City Council Meeting   8/17/2020

I move this council certified by recorded vote to the best of each council member's knowledge.

Ms.

Ms.

Walker?

Yes.

Ms.

Magill?

Yes.

Ms.

All right.

Thank you.

So I call this meeting to order.

We will have a moment of silence.

All right, Ms.

Ms.

Walker.

Present.

Ms.

Magill.

Here.

Ms.

Hill.

Ms.

Walker?

Yes.

Ms.

Magill?

Yes.

Ms.

All right.

Thank you.

Are there any announcements?

No announcements?

All right.

Any recognitions or proclamations?

No?

All right.

And next we have the consent agenda.

Ms.

consent agenda, appropriation, Belmont Bridge replacement project, $15,263,257.41, second reading, appropriation, appropriation of funds received for reimbursement for Crescent Halls driveway repair, $18,483.73, first of two readings,

Appropriation, Safe Routes to School Non-Infrastructure Grant Award, $95,000 Second Reading, Appropriation, Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Funding, FY20-21, $246,699 Second Reading, Appropriation,

Office of the Registrar CARES funding for the 2020 presidential election, $64,229.

Second reading, appropriation, Bama Works grant for supporting aspirations, improving resiliency for vulnerable families, $6,000.

Second reading, ordinance approving city space as central absentee precinct for the November 3rd, 2020 general election.

Thank you.

So if anybody is joining us in the webinar currently and would like to speak to council about the consent agenda, you can click the raise hand icon.

And if you're joining us via phone, you can press star nine.

Mayor Walker, we have one person with their hand up and that is John Hossack.

I wanted to speak about the Northeast Park acquisition.

If there's anybody that wishes to speak to the consent agenda, please raise your hand.

Mayor Walker, I believe that's it.

All right, thank you.

And Mayor Walker, I just wanted to make one clarification on item on the consent agenda before we make a motion is that the city space is the central absentee precinct that is not removing that people can still utilize the registrar's office.

Is that right, Dr. Richardson?

That's what we've confirmed.

So people who are coming and needing a special assistance, ADA,

as well as wanting to use that location.

And the only comment that I

It's the second reading on appropriation number four but it seemed like there were some key voting members and I know that you can't control who will be present but it just seems like if there could be

Mayor Walker, I actually asked Ms.

Attack about that and she said that anyone even if absent could have submitted their scores even if they weren't present at the meeting because I asked her I said could scores have been submitted

Okay.

All right.

Okay.

No.

All right.

I can move to adopt the consent agenda as presented.

All right.

Any further comments or questions?

All right.

Ms.

Ms.

Walker?

Yes.

Ms.

McGill?

Yes.

Ms.

Okay.

City Council and the public, I have a couple items tonight to discuss.

One was dealing with the 25 hour, the 25 miles per hour speed limit on Cherry Avenue.

And then the second one was pertaining to the crosswalk timing off of Tempton, Maine and Preston and Grady across from Larchton Park.

We're going to come back to that at the next meeting.

We're still doing some research on those two items.

I know last year we did talk about the crosswalk timing, but I wanted to make sure we went back and reviewed it again to make sure that things have not changed.

So we will come back to that at the next meeting.

And then the last item was dealing with eviction notices moratorium.

And tonight through resolution,

The council will be requesting delegate Hudson and Senator Dees to support an eviction moratorium during the August special election.

Thank you.

All right.

Sarah Walker, we have four people who registered to speak.

And in this order, Marta Keane, Myra Anderson, Brad Slocum, and Elizabeth Stark.

And I will mention to our attendees that we do have a total of 16 slots for people to speak during this time.

So after our four registered speakers conclude, we will have 12 additional spots open for public comment.

If you would like to address council during this time, please click the raise hand icon, or if you're joining us by phone, press star nine.

We'll call on you in the order of hands raised and please state your name and place of residence.

You will have three minutes to speak.

I just really quick, Mr. Rice.

Sorry.

I just wanted to also clarify that we do have three public hearings tonight.

So isn't it our preference that if you're coming to speak on one of those public hearings,

which include easements for Ragged Mountain, as well as the International School.

And then lastly, the sale of that park, which I know that Mr. Hasek has also raised his hand about that we should have those come during those agenda items.

Isn't that our preference?

The two Ragged Mountain ones, International School and then that.

So I just wanted the audience to know that if you're coming to speak on those things, you will have a specific time to address those public hearings.

Okay.

And first on the list is Marta Kean.

I think Marta is here.

Marta, you are on with counsel.

Okay.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

It's great to see everybody.

I wanted to let you all know what's been going on during COVID because we've still been offering services.

I'm sorry, I didn't say my name.

Marta Keene, CEO of Java, the Jefferson area board for aging.

Java has still been offering services and supports for seniors and caregivers during this difficult time.

We kept all our staff on payroll with benefits, and that meant we were able to continue doing information and assistance and options counseling by phone.

Our insurance counseling for getting started in Medicare, our counselors met either via Zoom or by phone, depending on people's capacities for technology.

The really key thing is that the Mary Williams Community Center and our adult care center and our preschool, along with our volunteers created new ways to stay connected.

We did weekly check-ins with calling.

We had activity kits that we sent out, Facebook live events from petting farm tours to cheer yoga to a volunteer who tells jokes once a week.

and the big hit was conference called Bingo every week.

And so all of those were ways for our folks who had to isolate at home to feel a connection.

We hope if all goes well to open back up in September with the community center.

And at that point we will run parallel programs because some of our members are high risk and are not comfortable returning.

So we will continue offering them

These same services to stay connected as well as having people be able to come back in a couple days a week for socialization and activities and a meal.

We've also had FISH, the Friends in Schools, helping go completely virtual.

We're setting up programs to provide mentors and tutors for students.

So that parents can request that help or teachers can and we're looking forward to the fact that once again because of the virtual nature we have a lot more volunteers.

We have volunteers from other states.

We even have a volunteer from India who a young woman

who's putting together videos of what it's like to live in India.

So people are just finding lots of ways to try and offer support.

And I want to thank the city.

You helped us gather a lot of our PPE.

so that as we come back, our adult care center and our preschool has opened up already.

We're able to keep everybody safe and we're following all the CDC guidelines for sanitizing.

And so I wanted to use this evening so that you and the citizens of Charlottesville know that we are here and we are still working.

We're constantly weighing the negative impact of isolation

against the safety of our members so that we can find that balance.

And we're always ready to close if a situation changes.

But thanks to your way, I think we're in good shape.

Thank you.

Mayor Walker, next we have Myra Anderson.

I don't see her name as an attendee online.

We do have one phone number calling in.

Myra, if that is you, please raise your hand by pressing star nine.

It appears that is not Myra.

So we will go to next on the list and that is Brad Slocum.

Excellent.

All right, thank you very much.

My name is Brad Slocum.

I live on Harmon Street in the city.

And thank you for the chance to speak.

I'll keep it fairly brief in part because unfortunately, I didn't get to prepare as much as I'd hoped.

But I specifically wanted to bring up the apparently pretty new presence of a number of security cameras that seem to be installed on

Thank you so much for having me.

Market Street, they seem to be pointing at the parks and just curious about, you know, what the cities, if it was the city that put them up in the first place, you know, what the intention is there, how much money are we spending on adding security cameras to public parks instead of putting the money towards

you know releasing the injunction to get rid of the statues things like that and also you know whether these cameras are going to be used to prosecute anybody such as the self-styled monument guards who have been documented to be armed and threatening regular people using the parks during

You know, the hours that the parks are open, which, you know, doesn't seem too great.

And it seems like the cameras might be pretty helpful in, you know, preventing those people from making our city less welcoming than many people already feel like it is.

So yeah, I would appreciate any update on on those new security cameras.

I believe people have documented at least four or five new ones.

But like I said, I didn't get a chance to track them all down.

and I'll leave it at that.

Mayor Walker, next we have Elizabeth Stark.

I believe she is here.

Great, thank you.

Can everyone hear me?

Awesome.

Thank you all.

I really appreciate hearing about your support for potential eviction moratorium legislation in the upcoming special session.

It's my understanding that that legislation, in order to go through somewhat immediately as emergency legislation, will need a two-thirds vote in the state senate

And that's a really, unfortunately, unlikely hurdle and that if that legislation doesn't go through as emergency legislation, it actually can't be enacted until December.

I don't claim to be an expert on the minutia of special session legislation, so I may have some of these details and I may have them wrong.

But when I called Senator Deed's office today, the aide in his law office sort of laughed at me and said that she thought it was just absurd to think that this kind of legislation could go through during the special session.

So while I share your support for it, I'm really concerned that it might not happen and it especially might not happen on an emergency basis.

The other thing I wanted to talk about is

the rent and mortgage relief program hotline, which I believe is staffed through a partnership with the city and United Way.

I know you all are aware of it.

I know the people that manage that hotline are aware of it, but people cannot get through to that hotline.

I called today first thing this morning.

I got first a strange message that said, please say your name for Google Voice.

And then I was transferred to a very long message.

That message is not in

Spanish.

There's no Spanish language information on that hotline.

Some of myself and other volunteers in the community have been outside talking to people that are heading into court and they have all said that they're unable to get through to that hotline.

And really the only way to make contact is basically to spend the day just calling and calling.

So I just want to flag that I know they're trying to hire folks for that hotline, but things need to take place immediately because people in the community who are our most vulnerable citizens

and the folks that least have the time to just keep calling and calling are being left behind and are going into court and getting evicted right now, right now.

