Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson has called a new special Dallas City Council meeting for June 17 to put the City Hall relocation debate back before council days after a judge blocked key votes over public-notice concerns.
The council will consider two voting items that would authorize City Manager Kimberly Bizor Tolbert to negotiate and execute pre-acquisition agreements tied to possible relocation sites for city operations housed at Dallas City Hall.
The resolutions would not finalize a move, sale, or redevelopment of the 1500 Marilla Street property. Instead, they would allow the city to spend up to $3 million on due diligence work before bringing the results back to the council for consideration.
Relocation Review Revived
The first agenda item would authorize due diligence for no more than four property locations in the Dallas Central Business District for the purpose of assessing relocation options for City Hall staff and functions.
That item would transfer up to $2 million from the ARPA City Hall Generation and Electrical Repair line item to a new ARPA City Hall Pre-Acquisition line item.
The second item would authorize due diligence for no more than four property locations in Dallas for the possible relocation of 911 and emergency operations staff and functions from 1500 Marilla Street.
That item would transfer up to $1 million to the new pre-acquisition line item.
Both items list the financing source as the ARPA Redevelopment Fund.
Johnson wrote in a June 11 memo to City Secretary Bilierae Johnson that the “ARPA Redevelopment Fund” refers to local money, not federal American Rescue Plan Act money.
“I note solely for information purposes that the monies in the ‘ARPA Redevelopment Fund’ are local funds not sourced from federal American Rescue Plan Act funds,” Johnson wrote.
Court Fight Continues
The new agenda comes after the Dallas City Council voted 9-6 on June 10 against moving forward with repairs to Dallas City Hall after a judge blocked broader votes to relocate city operations and redevelop the 1500 Marilla Street site, as previously reported by The Dallas Express.
State District Judge Eric Moyé granted a temporary restraining order on June 9 that blocked the council from voting on several relocation and redevelopment items because the posted agenda language was too vague.
The lawsuit was filed by Council Members Adam Bazaldua and Paula Blackmon against the City of Dallas, Tolbert, and City Secretary Bilierae Johnson. The suit argued that the prior special-meeting agenda failed to give the public sufficient notice about the possible relocation and redevelopment decisions.
The new June 17 agenda uses more specific language, including references to pre-acquisition agreements, cost sharing with property owners, due diligence deliverables, relocation sites, and separate assessments for City Hall staff and 911 and emergency operations functions.
The agenda also includes an executive-session notice, meaning council members may meet behind closed doors if discussion of the items involves legal advice, real estate negotiations, economic development talks, security matters, or other topics allowed under the Texas Open Meetings Act.
Repair Path Rejected
The council’s June 10 vote rejected the repair-only option that remained available after Moyé’s order.
Johnson framed that vote as a step toward reducing taxpayer costs and rethinking the future of Dallas’ urban core.
“Rather than spending what likely would have amounted to over $1 billion to stay in an obsolete building, we directed the City Manager to begin imagining the future of our city’s center,” Johnson said after the vote.
Consultants previously estimated major repairs to the I.M. Pei-designed City Hall building would cost $531 million to $611 million over six to 10 years, while total 20-year occupancy costs could approach $1.6 billion when factoring in modernization, swing space, financing, and operations, as The Dallas Express previously reported.
Preservation advocates and some council members have urged caution before any relocation or redevelopment plan moves forward, arguing that the city should provide more public detail on costs, replacement sites, and the future of the current City Hall property.
The June 17 meeting gives the council another chance to consider relocation-related due diligence after this week’s court order.
