--------- not the neighborhood street. >> Correct. >> Yes. And that was based off of like hey like yes those are named uh projects or named streets um as in previous bond program books it's shown like from what
And that is what is expected to go into provide that level of detail if they search but it's stuff that staff has already sit down and I'll just um so you'll be here and then we swap or do you want me to move to that side?
>> I'll be here and then I'll just go over there. Shift over and then stay there. Okay. Good afternoon. It is just past 1:30. I will call our bond work session to order and turn it over to Jay Chapa. Thank you'all for being here. >> Good afternoon. Happy New Year to
everyone. Um today we'll be covering basically um the outputs or the information that we received from the couple of months of public meeting sessions we had that included both the bond and um as well as comp plan uh
information. staff has compiled all that data, compiled all the comments and we have a presentation for you uh that they will go through to present um at the end of the day the final set of um recommended
pro projects for the program and really what came out of it is that that there was no change is I guess get to the top line that there's no change in the recommendation based on the information but we do want to go through it we want to provide it uh to you so we can get your feedback. Ultimately, the goal is
to have uh council approve the date for the bond program in February. It's your first February voting meeting. Um which would be the 10th of February. Uh but we do have another work session on the 27th of this month in case we need additional information that we'd come back to the city council with. So with that, I'm
going to turn it over to April Rose, um who's going to go through the presentation with the data. Well, actually, Christian's going to kick it off. >> We're going to do it together. You know, I like to do things with people up here. All right. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks, Jay. I'm Christine Simmons with the Fort Worth Lab, and I can't believe
that it's been like 10 months since I first presented the 2026 bond staff recommendation. It seems like it's gone fast, at least for a lot of staff members, and I do want to thank staff that's here from Fort Worth Lab and all the different submitting departments for all the collaboration through the process. Um, we have met on a number of
occasions to hash out propositions and percentages of funding and a project list and implemented lots of community engagement online and in person. So, like Jay mentioned, we are going to report out today on how that engagement went, uh, how many people did we hear from, what did that sample really look
like, and what kind of comments did we get? um and then facilitate discussion as needed in hopes of getting that bond project list finalized and in a place where we can prepare for a May election. Just a quick reminder of where we've been. In August, you approved the
current list of projects and that's what we've used to go out to the public. So, um we did that through October and November and all of you were supportive of that. Thank you very much. Um, we talked about the comp plan and the bond program and that's part of the citywide effort to really kind of streamline some
of the engagement opportunities so that when people show up at a public meeting, they get to hear about lots of interrelated and interesting city business. Uh, so that was a great example of how that can go. The data that you see today is cut off as of December 31st. We ended the bond meetings right before Thanksgiving and
then we've continued to receive email comments here and there. Um and I think maybe a few right after the new year, but um mostly the data you see today is through the end of the calendar year. Uh a number of engagement methods. So between the fourth lab and CPE, we're
really trying hard to engage the public in different ways. Some people prefer inperson meetings and always will and that's totally fine. They like to engage with staff and with each other. That's great. We did make all those meetings hybrid this year as you know which was helpful for people who maybe can't make it to a public meeting that starts at 6
p.m. might want to watch from home or might want to go back and watch later. We also had a bond email address which we've had before where we received comments. This year we had two interactive tools that were pretty cool. Story maps and balancing act. Um those were available for project research and mapping. And then balancing act was
you'll hear a lot about the engagement and balancing act today. That's where people could customize and submit sort of their own individual project lists and propositions. So, a quick snap of kind of what engagement looked like in summary. You'll see we had 18,000 a little over 18,000 website views. That includes
connectworth um the appropriate city web pages and balancing act and story maps. Like I mentioned, um across those 11 district meetings in person, we had 260 people attend. Uh and that doesn't include those who watched online. And so on YouTube, you'll see, 1100 more views
and then some YouTube impressions on top of that. And I think that's where, you know, you kind of scroll over and you start to play part of a video. So it doesn't mean they watch the whole thing, but maybe that they saw a portion, but 119 YouTube views of the bond meetings. We had uh 177 submissions in balancing
act, which is that tool where you kind of pick your pick your uh project list and then lots of different comments across the in-person meetings, email, and in balancing act. And just as a reminder, since we are going to talk about balancing acts, this is kind of what it looks like. Um, I showed this video before when we were demoing some
of the engagement for you, but just as a reminder, you can, um, enter your zip code. That's kind of how we get some of the demographic information that you'll see. And then you can pick and choose different projects. Some which are named projects in different categories. Um, and then some are kind of like yes and no, I want to do this or I don't want to
do this. And then you kind of have to balance and submit. So, a lot of the data you'll see is as a result of people going through that exercise, which is pretty cool. Um, has has some good applicability for the budget process as well. So, it's kind of a tool we've been testing out. All right, with that, I'm going to turn
it over to April Rose Essia. She's uh the senior capital projects officer in the Fort Worth lab, and you'll recognize her from facilitating the public bond meetings to go over some of the data analysis. Thank you Christian and hello Mayor and council. Um all right so regarding demographics in the balancing act I do
want to point out that there were 177 submissions through the balancing act themselves. So what was some of the insight in the demographics? So for one this slide shows the engagement by zip code in which you could see the central the interloop area east west north and south throughout the entire city of Fort
Worth. Uh the darker purple color is what is considered more feedback in which areas where we received additional feedback and then less feedback is basically going to that white color. Moving on, which is shown by engagement by district. Uh so you can see the breakdown for the number of submissions
and we also have those that did specify those that were unsure as to what council district they were located in or just outright did not specify. Um but again, dark purple versus the white color on there. >> Mayor, can I ask a question? um this engagement that you're showing
is this feedback is directly from email or online. Is that correct? >> And this is specific to the balancing act themselves. And so we're going to dive into um the information that really just they provided just a far more of like where they would like to see the dollars. And so we really want to give you an insight of those individuals that
were saying that they wanted to move some funding around uh where that feedback was coming from, not necessarily the overall attendance or comments. And just a quick question, the feedback that was actually given in person, did we document those feedbacks as well? >> We absolutely did. And I'll go and show
