City Council Meeting   6/20/2023

Ms.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I was looking all the way to the right.

He's coming.

Yes.

Councilor Payne?

I apologize in advance to Michael.

I did not intend to try to put him on the spot.

Councilor Puryear?

Here.

Okay, so we're casting votes electronically.

Hit the green.

Okay, passes unanimously.

This meeting will only be in two sections this time.

First there will be a closed meeting to discuss and interview candidates for various boards and commissions.

Then the City Council business meeting which will begin roughly 6.30.

Yes, sir.

All right.

We have a motion and a second.

And please cast your vote.

also passes unanimously and Michael I apologize.

I convened the meeting looking to my right and seeing all the usual suspects here.

The only thing we've done so far is we're moving to go into closed session and if you would like to vote on whether we go into closed session we can count your vote.

Okay, that motion passes five to nothing.

We are now going to be in closed session.

We will return at about 6.30.

For those joining by Zoom, there is a separate link for the 6.30 meeting.

So we'll see you in two hours and a half.

Thank you all.

I will look to the left before I start the meeting.

Okay, folks, let us come back to order.

It is 6.30.

It's time for the second session of our day.

Sure, I've got that.

Okay.

Please cast your vote.

Okay, it passes 5-0.

Let's begin the 6.30 p.m.

Thank you.

Counselors, any announcements?

One announcement I would like to make and it's just a personal thing is that one of the perks I guess you could call it I'm not sure of being mayor is that I got a call from folks at the Historical Society asking me if I would be interested in a cameo appearance in a play and I am going to be playing the part of the governor of Virginia

in a play that is being produced up at PVCC.

The play is called Can't Feel at Home.

It's about the folks who were dislocated from the top of the Blue Ridge Mountains when the Shenandoah Park was created in the 1930s.

And aside from the fact that they had to go so far afield to find somebody to play the governor,

It's really a very well done play.

It's based loosely on about three or four different families, but it's all very much true to life.

And if you have any interest in the history of Albemarle County and the history of this area, I would recommend it, 7.30 on Friday night.

The Governor of Virginia, sir, did not wear overalls.

I do have to wear a three-piece suit and so somebody had to go find me a vest because I don't own a vest.

Anyway, it's going to be

An interesting experience for me, I get to play some mixture of Snidely Kay Whiplash and Darth Vader as I tell the sheriff he's got to go burn those people's houses down.

It is an official plug, by golly.

I know.

The problem is when I was 15 I could memorize stuff.

I am not 15 anymore.

I'll just leave it at that.

It's been tough.

But we're working on it.

Any other announcements?

Okay.

Any items for recognition?

Board Commission appointments.

I've got the list.

All right.

So we'll start with CDBG, Community Development Block Grant Committee.

Historic Resources Committee.

Genevieve Keller, Jelaine Schmidt and Richard Wilson.

Macca, Sarah Schauf, Planning Commission, reappointing Hosea Mitchell and Rory Stolzenberg, Region 10 Community Services Board, Mr. David Auper, Retirement Commission, David Hughes and William Newberry,

Sister Cities, Stella Mattioli, and Elizabeth Smiley.

Social Services Board, Ashley Zhang.

I may be mispronouncing that.

I apologize if I am.

Towing Advisory Board, Dan Miller.

All right.

Any discussion?

If not, please cast your vote.

Consent agenda.

Ms.

Number one.

Minutes, May 23rd, Joint Council Planning Commission work session.

Special meetings, June 1st, June 5th, June 7th, and June 8th.

Two, Resolution Appropriating Insurance Claim Reimbursement for the Avon Fuel Station Replacement Project, $40,000, second reading.

Three, Resolution Appropriating Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services American Rescue Plan Act for Law Enforcement Equipment Grant, 2023, $447,000, second reading.

Four, Resolution Appropriating

Grant funding from the Virginia Department of Emergency Management Emergency Shelter Upgrade Assistance Fund $445,307.

Second reading.

Five resolution appropriating Charlottesville Supplemental Rental Assistance Program funding FY23 for use and acquisition of property $137,500.

Second reading.

Six, Resolution Appropriating Supplemental Federal Transit Administration and State Capital Funding, $7,323,087.

Second reading.

Seven, Resolution Appropriating Funding Received from UVA Donation to Emmett Street and Fontaine Avenue Streetscape Projects, $5 million.

Second reading.

Eight, resolution appropriating $5,300,000 to the Charlottesville City School Board for the acquisition of KTEC.

Second reading.

Nine, ordinance authorizing the conveyance of city-owned sanitary sewer line easement on West Main Street and Water Street for the code building project.

Second reading.

Ten, ordinance amending and reordaining Chapter 31, Utilities.

of the Code of the City of Charlottesville, 1990, as amended to establish new utility rates and service fees for the city gas, water, and sanitary sewer.

Resolution.

Fontaine Avenue Fire Station alerting system update.

Okay.

We will now take public comment regarding items on the consent agenda just read by the clerk.

Each speaker will 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 and wish to speak on the consent agenda, you can press star nine.

We will alternate in person and virtual speakers.

This is only for those 11 items just read.

If you signed up in advance to speak, that moment will come in a few minutes.

It's not now.

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

Yes, Mayor Snook.

I see one raised hand.

All right.

