City Council - Regular Meeting

. . do do do do do do

so so

you Thank you.

Thank you.

Praise the Lord. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to our May 26, 2026, city council meeting. We'll now have invocation by Mrs. Reid.

OK. Let's stand.

Follow by the Pledge of Allegiance.

OK. Bow with me. Lord, we just thank you so much for this night. We thank you for this room full of young people. We're so grateful for them. We're thankful for the lives you've given them. We thank you for the future that you already have laid before them, God. And we are thankful for getting to recognize some truly special people this evening. We just ask that you are with us, you guide us, you guide our words, Lord. And we just thank you for our beautiful city. In your name we pray, amen.

Amen. 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. Madam Clerk.

Mr. Mayor, tonight we have a couple of very special recognitions, the Sandusky Middle School basketball team and then Citizens Academy graduation. I believe there's been information that we are waiting for more Sandusky students and maybe one coach.

Yes, we have one coach and I think three eighth graders that are on their way from University of Lynchburg. So if you don't mind, Madam Clerk and Mayor, could we start with Citizens Academy first to give them time to get here? Is that okay?

That's fine. Thank you, Council. Agreement, City Council, no, City Academy first. Thank you all. 21st Citizen Academy graduation. Tonight we are proud to recognize the graduates of Lynchburg Citizens Academy. Citizen Academy gives residents a behind the scene look at how the city government works. Over the past several weeks, these graduates have learned from city departments, tour city facilities, met city staff, and seen firsthand how services are provided for our community. This program is about more than learning how government works. It's about understanding trust and connection between city and people we serve. This year graduates, thank you for taking time to learn more about your local government. Thank you for asking questions and thank you for caring about the future of Lynchburg. We hope you will take what you learn and stay involved in our community. On behalf of Lynchburg City Council graduates of the 2026 Citizens' Academy, thank you.

Mr. Mayor and City Council, before we call graduates' names to be recognized, Ms. Susan Brown, Interim Director of Communications and Public Engagement, has a few remarks.

Thank you, Alicia. Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of Council, tonight we are here to recognize the graduates of the 21st Annual Citizens Academy. Over the past 21 years, an astonishing 463 Lynchburg residents have participated in this program. And this year alone, we welcomed 25 participants, and notably the program reached capacity in just three days. on lots of demand that level of interest speaks to the community's strong desire to better understand and engage with local government over the course of 12 weeks and 13 sessions this cohort experienced a comprehensive look at how the city operates they connected with more than 25 departments and offices gaining first-hand insight into the service that keep lynchburg running every day As always, this learning extended well beyond presentations. Participants took in the view from the top of the water tower, climbed a ladder truck, toured labs at the water resources recovery facility, observed a police department drone demonstration, and even had the opportunity to try out public works vehicles. These moments bring city operations to life in a way that's both meaningful and memorable. I want to take a moment to recognize the communications and public engagement staff. This team had a great hand in working to deliver this program, specifically Marisa Nanatovich and Brianna Elliott, who stepped into the lead planning and execution of this program following the retirement of a long-time program coordinator in January. Their leadership ensures a seamless transition and a successful experience for this year's class. The program continues to be one of the most effective ways we build transparency, civic trust, and pride. These graduates now serve as informed ambassadors for the work happening across our organization. At this time, I am pleased to invite this year's class spokesperson, William Booz, to come forward and offer brief remarks. Following that, we will present the certificate.

Where is the mayor? Oh, there he is. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Vice Mayor, and members of the city council. I'm pleased to represent my fellow classmates in this 21st year of the Citizen Academy. Let me tell you a little bit about our class first, though. Five of us are older than 60. The rest, about 18 to 20, depending on who filled out their form that I gave them, are below 60. There are three times more females than there are males. Not surprising, I think. The person who's lived in Lynchburg the longest has lived here 67 years. And I'm assuming perhaps she was even born here. The rest of us are... I've lost my place here, okay. Three are less than a year, and one over 67 years. You average about 20 years. So we've all been here a good bit of time, even the short timers. We have six members, four members who are retired, two are unemployed, and the rest are all working. And two of them work for the city. And there are eight that were in the field of education during their time that they worked or are currently in the field of education. I asked my classmates to give me some highlights. And overwhelmingly public works and water resources got the highest scores because they i think have the most toys and more importantly we got to play with them i myself or we all drove the uh snowplow i think i killed three pylons in my you had to go through an obstacle course um we also did the riding lawnmower and the trash truck, we got to pull that up and put it down and I think everybody made that okay. And the brush truck, some people lost the block of wood, but it's all good. The other thing is that was mentioned by almost everybody in the class and everybody I know feels is the passion that the workers for the city exhibited when they were presenting to us. They were brought out in the evening, having to present a whole row of people presenting to us. But they all had smiles on their faces, and they were all very passionate when they were talking about what they do. And I think what we took away from that, I know what we took away from that was that we have an incredible crew of workers that make this city work. And it was eye-opening to all of us much more so than what people typically think, how much they do for us. And I know I have only been here 24 years, and I am very appreciative of that. The other thing I asked was, what would you want me to say to the council? Most importantly, and I think most by everybody, was keep this program going, which obviously you believe in because you've been doing it for 21 years. One person said that they have friends in another municipality and they're envious. I know there's a program similar to this in Alexandria, because that's where our son lives, but I think it's an excellent program to inform citizens about where they live. Some people suggested even doing it two times a year. Now this one you may not really go with, but several people suggested it should be a requirement to even run for office on the council. So let me express my thanks, our thanks, for the experience we've had over the last three months. It's been wonderful and very, very eye-opening. And especially communications and public engagement be putting this all together with especially marissa nananovich all right and brianna elliott who are our leaders thank you very much okay i'll begin call your name so please come on up william booth

If you just want to line up.

Yeah.

Dr. LaTanya Carter. Todd Coogan. Tina Cooley. Dr. Elizabeth Giddens. Jakia Harvey. Jenmarie Jacober. Troy Jennings. Taryn Kelly. Tracey McCray. Pamela Minkler.

Hope Maffa.

Susan Nice. Rebecca Nice.

Pat O'Hara. Elsa Ramirez.

Devon Robertson. Jennifer Sims. Dr. Barbara Tevelev, who I don't think is here. Emily Wasson. Dr. Beth White. Lauren Wingfield. William Worley. Tamara York. And last but definitely not least, Peter York.

All right, ready? Three, two, one.

Not so bad. Good job.

Give everybody a second. All right, Mr. Mayor. Now we have the Sandusky Middle School Lady Sardines basketball team. They are accompanied by Coach K, Coach Jeff, and Coach LaFaggio.

Tonight, we are proud to recognize the Sandustic Middle School Lady Spartans basketball team. This year, the Lady Spartans had an incredible season. They went undefeated, finishing with a perfect 11-0 record. They also won Lynchburg City Championship and Seminole District Championship. Praise God, these girls did real good. Yes, yes. This was the school's first undefeated season since 2004. This is a big accomplishment. It takes hard work, teamwork, and dedication to have a season like this. These young athletes show all those things. To the players, coaches, and families, congratulations. You have made Sandusky Middle School proud. You have made your families proud. You have made the city of Lynchburg proud. On behalf of Lynchburg City Council, congratulations to the Lady Spartans on an outstanding season.

Hey there. Congratulations.

That's the way it's going. That's why I bought this beer. Madam Clerk.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Tonight's City Council agenda is divided into four sections, consent agenda, public hearing, public comment, and general business. The first section is consent agenda. It includes routine items that can be approved with one vote.

We have a motion on the consent agenda. So moved.

Second.

Thank you. Let us vote. Let us vote, please.

All right, initiating the vote now. The motion passes 4-3.

and i know this has come up before uh the real estate transaction that was on there for 805 court street well i i think the problem is it's been voted down at this point if that's the case what i can do is bring it back similar like i did before with a ratification to have an address since it didn't pass by five or excuse me six of seven okay

i believe that would also be agenda item number seven for the discretion external service providers that's correct that required five so that would be a fail okay so those both would have to come back All right, the next section is public hearings. These are required by law or directed by council. Procedure. Staff will give a presentation. The public can give comments. Individuals will have three minutes to speak. If you're speaking for a group, you have five. Group speakers must say which group they represent. Each group gets one spokesperson. Each speaker must say their name and the locality of residence. After public comments, the public hearing will close and the matter will rest with council. Agenda item number eight. Consideration of adopting a resolution approving the FY2027 Annual Action Plan for CDBG and Home Program. Ms. Melva Walker, Grants Manager, will provide a summary of the request.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor Deamer, and members of City Council. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, known as HUD, requires the city as an entitlement city for receipt of the Community Development Block Grant and Home Program funds to prepare and submit an annual action plan within the 2025-2029 five-year consolidated plan. This plan outlines the needs, goals and objectives for community development, including housing and non-housing areas. The grants administration staff has prepared the fiscal year 2027 program year 2026 plan, and it includes all of the required components and the recommended CDBG and home projects approved by city council at the public hearing conducted on April 23rd. The total amount of entitlement funds and reprogram funds for CDBG was $778,316.58. The total amount of home program funds, entitlement funds was $324,752.94. The projects approved include, in CDBG, the neighborhood improvements and public service area, the Diamond Hill neighborhood plan, phase two improvements, upper campus, the Central Virginia continuum of care, coordinated homeless intake and access, known as CHIA in the community, and Merriam's House Extreme Weather Center. Under the home program, the development of affordable rental and home ownership housing units and down payment assistance had three projects, Rush Homes with Carolyn's Place as the city's community housing development organization, the Greater Lynchburg Habitat for Humanity New Home Construction, and Lynchburg Community Action Group for first time down payment assistance. A public notice was published stating that a draft of proposed fiscal year 2027 annual action plan was available for public review and comments. The public comment period began on April 24th and ends at the conclusion of the public hearing tonight. Prior to the meeting, the grants administration staff had not received any written comments regarding the plan. Any comments received tonight will be incorporated into the final plan and submitted to HUD tomorrow.

Thank you, Ms. Walker. Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor? Is there anyone who wants to speak in opposition? Ms. Alicia, are there any voicemails?

There are none.

Public hearing is now closed. May I have a motion, please? So moved.

Second.

I'll speak to your motion.

Yes, thank you. I'm also a member of the CDAC committee. This is one of the joys of serving this committee. They do so many great things for our community and to have community partners or persons from different areas, from Donahue, Timberchill, College Hill, Donahue, whatever, various inner city areas that are part of that committee that make the decisions with the city staff. So we appreciate the ones who serve in that committee and do so many great things from home improvement to to the extreme weather centers to to carlin's place with the rush homes and having a very manatee and linkag so many other great organizations nonprofits that are doing so many new things helping with the homeless helping first-time home buyers so many great programs amazing programs and i still help persons reach out of the level out of poverty so they can be more sustainable themselves into residential housing into um there's a various assists that we see so we're thankful to be a part of that committee i'm thankful for mel walker her team for all of us doing an amazing job. Thank you.

Mr. Dean. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to thank Mrs. Walker for the work she does because you represent the city so well and this program, which is so important to so many people. I benefited from a first time homebuyers program when I bought my first home in Lynchburg. And that low interest rate was the thing that made it possible. And the first payment that y'all do, I think, is a really good way for people to get into homeownership, which is the key to breaking cyclical poverty in our country. The ability to buy a home and share it with your children and your grandchildren and And to not watch it all go to pay for taxes, you actually can get something back. It's a great investment. So thank you for the work you do in the program. And so I'm happy to second it, Mr. Mayor. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I also have the privilege of serving on CDAC with Dr. Wilder and very much enjoy my time there. Ms. Melva does an excellent job at taking federal funds, giving us options and how we appropriate those funds for wraparound services, specifically dealing with housing and homelessness. And I'm very excited about the current appropriations in our community. And I think it's an excellent committee. So thank you. Happy to approve tonight.

Anyone else? Cast your votes, please.