My understanding is that that's a partnership between the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission and United Way.

And there are definitely very severe problems in terms of shortage, not being able to get to the line, but just want to flag this Thursday at 7 p.m., the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission.

as having an electronic meeting.

Yes, I can.

Thank you for those comments we need to hear.

And as Mr. Payne said, this is a regional partnership that we're working with United Way.

United Way is one of

So three subgrantees.

As Mr. Payne said, we would love to hear from you Thursday night.

If you went to our website, there's also, if you go to the tjpdc.org website, there's also an email regarding the

rental relief program.

We would love to hear these comments.

We're very much aware of the delays, and we are working not just with our local governments, but also on this Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development, where the funding came from, is also working to try to help all of the localities with this problem.

And I know hundreds of calls going through the emergency assistance line when we first start staffing it.

And then there had to be additional partnerships to figure out how to accept, you know, figure out how to better process, you know, the request and the calls.

And so I know that, you know,

Hopefully, I know that it's been a problem just figuring out how to turn these dollars around and get them into the hands of families efficiently.

So hopefully we're learning and doing better.

OK, Merle Walker, that concludes our registered participants.

We do have three additional public commenters with their hands raised.

Tanisha, you are on with council.

OK.

I sent the email today.

It's actually late.

It's like two weeks late.

But I thought I said something at a council meeting in the past about the city parks and recs working with the community recreation centers to allow a tutoring program for kids that will need help and assistance during the first nine weeks of virtual school.

There's a lot of community members.

The Boys and Girls Club announced today was on the news that they would be accommodating 75 kids.

So I'm hoping that you guys, CRHA, Parks and Rec,

City of Charlottesville, whoever is responsible for the actual recreation centers, that you will allow community members to lead this initiative to help kids who have parents that are essential workers.

I've also reached out to both superintendents, the county and the city, just to determine what

they were putting in place.

I know that they're working on some things, but I still don't foresee the caseworkers for like 504 plans and IEPs being able to accommodate and meet all the kids that are gonna need the help that they would normally get in school with everybody being virtual.

So I just wanted to throw that out there.

Also back to what Ms.

Stark said about the eviction

I think getting legislation to pass on that is probably very unlikely.

based on the makeup of the General Assembly.

Also the comments about the Thomas Jefferson Planning District.

I just think that it would be better to also implement maybe like an online process versus just phones.

Because I mean, if you don't have the manpower, and we went through this before with other funds that were allocated,

then you kind of knew it was going to happen.

So I just think maybe an online process to accommodate, you know, we know the older community don't use the internet like that, but most, almost everybody do nowadays.

So it might be beneficial to have both options available and that would eliminate some of the phone calls coming in.

But anyway, that's all I wanted to share with you guys tonight.

Thank you.

Yeah, you know, in terms of the using spaces, public spaces, I think that is, you know, that came up with one of the school board meetings that with the school board numbers that we were in.

You know, I have the same concerns that I have

about teachers not being able to return to the classroom.

And I don't know how and what the implications are if something goes wrong, if we are opening the spaces and the liability because there will have to be staff members in the spaces too.

So the same concerns that we have about, you know,

No, but I'm just saying the cleaning the building, we would want to do that.

We wouldn't want y'all to do that.

Yeah.

All right, so that was just my comment there about just the safety aspect.

And in the meetings about whether it was going to be virtual return to school or not, the comments that started was that what would happen to

you know, the children who are not able, parents are not able to create these learning pods, send them to a private school setting.

And I think we are all, we don't have the level of safety concerns that we are probably going to need, especially going into this fall semester.

So I don't know where that conversation

Dr. Richardson, because I know Dr. Atkins, they were planning to include us in those conversations, the school and school board, and what other needs.

They had even talked about using spaces too.

So I don't know while I was away if that conversation continued and where you all were at with it.

But if it's not safe for teachers to be in classrooms with students, then the same is for any

adult, and any child.

You haven't addressed it further to my knowledge, but I had a similar response to a school member when they raised this idea in the beginning, just comparing if they're going to be in an environment like that, I just assumed they should be in school.

But if, and I just think there is some

Okay, Mayor Walker, next up we have Don Gathers.

Good evening, council and all others assembled.

Welcome back, Mayor Walker.

Good evening.

We had a conversation last council meeting, excuse me, about the street renamings, and it was a long, protracted conversation.

and I think that the final resolution or ideal anyway coming out of council was to not act on any of this until potentially October, which means that by the time something's actually done, it may be November or into December if at all this calendar year.

And I would urge you all to please rethink that because

I don't want us to miss the magnitude of this moment or lose out on the momentum of the movement right now as it is.

I'm afraid that people will just, as is basic humanity, let stuff drift and tend to forget about it.

And we need to keep this very much in the forefront.

If others want to come forward with other street renamings, they certainly

are welcome at any time throughout the year to do so.

And I think that that doesn't need to be the holdup in acting on the requests that have been brought forth at this point.

We as a people have always had to,

to wait.

We've always been told to wait or that the time isn't right.

And I think that this is the moment in time.

This is the opportunity that we have and we need to go ahead and act right now.

I hate to be cliche-ish and say strike while the iron is hot, but that's exactly where we are.

That's precisely where we are at this particular moment.

And I would ask, I would urge council to please go ahead and move the

the request forward for the street renaming of Black Lives Matter as it was presented and deal with other street renamings that may potentially come forward if and when they ever do.

And Mayor Walker, just to clarify both for you as well as just to repeat what we discussed last meeting, I believe council was in a position to

to vote on that based on our meeting prior to that, which you were participating in.

And there was another request that we actually were following to honor with a very similar request as Mr. Gathers, but he had reached out to council prior to that meeting, expressed concern with that decision.

And so, and in the meantime, continue to get more suggestions for street renamings overall.

And so council did decide to wait until we could give a timeline by which if all requests come in by, I think we decided on August 31st,

We would then evaluate all those in totality and make decisions on one or more street renamings.

But the intention was last meeting that we would vote on our decision, which we had discussed in the meeting that you did attend prior to that, which was to rename it.

Okay.

And was there a conversation with

Ms.

Ms.

Higo.

Dr. Richardson, have we received any new

I have received additional requests.

Yes.

Okay.

You know, I mean, on the same lines there, um, various requests around the city.

All right.

Because we had the first ones, I know we had, uh, Ms.

Hudson,

Oh, it was Ms.

Anderson, right.

Ms.

Anderson.

Okay, and then receive more that we haven't seen yet since then.

And okay, so I guess since the expectation has been and that we are receiving them, then we would have to now wait since that's been stated.

But I do understand the, you know, concern around waiting.

But hopefully, if you know,

We can review this and be ready to have the discussion at least the first meeting in September, which just gives, because the first meeting is on like the eighth or the day after Labor Day, correct?

So that gives us a little bit more turnaround time.

Okay, Mayor Walker, next up we have Robin Hoffman.

Yes, hi everybody.

I have a few concerns.

I've been in my house since 2019 when I broke my ankle.

However, I was able to volunteer a lot and do TV shows on Charlottesville Community Media Center because before COVID,

David Dillahunt designed this studio that's like the state of the art, which I'm saying that we're not advertising enough.

I know you guys have so much going on, but

You know, David's trying to advertise, everybody's trying to advertise, but I think this is going to be the spot for people to do teaching, all kinds of things.

You know, you can do after school work through the studio and David coordinates all that.

He can put video and everything and tie it all in.

So I think no other city has this.

So we are at the forefront of like,

Zoom.

And we need to advertise it.

And then also I want to say I've been volunteering for the COVID testing and I've been like the valet because I'm high risk because I'm 64 or whatever.

Anyway, so they have not gotten their act together.

In fact, I've been in contact with Dr. Bynes at the Thomas Jefferson Health Department

because like things like the incarnation, there's no, they're having church during the COVID testing.

And anyway, I was like the valet, I was like telling people which way to go and then they didn't have anybody on the other end.

And there's all kinds of issues.

Like if you have a Prius, do not go to one of these lineup things, your battery will die.

You know, there's little things that I alerted Thomas Jefferson Health Department.

But also what I want to say is also I found out that CPR was being given because I had to renew my registered nurse license CPR, BLS, and they're giving it mouth to mouth.

So I got on the phone with American Heart and then I got on the phone with

the CDC.

And then I got on the phone.

Finally, the person that responded was Dr. Bynes.

And that's how we got into conversation about COVID testing.

But she said, oh, so like people going into Cedar and all the nursing homes, they usually get hired in the summer.

You know, cause everybody that's just when they, the hired and they're all doing the CPR mouth to mouth and they're doing it in KTEC too.

So,

COVID testing is crucial to, this is like the beginning of everybody's problem.

We need to test, so we need to get it right.

And I had some suggestions and hopefully Thomas Jefferson will have some time to contact you and that sort of thing.

Sarah Walker, next up is Nancy Carpenter.

Yeah, I can.

I didn't realize I raised my hand, but that's okay.

Um, I just wanted to, uh, support what Elizabeth Stark said about the, um, community resource line.

Um, it was the same way back in February and March.

It was just, you know, an incredible volume.

And even now it's even more of an incredible volume.

So whatever we can do to support TJPDC in providing people who can be trained to answer the phone and are not afraid of entering data into a database, certainly would love to see whatever we can do as a community to support our neighbors and friends who are facing rent and mortgage problems.

The second thing I wanted to ask your health

I have seen an increase in people saying that they were homeless.

