Richardson City Council Work Session June 16th, 2025
PODCAST
Here is this week’s AI Podcast Summary, created using Google’s NotebookLM program: AI Podcast Here (AI is likely to have inaccuracies.)
MINI SUMMARY
And here is this week’s mini summary. The usual detailed report is down below.
The Richardson City Council work session began with recognitions for Mary Bedosky, the new Rotary District 5810 Governor, and Nathan Liu, the 2025 RTX MATHCOUNTS National Champion.
An update on the Arts & Culture Master Plan revealed that community engagement involved over 70,000 "touch points," including social media reach and surveys. Key findings indicated a desire for affordable indoor performance/rehearsal spaces, art studios, and artist housing, with many residents seeking cultural fulfillment outside Richardson. Five objectives and various short-term and long-term recommendations were presented, leading to council discussions on cultural districts, grant processes, visitor data, and public art.
The FY 25 2nd Quarter Financial Report indicated that General Fund property tax revenues were significantly below estimates, notably due to value dispute lawsuits, a $1M loss from a property tax exemption for the Northside Campus, and a over $3M revenue loss from a miscalculated abatement for TI. Golf Fund and Hotel/Motel Tax Fund revenues also underperformed, though all funds are still expected to finish the year within estimates.
The Council continued discussions on charter amendments, considering increasing Council pay, defining procedures for Council misconduct investigations, and allowing alternative insurance coverage (like a crime policy) in lieu of a surety bond for the city manager. Amendments also proposed aligning residency requirements for board members, clarifying promotion rules, and changing public hearing references from "citizens" to "the public".
Further charter amendment discussions covered initiative and referendum signature thresholds, with some council members advocating for lower, more accessible thresholds tied to mayoral election votes or a lower percentage of registered voters, while others preferred the current system. Proposed new sections included "Continuity of Government" for disaster scenarios and a charter requirement for a "Code of Ethics". A public hearing on these amendments is scheduled for June 23rd, with propositions to be prepared and reviewed in July.
OPENING
All councilmembers are present as well as City Manager (CM) Don Magner and City Secretary Aimee Nemer.
CM Magner acknowledges one written public comment submitted by Erica Burke (apologies if misspelled) regarding SNAP replacement benefits for Dallas County residents. No speakers are present.
The first item is recognizing newly appointed Rotary District 5810 Governor Mary Bedosky. Mayor Omar reads a proclamation recognizing her years of service to the city and to Rotary International. Council takes a picture and makes comments appreciating Mary’s service and congratulating her on being appointed district governor. The next recognition is for Nathan Liu, the 2025 RTX MATHCOUNTS National Champion. Mayor Omar reads the proclamation recognizing Nathan’s achievements. Council also takes a picture with Nathan and his family.
ARTS & CULTURE MASTER PLAN
Next is an update on the Arts & Culture Master Plan. Rich Neumann of the BerryDunn consulting firm presents. Richardson’s cultural plan was last updated in 2013. This plan update involved community engagement which kicked off with an initial presentation to Council on May 20, 2024. An online survey was open from June – October 2024. In person engagement was also done at local restaurants and coffee shops, the Eisemann Center, Chinatown, and the Cottonwood Art Festival. Stakeholder meetings were also held with the Cultural Arts Commission, grant recipients, staff, and UTD. Consultant Neumann claims that this process totaled over 70,000 “touch points”. Consultant Neumann later clarifies that this number includes an estimated 67,000 people “reached” on social media. The survey website had just under 1,200 hits.
Demographic data from this process shows that the age and diversity of Richardson’s population are expected to increase. Visitor data shows that visitors from outside Richardson had a total of 627,000 overnight stays in 2024. Visitors spent an estimated $184M in Richardson in 2024. Visitors typically stay for a week or less. The highest concentration of visitors comes from Central and South Texas. Stakeholder meetings concluded that the community desires affordable indoor performance and rehearsal space, affordable art studio space, affordable artist housing, and a centralized arts district. Other findings from the survey concluded that most respondents seek cultural art fulfillment outside of Richardson. 35% of respondents have never visited the Eisemann Center. Most respondents prefer to spend $50 or less on an activity. Respondents want more live music, community events, visual art opportunities, and theatrical productions.
