2006 Dallas Bond Package

[BigD5349]

Dallas' to-do list may total $1 billion
Need for bond clear, details aren't
09:20 PM CST on Saturday, December 31, 2005
By DAVE LEVINTHAL / The Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/010106dnmetbond.22907dc.html

Reconstruct dozens of Dallas roads and buildings, overhaul downtown, renovate an aging football stadium, replace storm water drains and attend to a smorgasbord of other civic needs. The city's to-do list in 2006 is long and likely expensive. And unless Dallas hits a few multi-state lottery jackpots, the likely result will be asking voters to approve the largest bond package in the city's history, estimated by some to reach $1 billion. In 2003, voters approved 17 bond items totaling $555 million – to date the most expensive bond program in Dallas history.

Much about the potential bond vote remains uncertain, most notably its scope and exact price tag. It's timing, too, is unsettled, although some city officials say November is most likely. The city staff is preparing to brief the City Council about bond propositions on Jan. 18. Soon after, Dallas will probably begin conducting public input meetings and otherwise crafting a bond proposal internally, City Manager Mary Suhm says. "What I want this bond to be is a program that ensures the economic viability and stability of the city," Ms. Suhm said.

While she declined to speculate on the bond's price tag, Ms. Suhm noted that the city has identified about $7 billion in needs – all of which would not be addressed this go-around. But improving Dallas' downtown, which this decade has already seen spurts of redevelopment, will likely become a central focus of any bond program. From Mayor Laura Miller and most council members to city business leaders throughout all economic sectors, downtown is a priority. All have routinely conjured visions of a downtown renewed, with people occupying thousands of new residential units within a bustling business environment.

A report generated by the Inside the Loop Committee, an organization consisting of business and government leaders intent on improving downtown Dallas, concluded that the city should immediately pursue five goals in order to continue revitalizing downtown. They include:

Striking a deal to build a Dallas Convention Center hotel.

Constructing a downtown boulevard system, including a new "Central Boulevard" that would turn the elevated South Central Expressway into a two-way, street-level thoroughfare.

Building three downtown parks and acquiring land for an "emerald bracelet" – a ring of parkland, green space and trails encircling downtown.

Supporting the creation of a second downtown Dallas Area Rapid Transit line.

Improving downtown's pedestrian environment, including enhanced sidewalks, jogging and cycling paths and a proposed "deck park" that would span the canyon-like Woodall Rodgers Freeway between downtown's Arts District and Uptown.

Of these, bond financing for the deck park, downtown parks and boulevard system top the wish list of Assistant City Manager Ryan Evans, who oversees City Hall's economic development efforts. The creation of a West End Historic District plaza, improved streetscaping and transportation projects also are downtown priorities, he said. Aside from the emerald bracelet concept, which he gave a lower priority for a 2006 bond program, "we're pretty much on the same page with the Inside the Loop Committee," Mr. Evans said. Downtown's share of the bond program could exceed $100 million, said Dan Blizzard, an ex officio Inside the Loop Committee member who also serves or has served on several other downtown-focused boards and committees. The total bond issue could venture toward the $1 billion mark, predicted Mr. Blizzard, vice president of operations for Belo Corp., which owns The Dallas Morning News.

Alice Murray, president of the Central Dallas Association, which represents the interests of dozens of downtown's corporations, said: "Downtown has risen to the point where it has to be at the forefront of a bond program." Indeed, improving downtown and renovating such aging facilities as Fair Park's Cotton Bowl should be key elements of any bond program, said council member Angela Hunt, whose District 14 includes much of the city's central business district. "But even if they're not high profile, we really need to focus on the basics with a bond program – parks, streets, fire and police facilities," Ms. Hunt said.

Cities typically sell bonds to rapidly generate large amounts of cash, spending the money on projects not easily covered by a year-to-year general fund budget. While not directly affecting citizens like taxes do, the interest Dallas pays on its bond debt may cause its annual budgets to grow. Ms. Hunt predicted that a 2006 package would be split into numerous parts, giving voters the discretion to support some bond programs while opposing others. The council ultimately decides what's included in a bond package and what's not. Members must also approve the final package before voters consider it. "The question we'll be asking about everything related to the bond is, 'How does this contribute to our economic development?' " Ms. Suhm said.

[gc]

edit: Added link to article.

[incrediculous]

That article needs editing.

I never knew we were looking at lowering the expressway in downtown and making it a boulevard. That's cool. Hope it happens.

[RadicalBender]

I've got a technical question. I understand in general terms about how municipal bonds work and all, but who are the ones who actually purchase these bonds and how do they go about doing it? Are they big investors? Small investors? Local? Foreign?

Just something I've always wondered.

[Dallasite]

I think DISD is priming itself to have another bond election also.

