Coraggio Consulting
City of Fairfax City Council Meeting, Tuesday, June 24, 2025

Date: Tuesday, June 24, 2025
Place: City Hall, City of Fairfax, Virginia
Length: 4h 7m (video)
Official meeting video (city, Granicus): https://fairfax.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=13&clip_id=4239
Agenda: https://fairfax.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=13&clip_id=4239
Minutes: https://fairfax.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view_id=13&clip_id=4239&doc_id=de13f60f-51f1-11f0-b7f5-005056a89546

Machine transcript (speech-to-text) produced by Coraggio Consulting. Not an official county record. Names and numbers may be misspelled; check the video at the timestamp before quoting.
Speech-to-text: whisper.cpp, model large-v3-turbo. Produced 2026-10-12. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[00:00:12] Good, oh, I have to bang my thing. Okay, good evening. I would like to call the regular meeting of June 24th, 2025 to order. If you are able and so choose, please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance 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.

[00:00:43] So very strangely, we have no proclamations this evening. I'm not sure I can recall having a meeting without proclamations, but here we are. I would like to ask, is there a motion to approve the board and commission appointments?

[00:01:01] Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Do I need to approve the board? Oh. Yes. I have those. Who is organized here?

[00:01:18] I move to appoint the following applicants. Jason Desai as a city resident representative to the Move Fairfax City Steering Committee, and Emily Rabbit as the city resident representative to the move's Fairfax City Steering Committee.

[00:01:40] Is there a second? Second. Okay, the motion has been made and seconded. A roll call vote. Council Member McQuillan? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Council Member Hall? Aye.

[00:01:55] Council Member Amos? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We'll move to adoption of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? Council Member Hardy-Chandler? I move to adopt the agenda as presented. Is there a second? Second. The motion has been made and seconded. A roll call vote.

[00:02:11] Excuse me. I'd like to offer a couple things before we do that. But first, is this the point on the consent agenda to determine whether anything would be moved out of that? No, that would come with a motion for the consent agenda and then pulling things off.

[00:02:30] And in terms of adding an item to the agenda, is this the appropriate time to do that? So I would like to propose adding an item, which I think would be 6I, which would be a very brief discussion of the bus rapid transit meeting of the NVTA-PCAT committee.

[00:02:53] So, Council Member Peterson, you're proposing to add something to the consent agenda. I would suggest perhaps you're looking to add a 5A before the consent agenda to do what you'd like to do? I'll look to your guidance. It's not appropriate for the consent agenda.

[00:03:10] I'll just say that. I understand my mistakes. So I'm open to wherever the best placement is for that. 5A. Great. Second.

[00:03:26] He's making the motion in the form of an amendment. Second. So we have a motion on the floor made by Council Member Peterson to add 5A. It's been seconded by Council Member McQuillan. A roll call vote. Council Member McQuillan? Aye. Council Member Bates?

[00:03:43] No. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? No. Council Member Hall? Aye. Council Member Amos? Aye. Okay, motion passed 4 to 2. Okay, there is a motion to approve the entire agenda.

[00:04:06] At this point, we have a motion on the floor. Is there a second to approve the amended agenda? Council Member Peterson already seconded before he made his amendment. Okay, therefore, we have now approved the agenda. We need a vote on the underlining agenda. I'm sorry.

[00:04:22] A roll call vote on the amended agenda. Council Member Amos? Aye. Council Member Hall? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member McQuillan? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We will move on to the initial general public comment.

[00:04:41] No, I'm sorry. Sorry. Yeah, I'm sorry. Initial public comment. I got out of order, so you're right. No, that's okay. I thought we got all the votes. You're right as always. Okay, so I only had one person sign up by 5 o'clock p.m. today. If there are people in the audience that want to speak on general public comment, there is a second line item for that which is under agenda item eight so right now i'll just call the first call first speaker up which is john freeman with me does it just have to be me by myself

[00:05:19] yeah you just go to the podium okay and just get your name address and your statement uh my name is john freeman uh i reside at 10907 fairchester drive and what was the and what was it regarding the nuisance alarms at the dealerships so i brought this up several council members what's happening is the dealerships in order for them to find a vehicle they hit the car alarms and i jim that's my daughter we have a whole bunch of people that we're speaking for that are kind of

[00:05:59] complaining about this issue it's come down to went through zoning i think it it finally made its way to the police and they need to basically find a uh to see it happen witness it happen i was on the phone with council member hall discussing this and in the term of the 15 minute phone call 10 minute phone call three alarms went off so she got to witness that is correct so um it is a problem for people that reside adjacent to the dealerships so up and down fairchester i'm sure

[00:06:39] it happens at the other dealerships. It seems to be a common issue. I spoke to the manager at the time at the Hyundai dealership, and he said that's just how we do things. So we have, I forget what code section, I've sent the email to the whole council. I know it's a code section regarding nuisance alarms. It's a misdemeanor. And I'm asking that maybe, we used to tell dealerships before they opened uh jim was a part of that he was an inspector with the city and when we went to

[00:07:16] do pre you know inspections before they built the project we would inform them that the car using the horns is prohibited and for some reason that slipped and now we're having to deal with it like on a holiday like a monday like a holiday weekend that's all you hear is horns because they're selling cars every time they sell a car every time they look for a car for a test drive they go like this they stand across the street and the lot's right behind my house and the honda dealership i hear it all the time faintly but i know the people along egan are

[00:07:51] hearing that too so it would be nice if like the police um instead of i just i don't know what the solution set would be but i know we'll be talking to a general manager and saying this is a misdemeanor and we take this seriously um it's it's a disturbance of the peace and it's uh you know hopefully you guys can resolve this for me okay all right we can we can move to 5a

[00:08:27] brief discussion of bus rapid transit council member peterson well thank you uh so at the end of the last council meeting i made a quick mention of the fact that i am the city's representative to the northern virginia transportation authority nvta something known as policy coordination and Advisory Committee or PCAC. It's one of eight boards and commissions I serve on. That one is focused on regional transportation issues. And so we have a series of meetings that push forward

[00:09:05] regional issues of local interest to the city of Fairfax. And one of them is the advancement of bus rapid transit. And so I will be with that committee tomorrow evening. We're being asked to take a vote in support of advancing the further development and exploration of BRT, as it's known, through the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority.

[00:09:33] And we've been encouraged as a part of that process to engage in outreach back in our individual jurisdictions to ensure that the public is aware of this process and has opportunities to be involved. So I simply wanted to make sure everybody here in the city was aware and that they would have access to the public information package that has been put together.

[00:09:57] That is in the form of a slide deck that has been made available. And I would also like to invite city residents, if they have a chance, to look at this and have any thoughts, to be in touch with me prior to my attendance and my vote tomorrow evening.

[00:10:15] has the issue has attracted a lot of interest in jurisdictions already we are at the very beginning of a long-term process regionally and it is a process that will be incremental in nature and I wanted to be sure that city residents were not only aware of that but understood kind of the timing and sequencing of this because it is one of the typical progressive incremental issues we go through where at some point it will become more and more binding and so it would be probably best for people to know and have an opportunity to be involved early rather than

[00:10:54] later there is a long presentation i don't intend to try to do that tonight but i did want to make sure that that was made available and i'm not sure the best way whether it could be added to this meetings actual agenda items so people can access it online or whether there's a better way But I wanted to be sure people had access to it and also that you can reach me through my council email address, but you should feel free to contact the entire set of folks up here, Mayor and City Council, with your thoughts on this.

[00:11:28] I would just say that with respect to the city of Fairfax, a couple of key things that you might look for as you do that is, first, there are a set of potential routes that go through the city, and it would be great for you to get acquainted with that map.

[00:11:45] where these routes might actually go there are some potential methods by which this would be funded and i'm sure it will be of interest in both the short and long term how we go about actually providing funding for this system there are some special issues that will come up that will probably be of interest to everybody here because we've certainly seen this is the case in other jurisdictions one of them is whether we would reserve lanes for bus use only and that's one of the design issues that would come up and also issues of

[00:12:22] environmental impacts there are at least two pilot areas and there may actually be three within the region already to look to and some of the early experience has been that that all of those issues and others have attracted quite a bit of public interest and in some cases concern. The document has at the back of it a series of recommendations and next steps. I won't go through them all here, but they're pretty easy to read in terms of what would happen next. Again, this is a stepwise progressive process where the intent is

[00:12:57] to begin looking more and more specifically at what would happen next and how that would happen. So, again, I wanted to just be sure everybody was aware of this as it moved forward. NVTA has already done a little bit of outreach in the city, and it happened in two forms, is our understanding.

[00:13:21] The first is some survey work. We understand that 24 people in the city were surveyed, which is great, but not necessarily representative of the whole city. We understand that there were some open sharing sessions as well that took place.

[00:13:37] But again, given the long-term importance of this and some of the feedback that is coming out of this exercise and other places, we were encouraged to be sure we were doing everything we felt we could and should to make people aware and get them involved. So with that, I would just ask if there's a way we could get this link to the NVTA PCAC website made available so that it would be easy for city residents to access and that also that everybody would understand that they should feel free to be in touch with me with comments as well as everybody else here mr. Foster oh since council amended the agenda we'll we'll put a revised agenda tomorrow and we can put the

[00:14:17] document that mr. Peterson referenced with the information on the BRT well we can put that as an attachment so we can take care of that tomorrow yes because amending the agenda this way is highly unusual. We call it freestyling, brought to you by four members of the council who form a majority, for those of you who want to understand how this happens, because they all read the charter. So we generally set an agenda, and we generally don't amend things on the agenda the day of a meeting. But just so that the public is aware that we are freestyling here, and that pretty much every meeting we have surprises like this,

[00:14:54] Because all it takes is a vote of four, and you can basically talk about anything. So that's where we are right now. So I'm sure that was very illuminating for everyone. I also sit on the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority and the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission. And, yes, bus rabbit transit is very important to our region, something we should all support.

[00:15:11] And I will also mention that there will be further information when NVTA does a presentation to this council in a work session in the fall. And with that, we will move on. I vote. We can move to the consent agenda.

[00:15:31] Okay, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? Councilmember Hardy-Chandler? I move adoption of a consent agenda for agenda item number 6A, consideration of the May 27th, 2025 special meeting minutes. Agenda item 6B, consideration of the May 27th, 2025 regular meeting minutes.

[00:15:49] Agenda item 6C, consideration of the June 3rd, 2025 special meeting minutes. Agenda item 6D, consideration of appointments to boards and commissions. Agenda item 6E, number 6E, consideration of approval of changes to the Fairfax City Purchasing Resolution.

[00:16:06] Agenda item number 6F, consideration to receive the list of delinquent taxes from the city treasurer in compliance with State Code Section 58.1-3940. Agenda item number 6G, consideration of a resolution setting the allocation percentage for personal property tax relief pptr in the city of fairfax for the 2025 tax year at 32.00 percent agenda item number 6h consideration of a resolution to adopt the updated emergency

[00:16:41] operations plan eop i move to approve the consent agenda items number 6a through h and the motion accompanying the consent agenda item as printed is there a second a second with a request to move something some things out of the consent agenda of course what things would you like to remove from the agenda well and this is for purposes really of just doing a read for the benefit of the public so they have an opportunity to see and hear the contents of some things that otherwise they might have to click a couple times to reach the for i guess it would be items d through h

[00:17:25] items 6 d through h will be removed for discussion is there a second on the motion with removing d through h second okay we have a second a roll call vote councilmember mcquillan aye councilmember bates aye councilmember peterson aye councilmember hardy chandler no councilmember hall aye council member amos aye okay motion passed five to one uh question yes that was a vote on the consent agenda

[00:18:01] minus right minus d through h okay which we will pull out separately yeah and we will vote on them Separate. Okay. 6-D, consideration of appointments to boards and commissions.

[00:18:25] Council Member Peterson? My only request here is simply that we read the list as we did earlier when we did approvals of the two appointments we made earlier this evening so that everybody knows who's being appointed.

[00:18:44] Council Member Amos? I think out of respect to some people's privacy, I would say no to that. Mr. Lubkerman? Well, I mean, the only thing I'll say is it's printed on the agenda. The motion has all the names on it.

[00:19:04] But having said that, it's available on the agenda for folks to read. Because it's the consent agenda. Well, who would like to read the name? Ms. Shinneberry, do you have it? Well, on this particular item, since it's set up as a motion with a bunch of individuals in it, if someone would like to read all the names, it would be appropriate for somebody to read the motion with each of the boards and commissions and the names.

[00:19:32] It's right there on the item. that's two pages long so somebody would need to whoever wants to make a motion to approve this item could just simply read the motion with all the names council member amos uh i can do it okay i move to appoint the following applicants commission for women dorothea tyree trish bailey commission on the arts amber lee page melanie cameron gian wang and mcmerow rahul bardin cheryl newway george mason university fairfax campus advisory board matthew slumka board of of equalization timothy shoal fairfax village in the city advisory board rebecca rager regional

[00:20:12] coordinating council for adults and adults with disabilities grace francis regional fairfax falls church community services board jennifer desai parks and recreation advisory board rob knowles and i would just simply add without reading the terms for the terms set forth for the terms set forth in the in the motion is there a second second uh a roll call vote council member amos aye councilmember Hall aye councilmember Hardy Chandler aye councilmember Peterson aye councilmember Bates aye councilmember McQuillan aye motion passed

[00:20:47] unanimously consideration of approval of changes to the Fairfax City purchasing resolution councilmember Peterson just is there by any chance a staff person that could do just a very very brief summary for the benefit of people who are listening here there is councilmember Peterson our procurement Director, Patty Incenti, is coming to the podium, and we'll give a quick staff presentation on this side.

[00:21:14] Good evening. So as I mentioned at the work session two weeks ago, we bring the purchasing resolution to the council for adoption every year so we can incorporate any changes that are made to the state code, which we then need to reflect in our own resolution.

[00:21:33] The two primary changes to the resolution are, one second here, introduction of HB 2150, which addresses IT contracts and the terms and conditions that are contained in a supplier's agreement are void if they are inconsistent with Virginia law.

[00:21:55] and SB 913, which requires that every contract over $10,000 for goods and services include a provision that the contractor agrees not to use products produced by child or forced labor. The other changes to the document are classified as technical amendments.

[00:22:16] So, thank you so much. Is there discussion? Council Member Peterson, are you moving that we adopt this? Is there a motion? I'm asking you if there's a motion.

[00:22:33] Yes, there's a motion at the end of the item, if someone would read it. We have to do that on each of these that you pulled off. Sorry, you're going to have to direct me to the motion.

[00:22:52] I've got the staff report here. I'm sorry. It's the very last page of the staff report. There should be a motion right there. Yes, two lines. Great. I move to adopt the 2025 Fairfax City Purchasing Resolution as recommended by city staff and as attached to the agenda item.

[00:23:12] Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded, a roll call vote. Councilmember McQuillan? Aye. Councilmember Bates? Aye. Councilmember Peterson? Aye. Councilmember Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Councilmember Hall? Aye. Councilmember Amos? Aye. Motion passed unanimously.

[00:23:34] Item 6F, consideration to receive the list of delinquent taxes from city treasurer in compliance with state code section 58.1-3940. Mr. Peterson, Councilmember Peterson. is there any very brief explanation yes good evening mayor and council the taxes that we are writing off tonight are business license and personal property taxes for the tax year 2019

[00:24:12] these taxes are only collectible for five years and by state code and so these are the taxes that we are have been unable to collect and represent a very small percentage of the overall billing Just as an example, in 2019, we billed $9,185,000 of business license.

[00:24:35] We were writing off $10,000 of that tonight. In personal property in 2019, we billed $9,721,000. We're writing off $34,000 tonight, so about 0.35%.

[00:24:51] That earlier percentage was 0.11%. Are there any questions? while i'm up here questions for mr sebelia is that pretty common the percentage is consistent from year to year um it used to be much higher uh but we've uh we've done some really really good hiring and some restructuring so whereas we're writing off a point uh 0.11 percent of business license now uh in previous years it got as high as 0.6 percent so it's never really been too big

[00:25:30] issue but we we have a pretty dynamic team um uh working it right now and and it's frankly better than it's ever been uh meals tax is the same way it's as clean as it's ever been because of the the vigilant efforts of two people upstairs i'm really quite proud of them wonderful thank you is there anything else council member amos uh i was just going to say i can read the motion um is there further discussion before council member amos moves the motion proceed council

[00:26:07] member amos i move that the city council write off taxes in compliance with state code section 58.1-3940 and publish the list of delinquent taxes on the city website in compliance with state code section 58.1-3921 is there a second second uh roll call vote council member amos aye council member hall aye council member hardy chandler aye council member peterson Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member McClellan? Aye. Motion passed unanimously.

[00:26:39] 6G, consideration of a resolution setting the allocation percentage for personal property tax relief, PPTR, in the City of Fairfax for the 2025 tax year at 32%. Council Member Peterson? Again, sir, somebody who can provide just a very quick summary. Thank you.

[00:26:56] Good evening, Mayor and Council. This year's rate, we're setting at 32%. That is the portion of the personal property tax that the state will pick up.

[00:27:14] As you may have heard before, the state's contribution to our residents for tax relief is locked in at $3,099,000. It's been set at that for some years now. As the value of the personal use fleet increases, that percentage that the state is going to cover will decrease.

[00:27:40] So people are going to see that number go down. This year is a bit of an anomaly. It's actually that percentage is going up. It's based on calculations that I do based on a tool that was provided to me from the county.

[00:27:57] It's one that they use in determining what that percentage should be. But just keep in mind that the personal property tax relief is only available on the first $20,000 of a vehicle's value, and it's only for personal use vehicles.

[00:28:17] It's not covered commercial vehicles. Any questions? Questions for Mr. Sebelia? Any? Council Member Hall? So if this is, what is the impact of this to our residents to go from the 29.25 of the 2024 level to the 32% that's proposed?

[00:28:38] About 22 bucks. So each resident that has a vehicle is anticipated to pay an extra $22? Yeah. No, no, no, we'll pay $22 less. $22 less. Yes, as a result of this increase in the PPTRA percentage and the increased percentage that the state's going to cover from 29% and change to 32%.

[00:29:00] Thank you. I'm sure our residents are very happy to have that broken out so they can understand that more clearly. I appreciate it. Council Member McQuillan? Thank you. And you mentioned that that was due to a calculation and it's an anomaly for it to go, that percentage to go up.

[00:29:17] Yeah, typically it goes down. um so the calculation estimates what the value of the um personal use fleet will be and this year it saw that value going down so uh but i'm happy to provide this sexy spreadsheet but yeah i'm i'm happy to provide those details thank you yeah appreciate it other questions is there a motion council member amos council member amos when you're reading the motion there is a small typo

[00:29:54] in it if you'll change that to 2025. understood thanks i move to adopt a resolution setting the allocation percentage for the personal property tax relief for tax year 2025. second motion has been made and seconded a roll call vote council member amos aye council member hall aye council member hardy chandler aye council member peterson aye council member bates aye council member mcquillan i motion passed unanimously 6h consideration of a resolution to adopt the updated emergency operations plan councilmember peterson uh do we have yes staff can give us a

[00:30:32] quick synopsis of this good evening mayor and city council we have before you this evening for your approval the update of the city emergency operations plan the commonwealth requires at municipalities, particularly cities and counties, to have an emergency operations plan and to revise and update it every four years.

