City Council   1/3/2017

If we could all do the Pledge of Allegiance, please.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Mr. Fenwick?

Here.

Mr. Bellamy?

Here.

Mr. Signer?

Here.

Ms. Szakos?

All right, we have a number of announcements tonight.

Announcements for January 3, 2017.

City Hall closed Monday, January 16, for Martin Luther King Day.

Charlottesville Area Transit will operate full service.

City trash and recycling will be collected as usual.

Our offices will reopen at 8 a.m. on the 17th.

City Council will meet on Tuesday, January 17th.

No, no, no.

Boards?

I would wait, and let's do that after.

Let's do that after.

Yeah, after we do announcements.

Yeah, I can keep on going.

I'd like to welcome three young ladies from Charlottesville High School, the senior government class.

So you see, I do this so your parents know that you actually came down here.

Well, welcome.

Welcome.

And I'd like to give a shout out to a member of the community, Corey Claiborne, who's an architect.

This past week, maybe two weeks ago, he got a national award as the Young Architect of the Year from the American Institute of Architecture.

Corey is a member of the West Main Street Baptist Church, and he's a member of the Planning Commission as well.

So Corey, if you're listening or watching, congratulations.

Good evening, everyone.

So I have a couple of announcements.

One about a Martin Luther King event, which will be taking place here in the city of Charlottesville.

Mr. Alexander, in partnership with the Charlottesville Parks and Rec, will be having the Continuing His Dream and Works event on Monday, January 16, 2017, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. at the Carver Rec Center.

It's a family affair and he emphasized in all caps that it is free.

So everyone please show up.

Program highlights include the fourth annual Alicia B. Lugo Award.

The keynote speaker will be Elijah Coles.

They're going to have a gospel vocalist, poetry as well as dancing and the mistress of ceremonies will be Miss Talia Cunningham from Newsplex.

So again, that is Monday, January 16th from 1 to 3 p.m. at the Carver Rec Center.

Also on Saturday, January 21st, we will be having, we being the Alliance for Black Male Achievement in conjunction with several other organizations here in the city, we will be having our kickoff for set, which is Saturday enrichment training.

which will take place at Ruffner Hall at the Curry School in the University of Virginia.

That will be from 9 a.m. to 12 noon, the third Saturday of the month, Saturday, January 21st.

Food will be included and it is for all young men from all backgrounds, grades 6 through 12 who are willing to come and learn a little bit about being a young man.

So again,

Thank you.

The only announcement I have is that I'll be doing open office hours, which I do every month, this Thursday at 12 o'clock.

And if you would like a slot, you can contact Page Rice clerk at RiceP at Charlottesville.org or 434-970-3113.

Alright, I would like to announce that on Thursday, January 12th will be another Our Town meeting, a community meeting for the Belmont, Carleton and Woollen Mills neighborhood where city council and all the department heads will come.

There will be free dinner at 6 o'clock and at 6.30 there will be a meeting that's all public comment.

People can say what they like and

Some of the problems that people bring in can actually be solved on the spot.

There'll be childcare also provided.

It's gonna be at Clark Elementary School Gym, so six o'clock on January 12th, Thursday.

And just since folks were announcing Martin Luther King services and events, there are a couple of more, couple more of them coming up on January 22nd, on Sunday.

I think it's at three o'clock.

is the community Martin Luther King service, which we can announce again at the next meeting.

And then on the following Saturday at five o'clock is the UVA meeting or celebration as well.

Okay, I just have one announcement.

And that's the city curbside Christmas tree collection the week of January 9, 2017.

It's hard to say that.

City of Charlottesville curbside trash or recycling service customers may place Christmas trees at the curb for collection the week of January 9.

Trees must be at the curb by 7 a.m. on Monday, January 9 for collection.

Trees must be free of all decorations, stands, and nails.

The program is for Christmas trees only, no yard waste.

As in past years, trees will be taken to Darden Tow for chipping.

The City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County together will chip approximately 2,500 trees,

And I realize I had an error in my announcement as I was looking it up as I was announcing it.

OK, thank you.

Let's move to nominations to boards and commissions.

Is there a motion in favor?

Second.

Or so moved.

Excuse me.

I have a second.

Second.

Any discussion, questions?

All in favor?

Let's carry five to zero.

Congratulations, everyone.

We now move.

We typically would do response to matters of the public by Mr. Jones, but from last one, but there were there were no items for staff concern.

That's correct.

Last meeting.

OK, so we are now to matters of the public.

Ms. Rice, Ms. Brazelton, do you mind?

Thank you.

We welcome public comment.

It's an important part of our meeting.

Time is reserved near the beginning and at the end of each regular City Council meeting for matters by the public.

If you are here to speak on a public hearing, we have one of those tonight.

Please wait to speak until that item and there's a sign-up sheet right here if you're interested in speaking on that, which is the first item on our agenda after the consent agenda.

Each speaker has three minutes to speak.

Please give your name and address before beginning your remarks.

I'll read the now read the guidelines from our from our rules.

Improper comments and disorderly conduct are not permitted.

Persons appearing before the council will not be allowed to campaign for public office, promote private business ventures, use profanity or vulgar language or gestures, threaten violence toward council city staff or members of the public, engage in behavior that intimidates others, interrupt other speakers or engage in behavior that disrupts the meeting.

Any speaker who violates the rules will be called to order by the mayor.

If the remarks or conduct persists, the mayor shall order the speaker to cease speaking and be seated.

If the order is not heeded, the mayor shall direct the sergeant-at-arms to escort the individual from the meeting room.

So we now move to, we've got several folks signed up tonight, and there are still three spots open.

So if anybody present here would like to speak and sign up for one of these, the wait, the

In person sign up spots, there's still a couple available.

We have Federico Venegas as the first.

Not present.

Okay, Joy Johnson.

Good evening and Happy New Year.

I'm Brandon Collins.

I live at 418 Fairway Avenue and I work for FAR, Public Housing Association of Residents at 1000 Preston Avenue, Suite C.

I am here tonight, apologies for Ms. Johnson who has fallen ill and I was very much looking forward to what she had to say.

So I'm going to try to squeeze it all in.

As you received on the 28th a number of us, 18 community leaders including as well as FAR and the Legal Aid Justice Center sent you a letter regarding form-based code and zoning in the city of Charlottesville.

I don't know if you've had a chance to look at that letter.

But for the public's interest, form-based code can be very confusing, but it basically means a different type of zoning, and it's something that you all plan to undertake in a small section of the SIA, presumably within six months.

And there has been a call to put out a request for proposals for a firm to design the code

for that area

They're confused.

They want to be a part of the process.

It's very hard to give meaningful input into a zoning change when you don't even understand the format of the zoning.

And that's very important for the people who live within the SIA and very important that all approaches for these zoning changes really come with an attention to how it's going to benefit current occupants of the neighborhood, primarily low wealth people and people of color.

So it actually comes with some specific requests that you maximize community involvement

including low wealth residents and people of color in the actual drafting of the RFP.

Now the RFP really does say to the firm this is the end product we want from you and we really think it's vital that the public has input into that and not just the staff as that really will drive the final product and that needs to be guided by strong informed voices.

It also includes having these folks involved in reviewing applications for the firm that you select, interviewing those firms and participating in the decision making.

We would ask that in that RFP it would include, and I'm quoting from the letter, respond to the concerns of low wealth residents and people of color who are involved in the process, require applicants to demonstrate expertise in zoning work which positively impacts affordable housing, racial and economic diversity and stability for vulnerable residents, show that the applicants are compatible with our community-based values in Charlottesville,

and provide expectations for substantial involvement of neighborhood residents.

Additionally, rigorous outreach needs to be conducted to help the people who are most at risk of adverse impacts.

This community of Charlottesville is very concerned about gentrification.

Thank you.

My name is Jason Kessler 1013 Alta Vista Avenue.

I'm here to talk about the creation of a phony 501c3 by Vice Mayor Wes Bellamy called Young Black Professionals Network.

which he used to illegally solicit thousands of dollars.

Bellamy and Young Black Professionals Network are the subject of an ongoing investigation by both the IRS and the state of Virginia.

When questioned by CBS News, Bellamy refused comment.

He wanted to avoid making false statements that might later be held against him in court.

Instead, he put forward the Vice President of YVPN as a human shield.

This VP stammered some claptrap about it being a paperwork error.

If Bellamy had missed only one accountability measure, perhaps we could dismiss it.

But Bellamy plowed through so many basic accountability measures with Young Black Professionals Network

You'd have to be a fool to believe it was anything less than intentional.

Obviously he thought he could get away with it.

When we live in a climate where a counselor can talk about raping a sleeping woman and still remain on council, we are not talking about a climate of accountability.

