[5:17] Welcome to Charlottesville City Council, we're glad you all are with us. We will begin our meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.

[5:51] Ms. Rice, can you call the roll, please?

[5:54] I think Mr. Fenwick? Here. Mr. Bellamy? Where is it? Mr. Signor? Here. Ms. Zacus? Ms. Galvin? Here. And I'll explain for everybody, Kristen Stacos is not with us tonight. She is on a visit to our sister city in Italy, Poggio Icono. But she, we do have a little bit of feedback from her on various items.

[6:14] which is obviously not here in evoke, but we do have a quorum under our rules to meet.

[6:20] We will begin with awards and recognitions and announcements so we could go from Ms. Galvin.

[6:28] Sure, I have two. One is a save the date, Saturday, July 29th from 10am to 7.30pm.

[6:42] and the 10th annual community health fair will be at the Booker T. Washington Park, on Preston Avenue, in Charleston, Virginia.

[6:50] So just join us for a grand time and the welcome processional starts at 10 a.m.

[6:58] Oh, I'm sorry. I think I did.

[7:00] And then we'll be fine to also rename us from here.

[7:04] So all right.

[7:06] So the other announcement is about Chamba.

[7:09] And I want to invite Lily Williams for now, please,

[7:14] to make the announcement about the festival.

[7:16] She can do a far better job than I can.

[7:20] All right, Miss Lily.

[7:22] You got a dance.

[7:23] I know I won't be the same.

[7:26] OK.

[7:27] When she started to say, first of all,

[7:29] Good evening everyone and I want to start out by saying real quick that without the Charlottesville City support and

[7:37] We could not do this. So I want to thank you right off the bat

[7:40] Thank you for the success of this festival. Let's turn to three days people love it

[7:45] So I'm gonna tell you exactly what's gonna be happened. So it is our 28th

[7:51] Festival and you look festival

[7:53] I'm just gonna start out on Thursday the 27th and now it used to be the taste of God about a taste of Africa

[7:59] So we got, now Ghana has been joined by Kenya.

[8:03] So we're gonna have an evening of storytelling

[8:06] by Tahara product, productions and company,

[8:09] and we got, we're gonna have God's Bungal Gospel Group.

[8:13] So from that one, on Friday, of course, is Ladies Night,

[8:17] and that's gonna be a hair show, a fashion show.

[8:21] We got Sister's Conquerant Cancer Modeling.

[8:24] It's gonna be a wonderful evening, so please come out.

[8:27] But for these two events, they're gonna be a carver,

[8:29] But I want you to know if you do want to attend,

[8:31] that you have to let us know.

[8:34] And you can go online and to e-bike and get a ticket

[8:37] because of the capacity, you will have to have

[8:40] to take it to come.

[8:42] And on the final day, of course, is Saturday.

[8:46] That's going to be a book if you wash it in part.

[8:48] And that's in a village setting.

[8:50] I'm sure if you've come, you'll enjoy yourself.

[8:53] That's going to be food vendors.

[8:54] I help there.

[8:55] free swim, all kinds of vendors that sell all kind of wonderful things. So again, I hope

[9:02] you can all come out, enjoy yourselves, it's a family event, it's all kinds of things

[9:08] you can do, it's gonna be wonderful. So you know, we have a wonderful committee that we're

[9:12] all very proud of who worked really hard on this and we have wonderful sponsors and support.

[9:18] So I want everyone to come out and enjoy yourself on one or all of those days. And thank you

[9:24] Thank you so much for your time.

[9:26] Thank you.

[9:31] Thank you so much.

[9:32] That was wonderful.

[9:35] The second announcement that I have is entitled Race Still Matters.

[9:42] Wednesday, July 19 at 6.30 p.m. at the Jefferson School African American Heritage Center.

[9:49] If you missed the information meeting about the continuation of the dialogue on race study circles,

[9:54] You have another opportunity on Wednesday, July 19 at 6.30pm at the African-American Heritage

[9:59] Center.

[10:00] That's at the Jefferson School City Center.

[10:02] The dialogue on race is a city of Charlottesville initiative that began in 2009.

[10:09] The community of Charlottesville came together in courageous conversations that led to the

[10:13] creation of the City of Promise Education Group, the Chamber of Diversity Business Council,

[10:19] the Human Rights Commission, and the Office of Human Rights, just to name a few.

[10:23] So, for more information, contact the Office of Human Rights at 434-970-3023.

[10:32] That's 434-970-3023.

[10:36] Thank you very much.

[10:38] Thank you.

[10:39] It's about me.

[10:41] Sure, good evening, everyone.

[10:42] Good evening.

[10:44] Good evening, everyone.

[10:46] Good evening, everybody.

[10:48] We like each other today.

[10:52] So I have a couple of announcements to read today first and our assistance I would be remiss if I want to send if I didn't rather send a rest in peace or rest in power to the young men.

[11:05] Denzel Morton, a young man who was shot and killed here in Charlottesville last year

[11:09] today is the one year anniversary just left a small celebration for him so I like to

[11:14] definitely start off by saying rest and peace to him as well as let's stop the violence

[11:18] put the guns now we need not have any more gun violence in our city and so not just

[11:24] rest in power to Denzel but to everyone who's lost their lives.

[11:33] So my first announcement is for the history of race and ethnicity in Charlottesville, Virginia.

[11:39] That's going to be Monday, July 31, 2017 at the Carver Rec at 6.30 p.m. Did you know in the

[11:46] 1860s, there were more Africans and African-Americans than whites in this area, that there was a group

[11:52] of black men known as the 400s who owned land and businesses in Charlottesville after the

[11:57] Civil War, Vinegar Hill started out as a neighborhood populated largely of Irish immigrants

[12:03] and Charlottesville has a large history of different people coming together to fight segregation

[12:09] and discrimination. Kind of reminds me of right now. Join us for an important lesson and

[12:14] discussion about the racial and ethnic history of Charlottesville and Miss Charlene Green will

[12:19] be leading that effort. Again, that's Monday July 31st at Carver Wreck at 630. If you need more

[12:25] information. We have flyers up front. Um, Miss Galvin is also, uh, put in a plug as well as

[12:31] Missouli about, um, the Chihamba Festival. I hope you all can come out where your garments. I

[12:36] have mine knowing today showing love to the ancestors and we hope that everybody can come out once

[12:41] again this weekend. It's going to be a phenomenal event. Thank you all.

[12:48] Uh, the parents might like to

[12:50] hear this. It's the back to school. There you go. August 19th from 10 30 to 12 at the Pavilion.

[12:58] Families can register to be guaranteed free school supplies, backpacks, and more.

[13:05] Or to volunteer or donate, go to www.cvillbacktoschoolbash.com.

[13:13] There will be over 30 community organizations participating as well as teachers and school

[13:18] staff on hand, entertainment by the Wilson School of Dance, Laughing, Dragon, Kung Fu, Charlottesville

[13:26] cheerleaders and more okay

[13:31] all right well good evening everybody I'm going to

[13:34] read a statement now about the events of last weekend and then we'll go on to

[13:40] city manager response matters about public then we'll go on to the matters but

[13:44] public themselves in this meeting then we'll get on to our regular agenda over a

[13:51] year ago Charlottesville began a difficult but necessary journey to finally tell

[13:55] the truth about race in our city. Over six months, our Blue Ribbon Commission on

[14:00] Racial and Public Spaces, which was charged with changing the narrative by telling the

[14:05] full story of race through our public spaces held 17 separate public hearings. Their

[14:10] report contained over a dozen recommendations, many of which we have already acted on.

[14:15] This important work not only put us at the forefront of communities seeking to reconcile

[14:19] with the troubled past, it also made us a target for many fringe groups who oppose that

[14:24] very mission. Who see no problem with a false history based on systemic racism and white supremacy.

[14:30] I and many others spent many hours over the last several weeks organizing many alternative

[14:35] events aimed at taking the spotlight away from the KKK and communicating a message of pluralism,

[14:41] tolerance, and enlightenment. This mortgaged word of events was created through the time and

[14:46] generosity of dozens of local businesses, communities, organizations, and faith leaders. I'm sure I

[14:52] I speak for everyone on Council, and I express my deep appreciation to those individuals who stepped up to organize such events, including Jeanette Martin of the NWACP and

[15:00] Secretary Douglas and Steve Blaine, the African-American Heritage Center, Hunter Smith of Champion Brewery,

[15:05] Charlene Green and John Klugey, the Human Rights Commission, Coren Capchon, Kirby Hutto,

[15:09] of the downtown Pavilion, Dr. Alvin Edwards, and Reverend Elaine Thomas of the Interfaith

[15:15] clergy alliance, led by cut nurse, who's in crystal and brine whimer of the Ixard Park,

[15:19] the band's Crystal Garden, Kim Milo and Whiskey, we are star children, and the first African

[15:23] Mount Zion Baptist Church choir, among many, many others, and that's an incomplete list.

[15:28] Well, thousands of people chose to resist by attending these events, others decided

[15:32] to go to the park and counter-protest.

[15:35] That was absolutely their right, and I was so proud to read the headline showing that

[15:40] the counter-protesters had outnumbered the pitiful KKK by a factor of 200.

[15:45] No matter what you chose to do on July 8th, the important thing is we spoke with one voice

[15:50] and sending a clear message that we reject racism and intolerance in this community.

[15:55] As you might expect, we've heard a huge amount of feedback related to July 8th and to events to come.

[16:02] Hundreds of people have praised the city's response, whether from our courageous police officers or from city officials.

[16:07] We've heard from many community members who were energized and reassured by the overwhelming rejection of the plan here.

[16:14] There have been many complaints as well.

[16:16] Many relate to the handling of the counter protestors after the plan left the city.

[16:20] We have heard from business owners in the downtown mall as well.

[16:24] One restaurant owner told me he had 40 dinner reservations canceled on Saturday night.

[16:28] At least one store was vandalized.

[16:31] We have received hundreds of emails from ACLU members that requested City Council supervise our police force in particular ways.

[16:38] We have received hundreds of emails requesting that we revoke a permit on August 12th.

[16:43] For an August 12th, I'll write rally, see money in the signs here.

[16:46] Still others have requested that City Council

[16:55] drop the charges for those who arrested on July 8.

[17:20] Okay, and we're in the part of our meeting before I've read our rules, but everybody has been our meetings and

[17:25] knows that once we get started with the matters of the public, we're going to have to shift our rules.

[17:29] I just haven't, I read them usually before the matters of the public, so I'll get to them in a second.

[17:36] And others have put in a different request and charges ranging from social services to

[17:42] our public housing policies to the disappearance of Sage Smith.

[17:47] Some of these requests have been directed to me personally, others have been directed

[17:51] to Council large or to members of our staff.

[17:53] I want to tell everybody we take this all very seriously.

[17:57] And that means that we also need to be very serious about how we consider each and every complaint

[18:02] and request.

[18:02] and I have to be serious with the public about what we can and cannot do on City Council.

[18:08] It's essential that anyone wanting to organize for change and improve government understand the structure of local government in Charlottesville and in Virginia.

[18:16] First, we have a city manager form of government in Charlottesville.

[18:20] 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 counselors.

[18:29] The city manager has the operational authority over day-to-day decisions of staff, not us.

[18:34] It's important that you understand that.

[18:36] Second, council does not have any authority over decisions made by our prosecutor, the Commonwealth's attorney.

[18:43] He is separately elected by the people precisely to maintain his independence from elected political officials.

[18:51] So we cannot drop charges ourselves.

[18:54] And third, council is a part-time body with, at present, one and a half staff members.

[19:00] We rely on our staff for research, for analysis, and for legal guidance, and it does take

[19:05] some time to get things right and to do our due diligence the right way.

[19:09] For this reason, I want the public to know that I am asking that the content of all of these

[19:14] emails, and we've received, I'm probably close to a thousand at this point, that the content

[19:21] be conveyed to Mr. Jones and to staff in order that they review an advise council 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.

[19:39] I am separately requesting that our Commonwealth Attorney be apprised of the request we received at council regarding these events.

[19:47] As I reflect on the experience of being mayor during this extremely turbulent times, I often return to the importance of perspective and balance.

[19:56] Going forward, I don't want what we do, what we do regarding public safety and the First Amendment to necessarily fit on a bumper sticker, or even in a tweet.

[20:06] 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.

[20:14] Next, the public safety, the most important things elected officials can do is to provide

[20:19] the public with respect, accountability, and transparency.

[20:24] We must maintain the public trust in our policing.

[20:27] Fortunately, I believe that we are beginning from a very strong footing.

[20:30] We hired Al Thomas as chief not because he would be our first African-American police chief

[20:35] in Charlottesville, though we're all very excited about that fact, but specifically because of

[20:44] which begins and ends with building bridges and bonds throughout the community.

[20:49] That is the spirit in which we should, in the city, consider all of the requests and

[20:54] complaints that we received, that we will doubtless continue to receive.

[20:58] And it's the spirit in which I hope and expect our city manager and the staff to report

[21:02] to him will also strive to listen, to learn, and to improve.

[21:06] The Charlottesville Police Department began their formal debriefings about the rally early

[21:10] last week.

[21:10] tonight, City Manager Jones will present, will provide an account in timeline of the event of July 8th.

[21:17] This is a beginning, not an end.

[21:19] We will be ever vigilant in both our public accounting of July 8th and in our preparations for August 12th.

[21:25] 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,

[21:32] I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution.

[21:36] Protecting a freedom of speech should be a sacrosanct obligation for the city.

[21:39] However, I have grave obligations about logistical aspects of this event, which has the potential

[21:46] to draw much larger attendance than the earlier one.

[21:49] Our downtown parks are small and they are located in a crowded, dense, urban location

[21:53] where maintaining separation between crowds, attending an event and traffic moving within

[21:58] city streets is difficult at best.

[22:01] These logistical concerns include the potential crowd size, methods of ingress, and egress

[22:06] in parking.

[22:07] I encourage the police department and city event staff to carefully examine these issues and to make the best possible plan for security of the safety of individuals and attendance of the general public and maybe the downtown area for non event related reasons that same day.

[22:24] 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.

[22:36] If the information available to the police and staff indicate that this is possible within constitutional bounds.

[22:44] In closing, I hope I pray and I believe that we will merge in this difficult moment in Charlottesville's history stronger and more committed to our core principles of pluralism, tolerance, and progress.

[22:54] As Martin Luther King, Jr. One 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.

[23:21] It might not always be the smoothest journey, but we will get there together.

[23:24] Thank you.

[23:31] Mayor Signer, I have one more announcement.

[23:33] Yes, sir.

[23:33] I forgot to make.

[23:34] And even before I make my announcement, I'm very pleased that you're taking this route

[23:38] in regards to looking at alternatives.

[23:40] So thank you.

[23:41] And I think that also means that we've heard the public and it may not always seem as if we

[23:47] do, but I do think it's a step in the right direction.

[23:51] One last announcement that I received and I apologize when I read it earlier with everything

[23:55] going on right now, July is also African-American Mental Health Awareness Month,

[24:01] and we think it's really important for everybody to have the resources available for them to be able to handle with these issues.

[24:08] So on July 25th at the Jefferson School, from 6 to 8, please again mark the date.

[24:13] July 25th from 6 to 8 at the Jefferson School, there's going to be a Black Mental Health Matters event.

[24:19] There's going to be a guest speaker, Mr. Darnell Walker,

[24:21] And he's going to be screening portions of his film outside the House of Black Mental

[24:26] Health film.

[24:26] And this event is being put on by Wes Bellamy, Regent Tinn, Ebony Bug on our own, the

[24:32] therapeutic community and mental health America and the adult Americans of Charlottesville.

[24:37] And we're going to be talking about the stigma of mental health in the African-American communities.

[24:42] Refreshments will be provided, again, that's July 25th from six to eight.

[24:47] And we want it really important for everyone to come out if you can.

[24:49] There is nothing wrong with talking to someone or getting help in times like this or any time for that matter

[24:57] So please please please

[24:59] July 25th from six to eight

[25:05] Yes, sir

[25:06] I might as well jump in here as well

[25:09] I also have grave

[25:11] Concerns about the challenges of emancipation part

[25:14] And I have read the hundreds of emails from y'all about that

[25:18] So, I think we're going to be hearing more about that shortly, but you know, this is our

[25:24] country, this is our city.

[25:26] And I personally, I just don't like it when I'm concerned and I bring my concerns forward

[25:32] to somebody saying, well, we can't do that because of freedom of speech.

[25:36] And it's not that I don't respect freedom of speech.

[25:39] I do.

[25:40] I had a little situation earlier this year, last year, about freedom of speech.

[25:46] But it's the fact that this is our country, the freedom of speech is not an unfettered

[25:53] freedom.

[25:54] There are exceptions to it.

[25:56] We'll be looking at that.

[25:58] And I don't want to give anybody false hope or anything.

[26:01] But I mean, it's very important that we have this conversation throughout the community that

[26:07] everybody is.

[26:08] I see a few people from the faith community here.

[26:11] 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.

[26:21] We'll be better prepared for what happened by what happened a couple of weeks ago, so thank you.

[26:28] We will also resist.

[26:37] Mr. Jones is going to be giving us more details later on this evening, I believe, about exactly what's going to be happening.

[26:44] And as Mayor Signor is saying that Mr. Jones is the city manager and the one that is the one that really does pull the levers of government.

[26:52] So all of us will be really listening to Mr. Jones and taking his lead and that of the police chief as well.

[27:01] 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 the city.

[27:10] 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.

[27:20] 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 non-violent in our steadfast protest.

[27:31] And it was reassuring to see our numbers in peace overwhelming hate.

[27:37] We will do it again, we did it last week.

[27:40] So just on that note, I guess we can proceed with the meeting.

[27:48] Thank you all.

[27:49] Okay, let me, I'm just going to read the, this is the section from our, from our rules.

[28:02] This is section 9, and then I'll read the guidelines for management of public.

[28:07] Improper comments and disorderly read this before every meeting.

[28:10] Improper comments and disorderly conduct are not permitted.

[28:13] Persons appearing before the council may not use this campaign to campaign for public office,

[28:18] Just promote, use this platform, excuse me, campaign for public office, promote private business ventures.

[28:23] Use profanity or vulgar language or gestures, threaten violence, threat, counsel, city, staff.

[28:27] Or, members of the public engage in behavior that intimidates others, interrupt other speakers or engage in behavior that disrupts the meeting.

[28:36] Any speaker, and rule 10, is any speaker who violates the rules will be called to order by the mayor.

[28:40] If the remarks or conduct persists, the mayor shall order the speaker to see speaking be seated.

[28:44] the order is not heated, the mayor shall direct the sergeant and arms to escort the individual

[28:48] the meeting rooms.

[28:50] I just want to introduce everyone to two really wonderful gentlemen we have your officer

[28:56] McIner and the officer Roberts, members of this community, I don't want to need to make

[29:01] their acquaintance, we're going to, I've spelled out the rules that we have, so you basically

[29:09] if you're called to order, there's going to be a lot of emotions, this meeting tonight,

[29:13] a lot of people want to be heard, but it's in the interest of all of us to have this happen

[29:19] as civilly as we can, and also as efficiently. One of the things that happens when people

[29:25] disrupt people who are speaking up here is they get more time right at the front of the

[29:28] room. Well, we try to move things along, and that isn't so great because then they're up

[29:33] here for like 10 minutes, getting their face on TV. So if we move along, the folks are going

[29:38] three minutes up here and one of the things that's worked really well in the past is when you have

[29:44] a strong emotion about something you like it use hand gestures because everybody will watch it or

[29:47] they'll see it on TV so you put up your your thumbs or you whatever works for you if you don't like

[29:54] what they're doing put you know thumbs down we will see it everybody on TV will see it but when it

[29:59] I can't stand it.

[30:00] The outbursts or to anything that stops the flow of the meeting, we're going to have to call you to order because it's in our rules. Unless you're recognized by the chair of the meeting, 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 Will and Mills Neighborhood Association issue. We got some important business tonight. So I just wanted to lay out those rules. Everybody okay with what I've read? Okay. We will get through this. Everybody will be heard.

[30:27] And I just wanted to say that before we get into the main body of the meeting so and the officers here

[30:34] They will be kind of paying attention because sometimes I can't you know, but like last time there are all these people humming and

[30:41] Hopefully we just can move along with with kind of an orderly meeting and everybody gets hurt

[30:47] Yeah, but see I mean no joke seriously. We can't do that because we have to move the meeting long so

[30:55] Okay now that everybody cool

[30:57] All right looks like everybody's cool. Okay, so now we're going to go to Mr. Jones this is city manager response matters by the public from the last meeting

[31:05] And then we'll get on to matters to the public for this meeting. Thank you, Mr. Mayor

[31:09] Just one item to follow up on for matters by the public from the July 5th

[31:13] Council meeting Mr. Kevin Cox brought up his concerns about a large increase in the amount of traffic and

[31:18] Street used by pedestrians and bicyclists on West Main Street

[31:21] I made a suggestion to provide additional police officers along the street to address

[31:26] some of the issues of folks breaking the traffic laws there.

[31:30] You also mentioned an educational campaign to remind people of the responsibilities as motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists.

[31:36] We have been running PSAs on the radio during the course of the last year to do just that.

[31:41] We'll continue to do that this fall.

[31:43] Additionally, we are discussing adding officers to West Main Street to increase enforcement along the corridor.

[31:48] And we have been keeping a close eye on some of the issues that have arisen

[31:53] as construction projects are happening on West Main Street with the effects that it's having on our sidewalks especially.

[32:00] And so we're trying to keep it close by on that and address it as soon as we see them.

[32:04] Thank you.

[32:05] I do have one quick question, Mr. Jones.

[32:07] I understand that there was an audio warning that was put on the ends of the tunnels that were provided for the pedestrians on,

[32:18] I guess it's side of the street that's where the hotel is being built, but the people

[32:24] couldn't, the volume was not loud enough to be heard over the construction noise, has

[32:29] that been a just?

[32:30] I think I do believe that the folks in NDS are working to ensure that it's a acid.

[32:34] I know that at one point on at least one of the sides, there are some issues with batteries,

[32:38] the batteries that run out, and so that wasn't working at all, but we went out there, we replaced

[32:42] the batteries.

[32:43] I think we've also adjusted the volume as well.

[32:45] And the other thing was that the contractor had put down a illegal crosswalk

[32:51] That that's true and we corrected that. Okay. Thank you

[33:06] Okay, now we'll move on

[33:10] Okay

[33:16] And these are also the rules we read before every public comment pre-starts

[33:22] This is our first public comment period.

[33:24] We have another one unlimited slots after the meeting concludes.

[33:28] So if you're not in one of the 15 here, you can speak afterward to us.

[33:32] Just have to wait around until the end of the meeting.

[33:34] We welcome public comments and important part of our meeting.

[33:37] Time is reserved near the beginning and at the end of each regular city council meeting matters with the public.

[33:41] Please follow these guidelines.

[33:42] If you're here to speak for a public hearing, please wait to speak on that matter until the report to that item has been presented.

[33:48] and the public hearing has been opened.

[33:50] Everyone here about the woolen mills conservation district

[33:52] should know that we did put the public hearing back

[33:55] in the meeting tonight, so there is a public hearing for that

[33:57] and you can sign up right here.

[34:00] Each speaker has three minutes to speak.

[34:03] Please give your name and address before beginning your marks

[34:05] and please pay attention to the timer right here,

[34:07] which operates like a traffic light

[34:09] when you're down to the end of your time

[34:11] at the Ziello and then red.

[34:13] Please do not interrupt speakers whether you agree with them.

[34:17] Okay, so we'll move on to Jeffrey Sands, the first one signed up.

[34:29] Thank you very much. I will stay within my three minutes.

[34:33] I believe in speaking for my own perspective and my own experience, which is as it should.

[34:39] But before I do that, it's really important to me to recognize all my brothers and sisters here.

[34:45] Every quality, every gender, from every country in the world that I stand with you solidly through your struggle.

[34:54] And it will take all of us working together, whatever our approach, face this hate down by any means necessary.

[35:02] Thank you.

[35:03] I was born in 1954.

[35:06] In the shadow of the Holocaust, the ashes were literally still small degree.

[35:12] I had family members, friends, teachers with serial numbers tattooed into their flesh.

[35:28] I've been called every name you can imagine and some you can't.

[35:32] I've been spit on, salted, attacked, threatened, even today.

[35:38] The hate tweets are coming, which means that I'm begging some crimes.

[35:43] So keep them coming.

[35:54] And now I'm 63 years old and this is still going on and I've had enough and I just

[36:02] I just we

[36:07] should want

[36:11] to say just a few things about what's going on the city council did not create this

[36:16] Problem Mr. Bellamy did not create this problem you sir turned over a rock and we have now seen what was underneath it

[36:24] And there's no place for it in this community

[36:28] regarding

[36:29] I mean, the August 12th event, this is not an issue of free speech, it's not an issue of 8th, it's just 8th.

[36:39] Mr. Sands, I'm going to...

[36:40] Your native file 8th.

[36:44] Mr. Sands, I'm sorry.

