Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
00:08Election might be over, but the debates are just getting started. I'm Sarah Zubiate Bennett, and welcome to Let's Talk Local. Today, we're diving into Propositions S and U with 2 strong voices on opposite sides of the issues. Monty Bennett will share why he's all in, while former Dallas mayor Tom Leppert gives us his take on why he's not. It's so important to me as a host of this show to bring a very balanced perspective to every issue, even those that are personal to me. And stick around. After hearing their perspectives, we're heading to Community Beer Company for a chat about what these results mean for Dallas HERO and our city's future. Thanks for tuning in, and don't forget to like and subscribe so you're always in the loop.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
00:48Hello. Thank you for joining me on Let's Talk Local, Gentlemen. I am looking forward to the interview today. I know you are both very passionate about some issues that we're gonna be covering, but I think that that contributes to some really meaningful dialogue, especially because both of you are highly successful, highly accomplished, gentlemen. Tom here, Tom Leppert is a former Mayor of Dallas. He served from 2007 to 2011 and is quite an accomplished, businessman outside of that service as well. Monty Bennett is the President, Chairman and CEO of Ashford Group of Companies. They are both 2 highly intelligent and accomplished gentlemen, and I'm looking forward to the dialogue that we're gonna be having today. If we could, I would like to start with some high points from the city, as it relates to conversation today, and then I wanna dive deep into some of the propositions that brought us here, in all truth. So starting at some of the high level city matters that I believe drive a lot of the conversation that actually developed these propositions to begin with. In this past year, the city of Dallas experienced a significant increase to its budget. The exact amount is $343,000,000 for the total $5,000,000,000 budget. Could you both share your perspectives, beginning with Tom, if you're comfortable, Tom, on how these additional funds have been allocated and if you believe these allocations align with Dallas' most pressing needs?
Tom Leppert:
02:24I will. Thanks for having me, first of all. It's good to be here with with Monty. I think we can talk about the last year, but for me, the concern is really over the course of the last decade, and I think that gives a better example of at least what my concerns are. If you look over the course of the last decade, the operating funds, kind of the basic core budget of the city, has increased about 96%. It's nearly doubled. Even if you take out the component of inflation, it's gone up by 46%.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
02:56That's right.
Tom Leppert:
02:56I think a lot of people, me included, as citizens of of this city, look and say, have we gotten 46% more value? Have we gotten 46% better services? Those sorts of things. And I will tell you that I'm I'm really concerned about that. In the last year, I don't think that's been as much the issue. As you mentioned, nearly $350,000,000, but $250,000,000 of that was additional capital expenditure, which was voted on by the voters of this city, and about $250,000,000 of that. If you look at the operating budget, again, the core part of it, that went up around $65,000,000. The actual increase in public safety was $78,000,000. So in that sense, I think there was good steps made from something that I think Monty and I are both gonna be in agreement on, and that is a primary role of the city is public safety. So if you look at it, I'm more concerned about the long term, that last 10 years and the increase in spending. This last year, I think, has actually been more in line, and the priorities have been more focused on public safety, things that I'm concerned about, and less on some of the other social or what I'll call noncore programs that the city has initiated over the 10 years. So that's really my concern.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
04:08Okay. Thank you, Tom. Monty, could you share your perspectives on this?
Monty Bennett:
04:13I think I have a view that a lot of the voters have, which is a feeling that the money's just disappear someplace. As I drive around the city and look around the city, the city is not any cleaner. The roads aren't any better. The, policing will get modestly better than modestly worse. We are not getting a value for all this additional money, and you hear stories about people and their property taxes and how much they've gone up, and they're really pricing people out of their own homes. It's terrible. But when you look around, we don't get 46% more value. We get less. In most businesses and in areas of life, as volume increases, the cost to deliver a product or service typically decreases. So it's the old economies of scale except in larger American cities. It's just the reverse. The more money that cities have per capita, the worse services are. And it's a terrible phenomenon that is happening across our country and is happening in Dallas. And I fear for Dallas because, Dallas is on the path of some of these other large cities, and they are declining in livability. And, they're not as far as long as some of these other big cities, but they're on the path, and that's a problem.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
05:45Yes. I agree with you. If you all have not had the chance to read Mark Moses's book, my interview would him some time ago, it actually speaks to this exact issue. I'm actually eager to explore some of the propositions that placed you both on opposing sides of these particular amendments, specifically relating to Propositions S and U. They're now law. I know they diverged on the actual strategies to achieve particular goals in the city. Since they're now law if we could begin with Tom again, can you share your insights on the challenges and the opportunities that these laws are going to bring to Dallas?
Tom Leppert:
06:27Well, the effect of them, I think we're gonna find out over the course of the next several years. As you mentioned, I was opposed to them. I think you would find that Monty and I, and hopefully most of the people in Dallas, agree with kind of the underlying pinnings. Do we want more accountability? Absolutely. Do we want better public safety and more police officers? Absolutely. I'll give you a personal perspective on that. In the period that I was mayor, we increased the police force larger from a proportional standpoint than any other city in the last 75 years. So as a poster child, I guess, I'm front and center on this because as mayor, I increased the police force more than we've seen in 75, years in any any city. So I am clearly in favor of more police officers and understand where it should go. My issue, however, on the propositions is they weren't very well thought out, and there's some unintended consequence, and we'll talk about those, unintended consequences come into play. I'm concerned that and, again, we'll find out over time the effect of these. But if I look at them, the sort of things I see could happen and probably will happen, actually make the problems much worse. They increase the cost to the taxpayers, which I don't wanna do, and take flexibility out of managing crime, which I saw as mayor, the necessity to be able to do, to be flexible and move those. It allow it it doesn't permit that, and those are the things that give me real concern. It also puts us in a position that no city's ever been in. One of the propositions that was passed, eliminate sovereign immunity for the city. There is no city, no county, no state in the entire nation that has ever done that. I don't want us to be an experiment in that game. That's one that I think has a number of different consequences that are all going to be negative for the city, and I think we've seen some of that come. We had a, the outlook for our city from an independent bond agency, took that down. So we can talk about some of the pieces, but that's really it. So from a philosophy standpoint, I think we're in agreement. More accountability, more public safety, we we both want that. It's a matter of how to get there, and I don't think these do that.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
08:45Okay. Thank you, Tom. Monty, would you be so kind to share your insights on the challenges and opportunities that these laws will bring into play?
