Kennedale Observer - Latest Newsletter

 

March 1, 2026 – Volume 9 Number 9

HIGHLIGHTS:

* Primary Election Day is Tuesday.

* P&Z recommends denying the zoning case at 444 E. Kennedale Parkway.

* May 2 Election has three contested races:

Ballot Order:

Mayor – Brian Johnson

Mayor – Thelma Kobeck

Place 2 – James Connor

Place 2 – Bryant Griffith

Place 4 – Ryon Ray

Place 4 – Melissa Barrow

Question 1 responses are in this newsletter.

 

 

SCHEDULE:

Tuesday, March 3: Primaries Voting Day, 7:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.

Tuesday, March 10: KKB (Keep Kennedale Beautiful) meeting, 6:00 p.m.

Tuesday, March 10: Parks Board meeting, 6:30 p.m.

Thursday, March 12: Board of Adjustment meeting, 5:30 p.m.

Tuesday, March 17: City Council meeting, 5:30 p.m.

Tuesday, March 17: St. Patrick's Day.

Tuesday, March 24: EDC Board meeting, 6:00 p.m.

Thursday, March 26: P&Z meeting, 6:00 p.m.

 

KNOW WHAT YOUR CITY IS UP TO...

Your City Council

The city council did not meet last week. The March regular meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 17.

 

Leftovers:

The “Investigation” was listed on the executive session agenda for the October 21 meeting. Council Member Kobeck came out of executive session and made the motion to waive the attorney-client privilege and release the investigation report to the public. That motion was approved, 4-0.

We have taken the .pdf Investigation Report and converted to text (far from 100% perfect) and tried to make improvements at: http://www.arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_13.html .

 

Previous Analysis:

Results: The evidence does NOT confirm…

See the November 9, 2025, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Witch Hunt?

See the November 16, 2025, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Jeff Nevarez interview – Our Part I

See the November 16, 2025, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Jeff Nevarez interview – Our Part II

See the November 23, 2025, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Was the Investigation Hi-jacked by the city attorney and city manager?

See the November 30, 2025, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Pay to Play Scandal

See the December 7, 2025, Kennedale Observer for more details.

-
Wandell Investigation Files

See the December 14, 2025, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Lack of Accountability/Afraid to Speak

See the December 21, 2025, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Griffith vs. Hull – “The Threat”

See the January 4, 2026, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Chamber Vote

See the January 11, 2026, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Hiring Austin Degenhart

See the January 18, 2026, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

City Manager has Favorites?

See the January 25, 2026, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

Our Commentary

See the February 1, 2026, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

“No Shame” Griffith

See the February 15, 2026, Kennedale Observer for more details.

 

 

Question 1: Although the city council cannot dwell on past councils' decisions and it must move forward, we would like to know if current council members have learned from past decisions, including those made by previous councils. From history, were each of the following zoning case items a good decision or a poor decision, and why?

a) “UV” zoning on Kennedale Sublett Road just east of Kennedale Parkway?

b) “MF” zoning on Joplin Road just south of Kennedale Sublett Road?

 

Ballot Order:

Mayor – Brian Johnson – Did not respond.

Mayor – Thelma Kobeck – a) As I have stated in the past (two years ago), this was a very poor decision. The developer of Hammock Creek came before the then-Council (in around 2019) requesting a Resolution of Support in order to apply for a government grant to assist with building the development. It was touted as a mixed-use development that would include retail, restaurants, etc. There was a verbal promise by the developer to pay for the widening/improving of Kennedale Sublett Road and any related infrastructure needs (I was present at the meeting). When Kennedale residents vocally opposed this, the developer threatened to sue Council members and the City of Kennedale if his request was not approved. Ultimately, the development was approved, but what was actually constructed was nothing like what was promised. The developer did not pay for any improvements to the infrastructure, no retail connected to the property was ever built, the apartment buildings themselves were stories higher than they were supposed to be and the valuation of the property is millions of dollars LESS than the community was assured it would be. The fact that a developer was able to use threats and coercion to force a Council to approve a development set a dangerous precedent for any future developments that may be unpopular in the city. Moreover, it was known that this particular developer had a documented bad history in the DFW area and had NEVER built a mixed-use development before. To make matters worse, the Hammock Creek development has negatively affected the traffic issues in this area, adding more vehicles to a narrow winding road that was already congested before this development was built. Finally, there is the issue of tax revenue being generated by this property. If the property had, in fact, been a $40 to $50 million then the drain on the infrastructure costs might not have been so much of a problem. However, the revenue for this development for the City of Kennedale is for a property that is valued at around $7 million. That hardly makes it a good value for the City of Kennedale considering the headaches it has caused.