[36:47] It says in our rules, remarks must be addressed directly to Council.

[36:51] We have no obligation to just want you to put it, thank you, to put up with this.

[36:55] There are legal remedies, and I know they're being pursued,

[37:01] but this should not stand.

[37:07] We cannot revoke the permit.

[37:10] Let's find a filthy basement for them to exercise their frame of speech.

[37:18] And if nothing else, then I'm very serious.

[37:20] There is no place for guns on August 12th, thank you very much.

[37:25] Okay,

[37:37] so we had one person cancel somebody to go to the first

[37:43] thing in the waiting list, Shawnee West?

[38:00] Oh, I'm Shawnee West and I live at 12

[38:02] before East Jefferson Street in Charlottesville

[38:04] and I guess I'm a little surprised I was called.

[38:08] Really?

[38:09] So I am speaking in reference to this forthcoming rally

[38:14] which I would rather not see and therefore I do request

[38:19] just 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 reasonable amount of resources and funds, this should not go forth.

[38:47] This is creating, this white supremacist alt-right group are creating fears, I mean, feelings

[38:57] of fear, and I believe Tara in many people, and I am one, very concerned citizen, when

[39:06] I was at the July 8th rally, I was there with the clergy and a peaceful, beautiful demonstration

[39:14] of unity and harmony.

[39:17] And when I was right up front there

[39:19] and I saw the state police and the riot gear come out,

[39:24] I felt like I got sucked in the stomach, literally.

[39:27] And I said, oh, I don't feel safe here anymore.

[39:32] This is what I thought.

[39:33] This is from past experience and what

[39:35] I've seen in videos of various places,

[39:40] not that I've been there.

[39:41] But so what I'm saying, I don't

[39:43] believe that there is a place for this militarization of weapons here in this city.

[39:49] This is not a place for that.

[39:51] We really do need the dialogue on race and there is a lot of healing that must be done

[39:58] here.

[39:59] And I don't feel it is in the interest of this city to include this rally on August 12th.

[40:08] So there needs to be a safe place we need to pull the permit

[40:14] I don't know if that's three minutes, but that's all I have to say thank you

[40:23] James McKinley

[40:25] James McKinley Oaks

[40:27] Yeah,

[40:33] that's me and I'm going to offer my time to delay

[40:37] My

[40:47] check

[40:58] Drop down on me and a lot of us I want you to pass that down the row, please. I want you to touch it

[41:04] I want some accountability.

[41:08] I want you to imagine that thing hitting your flash at high velocity as it did for many

[41:11] of us.

[41:17] A lot of uses that took place, I'm going to, you turn

[41:28] to incident four and five, streets

[41:31] were blocked off till six, yet we were instructed to leave.

[41:34] When we went on to the sidewalk, we were told it was an unlawful assembly.

[41:37] Where were we to go?

[41:38] Streets, sidewalks, there were contradictory directions, given by the police.

[41:42] It's inconsistent.

[41:44] Then when demonstrators' backs were to the police, the first tear gas canister was found.

[41:49] Where this story emerged about protesters using pepper spray on the police.

[41:54] I don't know where that came from.

[41:56] You can see in the ACLU photo, you can see in the ACLU legal observers' photo there that their backs are to the police when the first tear gas canister was checked.

[42:09] incidents two and three demonstrators were trampled, then the police kicked someone

[42:13] and had three times before moving on. A third person stepped in to attempt to

[42:18] assist that person and then was beaten by baton.

[42:23] That's that's that's to order was beaten by a baton and then was arrested for failure

[42:28] to disperse in the very act of trying to disperse and help other two other people

[42:33] disperse as they're being beaten by batons.

[42:37] Okay, okay, now Klanzman was pulled the mask over his face as he was leaving and the police

[42:43] asked him to remove the mask very politely asked him to remove it, he did, yet when the

[42:48] demonstrators were covering our noses like so, as I did myself, to protect ourselves from

[42:53] the tear gas, three of them were arrested for masking, two people,

[43:05] another account here,

[43:07] woman by the name of Heather Dorsey after hugging a policeman, actually a policeman

[43:13] actually stepped on her shoe and when she turned around, you know, her shoe was

[43:17] being stepped on when she turned around and asked him to step off he flung her

[43:20] to the ground and see her wounds. The second place is it this has to stop this

[43:27] militarization of the police and there's militarization the inevitable result is

[43:32] violence, to a hammer, everything's a nail.

[43:36] Thank you.

[43:42] Poon,

[43:55] Elaine Poon.

[44:02] I'm Elaine Poon with the Legal Aid Justice Center,

[44:04] and I'm seeing my time to Mary Bauer.

[44:07] Good evening, I'm Mary Bauer.

[44:08] I'm the Executive Director of the Legal Aid Justice Center,

[44:11] and I reside at 1231 Agnes Street in the city.

[44:14] Today, LAJC, along with the Weatherford Institute, the ACLU,

[44:18] and the National Lawyers Guild, sent each of you all,

[44:21] including Mr. Jones, a letter asking for an investigation into the police tactics on July 8.

[44:28] In short, we urge each of you to use the time between now and August 12th whatever happens there to conduct a thorough,

[44:35] independent investigation of police response to the protests.

[44:39] We appreciate these are difficult issues, but we have profound concerns about the militarized law enforcement presence on July 8.

[44:46] With police stress and riot here, driving armor to vehicles and carrying weapons typically

[44:51] reserved for war zones.

[44:54] We ask the city to acknowledge that this choice to use these kind of tactics instead of planning

[45:00] The investigation 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? Who's police officers were dressed in riot here, and why were those officers sent to that area?

[45:29] who declared an unlawful assembly. And why? What factors warranted such a declaration?

[45:36] We have done an illegal analysis and we don't see any legal basis for that declaration.

[45:42] Third,

[45:45] the use of tear gas and what was the reason for that decision. We call upon the council

[45:51] to create an independent advisory committee to work with City Council and the police

[45:56] well before August 12th to ensure the civil rights and liberties of all participants are protected

[46:02] whatever happens next. Longer term we ask that the city establish a permanent civil review board

[46:08] for the Police Department comprised of city residents advocates and other community members.

[46:13] This event was difficult one for our city to be sure but we think an honest evaluation of what

[46:19] went well and what did not will leave us in a far better place on August 12th and beyond.

[46:25] And I do have copies of that letter if you all have not seen that.

[46:28] Yep.

[46:29] Send it to the staff for now.

[46:31] We've got it.

[46:44] Thank you.

[46:46] Linus Seville.

[46:48] Linus Seville.

[46:49] Thank you.

[46:59] My name is Linus Seville.

[47:01] I live in Charlottesville.

[47:03] And I'm here to talk to you about what happened.

[47:04] I'll be sharing my time at first.

[47:06] I want to make a short statement that the police need de-escalation training.

[47:10] They were able to maintain control of the crowd throughout

[47:14] and a mostly charged visit by the clan and then unexpectedly and quickly shifted gears showing an aggressive and militarized response to the community.

[47:23] Both the people following orders and those giving orders need de-escalation training.

[47:29] I'd like to introduce you to Jay Scott. I am sharing my time with him at the request.

[47:34] How are you doing today? How are you doing tonight?

[47:36] I was actually on the line with everything took place, you know, when we chained up and got together, it was no balance out there.

[47:42] You know I ain't got too much time so I want to get straight into it. It was no balance, you know

[47:46] At back was turned to the cops. I was actually he took us beautiful times

[47:50] I got I seen a bomb coming underneath my foot, you know like still when I wake up right now

[47:55] I can hear like you know ting in my head, you know like just all the effects of the bomb hitting the street

[47:59] You know I watch this on video games, you know like but I was actually a boy this time

[48:03] But on other than that I feel like the media, you know the news and the people who's doing these articles is doing a lot of line

[48:09] Me person I got a lot of videos and I got a couple friends with me

[48:14] They got a lot of videos also that on show. Nobody was valid at all

[48:17] No 10 guests any of that like it might say it was pepper spray you a cop and then see any of that

[48:24] Police brutality. I think that you know, they used a lot of force all day like I said

[48:28] I was 10 guests. I was hit with a shield, you know

[48:31] Like you know my hands up the whole time

[48:32] I got a video walking right back and forth past the cost and you know piece for me

[48:36] It's up, you know, the whole time.

[48:38] And never once, you know, we acting in any kind of bad way.

[48:41] Other than that, I just wanted to say that,

[48:46] just to act the best, like I said, even being paranoid,

[48:48] you know, I got to walk through Charlottesville now

[48:50] and feel like, you know, my life can be dirty

[48:52] because, you know, I made the front paper, you know,

[48:53] I was dead, you know, I was front lined

[48:55] and I'm not gonna let, you know,

[48:56] the city allowed the KKK to come in

[48:58] to do their rally, they protest,

[49:00] and I'm gonna be one of the ones

[49:01] that's gonna stand out there to go against it,

[49:02] you know, every time.

[49:04] So, the last I wanted to say is,

[49:06] I hope you're all ready for August 12th to come down, we ain't running, we ain't hiding, and we will be out there.

[49:12] So if August 12th coming, the permit is allowed there to be there.

[49:16] We're going to be there also, we ain't running, we ain't hiding.

[49:19] They use force, we're going to use force, so that's all right.

[49:25] Don Gathers.

[49:34] Good evening. Good evening.

[49:39] The dates and events that happen during people's lives that they'll always remember where they were.

[49:43] The birth of a child of 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.

[49:56] The day that the Klux Klan came back to town, the day that the citizens of Charlottesville were tear-gassed.

[50:04] The melodious stretch of stint of racism has, again, risen above the surface.

[50:09] Ground zero for this putrid smell originates under the statues of Stonewall,

[50:13] Jackass, and Louis Bobby Lee.

[50:17] The better fact that these two bronze participation trophies has given rise to all of this hatred,

[50:22] demonstrates the incredibly urgent need for them both to come down and to leave our city.

[50:28] It is time for you to rescind them, revoke the permit for over the 12th.

[50:32] The accurate venom that now permeates our community is tied directly to those who reveal

[50:39] the false narratives viewed from the law's cause.

[50:41] The facts that there are so many speaking and voluminous tones of evilness of violence

[50:46] and a white supremacy should be sufficient enough to move the council's needle toward saying

[50:51] no.

[50:52] July 8th made manifest the willingness of the citizenry to unite against any form of wickedness,

[50:58] against any level of stupidity, against any and all that confused the facts of us being

[51:02] forcefully brought here in chains and stocks as opposed to willingly jumping on the boat.

[51:08] Those who now speak in an underlying tone of us going back to our country seemingly

[51:13] think that we were on a carnivore cruise ship as opposed to a slave ship.

[51:17] Point of clarity, my ancestors were not up on deck sipping my ties and playing shuffleboard.

[51:22] They were in the belly of the boat rowing and getting beaten.

[51:26] It is a widely held notion, excuse me,

[51:33] it is a widely held notion that that evilness

[51:36] and wickedness cannot be driven out through evilness and wickedness, that only peace can

[51:41] do that.

[51:42] We've seen the wreckage of communities throughout this country where militarization has been

[51:49] used to try to gather peace, bodies are littered all over this world because of that.

[51:55] But I ask an employer in urging that you please demilitarize the police, take care of the

[52:03] citizens of our city, take our needs and our desires and our safety in hand and in consideration

[52:10] first.

[52:12] Please rescind this pathetic and pitiful party that they want to have, if they're so insisted

[52:22] who don't have it all from Monticello since Tommy was

[52:32] so kind as to allow them to organize

[52:37] the first clan meeting there some 96 years ago.

[52:40] Thank you.

[52:42] James Dyer.

[52:54] I feel kind of nervous about a guitar up here, so pardon me a second.

[52:58] Thank you guys for having me.

[53:00] First of all, I want to quote my teacher in this life, the Buddha, who said that if you speak

[53:07] a little you're blamed if you speak a lot you're blamed if you speak not at all you're blamed

[53:12] everybody feels blamed everybody in this room and I know all you all no matter what you say no matter

[53:16] what you do somebody blamed you and so in that spirit I don't want anybody to feel blamed but at

[53:23] the same time the city does need to take responsibility for what happened on July 8th I went up there

[53:30] I'm a, I'm a, I was raised Catholic. I'm a Jewish descent. I'm hitting on two cylinders for what the clan doesn't like, but the new

[53:38] mountain doesn't like. So I was up there for me, but I was up there for everybody that the clan targets. Black, white, Jewish, whatever. You know, we're on the same boat here. But what I witnessed on that

[53:53] Saturday was not defensive free speech. I saw a police state operation defending

[53:59] a terrorist speech. This was nothing about free speech. And I know you're a lawyer but

[54:05] and you know as well as I do, that law and morality have nothing to do with each other.

[54:10] And so this brainless defense of free speech is killing us. Freedom of speech, if your speech

[54:20] which is being used to promote the idea that other human beings don't deserve rights.

[54:26] It's not a form of speech that we have any obligation to defend or protect, at all none.

[54:34] And so it is incumbent upon everybody of conscience.

[54:39] I'm sure what the law says, if the law says we have to defend the clan, we have to defend

[54:44] new Nazis.

[54:45] We need to resist that law because that is an unjust law that is not a law that is in line with morality.

[54:54] George Orwell said that the object of power is power. That's all it is. And that's all I witnessed on Saturday.

[55:01] I witnessed, well, how many cops were there? 200 cops up there and a bunch of automatic weapons and notarized.

[55:09] they were displaying up a show power to the citizenry.

[55:13] They were intimidating us.

[55:15] While protecting a terrorist group, that is what the Taliban did.

[55:21] We cannot be on the same side as the Taliban, or ISIS, or al-Qaeda, using a military force

[55:28] to defend terrorists.

[55:31] It is sending us down a road that is completely, there's no redemption on that road, none.

[55:37] whatever. And I'm actually appalled that anybody could defend the

[55:43] clan's right-to-free speech or neo-Nazi's right-to-free speech. It's not like we

[55:47] misunderstood what they've said. I mean they've been pretty freaking clear over

[55:51] the years what they're about. What are we defending? We're not defending much of

[55:55] anything. Thank you.

[56:03] Suzy Hoffman. Suzy Hoffman, please. Thank you.

[56:07] Hello.

[56:16] My name is Susie Hoffman, I live at 1203 Augusta Street, sorry, I'm short of this down.

[56:23] I'd like to bring your attention to the following, to petition to study the traffic and safety

[56:28] impacts of the proposed Greenleaf Center at 1147 Rosehill Drive.

[56:34] The petition has been emailed to you and currently has 109 signatures.

[56:39] We will be canvassing our neighborhood over the next few weeks and we'll be back with more.

[56:44] 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.

[56:56] The petition reads, residents of the Kellytown, Rugby Hills and Rosehill neighborhoods are concerned about the traffic and safety issues associated with the three-story 34,000 square foot green leaf center scheduled to be built at 1140.

[57:14] seven rows hill drive. The center is proposed to include 53 parking spots and an entrance exit on to our residential Amherst Street.

[57:25] The area where Greenleaf Center is to be built is located within a one business district.

[57:32] Per the code of the city of Charlottesville, the B1 business district is established to provide four service type businesses and

[57:40] In offices used uses of a limited size which are open primarily during daytime hours.

[57:47] The intent of the B1 regulations is to provide a transitional district between residential

[57:54] areas and other commercial areas of the city.

[57:58] The uses permitted within this district are those which will have only minimal traffic impacts.

[58:04] We feel strongly that the Green Leaf Center and specifically the entrance and exit onto

[58:12] Amherst Street, a residential street, will have more than minimal traffic impacts, and

[58:19] are petitioning the City Council to request a traffic study prior to construction.

[58:26] We ask that the City review the existing traffic patterns and consider how they will be affected

[58:32] by the additional traffic the center will generate.

[58:36] The study should be conducted during the city's school year at morning and evening peak hours.

[58:44] We hope that you will act in your capacity as an advocate for the tax paying residents of Charlottesville.

[58:51] Thank you very much for your time.

[58:54] Thank you.

[58:54] Peter Clemen.

[59:06] Good evening.

[59:07] I'm Peter Clemen.

[59:09] I live at 407 Hedge Street in the city.

[59:11] 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.

[59:29] The three particular target items I want to talk about are the,

[59:35] this will lead up to a recommendation I'd like to make.

[59:39] But during the time of the discussion, building massing was a concern about how large this building

[59:46] would be and what the distribution of units and unit sizes would be in that building,

[59:52] the provision of affordable housing as a component of the special use permit application, and

[59:58] and something about traffic.

[1:00:00] issues. So the most important and disconcerting issue to me was that the applicant was presenting

[1:00:07] to you the by right opportunity presented to them as this onerous project. They could build

[1:00:15] over a hundred units with four bedrooms per unit and this would cause a huge amount of traffic

[1:00:23] in the community and a huge massing on the site.

[1:00:27] And so the existing by-right, which would have appeared to be somewhat of a, I would

[1:00:32] think, sort of neutral kind of position, was being held up as being the horrible, most

[1:00:38] horrible of the alternatives, and clearly you should pick their alternative because it's

[1:00:42] much better than what they could do by-right.

[1:00:45] I think that needs to be reviewed, seriously.

[1:00:48] Also, the provision of affordable housing.

[1:00:50] We hear every month, or other month, that the target for affordable housing in the city is about 15%.

[1:00:58] Yet on this project through the SUP, especially this permitted program, they're offering to present four units,

[1:01:08] which is about 3% of the population of units that they are proposing.

[1:01:12] How are we ever as a city going to reach 15% affordable housing target when we build large housing developments

[1:01:19] where we're only providing 3%, and those might not even be in the targeted neighborhood.

[1:01:25] Also, finally, the traffic analysis I thought was a little disingenuous on the part of the applicants.

[1:01:31] And that was stating that there was going to be, even taking them at their traffic analysis,

[1:01:37] 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.

[1:01:46] The distribution of those trips over the course of the day is a significant factor.

[1:01:51] And so the residential neighborhoods tend to provide trips during peak hours, whereas

[1:01:56] commercial doctor's office are spread out over the day, and they don't really add to

[1:02:01] the major problem times or traffic.

[1:02:03] So I think that in the future, the council really needs to push these things back to the

[1:02:09] planning commission before making decisions on these Denovo appeals.

[1:02:14] Thank you very much.

[1:02:17] My

[1:02:24] name is Audrey Whitrup, I live in Charlottesville, Virginia and I'd like to share my time with music.

[1:02:33] Hello, my name is Mark Music and I live in Charlottesville and in the interest of personal safety I'm not going to share my address.

[1:02:40] I'd like to add my own voice to those of so many others requesting that Mayor Signeur, the city council, particularly the city manager, and any other city official with the authority to do so, rescind the permit for the night the right rally scheduled for August 12.

[1:02:55] I as do so many others believe that this permit should be rescinded because the organizers

[1:03:00] of this action have made it very clear that their intention is to incite and even commit

[1:03:05] acts of violence and so racial hatred in our community.

[1:03:08] This alone should be caused for canceling the permit, but city officials continue to defend

[1:03:13] the permit and by extension the rally under the guise of free speech.

[1:03:17] The problem is, most of our understanding about what freedom of speech means has become

[1:03:22] increasingly muddled, I'd say, intentionally so, by a reactionary interest focus not on

[1:03:28] providing more inclusive spaces for a diversity of voices in our society, but in reinforcing

[1:03:34] a system where the voices of those with greater social power, white folks, male identified

[1:03:38] folks, straight folks, etc., are able to maintain that power over those with less power.

[1:03:44] Let me say it another way.

[1:03:46] We act as if giving people equal time is the same as creating equality, but in many cases

[1:03:51] it simply allows folks with power to continue to act out that power in ways that continue to

[1:03:56] hurt oppressed folks. Acts of speech are exactly that, acts. When we treat all acts of speech

[1:04:02] as effectively neutral, we help normalize oppressive speech and further oppressive acts.

[1:04:08] And what are folks who have historically suffered and currently suffer forms of oppression expected to do?

[1:04:14] What do our city officials ask us to do? Ignoring. We're asked to ignore all the resources and assistance

[1:04:20] the city is providing to ensure that folks with values and direct conflict with the alleged

[1:04:25] progressive vision of the city, the self-styled capital of the resistance have in state sanctioned

[1:04:32] space in order to attack it. We're told that by allowing ourselves to be angered, to be

[1:04:36] upset by people who literally would celebrate our deaths and those of many of our loved ones

[1:04:41] and neighbors that were somehow playing into their hands or taking the base.

[1:04:46] People of color are continually expected to sacrifice their emotions, their hurt, their

[1:04:50] very humanity, and the service of white comfort which becomes abstracted out into the community

[1:04:55] at large under the label public order. We're continually asked to police ourselves when no

[1:05:00] such expectation is placed on white folks. Instead of being empowered to draw on righteous

[1:05:05] anger and indignation and injustice, we're told to be smaller, quieter, or even just quiet.

[1:05:11] This is a price we pay for inclusion in progressive visions of our communities to find through the lens of whiteness, the very loss of the very parts of ourselves that could be the most valuable and creating freer and more human communities.

[1:05:25] Any truly progressive city would not reject paying, playing that burden, placing that burden on oppressed folks.

[1:05:30] I ask that the series in the permit and reject the white supremacist foundation of this entire discussion that there's no such that there's such a thing as an acceptable amount of racist terror that folks of color simply have to live with in the interest of the status quo.

[1:05:59] Thank you.

[1:06:02] So those are the first ten 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.

[1:06:12] So the the system that we have everybody was chosen from among those as opposed to first first in line

[1:06:19] So that that's the system that we have now. We have the five slots that you sign up for

[1:06:24] First come first served before the meeting starting at 630 and that's Aaron Winson is next in those five slots

[1:06:30] I'm

[1:06:35] gonna share my time with AC Yarni

[1:06:37] Council

[1:06:45] win everyone

[1:06:47] My name is Beatrice AC Yarni. I am a Charlottesville resident

[1:06:51] And here this evening to make you aware that we need to go ahead and revoke this permit

[1:07:00] on August 12th.

[1:07:04] So I'm born and raised here, I was born and raised here in Charlottesville, also a UVA

[1:07:09] graduate, I have a Holden MSW from VCU and I love Charlottesville and I love that we have

[1:07:20] the African-American festival.

[1:07:21] I love that we have the Jefferson City Center

[1:07:24] doing good community education around just learning

[1:07:30] about African-American history,

[1:07:32] learning about where we come from

[1:07:33] and instilling pride within the African-American community.

[1:07:37] I will say that we have been quiet for a long time

[1:07:42] as black people in Charlottesville.

[1:07:45] The residents, we have been silent for a very long time and July 8th, upcoming August 12th.

[1:07:56] These are opportunities that we have never taken advantage of before.

[1:08:02] We have never taken advantage of those opportunities as black, homegrown, charlotteville residents.

[1:08:10] And we need to have the opportunity to speak.

[1:08:13] So, I do support showing up and saying something and being present and letting the alt-right CR faces.

[1:08:22] I also very much support revoking the permit in the first place.

[1:08:27] There is so much conversation that's happening around white supremacy and breaking down institutions, rebuilding them so that everyone is treated fairly.

[1:08:40] There is a lot of conversation happening around that.

[1:08:45] Often institutional racism, to me, looks like following the rules when it works out for the bad guy.

[1:08:54] And essentially that is what happened on July 8th.

[1:08:59] 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.

[1:09:10] Whereas, you know, this group comes and they can just apply for this permit just like that and have thousands of dollars be used to protect them.

[1:09:21] You know, it's baffling to me. I do agree the law and morality are not the same and that all of us do need to take a look at ourselves individually regarding the choices that we make.

[1:09:35] And when I say we, I'm talking about our city.

[1:09:39] Thank you.

[1:09:46] Samantha Pico.

[1:09:53] I'm Al Moral, County resident, and I will be sharing my time with Luke Karmes.

[1:09:57] Thank you.

[1:09:59] I have a

[1:10:02] lot of time.

[1:10:03] I'll get right to the point.

[1:10:05] As a veteran of two wars in a former member of the United States intelligence community,

[1:10:09] whose job it was to study tactics for a living, I know escalation of force procedures.

[1:10:13] 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.

[1:10:22] And that!

[1:10:25] On July 8th, there was no violence perpetrated on July 8th except by those in uniform.

[1:10:31] I watched a 60-year-old woman push to the ground or head slammed into the concrete.

[1:10:36] I saw a man on the ground with his hands behind his back picked in the face by an out-marked county sheriff's officer.

[1:10:42] I saw a capricious application of the law, choosing when to apply, when not to apply.

[1:10:49] The massive ordinances, the unlawful assembly.

[1:10:52] And you know what? I also know about ad hoc after-the-fact justifications for violence.

[1:10:58] Because frankly, I used to write them for the military.

[1:11:02] So when so-called leaders, so quickly and unquestioningly coalesce around these justifications

[1:11:10] for unwarranted police violence.

[1:11:13] Justifications that are so obviously false on their face

[1:11:17] that it's strange credibility that any thinking person

[1:11:20] could accept them.

