City Council   7/17/2017

All right.

Good evening, everybody.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Welcome to Charlottesville City Council.

We're glad you all are with us.

We will begin our meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag

Ms. Szakos?

And I'll explain for everybody, Kristin Szakos is not with us tonight.

But we do have a little bit of feedback from her on various items, but she's obviously not here to vote.

But we do have a quorum under our rules to meet.

We will begin with awards and recognitions and announcements.

Sure.

I have two.

Saturday, July 29th from 10 a.m. to 730 p.m. Chiamba's 28th African American Cultural Arts Festival and the 10th Annual Community Health Fair will be at the Booker T. Washington Park on Preston Avenue in Charlottesville, Virginia.

So just join us for a grand time and the welcome processional starts at 10 a.m.

So the other announcement is about Chiamba and I want to invite Lily Williams forward now please to make the announcement about the festival.

Alright Ms. Lily, you gotta dance.

Okay.

What she started to say, first of all, good evening everyone.

Good evening.

I want to start off by saying real quick that without the Charlottesville City support, and we could not do this.

So I want to thank you right off the bat.

Thank you for the success of this festival.

It's turned to three days.

People love it.

So I'm going to tell you exactly what's going to be happening.

So it is our 28th annual festival.

I'm just going to start out on Thursday the 27th, and now it used to be the Taste of Ghana, but it's Taste of Africa.

So we got, now Ghana has been joined by Kenya.

So we're going to have an evening of storytelling by Tahara Productions and Company, and we got, we're going to have God's Bungle Gospel Group.

So from that one, on Friday, of course, is Ladies Night.

and that's going to be a hair show, a fashion show.

We got Sisters Conquering Cancer Modeling.

It's going to be a wonderful evening, so please come out.

But for these two events, they're going to be at Carver, but I want you to know if you do want to attend, that you have to let us know and you can go online to e-vite and get a ticket because of the capacity.

You will have to have a ticket to come.

And on the final day, of course, is Saturday.

That's going to be Booker T. Washington Park, and that's in a village setting.

I'm sure if you've come, you will enjoy yourself.

That's going to be food vendors, a health fair, free swim, all kinds of vendors that sell all kinds of wonderful things.

So again, I hope you can all come out, enjoy yourselves.

It's a family event.

It's all kinds of things you can do.

It's going to be wonderful.

So we have a wonderful committee that we're all very proud of who worked really hard on this.

and we have wonderful sponsors and support.

So I want everyone to come out, enjoy yourself on one or all of those days.

Thank you so much.

That was wonderful.

The second announcement that I have

is entitled Race Still Matters, Wednesday, July 19 at 6.30 p.m. at the Jefferson School African American Heritage Center.

If you missed the information meeting about the continuation of the dialogue on race study circles, you have another opportunity on Wednesday, July 19 at 6.30 p.m. at the African American Heritage Center.

That's at the Jefferson School City Center.

The Dialogue on Race is a City of Charlottesville initiative that began in 2009.

The community of Charlottesville came together in courageous conversations that led to the creation of the City of Promise Education Group,

the Chamber Diversity Business Council, the Human Rights Commission, and the Office of Human Rights, just to name a few.

So for more information, contact the Office of Human Rights at 434-970-3023.

That's 434-970-3023.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Bellamy?

Sure.

Good evening, everyone.

Good evening.

Good evening everyone.

We like each other today.

So I have a couple of announcements to read today.

First, in our assistance, I would be remiss if I didn't rather send a rest in peace or a rest in power to the young man Denzel Morton, a young man who was shot and killed here in Charlottesville last year.

Today is the one year anniversary.

just left a small celebration for him.

So I'd like to definitely start off by saying rest in peace to him, as well as let's stop the violence, put the guns down.

We need not have any more gun violence in our city.

And so not just rest in power to Denzel, but to everyone who's lost their lives.

So my first announcement is for the history of race and ethnicity in Charlottesville, Virginia.

That's going to be Monday, July 31st, 2017 at the Carver Rec at 6.30 PM.

Did you know in the 1860s there were more Africans and African Americans than whites in this area?

That there was a group of black men known as the 400s who owned land and businesses in Charlottesville after the Civil War?

Vinegar Hill started out as a neighborhood populated largely of Irish immigrants and Charlottesville has a large history of different people coming together to fight segregation and discrimination.

Kind of reminds me of right now.

Join us for an important lesson and discussion about the racial and ethnic history of Charlottesville and Ms. Charlene Green will be leading that effort.

Again, that's Monday, July 31st at Carver Rec at 6.30.

If you need more information, we have flyers up front.

Ms. Galvin has also put in a plug as well as Ms. Lilly about the Chehumba Festival.

I hope you all can come out, wear your garments.

I have mine on today.

showing love to the ancestors and we hope that everybody can come out once again this weekend.

It's going to be a phenomenal event.

The parents might like to hear this.

It's the back to school bash.

There you go.

August 19th from 1030 to 12 at the pavilion.

Families can register to be guaranteed free school supplies, backpacks and more or to volunteer or donate

go to www.cvillebacktoschoolbash.com.

There will be over 30 community organizations participating as well as teachers and school staff on hand.

All right.

Well, good evening, everybody.

I'm going to read a statement now about the events of last weekend, and then we'll go on to city manager response matters of the public.

Then we'll go on to the matters of the public themselves in this meeting.

Then we'll get on to our regular agenda.

Over a year ago, Charlottesville began a difficult but necessary journey to finally tell the truth about race in our city.

Over six months, our Blue Ribbon Commission on Race Memorials in Public Spaces, which was charged with changing the narrative by telling the full story of race through our public spaces, held 17 separate public hearings.

Their report contained over a dozen recommendations, many of which we have already acted on.

This important work not only put us at the forefront of communities seeking to reconcile with the troubled past, it also made us a target for many fringe groups who oppose that very mission.

who see no problem with a false history based on systemic racism and white supremacy.

I and many others spent many hours over the last several weeks organizing many alternative events aimed at taking the spotlight away from the KKK and communicating a message of pluralism tolerance

Enlightenment.

This smorgasbord of events was created through the time and generosity of dozens of local businesses, communities, organizations, and faith leaders.

I'm sure I speak for everyone on council when I express my deep appreciation of those individuals who stepped up to organize such events, including Jeanette Martin of the NAACP, Andrea Douglas and Steve Blaine, the African American Heritage Center, Hunter Smith of Champion Brewery, Charlene Green and John Kluge of the Human Rights Commission, Corin Capshaw and Kirby Hutto,

of the Downtown Pavilion, Dr. Alvin Edwards, and Reverend Elaine Thomas of the Interfaith Clergy Alliance, Ledwick Kuttner, Susan Krischel, and Brian Weimer of the Ixart Park, the Band's Crystal Garden, Camomile and Whiskey, We Are Star Children, and the First African Mount Zion Baptist Church Choir, among many, many others, and that's an incomplete list.

While thousands of people chose to resist by attending these events, others decided to go to the park and counter-protest.

That was absolutely their right, and I was so proud to read the headline showing that the counter protesters had outnumbered the pitiful KKK by a factor of 200.

No matter what you chose to do on July 8th, the important thing is we spoke with one voice and sending a clear message that we reject racism and intolerance in this community.

As you might expect, we've heard a huge amount of feedback related to July 8th and to events to come.

Hundreds of people have praised the city's response, whether from our

Courageous police officers are from city officials.

We have heard from many community members who were energized and reassured by the overwhelming rejection of the Klan here.

There have been many complaints as well.

Many relate to the handling of the counter protesters after the Klan left the city.

We have heard from business owners in the downtown mall as well.

One restaurant owner told me he had 40 dinner reservations canceled on Saturday night.

At least one store was vandalized.

We have received hundreds of emails from ACLU members that request that City Council supervise our police force in particular ways.

We have received hundreds of emails requesting that we revoke a permit for an August 12th outright rally.

Still others have requested that City Council

Still others have requested that City Council drop the charges for those who were arrested on July 8th.

And we're in the part of our meeting before I've read our rules, but everybody who's been in our meetings knows that once we get started with the matters of the public, we're going to have to shift our rules.

I read them usually before the matters of the public, so I'll get to them in a second.

And others have put in different requests and charges ranging from social services to our public housing policies to the disappearance of Sage Smith.

Some of these requests have been directed to me personally, others have been directed to council at large or to members of our staff.

I want to tell everybody we take this all very seriously and that means that we also need to be very serious about how we consider each and every complaint and request and I have to be serious with the public about what we can and cannot do on city council.

It's essential that anyone wanting to organize for change and improve government understand the structure of local government in Charlottesville and in Virginia.

First, we have a city manager form of government in Charlottesville.

What that means is that the Charlottesville Police Department and the Chief of Police report to the city manager, to Mr. Jones, not to the mayor or to other councilors.

The city manager has the operational authority over day-to-day decisions of staff, not us.

It's important that you understand that.

Second, council does not have any authority over decisions made by our prosecutor, the Commonwealth's Attorney,

He is separately elected by the people precisely to maintain his independence from elected political officials.

So we cannot drop charges ourselves.

And third, council is a part-time body with, at present, one and a half staff members.

We rely on our staff for research, for analysis, and for legal guidance, and it does take some time to get things right and to do our due diligence the right way.

For this reason, I want the public to know that I am asking that the content of

All of these emails, and we've received probably close to a thousand at this point, that the content be conveyed to Mr. Jones and to his staff in order that they review and advise counsel on the facts, the issues, on our legal authorities, and on potential actions that we could take just as we do with all constituent concerns and requests.

And you're going to hear some tonight.

I am separately requesting that our Commonwealth's Attorney be apprised of the request we received at Council regarding these events.

As I reflect on the experience of being Mayor during these extremely turbulent times, I often return to the importance of perspective and balance.

Going forward, I don't want what we to do, what we do regarding public safety and the First Amendment, to necessarily fit on a bumper sticker or even in a tweet.

We're here instead to try our best to figure out the best policies that we can enact that will ensure that we're protecting both our citizens and the Constitution.

Next to public safety, the most important things elected officials can do is to provide the public with respect, accountability, and transparency.

We must maintain the public trust in our policing.

Fortunately, I believe that we are

beginning from a very strong footing.

We hired Al Thomas as chief, not because he would be our first African American police chief in Charlottesville, though we were all very excited about that fact, but specifically because of his long expertise and specifically because of his passion for community policing, which begins and ends with building bridges and bonds throughout the community.

That is the spirit in which we should, in the city, consider all of the requests and complaints that we have received and that we will doubtless continue to receive.

and it's the spirit in which I hope and expect our city manager and the staffs who report to him will also strive to listen, to learn and to improve.

The Charlottesville Police Department began their formal debriefings about the rally early last week.

Tonight, City Manager Jones will present, will provide an account and timeline of the event of July 8th.

This is a beginning, not an end.

We will be ever vigilant in both our public accounting of July 8th and in our preparations for August 12th.

On August 12th,

As a scholar of the Constitution and as an attorney, I'm passionately devoted to the First Amendment, and as a city councilor, I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution.

Protecting the freedom of speech should be a sacrosanct obligation for the city.

However, I have grave obligations about logistical aspects of this event, which has the potential to draw much larger attendance than the earlier one.

Our downtown parks are small, and they are located in a crowded, dense, urban location.

We're maintaining separation between crowds

Attending an event and traffic moving within city streets is difficult at best.

These logistical concerns include the potential crowd size, methods of ingress and egress, and parking.

I encourage the police department and city events staff to carefully examine these issues and to make the best possible plan

for security of the safety of individuals in attendance of the general public who may be in the downtown area for non-event related reasons that same day.