Taking all of this into account, five objectives are presented: Improve awareness of cultural opportunities in Richardson, Continue to diversify Richardson’s cultural offerings, Support growth of Richardson’s creative community, Plan an effective cultural tourism strategy, and Define a cultural district and seek a designation. Short-term recommendations to achieve these objectives include partnering with grant recipients and partners to amplify messaging, auditing current offerings to determine if any underperforming events need to be evaluated, exploring the viability of low-cost studio rentals and artist housing based on opportunities noted in the upcoming Housing Needs Assessment, and implementing public art maintenance practices recommended in the Public Art Master Plan. Longer-term recommendations for seeking a cultural arts district designation include determining the best location, scheduling an orientation with the Texas Commission of the Arts, and submitting a letter of intent to that commission.
Councilman Dorian would like to see Interurban become the city’s cultural district. He would also like to see a dinner theater with the Richardson Symphony Orchestra. Councilwoman Justice asks how the grants process can be made more efficient. Consultant Neumann answers that they will offer examples of what the process could look like in their final report.
Councilman Shamsul asks what attracts visitors from out of state. Consultant Neumann answers that they don’t know. The visitor data is compiled by utilizing AI technology to track cell phone signals that come into the city. This data only provides location, not motivation. Councilman Shamsul also asks about the data showing most people want to spend $50 or less on an event. He would like to understand how often someone is willing to spend this much in a year. Consultant Neumann doesn’t have this information. Councilman Shamsul also asks what the specific recommendations are for increasing live music performances in Richardson. Consultant Neumann answers that live music can be done at low cost in any venues across the city.
Councilman Barrios asks about the recommendation to have a flexible arts/performing space. He asks if they got feedback asking for a space with multiple “black box” stages for theatrical performances. Consultant Neumann confirms that they did receive that feedback from the community. He states that groups expressed a desire to collaborate. Councilman Barrios asks what the next steps will be for this plan. Consultant Neumann answers that this is Council’s chance to provide feedback before they adopt the final plan.
Councilman Hutchenrider asks for elaboration on the recommendation to audit current offerings to evaluate potential adjustments to programming. Consultant Neumann answers that this is something they typically recommend as a best practice. Councilman Hutchenrider also asks for clarification on the claimed 67,000 social media engagements. Consultant Neumann explains that this was the number of “reaches” through the entire process. This means the number of times a post ended up in someone’s timeline, regardless of whether someone has seen it or engaged with the post. Councilman Hutchenrider also advises the consultant that he wants the “tourism data” to instead be labeled “visitor data” since much of this is likely for business and not strictly tourism. Mayor Omar asks for best practice suggestions regarding an affordable shared indoor performance space, marketing, and programming audits.
2ND QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT
Next is a presentation of FY 25 2nd Quarter Financial Report. Budget Officer Bob Clymire presents. General Fund revenues are roughly at the same pace as last year’s. This fiscal year’s property tax revenues are slightly below estimates and are less than last fiscal year’s at this same time. Budget Officer Clymire explains that property tax is estimated to be $3M less than estimated due to value dispute lawsuits and reductions to certified tax rolls through supplements from the appraisal districts. The Collin Appraisal District has approved 100% property tax exemption for the residential portion of the Northside Campus. This will cause a loss of over $1M in revenue for the city. The development has agreed to a one-time settlement of $1M to repay some economic development agreement terms. The Collin Appraisal District also certified tax rolls without including a significant abatement for TI valued at over $590M. This miscalculation will cause an estimated revenue loss of over $3M for FY25. Sales tax revenues are currently tracking above estimates. General Fund expenditures are in line with estimates.
Water & Sewer Fund revenues are in line with estimates. Installation charges are up due to the installation of an 8” meter at UTD. Water usage is also mostly in line with estimates with an irrigation spike due to October 2024 usage. Sewer usage seems to be tracking above estimates so far. Water & Sewer Fund expenditures are also in line with estimates. Solid Waste Fund revenues and expenditures are in line with estimates.
Golf Fund revenues are unfortunately nearly 20% below estimates. This is due to a delayed Course #2 reopening. As a reminder, this report accounts through March 2025. Since March, rounds played have exceeded each month’s estimates, so this fund is hopefully on track for recovery. Golf Fund expenditures are in line with estimates.