[00:31:05] This is our four-year update for that emergency operations plan for the city's overall emergency management program. Mr. English here worked on the rewrite along with our consultants and all the department heads, which have signed off on the plan, which all have operational processes within the plan.

[00:31:22] I'll gladly answer your questions, or the big guy behind me can help answer them if I don't have the answers. questions on the emergency operation plan council member peterson thank thank you uh and i know you've got in the staff report a couple bullets here in terms of the major updates and there are a couple of different things here uh it might be nice to just quickly restate them but included in them i one specific question the last time this was done was four years ago is that correct yes

[00:31:56] Because of my own professional background, I'm always interested in climate change issues and hazards related to that. Is there anything in here that changed because of climate-related hazards, whether it's flooding, heat, anything like that, in this new updated plan?

[00:32:12] I'll let Mr. English answer that question, but I know there's a separate standalone regional hazard mitigation plan, which does include climate change as part of that, that we're a part of. Good evening. As Chief O'Neill said, the Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan does outline some of the changes, the climate change, and what will be forthcoming in that.

[00:32:34] That is actually due for update next year. It's always a year off from that. So our current plan goes back to the last hazard mitigation plan so we can align with that. And then for our next one, we'll do that. It's always a year off, so we're always aligning to the old hazard mitigation plan under the state code that we do that.

[00:32:52] If I might just add something quickly to that. So I also am the representative to the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Transportation Planning Board. And one of the recent presentations we had was about the introduction and use of a new flood risk model for the region.

[00:33:15] The old modeling was done using FEMA-related information, and there's a new model that happens to be called Fathom. What happened was as that was applied region-wide, including but not limited to the City of Fairfax, the exposure to flood risk increased geographically from 14% to 38%.

[00:33:40] So this is a very big jump that's as a consequence of a new modeling tool being introduced. the commonwealth of virginia has adopted that tool and is making it available to jurisdictions along with the along washcog and providing training for staff and municipalities etc etc so that will presumably be available and might be helpful as you do this update next year it was again a pretty significant jump that happened yes sir and mr satoshi etu manages our floodplain program and

[00:34:19] his liaison for that piece of the puzzle in our public works department any other discussion or questions council member hall sorry i think my only suggestion um and it doesn't need to be done with this one i recognize a lot of work already went into this um there are some areas where it refers to his or her designee i think just in the spirit of inclusivity we might want to reconsider how we reword that in the next one moving forward so thank you but otherwise i think it's a great

[00:34:51] document and well done any other discussions or questions uh a motion council member amos i move that the city council approved the resolution adopting the 2025 emergency operations plan for the city of fairfax a second second uh roll call vote council member amos aye council member hall aye council member hardy chandler aye council member peterson all right council member bates aye council member mcquillan aye motion passed unanimously we will now go on to the public hearing it's a public hearing and council action of a resolution authorizing the exercise of quick

[00:35:29] take powers to include the initiation of condemnation proceedings for the acquisition of certain fee simple rights of way and easements on various properties for the blenham boulevard multimodal improvement project in parence upc dash one zero seven zero one three in parence i'll organize brian lubcom and city attorney first to provide staff report thank you and good evening again mayor and council uh you recall um wendy sanford the consultants had a lengthy uh discussion with you all about the blend and boulevard project at the work session on june the third

[00:36:03] and as was noted at the time we we said we'd be bringing forward um this resolution with respect to certain properties in order to keep the project timelines moving so the staff report is self-explanatory as noted in there the city's determined there's a public need for various rights away and/or easements from certain property owners the resolution details the the scope of the needed acquisitions the city as we noted in the work sessions made good-faith offers to the respective land owners for the full estimated value of the acquisitions as well as cost to cure items and we're continuing to work with the applicable property owners I'm pleased to report that while this resolution contains 12

[00:36:42] properties we've actually reached agreement with two more since this was drafted so the blue copy of the motion is Hardy Chandler when you make the motion reflects the deletion of those two as well as two two corrections and we're continuing to work with others we anticipate that others will be resolved and as noted in the work session and like to reiterate it again here we do not like to do condemnation against especially against residential properties We will continue to work very hard to try to resolve these.

[00:37:12] A couple of the ones that require resolution are simply because the individuals are out of the area and have not been able to respond, final response on documents. And as noted in the work session, there were a couple of properties that actually asked us to go to QuickTake for various reasons, if it's associations or others, where the voting requirements just simply make it difficult to do without resolving it through that manner.

[00:37:33] Wendy Sanford is here if you all have any questions, as well as our consultant. And with that, I'm happy to turn it over for any questions. Are there questions of staff? Council Member Hall? I don't see the attachment in Granicus. Is it possible to share it?

[00:37:50] Which attachment? The attachment? It says no attachments when I view it. Oh, well, the attachment to the staff report of the proposed resolution. Oh, it's not in Granicus? No, there's nothing in Granicus. It just said no attachment. Let me see here. No, the staff report is on there, and it has the resolution and the sample motion, which are the only ones referenced.

[00:38:12] Perhaps there are some difficulties pulling it up. It's right here. I just pulled it up. It's right here.

[00:38:28] Oh, okay. Yeah, that's where I am. Ah, thank you. Okay. I looked it over before at home, but I just want to make sure I could review it one more time.

[00:38:45] Thank you. Are there specific questions for staff on this?

[00:39:06] Okay. If there are not specific questions, I will open the public hearing. Ms. Shinaberry, has this public hearing been properly advertised? It has. Nobody has signed up prior to the meeting. Is there anybody who would like to speak on this public hearing item at this time? Okay, I will close the public hearing.

[00:39:24] Mayor, I'm sorry. There's one item I wanted to emphasize as well that I forgot to in my presentation. We did reach out before this action to each of the property owners, as noted in the staff report, and advised them that we'd be proceeding this evening. So this will not be a surprise to any of the property owners.

[00:39:40] And, again, we're continuing to speak with all of them. But we did take that action. I think it may have been Council Member Hall asked us to make sure we did that during the work session. Okay. Is there a motion, Council Member Hardy-Chandler? I move that the City Council adopt the presented resolution as attached to the staff report and considered at this meeting following required public hearing, authorizing the exercise of quick-take powers to include the initiation of condemnation proceedings for the acquisition of certain fee-simple rights of ways and easements on various properties

[00:40:17] for the Blenheim Boulevard Multimodal Improvements Project, UPC 107013. I further move, as requested by the city attorney, that the resolution be amended to correct the spelling of the two owners of parcels 008 and 054, and further that parcels 004 and 047 be deleted from the final resolution as revised and finalized for signature.

[00:40:46] Is there a second? Second. okay emotions been made by council member hardy chandler and seconded by council member amos is there any discussion on the motion hearing none a roll call vote council member amos aye council member hall aye council member hardy chandler aye council member peterson aye council member bates aye council member mcquillan aye motion passed unanimously we will now go to the second general public comment is there anybody in the room that would like to make a general public comment tonight You can step forward to the podium.

[00:41:26] Okay. All right. That concludes our meeting. We will now convene and go into, we will recess the regular meeting to go into the work session room. We will take a five-minute recess to go into the work room next door.

[00:41:39] Welcome to our work session.

[00:49:23] I will recognize Council Member Amos. Thank you, Mayor. Considering that we only have one true presentation and the other items are verbal, mostly discussion, I think we can reasonably be out of here by 10. So I would like to propose that to Council. Do we have consensus?

[00:49:39] the council on a 10 p.m recess time okay well we will we will aspire to be out of here by 10 p.m uh ms shenna berry our first item for the work session is a presentation update on old town hall project i'm going to recognize andrew wilson construction manager and syed masood capital projects manager to provide the staff presentation good evening um by way of introduction because i I've met some of you, but not all.

[00:50:12] I was the building official and fire marshal for the city from 1997 to 2019. And since I retired five years ago, I've been helping out with various and sundry construction projects throughout the city in public works, parks, and police.

[00:50:29] The main thrust of tonight's presentation is because there were some questions about the project and particularly the color scheme, which you have paint chips for now. But we're going to refresh.

[00:50:45] Most of you were not around. We did a presentation in December of 2023. Most of you were not council members then, so we would like to review that presentation with you. I'll go through fairly quickly. If you do have questions, please stop me and ask. So quick overview.

[00:51:05] We'll give you the background. We did a thorough assessment of the building conditions, so we'll go over that. The proposed alterations, the design options for the rear addition, a brief discussion of the funding and the budget, and then finally the proposed project schedule.

[00:51:24] So every one of our projects starts somewhere. Ours starts on the 14th of August, 2020 at 3.42 in the morning.

[00:51:47] Some of you may have seen that, some of you may not. This began a process of restoring the front columns and the front porch of the building.

[00:52:03] The front porch in this picture at this time was concrete. That was a later replacement. We spent quite a bit of time with the architects and historic resources discussing whether the porch floor should be returned to wood or maintained as concrete. The structural engineer determined that the concrete was failing and would need to be replaced anyway, So the decision was to go ahead and replace it with what was appropriate for the period the building was constructed, which is 1900, which was a wood, Douglas fir wood porch floor.

[00:52:35] You'll see in this picture the before and after of that project. The column on the left was completely replaced. You might have seen when the column fell that it actually broke into two pieces. The bottom four feet was actually a section that had been replaced at some time, probably in the 1990s.

[00:52:56] So that left column now is entirely new, but it matches the other three, which are the historic, original columns. This shows a picture of the building as it was constructed in 1899-1900.

[00:53:12] And what's evident in this picture is, number one, it definitely had shutters on the lower level. And number two, there is definitely a contrast between the field or the siding color and the white trim. There are obviously no color photographs from that time period, and all of the siding was replaced in a project, again, I think in the 1990s.

[00:53:38] So we were not able, through any historic research or sampling, to determine what the original colors were. The architect did extensive research on what was appropriate, what was in common use at the time on this style of building, and that guided our research.

[00:53:59] This is just some information that came up in the historic research. The architect was Walter Gibson Peter. These are three rather well-known buildings that are also the result of Mr. Peter's work as an architect. The superintendent's house at the Naval Observatory, which is now the vice president's residence.

[00:54:19] Walter Reed Building 1 and the F&M Bank, which is a pretty iconic building in Georgetown. The key items from the assessment memorandum are restoring and repairing the historic interior and exterior elements, improvements to the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, enclosing the rear addition porch to provide additional storage space and to improve appearance, increased functionality and storage throughout the building, and design improvements to the exterior and interior of the rear addition and adjacent site.

[00:54:55] Part of the purpose here is that we recognize that this is a historic building, But it is also a building that was gifted to the city for public use and for public events. And that's an important thing to continue. So we want the building to maintain its historic character while also being functional and useful for events and weddings and city functions and private functions and rental income.

[00:55:21] These are just some photographs that we took of the exterior showing the need to address repairs to the exterior. which just protects the entire building this shows the the top right picture is important that shows the two air conditioning compressor condensers right now they're very visible it was pointed out by a former council member that when those were put there the Weight Watchers building was right next door and with

[00:55:56] those wing laws those were not visible but now with the with that building gone and being turned into the old town square park this area is highly visible so as part of this project we will relocate replace and reinstall the new units upon the flat roof portion of the building these units were put in in 2014 they are according to the engineers in the last third of their service life but they also are using a refrigerant that is no longer manufactured it's It's still available through existing stock, but it's no longer manufactured.

[00:56:35] And the risk with them is, in my mind, somebody books a wedding on a Saturday in August, and city staff shows up at 9 o'clock in the morning, and one of these units is not working. And it's a day like today. And that would be a very difficult thing to manage in a rental situation.

[00:56:55] So the new units will be more efficient. They'll be more economically friendly, they'll be quieter, and they'll be less visible. We'll also be replacing the flat roof that you see at the bottom. It will stay flat. We'll take the skylight out, but that other equipment will be moved up to that roof, and it will not be visible.

[00:57:17] This next picture just shows some of the interior finishes to the building, and the intent, again, is to upgrade and make it a more attractive functional space for rentals. This shows an area at the rear.

[00:57:35] We did improve accessibility, handicapped accessibility of the building by creating a ramp to the front porch so that there is now grade-level access to the front of the building, which did not exist prior to that renovation involving the columns. There is a noncompliant ramp that goes to a rear door that's not shown in this picture.

[00:57:55] It's to the left of that small parking lot. But as part of this project, we would repair that parking lot and widen and create a ramp where you see the two railings and the steps. The steps would be taken out and a ramp would be created. The other factor here is that that sort of open area that you see under the porch would become a restroom facility which would serve people using the Old Town Square Park, and it would allow for the throne to be removed,

[00:58:31] which relocated at the discretion of parks. it won't be there right now it is taking up a parking space and and there is some cause significant cost associated with it so if it can be repurposed that would that would be a benefit and the this restroom that I'm speaking of would only be accessible from the exterior of the building so that it would we're looking at a system similar to the throne access system for people to be able to use it this shows some areas at the rear this shows again those those

[00:59:10] porches the intent you'll see in a subsequent slide that those porches are pretty much used for storage and for trash anyway so the intent of the project will be to enclose that and make it fit more with the style of the building and provide significantly more interior storage space on the left picture you see the door to the left in an alcove that will be changed that door you will see will move to the center of that wall. Historically, in this style of building, that

[00:59:45] door on the corner with the alcove is not period. It does not really reflect what's appropriate for this building. And also these open areas, both the alcove by the door and that exposed lower porch are a security risk because people can hide there. This shows the proposed finished project. I know there's a lot of interest in changing the color scheme from the white on white to this cream we

[01:00:24] spent quite a lot of time on this the original color selected was a deeper hue than this but was period correct that was presented in the December 23 work session to council it was subsequently taken to the Board of Architectural Review for a work session they unanimously agreed that a slightly contrasting color was preferable, but that they thought the color we had selected was

[01:00:59] a little too much. We revised the plan and came back. This is the color that was approved by the Board of Architectural Review, and that is the one called Cottage Cream on the top left of your chips. They have it. You all each have the chips. This shows you that other end with those rear

[01:01:33] porch is now enclosed and it also removes the column that was in the center of that wall where the two windows are because that was another element that was not having a pilaster in the middle of that wall is was actually not a period element this then shows you what you would see from the parking lot adjacent to old town square and you the other element to note here is that that walkway, you see the stone retaining wall. In the current situation, that stone retaining wall

[01:02:10] is about a foot and a half shorter than that, and then you come down a series of stone steps to the sidewalk, and then you walk around, and then you go back up a series of steps into the building. This actually allows grade level access through the front doors, through the kitchen, through this side door, and to that restroom, and to that restroom from the Old Town Square Park.

[01:02:33] Not seen in this picture, but to the left going towards the park, there's a switchback ramp so that the person in the wheelchair can get from the park all the way to the restroom or into Old Town Hall. That's also helpful for catering for events because now they can wheel things in and out of the kitchen door, the back door that provides access to the kitchen without having to deal with stairs.

[01:02:57] This is, I gave you the actual samples because trying to show you colors on a computer monitor is questionable, but you have it there.

[01:03:15] This just briefly shows you the first floor plan. Not much changes here except the restrooms get reorganized. You have that porch that's enclosed and the addition of the restroom. And then the upstairs floor plan, again, the only real change here is there are two, right now at the top of the stairs going into the main room, There are two sets of doors, and we're taking out one of those sets of doors.

[01:03:44] And then in that small room, a wall was added a long, long time ago to create a restroom, and that will be taken out because that's not where the restroom is anymore.

[01:04:02] And then again, we're enclosing the porch at the back to provide storage. So the sequence of our project was we did the condition assessment, stakeholder input, which involved historic resources, parks, planning, public works, code administration, and some of the user groups.

[01:04:25] Schematic design, a city council work session, which was in December of 2023. Board of Architects will review work session and followed by approval. Because this project is using some federal funding, a review by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, and their approval was also required, and we have completed that.

[01:04:44] We did the interior paint analysis, prepared construction documents for bidding and for building permits it's been it's right now we have four outstanding comments with the building department but we've submitted the revisions and I expect that we will have the building permit any any day now and the zoning permit is all is approved contingent on issuance of the building permit as of right now the project is out for bid the bids are due July 2nd once we have received the bids and verified that they are qualified responsive and

[01:05:18] responsible and check the references then we will be bringing that to council for award of the contract given that we're doing this work session tonight we would propose to put that on the consent agenda given that we've already if you had unless there's a preference not to finally City Council and approval and then we go into construction administration and the plan is for this

[01:05:51] project to be completed in 300 days. I will, very briefly, I didn't cover this in the presentation, if you look at the paint chips at the bottom and it talks about interior, the one labeled bride's room, which is the color sociable, this one, that is actually what was identified as the original color of the interior of the building. And it wasn't paint, it was a pigmented plaster.

[01:06:19] We tried some of this on the wall, and the decision was that it might be historically correct but wouldn't look very good in people's wedding photographs and for events. So we tried a couple of different blues because that was the next color that the interior was painted.

[01:06:38] The first one was slightly more intense and had a little more red in it than this one. This is the one that we've selected right now and intend to use. this one because of because it is a historic color for the building the intent would be to paint what's what they what parks refers to as the bride's room which is a small room at the top of the stairs to paint that room in this color it does look very good with the with the stained woodwork and that room would have an interpretive panel that would show the history of the interior of the building and how the colors changed over time and with that I will

[01:07:14] turn it over to Mr. Massoud to wrap up. Good evening. I'm Saeed Massoud, the project manager at Public Works. This is the project budget slide. We received $2.1 million from Department of Housing and Urban Development as part of their community project funding grant. And in addition, we adopted, the City Council adopted $1.8 million in general funds and

[01:07:52] fiscal year 2026 so the total project cost is 3.9 million dollars we feel that this amount is enough and we will know for sure once we receive the bids on July 2nd this is a the budget sheet that we submitted back then and you have a clear copy of this there's a copy of that attached to the staff report also just because that obviously isn't quite legitimate and these are some key dates These were discussed in the previous slides.

[01:08:33] We anticipate to complete this project and give it for occupancy by June or July 2026. That's the key date. That's it.

[01:08:49] I think we're open to questions. All right. Questions for our team? Council Member McQuillan. So when was it painted all white? i believe the siding was replaced sometime in the 1990s and we have honestly at this point no idea what color it was before that but um historically it was a two-tone building and quite frankly

[01:09:27] there's there's a lot of architectural detail on the building and there's some there are some really nice details but with the white on white color scheme they kind of get lost because it's it's even of even that white is a very very stark white other questions oh was there any discussion because i know we rent this venue out a lot for weddings it's i think it's one of our primary venues for weddings in the city um or it is have we discussed this with the eda or or anyone that

[01:10:01] deals with marketing and what the exterior paint color could do you know could it draw more people in could it do the opposite have we discussed that as far as from that perspective of being an attractive venue for these events you took that into consideration for the interior colors so i'm just curious if not specifically with the eda now but with uh our our wedding venue expert would be uh stacy summerfield parks director probably because they're the ones that rent it

[01:10:36] for weddings yeah we have not talked about it specifically we did appreciate the tone down from the historic color was definitely very historically accurate it was very um i believe it was called squash so it was very squashy color but um the cream color allows for the um exterior accents to kind of be more visible but also more toned down than the uh historic yellow so go ahead yeah I don't have any more questions, just more of a comment.

