there anything that gives us um gives us kind of comfort to put it out in May as opposed to November? Do we have to pay an additional $10,000 to put it into uh the bond measure into the general election or

No, there's not additional money for um there's no cost for the city to put a bond measure on um on an election where there's going to be a ballot produced anyway. So um primary elections, general elections, there's going to be a ballot anyway for just candidates that are running for office. So there's no additional cost for the city to put a bond measure on those ballots. um if we put a bond measure say on this uh election in November that just happened where there it's not a general election but there's there's an election that could be scheduled um then we have to pay for those ballots to be produced because there was nothing our voters weren't going to get anything and if we put that out then there's a cost associated with that election but not for the primary or a general election. Um, I do think one of the things if we're are thinking of things that are in front of our face, um, the the state uh passed in their special session the transportation funding package um the $4.3 billion uh uh bill that's tax based um that's currently being circulated for signatures that would be referred that would be on the November ballot um if it's successful at getting referred. My opinion would be you would want to maybe avoid that ballot um with a money ask given that um you have a lot of people that might be interested in saying no to the state. You're going to have a hard time having them say yes to something localhole. So um I think that knowing that that's being referred in November this May is um you're not competing with that in May. So you might you might have a longer runway to do campaigning for November. That's attractive. Um, but you're competing with that particular issue that we know is is a potential um downfall I think for any other money measure on that ballot.

So, in your discussions with the contractor so far, there's no way to get this down to the 10 or 11 million range.

There's not without you're you're eliminating a lot of programming and spaces in order to do that. So, I mean, you can you can get to an 11 million or a $10 million project. you're you're going to have um a pro you're not going to get there with the building that we put forward. If you're gonna design and build something completely different um significantly smaller um uh I would say if you want to get down to something of that size I would propose taking our existing itemizer building and renovating that space because that's about the size of a building that you would probably get for that value. There's a there's another aspect just hypothetically. Um if if we were either because we chose to or because it was our plan B, if we were to end up um renovating that building, um there would be a couple of long-term implications to that that are basically positive. One would be that in sometime in the future when we when we did decide to build a new police building from scratch, um just for instance, if we decided to do it where the uh where West um Wamtt Valley Fiber is, then the police wouldn't have to find temporary quarters while the construction was going on because they could stay where they were. And the other thing is once they vacated the space, we would be sitting on a very very valuable piece of downtown CBD property that we could do something maybe really useful with like develop it into retail or something like that. So that's longterm. That's not solving dealing with the immediate problem at all. But those are just a couple things to keep in mind if we ever end up in that position.

Yeah. I think the the keys that you're and decisions that the council has to make is um are you looking for uh kind of an immediate short-term fix, right? Which is um you know a a $10 million project um that would serve you, you know, immediate immediate needs. It probably wouldn't even fulfill all your immediate needs, but it would be much better than what we have today. So, and I think the police department would be happy with anything better than today. Um but your your community then turns around and is faced with um as it grows and as the community gets larger um needing a new station, you know, 1015 years down the road. And now you're asking for um you know, something that's probably going to cost in the 25 to $30 million range as opposed to the, you know, $5 to $60 million range that you can ask for right now, which would serve you, you know, hopefully 30 plus years. Um, so you're you're you have to weigh that decision.

A lot to weigh. Yeah.

Brian, for not knowing these things, but uh, real quick, how many active uh, shore accounts do we currently have roughly? Um, I should have written this number down because I looked at it the other day. Cecilia, we're over it's between seven and 8,000, isn't it? Yeah, probably. Yeah, it's closer to seven. It's like 7,200, something like that. And then as we, let's say that we did the revenue bond and that's what we're going with. As we add sewer accounts, would the cost on our bills go down as we add more or would we pay off sooner?

I think there there's potential for either of those to be the case. Um we uh the financial adviser um accounts for some growth right in that in the sewer uh accounts um over the over the time of the debt. So they're accounting for some of that growth. But let's say we were outpacing that growth that they were estimating. Um then yes, you're going to receive more revenue than you anticipated, meaning that you could pay that off faster. Um or you could uh say, "Hey, maybe we were charging, you know, $14 a month and now we're only going to have to charge $13 a month." Um so I think either of those could be um possibilities uh if growth were to outpace the ex the projection.

