City Council   4/17/2017

Recognitions and announcements.

As recent practice, let's just mix them all together because we have a number of different proclamations and announcements today.

I have a couple announcements.

The first one will be, again, Mr. Alexander is wanting us to let everyone know about his third annual My Helpless contest.

It's a thinking, writing, and reading activity that involves

Children writing in 150 words or less what's important to them in terms of helping people.

And they have to be eligible, all students throughout Charlottesville and surrounding counties in grades K through 2.

35, 6, 7, 8, and 9 and 12.

That's K through 12.

The winners, one winner from each category will be chosen and get $100 in cash.

And the contest runs Monday, March 13 through Friday, April 21.

So that is this Friday.

You can drop or send entries to Carver Recreation Center to the My Help list.

That's 233 4th Street NW, Charlottesville 22903.

Include your name, address, and phone number.

Again, the contest is all about writing five things that you have done to help someone or how you can help someone.

So it's sponsored by Sheriff James Brown, Dave Chapman, the Commonwealth's attorney, J.F.

Bell Funeral Homes, Johnny Bates, the real estate broker, Lynn Fox, and CAT, Johnson Area Transit, as well as NBC 29.

Contact Mr. Alex Zahn at 804-321-3636 or Alex Zahn, one word, at i-c.net.

You can also visit the website www.myhelplist.wordpress.com.

The next announcement is related to an event that occurred during Tom Tom last week, the vessel as well as the hometown summit.

But it was last Friday I had the opportunity to attend a summit luncheon at which the launch of the Charlottesville Renewable Energy Alliance was celebrated.

Supervisor Norman Dill from Almonte County was also in attendance, and as was the Environmental Sustainability Manager, Crystal Riddevald.

She was actually the moderator.

This impressive collection of alternative energy innovators are really worthy of some recognition.

There are eight renewable energy companies located in Charlottesville and Almonte County, and they have come together for this alliance, Seaville, REA.

And the members currently include Sun Tribe Solar, Apex Clean Energy, Coronal Energy, Columbia Power Technologies, Alt Energy, Hexagon Energy, Segura Solar, and Collum.

Collectively, these eight companies generate more than 2,700 megawatts of clean energy.

That's enough to power a city 40 times the size of Charlottesville, or well over half a million homes.

So again, we're just really excited that this alliance has been forged in Charlottesville.

It's pretty darn impressive that we have that caliber and that variety

of Innovation in Alternative Energy in Little Charlottesville.

There's also a proclamation underneath your materials.

Oh, I've got something else.

Oh my goodness.

Oh, I do have others then.

Proclamation Arbor Day.

I'm going to ask Mr. Paul Josie, who's the chair of the Commission, to come to the front to accept this, please.

Oh, very good, thank you.

Well, I will read it and then hand it to the mayor and he will give it to you.

So, many different ways to complicate life.

So, whereas Arbor Day, first established in 1872, is a special day observed through the nation and the world, set aside for the planting of trees, and was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska, whereas trees can reduce the erosion of topsoil by wind and fire, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce life-giving oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife,

City of Charlottesville and urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands and further I urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well-being of this and future generations.

Thank you very much.

I'd like to thank City Council and Mayor for reading and giving us the proclamation for Arbor Day.

I'd like to mention that Arbor Day is being held on the 28th of April, this coming Friday.

There will be a celebration in front of the library.

It's a combined celebration between the Charlottesville area tree stewards and the tree commission.

And I'd also like to encourage everybody, public and the city, to continue planting trees.

Trees are incredibly important.

This proclamation underscores the importance of trees in our community.

They provide economic benefits.

They provide environmental benefits.

This Friday is the 21st.

10 o'clock.

All right, I have a couple of quick announcements and then also a proclamation.

My announcements are all around the Dogwood Festival.

If you've driven on 250, you've noticed the carnival already going on.

It is running through, hold on just a second, added a second, I'll get to it.

Oh, the carnival is the last day, it's the 23rd of April.

But the parts of the Dogwood Festival that are left,

are on April 21st, which is Friday, this Friday.

The Dogwood Benefit Breakfast will take place at the DoubleTree Hotel.

Doors open for silent auction at 7 a.m. and buffet breakfast opens at 8 a.m.

Also on April 21st is the Dogwood Vietnam Memorial Rededication at 11 a.m. in McIntire Park East.

And on Saturday the 22nd will be the Dogwood Parade.

And I know I'm marching in it with my dogs.

I think probably several of my fellow counselors will also be marching.

It's great fun.

It's a great way to see the variety that is Charlottesville on parade, literally.

So 1050 on Saturday.

Saturday evening will be the Dogwood Queen's Ball, also located at the DoubleTree Hotel.

Tickets are $20.

Table sponsors, $225.

Cash bar.

And then also on April 23 is the Charlottesville Municipal Band's Dogwood Festival Spring Concert at Dickinson Auditorium at Piedmont Virginia Community College.

And it's free.

And again, the last day of the carnival is that evening.

So thank you to all the people who do the work and planning of the Dogwood Festival every year.

We get to enjoy all those events.

and the proclamation that I have is to honor Child Abuse Prevention Month, which is April, whereas preventing child abuse and neglect is a community responsibility that depends on the involvement among people throughout the community and whereas child maltreatment occurs when people find themselves in stressful situations without community resources and don't know how to cope and whereas the majority of child abuse cases stem from situations and conditions that are preventable,

and an engaged and supportive community.

And whereas all citizens should become involved in supporting families and raising their children in a safe, nurturing environment.

And whereas effective child abuse prevention programs succeed because of partnerships created among families, social service agencies, schools, faith communities, civic organizations, law enforcement agencies, and the business community.

Now, therefore, Michael Signer, Mayor City of Charlottesville, does hereby proclaim April 2017 as Child Abuse Prevention Month

and calls upon all citizens, community agencies, faith groups, medical facilities, and businesses to increase their participation in our efforts to support families, thereby preventing child abuse and neglect and strengthen the community in which we live.

Signed and sealed the 17th day of April, 2017.

And is Brittany Selkreg here?

Wonderful.

I'm with Ready Kids.

Wonderful, I thought I'd seen you there.

We had our Pinwheel Garden on April 1st this year to start Child Abuse Prevention Month and just raise awareness in our community.

It's a really important issue so thank you guys for recognizing that.

It is unfortunately a very real problem in our community.

I am one of the trauma counselors at Ready Kids who works with victims of child abuse.

We currently have seven full-time counselors and still have about 40 kids on our waiting list for services.

So we just want everyone to know that though it is a very serious issue, it is something that's preventable.

There's a ton of resources in our community that are available to families in stressful situations who are at risk.

Thank you.

I have one that really, really means a lot to me.

So before I read this, I want to acknowledge a couple of people in the room.

I see our illustrious and wonderful Chief Thomas in the back.

And I'm going to clap for the Chief.

Y'all are going to clap for the Chief.

So this one again means a great deal.

We're honoring the life and memory of Mr. James Willie Jones, the first African American police officer in the Charlottesville City Police Department.

And whereas James Willie Jones was born on May 21st, 1942 in Albemarle County to Robert and Agnes Jones.

And whereas Mr. Jones received an education from the Albemarle Training School in Burley High School, where he stood out as a football star

and whereas James Jones entered and served in the United States Army and became part of the military police and whereas then Chief of Police James E. Adams approached the parents of James Jones to discuss if their son could handle the difficult job of being the only black police officer on the force for the city of Charlottesville.

and whereas in June of 1963, James W. Jones became the first black police officer for the city of Charlottesville and whereas despite facing significant racial adversity such as needing to call a supervisor before he could write tickets to whites in violation of the law,

and whereas James Willie Jones gained the respect and admiration of the members of his community and his fellow police officers and whereas Mr. Jones continued his career in policing and safety as a security guard in Northern Virginia and whereas James Willie Jones, Jones's service on the Charlottesville City Police Department during the civil rights era helped to pave the way for the hiring of other people of color in Charlottesville and now therefore be it resolved

that the city of Charlottesville graciously thanks Mr. James Willie Jones for his service to our country and his service to our community as he worked in difficult times to make all people in this city feel safe and respected, signed, sealed, and delivered by our illustrious mayor and the members of city council.

We'd like to call the family of Mr. Jones to come to the front while we give them a round of applause, please.

Song, y'all probably too young to remember the rhythm of the blues song.

It's a long time coming.

And I appreciate what y'all have done, the council and the mayor and the city of Manhattan.

Don't forget Mrs. Green back there, Charlene Green.

She put a whole lot of effort into this proclamation and whatnot.

But like I said, approximately, James did have a difficult time.

He had more law enforcement training

and his kids did when he was high in the city of Charlottesville.

So it was very difficult for him to, if he had a problem, he couldn't talk to nobody.

You know, he detected right in the boat.

He'd keep it all within his cell.

But he made it, and he made history, and it's not only him that made history in Charlottesville.

There's other people that have made history in Charlottesville.

You can go out on the street right now and ask any person, especially the black community,

over the first cop, over the first five, they can't tell you.

These people are 50, 60 years old.

So people have a tendency to take a little bit and run with things.

They don't get the whole facts on things.

There's so much confusion going on here in the city.

If you learn the facts on certain things, you wouldn't have these problems.

It wouldn't be as bad anyway.

But people just take the ball and run with it.

But you take time to think.

And I appreciate this.

Well, first, I'd like to start by saying it's great to see Chief Thomas here, because I know I mentioned to you, Chief, many months ago about your officers on the downtown mall, particularly.

They are making a real effort to communicate with the people down there.

They're a lot friendlier.

I think we all understand the kind of person you mostly run into, but to see the officers wearing the uniform take time to talk to merchants and shoppers

It makes it more of a team effort.

So I just wanted to thank you publicly.

Thank you and your officers.

And I'd like to recognize Zach.

Zach, are you still here?

Okay, there he is from Shonsville High School.

