Dallas elected officials finalized a slate of proposed changes to the city’s charter. They include measures to decriminalize some amounts of marijuana, administrative policy tweaks, changing when elections are held and allowing noncitizens to serve on city commissions.
While the final vote was made during Wednesday’s marathon city council meeting, Dallas voters will ultimately decide which changes to the city’s charter should be passed.
Elected officials voted to give Dallas voters a second chance to allow noncitizens to serve on boards and commissions laid out in the charter. The topic elicited strong emotions and tense debate around the horseshoe.
Voters will have the chance to decide on an independent inspector general’s office to investigate crime and corruption inside City Hall — and have the director report directly to the city council.
And the council approved a measure that could allow more Dallas residents to serve on boards and commissions. The issue was placed on a pervious ballot and failed. The topic gained intense and emotional discussion from council members during the meeting.
Measures aimed at decriminalizing four ounces of marijuana and another set aimed at public safety funding and city hall accountability, will also be added to the ballot. Voter petitions that were certified by the city secretary last month dictated that the city let Dallas voters weigh in on the issues.
Even though the city is legally required to move the propositions forward, four elected officials voted against calling the special election for the marijuana amendment. The rest of the council voted in favor of calling the election.
When it came to vote to move the voter-led propositions that would dictate funding for public safety, hiring hundreds of new police officers and create new compensation metrics for city officials, the council voiced concern. Ultimately, the body voted 12-3 to call the special election.
“I do think they can cause harm to our city,” District 9 Council Member Paula Blackmon said during the meeting. “But I will put it forth to the voters and let them decide.”
But Dallas voters won’t get to weigh in on all changes brought up during the council’s discussion. They range from administrative and technical amendments to police oversight.
A motion to place the director of the city’s Office of Police Oversight under the supervision of the city council was ultimately voted down by elected officials.
The decision comes after the city’s civilian-led police oversight board’s investigative powers have come into question after the board started investigating a controversial complaint against the Dallas Police Department.
Council members and board appointees expressed concern over what they view as a lack of independence.
Now, its up to Dallas voters to decide which of the proposed changes to the charter get adopted. The measures will be placed on the upcoming November election.
‘If you hate us, tell us’
The city council voted to send a measure that would allow noncitizens to serve on the boards and commissions laid out in the charter, to Dallas voters. A related measure was put in front of voters in previously but failed.
But, like many amendments proposed during the marathon meeting, not every council member was on board with the idea. District 12 Council Member Cara Mendelsohn offered a motion to strike the proposal from the ballot.
“This is not a good plan,” Mendelsohn said after. “And I respectfully ask for your reconsideration so that we remove this item.”
Mendelsohn quoted from an opinion piece written by three former Dallas mayors — Tom Leppert, Mike Rawlings and Ron Kirk — published in The Dallas Morning News. The piece voiced opposition to 12 charter amendments, including the one aimed at opening some boards and commissions up to more residents.
“This proposed amendment reflects a misguided notion that would further diminish the importance of encouraging voter participation and ensuring members have vested interests in the effective functioning of these organizations,” Mendelsohn quoted from the article. “We cannot conceive how the work of these important boards and commissions would be served by eliminating these minimal requirements.”
Mendelsohn’s comments gained intense and emotional rebuttal from members of the council.
“Say the truth,” District 6 Council Member Omar Narvaez said. “If you hate us, tell us, that’s for anybody who cannot tell the truth.”
Jaynie Schultz, who represents council district 11, offered up her speaking time to anyone around the horseshoe that could answer one question:
“What is the negative of having people who are noncitizens be able to serve in these capacities,” Schultz asked. “I would just like to hear a rationale for this, I haven’t heard that.”
No one answered the question.
“So, there is no rationale,” Schultz followed up.
The motion failed with a 2-13 vote.
‘Zero fraud, waste and abuse’
Gay Donnell Willis, who represents council district 14, introduced a motion to place the inspector general’s office under the supervision of the city council. Currently, that office is a division reporting to the city attorney — and right now the inspector general is also an assistant city attorney.
Willis had multiple letters from local leaders advocating for the change. In the past, Dallas elected officials have been the subject of corruption — some cases leading to criminal charges.
“I am asking you, lets stand together and for the residents of Dallas, to instill trust by carving a clear path to zero fraud, waste and abuse at city hall,” Willis said during the meeting.
Others on the council voice support of the measure. District 10 Council Member Kathy Stewart said a completely independent inspector general is crucial to the function of government.
“Setting up an office of the inspector general in the city charter and asking the voters to approve this, shows our Dallas residents how we value independence, accountability and transparency,” Stewart said.
Under the proposed amendment, the council will have complete control over hiring and firing the inspector general. While Willis’ original motion would have called for a majority of council to vote in favor of removing the inspector general – that was amended from a three fourths vote to a two thirds vote by District 9 Council Member Paula Blackmon.
“I think that threshold is actually, to me, just more consistent and would better reflect…what can be carried out realistically,” Blackmon said.