Bond
Bonds are debt and are issued for a period of more than one year. The U.S. government, local governments, water districts, companies and many other types of institutions sell bonds. When an investor buys bonds, he or she is lending money. The seller of the bond agrees to repay the principal amount of the loan at a specified time. Interest-bearing bonds pay interest periodically.

Bond agreement
A contract for privately placed debt.

Bond anticipation note (BAN)
A short-term debt instrument issued by a state or municipality to borrow against the proceeds of an upcoming bond issue.

Bond broker
A broker on the floor of an exchange who trades bonds.

Bond Buyer
A daily publication featuring many essential statistics and index figures relevant to the fixed income markets.

Bond Buyer's municipal bond index
A municipal bond price tracking index published daily by the Bond Buyer.

[BigD5349]

To recall some context around the bond package, these are excerpts from the Tipping Point article:

http://www.dallasnews.com/s/dws/spe/2004/dallas/cityhall.html

In a 2002 poll by The Dallas Morning News, two-thirds of residents thought City Hall lacked vision and was rife with corruption. In The News' 2003 poll, nearly two-thirds of residents said that people like themselves have little or no influence over City Council decisions.

The second poll used some of the same questions that the city used to ask residents in its own polling. The city last did that in 1993.

"The citizens have a distrust of government," Dr. Fairbanks said. "The government has a distrust of citizens. Dallas leaders are really distrustful of the public."

One manifestation is what former Mayor Ron Kirk called "the no-new-taxes brick wall" -- the refusal to even discuss the merits of paying more in the short term to make the city better or more competitive in the long term.

"That becomes a terrible disincentive to creative thinking," Mr. Kirk said.

Or consider the $555 million bond package for bread-and-butter improvements that was put before voters last year.

Nearly half of council members, including Ms. Miller, wanted to limit the proposal to $371 million on the ballot. The council ultimately went for the full $555 million -- and it passed with large-to-huge majorities in every part of the city.

Subsequently, one bond-rating agency downgraded the city's bonds, which could make it more expensive to borrow money. The reason? Dallas is failing to invest enough in its infrastructure.

Several council members cited the bond vote as the point at which the city began to rebound from a period of lethargy.

"After that, everybody [on the council] looked around the room and said, 'Wow,' " recalled council member Veletta Forsythe Lill.

"I wish now we had done a bigger bond program," said Ms. Suhm, the first assistant city manager. "We just weren't quite brave enough."

In effect, the council didn't lead the city, the city had to lead the council.

[BigD5349]

I'm glad to see a more aggressive bond package. I'm looking forward to seeing the details.

[BigD5349]

That article needs editing.

I never knew we looking at lowering the expressway in downtown and making it a boulevard. That's cool. Hope it happens.

What does this mean exactly (creating the blvd)?

I don't see how we can turn an expressway into a blvd. It would be an absolutely wonderful thing to reconnect Deep Ellum to DT. I am very curious.

[incrediculous]

What does this mean exactly (creating the blvd)?

I don't see how we can turn an expressway into a blvd. It would be an absolutely wonderful thing to reconnect Deep Ellum to DT. I am very curious.

To turn an expressway into a boulevard, you just lower it onto the cross streets and put up a few stoplights. It's definitely feasible. There's already access to Interstate 30 from 75 via Woodall.

[antoinekhuu]

I never knew we were looking at lowering the expressway in downtown and making it a boulevard. That's cool. Hope it happens.
Do they mean the South Central expressway the elevated I-345 or something else?
Where can we get more details about these DT boulevard system?

[BigD5349]

Do they mean the South Central expressway the elevated I-345 or something else?
Where can we get more details about these DT boulevard system?

It sounds terrific to take out the elevated freeway. I just imagine that would be an awfully expensive project, more than we could do with a city bond program, meaning Dallas would have to depend on Federal and State funding to pull it off.

I also don't understand how the traffic flows could work... The elevated freeway connects Central to both I-45 and I-30 East/West. Relying only upon Woodall Rogers seems to me to be a recipe for future traffic jams.

Eventually, one way or another, that barrier between Deep Ellum and DT will be removed. I always thought it was coming maybe in 15 to 20 years, but if sooner, all the better! I hope someone can post more details about this.

[UrbanHope]

Before we go trying to raise another $1 Billion .... can we get a scorecard on what's been done with the $550MM from the 2003 Bond Election?

Dave raises a great point in his headline ... "details unclear"


The article says, "from Mayor Laura Miller and most council members to city business leaders throughout all economic sectors, downtown is a priority." WHAT ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOODS?! Most of these people don't give a damn about the neighborhoods... which is what LM campaigned on in the first place.

