TheaterFire

Dallas politicians don't unanimously agree on much, and have many different visions for Dallas, except that Charter Amendments S, T, and U have horrifying consequences. VOTE NO on S, T, U!

Posted by Additional-Sky-7436@reddit | Dallas | View on Reddit | 132 comments

Dallas politicians don't unanimously agree on much, and have many different visions for Dallas, except that Charter Amendments S, T, and U have horrifying consequences.  VOTE NO on S, T, U!

Reply to Post

132 Comments

CyrusTheRed@reddit

CITY OF DALLAS NOVEMBER 5, 2024, ELECTION PROPOSITIONS EXPLANATIONS, ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST Proposition A: Amendments to the Employee Retirement Fund Explanation: This proposition seeks to update the city’s employee retirement plan by changing how contributions are calculated, adjusting the rules for who manages the plan, and adding flexibility for the city to contribute extra funds if needed. For: Ensures long-term stability of the retirement fund and offers flexibility for the city to add extra funds, which can protect retirees. Against: Increased contributions may place financial strain on both the city and employees. Changes to the board’s powers could reduce oversight. Proposition B: Adding a Preamble to the City Charter Explanation: This proposal would add a statement to the City Charter, declaring Dallas to be a fair, equitable democracy that works to ensure justice and safety for all residents. For: Reinforces Dallas's commitment to fairness, equity, and justice, promoting unity and trust among residents. Against: It is largely symbolic, with no direct legal impact. Some may argue it adds unnecessary language without practical value. Proposition C: Increasing Salaries for the Mayor and Council members Explanation: This would increase the annual salary for the Mayor to $110,000 and city council members to $90,000, with adjustments each year based on the cost of living. For: Higher salaries can attract more qualified candidates and ensure fair pay for city leaders. Annual adjustments tied to living costs keep salaries current. Against: Some residents may view the raises as inappropriate or excessive, especially if city leadership is perceived as ineffective. Proposition D: Removing Election Date from the Charter Explanation: This proposition would remove the requirement that city council elections be held in May, allowing elections to be scheduled based on state law or city decisions. For: Aligning with state law simplifies the process and reduces confusion, potentially saving money. Against: Changing election dates might confuse voters, potentially leading to lower turnout. Proposition E: Eliminating Ability to Run Again After Serving Term Limits Explanation: This proposal would prevent city council members and the mayor from running again after serving the maximum number of allowed terms. For: Encourages fresh leadership and new ideas while preventing long-term monopolization of power. Against: Experienced leaders may be forced out, leading to a loss of valuable experience and limiting voter choice. Proposition F: Providing City Secretary and City Auditor with Employees Explanation: This would require that the city council provide employees, in addition to assistants, to support the City Secretary and City Auditor. For: Providing additional staff will help these departments manage their responsibilities more efficiently and accurately. Against: It could increase city spending, and some may argue that existing staff levels are sufficient. Proposition G: Adding Eligibility Criteria for Redistricting Commission Explanation: This proposition would establish clear eligibility criteria for serving on the redistricting commission, which adjusts city council district boundaries. For: Ensures that commission members are qualified, leading to fairer and more transparent districting. Against: Could make it harder to find eligible members, limiting the pool of potential candidates. Proposition H: Removing Voter Registration Requirements for Boards and Commissions Explanation: This proposal would remove the requirement that members of certain city boards and commissions (like the planning or park boards) be registered voters or taxpayers. For: Expands the pool of candidates, allowing for more diversity and representation in important city roles. Against: Reduces accountability, as some board members might not be fully invested in the community. Proposition I: Extending Petition Deadlines and Reducing Required Signatures Explanation: This would give residents more time (120 days instead of 60) to collect signatures for a petition and reduce the number of required signatures from 10% to 5% of voters. For: Makes it easier for residents to participate in the democratic process by extending deadlines and lowering the threshold