City Council Meeting   12/19/2022

Okay.

All right.

So let's call to order our December 19th, 2022 Charlottesville City Council meeting.

Ms.

Councillor McGill will not be with us.

Correct.

Well, we do it for the whole thing.

Yeah.

For the PCOB, I think we had on a consent agenda.

Right.

There were one or two little changes that we're going to tweak.

So we'll take the PCOB matters, number five, on the consent agenda.

We'll take that off and we will put that, I guess that goes at the very end of the action item, so it would be a

If we were keeping the same numbers, it would be number 12.

It would come after what is presently marked as number 11.

Okay, with that amendment, motion and a second.

Who was the second?

Me.

Okay, I'll head you as the motion.

Who made the motion?

Okay.

Any opposed?

The motion passes.

So this meeting as always will be divided into three main sections.

First is a work session to hear and discuss a presentation that will not require a council vote, at least not today.

It will be followed by a closed meeting

and then the city council business meeting which will begin around 630 with seating available in council chambers for up to 23 preregistered attendees and media.

So on our four o'clock agenda we have the topic of redrawing precinct lines for voting and we have with us today Taylor Yowell our registrar and Anne Hemingway the chair of the board of elections.

I'm going to start off tonight.

I'm Anne Hemingway.

And I'm just going to give you a little background on this, on why we are proposing these changes with the precinct map.

Correct.

That's what I understand.

So the reason this came up is a couple of things.

First, after the 2020 election, the city of Charlottesville was kind of tagged by the state board of elections because one of our precincts had over 4,500 active voters in the precinct.

And it didn't require us to make a big change, but it did alert us that

that particular precinct, Johnson Precinct was getting larger and larger.

In addition to that, there have been ongoing issues that we've had with the tonsillar polling place because it's just too small.

And that polling place, that precinct was also getting larger in size because of the development in the southern part of the city.

We've also had problems

and complaints about Alumni Hall, which is one of our really one and only private polling place.

We've had trouble just getting our schedules coordinated with Alumni Hall.

Parking's been a problem.

And it's also the farthest away from the election office.

So when we have to take supplies there in the late afternoon,

it's very problematic.

So once we started looking at the map and we started thinking about possible alternative polling places as well as relieving the Johnson Precinct

It basically became very clear that the entire city precinct map would change.

Taylor and I went to all the public schools buildings because they are the school buildings that are in neighborhoods.

They're great places for polling places.

They have parking.

The city schools are now by state law closed on the November elections.

and we basically decided after going to all the schools that we would propose eliminating Tanzler as a polling place, Tanzler Recreation Center and opening up Jackson Valley School and then redistributing voters around there.

And then we decided to retire Alumni Hall

put some of those voters into Venable, but basically move Walker over and move other people into Charlottesville High School.

That's our other new proposed polling place.

And Taylor's going to talk more about how we redistributed their voters there.

We've always had a history of complaints around Venable, of people that

think they should be able to walk to Venable and the importance of walkability.

So we did change some of the voting around Venable to make the people that can walk there be able to walk there.

So that's the history behind it.

It really took several years to come up with this proposed precinct map.

We ran into the 2020 census, which put a moratorium on this kind of project.

And then the results of the 2020 census were delayed significantly.

And then we ran up against the congressional redistricting statewide.

And the state election office asked us to just delay this until that redistricting was concluded.

We recently put together what we thought was a good precinct map.

We sent it out to community people and people on our precinct committee.

We got some good feedback and made some changes.

We've made several changes already to address walkability issues.

And so we feel pretty comfortable now with the proposed map.

We've taken it to several neighborhood associations.

to discuss it.

So it's out there and we're ready to move forward.

So that's the end of my presentation.

Yes.

So, counselors, I gave you a handout, a little cheat sheet.

and I'm just going to briefly run through what the process looks like because there's a lot of legal stipulations about what happens if you're changing precincts.

So I wrote this when I was first mayor coming in front of the committee and we were talking about whether we do it for a general election or primary election and obviously the decision's been to get this done before the primary election, give as much notice as possible.

It's just a visual.

So we're in that first block right now where we are

seeking community stakeholder input.

We've done that.

We're broaching it with you guys.

Then we're going to have a council reading.

And if you turn your sheet over, I put in dates that are more accurate based on what we go.

So the current plan is to get an ordinance in front of you.

And there's quite a few ordinance changes because we have to write out what all the changes are going to be.

We also have to change one of the wards to encompass the new precincts as drawn.

So we're going to come in front of you on January 17th, propose ordinance changes.

That's going to

kick off a public comment period that's going to last for about 30 days.

During that time, there's going to be at least one public hearing during that public comment period.

After the public comment period, then we're going to meet again, and you guys are going to approve the ordinance changes, and they won't go into effect until a waiting period has happened.

The waiting period is to allow anybody that might have a claim of voting suppression or an issue to bring a claim, so that allows for that.

to come to you guys' attention should it be out there.

Also, there'll be a newspaper notice.

And then the ordinance will go into effect.

This is earliest day, earliest possibility is around April 7th.

I'm not, I try to count exact days, but I just felt a little weird saying, because you never know what's going to happen.

So I added a day or two every now and then just because I'd rather have a little bit of cushion even on this expectation.

So that would have it being enacted April 7th, which is about 70 to 75 days ahead of the primary election.

And notice can be mailed to them.

The reason I made the visual timeline on the front is it's a little easier to understand all the requirements that fit in there.

And it also cites the code section should you want to look up what's required, because each one has specific requirements.

Like when you do the notice, you have to publish it through regular means and also online.

All those things.

So I'm happy to answer questions about that.

I just wanted to give you guys an assurance of what the process is going to look like because it's a little nonstandard.

And I will note, so the important star is to note that if there should be something that happens at public comment that causes you guys to want to make a change to the precincts,

then that adds an additional 15 days where we have to continue the public comment period and it adds to the process.

So we do want to keep that in mind as we're moving forward that it can push out beyond that April 7th day which is why we're pushing to get it done earlier rather than later.

And the other thing worth noting, just in case you've heard from people, is that this is all from the 2021 Voting Rights Act is why this all has to happen now.

And sometimes people mention the Attorney General's certification is another way that you can go about, but that wouldn't be appropriate in this case because the changes are so substantial.

We would want to do the full process as anticipated by the law.

We convened a group of people, both staff from the registrar's office, I was from the board, and then some people in the community that were interested in one person from the Planning Commission, an election official, Lloyd Snook is on it, and

Oh, right, representatives from the political parties.

Okay.

So I got just a couple of follow-up questions.

There were, in fact, both from the committee itself and also from our conversations with several neighborhood associations.

One of the party reps was concerned that we had moved Friendship Court

back into Key Rec, which is walkable for them.

And he felt it was more appropriate that they go back to Clark, which is their original voting place because that's where those kids go to school and the families in that area, they just expected to be in Clark.

So we moved that back.

There's some concern about retiring Alumni Hall, about, you know, from a particular one person that lives in that Thompson, Lewis Mountain area.

and we addressed that.

I mean, that is going to be the one area where those people will have to drive to Venable.

They're going to be in Venable.

And then we had some discussion at Tonsillar.

There was some concern that people

that would walk to Townsler would no longer be able to walk to their polling place.

I don't know how many people actually walk to Townsler.

It's not a very walkable precinct as it is, but we did note that the people that live near Townsler will now be in the Buford precinct, which is just a couple blocks up the street and probably more walkable for them, actually.

Good.

I just have one other question.

It is something that you guys are going to have a public hearing and there's also going to be an open public comment period where they can submit and we can decide the ways in which we want them to submit and the law stipulates as to some of them.

I think we have to provide them a way to do it via snail mail, via email, probably via fax if that's still around.

Various ways to get it in for that 30-day period and then the public hearing will be in a council meeting.

So I just want to, is that part of our, Ms.

Thomas, is that part of our regular scheduled meeting or is that a special meeting?

It's not on the calendar just yet.

Because it just gets real tight with the budget and everything.

And Vice Mayor, I think it would

If you guys want, I guess depending on how many people we think would be presenting comment, I think you can do it at a regular meeting if there's scheduling or it can be a special meeting, but it can't happen during a regular meeting.

February would be just before we would get the budget.

I got it.

Yeah, two questions.

One for you, Ms.

Carlson.

So is this essentially a schematic that backs up from both a primary as well as a general?

Yes, I put general at the end because there is a hard deadline for the general election.

It can't make any change within 60 days of the general election.

Okay.

And this originally, although I'm very impressed with my PDF skills in making this, this originally was presented when that was still on the option of do we want to get it done before general election.

So I tried to provide that scenario and then also the primary scenario.

But now we are at the primary scenario, which is why I added this.