I furthermore believe staff should consider whether there are other locations within the city where the First Amendment could be equally upheld without those logistical challenges of the downtown location if the information available to the police and staff indicate that this is possible within constitutional bounds.

In closing, I hope, I pray, and I believe that we will emerge from this difficult moment in Charlottesville's history stronger and more committed to our core principles of pluralism, tolerance, and progress.

As Martin Luther King Jr. once said, and as Barack Obama frequently said, the arc of history is long but it bends toward justice, but that requires us to bend it.

As my wife often reminds me, and as some of you probably agree, even when I try my hardest to find answers, I'm still a flawed man.

With this very much in mind, I'm looking forward to working with the public and my colleagues to steer our community toward more just, tolerant, and tranquil waters.

It might not always be the smoothest journey, but we will get there together.

Mayor Signer, I have one more announcement I forgot to make.

Even before I make my announcement, I'm very pleased that you're taking this route.

in regards to looking at alternatives so thank you and I think that also means that we've heard the public and it may not always seem as if we do but I do think it's a step in the right direction.

One last announcement that I received and I apologize for not reading it earlier.

With everything going on right now, July is also African American Mental Health Awareness Month and we think it's really important for everybody to have the resources available for them to be able to handle with these issues.

So on July 25th at the Jefferson School, from six to eight, please again mark the date, July 25th from six to eight at the Jefferson School, there's going to be a Black Mental Health Matters event.

There's going to be a guest speaker, Mr. Darnell Walker, and he's going to be screening portions of his film outside the house, a black mental health film.

And this event is being put on by Wes Bellamy, Region 10, Ebony Bug on our own, the therapeutic community and Mental Health America, and the adult

Americans of Charlottesville, and we're going to be talking about the stigma of mental health in African American communities.

Refreshments will be provided.

Again, that's July 25th from 6th to 8th, and we want it really important for everyone to come out if you can.

There is nothing wrong with talking to someone or getting help in times like this or any time for that matter.

I might as well jump in here as well.

I also have grave concerns about the challenges of Emancipation Park and I have read the hundreds of emails from y'all about that so I think we're gonna be hearing more about that shortly but you know this is our country this is our city and I personally I just don't like it when I'm concerned and I bring my concerns forward to somebody

saying, well, we can't do that because of freedom of speech.

And it's not that I don't respect freedom of speech.

I do.

I had a little situation earlier this year, last year, about freedom of speech.

But it's the fact that this is our country.

The freedom of speech is not an unfettered freedom.

There are exceptions to it.

We'll be looking at that.

And I don't want to give anybody false hope or anything.

But I mean, it's very important.

that we have this conversation throughout the community that everybody is.

I see a few people from the faith community here.

So try to attend these events.

We're probably going to have the same kind of run up that we did to the KKK.

And we will get through this.

We'll be better prepared for what happened by what happened a couple weeks ago.

Mayor Signer, I have a couple of comments.

Mr. Jones is going to be giving us more details later on this evening, I believe, about exactly what's going to be happening.

And as Mayor Signer was saying, that Mr. Jones is the city manager and the one that is the one that really does pull the levers of government.

So all of us will be

Really listening to Mr. Jones and taking his lead and that of the police chief as well.

But we are hearing you and we are part of this community as well and we have felt the intense hatred that's been leveled at this city.

Speaking of which, I had the honor and the humbling experience of marching with many of you.

I see many of you that were in the counter rally last week.

And I want to thank, from the bottom of my heart, the clergy collective for providing us with the tools that we needed to be nonviolent in our steadfast protest.

And it was reassuring to see our numbers in peace

overwhelming hate.

We will do it again.

We did it last week.

Thank you all.

Okay, let me, I'm just going to read the, this is the section from our rules.

This is section 9 and then I'll read the guidelines for matters by the public.

Improper comments and disorderly, read this before every meeting, improper comments and disorderly conduct are not permitted.

Persons appearing before the council may not use this platform to campaign for public office, promote private business ventures, use profanity or vulgar language or gestures, threaten violence toward council, city staff, or members of the public, engage in behavior that intimidates others,

Interrupt other speakers are engaged in behavior that disrupts the meeting.

Any speaker in rule 10 is any speaker violates the rules will be called to order by the mayor.

If the remarks or conduct persist, the mayor shall order the speaker to cease speaking and be seated.

If the order is not heeded, the mayor shall direct the sergeant in arms to escort the individual to the meeting rooms.

I just want to introduce everyone to two really wonderful gentlemen.

We have here Officer McInerney, Officer Roberts, members of this community.

I don't want to need to make their acquaintance.

I've spelled out the rules that we have.

So you basically, if you're called to order, there's going to be a lot of emotions this meeting tonight, there's a lot of people who want to be heard, but it's in the interest of all of us to have this happen as civilly as we can.

and also as efficiently.

One of the things that happens when people disrupt people who are speaking up here is they get more time right at the front of the room while we try to move things along and that isn't so great because then they're up here for like 10 minutes getting their face on TV.

So if we move along, the folks are going to have three minutes up here and one of the things that's worked really well in the past is when you have a strong emotion about something, you like it, you use hand gestures because everybody will watch it, everybody will see it on TV so you put up your thumbs or you

whatever works for you if you don't like what they're doing put you know thumbs down we will see it everybody on TV will see it but when it comes to outbursts or to anything that stops the flow of the meeting we're gonna have to call you to order because

It's in our rules that unless you're recognized by the by the chair of the meeting we we we can't go on and We are going to need to move along.

We got a lot of business tonight We got a lot of people here who are for the woolen mills neighborhood association issue.

We got some important business tonight So I just wanted to lay out those rules everybody.

Okay with with what I've read

Okay, we will get through this, everybody will be heard, and I just wanted to say that before we get into the main body of the meeting.

So, and the officers here, they will be kind of paying attention because sometimes I can't, you know, like last time there were all these people humming and hopefully we just can move along with kind of an orderly meeting and everybody gets heard.

Yeah, but see, I mean, no joke, seriously, we can't do that because we have to move the meeting along.

So, okay, now that everybody cool?

All right, looks like everybody's cool.

Okay, so now we're gonna go to Mr. Jones.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Just one item to follow up on for matters by the public from the July 5th council meeting.

and street use by pedestrians and bicyclists on West Main Street.

He made a suggestion to provide additional police officers along the street to address some of the issues of folks breaking the traffic laws there.

He also mentioned an educational campaign to remind people of their responsibilities as motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists.

We have been running PSAs on the radio during the course of the last year to do just that.

We'll continue to do that this fall.

Additionally, we are discussing adding officers to West Main Street to increase

I do have one quick question, Mr. Jones.

I understand that there was an audio warning that was put on the ends of the tunnels that were provided for the pedestrians on I guess the side of the

Street, that's where the hotel is being built.

But the people couldn't, the volume was not loud enough to be heard over the construction noise.

I think, I do believe that the folks at NDS are working to ensure that it's adjusted.

I know that at one point, on at least one of the sides, there were some issues with the batteries.

The batteries had run out, and so that wasn't working at all, but we went out there, we replaced the batteries.

And there's now the statement?

Okay, thank you, sorry.

Okay, now we'll move on.

Ms. Rice, may I have a request?

This is our first public comment period.

We have another one, unlimited slots after the meeting concludes.

So if you're not in one of the 15 here, you can speak afterward to us.

You just have to wait around until the end of the meeting.

We welcome public comments.

It's an important part of our meeting.

Time is reserved near the beginning and at the end of each regular city council meeting for matters of the public.

Please follow these guidelines.

If you're here to speak for a public hearing,

Please wait to speak on that matter until the report for that item has been presented and the public hearing has been opened.

Everyone here about the Woolen Mills Conservation District should know that we did put the public hearing back in the meeting tonight so there is a public hearing for that and you can sign up right here.

Each speaker has three minutes to speak.

Please give your name and address before beginning your remarks and please pay attention to the timer right here which operates like a traffic light when you're down to the end of your time it is yellow and then red.

Please do not interrupt speakers whether you agree with them.

Thank you very much.

I will stay within my three minutes.

I believe in speaking from my own perspective and my own experience, which is as a Jew,

But before I do that, it's really important to me to recognize all of my brothers and sisters here, every colony, every gender group, from every country in the world.

And I stand with you in solidarity through your struggle.

And it will take all of us working together, whatever our approach, to face this hate battle by any means necessary.

Thank you.

I was born in 1954 in the shadow of the Holocaust.

The ashes were literally still smoldering.

I had family members, friends, teachers with serial numbers tattooed into their flesh.

I've been called every name you can imagine and some you can't.

I've been spit on, insulted, attacked, threatened, even today.

The hate tweets are coming, which means that I'm making some progress.

So keep them coming for me.

By the way, use your real name.

Don't be.

I just told you my name.

And now I'm 63 years old.

And this is still going on.

And I've had enough.

And I just, I just can't.

And I don't think we should.

I want to say just a few things about what's going on.

The City Council did not create this problem.

Mr. Bellamy did not create this problem.

You, sir, turned over a rock.

And we have now seen what was underneath it.

And there's no place for it in this community.

Regarding the August 12th event, this is not an issue of free speech in my view.

It's not an issue of hate speech.

We have no obligation to put up with this.

There are legal remedies and I know they're being pursued, but this should not stand.

If we cannot

Revoke the permit.

Let's find a filthy basement for them to exercise their freedom of speech.

Thank you very much.

Hi, thank you.

Yes.

Oh, I'm Shawnee West and I live at 1204 East Jefferson Street in Charlottesville and I guess I'm a little surprised I was called.

Julie.

So I am speaking in reference to this forthcoming rally which I would rather not see and therefore I do request revoking this permit which I believe actually is not in accordance with the standard operating procedures for special events permit which says if there is a danger to the community

or if it is being used beyond a reasonable amount of resources and funds, this should not be, this should not go forth.

This is creating, this white supremacist alt-right group are creating fears, I mean feelings of fear and I believe terror in many people.

And I am one very concerned citizen.

When I was at the July 8th rally, I was there with the clergy in a peaceful, beautiful demonstration of unity and harmony.

And when I was right up front there and I saw the state police and the riot gear come out, I felt like I got socked in the stomach, literally.

And I said, oh, I don't feel safe here anymore.

This is what I thought.

This is from past experience and what I've seen in videos of

various places, not that I've been there.

But so what I'm saying, I don't believe that there is a place for this militarization of weapons here in this city.

This is not a place for that.

We really do need the dialogue on race and there is a lot of healing that must be done here.

And I don't feel it is in the interest of this city to include this rally on August 12th.

So there needs to be a safe place.

We need to pull the permit.

Thank you very much.

Yeah, that's me.

Mic check.

You dropped something, counselors.

You dropped it on me and a lot of us.

I want you to pass that down the row, please.

I want you each to touch it.

I want some accountability.

I want you to imagine that thing hitting your flesh at high velocity as it did for many of us.

You turn to incident four and five.

The streets were blocked off till six, yet we were instructed to leave.

When we went onto the sidewalk, we were told it was an unlawful assembly.

Where were we to go?

Streets, sidewalks, there were contradictory directions given by the police.

It's inconsistent.

Then when demonstrators' backs were to the police, the first tear gas canister was found where this story emerged about protesters using pepper spray on the police.

I don't know where that came from.

You can see in the ACLU photo.

You can see in the ACLU legal observer's photo there that their backs are to the police when the first tear gas canister was ejected.

Incidents two and three demonstrators were trampled, then the police kicked someone in the head three times before moving on.

Was beaten by a baton and then was arrested for failure to disperse in the very act of trying to disperse and help other, two other people disperse as they're being beaten by batons.