[1:11:22] We're left with only a few conclusions.

[1:11:25] Either those leaders are guilty of collusion

[1:11:28] in these acts of violent repression,

[1:11:30] or they lack the power or the will to do anything about them,

[1:11:34] or they are incompetent.

[1:11:36] But the problem is, no matter which of these is true,

[1:11:39] It is the residents of Charlottesville that suffer because of it.

[1:11:45] So all of this forces me to ask who were the police protecting that day

[1:11:50] and who are you council members and Mr. City Manager protecting right now

[1:11:56] and who will you choose to protect on August 12th when we do this all over again?

[1:12:03] You don't get to grandstand about being the capital of the resistance

[1:12:09] Well, licking the boots of those who are actively trying to touch that resistance.

[1:12:15] The world is changing, with or without you, and this city, this city is rising up.

[1:12:22] With shoulder to shoulder, with clenched fists of all colors and creeds raised together

[1:12:28] in resistance against those systems, which seek to keep us divided.

[1:12:34] 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.

[1:12:52] Revoke the permit, demilitarize the police, and drop the charges.

[1:13:15] That's me. I'm a city resident, and I'd like to share my time with Sarah Bricken.

[1:13:20] Here's

[1:13:24] of August 12th's Unite the Right Rally and local white nationalists want you to believe

[1:13:29] that their rally is about freedom of speech. They will argue that rescinding the permit for the 12th

[1:13:34] is a blow against free speech, the first amendment, and against the ideals that this country supposedly stands for.

[1:13:40] 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.

[1:13:56] 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.

[1:14:09] defending and protecting their racist rhetoric

[1:14:11] long past the end of their issued permit

[1:14:14] and then turning violent, deploying chemical weapons

[1:14:18] and arrests at random on a grieving community

[1:14:22] who were in turn expressing our right to freedom of speech.

[1:14:27] Freedom of speech means nothing without the freedom to assemble

[1:14:32] and this city's decision to protect hate speech

[1:14:36] and racism, while physically assaulting peaceful protesters there to represent and protect

[1:14:42] our community from the very same, shows that your loyalty to freedom of speech is nothing

[1:14:48] more than an empty promise. The KKK came to Charlottesville because they not only expected

[1:14:55] but knew that the police force and the city government would do nothing to-

[1:15:00] 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 and extension in permitting that permit to

[1:15:30] private use of a public park and a cadre of police with military grade weaponry

[1:15:37] there to snuff out any opposition to their views. Furthermore, some speech is

[1:15:44] violent, not rhetorically but in the very real and very long term effects it has

[1:15:51] on the mental health of the citizens of this community, particularly black people

[1:15:56] and people of color. To believe that the organizers of the August 12th rally want only to air

[1:16:01] their views and be part of a robust debate on the state of America is not only naive but dangerous.

[1:16:09] Organizers of the August 12th rally have a long record of physical violence, intimidation,

[1:16:15] stalking, and terror campaigns against Charlottesville and communities nationwide.

[1:16:20] If Charlottesville truly wants to call itself the capital of the resistance,

[1:16:24] and it has to begin by resisting the false narrative

[1:16:27] as white supremacists want you to buy into.

[1:16:29] Thank you.

[1:16:30] Thank you.

[1:16:31] Thank you.

[1:16:32] It's a pleasure.

[1:16:33] Thank you.

[1:16:33] Well, time comes.

[1:16:34] Political status.

[1:16:35] Come on.

[1:16:35] We got it.

[1:16:36] Come on.

[1:16:37] This is unfair to others.

[1:16:41] Are you done?

[1:16:42] This is unfair to others.

[1:16:43] No.

[1:16:44] It's not fair to others, ma'am.

[1:16:46] Seriously.

[1:16:48] Or be written in history as a puppet.

[1:16:51] It's this action.

[1:16:52] Welcome to white supremacists.

[1:16:52] Thank you.

[1:17:00] I

[1:17:06] live here. Drop the charges or send the permits. I watched an elder in our community get

[1:17:10] gassed and buy her in tax dollars.

[1:17:20] What's your name?

[1:17:22] I'm not giving you any money.

[1:17:24] Okay.

[1:17:24] 1700

[1:17:28] days. 1700 days since Sage Smith was last seen. Where is Sage Smith? Number

[1:17:38] one.

[1:17:44] Number two.

[1:17:46] Somebody knows me as the call-out queen. It is taking everything

[1:17:51] in me right now not to call you out Mr. Mike Signeur.

[1:17:57] Today I will do

[1:17:58] something different. I will give my account of being gruelized by the police and I

[1:18:04] I'd like to start off with saying that this instance is reality for black residents and

[1:18:09] it is only my white privilege, the reason why I did not get arrested on Saturday.

[1:18:19] After the clan had left, people made their way to an alley in which a charter bus supposedly

[1:18:23] for the clan was waiting for members to get on.

[1:18:26] There were military-grade humbys and state police and military gear carrying what looked like

[1:18:30] assault rifles.

[1:18:32] The police threatened to arrest us if we did not disperse.

[1:18:35] So the majority of us walked up the alley away from the bus.

[1:18:39] As we were walking out of the alley, one woman was randomly and swiftly grabbed and

[1:18:44] clothed a black woman.

[1:18:46] A number of us had a visceral reaction to what was necessary arrest.

[1:18:51] And so we started yelling at the officers to let her go.

[1:18:53] The officers were starting to lead her down a ramp connected to the domestic and juvenile

[1:18:58] court.

[1:18:59] So some folks decided to do an action so the officer could not take her away.

[1:19:03] I joined the action, but I was quickly picked off by an officer.

[1:19:07] I was pulled up by an officer and thrown to the ground back first.

[1:19:11] I was then accosted by an officer to get up and was helped by someone.

[1:19:16] I was then thrusted back into the fray and watched as officers assaulted

[1:19:19] and tried to arrest my comrades.

[1:19:22] My friends stood their ground and police were getting increasingly upset

[1:19:25] until completely escalated and an officer pulled out what looks like a assault rifle

[1:19:30] and pointed it at one of our comrades head.

[1:19:35] The crowd ran strongly to that pushing my comrade

[1:19:39] towards the police officer.

[1:19:41] The police grabbed me in an attempt to remove me

[1:19:44] from the situation, threw me to the ground on my knees.

[1:19:47] I was luckily picked up by a fellow comrade,

[1:19:50] but immediately proceeded to have a panic attack.

[1:19:53] Minics pulled me out and laid me on the ground,

[1:19:55] took my blood pressure and pulse,

[1:19:56] and they were extremely high levels.

[1:19:58] They attended to me for a couple of minutes

[1:20:00] and warned that they had to move because the police were planning to violently disperse us.

[1:20:04] We could not move because the medics were concerned about my blood pressure

[1:20:08] and within seconds, no, no, no, no.

[1:20:10] Thank you. Yes, ma'am. No. Listen, ma'am.

[1:20:13] You violated her rules. Listen, listen, listen.

[1:20:15] No, we're going to read it. We got it. Sorry, we got to escort you out.

[1:20:19] We're going to have to escort you out. We have to move out.

[1:20:22] We have rules. We have rules.

[1:20:36] We will read your statement. I think that it's art. 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 it three minutes.

[1:20:48] Everybody else kept it three minutes.

[1:21:00] How much longer will it take? How much longer will it take? Can you do it in one minute?

[1:21:05] Okay, all right.

[1:21:07] Of

[1:21:13] domestic violence,

[1:21:14] I was in a relationship for two years,

[1:21:17] and now I have complex post-traumatic stress disorder

[1:21:19] every day since then I wake up from nightmares

[1:21:23] in which my ex and an officer are planning to kill me.

[1:21:28] Look at me, my signal.

[1:21:30] You let this happen. Chief Thomas let this happen.

[1:21:33] You did this.

[1:21:34] You did this to our community.

[1:21:37] But guess what? We are stronger than you.

[1:21:39] We are stronger than the institutions that you protect because we are a community

[1:21:43] because

[1:21:52] my community protects me and I protect them and it is a shame of what

[1:21:57] you let happen on Saturday.

[1:22:08] James Pearl. James Pearl Law.

[1:22:13] I'm the show that's a little resident and I'm sitting my time to Emily.

[1:22:19] Thank you. My name is Emily Gorsonsky. I'm a resident of the city.

[1:22:27] With

[1:22:27] due respect to the short staff of the city council I understand that there is

[1:22:32] a lot of work to do so we have done that for you.

[1:22:38] Threats of violence from the organizers and people affiliated with the organizers have

[1:22:42] been rampant and Section 3.4.5B of the city's special event regulations grant grounds to

[1:22:51] revoke a permit if there is a clear and present threat to public safety.

[1:22:55] So what I would like to do is read to you some of these threats which have been obtained

[1:23:00] from both private and public communications, all obtained with consent.

[1:23:05] These threats include threats against the city council, including each of its members.

[1:23:11] Specifically against Mr. Bellamy, they think that you're drunk on power, by the way.

[1:23:16] And these threats include incitements not against just people from the left,

[1:23:30] but

[1:23:30] somebody says, the point of all of this is to lure Mr. Bellamy to the park and get

[1:23:34] him to do something stupid so we can get him removed.

[1:23:38] Now, I trust that you have the better part of discretion, so we won't worry about that.

[1:23:43] But later in this conversation and speaking about Richard Spencer, the headliner of this event,

[1:23:49] this individual affiliated with the individual organizing the event says, I hate it and

[1:23:55] And I'd love to turn flank and beat the bleep out of him after we finish with the leftists.

[1:24:05] In another post, this individual says, I can assure you there will be beatings at the

[1:24:11] August event.

[1:24:18] In advertising the event, they're calling for all able men and women ready to fight.

[1:24:27] On the daily storm, which is a neo-Nazi site, they're advertising this event gleefully.

[1:24:34] 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.

[1:24:51] I censored the square there.

[1:24:53] There,

[1:24:55] Daily Stormer also suggests that they need military members to crack the skulls

[1:25:00] of black people.

[1:25:06] Mr. Kessler stood in front of the police department with a private security force.

[1:25:11] That security force is a violent biker gang that prides themselves on their ability to break

[1:25:18] the law and commit violence.

[1:25:19] We must revoke the permit.

[1:25:21] Thank you.

[1:25:26] Thank you.

[1:25:29] Okay.

[1:25:33] Thank you, everyone, and for anybody who wants to stay after it, we have another public

[1:25:38] comment period after the meeting includes.

[1:25:41] Yes, of course, I just like to say I was, I don't know, maybe I've been asleep, but

[1:25:48] definitely working up tonight because the comments that I heard, especially from this young

[1:25:53] brother right here, I consider myself to be one who likes to stand up, who likes to stand

[1:26:02] out, but the way you eloquently described much of what I've been feeling and much of what

[1:26:07] But many people have been feeling was absolutely brilliant.

[1:26:10] And I think many of you are absolutely right, laws do not supersede morality.

[1:26:17] And oftentimes, those laws that have been put in place were to keep people who look like myself and others behind.

[1:26:23] And because these laws were made, essentially, we oftentimes are told that we must either ignore something.

[1:26:31] We need to turn the other cheek, or we need to look at a different way of not responding.

[1:26:35] And I just think that's completely BS and at this point, we have to look at doing something.

[1:26:43] I think it's also really important for us to take note of what Ms. Mary-Barr stated.

[1:26:49] And I would like to request to our city manager and staff to, as well as our police chief,

[1:26:56] Chief Thomas, who I love like a brother, but I do think that the citizens here,

[1:27:00] where they do deserve a response or an explanation of some of the things that transpire.

[1:27:06] We can't just simply ignore or act as if all of these accounts are by quote unquote crazy

[1:27:14] people who are just making this stuff up.

[1:27:16] There's no way that all of these people can feel this way, come out and say these things

[1:27:22] with such force.

[1:27:24] Some of this has to be true in some shape form of fashion.

[1:27:29] And we can't act as if none of it is true or that all of these people are making this stuff up.

[1:27:34] So I'd like to request the following, Ms. Bauer touched on this and I'd just like to reiterate it.

[1:27:40] She said in her statement, we asked that, excuse me, we asked the city to acknowledge that the choice to use tactics instead of planning for de-escalation is consistent with Charlotte's

[1:27:50] those values in good policing and to conduct an independent investigation into law enforcement's actions on July 8th.

[1:27:57] That inquiry should address at least the following questions.

[1:28:01] Why who requested the Virginia State Police, so I think the citizens they deserve to know that.

[1:28:07] On what terms were they requested?

[1:28:09] What conversation was there about the show of force requested?

[1:28:12] Secondly, whose police officers were dressed in riot gear, and why were those officers sent to the area?

[1:28:18] who declared Saturday's counter-process an unlawfully assembly, and why?

[1:28:23] What factors about the counter-process warranted this declaration?

[1:28:27] Who ordered the deployment of tear gas and what was the reason for that decision?

[1:28:32] And then lastly, I think her point is also something that we have to a certain extent.

[1:28:37] Longer term, we accept the city established a permanent civilian review board for the Charlottesville Police Department, and I think currently, we have something similar with the

[1:28:46] 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.

[1:28:56] And I don't think this means that we're 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.

[1:29:08] I cannot, thank you, but please let me finish.

[1:29:12] I cannot sit here in good moral standing.

[1:29:14] And this may make some people not like me,

[1:29:17] but there's enough of those people anyway.

[1:29:19] But I can't sit here in good moral standing

[1:29:21] and just pretend as if all of these people

[1:29:24] are saying the same thing with video accounts

[1:29:27] over and over again are not telling the truth.

[1:29:31] I also have spoken to several police officers who

[1:29:33] told me African-American police officers at that

[1:29:36] that who told me how uncomfortable they felt

[1:29:38] during that time as well as people saying things to them

[1:29:41] as if they are just there to protect the KKK

[1:29:44] or people throwing stuff at them

[1:29:45] and people spitting on them.

[1:29:47] So I think it's both sides.

[1:29:48] There's time for healing.

[1:29:50] And while those officers are absolutely empathized

[1:29:52] with not only the African-American police officers,

[1:29:54] but all of them, I do believe that our citizens

[1:29:58] deserve to have answers to these questions.

[1:30:00] So, Mr. Jones, if we can, I would like to, again, request to answer 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 a right to feel safe. These idiots who have come in 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.

[1:30:29] 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, we will resist and we will be prepared.

[1:30:39] Thank you.

[1:30:46] Okay. Any other responses?

[1:30:49] I want to hear what Mr. Jones has to say.

[1:30:51] Sure.

[1:30:52] I think we're ready to.

[1:30:53] Sure. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of council.

[1:30:56] I just wanted to take a few minutes to talk about the events of July 8th.

[1:30:58] And before then, I'd like to talk a little bit about free speech, right?

[1:31:02] There were a lot of comments this evening that the City of Charlottesville, the police,

[1:31:06] were protecting the speech of the folks from the KKK.

[1:31:11] They were not.

[1:31:12] They were protecting their right to speak in our country.

[1:31:15] And time and time again, the U.S. Supreme Court has said that people have the right to speak,

[1:31:21] even if it's as terrible as the speech we heard coming from the KKK on July 8th.

[1:31:28] In fact, there have been numerous cases in which the Supreme Court has ruled on that,

[1:31:32] including the Nazi Party versus Skokie, Illinois in 1978.

[1:31:38] And you know who defended the Nazi Party in 1978?

[1:31:42] The ACLU defended the Nazi Party and defended their right to say the awful terrible things that they were saying.

[1:31:51] The law that we have in place to protect our free speech,

[1:31:55] protected African-Americans eventually, in our communities, and allowed them to speak.

[1:32:01] Right, right?

[1:32:03] Mr. Jones finished, honestly, we've got to be so-

[1:32:05] You don't understand history, if you don't understand, that those were the same laws

[1:32:10] that Dr. King used to help African-Americans, to help us, us, gain the rights that we have

[1:32:17] in our country today.

[1:32:19] That's why those laws were used.

[1:32:22] schools. They were used to allow us to speak. They allowed Dr. King and hundreds of thousands

[1:32:29] of people to congregate in 1963 on the National Mall. That's what was used because the

[1:32:37] people who before then and the South, what they did was they tried to use the same types

[1:32:44] of tactics that are being talked about tonight to defy us that right to speak. They did that

[1:32:51] time and time again and they got away with it, right?

[1:32:56] So we're not going to let that happen, we are not defending the speech, we are defending their right to speak.

[1:33:07] So, that's why you can disagree, that's fine, hey, that's the great part about America, you can disagree with me.

[1:33:14] So the Charlottesville Police Department spent a significant amount of time preparing for the rally of Justice Park.

[1:33:20] from the beginning of the, let's let's let everyone please, from the beginning the department was committed to protecting the safety of everyone in that park.

[1:33:31] Everyone in that park, that's why there were barriers that were set up to protect everyone who came to that park.

[1:33:37] They worked closely with our regional partners, but you don't really want to answer that, right?

[1:33:42] If you leave and you don't want to answer it.

[1:33:44] They were closely with our regional partners in the Virginia State Police.

[1:33:48] 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 Park Park, and the Sprint Pavilion.

[1:33:59] Hundreds of people attended those activities in an effort to celebrate our diversity and

[1:34:03] to send a powerful message to members of the KKK who came to Charlottesville to preach hate and intolerance.

[1:34:09] As the day wore on most of the attention was centered on Justice Park, a lively and largely

[1:34:16] peaceful crowd began gathering in the park at noon, and they began to voice their opinions

[1:34:22] about the KKKK, and their opinions about other issues related to race in our community

[1:34:28] and around the country.

[1:34:30] And that crowd grew in size over the next couple of hours.

[1:34:38] I do not interrupt your eloquence speech, I ask that you do the same for me, thank you.

[1:34:47] During the due to the increasing size of the counter-processed crowd, additional Charlottesville police and Virginia State Police resources were brought out to the park site.

[1:34:57] The purpose of the additional resources was to secure access to the park and ensure the safety of all the parties in attendance.

[1:35:04] We had to delay the arrival of the KKK because of the blocked entrance to the park.

[1:35:10] 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.

[1:35:20] The officers escorted the KKK members into the permitted area at around 345.

[1:35:25] Although the KKK have been granted an hour on their permit, police ordered them to discontinue their rally into part, a little more than 30 minutes after they began their rally.

[1:35:34] The members of the KKK complied, and with the assistance of the Charles Police Department and Virginia State Police, they left the park at approximately 425, and they made their way to their vehicles in the parking garage behind the juvenile domestic relations court.

[1:35:49] There was not a chartered bus.

[1:35:51] The two buses that were there were to help bring state police to the downtown area.

[1:35:57] They were not used for the KKK or chartered for the KKK.

[1:36:01] A large number of people approximately 200 followed the KKK and

[1:36:05] large law enforcement to that garage.

[1:36:08] And they proceeded to impede the exit of the KKK members from the garage.

[1:36:13] Despite being advised to clear the street, the assembled crowd refused and at least several items were thrown at police officers.

[1:36:21] 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.

[1:36:29] Additional officers responded to the location to clear the road and the garage driveway of the protesters so the KKK members could take their hate and leave our city.

[1:36:38] The law enforcement response was to open the road and to prevent any protesters from being injured by the exiting vehicles.

[1:36:47] Soon after the KKK members exited to garage and law enforcement officers were told to stand down and they began walking back to the park.

[1:36:57] A large number of the crowd did not disperse but instead grew more aggressive towards law enforcement both verbally and physically as they made their way to high school.

[1:37:06] All right, I just want to, we need to get, we need to proceed through this, we need to be civil, if we can't do it, we're going to have to spend the meeting, I want everybody wants to hear this, then we can ask, yes, so was I, so was I, we just had a lot of folks be able to share their views, let's let Mr. Jones finishes.

[1:37:30] because 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.

[1:37:42] 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.

[1:37:51] As they felt that was the most effective, non-physical, non-violent means of dispersion of the crowd.

[1:38:05] Okay, guys, let's see, okay, everybody who is shouting for the floor is under our rules

[1:38:12] out of order, everybody's been called to order, I have to do this, I'm sorry, I don't

[1:38:15] enjoy this, but we're going to get through the remarks, we're going to move through our

[1:38:20] meeting, let nobody was shouted down while they were doing their three minutes up here,

[1:38:25] So let's let Mr. Jones speak, please.

[1:38:29] And neither am I.

[1:38:33] So the alternative was for folks to physically police officers to physically put their hands on folks and asking them to leave and possibly arresting them and possibly arresting them.

[1:38:47] All right, Ms. Walker, you've been called to order, you're going to have to be removed, okay, you're going to have to, you don't want to be removed, but you've been called to order, you've been called to order, you're going to have to be removed.

[1:38:59] Okay, and this is going to suck.

[1:39:02] Okay, officer, officer, we've got to look,

[1:39:10] gentlemen, we're going to have to ask for that.

[1:39:14] So I'm just going to re-read.

[1:39:16] Any speaker of violence rules be called ordered by the mayor.

[1:39:19] If their marks are chronic, persist, mayor shall order the speaker to see speaking be seated.

[1:39:22] If the order is not heated, mayor shall direct the sergeant in arms to escort the individual from meeting room.

[1:39:27] That's what we're going to have to do to get through this.

[1:39:29] Yes, sorry, these are the rules that we have to get to proceed through the meeting.

[1:39:35] So, we've been called to order and a couple other folks.

[1:39:38] 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.

[1:39:51] At that point when there are 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 disperse, and the police returned to the park.

[1:40:13] To point the

[1:40:18] gas,

[1:40:23] deployment of the gas prevented physical confrontations with the protesters.

[1:40:27] No one from the city or the Virginia State Police came into the day with a goal of using,

[1:40:43] let's wait Mr. Jones, let's wait about 60 seconds, we need everybody who is leaving, we're just going to suspend the meeting for about a minute.

[1:40:52] Well people leave,

[1:40:58] Ms. Rice, can you, we're suspending, we're suspending for five minutes.

[1:41:03] Let's, let's suspend for five minutes. Okay, you can smoke, sir.

[1:41:08] Go outside clearing out.

[1:41:29] We're taking a break for five minutes.

[1:41:32] Restart at quarter-tail.

[1:51:30] The rules apply. Don't want to stop meeting again. We can get through this, the civility, and with some process we still have a lot of items ahead of us, too, on the agenda for tonight. But Mr. Jones, if you could back up maybe a paragraph or two before you interrupt it, I would appreciate that. Sure. And one of the things I would like folks in the audience who are watching on television to know that if there were individual issues that were brought up this evening,

[1:52:00] about ways that individuals were treated as part of this.

[1:52:04] They can file complaints with the city about those individual complaints, and those will be investigated.

[1:52:11] So there is a process by which we investigate those things, and so they should look into that and

[1:52:17] provide some background on them, fill out a complaint against the city that we can review.

[1:52:22] So, as I was saying, that there were numerous requests for the crowd to disperse on 4th Street and also on high Street.

[1:52:35] The police officers were concerned that this was starting to escalate again.

[1:52:40] 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.

[1:52:49] No one from the city or the Virginia State Police came into the day with a goal of using the chemical irritant.

[1:52:55] It was only used to help disperse a group of folks who had been asked numerous times to leave the immediate area.

[1:53:02] After hours of protest, that began around noon.

[1:53:07] Despite some of the criticism that we've been receiving during the last week or so,

[1:53:11] I believe our police officers did an impressive job in exceptionally difficult circumstances.

[1:53:15] We had over 1,000 people in and around Justice Park, passions were running high, and only

[1:53:22] three people suffered injuries that warranted trips to the hospital, two were heat related,

[1:53:27] and the other for alcohol.

[1:53:29] There were only 22 arrests that were made on that day, the great majority of which were

[1:53:33] misdemeanor charges.

[1:53:35] I credit most of our residents who came out to the park that day for making it a safe

[1:53:40] event and for standing up to the hate of the KKK.

[1:53:43] 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 safety that day.

[1:53:53] 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.

[1:54:01] And as I said before, if we have a significant concern about individuals who are affected that day, they can bring that complaint to the police department and to the city.

[1:54:13] We prefer the review and we will take a look at it.

[1:54:17] The chief is looking at all of the video evidence from that day that we have pulled together

[1:54:23] reports that have been pulled together and he will compile that into a report that will

[1:54:28] come to the City Council for future consideration.

[1:54:32] And with that, Mr. Mayor and Council, I'll answer any questions that you may have.

[1:54:39] Thank you, Mr. Jones.

[1:54:40] I do have a question, which is, if you could help explain the context of the decision to

[1:54:49] use what's called riot gear, it would be helpful, I think, to us in the public.

[1:54:54] If I was in the park for a good portion of the afternoon, and if you walked in that park

[1:55:00] and tell about 335 or 340, the only office you saw were in uniforms.

[1:55:10] The first time you saw anybody in the right gear in the park was when they brought the KKKM and that was because they had to form a line to bring them in because they were blocked from entering the park.

[1:55:22] The other time that the next time you saw a significant number of officers in right gear was when the crowd had gone down and was blocking the exit for the KKK.

[1:55:34] Okay, we had purposely staged the officers in right gear away from the park.