And these are the earliest dates, and then the latest dates would be kind of what I envision on the back.

And there's not a lot of wiggle room.

We'd want to start it, obviously.

Okay.

It is based on the general election.

Yes, between, and I apologize, but this would be when we could start.

So January 17th would be when we could start and we would get it done about April 10th, anticipating no changes that would extend it.

Got it.

And then the other question I had for the folks on the screen, the latest, I guess, map is the one that I got from the mayor a few weeks ago, I guess, dated, the proposed precinct map dated October the 7th, 2022.

I think it'd be great if you could just share that and maybe just sort of gesture.

Absolutely.

Yeah, and I guess I should transition as well.

Okay.

I think that the

moving Friendship Court to Clark was after the map that I had sent to you.

Okay.

All right.

Yes.

Sure.

So I think this is the biggest change right here where we moved Friendship Cork back into Clark after getting public comment, going to a few of our meetings with neighborhoods, everything of the sort.

So we moved Friendship Cork back in this area, back into Clark rather than I think it was previously in Buford, maybe in the copy that you all have.

It looks like there have been some pieces of key that were up north of the bypass Yes, okay, so you have one even older then, so yes, so this portion of key rec is now in CHS because after talking again to some more people in the community, this portion right here

It is not typically walkable either way to Key Recreation, so if someone is driving, it is able to, they would then drive to Charlottesville High School rather than into CHS because this portion right here was actually previously in Carver, so from McIntyre to the right

That is actually all walkable to key recreation, whereas it is, which are easily walkable into key rec after getting, again, more communities, stakeholders, opinions and feedback.

So that was all changed.

So that moved out about six, a little over 600 voters.

Okay.

Yeah, I'd love to get a copy of that.

So it is actually on the city's GIS.

If you go to open data, in order to get public feedback, the GIS team here at the city has actually been very, very helpful with our

Tons of different changes that we have had and actually has been updating this as we've gone along in order for community and voters anyone to look at and see or to review.

Great.

Can you say, so

So that is not.

So what it is is that you cannot create a precinct with more than 5,000 voters.

And then during a presidential election, they will flag any precinct that has over 4,000 registered voters that do vote there actively.

So

And for example, in the 2020 general election, we had over 4,000 people vote in Johnson.

And you have to remember that was when we also had a ton of early voting here in our office.

So it was really only about 800 people voted on election day, but just in general, they are registered Johnson voters.

So that's why it was flagged.

So you can't create one of more than 5,000.

So we tried to keep all precincts between the 3,000 to 4,000 mark.

Let me pull up.

I can also share with you all this here.

Give me one second.

For the precinct.

So I will pull this up and I will send it out to everyone.

So if you are looking on the left or on the column, it gives you the precinct total.

So when we say current, this is kind of when we started this actual project.

This was the current precinct total, so the number, so everywhere was still, we had Johnson, so they were still at a little under 4,400 voters, but we always get a big influx of voters right around the presidential, so you'll get a few hundred more, so it'll be right at that 5,000 mark, which made them hit over 4,000, which is why we got flagged by the state in the first place.

So this, the middle columns, C through J, show you the totals after all of the changes.

So it shows how many voters got moved out of, for example, it shows how many voters got moved out of Alumni Hall and in which precincts that they went to.

So it gives that description.

And so column L to the right gives you the new totals.

So again, we tried to

redistribute them a lot more evenly.

We still have two precincts that are right over 4,000, but from what we have seen thus far, if any moving out of Clark, the problem is

is you take away a lot of walkability because if you look at Clark's precinct map itself, a lot directly to the left or above the school, which could either go over to Buford or go up to Key Rec, that is where 90% of those voters actually walked to Clark itself.

So we weren't able to get that one under 4,000.

And then the other one was Key Recreation.

We could potentially move some more out of Key Rec, especially at the northern portion of Key Rec and send in to CHS.

But again, that is everyone on then this side of the bypass and it does take away walkability as well.

It is correct.

Okay.

I'm familiar with what it is now.

It's the changes that are important.

Okay.

No, no specific questions.

I mean, I think the changes make sense to me.

The biggest question, which was discussed a little bit, is just how to educate the community ahead of time.

Absolutely.

So one of the main factors is anyone that would move, which it is a pretty significant number of voters that will move,

If this goes through, it's about 40% of our registered voters here in Charlottesville.

So even though it's only two new precincts because of how the lines change throughout, it is a significant number.

So anyone that does move precincts, they will get a new voter notice in the mail.

So telling them where they need to go on Election Day, it is going to be posted on our website.

It does have to be posted in the newspaper.

Yeah, I definitely think I was going to say that I think when Brian asked before, I think about the map, you said that it was with the GIS department or something like that.

I just think it needs to be, you know, at least for a couple of months or something, go to the city because people are going to go to the city's main site to try to look for information to have

You know, click here for information on the new voting areas or something.

So they don't have to click, click to go through to get the GIS.

And maybe they don't have to now, but I don't think that GIS is like one of the main tabs, you know, that you go to.

Yeah, absolutely.

I agree.

I am not sure on that end, I can

talk to some people in the city.

I just want to say I

I know that it looks like roughly 40 percent of our voters will be voting someplace different from where they voted last November.

And I can tell you, every time we've had even tweaks to the boundary lines before, there has been great consternation and people are thinking, gee, I don't know where I'm supposed to be voting.

I don't know.

Just a lot of concern about that.

It was important to me that we start this process of educating before the first public hearing because one of the things that has concerned me is the number of times that we end up totting out something for a public hearing and the first time the public or even the first time we have a chance to see it

is when the agenda and the packet come out five days before the meeting and something of this complexity needs a lot more time for people to just sort of sit there and soak it in and a lot more time for you all to educate the voters about where they're going to vote next and to

Make sure that they understand, no, it's still going to be a school gym.

It's still going to look like what you're expecting.

And we'll just hopefully people will sort of get over the oh my goodness moment to the sigh.

and then they get to go ahead and do what they've always done.

Just a quick follow-up, Mr. Mayor.

I note that the schools will be closed.

I assume that you touch base with Dr. Gurley or the schools to...

Sorry, so we have discussed with Kim Powell or?

Yes, that is my point of contact with the school system.

So when I went around to the schools originally, I believe we did that in the spring, maybe when we did that in the spring.

So I'm

in the process of reaching out to actually I think it was the superintendent now where I had not spoken with him previously.

One other thing I can touch on I know is that we have reached out to a few additional neighborhood associations in order to go to in January.

So as this is approaching the time for that way it's going to council, we want to attend a few more because the ones that we had attended originally and have been going to are the ones that are really harshly or heavily impacted as far as, you know,

the Orangedale and Fifeville neighborhood, the Lewis Mountain neighborhood.

So the ones that are a large majority or most are moving to a different precinct.

But we do plan to still want and planning to attend the smaller ones as well.

So that way, that is another form of voter outreach.

Great.

So the next time that we would expect to see you all back here is going to be on the 17th with hopefully the ordinance drafted and the I's dotted and the T's crossed.

And then that will trigger our public hearing and notice comment period and all of that?

Correct.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah, we have to assume that it's going to be some hiccup somewhere.

I couldn't even do, I was counting down the days to the exact date and I'm like, it just doesn't feel right.

Yep, and that second reading of that ordinance will actually happen in March, so there will also be, there's that 30-day period where people, if they, they still have kind of another shot at goal, not shot at goal, another chance to speak up if they do.

I've been watching too much world stuff, huh?

Yeah, I am.

So, yes, that's correct.

And just one quick question.

I think you already talked about this, but just again, if something did come up in the, you know, this process where we realize something needs to be tweaked, you said that's an additional 15 days.

I don't believe it's another public hearing.

So 15 days on the public comment period.

Thank you.

Any other questions for anybody on all of this?

Well, we are blessed in that we only have one item on our four o'clock agenda here, but that's okay because we have a whole lot of things we have to talk about in closed session.

So thank you, Taylor.

Thank you, Ann.

And then I will send all of this out to you all in just a few minutes.

Great.

So we're a little early on getting out of the four o'clock session.

Sure, I will read the motion.

Pursuant to section 2.2-3712 of the Virginia Code, I hereby move that the City Council close this open meeting and convene within a closed meeting as authorized by Virginia Code section 2.2-3711A1.

A3, A7, and A8 for discussion or consideration of prospective candidates for appointment to boards and commissions and of the possibility of an assignment or appointment of outside legal counsel for pending litigation or other legal matters.

Discussion or consideration of the acquisition of real property for a public purpose or of the disposition of publicly held real property

where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, 100 Rio Road East.

Consultation with legal counsel regarding the above reference matters and regarding a procedural matter relating to the proposed mid-year budget amendments.