you in just a moment through a dashboard. Thank you. Good question. >> All right. And other demographics show by gender. Uh both male female did not specify on the, you know, y-axis is the number of submissions. Um as well as the age range. So you can see within the age
range, we we really did hear feedback in the balancing act. um from those aged 30 to 69 and then um just kind of seeing those outliers. All right. Are there any questions on other demographics? Moving on. So now we're going to dive
into the submitted comments. Now the two slides I'm about to show you are those that you saw in person that we were all in attendance for versus the contrast of what was submitted through the balancing act. So to begin the responses by proposition in the email and bond meetings which thank you again for
having your staff and your district directors forward us emails. We were able to collect that information and what you see here is um you know those that um showed the support were neutral or even opposed a specific proposition. There was 141 total comments that were
received. Of that 141 that represents 0.02% of the population 18 years and older. So again, this was in person and via email. In contrast, those that were submitted through the balancing act submission. So this was those at home on their cell
phone and so forth. Just showing a little bit more of what that diverse um type of feedback uh is located. So whether it's streets of mobility at 42725 respectively for opposing neutral and support uh public library, affordable single family housing, you could really see that background. I'm
actually going to toggle between the two in just a moment just to show that um with parks and open space, you could really see that number at 63 with support. Um also kind of shows um some of the feedback that we're receiving during the comment meetings where those may have attended um in great support for Gateway Park, for example. And so
kind of hearing that type of response um again and so those were also uh collected during this time and so you could see some of that uh between the two. All right. Are there any questions regarding the responses by proposition? And again with the balancing act we
received 188 total comments to represent 0.03% of the population 18 years and older. So if you add the two at 188 and 141 we received 329 uh submitted comments to represent 0.05% of the population.
>> Thank you mayor. Um question uh in in going and hearing back from some of the bond meetings um did staff filter out or take into account duplicative um input? not um because for one if it was from
the same individual and they ended up coming back as far as just we recorded the comment itself and that's what you'll see is um >> we had individuals that were advocating for you know specific projects that they were important to them go to multiple meetings so I'm wondering how that
information was >> we collected it as we received so if that individual showed up five times on that same topic uh we recorded as such >> all right thank you >> thank Okay. So, if you'd like to really see more of the insight and what that breakdown is
even by council district, by project proposition, or even project type, uh the Fort Worth Lab team, the data analytics team has developed a bond program feedback dashboard. And um just some of the elements regarding this dashboard that will be interactive and will be posted online for the public to
also utilize. It will you can select by district and anytime you highlight a specific district it'll show you what the responses are in each one of those two columns on the right hand side which is again project proposition and project type those that were in support neutral or oppose. Um, we'll also have a dynamic
counter so that you're always clicking on a specific item and you'll see what responses are being shown and um the responses by project type just to further clarify that can like really go into detail on community parks, traffic signal, open space, arterials and so
forth. And we also have a second page and so this really dives into being able to actually filter by certain types. So you can filter by council district um new bond project suggestions and it you can actually read the comments um as well and this was just recorded word for
word uh if it was by email we copy and pasted that in and if it was part of balancing act uh that was also uh added on here. So this is will be available and is available um will be available for the public. All right were there any questions regarding uh the online program
dashboard or the comment breakdown? Okay, moving on. We have data insight from the balancing act. Again, this is specific to the 177 submissions. So, stepping away from the what we hear what we heard during the bond meetings and via email. This is only through the
balancing act. So, in the balancing act there was 55% uh submitted the balancing act with no change. So, that was about 98 respondents. So, they went through the balancing act themselves. They may have added a comment but they not did not change say the funding mechanism or
the funding in support of or not in support of a specific project but there were 79 respondents so 45% of the 177 submissions representing 003% of the population that at least had one change to the proposed bond proposition. So
what exactly is that breakdown? So um you can see here with streets of mobility and this is just very broad scope but still kind of giving you some insight. Uh the sidewalks, school safety, vision zero and street lights as well as major roadways had that ability
to be able to toggle to meaning to add dollars or to reduce in dollars. So it wasn't necessarily like a full like in support of or deny, but you you can actually see where the funding went or how much it was in support of. So for the top four that are listed here in green, you'll see that on average um you
could see that net increase. Um for example, sidewalks at 2 million. Um but again, it was part of that change. So for parks and open space, uh this was a yes, you're in support of or uh no, you'd like to remove this particular
project off the list. 138 for Metabrook Golf Course, for example, remained unmodified. So 39 selected to remove that project from the list. And then from there they completed their own version of balancing uh the prop the overall bond program. And then you could
see here that park infrastructure and drainage that was an optional program. So that's shown in a blue uh you know blue uh plus sign at 33 individuals selecting the funding for park infrastructure and drainage. >> So moving on to public library. can
mention >> absolutely >> that 33 we think it's Richard Salah voted 33 times on the system just so so you allize on that one >> writing that in I'm sure he's laughing as he's watching it right now um all right so next is public library and so you could see the the dynamic between
History Center Diamond Hill and Southwest regional and those that remain unmodified versus those that redirected the funding to other categories um there were projects additional optional projects such as Eastberry renovation at 18 individuals selecting that specific project to add to the uh proposition as
well as new far west uh public library. Okay. And next is the affordable single family housing. 156 respondents um that particular item remained unmodified. 21 selected to redirect funding to other propositions. Because this was a yes no,
we wanted to also provide additional information from the comments that were aggregated. 31 were in support, 16 were neutral, three were opposed. Um just additional feedback is you know 23 respondents would like to increase uh affordable single family housing to 10
million. Respondents indicated that funds uh should be specifically designated for home ownership and overall respondents indicated that if there were to be some adjustments that perhaps they could be made within the overall bond program. They indicated items like maybe there are lower
priority capital initiatives or animal shelter open space as potential options. For public safety, uh the 911 call center, fire station 46 and fire station 40 remained mostly unmodified uh with those individuals at five, five and nine
respectively kind of redirecting funds to other propositions. Fire station 12 and police central division were the optional programs uh provided in the balancing act and you could see here um their you know selection at 19 and 21 individuals for that.
