City Council Meeting   12/20/2021

Okay.

Sure.

I move a city council member certified by recorded vote.

Ms.

Thomas?

Mayor Walker?

Yes.

Vice Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Councilor Hill?

Yes.

We'll have a moment of silence.

Thank you.

Mayor Walker?

Present.

Vice Mayor McGill?

Here.

Councillor Hill?

I'm here.

Mayor Walker?

Yes.

Vice Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Councillor Hill?

Yes.

Are there any announcements?

Mayor Walker, there's an announcement from Mr. Alexander.

The fourth annual Harambee family events calendar, the Charlottesville, Virginia Harambee family events is a calendar that highlights African American cultural activities in Charlottesville.

and the surrounding areas.

The calendar created and designed by author and award winner Mr. Alexan presents countless events from January 2022 through December 2022 and will be available on Monday, December 27th, 2021.

Harambee, Swahili all pull together cultural events objectives are to inspire and unify area citizens to communicate more effectively and create maintain a positive environment for change in civility.

The calendar also strive to strengthen family relationships and nurture cultural awareness, particularly among African Americans who have experienced a lack of inclusion in many area events.

The Harambee Family Events Calendar will be distributed throughout Central Virginia, schools, churches, businesses, clubs, organizations, and social media.

The calendar sponsors are Charlottesville Area Transit, CAT, Wegmans, Blue Ridge Graphics, Carter Meyers Automotive, Mahogany Management, and Vanieri's Tree Company.

Thank you.

Any other announcements?

Okay.

Next up, we have recognitions and proclamation.

I apologize.

Mayor Walker, Councillor Hill, I would like to thank you both for your service.

Mayor Walker, you ran on a platform of unmasking the illusion of being there for those who have not had a voice in many spaces.

I would like to thank you for being that voice for many others.

Additionally, I would like to thank you for jumping in with both feet and creating programs such as Home to Hope program, which have benefited our community members tremendously, many of whom would not have had the chances that this program has given them.

Thank you for your service to our community.

Councilor Hill,

Thank you for the time that you have spent in those last four years connecting people in our community for answering almost every email that has come through and for often keeping many of us on track when we start going sideways down sporadic paths and trying to figure out exactly where we're supposed to be or what we're supposed to be exactly doing in that time.

You have helped me and you have helped others in the community navigate local government.

Thank you both very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I just kind of had to believe that we're at this juncture.

The last four years have been uniquely challenging for Charlottesville.

This small city has carried a lot on its shoulders, and I believe these challenges have impacted the work that, you know, council and staff have been able to accomplish.

I acknowledge there's been missteps, and I've been a part of some of those and take ownership of that.

So all will weigh heavily on me, and there's much more I was hoping that we could have made strides on before the end of this council's term, and that I would have been that

had the opportunity to be a part of.

I have a lot of mixed emotions as I finish my term.

Reflecting back, there's so much about this work that has energized me, including engaging directly with our constituents, building relationships with city staff, in partnerships with our regional stakeholders, working together to address our problems and our priorities.

And there's so much work to be done, and I would love to be part of it in this capacity, but at the same time,

This has taken its toll in a way that I could never have predicted and I knew at the time that I made the decision that I was going to need to take a step back and reassess ways that I can be involved in the community that bring back that positive energy for me.

A mantra that I relied upon during this experience has to filter out the noise and focus on the signal and I think over the course of my term

I've gotten better at doing that, but believe that the noise has hindered us at times from the signal.

It's played out in both what the community perceives versus the reality of what we actually have achieved, which I think is a lot more than sometimes a perception, as well as the reality that we could have accomplished so much more if we had a more effective collaboration among ourselves as leaders and the community working with us more collaboratively that we serve.

When you look at how we've allocated our resources and the priorities we've placed on supporting initiatives that most directly impact the most vulnerable in our community, the leadership we've shown on issues that are being considered across the nation relative to what we do and do not want in our public spaces, develop a model for law enforcement oversight, the work that's been done to explore every tool at our disposal to try to make living in this community possible for people across incomes.

There has been a lot of positive and there are so many opportunities for progress moving forward and

I mostly just want to thank our city staff who have and continue to work tirelessly in the face of many challenges to deliver services to the community and achieve council's objectives.

I've been inspired by the resilience that I've seen day in and day out from so many in this organization and remain optimistic about the path ahead for our city.

This experience has forever changed me in the lens through which I not only see our community, but the broader world that I live in and I'm raising my children in.

I want to thank the citizens of Charlottesville for providing me this opportunity to grow and to serve.

I look forward to cheering on the next council and the city staff from the sidelines alongside of you, the citizens.

I wanted to share just some text from bell hooks

recently became an ancestor for those familiar with her work.

And there's a chapter in her book, Salvation,

Loving Justice that I wanted to share, and I've tried to think, write my thoughts down, and it's been very hard, but, and I wish we were doing this at the end of the meeting, but anyway.

She says in this chapter, progressive visionary leaders have always known that any action which liberates and renews oppressed and exploited Black people strengthens the nation as a whole.

Not only do these actions provide a model for ending racism, they provide strategies for the overall healing of America.

By focusing more on the personal flaws of leaders, both past and present, the same group, and she had talked about conservative members

of our population right before this, effectively deflects attention away from the wisdom teaching of these leaders, provided that they would enable us to care for the souls of Black folks and the nation as a whole.

Visionary leaders abound in our society.

Many of them are women.

Patriarchal thinking blocks recognition of the power of female wisdom and our words.

Contemporary Black women leaders know that we can only heal the crisis in our diverse Black communities by returning to a love ethic which stands in opposition to all forms of domination.

Before us, visionary Black thinkers, many of them women, have prepared a feast, one that can heal our soul.

It is no accident that just as visionary anti-sexist Black women are finding a voice and making that voice heard, the dominant culture renewed its focus on patriarchal masculinity, white supremacist capitalistic patriarchal leaders who benefit from the most disrespect and devaluation of Black female wisdom.

and she goes on to say that returning to love and a love ethic can provide every Black person with the strength to survive with dignity and passion no matter what their economic lot in life.

She talks about us being removed from the balance of addiction as a nation of physical abuse, emotional torture and the resources to heal our wounds are already at our disposal.

and then she goes on to talk about a redemptive love and that the individuals who can provide that redemptive love are already a part of our beloved community, referencing Dr. King.

and making the choice to love can heal our wounded spirits and our body politic.

It is the deepest revolution, the turning away from the world as we know it, towards the world we must make if we are able to be one with the planet, one healing, heart-giving, and sustaining life.

Love is our hope and our salvation.

So just in honor of

Bell Hooks wanted to share that.

It's actually been 1,450 days.

I've been keeping track for a long time, the number of days.

And I think you know or you think you know a thing.

And I am one of those people who have thought for a long time that I know a lot of things.

This time on council has definitely taught me that I know almost nothing.

And minus losing my grandmother in this process a year ago yesterday and the amount of dedication and time that this physician has taken, I probably wouldn't have

Well, any regrets, but I have some regrets there just with how I've spent time.

I think back to conversations on Holly's front porch about running when I would just laugh at her and dismiss her and go on to usually eat whatever sweet pastry we were consuming at the time and continue to talk.

knowing the exhaustion that she felt trying to serve this community and ultimately upon her passing, making the decision to honor her by running, not knowing what that

what would be the outcome of that, but just knowing that it had been something that she had asked.

I'm sure she asked a lot of people who she thought could do this job well, so I don't think I was the only person, or I know in the fact that I wasn't the only person

that she asked, but as I contemplated for a few months, I mean, up until I made the announcement that I was running, I was still contemplating it.

It was, you know, a commitment to her work and her vision.

for this community.

Holly used to say, it wasn't a joke, she was very serious, but she used to say we would get t-shirts made with our percentage of the population on it because of her concern that we would no longer exist here.

And based on current census numbers on Weldon Cooper and what was going on at the time, she was definitely on to something.

I had originally planned to announce re-election in March of this year and

and Holly's birthday is in March.

And I quickly came to the realization I was going to quit in December, but that's another story.

Stay on track.

This is why I should write stuff down.

But December of 2020.

But I quickly came to the realization that I

spent all of my time contemplating the last time based on Holly asking me a question and wanting to fulfill some of the things that were her desires for this community.

And it was all about honoring her.

It was never something that I thought.

would be a part of my life or that would work or that I desire to spend my time in this way.

So this year, as I was contemplating when I was already struggling quite a bit, it became really apparent that

it probably wasn't the best decision.

And I delayed it for months and ultimately everyone knows that the firing of the chief was what ultimately like just sealed it for me that it was probably a better space and time for me to do my work, whatever that work turns out to be.

With all that said, I have

learned so much during this time.

And I wouldn't minus, I would have preferred to spend time with one of my favorite people in the world more and family as a whole, I wouldn't give this time up.

I think that we are in

a space where we have to decide who we are gonna be as a community and how we're gonna lead or whether we're gonna lead through love or whether that call for normal,

status quo is going to be what influence our decisions.

As I've told the council multiple times, that making the decision and being honest with the community about where we are as a community is going to be essential for whoever comes next, whether it's council member, city manager, for this to be successful, the community is asking

like who we are and how we fit in this world.

And are we going to allow these systems that have been created and have been created off of pillaging communities, destroying people and off the labor of those enslaved?

Are we going to continue to let those foundations rule in modern day?

Those are never gonna be easy topics.

It's never gonna get easier than it has been the past four years.

And the only way it's easier if we ignore that call and we try to return to the state that we were previously in.

We talk often about the business of a city.

And as we can see that even in the turmoil that we are in,

what America usually hinges its success on is that capitalistic thinking.

And so in that, the city has maintained

the ratings that say that we are able to financially operate as a city successfully.

There is not trash all over our streets.

People are still moving here.

Businesses are still booming.

All of that stuff is still happening.

I think the business of governments has to be

an equal investment to the destruction of people, to the healing of those people.

And until we make that decision, there's going to be continue to be this fight about what moving forward looks like.

Charlottesville could very well become a city that almost all white

Wealthy and people would rave about that.

We're almost there.

And nothing as toxic as people think I've been over the past four years

Nothing has stopped people who are aligned with that vision from coming here, from opening business here, and from raising their families here.

And that means that for people who do not have that power, for people whose voices are not often heard, we're going to have to be very intentional about what it looks like

for them being here.

We can be a community where in 25, 30 years we put up plaques and say Black people used to be here.

We can put up plaques honoring the Black people who are now on the outskirts of the community or in other places.

Or we can be this very vibrant community where our people who have been disregarded in the past can actually have a chance to thrive here.

I make no apologies for fighting.

for us to understand that there are people who suffer every day.

And when I think about the fact that I come from, and I talk about the women who raised me all the time, but I come from women who are just the most compassionate people

They are everyone's favorite.

They are amazing women and what their struggle living in this community and surrounding counties have looked like.

My great grandmother was born in 1912 and in Louisa County, Virginia.

and there's a lot that I could go into her, but just amazing, beautiful person.

And their fight, while I am very vocal about what my fight is, my great-grandmother and my mother, what they tried to

do was instill, no matter what went out in the world, that we were loved and that there was joy to combat the world.

I am so fortunate because of that, because a lot of people, families want to display and show that love.

And because of what they have to do to survive every day,

it seems that that love is missing.

And a lot of those families end up in our social services and human services system.

And what is missing there is that just their inability to get through the torture that they are put through every day.

And a lot of people think that it's just your own actions that are leading you here.

And they don't look at the system that is treacherous that needs to be destroyed.

And so when people talk about the fact that we have been through in the past four years, the turnover, and some people have used some of the turnover that should have happened to their advantage when it was convenient.

And any video that you pull of me will show that consistency.

and how I made decisions, but creating an equitable community, destroying the system that upholds the white supremacist thought process, that upholds the status quo, that upholds the fabric that America was built on and that Charlottesville is a local model of,

is the work that's going to have to be done.