We're out here trying to shut down hot-sheet motels and clean up drughouses and we have to risk our lives because these jackasses don't care if I catch a bullet in my head or not as long as they have people living in million-dollar condos and shiny bridges.

AHunt makes the most sense here. I hope her colleagues feel the same way.

[LDSR]

Regarding S. Central Exp... perhaps people should look at a map, or better yet, spend some time downtown.

They're not talking about the large elevated highway that connects US-75 to I-30 and I-45. It's the 'old' central expressway that they're talking about.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=dallas&ll=32.783414,-96.791611&spn=0.015064,0.032126&t=h&hl=en

[incrediculous]

Damn. Where is the old central expressway? I don't see it on the map.

[JasonDallas]

Damn. Where is the old central expressway? I don't see it on the map.

Just look for a road that continues south through downtown when the highway veers off to the east.

Jason

[incrediculous]

Got it. This is disappointing.

[BigD5349]

Regarding S. Central Exp... perhaps people should look at a map, or better yet, spend some time downtown.

They're not talking about the large elevated highway that connects US-75 to I-30 and I-45. It's the 'old' central expressway that they're talking about.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=dallas&ll=32.783414,-96.791611&spn=0.015064,0.032126&t=h&hl=en

Um, I do look at maps and spend time downtown.

There's one confusing little word in the article, "elevated". The South Central Expressway you mention is already at ground level from I-30.

What I think might have happened is that the writer made a mistake and confused the roads. I just didn't see how Dallas could tear down the existing expressway with a mere bond program, so they're probably talking about a boulevard on old South Central Exwy to strengthen Farmer's market and bring development closer to Central Expressway and Deep Ellum. The entire extreme eastern edge of DT is a development gap right now.

[BigD5349]

Well, we don't know the details yet. But the article does say that the bond program could approach $1B with around $100M going to downtown.

At the end of the day, I believe there will be significant money spent in the neighborhoods.

The corner is turning in DT, but it is an imperative for the entire city that the rebound fully succeeds. Voters understand this as they are overwhelmingly approving investments in recent bond elections.

I think the fact that the city's bond rating actually went down because the city wasn't investing enough tells the story.

To answer your question, here is the summary of the 2003 $550M package:

http://www.dallascityhall.com/dallas/eng/pdf/Capital/2003CapitalBondProgramSummary.pdf





Before we go trying to raise another $1 Billion .... can we get a scorecard on what's been done with the $550MM from the 2003 Bond Election?

Dave raises a great point in his headline ... "details unclear"


The article says, "from Mayor Laura Miller and most council members to city business leaders throughout all economic sectors, downtown is a priority." WHAT ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOODS?! Most of these people don't give a damn about the neighborhoods... which is what LM campaigned on in the first place.

We're out here trying to shut down hot-sheet motels and clean up drughouses and we have to risk our lives because these jackasses don't care if I catch a bullet in my head or not as long as they have people living in million-dollar condos and shiny bridges.

AHunt makes the most sense here. I hope her colleagues feel the same way.

[tamtagon]

The corner is turning in DT, but it is an imperative for the entire city that the rebound fully succeeds. Voters understand this as they are overwhelmingly approving investments in recent bond elections.

Word up to your mother!

It's imperative to the financial health of the city that downtown revenue generation increases; this will reduce the burden placed on home owners at the same time will result in more money for neighborhood infrastructure upkeep. The greatest revenue potential lies within commercial developments. Residents and the city have the most to gain through the expansion of the Central Business District.

[UrbanHope]

Question for those in the know:

What are the systems in place to make sure that the money approved goes exactly where it's earmarked in the '03 bond proposal?

[antoinekhuu]

Um, I do look at maps and spend time downtown.

There's one confusing little word in the article, "elevated". The South Central Expressway you mention is already at ground level from I-30.

What I think might have happened is that the writer made a mistake and confused the roads. I just didn't see how Dallas could tear down the existing expressway with a mere bond program, so they're probably talking about a boulevard on old South Central Exwy to strengthen Farmer's market and bring development closer to Central Expressway and Deep Ellum. The entire extreme eastern edge of DT is a development gap right now.

I am still confused. If it is in South Dallas,why they call it Downtown boulevard system?

[texman]

The article also discusses a the package supporting a second DT DART line. The elevated freeway might be related to this, since all of Robertbs plans have shown a conflict with I-345.

[antoinekhuu]

Tear down the elevated freeway and turn the land under it to boulevard can't be very expensive since there will be no shifting of traffic while construction.However,I can't imagine how traffic will flow into the mix master before Project Pegasus.

[BigD5349]

I am still confused. If it is in South Dallas,why they call it Downtown boulevard system?

