City Council - public_hearing

It's just really a lot of fun, so I hope that everyone can make it. And if you can't make it, please look at our website. The library puts on a number of programs in partnership with the Black History Museum almost every single month where we continue to tell our story. So with that, there has been a motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, the ayes have it, and the proclamation passes. Madam Clerk, next item.

Presentation of a proclamation recognizing September as National Preparedness Month.

And I have asked Councilwoman Marks to read this proclamation. If you are joining us for National Preparedness Month, please come to the front.

Good morning. As a member of the CCC, along with Councilwoman Green, I am very proud to read this proclamation to you. Whereas September 18th is National Preparedness Month, NPM. After the terrorist attacks that took place 25 years ago, NPM was established to remind everyone that preparing for emergencies and disasters can keep them, their families, and their communities safe. And whereas the City of Alexandria joins its local, regional, state, and federal partners in recognizing this month and reminding the community of the importance of being prepared for emergencies. And whereas the City of Alexandria is at risk for a variety of threats, including severe weather, coastal and inland flooding, extreme heat and cold, winter storms, acts of terrorism, transportation incidents, and other hazards. And whereas the City of Alexandria Office of Emergency Management provides resources and information to help all Alexandrians prepare for the threats and hazards most likely to impact our community. And whereas preparing for emergency requires a few steps, knowing your risks, having a plan, building a kit, staying informed, and getting involved. Taking the time now to work on completing those steps will help you better prepare for whatever emergencies impact the city. Now, therefore, I, Sandy Marks, on behalf of Aaliyah Gaskins, Mayor of the City of Alexandria, Virginia, and on behalf of the Alexandria City Council, recognize September 26th, or September 2026, as National Preparedness Month in the City of Alexandria. And the Office of Emergency Management, OEM, urges all Alexandria residents and businesses to take steps now to prepare for emergencies that could impact the community. Visit the OEM website, alexandriava.gov slash emergency management for more information and resources. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and cause the seal of the city of Alexandria to be affixed this 19th day of September, 2026. MARK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS ON BEHALF OF YOURSELF AND YOUR OFFICE AND PERHAPS THE COMMITTEE?

GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL FOR THIS PROCLAMATION. COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER THAN THE COUNCILWOMAN SAID, BUT JUST A REMINDER TO FOLKS TO VISIT OUR WEBSITE, ALEXANDRIAVA.GOV, BACKSLASH EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT. GREAT RESOURCES AND INFORMATION ON BEING PREPARED. THIS BEING THE 25TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE 9-11 ATTACKS IN 2001, IT'S MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER AS A NATION THAT WE BE PREPARED. And I also want to invite all of you next Saturday to join us at Chinquapin Park from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. for Tons of Trucks. It's a very big event in the city, and this year being the 10th anniversary of that event, there will be a host of different special vehicles for you to check out and learn about emergency preparedness and ways to get involved and volunteer to help serve your community. So I hope to see you all there. Thank you all.

And Mark, I would like to thank you and your teams for, as I like to say, thinking through and preparing for the worst case scenario so that the rest of us can sleep. So we appreciate you. And with that, Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

There has been a motion by Councilwoman Marks and a second by Councilwoman Green. to move the proclamation recognizing September as National Preparedness Month. Is there any further discussion? I would just echo my thanks to Mark and your amazing staff, as well as all of our emergency management professionals from police to fire and our even volunteer teams who help us prepare. I would just reiterate, there are not only resources on the website in terms of how you can build an emergency preparedness plan for you and your family, There are also trainings and other opportunities that you can sign up for, and even ways that if you're interested in volunteering, that you can join our Reserve Corps and really help us become a more resilient community. With that, there has been a motion by Councilman Marks and a second by Councilman Green. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. The ayes have it, and the proclamation passes. All right, Madam Clerk, next item.

Presentation of a proclamation proclaiming September 19th as Mears Cup Rugby Players Day.

And we are going to be postponing this proclamation. Didn't realize when I scheduled it that this is a big rugby championship weekend. So all the people we are honoring are playing. So good luck to those who are playing from our women's and men's team and even some of our legends that are coaching this weekend. Before we go on to the next item, I realized that I needed to state earlier, the item that we deferred, item number 15, will be heard at the next public hearing, which is on October 17th. Madam Clerk, next item.

Public discussion period.

We are now going to move into our public discussion period. For all those who are pleasant, not pleasant, present, but I hope we're all pleasant, present, please remember that the purpose of this meeting is for the purpose of conducting business. We want to make sure that we hear from everyone. What I will ask is that when I call your name, please come to the podium. Everyone will have three minutes to speak. We allow snapping and signs. Unfortunately, we don't allow clapping. Mainly that's because it's a very small room. So every time somebody makes a large sound or whispers, we hear it up here. And then if there are any outbursts, I'll give a warning. behavior continues, then I will ask that you be escorted out. I will also ask, please make sure that we silence any phones or other devices. Again, every sound comes back here, and then that means we can't hear the great words that everyone else is saying. With that, I will begin with our first speaker, and that is Glen Pine.

I don't recall the people of Alexandria consenting to mass surveillance with zero public benefit, and yet here we are. Our city is now packed with so-called automated license plate readers, which are AI technology capturing pictures and videos of our vehicles, plus their interiors, plus their occupants, the immediate surroundings, bumper stickers, and more than 100 other data points. This camera dragnet generates massive amounts of data for easy retroactive searching, transforming our daily movements into potential evidence. ALPRs have been used to surveil people for their political and religious views, to stalk women, to track those seeking reproductive healthcare. They target people based on their race, sexuality, immigration status, and a recent study showed ALPRs are clustered in areas with people of color and the poor. Meanwhile, any claim that this data stays in Alexandria or even theoretically can stay here is pure fiction with easy side door access for agencies like ICE and DHS. So to anyone thinking that giving up so many of our rights maybe is worth it because ALPRs are reducing crime, there is literally zero evidence that they do. Flock and police departments like to cite a study that was written by two Flock employees. All other so-called evidence is purely anecdotal. Police and ALPR companies say, trust us, but independent studies show that there is no evidence. This is not just about Flock. The thing that we don't want is mass surveillance. Alexandrians don't want you to switch flock to another brand. We want you to permanently cease all ALPR contracts and physically remove the existing cameras. OK, so while we're on the subject of eroding our constitutional rights, I'll briefly mention this council's new proposed citizen participation policy for meetings. The language in there is concerning. It bans so-called personal attacks, political campaign speech, and something called off-topic commentary. This gives an overly broad mandate for the council to silence constituents, and it comes off as a chilling swipe for those who are here and have a right to advocate for core concerns and to criticize public officials. other texts in the proposal squeezes out citizen journalism and bans expressions like clapping which we just did twice earlier today and which frankly does very little to slow meetings this all comes off as right-wing anti-free speech legislation that is out of step with the city please scrap it thank you thank you for your time today um councilman aguirre mr pine you might

Yeah, I'm going to ask you a couple questions. You know, we don't have a chance to clarify some of the stuff that you spoke about, but the clapping, it's always been a tradition in the council not to have clapping during the public speaking section. So clapping during the proclamations has always been something, just not during speaking because it does take up time. whether you agree or not with that. I've literally seen it take up time. In terms of the political campaigning, it's more so folks that are candidates, not necessarily political views. It's folks that want to try and use this public hearing as a platform to launch themselves for political gain. So that's more what that's directed to. I know it's very vague when you see it and read it, but that's part of the intention. Lastly, around the license plate readers, I'm just curious, is it just flock or are you also interested in getting rid of red light cameras, speed cameras in the school zones and body worn cameras?

The call here today is to remove all automated license plate readers and future contracts with them and physically remove them. That's the scope of what I'm asking for.

Just to be specific, because this will also include speed cameras and red light cameras. So you want those removed too?

Speed cameras and red light cameras, if they are plugged into the same network that the flock data and ALPR data goes into, should be removed.

Thank you for that clarification. I think that's helpful because when we deliberate this a little bit more, part of what I asked for is like a glossary of terms for the different types of cameras that we have because we have about seven different types of cameras in the city. And technically, the speed zone cameras and the red light cameras are license plate reader cameras because they're taking a picture of it. but they're not necessarily plugged into the same network that you're referring to. So just wanted it for clarification. Thank you.

ALICIA WILLIAMS- Great. Also, I just want to reiterate, I know this is an issue everyone is passionate about, everything that people will speak about today. But we need to limit outbursts from the crowd. If you want to speak, you will have your three minutes to speak. If you have not yet signed up to speak, please see our clerk, and you can sign up to speak. Next, we have Pamela Goodell. Is she online? OK. Then I'm going to move to speaker number three, Susan Douglas.

There's been lots of excitement about Mayor Gaskin's statement that there's no role for flock in Alexandria. Eliminating flock while allowing room for other ALPR vendors is like putting a one inch bandaid on a gushing femoral artery. might be a great sound bite, but it does not address the problem. Flock is the most well-known of the ALPR technology, but alternate cameras by Axon or Motorola will do the same thing that Flock is doing, which is to put Alexandria and its residents under surveillance. Research leaves little room for doubt about why ALPR technology has no place in Alexandria. Every license plate that passes by a camera, of which there are at least 61 in Alexandria, triggers a photo. Your license plate is captured, your image is captured, as are the make and model of your car, details such as bumper stickers, dents, even your roof rack, every single time you pass by one of these cameras. And chances are that you pass by way more than one camera on any given day. I regularly drive same road in Arlandria where some intersections have not one, but two cameras. And if you do the math, it's quite alarming. Around the entire nation, there are 20 billion scans a month. The data captured by these cameras near homes, at places of worship, near women's health care facilities, and even shopping areas can provide a comprehensive picture of someone's life, their religious preferences, what kind of health care they're seeking, and what they're buying. No one should be gathering this information on our residents, and particularly not for residents who are not committing crimes. This technology enables law enforcement to establish a database of potential suspects before there's even a crime, and that's backwards. Flock says their cameras have succeeded in solving crimes by locating perpetrators, but the study they cite is a non-peer-reviewed white paper which any good researcher will tell you is not ready for prime time. We are living in a time of increasing government overreach, and ALPR technology is collecting the stories of our lives without our permission. The city must demand that its ALPR cameras be removed, that the contracts for those cameras be canceled, and that future use of ALPR technology in Alexandria City be banned with an ordinance. Thank you.

Thank you for your time today. Madam Mayor. Councilman Aguirre.

Sorry, ma'am, ma'am.

Ms. Douglas.

Same question that I gave Mr. Pine. Are you also don't want the red light and speed cameras? Are you okay with those?

I don't want anything that feeds information into a system that can be accessed by ICE.

Thank you.

Yep.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Cindy Carballo, followed by Rashi.