And anyone that thinks that we're going to be able to hold hands in a circle around a campfire and kumbayadas, they are not being realistic about what it's going to take to actually ensure an equitable society exists.

And so I hope that you all are about the business of continuing that work.

I hope that when the challenges that you will confront, that you confront them and that you don't just place blame on what has occurred the past four years and why it is difficult for you to do your work.

I hope as you come to the realization of moving past placing blame primarily on me that you understand the healing that is needed in this community and that your obligation, hopefully you understand your obligation to mend.

And it is all of our duties to

ensure that what happened in the past at some point you have to right the wrongs and that's where we're at as a community that's where we're at as a nation and we're either going to destroy ourselves or someone is going to take the plunge and figure it out.

So for those people who have supported me and

I appreciate your belief in me.

I appreciate the work that we've done together.

I don't know what continuing this work looks like, but I will tell you that I am more equipped than ever to continue the work that we've started.

And I hope that you all

Don't give up and that you're not discouraged and that you understand the importance of this mission and that an election cycle or being a member of one body, while this is very important and I don't want to downplay it, there is the community as a whole and the fight has to continue on figuring out what that looks like and what

and how to move it forward is going to be important for the community that we've all said we desire.

So thank you all from those who voted for me and have supported me along the way and even for those who supported me at one time and no longer supported me to those who never supported me.

I hope that we all have a common goal of making sure that everyone in this community

Mayor Walker, if I could, I just wanted to say briefly,

to both you and to Heather Hill.

I've learned a great deal from both of you over the last two years.

Some people may not know that you had gotten for the rest of us a copy of the book, Black Fatigue, which I read.

I also, when I saw the

coming through on a city credit card form that you had gotten a copy of the book, Black Butterfly.

I bought that book and read that too.

I've learned a lot in reading those things as well as just in conversations with you.

And I know that you probably regard me as a lousy pupil, but I have learned from you and I appreciate your service and I appreciate your

Likewise, just would thank both of you for your service and echo what others have said in terms of

I've never once doubted the sincerity in the commitment to justice and improving the community.

And those are things that you often cannot take for granted in politics by any means.

And I think over time myself and others will appreciate more how rare that is.

And I was just thinking this weekend about the

the policy legacy in terms of things that were considered not at all on the agenda and possible redevelopment of public housing, a friendship court, police civilian oversight, expansion, tax relief, so many things home to hope things that have a direct positive impact on people's lives.

And I just hope

in whatever role I am able to, I can help maintain and expand that work over the coming years.

And I know it hasn't been an easy two or four years for anyone, but I think there's so much that your advocacy and commitment to justice and real change has achieved.

I move that Council appoint the following to the boards and commissions.

The Board of Architectural Review, Sherry Lewis, Hunter Smith, Clayton Strange, and David Timmerman.

To the Historic Resources Committee, Richard Wilson.

To the Human Rights Commission, Mary Bauer, Wolfgang Kepley, Andy Orban, Linnell Van Schill.

to the Minority Business Commission, Aria Garland, to the Region 10 Community Services Board, Richard Stott, to the Sister Cities Commission, Alison Brown, Sylvia Neustron, and Vivian Wong, and Kimber Hockey, to the Social Services Advisory Board,

Connor Brew and Sherry Stewart.

Mayor Walker?

Yes.

Vice Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Councilor Hill?

Yes.

Next up, we have the consent agenda.

Ms.

Consent Agenda, one, minutes, November 15th, work session, two, resolution, appropriating funds from progressive and national general insurance companies for a loss associated with city of Charlottesville traffic assets, $17,448.47, second reading, three, resolution,

appropriating funds for the Virginia Department of Transportation bicycle and pedestrian safety program for bicycle and pedestrian improvements at Preston Avenue and Harris Street $245,725 second reading for resolution appropriating funds for the Virginia Community flood preparedness grant stormwater management model of Morris Creek watershed $307,000 second reading

Five, Resolution, Appropriating 2020 Local Emergency Management Performance Grant, $7,500, second reading.

Six, Resolution, Appropriating Funds for the COVID Homelessness Emergency Response Program Community Development Block Grant, $680,263, first of two readings.

Seven,

This should read resolution, I believe, but action item approving the final disposition of the Thomas J. Stonewall Jackson statue.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor Walker.

At this time, if you would like to address City Council on matters not, I'm sorry, on the consent agenda, please click your raise hand icon.

Mayor, we have a couple hands raised.

First one is Thomas Randolph.

Thomas, you are on with Council.

Hello?

The September 7th meeting

I had asked about getting possession of the Lee and Jackson monuments.

And I was told by Brian Wheeler and also City Manager Boyles at around three hours, 35 minutes in the video of that meeting that you have on your website that I would be sent an email to apply for those monuments.

and I never received an email to apply for them.

And I called about two or three weeks later and I asked when I could apply and I was told that the application period had not begun, but still I had received no email about that.

I'd received no application form.

Then later I read something that, well, I did email Heather Hill, I think, or I had an exchange with her, but I read somewhere that the period for applying had ended, and maybe I got that from Heather Hill, but I was never given an opportunity to apply for those monuments in a,

wondering how many other people were never given opportunities.

I mean, you're destroying these monuments.

I've never heard of that in this country of destroying art.

And that's what the Taliban does.

It's not what we do in this country.

And I think the whole process should be reopened.

And you should take applications from everyone who's interested in preserving those monuments.

Next up, we have David Rhodes.

David, you are on with City Council.

You have three minutes.

I am getting, it looks like Mr. Rhodes is using an older version of Zoom.

I will have to promote him to panelists.

Mr. Rhodes, you're on with counsel.

Here I am.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you.

All right.

Thank you.

The love ethic is a good thing.

You know, Mayor Walker spoke about her great grandmother.

I wish I had more time to speak about my great-grandfather who suffered in a Yankee prison in Maryland but you know so far we haven't come together I'm gonna say something about the statues of course I'm sure you guys have already made up your mind about what you're going to do with the Jackson statue but I appreciate the opportunity to

see my piece anyway.

Helps me personally, helps me live with myself.

I think I felt the same way about six years ago when I spoke to a different city council, when I spoke about political compromise and Mr. Bellamy told me to take my hat in my compromise and take a hike.

but it really is too late for a compromise now and as much as I revere these monuments and the history and the heritage that they represent they need to leave Charlottesville and not come back in a different form either you know there were people like me who would work all day

and month after month would spend shifts downtown all night making sure those monuments were not destroyed.

And if that monument is destroyed, that was a bad decision, bad decision after bad decision.

If Lee is melted down and turned into another form of art and put on public display,

who's gonna stay up all night and protect that because it will be vandalized.

Now, monuments in Charlottesville have been stolen.

They have been defaced.

They've been chunks knocked out of.

And even when these people were caught, the local justice system did nothing or very little to these people.

So is another set of rules going to be put forth for this new piece of art?

Probably so.

So more hate and more divisiveness when these people who vandalized this piece of work, he was a bad decision.

Anyway, I'm a proud Confederate ancestor.

People can't, very, very smart people seem to not be able to separate me being a proud Confederate ancestor from white supremacy and racism.

But yet I exist.

I'm here and have been given no voice.

Bent over backwards for Native Americans about the Lewis and Clark statue.

Richard, you're on with the city council.

Thank you for this privilege.

I'm Richard Allen, 1425 Trailside Court.

and I salute from the bottom of my heart Mayor Walker and Ms.

Hill for their dedicated service to the city.

I've been following the disappearance of the city's sign reading site of slave block for seven years.

I was schooled about this by Mr. Eugene Williams who led the desegregation of public schools in the 1960s.

He taught me of his hometown's poor record of racial equity and inclusion.

In August 2014, I'm going to say this again respectfully, 2014, I interviewed Mary Jo Scala, preservation and design planner for the city of Charlottesville, and she wrote to me, the gray slate plaque reading site of slave block was removed from Courthouse Square between 1985 and 2002.

I don't know why the gray black was removed, who removed it?

I arrived here in 2003.

The city's historic resources committee is currently working on a new series of courtsware markers.

Why was a single one that acknowledged slavery removed?

I joined with a concerned team of others forming the slave black citizens group.

We made an exact replica of the sign and tried diligently to learn how to get it reinstalled.

In the last two weeks, I met with Commonwealth Attorney Plotania.

He was sympathetic to our goal, but had no power to make that happen.

He asked me to see Ashley Marshall, the new deputy city manager for racial equity, diversity and inclusion.

Perfect.

A city official with the exactly needed responsibilities.

And she replied on December 16th.

Quote, the key departments needed are not within my portfolio.

It is also my understanding that the HRC is actively working on their plan for this marker under the direction of city council.

My office defers to council.

On December 17, her colleague DCM Sanders told me the same.

He said, we must wait the direction of council.

I had good emails with Phil Varner, Chairman of the HRC.

He informed me that seven years later, they are still very busy gathering information and planning to put up new signs.

But the good news is that it is you, City Council, whose job it is to direct the managers and engineer to install our replica sign.

We don't want to wait another year or years for that to happen.

And so I direct my last question to Councilors Payne, McGill, and Smoot.

Buck stops with you.

Will you give a Christmas gift to our city this very week?

When can we meet with you to show you our replica and see it promptly installed on Court Square?

And just to make sure, because I kind of spaced out there, but that we, I heard what he said, I'm just saying I wasn't connecting that we're not in a regular community matter.

And next we have Andrew Shelton.

Andrew, you're on with the city council.

Hi, thank you for your time.

And I'd like to thank Mayor Walker and Councillor Hill for their service.

I just wanted to speak briefly on the statues as a Confederate descendant myself and say that I am very grateful that they have been moved.

I'm very grateful that the Lee statue at least has been disposed towards a good purpose for that bronze symbol of hate that no longer looms over our city.

And

Also directly to the gentleman who said that it was a slap into the face of the folks guarding the statue last summer.

We all know that those folks were harassing and generally being a bother to the people in town who have to deal with those things.

So I think that he should consider that his is not the only opinion on the matter.

Next up, we have Tanisha Hudson.

Tanisha, you're on with City Council.

Good evening.

I just want to speak on the monuments as well.

We know what Charlottesville stands for.

We know that a lot of people believe in that big piece of steel and the pain that it caused.

to our community over the last few years.

But I want you all to just take a moment to reflect and think about the pain that was caused to people of color, not just from the Civil War, but also from them even putting those statues up and what it was supposed to mean to Black people.

that we were to always be inferior.

And I don't know about y'all, because y'all might not want to speak on what y'all ancestors did, but I'm going to speak on what my ancestors did.

They fought, and fought long and hard for me to be able to sit here today and argue with you the way that I've argued with you over the last how many years, and just let you all know, Sena, Lloyd, and Michael,

It lies with you all.

Y'all ran on platforms that you wanted to help people that look like me.

You haven't done it yet.

You haven't.

This is your chance to do what you say you're gonna do.

And not just about a statue, but in everything that you touch, you always have to remember.

And don't keep giving us breadcrumbs.

We don't want breadcrumbs.

We're not birds.

We don't want your little sunflower seeds.

We're not birds.

We're human beings.

Poor people in this city deserves more.

And they're not at these meetings like me and other people because they're somewhere bagging your groceries or pressing your clothes for you to get dressed for work.

or cleaning up your bathrooms inside your business offices or washing dishes or cooking at the restaurants that you go eat at.

And you need to always remember that.

You're supposed to give the same respect to your janitor that you give to your CEO.

And y'all need to learn to do that.

And I'm gonna speak again later.

I got more to say, but I just wanted to say, make sure that you all

do the work of diversity and being inclusive to people of color when you make these decisions, even about monuments and statues.

Next, we have James Groves.

James, you're on with the City Council.

Hi, good evening.

I just wanted to make two brief comments in regards to the appropriation of funding for the Virginia Community Flood Preparedness Grant, specifically stormwater management modeling for Moores Creek Watershed.

I certainly support that allocation of funds.