Bellamy put a dummy website online for this fake charity with a donate button and pictures of MasterCard, Visa, and American Express credit cards.

Under that it says, your donations are 100% deductible.

That claim is false in several regards.

First, the organization was never registered with the state as required by law.

Any authentic charitable organization must register before soliciting donations.

You can't just have any common scam artist, let alone a sitting politician, call up granny asking for money.

or throw up some scam website asking for money and tell people the money is going to charity when it's just going into their pocket.

Wes barreled right through the next safeguard against corruption, which is filing with the IRS.

You may think he was just ignorant, as he has been about a lot of things, but honestly, who in their right mind thinks they're going to create a nonprofit and not file it with the IRS for two consecutive years?

So Wes is taking in thousands of dollars through this site.

We don't know how much on the sly, in person, like,

Hey, Daddy needs a new suit.

Just file it on your taxes as a donation.

And not filing paperwork with the government.

Who does that except someone who A. thinks they're beyond reproach and B. is intentionally trying to obfuscate their cash flow?

What happens when all the people who claimed YBPN donations on their taxes for the last two years realize they claim deductions for a sham organization?

What does the IRS do in that case?

Wes isn't the only one who's guilty.

In some ways, he's a small timer.

This past June, City Council dropped over a quarter million dollars into the lap of Kristin Szakos's husband at Virginia Organizing.

That's big league corruption there.

But Wes is the most obviously guilty.

IRS is investigating him.

The state of Virginia is investigating him.

Lawrence.

Good evening ladies and gentlemen, you all know me, Lawrence Gaughan, 4694 Watts Passage, 22911.

I come before the council respectfully with an urgent matter that should be addressed by major cities or municipalities all over the country and that is the issue of

lack of accountability, frightfully low turnout.

And what I want to point out is that the problem is evident in the way that we vote.

We had 70% turnout from the citizens of Charlottesville a month and a half ago in a presidential election.

But when the last three city council members ran, I think the turnout was 10 to 15%.

So virtually nobody is picking these council members.

I want to point out that they're all Democrats, so it does begin with a process of going to a Democratic committee known as the Seville Dems.

It's a very small committee of people who have connections with usually elite donor class Democrats and voila, they pick three people to run out of five Democrats.

They pick three to run for city council and voila, these are the three that got elected in the last election.

And nobody really voted for you guys.

So you're kind of put in by a small group of Democrats in the city, very low turnout.

spend a record amount of money to run your campaign.

For somebody who's written a book about Madison, you should understand this is the exact antithesis of the way that Madison intended for representative democracy to function.

It is a shame that it is happening not just in Charlottesville but in towns and cities all over the country.

We have no accountability.

The very people that help these guys get into office are the last people who are going to hold them accountable.

Who is going to hold them accountable?

Well, we can form nonprofits that play by the rules, of course.

I have one called Gov360.

The idea is that we have to have a Bernie Sanders type political revolution.

I point out that when he was mayor in Vermont,

The turnout increased dramatically because he went out and got people to vote because he didn't have the nerve to sit on the city council knowing that he got elected and put in there by nobody.

It is a serious problem, not just in Charlottesville, but all over the country.

And in all due respect, I'm not saying that there are any tyrants here before me on the City Council, but to quote Jefferson, all tyranny needs in order to gain a foothold is for the people to remain silent.

The people of Charlottesville are remaining too silent.

There is a void of leadership and there is also a massive void of participation by the citizens and then it becomes a snowball effect where they're kept out of participating in their own government.

We need to stop this.

Thank you.

Nancy Carpenter?

Rebecca Quinn, 1044th Street here in the city.

Perhaps in the interest of having a short meeting, there's no verbal presentation on the composting report.

I'm disappointed because I see that as a missed opportunity to inform citizens, many who do watch these proceedings.

Most people I talk to are not aware of the McIntire Center compost drop-off.

nor were they aware during market season of the drop off at city market.

On, so this report, well despite the success attributed in the report to the market collection, only 30, 50 people or so dropped off.

That's really a tiny fraction of the residential population in the city or even downtown.

Imagine if 10%, I can dare to hope for 20, 30, or 50% of downtown homes participated.

Yeah, I know in some of the outer neighborhoods, people do have the opportunity for compost piles in their backyards, but a lot of people don't want to do that for a lot of reasons.

And downtown, many of us don't have the opportunity.

The report suggests a number of next steps, but I think it misses a serious or an obvious component.

It's great to have one-on-one, face-to-face education at the city market, but you only capture the people who go to city market.

And I know a lot of people who don't go to city market.

So I think surely the city's committed staff can come up with some more ideas.

To me, there's an obvious one that's missing.

Engage the neighborhood associations.

Get them to reach out to their citizens to tell them about the McIntyre drop-off at this time.

Sure, we'll have time as before next market season to get that interest, but in the meantime, I want everybody to drop off their compost at the McIntyre Center.

You can get free bags,

I put it in the freezer if I don't get to the drop-off center once a week.

And as I've said many times, I put out trash with a sticker probably every two to three weeks because I'm composting and recycling.

What I don't see is the recognition by city council or Wes Bellamy specifically is his knowledge or is his acknowledgement of his hypocrisy and willingness to change his opinion on things.

He disparages the founders of this country as being racist due to one aspect of history of slavery.

His basis for wanting the statue

removed of R.E.

Lee is based on one part of his life of slavery.

He puts no value on the enormous contributions they made to the founding of this nation.

So should we diminish the contributions of the character of these individuals due to one part of their history?

According to Wes Bellamy, we should.

So I have to ask you, shouldn't you be judged by the same standards?

You ask for forgiveness for your past actions, yet you're not willing to grant that same forgiveness to those in the past.

Don't you see the hypocrisy in saying, in effect, we cannot forgive these men for their actions, but by the way, you should forgive me.

For me, if you publicly state that you were wrong about the statues and ask

asked that to be dropped would show me that you have had a change of heart and a realization that others have a right to their beliefs in history.

What if someone called for the closing of the African American Heritage Museum?

What's the difference?

I see no difference between those here who want to tear down our monuments to history

and those monstrous maniacs of radical Islamic Muslim terrorists who go around destroying Christian churches and artifacts.

We see an encroachment by liberal socialists on Catholics and Christians to their beliefs and this is an encroachment on those who have a history with Confederate veterans.

You have to be willing to forgive

before asking for forgiveness.

Anything less is akin to do as I say, not as I do.

But not only do you want to remove white history, you're using our tax dollars to pay for monuments to black history.

As I said before, I'm not opposed to putting up monuments to black history anywhere in this town, but not at taxpayer expense.

I would like you to answer tonight

as to whether you think the effort for removal or renaming should still go forward.

Good evening.

I'm Peter Kleeman.

I live at 407 Head Street in the city.

I'm here tonight to continue participating in our conversation about public involvement and public participation in decision making by council.

And I was disappointed when I read the agenda background material for this meeting today, in particular on a resolution

1C on your agenda, the East McIntire Park critical slope waiver, first of one reading.

There's an issue discussed in the background material about waiving the critical slope

requirements in the park.

And there's a discussion about how it's going to do some damage, but it's not going to be a lot of damage.

And oh, it's going to be great for the public.

There'll be opportunities for people to use the trails that are proposed.

But there's no discussion about whether there's an opportunity to avoid.

having to use a critical slope waiver.

What would be the alternative to having that slope waiver put in place?

Perhaps a very small deviation of a path.

Perhaps an otherwise relatively insignificant change that might cost a tiny bit more but may actually protect the slopes in the park.

The park has been put under a lot of stress in the last years.

I have been an active user of that park

and I will continue to protect to the extent I can the eastern side of McIntire Park.

I would hope that in the future or perhaps you could even defer this item and allow the public to see what the alternatives are to that destruction of a slope that could possibly or should easily be able to be maintained as it is and protect the park

in more of its original state.

So I request that you reconsider that resolution and that you include the public in all of these items.

When I look at the agenda packet and it says public involvement and there's a comment something like, there was no public involvement on this issue, I think that should be a trigger to all of you on council saying, why?

Do we not have any public involvement on this issue and let's take a proactive stance on getting information to the public and requesting they respond as to what their wishes would be in that regard.

Okay, I want to thank everybody who chooses to come up and speak to us and make public comments.

It makes a great difference to our thinking about issues and it takes courage to come up here and speak at the dais and we really appreciate it.

We also read very carefully all the emails we get to council at Charlottesville.org or to our individual email addresses or the phone calls that we get.

I actually just have a quick one.

The critical slope waiver

Would you like to?

Federico de Venegas, 1112 Montpelier Street.

I'm here to talk about Crescent Halls.

I was reading the paper.

There's a quote by the superintendent.

It says, I have a great deal of respect, admiration and concern for my friends at Crescent Halls.

