Remarks by Victoria Watlington
53 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 2 of 3
Well, for the summertime, sure. In the wintertime, that's four or five hours where youth would still be permitted to be out, but it is also dark and people are likely inside. So I'm just curious as to how we're thinking about how this applies during the winter months.
And then just finally, are you suggesting as part of your proposal, a pilot to gather data? Are you suggesting full on implementation at the start?
Yes, so the appointments for the Community Relations Committee, Zachary Claywell received six votes and Alexis Healing received eight votes. Alexis, good.
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Thank you. A couple of things for me. So firstly, I just want to say thank you to staff and to all of the AEC professionals that participated in my town hall a couple of weeks ago. regarding health care and data centers and the impact that that infrastructure has on our labor, has on our materials and the broader community needs. So we appreciate you bringing your time, your talent to the room because that's what it's going to take as we deliver these policy solutions. These public forums are always my favorite meetings because I love to hear from the residents because I truly believe that it…
Andrea Leslie-Fight, city attorney. Good evening. I'm Victoria Wellington. I have the pleasure of serving you as a member at large.
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
And just basic crime theory, if you will, forgive me. I'm obviously not a law enforcement officer. Why does it matter if it's dark as it relates to incident rates?
And just for comparison's sake, do we have those same numbers for the 11 p.m. and later window? What is that additional two hours? Right. We did not pull those numbers, but we certainly can. Sure. That would be great. I'd be very interested to see what the difference would be between those two hours. And then can you speak a little bit to the nature of the activity? Why having structured events after 9 o'clock for teens may result in low incident rate or no incident rate versus the unstructured?
That makes sense. So it sounds like for the structured events, a particular seeker, if you will, shows up for the structured events because most of the kids are just looking for something to do. And it is because there are other kids around that those who have other motives are able to come in and be disruptive. Yes, ma'am. Okay. That makes sense to me. Just a couple more questions. I wanted to understand how... Walk me through, for someone who would say, 17-year-olds out at 9 p.m. in and of itself should not be an issue. We've heard the exceptions. If there is an event, however, that's not…
Thank you for that. And then in the wintertime, when it gets dark at 5 p.m., how are you all thinking about that, the hours between 5 to 9 in the wintertime?
Thank you. And my very last question, I think back to a couple of years ago where we had these conversations with the General Assembly around raising the age and then lowering the age that relates to juvenile crime. Can you just talk to me about how that overlaps with this work?
Good evening, Dimple Oshimura, at large. Good evening, I'm Victoria Watlington and I have the pleasure of serving you as a member at large.
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Sure. I know that this isn't the first time staff has worked on it, though. So I just want to understand truthfully, what is the barrier to delivering a response to this cumulative impact? Because if there's something real structural here or legislatively that we need to understand, I'd rather we be clear about that.
So is there a real structural barrier to be able to adjust such that we can have cumulative impact considered?
Okay, I look forward to hearing that in committee. So it sounds like what's in committee is not a policy question, it's a matter of explanation. What are we working on?
And then will we also understand, once we understand the explanation, the outcome, will we understand what's going to close the gap to the outcome? Because what I think I hear you say is that even though we're seeing 1,500 for each petition before there's a threshold, there's some other mechanism that's looking cumulatively.
If that's the case, the outcome feels like there's still an opportunity to improve our traffic and transportation planning because what we're seeing is overcapacity in these particular areas where we're building. Will we also be getting some recommendations of what we can do to make adjustments?
So will you be bringing back recommendations? I'm trying to get a sense of what's going into committee because if what we're going to get back is the explanation, we may be able to get that as pre-work before a committee discussion. Sure.
I'll let you spend the committee discussion on the actual recommendations versus the explanation. Do you follow what I'm saying? Yes.
Because if we need to adjust the referral, this would be the time.
So I don't know if that's a question for the clerk. Before we move past this, this is the opportunity to adjust the referral to capture the need that Council Member Johnson has brought up. So if no one has the referral right now, is that something that we can see before we close business today?
So 16875 a must accuse myself from this bill.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Following up on that, I'm actually looking at the NLC website that is speaking to this particular initiative. And there are a couple of things that jump out at me. The first one being that exactly like was just mentioned, It says here that finally local government should carefully review all eligibility requirements and certifications. The solicitation includes provisions related to federal immigration information sharing requirements and identify certain activities that are not eligible for funding. So I would like to understand very, very clearly what specifically that…