[1:55:40] We did not want anybody in right gear in that park.

[1:55:43] That's why most of the officers were in that park were in their uniforms because that's

[1:55:47] not what we wanted to, the message that we wanted to send to folks there.

[1:55:51] And if you were there in the hours beforehand, you didn't see someone in right gear.

[1:55:55] It wasn't until the police felt that they were overwhelmed with trying to clear that line

[1:56:01] line on to get into the park that they brought out some officers in right here and then you

[1:56:06] saw the majority of the officers in right here from the state police came out on 4th

[1:56:10] street to clear that area so that the cars could get out and we could send the KKK back

[1:56:16] to North Carolina. But the goal was never to see anybody in right here. They were just

[1:56:22] staged just in case they were needed and unfortunately they were needed to help clear those areas.

[1:56:26] Yes.

[1:56:33] Are there colleagues, 70 questions for Mr. Jones?

[1:56:39] And the questions that Vice Mayor Bellamy brought up earlier are questions that can be addressed

[1:56:44] in the more in-depth and the chiefs report to the City Council.

[1:56:48] Yeah.

[1:56:49] I just think the public deserves the right to answer those questions and I'm glad that

[1:56:53] Chief Thomas will be willing to address those issues in hours of sex and I know he's prepared

[1:56:59] to do so.

[1:57:00] Thank you.

[1:57:02] Yeah, I just want to underscore that I'm sure that the whole council is in agreement that we do want a thorough investigation.

[1:57:09] At the same time, we really appreciate thorough representation just now.

[1:57:13] So thank you.

[1:57:14] You're welcome.

[1:57:16] And I would add on to that, too.

[1:57:18] I think that Mr. Bellamy, I would double everything you said.

[1:57:22] And I think that all these questions that pertain to concerns about the choices, I mean, this is in the vein of an investigation.

[1:57:29] So I think a report slash a very thorough inquiry that's critical based on the feedback

[1:57:35] you've heard from Council and from the citizens I think is essential.

[1:57:38] One of the things I've been struck by in so many of the, I mean there's a lot of anger

[1:57:43] and frustration but a really striking percentage of the comments have been forward-looking with

[1:57:49] people thinking about what do we learn from this for future practice and I think that that

[1:57:57] certainly is resonating loudly and clearly for me and I think that in the vein of listening

[1:58:03] and learning that the report should address all the questions before.

[1:58:08] And Mr. Mayor, I'd also like to address the issue of the permit for the August 12th event.

[1:58:16] The city is not in a position to say that folks cannot come and demonstrate.

[1:58:21] 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 of it, and assess the concerns about that.

[1:58:35] 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.

[1:58:46] Once again, getting back to the Supreme Court rulings,

[1:58:50] you cannot base it on the content of the speech.

[1:58:54] As awful as that speech may be, you cannot do that.

[1:58:58] And the Supreme Court has said over and over again

[1:59:00] that we do not have a power as a municipality to do that.

[1:59:06] Okay, thank you.

[1:59:07] And Miss Robertson, if I've said anything that's inaccurate,

[1:59:11] I'm not practicing attorney, then you can correct me.

[1:59:13] No, that's accurate.

[1:59:14] and in the ACLU letter that you received, which was primarily to address the questions

[1:59:22] about the police conduct, there's a statement to that effect in the ACLU's letter.

[1:59:31] Okay.

[1:59:31] So a lot more to come from the city.

[1:59:35] Okay.

[1:59:37] We're in okay down there.

[1:59:40] Okay.

[1:59:41] All right.

[1:59:41] So we now have, well, we're at 9 o'clock break.

[1:59:46] We can usually take a break.

[1:59:47] but I think we will. We have taken that break. I'm going to. Is everyone okay with that?

[1:59:50] Yeah. Tellings? Absolutely. Okay. All right. We're going to move on to our consent agenda.

[1:59:56] Ms. Rice, would you mind reading it? Item A.

[2:00:00] For July 5th, 2017, item B, appropriation, strategic, investment area, form-based code, $228,000, second of two readings. Item C, in appropriation, 2017, 2018, community development, block grant, $430,000, $316.31, first of two readings. Item D, in appropriation, 2017, 2018, home funds, $9,748.69, first of two readings. Item A, in appropriation, home investment partnerships, program, $3,214,000,

[2:00:30] first of two readings. Item F, an appropriation, amendment to community development block grant account, first of two readings.

[2:00:36] Item G, a resolution authorizing revenue bond issue for Jefferson Scholars Foundation, first of one reading.

[2:00:43] Item H, a resolution refund of tax payment to county waste LLC, first of one reading.

[2:00:48] Item I, a resolution refund of tax payment to Wells Fargo Equipment Finance Inc, first of one reading.

[2:00:53] Item J, a resolution refund of tax payment to PNC Equipment Finance LLC, first of one

[2:00:59] reading.

[2:01:00] Item K, an ordinance, quick claim to V.Fontana and Highland Ridge subdivision, second of

[2:01:04] two readings.

[2:01:05] Item L, an ordinance approval of sale, bail or lane lot, second of two readings.

[2:01:09] Item M, an ordinance, King Street Resoning Application, second of two readings.

[2:01:13] And item N, an ordinance parking ordinance changes, second of two readings.

[2:01:19] comments on to be the strategic investment area for base code I think it's

[2:01:26] premature to be writing this code before we have completed the review of the

[2:01:32] comprehensive plan and the vision statement and and the parking ordinance

[2:01:38] changes as far as the concerns what I consider a burden on the workers and

[2:01:46] the businesses and the shoppers downtown, so other than that, I will support that.

[2:01:51] The consent agenda.

[2:01:56] Okay. Thank you, Ms. Femmeick.

[2:01:59] Is there a motion to approve the-

[2:02:00] I move that we adopt the consent agenda.

[2:02:03] Second.

[2:02:04] Second.

[2:02:05] Okay.

[2:02:06] I need further discussion.

[2:02:07] All in favor?

[2:02:10] Carries 4-0.

[2:02:11] Thank you.

[2:02:12] Moving on to item number two, this is a- we have a- we have a public hearing on this matter.

[2:02:19] It's a Charlottesville Fire Department and Charlottesville Almarque Rescue Squad, Emergency Medical Services System Improvement Strategy and Cost Recovery Program, Chief Andrew Baxter, Fire Chief or Charlottesville Fire Department will be presenting.

[2:02:32] We have 15 minutes allocated here. We do have a public hearing because the nature of this matter, we do not, however, have a vote.

[2:02:38] So we will we will just be hearing presentation new questions from council and then have a public hearing if anybody would like to speak on this cost recovery item

[2:02:46] There's a public hearing sheet that's at the front here. I don't see anybody signed up on it right now

[2:02:50] But please do come down. We'd like to speak. I think the baby wants to speak. He's just naked. We love well

[2:02:56] We all want to hold that baby

[2:03:01] Some hurts a job

[2:03:03] All right

[2:03:04] Mr. Mayor, did you want me to go over the presentation that we did last time again or no, I don't think so, I think we're okay, we're just

[2:03:11] So thank you for your time this evening just a brief introduction. Ms. Jim Leeville

[2:03:17] President of the Board of Directors of the Shalsvah Maresky Squad and also in the back

[2:03:22] Mr. Alex Belgaard Chief of the Shalsvah Maresky Squad are also here as well as Oliver

[2:03:29] So we're here tonight's talk again

[2:03:31] Again, just as a reminder, we did a work session in June and reviewed our strategy.

[2:03:37] We came together almost a year ago to develop a vision for an effective EMS transport system

[2:03:45] for the City of Charlottesville.

[2:03:47] Our goals are to provide consistent effective delivery of a high performance EMS system while

[2:03:52] at the same time supporting a very robust combination, career, and volunteer EMS transport system

[2:03:58] providing for the health and safety of our responders in this all hazards

[2:04:02] environment. A lot of collaboration went into this plan, city staff, cars,

[2:04:07] volunteers, members of the Charlottesville Fire Department. We established

[2:04:11] performance benchmarks for the system, developed an EMS improvement strategy.

[2:04:16] This supports a regional vision. We've briefed council in a series of 2-2-1

[2:04:21] briefings and then in our June work session. Other city staff have been

[2:04:25] involved in developing this plan as well, including budget finance, communications and

[2:04:30] information technology folks.

[2:04:32] Some very recent developments just in the last few years, Admiral County Fire Rescue

[2:04:37] was providing a daytime firefighter medic staffing support to cars as late as 2013, 2014, City

[2:04:44] Council approved an ordinance but never passed a resolution establishing a fee schedule.

[2:04:51] Also in 2014, so just over three years ago, now June of 2014, Charlottesville Fire started

[2:04:57] providing daytime firefighter medic support to the rescue squad.

[2:05:03] The major component, I think of interest to people as part of this strategy is instituting

[2:05:08] an EMS cost recovery program, or in layman's terms, billing for ambulance transport.

[2:05:14] This will be an insurance only billing program, Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance would

[2:05:19] be bill, there's no bill for city residents, no charge for a non-transport, no denial

[2:05:26] of service for any inability to pay, and no resident would ever be referred to a collections

[2:05:32] agency for inability to pay, that's what's known as a compassionate care model. Just to give

[2:05:39] you some perspective and for our community, there are 38 independent cities in the Commonwealth,

[2:05:45] 37 of them have some form of EMS billing were the outlier right now.

[2:05:51] Five of six jurisdictions in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District has some form of EMS billing.

[2:05:56] 80% of Virginians live in communities with some form of EMS billing.

[2:06:01] And 85% of Americans live in a community with some form of EMS billing.

[2:06:06] Our projected revenue, we're looking at approximately $720,000.

[2:06:11] 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 in revenue.

[2:06:25] 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.

[2:06:38] Well, again, the emphasis is on ultimately building a regional system.

[2:06:43] So the question then is what do we do with the revenue?

[2:06:46] What's the intention of using that revenue for?

[2:06:49] A critical component of this is providing a consistent funding stream for cars, operations,

[2:06:55] and I'll just let Jim talk for a moment if you would please about where you are with your budget and what this money goes for.

[2:07:01] Sure, so our operating budget is right around a million dollars per year, slightly under.

[2:07:06] where right now our charitable giving is coming in around 200,000, which is a substantial gap from where we need to be

[2:07:13] for operations alone not to include capital funding.

[2:07:16] So we see this as a vital piece of being able to remain an organization that provides the MS service in the community.

[2:07:26] And just as a reminder, cars since 1960 has been providing this primary public safety service.

[2:07:33] And as a sidebar, it's where I got my start in emergency services.

[2:07:38] So the rest of that revenue would go for additional staffing for Charlottesville Firefighter

[2:07:43] Medics on a 12-hour daytime unit, a peak activity unit, and on a 24-hour unit running out

[2:07:48] of the Fontaine Avenue Fire Station, and then also we would need to hire a civilian EMS

[2:07:54] billing specialist.

[2:07:55] This is a very complex, very detailed task, and we need a specialist in order to help us

[2:07:59] do that effectively.

[2:08:01] 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.

[2:08:15] So we're obviously available to answer any questions from council or from the community.

[2:08:26] on the future? Thank you. Yes sir. Of cars. Is this going to be, is this what the future

[2:08:32] looks like? Are they going to survive or what's down the road for cars? Go ahead. I have an opinion.

[2:08:44] Absolutely. I think this is just us getting in line with what everyone else is doing to remain a viable organization

[2:08:49] that's something that we've talked about on and off for the last 10 years in different constructs.

[2:08:53] the current proposal kind of brings together I think the best of what both of our agencies

[2:08:57] have to offer in a way that's truly collaborative and so it just absolutely makes sense right

[2:09:03] now to move forward with this.

[2:09:05] I understand that but I'll start, I meant the money part of it.

[2:09:09] So is the gap, I would think the gap is not going to close anytime soon.

[2:09:14] I think if we start billing for services it absolutely will, that's what's going to make

[2:09:17] up the majority of our operating budget that's not currently covered as well as moving forward

[2:09:22] in the county with the same standards.

[2:09:27] 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.

[2:09:40] As I've said to our cars 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.

[2:09:54] service because they're salaries are zero because they're volunteers.

[2:09:58] That said, the system is busy enough now and will continue to get busier and provide

[2:10:04] opportunities to demand more funding for training and for equipment.

[2:10:08] It's a very, very sophisticated service now and that will require an input of public dollars

[2:10:13] and over the long term.

[2:10:16] Just as a quick background for the public in general, they used to be rescue squad.

[2:10:21] they would bring on med students, nursing school, medical school, and basically just pick

[2:10:32] people off the street and put them in the back of the ambulance and take them to the hospital.

[2:10:37] So if anybody out in the community wants to get some better idea of how those vehicles

[2:10:43] are really rolling operating rooms, please look at one of these community events where

[2:10:49] the rescue squad brings their vehicles. It is truly amazing what they can do in these vehicles,

[2:10:55] so thank you. Better yet come do a ride along and join cars. I just

[2:11:04] have a comment,

[2:11:05] Mr. Mayor. I just want to applaud you for the thoroughness of this review and the assessment

[2:11:11] that you've made of the situation. You've given us a plan and not only you've given us a plan,

[2:11:17] and you've given us all the tools from the MOU,

[2:11:21] to the resolution, and then to a fact sheet

[2:11:24] that is really important for the community to understand

[2:11:27] is a very thorough, comprehensive package

[2:11:30] that actually, quite frankly, makes our decision making

[2:11:34] quite efficient.

[2:11:35] I appreciate it very, very much.

[2:11:37] So the content is much appreciated,

[2:11:39] but also the thoroughness and the delivery

[2:11:42] of the final product to us tonight

[2:11:44] is extremely appreciated.

[2:11:46] Okay, well thank you.

[2:11:53] Okay, I want to second on that.

[2:11:57] Right, yeah, yeah.

[2:11:58] Thank you also very, very careful.

[2:12:00] And I know this conversation began early

[2:12:01] and it was really important to do it.

[2:12:03] Carefully, thoroughly with respect to all the stakeholders,

[2:12:07] vulnerabilities.

[2:12:08] And I think this is an example of good governance

[2:12:10] and really caring about the status of the volunteer force.

[2:12:14] So thank you.

[2:12:15] Absolutely.

[2:12:17] Okay, I'm going to open the public hearing

[2:12:19] we have in this matter is anybody interested in like that interested in speaking okay wonderful thank

[2:12:28] you it's good

[2:12:40] my name my name is glory beard and I'm live at 11 16 page street showers field

[2:12:51] and I'm here to talk about housing oh no this is only on the are you going to talk about the oh this

[2:12:58] This is not. This is only on the cost recovery. Yeah, we got a full matter of that public at the end of the meeting. Oh, sorry. I'm sorry. That's okay. You're fine.

[2:13:07] Although that sounds we'll look forward to it.

[2:13:10] Okay. Anybody else wish to speak about this, this item?

[2:13:15] Okay. I'm going to close the public hearing then.

[2:13:18] And I believe that's all we need to do, right? This time around. Okay. All right. Thank you all. Moving on item number three on our agenda. This is public hearing and ordinance.

[2:13:30] This is a long time in the making, urban archery, ordinance, and related revisions.

[2:13:36] This is the first of two readings.

[2:13:38] Mr. Mike Murphy, a city manager will be presenting.

[2:13:41] We've got 20 minutes allocated to this.

[2:13:45] We will only have a motion and a second as this is the first of two readings.

[2:13:50] So the full vote would happen the second time.

[2:13:53] Mr. Murphy.

[2:13:53] Good evening, Council, Mike Murphy's and City Manager.

[2:14:01] Well, we have been four or five times now talking about this deer problem, and tonight

[2:14:07] we're very close to the end.

[2:14:10] One thing that is a part of the actions Council has taken, that is not a part of this particular

[2:14:16] memo, is I want you to know that the RFP that you requested for sharpshooting services

[2:14:22] is currently issued on the street. We'll be putting together a team to review that proposal

[2:14:31] probably in August. So as for the matter before you tonight which is to move forward the elements

[2:14:39] of the urban archery ordinance, you'll remember the last time I was here, we had a variety of maps

[2:14:46] gaps behind you to depict the appropriate size.

[2:14:49] We went over a number of elements of a proposed ordinance,

[2:14:55] cobbled together from many ordinances throughout the state.

[2:14:59] We had a couple.

[2:15:08] 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.

[2:15:26] It's because it was part of the discussion, Mr. Gore, from the City Attorney's Office who

[2:15:34] helped to draft this, wanted to give you all the option about contiguous parcels making

[2:15:42] up the half-acre.

[2:15:43] It's my understanding that we should strike that clause and that we are looking at the parcel

[2:15:50] will, discreetly, individually being half an acre, so that we can kind of affirm with

[2:15:58] property owners ahead of time whether they're eligible to apply or not.

[2:16:02] So with the exception of striking that one clause, I'm happy to answer any questions, but

[2:16:07] I think that we've gone over this quite a bit to get to where we are today.

[2:16:14] And where, what was that, do you say number four?

[2:16:17] Yes, sir.

[2:16:17] 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

[2:16:28] And I'd request that

[2:16:29] Council just strike the section that says or

[2:16:32] Continuous parcels which in combination consist of one half acre or more. So this is to prevent that

[2:16:42] Three neighbors with point one seven acres could ban together to create an eligible parcel

[2:16:48] But it didn't take that as your intent in the discussion because that was the different maps we had last time, okay, all right

[2:16:57] Okay, any any other questions?

[2:17:00] I have a question which is okay, item number 10 if the deer which has been shot with an arrow leaves the prop

[2:17:07] And first of all, I want to say thank you the spending I mean again lots of good governance here tonight in our in our items

[2:17:13] because a lot of care and a lot of nuances had to be worked out to get this.

[2:17:17] And even Miss Acos, who was a man who didn't have her proxy or anything but she praised

[2:17:22] the care that had gone into this to me in our customer meeting last week and she was,

[2:17:28] she was, you know, has reservations about the whole project.

[2:17:31] But item 10, if a deer which has been shot with an arrow leaves the property in which the

[2:17:35] hunter has permission to hunt, the hunter shall obtain permission from any property owner

[2:17:38] over which year Chino's traveled to pursue or retrieve the deer, so they don't have to

[2:17:44] do this beforehand. This happens after the deer, I'm just trying to think about the logistics,

[2:17:50] and we had lots of other models. Yeah, certainly. It's an ad hoc thing, based on if the deer goes,

[2:17:56] and then you get permission, and most, you know, almost all the time, they would get it from the

[2:18:02] I think it would be preferable if you know that you're going to make your parcel eligible for hunting that you

[2:18:09] require that permission from your adjacent neighbors ahead of time so that you don't

[2:18:13] 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

[2:18:21] but what we do know is that it's the property owner's prerogative to allow that permission or not

[2:18:29] 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.

[2:18:41] If you wound it in Mr. Signer's yard, you cannot cross Mr. Jones's yard to get to Mr. Bellamy's yard to get the animal.

[2:18:51] I guess my question was should we just make it be in advance that they, I was trying to think

[2:18:59] to just like one of the person is on vacation and then they, you know, it's pretty far into the neighbor

[2:19:04] and property, but there's a fence and then the deer sits there because they can't get permission

[2:19:09] well, you know, after the deer has been shot, it just seems like if we required, I don't know, these may be over thinking it.

[2:19:16] But I was, I think the question then you have to ask yourself, Mr.

[2:19:21] Mayors, which direction is this wounded animal going to run if we drop a pin at the

[2:19:25] point where you shoot the deer, how far out do you think it might run?

[2:19:29] How many properties in I did in tail, if you say that it's 150 yards out, how's that

[2:19:33] going to vary from parts of the parcel?

[2:19:36] All right.

[2:19:36] Thank you.

[2:19:37] That addresses my question.

[2:19:38] Thank you.

[2:19:41] It's the minutia that matters.

[2:19:45] All right.

[2:19:46] Any other questions, Mr. Murphy?

[2:19:48] Any help?

[2:19:49] Okay, do we have a great channel?

[2:19:51] We have a hearing.

[2:19:52] No, we have a public hearing, so let's, I don't see anybody who signed up for public hearing.

[2:19:59] Opening public hearing, if anybody would like to speak about this matter, now's your chance.

[2:20:06] No, you need to come up.

[2:20:09] Not interested?

[2:20:11] Sure?

[2:20:12] Okay.

[2:20:13] All right, going, okay, closing public hearing.

[2:20:18] All right.

[2:20:18] We have a motion.

[2:20:24] I move to adopt the ordinance amending and reordaining.

[2:20:31] Chapter 33 of the Code of the City of Chancel 1990 as amended relating to urban archery

[2:20:36] hunting.

[2:20:37] Is there a second?

[2:20:39] That's all we need.

[2:20:39] As amended in item 4.

[2:20:41] As amended in item 4.

[2:20:43] Okay.

[2:20:44] And we have second from Mr. Fenwick, all right?

[2:20:47] Okay.

[2:20:48] So thank you all.

[2:20:49] Thank you very much.

[2:20:50] Thank you, Mr. Murphy.

[2:20:52] Thank you.

[2:20:54] Moving on to item number four, public hearing and ordinance.

[2:20:58] This is closing and vacating First Street South between Water Street and South Street.

[2:21:02] Again, first of two readings.

[2:21:04] We just have motion in a second.

[2:21:05] Ten minutes allocated to this.

[2:21:07] I believe Ms. Robertson has on here that Mr. Brown is presenting.

[2:21:16] I'm Mr. Brown for evening.

[2:21:17] Yes, okay.

[2:21:18] Thank you.

[2:21:20] She looks really different.

[2:21:22] Please.

[2:21:23] It's kind of a complete makeover.

[2:21:28] This matter is fairly straightforward.

[2:21:32] As you all know, some time ago, the city council

[2:21:36] entered into an agreement with a private developer

[2:21:39] for the sale of some land across the street

[2:21:43] from the Water Street parking garage.

[2:21:45] She's going to be a new residential development.

[2:21:48] 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.

[2:22:03] That is something that you agreed to consider, and so there's an ordinance in the packet that proposes for

[2:22:14] the street to be vacated. You are required to have a public hearing on that and our main

[2:22:22] recommendation is that this should you approve this vacation, it should not become effective

[2:22:33] unless and until the closing of this sale of property actually occurs. So the ordinance

[2:22:40] has been drafted to include a condition that states that the ordinance vacating the street

[2:22:46] would not be recorded in the clerk's office unless and until the closing has actually taken

[2:22:54] effect and that the deed has been recorded. This is again on occasion City Council does agree

[2:23:02] to close certain streets and sometimes does so in connection with an adjacent development that's

[2:23:08] happening, so your decision just needs to take into account the developer's request as

[2:23:15] well as whatever you hear at the public hearing.

[2:23:19] Okay, thank you.

[2:23:21] Any questions?

[2:23:23] I do have a question, and I'm not sure if this is the applicant or not, but as my understanding

[2:23:29] that this vacation of first street was actually going to be replaced with the final design

[2:23:38] with a pedestrian pathway that was integrated with the design of the project, you couldn't

[2:23:44] hear me, that it was, this was going to be, yes, the street was going to be vacated, but

[2:23:50] the design of the ultimate project was going to be putting in that same location of pedestrian

[2:23:56] pathways, it was still going to be accessible for people as a through way, but it wouldn't

[2:24:02] be for cars, it would be pedestrians, is that still correct?

[2:24:05] Please

[2:24:11] introduce yourself.

[2:24:12] Evening on Keith Wood with Market Plaza, LSA, yes,

[2:24:15] there will be an easement and that's part of the documentation

[2:24:19] that's been prepared and will be submitted

[2:24:22] with the closing.

[2:24:24] There will continue to be a pedestrian easement

[2:24:26] through where first street now is.

[2:24:29] Thank you.

[2:24:31] That's my question.

[2:24:35] And is that any further?

[2:24:38] That's not.

[2:24:39] OK, let's open the.

[2:24:41] I do have one more quick question.

[2:24:42] That does not need to be in the ordinance, it's another part of the application, so that doesn't have to be in the ordinance for it to be effective.

[2:24:51] It can be a condition, if you'd like to make that a condition, it is not in the ordinance at the present time.

[2:25:00] I understand that it is in the contract that we've executed with the city, the easement and all that.

[2:25:07] So it is in the contract.

[2:25:08] It's in document, yes.

[2:25:10] Okay, that should be sufficient. Thank you.

[2:25:13] Thank you.

[2:25:18] Okay, it's open to public hearing. Public hearing is open. I don't.

[2:25:22] Anybody want to speak about this matter?

[2:25:30] I would just speak real briefly. Is there any?

[2:25:32] Your name, please.

[2:25:33] Michael Paine, 3164 on with drive. Is there going to be any

[2:25:39] study or examination of the public impact of this? How would affect

[2:25:43] traffic patterns? How would attract affect people in that area?

[2:25:46] Well, vacating it because it seems, you know, it could be a situation where we're

[2:25:52] inconveniencing the public in order for the profit of one private developer that seems

[2:25:57] kind of a strange priority for City Council to make that decision if it's the case that

[2:26:03] it would impact the public in any way to vacate that street.

