March 23, 2026 Newsletter
March 23, 2026 – Volume 20 Number 12
Highlights:
* City Council to meet on Tuesday; including a development agreement for mixed-use project downtown with more massive apartments.
* P&Z meets on Wednesday.
* AISD meets on Thursday.
Teachers' Salaries
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_97.html
Taxpayers' Funds at Risk:
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_83.html
City Council grades:
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_39.html
AISD Board grades:
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_1.html
Citizens Defending Freedom vs. AISD
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_14.html
Open Letter to AISD Taxpayers
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_11.html
Arlington is a city where citizens are relegated to being spectators, rather than players on the field. The SPECTATOR helps citizens know what is happening on the field. Only a few of the in-house team members are allowed to play ball in Arlington. The SPECTATOR helps citizens understand the game.
GAME SCHEDULE:
Tuesday, March 24: City Council meetings, 101 W. Abram Street, 10:15am, 2:45pm, 6:30pm. (You must preregister online by 5:00pm to speak during citizen participation.)
Wednesday, March 25: P&Z meeting, 101 W. Abram Street, 5:30pm. (Work session at 3:30pm.)
Thursday, March 26: AISD Board meeting, AISD Administration Building, 690 E. Lamar Boulevard, 6:30pm. (You must be signed up online by 3:00pm if you wish to speak.)
Friday, April 3: Good Friday. City Offices closed.
Sunday, April 5: Easter.
Tuesday, April 7: City Council meetings, 101 W. Abram Street, 6:30pm. (You must preregister online by 5:00pm to speak during citizen participation.)
Thursday, April 9: AISD Board meeting, AISD Administration Building, 690 E. Lamar Boulevard, 6:30pm. (You must be signed up online by 3:00pm if you wish to speak.)
Wednesday, April 15: P&Z meeting, 101 W. Abram Street, 5:30pm. (Work session at x:xxpm.)
Monday, April 20: Start of Early Voting for Municipal and ISD May 2 Election, 8:00am-5:00pm.
Tuesday, April 21: City Council meetings, 101 W. Abram Street, 6:30pm. (You must preregister online by 5:00pm to speak during citizen participation.)
Thursday, April 23: AISD Board meeting, AISD Administration Building, 690 E. Lamar Boulevard, 6:30pm. (You must be signed up online by 3:00pm if you wish to speak.)
Tuesday, April 28: City Council Spring Retreat.
Tueday, April 28: End of Early Voting for Municipal and ISD May 2 Election, 7:00am-7:00pm.
From THE LOCKER ROOM
Arlington City Council Update
The Arlington City Council will meet this Tuesday, March 24, for a full slate of meetings. The first of three committee meetings is at 10:15am. The afternoon session begins at 1:15pm, but goes into executive session first. The open portion of the meeting will start no sooner than 2:45pm. The evening meeting is at 6:30pm.
Committee Meetings
The Finance and Audit Committee will meet for about 45 minutes at 10:15am. They will discuss the FY26-Q1 budget analysis and the FY25 Year end audit (BAR presentation , BAR-Q1 and business plan , external audit presentation , single audit , popular annual financial report , comprehensive financial report with audit letter).
The Community and Neighborhood Development Committee will meet at 11:15 and spend about 30 minutes each on multi-family inspections-public transparency and a homeless update (multi-family presentation , nothing available on the homeless update).
The Transportation and Municipal Infrastructure Committee will meet at 12:30pm and discuss a Handi-tran update (presentation).
Afternoon Meeting
The afternoon meeting will begin at 1:15pm and go into executive session. The executive session agenda includes:
1. A condemnation at 415 N. Collins for the Entertainment District sidewalk project.
2. Sewer easement at 1140 W. Main Street.
3. Real property discussion for Affordable Housing. [This one scares me.]
4. Offers of incentives to business prospects.
The open portion of the afternoon meeting will start no sooner than 2:45pm. That portion of the agenda includes three work session items, two informal staff reports, and a discussion on external committees.
Evening Meeting
The agenda for the 6:30pm evening meeting includes 36 consent agenda items, four public hearings, an ordinance, and a development agreement resolution.
Consent agenda item 8.13 is $7,135,000 for the Woodland West Aquatic Center (staff report).
Consent agenda item 8.21 is paying Anthem more money [from the Economic Development Corporation] for the purchase of 2.4 acres to be taken off the tax rolls for $3,433,184 (staff report , resolution). [That is about $20,000/year in tax revenue that the general fund will not be receiving. And will the taxpayers have to pay into the recently created public improvement district (PID)?]