So for animal care and shelter facility, it remained also mostly unmodified. 29 did re redirect funding to other propositions. Um but to provide additional insight on that for the comments that were received, uh eight were in support, seven were neutral, and four were opposed. And so respondents
just in support overall cited animal welfare, public service value, and the need for improved shelter capacity. as well as respondents in opposition on the other side of of that fence uh cited magnitude of cost expressed frustration with the all or nothing funding option within the balancing act which was
consistent with what we heard in the in the um bond meetings um and that compared to affordable single family housing propositions. So um individuals did add those those comments in there. So with that being said um are there any questions regarding the balancing act
submissions? Any questions from council? >> All right, please. Thank you. >> I'm gonna go and hand this off to Christian to take us into the next set of slides. >> Okay. So, um I think we all agree public
engagement is a really important part of of these processes whether it's comprehensive plan, budget, bond. We obviously hope for lots of people to be engaged along the way and we as staff try to provide multiple opportunities and tools for that to happen. We cannot make people engage with our processes,
but we certainly don't don't want to exclude anyone. Um, what you've likely noted in the analysis, and I'll just say it, is that these numbers aren't very big. They're certainly not a statistically significant sample of the population um, by any stretch of the imagination. And that's not what really
engagement's not really sampling. It's a kind of a a different ballgame. We often hear from people who are already really engaged um in the city's business. Uh we still think it's really important to analyze the data that we receive and present it to you. Um it's it's a valuable qualitative signal of what's important to people who are already
engaged. And so we wanted to make sure that you still knew the results of those bond meetings and of the balancing act tool that we provided to the public. So as you've seen, there were really no significant like on average swaps or recommendations made. Um there are
certainly pockets of support for a variety of projects. Um but saying it another way, staff feels that the engagement sort of validated the general direction of the bond and that's why Jay sort of opened by saying we're not really recommending any big changes right now. It's time to discuss at this point and see what we need to do to get
the list ready um for finalization and then calling the election. Uh so what happens next is we can have that discussion today. We have time set aside to do that. We have an optional placeholder in a couple of weeks if we don't get that work done today. And then we'll likely call the election on
February 10th. We have till the 13th to do that, but we're hoping to do it on February 10th. And then you can sort of see from there we'll do another round of public engagement, which is an educational campaign at this point. Not really a what do you want in and out, but a here's what's on the the ballot. And then we'll have um early voting and
voting where we hope people, you know, choose to exercise their their right to vote in any in any way that they'd like. So, I'm going to pop this up here because this is sort of the proposition funding by um or funding by proposition with the proposed ratios and sort of
some reference information that you've seen a couple of times about what it looks like compared to a couple of past bond programs. But with that, that's that's it. Like that's where we are. And so now it's time to sort of discuss council reactions to the list. You have the proposed list um and we can talk
about, you know, next steps. So, I'll turn it I may be back over to Jay or the mayor at this stage. >> Thank you, Christian. >> Yes, at this point staff really wants to get your feedback. Um, as was mentioned, we're not recommending any changes from what we took out to the public. There
was, you know, there's pockets of of folks and really a lot of the the more passionate were the same folks and it wasn't many folks involved in either wanting additional funds for instance for for affordable housing or uh wanted
money taken from one pot to add to Gateway Park have that that increase. But it wasn't overwhelmingly any really uh significant amount of group folks that really felt compelled that compelled us to change
where we are. It seems from from our perspective and staff's perspective that what we took out was fairly balanced and and most folks thought it was a good program going forward. So, we of course at the end of the day, city council get
to make that decision. And so, we wanted to get your feedback and uh see what tweaks or or changes potentially we need to look at making so that we can get to a final list to to make the required dates for us to hit the uh the council
approval of a actual bond election. So, >> thanks Jay. Questions or reactions from council? >> Council member Nells, go ahead. Uh yes to the affordable housing piece uh the addition I wanted to see um I guess on
that slide you articulated uh moving five to 10 million I'm not sure to affordable housing what have we identified uh I think one of the things on there was open space have we identified open space uh purchases for
the 25 million >> I think overall there's an overall plan that identifies all those those properties. There's not, you know, since we don't have the money, there's not contracts or negotiations or anything, but there's more there's more properties that haven't been identified
than dollars available even if the 25 million was the chair. >> Yeah. >> Sure. Um well, I want to propose to the council. I don't know how we can if we can look at it maybe for the next meeting. I don't want to uh prolong the uh discussion, but if we can look at
moving uh I guess 10 five to 10 million to affordable housing in one of those categories, I don't know. Maybe staff have a better idea of how we can move it around. >> Any other reactions from council? Councilman Beck,
>> I'd just like to echo uh Council Member uh Nettle's request that we increase the overall amount um of money included in the housing bond. I'd also like us to take a look specifically at how we're designating that housing bond. I think
um single family home ownership is incredibly important. Um but as a policy for the city to only incentivize single family home ownership and not other forms of um of ownership whether that be
multifamily or um leaving enough um options for us to get creative with those dollars. Uh I saw what happened with ARPA. We most of us here saw what happened with ARPA and we were able to use very relatively small pots of of
money to make huge impacts in some affordable housing developments. So I my request is twofold. I'd like to see additional dollars put into affordable housing and I'd like to see those additional dollars unrestricted to single family. I'm okay with with us
making a stance and say we want to um continue our community land trust. Uh, but I'd like to see that other five million unrestricted to go to to future housing needs. That, let me be clear, may could very
well be home ownership packages where we have like what we did with ARPA where we have a a developer come in and we're able to to capitalize, but that was so impactful to our community. I'd like us to use the bond in that way as well. So, so is if we when we go forward with the
educational piece, it would be affordable housing and we would communicate that it could be for single family or for participating in uh multif family affordable developments as well. those multif family. We get really hung
up on multif family, but I think the spirit of putting the single family in there was we really want to focus on home ownership, but there's other forms of home of of ownership of property ownership that aren't necessarily single family. >> Okay. So, just zero it in on home ownership, but it could be
>> Well, I I I would like the preference to have some some flexibility if we >> as well. Okay. So, be the full broadspectctrum. Yeah. Just trying to get clear. >> Yeah. I think it's important for education that we talk about how portions of that funds aren't that we're not just subsidizing um apartment
complexes, but we're actually subsidizing home ownership, whether that be a condo, which in all honesty from a bond perspective, from a city perspective, why we would subsidize single family home ownership when we know that sprawl is one of our biggest
costs of operating the city doesn't make sense to me. I was just trying to figure out how to communicate when we start going on the education side to the public and they asked the question about what the dollars are. That's what I was trying to >> Thank you, Council Peoples.
