Board of Adjustment reverses revocation of Contender/Champions certificate of occupancy with conditions

The Dallas Board of Adjustment Panel A voted 4–1 on Sept. 16 to reverse the building official’s April revocation of a certificate of occupancy for the Contender/Champions social club at 17776 Dallas Parkway, granting the applicant’s appeal on the condition the club close the property’s vehicular and pedestrian access to Bridal Grove Lane and install an eight‑foot solid fence matching the existing perimeter wall.

The decision came after a hearing that lasted most of the day and drew hundreds of in‑person speakers. The board heard legal arguments from the applicant and city attorneys, testimony from city planning staff, and repeated, often emotional statements from nearby residents who opposed an operation they said would bring gambling, heavy traffic and crime to a residential neighborhood adjacent to an elementary school and churches.

The reversal restores the previously issued CO unless the condition is not met; the board’s motion explicitly made the applicant’s compliance with the fence and the closure of the Bridal Grove access a condition of the approval. The motion required the applicant to permit and construct the closure and fence in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws and safety requirements.

Why the board acted

The board’s discussion repeatedly returned to three issues members described as central: the city’s rules and procedures for issuing and revoking certificates of occupancy; the factual record assembled during months of plan review and the hearing; and the legal question whether the club’s proposed poker operations would violate Texas law. The city argued the CO had been issued in error because the building official concluded the club’s proposed operations implicated state gambling statutes. The applicant argued the club’s land‑use statement and operations fall within protections recognized in recent appellate rulings and asked the board to treat the recent Texas Card House decisions as controlling.

The applicant’s case and testimony

Attorney Tommy Mann, representing Contender Dallas LLC, said the company followed the city’s permitting process and clearly disclosed poker on its land‑use statement and floor plans. Isaac Trumbo, identified in testimony as managing partner and president of Champions, told the board, “We’re here today because we wanna be treated fairly and the fair result is to grant our appeal.” He and other supporters said the club has invested in the property and in security and that employees depend on the business.

City case and staff testimony

Assistant City Attorney Stacy Rodriguez and Planning Assistant Director Megan Weimer told the board that, when the application was flagged after the city initially finalized the CO, staff review showed the land‑use statement and plans described poker tables and poker operations. Weimer testified she reviewed the submitted materials and ‘‘saw a land use statement that clearly referred to poker being played at this establishment. And my heart sank,’’ and said staff concluded the CO had been issued in error and needed revocation.

Public testimony

The hearing included many hours of public comment, with neighbors reporting traffic, safety and quality‑of‑life concerns. Residents from the Bantry North neighborhood repeatedly said the proposed use would draw tournaments and large crowds and cited crime statistics presented from research on poker‑adjacent areas. Vivian Unger, a Bantry North HOA board member, told the board the neighborhood gathered more than 1,200 petition signatures opposing the club and said she opposed a CO that would allow poker operations adjacent to homes and an elementary school.

Council member Kara Mendelsohn testified as a fact witness, saying she had not supported the Champions application and that earlier comments attributed to her at a town hall had been mischaracterized. She told the board she had asked the city attorney and county district attorneys for legal guidance on poker clubs and said she remained opposed to locating a poker operation next to the neighborhood entrance.

The board’s condition

Panel members debated possible ways to reduce impacts on the adjacent neighborhood. The motion that passed requires the applicant to close the property’s vehicular and pedestrian access to Bridal Grove Lane and to install an eight‑foot solid fence consistent with the property’s existing perimeter wall along the length of Bridal Grove (subject to applicable code, sight‑triangle, fire‑access and permitting rules). The motion makes those conditions a requirement of the CO; if they are not carried out the board’s reversal would not be effective.

Vote and next steps

The vote to reverse the building official’s revocation passed 4–1. Panel member Michael Hopkovich cast the lone dissent. The board directed staff to include the conditions in the final decision letter. The city and the applicant may still pursue the matter further in court; district and appellate litigation over poker‑club land use remains pending in Texas courts.

Ending

The decision resolves the immediate question about whether the Champions club may hold the CO it received in April, subject to the fence and access closure condition. The case is likely to remain in legal and public view: opponents signaled continued concerns about traffic and public safety, while the applicant emphasized investments and jobs created; either side could pursue further legal action or administrative review.