Good evening, Mayor, councilors, and city staff.

I'm addressing item number 10.

Charlesville Utilities Ordinance.

In the days after the Seville Gas public hearing on June 5th, on the utility hearing, a smoky haze descended upon Charlottesville caused by the unprecedented wildfires in Canada.

My kids were kept inside for recess at school to protect their loans.

These fires were exacerbated by climate change.

Unfortunately, what we learned from the public presentation

at the public hearing about Charlottesville gas for the next year and their rates, and by reading their rate reports, is that their emissions are going up, not down.

In the report and presentation, they didn't suggest any new changes to the way they do business that would significantly reduce their climate change causing pollution.

Rather, it will continue on business as usual.

I'll note last year,

At the same public hearing, many of you and I questioned them about carbon offset purchases and why they're buying $300,000 plus of offsets from British Petroleum.

Did anything change since last year?

No.

This year, they touted a low-income weatherization program.

They literally spent only $9,000 on and served 12 families during what was the most expensive winter heating season we've known in the last 10 years.

$300,000 plus the British Petroleum and $9,000 to helping low-income families weatherize their homes.

The response was also to study decarbonization.

Start the study in January, this January, and study it for the entire year.

Is someone dragging their proverbial feet?

Things need to change and change quicker.

While I'm not suggesting you vote down their rate ordinance and this consent agenda,

I'm highly suggesting you get the needed changes and demand better from Seville Gas Management.

In the meantime, I hope to not see any more smoky, hazy days descend upon Charlottesville.

Thank you, Mr. Meyer.

Anybody else in person?

I see no additional raised hands.

Okay.

Is there a second to the motion?

Second.

Any further questions or comments?

If not, please cast your vote.

Okay, that passes 5-0.

I think it would be appropriate at some point to note at this point that Mr. Meyer raises an interesting question that I, he sent an email to us earlier, I guess earlier today, maybe it was yesterday, that I just haven't had a chance to follow up on.

But his question about following up on discussions that were being had a year or so ago

dovetails with some of the questions that other folks have been asking about the state of the carbonization studies and things like that.

And I would be curious to know, perhaps by the meeting in July, whether we can get some sort of an update on where we stand with all of these different questions.

Because, I mean, he's raised a legitimate question about, you know, what has changed since last year.

Sure.

Okay.

No, we did our monthly report for June at the last meeting.

It was very thorough.

So now it's time for Community Matters.

There are two pre-registered speakers leaving 14 slots for additional speakers on Community Matters.

Each speaker will have up to three minutes to speak and we will now open the floor to pre-registered speakers.

Our first speaker listed is John Hasek.

Mr. Hasek?

We're used to hearing you on the Zoom.

Thank you.

Good evening, councilors.

I'm here to discuss the zoning ordinance.

I could focus on the fact that the mayor said that you spent about 30 seconds discussing the details of the flum, while I have 180 seconds right now.

I could discuss how the plan is projected to yield about six affordable units per year.

However, I'm here about architectural design control districts and historical conservation districts that apply to many properties south of US 250 on Park Street, Locust Avenue and some intervening streets.

Module 1 contains only a placeholder but the essence is clear.

These are overlay and they will be respected.

Demolition in these districts will be on an exceptional basis.

Since this plan is equity at its centre, I would like you to ponder the equity involved that allows some streets to get this get out of jail card.

To be clear, I like one of these from my own street.

I'm not proposing that you tear up these districts.

I view these districts

as an informal contract that homeowners buy into, limitations and responsibilities taken together.

I also note that homeowners bought into current zoning for similar reasons, an expectation of stable responsibilities and limitations.

So both zoning and conservation districts are informal contracts.

The city evidently takes the view that it can tear up one of these informal contracts, but the other one appears to be too toxic to touch.

How exactly is that defended?

Are there some demographic issues here?

While there appears to be no immediate loss from just tearing up these informal contracts in front of those involved parties, be aware of the long-term cost in terms of the loss of trustworthiness that may take decades to correct.

Thus, while I'm disappointed not to be a beneficiary in one of these districts, I'm here about a bigger issue.

I have a bigger issue than this.

The high intensity development that would otherwise occur closer to the downtown core, where it makes sense, is now pushed to just outside of these conserved streets, i.e.

adjacent unprotected streets in north downtown Martha Jefferson and my own neighborhood in Locust Grove.

This amounts to doubling the development pressure on these adjacent streets.

This I cannot support.

Is there a better way?

It would be better to enable context sensitive development citywide like attached or unattached accessory dwelling units in rear yards or house splitting into separate units wherever feasible.

Developments of greater scale ought to go through a proper accelerated review process.

After all, in 2022, the Planning Commission, City Staff, and Council approved the following in one neighborhood, 95 units at Macca, 85 affordable, 50 affordable units at Park Street Christian Church, 60 units at Mount View Baptist Church, and 77 units in the flood plain, by the way.

All of these have legitimate controversies, road safety, tree loss, and stormwater, etc.

So from where I'm sitting in my neighborhood, I just do not see what is the pacing problem with the current zoning code as it stands today.

Thank you, Mr. Hosick.

Good evening, Mayor and Councilors.

My name is Sam Galland.

I live at 123 Goodman Street.

I'm speaking tonight on the Zero East High Street proposal on the Rivanna floodplain.