>> So, I just wanted to add I'm in agreement with uh Councilman Nettles and Councilwoman Beck. I mean, we need if there uh are monies available to move, we should move that over to housing. >> Any idea of where what monies to move? I
mean because the monies that get moved, they're going to impact other projects, right, that are are important to other folks on this DAS and in the in the community. >> Do we we not have any additional bond in open
>> the question Council Beck just asked about bond capacity? Do you have I mean if you went to 845 million because I think our our our hard and fast rule is we are not impacting the tax rate. So correct. That's a question you Yeah. >> Yeah. We can we can look into that to see if we can add another 5 million without
>> without touching other projects. I think that'd be the less painful exercise everybody involve. >> We were up to that that limit when we when we picked it up to 840. You recall we were at 800 and then we went up to or 820, >> right? >> Then we went to 840 because we had additional capacity when we had the
>> the final TAD numbers. But we can we can look at to see if we can go another five million and be able to re meet that requirement if the whole council's in agreement. >> So Jay, you just answered my question. You asked me where we were going to get it from. >> Yeah. Right. >> Thank you. >> Well, and we we're joking, but it is
true. That is the least painful way to think about this. >> The answer might be that no, we can't. >> Right. And then we need to decide there would a do we agree that that's the direct direction and and if it is, then b where would that money come from? So, council member Hall, believe you have. >> Yes. I just wanted to go on the record
as well as supporting um also Councilman Nettles and Beck as well as uh Peoples and their assertions. I think um while we didn't have a significant number of participants um in providing feedback. I think you know from just public comment
the commentary that I have and and just what we know about our community affordable housing is a crisis in the situation. So I think if there's an opportunity to increase what's been aotted or um proposed I would like to explore those opportunities.
>> Council member Martinez. Um, yes, of course. I I really think we should increase the uh affordable single family housing or uh home ownership housing, but um my preference would be to increase the capacity. Uh and if we do look at another um area, I think the
idea was from open space, but I'd like to see those properties that are being considered listed in priorities to see how they would impact at least district 11. >> Thank you, Council Lorf. Yeah, maybe I'm the uh the lone wolf here, which probably would not surprise me, but I do
not support that. Um I think the five million for affordable single family housing is I I think a good test for us moving forward on affordable housing and a bond program. I think it's important for the um the home ownership and I'd like to learn more about what these other forms of home ownership are that could be multif family. I'm certainly
open to learning more about that. Uh if we were going to add any capacity, then I think it should be what we always hear from every district. Um and that's our streets mobility and streets, streets, streets, streets, streets, not just more more housing. Sure, it's a problem, but I don't think it's this council's problem to solve. I don't think it's a
taxpayers uh problem to solve directly. Uh whereas the streets are directly our problems to solve. Um and same thing with public safety. So, if we're going to have a wish list and increase capacity and that's doable, then I would like to see that go to streets and
mobility or public safety, which I feel far more important. That's my opinion, the opinion of my district. Council Ky Chson. Yeah, >> I'll just say I'm I'm supportive of increasing the amount that's put in the affordable housing fund. What that amount is, I don't know. We can look at
the capacity, the least painful method. I do think the most questions I'm getting for is who qualifies for it. What does that look like? So that education piece, back to what you're talking about, I think for it to pass, at least in the people I'm talking to in the district three, um there's a little bit of education you're going to like what are the organizations, what does
that look like? We know great organizations out there, but I think there's a big education piece that we got to get through and these numbers that we've gotten, which is 002% of the population that are responding tells me no one's really paying attention to this right now. So we've got to got three months, four months to really educate
folks on what's happening. Thank you, Council Member Flores. >> Um, I'm supportive of Jay and his staff looking at this further. Um, you know, without that information, I can't make a fully informed decision where I, uh, I mean, there are projects here and
initiatives that I think all of us would agree, you know, deserve a good look see. And if we can increase capacity, we can do it safely. We can do it with fiscal responsibility, not increase uh what it costs us to, you know, if we have to borrow money, you know, when it
comes to debt and uh leave us in a position where we can deal with future crisis because if co taught us anything, we didn't see that coming. What's coming next? Want to be, you know, want to keep the city in a position where it can respond to such crises while still
offering essential services. Thank you. Council Hill >> Jay, will you remind me how much uh what percentage of the bond goes to public art? Is it sir per um >> it's it's a a >> project >> approximately it ends up being
approximately like 2.1% because you have 1% from the streets and mobility proposition and 2% from everything else. >> Is there any way to reallocate some of that to streets and mobility? >> It's about 7.8 million. Is that the number? I think it's a little higher than that.