Hotel/Motel Tax Fund revenues are about 10% below estimates. This is due to Eisemann Center revenues not reaching expected revenues through the first half of the fiscal year. Hotel occupancy taxes have also underperformed. Budget Officer Clymire notes that two hotels have undergone remodeling, which has closed some of their rooms. Some of the economy hotels are also seeing a general decline in business. Hotel/Motel Tax Fund expenditures are roughly in line with estimates.
Budget Officer Clymire notes that all these funds are still expected to finish the year within estimates. He does note that next year’s property tax revenue is likely to be lower than this year’s adopted estimate due to the issues explained regarding the missed abatement and the Northside property tax exemption.
Councilwoman Justice asks how the missed abatement happened. CM Magner answers that the appraisal district applies the abatement. Richardson has over 33,000 accounts that make up all certified tax rolls. CM Magner states that there is no way they can verify every single account and abatement in the time they receive the certified rolls from the appraisal district and the preparation of the next year’s budget. The Collin Appraisal District did not catch their mistake until after this current budget was already adopted. The city is making necessary adjustments to ensure everything still works within budget. TI has 30 accounts due to a cascaded structure for their business personal property. They can keep an eye on larger abatements to check for accuracy going forward.
Councilwoman Justice asks if this is a historical issue or just for this year. COO Kent Pfeil explains that this abatement was triggered last year. The Collin Appraisal District described this as a glitch. Supplemental rolls are expected. This one just happened to be much larger than usual. CM Magner explains that they are also seeing a rise in disputed values each year. They will need to keep an eye on prior year taxes and budget accordingly.
Mayor Pro Tem Hutchenrider asks to relay these types of budget issues to state legislators so they can help stabilize things at the state level.
CHARTER AMENDMENTS
Next is a continued discussion on recommendations for charter amendments. Based on the discussion from last week and the CPI analysis done by Commissioner Strecker, staff recommends considering increasing the current per meeting Council pay from $100 to $150. Then, in five years, increasing it again to $200 per meeting. Regarding Council misconduct, staff recommends adding language specifying Council’s options to reject a complaint or send the complaint to the city attorney who may then appoint outside counsel if necessary. This is based on last week’s discussion which asked for detailed language on how an investigation into Council misconduct would take place. This additional language comes from the city’s Code of Ethics.
Based on last week’s discussion on the topic of the city manager’s surety bond, staff now recommends deleting Sec. 6.06 and moving the intent into Sec. 18.08, titled Bonds of city official, employee, or department director. Council would still require the city manager to have a surety bond. This section also currently allows Council to require a surety bond on any other official, director, or employee. Added language specifies that Council may also purchase a crime policy, errors and omissions policy, or other appropriate insurance coverage to protect the city from any loss in lieu of a surety bond. (I’m still not quite settled on how I feel about creating the option to not require a surety bond. If a crime policy indeed covers the exact same intentional acts as a surety bond and has the same mechanism, fine. If we lose any protections by allowing a different type of insurance than a surety bond, I still have reservations.)
Councilman Shamsul asks what is unique about a surety bond compared to other types of coverages. Asst. City Atty Joe Gorfida explains that the Crime policy essentially covers what the surety bond would cover. City Atty Pete Smith describes the surety bond requirement as archaic. Councilman Shamsul asks specifically if there is anything that the surety bond covers that the crime policy will not cover. Asst. Atty Gorfida answers that an insurance professional would be able to answer that question specifically. CM Magner suggests requesting a memo from the insurance consultant answering the question. He will bring that memo back next week.
Council now reviews the remainder of recommendations from staff and the Charter Review Commission, picking up on last week’s review with Article 9, Boards and Commissions. Sec. 9.10, Zoning board of adjustment, has recommended minor changes to clarify language. Councilwoman Justice asks if they should also update Sec. 9.02 to require a 12-month residency for members of boards and commissions to align with the recommendation for Council qualifications to require a 12-month residency. Councilwoman Justice also asks if they should amend language referencing a board or commission member not voting on an item to reflect that this is only allowed when they have a filed conflict of interest. Staff agrees to return with that language. Sec. 9.11, Civil Service Board, includes a recommendation to relocate applicable subsections from Sec. 9.12, Civil Service Appeals Board.