KK Klansman pulled a mask over his face as he was leaving and the police asked him to remove the mask, very politely asked him to remove it, he did.

Yet when the demonstrators were covering our noses like so, as I did myself, to protect ourselves from the tear gas, three of them were arrested for masking.

People.

Another account here.

Woman by the name of Heather Dorsey.

After hugging a policeman, actually, a policeman actually stepped on her shoe and when she turned around, you know, her shoe was being stepped on, when she turned around and asked him to step off, he flung her to the ground.

You can see her wounds.

The second place, this has to stop, this militarization of the police.

When there's militarization, the inevitable result is violence.

Good evening.

I'm Mary Bauer.

I'm the Executive Director of the Legal Aid Justice Center and I reside at 1231 Agney Street in the city.

Today, LAJC, along with the Rutherford Institute, the ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild, sent each of you all, including Mr. Jones, a letter asking for an investigation into the police tactics on July 8th.

In short, we urge each of you to use the time between now and August 12th, whatever happens there, to conduct a thorough, independent investigation of police response to the protests.

We appreciate these are difficult issues, but we have profound concerns about the militarized law enforcement presence on July 8th, with police dressed in riot gear, driving armored vehicles, and carrying weapons typically reserved for war zones.

We ask the city to acknowledge that this choice to use these kind of tactics instead of planning for de-escalation is inconsistent with Charlottesville's values and good policing.

We ask you to conduct an investigation into the law enforcement's actions on July 8th, and the inquiry should ask at least the following questions.

Who invited the Virginia State Police and why?

On what terms were they requested?

What conversation was there about what show of force was requested?

Whose police officers were dressed in riot gear and why were those officers sent to that area?

Who declared an unlawful assembly and why?

What factors warranted such a declaration?

We've done an illegal analysis and we don't see any legal basis for that declaration.

The two ordered the use of tear gas, and what was the reason for that decision?

We call upon the council to create an independent advisory committee to work with city council and the police well before August 12th to ensure the civil rights and liberties of all participants are protected, whatever happens next.

Longer term, we ask that the city establish a permanent civil review board for the police department comprised of city residents, advocates and other community members.

This event was difficult one for our city to be sure, but we think an honest evaluation of what went well and what did not will leave us in a far better place on August 12th and beyond.

And I do have copies of that letter if you all have not seen that yet.

We've got it.

Thank you.

Lena Seville.

Lena Seville.

My name is Lena Seville, I live in Charlottesville and I'm here to talk to you about what happened.

I'll be sharing my time, but first I want to make a short statement that the police need de-escalation training.

They were able to maintain control of the crowd throughout an emotionally charged visit by the Klan and then unexpectedly and quickly shifted gears showing an aggressive and militarized response to the community.

Both the people following orders and those giving orders need de-escalation training.

I'd like to introduce you to Jay Scott.

How y'all doing today?

How y'all doing tonight?

How you doing?

I was actually on the line when everything took place, you know, when we chained up and got together.

There was no balance out there.

You know, I ain't got too much time, so I want to get straight into it.

There was no balance, you know.

At back was turned to the cops.

I was actually tear gassed, beautiful at times.

I seen a bomb coming underneath my foot.

Still, when I wake up right now, I can hear it tinging in my head, just all the effects of the bomb hitting the street.

I've watched this on video games, but I was actually bored this time.

Other than that, I feel like the media, the news, and the people who's doing these articles is doing a lot of lying.

Me, personally, I got a lot of videos.

I got a couple friends with me that got a lot of videos, also, that shows nobody was violent at all.

No teargas, any of that, like somebody said it was pepper spray, you a cop, you didn't see any of that.

Police brutality, I think that, you know, they used a lot of force out there, like I said, I was teargassed, I was hit with a shield, you know, like, you know, my hands was up the whole time, I got a video walking right back and forth past the cops saying, you know, I'm peaceful, I'm here, my hands up, you know, the whole time.

Never once, you know, reacted in any kind of bad way.

Other than that, I just wanted to say that,

Just the after effects, like I said, even being paranoid now, you know, I got to walk through Charlottesville now and feel like, you know, my life can be threatened because, you know, I made the front paper, you know, I was there, you know, I was front line and I'm not going to let, you know, the city allowed the KKK to come here to do their rally, their protest, and I'm going to be one of the ones that's going to stand out there to go against it, you know, every time.

So the last thing I wanted to say is, Kesla, you know, I hope y'all ready for August 12th.

If it come down, you know, we ain't running, we ain't hiding.

and we will be out there.

So, you know, if August 12th come in, you know, the permit is allowed.

They'll be there.

We're going to be there also.

We ain't running.

We ain't hiding.

You know, if they use force, we won't use force also.

Good evening.

Good evening.

There are dates and events that happen during people's lives that they'll always remember where they were.

The birth of a child or children, the Kennedy assassination, Martin Luther King's assassination, the 9-11 attacks, etc.

July 8, 2017 will be one of those dates for every resident of Charlottesville.

The day that the Ku Klux Klan came back to town, the day that the citizens of Charlottesville were tear-gassed.

The melodious stench of racism has again risen above the surface.

Ground Zero for this putrid smell originates under the statues of Stonewall Jackass and Little Bobby Lee.

The bitter fact that these two bronze participation trophies have given rise to all of this hatred demonstrates the incredibly urgent need for them both to come down and to leave our city.

It is time for you to rescind and revoke the permit for August the 12th.

The accurate venom that now permeates our community is tied directly to those who reveal the false narrative spewed from the lost cause.

The fact that there are so many speaking in voluminous tones of evilness, of violence, and of white supremacy should be sufficient enough to move the council's needle towards saying no.

July 8th may manifest the willingness of the citizenry to unite against any form of wickedness, against any level of stupidity,

against any and all that confuse the facts of us being forcefully brought here in chains and stocks as opposed to willingly jumping on the boat.

Those who now speak in underlying tones of us going back to our country, seemingly think that we were on a carnival cruise ship as opposed to a slave ship.

Point of clarity, my ancestors were not up on deck sipping Matias and playing shuffleboard.

They were in the belly of the boat rowing and getting beaten.

It is a widely held notion, excuse me,

There's a widely held notion that evilness and wickedness cannot be driven out through evilness and wickedness, that only peace can do that.

We've seen the wreckage of communities throughout this country where militarization has been used to try to gather peace.

Bodies are littered all over this world because of that.

I ask and implore and urge you that you please demilitarize the police,

Take care of the citizens of our city.

Take our needs and our desires and our safety in hand and in consideration.

First, please rescind this pathetic and pitiful party that they want to have.

If they're so insistent on having it, offer a Monticello since Tommy

because God bless Tommy.

He was so kind as to allow them to organize the first Klan meeting there some 96 years ago.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi.

Hi.

How you doing?

I feel kind of nervous about a guitar up here, so pardon me a second.

Thank you guys for having me.

First of all, I want to quote

My teacher in this life, the Buddha, who said that if you speak a little, you're blamed.

If you speak a lot, you're blamed.

If you speak not at all, you're blamed.

Everybody feels blamed.

Everybody in this room, and I know all you all, no matter what you say, no matter what you do, somebody blames you.

And so in that spirit, I don't want anybody to feel blamed.

But at the same time, the city does need to take responsibility for what happened on July 8th.

I went up there.

I was raised Catholic.

I'm of Jewish descent.

I'm hitting on two cylinders for what the Klan doesn't like, what the neo-Nazis don't like.

So I was up there for me, but I was up there for everybody that the Klan targets.

Black, white, Jewish, whatever.

We're all in the same boat here.

What I witnessed on that Saturday was not defense of free speech.

I saw a police state operation defending a terrorist group.

This is nothing about free speech.

And I know you're a lawyer, and you know as well as I do that law and morality have nothing to do with each other.

And so this brainless defense of free speech is killing us.

Freedom of speech, if your speech is being used

to promote the idea that other human beings

It is incumbent upon everybody of conscience.

I don't care what the law says.

If the law says we have to defend the Klan, we have to defend neo-Nazis, we need to resist that law because that is an unjust law.

That is not a law that is in line with morality.

George Orwell said that the object of power is power.

That's all it is.

And that's all I witnessed on Saturday.

I witnessed, well, how many cops were there?

200 cops up there and a bunch of automatic weapons, notarized?

They were displaying a show of power to the citizenry.

They were intimidating us while protecting a terrorist group.

That is what the Taliban does.

We cannot be on the same side as the Taliban.

or ISIS or Al Qaeda using a military force to defend terrorists.

It is sending us down a road that is completely, there's no redemption on that road, none whatsoever.

And I'm actually appalled that anybody could defend the Klan's right to free speech or neo-Nazis' right to free speech.

It's not like we misunderstood what they've said.

I mean, they've been pretty freaking clear over the years what they're about.

Hello.

Hello.

My name is Susie Hoffman.

I live at 1203 Augusta Street.

Sorry, I'm short.

Trying to get this down.

I'd like to bring your attention to the following petition to study the traffic and safety impacts of the proposed Greenleaf Center at 1147 Rose Hill Drive.

The petition has been emailed to you and currently has 109 signatures.

We will be canvassing our neighborhood over the next few weeks, and we'll be back with more.

The petition reads

I would add we would appreciate the matter being included in the August City Council meeting, if possible, although I understand there's a lot of other things going on.

The petition reads, residents of the Kellytown, Rugby Hills, and Rose Hill neighborhoods are concerned about the traffic and safety issues associated with the three-story, 34,000 square foot Greenleaf Center scheduled to be built at 1147 Rose Hill Drive.

The center is proposed to include 53 parking spots and an entrance exit onto our residential Amherst Street.

The area where Greenleaf Center is to be built is located within a B-1 business district.

Per the code of the city of Charlottesville, the B-1 business district is established to provide for service type businesses and offices uses of a limited size, which are open primarily during daytime hours.

The intent of the B-1 regulations is to provide a transitional district between residential areas and other commercial areas of the city.

The uses permitted within this district are those which will have only minimal traffic impacts.

We feel strongly that the Greenleaf Center and specifically the entrance and exit onto Amherst Street, a residential street, will have more than minimal traffic impacts.

and are petitioning the city council to request a traffic study prior to construction.

We ask that the city review the existing traffic patterns and consider how they will be affected by the additional traffic the center will generate.

The study should be conducted during the city school year at morning and evening peak hours.

We hope that you will act in your capacity as an advocate for the taxpaying residents of Charlottesville.

Thank you.

Good evening.

I'm Peter Kleeman.

I live at 407 Head Street in the city.

I'm here to talk about zoning today.

and particularly about the zoning discussion that took place in council at your last meeting and that was about the appeal for a special use permit on East Jefferson Street.

The three particular target items I want to talk about are the

This will lead up to a recommendation I'd like to make.

But during the time of the discussion, building massing was a concern about how large this building would be and what the distribution of units and unit sizes would be in that building.

The provision of affordable housing as a component of the special use permit application.

and something about traffic issues.

So the most important and disconcerting issue to me was that the applicant was presenting to you the buy right opportunity presented to them as this onerous project.

they could build over a hundred units with four bedrooms per unit and this would cause a huge amount of traffic in the community and a huge massing on the site.

And so the existing by right, which would appear to be somewhat of a, I would think sort of neutral kind of position was being held up as being the horrible, most horrible of the alternatives.

And clearly you should pick their alternative because it's much better than what they could do by right.

I think that needs to be reviewed seriously.

Also, the provision of affordable housing.

We hear every month or other month that the target for affordable housing in the city is about 15%.