>> 10.8. >> Oh, 10 10 million. >> Uh, yeah, it's about 10 million that. So, there the the city it it is a I believe it's an ordinance. I'm looking at our city attorney. I think it's an ordinance that was passed that requires
that to occur. So, we'd have to council could change the ordinance and make it, you know, 1% across the board, which would take half of the money from the streets and mobility infrastructure projects, and then you could reallocate that to a different proposition.
>> I'm I'm listening to you, Charlie, too. I think the majority of my district, from what I've heard, is streets and mobility and public safety um is probably their highest concern. The amount of potholes and both inside the loop and outside the loop and the traffic problems. I mean, if we can relieve some of that through the bond, I think that would be prudent.
>> Council member Bl, >> since everyone else has spoken, I feel compelled to do so as well. The uh so this council agreed that our number one priority was
streets and mobility infrastructure multiple meetings ago and all agreed to prioritize more in that area from a bond perspective. We're still doing far less than what we've done in previous bond programs. And there's need in every
single one of our districts. And and we all are aware of presentations we've had from TPW about how dire the need is and how far behind we are. At some point, we have to get serious about that. And so I
would advocate for any additional funds going towards that critical need that we are responsible for. >> Council Nelson, >> um I'll add to that. Um I can support that effort as well. And I also say at some point we have to have a ser serious
conversation about our tax rate. Our tax rate also supports uh fixing our roads and infrastructure on an annual basis uh for our TPW. Uh the second thing I want to add to when we're talking about the uh housing to articulate uh what Councilman uh Beex, Councilwoman Beck
said is there were projects, specific projects that we were able to uh get across the finish line such as Renaissance uh housing in district 8. And I also uh I think it's a incumbent of this council to make sure that we remind the people that there is no uh
multifamily approved unless it comes through this council body. So even though we have money set aside, those monies will only be identified to projects that will be qualified to be approved through this council. And so it's just not free money to make apartment complexes go all over in
districts that some may not want those in their district. So I think the education piece to what Councilman Crane talked about is going to be uh vitally important to get this across the finish line. in major cities across uh Texas such as Austin and San Antonio have done
10 20 times more than we're doing today. Uh but I do agree with Councilman Bllelock about um increasing the uh streets and mobility, but I think that conversation also goes along with the tax rate and not just on the bond election. >> Anyone else?
>> One last thing, you don't mind. Can you revisit what you just said uh Jay about the whole 1% and the changing that because would we need to go to back to the voters on public art on allocations? >> It's by ordinances. City council passed the ordinance that on all our bond
programs 1% of the allocation. So the 511 million goes to art for because it's streets and mobility and then the remaining non streets and mobility has 2% of those dollars go to public art. combined it's about a little bit over $10 million.
>> So you're saying we can change that percentage though and change it from like three all the way down to one or >> you could well it's it's two and one. So you can you can change uh so that they're it's all 1% or you could eliminate it. We had that conversation this summer when we went through the different alternatives and the council
decided at that time that she didn't want to make changes overall or the consensus was to not make changes but that's that's always an option. We just have to do it before uh the 13th. Gotcha. Okay. For the 10th of February. Okay. Thank you.
>> Anybody else want to add? I'm going to attempt to summarize some of this for staff so we can get some good directions moving forward. It sounds like number one is we want to check on total bond capacity to see what kind of increases we could achieve without touching the tax rate. Number two is a clear memo to
council about what the public art ordinance looks like today and what that really means. add in there. I've talked to staff before and this is an important conversation especially. I think we all enjoy public art in Fort Worth. That's not something I think we're proud of it. I think one thing I brought up recently
is a very large majority of that money is actually not invested in local artists. It's usually outside of Fort Worth. A lot of them are from Texas, so that's a positive. But this is not something where you're investing in community art. So, I want that on the record before we um get any kind of
emails from community artists that that this is not money that unfortunately it doesn't go to them in the first place. And then the third element to this is if you're going to move money, where are you moving money from? Um Councilman Martinez wanted to see a list from probably Allison, if you have it on open
space acquisitions we would love to achieve that are all over the city. It's well over 25 million, but that would give an idea for council members as well. And then council member Beck wanted to make sure language was clear that allowed for housing ownership not
just strictly single family housing but different products that are available across the city. What else did I miss? >> So just to get clarified are we on the housing piece? Is it just ownership or is it so it's ownership or rental? Okay.
>> Anything else that I missed? >> Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. Yes. Council member Crane. I would just say to add to what I said too is is then who falls into the categories that would qualify for it. I mean it's it's one agree we should figure out how f it could be flexible
but then what are the qualifications? What does that look like? >> Thank you. Anyone else have anything? >> Yeah, I mentioned at the beginning. Yeah, perfect. Okay. Does that give clarity? You can come back to some of that via email and then we can have that
other session on the 27th to help try to finalize things by the date that you need us to to call the election. >> Correct. Absolutely. >> And then another fun reminder, you can't advocate for anything other than go vote after this is set. >> So now's the time to talk about this. Once the vote is set in February, this
council can only advocate go vote for the bond. You can't vote you can't advocate against a proposition for a proposition. Stay on your head differently. Just trying to keep you out of trouble. And Liam will remind us of that as well. Okay. Did I get everything? Great. Jay, I think that's
all. >> Yes. And that applies to staff as well. So >> Oh, I didn't realize that. Congrats staff. You also can't advocate for the bond. >> I want to make sure staff understand. >> You got department heads out there lobbying just for their issue. >> Okay. Yes. Council Nettles, >> are we still waiting on a presentation
for uh >> 27th for charter? >> Yes. Okay. >> Anything else? Okay. Meeting is journ. Thank you all very much. Part: 2
Okay, good afternoon everyone. We're going to get started on time and so I call to order the Property Management and Environmental Services Committee today, January 13th, 3M. Um, and so, uh, we have two briefings. The first briefing is efforts to develop an energy
strategy for city facilities and that's going to be presented by Jordan Belusk. Yes. Hello. You said my last name correctly. Thank you. I had some help. That's a hard one. Okay. Good afternoon,
committee members. My name is Jordan Belusk. I'm with the environmental services department. I'm an environmental supervisor and I'm thrilled to be here today to talk to you about our efforts to develop an energy strategies for the city facilities systems and fleet.