Moving on to Art. 10, Civil Service. Sec. 10.04, Promotions in the classified, includes a recommendation from staff to specify that the Civil Service Board shall provide rules that afford all employees an opportunity for promotion prior to a position being posted to external candidates. Now to Art. 11, Budget and Financial Procedure. Sec. 11.04, Public hearing, has a recommended change from staff to change “citizens of the city” to “the public” in reference to who can be present and express opinions.
Now for Art. 14, Initiative & Referendum. Sec. 14.01, Power of initiative, has a recommended change to align and specify requirements for what must be on a petition with Article 5’s Recall requirements. Councilman Barrios asks if this recommendation is to align with state law. CM Magner answers that the additional language aligns the section with state law. Councilman Barrios is concerned that the number of signatures required to exercise these direct citizen powers is higher than the number of votes it takes to win an election in the city. He suggests tying it to 50 – 60% of the number of votes in the last mayoral election. Councilwoman Justice states that 60% of the number of votes in the last election equates to the same number as 10% of currently registered voters. Councilman Dorian disagrees with changing the threshold. He thinks it would introduce an element of inconsistency.
Mayor Omar is fine with keeping it attached to the number of qualified voters. (By the way, qualified voters means registered voters.) He is worried about an election with low turnout resulting in a low threshold. He is interested in reducing the threshold to a lower percentage of qualified voters. He states that the 2015 Charter Review Commission’s recommendation to raise the threshold from 5% to 10% was likely a response to the successful petition to directly elect Richardson’s mayor. (If I recall, Sec. Nemer clarified during a 2025 Charter Review Commission meeting that the direct election of mayor petition was actually a petition to amend the charter. Charter amendment petitions are regulated by state law. They are not an initiated ordinance, a repeal of an existing ordinance, or a recall of a councilmember, so they are not regulated by the city charter.)
Councilman Shamsul wants this to be a data-backed decision. He doesn’t want it to be an arbitrary number. He agrees with not making it too difficult to exercise these powers, but he also doesn’t want to make it too easy and cause instability. Mayor Pro Tem Hutchenrider asks if staff could provide a list of comparison cities’ thresholds. Councilwoman Justice mentions that this is already in their packet. (I sent Council the comparison chart that I created for my input to the Charter Review Commission. I hope Council has reviewed it to see that most of our comparison cities do not have a threshold as high as we do. Just over half of our comparison cities attach their threshold to the number of votes in the last election.)
CM Magner asks if the consensus from Council is to keep the threshold attached to the number of qualified voters. If so, they can provide a chart comparing only the other cities who attach their threshold to the number of qualified voters. Councilman Barrios supports asking for a comparison chart. He wants Richardson to be more accessible than other cities.
Sec. 14.02, Examination of initiative petition, has very minor recommended changes to use consistent language when referencing the city. Sec. 14.09, Power of referendum, has the same recommended changes as Sec. 14.01.
Now for Art. 17, Prohibitions. Sec. 17.01, currently titled Church and school property assessments, has a recommended change to change the title to just “Property assessments” and replace “church” with “religious organization”. Sec. 17.03, Execution, garnishment and assignment, has recommended changes to simplify the language. Atty Smith explains that this section states that city property is exempt from execution. City property cannot be seized or garnished except when state or federal law requires it. Mayor Pro Tem Hutchenrider has some interesting questions on this topic. He asks if child support or some other type of lawsuit filed such as a car accident would still be subject to garnishment. Atty Smith answers that civil suits cannot seize city property. Employees can still have wages garnished as required by state or federal law.
For Art. 18, General Provisions. Sec. 18.01, Personal financial interest, has a recommended change from the commission to allow Council to pass an ordinance allowing members of boards and commissions to “participate in a city economic development incentive program or other similar program … where such program requires participation through a contract.” CM Magner notes that the commission also included a second version of this recommendation that includes employees as well. His recommendation is just to focus on the first version.