They're great people.

Does that sound familiar to anybody else but me?

This is a non-statement.

I think that City Council is letting the people live in squalor at Crescent Halls.

I think that there's not enough of a reaction.

I think that this City Council puts aside money for surveys of the downtown mall and numerous

Things that they don't need and then they let people just go living in Squawheart.

Anyways, my final thing that I'd like to talk about is the City Council Public Matters.

I think, Mayor Signer, you have done a great disservice to the city by not allowing people to speak.

according to First Amendment public redress of grievances.

I understand that you don't want hate speech, but people still have the right to address the people who are there to represent them.

I also think that UVA's meddling in the Charlottesville public chambers is unwarranted.

I think that

All of you should do more to say that this is Charlottesville and not just let them take over whatever they want.

Also, I'd like to say that Bellamy, I'm really, really disappointed in you.

I'm not surprised, but I don't think that you should be taken off, but I think that you should still apologize again.

Please.

There's no speaking without the allowance of the chair and that's the rules.

Any other responses?

One point I think that needs to be made

Specifically in regards to Crescent Halls, I think the city as a whole, we are working diligently to try to make sure that we can do what we can in terms of collaborating with the CRHA as well as other public entities such as FAR to ensure that we are trying to get

movement in regards to not only redevelopment but fixing the immediate issues that we have here in the city and our public housing sites.

As the CRHA rep, I know that we are having, we just had our annual meeting last month.

There are consistent and constant meetings going on and we all wish that we could get it done faster.

But unfortunately, that's just not how some of these issues work.

I do know that there is a commitment from FAR

There's a commitment from the CRHA Commissioners and the Housing Authority Board.

And there is a commitment, excuse me, there is a commitment from City Council to make sure that we do what we can to get this right.

I'm looking forward to where we're going over the next few months to figure out how we can devise a plan to not only help the residents at Crescent Halls, but help the residents of West Haven, make sure that we get the individual at South First Street, as well as all of our public housing sites, Sixth Street, so on and so forth, to get them where they need to be.

So this isn't something that we're just kind of passing the bulk on.

But I think it is important once again for the city to understand that these are two separate entities.

The CRHA is its own separate entity.

City Council, we don't have direct authority to just tell the CRHA or the housing authority what they should do or the practices that they should follow.

And we're working to move towards more of a partnership.

And that is the way in which we need to go in order for us to move forward.

Personally, I believe that we have

We're in a better position and we're moving more forward.

We have more headway on where we are now than where we've been in some time.

But that still doesn't mean that we don't have a lot of work to do, which we do.

Lastly, I will finish with, I know there are a lot of young people who are watching, a lot of people who have been watching.

And I think it's important for all of our little ones who are watching to understand that when individuals go low, we always go high.

and never, and never, and never, ever, ever do we allow the ideas or words of a few people to dictate what we do and how we conduct ourselves.

So for all of our little ones watching, make sure that you understand that clearly once again and you heard it from Mr.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I would say as a point of clarification in response to the comment by the last speaker, it appeared that he may not have known about some recent events where we settled a lawsuit that was about the provision in our public comment procedures that was called 9G, which talked about defamatory attacks on individuals.

So that's no longer in our

governing procedures.

And in a comment I made last week in an op-ed I wrote in the Daily Progress, I explained that from our perspective this was about conduct, not content.

That was the way that it was written in the procedures.

It was keyed on a phrase about disorderly conduct.

And my interpretation during the one time this was invoked was that there really was a danger in that particular meeting of

of an eruption of disorder that was related to the conduct and explain that and put out the facts as I saw them as the chair of the meeting at the time, so I wanted to clarify that.

Excuse me, Mayor Signer, I have a request and it's related to the discussion about the CRHA, Shostel Redevelopment Housing Authority.

I would very much like to get on our calendar, it could be a work session,

A regular meeting with an update, a work session would allow us to have more of a give and take with our colleagues on the CRHA board.

But I do feel it's very important that we get an update on where we are on a timeline with the whole process of community engagement, moving into a discussion about redevelopment.

I think it's extremely important.

And if we need to talk about this under other business, but this seemed like an opportune time.

If we can just get that on the calendar if there's agreement.

Is there agreement?

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Sounds good.

Ms. Carpenter, would you like to have your spot?

We missed you.

Okay.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to come forward and do my public comment.

My name is Nancy Carpenter and I live in the Rose Hill neighborhood.

What I was first going to talk about was the request for proposal and supporting a very

robust community engagement action as much as we could possibly support.

I think that it's important that people who are affected know who the consultant is going to be, who they are, what their background is, how they relate to the neighborhoods that are going to be affected, to the people that are going to be affected, because it's their lives that will change

dramatically, for the better, I hope.

That's the outcome for the better.

And I support what Mr. Collins said earlier.

But one of the things that has really struck me tonight in speaking or in listening at a meeting that I was at before was a UVA physician who works with people in palliative care, end of life.

and a lot of her patients are cancer patients of all ages.

And she's very concerned in the next weeks, months, up to a year what will happen to those patients if they lose, a lot of them have insurance only because of the Affordable Care Act.

And I'm hoping that you as individuals and also within the various municipal groups that you're involved in, all the other types of groups,

that they will take a robust stance to protect the coverages that these people who are at the end of their life who are in cancer treatment will be able and their families will be able to have a peace of mind that at least at this stage of their journey that they can comfortably afford the care that is needed to help them transcend to their next point.

I was very surprised to hear of how many of the physicians at UVA are very concerned about their patients, you know, whether they are five years old or 95 years old.

So I think it is very important.

I urge you, as someone who supports the Affordable Care Act, it's not perfect, but it is a start.

And to hear that there are stories out there, and it doesn't matter what side of the political spectrum

you're on when you have a five-year-old or your mom or your brother or your cousin, whatever your family member or friend relationship is, when you know that their care could be compromised if our country decides to take the wrong path this year.

I did change my subject and I do appreciate your being able to allow me to do that.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Happy New Year to everyone.

My name is Joy Johnson and I reside at 802A Hardy Tribe.

I'm here tonight to talk to you all about the concern that we're beginning to feel about redevelopment and the codes

And based on what we have learned through the history of vinegar here, because we keep going back to that, is that cold was one of the reasons and how people lost property and how things would change.

And so we really don't want to see, I personally really don't want to see that happen again.

So with this SIA conversion and

trying to understand the coding and all.

And it's not just public housing.

I am a public housing resident, so yeah, I speak and advocate on behalf of public housing.

But it's people who live in the SIA, strategic investment area, who are also homeowners, who this is going to affect.

and so I really want you all to think about it and I know Ms. Galvin this is a pet project of yours and I want to see you succeed but I want to see you succeed in a way where everybody not just homeowners but also renters and also low wealth families because we have section 8 properties in that area that is going to change and so

I felt like the meeting that I was in, I felt like we weren't being listened to or we weren't being included.

It's how we feel, perception is real, and it's how we feel.

So before you all move on on doing something, please find a way on how you can make people really understand about this whole coding and zoning.

actually what it means.

The fact that FAR has really taken a turn in saying we want to work with the city and the housing authority so that we can have something very positive.

Trust is one of the biggest issues and if we feel that we can't trust you, then it's not going to be a positive working relationship.

I'm here tonight to please, I wasn't feeling well, but I got out of my bed and tried to get here just to say that please make absolutely sure that we are all included with this whole zoning thing.

Thank you.

All right, and we will move on doing a work session, which was talked about before.

All right, so we're moving on to the consent agenda.

Item A, minutes for December 19th.

Item B, an appropriation fiscal year 2017 transit grants, $576,676, first of two readings.

Item C, a resolution East McIntyre Park critical slope waiver, first of one reading.

Item D, resolution, acting clerk of council, first of one reading.

Item E, an ordinance, conveyance of Rougemont, second of two readings.

Item F, an ordinance, closing the portion of Ware Street, extended, unaccepted, first of two readings.

Second.

Is there a second on that, simply a second?

A second.

Okay, so we'll move that off of the agenda, so we'll move to... With that, does it come with, can we pull for discussion, or is it...

So we'll do that at the end of the regular agenda, right?

Okay.

All right, so any other changes?

Okay, so we have a motion to do the consent agenda as amended?

Okay, that was moved, seconded.

Okay, any further discussion, questions?

Okay, all in favor?

Okay, so consent agenda minus that item

because C is adopted.

All right, moving forward.

So we'll do that at the end of we'll do that as an item six on the agenda.

So moving forward to item number two on the agenda, public hearing appropriation.

It's the first of two readings allocated 10 minutes on the agenda for this.

Mr. Tony Edwards, NDS services manager will be presenting.

Good evening, Mayor, Councilors, Manager.

We've brought this subject before you previously.