The first public hearing is for AV26-01 for a variance on the distance requirement for a liquor store, at 1606 W. Randol Mill Road (staff report). They are within 300 feet of a public school.
The second public hearing is for PD25-23, at 2301 N. Collins Street (at Brown Trail). They wish to change the CC (community commercial) to a planned development plus a billiard parlor and package liquor store (staff report).
The third public hearing is for ZA26-01, at 300 W. Park Row Drive. They wish for a straight zoning change from CC (community commercial) to residential medium density (RM-12), usually townhomes (staff report).
The fourth public hearing is for PD20-22R1, at 109 W. Rogers Street. They wish to modify the development plan (staff report). I believe they are trying to add short-term rentals as it is RM-12 base zoning.
The ordinance is for the appointment of part-time municipal court associate judges (staff report).
The resolution is a development agreement for mixed-use redevelopment downtown (staff report , resolution). [Commentary: I write this as a commentary because the only facts I know are in the staff report. The staff report fails to say where, but the resolution says it is 415 W. Abram Street.
The city will be throwing in just shy of $4 million dollars, the developer will spend at least $60 million, and the project should be listed on the tax rolls for at least $40 million. Property taxes on $40 million is about $250,000/year starting in tax year 2031 so for us regular people that will take 16 years from 2031, however [speculation] the economic development people will throw in a bunch of other garbage factors so that they can probably say makes it about/maybe half that.
If you go to the last several pages of the resolution, you can see the drawings of these massive apartments.]
Council Leftovers
The fourth Arlington Spectator question for the candidates: The City Council has given away millions of dollars and/or potential revenues to companies to encourage development. At what point has there been enough “encouragement” and when should the taxpayers-- and lowering tax rates-- become a higher priority than development? Why?
Ballot Order:
Mayor
Hunter Crow - I would likely take a hardline stance against corporate subsidies:
Ending "Corporate Welfare": I have consistently criticized the use of public funds for private profit. I would likely argue that millions of dollars currently "given away" to companies should instead be diverted to social services, such as affordable housing, food security, and education.
Taxpayer Priority: I would likely state that taxpayers have already done enough "encouragement." I have emphasized in the past that government should serve the people, not private equity or developers. I would favor lowering the tax burden on working-class residents over providing incentives to wealthy corporations.
Transparency over Incentives: I have specifically targeted the lack of transparency in executive sessions where these deals are often brokered. I would likely demand a full audit of existing development agreements to ensure the city is receiving a fair return on its investment.
Community-Led Growth: Instead of top-down corporate development, I have advocated for grassroots and community-led initiatives that keep wealth within the local economy rather than exporting it to corporate headquarters.
Jim Ross – Did not respond.
Shaun Mallory – Did not respond.
Steve Cavender – Did not respond.
District 3
Kelly Burke –We are already at that point now, we have had enough. My focus would be on small local business and opening the doors for our local small companies to bid openly on some of these contracts. Lowering taxes should always be the number one priority of A Councilman.
Nikkie Hunter – Did not respond.
District 4
Tom Ware – Did not respond.
Rojo Meixueiro – Did not respond.
Lisa Ventura - Enough is enough. We are giving away the cow when we still need milk. The residents of Arlington have traffic, property taxes, and other bills to pay when big companies are raking in our dollars and not giving back to the city that is making them wealthy. I'm not against incentives, but there should be a sunset clause so that the city is eventually rewarded for taking the risk. There should be a clawback clause so that the city can recover from a bad risk. There should be performance based incentives, not automatic ones. At some point, the focus should shift to lowering the tax burden and investing in core services like police, fire, roads, and neighborhoods.
Residents should come first. Economic development should serve the residents who live here, not cost them. Arlington is already a desirable city to live, work and play. Developers and investors already want to invest here. Filmmakers want to use Arlington as a film set. Businesses want to invest here to capitalize on our growth. Let's negotiate better deals for our residents that benefit all of us.
District 5
Rebecca Boxall – I addressed the incentives question in an earlier response. We are in competition for higher wage jobs and greater opportunity for our residents. We cannot rely on citizens being able to travel long distances to access greater opportunity. Long term this will not be sustainable.
The property tax RATE should be tied to some fixed metric other than fluctuating unrealized valuation. I have suggested some formula that includes land area and linear frontage of roadway or some other fixed metrics. If valuation is included it should be at a low percentage of the total calculation, say 10%
Inflation hits cities too. Cost of goods and services rise, employee wages rise, so taxes will need to be adjusted to compensate if we want the same level of services. We can't expect that inflation won't affect cities the same as it does everyone else.
