During a Charter Review Commission meeting on Monday, commission members unanimously voted to reject two proposed amendments that would place the Dallas Park and Recreation Department under the direction of the city manager.
The Charter Review Commission is tasked with reviewing and recommending amendments to the Dallas City Charter, if necessary, “to ensure the effective governance of the city,” according to the City of Dallas website.
Chris Luna, a former Dallas City Council member, offered Amendment 85, and activist Dominique Alexander, president and CEO of Next Generation Action Network, submitted Amendment 70. Both proposed amendments sought to change the governance of the Dallas Park and Recreation Department.
“The park and recreation department is the only department that does not report directly to the city manager,” Luna wrote in his amendment. “I think that it would be efficient and effective to have the park and recreation department directly under the management and supervision of the city manager. The role of the park and recreation is too important to have them in a silo.”
“In my 40-year career as a civic activist in this building, I have dealt with the Park Department and the Park Board on many, many occasions,” commission member P. Michael Jung (District 9) said. “What I have seen throughout that time is a high degree of accountability, as you heard from the many speakers here today. That accountability is on account of the fact that there is a direct conduit to our city council person through the person of that council member’s Park Board appointment.”
Each member of the city council appoints a representative to the Park Board, which has a total of 15 representatives.
“It may be that separation of the park department from the other administrative departments of the city would not gain one a good grade in a high school civics class, but that doesn’t take into account the reality of Dallas, Texas, — both at the time this provision was first put in and today,” Jung said.
“This wasn’t a problem 100 years ago. It’s not a problem today. I agree with Commissioner [Gregory] Franklin that the cure in this case would be worse than the decision, and I think the frustration level would rise significantly if we were to adopt these amendments,” he said.
Luna did not attend the commission meeting.
In his amendment, Alexander claimed that the Park and Recreation Department favors some sections of the city over others — based on ethnicity.
“The current way only continues an inequitable Dallas that serves wealthy areas and fails to address impoverished areas of Dallas. The City of Dallas has a racial equity plan that the park board doesn’t even recognize. Lastly, it only keeps the city park & recreation department open for private agendas, for gentrification plans to displace minority communities.”
He was one of more than 15 people who spoke at the meeting about the proposed amendments.
“My amendment wasn’t about whether I support a park or not,” Alexander said. “My amendment was the structure and the government and the levels of the transparency of it. It’s about making sure that this council, when it votes on racial equity … that it actually stands up to those principles and not just say it.”
Next Generation Action Network is one of several organizations whose logos appeared on an image to support the appointment of Deputy City Manager Kim Tolbert as interim city manager.
“My concern is trying to obtain that level of transparency that you seek with putting [the Park and Recreation Department] under the supervision of city manager would make the problem worse than it already is,” Commissioner Franklin contended. “Being a resident of District 8, I feel your frustration. Just trying to think it through, how do we get to that transparency without muddying the waters and making the situation worse?”
Alexander responded:
“This is not about individuals who sit on the Park Board. This is all about the park department as a whole, to make sure it serves all of the city — not just a certain level, a certain income bracket and … a special interest group.”
Several members of the Park Board, including Scott Goldstein (District 10), stressed to commissioners that the organizational structure the department has used for a century works.
“Like most American major cities, Dallas has its share of challenges, and the Dallas parks system is not among them,” Goldstein said, adding that the amendments are “solutions in search of a problem that does not exist.”
“In considering these proposals to undo nearly 120 years of Dallas parks independence, I urge you to consider what will best serve the people of Dallas. I believe you have your answers in your email inboxes and in the chambers tonight,” he concluded.
The park system in Dallas was created in 1876 following the development of City Park. Not long after the turn of the century, the Dallas City Council formed the Board of Park Commissioners to oversee management, contractual, and budgetary issues related to the acquisition of Fair Park in 1904. Over the next 11 years, the park system expanded to a dozen parks encompassing nearly 250 acres.
Then, Foster Jacoby was hired as Dallas’ first superintendent of parks in 1920. Charter revisions in 1927 and 1930 created an independent park board to manage a system that had grown to 32 parks totaling more than 3,773 acres. Today, Dallas’ park system covers almost 21,000 acres and includes more than 400 parks and 180 miles of trails.
Jennifer Scripps, president and CEO of Downtown Dallas Inc., told commissioners that “the Parks department isn’t broken.”
“Our duties today include contracting with the Dallas Park and Recreation Department for enhanced maintenance services and activation of 12 downtown parks,” she said. “Over the past 20 years, downtown has experienced a park renaissance, adding more than 20 acres of green space. This is a feat unmatched by any other major American downtown. Please do not change the City of Dallas charter to fix something that isn’t broken.”
The City’s first “greening czar,” Garrett Boone, appointed by Mayor Eric Johnson last year, expressed “grave concern” over the proposed amendments.
“I’ve worked closely with Dallas Parks for almost 15 years and have gained the greatest respect for the top leadership and the staff at every level,” he said. “Putting parks in the caldera of political instability is, in my mind, a bad idea.”
“It is because of this stability that private philanthropy has given over $350 million to parks projects in the last 10 years. The current system is built on nearly 100 years of precedence. Why introduce changes that would only expose the department to instability and unfocused management?” Boone challenged.
Dallas attorney and former Park Board president Bobby Abtahi said he was “extremely disappointed” that Luna did not attend the meeting.
“I challenge you to read the press this building has gotten the last few years and tell me: Would you like the park department to be more like permitting? Would you like it to be more like 911 response times? Would you like it to be like the streets? Would you like it to be more like the loose dogs in South Dallas? If you want to strengthen the city’s park department, make it more independent — not less independent,” Abtahi said.
He also expressed disapproval of government bureaucracy.
“I feel the weight of this building — this building that was designed to show you what bureaucracy and city government can do to the man sitting at the front step,” he said. “I can tell you if these are put on the ballot, we will be organized. We will raise money, and we will fight them. If we have to keep coming down here, we will.”
Approved amendments must be presented to voters before the city charter may be revised.
“I’m deeply concerned this very well-functioning group would try to be placed under city council purview,” said Ted Ellis, chair of the White Rock Lake Foundation. “I’m concerned that if we put it under there, just as previous speakers have mentioned, that we’re going to have the same issues as with permits, with streets, etc.”
Timothy Dickey, the Park Board member representing District 6, offered his opinion.
“City manager’s job is not vision,” he said. “It’s execution. Vision is city council and the Park Board.”
Commissioner Adam McGough (District 12) commended the “dedication” of the Park and Recreation Board members.
“I can’t say more strongly how thankful I am that it has been set up this way and not under the city manager thus far due to a lot of the reasons that we’ve said so far.”
Angela Hunt, the commissioner representing District 14, agreed.
“I think we’ve had many eloquent speakers tonight,” she said. “I think we should, all around this horseshoe, take just one moment to appreciate how wonderful it is that we had people turn out in droves from across the city to tell us how wonderful, how great one of our city departments is. That is rare, and that is meaningful.”
Just before commissioners cast their votes on the proposed amendments, Park and Recreation Department Director John Jenkins was asked to address the commission.
“In the northern sector, we have what we call a ‘park desert,'” he said. “It’s just because of the way the city grew in earlier years. We weren’t able to acquire a lot of park land 30 or 40 years ago. We do have a lot of park land in the southern sector. We talk about equity. That is our driver. We want to make sure … that everybody has access to greener space. We do follow the racial equity plan.”
Commissioners deferred consideration of Amendment 121, which would allow the Park and Recreation Department budget to be approved by the city council.
