City Council Work Session   12/6/2021

Most of the members are here.

Heather, the message I just sent you, I have the answer for now.

I hadn't looked at my phone.

Staff, are you good to go?

All right.

Yes.

Call this.

Ms.

Vice Mayor McGill.

I was called today and told that she would not be here for an emergency.

Councilor Hill?

I'm here.

Councilor Payne?

Here.

All right.

Thank you.

Today for this 4 p.m.

work session, we will have a discussion

Good evening.

Good afternoon, everyone.

It's Lushin.

Okay, so what I intended to do in this portion of this conversation, and I'm indulging in asking that we'll go back to when you all consider the affordable housing plan and provide a little more detail in regards to actions for staff.

What I wanted to do today was primarily go over the governance item as it related to the CAF committee.

So the group that will determine

Request for funding, as well as if you wanted to go into the governance conversation about the cash structure and plan that as well, so that we as staff are given the direction that we need to take to be able to realize the tenets of this particular plan.

But to kick that off, I wanted to just remind everybody of where we are and that we have

Retitle the Office of Housing and Redevelopment, the Office of Community Solutions.

That team will focus on affordable housing programs, commercial revitalization and development activities, and neighborhood and constituent services.

That last being an item that is a little across the board, all over the place, not really organized in any way.

And my desire would be to bring some organization to that.

some consistency to that and to be able to have a clear place that if a resident were working on a matter and they just didn't feel like they knew who they could talk to, they could always reach out to this particular team.

And that team being made up of Alex Ikifuna, who is the interim director, Brenda Kelly, redevelopment manager, and Aaron Atak, grants coordinator.

And pull all this together with that last bullet highlighting there more capacity is needed.

We have a number of ways that we can go and a lot of work that can be done.

And as the affordable housing plan identified, there's definitely more work to be done.

So just to have that conversation about where else we can go is what I intend to bring forward in future conversations.

Next slide, please.

This is an example of where that capacity could go and just taking a look at where we are and the work that is to be done.

There's a number of positions that could be created, not suggesting that we need to do all of these things at one time, but just to kind of give you a peek into what's in my head and how I have looked at this particular area of our work.

Someone that can take a look at the return on the investment.

As you all know, we are going to be receiving a report from HRNA at the end of the month on the 20th at the next council meeting.

They'll be providing for us a snapshot of the work that they've been doing to provide some analysis, some significant analysis of funding relationships that we have invested in and then what the returns of those investments have been.

We are definitely feeling as though we're going to learn a lot, a lot of improvements that will need to result from that particular report, and then to be able to go in and really make those things happen.

Someone who has specialty in low-income tax credits, new markets tax credit, and just investment in general, it would be nice to have on the team to be able to look at what the proposals are suggesting can be done.

Are they really doing those things, and how can we move our needle?

Someone to inspect projects just to make sure that they are happening as we determined that we wanted them to as we contracted them to and more or less just make sure that everyone is meeting expectations.

Someone to deal with the finances of all this as we are able to bring additional resources to the table.

I think there is some opportunity for us to bring more money to the city to help us do more affordable housing work.

And as we bring more in, there will be a need for someone to specialize in being able to determine how that money comes and goes.

Neighborhood Ambassadors would be really taking that third bullet and figuring out ways that we can make improvements to our interactions with the community at large.

That suggestion would be that these would be individuals who'd be assigned to neighborhoods and would be available to them directly, and then we would be able to make sure that they're always heard.

And then looking at contracts and just community planning in general are all areas that we could grow.

Next slide.

So to look at the affordable housing funds specifically, these are the items, these are the tenants of the plan as presented, you all adopted, the highlighted items being reform in the structure and function of the housing advisory committee, create and empower a separate CAF committee to set priorities and distribution of the funds, realign priorities, increase capacity and empower staff, and establish clear, transparent, competitive CAF process.

Yes, where we are at this time is that we're ready to act.

We just felt as though we need further guidance from council on how we should proceed.

The adoption of the plan suggests that we'll reduce the number of seats from 21 to between 10 and 15.

I think we should have some discussion on what is the right number, as well as them all being appointed by council.

So the question is

Do we start to announce this, take applications and start to field a group to become this newly organized body?

You've identified in accepting this as two-year terms, max four-term eligibility.

One of the questions would be in regards to those who make up the Housing Advisory Committee today, how do we transition folks off that then we will replace them with others as we meet other priorities set in the makeup of the structure?

with that last that next item being increasing our BIPOC representation so that we have all voices included in these ongoing conversations.

So how do we get seats that are currently occupied, not occupied so that they can be replaced by Black, Indigenous and people of color to

realize what it is that we prioritize in having a wider voice, as well as providing spaces available for housing program beneficiaries and subsidized housing residents.

These are all items that are in the plan, and I guess we're looking for some direction through your discussion on how you would like to see that to proceed.

There was reference to giving regional representatives some voting power.

I'm very curious about that specifically in regards to how you envision that happening at this time.

Everything regarding the CAF is internal to the city.

So I guess we're looking to see if we're thinking we want to go beyond that or do we just want advisory suggestions from those that are outside the city to help us more or less align what we're doing in the city with what it may be happening in the county and elsewhere.

And then the natural item that I feel like we can easily deliver on is developing an onboarding process.

Once we get some questions answered, then we'll be able to take a look at what an onboarding process will consist of.

Next slide.

And then just to fill you in on where we are today, based on HRNA doing their reporting work, we're waiting for that report to come in to allow it to influence the next round.

We anticipate being able to have the packet revised with some early improvements that we'd like to release and have that go out in January and then give a 30-day period, of course, to have applicants submit their

requests for funding, and then we'll get our responses back to them in a period shortly after.

If we could go back one slide and just leave it on that page and just kind of have some discussions, I guess is what we're more or less looking for at this time from councils.

Well, I would like to start with the regional representation with voting powers.

Can you explain where that's coming from?

Because I know in here it talked about regional collaboration, but I don't know unless there's a funding pot, a regional funding pot, which is what this was talking about.

The regional, Michael, and I think you're still on that, right?

Okay.

All right.

So I just, I don't know if our internal dollars, just like we don't vote on their internal dollars, that they should have a seat here.

But expanding, go ahead with someone.

Okay, but if whatever comes out of the Regional Housing Partnership, and once those things start building, and if there are cap funds that we feel should be utilized for those projects and transferred, then I think that's a better way.

I have a related and perhaps even more basic question.

I'm just curious what we think is meant by regional representatives.

I wouldn't say that I know that.

It's just a recommended change from the governance section of the HACC from the Affordable Housing Plan.

That's one of the items that are there.

I think it more or less falls in line with what Mayor Walker and

was just saying that regional is probably an attempt to align what we're doing in the city with what's happening in the county, but that it's not necessarily specific to a need to act right now.

Historically speaking, we have had both a UVA representative on the HACC.

I can't speak to what the attendance has been like from some of those representatives, but also we had a county representative in the form of someone who was the housing person on the county side.