"South" Central Exwy is the old thoroughfare that ran into South Dallas. I assume this -proposed boulevard is the part running through downtown -- not the elevated Central Exwy (SH 75/I-45), but the ground level South Central Exwy. South Central Exwy eventually turns into CF Hawn Freeway.

We'll have to hope someone in the know posts some clarifications.

[BigD5349]

Tear down the elevated freeway and turn the land under it to boulevard can't be very expensive since there will be no shifting of traffic while construction.However,I can't imagine how traffic will flow into the mix master before Project Pegasus.

I don't know. I think it would be very expensive.

[incrediculous]

I'm emailing David Levinthal and I'll post the reply.

[BigD5349]

Bonding Experience: Did City Council learn lessons of '03 election?

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-bonds_11edi.ART.State.Edition1.1358ece1.html

04:54 AM CST on Wednesday, January 11, 2006


It's that time again: Next week the Dallas City Council is scheduled to begin shaping the city's next bond package, which could go before voters as early as November. So let's revisit a couple of lessons from the 2003 bond election.

Lesson No. 1: Be bold (but not reckless).

Nearly half the council members, including mayoral candidates Laura Miller and Mary Poss, wanted to keep the 2003 bond package to $371 million, even though they acknowledged that the full $550 million eventually approved by the council was badly needed. The skimpers simply didn't trust voters to appreciate the wisdom of aggressively investing in basics such as streets, parks and libraries.

Voters proved them wrong; the entire $550 million package passed overwhelmingly in every council district. That doesn't give the current council a blank check to load up the next package with frills and boondoggles. But it does indicate that Dallasites are willing to invest in things they believe will make their city more livable and competitive.

Lesson No. 2: If it looks like a political slush fund, it's a bad idea.

We're referring here to the "discretionary" bond money that was doled out for the first time in 2003, allowing each council member to personally decide the allocation of roughly $4 million within his or her district. That departure from past practices flies in the face of Dallas' dedication to professionally managed government, which voters reaffirmed twice last year.

Bond packages are constructed using a document called the "needs assessment," which scores thousands of potential bond projects according to importance and urgency. It's designed to see that the money is spent rationally, rather than according to political influence. There's no good reason to depart from that template.

Come to think of it, most members of the City Council fiercely defended the city manager form of governance. If they meant it, they'll listen to City Manager Mary Suhm, who opposes the discretionary funds. Besides, some council members haven't even spent their 2003 bond money – so what's the point of having it?

Finally, if any council member doubts that taking personal control of big pots of public money is a dicey move, here's our best, three-pronged argument: FBI.

[Cliff Dweller]

UrbanHope has raised a good question, does anyone know the answer? It's my understanding that bond packages are sometimes passed with rosy scenarios, but then the money is never raised. Or it is raised and used for other purposes.
Wouldn't it be nice to see a report on how previous packages have played out in the long run? And wouldn't it be nice if that received as much publicity as the lastest package of shiny new proposals?

[AndyIvey]

I do not even see how money could be used for another purpose. If that is possible, why approach the voters for approval?

[BigD5349]

Council starts talks on billion-dollar bond issue
Record-setting plan would tackle long list of needs

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/011906dnmetdalcouncil.1742900e.html

09:02 PM CST on Wednesday, January 18, 2006
By DAVE LEVINTHAL / The Dallas Morning News


Big, bigger or biggest?

Biggest, several Dallas City Council members said Wednesday as they began mulling the timing and dollar figure for a bond program that at once would address a long list of municipal needs – and result in property tax increases.

Dallas' second- and third-ranking elected officials, Mayor Pro Tem Don Hill and Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Elba Garcia, say they favor a $1.5 billion bond program.

That's nearly three times the size of Dallas' 2003 bond program, which ranks as the city's richest.

"The needs inventory is not going to get smaller," Dr. Garcia said. "We need to look at the bigger picture. The $1.5 billion should be a starting point."

If city officials clearly explain to voters that Dallas must invest in its deteriorating infrastructure or face numerous and mounting civic problems, "they will spend the additional money," Mr. Hill said. "Support for it will grow."

Council member Maxine Thornton-Reese told her colleagues she'd support a $2 billion bond program. If her constituents say they'd support a $5 billion bond program, Dr. Thornton-Reese said, she'd consider supporting that, too.

City staff members estimate that Dallas would need more than $7.2 billion to address every item on its public needs inventory.

The majority of council members wouldn't commit to a specific dollar figure Wednesday, the first time the council debated a new bond program en masse.

But most spoke of a need to aggressively rebuild such city assets as public buildings, streets, sidewalks, pipes and drainage systems. Beginning next week, council members are scheduled to conduct constituent meetings in their districts to discuss the details of a new bond program.

No council member talked specifically of a bond program under $1 billion. And no council member objected to conducting a bond election in November, the city staff's recommended timing.