The project is concerning because it proposes a massive amount of fill dirt up to 17 feet and over several acres.

to elevate the apartments out of the flooding risk in a 100-year flood.

That's great for the apartments.

The downside is that it will increase flooding risk for the neighboring properties.

Imagine a flood scenario where water has crept up to Caroline Avenue and a fairway and then add 100,000 cubic yards of filled dirt near the river with walls on multiple sides.

The water will get somewhere else, which happens to be yards and houses.

As you probably know, this project has not come to the planning commission or to city council because it is seeking a by right approval.

So why am I speaking to you about it?

The reason is that the project includes new public facilities that require separate authorization before any other approvals.

There's a section of state code that is duplicated verbatim in the city zoning ordinance.

It requires that new public facilities must be reviewed by the planning commission as to whether they are consistent with the comprehensive plan.

The Planning Commission's decision can be appealed by the developer to City Council and it can also be overruled by City Council in the absence of an appeal.

In short, it is ultimately up to you guys, the governing body.

State code does offer the city some discretion.

In certain cases, the public facilities may be deemed already shown on the Comprehensive Plan and you can skip the formal review.

As you know, the new public roads, water lines, and sewer lines in this project are not shown on the comprehensive plan and they should be subject to a proper review by the planning commission.

So far city staff has been very thorough in reviewing this project against the zoning ordinance, but they have not addressed the requirement for the comprehensive plan review.

I am not sure if staff is ignoring the requirement or if they have decided that these facilities are in the spirit of the comprehensive plan and we don't need to bother doing a review.

Are they deeming the streets and sewer lines to be already shown on the comp plan?

Who is doing the deeming?

This seems particularly relevant because the project has actually proposed public roads to circumvent a zoning violation.

Their two access drives were illegal.

So they're asking the city to build new roads instead.

I guess it's a lot easier than rezoning.

In a previous letter, I asked the staff consult with city council on how to address this comp plan requirement.

I don't think this has happened.

So today I would like to make a simple request of city council.

required that the Planning Commission review the public facilities proposed by Zero East High prior to any approval of the site plan.

Thank you, Mr. Golan.

So that's our two pre-registered speakers to fill the remaining speaker slots.

If there's anyone online who would like to speak, you may select the raised hand option in the Zoom webinar, or if you're joining by phone who wish to speak, please press star nine.

In-person attendees may raise your hands to be recognized.

We'll alternate you with virtual speakers.

There will also be an additional public comment section at the end of the meeting.

So is there anyone else in council chamber who would like to speak?

Yes, ma'am.

Come forward.

Identify yourself.

Hi, I'm Rebecca Riley.

I live on Caroline.

I think a lot of you have heard from me recently.

I am also here about Zero East High and specifically about the comprehensive plan, which was endorsed by Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on February 2nd of 2022 and also adopted by the City Council here.

and February 7th of 2022 as a joint effort.

I have a lot of things I could read, but I'm just going to choose two of them.

The vision statement that has been published in the urban Rivanna River corridor plan states, the Rivanna River flowing through Charlottesville and Albemarle County is one of the community's greatest assets.

In and near Freebridge, Woolen Mills, and the Pantops area, the River Corridor is and will be a dynamic place where people can experience a natural environment, healthy outdoor activities and venues, peaceful and serene opportunities, and important historic and cultural points of interest.

In the paragraphs leading up to that, it states that as the guiding principles were considered to be of equal importance,

initially after presenting the first draft of the vision statement and guiding principles to the committee it became clear that the primary objective for the future of the river corridor needed to be environmental protection and stewardship and all of the other guiding principles need to be advanced in a balanced harmonious relationship to this critically important primary objective.

So the vision statement is to protect the river and the environment surrounding it.

The final thing that I will read to you is under the development and redevelopment topic within the comprehensive plan.

It says, in all cases, development and redevelopment should be planned and designed in context sensitive ways that respect the Rivanna River status as a scenic river, the first river in Virginia to achieve this official designation.

So as Sam said just a moment ago, there is a state code and a city zoning ordinance

that state that new public facilities must be reviewed by the Planning Commission to determine if they're in line with the city's comprehensive plan.

The Zero East High Street proposal and the public facilities that are on that site plan are not in line with preserving our river, with keeping the environment around the river clean and healthy and accessible to the public.

So I ask that council resolve to require a comprehensive plan review.

Ms.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Rowley.

We're scheduled to walk the site tomorrow morning at 7-15.

Absolutely.

Okay.

All right.

Is there anybody else in person who would like to speak to us?

All right.

The first action item is a CPD firearms buyback program.

Mayor, Councilors, City Manager, Deputy City Manager, before you is a proposed ordinance allowing for gun buyback programs to simply occur within the City of Charlottesville.

To be clear, the gun buyback program is just one part of the overall whole of community approach to address gun violence.

This, along with other initiatives such as the redeployment of resources to areas that are disproportionately affected by violent crime, identifying and focusing

on those who commit those crimes, and most importantly, working with the community, mental health services, human services, and other community stakeholders to ensure meaningful partnerships in meeting the common goal of reducing violent crime within the city of Charlottesville.

I've said it many times that the police department can't do this on its own, and we have to ensure a co-production approach with our community to address these complex issues that we're dealing with.