b) The Alta Landing property is an example of another poor decision, although this one is not as financially costly for the city. This development came on the scene not too long after the Hammack Creek development, in about 2020. Again, just like with the previously discussed development, the developer promised one thing and built something different. The buildings in the Alta development were supposed to be only two stories high, but the developer built them three stories high and apparently no one at the City level thought to check on what was being built until it was too late. Since then, the Kennedale residents who live in the adjacent properties have been plagued with issues including all manner of trash in their yards, an invasion of privacy from the development of Alta, and even one incident involving a car that crashed through the privacy fence into one resident’s backyard. Recently, the developer who owns the property and the City sought to correct the problems not by changing the zoning from MF (multi-family) to PD (planned development). This zoning change effectively wipes clean all of the issues that occurred with this development, whether they were caused by a lack of oversight on the part of the City or failure to comply with zoning and other requirements by the developer. While this benefits the City and certainly benefits the developer, it in NO way compensates the residents of the adjacent properties. I voted against this zoning change because I cannot in good conscience vote in favor of something just so everyone can pretend that mistakes were not made and to benefit a developer. To be fair, Alta Landing is the biggest tax-paying entity in the city of Kennedale. But when you consider the myriad of problems that have arisen as a result of this development over the years, it is difficult to think of it as a “good idea”.

When I responded to a similar question two years ago, I expressed the hope that after these two poor decisions, Kennedale would be more deliberate when considering developments of this sort. Sadly, I haven’t seen much change in how the City Council considers developments. Only recently, the Council voted to issue another Resolution of Support for a proposed development where the developer made some questionable claims while submitting his application before Council and approved a planned development on Dick Price Road with that developer promising to construct the necessary infrastructure (i.e., road expansion, etc.,) to address any possible issues caused by the development of a few hundred units (think Hammack Creek Revisited). It doesn’t seem that Kennedale has learned any useful lessons from the recent past.

In both of these recent proposed developments I was the single opposing vote.

While I am not opposed to growth, I want us to be more concerned about the Kennedale residents who are already living here than we are about the developers who want to promise us the moon and stars. I also want us to think beyond the immediacy of a vote and look at both short-term and long-term implications of a development.

 

 

Place 2 – James Connor – a) The answer is both yes and no.

Initially, the concept presented to the city appeared to be a strong opportunity. The development was marketed as a mixed-use catalyst project — a place where residents could live, work, and shop. The projected property tax and sales tax revenue seemed beneficial for Kennedale. Additionally, the inclusion of affordable housing would have expanded options in a city that, at the time, had only one affordable apartment complex within the incorporated limits.

However, what was ultimately delivered did not match the original vision. Instead of a balanced mixed-use development, the project resulted in apartments without the promised retail component. Reports of code violations, concerns regarding building standards, lack of sufficient oversight, and subsequent issues after construction significantly impacted public perception.
UV zoning can be a positive tool when used correctly and when developments adhere to the originally approved vision. In this case, once revised plans showed only apartment construction, the zoning should have been reconsidered or amended. Allowing the project to proceed as it did set a concerning precedent for future development in Kennedale.

b) The decision to apply MF zoning in this area appears to have been ill-advised.