They are either in their cars or they have been paying for a hotel and they can no longer do that.

I was on the call with the Low Income Housing Coalition today and one of the statistics that they said was September they're looking at potentially 19 to 23 million people losing their housing in September because the unemployment PUA has stopped, the eviction moratoriums have slowed down or some states never had them to begin with, so the state program that we have has

This is what the 30th day basically, calendar day since it's been operational.

So it's still kicking those bugs around.

If there's anything that you can do personally to look at business groups or property owners that may have a hotel or something that can be purchased, I think that's been some conversation around the table.

But to purchase a hotel and use it for

some type of emergency shelter and then transition it into some type of permanent supportive housing for people who need subsidized housing along with case management would be helpful in the long run.

But, you know, we're not through it yet.

We just have to, you know, work together with the kind of the counties working on their end trying to get some monies together for county residents and hopefully they'll have their protocol and process ready to go.

And I do think, you know, there is, I thought there was an online application, but there's just, from what I can see, there's just a lot of paper going back and forth that I'm really concerned ongoing because of the problems that our Postmaster General seems to be implementing that that's going to slow down that process even more.

So, you know, thank you for allowing me to speak when I didn't realize I had put my hand up.

Thank you.

Okay, Mayor Walker, next on the list is Jojo Robertson.

Hi, I have a deck of hodge of things to speak about.

First of all, I, like Nancy, am seeing so many people that are on the, that are homeless, and they're reaching out through certain, you know, Facebook groups or, you know, a lot of these people have children.

They don't even know where their child's supposed to go to school.

and it's very, very disturbing.

The second thing I wanted to mention was I had a friend who had a house fire back in March and this person was also on, he was on Section 8 and

They were, him and his family were applying for different places to live.

As of July 1st, I believe, if I understand this correctly, if a landlord has more than four rentals, they must accept Section 8.

So I was helping this person apply for different places to live under this

thinking that this was the law.

And also, you know, every time somebody has to pay to have a place, they have to put down a 50 dollar application for

So what we found were even though the law has changed, there are many landlords that are making it even more difficult.

So while people are putting money down on the place that they think is going to have to accept Section 8, landlords are now saying, oh,

You have to make three times the amount of rent, which that makes absolutely no sense if you're taking Section 8, right?

Which is if someone is paying over 30% of their income in rent.

So I think this is really disturbing to me.

I think people need to recognize this.

And before you go out there and put down money for places, ask these questions.

Also, I hope that these landlords that are doing this, especially in the city, but they are receiving no help from the city during these challenging times.

It's ridiculous.

It's just

So unreal.

So that was number one.

Number two.

Oh, and then Red Cross had said that they were going to help him.

So because this person could not find a place to live,

His money from the Red Cross disappeared, which was going to be a deposit on his new place.

So it's just unreal.

So now we're just running around trying to find some place for this individual to live.

So that's number one.

I think that's important to point out.

Number two, something totally different.

With the CRB, I think it's important.

I really think Rosea should really be considered for the position of someone that lives in

I guess public housing, her experience and dedication is very evident.

She's keen, she's the one that brought about the cameras.

She's bold, she's direct.

I think it would be an asset for the city to have her.

And I think there's other people that feel like me and know she did not know I was going to say this tonight.

I haven't even spoke with her, but it's been on my heart.

Robertson, your time is up.

Mayor Walker, that concludes anyone with their hands raised currently.

Those in attendance, if you would like to speak during this portion of public comment, please do so by clicking the raise your hand icon, or if you're joining us by phone, please press star nine.

What time will we return?

Okay.

All right.

or 751.

All right, so I call this meeting back to order.

And next item is a public hearing.

and Ordinance for Granting Permanent and Temporary Easements to the Rivanna Water Service Authority for the Installation of Waterline Facilities in Ragged Mountain Natural Area.

Good evening, Mayor and Councilors.

This is Maren Hildebrand, the Director of Utilities.

The Community Water Supply Plan was approved in 2012, and this plan will provide adequate drinking water for future needs.

One element of the plan includes the construction of a water supply line from the South Rivanna Reservoir to the Ragged Mountain Reservoir.

This water line will replace the existing Upper Sugar Hollow pipeline, which is very old, and increase raw water transfer to the urban water system.

The water line is anticipated to be constructed between 2027 and 2040.

The benefits of the raw water line include increasing the water supply for the community, improving both redundancy and operational flexibility for the drinking water system, and providing a better balance of environmental needs.

A request was made to the city to approve an easement for the Ragged Mountain Reservoir property to allow construction of the water supply line.

The Departments of Parks and Recreation and Utilities have reviewed the proposed deed of easement and plat and have no concerns.

This request supports City Council's Green City vision.

It contributes to Goal 3 of the strategic plan to provide reliable and high quality infrastructure and to be responsible stewards of natural resources.

A community information meeting regarding the water line was held by Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority in June 2018.

Also, a public hearing is required by law to give the public an opportunity to comment on a proposed conveyance of the easement.

In addition, staff recommends approval of the easement to Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority for the raw water line from the Ragged Mountain Reservoir to the South Rivanna Reservoir.

And the only question that I have was just the time between the vote and when these lines are there.

By Rivanna is to have all the easements in place and there are numerous easements they have to obtain and to have all those in place before they start the design process so they know exactly where they need to install this line and design around.

So we did receive an email, someone voicing a concern about the $80 million project itself when there are less expensive alternatives potentially.

If, well, actually the community water supply was approved by council in 2012.

And this was a element of that water supply plan that was already approved by council in 2012.

It was also approved by the Board of Supervisors, Albemarle County, Albemarle County Service Authority and also the Board of Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority.

So this is an element of that.

And the estimates have always been around $80 million for this pipeline.

All right, thank you.

I think one thing that we need to make sure we understand is, and this part of the objection, one of the objections we've gotten by email was, hey, we're really not going to need this kind of capacity.

Why are we spending this kind of money?

Since 2012, a number of things have happened.

One very good thing that has happened is that Charlottesville and Albemarle have been very much better about water conservation.

and so we have been able to look at things.

You could look at things and say, okay, gee, based on that, we're not going to come as near to the danger point as we thought we were going to be.

On the other hand, if you look at the sketch of what we think the capacity is gonna be, what we think the need is going to be, there comes a point in about, I think it's about 2040

2040-2045 where things get very tight, where if we don't do this and we happen to have a nasty drought, we're going to be very sorry.

And so part of the plan for going out to 2080 here is to say, we're not going to let ourselves get to that point where we are so close.

I don't know whether people remember, there was a time in 2002, I think it was, when our drought

was such that we were getting down to serious water conservation efforts.

I remember it acutely because I was having a political fundraising event that took place the night that the drought broke.

And we had been

planning for all of these drought conditions until I think it was September 12, 2002, when suddenly the skies opened up and after about a week of rain, we could all go, oh boy, we dodged that bullet.

But that's how close we came just within the last 18 years.

looking at things again about another 18 to 20 years out there is another point there where if we get the wrong drought at the wrong time and we haven't made this plan we've got a problem and given what we do know about climate change right now which is that we don't know what to know

All we know is that we don't wanna be too close to that line.

I've looked at it, I'm the council representative to the Water and Sewer Authority and I spent some time looking at all of this stuff and I'm convinced that yes, it's quite possible, we may never need to have that capacity.

On the climate change point, obviously it varies region by region, but we do know it's going to lead to increased drought and a pretty clear expectation of much more widespread water scarcity throughout the United States over a 50 year plus time horizon.

So obviously,

it's foolish to not to incorporate that into any decision making about these things.

Are there any other comments?

All right, so we will open this up.

for a public hearing.

Mayor Walker, we do have one member of the public with their hand raised.

If anyone else would like to address council relating to this public hearing, please click the raise hand icon or press star nine if you're calling in.

And right now we have Ms.

Dee Dee Smith.

Thank you and good evening.

I'm here tonight to talk about the South Fork Ragged Mountain Pipeline.

My immediate concern isn't so much about giving away more park land for this right away because that doesn't cost your constituents an $80 million pipeline for which there are much cheaper alternatives does.

This $80 million pipeline that, may I add, was not in the original plan and was added very late in the game doubles the cost of the community water plan.

And that debt is going straight into our water bills.

And what makes this project so egregious is that the stated purpose of building this $80 million pipeline can be accomplished with a very simple alternative that costs $1 million.

$80 million or $1 million for the same goal.

And all of this is explained very well in the graph I sent you by email twice, which is from a study that just came out, was presented to the board of Rivanna this summer.

It's a very straightforward picture of the choices.

So if you'd be so kind as to pull up the graph, it's basically just got two lines.

The line on the bottom is daily demand for water, demand that needs to be met during a drought.

Right now, we use around 10 million gallons per day that has not changed in 20 years.

And that rises, they say, in 50 years to 14.3.

That's your ultimate goal, according to this plan, enough water to meet demand in a drought 50 years from now, 50 years from now.

And that's what they mean when they say safe field.

Now above that demand line, you'll see the alternatives and how they work to meet that goal.

The first and most important thing to notice in this graph is that within two years, Rivanna Water and Soar Authority will have completed the expansion of Observatory Water Treatment Plant.

That was the most critical piece of the original plan.

which alone gets us to our 50-year goal, our safe field, boom, done.

Except you'll also notice that the safe field declines over time slowly because South Fork is silting in and losing capacity, which begs the question as to why restoring the South Fork, aka dredging,

is not one of the alternatives.

But moving on, that bill is going to come to the city in 50 years.