Another question. Do we have any bonds that are going to be aging out in the next couple of years? Not in the next few years. um city or county or anybody that affects us, the residents of Dallas, the county sheriff, sheriff's office is due up for their their levy renewal, I believe. Yeah, they're Yeah, they'll ask they usually ask for it in year four, which I think maybe within the next year year or two. It's either next year or two. Yeah, sure. We're not seeing um good question

any like obligation bonds or or things that the city has that will be rolling off in the near future.

Do you have an estimate as far as if we went with option B um what that would look like given the numbers of accounts that we have and and the ballpark and it do you have a general estimate of what that fixed amount would be around? So, the the numbers that we came up with here, um, to do a $14 million bond, if it was a $14 million bond over 20 years, um, with a total debt amount of 23, uh, that's estimated based off the current public safety fee, um, which is 1250, I think, is what they used here. Um, even though currently the fee is, I think, 1283 or something like that with the COLA that was applied to it this year. So, um, if you had, let's say you had a a 15 or a $16 million total project cost, you're probably looking at something in the ballpark of a 14 to $15 a month fee would be my guess. They would have to run those numbers, but you're probably in that range. I have a question about accounts.

Does an apartment complex pay one sewer account? Each unit has a sewer account. Each unit has a sewer account. Correct. So, an apartment that has 50 units would pay 50 fees, one for each. But the tenant doesn't get a water bill, do they? I mean I don't No, the over to the apartment company gets pays 50 fees. So yeah. Okay. Yep.

Or if a a a business has um multiple tenants, they have multiple sewer accounts as well. So um you like some of the downtown businesses might have multiple tenants on the same property. Uh let's say one property has four tenants, they have four sewer accounts. I mean, I've lived in apartments before and I never had a like a water bill or a sewer bill. So that So that's paid by the management company or the owner and they would pay per unit.

I'm hearing from constituents that they're in favor of doing a rehab of the uh P County itemizer building. Um I don't particularly personally think that that's the right way to go. I I would rather see a rebuild um a twostory police station. Uh that would be uh as far as I'm concerned a better investment for the city, the citizens and police officers. But what I'm I'd like to throw it out there to uh my colleagues here uh just to see you know what where are you on this or what do you see um the police department whether it's a a rehab or rebuild or a totally uh brand new station.

I don't think we need a PlayStation We need a PlayStation worse today than we did a year ago. It's and it's getting worse every every month. But I also think that the public is hurting worse now than they were. I see no way that we could sell a 1561 17 million project. There's no way I think we can sell it. Totally concur with that. I believe wholesapple was fairly vocal about, you know, and I agree that we we should really do this right, do it the first time and do it for a long term, but I don't think the citizens want to pay for that.

Well, I'm I'm hearing this a lot of the same kind of grassroots feedback that you're hearing pretty much in the same words, I imagine. Um, you know, no matter what we do to the IO building, it's not going to be the kind of jewel that we'd like it to be. But if we can, you know, if we can get a few thousand square ft for meeting space and storage and whatever else, it's anything as was said earlier, anything is better than what what we're dealing with now. Um, and uh, yeah, that's yeah, you wanted to know what we were hearing. That's what I'm hearing. I've heard both sides. Um, obviously I've heard the remodel that what's there, use what's there, we're going to vote you down no matter what you do. But I've also heard the exact opposite. Um, there were a lot of disgruntled people that when it failed were couldn't believe and they wanted it just to go right back out. The exact same question. Um they go, "If we can get people to tour the police station to see the conditions that we have, why would we throw money into a hole, which is what I'm calling the itemizer building, it's not safe." Um in an earthquake where it's the exact same place, we don't it it will come down. Um the buildings next to it will topple on top of it is one of the biggest things if I remember right. Um, so do I think it's going to pass? I think it's going to be a a bare fight, but I think that we need to put out the same question hopefully through the value engineering and getting this is actually what it's going to cost. Um, there might be some amenities inside after we look at the value engineering that we can cut and delay um, and figure out other ways to pay for some of those things inside the that are interior to the building,