Yet on this project, through the SUP, Special Use Permitted Program, they're offering to present four units, which is about 3% of the population of units that they are proposing.

How are we ever, as a city, going to reach a 15%

for the housing target when we build large housing developments where we're only providing 3% and those might not even be in the neighborhood, the targeted neighborhood.

Also, finally, the traffic analysis I thought was a little disingenuous on the part of the applicants and that was stating that there was going to be, even taking them at their traffic analysis, that there would be no difference in the total number of trips that would be generated by one use versus the proposed use versus the existing use.

The distribution of those trips over the course of the day is a significant factor and so the residential neighborhoods tend to provide trips during peak hours whereas commercial doctor's office are spread out over the day and they don't really add to the major problem times for traffic.

So I think that in the future the council really needs to push these things back to the Planning Commission before making decisions on these de novo appeals.

My name is Audrey Whitrup.

Hello.

My name is Mark Maziek, and I live in Charlottesville.

And in the interest of personal safety, I'm not going to share my address.

I'd like to add my own voice to those of so many others requesting that Mayor Signer

the city council, particularly the city manager, and any other city official with the authority to do so rescind the permit for the Unite the Right rally scheduled for August 12.

I, as do so many others, believe that this permit should be rescinded because the organizers of this action have made it very clear that their intention is to incite and even commit acts of violence and sow racial hatred in our community.

This alone should be cause for canceling the permit.

But city officials continue to defend the permit and by extension the rally under the guise of free speech.

The problem is most of our understanding about what freedom of speech means has become increasingly muddled.

I'd say

intentionally so, by reactionary interests focused not on providing more inclusive spaces for diversity of voices in our society, but in reinforcing a system where the voices of those with greater social power, white folks, male-identified folks, straight folks, etc., are able to maintain that power over those with less power.

Let me say it another way.

We act as if giving people equal time is the same as creating equality, but in many cases it simply allows folks with power to continue to act out that power in ways that continue to hurt oppressed folks.

Acts of speech are exactly that, acts.

When we treat all acts of speech as effectively neutral, we help normalize oppressive speech and further oppressive acts.

And what are folks who have historically suffered and currently suffer forms of oppression expected to do?

What do our city officials ask us to do?

Ignore it.

We're asked to ignore all the resources and assistance the city is providing to ensure that folks with values in direct conflict with the alleged progressive vision of this city, the self-styled capital of the resistance, have in state-sanctioned space in order to attack it.

We're told that by allowing ourselves to be angered, to be upset by people who literally would celebrate our deaths and those of many of our loved ones and neighbors that were somehow playing into their hands or taking the bait.

People of color are continually expected to sacrifice their emotions, their hurt, their very humanity in the service of white comfort, which becomes abstracted out into the community at large under the label public order.

We're continually asked to police ourselves when no such expectation is placed on white folks.

Instead of being empowered to draw on righteous anger and indignation and injustice, we're told to be smaller, quieter, or even just quiet.

This is a price we pay for inclusion in progressive visions of our communities defined through the lens of whiteness, the very parts of ourselves that could be the most valuable in creating freer and more human communities.

Any truly progressive city would not reject placing that burden on oppressed folks.

Thank you.

So those are the first 10 slots in our public comments that you sign up for in advance.

I just want everyone to know that we had 57 people who wanted to speak.

So the system that we have, everybody was chosen from among those as opposed to first in line.

So that's the system that we have.

Now we have the five slots that you sign up for first come, first served before the meeting starting at 6.30.

Good evening, Council and everyone.

My name is Beatrice AC Yarny.

I am a Charlottesville resident and here this evening to make you aware that we need to go ahead and revoke this permit on August 12th.

So I'm born and raised here.

I was born and raised here in Charlottesville.

I'm also a UVA graduate.

I hold an MSW from VCU.

And I love Charlottesville.

And I love that we have the African American Festival.

I love that we have the

Jefferson City Center doing good community education around just learning about African American history, learning about where we come from and instilling pride.

within the African American community.

I will say that we have been quiet for a long time as black people in Charlottesville.

The residents, we have been silent for a very long time.

And July 8, upcoming August 12, these are opportunities that we have never taken advantage of before.

We have never taken advantage of those opportunities as black homegrown Charlottesville residents, and we need to have the opportunity to speak.

So I do support showing up.

and saying something and being present and letting the alt-right see our faces.

I also very much support revoking the permit in the first place.

There is so much conversation that's happening around white supremacy and breaking down, breaking down institutions, rebuilding them so that everyone is treated fairly.

There's a lot of conversation happening around that.

Often institutional racism to me looks like following the rules when it works out for the bad guy.

And essentially that is what happened on July 8th.

You know, if people of color want to stand and talk about what is important to them, it's very frequent and very easy to get shut down and intimidated

whereas this group comes and they can just apply for this permit just like that and have thousands of dollars be used to protect them.

It's baffling to me.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Samantha Pico.

I don't have a lot of time.

I'll get right to the point.

As a veteran of two wars and a former member of the United States Intelligence Community whose job it was to study tactics for a living, I know escalation of force procedures.

But more importantly, I know what it looks like when a hostile occupying force with no connection to a community comes spoiling for a fight.

on July 8th.

There was no violence perpetrated on July 8th except by those in uniform.

I watched a 60-year-old woman push to the ground, her hand slammed into the concrete.

I saw a man on the ground with his hands behind his back kicked in the face by an Albemarle County Sheriff's Officer.

I saw a capricious application of the law, choosing when to apply

when not to apply, the masking ordinances, the unlawful assembly.

And you know what?

I also know about ad hoc, after-the-fact justifications for violence.

Because frankly, I used to write them for the military.

So when so-called leaders so quickly and unquestioningly coalesce around these justifications for unwarranted police violence, justifications that are so obviously false on their face that it's strange credulity that any thinking person could accept them.

were left with only a few conclusions.

Either those leaders are guilty of collusion in these acts of violent repression, or they lack the power or the will to do anything about them, or they are incompetent.

But the problem is, no matter which of these is true, it is the residents of Charlottesville that suffer because of it.

So all of this forces me to ask,

Who were the police protecting that day?

And who are you council members and Mr. City Manager protecting right now?

And who will you choose to protect on August 12th when we do this all over again?

You don't get to grandstand about being the capital of the resistance while licking the boots of those who are actively trying to crush that resistance.

The world is changing with or without you and this city, this city is rising up with shoulder to shoulder with clenched fists of all colors and creeds raised together in resistance against those systems which seek to keep us divided.

Now, we are saying no.

We are saying enough is enough and you have a choice to make.

You can stand with us shoulder to shoulder or you can continue to enable, empower, and embolden those who violently seek our silence and our acquiescence.

That's me.

The organizers of August 12th's Unite the Right Rally and local white nationalists want you to believe that their rally is about freedom of speech.

They will argue that rescinding the permit for the 12th is a blow against free speech, the First Amendment, and against the ideals that this country supposedly stands for.

They would have you believe that speech of any kind, even hate speech, should not only be protected by the First Amendment, but given a platform, an unequivocal protection by police, government, the city manager, and the city council.

We saw this protection in full effect on July 8th, when this city not only granted a permit to the white supremacist terrorists of the KKK, but then formed a human shield of law enforcement

defending and protecting their racist rhetoric long past the end of their issued permit and then turning violent, deploying chemical weapons and arrests at random on a grieving community who were in turn expressing our right to freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech means nothing without the freedom to assemble.

And this city's decision to protect hate speech and racism while physically assaulting peaceful protesters there to represent and protect our community from the very same shows that your loyalty to freedom of speech is nothing more than an empty promise.

The KKK came to Charlottesville because they not only expected but knew that the police force and the city government would do nothing to stop them.

They came counting on a hundred foot radius between them and anyone who would confront them and you delivered exactly that.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences, and protecting freedom of speech does not mean elevating hatred to a coddled and privileged position above other citizens in the form of reserved parking, an extension in permitting that permits to private use of a public park

and a cadre of police with military-grade weaponry there to snuff out any opposition to their views.

Furthermore, some speech is violence, not rhetorically, but in the very real and very long-term effects it has on the mental health of the citizens of this community, particularly black people and people of color.

To believe that the organizers of the August 12th rally want only to air their views and be part of a robust debate on the state of America is not only naive, but dangerous.

Organizers of the August 12th rally have a long record of physical violence, intimidation, stalking, and terror campaigns against Charlottesville and communities nationwide.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Come on, come on, we gotta, come on, this is unfair to, this is unfair to others.

Are you done?

This is unfair, no.

Thank you.

Hi, I live here.

Drop the charges or send the permits.

Oh, you yield to me.

I'm not giving you my name.

Okay.

1700 days.

1700 days since Sage Smith was last seen.

Where is Sage Smith?

Number two.

Everybody knows me as the call-out queen.

It is taking everything in me right now not to call you out, Mr. Mike Signer.

Today I will do something different.

I will give my account of being brutalized by the police.

And I'd like to start off with saying that this instance is reality for black residents and it is only my white privilege, the reason why I did not get arrested on Saturday.

After the Klan had left, people made their way to an alley in which a charter bus supposedly for the Klan was waiting for members to get on.

There were military grade humvees and state police in military gear carrying what looked like assault rifles.

The police threatened to arrest us if we did not disperse, so the majority of us walked up the alley away from the bus.

As we were walking out of the alley, one woman was randomly and swiftly grabbed and cuffed, a black woman.

A number of us had a visceral reaction to what was a necessary arrest.

And so we started yelling at the officers to let her go.

We're starting to lead her down a ramp connected to the domestic and juvenile court, so some folks decided to do an action so the officer could not take her away.

I joined the action, but I was quickly picked off by an officer.

I was pulled up by an officer and thrown to the ground back first.

I was then accosted by an officer to get up and was helped by someone.

I was then thrusted back into the fray and watched as officers assaulted and tried to arrest my comrades.

My friends stood their ground and police were getting increasingly upset until it completely escalated and an officer pulled out what looked like an assault rifle and pointed it at one of our comrades' heads.

The crowd reacted strongly to that, pushing my comrade towards the police officer.

The police grabbed me in an attempt to remove me from the situation, threw me to the ground on my knees.

I was luckily picked up by a fellow comrade, but immediately proceeded to have a panic attack.

Medics pulled me out and laid me on the ground, took my blood pressure and pulse and they were extremely high levels.

They attended to me for a couple of minutes and warned that they had to move because the police were planning to violently disperse us.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

You're violating our rules.

We're going to have to ask her out.

We have to move on.

We have rules.

We have rules.

We'll read your statement.

Listen, we will read your statement.

I think we have it.

We're going to read it, and we just have to proceed with our rules.

This is not civil.

We have rules here.

I'm sorry.

Everybody else kept the three minutes.

Everybody else kept the three minutes.

How much longer will it take?

I don't even need my phone for this.

Listen, I am a victim of domestic violence.

Every day since then I wake up from nightmares in which my ex and an officer are planning to kill me.

Look at me, Mike Signer.

You let this happen.

Chief Thomas let this happen.

You did this.

You did this to our community.

But guess what?

We are stronger than you.

We are stronger than the institutions that you protect because we are a community.

I will never stop saying Sage Smith's name.

Thank you.

James Pearl.

Thank you.

My name is Emily Goresunsky.

I'm a resident of the city.

With due respect to the short staff of the city council, I understand that there is a lot of work to do, so we have done that for you.

Threats of violence from the organizers and people affiliated with the organizers have been rampant.

and Section 3.4.5b of the city's special event regulations grant grounds to revoke a permit if there is a clear and present threat to public safety.

So what I would like to do is read to you some of these threats which have been obtained from both private and public communications, all obtained with consent.