At the time the case came before council, there were no apartment developments in that immediate area. A lower-density alternative — such as a pocket neighborhood or an expansion of the existing Steeplechase subdivision — may have been more consistent with surrounding land use and neighborhood character.
Due to the elevation and topography of the land, the apartment development has reportedly created downstream impacts for Steeplechase residents, including erosion and lighting concerns, among other issues. These challenges have reinforced the perception that the zoning decision, combined with insufficient oversight during planning and approval, was not in the long-term best interest of the city or its residents.
This reflection is not about assigning blame, but about learning from past decisions to ensure stronger planning, oversight, and alignment between approved zoning and delivered development moving forward.

Place 2 – Bryant Griffith – Together, these experiences reinforced several principles that guide my leadership today: growth should follow the Comprehensive Plan shaped by citizens, rules must be applied consistently, property rights must be respected, accountability after approval is essential, and communication with residents must improve throughout the process. The goal is not to relitigate past votes but to apply what we learned so future decisions are clearer, fairer, and more predictable for everyone who calls Kennedale home.

Cities cannot remain focused on past decisions forever, but responsible leadership requires learning from experience and applying those lessons moving forward. Zoning decisions are rarely simple matters of being entirely right or wrong; they are long-term planning choices made within the framework of the Comprehensive Plan, adopted ordinances, and state law protecting property rights. My approach then, and now, has been to balance three responsibilities: honoring the citizen-driven Comprehensive Plan, respecting lawful property rights, and protecting Kennedale’s long-term financial stability.

a) The Urban Village zoning along Kennedale Sublett Road was consistent with the city’s long-range vision of concentrating growth closer to existing infrastructure, retail, and civic areas so development occurs efficiently rather than spreading unpredictably across neighborhoods. Property owners must be able to rely on the rules a city has adopted, and when an application meets those established standards, consistency matters. The primary lesson from that project was not the zoning designation itself but the importance of execution and oversight. Approving development is only part of the responsibility; ensuring commitments are fulfilled through strong agreements and accountability is equally important, and later updates to development standards reflected those lessons.

b) The multifamily zoning on Joplin Road similarly aligned with broader goals of housing diversity, economic activity, and strengthening the city’s tax base. Strategic density near transportation corridors can support local businesses and reduce long-term tax pressure on homeowners. However, that experience also highlighted the need for stronger communication with residents and more proactive oversight during implementation. The lesson was not that growth was a mistake, but that growth must be managed carefully and transparently to maintain public trust.

 

 

Place 4 – Ryon Ray – Did not respond.

Place 4 – Melissa Barrow - Kennedale is at a pivotal stage in its growth. We are no longer rural, but we are not a dense urban center either. That balance makes every zoning case consequential.

In a community of our size, zoning decisions along major corridors have long-term consequences for traffic, infrastructure, neighborhood character, public schools, public safety resources, and fiscal sustainability.

As I consider these past cases, I do so through the lens of my core tenets: integrity, transparency, and respect. Integrity requires us to assess not only the intent of a decision but its real-world results. Transparency requires that expectations, standards, and obligations be clearly defined and enforceable. Respect requires listening carefully to residents who are directly affected.

From these past decisions, several lessons emerge:

- Zoning should align with realistic market demand

- Promises made during hearings must be written into ordinances.

- Fiscal benefits must be weighted against neighborhood impact

By operating with integrity, practicing true transparency, and treating all stakeholders with respect, we can ensure that future zoning decisions strengthen Kennedale’s neighborhoods, support sustainable growth, and protect the long-term stability and character of the community.

a) I believe the intent behind the Urban Village (UV) designation was positive. However, the level of demand necessary to fully realize an Urban Village concept has not clearly materialized. Future corridor planning should be closely aligned with demonstrable market realities to ensure zoning produces predictable, achievable results.

UV zoning along Kennedale Sublett Road was adopted with the intention of encouraging mixed-use, walkable, higher-quality development along one of our most visible and heavily traveled corridors. This type of zoning can be beneficial in communities that have strong and sustained market demand for that type of development. However, Kennedale is a small city operating within a highly competitive regional market. We do not have the density, foot traffic, or commercial demand that naturally supports true Urban Village-style development.