Monty Bennett:
08:55Sure. Back to American cities generally and then applied here to Dallas, is cities as they grow, seem to go through a process where they're pretty responsible to the people. They meet core needs of the citizens to, to provide street repair and cleanliness and, crime reduction and safety and these kinds of things. And then something happens at a certain size where cities stop doing that. And you see that in all of our major markets. And that turning point for our city was when Tom left in, 2011, and it started to change. And if you look over at Fort Worth, Fort Worth hasn't changed yet. They're still very focused on these issues. In fact, the crime in downtown Dallas is 6 times worse on a per capita basis than the crime in downtown Fort Worth. And it's just amazing how different these stats are. But Fort Worth is close, and I believe Fort Worth is gonna cross over this invisible line here in the next decade and start to go down this path of poor city services, mismanagement, and the like. And the city of Dallas crossed that line in 2011, 2012, and it has not been responsive to the needs of the people since. And I believe that what Tom would like to do, and we've had other private conversations about how he'd like to see this come about is appropriate and the right way to do it before a city crosses that line. But after it crosses that line, I don't see that working anymore. I think that the city council, our city council, and our city government needs a jolt.
Monty Bennett:
10:42The people have to come in and put the marker down and say no more of this. You need to be responsive to us. And that's what I think that these charter amendments do. They inform the city, and they tell the city how important these objectives are to them because the city council has gone off in all kinds of other directions with all kinds of other priorities and why they talk the talk about these being important. The facts on the ground show that they're just not important to them in the way they spend money, in the way that they conduct themselves on the city council. And we've crossed that Rubicon here in Dallas many years ago, and we need something different.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
11:20Thank you. How should the city strategically plan to ensure successful implementation of these laws since they're now law, while addressing the concerns that you've raised? Starting with Tom, please.
Tom Leppert:
11:35My concern is and really the premise of your question, the ability to deal with those is now outside the city. They're gonna have very little options to be able to to deal with these. They're very specified on where monies need to be spent on the crime side. My concern with that, as I mentioned a moment ago, eliminates the flexibility. When I was mayor, we had some great progress on fighting crime. We were we clearly led the nation in reduction in in crime, in places cities would have loved to have been in in the position that the Dallas were. But some of it is not just police officers. There are a number of different options that you wanna have. For instance, today, technology is a much more important part of it, using cameras, etcetera. So some of it, you don't need the same numbers of police officers if you can use technology, which is a great thing, and it happens and affects all businesses. That's one example. Another example was Monty mentioned the downtown issue, which I'm also concerned about. But in downtown, you can use public safety officers, ones that aren't fully trained and at the compensation level of 1 of the full police officers, and use those. And those are very effective in dealing with homelessness, etcetera, pulling people off the street, those sorts of things. Much more cost effective for the taxpayers.
Tom Leppert:
12:54It doesn't allow that flexibility to change because they are part of the constitution of the city now, and they get built in. As we look at the other amendment, which as I mentioned, takes out sovereign immunity, the question then becomes what is the real flexibility? And I'm afraid what will happen, and I hope that this isn't the case, but I think this is I think you're starting to see some signs already, that it allows any lawsuit to be thrown in front of the city. And and and let me give you a couple of examples of of that that are real concerns. If Monty's planning an addition to his house, that would usually be something where the city would give a building permit and would go off in that, but there are regulations and city charter laws that talk about overcrowding, talk about, different pieces of that. If I don't like that, I can actually bring suit against the city, and hold Monty up. That's not just on a residential. Think of us bringing in a new business. There may be a very attractive business that we're trying to bring in, but yet there could be a very small number of people that don't want that. They can bring suit the city and delay it. The other piece of that is a lot of what otherwise has been policy down at city hall can now be determined by judges in Dallas County. My sense is and my guess is those are judges that Monty would never vote for, because they tend to be left leaning, and it really pushes the potential of having decisions being made by justice, by judges, as opposed to the people that have been elected. That, I think, is a real concern.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
14:31Thank you. Monty, could you speak to some of these issues that I just asked about, please?
Monty Bennett:
14:38Sure. Thank you. What goes on down at city hall is what I call the great con. And what I mean by that is politicians, and there's reasons people don't like politicians. And it's because what they do is they'll say one thing and then do another.
Monty Bennett:
14:54And so they talk about the importance of public safety and how they want to improve public safety, but they're not genuine. And some are, but many aren't. And the con that's been going on at city hall for a number of years now is where they state proudly that they've budgeted for an additional 250 officers in the budget. And they cluck around and talk about how they care about public safety. Then over the course of the year, they announced that, well, they tried really hard, but shucks, they can't quite hire these 250 officers like they wanted. And it's a recruiting problem, and, gosh, they can't do it. And, well, they better just go spend that money someplace else. And they spend it someplace else, and then we lose as many officers as the number that we gain, and no progress is ever made. And the truth is is that we don't pay our officers enough. We just don't. We have, many, many open positions. And if you go up to Plano, they have a waiting line. And there's a waiting line in Plano because in Plano, they do what this amendment now forces the city of Dallas to do, which is to conduct a survey of all the police departments and to pay their people in the top five of all North Texas police departments. So they have a waiting list, and we can't hire anybody. And so the con is is that if the city council would raise the pay of our officers, they could fill all those positions tomorrow morning.