Again, I'm not clear on

how much that participation has happened since when I was on the Housing Advisory Committee.

And so I totally agree.

I don't think that from a voting perspective that it doesn't seem clear, but I do think their ultimate goal should get to a more regional, like the Regional Housing Partnership is.

I think that's our goal is to get to that.

And so we're looking at this thing much more holistically than just the city.

But I also agree with what the mayor was saying around the dollars just can't be coming from one source.

We have to get to a place where everyone's really contributing to that pot.

And we're looking at these things across the region.

So if someone like Counselor Payne's current position comes to the city and at some point say, this is where we are in this process and this is where what we think these funds should be utilized for at this time, then I think that's what brings in that regional approach because they would have come up with something that could utilize dollars versus

what the hack is supposed to do or what we're hoping it does in city limits at this point.

And I don't think that we should have other entities voting on what happens with the dollars.

And there are enough individuals in the city who are doing work in the city to take up these slots, because I'm sure that's already going to

And for the HAC, it's not really related to the money allocation, but at the same time, it is related to policies.

So I think the same still holds true.

And then we look at the CAF committee, where the reference for pursuing regional priorities, yeah, I definitely see that that's something that should be done.

They do.

I think what we're trying to figure out at this moment is, I guess what I've heard is that to participate on the HACC is one thing, to participate on the CAF committee is altogether different.

Yeah, and I think with the reduction of those members, and I see the regional representation here, but

I think if we have a liaison between the that sits on both the hack and the RHP, I think that's it.

Okay, that's fair.

I understand that and I agree with that as well.

Okay, so I think if we go with looking at the hack itself and the number of seats from reducing from 21 to 10 to 15,

Don't we first need to agree on what the hack is going to do?

Is it going to do the same thing it's always been doing or are we thinking it's going to do something different?

There's a group of specific items listed on page 72 of the affordable housing plan.

I think that's the way I'm looking at it from assuming that when you all adopted the plan that that's what the agreement was for you.

Well, in all candor, we didn't

We didn't spend, I don't think we spent 30 seconds on that particular page and certainly not on that paragraph.

So I don't know whether we're necessarily wedded to the things in that paragraph.

I understand why you as the person trying to implement what council has said would regard that as the starting point.

I'm just not sure that we have spent

I guess what I will offer for you as one key takeaway that I have desired for this conversation because we'll talk about home CDBG task force next but is to ensure that you all gain an appreciation for the expertise that is provided by staff in that we are not deferring decision making power outside of the building.

when we are in the building capable of really, really figuring out what's the right approach to take on the resources being dispersed and how best they can be managed because we are taking into consideration past experience, past performance, and then aligning that with the consolidated plan priorities that come from HUD in other ways as well as what we consider the conversations to be among council and staff.

So I guess the question is more about what is it that you need the hack to do?

It's probably the question that I will pose back to you, Councilor Snook and others, would be even thinking about what your experiences have been to date, where they performed as you would like them to, and where maybe not.

And I think that, oh, go ahead.

Well, I was raising my hand just frankly to scratch my head.

But I guess, you know, I'm not familiar enough with how decisions and policy recommendations on housing matters either have been made or should be made.

We don't have a housing coordinator at the moment, as I understand it.

And

It was never quite clear to me where the line of authority lay or lines of authority lay in city council, in city hall over some of these matters.

So I'm trying to figure out, out of the different players, we've got city staff, we've got the CAF committee being recommended, we've got the housing advisory committee.

I guess I just want to try to figure out how that

that whole package is going to fit together.

And I'm really just kind of wondering whether the Housing Advisory Committee has specific tasks or just being told, hey, you're kind of in charge of housing, go do housing stuff, which is frankly what this list kind of reads like.

And I just wondered if there are specific things that we want to empower

the Housing Advisory Committee to be doing, or whether this very broad list of, you know, advise on existing housing priorities kind of language, whether that's just sufficient to say, you know, we'll tell you later what we want.

I'll just speak historically.

This is not in the last two years, I'll be honest, because I think during the pandemic, it's just been less so, but historically, the HACC would bring forward policy proposals.

I'll be honest, the two years I started on the HACC, I jumped on there because I watched how often kind of staff and the committee were kind of in conflict with each other with the hopes that we could all get onto the same page.

And so I would love, Sam, for you to kind of just provide, given that I know that we're going to have some other conversation around CBDG.

What what do you see is the most effective and efficient way for us to a leverage these outside resources in the community, but also recognize the role that staff must play.

And as Lloyd said, we know we're still down staff in order to really be, you know, meeting all of these needs.

Sure.

So what I can tell you is, I guess I'll start with just being the new guy who has been building perspective now since July.

When I first arrived and had done some preliminary work in advance and watched meetings and all and thought I understood a little more than I did.

And staff can tell you that as I've been working with this particular team, they've heard me consistently say,

Wait, we do what?

I've done that a few times.

And I've had to say that again one more time, make sure that I'm hearing that correctly.

When I process what I think is the right approach is that a housing advisory committee is just that.

They're advising.

They are providing information to inform whichever entity or group of individuals have the real authority to take whatever action.

They're providing information, informed information,

informing them of things and providing a perspective that can be utilized to reach a decision.

That in no way means that they take action that is policy, are forming the next steps and actions that are to be taken, but they are more or less just considering, well, if you do this, this may be an unintended consequence.

If you do this, this may be the result.

You

might not necessarily appreciate that.

It is respecting their expertise and their perspective for being in the conversation, but the key capacity concern is that they cannot influence outcomes that might impact them and their organizations directly.

So that's why advisory being in the name means a lot.

So to have an external group of individuals who are willing to come together and tackle housing issues in a market such as this, that is very complicated, is the best thing that we could ever hope for because we just don't have the staff to tackle it ourselves.

So to have an advisory committee of individuals who are willing to come in and talk about inclusionary zoning and various tools and resources that can be utilized to make these things more equitable and attainable for people is exactly what we should be doing.

But that advisory committee is, again, there shouldn't be tension with staff.

And I've heard that as well.

And that means it's not working if it comes down to that.

There should be a cooperative and collaborative relationship that exists between the members of the housing advisory committee and staff.

Because one thing that everyone has to remember is the staff for the city government

is here to protect the interests of the city government.

And if there are resources that are theirs, it is their responsibility to steward those resources

for the public good.

And they are meeting objectives and working to achieve outcomes that are important that have been set mostly by the city council, but sometimes by outside forces like HUD and any other funding source.

So we have to be able to balance all of that.

And for balancing all of that, sometimes what we hear when the local conversation may not necessarily be what we want to hear.

and we can't disregard that particular part of the conversation if the governing body is telling us we must do this and you must meet this guideline or you must meet this test.

So you've got to be able to work through that and that's where you need as much of a cooperative relationship as you can get on the local level.

I think when I look at the role on page 72, when I read that, and I've read all of this three or four times, I don't have a problem with

The role being considering, although that laundry list of items there, it is not taking action.

So if it is to help consider how this will work in Charlottesville, what is it about our market that means we need to do something a little bit different regarding this particular concept?

