City Council Special Meeting - Interviews   6/24/2021

Ms.

Councillor Hill?

Here.

We have currently on your agenda two of second readings for the conscious capitalist grant applications, the mid-cycle or out-of-cycle requests that were made.

These would be the final approvals so that we could appropriate this money for the one non-profit but for two programs.

But we're also asking you to add to the agenda, which would take a unanimous vote from Council, the introduction and first reading of a resolution to appropriate funds that would be used for the removal, storage, and covering of up to the three statues that we have within the city.

As we're nearing in on the 30-day timeline that we had before any action could be taken, you had already approved that resolution, but now for action to take place, we would require funding.

This would give the city manager the authority to expend funds on whatever is chosen for these items.

Just as a reminder, this would just be the first reading and so it would have to come back to you.

Also, should a consideration be made to transfer ownership of any of these statues, that too would have to come back to you for official votes.

That's something that we could not do administratively.

But this funding could be used to either cover, relocate, or store any or all of the three statues.

Ms.

Mayor Walker.

Yes.

Last Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Councillor Hill?

Yes.

And I wanted to respond to

question Ms.

McGill, I believe, raised about if we can't use our being able to come back at a later date,

I will start by saying we did, Mr. Boyles did some research and it appears that both of these, based on the research and some other examples he's found, would potentially be eligible.

We have to finalize that look at that guidance, but he did find other examples where programs such as this have been

funded through our, we would have to look at the, you know, again, the devil's always in the details, but we'd have to have to look at that.

So it does appear that that would be available.

It would be technically against the policy that you have provided to give $50,000 in one fiscal year and then come back technically in another fiscal year and give another $50,000.

But we plan to bring that, and we will bring that policy either in a

first meeting in August, second meeting in July for your consideration for all the changes that we've been discussing.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ryan.

Yes.

So we'll do them one at a time.

I move we adopt a resolution appropriating funds for the Conscious Capitalist Foundation's Peace in the Streets program at $50,000.

Ms.

Thomas?

Mayor Walker?

Yes.

Councilor Hill yes Councilor Payne yes Councilor Smith yes okay that carries five to zero I move that we adopt a resolution appropriating funding for the Conscious Capitalist Foundation's Support of Intensive Youth Mentoring Program Mentoring and Support Program for $50,000 second Ms.

Mayor Walker?

Yes.

Councillor Hill?

Yes.

That carries five to zero.

Happy interviewing Ryan.

Do we have to have the first reading now?

And if you'd like, I can read that if you

since I've had a chance to look over it in a little bit more detail.

Just for first reading is a resolution appropriating funding of $1 million for the cost of removal, storage, and our covering of the statues and sculptures of Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and the statue and sculpture of Sacagawea Lewis and Clark.

Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the sum of $1 million from the Capital Improvement Program Contingency Fund is hereby designated to be available for expenditure at the discretion of the City Manager for costs associated with the removal, storage, and or covering of the statues, sculptures of Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson located in City Public Parks

is authorized by resolution of City Council dated June 7, 2021, and for cost associated with the removal and our storage, if necessary, of the statue and sculpture of Sacagawea, Lewis and Clark, located at the intersection of West Main Street and Ridge Street.

The expenditures of $1 million would come from Fund 126, account number 5906,

My first question is, I understand that a prior council, perhaps even back in 2017 or so, had set aside up to a million dollars to be used for removing Lee and Jackson and also for any excess to be put toward whatever may come thereafter.

I can sort of help with this, and you can fill in if you'd like.

It is correct that back in 2017, you can see in those original council motions that a figure of a million dollars was referenced, but as you know, everything goes by individual fiscal year units, and because the lawsuit took so long to resolve and that sort of thing, there wasn't really

sort of in a place where the funds in each budget were both segregated and appropriated.

So what staff has done over time is made sure that those equivalent amount of monies have been accumulating in this capital improvement program fund location.

So now there are monies in the current fiscal year budget already

but they do need to be designated for this specific purpose.

So I think it's just the difference between making sure from one fiscal year to the next that this amount of funds is out there somewhere to be available but it hadn't been placed in its own special fund every single year to be appropriated in each fiscal year.

So that's why you need the action for the

But the specific question, I guess, that I had was my understanding was that the amount that is set aside or allocated or whatever verb we want to use for that million dollars accumulated, I don't know, was that the original

Council vote specified that the million dollars was for moving those two statues and and for providing something to go into those spaces once those statues had been removed.

Oh, that is correct.

Yes, there was a lengthy one of the there were several resolutions in 2017.

And the resolution that mentions the million dollar figure

Okay, and that there had

Right, based on what they

And we're adding to this, we're removing Lee, Jackson and Lewis, Clark and Sacagawea.

And as I recall, we have heard estimates that the cost to move Lewis and Clark and Sacagawea is in the neighborhood of $100,000 to $125,000.