Dear Mayor, Vice Mayor, and members of City Council, my name is Cindy, youth organizer with Tenants and Workers United. For 40 years, our organization has actively been working with young people, parents, community members in order to improve issues impacting them, including education, housing, and immigration. TW is here today standing alongside our youth members of Alexandria United Teens because they're concerned about the use of automated license plate readers in their city. This technology's purpose is to mass surveil and criminalize our underserved communities of color. Unfortunately, being surveilled is nothing new for our youth. In the past five years, we've seen an increase of more cameras, metal detectors, security, and more police in school grounds. During the last few weeks, our youth have been assessing Alexandria neighborhoods and the placement of this technology. Based on our observations, this technology is placed in mostly in neighborhoods of color, such as the West End and Orlandria. Our most vulnerable families are currently being criminalized with ice presence in their communities, and having even more eyes watching is horrific and traumatic. While we know that the city and Alexander Police Department has stated that you do not collaborate with ICE, our families do not feel safe because we know the capacity and the extent of the use of these cameras. There are countless examples of how this technology has been using negative ways across the country. Flock safety and all ALPR technology create harm in our communities, distrust in our local government, and do not create public safety. TWU submitted a FOIA request of the ALPR cameras to the city. It's disappointing the lack of information we received back around the usage and management of the current system. We do not know how much the city is investing on this. These funds would be greater investments in essential needs for families such as housing, mental health, and other critical needs. Our youth and their families along all city residents deserve to live in a city where they're able to do daily tasks like attend school, socialize, play in parks, buy groceries, and attend community events without being constantly surveilled and trapped by our every move. Young people deserve veteran investments that prepare them to succeed in their lives. We know that US City Council have a lot of influence, power, and say over this technology. We need you to take action. We're calling on you to take a bold decision and end the current contract with Flock. Ban the usage of all ALPR in Alexandria City and remove all current ALPR cameras as soon as possible. We are counting on you to put our young people and communities first over this harmful technology. Thank you. Thank you for your time today, Councilman Aguirre.

Senorita Carballo, la misma pregunta por las personas que no escucharon antes. Cuando uno dice todas las cámaras, ¿está incluyendo también a las cámaras en las luces rojas y también las cámaras de velocidad en las zonas escolares? Todas, todas, todas. No importa las que están ayudando a reducir la velocidad en las zonas escolares y tampoco las personas que están cruzando el rojo.

So if they're related to the same, we want them removed.

But if they're not?

All right. We're not going to have people speak out. You will have your opportunity to speak at the three minutes, and there you can respond to what you've heard or your prepared testimony.

Then if they're not, then just the current one set.

Again, so for the people with the outburst, words matter, right? So if you're saying all, this is all cameras. So that's what I want to be clear with. So this is what the topic is. Thank you. All right.

Next speaker is Rashi, followed by Heidi Aguilar.

ALPRs and mass surveillance technology make all of us less safe. This technology violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure. Oh my God, what am I talking about? This city council doesn't care about the Constitution. You guys are yourself working right now to dismantle it by limiting free speech and violating the ability for the public to comment in any way beyond what our supreme leader, the mayor, deems inoffensive. As a friend of mine once said about this city council, who needs tiki torches and MAGA hats when we have Democrats like you? You will hear today people speaking about how those most endangered by the technology are those the most vulnerable of us. Black and brown communities, immigrants, women, LGBTQIA communities, people seeking abortion care and gender affirming care, people fleeing domestic violence. This technology is flawed, and the people who use it, whether police or federal agents, are problematic. Those who claim that ALPRs offer any semblance of safety should remember that studies show that ALPRs misread up to 10% of license plates and faces. Officers then act on this data without verifying its accuracy. And Sandy, you seem to care a lot in the last city council meeting about crimes against women. You probably remember how Colorado police held a mother and her children at gunpoint face down on pavement for hours because ALPR cameras wrongly flagged that her car is stolen. Reliance on ALPR technology disproportionately affects black communities and other marginalized groups. As Christopher Newport University researchers have shown in Virginia, these cameras are more likely to be found in neighborhoods that are majority black, low income, or both. More than 80 law enforcement agencies have run ALPR searches that targeted specific ethnic communities. We know that even if Alexandria isn't actively sharing its data, ICE and federal agencies can still access it due to the lack of privacy guardrails and effective governance, not to mention side door and back door access. We also know that the individuals who have direct access to this technology, the police, are a population demonstrated to have above average rates of domestic violence, and we definitely know about their track record when it comes to police brutality and misconduct. Fun fact, Kansas police used ALPRs to pursue a man who wrote an op-ed critical of the department, and more than 50 agencies have run hundreds of searches on protest attendees. What we are asking of all of you today is that you immediately turn off all existing flock cameras, as well as the other forms of ALPRs that Chief McGuire mentioned you have. That does not mean just replacing flock with another technology that will produce the same dire outcomes. And you should also, by policy, ban the use of ALPRs by private individuals and companies in the city. Make no mistake, continued use of ALPRs will waste taxpayer money, because without a doubt, the city will be sued for ALPR-related misconduct. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. All right, Councilman Aguirre.

Ms. Rashi, same question.

Please, please. Please repeat the question.

So red light and speed cameras aren't necessarily plugged into this network. There are still photos. Did you want to remove those as well? Are you okay keeping those?

They are not integrated into ALPR databases. There is no overlap in the data that is searched. Can you confirm that?

With the red light and speed cameras, that's what I'm working on right now.

So you're not sure either?

I'm like 90% sure it's not.

Well, once you can confirm, then I can let you know.

Thank you.

All right, next speaker is Heidi Aguilar, followed by Marta Shantz.

Good morning, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and members of council. My name is Haiti, and I'm currently in 11th grade and part of the youth group at Tenants and Workers United. I'm here today because I don't feel safe with flock cameras in our community. I understand that the city has a responsibility to keep people safe, but I don't believe safety should mean that residents have to feel like they're being watched everywhere they go. I also think that we need to ask important questions about these cameras. Who has access to the information they collect? How long is that information being collected? And who can it be shared with? And what protections are in place to make sure this technology isn't being misused? Our community needs healthcare, mental health resources, housing, youth programs, and other services that address the problems people are actually experiencing. Surveillance should not become a substitute for investing. in people who live here. I believe Alexandria residents deserve both safety and privacy. We deserve to have a voice in decisions about the technology that can affect their daily lives. I'm asking council to listen to the residents' concerns, be transparent about how flock cameras are being used, and to consider whether this is truly the investment our community needs. We are asking the city council to remove flat cameras from Alexandria and to prioritize other resources that actually support the people who live here. We want to feel safe in our community without feeling like we're being watched everywhere we go. Thank you for listening.

Thank you for your time today, and I apologize for the mispronunciation of your name. Next speaker, Marcia Sean, followed by Lilia Hernandez, Vasquez.

Good morning, Mayor, Vice Mayor and City Council. My name is Marta Shantz. I'm here as the chair of the Environmental Policy Commission. Different topic than the other public speakers this morning. Here to kick off our monthly public hearing three minute remarks. You may recall last year we tried a new effort to have an EPC commissioner join each monthly public hearing to give you a brief recap of our prior meeting and a heads up on the agenda to come. We think that was well received, and we are continuing that again this year. Over the summer, we didn't have EPC meetings, but we had summer homework. So we explored topics ranging from green building plan implementation efforts to sustainability at ACPS. to cross-commission collaborations and alignment, to the flood resilience plan progress, to sustainability elements of the Duke Street land use plan, to reducing heat islands at AstroTurf fields, to bike lanes for safe routes to schools, and honestly, much more. It was a lot of summer homework, lots of engagement. We'll continue to focus on these topics over the course of the year. In September, we were going to meet on Monday, but that is Yom Kippur. So we pushed one week to the 28th for a monthly EPC meeting. We'll be focused on our legislative priorities. We'll have a brief from Delegate Kirk McPike on what's going on down in Richmond, as well as a preview from the Virginia League of Conservation Voters on what their legislative priorities are. We try and have alignment and messaging and continuity from years past to hopefully bolster and have some collaboration and work together across the Commonwealth. Generally, we're always keen on some topics like getting more local authority for stretch codes for new construction, for local authority for building benchmarking ordinances and building performance standards, local authority for energy efficiency and electrification incentives, for example, e-bike incentives and otherwise. We're also keen on confirming local authority for community choice aggregation, that utility initiative that we've been talking about and encouraging that we know many on council are also keen to learn more about, because Dominion is not on track to meet its renewable portfolio standard, and there's some opportunity for Alexandria to lead there. We're also keen to continue advocating in our legislative priorities on state funding and grants for local community resilience efforts. You may have noticed the federal government has reduced a lot of FEMA spending, and so we're very thoughtful to make sure that there's disaster response after extreme weather events and proactive resilience there. Notably, utility regulation and data centers are on our radar this year as well, and we'll likely have some information on our legislative priorities there too. That is new for the EPC this year, but we think it's a significant climate equity and decarbonization issues at play here. In October, we'll focus on budget priorities, both on the operating and the CIP side of things. It's a busy fall. We're looking forward to a good FY27. If you need to reach out on anything climate, come to the EPC. We're here for you. Thank you very much.

all right thank you for your time today our next um vice mayor bagley ms shantz yes one of the uh topics i didn't hear you mention was um environmental justice yes could you maybe define that for the group and talk a little bit about whether the epc and our climate action plan in the city talks about environmental justice yes so environmental justice or climate equity these are topics that look at how disadvantaged communities are often disproportionately

penalized by climate change whether it's an energy burden on utility costs because low-income and disadvantaged communities tend to have Less energy efficient homes and so they pay more on utilities and it's a much higher percentage of their income There's an equity issue here particularly when we think of for example rising utility rates from Dominion or our water companies So there's a just utility bill issue there. There's also a lot of health issues connectivity between health and climate change particularly on the environmental justice side of things when for example you live in a home that can't that doesn't have air conditioning on these extreme hot days we've had over the summer like over 100 degrees you've got folks whose health conditions are exacerbated because they they don't have air conditioning to be in it's actually quite a nice tie into the proclamation on emergency management because i know that the the city's department is thinking about how to balance extreme heat with equity and that climate justice tie in there, really being thoughtful about that. There are a lot of ways as we think about kids and safety, as we think about low-income communities, as we think about healthy homes, that climate and climate equity really tie in.

And who are most likely to become climate refugees in the future?

So climate refugees is a really interesting term, and it's one that's become more and more on the radar of the sustainability and really urban planning community over the past decade or so. The idea is that climate migration is happening when it gets so hot in one area. There's either like micro migration, like fewer people are living – right on the Miami waterfront, they're moving inland a little bit. But also there's bigger climate migration, like people in Phoenix can't survive with 115 degree days. And so they move somewhere cooler, like maybe they go to Denver or Salt Lake City. And so there's this migration of folks who are living in areas that have all of these extreme weather effects on the climate side of things that are affecting their daily lives. And they're moving to other communities, whether it's kind of near term migration, or further migration across the country. Absolutely. Thanks, everyone.

Thank you. All right. Our next speaker is Ms. Vasquez, followed by Bernice Perez.