This is a preparation request for the HB2 projects that we successfully were awarded by the state.

Just to refresh your memory a little bit about these projects, the fundings provided, the necessary resources to design and provide right of way acquisition and the necessary construction to implement the infrastructure improvements and this is based on the state application that we submitted on.

I won't repeat the differences as far as the funding needed for each, but I will say that this will be a crucial and vital improvement to the downtown area, especially for

advancing our desire to apply the streets that work type concepts and be able to do the streetscaping projects that we've strived to do in the past.

As far as the public engagement on this, as we've stated before previously, the East Main or the East High Street Improvement Project has been a priority for the Martha Jefferson neighborhood.

Association for quite some time in that neighborhood is part of the SIA priorities as well.

So this ties in very nicely with that and there's been a lot of discussion about that in the past.

The Fontaine Avenue improvements underwent review in 2004-2005 based on previous public input more limited scope was expressed need so we therefore have looked at the right of way that we have and our hopes are that we can just utilize the existing right of way and not have to acquire a lot of additional right of way there.

Proposed improvements have been developed under a joint collaboration with UVA and some of the adjacent property owners there.

We've also recently been in contact with our VDOT reps that have close contact to the railroad and the need to be able to provide a tunnel underneath the railroad embankment there.

So it is the staff's recommendation for approval for this appropriation of these funds.

I do have a question, and again just for clarification, because all of these projects do predate the adoption of the streets that work, but I do see that this is an application that is providing resources for design as well as engineering.

Definitely.

All of these will be put out on an RFP and one of the first phases of that will be public engagement and getting that input.

Streets that work, even though it wasn't as formalized as we have it now,

Thank you Two questions.

Yes, it's a reimbursement type process.

So we spend it and then they pay it.

So we spend, they repay.

I have two or three questions.

So for the people listening or watching, am I correct in saying that HB2 House Bill 2 is one and the same with SmartScale?

Correct.

Same thing?

Yeah, the stage is interchangeable.

So you answered about the financing.

And this is on East High Street.

Essentially it's an extension of where the downtown mall work and the streetscape work ends there on 7th Street beside City Hall, this building here.

So it's two blocks on East High Street and the intersection at Locust where the Tarleton Exxon or the Tarleton Citgo used to be.

It will include that.

It doesn't stop there.

It goes all the way to Locust.

It goes, yes, I understand that, but in the opposite south of that intersection, that's 9th Street.

Correct.

Okay, but that's not included.

The whole corridor is included.

So it goes 9th Street to?

To High.

Oh, okay.

So the street length on East High is two blocks from Locust to 7th Street.

Right.

Okay, the street length and that intersection, the Locust intersection,

At that intersection, 9th Street starts, am I correct?

Yeah, 9th Street.

This project does not continue across the bridge.

Okay.

And you said you don't have to, you might not have to acquire additional right of way.

There's going to be some minor right-of-way portions that we'll have to flesh out when we do the investigative work of the right-of-way.

Okay, we're getting on to Fontaine now.

So what happens on any one of these three streets if we don't spend all that money?

Does it just stay with the state?

So we cannot apply it to any other... We could certainly approach it with that.

Thank you.

Any other?

Ah, yes.

Opening the public hearing now.

Anyone interested in speaking about this matter?

Okay, it doesn't look like we have anyone.

So, closing the public hearing.

I, Mayor Signer, I move that we approve the appropriation HB2 smart scale FY 2017 for $29,452,721.

Is there a second?

Is there any discussion or questions?

You did a mistake.

Those are the first of two readings.

Just motion to second.

Okay, we move on now to item number three on the agenda, the appropriation.

This is Hillsdale Drive extension, an appropriation of $322,000, $943, and a transfer of $117,641.

First of two readings.

Yes, so I'm here to request two actions.

One, an appropriation for $322,943.79 and that is for a betterment for the Albemarle County Service Authority in connection with Hillsdale Drive.

It is for a 10-inch sanitary sewer line that runs along Greenbrier Avenue between just north of, or sorry, just west of Westfield Road going all the way to existing Hillsdale Drive within the roadway.

We have finalized the design costs of $25,506.79 and we have a construction bid from Fielder's Choice for $297,437.

And then the second betterment is for an eight inch water line between India Road and existing Hillsdale Drive that is in the new section of Hillsdale Drive that we're currently building that's next to Homewood Suites.

This figure has been finalized.

It's $117,641.50.

We're requesting a transfer from the city's water department to the Hillsdale Drive extension project.

And again, these numbers have been finalized.

The design is $9,955.65.

The actual construction cost is $103,230.10.

And the inspection expenses is $4,455.75.

Are there any questions?

I would like to make a motion that we adopt

Appropriation of $440,585.29, which is very specific, and the transfer of $117,641.50.

Is there a second?

Is there any discussion?

Thank you very much.

All right, we now move on to item number four.

Everyone, this is a fairly abbreviated agenda tonight, so we're we're clipping along for the first meeting of the year.

Yeah.

All right.

Item number four, report audit presentation for fiscal year 2016.

Chris Cullinan, director of finance will be

Initiating the discussion I believe.

Good evening Mr. Mayor, Members of Council.

For the record, my name is Chris Cullinan, the Director of Finance for the City.

The Code of Virginia requires that localities have all of their accounts and records audited annually as of June 30th of each year by an independent certified public accountant in accordance with the specifications of the Auditor of Public Accounts for the Commonwealth.

The City's auditor is required by state code to report to the governing body at a public session.

John Aldrich from Brown, Edwards & Company will be presenting their report to City Council.

Before I ask John to come up, I also want to just mention that the city's comprehensive annual financial report, or CAFR, is available on the city's website under the finance department or the financial reports tab.

Also, if folks would like hard copies, we can make those available to them as well.

970-3200.

Alright, well good evening, good to see you all.

As Chris mentioned, we are here to present the audit and one thing I would like to say at the beginning, if you ever want us to come up and just go over the financial report with you in a work session, we're more than happy to.

That wouldn't be a problem at all.

Again, I'm John Aldrich, I'm Brown-Edwards, I'm from our Roanoke office and I served as the partner on the job this year

I just want to tell you a few things about the audit.

As you know, the audit not only includes the city, it also encompasses the school board and the EDA.

So that's all part of this same audit.

We issued an unmodified opinion on the financial reports this year.

So, meaning the unmodified, that's the highest level of assurance we'll put on a financial report.

That's akin to a clean opinion on your audit reports.

The audit clean opinion on the financial statements.

In addition to looking at the financial statements, we also have to test a certain amount of the federal money that goes through the city and the school system.

This past year, just to put it in perspective, y'all had $18.6 million of federal expenditures.

Again, some of that's at the school system and some's at the city.

And in looking at that $18.6 million, we have to test a certain percentage of that.

And then what they call these are major programs we have to look at.

The programs we looked at this year would be Child Nutrition, Community Development Block Grant, Title I, Foster Care, and Adoption Assistance.

I'm pleased to tell you in looking at all those, you complied with all the federal guidelines.

There were no findings at all.

So the no findings at all and the federal stuff we looked at.

In addition, not only do we have to look at the federal money, the state code requires us to look at certain things that the Auditor of Public Accounts

says these are critical things we want you to look at.

And in doing that, the book's probably 50 to 60 pages long of things we have to look at.

And if we find anything, we have to report it to you.

This year, there were only a couple small minor things we found.

There was one related to the economic interest statements.

You know you have to file those twice a year.

Well, it seemed like there were a couple back in December of 2015 that weren't filed timely.

By June, that was rectified.

Everything was turned in timely by June.

The other thing, there was an item on social services related to encryption and a policy there.

There was just an individual we talked to that wasn't aware of the policy.

Both of these things are an understanding they've been taking care of since then.

I also just want to mention

As part of

There's some segregation of duties matters that needed to be fixed, meaning where you had one person doing a task that really they shouldn't.

And what we found there, a lot of these things maybe have gone back a few years.

And when we brought that to management's attention, they were quick to fix it.

They were very grateful working with us on this saying, yeah, thanks for bringing this to our attention.

We're going to work with the software vendors, whoever it is, to fix this.

So again, I just want to point that out to you.

And also there were just a few other things that we just suggested to them, just operating type things, and again that's in your document.

I will tell you this, management, like I said, they've been really good.

about taking these and addressing them with staff.

And what we plan to do is next week, come back and meet with your staff and just kind of start planning for next year, okay?

What went right?

What could go smoother next year as part of this audit?

Because anytime there's a first year audit, it's a little bit challenging on both sides, getting to know each other.

So we're going to meet next week.

We're going to talk about things and to see, you know, how we can make this process smoother next year.

But again, the key takeaways, no findings at all in the federal dollars and you received an unmodified opinion.

A couple of minor questions.