for petitions. Against: Could lead to an increase in frivolous or unnecessary petitions, wasting city resources. Proposition J: Allowing City Council to Replace Board Members Before Terms End Explanation: This proposition allows the city council to replace members of boards and commissions before their terms are over. For: Provides flexibility to remove underperforming or problematic members, keeping boards effective. Against: Could lead to politically motivated replacements, undermining the stability and independence of these boards. Proposition L: Adding the Office of the Inspector General Explanation: This would create an Office of the Inspector General, responsible for overseeing city operations to ensure transparency and accountability. The Inspector General would be appointed by the city council. For: Creates a watchdog to oversee the city’s actions, which could prevent corruption and increase public trust. Against: Adding a new office could increase costs without guaranteeing better outcomes, and may duplicate existing oversight functions. Proposition O: Amending Appointment Procedure for Associate Municipal Judges Explanation: This proposal clarifies how associate municipal judges are appointed, stating they must live in Dallas within four months of their appointment and be practicing attorneys in good standing. For: Clarifies rules, ensuring judges are qualified and connected to the local community. Against: May make it harder to find qualified candidates due to the residency requirement. Proposition P: Removing Requirement to Pay Half of Administrative Law Judge Costs Explanation: This would eliminate the rule requiring city employees to pay half the costs of having an administrative law judge conduct an appeal for job dismissals or demotions. For: Reduces financial barriers for employees seeking to appeal decisions, making the process more accessible. Against: Increases costs for the city, which may need to cover more legal expenses. Proposition Q: Technical Amendments to Conform to State Law, Correct Terms, etc. Explanation: This proposition proposes several technical changes to align the City Charter with state law, city code, and current practices, and to correct outdated language. For: Ensures the charter is accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with state laws and city practices. Against: Some may argue the changes are unnecessary if they don’t result in real improvements or impact daily operations. Proposition R: Reforming Marijuana Enforcement Explanation: This would reform how the city enforces marijuana possession laws, making minor marijuana possession the lowest priority for law enforcement and prohibiting arrests for small amounts unless tied to a serious crime. For: Reduces unnecessary arrests, freeing up police resources for more serious crimes. Helps prevent criminalizing non-violent offenders for minor drug possession. Against: Critics may worry it sends the wrong message about drug use and weakens law enforcement’s ability to maintain order. Proposition S: Granting Standing to Residents and Waiving Governmental Immunity Explanation: This would allow any Dallas resident to sue the city if they believe the city isn’t following its own rules or state laws. It also removes the city's immunity from such lawsuits, allowing residents to recover costs and attorney’s fees. For: Empowers residents to hold the city accountable, ensuring that the city follows its own and the State of Texas’ rules and laws. Against: Will lead to an increase in lawsuits by the State, which may drain city resources and taxpayer money. Proposition T: Annual Community Survey Explanation: This proposition would require the city to conduct an annual survey of at least 1,400 residents to measure satisfaction with quality of life. The city manager’s compensation or job security would depend on the results. For: Ensures the city manager is responsive to residents’ needs by tying performance compensation to community satisfaction. Against: Conducting annual surveys could be costly, and linking the manager’s job to survey results may promote short-term thinking over long-term planning considering the measures are societal issues outside of City manager’s direct control. Proposition U: Police and Fire Funding Appropriation Explanation: This proposal would require that at least 50% of any additional city revenue (above the previous year’s amount) be allocated to police and firefighter pensions, as well as increasing officer salaries and the number of police officers to at least 4,000. For: Ensures adequate funding for police and firefighters, helping retain staff and maintain safety. Against: Could reduce funding available for other city needs and over commits the city to policing, limiting flexibility in how future revenue is spent.
View on Reddit #37011744

