Janie Cisneros, leader of the West Dallas community group Singleton United/Unidos, is suing the city for blocking a process that some say is one of the last avenues for getting an 80-year-old shingle plant shut down.
West Dallas residents have been telling the city for years that the GAF shingle factory is polluting their air — and harming their health.
Cisneros has tried twice to file for amortization — or a scheduled closure — of the factory. But city attorneys denied the application both times, citing a new state law that they claim changes how municipalities handle the entire process.
They told Cisneros the city needs to amend its own code before it can accept her application.
That process requires going through multiple committees and commissions — and in the meantime, the city is not accepting any amortization requests.
But the city’s proposed fix — that has already been discussed by at least one city commission — takes away a resident’s right to file for a scheduled closure. Activists and even some city commissioners have said that goes above and beyond what the state law has laid out.
The legal action comes after a years-long struggle between residents, environmental activists and Dallas elected officials over what to do with the GAF Manufacturing shingle plant that sits off Singleton Boulevard. That includes failed negotiations between residents and plant executives — and being “disrespected and belittled” by at least one Dallas City Council member.
“The City shenanigans to protect GAF at all costs needs to stop. People are sick. People are dying,” Cisneros said in a press release. “The City has equity and empathy as core values. Why do they not apply to the residents of West Dallas?”
KERA reached out to the city for comment but did not receive a response before this story published. When asked previously for comment about the proposed amendments to the amortization ordinance, a city spokesperson said this:
"Because our development code has not been amended yet to reflect the changes in state law, the city cannot process a request to establish a compliance date at this time as it would be in conflict with state law and/or the city code."
‘Obligation’
The case was filed with the Dallas County Court a few days before Christmas, late last year. According to court records, the city of Dallas was served with the suit earlier this month.
Cisneros’ petition argues that the city’s code has not been changed yet — regardless of it being in the amendment process — and the new state legislation doesn’t change the Dallas Board of Adjustment’s “obligation to hold a public hearing after a resident or landowner requests…a compliance date for a nonconforming use.”
And the petition has a clear goal. Cisneros wants the city to allow her scheduled closure application to move through the process currently allowed under the code.
But city officials have claimed their hands are tied essentially because of Senate Bill 929, which was passed in May 2023.
According to city officials, SB 929 changes the payment structure of the amortization process. The bill allows the nonconforming use property or facility owner to pick two options when faced with an amortization request: Stage the closure over time or accept an immediate payment from the city and stop operations.
“The results of [SB 929] is that it puts the taxpayers at risk to parley a large amount of money — with no oversight from city council,” Assistant Interim Chief of Counsel Bertram Vandenberg said during a Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee meeting in October of last year.
Officials claim before they can process any request, they need to amend the city’s code. But in the same briefing, Vandenberg admitted to the commission that the new law did not change who could file for amortization — and that the city proposed to remove that right, on its own.
Vandenberg said during the meeting last year that “residents will still have the ability to go to city council meetings and sign up to speak and request their city council members to do so.”
But residents and activists said that is not enough protection for communities faced with GAF-like situations.
“Anybody who seriously suggests to solve City of Dallas problems by approaching the five minute general speaking time at every city council meeting, has never tried to get anything from the…meeting before,” Downwinders at Risk Director Jim Schermbeck told commissioners during the meeting. “That is obvious and it is not a serious proposal.”
‘Fighting back’
This is only the latest in a long campaign to see what some West Dallas residents say is a major source of pollution in their neighborhood.
After being blocked twice by the city, Cisneros lobbied District 6 City Council Member Omar Narvaez — who represents the area — to speak up on the resident’s behalf.
During a November community meeting, Narvaez told residents that he supports their fight to file for amortization — but any attempt to “directly or indirectly influence city processes” goes against his personal ethics and may be illegal.
Narvaez could not point to any specific city ethics rules that would prevent him from speaking out against the factory.
And after community push back during the meeting, Narvaez had this to say to residents:
“My job is to get stuff done inside city hall,” Narvaez said. “You want me beating on a drum and walking up and down Singleton in front of GAF…yeah I can do that. It’s not getting you anything from city hall because they’re not watching that. They don’t care.”
But Wednesday’s press release from Singleton United/Unidos makes Cisneros’ point clear:
“After months of getting Dallas City Hall doors literally shut in her face, West Dallas resident Janie Cisneros is fighting back.”
Got a tip? Email Nathan Collins at ncollins@kera.org. You can follow Nathan on Twitter @nathannotforyou.
KERA News is made possible through the generosity of our members. If you find this reporting valuable, consider making a tax-deductible gifttoday. Thank you.