Monty Bennett:
16:28That's a fact. But they won't do that. They'll pretend like the problem is something else, and it's because of this or because they don't have an academy or these other kinds of reasons, and it's insulting. It's insulting to me. It's insulting to the voters because we all know that they could fill those positions tomorrow morning if they were sincere, and they're not sincere. Tom was sincere when he was mayor and wanted to build up that police force. And because he was sincere, he got it done. But our city council is not sincere, and they haven't been sincere for a long time. And so this forces them to do the right thing because they haven't been doing the right thing for 15 years. And it's a terrible shame, but, it's come a time where the citizens have said, time's up. You had your chance.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
17:16Oh, no. Were you gonna say something, Tom?
Tom Leppert:
17:18In a lot of ways, I agree with Monty.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
17:21Mhmm.
Tom Leppert:
17:21From a business standpoint, it's a supply demand issue, and I do think there's some opportunities to do a much better job of both pay and of recruiting of of officers that would make a difference. So, actually, on on that piece, we're gonna agree. Where I would tend to, again, be concerned about what we're doing is that for for instance, in the amendment itself, it excludes front end bonuses. When we recruited officers, we were very successful by using front end bonuses. That has the advantage of putting monies on the table to recruit individuals, but it doesn't mean that we're gonna pay them for the next 30 years at those levels. It's kind of a front end, so we don't have the compounding effect that you go in. So that gives a lot more flexibility, both in terms of the recruiting. By this charter amendment, we can't do that anymore, or it doesn't count for the dollars that are counted into the survey, those sorts of things. As I said later, some of the dollars now, different 10 years later, I'd actually put in technology and different types of officers, which I talked about about before. Again, this doesn't give the flexibility.
Tom Leppert:
18:30Can the city do a better job of hiring those officers? Agreed. Not a question. But we still need to have that flexibility to go forward, and it eliminates the flexibility. And importantly, this charter amendment doesn't do everything that Monty said, in the sense that if they don't hire those officers, nothing happens.
Tom Leppert:
18:50The money just kind of goes in an escrow account and sits there. So it doesn't really ensure that the people that's down at city hall are gonna do any better job than they have have done. Again, I'd rather see real results come about, and really push our people to be creative, to think about how to flexibility use that, how to be reduce crime more cost effectively for for the taxpayers, how to focus on the key areas, which is an absolutely critical point. Keep in mind that over the course of the last 6 years, we've seen crime actually go down in the city of Dallas, and compared to some of the other cities, for instance, in other large cities, Houston, San Antonio, violent crime in Dallas is far lower than those cities. Total crime is far lower in in in those cities. And year to date, we've seen a reduction in, violent crime about 20, 25 percent of homicides, 30% over the course a year to date.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
19:48Okay. Monty, would you do me a favor and respond to what, Tom has just said, but also, in your opinion, can you also speak to some of the changes or some of the different climate that exists today versus whenever he served as mayor? Because I know you're speaking about this flexibility, Tom, but they've had this flexibility, in the past, yet we're saddled with these particular issues. Monty, do you have any response to that? And then I'll let you weigh in in just a moment.
Monty Bennett:
20:21Sure. The city's had this flexibility, and flexibility is helpful, but they haven't used it. And, I think the right saying is is that, you know, I'd rather, the crime problem be addressed, by these amendments in the wrong way than not being addressed at all by the city council today. And if you look at the crime stats, and I have them right here, from the FBI, and this is a list of, the top 25 cities by population in the United States, and it ranks them by violent crime, property crime, and a combo of total crime. And Dallas is, I think, 14 out of 25 for total crime with number 1 being the lowest crime rate.
Monty Bennett:
21:08And if you look at violent crime, it's at 11, and in property crime, it's number 15. So it's right in the middle of the pack. So it's no great shakes, and I want us to be number 1. Why shouldn't Dallas be the lowest crime city of the top 25 in the country? There's no reason for it not to be. Dallas is not a standout as far as low crime. It's just not. I think that the city council has had 15 years to take advantage of that flexibility that you took advantage of, but they haven't, and I have no reason to believe that they'll change their behavior. And I don't think it's fair for the citizens of Dallas to suffer through much worse crime conditions because the city council can't get their act together. And this amendment, the one about the Dallas police, will allow them to use bonuses. It just doesn't count towards the comparison of starting pay. But they can use bonuses. They still have flexibility. It's just in some areas they don't. And on that sinking fund, they can use the money next year, which wouldn't be terrible if the city of Dallas ran a surplus for a year and then used it, more appropriately the next year. So the the city of Dallas just needs to get it together.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
22:22Okay. Yep. I do agree with that. Thank you so much. I'm gonna switch over to something that I think was a really was quite a standout statistic whenever you were mayor, or I guess the period of time is gonna overlap the time in which you were mayor. So Dallas used to lead the the nation in crime reduction between 2003 and 2013. So it was that particular decade. And, again, you served from 2007 to 2011. And it Dallas achieved a remarkable 50% decrease during that time compared to a 26% average among the top 25 cities. However, over the past decade, the progress has slowed significantly with only a 2% reduction in crime from 2013 to 2023 and a concerning 11% increase since 2019. What do you believe, beginning with Tom again, if we could, have contributed to the stagnation and the rise in recent crime?
Tom Leppert:
23:26Well, you've got a period there when we went through the COVID.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
23:28That's right.
Tom Leppert:
23:29And so that's a real issue. And the biggest decreases in that period of time that you talked about were the 2007 to 2011 piece. I'm using the same numbers that that Monty is. What you really need to do and what the comparison is is you look at the 9 largest cities. Those are the cities in the United States that have a population of over a million. If you look at that from violent crime, we're the 2nd or third lowest in terms of violent crime, which which is the key. And again, our challenge for the most part is property crime. I think there's been good progress made on the violent crime. The property crime does continue to be a a concern and an issue.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
24:07You believe that COVID was what Well, there was a period of COVID.
Tom Leppert:
24:11I think you need to look at
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
24:13the stagnation.
