We Must Fix Our Levees NOW

I was very concerned to see that the U.S. Corps of Engineers has deemed the safety of Dallas’ levees “unacceptable.” The Corps revised their safety standards after the Katrina tragedy, and re-evaluated Dallas’ levees under this new system. They announced the results of their review yesterday.

I was surprised that our levees failed to meet the new standards since the Mayor just got back from lobbying our Congressional delegation to pressure the Corps into speeding up their safety evaluation of the Trinity toll road, which is to be built within the levees. If you’ve been following this issue, you know that no major road like this has ever been built within a levee system. Knowing that our levees do not meet the Corps’ new safety standards, I think it’s irresponsible to lobby the Corps to speed up what should be a thoughtful, deliberate safety review of an untested engineering design like the toll road. Rushing to pour millions of tons of concrete into an already unsafe levee system is a dangerous plan that could have dire consequences. Continue reading

Trinity Park or Trinity Toll Road?

Last month, I began working my way through the master plan for the Trinity River Project, along with maps and drawings showing what lies ahead for the project. Although I’m on the Council’s Trinity River committee, we haven’t been given a primer on the overall scope of this project, and I wanted to fully understand it.

I was very, very disappointed in what I found: This is a roads project.

Yes, you read that right. All those rumors you’ve heard, all those Jim Schutze articles you’ve read, they’re right on the money. The vast majority of the public funds for this project will be spent on a six-lane highway INSIDE the downtown levee. (To be clear, the levees are the little hills that run along both sides of the Trinity River basin.)

So you’re thinking to yourself, why on earth would we put a huge highway — a toll road — inside the levee that is supposed to contain the biggest park in the world? Frankly, I have no idea.

I’ve gotten various explanations about the toll road. Some say we must have a road there or we’ll have traffic problems in Dallas (imagine). Some say I-35 is overwhelmed and must be expanded, and this is the single, best, and only way to do it.

Others offer this explanation: Without the road, we couldn’t pay for the park. Here’s how that theory works. We’ve got to dig out a bunch of dirt to create the man-made lakes. TxDOT needs a bunch of dirt to build up the levee for the road, so they’ll buy that dirt from us, and we’ll basically get the lakes dug out for free. Unfortunately, I have a sneaking suspicion that at the end of the day, TxDOT is going to say that the City was going to dig out the lakes anyway, and we’re lucky that they took all that dirt off our hands, and here’s the bill, thank you.

Up to now, when people have asked me what I think about the Trinity River Project, here’s what I’ve said: Whether I like it, love it, or think it’s the worst project ever, my responsibility as an elected official is to effectuate the will of the voters who approved the Trinity River Project bond in 1998.

So what exactly is the “will” of the voters? I think we can deduce that in two ways. The simplest is to look at what residents wrote on comment sheets and questionnaires the city sent out at the time the project was being developed.

I reviewed all of the comment sheets, and when residents were asked about the most important part of the project, they said “the parks.” When asked what they thought about the transportation part of the project, they stated some variation of “NO HIGHWAY! NO TOLLROAD! THE ROAD WILL RUIN THE PARK!” Often in capital letters. Usually underlined.

Another way we can discern voter intent is to look at what residents ask most about when they want to know what’s going on with the Trinity River project. People ask me all the time, “When is the Trinity River park going to be ready?” “When will we be able to canoe down the lakes?” No one has ever, ever asked me, “When is the huge toll road going to be built?” People want the huge, glorious park that they were sold and that they voted for. People want flood control and protection. People want the lakes, the wetlands, the Great Trinity Forest. No one wants a big stinking toll road with cars whizzing by. If you’ve been down to the Trinity River, say, around Sylvan Avenue, the nice thing about being down in the floodplain is that you’re surrounded by a vast park with green hills on either side. You don’t feel like you’re in the middle of a city. Loud, polluting cars zooming by inside the hill are going to kill that.

I got this bee in my bonnet after the Trinity River committee met today. We were briefed on the North Texas Tollroad Authority’s possible involvement with the tollroad. I voiced exactly what I’ve stated above, and pointed out that I wouldn’t be supporting a highway along the Trinity Park in any way, shape, or form.

The chair of the Committee, Ed Oakley, pointed out that the tollway was a done deal, and I wouldn’t have the opportunity to vote against it; that the only input we have now will be to create a pretty design for the toll road.