I just wanted to highlight it here briefly and two items within the proposal that the city submitted for that grant.

One is that this area, the Moores Creek Watershed,

is an area within the city limits that is highly urbanized and includes over 65% of the city's high social vulnerability geography.

And then the other thing I would note in the grant application, which again, I support is that part of this work, this modeling work is going to look at future areas of vulnerability will be identified based on climate change influenced storm events.

and so I just want to put that out there as a placeholder for my comments.

It'll come in a moment during Community Matters.

I think this grant proposal which Andrea Henry and others have won should be commended.

It's work that needs to be done before we look as a city at additional development in the Moores Creek Watershed.

If anybody else would like to speak on items on the consent agenda, please click your raised hand icon.

All right.

Thank you.

So, counsel, are there any other comments, questions, any item on the consent agenda?

Move to approve the consent agenda as written.

Second.

Ms.

Thomas?

Mayor Walker?

Yes.

Vice Mayor McGill?

Yes.

Councilor Payne?

Yes.

All right, that carries 5-0.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you so much, mayor and counselors and members of our community.

We noted that there were three matters from the public from the previous December meeting that we wanted to make sure we knew that that we stated that we're in progress of us determining actions.

The first was concerning about leaf pickup and the dust that is created.

We are working with our public works team and our fleet team to try and determine a good solution to reduce that dust and particle matter that is occurring through the vehicle.

The second thing that we noted was a request to rename half streets.

While the city currently has a policy for honorary street naming, we are investigating along with the city attorney's office

the process to change an official street name to a different street name.

We imagine that that will involve also the United States Postal Service, and so just we wanted to make sure the community knew that we were working on that.

And then the last community matter from the prior meeting that we wanted to make sure we addressed was Mr. Allen's request, but he has just spoken to you all during this time, again reiterating his request for the slave black marker.

Finally, for Council, there were questions concerning the city's cybersecurity in relation to the malware breach that occurred in the General Assembly.

We did reach out to Mr. Hawks, our Interim Director for IT, who provided Council with a response of the work that they have done to ensure that our systems are solid, including multi-factor authorization,

cybersecurity training for all team members and other methods.

While no method is fail-proof, we have certainly invested in making sure that we have the least amount of vulnerability in our technical systems as possible.

Thank you.

Counselors, any comments or questions?

No.

And just on the street naming process, Ms.

Mary Carey has that request in that she's had about changing McIntyre or portions of it.

Yes, ma'am.

Next up, we have Community Matters.

Thank you, Mayor.

And the first speaker is Kimber Hawkey.

Kimber, you are on with City Council.

You have three minutes to speak.

All right.

Ms.

Hawkey, are you with us?

Mayor, I could try Ms.

Hawkey again at another time.

Next up, we have Phillip.

Oh, I think we have Kimber.

Kimber, are you with us?

Kimber, we are going to try you another time.

Hang in there.

Next up, we have Philip Harway.

Philip, you're on with City Council.

Thank you.

Mayor Walker and members of the City Council, thank you for allowing me to speak this evening.

I also would like to commend Councillor Hill and Mayor Walker for their time, providing their expertise, their hard work and their opinions in an attempt

make Charlottesville a much better place for all of us.

I live on Alta Vista Avenue in a house that was originally built in the 1920s.

The house is solid and it was updated in 2010.

At that time, the owners protected this structure by capturing water that flowed to the house regularly.

The property sits slightly lower than the adjoining properties and water from those adjoining properties, alleys and streets flow towards it.

Fortunately, this is an area of town that's nowhere near any other water sources other than the natural rain.

And they were successful in their preservation efforts.

And my wife and I are happy to be here in this house.

This still remains a large enough problem, though, whenever it rains, that when I heard and saw what was being proposed on Nassau Street, I was aghast at the idea that anything would be built here, much less being considered for upzoning.

There's so many stories in the news regularly about construction being placed in the wrong places, stories about construction being done poorly or not sufficiently considering the effects of water.

and stories of communities being ravaged by water overflowing the banks and rivers and creeks.

I've been made aware of previous flooding on Nassau Street, its proximity to Moore's Creek, and studies showing this is already a questionable area for construction.

This is not even considering what we know is coming down the pike towards the salt, considering the climate change worldwide that we are witnessing more and more.

So my question to you tonight as representatives of the citizens of Charlottesville knowing what is known today and thinking for a second about what is likely to happen climate wise how can you approve an upzoning which will lead to more construction in such an area when problems occur here as they likely will due to weather factors and analysis are made looking back to the decisions you're contemplating tonight

Will you look back and realize you helped facilitate the likely disaster or that you voted against it?

OK, we are going to try Kimber Hawkey one more time.

Kimber, if you're with us, you are on with Council.

Oh, good.

Well, first, I want to reiterate my thanks for the service of Mayor Walker and all that she has done, as well as Ms.

Hill.

I also want to say that I'm very happy to hear about the Kenyan tradition of Harambe being mentioned as my year in Kenya that was often a

a call to the community to everyone to put together and I would like that to happen in Charlottesville.

Other than that I'm talking about the asking for the denial of the upzoning on Nassau Street.

I've sent a long email as others have talking about the clear conflict of interest that exists because the person applying for the upzoning also

rewrote the flood maps to his advantage.

This is a dangerous flood zone area, and history has shown that.

There has been floods in multiple years, let me write them down here, in 1924, 1937, 1942, 1944, 1955, as well as 1969 with Camille.

and we're talking about supposed 100 year floods.

So this is one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, seven something events that have happened.

This is going to happen again.

It's clear.

The city should not be building here.

If you all have read the Army Corps of Engineers report, it's quite damning for this area, as well as eyewitness accounts.

Floodwaters have covered Nassau Street by

providing the amount of infill that is happening down there, you are simply increasing the issues for surrounding neighbors.

This is not a question of what's it called common enemy and such because of the quantity of infill and construction going on.

And I would hate for people to file

lawsuits against the city for the decisions to allow construction in these areas.

As you mentioned, there was a mention in an email from Mr. Schimp, Schimp, excuse me, that there was some wetland disturbance.

So that should be studied.

Last but not least, we're talking about affordability, and there's no real affordability going on here.

Now, we should not be building here at all, of course, but if you are, at least, oh, I don't know.

It's just, the whole thing is ridiculous.

Please deny this application.

Thank you.

And next we have James Groves.

James, you're on with the city council.

Hi, my name is James Groves and I'm a city resident.

This evening, as the year draws to a close, I would like the city to embrace an end-of-year resolution to make 2021 the last year when it ignores climate change.

To protect our city's residents and to contribute to a global solution to climate change, Charlottesville must begin to move now.

This fall, as the comprehensive plan was being finalized,

I urged the Planning Commission to insert language into the plan, committing to a phase out of natural gas service.

On October 8th, three city offices asked for rejection of that idea and indicated that they would instead like to study the city's gas service and provide recommendations of some sort at a later date.

At your next meeting, I would appreciate an update on the progress that city officials have made in planning for elimination of the damaging emissions from the city's gas service.

Tonight, you can jumpstart action on climate change by denying the Nassau Street upzoning request before you.

Climate change will bring more intense rain to Charlottesville with periodic threatening flash floods.

Historical and recent independent analyses of Nassau Street indicate extreme flood risk there.

Two weeks ago, I was extremely disappointed to hear the developer downplay the risks.

He indicated that his proposal would put homes many feet above the 100 year base flood elevation, closer to the 500 year flood elevation.

In fact, recent flood maps

including maps the developer himself has had a hand in writing show the proposed buildings at the water's edge or inundated by multiple feet of water during 100 year events.

We should await the results of the new flood preparedness grant before considering further development in this area.

Placing moderate income residents in harm's way without such analysis and without flood insurance is not the route to racial equity or fair affordable housing in Charlottesville.

Beyond these two items, remember that the city has not provided an update on our greenhouse gas emissions in five years.

Also, two and a half years have passed since the City Council asked staff to prepare a climate action plan, and as of tonight, no plans emerged.

Best wishes for a healthy holiday season, and thanks to all, but especially Mayor Walker and Councilor Hill for their service.

And next up, we have Mark Cavett.

However, I do not see Mark Cavett as an attendee currently.

So we will go to our fifth signed up speaker, which is David Coleman.

And David, you are all at the City Council.

You have three minutes.

and I am getting a message that his version of Zoom is incompatible.

And David, you're on with council.

Yeah, thank you very much.

I'm not sure where I was cut off before.

I appreciate it in another three minutes.

I just wanted to say I know it's very hard for very smart people to separate me being a proud Confederate ancestor from white supremacy and racism, but I do exist.

For example, it's hard for very smart people to separate

People that are pro-vaccine, COVID vaccine from people that are against mandate.

But, you know, there's still individualism.

There's still people who don't like being told what to do and for sure not who to honor.

I wish people could separate the government from the people.

Back in the day, city council

Charlesville City Council enacted a segregation ordinance, not to people, not to people.

And, you know, when you decide what to do about the Lewis and Clark statue, you bend over backwards to get Native American opinions, fine.

You bend over backwards, I'm sure, for the new slave block to

talked to descendants of slaves.

So where am I as a Confederate ancestor?

A lesser person?

I've never been considered in this five or six years seriously that I know of.

I've written, I've talked, I've written, and I've talked.

So you can't fight hate with hate.

You can't fight racism with racism.

I hope you do something with the statues where the people who do want to enjoy them will enjoy them.

Somewhere private, if they can choose to see them, they can see them.

That's all I got to say.

And our last signed up speaker is Mr. Richard Hopcraft Allen III.

and Richard, you are on with the city council.

Thank you, council.

I am the same Richard Allen who spoke out of turn during the consent agenda.

I do want to apologize for my unfamiliarity with the process and I hope to get better at it.

I will simply reiterate with great brevity my remarks a moment ago.

First,

Deeply sincere salute to Mayor Walker for all she has brought to the conversation in our city across four years and to Councilor Hill for her deep dives into some of the turmoil and complexity of what our city's gone through ever since August 2017 and for her work on the Historic Resources Committee.

You folks are diligent patriots for our city and to be admired.

Thank you.

And finally, I will simply state that I will come back in the new year and reiterate my final question, which was to Councilors Payne, McGill, and Snook.

Councilors, the buck stops with you with regard to a city installed plaque that disappeared according to your own preservation planner sometime between 1985 and 2002.

Dozens and dozens of people have been besieging you, asking you to replace that plaque that acknowledges enslavement.

It should be in the center of town with all the other magnificent gray plaques.

And I will reach out to you and new council in the new year if you do not choose to go into meeting later tonight and simply decide to give the city a Christmas gift

and let us show you our perfect replica of the site of slave block sign and allow us to install it, but only until HRC comes in and actively does its own renewal on Court Square at some point hypothetically next year or in some future year.

And that concludes our signed up speakers.

I was looking for Mr. Cabot.

I don't see him signed back on.

And I do see five additional speakers with their hands raised, Mayor.

Next being Tanisha Hudson.

Tanisha, you're on with the City Council.

Good evening again.

First and foremost, I just want to say, Mayor Walker, thank you so much for your service.

You know, we didn't always agree.

We agree.

What about 98% of things?

2% we didn't agree with.

But I just want to recap Charlottesville in these last few months because you

definitely taken the blame for a lot and you haven't been the only person involved in operations.

Let's make that clear and I want the record to reflect that.

So I'm gonna go through and just talk about how each person has involved themselves in operations other than Mayor Walker.

Heather Hill was very involved with Andrew Baxter in the fire department when they were targeting Dr. Richardson.

There's a recent FOIA request that I received where she is considered their ally.

Lloyd Snook was heavily involved with the more recent incidents of Chief Brackney, where his intel or his person told him that there was going to be a secret meeting.

We know that that was nobody but somebody from the PBA, Lloyd.

More than likely, it was Denise Lunsford.

We also know that Chip authorized a raise for the following individuals, Tito Durette, Ashley Marshall, and Sam Sanders.