Councilwoman Justice doesn’t want to create the appearance of impropriety. She is not in favor of this recommendation in any form. Councilman Barrios agrees. He doesn’t want to create the ability for a commission member to be a recipient in any economic development agreements. CM Magner responds that this amendment would not change the prohibition of commission members from receiving a contract like an economic development agreement. The only thing that would change is that Council would be able to pass an ordinance allowing members of boards and commissions to participate in the Home Improvement Incentive Program. Councilman Barrios, after hearing this, is now in favor of the recommendation.
Councilman Shamsul only wants to specify the Home Improvement Incentive Program if they approve this recommendation. Atty Smith states that he didn’t specify the name of this program because the name of the program could change in the future. CM Magner adds that this amendment would only create the ability for Council to pass such an ordinance. It doesn’t allow board and commission members to automatically participate. Council would still have to pass an ordinance. Councilman Shamsul still wants to avoid any potential loophole language. He does not support the recommendation unless they specify the Home Improvement Incentive Program. Councilman Dorian asks if the individual boardmember would have to come before Council to be approved for participation. Atty Smith reminds Councilman Dorian that it would be up to the ordinance that Council approves, if they approve such an ordinance.
CM Magner states that he does not see this as a loophole. Council would have to specify the program that they would allow members to participate in. Councilwoman Justice replies that something could change with a future Council, and she wants to avoid that. Mayor Pro Tem Hutchenrider shares these same concerns. He doesn’t want to open up any possibility for unintentional consequences. He agrees with not recommending the amendment. Mayor Omar asks if naming the Home Improvement Incentive Program would change anyone’s opinion. Councilman Barrios now withdraws his support of the amendment. Councilwoman Justice is still against recommending this even if they specify the program. Councilman Shamsul would not support this unless it specified the dollar amount and that it would be for someone’s own home. He doesn’t want to see boardmembers have this program taken away from them, which is how things are currently, but he wants to prioritize avoiding any loopholes.
Sec. 18.05, Public library, has a very minor recommended change to add plural “libraries”, just in case. Sec. 18.07, Condemnation of dangerous structures, has a recommended change to add language specifying that an appropriate city official can determine that a structure should be condemned. Sec. 18.09 is a newly proposed section that would be titled Continuity of Government. This is the section that would, in the event of a disaster that incapacitates councilmembers, enable the highest surviving city official to request the Dallas County Judge to appoint a commission to govern the city and call the next city election. Another newly proposed section is Sec. 18.10. This would add a charter requirement to always have a Code of Ethics.
Mayor Pro Tem Hutchenrider asks a question about Sec. 18.07. He asks how a structure would be condemned. Asst. Atty Gorfida answers that the Building Standards Commission determines this. Mayor Pro Tem Hutchenrider also asks why only the Dallas County Judge is specified in Sec. 18.09. Atty Smith answers that the city is principally in Dallas County. He could add Collin County if Council desires. Councilwoman Justice and Councilman Shamsul are against adding anything further.
For Art. 19, Effective Date and Effects of Adoption, Sec. 19.03, Charter amendment, has a recommended change to clarify that any method of amending the charter will go before voters in an election. A brand new section that has been recommended by staff since the commission’s report is Sec. 19.07. This would be titled Definitions. This includes definitions of various terms found in the charter. Councilwoman Justice asks why they need to include a definition of “business day” if it is not in the charter. (“Business day” is mentioned in the new proposed language for Sec. 3.06.) Councilman Barrios asks about the definition for “councilmembers”. Atty Smith answers that “Members of the Council” would be inclusive of the mayor whereas “Councilmember” would mean all councilmembers except the mayor.
CM Magner explains that a public hearing will be held on June 23rd. The city attorney will begin preparing propositions in July. Council will review these propositions on July 21st. (My birthday!) Council will make the decision on calling an election at their Aug. 11th meeting.
CLOSING
Council discusses Councilwoman Justice’s appointment as Vice President of the North Central Texas Council of Governments Executive Board, an Eisemann Center performance, the DFW Asian American Soccer Tournament Annual Gala, and the upcoming recognition of 100 years of city incorporation this Sunday, June 22nd in Downtown Richardson. Council then convenes into executive session to have Chief Tittle brief Council on building security and protocol. The footage ends here.