Dear mayor and city council members, my name is Lilia Hernandez Vasquez. I'm currently a senior in Alexandria City High School. I am an Alexandria resident that is part of the organization Tenant and Workers United for a year. Recently, the community and myself have been noticing more flock surveillance cameras around minority communities. Uncertainty is roaming through these communities from how law enforcement is keeping the data from these cameras confidential from the public. creating a feeling of insecurity by just walking outside or driving in roads without our data and identity being collected with the community's consent and agreement. This technology is not only being accessed by law enforcement, but as well as federal agencies, including ICE. These flock cameras are building concerns on false criminalized data and error identifications that are increasing deportation in these minority communities. The feeling of being frightened and alarmed from how my data can be collected without my consent terrifies me to even have a peaceful walk or car ride. In particular, information from the flock cameras providing artificial intelligence is being used to identify car plates and people. I am mostly worried that most of my information collected could create consistent errors creating a high chance of false criminalized data on myself and the community. Having a constant fear of going outside or being tracked shouldn't be a normalized matter. Me and the community believe that these flock cameras should be demolished and taken down on how it could increase a feeling of comfort and security without being constantly alarmed on feeling that our identity is being collected or tracked from confidential artificial data. On behalf of myself and the community, I believe the mayor and city council should take action to help residents feel safer by taking account the removal of flock cameras. This would create residents like myself feel safer on how our privacy should be an important priority, but as well as the community's voice being heard involving consent on collection of personal data. Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time today. Our next speaker is Bernice Perez, followed by Rachel Miller.

Good morning, Mayor and City Council. My name is Bernice and I'm a senior at Alexandria City High School and I lived in Alexandria my whole life. I've been part of the organization Tenant and Workers United for the past two years. What I'm seeing currently in our community is that there seems to be a lot of flawed cameras in certain neighborhoods more than others. I went out to see where these cameras were placed and I noticed what some... I noticed that some were right in front of buildings and neighborhoods where many residents are people of color. This raises concerns about fairness, privacy, and why certain communities seem to have more surveillance than others. I believe our community should get rid of flawed cameras because people deserve to feel safe without feeling like they're constantly being watched. One of my biggest concern is who is actually watching us and how these cameras are being used. How do we know that our privacy and our safety are being protected? I am asking you as elected leaders to take action and get rid of flawed cameras in our community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time today as well. Our next speaker is Rachel Miller followed by Allison O'Connell. Do we have Rachel? Rachel, we are ready whenever you are. Please unmute your microphone.

Great. Can you all hear me?

Yes.

Perfect. Good morning, mayor and city council members. My name is Rachel Miller, and I live and work in Alexandria. Today, I'm asking the council to address the widespread use of automatic license plate recognition technology, or ALPRs, across Alexandria. I'm intentionally using the term ALPRs rather than flock cameras because flock is simply one vendor. If the council does decide to ban flock but not ALPRs more broadly, another company can and likely will fill that gap. I do appreciate the council's continued discussion of this issue, particularly the questions that were raised at last week's city council meeting and the mayor's statement that flock cameras do not belong in the city. I agree, but I believe we need to go one step further. My concern is that ALPRs will compound existing racial and socioeconomic inequities within the city. I reviewed the city's available equity data, which consists of 22 indicators of disparity within the city. I compared that alongside community reported ALPR sightings since the police department has not provided the public with exact camera locations. What I found was concerning. Reported ALPRs appear concentrated in areas with higher proportions of foreign-born residents, non-native English speakers, and individuals with lower incomes, while areas with higher incomes and fewer non-native English speakers have limited reported sightings. I believe that surveillance does not happen in a vacuum. A neighborhood that is more heavily monitored will inevitably generate more recorded activity and potentially more enforcement. Lower income residents are also statistically proven more likely to struggle with the costs like vehicle registration and maintaining insurance, which would be flagged by these cameras. This creates ultimately a troubling cycle where communities already experiencing inequities will face greater surveillance, which in the end generates more enforcement data, which can be used to justify even more surveillance. So you see that cycle occurring. There is also a fundamental privacy concern here. On the Alexandria Police Department's public safety dashboard, the department does claim that its goal in using these cameras is to, quote, responsibly use every lawful tool available to help solve crimes, deliver justice for victims, and protect the community while respecting constitutional rights and maintaining public trust. The police department says that it wants to use every lawful tool available while respecting constitutional rights and maintaining public trust, but ALPRs are fundamentally different from red light or speed cameras. They do not only document a violation when it occurs, they are continuously recording vehicles, making it possible to reconstruct where people travel and what places they visit. Now, as an Alexandria resident, I do not believe that my government should be able to record of my... throughout my own city. And it is my belief that maintaining that record of my movements, even if it's only for 21 days, tended to protect. And finally, I'd just like to add that I do believe this erodes public trust. The cameras may collect objective information, but that information is ultimately accessed and used by people. The individuals who access this data are not objective, and they have proven in other communities and states that when given this amount of power, they will use it beyond its true purpose.

Thank you, Rachel, for your time today. Your time is up. I did want to note that there were some times when your internet connection was unstable. So if you were reading, I would encourage if you could please send a copy of your testimony to the council so we have all of the words for the parts where sometimes it was a little difficult to hear.

Madam Mayor.

Councilman Aguirre.

Given something was said, and I appreciated what the speaker said, delineating or separating out the difference between flock cameras that are ALPRs and then another style. I didn't realize that we have Assistant Chief North here. If I could call him up for a second. Yes. So I had mentioned earlier that I was 90% sure and needed to get some confirmation. And luckily there's someone here that could give such confirmation. Thanks for joining us, Assistant Chief North. Two quick questions. First of all, are the red light cameras and speed cameras also considered automatic license plate readers?

Good morning, Mayor, members of City Council. Yes, sir, to be directed to your question, these are license plate readers, ALPRs.

Yes, sir. And second question, are these cameras the same as flock cameras? Are they plugged into a similar network? Are they collecting as much information? Because we know what some of the flock cameras are collecting. bumper stickers, dance, color, everything else, are these, and also utilizing AI, are these other cameras doing similar and are they plugged into the same network?

Yes, sir. Same as in technology. In regards to vendor, it's a different vendor. It also is managed in a different retention separate from the flock safety platform.

So then do other agencies have access to the red light and the speed cameras?

No, sir. Unless they make a specific request, we can collaborate with those agencies depending on their law enforcement purpose. But no, that's not the intent. The primary purpose of those speed cameras and red light cameras is for the traffic safety purpose.

And so basically the picture gets taken, an officer reviews if they've actually ran a red light or they were going over the speed, and we send them a ticket. Yes, sir. All right. Yes, sir. So thank you, Assistant Chief. Thank you.

Assistant Chief, well, actually, I guess this would go to Mr. Manager. I know at our last council meeting, one of our directives was to get all of this information in one place so that the public doesn't have to search. So I would just ask that questions that come up today where we've received an answer, can that be put on the website so that that information is there? Thank you. Councilman Alnubi.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Chief North, one follow-up. I appreciate my colleague's questions. I want to dig a little deeper into what he's asking for my own understanding. For the red light cameras, are they also collecting license plate data all the time or only when they detect a violation?

I do not know that answer specifically, but we can get back to that. But certainly to the latter part, yes, when there's a violation, certainly takes that image. But in terms of just passing vehicles that are not committing violation, I'm not certain. But I will get a response back to you really soon.

Yes, please. Thank you. That would be helpful. Because I think what I understand the main concern with ALPRs is they are constantly collecting data. So I think that would be a... important distinction to understand. I appreciate it. I understand. Thank you.

Madam Mayor.

Councilman Aguirre.

Now last question. To follow up on my colleague's question, can we also find out how long that data is stored for? Yes, sir. Thank you.

Thank you. And again, when you circulate it to the council, post it for the public. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Next speaker is Allison O'Connell followed by Carissa Young.

Good morning. I'm a member of DFLOC Alexandria. Like many folks here today, I'm here to talk to you about ALPRs. I was at your last legislative meeting and I wish I could be happy that several of you said that you didn't want FLOC cameras in the city anymore, but I'm concerned that you're using FLOC, the vendor, as a shield to ignore what the actual public demand is. Because then you went on to discuss keeping ALPR tech with potential restrictions or simply getting rid of FLOC and moving to another vendor. Now, since I'm here with Deflock Alexandria, it might seem surprising that getting rid of flock is not my ultimate goal, but we're called Deflock because the Deflock movement is a powerful cross-country, cross-political spectrum movement to get rid of mass surveillance in our communities. People in Nova know the name, they know they want these cameras out, and they want to join Deflock movements in our city and Arlington and Fairfax. But Flock is to ALPRs what Kleenex is to tissues. The brand name has become synonymous with the technology, but Flock is not the only purveyor of AI-connected ALPRs and all of the potential vendors are bad. The technology itself is bad. When constituents say they want Flock out, what they are really saying is they reject cameras that surveil them and their neighbors 24 hours a day and compile their information into dangerous AI databases. They're not talking about just one vendor. ALPRs violate our privacy, and there is no meaningful way to regulate the way this data is shared between private companies, law enforcement, local, and federal government. It puts our immigrant communities in danger through direct access by ICE and jurisdictions that allow it, side door access to ICE and the federal government when friendly officers allow that, and federal subpoenas that supersede our state laws. ALPRs and their placement disproportionately impact minority community members. ALPR tech has been frequently abused as a tool of intimate partner violence and stalking. Alternate ALPR vendors include Motorola, which has all the same rest of the flock, but has an active contract with ICE. Axon, formerly known as Taser, which had a scandal when they wanted to attach tasers to drones, and which supplies ICE with tasers and body cams and received a $5 million investment from Donald Trump this year. And Leonardo, whose LSAG devices go beyond tracking license plates and track Bluetooth and wireless emissions, allowing a more invasive stalking of individual people. there is no better technology because the technology is inherently invasive and dangerous we don't want a flock alternative we want all alpr technology out of our city please turn off the cameras immediately and remove them regarding the red light and traffic cams it's my understanding that they only actively collect data when a violation is committed i'm not an expert though we are partnered with justice board virginia and dr stephen keener who is an expert would be happy to give a presentation to council

Thank you for your testimony. Our next speaker is Krista Young, followed by Nicole Radshaw.

I don't want flock in my city, not because I have a problem with the company, but because I don't trust anyone to have complete and total access to my movements and location at any given moment of any given day. That's the real issue, not which company you decide to trade our city's dwindling funds for the opportunity to violate my rights. No, the real issue here is trust. I don't trust the federal government with Donald Trump in the White House, especially when he has consistently tried to manufacture crises and loudly and proudly confesses to wanting to persecute his political opponents, a.k.a. anyone who votes against him. With those parameters, who in this room can say they are innocent? As AI videos continue to develop with disturbing accuracy and now Flock has proven to be so easily hacked, it would be effortless to frame those dissonance, which he refers to as Democrats or Communists interchangeably, by the way. Why allow him such an easily accessible weapon? I don't trust my state government not to facilitate the expansion of Flock through ongoing data center construction. Now I can say I no longer trust my local government when they are putting arbitrary restrictions on my speech. First, you grant Flock my ability to violate my Fourth Amendment rights, and now you seek to grant yourselves an opportunity to violate my First Amendment rights, should you deem my comments a personal insult. my rights are god-given and not dictated on the boundaries of your feelings or when convenient how vocal i am to speak in opposition to an issue that makes you or chief mcguire look bad you are worried about rude comments i think it is rude you allow flock cameras to track my movements at all when i am a survivor of domestic violence i think it is insulting that when i was told the apd does not collaborate with ice and yet they had access to our footage for who knows how long and how many people were kidnapped and tortured because of that oversight I think it is disrespectful that one of your most pressing issues at this moment is restricting the rights of your citizens and not stopping the illegal ICE kidnappings which Flock enabled. At this moment, before the midterms that will determine the future of this country while we balance on the precipice between fascism and democracy, I have to ask myself, if both Democrats and Republicans in office are casually violating my rights, then who do I trust? Who earns my vote? Because if you implement the proposed resolution and then trade flock for another ALPR vendor without the name recognition and hope it goes unnoticed, you are no better than Republicans. I hope you make the right choice. Whatever you decide will determine my choice in the election next year.

