March 9, 2026 Newsletter

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 10: City Council meetings, 101 W. Abram Street, 10:45am, 2:30pm, 6:30pm. (You must preregister online by 5:00pm to speak during citizen participation.)

Wednesday, March 11: Economic Development Corporation (EDC) Board Meeting, City Council Chambers, 101 W. Abram Street, 4:00pm.

Thursday, March 12: 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, March 17: St. Patrick's Day.

Tuesday, March 24: City Council meetings, 101 W. Abram Street, 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 x:xxpm.)

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.)

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.)

From THE LOCKER ROOM

Arlington City Council Update

The Arlington City Council will meet this Tuesday, March 10, for a full slate of meetings. The first of two committee meetings is at 10:45am. The afternoon meeting will begin about 1:00pm, but goes into executive session. The open portion of the meeting will start no sooner than 2:30pm. The evening meeting is at 6:30pm.

Committee Meetings

The first committee meeting is the Community and Neighborhood Development Committee. They plan to meet at 10:45 for about 60 minutes to discuss multi-family recycling (30 minutes, presentation) and HOME review of the PY2026 Action Plan (30 minutes, presentation).

Don't bother trying to rush to the Economic Development Committee meeting at noon, as you are NOT invited. It is all in executive session for another lopsided deal; hold onto your wallets.

The quasi-committee of the Arlington Housing Finance Corporation will meet at 12:30pm (agenda). The main item on the agenda is the issuance of $40,000,000 in bonds for the Matlock Flats

Afternoon Meeting

The afternoon meeting is expected to start about 1:00pm and go into executive session. The executive session portion of the agenda includes a legal discussion of the Prestonwood Estates Homeowners Association lawsuit and offers of incentives to business prospects.

The open portion of the meeting will begin no sooner than 2:30pm. The open portion of the agenda includes four work session items, two informal staff reports, and external committee reports.

The four work session items are:

Lake Arlington Golf Course proposed access agreement (presentation , agreement)

FIFA World Cup 2026 (presentation)

2026 Capital Budget (presentation)

Water Utilities End of Year 2025 Report (presentation).

The two informal staff reports are:

Periodic review of the Code of Ordinances (staff report).

2025 Landmark Preservation Annual report (staff report , annual report).

Evening Meeting

The agenda for the 6:30pm evening meeting includes 23 consent agenda items, three zoning case public hearings, an INDYCAR support contract resolution (staff report), and a consideration to call a public hearing of a failed P&Z case.

Consent agenda item 7.14 is the creation of Arlington, Inc. (formerly Arlington Convention Center Development Corporation) (staff report).

Consent agenda 7.18 is to use the RFP method to select the best developer for city owned land at 501 N. East Street (staff report).

Consent agenda 7.20 is the city agreement with Texas Health Resources regarding sponsorship of the new ACTIV (staff report , agreement).

Consent agenda 7.21 is for a resolution of “no objection” for 291 apartments at 1801 E. Arkansas Lane (staff report).

Public Hearing #1 is for zoning case SUP25-10 (2102 Prestonwood Drive) for a specific use permit for a secondary living unit (staff report).

Public Hearing #2 is for SUP10-23R4 (Liquitek – 408 113^th Street) for a revision to a specific use permit to add a maintenance building to the site (staff report).

Public Hearing #3 is for PD25-14 (1112 N. Collins Street) to change to a PD, including a package liquor store (staff report).

Zoning Case ZA25-6 (Kelly Elliott Road and Interstate 20) was denied by P&Z. The council will hear from the applicant for a potential zoning case public hearing (staff report).

Council Leftovers

The second Arlington Spectator question for the candidates: a. How do you feel about SB840 which allows changing commercially zoned properties to mixed-use or multi-family zoned properties without an approval from P&Z and/or the city council? Why?

b. How do you feel about RMU (Regional Mixed Use) zoning and its potential 100 units/acre? Why?

Ballot Order:

Mayor

Hunter Crow - I would typically approach policy through the lenses of affordability, environmental sustainability, and grassroots democracy. My likely responses would include:

On SB 840: I would likely support the goal of increasing housing supply but might criticize the method. As a proponent of local engagement, I would argue that removing city council and P&Z approval silences residents. I would advocate for discounts for residents in need and might view by-right conversion as a way to break the "tyrant's veto" that prevents affordable housing.