I think the hat can provide that information, that perspective, and then that information should be able to come back in, be processed along with staff recommendation and therefore come to you as the council.

with the recommendation from staff and the feedback from the advisory body.

Is it your sense that this group would be working primarily with the housing coordinator, whatever type of we're going to give the person, and that that person would basically be

I'm trying to think of an analogy would be to the housing advisory committee like the head of NDS would be to the planning commission, for example, in terms of being the person who's in charge of

Right.

I would definitely see it as that.

That would be my preference.

And I guess part of what I'm kind of forecasting is that I'm looking at that housing coordinator role as one that needs to be expanded.

It needs to be elevated so that it can perform to that degree.

The only other thought I had sort of as a broad matter is that it kind of feels like by the time we add in all of the people we want to add in,

at the same time that we're trying to say we're going to cut down on the number of people on the committee, there's going to be a real crunch.

But on page 72, there's at least an attempt to break it out to say two or three of each of these five categories.

And I guess that provides a

a meaningful way to think about who we would appoint.

And I'll give you just an example of her reference to that when we have a LIHTC deal that's being considered, that we actually need members on this committee to understand LIHTC deals in order to consider them.

I don't necessarily agree with that.

I think we can ensure that the basic information is available

in regards to what is the ultimate outcome, the schedule, the cost, and the income bracket that we're actually going to reach.

I think those are the most important factors in that particular situation.

My desire would be that I will have a staff member

So what is your sense of what the staff would be that would be needed if you're talking about expanding the role of the housing coordinator and

all these various other functions that you were looking to try to add in.

Yeah, I mean, we could very easily be inside of a small department, but I'm not suggesting that we're ready to go there yet.

I'm willing to walk slowly to get us progress.

I think the housing coordinator role, why I have not rushed to try to put it out there to fill it is because I wanted to get clarity on this conversation specifically so that I understood who I'm looking for and what I'm going to need them to be able to do and what skill sets I'm going to need them to be able to bring to the table.

Ideally, what I imagine is that that position would be at a higher, definitely at a higher pay level and that skill set would be there.

Right.

Sure.

And that position is probably more far off, actually, because it would take more money coming in.

I understand at one time we had a county allocation of funds along with our city allocation.

If we were to go back down that road and were able to do that in a more regional way, because there will be so much more money in this conversation, there might be a need for somebody like that.

And I like what, so how advisory groups should work here, I understand probably what's happening here a little bit based on the past.

I remember a couple years ago when we received a proposal, staff wanted to present one proposal, HACC members wanted staff to present a proposal.

I thought we should get both proposals.

and that no one should be slicing and dicing them up without us getting all the information.

But ultimately, that proposal was what staff wanted to submit was changed.

And I just think if we could have figured out that collaboration better where we were getting all the information versus selected information.

And so,

Thinking of just that scenario, I wouldn't have wanted the group to not be able to present that information, just like I don't think staff should not be able to present their information.

And counselors should be able to ask questions on all of it to get at the point where they are asking staff questions about it to dictate the direction that we're going.

So I don't want to head down a direction where it's

Only staff is making the decision either.

And I also don't want to head down a position where staff don't feel like there's really any use for them because other people have been dictating outcomes.

And I don't know.

It seemed like it should be simple, that there should be a better way.

But so I'm hoping that there is.

Just thinking of the LIHTC

conversation.

I know from being on the CRHA board and the redevelopment committee, that is, it's a lot of information and it's a lot of expertise for one person.

So is that a situation where, I think if there is community expertise, that's good, but is this a situation where the potential in the future employee would be helping to ensure that

because I know the attorney's office, let's just go with CRAJ project.

The attorney office had some reservations about that contract, which I think from the history and even with PHA that there should have been the same reservations for both contracts in terms of what the issues that they were bringing up.

So are you saying just in a case like that, that there would just be experts on staff to make sure that those contracts

are that the city is clear on the position that it's getting involved in?

It could be a combination.

I lean more towards the first being the lead aspect of it, that depending on

depending on what we really communicate to the housing advisory committee because I want to be fair to them and make sure that they clearly understand what their responsibility is so that from that going forward the spirit of collaboration begins with an understanding of that so as long as they understand what their responsibilities are we will work with them to deliver what needs to be delivered

I'll take that particular moment, and while it should have been simple that you could have had differing opinions, I would never have resisted sharing that there was a difference of opinion, and I would have shared that other opinion as well.

If I believed in one over the other, you just would have heard me strongly advocating for one over the other because I felt strongly about it.

And I think there's room for us to be able to present there's another alternative.

We may not necessarily agree with the alternative, but here it is.

But if we're able to get the person, the kind of person that I would like to see in this particular capacity

They would, in my mind, do the work that we don't necessarily want to force on the community to have to understand a LIHTC deal and go through so much training and review of each individual packet to try to understand what this is for having not been doing it for a long time.

They would be able to trust that their interactions with this person could produce the information that they needed.

to be able to consider it on its merit.

I think if we can make sure that people receive enough information to understand that this deal on this site to do this number of units and it's gonna deliver at this cost by this date to reach people at 30% AMI, 50% AMI, whatever it may be,

I think that is sufficient for them to be able to understand if this is a good deal or not, because part of the packaging that goes around it is we should also be telling them this project is capable of helping us achieve 30% of the number of units that we prioritize for this fiscal year.

And they can use all of that information to make that decision.

If we're not able to tie that particular project to the overarching goal that we're attempting to achieve, then they don't have the information that they need.

And I could give them the light tech packet and blow their minds with a whole bunch of numbers and charts and things like that.

And they still don't know what's going on.

So I don't think it's fair to them to overwhelm them with too much information.

If they're interested, we can give them access to learning more.

But I don't need that to be able to get the community input that I value in this particular scenario.

Okay.

So since Heather and Michael have both spent considerable time on the hat, in terms of the role of the Housing Advisory Committee, do you all see anything that's missing from that definition?

Are you all comfortable with us moving forward?

Yes, I would say largely, I guess, you know, just my two senses, I would see they they provide some value added in terms of generating

policy ideas and proposals.

And I think, you know, we can point to several positive changes and new policies that have been enacted that started from HACC and having them continue that role of being something that can help generate affordable housing

Paulus, Ph.D.

: Policy ideas.

I think that's important.

Where I've seen the gap is just when generating a lot of those ideas, being able to get on the same page of city staff in terms of, okay, this may be a great idea, but let's identify the staff resources, staff positions, and money needed to make it happen, and then just begin to plan out how we're going to actually make it happen, given that.

And I would see that being the big

a big gap there.

And I guess I would also hope, you know, maybe they can help staff, you know, at the conclusion of the study that we're getting on the 20th to help more permanently track and evaluate where we're succeeding and failing in our affordable housing investments, even just in terms of

How long are these properties being kept affordable?

And I would say my observations are consistent with Michael's during my time on there.

And I think there certainly is a big emphasis now as Sam was kind of laying out this role.