Thank you for your testimony. I also, I know there's been a lot of comments on the resolution that council will review on Tuesday. There probably should have been some definitions included and we can work on that with staff to update that. I want to be clear, our personal insult, we get those all the time. That's not something we speak to or stop. I think many of you have called me names. We've sat here. That's not what we're talking about. In the last year, there have been people who have come and given actual threats and then followed up on those threats. That is different. And so that is what we were speaking to. But there will be some definitions presented on Tuesday so that we can all be clear that we're using the same terminology as we speak to this issue. Madam Clerk, oh, actually, next speaker, Nicole Radshaw.

Hey, good morning. My name's Nicole Radshaw. I'm going to take a deep breath because I'm shaking a little bit. This is what I do with my students. So I live in Alexandria, and it really doesn't matter how long or whether I own a house or whether I'm a renter. Like, I live here right now, like all these people do here. I am a member of BPAC, Alexandria Family for Safe Streets. I'm an educator for ACPS. I'm a parent. I ride my bike. Usually I come here and tell you about the cool stuff I've seen on vacation, like in Toronto, the great bike bus and pet infrastructure, like in Black Rock, Connecticut, the walkability and the mixed-use community. But I'm here to read portions of the crash report that I got on Monday at the BPAC monthly meeting from Sergeant Reeve. There were 23 incidents. When I started to get through, tried to read them, I couldn't get through half of them. So I'm just picking a couple. So the first one on July 20th was at Potomac and E Street. It was between a bike and a car, a minor injury. It's like the Virginia Tech intersection. The biker and the stop sign, the cyclist was cited. I'm sure there'll be people who'll be happy about that. August 1st, Slaters and Hortner, car and pedestrian minor injury. The SUV was making a left onto Slaters.

Pedestrian was in the crosswalk.

The driver was cited. There's a lot of e-scooters in the crosswalk, pedestrians in the crosswalk. Let's jump down to 3200 Duke, car and pedestrian, serious injury outside Alexandria Commons. Car was turning right from parking lot onto Duke, pedestrian in the crosswalk. Okay, let's skip ahead, because I know I don't have a lot of time. I'm going to come to the one that's in my neighborhood, because I'm a West End girl. 400 block of North Van Dorn on August 31st. It was a car and pedestrian, and this one was fatal. It's under investigation. I haven't heard anything about it anywhere, except I've seen a picture of flowers in a shrine, so I'd just love to learn more about that. So that's what Sergeant Reeve said. Anyway, let's see if I can find... the rest of what I want to say. This is upsetting, because my job is to teach students about pedestrian and bike safety. And on Monday, I was at John Adams, where these kids are biking and pedaling. This never happens on the first day of biking. They were learning the signs, stop and crosswalk. And then I got to the BPAC meeting and heard this crash report, also knowing that I was going to possibly hear the same thing at the Alexandria Family for Safe Streets meeting on Tuesday, the next night. I do education. That's my job. You guys do enforcement. We're hearing a lot about the flock, the APRs, the stop sign cameras. But I want engineering now. I want you guys to fix our streets. I want daylighting. I want lanes for bikes and scooters. I want pedestrian islands. Thank you for voting for East Braddock, for those of you who did the positive. And I want the safe streets to schools. I want the safest for our students, for our community. I think those are all my notes. Thank you.

Thank you for your time today. Vice Mayor Bagley.

Ms. Radshaw, thank you for the work you do in the schools. I know you were a little flustered today. Sorry. No, no, no. I want to give you actually a chance to just explain the work you do in the schools. Like what's the role and what do you do in the schools?

I am. the Pedestrian and Bicycle Education Support Specialist for ACPS. And we have a program where we go around to every single school in Alexandria in third grade and teach bike safety, how to ride a bike, bike safety. And we have a pedestrian safety curriculum that the PE teachers do in K-2. In sixth grade, we deliver refresher assemblies about multi-mobility safety. We're bringing in scooters. We're talking about how to ride the bus. And we have fleets at the high school. And so we go to every single school. I see all. I see the streets. I see the facilities. I mean, that's a whole other thing. But every single student gets it.

And you mentioned being a West End girl. And I think you've been here for all the other speakers. And the woman who spoke over, I think her name was Rachel, who spoke over the speaker, she sort of referenced the fact what the maps show, when you lay over ALPR maps and you lay over who lives in those areas. Is there another element as somebody who referenced sort of maps and streets that those maps reveal about the city?

So looking at this crash report, these are the high crash corridors. So thinking about like Van Dorn, which I wrote up today on the sidewalk, sorry, because it's crazy and scary on the road. So Van Dorn's a high crash corridor, right? And that's high density. It's a 35 mile per hour road, so faster streets. I mean, it's lower income. Westside's lower income. We've got, you know, you think about where is it? Like in front of Hammond, you've got Southern Towers. You've got, well, that's like just across the way. You've got Seminary Towers. Again, the seminary right there, High Crash Corridor, and Duke Street, right? Alexandria Commons. high speeds, high crash corridor, lower incomes. Like just how Ms. Shands talked about the heat map, man, come with me, 9 o'clock, Tucker, no shade, hottest, hottest school, hottest playground in that area, that park, right by 495 and 395. Again, high density. High environmental costs, high health costs. We don't have the safe streets, so kids can't go out and play. And, yeah, anything else?

I appreciate your time. And to be clear, I asked her this question not to justify the presence of more LPRs in that area, but to show to the city yet again, it's the same map. Every equity issue in this city, every health issue, every safety issue, it's the same map. So this wasn't a question to say, and that's why more AOPRs in the West End is the right decision. What I'm drawing out here is it's the same map over and over again. The density is in certain places. The heat islands are in certain places. The asthma in certain places. The utility bills that can't be paid. They're all in the same places. It's the same map over and over and over again. So the questions I asked today, because I knew my colleagues were going to follow up on the ALPRs, I followed up with Ms. Shantz and I followed up with Ms. Radshaw, because while they're talking about safe streets and Ms. Shantz is talking about the environment, it's the same map over and over again. We put more people who are in lower incomes who are disproportionately black and brown and immigrants in the same places, and then we don't invest in those places. There's no rec center in the West End. There are more fatal injuries in these corridors, in Orlandria. There are more fatal pedestrian injuries. So I just want to be very clear. I'm not ignoring one issue and highlighting the other. I'm trying to tie together that all of these policies are related. The way we enforce crime, the way we build housing, the way we design our streets, we need to be mindful that all of these things are related. Okay, Councilman Chapman.

There's a point of information. We do have a rec center in the West End, I think. Well, not rec center. Sorry. There has been for many years conversations by community members about expanding rec centers, particularly in the landmark Van Dorn area. because we don't have a number of municipal opportunities there. I certainly appreciate the Vice Mayor's comments and concerns, because she is correct. If you look at the map on a number of issues, it is pressing definitely to the west end of the city. And I appreciate the work that a number of residents and citizens have done around safe streets the city has continued to invest in that continue to show that in a number of our kind of master planning materials and plans one of my concerns is that While we know there is some systematic challenges to what we do and there's some infrastructure definitely needed, and I will never disagree with that, I do think our state is very lax on individuals that regardless of the infrastructure are going to be bad actors. And I think, I would hope that one day we take a stronger state position around people's ability to continue to operate a vehicle in a dangerous fashion. I don't think as a city we talk about that enough because we can't necessarily change everybody's driving habits, right? And so we talk about the infrastructure, we talk about the need to do that, but there is a conversation there around who should be able to still be allowed to operate a vehicle and hopefully Maybe one day we make something like that part of our legislative packet to talk to folks down in Richmond.

Thank you, Councilman Chapman. I think one point I just want to emphasize, you can sit down, Ms. Badshaw, but between what the Vice Mayor said and what Councilman Chapman said, I think sometimes when we're talking about the map and we're talking about areas, everyone is guilty of just saying Weston. I say it too because that's where I live. But I think it's important to recognize the West End is a collection of very distinct neighborhoods. What is happening on Van Doren is different than what is happening on Beauregard, which is different than Eisenhower and other streets. So if we're going to talk about maps and disparities and where different resources are from rec centers to libraries to other things that are lacking, I think we need to be very intentional and look at each neighborhood and what they have and don't have. So that would just be my comments on maps. Councilman Aguirre.

No, thank you, and I agree wholeheartedly with your comments and also with my other two colleagues. And just to drive home some of what Councilman Chapman was saying, an individual recently jumped the curve, hit an individual, killed them, and they got 40 hours of community service. That was it. And so, yeah, in Fairfax, that's right. So that needs to change.

I agree.

Before I call the next two, I want to check my numbering. Madam Clerk, I believe that Nicole Radshaw was number 12, which means we would have 13, 14, 15. Is that correct? OK. I just want to make sure I was tracking. All right. Then our next speaker is Tony Mashler, followed by Morgan Waite.

Good morning. I'm here to urge immediate decisive action, turn off all flock cameras immediately, remove them completely within one week, and pass a comprehensive ban on all ALPRs within our city limits. Let's be clear what these devices actually are. They are not benign traffic tools. They are instruments of mass indiscriminate surveillance by tracking, logging, time stamping, and storing the movements of every single resident, particularly the poorer and browner residents and visitor 24 hours a day, including the storing of video footage subject to AI analysis, ALPRs constitute continuous warrantless searches that flagrantly violate the Fourth Amendment. When Alexandrians know that every routine trip to the grocery store, every visit to a house of worship, and every meeting with a political group is being recorded and archived in government and corporate databases, it creates a profound chilling effect on our freedoms of speech and association. People begin to self-censor. People alter their daily lives out of fear. That is not public safety. That is a digital big brother eroding the very foundation of a free and open society. Furthermore, I'm particularly concerned about the sharing of city-gathered data far beyond our local borders, even when the city attempts to avoid this. The information does not stay in Alexandria. It is funneled across regional and national networks and can be accessed both officially and unofficially by local, state, and federal agencies unconnected with Alexandria. In fact, reporters from the Virginia Center for Investigative Journalism at WHRO-TV discovered that law enforcement agencies outside the Commonwealth conducted more than seven million searches of Virginia cameras in one year. including 3,000 searches related to immigration status. They specifically noticed that Warren County Sheriff's Office had performed more immigration-related searches than any other in the state upon federal agency request. As the ACLU of Massachusetts has found, local license plate scanner data has routinely been shared with ICE and other federal and local agencies for broad investigative purposes. And here is the most alarming part. This data sharing happened even when the specific jurisdictions where the cameras were located had sought to restrict access to their own officers. and even when state laws had forbidden police to inform out-of-state officers about health care travel related to gender affirmation or abortion care. Once our data is handed over to private surveillance brokers, local accountability vanishes. Alexandria must not be complicit in this erosion of our civil liberties. Thank you for your time today. Thank you.