Finishing the vote now. Motion passes 7-0. Agenda item number nine. Conduct a public hearing to receive citizen input regarding appointments or re-appointments to vacancies that will exist June 30th, 2026 in school board districts one, two, and three. Just to go housekeeping, the floor will first be open to any of the candidates who would like to speak at tonight's public hearing. Please state your name and school district for the record and time will be limited to three minutes. Then the mayor will open the floor to any citizens present who would like to comment upon any name that has been submitted or offer additional names for consideration. Please state your name and locality of residence for the record. Before we begin, state code does dictate that in order to be considered for appointment, applicant's names must be read into the record, so I'll do that now. District 1, I have Shea Tinsley, Jack Shule, Asia Harris, Melanie Phelps, William Lewis, Brittany Smith, and Liza Gigianto. District 2, I have Leticia Lowry, Kathleen Riddle, Angela Cox, Nicole Albert, Toby Johnson, and Tiffany Goode. And District 3, I have Jabari Jones and Delisa Rogers.

The floor is open for school board candidates. Is there anyone here who want to be appointed to the school board? Who applied?

No.

There's no one here.

There are none. Then that would be the pad over the floor to the general public.

Is there anyone else who would like to apply for school board?

Or could speak on the qualifications.

Or speak for someone that's not here who want to be on school board. Mr. Brim.

good evening mayor members of council my name is michael bremer i reside in ward three any viable candidate for school board should be able to make a public statement of unequivocal support for our children in public schools this report should include consistently and vocally supporting full funding for the superintendent's budget promoting only students who demonstrate their competence in reading fluency and comprehension and basic computational skills and reasoning. Acknowledging that teachers are the most informed and capable adults alongside parents and guardians to guide children and ensure student learning. Understanding that teachers cannot permit an individual student to derail learning for their classmates. supporting administrators in matters of instruction, curriculum development, and discipline, and developing additional strategies to acknowledge student successes and funding opportunities for creative demonstrations of achievement. These are just basic requirements I believe every school board candidate should be able to publicly acknowledge. Thank you for your time.

Is there anyone else here who would like to speak on behalf of an applicant for the school board?

Mr. Mayor, historically, Council has held over a public hearing for a second public hearing. In that time, we'll still collect applications and then do the same, read the list into the record, and then offer the floor to anybody who would like to speak. We'll also do a little bit more outreach on our end to see if anybody would like to come to speak. If there's consensus from Council to hold that over?

Yes. Is there consensus to hold it over?

So a second public hearing will be held June 9th.

June 9th.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

All right, the next section is public comment. Speakers have three minutes to speak. If you're speaking for a group, you have five. City council listens to your comments and may ask the city manager to follow up. Citizens often express differing opinions to make sure everyone feels comfortable speaking. There's no applause, cheers, or jeers. Do not intimidate, insult, or disrupt others. Do not use profanity, promote businesses, or campaign for office. Agenda item number 10. Hear from a citizen regarding who can we trust, Peter Seferati. Please restate your name and locality of residence.

Good evening, I'm Peter Ciaffarati, resident of Ward 1. I have a question for you tonight. Who can we trust now that the 2027 budget is looming over us? A word of wisdom I was given 50 years ago has helped me determine who I can trust. Forget what they say, watch what they do. Now, what did the city council do about the city budget last year? Well, the budget process was hijacked with ridiculous proposals, questionable CIP, and delays in engaging the public. A budget based on the real estate tax rate of 89 cents was proposed by the city. An equalized rate of 76.7 cents was proposed and defeated by the gang of four, Feraldi, Reed, Wilder and Taylor. The highlight of the budget process was a staged walkout by the gang of four at the last minute public hearing on the tax rate. Feedback from hundreds of citizens was completely written off by the four who also walked out on several budget work sessions. In a final act of disrespect for the citizens they should be representing, the gang of four tried to persecute the three council members who actually stayed in this room to talk to the public. The following day, the real estate tax rate was set at 84 cents. Fortunately for taxpayers, Mayor Taylor did relent a little bit. However, real estate taxes increased by a lot due to the large increase in assessed values.

For some reason,

Mayor Taylor has spent the last year claiming that he lowered taxes. A simple parcel search with Lynchburg's GIS will show that everyone paid higher taxes except the no people whose home values declined by 10% or more. Didn't happen. So here we are again. And what can we expect? What can we the people expect this year? Some of you are running for reelection. What do your campaign materials say? Well, Reed and Taylor say they want to, quote, protect citizens from tax increases. Sounds great. They say they have conservative values. Mr. Faraldi keeps making the claim that he has never voted for a tax increase. Mr. Faraldi, I would like to point out that you also never did anything to prevent a tax increase. You could have been the deciding vote for an equalized rate, but Mr. Wilder, since you claim to be an exalted saint, I will not address your position for fear of God's wrath. I'm sure that Marty will enthusiastically vote for a tax rate. He has a track record. The good news is that this year you can protect we, the taxpayers, from a heavier burden. You don't have to get elected and wait for another budget battle to lower taxes. You can do it right now. All it takes is amending tonight's agenda to add the vote on equalizing the tax rate and call the vote. The tax paying public can handle it. The businesses thinking of moving to the counties to stay in business can handle it. All those employers you're trying to lure to Lynchburg can handle it. The question is, can you handle it? Can we trust what you say? Will you do what you say you will do? It's time to ask the city departments to tighten their belts next year. Don't force the public to tighten their belts again. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Agenda item number 11. hear from a group representative regarding the bus challenge, accountability, funding, and GLTC's future, Cameron Howell, GLTC. Please restate your name, group representative, and locality of residence.

Good evening, members of council. My name is Cameron Craddock-Howe, ward one, and I'm the chair of the board of directors for GLTC, our public bus system. A decade ago, when I was site supervisor for youth aging out of foster care, I was teaching them how to navigate adulthood. One of the most profound experiences I had was teaching them to ride the bus by riding it myself. I learned quickly that navigating public transit requires time, patience, and dealing with elements. It was after several of these experiences that I wrote to city council and applied to be on the GLTC board of directors. When I joined the board, the bus system was in a financial crisis with the options to cut routes or raise fares. During my first meeting in 2020, I looked at the makeup of the board. Only one member was a bus rider. I challenged the board of directors to ride the bus in their daily lives before voting. This simple request is now a yearly expectation for all board members, and it changed how we understand service and accountability. Now I'm standing before you, members of council and city staff, and I'm challenging you to do the same thing. I challenge each of you to ride the bus for at least one day. And while the financial challenges facing GLTC are different today than they were when I first joined the board, the premise remains the same. You cannot effectively govern a system you have never experienced. Two weeks ago, I pulled into a parking lot and saw a woman stepping off the city bus. She waved and I waved back, then I recognized her. She was someone I had worked with years ago, one of the young people from the foster care group. We caught up for a few minutes and she told me that when Sunday service resumed in 2020, she started going to church regularly. Now Sunday service has stopped temporarily due to driver bus shortage. and she stopped going to church. That's what the system does. It doesn't just move people, it connects them to their lives, to their community. The GLTC and the city have a binding memorandum of understanding, an MOU, that outlines the financial relationship. While the city helps fund, the the bus and appoints the board the gltc is legally separate from the city under the mou operating surpluses are returned to the city and placed in a restricted reserve fund for transit operations since 2020 the gltc has returned more than 1.9 million to that reserve The proposed FY27 budget would reduce those reserves to roughly 100,000, well below the 500,000 minimum required by the MOU. GLTC has not requested to use those funds, which is a stipulation of the MOU. The proposal would use 800,000 to cover ongoing operational expenses that the MOU identifies as a city responsibility. The proposal would also use $500,000 in transit reserves for a multimodal study, despite existing state-supported planning efforts and other available funding opportunities. GLTC has communicated with city staff regarding using existing grant funding from this year's budget to support their proposed study, while minimizing required local match instead of drawing down the transit reserves. These reserves exist to protect transit continuity during operational shortfalls and unforeseen expenses, such as volatility in fuel prices or interruptions in state or federal budget. If we drain them now, we are at risk for creating a much larger financial problem. Using one-time funds for ongoing operational expenses is not a budget solution. It is a deferred crisis. Last Thursday, the GLTC board passed resolution urging the city to honor its commitment under our binding MOU. Commitments that help protect the reserve fund built to sustain GLTC beyond FY27 and draining those reserves puts the entire system at risk. I urge you to provide the additional local funding needed for GLTC to maintain current service levels and secure its required local match for state and federal grants. Other cities have made this mistake. In Cleveland, cutting service by 25% over 15 years while doubling fares didn't save money. It triggered a death spiral of failing ridership, higher per passenger costs, and deeper cuts. Fixed costs don't disappear when buses stop running. What disappears is the ridership, the federal match, and eventually the system itself. GLTC is asking for local funding needing to maintain service and preserve 2.5 million in state and federal grants that depend on it. While short-term budget pressures are real, failing to invest now risks a far greater cost to the city later. On April 16th, the board sent you a letter showing you what cuts would look like to our system based on the proposed operational funding, a system you are helping succeed or fail. Lynchburg is an older city with narrow streets that can only expand so much, and the hills make it difficult to walk. As our city grows and more cars are on the road, our transit pressures will increase. Our bus system helps relieve that strain by connecting residents to jobs, services, and community while leveraging state and federal funding to reduce local taxpayer burdening. My request is simple. Ride the bus, fund the bus, and preserve the reserves so that GLDC can continue serving this community for Unicom. Thank you. And here's a copy of all the documents referenced for the official record. Thank you.

Agenda item number 12. Hear from a group representative regarding Words Matter, Dr. Beth White, Citizens United for Lynchburg. Please restate your name, group represent and locality of residence.

Dr. Beth White, Ward 3, Lynchburg. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Vice Mayor, members of council. I will begin my remarks with this official disclaimer. I work for but do not speak for Liberty University. The statements I am making are my own and do not reflect the official position of Liberty University. However, they are based strictly upon statements that were made to and by individuals who were authorized to speak on behalf of the university. Much has been made in the news recently by Mr. Mischens and Mr. Deamer regarding statements that were made earlier this spring by CFO Witt and City Manager Benda regarding anticipated growth at Liberty University in the next several years to reach 30,000 students. Indeed, in the 28 years that I've worked at the university, we have grown by leaps and bounds. However, an official statement was released by the university stating that is not true and that quote, there are no immediate or long-term plans to take our Lynchburg campus population beyond its current capacity, unquote. So how could both the CFO and the city manager pull these numbers out of thin air and why? Did they just make them up? I wasn't there, so I can't tell you, again, speaking factually, from where these numbers were derived. However, I also find it interesting that at a meeting at the Lynchburg Planning Commission on May 13th, 2026 in these chambers, Mr. Dan Dator of Liberty University was addressing the body regarding new property that Liberty University purchased. If you watch the video at the 23 minute, 23 second mark of the meeting video, Commissioner Gannon made the following remark, quote, Well, I think with the long range plan, what it is, about having 30,000 students on campus within a few years, there is such a need for dormitory housing there at Liberty. It will double the size of Liberty, which is a great thing." Mr. Dieter stood here, responded, quote, fingers crossed, unquote. He did not deny or refute the claim. However, that is not what I'm here to discuss. I am here to discuss why council members, Ms. Jensen-Deemer felt the need to discuss this matter with media that is outside of the city on April 30th. I find it interesting that these two members of city council, both proud Republicans and both proud supporters of President Trump, would agree to talk with public radio, specifically NPR Charlottesville, especially in light of the president's efforts since May 2025 to permanently defund of what he considers to be, quote, biased media, unquote, in the form of public radio. I also find it quite telling that both council members, as our elected representatives, would do anything that paints our beloved city in any negative light outside of Lynchburg. Your job is to promote Lynchburg and make folks want to come here, to demonstrate that this is an area to which people will want to live, work, and play. It is not to make attacks on city officials that you have a personal vendetta against and trash our city to those who don't live here. That is the equivalent of putting your personal family drama on social media. This begs the question, would either of you openly broadcast on social media an argument that you have with your spouse in which you only share your side of the story? If not, then why did you feel the need to openly attack the character of our CFO who, like you proclaim to be, is an evangelical Christian and in the twilight of her career? Why did none of you attack members of the planning commission who made the same statement? I have personally known Donna Witt for nearly 30 years, both inside and outside of her financial realm. I have served with her and her husband at the same church more than 20 years, and watched as they actively participated in admissions trips around the globe. Her character is without question, and she stands morally and ethically above board. Otherwise, the late Dr. Jerry Falwell Sr. would never have allowed her to serve at any financial position at such a critical time in the history of Liberty University. By the way, Mr. Jones, when are you planning on paying back Lynchburg taxpayers for the about $150,000 that your lawsuit has cost us? One final thought. There are quite a few folks who stand up here and like to quote scripture. In speeches, people claim to know the mind of God and what he would say in certain situations. I remind these people to read the last few chapters of the book of Job. There, they will find that Job's friends claim to know and speak on behalf of God in their criticism of Job. It didn't go very well for them, but what do I know? I only taught Sunday school for more than 30 years.