mhci-throwaway@reddit

Thank you for your detailed comment, it’s very helpful!
View on Reddit #38373211

WayneRooneysHairPlug@reddit

You know what would be nice? Some information about those amendments.
View on Reddit #36998785

Mecha-Jesus@reddit

Prop S would allow any person or corporation to sue the city if they think the city violated its charter. This would tie up the city in meaningless lawsuits and would cost the city hundreds of thousands in legal fees anytime any antisocial weirdo gets mad at the city for any reason. Prop T would force the city to issue an annual satisfaction survey of residents. If enough residents state that they are unsatisfied, the City Manager gets fired. The only 5 categories on this survey are 1) crime, 2) litter, 3) homelessness, 4) panhandling, and 5) roads. The City Manager has basically no control over these issues, so the effect will be to paralyze city government. Prop U would force the city to spend 50% of any future additional revenues on police and their pensions, no matter what. What if the crime rate drops? The city still has to keep funneling money into the police. What if the city gets a huge one-off tax boost and wants to store it for a rainy day? Nope, 50% of that has to go to the police. What if a tornado hits and destroys roads, parks, and city buildings? Well I hope 50% is enough for that, because the cops have to get their cut.
View on Reddit #37000790

PumpkinCarvingisFun@reddit

Who comes up with this crap?
View on Reddit #37001880

CatteNappe@reddit

By all reports Monte Bennett, Ashford CEO is behind it. Uber right winger, very entitled, loves throwing his weight around (a "do you *know* who I *am*?" sort of guy) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty\_Bennett](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Bennett) >But where did Dallas HERO even come from? And who is behind the group?  >Reached by text message, Marocco chose not to identify the other leaders behind Dallas HERO, instead simply calling the group “citizen-driven, not a large organization, mainly volunteers.” >Many signs, however, point to Dallas HERO having ties to Dallas-area businessman Monty Bennett, [a prominent hotelier](https://www.wfaa.com/article/money/business/dallas-businessman-monty-bennett-company-leaves-new-york-stock-exchange/287-16839510-16db-4a29-8355-04d5e3f8d249) and regular GOP political donor who also serves as publisher of the online publication The Dallas Express. >Arvizu, who filed the lawsuit against the city in response to its amendment proposals, works a paralegal at Bennett's Ashford Inc. company, per her LinkedIn page.  >Meanwhile, Stefani Carter, whose LinkedIn page identifies her as president of Dallas HERO, sits on the board of Braemar Hotels and Resorts. As with the hospitality real estate firm Ashford Inc., Braemar is also controlled by Bennett.  [https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/dallas-county/whos-behind-dallas-hero-group-responsible-for-dallas-city-charter-amendment-propositions/287-af36b1fe-2077-4796-834e-f1754045cfd4](https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/dallas-county/whos-behind-dallas-hero-group-responsible-for-dallas-city-charter-amendment-propositions/287-af36b1fe-2077-4796-834e-f1754045cfd4)
View on Reddit #37003035

dart22@reddit

Oh hey, what a surprise, a small government Republican wants 50 percent of the city's tax revenue to go to the police. It's almost like they want government small for rich people and intrusive for everyone else.
View on Reddit #37008888

Mishawnuodo@reddit

And when their bad policies manifest themselves in real life, they'll blame Democrats, just like happened with gas and inflation
View on Reddit #38214642

llort_tsoper@reddit

The City of Dallas police and fire budget is already basically 100% of property tax revenue. Take a look at your property tax bill, look at the portion that goes to the City, every penny of that goes to police and fire.
View on Reddit #37014421

ihaterunning2@reddit

This. Last time I looked at the city budget the majority went to DPD and fire, with DPD getting the larger share. But we’re not paying officers more, average salary is about $50-$60K. It’s just volume of employees and A LOT of equipment. It’s also no wonder DPD has a recruiting problem when you can go to any suburb and make 30-60% more with less risk.
View on Reddit #37022853

otis_breading@reddit

The starting salary for DPD and DFR is $75k. The highest suburbs pay about $82k. It’s not a huge difference and the pay really isn’t the reason we don’t have enough officers.
View on Reddit #37040540

ihaterunning2@reddit

I just looked it up again and DPD did in fact raise salaries, it’s now $70K starting. And you’re correct it’s comparable to suburbs now.
View on Reddit #37048209

otis_breading@reddit

$75 is the new number in this year’s budget, effective Oct 1
View on Reddit #37059684

Cruezin@reddit

I thought a big chunk goes to schools too? I'm not in Dallas county though
View on Reddit #37022873

llort_tsoper@reddit

A big portion of your property tax bill goes to DISD, but just looking at the portion that goes to City of Dallas, basically all of that goes to DPD and Dallas Fire.
View on Reddit #37026691

BerserkxFury@reddit

The cops definitely deserve that and more though. They have really really tough jobs.
View on Reddit #37017714

de-gustibus@reddit

It’s very challenging to break into private homes and kill young men sitting on their own couches.
View on Reddit #37021303

UX-Edu@reddit

It’s always some rich asshole.
View on Reddit #37022753

NonlocalA@reddit

His funding Dallas Express isn't surprising at all.
View on Reddit #37010079

CatteNappe@reddit

Not at all.
View on Reddit #37017307

juhqf740g@reddit

Cool, were they at?
View on Reddit #37004126

CatteNappe@reddit

Who?
View on Reddit #37016906

Mecha-Jesus@reddit

The organization behind the STU props is called [Dallas HERO](https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/dallas-county/whos-behind-dallas-hero-group-responsible-for-dallas-city-charter-amendment-propositions/287-af36b1fe-2077-4796-834e-f1754045cfd4), a "grassroots" organization that consists entirely of employees of [near-billionaire hotelier, serial fraudster, Ken Paxton superfan, and anti-trans activist Monty Bennett.](https://therealdeal.com/magazine/national-may-2023/monty-bennetts-fire-and-brimstone-journey/)
View on Reddit #37003036

lillybheart@reddit

Those are comically awful. Like this goes well beyond “I disagree with this” this is so bad I’d assume it’s a joke
View on Reddit #37317786

JGM92AG@reddit

Question about Prop S. What is the current recourse or oversight if a Texas City violates its own charter? In other words, the city goes out and violates its charter... If somebody is impacted by that, what is their avenue for recovery and or forcing the city to comply with its own charter? Is there a state oversight board to which a Dallas resident could appeal?
View on Reddit #37051678