I can see there being value depending on the skill set this person could bring in.

and just elevating that to like a, you know, manager level or something like that.

Just so that the seat at the table feels balanced because there certainly were times where I just, I feel like the collaboration had more opportunity than was allowed to be had.

And I will add just another point to what I heard Council Payne say.

I mean, when it comes to

the analysis and the compliance aspect of it.

It's hard to share that outside the building because that responsibility really rests with staff in that that's really what their mission is in charge to do.

If we're going to receive funds, we need to put it out in a responsible way, but we also then need to be able to confirm that it's being utilized the way that it should.

I recognize that there's a need for consistent procedures and processes that we need to follow, and I'm planning to dig into that a little bit more and want to see

is that collaborative among the team, and then we will take those items to the HACC, but I don't believe that we should be expected to take it to the HACC for them to endorse their own compliance.

That doesn't necessarily work.

We can take it to them and share with them that compliance is coming.

This is what we plan to do.

This is why we plan to do it when we plan to roll it out.

But I don't know that we necessarily can always afford to get their endorsement of it because they just might not agree.

I wouldn't disagree with that.

I guess, you know, what I'm thinking of is, one, just acknowledging, you know, we, I don't think have been tracking our affordable housing investments as closely as we need to at all.

And I guess I'm just thinking, you know, if there's any possible value added, or enforcing compliance in a lot of areas for that matter.

But for the hack, I'm thinking more if there could be any value added in terms of tracking things like

We have a goal of producing this many affordable housing units at these AMI levels.

Where are we on getting closer to that goal?

Where have our investments not been as impactful as possible in terms of getting us closer to our goals and sort of just measuring where are we succeeding?

Where are we failing?

And we also have to think about, like, there are ways that we invest in housing initiatives outside of the CAF, and so I've always kind of tried to push for how do we look at all of this more holistically, and obviously many of us have talked about just across the organization, how are we measuring these things and what, you know, as we think about the Vibrant Communities Funds, we have the CAF, we have CBDG, you know, what is more of that streamlined approach specifically for housing that we can take to ensure

you know we're not in a case where there's the same organization applying for dollars five different ways and we're not really effectively tracking it and I know staff has done their best to kind of kind of piecemeal that together but there certainly have been cases where we've been looking at allocations and I'm like wait didn't we already allocate funding to that organization under this other program and how do we know what across the board these organizations are receiving and the accountability for that so that's just another area that

As we look at this, I just think it's much bigger than the CAF.

Obviously with our CIP as well, we think about some of the bigger allocations we've made for Friendship Corps and for public housing, those things were outside of that CAF process.

I would definitely agree with that.

I think it's urgent that we develop the internal ability to manage understanding of how we have all these different resources going out for housing.

I think the fact that I walked in at the time that we were doing this HRNA contract has kind of reminded me of that.

And that's where we've been talking internally about

with this and whatever recommendations they make to us as a part of that report, we will immediately start working on it because we should be able to track every dollar that we as a city government put into affordable housing and track the outcomes of it, regardless of if it is to produce a new unit or just to preserve affordability for someone, we should be able to track that all the way down to the deepest level.

And I'd love to be able to see that.

And another thought, which is a little bit of a tangent, but, you know, with that in mind, you know, knowing that, you know, we're going to be implementing some kind of inclusionary zoning, hopefully, that's great, but how are we going to actually track that those units are being rented at the levels that inclusionary zoning has set?

And I don't know if

And I think that may go back to the ROI analyst.

And my note that I have here is doing, you know, that part of the presentation was the, we approved the Office of Performance Management and the, you know, solution to the management position for

starting July.

And so that person, when I was discussing it, we were talking about both vibrant communities, that was the start, but also looking that this individual could work with what we're doing with CAF dollars and things like that.

And that could be the starting point for how that office gets off the ground.

So it seems like, I don't know if

Sam, you're thinking that those two things couldn't merge because there were conversations around this being in budget.

But I just think that's a possibility for us to consider for that funding.

But whether we started with this or Babin Communities Fund, which I think is necessary and needed to, just if we started somewhere and get that person

And then we can figure out how many staff members we need to add and what an office looks like.

Yeah, I would agree.

I mean, I had that thought too when I took a look at that proposal for the Office of Performance and Measurement II and thought that that would be an area that this particular aspect of work could get done.

And that's part of why I'm not sure I know exactly when we will be ready to have an ROI person just to look at CAF dollars, home CDBG dollars.

But

If we could, you know, combine them with looking at vibrant communities, that does make sense to me.

And it begins to give us the ability to put in place whatever our internal mechanics need to be for tracking because they were doing some stuff.

But to be perfectly fair to those that are doing it, they're doing the best that they can.

But what we have, we haven't necessarily slowed down enough to figure out what's missing.

I don't think so.

I mean, I know that if Chrissy were here, she probably would tell me, yes, I need to do something.

But no, I think I'm fine.

I can figure out how to navigate that particular process.

If that's what we want to prioritize is where I need to go, I'm ready to do it because I feel like the report from HRNA is going to be

interesting and it is going to be eye opening for us because while we've been very generous in releasing dollars, we have not been as responsible as we need to be in tracking those dollars to the outcome we desire when we let them go.

So in terms of membership, the

I asked this question before of why a counselor was removed.

So I'm going to advocate for that again.

I still think that a counselor should be on, you know, a part of the membership.

And so if we did three for every category for the first one, two, three, four categories, the regional representatives, if there's a desire to keep the UVA and county representatives on here, then that would just be two.

and then add a counselor.

So that would be 13 individuals.

I will share that.

I don't have any objection to a council member serving.

The only comment I was going to make is

Having sat on a lot of these things over the last few years, I just, I do feel like sometimes less is more.

And as I, in my time on the hack, it just seemed like sometimes when there was a smaller, really deep group discussions, they just made more progress.

And I found the current format pretty unmanageable just in terms of people really being able to contribute meaningfully.

So I just, I generally prefer if we can try to keep these types of groups as manageable and small as possible, but.

So what would you recommend?

Well, let me ask this question in regards to the county and UVA representatives.

I think from my meeting, well, Michael, you may can answer this better, but from the being on the PDC and what the regional housing partnership is supposed to do, which was

established just a few years ago.

I think that committee should be able to do that work.

And as always, these meetings are open to the public.

So those representatives can comment if there's something that they need to do.

I think maybe the work that UVA is doing

saying that they're going to do with affordable housing, maybe a UVA representative remaining on there.

But again, I just think this should be being done with the hack.

I guess my initial thought would be the most valuable thing is just having those

regular communication and strong relationship between the city and the regional partners in UVA.

I don't know if the hack is the best way to do it.

I guess my initial thought is there may be other avenues.

And I would think the most important thing is ensuring collaboration on specific projects, like UVA's proposal to build a number of affordable housing units, the hotel at 29 to provide

housing for homeless individuals in our community and things like that.

And I would also agree that, you know, I think it would make sense to really think about the regional housing partnership being a body that we can really take advantage of more because I know they're really

looking to strengthen, continue to strengthen, and they've gotten a grant money to do some projects.