As to whether the toll road is a done deal, only time will tell. As to making the toll road pretty, I say that that is putting lipstick on a pig. We can dress up the tollway any way we like. We can coat it in chocolate frosting and put a big red bow on it, and it’s still a toll road right alongside a park.

Who’s bright idea was this?

Last thing I’ll say is this: I’m a skeptic, if not by nature, then profession (attorney). When I see that all of the Trinity River Project comment cards and questionnaires unequivocally stated, in no uncertain terms, that residents didn’t want a tollroad, yet they got one anyway, it makes me very, very uneasy with the current comprehensive plan process. The city claims to be soliciting resident input on the comprehensive plan, but at the end of the day, I really wonder if it’ll make any difference at all. I get the feeling that the fundamentals of that plan, like the Trinity River Project, have already been written in stone, and we’re going to get what we’re going to get. I worry that in a few years, we’re going to be asking ourselves, “Who’s bright idea was this?”

Council Briefing: Trinity Crossing Entertainment Project

Today the Council voted to authorize the Economic Development team to continue negotiating the Trinity Crossing Entertainment project. You can see more info and my thoughts on this issue here:
Previous Blog on Trinity Crossing

Slot machines and a horse race track are currently part of the entertainment center proposal, and I’ve got concerns about bringing gambling in our City. I directed staff to look at this issue more broadly, not just at how much money this will bring to the City. For example, we need to consider the impact of gambling on public safety, social cost in gambling addiction, whether other cities that have adopted slots gambling have themselves become “addicted” to the revenue, and why other cities have tried to get out of the slot machine gambling business.

This issue is now going back to the Economic Development Committee to discuss concerns brought up by me and other councilmembers. (I’m on that committee.) We’ll then give direction to the negotiating team about what we as a City want to see in the agreement.

PROPOSAL: To continue negotiating the land trade and entertainment project; to bring a recommendation to the Economic Development Committee by November 21; to brief the full Council by Dec. 5; to present for Council vote by Dec. 14. (BB moved, JF seconded.)

VOTE: (13:2, AH voting yes, LM and MR voting no)

Proposal to Create “Trinity Crossing Entertainment Complex”

On Wednesday, the Council will be briefed by the Economic Development Department on a proposal to create an entertainment complex near the Convention Center in Downtown Dallas. You can read the briefing here: Council Briefing

The terms of the proposal have not been hammered out yet, but the tentative plan looks like this:

-The City owns Reunion Arena, but is losing over a million dollars a year on it. The arena’s total land area is about 360,000 sq. ft.
-The City owns half of the Convention Center’s Parking Lot E. Hunt Consolidated owns the other half, about 331,000 sq. ft.
-Lot E is where a company named Dallas City Limits is interested in creating an entertainment complex.
-The proposed deal would entail a land swap between Hunt Consolidated (Parking Lot E) and the City of Dallas (Reunion Arena). The City has received two conflicting appraisals on the properties, so we’re doing a third appraisal. At that point we’ll have more details about the possible land swap.

That’s part one of the deal. The second part of the deal proposes that the City sell Lot E to Dallas City Lights for fair market value to build the enterntainment complex.

As proposed, the entertainment complex would house retail shops, restaurants, and a horse racing track with “Video Lottery Terminals.” That’s a fancy way of saying slot machines.

I am supportive of the idea of consolidating the land at Lot E in order to create an entertainment center. I am also supportive of creating an entertainment center in our Downtown. HOWEVER, I am very troubled by the idea of allowing slot machines at the race track. Slot machines are highly addictive, prey on the poor, and in general create a seedy atmosphere that I don’t think is right for our Downtown.

Many cities that once permitted slot machines are now putting constraints on them or getting rid of them altogether. If our city becomes dependent on slot machine revenue, it would be nearly impossible to get rid of that form of gambling down the line. (The State Legislature would have to approve such slot machines before Dallas could proceed.)

I am less troubled by regulated horse racing if slot machines are excluded. However, race tracks without slot machines are in decline. Successful new racetracks, called “racinos,” incorporate slot machines and other forms of gambling into the mix. When these racinos are financially successful, it is due to the non-race gambling income, such as slot machines. So the question becomes, can our proposed race track stand alone, without slot machines, and still make money? If not, can Dallas City Limits put together an entertainment package that doesn’t include a race track or slot machines?