So the purpose of a gun buyback program is to provide an opportunity for individuals who no longer want or need firearms to dispose of them.

This allows unwanted firearms to be disposed of and not fall into the wrong hands or be sold illegally.

It also gives us an opportunity to engage with gun owners and provide literature on responsible gun ownership.

Once this ordinance is passed, our community involvement coordinator who's here tonight, Sergeant Eric Thomas,

He'll work to identify a local nonprofit who we will work with.

They'll take the lead on the program, fund the program, and we will just participate in the role of educating the public and obviously destroying the firearms that will be turned in.

Yeah, it's exciting.

Do you have a sense of

It depends.

There's different models out there.

The City of Roanoke has done three of these.

I've talked to folks from the City of Roanoke, from the Police Department, and they've seen some success with it.

It just depends on the firearms.

I'll give you an example.

An assault weapon like an AR-15 or something like that would obviously get more money than your grandfather's old shotgun.

So are you all looking tonight for just sort of the enabling legislation to let you develop the program?

Is that the idea?

Yes, sir.

There are.

There's plenty of them within the city of Charlottesville, and several have reached out to us already expressing interest.

Actually, this is how the conversation started.

Correct.

Okay.

They actually wrote it.

You didn't do it?

Okay, thank you.

So this ordinance would allow CBD to do gun buyback programs as you and any non-profits that you partner with deem necessary.

So if this ordinance moves forth, you don't have to come back to get permission to do another gun back program.

This is

So I was recently in Denver and I attended church while I was there and this particular church was partnering with other churches to have a gun buy back or donate program and they

would melt them down and use them as garden tools, I think was guns to gardeners, something like that.

Anyway, thought it was a good, it seemed to have gotten, because Denver has also seen an uptick in gun violence, it seemed to be very successful.

I'm going to see if I can squirrel down and find out information to send to you just as an option.

I think that's a great idea.

I'd be more willing to look at that.

Just two questions.

One, I appreciate from the beginning you've always said, you know, the research shows if we're expecting this to be the one big thing that changes everything.

Right, exactly.

But it can't do harm and it can also start community conversations, conversations in neighborhoods.

So City Roanoke, very similar to what I've been talking about, it's one of many things that they are doing.

And so, you know, when I talk to the commander down there who I know very well,

The biggest thing was just that, again, that community engagement, right, and having conversations, those organic conversations that I continue to talk about when someone's turning in a firearm about, hey, they may have more firearms at home, and hey, lock them up, don't leave your gun in your car, here's a pamphlet, you know, or you need some gun locks, here's some gun locks, stuff like that.

And the second question is, this is obviously the enabling ordinance to allow you all to do it.

So, well, that's why we're going to partner with nonprofits.

They typically will fund it.

We've had a few already who have said they wanted to fund it.

And when I mean fund it, it's providing gift cards at a certain level.

Any other questions?

People cool with that?

Consent agenda.

Next item, a minor budget amendment to reprogram $30,000 of CDBG funds.

Good evening Mayor Snook, Councilors, Ms.

Thomas, City Manager.

We are here before you to propose a minor budget amendment to help us effect some accessibility enhancements to Washington Park.

The impetus for this came from the fact that we have a couple big projects funded for the fiscal year 22-23 that are running a little bit behind schedule.

One is the Jordan Park Trail Bridge project.

And so we are required to spend a certain amount of HUD money by a certain deadline.

This money will put us over that threshold and

so when we identified the amount of money that we needed we began canvassing the community and accessibility issues come up very often and so we went around a couple of the parks and this would fund

I should have put together a side deck maybe but if you picture Washington Park in between the pool and the adaptive rec building there are three handicapped parking spots and a curb cut ramp that comes up onto the sidewalk then when you go into the park there's a very narrow pathway that extends for about nine feet and then takes a very sharp

left turn and heads into the main pathway into the park and that's very hard to navigate with wheelchair or other accessibility tools and then there's also gravel in there and around the adaptive rec building so this funding would allow

to completely remove that very narrow pathway with the gravel and have a city contracted paver come in and create a gracefully arching pathway that would go from the handicapped parking spot right to the main pathway leading up to the adaptive rec building and then to put two nine feet paved pathways

in and around the adaptive rec buildings which both entry ways are currently gravel which are very hard to navigate and become flooded during the rain.

We've been working with Parks and Rec on this.

This fits into their large plans and they work with a paver who did the pathways around the skate park and so they would be the exact same nine foot pathways that they used to

to circumnavigate the area around the skate park.

There would also be opportunity to buy some more accessible equipment for the adaptive rec program including some sound baffling inside the building.

This is a very narrow space and that would help them kind of maybe moderate the volume while also being able to put artwork onto the sound baffles and possibly some more adaptive picnic tables to go out around the playground.

Thank you.

Councilor, questions?

Yeah, I mean, I think this is a great idea, but as you were talking about, adaptive use made me think of the Bennett's Village Playground is going to be planned for Penn Park.

So I know this is done, but is this, is that project eligible for these type of funds in the future?

Because it is going to be truly accessible playground.

So, I mean, they're trying to

raise money for this in the future.

Yeah, that could definitely, that kind of a project.

That project is being conceptualized, as best I understand, from the ground up to be fully accessible.