Second.

All right.

Any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, motion passes.

Council will now go into closed session.

We will return to a separate Zoom link for the open meeting at about 6.30.

So if there are folks watching now, come back and see us at 6.30.

We are adjourned into closed session.

Okay, so let's call back to order our regular meeting.

The first item of business is to come out of closed meeting.

Yes, I move that the City Council members certify by a recorded vote that, to the best of each member's knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion convening the closed meeting or heard, discussed, or considered in the closed meeting.

Is there a second?

Ms.

Yes, Mayor, just one quick announcement, a reminder that the plastic bag tax takes effect in both Albemarle and Charlottesville beginning on January 1st.

And if one of the things that the little information that came out to us today said was that if you've got a thick plastic bag, like with handles, it's designed for multiple uses, there is no tax associated with that.

But obviously that's something you're going to bring.

It's not really something that the store would give to or sell to you.

So good announcement.

Any other announcements?

I think I would like to just note we got word that Saturday Tommy Theodos, the longtime football coach at Lane High School, died.

He was 89 years old.

He was at Lane when I was at Lane back in the 1960s.

Of course, he was probably best known for between 62 and 67, a 53-game non-losing streak where he had 49 wins and four ties.

He coached the first integrated state championship team in 1963 as they went 10-0 I note just as an indication of how really revered he was at that point in Charlottesville that there was a referendum to have two high schools built

and one of the contentious issues was, well, which one of the high schools is going to get Tommy Theodos as their football coach?

And there were apparently a lot of folks on either side of town who said, I don't want to have two high schools if it means that we're not going to have both of them coached by Tommy Theodos.

So it was one of those things where it was just hard to

I think the stadium is named after.

Yep.

And again, we look at things now when we look back on the time of the 60s

Everything we look at takes on, we have sort of a racial history lens to it.

And I think it's really worth noting that Tommy Theodos was, as I say, was the coach of the first integrated state championship team in Virginia.

That was 1963.

That's pretty amazing itself.

Okay, so that's, are there any proclamations?

Board or Commission appointments?

Yes, I have quite a list here that I would like to read off that we discuss.

For the Charlottesville Albemarle Visitors Board, one vacancy and is Daniel Shea.

For the Historic Resource Committee is William Bergen and Larry Rowley.

For the Human Rights Commission is Mary Bauer, Katherine Bertani.

No.

You're misreading.

Oh, I'm sorry.

All right.

Okay.

Yes.

I'm sorry.

Mary Bauer, Jessica Harris, Wolfgang Kepley, and Suzanne Lynn.

For the Personnel Appeals Committee, John Delahaney.

For the Region 10 Community Service Board, David Opper For the Ravanna Solid Waste Authority, Mike Gaffney And for the Ravanna Water and Sewer Authority, Mike Gaffney For the Sister Cities Commission, Kimberly Hayes

and for the Youth Council, Nava Kurgle.

Not sure.

Kurgle, I think.

Okay.

That's your motion?

Yes.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion?

Ms.

Thomas, call the roll, please.

Councillor Payne yes Councillor Pinkston yes Mayor Smith yes Vice Mayor Wade yes and that passes four to nothing and thank you to all those who have volunteered I will add that there are a couple of spots that we have simply been unable to fill for some time and they

In some cases they are fairly specific and fairly narrow categories, people who are involved with particular narrow issues.

But there are a few that are really very important issues and boards.

One is there's an opening on the Board of Architectural Review, which we did not fill this time.

There are two additional openings on the Historic Resources Commission, which we did not fill this time, for lack of applicants, primarily.

There is still an opening on the Region 10 Community Services Board.

So if you have a yen for public service, these are important boards.

Go to the city website, charlottesville.gov.

consent agenda number two minutes November 7th council meeting November 21st council meeting three ordinance amending the 2018 city county courts memorandum of agreement and approving a 40 year lease second reading for resolution transferring capital funds from the city county fund for renovations to Washington Park pool $350,000 second reading

Okay, thank you.

So we will now take public comment regarding those items on the consent agenda that were just read by the clerk and only on those four items.

The PCOB item where we decided to amend the agenda, it will be at the end of the day.

So if you were wishing to speak to us about the PCOB matters,

Your time will come in the next community matters public comment period, not in this one.

This is just those four matters.

So if you wish to speak on one of those matters, you'll have up to three minutes.

In the Zoom webinar, you may select the raise hand option to be placed in the speaker queue.

If you've joined by phone, wish to speak on the consent agenda, you may press star nine.

will alternate between in-person and virtual speakers.

Is there anyone in council chambers who would like to speak on one of the consent agenda items?

Okay.

Okay.

Any further questions or comments?

Hearing none, Ms.

Councillor Payne?

Yes.

Councillor Pinkston?

Yes.

Mayor Snook?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes, sir.

Mayor, members of council, we included the city manager's report in your packet.

There are a couple of items I'd like to highlight.

First, after the appointment of a new police chief on December 5th, the new chief Michael Kochis and I held a press conference with the local press to talk about his background, his interest, and what his aspirations are for his new role.

And we'll be doing more of that as he comes to town on January 6th.

The city manager and the human resources director held a town hall meeting for employees to discuss the new personnel rules that were enacted on October 17th.

Still a lot of comment but we are open and listening to feedback from employees and we will make some adjustments as suggested.

The Office of the City Manager would like to congratulate the Office of Budget and Management for receiving the Government Finance Officers Association Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the 2022 budget.

This represents the 18th consecutive year that the Office has received the award.

So congratulations to Chrissy Hamill and her staff and all who worked on this project.

The Office of City Manager also would like to celebrate the Department of Social Services recent honor as the Champions Employer of the Year by the Charlottesville Regional Office of the Department of Aging and Rehabilitation Service.

So big nod to the Department of Social Services and the great staff there.

I reported last Council meeting that we are excited to announce the launch of the National Community Survey, also called the NCS.

Specifically, the City wants to know what they can do to work towards a better, safer community.

To get involved, local participants should go to the website, pollcode.us slash Charlottesville That link is in my city manager's report.

If you pull that down, you can just hit the link and go directly to the survey.

The survey will be open until Friday, I believe.

With respect to weather preparation, sounds like we're going to need it this weekend.

I've met with the staff, gone over the plans for inclement weather preparation, and so I'm pretty satisfied that we are set and ready to go.

and I applaud the Department of Public Works for the work that they've done on that and Department of Emergency Management and Sam Sanders, our Deputy City Manager.

Those are just a couple of items I want to highlight.

I also want to acknowledge that I received word this week that our City Attorney, Lisa Robertson, will be leaving us effective December 28th.

Lisa has had a long career with the city of Charlottesville.

In my time here I recognize her as one top-notch professional who you can rely on for sound advice and guidance.

as we go through the work that we do in the city government.

We will miss her.

What I will do is come back to you with the next steps in terms of transition.

We will appoint an acting city attorney from the staff.

and then we will discuss other steps that we need to take in order to make sure we're covered in that office.

And we have something, a way to get there at the end of the meeting.

I'll offer a resolution.

That's it.

And Mr. Rogers, I just wanted to note that in your report, for the folks who read through the whole thing, I was struck by the fact that we had said

When you came a year ago, basically, one of your charges was to repopulate City Hall, and you've announced a number of hires of folks in important middle management positions, and that's what we've needed.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Just a minor, someone just contacted me.

But this says 350.

We just want to make sure that we don't have to come back later and, you know, and get things straight.

So, um,

I just want to bring it, you know, it may be something before we leave.

Okay.

3.50, right.

Yeah, 3.50, okay.

All right.

Community matters now.

There are four pre-registered speakers, leaving 12 slots for additional speakers on community matters.

Each speaker will have up to three minutes to speak.

We will now open the floor to pre-registered speakers.

And these will be folks who are online, I assume, but not necessarily.

The first one on our list is Angela Menaki, if I'm pronouncing it correctly.

Okay.

Well, let's keep an eye out for her.

Is Donna with us?

No, I don't know.

Okay.

How about Giorgio Carta?

Mr. Carta, come on up.

Okay, good evening.

My name is Giorgio Carta and I reside in the Belmont neighborhood.

I'm here to express some serious concerns which I believe are shared by many other residents and businesses in the area about the streetlight situation on the Belmont Bridge.

As of tonight, there are no lights whatsoever.

I just walked over it.

I can assure you that this is a major safety problem for pedestrians, for bicycles, for people using alternative means of transportation.

We have heard from the Public Works Department that there are no plans to have any lights until the construction is completed.

I think that's more than a year from now, and that's absolutely not acceptable.

Public Works gave us a suggestion that we utilize the 4th Street as a bypass or detour to the downtown mall, but this is obviously not practical for those who are coming from or going to areas east of the downtown mall.