And I do this because when I call the name out there, teachers know they're here.

Pretty important.

All right.

Next council meeting, Monday, May 1st at 7 p.m. at City Hall in these chambers.

This weekend brings us to the Charlottesville Eco Fair.

This annual event brings our community together to celebrate the earth and spread awareness about important environmental issues.

The Eco Fair will take place on the downtown mall near the pavilion on Sunday, April 23rd from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.

This free Earth Day celebration will feature live music, tasty food, kids activities, earth-friendly raffles and more.

Come check out the work of local environmental organizations and businesses.

Get information about sustainability projects and programs.

Pick up eco tips and tools.

Share your thoughts and ideas on how to create strong, engaged stewardship in our community.

And coming up, I'm not, I didn't have my, my link, my web link, so.

Rivanna is holding a collection for hazardous household waste.

Now, all of us who have older friends in town or live in an older house, I can guarantee you that somewhere in the basement is a container like this.

What is that?

Well, that's the question.

I am not sure what's in here, but it is not good, I would guarantee that.

and we have a member of the Sierra Club in here tonight.

It could be pesticide, it could be diazonon, it could be any of a number of things.

The Rivanna Solid Waste Authority is collecting this.

So go to the city website and look up either HHW or Hazardous Household Waste and they'll take paint, pesticides, chemicals,

They'll take just about anything except for ammunition, radioactive material, stuff like that.

So I apologize for not having the link, but it's well worth it to get this out of your basement.

Now we're all a little bit afraid.

But there's hope.

That's what it is.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Mr. Fenwick.

A couple announcements and a proclamation.

Proclamation, the Mayor's Challenge for Water Conservation is underway right now.

Please help us to become the most water-wise city in the country by taking the Water Conservation Pledge, which everybody can find at www.mywaterpledge.com throughout the month of April.

To find out more information on the competition and Charlottesville's involvement,

which is long standing, you can go to the city of Charlottesville's water conservation website which is www.Charlottesville.org slash water conservation.

and announcement, gone but not forgotten, unearthing memories at the Daughters of Zion Cemetery.

UVA students in the hands-on public history class that they have are hosting an event on Wednesday, April 19th, 2017 at the Special Collections Library in the Harrison Small Auditorium at UVA.

Please join us on April 19th for history, commemoration and conversation on this important part of Charlottesville's history, which City Council

Last year invested $80,000 in helping to rehabilitate, which we were very, very proud to do.

All right.

We now move on to city manager response to matters by the public from the last meeting.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

A couple of quick items.

The schools did increase the fees for this summer program to help cover the costs of the initiative.

There is, however, a sliding scale for tuition based on income levels.

So it was a slight increase that the schools did this year.

Mr. Burks was asking for the City Council to weigh in on that with the schools, but I just wanted to provide you with some background there.

And Ms. Rebecca Quinn had concerns about the new trail alignments at Ragon Mountain and their proximity to environmentally sensitive areas.

The trail alignments at Ragon Mountain have been intentionally located to try to avoid those areas.

That's been the staff's goal from the beginning of this design process.

However, as the trails are being constructed, staff will keep an eye out for sensitive flora

that may have been dormant during the winter and they'll make adjustments accordingly.

So they're going to keep an eye on that as they work on the trails.

Ms. Quinn also mentioned her concerns about the slope in front of the Jefferson Madison Regional Library Facility on Market Street.

The library staff share her concern.

They've reached out to her to further discuss this problem.

The library's recent attempts to cover the bare slope have not had a whole lot of success, and they believe that's in part because of a large tree that's shading that area.

That's all I have, Mr. Mayor.

All right.

Okay, we now move to our first matters by the public period.

We welcome public comment.

It's an important part of our meeting.

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

Please follow these guidelines for public comment.

If you are here to speak for a public hearing, please wait to speak on that matter until that item has been presented.

We don't have any of those tonight, so each speaker has three minutes to speak.

Please give your name and address before beginning your remarks.

Please do not interrupt speakers whether or not you agree with them, and I'll read the part of our procedures that govern this as well.

Section 9, 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 for 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 these 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.

We have tonight it looks like nine folks signed up and we have several spots available in our in-person sign up.

We have ten spots you sign up for in advance and five spots you can sign up for in person.

Yes, hello.

Thank you for letting me speak.

My name is Barbara Cruikshank.

I live at 324 Parkway Street in Charlottesville.

In 2015, after hearing from many members of the public, the City Council passed a resolution to address the issues of pesticides being used in the city.

And for about a year, you heard about the toxicity, the science behind the toxicity of pesticides in terms of human health.

So the resolution that you

signed said that you would, among other things, you would eliminate the use of pesticides on school grounds and in city parks and there were other parts obviously to it.

It has been two years.

Today I read the Parks and Rec IPM that they just released to you guys and this has not been done yet.

It has not been done.

The resolution, from what I can tell reading the IPM, has not, we have not eliminated pesticides on the school grounds and in the city parks.

There is some progress that's been made.

There's no question about that.

My question to the council is, will you do what you said you would do and will you eliminate the use of pesticides on the school grounds and in the city parks where children and families play?

Last year we were also told that it would only take $15,000 which really is a very small amount to, this was last year, to eliminate the use of the pesticides on the school grounds.

So here we're a year later and that's not been done.

Can we put any dollar value at all on the health of a child?

I don't think we can.

So it's been three years

and there has been progress, there's no question, but I ask you again, will you do what you said you would do and will you eliminate the use of pesticides on school grounds and in our city parks?

Thank you.

Before I get to the next, I should have said before that we have a timer up here.

Just please pay attention.

Green, you have three minutes and then when you're close to the end, it's yellow and when you're finished, it's red.

I reside at 1824 Field Road and I also am fortunate to serve as the director of the Charlottesville Free Clinic.

So this is a brief but significant note of gratitude.

About nine months ago you agreed with the county to let us renovate the clinic space inside the health department on Rose Hill Drive.

That was finished.

The benefit to the community has been visible already.

We added a fourth operatory for hygiene.

We have a bilingual hygienist who's also an RN, and we've been able to lift what was a ban or a restriction on one hygiene visit per lifetime.

We brought walk-in clinics in three mornings a week, so now instead of seeing four to five people, we see 10 to 12.

And it just really increased the whole quality of the dental clinic.

and I think it's had a profound impact on our patients.

So we were just, we will be featured actually by the Virginia Healthcare Foundation both as the city and as a free clinic and with our founding volunteers for being leaders in the safety net, healthcare safety net.

So thank you.

If you all have not seen the dental clinic, I think it's worth seeing and for the 3,000 people who the free clinic serves as their primary care, it's really increased access to the

So I thank you.

I do have some cards with a picture of a patient and our dentist at work.

Mr. Jones, yours will arrive in the mail.

I apologize.

Thank you very much.

Good evening.

My name is Benjamin Randolph.

I live at 423 Meade Avenue.

This is the third evening that I've given up to be with my wife and daughter to be here to speak to you about the development at 1011 East Jefferson Street.

That's how important it is to me.

The developers have requested a special use permit to increase the density from 21 dwelling units per acre to 87 dwelling units per acre.

They would like you to support a 126 unit apartment building on the edge of the Little High neighborhood.

a neighborhood made up of mostly single family homes.

And in fact, there's almost the same number of homes in Little High neighborhood as there are in this proposed apartment building.

It would forever change the diversity and the density of this neighborhood.

But today I would like to address the lack of meaningful, affordable housing units in this project.

According to the developers,

and I quote, this development will provide the benefit of new affordable housing units in the downtown area.

However, the developers fail to state in their proposal how many units will be affordable and how they define affordable units.

In conversations with the head of the Little High Neighborhood Association, the developers have stated that they will provide four affordable housing units out of 126, or 3%.

As you all know, the city's own plan calls for 15% of the housing stock to be affordable by the year 2025.

It's at 10%.

If you approve this special use permit, you're gonna be signaling to the community and to developers that all they have to do is propose 3% affordable housing, 3% of the units to be affordable housing in order to get a permit.

I want to say that you guys took the bold step of doubling the funding that goes to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund.

And you made that monumental commitment to increasing the stock of affordable housing in the city.

But if city council is truly serious about its commitment to affordable housing, then you must require developers to provide a higher percentage of affordable housing units when they request a special use permit.

And finally, I'd like to ask the developers to come back with a compromise proposal, something that addresses the needs of low income and workforce housing in Charlottesville and something that addresses the concerns of the neighborhood residents.

But up till now, they've said density is non-negotiable.

And I'd like to quote the mayor.

I attended his roundtable event Friday at the hometown summit.

Let's keep Charlottesville, Charlottesville.

Good evening.

My name is Nancy Carpenter and I live in the Rose Hill neighborhood of this fine city.

My comment tonight concerns a recent motion that was made at the April 3rd council meeting when you were having a public hearing on historic conservation districts and some text amendments.

and I apologize for not signing up, but in listening to the, well not the podcast, but Hannibal Tins rebroadcast of that.

There was a issue in the text amendments, or text sections 34 and at 345B and in section 34, 347B, that there was a motion that was made to require no application fee when someone comes

to NDS to make a proposal that may require a board of architectural review determination.

And there was also in that motion a change from requiring action by the architectural review board from 60 days down to 30 days.

And that if the board did not act, that on the 31st day, of course, the request would be approved.

I'm not really sure.

It was ostensibly the motion made to talk to and address the character of our neighborhoods and the affordable housing issues that we're facing in this city as we are everywhere else in this country.

and I'm really not sure how that motion deals with that because you have this form-based code audit that you're doing and I'm not really sure how, you know, changing those two sentences will work with your form-based code.

It just seems like it's taking away what form-based code is supposed to be adding to.

And the other thing is that the short response time

for the board to act also is a short response time for neighborhoods to act.

I know it says in there that adjoining property owners and across the street, they'll get their little notices.

But it also is a short amount of time for a neighborhood to come together and determine if this request that's requiring architectural review is something that the neighborhood has an interest in responding to.