[2:26:08] That's it.

[2:26:09] Thank you.

[2:26:10] Okay. Anyone else wish to speak?

[2:26:16] Okay. Let's close the public hearing. Any other comments, anyone?

[2:26:21] Mr. Mayor, I did have some comments to...

[2:26:25] And I guess Mr. Fenwick and Mr. Jones, we were the ones that were on council on the day

[2:26:31] as at the time when we were first looking into what to do with this parcel on Second Street.

[2:26:36] And if the public may remember that we had a competition, a design competition, and I

[2:26:43] believe there are about five entries, four or five entries.

[2:26:48] And in that process, all of these sorts of issues about the design and the implication

[2:26:54] and the impacts were investigated.

[2:26:57] This was also reviewed by the Planning Commission as well as the BAR.

[2:27:01] So this project, probably more so than any other project, certainly by right project, was highly scrutinized.

[2:27:11] And the closing of the street was something that was discussed quite a bit.

[2:27:15] But again, the traffic patterns around the block still were going to be functioning well.

[2:27:22] And then again, the pedestrian easement was really important.

[2:27:26] Thank you.

[2:27:27] Anything else to add?

[2:27:28] No, I think the 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 the city market in downtown.

[2:27:40] Yes. That was the goal of the city council was a report that had been given by a recommendation of 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.

[2:27:54] in order to accommodate that but then also to see this piece property redeveloped in

[2:28:00] a way that would bring mixed use into downtown another project into downtown the agreement

[2:28:07] is that city market has a home on that in that space for years to come so that was the public

[2:28:15] benefit of this.

[2:28:16] Thank you very much. That was a major detail.

[2:28:19] Sure.

[2:28:20] Thank you.

[2:28:22] Okay.

[2:28:24] Is there a motion on this?

[2:28:30] First.

[2:28:31] I'm always looking at you.

[2:28:32] How moved?

[2:28:33] I'll move it forward. It's the first of two readings.

[2:28:36] First of two readings.

[2:28:37] Is there a second?

[2:28:38] Second.

[2:28:39] Okay. That's all we need.

[2:28:41] All right. Thank you all.

[2:28:41] We move on to item number five.

[2:28:44] It's public hearing and ordinance.

[2:28:45] This is the Wonemills Village Historic Conservation District.

[2:28:48] First of two readings, we have many of my colleagues mind if we move this up to, we have 20 minutes here, but I imagine it will go a little bit longer, so if we move it up to 30, is that okay?

[2:29:00] Okay.

[2:29:01] We have, there will be a public hearing, there are some folks signed up here, I've got seven, so if anybody else wants to sign up, sign up, she does right here.

[2:29:10] We have Ms. Mary-Jose Scala presenting NDS Preservation Design Plan with Neighbor Development

[2:29:17] Services.

[2:29:18] All right.

[2:29:19] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[2:29:20] Thank you.

[2:29:21] The Woolen Mills Neighborhood Association originally brought this request to the Planning

[2:29:25] Commission for its initiation July 12th of last year.

[2:29:29] The proposal would add a historic conservation overlay district, which is the local regulatory

[2:29:35] regulatory type of historic district to 85 parcels located in part of the

[2:29:40] Willand Mill's neighborhood.

[2:29:42] The proposed district includes all the city properties within the boundaries of

[2:29:46] the Willand Mill's Village National Register District, and that's an honorary

[2:29:50] district that was listed in 2010 on both the state and national registers.

[2:29:58] So it's that area plus.

[2:30:00] It's 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.

[2:30:29] and the boundaries would enclose the most compact area that contains the most of those historic resources.

[2:30:37] So that's how the district was determined.

[2:30:41] City Council's being asked to take action to either approve or deny the overlay district,

[2:30:46] which was recommended unanimously by the Planning Commission with a 6-0 vote on November 9th of last year.

[2:30:54] and it was also unanimously recommended by the Board of

[2:30:57] Architectural Review 9-0 on September 20th of last year.

[2:31:02] In December 2016, the Will and Mills Neighborhood Association

[2:31:06] asked that the rezoning be deferred for six months or until

[2:31:11] the historic conservation district ordinance and guidelines

[2:31:13] could be revised for clarity of interpretation.

[2:31:17] Those revisions were approved by Council in April of this year.

[2:31:22] However, there continue to be concerns expressed by residents and or property owners in Willen Mill's neighborhood.

[2:31:29] Therefore, staff conducted a poll to gauge current interest of all affected property owners only.

[2:31:36] 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.

[2:31:47] So the results of the poll out of 85 letters sent, that's one per property.

[2:31:54] We received back 65 responses, which is 76% that's very good response rate.

[2:32:00] 37 said no, 26 said yes, and two of the letters returned unopened.

[2:32:06] So that's 37 against and 26 in favor of the proposed district.

[2:32:12] The rezoning consists of a first zoning text amendment to add woolen mills to the list

[2:32:19] of districts in the zoning ordinance, and then also zoning map amendment, which would

[2:32:24] add the historic conservation overlay designation to the 85 parcels.

[2:32:29] The effect of the proposed overlay district would make certain visible exterior changes subject

[2:32:35] to review by the B.A.R. And you all went over this in April when you review the ordinance,

[2:32:42] but to simplify it greatly, that would include new buildings and structures, some additions

[2:32:49] and demolitions of contributing buildings, some fences and walls, and also, if you want

[2:32:55] to paint previously unpainted brick. The regulations are much less strict than in the ABC districts.

[2:33:03] I would like to talk about community engagement.

[2:33:07] When the Planning Commission held joint, their joint public hearing on November 9, staff

[2:33:13] received 30 written comments at that time, 22 in support of the district.

[2:33:18] Of those from affected property owners, only 13 were in support and five were opposed.

[2:33:24] So at that time, there still seemed to be a majority of property owners in support of

[2:33:30] the district. On December 1st, that was shortly after the Planning Commission's public hearing

[2:33:36] at the request of John Frazi, who was chair of the Will and Mills Neighborhood Association.

[2:33:42] Another informational meeting was for residents, was held at Will and Mills Chapel. I went to that

[2:33:47] meeting several B.A.R. members and also Planning Commission representatives attended. There

[2:33:52] was a very good turnout, the chapel was full, and I think after that meeting everyone agreed

[2:33:59] that amending the ordinance and guidelines to make them more clear was a good idea before

[2:34:05] any new district was adopted. And then on December 21st, following that meeting, John Frazi

[2:34:11] requested deferral of council's consideration of the district for six months or until the

[2:34:16] final revisions to the ordinance and guideline were adopted. So we did that in April, and then

[2:34:29] NDS could not provide an opt-out option that the proposed district not be passed.

[2:34:36] So then in May and June, I sent out two mailings to all affected property owners.

[2:34:42] The first asked their opinion in a poll to explain why an opt-out option was not legal

[2:34:48] in Virginia, and that was provided by Lisa Robertson, the deputy city attorney, and then also

[2:34:53] So to send everyone in the district a copy of the new ordinance language and the new guidelines.

[2:34:59] So everybody was on the same page there.

[2:35:02] The second letter sent in June, I reported the poll results, which I just told you about.

[2:35:08] And also I gave them the date of this public hearing.

[2:35:13] And in that letter, I reiterated that Council's action would be based on an assessment of whether

[2:35:19] or not the proposed conservation district will serve the public interest and its decision

[2:35:24] will be informed by the results of the poll along with other factors.

[2:35:28] So staff recommendation along with the BAR and planning commission, staff recommends

[2:35:34] that the city council should approve the designation based on criteria found in section 34336c of

[2:35:42] the zoning ordinance of this part of Wolland Mill's neighborhood as the Wolland Mill's

[2:35:47] village historic conservation district including the proposed district boundary and the map

[2:35:52] of contributing and non-contributing properties as they're proposed and I'd be happy to answer

[2:35:57] any questions.

[2:36:00] Thank you.

[2:36:02] Any questions?

[2:36:05] I have one which is so I just noticed in the letter that was sent out so you asked the postcards

[2:36:12] they had a comment space on them? You got back to you? Are those in our material? I'm not

[2:36:18] asking you to, I don't know, were they tabulated or was there a general, was there a way to

[2:36:23] characterize what people wrote or... Let me see if I have that on screen.

[2:36:28] I think that I did,

[2:36:31] I did actually tabulate the comments. I do with them. Sorry. Just a lot of information with

[2:36:38] this file and

[2:36:42] it seems like an obvious thing for you to receive, I'm sorry I don't have

[2:36:45] it right now.

[2:36:46] Well, not many people in the spot, my question was more, in the nature of the information

[2:36:52] that they received, so they received the mailings and do you have any, can you anecdotally,

[2:36:59] how many of these folks responded to the comments, yeah, I was a couple of, I would say most

[2:37:05] Most people at least commented, you know, one sentence, which we left room for one sentence.

[2:37:11] One thing I just pulled out, there was like a three-page letter from one person, but most

[2:37:16] of them just did that.

[2:37:17] They just put a one sentence comment on there.

[2:37:20] Okay.

[2:37:21] Why?

[2:37:21] They wanted it or didn't.

[2:37:22] All right.

[2:37:23] Okay.

[2:37:23] I apologize again for not getting that.

[2:37:25] I just overlooked it.

[2:37:26] Okay.

[2:37:28] I do have a question, and again, thank you for all your hard work on this.

[2:37:33] So, am I right in understanding that the point of getting the resident input is to come

[2:37:44] to the planning commission and the VAR before they make a decision, and that it is one

[2:37:51] of two major pieces of information, the other being the architecturally significant features

[2:37:57] of the historic district itself.

[2:37:58] So resident input is not well defined in our ordinance, it just says that the VAR must

[2:38:05] consider the resident input along with the architectural features of the district.

[2:38:10] But in order to make a decision, that has to be submitted before the VAR and the Planning

[2:38:17] Commission vote.

[2:38:19] Well, I told you in my email this morning that the requirement for the poll started approximately

[2:38:27] 2010, when that city council said before we get any more historic districts, they want

[2:38:35] to see that there's some amount of neighborhood support for it before it's even considered

[2:38:40] by the city. So based on that, I guess Martha Jefferson was the first district to actually

[2:38:47] make application after that kind of policy decision was made. So I asked Martha Jefferson

[2:38:53] a neighborhood to show that there was a neighborhood support, they kind of came up with the idea of

[2:38:58] doing the poll. It's never been written down that a poll is required. So, and then Venable

[2:39:04] neighborhood, you know, they followed the same format. So, the idea was to get that kind of support

[2:39:09] in hand before we even went through the process, before it went to the BR, before it went to the

[2:39:16] Planning Commission and City Council. In this case, we did the poll at the end. It was odd. I've

[2:39:23] The reason I did it was because there was so much confusion and different things being

[2:39:30] talked about, especially by email, that I wanted to help clarify.

[2:39:35] And also, I thought it was important that, you know, a lot of things had happened since

[2:39:40] the Planning Commission held their public hearing in December or in November, and I thought

[2:39:47] it would be a good idea to update that information.

[2:39:50] and I consider it information, nothing more than that.

[2:39:53] And I just want to make sure I understand too,

[2:39:55] because before the 9-0 vote on the BAR and the 6-0 vote

[2:40:00] from the Planning Commission,

[2:40:02] there had been a poll done by the...

[2:40:04] Yeah, so by the neighborhood association.

[2:40:07] Then as I understand, it was 68% voted for,

[2:40:09] that was 46 people,

[2:40:11] and that was still had like a over 70% response rate.

[2:40:16] I don't remember the figures, I'm sure that...

[2:40:19] I just wanted a neighborhood representative to clarify that but that there was a positive

[2:40:25] response to that and then that precipitated the vote, that that was not precipitated

[2:40:29] but it was prior to the vote which was what was required by the ordinance of that resident

[2:40:33] input.

[2:40:34] I think when the B.A.R. on the Planning Commission took their votes they thought that there

[2:40:39] was neighborhood support.

[2:40:41] Okay.

[2:40:42] That's what I needed to hear.

[2:40:45] 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.

[2:40:54] Many years ago, I wanted to put storm windows on my house, so I'm pretty sure I went before the B.A.R.

[2:41:02] It was an aggravation, but it really wasn't burdensome and it didn't cost me anything.

[2:41:06] And they just were concerned about the appearance that I wouldn't decorate the house or something

[2:41:11] like that.

[2:41:12] Like I say, it was an aggravation.

[2:41:15] So if that were to happen today to one of these houses, would this be applicable?

[2:41:21] Would they have to go to BAR to get stormwinders approved or?

[2:41:27] Well, your property, I believe, is individually protected.

[2:41:29] So it follows the ADC guidelines.

[2:41:32] But even so, maybe they changed the rule after you got yours, because right now-

[2:41:36] You can approve them administratively, even in an ADC district.

[2:41:41] But in this district, no, we wouldn't, storm windows are definitely not something that

[2:41:45] requires approval.

[2:41:46] I mean, if it's something like that as well, a small item, no, I think if you remember

[2:41:51] in April when the ordinance was changed, it was, you know, we tried to make sure it was

[2:41:58] very, very simple and the idea is that the BR gets to review things that are visible that

[2:42:05] that happened in the front yard or from the corner a lot, the side yard, but the idea

[2:42:09] is what they want to review things that are going to have the biggest impact on the

[2:42:16] neighborhood.

[2:42:16] That's demolitions of contributing historic buildings, but it's also new buildings, what

[2:42:21] do they look like?

[2:42:22] And then if they're putting an addition on a building, you could put an addition, for

[2:42:26] instance on the front and it would completely change the look of a building.

[2:42:29] So it's those visible, you know, those larger things that they're trying to get.

[2:42:33] on the back would an addition on the back would not require a pool of if it's not taller or wider than the house

[2:42:41] Okay,

[2:42:47] one Mr. Bellings from last question. Just thinking about this and I was trying to type out my thoughts

[2:42:53] So if there's an individual who let's just say they just bought the house and

[2:42:58] Willemills and they decide that they want to move there and they want to either put on a new patio or if they're disabled for some reason and

[2:43:05] they want to add a ramp? Does this prohibit them or what is their process? Does this become

[2:43:13] a conservation district make it harder for them or can you answer that or speak to them?

[2:43:17] If they wanted to put a handicap ramp to the front door, I think that would require approval.

[2:43:22] I think if it was around back, like any addition, it wouldn't require approval. But they certainly

[2:43:28] wouldn't be prohibited from doing that.

[2:43:31] Yeah.

[2:43:31] Mm-hmm.

[2:43:32] Okay.

[2:43:33] Can you describe, or folks who don't know, what is a B.A., what's B.A.R. approval, like,

[2:43:40] what, what, what, what happens, and what somebody has to do, a permit, it's time.

[2:43:44] In a historic conservation district, you make application, the B.A.R. meets once a month.

[2:43:51] The fees have been waived for everything except new buildings and new and demolitions.

[2:43:58] So, any additions, for example, to 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.

[2:44:14] They're required to consider it, to act on it, yeah.

[2:44:18] So if they vote against it, what's the next step?

[2:44:21] If they vote against it, well, they usually don't vote against something.

[2:44:25] They usually try to work with the applicant to reach a compromise.

[2:44:28] If that's impossible, and they deny it, then the applicant is able to appeal to City Council.

[2:44:34] And does that compromise happen at the meeting itself?

[2:44:37] Yes.

[2:44:37] I mean, usually, yeah.

[2:44:39] Yeah, I mean, they negotiate often with the applicant.

[2:44:46] and they'll try to reach a solution that works for both of them.

[2:44:54] I just would, if I may, just remind our colleagues that we had that discussion in April,

[2:44:58] and I had put forth those...

[2:45:00] amendments to cut the review time in half and to cut the fees in half pretty much roughly. So that was in response to some of the concerns we've heard from the community. Well, actually did away with a lot of the fees. We did away with the fees, right? Okay. All right. So we now, I guess that was the presentation that we were looking for. So, okay, we'll now do any other questions or comments from council before we go to the public hearing?

[2:45:29] Okay, we have public hearing, which rice is it complete?

[2:45:33] Anybody would like, so we have nine folks signed up.

[2:45:39] Same rules, four comments are limited to three minutes.

[2:45:43] Please say your name and address.

[2:45:45] John Frazier is opening public hearing.

[2:45:51] Good evening.

[2:45:53] Good evening.

[2:45:54] My name is John Frazier.

[2:45:55] I live at 1404 East Market Street.

[2:45:58] And I'd like to provide some background

[2:45:59] to the woolen mills, neighbourhood citizens position, on the conservation overlay of

[2:46:05] CV currently under consideration, in plain terms, a process that began with a poll of the

[2:46:09] neighbourhood concluded with a poll of the neighbourhood would entail between those

[2:46:13] polls should be taken as a lesson for any organisation that, when offering a choice, meets

[2:46:19] activist opposition.

[2:46:20] I have been a member of the WMNA for the past six years and have been acting as chairperson

[2:46:25] with past four. Our Constitution states that we must take concerted action to conserve

[2:46:30] and improve the area as a historic residential neighbourhood, including when necessary, action

[2:46:35] to protect the integrity of the community. Given the glacial process on rezoning, we saw

[2:46:41] the CV as a youthful, if low-powered tool to prevent massively out of context construction

[2:46:48] in our neighbourhood, construction which has occurred in Rose Hill and Fifeville, and could

[2:46:52] It would occur in neighborhoods all over the city without a determined effort to find and implement regulatory protections.

[2:46:58] As we have seen numerous times, the voices of neighbors even when raised together are not often not enough to prevent unwanted development.

[2:47:05] With the changes likely to be brought by the redevelopment of the woolen mill and exciting and positive prospect,

[2:47:11] the board has tried to look ahead to the possible effects of such a project on an historic district.

[2:47:16] The WMNA board followed the process which had been undertaken in Martha Jefferson Inventable,

[2:47:21] which included a poll of the affected property owners.

[2:47:24] Based on the positive results, we asked that the Planning Commission proceed with the examination

[2:47:29] of viability of the CV and the Planning Commission found it had merit.

[2:47:33] The WMNA held a public session in which we clearly outlined the financial and regulatory burdens

[2:47:39] that come with this protection.

[2:47:41] Immediately prior to the public hearings, property rights advocates called for a closer examination

[2:47:45] of the regulations. This led to revisions to the CV code which have reduced cost and clarified

[2:47:52] restrictions. The WM&A was hopeful that property owners would consider the CV's pluses and

[2:47:57] minuses as written in the regulations and overseen by the city and make a decision. Some property owners

[2:48:03] were in favor and some for valid reasons of their own were opposed. Following the CV revisions,

[2:48:10] activist property owners went door-to-door with a petition which requested an opt-out provision,

[2:48:14] A provision which the city has determined is not legal in the State of Virginia.

[2:48:19] The email and flyers, Spurious claims were made that homeowners would not be able to maintain

[2:48:24] their properties without approval from the BAR, that they couldn't choose paint colors,

[2:48:29] siding, or roofing, none of which were mentioned in the CV.

[2:48:33] And that long-term residents would quote, be driven from their homes, unquote.

[2:48:37] The WMNA has been accused of holding an illegal poll of colluding with the city of having

[2:48:43] quote written the map, unquote, and intentionally misleading the neighborhood.

[2:48:48] None of this is true.

[2:48:50] As part of the public input on the CV, the City held an additional poll to gauge interest.

[2:48:54] It's not been done before, since the WMNA has begun the process with a poll.

[2:48:57] We pledged to the neighborhood to respect the outcome of the city's poll for support,

[2:49:01] based on the outcome, the WMNA removed its support.

[2:49:05] It was not based on any merits or demands of the CV.

[2:49:07] Thank you, thank you.

[2:49:09] Eric Hurt.

[2:49:13] Eric Kirk, 15 out of two of these market in Millamills, just to clarify that last point,

[2:49:19] the Willam Mills Neighbor Dissociation is pulled its support and so that should help determine

[2:49:26] this.

[2:49:27] First of all, another point, these homes, most of them 90 something percent, are not historic.

[2:49:34] So what that leaves is aesthetic choices, which I don't think should be, if somebody wants

[2:49:39] to do something to their home, paint it, put up a large offense, they should be able to

[2:49:43] paint break.

[2:49:47] You know, this, it was positive, as Mary Joyce says, until the neighborhood was educated

[2:49:53] about all of these costs and restrictions.

[2:49:57] So, first of all, I'd like to say that it has publicly bolded support.

[2:50:01] I'd also like to reiterate that this is a tremendous opposition by a majority of residents of

[2:50:07] mills to this district, and that the poll taken by the NDS has showed that.

[2:50:12] It should be said that this is not a neighborhood or community issue, this is a hundred percent

[2:50:18] property rights issue since it deals completely with residents' personal homes' properties.

[2:50:22] This adds costs and more hoops to jump through, and even though the vote came back saying that

[2:50:29] the majority of residents did not want this district, really with something like this, even

[2:50:32] one resident opposing it would be one too many.

[2:50:35] In the case of Wil Mills, the fact that these properties are not owned by the NDS, and

[2:50:40] they're not historic homes, least only the aesthetic restrictions and costs of these districts

[2:50:44] placed on residence.

[2:50:45] The personal taste of home owners should never be up for a democratic vote, which should

[2:50:49] need 100% participation and support to be placed on to them.

[2:50:53] The proposal of this nature should require overwhelming support of people who have to live under.

[2:50:57] This is not the case.

[2:50:59] So no matter what unwanted rules and costs, neighborhood development services and merit

[2:51:04] are attempting to push under a neighborhood.

[2:51:06] The fact is that these homes are not owned by the NDS or

[2:51:09] the Willemills Neighborhood Association.

[2:51:10] No matter what somebody else comes up here and says it's in

[2:51:14] favor of this for their own property, their neighbor's home is not theirs.

[2:51:18] So these homes that they sit on are owned by people who work hard,

[2:51:22] people who have taken out mortgages to purchase them.

[2:51:26] These are the people that have voted against this district.

[2:51:29] So to conclude, it must be set out loud to the NDS that these are not

[2:51:33] your homes to the Womens Neighborhood Association. These are not your homes. And I'd like to respectfully

[2:51:38] remind the council as you take up this device issue that these in fact are not your.

[2:51:45] Thanks. Catherine Rocket?

[2:51:52] I'm Catherine Rocket, 1800 Chesapeake Street. I'm here and I'm sorry that my family had to leave.

[2:51:58] We were filling up the entire road there but my nine-year-old aunt kind of reached her limit in

[2:52:04] had to leave and her son in daughter took her home. But I would just like to say Mr. Siger,

[2:52:09] you asked for what the comments had been on those cards that came back. It's really ashamed

[2:52:14] that the poll was not done with the neighborhood upfront. That what you depended on was the

[2:52:19] neighborhood association. Not everybody in this area is a member or attends those neighborhood

[2:52:25] association meetings. The neighborhood association is not an HOA. It's a voluntary organization

[2:52:31] as it's seen by many of the neighbors. I can tell you by 92-year-old mother who is still

[2:52:39] in the house where she's always lived, been there her entire life, moved down just the street,

[2:52:44] there has never been any place else other than Chesapeake Street that my family has been on.

[2:52:49] The answer we gave back on that card, if I could quote it for you, I wrote it down.

[2:52:53] The house, meaning 1800 Chesapeake Street, has no association with a historic event,

[2:52:59] person, architect, craftsman, or style. No special materials were used in its construction.

[2:53:06] It is not an example of a particular style and is located a significant distance from neighbors.

[2:53:13] That's exactly what the code is saying needs to be there in order for you to have this kind of consideration.

[2:53:20] And what we're saying is many of these houses, I can speak specifically from my mother's house, from my aunt at 1803 Chesapeake.

[2:53:28] My cousins, it used to be my grandmother's house, they were here tonight, 1803 and a half.

[2:53:33] those homes do not fit this designation that you are trying to place on them.

[2:53:40] And if I can quote my 92-year-old mother said to me just as I was leaving tonight to come here tonight,

[2:53:45] she said, Kitty, old is not necessarily mean it's important and should be kept and I think the same

[2:53:52] thing applies here. If people were excited about this being a historic district, they worked at the

[2:54:00] conservation. And the poll cards that were finally set out, as was mentioned, 76% responded,

[2:54:11] which is a fantastic turnout, if we only had that kind of voter turnout. Of the valid

[2:54:17] responses, you've heard the numbers, but the percentage is 59% of the people that would

[2:54:23] be considered and would be affected to no. And I think that's something you have to consider

[2:54:27] is what the neighbors and what that poll showed, it's just a shame that poll came so late

[2:54:34] in your process.

[2:54:35] Thank you.

[2:54:36] Thank you.

[2:54:37] Thank you.

[2:54:38] Lamma Oppenheimer?

[2:54:44] Thank you.

[2:54:48] I'm Lamma Oppenheimer.

[2:54:49] I live at 1615 East Market Street, and I am in the affected area.

[2:54:54] I'm here to urge you to vote against the historic overlay.

[2:54:59] I do want to second what was just said here, which is that, you know, our neighborhood

[2:55:03] is historic and deserves the marker that we've gotten and we were very supportive of that.

