All right, we'll go ahead and bring the meeting uh to order um before we get going because we had the Raleigh Convention Center fire last night. I know number of you just uh wanting updates and we don't have a lot of detail but I'll give you a little bit of highlevel uh additional um progress and then the city of Raleigh Carrie Painter or Evan Raleigh others uh later this afternoon uh we will have um additional sort of statements uh prepared but for for now um the city uh has just you know the city manager's office and assistant city manager Evan Raleigh have just informed me that um there the sprinklers were set off in the building. So there has been some damage where sprinklers, you know, damage uh some of the kitchens and sort of perishable goods, that kind of thing. They have looked at the um structural uh the shimmer wall. In fact, I was actually in contact with Thomas Ser, the artist of the shimmer wall this morning. Um and it looks like that that structural integrity is good. Um so that I know that's a beloved feature of that building. Um it looks like that one is okay. Um but they are still looking at all the other equipment um and assessing damages there. Um in terms of events, I know there's been some uh you know concern that what is this what happens to events? Cyber security which was supposed to have an event starting tomorrow. They have uh decided given the circumstances that they will find alternative venues. So if uh anyone's going to the cyber security conference they uh you know look for updates from that group and then uh other really kind of immediate events we are working with those organizers uh to think through uh what needs to happen but again I think we can have more details this afternoon um at city manager anything that just high level that you want to add? No, I think that covers it um quite nicely at this point. Hopefully this afternoon after all the inspections are conducted, we'll have more to share. >> Okay. And of course, just again uh a big grateful uh point of gratitude for our firefighters uh and just the preparedness uh for a fire like this that required the ladder trucks and a large coordinated response across the city as well as a fire and convention center staff who were on the on the front line there. So, just very appreciative that there were no injuries and that our um fire department responded so admirably. So, more to come in in a few moments after we get through some of this agenda. >> Madam Mayor, >> yes, >> if I may, I do also want to give a um thank you to our fire department. I know on Sunday there were a fire in Raleigh, southeast Raleigh and North Raleigh, which over 70 firefighters have had a response to those two separate fires and people were displaced. But I do want to thank the fire department for their continued work and service not just on city property but also to all of our residents in the city. >> You just uh one other reminders I did get questions about does this disrupt anything at the Red Hat Amphitheater, the ice skating, other events. Uh Raleigh Holiday downtown is all on the roads are all fine. I talked to Bill King from downtown Raleigh uh uh association and everything's open. all the lights events that were planned. Um, of course the the holiday tree and more square. So, no other disruptions outside of the immediate uh convention center. Okay, with that uh we have called the meeting to order and a pledge of allegiance. Uh, councelor Patton, would you mind leading us to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. And then we have some special awards. Is there Okay, it's on here, but no special awards at the moment. All right. Yeah, >> we'll keep going with the consent agenda. We had uh a few items pulled. I believe that was C1A, although my understanding is we're good with that now. >> I I'll mention it just so >> Okay. >> Uh yeah, thank you so much. Uh C1A had to deal with Raleigh Civil Service Act and exemption position. This came up a few years ago and I was just clarifying or asking questions of clarity to see how many uh if we were adding to the number of people exempt from being able to go to the community or the civil service commission and received uh great notes this morning and I just wanted to see if um um we can have just a summary so that the public can understand uh the questions and the responses. Thank you. >> So Charnell Jones, our HR director will be here to speak to this item. Mayor, do you want to approve the rest of the consent agenda before this item or take it separately? >> I think as long as Charnell's uh Miss Jones is right here, why don't we just go ahead with that and then we can maybe approve the rest? >> Okay. >> Charil Jones, human resources. Good afternoon. Um, as you all are aware, back in 2023, we went through this process of updating the exemption list and as well as the policy. And we went back a couple of times. And in that policy change, you all did revise the definition for division um and division head as well as immediate secretaries to kind of narrow the list of the individuals that will qualify for um exemption from the civil service act. And just want to be clear that the Raleigh Civil Service Act that is law and it dictates um the individuals that are exempt from the civil service which are the elected officials, employees or officials appointed by the city council, department heads, division heads, part-time or non-permanent officers or employees, employees serving the probationary period, and any um employees that are applying for those positions that I named previously. Um and based on that, we also went through a compensation study which required for us to be able to um to have to update our exemption list because most of the classification titles change as going through that process. And so we also have an individual's term has expired that is on the civil service commission and they um currently we need to go through a nomination and election process. And so that was the need of why this exemption list was updated at this time to make sure that we have the right people that could vote in that election process. And based on that review, um the numbers did change in regards to division heads and above it was around it went from 133 to 137 that would be eligible that would be exempt from the civil service as well as for immediate secretaries that change from 14 to eight that are on the list. So there is about a 1% change in the number. So it went down. >> Awesome. Uh thank you so much for that explanation. It really helped me understand and um I was a little bit confused with the secretaries but you did a really good job explaining that. So I really appreciate it. >> Okay. Thank you. Do you want to go ahead and make a motion um on that one because we've already pulled it so >> sure. I move to approve C1A in the consent agenda. >> Okay. Second. Any other discussion on that? All in favor of the motion I >> I. >> All oppose. Nay. Okay. So that was the first one u exempted. Then we also had uh pulled C3A um Nash Square public realm plan which we can talk about in a minute. And then also just wanted some additional on I'm just trying to see the number C uh the uh C1C. Correct. Okay. I thought we had three. Uh we were going to get additional uh information on the bonds and then uh the public realm and the civil service. So I will say if you if so that was uh C1A which we just voted on, C1 C was pulled and C3A. >> Mayor, while we're waiting, I'll move to approve the remaining items on the consent agenda. >> All right. All in favor of the remaining I. >> I. >> All opposed. Okay. Um, all right. So, why don't we move on to the C3A Nash Square Public Realm. Um, just to get some information on that. >> Good afternoon, council. Um, TJ McCort with the Raleigh Parks Department. Happy to answer any questions you have. >> Yeah, I've just got a couple. So I noticed in the plan or what is to come forward is there should be a comprehensive management plan on the protection and preservation of the historic tree canopy which I appreciate that had come to us from a couple different um concerned residents wanted to make sure and so can you just speak to the tree canopy that exists there and you know just what any other ideas that are coming forward for this uh proposal to ensure that it continues. >> Absolutely. So the trees at Nash Square we recognize are really the square's greatest asset. They've been there longer than just about anything else at Nash Square. Even though the square itself has been here since Raleigh was founded. Uh so yes, those trees are going to be at the forefront of our minds from the start of the process all the way through. Uh the first item on our to-do list is going to be a comprehensive tree health and tree risk assessment uh with Bartlett Tree Experts is uh one of the firms on the design team. So, we'll have a a full un inventory of all of the trees out at Nash Square, understand which ones are in good health, uh prioritize for protection, um and which ones we need to plan for the future for a succession plan. Um so, that tree succession plan is going to be part of the deliverables for this project. Uh it's going to help us manage Nash Nash Square strategically for decades and hopefully centuries to come. So, like I said, from the from the start of the process all the way through, uh the trees are going to be front and center. >> Great. Thank you. Could you also talk about anticipated funding needs or funding sources to implement any plans that come out of this? >> Sure. So, as as we go through the process, we'll be coming back to council uh at multiple periods. We'll we will be developing design alternatives. Uh one of the main differentiating factors between those alternative concepts is going to be the implementation cost. Um so at that time once we uh get to about the midpoint of the process when we're developing those alternatives uh we'll start making decisions uh about what track we follow uh in terms of the cost impacts for implementation. Um of course one of the deliverables with the concept plan is going to be a full implementation budget uh for what it would take to carry forward all of these recommendations. Um and at that time we would yeah discuss potential funding sources. >> Thank you. >> Any other Yes. um Mitchell Silver and then uh Megan Patton. >> Uh TJ, associated with the tree survey, uh is it in the scope to also measure the canopy, the distance between the understory, lowest branch of the tree and the ground. Uh looking at the park itself, there's a lot of sight lines. It's difficult to see through the park. And just some recommendation about an adequate uh distance between the lowest branch and the ground. So it does open up the side which offers uh some safety. So just asking is that part of it cuz right now it's very difficult to see into and through the park which does for some uh give a level of of feeling unsafe. >> Yeah, I think that's a great point and yes that will be part of the scope. Um we will get a full 360°ree assessment of every tree on site which will include like you said um right that distance between ground and canopy and also part of the design process is going to be very intentionally thinking through strategies for right crime prevention through environmental design. Uh how we make sure Nash Square is a safe place to spend time and yeah addressing a lot of the issues that are out there today in terms of visibility and lighting and and other factors like that. And the last question, you mentioned part of this is a public realm strategy. So I'm assuming the study area is not the perimeter of Nash Square, but you'll be including the context surrounding the park such as McDow, Dawson, Harget uh and and Martin Street. I'm just assuming that too is going to be part of the analysis of how that public realm connects to the new civic tower as well. >> Yes, sir. That's that's precisely right. Uh we worked with our partners in planning and transportation uh storm water and others to make sure that we weren't treating this as just a typical park master plan because Nash Square isn't just a typical park, right? It is it is more part of a cohesive civic realm, a public realm that includes the civic campus redevelopment. Um so yes, we'll be looking very very much so at the streets and sidewalks surrounding the square as well as the the park itself. >> Okay, councelor Patton. >> Hi. >> Hi. Um to that point, it's part of the larger civic space and we have new city hall going up. Um I my question is sort of around the decision to make this a standalone con consultancy project rather than say using one of our very skilled parks planners to do it in-house or tang tagging it on to the design of new city hall. So can you tell me why we landed on this? >> Definitely. Yeah. So, so because of how we scoped out this project and just like we said, right, because it's a public realm plan, it really does require a multiddisciplinary approach that gets into landscape architecture and surveying and civil engineering and transportation engineering and and so on. Uh, frankly, something that would exceed current staff capacity and and and capability to address in-house. So, we did have to uh put this project out through a request for qualifications process. Along with that, there are state statutes that dictate exactly how that goes. uh we wouldn't have been able to amend the the Civic Tower contract for anything over $50,000. Um so for this one, we did have to go through a separate RFQ process, that request for qualifications. Um and yeah, the the the designers of the Civic Tower didn't respond to the RFQ. Um however, the the the firm that worked on the master plan is on this design team in a consulting capacity. Thank you. >> So there will be some definitely definitely continuity uh with the civic tower plan. Okay. Any other conversation? If not, is there a motion to motion to approve? >> Second. >> Okay. So, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? I. >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that is unanimous. Thank you, uh, Mr. McCort. And then I had just uh pulled the C1C because I just it's it's a very large amount and just, you know, some context for council of what's going on. And we have Miss Bratzer from finance. Thank you. >> Yes. Allison Bratzer with the finance department. Um, yeah. So, there's actually two items on consent, uh, C1 C and C1D, I believe. Uh, the first one is essentially, uh, to close out the construction draw program that we have in place. Council approved that program in 2023. And so th those funds have now been spent. And so, it's time to go out and issue fixed debt. Uh, so that's the first program. All of this ties to the capital uh improvement plan as a part of the budget. Uh and again, these funds have been spent by Raleigh Water on their many initiatives that they have. Uh this is the second draw program that Raleigh Water has had. They will then be entering a third draw program which is C1D for $220 million which again ultimately ties back to their CIP plan and is a part of the financial models that support Raleigh Water? >> Just out of curiosity, what is your interest rate that you get on these? >> So, uh gosh, I don't have the bands interest rate off the top of my head. That's what we call the the draw program. I I could certainly share that. Um I'm actually up a little later with the annual uh comprehensive report. So I I'd be glad to share that interest rate with you if I get staff to give that to me. