Three Dallas City Council members sued the city to halt a pivotal meeting this week on the future of City Hall, accusing its leaders of trying to “ram through this momentous decision” without adequate public notice or council review.
The suit describes the council agenda for a special meeting Wednesday as “deeply problematic” and says residents have been denied “adequate notice” about what the city proposes to do with City Hall.
Council members Paula Blackmon, Adam Bazaldua and Cara Mendelsohn filed the suit Monday in Dallas County District Court against the city of Dallas, City Manager Kimberly Bizor Tolbert and City Secretary Bilierae Johnson.
The council members are asking a judge to halt the special meeting Wednesday in which the council is scheduled to vote on four items that would advance potential moves of City Hall and emergency operations, authorize redevelopment efforts for the City Hall site and begin a phased repair program for the existing building.
“We filed this because the process has been completely flawed from the start,” Blackmon said Monday. “I’m tearing down a building — for what?”
A city spokesman declined to comment late Monday on the suit.
The issue confronting the council is whether to spend hundreds of millions to remain in the building or continue exploring alternatives, including relocating city operations elsewhere. It is not clear whether a judge will hear the suit before that meeting.
“The loss or alteration of this irreplaceable civic landmark cannot be undone,” the lawsuit said, “Once a decision is made to pursue ‘redevelopment,’ the building may be damaged or destroyed before legal remedies can be obtained.”
The suit also said the agenda language is too vague to satisfy the Texas Open Meetings Act because it does not clearly explain what authority would be granted to the city manager, what sites are under consideration or how much money could be spent.
The agenda includes blank appropriation amounts for relocation and due-diligence activities.
The lawsuit challenges the city’s handling of the process. It says council members were denied an opportunity to delay consideration of the redevelopment proposal until they received more information about its scope, costs and potential impacts.
It also revives a dispute over council procedures. Bazaldua requested that the redevelopment item be deferred until the full council received a briefing on the proposal. Johnson denied the request, saying the council’s deferral rules do not apply to special-called meetings.