Unless I've missed it, I didn't see GASB.

GASB.

It's GASB.

It's the Governmental Accounting Standards Board.

OK. Did I miss it, or was it

defined in there.

It would be helpful at the beginning of that portion of the briefing that it was spelled out.

Federal expenditures.

Meaning, for example, a federal expenditure for you would be school lunch.

So let's say they gave you all, and this is just off the top of my head, $2 million for school lunch.

That would be an expenditure.

So that $2 million would be part of that $18 million.

Right.

Okay.

Not specifically, but what you have in one of your documents, you have in your packet, it's called the single audit.

Okay.

If you look there, there's a detail of all $18 million of those expenditures.

Most of the school ones are going to be starting with the number 8.

It'll be like Title I.

It'll be school lunch.

John, you're the expert.

You're the consultant.

Can you get that for me?

Is it easier just to punch up something?

Yes, sir.

I think that might be it.

So just to reiterate what you said for the public, people might be watching or might read this.

Well, the pages are not numbered here, but it says, we encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management, in performing and completing our audit.

And I think that's important.

Management has corrected all such misstatements.

And another one, disagreements with management.

No such disagreements arose during the course of our audit.

Thank you.

Yeah, I think that document is also part of the public items.

I just have a comment.

I appreciate receiving this document and getting the required communication with those charged with governance.

I really appreciated seeing the detail and I do think it's really important that we really kind of

say what we preach, which is transparency.

And I do think that this is an excellent review.

And I'm very gratified to hear that management has been working with you very closely and carefully and that there's a follow-up.

You're coming next week to work again with staff.

So I think this is just really good as a way to segue into our discussion next meeting, perhaps, about the results of the efficiency study as well.

So it's all part of the good governance goal

of our strategic plan too.

That's right.

Any other?

All right.

Thank you very much.

That was just a report.

Okay.

All right.

It's an oral report originally written, but we did want the public to get a little more information about this live.

So Susan Elliott, the climate protection coordinator for the city will be presenting.

All right, thank you.

I'm sorry.

My name is Susan Elliott.

I am the Client Protection Program Coordinator for the City of Charlottesville.

So the City Market Composting Program began in 2015.

It was funded through a small grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Based on the success of that program, the support from Council and the community led to a continuation of the program in the 2016 City Market season.

It also led to the establishment by the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority for a similar drop-off composting program located at the McIntire Recycling Center.

The city partnered with a local nonprofit, GreenBlue, to manage the general operations of the city market program, both in 2015 and 2016.

Both of those programs ran, the composting portion of the program ran from April and concluded in October.

The final report with all the details in it for the 2016 program is included in the council agenda, which is available online for anyone at home who wants to check it out.

For the 2016 program, the main goals were targeted around two main areas.

One was the residential composting portion of it through the drop-off collection site at the City Market.

That also included staff on site who can answer questions, assist residents with any pieces of it, and give them free compostable bags to collect their household compostables and bring it back the next week.

The other part of it was looking at what the waste streams were at the City Market, providing support to vendors and doing some investigation into

A couple of key highlights that came out of this program.

2016 was the first year that both the McIntyre Recycling Program for the composting drop-off and the City Market Program were both in operation concurrently.

The City Market Program saw a 17% increase in the amount of compostable material that was collected.

Residents that used the city market program demonstrated strong understanding of how to compost and required less training and assistance, which suggests that we could start to transition to needing less staff time there since residents are now in the habit and have a strong understanding of what is and is not compostable and how to set up their home setups.

Fourth, there was almost one day at the market

All of the vendors use sustainable food packaging materials and the amount of landfill waste that was collected from the market that day was reduced by almost 50% in volume.

So a couple of findings, observations, recommendations that came from throughout the 2016 season.

For the residential drop-off portion of the program, there is support within the community to continue the service and to also try to streamline it.

The past two years we've been requiring that everyone who brings material to be dropped off, we weigh it so we get a sense of what that volume is that's coming in, and we also kind of take a peek at what it is that they're bringing to make sure that it's in line with what we allow to be collected.

Since there's such a strong understanding of what is and isn't, we think that park can probably get streamlined in the future.

There is, that could also then open up opportunity that we have resources that we could start to apply in other areas to help expand the residential programs.

In terms of the market waste streams, the satellite stations that were there to collect waste generated by the market do need to have staffing to continue to prevent contamination and also to answer questions from market goers about which bin to put things into.

Volunteer service organizations and the CAT program are a valuable resource that definitely helped with that staffing and building education awareness throughout the community.

And in terms of getting sustainable packaging options for vendors to use, there was interest on the vendor side and market goer side for that.

There are also some possible opportunities that would need further investigation that could help to support a transition for that in this coming market season.

On a broader general Recommendations that were made for the city to consider is to look at starting to do some sort of secure Distributed drop-off locations around the city so that residents would have greater access Possibly even 24 hours a day seven days a week to be able to drop off their compostable materials whenever they're they're able to

The possibility of looking at what the buy right regulations are to do small composting piles so that the compost material doesn't have to be shipped to another facility outside of the city area.

And also then looking at businesses, events, and multi-family properties to see what sort of support and engagement around composting could be provided to those.

That's everything I had tried to pull out of the report and summarize.

I have a couple of specific questions.

One is, you have a chart here of the pounds that were picked up at the drop-off at the market, but I don't see anywhere in the text, so I'm trying to guess according to this chart.

No, I'm not.

Sorry, hold on, let me pull that.

I don't want to misquote it.

And at the McIntyre Recycling Center?

And how much at the recycling center?

I'd have to ask them.

I think we actually got something from them too, so I'll look there.

My other question is, you mentioned the possibility now that Black Bear is no longer an option locally for taking the stuff, of having smaller piles locally, but one of the real advantages to using the large amounts is that you could put in things like meat and fats and things that you can't do in a small home one.

So would these small kind of collector piles be

They would.

So the small piles that we would still need to get the approval from, Department of Environmental Quality, and I need to look into the details on that process further, but they are regulated.

They would have to be managed in some way to make sure that they're hitting the right temperatures, that the material is breaking down at the right rate, that the moisture content, all of that is being properly done.

The difference is that rather than needing a property about the size of a farm, you can use something that would fit within about half the size of this room.

So it's not a backyard pile, it's somewhere in between, but it would do that kind of industrial level composting.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

And I will just say that composting is something I have been working for my entire city council career, so I'm delighted that the passing of black bears service isn't meaning that we're stopping, because I know that going forward we're looking at a pilot

for doing it without them.

But I think it's really important.

I think that although we did hear that, you know, if you look at the population of the city, the number of people participating in the two programs is relatively small.

It's become a real need for those folks who are doing it.

And I think the fact that it increased this year at the market, even though the McIntyre Center was opened in that time, shows that the numbers are growing.

I, of course, would love to see us do curbside composting.

And then I think we can get the volume

that Black Bear was not able to reach, and that's why they closed, or at least a lot of why they closed.

And, Councilor, we received a report back in November on the composting.

Yeah, I actually have that somewhere.

I just want to get a little bit of a clearer sense of how the city is coordinating its efforts with the university and then the county.

Are you in ongoing conversations as well?

And I know, of course, the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority.

So each of the composting collection and then making sure that the material is getting to its own facilities is done independently by each of the organizations.

But in terms of staff being in conversation with each other about where are we taking things, are there ways to collaborate, that conversation is active and ongoing.

No, so thus far, so if you jump back about five years ago or so before Black Bear opened its facility, there really weren't any commercial facilities that were being used in programs in this area.

When they opened, they also began doing the hauling and the processing of the material

Over the last five years that model has diverged a little bit on the hauling side of it and so each of the groups, the county UVA, Rivanna, and the city have contracted their own hauling through their own means.

And so now that Black Bear is closing its processing side of it, the hauler that the City Market and the McIntyre Drop-Off Center have been using

They also operate out of Richmond, and so they are planning to bring the Charlottesville area material to the same facility.

They bring all the Richmond area material, which is in Waverly to the southeast of Richmond.

In terms of what the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority and UVA have worked out a pilot program that they've gotten permit approval for.

It's a three month program.

It'll start in January, that's later this month, and that will then be a transfer location where UVA's material will go to the transfer location

Okay, one quick question.

There was a rumor going around that Black Bear was going to revive or resurrect.

It might have been with the Waverly facility.

I haven't heard anything about them reviving.

I have heard that there is a commitment for them to continue their local hauling service for a period of time until a transition or something can be made.

And the one last thing I would mention, I think that the more we can increase the usage or the number of people using this, the better.

And I think the comment that Ms. Quinn made about, I guess, marketing this better was well taken.

Yeah, marketing falls under one of the things that I do.

I heard her comment earlier.

Definitely in 2015, I know we did reach out through the neighborhood association.