Now, for you all to be given raises like this, and Ashley being the director of equity inclusion and everything else, race ready, whatever, we know that there's people in this city that just got up to $15 an hour.

So the fact that we're giving people raises that played a role in removing somebody in a wrongful termination of a contract is absolutely wrong.

So, you know, as much as Heather, you want to walk away looking like you did a lot and that you did great work, you were in everything but a church.

You was involved with every person that's walked away from this city of color.

You snaked your way into being involved in that.

And now Lloyd is the new you moving forward.

He's going to be the next one to act just like you.

You can put the blame on the mayor all you want.

but it won't stick.

Only people that look like y'all gonna believe that.

Only white people gonna fall for that.

Sena ain't had a voice the whole two years she been on council.

But then when Brackney was terminated, it's Chip's decision let Chip do his job.

Chip did the wrong job, Sena.

And Michael, you just don't say nothing.

So two more years and you not saying nothing, I don't think we can deal with it.

So y'all better figure out what y'all gonna do to turn this city around.

Or we gonna be in more hell than what we've been in these last couple years.

And it ain't been pretty.

And you're not gonna have the mayor to put it on this time.

So who gonna be the one that you gonna point to now and say they're the reason?

Thank you.

And next up, we have Robin Hoffman.

Robin, you're on with the City Council.

Hi, everybody.

I want to congratulate, first of all, David Dillahunt and Joe Rice for putting on an amazing Christmas illumination.

And it was aired

a special on Channel 29, which I know David spent a lot of time editing.

It was amazing.

But I want to say that the work and dedication that the Communications Department again puts forward every day is something that the city can look forward to.

I think very much I want Nakia and Heather to have their own show.

I mean, this is ridiculous that we have stories that need to be elaborated on.

When I have a TV show, I do series now.

So, you know, I did like three episodes, 26 minutes of the Botanical Gardens, climate action, whatever.

And, you know, that did have an effect.

on how people think about things, you know, that, you know, ideas were provided as normalcy, you know, like, how can we do things creatively?

Please, please, please tell your stories on CPA TV.

People watch me for 12 years.

I'm not saying this for any other reason, but

that they tell me, they call me by my name in stores and they know my, I guess, you know, feeling for being able to tell a story is because it's about Charlottesville.

And it's about me being in Charlottesville.

It's about the people that are involved in Charlottesville.

But you are Charlottesville.

It's city council.

that I think for the last four years, and certainly for the last two years, has been telling their story.

And, and we need to continue that.

I think that that's going to make a difference.

And people are watching.

I think I think the effort for for 26 minutes now you can do it with your phone would be amazing.

You know, you can get on a program every day, every week, whatever you want to do.

And, but thank you very much for serving.

And that's it.

And next we have Grace Softier Hayes.

Grace, you're on with the City Council.

You have three minutes.

For the gift of your words and your works, I am deeply grateful.

Thank you so much.

I'm speaking today on behalf of

I'm speaking today on the final disposition of the city-owned sculpture titled The First View of the Pacific, also known as the Lewis Clark and Sakatulia statue.

I'm speaking in favor of the resolution and the statements that the family would like to add to that resolution.

I'm deeply grateful for the gifts of Sakatulia's ancestral

familial descendants who have come to visit our city on numerous occasions to do collaborative work with the community and the city of Charlottesville.

My mother also taught me to lead with love and to acknowledge the truth, even when it's difficult.

When I went to see the museum, Native American Museum in Washington, DC, after moving here from Texas and Oklahoma,

It took me three years to be ready to go.

And when I got there, I sat in my car for a good three hours before I was ready to get out and walk in, even though it was our own people who had done the works to put the presentations together in collaboration with the US government.

It was because I knew there would be strong emotion.

And I also took two days off of work.

the following two days after returning so that I could process and be ready to hold my composure in public afterwards.

I appreciate some of the speakers today who have said that although they have feelings of their own about these statues, that they agree that because they do evoke strong emotion, which can be, I can tell you, debilitating and regular functioning day.

to have them placed in a place with collaborative works between indigenous community members, the Lewis and Clark Center, the city of Charlottesville, Monica Nation, and Sacagawea's family themselves.

So I speak in favor of the resolution and the words are critically important because they are the things we say that we already do.

They are the same things that are in our current laws to protect equity.

And so just to acknowledge them on paper is important so that we can say, yes, we know this is right and we stand

together and doing this work.

We have a word in Chikashankhika.

This word is on our stop sign, not the word stop, because instead of the negative action of stop, we have instead a word that says, stand to attention, pay attention and be aware and be ready to be mindful of others.

So I say, let us both be walking toward one another so that we can meet in order to talk and have a good way of building right relations with one another.

And next up, we have Nancy Carpenter.

Nancy, you're on with the city council.

Very good.

Good evening, State Council.

Thank you for this opportunity to address you.

I wanted to say very quickly that tomorrow, December 21st, is the one day of the year where we have the most hours of nightfall, of darkness.

And as always, on December 21st, there's a national

recognition of that through the having of homeless vigils.

Now, the Haven this year is actually going to have an in-person remembrance vigil at 3 p.m.

tomorrow.

at the Haven with masks required and social distancing.

It's a time of reflection and remembering those who have passed this year due to the challenges of being unsheltered and those who have passed in previous years due to those same challenges.

and I wanted to also put a bug in your ear that there seems to have been an uptick so far this year of women who are seeking non-congregate shelter because they are literally homeless and right now it's very difficult to find a placement for them.

I know that the city has recently said they have

this little, I would call it a rainy day fund.

I know you all put some money away.

I think it sounds to be in the neighborhood of $5 million and was wondering if we could put it out there perhaps, and maybe the conversations are already happening, but trying to figure out how to address this perhaps

by helping to assist TJAC, which is the lead agency on homeless service providers, perhaps get a block of rooms through the cold season, you know.

We have a wonderful organization, PACHA,

however you know they are stretched thin to and on all the projects that they're involved in as well so it would be nice to be able to house these women as they come along because we know that women out on the streets are

so subjected to exploitation.

I think the figure I heard to kind of give a context to it was perhaps in the last two weeks 10 women have contacted the homeless information line and unfortunately there was no place to shelter them at.

So if perhaps that can be a project that can

be addressed.

That would be super because we really haven't had, I mean, we've had cold weather, but we haven't really hit our cold season yet.

And with a lot of things going on in public health and in the economy, very likely to perhaps see even more of an uptick.

And next up, we have Jeffrey Fogel.

Jeffrey, you're on with the city council.

I want to speak about the civilian oversight ordinance that you're going to consider tonight.

Not because I think they'll make any changes in it, because I assume that it's a done deal, the way most of the things that are of importance are done by people who run the city, in secret and a done deal.

And that speaks to my second point.

But my first point is,

The ordinance reads that the Civilian Review Board may not compel testimony from anybody, an officer of the law.

Comrade Snook explained to you that the Garrity decision of the Supreme Court required that.

But he was wrong.

And by now, I assume he knows he's wrong, even though he seems to be not interested in the subject matter or of anything going on tonight in council.

He was wrong.

So what is the reason why you're not going to compel a police officer to explain his or her conduct while on the job?

If any of you and I know you have worked for organizations, and you did something and your employer came to you and said, you as my employee have to explain why you did what you did, and you refused, you'd be fired.

What's the difference when it comes to police officers who in the circumstances might be assaulting somebody, might be illegally arresting somebody, might be shooting somebody, but they don't have to explain why they've done anything.

Now the reason isn't the Garrity decision.

I'm assuming, because I don't know because he doesn't talk about it, that Comrade Snook has been speaking for the PBA or their lawyer, Ms.

Lunsford, and that this is what passes their muster.

But most importantly, I want to speak about how this ordinance is going to turn into a secret civilian oversight board.

And I want to read you, and you've read it already, and I've reminded you of this, and I question to you all is, do you not think, do you not consider what's written to you?

Do you simply follow Comrade Snook in whatever he tells you?

Is that I know there's a lot of rhetorical questions here because none of you are inclined to respond to much of anything that's of any substance in this city.

In the version in the memo of December 3, Mr. Snook wrote,

They want to make sure that state law permits closed sessions for consideration of both evidence and deliberation of disciplinary matters.

That means that all hearings will be closed.

If that and when that occurs, I will be part of a coalition to abolish the Civilian Review Board because we don't need another secret body to make determinations about misconduct.

Next up, we have Rosia Parker.

Rosia, you're on the city council.

You have three minutes.

Rosea, are you with us?

We will try to come back to Ms.

Parker.

Next up, we have Jojo Robertson.

Jojo, you're on with City Council.

Hi.

I wasn't thinking that I would speak tonight, but there's just something that

I wanted to mention, so a few weeks ago, there was an individual that lived in Charlottesville, Miss Tonita Smith, who is Sage Smith's aunt.

She was murdered by a serial killer.

And it's just really bothering me.

She had six children, has six children.

so there's six youth that now do not have a mom and so this happened I guess around Thanksgiving and there is a GoFundMe out for her for her burial and also it may I mean from what I understand if there's anything extra it's for the kids and it just really bothers me because I know when Hannah Graham went missing

The world stopped, or at least Charlottesville stopped for Hannah.

And I know that it did because I helped a lot with that situation in getting meals for the police and the family.

The family ate at hotcakes every night.

You know, it's just, you know, gosh, you know, they were toted around by Homeland Security, her parents.

And it's just such a difference.

It's a huge difference.

And I think the people in Charlottesville, the ones that aren't even considering this mom of six that were considering Hannah, they should really be ashamed of themselves.

I mean, right now it's $6,000 and I don't know, you know, I have not had to bury someone, you know, financially.

Pay for that.

But people need to stop and just think that these kids are without a mom this year.

And I just want people to look up the GoFundMe.

And even if you can only leave $10 or $20 or five, it just doesn't matter.

If all of us collectively gave a small amount, you know, then it builds up.

We don't have to, you know, say, oh, we have to leave a large amount.

And just think of these children right here at Christmas time and what they must be feeling knowing that this is how their mom passed.

And think about it, you know, both Hannah and Tonito, you know, died because of a serial killer.

But, you know, we don't want to talk about someone that's not young and white and maybe wealthy.

And that's something that Charlottesville needs to consider

So please help go look for the GoFundMe for Tonita.

And I believe the family has that GoFundMe.

So help, you know, when you're considering Christmas this year, think about them.

That's all.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Roseanne Abrahamson.

Roseanne, you are on with City Council.

First of all, I'd like to say Merry Christmas.

I'd like to say it's an honor to have known those of you who I've worked with in two decades.

I am so honored to work with people who have the ability to look ahead, who have the ability to think

and to have the ability to care about others.

And today I'm looking forward and to the resolution that will be made in regards to my great, great, great aunt, Sacagawea.

I appreciate all the hard work and I'd like to extend good wishes to those who are leaving the council.

Mayor, you have done an excellent job

and I hope good things for you.

And I'm looking forward to our discussion later.

I have asked the mayor to read our context in regards to what we would like to see in the resolution.

And again, I'd like to thank each and every one of you.

I know it is a difficult job and just as life is difficult, decisions are difficult,

But I wish you well, and I hope that we can make the best decision tonight.

And I'm just excited.

Next up, we have Andrew Shelton.

Andrew, you're on with City Council.

Hi, thank you once again for your time.

I just would like to speak specifically to the Lewis and Clark statue and what I took to be primarily Counselor Snook's concerns at the last meeting about the possibility of actually getting some money for it.

And I want to say that I understand that we are in kind of a financial hole here with the statue removal, but I feel that it is very important as part of this entire process to do the right thing.

We have a history in this country of

White people breaking treaties with the people that were here before us for financial gain.

And I think it would be incredibly embarrassing for us as a city and for those of you that have put so much work into this entire process

to vote to send it to some fellow down in Texas for a few hundred thousand dollars, as opposed to giving it to the Lewis and Clark Center, the people that have worked with us on this process.

