{"id":418436,"date":"2026-08-27T18:24:07","date_gmt":"2026-08-27T18:24:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/418436\/"},"modified":"2026-08-27T18:24:07","modified_gmt":"2026-08-27T18:24:07","slug":"dallas-officials-look-for-funding-as-council-asks-for-budget-revisions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/418436\/","title":{"rendered":"Dallas officials look for funding as council asks for budget revisions"},"content":{"rendered":"

Dallas City Council members jostled over a handful of proposed budget revisions to City Manager Kimberly Bizor Tolbert\u2019s proposed $5.66 billion budget Wednesday<\/a>.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s budget season in Dallas, and money is tight<\/a> as revenue has fallen short of expectations and expenses have soared. Cuts suggested in Tolbert\u2019s budget are wide-reaching<\/a> and affect everything from park mowing to employee healthcare. Of course, council members have their own ideas about what to prioritize, especially within their districts. The revisions \u2014 seven in total \u2014 were based on feedback submitted by the council Monday.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Tolbert called it an \u201cinitial conversation,\u201d with future discussions planned to address further amendments. A budget workshop is scheduled next Wednesday.<\/p>\n

Before getting into the council-proposed revisions, staff began the meeting with a presentation on the city\u2019s transportation budget. The transportation budget includes $142.8 million for street improvements across roughly 800 lane miles, up from 759 in the current budget, according to the presentation. Street improvements were identified as residents\u2019 top budget priority in the city\u2019s annual community survey.<\/p>\n

Sign up for the This Week\u2019s Top Stories newsletter to get the latest stories delivered to your inbox<\/p>\n

THANK YOU!<\/p>\n

You’re all set.<\/p>\n

CLOSE\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n

Nobody wants to stay till 2 a.m.\u2014 shocking<\/p>\n

The city\u2019s budgeting process may look a little different to onlookers this year. Instead of heading straight into protracted back-and-forths over floor amendments proposed by council members in meetings, Tolbert asked council members to submit feedback and revisions earlier this week via email. Staff weighed those requests, and Wednesday\u2019s briefing explained how those proposals could be funded or \u2014 in one case \u2014 why staff disagreed with a revision.<\/p>\n

Even so, it took the council more than three hours to wade through multiple rounds of inquiries and comments on the seven amendments, the funding for which would total roughly $1.74 million \u2014 less than 0.1% of the proposed $2.034 billion general fund. Let\u2019s hope the time council members need for the rest of the budget doesn\u2019t multiply proportionally. <\/p>\n

No votes were taken at the briefing, although council members made it clear how they felt about the revisions.<\/p>\n

Council member Cara Mendelsohn criticized the change, saying it diminished the council\u2019s ability to manage the process.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe were supposed to have three chances, and instead we got a memo instructing us on a process that we own,\u201d Mendelsohn said. \u201cThat process was usurped from our responsibility, where we were told we would only be able to put in what the use of funds would be, and I don\u2019t appreciate that at all.\u201d<\/p>\n

Tolbert said the decision came at the suggestion of several council members to avoid the late-night slugfests that have marked recent budget processes.<\/p>\n

\u201cThat was the purpose of it,\u201d Tolbert said. \u201cAnd so I don\u2019t want to make council believe that we were trying to take away any of your authority. It was really to kind of try it out. We know that other cities have similar processes, and so we talked about trying to streamline and better use your time.\u201d<\/p>\n

There will be more opportunities for feedback, she added, and a traditional amendment process will take place later before a budget is adopted in mid-September.<\/p>\n

Money is tight<\/p>\n

Underperforming sales tax revenue, state-imposed caps, police overtime and employee medical costs all helped drive a $51 million shortfall<\/a> in the city\u2019s current budget. To close the gap, Tolbert\u2019s proposed budget includes cutting the employee healthcare plan,<\/a> eliminating adult learning programs, laying off library employees and cutting the park department budget.<\/p>\n

As presented Wednesday, Tolbert\u2019s budget still sits at $5.66 billion, and council voted yesterday to approve a recommendation for a 0.1-cent decrease in the city\u2019s property tax rate, a policy city leaders have pursued for 11 years straight. All that\u2019s to say, staff had to look for more cuts to the general fund to fund council\u2019s priorities.<\/p>\n