Soggy-Bedroom-3673@reddit

This is a bit of an arcane issue, but it's a question of standing to sue.  You can currently sue the city for violating its charter as long as you were harmed by that violation. This resolution would amend the charter to grant standing to *any* city resident who thinks the city violated its charter in any way, whether they were involved or not.
View on Reddit #37199659

JGM92AG@reddit

Got it. Thanks!!
View on Reddit #37199733

noncongruent@reddit

Prop U seems to have come about because the police constantly complain about having no money to hire or enforce traffic laws. If U fails then the police will simply point to that failure and ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯ when the complete lack of law enforcement on the streets keeps being a thing. Regarding roads, who has control over that? Any single person or division within city government? Also, by extension that includes sidewalks, too. Also, I'm not sure why the Park Cities would give two craps about any of this, the only connect they have with Dallas is being in the same county as us. They don't share our taxes, our money, our fire or police, our schools, nothing. If Dallas evaporated overnight the main effect on them would be less through traffic and less access to servants and landscaping people.
View on Reddit #37010056

zekeweasel@reddit

Strangely they purify their own water, but contract with Dallas for sewer treatment.
View on Reddit #37024681

Strong-Lime2041@reddit

I don't know why, but this strikes me as weirdly...poetic? In like a bad way? I feel like there's a better word for it but I'm very tired. 
View on Reddit #37028234

zekeweasel@reddit

I don't know about poetic, but I did find it a bit strange because there are quite a few area cities that either buy purified water outright from Dallas, or at the very least buy wholesale unpurified water from Dallas. The Park Cities do neither and do the upstream side themselves, but choose not to operate sewage treatment plants. Which makes some sense because there's nowhere in the Park Cities to plant a sewer plant that wouldn't be a massive nuisance. But I can't figure how it's actually sensible or economical to purify your own water in that situation.
View on Reddit #37130611

Strong-Lime2041@reddit

Poetic in the sense that they don't want our dirty poor people water but they'll happily give us their waste. 
View on Reddit #37140248

CatteNappe@reddit

They share our streets and other city services outside their little bubble.
View on Reddit #37018070

noncongruent@reddit

The streets may have the same name, but Dallas doesn't maintain any streets or other infrastructure inside the Park Cities. They also don't have access to other Dallas city services, which is why the Park Cities have their own police and fire departments. DART does service the Park Cities, but those cities contribute half their sales tax revenue for that, no different than any other city that participates in DART.
View on Reddit #37018225

CatteNappe@reddit

Ummmm..... those people emerge from the Park Cities *every day,* and drive on Dallas city streets, go to work in offices within Dallas that are inspected and protected by Dallas fire departments, shop in Dallas stores, obtain medical care from Dallas based hospitals and clinics, etc. etc. etc. As I said - *they share our streets and services outside their little bubble.*
View on Reddit #37024533

noncongruent@reddit

And people in Dallas drive on their streets without paying for it. It works both ways. Streets are a shared common good, they benefit everyone, not just the residents of the cities they're in.
View on Reddit #37026037

CatteNappe@reddit

You apparently got lost in the thread. The comment that led to this was: "I'm not sure why the Park Cities would give two craps about any of this, the only connect they have with Dallas is being in the same county as us. They don't share our taxes, our money, our fire or police, our schools, nothing."
View on Reddit #37068058

KeyEngineering3161@reddit

I can’t believe you actually had to write that 🤦🏻‍♂️
View on Reddit #37029050

AmNotAnAtomicPlayboy@reddit

That's exactly what CatteNappe means. They are an enclave of Dallas and a bedroom community to boot. Highland Park people routinely use Dallas roads as much as any Dallasite in the same area when they go to work or the airport or theater or whatever, but they don't pay for them. That's 35,000 or so very wealthy (on average) people who get to use Dallas roads for free.
View on Reddit #37021279

Bardfinn@reddit

“Crime”, “homelessness”, and “panhandling” are all the same category for their purposes, and right wing wealthy interests have been pushing for social media outrage over all three for over a decade, now. Any time they want to monkeywrench the city of dallas, just run stories about those topics on the local Sinclair news outlets. U is a nightmare tbqh
View on Reddit #37025365

heyitssal@reddit

I didn't know we had police
View on Reddit #37006588

pololamp1@reddit

yes because the are ridiculously underfunded and understaffed
View on Reddit #37007353

yung_accy@reddit

12 spotted
View on Reddit #37016705

ALaccountant@reddit

Jesus christ those are some bad propositions. I'm not in Dallas so can't vote on this, but I know quite a few people who live in University Park and this seems like the type of bullshit they would come up with.
View on Reddit #37000927