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Um with that, if there's no other questions, I'll move approval. >> And this was C1C, which is the one we pulled, but I do get your point that there were two items. Um so we have a motion and a second. All in favor of the motion? I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that passes. Thank you. >> All right. So then moving past consent to the report and recommendation of the planning commission and we have Miss Binham Walters. >> Good afternoon madame mayor, members of >> Nicole Bennett. >> Binham Walter Raleigh Planning and Development joined by joined by Nicole Bennett, chair of the planning commission. Before I turn to the report of the planning commission, I did want to share some information about TCZ 3225, Jeffrey's Grove School Road assemblage that is scheduled for a public hearing this evening. This is a collection of parcels with addresses on rooftop View Trail and Bird's Eyee Court on the west side of Creedmore Road, south of Jeffres Grove School Road. The request is scheduled for a public hearing this evening. Posted notice, web notice, meeting signup, publish advertisement, all correctly listed the public hearing as this evening. No one signed up to speak about the item. Mailed notice indicated that the request would be discussed this afternoon. For anyone here with interest in that item, it will be discussed tonight during the 7 p.m. meeting. Now, on to the report of the planning commission. So, upcoming holidays looking through January, we have a lot of public hearings scheduled for today. Uh, and looking ahead to January 6, we are suggesting four items for that meeting and these are all coming out of the planning commission report today. The first is C 20 2625 on Leville Road. This is about an acre with industrial mixeduse zoning. the the special highway overlay district and the airport overlay. They are requesting to remove both overlays and reszone to residential mixed use with a three-story height limit. There's an existing non-conforming residential use on the property that the owner would like to expand more than is allowed by the nonconformity regulations. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and with the future lane use map planning commission recommends approval. Again, all these items are suggested for your January 6 evening meeting. The second item on the planning commission's report is Z3325. This is at 2806 Gresham Lake Road. It's on the south side of Gresham Lake. This is just under 8 acres. It's currently heavy industrial with that special highway overlay district. The second uh they are asking to change to the light industrial or industrial mixeduse district and retain the Shod. Again, this is consistent with the 2030 comprehensive plan and the f future land use map planning commission recommends approval. The third reasoning request in front of you is Z3425. This is the North Hills request. This is just over 11 acres going from a a combination of districts to uh CX12 CX20 CX40 uh Shod on some of those areas. This is consistent with the plan and with the future lane use map planning commissioner uh planning commission recommends approval. Commissioner Oai was opposed again recommending a public hearing on January 6. And then the final item is text change TC125. This is an omnibus text change that is a readoption of portions of the 23 and 24 omnibuses uh that were invalidated by uh session law 202457. Uh, planning commission recommends approval and again that suggested public hearing date of January 6. What questions could Chair Bennett or I answer before you make your decisions? >> Questions? >> Yep. Councelor Patton. >> Yeah. Um, I'm going to have a couple, but I'll start with um, Leville Road. This is a second one in short succession removing the airport overlay district. So I just want to make sure I'm understanding that the airport authority or the airport staff still have further regulatory authority o over this irrespective of whether we leave the overlay on or not. So if the airport decides that this person's home expansion is not compliant with their needs, they can still my understanding is that because of where they are located within the airport noise contours that yes, they would still review. >> Okay. >> I have one on another but >> yeah, I also have a question about Leville. Um, so with the removal of the Shod 2, was there any conversation, Commissioner Bennett, with the planning commission on that? What was the request for or why to remove the Shod? >> Thank you. Good afternoon, U mayor and council. I don't recall conversation about removal of the Shod. Most of our discussion was about removing the airport overlay district. staff can assist me if you recall that. >> Yep. I suspect that given the size of the parcel and the distance from um qualifying highway >> road types that there would not be um significant requirements from the shod applicable applicable to this property. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah, that's something I might look into more when we see the case. Appreciate it. Okay. And councelor Patton, do you have additional? >> Yeah, I just um Commissioner Bennett would love to hear the conversation around North Hills. What did people find? I mean, obviously the majority of the commission was supportive of the case. What did you find to be good? What were the snags face? Just the conversation overall. Thanks. >> There's quite a bit of conversation on this one. Um I'll start with the opposition. Um, Commissioner Omay had concerns about um the height, the impact of the additional height on the adjacent neighborhoods. Um, she mentioned a lack of affordable housing with increasing the height. um she didn't believe that the um provision of open space was a significant enough community benefit um to justify the increased height. Um she had some concerns because the open space would be privately owned and regulated. Um, and I believe the the last thing was um she felt like the applicant um one of the things we were told as the applicant made their presentation was that um they were not increasing square footage or density beyond what they could do by right. And so um she felt like they should do what they could do by right rather than coming for a reasonzoning um for additional height. Other discussion was around um the traffic um the impact of the cancellation of the six forks road project and how that might impact this area. Um we had uh the the traffic consultant come and answer some questions about how traffic had increased over the years with development of um this area. Um, we uh talked about the consistency with the comprehensive plan, the policies that we were looking at that made this consistent. And um that essentially it felt like it was coming down to our decision was coming down to looking at the increased height and whether or not the benefits being offered justified that height increase because the rest of the case seemed consistent with the comprehensive plan and um a majority of us felt like it was. Yeah, I've got a question on this one too for Commissioner Bennett. Um I believe in the previous resoning case for these sites, a transit hub was a condition. Was that part of your all's conversations about um you know the need for that um with the potential BRT for Midtown? I I did watch your all's video of the meeting, but I can't I can't recall on that one. >> We did talk about that. We talked about the um provision of land for the fire station. Um but I can't remember I wasn't there. >> You weren't there. The applicant is here and can answer the I can't remember because we didn't stay on that one very long. I remember talking about the um provision of of dollars for the fire station. I don't remember the discussion about not including or including the transit hub in this one. I'm sorry. >> That's okay. I think I'll just note that for the public hearing. Um that'll be a conversation I'd like to have with transportation department um about the need for the transit hub and the location and whether that's relevant to this case. We did have a pretty comprehensive discussion about what was different about um this case versus the previous case that we had seen uh and why um some things were offered in the last case that weren't offered in this one. And it essentially what it came down to from the applicant was because they weren't asking for the additional square footage that they had asked for in the previous one, then some of those um I guess benefits weren't included as part of this one. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? Is there a motion or action? Move to set the public hearings as recommended by staff. >> Second. >> Okay. Any other discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that is unanimous. Thank you. >> All right. Uh, next we have the special items. Uh, Mr. Bryce Abernathy. >> Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Bryce Abernathy, Housing and Community Development. Um, this item is being brought back to you from the November 18th council meeting, uh, 116 Star Street. Uh, the owner came up during that meeting and suggest and requested a six-month extension. Um, and I believe council was in favor of that with the um fact if the property is properly secured and vacated. Um, this morning it was. uh staff went out and checked it and it I can confirm that it was has been secured at this point. >> So I move to grant >> I'm sorry I move to grant the property owner the six-month extension as requested at our November 18th meeting. >> Any other discussion? All in favor of the motion I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. >> Next, uh we have the tax increment reimbursement program, Ken Bowers. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. Ken Bowers is planning and development. So, this is a followup to um the work session that we held on September 16th. I just wanted to say that some sort of tax increment policy has been on the city's books since the spring of 2021. So far we haven't had any takers and so the revisions and modifications to the program are intended to make this uh program more broadly useful so that hopefully we can use it as a tool to enter into partnerships to deliver uh public infrastructure and benefits. So, a lot of this is a refresh, a shortened up version of what we presented back in September. But the what we've done is we've taken the policy, we've broadened the legal foundation for it to um uh all the reimbursement authorities that the city has to partner with uh private sector entities to produce public uh benefits and infrastructure. Um that means that projects that would not have been eligible in the old policy which was mainly for large-scale economic development would be eligible. So most of the development that occurs in the city is residential in nature. Would not have been eligible as an economic development. A lot of those um developments are quite valuable and do produce a significant tax increment. They would be eligible under this program. We're leaving the reimbursement schedule um somewhat flexible to something to be negotiated as part of the overall agreement. Um and we also since the original policy was adopted, we've council's adopted a partnership policy. We consider this to be under that umbrella and so would use the same process for intake for staff analysis for vetting and for council approval as well as the involvement of any relevant boards and commissions. So the key features of it is it's flexible can fund uh projects from modest scale to very large scale. Um it's low risk because the city is not doing any borrowing. That's one of the major ways it deser differs from tax increment finance. The borrowing is actually being done by the private sector partner. they are being reimbursed by the city. Um, and then because it's based on the tax increment, the reimbursement never exceeds the amount of revenue flowing into the city in any given year. So, what kind of things can we use this for? The two major categories. We've retained the focus on on large scale economic