Madam Mayor. I have Councilman Chapman, and then I have Councilman Aguirre.

Ma'am, is it possible to get a copy of your remarks? I uploaded it. Okay. Thank you.

Councilman Aguirre.

Ms. Masler. I'm sorry. Sorry. Same question, since you said all ALPRs, red light and school zone cameras.

If they can be searched by people outside of Alexandria, yes.

Got you. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Morgan Waite. Morgan will be followed by Nikki Enfield. Nikki will be our 15th speaker. Then we will pause the public hearing, go into our other business, and come back. Do we have Morgan? I do not see Morgan online. Okay. Then there might be a correction. It might be Nikki and then the next person. Next speaker, Nikki Enfield.

What's your drink?

hot coffee today.

You guys feeling super safe yet? I'm sensing some hostility. It's okay if the government watches its citizens, but if we watch you back, I mean, it's not like you were doing anything illegal, right? So why would you care if I was watching you?

I mean, you could have been thinking about doing something illegal.

Or maybe your neighbor was. You know Alexandrians are notoriously shifty, right? And I mean, community shmimunity. Constant, 24-7, vigilant surveillance. That's the key to happy, healthy, vibrant, non-paranoid communities. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who first said that. Okay, crap, crap, crap. I'd love to sit here and talk to you about how all this creepy tech was first tested on the Palestinians and how this is all happening now because the Epstein class is freaking out over the masses waking up and how that same Epstein predator class will always sell oppression. and call it safety. And the bootlickers, mouth breathers, and professional managerial class will gobble those lies up like a Thanksgiving turkey. But my cop buddy just texted me. We got a hit on my ex's license plate. So I got to go and make sure him and his new girlfriend are feeling safe. By the way, Jacinta, I saw your purse earlier. Super cute. I hope we're not using it to stash illegal drugs. We should put up more cameras and make sure.

Thank you for your testimony. Our next speaker will then be JW Grenadier. Do we have Ms. Grenadier? Ms. Grenadier is not online. OK. Then our next speaker will be Kelly Haywood Reston. Kelly is not online. OK. Then our next speaker will be Brittany. And I don't have a last name.

Sorry, I'm not as good of a public speaker. Hi, I'm a resident of Alexandria, and I'm calling for the city council to turn off all 61 city-owned flock cameras and have them all removed. Thank you. The use of this surveillance system does not make me feel more protected as a resident. It makes me feel like myself and fellow residents are always being watched. It's an invasion of our privacy that can easily be hacked and has already been used in harmful ways. I hope that council will listen to those of us today that have chosen to speak to you on this matter. That is highly disturbing, as it is something that the public has never asked for and does not want. I'm not a great speaker, so that's all. Thank you, and you did great, Brittany. Thank you.

Brittany is our last speaker at this time. We have another person, so I'm going to ask that we leave the public hearing open, and then we can come back, call that name, and close it at that time. Madam Clerk, next item.

Action docket roll call consent item 7 through 12.

Okay, I've had a request to pull 9 and 10. Is there a motion to approve items 7, 8, 11, and 12? So moved. All right, there's been a motion by Councilman Aguirre. Is there a second? And a second by Councilman Marks. Is there any additional discussion? Okay, Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote. Please call the roll.

Councilman Aguirre. Aye. Councilwoman Marks. Aye. Mayor Gaskins. Aye. Vice Mayor Bagley. Aye. Councilman Chapman. Aye. Councilman El-Nubi. Aye. Councilwoman Green.

Aye. All right, the ayes have it, and those items are passed. Madam Clerk, next item.

Special use permit 2026-00022, 911C and D Pendleton Street. Planning Commission action, recommend approval 6-0.

Is there a presentation from staff that is needed on this item? All right, I'm seeing no discussion. need for a presentation, we can jump right into council discussion and deliberation. Councilman Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I think one of the things that I, this is a small thing, so please bear with me. I'm trying to frankly understand what this is going to look like. I think they did, we usually get some type of rendering, some type of understanding of how it works with the neighborhood or looks next to the other kind of parking here. So can staff kind of help me with that part?

Yes, good. Good morning Sam Shelby planning and zoning You're seeing a little bit. This is a intro to it sort of an answer that you're seeing a little bit less here because This is going to the BAR that the the design review will have the primary kind of materials and massing and stuff will happen at the at the Parker Gray Because this is in the Parker historic district so the you're seeing a little bit less than you ordinarily would Because it's going through that process and the applicant has decided to wait until then to do um to get that design finalized um it will be a two-story structure with a with a penthouse um and it's going to be about 35 feet tall to the top of that penthouse so um it's it's going to be about 10 to 15 feet shorter than the arha building in front of it um and it'll be a little bit taller than the townhouses that are behind it okay

Thank you for that. That's very helpful. I think the other kind of question or concern I had, and I was trying to, looking through past conversations with council, I recall a development that we had where we I don't know if we conditioned, but I definitely remember a conversation where we talked to the developer about making sure people parked in their garage. If they had a garage, they kind of were instructed, again, I don't remember if it was conditioned or not, to park in that. The concern I have is kind of an equity piece here. If we are having somebody that has a garage, we are now allowing that to be kind of reconfigured and reused for something else. And if we've already gotten into the business of kind of demanding or conditioning folks to use their garage for what it is, now how do we kind of step back and say, well, you've got a garage. You've got opportunity to kind of play with that.

Yeah, Paul Stoddard with Planning and Zoning. Happy for the question. You're correct that on a lot of the larger townhouse projects especially, that's where we tend to see sort of conflicts in parking when there are sort of large groupings of townhouses. There is commonly a condition that says if there is a garage, then its principal use has to be for actually parking the car, not to become a very large closet. In this case, it's something of a one-off. And also, it is in the enhanced transit area, so there's already an expectation of lower parking requirements. And so I think that would be sort of part of the rationale on this one, that it's a small project, small impact, and generally lower parking expectations anyway.

But with the passage of it, I think I appreciate the answer. The only concern with that is that with the passage of this project, doesn't this set up the opportunity for additional folks along that same bank of garages to do a similar thing? And so it's not necessarily, to me at least, not necessarily a one off. It sets the kind of tone for what's possible there.

Yeah, that's a fair point. Would there be sort of a sequential then sort of follow on of how the other properties could see? We did have some speakers present when this was at Planning Commission, and it was actually some of the neighbors to this unit. And they actually communicated they expect to keep doing what they're already doing. So one person uses it as a professional studio, and they intend to keep it that way because it works for what they currently need. So I think it's a possibility, but not a certainty.

Right. No, I get that. I think what I've seen in the time I've been on council is that, yes, neighbors are going to have a certain use that they want to they want to continue until there's a financial opportunity to change and do something similar that somebody else has done. So while I appreciate that in the short term, I think there's still that long-term opportunity exists there. I'm not necessarily against the project. I just wanted to kind of understand better some of what could be a Pandora's box, particularly on this block that we're opening with these.

Yeah, I think, just to your point, I think if we see more of these come in, I think that's something we would obviously be paying attention to. Thank you.

All right, is there any additional discussion? If not, is there a motion? All right, there has been a motion to approve item nine, and that is by Vice Mayor Bagley, and a second by Councilwoman Green. Is there any additional discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Vice Mayor Bagley. Aye. Councilwoman Green. Aye. Mayor Gaskins. Aye. Councilman Aguirre. Aye. Councilman Chapman. Aye. Councilman El Newby. Aye. Councilwoman Marks. Aye.

Okay, the ayes have it, and item nine passes. Madam Clerk, next item.

Development Special Use Permit 2026-10007, 724, 726, and 728 North Patrick Streets, Townhomes. Planning Commission Action Recommend Approval 6-0.

Okay, is there a desire for a staff presentation? All right, we will begin with a staff presentation and then I think we have one speaker signed up So we will then go to the public hearing for that item Good morning Mayor and City Council for the record.

My name is Stephanie sample with planning and zoning This is the agenda The applicant proposes to demolish two existing buildings on the site and construct five townhouses fronting on North Patrick Street. The applicant has requested approval of a development special use permit with site plan and an SEP for cluster residential development along with modifications. Staff is recommending approval of the project. The project location is a relatively dense, mixed-use area of the Braddock neighborhood. The site is almost entirely within the boundaries of the Parker Gray Historic District and falls within the Braddock Metro neighborhood plan area. There are a variety of uses in the immediate area from residential on North Patrick and diagonally across the street to commercial to the west on Madison and across Henry Street. Charles Houston Rec Center is located across Patrick Street and the ARHA owned Samuel Madden development south block is located to the north. This block will be the second phase of the redevelopment of the Samuel Madden project with the north block currently under construction. The future building will replace the garden style apartments you see in this image with a multi-unit residential building with ground floor commercial uses. The building will be seven stories and reach a height of 75 feet. The two buildings on the site date from the mid-20th century and are not considered historic. A cluster of SUPs allows for a more advantageous site layout and is achieved by demonstrating that the same number of residential units could be accommodated on a by-right site layout. The proposed layout is supported by staff as it provides a meaningful open space for residents in the rear and allows for enlarged sidewalks and streetscape improvements along Patrick and Madison Street, which is a very active pedestrian route. As you can see from this rendered site plan, The townhouses will face North Patrick Street with a small planting area in front of each unit. The applicant has dedicated a small portion of the right-of-way so sidewalks can be enlarged and street trees can be added. A rear drive aisle will provide access to the unit garages, which will accommodate one car each. The project's open space will be located at the western edge of the site, which includes a BMP planter doubling as a pollinator garden with areas for seating. In addition, each townhouse will have a rooftop open space next to the partial fourth floor. Renderings on the right show the front and rear of the four-story townhouses, which will be clad almost entirely in brick, except for a small amount of fiber cement on the fourth floor of each unit. The BAR reviewed this project in concept in April, and they were supportive of it, asking only for a couple minor revisions when returning to the BAR for approval of a certificate of appropriateness. As with all projects, we like to highlight certain areas with respect to transportation. The existing bus stop will be enhanced for safer pedestrian access to and from the bus with a concrete bump out. The project meets the phosphorus removal requirement, and for schools, our estimate says the project should generate only one student. Benefits include five new housing units in a very transit-friendly area, pedestrian improvements such as sidewalks ranging from 8 to 12 feet, as well as a contribution to the Housing Trust Fund. There were three different community meetings where this project was discussed with very few attendees, and no one expressed concern about the project. With that, staff recommends approval of the project subject to the Planning Commission conditions.