On RMU (100 units/acre): I will likely favor high-density mixed-use development if it includes guaranteed affordable units and promotes "walkable" urbanism. I frequently emphasize reducing car dependency; therefore, 100 units/acre would be acceptable to him only if paired with robust public transit investment and green building standards.

Overall Stance: I would focuses heavily on fiscal transparency. I would likely ask whether these high-density projects receive excessive "corporate welfare" or tax breaks that could be better spent on direct social services or property tax relief.

Jim Ross – Did not respond.

Shaun Mallory – Did not respond.

Steve Cavender – Did not respond.

District 3

Kelly Burke – a) I believe that zoning changes should go through the council and P&Z. This is how local government works, all things go through the department heads then voted on by the Council.

b) I believe we have housing issues with the influx of people that have come into our City from various places, so we have problems to address. If we are going to continue to build we have to build quality not quantity,we need beautiful structures that are going to last the long haul. If the zoned locations are not going to have real future sustainable projects built on them, we can keep these locations as is until the right thing comes.

Nikkie Hunter - I believe local communities should have a voice in how their neighborhoods grow and develop. While I understand the state’s desire to address housing availability, removing the approval process from local Planning & Zoning commissions and City Councils limits the ability of residents and local leaders to provide input on developments that directly impact their neighborhoods.

Public hearings and local review processes allow residents to share concerns about traffic, infrastructure, safety, and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. These conversations help ensure development strengthens the community rather than creating unintended challenges.

I support responsible development and expanding housing options, but I believe those decisions are best made at the local level.

District 4

Tom Ware – Did not respond.

Rojo Meixueiro - A) Too many working families are being priced out of housing while commercial spaces sit underused. Arlington certainly needs more housing options, especially mixed-use or multi family housing in commercial areas. It’s how empty, unused, or struggling properties can become homes for teachers, service workers, young families, and any resident of Arlington who isn’t ready to or can’t buy a house.
In the effort of preserving all there is to enjoy about our District 4 neighborhoods, we should make sure new development strengthens our them through good design, infrastructure, and investment. Most importantly, though, we must choose the right land developers: the ones that work for the people over their pockets. New development provides the unique opportunity to bring good paying, safe, secure union jobs, whether for those building new developments or those living in them. I know that the City of Arlington and District 4 wants sustainable smart growth that helps keep the American Dream within reach for all, and I am the one who will bring it home.
B) RMU zoning can bring great benefit to our city. A good example to look to is the Sound at Cypress Waters in Coppell or Legacy West in Plano. Walkable neighborhoods with easy access to small business and community spaces means safer streets, which means safer communities. Not only would local businesses thrive, but residents would have more choices about how and where they live! With strategically placed transportation corridors, these RMU districts can weave seamlessly with existing development in District 4 and Arlington.
The real goal here is for an Arlington resident to have vibrant and livable neighborhoods to choose from. If we responsibly invest in infrastructure, RMU districts can help Arlington grow in a way that is more affordable, more sustainable, and better for working people.

Lisa Ventura - The bottom line is this: Arlington folks know Arlington best, and our residents deserve a voice in how our city grows.

I support smart housing developments and redesigning commercial properties that need help, we need local checks and balances. The Planning & Zoning and City Council processes help minimize strain on our infrastructure, traffic, drainage, schools, and public safety services.

Arlington should absolutely encourage smart growth, but with LOCAL oversight. Arlington should make decisions about Arlington!

Regarding Regional Mixed Use zoning

Mixed-use development can be a great tool in the right places, but densities like 100 units per acre require careful planning. Growth has to be balanced with infrastructure, traffic, and neighborhood compatibility.

Density is not our priority, GOOD planning is!

If a project strengthens Arlington and our infrastructure can support it, I’ll consider it. But growth should never overwhelm the neighborhoods people call home. Lobbyists in Austin should not be able to overstep local Arlington's decisions.

Citizens can message me on Facebook at Lisa Ventura for Arlington City Council.

District 5

Rebecca Boxall – I oppose SB840 in principle. It is a misguided example of top-down preemption that removes decision-making from the level of government best equipped to handle it, local communities.