And it is just that's clearly the right thing to do.

I think we can find money elsewhere.

It's just one per, one time per speaker.

And if anybody else would like to speak with council, please click your raise hand icon.

I see three other hands raised, Mayor, and that will exhaust all 16 slots.

Next up is Katrina Turner.

Katrina, you're on with City Council.

How is everybody going?

Hello.

I just want to talk about the statue for one.

Thank you for giving it to the Jefferson School.

and as far as the Sacagawea you know those statues should not go to anyone who is going to praise that statue again the way they did it here no one should have to go through what we went through here in Charlottesville and I think those statues it needs to go to Lewis and Clark

The next thing I wanted to talk about is the PCOB and I'm just wondering if you all are going to appoint anyone else on that board because I know people have applied and when you read the boards and commissions you spoke nothing about the PCOB

and Lloyd, you wrote a letter and you stated how, you know, you think the people on the PCOB for writing that ordinance and, you know, those were the only people you think, but there were a lot of people who wrote, who helped write that ordinance and the People's Coalition was one of the main people

who helped write that ordinance and to only give credit to the people, the group, that's not right.

And I just want you all to know that the People's Coalition and many other people had a hand in writing that ordinance.

And I would like a little bit of appreciation for everyone else also.

because a lot of people worked hard on that.

And to Mayor Walker, like you said, you know, a lot of people, you know, voted for you and supported you and everything.

And I want to thank you for the work that you've done.

And you know, I've been a,

a hard person, you know, and I want to thank you for the work you've done these last four years.

Next up, we have Rosia Parker.

Rosia, you're on with City Council.

Good evening.

These are some words that I would like to leave with City Council as Mayor Walker leaves, because she has been the main voice that spoke for the African Americans in Charlottesville.

My whole life is devoted unreservedly to the service of my sex.

Of all calamities to which humanity is subject, none is so dreadful as insanity.

Where there is no vision, there is no hope.

How far you go depends on being tender with the young, compassionate, the aged, sympathetic with the striving and tolerant of the weak and strong.

Because someday in your life, you will have been all of these.

I prefer to be true to myself even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others rather than to be false and to incur my own appearance.

I have one life and one chance to make it count for something.

My faith depends that I do whatever I can wherever I am whenever I can for as long as I can with whatever I have to try to make a difference.

Whenever you have a dream, you've got to grab it and never let go.

Nothing is impossible.

There is nothing impossible to they who will try.

I am from the poor people.

I represent the poor people.

I like the workers.

I like the people that suffer because the people have a different approach to life from the people that have everything and don't have nothing that don't know what suffering is.

I am not a coward, but I am so strong, so hard to die.

I don't doubt that it is, but it cannot be much harder than being left behind.

Everything I do is for the people.

What you have learned and experienced in life comes out in very unplanned ways.

Life has all these twists and turns.

The bad news is time flies.

It is the most important phrase of the Declaration of Independence.

All men, meaning all people, are created equal.

And that the government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.

And life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.

I couldn't face God much longer knowing that

that his black creatures are held separate from white creatures in the game that has given me all I own.

So first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

The time is always right to do what is right.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness.

Only light can do that.

And justice everywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

That comes down to you, Snook.

It comes down to you, Heather Hill, keeping me from off of that PCRB.

Like Katrina Turner said, we wrote that for the Black people, for the disadvantaged communities.

And for y'all to have sit there and turned the PCRB around and not putting me on that board, do y'all know all y'all did was open up a door for me, an avenue to sue y'all?

because y'all did not tell me that y'all would not be going for new applicants or old applicants.

I've applied on every chance that I could to apply because I stand in agreement with everything that was written.

Thank you.

And we have Mark Cavett back on who is one of our original signed up speakers and he'll be our last speaker for the evening.

Okay, hopefully you can hear me now.

Earlier, that was Kimber, I was using her sign in because the mine wasn't working for some reason.

But

Going back to my comments for tonight, Mayor Walker, Counsel Hill, four years ago, I gave you each a report from the Army Corps of Engineers.

This was recently sent to the other counselors in the format of an email.

I hope you looked at it.

The report was part of a 71-page report on Morris Creek for the city and the county.

At that time, in 1971, Morris Creek and Nassau area was a rural area.

Reports suggested that locality has developed zoning that will take into consideration anticipated flooding.

Unfortunately, the city did not heed the advice.

The county did.

I would like you east to go to Nassau and stand on it.

I would like each of you to crouch down till your eye level is four feet above the road surface.

Look east in the direction of the creek.

Everything you see below your eyes would be below water if we have a storm like the one in 1971.

come through.

You also notice that most of the first floors of the existing buildings would be low water level, not to mention any autos or items that may be swept away by the water moving at high velocity that the Army Corps expects.

Keep in mind that we had storms in 1924

1937, 1942 was a big one, 1955, 1969, and 1971.

The big daddy of all was in 1848.

If the current housing was there in 1848, they would have been swept away.

That's all I had to say about Morris Creek.

I did want to take a moment and say something concerning Macker, which is coming up.

on that.

I do support that development property and

My only concerns are basically is that the intersection needs to be redone where Morris Creek and Park Avenue is.

And also another concern of mine is that when they came around to the neighborhoods and spoke, the developers, they indicated that there would be some units there that would be at 30% AMI as well as a number of units at affordable housing.

What I last saw was basically a document that indicated it was going to be 80%.

So that is a concern of mine as to what happened to the other lower cost AMI.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I apologize, I muted myself.

I did miss count earlier.

Joy Johnson is the next speaker.

She will be the 16th and the final speaker for this public comment section.

And Joy, you're on with counsel.

Good evening.

I want to say thank you to Heather Hill for her service and thank you, Mayor Walker, for your service.

As a Black woman in leadership position, what I have found out, and so did Holly, it is a struggle.

It is definitely a struggle, but I will leave you with this, Ms.

Nakaya, because there are times in my life I had struggle about whether or not I would keep doing the things I would doing for the people and for myself.

This is from Marcus Garvey, which is very dear to a lot of what Marcus Garvey talks about is very dear to me because he's from my homeland, Kingston, Jamaica.

Never forget that intelligence rule the world.

Ignorance carried the burden.

Therefore, remove yourself as far as possible from ignorance and seek as far as possible to be

Intelligent.

You are a strong Black woman.

You are an educated Black woman.

And what I've learned through my journey, and I've met a lot of good people, Black and white, but still what I have learned is that there are people in this life, if you're smart and you're intelligent, they will beat you down.

I love you.

Thank you for being the voice of the people.

And I don't think they realize that you're more detrimental to them on the outside than being on the inside.

Thank you for all you have done.

Counselors, any comments?

I do want to address something that Ms.

Hudson raised about some of the staff increases just to kind of clarify that this is something very consistently that we've done when we've had people who have stepped in up and taken on additional duties and it's a temporary increase that is typically approved by supervisors for those purposes and so that's the case of

those that were named in addition to other staff who've taken on additional duties.

Thank you.

I had that on my list.

Same thing.

Whether there's agreement or not, for what happened in the police department, there is the acknowledgement that we do consistently for staff that if they take on additional roles or if the leader is not in, the person above them is not in places, someone else is fulfilling those duties that there is an increase.

and I have been really consistent.

The entire time I've been here about making sure people are paid and paid well for the work that they do.

Is there, I think the comment on the, and maybe we're going to do it then, but the decision about the PCRB, are you all going to make it when we discuss it about the board or you want to address that now?

I'm not sure that I understand what the what we had the discussion the last when we reviewed the applicants.

Um.

Well, we've had the discussion a couple of times about not wanting to make more appointments until we're absolutely clear on what we're asking them to do.

And that's not a discussion of a particular person.

It was simply a decision that we were going to hold off until we got this ordinance rewritten.

Yeah, it's my understanding from those conversations that there was an agreement that everyone would be asked to reapply at that time.

So I'm not going to be here, but that is the decision that was had.

Well, the version that is before you tonight, as I kind of went around everybody before us,

and went around and talked to other counselors.

There was not a majority that was in favor of making everybody reapply.

So the version that's in front of us here just continues the present board members.

I know we had talked about it perhaps being different, but there were not, as far as I could tell, there were not three votes for that position.

All right, well, I will say that that was not my understanding of, and again, this wasn't something, because I know that I'm not going to be here, that was led by me, so my understanding of those discussions, but what I will say to Ms., since that is the case, to Ms.

Parker, I have supported your application every time that it's been brought up, and

would have considered.

I have talked about the challenges that have presented with board members, but I don't think that any of the concerns are more any other people, even current people on the board now and some who have been on the board and are no longer there.

that there will be any reason that we can consider you based on some of the challenges and behaviors of those individuals.

And if I might, one of the concerns and this, I don't think this would come up in the context of any of the rest of the discussion

of the PCRB ordinance, but the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement notes that one of the transitions that has to get made from the group that is an activist group that gets the political pressure to have a PCRB or PCOB appointed in the first place, that often those folks are not, they don't have the

the same set of skills or personalities or whatever else you want to call it.

Nicole basically says don't appoint activists to the board.

And that's one of the issues that we have to have to confront.

And one of the things that counselors need to think about as we're trying to figure out who to appoint.

And that's just one other one other factor that goes into it.

So the fact that there are people who have felt very strongly about it and have

worked very hard for it and have spoken very passionately about it, while that's not a disqualifier, nor is it automatically a qualifier.

So,

I just have to find that wording.

But what I will say, and it's the same conversation I think we're having about this position, about who is hired for positions that are change agents in places like police departments.

And I'm thinking of a quote right now that I have to find.

It'll come to me and I'll share it.

I think it's very important to understand that those are actually the people who change, just change the world.

And so if that if they did write that, and I would have to read everything associated.

Yeah, actually, it's right here.

It's the district attorney in Philadelphia.

He says, and I think I read this before, we need to redefine what it means to be a politician.

It turned out that all of those activists I have represented mostly for free all these years who kept getting arrested for protests are really better at politics than most of our centric politicians.

And I think part of us

Having the discussion about what has changed, what does it look like, who plays a role in it, and this will come up later in the PCRB discussion, but even the discussion around that we've had about if people have had trauma and if they can't ride in police cars, whether they are then maybe fit to serve on a board.

And I don't know how you equate, because a lot of people are going to have this kind of trauma,

and it's going to come up that doesn't, that should never equate to the fact that they can't, you know, be of service.

So I think that part of the redefining and looking at things through a different lens, that it'll require that change, that people who may be viewed as unhelpful or because of the way they present, it has to be one of the biggest things that we change or that you all moving forward change.

Are there any other comments?

No?

Okay.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of council.

This agenda item is a public hearing and first reading of the year-end adjustments and appropriation for fiscal year 2021.

The audit has been completed and to close out the city's financial records for fiscal year 2021, several year-end adjustments require city council action.

These adjustments are to carry over unspent funds from the last fiscal year to the current fiscal year.

The appropriation totals about $12.2 million.

This total is comprised of two sources.

One is $5.5 million in surplus funds from the general fund for ending the fiscal year.

And the other is $6.7 million transfer from the Citywide Reserve account to the CIP.

And Council...

Council staff has three recommendations for the use of these funds.

I'll go through those briefly.

The first one is transfer $6,674,971 from the citywide reserve economic downturn account to the CIP contingency account.

As we talked about before, when the FY21 budget was constructed, we created a reserve in anticipation of COVID impacting our revenues.

as the year has now closed out.

We did not actually need those revenues or need those funds at reserve.

And I should back up and say that reserve was created by not transferring funds, cash from the general fund to the CIP.

That was the source of that.

And so we're recommending that those funds now make their way to the CIP contingency for future allocation.

The second recommendation is transferring $5,503,327 from the general fund fund balance to employee compensation.

And as we talked about before, that compensation

package includes two items.

One is a $3,500 bonus for employees who work full-time between January 1, 2021 and November 26, 2021 as a thank you for their service and essential work during what was a difficult year.