development. So, this would be something that's a job producing use, um, a major attraction, something of that nature. The types of projects that have been floated as targets um in the past would include things like downtown south or the redevelopment of the arena district. But smaller scale projects that could be used for smaller scale enhancements in the public realm could also be eligible. So if a mixeduse development is going up in an area of of infrastructure that really wasn't intended to accommodate good pedestrian flows, we might do pedestrian improvements. We might put in a transit stop. things that we can't that are offsite that can't be required by code but would enhance both the project and the public realm could be funded by a tool like this. So in order to be meet the requirements of participation it's got to align with the city plans and goals. You have to have an agreement value that obviously can be paid for out of the tax increment. And we also don't want to um because there is some overhead related to this. We want agreements of a certain threshold. We've set the threshold at $200,000 of value. Um it's infrastructure that we can't require by code wouldn't occur without the city participation. Um and the developer may be required to make a request for the county for participation. Now this is one thing that has changed since the policy was originally drafted and presented to you is we've provided some guidance. Instead of asking everyone to go to the county, uh we've created some thresholds. So if the agreement has a value in excess of a million dollars or is related to economic development or provides infrastructure that's regional in nature then we would want the applicant to go talk to the county. So uh to participate because the county is 60% of the of the tax you know tax bill for a property in the city of Raleigh. So if the county participates obviously there's much more larger increment than if the city goes it alone. So economic development projects are an example, projects in major regional centers would be an example, and then any infrastructure that enhances connectivity between jurisdictions of Wake County would be a third example of the types of things that would argue for county participation. I did want to say the county was not able to attend, but we have been in conversations. They are have had an opportunity to review the latest language. They are comfortable with it. They appreciate that we made edits that they recommended. They are working on their own policy. back on November 1st, um there was a presentation to the commissioner's economic development committee. Staff is moving forward over the next several months to to start drafting a county policy. They don't anticipate it being ready for adoption till uh later next year and at which time um based on how the county shakes out, we may revise want to revise some of these criteria to make sure that the city policy is in alignment with the county policy. But they express no hesitation with us moving in front of them on this issue. So lastly to sum up the financial aspects the bulk of the risk is assumed by the developer because the payments don't start until the project is built. Um uh the it's a it's again it's based on a fraction of the incremental property tax revenue so it's remains revenue positive. We've also built in a capacity limit so not too much of the city's tax base could end up subject to a tax increment reimbursement agreement. And then in terms of reporting, this will be part of the city's annual financial reporting. It'll be very transparent to the public and any other interested parties as to how many agreements are on the books, what the payouts were, and what their current status is. So, our staff's requested action is to adopt the policy. Once that policy is adopted, we prepared an update to the city's web page. Currently, it's about tax increment grants. This will be renamed to the new name of the policy. um and we'll put process guidelines will we incorporate by reference the process that's in the partnership policy and then of course you know no future agreements will be executed but for um uh the city council of receiving a staff recommendation and taking a vote. So ultimately the future of any agreement is in your hands and with that I'm available to answer any questions you may have. >> All right, thank you uh councelor Silver. >> Okay, thank you for the presentation. Um just had a question. and you said uh it's been in place since 2021. Uh no one took advantage of this uh program. Uh did you reach out to those uh large land owners or developers to find out what about that existing program wasn't workable? And in terms of this new approach, aside from the county, have you reached out as well to find out is this a program uh you know clearly you don't know until you know when it works but did you reach out to say this is acceptable and something that would be considered as a funding option for a new mixeduse project? >> Yeah. So again our conversations with the county they are amenable to considering um even in advance of developing their own policy requests that might come forward. Now, in terms of conversations with with development entities, we've had folks who have reached out to us and they haven't moved forward. A lot of it was eligibility because the project was say primarily residential, therefore it did not um qualify as an economic development project and then and therefore the old policy wasn't usable for it. I think the the specifics on the repayment schedule that were set forth lacked a certain amount of flexibility as well. So the longer you have to wait to get the payout, obviously with the time value of money, um the riskier it is for the development partner. So if you're able to negotiate within the parameters of speedier your payout, I think that would also be the attract up the attractiveness of it. Um so there's definitely interest out there. I think these were the major obstacles that we identified. Was there a third part to your question that I missed or you Okay, good. Thanks. >> Oh, sorry. Yeah. U councelor Patton and the mayor for temport. >> Hi. Um so just clarifying so the a person who a person who came to us and wanted to use this tool to do some um public improvement if they met the certain qualifications they'd have to go to the county to request participation as well and but they're approval for our program is not contingent on approval from the county as well. >> No it's not. I think that what what we would have to do though was do the financial analysis to make sure that it worked without the county participation that the repayment schedule and the size of the investment worked for that. Um, so the county saying that they don't want to participate doesn't mean an automatic denial, but it does mean that um the project scale will have to be in keeping with what the city's tax incrementing again, which again in round numbers is about 40% of the total tax bill that a property pays. >> Thank um so you said that you had some conversations with the county about their policy. Is it going to kind of track with our policy? Is it going to be different? Do you know? >> I don't know what the content is because they haven't started drafting it. I know that they are aware of our policy. We've also um had some conversations with the town of Kerry who are also considering a tax increment reimbursement program. So, we've shared our draft with them. Um I think that the I did look at I did watch the presentation that was given to the commissioner's economic development committee. I believe that the content of that presentation tracked very closely with the presentation that we've been giving to city council. So my I would anticipate that there won't be a ton of daylight, but they may have a slightly different take on when the county would participate and when we get that specific guidance from the county. I think it would be advisable for us to look at the parameters in our policy and bring and bring that into alignment. >> And you also said that um they asked for edits and adjustments to our policy. Did they set the threshold of uh over a million dollars? Was that a county recommendation? >> Um that threshold we proposed it and they reviewed it. And then the other substantive edit was there are some types of developments such as affordable housing or brownfields projects that will um apply for a tax exclusion or red or property tax reduction. And uh we the policy now requires disclosure if there is going to be such a request. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? Is there a motion? >> I move we adopt the policy as pro as list as shared >> some verb >> second. >> All right. All in favor of the motion I >> I. >> All oppose nay. Thank you very much for the work. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next we have uh Taiisha Mosley who will be presenting on the Raleigh Engagement Network city provided network benefits and citizen advisory council update. Long title that was a long title. Apologies for that. Uh good afternoon everyone. Taiisha Mosley with the department of community engagement. Um and we are going to talk about the Raleigh engagement network and CAC's today. Although you see me here, it's this the slides and information you'll hear are certainly not a onewoman show. Um, so I do want to thank the multiple departments who contributed to this to this item. The city manager's office, information technology, the city attorney's office, Raleigh Parks, communications, and last but certainly not least, I do want to thank the Raleigh Citizens Advisory Council for their partnership over the past nine plus months. And with that, we'll get started. Um, this is just a reminder for council and for our viewing audience that the initial conversations about the engagement network and citizens advisory councils began back in January of 2023. It continued through 24 at different meetings and retreats. We continued the conversations in 25. Most recently, we came to you in August with an update on citizens advisory councils. And after all of those meetings, retreats and conversations, there have been several actions that have been taken by you all and others that have been considered or proposed. For example, access to community centers. Um, there are 20 community centers that CAC's currently have access to. And as of November 28th of this year, there's been 85 CAC meetings that have taken place at city facilities. Thanks to the great folks in Raleigh Parks, um, city-owned technology. This is a familiar slide to you all. We conducted a technology assessment. We purchased media kits that included an owl, laptops, etc. Um, we've recently in working with the city attorney's office created an authorized user agreement that'll need to be signed for engagement network users before using the um hardware or the software. Um, Raleigh Parks has also done a significant amount of upgrades to their community centers. You'll see all those listed on the screen, which in some cases means that hybrid meetings can take place without an owl or any type of media kit um involved. We talked in August about a proposed Zoom solution um where the city would purchase the licenses, assign them to engagement network members um which is still on the table and we'll talk about later. We've since learned and been advised that the recording, if you choose to take this route, the recordings of the meetings within that city provided Zoom, it's not recommended that they be recorded. You've also seen information about a succession plan for CAC's. Most recently, the chair of Raleigh Citizens Advisory Council came to the Citizens Leadership Academy and shared information on what a CAC is and encourage our participants to participate. And as a recommendation of the Raleigh Citizens Advisory Council, we have added Robert's Rule of Order to the curriculum for Citizens Leadership Academy. If you're counting how many times I've said Citizen, tell me later. Um we in August came to you again. You saw these items particularly number five which was that we work with the Raleigh Citizens Advisory Council and other CAC's to join the the engagement network prior to the implementation of the items above. We're happy to say that through the continued partnership with RCAC that um they did vote to join the engagement network in October of um this year. And so that brings us to the engagement network. So this is where we are coming to you to enhance the benefits of the network to both meet the requests of the citizens advisory councils while also continuing to provide fair and reasonable support to other community groups. The majority of you joined me in the community engagement cafe back in January of 2023. You got that menu there. And of the seven items on that menu, the engagement network and access to community centers were the top two orders placed. And so we did launch the network in July of 2024 for affinity groups, small nonprofits, grassroots groups, etc. And at that time up until today, um there is access to community centers. It's a different different centers and a lower number. The city equipment looks a little bit different. Um and the capacity building as stated today is a a bit different from we are about to see on the next couple of slides. So the enhanced benefits essentially are being proposed under a tiered structure. There's general membership tier one and tier 2. Um it does require metriculation of the completion of steps before going to the next tier. um at the request of citizen advisory councils, they would like to be grandfathered in at tier 2. And you'll see here in a moment what that includes. Um I'm just going to highlight some of these um enhanced benefits that we're proposing. So annual funding is not