Thank you. Thank you.

Agenda item number 13. Hear from a citizen regarding the implications of Dr. Rule's resignation from glass, Scott Wiebe. Please restate your name and locality of residence.

Good evening, Scott Wiebe, Ward 4. A couple of years ago during a packed council meeting, scores of speakers asked some of you not to drastically cut the budget for Lynchburg City Schools. I was one of the speakers that night and I used my time to say that you get what you pay for. I'm here tonight to tell you that that message has come to fruition, and I believe it's getting worse still. My wife and I have been parents of LCS children for 13 years. This has been the hardest year by far. We've emailed, called, and met with more teachers and administrators than ever. While there are some heroic folks in our schools, they are being crowded out by new faces struggling to find their way, being asked to enact new policies that don't put kids first. Some of them even seem like they don't care much for kids. My boss routinely tells me that you can't pay for tuna fish and expect caviar. For the past couple of years, I believe that's exactly what we've been doing. And then two months ago, the EC glass community found out that Dr. Ruhle was resigning as principal. This made no sense and was devastating. He was one of the most caring and compassionate individuals in any of our school buildings, and he feels like he has to leave? Thousands of us signed a petition urging him to stay. Many of us spoke at the next school board meeting asking for information and seeking a solution. I called into that meeting and urged the school board to ask some hard questions of themselves and the new superintendent. After all, she was a major change from the previous year. Maybe that was a source of the issue. We got nowhere with the school board. So now I'm coming to you with two requests. It is a flaw of both the current board and of the system that they're not listening to parents. So my first request of you is the same as I presented to them. Can you get in there and ask the hard questions? Why did we lose Dr. Rule, someone who cares so much for our kids? What role did the superintendent play in this? And what kind of culture is she creating within LCS? I know the natural reaction when someone is just one year into such a big role is to say, wait and see, but that advice doesn't work here. Kids don't stop growing up. My oldest is graduating from glass this year. My second oldest is two years away. If we wait and see, and this fails, that's jeopardizing the rest of her high school experience. And I have two kids after that. For the sake of all our kids, please ask the hard questions. Secondly, I believe it might be time to do the hardest thing of all, and that is to give up some of your power. We need a school board that is accountable to parents, not just to city council. I know that you're starting the process of rotating in new school board members tonight. You should consider making this the last time that you do. I don't know if electing school board members is the answer. It does work for most communities, but we also know that elections don't always give us the best results. Maybe there's a third option. Regardless, it's time for a school board that is in some way accountable to the public. Two years ago, I was here saying that we'll get what we pay for. Tonight, I'm here to say that I believe we have a leadership problem now in our school system. We're losing good leaders and those left behind are cause for concern. In two more years, unless we do the right and hard things now, how much worse might it get?

Thank you.

We did have a citizen, Gary Taylor, who previously signed up, but then did reach out saying he was unable to make it tonight or wanted to be removed from public comment, I should say. So the next section is general business. It includes new items for discussion. This agenda item number 14 is a second reading, consideration of adopting ordinance 026-040, approving the FY2026 third quarter adjustments.

May I have a motion, please? Second. I would move approval. Second. Mr. Favreau, you want to speak to your motion? No, you want to speak to your motion. No more discussion. Let's vote.

Finishing the vote now. Motion passes 6-1. All right, agenda item number 15. This is broken into many. This is the budget, so second reading on adoption of the FY2027 budget. Item B is the second reading, consideration of adopting ordinance 026-044, appropriating the FY2027 general fund operating budget, excluding discretionary external service providers and the school's operating budget.

May I have a motion, please? Mr. Farag? Second. Mr. Reid, you want to speak to it?

Mr. Friday? Thank you, Mayor. So there has been a lot been said about this budget process, this budget and what it is and what it isn't. And I wanted to wait until this moment so I could hear what some of those misconceptions would be and how they're manipulated for political gain. Here's the bottom line. This general fund operating budget does very simple things. Number one, it honors a commitment to law enforcement. public safety personnel. It increases their compensation plan. Number two, it does continue a cost of living adjustment for city employees. I've long been an advocate for, we shouldn't do a two and a half percent, a three and a half percent, whatever it is across the board for everyone. We should target it to the frontline folks and have adjustments down the line, but that's not been something that this council or any council that I've been on has been interested in, but it does that. And here's why that's important. Council went for years, if not a decade of not doing a cost of living adjustment for city employees. Over a decade. This council and the one just before it, year over year has prioritized the folks who make this city run as a local government. That's important. Furthermore, it does continue the investments that we've made in very key areas. And I'm pleased to see, especially on the public safety front, that those are items that we are prioritizing. I would challenge my colleagues to look about where this budget is continuing the momentum over the last number of years that has been made. For the folks at home, this is the operating budget. This is paying for staff, personnel, contracts, and so forth. It's not the capital budget. It's not the infrastructure projects. So it's pretty clear cut. Greg, am I missing anything of note from primarily the operating fund?

The only thing notable, I think, is council's decision to continue the fee waivers for trash and for vehicle license fee, which I'm sure you would not want to forget to mention.

How could I? Even though some members of this dais have said that that was a really ridiculous proposal just a few years ago. and that it wasn't good enough. And now they're taking credit for it. This is something that has been done year over year. And we have taken a pot of money that was doing nothing. It was just sitting in ether and put it to good use for this next year. So that way your trash fee stays at zero and that your car is not having another fee tacked on top of it. Every time you pay it, the car tax every June, which by the way, that's coming up. I wish you didn't have to pay it, but that's besides the point. No Republican should be voting against police officers, firefighters, 911 dispatchers. No Republican.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. So just want to clarify, just so we have it on the record, Mr. Patrick, when it was introduced, this is pretty much called a maintenance budget. However, we did see an eight and a half or $8 million roughly increase in spending on the spending side for operations. But just to clarify what that was, it was the two and a half million dollars allocated for schools, correct? And then it was our, what, what Councilman Farrelly just explained for public safety allocation, then it was the cost of living increase. Wasn't there an insurance, also an increase in the insurance allotment or what we were contributing towards employee insurance? Is that also in this or no? Yes. Okay, so it was just because we're seeing an increase in insurance premium and what we needed to put for employees insurance. So that's the $8 million. So just to clarify for the public, eight eight million dollars that in spending on this budget was the money towards schools money for public safety the cost of living increase and then money that we had to increase towards employee insurance because that unfortunately probably everywhere is going up so that is the eight million dollars that we are are having to spend in this budget everything else was maintenance cip was maintenance projects that we've, a lot of which we voted on last year, and it's no new investments, it's just what we're continuing on in, in spending that like you know for example in the schools we adopted the school cip package last year we spent 10 million last year we're going to spend 30 that this year this coming um year and then we are going to be able to apply the feed waivers going forward so just wanted to get that out there to help explain some of the um questions that we've had and i do support it thank you what's the mission thank you mr mayor

You know, as a whole, I can't support this budget. It's not about public safety. It's not about judicial administration of the courts. It's not about not supporting them. It's about the fact that this budget was rammed through with one, one budget work session. Normally our budget retreats start in January. We didn't have our first budget retreat or only budget retreat until April. We didn't have our first budget work session until the end of April. That's not responsible governance. The budget calendar in this budget year was extremely compressed. I don't know why. Can't answer why. But if you look at it and compare it to previous years, there's never been anything like it. So with that, I'll make a substitute motion to adopt the Public Safety and Judicial Administration budget as proposed. And that's it, because I can't vote for the rest of it.

Second. I speak to second.

I was going to say this to speak for the entire budget, but I'll do it quickly now. I'm not going to pontificate on this. Everything that Councilman Mijins has articulated, I agree with. Compressed doesn't begin to describe it. The one thing I will disagree with my colleague on is that I think I know why this process has been so flawed. And that's because this is, without a doubt, a budget of the city manager of Lynchburg. This is not your budget, citizens. This is not the people you represented speaking and debating and deliberating. You heard how little of that actually went on. So I will support. This isn't about for or against, although this substitute kind of is very much for, for public safety and things that I believe in. So I can support that. The reason I'm protesting the entire process is because it's eliminated you, the citizens. Because you elect us to speak, to deliberate, to do the things on this budget. It's the biggest thing we deal with is the budget. In 15 minutes of debate on one subject where the city manager's position held firm because they had four votes, that didn't change a thing. It's still exactly what it was when the city manager pretty much proposed it. I can support these two items, but I will be voting in protest against this process because when I ran for office, I promised to represent the people of Ward 3, and I got almost no input on this budget for those people. So I will continue to vote against the budget until the process changes and allows the citizens' representatives to have more of a voice.

Mr. Verratti. Thank you.

mayor i would first ask a question if motion the person who can make made the motion and speak to it what is defined as public safety in the motion public safety i'm asking him to provide it recognize mr mayor i'm asking for the purpose of the question

Thank you, thank you, thank you, Mr. Mayor. For the purpose of the question, it would be the general fund expenditures for public safety and judicial administration that are listed on the ordinance.

Mayor, I would ask a further question. Could the council member please articulate which specific items public safety is referring to in his motion? Which departments? Mr. Bishop.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Feroldi, if you'll open the FY2027 proposed budget, it actually clarifies what departments fall under public safety and judicial administration. And that is what I'm referring to, what is in the document. that the manager provided to us and what the general fund expenditures on the ordinance that are provided demonstrate.

Further question, Mayor? Would Mr. Missions please read and articulate which departments by name what he intends as public safety?

Mr. Mayor, I appreciate the question over and over again. However, I find it comical because it's not what I intend. It's what the proposed 2027 budget states. So this isn't about intention. This is very simple. The ordinance before us has general fund expenditures, general government, judicial administration, public safety, public works, health and human services, parks, recreation, and cultural community development, non-departmental transfers to other funds, debt service, general fund debt service, schools, reserves, transfer to city capital project funds, transfer to schools, capital project funds, then component units, external service providers, and so forth. Right. We're talking about the general fund excluding component units and external service providers. That's what this motion is about. So it's the judicial administration line item, $7,785,333, and public safety line item, $60,033,908. If you look at the budget, it tells you what falls under judicial administration. Again, not what I intend, unless there is a error in the budget that Mr. Faraldi is familiar with that I'm not familiar with, and this is some kind of gotcha game he's trying to play. But judicial administration is circuit court clerk, circuit court judges, office of the Commonwealth's attorney, general district court, juvenile domestic relations court, district court, magistrate, sheriff's office, court service unit. Public safety is police department, fire department. That is what the budget says. Now, it wasn't that complicated to look that up, but it's not about my intention. It's about what was actually proposed. And that is the motion that I made.

Speaking to the motion. Mayor, I appreciate the banter, but the reality is that I want to understand because there's a lot trickery that we all have implemented at some capacity in our political sphere in life. So I appreciate the clarity and the ability that the reassurance that my colleague can read. Police and fire, I appreciate that as public safety, but is that to infer that the men and women who do not go out on a water main break in negative five degree weather are not public safety? That's what I just heard. They're not important to Councilmember Mischens. That's my takeaway. I'm not saying that's the reality. That's my takeaway. I'm also hearing the folks who have to show up in a crisis from a communications level, just like we had earlier this year, that they criticize, by the way, remember that, that they criticize the emergency response team and practically put them on trial. They're not public safety.

Not to Councilmember Mischens.

See, here's my point. Mr. Patrick. Mr. Patrick. Mr. Patrick. The reality is this budget process had a built in meeting if so and so wanted to review it further. Is that correct? in the calendar i believe in the budget calendar there was an opportunity to add additional work sessions if council so desired did you receive any such requests we did not thank you did you receive any budgetary amendments ideas cons what did you receive from the other side of the dais in writing to you or maybe over the phone

Speaking for myself and via email or over the phone, I believe I received an email from you about opportunities to bring back the fee waivers and in a conversation with the mayor, the same goal and objective.

So what I just heard you say, and tell me if I'm misunderstanding, is that not one request for an additional meeting or amending said proposed budget was provided for this council's review from Councilmember's missions, Deemer or Timmer? Is that correct?