It's just a long detour.

Meanwhile, automobiles are not asked to make any detours whatsoever.

I think we all applaud the city's interest in developing and promoting alternative transportation, including walking, biking, and so forth.

I think there's an opportunity to ensure that we can walk on the bridge safely with appropriate lighting.

During the planning of the bridge replacement, I think the city made a pledge that the bridge will remain open to vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

But in fact, without lights, the bridge is not safely accessible at nighttime.

So I would really respectfully request that the lights be restored right away.

The demolition of the west span of the bridge will halt until such lighting can be provided.

And that same plan be made to install lights as soon as possible, either temporary or permanent, so that we can walk safely over the bridge.

Thank you, Mr. Carter.

That's an important thing that somebody ought to be looking into.

Thank you.

Next on our list is John Hasek.

Have we?

He had sent an email earlier today saying that he did not expect to be able to join us.

Has either Ms.

Minaki or Ms.

All right.

Let's see.

Is there anybody else in the room here who would like to address us at this point?

Good evening.

City resident James Groves.

As you know, I've spoken recently about the City's financial support for the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure.

Several of you have emailed me in regards to those comments, and I'll follow up after the new year to prepare for the elimination of those outdated subsidies.

Tonight I want to comment upon another important financial element of climate action in Charlottesville.

Rather than underwriting fossil fuel infrastructure, the City should move quickly to establish financial support

for the transition to more efficient, environmentally friendly energy systems by enabling CPACE and Green Bank financing in Charlottesville.

CPACE stands for Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy Financing.

It is a tool that provides 100% upfront capital to property owners who want to upgrade their buildings with energy efficiency, renewable energy and water management systems.

After the state set up the Virginia CPACE Authority earlier this year, our city simply has to opt in to the statewide program to open up CPACE opportunities in Charlottesville.

Let's do it.

Green banks are public-private partnerships that promote investment in clean energy technologies by residents and business owners of a locality.

In 2021, the General Assembly authorized all localities to set up their own green banks.

These financial entities are seed funded with public monies that draw in significant private capital and they can be especially important to empowering low and moderate income residents to participate in the clean energy transition.

Earlier this year, Congress authorized $27 billion of funding for green banks with disbursement of funds required to begin in the first half of 2023.

$7 billion of that money is available for states, municipalities, and tribal governments.

To capture these funds, Charlottesville must first establish a green bank.

Recently, when I've spoken to the city's climate staffers, they've indicated that they do not have the bandwidth to pursue initiatives like creation of a green bank.

Indeed the recently published Charlottesville Climate Action Plan notes the importance of additional staffing to take plan ideas and translate them into real developments.

I hope that you will work with city management to ensure that proper staffing is in place to allow our community to capture more than our fair share of the clean energy financing opportunities that lie before us.

Mr. Groves, can I just ask you a question?

Do you know, because I looked into Green Bank financing a couple months ago, and what I was told, whether it's true or not, I don't know, but what I was told was that there is a certain critical mass of a size of a Green Bank operation for it to make sense.

to sustain the overhead, whatever it takes.

I couldn't give you a specific answer this evening.

What I would tell you is that with the just finished academic semester, I had two of my students write their final papers on green banks in preparation of helping the city.

I was in touch with Crystal Riddervold about this.

So I'll be taking their notes and I'll add that question.

I just finished turning in final grades.

So in the quiet time here, yeah, in the quiet time over the next few weeks, I'll process what the students have written.

I'll be in touch with Crystal and others, and I'll make a note.

I'd love to see what they've come up with.

Yeah, I'll make a note to get that specific type of information.

Thank you very much.

I had, I'm sorry, sir, quick follow-up.

You used the acronym at the beginning, I think.

CPACE.

Commercial.

Property Assessed Clean Energy.

Okay, thank you.

And that was authorized by the General Assembly in 2009, updated by 2015.

The thing that just recently happened earlier this year is that instead of the locality having to set up their own CPACE, the state has now set up a statewide authority.

So it saves the locality, the legwork, the staffing.

And so again, I could

Thank you.

Yes, Mayor Snook, we have one raised hand.

Robin Hoffman is joining us.

All right, Ms.

Hoffman.

Hi, everybody.

Happy holidays.

I want to say that I went to the Grand Illumination.

I had a table there for CPA TV or Charlottesville Community.

What?

CC Community Charlottesville Community Media Center.

Sorry, David.

and I talk to a lot of people and everybody's very excited about Charlottesville Public Access TV and the idea of it so I want to say that and then also they're going to be airing this live I think on CPA TV and also Channel 29 every year they do that Christmas morning I think it is and so and it's really wonderful a couple years since I've been here

I've watched it.

Also, I went to the Chamber of Commerce party and I met everybody there for the first time, like in person, got to talk to them a little more than just on this Zoom call.

But in any case, I want to say that I finally became a neighborhood representative since October 5th.

We've been trying to get signage

for our little community here in East High and also Caroline Avenue.

And beyond, I've been trying to get signage because we've had fatalities on our block.

We've had chickens killed and cats who, you know, we have racing cars through Fairway, Caroline and all that.

Anyway, so finally I became the neighborhood representative because people were taking, you know,

dragging their feet to get us some signage.

And so apparently Brennan Duncan is going to he received from me at least 10 permit applications.

and we hope we're going to get signage for like safe kids this that the other thing all over the place because we we really do have a traffic problem believe it or not and also I'm just concerned because I saw the

Post put up by the AT&T on East High for bus stop and there's no sidewalk.

I mean, are you actually pulling the bus over to the sign that says bus stop and there's no sidewalk?

I mean, I'm just wondering if you guys are paying attention to what's going on there and can we please start putting the signage up and have happy holidays.

Thank you, Ms.

Hoffman.

Is there anyone else present in the room who would like to speak to us?

Yes, Mayor Snook, we now have Josh Krohn.

All right, Mr. Krohn.

You are on with Council.

And you will need to unmute.

It seems that Josh is still muted on his end.

We can come back to him.

Yes.

Can you guys hear me?

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

So a couple of questions.

Everything that I'd like to speak to would be involving the Mountain View PUD.

So I know two weeks ago when we met, I think it's Sena Magill, I believe is how you pronounce her name, spoke to the fact that the Planning Commission

had not heard about this development since they voted to deny it.

And she just didn't want to infer as to what their decision may or may not be.

So I'd like to go into details about that, if you guys may, when that topic comes up.

And then also as far as the sidewalk proposal on River Vista Avenue.

So my residence would be

Obviously on River Vista, a portion of it that does not currently have sidewalk and then the proposed road that would go down toward the development is right.

The city owned empty lot is right beside me as well.

So I'm curious as to

If and when that sidewalk goes in, is that going to be sticking out onto what's currently the street that would then narrow the street even further?

Or will that sidewalk go into our yards?

And has that been... I have got no...

information from anyone in this development regarding if they're going to be putting a sidewalk in my yard.

So I was just kind of curious as to that process, what you do to current landowners that you're then building on their land and just kind of the steps that's taken in that process.

That's really all I have right now.

Thank you.

Anybody else in the chamber here who would like to speak to us?

All right.

So we will close that.

So let's see.

We have a public hearing and resolution of appropriation to amend the fiscal year 2023 budget.

Yes, sir.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the council.

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

This item is a public hearing and resolution of appropriation to amend the fiscal year 2023 budget for two readings.

This item is also referred to as the FY22 year-end appropriation.

As you heard at your last meeting, the audit for FY 2022 has been completed and the city's auditors have given us a clean opinion on the financials that we are reporting and have recorded for that year.

and so to close out this fiscal year we need to make a series of adjustments some bookkeeping type of items including funds that are in excess of the city 17% fund balance policy and the general fund and so the item this evening the appropriation amending this year's budget

are the carryover funds, the surplus, as it were, from FY22 and the general fund, which ended $22,917,915.01.

in excess of the 17% fund balance policy.

And I'll briefly just cover kind of how we got there over the course of that fiscal year.

We've discussed this with you all over the last year or so, but now we've completed the year, I can put a little bit more of the picture together.

And really the foundations for the FY22 budget was being laid almost two years ago as we speak.

It was the first winter of COVID in late 2020, early 2021.

Vaccines were just becoming available to first responders and essential workers.

COVID restrictions and closures were in full effect with no clear timeframe in place as to when they might be listed.