So if you really shorten that time, I don't see how

how that works with, you know, community engagement, you know, you're going through the comprehensive plan, you have this protocol that you're looking at adopting, you know, when you're talking about engaging your community for that process.

So I don't understand why you want a really robust process for that, but yet want to, it feels like it's taking away something that neighborhoods need as a tool to help, like, you know, I agree with what Mr. Randolph said, you know, this is another tool that helps neighborhoods to

Counselors, my name is Ben Doherty and I live at 104 Village Court right here in Charlottesville.

As we hear this evening the city manager's report on options for removing the lease statue, I commend the city council for its leadership on this issue.

That emblem of white supremacy never should have been put up at the center of the city and it cannot be removed quickly enough.

I encourage city council to pursue the options that most efficiently lead to its removal.

If that means donating it, auctioning it off, or initiating an RFP, so be it.

As long as we consider to move towards realizing the council's decision to remove the lease statue from its wrongful place at the center of the city.

In particular, as we consider the options for most quickly removing the statue, I ask Mayor Signer to think back to January 31st when he challenged all of us to stand up as the capital of the resistance.

We cannot be both a capital of the resistance and a capital of the Confederacy.

This is the time for this city to show leadership in demonstrating to other cities around the country that we do not have to put up with these kinds of monuments to white supremacy in our midst.

My concern, Mayor Signer, is that at the same time you claim the mantle of the resistance, you're going to present all kinds of excuses for not following through on City Council's vote to remove the Lee statue.

You may give excessive weight to the misguided legal arguments presented by the group of Confederate romanticists in their lawsuit against the city.

You may cite concerns with costs of removal, as if this historically small amount it might cost to remove the Lee statue can even be compared to the damage we have done by placing this racist emblem at the center of our city.

You may cite administrative concerns, such as historic designations, when we all know any administrative concerns would be quickly resolved if we were talking about a multi-million dollar development project.

You may cite differences of opinion, that you're not sure that the people of Charlottesville really want the statue removed and that you want to respect everyone's views.

To that, I would say that if your white liberalism leads you to be allied on this issue with people like Corey Stewart, Jason Kessler, and the Randall brothers, then it is time to rethink your position.

These are all excuses, excuses of the sort that white liberals tend to put forth when we want to pretend that we are not cooperating with white supremacy.

If we want to truly be the capital of the resistance, then let's show some leadership on this difficult issue.

Respect the three to two vote of the city council and work with your colleagues to move forward as quickly as possible in removing this racist statue from our midst.

Thank you.

Same song, second verse.

Just kidding.

Good evening, Council.

I'm Jeline Schmidt.

I reside at 11 Altamont Circle.

I commend the City Council's February 6th vote to remove the Lee statue, and I hope that this can be one of many steps toward changing the narrative on race in the city of Charlottesville.

No matter the eventual outcome of the lawsuit and the ultimate fate of the Lee statue, the official renaming of Change the Name Park should proceed forthwith.

Future official city communications and the promotion of events funded by the city should refer to the erstwhile named Lee Park by its new name.

One of the Blue Ribbon Commission's less noted recommendations for changing the narrative on race was to install a marker to remember the July 11, 1898 lynching of John Henry Brown, a black resident of Charlottesville.

The proposed memorial marker is manufactured by the Equal Justice Initiative.

EJI is a national organization which endeavors to recognize the 4,000 plus lynchings which occurred in our country in the 19th and 20th centuries.

As of today, the Albemarle

Charlottesville branch of the NAACP, the Legal Aid Justice Center and Serge Charlottesville have all endorsed this effort to memorialize the 1898 lynching of John Henry Brown.

More local organization support is forthcoming.

The cost of buying and installing the lynching marker are minimal.

I have provided Councilman Wes Bellamy and City Manager Maurice Jones with the relevant EJI documents.

I urge city council to appropriate the funds for the EJI lynching marker and to formally initiate this process of acquiring the marker with all due speed.

The marker should be visibly positioned in order to counter the celebration of white supremacy which dominates our public spaces.

The installation of the lynching marker should be publicized and activities sponsored in order to say his name and to affirm that indeed black lives matter and to change the narrative on race in Charlottesville.

On the topic of changing the narrative on race in Charlottesville, I regard the premise of the recently concluded TomTom Fest, which city council supported with generous grant, as a reminder of the type of narrative which needs to change.

Though there were some presentations on generational poverty and other injustices which are linked to the legacy of white supremacy, these were outnumbered by laudatory investor summits, boosterish industry luncheons, craft cocktail demonstrations, and celebrations in Lee Park,

which ultimately center Charlottesville's white founders.

Tracing the history of our town's innovation and entrepreneurship to local slaveholders and colonizers is problematic.

The Tom Tom Festival ignores key moments of Seaville's founders of color even though their innovation and entrepreneurial initiatives predate the most celebrated actions of Jefferson and Lewis and Clark.

Let's move the statue, change the name of our Central Park and support and install appropriate public remembrances of our city's history.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Rebecca Quinn, 1044th Street here in the city.

I don't know when the City's Historic Resources Committee was established by Council.

That doesn't really matter.

What matters is Council does occasionally decide it's important to create bodies of appointed citizens willing to contribute time and talent around specific issues.

So where is the Historic Resources Committee in the steps recommended for renaming Lee and Jackson Parks?

Okay, I understand the Parks and Recreation Committee Advisory Board has the formal charge or authority, but that doesn't mean the HRC shouldn't be identified as an advising and contributing consulting entity.

I'll read from the HRC's mission statement, to advocate for historic preservation, to promote an appreciation of local historic resources, both tangible and intangible, and to encourage and coordinate with appropriate municipal agencies, civic organizations,

institutions and individual scholars, the documentation and interpretation of local history.

Please specifically direct staff and Parks and Rec to consult with the HRC.

If CBS News, Morning News found Seville's story compelling enough to feature last week, surely the story of Confederate statues coming and going in Charlottesville warrants documentation.

If nothing else, the HRC

seems a likely entity to contribute to that documentation.

On another matter I expect you heard Albemarle County postponed a supervisors meeting recently because a physical notice had not been posted according to law.

On the clerk's door today is posted today's meeting but other meetings this week are not physically posted.

Now to be honest I don't really know if they're required to be physically posted but

Keep in mind these details matter.

Plus, how can we be a smart, citizen-focused government if we don't make sure things are posted?

There are also the ones that are on the webpage, sometimes don't have an agenda linked to them.

Or I noticed the BAR, the agenda's not linked, nor is the BAR's webpage.

So you know it's not easy to find a lot of this stuff.

I know every time I go for the BAR webpage it takes me a while to find it.

But there are a couple of other committee meetings and board meetings or public entity meetings that are not posted.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council.

Genevieve Keller, 504 North First Street.

Looking at your agenda tonight, I feel like it might be design night because of the kinds of issues that are on your agenda.

I support the neighborhood conservation district.

It's a very good tool that we have.

and I'm proud to have known the Murrys and Mitch Banyaris all my life.

Bunny Murray and I served on the board of the Preservation Alliance of Virginia together and I know she would be particularly interested in the kinds of issues that you are dealing with tonight.

She was a wonderful woman and it's about time that a woman's commitment to natural and cultural resources can be celebrated in our community.

But I would also like to address the Lee statue relocation.

And I don't know if you will take actions tonight.

I referenced Ms. Quinn's remarks on noticing.

It's not always clear when you will actually take an action or not.

And I particularly wonder if staff consulted all of the key representatives that you named to consult in the relocation planning.

If not, I ask that you not take any action until those key individuals are consulted.

And if they were, I apologize for bringing that up.

I'm particularly concerned that alternative locations in our city have not been analyzed to date, and I urge you to consider other possibilities before you make any decisions to sell or auction the artwork.

I'm concerned that there may not be an adequate understanding of the National Register of Historic Places or of the significance of historic objects.

and I find it that particularly disturbing for a city which the Department of Historic Resources has accepted as a certified local government.

I have several recommendations and best practices that I'd like to share tonight.

These are not my personal opinions but are based on extensive professional experience and national statewide and local standing with historic resources.

And so I start, any relocation actions should conform to the city's public trust responsibilities

Any relocation proposal should be handled openly, seriously, responsibly, and with care for all parties involved in accordance with other cities policies and procedures.

Any relocation should stipulate continued access to the resource.

Any relocation should be conducted in a manner

that promotes the protection and preservation of the resource.

The city could even contemplate continued ownership of this gift to the city and pursue relocation alternatives that might be based on a loan or co-ownership basis to ensure continued curation.

Any action should be consistent with advancement of studies related to the curation of history and art and similar activities that are related to artistic and historic resources.

Any proceeds from a potential sale should be used consistent with those activities.

Finally, relocations should be planned to promote the public good rather than financial gain, and in no event should any monetary gain be used for anything other than related activities.

I urge you to delay any action tonight until these and perhaps other alternatives and concerns can be studied sufficiently.

May I address the assembly, or am I only addressing you?

Yeah, our rules say you're supposed to address councils.

People at home can't hear you.

My concern is that the statute's issue hasn't generated any common ground among us.

We still see evidence, as tonight, we see evidence that we are us against them.

My concern is to produce a community conversation that actually lets us hear each other,

In spite of the magnificent leadership of Mr. Gathers, that did not happen in the Blue Ribbon Commission.

And I would like to propose that council investigate and produce some kind of an ongoing venue for communication among citizens.

I have such an idea which I'd like to explore with you.

whenever it's appropriate.

Thank you.

I didn't get your name.

I'm Henry McHenry, Garth Road in the county.

Thank you.

Okay.

Alright, that concludes our matters of the public.

We thank everybody for taking the time to come up here.

It takes courage to stand up here at the dais.

We take these comments extremely seriously.

The city manager will follow up on all items that raise the staff

a topic where staff can provide more information in two weeks of the next meeting.