something that's currently a part of the engagement network. We're recommending in the general membership ban um $300 per year until those funds are exhausted for specific uses. Um the community centers uh is increased from 18 to 20. City website presence is something that's new. The media kits we've talked about. We're also looking to add one-on-one consultations and targeted invitations to our community cares collaborative and the citizens leadership academy. Another cool benefit um of the enhanced network is the option to find your CAC. So residents can click the magnifying glass up there in the top right corner, type in their address, and both their CAC citizens advisory council and council district will show up. There's also a feature in the enhanced network where you can find other organizations. You can see the list of organizations who have been approved to be in the network and the meetings that they have coming up with their specific cadence. Um and all of that is in the actual engagement network platform. Tier one of the proposed platform does include um our certificate program that we partner with a higher education partner. Um course topics include things like mobilizing resources, strategic planning and thinking. Tier two includes a higher grant amount of $1,000 with the required match which is aligned with the Raleigh neighborhood registry and how it's set up today. And then also in tier 2 is the virtual meeting software. So that Zoom license that we talked about previously. So a little bit about the timeline and budget outlook. Um staff is prepared to uh begin rolling out the benefits in mid January. So including the virtual meeting software, the grant funding, the media kits, that certificate program we talked about, we would be prepared to begin in FY27. Um as you can imagine, there are mid-year costs about $25,000 that the department has absorbed through June of 2026. but to run this program um at full in a fiscal year would cost about $62,000. And so our proposed next step is that council consider adopting a resolution that would authorize then enhance benefits at the tiered benefit structure, the implementation timeline and formally incorporate citizen advisory councils. And with that, I'll take any questions. Okay, >> thank you for that presentation. Do we have questions or >> just comment? >> Okay. >> Um, I just want to thank the citizens that have been working on this with our city staff and thank our staff for the work that they put in. Um, we've come a long way from where we were. There's still directions and things that can go on, but as the city grows, I'm sure the CAC's will continue to grow. And, you know, my biggest thing is we can't go back to where we were. We can't, you know, unspill the milk. But the key, the goal is to move forward. And I hope today is a point and a time in which we can move forward as a community. >> Yep. Council Patton. >> Hi. >> Hello. >> Um just one question. I I love all the enhanced benefits at the different tiers. Um and even at the general um but I was noting they seem to be resource intensive like one-on-one coaching sessions. Um I'm sure you've thought of this but like are you do you have capacity staff capacity to support these additional benefits? >> So we do have um because it's midyear everything is not being rolled out at once. So we have the staff capacity through the end of the fiscal year and then after that and and during those six months we'll evaluate the intensity. We do have an idea um but we'll we'll do some evaluation and then if needed we'll come back during the budget cycle to potentially ask for additional staff. Councelor Harrison. >> Yeah, thank you so much Tes for all this work and to all the residents that are part of our CAC's and lead our CAC's. I know there's a number of CACs that have not um been, you know, have not come back since uh 2020, but there are folks ready, willing, and excited to get those going. So, I'm really looking forward to that, and I hope these resources are going to help jumpstart that process. I just want to note when I do Google Raleigh CAC, I come up with what I think are some older websites, older Facebook groups, um even some resources on the city pages that feel out of date. So, I'm just putting that out there as a note both to, you know, the RCAC group and to our own city staff. if there's an opportunity to kind of go through and and just remove anything that's a dead old link that would be helpful because when I do tell folks about CAC's they often Google things and find those outdated sources which then prevents them from getting engaged. So just being really thoughtful about next steps for that uh internet presence is going to be really important and if I can be of help I I will try to be but I know sometimes you have to find the original owner of the website or the Facebook group and it's not always easy. >> Yeah. Um, thank you for bringing that up. On the city side, um, my wonderful team in the audience has prepared to click go at the appropriate time. So, we will have some updated information online. >> Okay. Councelor Jones, who's done a lot of work on this. >> Yes. Super excited. Um, as we close out uh, all of this, I just had some things to say as we hopefully put a bow on this and and move to the next page. Um, I didn't come to public service as an expert in government. I came as a resident who wanted to understand it. Years ago, I signed up for Raleigh Neighborhood College and Citizens Leadership Academy simply because I wanted to learn how my city actually worked. That curiosity led me to join my local CAC and eventually to chair the organization. Those meetings were where I learned the real work of democracy. listening to neighbors, wrestling with really hard questions, and discovering that progress only happens when people are willing to show up even when it's uncomfortable. The pain of losing that connection to our city was devastating. It broke the trust between residents and their government. That is what we had to work through in these meetings. Putting our egos aside and remembering that we council are accountable to the very people we cut out of government. That's a lot of emotion. When I was elected, one thing was clear. Rebuilding our CAC system had to be done with the people, not to the people. Leadership didn't end when the vote came out. It's our job to bring people to the table and work through that pain. What has happened since then has been one of the most meaningful experiences of my public life. I'm incredibly proud of the CAC members who leaned in with good faith, lots of patience, and persistence. I'm so grateful for Robert Rice who was my vice chair from back in the day and who is a phenomenal leader and remained open to change while protecting the heart of the CAC's. And I want to thank assistant city manager Nikki Jones and community engagement director Taiisha Mosley uh who worked through complexity with professionalism and respect even when that path forward wasn't easy or obvious. So none of this work was flashy. None of it was quick. I understand that. But it was honest. It was collaborative. And it was rooted in listening. The commitment from everyone in that room to hear one another, to learn, to disagree without dismissing is something I will carry with me forever. This work is not finished and in many ways is just getting started. But it started on a foundation we built together. Not by one person or one group, but by the people who care deeply enough to stay at the table and do the work. There will always be voices who critique from the sidelines. That comes with the territory of change, but I encourage the community to also listen to the voices of those who were in the room where it happened. the residents and staff whose fingerprints are on every piece of this process. Progress isn't loud. It comes from the people sitting across from each other doing hard things with care. And that's exactly what happened here. This is why I ran and we did it. So now, let's get back to work. Thank you so much. >> All right. Thank you. And uh for all of those who brought forth this resolution, do we have a motion? >> I move to uh take staff's recommendation in um the community engagement network and CAC update. >> Second. >> Okay. Any other discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion, I >> all oppose? Nay. And that is unanimous. Thank you, Miss Mosley. >> Thank you. Have a good day. >> All right. Uh moving on to the report and recommendation of the city manager. >> Thank you, mayor. Good afternoon, mayor and city council. We have four items today in the manager's report. The first of which will be presented by Lou Bonipane, city clerk, and he will bring forward some calendar updates. >> Thank you, madame manager. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Lou Bonipin, city clerk. uh sandwiched between some meteor matters. We have a rather routine thing of adopting your annual meeting schedule for the calendar year 2026. Uh that includes your regular sessions on first Tuesdays, second Tuesday uh work session and public comment sessions and third t Tuesday lunch and regular sessions. Uh there's an exception to that. Uh Wednesday, November, excuse me, Tuesday, November 3rd, which would normally be the first Tuesday meeting, um is election day. So, uh, typically council meets the next day on the following Wednesday. Um, in addition, what's missing from your agenda materials is the primary election on March. So, that is Tuesday, March 3rd. So, we would suggest you adopt the the calendar with uh one amendment in the month of March if that's what council desires to do. Um, in addition, the agenda materials outline the uh annual budget review process, including the pre-budget work sessions and the June um budget work sessions following presentation of the city manager's proposed budget in May. Happy to answer any questions about the proposed calendar and the one adjustment that staff is suggesting. >> Okay. Do you have questions? >> No question. I was ready to move for approval with the amendment of the March meeting. We move from the 3rd to the 4th. Second. >> Okay. All in favor of the motion I. I. >> All oppose? Nay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> The next item is the residential permit parking program and we have Caitlyn Parker in transportation presenting this item. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Caitlyn Parker and I work in transportation. Today we're going to be reviewing the residential permit parking program or also referred to as RPP. So quick agenda. We're going to do an overview of the work work session that occurred on October 21st of this year. Review our implementation plan and go over staff recommendations. Also want to note that you do have a memo that does include a lot more details on these topics. So this program began in 1979. It was for single family homes. At that point, we had one zone and the annual permit was $10. It was not until 2018 that we made changes to this program at which point we defined our zone requirements, defined the petition process. We did add a caregiver permit, increase the annual permit to $20, included guest permits, and at that point we had 10 zones. Then in 2023, we did expand the criteria to include duplexes and town homes. And at that point, we have 13 zones as it stands today. And the annual permit still cost $20. So, as you can see, over the past 46 years of this program, we have not made a lot of changes, but our community has certainly changed. So, these are the current eligible properties in this program. You have a single family home, town homes, and duplexes. That does lead a large amount of excluded properties. So, for example, here we have a four family home. This home was built in 1948. Across the street is actually the town homes that was shown in the previous slide that were built in around 2022. Those town homes are allowed into the program, but this four family home is not. Also want to note that these are multifamily structures. So for example, that garden apartment does have four units with four bedrooms in each unit. So that is a potential of 16 parkers for one structure. We'll speak to restrictions later on that will help some of these residents into the program, but not all the resident residents. So at the work session, we did make some considerations. These considerations came from staff knowledge and research plus community feedback. I want to remind you that we handd delivered 3,000 survey letters to all properties within the 13 zones plus all properties within a oneb block perimeter of these zones. From there we've come with these considerations. Currently an annual permit cost $20. We were proposing $30. A guest permit cost 50 as it stands today. We're proposing $2. There's currently no limitations on amount of permits one can purchase. So in to ensure that we do have a parking availability in these zones, we are proposing a limit of four per lot annually and a four per lot daily. So that is four per lot and not four per unit. We also do have a caregiver permit that is for those such as like hospice nurses, nannies, and others providing services to homes. Um, we do recognize this could be a hardship on those going through those times. So, we are proposing going from $20 to $0 for those situations. Now, while we reviewing these considerations with the city attorney's office, we do need more time regarding the commercial properties being allowed into this program. Also, you'll notice that we did propose excluding those residential buildings with more than 12 units. After reviewing these considerations, we did want to align with the property structures noted in our UDO. Also, since we're only proposing moving forward with all residential properties at this