There were questions that were asked at the various budget work sessions by other members of council, but in terms of specific questions related to plans to amend the budget. Initiate change, actual change. I don't recall, and I went back and searched my emails after you had asked the question at the last meeting. Thank you.

Mayor? That's my point. This is underhanded in my view. This is disingenuous in my view because the reality is we wouldn't have adopted the fee waivers unless you and I pushed for that. That's number one. Number two, there could have been calls for a special meeting. None of them requested it, folks. and yet we're just gonna throw bombs at staff. Oh, it's rushed through. Call special meeting. They called multiple special meetings all last budget cycle, multiple, even last minute ones, and even scheduled them like an hour before the actual meeting was to try to circumvent the next meeting. Remember your history. It's just within the last nine months.

not one request for a special meeting and yet we're led to believe oh it's rushed through we can't make a decision no it's terrible i'm voting no i can't stand by it thank you mr mayor so um just going to address a couple things first of all the demonstration by mr firoli that we just had of his understanding of municipal government explains a lot because this Ordinance before us doesn't consider the water department because that falls under the water fund. And we're not addressing that. We're addressing the general fund operating budget. Additionally, if he doesn't understand that the emergency management function falls underneath the fire department, again, a failure of Mr. Feraldi to understand how your local government actually operates. Same thing with the 911 dispatch center falls under the police department. So if there's anybody that's up here just blowing smoke, it's all the way over there, right? The reality is this budget process was completely and entirely compressed. The responses that we got from our one single budget work session on April 28th, okay? So we had a budget work session on April 28th where we provided questions to staff, one budget work session. Our next meeting, which was our last meeting where we had the first reading of the budget, the first time staff responded to those questions was Monday, May 11th at 7.56 p.m. Less than 24 hours, if you wanna be exact, 23 hours and four minutes before our scheduled meeting for the first reading of the budget. So yes, I will throw that bomb on staff because that's not responsible governance. for the governing body, and this was questions from all of us, to ask questions from our budget, our only budget work session that was scheduled, and to not receive responses to those questions. Until 23 hours out from our first meeting, our first reading of the budget, that's irresponsible. That's why I can't support the budget as a whole, but I can support public safety and judicial administration. And that's why I make this as a substitute motion. It's not any trickery. It's not anything like that. I support keeping the men and women who put their lives on the line, that actually put their lives at risk to save others. and the men and women of our criminal justice system and the men and women that try to put dangerous criminals behind bars, I support them wholeheartedly. That's why I make this a substitute motion, because I cannot support the rest of the budget.

Let's vote on the substitute motion.

All right, we're just doing the substitute motion now, which was to fund only public safety and judicial administration. The motion fails, three, four. So now the main motion is back on the floor. Mayor, I have a question.

Yes. It's a parliamentary question. Mr. Friedman, we just denied a substitute motion. Was that on the merits of the motion or to make it the motion at hand?

I think it was to make it a motion at hand. So that would have been to substitute only to consider. the Public Safety and Judicial Administration projects.

So by denying that motion, would it be proper to infer on that motion outright that a council member would be opposed to those items?

No.

I think now everything is just considered as a whole. Thank you.

Let's vote on the main motion. Yes, ma'am.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just so y'all know, we're as exhausted as you are. Man. Last, the first reading of the budget. I tried to bring forward an amendment, and that amendment was to move some of the one-time funding to one-time funding in the schools to offset some needs in the school budget. That opportunity was missed. Actually, my bringing the amendment to the floor was opposed as procedurally inappropriate, which it was not procedurally inappropriate, which is ironic in the greater context of this conversation and Mr. Faraldi's claims about discussion and the need for discussion in the budget. So moving on from that, it goes back and forth, right? It goes back and forth. It's got you here, got you there, the whole mess. There's nothing wrong with separating out components of the budget to vote for what you're in favor of and to not vote for other things you're not in favor of. It establishes a record and that's how we communicate with you all is through our votes. The whole dialogue around this has become incredibly convoluted. Well, I'll save that example if we need it for later. But I've mentioned this before, and you can look at my comments from the last meeting. I won't go through them all again. The budget process has genuinely grieved me. And that might sound extreme and that might sound ridiculous, but we aren't having discussions about what's real from this dais anymore. We're just not. And you have to follow every single meeting and every single email to actually figure out what we're talking about. And I'll be danged if we don't have the rules of procedure memorized and the constituents don't have the rules of procedure memorized in order to actually figure out what's going on in our conversations. It's tragic. And I am so sorry for that because we're not talking about what's real anymore. And I hope that we can get back to that. I'm done with my comments. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Mr. Weill, yes, thank you. I do support the motion. I want to commend the staff for the work they did on the budget. So thanks for Ms. Witt and her leadership in this project for her years of service, 20 plus almost 30 whatever years. So we appreciate that. The challenge we have had is that the city council has inundated our staff with emails, with requests. That's why the budget process is less. Because they've been inundated with answering emails, going on rabbit holes. Should we have the abortion? Should we support VMI? Should we? All these things don't even have any effect to Lynchburg whatsoever. So the staff has been inundated with requests, inundated with legal actions, inundated with lawsuits. But so many things is why the budget process is less. Staff is tired. Staff is burnt out. I mean, I don't blame them. I don't want to meet either. I don't blame them. That's why it's shorter because they are burnt out and they're tired because they've been abused so much. So I pray for the staff. The other process is we've had several sessions in the community at different areas of all the wards. We have different sessions in our community so the citizens can have a voice of the budget. So we have continued their process. So I appreciate that as well. The budget is pretty much a similar flat-line budget, something that I did not agree with. I did not agree with taking out the money for the trash free. I thought they should keep it in because what happened is keep pushing it off, pushing it off. At some point, it's going to domino effect where they'll respect it every year. That's why I wasn't in favor of that. But I support the budget as a compromise because I know it was meaningful to some people. So I did it as a compromise. Does it do everything you want to do? No, it does not. But again, they talk about having more money for the schools. again normally they don't but they want to do this time i'll go with it but again the situation was they want to take it from the pools take it from the library take it from projects that have already been started so again i support the budget i support our staff i appreciate all your hard work you're doing um i continue to encourage you to be encouraged and to hold out thank you so much mr damon thank you mr mayor

I know people watching tonight probably wondering what's going on. I know there's lots of questions people have about this process. And it's hard to follow sometimes, especially if you're not watching every meeting, if you don't watch the work sessions and the finance committee and all the committees. But I just want the people out there that are watching to understand this. We hear you. We know you're concerned about your taxes and the increasing amount of money you had to pay this last year. We hear you. We are listening. We stayed when they canceled illegally the public hearing on the budget last year because we wanted to listen to you. And we're listening to you now, and we will continue to listen to you. But one thing I will point out, Ms. Timmer is correct. This is not reality. What you see up on this desk is so far from reality. And the best example I can point out right now for you to understand that is on one hand, you heard that we never sent any emails about what we wanted in the budget or calling for special hearings. And two minutes later, we hear we're inundating staff with emails. can tell you right now they can't both be true they can't both be true so just be understanding we're trying to communicate to you the truth of what's happening up here and it's not about individual things that i'm i'm weighing in on i may be for against different parts of this budget but i'm voting a protest vote against the process that cuts out the citizens of lynchburg Because y'all think you're making the change when you vote us in up here. That's what you expect. That's the way it's supposed to work. That's the way it's worked since I moved here 53 years ago. That is not what's happening now. And I'm sad to report that. So please pay attention to your government.

I think this is very confusing to follow, obviously, and I've had a chance to talk to a lot of citizens recently and answer a lot of questions. And it's been fun actually being able to take some of your concerns and follow up and then call you back and tell you, hey, I found an answer for you and be able to do follow through, which has been really cool. One of the things that has stood out to me is you know, um, the fact that it is really hard to understand how the government operates and it, you know, some of you are regulars that come every single week and we see you and, and a lot of people just don't understand who to call about what, and we do have to do a better job of making sure people in the city know how to get in touch with which department and get their questions answered because there are a lot of frustrations. But, um, You know, this, like I said earlier, this budget really, it was about maintenance this year. There are, we are listening and here's what we know. is Lynchburg you love your you love the services that you're provided and your taxes do pay for those services but you also don't want to have to pay a lot of taxes and so that's a that's a tricky thing we have to balance for you and we're listening because we have young families we have people that want to buy homes we have senior citizens that are you know paying their taxes in their homes after they paid their homes off and there's every variation of that And so we are listening to you and it's a tricky job we have up here trying to balance all of that and also make sure that we have police officers to look out for our safety and firefighters to take care of us and trash services to help pick up your trash and leaf removal. There's a lot to look out for and water and all of that that's provided for all of us. So it's a lot to do and to balance, but we're trying to do it all and do the best we can, but we are listening. We appreciate you. Thank you.

Everybody's speaking to this issue.

Okay, enlistment issue. Thank you. I'll be voting against the budget. This budget, again, I already spoke to the process, was compressed, incredibly compressed. In the past, council actually interacted with the department heads so they could have a question and answer session with the department heads to find out from the department heads directly what the issues were, what the priorities were. because that should be council's decision. You elect us to make those decisions, not a group of unelected bureaucrats. They're not on your ballot. We are. But what they've done is they've created a barrier between the actual subject matter experts of those department heads and us so that we don't get an opportunity to ask those questions. You know, I remember watching meetings in the past with Kimball Payne, credible city manager, and how when the budget process came around, you'd have a couple different department heads come in during budget work sessions, and there would be a great dialogue and Q&A between the council and the police chief or the fire chief or the director of public works. to get a real understanding of what the issues were, what the asks were, because there's always requests that are usually different than what's proposed. And then the council would determine the priorities and how to pay for it, because that's our job. It's our job to take your money and to spend your money. And the way this process has worked, We're talking about, with the general fund budget, over $200 million of your money. One work session. But the general fund expenditure subtotal is over $200 million on just the general fund operating budget. The budget as a whole is over $600 million. I just can't in good faith approve this with my vote based on the limited amount of time that we had to deliberate this and the way this was put before us. This budget does a lot of things for a lot of people, but it doesn't do enough for the taxpayer. And that's the main reason why I can't support it. Yes, we're extending another year of no trash fees and another year of DMV license fees, but now that's the norm. It's not any new relief. And I understand that there are individuals and families and businesses out there making hard decisions about how to spend your own money Gas prices are high, utility prices are high, groceries and goods are high. I understand that people are making tough decisions about how to spend your money. We didn't get an opportunity to deliberate how we are spending your money, but we're taking more than we did last year and spending more than we did last year. And it seems like Taking more, spending more, quality of services are not improving. Can't approve that. Can't support it. I'll be voting no against this budget.

Let's vote, please.

All right, initiating the vote on the main motion now, which is for approval. The motion passes 4-3. All right, this next item is a second reading, consideration of adopting ordinance 026-046A, appropriating the FY2027 operating fund budgets for all other funds except for the water fund and stormwater fund.

May I have a motion, please? No. Move for approval. Is there a second? No. There's no second. Motion fails. Well.

Motion fails, we're lacking a second. Moving on, consideration of adopting Ordinance 026-047, appropriating the FY2027, Schools Operating Budget by Major Classification.

May I have a motion, please?

Second.

I'll speak to you. Second. I'll speak to you first.

It's been brought up today that our schools are in some major transition. Just transition's always hard. There are always growing pains. And I was hopeful that we would fully fund the school's proposed budget this year. That's not going to happen, but I do want to support the budget that is put before us and make sure we get them as much funding as possible. So thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll support the motion.