It was against this uncertain background that the city adopted a very conservative status quo budget for fiscal year 2022 with modest growth of only half a percent.

but as the fiscal year began in July of 2021 vaccines were becoming more readily available restrictions and closures were being lifted and the economy reopened and rebounded with several of the cities larger more economically sensitive revenue sources performing significantly better than expected overall general fund revenues performed 14 3. million dollars above budget with some of the top uh budget uh performers being real estate taxes at a little over five million dollars over budget

Meals tax at $3.1 million, failed in use at about $2.6 million, lodging taxes at $2.2 million over budget, personal property at $2.2 as well, and finally business licenses performing $1.7 million better than expected.

And so on the expenditure side, city operations and facilities were limited during that fiscal year.

We in fact tried to reopen twice that year but did not

due to the Delta and Omicron variants and outbreaks and spikes in cases.

And so over the course of that year, we had significant savings in terms of salary and benefits from vacancies, primarily in police, parks and recreation and public work.

We also have about $2.1 million left over from the previous year surplus that went unused towards mid-year salary adjustments, to be clear.

Everybody received those adjustments, it's just that we were able to cover those within the existing budget from that year, did not need to tap those additional sources.

Also, some of our transfers to the Comprehensive Services Act and the Department of Social Services were significantly under budget by about a million dollars in total.

And so when you add all of that up and then net out what we're required to have on hand in terms of our 17% fund balance policy, you arrive at the $22.9 million of surplus funds available for reallocation.

And so staff has several recommendations for council's consideration, and I've grouped these into three categories to help us talk about these.

The first is

As you recall during your budget considerations for this year's budget, Council, there was a consensus to use approximately $11.5 million of that or about 50% of that for a number of items.

City managers made some recommendations for uses totaling about $4.7 million.

Why don't we take the questions that we have rather than you just reading off things, many of which we may not need to hear about again.

Great.

And hopefully Mr. Sanders is on the line as well.

Yeah.

So the SAFER grant match, can someone help me remember what that's for?

Know that this was something for the fire department.

The personnel that we provided grants.

And how much longer do we have to do this or what's the time frame?

And this amount helps us, for lack of a better term, ease those costs into our operating budget that we then eventually have to absorb.

Thank you.

Items E, F, and G relative to school reconfiguration.

And I'm sorry, this has been so long ago now I'm having a hard time remembering.

But basically these were commitments

These were proposals made to go ahead and sort of pay down the bonds.

Was that the idea?

This gets us to a $54 million bond scenario, which, in addition to cash, helps us get us to that first full amount in the CIP.

And these funds we were setting aside to help, again, very similar to the SAFER grant, we have to build those into our ongoing budget and our ongoing expenses.

And setting aside this cash helps us do that.

I think Ms.

Hamill is with us.

No, that's perfect.

Just a little bit of addition.

If you recall in the debt table that we all dearly love, when we were working through possible scenarios of tax increases, we showed that roughly three years at two cents each,

was a little over $1.9 million that would be required to get that base transfer up to the annual debt service transfer.

And when we were meeting with our last work session with the 23 budget development

Got it.

Fantastic.

Thank you.

I see the Meadow Creek Trail, Section 3 is on there, which I'm excited about.

I'm hoping that Mr. Sanders or Mr. Rogers can, or maybe Mr. Payne can help me remember relative to the school, to the buses.

So two additional buses, the Route 6 equity initiative of $1 million.

and then CAAT additional funding for 30 minute routes, two million dollars.

I guess the question I have, there's been so much that's changed with CAT over the year and our overall plans in that respect.

We believe so.

We believe so.

With respect to the Route 6 addition of Buses Route 6, when you look at the map and you saw that on this route, it was taking an hour.

for that route, and those were working class people.

Right.

Yeah.

And frankly, the city manager said to the director of CAT, we can do better than that.

Right.

Okay.

And what will it take?

Two more buses.

Right.

Okay.

You know, to reduce it down to 30 minutes.

Okay.

Great.

I'm in full agreement with what you wrote.

I think that I contacted you about a couple of things that I wanted to be considered for additional funding.

you know perhaps Parks and Rec may need some extra help with some of the litter that's in the city it may be some part some overtime staff pay or something like that and looking at some parkland for north of the city might be some property available for that these are some things we can maybe look at for as we look at either at the strategic plan or the upcoming budget but I

If I could return the other item here, the class and compensation study, one-time use of $2 million, I think that's fantastic.

Michael, any questions?

Yeah, it's just a few questions.

questions.

One, when it comes to the class and compensation study, the one-time uses, I still don't quite understand what those one-time uses are.

Is it just similar to that safer grant funding?

No, no, this is not for consulting work.

We already

allocated the funds for the compensation study.

That was $685,000 or something like that.

But the study will result in some needed improvements in our overall pay plan in order to be more competitive with the marketplace.

Don't know what that will be.

Don't know what the gap is.

So in other words, it's just to prepare for expected salary increases?

Right, right.

Okay.

The Meadow Creek

Golf Course, I understand this is for a loan.

Well, it's an enterprise fund.

We own it.

And if we own the golf course, there are improvements that need to be made from time to time.

Right now, there is no cash flow that they have.

And then for the transfer to the capital improvement contingency fund,

because it's kind of a vague question.

Chris, do you want to make that?

I think it's a couple of things.

One is, first of all, it's part of our financial management policies that it actually states that any amount above and beyond the 70% would go to the CIP.

But that's also understanding that there are competing

needs and other strategic opportunities we want to take.

And so, again, we consider the surplus to be one-time monies and we look for one-time uses.

But in terms of this specific amount, I would say there were two thoughts in mind.

One is we're obviously in some pretty strong inflationary headwinds at this point.

the CIP that the Planning Commission has been discussing that you will eventually be taking up.

We've been able to accommodate some of those inflationary increases within that CIP, but we don't know what the future holds in terms of that inflationary pressure.

And so these funds obviously can help with that going forward.

There's also, as we consider this amount, there are several

agencies in which we're partners that have some fairly significant capital improvements coming as well, such as the jail being one, the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority has a bailing bailer project that the city will contribute to.

And so knowing that there might be these capital requests as well, again, these funds might be tapped for that as well.

No, I think you got it.

I think this kind of keeps in line with our discussion with the Planning Commission last week.

As you know, the current draft of the CIP contemplates using around $9 million that's in the contingency for the things that Chris just mentioned.

Correct.

What's left over from the full $22.9 less those categories that I mentioned.

And one final question.

You know, I've asked this before, but there's $1 million for a new city manager fund.

What's going on there?

If you recall during the budget discussion, I think Council agreed that once you get a new City Manager, you want them to have some flexibility to make investments that they need.

And also it was stated that that might be one of the incentives that would attract candidates for the position.

But look at it as an opportunity for a transformational fund.

That new city manager comes in, has some ideas about how to move the government forward and may want to make some investments.

And that was the thought behind it.

Okay.

Well, one final question, real final question.

It was not actually worked on as a part of a prioritization project.

However, it was a project that had partial funding.

We were able to get a second batch of partial funding that did not complete the entire gap.

And because the project had been sitting stalled for quite some time, the thought was to try to figure out how we could potentially have council close that gap before actually losing those funds that we were able to secure.

We received two separate grants and one grant from VDOT actually was rescinded because we were not able to move.

but we were able to get a secondary backup to it and now we have two grants that are actually at this time the window is already open and we need the additional funds to close.

Thank you.

The only thing I wanted to ask about is we've allocated ‑‑ I remember council had decided on the ten things, Joe, identified there, roughly $11 million, and then

We've now got nine additional things that are city manager recommendations for one-time uses of roughly $4.7 million.

That $4.7 million is not anything that we had discussed when we passed the budget back in April.

Is that correct?

The Pathways Fund here, we're putting $575,000 into it.

What's the current state of that fund for this fiscal year?

How much did we allocate?

How much have we spent?

So I can speak to it generally.

I can tell you what we know is that I believe we've funded that at about $700,000 so far this year, or maybe I have it reversed.

Do we have $700,000 or $500,000 in this appropriation?

This says $575,000.

Yeah, so this the the amount that's in this appropriation is what we expect to get us through.

So that's just a little under 1.3 if I'm doing the math correctly.

And that is basically a projection based on the current monthly payouts that are being requested and needed.

And also as sort of a precursor to discussion for what we would do in the 24 budget because

As you know, or as you may recall, there's currently just about a little over $85,000 in the base budget, budgeted for pathways.

And we have significantly increased that funding using this one time federal dollars.

So if I remember correctly, it was basically $85,000 a year for a few years before I came on council in 2020.

And then in 2020, we added significantly to it because of COVID coming and we anticipated we would have greater needs.

And so we've basically gone from $80,000, $85,000 in the first year to I think it was about $385,000 by the end of that fiscal year.

And then now it looks like we're up over $1.2 million, $1.3 million a year.

And the 575, as it points out, gets us through June.

Yeah.

Mayor, I ask the

I asked a question earlier over email because I was curious.