Are there questions for staff at this time? If not, we'll go to the hearing. Councilman Chapman.

I'll go to the hearing first.

Okay.

Mr. Blair.

Good afternoon. I'm Duncan Blair here representing this project. I don't think I'll elaborate. I think the staff presentation clearly explained the project, worked very hard with the community and staff in creating what eventually will be a transition project between the Samuel Madden redevelopment. the project that will potentially be coming behind it but it most importantly it reinforces the residential character of North Patrick Street the units were facing Patrick for that reason and we had set the units back from the housing the south it is taller but at the BAR and as we move forward with a certificate appropriateness we believe that transition between this new project the prod units to the south will in fact strengthen the area and provide a transition from the staff said 75 feet of height in the Samuel Madden project. And I don't think it's naive to say that the property behind this facing Henry Street, which is owned by an investment corporation, at some point will come in also for development, most likely multifamily facing Henry Street. So we're trying to put a piece of a puzzle together that reinforces the residential area, provides housing, and anticipates how it will fit in. Continuing to redevelop Braddock Road metro area so be glad to answer any questions.

Okay. Are there questions for the applicant?

Councilman Chapman, so I don't have any Kind of current questions for the applicant. I do want to start to talk about kind of why I pulled this Because I think while I appreciate mr. Blair's assertion that this is going to add to the residential character of this neighborhood. I think one of the things that this particular site does is kind of flip the switch. You have a commercial portion of this block. You have commercial portions of a couple of other blocks. And I guess I have kind of some firm disagreement around what we're doing with this corner. You know, I looked in the letter, I think one of the letters that we, maybe the only letter that we received from this and it said, you know, moving forward from these kind of underutilized businesses. I think that's challenging within this particular area. because I don't want to Take commercial that is being utilized regardless of what this person may think And kind of make it residential we have residential and other places of this neighborhood we are going to have residential right across the street and it's my concern that if Mr. Blair's kind of vision plays out or his statement plays out where? The rest of this part of Madison will be turned into residential We would not have some of the neighborhood serving uses that we would frankly fight for in other parts of the community I distinctly remember when we did Oakville Triangle. There was a firm intention on saying, we are going to preserve neighborhood uses. And I see that with the low scale commercial that we have on this part of the block. We've already gone through opportunities to shift residential on this block, whether it's the Alexandra Lighting building that we've converted from commercial to residential. And I'm very worried about the opportunity to lose some of that additional commercial on this strip. And frankly, as Mr. Blair states, this would be an entree to doing that, kind of setting the tone for the rest of the strip to come in. I do think we should be looking at opportunities and some of our residential neighborhoods to preserve that. This building did not come in as a mixed use project, probably just doesn't have enough space or whatnot. But if it were to, I think that could be a solvable solution. But again, that's not what's in front of us. So I do start to have concern about how we're laying out pieces of Parker Gray. yes, we can take some of the storage units and flip those into townhouses. That makes sense, as staff laid out in that. There's already some examples, other places in the neighborhood. But I do think we have a unique issue in this part of Parker Gray where we have the opportunity to preserve neighborhood uses. And I'm concerned about not realizing that. Unfortunately for the property owner, we haven't said that as a council and kind of talked to staff about that. And so I do feel kind of bad around the lateness of this conversation. But I do think there is an opportunity to do that. I think the challenge I have with kind of lining up additional residential on this side is that if you go to the other side of the street, it's not going to be residential. It's the Charles Houston Rec Center. And so it's not like you have a missing piece, per se. While it might not look good from the street, I think there was intent to keep commercial on that side of the block. I think if you look further up Madison, there's been investment put into the buildings where there's some paint on them. Some new businesses have come in. I would agree with you that years ago, I thought all of this was going to convert to residential. But we have had, in some parts of the city, a renaissance of smaller scale commercial. And I think this is what that is. If you ask, and I'll be very straightforward, if you ask any black man, where are you going to get your hair cut, that's one of the few places in the city that you have that. The other place with the limited hair that I do have that I visit is another place in Oakville Triangle where we intentionally said, we are going to preserve neighborhood uses. And that's where Barbershop has had the opportunity to set up. And so I think with this project, while it was on consent, while I did have a good conversation with staff, this is not necessarily something I can support. I do think the vision of what we've done with this part of Madison should stay neighborhood serving uses because we are adding housing, have housing in that area. And so whether we have mixed use on Henry Street, this portion of Madison that has been kept together, I think to me it's a better planning idea to keep this as something commercial. You know, there is an infill space right next to the the property on the corner. If somebody wanted to do something with that, I think there's opportunity there. But I think with what I'm seeing here, I'm not in support of it at this time.

Thank you, Councilman Chapman. Before I go to Mr. Blair, since we haven't closed the public hearing, I did have a question for staff. What does the plan specifically for this neighborhood call for in terms of the mix of commercial uses and neighborhood serving retail? And I guess I'm asking, I know other plans we've actually named like a percentage. We've targeted some areas. Can you speak to that a little bit? Can you jump in for one quick point? Yes, Councilman Chapman.

I apologize, Madam Mayor. I just wanted to also, because I forgot about this part. In the staff report, it also mentions that this was not ever thought of as a development site in the 2008 overlay. And so I want to, as you ask that question, that's something to be considered as well. Thank you.

Catherine Miliaris. So I think one of the things, right, no site exists just as an island. So across the street with Samuel Madden, with that redevelopment, there is commercial and retail recognizing that all these sites, as they transition, we need to keep those neighborhood serving uses. And this is a primary walking street, so it makes sense to have it there. So in that case, the small area plan did show that it needed to have that mix of retail, so we have it there. But this site was not included. And I think, you know, staff agrees. One of the things, especially in Parker Gray and Braddock, are those very small retail places that are really important. So we do work to support those as well.

And I guess my question was more towards the whole, like, Exactly to your point. We think about an entire neighborhood. And I recognize there was an intentional plan for Samuel Madden in keeping those uses. But that's one building. And Parker Gray boundaries are much bigger than that. So I guess another way of asking my question is, for the boundaries of this plan, did we have a specific goal laid out as it relates to the mix of neighborhood serving retail?

The plan wants to keep a mix of neighborhood serving retail, recognizing that there are certain key areas for it. And what we have learned since the 2008 plan is that you can't have retail in every location. We actually came upon that with the 701 North Henry, where we worked with the applicant. We should have retail here. So where we compromised with 701 North Henry, the Aiden, is that there's a retail-ready space. So if retail isn't ripe on every place that we put it right now, at least there's an option in the future. But the plan, broader, does want small neighborhoods serving retail. that can support the residents. And it's actually, I think, increasing some of the retail than what it had had when the plan was put into place.

And beyond this development, if this were approved today, what sites in the future would exist to continue to advance the neighborhood serving retail goal?

So you approved it a couple of times. Braddock West, that will have some neighborhood serving retail as well as some community space there. Those are, and then the Belpre also brought in a lot there as well. And then the name of the building where Bastille is. So we've had a lot that have brought in, in them. Most of the sites, but a lot of the Braddock plan has actually been constructed and implemented. So we've, the most recent is, and they're still filling the retail. is at the Braddock Gateway site. So that is.

OK, thank you. And I think why I'm asking, just so you know, is I think to what my colleagues bring up, there become limited options. We are a city of fixed space and fixed boundaries. And within each plan, there become limited, the more things we've approved, the different things we've worked to build, there become limited additional future opportunities to meet some of these goals. And I think we have to take our decision within that context

Mr. Blair and then I'll go back to council discussion and told the public getting his clothes Catherine said both through what I was going to say especially with regards to the retail space in the base of Samia Madden project across the street Bell pre is a great example of retail businesses and a redevelopment project and My biggest regret with that project is there could have been a Harris Teeter there, which really would have benefited the community. Things are changing. Outlooks are changing. One of the things I was going to say, I talked to Mr. Wanzer, and there's an opportunity that is really pretty cool. The renovated, publicly supported project, the rooming house at the corner of Pendleton And North Henry Street has commercial space in it that traditionally is my understanding had been a, I don't know what you call them anymore, barbershops, I don't know if they're salons, but I'll just generically say where you get your hair done if you have hair. And that would be a great opportunity for him to go to, to continue to be in the community and to go into a location that had been a historically minority owned business.

I have Vice Mayor Bagley in the queue and then I have Councilman Chapman.

I appreciate the public hearing is still open. I think this is more a question for staff but Mr. Blair if there's commentary as well. I think I share, I asked this during my briefing and I share the ongoing concern about the particular loss of like this particular brand style size of business in this particular neighborhood. It's so authentically like sort of tied into the neighborhood while at the same time like recognizing it's a privately owned parcel with certain buy right and other sort of, you know, they could just choose another tenant. I mean, there are limited tools essentially, you know, that the city has to sort of keep certain businesses. And so What I'm curious about, and I think I asked about this during my briefing, and maybe this is where Mr. Blair might have commentary as well, is what are the tools beyond planning and zoning, specifically how we zoned it, which I think we've talked about. What other tools did we tap into, consider, are still in play potentially to maintain some of these small commercial spaces in the zone, recognizing the limitations sometimes of how you zone a parcel with intentions, but don't ultimately own the parcel and dictate the results.

Sure. Paul Stoddard again with Planning and Zoning. Happy to speak to this a little bit, starting a little bit more on the zoning side of things. So the application in front of the council is an SUP to allow them to do a cluster development. They're not actually requesting any bonus density. And they are using a permitted use. So even without the SUP, they could still put townhouses on the lot and demo the existing building. In terms of maintaining the use, sometimes it's about maintaining the building, sometimes it's about maintaining the use, we've already set up coordination calls with ADP to help them relocate, hopefully within neighborhoods, so providing them real estate assistance around what are available spaces, what might be a good spot for them to move into, what might they, right and often ADP knows a little bit more about the buildings than would otherwise be available in the listings. So hopefully helping them. But I think really it goes back to sort of some of the language about what is the planned guidance. And we do actively work with applicants, as Catherine said. It's generally with the larger projects where we can push a little bit harder to get some sort of ground floor use in there, because they are requesting a density bump or there's more project to carry some of those costs. When people are developing under their permitted uses, it's a little bit less flexible about what we can do.

I'm curious. I know we talk about pattern books. And is there something? we have in the city and in Alexandria and also in lots of other places is sort of that even in a townhouse set up, the ground floor is a business and then there are people that live above it. I'm wondering is that model in sort of our pattern book, was that an option here given that it is kind of, you know, that would be I assume permittable and consistent with current uses. Do we have a pattern in that?

Direction that we encourage users and I can see mr. Blair skinny Two answers first answer is you could encourage retail by giving bonus density If retail is included in a project it is hard to have a townhouse project when you think of the ownership and living there to have the retail below you and in whatever is Carlisle behind the Whole Foods on that circle there was a Condition of that approval that they have some live work units I do not believe those are have been successful and are continued to be live work, but that would be an example of where there could be a building type that could have some type of commercial use on the bottom. I think you'd probably find it'd be more tax places or other personal service uses because retail likes to be around retail because they depend on traffic for their patrons. So you want to have a critical mass of it in one place.