Tom Leppert:
24:13You need to look at the FBI statistics. In that period of COVID, we ended up with violent crime increasing across the nation, unfortunately.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
24:22Monty, do you have any additional insights to what you believe may have contributed to the stagnation and the situation that exists today?
Monty Bennett:
24:30Sure. Mismanagement mismanagement by our city. We crossed that line in around 2,010, 2013, and, the city has just been mismanaged. And, the crime problem is not, nuclear physics. It is not like one of Elon Musk's, rocket ships. It's not hard to solve. There's just not the political will. And the people that, sit around the have their own priorities. They have their own pet projects. They have their own buddies that they want to give contracts to, and they can't do it all. So what they do is they talk about wanting to introduce, a reduced crime and wanting to hire these 250 officers and then doing the con and the bait and switch, and, oh, well, we don't have that money. We'd better spend it over here on these pet projects and my buddies and all these other kinds of things. And that's the problem. And that's the ethos that has taken over and takes over every city in the United States, unfortunately, once they get to certain size. And that's what has happened in Dallas, and Fort Worth is on the verge of moving that direction. And I think if we don't want that to happen, we need to do something serious and major because there's no reason to believe that it's gonna get any better. There's no reason to believe that, next election that all of a sudden we're gonna have city council people that are serious about getting crime down. So I think that this was a great, impulse by the people to stand up and say, no more. This is important to us. We want crime down. And they've spoken, and I think the real issue is, will the city continue to try and thwart the will of the people? Because the city tried many ways to not have these, amendments get on the ballot. They've tried to, have other amendments go on that surreptitiously, negate these, propositions without anybody knowing it. They're sneaky. And, again, this is why people hate politicians because of all these sneaky tricks, and it's gotta stop. And if it doesn't stop, then the people are gonna keep taking the power into their own hands to get what they want, and I hope it wakes up our city council.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
26:53It seems to me like it's even an issue of political ideology versus political reality. So I agree with with what both of you are saying, but if I'm understanding you, or I guess the point that you're trying to make, it's ideology, or it's an ideal situation that would actually exist. It's more idealistic to think that the council is in a shape today where their meeting of the minds would produce the flexibility or would would produce honesty and integrity
Monty Bennett:
27:34Would take advantage of the flexibility.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
27:37Exactly. And would adequately implement the flexibility versus what you're saying, I don't believe you think that exists today or that type of prudence on the council. But if you can, go ahead just, speak to that for your 2 minutes, please.
Monty Bennett:
27:53Sure. It's just a matter of practicality. The the city council for 15 years has shown that, they cannot take advantage of these processes and and implement the flexibility that you did or other mayors may have to solve problems. They're not interested. They are interested in their own objectives and their own ideologies. And so it's a matter of, do I want a perfect solution that I can't ever get to, in my opinion, or a pretty good solution that is achievable? And so that's how I kind of look at it. It's not as ideal as how you solve the problem years ago, but we don't have the city council we had 15 years ago. And, under the current conditions and as far as I can tell for the foreseeable future, we're not going to. I don't think anybody has any reason to believe that we're gonna have a city council that, was aligned with you like it was back in, in the 2000,2010 time frame. So it's either, getting it done unperfectly or not getting it done. And so I'd rather get it done one way or the other. And I think most voters are the same way. I don't think the voters, as they showed in in their votes, are so interested in these the nuances because they've had to suffer under these bad policies.
Monty Bennett:
29:24And it's our friends in the black and brown communities that suffer the most. They're the victims of crime more than whites are. And interestingly, if you look at the votes, they're the ones that proportionally voted a lot more for these amendments than the whites did because they are the ones that suffer under the crime. And so I think that if we wanna show compassion to the people in the black and brown community, we need to listen to what they're saying, and, they want more police protection. They are not happy with the city. And people and whites that live in nice neighborhoods, they can hire their own local patrol. I moved to Highland Park because of these problems in Dallas, and wealthier people, not always white, but often, can move to areas where these problems don't exist. And meanwhile, our poorest members of our communities are the ones that suffer, and they shouldn't have to suffer another 15 years until we get the right city council to take advantage. So I think it is that. I think it's doing it, from my standpoint, the the the 100% perfect way versus, I think, it hasn't been happening. And so, well, let's do it, in my view, the 90% way, and, and at least get it done.
Tom Leppert:
30:47But the nuances make a difference, and it's not a question of is it short of perfect. As I've said, I think these result in real problems, problems that are going to hurt the city, and that just pushes us further back. We need to go forward.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
31:03And if you could, Tom, can you speak to those problems? A question that I'm gonna ask later is relating to Moody's, but can you be specific in what you mean by really severe problems?
Tom Leppert:
31:18So in the policing one, it doesn't allow the flexibility of where to put dollars. As I've talked about before, there are ways that you can put dollars much more effectively than police officers and deal with crime. Again, I wanna see more police officers. Don't get me wrong on that, but there are places downtown, etcetera, where using, public safety officers, those sorts of things are gonna be much more effective and cost effective for the taxpayers. Again, let's reduce the cost of government. Let's not blatantly go in and start increasing the cost of government when we don't need to do it. There's other expenditures that I think are important too. Technology, etcetera, things that that that I've talked about there.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
31:59And can you expand on that? You keep saying technology. What does that mean?
Tom Leppert:
32:03Using cameras. Sometimes it's a lot better to have the cameras and have operators operate those through artificial intelligence, identifying where there are crime issues and those sorts of things. It's important to understand that in the city of Dallas, about 40% of the crime is about 6% of the area of the city, of the geographic area. Even more than that, about 10% is in about 0.5% of of the area of the city. So you can use technology to focus in on specific areas that are gonna be beneficial. Again, this isn't particularly insightful from me or the city of Dallas. Other cities across the nation, we actually use that. Chicago, New York had been much more pioneers on using some of the technology, and you're seeing that now much more than even when when I was was in office. Then to go to the other amendment, I think that's the real concern. I think the the additional lawsuits that can come on the city are gonna increase the cost of of doing business. The city's gonna have to respond to every single one of these. I think that's a real problem. 2 is I think that you have the unintended consequences, that I mentioned, that you can hold up projects that need to go forward, it will create and Dallas today doesn't have a very good reputation, to be frank with you, of how it processes, permits, zoning, etcetera, those those sorts of things. This can come to an absolute halt now. So if I'm a business looking to move into Dallas, and I see that it's a very uncertain environment just to even get a building permit, that may make me pull away from doing business in Dallas.