[01:11:13] Having looked at a lot of the local venues for weddings around here, it seems white is a preferential color. It has, I know, been a staple in our city. It's on a lot of our stickers. I received a beautiful card with that building. So for me, I appreciate the attention to the trim and making the details pop.

[01:11:34] But I just, I don't care for this color, and I haven't heard a lot of residents who have been very supportive of this change of color. So when you said that there was a lot of interest in changing the color, I know that's probably with the people that you converse with, but I just know that there's a lot of voices out there that feel a little differently.

[01:11:53] So I just wanted to convey that information out there. Council Member Amos? I just wanted to add to the point about the EDA. I think it was a couple months ago I sent an email. I don't I think council may have been cc'd on it where I asked not the EDA, but the Believe it was dr. Director Bruno or someone in that field and they did state that the impact would be minimal They suspect so the the color difference economically doesn't really make a difference Just want to let my colleagues know I I think we were all on that email But I did ask that a few months ago other questions councilmember Peterson

[01:12:34] Well on the color. I do appreciate your point honestly, because I know a lot of people who feel that way. But I did just want to say, maybe slightly in defense of the colors that were picked, for what it's worth, I've done quite a bit of traveling, including work in Eastern Europe.

[01:12:51] And I was in Kiev for a series of years. And for those of you who haven't been in Kiev, in the downtown area, these kinds of colors, in fact, the deeper ones that I guess we moved on from, predominate, and they really, really pop and have become just a cultural icon.

[01:13:13] People love them, and I honestly wouldn't have thought that if I'd looked at them on a piece of paper, but when I see the real thing there, they are magnificent. So I appreciate that this is not an easy process, but anyway, I just wanted to pass that on.

[01:13:29] I'd just like to add that when this project started and we were able to get the grant money, were people most of the people in the council back then said all right this is an opportunity to take this building back to the way it was when it was built in 1900 so i feel that we were kind of directed to make this look like when it was built as much as possible the other the one other thing i would add to that is that this is paint so at some point it's going to get painted again

[01:14:08] It's not a permanent change to the building either. Council Member Hardy-Chandler. Well, I do want to thank you for all the work that you put into doing the research and trying to be historically accurate.

[01:14:24] I think when I consider our old town hall building, our city hall building, I want to look at that in the larger context of what we're doing with our city. And I think some of that historic charm is something that, as a whole, is attractive and could be attractive and marketable.

[01:14:45] So I realize we're talking about this in isolation, but I also think about it as part of a larger community and the story we're trying to tell about our history. So I appreciate the work, and I also appreciate the color change, particularly, regardless of what the colors are, just the attention to the historic meaning of those and what that means on in a broader sense so thank you other questions councilmember hall um regarding the colors i will say it sounds like the historical color is darker than what is currently being

[01:15:24] proposed many residents still seem to want white but it seems like there was a decision to kind of fall somewhere in the middle is that accurate yes that that's was based on input that we received from a work session with city council in 2023 which obviously was not this council and then input that we then we based on that input that we then received from the board of architectural review yeah i it is paint it can be repainted i i think that once it's actually painted there will

[01:16:03] be a large portion that are very unhappy and there will probably be an equal portion that are happy So I would expect that we will hear a lot of things once it's actually changed and people are seeing it in action. Change to something that's been that way for a long time can be hard.

[01:16:21] And you may remember as part of the original project after the column came down, there were four large linden trees on the Main Street side of this building. And those trees had been, we have pictures from when those trees were planted, which was in the 1990s, and at the time they were maybe 18 feet tall.

[01:16:46] By the time we took them down, they were taller than the building, and they were brushing up against the building, and they had completely obscured the visibility of the building. And there was opposition to removing those trees. There was concern about what people would think when we did that.

[01:17:02] There's still daily opposition on removing trees, so I understand. But with these specific trees, we took them down on a Saturday, and there were quite a lot of people out on the street. And I heard comments from several people like, oh, wow, I didn't even know that building was there.

[01:17:23] And one of the oval windows, which is in the bride's room that I mentioned, that whole facade could not be seen. And it's a beautiful building, and it was completely obscured.

[01:17:39] So I think this is something that people will probably get used to. Yeah, I'm sure people do. Yes, and we made sure that the canopy cover for the property as a whole was maintained while taking those trees out.

[01:17:56] But the trees were definitely having a detrimental impact on the building. But I give that as an example of a change. Change is hard, but then you get used to the new.

[01:18:12] Yeah. Well, I don't love the cottage cream, but I will say it is way better than the squash. I'm hopeful that once it's on there, it will look better than I think it does. How much has been spent to date so far? In terms of the original project to replace the column, the construction cost was about $600,000.

[01:18:41] And then there was probably $150,000 in design fees for that, and I think we're about $300,000 in the architect fees. So this project was divided into two phases. Phase one was porch repair, and this is phase two.

[01:19:02] Phase two is like a more in-depth rehabilitation of the building. For phase two, we have spent almost $500,000 on design fees and studies. I'm sorry, for design and what?

[01:19:19] Studies. We completed an environmental assessment. Oh, studies, sorry. Okay. And other, like, studies, hazardous material assessments and paint analysis, stuff like that. Okay. And so the 3.9 that is in the budget, is that inclusive of all of the fees that you just mentioned, the million dollars the 300 the 600 the 150 and then the 500 this is 500 include this is only for phase two and what i mentioned include is part of that total budget okay so there's another separate

[01:19:54] bucket of money for no we we've completed phase one this is this is the budget for phase two okay phase one was a more urgent project because the column was the building was missing a column and And that was the more urgent project. That project has been completed and closed out.

[01:20:11] That was probably $800,000. Okay. And this now is for the project that we're doing now, which includes design fees that we have spent through today. That includes the historic research document that you have in the packet.

[01:20:27] It includes the environmental assessment, the structural assessment of the building, all of those studies. And then it includes the architect's fees for doing the design, going to the BAR, and then it will include the amount.

[01:20:44] We hope it will cover what's left for construction. To finish the project. Okay. Right. What had happened was when we did phase one, phase one was an emergency. The column came down. We had to get the money. We had to fix it. So that was phase one. During phase one, somebody from Jerry Connolly's office actually called us and said, hey, we see you're working on Old Town Hall.

[01:21:03] There's money available. And that's how we learned to apply for the $2.000,000 grant. Because there were a lot of things with this building that we never had money to do. My facilities guys would do patching and repairs and spot repairs, a lot of the work in-house. But we never had the capital money to make improvements that were badly needed.

[01:21:22] So when Connolly's office called us and said, hey, there's available money. And he liked this building a lot, Mr. Connolly. We pursued it. and the money that you're talking about is just for what we're doing now.

[01:21:37] The previous project's done and closed out to repair the column. - Okay, and then on the CIP page on the back there, the 1,500, what is the annual increase in operating costs attributed to? I mean, we're replacing the HVAC units.

[01:21:54] I would think those would be more efficient, so I'm just curious what goes into the 1,500 that's expected annually over what we're, I assume, currently paying? It's basically custodial, upkeep, minor repairs, possibly after events, cleaning, things like that.

[01:22:32] But why is that an additional increase in what we're currently paying? Because there's more space. Space is made. There's a new bathroom. There's a public bathroom. We feel that it's going to be used more and there'll be more maintenance required. Okay.

[01:22:47] That makes sense. Just wanted to understand where the numbers are coming from. And the only thing I guess I will say with your question about the consent agenda is that if it doesn't come in under the budget, then I would probably just suggest it does have its own line item, so it doesn't get pulled out on its own anyway.

[01:23:07] Yes, absolutely. No, if it does not come in under budget, it would definitely be a public hearing item. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Council member Amos. I just wanted to say is there a reason why you wore that top by the way? Are you advocating for something? No, I just wanted to echo the council member Peterson and council member Hardy Chandler Having also grown up in Europe the architecture there is phenomenal and when you go to these local communities You often don't see plain white buildings typically it is something of a darker color like the squash and they somehow make it work so

[01:23:46] Definitely like that aspect and to Councilmember Hardy Chandler's point. We you know, we have murals going up we're starting to add a lot more color and vibrancy to Old Town and You know when I first got on council, I was like well who cares between a white and cream building? But having spoken with not just historic resources on the significance of that our historic society in the city Understanding more of BAR's logic. I think all those voices coming together. This makes a lot more sense so appreciate all the efforts that you put in other comments or questions about Old Town Hall well

[01:24:23] I appreciate you saying something about Congressman Connolly because he he loved the city and he brought home money for Old Town Hall and for the Lamb Center and It's good to have representatives who look out for their constituents in that way. So thank you very much Missionary our next items a discussion of possible amendments to chapter 54 in parents offenses and miscellaneous provisions article 1 in parents general section 54-4 of the city of fairfax virginia pertain the prohibition prohibition on the possession carrying or transportation of firearms ammunition or

[01:25:01] components or a combination thereof in city buildings or facilities on public property or at permitted public events i'll recognize brian lubkman city attorney to provide the staff report good evening again mayor and council um this is an item that doesn't have a recommendation but uh just wanted to give you a brief staff report and there's more detail in the staff report accompanying the work session item um this is not a new ordinance city council for those of you who don't know enacted section 54-4 on february 9th 2021 following extensive discussions in 2020 and 2021 i encourage you and members of the public to watch back the discussions those evenings

[01:25:41] especially the um uh the the february 2021 uh night where this was enacted there was some some very robust discussion on a number of issues. The ordinance in the city and in a number of other jurisdictions came from 2020 amendments to the Code of Virginia. One thing to note is that Virginia is a state that if you don't have specific authority to regulate firearms, you cannot go beyond what's granted. So the changes in 2020 were significant in that they provided certain categories of restrictions that localities could impose on firearms. So the effect of this is that a number of jurisdictions and just by way of example Fairfax County obviously

[01:26:19] our neighboring jurisdiction surrounding jurisdiction Arlington County Alexander Falls Church enacted all enacted fairly similar ordinances with a few variations here and there we did say when this was enacted that we would bring it back to see if any changes were desired there was a lawsuit involving the Fairfax County ordinance which was dismissed at one point the county ordinances is now in effect so as noted in the staff report prior to enacting the initial ordinance in early 2021 the considerations before the city council included whether such an ordinance was needed or desired and there was good discussion on that whether

[01:26:56] any firearms prohibition if enacted should be limited to indoor facilities or some are all outdoor options for prohibition and whether any areas or facilities should be exempted the level of enforcement desired whether to provide for active security screening magnetometers other other devices in some public buildings and security personnel to undertake it as well as any additional law enforcement or security personnel desired, and costs associated with the same.

[01:27:23] Whether to provide exemptions, if you note in the existing ordinance, there are specific exemptions. Those tend to be fairly consistent across jurisdictions, and you can see what they are in this ordinance, which is redlined with some possible changes if council decides to do it. Other discussions included whether individuals having lawful concealed carry permits in Virginia should be exempted.

[01:27:46] I will note the concealed carry laws in Virginia have changed, and the process for obtaining concealed carry has changed. It's much more strenuous now than it used to be. It used to be the training requirement was fairly minimal. Now it's a little more intensive. And whether others should also be exempted, such as judges, prosecutors you see in the staff report that have legitimate reasons, or folks involved in educational historical programs.

[01:28:13] So this draft ordinance, and that's all it is, it's for suggestion, there were a couple of council members who mentioned that there might be some merits in having the city's ordinance sort of parallel what's in Fairfax County. So this, for discussion purposes only, would accomplish that.

[01:28:32] If you look at the ordinance, you'll see that there are a couple of additions. Most notably, in proposed 54-4B4, you would also include a prohibition in essentially for city-permitted events on the streets, alleys, sidewalks, around such events.

[01:28:50] Now, city permitted, to bring everybody back to 2021, was a long discussion because in the city, as with many other jurisdictions, but of course we have city-sponsored events and then you have city-permitted events. The city issues a lot of permits for private events. And some of the discussion then and what some other jurisdictions have done as well is say that, you know, certainly for events that are sponsored by the municipality, there's perhaps some desire to have regulations on that.

[01:29:17] So places that did that certainly could do that. I also added some language in here about capturing, for example, Gateway Park. So that's the sub-six. So it's kind of convoluted, but essentially Northern Virginia Regional Park, Nova Parks, operates that park.

[01:29:33] So we needed some specific language on that if we wanted to make that change. There are signage requirements. Obviously, that was one of the discussion points back in 2021. you have to post prominently signs at the entrances and in the area of public events if you want to do this.

[01:29:50] So previous council decided that there wasn't a desire to do that at that point. So you'll note when you come into our buildings, other places, you see prominently that there are signs speaking to the regulations on firearms. Other tweaks that are possible in here on the private security personnel, there was some discussion about, well, you know, what is the real qualification of private security?

[01:30:13] So the language in here speaks to license by the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, perhaps a restriction that counsel might want to pursue. And then the final area, and this in the originally drafted ordinance in 2021, we had this in as a class one misdemeanor, which does have as a possibility a jail component.

[01:30:35] The discussion with counsel at the time was to lower it to a class four misdemeanor, which I think it's still the same as a $250 fine. The last thing I will say is I did ask for some statistics. There have been no charges under the ordinance since it was enacted in 2021.

[01:30:52] I can't speak to whether we have a problem in the city or not. You see the statistics about how relatively safe the city is, depending on your perspective. But we don't have a recommendation on this. We're just bringing it forward as part of a periodic review. And if the council decides to proceed, I would just simply ask you provide us with any questions, any information that you would like.

[01:31:14] And if there is a consensus by council to place this on a future agenda for introduction of an ordinance, I'm assuming we could have a much more robust discussion at that point. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you may have and take any questions you may have. Council Member Bates.

[01:31:34] Thank you. I just want to say that this is something that I've been following for many years. And personally, you know, I certainly sympathize with those who feel that they should have the right to carry a gun in public.

[01:31:56] And, you know, my family and friends, a lot of them have guns, carry guns. And, you know, I just want to say that personally it's certainly a complex issue and, you know, certainly can't keep everyone happy.

[01:32:19] but I think that from my perspective, these places, parks, municipal facilities, and events are not places I believe it's appropriate for non-law enforcement to have guns.

[01:32:36] And, you know, my biggest concern is, let's say that, you know, a resident has a concern about someone carrying a gun in one of these places, especially an event, which, you know, currently not covered.

[01:32:53] And they, you know, they see them with a gun and are concerned about them, maybe have a bit of a weird feeling about how they're acting. But that person is not doing anything illegal at that time. From my understanding, you know, because they're not breaking the law, they're not breaking the law.

[01:33:13] And so it doesn't really become a crime until they do break the law. And then, you know, we can have a law enforcement response after the fact. Whereas if we were to include events, then we can have a response before something happens, which I think would certainly be ideal.

[01:33:36] And as far as the penalty, to my mind, a Class 4 misdemeanor, I believe that's a maximum $250 fine. Is that correct? Yeah, that is, from what I've seen, cheaper than a lot of guns on the market and not a huge disincentive.

[01:33:56] I mean, my top priority is including events, but I also think that looking at increasing the penalty makes sense for that reason. And then lastly, for the purpose of just simply having consistency between the city and the county, I mean, city and the county, they share a name, but beyond that, you know, really share an economy, and we have a lot of cross-pollination people living in the county coming to the city and vice versa.

[01:34:25] So I think that it could create some confusion if we have people who, say, are used to the city's policies being a bit more lax, who then go into the county and all of a sudden they're breaking the law after crossing the county line.

[01:34:44] That, I think, is certainly a possibility. And, you know, I think that I'm certainly glad to hear that there haven't been any recorded violations so far, recorded charges. And I'd hope that it certainly stays that way. But, you know, I think that we certainly want to be proactive rather than reactive. And I do want to call attention to a peer-reviewed 2024 paper that was published by research or written by researchers at UC Davis.

[01:35:25] There's an article about that paper on the UC Davis website entitled Study Suggests Gun-Free Zones Do Not Attract Mass Shootings. I can certainly, you know, if anybody out there in the audience wants me to send that to them, I'd be happy to.

[01:35:41] But from an infographic available in that article, one big point that stuck out to me was active shootings were 62.5% less likely to occur in gun-free zones than in gun-allowing establishments. And if you look through the rest of the text in the infographic, they kind of give some examples of establishments, bars, restaurants, business, public park.

[01:36:12] And I think that really events are, for me, an even bigger concern than parks or municipal buildings because of just the vast number of people that could be concentrated within a certain given area.

[01:36:29] Um, and at the end of the day, you know, I think that we want to give our police department the authority to keep us safe and, uh, and give them laws to enforce that are going to keep us safe.

[01:36:46] Um, and, uh, yeah, so that's where I stood on this. Thank you. Mayor, I'm sorry, just a couple of points of clarification. Um, I want to make sure everyone understands none of you were on the dais when this was enacted. So the, the enabling authority is very clear.

[01:37:02] So if you read the existing ordinance and any new changes, all of the prohibitions are within areas. So, in other words, there's specific language in a building, in a public park, in a recreation or community center.

[01:37:18] You know, the parking lots are not covered with that. You walk outside the building, not covered, it's in the building. One of the discussion points at the time, and I think, I'm going back and thinking a little bit about the discussion, and again, I encourage folks to watch the video back. On the events issue, there was concern that folks, because there have been no citations, that doesn't mean people don't have guns and aren't walking around.

[01:37:40] I mean, we all understand that. And I suspect what's going on is that in situations where there's confusion or folks are carrying something, they don't realize they're going in a building, you know, police officer or someone will approach and say, hey, you know, you're not supposed to do this, and it just diffuses and goes away. But I think there was some concern, and this goes to the signage issue for events like Rock the Block or Fall Festival, the signage would need to be prominent so folks would understand that, you know, they're walking down and all of a sudden they enter Fall Festival, you know, they're in a no-gun zone and they have to think about that.

[01:38:12] So those were considerations, I think, that the previous council were looking at and deciding whether or not to proceed. So I just wanted to be clear that these are not by any means creating citywide prohibitions. They're specifically designated areas. That's all that the Commonwealth allows municipalities to do.

[01:38:29] So just wanted to interject that. Councilmember Amos. I just had a couple of questions, just because I'm not a gun owner, and I don't really, to be frank, I don't know a whole lot about guns. So could you explain more on the security personnel piece?

[01:38:46] I'm curious on what exactly does that mean? The private security? Yes, yeah. So their event, well, it says hired by the city, licensed at a president building a facility of public property. I assume, and I don't know if the park's right now, she's not here, but I assume that there are events where city security is supplemented or private events have private security.

[01:39:09] And I think there's just a desire to make, well, first of all, there's a desire to allow folks with certain qualifications operating in that role to be able to carry as necessary. Beyond that, I don't have an answer, but I'm happy to come back if this moves forward. Okay.

[01:39:25] For sponsored events, I guess I just wanted to kind of get clarity on that. So I know part of it would be like 4th of July, so I'm assuming that is applicable to like Chocolate Lovers Festival, which is already in a building, but with the IDCC. What are some other examples of sponsored events?

[01:39:41] Sorry, I'm just kind of slipping a little bit on that. Okay. Just kind of a point of clarity on what that means. So when you talk about city events, Chocolate Lovers Festival is a city event, But the Tiny Music Fest, for instance, brand new, is a private event.