With a fixed rate metric, revenue would be more predictable for budgeting purposes and more transparent when the rate needs to be adjusted. Relying on values to rise seems to me to be a fragile metric. Valuation usually follows inflation, but not always.
Brittney Garcia-Dumas – Did not respond.
District 8
Jason Shelton – Did not respond.
Melody Fowler – Did not respond.
Corey Harris – Did not respond.
Also as part of the city election will be the vote for whether or not to continue with the 1/4-cent sales tax for road repairs.
# # # # # # # # # # # #
The City of Arlington proposes a total project investment of an estimated $24,000,000, combining federal, state, local, and private resources for the acquisition and demolition of an existing two-story, 81,205-square-foot dilapidated motel structure at 1220 W. Division Street built in 1965 and comprised of 72 rooms. So far, they have determined they will use approximately $3,850,000 in federal HOME-ARP funds. Part of the city/local funds included is $2.85 million of Arlington Housing Finance Corporation funds. Anyone's guess on the specifics of the rest of the funding?
Following demolition, the city intends to construct a new permanent supportive housing community consisting of a minimum of 70 units. The new development will provide safe, service-enriched housing for chronically homeless individuals, veterans and their families, people with disabilities, and other vulnerable populations. The primary objective is to expand the supply of affordable, supportive housing and promote long-term housing stability for residents experiencing or at risk of homelessness.
So has anyone divided that out. $24,000,000 / 70 units = $342,857/unit [cost of a house???].
Economic Development Corporation (EDC)
We do not know the date of the next EDC meeting.
Upcoming Public Hearings
On Tuesday, March 24, the city council will hold a public hearing on AV26-01 for a variance on the distance requirement for a liquor store, at 1606 W. Randol Mill Road. They are within 300 feet of a public school.
On Tuesday, March 24, the city council will hold a public hearing on PD25-23, at 2301 N. Collins Street (at Brown Trail). They wish to change the CC (community commercial) to a planned development plus a billiard parlor and package liquor store.
On Tuesday, March 24, the city council will hold a public hearing on ZA26-01, at 300 W. Park Row Drive. They wish for a straight zoning change from CC (community commercial) to residential medium density (RM-12), usually townhomes.
On Tuesday, March 24, the city council will hold a public hearing on PD20-22R1, at 109 W. Rogers Street. They wish to modify the development plan.
On Wednesday, March 25, P&Z will hold a public hearing on PD21-28R1, at 800 Debbie Lane. They wish to revise development plan.
On Wednesday, March 25, P&Z will hold a public hearing on PD25-8, at 2100 S.E. Green Oaks Boulevard. They wish to change the CC (community commercial) to a planned development plus a car wash.
On Tuesday, April 7, the city council will hold a public hearing to update the Unified Development Code (UDC) for form-based zoning.
On Tuesday, April 7, the city council will hold a public hearing on SUP08-2R1, at 8380 Glenn Day Drive. They wish to amend the current specific use permit for gas drilling.
On Tuesday, April 7, P&Z will hold a public hearing on SN-FBZD26-01, on 681.63 acres of 1162 tracts for form-based zoning. Boundaries west: Davis Street; south: UTA Boulevard; east: Willis Avenue; and north: Stanford Street.
On Tuesday, April 7, the city council will hold a public hearing on PD26-1, at 109 W. Rogers Street. They wish to revise the current development plan to allow for short-term rentals.
On Tuesday, April 7, the city council will hold a public hearing on ZA26-2, at 2401 W Green Oaks Boulevard. They wish to change the current development plan for a veterinary office to a “straight” neighborhood commercial (NC) zoning.
On Tuesday, April 7, the city council will hold a public hearing on ZA25-6, at the northwest corner of I-20 Highway and Kelly-Elliott Road (3 lots). They wish to change the straight zoning from residential to NC (neighborhood commercial) on 2.727 acres.
# # # # # # # # # # # #
P&Z Commission
P&Z is scheduled to meet on Wednesday, March 25. There will be two public hearings on their agenda. The agenda can be found at: https://www.arlingtontx.gov/files/assets/city/v/1/planning-and-development-services/documents/planning-amp-development-boards-amp-commissions/planning-and-zoning-commission/posted-agenda/planning-and-zoning-commission-regular-session-03-25-2026.pdf .
Public hearing #1 is for PD25-8, 2100 S.E. Green Oaks Boulevard. They wish to change from community commercial (CC) to a planned development (PD) for CC with a car wash (staff report).
Public hearing #2 is for PD21-28R1 to modify the development plan (staff report). The original plan did not allow for gasoline sales.