Tom Leppert:
33:41That's not good for the tax base. That's not good for the taxpayers. There's also the way this is built in. Although you can't sue the city for damages, it's built in that attorney's fees, which have profit components attached for the attorneys, that's built into it. So if I'm a plaintiff's attorney, and I'm sure you deal with lots of plaintiff's attorneys, plaintiff's attorneys, there's a real incentive now to bring lawsuits against the city because they get paid for it. They actually get paid for it. It's those sorts of things that can all be dangerous. And then we can talk about the the Moody's piece. That was, I think, an outside indication that people are looking at least from a skeptical standpoint on what the effect of these will have long term to the financial stability of the city of Dallas.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
34:29Thank you. And, Monty, do you have anything that you wanna add to to that?
Monty Bennett:
34:34I think whenever there's change or something's different, there's concerns about what other effects there might be, what unintended consequences there there might be. And, unfortunately, that many times, puts a, a governor on change, and we need change. We need better crime. We need our city to follow its own laws and to follow state laws. That needs to happen. There is a a tremendous, homelessness, camping problem in our city. There are literally 100's of homelessness camping sites, and state law requires that they be taken down and that these people get the help that they need. And the city just doesn't comply. And they just choose which laws they think are important and which laws they don't think are important. And, look, I can't do that. I can't decide which laws are important for me to follow and which laws are not important. I have to follow them all, and every citizen in Dallas has to. And if they don't, they either get fined or they go to jail. And so all that other amendment says is just follow the law, city of Dallas. And the worst thing that happens to the city of Dallas is not that they're fined, not that they go to jail, which is kind of unfair.
Monty Bennett:
35:51I don't know why I get fined and go to jail, but the city doesn't. But all that charter amendment does is, say, hey, you gotta follow the law now. And as far as those attorney's fees, they only get attorney's fees if they win predominantly on the issue, and that's up to the judge, and that's a big risk. And that should, provide a a concern on anybody that's litigious and wants to jump out and, and take advantage of that. So we'll see.
Monty Bennett:
36:19And if it has to be tweaked, then it needs to be tweaked. But the city has to follow the law. And, I think it's time that this happened. This is a movement, I think, that's beginning in America where citizens are holding their government more accountable to say you can't just take all this money from us, just vast amounts of money, run up extraordinary debts. This city, whenever it has the ability to take on more debt, it takes on more debt, and it takes on 20, 30 year debt, and instead of spending it on objects that will last 20, 30 years, like a construction project, they'll spend it on something like, operating supplies and pencils that are gone, in the next day. It's ridiculous, and I think that's what needs to change.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
37:07Okay. And thank you for that. I appreciate it. Did you have something to add to this, Tom?
Tom Leppert:
37:11Take on debt. That task to take the voters' approval, so voters, the very same voters that we talked about a moment ago, they're the ones that go out and give their approval to be able to to to do that, and that that becomes critical. And again, I wanna stress, in terms of this sue the city, there is no city, there is no county, there is no state in the nation that has ever gone this route
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
37:34That's correct.
Tom Leppert:
37:35That has ever gone this route.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
37:36That's right. That is right.
Monty Bennett:
37:38I think Dallas should be a leader, don't you, Tom?
Tom Leppert:
37:41Not in this case. I sure don't want it to be an experiment where you can end up having, lawsuits come in. The city has to respond to all those. The taxpayers have to pay for a a a big chunk of that, probably all of it, that's not good for the city. That that again Well, so far more of a problem.
Monty Bennett:
37:59It's been a month, and there's not been one lawsuit, so we'll see.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
38:03There's clearly a difference, I think, on the interpretation of these particular laws, S and U, these charter amendments. Do you believe that there's been any misinformation or falsehoods, Monty, shared or that still exist today regarding these particular amendments?
Monty Bennett:
38:28Oh, yes. I think the city and its allies, and I can't say, Tom, whether you were involved or not, spread out, all kinds of just outright fabrications about what these, proposed amendments and now amendments say. And it's a shame because it scares people. For example, the one about suing, allows people to sue the city to make them to follow the law. But, the side, opposing these amendments went out and told everybody that, individuals can be sued and held personally liable. Police can be held personally liable, city workers. A friend of mine that volunteers for the city says he has trouble with, a bunch of other volunteers for the city because they've all believed now that they are going to, have personal liability and be sued because of this charter amendment. And that was not something that the pro charter people said. That was what the anti charter people said. It's just a lie.
Monty Bennett:
39:23That's not in the charter amendment. And there's all kinds of other provisions. I don't know how much time you wanna give me, but, the idea that, I think one city council person was complaining, oh, we can't hire a 1,000, people, cops in a year and and would have to lower our standards. Well, it doesn't call for hiring a 1,000 police officers in a year. And, so I don't know if this person is just ignorant and didn't read it or if she's purposefully, deceiving people, but there's quite a few around this. And they're just scare tactics, and the world's gonna end. And, you know, it's just a shame because in the end, the messaging for the anti crowd spent 8 to 1 against the crowd that was pro it. And, despite all this heavy, heavy messaging against it and even with all these outright lies, they still passed. And I think that tells you what the citizens think of what when city leadership tells them something, whether they believe them or not. And they don't believe them because politicians have a bad rep, nothing personal.