For those employees who joined the city during the year or are seasonal, part-time, or temporary, they will receive a prorated amount of that $3,500 based on the number of hours they work during the year.

And then the second piece of that compensation is a 6% mid-year pay adjustment for all benefit eligible employees.

This is a market adjustment which recognizes the need for the city to retain and recruit

qualified employees.

And then finally, the third recommendation is transferring $6,393 from the general fund fund balance to the city treasurer's office.

This is part of the agreement that the city has with the Commonwealth when they open the DMV select office in the lobby of City Hall.

As I mentioned, this is a public hearing and we advertise that.

back on December 11th and Saturday in the Daily Progress.

Counselors, do you have any questions or comments at this time?

Thank you, Mayor.

And if anybody would like to address counsel on this public hearing, please click your raise hand icon.

You have three minutes.

Council, I see one person with their hand up.

It's Mark Cavett.

Mark, you're on with Council.

Basically, just want to say that I would like to see a lot of this money, a good portion of it, be used towards the affordable housing fund to kind of shore that up and get that going and towards the goal that you all indicated previously that you'd like to have $10 million.

That's my recommendation.

Next up, we have Tanisha Hudson.

Tanisha, your own city council.

So I would like to see more money going to the Affordable Housing Fund as well.

But I would also like to see the

the city do more as far as creating its own level of housing.

I know we love to always say CRHA, but I think that there's things the city could also do with purchasing land space and building things themselves as well.

That's something that they need to work towards in the future because I just don't see how anyone in their right mind in the city think that poor people will continue to make it here.

It's going to be nearly impossible in the future.

I mean, you're talking about 6% raise increases in the budget to go towards salaries.

You're talking about people making $15 an hour getting a 6% raise increase.

I mean, come on, do the math.

A one bedroom is anywhere between $1,500 and $1,800 around here.

So that's just something to think about.

Areas around us are giving cost of living adjustments.

You all need to take a look at that.

There's state jobs, federal jobs.

Everybody is doing a cost of living adjustment.

To retain workers, they're paying a lot more.

It's not just the city of Charlottesville that's losing people to other positions.

It's every realm you can think of, federal, state.

local, doesn't matter.

The private sector is paying a hell of a lot more money to individuals.

Mayor, I think I inadvertently cut Tanisha off.

What did y'all last hear?

I'm sorry.

Where did I stop?

Because I was still talking.

Oh, yeah.

The private sector is definitely competing and paying people a lot more money.

So that's something that you all can think about.

I know prior to Brackney's exit, police were complaining about their wages and how they could go and work in

and other localities and make more money and also take a car home.

You know, I just think we got a lot of work to do.

And when we all talk about, you know, we want to do the right thing, there's ways that we can do the right thing to make Charlottesville, you know, a place for all.

The city may not be paying that type of money, but I think there's things we could put in place to get people to the jobs that are paying 20, 21, $22 an hour.

So, I mean, I don't know.

who needs to hear this message?

It's not just the budget department, the finance department, but we got a lot of work to do.

giving people adequate housing, affordable housing.

And I'm very careful when I say affordable, low income housing, because you have a lot of low income employees that work for you that cannot afford to live in a city.

So we need to make sure that we're providing a space for them so that they can live where they work.

And we also need to be pushing people

to get jobs that are paying them more so that they don't stay at the city of Charlottesville making only $15 an hour and they can go somewhere else and make 23 or 25.

So again, you got to compete.

And next we have Kimber Hawkey.

Kimber, you're on with city council.

Hi.

Excuse me.

I just wanted to say I'm sure that there are a lot of people who do deserve raises and bonuses at the city, and I know Mayor Walker has talked about the need to pay a city council more for all the work that y'all do.

I just really want to encourage any budget surplus to be also considered to be given to the Affordable Housing Fund because that needs to be funded.

and specifically to provide money for community land trusts to help people become independent and have quality housing.

And if anybody else would like to speak on this public hearing, please click your raise hand icon.

We have the hand raised by Ms.

Martha Smyth.

Martha, you're on with City Council.

Thank you.

Good evening.

I agree with what's been said by several people now that we really need to put excess monies into the affordable housing fund understanding that is already

underfunded.

So we need to do some work to catch up and put our money where our mouths have been for the last months on the comprehensive plan.

So I encourage you to do that.

Next, we have Rosia Parker.

Rosia, your own counsel.

Yes.

Good evening again.

Have you ever slept outside on a night like tonight where it's frigid and it's very cold?

Well, if you haven't, let me tell you, I have.

I've been homeless for five years before coming into Charlottesville, sleeping outside, no help with three children, entrusting them to social services for them to lose the paperwork to my children.

There are a lot of homeless people that are out here.

You see them when you sit in front of City Hall.

You see them as you walk up and down the mall.

You see them as you're driving up and down the different corridors of Charlottesville.

Homelessness is a very

is threatening danger to people's lives, mentally, physically, and emotionally, and spiritually.

Everything about a human being of humanity.

So therefore, I've been fighting for justice for affordable housing for years.

This is something that is in my spirit that I fight for desperately.

We need to put your money where your mouth is.

You need to understand that life is not a game for some people that cannot afford to be a millionaire, live in big houses with picket fences, looking fancy.

I live in a brick house with center blocks where it's cold and it's hurting my body.

It's dealing with me mentally.

These people that are doing the work, they need to be paid.

Because if they're not paid, they cannot live.

And if they can't live, they end up back in public housing like I am, stuck, trying to crawl my way out.

I've been in public housing for 17 years, but now it's my time to get out.

But I chose to stay here to fight for my people.

And if you don't know what it is to fight for your people, then you need to get off city council immediately.

But until then, I'm going to continue to fight with you until you learn what it is to fight for people that are less fortunate than you.

No additional hands, so we'll close the public hearing and open it up for comments or questions from counselors.

I'll say that in terms of, and I've stated this before, the 6.6 million just to

The thought behind that was the impact of the unknowns

of the impact on the fiscal health of the city during COVID.

And I think, you know, I'm not going to be here for this vote.

But as I've stated, I will press for us to just be more thoughtful in terms of what that money is used for and how it

and how it can assist, you know, the public.

And there are so many ideas out there and there are so many uses for this.

And it could, I know there are great, you know, CIP and there are staff members who need things funded, but I think we're back to how we prioritize and fund those things we prioritize.

There will always be a list

and this is not letting anything go and it becomes worse.

We want to maintain things, but if we had had a hit, let's say, on the real estate taxes and the sales tax had not increased, we would have had to use this money for something else.

I think this

pandemic and based on what I've read through the Great Recession that the city has been able to come out of these things and not necessarily be harmed the way communities that are not as wealthy as ours are.

And I just think that this would be something that, you know, we should be more thoughtful about.

What does it mean?

If we just simply transfer it to the CIP and then we have those asks that's just presented to council randomly based on what's already on the funded or what makes it from the unfunded to the funded list, I don't think that that serves us.

And definitely number two, I support.

And again, thanks to staff for working.

on that and pulling that together.

And number three, does it, of course, would support that too.

Any questions or comments?

I'm just, I'm very concerned.

We don't know if we can get the state sales tax yet.

The change in government in the state level is definitely worrisome on that front.

As much I want to be,

working towards affordable housing as well, very much so.

And I believe we have room for that in our CIP budget, where that's where we find the affordable housing money is usually in the CIP budget.

So that's where this is going as well.

So I mean, this is where my thinking is coming from in supporting this at this time.

Because if we don't work on

some of the basic infrastructure needs of our city as well.

I mean, that's where we pay for a lot of the affordable housing grants through the CIP.

And we're looking at a $75 million bill for one school.

With another school, we're still gonna have to reconfigure and other schools that are badly outdated.

I just, we have to start

looking at these and hopefully with ESG and other HUD monies, we also might be able to help further the emergency services grants for homelessness.

So some of those have been upped.

I was actually hoping to check in next week with our human rights, or not human rights, human services department to see how that is going this year.

and I'm definitely in favor of the pay raises.

Our staff is underpaid compared to pretty much across the board is underpaid compared to other localities.

People have stuck with us through this pandemic and they have worked hard and we need to be valuing them.

And if I could just chime in on that, I think that if you told staff that you wanted this money set aside to discuss those priorities, I think that's different.

Or, of course, we know that there are a lot of things that are unfunded on the CIP and things that are on the funded list that may need additional funding

Well, I guess to the end, I guess my question would be then to Ms.

Hamill or Mr. Cullinan, like what is actually, what actually happens when we transfer this money and then what decisions are made based on that decision to transfer?

So it goes into the CIP contingency account, which is unprogrammed.

And it truly is a contingency fund in terms of unforeseen needs, either with existing projects that may have cost overruns or projects that were just completely unforeseen at the time.

But I think the critical thing is, is that it gives you choices and it's cash.

which is easily accessible.

You can make fairly quick decisions as opposed to say a bond issue, which obviously takes some time and effort.

So that cash does give you a lot of choices.

It gives you a lot of flexibility.

And to the extent that you can then have a more thorough conversation around some of these large policy issues, large price tags, you can then program those funds

either in conjunction with other funds, such as the CAF, which as Vice Mayor Miguel pointed out, that is in the CIP, if there's something to augment some existing things within that, or again, if it's something completely new, perhaps in the affordable housing realm that we don't foresee today, but again, it gives council the opportunity to act quickly with those funds.

No, the only thing I would add is just that the contingency dollars cannot be spent unless they come back before council.

And for example, I can think of a project that's

We are aware of right now, but maybe weren't aware of like a few months ago, and it is in the affordable housing realm, which for a LIHTC application would need a commitment from the city to be successful.

But I would hope that because we have to be more thoughtful about what we're funding when I got the email about the messages about that LIHTC application.

If we're thinking about this in whole, we have to make sure that the projects that we've already agreed to, that we can fund those and that there's agreement to do that.

So we're not even at the point, I think, of whether we're bringing on any new things yet.

It's whether, and maybe you all will be, but there are question marks about the current projects and how to make those successful.

and even as PHA asked for more money for this new project, they are contemplating changing the AMI terms in the current project downtown center of the city and

The Council needs to look at that.

As one of the speakers talked about tonight, the affordability of what was originally proposed even for MACA versus what is being proposed now, according to them.

I have some reservations there, so I have not spent a lot of time there, but again, we will either be in that space where we're talking about

I was just raising it as an example because of

Chris's point of that.

It's just this transfer allows the council in the future to have choices.

And to me, that's a good thing.

So, Council,

You all have to pay very close attention when things are being brought up that you all are aware that these dollars, why they were set aside, what is the intent behind them, and then moving forward what you all vote on, because you wouldn't necessarily be thinking, and we've done it before since I've been here, I could give

a lot of where things come before us and we don't look at just like the whole picture.

I also think that even, you know, a lot of people think they're doing a great job and I've been saying that and took a lot of heat for it.

I'm going to keep saying it.

But the report that we're going to get at the end of the night also talks about even if these people think that it doesn't talk about that.

This is my translation of what I know to be true.

Question.

I discussed a little bit before, but obviously with the raises to keep pace with inflation and cost of living, just how, if at all, does this relate to the wage and compensation study and sort of is there any sense of a rough timeline for that moving forward?

As we were discussing this, we talked about sort of three timelines that we were looking at, two of which we're discussing tonight.

One is the bonus, which really is a thank you for work already done during the calendar year.

The second, the mid-year market adjustment is a short-term or medium-term sort of realization of where we are in the market, what other localities are doing, what we need to do here and now to retain and recruit employees.

And then the third piece is what you just mentioned, and that's the classification and compensation study.

And that really looks at the longer-term, more systemic

Hay, compression, all of those sorts of things.

And also has a very large price tag attached to that.

Ms.

Marshall is championing that.

I'd be happy to.

Council, what we determined is that there is an ability for us to move forward with that plan sooner than later.

We are working with a firm to update some pricing schedule that our previous HR Director, Ms.