For example, council members asked for $500,000 in additional funding toward Dallas Animal Services cruelty response. Unfortunately for the critters at the Dallas Zoo, staff identified the funding source as an equivalent cut to the zoo\u2019s partner stipend, bringing the total recommended city cuts in the zoo\u2019s budget to nearly $1.2 million. Staff\u2019s original recommended budget decreased the animal cruelty response budget by over $20,000, although DPD is set to receive an approximately $46,000 bump for cruelty investigations. Staff told the council the extra funding would support forensics, medical care and increased capacity to meet rising need.<\/p>\n

Most council members pushed back on the proposal, with some arguing that they supported more funding for DAS, but didn\u2019t support taking money from the zoo. Council member Kathy Stewart said the zoo is the second-largest employer in Oak Cliff, while Jesse Moreno said he was not keen on taking funding from those particular animals. <\/p>\n

\u201cThe zoo is an economic engine as well,\u201d Moreno said. \u201cIt brings people to our city, so I would like to see possibly another source for animal cruelty.\u201d<\/p>\n

Paul Ridley, who represents much of downtown Dallas and Uptown, said that with the DAS budget set to increase while other departments make cuts, it did not make sense to target the zoo.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere has been no indication of what the $500,000 would be needed for, or any metrics to support the need for it,\u201d Ridley said. \u201cWe\u2019ve already exempted this department from all of the other cuts that the other departments are suffering.\u201d<\/p>\n

Other revisions followed a similar pattern. Restoring partner funding for southern Dallas nature preserves, as the Trinity River Audubon would come at the expense of the park department\u2019s security budget. Funding for a legislative consultant \u2014 the council eliminated funding for lobbyists in 2025 \u2014 ahead of the January session would come from a vacant police administration position and by eliminating a contract with the company that administered a controversial city hall<\/a> survey earlier this year.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Council members, who have repeatedly said the state legislature\u2019s attempts to restrict cities\u2019 ability to grow revenue exacerbate growing fiscal issues, were mostly supportive of an \u201con the ground\u201d presence in Austin, as Tolbert framed it. Gay Donnell Willis said she was worried about the city being left behind as other major Texas cities invest in legislative advocacy ahead of the session.<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019m worried about Dallas being flat-footed,\u201d Willis said. \u201cAnd when it comes to water and some other categories, I just think we need to have people on the ground all the time there who can get that intel. This is really about intelligence.\u201d<\/p>\n

Staff have other thoughts<\/p>\n

Staff identified potential revenue sources for six of the seven revisions, including how to restore funding for adult literacy programs<\/a> at the Dallas Public Library. The last revision, an attempt to restore funding for an eviction legal defense program that was cut in the proposed budget, was the exception, as staff said it was not a core function of the city government. Council members first voted to fund the program when they adopted the current budget, but that funding never materialized as shortfalls grew earlier this year. Tolbert\u2019s proposed budget eliminates future funding for the program entirely.<\/p>\n

The city manager explained that the Dallas Eviction Advocacy Center already receives over $1 million in funding from the county, although Executive Director Mark Melton told the Observer this week<\/a> that he\u2019s now been left with a \u201chole in my budget\u201d after city funding for the program fell through.<\/p>\n

Council appeared split on the proposal, with council members like Bill Roth, Stewart and Mendelsohn agreeing with staff\u2019s recommendation that it is not the city\u2019s responsibility, especially given budgetary constraints. Other council members said they had seen the impact of similar programs in the districts and called for funding to be restored. Mayor Pro Tem Jaime Resendez pointed out that staff had identified housing stability and homelessness prevention as core city priorities, which didn\u2019t make sense given the preventative role of eviction advocacy.<\/p>\n

\u201cIdentifying something as a core service has to mean something when the budget gets difficult,\u201d Resendez said. \u201cIf the first response to a budget challenge is to eliminate the programs that prevent residents from falling into crisis, then we have to ask ourselves whether spending decisions actually reflect the priorities we say we have.\u201d<\/p>\n