Mr..

Manager Appreciate the discussion just there is just want to share a little bit of How some other cities may have approached something like this? occasionally when Sort of there's a transition sometimes the ground floor is designed to as a commercial type space, higher ceilings, things like that, but is allowed to be used as residential until it transitions or the market calls for it. Sometimes that's, depending on how the construction happens, I've seen that on occasion in some key areas out, not necessarily in Alexandria, but in other places.

I just wanted to add one small thing. The Samuel Madden South project has commercial frontage on the entire Henry Street block. So there is a lot of square footage that there could be opportunities to have local small businesses. Councilman Chapman.

Yeah, no, I appreciate that. But I think what my concern here is, you know, we are, and this is for much of Parker Gray, we've had to create that, right? We've had to create the commercial mixed-use space with new developments. You know, 30 years ago, you had warehouses in much of that portion of the community. And so, you know, working with the development community and property owners in the city, we've created that. kind of what we have. I think what I'm hoping that we also kind of think about is the current commercial spaces there still have life, still have that opportunity, if properly invested in, to still have new buildings. You look at Madison, that block of Madison. There's been additional investment in some of those buildings. I think you have a yoga studio, tattoo place, taco spot, because somebody decided to say, hey, I'm going to invest additional money in this, put some paint on the wall, and keep that commercial space rolling. I think you have the opportunity to keep that block, both sides, a commercial space if this doesn't change. But that's up to the rest of the council.

I just had a quick follow-up question. For the Samuel Madden development, I know that for some of the ground force base, there has been a dedication to, I think, one space is for alive. There's a daycare center. How much of that is on Samuel Madden North and how much is on Samuel Madden South in terms of what has been dedicated, like assigned?

Samuel Madden North is the, Alive is the only space, commercial space in that building. And then there's the, the north end of the South Block is the child care facility. And then all of...

the significant portion is on Madison across the street from this site okay but the rest has not been dedicated right right right thank you all right if there's no further council discussion I would look for a motion to close the public hearing okay then mr. Blair I would ask that you please sit down and I will call the speaker who has signed up for this Oh, it's Melissa Kunin. Sorry, I had her for a different item. So I was, OK.

Hi, I'm Melissa Kennan. I used to live at Belle Prix. And I was just walking around this neighborhood yesterday. And I have to tell you that I fully support Councilman Chapman's comments because this block is probably the last block where we have some very unique commercial uses. There are very few sites left in this neighborhood. To correct something that was said earlier, the Allait does not face North Henry. And if it had commercial space, it would be on Payette behind it. But originally I thought this was a great project, and then while we were walking around this neighborhood last night, I realized the whole block, that one block of Madison between Henry and Patrick is... is the only area where we have wonderful new or reuse of spaces that are for small businesses. And there are very few other opportunities in this entire Braddock neighborhood unless they move into a new building. That's the only point I wanted to make. But I think I agree completely with Councilman Chapman's comments. And that barbershop has been there forever. Thank you.

Thank you for your time. There's been a motion by Councilman McGarry and a second by Councilman Chapman to close the public hearing. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it. The public hearing is closed. Any further council deliberation or motion? I see two hands.

I saw Councilman Chapman and Vice Mayor Bagley.

To my colleagues I think you know I hate to be a kind of stick in the mud here but I think one of the conversations we've had regularly is about kind of our our percentage of residential and commercial revenue I think there are and continue to be tough choices made as we look and as landowners look to change what they're doing as Melissa said and I think this is the The reasoning for me pulling this from consent and pushing against it is that there are few unique opportunities in various parts of the city to keep neighborhood uses that attract small business, regardless if it's a barbershop or whatever it is. it's about the use. Because this is not just about the barbershop, let's be very clear. There is also another property, another business that is also going to lose opportunity to continue there as well, because there was space and there had been space for a community store. And so as we talk about convenience stores and their opportunity here in the city, that's another neighborhood serving use. And I think With the opportunity, let me say it this way, and this might ruffle some feathers. I think we have done different things in different parts of our city. In Old Town, we've usually reuse buildings, new paint, new interior, whatever they are. That's the ethos of Old Town. As we created new communities in Potomac Yard, we were very, very focused, because we heard from the community about and neighborhood serving uses. I think as you look at the staff report, very few people in the neighborhood engaged. And so whether they care or not, I think it could be an argument of some discussion. But I would say for those folks who are going to want future neighborhood uses, changing this and passing this does not allow for that. And so yes, there'll be some additional creation of opportunity, hopefully, in Samuel Madden. But again, creating new ones and using that as a reason to say, hey, we're going to let go of some of what's already there, frankly, wouldn't fly in Old Town, wouldn't fly in some of these other neighborhoods in the city.

Great. Vice Mayor said she no longer has comment. Oh, you did? OK. Yeah. Vice Mayor Bagley.

Sorry. I misunderstood. We misunderstood. No. I had a little bit of a, I wanted to ask staff a question, partially to clarify it, just for the public dialogue on this, that the businesses we're talking about are essentially renters in these buildings. OK. And I can see you nodding, but I'm just getting like, you know, for anybody listening at home, yeah, so that's correct. Yeah, and I think it was implied, I think, by all the discussion, but they have effectively always been renters. These are not people who own the building at some point or own it currently and are selling. And so why I just reiterate that point and the question I maybe inelegantly was getting at earlier is my concern that people A denial today does not necessarily maintain the status quo in these parcels, that there is a version of a teardown that can still happen. There is a version of a remodel, a renovation that could still happen by right. This is a residential mixed-use neighborhood with a lot of allowed uses. And so I'm seeing nods from the applicant as well and from staff. And so I just... you know, as we move, you know, towards a motion presumably, wanted to express that I think for the community understanding and engagement here as well is that a denial potentially of this, and I share, you know, the concerns that have been expressed about the loss of these particular businesses, but I'm trying to highlight a higher level problem, which is the limitation sometimes of planning and zoning, you know, like how we zone something and what it can and cannot sort of require and protect. And which is why I was trying to get at what do we do to encourage the actual owner and applicant to make pattern choices and style choices. But that's what I am sort of wrestling with when this comes to a motion is there are allowable by right uses here that may result in loss of the commercial ground floor space regardless of this vote today. And so what I am taking with me into this is planning and zoning, planning commission's hearing on this and recommendation, which was 6-0 in favor, and other sort of evaluative measures about height and setback and new neighborhood character and other efforts in that regard. But I'm not dismissive at all of the concern about the loss of the businesses. I just am eager for us to continue focusing on the tools that work to produce the outcomes we want in our small area plans, in our planning and zoning decisions, and in our funding choices. You reference AEDP, but are we properly funding the small business retention efforts that it takes to retain a business in this environment?

I saw a hand from Councilmember Newby, but before I go there, there's just two points I wanted to make. I appreciate the points of the Vice Mayor. I think what's coming up for me in this discussion and just all in every decision we make, thinking about it not just as project by project, but how are we looking at the full goal for that neighborhood plan? And I think this is a limitation of planning and zoning. We don't always have a way to look across every single thing. We get one project. And the ability to look at that within the context, there aren't always perfect tools for that. But I do think that is the role of the council, to be working within that imperfect science of trying to figure out, how does each piece of the puzzle lift up the neighborhood vision that we're trying to create? And so that's where I've been trying to follow the conversation and put together. And then the last thing I just want to say is Vice Mayor Bagley mentioned the pattern book. This is maybe the third case where that has come up related to town homes that are designed in such a way that can be converted. I think the most recent was over the, I don't think it was in June, but the project on Eisenhower when we talked about the town homes there and whether or not. I just want to make note for the manager and for staff, this keeps coming up. So I think at some point, we might need to give more clear direction on whether or not that's a pattern book we want to see. And if so, what would be the process to move us there? I see Director Stoddart, and then I'll go to Council Member Newby.

Yeah, just briefly to reinforce that point and sort of communicate that the message is received and we'll get to work on it. I think one of the things that probably has made Old Town successful is the flexibility that the buildings have been able to change use over time, that the way they were designed accommodated whether it wanted to be residential or commercial on the ground floor. I think as sort of building science has evolved, more often we see people building single-purpose buildings. And that's working against part of what's made Old Town so successful and be so resilient over its history. So I think that's something we want to look at is how are people designing modern townhouses to still have some of that traditional ability to be sustainable and change for their useful life.

Thank you. Council Member Newby.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Question for staff. And we touched on this a little bit. If you can just help me understand a bit more. What are other by-right uses for that parcel? If you can just list. I mean, I don't know if it's unlimited. But if it's limited, if you can just list them for me.

Just briefly on the residential side, and there's a long list of commercial uses as well, but it's in the CSL zone, commercial services low. It does allow, as a permitted use, single family units, double family units, townhouses, multifamily. So there's a wide range of residential uses that are allowed, as well as a large list of 20-some items of different kinds of commercial uses.

Got it. Thank you. And you mentioned multifamily. Does that mean multifamily, would that include floor, ground floor retail? It doesn't have to, no. It doesn't have to. They would have the option to do it, but not a requirement. They would have the option to do that, okay.

Thank you.

Okay. If there are no additional comments, I would entertain a motion or a proposal on how the council wants to move forward. Councilman Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I would move to deny the approval of this DSUP.

Second.

All right. There has been a motion by Madam City Attorney.

Can you state on the record the rationale behind the denial?

Let me actually change my motion, because I did speak with a colleague earlier about a different action. I think given some of the conversation, and this will make sense with the conversation potentially, So given some of the conversation we've had, because the Vice Mayor is right, there is a kind of by right opportunity to still do residential in this space. I think one of the things I was hoping to do earlier before I kind of said something different was see if there was an opportunity to have a conversation with the property owner about the potential to do something on this site that does blend kind of the push that the property owner wants but has some integration into the commercial space. Because I think you do have something unique here, and I think the property owner could have value from that as well because again this is going to be a corridor with both sides commercial and so opportunities for really playing out what that open space could look like and how that also could play into the commercial feel here is i think an opportunity and so i had expressed to my colleague earlier and i appreciate him catching me on this that i would actually like to defer this to see if there's an opportunity to have a conversation

For the with the property of two points here before you give a new motion You're gonna have to withdraw the old motion and then so let's withdraw that and then typically because the public hearing is closed I would not go back to the applicant but recognizing where this conversation is going I would like to get the applicants perspective on this.

So first let's do the withdrawal Like to withdraw my earlier motion.

Okay, and is that comfortable with the seconder?

Yes, it is.

Okay, so that motion is withdrawn. Mr. Blair.

Thank you for the opportunity. First of all, this is a special use permit. The reason it's a special use permit is we're doing a cluster development. The benefit of the cluster was to create the open space mid-block, which will provide a consolidated open space that relates to the streetscape. Other than that, there could be a by-right project. That's not a threat, it's a statement. Whether or not there would be an opportunity to look at, we'll call it live retail, live whatever, I think the problem is height and how do you accommodate that type of use with a 50 foot height limit. And there's no mechanism to change height through a variance other than a rezoning. that retail typically needs and on an architect. Jason, what? Twenty feet by the time you do the mechanical or is 17 enough?