And I think in America today, no playground should be built that is not from the ground up fully accessible.

That would definitely be eligible to apply for CDBG funding in the future.

It's Kara.

So do I ever contact you or Alex or who's the?

Both of us.

So I have a question.

I think this is an excellent idea.

You are asking for additional money because the monies that you currently have through your grants and other HUD fundings

will allow you to do X, but in order to do what we need to do additionally to make the area more adaptive is an additional $30,000.

No, you're exactly correct, Councilor.

This is in addition to the currently funded programs to help us meet the HUD spending threshold that is required.

in part because one of the big projects that we pledged a lot of money to is still in the final design review phases before it can go to bid okay so what's the turnaround time to get this done because the park is already open the park is already open we have met and walked I've met and walked to the ground with Parks and Rec and the paver if we can get the final approval

There's some question about a couple things.

He can start the following day.

He has availability within the next couple weeks.

Okay.

My understanding, that's a very good question, my understanding is that each phase, so there would be, in terms of the paving, there would be three phases, the initial pathway and then the two spaces, would probably take two or three days.

It's a very simple process for them to come in and dig out and prep the, what they call the pad, and then because we're going with a nine foot width, which is also perfectly in accordance with ADA requirements,

they can just take the you know do prep one day walk their big they have a big machine that just does a nine foot pathway and do that on the second day and then the third day it's close the area is closed off for drying and curing each section would be done in turn and would not

So we just have to be extra careful with our children at the park while this is going on and everybody will have adequate notice and understand what's happening.

Okay.

We've worked with Parks and Rec from the very beginning of this when we initially floated the idea and they have pledged to work with us to make sure that everything is done safely.

And it's very similar, almost identical to what they've done around the skate park, which did not have to close.

My understanding is they didn't have to close any part of the skate park, just certain pathways around as they put in the new accessible pathways.

Yes, and I don't have any questions.

I have one specific

question.

I know you were copied on an email about a week ago just to sort of set the stage for everybody.

I got an email from a friend who wanted to ask specifically for help for the public event to be on the 8th of July, I believe.

and the person who uses a wheelchair said that and pointed out that there's a sidewalk within the park on the Preston Avenue side has a huge crack that prevents wheelchair users from passing and visiting all the booths and then

I passed that email on to people and somebody passed it on to you and Chris Gensick replied to me basically that yes, we expect to be able to get this done out of CDBG funds working with NDS and we'll specifically check and fix that crack.

I believe we are ready to start soon and we're trying to beat the deadline for the fair.

To be clear, the two proposals are slightly different.

The cracked sidewalk came to our attention after this was proposed.

But as a result of that email, we did communicate, Chris and I, with Public Works, and they have the staff and the equipment to

do that kind of repair.

So the fact that we were

that we would have a second reading on this to officially approve it on July 17th would not prevent you from getting the work done before July 8th.

Yes, that is a good question.

We are working with the city attorney.

The practice is to have two hearings, but according to the HUD approved citizen participation plan, the formal requirement is one hearing.

Is this one of those things where if we pass the motion by at least 80% or 60% or something like that that we can dispense with a second reading?

Do we know?

I know there's some provision out there that allows us to dispense with a second reading under certain circumstances if we're basically unanimous.

Good evening, councilors, mayor, city manager.

I think

That's the question both of us have been asking ourselves.

What is the best way to expedite this?

Okay.

If we keep on the current schedule and have a second reading on July 17th, is it going to be possible to use this

this reason for, I was going to say excuse, but that sounds sort of snide.

I don't think it's possible.

It's going to be possible.

However, we can look into that because this is hard money.

The city, it's the city attorney indicated that this has to be two readings.

That's why I asked that somebody in the city attorney's office needs to clarify this.

However, like Anthony stated earlier, we can coordinate

with public works, which we're already doing, to use existing resources to fix that particular sidewalk while we are waiting for the second reading to go through.

I see him on the Zoom, but he'll need to start.

Good evening.

Good evening.

No, I really was not.

I apologize.

Okay.

So the question that's presented is that there is a minor budget amendment to reprogram $30,000 of CDBG funds.

We would like to be able to use it to make some specific

repairs before a July 7th fair to be held in Washington Park.

And that's what this is really trying to do.

Right now it's set for a first reading tonight, second reading on July 17th.

That's true, Mr. Mayor.

Okay.

Yeah, once.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Then I would

I would move to approve the resolution reprogramming community development block grant funds from fiscal years 2017 to 2019 to enact accessibility enhancements in one or more city parks in the amount of $30,000.

Yes, if approved by supermajority it would take effect immediately.

That would be fun.

All right.

Any further discussion?

Got a second?

Uh-huh.

Okay.

Any further discussion?

Shall we vote?

Okay.

Five-nothing.

That's the supermajority necessary.

We don't need a second reading.

Go forth and do good things.

Thank you, Mayor.

And let me add, by the way, because I just want to comment on this.

This is something that was already kind of in the works before the email that I got on June 8th.

And the email I got on June 8th included the line, my friend told me, thank you so much for caring, but unless you know someone on City Council, you'll never get that crack filled.

and I wanted to tell everybody that the reason why it's going to get filled is not just because somebody knows somebody on council but because in fact it was already kind of in the works that people had identified it and in fact that the email that I got said we already intend to try to beat the deadline for the fair.

