City Council - Regular Meeting

I think it's a cane. It's got a rubber cap.

No, call this regular meeting of the Jacksonville City Council to order. We're going to begin the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Logan Sosa, followed by the invocation. Please rise.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Let us pray. Our most gracious Heavenly Father, we thank you for your presence today. We thank you for being here in this facility, in this community, and in our hearts, Lord. We know that wherever there are two more of us gathered, that you're going to be with us, and your presence is going to rule over everything that we do, Lord. So we ask for your grace, we ask for your blessing, we ask for your guidance, and to give everyone here the ability to listen, and in turn to hear what others have to say, Lord. We know that everybody that's gathered in this room tonight with the council is all here for the same reason, and that's to better our community and to protect the place that we all call home. Lord, we ask for the blessing of those men and women who are serving to give us those rights to be here tonight. We're so blessed to have them protect us. day in and day out, Lord, so that we don't have to go fight that fight. Lord, we thank you for our children. We thank you for the challenges they go through each and every day and for the foundation that they're building right now because that's the future Jacksonville. That's our city. That's our community, and that's our people, Lord. We ask for guidance and wisdom throughout this night so that when we leave, we all have the same mind, the same heart, and that is one city, one community, and one focus. Thank you, Lord, for all your many blessings. In your name we pray.

We've been provided with a copy of the agenda for tonight's meeting. And I would entertain a motion to adopt the agenda.

Move approval of the agenda.

Second. Any discussion? If there are none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed? All right, now we're going to move on to public comment for tonight. Before we go to public comment, I've got some rules as far as how we do things here business-wise with the council. Council has adopted rules and procedures for the public comment period and we will be abiding by those rules this evening. During our open public comment period tonight, we are likely to hear feedback on House Bill 1038 and other subjects also. We understand that this is an issue where many people hold strong views and we appreciate everyone who is here to share their thoughts with the City Council. The City Council's role this evening is to listen respectfully and ensure that everyone has an opportunity to be heard in a safe and orderly fashion. As a follow-up to this public comment session, we encourage residents to share their views directly with the bill sponsors and those members of the legislature currently considering this bill. Before we begin, we would like to review a few procedures to help the meeting run in an orderly fashion. First, please, when your name gets called, please come to the lectern and begin by clearly stating your name and your address to the clerk over here. Which one you want to come? The one over here. Okay. Second, each speaker will have one opportunity to address counsel and will be limited to three minutes. Our local rules of procedure limit the total public comment period to 15 minutes, and although this time may be extended upon consensus of the council. And finally, the public comment period is intended for council to hear from residents. It is not a debate or a question and answer session among speakers or with council members. If you wish to provide additional information afterward, you are always welcome to contact members of council directly. If several people are attending on behalf of the same organization or group, we encourage you to designate a spokesperson where possible. And we also recognize that many residents may share similar views. If a previous speaker has already expressed your position, you may simply indicate your agreement rather than repeating the same remarks in full. All comments submitted tonight will be heard and included in the public record. Hearing the same reason someone is for or against the legislation repeatedly does not give the argument more weight. And finally, we ask everyone to remain respectful throughout the meeting towards speakers and one another. Applause, interruptions, personal attacks, or disruptive conduct will not be permitted. Anyone who is not able to abide by the council's public comment procedures will be asked to leave our chambers. So thank you, and we will now begin the public comment after I get consensus from council to extend that 15-minute period. Is that favorable? Yes. Is that all I need there, Madam Attorney? Okay. This won't be legal. So with that, now I've got some folks on here that have signed up for something other than the 1038 bill. So let's get them out of the way first, give them a chance so they don't get caught in the rush here. Tracy Rainer.

Gosh, I thought I'd have a little bit more time to calm my nerves, but lo and behold, I get to be the first. OK. So I'm here. Good evening. I'm here on behalf of myself and I'm sure thousands of Onslow County taxpayers here to discuss the increased property tax burden placed upon the citizens of Onslow County. Four years ago, when the tax reevaluation occurred in 2022, I went before the Oslo County Board of Commissioners, didn't think to come here. But anyway, and I fought this same fight in front of the Board of Commissioners, and I have already fought this same fight in front of the Board of Commissioners already in the last couple of weeks. But in any case, Well, my property taxes in 2022, I'm speaking to you now regarding your city taxes. I had this same conversation again with the county. Of the properties that I have, the tax increases in the city alone, I have properties here that are rental properties. And then I have property of which I just pay county taxes cuz I live outside of the city limits. However, I do have seven rental properties in the city of Jacksonville, of which of those seven rental properties, the taxes went up 85% to 88% in 2022. Exactly. And now with the tax reassessment again in 2026, I'm looking at another 49% to 51%. Exactly. Thank you. Thank you. So my argument here is, as I went before the board of commissioners, they're looking at a revenue-neutral rate. And as I went before another city council in another area that I have property... It was the same way, a revenue neutral. I'm asking you guys to look at revenue neutral. I have not been before you before. However, I do know that I think the last time that I heard something online, when I heard it, it was that you guys were considering keeping the same tax rate, which is 65 cents per hundred, I believe. Well, 65 cents per hundred on that increased value of which... of which my properties went up from roughly the last assessment was like $112,000 up to $158,000. So now we're looking at additional, now you're looking at $0.65 per hundred of all of the additional $40,000 roughly. That's a lot of money and that's just my property. So I can imagine all of these other people that are going to be paying that $0.65 per hundred if that's what you guys do. I ask that you guys curb your budget, curb your spending, stop doing everything for free because nothing is for free. Somebody pays for it. The taxpayers pay for it. We don't need more fluff. We need you guys to start cutting costs and looking out for the citizens who elected you in these positions. Thank you so much.

for the record. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Even though I spend most of my time outside the house within city limits, I stay in the county part of Jacksonville and do not get to vote on the policies you bind me to or the people who make them and I find this unreasonable. While I also oppose HB 1038 and came here to support this concerned citizen speaking out against it, I would add that we need ranked choice voting, an end to the party system and the electoral college, and voters trusted to vote on issues on every ballot. And I cannot ignore that, like the county boards of commission and education, this council is violating First Amendment rights with your invocation. My allies of faith know I'm asking for an end to discrimination, not trying to deconvert anyone, or as county commissioners often imply, ask anyone to hide, deny, or dishonor their faith. Quite the opposite. Please worship on your own time, not the time of the diverse people you serve. Out of respect for and celebration of diversity. I've spoken at length about this at their meetings, so here I will challenge the council to be more inclusive than the more discriminatory bodies of local governance with whom you interact to serve the public. Staring at a Confederate monument on the courthouse steps to honor Dr. King following the march in February felt disgusting too. So I hope the city and county work together to find a more appropriate place for that sculpture and replace it with a more inclusive monument to justice. Remember the negative effects of marginalization compound, so work to create and effectively implement kinder, sustainable, equitable policies and procedures. Not by raising taxes that way, though. The injustice in our justice system provides clear evidence of compounding marginalization. Stop drug testing and raiding homes and businesses. Stop militarizing law enforcement to focus on understanding the needs that led to the behavior that caused harm. And meet the emotional, material, physical, relational, communal, structural, and historical needs without throwing people in cages. ncorj.org and read Angela Davis's Abolition Feminism Now to learn about restorative justice, but be careful not to infuse prison abolition efforts with discriminatory religious favoritism. On facilities infrastructure, emphasis on park and community design. Be kinder to people experiencing homelessness and encourage your county to do the same. There were days experiencing homelessness to which I will soon return. I had the stamina and discipline to ride my bike eight miles to find a recycling receptacle and there were days I was tempted to toss my trash on the ground. But I do not believe for a second that all or even most of the trash I see in the parks or on the side of the road is left by desperate homeless people. Parks, rest areas, community centers and shopping centers should have clearly marked recycling and trash bins and and people need to be more respectful to the environment when disposing of unwanted items. Reduce, reuse, recycle, compost. Parks should also have functional water fountains, shaded seating with no hostile to homeless design, electric outlets and Wi-Fi access, and no one should be shooed away or harassed for sleeping in a park. Why have the fountains at Georgetown Park been turned off every time I've checked since February? I emailed the Parks Department and received no response. Water is life, and I've spoken in county commission meetings about the disproportionate injustice of neglecting this particular area of the city. I hope that Jacksonville will celebrate LGBTQ.

Thank you very much. If I pronounce your name wrong, please forgive me ahead of time. Sometimes I have a little problem with it. Hannah Coca. Name and address for the clerk, please.

Good evening, Mayor.

Name and address for the clerk.

My name is Hannah Coca, and I live in Ward 4, 1009 Vernon Drive. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council members. I'm one of the founders of North Carolina's fastest growing manufacturing company. Three years ago, my husband and I moved here to buy the old Jerry Popkin house. Some of you may know the name. Jerry Popkin was one of the furniture kings of Onslow County. Nobody wanted that house when we bought it, but to me, it was a work of art worth saving. In many ways, that's how I feel about Jacksonville. Since moving here, I've learned this is one of the youngest, if not the youngest, median age cities in America, with an average age around 24 years old. Look around this room tonight. Does it seem like they're represented here? That matters because representation matters. I understand the argument behind at-large representation. The idea that every council member should answer to every voter is not unreasonable. Wanting leaders to think about the entire city, it's a valid goal. But representation is not only about who gets to vote. It's also about, realistically, who gets heard, who realistically gets to run, whether everyday residents feel they have someone at the table who directly understands their community. Ward systems create pathways for young leaders who are deeply rooted in specific neighborhoods, people who may not have the money, the citywide name recognition, or political connections needed to compete at an at-large space. And frankly, it has never been harder to become a public servant. Think about the realities facing young families and working people right now. Childcare costs, rising housing costs, limited maternity leave, multiple jobs, caregiving responsibilities, running for office also requires enormous time, energy, and financial sacrifice. Expanding campaigns citywide risks making local leadership even less accessible to ordinary residents. That concerns me deeply in a city this young. What concerns me even more is the process. A change this significant to Jacksonville's representation should come from Jacksonville residents through transparent local discussion, not be imposed externally without broad community consensus. Local government works best when people feel ownership over it. And restructuring how this city elects its leaders should happen with the trust and participation of the people who actually live here. I came to Jacksonville because I believe in this city. I want to grow another huge, successful manufacturing business here. I want to create more jobs here. I created 150 in Butner, North Carolina. I want young entrepreneurs, young parents, young organizers, veterans, and working class people to be here. You only spend a short time on this earth. Why would you make the on-ramp to leadership harder for the next generation of our leaders?

Okay, folks, I've told you in those rules, no applause. This is the council chambers. If you want to stay here, please abide by the rules.

Ruth White.

Ruth White.

Ruth White, 309 Creon Court. My name is Ruth White. I reside at 309 Creon Court. I'm a dedicated, active, and registered voter from Ward 3. I'm here tonight to voice my opposition to House Bill 1038. I believe this bill is oppressive, suppressive, and disrespectful to the residents of Jacksonville. It threatens fair representation and risks creating a system where some communities no longer have an equal voice in local government. Our current ward system helps ensure that every neighborhood has representation and accountability on the city council. Eliminating that system would dilute the voices of many residents, especially those in historically underrepresented communities.

David White.

My name is David White. I'm a co-resident of 309 Creon Court, Jacksonville. My name is David White and I'm a registered voter and a resident of Ward 3. I stand here this evening in opposition of NC House Bill 1038. This proposed bill introduced by representatives who do not reside in Jacksonville is unfair to citizens who deserve accountability from the ward leaders directed or elected to represent their community. Our ward system ensures local voices are heard and neighborhoods have direct representation. Thank you for your time.

Matilda Wilford.

Matilda Wilford, 111 Robin Hunt Drive. I'm Matilda Wilford.

I'm reading the following as written by my mother, Marcia Wilford.

I'm here today remembering former State Senator Mrs. Keever Clark. She would be here to remind us that one city, our city, is more than just a slogan and she would point out in her own powerful and direct way if that standard would not be met. Your governing body is being threatened by overreach. Tonight, you have the opportunity to stand with a unified voice and proclaim that you defer to the will of the citizens you serve in deciding local elections versus overreach of tyrannical government dictating to you. A quote from Abraham Lincoln, quote, it often requires more courage to dare to do right than to fear to do wrong, end quote. Strong leadership is about speaking the truth no matter who is listening and standing for what's right no matter who disagrees. It is about being a guiding voice that directs others toward honor and civility. Now is a time for bravery and leadership to do and say what is morally fair, correct, and right. At the recent city workshop, several council members spoke against the House bill that came out of Raleigh. A few others mentioned they wanted community feedback before moving forward. As a resident of Ward 2 in Jacksonville, I believe that having a representative who speaks for us, someone on the city council who lives in our local community and in some cases our own neighborhood, is optimal. It is the most direct representation there is and government at its most local level. The choice tonight is to exist as one city and not let outside forces push us apart by further both insulating and isolating members of the community. Now is the time to speak with one voice in protection of our city. Please save the ward system.

Thank you.

All right.

Carmen Spicer.

Good evening, council. Good evening, mayor. My name is Carmen Spicer. My address is 59 Kerr Street. What a wonderful evening. Reflections. What a difference a neighborhood is when you have someone there to represent you. There is a difference. So when you can eat the fish out of the river and that makes a big difference of the land application, wastewater treatment process and the Sturgeon City effort made. While you're walking your dogs in the Riverwalk Crossing and playing pickleball at Kerr Street Recreation Center, what a difference a commitment. to creating and implementing and improving those attractions that has made. See, it's all based on the representative. When you bring your children to those hot summer days to laugh and roam in the splash pools around town, what a swimming pool. What a difference it makes when you have a representative who remembers the fun we experienced at the neighborhood Kerr Street Recreation Center with a little wading pool doing segregation. It makes a big difference in your neighborhood representation from a community when you have a representative that's from your community who loves the community, who loves the water, who knows the attractions. that our community is capable of providing to the immediate community and the redounding benefits citywide. What a difference to have a representative who understands the neglect of failing to include Pickettown and Georgetown. It is city limits. And knew exactly what to do about it. To the viewers, what a difference it makes. You're able to watch it on G10. I can't list all the accomplishments, but I would like to say this. It makes a big difference when we have a representative that loves our community and that we know. Thank you so much. And by the way, I'd like to say this. I'm still looking for my sidewalks. Thank you. Waiting for my sidewalks.

Thank you.

John Getty.

John Getty, 120 King Richard Court. Good evening, Mayor Phillips and members of the council. I'm speaking this evening as a Ward 2 resident of more than two decades. I'm a retired Navy chief, and when my service ended, I made a deliberate choice to make Jacksonville my home. I chose this community because I believe in it. And the people here, and the military families here, and the idea that Jacksonville was a place where service and voice still matter. After retirement, I spent years serving this county as a special victim detective, working under sheriffs Ed Brown, Hans Miller, and Chris Thomas. I fought for people who often did not have a voice. I saw firsthand what it looks like when people feel ignored, overlooked, or powerless, and I worked every day to make sure they were heard. This is why what is happening now is so deeply disturbing. For military families and veterans, the ward system matters because it preserves local representation in a community where so many residents are tied to the armed forces. Military families move often, face unique housing and employment challenges, and need leaders to understand the realities of service life. When most residents within the city limits are military affiliated, moving ward representation risks diluting the voices of the very people who have built and sustained this community. Our neighborhoods are not all the same. What our neighborhoods face in traffic, drainage, growth, safety may be different from another. Who knows these differences better than the people who live there every day? The ward system gives residents a direct voice. It ensures the neighborhoods are represented. It helps keep people from being drowned out by a system that favors the loudest or the best funded voices. For military families, for longtime residents, for working people, for the folks who keep this city going every day, the voices matters. If you move the system, you do not create more democracy. You take it away. After years of serving this county, I am now watching the very government I proudly served and respected attempt to strip away representation from the people of Jacksonville. That's not progress. That's not fairness, and that is not what public service is supposed to look like. So I ask you now, with all due respect, do not take representation away from the people who depend on it the most. Thank you.

Adam Maddox?

Adam Maddox.

Adam Maddox?