When zoning is aspirational but market demand is limited, it can result in prolonged underdevelopment, stalled projects, or outcomes that fall short of the original vision. Zoning should reflect realistic economic conditions, not simply an idealized model of growth. The concept, which works well in larger or more urbanized communities, has not translated seamlessly to Kennedale. We need to be honest about what our market can reasonably support. Having the best interests of Kennedale in mind means ensuring that corridor zoning produces tangible benefits rather than speculative entitlements.

b) The 2019 decision to change the zoning on Jopin Road from Residential to Multi-Family (MF) was a major shift for that area. Moving from single-family homes to apartments significantly increased the allowed density and changed the character of the surrounding neighborhood.

In a small community like Kennedale, decisions like that carry real weight. When we make that kind of change, it’s important to think several steps ahead and put clear standards in place. I don’t believe that level of foresight or long-term protection was fully built into the original decision.

I want to be clear. Multi-family housing is not a bad thing. Having a mix of housing options can be healthy for a city. But when higher-density development is placed next to established neighborhoods, it needs strong buffering, consistent maintenance expectations, and real accountability. We also must consider the impact on infrastructure, public safety, and school capacity before making those changes.

Since the property transitioned to MF, nearby residents have voiced ongoing concerns. They’ve dealt with trash from the Alta Landing property entering their yards, barriers that haven’t performed as intended, including an incident in which a vehicle ended up in a resident’s backyard, and frustration with the overall scale of the development. These aren’t abstract complaints. They are daily quality-of-life issues for the people who live there.

In my view, this zoning change has leaned more toward benefiting developer interests than protecting current residents. Moving forward, we must make sure that when we increase density, we also increase protections — clearly written, enforceable standards that safeguard the people who call Kennedale home.

# # # # # # # # # # #

[Commentary: a) So what happened at Kennedale Sublett Road, just east of Kennedale Parkway. Winter 2019: the developer proposed a mixed-use development with commercial, low-income apartments, and townhomes. The council approved the resolution of support (February 2019) after, we were told, the developer threatened lawsuits against the city and one of the council members (she abstained for the vote) allowing Mayor Johnson to break the tie to approve. [What an extremely poor job of leadership, partnering with someone who is going to threaten to sue you whenever they don't get their way.] We were told that citizen opposition e-mails ran at a 5:3 ratio (62.5%). Fast forward to July for the zoning case [this is negotiation time and the poor Kennedale leadership proved unable to perform]. There was no business piece and they wanted “straight” urban village “UV” zoning. This was approved by the Brian Johnson, Josh Altom, Chris Pugh, Sandra Lee, and Chad Wandell council. Very predictably, what was promised was not built. The townhomes near Mr. Elam's property were not built. Kennedale got extra tall with an extra floor, 100% apartments, built within UV limits and according to what we have been told, with the poor staff (George Campbell and Melissa Daley) built into the roadway right-of-way. If you are going to approve this, the developer should have been locked into a planned development “PD” and not given a free run of whatever they wanted in “UV”. This was an extremely poor decision by that 2019 council. [You can put restrictions on a “PD” but cannot put restrictions on a straight zoning.]

b) Joplin Road. In August 2019 the council removed the 16 units/acre restriction on MF. In October 2019 they approved these apartments adjacent and towering over existing R-2 homes [not even Arlington does that]. One can only hope that the 2019 council of Brian Johnson, Josh Altom, Chris Pugh, Sandra Lee, and Chad Wandell never get to decide another zoning case.]

 

Last Week

Last week the Economic Development Corporation met on Tuesday for their February regular meeting. P&Z met on Thursday for their February monthly meeting.

 

This Week

There are no meetings scheduled this week.

 

Public Hearings

On Thursday, March 12, Board of Adjustment (BOA) will hold a public hearing for the renewal of a special exception for vehicle repair, minor use at 6317 Wildcat Way.