Vineyard, had begun.

So I'm just moving it through completion.

And so once that document is submitted, approved, and signed, it is our hope that we will begin by having a first kickoff meeting in January of 2022.

Gallagher has told me that they assume that that study will actually take roughly nine months.

So as Mr. Cullinan noted, this is a long-term role.

But what we do know is that the 6% is inadequate to raise us up to where we should be for equitable and appropriate pay.

So we know that we're not going to find out later on, nine months from now, that 6% was too much.

That's not going to be the answer.

Our hope is that this can get the ball started, but we really need that data to find out exactly how far behind we are and for what members of our team we are far behind so that we can begin to make a long-term plan along with you all with the guidance of Mr. Cullinan and Ms.

And the only other question I have is just, I guess when it comes to money to the CIP contingency fund, is the way I'm thinking about it accurate and sort of like the elephant in the room is really that the CIP as is is not really affordable.

And that even if we factor in as an assumption, some equivalent of a 10 cent tax, 10 cent real estate tax increase,

that that 6 million is basically just gonna be eaten up by existing already budgeted projects.

So I think basically, you know, the 6.7 gives you options.

As Chris noted, it is cash.

So that is definitely money that you could use to buy down whatever a tax increase may look like you could apply that as either cash to the project, or you could decide to apply that as cash to the debt service for the school project, which then frees up

you know $6.7 million of debt for something else or reduces the tax increase that may be necessary to afford the school debt project and so

Again, I think it just gives you flexibility until we have time to sort of work through these scenarios and figure out these kinds of things.

You know, as Mayor Walker noted, there's lots of priorities and lots of things on the unfunded list.

Okay.

Yeah, that makes sense.

And I mean,

As I've said, you know, I think it's imperative we maintain our affordable housing commitments and fund the CAF and our affordable housing strategy.

And I see how that gives us flexibility, but I'll just, I'll say it every time.

I think that I don't really have anything to add to what others have said.

I'm concerned about how we are going to deal with that contingency, but I also agree that putting it in the contingency fund gives us as council the most

in the future while also giving us the most flexibility.

And so I'm in favor of that.

I'm also in favor of the raises and other salary or bonus adjustments because we're seeing that we're losing good people who can go someplace else and get

two, three, four or five thousand dollars more.

We need to be we need to be keeping up and we haven't been.

And my comment based on the compensation study information we just received and somewhat to the point

there's going to have to be some kind of, you know, agreement and you're going to have to work really hard to get staff to understand that at some point based on

The conversations that we've had around payment, while 6% may not be too much, there may be a way to distribute those monies where some people who are at lower income levels get more than 6% and some people who are higher or maybe above gets less.

And so there is a

a better way to do that that's not just cross the board.

We are not there yet and we've been having this conversation the entire time that, you know, our four year time and so hopefully we'll get there, but at some point people, even if we're in a place where they may be able to go elsewhere, there's going to have to be this common understanding of why certain people are getting more

at certain points and why that is.

And that's going to take some understanding because you're not always going to be able to increase salaries across the board.

And I think that study is going to show some of the things that have come up before is that there were some people giving raises.

The equity study that was

was done during interim city managers show that there were primarily like black women who were not often given raises.

And there were some, you know, there have been discussions over time about, and even in the, I've worked in two departments within the city, even with those departments on who's given raises and increase and when.

So there will be some challenges once the study is done.

and there will have to be some hard decisions about the start, where to start and who to increase and hopefully while everyone is working hard and the acknowledgement of that and like the thank you that's being given today there may come a time where you can't do that across the board and I hope that you all are just able to successfully get the city employees on board with understanding why the starting point is whatever the starting point is going to

to be to eventually hopefully make the system more equitable and starting with the people who are probably having the most challenging time surviving as city employees.

And the only other thing that I had noted was this is, you know, good, but I still think the changes

that were made to leave time, the administrative leave and stuff, especially with employees, the CFD, CPD, this came up with social services employees who are just based on staffing levels are not able to take time off.

and what can we do about losing them, losing that time, especially as in a time like this, that is still a big question mark that hasn't been resolved.

And so someone was talking and I wrote a note for that.

All right, so this will be on the January 3rd.

And I don't know if we should put it on the consent agenda because there will be two new counselors and it will give them a chance and they may not know about like pulling items as discussed or whatever.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you all for that.

And thank you all for your work, especially on the bonuses and pay increase for staff in such short amount of time.

I guess I'll go ahead and present it.

What you have before you is there have been some changes, not really many major changes.

tightening up language and so on from the version that you saw two weeks ago.

I want to make a couple of points, partly because they were commented on by others.

The first is that in the memo, there have been a couple of memos floating around talking about who has been involved in a lot of this work.

And it's absolutely true that we need to acknowledge the work going back to 2017

from the People's Coalition, from the Legal Aid Justice Center, from the first PCRB that was appointed where their basic function was to try to figure out what the PCRB ought to be.

And some of those folks have spoken tonight, Katrina Turner and Rosia Parker are among those who have been active from the very beginning.

The point, I guess, that was being made in one of the emails or one of the drafts was simply to comment on the changes that had been made since the August

version that had been passed by the PCRB.

And to make clear that there was a group of us, Bill Mendez and Jeff Frazier from the PCRB, Michael Payne and me from the council, plus Ashley Marshall, plus Lisa Robertson, plus Cynthia Hudson, the council for the PCRB, various other people have

have weighed in in various ways to try to tighten the language, to try to make it say what we want it to say.

And I think the result is if you look around at the other ordinances that have been passed by other places in Virginia, we have given to our PCRB, soon to be the PCOB, more authority to do more things than any other place in the state of Virginia.

So I think we can be glad that we have moved strongly in that direction.

In this draft, there are a couple of changes that didn't get into the version that is in front of you.

They're all minor.

There are four places where we're changing the word

Oversight to the word monitor.

There is one thing that I also want to make clear that the present PCRB members would continue as members of the PCOB.

The terms to which they have already been appointed would continue.

One thing that's not in here, but I would also want to add,

is that it seems to me that and let me just talk a little bit about what is currently happening with the PCRB.

There is one hearing that is set up under the present ordinance and the present procedures

and I don't know when that's going to be taking place, but I think judging by some other correspondence that it may be set for some time in January or February, we want to make sure that that gets over before this

version of things takes effect because there are different standards that are used, different procedures that are used.

And so my suggestion was that we simply provide that this ordinance will take effect on March 1st.

This version of the ordinance would take effect on March 1st.

That would enable two things.

One, it would enable

the PCRB to have the hearing that they're supposed to be having under the present procedures.

And the second thing it would do is it would be the opportunity to finalize the procedures under the new version, which is something that we've always wanted to do.

We've wanted to have the procedures take effect at the same time as the ordinance itself.

So, um,

Those are the couple of changes, changing oversight to monitor and so on.

I can run through the specific paragraphs on that.

And then making the effective date on March 1st.

I don't know.

I don't remember whether there were other issues that we were talking about.

One of the other issues was the question...

of whether anybody, just basically anybody could file a complaint.

Did you have to be an actual witness or the aggrieved person?

And this particular version, we wound up taking out the language that we were at one point going to be putting in that would have made it clear that you had to be either there at the time or the aggrieved person yourself

and now there's no restraint, no restriction on who can file a complaint, but we've also given to the PCOB the authority to decide that there are certain things that the PCOB doesn't want to further pursue because let's say they've decided after initial review

that this is, it just doesn't rise to the level of, or they just don't think there's enough there or something like that.

One of the reasons to have the restriction in there was to try to weed out the number of cases that people were afraid might suddenly start coming, and some of which might seem to be not terribly

well-documented or that people aren't all that interested in pursuing and giving the PCRB the opportunity to say, after a quick little investigation, you know, this isn't really what we need to be doing, would solve that problem.

And I think that what we have done here does exactly that.

There's one other issue that has come up, and I've talked to some members, but not every member of council on this,

is the question of whether to require participants on the PCRB to go on police ride-alongs.

Some places like Arlington and Alexandria require three ride-alongs a year.

Nicole mentions it as one of the standard kinds of training that people ought to be having to go along on a police ride-along to see what police work is actually like.

On the other hand, there are some folks who feel that that's not

not appropriate, that it would basically tend to discourage people who might regard being in a police car as a triggering event.

It would discourage them from even participating as a member of the PCRB.

So that is an issue that I did not get a consensus on from the rest of you all and would like to ask that we talk about openly and try to decide how we want to do it and

If we want to put it in there, then fine, and if we want to modify it, one of the suggestions in Richmond, for example, was that there could be a waiver for, let's say, somebody who was in a wheelchair and couldn't physically get into a police car, or there are other provisions like that that could be made.

I actually have a list of questions.

Okay.

The ride along issue is a very big deal to me.

Working in mental health for 17 years.

This body is very much supposed to be about

bringing forward and also listening to people who are seeing a policing system differently than I have experienced a policing system.

It's to have a very well-rounded and to really see the whole thing.

And if we exclude people because of a condition they have developed based on a bad experience with interactions with police, that is narrowing our field.

PTSD is real, triggers are real, and we can work around that in different ways.

I sent an email about some ideas just off the top of my head about how we could address this with either having someone walk with beat cops

at the university through Rugby Road or on the downtown mall that they could still, the whole purpose of this training is from my understanding is that people understand what's going on and how policing works from the policing perspective.

And maybe some of the things that people don't always see the police have to handle

and there's ways to do that that are not just being in a police car.

I was wondering even if, you know, the ECC would be willing to have someone sit there and listen, you know, shadow a, and again, I haven't talked to Sonny Sexton about this or anything.

These are just ideas off the top of my head where he could, maybe somebody could sit there and listen to incoming 911 calls.

that people could ride along with bicycle officers, or we still have at least one Segway, I believe.

They're not that hard to operate.

So, I mean, there's just, we have ways of also getting that training to people that doesn't mean necessarily being in a police car.

And I think we can design this training

with options so it fits somebody where they are at so that their voice can be heard and valued.

So that's number one on the ride along thing.

It would be helpful to me if it's okay with you to hear other counselors' responses on that particular issue.

We can get a consensus there and then we can move on.

That works for me.

Yes, I brought this up.

So my position is still the same, that I don't think it should be mandatory and that it'll exclude, it could possibly exclude a lot of people.

And I don't think they should have to apply for waivers.

I think that they could serve well, the city well on this board and not do ride alongs.

Ms.

McGill had mentioned the possibility of a walk along or some other training that would allow members of the board to see police officers doing their jobs.

I don't, I certainly think it's appropriate.

So there are a couple of ways we can deal with that.

One, of course, to take out just take out the word shall.

to make it clear that the department would offer ride-along sessions to people, members of the board who wanted to avail themselves of that.

The other approach is the walk along or some other method that kind of drawing on some of what Sena had suggested.

Michael, how do you feel about that?

Again, I mean, I guess it just comes down to the importance of if alternatives, if those are other also optional or just become something different that's mandatory.

And I guess I'm open for

Okay.

So we've got three votes for putting it in some form of optional.

While we're going along, we can figure out under the paragraph, Section 2-466, Paragraph C,

ride-alongs, the department and we put in language that says something to the effect of the department shall facilitate ride-alongs for any members who wish to participate, something like that.

Yes.

And also if we can reimagine some stuff again like walk along or again

Okay.

The next paragraph talks about additional training that the city shall provide.

I'd also like to see in that area if we could mention about trying to do a community walking along that previous members also mentioned.

that was helpful to them about going in with, I believe it was FAR, and going in to public housing communities and talking to people.

Do you want to, let's see.

First of all, you say I agree with that question.

I'm just I'm sort of trying to figure out how to how to fit it into the paragraph or make a new paragraph or something.

So how would you want to express it?

The city will also provide board members with additional relevant training on subject.

We could also then put in or we can put it in with in between that that additionally walk-alongs within six months of appointments that there is also it is highly encouraged that

board members.