"I don't favor any number," Mayor Laura Miller said. "I'm going to go out to these meetings and listen to what people have to say. I know that there are certain projects we have to do, but I have no idea where that number will wind up. But we'll know pretty quickly."

Said Bill Blaydes, chairman of the council's Economic Development and Housing Committee: "If we're going to turn this horse around, we're going to need to step up and spend the dollars. I'm not afraid of a high number."

Effect on taxpayers
Cities typically sell bonds to quickly generate large sums of money for public works projects and are repaid in installments out of the municipality's annual budget over a set number of years. Dallas voters approved capital bond programs most recently in 1995, 1998 and 2003.

So how could a November bond program affect Dallas taxpayers?

Assume the city's tax base expanded annually by 2.8 percent and officials continued to issue bonds already approved by voters.

Given that, Dallas Chief Financial Officer Dave Cook estimated that a $500 million 2006 bond program would result in a homeowner with property valued at $150,000 paying an extra $12.72 in taxes a year for six years.

For that particular homeowner, a $1 billion bond program would result in an $88.56 tax payment increase, while a $1.5 billion bond program would bring the number to $164.40, Mr. Cook said.

Under these three scenarios, homeowners with similarly valued property, and with senior citizen tax exemptions, would realize tax payment increases of $5.94, $41.33 or $76.72 respectively, according to city data.

It's conceivable that two different bond programs with the same dollar amount could prove markedly different.

City Manager Mary Suhm warned that a bond program concentrated on building and improving city facilities, for example, could increase the size of the city budget by adding annual operations and upkeep costs that a road- and infrastructure-heavy bond program wouldn't.

While most council members say any bond program should focus on basics – streets, facilities, libraries, parks, sewers – downtown redevelopment projects and renovations to Fair Park's Cotton Bowl may rank among the program's higher-profile items. Several council members have also expressed a desire to split the bond program into numerous parts, so voters may support some items while opposing others.

No matter what, Dallas' bond program's foremost goal should be to enhance the city's economic health, Ms. Suhm said.

"If we don't invest substantially," she said, "we're digging ourselves into a deeper hole."

Timeline
After council members' public meetings, the city staff is scheduled to again meet with the council in March.

At that meeting, the council will begin to crystallize a 2006 bond program dollar figure, Ms. Suhm said. The city will present an updated needs inventory to the council at an April meeting; more public meetings are scheduled for May and June, with a final council decision needed by August.

The heated issue of whether council members would receive 2006 bond program discretionary funds – millions of dollars in bond money they may earmark for projects they choose – went all but unmentioned Wednesday.

Council member Mitchell Rasansky did ask staff members to investigate what federal or state money may be available to address Dallas' public works needs between now and then.

"Have we really exhausted our means?" he asked. "I understand you do need a bond program. But we have to watch taxpayer dollars."

And Ms. Miller would only predict that council members should prepare for a lively debate in coming months.

"We're so across the board right now," she said.

[mdunlap1]

Council starts talks on billion-dollar bond issue
Record-setting plan would tackle long list of needs

This is the absolute LAST thing the city of Dallas, especially downtown, needs.

Dallas, especially downtown, needs the exact opposite: lower taxes and less government scaring development off.

[Flaming Moderate]

I would vote yes as soon as I see the Trinity River Project. All these bureaucrats want is more, more, more money. If we could get the buffoons out of there - Maxine and the Indicted - and get some intelligent, legitimate leaders, maybe I would trust them with more money.

[F4shionablecHa0s]

This is the absolute LAST thing the city of Dallas, especially downtown, needs.

Dallas, especially downtown, needs the exact opposite: lower taxes and less government scaring development off.
Well, the city government has been ignoring downtown for the past fifteen years and it turned into a squalid hellhole. Maybe if they had cut off DART service and stopped maintaining the roads at all it would have turned out better?

[Random Traffic Guy]

I would vote yes as soon as I see the Trinity River Project. All these bureaucrats want is more, more, more money. If we could get the buffoons out of there - Maxine and the Indicted - and get some intelligent, legitimate leaders, maybe I would trust them with more money.

Which TRP, the nice park with lakes and greenery that was used to sell the bonds, or the toll road TRP that it turned into?

[mdunlap1]

Well, the city government has been ignoring downtown for the past fifteen years and it turned into a squalid hellhole.

Ha! I wish they had been ignoring it. Instead, they've kept ridiculous property tax rates and all kinds of government regulations in place (besides the huge cement highway prison they've built around the place). Only recently, after having run so many businesses out of downtown over the past few decades, have they been forced to cede ground via tax cuts, land giveaways, etc.