Our emails are on the website and you can also email us all at council at Charlottesville dot org.

I have two responses that I'd like to state.

One, in regards to Mr. Randolph, I think this is, as he alluded to, the third week in which he's come

in regards to the issue at 1011 Jefferson Street.

Do we have an idea when that may come before us in May?

So we'll be able to address that issue then.

So I just think it's important for not only he to know, but the rest of the public to know.

And also in regards to Mr. McHenry, his request for us to have essentially a larger conversation, a community conversation in the equity package.

represented for the budget which was passed and we actually adopted through the Human Rights Commission, Ms. Green, we asked for $10,000 to be allotted for continuation of the dialogue on race.

I know that she's working on that.

I think that essentially speaks to your question in regards to us having a larger community conversation.

I think even throughout all of this issue as a whole, we've been having a great deal of community conversation.

Right.

So that's why we want to make sure we let you know that as well as the community.

I just have one clarification because it has to do with something that's in our consent agenda.

I just wanted to clarify before we actually vote on it.

Ms. Carpenter had some concerns about language that was changed in that.

And I just wanted to clarify that that is not a citywide change.

That is just

for this new piece of overlay language for two particular neighborhoods that are specifically historic overlay districts.

And it was just about the things that are added onto them that other neighborhoods don't have.

So it really is a very specific, targeted thing.

Mayor, I do want to respond to Ms. Quinn's comment about making sure that we consult with the Historic Resources Commission and I believe that the resolution that council adopted with regards to

creating a master plan for the historic parks of both Lee and Jackson and to transform the Jackson statue in place specifically listed the the Historic Resources Commission as to be one of the consultants that Mr. Jones will be following up with.

We're not discussing that particular resolution tonight.

That's that's going to be part two.

where staff will come back to us with regards to the RFPs for that.

That's right, counselor.

The Place Design Task Force and the Human Rights Commission.

Those were the three that were identified.

Great.

Alright, thank you all.

Moving on to the consent agenda.

Now we have one item that we are gonna, that we've already determined to move off of the

So we're going to deal with that in a regular agenda in a future meeting.

Aside from that, we have items A through, I guess it will be F now.

Third, 2017, item B, appropriation, supplemental appropriation of FY 2017 transit grants, $97,528.

Second of two readings, item C, appropriation, reimbursement from RWSA for paving costs to Ragged Mountain Roadway, $11,796.48, first of two readings.

Item D, appropriation, domestic violence services coordinator grant, $49,336, first of two readings.

Item E, Appropriation, Use of Charlottesville Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau Fund.

Nope, sorry.

Item E, Resolution Fund Transfers from CIP Reserve to Comprehensive Plan 2018 Account, $100,000, first of one reading.

Thank you.

Further questions, discussion?

All in favor?

in the way of mine.

This is probably a problem to solve for the long term.

OK. All right.

Thank you, Ms. Agnes.

Is that far enough?

Yes.

Thank you.

All right.

Probably should have addressed that a year ago.

OK. Now, folks, we have a pretty busy agenda tonight.

So we have 10, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 items ahead of us.

Time amounts on each of them consistent with our rules.

So I'm going to do my level best for the sake of all of us to move us through this as expeditiously as I can.

And we'll do our best.

So we'll take a break at 9 o'clock consistent with our rules, and we'll just work through all this.

First item is a resolution.

This is the adoption of House Conservation District Design Guidelines.

This is the first of one reading, so we will have a full vote on this.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

You just approved on your consent agenda revisions to the Historic Conservation District Ordinance.

The Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review is also recommending certain revisions to the historic conservation district design guidelines.

And those were adopted the same time as the ordinance, 2009, so they are in need of update.

Updating them now would also keep them consistent with the ordinance changes that you just adopted.

The process to amend guidelines is slightly different than the zoning ordinance amendments because

They're in a separate document.

They're not contained in the zoning ordinance, so they don't have to go through the Planning Commission for approval.

The BAR recommends them, and then you all can approve them.

Let's see.

There are basically two pages of guidelines.

One's for new additions and new construction.

The other one's for demolitions.

They're very short and concise.

There are no proposed changes to the demolitions page, and there are some changes

recommended to the new construction page.

The only substantive one I would say is the one that regards not recommending painting unpainted brick or masonry.

There's also a new section.

They kind of reformatted and organized them better, so there's an introduction.

We never had that before.

And then the district information is organized all in the same place, so it's easier to get to.

So there were very few public comments on this, and staff would recommend that City Council approve the 2017 updates to the Historic Conservation District design guidelines as submitted.

Mr. Mayor, I have two questions that are pretty specific.

My first question is, both in the building scale section and the building form section, the new language notes that other things may be approved in the new language.

Under building scale height and massing?

Yes.

OK. And which number?

Hold on, let me get it in front of me.

Oh, I see what you're saying.

Keep the height and width within the prevailing average height and width.

Yes, exceptions may be approved.

By whom?

By the Board of Architectural Review.

What this is addressing is the fact that

It would always be the BAR.

I would really prefer that it say that just so that we can know what that is so that we don't later say, well, it just says it'll be approved.

And so that's there.

Right.

and I wouldn't say it's an exception to a guideline.

It's not really a zoning exception, do you see what I mean?

But it definitely clears it up to add.

It just makes me more comfortable just to have that clarity.

So those two places.

And then my second question is in the paragraph right after that second approved paragraph, so number two under building form roofs and porches.

Okay.

And what it ends up saying, if I'm correct with the underlines and cross-outs,

is that if many of the contributing buildings on the same street have porches, then the design of a new residence should include a porch of similar width and depth.

Before it, just said a porch is strongly recommended.

What triggers that?

I think, well, yeah.

The design of a new resident should include a porch or similar form of similar width and depth.

But many is awfully vague for me to be doing that sort of strong recommendation because many on a street of 50 houses could be 40, 20, 12.

Good question.

I would be comfortable with going back to something close to is strongly recommended because then they can know that it's something that they're asked to do but they don't feel like they're stuck not knowing whether they have to or not.

Okay, that sounds great.

Those are my only questions, thank you.

And otherwise I thought it was a really, I loved the introduction and I think it's really much clearer.

I do have a question, Mayor Signer.

And it's in the section under demolitions and it's with reference to what something that Mr. Bill Emery sent to us earlier today.

And I believe it relates to item number six under demolitions, which relates to the character of the district.

And if I'm understanding it correctly, I think this item number six under demolitions does address character and that that is one of the criteria of identifying whether or not a building should be scrutinized for demolition.

And I'm not sure would it.

And if you're familiar with the with the email that Mr. Emery sent, I'm wondering if if we added just language to

the character and continuity of the district.

Would that make it stronger?

Is that something that might alleviate the concern?

I think I missed his email today.

I'm sorry.

I would say that these demolition guidelines are identical to the ADC district.

But that may be appropriate to add that in there.

So what Mr. Emery cited was Section 34-278B and that reads as follows with regards to standards for review of demolition.

Whether and to what extent a contributing structure is linked historically or aesthetically to other buildings or structures within an existing major design control district or is one of a group of properties within such a district whose concentration or continuity

possesses greater significance than many of its component buildings and structures.

He felt that should be added to this so that the whole built ensemble of the of the neighborhood is not lost.

And I didn't know if it was simply a matter of if we just added another word to item number six, whether that would suffice, because again, I do like the simplicity of the language of this

I don't think it changes the meaning to just simplify it.

Okay, so you think we still get at what Mr. Emery was getting at?

I mean, I would, if my colleagues don't mind, I wouldn't mind adding the character and continuity of the district.

Okay, and I would, Ms. Brazelton, on the future agenda items, let's put the time, but we're okay.

We have two minutes left on this, but we can put it up on the clock, but we're fine right now.

I can clarify the comments that Mrs. Carpenter made at this point, if that's okay.

Sure, of course.

The reason for the decrease in time review and the

on the lesion of two of the fees involved.

There was a series of six fees.

The the three major ones that do relate to demolition still exist.

But it was an acknowledgment that this was applied to a neighborhood that wasn't necessarily an affluent neighborhood.

And when you looked at, in particular, the lawnmills, its annual median income was about forty six thousand dollars a year compared to the rugby road.

and the Locust Avenue neighborhoods that had a median income of $102,000 a year.

So we're seeing a big uptick in concern from the Willam Mills residents about the cost of this overlay district, which we all agree is what the residents need as a tool to help them protect the character of the neighborhood.

So this was a clear attempt to make it less

Onaris, a process and less expensive for people of more modest means.

Okay, great.

Yes, I would like to do that.

So two by the BAR, one strongly recommended, and then end continuity.

I'm right on time.

All right, so we have a second.

We haven't voted yet.

Any further questions?

OK, all in favor?

As amended, that varies five to zero.

All right.

Doing well.

Thank you.

Item number three on our agenda resolution, initiate zoning text amendments for legal audit of the zoning ordinance.

Again, this is the first of one reading, so we'll have a full vote.

Mr. Craig Brown, City Attorney, will be presenting.

Mr. Brazelton, excellent.

We have 10 minutes up here, so everyone please keep an eye on the time.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

such that it aligns with the 2018 comprehensive plan update and by regulatory framework it meant the zoning and subdivision ordinances standards design manual, district and entrance quarter guidelines, affordable housing guidelines,

and other supporting documents.

In other words, documents that inform our comprehensive plan and govern land use in the city.

The action item tonight I think represents probably the first benchmark in complying with that September resolution.

in that it signals the completion of our legal review of the zoning ordinance.

Now let me emphasize that this was not a review of substantive provisions in that it didn't look at whether property was zoned correctly or whether setbacks were correct.

It really focused on two or three points.

One,

whether the provisions in the zoning ordinance were consistent with state law requirements or recent state court decisions, whether there were provisions that were unclear or that had presented challenges for implementation, and we also tried to make the ordinance simpler to utilize and easier for individuals to understand.

The resolution that is before you tonight does not adopt or approve any of those changes.