time, we're going to rename the program name at at this point. um if we did allow commercial properties, we would then ask to change the name. So from this, we've considered doing two phases to implement these changes, which is why there's different colors. So the first phase would allow these new eligible property types into the program beginning January 1. Again, these are defined in our city's unified development ordinance. We are proposing a new cycle. So currently the cycle is from January 1 to December 31st. This new cycle would align with our fiscal budget cycle plus it would align with the collegiate schedule. So currently college students usually have to per purchase two permits within a 12-month cycle um because of the current cycle. This would allow most of them to only have to purchase one. We are proposing to move forward with increasing the fees for the annual and guest permit but decreasing the fee for the caregiver permit and then moving forward with the restriction rules. Again, this came from a lot of staff research for each zone. How many spaces are on the curb side? And so this number would allow us to have parking availability for each zone for residents, visitors, and their guests. Phase two would be for us to return to council at a future meeting with recommendations on commercial properties. If commercial properties are approved, we would propose a new program name and we could present any further pro process considerations. So staff recommendations are to adopt the proposed ordinance changes with the program modifications and to direct staff to come back to council at a future meeting with recommendations on commercial properties and process considerations questions questions for Miss Parker. Yes, >> I'm just prepared to make a motion. I think we had a robust discussion during our work session on the topic and you all have done a fabulous job coming up with a program that will meet more needs. Um and so with that uh I motion to adopt the ordinance. >> Okay. Any other discussion? All in favor of the motion I >> I. >> All opposed and appreciate your work on this. >> Thank you. >> All right. Next, we have a comprehensive plan update by Sarah Shaughnessy, and she's going to talk to us a little bit about Reflecting Raleigh, the technical teams, and making those appointments. >> Yes, good afternoon. Thank you, Madam Manager. Again, Sarah Shaughnessy with Raleigh Planning and Development. Um, I'm here today to give you an update on Reflecting Raleigh, where we've been in phase one, what to expect in phase two, and the technical teams that will support phase two specifically. Um, so again, um, overview of the presentation. We are asking that you approve our recommended community expert participants. Um staff have recommended five candidates per team to work alongside staff and representatives from each of the boards and commissions um to support developing the next comprehensive plan. So just as a refresher, we began this project in July 2024, kicking off our engagement um phase, first phase of engagement with the affordable housing summit in August. We are um at the beginning of plan development phase two which will continue through May of next year. Um then we'll um go through a plan drafting phase, bring the final plan out or the draft plan out for another round of robust community engagement and then expect to begin the review and adop adoption process in July of 2027. Um staff will be returning to you at many points along the way, specifically um at the conclusion of each phase with sort of a recap of what we've done and forecasting what's coming up. Um we will also continue to provide monthly updates in the manager weekly report. Um so during the first phase of reflecting Raleigh, we hosted or attended 91 unique events engaging with over 3,000 participants. Um we attended or hosted a range of event types from ask a planner events to larger community conversations. And across these activities um really five themes emerged from public input. Um one was a desire for an appreciation for continued community engagement and education. Folks wanted information about how their neighborhoods are changing um and how they could be involved. um a preference for smart growth specifically through what many participants termed strategic density and multimmodal connectivity. Um strong interest and priority in housing affordability, variety and supply. An emphasis on fiscally and environmentally sustainable development and infrastructure. And then finally an interest in preserving and equitably distributing natural resources. Um so in phase one we also started a community inventory with a consulting firm. Um this will include an ac assessment of existing conditions um some key trends since the last plan was adopted in 2009 and some forecasts of how the population is likely to grow and change. Um so these two components public input from phase one along with the community inventory as well as an assessment of emerging issues and an inventory of related plans for the city and for the region will inform phase two. Phase two includes a civic assembly which we talked to you about in October. Um some targeted engagement with institute partner institutions and public agency peers, a cost of growth analysis which we've also talked to you about. And then what we're here to talk about today um five teams of technical experts. Um so the topics for each of these technical teams that you see here were selected based on um the community conversation topics as well as input we received from the public during these engagement efforts and these um community conversations. Um each team will consist of city staff from departments across the organization, representatives from boards and commissions who have already been appointed to serve and advise on these topics and then five seats for technical and subject matter experts from outside the organization. And these were selected through an application process to select community experts. Staff put out an open call to apply. The application was hosted on engage Raleigh, the city's engagement portal website, and open between October 20 um October 21st and November 14th. We received nearly 150 complete applications for a total of 25 seats, five per team. um coordinating committees consisting of staff from multiple departments reviewed applications and selected candidates based on technical experience and the level of interest demonstrated in their applications. Staff also worked to ensure relatively even geographic distribution based on home council district um as well as looked for expertise um in uh a variety of content areas. Um so for example the transportation coordinating committee um sought to select community experts that um brought perspectives on a range of transportation modes and then also a range of different government levels. So looking for local and state and federal expertise there and that was true really across teams. Um so to dive into the sort of preliminary scope and membership of each of these teams um the land use team will focus on the city's future growth framework, urban form and placebased guidance aligning future land uses with anticipated population growth, service needs and community goals. Um the team will consist of staff from multiple divisions within planning and development, the office of sustainability and the department of transportation along with the boards and comm representatives from the boards and commissions you see here. um as well as the community practitioners and subject matter experts listed on the slide. The transportation technical team will focus on an integrated approach to land use and transportation planning with policies that support a safe and well-connected multimodal network. The team includes staff from multiple divisions within the department of transportation along with other staff, boards and commissions and community experts you see here. Um here is a list of the housing and neighborhoods team membership. This team will work on policies to increase housing affordability and supply, align housing policy with anticipated demographic shifts, um consider trends in economic development and employment, and also recommend policies to support the development and maintenance of complete and vibrant neighborhoods. Um the natural resources technical team will focus on conserving and managing natural resources, environmental stewardship, and leveraging natural assets for public health and recreation. The team will also work to align environmental protection with our land use and infrastructure planning goals. And the the member the proposed membership for this team is on the slide here. Um and finally to round things out um the infrastructure and services technical team will focus on identifying future service needs based on anticipated population and economic growth. developing land use policy to support efficient and sustainable service delivery and aligning capital budgeting with long-term service delivery goals to ensure sustainable and cost-effective infrastructure investment. Um, and this team composition is listed here. Um, so again today we are asking your approval of the um community expert candidates. I will leave this here on the slide for your consideration. We also have a more detailed list included in the agenda backup materials. Um, and with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you have. All >> right. Questions? Councelor Harrison? >> Yeah, I'm curious on the infrastructure team, um, because we have such a need to grow our police and fire station footprints. Um, do you feel like we have the right expertise from the community on that? I just wasn't sure if anyone had any knowledge on police and fire infrastructure. We do have representatives from um staff representatives from police and fire on that technical team. Um the member of the police advisory board would like to serve on the housing and neighborhoods team. So we do have representation from that board um on a different technical team. >> Okay. >> But yes, I think we are confident that we have the right expertise. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Councelor Silver. >> Well, thank you for the presentation. I certainly support creation of the community experts. Just wanted to make sure one question is that I met with the home builders recently. I told them that this was being worked on. Just want to make sure as the plan is moving forward, we don't proclude other stakeholders that want to weigh in as the plan is developed. That's just question number one. It seems like you're nodding your head that they'll be included. The second one, I don't know where it fits in. I'm looking toward the implementation of the plan. And there are many ways you implement a plan. I'll just focus on one and that's policy and decision-m we make here at the table. I think from my perspective there's a lot of improvement on the policies we look at for zoning cases. I know for example when I talked to some in the industry very concerned about the number of policies where I don't see a focus group cuz that's more governance and implementation. So can you share with me how that will be considered because I as we look at cases I think that's where the rubber hits the road for us that's where this comprehensive plan is cited every time we meet because we have to look at consistency and so for me that's where the rubber hits the road and just want to know how all that comes together when we look specifically at what we as a body and staff has to look at as they determine consistency with uh resoning applications. >> Sure. Yeah. Thank you for those questions. So to answer your first question, um there will be opportunities for those not selected on teams to participate um we will along with um the rest of the public have a really robust engagement process on the final um or sorry the the second draft of the plan when we take it back out to the public. We are also um engaging with partner institutions to kind of understand um some of the emerging issues that they are seeing and planning for and to make sure we have a good understanding of regional and other department goals and that the comprehensive plan that we create is aligned with those. So definitely other opportunities for focus groups and continued engagement to make sure that we hear from everyone. Um as far as the um sort of implementation piece, I know you mentioned there's concern over um many uh perhaps too many policies. It is in of interest to the planning department and I think the Raleigh community to narrow the scope of the plan and really fine-tune um the number of policies that we have in the plan. Um our interest is in um hearing from the technical teams allowing them to provide recommendations based on their content expertise and then as part of the drafting process consider how we might implement those recommendations. >> Yeah. And just clarify exactly when that step because that for me is one of clean interest. We often hear the term public benefits. That's this wide. Can we be more specific and clear because when you hear the term sometimes is delineated, other times it's open-ended. And I think for everyone involved believing in transparency and clarity. So I'm looking to get that down. I'm just wondering when we look at evaluating resoning cases with the comprehensive plan, where does that fit in? Is that toward the end of the process? Will that be discussed? I don't know where it fits within the technical experts if that's land use. So that's one I think would be very helpful not just for council but for staff but for the public who weighs in and looks at that comprehensive plan as a guide uh for how we'd like our city to grow in an equitable and fair way. >> Yes, I um I agree with you. That's