# # # # # # # # # # # #
AISD School Board
The AISD School Board will meet this Thursday, March 26. The agenda should be posted on Monday.
Last week we reported how the school board voted on the pay for performance program and the Bluebonnet Math materials. Chris Moss of the Arlington Report has an article on those subjects at: https://fortworthreport.org/2026/03/13/arlington-isd-seeks-state-programs-to-improve-math-increase-teacher-pay/ .
Question 4: The district has performance improvement plans where the goals are for less than 50% of the students meeting or exceeding grade level expectations on the state achievement assessments. Is this acceptable? Why or why not? What are your suggestions regarding student achievement goal plans?
AISD Ballot Order:
Place 6
Jan Tyler - As a teacher in Arlington, I have worked on campus plans to determine grade level expectations for the state achievement assessments. The goal is to set a percent that is attainable for your grade level on your campus. That percent of increase has to be realistically based on last year’s performance with no change in the curriculum nor state assessment. Each campus is expected to reach that percent by the administration. It would not be prudent to raise the percent to a number that was unattainable. I assure you that not one teacher would ever have that low passing rate as their personal goal for their classes. The state assessment is so flawed that teachers do not equate their subject passing scores and achievement performance on the campus improvement numbers. Every teacher wants their students to master the TEKS, these are the skills that Texas has adopted as essential to each subject. A very high percent of the students do meet the grade level expectations by passing the subject. Teachers are teaching the TEKS, but the current state assessment does not reflect a true picture of achievement. It is hard to describe in words how it is written, but it requires reasoning that isn’t appropriate for the level being tested.
Currently, we are stuck with the STAAR test for two more years. Immediately, I think that districts should be using alternative assessments, like MAP, which assess students at the beginning, middle, and end of the year. It measures achievement and growth for each student by using normed percentile scores. MAP scores offer more up-to-date data and achievement information to teachers in real time. I believe that AISD does use it, but not sure if it is across the district. The district is starting to adopt new curriculums and they need immediate feedback to assess if they are improving learning by the choices they are making. I would definitely support new curriculums that teachers support and can be used in all schools across the district. I would hope that when our curriculum aligns with a reliable assessment, those low passing rates will be replaced with acceptable high level expectations.
Brooklyn Richardson – Did not respond.
Place 7
LeAnne Haynes - I believe this question might be a bit misleading, as the answer is actually more nuanced than it seems. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) categorizes STARR test scores into performance levels: masters, meets, approaches, and did not meet. According to TEA, a score of "approaches" indicates that a student is on track to succeed in the next grade or course with some targeted support. This shows that a student with an "approaches" score is effectively passing.
Focusing solely on the "meets" or "masters" categories doesn’t give a complete picture of our students' performance and their progress over time. Our primary goal is to see growth, whether that growth surpasses 50% or not. The key question we should always ask ourselves is, “Did our students demonstrate growth compared to last year?"
The objectives laid out in our district improvement plan are designed to be SMART goals: specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely. While some may view these goals as small steps, those who understand the data know just how challenging it is to make even a one-percent increase. The goals we set are meaningful, and the results we've seen over the past several years clearly demonstrate progress for our students. Ultimately, year-over-year growth is what defines our success!
Linton Davis - Having a goal of less than 50% of our kids meeting or exceeding grade level expectations is unacceptable, period. That means that 50%+ of our children are not getting the necessary foundation to become the person that God created them to be and that’s on us as parents and on our school district. We correct this by:
- Setting new expectations for performance in reading, writing and arithmetic that reflects all students performing to 85% of grade level.
- We focus on enhancing both verbal and written communication skills; I-Phones are not a child’s friend in learning or in developing their social skills.
- Students that do not perform to expectations need to either have a remedial summer program or should be retained.
- Discipline issues within the classroom will not be tolerated. This may require expansion of in-school suspension and counseling and/or, in difficult circumstances, out-of-school suspension where the child is returned to the parents until established behavioral norms can be demonstrated. All days on out-of-school suspension are counted as absences.
AISD Bond Election
https://www.aisd.net/bond-2026/
[Commentary: I have a great deal of difficulty accepting this bond. AISD has a decreasing student population from 63,000+ to maybe under 50,000 this coming school year. Other districts, in an effort to save money, have closed schools, which makes very logical sense. AISD will be closing its first school (Blanton Elementary) at the end of this school year.
The board went out of its way to add a second (unnamed/unplanned?) elementary school replacement [South Davis Elementary was the first and named school replacement], basically saying, here, raise the tax rate, give us the money and we will decide.