The specific amount is the remaining balance is $328,675.

And then last year, the total dispersals were $657,000.

So it roughly kind of helps us get to the next year.

I'm sorry to ask this question.

I have a sense of what the Pathways Fund is for.

Yes, sir.

Councilor Pinkston, the Pathways Fund is a fund that supports individuals in our community who find themselves with some hardships dealing with rent and utilities.

It provides a maximum of $3,000 per fiscal year.

as well, and then provides about $1,000 a month.

So an individual who may just have some trouble bridging the gap for rent, they can call Pathways and find some assistance with that.

Same with some utilities.

Right now, if it is

Mr. Cullinan, please keep me honest.

If it is a water bill, I believe there is some state funding that may be available.

But if it's, for example, electrical bill right now, Pathways would still provide that.

Thank you.

Great.

Okay.

All right.

So at some point, we've got to get to the public hearing piece of this.

So let's move on to that next.

I'll now open the public hearing.

Mr. Dillahunt, we're ready for the first speaker.

All right, anybody in the room here who would like to speak to this issue?

Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing.

So this is an item that we will be, we're being asked to carry the item to the January 3rd meeting for the second reading and vote.

I may be alone in it.

I think overall there's a lot of positive things in it, a lot of operational expenditures.

Quite frankly, I don't think we have a choice but to make.

But I still think when it comes to our ARPA and our surplus funds, we're not quite there in terms of realizing the kind of transformative impact we can have with these one-time funds.

Specifically, I guess, I would like to see a combination of surplus and ARPA

some kind of seeding money for basically land acquisition on the part of the city.

I think ideally for affordable housing.

I think our housing authority is going to have some transformative opportunities available to it.

We don't know what kind of opportunities there could be related to homelessness.

Less important, you know, there could potentially be acquisition opportunities for additional park lands for the city.

So anyway, I would just love to see that kind of priority and I would put that above perhaps the city manager's fund and maybe

Not all, but a little bit of the money going to the CIP Contingency Fund just because some of these opportunities aren't going to be available forever.

So that's kind of where I'm at overall.

So if we put money in the CIP Contingency Fund and then one of these public housing opportunities comes up, any reason we can't

So all we're really doing by putting $6.6 million into the capital improvement contingency fund is to say that if we've got a capital project coming down the road that we're going to need some money for, there's $6.6 million that we could, in theory,

That in combination with the city manager's fund balance and I know in some of our ARPA allocations we had allocated to unallocated buckets I guess and I would agree that all those opportunities are there so we have some options I just worry if they're not earmarked for something specific they can kind of find their way to other things but

Okay.

So it's not going to just sort of disappear unless we allow it to disappear.

Every ARPA allocation we had to vote on, right?

But when we technically allocated to a fund that remains unallocated, does that come back for us for a vote for each of those?

Like, for example, there was an economic development bucket.

Correct.

The intention was to, when specific projects make themselves known, we will come back to you to get your, to inform you and to get your approval to move it into those specific pots.

Okay.

Well, that's all I have.

I imagine, you know, as the budget cycle goes on, we'll have a lot of conversation about those different buckets.

So what do you think?

Michael, what do you think?

Well, I'd be interested in more conversation, but if there's not a majority agreeing with me to change anything, you know,

To me, the idea of the contingency fund is we have a lot of ideas that have been floated around in the last month, two months, three months that have not crystallized.

We're not ready to have them crystallized yet.

And part of the reason for putting this money in the contingency fund is that when we get around to crystallizing it, we will be able to reach out and say, okay, that's available to us.

But you're also speaking of like the city manager allowance, right?

Yeah, I mean, I just think, and I'm sure we'll have more conversation during the budget cycle, both about that and the ARP allocations.

I just think when we start to look at some of the opportunities in front of us, at least for me, I'm anticipating that there may be priorities that jump above that, that are kind of limited in terms of our time that we can take advantage of those opportunities.

I am, yeah.

I am, you know, I'll be able to look and see what the changes based on, if staff makes any based on our comments.

Okay, so let's put it on the consent agenda.

All right.

Along the lines of what Councilor Payne just mentioned, I would love to get an update at some point relative to our ARP money or the other grants that we've received and where we stand in terms of how those have been allocated.

the timeframe we have in which to allocate them.

I'm sure, Mr. Cullen, and you're keeping spreadsheets of all these things.

And I will just go ahead.

I can do that.

We're actually getting ready.

The federal U.S.

Treasury requires a report every quarter.

And so at the close of this month, it'll be the close of the second quarter of the fiscal year.

And so I'll have a report due to them.

So I'll make sure that

You receive that information, updating on what has been spent.

You obviously know what's been appropriated to date, but then they also want to know what's been spent, so I'll update you then.

And then just as a reminder in terms of the time frame, we have two more years, two more calendar years to obligate the fund to encumber them, and then two years after that to actually spend them.

So we do have some time, but there's some fairly large

initiatives that we have in mind.

And so we're getting those underway and continue to move on them.

And I will just say as a final thought, you know, following my criticisms, as I do want to highlight, I think there's a lot of really positive transformative investments as well, particularly in public transportation, making school reconfiguration feasible.

The other thing that I would just like to say,

when people say, oh my goodness, how can you possibly have a $22 million surplus?

And the answer is, I was sort of reflecting back on it, once COVID hit, our financial team really went above and beyond the call of duty in finding ways to economize and to hold the line and to not spend anything we didn't absolutely have to spend.

starting with Dr. Richardson's decision two and a half years ago to basically freeze the budget.

And then Chip Boyles did essentially the same thing last year.

But Ms.

Hamill, Mr. Cullinan,

Jason Vandiver, our treasurer, Todd Divers, Commissioner of Revenue, have really done really a great job over the last few years.

I'm looking around at places, other parts of the country where they're talking about all of the financial hardships that they've had through COVID and coming out of COVID.

They are in nowhere near as good a shape as we are in.

Okay.

Our next item for a public hearing is for private drainage easements at 2100 Avon Court.

Ms.

Robertson?

Yes, it is.

I'm on my way.

All right.

Good evening, everyone.

For this agenda item, a private developer is asking the city to grant it some drainage easements across property owned by the city having an address of 2100 Avon Court.

that is located in Albemarle County.

The construction of the industrial building in Albemarle County is subject to the county's zoning ordinance and development codes, but in order for them to be able to complete the improvements that are going to be required on their county site plan, the developer needs these easements.

And so as noted in your agenda materials, any time the city disposes of any portion of its interest in city owned property, whether in whole and outright sale or simply granting some sort of easement or right of use, city council has to have a public hearing.

And depending on the length of the proposed easement and the terms of it, you may also have to

go through a bid process.

Because this particular easement is a lengthy one, it's for more than five years, City Council is required to invite people to submit a bid if they want to compete for

the right to have an easement across this property.

It seems a little bit of a strange process, but that's what the code requires.

So there's been a notice and an advertisement.

So what City Council needs to do is open a public hearing on this matter, specifically invite any persons who may have

public comments but also any persons who may wish to offer alternative bids to present them during the public hearing and once the public hearing is closed the mayor will declare the bidding closed and then if no bids have been received

City Council can go ahead and make a final decision on the requested easement.

You'll notice that there is a proposed ordinance in your agenda packet that if you should decide to grant the requested easements, the ordinance sets out the terms under which that will be proposed.

And you'll also note that under the recommendations section of your agenda memo,

There is a suggested motion that you can use to approve the ordinance if that turns out to be your decision this evening.

All right.

Any counselors have any clarifying questions for Ms.

Robertson?

Okay.

Failing that, I will now open the public hearing both for comment and for alternative bids if anyone wishes to make an alternative bid for the right to have an easement across this property.

Anybody here wishing to speak on this matter?

All right.

So I will now close the public hearing and close the bidding and the is no longer open for alternative bids.

Consent agenda?

Okay.

Consent agenda.

There we go.

And then the other public hearing also for an easement is a temporary aerial easement at 1223 and 1225 Harris Street.

Ms.

Yes.

For this particular item, there is a proposed development within the city at the address that you just read, 1223 to 1225 Harris Street.

and the development proposes construction of an apartment building and to do that there's going to be a need for a temporary tower crane and when that crane is operating the

The area over which it'll be operating will extend over and into city owned right of way for public streets.

So in your agenda materials, there is a proposed ordinance.

And if you should choose to approve this aerial easement, there will be a

is a flat that is prepared to go along with a proposed temporary deed of easement.

And because this particular property use is proposed for a period of less than five years, you do not need to use a bid process.

You simply need to have a

Okay.

Councilors have any questions for Ms.

Just, I guess, a

Kind of a broad one, why five years?