If you eliminated all taxes and fees of every kind in downtown and sold all government land in downtown Dallas, today, the vacancy rate would be next to nothing within a year. And the people moving back in would more than do enough to clean the place up and take care of the streets fronting and serving as access to their homes and businesses (assuming the government allowed them to do that as well, of course).

Yet these criminals fight every potential new downtown occupant for every last dime they can steal without having the entire place just up and leave them with nothing.

[WestTexan]

Ha! I wish they had been ignoring it. Instead, they've kept ridiculous property tax rates and all kinds of government regulations in place (besides the huge cement highway prison they've built around the place). Only recently, after having run so many businesses out of downtown over the past few decades, have they been forced to cede ground via tax cuts, land giveaways, etc.

If you eliminated all taxes and fees of every kind in downtown and sold all government land in downtown Dallas, today, the vacancy rate would be next to nothing within a year. And the people moving back in would more than do enough to clean the place up and take care of the streets fronting and serving as access to their homes and businesses (assuming the government allowed them to do that as well, of course).

Yet these criminals fight every potential new downtown occupant for every last dime they can steal without having the entire place just up and leave them with nothing.

^Your singular focus and one-dimensional thinking is incredibly tiresome. You must bore the hell out of your friends. The real world is slightly more complex than you allow for with your arguments.

[Lakewooder]

delete

[UrbanHope]

I'd be more inclined if this was done in 2007, after the next CC election.

I have zero confidence in having MTR decide where tax dollars are spent. Remember, she STILL has spent the $4 million in disretionary funds from 2003. I'm sure she'll be the loudest w/r/t getting more discretionary money from this one.

[trolleygirl]

Mdunlap does have a point. perhaps his delivery is *off*

Maybe it's just the way he phrases certain tyhings.

But there is a valid point. As a homeowner, I'm tired of subsidizing the uber rich, people who can afford more than me, and then hearing the "trickle own" defense.....how soon we forget. We gave Yahoo/Broadcast a $20 tax abatement two years in a row. For what? For the promise of new jobs, only the new jobs vanished.

As a lowly tazpaying citizen, I have to say this is unacceptable.

[BigD5349]

Mdunlap does have a point. perhaps his delivery is *off*

Maybe it's just the way he phrases certain tyhings.

But there is a valid point. As a homeowner, I'm tired of subsidizing the uber rich, people who can afford more than me, and then hearing the "trickle own" defense.....how soon we forget. We gave Yahoo/Broadcast a $20 tax abatement two years in a row. For what? For the promise of new jobs, only the new jobs vanished.

As a lowly tazpaying citizen, I have to say this is unacceptable.

I don't understand your point. I presume you are making a comment about tax abatements and not about the bond package?

Mdunlap is the ultimate supporter of tax giveaways. His point is give these guys huge tax abatements because the government is evil and because low taxes attracts businesses.

But the bond package is going to be a large meat and potatoes package. According to the DMN, priorities listed for the bond package are street overhauls, improved storm water drains, downtown revitalization efforts, Fair Park renovations, and the building and repairing of police, fire and other city facilities.

[BigD5349]

I'd be more inclined if this was done in 2007, after the next CC election.

I have zero confidence in having MTR decide where tax dollars are spent. Remember, she STILL has spent the $4 million in disretionary funds from 2003. I'm sure she'll be the loudest w/r/t getting more discretionary money from this one.

Why would we delay investing in our decaying infrastructure because of MTR's discretionary funds issue? That's just a stupid program that needs to be killed, and Dallas still needs to move forward with the much needed investments in infrastructure.

At least the packaging of the proposals will be somewhat separate, so voters can discriminate at the polls. If $1.5B are put on the polls and $1.2B passes, then fine. But if we put $750M at the polls and only $500M passes, then we are still allowing basic infrastructure to decay, IMO.

[UrbanHope]

At least the packaging of the proposals will be somewhat separate, so voters can discriminate at the polls. If $1.5B are put on the polls and $1.2B passes, then fine. But if we put $750M at the polls and only $500M passes, then we are still allowing basic infrastructure to decay, IMO.

I'm sure that all of the proposals will pass overwhlemingly, just like in the last bond election.

We'll see how the money will be spent once we see the proposals.

How much do you want to bet that a good chunk of the money is going to go to pork projects like arts buildings and cultural arts buildings? Once again, we'll spend more money on these place than we will on the home repair program for low-income people and seniors. Just like last time.

[Flaming Moderate]

Why should the government be in the home repair business?