The second alternative to meet the goal is to raise the water level in the Ragged Mountain Reservoir to its full capacity.

That's the second box.

The dam is fully built.

It's just a matter of clearing the land to allow the water to rise.

Apparently it costs a million dollars.

and gets us to our goal, even farther to our goal.

Then we get to the third alternative, the elephant in the room, $80 million, even though those first two, either of them were good.

Mind you, this pipeline doesn't give us any more water.

It gives us more flexibility, but we don't need that flexibility to meet our goal.

So why is this even on the table?

Well, having been in the room at the time, I'll tell you it's because there were some very powerful voices.

I was not one of the powerful voices.

Many of them who represent Western Albemarle, who do not want us taking water from the Mormons.

and they think we should pay $80 million so they can have the river all to themselves.

Mind you, the Mormons is a public river and it's the only clean, raw water source in Albemarle County.

That's been verified over and over for literally 100 years.

I just have two more points, quick points.

Mayor Walker, we have one additional speaker and that is Neil Williamson.

And Neil, you are on with council.

Yes.

Good evening.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Neil Williamson with the Free Enterprise Forum.

Back during the community water supply discussion, we stood side by side

with the Piedmont Environmental Council, the Southern Environmental Law Center, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Charlottesville Area Association of Realtors supporting the Community Water Supply Plan.

We believe that the Community Water Supply Plan provides the water needed and the flexibility needed.

In 1966, the year of my birth, our forefathers allowed for the South Fork Rivanna to be built.

It was much more than a 50-year water supply plan.

It is important for you to look forward.

And I believe that this small step is a part of the community water supply plan that we have already had a discussion and a debate about.

And I'm hopeful that city council will back the previous councils as well as the other boards in supporting this effort.

Anybody else in attendance would like to speak or address council relating to this item, please click the raise hand icon or press star nine.

Okay, thank you.

And I guess it may be just for public benefit, especially since Ms.

Smith was on the council when this initial vote would take in place if it's possible to have a just brief discussion of how what was voted on changed.

So I'm not familiar with what was changed, unfortunately.

I know this pipeline has always been a part of the community water supply that was approved in 2012.

And this is just one of the elements in moving forward.

and it what just to give you a little more detail what it does is it we have when Ragon Mountain Reservoir was expanded in in the last five years it provided almost a billion gallons worth of water and the South Rivanna Reservoir does not have that kind of capacity so this pipeline would transfer that raw water from

The Wagon Mountain Reservoir to the South Rivanna Reservoir where it can be treated by the South Rivanna treatment plant.

And then it just provides so much more flexibility and capacity.

And then if you ever have a catastrophic issue with one of your major wastewater treatment plants like Observatory,

or the South Fork, if you're able to have that flexibility that you can also treat water at either plant.

It's sometimes useful to remember the old saying that in the world of infrastructure, if you're doing it exciting, you're doing it wrong.

Are there any other questions from council?

Jake, you are on with council.

Hey there.

I don't have a position either way on this because I don't know enough, but I'm just wondering, do we have a sense of the rate payer impact?

I know Dede Smith mentioned that this was going to go into water bills.

And that's been a major point that Ms.

So maybe Councilor Snook, I don't have this right in front of me, but my understanding is that there was a cost share associated with this and the city

And the other thing I would say about trying to calculate rates beyond about five years is that it's

It's a fruitless exercise.

Whatever we're going to end up doing here is going to get bonded.

It's going to get bonded 20 years in the future, trying to project where all of the rest of the economics are going to be in 20 years.

is very difficult.

We can do some, well, okay, let's make some rash assumptions and figure out which one comes out better.

And my recollection is that, again, we're looking at a situation where the rate increase

If you truly assume that the $80 million was not going to be used in any useful purpose and that it was simply money being thrown into the river, then obviously it's going to have an impact.

I don't think that most observers, Ms.

I think it is important though for us to be able as a council have those discussions so that future councils can see because you are tying up resources and if you think about like the big picture

items that like Dr. Richardson talked about early on when he came in about the state of the city buildings, the possible city center, school renovations, affordable housing.

Like as you start adding those things, you are projecting out decades and you would want to know what the potential costs and when they're going to meet

So that's-

The water and sewer authority bonds are completely separate.

They are not a part of any of our capital improvement program allocations that we city council have a right to make and a power to make.

So don't think that

We are responsible for 15%.

Then that 15% has to come from somewhere on the city end, and we make contributions to keep this entity afloat now.

What you're primarily looking for is just basically a pro forma of what it will look like in the future.

The economic impact that it will have upon the residents based upon, you know, what those projections are moving out.

But as with anything else as council and Snook said, you know, those bonds are issued through Rivanna and not through the city.

And as we know,

to overall, you know, with Rivanna as well as with the city.

We retired debt along the way, which pushes that amount going out further.

You know, it decreases how much, you know, we'll have to pay in that.

So it's just all a cordon on how things go.

But just like the mayor said too, you know, we want to make sure that we aren't continuing to defer cost to future councils

They establish a rate every year based on their

the current operating budget and capital needs and out of our rates, I know we, which also incorporates the operating budget for the city, our contribution to Rivanna is

And it's really based on our billable units, which is a little bit more of a bigger discussion.

I do want to add that if you looked, and we can certainly provide this, if you looked at the debt responsibility for Rivanna in future years, this comes at a point when their debt is decreasing and they have planned for that.

I'm sure that Mr. Moyer or somebody else from Rivanna would be happy to join us at a later meeting to explain it all.

I mean, it is appropriate that at least every eight years we talk about it openly and new counselors get to hear the spiel and to understand the logic because there's nobody on council right now who was a part of the discussion in 2012.

So it might be appropriate to get them to come back and

Well, he's been here in the past two years, like Heather and I have heard reports.

I just think that the question regarding the contribution that we make and it could increase based on a significant project like this isn't, you know, that that's possible.

OK.

We do have one member of the public with their hand raised, Mayor, and that is Rory Stolzenberg.

Thanks, and good evening, council.

I don't have a lot to say here.

I just wanted to note as a point of fact that I believe the pipeline was adopted as part of the water supply plan going back to the one adopted in 2006.

So that's all I got.

All right.

Thank you.

All right.

So close the public hearing.

Madam Mayor, let me put something on the table.

Yeah.

Anyone opposed?

No?

All right.

So that's going to move to consent for the September 8th meeting.

All right, next up, we have another public hearing

with an ordinance for granting an underground utility easement to Dominion Energy for the installation of electric power lines in Ragged Mountain Natural Area.

And it's the first of two readings also.

And Mr. Jensink from Parks, is he here?

Good evening.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you for having me, Ms.

Mayer and Dr. Richardson and Council.

This agenda item is to effectively bury an existing power line on the Ragged Mountain and the new Hayward Forest property.

The line has been there for quite some time.

Dominion is burying its power lines, I believe, all the way up Reservoir Road.

This happens to be a property that we own.

They had, as you see in the memo, looked into burying it next to the driveway of Ragged Mountain and moving it off of its existing alignment for this little short stretch.

They came back later after some technical review and said, it makes more sense to simply bury it where it is now.

The current easement allows for only overhead lines.

Are there any questions from council?

No?

All right, we'll open the public hearing.

If anybody in attendance would like to address council relating to this public hearing, please click the raise hand icon or press star nine if you're joining us by phone.

Thank you.

We'll close the public hearing here.

Council, is there any discussion?

Nope.

All right.

And it's a no vote again.

No objections.

All right.

So this item will be moved to the consent agenda for the September 8th meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Next, we have a third public hearing ordinance for granting a drainage easement to the International School of Charlottesville.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Councillors.

Before you tonight is an ordinance to grant a drainage easement from a property on Linden Drive owned by the International School.

It is for a drainage easement.

In your package you'll notice it goes over a very small portion of Reeves Park and it's going to hook into an existing drain there.

It is worth noting that the city staff recommends and the easement does contain language that the specimens trees shall be protected and that obviously any property that's disturbed will need to be restored back to its current state.

All right.

Thank you.

And those were the only two questions I had about, you know, some of the discussions around grass can be as serious as the discussion we have regarding trees.

So just making sure that that was alignment with what that replacement grass was, and then the trees if they were disturbed.

So I did ask those questions.

Are there any clarifying questions needed before we open the public hearing?

All right.

We'll open the public hearing now.

And if anybody in attendance would like to address council relating to this item, please click the raise hand icon or press star nine if you're calling in.

No hands raised, okay.

Council, any further discussion?

Nope.

All right, so we'll close.

This is also a no vote.

Are there any objections to moving this item to the September 8th consent agenda?

All right.

That can go on the September 8th consent agenda too.

All right, our fourth.

Madam Mayor, Councillors, if I may, I know that

Well, I'd like to start with just a little bit of background that there was a policy adopted to the earlier discussion about the 2012 water plan.

There was a policy adopted by the city council in 05 concerning the sale of city-owned land.

And that policy was amended in 09.

And it has not been amended since.

and so the policy allows for people to submit proposals to purchase city land and if the proposal meets certain criteria within the policy, it will go to you as you have this item tonight.

However, it's my understanding in talking to some of you and again, this met the policies four corners but it's my understanding that

This council is not particularly inclined to sell any parkland, even though, again, the policy is silent to parkland.

But I thought it would be a good idea for the council maybe to, if you like, if that's your policy preference, rather than going ahead with this hearing tonight, would be to defer this, and I can bring back

an amended policy that would in effect not allow people to simply submit a proposal to purchase parkland from the city through staff and then it gets to this point.