OrangeGringo@reddit

Let’s not throw this on UP. This is all driven by one guy who doesn’t really get along with people in UP or HP either.
View on Reddit #37008911

HomicidalJungleCat@reddit

This is all from that monte guy right?
View on Reddit #37011159

OrangeGringo@reddit

No opinion or debate on anything you said except, the City Manager is THE one person in Dallas who really does have responsibility for roads.
View on Reddit #37008836

Jackieray2light@reddit

Just one comment, the city manager absolutely has control over what is being done to combat most of those issues. Other than the police, the city manager is the top of the food chain for all the departments that adress these issues so the buck should stop with them.
View on Reddit #37006885

DonkeeJote@reddit

and Prop U gets even worse with the hiring mandates.
View on Reddit #37005200

deja-roo@reddit

Wow those really are bad.
View on Reddit #37002635

Ok-Aardvark-6742@reddit

Don’t we already get an annual survey from the city? Maybe I’m remembering that wrong. Either way, lengthy mailed surveys are usually filed in the recycle bin at my house. Seems like a stupid thing to base someone’s job on, especially if the response rate is super low. Thanks for the summaries either way, really helpful.
View on Reddit #37001189

arcanition@reddit

* Prop S: Any person or corporation would be allowed to sue the city of Dallas if they believe the city has violated any charter laws. * Prop T: The City Manager's pay would be based on a survey. * Prop U: Half of all city revenue would be required to go to police. City of Dallas police would have to increase number of officers by 30%.
View on Reddit #37033359

Additional-Sky-7436@reddit (OP)

I mean... Google isn't that hard to use. [https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=City+of+Dallas+Charter+Amendments+S%2C+T%2C+and+U](https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=City+of+Dallas+Charter+Amendments+S%2C+T%2C+and+U)
View on Reddit #37000844

November9999@reddit

My guess is if Reddit is against it it’s probably common sense legislation that any normal citizen would vote for.
View on Reddit #37014690

Bardfinn@reddit

2015 was 9 years ago, the narwhal bacons at midnight back then, kind stranger, don’t forget to tip your fedora on your way out
View on Reddit #37025464

v4por@reddit

I found a decent article. https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/2024/09/27/our-recommendations-on-dallas-charter-amendments/
View on Reddit #36999655

spacedman_spiff@reddit

[http://citysecretary2.dallascityhall.com/pdf/Elections/2024/110524SE/PCL.pdf](http://citysecretary2.dallascityhall.com/pdf/Elections/2024/110524SE/PCL.pdf)
View on Reddit #36999565

Adddicus@reddit

Silence peasant! Just do as you're told!!!
View on Reddit #36999441

Jackieray2light@reddit

Also vote no on C... Dallas council members do not need a 50% raise, the mayor doesn’t need a 40% raise and their pay should not be linked to inflation. And vote yes on E, 4 terms should be 4 terms, the idea that council leachers get to take 1 term off then return for 4 more terms is dumb.
View on Reddit #37006241

sandefurian@reddit

Why should their salaries not be linked to inflation?
View on Reddit #37010819

daydrunk_@reddit

Because the average persons isnt
View on Reddit #37013688

sandefurian@reddit

That’s a shitty argument.
View on Reddit #37013727

twelveframe@reddit

That's actually an excellent argument. If the government does push employers to make sure that raises are in alignment with inflation, why should we vote to have the governments raises be in alignment with inflation?
View on Reddit #37044902

JodorowskyJuice@reddit

Because we want to incentivize talented people to be public servants, even if currently the public servants are hacks. This "I'm not getting anything, why should you" mentality probably doesn't help you.
View on Reddit #37064618

DepartmentDue8160@reddit

Then request in as general law for everyone else, not just the club members. Fuck wrong with you man
View on Reddit #37047965

--rooster@reddit

Why should city council get 50% raises? Why should the mayor get 40%?
View on Reddit #37011725

dfwfoodcritic@reddit

I don't know how I am voting on it yet, but I THINK the pro argument is because they currently don't get paid enough for that to be their full-time job. Like half of them are injury lawyers or landlords or retired.
View on Reddit #37012295

--rooster@reddit

>The mayor definitely does get paid plenty though imo. Agreed.
View on Reddit #37014297

de-gustibus@reddit

This mayor does, especially since he moonlights as a mayor and works full time as a dickhole. But in general elected officials should be paid respectable salaries. That way they can ensure they can be regular people and not independently wealthy.
View on Reddit #37021376

sandefurian@reddit

Percent raises mean nothing without knowing both the current salary and what is industry standard. If they’re making that much less then they should be then yeah, they should get the raise. And everyone should have their salary linked to inflation.
View on Reddit #37013456