Okay. So, what we're going to talk about today is an overview of our energy efficiency and conservation block grant which is our EECBG. You may remember back in June of 2023, there was an M andZ presented about the grant and then of course later that fiscal year in
2024, we were granted that grant from the Department of Energy. So, our outcomes that we want to highlight are going to be our strategies document and then our partial street light retrofit in partnership with TPW and then our postcard and website resources that were
launched and then of course we'll follow up with next steps and as we close out the grant. So, like I said, there's three components to our grant. First being our strategies development. So, that is our energy efficiency conservation strategies for city facilities, systems, and fleet. That's our document that
we're creating in partnership with our contractor Amaresco. Second part is our project implementation, which is the retrofit of 1,650 street lights in partnership of course with TPW. And then the third component of that grant is our Peplica education
and outreach where we mailed postcards out and developed an energy and sustainability website. So getting into that first component which is our strategies document. So this document in partnership with our contractor Amaresco is how um which we're wrapping up. We
are developing a framework for cost savings for the city. Um so we understand that city departments do not have the means to immediately make changes. However, what this document serves as is a guide book, a tool, a menu of resources that departments can
use to make future retrofits, future buildings, future construction. So, you'll see that it discusses the metrics of utilizing strategies for energy efficiency and conservation. And then it outlines opportunities for including strategies into action plans for future
projects like we mentioned. And then it provides the framework for energy and cost savings for city city facilities, fleet and systems. So with our partner Amaresco, they conducted audits across the city of our city facilities, systems, and fleets. So it outlines the
the strategies document outlines the city's use and inventory of assets. And then it defines cost-saving strategies for renovations, retrofits, new construction standards for city facilities such as our buildings, our systems such as street lights and HVAC systems and utilities, our fleet as our
passenger vehicles and our heavier use equipment. And then of course it will highlight successes such as our lead level renovations like our beautiful city hall. Second part of our um grant of our EECB
EECBG grant is our retrofit of 1,650 street lights um in partnership with TPW into LED street lights with smart node technology. So currently TPW is underway making waves with street light retrofits. So there's currently 71,000
street lights across the city. They have already retrofitted over 40,000 of them. But with our help with t with um leveraging EECBG funds, we were able to help them out with about 5% of the remaining 29,500 street lights. These
this retrofi retrofit extends the life by 5 years going from 10 years to 15 years. And then my favorite part upon completion streetlight retrofit should help save $1.2 million in energy cost each year
for the city. That is my favorite part. And then the third part of our grant is our public education and outreach. So this part um we were able to develop the lovely postcard that's there in front of you. And you'll see on the postcard we
were able to mail this out to 143,000 residents across the city which equals out to be about 55% of the residential parcels within the city. Um, and then with that, you'll see on the back there is a QR code that you can scan that leads you to our energy and sustainability website that we also
developed and launched in November of 2025. So, um, this postcard you'll see, um, you know, it not only teaches residents how to save energy, how to save water, but it also leads, you'll see on the back, it leads our residents
to our existing city programs such as neighborhood services priority repair program, the smart flush, the smart repair program with the water department. So, it educates our residents on existing programs for the city, but it also when you span that QR code and go to the website we developed,
it also um educates our residents on local, state, and federal level tax rebates and and um and credits. So, um you'll see here on that map, the dark blue are the residents that received
this postcard and we cross referenced it with NIPs in orange. So, we made sure that our residents within those NIP areas also received the postcard. We developed um this map and we decided who to mail the postcard to with three
factors. So, high energy burdens, um income levels, and then high energy use. And then you'll see on the next slide, this is just a bigger version of that that beautiful postcard. So, you'll see you'll see again it teaches residents how to save how to save water, how to
save energy. But again, the the overall um intent of this is to educate residents um of how to help themselves using existing city uh resources like our programs that we already offer and then also teaching them ways how they can save money for themselves through
those tax rebates and credits. And of course, next steps as we finalize this grant. So, we're working with our partners to finalize our energy um strategies document and then we're going to complete, of course, a grant-f funed
LED street light retrofit project. And then we are going to share all of our successes with city departments through city channels, through department head meetings. And then, of course, number four, we're always proactively seeking additional grant funding opportunities at the local and regional levels to
support our energy efficiency and conservation efforts when possible. So, I just want to thank our partners real fast. I've mentioned several of them. So, TBW, of course, with our streetlight program, um, property management with our conservation strategies document, neighborhood services and water
department, with our postcard, and then of course FMS and Fort Worth Lab have been a tremendous help as well. So, I just wanted to thank them and make sure they were recognized for all of their support that they've guided us over the next over the past two years with this grant. And that is it. I'm I'm happy to answer
any questions. Um, Excuse me. >> I don't have any questions. I want to say good job. Um my only suggestion would be um if we receive this a grant, if we receive a grant like this again and we're able to go back out and kind
of educate so many of these um tips or home improvement um you know that require tools and whatnot. So working with code to make sure that in conjunction with letting residents know this is how they can be energy efficient, right? Maybe the other side of that postcard is did you know
that you can rent tools to to do those things? And so I think that way it it it gives them uh the ability if they don't have that to to actually do the work. >> Yes, I completely agree. The mobile tool shed program is a fabulous new program that can use some more um education
outreach. I love that idea. >> Um and I believe Val has some clarifications. Yeah, Jordan, I wondered if you if you could give some clarity to the timelines for the next steps for one and two on when you'll get when we'll see the final Amoresco report and then
when the retrofit will be done and then also just touch a little bit on the 1.2 million in savings. How are those going to be tracked? >> Yes. So, uh number one, the strategies document. So, we're hoping to have this wrapped up in February. Um, we're
currently working with our contractor to we're in the final stages with our contractor. Once they have their version completed, we will work with our departments to make sure that they're of course represented accurately within the documented as well. Um, and then number two, the LED street lights. So, in
talking with TPW, they project that they should complete all of the grant-f funed streetlight retrofits by spring of 2026. So, here within the next couple of of months. And then the savings of 1.2 2 million. So that was a a figure provided
to us from TPW. And it's my understanding that that figure is a projected figure that they um have worked out through their Encore um audit. So they're currently getting audited through Encore and they believe that when that Encore audit is completed, the city should see that $1.2
million um savings there. that will capture um making sure that all of the street lights that have been retrofitted that they're being built appropriately to the city because of course that's a lower cost amount for an LED or a solar street light versus your traditional
street light. >> Okay, perfect. Because I want to make sure we stay on top of that because we'll hear about savings coming in, but it is really nice to be able to pinpoint and track and show where we've actually seen those savings come to fruition. >> Absolutely. >> Uh do we have any more questions?