While Blackmon’s amendment passed, not everyone was onboard with the entire charter proposition.
“It strikes me that this amendment is unnecessary,” District 13 Council Member Paul Ridely said. “We have had no complaints, that I’m aware of, that the city attorney is interfering in the substantive decisions or recommendations of the inspector general.”
Ridley also said the current inspector general could not cite any interference either.
“The current arrangement has been working well, therefore there is no reason to change it,” Ridley continued.
Carolyn King Arnold, who represents District 4 in southern Dallas, said she was onboard with ethics, but skeptical about the amount of support coming out about the proposition.
“We have had people that…have been writing from everywhere, so when you see that much movement, there is a reason for me to pause and reflect,” Arnold said. “Whether I am in the minority or the majority, I cannot support the isolation, especially when we have a budget right now that we are trying to cut.”
Arnold also said she was concerned about lowering the voting threshold to hire or fire an inspector general — citing it would be hard to remove someone from the position if they weren’t performing well.
The amendment passed by a 13-2 vote.
May to November elections
When Dallas should have its elections — either May or November — has been the subject of charter discussion since last year. But the measure to change from early Summer elections to the Fall did not gain much support at a recent council meeting.
The city’s Charter Review Commission decided not to send a recommendation to change the election date to the council as part of its final proposals.
During Wednesday’s discussion, District 1 Council Member Chad West introduced a motion to remove any mention of when an election should take place, from the charter.
“I will not go into the virtues with my colleagues on why I believe November odd-year elections are a good thing,” West said. “The opportunity for us as a council to change our election date…would, as we’ve seen in other cities across Texas, most likely double voter turnout.”
West also argued the change could lower costs to the city and engage more Dallas residents in important city decisions.
Cara Mendelsohn, who represents District 12, said there were many issues with changing the city’s election date. That includes the possibility of a December runoff.
“I don’t know if you’ve ever tried to host an event in December, but people are super busy,” Mendelsohn said. “They’re busy with holiday parties, they’re busy with end of year activities for their job, vacations.”
Mendelsohn told her colleagues that the result could be “a turnout of just the most ardent supports of any specific candidate.”
“Which really may not yield the results that people would like,” Mendelsohn continued.
Even with opposition, the amendment was passed by a 9-6 vote. If passed, the city would need to pass a local ordinance setting the new date and seek permission for the change from state legislators.
'This office is vulnerable'
District 7 Council Member Adam Bazaldua introduced a motion to place the director of the city’s Office of Police Oversight under the council’s supervision.
The proposal comes after the city’s civilian-led Community Police Oversight Board tried to investigate a complaint made against the department by Dynell Lane. Lane is a disabled veteran who was reportedly forced to urinate on himself after being denied the restroom at a Deep Ellum pizza restaurant.
Officers on the scene mocked Lane, according to body camera footage released after the oversight board started to investigate the case.
But during that time, a confidential legal opinion was handed down from the city attorney, essentially telling the board it couldn’t investigate any case that the department’s Internal Affairs Division hadn’t already started to look into — or deemed “no investigation.”
During Wednesday’s meeting John Mark Davidson, the chair of the oversight board, spoke in support of sending the measure to voters. Davidson said after working under two city managers — he noticed a shift.
“This office is vulnerable...to whoever is in that seat,” Davidson said. “That tells me that this is very personnel driven, it’s not people centric.”
District 3 Council Member Zarin Gracey said the motion to shift the oversight structure was more than just administrative.
“I will be supporting this notion, if for no other reason than Dynell Lane,” Gracey said. “He is not only a resident of District 3 but he actually lives across the street from me.”
Gracey said bureaucracy got in the way of handling Lane’s case properly.
Immediately, some on the council voiced opposition to the change.
“I’m not going to support this amendment,” Mendelsohn said. “What happened in that one case shouldn’t be the basis for changing how we’re structured.”
Mendelsohn voiced concern about the oversight board becoming politicized. She also admitted Lane’s case was humiliating.
“But it also got the attention it needed and is being addressed,” Mendelsohn said. “Not the way it should have gone.”
Interim City Manager Kimberly Tolbert told the council that the move could mean “starting all over again” in terms of police oversight.
“There will still need to be the workflow defined, and how that position still has to engage with the [city manager], engage often with the city attorney,” Tolbert said. “That had not been done, and it did not give the board…day-to-day governance.”
Tolbert said that would be a responsibility of the council, if the measure was passed.
The council voted against placing the measure on the November ballot.
What's next
Now that the council has voted on a final charter package, the propositions will be placed on the November ballot for Dallas voters to decide on.
The process getting here has been ongoing since last year. The city appointed a 15-member Charter Review Commission who held numerous meetings and heard public input on the proposed changes.
Along with the charter review’s recommendations and the city’s — four propositions will be added from voter-led petitions. Those center around looser marijuana policies in the city and amendments focused on public safety.
The council has debated and discussed the changes — and added in a few of their own — for months. Now the decision is in Dallas voters hands.
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.