[2:55:09] But that doesn't mean that we should be put under rules to conserve what's there.

[2:55:14] Already, if you walk around the neighborhood and I urge you to come down there,

[2:55:18] the architecture ranges, everything is a very eclectic neighborhood.

[2:55:23] There is no uniform aesthetic that could be applied to it.

[2:55:26] And I think if you look at what's happened over the course of this,

[2:55:30] I think it's very telling the very first poll that the WMNA did was bias towards this

[2:55:37] outcome.

[2:55:38] If you read what was sent, it said it was basically pushing this as a way to save

[2:55:42] the neighborhood.

[2:55:43] Many of us who know Bill and no other people are pushing it trusted that at first and he's

[2:55:48] only when we started looking closer and said yes and then we started looking closer.

[2:55:52] A big turning point was that meeting at the Chapel with Mary Joy, where it became very evident

[2:55:57] that this was completely subjective to Mary Joy as to what would go before the bar or wouldn't.

[2:56:03] So we asked very clearly to kept the ordinance redone.

[2:56:07] That was redone, but it hasn't fixed that problem at all.

[2:56:10] If you read in that language, there's a lot of places where it's kind of up to Mary Joy

[2:56:14] if something is going to get done, you know, put before the bar or not.

[2:56:17] I think it's very telling that someone who was on the planning commission

[2:56:20] and is currently in the neighborhood in a historic home is very against this because of his dealings

[2:56:26] with the bar and the problems that is created down to him just saying he had a huge fight

[2:56:30] over whether he could paint his mailbox.

[2:56:32] So I think that all of this comes down to it and you really need to listen to what those

[2:56:36] of us who, once we were educated and looking at it and hearing what the bar and Mary Joy

[2:56:41] was saying, we all very much were, many of us became opposed to this.

[2:56:46] We're grateful that the WMNA has decided to withdraw its support.

[2:56:50] It's discouraging that the head of the WMNA tonight is reading it in such a way that

[2:56:56] it makes it seem like those of us who are against it have somehow conspired to, you know,

[2:57:01] go against them in this way, but they've got to respect the will of the people as it goes

[2:57:06] in this case.

[2:57:07] And I hope you can vote against this overlay.

[2:57:09] Thank you very much.

[2:57:12] Thank you.

[2:57:13] Barry Umburger?

[2:57:22] I think you didn't, Mary Ember, the 1701, you sported the street, 35 years now.

[2:57:28] I can support everything limb just to say to you covered a lot of points.

[2:57:34] The first poll was not representative of the way people would have reacted if it had

[2:57:39] more information.

[2:57:40] It was lack of information.

[2:57:42] And then upon the last six or eight months or so, getting more information, people came

[2:57:48] around to see it a different way.

[2:57:51] Obviously, the first poll was used to justify the unanimous votes for the overlay from

[2:57:58] NDS and BAR.

[2:58:01] If anything else, as you go back to them and say, okay, well, 59 percent of the people do

[2:58:06] not wish to have this.

[2:58:06] We're not asking for it.

[2:58:08] We're not asking for it.

[2:58:09] In the first place, where they have done that, if an innocent person with people were not

[2:58:12] asking.

[2:58:13] In terms of regulations, they have shifted, and it's also, it's way too much up to personal

[2:58:19] and trepitation methods. They say there's no there's no restrictions on a roof for instance

[2:58:24] well if you have a standing seam still roof you will replace it with a sheenal roof because you

[2:58:29] can't afford a $40,000 standing seam roof you are not allowed to do that. I said if you want to

[2:58:35] change a vertical window they say they prefer horizontal or some aesthetic reason and a house that

[2:58:41] may have no greatly significant architectural details in the first place. So it's just kind of

[2:58:49] somebody wouldn't do the things they're trying to go against, they could easily buy all the

[2:58:53] properties that are not covered at all. My next door neighbor is not covered at all. I'm

[2:58:58] restricted, he's not restricted. So they could buy his house to do what they want. So it's

[2:59:03] this kind of a flaw of process in the start. And it's not needed. I just don't think it's needed.

[2:59:10] And the current zoning address is so many of the concerns. And the other ones are theoretical

[2:59:15] And there can always be theoretical concerns, but I urge you all to think of these and go against the ordinance or the overlay.

[2:59:24] Thank you.

[2:59:25] Jason Ivey.

[2:59:32] Hi, I'm Jason Ivey, I live at 1808 in the market. I'm part of the affected area.

[2:59:37] I think I agree.

[2:59:39] 100% of the buried lamb, Eric.

[2:59:42] We don't want it.

[2:59:44] The majority, I walked this neighborhood. I'm one of those people.

[2:59:46] I talk to these people, and I know for a fact, most of the majority of people don't want it.

[2:59:52] I think that's the key, that's the bottom line here.

[2:59:55] And I think beyond that, I agree that the map is flawed, it has been flawed from day one.

[3:00:00] I think was good for the goose, is good for the gander, only one member of the board actually lives in this district. The rest of the people who voted on this, with three people objecting myself and two other people in the initial poll, as I understand, I could be corrected about that.

[3:00:17] When people figured out what really it said, and then we went back and tried to fix it, I don't think it fixes anything. I think it's extremely arbitrary. And I don't think the neighborhood warrants it.

[3:00:29] This is not Colonial Williamsburg, this is a working class neighborhood that is in development and is changing, and it's changing for the better.

[3:00:37] Nothing is broken here.

[3:00:39] I think you could argue maybe that painting brick might not be a good thing necessarily.

[3:00:43] I can see that, but when the BAR asks a member of the Planning Commission to change his growl 17 times to get the color correct, that's absurd.

[3:00:55] That's intrusive and that's cost-prohibitive.

[3:00:58] And I think we didn't address, you have to submit renderings.

[3:01:03] I mean, what does it cost to hire an architect to go before the VAR and defend the fact that you want to put a handicraft,

[3:01:09] a ramp or change your window, whatever you want to do?

[3:01:13] I also think that I think the first poll was flawed and I think that the vote was not based, you know,

[3:01:21] We have initially three people objective, and that changed.

[3:01:27] And I think that there should be another vote about a B.A.R., and I think there should be another vote by anybody.

[3:01:33] And I urge you to not approve this, and I thank you for your time, appreciate it.

[3:01:39] Thank you.

[3:01:42] Connor and Childress?

[3:01:45] Good evening, Mayor of City Council.

[3:01:47] Thank you all for taking time to listen to us.

[3:01:48] My name is Connor and Childress, I'm a 15-16 East Market, which is an affected house.

[3:01:52] I want to focus on a line of questioning raised by Councilman Galvin to start with, which

[3:01:58] was neighborhood support and whether that existed prior to the planning commission and

[3:02:05] the B.A.R.

[3:02:05] vote.

[3:02:06] As to echo earlier comments, the first poll that went around signaled really quite remarkable

[3:02:13] neighborhood support.

[3:02:15] I don't know if you all have seen the poll by printed a copy off of what was sent.

[3:02:20] Mind how cost it?

[3:02:20] Sure.

[3:02:21] I

[3:02:23] don't have a copy of the NDS poll, but I think that you would find that it was much more comprehensive.

[3:02:28] It contained a copy of the ordinance that would affect the properties.

[3:02:36] The education process really started after that vote was taken.

[3:02:43] And so while the neighborhood may have initially signaled some support base on that poll, I think that poll is flawed.

[3:02:48] And I don't think the City Council should consider that as showing true neighborhood support when the education of the neighborhood

[3:02:56] commenced with that poll

[3:02:58] ask you all to

[3:03:00] heed the

[3:03:02] The applicant who is withdrawn in support and treat this like you would any other zoning app amendment where the applicant is withdrawn in support. Thank you.

[3:03:09] Thank you

[3:03:11] Robin Haines

[3:03:12] Good

[3:03:17] evening. I'm Robin Haines from 1709 East Market Street.

[3:03:21] This has been a long and painful discussion in the woolen mills with a lot of conflicting information.

[3:03:29] The other neighborhoods that have overlays have been successful.

[3:03:36] They have made additions, new buildings, renovations with ease without personal bias by

[3:03:53] The opposition is very passionate and verbose.

[3:03:59] The people supporting this are very quiet and a little bit scared.

[3:04:06] It feels a certain amount like bullying.

[3:04:11] There is valuable neighborhood history.

[3:04:15] I live in a house from the 1895.

[3:04:17] It was built by someone who worked in the mill.

[3:04:26] It's a simpler kind of history than is often architecturally valued.

[3:04:33] But in the neighborhood do value it.

[3:04:36] There is a lot of diversity that is mixed in and that's okay.

[3:04:41] We just want to protect our historic character.

[3:04:45] and I do not believe that the B.A.R.'s decision is part subjective.

[3:04:56] Bill Emory?

[3:05:00] Bill Emory, 1604 East Market Street.

[3:05:03] Zoning code is formulated and put in place by you, the legislative branch.

[3:05:09] Zoning is a police power.

[3:05:11] Zoning is guided by law in the direction of best urban planning practice.

[3:05:16] Zoning is not a popularity contest.

[3:05:19] In the current comprehensive plan there's direction in the historic preservation chapter which

[3:05:25] relates to our discussion this evening and reads, consider portions of the Woolen Mill's

[3:05:29] neighborhood for the historic conservation district designation.

[3:05:33] And so we are, Woolen Mill's neighbors have worked towards stability through planning for

[3:05:38] their neighborhood for a long time, August 1st, 1988, neighborhood president Joe Reims asked

[3:05:44] Council for a small area plan. The CV before you denied offers a first step towards such planning.

[3:05:52] The historic conservation overlay of the CV was crafted to protect the character and scale of

[3:05:57] modest historic neighborhoods without imposing harsh requirements and residents who want to remodel

[3:06:02] their homes. The CV overlay has a light touch. This overlay has been in place in Martha Jefferson

[3:06:08] neighborhood since 2010 and the Vennel build neighborhoods since 2014 and to date there

[3:06:14] have been no property under appeals before council regarding administration of the ordinance.

[3:06:20] The BAR and the planning commission have both unanimously recommended the establishment

[3:06:24] of the CV, the first such recommendation for an unassuming labor and neighborhood.

[3:06:30] The recommendation by the plan commission is in line with the purposes of the designing chapter,

[3:06:34] particular section 34-3 to protect and enhance the character and stability of neighborhoods

[3:06:41] to protect against destruction of or encroachment upon historic areas.

[3:06:47] The proposed amendment in addition to the CV section of the zoning code furthers the

[3:06:51] purposes the municipal code zoning chapter and the general welfare of the entire community

[3:06:58] is evidenced by letters you have received in support of the amendment.

[3:07:02] The CV is an overlay which does not limit density, underlying primarily R1S zoning and the

[3:07:09] will mills allows for doubling of density through construction and accessory dwelling units.

[3:07:15] Establishment of the will mill CV will realize the specific purposes of the zoning code, section 34,

[3:07:22] 335 paraphrasing will help sustain a neighborhood with a collective character and quality, which

[3:07:28] service, important visible reminders of the heritage of the city becoming wealth of

[3:07:32] Virginia and this nation, it will help assure that new structures, additions and related

[3:07:38] elements will be in harmony with the scale and character of the existing buildings, structures

[3:07:42] and areas.

[3:07:44] It will document and promote a fuller understanding of the social history of the city neighborhoods.

[3:07:49] This goal was also recommended by the Blue River and the Commission on Race, Space and Public

[3:07:58] the will and mills is a worthy of local protection.

[3:08:02] People on preservation supports the district,

[3:08:05] will and mills neighborhood is place worth caring.

[3:08:08] Thank you.

[3:08:10] All right.

[3:08:12] I'm going to close the public, is it?

[3:08:15] Oh, okay, what do we need to do?

[3:08:17] The sheet's been down here for a while, sir.

[3:08:19] I thought it was on the other side of the building.

[3:08:23] So my name's Jeanine Richardson.

[3:08:31] I'm opposed to this conservation district.

[3:08:35] Many people have spoken very well about the reasons why this district is really not needed.

[3:08:47] Not to mention the fact that many of us really do not find purpose in designating the

[3:08:53] will and mills as a conservation district.

[3:08:57] Not to say that the district will, let's say, the Chapel,

[3:09:00] John Fink's house, the workers' cottages and the mill,

[3:09:04] of course, are not within the city of Charlestown.

[3:09:08] So to say that this neighborhood has a character

[3:09:12] is, to my eyes, not valid, the lines of the district

[3:09:23] are arbitrary. They can exclude a house such as mine, which I built, not the house that I live in,

[3:09:31] which comes from 1900. Simple house that it is. My second house is a copy of a serious cottage

[3:09:39] from 1920, built in 2010. This is an exact copy. It's excluded. Now, are there historical features

[3:09:51] I mean, I read that part about culture, architectural, I can't remember all of the issues, but I just checked no, no, no.

[3:10:06] And as other people have spoken to, I feel like the process has been the horse before the cart or the cart before the horse.

[3:10:15] I'm not quite sure which metaphor would be best, but that we weren't informed in that first poll and if we had been

[3:10:24] I

[3:10:24] seriously doubted the B.A.R. and the Planning Commission would have

[3:10:29] supported

[3:10:30] the application by the board of

[3:10:33] Wall and Mills

[3:10:34] not all of the people in

[3:10:37] Wall and Mills to have this district. So I oppose it and I don't like giving you the power to make that decision

[3:10:46] But that's personal. But then again the personal is political and the political is personal. Thank you.

[3:10:54] Thank you.

[3:10:56] Okay. Any others?

[3:11:01] Closing the public hearing?

[3:11:04] All right. Usually under our rules we like to begin with a...

[3:11:11] I'm sorry.

[3:11:19] We usually like to start with a motion but we've got...

[3:11:23] And then we do discussion after motion.

[3:11:28] So is there a motion on the floor?

[3:11:31] I'll make a motion.

[3:11:34] I move to pass an ordinance amending and reordaining section 34-337,

[3:11:40] a chapter 34 of the code of the city of Shonsville,

[3:11:43] as amended to add a new zoning overlay district to be known

[3:11:46] as the Wall and Mills Village historic conservation district.

[3:11:51] OK, is there a second?

[3:11:56] I'll second.

[3:11:56] Okay.

[3:12:00] So I get the floor for five minutes.

[3:12:01] You do?

[3:12:02] And that means that it's moving to a second hearing.

[3:12:05] So a second action where we have a full vote of council in an upcoming meeting.

[3:12:14] So I basically have four reasons or three reasons that I'll sum as to why I think this is an

[3:12:22] important amendment to our zoning ordinance.

[3:12:25] First, it meets our zoning ordinance requirements.

[3:12:29] Establishing a new conservation district is a zoning map in Texas amendment.

[3:12:35] And it can only be initiated by a planning commission or city council.

[3:12:39] The planning commission initiated the zoning change upon the request of the WON-Mills Neighborhood Association.

[3:12:45] And the zoning ordinance also states that the BAR establishes these districts based on two things.

[3:12:51] information that may be provided by the neighborhood residents and the architectural

[3:12:56] character defining features of the proposed district. The BAR voted 9-0 and the planning

[3:13:02] commission voted 6-0 to approve this designation after evaluating both the resident input as

[3:13:10] well as the architectural features of the proposed district as evidenced by physical surveys

[3:13:16] in the Will & Mills placement on the National Register of Historic Places in Virginia landmarks

[3:13:22] register. Those are not arbitrary designations, those are not arbitrary maps. Those are not

[3:13:28] arbitrary surveys. Allowing a second opinion poll to overturn the votes of the BAR and

[3:13:34] Planning Commission, however, makes little sense when resident input is supposed to inform

[3:13:40] decision not undermine the illegal authority thereby in my view setting a bad

[3:13:45] precedent. If you don't like the law you change it. You don't sabotage it.

[3:13:51] Second, it follows precedent. The Planning Commission and the B.A.R. are not

[3:13:56] required by the zoning ordinance to specifically conduct community surveys in the

[3:14:00] first place. Securing proof of resident input is therefore not a matter of

[3:14:05] ordinance or written policy, but precedent dating back to 2009, when the

[3:14:10] five full tonsil of nail who was under consideration for a national registered

[3:14:13] designation. And it was at that time, city council directed staff to provide

[3:14:18] evidence of neighborhood support before pursuing, but it did not specify how or

[3:14:23] how much support. That's why in 2010 with Martha Jefferson in 2014 with

[3:14:29] Venable, and then in 2016 with with the will and mills, all requesting

[3:14:33] in conservation districts, when staff ask them to provide evidence of support, all neighborhood

[3:14:38] associations sent letters of support, and each conducted one poll of effective residents

[3:14:45] prior to any votes taken. Third, it is not arbitrary or unfair. Given our ordinance

[3:14:52] and precedent, we must treat our neighborhood associations fairly and our neighborhoods fairly,

[3:14:56] and consistently, when they request the planning.

[3:15:00] Commission to initiate an overlay district designation process. To do other size, otherwise, would seem arbitrary, especially to the woolen mills neighborhood that did submit evidence of neighborhood support prior to the BAR and PC vote back in 2016 and May. At that time, 46 residents, or 68% of the residents, pulled yes for the district overlay. NDS staff made the unprecedented decision to pull the woolen mills again.

[3:15:29] Again, after the BAR and PC voted because the ordinance language had changed, all to

[3:15:35] the benefit of the property owners.

[3:15:38] It was that second poll, however, that showed diminished support of the overlay designation.

[3:15:43] Six to seven months after the BAR and planning commission had legally exercised their authority

[3:15:49] to approve this designation based on resident input and physical surveys as required by the

[3:15:57] law.

[3:15:57] Again, if you don't like the law, you change it, but we are a system, a government of laws, not of men.

[3:16:06] No, so in some, and no other neighborhood association was expected or required to conduct a second poll

[3:16:14] after the Board of Architectural Review and a planning commission had voted in favor of the designation.

[3:16:19] So in sum, staff had secured verifiable evidence of the architectural and

[3:16:25] historic significance of this district, along with resident support prior to the Planning Commission.

[3:16:30] And VAR unanimous decision to approve this designation has required by our established ordinance and established precedent.

[3:16:38] In addition, the proposed conservation district will further the goals of the comprehensive plan, specifically historic preservation urban design goal 6.7.

[3:16:47] and it will protect against destruction of an encroachment upon historic areas and it

[3:16:52] will serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice.

[3:16:57] For all these reasons, I move to adopt this ordinance for the Willem Mills Village Historic

[3:17:02] Conservation District.

[3:17:05] Thank you.

[3:17:09] Okay.

[3:17:09] Ms. Romack.

[3:17:12] Well, there's no question that this area has a historical context, a unique historical history.

[3:17:22] And all you have to do is ask anybody in the city about woolen mills and they can probably

[3:17:27] start to tell you the story.

[3:17:30] Personally, I think that is something to reserve.

[3:17:34] It's what adds to the city's character.

[3:17:39] But probably the most important thing is the unanimous decision on the BAR and the planning

[3:17:44] commission.

[3:17:45] I've said a number of times, unless I have a compelling reason to overturn what they have

[3:17:51] suggested I'll give that great weight, so that's why I will support this.

[3:18:06] Okay.

[3:18:09] Well, essentially this just takes us to another meeting, right?

[3:18:16] So, would there be another public hearing?

[3:18:19] Yes.

[3:18:19] Or no?

[3:18:21] No.

[3:18:22] No, this is the public hearing.

[3:18:23] So at the next meeting, we don't agree.

[3:18:25] We vote on it.

[3:18:26] Right.

[3:18:26] With the full vote next time.

[3:18:28] I will say on understanding both sides of the argument, honestly.

[3:18:33] And thank you for starting my time.

[3:18:34] This page.

[3:18:35] I was based on the communications that we received today.

[3:18:39] And I also spent some time in the neighborhood this morning walking around

[3:18:44] and talking to a few of the neighbors.

[3:18:46] And furthermore, the emails and the communications that we were sent today

[3:18:50] received today rather. I was just rather perplexed with the amount of people who

[3:18:57] believe that they have been bullied by what has been transpiring and I know

[3:19:01] some people may say oh how can you be bullied into you know a position on

[3:19:05] a conservation district but some people it was clearly articulated that there

[3:19:11] has been a message of if you do not join with us then you are enemy and we are

[3:19:16] going to attack you in several different ways. And I don't believe that to be true, or I don't

[3:19:22] believe that that's how we should operate in any shape form of fashion. And honestly speaking,

[3:19:26] I think it's somewhat contradictory for us to say that, well, we stand against opposition from what

[3:19:33] we heard earlier tonight, but then have some people believe that those same tactics are used against

[3:19:38] them. So I wish that we can figure out a way in which we can try and work together on this and

[3:19:43] some shape form or fashion and find a happy median if there is one.

[3:19:47] That being said, the motion has already been made in a second, so

[3:19:53] when it comes back on the agenda, excuse me, on the next agenda.

[3:20:00] And we're also, of course, missing a colleague.

[3:20:04] I will say in a minute, I think this is a very tough issue.

[3:20:10] There's a lot of tough issues, the land-use ones are specifically so I'm glad that we have

[3:20:17] another shot at considering this.

[3:20:21] I take seriously everything that Ms. Galvin said.

[3:20:24] I also take seriously the actions of past counsel and asking for a poll.

[3:20:30] There's precedent there.

[3:20:31] There was decision-making that went into that right or wrong.

[3:20:36] And I do hear people take their homes extremely personally and especially in a neighborhood in Charlottesville right now with our real estate market, a family moving in.

[3:20:48] Your home is a lot and constraints on the home itself are people perceive them very seriously and a significant opposition has developed.

[3:21:02] Now, the thing that I'm very interested in, Mr. Bellamy alluded to, which is the rational

[3:21:08] basis of that opposition.

[3:21:10] And that's what I'm weighing.

[3:21:11] And I want to see these postcards.

[3:21:13] I want to see what people said in their comments, and I'm glad that we have some more time

[3:21:17] to look at that.

[3:21:21] But I hear my colleagues have said also, and I've read all the materials very, very carefully.

[3:21:27] I think this is a – it's a tough and I should say that I have a lot of friends at small

[3:21:31] neighborhood who are passionately for this, with very good reasons and I have friends

[3:21:36] who believe that they were – they've changed their own minds, they believe they're misled

[3:21:41] and one juncture or another.

[3:21:43] And so they've had a very hard time making their minds up.

[3:21:48] So I think that we have a lot to weigh here and that's what I'm going to be doing.

[3:21:52] It's not an easy answer for me.

[3:21:55] Luckily, I don't have to make a decision right now.

[3:21:58] Can I have 30 seconds?

[3:22:00] Sure.

[3:22:00] I do want to speak to the comment that was made that there is a lot of concern about

[3:22:07] the destruction of the physical character of our legacy neighborhoods.

[3:22:11] We've been hearing it.

[3:22:12] We heard that at town of Lebanese Jefferson Street.

[3:22:15] And we've also heard tonight that our zoning reform, though it's in process,

[3:22:19] is going at a glacial pace.

[3:22:21] This is a tool that many communities, many neighborhoods, are reaching for because

[3:22:25] they believe that it's a stopgap measure until we do get better zoning.

[3:22:30] And zoning is already telling people what to do with their property, that's something

[3:22:34] that's a given.

[3:22:34] It's already been proven since 1929 that localities can govern the use of land.

[3:22:42] So it's already being done, it's a question of how.

[3:22:45] out. And so that's where we're at at this point in time. If we had better zoning, I think

[3:22:52] this might not even be an issue, but we don't have it yet. And this is again an opportunity

[3:22:55] for the community to feel like they have some control over the character and scale and

[3:22:59] massing of their community.

[3:23:03] Okay. Thank you.

[3:23:07] Oh, yeah. Let's. Well, we're headed. So we're finished with the

[3:23:11] Thank you all very much. We have a quest for a break, but we're all well.

[3:23:17] We don't have to. We usually take one at 11, do you?

[3:23:19] No, that's fine. We might be able to get through everything,

[3:23:22] but then although the CDC, well, I'm willing to take a break.

[3:23:26] We want to take a break?

[3:23:28] Let's take five minutes.

[3:23:30] Okay. All right.

[3:23:32] Back in seats by 10-30, please. And then we'll finish up.

[3:32:45] Moving back into session, now move on item number six. On our agenda, reallocation, this is a report and a resolution. Reallocation of existing funds for park projects. Mackentires, we've got two items that are together. So Mackentire Park, Railroad pedestrian bridge, first of one reading, that's a motion, a second, a skate park, first of one reading, the motion, a second. We have 20 minutes allocated, this is Mr. Doug Eamon, manager, park's official will be presented.

[3:33:14] Thank you. I am Doug Eman. I am the Parks Division Manager, and I'm joined by Vic Garber, who's the Recreation Division Manager.

[3:33:23] The item before you this evening concerns two large projects in McIntyre Park, the bicycle pedestrian bridge over the Norfolk Southern Railroad, and the new skate park on the east side of the park.

[3:33:34] The issue that requires council decision is regarding the construction costs of each project both of which exceed funding currently allocated projects within McIntyre park include pedestrian bridge the skate park with the third being a large generic project for the implementation of the park master plan.