not part of the structure. Um, do I like putting it out? No. But at $15 a month per sewer, we might be able to get it P. I mean, there might be. I'd like to know the question. I don't think a survey is in our benefit, though. I would also point out on the subject of surveys um that the polling firm that did the survey for this last goound told us we had a very good likelihood of passing it and we ended up losing it with a 10-point spread. So polling is not an exact science. And and I even I I remember when we we sat in this room and the guy was presenting the his results to us, I asked him point blank, did you take into account things like the Bradley effect? And he said, oh yes, we we took all that into account. That's all folded in. He still told us we would probably pass and we still lost with a 10-point spread. So, whatever we do when we get to that point, if we do another if we did do another survey, boy, you have to take that stuff with several grains of salt. I think I'll just add my couple cents on the survey. Um, I think that there was value in doing it the first time because it was an a way to engage a lot of the community who didn't even know we were having these conversations, right? You've now put the question out to the voters. Um, and so you've gotten the attention of a lot of the voters already on this topic. So they're not coming at this blind or new, right? So I think if you put a question back out, a similar question, the same question, a different question, but on the same topic, um, you're going to have a little bit more informed uh, voter base than you did without doing without doing polling. Um, so I don't think polling is necessary for that benefit. Um, and councelor Shane, you're right. I think it's um there there can be value to that and it's nice when it works but sometimes it

doesn't work and then you kind of scratch your head at like man I thought we were really going to we had the winner this time and it just didn't work. So

well given your point which is that there the public's much more aware now than they were before. Um yeah I don't think I don't think we learn anything we don't already know. Yeah, I think the key with if you put a the new question back out with a revenue bond, um that's going to be the the key piece of information that needs to be communicated and educated on is this is not the same. It's not the same. Um it's it's different and here's how it's different and here's how we made it better. And we did look, you know, we tried to value engineer the project. We we got multiple um uh different contractors to evaluate the cost estimate um and it that was the price right um for what we were asking for that was the price. We did evaluation exercise we got it down to this number and that assumed some escalation in project cost uh you know with a year delay on construction. Um and so you know you're you had a project that was even more expensive to from the beginning we were able to carve it below where you know we asked you last time. Um and with this different financial uh structure of paying for it we're able to shave off this much more on the back end of the debt and years that you're uh needing to pay this.

You're absolutely right. I mean the the kernel of the message that we put out has got to be this isn't the same proposal. it's different and here are the reasons why and here's why it's better and not the same thing that you were asked for last time around. That's got to be the the the central part of the message.

Yeah, I think maybe the message is, you know, hey, let's not talk about the cost of the building. Let's cost about let's talk about the cost of the debt. You know, we put out a project that was going to cost you 37.5 million and now we're putting out a project that's going to cost you, you know, say 24 million. You know, you're saving 13 million or 25 million. you're saving 12 has to be part of the conversation. that's um you know part of that conversation and then people are saying oh well I see with what you're doing you're saving you know you're you are being wise with our money you know

we talk about like $15 sewer fee to pay for this you know that's ballpark um would the $12 was I not listening uh the 12 the current fee for personnel doesn't go away. So, this is additive. This would be a new fee to pay just for this project, right? The fee we're charging now is essentially paying salaries and the fee for this would never change or it could go down theoretically.

So, like councelor Spivey said, I we would we would our analysis would um assume that that fee would not need to go up, right? We would put in conservative estimates on growth and calculate it so that the fee could be fixed at that amount for the every year up to the 20 years. If your growth in your community, meaning number of sewer accounts was grew faster than what we anticipated, then you're going to have more money than what you thought and you're going to be able to either pay the debt off faster or you could reduce the amount that you collect to just make the payments that you have to make. So, um, you could see I think we would make sure that you wouldn't ever have to pay more than what we said you had to pay. There's potential that you could pay less again if growth in sewer accounts was faster than what we anticipated or projected. Um, or we could reduce the number of years of debt. Maybe it goes from 20 to 18.

And safety fee just went up. Safety fee went you applied a cola to it this year. So, it went up by like 30 cents. Yeah. So, COLA is like the cost of living adjustment, right? What's that different than the CPI? So the COLA So the COLA is based coal is based on the CPI. So we apply a CPI to the um to the fee. Yeah. What if we maintain continue to go up as that can that's adjust that's that's adjusted and approved. It's approved by the council each year.