[ahunt]

District 14 residents: I need your help. We are starting to work on what to include in the upcoming bond. I need to hear from you. If you live in District 14 and post on this board, please let me know what specific projects you think we need to include. Bond money can be spent on infrastructure improvements (not police pay or home repair). For example, are there some park amenities (playgrounds, benches, trails, etc.) that are a priority for your neighborhood? What about streets that are pothole-riddent? Or alleys that need repaving? Other projects? Your input really will help determine what is in the upcoming bond proposal, so please either post, email me at angela.hunt@dallascityhall.com (subject: Bond 2006), or come to one of the following meetings I'm hosting:

Monday, January 30, 2006
7:00 p.m.
Arlington Hall
3333 Lee Parkway
◊
Thursday, February 2, 2006
7:00 p.m.
Woodrow Wilson High School Auditorium
100 Glasgow Dr.
◊
Thursday, February 9, 2006
6:30 p.m.
St. Thomas Aquinas School
3741 Abrams Rd.
(joint meeting with Councilmember Griffith)

[BigD5349]

Dallas residents aim high for bonds
Dallas: Meetings backed $1.5 billion, surprising some council members

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-citybonds_06met.ART0.North.Edition2.90e1fb6.html

07:33 AM CST on Monday, March 6, 2006
By DAVE LEVINTHAL and EMILY RAMSHAW / The Dallas Morning News


Here's Dallas' billion-dollar question: How much are voters willing to spend to improve their roads, lights, firehouses, parks and the like?

The answer: More than many City Council members first thought.
From farthest Far North Dallas to southern Mountain Creek, residents routinely told their representatives they would support a $1 billion bond package if City Hall, as planned, puts one before them in November.

And many residents who attended a series of recent council member-hosted neighborhood meetings – especially those in the city's southern sector – backed a $1.5 billion program.

"I'm sure surprised. But I was pleasantly surprised," said Linda Koop, who represents largely North Dallas District 11 and serves as the council's Transportation and Environment Committee chairwoman. "I see confidence in the public as far as their government is concerned."

Municipalities sell such bonds to fund public works projects that are often too pricey to include in standard year-to-year budgets.

A $1.5 billion bond program would rank as Dallas' largest ever, at nearly three times the cost of its 2003 bond program. Even so, City Hall says it would need about $7.2 billion to address every bond-eligible public need in Dallas.

South of the Trinity River, the needs list is striking.

Flood control, road repairs and enhanced police presence – and everything in between. But homeowners there say they're willing to pay for it, if given the opportunity.

Only a "very small percentage" of the residents at the neighborhood meetings supported a bond issue less than $1 billion, District 3 council member Ed Oakley said.

"We've been in this community for 30 years, watching all the economic development go to Cedar Hill," said Irene Alexander, who lives in council District 4 and supports a $1.5 billion bond program. "This city does not have a level playing field. The only way for us to achieve that is to catch up."


Packed house

Arrivals to City Council member Maxine Thornton-Reese's bond meeting at the Beckley-Saner Recreation Center started slowly. But 10 minutes into last week's event, the house was packed; almost exclusively black, almost exclusively women.

And they've got big ideas. For alley paving and sidewalk repairs. For creek maintenance and storm water improvements. For better shopping options (particularly at the Lancaster Kiest center) and more visible police, especially around the area's vacant lots.

"If you're way far behind, you have to run real fast, like they do in track," Dr. Thornton-Reese said in her pitch for a $1.5 billion bond. "The squeaky wheel gets the oil. What happened to the last people who voted against a bond package? It was Wilmer Hutchins."

Most of her constituents agreed with her, casting straw votes for a $1.5 billion bond package. But some – like Ernesto Peña – aren't so easily convinced, particularly after watching a colorful video about new development projects in Dallas.

"That video's all pretty," he said. "But how much are the taxes of those multimillion-dollar downtown buildings going to increase? We're supporting them."

At the Kiest Recreation Center on a recent Wednesday night, Mr. Oakley took recommendations for the 2006 bond package from people in a lively and diverse crowd. They want road repairs on Hampton and Westmoreland roads. New "pocket parks" and historic period street lights. Improvements to the North Oak Cliff Library, and, as always, Fair Park.

But his constituents' top concern? Erosion along creeks. There's Ten Mile Creek. Five Mile Creek. Coombs Creek, Crow Creek and Cedar Creek. They've got flooding problems, trash problems, silt problems. And residents' backyard trees are losing their roots and toppling.

"With what happened with Katrina, we're taking this very seriously," Mr. Oakley said.

But these types of projects take time. Ed Hickson's West Oak Cliff neighborhood started pushing an erosion package for Five Mile Creek in 1997, he said, and finally got it into the 2003 bond issue – with the help of Mr. Oakley and Mayor Laura Miller.

Ms. Miller, Dallas' only citywide-elected official, didn't conduct bond meetings of her own, choosing instead to attend several council district meetings. There, she often sat among attendees, discussing city priorities alongside them.