Monty Bennett:
40:32You've not been one for quite some times. But they say things that that just aren't true. And so, unfortunately, there's not a good dialogue about the merits of it because, at least in this case, one side just promulgated lie after lie to scare people. And, if you wanted democracy, that's not the way to do it. And it's it's shameful. It really is because, a lot of politicians, current and former, were behind all these flat out lies, and it just is the reason why they pass because people hate them for all these lies. It's it's a it's a terrible shame.
Tom Leppert:
41:09Thank you. I I've read them. I've visited with attorneys that don't have a dog in the fight on what the implications are, and the sort of things I've said are the same things that I'm saying to you today, so there's no difference in what I said previously or what I'm saying today. I think it is important to note that every major business group in the city of Dallas came out opposed to these, and these are people that their interest in seeing Dallas go forward, additional businesses coming in, protecting the business that they're here, and they all came out against it too. I think the reason they passed is pretty straightforward.
Tom Leppert:
41:43It is a great headline. It's a headline, as we've said several times today, we all agree on. Do we want more accountability? Do we want more police officers? The answer is yes. Unfortunately, however, and it's probably it is the problem that I talked about earlier of trying to put policy into a charter, into a constitutional amendment, trying to explain all the intricacies, the details, the problems that come, the unintended consequences, you can't you you can't explain those to the populace. It's one of the reasons that we have a republic and not a democracy, is issues have to be decided because the nuances are important, the details are important. They have to be decided by elected officials of of the government. We put the responsibility on those people because you can't have every single issue come to every single person in this in this city or in this nation to vote on. It just is too difficult, and people don't have the time, the expertise to be able to understand all of the elements of it. It's the reason that our forefathers came up with a republic and not a democracy as they had in ancient Greece.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
42:52Thank you. Monty, did you wanna respond to this?
Monty Bennett:
42:55Sure. A number of business groups came out for it. Metropolitan Civic and Business Association and the Stemmons Corridor, business groups were for these. And a number of them, came out, against them, a number of the business groups. The problem is is when you go look at the membership of these groups, you see former mayors and other politicians in them. These are what are called captured agencies or captured organizations. And many of them do a lot of business with the city and receive the grift from the city. And so they are not independent, organizations. They are part, in some aspect, part of the problem. They become addicted to city revenue, and so they will never do or say anything against what city hall wants to do because, then their own ox gets scored.
Monty Bennett:
43:49And it's a dynamic that is happening at the federal level, and it's a dynamic that happens here in the city. And it's a terrible, terrible shame, a reason why people don't trust corporations either because they care more, many of them, about the revenues that they receive from the city's largesse than they do about the safety and security of the citizens. And, that's something that's a shame, but you do have some business organizations that, really stood up and did the right thing for this.
Tom Leppert:
44:20I have to respond to that because that's just not true. And I speak from personal experience.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
44:24Go ahead.
Tom Leppert:
44:25I led, prior to service in the city, I led the Dallas Regional Chamber. I was the chairman of it. I was a member of a number of different business organizations while I was the CEO of a Fortune 500 company here and was involved in those, And I can give you time and example of times we came out against the city, we came out against the local school board, other governmental agencies, because it wasn't in the interest of business, it wasn't interest in the interest of the city of Dallas. So to say that those business organizations are tied in with city government just isn't true. If you went down and looked at the list of those businesses and the work and the percentage of business that they have with the city, you would have to have a lot of decimal points before you would ever get to it.
Tom Leppert:
45:07That just wasn't, an accurate statement when you talk about the Dallas Regional Chamber, when you talk about downtown business, when you talk about the North Dallas Chamber, when you talk about the, Real Estate Council, those sorts of organizations.
Monty Bennett:
45:22Those organizations have changed. And, you know, over time, years ago, DCC, Dallas Citizens Council, was much more willing to, take strong positions, but I've seen that changed in the past 5, 8 years where, they got beat up pretty good a number of years ago for some of the positions that they took, and now they're church mice, and they won't oppose, things that the city does. In fact, you've got, former, city mayors, even members of it now. And it's a shame because I think that it's lost its punch and its, ability to speak well for the business community. But, that's my belief and that's what I've seen over time, just a personal perspective, and I'm involved in many of them. My firm's involved in in just about every one of the organizations that, are involved in promoting business in Dallas. And, many of them have gotten weak kneed over the years, and, it's it's a detriment to our city.
Tom Leppert:
46:24We'll just leave that as a disagreement, because I work with those people on a day to day basis, and I see people that are willing to stand up for wherever they think something's wrong, and they'll take whatever position they need to do to push our city forward. So we can just leave that as a disagreement.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
46:40Sure. Moving over to the Moody's credit outlook. So the it's revised, the Dallas credit outlook, from stable to negative, citing concerns over the financial implications of the Proposition U. to prevent an actual downgrade, the city must demonstrate effective financial management and strategic planning to address these particular concerns. Key recommended actions include developing a comprehensive implementation plan, ensuring financial flexibility, engaging with stakeholders, and monitoring progress reports. What other additions can each of you make to this list?
Tom Leppert:
47:15Again, as I've said before, a number of those things that they're asking for, are outside the control of the city. The amount of lawsuits that come. The city is not gonna be able to control that. They're gonna have to respond. That's gonna be additional cost that go into it.
Tom Leppert:
47:30Clearly, Moody's is concerned about those sorts of issues. The flexibility of that, clearly, Moody's is pushing on the flexibility. They believe these propositions reduce the flexibilities that I've said going forward. So while there can be a number of things done from kind of a paper planning standpoint, a number of the variables are outside the control of the city, which, again, is one of my my my concerns. Now, again, my also, my hope is that we'll look several years down the line, and some of the things I'm talking about won't be an issue. I honestly don't think that'll be the case, but that would be my hope because that's that would be in the best interest of of of the city, but we'll have to find out. I just don't wanna have... I just am uncomfortable that we put the city in this type of position at a time when we are attracting new businesses, this city and this region are really the focal point today of the economy of the United States. Every day. I mean, if you look at at the economy of the United States today, this is this is ground 0. This is where jobs are being created. This is where people are being moved. Companies are being moved here. This is where you wanna be. Doing these sorts of things, I think, endangers that. And I just think the future, the next 20 years should be much brighter than even the last 20 years as successful as we've been. Taking actions like this of eliminating sovereign immunity, putting us in the position of additional cost to the taxpayers, those sorts of things, It's just risks that I don't think are necessary. But, again, in 10 years, we'll be able to have hindsight on our side, and we'll figure out exactly what the implications are.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
49:07Yes.