Pool trouble leads to wider questions<\/p>\n

The city\u2019s embattled community pools, as they frequently have in previous budget seasons, quickly became a point of contention on Wednesday during discussion of a revision to keep the Pleasant Oaks pool open by allocating $60,000 toward its operation. Staff explained that, as planned since last yea<\/a>r, the city will stop operating nine pools entirely in 2027.<\/p>\n

The city is already closing three pools after the summer, and staff warned that many of the remaining pools are past their effective lifespan, despite having received bond funding as recently as 2024. Park and Recreation Director John Jenkins said they \u201cjust aren\u2019t reliable\u201d due to their age.<\/p>\n

\u201cI just want to make sure the public as well as any council member understands that if they stay open, they can shut down at any given time,\u201d Jenkins told the council.<\/p>\n

Some council members backed the existing plan to eliminate funding for all nine pools by next year, with Mendelsohn saying she was \u201ctriggered\u201d that the discussion was even happening, as the city has long planned to shutter the aging pools. Others highlighted the need in communities where \u201cthey don\u2019t have private pools at their homes,\u201d Chad West said. Resendez noted that the Pleasant Oaks Pool currently has the highest attendance of the nine.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat I want to avoid is an unnecessary gap in service, where we close a heavily used pool, leave the community without that amenity for an indefinite amount of time, and then eventually come back and build its replacement,\u201d Resendez said.<\/p>\n

Perhaps the most pointed moments came when council member Adam Bazaldua questioned why funding needed to be cut from other areas to fund park needs, even as the department\u2019s multiyear balance had grown exponentially. Jenkins said the department has $15 million in multiyear program funds, mostly coming from fees and appropriations, and explained that those funds are needed for unplanned maintenance. For example, he said the funding could offset the cost of a $500,000 HVAC unit that the department would otherwise be unable to fund.<\/p>\n

Still, Bazaldua pressed department leadership on how the funding had been allocated and said he has not been \u201cable to find a policy on the books that has given the authority\u201d to the department to allocate money from its own funds.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019ve got things that fall under your jurisdiction that we\u2019re trying to find $60,000 for to prevent a pool from closing for the community,\u201d Bazaldua said. \u201cThat shouldn\u2019t be our job, and if we are the purse strings, there\u2019s no one at a director level in this organization that should have the unilateral authority to decide where millions of dollars are going to be spent without talking to this council.\u201d<\/p>\n

When asked whether or not policy had been followed by the department in allocating money toward the multiyear fund by Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Maxie Johnson, Rory Gaulter, interim city auditor, said, \u201cNo, it was not followed.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is simply unfair to the city manager and to this council that we\u2019re needing money for parks. Councilman West talking about money for the pool,\u201d Johnson said. \u201cYet we got funds that exist, and the auditor said that policy has not been followed. You can\u2019t ignore that. You absolutely can\u2019t ignore that.\u201d<\/p>\n

City CFO Jack Ireland said the council approves the fund balances each year during the budget process as part of the appropriation process, while council member Paula Blackmon said the discrepancies generally stemmed from a lack of policy.<\/p>\n

\u201cMaybe we should create a policy,\u201d Blackmon said. \u201cAnd I understand where you\u2019re coming from, but I also don\u2019t want to not use a fund that is intended for its purpose and use the general fund.\u201d<\/p>\n

What\u2019s next<\/p>\n

A budget is expected to be adopted by the council on Sept. 16. The council will submit amendments by noon Friday before next week\u2019s workshop, where non-binding straw votes are expected.<\/p>\n

Straw votes were initially expected at Wednesday\u2019s meeting, but council members ultimately chose to postpone voting on those and additional amendments until the next workshop.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Dallas City Council members jostled over a handful of proposed budget revisions to City Manager Kimberly Bizor Tolbert\u2019s…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":12455,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[3084,102,104,103],"class_list":["post-418436","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-dallas","tag-city-hall","tag-dallas","tag-dallas-headlines","tag-dallas-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/418436","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=418436"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/418436\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/12455"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=418436"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=418436"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=418436"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}