[01:39:56] It's a private event, but I'm sure they have a permit in that private parking lot to host an event. They're serving alcohol there. So there are events that are, like, actually, the Asian Festival is actually a private event that's in the city.

[01:40:13] Okay. And then there, so there are city events that, but I will tell you, we had security at the first Pride event at Old Town Hall. There was security there, private security there. They were checking people coming in and out of all the entrances. So that, to me, is my own experience with a city-sponsored event that had private security.

[01:40:32] Although, again, Old Town Hall being a building that's subject to the prohibitions, again, whether it's private security, whether it's city security, whether it's et cetera, that would be appropriate. Right. In terms of defining events, I mean, I think that's a little bit of the sort of the bugaboo, right?

[01:40:47] Because there are events that the city sponsors, there are events that the city co-sponsors, there are events that the city provides funding to. Arriving at a definition is part of the difficulty, not insurmountable. I mean, I think we can do that readily if there's a desire by council to move in that direction.

[01:41:04] But again, if we get into sort of the multitude of privately permitted events, and I would dare say there are dozens if not hundreds of those in the city you're introducing a requirement for signage and it might need to be portable signage because these events are not necessarily in one spot with the signage meet the requirements etc again I think the jurisdictions that have stayed away from that restriction I think it's because of sort of the practicalities of trying to trying to regulate it and again it's it's it's as much education as it is enforcement I think I don't think anybody wants to start arresting people

[01:41:43] for bringing guns into events or into buildings unless, you know, there's a perceived threat. And I know our police department are very well trained in identifying issues like that. I think you answered my question about signage. I was also going to ask in terms of the penalty, because currently class four is 250.

[01:41:59] Does the signage also need to indicate what the penalty would be, or would it just say gun-free zone, or what does that look like? There is no requirement under law that it state the penalty. It's been a while since I looked at our signs. I don't know if we say it's a class 4 misdemeanor. I suspect it says it's a violation of law to enter.

[01:42:18] So that's not critical. Are you asking in terms of the cost of changing a number of signs if the penalty changes? I just wanted to know if it indicates what the violation specifically is on the sign or if it's just saying, like, what different signages can qualify for different things.

[01:42:34] I'm just curious about that. Actually, the more and more I think about it, I'm starting to remember the sign. I think the sign just points to the city ordinance and all the requirements therein, which would include the penalty. Okay. Well, that was it for me. Council Member Hardy-Chandler. Well, I want to thank Council Member Bates for hitting some of the key points that I think are very, you know, common sense a part of this discussion, and I do want to continue this discussion.

[01:43:00] I'm curious in terms of the penalty, does the lower penalty reflect the other jurisdictions that have made these kinds of modifications, or is it lower than our neighbors? So the answer to that question is there was a variety at the time in 2021 and there continues to be a variety. Fairfax County is a class one. I don't want to characterize it because I haven't looked it up recently. I believe false church may be a class four. But again, there's a range of penalties. Of course, the desire is not to have to charge folks if they don't have to.

[01:43:34] And on the jail component of the class one, the comment I make, and I make this often with respect to other crimes within the city, it's often a different crime that leads to the penalty. So, right, you're carrying a gun, but you commit a robbery. That's what ends up getting you in more trouble than the actual carrying of the firearm.

[01:43:55] And I just want to highlight or get some more information about what you said in terms of it not typically leading to, I think there's a lot of concern and a lot of, feedback about law-abiding citizens being somehow inadvertently feeling the consequences of this, and it sounds like some of the comments that you made actually rebut that in that we don't have that kind of response. Right. Again, as with the number of laws, there's discretion. I mean, the desire is, unless somebody is clearly judged to be about to commit something or do something,

[01:44:33] The desire is to sort of diffuse, and I'm not a police officer. I'm just going by what the chiefs have told me in the past, but try to diffuse things before they become problems. But mistakes happen. People have firearms that they carry, and they forget that they have them. We read cases all the time about people going through TSA with firearms, and you think if there was one area where people would know you shouldn't do it, that would be one of them, but it happens every other week you see that.

[01:44:58] And then there's all these discussions about concealed carry, And I think I've seen studies that show that having some folks with training with concealed carry sometimes can help in situations. And then there's others that say that it doesn't help. So, you know, again, a lot of these are philosophical discussions as much as statistical and scientific.

[01:45:16] But, again, that's all part of the discussion that you all may want to have if this moves forward. And I just wanted to follow up with I appreciate revisiting that. This is the time to do it. We live in a very safe city. You don't respond to those kinds of things after events happen. And you have these kind of discussions ahead of time so that people are informed and they're not restricted by myths and misinterpretation.

[01:45:39] So I appreciate this conversation and I appreciate revisiting this and updating it. I think, again, looking at a larger context, and one of the things that I talked about a lot in the campaign, especially in terms of gun sense, is, you know, what do we do in terms of prevention and not response that's always going to be more costly?

[01:46:01] So my position is I appreciate the conversation. I think we need to look at these provisions closely and consider this not only to Council Member Bates' point in terms of our city, because we're not in a bubble, but in terms of where we are with the broader region.

[01:46:20] So I appreciate your work on that. Other comments, questions? Council Member Hall. These might be kind of premature, but it mentions in the staff report costs associated with the amendments to include the procurement of additional security material and personnel.

[01:46:40] Do we have an idea of what that cost would look like potentially? So as you can imagine, that's somewhat of a placeholder. I mean, there's some philosophical and policy decisions that would need to be made. Like, for example, do you want to install magnetometers at the entrances to the buildings? Those were discussions that were had when this was first enacted.

[01:46:57] I think the decision was made no at the time. I mean, I think there were some thoughts that, you know, depending on situations, that it might be visited in budget. I mean, these are budget items. They're expensive. We dealt with a situation here with the court where the sheriff's office provided magnetometers, and they were not working well.

[01:47:15] And so we looked into replacing them just on our own nickel. And nickel is a bad choice of words. They're very expensive. Security is expensive. You know, again, we can't station police officers at the entrances to every building. We can't, I don't want to speak for the chief, we can't station, you know, police officers regularly at the entrance to every park, at the entrance to every event.

[01:47:37] So those are discussion, that's part of the discussion of sort of the spectrum of what you want to do in terms of having something in effect. I think if the chief were here, she would say that they're always trying to identify threats and challenges, and regardless of whether an ordinance is in place, if they see something that looks a little out of the ordinary, they're going to investigate it.

[01:47:58] And that's regardless of whether you have an ordinance in place. But on the cost question, yeah, I mean, I would assume that would be something. And another reason for this timing is if there's a desire to sort of discuss or investigate the costs of security or other aspects, I think would be something you'd want to include before you have your next budget discussion.

[01:48:15] Yeah, I was just curious what, you know, potentially had been discussed previously, what other localities have done and just what we might be looking at. Yeah, and I think that aspect is also a little bit all over the place. Yeah. And then you've mentioned class one versus class four misdemeanor a lot.

[01:48:31] And I understand the $250 fee for class four. What typically comes with a class one misdemeanor? Is that jail time, fine? It's jail, fine, or both. So up to one year in jail, I knew you were going to ask me the number, $1,000. So it's similar to reckless driving then.

[01:48:48] Is that class one? You know, I wish I could tell you I did that work for a living. I'll save that for the prosecutor. But so it's jail time or a fine or both with a class one. With a class four, it's simply a fine. OK.

[01:49:03] And it would also be obviously up to the discretion of the not so much the police officer charging, but the prosecutor and the judge if a case came forward. OK. Well, and I think I mean, I had this conversation earlier with someone, you know, when people come to our events, if they're not aware of the laws, if this was to be implemented.

[01:49:19] I mean, I think there's an education component. There's a, hey, there's a sign here. Yes, you have a weapon on you. We ask you to leave, to store it, to go elsewhere. You comply. It's not a problem. You likely will not be receiving a ticket for inadvertently, potentially having an issue.

[01:49:35] It's where things escalate or go from there. So I will say this by, I have very limited experience with weapons, guns of any sort. I won't say I was surprised by the number of emails that we received, but I think one of the high points that was consistent among the concerns that we received was with regard to concealed carry and whether or not that should be treated the same as other types of gun ownership

[01:50:09] and, you know, open carry, things like that. And I do understand that it is, it's not a, you can't just look at someone that you think might be carrying and say, I need you to show me your concealed carry card I mean there has to be some sort of legal reason for asking for that so I anticipate that we will continue to receive a little bit more pushback on the concealed carry part I think you said earlier that the requirements to be a concealed carry have been made more stringent is that correct yes there's a much more stringent training requirement for I am familiar

[01:50:49] with firearms, and the concealed carry requirements in Virginia used to be fairly lax. They're still not, you know, the same as in a number of states around the country, but it is more involved to get a concealed carry permit today than it was before.

[01:51:05] Okay. And is there, like, a renewal that goes along with that? That part, I don't know. Again, it depends if you had a concealed carry under the previous regime and the new ones. I don't know if anyone in this room would have the answer, there are requirements. There isn't a continuing education requirement on concealed carry in Virginia. Yeah. Okay. I feel like these are questions we're going to get, whether they're asked to us or asked of you or things that we just would like to be able to provide a little bit more information on. No, and you know this. I mean, and you said it a few minutes ago, there are many people walking around with concealed carry, and you wouldn't have a clue

[01:51:42] that they're carrying a weapon. So whether this deters someone, I don't know. But again, stopping and asking folks whether they're carrying concealed before they enter into an event would not be appropriate under the law. Right. Even unless there's another unless there's a suspicion. Right. So they technically could still walk in unless we're physically doing screenings and things like that. And then they get caught in it. But in theory, they could still walk in and it's hidden well, then you would not know that it's there. Absolutely. Okay. Okay. I think,

[01:52:20] so I'm certainly open to having this conversation. I'm certainly open to getting the public's feedback on it. And again, learning a lot more about it. I think this is very, very surface on one hand, but very specific in other ways too. I am certainly open to further consideration of this, but I do think it's important, obviously, that we get the feedback from our community and understand what their concerns are and how we can try to at least recognize them and try to work through them, whether it means we can do it or we can't.

[01:52:53] I just, I would like to make sure that we're doing what we can to get the feedback. And then another component, I think that while we're doing this outreach and engagement, and I know that this is a cost, but I think that we should see if maybe there is, and this might be a Chief Hinsley conversation, but see if there is a resource to maybe be able to provide some sort of safe weapons storage, lock boxes, other things that we could be doing kind of at the same time here. I know that the schools had done that previously when they had a community event. There are organizations that are willing to provide some of those. We're obviously not

[01:53:32] going to be able to help everybody that might need it. But I think that the education component, the safe storage, a little flyer about storing where it should be stored, locking it up, keeping your ammunition separate. I think those are all things that we should try to do here because we can put in an ordinance that says you can't come here with this, but if we can educate and we can help people be safer at home, those are really, I think, where we will hopefully be able to see the fruits of our labor in that it will save a life inadvertently of kids playing at home or or something along those lines so you're speaking about the public education component not

[01:54:09] i almost misunderstood that you're not talking about the city having any storage at events for folks that might have forgotten that they were carrying a weapon etc uh that was not what i was well i was gonna i was gonna cut you off because that one from a liability standpoint i probably yeah no that was not what i was i just want to make sure i understood your question i meant like when i was i went to a providence community event when i was on school board and they had lock boxes for guns that they were there you know there were certain number of lock boxes they were able to give out. So for the person that might have their weapon at home that's not properly locking it up because they can't afford to buy the box or whatever, if there's a way that we

[01:54:45] could try to work with an organization, Moms Demand Action, or another one that might, I don't mean to throw that out there, but someone that might have an opportunity to help with that, I just think we should try to take advantage of as many resources as we can at the moment while putting out as much education as possible. So thank you.

[01:55:03] Other thoughts, comments? Council Member Peterson. Thanks. And to maybe just build on that and some of your comments. So 2021, you mentioned, I guess, in February, 21 in particular was a fairly robust discussion.

[01:55:18] I'm guessing that involved a fair amount of fact-finding and analysis that was brought forward. I haven't gone back and looked at it, but is that your recollection? Yes, and I didn't go back and look, but my understanding as well, there was a fairly significant gap between when it was introduced and when there was a public hearing, and some of that may have been COVID 'cause I think we first had the discussion in 2020 and then got interrupted.

[01:55:41] And then there was action in 2021. But my recollection, and I haven't watched it, but I did at least glance through the minutes of the meeting from 2021. And that's, we used to do verbatim minutes back then. So it's very detailed. There was a lot of discussion about various aspects, the exemptions, some comments on sort of the science and what the goal was of the ordinance, et cetera.

[01:56:07] So yes, again, I would commend to anyone who's interested in this topic to do that. We also had, as you can imagine, it's very, there are folks very passionate on both sides of this issue. So we had a number of both, I believe, electronic comments, but certainly folks that came and spoke passionately about the issue and gave their perspectives and their thoughts as to, you know, what was appropriate, what wasn't appropriate.

[01:56:28] So I would anticipate if this moves forward, and you've seen some emails already, that we would get some robust engagement moving forward as well. But, again, that's why we're soliciting questions. We'd like to be prepared. We'd like to be able to answer your questions, assuming there is a desire to move forward. And so just to be clear also, I think, if I understand your earlier comment, between then and now, in terms of the interest in being able to re-examine this, there's a proactive interest that I hear, but we haven't seen incidents driving the interest in reexamination you mentioned no citation but I gather from what you said

[01:57:07] there really haven't been incidents per se that have led us to want to take a second look at this and again I'm not I'm just going by what I in my conversations with the chief the chief may have a different perspective there have been no citations under 54 54 - 4 I don't believe that means that they're not have there have not been any incidents I think they get diffused I think there are some of them are misunderstandings I think there are attempts to move folks along.

[01:57:34] But in terms of those statistics, we could get that for you. Maybe the chief could give a little more of a nuanced answer to that question. Yeah, so I do think there's a lot of fact-finding, and there are two slightly different worlds here between events and parks, very different conditions where you have remote incidents that take place versus those that take place in a crowded environment.

[01:57:59] But since, I mean, the unfortunate thing is that since 2021, we have a lot of data now that we didn't have then about these incidents and what drove them, what affected them, what affected the success of response measures, all those kinds of things.

[01:58:17] So I do think that it would be important to, if we do move forward, enable some fairly serious updated fact-finding to take place. And some of that comes out of studies that have happened in other places, but some of that is probably taking a closer look at some of our circumstances here.

[01:58:35] Some of the key issues that certainly do come up is the question of timing. How long is it during an active shooting event between the time of the first shot and the time of the first call to 911?

[01:58:52] It's a very critical period of time. And the second is the period of time between 911 one in the response of actually having officers on site, the longer that period of time is until response actually happens, the more vulnerable people are. And it raises, I think, the question of whether concealed carry plays a role, a safety role or a risk reduction role in that period of time.

[01:59:14] That is part of what I think is coming in with the emails that we're seeing, and there are a lot of them, but it's beyond that. I mean, independent of that, those are the kinds of things where the analysis of these incidents is really focused quite a bit in terms of these time periods and what's going on so it would be helpful to know things like what are those numbers look like here in the city between you know the generation of 911 calls following an incident and then the response to those calls and how does that you know vary between being in the parks and being in an event-based environment this is a case where every minute matters and what you do to design around those minutes for safety

[01:59:51] starts to matter quite a bit as well and again i think we need and if we do go forward here a chance to really examine this because there's a lot of new information and and i would just underscore the word a lot you actually have to kind of go into the meta-analysis world do you think community engagement giving the public a chance to actually learn and work through all this is going to be very important as well i'm not sure what happened to the past in terms of why things didn't progress and what the opposition level was and to what extent that was a driver.

[02:00:30] But I think it's fair to expect, based on what we're seeing right now, that there's a pretty high level of concern by a lot of people in the city on both sides, right? So we would need to accommodate that. I would just, again, want to be sure we didn't get into a situation where we're not accommodating the engagement and the fact-finding that's necessary to really think this thing through and give people a chance to get comfortable with which direction they want to go. And the education component, another aspect of that, I know because I get inquiries from time to time, there is, and that's why I said it earlier, there is not a fair

[02:01:09] amount, but there's some confusion. There are people who think that there are absolute prohibitions on firearms in the city, and of course that's not the case. You know, even in the park context, we have a lot of open space in the city not all of it is in parks there's open land where that are not within park boundaries and these regulations don't apply and we're not allowed to restrict firearms in open areas that are not within parks within buildings and the like so I think that's regardless of what you all decided it's probably a good reminder that you know some updated communications some updated information to the public as part of this or

[02:01:45] separately would be a good idea well and just to add the other I mean there are three major dimensions of this come up and it's the control over the access and use of the firearm but there's also mental health and then there's response measures and response time and these things really together all really affect what can be done to be most effective to reduce risk and so a lot has happened within mental health to enable people to spot behaviors that are at risk and then

[02:02:25] respond to those spotting with actual reporting and that's a different world than it was five years ago so that's another area that would be good to understand more clearly that dovetails into other issues of public safety we have here in the city so that I think might be a part of this conversation as well to get a better understanding of kind of what that world looks like and where we are in making progress in terms of safety there. Okay the one other area of property that comes up from time to time just so everyone is clear schools are their own category there's a separate probe actually we have a couple former school board members here but

[02:03:00] there's prohibitions under Virginia law dealing specifically with schools so we don't get into that here so just because you don't see it in this ordinance doesn't mean that schools aren't covered. Council Member McCullough. I just wanted to make one comment. I too am in support of discussing and moving forward with this ordinance. Studies have shown now that greater gun enforcement does decrease gun violence and steadily suicides by gun have increased since 2021 and continues to

[02:03:38] increase. So I think going back to Council Member Peterson's statement about more recent data is needed and but I would I would encourage that we move forward with this ordinance thank you thank you Councilmember Bates thank you just a couple other points that occurred to me as far as you know certainly you know with the police investigating anything that might seem suspicious or

[02:04:15] concerning, certainly, you know, welcomed. However, if they do not find anything that indicates a crime is occurring, you know, and without the ban in place, even if someone does have a gun right now, one of these in an event or what have you, where they're currently allowed, if they do not see any reason to believe another crime is occurring, then they, you know, can't hold them, can't do anything further at that point as things stand now. Is that right?

[02:04:49] I mean, that's correct. I mean, even if you're permitted to lawfully carry a firearm, you're not allowed to brandish it. I mean, there's certain other, that's why I said early on, often it's the other criminal aspect or violation aspect that leads to the issue, not the possession of the firearm itself. But it's another aspect of it.

[02:05:12] Yes, in answer to your question, you know, again, you can open carry in Virginia for the most part. So, I mean, it's – I just want to say, again, there are folks walking around every day carrying firearms, and most of them you wouldn't even know that they're carrying them, especially the folks that have concealed carry permits.