Monty Bennett:
49:08I agree with Tom. I just come at it from a different perspective. You have something like 400 people a day moving to the metroplex, but I can tell you where they're not moving. They're not moving to the city of Dallas. The city of Dallas is losing population, and it has every year for quite a number of years now.
Monty Bennett:
49:24And so as the center point, as the, probably, the focal point of this whole area, how is it that it gains 400 people a day, but the city of Dallas loses people? Well, there's a reason, and that because there's a rot that's going on in city hall and in the center of the city, and it's happened to every major city in the United States. And as cities get to a certain size, this rot starts to happen, and the rot needs to turn around. And I think that there's always, reasons not to do something. I think there's always reasons not to be bold and to go off in a different direction. And to me, they're scare tactics. Oh, you don't wanna do this because of this. Oh, you don't wanna do this. Oh, scare, scare, scare, the bond rating or this, that, the other. I mean, the point is is what difference does it make what our bond rating is is if people keep leaving our city. They're leaving, and they've left every year for I don't know how many years. So we have to do something new and different. There's a saying, if you keep doing what you've been doing, you're gonna keep getting what you've been getting.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
50:32Monty, does Dallas HERO have any plans at this point in the role that it would like to play with respect to these amendments?
Monty Bennett:
50:43Dallas HERO is a group of individuals, of which I'm one, that wanna see these changes, in the city. And, Dallas HERO, myself included, approached a number of people in the city about trying to get some of these changes done and were rebuffed and talked to and said platitudes to, and and and, of course, nothing happened, nothing changed. And the people involved, the Dallas HERO, and the 179,000 (CORRECTION: IT was actually 169,000) people that signed the petitions to put these on the ballot and the 100 of 1,000 that voted for them, they just want a city that's what I think we all want, which is responsive to the citizens, is safe, is clean, is livable, takes care of our homeless people the right way, and that's what they want to see. And so, they're going to look at, is the city being responsible and being responsive? And if so, great. Then they can go back and just continue to live their lives. But if not, if the city council and city management continues to ignore the basics of city function, then they will be back. And we'll put more, charter amendments on the ballots. We'll put, petition driven ordinances on the ballot and continue to push initiatives to have our city be what we all want it to be. But they're just not, they're just not okay with being being, I guess the right way of saying is that they're just not gonna take the platitudes anymore, and, they want to see real change. And, if it happens, well, then they're fine. If not, then they'll take initiative.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
52:31Excellent. Thank you. And, Tom, given your extensive expertise in both public service and corporate leadership, what specific guidance or advisory support do you plan to offer the city at this point with respect to these particular amendments, if any if any?
Tom Leppert:
52:51Yeah. I I will continue to be a voice, you know, in opportunities like this to say where I think the city has fallen short. At other times, I'm going to be a great cheerleader for the city because, again, I think the city and this region have 20 years ahead of it that are going to be phenomenal, and the only thing that's gonna stop that is our own internal actions. They're not external actions that are gonna do that. This is gonna be a great 20 years as long as we don't mess it up. What I would hope is that community can work together on these issues. As you've heard over the course of the last hour or so or whatever we spent time today I think there's a number of areas where the city needs to do a better job, and I hope I, as well as a lot of other people in this community, will continue to be a voice. I applaud people that go out and get votes on things and and push change and those sorts of things, because I think that's a real part of our government, our democracy, here in the United States and here locally. My only objection, and I and I wish the conversation would have been open, with a 179,000 signatures, influence on people.
Tom Leppert:
54:01The one thing I'd I'd have them do is let's change things the way we need to change it, and that's change the people down at city hall then. Use those resources, both man money, but also a 179,000, because that is a powerful force. You can basically change the entire city council. You've got the total votes of the entire city council there. You don't like what they're doing? Change them. Because that's the quickest way that you're going to get change. It's not through these charter amendments that have either good or bad, depending on how you look at them, but clearly risks attached to them. Get people down there that have the confidence that on a day to day basis, not once every 2 years, but on a day to day basis, go in and advocate what you're saying. That's what we do in in in November on a national basis. I hope that that's what you'll see on the local level, but that's the way that you're gonna make real change, is to get people down at city council that are really committed to the sort of changes that we're talking about, and are gonna make a difference, and are willing to make a difference, and are more considerate more concerned about the city than they are about their own political view. And that's not a comment locally, that's a comment nationally. And until we have people that, again, are committed to coming in, making change, improving things, and doing it when it's not in their own political interests, we're not gonna see the change that we need on either national or local level. Enough soapbox. I'm sorry.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
55:22No. Not a problem. Monty? I just wanna, thank Tom for caring. Too many people in this city don't care until, it's too big of a problem. And you care. Not only do you care, but you get involved. And you were not only mayor, but you don't even have to be involved now, but you are. So thank you for doing that, and thank you for committing your time and talent and resources in order to make this city a better place. And if we had more people like you, we wouldn't be in this situation that I think needs changing.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
55:55Thank you both for joining me.
Monty Bennett:
55:56Good day, Sarah. Thank you.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
55:57Thank you. Monty and Tom have just shared their strong opinions on the passage of Propositions S and U. Now let's hear from you. At the Dallas Express, we're all about engaging with our community through events that spark conversation and gather insights straight from Dallas residents. Join us as we go to Community Beer Company where locals are diving into the 2024 election and discussing what these propositions mean for our city.
Sarah Zubiate Bennett:
56:19Thanks so much for being here.