Yeah. If we maintain the amount and it the number of payers goes up exponentially and we can pay it off faster then our in number for debt goes down. Correct. And so that I think is a selling point as far as keeping it where it's at versus and paying it off sooner versus adjusting it annually or whatever semianually. ing someone's bill by um you know a dollar $150 um a month um may not be as beneficial as you know saving a half million dollars in interest right

is your point I'm using madeup numbers by the way for anyone listening at home or in the room it goes into again um I've heard I have not heard Let's polish up the IDO the IO building. I have not heard that. What I've heard is if you're going to do it, it needs to be done right. And it I think the messaging needs to be um clear to the public what this what the plan is for this building. And my understanding is it's going to be the emergency operations center. um and that you know we're meeting the needs of the community into the future in into 20 to 30 years from now not for just today. Um I think um and this gets to maybe some of the earlier questions about you know the formation of a of a pack. Um you know my opinion is that because you can't have staff right working on campaigns during staff time. You know staff can work on campaigns when they're not on staff time or not in their official capacity. Um under election law. uh that the council would form the pack, right? That would run the message. Um and I think that you would utilize your meeting times with council, right? A portion of your meeting, maybe do all your business, and then at the end of the business meeting, you have our time to discuss pack business. And then you you talk about um you know, the the value of the bu the building or whatever the whatever topic you want to talk about related to the police station. Um you talk about maybe what you're going to do, you know, in the public. We're going to go knock on doors. You know, councelor Holtzapple and counselor uh Barry Antantos are going to go knock in this neighborhood and people that watch uh these meetings, which there are a lot of people in the community that do, um maybe you go out and knock in their neighborhood and they're like, "Hey, they say they're going to come in our

neighborhood and sure enough, they showed up." Um you're building some trust and and there's just a lot of transparency having the conversations about what you're doing, you know, in a live streamed meeting. So, I think there's um there's value in in doing that. Um if you were to put a question on the ballot um to have the council act as the pack and have your pack meetings live streamed to the public as you know part of your council meetings about the decisions we're going to have to make and when we're going to have to make them. So, tell me if I've got this right. Um we'll know the results of the value engineering sometime next month. Yeah. And you'll you'll be presented that on the 15th

and we'll know in January sometime in January whether we got the the grant or not. And what's the date in February by that we have to file by? 7th. 27th. So the last council meeting before that would be on the 16th. Um or is that too close to the filing date? Would we need to decide earlier than that? So it' be on the 17th because President's Day is the 16th.

I'm sorry. Right. Yeah. That's holiday. Yeah. So you you would have to unless you had a special meeting between the 17th and the 27th. Um and I would say the 26th because you have to make the decision. Then we have to file the paperwork the next day. Um you have up until February 26th to make the decision to put the measure on the ballot. Just wanted to get the timeline straight.

Right. But I would say if you wanted to use your existing meetings, February 17th is the drop deadad date to make a decision. I did a little a little bit of research on the costs of building a new police station and um I wasn't surprised because I know that the costs of building a police station are relatively high. on if you could follow me on page 19, uh, Silverton, they had a a city hall and a police station combined. The cost of that was 20 million and their population was a little bit over 10,000. in Redmond. They uh they had a new police headquarters over 42,000 square foot and the cost for their police headquarters is 49 million and Redmond's population is uh 27,000 a little bit over 27,400. Forest Grove uh they had a new police facility. their cost is 29 or was 29.5 million. So, uh even Tiger uh which has a population of about three times the size of Dallas has put together a project for over $150 million just to build a new police station. So, uh, those are not equivalent, but it gives you a general idea on how expensive it is to build a police station. So, I mean, compare that with 14 million. 14 million is very much on the