[02:05:30] That's just a fact. Yeah. And additionally, with regard to the 4th of July parade, which is a very unique event in that, as my understanding, at least in previous years, it occurs in areas that are under both the city's jurisdiction and the county's jurisdiction with regard to the ex-clave of the county where the judicial complex is. So in that case, if someone was carrying a gun, he would be subject to the

[02:06:07] county's ban in the judicial complex part of the 4th of July parade because that's being used for event would they be in violation of the county's ordinance that's a very specific question um i have not looked at that i would have to look at it i mean obviously that is the exterior of the judicial complex so ordinarily well again i don't know how courts may have their own restrictions on the parking areas or the common areas out there but remember over there you're not using the interior of a building either so um i suspect well i'm not going to answer the question uh we

[02:06:42] i think our police departments coordinate on those type of issues um and we can certainly answer that question if we come back with answers to the others yeah yeah because that um i think is a certainly unique situation because it's a cross jurisdictional event and i think that's potentially um you know if that is the case another opportunity for there to be a lot of confusion over you know with there being differences in the ordinance between the city and the county um you know not being a violation in one part of the event but being in violation the other part

[02:07:19] of the event or what have you and certainly because it is outdoors you know i that would only be subject to the event portion of the ordinance is my understanding i think you're actually correct i mean if the it would be a city event utilizing part of county property that enclave that is the judicial complex so it would be subject to the event restriction but whether it it could be enforced in another jurisdiction is another question we'd have to look at that so luckily we haven't had that but it's a it's a good point and we will we will have that information

[02:07:51] for you when we come back yeah thank you so say so just looking at trying to bring parity between the county and the city which i i think is part of this endeavor we're a 6.2 square mile city with 26,000 people in the middle of a 1.2 million person county and so i understand some of the additional expense and signage and all of these things that we're proposing to do but if the county has already adopted this it seems to me that they are taking on a much

[02:08:24] larger endeavor to try to do this for an entire county when what we're trying to do in the city is simply bring some parity because the county is all around us and that might make sense to do that i mean at its most simplest in its most simple form to me that is the benefit of a small city and to councilmember bates point there are county properties like how about the willard sherwood center you know there is county property and buildings inside the city too and the judicial

[02:09:03] complex, it seems to me that there's a benefit to have a policy that has parity among jurisdictions. So I will ask if there is, I know that Councilmember McQuillan has said she's interested in moving this forward. I think this is what we're trying to determine here. Is there a consensus or a majority on the dais to move this issue forward? Councilmember Amos? I think it warrants further discussion. Councilmember Hall? Yes, I do just have one question to comment. I did look forward on the melissa this might be a question for you i did look forward onto the futures list it looks

[02:09:38] like would be july 22nd yeah is that is there only one public hearing yes okay so i with it being in the middle of the summer i recognize we don't meet in august and that then delays things further and that's certainly not my intention but i i do worry that with the number of families that go on vacation in june and july that that potentially is not giving people enough of an opportunity to be able to be informed and aware of what is being proposed so i wish we weren't on vacation in august because again i think september is late and then we run into school and all of

[02:10:17] those things but i did just want to throw it out there as being a possible concern council member yes i do perceive as moving forward okay great thank you council member hardy chandler um certainly in support of continuing this conversation council member peterson i think with the same caveats is Council Member Hall. I'm concerned about the timing. I think we're going to need more time than that to work through this. And so my support would be really conditioned on giving us adequate time to go through the engagement and the fact-finding that's necessary.

[02:10:54] Council Member Bates? Yeah, certainly support moving forward, of course. With regard to when it would go into effect, I believe that it was recommended that we look at a delayed effective date and that's certainly something I think that you know that I think warrants consideration perhaps is sort of a compromise in that space so that we can move forward on it but look at making sure that we have enough time

[02:11:28] to get the word out about it and councilmember McQuillan yes okay great so there is desire on the council to move forward there is some so I'm not so I want to be clear, because ordinarily what I would do is, I understand the desire for information, introduce this on the 8th, 9th, 8th public hearing on the whatever the July dates are.

[02:11:57] If we go into September, that's fine. I will note I will not be here at the first meeting in September, so it would be the second meeting in September. But I'm trying to understand if you all want another work session on this to answer some questions. If you want to introduce the ordinance and have the discussions at the public hearing, how would you like to proceed?

[02:12:16] Well, there's some concern. Obviously, two members on the dais have concern about a June 22nd public hearing. Council Member Bates, I believe, said that to have a delayed effective date kind of answers not putting this into effect immediately anyway.

[02:12:33] that to start the discussion and have a public to have the public hearing and schedule it I don't know that there's an ideal time the delayed effective date though just to be clear would just be you'd have the ordinance adopted it would just be when it would go into effect so if there's concern about what's in the ordinance that just saying that doesn't solve that problem that just delays the enforcement of it councilmember Hardy Chandler so just a question I mean I think I would have more concern about the timing if this was an introduction of an ordinance but this is something that started in 2021 right and this reflects updates and

[02:13:11] modifications to that correct correct it's it's a normal modification it's the same process it's an introduction and a public hearing and the and there have been hearings on the original ordinance before correct in 2021 yes okay so i mean i guess for me i would just say i would have more concern about the timeline if this was an initial introduction like back in 2021 but there has an opportunity for public input. I think we can move forward. I would be comfortable moving forward with a public hearing, either whatever the date is, but just recognizing that there would be a

[02:13:49] different timeline if this was an introduction versus an update. So I think that offers additional or layered opportunity. The other thing, just so everyone understands, if you introduce an ORDINANCE, YOU CAN STILL MAKE CHANGES. THE SUBJECT MATTER IS REGULATION OF FIREARMS.

[02:14:05] SO YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE CHANGES UP UNTIL THE NIGHT OF ENACTMENT IF THERE IS DESIRE TO MAKE CHANGES. SO, AGAIN, THAT'S ANOTHER CONSIDERATION FOR YOU ALL. JUST IF I WANT. COUNCIL MEMBER PETERSON? YEAH, I DO FAVOR ANOTHER WORK SESSION.

[02:14:20] WE DON'T HAVE THE POLICE CHIEF PRESENT THIS EVENING. IT SEEMS PRETTY IMPORTANT THAT WE WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH THE POLICE CHIEF IN ADDITION TO OTHER PEOPLE WE MIGHT WANT TO SPEAK WITH AROUND THIS. I think that would be a fairly essential first step in whatever we do.

[02:14:37] We would, of course, have the police chief, the parks and rec director, and others available at public hearing night and an introduction night if needed. But fair point. But with respect to a work session where we get a chance to have Q&A and extended discussion, we haven't had that yet with them present.

[02:15:01] Well, we'll go back down the line and see what people want to do about a June 22nd, a July 22nd date. Council Member Amos? I think we can keep July 22nd, and if we're feeling uncomfortable, we can just defer. Councilmember Hall?

[02:15:25] Yes, I guess if we can. I just want to make sure people have opportunity. I understand this was introduced back in 2021, but I can't even tell you how many projects were introduced in 2019 and 2020 and 2021 that people are not aware of that are going on.

[02:15:44] And I recognize that this is an update. And I know I'm giving very long-winded answers tonight, but yes, I would support July 22nd. But I think that we need to make sure that the outreach is done.

[02:16:02] Council Member Hardy-Chandler. I support. Council Member Peterson. I'd like to do more before we do that. Council Member Bates. Yep, support July 22nd. Council Member McQuillan. Yes, July 22nd.

[02:16:17] There we go. So if we could prepare for July 22nd. So we will introduce the ordinance to make it look like the county ordinance at the first meeting in July with a recommendation for a public hearing July 22nd. And council, of course, can change that moving forward.

[02:16:35] Okay. We'll proceed based on that consensus. Terrific. Thank you. Ms. Shinneberry. Okay. Our next item is a discussion on process requirements for possible amendments to the city charter. I'll recognize Brian Love, commencement city attorney, to provide the staff report.

[02:16:50] So you've had some – hello again. You've had some sort of preliminary discussions, and every council goes through this every year, on whether there's a desire to pursue any charter changes. In the past, and the normal process, I don't want to say the normal process, the typical process is that items are brought forward, there's a public hearing, and council decides whether to push it forward to the General Assembly.

[02:17:18] As we've discussed at least once in the past, there is another option for charter, pursuing charter changes, and that's to submit a specific question to the voters. The only reason bringing this up today is that the time is rapidly passing in order to be able to do that with your August recess.

[02:17:37] Ballot questions for referenda on charter changes must be approved by the court at least 81 days prior to the election. So with your August recess, such as you see in the staff report here, essentially that That means you have July unless you have a special meeting. If there is an item you wish to submit to the voters.

[02:17:54] For some of these other items on here, and you've talked in the past about the transient occupancy tax limitation in the charter, and there seemed to be some consensus in seeking a change to that. The compensation of members of boards and commissions, I think there were a number of comments about that ours is perhaps low, and you want to remove or increase that restriction.

[02:18:13] And I think, yeah, and then there's a, regardless of what, if you all decide to do anything with respect to elections or not, we do have a dichotomy between the way our charter reads now and the fact that we have November elections. Again, for those of you who were, none of you were on council, but the General Assembly took May elections away from localities, recognizing that it would be difficult to do charter changes in all the jurisdictions.

[02:18:37] They allowed a process by which municipalities could do it by code change, and that's what we did here in the city. So we have a city code provision that provides for November elections. We have a charter provision that provides for May elections. So at some point, I wouldn't suggest doing it as a standalone, but if the city goes in with other charter changes, I would suggest that we at least make it reflect what the reality is.

[02:19:02] So with that, again, staff doesn't have any recommendations. Staff doesn't push charter changes unless there's a legal reason to do it. So I'm happy to entertain any discussion. So I'll open it up with four-year staggered terms, which is something I talked about with the last council, and it's something I've talked about with this council.

[02:19:19] And there are 41 independent cities in the United States, and 38 of them are in Virginia. And of the 38 independent cities in Virginia, 36 of them have four-year terms already.

[02:19:35] One has three-year terms, that's Alexandria, and Fairfax City is the only independent city that has elections every other year. Of the 38 independent cities in Virginia, 35 of them have staggered terms. We are one of the three that does not have staggered terms.

[02:19:52] This issue has been revisited before. There was a commission in 2013, I believe, in which it was recommended that we have four-year terms. It was introduced as a referendum on the ballot in 2014, a May election.

[02:20:08] I believe the voter turnout was about 2,500 people, and it was defeated. and that was the last time we talked about four-year terms, staggered or otherwise. So I am bringing this up again because I think that the public, not having had any say in whether our elections were in May or November, the public deserves to have a say in whether or not they want four-year terms, staggered or not, although I believe staggered, which is what 90% of other cities are doing, has a benefit.

[02:20:43] Now, this dais could make that change by a simple vote, but I know that our dais is very committed to public outreach, and this dais cares very deeply about what the public thinks, what voters think, what the residents think. And the best way to find that out is to ask them.

[02:21:01] And we have an election coming up in November of this year for the governor's race in which voters can weigh in on whether they prefer to have four-year terms or specifically the question I would like to ask is for your staggered terms.

[02:21:16] I will just remind everybody that in a little over six months, candidates will pull their packets to file to run for office. We're six months into this dais, and in six more months, candidates will pull their packets to run.

[02:21:32] And in less than a year, we will have a ballot with certified candidates on it. So elections will start, people will start campaigning in a little over six months. And so I think it's important for voters to understand the impact of elections on the government they end up with.

[02:21:52] We had 11 candidates running for six seats last time. Of the three incumbents running, only one was reelected. And so I think the reality, since we're looking at data, lots of discussion about data, since we're looking at data, there's lots of data here that I think our residents and voters should consider when they think about the quality of governance that they want in the city of Fairfax. So that is why this is something, I sent something around to all of you, that David Bulova investigated for us, the proposed four-year staggered terms, and whether or not a recommendation

[02:22:30] made by Council Member Bates about how to do the stagger was both feasible, legal, and constitutional, and it is. So at this juncture, I would like to open this discussion with this particular charter change. And to that end, I'd like to recognize Councilmember Billy Bates.

[02:22:49] Thank you. So this is an idea that I've been kind of kicking around as an alternative to having strictly even-year elections. And I'd initially intended to bring it up at a previous retreat but I think we ran out of time at the time and it's perhaps for the best that we're doing this in a work session instead on camera in a more formal environment. So basically

[02:23:21] what I was thinking is that we could have elections during the federal midterm year and the gubernatorial year, and that would be, you know, the stagger, half the council up, you know, one year, half the council up the other year. So my thought on that is that it kind of, to my mind, responds to some of the concerns that have been raised by others on the diocese

[02:23:54] and others in the community. It first off gets us off the presidential cycle, which I think is probably for the best but it's still on the other hand also avoids the county's election year when we also have the general assembly up but no statewide offices usually anyway and so that's a much lower turnout year and then also you have the potential for confusion with the county

[02:24:29] election you know having both of our elected bodies up at the same time furthermore it I think gives us the best shot at maintaining some level of equity between the two classes of council members in terms of turnout. From what I've seen, I think that the federal midterm year and the gubernatorial year tend to be the closest in terms of turnout, with the presidential year, of course, usually being a good bit higher and what I'd call the state-level midterm year being

[02:25:05] a bit lower um and uh you know on the other hand it's also kind of i think you know under those constraints somewhat maximizing the uh or minimizing the amount of time that residents are going without being able to um you know express their opinions and wishes at the ballot box at the local level as opposed to you know for example having uh just one single election for four-year terms all at once, and I think that it also kind of breaks things up a bit, makes

[02:25:45] things a bit more manageable in terms of having, at least among this dais, either three or four seats up at one time as opposed to all seven seats. I think that might kind of give the residents a bit more opportunity to focus on the candidates without being maybe quite as overwhelmed um and in terms of starting the stagger if we were to want to have referendum this year

[02:26:19] then you know my thought was that we would um you know assuming that it passes um send that general assembly for their next session and then if we were to uh start the stagger next year then And as far as in terms of the council anyway, the three top vote-getters would be elected for a four-year term that year, and then the three lowest vote-getters of those six winners would be elected for a three-year term, and then they would run again in the gubernatorial

[02:26:58] year, and then after that, you know, that's the year that they run, and then those who for a four-year term would run in the U.S. midterm years from then on. And, you know, school board could follow something similar.

[02:27:17] So, you know, my concern with not doing the referendum this year is that if we were to put it off until even next year, you know, for example, let's say that we have the referendum next year, we could not, you know, this could not go into effect.

[02:27:34] we want to respect the wishes of the referendum could not be voted on by General Assembly until the following year and that would be that you know low turnout county election year right before the next presidential election year so then you know and that's not a year that under this system we would be having an election and you would have to then go to the next presidential year and then you have the next gubernatorial year after that so i don't really see a way that we

[02:28:11] could avoid having city elections on the presidential ballot again unless we want to do something weird like you know running for one year terms one year or something like that i just don't see how that would work out so my concern with not doing it this year is that we may then be kind of putting ourselves in the position of having another presidential year you know presidential slash city election year without giving the voters the opportunity for input and I want to you know certainly would not on the other hand want to do this without a referendum I do think that it's something that we need a referendum on and we need to respect the wishes

[02:28:49] of that referendum and whether or not we go forward so I'm certainly open to other thoughts and feedback a question can voters petition to put something on a referendum I don't have the

[02:29:10] answer on for charter changes. The city has ability to have an advisory referenda. There are, I think, a couple of areas under which referenda are allowed that are voter initiated. I could look that up while you all are asking other questions. It just popped into my head as another avenue. If I could, Mayor, I just have a question about this proposal. So essentially what's being proposed is you would always be in a cycle of having two years of elections, two years off, two years of elections, two years off. Right. Once you get the, well, actually, even before you get to this okay i'm just trying to write this down and right and that's to specifically to

[02:29:46] avoid running in the presidential year are in you know because virginia so let's just back up and not assume everybody understands that virginia has elections on a four-year cycle the first year is the presidential election with the highest turnout we are one of two states that have off-year elections us in new jersey which is this year the governor's race and there's a slight drop off from the presidential the third year is the federal midterms where it drops off slightly it drops off a little bit more generally for federal midterms there's a huge drop off in the fourth year which is constitutional offices commonwealth's attorney sheriff you know um clerk of the circuit

[02:30:23] court and um the county board of supervisors and the county school board which is something we would avoid because we already have the same name as the county and the county school board and in in the last fourth year election i think the voter turnout in the city was 43 percent so it's less than 50 percent so it's not it's not necessarily representative of a majority even a simple majority in the city electing their local officers um so that's one of the reasons that that the council member base had suggested that we do this and and and delegate boulevard ran this past

[02:30:59] the people down in richmond it's unusual but it is feasible for us to do it this way and so we are you know, we are thinking about the ways in which we maximize having more than 50% of our voters come out, because in May elections, it was dramatically less than that. It was about 20 to 25% of people voted in May. So our first May election in 2022, 59% of the voters turned out, and obviously a huge number of voters turned out for the presidential election. We'd like to have

[02:31:35] as high as possible voter participation in municipal local elections without competing with the presidential and not having the confusion and the drop-off with the county elections. So this is the model that we are proposing. And the chair of the school board has indicated that she is interested if this is something that's adopted for the council. She certainly wants it adopted for the school board. And I would also point out that we have elections coming up for the commission of the revenue and the city treasurer and both of those are four-year terms

[02:32:10] because four-year terms are generally what a majority of cities and i believe even towns are doing in the commonwealth of virginia council member hardy chandler i just wanted to add that i think it's particularly well thought out in addition to it being the majority format of four-year terms. I just really think it's in the best interest of the city and the residents to have that continuity. It has been in some ways delightful to start with a larger proportion of

[02:32:46] the city council being new, but I also think that that puts up certain challenges as five people are learning this role that could be easier navigate more easily navigated with three veterans and three new people so in addition to what it means for the city council beyond that I just really think that continuity over a larger period of time is is what's in the best interest of the city

[02:33:20] a municipality that has to deal with multi-year projects long histories and no single term will cover the whole history of the things that need to be taken care of but I do think it serves it serves a service purpose in a better way than this two-year model and mayor I think you said people will start campaigning in six months I think it started pretty much now you know because it is such a short term so I would be in support of this and I'm very curious about the timeline

[02:33:58] for if we were to do this this year you said July what would be if this is something that that's a very short period of time and so I want us to be particularly clear on what needs to happen if that were to be pursued what other information could we get in the interim So that we don't miss a deadline for something that we may want to pursue so there is no mayor So there's no requirement

[02:34:33] For an ordinance so you don't need to do two meetings. There's no absolute requirement for a public hearing I think I would suggest and you all would probably say the same thing that this is probably something that might be appropriate for a public hearing So you could certainly do this at the last meeting in July, assuming no special meeting, and you do it by resolution.

[02:34:54] In terms of process, I would need to write the question. Obviously, as you can imagine, you're not asking the voters to vote on a general issue. You're asking them to vote on a specific question. So the exact language of the question would become critical. I could certainly draft something in time for you all to discuss this at the end of July.

[02:35:15] But that also depends on what, if any, changes folks would want to that. But the question would have to be precise. We would then submit a petition to the circuit court to issue an order, and that could be done fairly quickly, but it has to be issued, has to be ordered by the court at least 81 days prior to the election date.

[02:35:33] So, again, in terms of interaction with the council and the council taking action, because of the August recess, absent a special meeting, you have July. You have two meetings scheduled currently. And so I would point out, too, that getting a vote to ask the voters this question in July means that we have between that vote and November to educate the public much the same way we did on the school bond referendum.