I think they have some capacity building grants and have discussed stronger connection with local governments throughout the region.

And I would suggest that we could always invite them in without voting power and they can be advisory to the advisor body.

I mean, there's nothing wrong with that either so that they can provide an update on UVA's priorities as well as county priorities.

And then they can participate in the work with the perspective that they have.

Another consideration is if you look at some of this membership, you know, the housing providers, real estate professionals, I mean, a lot of those people are serving this region, not serving just the city.

So I mean, the county has even number of supervisors, but the reality is that there are very few of these votes that actually come down to a five to four or eight to seven.

Most of them are by by consensus.

So are you so Heather back to your thoughts so we can because we do have two other items.

Are you saying to keep it at because my math was all wrong in the first place because I scratched that last category out.

And I did the last two.

So I think that if we do two for the I would

say that we do three for the first category, the affordable housing providers, which I do have a question that was earlier in the document about the two year term limits and two year terms and four term limits.

So I just want to highlight that because it's not likely that those partners will change.

So do you wanna do three first category, two for the real estate professionals, lenders, developers, two for at large community members?

One of the thoughts that was somewhere floating around here was that perhaps the category

that you've, maybe if I'm thinking about what you're saying correctly, the two or three affordable housing residents could include people who are on Section 8 vouchers.

Okay.

It does.

It does.

I think that's fine.

So that would be 11?

Yes.

And then I guess for the committee that would actually review funding proposals and make those recommendations, how would you see?

Because that makeup would come from this group, I would imagine.

I just was confused because like I do see that the first category is affordable housing providers and as we've done this in the past that's where there has been a conflict and so in the past like we had a subcommittee that would look at the CAF stuff and it was if anyone had any ties to anyone application who's applying for those funds they couldn't be on it and so I think

just that category in itself could be problematic for being on a board that's going to ultimately determine how funds are going to be allocated.

I think the whole point was wanting to separate this out.

And again, they hacked it before with the subcommittee, but it still had

There was not that the trust wasn't there with the community.

There still seemed to be an issue of transparency.

So we changed that to the affordable housing residents beneficiary three city staff.

So in this way, it's saying that of these nine people, no more than three can be hack members.

I don't think people who sit on this board, and I think we just got a comment.

from Lisa, too, just saying that Richmond utilized a separate board to manage its housing trust fund.

I just think that these should be two separate boards.

And I think the only hesitation I had was, are we going to be able to satisfy all the categories are needed and not have duplication?

I was gonna say that.

Yeah.

Yeah, I guess I'm just a little confused, because I thought the proposal is having separate HAC and separate CAF, and I would agree with those concerns in terms of the CAF committee, but not so much with the HAC as a body.

Yeah, and I think for the HACC part, we're fine with it.

Okay, well, never mind then.

And then being the council representative on the CAF, even when I sat on, I was not a voting member.

I just sat and oversaw the process.

So ultimately it comes to council, the recommendation.

So I don't know that we should have a counselor on it.

And I was always uncomfortable when I sat on that thing, even if I wasn't voting.

Michael, have you sat?

Very unusual because of COVID.

I mean, I don't know.

I mean, I see in the documents that some other localities have a counselor present.

Yeah, it comes before the body as a whole.

So I don't think that, but I would recommend that the counselor who sits on the hat also is the counselor that sits on the calf.

Well, it ultimately comes before us anyways.

I just felt like I didn't want my, at the time, my presence as a counselor weighing in to take and have any undue influence over other members.

And so I literally was just there listening.

and just to observe the process and understand how it was got to.

So if it came to council, there was one of us sitting in there, but I think I would have been really uncomfortable if I had been a voting member and I think it would have affected the group.

Well, people are normal, so I think it would be fine, but okay.

All right, so where are we?

I don't know that we have to have a counselor on that.

I mean, we could always add another category of a representative if you wanted to do that.

So are we saying three staff, three at large?

Okay.

I think that's fine.

Just going by what Councilor Hill said about feeling uncomfortable in that moment.

I mean, that's probably real in regards that some might look to a council member to give them a nod.

I don't know, but

I will say that in this particular scenario, if it were three staff and three at large, then any tie votes will come to me to break.

So let's then, I think, so if there is not a council liaison, what I have found is that people may not show up there

So I think it is important for those discussions for there to be a member of the council on it.

And so maybe it can just be written that this person is a voting member on the HACC, but a non-voting member on the CAF.

Okay.

That's fine with me.

I just remember that we had tried last year to cut down the number of times that council had to be on, councilors had to be on various committees and in recognition in part that the number had gotten out of hand.

And I have my doubts as to how much it would add to the process at this point.

We're also, I mean, Michael and I are both on the region, I guess he's the official person, maybe I'm the alternate on the regional housing partnership.

and there are, I'm sure, going to be various other things like this that we're going to be called upon to get into the middle of.

Michael, do you attend the subcommittee?

Well, I guess we just had that conversation.

Okay.

I don't think, I don't know if it'll matter too much one way or the other.

My comments just stand that like my experience on there, I just, I do feel that it just was not the most, the best kind of situation to have a counselor in the room when those conversations were happening.

The I mean, I would think that that would be one committee where we would particularly want some expertise from providers.

We're asking the CAF committee would set scoring criteria and targeting recommendations for programs funded through the CAF.

I mean, I

Who better than housing providers and advocates?

And then we don't need to have a majority of them.

And certainly there are going to be conflicts that they would have to recuse themselves.

I agree.

I'm not faulting that.

No, I'm adding that the at-large can also be representatives from the larger expertise community, I would say.

That would be how you would get that.

You would get it in twofold because at-large does not just necessarily mean even more residents.

But we're still, there's at least a reasonable likelihood that we end up with nobody who's an expert.

Well, the question is, what are they voting on?

If they're voting on setting up the criteria, that's fine.

That's what this is.

I'm reading the description that says, in addition, the CAF committee will set scoring criteria and targeting recommendations for funding for programs funded through the CAF and review city staff recommendations for fund awards.

Only at the tail end do we actually get to them actually making a decision about funding.

Anyway, I don't really know what this group is going to do.

All I can do is take a look at what has been written.

It seems to me that there is stuff there for which we would want to have their expertise and that they wouldn't have to be barred from voting.

And I can see that value.

I think it's just important if we are going to keep that category that we are clear that whoever applies for that can't foresee themselves applying for these dollars during their term.

I just think even if they're on it in the room, this is what created this whole churn before with even just subcommittee of the HAC doing this.

because they felt like there's members of the HACC who had undue influence, even if they weren't on the subcommittee.

So I do think that a separation is necessary, but I understand where Lloyd you're coming from in terms of just the expertise.

Yeah, I think because there's no way that our affordable housing providers won't need the resources from the city from this pot of money.

So if they're on here, it's going to be very difficult to say, so you can't award money to yourself.

So the only way to avoid that is going to be to leave them out in some way.

And so is there...