Chris Putnam:
56:38So I'm Chris Putnam, and I'm the chief executive officer for the Dallas Express. I think most of you are familiar with us, but for those who are not, we are an independent alternative local news outlet, media outlet. Our mission is to provide a bit of a different voice to the community, though, not just Dallas, the larger DFW community, to basically be an alternative to, the the Dallas Morning News and Ft. Worth Star Telegram. That's our mission and it's been incredibly successful. We've had an incredibly successful year. This is our 3rd event actually and just super pleased with the turnout, you know, given the weather. And, it's Monday after all. It's the holiday season. So thank you all so much for being here.
Sgt. Sheldon Smith:
57:29This is the right thing to do. And believe me, when I came out and said that I support this effort, the other associations, they didn't agree with me. They said you shouldn't do this. But I stand on right. I always stand on what is right. I don't follow the steps of a man just because he has greater numbers than me, because I may be looked at unfavorably. I look at the citizens of Dallas, and I wanna make sure that we adequately protect the citizens of Dallas. That's what we swore to do. The expectation for police officers is that the city would support that. But for years, and I say years, those people that we put in leadership positions have sat there and watched, failure, and it became acceptable.
Sgt. Sheldon Smith:
58:23And finally, we get this crew that wants to say, it's not right. We're gonna stand on righteousness. We're gonna stand up for those officers who can't speak for themselves. I really appreciate that. We have what's called, watches.
Sgt. Sheldon Smith:
58:40A watch is the time period that an officer actually goes out and work. If you look at our first watch, which is the deep night hours, we have details with 3 officers covering your community. 3 officers and 2 supervisors. That's not adequate. But yet, our leadership stands by. They know this, and they haven't done anything about it. And until this movement, it would have continued. The people have spoken. You have spoken, and we really appreciate it. The rank and file officers come to me and they say thank you. They appreciate that I stood up for it. And I only I only did what was right. It was nothing heroic about it. How can you be a city leader and watch your department decline? How can you do that?
Art Martinez de Vara:
59:38The power of of the first proposition that was passed, S, has been quite remarkable, and and, you know, as an attorney, we do a lot of governmental litigation. You send a lot of demand letters and notice letters to the city, and 99% of the time, it gets, you know, file 13, thrown in the trash. Good luck. Sue us, buddy. We have immunity. That waiver of immunity was remarkable, because when I sent that letter, I didn't expect to see, 1, the the the the the tidal wave of media. Right? The scrambling, you know, whether they're going to comply or not is something different, but it certainly got their attention in a way that you don't do without a waiver of immunity, sending that exact same letter. Because they know that the threat is real. You know, the sovereign immunity is is their ace in the hole. Every time you sue the government, whether you've got a strong case or a weak case, they always raise issues of sovereign immunity. Whether you win at the trial level or lose at the trial level, it goes to the court of appeals. They get interlocutory appeals. They ask to set, you know, to set things aside and delay it, and they essentially have infinite legal resources because they have staff attorneys, and they try to bleed out the resident or the organization that's trying to get the city to do the right thing. That's their standard MO.
Art Martinez de Vara:
01:00:59So they have, like, 3 tricks. You know, city attorneys have 3 bags of tricks, but they're very powerful tricks. And the fact that we've taken away their strongest trick, which blocks people from suing, not because, the lawsuit wasn't strong or because it or because the city was right, but just merely arguing that you don't have the right to sue me because I'm the sovereign. Right? Going all the way back to, you know, jolly old England. That was that was the world, and we somehow adopted it and assigned that to the government. And so the fact that they're gonna have to go to court, like any one of us would have to go to court and defend your actions, I think is is a is a is a totally different game, a totally different reality. And I think you're seeing some of that, how powerful that really was, even in just these these initial, few weeks.
Sgt. Sheldon Smith:
01:01:51But it it starts with our leadership. What's your priority? Homeless is not the priority, I don't think.
Chris Putnam:
01:01:59Well, the good news is you you do see a few elected officials such as Mayor Johnson asking the right questions now and acknowledging that this is something this citizen uprising is something they absolutely must pay attention to. And even if it's not the exact solution that they wanted, they have to listen. And so I think it's a credit to all of you. There will be more attention on these sorts of issues going forward. Anything else that you all would like to add individually before we take questions?
Pete Marocco:
01:02:27Yeah. I have to say something about Sergeant Sheldon Smith. I got to tell you, I spoke with a lot of politicians, a lot of aspiring politicians. I spoke with a lot of officers. I spoke with a lot of firefighters. And I gotta tell you that when I met this man, this is the definition of what a servant leader looks like. And as a community, we need to uphold and and promote leaders like him. There is no convincing him of doing what's right. And I encourage you all to remember that there are people out there that just want to do what's right. So I thank you. I thank you, Sergeant Smith.
Sgt. Sheldon Smith:
01:03:04Thank you. Thank you very much.
Community Member:
01:03:08My name is Ed Zara. I own office buildings on Stemmons, and I've been the homeless czar of Stemmons Freeway for the last 25 years. During that time, the solution on homeless, you have to assess it, you have to educate the people, and you have to enforce it. Enforce it is a big part of the homeless problem. And I've worked with every single city organization, you name it, we've had meetings over these years and the result is usually the same. Nothing gets done. The wheels don't turn down in city hall. The Department of the the Homeless Solutions, I send photographs about every other month. I've even hired the homeless to clean up the underpasses where there's garbage beyond belief. And the one that really gets me every day I see it is the no trespassing sign on the underpasses that we had them put in. And of course, there's full fledged encampments. The city is frozen on their homeless approach. And it has to change and I'm glad you're suing the city. You can add my name to it.
Sgt. Sheldon Smith:
01:04:25I expect for my my leadership within the department to be very honest when you go before the council, the city manager, the assistant city manager with public safety and tell them what our problems are. And I think this is just my opinion. I think that that has not happened. I think that, we're in this position now because the people that knew about it didn't say anything about it.