"You can only issue so much debt every year and do so much work every year," she said at a joint District 11/District 12 meeting, where expanded park space, alley repairs and street improvements topped constituents' wish lists.


Overshot feared

Ms. Miller warned residents that a $1.5 billion package might overshoot the city's ability to spend the money it's raised. Shoot lower, she suggested.

Dallasites didn't exactly heed her advice at a joint District 9/District 14 meeting hosted at St. Thomas Aquinas Church by council members Gary Griffith and Angela Hunt.

When polled by city staff, just two people at the meeting said they favored a $500 million bond package, while 22 people supported the $1 billion package.

The winner? The $1.5 billion package, with 26 backers. Two people said the city should put a package more expensive than $1.5 billion before voters.

And the money should especially go toward parks, streets, recreation centers and trails, Trinity River Corridor improvements, flood control and renovations to Fair Park's Cotton Bowl.

"We'll be paid back by investment in the city," said Joanna St. Angelo, who said she supports a bond package of at least $1 billion. "If the city has $7 billion in needs, anything less than $1 billion doesn't make sense. It's pay now, or pay later."

[FoUTASportscaster]

Interesting article. It appears to me that people are more interested in now than later, which generally isn't good. I now it is different for a city, but gaining debt isn't good in the long run. It's like a 30,000 millionaire.

[AndyIvey]

The problem is that no one has addressed why we need such a large package. Council needs to make some tough decisions to ensure we do not require large bond packages in the future.

[Lakewooder]

Submit your suggestions for projects:

http://www.ci.dallas.tx.us/forms/bond_2006_form.htm

Mine included improvements to Fair Park, uncovering and beautifying Mill Creek (which now runs underground from the Fitzhugh / Bennett area across Ross at Haskell down by Baylor Hospital and the East end of Deep Ellum), improvements to Haskell/Peak to Fair Park, completion of East Dallas Veloway and Trail (old Santa Fe tracks) which intersects all these projects, also improvements and beautification of East Grand from Fair Park to I-30 -- this would link Fair Park with Samuell/Grand Park, Tenison Golf Course, the Arboretum and White Rock Lake.

[BigD5349]

Dallas bond value may be $1.4 billion
Council appears united on size of plan that will go to voters

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-citybonds_06met.ART0.North.Edition2.9f67d11.html

06:24 AM CDT on Thursday, April 6, 2006
By DAVE LEVINTHAL / The Dallas Morning News


Without a hint of dissent, Dallas City Council members said Wednesday that they're prepared to present a bond package to voters valued toward the upper end of what they've previously considered feasible.

City staffers, with the council's blessing, will continue to prepare a program worth $1.25 billion to $1.4 billion that would aim to rebuild and improve various public properties, from streets and sewers to parks and police stations.

Regardless of where the final bond package falls within that range, it will be more than twice as large as Dallas' 2003 bond program, worth $555 million.

"It's a realistic number, and I think it's the right place to be," Mayor Laura Miller said of City Manager Mary Suhm's proposed value range. "The purpose is to spark growth and construction activity in our city."

Wednesday's meeting represented the most recent in a series of steps the city has taken ahead of a planned November bond referendum.

With council consensus on the bond program's cost, Ms. Suhm's staff is scheduled to present a comprehensive proposal to the council next month.

The council is scheduled to approve a final bond package by August, but not before conducting a second round of community meetings, supplementing those held earlier this year.

A city survey of several hundred Dallas residents indicated that for each bond dollar spent, they would want 19 cents spent on street improvements, 14 cents on neighborhood parks and recreation facilities and 9 cents on major city facilities.

Dallas street quality might steadily decline unless the city invests in roads soon, Assistant City Manager Ramon Miguez told the council.

"Many of our streets are at the end of their useful lives," Mr. Miguez said. "We would much rather pay now than pay later."

Although Dallas has more than $7 billion in public improvement needs, it's not feasible to present voters a bond package nearly that large all at once, he said.

Paying interest on such a bond package would cause property taxes to soar.

"And we don't want to repeat what happened in 1985, when it took 10 years to sell the bonds," Mr. Miguez said. "We're very mindful of our responsibility to be prudent."

Said Ms. Suhm: "I have memories of building libraries and firing librarians."

On April 19, city staffers are scheduled to brief the council on the more than $7 billion public needs inventory, which staffers are continuing to update.

Staff writer Emily Ramshaw contributed to this report.

[AndyIvey]

Council's unity has not gone unnoticed. Congrats to our elected officials for getting along. However, what are they doing to reduce our dependence on bonds? I know bonds are necessary, but a $7B need only comes from shortsightedness or mismanagement. Maybe I am extra cynical today, but I predict some great lip service about long-term thinking between now and the ’07 elections.
BTW- Wy haven't we been told what impact this package will have on the city's credit rating?