Adam Mattis, 302 Country Club Road. Good evening, mayor and council. Hey. Well, to be brief, which is unusual for me. When I start thinking about this, I think common sense will not be tolerated. We have a local thing that's already working. We can tweak it, but you shouldn't do the baby out with the bath water. Let me put this in mind. As they already said, they're in your area, they work with your area. I work with mine. We got the flooding problem taken care of by the state. So they're able to work with different people's talents, knowledge, skills, and abilities. But when we separate, like one major city did, I'm sorry I don't have the documentation, but I read about it recently where Mecklenburg County had at large, and everybody was at large. And when they did the demographics of the people who was on the council, they were all in the same area. Forgot the other part of the county. And we don't want that here, period. So I want us to remember those who want to go against what we want. They say common sense will not be tolerated. So if they don't have the common sense, they don't be tolerated. The way we force it, we force our opinion through our votes. I encourage everyone to get everybody out to vote what you believe. Like I said, I'm in Ward 4. I'm here to represent myself, my Lord, my people, my people of Jacksonville. Forrest Gump has several things to say. And one of the things he said, what stupid is, stupid does. And I don't want that to happen here. We need to be the beacon and the light since we're the county seat. Thank you.

Cynthia Wakefall.

Good evening. My name is Cynthia Wigfall Simon, 109 Carver Road, Jacksonville, North Carolina. It's good to see all of you here today. I'm going to speak from some research that I did since I have a scientific background. I generally base my thoughts and comments on research. What I found out is this. At-large elections can weaken the representation of particular groups, such as people of color, especially if the group does not have city-wide base of operations or is an ethnic or racial group concentrated in a specific ward. District or ward elections give all legitimate groups, especially those with a geographic base, a better chance of being represented on the city council, especially communities of color. Several court decisions have forced jurisdictions to switch from at-large elections to district elections, and in most cases the reason was to allow more representation by specific ethnic and racial groups, acknowledging that the prior at-large system was a denial of equal access to the city's political process. District or ward council members are more attuned to the unique problems of their constituents. Ward elections may improve citizen participation because council members who represent a specific district may be more responsive to their constituency. The adoptions of at-large systems typically flowed from efforts to dilute black voters' power in southern cities after the Civil War and the municipal reform movement that sought to promote a citywide perspective in governance. The at-large system has been widely criticized and challenged in court because it often results in discrimination, especially against minority communities. At-large voting allows the majority population to win every seat. Minority forces out of elected positions. It has been used intentionally to suppress representation from diverse neighborhoods. Also, campaigning citywide is more expensive, so a person that may not have that income cannot afford to do at-large polling. Okay? At-large elections are discriminatory. Maintaining ward elections will improve descriptive representation for marginalized groups, produce counselors who are closer to voters, and generate political outcomes that are more likely to address the needs of the neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you.

Rebecca Cooper.

Hi, Rebecca Getty Cooper, 315 March Sea Lane. Thank you, Council, for the opportunity to speak this evening. I do not live within city limits. I did, however, grow up in Ward 2. But if this bill can be introduced by people who don't live in any ward, I don't have to live in one to speak against it. This past Saturday, I attended Coastal Carolina Community College's commencement ceremony to support friends. I, too, graduated from Coastal and have since earned a bachelor's and master's degree from ECU. Sitting through these ceremonies, the message is the same. We are proud to have and support such a diverse community. But this message isn't just heard at our local graduation ceremonies. It is consistently made public by our council's words and actions. The city's own website states Jacksonville is a caring community that shows civility and embraces the diversity of our neighborhoods and friends. This wouldn't be on the website if it weren't supported by the council. Councilmember Edwards has highlighted that a diverse, highly qualified workforce is helping Jacksonville grow and has ensured military families and veterans are top priority. Councilmember Hinero has made a stance clear that local government should be responsive, transparent, and focused on real needs of residents. That principle is exactly what the ward system upholds. Councilmember Willingham has affirmed that neighborhood representation is essential to community accountability. And Councilmember Dr. Washington has consistently emphasized civic leadership and accountability to her constituents. House Bill 1038 contradicts all of that. The ward system protects that promise. We already have two at-large seats representing Jacksonville as a whole. If you remove the ward system here, you send a message across our entire county. If this can happen in Jacksonville, it can happen anywhere. They could remove the aldermen in Richlands, the commissioners in Swansboro, the local advocates in every small town. It won't stop at Jacksonville. This is just a stepping stone. Residents across the county are tired of being ignored. They are tired of feeling like numbers instead of constituents. Jacksonville. One city, our city, my city.

Sorry.

Council Member Smith said it perfectly. One city does not mean one voice. One city means every neighborhood has a voice at the table. As a fellow Pirate and Cobb student, I know ECU's core value of service has been instilled in Mr. Gable. Government exists to serve, not to silence, not to dilute, to serve. This bill does not serve, so I ask our council to vote against House Bill 1038, protect our ward system, and stand by everything you continuously promote. Thank you.

Vicki Atkinson.

I'm Vicki Atkinson. I reside at 107 Washington Drive, Jacksonville, North Carolina. Good evening, mayor and council and fellow attendees. I am a native of Jacksonville, North Carolina, and I am a member of Sandy Run Missionary Baptist Church under the leadership of Reverend Dr. George D. Churchwell, and our church is very active in community betterment. This proposal would not help us. I am here regarding House Bill 1038 and what it means to Jacksonville. HB 1038 would remove the ward-based system and move at large elections. That's not a minor adjustment. It's an operational change to how the city is represented. Ward system exists to ensure every part of Jacksonville has a voice and a council member directly accountable for that area. Moving to at large elections shifts the dynamics and weakens neighborhood level representation. Decisions about how a city is represented should be by the people who live there. This proposal enhances the possibility of the following. All representatives coming from the same ward. Representatives having no clue as to what the issues are and what is needed in our different neighborhoods. There's some dangers in that large voting system. Moving to an enlarged voting system means the council members would be elected by the entire city rather than specific wards. This would lead to a concentration of power among majority populations, effectively sidelining majority votes. Historical evidence shows that at large elections often result in underrepresentation of minority communities as candidates may cater to the interests of the majority, leaving minorities marginalized. I'm asking the Council to take a formal position to oppose HB 1038 and support the maintaining ward-based representation. In conclusion, I urge the Council to consider the long-term consequences of this proposal. Maintaining the ward system is vital to ensuring fair and just representation for all residents of Jacksonville, North Carolina, particularly our majority communities. I thank you for listening and hope you will not remove our current ward-based system, which is just and fair to all citizens of Jacksonville, North Carolina. Thank you.

Isaiah Johnson. Isaiah Johnson here. Joseph Deming.

Joseph Deming, 213 Bishop Street.

Can you wait just a second? Mr. Johnson is here. My time to start? No, I'm going to start your time over again. If you'll yield the floor to Mr. Johnson since he was next on the list.

in them oh i'm sorry yeah go ahead okay thank you mayor phillips and city council good evening i've been a resident of jacksonville for 40 years my children were born and raised here i served locally with the north carolina national guard here in jacksonville i'm currently employed at coastal carolina community college and i've been a member of a local and diverse church for over 20 years though i was not born in jacksonville it has become and will continue to be my home As for this reason, I felt obligated to come here before the council this evening regarding House Bill 1038. The Jacksonville City Council, as you know, currently consists of six members, four elected by the voters of their respective wards and two elected at large. The core responsibility of the city council is to ensure that all of its constituents are represented fairly and equally. In 1989, the concern arose among certain constituents of being unfairly represented in our city government. As a result, the city was divided into four wards. Now, House Bill 1038 proposes a change in the city charter, the change would abolish the ward system entirely, making all city council members to be voted at large. This would allow residents to vote for every council seat, not just those in their particular ward. To those who oppose House Bill 38 and advocate for our current system to remain as it is, I would like to address a few points. In 1990, Jacksonville annexed portions of Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune and New River Air Station due to population growth. This annexation allowed the city of Jacksonville to receive additional state and federal funding to maintain and improve its infrastructure. However, this annexation does not grant the city authority over the federal property. It should also be noted that the population of these annexed areas were awarded not equally to all of the above awards. And this population, for the most part, are registered in their home states and do not participate in local elections. In this case, the combined registered voters of two of the wards are significantly lower than the other two, creating an imbalance in registered voters. Now, the population of Jacksonville has increased significantly since the wards were established in 1989, from 30,000 to over 72,000, according to the most recent US Census. The demographics of Jacksonville have dramatically changed as well. Now, there has been a decrease in the white population, but there has been an increase in other ethnic groups, most notably in the Asian and Hispanic population. Also, those that identify as multi-race, multi-ethnicity, or others on the most recent census has increased as well. So according to this data, almost 40% of Jacksonville's current population identify as neither black nor white. This shows the changes in the demographics of Jacksonville's population. Allowing city council seats to be determined by ward votes rather than an at-large vote will only perpetuate the disenfranchisement of many other ethnic groups within our city. I therefore encourage and support the passing of House Bill 1038 abolishing the current ward system and making all city council seats to be turned by an at-large vote. This will ensure fair representation and equal representation of every member of our city. Thank you.

Melanie Marzette. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Johnson. I'm sorry. I put a notarized name and forgot all about it.

Good evening, everyone. Mr. Mayor, City Council, my name is Isaiah Ike Johnson, and I'm here to speak against the proposed shift from the ward system to an at-large system. As we reflect on the preamble to the Constitution, we are reminded of our commitment to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessing of liberty. This proposal threatens to disenfranchise the underserved and underrepresented neighborhoods and to loot the voices in the local governments and impacts the concept of a unified community. is my understanding that this proposal is attempting to be forced on this council and the city, a proposal that something that the council did not ask for or did not request. The present ward system ensures that each neighborhood has representation tailored to the unique needs and concerns of its constituency. The localized representation empowers underserved groups to have a direct say in their local government. With this present four wards and two at-large seats in Jacksonville, we enjoy the best of both worlds. Local advocacy alongside broader city-wide representation, unlike our county representation. Moving to an at-large system mean that council could lead to a concentrated power among majority population, effectively sidelining the traditional historically underserved voices. Historical evidence show that at-large elections often result in unrepresentation of underserved communities, as candidates may cater to the interests of the majority, leaving the historically marginalized of a community unrepresented. By eliminating the ward system, we risk losing representation that reflects the diverse fabrics of Jacksonville. In conclusion, I urge you to consider the long-term consequences of this proposal. Maintaining our current system of four wards and two at-large seats is vital to ensuring equippable representation for all residents of Jacksonville. When we say my city, your city, our city, it's not just a slogan. Let's make sure that it means something. Thank you.

Hello. First of all, I want to give a shout out to in the new program that started over there for the retirees. I've had the opportunity to participate several times, and I love it. We keep that going. I'm up here again about the New River situation. It gets worse by the day. It looks like a jungle out there. You have dead trees, overgrown shrubbery, vines growing all over the dilapidated apartments that are out there, the burned out structures. And I understand that the city does not own that property. However, if you lived out there and you had to look at that every single day, something would be done. I believe that. And I'm asking you all to at least go out there and to look at what these kids and the homeowners and the renters who live out there have to look at every single day. It is horrible. We need to do something about that. The weather is warming up. You have our homeless population that's living out there in some of those apartments. They're being pushed out of the woods. We're building more. We don't have affordable housing. Something has to be done. Everybody deserves to be treated with dignity. I don't care if you live in a home, if you live on a park bench. They deserve to have just as much help as anyone else that lives in this community. And so I'm asking you all to really diligently work towards doing something about our homeless population. uh... because We are all blessed to be able, as far as I know, in this room, to have a place to lay our heads. They deserve the same treatment. Even if, like I've mentioned before, if you set something up to where you have a bathroom and a shower system, because you can purchase that, and you can put that in the parks. It's no different than the bathrooms that you have out there. The only thing that would change is that there's a shower system. And so I'm asking you all to really take that into consideration and understand that these are not just one people. You have people living in their cars. You have families who are living in their outdoors, and they deserve to be treated with some dignity. Thank you.

Thank you.

George Caldwell.

George Caldwell, 6694 Kalinowski Street, Ward 1. So good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. I stand before you to voice my strong support of House Bill 1038, a local bill that represents a crucial step forward for the governance and the future of the city of Jacksonville. At its core, this legislation is about a very simple yet fundamental principle of representative government, the alignment of responsibility and accountability. Currently, Jacksonville operates under a system where municipal elected officials are chosen solely by the residents of individual wards. Yet once they take their seats in office, they do not just vote on matters concerning a specific neighborhood. They vote on the city budget, they vote on infrastructure projects, emergency services, economic development initiatives, and impact every single resident within our city limits. The premise of my support for House Bill 1038 is straightforward. If you vote on behalf of the entire city of Jacksonville, you should be elected by the entire city of Jacksonville. When our leaders make decisions that affect the collective whole, they mandate should come from the collective whole. Under the current ward-only voting system, we inadvertently encourage a fragmented approach to city governance. It creates an environment where an official might feel primarily beholden to a small slice of the population rather than the city at large. This can lead to division and hyper-local politics that fail to see the bigger picture of what Jacksonville needs to thrive as a unified community. House Bill 1038 fixes this by ensuring that the electorate matches the scope of the office. By transitioning to a system where officials must be elected by the majority of the entire city, we ensure that every single voter member is accountable to every single citizen. It means that when any resident has an issue with how citywide policy is being handled, we know that every member making decision had to earn the citywide mandate. This bill elevates our standard of accountability. It requires candidates to campaign across the entire city, to listen to the diverse voices. of all neighborhoods and to govern with a truly citywide perspective. Jacksonville is one city with one shared future. We need leaders who are elected by all of us to work for all of us. I urge you to support House Bill 1038 to bring comprehensive accountability to our local government. Thank you for your time.

Joe McLaughlin. All right, remember what I said at the outset.

Joe McLaughlin, 101 Hampshire Place, Jacksonville, North Carolina. Question for the audience. Is discrimination on race OK if your tribe or your side benefits from it? Does that make it OK? We all know the answer to that question. He can't do that.

He cannot do that.

Because for the last 30 years or so, Jacksonville's ward system has been based upon the premise that the minority population will be advantaged in Ward 1 and Ward 4. I assume it was based upon the presumption that the majority, and several speakers tonight have talked about the majority, the majority of Onslow and Jackson must be so defective that they would never vote for a non-white person. I disagree with that. If it were ever true, Ernie Wright smashed that in 1996. He's the second highest vote getter. May Ernie rest in peace. But in 1996, Ernie Wright, elected by the majority, was the second highest vote getter. Followed in short order by Margaret Brown to the school board. Robin Knapp for county commissioner, Lewis Rogers to the school board, my good friend Melissa Oakley to the school board. So please, whatever you want to use to justify the current award system, have yourself a good time with that. But don't dare insult the majority voting population. They would never vote for someone that wouldn't look like them. That's disingenuous and not borne out by the facts. I rise in support of HB1038. What's the biggest underserved population in Jacksonville? It's Camp Lejeune. It's Camp Lejeune. If we truly were going to be interested in a one-city approach, we would draw the map so it didn't come off Camp Lejeune and make people come from Camp Lejeune to be represented. I appreciate your support and this time to address you. Thank you, Council. Thank you.

Amity Holland.

Hi, Amity Holland, 302 Burning Tree. Okay, hi, good evening. So we live in a beautiful and diverse state. You can wake up and surf on the coast in the morning and stand on a mountain peak by evening. Our communities are vastly different, coastal, rural, mountain, military, urban, and we recognize those differences by ensuring representation from people who understand the unique needs of those communities through state wards. Jacksonville understood that too when it adopted the ward system. Under this system, only someone who lives in a ward can run for that ward seat, and only the people in that ward choose their representative. That guarantees that every part of our city has someone on council who truly understand the needs of that specific community. Combined with the two at-large seats and the mayoral tie-breaking vote, every voter in Jacksonville already has influence over more than half of the city council. I fail to see how the system denies equal representation. What concerns me most is that this effort to remove our wards has happened without the people of Jacksonville being a part of the conversation. It feels like government overreach, a small group deciding they know better than the communities they represent. It smacks of the same kind of hubris we saw in 1898 just repackaged for 2026. We heard claims that the ward system is unfair because one ward might take more votes to win than another, but those numbers that have been presented were misleading. Winning totals are entirely based on voter turnout. There is no required minimum to win a specific ward. In reality, ward races in Jacksonville often fluctuate between just 100 and 400 votes, while at-large races have regularly been won with fewer than 900 votes citywide. As someone who recently ran a grassroots campaign, I can tell you firsthand how many people feel disconnected with local government. Many don't know what city council does or care or even knew when to vote. Running at large without money, connections, or a large support network feels nearly impossible in this city. But wards give everyday people a chance to serve their communities, and for nearly 30 years, grassroots candidates have had the opportunity to do exactly that in Jacksonville, giving a voice to parts of our city that might otherwise have gone unheard. Jacksonville is one city made up of many communities. Like a garden, different parts need different care to thrive. Ignore those needs and eventually the whole garden suffers. One city does not mean one voice. Protect our wards, protect our communities, protect our voices, and ensure that Jacksonville remains one city, our city. Thank you.