These threats include threats against the city council, including each of its members,

specifically against Mr. Bellamy.

They think that you're drunk on power by the way.

And these threats include incitements not against just people from the left but also on each other from the right.

In one quote somebody says, the point of all of this is to lure Mr. Bellamy to the park and get him to do something stupid so we can get him removed.

Now I trust that you have the better part of discretion

So we won't worry about that.

But later in this conversation and speaking about Richard Spencer, the headliner of this event, this individual affiliated with the individual organizing the event says, I hate it and I'd love to turn flank and beat the bleep out of him after we finish with the leftists.

In another post,

This individual says, I can assure you there will be beatings at the August event.

In advertising the event, they're calling for all able-bodied men and women ready to fight.

On the Daily Stormer, which is a neo-Nazi site, they're advertising this event gleefully.

In this, there is a post where they say that an individual by the name of Kyle Chapman, who goes by Based Stickman online, will be attending the event and they say it should be noted that he is going and his group are pretty prone to starting violence.

I censored the square there.

Daily Stormer also suggests that they need military members to crack the skulls of black people.

Mr. Kessler stood in front of the police department with a private security force.

That security force is a violent biker gang that prides themselves on their ability to break the law and commit violence.

Thank you, everyone.

Mayor Signer, before Mr. Jones goes, may I respond?

Of course.

I'd just like to say I was, I don't know, maybe I've been sleep, but definitely woken up tonight because the comments that I heard, especially from this young brother right here, I consider myself to be one who likes to stand up, who likes to stand out.

But the way you eloquently described much of what I've been feeling and much of what many people have been feeling was absolutely brilliant.

And I think many of you are absolutely right.

Laws do not supersede morality.

And oftentimes those laws that have been put in place were to keep people who look like myself and others behind.

And because these laws were made, essentially we oftentimes are

told that we must either ignore something, we need to turn the other cheek, or we need to look at a different way of not responding and I just think that's completely BS.

and at this point we have to look at doing something.

I think it's also really important for us to take note of what Ms. Mary Barra stated and I would like to request of our city manager and staff to, as well as our police chief, Chief Thomas, who I love like a brother, but I do think that the citizens here, they do deserve a response or an explanation of some of the things that have transpired.

We can't just simply ignore or act as if all of these accounts are by quote unquote crazy people who are just making this stuff up.

There's no way that all of these people can feel this way, come out and say these things with such force.

Some of this has to be true in some shape, form, or fashion.

And we can't act as if none of it is true or that all of these people are making this stuff up.

So I'd like to request the following.

Ms. Bower touched on this and I'd just like to reiterate it.

She said in her statement we asked that

Excuse me, we ask the city to acknowledge that the choice to use tactics instead of planning for de-escalation is consistent with Charlottesville's values and good policing and to conduct an independent investigation into law enforcement's actions on July 8th.

That inquiry should address at least the following questions.

Why?

Who requested the Virginia State Police?

So I think the citizens, they deserve to know that.

On what terms were they requested?

What conversation was there about the show of force requested?

Secondly, whose police officers were dressed in riot gear and why were those officers sent to the area?

Who declared Saturday's counter protest an unlawfully assembly and why?

What factors about the counter protest warranted this declaration?

Who ordered the deployment of tear gas and what was the reason for that decision?

And then lastly, I think her point is also something that we have to a certain extent.

Longer term we ask that the city establish a permanent civilian review board for the Charlottesville Police Department and I think currently we have something similar with the

The Citizens' Advisory Panel, which I'm a member of.

But we do need to look at more ways in which those two groups can work hand in hand and work with our residents.

And I don't think this means that we are anti-police or that we think that the police are all bad people.

But I do believe that the citizens deserve a response in public.

And they deserve to have these questions answered.

I cannot, thank you but please let me finish, I cannot sit here in good moral standing and this may make some people not like me but there's enough of those people anyway, but I can't sit here in good moral standing and just pretend as if all of these people who are saying the same thing with video accounts over and over again are not telling the truth.

I also have spoken to several police officers who told me, African American police officers at that, who told me how uncomfortable they felt during that time as well as people saying things to them as if they are just there to protect the KKK or people throwing stuff at them and people spitting on them.

So I think it's both sides.

There's time for healing.

And while those officers are absolutely empathized with not only the African American police officers, but all of them,

I do believe that our citizens deserve to have answers to these questions so Mr. Jones if we can I would like to again request the answers to those questions whether that be by Chief Thomas and I know that we know the answers to many of these questions because we're privy to some of that information but I think the public also deserves to know

and everybody deserves the right to feel safe.

These idiots who were coming here and talking all this stuff about this is their town, this is our country, go back to where you come from, this is our city, it's not theirs.

So I'm very, very proud of you all for standing up and I hope on August 12th we're prepared to not just turn the other cheek.

I'm not saying that we're going to go out there and be violent, but we are going to stand up.

Sure, thank you Mr. Mayor, Members of Council.

I just want to take a few minutes to talk about the events of July 8th and before then I'd like to talk a little bit about free speech, right?

There are a lot of comments this evening that the City of Charlottesville, the police were protecting the speech of the folks from the KKK.

They were not.

They were protecting their right to speak in our country.

And time and time again, the US Supreme Court has said that people have the right to speak, even if it's as terrible as the speech we heard coming from the KKK on July 8th.

In fact, there have been numerous cases in which the Supreme Court has ruled on that, including the Nazi Party versus Skokie, Illinois in 1978.

And you know who defended the Nazi Party in 1978?

The ACLU defended the Nazi Party and defended their right to say the awful terrible things that they were saying.

The law that we have in place to protect our free speech protected

African Americans eventually in our communities and allowed them to speak.

You don't understand history if you don't understand that those were the same laws that Dr. King used to help African Americans, to help us gain the rights that we have in our country today.

why those laws were used.

They were used to allow us to speak.

They allowed Dr. King and hundreds of thousands of people to congregate in 1963 on the National Mall.

That's what was used because the people who before then in the South, what they did was they tried to use the same types of tactics that are being talked about tonight to defy us that right to speak.

They did that time and time again and they got away with it.

Right?

So we're not going to let that happen.

They are not, we are not defending the speech.

We are defending their right to speak.

So, that's fine.

You can disagree.

That's fine.

Hey, that's the great part about America.

You can disagree with me.

So the Charlottesville Police Department spent a significant amount of time preparing for the rally of Justice Park.

From the beginning of the... Everyone please.

From the beginning, the department was committed to protecting the safety of everyone in that park.

Everyone in that park.

That's why there were barriers that were set up to protect everyone who came to that park.

They worked closely with our regional partners.

Well then you don't really want answers then, right?

If you leave and you don't want answers.

They worked closely with our regional partners and the Virginia State Police.

While the police were finalizing the preparations for the event, the city was working with our community partners to host unity events at the Jefferson School, the X-Art Park, and the Sprint Pavilion.

Hundreds of people attended those activities in an effort to celebrate our diversity,

and to send a powerful message to members of the KKK who came to Charlottesville to preach hate and intolerance.

As the day wore on, most of the attention was centered on Justice Park.

A lively and largely peaceful crowd began gathering in the park at noon.

and they began to voice their opinions about the KKK and their opinions about other issues related to race in our community and around the country.

And that crowd grew in size over the next couple of hours.

Sir, you're going to have to, you've been called to order on our rules.

I did not interrupt your eloquent speech.

I ask that you do the same for me.

Thank you.

During the, due to the increasing size of the counter protest crowd, additional Charlottesville Police and Virginia State Police resources were brought out to the park site.

The purpose of the additional resources was to secure access to the park and to ensure the safety of all the parties in attendance.

We had to delay the arrival of the KKK because of the blocked entrance to the park.

That's why they were late, because we had to wait until we could open up the park and allow them to come in and speak and express their constitutional right to speech.

The officers escorted the KKK members into the permitted area at around 3.45.

Although the KKK had been granted an hour on their permit, police ordered them to discontinue their rally and depart a little more than 30 minutes after they began their rally.

The members of the KKK complied and with the assistance of the Charlottesville Police Department and Virginia State Police, they left the park at approximately 4.25 and they made their way to their vehicles in the parking garage behind the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court.

There is not a chartered bus.

The two buses that were there were to help bring state police to the downtown area.

They were not used for the KKK or chartered for the KKK.

A large number of people, approximately 200, followed the KKK and law enforcement to that garage and they proceeded to impede the exit of the KKK members from the garage.

Despite being advised to clear the street, the assembled crowd refused and at least several items were thrown at police officers.

The City of Charlottesville Police made a decision at that point to declare an unlawful assembly.

That decision was made by the Chief of Police.

Additional officers responded to this location to clear the road and the garage driveway of the protesters so the KKK members could take their hate and leave our city.

The law enforcement response was to open the road and to prevent any protesters from being injured by the exiting vehicles.

Soon after, the KKK members exited the garage and law enforcement officers were told to stand down, and they began walking back to the park.

We need to proceed through this.

We need to be civil.

If we can't do it, we're going to have to suspend the meeting.

Everybody wants to hear this?

Yes.

So was I.

So was I.

Let's let Mr. Jones finish his.

Despite being advised repeatedly to disperse, members of the crowd continue to get more aggressive towards the law enforcement personnel staged at the park.

and especially on High Street.

As a result, the state police and the CPD command staff began discussing the need to deploy a dispersion irritant, which is more commonly known as tear gas.

Everybody who is shouting for the floor is under our rules, out of order.

Everybody's been called to order.

I have to do this.

I'm sorry.

I don't enjoy this.

But we're going to get through the remarks.

We're going to move through our meeting.

Nobody was shouted down while they were doing their three minutes up here.

and neither am I.

Alright, Ms. Walker, you've been called to order, you're going to have to be removed.

Okay, you don't want to be removed.

This is going to suck.

Look, gentlemen, we're going to have to, we're going to have to be escorted out.

So I'm just going to, I'm going to reread.

Any speaker who violates the rules will be called to order by the mayor.

If their marks are counted, persist.

Mayor shall order the speaker to cease speaking and be seated.

If the order is not heeded, mayor shall direct the sergeant in arms.

to escort the individuals from the meeting room.

That's what we're gonna have to do to get through this.

Sorry, these are the rules that we have to proceed through the meeting.

We have our officers here.

The Charlottesville Police Department made numerous public announcements asking the protesters to disperse and advising that tear gas would be deployed if the crowd did not begin to leave.

At that point, when there were a number of protesters who locked arms in an effort to not de-escalate, to escalate a situation, three canisters of tear gas were deployed and the crowd quickly dispersed.

Deployment of the gas prevented physical confrontations with the protesters.

All right.

Let's wait, Mr. Jones.

Let's wait about 60 seconds.

We need everybody who is leaving.

Let's suspend for five minutes.

Okay, because folks are clearing out.

We're taking a break for five minutes.

Alright everybody.

Coming back in.

Alright.

Same rules apply.

Don't want to have to stop meeting again.

We can get through this with civility and with some process.

We still have a lot of items ahead of us, too, on the agenda for tonight.

Sure.

And one of the things I would like folks in the audience and who are watching on television to know that if there were individual

issues that were brought up this evening about ways that individuals were treated as part of this, they can file complaints with the city about those individual complaints and those will be investigated.

So there is a process by which we investigate those things and so they should look into that and provide some background on it and fill out a complaint against the city that we can review.

So as I was saying that there were numerous requests for the crowd to disperse on 4th Street and also on High Street.

The police officers were concerned that this was starting to escalate again.

There were folks who had locked arms in an effort to keep the officers from clearing the street and at that point the tear gas was used.