I think it's an additional $2 million for our schools, and we gave them the flexibility to use those funds as they would see fit. So I appreciate that. Thank you. Mayor Redekop.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First, I've got to make a disclosure, which I have emailed the form to you, Ms. Finney, so you should have that. I'm a member of a group of people called Spouses of Teachers at Lynchburg City Schools, because my wife teaches at Lynchburg City Schools, and that I will be able to deliberate and vote on this matter impartially because the group is three or more people and it affects a lot more than just me. So I just have to disclose that because of the Conflicts of Interest Act. And there's a written disclosure that I've provided with the clerk that's on file for a number of years that she has to have that. um i will not be voting in favor of this i didn't vote in favor of it last time and i'm opposing it this time and the reason is because we had a great opportunity to find some one-time funds from things that weren't necessary to actually provide the full request from our superintendent and our school board. There were some one-time funding requests that were made. And I think some of the things that I believe are now out are school nutrition upgrades. Is out? That's in? What's the list of things that are out? Do we have the list of things that are out? There's a list of things that are out. And I feel pretty strongly that in the situation we're in right now with our schools, we need to be looking creatively with these one-time funds because it doesn't structurally increase how much we're paying year over year on the school division, but it gives us a real great opportunity to prioritize dollars from places where maybe we just don't need to, shouldn't be a priority right now. We've got huge challenges in our school division. We've got a new superintendent. And I think that with what she was given and provided, she's doing a great job, right? We know we're facing challenges in our school division. but I'm confident in the decision she's making because I have seen firsthand with my own kids in the school division, some great outcomes with some of the decisions she's made in leadership, right? And the direction things are going, a focus on academics. She is asking for help, one-time funds and resources for us to address issues with special education issues with alternative education to make sure that we have a safe and constructive environment with good order and discipline in the classroom for the kids that are there to learn and want to learn right i think that's wonderful you know something that a lot of people don't know about our schools unless you actually are in them is that we don't even have kitchens in all of our schools. So when I saw school nutrition upgrades on there, I'm glad that that one's in there, right? But a lot of these kids rely on the food that they get at the school every day. And some of these meals are shipped from one school to another school because we don't have kitchens in all the schools. And those folks are working hard in there, preparing meals for these kids. And if there's upgrades and equipment we need for them to be able to feed the kids, that's a one-time need. That is a huge priority for me, to feed these kids in school over some of the other issues. So I'm glad that that one's in there. But there are other things that are missing. I'm not sure, do we have that list? Mr. Patrick, can you read the list of what we're missing?

Yes. So of the items that were listed as one-time items from the school superintendent, those that aren't funded includes $10,000 for additional funding for advertising and recruitment, $75,000 for grounds equipment, The school nutritional equipment upgrades were actually already funded in the capital program, so they didn't need to be funded in the operating request. That would be funded twice. And then the PowerSchool SIS update.

Oh, that's a big one.

um and then um the material supplies building maintenance 179 000 was requested and 100 000 was funded and that's for alternative education i believe correct it's materials and supplies yeah that was that was a alternative education request for building supplies um so so that's you know we could have given her with a little

priorities of one-time funds right putting a brand new playground at miller park instead of fixing the one that's there do we need to replace the whole playground for 350 000 can we fix the one that's there i bet we could fix it for a lot less you know we're spending 900 000 in one-time funds on demolishing private property with the property toolkit. I would still like to see if we're actually recouping those dollars. I've asked that question. I'd like to see if we're recouping those dollars because that's a program where we're supposed to actually get money back after we do it so that it essentially we demolish the structure and then we get that money back when the property sells or transfers or however that works. I've not been told if we're actually recouping those funds, but we're putting another 900,000 of one-time funds into that this year. We're looking at the 1.4 million in furnitures, fixtures, and equipment of one-time funds cash for the public library renovation, $12.5 million already that we've sunk into that. We didn't need to do that at all, but we did it. I voted against last year. We've got a hundred thousand in downtown development, one-time funds, surplus cash that we are with last year, we called that back. So, you know, there's definitely opportunities for us to use some of these one-time funds to try to fill the gaps there. We should have done it. So that's why I'll be voting against this.

Hey, Greg. So how much was it again for the advertising? Do you still have that up by chance? I think it'll be up, 10,000. So 10,000 for advertising. How much for group equipment?

Grounds equipment was 75,000.

Okay. The SIS update? That was $145,000. And then the building and maintenance, you said the bulk of it was funded. Would it be accurate to say two-thirds of that was funded approximately?

The request was $179,000 and some change, and $100,000 was funded. So almost.

Sixty percent. Sixty percent. Just writing it down. So that's the reason to vote against the largest local investment into Lynchburg City Schools in the history of city? That's the reason? Ground equipment for $75,000, lack of funding on that is the reason to vote against teachers getting a pay raise? $10,000 in advertising is a reason to not support the investment into public education over the next year because of advertising? $10,000? That makes no logical sense at all. And the number one thing I heard that was harped on the most, school nutrition, is in there. First Lady Michelle Obama would be proud of you, Marty. Congratulations. This is absurd. It is the largest local investment into Lynchburg City schools in the history of the city. And voting against that, you can have your reasons. But if these are the reasons, ground equipment, advertising, a software update, and a building maintenance fund, 60% of which is gonna be funded. I don't get it.

I support teachers. It's time to vote. Go ahead, Marty.

I understand you don't get it because you don't have kids. I understand you don't get it because you're not married to a teacher. I understand you don't get it because you're never in the schools. Let's vote, please.

We're initiating the vote for approval now. Motion passes 5-2.

Mayor, may I interject? I have a question about an agenda item. Yes, sir. I may have misunderstood. The previous item before the schools, which was second reading consideration of adopting ordinance 046A for operating fund budgets for all other funds except water and stormwater. that's airport that's other things like i don't have an issue with that i misunderstood i would have seconded that can this council please consider that and vote on it and move on i don't think i think that passed with six or five votes last time so i mean if if there's no objection i would move its approval is what i'm trying to say I'm stating for the record that I misunderstood which item it was, so it's my fault. I would have seconded it otherwise had I realized it.

So the motion did not fail by vote. It was simply by second. So if the group wants to reconsider it and have it for discussion and a vote, certainly you could do that.

That would be my request. We'll make a motion. Mr. Alicia, you want to read it again?

Sure, so this is adopting ordinance 026-046A, appropriating the FY2027 operating fund budgets for all other funds except for water fund and stormwater fund.

Move for approval. And I would second. Second.

I want to speak to you. Yes.

Chris? I'm taking too many notes. That's why I didn't pay attention the first time. Okay, thank you. Let's vote on this, please. Thank you.

Initiating it. Nisheng, vote now. The motion passes 5-2. All right. Now we're jumping back to item F. This is consideration of adopting ordinance 026-048, adopting the FY 2027 through 2031 capital improvement program and appropriating the FY 2027 capital budget.

May I have a motion, please? Mr. Figueroa? I move for approval. Second. Mr. Figueroa, you want to speak to motion?

I do. $60 million for school infrastructure funding. $60 million for school infrastructure funding from Lynchburg City Hall is unprecedented. Democrat council, Republican council, somewhere in the middle council, no council has done anything of the sort. And that alone is a reason why this council should adopt it unanimously. No capital budget is perfect. I have voted against the capital budget over 10 times through my tenure up here. A large part of it were some projects I disagreed with. The bulk of it was the missing piece. Schools need to be fixed. This $60 million goes to the schools to fix the schools You cannot say you're for fixing the schools and vote against the capital improvement budget. It also fixes the library. I thought it was a little lie. Okay, I recognize that. But then at the back end of the library conversation, when we're actually trying to finish it, there's an attempt to remove parts of it. If you want a shell of a building, do just that. I don't want a shell of a building. I'd like a library for people to go to, for political parties to potentially meet and have meetings again. We used to do that quite often, actually. The local GOP used to meet there. It's a much better venue, I might submit. A venue where community events can be held and actually people be proud of. And then the pool. Mayor, no, I don't have kids. No, I'm not married to a teacher, although my wife teaches me quite often. However, my experience working with over a thousand kids in one summer at a summer camp is that the pool is the heart of a community. Lynchburg is no different. Lynchburg actually has a very long and racially charged history. That is for its own conversation. Let's put that all aside. The fundamental reality is that asset was falling apart, and it's being fixed. Now, you may not like parts of it. Okay. That's fair. But last minute's attempts to defund projects that are already underway I think are improper. So all I'm trying to say is no capital budget is gonna be perfect. This capital budget funds the number one need we have, which is the school system to actually finally be fixed. It actually addresses some key transportation items that have got to be addressed, particularly on Timberlake Road. Those bridges have got to be fixed with all those developments that these guys keep approving from their campaign donors. We need to invest more in the transportation system. This budget does that. These are things that we must do, we're charged to do, and I believe should be adopted. Thank you, Mayor.

i do believe we need to continue to invest in our community and if you want the person to continue to move into lynchburg we got to make sure we have the assets and the infrastructure to support that um as far as the upgrade to the library and the pool okay those are such needed especially in the inner city community they go to libraries for reading they come computers, for a meeting space, for a gathering space. The pool, my kids love that so much that they can go hang out with their friends, have a community asset like that. So we have so many assets in our community that we need to pour investment into that other people move out of the city if they don't have those resources. So that's why I support the capital budget. Thank you.

Ms. Reed? I agree. I'm super excited that we were able to support the a large infrastructure budget for the schools last year and that we're gonna see a big chunk of the money go towards in this year. And I agree with Councilman Friely that you can't support one without the other. I think it's insulting to attack someone for not having children and say that they can't understand schools. It just takes compassion. to understand the needs of children. And if you understood the children of our schools, whether you have children in them or not, you'd understand the direct link between Lynchburg City, a lot of the Lynchburg City School children and the need for our library and our pool. Because many of them use those two exact things for a resource. go to the library during the summer specifically, and a lot of them are there a lot of the times for multiple reasons. But there's reading time for homeschool families that that library is used for, preschool families. We have family members that use that library as a resource for job applications. Teens use that library for job applications. Kids from the high school walk over there after school sometimes to do homework. They use the computer centers. We need all the outfitting that is being used to put in there that's new for them to use because some of our kids don't have computers at home or access to computers at home. The pool is the same way. Not every child in this city has a neighborhood pool or access to that. That is the Miller Park pool for many of the same families that are Lynchburg City School families. So to support the schools and say we're wanting to fund the schools completely, that's wonderful. But to then want to take away from some of the same resources those same families need, or to say we've sunk money into a playground, sunk money into a playground for the same children? Like I said, I know our superintendent would not feel like that was a sunk investment either because she supports the resources that the families from her schools utilize. We can do both. We can do both. And the state has not given us their budget yet. Hopefully when they give it to us, there will be some extra money and maybe she can get it all done. And that would be a win for all of us. We're not that far apart. And this capital improvement plan, the one we voted on last year for the improvements that the library desperately did need and the Willow Park pool and the playground did need are going to be a win for many of our families that utilize those resources and our schools getting a much needed infrastructure improvement. We didn't even give them all the money that they needed, but we gave them a lot. And we're super excited about that. And we're on our way. So I'm thrilled to support this. Thank you.