It is a process resolution which transmits these changes back to the Planning Commission for their consideration for a public hearing and for their recommendation to this council, at which time you will take up the question of whether they should be adopted into law or not.

All of the changes, and it is a quite lengthy manuscript, are on the NDS website.

They have been there, I think, since February.

There's also a document that explains how my office, and this is the work of Ms. Robertson, so she gets the credit for all of this hard work,

It's entitled, Approaches to Legal Updates.

And then it has a lengthy, I think about nine pages of questions and corrections documents that shows the comments and concerns that we have received since February and the response to those comments.

And I think it gives some flavor of the ongoing

public engagement on this issue that's been taking place and will continue to take place when it goes back to the Planning Commission.

So before you tonight is a very brief resolution entitled Resolution Initiating Zoning Text Amendments to Amend and Recodify Chapter 34 of the Code of the City of Charlottesville 1990 Zoning.

You frequently do these initiating resolutions for specific changes.

This is for the entire chapter.

So I will be glad to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you, Mr. Brown.

Mr. Mayor, I'd like to take this moment to express my gratitude both to Ms. Robertson for doing this work, but also to the fact that we have a planning commission of people who are willing to dig into these things.

Having looked at it, I am grateful that somebody else is going to look at it first and make recommendations to us.

And with that, I would like to

Any discussion, questions?

All in favor?

And that carries 5 to 0.

All right.

Item number 4 on our agenda, another resolution.

Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust Allocation of Funds for Nassau Street Development in the amount of $240,000.

This is the first of one reading again, so a full vote.

We have 15 minutes allocated to this.

Good evening.

I'm also joined by, where are you guys?

There you are.

He is the chair of the Land Trust Board of Directors and Keith Smith, who is a member of Leadership Charlottesville, the current class, and he actually worked with the Land Trust to prepare this proposal.

So they are currently asking for $240,000 in affordable housing support and that money will be used for the acquisition and development of four undeveloped lots on Nassau Street.

Once the lots are purchased they will work with Habitat for Humanity of Greater Charlottesville to develop those lots and then Habitat will go on to construct four single-family homes upon those parcels and

which they will then make available for sale to families earning less than 80% of area median income which at this period of time that equates to about $63,900 for a family of four.

So $120,000 will go towards the acquisition of the parcels.

The other $120,000 will go towards the development of the lots to get them ready for construction.

Once the houses are developed, Habitat for Humanity will search for potential home buyers.

They will pull from their list of current program participants.

Priority will be given to City of Charlottesville residents or employees.

and the affordability of each house will be maintained through two mechanisms.

The first is through the Habitat financing model which consists of direct mortgages provided by Habitat for Humanity, appreciation sharing agreements, right of first refusal for Habitat to purchase the homes should the families choose to sell.

and deed restrictions that we usually place on any homes we fund through the Affordable Housing Fund and also through the land trust model.

Under the land trust model, the land trust retains ownership of the land itself so that the home buyer will purchase the structure instead of both.

So that pulls out a lot of the cost of home ownership and the purchase price.

Upon resale of the home, again, the land trust will retain ownership of the land

the homeowner, when they sell it, will receive a modest return on their investment.

Throughout the home ownership, they are allowed to make any site improvements that they choose, but they will only recoup whatever they invested into the structure itself.

The Land Trust does this by leasing the land to the homeowner through a 90-year lease, which

Rolls over whenever the home is sold.

And I really can't read.

So I would say the staff actually recommends doing this because it is actually going to own, increase the affordable housing stock in the city by four home ownership opportunities that will be affordable in the long term up to 90 years at this stage.

We make it something harsh and something cold and callous and I don't think that's the intent of this.

Lots are single-family detached.

These four will be single-family detached.

That doesn't mean the Land Trust and future projects can do duplexes with multi-family.

And again, I appreciate the home ownership aspect, so they still do acquire some equity by owning the building as they would with a town home.

So it's not necessarily that I'm looking as an apartment building,

So I have a couple of questions from notes that I took down while reviewing the information that came through.

I just want to make sure I understand this correctly, the request is for $240,000 for four lots, correct?

So essentially $60,000 per lot, which requires a $60,000 per home for starters, correct?

Okay.

All right.

Just want to make sure I cleared that part up.

Sure.

Got a couple.

So are these specific lots?

I apologize.

These are very four specific lots in your package.

It's on the contract for specific lots on that.

And the zoning is?

I believe it's R1S.

It is.

It's R1S.

And that's single?

That's single family.

Okay.

Which kind of addresses Ms. Galvin's question.

But she was talking about duplicates.

What was it, condoms?

No, these four lot specifics are single family detached.

I think what Ms. Galvin was asking me, can the land trust in different parts of the city do duplexes?

Oh, okay.

Okay.

Now we've had this question asked before.

It's in the package that we had in there that that's what we're going to do.

I think the firewall is the contractual arrangement.

I believe there's one habitat person on the land trust board.

On your board?

It's not my board.

I'm part of Leadership Charlottesville.

OK.

OK, so there's one person from habitat on the land trust.

That is correct.

How about the other way?

Excuse me, sir?

On the Habitat board, how many from the Land Trust?

That I'm not aware of.

Do you know?

Anybody else?

Do these funds, I'm perplexed by the part of this that's about hiring an executive director.

This is just additional information.

Currently the land trust is operating on an all-volunteer board and so to move forward they received an anonymous grant or funding of $100,000.

They're going to use that in order to hire an executive director part-time to make the organization more sustainable.

Okay, and Ms. Pethia, I would ask you if you could briefly comment, in Mr. Bellamy's question, I don't want to speak for him, but I heard the same

Well, it's a concern that I have, which is sort of the per capita use of our affordable housing fund.

We are steaming into a more strategic approach on this whole fund.

We're obviously doubling the monies that are going into it.

We've got to, you know, it's going to be more targeted and strategic with four or five different goals rather than dozens and hopefully a little more direction and long-term approach under your capable leadership, the new hack.

There's some new leadership there, so this is all very exciting.

I'm hoping that ultimately we get to a point where we know where we have benchmarks where we see I mean you're absolutely right this is

60 grand for a house, which is progress.

But it's not I'm not sure whether that's the right per dollar progress, given how difficult affordable housing is in the city.

But I also know that the bird in the hand at this point is probably where it sounds like this is what staff is saying, that this is a good project to go with right now.

But I do I want to emphasize we do have a strategic plan going forward that we're going to be much more directed and we'll have benchmarks about

Yes.

60 grand, is that the right amount for a single family home?

Yes, I think this is a great project to do for many reasons.

One, it helps the land trust expand their portfolio.

But because of the model, these homes will remain affordable long into the future.

Unlike a lot of the homes that we have habitat, they'll have a 15-year lien depending upon how much money we place into the project.

guarantees affordability in the long term.

Strategically moving forward, I am working on that and creating benchmarks that will help us.

I just have one more comment if I may and it's related to I guess at some point we're going to be getting another discussion about the zoning recommendation changes and this does illustrate for me again lot size matters and as I understand our minimum lot size per subdivision ordinance is 50 feet wide and that leaves out

the small cottage lots that can go in a 30-foot wide lot and that gets to being strategic.

We've got to open up the number of lot types so that we can still have detached products but that they get more on a square mile than we do now.

I would second that.

It sounds like we have.

That sounds very smart.

But we don't want to wait until we've done that.

We don't want to wait on this.

We don't have that.

Zoning recommendations to allow us inside the city.

Wonderful.

Excellent.

I have one more question.

Sorry.

So just for clarification, how much the land lease will be for the homeowner?

Right.

So the land is basically leased.

And it's a really nominal fee, is it not?

$25 a month, which is added.

So the homeowner will pay that to the land trust.

So when the homeowner sells the house, they are simply selling the structure itself, not the land.

And that's what helps keep it affordable so you're not factoring in.

I mean, if the land values go up because the neighborhood is developing and everybody wants to move in there, that house itself will

So, Mayor Signer, I do my best to be quick because I know we only have two minutes left.

And I don't want this point that I'm going to make to hold off this because I'm in support, but I think it's something that we need to think of as a community as we move forward.

Now, one of the ways in which individuals start to create wealth

and to build wealth is oftentimes what we've seen throughout history is people purchase homes and eventually they sell their homes.

They use the equity that was built to either save it or use the capital to do something else, invest it, so on and so forth.

Specifically for the communities in which Habitat and other entities such as Habitat are trying to empower, one of the ways for them to build that wealth is through selling their home.

However, if they can't have the full access to the pot because they don't own the land,

They're not going to be able to build the wealth in the traditional sense in which others have before.

So again, I'm not going to hold this up, but we need to think about that as a whole.

As we talk about moving people out of poverty, as we talk about building a minority middle class, these are some of the things in which stop people from getting there.

And I don't think there's any ill intent, but it's something that oftentimes goes unsaid.

And we have to think about that.

It's not just about us building affordable housing structures to put people in where they're essentially paying an affordable rent.

We want to be able to build a new class of people and have upper mobility.

Let me push back a little bit on that if I may because I understand your concern and I think that we are looking at equity and that you know to a certain amount limits that equity for a family and that's really important to acknowledge.

But I think what it also does is it makes getting that equity accessible for a lot more people.

The land trust is a model that's been used around the world and

to make possible not only the ability to buy a house and to establish equity, but also to maintain that affordability over time.

Because land prices can really shoot up in speculation, whereas housing prices aren't going to shoot up in the same way.

So they may be able to sell their house for more, but they're not going to be paying higher taxes every year because of the sales of houses around them.

I'm going to try to, we just finished our regular time and we were, the purpose of this is really to ask questions of our presenters so that it's good to have debate, but it's also not, we're really trying to be asked questions.

So we're finished with our regular time.

If we want to keep on going and ask questions.

Go off on what Kristin said and push back a little on what Wes said about the same thing.

Because right now we are in a land boom.

And if the owner of the house does not own the land, they don't pay the real estate on the land.