Okay.

Diana LeBlanc.

Diana LeBlanc.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the Jacksonville City Council. I come to you this evening. Oh, sorry, my address is 155 Rain Tree Circle. I wanted to be sure I got that in. I come to you this evening because I'm very concerned about what this House bill is doing to this community. I also am not from here. I like to say I am a Yankee by birth and I am Southern by the grace of God. I am here, I grew up in the east side of Cleveland and the Marine Corps brought me here where I served for eight years. And my husband and I, after he retired, we decided to stay here in Jacksonville. There have been many people who have posted that anyone who lives outside of the city limit does not have a dog in this fight. And I totally disagree wholeheartedly with anyone who feels that way. And here's the reason why. Decisions that are made by this voting body affect all of Onslow County in some respect. If property taxes go up, businesses are going to have to raise their prices. That affects everybody in Onslow County. The other thing that bothers me is that appears this has become a much bigger issue than it should be. I have no doubt that I could sit with many of these people in worship any Sunday morning. Why? Because we have a relationship with Jesus Christ and because we love the Lord and the Creator God who created this earth. So why on earth? are there are so many issues with this bill. I believe that this council represents all of Jacksonville and the city of Jacksonville, not just the ward system. If you're worth your weight in salt, when you run for the board, and you run for a position on city council, your focus should not be on the ward itself. Your focus should be on everyone that lives in the city of Jacksonville and everyone who lives in Onslow County. The last thing I want to say is this. Jesus gives us a really good example. He was some guy from Nazareth, but you know what? He brought 12 guys together and he totally transformed the world. Jacksonville, we are better than this. We are absolutely better than this. And so I encourage each and every person sitting behind me, but I encourage this body as well. We have to come together as one because a house divided cannot stand.

Lily Cortez. Lily Cortez.

Might be Lily Connolly. Anybody named Lily out there? 610 Walden Place. Yes. Live at 102 Webport.

Leave it open.

Willie Saunders.

Ms. Saunders, are you here?

She's not here.

She was here. I thought I saw her earlier.

Ms. Willie Saunders.

Mr. Hubert Saunders.

There you are. You're not going to speak?

Hubert Saunders.

As the lady says, I'm not living in Jacksonville, city limits, like I used to for such a long time. But as I sit here, if you look in the ordinance, you look at the people on the desk, and you look at their expressions, and you'd be surprised the message you get. I came to Jacksonville in 2009. Opened a business. And one day, it was a mortuary business. I got a message that says, the city has a cemetery, and it's very inexpensive. So I got in my car, went to City Hall, I walked in there, who they tell me to see, and she says, we don't have any more graves. Now we talking 35, 36 years ago. To this day, it is maintained by your city council and your taxes, not just certain zones taxes, everybody's taxes. And one day I was totally surprised. A guy came in and lost his wife and he wanted a grave. So I told him, I said, well, go down to the city. I understand they have some inexpensive graves. He goes down there. He comes back a half an hour later and said, I got a grave. But the trick was he was not black. He was a Filipino. Now they told me they had no graves 30 years ago, and this one guy. And so the whole time I've been in business, I have put one person in a city-owned cemetery that's maintained by our taxes. It's not fair. So we can't talk about being fair. It does not exist. And as I sit in the audience, and I look at the faces of the people that's on this council, I see expressions that not change from one to the other. You must have some kind of expression. I either agree with it, I don't agree with it, but make some kind of expression. Not one expression has changed, and that's sad. That is awfully sad. I agree with some things, and I don't agree with some things. but I think everybody should have a voice. And in this case, I think there still need to be positions where voices are heard and you are given the opportunity to make a voice that you know if you need something, you can go to that person to get a response. If I come to any one of you and you represent me, then I should be able to get Our response.

Thank you Mr. Saunders. All right. Thank you. Lauren probably didn't say that right. There you go.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council. My name is Lauren Sykenen, and I live at 610 Walden Place in Ward 2. I'm here to speak against House Bill 1038, the bill that would eliminate Jacksonville's ward system. The ward system is the structure that ensures that every part of Jacksonville has a voice. Ward 2 is not the largest in the city, but it has its own needs, its own neighborhoods, and its own priorities. The ward system guarantees that residents like me have representation of representative who lives in the same area, understands the local issues, and is accountable to the people who live there. Before Jacksonville adopted the ward system, at-large elections made it extremely difficult for minority and low-income lower turnout neighborhoods to elect candidates of their choice. There is a documented in legal history and the city's own records. The ward system was created to correct that imbalance and to protect fair representation. House Bill 1038 would undo that progress. It would replace a system designed to ensure equal representation with the system that has historically diluted the voices of smaller and diverse neighbor communities. That is not a theoretical concern. It is a pattern that has been seen in many cities when at-large systems replace ward-based representation. The concern about different ward sizes is not a reason to eliminate them. It is a reason to adjust boundaries during the normal redistricting process. Redistricting is the appropriate tool for balancing the population differences. Eliminating the ward system is not. The ward system also provides clear accountability. As a resident of Ward 2, I know exactly who represents me. If all seats become at-large, the accountability becomes weaker. Instead of each representative being part of a city having a designated representative, every council member becomes responsible for the entire city, which makes it harder for residents to know who has to contact and for neighborhoods to have their concerns addressed. HB 1038 does not solve a problem, it creates one. And it does so without the input from the people who live in the wards that would be affected. I'm asking the council to take a clear position opposing HB 1038 and to communicate that to the legislature that Jacksonville residents value neighborhood representation. The ward system is not perfect, but it is structured to protect the fair representation for every part of the city, including Ward 2. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Sylvia Leatherwood. Leatherwood.

My name is Sylvia Leatherwood. I live at 214 Burning Tree Lane. I'm going to keep it short. I agree with everything that has been said about keeping our wards and the pros that go with keeping our wards and making sure we have a representation throughout our wards. and that this bill will just destroy everything. So it's all been said. What I wanted to say, I want to keep the wards. Thank you. Ward 2.

Lord DePaul.

I'm Laura Deptola, 105 Byron Run. Good evening, council members and mayor. Thank you for the opportunity this evening. I also don't live in the city of Jacksonville. However, I am the chairman of our wonderful Republican Party here in Onslow County. And I'd like to read a letter to you that we recently sent to our legislatures. Dear Senator Lazara, Representative Shepard, Representative Gabel, and Representative Smith. At a recent meeting of the Anzal County Republican Party Executive Committee, a motion was made and unanimously passed to inform you of the party's complete and enthusiastic support of HB 1038, an act to require all member of Jacksonville City Councils to be elected at large. This correction will end the racially discriminatory wards that Jacksonville has suffered under for decades. A system where two of Jacksonville's wards typically require over 1,000 votes to get elected while on the other side of town only needed about 100 votes. This legislation will put all candidates on an equal footing when competing for and end the noxious practice of racially discriminatory voting wards. Thank you for your leadership and courage. Please do not hesitate to let us know how we may assist you in getting this legislation passed. So this went to all four of our representatives at the General Assembly from Onslow County. The representatives did not willy-nilly come up with this legislation out of nowhere. It came after a large outcry from the community, complaints about the current ward system. That's where the legislation comes from. And we are looking forward to watching 1038 move through the House and pass. Thank you.

Jaina Francis.

Good evening.

Good evening. Good evening. I come to you this evening as a concerned citizen asking you not to support at-large elections for Jacksonville City Council. The purpose of the 1990 lawsuit against the city was not to give all the marbles to a majority or minority group. Giving all a seat at the table of city council was. Among the city's marginalized citizens were women, among others. So were the Montfort Point Marines when they came to the city of Jacksonville in 1942. In 2012, when Congress awarded the Congressional Gold Medal to the Montfort Point Marines, the late Senator Kay Hagan remarked, quote, when these men walked through the gate of Montfort Point in my home state of North Carolina, you came brave and committed to serving a country that did not yet appreciate the sacrifices. A country that measured a warrior, measured a man, not by his courage and dedication, but by the color of his skin. In addition to Congress awarding the Congressional Gold Medal to the Montfort Point Marines, a memorial has been erected here in Jacksonville in their honor. Medals and memorials are great, and I very much appreciate the $275,000 this body appropriated for the memorial, as well as the $275,000 appropriated by Onslow County and the $330,000 awarded by the state. The Montfort Point Marines fought for the right to fight, a seat at the table in equality and justice for all. Ward elections provide an opportunity for representation for all. What better way to make amends to the Montford Point Marines than having an election process that attempts to provide justice and representation for all. I am encouraged that the city, via its ward system, has elected an African American council member from a predominantly majority ward. To the city, I say that's progress, and I applaud you, but there are still some in our community who want to take all the marbles and go home. The Montfort Point Marines did not want to take home all the marbles. They simply wanted a seat in the sandbox. Thanks to the board system, the late Montfort Point Marine and City Councilman Turner G. Blount was able to have a seat in the sandbox. The last living Montfort Point Marine in Jacksonville, Premise Ken Law, died in March. He was 100 years old. If you really want to honor his memory, the presence and memory of his fellow Montfort Point Marines and their descendants, of which I am the daughter of the late Lynn J. White and am among them, then uphold your current election process. which offers a seat to all to learn how to play well with others in the sandbox. In closing, if the city of Jacksonville really wants to honor these men and make amends for their mistreatment, then further extend your extension of an olive branch of a memorial with an action that provides a possible seat at the city council table and lives up to this nation's creed of liberty and justice and representation for all.

Thank you, Dr. Francis.

Thank you for your time and attention. Thank you.

Reverend Macmillan.

My name is Alex Macmillan. I live at 120 Garden Street, Jackson Hill, North Carolina. A greeting to the councilman and to the host of Everyone is Hero. I just want to share my story about this ward and at large system we have. I'm 79 years old, so I've been through quite a few of our cities and counties working to get different people to elect that will serve the people of Onslow and the city of Jacksonville. But once that we had had the opportunity to get a ward system. It made us more affected and more happy to see our Jacksonville city being able to accommodate all of our city, all of our council, all of our community that serves us. And I just want to say, I think that This has been a God-given part of our democracy to be established here by our councilmen that serves us and that we will continue to let this ward system live on in Jacksonville and hopefully in the County of Onslaught. And I want to say thank you for all of you and all the work that you have been doing.

All right, Councilman, I'll move on to the adoption of the minutes from the May 4th, 2026 special workshop meeting, and also there's seven consent items.

Move approval of the minutes and consent items.

Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Okay, so we're gonna take a quick recess, stretch our legs for about five minutes, come back. Okay, all right, we're gonna go back in session now and let me just catch up where we're at here. Number eight, this annual action plan, I think Pam Trafton is going to present this item for us. Pam?

Good evening, Mayor and Council. How are you doing?

Good.

It's a pleasure to come before you as part of our annual action plan planning process and to where we are at the final stages before we submit our annual action plan to HUD for submission. For introduction purposes, our annual action plan is based off of our funding source, which is Community Development Block Grant Funds. And they are administered by the Housing and Urban Development. And it allows us to address the community, making sure that we are hitting one of these three requirements. That it is benefiting low and moderate income, either persons or an area. We are addressing slum and blight removal, or we're addressing an urgent need such as a disaster, hurricane, or in the past we've had COVID dollar funds. Out of our national objectives, we have to make sure that we are providing decent, safe, and sanitary housing, providing suitable living environments, and also taking the opportunity to expand economic opportunities. So just to give you a background of our planning process, we start in November of each year. And then this year, due to the release of the allocations, our submission date is by June 1st. Throughout the planning process, we are before our homebuyer education, our money management classes, at least six to eight a year. We address public input meetings within the community and also public hearings such as tonight. This is also an opportunity when we're before our nonprofits to bring forth our annual action plan as well as our board development conference. So these are all annual opportunities that we are before our community to seek input on how to address our funding. Out of this year's planning process, we received 210 responses on our survey, which was an increase from last year. We are also looking at the housing community development activities that are identified within the survey. And we take the community's input and then that allows us to prepare our action plan for fiscal year 26-27. This is the third year of our five-year annual action plan, which goes through to 2028. And our entitlement grant this year is receiving at $368,000. We estimate our program income at $225,000, which is income that we received from previous loans that are in the community already, for a total of $593,000 for us to spend in fiscal year 26-27. We also identified that we have prior year resources that are available for us at $588,000. But tonight we're looking at exactly our annual action plan. Our draft was available on our website and available in the community to identify what the feedback was given from our community and how we plan to spend those funds. This gives you a breakdown of what our funding has looked like over the past 10 years. And you see that there is a decrease from our last year's funding, just based off of funding and the budget from federal dollars. Our current target areas is based off of our census tract. We identified projects that are within the city as a whole. We look at New River, which is part of census tract 26, and the downtown area, which helps us identify economic opportunities that are available. This gives you a breakdown of our third year annual action plan budget, the $593,000 that was presented earlier, and the allocations that we are utilizing to spend. out of this survey our affordable housing remains top of mind with residential reconstruction and rehabilitation and this is a great opportunity that we are currently partaking where we are taking lots that we've currently owned or identifying dilapidated structures that we acquire and we can turn around and make those available for affordable housing for homeowners We have partnerships that have taken place with East Carolina Community Development and with Linfield Point to do multi-family. So we will have almost 84 units that will come online within the upcoming year. And then we continue to look at our new single-family housing construction that also looks into the reconstruction where we have on Ann Street the two houses that were recently constructed. Homelessness is always going to be point of mind as that is a presumed benefit. So when we look at our nonprofit agencies, we identify how we can consistently assist our nonprofits that are focusing with our homeless population. Out of our initiatives, we have our down payment assistance program, where we're able to provide up to $25,000 of city of Jacksonville community development block grant funds. But we've also built a partnership with our North Carolina Housing Finance Agency that can go up to $50,000 in assistance. We have seen home buyers receive almost $100,000 with layered down payment assistance programs. And we want to continue those partnerships with our lenders that are able to supply those down payment assistance with our community. And then our acquisition and reconstruction will always be within scattered sites in the community because we identify that infill construction is a great opportunity to build within our community and bring the tax basis online for the community, the Clean and Green Initiative as well. Rehabilitation programs, we identify with our community that any of our dilapidated structures, our elderly community can apply for our residential rehab program. And this will allow us to look at exterior and interior opportunities to allow our elderly to age in place. So at this time, we have our next steps to open for the public hearing and ask for council to consider adoption of our annual action plan so we may submit. OK, thank you.

All right, at this time, we'll recess the regular council meeting, open up the public hearing on this plan. Anyone wish to speak to that? Seeing no one, close the public hearing. And, Counselor, you've been asked to consider adoption of the FY2026-2027 Annual Action Plan and authorize staff to submit the draft plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

So moved. Second.

Second.

Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed. Thank you, Pam. Next, we're going to move on. It's kind of a tough read, isn't it?

We're trying to save some money.

We go to number nine, which is... I'm having a little problem here with this thing. No, it's a budget discussion, but there we go. Okay. This is for fiscal year 2027 proposed budget discussion. Josh Ray, our city manager, will be presenting this item.