[02:36:03] This is the same thing. It is asking people to consider something that has an impact on them specifically. this so so deciding in july to put this on the ballot gives us a runway to talk with the public but the public will decide yes or no if it's overwhelmingly no it's no it was defeated in 2014 if it's yes it's yes but the voters will have spoken council member amos so as a point

[02:36:36] of clarity uh so the process is either we could do we need to get the referendum through by end let's say end of July, for it to be on the referendum, you can also do it, we could technically do it at any point, even without a referendum change. Is that correct? So again, as I said at the beginning, I would anticipate, unless there's not a desire to do it, that we'll be bringing forward at least one or two suggested charter changes in the fall through the normal public hearing and action process, transient occupancy, and perhaps boards and commissions compensation, and maybe cleanup if we get to that point. Well, I guess my question is, if we were to want to make

[02:37:15] transition to say four-year terms or four-year staggered terms whatever that looks like that is a referendum a required component no no charter changes have again two paths and it doesn't matter what the charter change is you either do it through you know you're elected to make these decisions you have a public hearing you decide to push it forward or if there's a question that you feel needs the sense of the public you can go the referendum route those are the two methods or the general assembly can just on its own initiative change your charter which is hasn't happened very often in Virginia gotcha so I wanted to thank my colleagues obviously I think I texted everyone if I didn't get to you I think I got to everyone so I sent the idea of what if

[02:37:54] we added this question of the community survey now I understand that's a four month process I think Councilmember Bates and Mayor Reed both actually provided very good feedback with in terms of timeline how that could affect that I would still be comfortable doing that and I will throw a curveball in there I'm not opposed to just also doing a public hearing I don't think it needs to be on a referendum part of the issue that I take with this process is that it's going to incentivize people to turn this into a campaign talking point either this year or especially next year there are going to be some people pro to I I've heard from people in the community who want to advocate for four

[02:38:31] year terms and want to advocate for two-year terms and I I do have concern with letting too much politics getting involved in this when in I'll preface that I'm a supporter of four-year terms over two-year terms I think it does provide more stability. So I think doing the community survey, and I'm actually open to doing a public hearing rather than having to do a referendum. So I'll throw that curveball out there for everyone. Well, the community survey does not go to all voters. The community survey does not go to every person in this city. So you are not asking every voter to weigh in through a community survey on whether they want this or not. And as far as this being political, I think the

[02:39:10] horses left the barn on this a long time ago. So what it comes down to, if we don't do a referendum and this council decides it's not going to support this, then that ship has sailed, which is why I believe strongly that we need to make a commitment to put this on a referendum and ask the voters.

[02:39:28] But if this council does not want to do that, then we need to have a vote so that the voters know who supports four-year staggered terms being on the referendum and who does not. So a public hearing yes and i am going to ask for a resolution and a vote so if you don't support it that's fine but there will be a vote council member amos quick question on the referendum if that were to move forward would it be four-year staggered terms or would four-year terms and then the staggered component be separate or is that all in conjunction or is that up to us it's your decision

[02:40:03] you know again we don't have a uh we're not advocating for anything you can do you can do four-year terms you can do four-year staggered terms you can do three and four-year terms if you look around the state there's lots of options okay i mean i'm curious what my colleagues think again i do think four-year terms are healthy for me it's just in terms of difference in opinion on process up to up to us council member hall i personally do not support four-year terms um i think that our voters did not seem to support that either i actually believe that this

[02:40:39] was done twice on a referendum. Is that correct? I believe it was 2014, and I think it was done a little bit more recently than that, wasn't it? Certainly not more recently. No, I think it's once, and I think it was, and I don't even remember 2014, but it's once. Okay, my mistake. I also believe that it failed 80 to 20. 80% were against it. Yes, 2,500 people that were invested in local elections in May. And I think I can't even tell you how many people that came to vote that I

[02:41:14] spoke with did not know we had local elections this year and also when I ran for school board. So I think we obviously have different opinions for some of us on what an educated voter looks like when it comes out for a local election. And I think that we can do all we can to educate and to try to tell people, but I do support putting this on a survey. I think one of the other things that was discussed about the survey is that while it's going to go out to 400 and some households,

[02:41:52] sorry, 4,000 households, we also have the ability to share that with as many other people as would like to answer it, and we will know that they were not part of the original pool of respondents But it's also a really good way to get feedback from other residents on a whole host of items that are outside of what the normal survey would do.

[02:42:19] So as far as staggered terms, I don't know that I support those either. I also do not support running in a presidential election ever again. I would be open to odd year elections, because I think that you get caught up in so much of the presidential pot of things. And I think that that tension, and I think it's really brought out a side of our city that we didn't have before.

[02:42:59] and i understand the shift from may to november we can't do anything about that but i i think things have been much more contentious and unpleasant in a lot of areas and i i think that if if i can personally do something to not have that continue i would love to see that go on um i think that we as a city could do a really good job of continuing to educate our residents on whenever it is our elections are going to be, whatever year, whatever they're running for.

[02:43:33] I don't think that there's a real good argument that is in support of four-year terms. And the other thing I will say about it is that depending upon where you are in your stage of life, four years can be a really big commitment. And I have concerns that people that know that they can do a two-year term, but may or may not see themselves either enjoying the role, liking the role or being able to continue because of a move or something else might be precluded from choosing to run for something because they don't want to put the financial burden or imposition of having

[02:44:13] to do a special election or a special appointee or anything else like that. So I feel like there are many things in our city that are not broken and really don't need to be fixed. And I also don't know that the reasons that have been presented by some choosing to do so are sufficient to open up a charter change and really make decisions without truly considering their impact.

[02:44:45] Thank you. Well, I would point out, again, that it's not about the candidates or what the candidates want. It's about the voters. And the voters, if they are competent to go and cast a ballot, should be competent enough to read a referendum and decide how they're going to vote without additional education. They are grownups out there. That would be my assessment of allowing voters to make their own choice. The question is whether this dais is going to vote to allow them to make that choice. It is their choice. Councilmember Bates? Thank you. I mean, you know, some of us

[02:45:22] don't want elections to occur in the presidential year, which I've come to agree with, but some of us also don't want elections to occur during the county's election year when, you know, I think a lot of opportunity for confusion, but also a steep drop-off and turnout. And I don't, you know, a different way of doing this while keeping elections off both the presidential year and the county year did not occur to me other than, you know, having a one-year term and then

[02:46:02] three-year term for everybody which you know I'd personally I don't think that would be a good idea and but I'm certainly my suggestions and you know another thing that occurred to me is that I certainly wouldn't be opposed to having both the referendum and a public hearing if possible within the time constraints you know to kind of maximize the amount of input that we can get but But, you know, really, I think that it would be best to give the voters some kind of option, you know, before the next presidential year.

[02:46:44] Councilmember Hardy-Chandler. I appreciate the and option. I do think that that's important. I agree with Councilmember Hall about the races, when they occur, and tension, which is why I think if we spread them out, we can spend more time serving.

[02:47:03] And I support for your terms for that reason. Campaigning is challenging. It's really good to be able to get out and talk to people. But when you're serving, you can talk to people also. And there's a lot of input and a lot of exchange when you have that opportunity to do it without some of the other activities.

[02:47:25] I think you can accomplish the same thing in terms of community communication and without, again, the tension that I agree with Councilmember Hall arose. So you spread those out, and I think the offering of the staggered terms in a way that avoids some of the pitfalls of a presidential year or a council election is really optimal.

[02:47:50] Timing is of the essence. So I really like the notion that putting the question on a survey does not preclude us for preparing for both and seeing, you know, we still have other discussions, we still have other questions. And that, I think, is sort of a responsible approach is let's take a look at what's possible.

[02:48:12] One might fall out, but at least we won't be at the end of July wishing we had done a referendum. Councilmember Amos. Before I make my comment quick question So how are we feeling about the discussion for community survey? I mean do do we want to go past 10?

[02:48:34] I was also just briefly speaking with Melanie and not Melanie Melissa god the Mel's and There is potential for doing that July 1st or July 8th, but I wanted to check with you all in terms of timing Would we be able to to do that? Yeah? Yes We're prepared to have it tonight if you want to delay it. That's certainly fine I know that we've been trying to keep this moving forward because the council has, you know, this has been an important issue.

[02:49:09] You know, we wanted to have that survey to get community feedback. So it's fine. There's no timeline for it. Just understand that the longer you take to finalize the instrument and get it out on the street is the longer it will be before you get results.

[02:49:27] That's all. But it's fine. But from a discussion standpoint, if you don't wish to have that discussion this evening and you want to do it at a future meeting, that's perfectly fine. I didn't have a chance to pass a piece of paper. Will Council be amenable to doing that next week? No.

[02:49:43] I think we should. It's 950. I think this is very important. I think we've already delayed it. I think that our goal was to get this out, and I do not support delaying it any further. I would rather table this discussion, to be totally honest, because I think this is not the important thing that Council had wanted to focus on.

[02:50:00] Okay. Well, the council, yes, you're right. Should we vote on whether the council wants to continue this discussion? Is that what you're asking, Council Member Hall? I'm saying that I was not the one that asked that the charter change for two-year versus four-year versus staggered terms be put on the agenda. To my knowledge, there was not a majority support to actually put that on there.

[02:50:23] the mayor put that on there okay i'm still speaking um all i'm saying is that there was a conversation earlier about council member peterson trying to add something to the agenda and there was a was there unanimous support for it was there enough support from council so there's just some confusion over how things get onto the agenda i'm simply saying we all i believe heavily supported the survey we did not all heavily support a discussion about four versus two year versus staggered terms and so i think if we want to see what the council's

[02:51:00] priority is and having the conversation and finishing tonight i think that maybe then that would be necessary for a vote to be had if that's what you're gonna push but i'm not really sure why it has to come down to a if i'm sorry i'm still speaking no you're good no i am still speaking Well, I was speaking first, and then you took what I was doing, but fine, continue.

[02:51:21] I don't believe so, but, I mean, if you think that that's critical to have a vote to be able to move forward, I mean, I don't really understand why it's so much tension and pushback. We'll just keep moving forward. Council Member Amos, I think we will just push through at this point.

[02:51:39] Okay, so let's just, I guess we'll just move on to the community survey. No, we're not moving on to community survey because we haven't finished discussing this yet. Okay, I wasn't sure what was going on. Okay, the point I was going to make, and now I'm losing my train of thought, and I know that I also mentioned this via text to some folks, and I think Council Member Hardy Chandler was getting to it.

[02:52:01] I would also be open to doing both. I don't think that's too problematic, and I think it accomplishes we get kind of more of a quote-unquote controller neutral set without the election side of it, and we can do the referendum, and we get people multiple points of contact at the same time.

[02:52:19] And I think that is fair, and I do want to acknowledge that I think it is worth the conversation. So, like I said, I am supportive of four-year terms, and I think it is worth a conversation. But why don't we just do both? So, I think what we will do is on the agenda for July 8th, we will have a public hearing, and we will take a vote on the 22nd.

[02:52:44] And in between those times, we can have further discussion on the four-year terms, but there will be a public hearing. We will put that on the agenda, and there will be a vote on July 22nd, and if it doesn't pass, it doesn't pass on this dais. If I may?

[02:53:01] Council Member Hall. Yes, thank you. Is there support from the majority of council to proceed with that decision? I'm not asking for your vote to proceed with this decision. This is going on the agenda. I don't believe you have the authority to do that under our charter.

[02:53:19] Mayor, and I'm confused because I don't know what we're actually voting, would be voting on on the 8th? So to introduce a public hearing on four-year staggered terms, drafting the question, and then we would have a vote on the 22nd to vote on whether or not we would add the question in its modified form, if there's a modified form, to the ballot in November.

[02:53:58] We don't have a, I mean, you're saying staggered terms. There's a lot in that. We don't have a question to discuss at this point. I haven't heard a consensus on what the question should be that you would be deciding whether to have a public hearing on. I thought the purpose of this evening was to see if there was consensus on moving forward with drafting a question with

[02:54:30] input from everybody on what would then be presented. Okay, fair enough. So the question And then becomes, is there interest on the dais in moving this forward or not? Council Member Amos? I would like to do the community survey.

[02:54:48] Council Member Hall? Not in the method that you have suggested. I would support the community survey. I would also support open opportunities for the community to come and speak. That is non-binding. That does not have a vote attached to it. And that allows people to come and, similar to an open house, to learn about it, to understand it, and to be able to provide feedback.

[02:55:11] Council Member Hardin-Chandler. I agree with Council Member Hall and the referendum because if we want to do that and this timeline passes, the opportunity to support the very optimal timeline that Council Member Bates has outlined will have passed, and we will miss that opportunity.

[02:55:35] Council Member Peterson. I support Council Member Hall. Council Member Bates. I think it's very important that we have a referendum on this year's ballot. I certainly support having an additional public hearing as feasible. And one question on the community survey, would we be getting the results of that back before the deadline to submit something to the General Assembly?

[02:56:03] So for to do a referendum, the answer would be no. If you're wanting to put some type of question on the community survey, by the time we get the result, by the time the survey can get done and administered and the results compiled, you would not have that information in time to then put it on for a referendum for this November.

[02:56:30] You would have time to do the traditional method of, so say, for example, you put on a survey and it's overwhelming support for it, just hypothetically. That's what you hear. Then you could do the traditional method of saying, okay, you held a public hearing, you get public comment, and then this council would vote to forward that to the General Assembly for next year.

[02:56:59] that's the that's what mr. Lobkman has said is that's the traditional method the referendum does happen but that's that's much more rare for charter changes to have a referendum it's typically done you you know do you mention like have an open house or education campaign or what you can do all of those things but it's typically you get public feedback and then council takes action it's not typically done with a referendum the way that the charter the way that charter changes work in Virginia the legislation must be introduced on day one of the assembly or or pre-filed and then other way if it's so if you don't get it in

[02:57:38] it can't be considered that year you would want the change in my experience with because I've worked two sessions in the General Assembly years ago so my experience has been in having done charter changes in other places for an election piece there go you're going to want to do the charter change in the election year meaning so that's that's so the focus of the timing right now is is important because with the the general assembly that would start in January of 26 if they had whatever charter change you adopt would take

[02:58:15] effect July 1 of 26 you have an election in November of 26 so whatever that question is whether you want for your term staggered terms whatever kind of terms you want if that was to get approved then that would be done at that November 26 election if you wait and then push it off a whole year you you could do the charter change but typically they're not you would be in the middle of a cycle and so they typically they don't typically shorten terms they would lengthen them so when we went to from May to November elections everybody got an extra six months that's how they that's how they may

[02:58:55] affected the change. All those who were in office just were by court order essentially got six more months and then they went to November elections. But in the other case, because you're every two years, if you try to do something in an off year, the General Assembly is not going to say, okay, well, you were elected to a two-year term, but we're only going to let you serve one and then you have to run again. I'm not saying they wouldn't do that. I'm just saying that is typically not the case and how they do yeah i think so council member hardy channel so the other thing um

[02:59:28] in addition to this i am interested in the other charter changes in terms of the transient occupancy tax and um the change to compensation for people who may want to run for office so are we also going to have discussions about that does that follow the same that follows the same process or a different process? So any charter change, so just being on the transient occupancy tax specifically, there's that, we couldn't do anything with that with our budget this year because there's a cap in the charter. So we need to, if you want to be able to have that

[03:00:06] as an additional revenue source in the future, then we need that cap removed. The only way we're going to get that cap removed is to amend the charter. So that does not have to be a referendum question again that would typically follow the what I would say this the traditional method you would we would hold a public hearing and so let's say you wanted to and I'm just making it you wanted to make ten different charter changes you've talked about like transient occupancy tax boards and commissions and there's let's say there's eight other things you want to do you would you would have all you would have a public hearing and have all those things there would be the we would have to draft a specific language that the change that we would want that's what people would be seeing and

[03:00:43] then that's what we would submit to our then you get the public comment assuming council adopts that you would present that to the ask our legislators and so in this case it'd be delicate boulevard and or senator Saleem to introduce that on behalf of the city and then it would go it would go through the General Assembly process and then assuming the General Assembly adopts those changes they would become effective July 1 of 26 so you know that so that's that's and so from a budget perspective if you know for next year's budget specifically speaking on transit occupancy tax we would know prior to July 1 and the

[03:01:21] adoption of the budget whether or not they remove the cap so you could consider that in your budget discussions to be able to take advantage of that in the next year's budget as an example you wouldn't necessarily have to have to wait another full year after but again that's that's how charter changes work in general so so anyway so yes so if you're wanting to consider other things you don't know you have time with the traditional method whether it's the terms if you want to consider terms if you want to do the traditional method

[03:01:58] you do have to you basically I would say have until like probably the late October time frame to have your public hearing and vote because then you would need to have time to present that you don't want to be doing it um because we need our legislators to have time to get that information submit so that there's no there's not a hard deadline but i would say if it's a practical deadline is probably the late october meeting is when you'd want to have all of that concluded so your public hearing your vote etc for a traditional method

[03:02:32] okay so based off of that would the community survey information be back in time for that It depends on when you all agree on, so if you, if after the, I will answer it this way, at the conclusion of this meeting, if you, if you are, whatever changes or things you want to do, if there's agreement on it, then the answer is yes.

[03:02:53] If we don't reach agreement and we keep pushing the discussion off future and future and future, then, then the answer is maybe. And at some point the answer would be no. So it depends on how, so we're, we, I say we as a staff, we've presented it to you.

[03:03:09] worked with our worked with the consultant we've presented that to you i know there's some questions that we're scheduled to discuss and it's not it's not a lot but there were some questions we can get through all of those and then once everybody is satisfied we will release the consultant to move forward and you're probably talking uh and we have a slide if we get to this point but you're if we got everything done today we probably have results by the time they administer it do all we probably have to be able to have the

[03:03:42] results to discuss in September so so again pointing out if we add a question about for your terms that's fine it goes out to 4,000 people 4,000 people do not respond when people go to the polls voters vote they are the voters this impacts the activity that they are engaging in it is not the same thing is is sending out a survey and so i again ask is there a way for it for citizens to put the referendum on uh it appears the answer is yes but there would be details to it which would be worked out okay great just wondering if there's another avenue council council member mcquillen we didn't get

[03:04:20] around to you i am in support of the survey i'm not in support of anything else great council member bates um so hypothetically could we vote in july to put it on referendum advisory referendum and then have it on the survey and have a public hearing later on and then once we get all of that back take action on sending it to the general assembly i don't i think if you have a referendum and the answer is no the voters reject the referendum i don't know if you could

[03:05:00] didn't circumvent that so this is getting a little complicated so the city is one of the few jurisdictions that is still allowed to have advisory referenda as you know so you were asking specifically about an advisory referendum not a charter change referendum or were you saying the same thing and you just misspoke well um either way just you know if there is a way of having both a referendum and having it on the survey you know and then having a public hearing. And then, you know, I think that my understanding is it would be difficult

[03:05:36] to. So the answer to your question is, if you put it on for a referendum, you cannot have a public hearing the same year on that because the referendum would be binding on the question. Yeah. Makes sense? Yeah. Yeah. So that was, but does that apply to having a, you know, if we choose a public hearing as our, you know, charter change, you know, option normal course um yeah but then have a separate advisory referendum in addition to that and then so so you are you are asking the question i think you're asking which is

[03:06:12] not a binding charter referendum but an advisory referendum that the council could do whatever it wanted with it wouldn't be bound to follow it the answer is yes you could certainly do that i'm not not sure what that accomplishes but you are permitted to have advisory referenda and those are non-binding but again there's a process for a binding referendum on this if the council chooses the only thing again from a practical standpoint if even if you did the advisory referendum you're not going to know the results till mid-november then you would have to then schedule your

[03:06:49] public hearing and had take all that action if you're if you're going to use that as the basis for your voting you would be hard-pressed to get all of that done in time you know from a practice from a practical I mean without having like special meetings or things like that to the manager's point ordinarily if you're going to do the public hearing ordinary charter amendments normally we're having the discussion firming up the language and dish of September and you're acting in October end of October at the latest November is pushing it really tightly especially given the submission deadlines and I don't know

[03:07:25] what session we have this year in the General Assembly coming up but something Well, it's day one regardless. Right, so. Okay. Right, so anyway, just an idea.