Okay, so this is the code that was just sent to us from Richmond just says prohibition on the award of grants or loans where board members are involved, no grant or loans from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund may be awarded to persons serving on the board or to other legal entities of which such person is a member of or which the person has a personal interest as the state or government conflict of interest acts defines that term.

So based on that, you know, using that and the issues that we've had in the past, I think that it's going to be best.

And while we've been having this conversation is to figure out how the funding doesn't occur.

And there's no way for those individuals to be on there and because they are going to need the funding more likely than not.

If we just clarify that the HACC will have a primary role in terms of developing the criteria for the CAF and the CAF is strictly making the allocations, if that makes sense.

or what about being able to, which they would be able to anyway submit proposals?

I mean, to comment on what they think the scoring criteria should be and target recommendations.

I think that goes back to the point that I was making in the beginning, is that in an advisory capacity, then you're going to receive an advisement on what the appropriate steps to be, council will take that action.

So however we, if we want to move that particular responsibility to the HAC, that gives me no heartburn, the HAC can actually settle on what the recommendation is for the scoring criteria.

and let that come before you to, as you're approving the allocation, you're approving that set of criteria, which is going to reset based on whatever the priorities are.

As long as the public is comfortable that those setting the criteria aren't trying to do it in their own interest or something.

Okay.

So then both, so the HAC will be able to make scoring criteria and targeting recommendations but

there will also be a proposal that comes out of CAF.

Is that what you're all saying?

I understand that, but we've tried that before.

And I think it's part of the thing about this, who's going to kind of

both skill set and the level at which this person is brought in, like they're going to seat at the table.

I think that has a lot to do with just the staff and I think just what our senior management team kind of partners with them to make sure that they are having their voices heard and that they feel that they are a partner in this.

And I agree that historically it hasn't always felt that way.

So on that, yeah.

Now I understand that.

I hope it works out.

So what we're saying now is to set the scoring criteria and targeting recommendations.

It's going to be in both.

I think it could be revised to say that awarding of funds will be in alignment with the scoring criteria that is set to identify the priorities.

so that it's working together, not necessarily repeating any effort.

So, oops.

To move forward, it's three at-large community members, three affordable housing residents or beneficiaries, and three city staff members.

All right.

So no council member at all.

All right.

Yeah.

And I think what I want to do because of timing is table the task force conversation.

Yeah, that's what I was just going to recommend.

We can move it.

Oh, 23 tonight?

It all depends on how long that goes.

No, the 20th is time.

Okay.

Yeah, but we probably not.

It's 15 minutes and we still have to do public comment.

Oh, it's only 15 minutes for this thing?

Okay.

So we'll move to item three just for the public.

The discussion for the CDBG Home Program Task Force, we're going to come back to that tonight if we can, or it will be moved to the 20th, so we'll update you at the 630 meeting.

for which direction we're going with that.

Good afternoon, Madam Mayor, members of council.

I'm Chris Cullinan, the city's director of finance.

Per state code, the city's auditors are required to present their report on the city's financial statements from the most recently concluded fiscal year to city council prior to the end of the calendar year.

This afternoon, we're joined by Michael Lupton and Matthew McLaren from Robinson Farmer Cox and Associates to present their report for fiscal year 2021.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mayor Walker, members of council.

Again, my name is Matt McLaren, and this is Michael Lupton.

We both serve as the co-partners on the audit for the city of Charlottesville, the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021.

Our remarks this afternoon are going to include two documents.

The first is titled the Communication with Those Charged with Governance.

This is a letter that is required in professional standards that

highlights about seven key points between an auditor and a government body, and I'm going to review that.

The second item is the independent auditor's report.

This, in summary, is the conclusion on the audit of the financial statements, and I will also review that document.

At this time, I'm going to review the communication with those charged with governance.

Again, this is a

of written correspondence between an auditor and a governed body, but I'm going to communicate that orally to you this afternoon.

There are seven key points, starting with responsibilities under an audit.

Just very briefly, there are auditor responsibilities and auditive responsibilities.

The auditive is responsible for

providing accounting records to be audited, providing a system of internal control, and either preparing and or accepting responsibility for that annual financial report.

The auditor's responsibilities include testing documents, examining policies and verifying certain accounts, testing controls, and finally, opining on the financial statements as presented.

Also disclosed in this letter is communication or accounting principles.

We're required under professional standards to highlight any accounting principles that were implemented for the fiscal year in June 30, 2021.

At this time, we're highlighting GASB Statement 84.

GASB is the oversight body for all governmental accounting pronouncements.

Statement number 84 dealt with fiduciary activities.

It had a mental impact to the city, but it was implemented accurately and timely.

The next item disclosed in this communication are accounting estimates.

Just about every financial statement has accounting estimates, including the city is no different.

The city has accounting estimates related to depreciable lives of fixed assets and also estimates as relates to pension and OPEB liabilities.

The fourth item disclosed in this communication

Goals around any difficulties encountered in performing the audit.

Please report there were no difficulties encountered in performing the FY21 audit.

The next item to disclose is corrected and uncorrected misstatements.

Most audits do include some proposed audit adjustments.

If those audit adjustments are included in the annual financial report, the audit financial statements, those are considered corrected misstatements.

Any uncorrected misstatements are those that are not included in the report and required in professional

Sanders to disclose those items.

Please report that all proposed audit adjustments were included in the annual financial report and there were no uncorrected misstatements.

The next item is disagreements in applying accounting principles or any other matters during the course of the audit.

Please report we had no disagreements with management during the course of the audit.

And lastly, this letter talks about consultation with other independent auditors.

This is also

called opinion shopping.

We're not aware that management had any other consultation with another independent audit firm.

That wraps up or summarizes the communication with those charged with governance.

And I'm going to quickly move on to the independent auditor's report.

Again, this is the document that's contained in the annual financial report.

And if you're following along in that document, it's pages 18 through 20.

It spans the course of three pages.

We've issued an unmodified or clean opinion on the financial statements.

This is the best report that can be provided to an entity on its audited financial statements.

We're also pleased to report that there were no significant deficiencies or material weaknesses to report during the course of the audit.

That concludes my remarks.

Thank you, Michael and Matthew.

Madam Mayor, I apologize.

I just, he referenced the independent auditor's report.

I apologize.

I verbally briefed you all on that earlier, but I will make sure I get you hard copies of that total document for your references.

But as they noted, the highlights, it's a clean opinion with no material findings therein, but I will be sure to get you all a full copy of that for your review.

Okay, counselors, and so we may have other questions, but we didn't have it to ask.

I don't know if the counselors have it or not.

I am interested in just what the change that you referred to for Statement 84, and it's in the first document.

Could you describe what that is?

A governmental financial report may include certain types of financial statements called fiduciary activities.

These are specific types of funds that are reported in a lot of governmental funds.

And this statement changed the format of that presentation for those types of activities, fiduciary fund financial statements.

Most notably for the city, the one change was actually related on the component unit school board.

that was related to the Student Activity Fund reporting and how it's reported now actually in the audited annual financial report.

Previously, it was a standalone document that was not incorporated in the annual financial statements.