great feedback. I think it fits most neatly in land use, but that will certainly be an issue that all of the technical teams consider. Yeah, I just want to jump in on uh Council Member Silver's uh recommendation about folks who may apply did not get, you know, selected, but that they stay engaged because I think we have a lot of talented and experienced individuals who put in their applications, former planning commissioners, city council members, um people who are, you know, in all these realms. So, it sounds like one of the best ways they can engage, if I heard it right, was the second draft. Um >> that's correct. Yeah. >> Okay. And so that would would be about what time frame? >> Spring of 2026 or sorry beginning of 2027. Sorry. >> 27. Spring of 27. Okay. Um and then will these groups will they do any additional engagement or they'll kind of be in their own groupings just working doing the work. they I will be focused on developing um the plan in phase two and then of course invited to engage and continue to provide comment across the the life of the project. >> Thank you. >> Any other comments? Okay. Do we have a motion >> for approval? >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor of the motion? I >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. That was actually unanimous even though we had one verbal. Thank you. >> And the last item in my report today, um, for those of us that are all into budgeting and finance, and it's the second best time of the year, the first is when we adopt the budget. Um, we have our CFO, Allison Bradshaw, here to give us an update on our annual comprehensive financial report. >> Yeah. So, good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Again, Allison Bradshaw with the finance department. Uh so before I get into the ACFR, um mayor, thank you for your question on the interest rates for the band anticipation notes for Raleigh Water. Uh that does fluctuate and for our last bands it was between three and a half and 4% was our interest rate. So really attractive. We have really wonderful banking partners here at the city. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Right. Well, I am thrilled to be with you uh today uh to present the annual comprehensive financial report or the ACFR for the year uh ended June 30th of 2025. So, let's see if I can There it goes. Um so, here's our agenda. Um I'm going to review the financial reporting process, just talk a little bit about the ACFR, then our external auditor is going to come up and provide their executive summary. Then I will close out with general capital reserves and then the staff recommendation which is for you to accept the annual report. But first I really just want to say a huge thank you and shout out to the team. So not all the team members are pictured in that picture. Many of them are in chambers today. And I do just want to say thank you. This team works for literally months on end to produce this very technical document. uh all of them have a huge level of dedication, professionalism, commitment to really ensure that Raleigh is putting uh the best material out. So I just want to say thank you to the team. So our financial reporting process uh so as the city manager alluded, it really all starts with our annual balanced budget that is put forth to council for adoption. We then produce quarterly financial updates. So essentially the how are we doing against the budget. We produced those at quarter 2, three and the fourth quarter or the final one was included in your agenda today. Uh we are now at the ACFR or the annual comprehensive financial report there with the star. Uh and we ultimately take that and boil it down into what's called a popular annual financial report. Uh the ACFR is over 150 pages. is again a very technical document. We try to take that and move that into something a little bit more user friendly um and we produce the popular annual report uh which is around 10 pages. Uh what you will see over on the right hand side of the chart is three awards. Uh we are what's referred to by the government finance officers association or the GFOA uh as a triple crown winner. Well, what does that mean? That means that the budget book, our uh ACFR and our PAFER or our popular annual financial report receive awards in excellence uh from the GFOA. So this is something that I know we're very proud of because ensuring financial transparency is very important to the city. So what is the ACFR? Well, and why do we do it? Uh well, we do it because we have to. Um, and it does have to comply again to governmental accounting standards. Um, but we do it for more than that reason. It really is the financial story for the city. Uh, I am very proud to say that we did receive a clean opinion and I will certainly let the auditor speak to that in a minute over our financial uh, statements. Uh, it really does summarize the financial uh, performance of the city. It looks at our actuals. It looks at budget variances and it goes from the general fund all the way to enterprises. It speaks to our debt portfolio. It speaks to um our other long-term uh liabilities like our OPE and our LEO and pension. So it is again a very technical document that is really used as our communication tool to both the credit rating agencies as well as our investors. It gives them an independent way for them to look at how are the city's uh finances. So, it's used by a very large uh variety of folks. And so, with that, I'm going to turn the presentation over to Albert Ang who is our senior manager on our audit and he's just going to speak to you about the audit summary. >> Thanks, Austin. Um, Albert, Cherry Becker, a senior manager. Um, just want to first off thank you. Thanks, uh, Allison and her finance team for, you know, just making the audio smooth and efficient process for us. Um, we start this back in in the early summer, so basically half their year where everyone's working on this, making sure we meet our deadlines and get get the uh get the audit completed. So, um, as she mentioned, we issue an unmodified opinion. So, that's the highest uh, it's a clean opinion, highest level of assurance we can provide on the financial statements. um so they are clean um and you know free from material misstatement. We encountered no difficulties with management or disagreements with management throughout the audit process um from procedures we performed. There were no material weaknesses in internal control we identified. Um and then the last bullet here is slightly outdated. Um as of Wednesday before Thanksgiving they did release the 2025 OM compliance supplement. Um without that we could not issue our compliance report which is our audit over the major federal and uh state single audit programs. We will work to get that completed um here this month. Um but that's the only update to this slide. All right. And uh this really is my last slide except for the recommendation uh which is our excess capital reserves. Uh and so our policy provides uh a reserve of 17% of essentially the subsequent year's uh budget and any excess above that uh rolls into the next budget process which would be the FY27 uh budget process and the calculation that was done again as we closed out the year we have in excess of a little over $3.5 million. And with that, uh, I would make a staff recommendation for you to accept the FY25 annual comprehensive comprehensive financial report. And I'm open to any questions and certainly Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, questions for Miss Brad. Appreciate you and your team's work on pulling all this together. >> Thank you. >> And I'm happy to make a motion to accept the report. Second. >> All right. All in favor of the motion, I >> I. >> All opposed. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you, mayor and council. That concludes my report today. I' just like to say to all of our friends and family in the viewing audience, happy holidays and hopefully everyone will have a safe holiday since we won't be together again formally right? >> Till January. >> Till January. And that's all. Okay, that moves us to matters scheduled for public hearings um for the afternoon session and we're starting with Miss Recal, reszoning Z2325 Gorman Street. >> Yes. Good afternoon, Hannah Recal, Planning and Development. So, this hearing uh is open. It was opened at your last meeting on November 18th. Uh it's for Z2325 at 1602 Gorman Street. um you continued the hearing to allow um some conditions to be received in time for consideration at this meeting um which they have been. So I can go through um those changes. So the previously provided uh two um conditions one and two remain the same and then there are two new zoning conditions that have been added. Um these both pertain to existing residential tenants. So in the case that there is an early uh termination of leases uh due to redevelopment uh those residential tenants would be entitled to 90 days written notice of that termination. And then condition four would apply uh should condition three be triggered. So in the case that there is early termination of leases, the property owner would would also provide relocation assistance in the amount of uh $2,500 for each dwelling unit um that has a early terminated lease. So, those are the uh revised zoning conditions in front of you today and happy to answer any questions you have. >> Questions. Okay. Go ahead. >> Good afternoon, Madame Mayor and members of council. Isabelle Maddox, 3700 Glenwood, Raleigh 27612. Here today, is my presentation coming up? Ah, yes. Thank you. Um to talk about reasonzoning uh at 1602 Gorman Street. Uh I think this is pretty straightforward case. I can get the president. There we go. Uh it's a parcel on the corner of Bert Street and Gorman Street. Um student housing rich area. Uh they're currently I think seven or eight units in these buildings. Um it is in the special residential parking overlay district there. As you can see from the zoning map, we've got RX3 in close proximity to this property. We're seeking RX4 here, but with a a height cap of of um 50 ft, which is the threetory limit. So, you know, you can squeeze four stories, but you got to keep it under 50 feet. Um, we would maintain the special residential parking overlay district. Uh, and the the this is a small uh property owner in Raleigh. He he owns other student housing. He has a his company is called NC State Student Rentals LLC. and he also does do a a scholarship program which I think is interesting. He contributes some of his profits to scholarships for NC State students. Um he'd love to do some sort of smallcale retail in this RX development and he is on the corner of a property. So I think it's hard to do retail in RX even though it's residential mixeduse. It's really hard to do it. You have to be at an intersection. There's a 4,000 ft limit. but I think he'd really like to squeeze in a little coffee shop or some sort of a retail establishment there. Um, basically we're limiting density to 40 units. Um, as I said, building height shall not exceed 50 ft. We will will provide tenants 90 days notice of any early terminations and we've discussed this condition with council member Harrison about the um relocation assistance if we do terminate leases early. Um, and that's just a concept. Again, he's a ways away from doing this redevelopment. As I said, he's a small um player in this in this whole arena. So, he's going to have to, you know, put a lot of pieces together to get financing, etc. for this property. But that's sort of a concept plan. Um, all in all, we think this is consistent with comprehensive plan. The future land use map designates this as moderate density residential which recommends multiple housing types including a small apartment building. Uh we have other medium density zoning at the same intersection. It'll add additional housing units in close proximity to the frequent transit area, the BRT on Western Boulevard, the major transit corridors of Gorman, Triion Road, and Avent Ferry. We'll provide additional housing for both NC State and Meredith um University and we'll facilitate the ultimate redevelopment of of fairly obsolete housing. Um and again requesting RX4 but limiting it to 50 ft. That concludes my presentation but certainly available for any questions that y'all might have. >> Okay. Thank you. Questions for Miss Maddox. All right. Then we will go ahead and close the hearing. Yeah, I'm prepared to make a motion. Um, I just want to thank uh our attorney's office. Um, Jennifer, I know you worked uh with Isabelle and Karen. Thank you for helping to coordinate that um around the relocation assistance condition. So with that, I move to adopt the proposed consistency statement dated December 2nd, 2025 contained in the agenda materials and to approve the zoning amendment with the adoption and effective dates described in the agenda item under recommended action. Second. >> Okay, have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor? I. >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that passes unanimously. Thank you. >> All right. Next case is resoning Z2725 which is 721 and 725 Grove Avenue. >> Good afternoon madame mayor and councel. My name Walter Raleigh Planning and Development. This is resoning Z 2725. I do but before I make the staff presentation I want to note that the applicant would like to have the public hearing held open and continue to your next meeting. So this is two lots on Grove Avenue uh just under three acres. The the current zoning here is residential 6 with that special residential parking overlay district going to residential 10 with conditions retaining the overlay. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan including the future lane use map. Planning commission recommends approval. So an o over aerial view of the site here you can see it outlined in yellow. You can see uh 440 there to the east, Hillsboro Street, Western Boulevard on the north part of the site. So, they have offered some conditions here. They've prohibited some uses. They have uh offered additional written notice to uh current tenants. They have also offered uh recompense for uh tenants that may need to relocate in the event of redevelopment. the existing uh entitlement here uh fair amount of residential entitlement. Their request is increasing that to allow for more units. The request is consistent with the low scale residential designation on the future land use map as well as uh there's no frontage applicable to residential development. So no inconsistency with urban form map here consistent with the plan overall. a handful of consistent policies here uh connecting to uh connectivity, access to transit, compact development, those sorts of things. Uh continuing on around uh infill compatibility, housing variety. Uh the two things here uh there's a response time issue here that the uh area does not meet fire response times and so that's flagging both the response time standard and the zoning and infrastructure impacts issue. So planning commission recommended approval. Uh the uh opposition here is from Commissioner Atwell who opposed the request due to the fact that similar development could be built using the frequent transit development option without needing to resone the property. What questions could I answer for you before you open the public hearing? >> Questions? None. Okay, I will open the public hearing. No one has signed up and we want to leave it open. So that unless there's further discussion, that concludes that case. >> And it would come back on January 6. >> Okay. >> Do you like the afternoon or the evening? >> Afternoon's fine. Yeah. >> Okay. So that concludes uh public hearings and we move on to the report and recommendations of committees of which uh there are none except the transportation and transit still has one item pending. >> Yeah, transportation and transit has one item pending the topic of um citizen initiated street closures and we'll take that up at our January meeting. Uh let me give the date certain. Sorry about it already. Uh January 22nd 3 to 5 in council chambers. Okay. We then have report and mayor of of the mayor and city council. I'll start with councelor Harrison. >> Yeah. Not much here. I just want to say happy all the holidays. So, um, hope you had a great, uh, Thanksgiving and then all the holidays to come in December. Stay safe out there. Watch out for each other. Take care of each other. And, um, we are not going to have a District D meeting in December. We will hold off until January, January 17th. >> Um, same thing. Um, no District C meeting in December. We will meet again in January. Um, everyone, please have a happy holidays, be safe, and stay warm. Just a few things. Our December 10th community engagement meeting has been moved to partner with ARPAC. So that's the Raleigh political accountability committee community and their event called Coffee and Council. So we will meet at Willow House coffee and community at 6:00 p.m. And I think I have counselor Harrison Patton and myself will be doing a recap of the last year on council. So join us and bring your questions. Uh secondly, I've got our decoding democracy book club will meet on Saturday, December 13th from 9:30 to 11:30, but it will be at Panera instead of Oberlin Regional Library. Panera Bread on Glenwood Avenue. I was not able to secure a spot at our normal place. My apologies. And then lastly, a big shout out to Amy Joe Edwards who hosted an invasive species cleanup in partnership with the city and NC State students. We had over 30 people come out to help clean up invasives at Fallon Park and look forward to scheduling more cleanup opportunities for the community. Thank you. >> Well, I will just say this is the one-year anniversary since councelor Silver and I were both sworn in on December 2nd of last year. Um, so just appreciate all the support and collaboration in the first year in office and looking forward to year two. Uh, and happy holidays. Mayor, thank you for the reminder. Uh, didn't know. Hopefully my LinkedIn will now update to a full year. Uh, I don't have anything to report. Just want to wish everyone a happy holiday. In terms of a District A committee meeting, we'll not be meeting in December. And we will have a date for you in January. As everyone else said, please be safe and have a wonderful holiday season. >> Not Not much of a report for me either. continued wi well-wishes for a warm holiday season and um don't give money to billionaires. Just bake and finish your knitting projects and share in community and that'll all be a happy holiday for all of us. >> No report. Uh I want to say thank you to a lot of our community partners who made sure folks who were in need had turkeys and all the foods uh and trimmings for Thanksgiving and know that a lot of our community partners would be be doing tour drives and uh similar food giveaways for the Christmas holidays. So thank you for all the churches and community leaders and other folks who really stepped up to support our community in this um trying financial times for some folks. >> Okay. Uh we now move to appointments. Yes. Okay. First, um we have um Raleigh Commission for Persons with Disabilities. This item is returning to council following an update from the city attorney during the last meeting regard regarding the commission's uh various exemption requests from the city code. Uh that included exemption from the residency requirement. As you know, city code requires that all advisory board members reside within Raleigh city limits. And then the second exemption request was on term term limitations. Uh city code prohibits an appointee from serving on a commission for more than three two-year terms in succession. So during the last meeting uh as you may recall the city attorney provided additional information on that request, including the presentation of a draft ordinance which would permit non-residents to serve on the commission. That ordinance was included in the agenda packet again this time for reference. The council also requested additional information during the last meeting on the tenure and residency of existing participants. Um so and along with staggered terms. So following your last meeting, staff met and randomly drew names to assign the two and three-year terms which is reflected in the attached roster of participants. Um I will also note that staff was unable to verify residency for uh participant Paula uh Capola who declined a provider address and Lawrence Carter who did not respond to staff. Um there is only one member of the group confirmed to reside outside of city limits and technically he is not eligible to serve under current code provisions. With all that said, council may wish to formally uh make appointments of the members of the commission in accordance with those staggered terms as requested. >> I'm going to turn to councelor Patton. Yeah, I might need some help getting the motions right, but um I think the the spirit of what I'd like to motion is to deny the the request for these exceptions such that the Commission for Persons with Disabilities is in line with all the other commissions on these on their bylaws while allowing this current slate of rostered commissioners to complete their terms at present. And then when these expiration dates are reached, those those members who are either not able to verify their residency or reside outside of the city limits would roll off and be replaced with a Raleigh resident. So if that is clear enough, I'll just say so moved. >> Well, you actually don't need a motion because you're not take you're not taking any action, right? There's no change. So, the only thing you will need to do is make appointments consistent with well, however you want to make them. If it's consistent with what um the clerk's office suggested in terms of some people getting the two-year and the three-year for the stagger, if if that's what you want to do, then you will need a motion for that. >> Okay. So I move to adopt the two and threeear stagger recommendations as provided by staff in the agenda packet. >> Second. >> All right. Any other discussion? All in favor of that motion? I >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. And that passes. Thank you. Councelor Patton for keeping us straight. All right. Uh next is board of adjustment one alternate vacancy. Um, Michael Alderman received seven votes. However, council member Silver nominated Anna Willis. So, it is the council's discretion on how to proceed on that one. >> Um, Mr. Alderman. >> All right. Um, do we need to take a formal motion? So, technically, Mr. Alderman already already received seven votes. So, nomination just hold for future time the other name. >> And there are actually more coming up very shortly. So, well, that makes sense to bring it down there. Um, so we'll jump back to that name. Um, so Mr. Alderman is appointed there. Um, design review commission, one alternate vacancy. Um, Chris Tusette received eight votes, so would be appointed. Uh, fair housing advisory board, two regular vacancies. Council members Lambert Melton and Patton nominated Andrew Dames. So that name will be coming back on your next ballot. Lastly, under appointments, police advisory board, one regular vacancy for the attorney slot. Um, Mr. Antoine Marshall received eight votes so would be appointed. Jumping down to nominations, arts commission, two regular vacancies, the term of Cla Lions Bastion and Mary Silver are expiring. Both wish to be considered for reappoint. >> Move to reappoint. >> Second. >> Yep. And uh I think just closing I don't think that counselor Silver has any conflict right with his own voting for his own wife who had incredibly good attendance. >> No I had the same issue when my wife was >> Yes. That's right. You've experienced this. >> All right. All in favor of the motion I. >> All opposed. Nay. And that the eyes have it. >> All right. Board of adjustment. Um more coming up here. So terms of Suzanne Prince and Kathy Rutersil are expiring. Miss Rutersil is not eligible for reappoint due to length of service. Past practice has been to elevate the longest serving alternate. Um so you have potentially the reappoint of Miss Prince and the elevation of Mr. Satiski Keith Satiski for >> reappoint Miss Prince and to elevate Mr. Satiski. >> Miss Prince is not she's not eligible. >> No, she is Kathy Rut. Sorry. Sorry. >> Yeah. And we had a second on that motion. Um, so all in favor of that motion I >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. Eyes have it. And then Council Member Silver, would you like to go ahead and nominate or shift your earlier nomination for Anna Willis to here? Okay. So that'll be coming back on your next ballot. Um, few more here. Raleigh Convention and Performing Arts Centers Authority, one regular vacancy. Term of Leon Cox is expiring. He would like to be considered for reappointment. >> Move to reappoint. Second. >> All in favor of that motion. I >> I. >> All oppose? Nay. That passes. All right. Raleigh Durham Airport Authority. One regular vacancy. Term of Shelley Winters is expiring. She would like to be considered for reappointment. Um, state law does indicate that appointment should be made at the council's first regular meeting in January. So, this would be coming back on your next ballot. You're welcome to make nominations at this time as well. Otherwise, it'll be coming back. Do we have to move to nominate her now for the January ballot? >> I she can automatically be on there as an existing member. Okay. >> Um okay. Raleigh Historic Development Commission. One regular vacancy resignation has been received from West Trip. I will note that there are additional membership attributes here to consider uh in filling this slot as outlined in your agenda item um which staff will remind council of on your next ballot. I just wanted to make one public comment. We've had some folks reach out about the RDU airport authority, but for me, if we have a sitting counselor with good attendance who or commissioner who wants to be reappointed, um I just wanted to state publicly that, you know, I will support the the sitting um member um as opposed to nominating new folks, but just wanted to state that publicly. Um, on the RHDC, uh, when you said we'll have more information for our ballot next meeting, uh, will that include it says a fourth of their membership has to reside or own a historic property. Will that will you give us a roster? basically like does this vacancy now dip them under that threshold or that's the >> we can um the information that's on the roster already we can find a way to better um present that visually so that you guys can understand if we're meeting that or not. Um >> okay thank you. >> Yep. >> So that will be coming back. And then lastly, Substance Use Advisory Commission. One regular vacancy resignation has been received from Christina Newton. So that will be coming back. >> I'd like to put a name for substance use, Calvin Prince. >> Calvin Prince. And going back to RHDC, I'd like to nominate Al Reer. R I E D E R. And if for some reason he doesn't fit the the vacancy requirement, I'll I'll withdraw. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. That's it. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, next we have the uh, report of the city attorney. >> Good afternoon, mayor, members of council. At your November the 4th city council meeting, you asked the city attorney's office to provide information about how the city might modify its non-smoking ordinances to eliminate exceptions not required by state law and to extend non-smoking prohibitions to ecigarettes and vaping. included with your agenda materials was a memorandum responding to that inquiry and I'm happy to summarize that if that's the pleasure of the council. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I think so. >> Seeing everybody. >> Yeah. >> Under state law, North Carolina cities may prohibit or restrict smoking in local government buildings, vehicles on local government grounds, and enclosed places within city limits. State law defines smoking as the use of lighted tobacco products. It does not cover ecigarettes or vaping devices. While cities may adopt rules that are more restrictive than state law, we cannot prohibit smoking in places where state law expressly permits it. Those places include private residences, vehicles, qualifying tobacco shops, cigar bars, smoking guest rooms and lodgings and establishments and premises of tobacco manufacturers or growers. Those exceptions would remain in place regardless of any changes to the city code. Our current city ordinance regulates smoking in three different places. It covers elevators, certain public places, vending areas, and specific areas of public facilities. They do not prohibit, while these limitations are significant, they do not prohibit smoking in all enclosed places. And quite uh I learned quite a bit about smoking as a result of this. Mhm. >> For example, you can smoke in the bowling alley, uh, but you cannot smoke in the restroom at the bowling alley or within 20 ft of the file line. So, you can't roll up your ball while smoking. Um, and there are some other gaps uh that appear uh other gaps that appear in other facilities. So, if council wishes, those non-statemandated exceptions can be removed. Uh but by doing so obviously we require code amendments and we did not prepare any uh proposed code amendments uh waiting for direction from council. Uh moving forward regarding vaping and ecigarettes. Uh we currently do not regulate the use of vaping devices or products in city facilities or in enclosed public places. Some jurisdictions uh in North Carolina do address the vaping through their general ordinance authority and council could certainly choose to do so. What was in your packet was two proposed model ordinances. There was the uh model ordinance from the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, which is the broadest of the two ordinances. It prohibits both smoking and vaping in government buildings. grounds, vehicles, and other public places. And then the second was the Wake County ordinance. The Wake County ordinance, which only currently applies in the unincorporate incorporated areas of the county. Its structure uh prohibits smoking, tobacco products, vapor products in county buildings, vehicles, grounds, indoor public places. Um and so it is up to council as to how you would like to proceed. Thank you for that summary question. >> Yeah, this is something I asked the city attorney to bring back to us based on emails and things we were seeing um and the general assembly as well. I would be oblong with the county ordinance. I think adding the city to that um updating our policies cuz I think about our parks and our programs. We have a lot of young people and things. I think just align vaping to be the same treated the same as tobacco. Um and I think that provides the consistency and also it I think it provides consistency to our law enforcement and enforcing the laws because they could say someone could say no I'm not smoking I'm vaping and then that holds a whole another conversation. But if it's all both treated the same I think it makes everything a lot cleaner. >> Just a question for councelor Branch. So, what makes you want to go with Wake County versus the state? >> Consistency. It's local. I mean, we can go with the state as well. Um, I mean, whichever one, I mean, as long as we do something. >> And just going back to the attorney. So, what what is the key difference between the state? You said the state is broader but >> the the proposed >> I'm sorry. So, the um the proposed ordinance from the um what was the group? I apologize. The >> tobacco >> um tobacco is is a lot broader in terms of it includes um vaping products and ecigarettes whereas um in all enclosed places whereas the county it is just um vaping in government buildings, grounds, vehicles, those type of things. >> Okay. I mean, I would just say I would be more for the state, the comprehensive solution, um, as opposed to the county, which is >> Yeah. I mean, I was looking at areas that we controlled, but >> Yeah. >> Okay. Just >> Yeah, that's fine. >> Councelor Patton and Councelor Lambert Milton. >> Yeah. I think I mean, I it sounds like there's broad support to to do more to be in alignment and to capture these other types of tobacco uses. And the question is really just which of these tools is best. We did receive an email of support from the American Heart Association in support of the DHS model ordinance and it sounds like it would capture some more of these exceptions like the bowling alley. Um so it I think would be my preference that we proceed to prepare one that's the DHS model ordinance but certainly open to the >> So that's the third option. >> That's the same. the >> Yeah, it was exhibit A. >> Well, on Council Member Branch's point, you know, I think there is a benefit to staying in alignment with our county partners um to a avoid confusion. Um and we have had other instances since I have served on the council where we have tried to align with the county um on these types of initiatives because there are no uh these are all imaginary lines. You don't know if you're walking into a city building or a county building. Um, there are folks in Raleigh that live in unincorporated parts of of Raleigh. They don't vote in our elections, but they exist here. And so, if we have a different ordinance, I think the enforcement piece and the public understanding may be confusing. Um, though I'm all for doing, you know, what we can to protect folks health. And then also, if there is a county ordinance to keep that consistency in the past, we have just joined in the county ordinance. There is some sort of state law or county law. I don't know that's the right word where we can just they can't pass ordinances in Raleigh but we can choose to join in and so instead of having to pass our own we would opt into the county one and then whatever changes that they would make in the future would continue to apply in Raleigh city limits. So my I think position and I'm not feel super strong about this is I think we should align with the county. we should opt into theirs and then any future changes they make will apply here too and that keeps us consistent and perhaps the advocacy could be directed there if if theirs needs to be expanded to become more robust but that's my opinion on it. So, just a question for the city attorney. Did the DHS model ordinance, which is supported by the American Heart Association. Was that developed after Wake County adopted their ordinance? Because I mean, one of my questions would be maybe this wasn't even around when Wake County adopted theirs, and perhaps we could go to the county and say, "We'd like to adopt the stricter ordinance that the American Heart Association is advocating for. Would you be willing to align so that we don't have this jurisdictional confusion? Mayor, I I don't recall um which came first. I can try to see if I can put my hands on that fairly quickly. Um but I I don't recall. >> Okay. Well, and then I mean maybe we could hold this open. And then also even if I would like to hear more color from Wake County as to why if if they did not choose if it was in existence and they did not choose to go with the DHHS uh model ordinance, why was that? So that we can understand their opposition to it. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I agree. I just would like more information. You know, when did the county pass theirs? Um are they open to looking at it again? And I just want to review this in more detail because there's a lot here. So >> I have a recommendation. Could we I think we could send this to safe, vibrant, healthy communities and perhaps at a upcoming committee meeting they could get someone from the county to come and present. They could I think that's a healthier way to continue the discussion and then make a recommendation to the full council. >> That works. And yeah, that's fine. And also, um, the county passed their ordinance January, I'm sorry, December 22nd, 2015, and they revised it, um, November 9th of 2022. It's at the bottom of the ordinance. >> Okay. >> So, that's when the county did theirs. >> Nice research. >> Yeah. >> Reading. And to clarify, so it sounds like the county's ordinance, you said. So there's like cigarettes, ecigarettes, and vapes, and those are treated separately. And the county captures two of those, but not all three. And also doesn't capture areas like the bowling alley or the um wreck room at the nursing home, like these other kind of shared >> spaces. >> Shared spaces. The county does not capture those. >> Is that I'm understand that. >> That's what I understand. Yes. >> Okay. So I think that's just worth clarifying. and it's only going to capture two of the three things and it's not going to capture these like shared potentially shared living spaces. So, >> what would be helpful is a table that just uh you know summarizes it really quickly for us so we don't have to read too hard and then we can have a little bit more information for whether it goes to committee or back here. >> Okay. >> So, we do not want to send it to do not want to send it to >> we we can send it to committee I think. >> Um Right. Well, here's what I'll say. If it goes to committee, that's not until the end of January. So, we wouldn't pass until February. If we want this passed in in December, I mean in January, then we needed to come back to the full body at our January meeting and then we can pass it based on the information. I think if giving we're not meeting again this month, um hopefully the four weeks, I take one week off, three weeks is enough time for staff to go in, pull the information and can bring this back to us at our January 6 meeting and then we can make the recommendation to pass or not pass at our January 6th meeting. That would be my recommendation. >> Okay. Maybe the follow-up information can be provided through a manager's memo. >> Okay. So we will keep it at the full table for now given that we are in December and uh that would cause uh additional delay uh just because of timing. >> Yeah. And the thing is at the January since meeting if we still say we need to go to committee the meeting is not until the end of the month we can still send it if we need to. >> So we're bringing this back in January >> January 6. >> Okay. >> Thank you. And I believe we'll have a number of folks commenting at our public uh uh comments tonight. So, uh recommendation of the city city clerk. >> Good afternoon again, mayor and council. Uh in your agenda materials, we received draft minutes from your November 18th work session and regular session. >> Move for approval. >> Second. >> All in favor of the motion? I. >> All oppose? Nay. >> Thank you. >> Great. Motion passes. And that concludes the regular agenda. I'm going to make a motion to enter into close session uh uh pursuant to general statute 143 318.116 to consider the qualifications, competence performance character fitness, conditions of appointment or conditions of initial employment of individual public officers or employees. So moved. Second. >> All in favor of the motion I. All >> oppose? Nay. And we will go into close session. You don't want to say Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat up here. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Hey hey hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Hey, hey hey. Hey Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Ooh. Ooh. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat up here. Heat. Heat. N. N hey. Heat. Heat. N. Woo! N Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Oh. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat up here. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. ah ooh. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. for me. Hey Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Hey hey hey. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Ah, ah. Hey, heat. Hey. Heat. Hey Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey, Heat. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Nat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Hey hey hey. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Ah, oh. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Ah, oh. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Hey hey hey hey hey hey hey hey hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat up here. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Nat. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey, Heat. Ah, oh. Heat. Heat. Heat Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Ah, hey. Hey hey hey. Hey, hey, Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. Nat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Ah baby. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. year or two. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey hey hey. Heat. Heat. Uh the council met in close session to consider the qualifications, competence, performance character fitness and conditions of employment uh of an individual public officer, employee or prospective public officer, employee. There being no further business, the meeting is adjourned. All right. >> And then Julie, obviously we got some folks back here. Did we