low end, and it uh coincides with what we're probably going to have to pay for a new police station. I mean to help drive your point home there, councelor Bentos, is um the Redmond Police Station at 49 million at 42,000 square ft is uh about $1,167 per square foot, which was in line with what our square, you know, per square foot dollar amount is for the police station. Um public safety facilities just cost more, right? Um I think we've tried to drive home that point. It's more than it's much more than building a house. It's more than building a commercial building. Um there's a lot more that goes into the structure of a public safety facility to ensure that when every other building falls down during an earthquake or um if uh a vehicle tries to, you know, smash into the building, right? You have to make sure that those things don't happen at public safety facilities. And so those buildings are armored pretty darn well. Um, and that's by design so that we can still provide those responses um, in the event of emergencies and catastrophes. And so you don't you don't these aren't goldplated buildings, right? And we don't have, you know, uh, extravagant, you know, toilets and, you know, we're not building it with $30,000 hammers. Um, they're not, but they're they're literal fortresses that are just that makes the building really expensive. Um, but that's by design. It's it's intentional. so that your public safety people uh who you desperately need at the most critical vulnerable time of the population, they want that building to be there. That that goes into the messaging that I think was lost in the initial um that that that never made it to the public.

Uh which is why the sticker shock of the price of it was so uh glaring. And I don't think you accomplish that with what's already currently there. I don't care how much work you do to it. It's not going to meet that standard that you need it to meet to be that. And and I think that messaging hasn't made it out to the public either. That taking what's here currently and making an adjustment to it doesn't doesn't meet the standard. Yeah. There are things needed.

Yeah. There are things with, you know, an existing building that you can do to improve it, but it's not going to it's not going to be to the same standards, right? Um, you know, you could have the itemizer building um have a seismic retrofit to it, which would enable that building to stand, but it doesn't protect a a building that's taller next door from falling onto and potentially damaging um, you know, your building. Um, so there's there's things like that that need to be taken in consideration. Um but yeah, the the real hardening of the shell and stuff like that, it's not going to take place without an even more significant investment. Um and yeah,

cost close to what we're looking at here cost for a whole new building. Yeah, bring us cost higher for sure. They're showing

as I was blowing leaves into the into the road for leaf pickup on Saturday. Um, a neighbor walked by who was new to the community and it was interesting to see why his parents had moved here years ago and why they relocated closer to my house. Um, and that was pure and simply because of the safety of the community. They looked at a lot of areas. He is a I won't go into his job. He was stationed in Albuquerque, moved here to take care of parents and was down in Medford and said, "There's no way I'm living there." looked around the Wamut Valley and found the quaint little town of Dallas and the safety, the the criminal activity in town, the uh clean streets, the le that the city t takes care and the county takes care of its homeless population in a manner that's not seen in a lot of the state is why they he moved to take care of his parents here. This is part of how we keep Dallas being the nice, quaint town that we are. We are known for our safety. Our police officers that do a great job. I don't have to worry about it. I mean, he he made a comment. He goes, "Look, there's my leaf blower. I forgot to put it away last night, and it's still sitting there on lock rail overnight. Sometimes I don't lock my door, but I try to because I mean it's habit. But Dallas is a safe community. How do we keep Dallas being a safe community? The only way we do that is to make sure that we keep our officers hap happy to be here and those investments that we make in our officers, how do you keep them here? You keep them in a nice facility. Um I've used this adage before. I'm an Oregon State alum.

Oregon State's not doing so great in football. University of Oregon, they spent a lot of money on their football stadium. It's easy to recruit. It's easy to raise funds. I was on the fundraising branch for Oregon State for years. It's a whole lot harder to say, "How about those Beavers? Can can you give me $50,000?" Or versus, "How about those Ducks? How about you give me $50,000?" I know it's different, but it's not. This is the same question. We're putting out our football team, which is our police officers, out into a risky place. And to me, a $15 ask, you know, shortened being more fiscally responsible in reducing the number of years is how we sell this. So that's my little soap box. I don't think anybody in this room doesn't get the importance for all of doing of providing this facility for all the reasons that everyone has discussed, including the ones Michael just brought up and all the things we were talking about before. The issue before us is what can we sell? I mean, we we're all on the same page as far as the need goes. I don't you know, there we can drill down into the nuts and bolts, but we all get it. We all understand why we need to do this. Problem is the issue before should be the issue before us is how do we make it happen? And one last thing, one of the major things I did hear is this revenue bond putting it on the fee on the sewer fees and spreading it out to not just the property owners to be but to the renters also in our area. Um was a very popular idea when it was being passed around and they were excited. the people I talked to were excited about having seeing it back on the ballot with that option.