That's correct?

Okay.

Mine went up, mine doubled.

My value of my land doubled, which means my real estate for that part, that tax doubled.

So that would help if somebody just had to pay the appreciation on the structure.

and not on the increase in the real estate.

So it's like a soup, you just have to figure out, not just the parts of the deal, but the timing of the deal as well.

So who pays the taxes though?

The house, the people.

On the land?

The president of the board just whispered in my ear that's what they pay.

So again as we look at

So they are building equity.

They build equity in the...

They have less debt because they're not buying it.

Not on the property, not on the land underneath.

But the property, can they resell the...

They cannot resell.

So how do they have equity?

They can resell the house.

Well, I think if you look at your tax records, you might see some different numbers.

I think your land is a little bit less than your houses.

Let's take a look at your tax records.

So, you know, a $100,000 lot or a $60,000 lot can have a $300,000 house on top of it.

So your equity is in the $300,000, not the $60,000.

I'm going to try to, if everybody who has a question could go through me first, just to be, please.

Is there anything further over here?

No, sir.

That I can't answer for you.

We need to get that answered.

You can look at the tax records to see, but as I'm being told, it's the total.

Here comes the board chair.

Thank you for saying that.

I'm Frazier Bell, chair of the board of the Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust.

Right now the city assesses the land as it would any other piece of land.

We would love to have that changed.

That would make it less.

We're a non-profit.

We don't have income as such.

So for us to pay taxes would be very difficult.

But what it does do is these properties, you've got to understand, if we're talking, and I'll use a simple example, if you've got a $300,000 house and $100,000 worth of land, they're buying a $300,000 house for $200,000.

There are mortgages on that.

So their savings while they're in that house

They can save, and we actually have one owner that's doing this.

Now, they may not be able to, but this is allowing someone to get into a house.

Now, it's not for everybody.

That's great.

But the thing is the way in which you were initially describing it made it seem as if that's the way across the board.

And you and I know that that's essentially an anomaly.

Mr. Mayor, because we are out of time, I'd like to make a motion that because this does indeed get at one of the main goals of the housing advisory fund or the housing of affordable housing fund, which is to leverage money.

So, you know, we do

We've done some things where we actually give the full amount for something to happen, and in this case, it's being leveraged at least four to one, from what I can tell, the cost of labor and of the habitat contribution to produce houses that poor people will be able to afford in our community with incomes of less than 80% of area median income.

We're waiting for a second.

Okay, now we can discuss and have questions.

We're under, we need more time because we, so I'm gonna put another five minutes on the clock at least, because if anybody wants to make, we have our rules.

So there's three minutes for, you don't probably feel the need to make a presentation about your motion.

Okay, so if anybody wants to ask a question, you have three minutes.

Or a statement to Ms. Galvin.

So the motion is on the floor.

Okay, so the equity that they would be gathering

to my way of thinking would be used to pay the increase in the real estate taxes.

This is affordable housing.

This is not housing for, you know, professionals.

We're trying to get people in these houses that are right up against it.

And they're thrilled to get in these houses.

I understand that.

So when they get an increase in the real estate tax,

on land that they do not own.

That would be on top of the land of the house that they do own.

No, I know.

Because at some point you can sell that land.

Right.

Well, no.

In perpetuity.

Yeah, literally 110.

So again, one of the things that's troubling for me with this is while it may not be as egregious, it sounds to a certain extent like predatory lending.

And here's the reason why.

No, some individuals, so now some people are going to say, oh, you're just making a huge kind of assumption there.

But here's the reason why.

Why you are providing someone with the service and you have well intentions, in just my personal opinion, how an individual can have

An entity, their home, not on the land.

If they choose to sell the home, they don't get the full value.

And then when someone else, if they qualify for the home, it starts all over.

They're not paying the taxes.

You guys are paying the property taxes?

No, we're not paying the property taxes.

Excuse me, the owner of the home is paying the property taxes.

The way it's structured, when they sell it, they get

25% of the gross equity that's built up in the house plus any paid-in equity that they get.

So they're paying on the mortgage, so they're paying down their equity.

They get that.

That way, when the house is resold,

It's not being sold at market value.

It's being sold at basically 75% less than what the market value would, well not that, take that back.

Using my example before, if we had the house for $300,000 and it went up $100,000 they would get their $25,000 of that equity appreciation.

So the house would basically sell for about

225,000.

Right.

And that keeps it affordable.

And talking about the taxes, unfortunately there's something called, you know, everything goes unvalued.

Cost of insurance goes up.

I don't know, my home is insurance all the way up.

My taxes went up.

There's really, unless the city were to figure out a way to help

I was going to suggest that could we table this until another time at which point we can get more clarification on these questions about what can we do to bring the assessment down and control the assessment and we do have a rebate program for low-income homeowners already.

I think we've had so many delays on other kinds of affordable housing in our community.

Well that makes a big difference for me that this can be coupled with our rebate for low-income housing.

Let's call the question on the first motion, which has been seconded.

We've had a lot of discussion on it.

See if there are three votes to move it.

I can pull it, my motion, to delay.

Well, the motion is, we have a motion that has been seconded.

Okay, so I want to make sure that my... That would come later.

We're now ready to vote on Ms. Szakos's motion.

Is there any other

I haven't spoken yet.

I'll speak very quickly.

I'll say I think that this shows why housing in Charlottesville is so complicated because in a very scarce 10 square mile city, these parcels are more expensive than we would like.

So you have to do complicated rigging to try and get the cost of the monthly down and

It sounds better than renting, but not as good as owning, which I agree Mr. Bellamy is extremely well taken.

That is the ideal.

You have full equity, but it's at least not renting.

So you allow somebody to live here for build up a little bit of equity.

But that's why I would vote for this.

I just want to clarify something for you.

Can you introduce yourself?

Good evening.

My name is Alex.

I'm the NDS director.

I just want to clarify.

The CLT, Community Land Trust Program, it's not in any way or any fashion related to predatory lending.

It was originally created actually by African American community, I believe it was in Albany, Georgia, something like that.

Originally to help them to be able to own their own homes, that was how it was originally created.

And there are several ways you can become a homeowner.

And this is just one of several tools you can use for affordable housing.

I've been involved in CLT in the past in North Idaho.

It's another way of helping low-income households to become homeowners.

So I think there are several communities that are using it as a tool or a part of their portfolio.

to address affordable housing.

So I think it's a good program and actually in terms of leveraging based on what the city is putting in and what the community land trust is going to put in, I think the city will come out much, much ahead of the game in terms of what we are putting in and what we are getting back.

Well, that's collective ownership and this is also some form of collective ownership.

Okay, I would like to vote on Ms. Szakos' motion and if it doesn't pass then we'll have some further, there will be another.

So, all in favor of the motion as seconded.

Thank you Mr. Mayor.

Mr. Mayor and members of council, this is an ordinance amendment to city code section 2-40 which is presented for a first reading tonight.

That section establishes the current salaries of the members of city council which are $14,000 for each member other than the mayor and $16,000 per year for the mayor.

The proposed amendment would change those amounts to

$20,000 for the mayor and $18,000 for the remaining members of council.

As noted in the agenda memo, this is subject to some pretty strict enabling legislation.

This proposed salary increase would not take effect until July 1, 2018.

State law says that increases in the salary of a member of council cannot take effect

until July 1st after the next regularly scheduled general election of council members, which, as you know, is in November of this year.

So the salary increase would take effect in July of next year, 2018.

What that means in practical terms is that it will be a full 10 years since the salaries of council members have changed.

Thank you.

So are there any questions for Mr. Brown?

Well, let me, so you can, so the public can understand a little better, Mr. Brown, what is the current salary for a counselor?

It's set forth in the city code since July 1st, 2018, the annual salary for members... 2008, excuse me.

Since July 1st, 2008, the annual salary for members of council has been $14,000.

And that's minimum wage.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's not tied to any specific number of hours.

It is an annual salary.

And again, the cap, the maximum, is established by state law.

And this would move council to the maximum established by state law.

It's not tied to any particular hourly rate, nor is it tied to any particular number of hours.

If it were to be tied to that, I didn't do the math.

Could you give me a ballpark figure?

I doubt you're making a living wage.

It's my personal experience.

I suspect the number of hours varies from week to week and varies from counselor to counselor, but I think these are generally viewed as

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay, discussion.

I guess because I initiated the discussion and it was something that came up in an email exchange with Mr. Fenwick had brought it up to bring it before council and I think it is an important discussion to have because when we've all tallied up our hours it is a 40 hour week and all of us are serving anywhere from five to seven other additional committee work and commission work

And I think when you put it that way at the regular council of salary at $14,000, it does come out to be about $6 and some change per hour.

The change would make it to something like $8 and some change.

And when you think about it, I've experienced in the last six years, periods when various circumstances have changed and I had become the sole breadwinner for my family with two children in college.

And it really is impossible to be a sole breadwinner on this salary.

and so what this struck me as is saying that this job up here is being quite restricted to people that either they must have a professional degree and be able to have the flexibility and the hours to call their own hours they either that or have to have a spouse with a very good income they may have to also be someone who's on a retirement that gets a really good pension it also suggests that they have to have paid off their mortgage

They can't have a mortgage.

So that kind of a limitation on the salary for what is a full-time job is making it impossible for us to be, quite frankly, as diverse as this community wants us to be.

And this is a minor step in a direction.

I think in addition to increasing salary, there needs to be consideration of, well, why can't we consider additional staff support to do policy analysis, since we're responsible for policy?

We have to do our own research for everything we put forth.

No one is doing our research for us.

If we're lucky, we can get an intern from UVA.

and that actually, as a student, that often means that we have to do additional supervision for the students.

It's not something that you can rely on as a professional.

So when you think about the other way that we could make it so this isn't a full-time job, perhaps as we move forward with getting a work plan that's based on our strategic plan and council will not have to be tracking

initiatives and reports, and they start coming automatically, that too could reduce the workload.