There are some things in the CIP that I support. There's some things that I oppose. I'm not going to be voting for it because simply I'm not going to continue to support one, the way this process worked out and two, something of note, because I finally pulled that document up and you left something out that was in the school's capital project there, Mr. Patrick. There's also a $300,000 reduction in middle school career and technical education improvements. That's, one-time funds that this is all one-time funds you've got schools capitals amount pay as you go and then one-time funding requests the the the grand total of the initial funding request was 2.865 million and then the prioritized critical funding plan was 1.645 million that's actually a 1.2 million dollar difference so that's that's on on the document that you all provided to us, the Lynchburg City Schools Prioritized Critical Funding Plan FY 2027. And I'm looking at it right here. So there's a huge chunk of the amount of program equipment provided for career and technical education. Again, priorities, right? Priorities. That's what it comes down to. And fully support. the school's funding for the repair of the schools. I went and visited every school when I was on the joint committee. And I appreciated when Council Member Timmer stepped in on that committee when Council Member Farrelly quit the committee. So we worked really hard to try to push forward. We actually wanted to get it done faster. We wanted to prioritize the repairs in the schools over unnecessary expenditures last year like the pool overhaul we could have fixed the pool for somewhere between a half to one million dollars instead of the 11 12 million dollar overhaul we're doing right now the library reimagination project 12 and a half million we didn't need to do that but we did it tax and spend policies voted against that just like when the amphitheater doubled in price And they approved that. I voted against that too. And that's big dollar amounts of your tax dollars that we're spending. And I just can't support those projects. There are things that I can support in the CIP. I support the infrastructure projects. I support the school repairs. I support the fire station repairs. But, you know, like I've talked about previously, there used to be a process called the list. where council members could put an item on the list and then it would take a majority vote to bring it back. They've taken complete control over how we get to govern the spending of your tax dollars, the unelected bureaucrats have. It used to be a very deliberative process Councilmember throws something on the list. Majority votes to bring it back. Boom. That's how it works. Nope, we can't do that anymore. I mean, I remember my first CIP debate. They had a complete demolition and rebuild of a parking garage downtown for close to $60 million. Even Democrat Mary Jane Dolan thought that was and we killed it and took it out. Right? It is time to stop rubber stamping these bureaucratic pipe dreams that you have to pay for and focus on what's truly necessary. That's what matters. We need to be the best at what government is required to do. and we need to be excellent stewards of your tax dollars. But all this extra stuff that's getting thrown in here for whatever reason, because some consultant dreamed it up, because it's on some comprehensive plan, whatever it may be, we don't need to be. supporting those tax and spend policies that's why i can't support this capital improvement program again there's items in here i do support but as a whole because the process because of other things in here that i just can't support i'm not supporting this capital improvement program

This may be my last opportunity to have a public opinion on this budget process. And I've obviously voted against a lot of it on principle. And I'm going to continue to do that. We know, as citizens in Ward 3, we definitely get it that there's a spending problem. We're spending more all the time. Doing it again this year. We also know there's a high tax problem. And again, the taxes are going up mega this year. But something we don't talk about often is that we've got a debt problem. And what we do in this city with this CIP budget that's about to come before us is we throw it all on the credit card and pass it off to another generation to pay for it. And I've got kids. And I've got a grandchild. And that is immoral. And we have, I think, last check, over $400 million in debt that somebody's going to have to pay someday. Maybe that's not a lot to somebody. It sounds like a lot to me. So, yeah, we got a tax and spend problem. But I think we also got a little bit of a runaway, unsustainable debt problem. And I support some of the items on the CIP budget too. Some of them I don't. But in the long term, this process has got to change. And hopefully the people will help make some changes and send some people to make some changes because I don't see it as sustainable for us to continue down this road. And I'm going to sound a clarion call right now that if something doesn't change, we're headed to a situation where I'm not exactly sure where it ends up, but if you were doing this as a family, spending too much, borrowing too much, I think we all know where that ends up. And government really is no different. We don't print money here. That's the federal government. We have to have a balanced budget. And throwing things on the CIP credit card is really great. It makes you feel good. But a lot of the people that are doing that aren't going to be around when the bill comes due. So we need to be careful what we're doing. And that's why I'm going to vote against this particular part of the budget as well.

TODD BANDUCCI- Ms. Timmer.

CHRISTIE WOODARD- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

I greatly appreciate both of your comments, but especially Mr. Deemer's comments. And they really resonate with me. I'm a little bit, I'm going to echo, but I'm actually voting for this. And I'll explain why. I voted against the last CIP, I still stand by that vote. Not because I don't think we should have a nice pool or don't think we should have a quality library, but actually because of how some of the information came forward and how it was incongruent with information I had directly received from vendors and how our money should be spent in that context. I've spoken about it a number of times, haven't seen it reported on, looking at you. But I've spoken to that a number of times. So voted against that CIP. There are projects in the CIP that I am for. I am for the school improvements. Hands down, they're absolutely needed. critical issues in our schools when it comes to the infrastructure. We've got to do that. There are critical needs when it comes to road improvements and some of these components and the improvements with the fire department that must happen. And that is what my vote is for today. The pool and the library, they've already been passed. So my vote on the CIP is is not a reflection of that so much. But I do want to re-echo what Mr. Deemer said. And I believe that this is a larger issue in the budget process. If we continue to inflate the CIP, that's what ultimately is going to drive our real estate rate because it is the priority of what we have to address. when it comes to our financial policies. The first thing you deal with is debt service and making sure that you're covering that debt service at a certain percentage of your revenues. So if we continue to inflate out the CIP, it demands greater revenues in how we structure the taxes in the future. So we have to take that into consideration rather than just look at the fact that there might be a lower payment on the debt service today. This was brought up earlier in a work session. Well, what about Mr. Feraldi brought this up, actually, in the context of the work session. What does that mean five, ten years from now when those rates adjust and we're paying on other components of the debt? I will be voting in favor today predominantly for the schools, kind of aligned with some of what Mr. Farrelly said. I completely support my colleagues in voting against it because of some of the other components that have been included and all are relevant and pertinent to this discussion. So I'm grateful that we were able to have it. And with that, I will call the vote.

Let's vote please.

Finishing the vote for approval now. The motion passes 5-2. All right, item G. Consideration of adopting ordinance 026-049, appropriating 50,000 of the FY2027 reserved for contingencies for use by the city manager.

Move for approval. Second. I'll speak to you.

motion dr welder you know again he has this question for certain items i'm not um for certain items um for what what he's been dealt with he needs we need to give him more this question because he has dealt with a lot but again um i rest my comments there mr dean thank you mr mayor um i had a press conference right out here in the hallway uh

about a month ago or something like that, where I basically made it clear that I was just trying to find out information on how to do a forensic audit of the third floor of City Hall. Because there were a lot of questions that a lot of us had on the way things were going. And we never got answers to those questions. And all I was doing was asking, what's the process? Because localities do this regularly on a weekly basis across the Commonwealth of Virginia. Ask for forensic audits. That's the way you answer the questions. If you haven't done anything wrong, then it should show up in a nice independent third party. And it wasn't a vote for doing it. It was just calling for, can you just explain the process of doing and requesting and paying for a third party external independent audit of the third floor of this building? And I was told that the third floor had looked at everything and they had determined that everything was fine. They didn't see any problem with themselves. That's not the way it works in the Commonwealth of Virginia. And I'm going to continue to ask for that audit, or at least just an explanation on how to do it. That's all I was asking for. And I was heckled by some of the city staff who interrupted my press conference, which was totally inappropriate. Things have got to change. This culture down here, obviously everybody sees some problems with independent little things of it, but it's a bigger issue and it's an overriding issue that this is a big spending budget. It's wholly created by one person in this town, pretty much. Any attempt to change it was thwarted. We had priorities for Nutrition and special ed, and they had priorities for playgrounds. You know, that's a great debate. We had it. We lost. And that's the way we decide things. People are paying attention. I actually agreed with about 90% of what Mr. Bremer said about public education tonight. I found a lot in common with what you said, Mike. I want to support and I have supported our public education. And one student throwing chaos in the classroom is a horrible thing. But ultimately, we've got to make some decisions going forward in this city of who we want to be. And I hope that the city we want to be wants a city manager who's open and transparent and doesn't think investigating himself is the proper way to do an investigation. So I'll be voting against this. Mr. Mission.

You know what? I've just got to... Kind of echoing on what the Vice Mayor just said. I've asked a lot of questions about information I receive regarding credit card transactions. One of them is the number of transactions that don't have a finance description at all in them. Because if you look at the blank number, I've got the spreadsheet in front of me right now, where there's nothing at all in the finance description, which is an expense description, that total ends up being, on this particular spreadsheet of transactions, over $70,000 of your tax money with no expense description. And when I see that and I see things on it, airports, hotels, you know, airfare, things of that nature, that there's no finance description for it, is it something that was necessary? Why isn't it, why aren't we able to see? If you have a credit card where you work, and you make a purchase on that credit card, I'm sure on that company credit card, you have to explain what it was. One of the other things that really caught my attention too is the way some of the money is spent. And when I look at how money is spent and I see things like, let me see here, flowers, right? $2,100 spent on floral arrangements. Vast majority of that coming out of the city manager's office budget. If you've got flowers you wanna purchase for somebody that you work with or somebody in the community with your work group, right? People chip in together and buy the flowers. You know, we got a city manager that makes close to $300,000 a year and a deputy city manager that makes over $200,000 a year, but the flower arrangements are going on a city credit card, a city credit card, your tax dollars, because I know people that make a lot less than that, that pay for it themselves. Now there was something that was very interesting to me that I found on here. And it was kind of, you know, don't even understand why it's even on here. But there was a hotel at the Virginian that was purchased. for somebody that came up from an NAACP in Houston for an event in Lynchburg that had nothing to do with city government, and I talked to somebody that was there. So is the taxpayer just paying for these things? Again, not your money. I mean, it's your money, but why is it being spent that way? You know, I look at things that that kind of catch my attention too we've got a going away party for somebody working in the city manager's office 610 bucks and catered food for that that should be something people are pulling out of their own pocket and paying for not using your tax dollars to do it and the list goes on and on and on and on and on of questionable expenses with these credit cards and when You know, Mr. Deemer mentions a forensic audit. This is why we need one. Something else that's very interesting is the purchase card policy says that meals are only authorized for overnight travel. That's what the policy that was provided to me says. Yet, when I look at the amount spent, and some of this is probably legitimate at some points, but when I see the amount of money spent locally here in Lynchburg in restaurants for meals, and I see things like somebody that works in the communications department meeting with somebody that works with the communications department in Bedford County and putting lunch on the city credit card and forest and examples like that over and over again, lunch meeting, right? Lunch meeting, like locally, that's your tax money. You know, why does the policy say meals are only authorized on overnight travel? but you've got, and these aren't all the credits. This is just a snapshot of city manager's office and leadership team members. That's what this is. Why is your tax dollars getting spent that way? Why? So, you know, I'm with the vice mayor on this. I still have a lot of questions about how your money's being spent. And I agree that we need to have a forensic audit. It's totally different than the annual financial report that we get every year. But we need somebody to look in and dig in deep into how your dollars are spent and if it complies with policy and the management decisions being made behind it. And I won't be supportive of this.

independent auditors report brown edwards here it is folks not a forensic audit marty i did my best not to cut you off tonight please do the same respect as much as you want me to here it is folks this is the audit media here it is And for reference, I won't tell you where you can get it, but if you go to a certain website associated with one of the seven of us, you can actually get a direct link to it. Imagine which one it is. Number two. Number two. I'm sorry. I'm pacing myself because there's just so much here. How many times did any member of this dang council take a free meal in that back room and stuff their faces full of food paid for by the taxpayers? I guarantee you there are at least two hypocrites up here, both over there. And those men need to be answering that simple question because my campaign finance report Every time I eat here or at University of Lynchburg, I'm paying my way. It is disingenuous to insinuate that something is wrong in city manager's office when they are piling their stomachs full of taxpayer-funded money and food and engrossing themselves. It's ridiculous. Also, I would like to point out. I've seen a video recently that says if council member missions doesn't get his way with these problems, he's going to run for city council to find solutions for them. I believe that was a threat. I believe that's been his intent for these last four years. And I believe that's what he's been trying to do to each and every one of you, these city staff. And I believe that's what he's been trying to do to anyone who stands in his way because he got fired and he just can't stand it. That's the reality. And by the way, the only reason I didn't say point of order is because it wouldn't have gone anywhere. The reality is none of this has anything to do with the $50,000 for the city manager to pay for things. Good riddance.

Thank you.

A couple of things. One, I wanted to make it clear for the record that when we were and I distinctly remember this, presented the budget this year. I recall the city manager telling us it was our budget, not his budget. I recall him saying, I'm presenting to you your budget. So I wanna be clear about that, not his budget because There's been so many accusations hurled at him today. I can't even keep them all straight. And it's not me defending him. It's just making things factual because there's been so many lies. I don't even know how to unravel them all. So that's the first one. Secondly, we continue to talk about the taxpayer dollars. and being good stewards of the taxpayer dollars and misspending and misusing taxpayer dollars. We have someone up here attacking our city manager and his use of taxpayer dollars while he's, we were reminded tonight, cost the city upwards of $200,000 in a lawsuit. Someone's done the FOIA records of his FOIA requests. That's cost tons of money too. And let me explain to someone who I don't recall being a CEO, how it is to be someone that's a CEO when you have to take people out and you have an expense account. You don't have people chip in necessarily always, especially at the level of a city manager, which I'm not at. He represents our whole city. If someone passes away and he's sending flowers, I'm assuming he's sending it on behalf of the entire city in some pretty significant circumstances. For example, when Dr. Cardwell passed away, who is a significant person in our city, he's not gonna be like, hey, Greg, can you give me a 20? Hey, Shaq, you got a five? No, that's not what a city manager does. He uses his expense account to send something that is representative of what a city CEO would do and send the appropriate type of flower for someone like Dr. Owen Cardwell, who deserved something lovely. And I assume if we had to approve something for him, which we don't, because he's in his own lane as the CEO of this city, we would say that's acceptable. And by the way, as the CEO of this city, he is entertaining people coming here who we're hoping will do business with us. And hopefully we'll bring their businesses here and hopefully we'll invest in our city so that they will help grow our tax base so that we will have more revenue so we can reduce the burden on our citizens, which is the goal. And he's working with our city attorney who's helping sign contracts for our city to help that happen. So he needs to be able to spend those dollars on his credit card that you're questioning if we're going to go there, which wasn't really part of this. But you went there, so I'm going to go there with you. That is the job of someone who is in his position, whether you like him or not, vendetta or not. That is what someone in his position, cities across America, does. A good one does. hopefully he's not wasting it because if you look at some of the jobs and the businesses that have come here i'm assuming he's doing his job well because we've seen expansion with many of our businesses and new businesses come in you may not agree with who's having lunch with whom across the county and in the city that's not up to you if the audit is clear and we're not getting in trouble then And if there was something flagged on the audit, then we should be concerned. But the witch hunt that we've all watched ensue for the last almost four years, everybody can see it. And the video that we've now all seen that you basically told everybody you were gonna do is so obvious to all of us. I'm done.