But again, if that's a policy preference that you all do not want to or have any interest in accepting or entertaining offers to buy city parkland

That seems reasonable to me.

I don't support on principle selling parkland given its scarcity.

You know, regardless of price, in this case, I think the price is also extraordinarily low.

But even at a higher price, I wouldn't be inclined to support selling our scarce public park lands for private use.

And so yeah, to me, that makes sense as part of the larger policy.

And I don't think it necessarily needs to be part of the larger policy.

But I think even just selling

are public lands, whether they be parks or not.

Land is such a scarce resource here that I think we need to use it very strategically.

I also, I mean, personally, I think I agree with the

I'm not interested in seeing our park lands reduced.

And I also don't want staff time, personally, to be, I mean, I know a considerable amount of different staff time was put into this proposal.

And with the way the policy is currently written, that would be expected.

I can't really see myself

ever voting to sell Parkland.

Let me add, my thought was not quite as categorical as

That was Magill's statement a moment ago.

But there are an awful lot of things, a lot of areas that are thought of as being not productive parts of parks that are in fact ecologically important parts of those parks.

And there are all kinds of things that I can imagine, even a difficult slope down to a difficult stream where I just remember an eighth grade class where we were told we were supposed to pick a one foot by one foot area and visit it every day for two weeks.

and report back on what changes it went through during those two weeks.

There are things that we learn by being exposed to nature that hasn't been developed by humans.

That if we take away all of the places where you can learn that way, we take away something very important.

And so the fact that it doesn't seem like it's productive land being added

to anything where you can throw a baseball at it or where you can kick a soccer ball to it.

And I just agree with many of the points raised and I'm specifically to the staff time and just the desire to preserve as much of this type of land that we can and also the precedents that it sends.

I know that's something that my other colleagues also expressed

when we were just talking about it over the weekend.

Just given if we go this direction with any one decision, not necessarily this one that we were looking at.

So I definitely am in support of us modifying the policy to reflect that preference.

It's my understanding that if there is some extreme situation where it's really unique, that it's not that it can't ever come in front of council for a decision, but it wouldn't be automatically triggered to put staff's time and energy in.

So it's not like it was an end all be all, but it's just our preference for the policy to not go through staff in this case.

That is correct.

I mean, obviously, as you know, it takes three members of council to amend a resolution or policy.

And, you know, let's say somehow there was, you could amend your policy at your next meeting to exclude park lands from it.

However, if

If somebody had a real need and three counselors wanted to, they could then vote to amend the policy at a subsequent meeting or make an exception to the policy and consider a potential sale of parkland.

But what this would do is just create the de facto rule that staff wouldn't consider offers to buy parkland, that somehow the council

would need to say to staff, hey, look, three of us support this possible sale.

Thank you for clarifying.

And that's a, I immediately thought of the alleyways, which we changed the reverse, we reversed that.

All right.

I know we're not having a public hearing, but I do feel a little wave of guilt right now because I know that at least one person had wanted to at least speak on the subject generally.

So it's not moving forward, and it's not going to be on a consent agenda.

Correct.

At the next meeting, I will have a policy amendment for you to consider, and then at that time,

So, Councilor Hill, what you're asking is that if someone who

And it might be a moot point.

I just know that specifically Mr. Hasek had chimed in earlier to say, is this my time to speak?

And we said, no, that's later.

A public input, all right.

Yes, Mayor, we currently do have one hand raised from a phone number.

Mr. Hasek does now have his hand up.

But I will go to the person with the phone number.

And you are now on with council if you wouldn't mind stating your name and place of residence.

Hi there.

My name is Dan Katz.

I'm here with my wife, Veronica.

We're the

couple that are offering to buy the parkland behind our house.

And totally understand everything you all are saying.

Appreciate all of your public service, too, just in general to Charlottesville.

The reason that we went through this process, and also apologize, obviously don't want to be the couple that's wasting or using up staff time

But we went through this process because the land in question floods a lot.

And it's been flooding since we moved.

And we were in touch with the city both to work on some of the trees, one of which needed to be repaired or maintained, but also because we wanted to figure out how to prevent the flooding.

But more than that, our intention is to keep the land

when we would be willing to do whatever is required to sign anything that says that we would not develop the land, keep it open.

But it's land and the park manager that we've worked with, who's been awesome, has verified you can't get to without going into a creek or going into someone else's backyard.

And so we just want to remediate it and put a rain garden in or something to just

prevent the flooding and that this was sort of the way that we needed to do it.

And I agree with all of you that parkland is super important.

We are active users of Northeast Park and love using the trails and things with our kids.

And yeah, we're just happy to have it.

and the park in general.

But this is sort of a distinct thing.

It's not a place like no one goes back there.

No one uses it.

And it is a health risk to us.

But I do totally understand all the things that you guys are or we understand the things you're saying.

And I think I guess that's it.

That's it.

And if the price is the issue, we would, you know, we're trying to figure out how to value land that is, you know, going to cost us money eventually, or someone money to rehabilitate at some point, but obviously don't we're trying to do something that's fair.

And yeah, appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Yes, one other person.

That is John Hostak with his hand up.

And John, you are now on with council.

Well, thank you very much for this opportunity to speak.

I really

I appreciate that you've put so much thought into this matter.

I really value the park as an undeveloped resource.

It's publicly owned by the entire population of Charlottesville and I really think it should stay that way.

I have no problem with any of the personalities involved in this and I'm really concerned, as I think you are, in terms of the precedent issue and also the principle.

I actually don't even have a problem with the people adjacent to that piece of land having priority used to it.

It's like it's not been an issue in the past and I don't see it being an issue in the future.

So, in my opinion, the sale is contrary to the vision of this council in terms of the green policy, the healthy communities, all the rest of it connected, smart government and those sorts of things.

I value the trees in terms of their shading, their carbon dioxide to oxygen conversion, the canopy, the reduction of heat and all the rest of it.

And I think I'm on the same page and I appreciate your input on this in terms of it being a matter of principle that you do not accept piecemeal sale property.

And in particular, in this instance,

I do believe that there is adjacent properties at 914, 916 and 918 Marshall who could view this sale as they see a precedent here and they want an identical arrangement and that that's something that we would not want.

So I'll leave it at that.

Thank you.

I don't want to go down a rabbit hole with this, because we're going to move on.

But I did have a question for Mr. Genzic about the accessibility, because I know that both Counselor Magill and I have ventured to the very end of this park on foot.

And I believe I wasn't trespassing.

And so I feel like I was accessing this property without being on personal property by following the park.

And granted, yes, there was a stream.

And it was not the most clear path.

I've been in this little spur once.

I believe somebody reported a dead deer.

They want us to go look at it.

And I also, you walk up and it feels like you're in the woods through the whole creek.

When this particular specific request came in, I took a look at the GIS and realized there's a curve in the creek and the valley, like Lloyd mentioned, you know, the stiff

Steep thing going down into the creek without having a survey I couldn't say but it would appear that without getting in the creek at one point you do have to go on to 916 or 914's property briefly but again that doesn't mean you couldn't walk through the creek if you didn't want to you know and have access to it but it's uh you couldn't tell on the ground without a survey but I didn't think about it till this came up it would appear

Okay.

All right.

All right.

Thank you.

Next we have public hearing resolution endorsing the submission of three smart skill

Applications requesting transportation funding by the Charles Albemarle Metropolitan Organization, the hydraulic 29 intersection improvements, the Hillsdale Avenue South extension, and the Fifth Street hub and trails.

Hi, Chip.

I do have a presentation.

I will share that immediately.

Mayor Walker, council members, I'm Chip Boyles, the executive director for the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, as well as the Charlottesville Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization.

Thank you for considering an endorsement tonight for these three projects that the mayor mentioned.

They are being considered and have already been approved for a submission by the MPO

to the Virginia Department of Transportation for smart scale funding on the statewide program.

These three projects are for that statewide competition.

They're projects that have been jointly worked on and jointly benefit both the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County.

And all three are projects that we have been working on through a planning process for quite some time, especially with the hydraulic and 29 project that's been in a planning process for about three years of public engagement.

We have submitted projects for the hydraulic in 29 in the past, a roughly $100 million project that did not score well at all because of the cost of it.

But as you all know, that's a very congested intersection.

And if I'm not mistaken, it's the number one

intersection for congestion and all of the Culpeper District.

So it's definitely a transportation need that we have.

What we're asking you for tonight is just your endorsement of this project because all three projects are directly related to the City of Charlottesville.

I can certainly go into great detail

excruciating detail on especially the hydraulic project, but both of the hydraulic projects are included in the hydraulic area, small area plan.

that both planning commissions for City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County have supported and the small area plan that both the Charlottesville City Council and Albemarle County Board of Supervisors have supported as well.

I'm sorry.

So this is a different scope, though, than the overall project.

Looking at estimated costs, I'm trying to understand

Sure.

And I was going to say one of the things that may be best if I answer questions for you, if I try to go through all of these projects in the detail, we may be here for quite a while.

So what you're looking at in the presentations is a combination of several components.

All, if you look in the upper left-hand corner,

So under project one, you have different options.

What you're looking at on the screen right now is just a reconfiguration of the intersection that's removing a couple of left turn movements and replacing that with a roundabout over at the Hillsdale and Hydraulics so that

Some movements would have to go through that roundabout to make the turning movements.

Others may have to find other alternative ways to get through that intersection.