So three different ways of getting this to be a manageable job for people that have responsibilities of raising a family, maintaining a home, there is the need to increase the salary rate, the need to increase staff support, and then there's the need to increase the efficiencies in the way

Council gets its information.

Thank you.

I do support this and plan to vote for it, although I won't get it.

I'm not sure that I really believe that council should be a full-time occupation for any of us, because I think that it's not for all of us.

And I think that the fact, one of the things that, you know, and this happens in the Congress as well, that our founders sort of envisioned was that people would still be very engaged in their own lives as well as doing this.

So I think if it became, you know, there are places in California where they get paid $120,000

to be on city council.

And people fight for those positions.

And you end up with people staying in council for 40 years because that's their salary and they can't afford to leave.

So I really don't believe that making it a full time position is a good thing.

But I do think that adding, you know, going up to the recommended maximum for the state of Virginia is something that is reasonable.

It's been 10 years.

So that makes it about a 2 percent increase per year, which is about what we try to give staff.

I will just add that I think that it would be helpful by the second reading to have some information on comparable jurisdictions with comparable workloads.

If there would be interest in having that from my colleagues, I think that it would be helpful.

Yeah, that wouldn't hurt.

So there's been a motion and a second.

And I would just like to add, if I may, in response to Ms. Szakos, that this ideally is not a full-time job, but it does demand an awful lot of time.

It does.

I don't know how it's not.

That's true.

When you do the data, we're essentially getting paid probably $3 or $4 an hour to the full time commitments.

And we talk about the point in regards to us trying to have more diversity or even just different people from different backgrounds of different ideologies on council.

You really can't do this unless you're able to take care of your family.

or in another way.

How can, I mean, if we're just, to lay an example, if someone was to work, and this is no disrespect to people who may work at like a convenience store or a food line or somewhere where they pay $9 an hour, how could they do that job and do this job and take care of your family?

We talk so much about we want single mothers and people of that nature to be engaged in the community process or we want them to run for these offices or we say, why have we only had

Eight people of color in our history serve on city council.

When you look at the wage disparity in this community and you look at where we are now, even when we pay people, this essentially is a job for, I mean, call it what you may, but some would say this is a job for the elite, those who can take care of themselves.

And I hate the fact that it is that way.

OK, let's take a break.

So let's go back.

We've earned ourselves two extra minutes.

Everybody could be back in here at 9.05.

That would be great.

All right, we're gonna go back into session.

All right, we have a welcoming city update here.

It's at 10 minutes, but at the top of this I'm just gonna, these were a little too short, I think a couple of them, so I'm just gonna say that this will be 15 and hopefully go a little shorter.

So this is a

Maurice Jones will be presenting, our city manager.

And Charlene Green, our manager of the Office of Human Rights.

Then we'll be having clarifying questions, then a motion.

Mr. Mayor, before we have the presentation, may I ask a quick favor of the body?

So looking at this, it feels like it's sort of a mash-up of things.

And so I would like us to consider actually this in three pieces, and I think the presentation will be the same, but one as an actual update of the process that we've had

for Welcoming Cities, one on the resolution minus the final paragraph and then separate motion and consideration of a ten thousand dollar grant to Legal Aid.

For everybody's clarification, three items will be doing and I apologize, I should have clarified that.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and City Council.

As you know, our nation's been engaged in ongoing debate

over the future of immigration and this contentious issue has created an atmosphere of fear within our immigrant population here in the Charlottesville area.

Recent immigration rates throughout the nation which we will publicize have heightened the anxiety for documented and undocumented

immigrants alike leading to rumors concerning federal, state, and local law enforcement.

The City Council has on several occasions in recent history publicly supported our community being a welcoming city for all.

The most recent proclamation approved on October 5th of 2015 derided the corrosive nature of our national discourse on immigration and proclaimed

Charlottesville is a place that strives to welcome all people.

The city is also working with Welcoming America to officially become a welcoming city.

The city is developing a commitment letter to finalize that agreement and once we have joined that cohort, we will join a number of cities and counties around the country that have pledged to become more welcoming.

Ms. Sarah Brazelton has been working on that for us to make that happen and we are in the process of finalizing that.

Over the course of the last six months, representatives from the city have engaged with immigrants in our community and the organizations that provide support to them.

Officials have tried to allay any fears that people have had concerning the request of information on legal status of immigrants and federal immigration detainers.

The city is also developing an informational brochure that outlines its immigration related procedures while also offering resources for local immigrants.

The brochure will be made available on the city's website in city buildings and offered through our non-profit partners as well.

The city council this evening is being asked to vote on a new welcoming city resolution

that addresses the concerns raised by residents of our community.

And additionally, as the mayor and Councilor Szakos mentioned a few minutes ago, there's also been a request for funding by the Legal Aid Justice Center to help provide advice to local immigrants on their legal rights.

That is to the tune of $10,000.

That would come from the City Council Strategic Initiatives Fund if Council decides to move forward with that and prove that this evening.

We have any questions and then a motion.

You did a great job, Mr. Jones.

Thank you.

So what we're going to do is we're going to

We have three things that we'd like to accomplish right now.

One is to, I guess all we really need to do is state and explain to the public the status of the welcoming city.

So we've done that.

And then the second thing is voting on this resolution.

And the third thing will be voting on a separate allocation, which Ms. Szakos will do.

Ms. Galvin, I'm happy to second it without the final paragraph, if we were going to break that off into a separate motion.

So the motion is for the drafted resolution without the last paragraph.

Or the word and before it.

Perfect.

Okay, so now let's make questions on that motion.

Well, anyone?

Okay, well, so the capital of the resistance, and I have three minutes, Ms. Breslin.

So the capital of the resistance rally was, a press conference was mentioned earlier, and the single

The biggest policy initiative that came out of that, that I made during my remarks, was that we wanted to craft a policy and be advised on, our city manager and stakeholders, on what we could say about immigration issues in our community and what was our policy.

What we have here, I'm extremely proud of, a staff we're working on.

It represents a very nuanced, very principle-based and substantive approach to

explain where we are as a community, what we believe in as a city council, and actually do something with a partner, an important partner, which is Legal Aid Justice Center.

The plan for what they're gonna do with this $10,000 is extremely robust.

They're gonna spend it on three major activities, Know Your Rights presentations, emergency preparedness workshops, and direct legal representation

of 10 to 12 individual immigrants statewide who have been detained.

So we are working with a strong partner to actually move the ball and

Be a vigorous advocate and educator on these really important issues.

And the resolution itself is very strong about who we are, who we want to be, the fact that we have limited resources, that we see our mission as public safety and enforcing state and local law.

And it's been crafted with very strong input from our Commonwealth's Attorney, from our Chief of Police, from immigrant representation groups,

from City Manager's Office, Office of Human Rights, and we're putting out this important brochure and resource, which our friends in Albemarle County also have done.

So I think this really is an excellent effort, and for me, there's been a couple of just extremely powerful anecdotes.

We did a listening session with a lot of stakeholders among the Latino community.

In a very short time, 150 people came to the Church, to Covenant Church.

to hear what the fact was in this community and the difference between the rumors and the facts was staggering and heartbreaking.

What people were feeling and fearing and their kids who got up and talked to us.

They need this kind of reassurance.

They need to know where we are as a policy making body and where our police is and where our prosecutors are and where the jail is and where the churches are.

So it is important.

I did a similar event at the mosque where

three dozen political refugees who were here were equally terrified about where the community was on Muslim and immigrant and refugee issues, and I believe that this will also provide them with the reassurance that they need from this community where they are living, where they've moved, where they're raising their families, and where they came to flee tyranny.

Okay, we'll call the question.

Sure, this is on the resolution itself.

Is there, okay, all in favor?

So I would like to make a second motion.

Be it resolved that City Council approves an allocation of $10,000 to be provided to our nonprofit partner Legal Aid to support programs for providing legal services to immigrants in our community.

I did have one, so that is the motion.

I did have one question, though, about the proposal

It's for three things.

Know your rights information for emergency preparedness workshops and for legal representation.

In the language that was presented to us, it says legal representation for people statewide.

pretty firm that within our community means that legal representation for Charlottesville residents.

I would urge Legal Aid to use our grant as kind of leverage and inspiration to go to the county and to other places in Virginia to request their support for people in other areas.

But I suspect that this is, and if some of the staff research and stuff that goes into that stuff can be used for other

OK, so now we have a second.

So discussion further on this.

I would just like to, just so the public doesn't miss this, and so that anybody out there who wants to attack this, and this goes back to the resolution, I just want to read this so it's absolutely clear.

This goes from the resolution, so we're sort of bridging the two topics.

be it further resolved that whereas public safety is a paramount mission of local government, that we defer to the considered judgment of our law enforcement and public safety professionals that the limited and welcoming approach to immigration questions they currently employ, which emphasizes local discretion and the maintenance of trust between residents and our public safety professionals, is our best option for maintaining security in our local community.

And what that means is that if you adopt some of these policies which

Repel people from calling the police, say, if there's a domestic violence situation, if they're afraid to call the police because of this other fear-mongering or demagoguery that's out there, that hurts the security and the safety of our community.

So this is the wisdom that we've received from our police, from our jail, from our prosecutor, the people that we trust to keep our community safe.

It does.

Okay, ready for a vote?

All in favor?

And that carries five to zero.

Thank you very much.

Okay, moving on now to item number seven, report removal of the Robert E. Lee statue.

20 minutes allocated to this.

It could go longer.

In May of last year, the City Council created the Ad Hoc Commission, Blue Ribbon Commission on Race, Memorials and Public Spaces to address the questions and concerns brought before the Council regarding the statues of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson.

There were 11 Commission members who were presented.

are appointed after an application process to that commission.

They were charged with providing council with options for telling the full story of Charlottesville's history of race relations and for changing the city's narrative through our public spaces.