I was trying to remember if we did at all during 2016 with it.

We do welcome any advice or suggestions people have about how to get that out there.

We've put things in the utility bill inserts, like the mailings that go to everybody.

We've had different posters at the city market for it.

We have two different web pages, a general composting one on the city website and one specifically for the city market program.

and we have posters up at the McIntyre Center and we've done some cross-promotion of that so if anyone's at McIntyre wants to use a downtown one they can and vice versa.

But if anyone has suggestions, we have an email address, composting at charlottesville.org and we'd welcome suggestions of other outlets and ways to try to get the word out there.

Thank you.

Alright we now move on to an item from the consent agenda that was pulled and it was item C of resolution East McIntyre Park critical slope waiver so because we pulled it we can discuss it now and act on it separately.

The whole point of the critical slopes waiver is bottom line, river health, stream health.

and it's very important, it was important enough that it became an ordinance, which is law.

So as a matter of policy, I think any time that we want to grant a waiver for something, a legal restriction basically, that it should be set in front of the public, that item exclusively, I understand we've had a lot of discussion about this,

about the YMCA, but to my knowledge, the critical slope waiver has never been asked for before.

So that's where I come from.

It's an ordinance.

It should have a public hearing.

If it turns out that nobody shows up, nobody shows up, and it's just a matter of minutes, but it's a matter of policy.

I would object to ordinances that we grant waivers on being put into the consent agenda.

I'll just say for clarification, this is not for the YMCA.

I'm sorry.

Yes.

Okay, my name is Heather Neumayr, I'm a city planner with NDS and Kathy Galvin is correct, this went before planning commission in December

And back in a little brief history, back in March 2015, you all approved the East McIntire Park Master Plan.

So this site plan with the associated critical slope waiver is to implement that plan.

There are attachments in your packet and online that show what improvements are going in the park.

The Botanical Garden is one, the visitor center, and then a series of pathways, which part

In part touched the critical slope waiver and the engineer team and Parks and Rec department have made it clear that while in the process of looking where to put those access points, they tried to minimize as much as possible touching the critical slope waiver.

critical slopes, but in order to make the access possible, they had to cross the streams.

And in order to do that, they had to touch a portion of that.

But the process for a critical slope waiver is you're supposed to show that you outweigh the benefits of preserving the critical slope by public benefit.

And staff, including the Parks Department, has shown that they are doing that by restoring the majority of East McIntyre Park from turf to natural state

and then creating access throughout the parks.

So staff believed that this was a public benefit which falls in line with finding one which can be found in the ordinance and then Planning Commission did recommend unanimously to recommend approval for the waiver.

So thank you.

Mr. Daly, would you like, well, first of all, any questions for Ms. Neumeier?

Well, a quick question.

Okay.

I just want to make sure I understand.

Our ordinance on the critical slopes allows for waivers as part of the ordinance.

Correct.

procedure within the ordinance to grant a waiver, does that require a public hearing?

It does not.

Okay, that's a motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay.

And we do need a full vote on this.

So first of one reading.

So any further discussion or questions on this duly seconded motion?

OK, I think we're ready for a vote.

All in favor?

OK. And I agree with Mr. Fenwick.

I think that although this has been publicly vetted, really almost ad nauseum, not this particular thing, but this plan,

Time passes and different people come in and so I think it's a healthy thing to have it have been aired.

This has worked.

Thanks.

OK, we have concluded our regular agenda items.

I have one item that I'd like to raise specifically for our attorney, Mr. Brown, as we are having a great deal of discussion about statues moving, not moving, so on and so forth.

The Attorney General on request will issue legal opinions that don't involve factual determinations.

If the question is whether the removal of the Robert E. Lee statute would violate the state code provision,

that everyone is aware of and it's been discussed a lot.

Who would explore that option?

Just as a matter of procedure, in the past, I have always asked for, you know, a majority of council to authorize that rather than having individual council.

Sure.

I would have a question then, because I have no problem with asking for that, but I don't want to kind of

Hoggtyus and having to wait until that, you know, it could be months and months and months before that opinion comes back.

It's his opinion.

It's not binding on a court.

I don't know the time frame for getting an answer.

I think this is a

particularly busy time of the year because it's my understanding that they do get a lot of inquiries, legal questions from the General Assembly while they're in session.

So if it's Council's desire, it's not simply asking the question.

Then I'd like to ask if we have to vote on this, I would rather vote at the next meeting, if Mr. Bellamy still wants to bring it forward at the next meeting.

And please understand, I'm not suggesting that you don't do it.

No, I understand.

And I'm not saying I wouldn't support it, I just, because...

I haven't heard about it before.

And I guess I have a question procedurally.

Would that be best done by resolution from this council authorizing you to ask that?

I don't feel that something as formal as a resolution is necessary.

I can say it's the first I've heard of it as well, and I would want to think about it carefully.

The AAG opinions can have bearing on local government matters, but it gets into separation of powers issues in my mind.

The Attorney General's office in Virginia is a separately elected political office that represents state agencies.

They don't represent local governments, so their opinion may or may not be relevant in this matter.

I mean, it could be, it could not be.

I think that we could have a vote

on it, and I think it's a good discussion.

Mr. Mayor, I think the words the courts frequently use are that Attorney General opinions are entitled to due consideration.

Right.

Exactly.

Agreed.

So furthermore, that would even kind of expound or that would be the explanation in regards to why I would like to have an opinion.

I don't think it's something in which requires a long drawn out conversation in regards to us getting an opinion.

from the Attorney General.

I understand that many of us, this is a big decision.

We're not discussing it right now.

I've heard some of my colleagues say that this is the first that they've heard about it.

But some of these issues, and I think this kind of speaks to the way in which we operate as a whole in regards to counsel.

I feel like every decision that we make does not have to be one that requires a long, drawn-out discussion.

I'm literally just asking if our attorney could ask the Attorney General for an opinion.

I guess I'm somewhat confused as to why that would require even further discussion if we're just asking for an opinion and we know that it's not binding.

We're literally just asking for his opinion in regards to the matter.

We know, and I'll be quiet after this, we know that again it's not binding and furthermore

that his opinion is essentially just an opinion as Mr. Brown just alluded to.

It's considered to have due consideration, nothing more, nothing less.

I guess my concern is it does take a fair amount of staff time, both here and at the Attorney General's office.

And so I think if we have the policy that we have to have a vote to do it, I just I want to make sure that the consequence of my vote, if I vote for it,

is it to delay any decision about the statues unduly?

I agree we need to get moving on whatever decision that we're going to make.

And so a lot of the research has already been done.

So I think that would shorten the time considerably.

Well, you know, Mr. Bellamy, I would respond in the interest of efficiency, which is the premise that you just said,

As an attorney, I'm working in a lot of different kinds of legal.

I tend to think that you go for your simplest, most immediate legal answer unless you need more.

So we have an attorney who works for us, who provides us with counsel.

That's the point about having some cities don't have a full-time counsel.

So when Mr. Brown and his staff are right there for us, this is a whole other level of

legal, it's an added layer that you're asking for and it's from a very political office.

The Attorney General is elected statewide to do statewide policy, separately elected, not hired.

So those would be reasons that I, you know, you asked what would be the pushback or the secondary concerns.

To me, those would be among them.

It introduces a whole other layer of complexity and redundancy, potentially, and inefficiency.

So the

that at least again without having only had this time to respond to it.

But if we had it more full, then I think that this is the reason that it would be worth debating rather than, there was a lot of rush on this initially, so I would respond by saying we should be able to even debate your idea rather than just say,

There's going to be a great deal of debate no matter what happens.

If there is a vote from this council for individuals to move that statue, let's just speak hypothetically, if that happens, we are well aware that there's going to be a great deal of pushback.

Let's just be honest about the situation.

We know there's either going to be a lawsuit,

Multiple lawsuits, individuals are going to say, hey, where's the due diligence in terms of X, Y, and Z?

And in my opinion, this just crosses one thing off of the checkbox.

Not saying that we don't know what's going to happen, but we can already say when we have that conversation that this has already been placed in motion.

And I don't, maybe I'm just seeing it differently.

I understand your perspective, Mayor Seidner, in regards to you feel as if this was rushed, but

Us asking for an opinion.

We've already asked an opinion in regards to the interpretation of the law from our personal attorney.

And now us asking for an opinion from the AG.

I don't understand how that is.

Maybe catching some individuals as off guard or blindsided because it's just essentially doing due diligence.

So maybe I'm just not seeing it.

And I'll say, I don't feel blindsided.

It was something that I know you had mentioned at one point talking about possibly doing it.

It's just that before voting on it, I think it would be really important for us to understand.

I mean, I'm balking more because I am in a hurry than because I want to delay something.