Mr. Ray. Thank you, Mayor. I did provide a document to city council this evening. It is a document that we had emailed out. Fortunately, we're not going to put that on the screen because we've already complained that the numbers are too small so no one will be able to see it. So we do have a few copies later. What we provided to the council is some work that the members of the council have been working on over the past month. to discuss what to do with next year's budget. The challenge that City Council has at this point is determining to use the reval that Onslow County completed this year or using the old valuation. The City Council does not have a choice here. If the Onslow County completes the reval and the state accepts that, then the city council will utilize that revaluation and we'll build a budget based on that. What city council would determine is the tax rate and the expenses that you will use for the FY27 budget. The reason we put this item on the council agenda tonight is because this date is the date that council adopted for your FY27 budget calendar where you would typically consider the budget for next fiscal year. However, as we've talked about earlier tonight, one challenge that the council has is there is a Senate bill and a House bill that sits in the General Assembly right now that could impact the budget that is considered by the city council. A Senate bill potentially freezes the revaluation for nine counties across North Carolina. Onslow County is one of those. If that Senate bill goes into effect, the budget that is used by the council would therefore be impacted. If the House bill goes into effect, there's a House bill that would place an item on the ballot coming up in November. that could have an impact on what the House proposes for limits of valuations or local taxes. So, Mayor, one of the things that we originally wanted to do is talk through some of these options. However, staff recommends to council that we move this item to the next council meeting, which would be the June workshop meeting, to discuss further. in hopes that the General Assembly will take an action in the next two weeks. We cannot guarantee that the General Assembly will take an action on any of these items that we're talking about, but we do need something to happen before council makes a decision on both the tax rate for next fiscal year and on the budget.

And June 30th is the drop-dead deadline on this, right?

Yes, sir, Mayor. The challenge for the council is you have to, by state statute, you have to adopt a budget by June 30th. So we do have two meetings that are set for the month of June. Council typically approves the budget by the end of May, but that gives us the additional month of June to be able to make some changes and to consider a budget. The challenge for the council is the General Assembly does not have to take action on either of those bills or any bill before June 30th. So we're really just waiting it out to determine if they take action up until June 29th, then the council could come in here and we could work for the evening of June 30th and present a budget for next year. So that's the challenge that you have, Mayor, and I know that a lot of people want to have answers to what's the tax rate going to look like next year and what is their reval going to look like. Unfortunately, the city doesn't have that right through the state of North Carolina to determine that at this point.

Mr. Ray, thank you so much for providing us with additional options. The letters and numbers are very tiny, but I'm grateful that I have more numbers to look at to make my decision. I also take an account of the comments that were made by the citizens. And based on your brief, I move that the fiscal year 2027 proposed budget is tabled until next month.

Second.

To when? Oh, OK. Next month. OK.

I'll second that one.

Any other discussion on that?

Please contact your legislator and tell them that municipalities must make decisions by June 30th. They should help us out and make one as well.

I hear the citizens about the 37% increase in their property values, and I really think that... that we're going to have to look at this in a more comprehensive manner, and we can't do that until we know what it's going to be. There's a lot of people that said, we're going to set the tax rate at $0.60 per hundred for the reval, and that hasn't happened. We haven't made that vote yet, and I think we need to first know what that's going to be, and then we can make some decisions. But as a taxpayer here, too, I understand when your taxes go up because we have a lot of retirees in this community, and they're on fixed incomes, and so we've got to be cognizant of them and make sure that we're doing everything we can to keep the tax rate low. And I'll go into the sales tax issue. If the sales tax issue, if they would change it back to per capita, which is what the state is, then no matter what our tax rate is, we'd be able to lower it. So I encourage people to talk to their county commissioners you know about 50 million dollars is generated in jacksonville of the 80 million dollars that's uh that this that sales tax that comes back to it and yet we only get a small small portion and so um Encourage everybody in this room to make sure that they tell their County Commissioners. Hey, you know, we're paying for those services. You're paying for those services at Walmart and Target and Lowe's or we're having to respond. We have to pave the roads and that money is going somewhere else. So I would encourage you to talk to your County Commissioners about that.

When they changed that sales tax formula back in 2013, it caused us to have to be able to meet the revenue level that we had to have to provide just essential services, we had to raise the property tax in Jacksonville to 10 cent above what it was. So you figure that, you know, if that didn't, if that wouldn't have happened, you know, sales tax is a fair tax because everybody pays it. Property tax is a tax that you keep paying year after year after year after year. sales tax if you you know if you buy something you pay the tax everybody buys stuff pay the tax instead of having to raise your tax on your house every year you know every four years when they read out so that's the importance of that balance between the sales tax and property tax that we we so much would like to bring in in some kind of equilibrium comment

I'm looking forward to that meeting with the commissioners. Two-thirds. Call for the vote.

Okay. She has a motion. It's been seconded. All right. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed.

Okay.

Thank you, ma'am. I didn't hear any opposition. Thank you. All right. Let's go on to give me just a second. I'm slow. I'm not slow. This thing here is slow. We're going to go on a discussion of House Bill 1038.

Good evening, Mayor Phillips, members of council, staff, as well as all of the attendees. I voice my opposition for House Bill 1038 because representation matters, even down to the individual community clusters we call the ward system. But let us not forget that we still have two at-large seats. In a city like Jacksonville where military families, lifelong residents, retirees, working-class neighborhoods, and diverse communities all coexist, every area of the city deserves a direct voice at the table. I share with you the scriptures from the Holy Bible that aligns with my confession and my profession of faith. The first one I want to share is one that was read today during the Daughters of the American Revolution, celebrating the garden that was placed out at Richard Reyes Park. And the scripture came from Deuteronomy 19, 14, and it says, in the inheritance which you will hold in the land that the Lord your God gives you to possess, you shall not remove your neighbor's landmark, which the men of old have set. I also echo the scripture that is in Isaiah 1, verse 17, and it's out of the easy read version. Learn to do good, work for justice, help those who suffer under the control of others, speak up for the widows and orphans, and argue for their rights. Now, there's a situation before us, and my objection is to block the passage of House Bill 1038. It's entitled, at large elections, Jacksonville City Council. To protect local governing is why I want to block it. Municipal authority, I want municipal authority. preserve war-based representation and voter equity, and ensure this council represents Jacksonville's brand as the all-American city, caring community, our city, one city, my city. Now, North Carolina House Bill 1038 is summarized as such. It makes the following changes to section 2.8 of the city of Jacksonville's charter as amended, replaces the hybrid at-large ward election of the mayor and city council members with an at-large election of these municipal officers. It removes outdated language and make technical changes. specifies that the at-large election will begin at the regular municipal election in 2027 and continue biannually thereafter, retaining the staggering of the council members' terms as when they were elected by ward. I asked for the auto recording of the House Standing Election Law Committee meeting that was held on May 5th. Now, I have to preference it because there are things I need to share with you before listening to it. It's presented by the primary sponsor, District 14, Representative Wyatt Gable, and the co-sponsor, District 15, Representative Phil Shepard, to the House Standing Election Law Committee on May 5th, 2026. Members of this committee asked questions and offered comments that included Representatives Stevens, Dale, Rubin, Belk, Buncee, and Dixon. I requested that the recording of the election law committee meeting be played in the presence of all council and the public so that all can hear the exact reason for the submission and the committee's response. Please consider the following. First of all, Jacksonville City Council did not request this bill or actions to be taken concerning our election system currently in place. Under no circumstances am I playing this to disparage our mayor or sitting council members. Any comments made on this recording about individuals who were not present at the subject meeting may be considered hearsay. Why? Because they weren't there to refute the claim. After the recording, I will present my statement to the mayor and council as this discussion continues. HB 1038 is currently with the primary sponsor to address concerns and for more analysis. The Jacksonville Daily News reported Representative Phil Shepard stating it, the bill, should be placed back on the agenda soon. I say that because it has been said that the bill was pulled. It did not say the bill was removed. If we could play the audio, please.

Mayor, let me get Alan to start. All right.

Our last bill is House Bill 1038, at-large elections in Jackson City Council. Representative Gable, Representative Shepard, you're recognized. And there is PCS, and without objection, the PCS is before us. This is what's called good committee work, that they've gone ahead and fixed the problems before we get here. So, if you're recognized, present the bill.

Thank you. So this bill, pretty straightforward. Currently Jacksonville has the mayor and two councilmen that are elected at large and then four elected by a ward system. We're just making all, getting rid of the ward system and making them all at large. The main reason for this is because Some of the wards have about 1,200 people that will vote in them, and another one might have 200. So we're not getting real adequate representation there and population issues. So we're just trying to make this all even so we don't have to keep updating maps and making it really difficult on the city. So I'd be happy to answer any questions if anyone has any.

All right, we have some questions. I think I saw Representative Ball's hands first. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Excuse my voice, getting over cold. Because this has happened several other places that there have been changes from district election versus district statewide, countywide, or a combination of those. Wouldn't it be possible just simply to change how the wards were drawn so that there can be election of those person closest to their people as opposed to running at large? Makes sense to me.

So they have obviously redistricted in the past like we do for our legislative seats. But the issue we run into there is because the base in Camp Lejeune gets drawn into it, then none of those people in Camp Lejeune ever participate in municipal elections. So you get a very small pocket of people that are electing their one councilman, whereas you have the other ones on the other side of town where there are a ton of people voting and having real elections. That's the issue that we keep running into. So we think this way you're getting more representation because you're able to vote for everybody, and then it's all equal for everybody as well.

Just a quick follow-up, if I might. A follow-up? And you have received support from these people who are voting now all through the area as opposed to voting for someone in their ward.

Yes, we've received that. That's the whole point of this bill is we had so many people ask us to do this.

Well, you know, we like to please the people, don't we? Yes. Representative Dahl.

So I actually spent all weekend on this back and forth. And with the council, and the council is very concerned about this. They're very concerned about getting rid of the wards because it gets rid of certain community voices. And they're afraid that once they go all at large... It will be the bulk, you know, whoever the bulk of the voters are will get those candidates. And it could be a very skewed council because they're not getting their votes. I understand about Camp Lejeune and maybe there should be. a different look at this because when we go at large, we have a lot, when we go all at large, we have people that feel disenfranchised. So, I mean, I have no choice but to vote no on this because the council has not asked for this and we have to respect city government before our needs, I do believe. Representative Shepard?

I was just going to mention that Thank you, Chair. This city of Jacksonville was at large at one time until they annexed the base. They took part of the base in for the population, so it would justify some of the grants they were asking for with the federal government. So then they created a ward system after that. And 90% of the people that live on base don't vote here. They vote at home. And so it's sort of disappropriated in a way. Because you've got more people voting in one ward than you do another. So it is a little unfair the way it is set up now. So this will take care of that. Thank you.

Do you have any questions? You may have follow-up.

There is more than one solution to every problem. And I don't see this as a sound solution, especially when I've had so many calls. I rarely get calls from council or anybody. I mean, I don't have anything to do with Jacksonville. So I just think that we might want to look at other solutions. And that's interesting because I don't recall getting a single call.

But Representative Monsey.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So I appreciate Rep Dahl's due diligence. I just want to be clear, I want to pose this to you all. Have the mayor and city council of Jacksonville, have they supported this?

The mayor indicated to me that he was very supportive of this, and I've had other council members. There's probably... some that do not, and there are some that do. And plus, a lot of my phone calls have come from citizens in the community that have asked for this.

Do you have a follow-up? Has that come in the form of a resolution kind of getting at Representative Rubin's question on prior bills, but has there been a resolution of support for this from the city council and mayor?

I haven't seen one from the city council, no. I've just talked to them individually. Go ahead. Representative Dixon.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think we could make an argument if you're talking about pure democracy, which we don't have, but if we did have pure democracy, this would be the ideal because this truly gives the true majority the vote.

Okay. Representative Rubin, I saw you first.

Thank you. So we've had, obviously, new case law around the Voting Rights Act. We also have, just a couple years ago, Allen v. Milligan. What analysis was done? Let me back up, actually. When I looked at the charter language that's being struck in this, it identifies two of the districts as minority wards. Was that something that you took into consideration when putting this bill forward? Let me ask that first.

I mean, that was not the intention of getting rid of it for that purpose. It was, as we stated earlier, for population because, again, we have one district that has 1,200 voters and another that has 200 and one that has about 190. It's kind of uneven, and that was our thought process of it.

Follow-up, Madam Chair? I mean, I hear that. I mean, we don't do that anywhere else where we look at the number of voters. We don't look at the number of people who vote. Otherwise, our House districts are going to be totally wacky with that because House districts have very different voting rates. But my real question is around these recent Supreme Court decisions, both Allen and the Louisiana case from last week. What analysis was done to make sure that the change that you are making complies with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act? which even with last week's decision still exists. And they've had lawsuits related to these types of things in this jurisdiction.

I'll ask Ms. Sammons that question. Do you have any kind of analysis was requested or done?

Jessica Sammons, Legislative Analysis. Representative Rubin, I'm not aware of any analysis that was done from a Section 2 perspective.

Follow-up question, Madam Chair? Good follow-up. So there was no analysis on how the change affects minority voters' ability to elect candidates of their choice, whether there's racially polarized voting in Jacksonville, or whether minority preferred candidates tend to succeed in citywide elections or primarily within the ward structure. And I'm asking those questions because those are the analysis under the law. Has that analysis been done? Happy for that to go to staff.

Ms. Sammons?

Representative Rabin, I am not aware of whether or not any analysis has been done

And I think what you heard from the members here is that it's taking into account the military basis, which is a very transient population that's probably not going to be involved in local politics.

I understand. My question, Madam Chair, is just around our legal compliance. And obviously I would hate to see the city of Jacksonville subject to more lawsuits because we didn't do our diligence. Because that will leave the legal fees even if they ultimately win. Madam Chair, I call for the yeas and nays. Thank you.

And I'm just consulting with them as to whether there are other things they want to be looking at. But let's see. Representative Belk.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have to talk about my town because I am not familiar with Jacksonville. But at one time, we had only at-large members. And at a certain time before we went to district, we had... Every single member of our city council was elected within a one-mile radius, one neighborhood. They represented that neighborhood. And it was totally different from all the neighborhoods in our town. And that's why we went to district so that we could spread that out because they were representing a single town. And I think a lot of people who have gone from at-large to district, that is the purpose. The purpose is to spread that out, not to... get rid of at-large because we still do have at-large but we have districts and going to turnout and that's what you're talking about as you're talking about some particular places don't have turnout and you know that's where you go and say okay we have to come up with some education we have to come up with some incentive to get those people to understand that they they need their voices their own so thank you okay

And I thank you for all the comments. Is there any more comments by the committee? So I think the members would like to pull the bill and take a look at some of your suggestions, particularly in light of the military base. I think at one point what they showed me, though, was a district that currently is like this big and hardly anything in it that actually goes out and reaches another area. So it's sort of a donut hole kind of thing. And so they want to look as to whether there might be a better option versus... continuing on with what they want to do. So let's give them some time and we'll pull this bill. And with that being said, there's no further business. We are adjourned.