I would say yes.

That is a close estimate based on some of the other information that we're now getting.

I think in 2017, there was not a good estimating tool for removing statues.

Now, five years later,

There have been a number of statues removed around the state, and we're getting better estimates.

I would still relay that we haven't moved forward on the request of statements that we have received on the Sacagawea, the statements of interest.

So as I recall, after we had that discussion six, eight months ago, however long ago it was, there

there was some suggestion that there might be some folks out there willing to basically take the Sacagawea Lewis and Clark statue for essentially no cost to the city.

Yes.

Okay.

We have been continuing that conversation with the parties.

That's all the questions I have for now.

I have a question.

I thought we put in 2020,

I thought we put a portion of our surplus towards statue removal as well.

My understanding, the only funds for removal of Sacagawea are included in the West Main project.

Yeah, so I think that first of all, if it turns out that money won't be needed in connection with one statue, it'll be available if needed for a different statue.

And so it's not a given that it would actually need to be expended.

And we're also just trying to make sure that

there's enough money everywhere, whether it's in, you know, I can't remember, and Chrissy wanted to be here this morning, but she had an appointment that precludes her being here.

So I can't really speak to whether there's actually been an appropriation associated with Sacagawea or whether, like in prior years, council is saying to everyone, make sure you have this money

somewhere for this purpose.

But when it comes time, when you get to the point where we are now, where the city manager needs to be able to make plans and represent to people that he has the authority to make those plans, there needs to be this type of formal appropriation to allow it to be spent.

unless Chip knows the answer on the West Main Street funds.

I just wanted to bring up that, I mean, it's kind of not about this resolution necessarily, but that if previous council put a million, said we want to earmark a million for this, I know that when we first started in the beginning of 2020 and voted on the surplus for that year, part of that went towards statute removal.

I wanna say around 400 to 500,000, as well as then I do remember call when we were talking about the West Main project, the statue was not part of that and staff asked us that regardless of what happened with the West Main project, regardless of what happened with VDOT monies, because VDOT would only pay for the statue to be moved

like a foot or two.

And we said, no, we want it removed.

And whether that got rolled into this, I just wanted to make sure that... So Chip and Chrissy can do the research about the Sacagawea statute.

And if there is a formal appropriation

for the current fiscal year that specifically relates to that statute, that money would be available on top of the money that's addressed in this resolution.

And so one way or another, rather than us trying to sort out all the different occasions that Council's talked about this in the last five years,

And Councillor McGill, I would just add that I think what's happening is those past directions from Council led to the CIP Contingency Fund

being built up to have that capacity.

And what's happening now is it's just being formally appropriated.

So it's not a second million dollars.

And Chris is listening in.

Yeah, I think that I think when you actually vote, we would do well to make it clear that I'm going to assume that let's just say this.

If your second reading doesn't happen in the new fiscal year, we will need to clarify that the appropriation is for that new fiscal year.

But if the second reading does happen after July 1, then

It could be very likely that we try to convene you because we may have this plus one other issue that would be a very quick meeting that we would want to address.

We're working on the school bus driver issue very, very quickly as well, which is very timely.

Trying our best to give you the break in July.

So my only question is the way that the appropriation is written.

It is specific to storage removal covering.

Is this broad enough that if there is money left over that it could go towards doing something else, even if it's

So I think I think we should my recommendation would be to leave the language as written and then part of what we need to do if council wants to embark on the sort of ambitious redesign of public spaces that was reflected in that 2017 resolution.

that's probably something as as the wording of your June 7th resolution reflected that's something that the city manager's office should really develop as a capital improvements project and develop numbers that are specific to that purpose and then you know if so, if there is money that's not spent for the purposes discussed in this resolution.

Thank you.

So for now, we don't have to do anything more.

This is our first reading.

I just know it's 9 o'clock and we have to start our other thing.

Pursuant to section 2.23712 of the Virginia Code, I hereby move that the City Council close this open meeting and convene within a closed meeting as authorized by Virginia Code section 2.23711A1 for discussion, consideration, and interviews of prospective candidates for appointment by City Council to various boards and commissions of the city government

including the Planning Commission.

Thomas?

Mayor Walker?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Mayor McGill?

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Mayor McGill?

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Mayor McGill?

Yes.

That's correct.

Sorry, I had an unstable connection, and then when I tried to go back in, it said it was ended, so Oh yeah, we thought you clicked off to go here, so No, sorry, no, I didn't Ready to read out?

No, we're waiting for Michael Oh, sorry I froze for a bit, and then it just went out

He was looking for the link.

Second.

Ms.

Vice Mayor McGill Yes.

Councilor Hill Yes.

Councilor Snow Yes.

And we are we don't have any other business correct here.

All right.

All right.

This meeting is adjourned.