Point of order. I still want to do it. A rule very specifically says that we're not to campaign and referring to campaign videos is a serious violation of that rule. And I would hope that we would refrain from any campaigning up here whatsoever.

Whose video is it?

video of her campaigning.

I didn't say she did. Campaigning up here is improper, Mr. Mayor. Please rule on my point of order. Whose video was it? It's not Jermaine, Mr. Mayor. She just said it. How could it not be Jermaine?

Mayor, I didn't say campaign video.

She didn't say anything regarding campaigns or campaign videos. She was speaking to what was simply brought up by another council member.

Yeah.

Which I think would be germane.

I was not a council member when that was.

Well, just now. It doesn't matter.

Okay.

Let's just not campaign. I didn't. Thank you, Kurt.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, if Council Member Reed would apply for a question, I do have one simple question for her about what you just said.

No.

The question is, she mentioned lies. I would like to know what those lies are.

I'm not answering questions. You don't want to answer your question.

Well, that that that I cannot force her to answer the question. But again, OK, you know, Mr. Mayor, I still have the floor. I'm speaking to this. There was just you just allowed. The two of them to just accost me verbally for like 15 minutes and you just want to move on. You're campaigning right now. That's what you're doing. So the reality is. No, I'm not. The reality is. The audit that was shown to you, the comprehensive annual financial report that was just displayed to the cameras, to the media, that's not a forensic audit. That's not what they did in Halifax County. That's not what they did in Martinsville. That doesn't uncover anything that you would find in a forensic audit. And you know what? There shouldn't be slush funds to spend thousands of dollars on floral arrangements with your taxpayer money. This is not a corporation. This is your municipal government. This is not a private corporation. This is a municipal government funded by your tax dollars. right we should not stand for your money being spent that way we should not stand for the policies and how city credit cards are to be used to be ignored as a governing body we should not stand for that and that is why we need a forensic audit to determine if those policies are being followed at the very smallest level. And I don't believe they are. Can I say that they aren't for sure? No, I can't. I can't. But the only way we're gonna find out is with a forensic audit. And that's simply what needs to happen. It's necessary. Just the amount, of charges alone that have no finance description in this small snapshot of data that I have because there are a lot more credit cards out there than the ones that I'm looking at. And if your position is we don't want to look into it and then attack me personally because I care about how your tax dollars are being spent, if that's your approach, So be it. But that's what this is about. It's about your tax dollars, how they're spent, and the management decisions that are being made. Let's call the vote.

Finishing the vote now for approval. Motion passes 5-2. This will be the first reading of the adoption of FY 2027 water fund and stormwater fund operating budgets. Consideration of adopting ordinance 026-046B appropriating the FY 2027 operating fund budgets for the water fund and stormwater fund.

I have a motion, please. Move for approval. Is there a second? Second. I'll speak to your motion. I'm sorry.

Yes, I'm sorry. Basically, the water fund is a self-fund that mainly supports the services that it provides. So it's like an extra fund as it supports. They come up with the cost to support the services. Thank you.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak on the water fund? Let us vote please. Oh, Ms. Reid.

I just wanted clarification because I know we had this conversation earlier, but in order for Mr. Mitchell.

Mr. Mitchell.

Do you mind? Yeah. In order for you to receive the $15 million we discussed earlier in work session, right, we need to pass this?

So this is the amended water fund budget that takes into account the cuts that had to take place in order to, correct?

Yeah. This budget reflects the water and stormwater budgets without rate increases. Without the rate increases. That's correct.

yeah correct so those the projects that were discussed earlier as well as the operating budgets would be cut based upon the discussions earlier they would be cut if we pass this one correct so we need to pass the one with the increases in order for you to get the 15 million

Do you want to speak to that?

The $15 million does come with certainly a commitment that we would increase rates at a regular basis. Again, the conversation I had with the Virginia Department of Health related to that, They did not absolutely commit one way or another if we did not pass a rate increase this year. But because that will be reviewed in the process, it certainly could have the potential of impacting particularly the $7.5 million grant that's associated with that. I don't know if I'm explaining that correctly. No, you are, but we don't know. So right now, we had to amend our CIP and our operating budgets to account for the no rate increases. So the CIP was amended as well as the operating budget was amended. So at this point, the projects that we outlined at the work session today will be eliminated from the CIP, as well as the potential of jeopardizing the $15 million from the Virginia Department of Health.

They'd be deferred from the CIP?

Correct, they would be deferred, assuming that there'd be rate increases in the future to fund them.

Got it, okay, thank you.

That's one. No, nothing else, nothing. Is there anyone else?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This one's really a conundrum for me. People need to understand this is a separate fund, and it funds itself. And there is no more critical infrastructure than providing water to citizens of Lynchburg. I don't like rate increases. I don't like paying more on my water bill more than anybody else. But we got crumbling water mains and pipes, and I've seen them firsthand. When I ran for office, I made it very clear that there was a lot of neglect that happened in previous councils to our infrastructure, whether it's school buildings that are crumbling or infrastructure like water pipes, that we're barely meeting the maintenance on to keep those pipes running. And if you turn on your shower in the morning and it doesn't work, or if you turn on your sink, it doesn't work, and you need water to drink, this is critical. And this is a self-funding thing. And if it's not self-funding with the fee that we're paying, then it ought to be. It ought to pay for itself. And removing this, I know I made part from some of my colleagues on this. But this isn't optional in my mind. And if this is a separate fund that funds itself and the fees that we're charging on our bills aren't covering basic maintenance and replacement. And so what our answer is, is throw it on that credit card bill debt that I talked about earlier. That that's not sustainable either. This isn't optional, this is our water. So I may surprise some people on my vote on this, but I'm gonna vote against it because I believe it should be a truly independent, self-funding fund as it's supposed to be, and we shouldn't be dipping in all over the place to try to make it balance out.

That's the mission.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Something just caught my attention.

Are we monitoring Facebook comments in real time? staff over here because the video i just heard the video from over there is that what that is it started playing even though it's on silent so just wondering if we're like real-time monitoring and nope hiding or deleting facebook comments that's all i was curious about um that would not be me no this is this is absolutely this is an easy one i'm glad we didn't increase the rates this year and I appreciate the hard work that you do, Tim, and everything you guys do over there, and I'll be supporting this.

Anyone else? I was out there tonight, that 10-inch pipe burst down on 10th Street. And Tim and his crew got out there, cold as all get up. and got down in that hole and worked those pipes. So they need everything they get, everything they can get to keep the water flowing. You know how many people would not have had water that day had they not got out there that night and made that main repair? A lot of people. So I'll be supporting this. Mr. Timmer.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm just clarifying your comment with supporting. I'm confused because it goes back to Ms. Reid's earlier question and Mr. Deemer's comments. Supporting this is supporting flat rate. Not supporting this is to bring back the question of a rate increase. Okay.

To keep everything fluid. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Tillman.

So we're in an interesting place right now on this vote. So can I provide some context just so everyone understands? So at the last meeting, there was four votes to not approve the rate increase. And what that meant was for the first reading of these funds, we brought back a budget that did not take into consideration rate increases. It also meant that if we wanted to consider rate increases as part of this budget process, we would need to now have another public hearing. So it sounds like there might be support for rate increases. What I would tell you is that there's basically two paths that you could go down if there was interest in that. First path is to vote Those in support of a rate increase would vote no. This would fail. We could then have a public hearing and two additional readings on the water and the stormwater budgets. The other path would be to support the first reading, which is just an opening, then have a public hearing. and then come back and in the second reading support a budget with a rate increase. Either works. One's just shorter than the other. So, you know, with that context, I'll leave it to council.

Ms. Timler.

Well, in the nature of that discussion, I would prefer the second option. I think it's cleaner moving forward.

I just think it's a no-brainer. I think that we should approve this and then, you know, if there's any, I'm not going to support a rate increase. That's just all there is to it. But I will support this budget because this budget gets done without the rate increase. And it's that simple. If something changes between now and the second reading, So be it if you find the fourth vote, but I think that we need to keep the water running. So we want to make sure we at least appropriate the baseline here. And I think that we should, we should do that.

Mr. Wilder, just to make something clear, I'm so confused at this moment, I'm sorry. So if we do approve it, we can still, this is the first reading, because it failed the first time. So obviously we had to approve it now in order to pass the budget, so that's why I was saying yes. So if we do approve it now, we can still come back at the next time and do it increasingly if we need to?

possibly one option might be um to approve the so so and i wouldn't even begin to understand the machinations of of changing a motion in a second but to approve the budgets um but also ask for there to be a public hearing That way, the next time council came back to debate the water and the stormwater budgets, there would be a path for council to either approve the budgets with the rate increase or not. But not having that public hearing wouldn't provide that option. So again, I'd leave it to council. Okay. Yes.

And still vote down a rate increase at the next meeting if you choose to, and then it stays the same if you adopt the budget. Or alternatively, if y'all choose, there'll be an option B of an appropriation that'll be the second reading that would incorporate the rate increases.

And if I can just add, the motion right now stands to approve this. There's a motion on the floor to approve this.

Maybe a motion to approve this and have a public hearing.

It is Council Member Wilder's motion and seconded by Council Member Faraldi.

Can I amend my motion to amend it and to include the public hearing? Can I do that?

I think that would be fine. Is there no objection from Council Members to simply consider it? Yes.

always going to support any time we get to hear from the public on something so it's easy to approve the public hearing i still won't support a rate increase but i will approve the uh the motion as it stands and appreciate the addition of the public hearing let's vote please all right initiating the vote to approve with the public hearing

The motion passes 5-2.

Thank you for the clarification. I appreciate that. Thank you.

All right, our final item, agenda item number 17. This is a LU enrollment resolution by Councilor Emissions.

A motion, please. Mr. Burrard. May I have a meeting table for two weeks? Second. Table for two weeks.

We get to speak to the motion, Mr. Mayor. I see what was done there. Normally, Mr. Mayor.

Only that I haven't had a discussion with Liberty over the phone, in writing, and considering the nature of this, I would like to have that conversation with them myself so I can make an informed decision on the matter. If this warrants my support in two weeks, we'll consider it then. Mr. Wald, I want to speak to you a second.