But by removing those turning movements, you're able to reduce the traffic signal time, stopping the flow of traffic on Route 29.

and speeding up traffic that can get through that intersection.

This is mostly just a restriping and reconfiguring of the traffic signals.

So cost effectiveness is just over a million dollars compared to doing a grade separated intersection, which is what we submitted two years ago for a hundred million dollar total cost.

Brian, if you could turn to perhaps the next part of project one,

Which is a, make sure I'm... Is Joe here with us tonight to show you now, Chip?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Okay.

All right.

I'm making sure...

This is what's up now is actually part of a second part of the project, which is a Hillsdale extension change that creates what's called a continuous T intersection where Angus Road comes into Route 29.

creating a continuous right turn movement.

Again, that's in place of the previous project.

We were looking at a grade separated intersection there that would take Angus over 29.

Again, the cost was just prohibitive from submitting that forward.

So this is just another component of the bigger project submission.

One of the most costly components of the hydraulic intersection is to create a roundabout at the Hillsdale and hydraulic right by Whole Foods, but two things

You have to keep the traffic flowing through hydraulic.

And secondly, you have to create a means for those people that are losing a left turn so that they have a way to very easily do a U-turn and get back to the turning movement and also allows the turning movement into the old Kmart side.

A traffic signal is currently there, but with the changes at hydraulic and 29, the traffic queuing would back up through the traffic signal there and would also affect all the way down to the 250 bypass.

So a traffic circle is demanded rather than just traffic signals at the whole food intersection.

Just one quick question.

Well, with that one, what would happen is with this

The original plan that we submitted two years ago had some turning lanes between 250 Bypass and Mickey Drive.

What this traffic circle would do would give the folks coming in and out of Mickey Drive two options.

Either they could wait to come out and make a left-hand turn.

or they could immediately take a right, go through the traffic circle and come back out to the 250 bypass.

So one of the improvements that this would provide would be giving people leaving Mickey Drive two options where they only have the option now if they're choosing to turn left, they just gotta wait for traffic to allow that.

So is it expected that people who would be going down hydraulic from the 250 bypass, a lot of people right now turn onto hydraulic and then make a left onto 29.

It's according to, I'm trying to answer it the best I can.

They would, in this scenario, they could still go to 29 and take a left.

But they would have another option if the second project is funded that's in the package tonight, which is Hillsdale South.

If Hillsdale South is funded, then they could also go a little bit further than hydraulic, take a right, and then be able to access 29 from Angus.

And I think that there's a drawing of that in this packet as well.

It should be another one.

There we go.

There we go.

This is project two that the MPO was considering.

For some of you that's been following this for a long time, the city had a project approved, but not near the funding approved by VDOT that took Hillsdale South all the way to Holliday, but did not connect it to 250.

And traffic-wise, that didn't make any improvements of trying to get people either off of 29 or off of hydraulic.

What this project does is takes Hillsdale South all the way to 250.

I'm pointing at my screen.

You all can't see that.

But the yellow in the drawing, there we go, that is removing those ramps so that anybody who wanted to go from the 250 bypass to 29 would get off at the Hillsdale South turn.

And then they could either take a left on Angus to access 29 or go forward to hydraulic.

people going westbound on the 250 bypass could either get off at Hydraulic or Hillsdale South.

And to be perfectly, I mean, I'd like to give my opinion, the project of Hydraulic in 29, we believe stands a very, very good chance of getting funded.

because it makes major traffic improvements, increases safety, and with $18 million that is left over from the previous project, it buys that project down to, we're only asking for about $7 million for a major improvement.

The Hillsdale South project is roughly, I think, $26 million that we'll be requesting.

Pretty sure on that one, they will be able to make left-hand turns.

So it's trying to remove the left-hand turns from 29 onto hydraulic, because it's those that have to stop the traffic on 29.

They would be a, one of the ways would be to go through the intersection and do a U-turn at the next traffic signal up.

And then the other left-hand turn removed is the left hand from hydraulic going to 29 North.

That is, from a traffic count standpoint, not a very heavy traffic movement.

and if you've ever been through there, that signal is very short.

Only three or four cars can go through there at a time already, but it still moves the cars through.

So by eliminating that, you're increasing the green signal on 29 even more.

And let me, for those new too,

This, we spent and the city had representatives, half of the representatives on the advisory committee.

VDOT was very generous in funding a two-year study of this intersection with numerous, numerous options.

And this, through that process, really was what the advisory committee thought was the best route.

Well, I shouldn't say.

Aside from the $100 million option.

It was the most feasible to get funded.

We came up with what we thought was the best options, and it did not score well at all because of the cost.

The grade separated intersection really would have been the project.

As I said, a lot of details.

One of the other components to this project, not the Hillsdale South, but the hydraulic, is a bike pedestrian bridge that is on the north side of Stonefield.

The original project would have been a vehicular bridge, but again, trying to still provide a benefit, but bring down the cost

and because of the intersection, making sure that we're providing a very safe way for pedestrians and bicyclists to get through hydraulic and 29 is an elevated bridge structure.

And that would be right at the northern boundary of Stonefield.

And I think it shows it on one of these drawings as well.

but not that one yet.

There we go.

Back up one more.

Yeah.

We definitely need some way for people that aren't in vehicles to get across that road because it is not an option right now at all.

I used to have to walk over that

During the study, the numbers of people who crossed 29 even not at the light was very alarming.

So you're sprinting to the median, and then you're sprinting the rest of the way.

Yes.

Yeah.

And that also gets us points in the scoring process by what we believe is adequately addressing that need.

The final project of the three that the MPO is hoping to submit is a bike pedestrian path that connects the city with Albemarle County.

And if you could go to the last drawing, I believe that it is, yep, right there, is another project that's in the long-range planning.

It's in the regional bike pad plan of

connecting Fifth Street Station roadway, and this is one leg of trying to connect all the way out to

the parkland across I-64.

And this is a project the Albemarle County received some proffer money from the shopping center development.

We also received a $400,000 grant from VDOT, but this project has turned out and it's even been updated from the information that was originally shared with you to a $10 million project.

The cost of this really increased if we use transportation dollars.

You'll see two areas of the pathway that are bridge crossings.

The pathway and those bridge crossings have to meet a higher standard when it's being designed for transportation use.

Vehicles can't use it.

But even for bicycle use, the width of it has to be increased beyond what just recreational use may be.

So that really drives up the cost.

But if we build it to recreation standards, then we can apply to VDOT for funding.

So VDOT recommended that we submit this to be considered in the SmartScale funding this round.

Thank you, council.

All right.

So we'll open the public hearing.

If anyone in attendance would like to address council relating to this item, please click the raise hand icon or press star nine if you're calling in.

And we do have one person with their hand raised, Mayor, and that is Cecilia Mills.

And Ms.

Thank you, Cecilia Mills, 703 Wilder Drive.

Since I was watching for the Northeast Park, I just stayed on.

And now I have a question about this hydraulic intersection.

And if you could possibly bring the drawing back up, that would be helpful because you went through them very quickly.

But my question is, I drive through this intersection quite often.

And I know that the traffic that backs up is often because you're behind a truck.

So it looked as if the lane turning towards North on Hillsdale becomes one lane and then people want to turn into Whole Foods at that first exit and then that backs up onto hydraulic as well so

Yeah, that's the Angus in 29.

That's not the hydraulic.

But anyway, my question is, is this still one lane when you're going north on Hillsdale from hydraulic?

Marin Council, if I may.

No, it's two lanes and the traffic circle is designed to accommodate large truck traffic as well.

Knowing with the old Kmart site and Whole Foods, large trucks will have to maneuver that traffic circle.

That's what I'm saying.

That's where the backup, there's a turn into Whole Foods that everybody thinks they need to go into.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

If anybody else in attendance would like to address council relating to this public hearing, please click the raise hand icon or press star nine.

All right.

Thank you.

So we'll close the public hearing.

For that, are there any additional questions from council?

Clarifying questions?

Nope.

All right.

Just to clarify, I see there's two resolutions.

Is that correct?

All right, I'll get started here.

I have to do them one at a time.

All right, any clarifying or further discussion, clarifying questions?

No?

Thomas, would you take the vote, please?

Mr. Snook?

I can see him saying yes, but I can't hear him.

OK, I couldn't see him.

OK, Ms.

Walker?

Yes.

Ms.

Magill?

Yes.

Ms.

Hill?

No.

Mayor Walker, if I may, Councilor Snook, could you just please send a message to Ms.

Yeah.

I'm trying to read Lloyd's mind on what he's saying.

I can see him now.

Yeah, I can see him, just can't hear him.

All right.

So ready for the next motion?

Are we ready?

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Okay, I found a button I didn't know I had.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Ready for the vote?

Yes.

Ms.

Walker?

Yes.

Ms.

Magill?

Yes.

Ms.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

If I could, Janicek, who has been so instrumental in working with this and with our staff on this project, just sent me an email making sure that I was clear that there would be those two restricted turning movements at hydraulic as part of this.

I think I touched on it, but I may have ran through it a little bit

where it wasn't so clear.

So she just sent me an email just to make sure that I was clear on it.

Thank you.

Next, we have an ordinance.

Amending Chapter 33, Weapons of the Code of City of Charlottesville to add Section 33-10 to Prohibition of Firearms on City Property.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Councillors.

This is the second reading, but Councillor Snook had sent an email asking for this item to be delayed for a third reading.

He had some questions he wanted to go over with the Commonwealth's Attorney concerning the enforcement of this.