[3:33:57] Combining funds from three, these three projects would provide a means to complete both the bridge and skate park projects utilizing existing funds.

[3:34:08] The bridge connecting the two sides of the park has been shown on numerous city plans for many years beginning in 1972 master plan from McIntyre Park and carrying through to the current city comprehensive plan.

[3:34:22] The bridge is a critical east west link in the off street transportation network.

[3:34:29] A $1.2 million grant has been received from V. for this project.

[3:34:36] The skate park was included in the 2012 adopted master plan for the park and will replace

[3:34:41] the skate park that was originally located on McIntyre Road.

[3:34:45] That facility was lost due to the construction of the U.S. 250 bypass John Warner interchange.

[3:34:52] a temporary escape facility was located in the old parking area on the east side of the park in February of 2013.

[3:35:01] Following the receipt of bids for the escape park, staff had negotiated with the low bidder to reduce the cost of the project by over $450,000.

[3:35:11] This will result in the exclusion of lighting in the facility at this time.

[3:35:16] However, our plans are to provide the critical infrastructure that will allow for easy installation of the lights in the future.

[3:35:24] No skating play elements were removed from the scope as part of the negotiations.

[3:35:29] The proposed funding approaches to reallocate funds for the McIntyre master plan implementation capital account to each of these projects in order to bring both to fruition.

[3:35:41] This approach will not use all the available funding and will leave the balance for some other projects in the park.

[3:35:49] That includes a trail from the bridge to the interchange and a bridge over a

[3:35:54] tibetary to Shanks Branch connecting a trail into the botanical garden core area.

[3:35:59] Should council agree with this approach other projects within the park will be delayed until further capital funding may be approved.

[3:36:07] of staff acknowledges that this will delay other amenities identified in the master plan.

[3:36:12] However, staff believes that this approach will allow the city to complete two important citizen-driven community projects with existing and available funds.

[3:36:22] This concludes my remarks in presentation.

[3:36:25] I'd be glad to answer any questions.

[3:36:28] Thank you.

[3:36:34] Any questions?

[3:36:36] Okay.

[3:36:39] All right.

[3:36:40] So I guess we need a motion for the railroad bridge resolution and a motion on the

[3:36:47] skateboard.

[3:36:48] Some move.

[3:36:49] Unbote.

[3:36:50] Let's do the first one.

[3:36:52] Oh, can we do it together?

[3:36:54] We probably need to do them separately.

[3:36:58] Okay.

[3:36:59] Okay.

[3:37:00] So we need a full vote on both of them.

[3:37:03] Okay.

[3:37:03] So let's do the Ms. Galbany-Field mine.

[3:37:05] Motion of the first one.

[3:37:06] The railroad bridge resolution.

[3:37:08] Some move.

[3:37:09] Okay.

[3:37:09] Okay, and then we have a second, should I make?

[3:37:11] Second.

[3:37:12] Any discussion?

[3:37:13] Any questions?

[3:37:14] Okay, all in favor of that?

[3:37:17] There's four to zero.

[3:37:19] Do you mind doing the honors again?

[3:37:21] I move the resolution to adopt the resolution from the McIntyre Park CFP funding for the

[3:37:26] Skate Park Project.

[3:37:28] Perfect.

[3:37:29] Okay, second.

[3:37:30] Second.

[3:37:30] Any questions?

[3:37:31] One question.

[3:37:32] So Mr. Duck, this squares them away, so the skate park is good to go now or help me.

[3:37:39] Right.

[3:37:39] Yep.

[3:37:39] So yeah, we'll move forward with the exception of lighting lighting. Yeah. Okay. I just want to make sure

[3:37:44] Okay, on paper

[3:37:49] Order zero. Thank you. Thank you

[3:37:52] All right

[3:37:54] Explain the public we on this next item the agenda. We

[3:37:58] Elected at the request of the presenter

[3:38:01] To have the revanna quarterly update your report only so no verbal presentations removing on to

[3:38:07] The last item on the agenda right now, which is a report

[3:38:10] We're community development corporations report, we have 30 minutes allocated to this, important to clarify for the public, we are in the second meeting of each month, which this is, we intend for these meetings to be where we can have work sessions, which are open discussions without action on the table without emotion and resolution drafted, this should have said, we're in the future we're going to try to say work session and flag these specifically and describe them.

[3:38:40] them this way. But we are headed into a report and we are discussing this issue, the range

[3:38:47] of issues raised in staff report. We are not prepared to or required to make a decision

[3:38:52] on an action here. This is a half an hour work session on the topic of community development

[3:38:57] corporations report, which we are given by staff. And it contains a range of options that

[3:39:02] was requested by council in previous meeting. So with that, is Alex becaving to presenting

[3:39:08] or Brenda's, I'm sorry, who's going to leave it with talents?

[3:39:13] Oh, okay.

[3:39:14] Well we need Alex to do them.

[3:39:19] And the meantime, I have a point of clarification.

[3:39:21] So based on our deliberations tonight, then staff will come back to us with a resolution

[3:39:28] for adoption that would then build in kind of the specifics that are somewhat requested

[3:39:36] in this memo, i.e. the time frame in which the alternatives you want.

[3:39:43] Is that the right kind of process here that we're deliberating today, giving staff our

[3:39:51] ideas of what we like about what's being, what was researched, what we want to move forward

[3:39:56] with, and then staff will come back to us with a resolution because there are several ordinances

[3:40:02] here.

[3:40:02] I believe that's the direction we're looking for to my account.

[3:40:05] Okay.

[3:40:07] But that would happen as a result of accounts-

[3:40:09] Of our deliberations tonight, right, okay.

[3:40:12] And if we couldn't get there then we wouldn't, but hopefully that's one of the things that

[3:40:16] emerges from this session.

[3:40:18] But we, importantly, we could also, there's a lot of different ways that emotion ends up

[3:40:23] on the action item on the agenda, that could also blossom after the meeting, for instance,

[3:40:30] with Councillors requesting to put an item on the agenda, so it doesn't necessarily have

[3:40:36] to happen in this half an hour, but it could happen in half an hour, I think.

[3:40:43] Does that make sense?

[3:40:43] Is that?

[3:40:44] Well, I mean, before I understood what the intention was of this agenda item, I had put

[3:40:53] together this resolution that included the five bullet points that we could have either kind

[3:40:59] kind of like uses a menu to take away, add, and then fill in the blank for the timeframe.

[3:41:06] I don't anticipate that we'll be voting on a resolution but I do think having a resolution

[3:41:11] that is structured that way at some point will be very helpful so that we can see what

[3:41:18] new ordinances were requesting and there's either there was one, two, three different recommendations

[3:41:26] for three new ordinances that we need to give direction to staff on it that we want them to develop.

[3:41:35] Thank you.

[3:41:40] Okay. So, Mr. Kephina.

[3:41:42] There you go.

[3:41:48] Good evening, Councillors.

[3:41:50] My name is Alexander Kephina.

[3:41:52] I'm the NDS Director.

[3:41:59] So, members of the City Council had asked staff to evaluate the possibility of establishing

[3:42:06] and commercial development corporations,

[3:42:10] so the citizens who can use the corporation,

[3:42:13] or the city of other, can use the corporation

[3:42:15] to further creation of a forever housing in the city.

[3:42:21] And Andy has worked with the city attorney's office

[3:42:25] evaluated the state legislation to see whether there

[3:42:30] will be an opportunity for the city council

[3:42:32] to accomplish the requested objective.

[3:42:37] The City Attorney's Office found that the current legislation

[3:42:41] will not allow the City Council to establish a CBC.

[3:42:46] However, there are certain alternative options

[3:42:51] that are available for the City Council to pursue.

[3:42:55] If you had wisdom, you decide that it's going to help

[3:42:59] the city to accomplish a creation of more affordable housing, and some of those alternatives

[3:43:05] are part of the staff report that was provided to the city council. One being the utilization

[3:43:13] of the affordable housing fund to assist the private developers to create affordable housing.

[3:43:21] Currently, the ordinance guiding the use of affordable housing fund makes it accessible

[3:43:29] to non-profit organizations alone, private developers cannot access their

[3:43:35] affordable housing fund for creation of a affordable housing. There was an email

[3:43:44] that proposed resolution that was sent by Councillor Garvin regarding this

[3:43:53] particular item on the agenda. We are fully in support of using the private, using

[3:44:03] the affordable housing fund for making it accessible to private developers for the creation

[3:44:09] of the affordable housing. But we don't want to use it as some kind of subsidies. We like

[3:44:16] to leverage the fund in several ways to feel things like gap financing, things like maybe

[3:44:27] supporting development through loan, is that zero interest loan or low interest loan

[3:44:35] or what have you.

[3:44:36] The other options we can also explore as part of that particular, this particular financing

[3:44:45] or support mechanism for private development.

[3:44:48] The other option would be the land bank operation.

[3:44:52] I was kind of surprised.

[3:44:53] The state legislation referenced that as a land bank operation.

[3:44:56] I suppose to land bank authority.

[3:44:58] because

[3:45:00] Around United States, it's usually referred to as land bank authority, but in the state of Virginia,

[3:45:05] which has a lot of ways of doing things as opposed to other states, you know, trans-local government

[3:45:16] around the state, the authority to establish a land bank operation. On that land bank operation,

[3:45:22] I think the city can accomplish a lot.

[3:45:25] It's quite unusual to find that the land bank cooperation in Virginia can do a whole lot

[3:45:33] of things, you know, in terms of property, our position, research, demolition, they can

[3:45:39] go into pet mushrooms and what have you.

[3:45:42] And the land bank can actually, they can enter pet mushrooms and then can the city can, in

[3:45:51] In terms of agreement with the land bank authority, remits 50% of the real estate taxes collected

[3:45:58] or repropatible by a person from the land bank for up to 10 years.

[3:46:03] And essentially, I think that sharing of the real estate taxes may be one way for the

[3:46:12] land bank authority to fund its operations, you know, either pay any taxes.

[3:46:16] It's almost like a tax increment finance.

[3:46:19] Yeah, in a way.

[3:46:20] But that would be some kind of avenue to fund the operation

[3:46:26] once the policy starts coming in.

[3:46:30] I think it's a good tool.

[3:46:32] I've used it in the past.

[3:46:34] It's a tool that when you create that,

[3:46:38] it doesn't start showing signs of benefit,

[3:46:43] It's been over time, you know, the benefit that I grew to the city in terms of using it as a tool for advanced acquisition of property for future development begins to manifest itself.

[3:46:56] So I think is it good to that the city needs to consider along with other options that I'm going to be talking about here.

[3:47:03] The other option that is available with the housing rehabilitation zones, this is made

[3:47:09] by Ordnance established this housing rehabilitation zones to provide incentives and regulatory

[3:47:14] flexibility for certain housing development activities such as within tax lane on a property

[3:47:21] to facilitate sale of delinquent properties to a new one for weaker rehabilitation or

[3:47:28] demolition and their replacement.

[3:47:31] The one of the benefits of this particular designation is it increases the, it provides

[3:47:38] the opportunity to increase the housing inventory by taking on productive, it has vacant

[3:47:44] lots, abandoned buildings by, by landlords and things related to that, taking it and then

[3:47:55] and turning it into a productive property.

[3:48:00] That is one of the essential benefits

[3:48:02] of this particular program.

[3:48:04] Additionally, the other thing it does

[3:48:06] is it provides opportunity for potential development

[3:48:13] to access state funding through the Virginia Housing

[3:48:17] Development Agency.

[3:48:19] So once it's designated, the properties within that zone

[3:48:23] would be able to access or be able to become eligible for state funding.

[3:48:28] Yes, a question, isn't she?

[3:48:30] I thought you had worked in that designation for the SIA, and that's why one of the buildings

[3:48:36] that, I guess, Mr. Woodard is developing.

[3:48:39] Yeah, what we did for the SIA was designation of the area, say, revitalization area, but

[3:48:47] This one is housing, this designation will be housing rehabilitation zones.

[3:48:54] So they basically have some kind of identical functions.

[3:48:58] Okay.

[3:48:58] That's why it's not a familiar and it's not a, that's great, that's great.

[3:49:03] Okay.

[3:49:03] And the other option that the city has is to establish a more robust zoning incentive program.

[3:49:11] Right now what we have, the ADU we have in terms of regulation, basically

[3:49:16] We require a developer that is seeking with Zoning or SUP approval to provide affordable

[3:49:24] dwelling unit as part of that particular development.

[3:49:28] But with this particular option, there is something in the state legislation that grants

[3:49:38] all localities within the state the authorities to establish a density bonuses applicable to

[3:49:43] by a right development.

[3:49:45] And essentially, it gives, it will give the city some kind

[3:49:49] of opportunity or leverage to actually purchase

[3:49:58] up to a thought of fossil aid use within that development

[3:50:02] within 90 days of completion, and then listed for sale.

[3:50:07] And also, the city will also have the leverage

[3:50:10] which, you know, to actually determine or influence the rent in a disposal of remaining

[3:50:20] the use within the development based on income and legible applicants.

[3:50:28] And finally, there is another option, this option relates to the federal program, the

[3:50:36] an entitlement community, which means the city can undertake a whole lot of project and

[3:50:42] program in accordance with federal regulation. As an entitlement community, the city can

[3:50:49] actually exercise NDS in particular, exercise this particular option. The city can designate,

[3:50:56] not designate, but the city can approve a non-profit organization, which represent a target

[3:51:04] area like for instance the SIA, that non-profit organization could be a

[3:51:09] neighborhood association, any active neighborhood organization within this

[3:51:14] particular low income area. They can apply for designation as a CBD or

[3:51:18] community-based development organization, which is different from

[3:51:22] children, community housing development organizations. The reason why the

[3:51:28] federal government or HUD, if you were, created the CBDO, is to provide

[3:51:47] The other reason why the federal government established that was CBDOs are not regulated

[3:51:54] like Chaudu's are regulated or enterprise or what have you they are established and

[3:52:02] granted some kind of new ways or a large regulation you know in essence for

[3:52:07] instance the CDBG the CDBG program committee development program there is a

[3:52:13] statutory requirement that the entire two main communities like the city cannot

[3:52:18] not spend more than 15% of the city beach money for public services, they are required to

[3:52:25] spend up to 15%. However, if the city has a CBD community-based developmental organization

[3:52:32] because it is a grassroots organization, the city can raise that percentage to 50% or

[3:52:42] So that average between 15% and 30% or 50% will be dedicated to the CBD use.

[3:52:54] So there are a lot of protection that is granted to CBD use.

[3:53:00] So if it's something that we have to do, it's going to take a while to get it going

[3:53:04] I mean, the non-profit organization in the low-income area may be a read street neighborhood

[3:53:11] association.

[3:53:12] They will have to apply.

[3:53:13] They have to have a five, four, one, three designation.

[3:53:16] We have to prepare the application process, which they will complete.

[3:53:20] Then we review the application for completeness, and then if they meet all the requirements,

[3:53:25] then we send them, we consult with the U.S. Department of Health and Development, and then

[3:53:31] and if they conquer, then we satisfy them and say CBDU.

[3:53:36] And then every year, they have to submit the application,

[3:53:39] maybe one page application form for the certification.

[3:53:44] And every time they submit that particular application,

[3:53:46] we have to ensure that 51% of the board of directors

[3:53:50] are low-to-moderating.

[3:53:52] So how is it different than a community development corporation?

[3:53:56] Because it sounds an awful lot like a community development

[3:53:59] It's a, it's a, they have some kind of similarities, but CBDO is called out in hot regulation.

[3:54:09] It's, anybody can set up a CDC, it doesn't have a CDC, I don't read about it more in

[3:54:17] hot regulation, but it's also a, some kind of a grassroots community development corporation.

[3:54:24] There's still BDO, it's more grassroots, it has its protection on the federal regulations,

[3:54:35] it has a lot of leeways and is also different from the CDC.

[3:54:39] Okay.

[3:54:41] Sorry.

[3:54:43] Mr. Trump?

[3:54:44] Yeah.

[3:54:44] That's my presentation.

[3:54:48] Thank you.

[3:54:51] So, Mr. President, thank you for the report.

[3:54:55] So in regards to another has to be more so of a grassroots kind of thing, and I know that we have several nonprofits in the area, as is, and I know there's also oftentimes talk of people not wanting to duplicate work.

[3:55:12] But I do think this is somewhat of an anomaly. So if this were to be a new organization, what would that board composition have, what would it need to look like, or is it they have their own autonomy to

[3:55:25] Yeah, it's not something that the city has to dictate in terms of what they need to do.

[3:55:35] However, if the city is going to fund them, then the city will have the delay in terms of seeing.

[3:55:45] We're going to give you this amount of money here since we expect you to do with the money.

[3:55:49] and then the money has to be consistent with the SIA plan,

[3:55:53] the comprehensive plan, the consolidated plan,

[3:55:56] on what are you.

[3:55:57] The city cannot dictate directly like you would dictate

[3:56:00] to an interest or an interest.

[3:56:01] They have to be independent.

[3:56:03] So they'll be independent.

[3:56:04] The city isn't their board per se,

[3:56:06] but more so like a partner?

[3:56:07] No.

[3:56:08] Yeah.

[3:56:08] OK, how long, like in other examples,

[3:56:11] how long does it normally take for these kind of entities

[3:56:13] to get off the ground and up and running?

[3:56:15] And the most important thing is to have a delineated low income neighborhoods that meet the criteria.

[3:56:26] Secondly, to have a viable non-profit organization, grassroots non-profit organization within that neighborhood.

[3:56:33] Some people that live in that neighborhood are willing to come together to create that particular non-profit organization.

[3:56:42] They have to get a 5413 designation from IRS.

[3:56:48] And, of course, they have to have buy-offs.

[3:56:51] They have to have a debut to higher executive director.

[3:56:55] Of course, they can seek that kind of funding.

[3:56:59] They may ask the city for the funding, what have you.

[3:57:02] And then they will also get through and in compliance of federal regulation.

[3:57:12] I have a question from, could the city provide technical assistance though to start one

[3:57:17] even though it wouldn't be under the umbrella of the city, we could like we do with the

[3:57:22] ASE program and the economic development office.

[3:57:24] Yeah, we can do the training, provide technical assistance in terms of them starting the

[3:57:31] interested, but it started the organization. And then, of course, I recommend to them

[3:57:38] some federal training that they need to attend.

[3:57:40] Right. Okay.

[3:57:46] Mr. Remake, I have a question. I don't want to.

[3:57:51] Just, this will be a combination of state and federal.

[3:57:55] Yeah. If at the end of this presentation, the council gives us a direction, we have to go back

[3:58:03] can then figure out how we can marry the federal program with the state program.

[3:58:10] But as far as the CBDO is concerned, it's something that the city can execute on its own

[3:58:18] by providing technical assistance to potential group of people that are interested in starting

[3:58:25] this particular program.

[3:58:26] so really I was heading for with the federal situation as it is with the feds

[3:58:34] guarantee the money or how would they how would that work where the feds the only

[3:58:39] money we get from the federal government is CDB Jan home fund you know and that's

[3:58:46] sort of at risk right now correct yeah it is but I don't think they're going to

[3:58:53] I'm sorry, I don't think the current administration is going to eliminate it because there are a lot of interest groups, US Conference of Mayor, American League of Cities, American Employee and Associations, and a whole lot of other interest groups that are lobbying to ensure that the program remains in place.

[3:59:18] If I recall, we're part of that log group effort.

[3:59:24] Exactly.

[3:59:28] A couple of questions.

[3:59:30] So I am, there's a great value in counseling the policy

[3:59:35] making body, but I'm also curious about your opinions

[3:59:38] about what works the best for a city our size.

[3:59:41] So a lot of, you know, we have some, a lot of time we feel

[3:59:45] like a lot bigger a city, but we're 50,000 people

[3:59:48] and NDS, one of the things that the efficiency study found

[3:59:52] out is that there can be a downside to some of our initiatives when we kind of

[3:59:57] load a lot of new projects on to on to

[4:00:00] So I'm trying to think through those concerns well we have, and I can hear you're enthusiastic and you really care about this and we all do. So what's the options that really would be the best and most effective. I know that I took Mr. Balmy very much to mine in saying the projects that have a long startup cost that acquire a lot of administration and care and feeding can sometimes take quite

[4:00:31] long time to become effective of all these the land bank to me just on the

[4:00:36] face of it seems like it would be the most impactful quickly because you could

[4:00:41] sort of I can envision you know five go getters on the board saying well we're

[4:00:47] gonna get started with and it was just recently authorized and it seems as if

[4:00:51] it would be self-running and it's it has to have these purposes so but I'm

[4:00:56] very curious about where your advice does it's where we should track our

[4:00:59] in your knowledge of NDS, given your knowledge of the city or size?

[4:01:06] I think land bank is a, land bank is very practical.

[4:01:12] It's something that we need.

[4:01:16] Even though it was authorized, I think in 2016, you know,

[4:01:20] I wish it was done way back before then,

[4:01:24] because by now we would have done that.

[4:01:27] I think Blambank is like a low-hanging fruit, you know, I think it's something that staff can work with Lisa, you know, to explore that, and I think it can be quickly executed because

[4:01:42] Do we have enough target properties in a city of the size that would justify the existence because it looks like the landbank works on a vacant abandoned and tax-stalling

[4:01:53] I think what properties we have is sufficient.

[4:01:57] I think Stacey was working with the tax assessor

[4:02:04] to do the inventory.

[4:02:06] I think she's compiling that.

[4:02:08] We can get it and email it to the City Council.

[4:02:13] That's a good question.

[4:02:15] However, if we set up a land bank,

[4:02:17] even if we don't use it right now,

[4:02:19] over time, the benefit of the land bank will begin to materialize. I think there are several

[4:02:28] things, usually, that the genuine grants, the local government in terms of land bank.

[4:02:35] There are several things here that the land bank does, that there will be benefit shelter

[4:02:38] to the city right away. So I think we need to explore that because it wouldn't take a whole

[4:02:47] a lot of work to put the land band together. However, to operate the land band, you have

[4:02:53] to have a dedicated maybe about time person, you know, they don't meet all the time, but

[4:03:01] the person will be somebody who will be doing research on properties and things like that.

[4:03:05] So that's why I think we need some time beyond...

[4:03:09] They don't pay for that, does the land make have an operating budget, for instance, or are

[4:03:13] are they purely, are they purely, are they, are they paying for the, for the staff that

[4:03:20] will be coordinating the, the research. And if property is closing, it's going to cost

[4:03:27] money and things like that. And the staff salary. And then of course, once the lab bank, you

[4:03:38] know, there's a lot of questions here because I, one of my questions would be, do we, in

[4:03:43] in creating this, is it self-funding through its operations or does it?

[4:03:49] It takes a while before it becomes self-funding.

[4:03:54] If we have a land bank, they probably take a few years before it can start funding itself.

[4:04:00] In terms of, if we list it, if 50% that goes back into it.

[4:04:04] I have another question.

[4:04:05] Is there any possibilities that you could do a land bank jointly with Al-Moral County?

[4:04:10] given given the memo, given the MOU about redevelopment and housing and what is there is that pot enabled within the it's possible it's possible if the state legislature legislation allows it.

[4:04:23] That is something that can be considered.

[4:04:27] It doesn't able to join the regional.

[4:04:29] So it really does act like an authority.

[4:04:31] interesting. I would be really, this could really hit what we've been talking about a lot for a lot. I mean, I guess who runs the land bank?

[4:04:40] The city can land bank is if the city creates, if the city creates that then it becomes a city can decide how it takes place.

[4:04:51] But does it have a board? So the board can have a county and city wraps on it if it's going to be doing both restrictions.

[4:04:59] Yeah, it's a five-member board. Yeah, you could be treated like a number but I would be I'm very interested in it. Yeah, I would

[4:05:11] It's intriguing and just

[4:05:13] Costes because of trust

[4:05:16] I don't know, but just to develop the give staff to go ahead to develop the ordinance. Oh, yes, I'm sorry

[4:05:23] You know, I would like to be advised on that on that

[4:05:29] that possibility in conversation obviously with your counterparts, but it'd be super interesting

[4:05:33] because there, this is one of the reasons the housing has come up so much as a possibility

[4:05:40] of cooperation because populations do move around a lot. You can, it's a lot as we grow

[4:05:47] kind of press our boundaries, you know, the communities are growing closer together. It'd be

[4:05:51] very interesting to see the counties and maybe they wouldn't be interested, but I'd like to

[4:05:55] At least, it's for it.

[4:05:57] And we did pass an MOU directing

[4:05:59] area's cooperations.

[4:06:00] This would be completely connected to that area.

[4:06:06] Well, just as a precautionary note,

[4:06:08] just remember, by low, so high.

[4:06:12] Especially if you're talking about self-funding,

[4:06:15] that's the problem with real estate.

[4:06:19] But this was just to give us the enabling order.

[4:06:22] But I think from the very beginning,

[4:06:24] that has to be kept in line.

[4:06:26] But you're right, it's a little bit down the road.