Sixteen, eighteen.

So you need that height, and that's probably what's problematic. I don't represent the owner of the property, so I can't speak for the owner. My client is purchasing the property for the purpose that he's planned. But we've had a discussion for almost a year and a half now. We believe it would be productive. I'm sure the owner of the property would be willing to have a conversation with the city. But my client's project is what he is presenting and what he has made a substantial investment in presenting. I don't mean that in any way adversarial.

Thank you, Mr. Blair. Councilman Chapman, let me return to you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I apologize for kind of doing this out of order. But yes, I'd love the opportunity to have further discussion. I certainly understand your position you have right now with the understanding from your client. Even with that. I still would love the opportunity to to Have a greater conversation. And so I will put on the on the floor motion to defer Madam city attorney. Do I need to give a date certain?

I think we can probably have a conversation within the month and so returning I hope we can do that their contractual obligations also and again, I can't speak for the owner of the property Second, yeah, I would put this to the next public hearing

So we have a motion to defer item 10 until the October public hearing. There's been a motion by Councilman Chapman and a second by Councilwoman Green. Is there any additional discussion? Mayor Bagley.

Yes, thank you. I guess it's a little bit of a question then for the city attorney, maybe staff, is to the extent that the discussion results in changes to the parcel, would it need to go back to Planning Commission and or you know, what are the downstream effects potentially of changes?

We're going to go to City Attorney Brown.

Thank you for the question. It depends on the level of changes and the scope of those changes. So there is a possibility that we would need to go back to Planning Commission for consideration, depending on, like we said, this is a cluster SUP. So it may change the approval type. We'd need to examine it once.

we have detail if there is you know further discussion about a consideration of that option okay no i thank you and i think all i'm trying to flag for myself my own interest and i guess my colleagues is um knowing our briefing schedule and how things come back around i mean ideally mr blair and if my colleague can you know try to have their conversations over the next week or two, because next month feels ambitious. Although I understand why we have to set a date, it actually feels fairly ambitious to the extent that the conversations result in potential changes.

Let me go back to Councilman. Do you have a comment on timing?

I want to be very clear. The conversation needs to be with the property owner.

Yes, understood. Not my client. Yes, Councilman Chapman.

Yes, I just want to kind of be clear for my colleagues. I'm not walking into this expecting big miracles to happen and things to change. That's kind of why I'm keeping on the typed timeline. If something does come up, obviously, I think there's communication that we can have. But with respect to where we are and what this is, I wanted to just stay on track with a simple deferral to next month to have the conversation. If it goes well, there's other conversations from there. But if it doesn't, at least the client and folks are back on track with a month's delay. So that's kind of the reasoning for deferring just to next month.

OK. Is there any additional council discussion that is needed? OK. Hearing none, Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote to deny item 10. Oh, well, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. To defer item 10 until the following month. Please call the roll.

Councilman Chapman. Aye. Councilwoman Green. Aye. Mayor Gaskins. Nay. Vice Mayor Bagley. Nay. Councilman Aguirre.

Aye.

Councilman Elnubi. Aye. Councilwoman Marks. Aye.

All right, the ayes have it. Item 10 will be deferred until our next public hearing. Madam Clerk, next item.

Public hearing, second reading, and final passage of an ordinance to vacate a portion of the right-of-way, public right-of-way at the southern end of Kent Place.

Okay. Is there staff presentation that is needed? No. Vice Mayor Begley.

I would move to approve on, well, there are no speakers, right? There are no more speakers on this item. Okay, so given that there's no speakers, we don't need to move to close the public hearing? You still do. We still do, okay. So I would move to close the public hearing and to approve on public reading, second reading, final passage of the ordinance to vacate a portion of the public right-of-way at 2702 Russell Road.

Okay, is there a second? Second. Second. There has been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilman Aguirre. Madam Clerk, well, any discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote. Please call the roll.

Vice Mayor Bagley. Aye. Councilman Aguirre. Aye. Mayor Gaskins. Aye. Councilman Chapman. Aye. Councilman El Newby. Aye. Councilwoman Green. Aye. Councilwoman Marks. Aye.

All right, the ayes have it, and item 13 is passed. Madam Clerk, next item.

public hearing, second reading, and final passage of an ordinance to vacate a portion of public right-of-way at the southern end of Kent Place adjacent to the property at 2800 Russell Road.

Okay. Is a public, is a staff presentation needed? No. Okay. Vice Mayor Bagley.

Thank you, Mayor Gaskins. There being no public speakers present, I'd move to close the public hearing and move to approve on second reading final passage the ordinance to vacate a portion of public right-of-way at 2800 Russell Road.

Second. There has been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilman Aguirre. Any further discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote. Please call the roll.

Vice Mayor Bagley. Aye. Councilman Aguirre. Aye. Mayor Gaskin. Aye. Councilman Chapman. Nay. Councilman El-Nubi. Nay. Councilwoman Green. Nay. Councilwoman Marks. Aye.

All right, the ayes have it. All right, item 15 has been deferred. Item 16 and 17 were... simply for council information only. I will now return us back to the public hearing. On my list, the speaker was moved to a different item. So I just want to check. OK, so we have no one else who has signed up since. OK. Oh, OK. Who was the first person? Hold on. Give me one second. Oh, OK. So we have two speakers, and we will start with Kelly Haywood.

Thank you so much for your patience with me. I was at work this morning and things went a little bit longer than anticipated. I have some comments here, some public comment here that I've written up, but I did listen in this morning and I wanted to preface my comment by saying that Virginia regulates automatic license plate recognition systems, LPRs, such as Flock, Axon, Motorola, and others via the Criminal Code of Virginia and are used to track vehicle locations via 2.25517. Photo speed cameras are very different. They reside under a separate statutory framework. They're designed for civil penalty revenue and are used to enforce speed limits in school work zones, typically, without continuous tracking of constituents. So we're talking about two completely different systems and different statutory frameworks. So I hope that we're not conflating those as we're continuing discussions. I come to you today as someone who works and used to often play in Alexandria. The right to be free from arbitrary or unlawful interference with one's private affairs is a core principle, not just of our Constitution, but to a modern understanding of human rights. Simply put, free countries don't surveil their citizens. It's impossible to overstate how grim and harmful mass surveillance is, but anyone who's read George Orwell's 1984 or watched Tom Cruise's Minority Report could tell you why it's a bad idea. The use of mass surveillance technology by law enforcement infringes on fundamental privacy rights and risks further exacerbating mass incarceration and racial disparities in the criminal legal system. Bipartisan majorities in the General Assembly recognize this. Virginia state lawmakers have repeatedly rejected proposals to expand ALPRs to state highways. And community members here and across the state have the common sense to instinctively recognize the dangers that ALPRs pose to their safety, civil liberties, and democratic freedoms. Several dozen communities in Virginia have canceled their surveillance contracts. I'd be here way longer than my comments if I listed all of those that have done that. They've banned them, or they've put moratoriums on the tech. On Tuesday, Harrisonburg City Council will vote on the city's drafted ordinance to ban ALPRs outright. I've lived in Virginia for over 40 years without corporatized mass surveillance. We are one of the safest states in the U.S., and crime is at 52-year lows. High-paid lobbyists and salespeople for predatory private tech companies approached APD with a trendy crime-fighting tool, false crime narratives, and the vendors help you to find the money to implement it without our consent. There is no reliable study that shows they do what the vendors or police say they do. Flock initiated a study, very savvy corporate propaganda written by two of their own employees. Real studies, like the one at the Virginia State Crime Commission, acknowledge that ALPR deployment disproportionately target black and brown communities. Geospatial analysis in Hampton Road show majority black neighborhoods experience surveillance at four times their population share. In highly segregated areas, that disparity jumps to seven times.

Thank you so much for your time today.

We appreciate your testimony.

Yes, Councilman Green.

Thank you for your testimony. Do we have a copy of your testimony?

No, and I swear I timed my comments. May I finish? I really took a lot of time to come here today. I don't have much more to say.

We've given three minutes for everybody.

But I would love a copy of what you testified on. Is that possible?

Certainly. I can send you a copy. Thank you. I'm asking that we ban all license plate readers. This marriage between government and private tech vendors is a problem. Thank you so much for your time today.

OK, our next speaker is Melissa Kennan.

And your last.

Yes.

This is like having a private conversation.

Good morning.

Afternoon. I don't know what time it is anymore. I wanted to speak on the proposed amendment to the city council procedure resolution regarding the public hearing and public comment protocol. You'll be voting on it next Tuesday's legislative meeting. First, I want to express my really sincere appreciation to the council members who listened to the community and chose to maintain the five-minute time allocation for civic association neighborhood groups rather than reducing it to three minutes. That choice demonstrates true leadership and a genuine respect for the civic voice. Thank you. However, I'm here to strongly oppose counsel's proposal to a formally established dedicated rebuttal time for developers through their representative attorneys. That term was added by counsel, and I was confused as to why it was used, and the term The definition is a rebuttal is an effort to prove that an opposing argument is false or flawed. But residents like me who take the time to research these issues and come before you are not trying to push a false narrative. We are constituents bringing forward lived experiences and vital neighborhood data so you can make the most informed decision possible. Over the past five years, I've lived through nine DSP approval processes in Old Town North alone. The DSUP process already takes months, if not years. And from my experience, I can tell you, developers do not suffer from a lack of time or opportunity to engage with the public and include the results of those conversations in their presentation, but they do not do that because they already know they get free time to rebut comments at that hearing, only at that hearing, not all the dozens or hundreds of comments they received during the course of getting this project through the approval process. So by formally establishing time for rebuttal, I think council's telling, um, citizens that, um, the hours of research and testimony that they provide can simply be dismissed as false by the attorney who gets the last word and the developer strategy of refusing to work with residents. during the application process is condoned. If we want better city planning, the solution is to give developers time to the opportunity and the requirement, if we need to, to expand opportunities to work with the community and city staff, not just on the public initiatives as we do now, but with developers from the earliest design phases straight through to council approval. getting buy-in with the community shows that you would not have as many comments coming to you at any of the public hearings. So I ask that you remove the rebuttal provision from the amendment, and let's focus on collaborative planning instead. And just as we saw with Item 10 today, if the owners had met with the community... Thank you for your time today.

And I did want to just state what we're trying to achieve with that provision is right now they have unlimited time. So like when we go back to the developer, they're able to speak as there's no time limit. And so we're trying to shorten that amount of time within that process so that it is not giving an imbalance between the developer and the resident.

But.

Madam Mayor, move to close the public hearing.

All right. There has been a motion by Councilman Aguirre to close the public hearing and a second by Councilwoman Green. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it. Public hearing is closed. Is there a motion to adjourn?

All right.

There has been a motion by Councilman Green and a second by Vice Mayor Bagley. All those in favor of adjourning today's meeting say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. Meeting adjourned at 1148. We can't control the weather, but we can control how we prepare. And so I'm declaring June as Hurricane Awareness Month here in the city of Allingfield.