[03:07:44] I, you know, certainly would want to maximize the avenues through which we can take community input into consideration. But, you know, my main thing is that I think that we definitely need to have at least a referendum on it.

[03:08:00] And I certainly want to move forward with voting on that at least in July. And we'll see whether or not we have the votes for that, but I would ask people who are going to investigate and look into this, and I'm more than happy to speak with anyone who wants to do that, when people say they believe in transparency and community outreach and feedback and listening to the voters, it's one thing to say it, it's another thing to take actions that prove that is, in fact, your core values.

[03:08:30] So we'll see in July whether or not this dais is going to ask the voters or not. And then the voters can decide in the next election whether or not they have a representative government. So we can move on now to the community survey. Mayor, oh, I'm sorry.

[03:08:49] I just want to make sure I understand. I'm not being asked to do anything on this at this point. Not at this point. Okay. And we're moving on to the community survey. And I did not recognize you, Council Member Hall. Point of order, Mr. Lepkinen, is it possible for Councilmember Hall to be recognized here?

[03:09:09] So it's the chair's meeting. The council can certainly override her by majority vote. Let's do that. This has been so much fun so far. Councilmember Amos. In my opinion, I'm ready to move on. I'm sorry.

[03:09:26] I'm just trying to understand exactly what it is that you said we're doing in July because I didn't think there was support to put something on the agenda for July. So I was just trying to get some clarification on that. Unless there is support for us moving forward, this is not going to go on the agenda in July.

[03:09:48] But there is an avenue for the citizens, and I will discuss that with Mr. Lubcomen later, if the citizens want to try the avenue of petitioning to put this on the referendum. And I said, I believe there's an avenue. I'm not 100% sure about it. Well, we can investigate that.

[03:10:04] I hear you, but the city doesn't organize citizen petitions. Oh, I'm aware. Okay. Very aware. Fair enough. I've got you covered. Fair enough. So let's move on to this community survey. Ms. Shinneberry. I'll recognize Brian Foster, city manager, for this staff presentation.

[03:10:24] Okay, thank you. Melanie and I are going to tag team because some of this, as you know, I was on vacation, and so some of the questions and things came in while I was out. specifically you know we'd send out the survey instrument we asked if anybody had any questions or comments and then asked to and I hadn't heard anything and a couple of you had didn't ask for some more time and so anyways where we ended up is a council member Hall council member Peterson had some questions and

[03:10:58] or comments and so we we sent those to etc etc of course you know is the survey company just to get their feedback we wanted to make sure that the questions and things that weren't wouldn't necessarily impact the statistical significance or anything like that just to just for clarity so just some general comments they made and you asked about schedule so if we get everything done by the 30th of this month they says they see on the slide here the surveys would

[03:11:33] likely be mailed the middle of July and we would anticipate mid to late August this is what it would take to administer because they're gonna keep going until they get the requisite number of responses and so then the final report would be ready early to mid-september so that's if we could get all this moving that's that's the general time frame well and as a general statement that they said to us was the current draft of the survey is there's a full seven pages and that's the maximum that they do and there's reasons for that you know

[03:12:10] because if you make it too long people are not going to complete it etc and so what they're saying is if there are any significant additions that we want to make to the survey we would likely need to delete or shorten some of the existing questions so that just as a general statement that's what they said so I think councilman Hall's things were first and then councilmember Peterson's so councilmember Hall had there were lots of questions and you can see the numbers there where if you know they were rate they were asking a variety of

[03:12:44] questions in certain areas and then the question asked of those on the list what three are the most important and three was the consistent number and a council Hall said asked if there were well some of them had a lot of choices so could we ask for five or four or a larger number for people's preferences which we can and you can see the response from ETCs they usually ask provide their top three or four depending on how many items are listed they usually don't ask for more than that because of time and effort it takes and a lot of times people don't do

[03:13:22] that many any of them they might only pick two or three so that's was their answer so that the certain so the short answer is yes we could they don't necessarily recommend certainly five but they specifically said that for a question 2 and question 15 they thought it was appropriate to change it from 3 to 4 so so the first sort of discussion point if you want to pause here is do you have a preference hold on again can you toggle between the the survey

[03:13:55] instrument that might be held okay so like so question two so question two for example is asking of the question one there are 17 and it's asking people to rate the quality of the various services and then they say which of the ones and then of those question two saying which of the ones should get the most emphasis and so I think Council member Hall is saying well there's 17 should we be able to ask them to have more than just three can they ask for five that is that fair yeah so so really the question is the short answer is yes we could ETC

[03:14:32] responded they don't normally do that but they did say there was a couple they would recommend four versus three but if you want to do that we can and we just need to know if if that's what in fact you would like to do and it will make we can make that I said make the change we can have ETC make the change so it's a matter I mean what this gets you is not everybody's gonna say the same three but this goes back to that if you remember from their presentation sort of that satisfaction versus importance and this is where that ratio that they do to

[03:15:05] determine you know if if they say that they're very satisfied but it's they don't think it's very important it's not going to filter out as something you need to focus on whereas if it's very important to them but they're not very satisfied that's what's going to tell you that that's the area of focus so that's the purpose of asking that these questions um asking like for your top three um for each of these so that's because one of the desires is asking what people's preferences are and where we should be focused on our energy that's how you get to that um with this survey instrument so um

[03:15:43] that's why i think they tend to limit you know because it makes people sort of focus on what you know you know because if you could ask them all five or six or whatever it potentially could dilute and you may not get as this exact significant importance as maybe you would otherwise by limited limiting it to three but again we can do whatever council desires I don't I'm I'm not council member Hardy Chandler has a question council member heard of Chandler I just wanted to reiterate they probably didn't go into it but I work for a place that works with psych and the development of instruments has a science to them.

[03:16:23] So I'm sure they didn't go into the detail, but there are reasons why in the science of question construction that you want to confine the responses. Certainly we can do it, but to your point, I just want to back up what you're saying, that it will sort of dilute the meaningfulness of what we actually get, even though you give people more options.

[03:16:45] we also want to be mindful of making sure that we get meaningful, interpretable data. Exactly. Thank you for that clarification. It was very helpful. Other comments, questions? Council Member Bates. I just want to say that I think it's of the utmost importance that the survey that goes out is statistically significant and demographically representative.

[03:17:12] And I certainly also that the questions have a certain level of integrity so that they, the wording of the questions does not itself create bias. And so I certainly would not want to differ from the recommendations of the polling company, but you'll be open to tweaks, certainly, but would not want to differ from their recommendations.

[03:17:37] Councilmember Amos. The only thing I'd like to add to that comment is I've also done surveys before in my bachelor's and master's programs. Typically, you do want to constrain it to one of the major criticisms, for example, of government is that there's too many priorities and then you can't really focus on anything.

[03:17:54] I think having a top three, maybe a top four, works better, but I think five would be too much. Other comments? Okay, so I'm not hearing, so I'm not hearing a desire from them, or I want to confirm that you're okay with just leaving it as three, as the survey company has suggested, or is there a desire to have more?

[03:18:27] Okay, three, Councilmember Amos? Yeah, I'm good with three. Councilmember Hull. If that's their recommendation for a variety of reasons, that you're a councilman's authority channel. Still talking. Yes. Council Member Peterson? Did I hear you say that in some cases they thought it could and should be four and in others it could?

[03:18:48] They said question two and 15, they said they could do four. They would be comfortable with if you want to make four for those two specific questions. Well, I would suggest they go ahead and accommodate that if they think that's okay. Okay.

[03:19:05] Council Member Bates, three? Yeah, I mean, certainly if we want to go to four for the questions that they recommended for being the maximum four, but only for those questions, I wouldn't be opposed to that. But, yeah. Council Member McQuillan?

[03:19:21] Yes, I agree. I'm okay going to four. Okay, so, and I'm seeing head nodding over here. So, based on this slide and a lot of these questions, then we will ask them to change to four for question two, question 15, because they said that was okay.

[03:19:40] rest of them will stay at three okay the next slide question 10 the question was that's what has to do about appearance I was in the community appearance section do you want to pull that up Melanie so question 10 was community appearance so asking their satisfaction like enforcing cleanup of litter mowing maintenance of property etc you can see the list there the council member Hall's question was well if they're in an HOA the HOA would deal with that in a lot of

[03:20:18] a lot of ways and not necessary so you know that that HOA does enforcement so can you go back Melanie so the so the question and we don't really have an answer said for discussion her thought was if if they're living in HOA the city has may have little impact on whether mowing maintenance etc at the level of maintenance because because so for example we don't provide you know garbage collection to all neighborhoods so like condominiums for example that they would do something that they do on their own through their homeowners

[03:20:54] association so so the question is you know it depends on where they have an HOA I don't think we got this specific question referenced with with ETC I don't know how much that's gonna because we still enforce those things so like even if they show whether HOA enforces that are not the city would still enforce our standards usually HOA might be more restrictive so like for example if our grass-cutting levels says it after so many inches you know you get a violation you know HOA might be let be more stringent but they're still the city

[03:21:32] would still be doing some enforcement so I don't my personal I don't I don't don't know we could ask we could ask a yes no question whether or not you're in an HOA but then we won't know from the respondents how either either we're going to tell them to skip and don't ask that answer that or you know we may not know thoughts council member hall thank you uh so i i just we could certainly reference the addresses that come in to see if they are in an HOA but my

[03:22:06] concern was that if if we're just trying to take the data from yes they're really satisfied with this and it is important to them if it's not a service the city is truly providing whether they're overseeing it to me is different i just thought it was trying to kind of weed out a little bit of the data in a different way but well if we if if we're going to assuming we can they can provide that information, I mean, they will give us heat, or not say heat, but GIS maps. We'll know where all the respondents are from visually, so we would necessarily need to ask the question.

[03:22:43] If you're wanting to get at whether or not they live in an HOA, we could probably, we should be able to parse out that data without asking the question if we're going to go look at it on the backside. That's fine. I just think it may dilute the answer a little bit, but if we can run a report of these people are in the HOA, but these people aren't and said the same thing, I think that's fine I just was trying to give people the opportunity in advance to do it so if that's an extra question it takes up more space totally fine with this sure thank you no well that's I'm making a list I will circle back to ETC

[03:23:17] to make sure so the next one was either the document needs to be renumbered because I mean you notice there were some questions miss as just how it got numbered because I so that was that's already been I think it's already been corrected with them or that's on their list so for the next one questions 21 the and if you'll pull up it's an item six and seven so if you pull up the survey Melanie 21 thank you so 21 this is about public communication outreach the number six was again we're asking people's satisfaction their ability to

[03:23:54] report a concern to city staff city's website in person or by phone and then ease of paying bills applying for things and and obtaining permits so the what I if I'm understanding councilmember Hall's question or comment was you wanted to basically separate those and ask them individually is that correct as opposed to in the aggregate I think you want to pull her question back up it I said you said you just you break these out further to see how people engage yes but and I think I had a suggestion the Fairfax City resolve we can we can

[03:24:33] absolutely add that as in in there that's easy i don't hang on let me see so item six was item six was um how the how they uh is the using the website reporting a concern uh in those various methods and we can add the fairfax alert fairfax what's it called fairfax excuse me fairfax resolve and then on seven um that's for like basically transacting business so getting a permit doing an application paying a bill yeah i guess i i was just trying to ascertain the information of are

[03:25:10] they um are they reporting things on the website are they doing it in person are they doing it over the phone are they doing it the fairfax city resolve i just i thought having that level of detail could be helpful to try to see where we should be focusing efforts i mean if everyone's calling in i we can probably get the call data but just i was just trying to understand what people prefer maybe it's not the most appropriate way to do it well that was my thought fair enough This is asking, so this is, again, most of these are asking satisfaction.

[03:25:40] So what we're trying to gauge is level of citizen satisfaction and is it, are they satisfied and how important is it? Because, again, going back to that, if it's very important to them but there is a low satisfaction, that's where we want to focus.

[03:26:00] Yeah, I guess. So, I mean, again, could we parse those out? And the answer is yes, we could, but then it goes back to their general comment that you're lengthening the survey and it's making it too long, and then we'd have to cut other things. Okay, Elizabeth, I took the assignment seriously.

[03:26:17] Go ahead, Mellie. I was just going to say, and also, even if we only have a certain number of people that come in in person, we still want to be available in person. We still want to be available by phone. I would argue that probably Fairfax Resolve is where we get majority of our complaints and concerns and questions.

[03:26:37] In-person has dropped since COVID drastically. Even phone complaints have dropped. Anecdotal data, I don't have anything written down. If nothing else, I would like to see Fairfax Resolve added, because I think people would be like, Fairfax Resolve, what's that?

[03:26:55] That would be on number six there. That's an easy add. That's easy. Okay. And then question 24, you're asking, why do you wish to know the benefit of knowing they have Cox or Verizon?

[03:27:11] It's not, we don't care, actually the intent is not we care which one they have, it's whether they have it for cable. Two reasons. One is the cable, channel 12, it's try to gauge how many people have it so that these have the potential to watch things on channel 12.

[03:27:28] The other thing it will help us with is because of our PEG fees, the public, that's on the, so because if they, we only get those fees if they have cable TV. If they don't have cable TV, the fees aren't levied. That's just how the law works.

[03:27:45] And so as we see a decline in people having cable television subscriptions, there's a corresponding decline in the revenue that we get to maintain Channel 12 so we can continue to show things. So it's really just to sort of get at that.

[03:28:01] It's not do we care which provider they have. It's just are they getting cable service from there. I knew we didn't care which one they had. I was just trying to understand, is it so we could know if they could access Channel 12? And then I think I also was curious, another unrelated question, but do we know how many people can actually, are watching our streams?

[03:28:21] No, we, yeah, no, we've asked, I've asked that question, basically like Nielsen ratings for the TV, you know, and there's, we've, and I'll circle back with Dave, who does that for us, but it's very hard, And we don't, there's not really that ability for us to do that, to know.

[03:28:43] And it's not, it doesn't generate enough to like where you could even like try to do Nielsen ratings kind of thing. So to track that, that's just, it's an unfortunate, and certainly anecdotally we hear, oh, I watched it on channel 12, you know, or I hear from people or on the website for that matter.

[03:29:02] But to get actual numbers, we don't really have that ability, at least as of now. and then uh in question 25 you you you were suggesting we split out uh that was whether we were asking you to how many meetings do they attend or watch and you wanted to split those out um can you pull that up yeah i was mostly just curious if you know we can see there's no one here anymore but you know there were 20 people earlier or 10 people earlier but we have no idea how many people are watching it at home so i was just curious right well and so that's why we sort

[03:29:38] of put both i mean it's not it's asking for both the same question so i mean i think from our perspective is whether they're in person or watching on tv we're capturing that and and and the frequency um that's fine that's just my thought process sure sure um can you go back did we can't did we capture the last one melanie on the last one sorry okay yeah yeah yeah yeah okay sorry and then the so uh 29 again it's a it's a numbering issue we've already gotten that fixed um question 30 uh you wanted you're asking about adding other key areas of budget which we could

[03:30:14] do again it gets to the lengthening of the survey um these are the main yeah the two specifically you asked was general government um uh which is how we that's what the term we use in the budget if you wanted to do that i might suggest we use like maybe government administration maybe something that's a little bit easier to because that's the same kind of thing but whatever we call it but we could add it and the other one I think we read was debt service which would also add I just went and pulled up the pie chart yeah yeah yeah yep making sure we have all of the areas so again the only thing I would say about debt

[03:30:54] service is that doesn't quite fit with the rest because that's not a that's not a direct service I mean it's part of our budget but it's a function of how we pay things versus education or public works or libraries that's an actual service that's being provided and you're asking them should we be doing more with should we be investing more investing less etc so I don't think that service would be an appropriate one just that's just I'm just sharing my opinion but we could add that we could add the general government piece if that's what if you would like

[03:31:29] that's that's a little more nebulous because it's like finance and HR and and as those again not really a direct service provision to the public it's what sort of helps so it's the back office things that keep the keep the trains running so to speak so but we can add it if you'd like okay all right so question so the question 39 what you were asking and this was a very good actually I like the suggestion of you adding more brackets because the

[03:32:02] original because they do these surveys all over the country um and we're asking this demographics you know we're in a much more higher income area and so um you know we start under 25 25 to 50 etc what melanie had showed on the other and we and jc looked up the way we tend to track things or the way the census tracks it is for this area less than 50 50 to 100 100 to 200 greater than 200 so actually we were suggesting because you brought that up maybe scrapping the whole thing that's

[03:32:37] there and go back with just those four categories if i may i i do think that there's a significant difference that between 100 and 200 which is why i kind of like the 150 okay well we can so we could do 100 to 150 and then 100 if you if you we could do 100 150 150 200 and then greater than 200 or do you want to just do greater than 150 i like your suggestion okay one to 150 150 200 greater than so we'll have five so then okay that's fine we'll have five categories that's fine and and we'll break the 100 to 200 into 50,000 increments thank you we can do that um

[03:33:16] and then uh question 40 was again these are some of the trying to get some of the demographics um you're at in essence i think you were asking about remote work you work from home uh but she's not a home-based business so I think you're talking about remote work we can add that as a choice to the to that that's not a problem it's not an it's it's an additional answer but it's not adding to the question list so that's fine we can we can add that we also recommended taking out for number five it's not currently employed takeout outside of yeah yeah yeah we just it's

[03:33:50] you yeah just you're just not currently employed yeah all right and then yeah so right here should we also add an option for other adults who live in the house but are not the ones completing the survey specifically i don't know how we capture that um because admittedly yes there's a in probably a single person in the household that's filling out the survey i'm just not sure how we capture that information well i think when i've done other surveys you know it says you know how many adults are living in your home how many children and then people can

[03:34:28] just does everything have to be a pre-programmed or are people allowed to choose a number for some of these things? Because I know I'd add, I think one of my questions was about like an open-ended opportunity. So could they, and like, yeah, because obviously they can put in a decade in which they were born. So it looks like they can put in a number. Right, right. So I just, I think it's, it's helpful information. I think from a child perspective, you know, like, do we have a lot of zero to three? Then likely in two years, we're going to have a lot of fives that are maybe going to kindergarten so i just thought it was a good way to try to capture what we have so so you're talking about okay so you're talking about question 42 is that the specific question you're

