Remarks by LaWana Mayfield
116 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 5
Good afternoon, LaWanna Mayfield, I currently serve you as Councilmember at large, thank you. Ed Driggs, District 7.
Thank you, Mayor, for comment, separate vote, item 27.
Thank you, Mayor Harrington. I would like for us to also consider, in light of legislative language that's on the ballot regarding the amendments, and if these amendments were to pass, one of the major impacts for us would be a... reduction on access to our property taxes of which 60% of our taxes go to public safety. Right now approving this particular contract for undercover vehicles. I have concerns that I share with my colleague, but also have concerns as we move forward. If community doesn't recognize that the answer should be no on the amendments, if it passes and we are then, put in a…
Well, I mean, do I need to make a motion at this point?
So at this point, I would like to do a motion to defer item 15, which is the police undercover vehicles.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I sent a staff of question, which I started still mayor. We're going to need a recommendation to housing and neighborhood services committee regarding our annexations. We have some very specific goals through housing and neighborhood services regarding access to attainable housing. As we look, to expand access of our resources, resources being water, sewer, sanitation. This particular request is just under 19 acres, and what they have proposed in here is potentially 78 multifamily attached units. My question is, will this actually address our housing shortage as far as…
So understanding the way our process is currently set up, we need to, again, get this referred to Housing and Neighborhood Service Committee sooner rather than later for us to really identify what are our goals, how does the UDL play into our goals, because you need to do a rezoning, annexation or rezoning, which one comes first. But if there's not clear written goals, not just verbal, I did verbal with the river district. There were a lot of verbal comments. None of that made its way into the contractual obligations. Ensuring the idea of just saying, well, let's just keep growing the city.…
Thank you, Mayor Harrington. Thank you for the presentation. So I believe we all received council received the same email. The question in short is, well, the same app based pricing rights be available for our local companies. because that's one of the challenges and the concerns. And I believe in all of that, it was addressed a little bit, but how does that play out for our local companies versus these national companies?
So is there any consideration, since this is just an update to council, to slow down in order to do the additional research to find out how we can best connect with our local companies? So if I would rather call for a cab, but what I have on my phone is the app for Uber or Lyft, how do I identify as a consumer? How do I find my local company versus this much larger company?
Good evening. Luana Mayfield, serving you at large. Ed Driggs, District 7.
Thank you. We have staff here from Historic Landmark. While they're coming up, I need us to ask some very serious questions. Again, right now, on the ballot, our North Carolina General Assembly has amendments. In those amendments, there is the possibility if people keep voting yes instead of voting no to the amendments, that we will have a limitation on taxes. This particular property, what is presented to us, says based on the current value, the potential amount of deferrable taxes would be approximately $10,559.43 for the city of Charlotte and 17,756 dollars and 42 cents from Mecklenburg…
I need to hear the justification. Help me out.
So we do not have anyone that's representing our historic landmark. Do we have anyone from planning? So we have this request in front of us, and we don't have anyone here to answer a question on it, just for clarification. Is there anyone here from since we don't man, just for clarification, I am going to be a no because we need to have some very real conversations about what the financial potential impact will be if this community supports these recommended amendments. So if we have someone that can answer to speak to that, it's a separate conversation for you. I would just like to…
Well, it's an A and B where we're closing the hearing and there's a request to approve, which I've also shared. We should not be doing the same in the same motion.
You don't have to sign up in order to answer my question. Unless we ask you a direct question, right?
So, for clarification, Attorney Leslie Fite, the specific question that I asked regarding why this was identified as a historic landmark. Would that be a question better for our historic landmarks district representative or is that a question for the petitioner since we have him here to try to identify why this was identified as a historic landmark? Is that an appropriate question for the individual that's standing or no?
That's what I thought. Unfortunately, I'm not able to ask you the question. It would have to be staff, and we don't have our city staff here. Thank you, Mayor, for that clarification.
So, Mayor, I think it will be helpful in the future that we make sure that we have staff here because, again, we are having a discussion right now. Thank you. $28,000 in tax rolls, but what is being proposed is a hotel. So, again, help me understand. The idea of a historic designation for this site, for something where a hotel is going to be built on it, and my greatest concern is the ability of our General Assembly to create language that people think is a positive thing, and if this community supports it, and we have the limitations on our tax and authority, What that impact will be. So…
Thank you, Mayor. Still the same, the beginning of the same conversation. regarding annexation. But I also want us to be very clear. I personally have concerns because in 2017 it was with a lot of good faith that multiple discussions when I was the district representative because this project started under my representation of district three. And we had multiple conversations around the diets in committee where there were verbal agreements regarding not creating something that was not going to be accessible to the diversity of our community. We have very clear conversations regarding diverse…
I have a clarifying question. So this proposal has 18 and under the requirement for a helmet. way back once upon a time we didn't with seatbelts we learned that we need to so versus it being an expectation for all what I'm wondering because we do have some areas where sidewalks are not a small. So if we have an individual that may be at max be on a bite and asked whether they hit a level part of the sidewalk or run into a family of there's an accident specifically if it's the South is that with that then open the city to be liable if there were a lawsuit they don't have on a helmet there 26.…
Okay. Is there any consideration of... This is looking at a looking at potential speed of a bite to require a helmet like if it goes over. 18 miles 20 whatever the number is where if there were to be an incident where the stock short something happens where it could be potential damage. Any discussions in committee regarding looking at that number to identify helmet versus age 18 and under?
So even though that's what the North Carolina General Assembly has identified, what you're saying is we do not have the ability to have more comprehensive, because it's not more restrictive, it's just more comprehensive language around your protection.
Thank you, Mayor Harrington. I do want to thank our attorney's office as well as Allison Craig. But I also want us to be honest. The first project came before us in 2023. At that time, when I asked questions and proposed a delay, I was the only no vote. The second project came before us in 2025. Council Member Johnson and I were the only no votes. This is, we are at the place now where we're being very reactionary. So the idea of which I respect that some look at this as an economic opportunity, that's four to six months for the actual construction of the building. That's not long-term. It is…
Which I've already mentioned, I'm going to reiterate at this time. I would love for us to have a referral to committee so that we can really have a real discussion around the annexation process to identify how we consider annexations, understanding whatever happens with the ballot measure, knowing that language can be created by the North Carolina general assembly that can limit what would that actual impact do to the city financially? Cause we tend to be extremely conservative with our investments. So we have, I believe we exceed what our, mandated set aside revenue is. Also, would like more…
Good evening, Luana Mayfield, serving you at large.