The board claims to make fact-based decisions; however, they seem to be failing. Where are the fact-based decisions on saving the taxpayers’ dollars and being efficient with taxpayers’ funds? Why have they not come up with plans to being more efficient with taxpayers’ funds rather than just raising the tax rate, giving them money, and having no specific plans on a second school replacement.
I say vote NO at least to Proposition A of the AISD Bond package.]
A Chris Moss article in the Arlington Report explores the possibility of the AISD joining the pay-for-performance teacher program offered by the state. That article can be found at: https://fortworthreport.org/2026/01/07/arlington-isd-considers-texas-pay-for-performance-teacher-program/ .
AISD saw a jump in their accountability scores because of their challenge of some of the STAAR testing results. Chris Moss of the Arlington Report has an article at: https://fortworthreport.org/2025/12/09/arlington-isd-sees-2025-academic-accountability-bump-after-staar-appeal/ . Also an AISD article may be found at: https://www.aisd.net/district-news/updated-district-and-campus-accountability-ratings/ .
There has been a recent Arlington Report article by Drew Shaw about the dismissed David Jarvis lawsuit against the AISD. It can be found at: https://fortworthreport.org/2025/12/31/federal-judge-dismisses-lawsuit-against-arlington-isd-about-first-amendment-retaliation/ .
The AISD enrollment is expected to fall below 50,000 students at some point, maybe as early as the 2026-2027 school year. Chris Moss of the Arlington Report has a story at: https://fortworthreport.org/2025/12/03/arlington-isds-enrollment-projected-to-drop-below-50000-next-year/ .
The AISD will NOT be posting the Ten Commandments for now. An article by Chris Moss of the Arlington Report: https://fortworthreport.org/2025/11/05/arlington-isd-agrees-not-to-post-ten-commandments-amid-lawsuit/ .
The AISD Board and Superintendent have established written goals, including student improvement on the STAAR testing. The Chris Moss article in the Arlington Report: https://fortworthreport.org/2025/10/01/arlington-isd-school-board-sets-goals-and-expectations-for-new-school-year/ .
TEA Accountability Data:
In 2020, the AISD was tied for the highest M&O rate of all the school districts in Tarrant County. Since then, there has been NO tie. The AISD HAS the highest M&O rate in Tarrant County. [school district tax rates]
Top 5 of Tarrant County's 21 ISDs M&O Rates
1. Arlington ISD $0.802200
2. Birdville ISD $0.786900
2. Fort Worth ISD $0.786900
2. Lewisville ISD $0.786900
2. Mansfield ISD $0.786900
Teacher Salaries
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_97.html [Arlington ISD easily pays the highest salaries, thus creating ISD inflation.] An article by Jacob Sanchez in the Fort Worth Report confirms that the Arlington ISD pays the highest salaries in Tarrant County [ https://fortworthreport.org/2025/12/17/teachers-in-this-tarrant-county-school-district-earn-the-highest-salaries/ ].
HELPFUL CONTACTS
The Spectator: www.ArlSpectator.mysite.com
to be added/deleted to/from the mailing list e-mail: ArlSpectator@yahoo.com
We can be found on Facebook at ArlSpectator.
Teachers' Salaries
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_97.html
Taxpayers' Funds at Risk
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_83.html
City Council grades:
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_39.html
AISD Board grades:
http://arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_1.html
City of Arlington website: www.arlingtontx.gov
e-mails of mayor and council:
.................... first.last@arlingtontx.gov
mayor = jim.ross
district 1 (north) = mauricio.galante
district 2 (sw) = raul.gonzalez
district 3 (se) = nikkie.hunter
district 4 (west) = andrew.piel
district 5 (central/east) = rebecca.boxall
district 6 (all) = long.pham
district 7 (all) = bowie.hogg
district 8 (all) = barbara.odom-wesley
AISD website ....................... www.aisd.net
McMurrough............ - sarahforaisd@gmail.com
Fowler ................... - fowler.aisd@gmail.com
Mike .................. - larrymike.aisd@gmail.com
Wilbanks .......... - dwilban.aisd@gmail.com
Chapa ...................... - chapa.aisd@gmail.com
Richardson ... - brooklyn.richardson.aisd@gmail.com
Haynes ................... - haynes.aisd@gmail.com
TEA Accountability Data:
ARC Political Watch Committee Reports
includes coverage of Mansfield ISD and national, state, county, & city
Texas Legislative Online:
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Home.aspx
To be added to/deleted from our mailing list please e-mail your request to: ArlSpectator@yahoo.com