So while I will be happy to take credit for all kinds of things that are not my doing

I don't really deserve the full credit in this respect and you all do for having identified the problem and being able to jump on it.

Correct.

Okay.

Okay.

Next item.

Approving an agreement with CRHA for the Dogwood Properties Portfolio and reassigning an $850,000 promissory note.

Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor and Councilors.

Back in April, you approved a $5 million capital investment for the acquisition of the Dogwood Properties portfolio.

At that time, I'd express that there was an item that was still outstanding that would have to be brought back, and that is in regards to a promissory note that was issued back in 2007 by our prior council as a loan for $850,000 that was used for the acquisition of this property initially, this portfolio initially.

The funds were awarded to PHA, who then used them through the Dogwood Properties of Charlottesville, LLC, a company in association with Woodard Properties.

That note carried an affordability compliance term, and Woodard has been maintaining that responsibility by bringing back records and reports to council in five-year increments, basically indicating that the property has remained affordable for that period of time.

and in exchange for doing so council's action has extended the note for another five-year period.

Each of those reports were brought before you in 2012, 2018 and in October of last year which indicates that the note is still active.

It's a current active not in default and the portfolio was priced for CRHA's acquisition with the city's investment without consideration of the note.

At that time the

assessment had been done on what the portfolio was worth and that was what the price, that price was indicated by Woodard to CRHA at $10 million, $5 million of which has been secured through a private loan and the other $5 million is what you all approved in April.

This $850,000 note, the request that we are making by bringing this item to you is to reassign the note to CRHA who is the operating manager of this portfolio for a future decision by a future council to determine whether or not this $850,000 needs to be repaid

after the first mortgage is paid or that council can make a decision to cancel the note or whatever other conversation may be had with CRHA at the time could be considered.

So you're approving a joint item in this resolution.

So the question that I had raised,

I was trying to remember the history behind this and I appreciate Mr. Sanders you sent us in response to my questions you sent us the correspondence from 2012 or 2013 of course none of us was on council back then I suppose I should have some better recollection than I do because I was on the board of Piedmont Housing Alliance at the time but I frankly don't that was that was now over 10 years ago so

As it appears to me looking at the correspondence,

that the $850,000 was being loaned to PHA for the purpose of assisting Dogwood Properties of Charlottesville to buy 57 units and for, as consideration for that, that they agreed to do a whole lot of reporting on affordability and number of bedrooms and all of that in a way that they would not otherwise be obligated to do.

Correct.

and that I mean I don't want to make this sound improper because I don't intend it to be implying that but it sounds like

Number one, I suspect that somebody needed $850,000 for some purpose.

And number two, that we needed to get this feedback and this constant flow of information.

And since one can't happen without consideration, neither one can happen without consideration, we constructed this deal basically that makes the $850,000

in essence contingent on the city of Charlottesville continuing to receive this information is that correct that is correct now

It's always been in terms of the city, not CRHA.

That would be a future council's decision.

I mean, it could be that that future council may make the determination that we don't need to bother with that.

We can cancel the note.

Let's just call that done.

And if we did so,

the beneficiary of that decision would be CRHA.

Correct.

So any generosity on the city's part either now or 10 years from now the recipient of that generosity is not going to be a private entity.

And technically I would say that it's really a hybrid because the city has a half interest.

So these are the proceeds that would pay back that $850,000.

I guess the overall point that I want to make is that this doesn't end up being an $850,000 gift to Keith Woodard.

Correct.

It might end up being some contribution, some forgiveness of a debt to CRHA.

Also correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

A question on the loan agreement portion.

Are we in a place where all parties involved agree in terms of what we're going to be voting on tonight?

Yes.

What you have before you is a draft.

And I worked with the SANS attorneys last week and made sure that everything was written in a way that the city manager is who you're authorizing to make any adjustments to the language.

I met with John Sales this morning to have a conversation about exactly that.

We went through a few things that we can make as some adjustments.

Those all appear to be reasonable adjustments that can be made, and I anticipate that the attorneys from Sands would agree with that.

Okay.

And us voting on what's in the packet still allows those adjustments?

Yes.

Yes.

So a few months ago now, I guess, we voted to allow this to move forward.

I guess at the time that was sort of direction to you all to take us to this place now.

In other words, we assigned the funding, directed the funding to be allocated for this work.

Yes.

It will be the operating agreement that is between the city and CRHA.

OK.

And that would include the transfer of the $150,000 obligation, the note to CRHA?

All right.

Okay.

Okay.

Approval of joint ownership and loan agreement with CRHA to support the acquisition of the Dogwood Properties Portfolio as permanent units of affordable housing.

Yeah, that's what I was saying.

I heard it.

Any further discussion?

If not, let's cast votes.

Five zips.

That passes.

Next, resolution approving the employment contract with Jacob Stroman as City Attorney.

Mayor, counsel, tonight you have before you a contract for the appointment, the approval of the contract of Jay Stroman as city attorney.

You approved the appointment at the last meeting.

And we asked the city attorney, Sands Anderson, to draft an agreement for us.

We shared that with Mr. Stroman.

He's in agreement after some back and forth.

Questions of Mr. Rogers?