--rooster@reddit

That information is not a secret.  https://www.fox4news.com/news/dallas-city-council-pay-raise-proposal
View on Reddit #37014071

sandefurian@reddit

Obviously it’s public, the point is you can’t just decry a percent raise. That’s a fair salary for those positions.
View on Reddit #37016358

--rooster@reddit

Also vote YES on R... prohibiting DPD to arrest for marijuana possession, making misdemeanor marijuana possession the DPD's lowest enforcement priority, and to prevent city resources and personnel from being used for tests to determine if a substance "meets the legal definition of marijuana."  So much money and resources being wasted on that bullshit. No more.
View on Reddit #37009893

azwethinkweizm@reddit

While we're at it let's make sure we vote AGAINST Prop H. In a city of more than a million people, it's embarrassing that we have such a low voter turnout. City boards and commissions should be made up of people who are registered to vote. Removing that requirement is inappropriate and sends the wrong message to voters.
View on Reddit #37049738

MadMatMax@reddit

AZa,z,q,qzqz an,,@@
View on Reddit #37045949

SandmanBun@reddit

The mayor(s) and city council are as corrupt and complacent as it gets. I’ll vote in favor of anything that they oppose, especially if it means more funding for the terribly underfunded DPD. If you like how bad things have gotten in Dallas the past four years, then by all means, side with the politicians and council members who caused it to be that way.
View on Reddit #37005128

otis_breading@reddit

The cops oppose the amendment too. The police association spoke out against it. These are bad-faith proposals that were not made in conjunction with any police input.
View on Reddit #37041343

Elveintisiete@reddit

DPD has a long history of misconduct. throwing more money at them isn’t the answer
View on Reddit #37007737

CheesingTiger@reddit

I don’t really understand your logic homie. If the cops are incompetent, you do not magically get competent law enforcement by doing the same thing lol. You need to invest with training, more personnel, raise salaries, etc.
View on Reddit #37011839

Elveintisiete@reddit

And here you are trying to throw money at it and say that’ll fix everything. Make due with what they have and implement different training and policies . Money isn’t the answer to everything.
View on Reddit #37011955

CheesingTiger@reddit

No but that is how you fix that problem. You don’t just get different training or policies you have to fund the training and fund the salaries to make good people want to be cops. If your police are under supported, underpaid and undertrained how do you expect them to get better?
View on Reddit #37012098

Elveintisiete@reddit

So giving them more money is going to stop the misconduct ? Paying them more money is suddenly going to make them better policemen and women? What a joke.
View on Reddit #37012286

CheesingTiger@reddit

I understand your misgivings but look at the reality. We’ve done the whole barebones police department and you are unhappy with the result. Your resolution is… Just get better. But how? You can’t just expect an overnight success from a starting point where you’re unhappy with it. If you are unhappy with it, investment has to be done to show them how, to hire the right people, etc. Look at what Teddy Roosevelt did to the NYC police force with how he revolutionized the training, pay, qualifications, all that. What’s that saying about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result? Haha
View on Reddit #37012415

Elveintisiete@reddit

more money , then more money after that and more money again all the while they get new cars ,new guns , new equipment and none is spent on training . I bet you believe the police are actually here to protect and serve too huh? And the fact that you would bring up NYPD says a lot about you lol . Amerikkkas biggest gang just wanting more and more .
View on Reddit #37012718

Elveintisiete@reddit

Nah
View on Reddit #37012441

TrendingTXN@reddit

Nah, I'm going to go ahead and vote for it. More cops is more better.
View on Reddit #37008628

otis_breading@reddit

The cops oppose this too. The police association, current police chief, and former police chief all have said they oppose the amendment.
View on Reddit #37041245

moonwoolf35@reddit

If it was proposed by University or Highland Park it's usually bad news
View on Reddit #37004353

heyitssal@reddit

Why?
View on Reddit #37006608

maybeidontknowwhy@reddit

Are you asking seriously or in jest?
View on Reddit #37006760

November9999@reddit

Not OP but seriously. Or are all rich people the boogie man?
View on Reddit #37014740

KeyEngineering3161@reddit

In this sub the vast majority of ppl suffer from major wealth envy. It’s quite pathetic.
View on Reddit #37029302

maybeidontknowwhy@reddit

Since you obviously ask in jest and are not serious, then yes. Especially those of Highland Park
View on Reddit #37014860

freetile99@reddit

Odd take
View on Reddit #37015422

ResolutionMany6378@reddit

Rich people do not care about anyone else.
View on Reddit #37013689

heyitssal@reddit

That’s funny. The rich people I know are supporting all their extended family around them and getting very little thanks. “Oh, they have money, what’s it to them?”
View on Reddit #37021170