Beyond the issue of local control, SB840 assumes that land-use decisions can be standardized across vastly different contexts. That assumption is flawed. Development decisions involve thousands of variables, including site conditions, surrounding land uses, infrastructure, preservation, and environmental impacts. These considerations have been a part of development decision-making for millennia.

Having worked in the design and development field for over 30 years, I am particularly concerned about oversimplified approaches to land use, whether they come from the federal, state, county, or even the local level.

Development is inherently site-specific. Not all parts of a city are the same, and no two parcels are identical. Development tailored for a locale and site are essential to achieving resilient, anti-fragile built environments that stand the test of time. Expediency for a pre-determined result is the opposite of the longer view.

In response to state preemption, I worked closely with Planning and Development staff to amend our zoning and building permit regulations to help ensure we get the highest possible standard of design and construction while respecting the intent of SB840.

Unfortunately, SB840 is not an isolated case. There are several other state planning and zoning preemption bills that raise similar concerns about responsible land use.

b) We no longer have a zoning category which allows 100 units/acre.

RMU now has a cap of 36 units per acre (the State mandated minimum and, now, the city mandated maximum).

If a developer proposes to exceed 36/acre they must request approval from P&Z and Council.

Brittney Garcia-Dumas – Did not respond.

District 8

Jason Shelton – Did not respond.

Melody Fowler – Did not respond.

Corey Harris – Did not respond.

# # # # # # # # # # # #

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.

Economic Development Corporation (EDC)

The EDC will meet this Wednesday, March 11, at the Council Chambers, at 4:00pm. The agenda can be found at: https://arlingtontxedc.com/assets/main/agendas/march-11,-2026.pdf . There will be a public hearing for the purchase of 2.4 acres (which 2.4 acres???) at Anthem (1400 N. Collins Street) for $3,433,188 plus closing costs.

The agenda includes:

passing the minutes (Feb 17 minutes)

financials (no link available)

Industry spot light-closed job ads 2025 (report)

Outstanding projects update

Two action items (Anthem , Dallas Business Journal agreement)

Executive Director's Report (presentation)

Executive session.

Upcoming Public Hearings

On Tuesday, March 10, the city council will hold a public hearing on SUP10-23R4, 408 113th Street. They wish for high impact IM (Industrial Manufacturing) on 2.379 acres.

On Tuesday, March 10, the city council will hold a public hearing on SUP25-10, 2102 Prestonwood Drive. They wish for a secondary living unit on 0.749 acres.

On Tuesday, March 10, the city council will hold a public hearing on PD25-14, 1112 N. Collins Street. They wish to change the current CC (community commercial) to a PD-CC use plus a package liquor store.

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 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.

# # # # # # # # # # # #

P&Z Commission

P&Z met this past Wednesday, March 4. The agenda is 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-03-04-2026.pdf . There were five public hearings. The meeting may be viewed at: https://arlingtontx.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=10&clip_id=5388 .

(2:54) Public hearing #1 was to amend the Unified Development Code (UDC) to allow for form-based zoning (staff report). It was approved, 8-0. [Commentary: Much like townhomes, my experience with form-based code is that parking is always the problem, and the city's response to the issue, to reduce parking requirements, is ridiculous. The city will require only 80% of the parking requirements if density is over 36 units/acre and reduce business parking requirements by exempting the first 2,000 sq. ft. of commercial area.]

(1:06:09) Zoning public hearing #1 was to form the specific downtown area that will allow form-based zoning (staff report). It was approved, 8-0.

(1:08:27) Zoning public hearing #2 was for SUP-08-2R1 at 8380 Glenn Day Drive. They wish to establish a drill zone at the existing well site (staff report). It was approved, 7-0.

(1:22:01) Zoning public hearing #3 was for PD20-22R1 at 109 W Rogers. They wish to revise the current development plan (staff report). It was approved, 8-0.

(1:39:15) Zoning public hearing #4 was for ZA26-2 at 2401 W Green Oaks Boulevard. They wish to change from a PD for a veterinary office to neighborhood commercial “NC” (staff report). It was approved, 8-0.