[4:06:31] I mean, we can just go by all the recommendations

[4:06:34] and have briefs conversation because I'm really,

[4:06:37] really interested in all of them and how they come online

[4:06:43] and how they coordinate with each other

[4:06:45] that's part of like a grand vision.

[4:06:48] But what I saw with the incentives

[4:06:50] or the private development is that it could also be a way

[4:06:54] for us to kind of jumpstart or encourage more of our smaller minority contractors.

[4:07:02] Yeah, that's a good point.

[4:07:04] I really could be an engine for them to get you know more robust and be competitive.

[4:07:10] Yeah, actually this is working on some kind of revolving loan fund proposal.

[4:07:17] So this is one of the reason why we would like to have this private initiative, and then

[4:07:24] the existing governments to allow staff to provide access to private sector in terms

[4:07:34] of leveraging, and then also helping probably small minority contractors in terms of accessing

[4:07:43] and the fund for either innovation, you know, of multi-units and things like that.

[4:07:50] No, I think that, I would, I find that really appealing.

[4:07:57] I don't know, I have the colleagues

[4:07:59] feel like, but I think that that, that's something that we've talked about, how do you spur

[4:08:04] the construction industry and with the minority representation, and this could be one of those

[4:08:11] tools that the government can actively participate in.

[4:08:17] Yeah, I mean, I think I'm sorry.

[4:08:21] Yeah, I think it's a great idea to just think we have to be cautious in terms of who

[4:08:29] we bring to the table because you don't want to create a sense in which you have like people

[4:08:36] coming on saying, well, this is again like what's best for you.

[4:08:39] This is something that you should do and I don't think that's what we're I know that's not what we're saying

[4:08:43] It's just something you offer that people come to the table. Yeah, they they are the ones choosing to come to the table

[4:08:49] The grassroots approach I think is

[4:08:53] Grassroots needs fertilizer

[4:09:01] All

[4:09:03] right, what other so you're looking for direction through council what what else what else what

[4:09:11] most do you need to know about it?

[4:09:12] I just like the housing rehab zones.

[4:09:15] I think it could be applied to the small aeroplanes.

[4:09:17] Our small aeroplanes just become them.

[4:09:20] Yeah, everything that is here,

[4:09:23] we don't have a problem with that,

[4:09:25] but it's just the time to put it up.

[4:09:27] Sure, yeah.

[4:09:28] Some of them might be like a little hungry food,

[4:09:30] like men in the ordinance,

[4:09:33] to allow private sector to access.

[4:09:37] You know, the affordable housing farm

[4:09:40] in the form of a low interest or zero interest loans and they use it as

[4:09:44] leveraging and provide opportunity for maybe duplex, triplex or duplex or what

[4:09:56] have you renovation and things like that. So there could be a lot of benefit in

[4:10:02] that and the reason why we are changing the way we are looking at changing the way

[4:10:09] we are managing the front is being used is you know right now a council has doubled the allocation

[4:10:16] you know but if you look historically we've spent about seven million dollars you know in terms

[4:10:24] of the money going into the park but the amount of money we have coming back in India we have

[4:10:32] different. It's 400,000, you know.

[4:10:37] I think going for that we need to diversify

[4:10:41] a portfolio, change the program a little bit. Like the mayor said, things

[4:10:47] strategically. It doesn't have to be just capitalizing people to produce

[4:10:53] affordable housing. We can actually resolve the money because somewhere down the

[4:10:57] road, you know, five years, seven years from now, I think we need to make

[4:11:02] in terms of vision we need to make the programs sustainable so at some point in the future you know at

[4:11:08] least the money or the proceeds coming back portions of that would be able to pay for additional

[4:11:16] staff to be able to do specialized functions you know there right now we don't have the opportunity

[4:11:22] to do that I think we need to do it you know because in the future as well another city council may

[4:11:28] come in and decide they're not going to be funding for the

[4:11:32] house. I'm not saying that it's going to happen but you never know who's

[4:11:35] going to be behind that desk. And then hopefully if we do what

[4:11:42] we are proposing to do, hopefully in the next five years we'll be able to

[4:11:46] have a sustainable affordable housing fund as opposed to just

[4:11:52] putting money in it all the time. I want to just want to call

[4:11:56] a lot of race attention to the past 11 o'clock, which is usually when we almost up with our

[4:12:00] 30 minutes here. So I just want to, unless we want to spend more time, we probably wrap this up.

[4:12:05] I just want to make sure we give clear direction to staff, we know what we're going to get back.

[4:12:08] Yep, I was just about to, so this is only 35 minutes.

[4:12:12] Sure. Okay, so what, let's add here if I wouldn't get directions to.

[4:12:15] Does that think we, no, I think we need to discuss that.

[4:12:19] Oh, just one last question for me.

[4:12:21] there. Does this impact the CRHA in the shape homework fashion or is this potential partner or?

[4:12:28] I don't think it impacts them. If we have a land bank authority, it's a

[4:12:33] authority that we benefit CRHA. The cities go PHA and things like that. So I don't think anything

[4:12:43] we are proposing here will impact them. Okay. Thank you.

[4:12:48] Well, again, I just want to say that I support this broader portfolio and that it is going

[4:12:57] to give us a lot more tools to start producing affordable housing.

[4:13:03] I think so.

[4:13:03] And we're not waiting on housing authority and we're not even waiting on, he's not housing

[4:13:09] alignments.

[4:13:10] They're going to be players in the field, but these are other tools that are going to actually

[4:13:15] really let us start pushing the production of housing.

[4:13:20] So I just feel that this really is the beginning of a concerted strategy on how to produce

[4:13:29] affordable housing independent of the other housing providers, which is something that

[4:13:35] we haven't had before.

[4:13:36] So I really thank you a lot for getting this in Lisa, the research that Lisa and Andrew have

[4:13:41] done, too.

[4:13:42] So I just, I had in my draft resolution, I put down the October 23rd date only because

[4:13:50] that's when the June 19, how HAC recommendation resolution had a deadline and that was when

[4:13:58] the first quarterly report was coming from the strategic plan.

[4:14:04] That was somewhat arbitrary but just somewhat also to suggest that it would be great to coordinate

[4:14:09] the other council resolution with this one so that it begins to have that feeling of

[4:14:17] a concerted citywide affordable housing production strategy. So if that makes any sense.

[4:14:25] Yeah, I was going to ask would it be possible to take this feedback if there's kind of general

[4:14:30] enthusiasm about all of these items as long as there's no major issue that would hold them

[4:14:36] up to get a model result. I mean to me the thing will make more sense to be to get model

[4:14:41] resolutions if you need multiple ones which you probably would because they're quite different

[4:14:44] items. And I think it would be great if we also got a because they do fit together strategically

[4:14:53] just some kind of a memo that that's not a lot but that would couch them both with each

[4:15:00] And with, obviously, our, obviously, strategic plan, but I think with the other items that we have, we have new, you know, we have new staff. Also, the, the works that we, and, um, and, yeah, right here, we develop a manager. So I would, um, those are the two deliverables that I would think would be great. Would be model resolutions and a strategic overview of this. And then you tell us when you think you can start giving it, giving us this.

[4:15:30] model resolution with the kind of on the board.

[4:15:33] And I think one of the important things for me is, I mean, we always do this is the

[4:15:37] resource allocations and the doability.

[4:15:40] I mean, we have to consider those things.

[4:15:41] We don't want to lard, you know, if it's not workable within the current, and yes, but

[4:15:47] we know that affordable housing is a priority of ours.

[4:15:50] So this would bring us right into the next budget cycle.

[4:15:54] Exactly.

[4:15:54] I think one of the other things that we have to consider, too, and I mentioned earlier, was

[4:15:59] any sort of joint effort with Auburn County, and so we may want to tee this up as part of our discussion with the county in September to get a sense of where they are on it as well, and that would give staff, if we're aiming for October, that would give staff a little more time to make adjustments based on the feedback that we get from the county.

[4:16:20] Yeah, obviously if that I think that by the next meeting we wouldn't if we would want a like some kind of a cut at feasibility on that if it's not

[4:16:28] We if it's not feasible to join layer

[4:16:30] Maybe we can just do a lamb make ourselves and then I could join but probably not if we're talking about a regional

[4:16:34] Lambay that's going to be a longer run thing, but we could absolutely bring it up to the next summit with the county board

[4:16:40] I really would like to recommend that the City Council pursue the possibility of having a joint city county land bank authority

[4:16:48] Yeah, you would. Okay. Great.

[4:16:51] Yeah, it would be. That's progressive.

[4:16:53] It would be very, it'll be. It would be terrific.

[4:16:55] Yeah, just in paper, but we'll see.

[4:16:57] And we've built a lot, a lot of things to explore with that.

[4:16:59] Of course, we can definitely talk about it.

[4:17:01] We can definitely talk about it.

[4:17:01] Right. We can go fall back to just the city.

[4:17:04] The nice thing is we have the MOU.

[4:17:06] We know that this is a value to both bodies,

[4:17:08] as we did an MOU on housing and development.

[4:17:11] But I can imagine there's a lot of detail

[4:17:13] in the ordinance that you have to write.

[4:17:15] So,

[4:17:19] if you got in clear direction, so we're going to be seeing something around September

[4:17:25] with regards to the land bank and then something maybe the beginning of next year with regards

[4:17:31] to the bigger picture with all these other components and then that also could let us know

[4:17:36] whether we need another staff position, quite honestly if in order to get some of this off

[4:17:42] the ground.

[4:17:45] Thank you for your hard work.

[4:17:46] Thank you so much and thank you very important for the city to move forward on Lisa. Thank you Robertson and

[4:17:51] Brenda Kelly was involved as well

[4:17:55] All right

[4:17:56] includes our regular

[4:17:57] Regular agenda

[4:18:01] Go to other business from my colleagues. Do you want have anything they want

[4:18:08] to bring up?

[4:18:09] Okay, mr. Jones. I do want to put in a special request that we see the the comments that were on those postcards

[4:18:15] I just, this is about the, about Warren Mills.

[4:18:19] Let me see that data.

[4:18:22] Any, on the other side, any other business?

[4:18:25] No, no.

[4:18:26] Okay, all right.

[4:18:27] Finish other business.

[4:18:28] Now we go to second, manage the public periods.

[4:18:31] Any, make the public wish to name and address three minutes.

[4:18:38] Good evening, Brandon Collins.

[4:18:39] I live at 418 Fairway Avenue, and I work for FAR.

[4:18:44] And, you know, I've been intrigued by this conversation.

[4:18:48] It's disappointing to me to sort of gotten wind of this by checking your agenda and the

[4:18:54] agenda materials instead of having some contact with the city government about such a really

[4:19:00] important topic, and it's gotten sort of our curiosity picked us to where this came

[4:19:05] from and what is the intention of originally looking to see about a city CDC apart from

[4:19:12] the CRA.

[4:19:13] as you know, a CDC not being something that the city can actually do on its own is actually

[4:19:18] not new news, it was fairly old news.

[4:19:21] But this information presented is really interesting and I think it would be, as I'm sitting

[4:19:30] here listening, I know it sounds to me like you guys are not really interested in partnering

[4:19:34] with CRA on these efforts or seeing a way that this can help with the redevelopment of public

[4:19:40] housing or making sure that CRHA can redevelop and develop additional affordable housing in

[4:19:47] the city and become an actual developer of affordable housing here.

[4:19:52] But looking at some of these recommendations, there are certainly things in here that

[4:19:56] could assist the housing authority in major ways.

[4:19:58] It seems to me I would hope before any resolution comes to you.

[4:20:04] You can put the land bank aside because I'm not sure that that's as beneficial to

[4:20:09] CRHA as some of the other things, but before these other things come to you, a conversation

[4:20:16] with CRHA is greatly needed about this, particularly a redevelopment committee, and seeing how

[4:20:22] these things, well, it might not impact them if you just kind of do it your own and go it

[4:20:26] alone in the city of Charlottesville, it's going to do this, that you actually might find a

[4:20:30] a way that could really make things work for CRJ.

[4:20:33] As you know, they're searching for ideas

[4:20:36] and they need to help.

[4:20:37] And I think you guys should be in the business

[4:20:39] of helping them.

[4:20:40] I would also say meet with FAR.

[4:20:42] We want to be an active partner.

[4:20:44] We're actually expanding our staff capacity.

[4:20:46] We're looking into issues like this in a much bigger way.

[4:20:51] And we're really excited about that.

[4:20:53] And we want to engage with you.

[4:20:55] So give us a call.

[4:20:56] We want to talk about it.

[4:20:57] What's very interesting is the idea

[4:20:59] of a CDBO, I can think of a nonprofit that has 501C3 status that has some understanding

[4:21:05] of affordable housing, where the idea of perhaps establishing land trust has been something

[4:21:11] that has been discussed, or the idea of resident management corporations.

[4:21:15] This is another kind of big idea for that, and that's something I think worth exploring

[4:21:20] with far and other partners.

[4:21:22] Certainly, not just the RHA, but also, I think, Habitat and PHA also should be consulted

[4:21:28] on these things. And I think you have the duty to do that. I would also just mention

[4:21:34] on the HRZ, the rehabilitation zone, waving a tax lien. I would love to know the specifics.

[4:21:41] I'm sorry, I'm out of time. I have how that might relate to payment in lieu of taxes.

[4:21:46] First here. Thank you.

[4:21:49] Anyone else?

[4:21:50] Hello,

[4:22:01] my name is Kali Sishan and I'm a resident of Charlottesville. And you guys should be

[4:22:06] horribly ashamed of yourself. It is unbelievable to me that you guys have the

[4:22:11] intellectual dishonesty to frame the rally on the 8th and the 12th as a first

[4:22:16] amendment issue when it's clearly not you're acting like it's oh it's what

[4:22:20] you can't just silence people because of the difference of opinion. Nobody's

[4:22:24] saying silence them, people are saying that you don't have to give them a

[4:22:27] taxpayer-funded stage. And frankly the first amendment eases and even the

[4:22:32] It isn't even relevant here because the reason people are asking you to

[4:22:36] re-brope the permit isn't because of the content of their speech, it's because

[4:22:39] it's a public safety issue, which is very much within the regulations.

[4:22:47] I really think that you've disappointed the entire city tonight and we see where

[4:22:51] you stand now and you've made it very clear that we can't trust you between the

[4:22:55] lies about protesters being violent, which is clearly provably false by

[4:22:59] looking at all the videos, bringing up the ACLU, defending the Nazis, like what

[4:23:06] happened with the Nazis? Maybe that wasn't such a great idea. It is just, well I

[4:23:13] won't say it's unbelievable because I'm cynic and I don't trust the government

[4:23:15] much at the time anyway, but it is shameful. It really is shameful. And you know if

[4:23:22] ISIS wanted to get a permit to hold a rally in the park, you would laugh,

[4:23:29] you

[4:23:29] arrest them. You can somehow see terrorism when it's foreign and brown but when it's white

[4:23:35] and in your backyard, well, it's just people with a difference of opinion. The KKK and the Nazis

[4:23:40] have killed more Americans than any other foreign terror group ever has or ever will.

[4:23:47] And it is just mind blowing to me that we're even having this conversation. This is ridiculous.

[4:23:56] Thank you.

[4:24:06] Nancy Carpenter, thank you for this opportunity this evening.

[4:24:10] Almost Tuesday morning, good morning.

[4:24:12] I also am in the camp of revoking the permit, not because of free speech rights.

[4:24:18] Those idiots had the right to spew whatever violent,

[4:24:22] filled, hate-filled messaging they want to use to kind of unite their silly side and

[4:24:28] create a new civil rights movement if they so desire.

[4:24:31] However, I'm looking at it from a public safety issue too.

[4:24:34] We have a day shelter right across the street.

[4:24:37] from where this rally is going to be held.

[4:24:41] There are a lot of people that are going to be triggered

[4:24:45] by the stuff that they will see.

[4:24:48] We have women who are sexual assault survivors

[4:24:51] and they will be subjected to the misogynistic clamor,

[4:24:57] claptrap clamor of some of those men that will be attending

[4:25:01] because we all know that they don't have a very high opinion

[4:25:04] of women.

[4:25:05] We also have people who have PTSD who are veterans that may be severely triggered by some

[4:25:12] of that militarized police presence we will see that we will experience.

[4:25:18] We also have people, this is a low barrier shelter, so sometimes they're intoxicated and

[4:25:24] when you're intoxicated we all know what that does to us.

[4:25:26] It lowers our inhibitions and our boundaries and our barriers.

[4:25:30] And those are people that could inadvertently say something.

[4:25:32] And once again be subjected to the criminal justice system because they'll have zip ties put on their hands because they're drunk and public if they so wish to be targeted as such.

[4:25:43] We also have people who have mental health issues who don't know what sometimes how to maintain their emotions like I'm trying very hard to do right now.

[4:25:54] And they could go up in the park and the next thing I know some basic man or baked the

[4:25:59] last go or humble pie is going to be bust in their head open and they're going to be

[4:26:05] in the hospital or worse.

[4:26:07] There's also as public safety, I know you walk that square, you have to look at the physical

[4:26:13] space of that square.

[4:26:15] How it's one thing to have a couple of courthouses that you can stage the goons from, okay?

[4:26:21] That's one thing.

[4:26:21] But you have four streets.

[4:26:23] You have a residential area directly behind that.

[4:26:26] You're one block off the mall with a lot of tourists that aren't going to know what's going on here.

[4:26:32] And there are people, those are people who have identities that these fools don't deal with very well, okay?

[4:26:40] Jason Kessler has said on that podcast that I sent you an email of.

[4:26:45] I don't mean to have time to read it, but it is a podcast and I've identified the times that where he said the thing.

[4:26:51] but he said the police were totally on his side.

[4:26:53] He said the oath keepers were coming.

[4:26:55] They weren't sanctioned by their leadership,

[4:26:57] but you can't stop people from coming, all right?

[4:27:00] He talked about the German nationalists in the Europe,

[4:27:03] the nationalist movements over there,

[4:27:05] how they can I effectively organize,

[4:27:07] but they are going to organize here,

[4:27:09] and that means they will bring violence.

[4:27:11] Thank you.

[4:27:12] Revoke it or move it.

[4:27:14] Thank you.

[4:27:31] You know, I do understand the city management and Chief of Police and City Council are

[4:27:36] a very difficult position to learn the events of July 8th.

[4:27:39] It means clear, you know, there is a legal and constitutional requirement, requirements

[4:27:44] that have to be met.

[4:27:46] It's clear, I mean, you need some policing presence that you can.

[4:27:49] You have to provide separation.

[4:27:52] But I do think the presentation did not give a full view of what happened that day.

[4:28:01] You know, there were people gathered, and people were on the street adjacent to the park.

[4:28:04] They moved to the street adjacent to the parking garage, playing closed policemen to clear

[4:28:08] that non-lawful assembly, and they successfully de-escalated and cleared the path for the KKK

[4:28:14] to leave the garage.

[4:28:15] And it was after that that riot police primarily came out, and it was that point after every

[4:28:21] remember the KKK had left that people moved back to the street adjacent to the park and

[4:28:25] you saw riot police line up in a peaceful, lawful assembly and these were officers from

[4:28:32] outside of Charlottesville, one of them over the PA system said and I quote, you better

[4:28:36] watch yourself, Charlottesville and fired in total three canisters of tear gas.

[4:28:44] Tear gas is banned by the Geneva Convention.

[4:28:46] It is not a non-lethal form of crowd control – it is a less lethal form of crowd control.

[4:28:53] People have died from it.

[4:28:54] People will have serious long-term effects from it, you know, getting hit directly.

[4:28:59] And I think we need to think, you know, what – the presence of the riot police escalated

[4:29:04] the situation more than anything.

[4:29:07] And I think we need to think, you know, long-term about the implications of having hundreds

[4:29:12] of riot police with military-grade equipment.

[4:29:17] Basically, acting like, you know, the residents respond to that as if they're an occupying

[4:29:22] army.

[4:29:23] Of course, you know, this is part of a larger, you know, national issue of militarization

[4:29:27] of local police.

[4:29:28] And, you know, this is one event.

[4:29:30] But I mean, once you have militarized police force, you know, it sort of just builds on itself

[4:29:34] and it gets out of control and everyone can have good intentions, but you end up with

[4:29:38] that outcome.

[4:29:38] I mean, you look at, you know, again, it's part of a larger issue.

[4:29:40] you look at areas like uprisings in Ferguson and Baltimore where black residents were treated

[4:29:46] by militarized police as if they were living in an occupied area.

[4:29:51] And I think City Council should respond proactively to this and follow the recommendations of the

[4:29:56] the ACLU in terms of exploring having stronger...

[4:30:00] Citizen oversight and citizen control over policing policies, and having city council review the purchase of military grade equipment and surveillance technology, and to ensure that policing strategies comply with constitutional rights, citizens. Because, again, this is a larger issue, and I know it sounds alarmist to say, but you know, imagine you have this amount of militarized police presence, and you have a mass demonstration against a war like with Iraq, or with the Trump administration,

[4:30:29] to clear Black Lives Matter terrorist organization, which I know sounds alarmist, but thank you.

[4:30:32] Members of the administration have said they want to do that.

[4:30:35] So again, think about the long-term locations.

[4:30:36] Thank you.

[4:30:37] Thank you.

[4:30:41] What else?

[4:30:44] No.

[4:30:44] You can't.

[4:30:46] First thing you can't go twice.

[4:30:52] We can't.

[4:30:54] She's asking me to read her statement.

[4:30:57] I'll leave it up to you to determine whether I can or not.

[4:31:00] Is that okay with her right here?

[4:31:01] Okay.

[4:31:01] All right.

[4:31:01] To whom it may concern.

[4:31:03] I'm very concerned about the safety of the community with the upcoming Unite the Right event

[4:31:07] on August 12th.

[4:31:08] And both the amount and type of people who are expected to gather, there is legitimate cause for concern of violence.

[4:31:14] I'm asking that you revoke Jason Kessler's permit for August 12th, both for reasons B and F, in your standard operating procedure for the special events permit.

[4:31:24] Which says that a permit may be denied because of danger's activity or location, or because the event is taking up more than a reasonable allocation of city funds and resources.

[4:31:33] I know the cost is not any after the July 8th action, but the high cost of police resources in events like this is fairly well documented.

[4:31:41] We all know there are many other better resources our city's money could be put towards.

[4:31:45] Our tax dollars should not go towards police protection for white supremacists whose goal is to intimidate and terrorize a diverse community.

[4:31:53] The location for the rally is also an unsafe one.

[4:31:55] Kessler claims that 700 white supremacists are going to show up, and the downtown area

[4:32:00] is not suitable for that many people, in addition to the counter protesters that will show

[4:32:04] up.

[4:32:05] If the July 8th is any indication the anticipated crowds for the 12th is just asking for trouble.

[4:32:11] I feel that the city instinctively understands this because they have already rescheduled

[4:32:15] the back to school bash, which was to take place in the pavilion, blocks away from the park.

[4:32:20] The implication seems to be that the city feels that the downtown area is not a safe place

[4:32:25] for children and families to be on August 12th and if this is the case then the permit

[4:32:29] should be denied for being a dangerous activity. Why are white supremacists being prioritized

[4:32:35] over our children? I am sure you are aware that groups such as League of the South,

[4:32:39] Identity, Europa and Vanguard America are expected to be hanging around town all week and long

[4:32:44] and an article about the event, white supremacists are claiming that quote Charlottesville has

[4:32:49] the potential to be a breakthrough moment in our activism and quote an advertised flyers

[4:32:54] that say the fight over the statues is an attack on whites, racial existence, and to quote,

[4:32:59] fight back or die." The community is right to feel threatened and afraid.

[4:33:03] The city should not be providing a safe space for people like this.

[4:33:07] There have been many unjust laws and policies and even Supreme Court decisions in this country,

[4:33:13] as Charlottesville well knows, but that does not make them right.

[4:33:16] What is legal and what is right are two different things.

[4:33:19] a community should not be forced into terror, just because some white men feel that spreading

[4:33:24] fear is their God-given right.

[4:33:26] Well, the city do what is right.

[4:33:27] When you recognize the historic weight, the legacy of terror behind the white supremacist

[4:33:32] alt-right groups, and will you stand in defense of those who are at risk.

[4:33:35] The latest public safety concern is the group who appeared with Kessler at his press conference

[4:33:40] on July 11th, the Warlocks Motorcycle Club.

[4:33:43] They are listed as one of the ten most dangerous biker gangs in America with a history of violence,

[4:33:47] including killing police officers.

[4:33:50] There's nothing about the August 12th gathering that indicates it is going to be a safe and peaceful event.

[4:33:55] The city has an obligation and according to the restrictions associated with the permit,

[4:34:00] the right to revoke official city approval to Jason Kessler and the white supremacist.

[4:34:04] Thank you.

[4:34:05] Thank you.

[4:34:06] Thank you.

[4:34:08] Okay.

[4:34:10] Anything else?

[4:34:11] All right, we're adjourned.

[4:34:12] Thank you.

City Council

Transcript