A final report was presented to council on December 19th of last year and council reviewed the commission's recommendations at its January 17th meeting of this year.

On February 6th, the city council voted 3 to 2 to remove the Lee statue from Lee Park

but to keep the Jackson statue in its current location.

In separate motions, the council voted unanimously to rename both Lee and Jackson Park and to move forward with developing a request for proposal, an RFP, for professional design services to create a master plan for the historic North Downtown and Court Square districts.

Staff is developing the RFP.

I think it was mentioned earlier by Councilor Galvin for the design services with the goal of posting it in late May or early June.

Council directed staff to return within 60 days to provide options for moving forward with removal of the statue, at least statue and renaming of the parks.

representing those options for your consideration this evening.

First I'll cover the removal of the Lee statue.

There are several options for the City Council to consider.

One would be an auction during which the City Council could declare the statue to be surplus property and then the staff would sell the statue at an auction to any purchaser willing to pay for it and would require the purchaser to bear the cost of removing it from city property within a specified period of time after the purchase.

The purpose of a surplus auction is to maximize the value for the city and also to have the property disposed of after auctioning it off at the purchaser's sole discretion.

The city could also advertise that it's interested in selling the statute to an individual or entity through a bid process.

The bid would establish the conditions for the proposals to meet.

and the city can also reject proposals that do not meet those requirements.

This alternative could take place on a schedule determined by the city council and staff and the initial timing decision would be made on how and for what period of time it would take to get the proposals back.

Council would wish to advertise its interest in receiving those offers to purchase through the RFP process

We would post that, receive the proposals, review those proposals, and then present a recommendation to city council for your consideration.

A donation is another option for us to consider.

The city could donate to a government entity within the U.S., local, state, or federal, or we could donate it to a non-profit entity.

The city would have to negotiate with that entity over who would be responsible for the costs associated with removing the statue from the park and moving it to its new location.

One of the Blue Ribbon Commission's recommendations was to move the statute from its current location to a new space in McIntire Park.

The City Council back in February did not include this option in the resolution that it passed.

However, staff believes that it is important to explain what procurement steps would need to be taken in order to move the statute within the city limits.

and what that means exactly is that we would have to hire a contractor to do that for us and we'd have to go through an RFP process because we don't believe that our employees have the capacity to do that, to move a statue like that, keep it without any sort of damage and move it to a new place within the city.

We believe it would make more sense to have a contractor do that.

So those are the options to consider for disposition of this statue.

So the city does have a naming policy for its parks and recreation facilities.

It was in the memo, attached to the memo for consideration tonight.

Under normal circumstances, it is recommended that the parks be named in accordance with geographical, historical, or ecological features that are indigenous to the park site or to the immediate vicinity of the site.

or be named for an individual who has made a significant gift of land or significant contributions to our park system or to our city.

After deliberation, the final action on naming of a new park or facility rests with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.

But because of the uniqueness of this situation, staff believes that there should be extensive community outreach associated with this process and ultimately the decision on the renaming of the park should rest with the City Council.

So the staff proposes establishing several ways for the city

to solicit input on names for consideration.

We would set up an email, a special email that would collect proposed names.

We would put an opportunity in the water bills inserts to allow people to submit suggestions.

They would put those back into the water bills and they'd send in their bills.

We would conduct an online survey.

We would use social media to collect possible names for consideration.

And then once all of that is done, within a period of about 45 days, the names would be collected, the staff would work with the Parks and Rec Advisory Board to narrow those suggestions down to five.

to 10 names for further consideration for each of the parks and at that point the council could begin deliberations of the final submissions or offer another round of polling based on those names and then ultimately would come back to city council for the final decision on the names for both parks.

Sure.

I was under the impression that the motion that about

what's now Jackson Park was included as part of the reconceptualization and the actual motion for the park name change was the Lee Park.

As I recall, if I may add, the resolution that did include the Jackson Park, that

And I'm inclined to wait on the Jackson Park conceptual thing together, but I have brought a motion which I have

distributed to council that specifically addresses the Robert E. Lee statute and the name of Lee Park.

And if anybody wants to add Jackson Park to that, or if we can, in our discussion, it might be a little flexible.

And I've tried to write it in a way that is, that can respond to the needs of our conversation with amendments.

So there are a couple of decision spots.

And may I ask if you would entertain a modification to your motion?

before I make it?

I don't know.

OK.

I would be inclined to do them together, but we can see where we are as a council.

But they were two separate motions.

I'll also say it's a little— And they were two separate motions.

As a matter of procedure, it is—

This actually happened the last time.

We should, when it's a resolution containing policy, which this does, this was just listed on our agenda as a resolution, not as a, I mean not even as a report.

So all we're doing now is receiving a report.

Usually you'd have some chance for public engagement on a resolution.

I will say that there is nothing in the proposed motion that I have brought.

It's a resolution, not an ordinance, that is not in our report from staff.

So it doesn't shake up and do different things than that.

Well how about, I'd actually be interested, are there three folks who would like to do this tonight even though it wasn't, even though all we're supposed to be doing is a report?

And I'm anticipating there is, I just want to have that extra step.

Yes, I would like to.

So I'll just read out the motion.

Whereas City Council voted on February 6, 2017 to remove the statue of Robert E. Lee from the park currently known as Lee Park and to change the name of the park, and whereas City Council instructed staff to analyze options to carry out this decision and to present them within 60 days to City Council, which they have done,

and I am picking the one that I have in polling my fellow Councillors have believed will be the one we do so it is the language we may change it as we go along but whereas Council has considered this report and decided that a request for proposals is the option that it prefers

Therefore, be it resolved that the City of Charlottesville will issue a request for bids for sale of the statue and will advertise this RFB request for bids widely, including to organizations responsible for sites with historic or academic connections to Robert E. Lee or the Civil War with the following criteria for awards.

The statue will not be displayed to express support for a particular ideology.

The successful applicant will pay for and or take responsibility for removal and transportation.

The removal and transportation will be carried out in a manner that preserves the integrity of the sculpture.

The display of the statue will preferably be in an educational, historic, or artistic context.

The purchaser will repair any damage to the park incurred as a result of the removal.

Some preference will be given to proposals that include a plan for maintenance of the state's National Register of Historical Places listing.

Be it further resolved that if no responsive proposals are received, council may consider donation of the statue to an appropriate venue.

and this is the part that may be taken apart.

And be it further resolved that the city will hold a contest to select a new name for the park according to the following procedures.

And I've put in dates here, which I'm very non-committed to, but I'm just kind of as early as possible in my dates.

Announcement of the contest will be made immediately and widely disseminated.

Entries will be received through, and I put May 10th.

The top five appropriate suggestions will be submitted to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board

for consideration at their May 17th meeting, and they will make a recommendation to council to include no more than three choices.

Council will select a new name at its, in this case, June 5th meeting, and a drawing for a prize will be taken from among the contestants who made the winning suggestion.

And I don't know if we need it in the motion or not, but I think that the suggestions that Mr. Jones made about how to do that through various venues is a great one.

And I put that in defining the word appropriate above, names that are offensive or that espouse neo-confederate positions will not be considered.

I don't think that I've, does a friendly, that doesn't need to be seconded, that's just a request for a friendly amendment, or a request for an amendment.

Well I have no problem with doing it separately, I just want to make sure that

that we have it all in one place, that it's here.

If we want to take two votes, especially if we're committed to taking them tonight, I'm fine with that.

It's fine.

Okay, so we have two separate motions now.

And so I get five minutes, of which I would like to take two and cede my other three to Mr. Fenwick.

And I'm not going to go into great detail.

I've addressed this issue for many, many times and why I support the moving of the Robert E. Lee statue.

and I share the concern that we've heard in public that in a straight auction, which is one of the options, the ultimate fate of the statute could be very problematic and I don't support that route.

The request for bids option offers the potential financial benefits of an auction with the ability to have more control over its eventual location and use.

I would, for instance, want to include, or I do want to include the preference that it be used for historical, artistic, or educational purposes and not for glorification of the Confederate cause.

The donation option could also give us that ability, but I'm hoping that with a request for bids we will be able to recoup the costs of the moving of the statue.

I'm not expecting to make a great profit off of it, or any.

The historical listing is less of an issue for me, which some people have expressed a great deal of concern about.

I agree that delisting should never be taken lightly.

I believe this is one time when justice trumps historical preservation.

And just like we would agree to allow the tearing down of an historical home that's posing a danger to the neighborhood, I believe we should now allow the removal of a statue whose message is offensive and negative toward the principle that our community holds dear and that has a negative impact on our efforts to make all people feel welcome and valued here.

I'll pick it up.

A few words about the statue issue.

First, it's nice to welcome to our council meetings the Confederate flaggers, but I have to say I'm puzzled.

First, why do they feel the need to come armed with pistols and machetes to our city that celebrates free speech?

I can assure you we will not intimidate or bully them just because they say what's on their mind.

And second, for a group that claims to honor a man for his personal qualities, they mock the legacy of Robert E. Lee,

by their actions.

I would not characterize this community discussion as divisive except for our Confederate flagger friends.

I would describe it as informative and educational.

Since repetition is the heart and soul of education, it is important to bear in mind and to repeat over and over and over again what we have learned.

There is now no imminent action planned for the statute because of the legal filings.

and the duration and outcome of the legal action is unknowable.

At present, there are three primary complaints about relocating the statute.

A few people who have not been paying attention are saying we want to destroy the statute.

No, the word used in the historical record is remove.

You can look it up.

If the courts rule that moving the statute is legal, the statute will merely be in another place.

The second is this will cost taxpayer money to defend a lawsuit and additional taxpayer money to move it.

No again.

The city of Charlottesville has an insurance policy with the Virginia Municipal League to defend litigation the city finds itself in.

As with many insurance claims, the initial response from VML is that they will not cover this cost.

But that opinion will be appealed.

and there are Charlottesvilleans who have offered to underwrite moving expenses if necessary.