One of the things that we haven't talked about with with the revenue bond is that it's um you eliminate the confusion of the assessed value uh calculations with obligation bonds, right? Property taxes. And so you're able to go in there and say this is how much it's going to cost you per month and this is how it gets paid. Period. And that's simpler. And that's and it's much simpler. It's the same. It's the same for everyone. Um, and so I think that that's that's uh with the the debt plan B that's put together. Um, it's an it's easier to educate when the the answer is the same for everyone.

Spread the cost out more.

It it spreads the cost out more. There's more people more people paying in the system. everyone has skin in the game. So, um I think that the the revenue bond is the right plan, right? So, I I I don't question that at all. I think that's the right way to go. That would be my recommendation. Um it it does come down to what can you sell? Um and when can you sell it? Um, and if if I can't sell it now, you have to ask yourself, will I be able to sell something different in the future that could be worse or better? The circumstances could be worse or better. There's just a lot of unknowns, right? So, you have to look really at what are the knowns that I have today and can I sell it? Do I have the energy to sell it? Do I feel that I could, you know, make convincing enough arguments with what we've put together? Those are things that you really have to think about and evaluate. Um, we don't we don't have all those answers yet because we don't know what the project cost would be. Um, we will know that in a month and so you'll have more information um forthcoming, but I think it's been a good conversation tonight. And

I totally endorse your point about the revenue bond. It's it's simpler to explain. It's easier to understand. It spreads the burden uh more equally. Yeah, I mean for all those reasons, if we're going to finance it, that's the way to go. We just go around and just get a nod up or down on the revenue bond. What we're thinking as a group, numbers aside, just what your thoughts are. Show hands. Show hands. That's the way to go. Compared to the other compared to property tax,

I I do think we need to be prepared for the question of if it's so good, why didn't we do it this way the first time? um how can you shave off this many millions? Why didn't you do that before? We just need to be ready for that question. Yeah, and that's that's an awesome question and um I think that's where, you know, the council just, you know, uh owns up to the the traditional way of um financing public improvements like this is with an obligation property taxbased bond. Um, nine times out of 10 that's what you see. Um, you don't want that,

right? And that's that's that's typically how you do voter approved bonds is general obligation bonds. Um, you tend to get a lower interest rates um with obligation bonds than you do with revenue bonds. So, you're you're also seeking a lower interest rate. Um, so that's something that the public needs to know is you you might have a little bit higher interest rate with the revenue bond, but that's offset by the amount of payers in a much more beneficial way with this this question. So um

and bond rates have come down a little bit recently. So um so that's beneficial compared to what we did last time. So I think there's um that's the answer to that question is uh we went with the traditional route um that typically has lower interest rates. um you said no to that and said this is too expensive overall. So we found a way to make it less expensive overall. Um and we're not required by law to ask you this question, but we want to ask you this question because we feel that it's important that you endorse this this this better plan. And yeah, it this is a better plan. We didn't think of it in the in the first way cuz we were following the more traditional path, but we're going down the untraditional path and and find that that's better overall for the public. So,

yeah, that's how I would answer that today. There's probably a better, more eloquent way, a shorter way to answer that in the future. We'll work on the messaging. Yeah,

depends on if you want to get reelected or not. I will just say since I haven't spoke during the discussion that for the record I am 100% behind putting this back on the ballot again with a um with a public with a with a police station fee. Um I I know it's a hard time to ask the question. And it's always hard to ask the citizens for more money. And um I uh regardless of what the results are, uh we got to campaign hard and hope that and give them the opportunity to make that decision again with with this other way of doing things. I just think we need to do it. Um, you know, I've lived in this community all my life and um, you know, the station should have been built 25, 30 years ago and um, it's way past time and it only gets more expensive every year. We wait, we're going to see that when we get um, the um, uh, engineering report back that, you know, a big chunk of what we could have saved we didn't save because it's another year down the road. And um like I said, I'm 100% behind it and I don't want there to be any question about that. So I wanted to make sure I said that.

Does anybody else have any other discussion tonight for the work session? All right, we'll adjourn till 7:00