Well, I would look at it as

I would come down with Wes.

This is not a question that has not been asked before.

I've gone to all the Commission meetings and it's been asked a number of times.

And people are always dancing around it.

So in a way, what Wes is asking is for us just to get with it.

This is not plowing new ground.

I understand about the AG opinion, advisory in nature and all of that.

So I don't see any reason to

to delay it.

Would it help if we delay what?

The process that the Blue Ribbon Commission has taken this community through.

One thing I'd like to offer what may move us off this rock, which is that if we can ask our attorney, and he can say no that he needs a vote in the first place, but in preparing a memo for our vote at the next meeting to kind of do a basic kind of what that would look like, what that request would look like, and then so that worked

then won't be a terrific delay after our vote.

We can just go ahead and go out.

Well, let me with all due respect.

I mean, this is this is designed to this is a step we have to take.

Somebody has to take it.

Again, I have a question again.

I'm a little confused.

We do not need an opinion from the Attorney General's office, correct?

It also would only advise us on questions of state law.

There are entirely different legal questions about the progeny of the statues and the charter that the AG won't likely advise us on because it's a matter of... Well aware.

It's an element.

I agree it's just one element.

I'm hard pressed for individuals to persuade me that it won't be an important element regardless of what he says.

It's going to be something that comes up.

When we look at the long game, and I apologize if you all feel blindsided, sometimes I feel like we do things in which that

It allows us to remain stagnant.

And I'm not saying that we shouldn't process things and we shouldn't take our time and make sure that we go through the proper motions.

But these are issues that this AG opinion, this potential lawsuit, whatever occurs, however it occurs, some of these things are inevitable based on whatever decision we choose to make.

If there's a vote, if there's a 4-1 vote, that the statutes should remain and we

We take the recommendation from the Blue Ribbon Commission.

Well, they gave us several recommendations.

But if we just take one that says that it should stay, then so be it.

If the vote goes and that we say that the statutes should be moved, then this opinion would be needed.

I don't understand.

Mr. Bellamy, the thing is that there

But the presentation you're providing isn't addressing that.

It is a different political office.

that is not what you're describing it as.

It does not provide a clean and straight necessarily legal opinion for a client that, they're not even our client, or we're not their client.

Yeah, but it is a step that would have to be taken and it will be taken anyway as the saying goes.

The governor was involved before

vetoing that law that the state legislature passed.

But not necessarily either the AG or the governor's office.

It could be, I mean, how would it necessarily involve those two offices?

It wouldn't.

But that's the General Assembly, that's not the Attorney General.

They don't opine about

Statutory conflicts is a matter of routine.

It depends on their client.

We're not their client.

They don't represent local government.

So this is what I'm saying.

I'm saying that our attorney is sitting right here.

And he has gone through this procedure before, am I correct?

Yes, sir.

But just to bring it forward for our approval or not.

But at least it would be something tangible to look at.

Okay, just a compromise.

And maybe we could suss out how long a response would take.

Yes.

To get an opinion.

That might be helpful information.

Thank you, absolutely.

And I just think it's, as a matter of practice,

It hasn't happened.

The proper procedure that we've always done historically is that we offer a suggestion for a future item on the agenda and you get

So we pick and choose when we want to do that.

It has not happened this year.

We have over the course of the last seven years made exceptions to that policy when something is either something that's just pure housekeeping or something that is an emergency and has to happen by a certain date.

It being placed on the next meeting, I think it's fine.

I'm glad we had this initial conversation.

I don't, I think I've spoken with a few of my colleagues just for public knowledge.

Spoken with essentially all of my colleagues in regards to this topic.

This isn't something that I want us to quote unquote fight, fall out, and become ugly about.

Whether we agree or whether we disagree is fine.

But us having the conversations, albeit very difficult conversations, we still need to have them.

And I don't want us to shy away from them or become stagnant in the way in which we proceed because of...

Okay, other items of other business?

Okay, we're going to open our final matters by the public.

Anyone first come, first served?

State your name and address.

You have three minutes.

Good evening.

My name is Peter Kleeman.

I live at 407 Head Street in the city.

I think it's very instructive, the discussion that just happened, about how important the details just prior to a vote are.

As a citizen, on issues that I come before council many times, there's a comment that the public has been involved in the past.

They have gone to town hall meetings and talked about items.

There have been meetings and other boards and commissions, but when it comes down to it, it's when the words are written that are going to be voted on, when it gets very important, and that's the time when all the information crystallizes before the public to say, oh my gosh, they are going to enact these words.

So I would like to encourage council to recognize that the same concerns that they have just demonstrated here very clearly, that those details are important.

That they also recognize that those details are important for the public as well.

That an item that's going to come before

City Council that's announced on a Thursday when the agenda is distributed and the background material is available is the opportunity that the public has to understand what those words are that are going to be voted on and that's the time they need the opportunity to contact and present their thoughts and to comment on

such an item.

It's just like this conversation of, well, we don't like to vote on an item during new business to the city.

This is new business.

And we're being asked to not participate and provide our comments about what our concerns as individual citizens or groups of citizens are on the exact wording and the impacts that are

implicit in the actual words presented in the agenda.

So I would like very much to recommend yet again that council recognize the need for the city to have an opportunity to participate once those final words are prepared, because that's where the decision gets made.

Rebecca Quinn, 104 4th Street here in the city.

Regarding your last discussion, I do think it's important to know what our legal constraints are.

And I do understand some of that was explored on behalf of the Blue Ribbon Commission.

But remember, we're not the only jurisdiction going through this.

And so maybe even in the last three, four, five months since the information was provided to the Commission, maybe other cities have found

found out or explored this particular question.

So one opportunity might be to reach out to a few of those that are grappling with the same question.

I would also, if indeed a, whether it's an opinion that stays within the council's office, Mr. Brown's office, or goes beyond, I would like the question to include whether shifting, I don't want to use moving or removing,

shifting a statue within its environs might be constrained by state law.

And the reason I say that is one of the recommendations is leave it in place and contextualize.

And I would like to explore options that would move General Lee off center to create a much more usable central area

in the new named park, whatever that name might be.

And I'd like to know if indeed there is a constraint, would it also constrain that as a possible option?

Payne.

I'd just like to bring to the attention of City Council, Seville Weekly wrote an article just a few days ago about question halls and it was reported that residents are still reporting that there are very poor living conditions.

Dangerous levels of heat in the summer, insufficient heat in the winter, that there's bed bugs, that washing machines are overflowing.

So I would just like to keep it in the mind of city council that it is important not just to talk about these things, not just to say it's a good idea.

but to actually allocate money to support affordable housing in Charlottesville and to really make that a priority to favor affordable housing over expensive development projects and I look forward to seeing City Council take the issue of affordable housing seriously going forward.

Nancy Carpenter again from Rose Hill neighborhood.

I guess I'll hijack the meeting as Seaville Weekly kind of pointed out recently.

But I wanted to come back and talk about the RFP for getting a consultant to look at this form-based code modifications that the city is going to embark upon and

really referenced that December 28th letter that was sent out and signed by a number of local organizations and individuals that are advocates for our city residents that are either struggle day to day with just low income or extremely low income or are in marginalized communities.

That letter kind of set in motion what could be considered the skeleton of a social impact tool being very grassroots and

really, really, really engaging the people who are going to be affected by this redevelopment as it goes over the next term of years, because it's not going to happen in the next three to four, but certainly will be started upon.

And I think that really making sure that there are local people in that neighborhood who are

certainly a strong part of any advisory panels or commissions or even, I think Ms. Johnson was talking about trust.

And I think that's one thing that I hear a little bit when I talk to people going back a couple of decades is the trust that was destroyed by the urban renewal that Charlottesville went through when that was supposedly the answer to everything, which we all know that it wasn't.

and it would be really sad to think that in 40 or 50 years historians, if we don't do this right, could look back at this and look at this and say Urban Renewal 2.0 and not that it was a good experience once again, you know, our marginalized communities feeling the brunt of being moved, feeling they're being moved out, they're not being heard, similar I think to Mr. Payne, you know, the residents at Crescent Halls are not going to be silent any longer.

about some of the conditions that they would like to see dealt with, even though it could be a housing authority issue or it could be something that the City Council could support.

So I just wanted to say that I support what Ms. Johnson said.

I support what that letter talked about.

And I think that, you know, instead of rushing gung ho for your form-based codes, let's make sure that we do

get everybody's viewpoint, that we do look at how that impacts the quality of life or the social life or the historical life of the community in action.

So thank you for your time.

Good evening.

My name is Joy Johnson, and I reside at 802A Hardy Drive.

Form-based code is, and I was in a meeting and when I heard you, Mr. Signer and Mr. Bellamy say, you don't understand it.