Okay.

I've seen that somewhere.

Okay, thank you.

I just wanted to clarify, like, so beyond this discussion, we will be discussing, like, year-end stuff, I guess, at the last meeting of the year?

Yeah, no, we'll be discussing starting that now, but there are any other questions that you have for the auditors?

Okay, sorry, yeah.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions?

No.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Okay.

And so with that information, we have completed the annual comprehensive financial report.

We will be posting a copy of that online to the city's website, specifically in the finance department.

Hard copies will be available for anybody who might want one.

But I'm pleased to report that we finished fiscal year 2021.

The general fund had surplus revenues of about $5.5 million.

I want to take a few minutes just to kind of walk through the results and kind of how we arrived there.

As you'll recall, when Council was preparing and adopting the FY21 budget, COVID was just beginning in the spring and early summer of 2020.

And going into that, we were confident that COVID was going to impact our revenues, but we were unsure of exactly how, but that our more economically sensitive ones were the most likely

vulnerable to changes in the economy and pandemic measures and shutdowns and so forth.

And as we went through the year and as we got to the end of the year, the more economically sensitive revenues such as personal property tax, meals tax, lodging tax,

underperformed compared to their budget and underperformed to their actual results in the previous fiscal year.

Fortunately, though, the city's largest revenue source, which is real estate taxes, performed as well, if not actually a little bit better than expected.

And then also sales tax performed better than expected as well.

And you know, that's attributed to the city actually does get sales tax on online purchases made within the city.

and also just non-discretionary spending during the pandemic, things like groceries.

People still had to shop for groceries during the pandemic, so that helped.

Those two revenue results helped offset the poor performance of some of our more economically sensitive ones.

On the expenditure side, though, we were also under budget as well, which helped, again, with the revenue picture.

Several of our larger departments had vacancy savings,

through the course of the year, as well as reduced levels of service or closed facilities during COVID.

And that resulted in expenditures being less than expected.

But I also want to point out that the city also received $8.2 million of CARES money during the fiscal year.

Now, to be clear, the $5.5 million does not include any CARES money.

We account for that in a separate fund outside of the general fund.

But what it did allow us to do was instead of utilizing our general fund dollars to do certain eligible projects or eligible activities, we will use the CARES money instead.

So that CARES money stepped in the place of the city's own revenues.

And so that certainly

helped with the bottom line to generate that 5.5 million that I mentioned.

And so

Staff is planning to bring the year-end appropriation to council for public hearing first reading on December 20th.

And in addition to a handful of housekeeping items that we need to do to close the fiscal year, we're going to be making two recommendations, which we want to get your feedback and guidance on this afternoon.

The first one is, as you'll recall, when the FY21 budget was put together back in 2020,

is we did create an economic downturn reserve of about $6.7 million of budgetary capacity by not transferring cash from the general fund to the capital improvements program.

As you know, one of our financial policies is that we'll transfer no less than 3% of the general fund to the CIP.

However, given the extraordinary circumstances that we found ourselves facing, that seemed to be a prudent

step to take at that time.

And as it turns out, we didn't have to tap into that money through the course of the fiscal year.

And so that 6.7 million is outside of the 5.5.

As I mentioned, it's just that we simply didn't spend that.

We didn't transfer it like we

would have planned to.

And so that 6.7 million, we are recommending that that be set aside to the CIP Contingency Fund in recognition that that's where it came from in the first place.

That's how we created that reserve capacity.

We deferred cash funded projects for that year.

And obviously, as we all know, there are several large capital needs, both in the upcoming year, but in the five year plan as well.

And so our first recommendation is going to be to appropriate that those downturn funds to the CIP contingency.

The second recommendation

involves the $5.5 million in surplus revenues.

And our recommendation, I should back up before I give the recommendation, I should also point out that our policy, our financial management policy does state that that as well should go to the CIP contingency.

Although in the past, other uses of those funds have been made for other one-time types of expenses or unforeseen things or opportunities that produced a return on that investment.

That being said, there have been discussions with the mayor and council, city management and leadership regarding employee compensation and recognition.

And so tonight we're recommending that the $5.5 million be set aside for a series of employee compensation adjustments, the first one being

A one-time bonus, I thank you for service and dedication and essential work performed during what's been a difficult year for work already performed during the past calendar year.

The second one is a mid-year market adjustment to acknowledge the challenges and our competition in the local labor market to make sure we can retain and attract the most qualified candidates and retain our employees to do the essential work that they have been doing and need to continue to do.

And then finally, this isn't a dollars and cents recommendation, but also just

an update on the class and compensation study to address the more long-term systemic compensation challenges that we face as an organization.

So sort of a thank you for work already completed, a short-term adjustment, acknowledging some current market realities, and then again, a longer-term, more strategic look at how we do compensation.

And so with that, I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Sanders.

and Ms.

And can I just, before I forget,

But I do want to just for staff to ponder the 6.7 million transfer, especially with the infrastructure bill that was passed and that money may be coming for some of those projects.

And I know we don't know the amount that localities will get from it, but based on the poverty rate before and what will happen to the majority of people who were in poverty, that that will probably be a deeper level of poverty coming out.

I don't know if CIP

is where we should be considering allocating that with the fact that there may be funding coming in the future.

We also have a $75 million project out on the horizon that

I think that any contributions we can put into the CIP right now I think are going to be needed.

And if we're going to be able to do any of our other priorities.

And we took it from there.

Or didn't transfer to there.

But what I'm saying is, and I've been saying this the whole time with the school reconfiguration project, something that cannot solve

All of the issues that we have, schools as fabulous as we want to believe that they are, we are arriving at this current place that we are with the current situations that we have with our public.

One of the primary focus, I think, is to make sure that families don't

are not in deeper levels of poverty than they were before the pandemic because then it won't matter what the fancy schools look like because you're going to have people showing up and they're not going to be in a position to learn.

And so I just think we should be more strategic.

And that was the original thought of why this may not happen because there may be greater needs.

And I don't think that we stress ourselves to think about what those needs are to make sure that families are as healthy as possible, leaving

Well, ma'am, if there's any further questions that you have, our director of finance did a wonderful job of really covering the suggestions that staff has come up with for council's consideration.

And if there's any details that council would like additional information on, we are happy to provide that.

But really the focus is that that thank you bonus is key towards work that has already been completed by our staff through 2021.

Correct.

I was thinking that we were going to see the current proposal.

Yeah, we need the chart.

The chart that spells out the size of the bonus because it's a $3,500 bonus sliding scale based on hours reported.

Yeah, that's been my holdup all weekend where I think I may have a question.

I'm not sure if I have a question because I just don't remember the entire thing.

But if you are saying that it's clear, then okay.

But maybe I don't.

I was happy with what was presented during the meeting.

I have the chart if I can share it.

That's fine.

Let's see if this works.

Are you able to see it?

The edges cut off just a little bit, Chrissy.

Much better.

So, Mayor, this is the chart that we provided you and other council members for consideration of this proposal.