>> No. Uh Jordan, thank you so much. I think y'all did a wonderful job with the postcard. Do you know if this is also online uh in Spanish? >> The So the this um is basically word for word on our energy and sustainability website and of course the website itself
can be translated into Spanish. >> Okay, awesome. Thank you. >> And now we will hear from Avery Pesk about solid waste infrastructure for recycling grant program award. Good afternoon committee members. My
name is Avery Pesik. I'm senior management analyst in our environmental services department and it's all good news today from us. I'm here to talk to you about the solid waste infrastructure for recycling or Swiffer grant today.
So many of you have seen these before. These are our solid waste guiding principles. Um these underpin all of the surfaces all of the services that we offer in solid waste services. So that's to offer exceptional customer service to provide the best service for the best
value to our residents to maintain a clean and attractive city and to extend our landfill life. Many of you have heard about our landfill life. That's top of mind for our department right now as well as solid waste funding. So we're really excited. Big congratulations to
Jim Keyasel and the team for identifying this additional $4.8 million that are going to help our programs in solid waste. So, I want to um draw your attention to a couple of the pictures here. This is our Hillshshire dropoff station. We're
going to see several exciting improvements as a result of this funding to Hillshshire and all of our dropoff stations. But the ways that we're going to use this funding is to expand public education, to pilot an exciting reuse program for our residents, new electronic signage, so you can see what
our signs at the dropoff station look like currently, and then to do several construction improvements to our old Hempill dropoff station and improve our scrap metal recycling there. So, I just wanted to offer a budget breakdown for y'all so you can see where
that money is going. About $1 million is going to that pilot reuse program as well as expanding recycling education and messaging. 550,000 for new recycling equipment. Specifically, that's going to be used for recycling compactors at our
dropoff station. 33,000 for new electronic signage, replacing those outdated digital signs at our dropoff stations and then about $3.1 million in construction improvement to old Hempill dropoff station. Now, I
do want to note here this is a the $3.1 million is a study that we did with Elements of Architecture and Property Management. Everyone in this room is probably familiar with construction prices and what they've been up to the past couple years. So, first order of business is going to be to get that
quote updated, make sure we're on target with that budget here. So, as a avid recycler, I'm super excited about this opportunity that we're offering our residents, which is the pilot reuse program. This is going to be a location at each of our dropoff
stations that offers residents the opportunity to um give their neighbors items that are still they still have a lot of life in them, a lot of love to give. So those can be things like furniture, electronics, building materials. We want to give them an easy
place to drop off where they're already taking many of their household goods, our drop off station, and then other residents can pick those up free of charge. We're going to keep them on site for a matter of time and then offer those to local nonprofits, things like the Wellman Project, Habitat for
Humanity Restore, as well as Goodwill. So um really exciting opportunity there. In addition, we're going to be increasing efforts to communicate our recycling program. Everyone here has likely seen our rethink campaign. Lola McCartney and our communications team
are always leveraging our internal channels to get that message out on how our residents can recycle best. Even with those efforts, we see about a 27% contamination rate in our single stream recycling. So, we're really excited to use this funding to leverage additional
opportunities with high visibility advertising and get the public's interest and attention on recycling goals. We've talked a little bit about Old Hempill dropoff station. You all can see this top left picture. That's the
current scrap metal recycling site at our old Hempill dropoff station. Old Himill is our oldest drop off station as well as our highest use. So in fiscal year 25 alone, we saw over 123,000 visits to old Hempill dropoff station.
So improvements at this location are going to represent direct improvements to our residents experience. Um it's going to be concreted over, have a retaining wall to prevent the flooding that you can see in the area, as well as offer a new location that we're going to
put our reuse opportunities. You can also see what the current fencing looks like. That's resulted in a few breakins as people are trying to get the scrap metal and sell it for themselves. So, one of the improvements is improved fencing at the location. In addition,
we're going to improve traffic flow, which is going to help our residents safety while they're dropping off items here. Finally, we have new equipment and electronic signage at the drop off stations. We've talked about a bit about this already, but we are going to use
the funding for up to 10 compactors for recycling. That's going to result in increased amount of colle of um materials that are being dropped off at once, which is going to reduce the number of daily trips that our staff are having to use and that's going to
increase staff efficiency. And then these electronic signs, this is an exciting opportunity to continue that message, the recycling message for people that are already there and trying to recycle. So, the improved LED screens are going to offer better visibility,
more bright. They're going to be able to be remotely updated, and they're going to offer increased visibility from a number of distances and angles. So, we're really excited about that opportunity. Finally, just want to touch on timeline and next steps for us. Um, this is a
grant period of three years, but we're really excited to hit the ground running, start with some of those purchases of equipment. So, that'll be quick improvements for our residents. We're going to continue collaborating with our departments in property management, IT, development services on
signage. So, we're really excited to um to see a difference this is going to make for our residents and city. So with that, I will take any questions. >> Thank you, Avery. Does anybody have any questions? >> Just >> Councilman Lowdorf, sorry. Go ahead.