# # # # # # # # # # # #

AISD School Board

The next AISD School Board meeting will be Thursday, March 12. The agenda should be posted on Monday.

Question 2: On January 20, 2026, the board voted to close Blanton Elementary at the end of the school year. Do you agree with this decision? Why or why not? How difficult of a decision is it to make?

AISD Ballot Order:

Place 6

Jan Tyler - Closing a school should be one of the most difficult decisions a Board member has to make. Every student, parent, and staff member works to make their school the best. As a school community, they have ownership in every way that the school functions. They have invested their time and efforts to make their school one that they are proud of. Because of the emotions attached to a neighborhood school, any changes whether it is closing or changing boundary lines, needs time, deliberation, and a great amount of communication with everyone affected by the changes.

Regarding Blanton, the Board cited many parent meetings over many months. This would be a priority in this situation. I would hope that every option was discussed and evaluated before the final decision. While making the decision to close, the next priority to consider are the impacts on the displaced students, as well as, the schools receiving the students. In the Blanton closure, there did seem to be transportation concerns and not having a safe, timely walking distance to a new school.

The final consideration would be the financial advantages or disadvantages of closing a school. With the decreasing enrollment, it would seem plausible that the enrollment could sustain one school closing, and save the money on maintaining an aging building.

These are all the factors that I would want answered and defined before voting on this issue. Since, I didn’t have any details regarding the facts about the Blanton closure, I cannot not tell you how I would have voted. I can only tell you that I would have asked that all the factors mentioned above were addressed and deliberated with the sole purpose that the closure was in the best interests of the students, parents, staff, and fiscal responsibility.

Brooklyn Richardson – I was part of the 7–0 vote to close Blanton. This was easily one of the hardest things I have had to do during my three years of service on the board. After the staff assessment was presented, in-depth conversations were held and data was reviewed. I agreed with the recommendation that was brought to the board.

I attended the family and stakeholder meeting held at the Blanton campus. I listened to families and children ask their questions. They sought to understand “Why us?” and “Why now?” but most importantly they wanted to know, “What is next for us?”

Showing up for grand openings, graduations, award ceremonies, and reading in classrooms…. that’s the easy stuff. What people don’t see is the hard and emotional work that happens behind the scenes. The faces and comments that you carry with you long after the meeting ends.

However, just because something is hard doesn’t mean it is not the right thing to do.

I stand behind the board’s vote. This vote is representative of our vision statement: Arlington ISD creates exceptional learning experiences that inspire all students, empower their dreams, and prepare them for the future.

Place 7

LeAnne Haynes - The decision to close Blanton has been one of the most challenging I have encountered as a trustee. Hearing the heartfelt testimonies from the Blanton community about their deep affection for the school and its staff, and their appeals to keep the school operational, was truly moving. It is evident that Blanton has fostered an environment where students feel welcomed and valued, making the prospect of closing the school and removing that support difficult to accept.
However, I recognized the necessity of prioritizing the facts over my emotions. Blanton, a facility that has served the community for 69 years, is grappling with numerous maintenance issues. Moreover, its enrollment has seen a continuous decline year after year, with projections indicating this trend will persist.

In making this decision, I aligned my thoughts with our recently adopted values and beliefs, particularly those concerning the maximization of resources and learning environments. Our board developed these guiding principles to inform our work. If we believe that our learning environments need to be safe, productive, and well-maintained spaces, alongside the commitment to optimizing district resources for the enhancement of student learning, then the decision to close Blanton was indeed the correct one.

I commend our board for adhering to our shared values and beliefs, even when faced with such a difficult yet necessary choice.

Linton Davis - I understand and have empathy for parents going through changes like this; however, the premise of my campaign is to bring objective and non-emotional analytical capabilities to the Board. I support the decision to close Blanton, and I’ll say up front that I don’t think that this will be the last school closure, given the decline in our student population. Hopefully, we can turn that around by focusing on teaching kids how to think and improving student performance across the board. School Choice is here to stay, and the focus is on making the AISD the schools of choice in Arlington and across the metroplex. Once we achieve that and our student population starts growing, then we can have the conversation about expanding our facility footprint. But for now, the right answer is to get the most bang for our buck and that includes right sizing of our facilities and our property.

# # # # # # # # # # # #

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