I was just like, yeah, you don't understand it.

That means the community doesn't understand it.

If the community doesn't, if your mayor doesn't understand it, how can you move forward?

What worries me is that I thought I heard, and you can correct me, that you all are getting a, you need, you are going to be getting a report from this consultant in the next six months.

The meeting at City Space.

And so maybe I took it the wrong way.

But six months is here and there isn't a plan.

So I want to know what is the work plan to make sure that we do understand.

And then the other main thing I want to say is it's very hard right now to get residents motivated to get involved in things.

And so when we get folks at the table, if they're feeling like this is just a waste of my time,

Then we really are just, you know, that's where the trust break down.

And then I also heard in that meeting about the good job that Friendship Court is doing.

Well, people are asking, where is the road going to go?

Yeah, you know, you have questions about even that plan that people don't understand.

And so again, I was in another training where

A planner who kind of understands about planning asks the staff of this planning department

What is going to be the impact of form-based code?

And they couldn't answer it.

So if your own planning department can't answer the question and how is it going to impact our low-wealth folks or people in the neighborhood, then I want to see a vigorous discussion like you all were doing about the statute be done about form-based code and how it is going to impact our folks who lives in that neighborhood.

Thank you.

Dean and Mayor Signer and council members, my name is Jordan Leahy.

I stay over in the Martha Jefferson neighborhood just down the hill.

I'm here to read a letter that I penned to the Daily Progress that they were gracious enough to print and publish last week.

Before I do that, I want to note that as far as we're talking about the statues of the Confederate generals, that the Blue Ribbon Commission of the BRC noted in the report, as I read it, that the construction of the statues in the first place

was based in this lost cause narrative of the war and I would encourage all of you to embrace more accurate and inclusive lessons from history as we all go forth in this decision.

My heart breaks to say that the BRC's conclusions are disappointing is to give validation to their inquiry in the first place.

The monuments and parks in question stand to honor men who fought for a false cause.

They pay homage to white supremacy, a disturbingly relevant and enduring disease in the American bloodstream.

And to object to identifying the men in question as white supremacists is to express an impressive ignorance of context from any and every angle both generals were white supremacists.

This is not a controversial claim, even if it is uncomfortable to some.

They led an army fighting to defend a cultural way of life, one dependent on the inherent oppression and degradation of human beings, human beings with minds, hearts, souls, families, and bodies.

In this regard, the memory of the generals inspires mediocrity of best and predictable hatred at worst.

It means nothing to mark a day on the calendar if we honor the false memories of these men on a daily basis.

It will be a mockery to celebrate Liberation Day, which I myself look forward to celebrating, on March 3rd.

but it will be bittersweet at best if the monuments remain in place and we honor those men every day.

Let us cease to honor men for having good intentions.

If one's actions are judged by one's intent, it would be nearly impossible to convict anyone of any wrongdoing.

If we are to tell a fuller story of their exploits, let us do it in a constrained enclosed space, perhaps a local museum or donate them to a state museum.

to mark the history and we can put plaques and notations of their misguided and failed actions included there.

The abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison wrote, tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm, leaving the monuments in place

allows the fires of white supremacy to burn openly.

And the prophet Amos said that we should douse them with the rolling waters of justice.

Attempting to alter the narratives of the statues while leaving them in place is a public expression of white moderation, which is the very thing that Dr. Martin Luther King warned us about in his letter from an Alabama jail.

He identified this as worse than the more honest hatred of the white citizens council member or Klansman.

We can do better than this.

Take them down.

Ah, because I'll forget.

You can get a cookie too.

Hi.

Good evening.

My name is Joe Starzia and I live in Belmont.

I'm an organizer of Showing Up for Racial Justice and I had the pleasure this summer and fall of attending the Blue Ribbon Commission meetings on race memorials in public spaces.

I won't rehash what they wrote in their report.

It's extensive.

It's findings speak for themselves.

But I did want to share some observations since I had the opportunity to attend a lot of the meetings.

First,

White people, especially white men, especially especially white men in positions of authority, will not hesitate to tell you that they know how the African American community feels about the monuments.

I have had white men in the last several months tell me that they know that, quote, a majority of people

black and white in one case and quote by a count of six to one end quote in another case that black folks support keeping the monuments.

Six to one being such an oddly specific number that I assume it was either made up or the man spoke to exactly seven people.

Second, if you were not born here you will be told that your opinion does not matter.

If you are under the age of 60 you will be told that your opinion does not matter.

If you are an African American counselor who supports the removal of the monuments, you will be told, perhaps by your own mayor, that your voice will not be seriously considered because you are not from here.

Finally, when you discuss race in Charlottesville, you will bump up against what I have come to think of as Charlottesville exceptionalism.

It is the idea that Charlottesville is fundamentally different from other communities in the South.

Charlottesville in this conception is a community which is free of racial strife and where any discussion of racism is a discussion about the past.

I had hoped, perhaps foolishly, that these tired arguments would not follow us into this chamber and so I was horrified to see them personified at the December 19th City Council meeting when Mayor Signer took the opportunity to surreptitiously attempt to frame the entire discussion.

Let me take this opportunity to reframe.

First, Mr. Mayor, it is not wise for a white man to say that he speaks for the African American community, nor to delineate which African American voices count and which don't.

Second, a majority of citizens of Charlottesville were born somewhere else.

The median age in Charlottesville is 29.

I am 33 years old.

I pay taxes.

We own businesses.

We vote, often for Democrats.

And we have a right to feel comfortable in our public spaces.

I love Charlottesville.

I've called it home since I was eight years old.

I believe that it is in many ways exceptional.

But racism exists here.

It did not begin with the discussion of these monuments.

It has been exposed by it.

And we can do something about it by removing the monuments.

Anyone else?

Okay, well, before we conclude, because I was raised in that, I just want to clarify, I did not and never have said the perhaps allegation that was in that about something that I said to Mr. Bellamy about

whatever that was.

That was a nonsense allegation that is not alluding to anything I've ever said.

So I just wanted to clarify that.

But we will be looking forward to these debates.

And I have enjoyed greatly my conversations with Mr. Bellamy very passionately and very authentically about this issue and virtually every other one that we talk about.

I'd just like to thank people.

I'm so glad we had a shorter meeting so more people could stay after and speak.

So thank you for being here.

Consultant for Form-Based Coup.

Yeah, I mean typically we have not, for an issue like this, we have not brought in, we have not had a significant amount of civic engagement on the development of the RFP.

But we have brought folks in once we have, as part of kind of occasionally we'll have folks come in and provide some input on folks on the RFPs once they've been submitted.

We've done that for various groups.

Usually we have a committee that's formed

to take a look at the RFP and review it and that type of thing.

After all the RFP responses, the responses to the RFP, but we have not historically had a lot of civic engagement for the development of an RFP for something like foreign-based code.

There has not been a suggestion that we do it for the standard and design manual and some other things that we've done just recently.

Well, the RFP will go out once it's developed.

I know NDS is working on that right now.

And then we will have the responses back.

Then there's the process of reviewing those responses, asking questions of the consultants who apply.

Then there's usually we narrow it down.

Then we'll have a discussion with negotiations with the final candidate or two.

And then we will

No.

So we're looking at maybe a nine month, eight to nine month process.

So I am moved by the

I understand that

in the developing of the RFP itself that there may be some process issues.

I'd like to explore if that's possible to bring folks in on that level.

If not, I would like to ask that we include Charlene Jean in that process because she's been doing a lot of kind of equity scanning and somebody was talking about the policy tool that she's been looking at a lot of those and maybe can inform that process.

But I would like to express a strong recommendation that we include

If I may add to that on Mr. Mayor that

and Mr. Jones that the SIA steering committee itself had members from the public housing community, from the community at large, the different neighborhoods involved, and I think that also was a precedent that worked well.

They were not involved with writing the RFP, but members of that steering committee were involved with helping to

I think that could be the healthy compromise here that doesn't break from and does not undermine staff's responsibility to act on

on doing their job, but it does get the community's feedback at critical moments, which is the selection of the consultant.

I think that's a good suggestion to have Charlene take a look at the, Ms. Green take a look at the RFP itself, but I think one cautionary note, and it's been said that we've been rushing this, but the SIA plan was finished in December 2013.

It's 2016, 2017, January.

We are seeing a change at the level of HUD.

We all know we want to get moving on having a good plan.

So we don't like

Kristin?

Absolutely.

Just understand, too, this council already approved getting assistance from UVA to do the modeling in three dimensions so that people can see what this looks like.

We've been committed to that.

We just need the overall plan now.

Christian, a question.

No.

Right, Friendship Corps, yep.

Okay.

Fenwick, you okay?

I'm okay.

Let's adjourn.

Anything else?

All right.

Thank you very much.