>> No, you're good. Um, for the pilot reuse program, is that going to be at all the drop off stations? >> Yes, we're going to start it at Hillshshire first and then expand to all of the drop off stations. >> Okay, awesome. And but that's not going to include like access to scrap, right? So scrap scrappers aren't going to be able to come in there and take scrap
metal out. And >> that's correct. It's going to be focused on things like furniture, electronics, building materials, things like that. >> Okay. And will will the nonprofit still get first dibs on like the bikes for example because I know we have a nonprofit up north that they'll take the bikes and they'll fix them up and give
them to kids in the area. Will they still get first dibs or it's just like a free-for-all, first come first serve or? >> Yes, we'll continue with the nonprofit for receiving bicycles. But for those other items like the furniture and things, our residents are going to get first dibs and then it'll go to nonprofits after that.
>> Okay, awesome. And then for for Hillshshire, I don't know about the others, but um if there's any way to increase the styrofoam recycling as well, because I know that one's always full there and then like, well, just go ahead and throw it in the normal one. And it's like, >> yeah, >> there's more capacity. So, >> yeah.
>> Thank you so much. >> Thank you, Councilman Laror. Do you have a specific nonprofit that you wanted to ensure was included in this notification? >> Um, I can't remember the the name um the name of the one that uses the bikes, but they're already involved with them. Um,
in fact, I learned about this a couple years ago whenever I actually saw a bike and took a bike and come to find out, oh, no, you can't do that. It's like, oh, my bad. But statute of limitations has passed. So, that's that's gone. Uh, then I found out about this nonprofit. So, okay. And I think it would be helpful though for other nonprofits to
find out that they can do something similar to this, especially other drop off stations. Um because I know they're helping out a lot of uh residents in North Fort Worth with those bikes and creating like little uh bike clubs and they're doing a lot. So just kind of opening that up and letting more know about it, I think would be pretty pretty
cool, too. >> So we could share that name of the nonprofit you're uh thinking about, but also want to make sure that when we love is on the list. I think it is, but I just want to >> make it uh >> known. Um with the improvements at uh old Hempill dropoff site will there be
any be any impact to the hours operating hours like will it be closed for any time? Okay. Just that certain section >> yes the the improvements are mainly focused on the scrap metal recycling. So we don't anticipate additional closed hours at this time.
>> Okay. Thank you. Does anybody else have any other questions? I just want to stress something that Avery mentioned at the beginning and that's the team's continuing to work with EPA on the grant funding and the need to potentially adjust the award just to account for
inflation. So, we can report back once we have that fine-tuned and if we have to make any adjustments to how we originally intended to spend the money, we will make sure we come back and brief you on that. >> Awesome. Thank you, Avery. Thank you. >> Um, so now we move on to requests for
future agenda topics. Does anybody have anything that like Councilman Crane? >> Uh, I don't know if it's the perview of this committee, but I'd like to look at the hours again. I'm a frequent flyer at the old Hemp Hill uh one and it's 8 to 12 on Saturdays and when most people are getting up start at 8 9 10. By the time
it's time to go, it's 2 or 3 o'clock in the afternoon. So, I'd like to look at that again. It seems very friend the hours right now seem very friendly for more commercial users, not necessarily residential users. I know they they extended the evening hours to like seven. So that makes it easier for folks that you know 9 to5 they could just go
after work. >> I don't Is it Is it seven? I thought it was still 5. >> No, I think because I drove over there. Yeah. >> Okay. >> I thought it said seven. So we can get clarification on that. >> I was um recycling old electronics and
batteries if you must know. But I so does I was going to ask about that um offline but maybe it is the purview but definitely the hours because same frequent flyer in fact I got uh pnged because I I took too much stuff so I was I could not use it anymore in December but uh definitely hearing a lot about
the hours too because to the point like usually you do all the work Saturday morning and then take it in. I actually talked to one of the employees how he felt about the hours um and they actually just wanted to completely get rid of all the weekend hours which I can understand but understand they were closed on Monday so maybe even if it's closed Monday and Tuesday to give them
the necessary time off >> the addition. >> Right. Exactly. Um so would definitely like to look at that as well. >> Okay. >> And I think that's that's a reasonable request. I know the team spent a lot of time in Reuben through a six project and trying to find just that work life balance for the employees as well. But I
think the team can definitely take a look at that and look at some of the use data since we've made some of the changes. But I will say that we have heard from people. People are noticing the changes. Um, and you know, some of those are, I think, mostly for the good, but we have called when people have said, "Hey, they used to let me in and
they didn't check my ID. Well, we're checking IDs now." Um, so the team is really trying to be proactive about communicating, but I think that they'd be willing to go back and look at the Saturday hours and talk to the employees and see if there's maybe a middle ground.
>> Thank you. So, if there's nobody else, I uh just want to make a comment because I feel like it would be appropriate for uh this uh request to come before this committee, but I've expressed concerns about data centers in Fort Worth and I really want to better understand how they impact our infrastructure and
resources. Um, that being said, I've asked our city manager to schedule presentation before city council, most likely during work session um to learn more about data centers and how they may stress our infrastructure, water, and energy. So, just heads up. Um, so if
there's nothing else, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. Awesome. And we are adjourned. Thank you.