Fort Worth staff report public feedback, recommend keeping proposed 2026 bond list unchanged

Staff told the Fort Worth City Council that public engagement on the proposed 2026 bond largely validated the current project list and that staff was not recommending any major changes ahead of a likely bond call in February.

Christianne Simmons of the Fort Worth Lab said staff "have met on a number of occasions to hash out propositions and percentages of funding and project list" and described hybrid district meetings, a bond email inbox, story maps and a "balancing act" tool used to collect responses. April Rose Escamilla, senior capital projects officer, told council there were a little over 18,000 website views, about 260 in-person attendees across 11 district meetings, and roughly 1,109 YouTube views of bond meeting videos. The Balancing Act generated 177 submissions; staff also recorded 141 comments from emails and in-person meetings, which combined to 329 submitted comments.

Simmons and staff cautioned that the sample sizes were small and not statistically representative, but said the responses provided a qualitative signal. "These numbers aren't very big," Simmons said, "...but it's a valuable qualitative signal of what's important to people who are already engaged." Staff summarized Balancing Act results that showed many respondents left propositions unchanged (55% of Balancing Act respondents) while others reallocated modest amounts; for example, sidewalks showed a net increase that staff estimated at about $2,000,000 in the tool's reallocation exercise.

On specific project areas, staff reported: most library and public-safety projects remained unmodified in responses; Meadowbrook Golf Course saw many respondents leave it unchanged while 39 selected removal; affordable single-family housing remained unmodified for 156 respondents, with some asking to increase its allocation to $10,000,000 and to designate funds for homeownership; and animal care facility proposals received mixed comments citing both capacity needs and concerns about cost.

Jay Chapa, who led the staff presentation, summarized the staff position: the engagement "validated the general direction of the bond," and staff were "not really recommending any big changes right now." The council was told staff will prepare educational materials for voters and that the council could call the bond election at its Feb. 10 voting meeting if it chooses; staff also noted an optional follow-up work session later this month if additional decisions are needed.

Next steps identified by council and staff include reviewing total bond capacity and whether modest additional capacity can be added without increasing the tax rate, preparing a memo explaining the public-art allocation ordinance, and producing a prioritized list of open-space acquisition targets should council consider reallocating funds.