But we'd also have to figure out if we would partner with somebody.

Sorry, this mute thing is killing me.

Is there a way

The one thing I do get worried about, if a person, somebody sees something and they say, hey, this is something that should come before the PCRB, and they bring it before the PCRB, but the victim in that case doesn't want it to for whatever reason they have.

Well, that's certainly something that we've talked about that before.

I guess my sense of things would be that if somebody brings a complaint forward and the aggrieved party doesn't want it brought forward, doesn't want it investigated, that

would certainly be a circumstance that the board could consider in deciding not to investigate.

The issue that we get into is that at some level, whether it's through the audit capacity or the ability that was felt to be important, that the board could initiate its own investigations.

Under those two scenarios, the investigation would go forward without the consent of the of the aggrieved party.

And that that's that's a problem.

And I'm not sure how we I'm not sure how we keep the ability to do audits and so on without respecting sort of the the veto power of the of the aggrieved person.

I can see, as Vice Mayor MacGillan is laying out where someone would want to be, like the aggrieved person would want to have the ability to not have that pursued, but I understand the kind of the predicament that

is in place because we are opening it up beyond the aggrieved person to be able to pursue.

And then obviously the board can then make a decision to follow through.

But I do share that concern.

Let me ask our executive director, Mr. Aguilar, here on the call.

Good evening, counsel.

So the way that I've seen that in D.C., well, in D.C., we needed the injured party, so to speak, to file the complaint.

So they had to have that direct nexus.

But I've seen it

There's limitations to an investigation if that party is not involved.

So can you actually meet that threshold of the preponderance of the evidence if you don't have that direct testimony?

In some cases you can, in some cases you won't be able to.

I think another issue here is that you may be able to control it

from the civilian oversight component.

But if the complaint is received by the police, they still would have this duty to investigate.

They may not be able to meet or have a complete investigation if they don't have that injured party.

So it does present some some obstacles to the investigation itself.

But but I do

hear the concern about being able to allow the complainant or that injured party to opt out if they don't want their process or their experience to be part of a public hearing.

But there's also just very logistical limitations to not having that party participate in the investigation.

In one of the drafts we had a couple of weeks ago, there would have been as a

another subsection to 2-458 section C, there would have been a new paragraph 9 that basically said an allegation of conduct that the aggrieved part of that it was not witnessed by

and I don't remember exactly how the language was, Ms.

Robertson may remember it because she's actually the one who drafted it, but it basically would specify right there that if the allegation, if the aggrieved party or a direct witness was not the complainant, it wouldn't go forward.

That's another way to address this issue, but it does result in some cases where the board would not have the power to investigate.

And I think based on one of the recent cases where there was a

attorney who saw video footage.

I think a case like that should be able to come forward.

I think that's what Mr. Fogel highlighted.

So as long as we expand the definition of when it's clear evidence that someone has witnessed of a violation, that that can be brought forward.

I do understand both the

I mean, people get scared for a lot of reasons once they bring things forward.

So you wouldn't want someone who just out of fear pulls this from being, you know, pulls their situation from being reviewed.

So I do understand both sides, but I think that they should have that we should never force someone into a process

And I can think of several, you know, incidents where that can, that that has come up over the past, you know, few years.

But there, you know, there have been times where people haven't wanted things to go forward.

There have been times and that it has been, they've been afraid.

There have been times where people don't

believe that they have the right to bring something forward.

So then if someone sees it that understands like you do have the right, you would want them to be able to bring it forward.

Once that person is aware of their rights and maybe less fearful, you never know what's possible.

Is there a way if those cases could be brought forward, but then the victimized party, I don't know what else, I don't know a better term to use in this situation, could then, when brought aware of that, if they said, no, I don't want to be part of this, they can then opt for it?

I don't want to re-traumatize someone who's already been traumatized.

I want to give the power to the person and not take it away from them and try to protect somebody.

So the way we've got it broken out under Section 2-457 matters the board may investigate first can investigate a complaint from members of the public regarding misconduct, blah, blah, blah.

That is not limited to the aggrieved party or to a direct witness to anybody.

Once that happens, once that complaint is made, then

Sincerely problem.

Like if somebody then if then the board investigates the auditor because there could also be time let's say the auditor is going through stuff and they're seeing a pattern and so they reach out to somebody and they could either let's say do something on their behalf or they could reach out to them and say we've noticed this we would like you to we would like to do this on your behalf do you agree or

if somebody in the courtroom sees video footage and says, hey, that's a PCOB issue that needs to be brought forward.

It's brought forward when the party is then contacted, they could then say, no, I don't want this going forward any further.

But they have the power then in that right.

But then it's also still brought forward on their behalf by someone who has seen it and recognizes it

If there were to be a hearing, as we've got section 242-459, paragraph A, if basically the complainant

Of course, we're still talking about the complainant is the person who brings the complaint, not the aggrieved person.

That doesn't solve the problem.

We had tried to make it so that the board could say at some early point, this isn't going anywhere.

Let's short circuit it.

Let's stop it without having to go through a full hearing and everything else like that.

And that was my sense of how the issue would get resolved if somebody really didn't want to go forward with it.

The complaint would be received, it would be noted by whoever would need to note it, but it wouldn't have to be further investigated.

We may need to clarify that.

And I had made a note to understand what Mr. Fogel, to just question what further understanding of what Mr. Fogel's issue was when he mentioned Garrity.

I don't know what Garrity is.

Again, I will repeat, I am not a lawyer.

And I don't know what he's talking.

Well, I am not an expert on that, but I can explain a little bit.

The Garrity decision is a decision that basically says if a police department compels a police officer to make a statement as a condition of their employment, that is a compulsory, it's a compelled statement.

It's not a free and voluntary statement.

And that statement then can't be used against the officer in a criminal proceeding.

What we've said here is the board may not compel a statement from any department employee.

That doesn't mean the police chief, who has the authority to compel a statement, the police chief could compel a statement.

and in that case, there's no, I don't think we've got anything in here that says that the statement couldn't be used.

My problem and the reason I don't want to have the board authorized to compel a statement is that when the police officer, when a police chief makes a decision to compel a statement,

that police chief is having to weigh specifically the possibility of prosecution versus the possibility of internal discipline, recognizing that pushing ahead on an internal discipline could compound some problems with the criminal prosecution.

Whereas if we give the board the power basically to muck up the works for both the prosecution and the police, then

I think we're putting the board into a spot that it shouldn't be in.

That's my view of it all.

In Washington, D.C., we had what was called a CANS, which was the administrative subpoena that we had for officers.

And the statements there were compelled.

We gave them a guarantee and reverse guarantee in D.C.

But

One of the things that comes to mind, I mean, if we do have the opportunity, which is written in here, the subpoena, that is another avenue that could be revisited.

If we do an interview with a witness officer or a subject officer, we believe that they are withholding or not providing the information that we believe is essential for the case,

We could try to work it out with the city manager as per the procedures in here.

If that doesn't go, then we can go through the board and have them request a subpoena and we could go that route.

So I think that there are options here for getting that statement.

And I should say, by the way, when I was giving credit to other people, I should have mentioned your involvement.

You've been a great help as we've tried to work through drafts because you've actually lived this.

You know what we're just talking about.

Yes, thank you.

I appreciate the work that has been put into this.

And I should add, by the way, just to comment, I haven't spoken to anybody from the PBA on the context of this ordinance, period, ever once.

Directly connected to that, the two biggest sort of unfinished questions to me were one of the ride alongs, which seems resolved.

And two, just this issue, because I know it had been raised, you know, a possible concern when it comes to compelled testimony, that there would be a slight difference between the IA and the PCOB process, given that in the IA process, the chief could compel testimony.

I mean, do we feel confident that that sort of

I'm not sure.

whether, when you were talking, I was trying to think, okay, is there a specific change in the text that would address your concern?

I wouldn't be sure what it is, what it would be either, to be honest.

I know this is a, I think,

I just know it was raised in emails that you could potentially have a difference in the IA in the PCOB process in terms of compelled testimony.

I would think that if the PCOB had the power to subpoena the text of a statement, that that would solve the problem.

Just thinking out loud here, I don't know.

Anybody else have any thoughts?

Mr. Aguilar?

Sure, right.

So the subpoena, they could also

could pay or request a subpoena to give the testimony of that officer.

That's the avenue that was saying.

But even before that, the way that the ordinance is written, I can have a discussion with the city manager and inform them.

I just had this interview with this officer, with the subject or witness officer.

I asked him this question.

I wasn't given the information.

It appears that they may have that information.

the city manager could then get involved and have a discussion with the the Charlottesville chief of police and try to see if we can have resolved that that route.

And if not, then we go through the subpoena route.

So the the commentary about the

So is it your sense that to address Mr. Payne's concerns, we don't need to change anything more in the text?

Well, I think the bottom line for my concern is just ensuring that there's basically not any disincentive for someone to choose one process over the other because they feel one would provide lesser recourse to get statements or certain evidence during that process.

I think, you know, those points about

And this may be one of those situations where we just have to get started and see how it works.

Yeah, just to add, another neat feature of this process is that it has to monitor an ability that's been entrusted to me.

So if a complainant does choose the route of going to IA, I would have the opportunity to closely look at that investigation.

If I see a

of the investigative plan or the questions that are being asked of the officers and I see that maybe there's a question being left out or a question that could be added to enhance the investigation, I'll certainly make that recommendation.

If I feel like the investigator was not seeking a compelled statement where they could have, I will certainly have that discussion in real time.

So I think that there's different ways we could address these concerns to make sure we have thorough investigations.

Just the final question I have on that point.

Is my understanding accurate that the path to resolving it to the city manager is something that can also be sort of fleshed out more during the operating procedures and included as part of that?

I would think so.

And I just have to the question.

Okay, so the discussion that we were having and we've been having for a number of months now, basically the concern that Mr. Payne and I had as we were talking about it was that if we decide we're going to just

disband the current PCRB and constitute a wholly new PCOB, we would not have, frankly, wouldn't have any idea what we're going to end up with.

And we're going to end up with nothing for at least some period of, you know, maybe months.

And that

The better course would be to go ahead and continue, just carry everybody over from the PCRB to the PCOB when on March 1st, according to the way that I would amend it here, on March 1st, the PCRB would just become the PCOB.

It would then be able to go on and do what it needs to do.

admittedly, one of the things we found in talking with members of the PCRB over the last four or five months, as there has been a lot of dissension on the board, is that if we didn't reappoint one person, then two others were going to leave.

And it sort of broke out so that either way, we were going to be left with three members of the board

of a seven-member board, not even enough to do anything with.

So it just seemed to us as we were talking it through that the better course is not to try to dissolve what is there now, but just recognize that when it is time to reappoint people,

and there will be some reappointments.

I think it's at the end of 2022, if I remember correctly.

Then we can consider what changes have to go into the makeup of the PCRB or PCOB at that point.

However, I know that there are at least two members of council who were in favor of disbanding.

We've had a lot of conversations around just the shift in current ordinance to what we're going towards and there being a benefit to kind of reevaluating every member of the PRCRB through that lens as an argument for reconstituting in addition to some of just the more dynamics at play.

I don't have that up on my screen so

Can we have Mr. Mendez chime in?

Sure, one moment.

Yeah, thank you.

I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you about these concerns that you have.

Just to go quickly,

You were at this particular point talking about the need to reconstitute the board.

My personal feeling is that it's neither necessary nor desirable to do that.

We'll lose momentum and there will always be the question of, well,

who didn't the city council like that we would all do the best to avoid.

In terms of other issues, I think the board is pretty unanimous in we would very much prefer not to have ride-alongs be

Mandatory, and I know that I believe that Mr. Aguilar had written some language in one of his emails that made it optional, and I think that's how we feel.

In terms of a lot of these other issues that we've been discussing, remember that we have to, within the next few months, develop

two sets of operating procedures.

One, standard operating procedures that define the relationship between the police and the CRB.