Thank you to everyone here in the chamber for your patience. I am not here to discuss what took place in 1990 nor in 2021, for I don't have the legal background or the personal experience of what took place at that time that brought us to the place that we are here for today. Jacksonville is a two-at-large, four-ward election system. My reasoning is the matter at hand. Reasons Representative Gabel presented to the committee responsible for reviewing, voting, and submitting it to the next level. It is important that you hear the exact reason why this bill was submitted from the very voice of the primary sponsor. Why? Because that bill has been handed back to them. And I'm sure the verbiage is going to change drastically. But it's important that the citizens of Jacksonville know exactly why it was submitted. The first statement that he makes is that it's pretty straightforward. I can only assume, and we don't want to do that, and this is the only time I'm going to do it, is that to say that, hey, I'm going to submit this bill, and just like a majority of the local bills that are presented, they just float right on through. But unfortunately for Jacksonville, representative Gable's plea, there are those in the room that had questions as we should have questions. He also made a statement saying he's getting rid of the ward system. He's not getting rid of the two at large hybrid ward system. He's getting rid of the ward portion. and making them all at large. The main reason is that some wards have about 1,200 people that vote in them and the others have 200. He also makes a statement saying we're not getting real adequate representation there. and population issues. These are his words, population issues. So they are trying to make this all even. Now on my notes, I have it in bold letters saying, make what even? So we don't keep updating the maps because it's really difficult on the city. Well, I want to respond to the 1,200 people that vote in one ward versus the ones that have 200 voters that vote. I'm going to give you two numbers. One number is going to be from the 2020 census and one number is going to be what was redistrict and what is THE NUMBER OF POPULATION OR THE POPULATION NOW. OKAY? SO 2020 POPULATION FOR WARD ONE, 19,386. AFTER THE REDISTRICTING TOOK PLACE, WARD ONE HAS 17,768. WARD TWO STARTED OUT WITH 14,691. NOW AT 18,226. Ward 3 started out with 21,129, now 17,830. And Ward 4 started out at 17,517, now at 18,899. Now, the ward mean population, to balance it out, each ward has roughly 18,899. individuals in this population that has the propensity or should or can, barring children, to vote. The assumption that is given with the 1,200 that vote in one district versus the 200 that votes in one district is to say that those districts are mainly military. And those people—let me make sure I say exactly what he said. The issue is that the base gets drawn into it, and none of those people on Camp Lejeune ever participate in the municipal elections. So only a very small pocket of people are electing their one councilman, whereas on the other side of town, there are tons of people voting, having a real election. That's the issue we're running into. Well... I believe that I don't hear that there's an issue with the population. His issue is with how many people vote. And that sounds like a voter education issue to me. It sounds like that the city of Jacksonville and Camp Lejeune should walk into some type of memorandum of understanding or agreement so that the nonpartisan candidates can go aboard the base and solicit their votes. Now, I've worked the polls before, and I've seen military personnel come and vote. I've seen them in uniform come and vote. I've seen them at all ages come and vote. But to assume that Ward 1 and 4, they are the wards that are being pinpointed, that majority of their population is on base is erroneous in nature. No one has those figures. The Board of Election doesn't have those figures, and our resident historian doesn't have those figures. So I don't know what proportion of those people who don't vote, because I believe everyone has the opportunity to register and vote. And during this discussion, if anyone have any questions about how many are actually registered to vote, I can give you those numbers as we come up on that. But I just wanted to let everyone know that there's 18,000 per ward. And I believe, even as a newly elected council person, I believe that Onslow County has an issue with voter education. It is not a secret, I can't tell you the number, but it's fairly low out of 100 counties where we- 100. 100 counties. And I don't know where Onslow County ranks. But something tells me that voter education is needed, not redistricting. Gable also says, and I'm coming to a close because I have to open this up to my fellow council persons. Gable said, this way you will get more representation because you're able to vote for everybody and that it will be all equal for everybody. Well, I read a couple of articles on all large individuals on council, but I think I want to take the opinion or the professional opinion of the representative that made a comment that says that all ward at large poses a problem when it comes to all of those individuals being selected out of a select area. And it also poses a problem that some areas, some marginalized areas, some areas that are under attended will not get the proper representation. This way, every area, every community that has been gathered by those who redistrict our city has provided us with an equal number, give or take that 5% plus or add or subtract, I believe they did a great job. Now, can we go back and do it because we've had several annexations? Of course we can. But to take away the election system that works for our community is not the answer. Or to make it seem as if going all at large is the only answer, I beg to differ. So there was a question that said, have you received support from these people voting now throughout the area as opposed to someone in their ward? The answer was yes, we have received that. That's the whole point of submitting this bill. So many people asked us to do this. That may be something that another member of the council may want to talk about, but Though so many people, if they were in the city of Jacksonville, under the current election policy, the best thing to do as a citizen is to talk to your elected officials, is to talk about it and see what can be done, to make your grievances known so we as a city can handle that. So I'm not sure of what group of individuals push this bill through, what I do know is that the justification that the representative who sponsored it is lacking information, is lacking data, is lacking a true justification. I want to close with Jacksonville has embraced the vision of one city, our city, my city. That vision works because it recognizes unity without erasing neighborhood identity. True unity is not achieved by silencing local voices. It's achieved by ensuring every voice is heard. I heard the voice of Ward 2. I stepped up to the plate. In my six months, I have gone from meeting to meeting toward the city and found out what happens behind the scenes. I recently contacted our city clerk and said, I'm ready for my business cards to have my cell phone number on it because now I have enough information that I'm not afraid to answer any question. The key question is not to simplify efficiency to make it easier for us so that we don't have to redraw maps when in annexations you need to do so, but it's whether every community continues to have a meaningful seat at the table. I close with two quotes from Thomas Sowell. The first one says, when people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination. And the most basic question is not what is best, but who shall decide what is best. Thank you.

You still want a poll? Yeah. Okay. Mr. Willingham has asked me to do a poll, and I'm going to interject it at this point. Can I do that?

Yes, sir.

I'm in charge, kind of right? All right. All those, just a show of hands. I would like to see those that are here in support of, not in support of Bill 1038.

Just a show of hands.

This is opposition.

Opposition only.

Opposition to 1038. All right. Thank you very much. Too many to count. All those that are here in support of 1038? Okay. Of course, a lot of people left, but okay. There's your poll, Mr. Willingham.

You ready? Okay. Attachment one. Mr. City Manager.

I really appreciated all of the comments that talked about the benefits of ward representation, neighborhood representation. We still got some comments about the racial aspect of it. And if you listen to the tape, the committee was concerned also about the racial aspect of it. So I'll address the litigation that got us to this point. So the case you see before us is the case that has been subject to all of the recent discussion. It says white versus register, but this is from the Calais case, Louisiana versus Calais, that the Supreme Court just decided. And this language is verbatim. It's taken from that case. But they refer to the case of White versus Regis, and sometimes you'll see White versus Texas. And there has been discussion about the disadvantage of the LR system. And we have people who have done research and they've reached a conclusion. I think the best thing to do is to give you what the case says, the current case that is precedent as we move forward. And this was in bold, the language references a former Supreme Court decision in white. It said the court recognized that at large districts can be employed to achieve discriminatory ends. Also, they cite another case, Perkins. which observed that a switch to at-large elections could be a method to maintain white control of the political process. I cite another case, Allen, explaining that a change to at-large voting could nullify the ability of minority voters to elect the candidate of their choice. So people want to say that Calais is the reason why we're here and we need to make changes. Calais talks about this as a problem at large systems. That's not what Calais is about. Calais is about how you draw the districts that you do have And I've reached out to the mayor with some suggestions on how we move forward within Calais. So I'm going to show you another case attachment to. Now This is a case, and it seemed to be some confusion, and people were twisting the words when I said that the plaintiffs won the case. And this was the case, too. Our issue was that the at-large system was discriminatory. So we just don't have Calais. We have the facts of our history and our evidence that we put forward. And there's nothing better than the language. The language is right here. It says the court concludes that the plaintiffs are prevailing parties. In my dictionary, prevailing means you win. So we won on the issue. Now, before when we talked about it, it was, oh, there was two decisions. That's normal when you have a decision that makes the decision on who prevails because then you got to have the decision on the attorney's fees. So the second part was because we prevail, we won the attorney's fees. So we have a system that we're being asked to go back to that has already been determined to have been discriminatory. That makes no sense. And look at this next case, attachment three. This is McLaughlin versus Onslow. But you can see that there's a list of people that got sued, including some of the people sitting up here, okay? Sammy, the mayor, Mayor Phillips, Cindy Edwards, Dr. Washington. COUNCILMEMBER LOGAN, OKAY? WHEN THEY GOT SUED, THEY DEFENDED THE AT-LARGE SYSTEM SAYING THAT OUR SYSTEM IS NOT DISCRIMINATORY AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE. THEY SAID IT. THEY DEFENDED IT. AND THEY WON. SO THERE'S SOME IMPORTANT LANGUAGE IN THIS CASE. Highlighted right there, it says, recognizing that in 1965, apportionment based on total population was stated to be constitutionally unassailable beyond question, okay? So they come in here today when they've lost two cases. Okay, and that's what the judiciary is for. We don't have the name call. We take it to the courts and we have the judgments and we read the judgments. So they come in here today talking about the people who vote, the number of people who vote. Council Member Smith delved into that, but it was unnecessary because this tells you it's unconstitutional. to have a system where you try to predict who votes and you draw wards or districts. And very interesting, because one person said that the Camp Lejeune is an issue. In 2017, my district had 280-some votes less than Jerry Bittner's district, which was Ward 2. 280-some, that's it, in terms of people who came out to vote. That same year, the plaintiff ran for the third congressional district. for Washington, DC, the third congressional district has Camp Lejeune. They don't talk about taking Camp Lejeune out of the third congressional district. The third congressional district has 131,000 less than the fourth congressional district. They don't worry about 131,000. But 285 is a problem for Camp Lejeune. Now, let's go to the second page, because this is interesting, in this case. OK, let me see. Let's try the third slide. No, go back. Let's see. It's the discussion, oh, this is slide one. It's the discussion on... Let me see. I can't operate that. Give me just a moment.

Take your time.

Okay, we'll go to the next one.

Okay.

This was a litigation that I was involved in and And the only reason I bring this up is because when we tried to explain that, what losing the lawsuit means, when the McLaughlin lawsuit, when they lost it, there was attempts to give it a different interpretation. Well, it got dismissed, they can bring it back. And just because you pay attorney's fees doesn't mean that somebody won the case. OK, this is a case they paid attorney's fees. Not attorney's fees. They paid $80,000. Now, in this case, it's a settlement. So they can walk away and say, there's no liability. They can say, we didn't do anything wrong. That's what a settlement is. But when you have a case where the judge determined who's the prevailing party, yes, you did something wrong. So just to put that in context, this is a settlement. And from now on, they can say, well, it wasn't any kind of unlawful searches and seizures. But I bring this up for another reason, because when you have neighborhood representation, you can get at things like this. that help policing, helps better policing, when you can check them like this and you don't end up with Rodney King situations. So neighborhood representation can do that. And I don't think we would have been evolved that way if it hadn't been neighborhood representation. When I'm in that community and I can see what they're doing. Okay, I'll go to the next one. Now, I just put this in here. This is the food truck case. Just to show you again, this is just like what happened in the first case I showed you where we said the at-large system was discriminatory. The city of Jacksonville realized that we got a bad case. So we changed the law. Changing the law gave the other side what they wanted. So Then it was not settled. They were still determined to be entitled to attorney's fees. That's the difference in the settlement. And you see here that that suit was won to that extent. So the only thing they had to do once they changed the law and gave the other side what they wanted. So that's the significance of that. Okay, next. Okay. This is... And I show you this because we've been tossing about the concept of one city. And if you go to Wikipedia right now and you look up the city of Jacksonville, you're gonna see basically two things. It's the home of Camp Lejeune. And you're going to see this last paragraph. The last paragraph says, in 2016, Jacksonville became the first jurisdiction to adopt a paid holiday honoring the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution, which made slavery in the United States and territories illegal. The resolution of adoption mentions prevention of modern slavery, which it describes as human trafficking, including child labor and military service. That's what the world sees. The significance of that is empathy. Because if you drew lines based on what part of town you come from, race, we never could have reached this decision to do this great thing that the world sees, okay? Somebody up here, voted for it and helped put it together. That's Dr. Washington. Somebody else up here was instrumental in the presentation. Cindy Edwards, okay? Bob Wharton may be viewed as casting the deciding vote. No special interest, no party, no race. It was just doing what was in the best interest of the city. And so that's a one city moment. That's what we should be about. Not catering to special interest groups, okay? Now, we took a poll, and the city said at the last meeting they wanted to hear from the people. I'm like, well, look at the two cases that should dispose of the issue. We need to support the system that y'all just supported two years ago. They said they wanted to hear from the people.

They heard from you.

All that is meaningless if they don't listen to you. But they just didn't hear from the people in this room. We got email. And Mr. City Manager, what was the count on the email?

Mayor, I think the numbers that I saw today were 26 that council received in opposition and then one email from the Republican Party in support of 1038. Okay.

You're right. Overwhelmingly, you have spoken and we should act. Especially if the reason for postponing it when we did was to say that we want to hear from you. That will make our decision. Hearing from you all will make our decision. And it's clear what you're saying. So next slide. Now, I've been involved in two of the All-American City efforts. The first one, my son was involved in and they were transported to the event and they were excited. But what do we say to these children? When we act like this, how is that a one city moment? When by the legal standards, this should be opposed out of hand. We ask you about it, you say it should be opposed. What do we say if that's not enough? So I do like that I heard about the benefits that you all feel. I didn't hear that. It was these false arguments. We call them red herrings. About you can draw based on how many people vote. That kind of stuff. Not the benefits. If you're gonna be honest and you do oppose the ward system, you gotta come in here and say, but look what you've accomplished. If that doesn't begin the conversation, it's disingenuous, okay? Cuz we have accomplished a lot. So, What I did not hear, was this is for a political purpose. Didn't hear it, okay? The only way they can get away with party gerrymandering is if it's for a political purpose. So I'm really pleased, and I don't think anybody up here is gonna say that, They understand this to be about a political purpose, because we're nonpartisan. Changing this to a war, we're still nonpartisan. I mean, change is at large. So it's almost like it can't be for a political purpose. They haven't alleged that it was for a political purpose. And that's very important. And so that needed to be established for the record. It kind of bothers me that his name gets tossed out when the people up here know that Ernie was on the committee to draw the district lines. We consider Ernie as our representative. You're going to toss his name out in defense of this kind of stuff that you're trying to do as if he supports it or would have supported it. It's just very disrespectful to his legacy to do that. So at this time, I would like for my colleagues to comment and there were allegations that we were talked to. I was not talked to. And I don't think, and I mean before it was initiated. And I'm seeing some heads like this. So it's wrong for them to mislead on that level.

Exactly.

thinking that we would never know. I guess that's what, you know. So, have at it.

Well, first, thank you for everybody for coming out tonight. It was very nice to hear. I was one of the people that wanted to hear from everybody because I have not spoke to obviously all of y'all. So thank you for taking the time to come out to us. Thank you for, you know, kind of educating us. I'll be honest with you, I was never asked about this from Gable or Shepard. No one called me about it. So I found out, actually, I think I was asleep when Nikki sent out a text in the morning. So when I first heard about it, and I was one of the ones last time that wanted to hear more. And I'll be honest with you, I haven't made up my mind 100%. I'm definitely just mulling things over. I like to take things in. I like to think about it before I make a decision. But I do appreciate everybody coming out here tonight and taking the time to meet with us. So thank you.

I believe it was Ms. Matilda. I'm going to quote you, darling. I'm going to quote you a quote. She said, strong leadership is about speaking the truth. And in some cases, that means we have to be gracious enough to hear a 360 view of something. Like, I think a healthy debate, and I'm pretty sure you'd agree, Mr. Gillingham, can include different viewpoints and should. Doesn't mean we're ever going to, we're never going to always agree on everything, even on most of the municipal things we vote on. A lot of them are unanimous, but sometimes they're not. Everybody looks at problems and challenges in different ways and has different perspectives. I would like to say that in the interest of the 360 facts and fairness, there are some numbers that I pulled from the local board of elections and the census data that I do find interesting. um the city of jacksonville has roughly a 30 population churn we're kind of a unicorn we're not like kerry or wilmington or another community because of the large population we have of military attached families our population turns frequently and at a very high rate compared to most communities. We also have a younger population, the median age being low, as you well know. And I'm not sure about all of y'all, but when I was 18, I didn't care who was on city council. When I was 20, I hardly noticed. It was a little later in my life before I started paying attention to government and leadership. That doesn't mean we don't have kids today who do pay attention. But a lot of the base population that's come up in discussion is also young or and or registered in another state. That does make a little bit of a difference. It was pointed out statistically that the population in each board is roughly 18 to 19,000, totally within the acceptable population limits. When I pull the data from the Onslow or requested the data from the Onslow County Board of Elections for the actual registered voters, Ward 1 has, as was stated, 18,000, 19,000. I don't have the exact figure. I tried to catch it when Councilwoman Smith said I think it was 19,000 and change.

We just want to average out 18,000.

18,000. Registered voters are 3,482. That's Democrat, Republican, unaffiliated, Green, everybody.

3,482.

What is that number, too? Registered voters. Registered voters in Ward 1. And Ward 1 is 5,107. I got this data from the local Board of Elections on May 13th.

I will have to- This information came from our city manager and provided to all of us. This came from the Board of Elections.

And it was May 13th, so it's very recent. I don't know why there's a discrepancy, but it's probably not worth fighting over. If you got 18,000 and registered 3,400 or so, in the next ward over that has 18,000 registered voters, all parties, 10,449.

I have 13,256.