No one from the city or the Virginia State Police came into the day with a goal of using the chemical irritant.

It was only used to help disperse a group of folks who had been asked numerous times to leave the immediate area after hours of protest that began around noon.

Despite some of the criticism that we've been receiving during the last week or so, I believe our police officers did an impressive job in exceptionally difficult circumstances.

We had over a thousand people in and around Justice Park.

Passions were running high and only three people suffered injuries that warranted trips to the hospital.

Two were heat related and the other for alcohol.

There were only 22 arrests that were made on that day, the great majority of which were misdemeanor charges.

I credit most of our residents who came out to the park that day for making it a safe event and for standing up to the hate of the KKK.

But I also give credit to Chief Thomas, his staff, the Virginia State Police, and our regional partners for working together to try to ensure everyone's safety that day.

The Chief and his team have been reviewing the events of that day and are committed to learning from it as they prepare for other events in the future.

And as I said before, if we have significant concerns about individuals who are affected that day, they can bring that complaint to the police department and to the city for further review.

And we will take a look at it.

The chief is looking at all of the video evidence from that day that we have pulled together, reports that have been pulled together, and he will compile that into a report that will come to the city council for future consideration.

Thank you, Mr. Jones.

I do have a question, which is if you could help explain

the context of the decision to use what's called riot gear.

If I was in the park for a good portion of the afternoon and if you walked in that park until about 3.35 or 3.40 the only officers you saw were in uniforms.

Virginia State Police, City of Charlottesville officers.

The first time you saw anybody in the riot gear in the park was when they brought the KKK in and that was because they had to form a line to bring them in because they were blocked from entering the park.

The other time, the next time you saw a significant number of officers in riot gear was when the crowd had gone down and was blocking the exit for the KKK.

We had purposely staged

the officers in riot gear away from the park.

We did not want anybody in riot gear in that park.

That's why most of the officers in that park were in their uniforms because that's not what we wanted to, the message that we wanted to send to folks there.

And if you were there in the hours beforehand, you didn't see someone in riot gear.

It wasn't until the police felt that they were overwhelmed

with trying to clear that line to get into the park that they brought out some officers in riot gear and then you saw the majority of the officers in riot gear from the state police came out on 4th Street to clear that area so that the cars could get out and we could send the KKK back to North Carolina.

But the goal was never to see anybody in riot gear.

They were just staged just in case they were needed.

Yeah, I just think the public deserves the right to answer those questions and I'm glad that Chief Thomas would be willing to address those issues.

He and I were just texting him.

I know he's prepared to do so.

I just want to underscore that that I'm sure that the whole council is in agreement that we do want a thorough investigation.

At the same time, we really appreciate thorough representation just now.

You're welcome.

And I would add on to that, too, I think that Mr. Bellamy, I would double everything you said.

And I think that all these the questions that pertain to concerns about the choices.

I mean, this is in the vein of an investigation.

So I think a report slash a very thorough

inquiry that's critical based on the feedback you've heard from council and from the citizens I think is essential.

One of the things I've been struck by in so many of the, I mean there's a lot of anger and frustration, but a really striking percentage of the comments have been forward looking with people thinking about what do we learn from this for future practice and I think that

Mr. Mayor, I'd also like to address the issue of the permit for the August 12th event.

The city is not in a position to say that folks cannot come and demonstrate.

We can investigate concerns about threats

which I'm sure the police will do as they did in the run up to the July 8th event and assess their concerns about that.

But in terms of keeping folks from speaking in the park, that is not something that we can revoke the permit or not issue a permit based upon.

Once again, getting back to the Supreme Court rulings, you cannot base it on the content of the speech as

Awful as that speech may be, you cannot do that.

No, that's accurate.

And in the ACLU letter that you received, which was primarily to address the questions about the police conduct,

Okay, so a lot more to come from the city.

Okay.

Everything okay down there?

Alright, so we now have

Well, we're at our 9 o'clock break.

We can usually take a break.

But I think we have taken that break.

Is everyone OK with that, colleagues?

Absolutely.

OK. All right.

We're going to move on to our consent agenda.

Item A, minutes for July 5th, 2017.

Item B, appropriations strategic investment area form-based code, $228,000, second of two readings.

Item C, an appropriation 2017-2018 community development block grant, $430,316.31, first of two readings.

Item D in appropriation 2017-2018 home funds, $90,748.69, first of two readings.

Item E in appropriation home investment partnerships program, $3,214.26, first of two readings.

Item F, an appropriation amendment to community development block grant account, first of two readings.

Item G, a resolution authorizing revenue bond issue for Jefferson Scholars Foundation, first of one reading.

Item H, a resolution refund of tax payment to County Waste LLC, first of one reading.

Item I, a resolution refund of tax payment to Wells Fargo Equipment Finance Inc., first of one reading.

Item J, a resolution refund of tax payment to PNC Equipment Finance LLC, first of one reading.

Item K, an ordinance, quick claim to VDOT, Fontana and Highland Ridge subdivision, second of two readings.

Item L, an ordinance, approval of sale of Baylor Lane lot, second of two readings.

Item M, an ordinance, King Street rezoning application, second of two readings.

Comments on two.

B, the strategic investment area form-based code, I think it's premature.

to be writing this code before we have completed the review of the comprehensive plan and the vision statement.

And the parking ordinance changes as far as it concerns what I consider a burden on the workers and the businesses and the shoppers downtown.

So other than that, I will support the consent agenda.

A second?

Second.

Okay, any further discussion?

All in favor?

Carries four to zero, thank you.

Moving on to item number two, this is a, we have a public hearing on this matter.

It's a Charlottesville Fire Department and a Charlottesville Albemarle Rescue Squad Emergency Medical Services System Improvement Strategy and Cost Recovery Program.

Chief Andrew Baxter, Fire Chief for Charlottesville Fire Department will be presenting.

We have 15 minutes allocated here.

We do have a public hearing because of the nature of this matter.

We do not, however, have a vote.

So we will just be hearing presentation, do questions from council, and then have a public hearing.

If anybody would like to speak on this cost recovery item, there's a public hearing sheet that's at the front here.

I don't see anybody signed up on it right now, but please do come down.

Well, we all want to hold that baby.

So, thank you for your time this evening.

Just a brief introduction.

So we're here tonight to talk again.

Just as a reminder, we did a work session in June and reviewed our strategy.

We came together almost a year ago to develop a vision for an effective EMS transport system for the city of Charlottesville.

Our goals are to provide consistent effective delivery of a high performance EMS system while at the same time supporting a very robust combination career and volunteer EMS transport system providing for the health and safety of our responders in this all hazards environment.

A lot of collaboration went into this plan.

City staff, CAHRS volunteers, members of the Charlottesville Fire Department.

We established performance benchmarks for the system, developed an EMS improvement strategy.

This supports a regional vision.

We've briefed council in a series of 2-2-1 briefings and then at our June work session.

Other city staff have been involved in developing this plan as well, including budget, finance, communications, and the information technology folks.

Some very recent developments just in the last few years.

Albemarle County Fire Rescue was providing daytime firefighter medic staffing support to CARS as late as 2013.

2014, City Council approved an ordinance but never passed a resolution establishing a fee schedule.

Also in 2014, so just over three years ago now, June of 2014, Charlottesville Fire started providing daytime firefighter medic support to the rescue squad.

The major component, I think, of interest to people as part of this strategy is instituting an EMS cost recovery program, or in layman's terms, billing for ambulance transport.

This will be an insurance-only billing program.

Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance will be billed.

There's no bill for city residents.

No charge for a non-transport, no denial of service for any inability to pay, and no resident would ever be referred to a collections agency for inability to pay.

It's what's known as a compassionate care model.

Just to give you some perspective, and for our community, there are 38 independent cities in the Commonwealth,

37 of them have some form of EMS billing.

We're the outlier right now.

Five of six jurisdictions in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District have some form of EMS billing.

80% of Virginians live in communities with some form of EMS billing and 85% of Americans live in a community with some form of EMS billing.

Our projected revenue, we're looking at approximately $720,000.

looking at six months of revenue for the remainder of FY18 and in FY19, based on our current and projected call volume, we estimate between 1.2 and 1.4 million dollars in revenue.

You'll see at the next meeting, in fact it's in your packet tonight rather, the resolution establishing a fee schedule.

It is directly in line with what the county charges for ambulance transport as well.

Again,

the emphasis on ultimately building a regional system.

So the question then is what do we do with the revenue?

What's the intention of using that revenue for?

Sure, so our operating budget is right around a million dollars per year, slightly under.

Right now our charitable giving is coming in around $200,000, which is a substantial gap from where we need to be for operations alone not to include capital funding.

And just as a reminder, CARS since 1960 has been providing this primary public safety service.

And as a sidebar, it's where I got my start in emergency services.

So the rest of that revenue would go for additional staffing for Charlottesville Firefighter Medics on a 12 hour daytime unit, a peak activity unit, and on a 24 hour unit running out of the Fontaine Avenue Fire Station.

And then also we would need to hire a civilian EMS billing specialist.

This is a very complex, very detailed task and we need a specialist in order to help us do that effectively.

So the next steps, as I mentioned, you'll see the resolution in your packet along with an agenda memo for the appropriation of the revenue and a copy of the MOU that we've agreed to enter into with the rescue squad.

On the future, thank you, of cars,

Is this what the future looks like?

Are they going to survive?

Absolutely.

I think this is just us getting in line with what everyone else is doing to remain a viable organization.

It's something that we've talked about on and off for the last 10 years in different constructs.

The current proposal kind of brings together, I think, the best of what both of our agencies have to offer in a way that's truly collaborative.

I understand that, but I meant the money part of it.

I think if we start billing for services it absolutely will.

And if I could add to that, Mr. Fenwick, we're committed here and I think the reason we're here tonight together is that we share a trust in this shared vision of the future of a truly combination system.

As I've said to our CAHRS partners throughout this process, that we will always support you as long as you're providing quality service because you will always be a relatively cheaper investment in being able to provide that service because their salaries are zero because they're volunteers.

That said, the system is busy enough now and will continue to get busier and provide opportunities or demand more funding for training and for equipment.

Just as a quick background for the public in general.

It used to be Rescue Squad, they would bring on med students, nursing school, medical school, and basically just pick people off the street and put them in the back of the ambulance and take them to the hospital.

So if anybody out in the community wants to get some better idea of how those vehicles are really rolling operating rooms, please look at one of these community events where the rescue squad brings their vehicles.

Better yet, come to a ride-along and join cars.

I just have a comment, Mr. Mayor.

I just want to applaud you for the thoroughness of this review and the assessment that you've made of the situation.

You've given us a plan and not only given us a plan, you've given us all the tools from the MOU to the resolution.

and then to a fact sheet that is really important for the community to understand.

It's a very thorough, comprehensive package that actually quite frankly makes our decision making quite efficient.

I appreciate it very, very much.

OK.

I want to second all that.

Right.

Yeah, yeah.

Thank you also.

Very, very careful.

And I know this conversation began early.

And it was really important to do it carefully, thoroughly, with respect to all the stakeholders' vulnerabilities.

And I think this is, for example, good governance and really caring about the status of the volunteer force.

So thank you.

Absolutely.

OK.

I'm going to open the public hearing we have in this matter.

Is anybody interested in?

Would you like that?

Anybody interested in speaking?

I am.

Okay.

Wonderful.

My name is Gloria Beard and I live at 1116 Page Street, Charlottesville.

Oh, no, no.

This is only on the, oh, you're going to talk about the, oh, this is not, this is only on the cost recovery.

Yeah.

Oh, sorry.

That's okay.