We've already discussed it, and also it doesn't have a bearing on the outcome of what we did, so that's why I really don't think it's necessary, but I do agree with holding it off.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for demonstrating that you always look to the left and plan things with Mr. Feroldi first. And thank you for actually owning that for the public that you do that. So it's pretty interesting how that all went down. But the reality here is that staff went up to New York with information that wasn't backed up about the enrollment figures of Liberty University and delivered that to the bond rating agencies. Now they're tabling this because they don't wanna vote on it, because they don't want to hold staff accountable. I voted against the certification of the closed session because there was information in the closed session that did not have anything to do with the agenda item. And one thing I will tell you loud and clear is that city staff violated the Freedom of Information Act. The city attorney actually said the information that they provided to us up there were public records, but they did not disclose that to me when I asked in an email that they even existed. It's a violation of the law. And you know what? That's a problem. You can't have a bureaucracy ignoring transparency laws. So the reality here is we've got a resolution that says, you know what? We're gonna correct the record because there's false information that's been put out there information that Liberty themselves has contradicted about enrollment figures that went to the bond rating agency. And we're going to train and equip people and put policy in place to make sure these things don't happen again. That's what this resolution is all about. It's very simple. It's very simple. But some people just simply do not have the courage to vote for it. and that's why they're tabling it. You know, I got to listen to somebody up here on this dais try to explain to me what my conversations were with people when they were not even a part of it. Those are the kind of things that happen, right? The same person, keep in mind, that has said up here on this dais, You tell people what you want them to believe, not tell them the truth. You tell people what you want them to believe. Council Member Reed, that's not what you do. You tell people the truth, not what you want them to believe. Doesn't work, doesn't work on me. So the reality here, because they just don't have the courage to vote on a resolution to say, you know what? We're going to make sure we correct the record. We're going to make sure that we don't get ourselves in any kind of potential compliance issue with the SEC. Pretty big deal, right? and that we report back to how did this happen in the first place? But I'll tell you the thing that was the most shocking to me to find out upstairs in that closed session that had nothing to do with why we went into closed session was that when I asked for something that backed up what they said, that backed up the figures, they never told me anything existed. That's a violation of the Freedom of Information Act because then they turn around and they give us something today. that they say is a public record, but it wasn't subject to disclosure. And then in addition to that, it's also kind of interesting because it sounds to me like the information that got shared was not supposed to be shared maybe. And the same person that said that the information that she got ahead of herself in an email, right? then turns around and says the information's accurate? Today? I ask, was the information provided in writing? Taking something to a bond rating agency for our credit rating for municipal bonds for the entire city that wasn't even backed up in writing? You know, it's just unfortunate. I will be voting against tabling the motion because the longer this hangs out there, the longer potential people could be looking at this information. It's in an S&P report that Liberty University's enrollment is going to increase to 30,000 on campus in five years. That would be almost a 20% population increase for the city. I challenge you to find a city in the United States that is projecting a 20% population in the next five years. You're not going to. And as long as that information is hanging out there, there's a potential for investors to look at that and then, hey, you know what? I need to buy property to build more storage units. I need to buy property to build more college housing. And then to realize that that's not true, they could end up losing money over it. All because we're not willing to simply correct the record and own it. But you know what? There's information out there that's conflicting because we said the city, somebody on behalf of the city, put this out there. Liberty University has contradicted it with an official statement. It's that simple. But I'm very, very disappointed to find out about the complete and total, you know, just egregious violation of the Freedom of Information Act by our staff with this. To say, to not even acknowledge that something existed. And it makes me question how they treat you all when you ask for information. How do they treat the press when the press asks for information? Do you guys get the same roadblocks? I will not be voting in favor of tabling this motion, but I will make a substitute motion to adopt the resolution with some changes, and those changes I will list out would be to incorporate the number one clause on Councilmember Timmer's resolution that she brought forward, the number two clause, the number three clause, her fifth clause and her sixth clause in place of mine on the resolving clauses. And I've got it all typed out here, but we saw it today. And then adding at the end, be it further resolved, the city attorney shall report back to council on the status of these actions within 30 days of adoption. So I'll make that as a substitute motion to adopt it with those changes incorporating the language from your resolution on the resolving clauses.

We have a motion.

We have a motion.

I will second. I'll second.

I will speak to your second.

Are you done speaking? I'm done. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, I'm just... This whole thing has gotten so blown up, and it's pretty wild. So the resolution that I put forward, and I've spoken about this in the work session, I've provided it to all the council members. It's distinct from Mr. Mischin's, but I'm grateful that he was willing to incorporate mine into his and adjust some things with his that we kind of differed on a little bit. And the collaborative element, I really appreciate that. It's just prudent and wise to self-disclose and doing so actually protects city staff and doesn't condemn or damn anyone. It's just good policy. So I'm gonna read just a basic statement. We can move to the vote, but I believe two measured and constructive steps would serve the long-term interests of the city and the taxpayers. The first is that it is prudent and wise for the city manager to review the city's existing policies and procedures for the preparation, sourcing, verification, and communication of information provided to credit rating agencies and the public. The goal of such a review should be to identify any opportunities to strengthen our internal controls so as to minimize the possibility of future misunderstandings. or the unintentional provision of information that later proves unreliable, or may have simply changed over time. Good governance demands that we continually improve these processes to protect the city's credibility and fiscal standing. The second is that I believe the city should carefully consider the filing of a voluntary disclosure statement on the municipal securities rulemaking board EMMA system as is expressly allowed under federal security regulations. While not required, such a voluntary filing can promote transparency, ensure that investors and the market have clear and current information, and demonstrate the city's commitment to high standards of disclosure. These steps, reflect responsible stewardship. They focus on prevention, continuous improvement, and the maintenance of Lynchburg's strong reputation in the fiscal markets, financial markets, all of which ultimately benefit our taxpayers by helping to prevent, to preserve favorable borrowing costs and public confidence. And so that concludes my comments. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

But I do want to, again, for the record, give some clarification that I think Ms. Timmer just said something about this is exploded or gotten out of, what did you say how it's blown up maybe? Maybe that's what he said was blown up. So it's blown up because my colleagues have blown it up. Last month, a statement was made by Ms. Witt And all of a sudden, it blew up because a number she gave was not expected. She answered for it. We discussed it at the work session. We've discussed it numerous times now. It's become an inquisition, an interrogation. a news source from Charlottesville got involved. Our local media has been like asked about it multiple times asking to cover it. And nobody has seemed to really wanna cover it except for our colleagues. We discussed it at length in a closed session today. We discussed it at length in our work session today. I invite you, if you want to hear more about it, to go back and watch our work session where Ms. Witt answered me directly when I asked her, was the number she gave accurate? She said, yes. I said, did you lie about the number that you quoted? No. Ms. Witt is a Liberty graduate. She was a CFO and has been for 27 years for the city. She has an ethical obligation She answered it, go back and watch. So we've gone over this. We also went over the fact that the number that was reported to the bond agency, the SEC, all the things that have been referenced was not inaccurate. The number that was given had no bearing on our bond rating, anything either way. So the city's not in trouble. The city wouldn't have been in trouble had the number have been off either way, but it wasn't off. There've been multiple conversations with Liberty University, with our city manager. Everything's fine. The only people making a big deal out of this are the people that now have introduced three resolutions today. And it's really just to try to make the city look like they've done something wrong. They can say no all they want, but it is. It's not that we don't think that the city should be responsible. That's not what those of us who are defending this are saying, or defending the city staff are saying, defending Ms. Witt are saying. But by supporting it, it does sound like, based on how these things are being written, that somebody did something wrong or intentionally wrong or that the city manager or now the city attorney or people that were in closed or whatever are doing things intentionally wrong. And we're casting doubt on our city leadership again. And that's just not the case. We've gone over it. So I'm not going to support the substitute motion. I'm not going to constantly support trying to defame and demean or attack people who we've already gone through this situation with and we know that they didn't do anything wrong. We shouldn't have to have resolutions and proclamations to say that these city staff members didn't do anything wrong. And Liberty University is fully aware of that. And it doesn't have to be in writing to prove that either. If our city manager and city leadership have good relationships, they shouldn't have to have it documented and signed with a feathery ink pen and sealed with wax. Thank you.

I'd just like to reiterate and reaffirm my comments in the work session. that this whole conversation is becoming about whether or not a group of people believe that Donna Witt lied. And I don't think that anybody at this day believes that Donna Witt lied. That is not what this is about at all. Donna Witt, she's great. This is not about her. This is about information that was provided, whether totally in good faith, I believe totally in good faith that doesn't purport with public records that are to the contrary when it comes to the bond crediting agency and how that has implications for city staff, how that potentially has implications for taxpayer dollars and how there's case law that supports it and it doesn't have to be done with ill will in order for SEC violations to be enforced. So this is, I was very hopeful in bringing forward my resolution in the way that it was worded and we've merged some things and we've adjusted some things, but essentially this is just talking about, hey, the city manager can put together some policies for recommendations in the future. We're losing Ms. Witt. as far as her role as the CFO. That's going over to somebody else. So let's put policies in place. Let's put procedures in place for moving forward. Let's self-disclose. There's no harm in self-disclosure. If anything, it demonstrates further good faith and builds those relationships. So you're welcome to vote against it. I understand the nature of the discussion, but there's no... belief on my part, and I've said this over and over, that this has to do with ill will or a lie. This is just how do we move forward as a city in the context of the public record? Thank you.

I know that the thing that was on the session to describe what we were talking about behind closed doors doesn't match what we did. I had to vote against certification. We didn't discuss any city investments opportunities at all. Ultimately, that's kind of irrelevant, but it kind of goes to the process again. No accusations were made of, no questioning of intent of Ms. Witt was made. This has zero to do with pointing fingers. We've made this case over and over again. It's not in the resolution. That's what matters. And I appreciate the effort to collaborate that my colleagues have done because my focus in my version was to focus on fixing the inaccurate information, which Ms. Wisp said in her email to us may have been accurate or inaccurate. Those are her words. We spoke to representatives from school, and they said it was inaccurate. So ultimately, we're still not sure what exactly was told to the bond agencies. We haven't really seen anything in writing. May never find out what actually happened in that room. But I know what happened in the back room back here, and it was not what we said we were going in for. And this red herring that we're attacking people is just that. It's not true. not pointing fingers at anybody it's saying create some some guard rails to make sure this doesn't happen again which was miss timmer's focus and it includes let's fix the bad information that's out there and get good information out there which was my focus so this is really an incorporation of three different resolutions that have come forward because this is an important issue And we need to make sure it doesn't happen again and that we fix what we've done. And this is a great way to do that. If we don't do that, I think ultimately it looks like we're part of the attempts to not correct information. That's not transparency. Let's correct the information. Let's make sure it doesn't happen again. This is our best chance to do it. And I've still got mine out there. And if this passes, maybe that'll change. But I appreciate the collaborative work that is combining the three, really.

Commission. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, so, you know, it's not an attack on anybody. It is very simple. The whereas clauses state what happened, the facts. There was information that was put out there where it was later acknowledged internally that the projection lacked the verified source and the city had gotten ahead of itself in presenting the information. That's what we received in an email. that we discussed it in our work session. It discusses the anti-fraud provisions, what they are of the federal securities laws, and then that city council has a commitment to full compliance with these obligations to maintain high standards of transparency and accuracy and to protect the interests of the city's taxpayers and its long-term access to the capital markets. And then it simply asks that the record be corrected that we file a voluntary event notice, self-disclosure, as Councilmember Timmer brought up, that we make sure that that supplemental disclosure material is available to potential bondholders. that we review and update our disclosure policies and procedures as a municipal government. And, you know, this is interesting because we actually, it's kind of interesting timing on this with Ms. Witt. And I don't believe that at all that she had any ill intent or that this was on purpose or any of that, right? but she, you know, it's out there that she's retiring at the end of the fiscal year, but, but it's kind of an interesting situation that we find ourselves in because this is the one staff member that according to city code, if our city manager complies with city code, he can't hire without our approval because Chapter 18 of Lynchburg City Code, Article 2, Section 1816 says, regarding the director of finance, the city manager shall appoint a director subject to the approval of the city council. So it creates an opportunity for us to ask questions, or it should. of any potential new CFOs on what their position will be with self-disclosure in situations like this. So, interesting time, interesting opportunity. We should support the substitute motion. We should get this corrected tonight. Well, we should get the resolution adopted tonight so that the beginning of the correction and the self-disclosure can happen. I'll be obviously voting in favor of this.

All right, let's vote on substitute motion, please.

No substitute motion for Councilor Mnuchin's resolution, but with the clauses from Councilor Timmer's, that was clause one, two, three, and six.

Let me read it off to you real quick and pull it up just so we've got it. So it would be her number one, her number two, her number three, my number four, then her number five, her number six, no effective date. That was a section of mine. And then at the end, adding, be it further resolved that the city attorney shall report back to the council on the status of these within 30 days of adoption. If you need, I can email it to you. You want me to do that?

All right, thank you. All right, I'm just saying that now for the substitute motion. Motion passes 4-3. That now becomes the main motion.

That's going on the main motion.

All right, initiating the vote now. Motion passes 4-3.

Thank you all. Motion to adjourn. Next meeting, second floor. June 9th, second floor. Next meeting.

Thank you.