Great, even higher, 13,800. If you've got five in one and 13 in another, or 3,500 and 10 and a half, those are not equitable participant numbers. They're just not. And a voting campaign and get out the vote is great. But if your get out the vote is talking to someone who's registered in Texas, and their car plates are in Texas, and they vote in Texas, they're probably not going to be so inspired by your speech, they go change all of that to vote here. And they don't technically have to change everything, but most of them don't know that. I think that's where the education piece can come in. But there is a discrepancy, not just in voter turnout, but in eligible registered voters to begin with. Ward 2 has 10,000, Ward 3 is right behind it, and Ward 1 and 4 are both at about the same lower level. So that's a discrepancy. It is a variance. It is a factor. We are a unicorn community because of our military population. I can say I was not anticipating HB 1038 to be filed and bring this discussion forward. It originated from citizens in our city. But I do see some of the claims that are made in that it isn't equitable and that it is political. I will say it is political. It's about political power and distribution of that political power. When 10,000 voters have a certain level of power distributed amongst all 10,000 and the same level of political power is distributed among 3,500, It multiplies that power for the smaller group and diminishes the power for the larger group. Their vote is impacted in its impact by the numbers of voters that are eligible to vote in each area. Just to put it on the record, it's already been said, but Ms. Welsh, we know that in 89, the class action lawsuit, 89-90, named specifically, what was the claim to that case? What did the plaintiffs assert?

And I apologize, we're talking about- The 1989 class action lawsuit filed against the city.

What was the stated claim? It's been stated before.

Yeah, so there was the complaint where Mr. Willingham was one of the named plaintiffs, and then the et al as well, versus the city of Jacksonville et al. Let's see, in the complaint it says, this is an action brought by black citizens of the city of Jacksonville, North Carolina, or the city, challenging at-large election of city council members as an unlawful dilution of black voting strength. Plaintiffs alleged that the city's at-large voting scheme denies and abridges the voting rights of black citizens in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended in 42 U.S. Code Section 1973 or the Act and in violation of 42 U.S. Code Section 1983.

So the case was brought because black voters felt they were being suppressed by the system. So that ethnic group is named in the case. Correct?

Yep, I quoted directly the statement.

And then when the ward system was created following that law case, ward one, ward four, ward one, oh God, English, ward one and ward four, I can do this, were created, what was the identifying characteristics of the neighborhoods that were carved out for the creation of those initially?

So I believe, and I'd have to take a look again at some of the other parts of the file, but I believe they called them minority wards.

For the purpose of carving them out? They were called Minority Awards in the city charter and in the legislation, but they were historically black communities, if I remember correctly. I think that's right. Okay, and so in our code, our city charter from 1989 to 2022, as has been said already, they were called Minority Awards. Populations were equal. They were not Minority Awards for population. It was Minority Awards for ethnicity. Is this correct? Safe assumption. Let's put it that way.

I believe so. I apologize. I didn't. You're good. Looks super close.

I know. It's a tough conversation to have.

What's the question? I didn't understand the question if you don't mind. Repeat that section, please.

The words minority ward were codified from 89 to 2002 in our city charter. They were labeled, words one and words four were labeled as minority wards. While the claim was that population was equal, they were called minority wards for a reason, and it wasn't the population, so it must have been the representation that was desired. Is that a logical assumption? I mean, it sounds like a logical derivative to me. Saying all of that, I have no issue with the ward system existing. I think local representation is great, and we should have someone that you can contact on the council with the issues in your neighborhood. If my issue with the wards as they sit today is that they were created based on race and our population does not reflect the geographic component that was mentioned earlier today. One of our speakers mentioned that at-large races really disadvantage people, especially when there's a geographic component. The data from the census and the data from the Board of Elections both indicate that our population mix across the city is uniform in every ward. There's just as much diversity in wards two and three as there are in one and four. They are historically black communities. But the population, the black population in the city of Jacksonville has declined to 15.3%. The white population has declined. But if you look at the Hispanic population that has risen to 20, Pacific Islander, Asian, Latin, Middle Eastern and all of the others. You add those all up. 41% of our population is diverse and not only black and not only white. Where are they? I think we're working a system because it works and it's not necessarily a horrible system. But the way that words were designed originally definitely had a racial ethnic component in it. And the demographics of our city don't necessarily reflect the need for that anymore. Specifically drawn on race. They don't reflect the needs specifically drawn on race. And to me, Mickey Smith is an excellent example of this. She just won, war three, a predominantly white district. I mean, war two. Excuse me. She did an excellent job campaigning. She got out the vote. She did great. She did the work. She holds the seat. She holds the title. She should. I have no issue with that. But I have trouble justifying the difference figures that I see in actual eligible voters. That's my only sticking point with the current wards.

I'm going to interject something at this point. When these council members are up here debating this, I don't want to hear a lot of unnecessary noise coming from the audience because they need to be concentrating on their debate and not what's going on out there. So please respect that. Thank you.

Just as a short rebuttal, You may mention that this was initiated, the war system was initiated based on race. And over time, African Americans have been placed throughout the city, or are throughout the city. People of color. African Americans. And although that's what initiated and draw everyone to the table to discuss, Once the districts were mapped out, the African Americans in those areas still were the minority. They weren't the majority in those wards. Regardless of what the charter says, the numbers don't match. The number says 18,000. The numbers did not cause for Ward 1 and 4 to have majority black. It didn't equate to that. What it did, it drew everybody to the table to say the all at large system is ignoring these communities. So when we draw these lines, we're going to draw these lines to make sure that the population is equitable. It equals, plus or minus 5%. But those two wards that came to the table saying, hey, you guys are forgetting about me, forgetting about us, they were still the minority. What changed is that that ward now can select someone for a council to have a vote at the table. It did not cause for only blacks to run for those offices. Case in point, two years ago, 2023, three years ago, Councilwoman Washington, Dr. Washington, ran a race against civilian last name Beltran. He ran for at-large at one time and lost, and then he ran for War IV. He only garnered 51 votes. That had nothing to do with black folks not voting for him. Out of the 18,000 give or take children, the onus was on him as well as Dr. Washington to go out, knock on those doors, make sure people understood. When I knocked on those doors, majority of the people didn't even know early voting had started. Majority of the people didn't even know what ward they were in. We spent every day at the Board of Elections. And what my very own husband and I did was when we met those individuals, we asked them what ward they were in. And I wish I would have kept the numbers, but there was a large number of people who resided in the county that was upset because they couldn't vote. All of that tells me, and you were present, It's not an issue with the numbers. It's not an issue with whether or not a predominantly black community is in this particular ward. Although that's a predominantly black community, it did not represent the majority. What that tells me is that we have an issue with how we have run this council in the past. I say issue in that your ward should know who you are and they should know what ward they're in. I was able to educate Ward 2. Not only that, I knocked on doors of individuals who did not look like me. And it was my platform and me sharing the opportunity with them that caused for them to make their vote. There were individuals who had not voted in the municipals that decided to vote because of the Get Out the Vote initiative that I made. Now, don't get me wrong. I thank God for the 683 votes. But this is a God moment. This was his doing, because I've never ran an election before. But what I did do is I compared what I was going to do and instructed to do compared to what everyone else was doing. And my 20-plus years here in Jacksonville, there was no political campaign. It was put your signs out, and you would have your different meetings with your different supporters. But I don't recall canvassing. I don't recall having a forum where individuals can come and sit and drink some coffee or, in my case, get some water, because I'm not bringing no coffee. In other words, the process of voting is so fragile. The aspect of voting is so fragile. The thing is, we've got to educate the people. And if we educate the people, they'll be able to vote. I made a note here about our young Marines. Being that I was one, I'm very intimate with being a young Marine, plus my son is one. My husband was one. And it took someone telling us about voting. We came from homes that did not vote. We came from homes that said voting, you're wasting your time, it don't even count. But it took someone educating us on the voting process that we started doing our absentee ballots. Now, what was crazy is that we only did every four years until we were educated about the fact that we need to be a part of what happens in the city that we lived in, regardless of how long we were going to be there. Now, I understand that individuals don't want to change their home or record. They have every right to do that. But what we don't have a right to do, as Representative Gabel stated, that they don't vote. And also what Representative Shepard said, that 90 percent of them don't even vote at all. You don't know that. You don't have the figures. And this information, not only was it from the Board of Elections and the North Carolina State Board of Elections, but something tells me that we need to investigate why the numbers are off. But the numbers don't lie. We have people that register to vote. Beltran, war four, had an opportunity, and your numbers may shift, out of the registered voters, he had 4,944 potential individuals that could vote for him.

And you know what he did?

He lost.

He lost because he only campaigned on base. There you go. Now, you said something that was amazing. He only campaigned on base. Well, primarily. I can't say only he's not here to verify that.

He's not here to verify it, but I asked for information about how can I go on base because I, too, had constituents that resided on Midway Park. And I had no documentation that gave me the authority to campaign on base. And that lets me know, too, that he should not have banked on just the base. He should have come to the city of Jacksonville and contacted Ward 1 or Ward 4 and analyze and pull the numbers on who he should have contacted.

I think I know why our numbers are different. When I parsed this data from the Board of Elections, I removed inactive voters. So the totals may be different because these are active registered voters versus inactive. That may be why the gap in difference. It didn't occur to me at first, but I just realized that's what was done with the data.

What I do know as... I mean, it's very similar.

Proportionally, it's the same.

It's very similar, but you know, it doesn't take much to become active. No. It doesn't take much. I say this because with our young Marines, isn't it our responsibility if we're going to count them in our electoral process that we educate them in saying, hey... You can do our absentee ballot or you can vote during the municipal or during the general. Well, you know what? Those Marines want to vote. I know that because I was on the poll. I was working the polls over there across the street during the general election. And there was a swarm of Marines in uniform coming to vote. And I had to turn them away. Why? Because they came on election day. Had they just come that weekend prior, those two weekends that we have that so many people complain about early voting, they would have been able to register on site and vote. But we stopped that because we did not educate our Marines. They belong to us too. We're the whole city. And we should be educating them on the opportunity to exercise their civic duty to vote. That's all I have.

Let me interject something real quick here. Madam Attorney, I've had a council member or two question why I haven't really gotten involved in these debates. And would you please explain why that is according to our Robert's Rules of Order, I believe it is?

Yeah, that's correct. So the Roberts Rules of Order have been substantially adopted in our local rules of procedure as well. And in our local rules, if the mayor does engage in debate, he is then required to have the mayor pro tem basically preside over the debate. And as you can see, the mayor pro tem is actively engaged in the debate as well. So that, I believe, is probably why our mayor has not engaged in the debate. Thank you.

Mr. Willingham.

Mr. City Manager, could you pull up attachment three again?

While he's doing that, for some of you, in understanding parliamentary procedures, the mayor would have to give up his seat in order to participate in the dialogue.

Thank you. Okay, I started with this so I could try to avoid the red herrings. But somehow, we're right back around to talking about how many people turn out to vote. It is illegal. It's against the Constitution to try to draw boundaries based on how many people you think are going to vote. It's impossible to do, and it's illegal. And that's what this means in this case. Whose case was this? Joe McLaughlin's case. So in the very case that he brought against the city, they told him that. But we still get this, oh, it's low voter turnout in one ward, so we got to do something. You can't do that. And we still get this, oh, 218 less in Ward 1 is a problem, but you don't hear anybody saying anything about 131,000. That's hypocritical. So, Councilwoman Edwards, when I said that there was no commentary, no concern raised about it being, that this is for partisan political reasons, okay? And that's fatal. To save it, I hear, oh, this is political. Of course it's political. No partisan political reasons have you heard tonight. None. Not even from Councilwoman Edwards, unless she wants to try to add some. But they don't have that to hide what they're doing. So But when you go down that rabbit hole about voter, the number of people who come out to vote, ask yourself this. Why is it the same people who engage in voter suppression complain about the number of people who come out to vote that they're trying to keep from voting? They reduce early voting. They don't want absentee voting. All of these things that they want to do to keep people from voting, but they try to get around this, and it's a red herring. It has nothing to do with it because you can't base it on that. That's the starting point. It shouldn't be the finishing point tonight. That's the starting point. You can't base it on that. But all of these little arguments... that don't have anything to do with Calais, the Supreme Court case, or any of the cases that you've seen. Because you've seen the cases. If they hadn't, you would have seen them. The Calais case is what the discussion is about. And Calais does not say you have to change from ward to at-large. I'm over.

Mr. Mayor, I'd like to ask the city attorney some questions. So what are our options here to look at? I know that you've been doing some research from the School of Government. And so could you tell us a little bit about what options we have?

Yes. So first of all, let's talk about the option at hand. So the legislature has introduced a bill we do not unfortunately get a say in the legislature on a vote for or against a bill right it's just the voting members of the legislature that get to weigh in on that no one in this room unfortunately gets a vote on the legislative decision on whether or not to adopt this bill what the city council can do is either indicate a unified or a majority intention to support a bill or a majority position to be in opposition to a bill. So I think that's kind of what we're structuring our conversation on today. But when it comes to changing a city charter, there are actually multiple procedures that can be followed to change a city's charter. And to change the method of voting is to change a city's charter. So ordinarily, a city's charter is set out by the legislature. And only the legislature can amend its own act ordinarily. But the legislature did pass a law that enabled city councils essentially to change a charter via ordinance. And they also set out in that law the opportunity for the voters to change a city's charter via referendum. And that is a very oversimplified view of it because there are many, many different stages to each of those processes. So the city council, for example, could pass an ordinance that they would then say would only become effective upon the vote of the people. They could pass an ordinance that said it was effective upon a date certain. And then there are certain triggering timelines on when a referendum would or would not be appropriate after the fact. So the School of Government actually published a really good question and answer article about the different options that people had to change charters. And I'll just kind of show it to the group here so you can see this is the law that talks about modifying charters. So there's quite a bit that the legislature says the citizens and the council can do, right? And in this case, the citizens and the council have not initiated any proceeding to change a charter. And so in the questions and answers, it talks about what paths there are if the city wants to change its charter via ordinance and what paths there are if the general population wants to change a city charter via ordinance. And again, there's a lot of overlap. So, for example, this House bill right now could be amended to say we're actually going to pitch this to a referendum. We want the voters to decide, right, that the legislature can actually issue that edict, putting it to a vote. But right now, all that's before us is a legislative action, and while that legislative action is pending, we're stayed from any kind of process that we would initiate to change an ordinance or any kind of process that the public could initiate. That's a longer answer, I apologize, but we have a lot of options as the bottom line when it comes to changing our charter. It's just that we're prevented really from initiating any of that until the legislature decides what to do with this pending bill.

In response to your statement, citizens can in fact contact representatives who will be voting on the house bill to oppose correct absolutely so that's whether that's via email letter or in person that's correct i mean i i i mean this isn't something we asked for uh i was just as surprised as everyone else that uh that this bill was introduced

You know, our community values fairness, transparency, and equal representation for every resident. Any system of local governments should support clear processes, balanced participation, and the confidence that all neighborhoods have the opportunity to be heard. Decisions affect how our city elects its leaders should be approached with a thoughtful consideration broad public input and a commitment to maintaining trust and unity among all those who call this city home above all the goal of the system should serve every resident equally and strengthen the infectedness and the integrity of our local government in that spirit i would move that we table this consideration and have a period of study, study that will provide us an opportunity to examine the range of possibilities and encourage constructive dialogue among all parties. If we have one group of citizens who have obviously gone to our representatives and said they feel disenfranchised, then I think it's incumbent on us that we sit down and try to develop some kind of consensus. And I think there is a way of consensus. And even if that means asking Representative Shepard, Representative Gable, and Representative Smith, who also represents part of Onslow County, to come in here and have some constructive dialogue and look for other, and I'll use Mr. Willingham's term, consensus, so that we can develop a solution that everybody feels included. And I think that's the problem, is everybody doesn't think that they're included, at least in one way or another. And I think given us a period of time since the bill has been pulled from the committee, given us some time to look at how we can come to a consensus and make sure that everybody has an opportunity to speak, and we have an opportunity to listen, and look for how we How we can, because if the bill passes, there's going to be people that feel disenfranchised. If the bill doesn't pass, then people are going to feel that. And so how can we look at drawing some consensus? And I think that's why I'm asking about what are our options? Are there options that we can use to have a win-win situation? And I think there are. We just have to explore those.

That begs me to ask the question, how could in a two-at-large and four-ward system that equally divides each ward give or take plus or minus 5%, feel disenfranchised. Well, I mean, I don't know.