On Tuesday, March 17, the city council will hold a public hearing on PZ26-01 to change the zoning from Old Town-4 to General Commercial-2 at 444 E. Kennedale Parkway.

On Tuesday, March 17, the city council will hold a public hearing for the 52^nd Year Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program to install 1175 linear feet of ADA compliant sidewalk along W. 3^rd Street (within the limits of Municipal Drive and North Road).

 

EDC

The Economic Development Corporation (EDC) Board met this past Tuesday, February 24 (agenda). The meeting may be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50zBiiHtWbk .

(3:27) Start of meeting. Sound did not start until about 5:13.

(4:50) The highlight of the meeting was a Market Analysis/Strategic Plan interview of Jason Claunch, with the consultant group Catalyst Commercial.

(30:09) Other portions of the meeting include the financial reports (financials), and approval of the minutes (Feb 3, 2026 minutes). They did not go into executive session.

 

P&Z

P&Z will meet this Thursday, February 26. They have a public hearing scheduled (packet). The meeting may be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itk66fiV-p4 .

(2:31) Start of meeting

(4:05) The highlight of the meeting was a public hearing for PZ26-01, 444 E. Kennedale Parkway. They wish to change zoning from OT-4 (Old Town-4) to C-2 (Commercial-2). [information on the case starts on .pdf page 11 of the packet link] This might be a prime location for a rail station. The applicant was not present. A motion to deny, passed, 5-0.

 

Other News....

TAD Rates

Tarrant Appraisal District has published the tax rates (October 2025) for the county. Kennedale has now dropped to the eighth highest municipality. [https://www.tad.org/content/rates/2025TaxRates.pdf ].

Top eleven of 41 (everyone else is < 0.65)

1. Everman 1.0260800

2. Sansom Park 0.8457840

3. Blue Mound 0.8138000

4. River Oaks 0.7439910

5. Burleson 0.7218000

6. White Settlement 0.7147780

7. Forest Hill 0.7004660

8. Kennedale 0.6961900

9. Pelican Bay 0.6762930

10. Fort Worth 0.6700000

11. Grand Prairie 0.6600000

 

HELPFUL WEBSITES and CONTACTS

Would you like to be added to our mailing list? Please send an e-mail to: KennedaleObserver@yahoo.com requesting to be added to our mailing list.

 

Also, please feel free to share this newsletter with your friends.

 

Kennedale Observer website:

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/index_3.html

 

Latest Kennedale Observer newsletter:

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_44.html

 

The “Investigation” Report

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_13.html

 

Senior Tax Freeze Missing

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_10.html

 

1083 Bowman Springs:

http://www.arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_45.html

 

Texas Open Meetings Act Violations???

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_9.html

 

The Bridge:

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_12.html

 

Texas Open Meetings Act Violations???

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/blank_9.html

 

Kennedale Observer: KennedaleObserver@yahoo.com

The Kennedale Observer can be found on Facebook as KennedaleObserver.

 

Kennedale Observer website:

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/index_3.html

 

Latest Kennedale Observer newsletter:

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_44.html

 

City Council Grades:

http://arlspectator.mysite.com/rich_text_26.html

 

The City of Kennedale website: www.cityofkennedale.com

Mayor and City Council Emails:

Mayor – Brad Horton BHorton@cityofkennedale.com

Place-1 David Glover DGlover@cityofkennedale.com

Place-2 Thelma Kobeck TKobeck@cityofkennedale.com

Place-3 Kenneth Michels KMichels@cityofkennedale.com

Place-5 Jeff Nevarez JNevarez@cityofkennedale.com

 

Recordings of City Council meetings can be viewed at:

[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4a2pjrnxZ5XrbsXcoLOP4Q?view_as=subscriber].

 

To apply for appointed positions:

https://www.cityofkennedale.com/boardapp

 

To be added to/deleted from our list, please

e-mail: KennedaleObserver@yahoo.com