But I would like to let the public know, in addition,

some things that have occurred and there are a few changes highlighted in the memo that you received one of which is the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority as well as the parking garages are not going to be considered governmentals for use for governmental purposes for this ordinance

You know, a question had arisen about CRHA and, you know, whether it was a local authority or not, but just to be safe, if you take a look in Chapter 36 of the Virginia Code, or Title 36 of the Virginia Code, you'll see that

It is a local political subdivision that has to be activated by the voters.

And additionally, as you know, the council appoints the authority board members.

And so I think it's better just rather than to have any ambiguity for a criminal statute or ordinance, it's better just to say CRHA is exempted in terms of providing housing.

Another change that

has been made is previously the ordinance is written if a special event were to be held in the city and they want to do higher secure armed security their only option would be to hire off-duty police officers there's now a another option which allows for

Certified officers by the DCJS, armed security officers to be hired.

So in effect, somebody who had a special event and needed armed security or thought they had the need for armed security could hire someone besides an off duty police officer.

Counselor Snook,

has asked, in the next version of the Ordinance, we'll see on September 8th, there will be a definition of firearm that tracks the definition of firearm found in the Virginia State Code.

And also, Counselor Snook requested, based on the Dogwood Festival Parade, an exemption for a historical reenactor that carries an inoperable

firearm.

Alexandria and Arlington enacted similar exceptions to their ordinance because they also have parades in which historical reenactors might carry inoperable firearms.

But again, I know Councillor Snook's here.

It's important if we're going to make this a criminal statute

that it be bulletproof basically, if I can misuse the metaphor in this instance.

But it's something where particularly where the statute, the state statute says, if there is to be a challenge to this ordinance and the challenge is successful, we have to pay the attorney's fees of the other side.

We've been there, we don't wanna do that.

I agree.

So I have a little concern about the guns in a historical context or inoperable that, because how do you know that?

I could see where that could be, you know, that could

become a tricky situation.

And especially, I'm thinking if someone intends to do harm, that gives them the avenue to have the gun on a scene where someone might think it's one that doesn't work when it actually does.

OK.

All right.

So are there any further questions on this?

Thank you.

It's 9.

OK.

So next we have the resolution.

for the consideration of support for the frontline workers fair treatment charter?

Is that, have we put that on?

I think Mr. Allen is here.

Yeah, what I wanted to say, you know, just as a refresher, that the frontline workers fair treatment charter, as you are aware, was developed by the equity center.

Network to Work at Piedmont Valley and the University of Virginia's President's Council.

And basically what this was, the charter was to identify regional support for the rebuilding of a healthy community as localities move forward with recovery efforts.

And they had listed a number of practices that we were requested to answer and to see how we're moving forward with them.

and we did just that.

We answered those practices to the best of our ability.

And we answered all of them.

The only ones that we did have kind of some hauls on was numbers three and six of that.

And one was based upon the robust premium compensation

and then the other one was dealing with open hiring practices and we talked about that and I had a conversation with Mr. Allen this morning about that and then about our options in terms of how we move forward with that and then be in collaboration with our partners throughout this region.

So I'll turn it over to Mr. Allen, and he can explain more about the direction that we can go into if we are not ready to move forward with this resolution.

As I mentioned, number three and six, we do have some issues with those two, and he can further explain where they're at and then how our partners are dealing with those practices also.

Thank you, Dr. Richardson.

Good evening, everyone.

Good to see you.

I think you summarized our sort of conversation this morning and sort of the progress of this charter that really trying to optimize item number 12 with the regional partnership.

I know that the university is in the same boat in terms of number three with the

extra compensation, given the concerns of this fall from a fiscal standpoint.

So is there a plan for three?

What are we saying?

That we're working on a plan or we're saying that there isn't anything that we can do at this time?

No, I don't think that's the case.

What we did was answer that in terms of what we're currently doing.

And then basically just talking about our overall plan in terms of trying to address it even more than what we're doing currently.

As we talked about before with that with the premium compensation was that we provide our employees with administrative leave days at this current moment.

When I'm coming back to the council is proposing a way that we can provide our employees with a bonus for their work during COVID.

And then as we move forward, look at other ways that we can try to provide them with some type of additional compensation for working throughout COVID.

And then the other item, you know, that's something that we just will not be able to do in its current form based upon some EEO violation that we may be confronted with if we move forward with that.

And I think that our partners are kind of dealing with the same thing with numbers three and six.

I think it's all of the above.

I mean, because we're all facing an uncertainty in terms of our projected revenues and our overall expenditures

So is the problem with number six, the open hiring practices, that it runs the risk of us not

basically waiting for a more diverse pool of applicants so that we may end up with, if all the first 10 applicants for the job are all white, bam, we've got a white person there, even though we may have a desire for more diversity in our workforce.

Okay.

I would also think it would be about people who would happen to know that a job is being posted.

Yeah.

It opened 10 minutes ago.

And I also think that we

need to have the discussion around if people are laid off, then are those individuals able to return to their jobs, which is another level of discussion.

But I think it's something that we, and I hope everyone is considering in this if they are being laid off because of the pandemic, what

When we open back up, what happens?

So I anticipated we're going to continue to have more dialogue on these topics moving forward, but I guess where does that put us for this specific charter request?

Is it that, Mr. Allen, you have some suggested just edits or you said that you might want us to go ahead and basically approve everything and say that you're looking at future collaboration for items three and six?

What does that language look like?

I'll let Don speak first.

I saw he unmuted himself.

Sure.

I think one option would be to adopt a resolution endorsing the charter tonight with exceptions of items three and six, which would then be referred to the council that's referred to

So is that council, this is a regional frontline workers rights commission.

We would be referring how we want to answer three and six

No, I don't think it's answering it.

But I think it's us putting down what we're currently doing, and then coming back to the commission and seeing what everyone else is doing.

I would say John stated it in terms of a further study of items three and six to see what possibilities or avenues there are towards it.

It doesn't, it seems to me that everyone is in agreement that this could possibly be a thing, but it's not a simple yes or no answer at this point.

I think it would require some further study.

Okay.

And I guess, can you just kind of update us on what how the formation of that will work and timelines?

I think that would require maybe some further conversations beyond tonight as to what that would entail, but I think from here with the commitment to the resolution, I think we could get started with that work, sort of as Councilman Snook just described of regional collaboration of workers and each of the entities, institutions being able to

to put forth that.

But the first step, I believe, is that the leadership from each of those institutions, the counties, the city, obviously, and the university, are eager to engage in those conversations for a regional collaboration.

Yes.

Mayor Walker, do you want a motion yet or?

Microphone's off.

Items 8 and 9.

Where were we?

around services, doing illness.

Dr. Richardson, do you have that summary handy that you gave to council before our last meeting?

Your microphone's off.

I have mine too.

So the wraparound services during illness, the notes underneath are city staff and community members have access to wraparound services if they are exposed and need to remain at home.

Human Services works in collaboration with the Health Department who delivers food, PPE, and other items to homes of those infected.

Human Services provides small grants, hotel stays, for those in the community who are unable to remain at home safely during isolation.

As far as the childcare, number nine, schools have been willing to engage in these conversations, but there are still many open traditional childcare slots in this community for people who need them.

The YMCA has also expressed a willingness to create a school age childcare program if there is sufficient interest.

And finally, thus far, there has not been an increased demand for childcare in our community.

Correct.

So do we have arrangements?

Because I know that there were some concerns about hotels and do we have contingency plans already with them?

Are we saying that we would be able to book rooms for employees?

Do we have a potential contract?

Like how has that been worked out?

I know there's already some concern about the UVA and the contracts that they may have if students or staff become sick.

Are there enough hotels for UVA students and city staff or others?

And as someone who's worked with

the issues regarding food security for families in this area.

There were concerns even with us at the time.

And I know if there's any food movement happening, Chantelle and her team or that team is at the table for those discussions.

And there was concerns about whether how many people we would be able to feed based on

How many people were sick at once?

So I missed the last discussion, but I just want to make sure that people are not

expecting something that we wouldn't be able to deliver if there were a lot of people at the same time who needed these services.

Because this is sort of like what's going on at the hospital.

You may survive if you are not, you know, one of a hundred people coming in the door at the same time, but if you're trickling in, that may be your survival rate increases.

So the same thing, if you're one of three families, yes, we can provide you with food, but if you're one of a thousand families, then that changes.

Mayor Walk, you bring up excellent points.

I don't want to speak for anyone else, but the Equity Center has been very heavily involved with Cultivate Charlottesville and Chantelle and Gabby and that team and providing the wraparound services beginning almost with the Crescent Hall event, which, gosh, that was what, June, beginning of June into May, that at each of the testing sites that have been provided by either Sentara, Martha, Jeff, the Thomas Jefferson Health District or UVA Health,

We have set up a network on the back end to provide wraparound services that is heavily involved city personnel and is currently transitioning to city personnel to provide those resources that you just mentioned.

I would say that even with that network, the need is great, I think, regardless.

So I just wanted to comment that I do believe that

That item on the charter is something that is moving in a positive direction.

And I would just urge the council to consider the childcare, I think, as schools are making, have made their decisions for this fall.

You know, I think people, I think that childcare need will increase as the more we require people to come back to work, the more we're going to need childcare, right?

And I think that's one thing that's probably missing from here when you base the decisions that you're making on the capitalistic system versus ensuring care for communities.

