Dallas City Council Special Called Meeting – June 17, 2026

This special called meeting of the Dallas City Council was convened on Wednesday, June 17, 2026, at 8:22 AM, and adjourned at 2:20 PM, with a recess from 9:01 AM to 9:32 AM and a lunch recess from 11:00 AM to 1:39 PM. The agenda contained two resolutions authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute pre-acquisition agreements for due diligence on potential relocation sites for City Hall staff (Item 1) and for 911 and emergency operations staff (Item 2). After extensive public comment and debate on numerous amendments, both items passed on votes of 9‑5‑1.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Greg Evans (District 1 resident) opposed relocation, referencing his grandfather’s civic legacy and stating that the council had repeatedly pulled city hall funding from bond packages.
• Mark Nunnley (CPA, 45 years’ experience) expressed support, arguing that a restraining order filed by council members was blocking the cost comparisons the opposition demanded and that a vote no would obstruct the process.
• John Gates (executive chair of JL, Citizens Council chair) urged a yes vote, stating the central business district is declining and relocation could spur revitalization.
• Rick Perdue (past chairman of TREC) supported moving, citing consultant reports on building system challenges and the need to invest in downtown.
• Jennifer Scripps (president/CEO, Downtown Dallas Inc.) supported the items, noting budget pressures and calling repair of City Hall “hundreds of millions of dollars” that would compete with core services.
• Trey Black (CEO, Ontarget Supplies) supported the items as information gathering, not a final relocation decision.
• Robert Walters urged a yes vote to obtain side‑by‑side cost comparisons.
• Jose Avila (District 2 downtown) argued that spending billions on the building while facing a $51 billion budget deficit is fiscal negligence.
• Bruce Orr (District 13) thanked those who voted against repairs the prior week and urged unity to allow the city manager to get detailed relocation costs.
• Melissa Lara thanked the council’s 9‑6 vote the prior week and urged continued momentum.
• Roland Parish (businessman, Oaktree? – unclear) urged support and a broader vision, citing examples of other cities.
• Cynthia Michaels (Heritage Oak Cliff) opposed, arguing the city already has real repair costs from a longtime city employee and that a $3 million expenditure is unnecessary.
• Andrew Scola opposed, predicting the building would become an abandoned hulk and called the plan a “monument to mismanagement.”
• Jedediah Ulrich (Democratic Socialists of America, North Texas) opposed, calling the process corporate appeasement and urging saving City Hall and building affordable housing.
• Daniel Campbell expressed belief in redevelopment but wanted a beautiful, community‑oriented space.
• Stephanie Drinka opposed, invoking architect I.M. Pei’s legacy and calling the demolition plan destructive.
• David Voss (District 2) strongly opposed, accusing the council of ignoring logic and reason, and shouted “Shame on you.”
• Jessica Stewart Lindvey (District 9) echoed shame and called the process regressive, destructive, and non‑democratic.
• Bruce Richardson warned that history will judge the council negatively.
• Dolores Levy Soroka (District 2) questioned the integrity of the process, suggesting corruption.
• Mike Davis supported redevelopment, urging the council to bring facts together and reinvest in downtown.
• Elena Stevens (District 1) opposed, calling the building an architectural icon and asking for a vision incorporating City Hall into downtown life.
• Ed Zara (District 14) opposed, arguing that leasing would cost $157 million every 10 years and that purchasing another 50‑year‑old building is a financial disaster.
• Quinn Matthews (blue‑shirt advocate) said over 300,000 positive responses online favored saving City Hall.
• Carol Bell Walton read a letter from city employees urging restoration of City Hall, stating employees were never asked.
• Amy Tran opposed relocation, describing City Hall as the place where she brought her children to advocate.
• Sean Jensen (District 11) opposed, questioning what $3 million could buy and calling for restoration.
• Erica Cole questioned lack of details on move costs and demolition.
• Diane Birdwell (District 7) accused the pro‑relocation side of being played by oligarchs and demanded transparent numbers.
• Karen Muncie (District 9) opposed, calling the push “playing realtor” and urging saving the heart of civic life.
• Yolanda Williams supported demolition, arguing 911 and recreation centers are more important than the building.
• Terrence Hudson (District 13) opposed, saying City Hall is for everyone and comparing it to other historic preservation successes.
• Katherine Guerra opposed, citing embodied carbon and demolition pollution, and warned that taxpayers would not fund another city hall given past mismanagement.
• Sana Saeed (Farmers Market Stakeholders Association) supported reimagining the dead zone, urging the council to show courage.
• Rollins Gilliland delivered a eulogy for the building, predicting future tragedy.
• Sydney Walker shouted shame and accused the council of betrayal.
• Jones (11‑year‑old, District 10) pleaded to save the building, explaining I.M. Pei’s symbolism.
• Melanie Van Landingham opposed, calling the process rigged and urging a vote no.
• Ronnie Mestis (West Dallas) asked why the issue isn’t put to a public vote.
• Michaela Watkins (District 2) criticized the lack of facts and called the plan underdeveloped and lacking integrity.
• Matthew Bach (District 11) opposed, comparing selling city hall to selling the zoo or Fair Park.
• Donna Denison (17‑year resident) asked for transparency on true repair costs and urged a vote no.
• John Lindbey requested independent review and a public vote.
• Kevin Pfeiffer (District 1) questioned how rent would be funded and urged using ARPA funds for repairs.
• Lisa Quintans (35‑year resident) criticized neglect of the area around City Hall.
• Catherine Garrison opposed, saying no one would agree to move from a paid‑off house.
• Sanford Dennison (District 4) said tearing down the iconic building would be an everlasting shame.
• Alex Scott (District 9) urged caution, citing the Stemmons Center debacle.
• Kristen Atwell accused the council of misleading the public and urged repairing City Hall.
• Erica Huddleston (District 14) urged careful deliberation, comparing to Fort Worth’s city hall move.
• Sarah McCarty (District 11) questioned the rush and lack of cost details.
• John Putnam (District 10) urged focus on protecting residents from ICE detainments rather than destroying City Hall.
• Paul Simmons said the issue is a budget problem and decisions should be in the hands of the people.
• Christina Hahn urged preserving the building as cultural infrastructure and warned against short‑term profit.
• Lucy Billingsley supported relocation as a boost to employee morale and downtown vitality.
• Arthur Santa Maria urged a yes vote to get real information for taxpayers.
• Jim Lake (Oak Cliff) supported the process, calling the site a valuable public asset that needs evaluation.
• Amanda Moreno Lake (District 1 business owner) urged moving forward with facts over emotion.
• Christopher Weiss (District 2) asked for a true comparative evaluation and a bond referendum.
• Simon Matthew advocated using ARPA funds to stabilize the current building and pursue historic designation.
• Nicholas McQueen (architect) urged preservation of I.M. Pei’s legacy.
• Sean Todd (preservation developer) supported relocation, citing years of neglect and the need to inject life into downtown.
• Don Dodd – not present.
• Andrew Chubataru – not present.
• John Eichmann (District 9, attorney) warned that the plaza in front of City Hall is a public square and cannot be sold without voter approval.
• Alex Michaels – not present.
• Peyton Jackson (virtual) called the process an illusion, asking for public vote and better meeting conditions.
• Roseanne Meals (District 14) urged a no vote or tabling until court resolution, referencing the Kennedy assassination and ARPA funds.
• Matthew Jacobs – not present.
• Jorge Cruz Sayens questioned charter violations and legal capacity.
• Zaida Basora (longtime city employee) said there is no urgency, repair costs are far less than estimated, and a lease never ends.
• Tamitha Curiel (District 5) read from a 1974 document and warned against deceptive practices.

