What should you watch at Dallas City Hall this week?

Dallas Police policy says ALPR systems and data are for official public safety and law enforcement purposes. Officers must have approved access, and every database search must include a law enforcement reason, such as a case number, CAD number, or offense type.

The policy also allows ALPR data to be shared with other agencies for legitimate law enforcement purposes. It says that sharing between agencies is governed by memoranda of understanding (MOUs) and that data sent outside DPD must be documented in a secondary dissemination log.

Dallas’ policy says ALPR data is generally retained for 30 days, although reads or hits can be preserved longer when they result in enforcement action or are needed for a case or evidence.

What we’re trying to understand: How do these rules work when another agency directly searches Dallas’ Flock network?

DPD says Dallas currently shares its Flock network with 1,508 law enforcement agencies, while 1,063 agencies share their networks with DPD.

According to DPD, authorized partner agencies can search Dallas’ network of cameras, but they cannot access Dallas’ alerts, hotlists, analytics or video management system.

DPD says platform access is limited to trained and authorized personnel and that user actions are logged. DPD also says it conducts weekly compliance audits, cross referencing searches with department case numbers and sending unvalidated case numbers to supervisors for review.

What we’re watching: Do those weekly audits include searches made by outside agencies? And what agreements govern access for the 1,508 agencies Dallas shares with?

DPD says Flock helps officers identify wanted or stolen vehicles, develop investigative leads and respond more quickly to crimes.

According to DPD, Flock was the primary solving factor in:

2023 – 14 homicide cases (7.7%)
2024 – 8 cases (6.3%)
2025 – 15 cases (13.5%)
2026 YTD – 12 cases (18.2%)

DPD says the cameras helped identify suspect vehicles near crime scenes, provided key investigative leads and corroborated other evidence.

The department also highlighted a June 2026 case in which a Flock camera detected the vehicle of a critically missing person from Crowley. Officers later located the person and reunited them with family.

Why we’re including this: Understanding the debate means looking at both the public safety value DPD says Flock provides and the questions around access, retention and oversight.

Dallas is considering a rewrite of its Living Wage Policy for certain City contracts. The proposal would change which contracts qualify, how the wage is calculated, and how the policy is enforced and reviewed.

The contract threshold would increase.
The policy would apply only to competitively solicited contracts worth more than $300,000.

The policy would focus on labor intensive services.
Covered categories would include janitorial and custodial services, security guards, landscaping, facility maintenance, temporary staffing, automotive maintenance and ground transportation.

Several types of contracts would generally be excluded.
These include professional and consulting services, construction, goods and commodities, software and subscriptions, financial services, equipment rentals and concessions. Certain emergency, cooperative purchasing and other contracts would also be exempt.

The wage calculation would change.
For each covered category, Dallas would compare:

1. MIT’s Living Wage Calculator for one working adult with no children in Dallas County, and
2. the median or 50th percentile market wage for the applicable occupation in the Dallas, Fort Worth, and Arlington area.

The City would use whichever amount is lower as the wage floor.

First tier subcontractors would also have to comply.
Contractors would be responsible for ensuring their first tier subcontractors pay the required wage.

The City could audit compliance.
Contractors would have to maintain records and provide payroll documentation when requested. Violations could ultimately result in withheld payments, corrective action, suspension or debarment, or termination.

The policy would come back for review.
City Council would review it at least once every two years, including its labor market conditions, economic impact and effectiveness.

These are two separate affordable housing proposals at the same address: 4600 W. Davis Street.

West Davis Senior Apartments
280 apartments: 140 one-bedroom and 140 two-bedroom units. The Dallas Housing Finance Corporation has indicated its intent to issue up to $55.5 million in private activity bonds for the project.

West Davis Family Apartments
360 apartments: 84 two-bedroom, 184 three-bedroom and 92 four-bedroom units. DHFC has indicated its intent to issue up to $80 million in private activity bonds for the project.

All 640 apartments are expected to be income restricted.
Both proposals say 100% of their units would be reserved for households earning 60% or less of Area Median Income (AMI).

Both projects are seeking 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits from the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs.

City Council is not being asked to approve construction itself. It is being asked to provide a Resolution of No Objection, which the projects need as part of the process of seeking the tax credits.

The Family Apartments require an additional Council action because the project is within one mile of another development serving the same population that received housing tax credits within the previous three years. Council must specifically allow the project to move forward despite that proximity.

The City Building Official has deemed the property unsafe, and an engineering report submitted with the demolition request found severe structural problems involving the home’s load bearing system, roof and framing.

The engineer concluded that the building is structurally unsound, uninhabitable and not feasible to rehabilitate, and recommended complete demolition.

Two contractor estimates put rehabilitation at approximately $187,200 and $267,600. City staff says the amount of work required would effectively amount to rebuilding the house rather than repairing it.

Under Dallas’ demolition rules for contributing historic properties, the Landmark Commission must determine that the structure is a major and imminent safety threat, demolition is necessary to address that threat, and there is no reasonable alternative that could eliminate the threat in time.

911 SYSTEM: +$10.35M

Dallas began implementing its Next Generation 911 system with federal grant funding in 2020. In 2021, City Council approved a five year, $9.96 million agreement with AT&T for hardware, software and managed services to upgrade the City’s 911 system.

That agreement has reached the end of its original five year term.

Council is now being asked to add $10.35 million and extend the agreement another five years, through August 2031.

$9.96M to $20.31M
Total authorized contract amount

The additional money would come from the 911 System Operations Fund.

DISPATCH + RECORDS SYSTEM: +$631K

Dallas is also considering adding about $631,000 to a separate system used by Dallas Police, Dallas Fire Rescue and Municipal Court and Detention Services.

The money would pay for removing and adding interfaces, data migration and integration maintenance for the City’s Computer Aided Dispatching and Records Management System.

The five-year agreement was approved in December 2025 for $47.19 million. The amendment would bring it to about $47.82 million.