[03:35:08] talking about having the choices or no i i i don't see my exact question right now but um no i think i was wondering if we could add uh i think it was just a general can we add an option for other adults who live in the house but are not completing the survey you know like do do we want to know how many people live in their house would that be helpful to us to know let us ask the we'll add that to the list and i think that and the reason i'm hesitating is because then i think what would

[03:35:41] happen is you're going to have um let's say 400 survey responses but it's going to look like you have 700 people but you didn't have 700 people respond to the survey you only had 400 respond to the survey if you're if you're asked if you're you're you're gonna or i guess you're gonna have answers that exceed the number of surveys is what i'm saying if you're starting to include more than one for specific questions but but we'll ask let us ask that okay and i guess actually now that we're looking at 36 i'm wondering should we instead of just ask about hispanic or latino

[03:36:20] should we maybe break that out further and ask you know are you caucasian are you african-american are you uh i can't think what the other specifics are oh i'm sorry does that need to then be two questions or can we free up another question yeah but yeah this i think this is we didn't create this is a standard okay that they do for surveying for 37 yeah okay okay so we would so we will ask

[03:36:56] about the other adults adding for answers um as well and then um and then you asked about a free text area yes we can do that and we did as it and in the this is a sample question you want to you because you what you followed up on that today our consultant told me that he does do this on some surveys this is the sample question you use for Chesapeake or not Chesapeake is it Norfolk he does do

[03:37:33] for norfolk virginia beach okay yeah so yes that's that's an option yeah so that and so that's the sample question which would be that they would suggest is anything we should be doing or anything not addressing the survey that you think we should know about and then it would be a free form uh box and so we would so basically we would just get that raw responses yeah now that that's remember hardy chandlin thank you now that we're looking at this could we expand the gender

[03:38:08] categories we can um do you um i think that was one of my questions yes um we can do you want it to be um uh non-binary is it uh what other i think you should just put other other other that's all kinds of things that are not that okay binary sure we'll add another absolutely okay okay uh

[03:38:46] and so then i think now we've gone to mr peterson's comments and questions so this section three does not include any question regarding the environment or natural forested landscape or more generally small town character um uh related attributes such as the combination environment schools uh history education arts recreation character city was top of the list of many residents during the campaign along with the need for better listening authentic community involvement I think it'll be helpful to ensure the survey provides a clear assessment and

[03:39:23] And also explores more functional reaction to city services. So what etc said was they could add a few items to question three And but if we do they we got to cut other things again because the survey link so what's on that box there is from a different community But it has some examples that he thinks are along the lines of what you're after so So I know this is kind of small To read but we can certainly can you we can certainly

[03:40:02] Add something like that again. It's just it goes back to You know there's lots I'm sure there's lots of things we would like to ask and learn but There's only so much we're trying to keep it focused and and so much space But we do we do ask we do get at that to some degree, but maybe not to the level I guess that you're after Variables and and we have a set here in the city that are unique to us I mean you can see that they kind of type that for other places too. I would say I

[03:40:39] I recognize there's a trade-off here because of length, and I very much respect that. And you've either got to shrink or let something go, whatever. I would say if they could do what they think is possible to accommodate that and tailor it. So they've got village stuff to tailor this.

[03:40:55] Because I do think getting some kind of a readout on specific quality of life variables would be real helpful here. Are there specific ones that you have in mind that weren't included? Well, so I may have missed, right? because it's a long story.

[03:41:10] I may have missed stuff, but I had a couple things in that paragraph I added. One of them is the landscape, you know, what's happening with the forest and landscape and the natural environment. Are people, you know, sensing that that's going uphill, downhill, et cetera?

[03:41:27] So that is one specific one, and you'd have to flash a paragraph up there again. Now everything is so big. And so there is a general one that is really, I think, part of the city of Fairfax, which is small-town character, and it would be good to know how people feel about that, how strongly do they feel about it, et cetera, whatever.

[03:41:52] Okay. All right. Let us follow. If you've got those two, I realize there's still a lot. Sure. Okay. If you've got those two and they could work with them, that I think would be helpful. Okay. That's it. We can do that. I'm looking around if their body's... Okay. Sure.

[03:42:09] We will follow up with... We will add that to the list to follow up with them. All right. Can you go to the next one, Melanie? thanks um i'm gonna read this one that's far away um so that you were asking about the uh you know comparing like section 12 um you know efforts to admit to plan and manage for growth and development you know like other issues this could be fleshed out um to garner a clear depiction of uh public views like density tall buildings etc and i know you all have had as we've had development proposals i know you've had lots of discussions on those specifics

[03:42:49] again you see the response we can do it but then that that's cutting something else because we're sort of maxed out at the at the limit so I guess the question is for for for you all are do you view those specific things as more critical than the other things we're asking and keep in mind I know this is the first one of these we're doing and as you we've been going through when we distributed for it you know you see some of these questions have been highlighted in yellow and some of them haven't that was just to show you all the yellow highlights are all the benchmarking we can do with with like-sized communities

[03:43:29] and in the region and nationwide etc so the more we deviate from that it doesn't mean we don't get good information but if you're wanting to also compare ourselves to others we lose that ability if it's not more in that more standardized format. Councilmember Amos. Yeah, I wouldn't recommend adding that type of language in there because high density tends to have a negative connotation and I don't want to really influence the survey. I think under perception of the community, overall quality of new development in the city of Fairfax does a good job of capturing that because people do factor height in already and density into that mindset and thinking. I think pointing out high density

[03:44:09] draws in automatic bias in my opinion i i kind of don't agree i think it is an area where the choice of words is going to be careful not to introduce bias because even if you say you know quality of growth is different than possibly some quantitative things like how tall are we going how dense are we going things like that i think those are important variables if there's a way to do them i i certainly think they would be very helpful but i also don't know with the set of additions that are being proposed here against what's already a full plate whether

[03:44:47] they have recommendations on where we would trim if we wanted to when they looked at this did they say okay you know there are some areas that we think could be trimmed a bit to free up room for new things that are being recommended here did they provide any feedback of that kind no i'm not sure we i'm not sure we specifically asked the question i i know in him in working having worked with this group in the past and other communities, I mean, it is about what we want. They are going to ask the questions that we want to know. But again, what they're

[03:45:25] saying is that there's certainly how you ask them, the way, sort of the standard wording, so you can do the benchmarking, so there's some consistency there, and then the length and how that affects it. But we didn't ask that specifically.

[03:45:41] So I would say, if it's possible, one way to deal with this, there's the quality of development, but there's the amount of it, too. And those are two different things. And if there's any way to get a bead on the amount as well as the quality of it, that might be helpful.

[03:45:58] I guess just to quickly add, under planning and economic development specifically says efforts to manage and plan for growth and development. Again, I don't want to get too in the weeds, because we also have people who don't know what high-density development even means.

[03:46:13] So I was just suggesting a simplification of that so that instead of getting into high density, et cetera, we would simply say the amount of, right? So there's the quality of and the amount of, and those are two different things that people are, they like, you can like the quality of something, but you cannot like the amount of it, and that's a sensitive issue.

[03:46:36] How does an individual assess the amount of something? Too much, not enough, too much, whatever. They're just conscious of the amount of something that's happening as opposed to... That seems beyond the scope of what this survey is trying to get at.

[03:46:51] I mean, that's getting more into, I mean, you could see one building that you don't like and say that's too much. I feel like we could be making assumptions off of inaccurate data with that type of language. Council Member Hardy Chandler, then Council Member Hall.

[03:47:12] It seems like a question before that is if we are going to add something like that, we would have to decide on what we're going to remove, right? So part of the question is, is that information, does that offer us something more that we want over something else that's already in there?

[03:47:32] Again, empathizing with the respondent and their, you know, fatigue in going through this survey. We certainly want them to respond. So I think a question before what this question says is, do we see this as more impactful than other information that's already in there?

[03:47:53] Because they've told us that we would have to remove something else to put this piece in there. If we say this is not as important as the information in there, then we can stop the discussion about how to word it. So I think that decision comes first.

[03:48:09] i think it would be relatively easy to remove question 34 which is in what type of residence do you live single family home townhome apartment or condo other i think in most cases based upon the address that they provide we would be able to determine is that a single family home or a townhouse community or an apartment or condo or whatever um i think the only thing we might miss there would be other which i guess might refer to garage apartment or something else that's not debate that doesn't fall into there. My only other comment about what Councilman, sorry,

[03:48:47] Councilmember Peterson is saying is I'm trying to remember back to the housing survey that went out somewhat recently. Do we know if any of those questions were covered in that that might be able to relate back to? I don't know. Okay. I'm trying to remember the questions. It's possible that some of those things were covered I'm not saying we shouldn't cover them here but I would like to maybe cross reference before we do a yay or nay on it thank

[03:49:23] you all right so okay I've got I've got that yeah so the section 7 mr. Peterson's comment was about assess reactions current future traffic congestion you know might be you know help to be more clear about perceptions of improvement

[03:49:59] for key intersections what etc response was their survey there that you we're going to have GIS maps which will show results geographically so one of the things that you'll get is if you will see if there are certain areas of the city who are lesser or more satisfied with every with all of the various things that they're that we're measuring that and again there was a lot there so I I could have missed something.

[03:50:26] Does that include traffic congestion? It does, yes. It doesn't specifically get, there is not specific, like, specific intersections, but it does talk about ability, ease of getting around the city, traveling from your home to regional roadways, et cetera.

[03:50:43] That's okay. As long as there's something that's in there on traffic congestion, and then geographically you can figure out where that is, where those ease of getting around things are. What you would, it's not going to identify a specific intersection.

[03:51:01] It's going to say that, like, for example, people in your neighborhood that responded thinks it's very difficult or there's lots of congestion. That's fine. Yeah, that's what it will be. That's fine, yeah, as long as, again, it's getting the traffic thing, you know, mapped in there. So we do have that, okay.

[03:51:16] That's fine. All right. I think it would also probably be captured in 7-3, how well traffic signals provide efficient traffic flow if people aren't happy with traffic flow. Yeah, right, okay. that's fine that's fine and then you were asking section 21 which we already talked about I think with council member Hall you also said it's greater clarity cover issues of listening collaboration public involvement two-way communication it's the same thing we could make additions but we have to delete other questions so if we go to 21 when Melanie's

[03:51:52] pulling that up you know these are the this is yes they're somewhat general but if you want to get more specific that it's just it's getting you know yeah what I think is missing here is two-way communication okay so when so can you elaborate I mean I mean I understand what you mean to a community but what is it that you're missing what is it that you're wanting to ask they have ease of access to information and it helps to have opportunities to participate in local government but it's advisory boards commissions volunteer it's not public

[03:52:30] involvement and community engagement and decision making right and you know city's website keeping you informed that's different than being involved in shared decisions in the community which is what is a really important element of public involvement community engagement is do that and i just didn't see anything there that got to the issue of whether we're involving people in a shared decision making process here and how they feel about that and so listening is different than talking right we need to listen to people and then be able to work with them around that

[03:53:06] okay i'm with you would you all like to see a question an additional one that tries to get at that okay i i guess my it might be maybe we could add to number two opportunities to participate local government maybe restructure or reframe how that's laid out and then add an example of like for example our budget open house that we did rather than adding an entirely new line item

[03:53:41] because that was a form of two-way communication question two uh sorry yeah i didn't question item two my bad into the under the yeah well we can we can um that's another i'll we'll we'll get with etc i think there's probably the way we can get at that yeah because you're probably really i think you're i think you're really just talking about adding one more thing that talks about community engagement and this is involved in the decision sure sure yeah so we'll follow up with them on that councilmember Hardy Chandler yeah I was

[03:54:18] just going to point out I really want to not alter the ones that are benchmarkable too much because it starts to but it sounds like it would presumably would be an ad it just be an additional one wouldn't necessarily be able to benchmark it but we could ask the question yeah and then I assess views on safety and parks and recreation it was a safety question etc that says six four asks residents to rate their feeling of safety in City Park okay and then survey this is a perception of current conditions but not doesn't seem

[03:54:57] to involve equal thoughts on future needs and they said you know they agree that the main purpose is to gather feedback on how well we're doing but There are also questions that, you know, those questions, the first thing, that importance versus satisfaction gets to the future piece as far as what they think we need to be focusing on.

[03:55:19] But it does not, I mean, future needs and concerns, so unless you're wanting to, I'm not, if you're asking the general, like, are you, should they, is there, is it, are they, is the future need and concern about traffic congestion, for example?

[03:55:37] Well, their answer, since we asked about congestion and if that rates, it goes back to that satisfaction and importance matrix, would get to the future piece. So I think that's helpful, but it's not uncommon to ask folks about their confidence in the future in different ways, like their confidence in their economic future, how they're feeling about that, and how they feel about, you know, their confidence in the future of the city in various ways and to manage around those variables because people's future perceptions of where we're headed are a critical thing.

[03:56:14] So that's really what I was trying to get at. And if there's a way they can tease that out with anything they've already got there so that it is bringing into that a little bit more of a longer-term look, again, at where people think that we may be headed and how they feel about that in various ways, I think it would be very helpful.

[03:56:35] Before you just talk further with them about that and see, you know, how they might possibly handle that. Again, focusing on priorities the next two years could build that in, but I think the key issue is this long-term look. And people do talk about that.

[03:56:52] They say, gee, I'm not so sure I'm happy about the way things are headed, or I really like the way things are headed, whatever, but it's got a longer fuse on it. Okay. And I think, is that the last one? All right. Yes. So we've got a few things, and so I appreciate that this was very helpful.

[03:57:10] um so based on this what our goal will be is today's uh tuesday we should be able to get back with etc um and and get responses and and how we might if there's some of these suggestions and then what i what my what my suggestion to you all would be is that since you're getting together on saturday for your council retreat is that we just quickly at the before the end of the retreat we will just we will just focus on these i don't have a count five or six or whatever the number

[03:57:48] is items that that we wanted to get some more feedback on make sure you're comfortable and if you are then we can meet that timeline that was on the first slide which is we will you know we will could have some results back by early September now the other thing I maybe I'm anticipating I know for council over all is it sounds like you want us to add a question specifically about four-year terms is and getting is

[03:58:22] that correct okay so part of it again going back to what mr. Luffman it's not here anymore but how is part of it is how you ask the question um as far as to get the answer that you i don't know the answer that you want but the if you know are you asking for about four year i don't think you can get in i don't think it helps try to get super specific but if is it the general question are would you prefer to have four year staggered terms for city council versus the

[03:58:59] current two-year term or something along those lines is that how we're going to ask the question council member hall i think it would be important to know do they prefer two-year terms four-year terms or four-year staggered terms i think those are are different things so so two-year terms four-year terms four-year staggered terms i think you do have to say something about currently we have two-year terms sure that's fair fair yeah um i also did just have one other

[03:59:37] question since we have jc here is are there any other budget related or finance questions that you think maybe we didn't cover in the survey that we would be super important to know from your cfo role from a budgeting standpoint something maybe we didn't hit on thank you uh council member not that i could recall i was actually trying to look up the city of alexandria's um budget survey when i was there i can't find it online if something does come up and i can find it i can convey to the city manager and the rest of council as well okay that'd be really helpful thank

[04:00:17] you okay so we will so we will fashion a question based on that that we currently have two-year terms and then ask them to mark what they i guess their preference and so what i would anticipate getting is you know x percent says that to your terms x percent says for your terms x percent says for your staggered terms is what i would assume how the responses would come back or when we get or so when we get the data in the aggregate that's what we get back okay council member hardy chandler do you anticipate that they would circle back and ask us what we want to remove from the

[04:00:56] survey to include that um they may and so let if you if it's if it's if it's acceptable if you let us take a step let us take working with etc if if we if there's something we need to cut let us take a stab at that first and we'll tell you this is what we suggest and asking them you know what we might trim in order to to to keep it at the at that level i would prefer that okay so let's we'll

[04:01:28] we'll do that and and if it requires if if with these changes it requires making reductions um we will on saturday we will clearly show you that we had to take these out and and if we did and what i would the caveat i would say is if we take something out my suggestion is we would take out something we would take out a question that is not a benchmark question we would leave all the benchmark questions we would remove a question that's not a benchmark question if that's if that's acceptable that's what I would suggest okay so I think we I think we

[04:02:05] are good we have some follow-up to do and we'll get we'll get that and get back with you and and so so just again just circling back we give this we have this discussion on Saturday then the unless as long as there's no if you're all in agreement after our discussion on Saturday then we will at that point move forward, basically telling ETC to proceed and go into production and survey, etc.

[04:02:43] Anything else? I would just like to make a request to get the information on the petition, the citizen or the voter petition for a referendum item. Whatever exists, I need that as soon as possible, if I could get that forwarded to me. Thanks so much.

[04:03:03] If there's nothing else, we will now reconvene the regular meeting and start with the manager's report out. I have nothing else this evening. Thank you. Council Member Amos? No, thank you.

[04:03:18] Council Member Hall? Just want to say thank you to everyone for having conversations tonight that were difficult. Clearly, there was a lot of passion about some of these topics, and I know that that can be hard. But I think that we tried to be respectful and communicative, And I hope that that is the takeaway that people see.

[04:03:41] I just do have one overall, I think, just suggestion, which is that if we think that there are going to be some topics moving forward or in future councils even that might be either controversial, might need a little bit more time, I think I would like to try to see the timing of those put on the agenda.

[04:04:04] certainly not over the summer when some people leave and go away for extended times or might go back to their home countries. I think that, you know, we potentially miss out on some additional interaction from our residents. I know we had a very, very busy early part of our term. I know a lot of it was spent with budget so that, you know, some scheduling was certainly a challenge, but I think the gun ordinance potentially has the opportunity for a lot of conversation and I certainly think the considerations about other charter changes do as well. So I would just

[04:04:38] suggest that those be done at maybe a less vacation-y season. Thank you. Council Member Hardy Chandler. I just want to once again acknowledge the work of the Fairfax Village in the city and all of the partnerships that they're trying to build. They are doing a lot of fantastic work with very little, and they deserve more support for the contribution that they're making so that people can age in place. And I also want to offer a very heartfelt thank

[04:05:12] you to the Juneteenth Committee and for awarding me the 2025 Legacy of Freedom Award. That was quite a surprise, but quite an honor. I stick by my comments when I receive that award that we have to move forward together. And even when it is challenging, we are interconnected and interdependent and we have to do this not only in service to our city but I think going through this life recognizing that we do depend on one another so thank you to the Juneteenth committee not only for that but for the hard work on a wonderful celebratory event of freedom

[04:05:51] hope we get there someday. Councilmember Peterson? Nothing to add thanks. Councilmember Bates? No comments. Council Member McQuillan. I just want to say thank you to everyone that applied for our boards and commissions.

[04:06:11] We've been working hard to interview, and we have appointed 14 so far just this evening. And so I'm very, very proud of that. This council is making ground. We are moving forward together, and we have a lot to be happy about. Thank you. I'll just close by saying we mentioned Congressman Jerry Connolly earlier tonight and the money that he brought into the city.

[04:06:35] He is being replaced with a special election on September 9th. It's at a weird time. I hope it's on people's radar. Who you elect matters. There's a primary this Saturday for any who want to participate, but please pay attention to who your elected representatives are because it matters.

[04:06:55] And with that, we will adjourn at 11.07 p.m. Tuesday.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coraggio Consulting · aguyonx.com