Let me just I'd like to mention I was at a conference a week ago and somebody came up to me whom I did not know and he introduced himself to me

as a counselor in the city of Chesapeake, which was Mr. Stroman's last job.

He just said, I understand you're hiring Mr. Stroman.

And I said, yeah, we are.

And he said, well, I just want you to know that if his side of the political factions down in Chesapeake, if his side ever gets the majority again, they're going to come try to steal him back.

because they very much valued him as a member and it was a situation down there where he got caught actually doing his job where he gave an unpopular opinion, a correct unpopular opinion to what was then a minority position on council

That minority position after new elections became a majority position on council and they decided they were going to hire Mr. Stroman.

And to me, I learned that story even before I talked to this fellow last week.

I learned that story and to me that was an absolute qualification for the job.

So I've been pleased with the idea that we should be hiring him.

Any other discussion?

Sure.

I move approval of the employment contract resolution for Jacob Stroman as city attorney for the city of Charlottesville effective July 1, 2023.

Is there a second?

Welcome to the city, Mr. Stroman.

Not yet.

Passes 5-0.

And we're about to do Mr. McRoberts out of a job.

He looks very sad.

Look, he's crying.

Zoom in.

Okay.

Next action item, adoption of the City of Charlottesville Emergency Operations Plan 2023.

One reading.

Mr. Snook, are you Mayor Snook, any counselors?

How are you today?

Great.

Great.

How are you?

Good.

Good.

So I have a quick presentation for you if you wish to see that on my plan.

Sure.

I trust you had an opportunity to read over the plan and it's just a 44 page document basically.

I had nothing else to do Saturday night.

I'm afraid I do not have a presentation to show from back here.

I uploaded it to Civic Clerk.

Maybe that was an operator error then.

Okay.

So I'll just kind of run through what this plan is.

So a little background is that

There was a regional concept or a regional emergency management coordinator.

That position was never filled post-COVID.

There was a regional emergency operations plan that was never adopted.

So each jurisdiction, meaning Albemarle and the city of Charlottesville had to create their own EOP.

So with that, I started writing and looking at some of the policy and comparing policies with the regional plan and came up with kind of hours.

And so

The City of Charlottesville Emergency Operations Plan is a multidisciplinary all hazards plan and it's just a framework of how we will do business during an emergency and it highlights who does what, which department does what and it has their how they're going to accomplish their tasks during an emergency and in a nutshell that's what that is.

It consists of a basic plan, which is what you have in front of you.

This part of the plan is public facing.

It'll go on a website or whoever wants to see it.

But there are four other appendices, and that's something that's for official use only, but it describes support annexes, again, who's going to do what during an emergency and things of that nature.

Yes sir.

Okay.

Kicked upstairs?

Yes sir.

So but there's some authority here that there's local federal state authorities and guidelines is how I wrote this emergency operations plan.

So I will send you a copy of the the PowerPoint so you can see that but basically the local plan or the local

Authority, which designates Mr. Rogers as the emergency manager and me as the emergency operations coordinator.

There are various other state and federal regulations that I had to write to.

Any questions?

Yeah, I read the plan.

It was very interesting.

Helpful, I guess, these things always, it's really kind of in the thick of the moment, I guess, where, you know, we prove the metal of a plan and whether it actually is, you know, worth the pixels that we see here.

That's the plan because if we don't do anything with this, it's going to sit on a shelf and when something happens, no one knows what's going to go on or how they're going to operate.

So it'll be

Yeah.

You know, chaos.

So my plan is to go ahead and start exercising this.

Okay.

Okay.

I think some sort of regular reporting would be helpful.

It doesn't have to be long.

I know that you referenced the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, that large plan that the mayor spent a lot of time reading a few weekends back.

What wasn't listed in there was like what we happened in 2017, you know, with a civil disturbance.

It would.

So that's the part that you don't see.

That's not the public facing part.

But a lot of times these things are going to be

in review.

Okay.

So there is a template that the Virginia Department of Emergency Management has.

So I kind of cross-reference with that.

And then there is a document that FEMA has.

It's a CPG 101.

And that document kind of mandates

what your EOP is supposed to look like.

And I know that you referenced Zeemer Hall as being one of the incident command centers over at UVA.

We do.

We meet on a monthly basis, all the emergency managers in the area along with ECC, and we talk about issues that are going on in our region.

Okay.

Okay.

So if this is approved, you said it takes effect immediately.

Yes, ma'am.

That you needed to make.

We have an emergency tomorrow.

So this plan is good right now as it goes.

And what I mean by tweaks, there is the EOC model.

I would like to change the EOC model a little bit and make it less complicated.

So then when we do have an emergency, those people who come to the EOC can focus on their job and not as much on the NEMS compliance, if you understand the...

So we'll have some people who are really good at that who can guide the different departments that come in to do their job.

So no emergencies until it's simplified.

How about that?

Hopefully.

Fingers crossed.

All right.

There we go.

No emergencies until it's simplified.

That's right.

Okay.

Absolutely.

And I assume that there would be some sense of if you're massively reworking it, you'd have to bring it back to us.

Absolutely.

But failing that, operational details, we don't need to be worried about.

Right.

You don't have to see it again until another four years.

That's right.

And so every four years, we would look at it one more time and say, yeah, it's still good.