Is that sort of like a break point in the code if it's more than five years?

I mean, I heard you mention the piece about bidding, but are they going to be doing construction for five years, up to five years?

So what what I did with this typically temporary easements and construction projects aren't long term easements.

And so I think that a period of less than five years

should be sufficient for this proposed development and it does avoid having to do the special advertisement and bid process because the code specifies that allowing private parties the right to use your property for a period in excess of five years does require the extra procedural requirements.

But what can happen is if you get to the end of

that maximum five year period and the developer says we haven't been able to complete the construction yet.

We're going to need a new temporary construction easement.

You can do it again and grant it for a period of less than five years a second time around with city council approval.

And if they, say they finish their project in three and a half years, does the easement go away?

What we have said in the ordinance is that the

The easement will commence on the date that a building permit is issued for construction of the city's edge apartments and it will extend not more than five years from the date of the issuance of that building permit.

So if the construction is completed in fewer than five years, it will simply end when it's no longer needed, but it will extend for not more than five years.

Maybe that's the way to... Yeah, we would probably terminate it sooner than that, but I just haven't had a chance to get with the developer's attorney to identify what

What piece of paper will or when the need for the crane will end.

The crane will probably be able to go away sometime before a certificate of occupancy is issued.

So I'll work that out and we will put that end date in the deed of easement itself.

Got it.

Thank you.

Other questions?

All right, so let's open it up for public hearing.

Is there anyone here who wishes to speak to this question of the aerial easement?

I see nobody.

Okay, so with no speakers, the public hearing is now closed.

So do we have agreement to carry the item to the January 3rd meeting for a second reading in the vote then?

Consent agenda.

Consent agenda it is.

Thank you, Ms.

Let's see.

Now we come to the Mountain View PUD.

Carrie Rainey to present.

Ms.

I am.

Good evening.

Okay, excellent.

Looks like I might have frozen again.

I'm getting there.

Carrie Rainey, Planner with Neighborhood Development Services.

Just as a reminder, SHMP Engineering, acting as the agent for the property owners, has submitted a rezoning application seeking to change the zoning classification of the subject properties from R2 to PUD or Planned Unit Development.

The PUD Development Plan proposes up to 72 dwelling units at an approximate density of 22 dwelling units per acre.

The area designated as Block 1 will continue to house the Mountain View Baptist Church and may include up to 12 residential dwelling units, daycare facilities, consumer services, businesses, retail uses, art studios, and outdoor parks.

60 multifamily residential units within six structures currently proposed within block two.

City Council discussed the zoning map amendment at their December 5th meeting.

Subsequent to that discussion, the applicant has revised their preferred affordability period to be 99 years in line with the recommendations of the draft inclusionary zoning analysis.

We also wanted to note tonight that there are a few clerical issues in the ordinance within your packet specifically there are a few references to the Park Street Planned Unit Development or PUD which should be updated to the Mountain View Planned Unit Development or PUD 1133 Otter Street is incorrectly noted as 113 Otter Street and at one point St.

Clair Avenue has an E at the end of Clair

that should be removed.

Also to note again, a sidewalk waiver for the development is also before Council tonight.

The applicant has indicated they would like to defer action on this waiver until further exploration is completed.

However, I'll ask that the applicant team confirm this deferral request when Council is ready to move forward to the sidewalk waiver.

Okay.

Okay.

Any questions for Ms.

Yeah, I guess to you or to the we'll start with you and then see if the applicant wants to answer.

We received

what I think is some good feedback.

I'm trying to pull it up now.

These are from people in the neighborhood, not all of whom were against the project, but they had questions.

I asked this last time, and I'm just having a hard time remembering.

The applicant will be required to meet all of our state regulations through the site plan process at the point in time when they move forward to that.

And then it would just be helpful to know the thinking about using, as opposed to having the new entrance that goes north onto River Vista, the idea of accessing, I guess, the second block through the church site.

Sure.

That was an item that was brought forth at the community meeting.

I'll let the applicant answer why or why not.

Okay.

We have a representative of the applicant here.

Sure, Justin Schimp, Schimp Engineering, engineer of the project.

On stool and water, we have to do, there's two components, there's a quality and a quantity, so how much you would flood property versus kind of the quality of the water it leaves.

We're required to do 100% of the detention or quantity on site.

There's a mix, it probably ends up being a portion on site and off site of water quality, but we aren't there yet, but that's, the code allows both options.

And then as to the road,

We looked at a few different options early on, but there's actually a public street stub out from River Vista was platted with the original platting.

And we initially tried to kind of avoid going that way.

The traffic engineer, the city actually, really told us that we should consider that.

required a second point of connection there just to get better circulation of the development.

So that was really the origin.

It was platted to access to the property back 50 years or more ago.

It was looked at.

I think the church was hesitant to reconfigure their parking lot substantially as part of that.

Correct.

Got it.

Okay.

So while you're here, sir, that was my question about, and maybe you answered this before, about the pedestrian access from the River Vista.

I thought, as I recall, the grading was substantially different there.

Yes, we have the confusion was initially we didn't have a complete sidewalk connection with the Planning Commission public hearing.

So pedestrians could get out to Rivista, but there was a break getting over to the bus stop or wherever else you wanted to go.

And so our amended proffer kind of completed the pedestrian connectivity between the Planning Commission public hearing and the first reading here at council.

So yes, that will meet all the required standards for connectivity for vehicles and pedestrians from Rivista.

And the new sidewalk will take people all the way over to St.

Clair.

Correct.

Right.

I think that's what I have.

Yes, largely echo the questions Councillor Pinkston asked from the neighborhood.

We'll definitively have some sort of underground storage system, which essentially stormwater from the neighborhood is routed into a series of tanks and store and detain and release.

That's pretty standard.

And then if the soils are suitable, we do an infiltration type system, which essentially allows your first flush of runoff, which contains some of the pollutants, to soak into the soils.

That's a preferred treatment.

The issue with that is we really don't know until we get into site planning and actually going out and boring holes

if the soils are suitable for that.

It's a pretty substantial process to go through.

But that's our first choice if a sort of technical criteria allows that.

No, and I understand and appreciate the ambiguity.

I just think on site would be much preferable, especially given the proximity to the Rivanna.

The only other questions from neighbors, one of the things they highlighted was the issue of a buffer along River Vista.

Sure.

Let me call Kelsey up to make sure I have the facts.

That's exactly right.

But essentially, we do have a proposed landscape buffer between the back of our houses and the houses on River Vista.

I believe, well at one point we moved the proposed building footprints further back off of the houses of River Vista, so we did increase that buffer we have there.

And are you planning new trees being planted?

Yeah, definitely.

Yeah, that's part of the component that we're planning.

I believe in our application plan, we had specced an S2 type screening buffer.

So the city has S1, S2, S3.

And the only other question that the neighbors sent us, which is an interesting, strange one, but I guess they highlighted that there's a fallout shelter on the line between this project and the Bank of America, which they were curious of any kind of research or acknowledge it as a strange site.

That's correct.

Yeah, it's on the Bank of America property.

So it's certainly interesting.

Okay, that's all I had from what they had outlined to us in addition to the question about the ingress and egress.

I would second Councillor Pinkston's questions.

Yes.

So, well, seven units is 10% of the 72 max build out.

So it's seven units to be constructed by the 59th dwelling unit.

Right.

Okay.

I have to say, I was fascinated to see that.

I didn't know it was a nuclear bomb shelter or whatever.

I've been in a number of places in Charlottesville where there was construction around 1960, 1961.

I think the strangest one, there's a fallout shelter in the bottom of the rugby house, if you're familiar with that one.

Anyway, that's right.

Okay.

I did have one other comment that I was going to mention later, but it's actually,

What may be appropriate to mention now is I was going to talk about how I met with D. Lapizzo currently with

County Board of Supervisors, and she had mentioned that something that she would like to do in the county, and maybe we could look at it in the city, is that that is to work with the Master Gardener to have those shrubberies be, and plantings be native plants, and the Master Gardener, they are willing to assist in identifying those things instead of getting

some ornamental, which could also be native, but it would be much, much better to get native plants in there.

So anyway, if that's something that y'all could look at, because right now I don't think it's required, but it's something I'm going to be asking staff to look at.

But it may be something you can do now.

Sure.

And I mean, just in response to that, I think we find in, you know, we have the opportunity to work on a lot of sites in central Virginia and natives do the best.

And so, you know, they've already built up pest resistance to native pests.

Thank you.

Any other questions, comments?

The only comment I would make is that there are a number of things that were mentioned in the email that was forwarded to us with a number of the neighbors that are not really SUP condition kinds of things, but are nonetheless good ideas.