Discussion Items

Item 1 – Resolution on Relocation Options for City Hall Staff The city manager explained that the resolution authorizes up to $2 million (originally ARPA funds, later changed to general fund contingency reserve) to negotiate pre‑acquisition agreements with no more than four property owners in the Central Business District. The funds would be used to conduct due diligence (environmental studies, test fits, etc.) to provide the council with an apples‑to‑apples comparison of the costs of relocating versus repairing the current building. The council stressed that this is not a vote to move or demolish; final decisions require a future council vote. Councilmember West moved to swap the funding source from ARPA to general fund contingency, which was approved. Multiple amendments were proposed and rejected (see Key Outcomes). After extensive debate, the motion passed 9‑5‑1.

Item 2 – Resolution on Relocation Options for 911 and Emergency Operations This item mirrored Item 1 but focused on 911/EOC staff and functions, with a funding cap of $1 million (also changed from ARPA to contingency reserve). Councilmember Mendelson offered several amendments aimed at ensuring secure parking, continuity of operations, and that any new facility would be equal or better than the current 911 center. All amendments failed on votes of 5‑9‑1. The main motion passed 9‑5‑1.

Key Outcomes

• Item 1 passed (9‑5‑1): Councilmember West’s motion to approve authorizing the city manager to negotiate pre‑acquisition agreements for up to four CBD sites, with $2 million from general fund contingency reserve (replacing ARPA funds). Funds are for due diligence only; no purchase or lease is authorized. Results to be presented to council by August 2026.
• Item 2 passed (9‑5‑1): Same authorization for 911 and emergency operations relocation due diligence, with $1 million from general fund contingency reserve. Results due by August 2026.
• All amendments to both items were rejected (each 5‑9‑1): These included requirements for non‑binding language, parking, public assembly space, security, redundancy, timelines, and funding limits. The council also rejected restrictions on considering properties with existing city tenants.
• The council will hold a regular meeting following the special called meeting; a public safety bond program item is expected on the June 24, 2026 agenda.