Obviously, people are disenfranchised or the bill wouldn't have been presented.

No, the bill was very clear on why the bill was presented. We listened to the tape and we listened to the primary sponsor on his exact reasons to the law, to the election law committee, who's in charge of reviewing that bill and voting on it to send it to the next level.

Well, but what I heard was that citizens from our community were contacting them and saying that they wanted to get rid of the ward system.

We just had a poll here in the audience, and I believe that those who support that would have still been here. Also, we heard a political letter that was spoken. So I'm still trying to figure out who are all these people And it seems as if, just seems as if, it's just a small portion with a larger voice or a louder voice.

Well, I don't know that. I don't know that there aren't people that didn't know about this city council meeting. I mean, it's a state bill.

And just to your comment and to our attorney's comment, what we decide here, And I'm looking for consensus. Well, there's one decision that can be made, which is what they mentioned, is that there needs to be a resolution from this council in support of or against. That's the only thing that will affect their decision. But anything we do here, we could talk about it. We can redo lines. We could come up with different ways. We're never going to satisfy everyone. But I believe that as a council, because we're all elected officials, we should be able to sit down and come up with alternate options if we need to, because I don't see this one as being broke.

But there are, that's what some of the committee members said is, what other options are available? And I think that we need some time. That wasn't questioning us.

That was questioning the representative who submitted it. And that's his job to do.

But also, I think it's our job to do, because if we think that citizens are disenfranchised because of the system, and obviously they've gone to our state representatives and asked for that, then maybe what we need to do is look at what our options are, and that's why I asked the city attorney to do that, and to look at how we can come to some kind of consensus with all the groups, all the neighborhoods, and try to... and try to look at what's best for our entire community and what are those things that we can do that can do that. And I think it's going to take some time for us. The Calist decision, I think, is going to impact that to some extent. i don't know how and i don't know to what extent what i want to do is i want to have a system gives every voter the confidence that they're being represented by the entire council and it seems to me that at least based upon what our representative said, is that people are going to them and saying it's not fair.

I wonder why they didn't come to the council. I have no idea. But we're going to do the work.

Did you frame that in the form of a motion? He did.

All right.

I'll second it. There's a second. Discussion. Now you can discuss.

Discussion. The statement was made that we have time, but the Daily News quoted Representative Shepherd, and I have his direct quote. He stated to the effect that they're trying to get that bill back. as soon as possible. I do have it here. I did read it earlier for the record. So what that soon as possible is, I don't know, considering they're only in session for a short period of time. Could it be revamped and put back in their hands tomorrow? Yes, it could be. But they can't move forward unless they have a resolution, because the committee has already indicated that.

Well, if that's the case, then it's dead, because they're not going to get a resolution. Are you making the decision for the council? No, no. I mean, we haven't made a decision. So until we make that decision, if that's the case, then the bill won't go forward, if that is the case.

Well, I am definitely glad that... the statement that Representative Shepard made about our mayor being in full compliance or, you know, supported, and some of the council members that he talked to individually are in support of it. I'm glad that that was hearsay. I know I personally, and this is to the council, this is to those that are listening, I personally sat down with our mayor because I wanted to know, did he say that? And I'm confident in saying that, no, Representative Shepard misrepresented our mayor. He misrepresented this council because we already know that majority of this council was not contacted by him.

I haven't talked to him about that bill.

I was as surprised as you are. Exactly, but he did state before an elected committee that he did. And I question the truthfulness of our representatives who would say and make allegations about this council as well as our mayor that were false. I question that. And I don't want to do work for someone else who wants to lie. They can do the work. But I understand what you're saying, sir. Y'all, let me know. I love these guys. We're going to leave here. We're going to eat together, okay?

Okay. Without trying to get too much into the legality... At one point in time, with part of the Voting Rights Act, was it with the pre-clearance, with section? Section two. With section five. Five is fine, pre-clearance. With the pre-clearance, meaning that if there was a particular jurisdiction that had a history of voter suppression and let's just be clear for this conversation voter suppression meaning black people that the Department of Justice had to approve The Department of Justice had to approve an election for a particular municipality. And at one point in time, the city of Jacksonville had to submit their voting elections to the Department of Justice. Based upon that information, every 10 years when the census is done, based upon your population, because now we have the ward system, That information is aggregated and the populations and the lines are drawn to be able to distinguish Ward 1, Ward 2, Ward 3, and Ward 4. So to give a little bit of history, because I was on that council, so I can speak of not what I think but what I know. When the COVID virus happened in 2020, that impacted our ability to aggregate the 2020 census data so that we could draw our lines. Subsequently, we had to ask special permission from the North Carolina General Assembly to basically allow us to curtail or should I say to suspend our voting for I believe it was the voting election for 21 that was delayed until 22 so that we could aggregate the data and Look at our lines to make sure that we had a balanced populations between wars 1 war 2 war 3 and war 4 based upon that information With the exception of Council Member Willingham, Council Member Yanaro, and Council Member Smith, the remaining council, including Council Member Jerry Bittner, Council Member Brian Jackson, and Council Member Bob Warden, we elected an individual, whether they was from our ward or from within the city of Jacksonville, to be a part of the redistricting committee. With that being said, there was public hearings, or I should say there was a public format in which the public could attend those redistricting committee sessions. And during that time, the public not only could attend, but you could also watch it on G10 and basically you can go to YouTube and you can bring it back and you can view it. And based upon that information, There was not many citizens that came out and said that they wanted the war system to be dismantled. There was a few, but it was not the majority of the city of Jacksonville. And it was usually the few that is still upset today and continues to be upset today. Not the majority of the city. City Hall was not bursting at the seams. It was not. So with that being said, I would think that as an elected official, that if the citizens were not saying, This is no longer working for us. The citizens were saying, this is working for us. And we want it to continue to work for us. And that has occurred with each time the census has been done. It happened in 20. I mean, it happened in, excuse me, it happened in 2000. It should have been 2010 and 2020 because I do believe Mr. Ernie Wright served those three years at 10 interval sessions. There was not a mass protest to say get rid of the system because the system was working. Council Member Willingham passionately talked about empathy, which is not to be confused with sympathy. Sympathy is just, I just feel sorry for you. If you've lost a family member, I kind of feel sorry for you that you no longer have your family members. So that's sympathy. Empathy is when you're able. to use your emotional intelligence. So you have to grow up. And place yourself into someone's shoes and view their point of view through their eyes. Not necessarily saying you agree with it, but being able to put yourself in someone else's shoes and view their viewpoint. Do everybody know who Maury Povich is? Okay. Maury Povich had a sister, does have a sister, that decided that she wanted to be a news anchor as well. I'll let you look it up on Wikipedia, give you some homework tonight. But here's my point. She wanted to be able to be a newscaster, just like the men. But in her day, Only men, specifically white men, was newscasters. Women were used to do the research to give to the men to make them look as if we've done our homework when it was really the women behind the scenes. So his sister really didn't like that. So what ended up happening? Do you know who Eleanor Norton Holmes is? Oh, absolutely. She worked in President Jimmy Carter's administration. Maury Povich's sister hired Mrs. Norton Holmes, who was pregnant at the time, to litigate her case for women discrimination. All the women in this room, regardless of the color of your skin, can speak about discrimination from many points of view. But I want to leave you with this to talk about empathy. As a representative of Ward 4 for the last past 15 and a half years, The lady who served before me, the Honorable Mrs. Fannie Coleman, lived just right down the street from me. And I emulated her because she was a registered nurse and I wanted to go into the field of nursing. And Mrs. Coleman was a pediatric nurse. And not only did she work at the Naval Hospital, she was the head of the pediatric clinic. And I say this to say, not only did she live in Ward 4, she also worked in Ward 4. Because Camp Lejeune Naval Hospital is in Ward 4. Fast forward, I never knew that I was going to follow in her footsteps. So now, not only do I live in Ward 4, I also work in Ward 4. I work as a school nurse. And my responsibility is taking care of the health needs of children ages two through 11 of our active duty military service member that's right here at . That's my day-to-day job. That's my responsibility. And although I've never worn the uniform of a military active duty service member, it's a badge of honor to be able to take care of those children every day that I go to work. Last week, I had an opportunity to go to Charleston, South Carolina, where one of my former nursing students graduated from medical school. Mono e Mono, master and teacher. Dr. Washington once taught Joshua Rivers. As of last week, Dr. Washington, Dr. Joshua Rivers, Mono e Mono, a military dependent student, 26 years of age, is now a physician. Had I not been elected to Ward 4, I probably would not have been working out on the base, and my past would have never crossed with Joshua. And South Carolina is celebrating him. But here is the one point that I want to make. I do believe it was said in this room tonight that a person of color I don't want to misquote the person, but he alluded to the fact that if you're a person of color, then no white person would ever vote for you. Okay. I'm going back to South Carolina again. There happened to have been an out of wedlock child by the name of SMA Washington who was not reared in her father's home because her father did not marry her mother. So she was reared in the homes of her mother's side of the family. When she became of age and she wanted to go to college, Instead of following in her father's footsteps and being allowed to attend the college he attended because legacy alumni, you know about that, right? The school that your father and your father's father and your grandfather went to, by right, legacy, you should be able to go. But she couldn't. So unfortunately, she had to go to a HBCU called South Carolina State University. Her father paid for her tuition behind the scenes, but did not want to acknowledge her. Her father became famous because prior to Senator Cory Booker, He held the longest filibuster in the United States Senate against the Civil Rights Act. How can you father a child by a woman of color and yet fight that your very seed cannot have the same rights as you? That was Senator Strom Thurmond. Empathy. How can you create something that is your DNA but feel they don't have the same right? And that's where we are. You look around this room. Ms. Edwards, you talked about Minority neighborhoods. I'll give you a little bit of history. The reason that the neighborhoods are historically black in the city of Jacksonville is something that was called restricted deed covenant where black people did not have the opportunity to choose where they wanted to live. Other people chose for them. That's where that terminology comes from. So we just can't throw that term around like it's our fault. Because if the truth of the matter, if we are all going to tell the truth, laws of exclusions are rarely written by people who look like you. They want to exclude you for a certain reason. And that's where we are. What is so harmful that only nine African Americans have had the privilege to sit on this council for 36 years versus your presence of 130 years? What harm have we done? If you listen to Council Member Willingham, and if you look at the reflection for 36 years, think of all the good that has occurred in the city of Jacksonville for over 36 years. When we come to the table, we just don't come and just sit. We come with our sleeves pulled up and ready to go to work because there is work that has to be done. And for some, this conversation is very uncomfortable only because you've never had to have it. You've never had to have it. So if you've had the privilege of not having to have an uncomfortable conversation, guess what? You're not thinking about what you're not thinking about. So I don't know how many more conversations we need to have with the public. Because when they're available, if there is an issue, They're not showing up. So if you're only telling me you're showing up in secrecy, well, we know what that means. And we know what it looks like. And we know the attire that's being worn. If you're really wanting to have a heart-to-heart conversation, you show up at the meetings. And you voice your opinion. So from 2020 to now, it's six years. I haven't seen that many people come to the city council meeting in six years that says we need to get rid of the ward system. And I've been sitting in this seat beside the mayor for the last past 15 and a half years. I'm not talking about what I think I know. I'm talking about what I do know. And I haven't seen individuals coming to the council meeting and saying, this is not working. But it is working. And it has worked. And it will continue to work. So is this conversation about 1038 about really the fact that it is working or the fact that we don't want it to work anymore? Because those are two different connotations. We are still having this conversation in 2026. In 2026, we're still having this conversation. Some of us sitting in this room right now, the voting rights bill may be one or two years older than you. But you've been able to take advantage of it. And now we're at the precipice that your grandchildren is probably going to have it worse than what your great grandparents did. If we're going to have a real conversation, it's going to have to be an adult conversation. And oftentimes that conversation, believe it or not, it starts with you looking at yourself in the mirror and exposing your hidden agendas. What are you willing to fight for versus what are you willing to fight up against? And we've made too much progress. Two lawsuits and we were still victorious and that's still not convincing? Because if they do it with this, But is it going to be tomorrow? What will it be?

Thank you, Mayor.

Well, we prepared.

Mayor, is there a way that we can have a discussion, set a time where we can have some discussion? Maybe appoint some people to help us facilitate a discussion with our legislators and hear from them why they sponsored the bill. And then, all right, that's enough.

We're going to take a recess for a few minutes because the mayor's back is killing him.

Take five. Yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

Resume. I'm sorry.

Presume anything. Mr. Willingham.

OK, I understand that there is a motion to table on the floor. But as part of the discussion, I would just like to bring up the resolution that had been prepared for the agenda item, please.

Mayor, I don't have that on the screen. But you do have the handout at each council member's seat.

Then I guess I'm going to have to read. But what I would like to do, these were drafted with the intent that everybody could agree on these things. It looks like there is a motion to table, and that may happen on the up or down vote, whether we approve or disapprove of HB 1038. This is a recourse so that we can accomplish this unity and consensus building. And so what is attempted here is just to state some facts. And if anybody disagrees with them, I'd like to entertain a disagreement, listen, and maybe we can still reword. Because what this does say is that pretty much what you've heard, that we didn't ask for it. And the majority of us weren't consulted. And we want to stand on the process where the things that impact us initiate from us. Because if we take any other approach, We all know that there has been the expressed intent to stop us from doing voluntary annexations. That's where we expand our boundaries and the city grows and property revenue grows. And if we co-sign for them to do things that we haven't initiated, that's next in mind. opinion just based on the most recent voluntary annexation and the comments from Representative Phil Shepherd. So this is not what I prefer, but Councilman Yanera talked about consensus building. Let's try to build something. But it can't be a moving target. It can't be, okay, we got two cases that support what we have here. We have the latest Supreme Court case that puts in context the discriminatory history of at-large systems. We don't have enough information so we have this. Now we have this and the people speak overwhelmingly in favor of keeping our ward system, which is a hybrid system. And now it's a moving target and we're talking about ghosts. We're talking about chasing ghosts when it's already been said that Representative Shepherd misled the committee. as it relates to the people he talked to. But we want to give credibility to this ghost of these people, the problem that Councilwoman Washington was having. Who are these people and where are they? So we want to credit that and kick the can down the road. So again, there's a motion to table. But I want to know who disagrees with these nine points, ten points. And because I think it's pretty factual. Whereas the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, number 89-46-4-BO for Terrence Boyle, that was the judge, Willingham and others versus the city of Jacksonville, the court determined that the Jacksonville at large system was discriminatory. against the plaintiffs, black residents of Jacksonville. That's number one. If anybody has any problem, we can come back to it. Number two, whereas Jacksonville executes a hybrid election system comparable to the U.S. Senate with two at-large members and the U.S. House with four equally populated districts, Jacksonville mayor has Jacksonville has a mayor elected by the voters citywide. Neither the North Carolina House of Representatives nor the North Carolina Senators have at-large elections. Jacksonville's hybrid system was a result of the above-cited litigation. The system is referred to as the ward system. Jacksonville has been incorporated since 1842. Number three, prior to the adoption of the ward system, no black person had ever been elected to Jacksonville City Council. Since the adoption of the ward system, two black members have consistently held the seats in the first and fourth wards for 36 years. However, a black person has never won an at-large seat in the history of Jacksonville. Whereas in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, number 722, civil 00171, with Joe McLaughlin as the lead plaintiff, the ward system was alleged to be discriminatory. The plaintiffs, that was McLaughlin and others, alleged that the above-sided system, which was a remedy to proven discrimination against black residents in the city of Jacksonville, discriminated against white people. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina dismissed the lawsuit finding no standing by the plaintiffs or failure to state a claim. The plaintiffs could not articulate a harm caused to white people by the ward system. There was no discrimination by the ward system against the plaintiffs. Number five. Whereas for the first time in the history of Jacksonville, North Carolina in 2026, Ward 2 elected a black person, Reverend Mickey Smith, which brought the total number of black members to three, along with Jerome Willingham and Dr. Angela Washington on the Jacksonville City Council. Number six, whereas Jacksonville's current election system was devised with the intent to provide neighborhood representation for previously underrepresented communities. Number seven, whereas on information or belief Jacksonville's current election system has never been an issue in a city council election and no one has ever run for city council with changing our system as part of their platform. Number eight, whereas Jacksonville City Council did not officially request HB 1038, neither was the majority of Jacksonville City Council informally consulted by NC House Representatives Phillip Shepherd or Wyatt Gable, neither of whom live within Jacksonville City limits. Neither Representative Wyatt Gable nor Representative Phillip Shepherd consulted with any current black council member. Whereas the city of Jacksonville has nonpartisan elections, therefore HB 1038 cannot be for a partisan political purpose. Whereas campus and Marine Corps base, Terraria Terrace, military housing, and New River Air Station are contiguous with wards one and four, all on the east side of US Highway 17. Article 1, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires all congressional districts to be practically equal. State legislative districts as well as local districts are required to be substantially equal. Just like the military installations are included in Jacksonville's wards, these territories are included in North Carolina's third U.S. congressional district. and not counting the residents would be unconstitutional. All voting districts, according to the U.S. Constitution, are drawn based on population, not a guess of who will vote. Therefore, now those were the ten facts, and this is a recommended summary. Summary, well, policy really. Therefore, be it resolved that particularly in this year of celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence from British colonialism, Jacksonville expresses concern that an election system might be imposed by the North Carolina House of Representatives, Wyatt Gable and Phillip Shepherd that has not previously been, that has previously been declared discriminatory. And no black person has ever been elected in Jacksonville in the application of the at large system before or since Willingham and others versus the city of Jacksonville Super. So I'd like a discussion on number one and who disagrees with number one.