You're fine.

Although that sounds, we'll look forward to it.

Um, okay.

Anybody else wish to speak about this, this item?

Okay, I'm going to close the public hearing then.

And I believe that's all we need to do, right?

This time around?

Okay.

All right.

Moving on to item number three on our agenda.

This is public hearing and ordinance.

This is a long time in the making.

Urban archery.

Ordinance and related revisions.

This is the first of two readings.

Mr. Mike Murphy, Assistant City Manager, will be presenting.

We've got 20 minutes allocated to this.

We will only have a motion and a second, as this is the first of two readings.

So the full vote would happen the second time.

Good evening, Council.

Mike Murphy, Assistant City Manager.

Well, we have been before you four or five times now talking about this deer problem and tonight we're very close to the end.

One thing that is a part of the actions council has taken that is not a part of this particular memo is I want you to know that the RFP

that you requested for sharp-shooting services is currently issued and on the street.

We'll be putting together a team to review that proposal probably in August.

As for the matter before you tonight, which is to move forward the elements of the Urban Archery Ordinance.

You'll remember the last time I was here, we had a variety of maps behind you to depict the appropriate size.

We went over a number of elements of a proposed ordinance cobbled together from many ordinances throughout the state.

We had a couple tweaks from council, including some language favored by Councilwoman Szakos.

You'll see all of that in tonight's proposed ordinance.

I would point out one very small change that, as you move in second tonight, we'd like you to tweak the language on.

And that's on page 4, or 94, in your packet.

And it is also, in fact, number 4 in the numbered ordinance.

Because it was part of the discussion, Mr. Gore from the City Attorney's Office who helped to draft this wanted to give you all the option about contiguous parcels making up the half acre.

It's my understanding that we should strike that clause and that we are looking at the parcel discreetly, individually being half an acre so that we can

kind of affirm with property owners ahead of time whether they're eligible to apply or not.

So with the exception of striking that one clause, I'm happy to answer any questions, but I think that we've gone over this quite a bit to get to where we are today.

And what was that?

You say number four?

Yes, sir.

So we have four pages in this memo in your packet.

And on page 94, you'll see it starts, hunting with bows is permitted only on residential parcels.

And I'd request that council just strike the section that says, or contiguous parcels, which in combination consist of one half acre or more.

This is to prevent that three neighbors with 0.17 acres could band together to create an eligible parcel.

OK. All right.

OK, any other questions?

I have a question, which is, OK, item number 10.

If a deer which has been shot with an arrow leaves the prop.

And first of all, I want to say thank you.

This has been, again, lots of good governance here tonight in our items.

Because a lot of care and a lot of nuance has had to be worked out to get this.

And even Ms. Szakos, who was a, I mean, I don't have her proxy or anything, but she praised the care that had gone into this to me in our customary meeting.

last week and she was, you know, has reservations about the whole project.

But item 10, if a deer which has been shot with an arrow leaves the property in which the hunter has permission to hunt, the hunter shall obtain permission from any property owner over which year she must travel to pursue or retrieve the deer.

So they don't have to do this beforehand.

This happens after the deer.

I'm just trying to think about the logistics and we had lots of other models.

Yeah, certainly.

It's an ad hoc thing based on if the deer goes and then you get permission.

I think it would be preferable if you know that you're going to make your parcel eligible for hunting that you acquire that permission from your adjacent neighbors ahead of time so that you don't encounter a circumstance where somebody has to knock on the front door and say, hey, we'd like to retrieve a deer from your yard.

But what we do know is that it's the property owner's prerogative to allow that permission or not.

And so if it isn't obtained in advance, this clause is just to say you cannot go on a different property line or you can't cross several property lines to go and retrieve the animal.

I guess my question was should we just make it be in advance that they, I was just trying to think through the logistic, like what if the person is on vacation and then they, you know, it's pretty far into the neighboring property but there's a fence and then the deer sits there because they can't get permission well, you know, after the deer has been shot.

I think the question then you have to ask yourself, Mr. Mayor, is which direction is this wounded animal going to run?

If we drop a pin at the point where you shoot the deer, how far out do you think it might run?

How many properties might it entail if you say that it's 150 yards out?

Thank you.

That addresses my question.

Thank you.

It's the minutia that matters.

Do we have a public hearing?

I don't see anybody who signed up for a public hearing.

Opening public hearing, if anybody would like to speak about this matter, now's your chance.

No, you need to come up.

Not interested?

Sure?

Okay.

All right.

Going, going.

Okay.

Closing public hearing.

All right.

Do we have a motion?

Is there a second?

Second.

As amended in item 4.

OK. And we have a second from Mr. Fenwick.

Is that right?

OK.

So thank you all.

Thank you very much for your hard work.

Thank you.

This is closing and vacating First Street South between Water Street and South Street.

Again, first of two readings.

We just have motion and a second.

Ten minutes allocated to this.

I believe Ms. Robertson has on here that Mr. Brown is presenting.

I had a complete makeover.

This matter is fairly straightforward.

As you all know, some time ago the city council entered into an agreement with a private developer for the sale of some land across the street from the Water Street parking garage.

It's going to be a new

residential development.

As part of that development, the contract purchaser has asked for a portion of First Street to be vacated and closed so that it can be incorporated into the development.

That is something that you agreed to consider and so there's an ordinance in the packet

that proposes for the street to be vacated.

You are required to have a public hearing on that.

And our main recommendation is that this, should you approve this vacation, it should not become effective unless and until the closing of this sale of property actually occurs.

So the ordinance has been drafted to include a condition that states that the ordinance vacating the street would not be recorded in the clerk's office unless and until the closing has actually taken effect and the deed has been recorded.

This is, again, on occasion city council does agree to close certain streets and sometimes does so in connection with an adjacent development that's happening.

Okay, thank you.

I do have a question and I'm not sure if this is for the applicant or not, but my understanding that this vacation of First Street

was actually going to be replaced with the final design with a pedestrian pathway that was integrated with the design of the project.

You couldn't hear me.

Yes, the street was going to be vacated, but the design of the ultimate project was going to be putting in that rough same location a pedestrian pathway, so it was still going to be accessible

It's for people as a throughway, but it wouldn't be for cars, it would be for pedestrians.

Please introduce yourself.

Good evening, I'm Keith Wood with Market Plaza LLC.

Yes, there will be an easement and that's part of the documentation that's been prepared and will be submitted with the closing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I do have one more quick question.

That does not need to be in the ordinance.

It's another part of the application.

It can be a condition if you'd like to make that a condition.

I'll just add that it is in the contract that we've executed with the city, the easement and all that.

So it is in the contract?

Okay, that should be sufficient.

Okay, let's open the public hearing.

The public hearing is open.

I would just speak real briefly, is there any, you know, Michael Payne, 3164 on Woods Drive, is there going to be any study or examination of the public impact of this, how it would affect traffic patterns, how it would affect people in that area while vacating it, because it seems, you know, there could be a situation where we're inconveniencing the public in order for the profit of one private developer, that seems kind of a

a strange priority for city council to make that decision if it's the case that it would impact the public in any way to vacate that street.

That's it.

Anyone else wish to speak?

Let's close the public hearing.

Any other comments?

Mr. Mayor, I do have some comments.

And I guess Mr. Fenwick and Mr. Jones, we were the ones that were on council on the dais at the time when we were first looking into what to do with this parcel on Second Street.

And if the publics may remember that we had a competition, a design competition,

and I believe there were about five entries, four or five entries.

And in that process, all these sorts of issues about the design and the implication and the impacts were investigated.

This was also reviewed by the Planning Commission as well as the BAR.

So this project, probably more so than any other project, certainly a by right project, was highly scrutinized.

And the closing of the street was something that was discussed quite a bit.

But again, the traffic patterns around the block still were going to be functioning well.

And then again, the pedestrian easement was really important.

Thank you.

No, I think the city's benefit of this was, one, the sale of the property, the revenue that we would receive from that, but more importantly, it was driven by the city market and keeping the city market in downtown.

That was the goal of the city council.

It was a report that had been given by a, it was a recommendation that had been given by a community task force that had looked into this and they wanted to keep the city market downtown after looking at a lot of different spots.

And in order to accommodate that, but then also,

to see this piece of property redeveloped in a way that would bring mixed use into downtown, another project into downtown.

The agreement is that City Market has a home in that space for years to come.

Thank you very much.

That was a major detail.

Okay.

I'll move it to move forward.

First of two readings.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay, that's all we need.

All right, thank you all.

We move on to item number five.

Public hearing and ordinance.

This is the Woolen Mills Village Historic Conservation District.

First of two readings.

We have

To any of my colleagues mind if we move this up to, we have 20 minutes here, but I imagine it'll go a little bit longer, so can we move it up to 30, is that okay?

It's fine.

Okay.

All right.

The Woolen Mills Neighborhood Association originally brought this request to the Planning Commission for its initiation July 12th of last year.

The proposal would add a historic conservation overlay district, which is the local regulatory type of historic district to 85 parcels located in part of the Woolen Mills neighborhood.

The proposed district includes all the city properties within the boundaries of the Woolen Mills Village

National Register District, and that's an honorary district that was listed in 2010 on both the state and national registers.

So it's that area plus two additional vacant lots that the neighborhood association requested.

and I would say that the consultant who wrote the National Register nomination, the process there is that they perform a architectural and historic survey of every building in the proposed district.

They determine whether they're contributing to the district or non-contributing and then they have to also justify the boundary and that's based on the period of significance for the district that they establish

and the boundaries would enclose the most compact area that contains the most of those historic resources.

So that's how the district was determined.

City Council is being asked to take action to either approve or deny the overlay district which was recommended unanimously by the Planning Commission with a six to zero vote on November 9th of last year and it was also unanimously recommended by the Board of Architectural Review

9-0 on September 20th of last year.

In December 2016, the Woolen Mills Neighborhood Association asked that the rezoning be deferred for six months or until the Historic Conservation District Ordinance and Guidelines could be revised for clarity of interpretation.

Those revisions were approved by council in April of this year.

However, there continue to be concerns expressed by residents and or property owners in Woolen Mills neighborhood.

Therefore, staff conducted a poll to gauge current interest of all affected property owners only.

Staff was clear in the letter that the poll was asking their opinion to help inform council's decision that it was not a vote and that council does not make zoning decisions by popular vote.

The results of the poll, out of 85 letters sent, that's one per property, we received back 65 responses, which is 76%, that's a very good response rate.

37 said no, 26 said yes, and two of the letters returned unopened.

So that's 37 against and 26 in favor of the proposed district.

The rezoning consists of a first a zoning text amendment to add woolen mills to the list of districts in the zoning ordinance, and then also a zoning map amendment, which would add the historic conservation overlay designation to the 85 parcels.

The effect of the proposed overlay district would make certain visible exterior changes subject to review by the BAR.

And you all went over this in depth in April when you reviewed the ordinance, but to simplify it greatly, that would include new buildings and structures, some additions and demolitions of contributing buildings,

some fences and walls and also if you want to paint previously unpainted brick.

The regulations are much less strict than in the ADC districts.

I would like to talk about community engagement.

When the Planning Commission held their joint public hearing on November 9th,

Staff received 30 written comments at that time, 22 in support of the district.

Of those from affected property owners only, 13 were in support and 5 were opposed.

So at that time, there still seemed to be a majority of property owners in support of the district.

On December 1st, that was shortly after the Planning Commission's public hearing, at the request of John Frazee, who is chair of the Woolen Mills Neighborhood Association,

Another informational meeting for residents was held at Woolen Mills Chapel.

I went to that meeting, several BAR members and also Planning Commission representatives attended.