Because part of the discussion that started happening, and we had a bit of it, is do you limit some of the requirements for home daycare centers or whatever?

and you put people who are small business owners at risk, who probably don't have the best insurance, who may take

kids because they are able to, but that doesn't do anything for the if-then situation of if they do become ill, then what are we saying?

We didn't think that schools were safe.

This is sort of the discussion that came up at the beginning of the meeting, but we are gonna say the kids that now can't come to school can come into your home, and then if you get sick, and since it's an in-home daycare, you put your entire family at risk,

Well, I guess we can continue to work through this document with the partnership and then see where we're at from there.

Is that how we move forward, Ms.

Yeah, and I would also, if this is written up anywhere, I know that Councilwoman Magill had mentioned, she was reading from something, any of those notes of what this is?

I thought you had it, I apologize.

Say again?

I thought you had it, I apologize.

Oh, no, I listened to the last one, but I just I think I think more for as we move towards a regional collaboration, what I will continue to do is not only just urge the city, but also the university and the county to sort of almost a status report of where they are with each item and to see what sort of solutions have been accomplished in any of these items where some some institutions may have gaps.

And so I would say if if a win for tonight would be a commitment to

And we did in our original meeting give you the green layer support for number 12 so that could begin.

Okay.

I thought I remembered that.

I have another number 11.

Well, I would say so.

Oh, Nikuyah, did you say you had another question?

Sorry.

Yeah.

Yeah, so it includes a whole line of temporary and some part-time seasonal workers who are hundreds of people in the city who are working who do not have health care.

Mm-hmm.

Well, I know in terms of what's available for temporary employees with the city, unless you choose tier three,

And so for us, we would know that is like how many temporary employees have used any of the healthcare options that we have.

And then

I have another question, I guess, about the applicability or the application of number 11.

Is the essence of this to say that, I mean, let's suppose that there is a temporary or whatever part-time frontline worker.

Are we saying that if we're putting them out there as a frontline worker,

and they get COVID-19, which they would presumably have gotten only because they were being a frontline worker for us, that we are going to limit whatever health care benefits we give to them to be the kinds of care that they would get under the

and some of the less generous plans or are we saying that affordable health care for COVID-19 in particular for people who are having an unusual risk of getting COVID-19 is one of those things that we as an employer ought to take on.

It sort of seems like it's not really a very strong step in the right direction to say, okay, go out there and hustle around with all these people who are going to get you sick.

We don't have that many in terms that are essential workers.

Well, I don't think you can say that because if you open a golf course back up and you send somebody out there to work, then you have now said that you are an essential worker.

If you have people doing park wellness and if they have the potential to come in contact with anyone at any point, then you are saying that you are essential.

We've had staff members test positive.

So at any point, any of those staff numbers,

whether it's public works, utilities, whatever you are now saying you're working in this environment you are now an essential worker and at any point if any of those individuals do not have access to insurance or even if they have access you know our top tier insurance you are paying for more than one person so again

If people can add their families to it, which they would need to, because if they are exposed, they can potentially expose your family.

You're talking about someone who is in a temporary

status being able to pay $160 or $130 per check.

That's just for one additional person.

And it's more than that if you have more family members than that.

That's not even saying if they are even able to afford that.

And I'm sure most of them are not.

So it's back to revisiting what we determine is essential.

Because as soon as we vote to open anything,

that is not in a virtual platform, like some of the discussions that have been about open and childcare spaces, there is going to be some employees who will have to be at those centers to make sure things run smoothly, even if there are other people there in a volunteer capacity.

So, what are we doing here, Mr. Blair?

Before making a motion, could I just ask Mr. Allen the concern that I was expressing earlier about part-time people who end up getting COVID because we've put them out there on the front lines.

How is the university or how is Albemarle looking at that issue?

I can't speak for the county and also, you know, I'm not like a university spokesman either, but I do know that, like I stated, UVA has healthcare benefits for its part-time employees.

I'm not talking about temp employees, that's a little bit different, but as a part-time employee, you do have the option.

to get health care.

You could question if it was affordable or not, but I think during this pandemic the testing that they are providing as well as the services for child care is something that they are doing and that

And I think, Councilman Snook, this again goes to the point of what I think what I'd be interested in seeing is this regional collaboration of all these things to compare and contrast.

It's not a commitment to do these things, right?

You're not gonna be on the hook for providing each of these things by going to this resolution.

What you're committing to is that specific question that you have, you would be able to ask it directly to university personnel, to county leadership.

So would it be appropriate to think about, whereas a moment ago we were thinking perhaps we support it, but we want three and six to be reviewed by the commission established in number 12.

We could add number 11 as being something else we would want to be reviewed by the commission established in number 12.

Well, I think this is more of a working document when we work collaboration with the other partners that will come to some type of resolution in terms of what everybody is doing.

It's really just looking at it.

That's just my opinion, Mr. Allen, that we're looking at it from all of our partners and then trying to find a way that we can all provide some

In that case, why didn't we have just, why wasn't number 12 just a number one and then one through 11 were examples of things that would be researched under the body that's created under number 12?

because if people read this, they are going to say to us, and I think we should be doing all these things, and I support them, but what I'm struggling with is that I think it's something that we can do better on a lot of these issues, and if someone read,

If someone were reading this, they would say to us, hey, so you are supporting wraparound services during illness.

And I was one of the first, one of the members on that first

you know, Carl Wolf Crescent Hall is the example you use.

So we brainstormed how to, if there are more positives in this building, and how do we keep people safe in a nursing home type setting, because that's essentially what's going on in that building.

And that's where the whole idea about these wraparound service and we started brainstorming what that would look like.

And

We also talked about it at a South First Street, West Haven, Friendship Court type.

Like if there are multiple families who are sick, how do we provide them with the wraparound services needed so that they could not worry about anything but getting well, stay indoors, and feed however many family members also

and whatever other needs they had.

So I support us doing all of those things, but I think that with signing off on this, that we are saying that this is something that we do or plan to do, or we're putting the plans in place to be able to do it by X date.

And I don't, that's not what I'm hearing.

So it just sounds like we, I support number 12 and I support all the other things that I would like to know

And I certainly agree that perspective that was last week even just reaching out to colleagues and just trying to understand where do we go from here because this is essentially what we looked at two meetings ago and Dr. Richardson provided a brief update the last meeting but still wasn't a lot of things resolved.

And so I think we're all in support of work being done

so that all of us, all these organizations including the city, the county, and the university and beyond can achieve these points.

But I agree with Mayor Walker.

This is where I've just had a hard time with seeing how do we get this to the next steps without misrepresenting where we are and also owning it.

I agree with the perspective Dr. Richardson offered just a little bit ago in terms of it being a working document that provides a basis for this regional collaboration and

invites these conversations and also invites conversations about what are limitations in terms of what we can do and how can we try to collaborate regionally to overcome those limitations and improve what we're doing.

And for that reason, I am totally comfortable in endorsing the document absent items three and six and moving forward in that way.

I would be ready to make a motion to that end.

I don't know if anyone else will.

I would just add to just listening to Mayor Walker, and I think it's I think I hear the hesitation, but it really is, as Councilman Payne just said, a stat or support of where you're currently at.

And I think making that

visible to the regional partners so that everyone can have a conversation because to date it's just been a conversation and a couple notes right but how can we make it updated so that we can all see it and all have actually have a tangible conversation about it and then secondly you know there's a couple items on there that are very specific to COVID and a pandemic right the wraparound services the PPE

But each of those items on there, and I also hear everyone's support of it, are things that we should be striving for regardless.

And I think those are things, without a pandemic, we would have been trying to strive for those things as well.

And so I think that's the importance of having this collaboration, because hopefully COVID will be gone.

But these issues will still be there.

Part-time employees not having health care, child care issues, all these things we have been trying to address for

Long time, right?

And I just think supporting this would be a step forward in that process of moving towards getting there.

I just, I said this last time and I feel the same way as well.

I just don't view the purpose of this document as at all saying,

Mission accomplished.

Like we've done all this.

I think it's the exact opposite, which is why I support moving forward with supporting it absent items three and six.

And I think that the absence is because there'll be future collaboration with the Frontline Workers Commission to further evaluate those.

And that's the only, and I'm sorry, I'm like messing up your motion.

I'll wait for a second.

I just have a comment I want to make.

I guess I can second it because I don't want to be able to discuss it.

I'll second it.

That's where I'm just confused because I think that what we're saying about three and six, like as Nikuyah was saying,

is kind of what we're saying about all of these items.

They're all, even if we're doing some things right now, we're not doing the optimally necessarily.

And so I'm just trying to understand, I hear what Michael's saying.

Like I want to just make sure that what we're saying is really representative of what we mean and that this is just a first step and that this is a working collaborative effort.

But I think that that applies to all these points and not just three and six.

I mean, it is all of them.

I mean, like I said before, it's a working document.

So we'll continue to work on those.

But I know right now that I know that the university, I know that the county, they're talking about number three and six because three, we know that's a financial issue right there in terms of compensation where we're all looking at it.

And six is just something we, you know, we just have EO issues with.

But all these documents, as you said,

I want to continue to work on them and it's working through the partnership to talk about it in ways that we can have those conversations to make improvements in those various areas.

Well, one is doing another may not be doing where we can look at that and try to strategize and see how we can be able to do it.

So I think that this is more so, well, I'm not going to speak for Mr. Allen, but also

It's sort of like a think tank almost trying to improve in those various areas as he said before.

These may go further than just during the COVID pandemic.