November9999@reddit

Found the poor! Of all the dumb things on Reddit. This could be tops lol.
View on Reddit #37014770

November9999@reddit

Alternatively if Reddit is against it, it’s probably good news.
View on Reddit #37014702

Optimal_Gluteologist@reddit

Sounds like we need to vote yes on S,T, and U. Thanks for sharing!
View on Reddit #37027390

BobWithCheese69@reddit

Only former living??? What about the current living?
View on Reddit #37026965

greelraker@reddit

What happened to amendment F?
View on Reddit #36999752

Additional-Sky-7436@reddit (OP)

As far as I'm aware it's still on the ballot. [https://ballotpedia.org/Dallas,\_Texas,\_Proposition\_F,\_Require\_City\_Council\_to\_Provide\_Employees\_to\_City\_Secretary\_and\_Auditor\_Charter\_Amendment\_(November\_2024)](https://ballotpedia.org/Dallas,_Texas,_Proposition_F,_Require_City_Council_to_Provide_Employees_to_City_Secretary_and_Auditor_Charter_Amendment_(November_2024))
View on Reddit #37001045

ihaterunning2@reddit

This went whoosh over my head too until the next comment lol. But serious question, is there a reason we wouldn’t allow them to hire employees? How strict is our city charter when it comes to people management? Seems an oddly specific proposition.
View on Reddit #37010947

CatteNappe@reddit

The charter doesn't say they aren't allowed to hire employees, this ill considered amendment says they MUST hire specific employees, and a certain number of them at a certain pay scale.
View on Reddit #37018208

ihaterunning2@reddit

Thanks! Well that seems very unnecessary. I don’t know why you’d need to codify something like that. I’ll definitely research all the propositions, I usually do it closer to Election Day.
View on Reddit #37022603

greelraker@reddit

I’m glad to know propositions and amendments S,T,F,U are all up to the people to decide. I think the world would be a better place if more people thought about STFU.
View on Reddit #37002894

reyam1105@reddit

I think you missed the joke, but thanks for the info!!
View on Reddit #37002795

StronkIS3@reddit

S and U seem fine unless I'm just misinterpreting something? T is a fucking joke
View on Reddit #36999964

spacedman_spiff@reddit

S would allow me to sue the City if they a cop didn't cite a speeder or my neighbor's lawn didn't get cited by code enforcement. Now multiply that by the number of Dallas residents. It would be disastrous for the city. U sounds great until you consider where the funds would come from (hint: parks, libraries, and other departments)
View on Reddit #37000224

StronkIS3@reddit

Ahhh I see thanks for clarifying. Yeah I didn't mind U; my line of thought was maybe it would help solve the DPD employment crisis to some degree, but do agree that I don't want these funds coming from (libraries etc).
View on Reddit #37000407

alpaca_obsessor@reddit

Yeah the goals seem like good targets but the mandate seems like it would hamstring the city’s ability to do anything else with it’s revenues (even if more pressing issues come up in the next few years).
View on Reddit #37001527

CatteNappe@reddit

When it first came out Chief Garcia said it was an impossible benchmark, and even if there were funds to do it, the recruiting and training pipeline couldn't handle those numbers. There has, understandably, been speculation that seeing the potential for these propositions to be voted in helped him decide on leaving for the Austin opportunity.
View on Reddit #37003340

yung_accy@reddit

Also, we’ve seen what happens when you dump money into police. Look at the NYPD - has more funding than many countries ARMIES (they have a police submarine!) More policing / more police funding ≠ safer.
View on Reddit #37019094

noncongruent@reddit

I'm pretty sure the mandates for funding are there specifically because otherwise the city would simply ignore the proposition if it passes and just shrug their shoulders while saying "We know you voted for it and wanted it, but there's no money so there."
View on Reddit #37010350

alpaca_obsessor@reddit

That just creates the issue of inflexibility for years to come in the city budget even if priorities dramatically shift, and the fact that the mandates can’t even be realistically met with current infrastructure would only serve to place untrained officers on the streets. Combined with the charter amendment placing increased liability on the city, that’s just a recipe for draining the city’s budget fighting endless lawsuits.
View on Reddit #37010626

yeahright17@reddit

They're written to sound harmless, but in fact, will cause a lot of issues. Allowing citizens to sue if they believe the city isn't complying with state law will allow interest groups to continually sue over anything and everything they want. Conservative activists will sue over any perceived slight. It will cost the city millions of dollars at a minimum every year to defend. A cop decides to let someone with no criminal record go for a minor crime? Lawsuit. A teacher mentions the fact that black people may have had a hard time after the civil war? Lawsuit. Etc. Forever. On the city manager - Performance is based on a survey of citizens. It would be super easy for groups like the group pushing this amendment to get a city manager fired if the group didn’t like what the city managers was doing (for example, helping homeless people rather than just bussing them out). Being easily fired by, essentially, the head of right wing groups is going to make no one want the job.
View on Reddit #37001867