There was a very good turnout, the chapel was full, and I think after that meeting everyone agreed that amending the ordinance and guidelines to make them more clear was a good idea before any new district was adopted.

and then on December 21st, following that meeting, John Frazee requested deferral of council's consideration of the district for six months or until the final revisions to the ordinance and guideline were adopted.

So we did that in April and then in May, staff received a petition with 43 signatures asking if NDS could not provide an opt-out option that the proposed district not be passed.

So then in May and June, I sent out two mailings to all affected property owners.

The first to ask their opinion in a poll, to explain why an opt-out option was not legal in Virginia, and that was provided by Lisa Robertson, the deputy city attorney, and then also to send everyone in the district a copy of the new ordinance language and the new guidelines.

So everybody was on the same page there.

the second letter sent in June I reported the poll results which I just told you about and also I gave them the date of this public hearing and in that letter I reiterated that council's action would be based on an assessment of whether or not the proposed conservation district will serve the public interest and its decision will be informed by the results of the poll along with other factors

So staff recommendation, along with the BAR and Planning Commission, staff recommends that the City Council should approve the designation based on criteria found in Section 34-336C of the zoning ordinance of this part of Woolen Mills neighborhood as the Woolen Mills Village Historic Conservation District, including the proposed district boundary and the map of contributing and non-contributing properties as they're proposed.

Thank you.

I have one.

I just noticed in the letter that was sent out, the postcards, they had a comment space on them that you got back to you.

Are those in our material?

Let me see if I have that.

I think that I did actually tabulate the comments.

I do with them.

Sorry.

Just a lot of information with this file.

I'm sorry I don't have it right now.

My question was more in the nature of the information that they received.

How many comments?

I would say most people at least commented, you know, one sentence, which we left room for one sentence.

One thing I just pulled out, there was like a three-page letter from one person, but most of them just did that.

They just put a one sentence comment on there, why they wanted it or didn't.

I apologize again for not getting that.

I do have a question, and again, thank you for all your hard work on this.

So am I right in understanding that the point of getting the resident input is to come to the Planning Commission and the BAR before they make a decision?

and that it is one of two major pieces of information, the other being the architecturally significant features of the historic district itself.

So resident input is not well-defined in our ordinance.

It just says that the BAR must consider the resident input along with the architectural features of the district.

Well, I told you in my email this morning that the requirement for the poll started approximately 2010 when that city council said before we get any more historic districts, they want to see that there's some amount of neighborhood support for it before it's even considered by the city.

So based on that, I guess Martha Jefferson was the first district to actually make application after that kind of policy decision was made.

So I asked Martha Jefferson Neighborhood to show that there was neighborhood support.

They kind of came up with the idea of doing the polls.

It's never been written down that a poll is required.

And then Venable Neighborhood, you know, they followed the same format.

So the idea was to get that kind of support in hand before we even went through the process, before it went to the BAR, before it went to the Planning Commission and City Council.

In this case, we did the poll at the end, it was odd.

I've never done that before.

But the reason I did it was because there was so much

confusion and different things being talked about, especially by email, that I wanted to help clarify.

And also, I thought it was important that, you know, a lot of things had happened since the Planning Commission held their public hearing in December, or in November, and I thought it would be a good idea to update that information.

And I just want to make sure I understand too, because before the 9-0 vote on the BAR and the 6-0 vote from the Planning Commission, there had been a poll done by the...

Yes, by the Neighborhood Association.

Then as I understand it was 68% voted for, that was 46 people.

I don't remember the figures.

I'm sure that one of the neighborhood representatives could tell.

I just wanted to clarify that.

And then that precipitated the vote.

That was not precipitated, but it was prior to the vote, which is what was required by the ordinance, some resident input.

Okay.

I have a question and I'll tell you what I did and you tell me if it would be what the process would be today.

Many years ago I wanted to put storm windows on my house so I'm pretty sure I went before the BAR.

It was an aggravation but it really wasn't burdensome and it didn't cost me anything.

They just were concerned about the appearance that I wouldn't decorate the house or something like that.

Like I say it was an aggravation.

So if that were to happen today to one of these houses, would this be applicable?

Well, your property, I believe, is individually protected, so it follows the ADC guidelines.

But even so, maybe they changed the rule after you got yours, because right now you can approve them administratively, even in an ADC district.

But in this district, no, we wouldn't.

A small item.

No, I think if you remember in April when the ordinance was changed,

It was, you know, we tried to make sure it was very, very simple and the idea is that the BAR gets to review things that are visible that happen in the front yard or from the corner a lot, you know, the side yard.

But the idea is what they want to review things that are going to have the biggest impact on the neighborhood.

That's demolitions of contributing historic buildings, but it's also new buildings.

What do they look like?

And then if they're putting an addition on a building, you could put an addition, for instance, on the front and it would completely change the look of a building.

So it's those visible, you know, those larger things that they're trying to get at.

One last question, just thinking about this and as I was trying to

If they wanted to put a handicapped ramp to the front door I think that would require approval.

I think if it was around back, like any addition, it wouldn't require approval.

Can you describe, for folks who don't know, what's BAR approval like?

What happens when somebody has to do it?

In the Historic Conservation District, you make application, the BAR meets once a month,

The fees have been waived for everything except new buildings and demolitions.

So any additions, for example, the handicap ramp on the front of the building, that wouldn't require a fee.

And so they would submit their application, go before the BAR.

The BAR is required to approve it at that meeting according to the April amendments.

If they vote against it, well, they usually don't vote against something.

They usually try to work with the applicant to reach a compromise.

Does that compromise happen at the meeting itself?

Yes.

Yeah, I mean, they negotiate often

I just would, if I may, just remind our colleagues that we had that discussion in April and I had put forth those amendments to cut the review time in half and to cut the fees in half, pretty much, roughly.

OK. All right.

So we now, I guess that was the presentation that we were looking for.

So OK, we'll now do, are any other questions or comments from council before we go to the public hearing?

OK, we have a public hearing.

Is it complete?

Anybody would like, so we have nine folks signed up.

Same rules as before.

Comments are limited to three minutes.

Please state your name and address.

John Frazee is first.

Opening public hearing.

My name is John Frazee.

I live at 1404 East Market Street, and I'd like to provide some background to the Woolen Mills Neighborhood Association's position

on the conservation overlay CV currently under consideration.

In plain terms, a process that began with a poll of the neighborhood concluded with a poll of the neighborhood.

What entailed between those polls should be taken as a lesson for any organization that, when offering a choice, meets activist opposition.

I've been a member of the WMNA for the past six years and have been acting as chairperson for the past four.

Our constitution states that we must take concerted action to conserve and improve the area

as a historic residential neighborhood, including, when necessary, action to protect the integrity of the community.

Given the glacial process on rezoning, we saw the CV as a useful, if low power, tool to prevent massively out of context construction in our neighborhood, construction which has occurred in Rose Hill and Fifeville.

and could occur in neighborhoods all over the city without a determined effort to find and implement regulatory protections.

As we have seen numerous times, the voices of neighbors, even when raised together, are often not enough to prevent unwanted development.

With the changes likely to be brought by the redevelopment of the Woolen Mill, an exciting and positive prospect, the Board has tried to look ahead to the possible effects of such a project on a historic district.

The WM&A Board followed the process which had been undertaken in Martha Jefferson and Venable

which included a poll of the affected property owners.

Based on the positive results, we asked that the Planning Commission proceed with the examination of viability of the CV and the Planning Commission found it had merit.

The WMNA held a public session in which we clearly outlined the financial and regulatory burdens that come with this protection.

Immediately prior to the public hearings, property rights advocates called for a closer examination of the regulations.

This led to revisions to the CV code, which have reduced cost and clarified restrictions.

The WM&A was hopeful that property owners would consider the CV's pluses and minuses as written in the regulations and overseen by the city, and make a decision.

Some property owners were in favor, and some, for valid reasons of their own, were opposed.

Following the CV revisions, activist property owners went door-to-door with a petition which requested an opt-out provision, a provision which the city has determined is not legal in the state of Virginia.

via email and flyers, spurious claims were made that homeowners would not be able to maintain their properties without approval from the BAR, that they couldn't choose paint colors, siding, or roofing, none of which are mentioned in the CV, and that long-term residents would, quote, be driven from their homes, unquote.

The WMNA has been accused of holding an illegal pole, of colluding with the city, of having, quote, written the map, unquote, and intentionally misleading the neighborhood.

None of this is true.

As part of the public input on the CV, the city held an additional poll to gauge interest.

It's not been done before.

Since the WMNA has begun the process with a poll, we pledge to the neighborhood to respect the outcome of the city's poll for support or de-support.

Based on the outcome, the WMNA removed its support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Eric Kirk, 1502 East Market in Willam Mills.

Just to clarify that last point, the Willam Mills Neighborhood Association has pulled its support, and so that should help determine this.

First of all, another point, these homes, most of them 90-something percent, are not historic.

So what that leaves is aesthetic choices, which I don't think should be, if somebody wants to do something to their home, paint it

put up a larger fence, they should be able to paint brick.

It was positive, as Mary Joy says, until the neighborhood was educated about all of these costs and restrictions.

So first of all, I'd like to say that it has publicly pulled its support.

I'd also like to reiterate that there's tremendous opposition by a majority of residents of Willam Mills to this district and that the poll taken by the NDS has showed that.

It should be said that this is not a neighborhood or community issue, this is 100% property rights issue since it deals completely with residents' personal homes and properties.

This adds costs and

More hoops to jump through.

And even though the vote came back saying that the majority of residents did not want this district, really with something like this, even one resident opposing it would be one too many.

In the case of Willow Mills, the fact that these properties are not owned by the NDS and they're not historic homes leaves only the aesthetic restrictions and costs that these districts place on residents.

The personal taste of homeowners should never be up for a Democratic vote, but should need 100% participation and support to be placed onto them.

A proposal of this nature should require overwhelming support of the people who have to live under it.

This is not the case.

So no matter what unwanted rules and costs, neighborhood development services and Mary Joy are attempting to push onto our neighborhood, the fact is that these homes are not owned by the MDS or the Willam Mills Neighborhood Association.

No matter what somebody else comes up here and says that's in favor of this for their own property, their neighbor's home is not theirs.

So these homes that they sit on are owned by people who work hard, people who have taken out mortgages to purchase them.

These are the people that have voted against this district.

So to conclude, it must be said out loud to the NDS that these are not your homes.

To the Willam Mills Neighborhood Association, these are not your homes.

Thanks.

Thank you very much.

I'm Catherine Rocket, 1800 Chesapeake Street.

I'm here, and I'm sorry that my family had to leave.

We were filling up the entire row there, but my 90-year-old aunt kind of reached her limit and had to leave, and her son and daughter took her home.

But I would just like to say, Mr. Signer, you asked for what the comments had been on those cards that came back.

It's really a shame that the poll was not done with the neighborhood upfront, that what you depended on was the neighborhood association.

Not everybody in this area is a member

or attends those neighborhood association meetings.

The neighborhood association is not an HOA.

It's a voluntary organization as it's seen by many of the neighbors.

I can tell you my 92-year-old mother who is still in the house where she's always lived, been there her entire life, moved down just the street.

There has never been any place else other than Chesapeake Street that my family has been on.

The answer we gave back on that card, if I can quote it for you, I wrote it down, the house

meaning 1800 Chesapeake Street, has no association with a historic event, person, architect, craftsman, or style.

No special materials were used in its construction.

It is not an example of a particular style and is located a significant distance from neighbors.

That's exactly what the code is saying needs to be there in order for you to have this kind of consideration.