All right. I want to ask the council if they want to carry on with this because I think you've already had an opportunity to speak and there's been a motion and a second. So I think the question should be called at this point. Now, if you want to bring this up at a later time, discussing each and every one of these points, that's fine. But we still have closed session. We still have a bunch of other things to do. Okay. I mean, but you can do it. I mean, if the council wants you to do it.

Well, it'll be helpful if we know who disagrees with any of these. It's not that complicated. This is part of the discussion.

Are we discussing this?

Are we discussing it or are we voting on the motion?

Well, I think the motion happened first, so I think we discussed that. And if you want to talk about it, I don't care. I mean... We're past dinner time, so.

You want to vote on calling the question?

I think that would be appropriate versus going down a list of different things and trying to get approval that way. I mean, you're basically trying to override the motion.

No, I wasn't. There's no motion on the floor to adopt this. It's just part of the discussion. And it was on the agenda.

Why didn't you lead with that? Wouldn't that have been more appropriate?

No, no. That's strategy. That's not. Fine. Give us each two minutes.

That's not. We'll hammer this thing out and move on. That's what I'd like to do. Two minutes apiece.

Y'all already had this. This has been with you. In your court. Okay. What problems with number one?

I don't have a problem with number one. Number two, what problems? I do have a problem with that one. So the county is pretty much at large, right? And there's representatives on the county commissioners at all parts of Wandslow County. There's Swansboro, there's Southwest, there's Jacksonville. I mean, they're all over the place, right, that they represent. It's not just one little area. It's not just Jacksonville. It's not just one little pocket. I mean, I would say the county operates at large, and there's representation all throughout the county, correct? I don't, that's... Well, I think it's the same thing as us, right? I mean, but they're...

I can talk to that, but I think it'll draw this out. Well, if you want to talk about it, here we go. Okay. How many African Americans have been elected in the county system? Oh, I don't know. Not many. You also forget I'm young.

One.

I'm a baby. One. One in the history. Why is that okay for us?

It was one that was elected, Ernie Wright, and one that was appointed. Well, we're talking election.

Okay, Ernie Wright. In the whole history of the county. But that's okay. That's the model you want.

I'm not saying it's okay. I'm just telling you that's a fact.

I don't want to argue. That's a fact, too, though, right? Is it a fact of one? Excuse me? One. I don't know, but sure. I'm taking your word for it. Okay. Okay, anybody else with two?

You know, I'm... It's getting a little late. I understand what you want to do, but I think we need some time to think about this.

I'm going to... If you do have a problem, just raise it. That's all we're asking. If you don't, you can think about it.

Are there some things that we can... Part of the discussion isn't necessarily about the... under representative districts it's moving from one to the other and if if we're going to have a discussion about you know if we're going to at-large or we're going or we're going to stay with wards that's not what this is about

This is about their taking action without our initiating the action. That's it. That's all there is.

I haven't talked to them. I plan on calling tomorrow. I have no clue. But what does that have to do with this? Well, down there tomorrow, the bottom was number eight.

Well, let's deal with number two. All right. Okay, anybody else with number two? What about number three? And all I'm trying to see is it factually correct, or would you like to correct it? That's all.

I'd like to take some time to look at it. I mean, you just dropped this on me. This is on the agenda. Must have went in late.

I don't know. I'd send it to everybody, I think.

It's factually correct. Can I ask a question without getting shot? If this, we've heard repeatedly that this is not about race, it's about representation. If it's not about race... Why are we pointing out that the black election results specifically and only? I'm asking.

Fair question. It's about the Constitution and how the laws have interpreted the Constitution. And the laws have interpreted the Constitution right here saying that this is discriminatory and what we have now is not discriminatory.

Well, then I have a question about facts. So you said a black person has won at large. When's the last time one has ran and then lost? At large? Yeah, I don't know that. Last election, Helen Thompson. When was this? Like two times in a row. Okay. Was it close? Was it way off? I mean, I don't know. I'm asking. You want facts? I'm asking for facts because I don't know those answers.

But she still lost.

But she still lost.

Yeah.

And that's the point. We want to win.

That's the point, Kenny.

Don't we all want to win? Yeah, but let's win with the law. Well, she had the opportunity. No, no.

These cases are the law. Let's win with the law. You're talking about facts. That's what I'm trying to understand.

I don't understand. The fact is nobody is won.

But that doesn't mean it's illegal. It doesn't mean it's wrong. You can't look at the case and say it don't mean it's illegal. We've already determined that. But someone had the opportunity to do something, right? Okay. Who's talking? I thought I was. Go ahead. I said, if someone has the opportunity to do something and they lose, how is that incorrect?

It says equal opportunity versus equal outcome.

Is that what we're... Yeah, I don't understand that, I guess. I mean, explain it to me. Zero to how many years we've been...

But we're not talking about years.

No, no, just let me talk if you're going to do that. Okay.

What's equal about that? You've had nobody in the history of the city win at large. What's equal about that? But I didn't determine that. Well, then, would you read the case from the Supreme Court that said these decisions were put in place for that reason?

How about that? But they had the opportunity. What I don't understand about it is they had the opportunity to run. We can't make voters pick something.

Oh, so... White people don't have the opportunity when they outnumber us in wards one and four. They don't have the opportunity to run. It's so easy to win in ward one. All you need is 200 votes. They outnumber us way more than 200. Who's that? White people in ward one. You have a lot more than we do in ward one. It's so easy to win in ward one. Win.

I'm not worried about that. I'm not in that ward.

He always got punchlines. Okay. Can we go ahead? Okay. Where was I? Number eight.

I think we're on number ten.

Then everybody's in agreement. Okay. No. Number four. Any problems with number four? Why would I stay here?

I was a party to that. I was a defendant.

Was the claim, and this is ignorance again, but I was not on council in 1989. I was in college.

I was too.

Which number? I told you.

Number four. Okay, go ahead.

Number four states, and this is just a point of clarification because I was not here in 1989, says that the plaintiffs allege that the at-large system discriminated against white people. Was that the claim?

Yes.

Ms. Edwards, she was on council when this happened.

Not in 1989. Oh, that's the 22 one.

Number four is talking about Joe McLaughlin.

I was thinking 1989 when I was in college. Sorry.

Okay, so we're good with that?

It is late.

Number five is accurate. Number five is accurate. Number six?

One word. Madam Clerk, did you catch in the reading that the word system needed to be inserted after election, current election system?

I tried to read it that way.

You did it well.

Okay, number six, y'all. Yeah. Number seven. This requires recollection because we kind of own information and belief, you know, it's not with certainty.

I don't think so.

You're good with that? I mean, you don't...

I don't recall anything.

Sounds historically accurate.

Okay, number eight. Like I said earlier, I plan on making a phone call tomorrow. But I haven't talked to them. It just says that. I want to know why they put my name out there. Because they did. They put my name out there, and I never spoke to someone. I know. So I plan on making a phone call and talking about it.

But it's correct, right? Sure. Number nine.

Question for the attorney.

Okay.

This asserts that an interpretation of the application of HB 1038, which is still under analysis from a whole lot of people with a whole lot of schooling, and we don't really have a lot back yet on how that will be interpreted. Is there any legal issue with us stating that it cannot be applied? We don't know for sure.

You're on number nine, right?

Yes. Okay.

So number nine says, whereas the city of Jacksonville has nonpartisan elections, therefore House Bill 1038 cannot be for a partisan political purpose. So I want to make it clear right now that I'm not offering legal advice to counsel. And it's my understanding that even though we have a motion on the table to table discussions, we're not yet done having debate and discussions at this time. So when it comes to a resolution, of course, you want the information to be information that is agreed upon. Anytime a resolution is passed by a simple majority of council, it's going to be agreed upon. I would assert that really that's a question of opinion. Which part? Number nine.

Number nine.

Just sort of in its entirety. Take out number nine.

Take out number nine.

OK. But that's not for me to decide to be clear. OK, we're good with it. It's for council.

We're good with it. Nine is gone.

Clever work.

I'll be honest with you. I don't know that it's a yes or no. That's fine.

Nine and ten are kind of unclear.

Nine is gone. Nine is gone.

What problem with ten? And for the public, I'll just read it while y'all... Go right ahead.

I don't like the not a guess of who will vote. Second half of that line. It's gone. I think if you state after the word population, the meaning is the same.

It's gone. I'll read it. Camp Lejeune, Marine Corps Base, Terroir Terrace, Military Housing, and New River Air Station are contiguous with the wards 1 and 4, all on the east side of US Highway 17. Article 1, Section 2 of the US Constitution requires that all congressional districts be practically equal. State legislative districts as well as local districts are required to be substantially equal. Just like military installations are included in Jacksonville's wards, these territories are included in North Carolina's third U.S. congressional district, and not counting the residents would be unconstitutional. All voting districts according to the U.S. Constitution are drawn based on population. factually correct. Okay. Okay, now we have to therefore. Okay, go ahead.

I'm sorry. I'd like to note that Ward 2 does in fact have military personnel in our ward, Midway Park. I closed my numbers down, but that needs to be accounted for as well.

Uh-huh.

Midway Park.

Uh-huh. Two and two.

One, two, and four. One, two, and four.

Okay.

Okay, so that leads us to the conclusion. Therefore, be it resolved that particularly in this year, the celebration of 250 year anniversary of the Declaration of Independence from British colonialism, Jacksonville expresses concern that an election system might be imposed by North Carolina. North Carolina House Representatives Wyatt Gable and Phillip Shepherd, that has previously been declared discriminatory. And no black person has ever been elected in Jacksonville in the application of the at large system before or since Willingham and others versus the city of Jacksonville Super. Accurate or inaccurate? I don't know. But this is a suggestion. This is more so than a fact that speaks to our preference to be consulted before these things are initiated. That's it. I think we can agree on that. Because you're saying you weren't consulted. Mayor? Okay. We're good.

You're good?

So I would say that with the adoption, the amendments, that the resolution meets the consensus of council.

Well, I think the thing is that we're not ready to, or what I hear from the council is they're not ready to approve the resolution officially until they've had time to discuss the other

options that were laid out that we were talking about before is that not right well so there is a motion on the table to table to table this discussion and so if there's if there's a removal you can remove that motion to then have a substantive motion on whether or not to adopt this resolution but right now that's that's not a motion

I mean, it's not in the motion.

That's correct, because right now the priority is the motion that's on the table.

I'm good with the voting on the motion, and I think we have all the information we need. So, what are you asking? We do the motion, that's it?

Yes.

All right.

You have a motion and a second. All right, all those in favor?

To table it.

To table, yes. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Show of hands. Aye. Those opposed? Okay. I'm going to err on the side of getting more information, too. I think the resolution is good. It's well written and everything, but I think there's a lot of things that need to be checked up against it.

But we weren't voting on the resolution.

That was on tabling the discussion.

That still happened. You know what I mean. Okay. The resolution, you know, there's a lot of stuff here I want to...

In the meantime, Mayor, is there a way that we can have an opportunity to discuss this, you know, as a council or individually?

I think that can be worked out at some point.

I agree. We, as a group, have not sat down and talked about this. As a full body, we have not had that discussion.

I thought you were saying you want to have it with the legislature. Is that what you're saying?

You want to have it with us or the legislature? I think with us and with the legislature, looking at an opportunity to sit down and see if we can come to some kind of consensus.

I feel like we had a debate tonight. I don't feel like we sat down and tried to come up with a game plan. I do feel that way.

There was a debate tonight. And I'm not sure. You know, I know that we talked last council meeting about the city attorney looking at the impacts of some of these bills or some of the Supreme Court decisions and maybe having her be able to explain some of those things in a more comprehensive manner.

So when are we talking about putting this, if we're going to have a discussion, how soon are we going to have a discussion?

So the way the rules are written is actually whenever you make a motion to table it, then it can be brought back. I'll have to pull out my rules. But I think it dies after a certain amount of time if it's not re-enlivened. Let's see. We have substantive motions and we have procedural motions. Do, do, do, do, do, do, do, do, do.

So... Well, it seems like that might be difficult to research. Why don't you research that, find out that council knows, and then we can come to...

I found it.

Okay.

It's Rule 21, and it's actually the motion, subsection F, it looks like, to defer consideration. It says, a substantive motion, the consideration of which has been deferred, expires after six regular meetings have been held following the day of deferral, unless a motion to revive consideration is adopted. So essentially, we could place this back on the agenda at any time. Of course, the public meetings laws do apply. So if we want to have some kind of special meeting between now and the next meeting, that would be a different thing for me to advise you on.

Is there a possibility for us to come back in two weeks at the workshop meeting and have a presentation about... All the things, these Supreme Court decisions, what our options are, and maybe by that time we'd have an opportunity to meet with our representatives, all three of them.

Certainly, we could bring it back for discussion at that time. Can the city manager work to set some time up where we can have some discussion with... Now, if we're trying to have a discussion with the entire body and some of the individuals in our legislature, that would trigger the public meetings law. So we can send out some options that may include three council members at a time or things of that nature. But I think what this would involve is the city manager getting in touch with... our representatives and seeing whether or not that's something they're interested in and if so, how we might be able to facilitate that.

So what if they decide to table until? So then what do we do?

Unfortunately, the legislature can make that call with or without our input.

Right, and so if they decide to table it until then what is our options because?

Yeah, so if they decide to just sort of table this matter indefinitely, there's really nothing we can do to force them to vote on the issue. So we have options again just to either resolve in favor of it, resolve against it, or pass no resolution whatsoever. Those options don't change whether or not they table it.

Madam Clerk, excuse me, Madam Attorney, let me ask you this question. If individuals from the Republican Party have had already conversations with our representatives, are those representatives now willing to have a conversation with the public?

I think that's up to the representatives.

So in other words, could we... have them to have the town hall meeting?

We couldn't compel them to do that. We could certainly invite them to do that. But it's anybody's opportunity that's never infringed on for anyone to contact any of their representatives at any time.

Right. But what I am saying, because the Republican Party did contact them and wrote a letter and they responded a certain way, then out of fairness, for those that may be sitting in an audience that did not attend that Republican Party meeting, what is their ability to

Yeah, so any group or individual could make a similar letter and a similar plea to a representative at any time.

OK. Mr. Mayor, I move to adjourn.

Second. No, you cannot.

You're in the regular meeting.

You're in closed session. We still need to do reports, right?

We still have that. Technically, a motion to adjourn takes priority. We do still have some reports to take, and also there is a closed session item on the agenda.

Yes, we have to go into closed session. You can make a motion on that if everybody wants to. uh pass on the reports other than the manager okay consensus builder is that okay all right we're good thank you thank you uh ms smith uh also you might want to uh say that uh We're going to recess the regular meeting and go into closed session. Just say motion to go into closed session.

I move that we go into closed session.

And that's to discuss consulting an attorney.

Second.

Attorney Clark. Second. All in favor?

Aye. All right.