Absolutely.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

You might have already touched on this, read through, it just seems like it's about decision making trees basically.

The biggest thing is that the previous document that you had is outdated.

The most current one was never adopted and that was because post-COVID, you know, there was a regional coordinator that left and they never rehired that.

So, none of the jurisdictions adopted that plan.

So, you've been without a plan since 2017, 18?

The new plan was 21 and so I'm sure they started writing that at the end of 20.

After tonight we will now have a plan.

Yes, sir.

The first one since 2017?

All right.

Any other discussion?

Okay.

Any discussion?

No.

If not, please vote.

Passes five to nothing.

Thank you.

Yes.

We had a couple public commenters earlier mention the issue of a comprehensive plan review of Zero East High.

I thought they made a very compelling case that given the proposed public facilities that this speaks to the heart of our comprehensive plan and I would absolutely support our Planning Commission engaging in that comprehensive plan review

I would agree with that.

In fact, if you hadn't said something about it, I was going to do the same thing.

The question that I've got, though, is a practical one in that I think we would have to vote simply

One or two random counselors saying, hey, you all ought to do, even three counselors saying without a formal vote together would not constitute an official action.

We would have to have a vote.

We have not noticed this as being a topic for a vote tonight.

My concern is that

I think that the Planning Commission is expecting to take this matter up again at their meeting on July 11th which would be before we would have a meeting where we could with proper notice and all the rest of that pass a resolution asking that they do something more.

I notice Mr. McRoberts is up on screen.

Well, what the speaker was talking about is often in local government circles called a 2232 review.

And that's after Virginia Code section 15.2-2232.

Some localities call it a substantial conformance review.

And the idea is to make sure that public facilities, utilities, streets, things like that are consistent with the comprehensive plan before you move forward.

I have not discussed this with your planning staff.

Presumably they know how to do 2232 reviews and my guess is that they're probably on top of this.

The good news is there's really nothing for council to do.

It's something that

if appropriate for a 2232 review is taken up by the planning commission usually at the request of staff and then there's the ability to appeal it to council or I think the speaker's correct I think that the council if it wants to appeal something and reverse something also has the right of appeal as well so I don't think there's any action you all need to take

Mayor Snook?

Yes?

This item has already been addressed from a planning staff perspective.

So the specific question is, is that going to mean that whatever discussion they might have expected to have had on July 11th,

Number one isn't likely to result in an approval of anything on July 11th, but number two is likely to result in this more detailed examination of the public aspects of

So what I would need to confirm is the timing of the matter but as it's been explained to me is that the Planning Commission has the authority irrespective of the public facilities that they can call up an item for review and they've opted to do so.

All right.

And that is actually planning to be held.

Okay.

One of the fears that had been expressed to me was that if we didn't say to the Planning Commission, conduct this review, that it would be called up on their agenda on July 11th.

They would feel constrained to approve it for whatever reason because they hadn't done this review and hadn't been asked to do this review.

I would imagine that that would be the case because they have opted to do that.

And the only other question I have is in terms of that process that they're going to conduct, they will make their determination.

I don't believe that is the case on this matter.

Well, on 15.2-2232B provides the Commission shall communicate its findings to the governing body indicating its approval or disapproval with written reasons.

Yeah.

It goes on to say failure of the Commission to act within 60 days of a submission unless the time is extended by the governing body shall be deemed approval.

The owner or owners or their agents may appeal the decision of the Commission of the governing body within 10 days.

We'll go on with the rest of it.

Okay.

and so we will come to that in just a second but do any other questions for city management to follow up on?

No.

Nothing.

Now we have another opportunity for public speaking for members of the public.

I know Ms.

Riley is just sitting there saying she wants to ask a question.

I just want to clarify what Mr. Sanders was saying because I was under the impression that the Planning Commission had called the site plan up for review.

My understanding is that that is different from a comprehensive plan review and so I just want to make sure that within that meeting that we're talking about the review that they've called it up that the comprehensive plan review is

Yes.

I'll even go one further.

I know we're working off sort of oral representations at this point, but let's find out what exactly that letter or motion or resolution or whatever is going to look like.

And I would ask that we put on our agenda for July 17th

at least for review of what that review looks like so that if we are not satisfied that it will be sufficiently comprehensive, we can make our own determination at that point.

But I really feel strongly this is something that we should not have substantive decisions on without having notice to the public.

I apologize for that.

So that is where my huge concern comes in and since the next Planning Commission meeting is before you are planning to meet again.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I know you'll be getting back in town, what, the night before or something?

Just so folks know,

The Vice Mayor is going to be doing the Lord's work over in Ethiopia for a few weeks.

So we applaud his charitable impulses.

We will miss him.

But he's already told us in advance what he wants to have happen.

So we've got our marching orders.

Okay.

Are there any other folks in here who would like to speak to us?

All right.

Well, there's nothing else on our agenda.

Okay, so we are adjourned.

Our next meeting will be July 17th.

Now the next regularly scheduled meeting.

I should tell folks that councilors have talked about perhaps having one quick emergency meeting by Friday or something because there are a couple of issues that we may need to try to resolve more promptly.

But I'll leave everybody in suspense about what that might be.

It will be properly noticed as the law requires.

And I'll talk to Ms.

Thomas about that.

Thank you all.