And I don't think we should be in the business of

making SUP conditions out of good ideas, but we can certainly say to you, you know, you're going to have some good opportunities for solar panels on south-facing roofs.

can't be a condition that we can impose, but it's one that I hope that you all will exercise when you have the opportunity.

There are other things like that that they've got and some specific issues about how you're going to handle access, you know, ingress, egress, and particularly during the construction process that I think if there's a way that can be accommodated, it would, you know,

It struck me as being, hey, those are good ideas.

I don't know that we can require it.

But I hope you all will take advantage of some of their good ideas.

And frankly, I would regard it as their goodwill.

These are neighbors who want you all to provide good housing.

They want you all to succeed.

They want you all to do so in a way that obviously doesn't inconvenience them any more than it has to.

But I know these folks and I know that they want you to succeed.

We haven't seen this.

After the community meeting, yes.

What I'm referring to is an email that we received a few weeks ago and

Councilor McGill forwarded it again today, just to make sure it was uppermost in our minds.

It was signed by Katherine Budouris, Kristen and Joe Zakos, David Hirschman and Garnet Mellon, various other people who are neighbors.

You've probably seen it.

You've probably seen those ideas.

Anyway, I hope it all works out.

I know last time around we had two votes over here were yeses ready to go.

One vote over here was I want more affordability for a longer period of time.

Do we have any other remaining issues?

I say Councilor McGill, I talked to her today at some length about it all.

I'd say my largest remaining concern is around stormwater management.

I think some of the buffer concerns will be best addressed with landscaping.

I'm not sure what we can exactly do as a requirement there.

The ingress and egress question, I mean, I think, quite frankly, I just don't know enough about the site or the conversations with the church to be able to say, you know, what idea there is feasible or not.

I can see advantages to it, but I guess it's not a deal breaker for me.

So I guess that's kind of where I'm at.

This is another situation where

You know, when you submit a proposal like this, it's often, we're basically saying conditioned upon submitting a detailed site plan.

And I would agree with that.

I mean, so, I mean, that's my biggest concern.

But for me, it's not a deal killer, I guess.

I don't there's some uncertainty and it's not you know 100% perfect but I think particularly with the additional terms of affordability overall I'm prepared to support the project and I think when you look at the type of density and location I do think that while it is a bit of a change it's definitely neighborhood scale it is what is necessary to provide workforce housing so I think there are a lot of just clear positives to it.

Sure.

Not Park Street.

That was one of the things.

The Mount View.

the Mount View PUD.

Okay, let me start over.

I move the ordinance approving a rezoning to authorize establishment of the Mount View PUD subject to proffered development conditions within the area of the parcels of land located at 908 St.

That's also an error, by the way.

1132, was it?

1133.

1133 Otter Street, 1221 Landonia Circle, and 1201 Landonia Circle.

Okay.

Any other discussion?

Ms.

Yes.

All right.

Motion passes four to nothing.

The sidewalk waiver request is tabled for now, and we may hear from you again.

So that concludes most of what we've got, but we had moved the PCOB matters to the end here, and so now we come to the PCOB.

We have both an ordinance and the procedures to approve, and we didn't really have anybody designated to present them, but I noticed at one point Mr. Mendez was on the call.

I am here.

Yeah, and I don't think that I have much to add.

Right.

And just so the record will be clear, the two amendments that I had said, and these were triggered in large part by some comments by Harold Foley and the People's Coalition.

And Mr. Mendez responded to Mr. Foley.

In many cases, the answer was,

It's in there in a slightly different place, you're fine.

But there were two amendments that I thought that I might suggest that would make clear for Mr. Foley's benefit exactly what we're doing.

One is a statement that would be on page 104 of the materials, paragraph 2E, that would add the sentence

Any evidentiary determination by the hearing examiner may be appealed to the full board, end quote.

The second change on page 116 of the materials, paragraph N, would insert the phrase paragraph 3A of between the word with and the word the, just making it clear where that reference is.

And I think that that

helps make clear the two of the issues that Mr. Foley was concerned about.

I had, just so everybody will know, I had sent copies of my proposed changes to all counselors ahead of time.

Right.

And then we can vote.

So the chair is making the motion.

I have it up.

I would move to include in the PCOB operating procedures on page 104, paragraph 2E, add, quote, any evidentiary determination by the hearing examiner may be appealed to the full board.

And on page 116, paragraph

Insert paragraph 3.A.of between with and the.

Motion and second.

Would just say to the larger question about the additional changes that were recommended, I think when I read through them and I haven't discussed them, so maybe I'm missing something, none of them popped up to me the things that really transform the core powers and functionality of the board.

And as this gets off its feet and has experience, I imagine if something doesn't work, from our conversations, we're all open to revisiting it.

So we actually have two things we have to approve.

One is the operating procedures.

And so we've got a motion.

Second?

Do we have a second on the?

Okay.

So let's take that vote.

Ms.

Councillor Pinkston?

Yes.

Mayor Snook?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay, that passes 4-0.

And then on the ordinance itself, this is the second reading amending Chapter 2, Article 16.

All right, we've got a motion.

Is there a second to that?

Second.

Ms.

Yes.

And that motion also passes 4-0.

Let me say, I got an email from somebody saying, you know, is council going to be open to more edits, more changes?

And I said, what I would really like to hope will happen is that everybody will try it for a year.

Let's see how it goes for a year.

And if there are changes that that year experience tells us we need to make, we're certainly open to making them.

One of the things that has been a source of some frustration to me at least has been that over the last few years we've had so much energy devoted to arguing about aspects of the ordinance

that the business of the PCOB or PCRB it was before didn't really move forward.

So I'm hoping that it will move forward.

We have written an ordinance.

We have given the power to the PCOB in what I believe to be the most expansive set of powers of any ordinance in the state of Virginia.

And I hope that it will get off the ground.

We're going to have to hire a new executive director at this point.

We'll be appointing some new members come January to start taking office March 1.

I'd like to just very quickly thank the council, thank Ms.

Robertson for the yeoman's work that she did in helping to pull the ordinance and the procedures together, as well as the board and the public who supported us with our involvement.

and I echo Mayor Snook's hopes and desires that we can now move forward with the business of the board.

Thank you, Mr. Mendez.

And I also want to acknowledge your persistence in this respect, too.

We would not have gotten to this without an awful lot of not only persistence, but also goodwill and belief that this is the right way to be going.

And you have led your group well, and more power to you, and hope it keeps working.

Okay.

I think you're correct.

It was a first reading, so first and only reading.

If you want us to vote again, we can vote again.

Now everyone take the vote.

Councillor Payne yes Councillor Pinkston yes Mayor Snoke yes Vice Mayor Waite yes thank you okay so are there other items for consideration we have one resolution that's been brought to us that we have to take up yes and

Okay.

So would someone like to – I'll tell you, I'll just read the resolution.

It says, be it resolved by the Charlottesville City Council that the city manager and any attorney serving as acting city attorney are hereby authorized upon their mutual agreement to retain outside legal counsel to assist the office of the city attorney

with any pending litigation involving the City of Charlottesville or Charlottesville City Council or with any matter requiring the provision of legal advice to the City Government or City Council subject to the City Manager's determination that funding is available for the services of such outside legal counsel.

Be it further resolved that the City Manager and any attorney serving as acting City Attorney are hereby authorized to jointly execute on behalf of the City of Charlottesville

and agreement in the nature of an engagement letter to engage outside legal counsel upon such terms and conditions as they deem in the best interest of the city.

Is there a second?

Second.

Just for the public's benefit, I mean, do we just want to briefly discuss why this is necessary?

Well, as the city manager announced at the beginning of the meeting, if you weren't paying attention early in the meeting, now is your opportunity.

Our city attorney, Lisa Robertson, announced that she was going to be leaving us effective December 28th.

And I will say, just speaking for myself, as an attorney, I have a great deal of respect for her professional competence.

I have a great deal of admiration for her hard work and the sacrifice to her own personal life.

One might even say to a certain extent mental health over the last few years.

That's right.

Okay.

Councilor Payne?

Yes.

Mayor Snook?

Yes.

Yes.

Mayor, I would just like to add to what you have said.

The city manager has said earlier just thanking Ms.

Robertson for her service to the city.

As you mentioned, it had been some difficult years.

I'll never forget when the first meeting I had in this building was with Ms.

Robertson and the vice mayor was with me.

She just gave us really good, calm advice and I've been very grateful for it and I wish her all the best in her future endeavors Yes, likewise, Brian and I had about a year to work with her and it's been wonderful, very, very just clear cut

concise information and advice.

But I'm happy that she's able to move on and find peace, happiness, you know, other places.

and the most important thing, they're a William and Mary grad.

But in all seriousness, I'll just echo what others have said.