PseudonymIncognito@reddit

>A teacher mentions the fact that black people may have had a hard time after the civil war? DISD has nothing to do with the City of Dallas government or municipal charter.
View on Reddit #37003908

yeahright17@reddit

You’re right. Sub in a librarian.
View on Reddit #37004359

Left_Ad1956@reddit

As a city of dallas employee... I would agree if it's extended to city council members being at risk for under performing in their districts also if directors would be held accountable for the actions of there departments... remove the 50% crap that goes to police... they don't answer calls anyhow unless someone cries gun. Their auditing needs to be more transparent for all departments/ council districts to the public to see how much crap goes on behind the scenes that no one ever finds out about.
View on Reddit #37016449

Playful_Gain_2579@reddit

Why would prop T be bad? The city manager doesn’t control these issues, but they can affect them. Seems like another government employee just trying to be unaccountable to the public. If a private employee is bad at their job they too lose their job, but now this government employee has no accountability and keeps their job because who’s keeping track of their work?
View on Reddit #37009042

ihaterunning2@reddit

Because playing musical chairs with the city manager is a bad plan. You need some level of job knowledge to be successful and you don’t get that if we’re constantly firing the manager. Making performance based on measurements the manager has little control over almost ensures that would be the outcome. I also absolutely see people giving low scores just to oust people or create chaos. We have city council meetings, go to them and voice your concerns there. Or contact your council member.
View on Reddit #37011406

Playful_Gain_2579@reddit

Have been to a few of these meetings and they resulted in nothing, even came with proposals not just complaints. Proposals that have been introduced in other cities and shown to be effective. Not one of the valid complaints, or proposals I heard in the council meetings was ever implemented. The council members didn’t even look like they wanted to be there let alone taking into consideration what the people were saying. What can performance can the city manager be measured on? Is there any yall would be okay with or do those in local government just get to keep performing terribly, because they have knowledge of the of the job?
View on Reddit #37014551

pcweber111@reddit

We’re prop f to complete the bullshit?
View on Reddit #37014410

TrendingTXN@reddit

It seems like ST and U are things that I want to see. Why wouldn't we want 4k police officers?
View on Reddit #37000785

CatteNappe@reddit

Would you want them badly enough to quit paving any streets, close all the libraries, and build a whole new police training center? Except, even if you did all those things you couldn't meet that goal, or pay for maintaining it annually. It's a ridiculous expectation; as is allowing any of us to sue the city for any reason, given how lawsuit happy some folks are. While we are searching for a new City Manager it's probably not the best time to decide their job evaluation will be based on a popularity contest via twitter or some such; and a new Chief of Police is hardly going to be eager to step up to a mandate that guarantees failure.
View on Reddit #37003733

TrendingTXN@reddit

Yeah because our streets are so strong right now. Lol.
View on Reddit #37003919

CatteNappe@reddit

Not gonna get any stronger if we pull all the funds earmarked for them to fulfill the impossible dream of 4K police, either.
View on Reddit #37004343

DonkeeJote@reddit

Not to mention most of those new officers would be dangerously undertrained. which also goes right back to the ridiculousness of Prop S
View on Reddit #37005440

DonkeeJote@reddit

We can want those, but they should be added in a proper manner and with proper training. Putting an extra 800 untrained cops on the street is a recipe for disaster.
View on Reddit #37005364

alpaca_obsessor@reddit

I think it’s a good goal but the regulatory mandate would seriously hamper the city’s ability to do anything else with its excess revenue even if more pressing issues came up years in the future.
View on Reddit #37001803

CatteNappe@reddit

It's guaranteed to hamper doing even the basics, now, let alone years in the future. Even the police chief said it was an unachievable goal, far beyond what their recruiting and training could accomplish even if there were all the money in the world to throw at it. It's possible facing that prospect contributed a motive for his resignation.
View on Reddit #37003963

Ok-Aardvark-6742@reddit

My issue with it isn’t the funding for officers, it’s putting an arbitrary percentage on it that will require additional legislation to change if funding needs change in the future. Can you imagine if the police have what they need, are fully staffed, and the city wants to reallocate surplus funding to another area that needs it? We’d have a campaign from the police about how the city wants to defund them. That’s a completely avoidable mess.
View on Reddit #37001556