And what you'll see at the very top, that breakdown table provides the reported hours, how we broke those down, and the percentage of bonus that would be allocated in that amount.

The maximum amount for any team member who worked

1,088 hours or above and has not received a bonus already will be $3,500.

The chart that is second on this page is important because we also wanted to make sure that we recognized our temporary season on returning retirees.

And so that ensures that the majority of those individuals who have provided us with more than 6.9 hours will receive recognition and a thank you for the work that they have already completed through November 26th.

The other key chart that we showed you all, Chrissy, if you would mind scrolling, is just in consideration of our sworn fire police and sheriff deputies.

You see Chrissy is mousing over it so you can bring your attention to it.

They are all eligible to receive up to $3,500 or the difference between what was previously received and that amount.

This was to ensure that individuals did not

feel as if they were being forgotten, but also that individuals did not receive double the amount, which could happen with certain individuals who may be caught forward supported, for example, and had received a bonus from the state.

But nearly every employee outside of 18 will walk away with some funding as a thank you from the city for their hard work and dedication during what

we hoped would be a less complicated year but continues to be complicated thanks to various reasons notwithstanding Omicron.

Yes, and I couldn't remember in, you know, when I was trying whether these said the percentage was different and that's what I was, the email that I sent over the weekend, that's what I was thinking that maybe it was but this is not so that's

the response you all gave, and now I can see it, and that's all that needed to happen.

Okay.

I just want to clarify for the public so that obviously we were just laying out the dollar amounts to go towards a bonus, but we'll also be leveraging some of that 5.5 as kind of planting the seed for that mid-year pay increase.

And then obviously that's something that we'll be doing in perpetuity because we have to maintain those dollars on the operational side.

So the bonus is a cost, the price tag right at $3 million.

And then there's another 2.5 roughly is what it takes to do the 6% market adjustment, which the plan is to make it effective in January.

So this would be immediate relief to folks seeing an increase in pay beginning January 22.

And then we are already looking forward to how do we sustain this for going forward and feel comfortable that the projections for revenues

So I did get language.

I need to finish reading it in regards to how many days have to go in between.

It's based on the size of the

The appropriation, I believe that dictates how many days were required.

So we'll be able to take a look at that in the morning because I did get that later today.

Yeah.

Okay.

No, I think, well, not think, but this is good, and I hope staff, you know, understands that even though things have been really challenging, that we do appreciate the work that they do and the effort, even with all of everything that's been going on, for them to continue to make sure that the city continue to run.

And, um,

The effort that they put in shows that it's not a one person, it's not an upper management that it takes all of us.

And I think that they do, you know, continue to show up and do a good job.

And I see people in the morning sometime when I'm out and walking across the bridge to come to work and, you know, you just see it.

So I hope that just a reminder.

And if I could, because I know that there will be a lot of conversation going on for the rest of tonight and throughout the building tomorrow, we have been working feverishly on trying to pull this plan together.

We will continue to do that work to be able to roll out details so that we can inform the staff exactly how this will work and how it will impact them so there won't be questions.

And ideally, we'll try to do that as soon as possible.

The question you posed, Mayor, on how soon we can consider it will be

And Madam Mayor, I do just want to recognize two team members who are not with us this evening.

Chris Bowdo in our human resources department and Brian Ray in the budget office.

They were integral in pulling together the information and that chart that Chrissy shared took many, many hours of

manual analysis to get us where we needed to be in terms of those breakdowns.

I told Brian thank you last week, but Chris, thank you too.

Appreciate all the effort, all the staff members that you all too put into this, and you did really good work in a short amount of time.

So thank you.

All right.

Any other questions, counselors here, thoughts?

No?

Well, thanks staff again for your work on this and again for the

Public, just before we go to public comment, we will either move discussion to the CDBG task force to either later tonight and we'll announce that at 6.30 timeframe or on the 20th.

Who do we have, Mr. Rice or Ms.

No, you have me right now.

Oh, one just popped up.

Good evening, City Council.

I know you've got a long day ahead of you.

I appreciate the conversation.

I did want to just put in a quick plug.

I've been a big fan of the HACC, and there's a lot of expertise in this community, and I really hope you can continue to rely on the expertise.

I did want to raise a question, I know it's pretty much decided, but CRHA is your housing arm for the city of Charlottesville, and I think over the past few years has shown that it is increasingly more capable

of meeting those needs and actually fairly unique in meeting the most ambitious goals for affordable housing in this community.

So I want you all to keep that in mind as you move forward, but also to consider that CRHA should probably have a permanent place on the HAC moving forward.

It doesn't exclude them from being able to seek funding, but I think since it is your

arm for housing wants to be that arm.

And I think you all want to see that happen and have that ability that you should make sure that CRHA is deeply included on the HACC.

Can you hear me, counselors?

Thank you.

This is my first time before you, and I apologize if I was a bit confused as to timing.

My name is Richard Allen.

I'm a professional iconographer.

And that means I've spent a career studying the public function of civic symbolism.

Last July, you counselors were praised.

people worldwide.

You oversaw removal of a century-old statues that honored slavery, that honored Indian extermination.

This was a truth-telling moment for Charlottesville.

I'm here to ask you to continue that by honoring the contribution of enslaved ancestors who built our town.

And you're halfway there.

you have tasked the historic resources committee memorialize the slave block site.

For over two decades, there's been no visible notice there acknowledging enslavement history.

But next year that will change the HRC plans to what they call go big with an extensive redesign of court square historic signage.

My Citizen Advocacy Group supports this.

Two parking spaces presently obstruct visual access to this center of Charlottesville where human beings once were sold.

Last month I met with city engineer Brennan Duncan and he made an eyes on inspection of this issue.

He informed us that the two parking spaces can be moved across the street

just west of 500 port squares entry door.

All he needs is your okay.

And our group respectfully asks that you give that promptly.

We ask that you place this request on your agenda for next meeting and discussion, and that you direct new Public Works Director Stacy Smalls to relocate the problematic pair of parking places.

What can our citizen group do to further encourage this action?

On behalf of hundreds of concerned citizens, thank you for creating unobstructed visual access to the HRC's memorial of the slave block.

And I'll just add that it has been very, very enlightening to see the hard work that you and staff are constantly engaged in.

At this time, I don't see any other hands raised.

If you would like to make a comment at this time, now is your time to do so.

Okay, looks like we're good to go.

So I'll close the public comment.

period.

And I'll bring the comment that Brandon

raised, I would like to explore that more.

I know that the relationship with the city and CRAJ hasn't been for a long time what I thought it should be, and so I am interested in that conversation, but I know that once you start opening things up like that, then everybody will make their pitch for why it should be them too, so I just want to acknowledge that, but I want to, I heard the question.

Any other comments?

at this time.

All right.

So we're going to now go into closed session.

Ms.

Thomas.

Chair Walker.

Yes.

Councilor Hill?

Yes.

Councilor Payne?

We couldn't hear you.

I can see.

Okay.

He says yes.

Thank you.

All right.

When we come back, we come to a different meeting.

Okay.